Three phase total power consumed

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
5 replies · 1K views
Butterfly41398
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Summary:: I don't seem to see any problem with my work. But my final answer does not match the correct answer. (In number 3)

Here's my work
 

Attachments

  • 20211113_135006_mfnr.jpg
    20211113_135006_mfnr.jpg
    42.6 KB · Views: 168
  • 20211113_134955_mfnr.jpg
    20211113_134955_mfnr.jpg
    40.4 KB · Views: 153
  • Screenshot_20211113-140202_WPS Office Lite.jpg
    Screenshot_20211113-140202_WPS Office Lite.jpg
    57.7 KB · Views: 169
Physics news on Phys.org
@Butterfly41398 , it's very difficult to make out the contents of your images (the handwritten workings), so I can't really help spot any errors. You'll have to clean up the images to make them useful, or better yet, type out the work so that others can quote it in replies.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz
Butterfly41398 said:
I don't seem to see any problem with my work.
As mentioned, it's best if you type your work into the forum to make it more legible. Please see the LaTeX Guide link below the Edit window for more information on how to format math equations at PF. Thanks.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz
I agree with the berkeman, of course. However, I manage to read your calculation. I still have to recalculate, but at first glance, I have a general observation: to convert the arguments from negative to positive you have to add 360 degrees and not 180.
 
In my calculation Iy is correct, Ib is correct except the argument has to be 27.525 instead of 29.525. However Ir is quite different. Ir=28.406<-69.1127.
 
Babadag said:
I agree with the berkeman, of course. However, I manage to read your calculation. I still have to recalculate, but at first glance, I have a general observation: to convert the arguments from negative to positive you have to add 360 degrees and not 180.
Following your entire calculation this it is not an issue. The only mistake it is wrong calculation of IR.
The power it is the real part of the sum of products: VR*conjugate(IR)+VY*conjugate(IY)+VB*conjugate(IB) where
VR=IR*ZR ;VY=IY*ZY;VB=IB*ZB