On 01/05/13 11:09, Martin Brown wrote:
On 01/05/2013 10:40, Huge wrote:
On 2013-05-01, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:

If each appliance is fitted with a "smart device", then no changes are
needed to the home wiring.
I would have thought is better to have "essential" and
"non-essential" circuits in every house.

And you think the teenagers are going to remember which socket to plug
something in to? Or the average person, come to that.

You think anyone is going to convert their existing house to that - put
all your furniture in storage, move out, have all the walls bashed
around to have a second set of cabling installed, replaster, complete
redecoration, move back in.

Dream on.

I've looked at 2 houses now that have parallel wiring systems for
110V and
BFO transformers tucked away somewhere. Most odd. I would have
thought it
would have been *much* cheaper for American ex-pats to throw away their
electrical appliances and buy new ones here, and get a proper washing
machine into the bargain.

They are dumb enough to think that their gear is the best in the world.

The Japanese may actually have a point believing that but much of
their kit will run on anything since half the country is 50Hz and half
on 60Hz depending on whether it was under US or UK influence after WWII.

Most portable equipment sold in the ROW these days will accept 50-60Hz
100-240v ac and run quite happily. Americans still have 60Hz only 110v.

I still recall discovering how my Ronson electric razor was supposed
to work when I first visited the US. A crap design that relied on a
60Hz mechanical resonance. I have used Braun or a wet shave ever since.

One of the most curious and interesting projects I ever worked on was a
digital stiorage scope for Gould Advance which could run on anything
from 48vDC to 250VAC without changing any settings whatsoever. All
handled by a pretty good SMPS.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.