Boosting power via transformers

[GoldDigger]

Touche, and it's why I stress that stating voltage as ...120/240V, 240/120V .... Stated correctly removes all doubt and needless interpretation.

Unfortunately, the difference between 120/240 (meaning standard single phase three wire with center tapped neutral) and 240/120 (indicating 240/120 three phase four wire with high leg) is a little too subtle to be depended on. For that reason I always add in the phase and wire numbers when there is any chance of misunderstanding.

The designations which contain Y are totally unambiguous, in addition to being listed in the NEC as standard system voltage combinations.

 

[kwired]

Touche, and it's why I stress that stating voltage as 480Y/277V, 208Y/120V, 120/240V, 240/120V and 120/208V is so important. Stated correctly removes all doubt and needless interpretation.

I wasn't even thinking of that when I mentioned terminology, I was thinking of

" We can boost the available 200A power to more through transformers"

Amps is not a unit of power, watts is, and that has been the response of most people is that you can change the amps to about any level imaginable but you are still limited to the output from the source for how much power you can have without changes to the source, which means voltage will have to change as well but net power out will be same as net power in (less any inefficiencies).

 

[Besoeker]

I wasn't even thinking of that when I mentioned terminology, I was thinking of

" We can boost the available 200A power to more through transformers"

Amps is not a unit of power, watts is, and that has been the response of most people is that you can change the amps to about any level imaginable but you are still limited to the output from the source for how much power you can have without changes to the source, which means voltage will have to change as well but net power out will be same as net power in (less any inefficiencies).

Yes, I thought about responding to that last point a few times.
A transformer is a consumer of power, not a producer of power.

 

[GoldDigger]

Actually the consumption if power is small and incidental. It is primarily a transformer of power. Duh!

Tapatalk!

 

[Besoeker]

Actually the consumption if power is small and incidental.

It's something I have to take into account when I'm providing guaranteed efficiency figures for systems with stinging financial penalties if they are not met.

But, actually, it was a point of principle. Transformers don't/can't boost power. They do the opposite. They consume it. Albeit it small in relation to the rating. But consume it they do. Even on no load.

 

[kwired]

Actually the consumption if power is small and incidental. It is primarily a transformer of power. Duh!

Tapatalk!

That be correct, the only power consumed by a transformer is inefficiency losses otherwise it is just a unit to convert from one voltage to another at same power level with input and output being the same overall power rating.

 

[Besoeker]

That be correct, the only power consumed by a transformer is inefficiency losses

That's my point. It consumes.
The title is about boosting. It does the reverse.

 

[kwired]

That's my point. It consumes.
The title is about boosting. It does the reverse.

The only thing it consumes is the energy lost because of inefficiencies, otherwise it just transforms voltage to a different level and passes input energy on to the output. The title is about boosting power, not boosting votage. A transformer is a great voltage booster or reducer, but can not boost power. It won't really reduce power either, kind of have to be careful on what I say on this one as it can reduce power but is operating outside of it's intended design when it is doing so.

 

[Besoeker]

The only thing it consumes is the energy lost because of inefficiencies, otherwise it just transforms voltage to a different level and passes input energy on to the output. The title is about boosting power, not boosting votage. A transformer is a great voltage booster or reducer, but can not boost power. It won't really reduce power either, kind of have to be careful on what I say on this one as it can reduce power but is operating outside of it's intended design when it is doing so.

Consumes power, not boosts power. That's my point.

 

[augie47]

Consumes power, not boosts power. That's my point.

what are you saying ???


(just messin with you ... understand completely)

 

[kwired]

Consumes power, not boosts power. That's my point.

Sorry but I still disagree, a transformer does not consume or boost power IMO. It simply passes it on, can either be at same voltage or at a different voltage. If you want to consider any losses in the transformer as consumption I guess you can, but you should also consider resistance losses in a conductor as consumption as well then.

 

[Besoeker]

Sorry but I still disagree, a transformer does not consume or boost power IMO. It simply passes it on, can either be at same voltage or at a different voltage.

No, it doesn't simply pass it on. You get less out than you put in. It is thus, a net consumer.

If you want to consider any losses in the transformer as consumption I guess you can,

Even if the transformer was sitting there powered up but unloaded, your meter would rack up units for which you would have to pay. Wouldn't you consider the electrical energy you pay for as consumption?

 

[kwired]

No, it doesn't simply pass it on. You get less out than you put in. It is thus, a net consumer.


Even if the transformer was sitting there powered up but unloaded, your meter would rack up units for which you would have to pay. Wouldn't you consider the electrical energy you pay for as consumption?

I do not disagree with that. I thought I mentioned inefficiencies, the intent of the transformer is not to consume power but to transform and pass it on. There are inefficiencies in almost anything and we generally disregard them for simpler problems/calculations, but sometimes in a more complex issue need to consider the efficiency.

Even a simple conductor has resistance and consumes energy when current is flowing but most of the time we disregard that fact.

Transformers are more efficient when loaded then when they have little or no load.

 

[Besoeker]

I do not disagree with that. I thought I mentioned inefficiencies, the intent of the transformer is not to consume power

Agreed. In general, it is designed to consume as little of the power as possible for its intended application. But is consumes some. It is a net consumer and you have pay for that just as you would with a heater.

There are inefficiencies in almost anything and we generally disregard them for simpler problems/calculations, but sometimes in a more complex issue need to consider the efficiency.

My point was very simple. The thread title is about using a transformer to boost power inferring getting more out than you put in. In fact, you get less out than you put in. That's the principle I was trying to highlight.

 

[augie47]

In think the original post has been well covered and Besoeker summed it up nicely (more than once)
I am closing the thread.