Infinate Power Control ?

[Mirilis]

So I am redesigning my system concept from the feedback I got before. One feature I want to add to my panel is similar to the EBC III from Highgravitybrew.com. The infinite power control.

Is it just a potentiometer on one of the 120 legs leading to the element? Im a little confused as to how they put that in.

 

[Brumateur]

So I am redesigning my system concept from the feedback I got before. One feature I want to add to my panel is similar to the EBC III from Highgravitybrew.com. The infinite power control.

Is it just a potentiometer on one of the 120 legs leading to the element? Im a little confused as to how they put that in.

No it's not. You will fry your pot if connect like this.
to do an infinite control you need some additional circuitry.

 

[Mirilis]

Some kind of pwm but I'm not sure of the details

 

[big_len]

If you can get a large potentiometer/rheostat that can handle the full load of your element then yes.

If you already have an SSR that triggers on-off with voltage you can use one of these (super cheap PWM controller) EDIT: sorry for ebay UK but you get the idea!

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DC-12V-8A...7898?pt=UK_Light_Fittings&hash=item5af425165a

If you already have a VSSR that varies based on the control current applied, you can use a small potentiometer to control that.

Does your concept already have an SSR or VSSR ?

 

[DaleHair]

Are you talking about a controller for an electric stove element? If so, I think you are correct, however those are usually only rated for around 12 amps.

 

[Mirilis]

Yeah I have an auber pid controller that signals a 30a ssr which connects to the second leg of the 4500w element power

 

[big_len]

Yeah I have an auber pid controller that signals a 30a ssr which connects to the second leg of the 4500w element power

Then you could use the LED dimmer module, you just have to make this quick mod to it though:

http://smokedprojects.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/led-dimmer-pwm-hack.html

Just have a switch to go between the auber signal going to the SSR and the Dimmer unit signal going to the SSR.

EDIT: Also don't be put off by the level of detail in that page, you just have to change one capacitor to the new value like it says near the end!

See this thread too:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f170/slow-pwm-using-hacked-led-dimmer-432147/

 

[big_len]

I forgot to ask, what model is you auber PID - many of them can do manual/infinite control anyway ?

D'oh !

 

[Mirilis]

Havnt picked exact model yet. Suggestions?

 

[Mirilis]

I know some have manual but I like the idea of having an easy knob to turn

 

[kzimmer0817]

So I am redesigning my system concept from the feedback I got before. One feature I want to add to my panel is similar to the EBC III from Highgravitybrew.com. The infinite power control.

Is it just a potentiometer on one of the 120 legs leading to the element? Im a little confused as to how they put that in.

This question came up a while back on a thread discussing High Gravity's new BIAB system. It includes their EBC-SV (single vessel) controller, but I'm certain that they utilize similar technology in their EBC-III. Here are a couple quotes from Dave Knott of High Gravity in which he describes their controller:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f170/h...troller-ebc-sv-357594/index2.html#post4459337

This is Dave, the guy in the video.

We take a different approach than most people when we build brewery controllers. This is because we started several years back with manual control, and developed our own analog power modulation circuit. We like it so much, that we have continued to include it in all of the next generation controllers. We do not use an SSR at all. We use two mechanical relays, and switch both hot wires so that when it's off, it's off. The PID is operating in the simple thermostat mode, and the power level is modulated with the TRIAC based circuit. We modulate the pulse width of each half-cycle of the line power.

While some might say, Why use a PID in simple thermostat mode, when you can pulse an SSR and let it Autotune?" We say, "Why would you want to control a boiling kettle with up/down buttons?

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f170/h...troller-ebc-sv-357594/index2.html#post4462771

We like the SYL-23XX series controller because it displays the set point and the measured value simultaneously.

Setting the parameter At=0 puts the controller in thermostat mode.

Since the thermal mass of a hot liquor tank is fairly large, once the temp has reached the set point, the heating element spends most of the time in the off state. There is really no need to use any fuzzy logic here. Simple thermostat mode will maintain the temperature very well. But people can still play with the Autotune parameters here if they want to. You would just want to have your cycle time (t) set to 20.

There are many ways to put together a brewing system that does the job very well. Since we are designing controllers for people that didn't build their own, we wanted the operation to be simple and straightforward for everybody. Twisting a power knob is something that everyone understands.

So, how I understand their system:
1. The PID is in thermostat mode which means that it operates just like a thermostat: it triggers the circuit when the temp dips below the set-point and opens when the set-point is reached. Apparently, they don't utilize all the fine-tuning features of the PID.
2. On one of the legs to the element, they insert a Triac (whatever that is) that actually controls the "power" to the element.

Someone mentioned using a PWM. Certainly you can have a PWM and a PID in the same controller with a switch to choose between which one you want controlling the element. But . . . you cannot have both a PID and a PWM controlling the element at the same time because of they way they work.

To me, the simplest way to emulate what High Gravity is doing in their build - from a functional standpoint - is to insert a SSVR into the circuit. Build the usual PID-based controller using one of the many schematics shown in these forums so that you have precise mash temp control. Then, insert a SSVR into the circuit after the SSR as in the following schematic:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f51/potentiometer-ssrv-wiring-help-423321/#post5377623

1. When you want to heat up to strike temp, set the potentiometer for the SSVR to 100% and your PID to the desired temp.

2. After mash, set the PID to MANUAL mode at 100% and control the vigor of your boil using the potentiometer just as you would adjust the knob on the stove.

A. If you want to build a copy of the EBC-III (2 PIDs, but only 1 element outlet where you would plug in either the HLT or Boil Kettle), you would have 2 PIDs in your control panel. Where the above hand-drawn schematic shows the 2 DC voltage wires going to the PID, you would have a 3-way selector switch to choose from which PID (Mash Tun or HLT) your SSR would receive control. While your kettle is heating up, you could still control the amount of power to the element using the potentiometer connected to the SSVR.

B. If you were to use a single PID, but have 2 element outlets with a switch to determine which element you want to control AND monitor, you would place a 220/240VAC selector switch after the SSVR (where you see the little guy peering over the fence) to send the current to the proper element.

Hope this helps a little. Please understand that I've not yet built a panel. Whatever I say has come from "book learnin'" and NOT "experience".

Keith

 

[Mirilis]

Thx for that post... I can go through that and work on my concept tonight. I am thinking I don't want to just use thermostat control and bypass the tuning ability of pid, but we will see

 

[kzimmer0817]

Thx for that post... I can go through that and work on my concept tonight. I am thinking I don't want to just use thermostat control and bypass the tuning ability of pid, but we will see

From what I've learned, that's what the schematic by Dawaii that I posted does for you - unless there's something I'm missing here. I'm thinking seriously of doing this:

Build a PID-based controller. Typical of many others with PID, SSR, Pump (120V for something). Then, insert the SSVR for power control as in the above diagram.

By setting the potentiometer on the SSVR to 100% and adjusting the settings of the PID, I can utilize the fine tuning ability of the PID just like everyone else. When I'm ready to boil, I can set my PID to MANUAL mode for 100% power (don't need fine tuning or temp control during boil) and control how vigorous the boil is by turning the knob on the SSVR.

Do study the quotations I took from Dave Knott's posting (the guy in the High Gravity videos with the bird on his shoulder). He presents a pretty compelling case against all the "auto-tuning" stuff.

While this isn't exactly how the High Gravity system accomplishes it, but I think it would mimic it perfectly.

Enjoy the planning.
Keith

 

[mattd2]

...By setting the potentiometer on the SSVR to 100% and adjusting the settings of the PID, I can utilize the fine tuning ability of the PID just like everyone else. When I'm ready to boil, I can set my PID to MANUAL mode for 100% power (don't need fine tuning or temp control during boil) and control how vigorous the boil is by turning the knob on the SSVR...

If you are using the SSVR to only control the strength of the boil I ask why. I have the typical PID setup that I use to control the strike/sparge water temp (in PID mode) and then use to control the strength of the boil (in manual mode). Basically when I have reached the boil I set the PID to 60% because I know this gets me generally around the 1 gallon boil off I account for. After that I leave it alone.
If you are worried about boil overs, etc. I would install a on/off switch and just turn the element off if I saw one coming - then either adjust the PID for a bit or turn it back on and babysit it until the hotbreak, etc. is over.

What is the need to add complexity when you have the functionality already.

 

[Brumateur]

Someone mentioned using a PWM. Certainly you can have a PWM and a PID in the same controller with a switch to choose between which one you want controlling the element. But . . . you cannot have both a PID and a PWM controlling the element at the same time because of they way they work.

Actually there is no problem at all to use PID and PWM at the same time. You just need to do 2 things:

1. Use relay output of your SSR. Just connect SSR to PWM through relay.
2. PID control period should be 5-10 times (or more) longer than PWM period. So if you are using 1Hz PWM cycle set your PID period to 10 seconds.
Switch wired in parallel with PID relay will control Manual (when it closed) / PID (when it open) modes.

 

[kzimmer0817]

If you are using the SSVR to only control the strength of the boil I ask why. I have the typical PID setup that I use to control the strike/sparge water temp (in PID mode) and then use to control the strength of the boil (in manual mode). Basically when I have reached the boil I set the PID to 60% because I know this gets me generally around the 1 gallon boil off I account for. After that I leave it alone.
If you are worried about boil overs, etc. I would install a on/off switch and just turn the element off if I saw one coming - then either adjust the PID for a bit or turn it back on and babysit it until the hotbreak, etc. is over.

What is the need to add complexity when you have the functionality already.

Matt,
What you're asking has been debated back and forth. I confess that I'm asking myself if whether my desire to have the simplicity of a knob to turn in order to make quick heat adjustments - despite the little bit of increased complexity and expense in the construction - outweighs the simplicity of construction of the setup that necessitates that I press small buttons (or "mash" the buttons as some folks say in Georgia) several times in order to make power adjustments.

I guess it has to do with how someone wants to control one's process. When I see some builds, I ask myself, "why in the world does s/he want to build it that way?" For example, I can't understand why someone installs switches along with separate indicator lights instead of simply installing illuminated switches.

I'm reminded of two statements the High Gravity guy made:

1. Why would you want to control a boiling kettle with up/down buttons?

2. Since we are designing controllers for people that didn't build their own, we wanted the operation to be simple and straightforward for everybody. Twisting a power knob is something that everyone understands.

If someone were to give me a Kal-inspired panel, I would graciously accept it and not complain a bit about pressing buttons.

Thanks,
Keith

 

[kzimmer0817]

Actually there is no problem at all to use PID and PWM at the same time. You just need to do 2 things:

1. Use relay output of your SSR. Just connect SSR to PWM through relay.
2. PID control period should be 5-10 times (or more) longer than PWM period. So if you are using 1Hz PWM cycle set your PID period to 10 seconds.
Switch wired in parallel with PID relay will control Manual (when it closed) / PID (when it open) modes.

Too many button-presses. Hee hee.
Keith

 

[big_len]

I would agree that if you are buying a PID controller with manual control you would not need a knob as well, I don't think you would actually be changing the manual value that often for it to really matter - you'd probably find the sweet spot and just sit at that for 95% of the boil time.

If you are determined, however, it have a knob to control it you do not need 2 SSRs or SSVRs. This is like using a sledge hammer to crack a nut. Whether you chose a PID controller that use PWM or a current output you can use either of the set ups shown below:

This will function exactly as the system already mentioned with 2 SSRs:
-For PID operation set the dimmer/potentiometer to 100% and use PID as normal.
-For "infinite control" set the PID into manual mode at 100% and control using the dimmer/potentiometer.

Personally, I would always opt for the PWM route.

The material by Dave Knott referenced is also correct, we do not need PID (proportional, integral, derivative) control in most cases. PID control is only required were there is a delay between the controlling actuation, such as a heating element, and the system's response. The likes of RIMS may need PID control since the temperature of the mash is of concern but there is a delay before the heated wort returns to the tun from the external heater. For a boil kettle or HLT, where the element is in the vessel, there is no significant delay and a thermostat style function is sufficient. However, if you autotune your PID to such conditions it should basically figure this out and do very little other than full power up until it is almost at the set temperature.

Never-the-less, we all use PIDs as, with advancements in micro-electronics, they are relatively cheap and very customisable - most accept many different kinds of temperature probes for example - and they are ready equipped with necessary outputs for relays, mechanical or solid state.

 

[kenh]

If you are using the SSVR to only control the strength of the boil I ask why. I have the typical PID setup that I use to control the strike/sparge water temp (in PID mode) and then use to control the strength of the boil (in manual mode). Basically when I have reached the boil I set the PID to 60% because I know this gets me generally around the 1 gallon boil off I account for. After that I leave it alone.
If you are worried about boil overs, etc. I would install a on/off switch and just turn the element off if I saw one coming - then either adjust the PID for a bit or turn it back on and babysit it until the hotbreak, etc. is over.

What is the need to add complexity when you have the functionality already.

I read the "Using the a PWM function of a PID to control your boil works great" over and over again on this site. But I have to disagree.

I use a SSVR controlled by a potentiometer for my boil pot and I use a PID to control my RIMS tube temperature. I know how long it takes to change the temperature on my PID and I know how long it takes to turn my boil down when the foam is rising in my brew pot. There is no way that adjusting a PID can be as fast as turning a knob down. I've saved myself a couple of times from a boil-over and I'm convinced that I would not have been able to react as fast with a PID.

 

[kenh]

I would agree that if you are buying a PID controller with manual control you would not need a knob as well, I don't think you would actually be changing the manual value that often for it to really matter - you'd probably find the sweet spot and just sit at that for 95% of the boil time.

If you are determined, however, it have a knob to control it you do not need 2 SSRs or SSVRs. This is like using a sledge hammer to crack a nut. Whether you chose a PID controller that use PWM or a current output you can use either of the set ups shown below:

This will function exactly as the system already mentioned with 2 SSRs:
-For PID operation set the dimmer/potentiometer to 100% and use PID as normal.
-For "infinite control" set the PID into manual mode at 100% and control using the dimmer/potentiometer.

Personally, I would always opt for the PWM route.

The material by Dave Knott referenced is also correct, we do not need PID (proportional, integral, derivative) control in most cases. PID control is only required were there is a delay between the controlling actuation, such as a heating element, and the system's response. The likes of RIMS may need PID control since the temperature of the mash is of concern but there is a delay before the heated wort returns to the tun from the external heater. For a boil kettle or HLT, where the element is in the vessel, there is no significant delay and a thermostat style function is sufficient. However, if you autotune your PID to such conditions it should basically figure this out and do very little other than full power up until it is almost at the set temperature.

Never-the-less, we all use PIDs as, with advancements in micro-electronics, they are relatively cheap and very customisable - most accept many different kinds of temperature probes for example - and they are ready equipped with necessary outputs for relays, mechanical or solid state.

This only works with a PID that has a internal relay. It won't work if the PID has a SSR output.

 

[Mirilis]

agreed.. i only want one TBH because.. I just want it and im building the panel lol! Theres nothing wrong with either way of using the PID or having a knob. Below is a screengrab of the panel im working the concept out on. (its not complete yet!)

 

[mattd2]

Matt,
What you're asking has been debated back and forth. I confess that I'm asking myself if whether my desire to have the simplicity of a knob to turn in order to make quick heat adjustments - despite the little bit of increased complexity and expense in the construction - outweighs the simplicity of construction of the setup that necessitates that I press small buttons (or "mash" the buttons as some folks say in Georgia) several times in order to make power adjustments.

I guess it has to do with how someone wants to control one's process. When I see some builds, I ask myself, "why in the world does s/he want to build it that way?" For example, I can't understand why someone installs switches along with separate indicator lights instead of simply installing illuminated switches.

I'm reminded of two statements the High Gravity guy made:



If someone were to give me a Kal-inspired panel, I would graciously accept it and not complain a bit about pressing buttons.

Thanks,
Keith

What I was meaning to highlight is that with the PID you can set your pretty much "boil off" - as in my xample 60% gets me at ~1 gallon. If I am continously fidling with the knob adjusting my boil as I go how can I know that at the end of the boil I won't have missed my expected boiloff all together! And if you Just mark where the knob needs to go for xx boiloff and leave it you are adding a whole lot of additional gear to achieve that, especially if you consider that you are not actually reducing any steps as you will likely need to set your PID to manual mode and then adjust it to 100% on anyway.

So to answer Dave's questions
1) Because I have to take those "button mashing" steps anyway and then I wouldn't touch the knob making it redundant
2) You have to learn how to use the PID for the mash control so the extra 2 minutes of learning how to set it in manual at a specific setting does everything that the knob does without installing extra control gear.

Considering he is talking about comparing it to how you cook on a store I would say the only reason a knob would be used, once a brewer has determined the needed settings, is during a boil over and the analogy to that on the store is to lift the pot off the element first

Sorry I don't mean to turn this into a "do it my way" debate, I only wanted to make sure people considered how much use this knob would actually get.

 

[mattd2]

I read the "Using the a PWM function of a PID to control your boil works great" over and over again on this site. But I have to disagree.

I use a SSVR controlled by a potentiometer for my boil pot and I use a PID to control my RIMS tube temperature. I know how long it takes to change the temperature on my PID and I know how long it takes to turn my boil down when the foam is rising in my brew pot. There is no way that adjusting a PID can be as fast as turning a knob down. I've saved myself a couple of times from a boil-over and I'm convinced that I would not have been able to react as fast with a PID.

I think you missed my point, if you want something to save you from a boil over - a on/off switch will do that (an most have that in their panels anyway). I don't imagine in the threat of an iminant boil over that you just adjust it down a smidge... and a smidge more...
I would think one would turn it fully down, and for that I think a switch is easier. Yes turning it back up to a bit under the original setpoint is a bit easier with a SSVR

But there is one thing that I don't get - people who use PID's to control the BK for the boil exclusively. If it is only for strength of boil control I think your setup is the best cost/funtinality balance.

My mentality is - if you have a PID controlling your kettle element for other reasons then use it for the boil control, if not then use a SSVR (unless you want a temp readout for you boil kettle)

 

[kzimmer0817]

agreed.. i only want one TBH because.. I just want it and im building the panel lol!

TBH= what?

I'm sure that it'll come to me as soon as I click "submit post".

Thanks,
Keith

 

[Bobby_M]

So there's a lot of debate back and forth about the merits of an VSSR for boil control when a manual mode PID is already in the picture and this is my summary. Guys that already have a VSSR for boil control love it. The guys that use a PID in manual mode love it. Moral of the story is they both work fine and are completely functional for boil control on their own. Who wants to click buttons? Everyone with an intermediate complexity electric brewery.

My advice is to grab the PID, SSR, and Heatsink that you'll already need to buy. Hook it up on a board for testing and be amazed at how easy it is to control the boil by clicking the up/down buttons in manual mode. Your first reaction will be "sweet" rather than "dammit, who can stand around clicking buttons like this?". We currently live in a button pressing world. There are no knobs on your TV remote, microwave, computer, phones, etc. It's intuitive already.

Sorry for the mini rant. Now the reality.. MAYBE the dual control would be valuable if you're not happy with the 2 second cycle time of the auber PIDs but I haven't found it to be an issue for pulsing at all. It may be if you oversize the element for the size boil.. like 5500 watts to boil 2 gallons. You'd end up setting your power to 20%.

 

[mattd2]

...We currently live in a button pressing world. There are no knobs on your TV remote, microwave, computer, phones, etc. It's intuitive already.

And most new stoves no longer have knobs either

 

[big_len]

This only works with a PID that has a internal relay. It won't work if the PID has a SSR output.

I would disagree, could you explain why you think that ?

If a PID outputs a PWM signal for an SSR at 100% duty cycle then that is essentially a DC voltage output. The external dimmer takes that DC input and performs modulation down to the required duty cycle.

 

[Mirilis]

TBH= what?

I'm sure that it'll come to me as soon as I click "submit post".

Thanks,
Keith

To Be Honest

 

[kzimmer0817]

To Be Honest

Thanks, Mirilis. I would have never figured that out.

Well, are you culling some useful information out of all the postings on your thread?

I can't tell you how many hours I spent searching and reading the discussions and arguments on folks' build threads. I "think" I've at least looked thru the titles of every single thread in the "Electric Brewing" section. I've studied PJ's drawing as well as those submitted by others in their builds in order to learn as much as I could. I've read thru www.theelectricbrewery.com numerous times.

Here's a very long thread discussion the use of the PWM:
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f170/pwm-show-us-how-221301/

Here's a thread by Walker in which he describes a controller containing both a PID and a PWM. One chooses with a switch whether to use the PID for mash control or the PWM for boil control. This is not what you've/we've been discussing here, though.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f51/my-herms-build-ready-criticism-173077/

Here's a good basic discussion about the SSVR. If I WANT to have a knob for boil control, I'm leaning towards the SSVR over the PWM mainly because there's essentially nothing to solder. The most common PWM on this forum is the Baketronics kit which must be soldered and for which you must order a different capacitor.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f170/basic-ssrv-controller-build-help-441783/

Here's another really nice, simple build using a SSVR.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f170/simple-ssvr-controlled-e-biab-rig-443594/index2.html

You said that you were interested in building a panel on the lines of the High Gravity EBC-III. I'm thinking that that means that you plan to do 2 or 3 vessel brewing. IIRC, the EBC-III has only one element outlet even though it has 2 PIDs and monitors the temps in both HLT and MT. When you're ready to boil, you will have to unplug your HLT from the controller and plug your BK into the controller. You do have the capability of the infinite power control with both the PID and SSVR/Triac. Because of the single outlet, I'm not sure of how much advantage their EBC-III has over their EBC-SV (designed for single vessel control). The mock-up you posted looks more like you're wishing to emulate their EBC-SV.

I'd like to suggest two builds for you to consider as opposed to trying to re-invent the wheel.

1. If you want a single PID in an attractive and simple panel consider looking at Voltin's build:
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f170/yet-another-ebiab-build-282235/

This looks the closest to your mock-up as any (save for the SSVR). If I'm reading your post correctly, this looks like the best build for you to copy and adapt.

You can only monitor a single vessel at a time. To give the infinite power control to this, you would simply insert the SSVR into his circuit as has already been describe above (see Dawai's diagram).

2. If you want to build closer to the EBC-III, but would like to have 2 element outlets so that you can keep both your elements plugged in (using a switch to choose between them), please study Tiber Brew's build. It's long.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f170/electric-brewery-plans-need-help-183775/

As in Voltin's build, you could easily insert a SSVR into the circuit for the boil kettle. If desired, you could insert one into the HLT circuit as well.

It doesn't sound as if you're wanting a switch to choose between the PID "or" the "SSVR", but that you want them together. In this case, I would strongly suggest that you study Voltin's build carefully. It would be very simple to place the SSVR into either hot leg of the element.

Looking forward to reading more about your build.

Respectfully,
Keith

 

[Mirilis]

Thanks for the great links. I have been working through a lot of material and finding out what I want as a brewer for my system and process. Im hoping to put a 50GFCI breaker and then do the single 30a plug (ill unplug vessel EBC style) plus I can run my cold side also (allowing a 10a temp controller that hooks to my fridge)

Ive decided to nix the boil control analog.. while i did want it.. i found other places to spend the additional $25 bucks.

Im working through the wiring diagram now hopefully ill start a build thread and then it will go dormant for like a year while i accumulate the parts here and there since SWMBO will not let me have money to bulid it. Ill end up scraping here and there until i have cash for pieces.

 

[kzimmer0817]

Thanks for the great links. I have been working through a lot of material and finding out what I want as a brewer for my system and process. Im hoping to put a 50GFCI breaker and then do the single 30a plug (ill unplug vessel EBC style) plus I can run my cold side also (allowing a 10a temp controller that hooks to my fridge)

Ive decided to nix the boil control analog.. while i did want it.. i found other places to spend the additional $25 bucks.

Sounds like a great idea. As Bobby_M alluded to in an earlier post, essentially ALL the intermediate-level panels rely solely upon the PID for temp control.

I just noticed that you've been a HBT member for at least 5 years and have over 1000 posts, so this isn't your first rodeo. What is, or will be, your process? 3-vessel all-grain brewing, single-vessel BIAB, or some intermediate?

Thanks,
Keith

 

[Mirilis]

Well this is what I have gotten so far.. take a look and let me know all the parts i messed up.



I will have a 20g vessel with a 4500w SS element to boil, a 15g vessel with installed herms coil for HLT and another 4500w element, and A converted cooler mash tun (temporarily .. ill eventually buy another kettle)

Mash pump will be on a 3 position selector.. auto will be controlled by the STC-1000 .. the other pump is on a 2 position switch.

Im open to improvement suggestions or especially "hey you screwed up on the wiring"

There will only be 1 plug for the element.. ill have to swap plugs to go to the boil but i want to do that on purpose, im forgetfull and ill eventually have the wrong element on if its just dictated by a selector switch

 

[Brumateur]

I'm just wondering what exactly type of heating elemnt do you have. Why it requires 240 and 120 connections at the same time?

 

[Mirilis]

L1, L2, N, G.. I forgot to lable...not sure how the element gets 240 and 120 though.

 

[Brumateur]

If its a regular 240v heating element you don't need to connect neutral to it. Just two lives and a grounding wire.