Maker Pro
Maker Pro

It's Time To Replace 60 Hz 110V Electricity

M

Mark Thorson

Jan 1, 1970
0
Now that the blackout has shaken the public's faith in
the electric power industry, we have an opportunity
to make much-needed large-scale changes in how
electricity is distributed.

The system we use now evolved from 19th-century
technology, with patches to adapt it to the rapid
growth which occurred in the 20th century. If we
were creating a new system today, we would never
choose 60 Hz AC. That's almost an ideal frequency
for causing heart fibrillation during an electric shock.
Much better would be the Air Force standard, which
is 115 VAC at 400 Hz. The main reason they chose
400 Hz is not safety, however, but to make transformers
smaller and more efficient. Weight is a major issue
for aircraft.

The Army uses 28 VDC. This is also safer, both because
of the lower voltage and absence of fibrillation hazard.
Edison originally promoted DC electricity in the late
19th century, but it lost out to the AC system because
the transformer technology of the time required AC.
Had the DC system been adopted, the electrical generating
plants would have to be located close to the consumers
of electricity.

We don't have that limitation. With solid-state electronic
switching power converters, we could use high-voltage DC
for distributing power. There would some losses in the switches,
but these are more than compensated by reduced losses in the
transmission lines.

Solar-power enthusiasts often convert their homes to 12 VDC.
That's for compatibility with cheap multicell lead-acid batteries
used to store power.

I propose that now is the time to adopt a new standard.
A DC standard would be best, to reduce the shock hazard.
The voltage should be the lowest practical voltage, both for
the improved safety and perhaps equally important for the
perception of improved safety in the mind of the public.
If you go much below 12V, the wires needed for high-power
appliances become rather thick. If you go much above
28 VDC, the shock hazard from touching exposed live wires
or terminals becomes too high.
 
S

Sam Wormley

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mark said:
Now that the blackout has shaken the public's faith in
the electric power industry, we have an opportunity
to make much-needed large-scale changes in how
electricity is distributed.

The system we use now evolved from 19th-century
technology, with patches to adapt it to the rapid
growth which occurred in the 20th century. If we
were creating a new system today, we would never
choose 60 Hz AC. That's almost an ideal frequency
for causing heart fibrillation during an electric shock.
Much better would be the Air Force standard, which
is 115 VAC at 400 Hz. The main reason they chose
400 Hz is not safety, however, but to make transformers
smaller and more efficient. Weight is a major issue
for aircraft.

The Army uses 28 VDC. This is also safer, both because
of the lower voltage and absence of fibrillation hazard.
Edison originally promoted DC electricity in the late
19th century, but it lost out to the AC system because
the transformer technology of the time required AC.
Had the DC system been adopted, the electrical generating
plants would have to be located close to the consumers
of electricity.

We don't have that limitation. With solid-state electronic
switching power converters, we could use high-voltage DC
for distributing power. There would some losses in the switches,
but these are more than compensated by reduced losses in the
transmission lines.

Solar-power enthusiasts often convert their homes to 12 VDC.
That's for compatibility with cheap multicell lead-acid batteries
used to store power.

I propose that now is the time to adopt a new standard.
A DC standard would be best, to reduce the shock hazard.
The voltage should be the lowest practical voltage, both for
the improved safety and perhaps equally important for the
perception of improved safety in the mind of the public.
If you go much below 12V, the wires needed for high-power
appliances become rather thick. If you go much above
28 VDC, the shock hazard from touching exposed live wires
or terminals becomes too high.

Reduce the grid load--put these in new homes.
http://www.gepower.com/dhtml/corporate/en_us/assets/fuelcells/index.jsp
 
O

Old Man

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mark Thorson said:
Now that the blackout has shaken the public's faith in
the electric power industry, we have an opportunity
to make much-needed large-scale changes in how
electricity is distributed.

The system we use now evolved from 19th-century
technology, with patches to adapt it to the rapid
growth which occurred in the 20th century. If we
were creating a new system today, we would never
choose 60 Hz AC. That's almost an ideal frequency
for causing heart fibrillation during an electric shock.
Much better would be the Air Force standard, which
is 115 VAC at 400 Hz. The main reason they chose
400 Hz is not safety, however, but to make transformers
smaller and more efficient. Weight is a major issue
for aircraft.

DOA. Skin effect. [Old Man]
 
B

Bill Vajk

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mark said:
I propose that now is the time to adopt a new standard.
A DC standard would be best, to reduce the shock hazard.
The voltage should be the lowest practical voltage, both for
the improved safety and perhaps equally important for the
perception of improved safety in the mind of the public.
If you go much below 12V, the wires needed for high-power
appliances become rather thick. If you go much above
28 VDC, the shock hazard from touching exposed live wires
or terminals becomes too high.


If you knew anything about this subject you would realize
how absurd your proposal is. Start with loss tables and
wire sizing in the National electrical code. Annotated
versions are sold, including an annotated version put out
by the National Fire Protection Association.

Shock hazzard is well managed these days by ground fault
interrupters. They're reliable and inexpensive, under $10
per unit, much less in quantity. They present a better
life safety solution than changing the present distribution
system. Such devices are already required for all garage
and outdoor outlets as well as in kitchens and bathrooms
within reach of water. Nothing is keeping anyone from using
this form of protection feature everywhere in their home.
 
U

Uncle Al

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mark said:
Now that the blackout has shaken the public's faith in
the electric power industry,

A Liberal!
we have an opportunity
to make much-needed large-scale changes in how
electricity is distributed.

First, interminable studies. Second, political power brokerage and
favors. Third... social activism! We don't need no stinking
engineers.
The system we use now evolved from 19th-century
technology, with patches to adapt it to the rapid
growth which occurred in the 20th century.

Parroting the Media. Kirchhoff's laws haven't changed, neither have
impedence and phase matching. A wire is a wire. What changes would
you make in substation infrastructure and software control modalties?
If we
were creating a new system today, we would never
choose 60 Hz AC. That's almost an ideal frequency
for causing heart fibrillation during an electric shock.
Much better would be the Air Force standard, which
is 115 VAC at 400 Hz. The main reason they chose
400 Hz is not safety, however, but to make transformers
smaller and more efficient. Weight is a major issue
for aircraft.

400Hz power lines would be lovely EM radiation sources. Long haul
lines would have major inductance losses.
The Army uses 28 VDC. This is also safer, both because
of the lower voltage and absence of fibrillation hazard.

Absolutely forget DC.
[snip]

I propose that now is the time to adopt a new standard.

Who pays for it, you?
A DC standard would be best, to reduce the shock hazard.

You know nothing about large scale distribution. Edison had his ass
cooked clear off by Steinmetz' AC. To substitute proven robust
existing infrastructure with delicate new hardware is a very NASA-like
act. One presumes the bottom line will be similar - financial and
performance.
The voltage should be the lowest practical voltage, both for
the improved safety and perhaps equally important for the
perception of improved safety in the mind of the public.

Screw public perception. One doesn't allow idiots to vote on
important things - or listen to them if they do.
If you go much below 12V, the wires needed for high-power
appliances become rather thick. If you go much above
28 VDC, the shock hazard from touching exposed live wires
or terminals becomes too high.

You are eloquent about that which you know nothing.
 
C

Chuck Simmons

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mark said:
Now that the blackout has shaken the public's faith in
the electric power industry, we have an opportunity
to make much-needed large-scale changes in how
electricity is distributed.

The system we use now evolved from 19th-century
technology, with patches to adapt it to the rapid
growth which occurred in the 20th century. If we
were creating a new system today, we would never
choose 60 Hz AC. That's almost an ideal frequency
for causing heart fibrillation during an electric shock.
Much better would be the Air Force standard, which
is 115 VAC at 400 Hz. The main reason they chose
400 Hz is not safety, however, but to make transformers
smaller and more efficient. Weight is a major issue
for aircraft.

Old Man points out skin effect as a big problem. It is. In addition to
that, consumers have many appliances which have induction motors and
transformers. A 60Hz transformer is inefficient at 400Hz and may
overheat becoming a fire hazzard. Induction motors designed for 60Hz
will likely not run at all on 400Hz and if by some miracle such a motor
runs, it will run at the wrong speed. Thus there is a large direct cost
in replacing all of the wires in the HV distribution system and in
consumer replacing non-functional appliances.
The Army uses 28 VDC. This is also safer, both because
of the lower voltage and absence of fibrillation hazard.
Edison originally promoted DC electricity in the late
19th century, but it lost out to the AC system because
the transformer technology of the time required AC.
Had the DC system been adopted, the electrical generating
plants would have to be located close to the consumers
of electricity.

Historically, early AC systems were 25Hz, 50Hz and 60Hz. 25Hz is to low
because 25Hz motors and transformers are quite large. 50Hz was preferred
in some parts of the world while 60Hz was preferred in the US.

Anecdotally, when I was in the Army, the power I used for the equipment
I was responsible for was 240 volt 3 phase AC. Even a piece of
transportable equipment I worked on was brought to my location for
repair along with a 100KW diesel generator set that gave me the required
240 volt 3 phase AC. On 28volts DC, this equipment would have required
3,570 amperes. 28 volts DC was not an option for that equipment.
We don't have that limitation. With solid-state electronic
switching power converters, we could use high-voltage DC
for distributing power. There would some losses in the switches,
but these are more than compensated by reduced losses in the
transmission lines.

Megavolt power transmission is commonly DC.
Solar-power enthusiasts often convert their homes to 12 VDC.
That's for compatibility with cheap multicell lead-acid batteries
used to store power.

I propose that now is the time to adopt a new standard.
A DC standard would be best, to reduce the shock hazard.
The voltage should be the lowest practical voltage, both for
the improved safety and perhaps equally important for the
perception of improved safety in the mind of the public.
If you go much below 12V, the wires needed for high-power
appliances become rather thick. If you go much above
28 VDC, the shock hazard from touching exposed live wires
or terminals becomes too high.

Let's look at the impact on appliances. A 1500 watt microwave oven will
probably draw 80 to 90 amperes at 28 volts. The power cord will have a
minimum of 2 4AWG conductors. 90 amp wall outlets should be interesting.
Now a modest home typically has about a 100 amp service at 240 volts
single phase. An equivalent service at 28 volts DC is 785 amperes. That
probably gets you up to about 00 or 000AWG wire for hom distribution.
That's really expensive.

I don't think we are ready to replace the power grid completely, replace
all household appliances and have to live with power cords the size of
elephant trunks (one place I worked had 480 volt 3 phase wall outlets
and the cords we plugged into them we called elephant trunks since it
took two men to plug in an appliance such as a 50KW power supply).

Chuck
 
S

Steve Spence

Jan 1, 1970
0
wonderful. drive up the price of natural gas and use up what little supply
we have. never mind that these things are not available yet .....
 
B

Bill Vajk

Jan 1, 1970
0
Steve said:
What's wrong with DC, Al?
My datacenters use a lot of it.
I use it at home, and in the RV. Wonderful stuff.

The simple fact that you ask that question is a
clear indication you have no ideal regarding
electrical distribution.

First study matters electrical, then make a
proposal if you think, once you know something
about the subject, there may be a valid reason
to make any change.
 
R

Robert J. Kolker

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mark said:
Now that the blackout has shaken the public's faith in
the electric power industry, we have an opportunity
to make much-needed large-scale changes in how
electricity is distributed.

Why don't you learn how the system works and why. See the following site.

http://people.howstuffworks.com/power8.htm

There is a good reason why we use high voltage ac to transmit electrical
power. Learn the physics, Learn the technology.

And stop being a schmuck.

Bob Kolker
 
D

Don Libby

Jan 1, 1970
0
Steve said:
What's wrong with DC, Al?

My datacenters use a lot of it.

I use it at home, and in the RV. Wonderful stuff.

Very long distance powerlines too, IIRC, like the one implicated
in a Big California Blackout a few years back.

-dl
 
U

Uncle Al

Jan 1, 1970
0
Don said:
Very long distance powerlines too, IIRC, like the one implicated
in a Big California Blackout a few years back.

Long haul lines must be DC. If you are located near a node at the
other end you don't get anything. OTOH, typical long haul voltages
are 500 kV to a megavolt or more to drop IR losses. The solid state
modules that smooth it to DC on one end or chop it back to AC on the
other are nearly a story tall with a hefty diameter.

Uncle Al had a degreed acquaintance who went to work at LA power and
water. During the tour he pointed up at narrow black ducting that
threaded everywhere just above head level and asked what it did.
Wasn't ducting as it turns out. It was naked solid copper busbar; the
black was dust cooked by ozone and whatnot from the field, and "please
don't try to touch it."

Dave did chlorination oversight. He like the idea of maybe getting
away with his life if something went sour.
 
S

Steve Spence

Jan 1, 1970
0
so you think that the only reason to use ac instead of dc is the ease in
stepping it up and down? shucks, a dc to dc converter can do that. that's
how we run 12 vdc gadgets in cars from a 144v pack.

there is no difference in efficiency between 110vdc and 110vac. deliver
110vdc to the outlets, and use a dc to dc converter to run 12vdc appliances.
 
S

Steve Spence

Jan 1, 1970
0
I'm not suggesting a change. I just know quite a bit about using dc. We do a
lot of it in EV's, rv's, and off grid homes. a lot of folks have big
misunderstandings about dc. DC is used in some high voltage distribution
already.
 
S

Steve Spence

Jan 1, 1970
0
yep, a good site for newbies.

how about a site with a bit more meat for us electronics guys ......

I prefer 48vdc in my house, but I don't need a grid to give it to me.
 
B

Bill Vajk

Jan 1, 1970
0
Steve said:
yep, a good site for newbies.

how about a site with a bit more meat for us electronics guys ......

I prefer 48vdc in my house, but I don't need a grid to give it to me.

I'm sure that if you look a bit you can find out
plenty about the deadliness of the old 32Vdc farm
systems.

One of the points in your first post on this subject
was about life safety. 48Vdc isn't.
 
T

The Ghost In The Machine

Jan 1, 1970
0
In sci.physics, Mark Thorson
<[email protected]>
wrote
Now that the blackout has shaken the public's faith in
the electric power industry, we have an opportunity
to make much-needed large-scale changes in how
electricity is distributed.

The system we use now evolved from 19th-century
technology, with patches to adapt it to the rapid
growth which occurred in the 20th century. If we
were creating a new system today, we would never
choose 60 Hz AC. That's almost an ideal frequency
for causing heart fibrillation during an electric shock.
Much better would be the Air Force standard, which
is 115 VAC at 400 Hz. The main reason they chose
400 Hz is not safety, however, but to make transformers
smaller and more efficient. Weight is a major issue
for aircraft.

The Army uses 28 VDC. This is also safer, both because
of the lower voltage and absence of fibrillation hazard.
Edison originally promoted DC electricity in the late
19th century, but it lost out to the AC system because
the transformer technology of the time required AC.
Had the DC system been adopted, the electrical generating
plants would have to be located close to the consumers
of electricity.

We don't have that limitation. With solid-state electronic
switching power converters, we could use high-voltage DC
for distributing power. There would some losses in the switches,
but these are more than compensated by reduced losses in the
transmission lines.

Solar-power enthusiasts often convert their homes to 12 VDC.
That's for compatibility with cheap multicell lead-acid batteries
used to store power.

I propose that now is the time to adopt a new standard.
A DC standard would be best, to reduce the shock hazard.
The voltage should be the lowest practical voltage, both for
the improved safety and perhaps equally important for the
perception of improved safety in the mind of the public.
If you go much below 12V, the wires needed for high-power
appliances become rather thick. If you go much above
28 VDC, the shock hazard from touching exposed live wires
or terminals becomes too high.

Conversion from the 110VAC/60Hz system we have as our
infrastructure, while somewhat desirable in light of
the aforementioned medical accident, will be extremely
expensive. For starters, it's not 110VAC everywhere
(that's only at the home); the generator plant runs at
about 26,000 volts. Also, every generator would have
to be rebuilt as the rotor speeds would be different --
or rewound, as the frequency would be different if the
rotor speed is left as is (I'm not sure one can change
the rotor speed very effectively on a water turbine unit,
for example). Transformers, which are carefully engineered
to handle certain currents and voltages, will have to be
rewound or completely rebuilt. And of course all consumer
equipment will require rewriting or replacement -- or one
can buy a lot of power converters, resulting in some
power loss.

I'll admit I like the general idea of a 400 Hz system
but the hum from such a system may get very irritating
(60 Hz hum is irritating enough but at least it's
a low hum). Think of the tone from a 440 Hz tuning
fork to get a general idea; you'd hear that *everywhere*.
(Presumably the Air Force, however, might have some
ideas on how to mitigate that problem. The 60 Hz hum
one hears is primarily from harmonics.)

Tower voltages are high to reduce losses from current while
the electricity is traveling long distances. Ohm's Law:
P = E^2/R; since R is fixed (barring such things as skin
effect) it behooves us to make E as high as possible,
consistent with other issues (e.g., ionization of the
atmosphere -- arcing). At the destination, step-down
transformers can be used with AC; DC has no such option.

There is a problem with solar power, although that may
be fixed at some point with newer technology; a solar
cell is essentially a sheet of glass (SiO2) which needs
to be melted at a high temperature during fabrication.
The energy used during this process takes years to recoup
(and is probably reflected in part in the cost of the unit
during initial install).

Some simpler options may be available for those
appropriately located; one that comes to mind is a simple
glass or plastic greenhouse, attached to the side of
the house, with an appropriate fan and good insulation.
While this cannot completely replace the heater it may
reduce the load on it. In the summer one can remove the
windows and replace them with screening, perhaps.

The problem with glass is the same for solar cells, though.
(A pity since it's so nice and transparent. :) ) However,
it's simpler to construct although I'm not all that
knowledgeable about how to reduce condensation on the
inside of the glass.

I'll admit I have no idea how to fix the power grid, but
complete replacement would, again, be a very expensive
option.

I'm also curious how difficult it would be to set up
a solar-powered steam turbine. :) (One assumes a
possibly-movable metal frame on the roof funnelling the
light via a reflective shroud into a pipe with a fluid,
heating the fluid. Of course one has to occasionally go
up there and clean the equipment.)
 
T

The Ghost In The Machine

Jan 1, 1970
0
In sci.physics, Sam Wormley
<[email protected]>
wrote
Mark Thorson wrote:

[snip interesting but slightly impractical suggestions for brevity]

An interesting thought, that, but now I wonder which is
worse, pollutant-wise: the transportation of electricity
over long distances, or the transportation of natural
gas, gasoline, diesel, or kerosene over long distances.
(The suggested unit runs on natual gas. However, I have
problems with natural gas, mostly because we're having a
bit of a shortage. Natural gas requires pumping to keep
it under pressure, presumably; gasoline, diesel, and
kerosene are, AFAIK, transported via large tanker trucks.)

The nice thing about this unit: the internal wiring of the
home is exactly the same.
 
A

Anthony Cerrato

Jan 1, 1970
0
"The Ghost In The Machine"
In sci.physics, Mark Thorson
<[email protected]>
wrote
Now that the blackout has shaken the public's faith in
the electric power industry, we have an opportunity
to make much-needed large-scale changes in how
electricity is distributed.
[snippage]

I'll admit I like the general idea of a 400 Hz system
but the hum from such a system may get very irritating
(60 Hz hum is irritating enough but at least it's
a low hum). Think of the tone from a 440 Hz tuning
fork to get a general idea; you'd hear that *everywhere*.
(Presumably the Air Force, however, might have some
ideas on how to mitigate that problem. The 60 Hz hum
one hears is primarily from harmonics.)

Besides all the other problems, sounds like a recipe for
mass population deafness--the long-term medical costs to
society might be stupendous! :) Why not just solve all the
problems by building a decent transmission system with
_proper_ protocols? Time to stop being penny-wise and pound
foolish-at least wrt quality of life -- someone recently
said we are the only superpower in the world with a third
world power grid system --let's add a few more backup
generation plants at critical nodes to help the network out
too (all new funding for all this crap is presently tied up
in political squabbles I believe.) We can fix the
system--have Big Blue et al. design the network and
failsafes this time--in this new age of "the rise of the
machines" have the computers help us instead of hurt us with
protocols designed by smart folks instead of Dumbos--uh,
wasn't all this math and stuff worked out in the 5 decades
of math and physics since the '50s...even without
computers...go back to the game thy etc. lit. or ask that
genius who won the Economics Nobel; he'll work it all out.
And if we have to pay some small price to constantly
maintain a slightly higher power generation capacity so be
it--it will be worth it, particularly when the terrorists
come to call now that they know our vulnerabilities! We have
the technology and a workable current system--we can rebuild
it even better! ...tonyC
 
"The Ghost In The Machine"
In sci.physics, Mark Thorson
<[email protected]>
wrote
Now that the blackout has shaken the public's faith in
the electric power industry, we have an opportunity
to make much-needed large-scale changes in how
electricity is distributed.
[snippage]

I'll admit I like the general idea of a 400 Hz system
but the hum from such a system may get very irritating
(60 Hz hum is irritating enough but at least it's
a low hum). Think of the tone from a 440 Hz tuning
fork to get a general idea; you'd hear that *everywhere*.
(Presumably the Air Force, however, might have some
ideas on how to mitigate that problem. The 60 Hz hum
one hears is primarily from harmonics.)

Besides all the other problems, sounds like a recipe for
mass population deafness--the long-term medical costs to
society might be stupendous! :) Why not just solve all the
problems by building a decent transmission system with
_proper_ protocols?

Ahh, that's not the main problem.
Time to stop being penny-wise and pound
foolish-at least wrt quality of life

It has little to do with "penny-wise and pound foolish" and a hell of
a lot to do with enviro-idiocy"
-- someone recently
said we are the only superpower in the world with a third
world power grid system --let's add a few more backup
generation plants at critical nodes to help the network out

Ahh, here is the rub.

No matter how smart the transmission system is, it cannot work
miracles. It needs a sufficient reserve capacity behind it. Now,
check the numbers from the last few decades and observe how the excess
generation capacity keeps shrinking. And no, this is not a matter of
being "penny-wise and pound stupid" ("Beeh, beeh, evil corporations
bad, evil corporations bad"), it is a matter of the public strenuosly
objecting to the construction of every power plant and every
transmission line. So, eventually, the public gets what it deserves
("who, me? Me, wrong? Me, the voter" to paraphrase P.J O'Rourke).

In order to deal with problems properly, you've to diagnose problems
properly, first. Seeking sacrificial lambs may be emotionally
satisfying but it does little to address the issues.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
[email protected] | chances are he is doing just the same"
 
"The Ghost In The Machine"
In sci.physics, Mark Thorson
<[email protected]>
wrote
Now that the blackout has shaken the public's faith in
the electric power industry, we have an opportunity
to make much-needed large-scale changes in how
electricity is distributed. [snippage]

I'll admit I like the general idea of a 400 Hz system
but the hum from such a system may get very irritating
(60 Hz hum is irritating enough but at least it's
a low hum). Think of the tone from a 440 Hz tuning
fork to get a general idea; you'd hear that *everywhere*.
(Presumably the Air Force, however, might have some
ideas on how to mitigate that problem. The 60 Hz hum
one hears is primarily from harmonics.)

Besides all the other problems, sounds like a recipe for
mass population deafness--the long-term medical costs to
society might be stupendous! :) Why not just solve all the
problems by building a decent transmission system with
_proper_ protocols?

Ahh, that's not the main problem.
Time to stop being penny-wise and pound
foolish-at least wrt quality of life

It has little to do with "penny-wise and pound foolish" and a hell of
a lot to do with enviro-idiocy"

It hasn't helped to force the biz into an isolated futures
market either. I'm not saying that this is a physical cause;
I'm saying that it redirects attention.
Ahh, here is the rub.

No, shit.
No matter how smart the transmission system is, it cannot work
miracles. It needs a sufficient reserve capacity behind it. Now,
check the numbers from the last few decades and observe how the excess
generation capacity keeps shrinking. And no, this is not a matter of
being "penny-wise and pound stupid" ("Beeh, beeh, evil corporations
bad, evil corporations bad"), it is a matter of the public strenuosly
objecting to the construction of every power plant and every
transmission line. So, eventually, the public gets what it deserves
("who, me? Me, wrong? Me, the voter" to paraphrase P.J O'Rourke).

Even thought New England power managed to squeak by, around here
the "voter" was promised a ridiculous low cost in order to implement
the split of power distribution and generation. How the hell are
these companies going to do development? They're barely able to
fund maintenance.
In order to deal with problems properly, you've to diagnose problems
properly, first. Seeking sacrificial lambs may be emotionally
satisfying but it does little to address the issues.

Meanwhile, California fiddles while power generation burns.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
 
Top