There is something wrong, with this banana

[mbrooke]

How can this be accurate? Actually what are they even trying to accomplish? :blink:

 

[MAC702]

...Actually what are they even trying to accomplish? :blink:

While I'm not smart enough to proofread how they did it, it says they are using it to derive a neutral from a source that doesn't have it. I can see the need.

 

[GoldDigger]

It seems to me that they should have taken the wye point of the zig-zag as the synthesized neutral.

 

[mbrooke]

It seems to me that they should have taken the wye point of the zig-zag as the synthesized neutral.

Thats how I normally see it. As is its a corner grounded delta.

 

[romex jockey]

It seems to me that they should have taken the wye point of the zig-zag as the synthesized neutral.

neat term....

~RJ~

 

[romex jockey]

The CT's are confusing

seems they are there to mitigate an imbalance

but the end result is a 277 load with a neutral

which could introduce the imbalance.....?

~RJ~

 

[mbrooke]

The CT's are confusing

seems they are there to mitigate an imbalance

but the end result is a 277 load with a neutral

which could introduce the imbalance.....?

~RJ~

The CTs are another mystery to me.

 

[mbrooke]

While I'm not smart enough to proofread how they did it, it says they are using it to derive a neutral from a source that doesn't have it. I can see the need.

Yup- thats the goal. In this case they have corner ground

 

[MAC702]

Yup- thats the goal. In this case they have corner ground

Where and when is the pic from?

Looks like it was discussed here several years ago. The 1999 Handbook shows it connected in the center. See Post #11: http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=138570

Post #16 seems to confirm it was accidentally changed after that.

 

[jumper]

Where and when is the pic from?

Looks like it was discussed here several years ago. The 1999 Handbook shows it connected in the center. See Post #11: http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=138570

Post #16 seems to confirm it was accidentally changed after that.

Nice job!:thumbsup:

 

[mbrooke]

Where and when is the pic from?

Looks like it was discussed here several years ago. The 1999 Handbook shows it connected in the center. See Post #11: http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=138570

Post #16 seems to confirm it was accidentally changed after that.

Hard drive- but you may have found the mystery origin of that pic I think Google might have dug it up from this forum- or it was taken from the IET forums assuming it was there first.

Either way thats why I love this place- you will always get a detailed answer.

 

[Ingenieur]

looks like the ct's provide gnd fault protection
it looks like if ct2 + ct3 NE ct1 then shunt trip

 

[mbrooke]

looks like the ct's provide gnd fault protection
it looks like if ct2 + ct3 NE ct1 then shunt trip

That would be it- thanks

 

[jeremy.zinkofsky]

That would be it- thanks

Agreed, you can find a more technical explanation (if you're so inclined and have a copy) in chapter 1 of the IEEE Std 142 "Green Book" under zigzag transformers.

 

[mbrooke]

Agreed, you can find a more technical explanation (if you're so inclined and have a copy) in chapter 1 of the IEEE Std 142 "Green Book" under zigzag transformers.

Will do. :thumbsup:

 

[pv_n00b]

And that's why the NEC and the Handbook are not design manuals.