First online complex Delta-Star or Delta-Y Transformation Calculatoris ready

Discussion in 'Electrical Engineering' started by Patrick Chung, Oct 10, 2013.

  1. Patrick Chung, Oct 10, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Patrick Chung

    Don Kelly Guest

    On 10/10/2013 1:38 PM, Salmon Egg wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > Patrick Chung <> wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.cirvirlab.com/simulation/delta-star_transformation_calculator.php

    >
    > I am curious about this post.
    >
    > 1. Was it a homework assignment?
    >
    > 2. Are there many people who would find it useful?
    >
    > 3. Is it not easier to derive the formula yourself than to remember
    > where it is in your files and how to use it?
    >
    > 4. Would a simple spreadsheet not do it?
    >
    > 5. Certainly Maple or Mathematica would find the comples
    > transformation a snap.
    >

    1)hopefully not for someone taking circuit theory where 3) is more useful
    2)not really -it is one of the network theorems that is sometimes useful
    3)absolutely true.
    4)sure
    5)yes- J or APL also work well

    But- it is pretty!
    --
    Don Kelly
    remove the cross to reply
     
    Don Kelly, Oct 10, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Patrick Chung

    J.B. Wood Guest

    J.B. Wood, Oct 21, 2013
    #3
  4. Patrick Chung

    J.B. Wood Guest

    On 10/21/2013 10:53 AM, J.B. Wood wrote:
    > On 10/10/2013 03:54 AM, Patrick Chung wrote:
    >> One of the most widespread 3 phase network topology transformation is
    >> now ready for use. Corresponding tutorial is:
    >>
    >> http://www.cirvirlab.com/index.php/electric/108-delta-star-or-delta-y-transformation-simulation.html
    >>
    >>
    >> as well as the calculator
    >>
    >> http://www.cirvirlab.com/simulation/delta-star_transformation_calculator.php
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Textbook/handbook stuff. Nothing new here. Sincerely,
    >

    Hello, and I probably overreacted a bit. What is new I guess is the
    convenience of an online calculator. My apologies to the ng and the OP.
    Sincerely,

    --
    J. B. Wood e-mail:
     
    J.B. Wood, Oct 21, 2013
    #4
  5. Patrick Chung

    Don Kelly Guest

    On 21/10/2013 12:09 PM, J.B. Wood wrote:
    > On 10/21/2013 10:53 AM, J.B. Wood wrote:
    >> On 10/10/2013 03:54 AM, Patrick Chung wrote:
    >>> One of the most widespread 3 phase network topology transformation is
    >>> now ready for use. Corresponding tutorial is:
    >>>
    >>> http://www.cirvirlab.com/index.php/electric/108-delta-star-or-delta-y-transformation-simulation.html
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> as well as the calculator
    >>>
    >>> http://www.cirvirlab.com/simulation/delta-star_transformation_calculator.php
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Textbook/handbook stuff. Nothing new here. Sincerely,
    >>

    > Hello, and I probably overreacted a bit. What is new I guess is the
    > convenience of an online calculator. My apologies to the ng and the OP.
    > Sincerely,
    >

    However- how often have you needed such a calculator? Also, if so, how
    often would you either look it up or work it out from scratch as I have
    often done simply because I either forgot or was too lazy to look it up?
    It is not a teaching tool.

    I have dealt with a lot of circuit analysis over the last 60 years but
    over this time, my use of star delta transformations has declined
    considerably as
    (a)I am looking for complete circuit solutions
    (b)If I am trying to reduce a circuit to a thevenin model--why bother
    when there are more powerful methods such as Z-bus which take advantage
    of the computer.
    (c) In relatively few cases I want to use this for its own sake.

    Admittedly this calculator may be useful as part of a set of tools
    -provided that set was all in one place and results could be saved and
    applied elsewhere. To some extent a language such as APL or J then
    allows considerable freedom along with the use of pre-defined
    transformations such as the delta-wye. As an aside, in J, the delta-wye
    transform and the y-delta transform each take one short relatively
    readable line. As with Patrick, I am sure that I learned more about
    programming than about the theory.


    --
    Don Kelly
    remove the cross to reply
     
    Don Kelly, Oct 25, 2013
    #5
  6. Patrick Chung

    Don Kelly Guest

    On 24/10/2013 8:47 PM, Salmon Egg wrote:
    > In article <awkau.8672$>, Don Kelly <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> I have dealt with a lot of circuit analysis over the last 60 years but
    >> over this time, my use of star delta transformations has declined
    >> considerably as
    >> (a)I am looking for complete circuit solutions
    >> (b)If I am trying to reduce a circuit to a thevenin model--why bother
    >> when there are more powerful methods such as Z-bus which take advantage
    >> of the computer.
    >> (c) In relatively few cases I want to use this for its own sake.
    >>
    >> Admittedly this calculator may be useful as part of a set of tools
    >> -provided that set was all in one place and results could be saved and
    >> applied elsewhere. To some extent a language such as APL or J then
    >> allows considerable freedom along with the use of pre-defined
    >> transformations such as the delta-wye. As an aside, in J, the delta-wye
    >> transform and the y-delta transform each take one short relatively
    >> readable line. As with Patrick, I am sure that I learned more about
    >> programming than about the theory.

    >
    > I agree fully with Don. It is more trouble to keep track of such a tool
    > than it is to look it up or derive. When you do get to the tool, you
    > also have to figure out how to use it. In my case, my reason for using
    > the transformation was mostly to study the transformation's properties
    > than a need for the transformation itself. It has some interesting
    > attributes.
    >
    > For example, use upper case letters to label the delta resistors (or
    > impedances). Use lower case letters for the Y such that A and a do not
    > touch, etc. Then A, B, C, a, b, c form three balanced bridges.
    >
    > A*a = B*b = C*c = A*B*C/(A+B+C) = a*b + b*c + c*a.
    >
    > Thus, once you do one of the two calculations on the right, you have the
    > cross multiplication product that balances the bridges.
    >

    This is interesting -you have hit a core of the problem. Going from A
    (Z12) B (Z23c) C (Z31) to a b c or z1n z2bn z3n works nicely -i.e going
    delta to wye. However there may be a problem going the other way- to
    deal with this one must say Z12 =A =(z1n*z2n +z1n*z3n+z2n*z3n)/ z3n or
    (ab+ac+bc)/c
    The problem is that the numbers are right but as you have indicated A
    and a do not touch. There is a rotation which is a problem of
    nomenclature - what is fixed is the terminals 1, 2,3 and we are dealing
    with Z12 etc or z1n etc (n being a 4th or neutral terminal not present
    in the delta).
    --
    Don Kelly
    remove the cross to reply
     
    Don Kelly, Oct 28, 2013
    #6
  7. Patrick Chung

    Don Kelly Guest

    On 28/10/2013 2:04 PM, Salmon Egg wrote:
    > In article <>, Don Kelly <> wrote:
    >
    >>> For example, use upper case letters to label the delta resistors (or
    >>> impedances). Use lower case letters for the Y such that A and a do not
    >>> touch, etc. Then A, B, C, a, b, c form three balanced bridges.
    >>>
    >>> A*a = B*b = C*c = A*B*C/(A+B+C) = a*b + b*c + c*a.
    >>>
    >>> Thus, once you do one of the two calculations on the right, you have the
    >>> cross multiplication product that balances the bridges.
    >>>

    >> This is interesting -you have hit a core of the problem. Going from A
    >> (Z12) B (Z23c) C (Z31) to a b c or z1n z2bn z3n works nicely -i.e going
    >> delta to wye. However there may be a problem going the other way- to
    >> deal with this one must say Z12 =A =(z1n*z2n +z1n*z3n+z2n*z3n)/ z3n or
    >> (ab+ac+bc)/c
    >> The problem is that the numbers are right but as you have indicated A
    >> and a do not touch. There is a rotation which is a problem of
    >> nomenclature - what is fixed is the terminals 1, 2,3 and we are dealing
    >> with Z12 etc or z1n etc (n being a 4th or neutral terminal not present
    >> in the delta).

    >
    > I have seen transformations, in Wikipedia for example, where the
    > nomenclature is not symmetrical. That is why I would have used A=Z23.
    > B=Z31 and C=Z12. Because each resistor in the delta will have one and
    > only one resistor in the wye which is not touching it, the pairs of such
    > resistors are Aa, Bb, and Cc. If you know one of these products you know
    > them all. Knowing either the delta or the wye values give a nice
    > symmetrical equation for this product.
    >
    > To my mind, the transformation was used to break a network down to
    > series and parallel connections that are easy to calculate. I almost
    > never did that. I used mesh currents to get a set of simultaneous
    > equations. Before that, the Kirchhoff laws were the way to go. With
    > modern computers, there is hardly any reason to use the transformation.
    > The only benefit I can think of is that comparison of the delta and wye
    > equivalents gives some insight into a particular combination.
    >
    > It could be that I am missing the entire point.
    >

    You are right- One does need double subscripts to deal with this
    properly. You know what is going on and the format and have put the clue
    in considering the "one and only resistor in the wye that is not
    touching" You use, properly a double subscript notation. Dealing with an
    idiot box, inputis of the form a b c where awhat is referred to may be
    Zab,Zbc, Zca or in the reverse case Zan,Zbn, Zcn. Check it out regarding
    the preservation of the terminals A B C.

    As to the need for the transformation- I agree- use Kirchoff.
    From my viewpoint as it appears is yours, use of I =YV (mesh) is
    better than V-ZI (loop) simply because in most cases it results in
    fewer simultaneous equations and is generally better for computer
    modelling because once a choice of reference bus is made (in power
    systems it is easy), the rest can be automated. It is messier with loop
    methods as there are so many choices.
    --
    Don Kelly
    remove the cross to reply
     
    Don Kelly, Oct 30, 2013
    #7
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads
  1. SQLit
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,788
    SQLit
    Sep 9, 2004
  2. Don Kelly
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    5,332
    Don Kelly
    Sep 9, 2004
  3. kawtar

    delta wye transformation equivalent resistor

    kawtar, Apr 15, 2016, in forum: General Electronics Chat
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    229
    Bluejets
    Apr 15, 2016
  4. zanzan

    CNC machine, Shapeoko 2 or 3, or XCarve Kit

    zanzan, Jun 16, 2016, in forum: Microcontrollers and Programming
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    432
    Minder
    Jul 12, 2016
  5. RCH
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    426
    AnalogKid
    May 13, 2017
Loading...