I always thought that a transformer that, say, was supposed to convert
480 volts to 240, or say 380 to 220, can always be wired in reverse
and transform, say, 220 to 380.

I understand that there may be some practicalities involved, such as
difference between nominal and actual no-load voltage to compensate
for winding losses. But is there anything else that may prevent a
transformer from being used in reverse?

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.

i

Ignoramus31086 fired this volley in
:

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.


Ig, they cannot be reversed "practically". So-called "core losses" and
winding resistances cause the actual load voltage on a load winding to
differ from the actual windings ratio. A 2:1 load ratio only works 'one
way' in reality, and is, in fact, seldom even close to 2:1 in actual
ratio of turns.

If voltage regulation under load is not important AND one imposes only a
fraction of the rated load on a step-down transformer, it can be used in
reverse, but expect large variation from the 2:1 ratio when used thus.

Lloyd

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:44:10 -0600, Ignoramus31086
wrote:

I always thought that a transformer that, say, was supposed to convert
480 volts to 240, or say 380 to 220, can always be wired in reverse
and transform, say, 220 to 380.

I understand that there may be some practicalities involved, such as
difference between nominal and actual no-load voltage to compensate
for winding losses. But is there anything else that may prevent a
transformer from being used in reverse?

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.

i

They all CAN be reversed. Some are not built of wiring stout enough to
do this properly..and some old ones are very very inefficient at doing
this.

That being said..I do it regularly with most of the modern common
brand names, though I dont try to run a 45KVA transformer at full
rating, running backwards.

I always leave at minimum..a 25% "margin"

Others here, smarter and better edumacated may differ.

Gunner

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:44:10 -0600, Ignoramus31086
wrote:

I always thought that a transformer that, say, was supposed to convert
480 volts to 240, or say 380 to 220, can always be wired in reverse
and transform, say, 220 to 380.

I understand that there may be some practicalities involved, such as
difference between nominal and actual no-load voltage to compensate
for winding losses. But is there anything else that may prevent a
transformer from being used in reverse?

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.

i

Usually, sometimes, maybe. Here's what Acme has to say:

7. Can Acme Transformers be reverse connected? ACME dry-type
distribution transformers can be reverse connected without a loss of
kVA rating, but there are certain limitations. Transformers rated 1
kVA and larger single phase, 3 kVA and larger three phase can be
reverse connected without any adverse effects or loss in kVA capacity.
The reason for this limitation in kVA size is, the turns ratio is the
same as the voltage ratio. Example: A transformer with a 480 volt
input, 240 volt output— can have the output connected to a 240 volt
source and thereby become the primary or input to the transformer,
then the original 480 volt primary winding will become the output or
480 volt secondary. On transformers rated below 1 kVA single phase,
there is a turns ratio compensation on the low voltage winding. This
means the low voltage winding has a greater voltage than the nameplate
voltage indicates at no load. For example, a small single phase
transformer having a nameplate voltage of 480 volts primary and 240
volts secondary, would actually have a no load voltage of
approximately 250 volts, and a full load voltage of 240 volts. If the
240 volt winding were connected to a 240 volt source, then the output
voltage would consequently be approximately 460 volts at no load and
approximately 442 volts at full load. As the kVA becomes smaller, the
compensation is greater— resulting in lower output voltages. When one
attempts to use these transformers in reverse, the transformer will
not be harmed; however, the output voltage will be lower than is
indicated by the nameplate.

--
Ned Simmons

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:53:07 -0600, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

Ignoramus31086 fired this volley in
:

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.


Ig, they cannot be reversed "practically". So-called "core losses" and
winding resistances cause the actual load voltage on a load winding to
differ from the actual windings ratio. A 2:1 load ratio only works 'one
way' in reality, and is, in fact, seldom even close to 2:1 in actual
ratio of turns.

If voltage regulation under load is not important AND one imposes only a
fraction of the rated load on a step-down transformer, it can be used in
reverse, but expect large variation from the 2:1 ratio when used thus.

Lloyd

https://www.automationdirect.com/sta...ansformers.pdf

On the other hand...

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb...r-480v-220448/

On the third hand...

http://apps.geindustrial.com/publibrary/checkout/Transformer2?TNR=White%20Papers|Transformer2|gener ic


"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke

I've been running my 440 3 phase plasma cutter through a transformer
for years now, off my 220 generated three phase.

Karl

Gunner Asch fired this volley in
:

On the other hand...

On the other hand, I was in the business of (first) testing them, then
later designing them. Florida Transformer Corporation, 1969... yeah --
long time ago. Plain'ol silicon iron-lam transformers have not changed a
whit since then. Not even a whit's whit.

What's claimed for 'average' installations, and what works at full rated
load are completely (totally) different animals.

Anyone who claims a 2:1 transformer of 'x' VA rating will work exactly
the same in reverse has either 1) over-designed the thing badly or 2)
lied.

The only other excuse I'll give them is if they designed it to go both
ways... which wouldn't be 'over-designing' in that sense, nor a lie;
because you can do that.

LLoyd


Lloyd

Karl Townsend wrote:
I've been running my 440 3 phase plasma cutter through a transformer
for years now, off my 220 generated three phase.

Karl





It is a violation of the 2014 NEC to install a transformer in reverse
unless the data plate states that it is allowed.

John

John fired this volley in news:Y_
:

It is a violation of the 2014 NEC to install a transformer in reverse
unless the data plate states that it is allowed.


For reasons stated earlier.
Lloyd

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com fired this volley in
. 4.170:

For reasons stated earlier.

But... I should also say for some reasons NOT stated earlier.

Before, we were only talking about the ratings and voltages produced if a
transformer of the correct relative voltages were reversed -- with the
right voltage applied to whatever might be the 'primary of the day'.

But what if some mook connected a 4:1 backwards on a 440 circuit?

OOPS!
LLoyd

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:53:07 -0600, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

Ignoramus31086 fired this volley in
:

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.


Ig, they cannot be reversed "practically". So-called "core losses" and
winding resistances cause the actual load voltage on a load winding to
differ from the actual windings ratio. A 2:1 load ratio only works 'one
way' in reality, and is, in fact, seldom even close to 2:1 in actual
ratio of turns.

If voltage regulation under load is not important AND one imposes only a
fraction of the rated load on a step-down transformer, it can be used in
reverse, but expect large variation from the 2:1 ratio when used thus.

Lloyd
That depends a lot on the transformer. The common consumer grade
voltage converter transformers for international use of small
appliances and home electronics are routinely used to convert either
120 to 240 or 240 to 120 - same transformer with the wires reversed.
They work just fine. Mabee when you get into larger transformers it is
no longer practical??

fired this volley in
:

That depends a lot on the transformer.

Clare, why don't you tell ME what the differences should be... mmmm?

I'm open to hear your figures on 1) core saturation values and their
effects, 2) IR losses, 3) hysteresis losses, 4) changes in effective turns
ratios at different loads and DC levels (rectification of the output).

Any three will do.

LLoyd

On 2015-02-19, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Gunner Asch fired this volley in
:

On the other hand...

On the other hand, I was in the business of (first) testing them, then
later designing them. Florida Transformer Corporation, 1969... yeah --
long time ago. Plain'ol silicon iron-lam transformers have not changed a
whit since then. Not even a whit's whit.

What's claimed for 'average' installations, and what works at full rated
load are completely (totally) different animals.

Anyone who claims a 2:1 transformer of 'x' VA rating will work exactly
the same in reverse has either 1) over-designed the thing badly or 2)
lied.

The only other excuse I'll give them is if they designed it to go both
ways... which wouldn't be 'over-designing' in that sense, nor a lie;
because you can do that.

For the last 3 years, I have had a transformer that I wired to be
backfed. I have 240v and I need 480 to test various equipment.

It produces 486 volts without a load. I did have to pull the windings
to tap into correct voltage, as the actual high voltage was too much.

Nuclear explosions, zombie invasion, fuses burning out, and other
terrifying events have never occurred.

I do not really care very much about the inrush current, either, as
long as it does not pop the fuses.

i

On 2015-02-19, John wrote:
Karl Townsend wrote:
I've been running my 440 3 phase plasma cutter through a transformer
for years now, off my 220 generated three phase.

It is a violation of the 2014 NEC to install a transformer in reverse
unless the data plate states that it is allowed.


I am sure that his data plate says so!

i

Ignoramus31086 fired this volley in
:

I do not really care very much about the inrush current, either, as
long as it does not pop the fuses.


You tell me right there (with the lack of care about inrush) that it is a
beast, and may have been designed for such duty.

Just the fact that it regulated as well as it did says a lot for the
design.

A lesser one would likely have produced about 500V.\

But that you knew to polish off a couple of turns and tap down says more!
G

LLoyd

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 18:28:39 -0600, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

Gunner Asch fired this volley in
:

On the other hand...

On the other hand, I was in the business of (first) testing them, then
later designing them. Florida Transformer Corporation, 1969... yeah --
long time ago. Plain'ol silicon iron-lam transformers have not changed a
whit since then. Not even a whit's whit.

What's claimed for 'average' installations, and what works at full rated
load are completely (totally) different animals.

Of course they are. And the data (and my experience) shows exactly
that.

Anyone who claims a 2:1 transformer of 'x' VA rating will work exactly
the same in reverse has either 1) over-designed the thing badly or 2)
lied.
True indeed


The only other excuse I'll give them is if they designed it to go both
ways... which wouldn't be 'over-designing' in that sense, nor a lie;
because you can do that.

LLoyd


Lloyd

Indeed.

Which is why I posted all three data points. They covered it with some
contradiciton..but all indcated one should not run transformers at
full power... backwards


"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:05:44 -0500, John
wrote:

Karl Townsend wrote:
I've been running my 440 3 phase plasma cutter through a transformer
for years now, off my 220 generated three phase.

Karl





It is a violation of the 2014 NEC to install a transformer in reverse
unless the data plate states that it is allowed.

John

Yes..and?


"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 19:25:14 -0600, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com fired this volley in
.4.170:

For reasons stated earlier.

But... I should also say for some reasons NOT stated earlier.

Before, we were only talking about the ratings and voltages produced if a
transformer of the correct relative voltages were reversed -- with the
right voltage applied to whatever might be the 'primary of the day'.

But what if some mook connected a 4:1 backwards on a 440 circuit?

OOPS!

And he gets a Darwin Award. Fair enough, wot?

--
A sound mind in a sound body is a short but full description
of a happy state in this world.
-- John Locke

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:53:07 -0600, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

Ignoramus31086 fired this volley in
:

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.


Ig, they cannot be reversed "practically". So-called "core losses" and
winding resistances cause the actual load voltage on a load winding to
differ from the actual windings ratio. A 2:1 load ratio only works 'one
way' in reality, and is, in fact, seldom even close to 2:1 in actual
ratio of turns.

If voltage regulation under load is not important AND one imposes only a
fraction of the rated load on a step-down transformer, it can be used in
reverse, but expect large variation from the 2:1 ratio when used thus.

Lloyd

I can't argue about transformer theory or design but 1:2 transformers
were quite common over here. At one time Jakarta, Indonesia was 115VAC
in some parts of town and 220VAC in other parts :-) Smallish thing,
usually painted green for some reason, and you had one for your fan
and another for your TV and so on.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 2015-02-19, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Ignoramus31086 fired this volley in
:

I do not really care very much about the inrush current, either, as
long as it does not pop the fuses.

You tell me right there (with the lack of care about inrush) that it
is a beast, and may have been designed for such duty.

Who knows. It is on a 100A circuit and is protected at the wall by 70A
fuses.

Just the fact that it regulated as well as it did says a lot for the
design.

A lesser one would likely have produced about 500V.\

But that you knew to polish off a couple of turns and tap down says more!

I do not have 240v, I have more like 246 volts.

What connected in reverse, it produced 506 volts at the high side,
which I deemed excessive.

I had to tap the output from the winding that produces about 486 volts
and I am a happy camper now.

i

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:07:28 -0600, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:

fired this volley in
:

That depends a lot on the transformer.

Clare, why don't you tell ME what the differences should be... mmmm?

I'm open to hear your figures on 1) core saturation values and their
effects, 2) IR losses, 3) hysteresis losses, 4) changes in effective turns
ratios at different loads and DC levels (rectification of the output).

Any three will do.

LLoyd
I don't know the engineering details - I just know that some will
work perfectly, while others don't work so well. I suspect it has to
do with core saturation and core permeability. Likely those with more
iron work better.Eddy current losses will likely be part of the
problem as well - so the quality and design of the laminations in the
core will be somewhat critical.
Design of the core, closed core and shell core, will make a fifference
too - a shell core, or E-Core will have less flux leakage for a given
size, This makes them more effective than a simple closed loop core
(or "ring") A simple E-I or E-E core won't be as efficient as an
interleaved core, which is a bit more expensive to build..

There is likely some difference in the windings of ones that work well
compared to those that work poorly. Stacked, or sandwich coils will
likely behave differently than co-axially wound coils, and if the
coils are marginally sized there will be more copper losses as well.

A higher quality shell cored transformer will have better regulation
than a lighter transformer or a closed core transformer and my
suspiscion is there will be a difference between stacked and co-axial
windings - not sure which will be better

On 2/18/2015 2:44 PM, Ignoramus31086 wrote:
I always thought that a transformer that, say, was supposed to convert
480 volts to 240, or say 380 to 220, can always be wired in reverse
and transform, say, 220 to 380.

I understand that there may be some practicalities involved, such as
difference between nominal and actual no-load voltage to compensate
for winding losses. But is there anything else that may prevent a
transformer from being used in reverse?

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.

i

We have a reversed 3-phase transformer to power our big convection oven.
The plant supply is 208 three phase. The oven requires 480 three phase.
The transformer is derated about 70% of the name plate KVA. Has been
running 24-7 for perhaps 10 years.

Paul

On 2/18/2015 4:44 PM, Ignoramus31086 wrote:
I always thought that a transformer that, say, was supposed to convert
480 volts to 240, or say 380 to 220, can always be wired in reverse
and transform, say, 220 to 380.

I understand that there may be some practicalities involved, such as
difference between nominal and actual no-load voltage to compensate
for winding losses. But is there anything else that may prevent a
transformer from being used in reverse?

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.

i

Some transformers are wired in figure 8 forms and when done they
couple better. Some cheap windings have a central core and an outer
winding on the 8. Better ones put both on the central core and use the
outer loops for flux and thus power.

Both of you are correct - one has to test the transformer, and see if
the power rating is working and not burning.

Consider a complex way - 220 to 12v. The low voltage winding is likely
high current. The impedance of the 12 v circuit is likely low. Putting
12v ac on it and expecting 220 - might happen if the supply can
deliver the wattage needed and the winding doesn't burn.

It comes down to VI of the input and VI of the output.

Can the winding take the power needed and not get hot.

Most can, some can't. Some transformers are made for it, others are
marginal and some can't handle it.

Getting back to power only - e.g. your stuff - boosting a winding or
bucking it or stepping up or down those power transformers are
"Universal". Can be used in any configuration. Due to losses you might
need to boost and due to gains (better coupling) need to buck
(subtract). Power transformers tend to be universal. Electronic
transformers can be either way.

You have to read the literature or just try it.

Martin

Martin

On 2/18/2015 6:03 PM, Karl Townsend wrote:
I've been running my 440 3 phase plasma cutter through a transformer
for years now, off my 220 generated three phase.

Karl

I do the like with my surface grinder. 220v to 220v 3 phase in a
rotary, then transformed to 380 3 phase using boosts on each phase.
Wild one is different then on to the surface grinders.

The boosters are 120/240 to 12/24v power units (forget the wattage) but
big. With insulation voltage high. So the 12/24 could be stacked on top
of the transformed leg of the 3 phase to make the step up value wanted.

My plasma cutter is on 220 single. Could go higher, but wasn't there
when I connected the plug.

Martin

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:58:37 -0800, Paul Drahn
wrote:

On 2/18/2015 2:44 PM, Ignoramus31086 wrote:
I always thought that a transformer that, say, was supposed to convert
480 volts to 240, or say 380 to 220, can always be wired in reverse
and transform, say, 220 to 380.

I understand that there may be some practicalities involved, such as
difference between nominal and actual no-load voltage to compensate
for winding losses. But is there anything else that may prevent a
transformer from being used in reverse?

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.

i

We have a reversed 3-phase transformer to power our big convection oven.
The plant supply is 208 three phase. The oven requires 480 three phase.
The transformer is derated about 70% of the name plate KVA. Has been
running 24-7 for perhaps 10 years.

"Derated 70%" or "derated to 70%"? There is a big difference there.


--
A sound mind in a sound body is a short but full description
of a happy state in this world.
-- John Locke

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 04:32:05 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:58:37 -0800, Paul Drahn
wrote:

On 2/18/2015 2:44 PM, Ignoramus31086 wrote:
I always thought that a transformer that, say, was supposed to convert
480 volts to 240, or say 380 to 220, can always be wired in reverse
and transform, say, 220 to 380.

I understand that there may be some practicalities involved, such as
difference between nominal and actual no-load voltage to compensate
for winding losses. But is there anything else that may prevent a
transformer from being used in reverse?

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.

i

We have a reversed 3-phase transformer to power our big convection oven.
The plant supply is 208 three phase. The oven requires 480 three phase.
The transformer is derated about 70% of the name plate KVA. Has been
running 24-7 for perhaps 10 years.

"Derated 70%" or "derated to 70%"? There is a big difference there.

Larry..send me an email...I found the prints/manual for that sig gen
and cant find your email address. Course it IS 5am..and Ill be on the
road in an hour or so. Ill email the attachment back to you.

Gunner

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 05:00:47 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 04:32:05 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:58:37 -0800, Paul Drahn
wrote:

On 2/18/2015 2:44 PM, Ignoramus31086 wrote:
I always thought that a transformer that, say, was supposed to convert
480 volts to 240, or say 380 to 220, can always be wired in reverse
and transform, say, 220 to 380.

I understand that there may be some practicalities involved, such as
difference between nominal and actual no-load voltage to compensate
for winding losses. But is there anything else that may prevent a
transformer from being used in reverse?

I spoke to a customer, today, who believed that it should not be
reversed.

i

We have a reversed 3-phase transformer to power our big convection oven.
The plant supply is 208 three phase. The oven requires 480 three phase.
The transformer is derated about 70% of the name plate KVA. Has been
running 24-7 for perhaps 10 years.

"Derated 70%" or "derated to 70%"? There is a big difference there.

Larry..send me an email...I found the prints/manual for that sig gen
and cant find your email address. Course it IS 5am..and Ill be on the
road in an hour or so. Ill email the attachment back to you.

Gunner

Never mind....


"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke

On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 8:05:48 PM UTC-5, John wrote:
Karl Townsend wrote:
I've been running my 440 3 phase plasma cutter through
a transformer for years now, off my 220 generated three phase.

It is a violation of the 2014 NEC to install a transformer
in reverse unless the data plate states that it is allowed.

Thanks for that, John, but many, many places don't even observe ... sometimes even PREVENT, yes prevent use of established commercial/residential building codes.
================================================== =====
"Texas didn't have a fire code and small counties are prohibited from having them."

"West, Texas, fertilizer plant blast that killed 15 'preventable,' safety board says" By Eliott C. McLaughlin, CNN
Updated 9:58 PM ET, Tue April 22, 2014

The 2013 fertilizer plant blast that killed 15 people and wounded another 226 in West, Texas, "should never have occurred," the chairman of the U.S. Chemical Safety Board said Tuesday.

Though the board's report says that at least 14 people were killed, the death toll was updated to 15 people in the days after the blast.

The board's investigation, released a few days after the first anniversary of the explosion, indicates the incident was "preventable," Chairman Rafael Moure-Eraso said. The statement from his agency, which was given Tuesday to reporters, blamed the company that owned the fertilizer plant, government regulators and other authorities for the incident.

"It resulted from the failure of a company to take the necessary steps to avert a preventable fire and explosion and from the inability of federal, state and local regulatory agencies to identify a serious hazard and correct it," Moure-Eraso said.

McLennan County, for example, didn't have an emergency response plan in place, and "the community clearly was not aware of the potential hazard at West Fertilizer," the report said.

A lack of fire codes was repeatedly cited in the report, with investigators noting Texas didn't have a fire code and small counties are prohibited from having them. But, the chairman said, local fire departments need fire codes to "hold industrial operators accountable for safe storage and handling of chemicals."

Texas town tighter than ever one year later

The board's supervisory investigator, Johnnie Banks, said all levels of government also failed to adopt codes to keep populated areas away from hazardous facilities. This is not unique to West, Banks said.

"We found 1,351 facilities across the country that store ammonium nitrate," he said, adding that farm communities are just beginning to collect information on the proximity of homes and schools to ammonium nitrate storage facilities.

The investigation determined that "lessons learned" from responses to similar incidents were not disseminated to firefighters, 11 of whom died when the West plant exploded.

The probe said guidelines from the National Fire Protection Association and U.S. Department of Transportation recommend that firefighters evacuate the area surrounding "massive" ammonium nitrate fires and that the area be doused with water "from a distance." However, the report said, the guidance is vague because of the use of subjective words like "massive," "large" and "distance."

"All of these provisions should be reviewed and harmonized in light of the West disaster to ensure that firefighters are adequately protected and are not put into danger protecting property alone," Banks said.

U.S. guidelines for ammonium nitrate storage have been static for decades, the board said, but the United Kingdom in 1996 mandated that storage facilities be one story, well-ventilated and constructed of concrete, brick or steel.

Moure-Eraso lauded the Fertilizer Institute for recently establishing guidelines for the storage and transportation of ammonium nitrate, along with recommendations for first responders in the event of a fire. He further called on all states and counties to likewise update their guidelines.

"The state of Texas, McLennan County, (the Occupational Safety and Health Administration) and the (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) have work to do because this hazard exists in hundreds of locations across the U.S.," Moure-Eraso wrote. "However, it is important to note that there is no substitute for an efficient regulatory system that ensures that all companies are operating to the same high standards. We cannot depend on voluntary compliance."

Though the Chemical Safety Board investigates serious chemical accidents and makes safety recommendations, it does not issue fines or citations. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the state fire marshal's office said last week that their investigation into the cause of the fire remains active.

West's mayor, Tommy Muska, told CNN last week that doing more policywise, like instituting a statewide fire code, "would have been a wonderful thing."

"You don't want to overregulate," Muska said. "But you also have to look at what (could) make us safer."

Rep. Joe C. Pickett, chairman of the Homeland Security and Public Safety committee in the state House of Representatives, said local authorities should go beyond having every place subject to a fire code.

The Democrat from El Paso is pushing to give the state fire marshal's office more authority, particularly over unincorporated areas, where about 60 of the over 100 facilities storing ammonium nitrate, like what exploded at West Fertilizer, are located. Unlike those falling within city or county limits, these facilities don't have to have things like sprinklers or other safety measures.

Other steps would include getting the word out about places that store ammonium nitrate and other potentially explosive materials.

"We don't want this to happen again," said Pickett, noting that state authorities took some immediate actions and that other, more deliberate ones are in the works. "There have got to be some changes ... But I don't want to rush and do the wrong thing."

-- http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/22/us/wes...investigation/

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 07:22:59 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 05:00:47 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:
Larry..send me an email...I found the prints/manual for that sig gen
and cant find your email address. Course it IS 5am..and Ill be on the
road in an hour or so. Ill email the attachment back to you.

Gunner

Never mind....

Weird. This one didn't come until tonight after 9pm but the other you
sent later got here by 5pm, when I got home.

It's all Lloyd's fault for mentioning it, right?
Or was that Jim? You guys all look the same online.

--
A sound mind in a sound body is a short but full description
of a happy state in this world.
-- John Locke

On 2015-02-19, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com fired this volley in
. 4.170:

For reasons stated earlier.

But... I should also say for some reasons NOT stated earlier.

Before, we were only talking about the ratings and voltages produced if a
transformer of the correct relative voltages were reversed -- with the
right voltage applied to whatever might be the 'primary of the day'.

But what if some mook connected a 4:1 backwards on a 440 circuit?

Probably instant beaker trip or fuse blow. That much mismatch
should saturate the core and draw *lots* of current from the wall.

But -- whatever was connected to the secondary, if it was turned
on, or if there was enough voltage to jump the switch contacts, would
almost certainly die, too. :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | (KV4PH) Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---