what is not uncommon in DC circuits is the chassis symbol. Not intended to indicate a ground connection.Which pretty much is the definition of ambiguous. You would be hard pressed to find a schematic of a battery operated equipment without the ground symbol. They exist, but are rare.
as you can see, the 'ground' symbol's origins. The 'pitchfork' is a misnomer.but I would bet that when this was drawn electrical & electronics standards were sparse and more Representative of real world objects. All that aside I was fascinated at it's depiction of earth ground. While it's not a schematic symbol of earth ground it does have an uncanny resemblance to it.
Looks like my two definitions there.12. Electricity a. A large conducting body, such as the earth or an electric circuit connected to the earth, used as an arbitrary zero of potential.
b. A conducting object, such as a wire, that is connected to such a position of zero potential.
Kind of looks like pictures of a grassy field.All that aside I was fascinated at it's depiction of earth ground. While it's not a schematic symbol of earth ground it does have an uncanny resemblance to it.
Stare at it for a while. You'll notice how the bottoms taper to a near point just like chassis ground. If that doesn't work for ya have a couple of stiff ones and look again. Actually it's beginning to look a lot like my "Lazy Z" bar napkin ground! Speaking of which... I'm out here for now.Kind of looks like pictures of a grassy field.
I totally support your case that this symbol is 'ground'. I've not indicated otherwise. I don't support the idea tha Wikipedia is the 'standard', although I'm sure they'd like to be known as such.So what reference would you accept? It is what I learned in college, and it has held true through my 30+ year carrier in Collin's Radio, Rockwell International, and Alcatel.
My symbol of choice has always been this...
It is extremely common in the vast majority of schematics.
My definition (which I wrote before looking at Wikipedia) and Wikipedia's don't meet your approval? That's OK, but it isn't your choice. It is the standard.
So here is another, not that it will convince...
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ground
Looks like my two definitions there.
Like I said, there is more than one definition. I've quoted 3 sources, myself, and two online encyclopedia's. The Electrical Code is for high voltage line transmission standards, but it isn't related to electronic definitions.
Huuuuuh?...often a ground is drawn just for the sake of drawing it ....
Huuuuuh?
It's like a given that a ground has to be in a circuit. Simulation programs won't even let you run unless you put that stupid triangle (at least the triangle is more accurate than the christmas tree symbol) somewhere. Not every circuit needs a ground or common drawn in, as no such ground or common exists, but we feel compelled to draw it anyways.Huuuuuh?
The answer is not complex. It is what we've been talking about, the point by which all other voltages are measured, nothing more. It this circuit there is only one voltage, but that little ground symbol also defines polarity of the voltage.
A note then working with electrical simulators. You will need to define at least one point that is used as a reference point. All voltage values will be referenced to this point. And the same will also apply to electrical schematics. You are telling the reader that this is the reference point in your system.
Actually Bill, it is more, it explicitly implies tied to earth.The answer is not complex. It is what we've been talking about, the point by which all other voltages are measured, nothing more. It this circuit there is only one voltage, but that little ground symbol also defines polarity of the voltage.
In short, there is nothing wrong with it, it is the convention.
by Duane Benson
by Aaron Carman
by Duane Benson
by Jake Hertz