No reason to have two SSR's unless you're trying to fire two elements at different times.
Yes, that will be the end result if you connect them that way.If I turn switch on 1 then element 1 will be ON and when I turn the switch to 2 will both be ON?
Or you must use two separate 16A circuits that cannot be connected to a single SSR...No reason to have two SSR's unless you're trying to fire two elements at different times.
What size of brewing are you doing? 5 gallon 10 gallon? A single 3200watt may be more than enough? Just curious.
Or you must use two separate 16A circuits that cannot be connected to a single SSR...
Thanks for reply.I'd advise against anyone trying to run multiple circuits into a single enclosure... just seems like a bad idea unless you really know what you're doing. Even if it's a rented apartment and you're trying to make due with limited electrical... If Franknh is doing 15gallon batches he should probably at least use the dryer outlet for 30amps. Grab an "RV Extension cable" and run it to your brew area and you'll have 30 or 50 amps at your disposal. This will also allow you to go 240v without trying to combine two circuits in your house off different service legs. 240v will allow more wattage at less amps.
If you use two separate circuits, then you need to keep the neutrals separate as well as the hots. If you don't, the GFCI's, or equivalent in your country, will be tripping all the time.
Brew on
This circuit will not work the way it is intended. Both elements will be enabled (i.e. "on") for both switch positions. Trace the connectivity in the two states, and you will see why. If you can't figure it out, ask and I will walk you thru it.Thanks for reply
I agree that both elements are not always needed.
And have the ability to turn them on and off individually.
So here is my plan nr 2
If I turn switch on 1 then element 1 will be ON and when I turn the switch to 2 will both be ON?
Bought me an Auber EZboil, so I'm terrified of ruining something here: P
PS: I have contactors available but haven't added them here..
View attachment 637155
This circuit will not work the way it is intended. Both elements will be enabled (i.e. "on") for both switch positions. Trace the connectivity in the two states, and you will see why. If you can't figure it out, ask and I will walk you thru it.
It can be fixed by adding a second switch block for position 2.
Brew on
When the switch is in position 1, then terminal 1 on the switch (which is hot) connects to terminal 2 on the left SSR. Terminal 2 on the left SSR is also connected to terminal 2 on the switch, so now terminal 2 on the switch becomes hot. Terminal 2 on the switch connects to terminal 2 on the right SSR, so now the right SSR terminal is also hot. The heavy red line shows what is connected to the PID output when the switch is in position 1.Unless I'm misunderstanding, I think you're wrong here. The SPDT ensures that only one of the SSRs are turned on at a time (floating input on an SSR = off).
I believe passedpawn is correct here. An SPDT switch allows continuity between the single pole input to either one of the out outputs. So either ssr# or ssr #2 would get the signal from the pid with no selection to kill both or allow both at the same time. It operates like many a/b selector switches would. The diagram here shows what I mean.When the switch is in position 1, then terminal 1 on the switch (which is hot) connects to terminal 2 on the left SSR. Terminal 2 on the left SSR is also connected to terminal 2 on the switch, so now terminal 2 on the switch becomes hot. Terminal 2 on the switch connects to terminal 2 on the right SSR, so now the right SSR terminal is also hot. The heavy red line shows what is connected to the PID output when the switch is in position 1.
View attachment 660117
Brew on
When the switch is in position 1, then terminal 1 on the switch (which is hot) connects to terminal 2 on the left SSR. Terminal 2 on the left SSR is also connected to terminal 2 on the switch, so now terminal 2 on the switch becomes hot. Terminal 2 on the switch connects to terminal 2 on the right SSR, so now the right SSR terminal is also hot. The heavy red line shows what is connected to the PID output when the switch is in position 1.
View attachment 660117
Brew on
Aha, that's why both elements were turned on whether I had the switch on 1 or 2. I did not see that before
I had to use 2 switches, 1 for each element.
But if I put a relay between + on SSR1 and Terminal 2 on the switch it would work?
Perhaps there is an easier way to block backfirering of power to the element 2?
Assuming it's still like the last diagram you posted, all you have to do is get rid of the one connection (I put an X in it below)
View attachment 661125
you need another type of switch... basically you just need one wired permanently without a switch off the pid output and a regular on off switch on the red line to the second ssr...Sure?
I know I'm not good at explaining, but the thing is, I want 3000W when I use switch 1 and 6000W when I switch to switch 2
With your suggestion, I get:
Switch 1. 3000W from element 1 or
Switch 2. 3000W from element 2
but i want:
Switch 1. 3000W from element 1
Switch 2. 6000W total from element 1 and 2
you need another type of switch... basically you just need one wired permanently without a switch off the pid output and a regular on off switch on the red line to the second ssr...
Didnt we just go through this? LOL thats NOT what he wants. that would only allow one or the other and not both at once.A single pole double throw switch would be what you want.
I agree or a dual pole on/off/ on switch like bobby mentioned.What's needed is something like an Auber SW3, with an added NO switch block. This would allow a 1, none, or both selection. Let's say one NO block on the left and two NO blocks on the right. The left block connects to SSR 1, as does one of the right blocks. The other right block connects to SSR 2. The other side of all switches are commoned, and go to the PID.
Brew on
Yeah, I was in a hurry when I read Bobby's post, and didn't take time to work thru it. The two are equivalent, but I just leave out the not required pair of contacts.I agree or a dual pole on/off/ on switch like bobby mentioned.
Enter your email address to join: