开云体育

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io
  1. HallicraftersRadios
  2. Messages
Expanded Topics Messages
Date
Re: Ballast Resistors? Source?

 

开云体育

If Jim is right about R-68 {I have not looked at the circuit}? we should be worried about R68 wattage.? As Jim says.

A related thing;? when these were produced, what was the rated temperature rise and rated ambient temp used in the standards? And what is it now?? In general it seems that replacement resistors are now smaller in surface area, so they must run much hotter ?than originals, which also means that they will tend to over-heat neighboring components if allow to run hot .

I am no expert on this, but if anyone has real data on these standards I would like to see it. ?Of course there might be various standards too. ?


--
don??? va3drl
Re: Ballast Resistors? Source?

 

Richard, thanks for getting me untangled. I am studying for tech, I was a novice back in 1980, so relearning things. I asked about the 300 Ohm pair in series because I can find 300 Ohm? Axial Ceramic Cement Power Resistor 5W easily but not 600 Ohm. ?Thanks for clearing up the 5 per cent vs 10 per cent tolerances. ?
Re: Ballast Resistors? Source?

 

Jim, thanks for setting me straight. I realize I would need to wire two 300 Ohm in series to get 600 Ohms. I can find 300 Ohm 5W 10 percent? Axial Ceramic Cement Power Resistors easily enough but have not found a 600 Ohm listed yet. I will replace the big silver can capacitor as I suspect that is where the failure occured.?
Re: Ballast Resistors? Source?

 

In SERIES, parallel will give you half the value. Maybe this was a
typo.
Generally speaking the closer the tolerance the better, i.e. 5% is
better than 10% but the actual value is what is important. Resistors
and capacitors are often closer to their nominal value than the
tolerance limits. Using resistors or capacitors in either series or
parallel will tend to average out their values, i.e. improve their
accuracy. But, not always, a bunch from the same lot may all be high or
low and using them in series or parallel won't improve the overall
accuracy.
For many applications in old radios the original resistors were
only about 20% accuracy, more modern units are almost always 10% or better.
If you are replacing low power carbon composition resistors use
modern carbon or metal film ones, they are much better and will last
forever. Modern plastic film caps are much better than the original
paper caps and both are probably cheaper.


On 1/18/2025 12:07 PM, Richard Oscoda via groups.io wrote:
Thanks for the supply lead. The soldering is messy because I was
removing a huge yellow capacitor that is not on the schmatic.
Showing my ignorance; can I create a 600ohm Axial Ceramic Cement Power
by using two 300 Ohm in parallel? ?Also, the 10 percrent figure is more
desireable than 5 percent?

--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
SKCC 19998
Re: Ballast Resistors? Source?

 

This is not a precision circuit so the extra money spent for a 5% part means little, 10% is good enough.

I think that you mean to parallel two 600 ohm 5 watt resistors to make up a 300 ohm 10 watt resistor?? That is OK as long as you have enough room in that area.? I would place the two resistors side by side, not stacked.? If you plan to leave the original filter capacitor can in place, find a new location for the three replacement filter caps so that they do not block the radiated heat from the power resistors.? Heat is always the enemy of reliability.
Regards.
Jim

Logic: Method used to arrive at the wrong conclusion, with confidence.? Murphy


On Saturday, January 18, 2025 at 02:07:10 PM CST, Richard Oscoda via groups.io <upmeharties51@...> wrote:


Thanks for the supply lead. The soldering is messy because I was removing a huge yellow capacitor that is not on the schmatic.
?
Showing my ignorance; can I create a 600ohm Axial Ceramic Cement Power by using two 300 Ohm in parallel? ?Also, the 10 percrent figure is more desireable than 5 percent?
Re: Ballast Resistors? Source?

 
Edited

Checking the math and calculating resistor power ratings using the voltages found in the manual:
Power (R43) = (265v - 150v)^2 / 6000 ohms = 2.2 watts, which at 5w is a X2 safety margin.? OK
Power (R-69) = (265v - 205v)^2 / 1500 ohms = 2.5 watts, which at 5w is a X2 safety margin.? OK
Power R-68) = (305v - 265v)^2 / 300 ohms = 5.3 watts, which is not good design work when using a 5w part.??
It seems that R69 should be at least a 10 watt part so that it too has a X2 safety margin!

It also looks like the dreaded previous owner left C99 A, B & C in the circuit and poorly tacked soldered the replacement for C99B in parallel with the original filter capacitor.? To add to the problem, the location of the new replacement filter capacitor blocks the radiated heat form the three 5 watt power resistors.? So there is no wonder why R68 and perhaps R69 failed.? I assume that the only remaining good 5 watt resistor is R43 and it still measures close to 6k ohms?
Regards,
Jim
Logic: Method used to arrive at the wrong conclusion, with confidence.? Murphy


On Saturday, January 18, 2025 at 12:52:22 PM CST, Dave Jordan via groups.io <wa3gin@...> wrote:


Amazon, eBay, Mouser


On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 1:28?PM Richard Oscoda via <upmeharties51=[email protected]> wrote:
Hello all, I am rebuilding a Hallicrafters SX-122.? Two of the three ballast resisters are broken.? Where do I find replacemets?
?
Re: Ballast Resistors? Source?

 

Thanks for the supply lead. The soldering is messy because I was removing a huge yellow capacitor that is not on the schmatic.
?
Showing my ignorance; can I create a 600ohm Axial Ceramic Cement Power by using two 300 Ohm in parallel? ?Also, the 10 percrent figure is more desireable than 5 percent?
Re: Ballast Resistors? Source?

 
Edited

开云体育

I buy most of my resistors and caps from Dave at

?

Less expensive then Digikey and Mouser.

?

Take some time and tidy up that soldering as well……….

?

Tom

W3TA

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Richard Oscoda via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2025 1:28 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [HallicraftersRadios] Ballast Resistors? Source?

?

Hello all, I am rebuilding a Hallicrafters SX-122. ?Two of the three ballast resisters are broken. ?Where do I find replacemets?

?
Re: Ballast Resistors? Source?

 
Edited

Amazon, eBay, Mouser


On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 1:28?PM Richard Oscoda via <upmeharties51=[email protected]> wrote:
Hello all, I am rebuilding a Hallicrafters SX-122.? Two of the three ballast resisters are broken.? Where do I find replacemets?
?
Ballast Resistors? Source?

 
Edited

Hello all, I am rebuilding a Hallicrafters SX-122. ?Two of the three ballast resisters are broken. ?Where do I find replacemets?
?
FS: Hallicrafters S-15 SX-15 (?) Sky Challenger Receivers, Spare Silver Sky Challenger Dial, Spare Hallicrafters Nameplate

 
Edited

I have two of these.
?

Receiver #1: in poor condition, some missing electrical components and connectors. Enclosure is poor, with a meter hole cut into the front panel, additional non-original front panel holes.? All controls are present and while a few are stiff, none are seized. Both main and bandspread dials function.? Non-original hardware.? Someone has worked on this one before and left a bit of a mess.? This is a parts unit.

?

Receiver #2: in better condition than #1, but still not great.? Appears to be mostly complete (no guarantee on completeness), with some obvious work having been done previously (a replaced transformer, some replaced electrolytic can caps, an added Jones connector on rear, maybe more). Enclosure is complete with no extra holes in front panel. ??Non-original enclosure hardware. All controls are present and while a few are stiff, none are seized. Both main and bandspread dials function. ?This is a parts unit or, while it would take some work, is a possible restoration candidate.

?

If it isn’t clear from the above, neither receiver is operational.? No testing has been done on either receiver or on any of the components. No tubes are included with either receiver.

?

I acquired these as part of a collection of other things I was interested in, and thought I might get to them someday.? I will not get to them anytime soon, and I need to shrink the hoard, so off they go to someone who might, maybe, be able to make most of a good one from the two, otherwise both should useful as parts sources to restore other S/SX-15’s.

?

Receiver #1 asking $30.

Receiver #2 asking $55.

Take both for $75.

?

I also have a pretty good spare Sky Challenger silver dial; someone had lightly marked it on the back with "SX-18?", but it appears to be the same dial with same markings as on the S-/SX-15 receivers.? Finally, I have a spare one of the small Hallicrafters nameplates (with the 4 little screws).? Pardon the photo quality, the dial is actually nicer than it appears due to the crappy lighting I have.? Offers considered on these, or we can negotiate inclusion with the receivers.

?

Cash only, payment upon pickup at my location in York, PA, or at delivery at a local (to me) meet-up, or at delivery at an area hamfest if we are planning to attend anyway (we usually attend many hamfests within an hour or so of York, PA, and others like Berryville, and we're going to the Xenia OH "Dayton" hamfest this year).? I will not ship the receivers.? I will consider shipping the spare dial and nameplate if they are purchased separately, shipping cost to be paid by buyer.

?

Inquire for more information, additional photos.

?
HT46 meter needed.

 

I need a meter for a hallicrafters ht46 transmitter. It was damaged in the process of being shipped.?
Please, can any one help??
message here or direct to rholstiaticlouddotcom? ? replace at with @? ?and dot with .? (period)
Robert KH2BR?
WANTED SX-146

 

开云体育

Looking for a Hallicrafters SX-146; working or not, lone or buy.



Walt Cates, WD0GOF
?
A majority of acceptance is not proof of correctness.


Re: Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

 
Edited

开云体育

Hi Richard, yes the problem is terminology and it is not just because many people are abusing words; it’s because? for the last 10 decades there have been people fooling with generators and transformers, creating many many difficult to describe connections, so the ordinary electricity.

I agree with much of your stuff about DC and terminology, but some not-so-good expressions have been ongoing for years

?

Re. I am not sure how a three-wire DC system works. ??????I am not sure what you mean, but if you have not looked at 1890’s electric power, you might think there are only 2 wire systems ?but Most people mean something like this

?whether it is a generator or battery ?this is the common configuration of “3-wire” but ?

?

The configuration of the typical LV AC system wiring is the same, or “copied” from Edison’s the 3-wire DC system where there is a “middle wire” or “common wire” or “Neutral”, and ?a ?hot positive ?and ?a hot Negative, both, WRT the middle wire, and for AC, there is “a middle wire”, and at the right point in time the AC system has a hot positive ?and hot Negative both, WRT the middle wire. ??You know doubt know this but use different words.

Re. DC does not have phase.? ..agree ?but the term “split phase” in AC implies divided in the MIDDLE … how do you say that for DC ? I agree it is loose words but seems to convey the idea with 2 words. ???????????

Re ?Since AC and DC are quite different I don't see how a DC system could be "copied" for AC. ???Yes, but the configuration was either copied or reinvented to be the same; just keep the wires and change the two DC generators to ?two AC generators and be careful of the “polarity” of the connections.

?

This might not be right, but it was my understanding that originally Edison had one 110 volt DC generator with one wire hooked to ground. ??light bulbs limit was 110V or they wouldn’t. When the generator was fully loaded, to feed more customers, he connect another generator but with the positive grounded, so he then had 220v line to line, or 110 to “ground”. I have never seen if the Ground became a “Ground wire” before the 3-wire system began.[Jim must know], but intentional running current in the ground was a problem, and it seems that the solution was to unground most electrical systems for a while so we had grounded neutrals and ungrounded ones. ???AS I have read and Jim said, ?AC grounding took a while, to evolve.? O course the first wires run into earth rods were in the 1754 for lightning ????? and then they invented insulators for the wires so don’t forget that history. And ?the fire insurance?

?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Richard Knoppow via groups.io
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 5:09 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HallicraftersRadios] Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

?

Don, you now have me confused. I suspect the terminology used may be
the cause. DC does not have phase. I am not sure how a three-wire DC
system works. Since AC and DC are quite different I don't see how a DC
system could be "copied" for AC.
Three wire AC distribution is at the end user where the pole
transformer usually reduces voltage from the pole lines to the consumer
voltage. Very often these transformers have a center tapped secondary
feeding the house. The outlets in the house can go to either side of the
incoming feed and the center tap or, for some high power items like
electric stoves or clothes dryers, across both sides for double the
voltage. The center tap is the return for the single side feeds and is
not used for the across the line feed except as a neutral. This does not
include ground connections, which do not usually go to the power line
but to an independent ground, perhaps a ground stake.
For this system to work the phase of the two sides is opposite.
That is, when one is most negative the other will be most positive. That
gives the full voltage across the line, while going to the center tap
gives you half the total voltage. The voltages are determined by the
pole transformer and have nothing to do with the distribution line.
Now, DC is one voltage. It can't be "split" into two phases because
DC doesn't have phases. One side is negative, the other positive. Stays
that way back to the generator. To have double the voltage on must have
two transmission lines from the generating station wired in opposite
polarity. Then one could connect between them and get the twice the
voltage of either line, but they are still essentially independent.
For long distance tranmission at very high voltages but is not
suitable for general distribution. That's why AC is the overwhelming
system in use.
Edison was a genius but had his limits. His name lives on in many
places including a great many electrical energy companies with Edison in
their names. For instance locally the Southern California Edison
Company. In New York City, the Consolidated Edison Co (one of the last
to supply DC current) and many others. Note that the General Electric Co
before its merger was the Edison General Electric Co.
I think I am beating a dead horse and will quite now.


--
don??? va3drl
Re: Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

 

开云体育

Jim you forgot about Romagnosi [Gian Domenico Romagnosi]

In 1802? was fooling with volta’s pile, and made a needle move? [lots of debate] later . 1820 Orstead gets all the credit.

Then what about early telegraph grounding? before they figured out that often earth conducts… ohh way OT again

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Whartenby via groups.io
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 4:28 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HallicraftersRadios] Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

?

Don

According to Mr. A.I. Google, the grounding of the neutral line became mandatory with the 1913 update to the NEC.? Grounding of the building service was not explicitly required until 1918.? It seems that the NEC has always been a work in progress.??My search terms were: "when did the NEC require that the neutral line be grounded" and "when did NEC require grounded outlets".

?

Tesla, Sarnoff, Armstrong, de Forest, Shockley, Collins, among many others, are all demigods, some with a vocal cult following, others with vocal detractors.? For me it would be Oliver Heaviside and John Costas to name two relatively unknows but both have made great contributions in the field of electrical engineering.

Jim ?


--
don??? va3drl
Re: Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

 

I think you can include a number of others to your list, for
instance Steinmetz. I am not sure Sarnoff should be included among
inventors and scientists. He was something of a genius business man but
not a technical innovator. Also, which Collins, the one I think of is
A.Fredrick Collins, one of the early innovators of wireless. Also wrote
a pretty good early text book. Art Collins, of Collins Radio fame was
again an innovative business man rather than a technical innovator. He
hired the best engineers he could find for his business. I am not sure
Oliver Heaviside is quite so unknown but maybe so. He deserves better. I
tend to draw blanks on names but know there are a bunch of others.
Modern electrical distribution mostly originated with Westinghouse
(AC) although Edison probably deserves to get credit for the idea of
electrical distribution.

2025 1:28 PM, Jim Whartenby via groups.io wrote:

Don
According to Mr. A.I. Google, the grounding of the neutral line became
mandatory with the 1913 update to the NEC.? Grounding of the building
service was not explicitly required until 1918.? It seems that the NEC
has always been a work in progress. My search terms were: "when did the
NEC require that the neutral line be grounded" and "when did NEC require
grounded outlets".

Tesla, Sarnoff, Armstrong, de Forest, Shockley, Collins, among many
others, are all demigods, some with a vocal cult following, others with
vocal detractors.? For me it would be Oliver Heaviside and John Costas
to name two relatively unknows but both have made great contributions in
the field of electrical engineering.
Jim

--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
SKCC 19998
Re: Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

 

Don, you now have me confused. I suspect the terminology used may be
the cause. DC does not have phase. I am not sure how a three-wire DC
system works. Since AC and DC are quite different I don't see how a DC
system could be "copied" for AC.
Three wire AC distribution is at the end user where the pole
transformer usually reduces voltage from the pole lines to the consumer
voltage. Very often these transformers have a center tapped secondary
feeding the house. The outlets in the house can go to either side of the
incoming feed and the center tap or, for some high power items like
electric stoves or clothes dryers, across both sides for double the
voltage. The center tap is the return for the single side feeds and is
not used for the across the line feed except as a neutral. This does not
include ground connections, which do not usually go to the power line
but to an independent ground, perhaps a ground stake.
For this system to work the phase of the two sides is opposite.
That is, when one is most negative the other will be most positive. That
gives the full voltage across the line, while going to the center tap
gives you half the total voltage. The voltages are determined by the
pole transformer and have nothing to do with the distribution line.
Now, DC is one voltage. It can't be "split" into two phases because
DC doesn't have phases. One side is negative, the other positive. Stays
that way back to the generator. To have double the voltage on must have
two transmission lines from the generating station wired in opposite
polarity. Then one could connect between them and get the twice the
voltage of either line, but they are still essentially independent.
For long distance tranmission at very high voltages but is not
suitable for general distribution. That's why AC is the overwhelming
system in use.
Edison was a genius but had his limits. His name lives on in many
places including a great many electrical energy companies with Edison in
their names. For instance locally the Southern California Edison
Company. In New York City, the Consolidated Edison Co (one of the last
to supply DC current) and many others. Note that the General Electric Co
before its merger was the Edison General Electric Co.
I think I am beating a dead horse and will quite now.


On 1/13/2025 3:25 AM, don Root wrote:
Jim, ??from ?your 3^rd paragraph and the references I agree with the
phrase? “split phase or Edison” ?for AC? systems with the OR included.

I agree Edison was the big man for DC, and he should not be forgotten.
And that 3-Wire DC system was copied for AC.

Thanks for that interesting link to way back. You no doubt notice that
the letters ”ground” do ?not appear.

I am quite aware of the development of AC, but my past “research” leaves
exactly who did what first as an ongoing debate. I have a few Tesla
books that I got at the AWA Rochester 30 years ago.

The use of the term "multi-phase":


<>

<https://
www.britannica.com/science/eddy-current>

<https://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyphase_system> ???“Multi-phase power generation
designs with 5, 7, 9, 12, and 15 phases in conjunction with “

*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jim Whartenby via
groups.io
*Sent:* Monday, January 13, 2025 4:15 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HallicraftersRadios] Power distribution, was: 2-wire,
unpolarized outlet ?

Don

I'm really confused by your post and the casual use of terms.? I assume
that you are still annoyed by the use of "Edison" to describe the center
tapped transformer distribution system currently in use?

There were three systems proposed to transmit power early on (1883-1896,
see:

<
PROC.1976.10325>) in the US and perhaps Canada too.? They are single
phase (Westinghouse), two phase aka polyphase (Tesla) and three phase
(Dolivo-Dobrovolsky*)*.? Tesla was the champion of the two phase system
where the two phases are separated by 90 degrees, in the 3 phase system,
120 degrees separates each phase.? The three phase system eventually won
the day.

Some sources credit Tesla with the three phase motor (patent filed in
1897) but his patent specified six wires connecting the motor to the
generator.? This is not what is used today.? Dolivo-Dobrovolsky a
Russian born German working for AEG developed the three phase system now
in use along with the delta-wye configuration, the three phase motor
(1888), three phase transformer and he designed the first three phase
hydroelectric power plant (1891) using all of his developments.

The split phase or Edison distribution system is part of the single
phase system.? The use of the term "multi-phase" is a distortion of
facts and implies a three phase system which it is clearly not.? Yes,
Edison developed his system for the lights powered by the Pearl Street
Station which used a "neutral" and two "hot" conductors.? From one hot
conductor to neutral was 110 VDC and across both hot conductors was 220
VDC.? This configuration is still used today but at a slightly higher
voltage using AC power but the principle is still valid and Edison still
deserves the credit.

Regards,

Jim

Logic: Method used to arrive at the wrong conclusion, with confidence.
Murphy

On Sunday, January 12, 2025 at 08:25:11 PM CST, don Root
<drootofallevil@...> wrote:

This is unfortunately a continuation of a part of the off-topic stuff
that brings down the respect of our forum, but must be done.

Re ??the *wording that began in a different topic**/g/
HallicraftersRadios/message/31466 </g/
HallicraftersRadios/message/31466> *?and somehow has been continued in
this topic and that continues a dispute is:

“Yes, it is known as the Edison split phase system, see:


phase_electric_power#:~:text=A%20split-phase%20or%20single,-
wire%20direct-current%20system. <
phase_electric_power#:~:text=A%20split-phase%20or%20single,-
飞颈谤别%20诲颈谤别肠迟-肠耻谤谤别苍迟%20蝉测蝉迟别尘.&驳迟;”

I previously glossed over the above wording believing that a comma was
just accidentally missing, and knowing people often use loose wording to
express difficult stuff, however when looking at the quoted link, I see
the following:

quote

“A *split-phase* or *single-phase three-wire* system is a type of
single-phase electric power <
phase_electric_power> distribution. ??It is the alternating current
<> (AC) equivalent of
the original Edison Machine Works <
Edison_Machine_Works> three-wire direct-current <https://
别苍.飞颈办颈辫别诲颈补.辞谤驳/飞颈办颈/顿颈谤别肠迟-肠耻谤谤别苍迟&驳迟;”

End quote???and not“Edison split phase system”

The term “split-phase” is used frequently in the above link , and
?“Edison” is used twice, but not beside “split-phase” or “split phase”.

Now, Re?? the previously quoted
v=yl35KT64g2g <>

Here is what I see in that quoted text at the top on my bit-machine and
screen with my old eyes:

*Ask An Electrician - How Does Edison 3 Wire (Split Phase) System Work?*

As I see it , [with? added spaces,color, etc ?for clarity ] the area in
dispute says :

*Edison 3 Wire****( **Split Phase****)*System.***

*I read that in my grammar as: *

*Edison 3 Wire****or *Split Phase***System …*

*Which ?means to me that the system can be identified by **either *

*1-**?the term **“**Edison 3 Wire”***

*????????or*

*2-**the term **“Split Phase”

*?????the term ?“single-phase three-wire” is perhaps more clear ?in a
multi-phase environment*

*And intentionally misquoting it as **“**_Edison split phase system_**”
and then reinforcing it seems to me to be intentionally part of the
“misinformation” society that is plaguing this side of the world. *

see


disinformation <
misinformation-disinformation>

?quote

Misinformation is false or inaccurate information—getting the facts
wrong. Disinformation is false information which is deliberately
intended to mislead—intentionally misstating the facts.

The spread of misinformation and disinformation <
pubs/reports/health-misinformation> has affected our ability to improve
public health, address climate change, maintain a stable democracy, and
more. By providing valuable insight into how and why we are likely to
believe misinformation and disinformation, psychological science can
inform how we protect ourselves against its ill effects.

End quote


--
don??? va3drl

--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
SKCC 19998
Re: Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

 

Don
According to Mr. A.I. Google, the grounding of the neutral line became mandatory with the 1913 update to the NEC.? Grounding of the building service was not explicitly required until 1918.? It seems that the NEC has always been a work in progress.??My search terms were: "when did the NEC require that the neutral line be grounded" and "when did NEC require grounded outlets".

Tesla, Sarnoff, Armstrong, de Forest, Shockley, Collins, among many others, are all demigods, some with a vocal cult following, others with vocal detractors.? For me it would be Oliver Heaviside and John Costas to name two relatively unknows but both have made great contributions in the field of electrical engineering.
Jim

Logic: Method used to arrive at the wrong conclusion, with confidence.? Murphy


On Monday, January 13, 2025 at 05:25:14 AM CST, don Root <drootofallevil@...> wrote:


Jim, ??from ?your 3rd paragraph and the references I agree with the phrase? “split phase or Edison” ?for AC? systems with the OR included.

I agree Edison was the big man for DC, and he should not be forgotten. And that 3-Wire DC system was copied for AC. ?

?

Thanks for that interesting link to way back. You no doubt notice that the letters ”ground” do ?not appear.

?

I am quite aware of the development of AC, but my past “research” leaves exactly who did what first as an ongoing debate. I have a few Tesla books that I got at the AWA Rochester 30 years ago.

?

The use of the term "multi-phase":

?

???“Multi-phase power generation designs with 5, 7, 9, 12, and 15 phases in conjunction with “

?

?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Whartenby via groups.io
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 4:15 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HallicraftersRadios] Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

?

Don

I'm really confused by your post and the casual use of terms.? I assume that you are still annoyed by the use of "Edison" to describe the center tapped transformer distribution system currently in use?

?

There were three systems proposed to transmit power early on (1883-1896, see:?

) in the US and perhaps Canada too.? They are single phase (Westinghouse), two phase aka polyphase (Tesla)?and three phase (Dolivo-Dobrovolsky).? Tesla was the champion of the two phase system where the two phases are separated by 90 degrees, in the 3 phase system, 120 degrees separates each phase.? The three phase system eventually won the day.

?

Some sources credit Tesla with the three phase motor (patent filed in 1897) but his patent specified six wires connecting the motor to the generator.? This is not what is used today.? Dolivo-Dobrovolsky a Russian born German working for AEG developed the three phase system now in use along with the delta-wye configuration, the three phase motor (1888), three phase transformer and he designed the first three phase hydroelectric power plant (1891) using all of his developments.

?

The split phase or Edison distribution system is part of the single phase system.? The use of the term "multi-phase" is a distortion of facts and implies a three phase system which it is clearly not.? Yes, Edison developed his system for the lights powered by the Pearl Street Station which used a "neutral" and two "hot" conductors.? From one hot conductor to neutral was 110 VDC and across both hot conductors was 220 VDC.? This configuration is still used today but at a slightly higher voltage using AC power but the principle is still valid and Edison still deserves the credit.??

Regards,

Jim

?

Logic: Method used to arrive at the wrong conclusion, with confidence.? Murphy

?

?

On Sunday, January 12, 2025 at 08:25:11 PM CST, don Root <drootofallevil@...> wrote:

?

?

This is unfortunately a continuation of a part of the off-topic stuff that brings down the respect of our forum, but must be done.

Re ??the wording that began in a different topic /g/HallicraftersRadios/message/31466 ?and somehow has been continued in this topic and that continues a dispute is:? ??

“Yes, it is known as the Edison split phase system, see:

”

I previously glossed over the above wording believing that a comma was just accidentally missing, and knowing people often use loose wording to express difficult stuff, however when looking at the quoted link, I see the following: ?

quote ?????

“A split-phase or single-phase three-wire system is a type of distribution. ??It is the (AC) equivalent of the original three-wire ” ?

End quote ???and not “Edison split phase system”

The term “split-phase” is used frequently in the above link , and ?“Edison” is used twice, but not beside “split-phase” or “split phase”.

?

Now, Re?? the previously quoted ?

Here is what I see in that quoted text at the top on my bit-machine and screen with my old eyes:

Ask An Electrician - How Does Edison 3 Wire (Split Phase) System Work?

As I see it , [with? added spaces,color, etc ?for clarity ] the area in dispute says :

Edison 3 Wire ???( Split Phase ) ???System. ?

I read that in my grammar as: ?

Edison 3 Wire ???or ???Split Phase ???System …

Which ?means to me that the system can be identified by either ?

1-? ?the term ?“Edison 3 Wire” ???????

????????or

2-? the term ?“Split Phase” ??

?????the term ?“single-phase three-wire” is perhaps more clear ?in a multi-phase environment

And intentionally misquoting it as ?“Edison split phase system” and then reinforcing it seems to me to be intentionally part of the “misinformation” society that is plaguing this side of the world. ?

see

?quote

Misinformation is false or inaccurate information—getting the facts wrong. Disinformation is false information which is deliberately intended to mislead—intentionally misstating the facts.

The has affected our ability to improve public health, address climate change, maintain a stable democracy, and more. By providing valuable insight into how and why we are likely to believe misinformation and disinformation, psychological science can inform how we protect ourselves against its ill effects.

End quote ???


--
don??? va3drl

Re: Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

 

开云体育

Jim, ??from ?your 3rd paragraph and the references I agree with the phrase? “split phase or Edison” ?for AC? systems with the OR included.

I agree Edison was the big man for DC, and he should not be forgotten. And that 3-Wire DC system was copied for AC. ?

?

Thanks for that interesting link to way back. You no doubt notice that the letters ”ground” do ?not appear.

?

I am quite aware of the development of AC, but my past “research” leaves exactly who did what first as an ongoing debate. I have a few Tesla books that I got at the AWA Rochester 30 years ago.

?

The use of the term "multi-phase":

?

???“Multi-phase power generation designs with 5, 7, 9, 12, and 15 phases in conjunction with “

?

?

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Whartenby via groups.io
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 4:15 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HallicraftersRadios] Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

?

Don

I'm really confused by your post and the casual use of terms.? I assume that you are still annoyed by the use of "Edison" to describe the center tapped transformer distribution system currently in use?

?

There were three systems proposed to transmit power early on (1883-1896, see:?

) in the US and perhaps Canada too.? They are single phase (Westinghouse), two phase aka polyphase (Tesla)?and three phase (Dolivo-Dobrovolsky).? Tesla was the champion of the two phase system where the two phases are separated by 90 degrees, in the 3 phase system, 120 degrees separates each phase.? The three phase system eventually won the day.

?

Some sources credit Tesla with the three phase motor (patent filed in 1897) but his patent specified six wires connecting the motor to the generator.? This is not what is used today.? Dolivo-Dobrovolsky a Russian born German working for AEG developed the three phase system now in use along with the delta-wye configuration, the three phase motor (1888), three phase transformer and he designed the first three phase hydroelectric power plant (1891) using all of his developments.

?

The split phase or Edison distribution system is part of the single phase system.? The use of the term "multi-phase" is a distortion of facts and implies a three phase system which it is clearly not.? Yes, Edison developed his system for the lights powered by the Pearl Street Station which used a "neutral" and two "hot" conductors.? From one hot conductor to neutral was 110 VDC and across both hot conductors was 220 VDC.? This configuration is still used today but at a slightly higher voltage using AC power but the principle is still valid and Edison still deserves the credit.??

Regards,

Jim

?

Logic: Method used to arrive at the wrong conclusion, with confidence.? Murphy

?

?

On Sunday, January 12, 2025 at 08:25:11 PM CST, don Root <drootofallevil@...> wrote:

?

?

This is unfortunately a continuation of a part of the off-topic stuff that brings down the respect of our forum, but must be done.

Re ??the wording that began in a different topic /g/HallicraftersRadios/message/31466 ?and somehow has been continued in this topic and that continues a dispute is:? ??

“Yes, it is known as the Edison split phase system, see:

”

I previously glossed over the above wording believing that a comma was just accidentally missing, and knowing people often use loose wording to express difficult stuff, however when looking at the quoted link, I see the following: ?

quote ?????

“A split-phase or single-phase three-wire system is a type of distribution. ??It is the (AC) equivalent of the original three-wire ” ?

End quote ???and not “Edison split phase system”

The term “split-phase” is used frequently in the above link , and ?“Edison” is used twice, but not beside “split-phase” or “split phase”.

?

Now, Re?? the previously quoted ?

Here is what I see in that quoted text at the top on my bit-machine and screen with my old eyes:

Ask An Electrician - How Does Edison 3 Wire (Split Phase) System Work?

As I see it , [with? added spaces,color, etc ?for clarity ] the area in dispute says :

Edison 3 Wire ???( Split Phase ) ???System. ?

I read that in my grammar as: ?

Edison 3 Wire ???or ???Split Phase ???System …

Which ?means to me that the system can be identified by either ?

1-? ?the term ?“Edison 3 Wire” ???????

????????or

2-? the term ?“Split Phase” ??

?????the term ?“single-phase three-wire” is perhaps more clear ?in a multi-phase environment

And intentionally misquoting it as ?“Edison split phase system” and then reinforcing it seems to me to be intentionally part of the “misinformation” society that is plaguing this side of the world. ?

see

?quote

Misinformation is false or inaccurate information—getting the facts wrong. Disinformation is false information which is deliberately intended to mislead—intentionally misstating the facts.

The has affected our ability to improve public health, address climate change, maintain a stable democracy, and more. By providing valuable insight into how and why we are likely to believe misinformation and disinformation, psychological science can inform how we protect ourselves against its ill effects.

End quote ???


--
don??? va3drl

_._,_._,_


--
don??? va3drl
Re: Power distribution, was: 2-wire, unpolarized outlet ?

 

Don
I'm really confused by your post and the casual use of terms.? I assume that you are still annoyed by the use of "Edison" to describe the center tapped transformer distribution system currently in use?

There were three systems proposed to transmit power early on (1883-1896, see:?
) in the US and perhaps Canada too.? They are single phase (Westinghouse), two phase aka polyphase (Tesla)?and three phase (Dolivo-Dobrovolsky).? Tesla was the champion of the two phase system where the two phases are separated by 90 degrees, in the 3 phase system, 120 degrees separates each phase.? The three phase system eventually won the day.

Some sources credit Tesla with the three phase motor (patent filed in 1897) but his patent specified six wires connecting the motor to the generator.? This is not what is used today.? Dolivo-Dobrovolsky a Russian born German working for AEG developed the three phase system now in use along with the delta-wye configuration, the three phase motor (1888), three phase transformer and he designed the first three phase hydroelectric power plant (1891) using all of his developments.

The split phase or Edison distribution system is part of the single phase system.? The use of the term "multi-phase" is a distortion of facts and implies a three phase system which it is clearly not.? Yes, Edison developed his system for the lights powered by the Pearl Street Station which used a "neutral" and two "hot" conductors.? From one hot conductor to neutral was 110 VDC and across both hot conductors was 220 VDC.? This configuration is still used today but at a slightly higher voltage using AC power but the principle is still valid and Edison still deserves the credit.??
Regards,
Jim

Logic: Method used to arrive at the wrong conclusion, with confidence.? Murphy


On Sunday, January 12, 2025 at 08:25:11 PM CST, don Root <drootofallevil@...> wrote:


This is unfortunately a continuation of a part of the off-topic stuff that brings down the respect of our forum, but must be done.

Re ??the wording that began in a different topic /g/HallicraftersRadios/message/31466 ?and somehow has been continued in this topic and that continues a dispute is:? ??

“Yes, it is known as the Edison split phase system, see:

”

I previously glossed over the above wording believing that a comma was just accidentally missing, and knowing people often use loose wording to express difficult stuff, however when looking at the quoted link, I see the following: ?

quote ?????

“A split-phase or single-phase three-wire system is a type of distribution. ??It is the (AC) equivalent of the original three-wire ” ?

End quote ???and not “Edison split phase system”

The term “split-phase” is used frequently in the above link , and ?“Edison” is used twice, but not beside “split-phase” or “split phase”.

?

Now, Re?? the previously quoted ?

Here is what I see in that quoted text at the top on my bit-machine and screen with my old eyes:

Ask An Electrician - How Does Edison 3 Wire (Split Phase) System Work?

As I see it , [with? added spaces,color, etc ?for clarity ] the area in dispute says :

Edison 3 Wire ???( Split Phase ) ???System. ?

I read that in my grammar as: ?

Edison 3 Wire ???or ???Split Phase ???System …

Which ?means to me that the system can be identified by either ?

1-? ?the term ?“Edison 3 Wire” ???????

????????or

2-? the term ?“Split Phase” ??

?????the term ?“single-phase three-wire” is perhaps more clear ?in a multi-phase environment

And intentionally misquoting it as ?“Edison split phase system” and then reinforcing it seems to me to be intentionally part of the “misinformation” society that is plaguing this side of the world. ?

see

?quote

Misinformation is false or inaccurate information—getting the facts wrong. Disinformation is false information which is deliberately intended to mislead—intentionally misstating the facts.

The has affected our ability to improve public health, address climate change, maintain a stable democracy, and more. By providing valuable insight into how and why we are likely to believe misinformation and disinformation, psychological science can inform how we protect ourselves against its ill effects.

End quote ???


--
don??? va3drl

641 - 660 of 31966