Current Transformers produce an output in proportion to the current flowing through the primary winding as a result of a constant potential on the primary //

We can see above that since the secondary of the current transformer is connected across the ammeter, which has a very small resistance, the voltage drop across the secondary winding is only 1.0 volts at full primary current.

However, if the ammeter was removed, the secondary winding effectively becomes open-circuited, and thus the transformer acts as a step-up transformer. This due in part to the very large increase in magnetising flux in the secondary core as the the secondary leakage reactance influences the secondary induced voltage because there is no opposing current in the secondary winding to prevent this.

The results is a very high voltage induced in the secondary winding equal to the ratio of: Vp(Ns/Np) being developed across the secondary winding. So for example, assume our current transformer from above is used on a 480 volt to earth three-phase power line. Therefore:

current transformer secondary voltage

This high voltage is because the volts per turns ratio is almost constant in the primary and secondary windings and as Vs = Ns*Vp the values of Ns and Vp are high values, so Vs is extremely high.

For this reason a current transformer should never be left open-circuited or operated with no-load attached when the main primary current is flowing through it just as a voltage transformer should never operate into a short circuit. If the ammeter (or load) is to be removed, a short-circuit should be placed across the secondary terminals first to eliminate the risk of shock.

This high voltage is because when the secondary is open-circuited the iron core of the transformer operates at a high degree of saturation and with nothing to stop it, it produces an abnormally large secondary voltage, and in our simple example above, this was calculated at 76.8kV!. This high secondary voltage could damage the insulation or cause electric shock if the CT’s terminals are accidentally touched.

Cuomo’s career was already finished because of another vastly more serious scandal that, coincidentally, is being buried by the media’s relentless focus on these salacious but ultimately trivial charges suddenly being levied by a couple of Democrat operatives—in the first instance almost three years after the fact. //

Cuomo’s career was already finished because of another vastly more serious scandal that, coincidentally, is being buried by the media’s relentless focus on these salacious but ultimately trivial charges suddenly being levied by a couple of Democrat operatives—in the first instance almost three years after the fact.

And this other more egregious scandal has the potential to blow up and encompass many more major party players.

I’m speaking, of course, about Cuomo’s March 25 order barring New York nursing homes from turning away patients diagnosed with COVID-19. //

1. It turns out that three other Democrat governors whose states also experienced an extraordinarily high number of reported COVID-19 nursing-home fatalities also issued the exact same orders as Cuomo.
2. The orders forcing nursing homes to accept patients diagnosed with COVID-19 issued by the quartet may wind up being responsible for an enormous proportion of the total number of reported U.S. deaths.
3. Because of the way COVID-19 diagnoses have been incentivized by the government, those orders wound up raking in a fortune for nursing homes.
4. Cuomo also signed a law passed by New York state’s Democrat-controlled legislature giving nursing homes immunity against civil liability from COVID-19 related lawsuits. //

It would have been tough for the media to keep ignoring Cuomo’s burgeoning nursing home scandal had Lindsey Boylan not given them those salacious but ultimately trivial three-year-old accusations of unwanted advances to start hyping instead. Likewise, if Charlotte Bennett hadn’t come along a few days later to help give the story legs.

And that nursing home scandal which, coincidentally, was so effectively buried by their stories had the potential to not only lead to criminal charges. It was likely to engulf three other major league Democrat politicians and expose just how much of the US official COVID-19 death tally was due to their actions.

Current & voltage in power circuits

If the voltage or current in a power circuit are too high to connect measuring instruments or relays directly, coupling is made through transformers. Such measuring transformers are required to produce a scaled down replica of the input quantity to the accuracy expected for the particular measurement.

This article is the first in a 12-part series on the differences between grounding and bonding.

Article 250 provides requirements for the grounding and bonding of electrical installations. It covers two different concepts:

1. “Grounding” is the connection to the earth. The grounding requirements provide a path to the earth to reduce overvoltage from lightning strikes, line surges, or unintentional contact by higher‑voltage lines [Sec. 250.4(A)(1)].

Failure to ground metal parts to earth can result in millions of volts induced on those metal parts. This energy seeks a way to the earth within the building, taking whatever paths are available (not just “the one with least resistance”, see Kirchhoff’s Law of Parallel Circuits). This can easily result in a fire and/or electric shock either by direct contact or from a flashover.

2. “Bonding” is mechanically connecting electrically conductive components to ensure electrical conductivity between metal parts [Art. 100]. The bonding requirements establish a low‑impedance fault current path back to the source of the electrical supply so overcurrent protective devices (OCPDs) operate if there’s a ground fault [Sec. 250.4(A)(3)].

These two systems overlap, but each serves a different purpose. You need them in both solidly grounded systems [Sec. 250.4(A)] and ungrounded systems [Sec. 250.4(B)].

Establishment Republicans like Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, and John Thune are focused like laser beams not on stopping the Biden agenda or anything else beneficial to average Americans, but rather on purging the Republican Party of Trump supporters whom they despise. Where is their outrage about the job-destroying executive orders? The assault on constitutionally-guaranteed liberties? The insanity of permitting biological men to compete in women’s sports? The overwhelming belief of their own constituents who are certain the 2020 election was stolen? The opening of the border to a flood of potentially diseased illegal aliens? The soaring gasoline prices at the pump directly attributable to Biden’s actions? The House Republican leadership’s orchestration of the caucus vote that kept Liz Cheney in her position despite her vote to impeach? The purported RINO congressional leaders are AWOL and only concerned about consigning President Trump and his supporters to the dustbin of history. //

The gold standard of Republican candidates is receiving a Trump endorsement, as was clearly shown during the 2020 election, during which 120 of 122 or his endorsed candidates won election. //

President Trump’s clarion call at CPAC to restore the Republican Party to its core principles and boot Establishment Republicans and RINOs is the correct way-ahead. Do not be fooled by third parties or PACs not endorsed by President Trump, as those are diversions that serve the Uniparty, not regular Americans.

The average number of fatalities suffered by states that imposed lockdowns last spring vs those that didn’t is also represented. And one important piece of information here is that states which locked down wound up with more reported COVID-19 fatalities on average than states that remained free.

Average COVID-19 Fatalities per million as of February 24, 2021:
Lockdown States: 1558
Free States: 1475

Regarding the parallel and series connection of CT's:
Secondary of the CT can be considered as CURRENT SOURCE!
Connecting two CT'S in parallel means two current sources outputs connected to the load, which means the result is the algebraic summation of the two secondaries of the CT's i.e:
If CT1 = 300/5 A
CT2 = 300/5 A
Then output result of parallel connection of the two secondaries of the CT's:
CT3 = 300/10 A, which is equivalent to 150/5 A.
NOTE: any two CT's can be connected in parallel even when they are not similar (they have different ratio)
Connecting two CT's in series is possible just in case if the two CT's are similar to avoid any current circulation between the two CT's!
This connection has an advantage to increase the burden of the output of the CT.
If CT1= 300/5, burden 15 VA
CT2= 300/5, burden 15 VA
Then:
CT3= 300/5, burden 30 VA
I hope this can simplified the idea of parallel and series connection of the CT's

Renewable wind, solar, hydro and biofuels cannot fill the gap //

So you don’t like CO2? What you need to know, then, is that there’s no alternative to advanced nuclear power.

Concern about the climate effects of man-caused CO2 emissions has prompted gigantic investments into so-called renewable energy sources: wind, solar, hydropower and biofuels. Meanwhile, in a huge mistake, nuclear energy – a reliable CO2-free power source producing 14% of the world’s electricity – has been left far behind.

Germany provides a bizarre example, albeit not the only one. Here the government’s commitment to its so-called climate goals has been combined, paradoxically, with the decision to shut down the country’s remaining nuclear power plants by 2022.

Would it not be more rational, if we believe that human emissions of CO2 are destroying the planet, to expand nuclear energy as quickly as possible, rather than shut it down? //

I believe we are facing a branching point in global energy policy. What should be the priority? Assuming it should be a goal to drastically reduce world emissions of CO2 in the medium and long term – which I don’t want to argue about here – is it wise to invest so much in renewable energy sources, as many nations are doing today? Or should we allot only a limited role to the renewables, and go for a massive expansion of nuclear energy instead? //

According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance, $288.9 billion was invested into renewable energy in 2018, the bulk of which went into wind and solar energy. Despite this, CO2 emissions worldwide continue to grow relentlessly.

China, for example, leads the world in the size of its investments into renewable energy, with over $100 billion invested in 2018 alone. At the same time China also leads the world in the construction of new coal power plants, which are the single biggest source of CO2 emissions by human activity. Since the start of 2018, China has brought 42.9 gigawatts of new coal-fired power plants online, with another 121.3 GW under construction and 200 GW or more in various stages of planning. //

The simple fact is, that in the foreseeable future no amount of investment into renewables, however large, will be sufficient to eliminate humans’ dependence on coal, oil and natural gas. That is, unless we are willing to collapse the world economy.

If we are really committed to reducing CO2 emissions, then there is no way around nuclear energy, and lots of it. The reasons are elementary.

Suppose that by some means we could completely eliminate the use of fossil fuels for transport and heating. This is hardly conceivable without greatly increasing the global consumption of electricity, which can already be projected to more than double over the next 25 years. Where will all the electricity come from?