Transformer Unknown Electrical Symbol?

ups! Posted it is a transformer but that was already the assumption!

What is it if not a transformer? A special one transforming 220 V to 24V? A reversing transformer?

I may not accurately formulated his question.
I speak English poorly.


The fact that this transformer I know.
Model: Moeller STN0,1 (230/24)
The question is why it is so drafted in the drawing.
We are talking about the graphic symbols of electrical equipment.

In Russia Colleges said that the image data are listed in EC 60617 and IEEE 315 (BUT I have not found it. Or look bad)

Transofrmatory portrayed as or similar to it

It comes close to be looking like d) in your book.

Me thinks that this symbol is maybe not following any standard.

Where are all the sparkies when you need them?

Next time I get a circuit diagram with ALL the symbols correct to a standard, will be the first. This one looks like the drafter did not have the transformer symbol available in his library of symbols so he made one the easiest way possible. Did you ever try to draw the synbol as you have shown it? Takes a bit of time, which we often do not have.

IdeaSmith, Phys thank you
In general, I met this image more than once
Here is an example I only found today
site http://www.abacom-online.de/uk/html/splan.html
program SPLAN 7 demo
screenshot of the program

as we see again used this image

in general it is a matter of principle to figure out how this symbol electric :)

>Where are all the sparkies when you need them?

I can not translate the word "sparkies"

>Did you ever try to draw the symbol as you have shown it?

No, I did not draw. It was already drawing to the finished block autocad

in general it is a matter of principle to figure out how this symbol electric :)

In your original post, there are electrical notations 220v - 24v... which are a dead giveaway. In your last post, it is part of a library labeled "Transformers". This is not a symbol I have come across in any standard, it simply looks like somebodies "made-up" generic transformer symbol (ie not an air core, solid core, or auto-transformer; simply a transformer of some type).

Sparky is slang for electrician (sparkies is the plural form); particularly a good electrician, bad ones are called "light bulb changers" in my experience.

my 2 cents

I see it used on drawings coming out of China, it is just another symbol to remember, just be consistent and don't mix symbols on your drawings.

as we say (literally, of course) "did not happen just like that, even the cats do not just have sex," everything has a meaning, and everything has a beginning and sort of a history of occurrence

well, can not take anything just

means someone somewhere came up with this

I was told that in 1980 ~ such schemes employed in Germany.

Admittedly this was associated with the use of ASCII artwork graphics

If these characters are used in China, means the Chinese from its take these symbols

Maybe it's not up to international standard, and some sort of national

upd

In this case, I do not care type of transformer, its core is not important

Important general indication of what is tranformator

I used to work for Klockner Moeller and can attest to the fact that internally, we constantly joked that "there is a right way to do it, there is a wrong way to do it, and there is the Klockner Moeller way to do it. Neither right nor wrong, but it WAS the way were were required to do it.". That definitely applied to symbols used in our drafting.

This is another representation of a transformer. See the following:

http://www.electronic-symbols.com/index.htm?url=/electronic_symbols/transformer_symbols.htm

The same is valid for an inductor:

http://www.electronic-symbols.com/index.htm?url=/electronic_symbols/inductor_symbols.htm

As it seems, ANSI discourages designers from using the -∩∩∩- symbol for an inductor:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/140043391/ANSI-IEEE-Std-315A-1986-Graphic-Symbols-Electrical-Electronics-Diagrams

(See page 23)

However, the -∩∩∩- symbol is widely used by most designers (instead of the "black rectangular" symbol), as it is more clear and understandable.

Dear G.K.

>This is another representation of a transformer. See the following:

>http://www.electronic-symbols.com/index.htm?url=/electronic_symbols/transformer_symbols.htm

>The same is valid for an inductor:

>http://www.electronic-symbols.com/index.htm?url=/electronic_symbols/inductor_symbols.htm

I saw this site. Even wrote it to the developers about the issue mentioned above but received no response. The fact that it contains electric graphic symbol without reference to a standard.

>As it seems, ANSI discourages designers from using the -∩∩∩- symbol for an inductor:

>http://www.scribd.com/doc/140043391/ANSI-IEEE-Std-315A-1986-Graphic-Symbols-Electrical-Electronics-Diagrams

>(See page 23)

>However, the -∩∩∩- symbol is widely used by most designers (instead of the "black rectangular" symbol), as it is more clear and understandable.

You can detail here, where on page 23 allocated?
(I'm having difficulty in translating and understanding of your answer)

1.Ansi offers an alternative?
2. use the character as a black rectangle?
3. and it is written in the form of comments on page 23?
4. Page 23 in the pdf file or numbering (what is written on the scan)?

If it is a symbol of the transformer appeared from somewhere and used by some people in the schemes, there must be a standard setting it is possible to use standard or already canceled and expired.
Perhaps in the older versions allowed to use the symbol, and then the change was made.
And engineers use (apply) the symbol of inertia

The "ANSI-IEEE std 315A-1986" (see the link in my previous post) is a supplement for an older one "ANSI-IEEE std 315-1975".

See on page 89. There is, again, the well known symbol -∩∩∩- (6.2.1) for the inductor and, again, there is the note (Note 6.2.1A) discouraging designers from using this symbol. However, it keeps on presenting this symbol for all inductor varieties (tapped, adjustable, e.t.c.). Moreover, it doesn't show the "black rectangular" inductor symbol at all. If (as it says) the -∩∩∩- symbol is not "recommended", then where is the "recommended" one??? I expected to see the "black rectangular" symbol -as the recommended one- but there is not. (Of course, there is not such a symbol in the newest "ANSI-IEEE std 315A-1986" either.) So, I'm a little confused myself.

Anyway, I -personally- prefer to use the -∩∩∩- symbol (instead of the "black rectangular"), as (I think that) most designers do.

I think that is not the recommended figure drawing A. (in ANSI-IEEE std 315-1975 & (ANSI-IEEE std 315A-1986)

And another figure recommended (IEC)

Probably you are right. Maybe the specific note refer to the symbol as the non-recommended one. But they should have put a label "6.2.1A" under this symbol, in order to be absolutely clear. I'm still not sure about that.

I think I found it.
Urgently need a standard IEC 60617-4 1983.

It was 1983, and can be more even earlier versions for comparison.

Symbol #04-03-02.

This symbol is repealed in 1996.

I have never seen a symbol quite like this but......just read the words. its giving you volts and hertz along with a VA rating, its a transformer that steps line voltage down to control voltage..I think haha

I think I found it.
Urgently need a standard IEC 60617-4 1983. It was 1983, and can be more even earlier versions for comparison. Symbol # 04-03-02.

This symbol is repealed in 1996.