On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 2:46:02 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:09:33 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 11:51:18 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:39:37 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

According to Fretwell, two phase power existed 100 years ago, and it
was over two wires, 90 degrees phase difference. Suppose I run it
over 3 wires instead, with a shared neutral, make it 120V. So,
you have a generator supplying 120V, two coils, one shared neutral.
Would there still be two phases there?
(I believe Fretwell said yes)
Your answer?

When you lie you can always make your point.
I never agreed you were right about any of this.
Two phase simply does not work like this

I clearly said *I believe* you said that it would be two phase. But it's
hard to keep track, because you won't answer a simple series of questions,
instead you bail out, claiming you can't answer a simple question about
whether a phase still exists when I change the angle from 90 to some other
choice, because "that system doesn't exist". So much for electrical
engineering, now it's claimed that we can only analyze that which is
actually deployed. That would get expensive fast.

I have answered you silly quiz TWICE
At least as much as you can answer nonsense questions.

They are all perfectly legitimate questions that any first week circuits 101
student should be able to answer. And you don't answer them in series,
you go part way into the example and then you start talking about transformers
when there are no transformers in the simple problem and you bail.



I prefer to live in reality and not some theoretical world where only
pink unicorns and blue oxen live.

Engineers can answer simple theoretical circuit questions. This is a
bizarre position, that only that which has been built can be analyzed
and explained.





So feel free to give us your definitive answer to the above simple question.
Here it is again, go step by step:

According to Fretwell, two phase power existed 100 years ago, and it
was over two wires, 90 degrees phase difference. Suppose I run it
over 3 wires instead, with a shared neutral, make it 120V from each
phase to the neutral. So, you have a generator supplying 120V on
each of two windings on the same shaft 90 deg phase difference,
one shared neutral. Would there still be two phases there?

I have to stop you there. You are just full of ****. Two phase
requires FOUR ungrounded conductors.
They either look like an X or T but they still act like an X

Two phases requires four ungrounded conductors according to whom, exactly?
I can have three phase with only three! And that exists, right?
So in what universe is it that I can't have two phases with less than
four? You really should just stop already.
Of course I can have two phases, 90 deg apart, with two hots and
a shared neutral. I simply take two windings on the same shaft,
separated by 90 deg, tie one end of each together into a common
neutral. This is really basic stuff.




So now, I run that from the generator into a house, we have three wires,
shared neutral, 120V, two phases, 90 deg phase difference, correct?
I could hook a scope up to the neutral and see two phases, 90 deg
apart, correct?

If I change the phase difference to 179 degrees instead of 90
by rotating one coil, are there still two phases? Yes or no?


Now I rotate it to 180 phase difference. Are there still two phases,
yes or no? If you disagree, explain how it's different, how there
suddenly there are not two phases there, where one phase just went.


S L O W L Y
When you rotate to 180 you have ONE PHASE, no matter how many times
you tap the output source.
A 180 degree phase angle is no angle at all it is a straight line.

A unique singularity in the world of electrical engineering? That
indeed is your parlor trick! You told us that 3 phases exists with
phases at 0, 120, 240. Yes? I have to check, because above you say
that two phases can't exist without 4 conductors, so that would imply
that 3 phase requires more than 4 conductors. But previously you just
told us that I can have:

3 phase 0, 120, 240
3 phase 0, 179, 240

but if I dare to move that winding one more degree to 0, 180, 240
Poof! now it's single phase? Are you sure that's your position?
In my world, the real world, you still have 3 phases. If you have
those 3 windings, connect one end of each to a shared neutral,
you still have a 3 phase power source, nothing magically disappeared.

And are you really, really sure you want to be on record that I can't
have two phases without four conductors? Maybe some of the other
"experts" here will weigh in on those two interesting positions.

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 2:49:17 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:31:28 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Already addressed that in another post just now. I clearly said "I believe".
Rather odd you're objecting to that suddenly, I've been posting the
same thing for two days.

... and I have been telling you for days, what you say about 2 phase
is simply wrong but you keep posting it.
Telling a lie over and over does not make it true.
You really are starting to sound more like your buddy trump every day.

I addressed it in the other post. As I said, this is the first time
you've insisted that one can't have two phases without 4 conductors.
You said that was the old 90 deg two phase system. I said OK, we can
morph that one step at a time. First step, instead of using two wires,
lets use a shared neutral, make it 3 wires. There isn't anything radical
in that, is there?
Just connect one end of each winding to a common return/neutral.
For a couple days, you didn't object. You have two windings, separated
by 90 deg on one shaft, two hots, one neutral. Very simple.
But now I understand you're
insisting that one can't have two phase without four conductors.
Are you sure that's your position of record? It seems very odd, since
we have 3 phase all over the place with just 3 conductors that it now
takes 4 conductors to get two phase. You might want to rethink that one.

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 3:51:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:48:31 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 12:29:45 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:55:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Now I rotate one coil so that instead of 120, it's at 179. Are there
still three phases?

Technically in your pink unicorn world, yes

OK, so we agree, if you take a 3 phase power source and rotate one winding
so that instead of 120 degrees, it's at 179, there are still 3 phases.



Now I rotate it one degree more, to 180. Are there still 3 phases,
yes or no?

No there is one phase. 180 degrees is a straight line with no angular
displacement, 3d grade math.

Wow, that's a stunning answer. Are you sure that's your answer? Your
final answer? By rotating that one winding from 179 to 180 degrees
suddenly this whole generator went to single phase? And I'm the one
accused of parlor tricks?

In my world, the real word, you still have 3 phases, 0, 180, 240.
Before the change you had 0, 179, 240. You'd of course see exactly
that on a scope. Anything else would be magic indeed.
.
0-180 is the same phase. It is a straight line with no phase shift.
Simply the idea that looking at both ends from the middle does not
make it two.


So, your position is that I can take a 3 phase power source, with three
windings, one at 0, one at 120, one at 240 and it's 3 phase. And if
I move the 120 one to 179, it's still 3 phase. If I move it to 181 it's
still 3 phase. But if I move it to 180, Poof, it's no longer a phase?
Where did it go? If I hook up a scope, I can see it when it's at 179,
yes? I can see it at 181, yes? It delivers power at all those phases, yes?
But if I move the winding one degree, it's no longer there? You might
want to rethink that one. What happens on the scope? It's gone?
There would be your parlor trick. Electrical engineering isn't built on parlor tricks. Just because it's 180 and the inverse of the one at 0 doesn't
mean it;s gone. And just for arguments sake, I'm not clear on what
all disappeared because we had 3 phase and now you say it's single phase?
Did it kill off the phase at 240 too?

On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 17:50:59 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 2:46:02 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:09:33 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 11:51:18 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:39:37 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

According to Fretwell, two phase power existed 100 years ago, and it
was over two wires, 90 degrees phase difference. Suppose I run it
over 3 wires instead, with a shared neutral, make it 120V. So,
you have a generator supplying 120V, two coils, one shared neutral.
Would there still be two phases there?
(I believe Fretwell said yes)
Your answer?

When you lie you can always make your point.
I never agreed you were right about any of this.
Two phase simply does not work like this

I clearly said *I believe* you said that it would be two phase. But it's
hard to keep track, because you won't answer a simple series of questions,
instead you bail out, claiming you can't answer a simple question about
whether a phase still exists when I change the angle from 90 to some other
choice, because "that system doesn't exist". So much for electrical
engineering, now it's claimed that we can only analyze that which is
actually deployed. That would get expensive fast.

I have answered you silly quiz TWICE
At least as much as you can answer nonsense questions.

They are all perfectly legitimate questions that any first week circuits 101
student should be able to answer. And you don't answer them in series,
you go part way into the example and then you start talking about transformers
when there are no transformers in the simple problem and you bail.

I already let you have generators and your theory still falls apart.

I prefer to live in reality and not some theoretical world where only
pink unicorns and blue oxen live.

Engineers can answer simple theoretical circuit questions. This is a
bizarre position, that only that which has been built can be analyzed
and explained.

Engineers live in a theoretical world. Ever see one wire a house? It
is zip cord and flying splices because that works on paper.



So feel free to give us your definitive answer to the above simple question.
Here it is again, go step by step:

According to Fretwell, two phase power existed 100 years ago, and it
was over two wires, 90 degrees phase difference. Suppose I run it
over 3 wires instead, with a shared neutral, make it 120V from each
phase to the neutral. So, you have a generator supplying 120V on
each of two windings on the same shaft 90 deg phase difference,
one shared neutral. Would there still be two phases there?

I have to stop you there. You are just full of ****. Two phase
requires FOUR ungrounded conductors.
They either look like an X or T but they still act like an X

Two phases requires four ungrounded conductors according to whom, exactly?

The people who wire the grid.


I can have three phase with only three! And that exists, right?

You might, theoretically be able to have it but it doesn't exist in
the power distribution system.
I live in the real world. I am not sure what planet you are on.



So now, I run that from the generator into a house, we have three wires,
shared neutral, 120V, two phases, 90 deg phase difference, correct?
I could hook a scope up to the neutral and see two phases, 90 deg
apart, correct?

If I change the phase difference to 179 degrees instead of 90
by rotating one coil, are there still two phases? Yes or no?


Now I rotate it to 180 phase difference. Are there still two phases,
yes or no? If you disagree, explain how it's different, how there
suddenly there are not two phases there, where one phase just went.


S L O W L Y
When you rotate to 180 you have ONE PHASE, no matter how many times
you tap the output source.
A 180 degree phase angle is no angle at all it is a straight line.

A unique singularity in the world of electrical engineering? That
indeed is your parlor trick! You told us that 3 phases exists with
phases at 0, 120, 240. Yes? I have to check, because above you say
that two phases can't exist without 4 conductors, so that would imply
that 3 phase requires more than 4 conductors. But previously you just
told us that I can have:
Perhaps you should just look at the geometry of the way these are
generated in the real world. I don't know what might be possible in
the lab.

I understand reality is a foreign planet to you but this is a diagram
of a 3phase "Scott Tee" making 2 phase. (drawn by a power engineer,
not a college geek)

https://www.electrical-contractor.net/theory/2phd1.gif

The 2 phase out is on the bottom.

On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 17:58:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 2:49:17 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:31:28 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Already addressed that in another post just now. I clearly said "I believe".
Rather odd you're objecting to that suddenly, I've been posting the
same thing for two days.

... and I have been telling you for days, what you say about 2 phase
is simply wrong but you keep posting it.
Telling a lie over and over does not make it true.
You really are starting to sound more like your buddy trump every day.

I addressed it in the other post. As I said, this is the first time
you've insisted that one can't have two phases without 4 conductors.
You said that was the old 90 deg two phase system. I said OK, we can
morph that one step at a time. First step, instead of using two wires,
lets use a shared neutral, make it 3 wires. There isn't anything radical
in that, is there?
Just connect one end of each winding to a common return/neutral.
For a couple days, you didn't object. You have two windings, separated
by 90 deg on one shaft, two hots, one neutral. Very simple.
But now I understand you're
insisting that one can't have two phase without four conductors.
Are you sure that's your position of record? It seems very odd, since
we have 3 phase all over the place with just 3 conductors that it now
takes 4 conductors to get two phase. You might want to rethink that one.

You can duct tape a funnel on the nose of a horse and call it a
unicorn but that does not make it so.
https://www.electrical-contractor.net/theory/2phd1.gif
Look at the diagram on the bottom. You will see that needs 4 wires. If
you make it a Tee or an Ell, you will end up with 3 phase.
In fact that was how they made 3 phase when they had 2 phase
distribution, well up into the 20th century. It was still in my IBM
physical planning manuals in 1990.
Same transformer, just wired the other way.
I am sorry if I keep coming back to transformers but that is what
electrical distribution uses. Don't blame me, blame Tesla and
Westinghouse.

On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 18:07:59 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 3:51:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:48:31 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 12:29:45 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:55:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Now I rotate one coil so that instead of 120, it's at 179. Are there
still three phases?

Technically in your pink unicorn world, yes

OK, so we agree, if you take a 3 phase power source and rotate one winding
so that instead of 120 degrees, it's at 179, there are still 3 phases.



Now I rotate it one degree more, to 180. Are there still 3 phases,
yes or no?

No there is one phase. 180 degrees is a straight line with no angular
displacement, 3d grade math.

Wow, that's a stunning answer. Are you sure that's your answer? Your
final answer? By rotating that one winding from 179 to 180 degrees
suddenly this whole generator went to single phase? And I'm the one
accused of parlor tricks?

In my world, the real word, you still have 3 phases, 0, 180, 240.
Before the change you had 0, 179, 240. You'd of course see exactly
that on a scope. Anything else would be magic indeed.
.
0-180 is the same phase. It is a straight line with no phase shift.
Simply the idea that looking at both ends from the middle does not
make it two.


So, your position is that I can take a 3 phase power source, with three
windings, one at 0, one at 120, one at 240 and it's 3 phase. And if
I move the 120 one to 179, it's still 3 phase. If I move it to 181 it's
still 3 phase. But if I move it to 180, Poof, it's no longer a phase?

No actually when you get to "181" you are 3 phase with opposite
rotation and it becomes a 179 phase shift.
The reality is that might technically be 3 phase but I am not even
sure it is sustainable.

When you reach 180 degrees "poof" it does disappear. That is when a
triangle becomes a line with no phase angle. That is elementary school
geometry
How many degrees are there in a triangle? any triangle? Don't even try
to say this isn't the geometry of triangles when your white paper is
loaded with trig symbols.
Trig is the science of triangles.

I already showed you how you can create the illusion of 2 phase from a
3 phase red leg delta on a scope,. You just need to hang the common on
the center tap. Your 3 phase motors are still happily spinning away
but you will look at your scope and swear there are only 2 phases.

I don't know why you can't accept the opinion of someone with 50 years
in the business who has actually done this **** (30 years in computer
hardware and 20 years as an inspector) and you rely on something you
googled up and a misconception you can't seem to shake..

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 6:47:11 PM UTC-4, Sam E wrote:
On 08/07/2018 09:55 AM, trader_4 wrote:

[wires]

Problem two:

According to Fretwell, two phase power existed 100 years ago, and it
was over two wires, 90 degrees phase difference.

Wouldn't that be 4 wires (2 per phase)

Yes, you're right and that's what he said and I acknowledged way back.
I just put two wires in the latest formulation of the questions that I posed
by mistake. The old 90 was two phase, 90 deg, on four wires. I used
that as a starting point because that's what Frewell says was a two
phase implementation. So the
problem I posed is where I morph that into 240/120 service, one step
at a time. Looks like we're stuck on step one, Fretwell says if I
have those two windings that are 90 apart share a common neutral return,
it's no longer two phase, that two phase has to have 4 wires. Which
of course is bizarre. Why would two phases require 4 wires, when we
have 3 phase all over the place with with just 3?

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 7:13:54 PM UTC-4, notX wrote:
On 08/07/2018 11:29 AM, wrote:

[snip]

No there is one phase. 180 degrees is a straight line with no angular
displacement, 3d grade math.

Apparently, you would consider turning around and looking in the
opposite direction to be looking in the same direction. North = South.
It's a good thing you're not flying the plane I'm taking from DFW
(Dallas Texas) to Montana. I don't want to go to Cuba, which you
consider to be in the same direction.

+1

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 7:29:05 PM UTC-4, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 08/07/2018 01:27 PM, devnull wrote:

[snip]

The secondary winding is one continuous conductor with a tap fastened in
the middle.Â* But the tap is unused to provide 240 volts.Â* You could
remove the tap and sit on it and you would still have 240 volts single
phase.Â* Get it?

With a disconnected (or nonexistent) center tap, you'd have 240V single
phase. The difference from 2 different phases is that you changed the
point of reference.

Exactly. They try to treat the center tap as a mere curiosity, when it's
purpose is to create two 120V voltage sources that are 180 deg out of
phase with each other with respect to it. And it becomes the NEUTRAL,
the SYSTEM reference point. I've asked many times
for someone to draw a circuit diagram that models that circuit without
using two 120V voltage sources that are either 180 out of phase or of
opposite polarity, which is the same thing. They won't because it
can't be done.





The same way, if you were in between the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth
(Texas), the cities are in 2 different directions. If you're in Atlanta
Georgia they're in the same direction.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"All religions are founded on the fear of the many and the cleverness of
the few." -- Marie Henri Beyle (Stendhal)

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 8:47:10 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 18:16:08 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 08/07/2018 11:37 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:48:22 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Yes, it is. You have two 120V voltage sources going into the house,
one 180 deg out of phase from the other. Look up the definition of
phase.

In the context of electrical distribution phase refers to the angular
displacement between the wave on the conductors and there is no
angular displacement in a straight line, only one end and the other
end.
bisecting a line does not make 2 lines unless one changes direction
(angular displacement)

If you have 3 conductors (one of which is neutral), how would you
determine if the others had the same phase or different phases? No
cheating please.

There are 2 possibilities right away.
That is where you actually need to understand the distribution systems
used in the US.

Nonsense Fretwell. He asked a general question, not one specific to any
distribution system. You're given three conductors from an unknown
source, one identified as the neutral. Could be from anything, directly
from a generator or synthesized electronically from a DC battery.
How would you determine what the phase relationships are?



I would need to determine what kind of system I was looking at. Simply
poking around with a meter or even a scope, is not going to give you
that answer unless you understand that.

In my world, the answer is a scope will give you the answer. That's
because the same rules of electricity apply universally. The electrons
don't care if they were created from a generator, a transformer or an
electronic box that synthesizes them from a battery. It's the voltages,
the phase relationship and the ampacity, that's all that matters.
And when you do that with the 240/120 service, you have two 120V
voltage sources that are 180 deg out of phase with each other.



Single phase and a corner
grounded delta will look pretty much exactly alike, just having
strange voltages (typically 480/240 for the delta, 120/240 for our old
friend the center tapped single phase). Both have 2 ungrounded
conductors and one white.

Sigh.


They will appear the same, single phase.
A center tapped delta will look a lot like 2 phase if you have a scope
with a grounded common (the only ones we had back on the olden days),
again you need to spot the "wild" 208v leg to figure that out because
it will look like it is 90 degrees out. The other two look just like
single phase. You will also have 4 conductors (one white) so that does
not apply to your question
The idea that you will simply see a 120 degree phase shift and say
that is 3 phase only works on a wye but that will be 4 conductors too
(one white).
The red herring Trader can't get over, 2 phase, will have 4 ungrounded
conductors and may or may not have a 5th grounded conductor (white)
but it is not a neutral, nor is the one on the corner delta above.

Nonsense. I take a generator with two windings on a single shaft.
They are at a phase difference of N degrees on the shaft. I tie one
end of each winding to the other, creating one common return/neutral. I
now have 3 wires and TWO phases. It really is that simple. If you
make N=90, you have the old 90 deg two phase implemented over 3 wires
instead of two. What do you claim I have there on those two hots?
If it's not two phases, what is it?

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 10:03:29 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 17:50:59 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 2:46:02 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:09:33 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 11:51:18 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:39:37 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

According to Fretwell, two phase power existed 100 years ago, and it
was over two wires, 90 degrees phase difference. Suppose I run it
over 3 wires instead, with a shared neutral, make it 120V. So,
you have a generator supplying 120V, two coils, one shared neutral.
Would there still be two phases there?
(I believe Fretwell said yes)
Your answer?

When you lie you can always make your point.
I never agreed you were right about any of this.
Two phase simply does not work like this

I clearly said *I believe* you said that it would be two phase. But it's
hard to keep track, because you won't answer a simple series of questions,
instead you bail out, claiming you can't answer a simple question about
whether a phase still exists when I change the angle from 90 to some other
choice, because "that system doesn't exist". So much for electrical
engineering, now it's claimed that we can only analyze that which is
actually deployed. That would get expensive fast.

I have answered you silly quiz TWICE
At least as much as you can answer nonsense questions.

They are all perfectly legitimate questions that any first week circuits 101
student should be able to answer. And you don't answer them in series,
you go part way into the example and then you start talking about transformers
when there are no transformers in the simple problem and you bail.

I already let you have generators and your theory still falls apart.

My theory falls apart? Your latest bizarre position is that if I take
two windings and put them on a single shaft generator, N deg apart,
connect one end of each winding to one end of the other and making
that a common return/neutral, that I don't have two phases over 3 wires.
THAT is where the failure is. To claim that there are not two phases
there is absurd.

As is your claim that if I take a 3 phase generator and rotate the 120
winding to 179 or 181 it's still 3 phases, but if I dare rotate it to 180,
then it becomes a one phase system. (I presume 181 is still OK, you
said 179 was, so it seems 181 would be OK by your methods too) And I'm
really concerned about that poor 240 phase conductor. Did it get whacked
too? If it's now single phase, what happened to that poor fellow?





I prefer to live in reality and not some theoretical world where only
pink unicorns and blue oxen live.

Engineers can answer simple theoretical circuit questions. This is a
bizarre position, that only that which has been built can be analyzed
and explained.

Engineers live in a theoretical world.

In my world they live in both the theoretical and real world. Just look
around you.




Ever see one wire a house? It
is zip cord and flying splices because that works on paper.



So feel free to give us your definitive answer to the above simple question.
Here it is again, go step by step:

According to Fretwell, two phase power existed 100 years ago, and it
was over two wires, 90 degrees phase difference. Suppose I run it
over 3 wires instead, with a shared neutral, make it 120V from each
phase to the neutral. So, you have a generator supplying 120V on
each of two windings on the same shaft 90 deg phase difference,
one shared neutral. Would there still be two phases there?

I have to stop you there. You are just full of ****. Two phase
requires FOUR ungrounded conductors.
They either look like an X or T but they still act like an X

Two phases requires four ungrounded conductors according to whom, exactly?

The people who wire the grid.

Is that the new fallback position? Maxwell's equations no longer apply?
It's all determined by the guys who do the wiring?






I can have three phase with only three! And that exists, right?

You might, theoretically be able to have it but it doesn't exist in
the power distribution system.
I live in the real world. I am not sure what planet you are on.



So now, I run that from the generator into a house, we have three wires,
shared neutral, 120V, two phases, 90 deg phase difference, correct?
I could hook a scope up to the neutral and see two phases, 90 deg
apart, correct?

If I change the phase difference to 179 degrees instead of 90
by rotating one coil, are there still two phases? Yes or no?


Now I rotate it to 180 phase difference. Are there still two phases,
yes or no? If you disagree, explain how it's different, how there
suddenly there are not two phases there, where one phase just went.


S L O W L Y
When you rotate to 180 you have ONE PHASE, no matter how many times
you tap the output source.
A 180 degree phase angle is no angle at all it is a straight line.

A unique singularity in the world of electrical engineering? That
indeed is your parlor trick! You told us that 3 phases exists with
phases at 0, 120, 240. Yes? I have to check, because above you say
that two phases can't exist without 4 conductors, so that would imply
that 3 phase requires more than 4 conductors. But previously you just
told us that I can have:
Perhaps you should just look at the geometry of the way these are
generated in the real world. I don't know what might be possible in
the lab.








I understand reality is a foreign planet to you but this is a diagram
of a 3phase "Scott Tee" making 2 phase. (drawn by a power engineer,
not a college geek)

https://www.electrical-contractor.net/theory/2phd1.gif

The 2 phase out is on the bottom.


Just because that's one way of getting two phases to power something
doesn't mean it's the only way.

On 08/07/2018 07:47 PM, wrote:

[snip]

If you have 3 conductors (one of which is neutral), how would you
determine if the others had the same phase or different phases? No
cheating please.

There are 2 possibilities right away.
That is where you actually need to understand the distribution systems
used in the US.
I would need to determine what kind of system I was looking at. Simply
poking around with a meter or even a scope, is not going to give you
that answer unless you understand that.

I did actually leave out something, that the 2 non-grounded conductors
carry the same voltage at the same frequency.

That and a voltmeter is all you need. There's no need to bring in
extraneous information, like power distribution systems.

If the 2 conductors carry the same phase, the voltage changes (AC) are
in step, so at any time they have the same voltage on them. The
difference is 0V and that is what you measure. No need for any of that
complex stuff, like where those conductors came from. It works the same
if you have 2 synchronized electronic inverters with a DC supply.

BTW, 240V is NOT the same as 0V.

Also, I remember someone talking about synchronizing generators by
putting a light bulb between the outputs. Same phase: no light.

[snip]

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"If a man would follow, today, the teachings of the Old Testament, he
would be a criminal. If he would follow strictly the teachings of the
New, he would be insane." -- Robert G. Ingersoll

On 08/08/2018 08:28 AM, trader_4 wrote:

According to Fretwell, two phase power existed 100 years ago, and it
was over two wires, 90 degrees phase difference.

Wouldn't that be 4 wires (2 per phase)

Yes, you're right and that's what he said and I acknowledged way back.
I just put two wires in the latest formulation of the questions that I posed
by mistake. The old 90 was two phase, 90 deg, on four wires. I used
that as a starting point because that's what Frewell says was a two
phase implementation.

When I first heard about that (90-deg 2-phase) he appeared to be saying
that since THAT was 2-plase, nothing ELSE could be.

So the
problem I posed is where I morph that into 240/120 service, one step
at a time. Looks like we're stuck on step one, Fretwell says if I
have those two windings that are 90 apart share a common neutral return,
it's no longer two phase, that two phase has to have 4 wires. Which
of course is bizarre. Why would two phases require 4 wires, when we
have 3 phase all over the place with with just 3?

I don't really know much about delta, but I do know what a phase is.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"If a man would follow, today, the teachings of the Old Testament, he
would be a criminal. If he would follow strictly the teachings of the
New, he would be insane." -- Robert G. Ingersoll

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:28:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:
So the
problem I posed is where I morph that into 240/120 service, one step
at a time. Looks like we're stuck on step one, Fretwell says if I
have those two windings that are 90 apart share a common neutral return,
it's no longer two phase, that two phase has to have 4 wires. Which
of course is bizarre. Why would two phases require 4 wires, when we
have 3 phase all over the place with with just 3?


Quite simple grasshopper
You need 4 wires because the 2 phases are not connected together.

If you connect 2 out of phase sources together you get 3 phase. Think
triangle.

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:37:21 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 7:29:05 PM UTC-4, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 08/07/2018 01:27 PM, devnull wrote:

[snip]

The secondary winding is one continuous conductor with a tap fastened in
the middle.Â* But the tap is unused to provide 240 volts.Â* You could
remove the tap and sit on it and you would still have 240 volts single
phase.Â* Get it?

With a disconnected (or nonexistent) center tap, you'd have 240V single
phase. The difference from 2 different phases is that you changed the
point of reference.

Exactly. They try to treat the center tap as a mere curiosity, when it's
purpose is to create two 120V voltage sources that are 180 deg out of
phase with each other with respect to it. And it becomes the NEUTRAL,
the SYSTEM reference point. I've asked many times
for someone to draw a circuit diagram that models that circuit without
using two 120V voltage sources that are either 180 out of phase or of
opposite polarity, which is the same thing. They won't because it
can't be done.

I have posted it several times

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:17:52 PM UTC-4, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 08/07/2018 07:47 PM, wrote:

[snip]

If you have 3 conductors (one of which is neutral), how would you
determine if the others had the same phase or different phases? No
cheating please.

There are 2 possibilities right away.
That is where you actually need to understand the distribution systems
used in the US.
I would need to determine what kind of system I was looking at. Simply
poking around with a meter or even a scope, is not going to give you
that answer unless you understand that.

I did actually leave out something, that the 2 non-grounded conductors
carry the same voltage at the same frequency.

That and a voltmeter is all you need. There's no need to bring in
extraneous information, like power distribution systems.

Thank you!




If the 2 conductors carry the same phase, the voltage changes (AC) are
in step, so at any time they have the same voltage on them. The
difference is 0V and that is what you measure. No need for any of that
complex stuff, like where those conductors came from. It works the same
if you have 2 synchronized electronic inverters with a DC supply.

BTW, 240V is NOT the same as 0V.

Also, I remember someone talking about synchronizing generators by
putting a light bulb between the outputs. Same phase: no light.

[snip]

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

Thank you again. That's exactly what I said, if you have two AC conductors
that are delivering power and they are the same phase, voltage and
frequency, you can parallel them, because there is no potential difference
between them. And what you have coming into a house with 240/120
service looks like two 120V voltage sources that are out of phase
with each other by 180 deg, or of opposite polarity, same thing.
It actually is that. By viewing it as that, all is explained:

A - With respect to the neutral, you see two 120V voltage waveforms with
respect to the neutral, differing in phase by 180. And that's exactly
what is there, each half of the secondary winding is a voltage source
and they are connected with opposite polarities with respect to the
neutral.

B - You can't randomly parallel any two 120V receptacles in the house
because some are on opposite phases.

If you measure between the two phases, you get 240V.

All that flows directly. There is no need to talk about transformers,
generators, or a synthesizer, if it happens to be created by an
electronic UPS type device, etc. If you add in ampacity, that voltage,
phase, freq info is all you need to design with it and use it.

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:47:37 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 8:47:10 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 18:16:08 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 08/07/2018 11:37 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:48:22 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Yes, it is. You have two 120V voltage sources going into the house,
one 180 deg out of phase from the other. Look up the definition of
phase.

In the context of electrical distribution phase refers to the angular
displacement between the wave on the conductors and there is no
angular displacement in a straight line, only one end and the other
end.
bisecting a line does not make 2 lines unless one changes direction
(angular displacement)

If you have 3 conductors (one of which is neutral), how would you
determine if the others had the same phase or different phases? No
cheating please.

There are 2 possibilities right away.
That is where you actually need to understand the distribution systems
used in the US.

Nonsense Fretwell. He asked a general question, not one specific to any
distribution system. You're given three conductors from an unknown
source, one identified as the neutral. Could be from anything, directly
from a generator or synthesized electronically from a DC battery.
How would you determine what the phase relationships are?

The nonsense is talking about things that do not exist. If you have to
make up scenarios from the planet MoRon to make your point it is not
relevant to the planet earth.


I would need to determine what kind of system I was looking at. Simply
poking around with a meter or even a scope, is not going to give you
that answer unless you understand that.

In my world, the answer is a scope will give you the answer. That's
because the same rules of electricity apply universally. The electrons
don't care if they were created from a generator, a transformer or an
electronic box that synthesizes them from a battery. It's the voltages,
the phase relationship and the ampacity, that's all that matters.
And when you do that with the 240/120 service, you have two 120V
voltage sources that are 180 deg out of phase with each other.


I am not convinced you have ever even used a scope.
Describe, in detail how you would set up your scope to see this parlor
trick.


Single phase and a corner
grounded delta will look pretty much exactly alike, just having
strange voltages (typically 480/240 for the delta, 120/240 for our old
friend the center tapped single phase). Both have 2 ungrounded
conductors and one white.

Sigh.
Don't know do you. I bet you have never even seen center delta.



They will appear the same, single phase.
A center tapped delta will look a lot like 2 phase if you have a scope
with a grounded common (the only ones we had back on the olden days),
again you need to spot the "wild" 208v leg to figure that out because
it will look like it is 90 degrees out. The other two look just like
single phase. You will also have 4 conductors (one white) so that does
not apply to your question
The idea that you will simply see a 120 degree phase shift and say
that is 3 phase only works on a wye but that will be 4 conductors too
(one white).
The red herring Trader can't get over, 2 phase, will have 4 ungrounded
conductors and may or may not have a 5th grounded conductor (white)
but it is not a neutral, nor is the one on the corner delta above.

Nonsense. I take a generator with two windings on a single shaft.
They are at a phase difference of N degrees on the shaft. I tie one
end of each winding to the other, creating one common return/neutral. I
now have 3 wires and TWO phases. It really is that simple. If you
make N=90, you have the old 90 deg two phase implemented over 3 wires
instead of two. What do you claim I have there on those two hots?
If it's not two phases, what is it?

You DO NOT understand 2 phase.
If there is an actual phase angle difference between A and B there is
also another phase angle between A and C. The complement of the angle
A B.
You do not need the 3d source to get 3P delta but it is still there.

http://myelectrical.com/Portals/0/SunBlogNuke/2/WindowsLiveWriter/WhatisanOpenDeltaTransformer_A776/Open%20Delta%20Transformer_thumb.jpg

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 07:01:50 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

I already let you have generators and your theory still falls apart.

My theory falls apart? Your latest bizarre position is that if I take
two windings and put them on a single shaft generator, N deg apart,
connect one end of each winding to one end of the other and making
that a common return/neutral, that I don't have two phases over 3 wires.
THAT is where the failure is. To claim that there are not two phases
there is absurd.

No what is absurd is that you have made a 3 phase corner grounded
delta and you are calling it 2 phase.
As soon as you put a phase shift between 2 connected sources you have
made 3 phase. The only difference between a bisected line and a
triangle is adding an angle to it. 5th grade geometry

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:49:45 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:28:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:
So the
problem I posed is where I morph that into 240/120 service, one step
at a time. Looks like we're stuck on step one, Fretwell says if I
have those two windings that are 90 apart share a common neutral return,
it's no longer two phase, that two phase has to have 4 wires. Which
of course is bizarre. Why would two phases require 4 wires, when we
have 3 phase all over the place with with just 3?


Quite simple grasshopper
You need 4 wires because the 2 phases are not connected together.

If you connect 2 out of phase sources together you get 3 phase. Think
triangle.

OK, let's go through this one step at a time. I take two windings
and put them on a generator shaft, with a difference of N degrees.
I connect on end of each winding to one end of the other winding.
That point is the system neutral. I connect a scope to the neutral.
I look at each of the two conductors coming from the so far unconnected
ends of the two windings. Do I see not see two voltage waveforms
that differ by N degrees?


If I do see that, then how by connecting two loads, let's say a resistor
between the conductor from one winding and and the neutral and another
resistor between the other winding and neutral, do I not still have
two phases and the same waveforms? What magic just happened to make 3 phases? And if I put a resistor between the two conductors, I
don't see how that creates a third phase either. Following that logic,
putting a resistor between two phases of our 3 phase system would
create another phase too, wouldn't it and I'd then have 4 phases?
If I put three resistors between phases, I'd have 6 phases?

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 11:17:47 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 08/07/2018 07:47 PM, wrote:

[snip]

If you have 3 conductors (one of which is neutral), how would you
determine if the others had the same phase or different phases? No
cheating please.

There are 2 possibilities right away.
That is where you actually need to understand the distribution systems
used in the US.
I would need to determine what kind of system I was looking at. Simply
poking around with a meter or even a scope, is not going to give you
that answer unless you understand that.

I did actually leave out something, that the 2 non-grounded conductors
carry the same voltage at the same frequency.

That and a voltmeter is all you need. There's no need to bring in
extraneous information, like power distribution systems.

If the 2 conductors carry the same phase, the voltage changes (AC) are
in step, so at any time they have the same voltage on them. The
difference is 0V and that is what you measure. No need for any of that
complex stuff, like where those conductors came from. It works the same
if you have 2 synchronized electronic inverters with a DC supply.

BTW, 240V is NOT the same as 0V.

Also, I remember someone talking about synchronizing generators by
putting a light bulb between the outputs. Same phase: no light.

[snip]

In phase means a straight line, no angular displacement and also the
same direction of current at any given time. If there is a voltage
generated across this source, it is obvious the potential will be
different from one end to the other. That doesn't make them out of
phase.

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 11:31:56 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 08/08/2018 08:28 AM, trader_4 wrote:

According to Fretwell, two phase power existed 100 years ago, and it
was over two wires, 90 degrees phase difference.

Wouldn't that be 4 wires (2 per phase)

Yes, you're right and that's what he said and I acknowledged way back.
I just put two wires in the latest formulation of the questions that I posed
by mistake. The old 90 was two phase, 90 deg, on four wires. I used
that as a starting point because that's what Frewell says was a two
phase implementation.

When I first heard about that (90-deg 2-phase) he appeared to be saying
that since THAT was 2-plase, nothing ELSE could be.

You could certainly have 2 phase with any angular displacement you
want but the thing to understand is the 2 phases are isolated from
each other.

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:52:46 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:37:21 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 7:29:05 PM UTC-4, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 08/07/2018 01:27 PM, devnull wrote:

[snip]

The secondary winding is one continuous conductor with a tap fastened in
the middle.Â* But the tap is unused to provide 240 volts.Â* You could
remove the tap and sit on it and you would still have 240 volts single
phase.Â* Get it?

With a disconnected (or nonexistent) center tap, you'd have 240V single
phase. The difference from 2 different phases is that you changed the
point of reference.

Exactly. They try to treat the center tap as a mere curiosity, when it's
purpose is to create two 120V voltage sources that are 180 deg out of
phase with each other with respect to it. And it becomes the NEUTRAL,
the SYSTEM reference point. I've asked many times
for someone to draw a circuit diagram that models that circuit without
using two 120V voltage sources that are either 180 out of phase or of
opposite polarity, which is the same thing. They won't because it
can't be done.

I have posted it several times

Not that I've seen. So, tell us, how do you model 240/120 service
without two 120V voltage source, one 180 out of phase or of opposite
polarity. How do you do it with one 240V source?


My model, the IEEE Fellow's model, and I believe Mark's model would
be TWO 120V 60 hz, ideal voltage sources. Take one connect it's
negative side to the neutral. Take the other connect it's negative
side to the neutral. One is voltage source is sin(wt),
the other sin(wt+180).

Or alternatively, take one connect it's negative side to the neutral.
Take the other and connect it's positive side to the neutral.
Then both voltage sources are sin(wt).

That is the only way to describe, to model, to draw the circuit we're
talking about.

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 1:05:55 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:47:37 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 8:47:10 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 18:16:08 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 08/07/2018 11:37 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:48:22 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Yes, it is. You have two 120V voltage sources going into the house,
one 180 deg out of phase from the other. Look up the definition of
phase.

In the context of electrical distribution phase refers to the angular
displacement between the wave on the conductors and there is no
angular displacement in a straight line, only one end and the other
end.
bisecting a line does not make 2 lines unless one changes direction
(angular displacement)

If you have 3 conductors (one of which is neutral), how would you
determine if the others had the same phase or different phases? No
cheating please.

There are 2 possibilities right away.
That is where you actually need to understand the distribution systems
used in the US.

Nonsense Fretwell. He asked a general question, not one specific to any
distribution system. You're given three conductors from an unknown
source, one identified as the neutral. Could be from anything, directly
from a generator or synthesized electronically from a DC battery.
How would you determine what the phase relationships are?

The nonsense is talking about things that do not exist.

So you're back to your position that in electrical engineering
we can only talk about things that already exist. Very bizarre position.



If you have to
make up scenarios from the planet MoRon to make your point it is not
relevant to the planet earth.

It's exactly by analyzing a wide variety of scenarios that we test
whether what we think is right or not. It's how we challenge what
we think is right, how we see if it works, or if there are holes.
This is like saying we can't figure out what speed a Volkswagen
would fall in a vacuum on earth, because it's a moron scenario
and can't be analyzed without doing it.








I would need to determine what kind of system I was looking at. Simply
poking around with a meter or even a scope, is not going to give you
that answer unless you understand that.

In my world, the answer is a scope will give you the answer. That's
because the same rules of electricity apply universally. The electrons
don't care if they were created from a generator, a transformer or an
electronic box that synthesizes them from a battery. It's the voltages,
the phase relationship and the ampacity, that's all that matters.
And when you do that with the 240/120 service, you have two 120V
voltage sources that are 180 deg out of phase with each other.


I am not convinced you have ever even used a scope.
Describe, in detail how you would set up your scope to see this parlor
trick.

I've described it quite clearly before. Take your scope, hook the
scope ground to the neutral, which after all is the SYSTEM reference
point, by design, not some random, bizarre point I picked. Put
one probe on one hot, put one probe on the other hot. You'll see
two 120V sine waves, 180 deg out of phase with each other.



Nonsense. I take a generator with two windings on a single shaft.
They are at a phase difference of N degrees on the shaft. I tie one
end of each winding to the other, creating one common return/neutral. I
now have 3 wires and TWO phases. It really is that simple. If you
make N=90, you have the old 90 deg two phase implemented over 3 wires
instead of two. What do you claim I have there on those two hots?
If it's not two phases, what is it?

You DO NOT understand 2 phase.

Then explain to us what that is that I described, if it's not
two phases. This two
phase thing sounds more and more like a miraculous unicorn. It
must have been very special when 100 years ago they stumbled on
the one and only way to make two phases, which was to use 4 wires
and make it 90 deg? Nothing else is allowed, no other way?
Yet somehow we get 3 phases on just 3? Where did those rules
come from? How do you keep track of it all?




If there is an actual phase angle difference between A and B there is
also another phase angle between A and C. The complement of the angle
A B.
You do not need the 3d source to get 3P delta but it is still there.

http://myelectrical.com/Portals/0/SunBlogNuke/2/WindowsLiveWriter/WhatisanOpenDeltaTransformer_A776/Open%20Delta%20Transformer_thumb.jpg

They used two of the three primary phases to generate two phases on
the secondary. So what? I've said many times you can generate
power sources many ways and exactly how you do it doesn't change
how many phases you have in the result. It's only the result that
matters, not if it came from a transformer, generator, or black box.
BTW, your example there does show two phases with just three wires,
what's up with that?

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 10:12:36 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:49:45 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:28:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:
So the
problem I posed is where I morph that into 240/120 service, one step
at a time. Looks like we're stuck on step one, Fretwell says if I
have those two windings that are 90 apart share a common neutral return,
it's no longer two phase, that two phase has to have 4 wires. Which
of course is bizarre. Why would two phases require 4 wires, when we
have 3 phase all over the place with with just 3?


Quite simple grasshopper
You need 4 wires because the 2 phases are not connected together.

If you connect 2 out of phase sources together you get 3 phase. Think
triangle.

OK, let's go through this one step at a time. I take two windings
and put them on a generator shaft, with a difference of N degrees.
I connect on end of each winding to one end of the other winding.
That point is the system neutral. I connect a scope to the neutral.
I look at each of the two conductors coming from the so far unconnected
ends of the two windings. Do I see not see two voltage waveforms
that differ by N degrees?


If I do see that, then how by connecting two loads, let's say a resistor
between the conductor from one winding and and the neutral and another
resistor between the other winding and neutral, do I not still have
two phases and the same waveforms? What magic just happened to make 3 phases? And if I put a resistor between the two conductors, I
don't see how that creates a third phase either. Following that logic,
putting a resistor between two phases of our 3 phase system would
create another phase too, wouldn't it and I'd then have 4 phases?
If I put three resistors between phases, I'd have 6 phases?

As soon as you connect them together, you get 3 phase delta.
If you don't see that, you have no business in this conversation.
Three phase delta is most commonly produced with two "sources"
(transformer secondaries)
It could be done with 2 windings in a generator but why would you
spend all of that money on rotating machinery and not add the 3d
winding to get 100% instead of 66.6% of the output?
In the case of transformers the economy is there so they do it.
In fact I have only seen 3p delta with 3 transformers once, in Key
West and I assume they grew into it.

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 10:19:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:52:46 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:37:21 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 7:29:05 PM UTC-4, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 08/07/2018 01:27 PM, devnull wrote:

[snip]

The secondary winding is one continuous conductor with a tap fastened in
the middle.Â* But the tap is unused to provide 240 volts.Â* You could
remove the tap and sit on it and you would still have 240 volts single
phase.Â* Get it?

With a disconnected (or nonexistent) center tap, you'd have 240V single
phase. The difference from 2 different phases is that you changed the
point of reference.

Exactly. They try to treat the center tap as a mere curiosity, when it's
purpose is to create two 120V voltage sources that are 180 deg out of
phase with each other with respect to it. And it becomes the NEUTRAL,
the SYSTEM reference point. I've asked many times
for someone to draw a circuit diagram that models that circuit without
using two 120V voltage sources that are either 180 out of phase or of
opposite polarity, which is the same thing. They won't because it
can't be done.

I have posted it several times

Not that I've seen. So, tell us, how do you model 240/120 service
without two 120V voltage source, one 180 out of phase or of opposite
polarity. How do you do it with one 240V source?

By center tapping it but it is still one, single phase source that
happens to be cut in half.


My model, the IEEE Fellow's model, and I believe Mark's model would
be TWO 120V 60 hz, ideal voltage sources. Take one connect it's
negative side to the neutral. Take the other connect it's negative
side to the neutral. One is voltage source is sin(wt),
the other sin(wt+180).

Or alternatively, take one connect it's negative side to the neutral.
Take the other and connect it's positive side to the neutral.
Then both voltage sources are sin(wt).

That is the only way to describe, to model, to draw the circuit we're
talking about.

Notice all of the trig functions in that dissertation. Hence me going
back to triangles.

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 2:06:58 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 10:19:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:52:46 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:37:21 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 7:29:05 PM UTC-4, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 08/07/2018 01:27 PM, devnull wrote:

[snip]

The secondary winding is one continuous conductor with a tap fastened in
the middle.Â* But the tap is unused to provide 240 volts.Â* You could
remove the tap and sit on it and you would still have 240 volts single
phase.Â* Get it?

With a disconnected (or nonexistent) center tap, you'd have 240V single
phase. The difference from 2 different phases is that you changed the
point of reference.

Exactly. They try to treat the center tap as a mere curiosity, when it's
purpose is to create two 120V voltage sources that are 180 deg out of
phase with each other with respect to it. And it becomes the NEUTRAL,
the SYSTEM reference point. I've asked many times
for someone to draw a circuit diagram that models that circuit without
using two 120V voltage sources that are either 180 out of phase or of
opposite polarity, which is the same thing. They won't because it
can't be done.

I have posted it several times

Not that I've seen. So, tell us, how do you model 240/120 service
without two 120V voltage source, one 180 out of phase or of opposite
polarity. How do you do it with one 240V source?

By center tapping it but it is still one, single phase source that
happens to be cut in half.

That isn't a circuit model. Back to circuits 101. Draw the circuit
using Thevenin voltage sources. I just did it for you, it takes
TWO voltage sources, it cannot be done with one.





My model, the IEEE Fellow's model, and I believe Mark's model would
be TWO 120V 60 hz, ideal voltage sources. Take one connect it's
negative side to the neutral. Take the other connect it's negative
side to the neutral. One is voltage source is sin(wt),
the other sin(wt+180).

Or alternatively, take one connect it's negative side to the neutral.
Take the other and connect it's positive side to the neutral.
Then both voltage sources are sin(wt).

That is the only way to describe, to model, to draw the circuit we're
talking about.

Notice all of the trig functions in that dissertation. Hence me going
back to triangles.

Notice that he starts out by saying:

Abstract:
Distribution engineers have treated the standard "singlephase" distribution transformer connection as single phase because from the primary side of the transformer these connections are single phase and in the case of standard rural distribution single phase line to ground. However, with the advent of detailed circuit modeling we are beginning to see distribution modeling and analysis being accomplished past the transformer to the secondary. Which now brings into focus the reality that standard 120/240 secondary systems are not single phase line to ground systems, instead they are three wire systems with two phases and one ground wires. Further, the standard 120/240 secondary is different from the two phase primary system in that the secondary phases are separated by 180 degrees instead of three phases separated by 120 degrees.


And note that to start the analysis, he draws the circuit showing two
120V voltages, one across each winding, Fig 1.

On 8/8/2018 1:43 PM, trader_4 wrote:
I've described it quite clearly before. Take your scope, hook the
scope ground to the neutral, which after all is the SYSTEM reference
point, by design, not some random, bizarre point I picked. Put
one probe on one hot, put one probe on the other hot. You'll see
two 120V sine waves, 180 deg out of phase with each other.

The transformer secondary winding has two ends, L1 and L2.Â* Put your scope common lead on L1.Â* Attach one trace probe to the secondary tap and the other trace probe to L2.

Your scope should display two traces in perfect sync that vary only in amplitude.Â* Pure single phase.

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 10:43:31 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 1:05:55 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:47:37 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 8:47:10 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 18:16:08 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 08/07/2018 11:37 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:48:22 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Yes, it is. You have two 120V voltage sources going into the house,
one 180 deg out of phase from the other. Look up the definition of
phase.

In the context of electrical distribution phase refers to the angular
displacement between the wave on the conductors and there is no
angular displacement in a straight line, only one end and the other
end.
bisecting a line does not make 2 lines unless one changes direction
(angular displacement)

If you have 3 conductors (one of which is neutral), how would you
determine if the others had the same phase or different phases? No
cheating please.

There are 2 possibilities right away.
That is where you actually need to understand the distribution systems
used in the US.

Nonsense Fretwell. He asked a general question, not one specific to any
distribution system. You're given three conductors from an unknown
source, one identified as the neutral. Could be from anything, directly
from a generator or synthesized electronically from a DC battery.
How would you determine what the phase relationships are?

The nonsense is talking about things that do not exist.

So you're back to your position that in electrical engineering
we can only talk about things that already exist. Very bizarre position.

This is about the service to your house, now you say that doesn't
exist?
You still miss the theoretical concept that as soon as you introduce a
phase angle shift between two connected sources, you have created a
delta. In the real world, it happens every day.
It looks like this on the pole
http://gfretwell.com/electrical/red%...ansformers.jpg
Conceptually like this
http://myelectrical.com/Portals/0/SunBlogNuke/2/WindowsLiveWriter/WhatisanOpenDeltaTransformer_A776/Open%20Delta%20Transformer_thumb.jpg
Wired like this
http://gfretwell.com/electrical/3p%20delta%20vee.jpg

.... and this is exactly like what you are talking about. They have a
single phase secondary (the big transformer) and they added another
secondary out of phase with it (the small transformer) and got 3
phases.

If you have to
make up scenarios from the planet MoRon to make your point it is not
relevant to the planet earth.

It's exactly by analyzing a wide variety of scenarios that we test
whether what we think is right or not. It's how we challenge what
we think is right, how we see if it works, or if there are holes.
This is like saying we can't figure out what speed a Volkswagen
would fall in a vacuum on earth, because it's a moron scenario
and can't be analyzed without doing it.

The problem is your scenario is flawed from the outset and the rest is
bogus from there.




I would need to determine what kind of system I was looking at. Simply
poking around with a meter or even a scope, is not going to give you
that answer unless you understand that.

In my world, the answer is a scope will give you the answer. That's
because the same rules of electricity apply universally. The electrons
don't care if they were created from a generator, a transformer or an
electronic box that synthesizes them from a battery. It's the voltages,
the phase relationship and the ampacity, that's all that matters.
And when you do that with the 240/120 service, you have two 120V
voltage sources that are 180 deg out of phase with each other.


I am not convinced you have ever even used a scope.
Describe, in detail how you would set up your scope to see this parlor
trick.

I've described it quite clearly before. Take your scope, hook the
scope ground to the neutral, which after all is the SYSTEM reference
point, by design, not some random, bizarre point I picked. Put
one probe on one hot, put one probe on the other hot. You'll see
two 120V sine waves, 180 deg out of phase with each other.


All you are proving there is one end of the secondary is plus when the
other is minus.
Duh
If they weren't the voltage would be zero.
A phase shift would be something other than 0 or 180 degrees
Both of those describe a straight line with no angular displacement.

Nonsense. I take a generator with two windings on a single shaft.
They are at a phase difference of N degrees on the shaft. I tie one
end of each winding to the other, creating one common return/neutral. I
now have 3 wires and TWO phases. It really is that simple. If you
make N=90, you have the old 90 deg two phase implemented over 3 wires
instead of two. What do you claim I have there on those two hots?
If it's not two phases, what is it?

You DO NOT understand 2 phase.

Then explain to us what that is that I described, if it's not
two phases. This two
phase thing sounds more and more like a miraculous unicorn. It
must have been very special when 100 years ago they stumbled on
the one and only way to make two phases, which was to use 4 wires
and make it 90 deg? Nothing else is allowed, no other way?
Yet somehow we get 3 phases on just 3? Where did those rules
come from? How do you keep track of it all?


It does require 2 isolated windings. They could have any angular
displacement they wanted but 90 degrees was most efficient to run
motors.
It turned out 3 phase was even more efficient and a better way to do
transmission so they went to that.



If there is an actual phase angle difference between A and B there is
also another phase angle between A and C. The complement of the angle
A B.
You do not need the 3d source to get 3P delta but it is still there.

http://myelectrical.com/Portals/0/SunBlogNuke/2/WindowsLiveWriter/WhatisanOpenDeltaTransformer_A776/Open%20Delta%20Transformer_thumb.jpg

They used two of the three primary phases to generate two phases on
the secondary. So what? I've said many times you can generate
power sources many ways and exactly how you do it doesn't change
how many phases you have in the result. It's only the result that
matters, not if it came from a transformer, generator, or black box.
BTW, your example there does show two phases with just three wires,
what's up with that?

That is 3 phase delta, not 2 phase. (note the name of the GIF)
The 3d phase just showed up in a "poof" as you describe it.
If I wanted 100% rating, I would add another winding across the two
upper connections but it is not necessary.

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 14:24:44 -0400, Bob wrote:

On 8/8/2018 1:43 PM, trader_4 wrote:
I've described it quite clearly before. Take your scope, hook the
scope ground to the neutral, which after all is the SYSTEM reference
point, by design, not some random, bizarre point I picked. Put
one probe on one hot, put one probe on the other hot. You'll see
two 120V sine waves, 180 deg out of phase with each other.

The transformer secondary winding has two ends, L1 and L2.Â* Put your scope common lead on L1.Â* Attach one trace probe to the secondary tap and the other trace probe to L2.

Your scope should display two traces in perfect sync that vary only in amplitude.Â* Pure single phase.

Exactly. He will see this wave.
http://gfretwell.com/electrical/sine...0secondary.jpg
Looking one way from ground he will see the hump up, looking the other
way he sees the hump down but it is still one wave.

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 11:17:51 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 2:06:58 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 10:19:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:52:46 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:37:21 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 7:29:05 PM UTC-4, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 08/07/2018 01:27 PM, devnull wrote:

[snip]

The secondary winding is one continuous conductor with a tap fastened in
the middle.Â* But the tap is unused to provide 240 volts.Â* You could
remove the tap and sit on it and you would still have 240 volts single
phase.Â* Get it?

With a disconnected (or nonexistent) center tap, you'd have 240V single
phase. The difference from 2 different phases is that you changed the
point of reference.

Exactly. They try to treat the center tap as a mere curiosity, when it's
purpose is to create two 120V voltage sources that are 180 deg out of
phase with each other with respect to it. And it becomes the NEUTRAL,
the SYSTEM reference point. I've asked many times
for someone to draw a circuit diagram that models that circuit without
using two 120V voltage sources that are either 180 out of phase or of
opposite polarity, which is the same thing. They won't because it
can't be done.

I have posted it several times

Not that I've seen. So, tell us, how do you model 240/120 service
without two 120V voltage source, one 180 out of phase or of opposite
polarity. How do you do it with one 240V source?

By center tapping it but it is still one, single phase source that
happens to be cut in half.

That isn't a circuit model. Back to circuits 101. Draw the circuit
using Thevenin voltage sources. I just did it for you, it takes
TWO voltage sources, it cannot be done with one.





My model, the IEEE Fellow's model, and I believe Mark's model would
be TWO 120V 60 hz, ideal voltage sources. Take one connect it's
negative side to the neutral. Take the other connect it's negative
side to the neutral. One is voltage source is sin(wt),
the other sin(wt+180).

Or alternatively, take one connect it's negative side to the neutral.
Take the other and connect it's positive side to the neutral.
Then both voltage sources are sin(wt).

That is the only way to describe, to model, to draw the circuit we're
talking about.

Notice all of the trig functions in that dissertation. Hence me going
back to triangles.

Notice that he starts out by saying:

Abstract:
Distribution engineers have treated the standard "singlephase" distribution transformer connection as single phase because from the primary side of the transformer these connections are single phase and in the case of standard rural distribution single phase line to ground. However, with the advent of detailed circuit modeling we
are beginning to see distribution modeling and analysis being accomplished past the transformer to the secondary. Which now brings into focus the reality that standard 120/240 secondary systems are not single phase line to ground systems, instead they are three wire systems with two phases and one ground wires. Further, the
standard 120/240 secondary is different from the two phase primary system in that the secondary phases are separated by 180 degrees instead of three phases separated by 120 degrees.


And note that to start the analysis, he draws the circuit showing two
120V voltages, one across each winding, Fig 1.

This guy is more confused than you. You should get a room.

It really is that simple. If you
make N=90, you have the old 90 deg two phase implemented over 3 wires
instead of two.

And what if you make N = 180 deg

How many phases do you have now?

m

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 10:11:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 17:58:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 2:49:17 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:31:28 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Already addressed that in another post just now. I clearly said "I believe".
Rather odd you're objecting to that suddenly, I've been posting the
same thing for two days.

... and I have been telling you for days, what you say about 2 phase
is simply wrong but you keep posting it.
Telling a lie over and over does not make it true.
You really are starting to sound more like your buddy trump every day.

I addressed it in the other post. As I said, this is the first time
you've insisted that one can't have two phases without 4 conductors.
You said that was the old 90 deg two phase system. I said OK, we can
morph that one step at a time. First step, instead of using two wires,
lets use a shared neutral, make it 3 wires. There isn't anything radical
in that, is there?
Just connect one end of each winding to a common return/neutral.
For a couple days, you didn't object. You have two windings, separated
by 90 deg on one shaft, two hots, one neutral. Very simple.
But now I understand you're
insisting that one can't have two phase without four conductors.
Are you sure that's your position of record? It seems very odd, since
we have 3 phase all over the place with just 3 conductors that it now
takes 4 conductors to get two phase. You might want to rethink that one.

You can duct tape a funnel on the nose of a horse and call it a
unicorn but that does not make it so.
https://www.electrical-contractor.net/theory/2phd1.gif
Look at the diagram on the bottom. You will see that needs 4 wires. If
you make it a Tee or an Ell, you will end up with 3 phase.
In fact that was how they made 3 phase when they had 2 phase
distribution, well up into the 20th century. It was still in my IBM
physical planning manuals in 1990.
Same transformer, just wired the other way.
I am sorry if I keep coming back to transformers but that is what
electrical distribution uses. Don't blame me, blame Tesla and
Westinghouse.

I'm sorry if I keep rejecting your claim that phase requires transformers,
because it does not. Again, you're confusing a particular implementation
with the general case. It staggers the mind that we can get 3 phases
on 3 wires, but you claim that to get just two requires 4 wires.
It's absurd and totally refuted by the simple example of the generator
with two windings, offset by N degrees, with a shared neutral.
Again, no transformers involved.

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 10:26:02 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 18:07:59 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 3:51:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:48:31 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 12:29:45 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:55:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Now I rotate one coil so that instead of 120, it's at 179. Are there
still three phases?

Technically in your pink unicorn world, yes

OK, so we agree, if you take a 3 phase power source and rotate one winding
so that instead of 120 degrees, it's at 179, there are still 3 phases.



Now I rotate it one degree more, to 180. Are there still 3 phases,
yes or no?

No there is one phase. 180 degrees is a straight line with no angular
displacement, 3d grade math.

Wow, that's a stunning answer. Are you sure that's your answer? Your
final answer? By rotating that one winding from 179 to 180 degrees
suddenly this whole generator went to single phase? And I'm the one
accused of parlor tricks?

In my world, the real word, you still have 3 phases, 0, 180, 240.
Before the change you had 0, 179, 240. You'd of course see exactly
that on a scope. Anything else would be magic indeed.
.
0-180 is the same phase. It is a straight line with no phase shift.
Simply the idea that looking at both ends from the middle does not
make it two.


So, your position is that I can take a 3 phase power source, with three
windings, one at 0, one at 120, one at 240 and it's 3 phase. And if
I move the 120 one to 179, it's still 3 phase. If I move it to 181 it's
still 3 phase. But if I move it to 180, Poof, it's no longer a phase?

No actually when you get to "181" you are 3 phase with opposite
rotation and it becomes a 179 phase shift.
The reality is that might technically be 3 phase but I am not even
sure it is sustainable.

Wow, more bizarre rules that come from nowhere. I have a 3 phase generator,
0, 120, 240 deg windings. I move the 120 winding to 179 and you say it's
still 3 phases. I move it to 180, and you say it all collapses somehow
and there is only one phase. I feel especially concerned for that 240 phase,
who killed it? Where did it go if it's now single phase?
And then if I rotate the winding two degrees more, to 181 it
somehow becomes "technically" 179? How the hell can that be? Among the
absurdities with that is that it's obviously two deg closer in phase
to the 240 winding than it was when it was at 179. Good grief, this
is like the twilight zone.





When you reach 180 degrees "poof" it does disappear. That is when a
triangle becomes a line with no phase angle. That is elementary school
geometry
How many degrees are there in a triangle? any triangle? Don't even try
to say this isn't the geometry of triangles when your white paper is
loaded with trig symbols.
Trig is the science of triangles.

I already showed you how you can create the illusion of 2 phase from a
3 phase red leg delta on a scope,. You just need to hang the common on
the center tap. Your 3 phase motors are still happily spinning away
but you will look at your scope and swear there are only 2 phases.

I don't know why you can't accept the opinion of someone with 50 years
in the business who has actually done this **** (30 years in computer
hardware and 20 years as an inspector) and you rely on something you
googled up and a misconception you can't seem to shake..

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 1:15:55 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 11:31:56 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 08/08/2018 08:28 AM, trader_4 wrote:

According to Fretwell, two phase power existed 100 years ago, and it
was over two wires, 90 degrees phase difference.

Wouldn't that be 4 wires (2 per phase)

Yes, you're right and that's what he said and I acknowledged way back.
I just put two wires in the latest formulation of the questions that I posed
by mistake. The old 90 was two phase, 90 deg, on four wires. I used
that as a starting point because that's what Frewell says was a two
phase implementation.

When I first heard about that (90-deg 2-phase) he appeared to be saying
that since THAT was 2-plase, nothing ELSE could be.

You could certainly have 2 phase with any angular displacement you
want but the thing to understand is the 2 phases are isolated from
each other.


Who made that unique requirement, that two phases have to be "isolated"
from each other? You just make it up as you go. There is no such
requirement. How can we have three phases that are not isolated from
each other, use just 3 conductors, but two phases requires four and they
now have to be isolated? And note, I'm not arguing about what that 100
year old particular implementation of what two phase was, I'm talking
about the general case.

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 2:04:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 10:12:36 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:49:45 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:28:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:
So the
problem I posed is where I morph that into 240/120 service, one step
at a time. Looks like we're stuck on step one, Fretwell says if I
have those two windings that are 90 apart share a common neutral return,
it's no longer two phase, that two phase has to have 4 wires. Which
of course is bizarre. Why would two phases require 4 wires, when we
have 3 phase all over the place with with just 3?


Quite simple grasshopper
You need 4 wires because the 2 phases are not connected together.

If you connect 2 out of phase sources together you get 3 phase. Think
triangle.

OK, let's go through this one step at a time. I take two windings
and put them on a generator shaft, with a difference of N degrees.
I connect on end of each winding to one end of the other winding.
That point is the system neutral. I connect a scope to the neutral.
I look at each of the two conductors coming from the so far unconnected
ends of the two windings. Do I see not see two voltage waveforms
that differ by N degrees?


If I do see that, then how by connecting two loads, let's say a resistor
between the conductor from one winding and and the neutral and another
resistor between the other winding and neutral, do I not still have
two phases and the same waveforms? What magic just happened to make 3 phases? And if I put a resistor between the two conductors, I
don't see how that creates a third phase either. Following that logic,
putting a resistor between two phases of our 3 phase system would
create another phase too, wouldn't it and I'd then have 4 phases?
If I put three resistors between phases, I'd have 6 phases?

As soon as you connect them together, you get 3 phase delta.

OK, then let's take the existing three phase, 0, 120, 240 system.
I connect a resistor between the 0 and 120 phases. Now exactly
like you just did with my two phase example, we have a
new phase also correct? Does that make it 4 phase power?



If you don't see that, you have no business in this conversation.
Three phase delta is most commonly produced with two "sources"
(transformer secondaries)
It could be done with 2 windings in a generator but why would you
spend all of that money on rotating machinery and not add the 3d
winding to get 100% instead of 66.6% of the output?

I don't know why you can't separate what exists, what;s efficient,
what's practical, what has been actually used, from what you can
construct, what you can analyze, using basic electrical engineering.





In the case of transformers the economy is there so they do it.
In fact I have only seen 3p delta with 3 transformers once, in Key
West and I assume they grew into it.

Again with the transformers.

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 2:06:58 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 10:19:57 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 12:52:46 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:37:21 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 7:29:05 PM UTC-4, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 08/07/2018 01:27 PM, devnull wrote:

[snip]

The secondary winding is one continuous conductor with a tap fastened in
the middle.Â* But the tap is unused to provide 240 volts.Â* You could
remove the tap and sit on it and you would still have 240 volts single
phase.Â* Get it?

With a disconnected (or nonexistent) center tap, you'd have 240V single
phase. The difference from 2 different phases is that you changed the
point of reference.

Exactly. They try to treat the center tap as a mere curiosity, when it's
purpose is to create two 120V voltage sources that are 180 deg out of
phase with each other with respect to it. And it becomes the NEUTRAL,
the SYSTEM reference point. I've asked many times
for someone to draw a circuit diagram that models that circuit without
using two 120V voltage sources that are either 180 out of phase or of
opposite polarity, which is the same thing. They won't because it
can't be done.

I have posted it several times

Not that I've seen. So, tell us, how do you model 240/120 service
without two 120V voltage source, one 180 out of phase or of opposite
polarity. How do you do it with one 240V source?

By center tapping it but it is still one, single phase source that
happens to be cut in half.

That now because of the tap, behaves as TWO separate voltage sources.
If you disagree, draw for us the circuit diagram that models it without
using two 120V sources. That's what you don't get. If it's just 240V
power, you can model it with one 240V source. As soon as you center
tap it, it's now two voltage sources, that are 180 deg out of phase
with respect to the system neutral/reference point.






My model, the IEEE Fellow's model, and I believe Mark's model would
be TWO 120V 60 hz, ideal voltage sources. Take one connect it's
negative side to the neutral. Take the other connect it's negative
side to the neutral. One is voltage source is sin(wt),
the other sin(wt+180).

Or alternatively, take one connect it's negative side to the neutral.
Take the other and connect it's positive side to the neutral.
Then both voltage sources are sin(wt).

That is the only way to describe, to model, to draw the circuit we're
talking about.

Notice all of the trig functions in that dissertation. Hence me going
back to triangles.


Actually there is not a single trig function in that math.

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 2:24:52 PM UTC-4, Bob wrote:
On 8/8/2018 1:43 PM, trader_4 wrote:
I've described it quite clearly before. Take your scope, hook the
scope ground to the neutral, which after all is the SYSTEM reference
point, by design, not some random, bizarre point I picked. Put
one probe on one hot, put one probe on the other hot. You'll see
two 120V sine waves, 180 deg out of phase with each other.

The transformer secondary winding has two ends, L1 and L2.Â* Put your scope common lead on L1.Â* Attach one trace probe to the secondary tap and the other trace probe to L2.

Your scope should display two traces in perfect sync that vary only in amplitude.Â* Pure single phase.

You can't ignore the central tapped neutral as if it was some insignificant
detail. It's the whole, essential point of the circuit. By center tapping
it and defining that center point as the system NEUTRAL and reference point,
you have created TWO 120V voltage sources. The parlor trick is to only put
the scope across the two hots and ignore the very important phase relationship
between each hot and the neutral/reference point.

Draw us the model circuit that shows what's going on there without using
TWO 120V voltage sources that are either 180 deg out of phase or
of opposite polarity, which is the same thing. It can't be done.

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 2:32:50 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 10:43:31 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 1:05:55 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:47:37 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 8:47:10 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 18:16:08 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 08/07/2018 11:37 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:48:22 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Yes, it is. You have two 120V voltage sources going into the house,
one 180 deg out of phase from the other. Look up the definition of
phase.

In the context of electrical distribution phase refers to the angular
displacement between the wave on the conductors and there is no
angular displacement in a straight line, only one end and the other
end.
bisecting a line does not make 2 lines unless one changes direction
(angular displacement)

If you have 3 conductors (one of which is neutral), how would you
determine if the others had the same phase or different phases? No
cheating please.

There are 2 possibilities right away.
That is where you actually need to understand the distribution systems
used in the US.

Nonsense Fretwell. He asked a general question, not one specific to any
distribution system. You're given three conductors from an unknown
source, one identified as the neutral. Could be from anything, directly
from a generator or synthesized electronically from a DC battery.
How would you determine what the phase relationships are?

The nonsense is talking about things that do not exist.

So you're back to your position that in electrical engineering
we can only talk about things that already exist. Very bizarre position.

This is about the service to your house, now you say that doesn't
exist?

Please, stop playing games. I gave you two scenarios, one with 90
deg two phase, one with 3 phase, where step by step I morphed them
into electrically exactly the same thing as the electrical service
into your house. It's those theoretical examples that you run from
and made the bizarre claims that it can't be analyzed because it's
a "pink unicorn" that doesn't exist. IT's what you have to do,
because if you stick with those simple examples, you're left with
the fact that I can morph the old two phase 90 or today's 3 phase
into what looks and behaves and is indistinguishable from 240/120
service. And it's two phases.




You still miss the theoretical concept that as soon as you introduce a
phase angle shift between two connected sources, you have created a
delta. In the real world, it happens every day.
It looks like this on the pole
http://gfretwell.com/electrical/red%...ansformers.jpg
Conceptually like this
http://myelectrical.com/Portals/0/SunBlogNuke/2/WindowsLiveWriter/WhatisanOpenDeltaTransformer_A776/Open%20Delta%20Transformer_thumb.jpg
Wired like this
http://gfretwell.com/electrical/3p%20delta%20vee.jpg

... and this is exactly like what you are talking about. They have a
single phase secondary (the big transformer) and they added another
secondary out of phase with it (the small transformer) and got 3
phases.


Sigh, back to the transformers again.



If you have to
make up scenarios from the planet MoRon to make your point it is not
relevant to the planet earth.

It's exactly by analyzing a wide variety of scenarios that we test
whether what we think is right or not. It's how we challenge what
we think is right, how we see if it works, or if there are holes.
This is like saying we can't figure out what speed a Volkswagen
would fall in a vacuum on earth, because it's a moron scenario
and can't be analyzed without doing it.

The problem is your scenario is flawed from the outset and the rest is
bogus from there.


So now having a generator with two windings and a shared neutral is bogus?
Taking a 3 phase generator that's 0, 120, 240 and moving one winding
to 179, 180, 181 is bogus? Only in your world, because the logical
and correct progression from there turns it into what is identical with
240/120 and you can't allow that to be. In reality they are very
simple scenarios. (And no transformers are necessary or involved)






I would need to determine what kind of system I was looking at. Simply
poking around with a meter or even a scope, is not going to give you
that answer unless you understand that.

In my world, the answer is a scope will give you the answer. That's
because the same rules of electricity apply universally. The electrons
don't care if they were created from a generator, a transformer or an
electronic box that synthesizes them from a battery. It's the voltages,
the phase relationship and the ampacity, that's all that matters.
And when you do that with the 240/120 service, you have two 120V
voltage sources that are 180 deg out of phase with each other.


I am not convinced you have ever even used a scope.
Describe, in detail how you would set up your scope to see this parlor
trick.

I've described it quite clearly before. Take your scope, hook the
scope ground to the neutral, which after all is the SYSTEM reference
point, by design, not some random, bizarre point I picked. Put
one probe on one hot, put one probe on the other hot. You'll see
two 120V sine waves, 180 deg out of phase with each other.


All you are proving there is one end of the secondary is plus when the
other is minus.

All I'm doing is looking at what the power service into the house looks
like, performs like and is. Again with the transformers. It doesn't
matter to the water heater, the TV, the engineer using the service how
it came to be. All that matters is what's there, how it performs.
If I tell you that you have two hots, 120V each, 180 out of phase with
each other with respect to the shared neutral, that each can deliver
200A, what more do you need to know to be able to use it?
??
??
What more?


I tell that to any electrical engineer, they use it. They don't need to know
if it came from a transformer, a home generator, was synthesized
electronically from a UPS with a battery, or came from those two examples
I gave you where I morphed it.




Duh
If they weren't the voltage would be zero.
A phase shift would be something other than 0 or 180 degrees

Show us where 180 is excluded from being a legitimate phase.
All the equations, all the electrical engineering I've even seen,
work with any phase angle.




Both of those describe a straight line with no angular displacement.

That's the other poster already addressed. IT's like saying there is
no north and south, only north and north.




Nonsense. I take a generator with two windings on a single shaft.
They are at a phase difference of N degrees on the shaft. I tie one
end of each winding to the other, creating one common return/neutral. I
now have 3 wires and TWO phases. It really is that simple. If you
make N=90, you have the old 90 deg two phase implemented over 3 wires
instead of two. What do you claim I have there on those two hots?
If it's not two phases, what is it?

You DO NOT understand 2 phase.

Then explain to us what that is that I described, if it's not
two phases. This two
phase thing sounds more and more like a miraculous unicorn. It
must have been very special when 100 years ago they stumbled on
the one and only way to make two phases, which was to use 4 wires
and make it 90 deg? Nothing else is allowed, no other way?
Yet somehow we get 3 phases on just 3? Where did those rules
come from? How do you keep track of it all?


It does require 2 isolated windings.

By what law of physics is that? If it requires two isolated windings,
four conductors, how is it that we can get 3 phases with just 3 wires?



They could have any angular
displacement they wanted but 90 degrees was most efficient to run
motors.
It turned out 3 phase was even more efficient and a better way to do
transmission so they went to that.

Irrelevant of course.

On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 10:10:00 AM UTC-4, wrote:
It really is that simple. If you
make N=90, you have the old 90 deg two phase implemented over 3 wires
instead of two.

And what if you make N = 180 deg

How many phases do you have now?

m

Two phases, which is precisely my point. If you have two phases at 90,
two phases at 179, two at 181, then you have two at 180.
It's all consistent. Otherwise there is a "parlor trick" at 180.

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 07:35:32 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 10:11:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 17:58:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 2:49:17 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:31:28 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Already addressed that in another post just now. I clearly said "I believe".
Rather odd you're objecting to that suddenly, I've been posting the
same thing for two days.

... and I have been telling you for days, what you say about 2 phase
is simply wrong but you keep posting it.
Telling a lie over and over does not make it true.
You really are starting to sound more like your buddy trump every day.

I addressed it in the other post. As I said, this is the first time
you've insisted that one can't have two phases without 4 conductors.
You said that was the old 90 deg two phase system. I said OK, we can
morph that one step at a time. First step, instead of using two wires,
lets use a shared neutral, make it 3 wires. There isn't anything radical
in that, is there?
Just connect one end of each winding to a common return/neutral.
For a couple days, you didn't object. You have two windings, separated
by 90 deg on one shaft, two hots, one neutral. Very simple.
But now I understand you're
insisting that one can't have two phase without four conductors.
Are you sure that's your position of record? It seems very odd, since
we have 3 phase all over the place with just 3 conductors that it now
takes 4 conductors to get two phase. You might want to rethink that one.

You can duct tape a funnel on the nose of a horse and call it a
unicorn but that does not make it so.
https://www.electrical-contractor.net/theory/2phd1.gif
Look at the diagram on the bottom. You will see that needs 4 wires. If
you make it a Tee or an Ell, you will end up with 3 phase.
In fact that was how they made 3 phase when they had 2 phase
distribution, well up into the 20th century. It was still in my IBM
physical planning manuals in 1990.
Same transformer, just wired the other way.
I am sorry if I keep coming back to transformers but that is what
electrical distribution uses. Don't blame me, blame Tesla and
Westinghouse.

I'm sorry if I keep rejecting your claim that phase requires transformers,
because it does not. Again, you're confusing a particular implementation
with the general case. It staggers the mind that we can get 3 phases
on 3 wires, but you claim that to get just two requires 4 wires.
It's absurd and totally refuted by the simple example of the generator
with two windings, offset by N degrees, with a shared neutral.
Again, no transformers involved.

And you keep being ignorant of the fact that what you describe will
end up being 3 phase delta. In fact when I showed you a typical 3p
delta done with 2 windings (transformer or generator, makes no
difference) you tried to tell me it was 2 phase.
You just do not know what you are talking about so it is hard to take
your questions seriously.