On Nov 18, 2005, at 9:34 AM, Will Matney wrote:
> Bill,
>
> 1kHz would be about as high to take it as you may have to go to a
> different grade of iron in the transformers which would cost more on
> the pound. I know the power companies look at that cost in paticular.
> However, using 1kHz would drop the core size of a transformer
> signifigantly. Motor frames would come down in size also for the same
> HP. As frequency rises, the amount of iron drops.
The best compromise mighty be to leave the mains as is. rectify and
use a DC switcher at the breaker box to generate the higher freq.
>
> Best,
>
> Will
>
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>
> On 11/18/05 at 8:52 AM Bill Turner wrote:
>
>> You have all indulged me regarding my quest for the safest way to do
>> 120/240 volt wiring and I appreciate that.
>>
>> Looking ahead to the distant future, here is something I would like
>> everyone, including the NEC, to consider: Shockproof houses.
>>
>> It is well known that the human nervous system does not sense an
>> electric shock if the frequency is high enough. Most of us have
>> received "RF burns" at some time in our ham careers and perhaps most
>> of us have marveled at the fact that even though it burns the flesh,
>> it does not shock at all. The implications for eliminating death by
>> electrocution are obvious.
>>
>> The technology already exists for houses to be wired with relatively
>> high frequency electricity. While the national electric grid should
>> remain at a low for reasons of efficiency, there is no reason, other
>> than cost, why houses should use such a dangerous frequency. Given
>> mass production, a solid state frequency converter could be built
>> into every house to change the 50/60 Hz source to a frequency not
>> dangerous to humans. Perhaps something around 1 kHz would do, or even
>> higher. Research would have to be done to find the optimum.
>>
>> In addition to the shockproofing, other advantages exist too. For
>> one, transformers in equipment could be made tiny by comparison to
>> 50/60 Hz versions, saving money, raw materials and reducing size and
>> weight. The need for a "safety ground" would be eliminated, although
>> a ground might still be needed to prevent RF burns, depending on the
>> equipment, but it would no longer be a safety issue. Even this could
>> be handled by going back to the two-wire polarized plug where one
>> conductor is grounded. If that plug were miswired, it would be only
>> an annoyance, not a hazard, and easily corrected.
>>
>> I realize there would be lots of opposition to this new system,
>> mostly on cost factors, but think of a house where nobody would ever
>> be electrocuted. I believe someday it will come to be.
>>
>> Comments welcome.
>>
>> 73, Bill W6WRT
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Amps mailing list
>> Amps@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
>
Richard L. Measures, AG6K, 805.386.3734. www.somis.org
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|