Connect with us

It's Time To Replace 60 Hz 110V Electricity

Discussion in 'General Electronics' started by Mark Thorson, Aug 16, 2003.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Hi Dark.
    The gasses are not isolated from the motor windings.
    See copeland products.
    This picture clearly shows the motor cooled by the
    refrigerant gasses. I have one of these. The gasses
    and oil bath the motor.
    http://www.redrok.com/engine.htm#copeland

    Duane
    --
    Home of the $35 Solar Tracker Receiver
    http://www.redrok.com/electron.htm#led3X [*]
    Powered by \ \ \ //|
    Thermonuclear Solar Energy from the Sun / |
    Energy (the SUN) \ \ \ / / |
    Red Rock Energy \ \ / / |
    Duane C. Johnson Designer \ \ / \ / |
    1825 Florence St Heliostat,Control,& Mounts |
    White Bear Lake, Minnesota === \ / \ |
    USA 55110-3364 === \ |
    (651)426-4766 use Courier New Font \ |
    (my email: address) \ |
    http://www.redrok.com (Web site) ===
     

  2. I believe Chlorine Bleach degrades as follows:

    NaOCl -> NaCl + 1/2O2

    The chances of a NaCl molecule making it to the ozone layer must be pretty low.
     
  3. In sci.physics, N. Thornton
    <>
    wrote
    Ew. Brushes.
    I'll admit to some curiosity as to whether it would be beneficial
    to reduce arcing by enclosing the vibrator in a vacuum. In
    air, of course, one would be subject to arcing.
     
  4. It seems smart, but it would create BIG earth loop problems.
    This (small appliances) would be used for say video equipment, audio equipment?
    In such a case, if they all have ground at -12 V (0V), then there would be all sorts
    of earth current.
    Anyways 1 A would be far to little, so 10 amps...
    The lossess, thick cables...
    No not for me, and I work a lot with that stuff.
    I am not sure but I think I have the local record AC / DC adapters ;-)
    These are extremely handy, and good ones have low losses and provide that
    nice total separation, great for video and test equipment.
    JP
     
  5. daestrom

    daestrom Guest

    I'm not sure a vacuum would stop arcing. Heavy currents could vaporize
    enough of the contact material to sustain an arc. And the burning/pitting
    would be just as bad.

    daestrom
     
  6. N. Thornton

    N. Thornton Guest


    Hi jan

    It sounds you only half got the idea. Lemme explain.

    Piping 12v 10A round would be expensive, and defeat the whole point of
    the exercise, which is to make things cheaper and more convenient.
    Bear in mind that to get 4x 10A outlets you'd need a power unit of at
    least 20A.

    12v 1A is plenty for lots of small items, and is cheap to do. It would
    run small radios, alarm clocks, radio alarms, night lights, smoke
    alarms, and numerous other small gadgets. It would make the whole
    setup cheaper in the end for the householder. Because gadgets would
    drop in price the range of them available and practical would
    increase.

    The removal of several small loads off the current mains ring would
    increase the number of items one could have plugged ni, but without
    the significant cost of additional mains wiring. The 12v 1A plugs
    could cost a few pence each instead of 50p each, be 7mm wide instead
    of nearer 50mm, 10 way sockets would cost 30p instead of 2 way sockets
    costing over £1, the wiring in the wall would be 7p/m speaker wire
    instead of 2.5mm^2 T&E @ 30p/m, the plugs would be tiny and no
    multiway adaptors needed, and so on.


    The idea of using 12v 10A for interconnected equipment is, as you say,
    not so workable/attractive. There are no earth loop issues with small
    gadgets since they aren't inteconnected.

    And in fact, if one did start using the 1A for small interconnected
    audio items the earth impedance could be got round by using a
    differential input, at a small fraction of the cost of a mains
    transformer and the various issues that come along with that. So even
    on interconnecteds you atill win.


    Regards, NT
     
  7. OK, I think I see you point., do you mean use 1 DC to DC converter,
    with separate windings and rectifiers for each outlet?
    That could be done,
    The 12 V 1 A is only 12 W however, substract some 80 % efficiency,
    for an audio amp that would result is 9.6 W (so 4.8 W / channell, or
    1.6 W if 5.1 surround, not enough for the big speakers).
    For a DVD player or VHS you will need more then that too likely
    (my DVD player has a switch mode and it does consume a lot).
    Also these 'appliances' you refer too usually need different
    voltages, in this DVD player I have -27 (why?) +12, -12, +5, 1.6
    (oh I see why, display).
    Most modern audio amps use symetric supply +- 40 V or more
    (for 8 Ohm speakers).
    So you will then need an OTHER switch mode and transformer.
    I see the good intentions, and for sure If I also had 12 V outlets
    (DC) I would use these too ;-)
    I did start on an in house system with 8 pole sockets that also had
    i2c data, 12 V, but it ended up in some box.
    This 240V 50 Hz we have here is real easy ........
    Voltage drop after a few meters were a problem in the 12 V system.
    It ment you would have to stabilize again at each drop point,
    either with low drop reguators to 9, or a 7805 to 5 V, or use some
    expensive switchmode chip..
    Nice to run a LCD display on the frontdoor, but bad for any higher power stuff.
    JP
     
  8. Rich Grise

    Rich Grise Guest

    Yes, and 10 12V 1A items is 12V 10A, so what do you gain? Install
    huge fat wire in the walls and a whole bunch of little expensive
    12V outlets? Or a separate set of 1A wire from your PSU to each of
    the outlets?

    Here in the US, they've discovered a thing called the "transformer."
    One of those magical gadgets lets you run your 12V equipment right
    off the mains! Or, you could move your rectifeer/filter to the basement,
    and drive all your devices off the same supply, necessitating additional
    isolation.

    I might use 24 or 28 or 48VDC when I build my solar house, but for
    now, mains is cheap enough.

    Cheers!
    Rich
     
  9. N. Thornton

    N. Thornton Guest

    already explained. Dont forget diversity.

    Neither. Runs will be limited length. One 4A supply will cover a given
    wall distance. A 4A supply will supply say 10 outlets.

    speaker wire 2.5A 7.9p - 9.3p/m
    1mm^2 T&E 12A 17.5 - 19p/m
    24/0.2 wire 4.5A 6.1p - 7.2p/m

    those are from a company selling regulation mains 2.5T&E for 29.5p/m.

    Outlet costs, lets see... straight boxed headers, 20 pin, 23p to 39p.
    Thats not much for a 10 way power socket, and its just over an inch
    long.
    The plugs for the leads cost much less and are tiny.

    Its small and neat as well as way cheaper.

    ok, now what does being silly prove?

    no, that would entail thick wires, loads more wiring, and a fused
    distribution system. Think.

    Advantages covered already.


    Regards, NT

     
  10. feklar

    feklar Guest

    Actually, I suspect the most efficient method of electricity
    transmission, for either long distance or direct feed into homes, will
    eventually end up being seperate oxygen and hydrogen pipelines. Zero
    line resistance loss, no transformer issues. Made out of cheap, high
    strength glass, with pipe sections being self sealing in case of
    instantaneous pressure drop.


    The Amazing and Mysterious Powers of Mexican Females.

    Chapter 1: Levitation and Summoning.
    http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/images/mexwench.jpg
     
  11. Steve Spence

    Steve Spence Guest

    and how will the hydrogen be made? you just introduced a whole nuther layer
    of inefficiency .......

    --
    Steve Spence
    www.green-trust.org
     
  12. N. Thornton

    N. Thornton Guest

    i.e. you dont know.
    gas flowing thru pipes needs a pressure drop to make it flow, so there
    is energy loss. There is also gas leakage in real world piped systems.
    no issues? OK, how do you convert H2 to electrons at 100% efficiency
    cheaply and safely?
    which just happens to be rather pricey.
    more cost


    NT
     
  13. feklar

    feklar Guest

    Someone on USENET who actually understood something someone else tried
    to posit or point out. This has to be a first. Someone save this
    post for posterity. This is truly amazing.
    In other words, you mean it takes energy to pressurize the system.
    This is true.
    Who says you need to? Say you used nuke plants fueled via a breeder
    reactor to perform the electrolysis. Not the most efficient setup
    possible, not even remotely close, but cost-wise that would still be
    cost-efficient, if it were not for the huges costs of the lawsuits the
    oil companies bankroll to keep such plants form being built.

    Actually, the means of oxygen and hydrogen production I was referring
    to was some future very large scale solar electrolysis design.

    The only real downside of any inefficiency in that case is very
    wasteful land use, but this can be tolerated as long as enough land is
    available and as long as the sale of the power produced will pay for
    the cost of the land expansion. Later, when more efficient designs
    are found, the pre-existing land used can be redone with the new, more
    efficient designs.

    Or, if no one can produce a more efficient design than the existing
    designs, at least you have something that works, and regardless of the
    inefficiency, the only real question is the return on investment,
    whether it will pay for itself in a reasonable period of time with the
    sale of the generated electricity and/or oxygen and hydrogen.
    It may be pricey now, but this is going to change drastically. Trust
    me, I have insider information.
    Nothing is free. Shite worth having always costs something. Even
    most shite not worth having will still cost you an arm and a leg.


    The Amazing and Mysterious Powers of Mexican Females.

    Chapter 1: Levitation and Summoning.
    http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/images/mexwench.jpg
     
  14. Bill Vajk

    Bill Vajk Guest

    Please take this sort of discussion to scifi writers groups,
    this is the sci heirarchy.
     
  15. feklar

    feklar Guest

    Hey thanks for the great advice. I hadn't thought of that. You're
    right, most of the really impressive scientific advances,
    geosynchronous satellites for example, were thought up by sci-fi
    writers, not scientists. Then scientists read the sci-fi, found it
    fascinating, and pursured the new ideas to fruition.

    I appreciate that excellent advice.


    The Amazing and Mysterious Powers of Mexican Females.

    Chapter 1: Levitation and Summoning.
    http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/images/mexwench.jpg
     
  16. N. Thornton

    N. Thornton Guest

    Well my stereo doesn't have an input for hydrogen and oxygen, nor does
    the monitor. So once you've delivered to the house you need to
    convert. With 240v ac (or 110) it is done cheaply safely and
    efficiently by a small transformer. Where is the cheap safe efficient
    convertor for your proposal? AFAIK there isn't one: could be a bit of
    an issue.
    If its not even remoetly close then its a non-runner from the
    financial perspective.
    Complete non runner, the costs are staggering.
    hardly. There's the small facts that
    1. no end user will buy the power
    2. no-one will finance the setup
    3. no competent busines person will get involved in the project
    etc
    Land is the least issue. Land is cheap in the desert.
    need way more than that!
    clearly it never will, that's what hopelesssly inefficient and
    ridiculously priced means.
    I dont.
    That's not much justification for your monstrously expensive proposal.


    Regards, NT
     
  17. Guest


    That's one hell of a tool bar you got there.
     
  18. feklar

    feklar Guest

    Either a thermal or combustion power generator or maybe quasiturbine
    at each house, or at nearby power company substations. If the latter,
    how many and where is up to them, it might only be used for long
    distance power transmission.
    Nuke plants as they exist to day in the USA are not even remotely
    close to being energy efficient, yet they are cost efficient and turn
    a profit. But from the power conversion standpoint, Its highly
    inefficient without even considering the fact that fuel is not getting
    reprocessed, and the breeder reactors are not being utilized to fuel
    the light water reactors. If what you said was true then all nuke
    plants would have to be closed down, or would never have been built in
    the first place.
    You have no idea what the economics are, obviously. If you did, you
    would know that the costs are not any real issue. Unless they are so
    expensive that not even governments or oil companies can afford to
    build them, then the only real determining factor is how long until
    return on the investment. If power output can be built up quickly for
    a low or moderate or even high initial cost, and the power gets sold
    to generate income, and the income pays for the land, equipment,
    labor, and materials used in the construction in a reasonably short
    period of time are the only considerations.
    Perhaps, perhaps not, it depends on what the power company finds most
    efficient.
    Only a fool passes up a business opportunity. There are stll
    investors left, if good enough workable ideas can be produced.
    Without knowing the details of the project, thats a little premature.
    Hopefully you aren't always like that.
    Like what
    Same as for nuclear power, when the plants were built they were
    ridiculously priced and hopelessly inefficient. But they had a
    reasonable return on investment, nevertheless. Same goes for deep
    undersea oil rigs.
    Let me guess, you are a green.

    The Amazing and Mysterious Powers of Mexican Females.

    Chapter 1: Levitation and Summoning.
    http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/images/mexwench.jpg
     
  19. DarkMatter

    DarkMatter Guest


    Right. Equip every house with a generator unit that costs more than
    most houses.

    You're an idiot.
     
  20. N. Thornton

    N. Thornton Guest

    Which? Which are you saying is
    available
    cheap
    reliable
    safe
    and maintenance free? I get the disctinct impression you dont know,
    but am happy to listen.

    tell us your plan
    whats your plan?
    2 separate issues.

    1. When nukes were built they were built to produce war fuel, and the
    cost was justified by that return. The first plant actually consumed
    more leccy than it generated.

    2. Nuke plants today pay, and your scheme doesnt, by miles.

    I have done the numbers for it, and its comically unfeasible. - Unless
    you can pull a _very_ clever rabbit out the hat to make it work. Given
    your lack of knowledge I find that unlikely.

    They are THE issue. That's usually the way in business.
    With nukes the govt had a reason to build them, so as you say cost was
    secondary. With your scheme there is no reason other than power
    output, governments have no other interest in this idea. They dont pay
    so they wont be financing them. That leaves it down to businesses
    banks and investors. But if it doesnt pay, no go.
    Your plan could never even pay 10% of its cost back in its lifetime.
    Its financially dead duck like.

    It doesn't, and never does. Do the numbers if you want to claim it
    does, show us.

    No, it depends on the sale price of the power. No-one will buy power
    at over a dollar a watt, full stop.

    If, yes, but this isn't.
    You've told me all I need to know. You have a proposal thats been
    looked at by many and always proven extremely impractical, and you
    have nothing more thana vague idea, no numbers, no concrete design.
    With dud ideas, yes. If you're capable you can learn the problems with
    this one and come up with something beter, then something better, etc.
    If you stick with this, you're going nowhere. Just learn how to
    evaluate and where the problems are.

    And understand this is one area where even the leading experts cant be
    expected to come up with much. Its a very very tough field.

    Your idea produces intermittent power. It is neither baseline nor
    peaking plant: you will thus get a low price for the power at best.

    The idea needs to pay.

    It needs numbers on it to see how much land, how much money, how much
    investment, return, run costs, any other issues...
    and finally it needs a real concrete design.
    their return was war fuel, not electricity.
    they have a so many percent success rate, with huge return on the
    successful ones. They pay.

    Address the issue. Don't wander off into personalities. If you want to
    get somewhere.

    That doesn't do your cred any favours either.


    Regards, NT
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-