Видео

From my understanding, this calculator model is not capable of that. I use a different calculator for those types of calculations

@@JasonOlson Thank you for the prompt response. I am in EE myself and I used a similar SHARP Writeview calculator in our circuit analysis course. There were times when we needed to solve a system of linear equations with complex coefficients (I think it started with frequency domain analysis). As much as I love the SHARP calc for its simplicity, I had to resort to solving everything by hand. A few months later I haf to buy a TI-89 just for this.

Yes the audio isn’t the best, this was a newer setup I was using and had to work out the kinks. As for the imaginary part, that was not the intent of this video, only to show the total. I cover breaking out the horizontal and vertical components in a separate video to keep them short and sweet

Yes you can cycle between the x and y coordinates. Easiest way for me to show you is if you go to the 4 minute point of my video “Parallel impedance Polar method”, I show it there. It’s the same process to cycle between when you are in rectangular mode or polar mode

The two magnetic flux are not equal. The remaining flux is what would contribute to eddy currents. Also remember that core uses laminated sheets to ensure no eddy currents are present.

@@JasonOlson Thank you

You are not incorrect but if you were asked to leave it in complex then it would be incorrect. This video is about complex number which do not use angles

.707 / effective value gives you peak value. Or effective value x 1.414

glass and LED's, the fun part of this project is getting the camera settings dialed in but we are getting close! thanks for watching

Load 3 does not utilize the neutral conductor so the voltage drop of the neutral will not affect it. That load will only have two conductors connected to it. Line 1 and Line 2 so their voltage drops are all that contribute to that loop

@@JasonOlson good to know. Thanks for the insight!!

Yes you are correct, got sloppy with my mental math!

@@JasonOlson thanks man. Do you have a video of the transparent board?

I do not have a video of just the board.

Thanks for the tip, I will do my best to clean it up!!

I'm really glad that you brought this up. One of the most fundamental mistakes there is (and I appreciate why because it is often taught this way) that current will take the path of least resistance. This was an idea that was presented when the fundamentals of electricity were being discovered but was soon disregarded. Think of it like to light bulbs connected in parallel, one a 60 watt bulb and the other a 40 watt. If current took the path of least resistance then the 40 watt bulb would never turn on. You can prove that it does in your house by putting a 60 and 40 watt bulb in the same fixture, both will light up because they both have a potential difference across them. The purpose of a common/neutral conductor is to carry the unbalanced current and maintain phase voltage. Hopefully this helps, I would be happy to continue discussing this with you as much as needed.

@@JasonOlson Thanks for the quick reply. To help me understand this lets take the example of a perfectly balanced circuit across both loads 1 and 2 meaning there would be "0" current flowing in the neutral according to what I've read and seen. So current flows across load 1 and then bypasses the neutral altogether and flows across load 2. I'm not following why no current wouldn't take a no load or low resistance (wire resistance only) path back to the transformer down the neutral but all go through a higher resistance of a second load. That doesn't make a lot of sense but accepting that this is the case must mean something is impeding the current from returning down the neutral. I have only come across one video explaining this and the explanation given was under a balanced load condition the power cancels down the neutral. I took that to mean the voltage from one leg must be opposing the voltage from the other leg down the neutral causing a net "0" current flow causing all the current to flow through the second load. Something must be causing a resistance to current flow in the neutral since it is a wire or bar perfectly capable of carrying current.

@@subatomicparticle6535 yes you basically have it right. You need to consider that the neutral wire is not connected to the same 'spot' of the source as the other two wires. So it's not simply a matter of current 'wanting' to take a path of least resistance. You need to consider the 'driver' of that current (i.e. the voltage between the points in discussion). Another way to phrase what you are describing is that the point between the two balanced loads will have zero volts in reference to the center of the voltage source (the center tap), while in reference to either end of the coil it has -120 and +120 still. A voltage of 0 implies no current flow, regardless of the resistance of the available path, where as the 120 volts potential will drive a current flow across a resistor. For AC, you can check out the sine functions graphed relative to neutral and observe the waveform destructive interference that occurs under balanced conditions.

yes you are correct!

Glad to hear that

There is two ways to analyze current. One is electron flow which is negative to positive. The other is conventional flow which is positive to negative. Convention is very common with electronics because it’s easier to understand for devices like diodes but at the end of the day it all is the same.

This was something that a colleague and I designed and built.

You are right, I clicked off in frustration. But came back bc it’s just a minor mistake