On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 08:15:58 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/5/2017 8:00 PM, wrote:

I suggested the OP put a sub-panel out in his garage.
This can come off the main feed into the house.
I'm not sure what a 220amp breaker is that you mentioned.

I think he means 220V breaker. If the main panel is full, then space
has to be made for the breaker feeding the sub. At least that's how I
read it.


Maybe even he meant 240 volt.

g Most people confuse the two. ;-)

On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 14:52:52 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/6/2017 1:59 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 8:16:13 AM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 1/5/2017 8:00 PM, wrote:

I suggested the OP put a sub-panel out in his garage. This can
come off the main feed into the house. I'm not sure what a
220amp breaker is that you mentioned.

I think he means 220V breaker. If the main panel is full, then
space has to be made for the breaker feeding the sub. At least
that's how I read it.


Maybe even he meant 240 volt.

Not being an officially trained electrician, I've never looked into
the 220-230-240 volt or 120-115-110 volt issue. I'm pretty sure
those are all identical and interchangeable, but why are all the
numbers used interchangeably? Why don't we pick one number and use
it? Why does everyone talk about 120 volt outlets in their house,
but the outlet says 115 volts.




IIRC it was 110/220, now it is 120/240 in the USA. Why that changed I
do not know unless it was to be able to save on the gauge of cables and
wires. And most home electrical devices will run on slightly less than
and or slightly higher than the stated voltage.

Yup, I don't remember when it changed but it was 115/230V at some
point between those two standards.

Oddly I think 440 volt is still normal

It's often called that but it is 480V.

On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 20:06:19 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/6/2017 3:52 PM, Leon wrote:

Oddly I think 440 volt is still normal

Unless is is 480

I read the explanation once but still don't get 277 volts from 2 legs of
3 phase.

It's the opposite. 277V is a single phase of a 480V phase-to-phase
system. This is entirely different than a 120V system (a transformer
is required to get there).

https://ctlsys.com/electrical_servic..._and_voltages/

The nominal 120 was decided as the standard for north America but I'm
not sure when. Voltages were 110, 115, 117 in different places some
years ago.

Yes, I'd forgotten 117V.

On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 12:30:07 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:43:14 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gramps' shop"
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 11:31 AM
Subject: TS Circuit -- Part 2


First of all, thanks for all the comments and good advice. The breaker
box is located in the garage and there is no clear, open route to the
basement and on to the shop. Here's what I am going to do:

Get an electrician to upgrade me to 200 amp service.

Good call if you don't know how to do that yourself, or your local
building
department won't let you.

Add a dedicated 20 amp and a dedicated 15 amp circuit to the shop.

NO! NO! NO! Run a 100 amp circuit to the basement and install a 100 amp
sub panel. Something capable of atleast 6 circuits. If you use Square D
then you have the capability to use compact breakers and double the number
of circuits if you need to later. Regardless, putting a sub panel in your
basement allows you to add stuff much easier in the future.

The size of the sub depends on the service entrance. If he only has a
100A entrance, a 100A sub is going to be a problem. Also, if he's
going to the bother to put in a sub, use one with at least 20
circuits. The difference in cost is pocket change. I wouldn't put in
more than a 40A or 60A sub, tops. There's nothing a homeowner is
likely to use that will take that much. The capapbility of lots of
circuits is important, though.

The total cost will probably only be a few hundred dollars more, but the
future flexibility will be an order of magnitude more.

I'm guessing $1200 to $1500 for this and I suppose the utility will try
to
hit me up for the cost of a new meter.

Get a quote so you aren't guessing.

+1 (I think he's low)

I think we are mostly on the same page here. We just disagree about the
details.

Probably talking past each other. It happens when threads get
convoluted.

On 1/6/17 2:48 PM, Leon wrote:



Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.





Actually no different. There is consideration of switching some high
voltage lines to DC partially because for the same peak voltage the
wires can carry significantly more power.

A big reason for the switch from DC to AC is the ability to efficiently
reduce the voltage at point of use, allowing the distribution lines to
run at higher voltage with the exponentially lower power losses.


-BR

On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 08:25:12 -0700, Brewster wrote:

On 1/6/17 2:48 PM, Leon wrote:



Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.





Actually no different. There is consideration of switching some high
voltage lines to DC partially because for the same peak voltage the
wires can carry significantly more power.

No, that's not the reason. High voltage DC transmission doesn't have
inductive, skn effect or (the same) corona losses. AC has the
advantage of cheap transformation from one voltage to another.

A big reason for the switch from DC to AC is the ability to efficiently
reduce the voltage at point of use, allowing the distribution lines to
run at higher voltage with the exponentially lower power losses.

The issue at hand is distribution. AC is much easier to transform, so
higher distribution voltages are possible.

On 1/6/2017 10:11 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 14:52:52 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/6/2017 1:59 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 8:16:13 AM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 1/5/2017 8:00 PM, wrote:

I suggested the OP put a sub-panel out in his garage. This can
come off the main feed into the house. I'm not sure what a
220amp breaker is that you mentioned.

I think he means 220V breaker. If the main panel is full, then
space has to be made for the breaker feeding the sub. At least
that's how I read it.


Maybe even he meant 240 volt.

Not being an officially trained electrician, I've never looked into
the 220-230-240 volt or 120-115-110 volt issue. I'm pretty sure
those are all identical and interchangeable, but why are all the
numbers used interchangeably? Why don't we pick one number and use
it? Why does everyone talk about 120 volt outlets in their house,
but the outlet says 115 volts.




IIRC it was 110/220, now it is 120/240 in the USA. Why that changed I
do not know unless it was to be able to save on the gauge of cables and
wires. And most home electrical devices will run on slightly less than
and or slightly higher than the stated voltage.

Yup, I don't remember when it changed but it was 115/230V at some
point between those two standards.

Oddly I think 440 volt is still normal

It's often called that but it is 480V.

LOL 480 it is!

On 01/06/2017 3:40 PM, John McCoy wrote:
m wrote in
:

Not being an officially trained electrician, I've never looked into
the 220-230-240 volt or 120-115-110 volt issue. I'm pretty sure those
are all identical and interchangeable, but why are all the numbers
used interchangeably? Why don't we pick one number and use it? Why
does everyone talk about 120 volt outlets in their house, but the
outlet says 115 volts.

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe"). When Tesla
and General Electric developed AC systems, they picked 120V
as the "household" voltage, but because 110 was already in
the public conciousness, people continued to call it 110V.

115V comes about because the utility is allowed 5% tolerance
for line loss, and 115 just sounds better than 114 (which is
what 120 less 5% would be).

220V and 240V are the same story - Edison used 220V in his
first DC systems, and GE used 240 when they introduced AC.

230V is a different animal - that's a 3 phase voltage in the
US. It's the standard household voltage in the EU, so if
you see something marked 230/240 it's probably intended for
sale in the EU and US.

Believe it's more when and what voltages were standardized by what was
to eventually become NERC...the first standards meeting was held in
about 1896(!) and then there were updates to nominal voltages a couple
times thereafter -- but, the public consciousness can't be changed; we
all grow up with whatever it is we hear and then pass it along with only
a few modifying influences gradually adding to the diversity.

On 1/7/2017 9:25 AM, Brewster wrote:
On 1/6/17 2:48 PM, Leon wrote:



Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.





Actually no different. There is consideration of switching some high
voltage lines to DC partially because for the same peak voltage the
wires can carry significantly more power.

That may be now but back then the DC simply did not have the range that
AC did.

Cars used to have 6 volt systems but switched to 12 volt so that the
cables could be smaller.





A big reason for the switch from DC to AC is the ability to efficiently
reduce the voltage at point of use, allowing the distribution lines to
run at higher voltage with the exponentially lower power losses.


-BR

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Q9idnQchSrQoje3FnZ2dnUU7-
:

On 1/6/2017 3:40 PM, John McCoy wrote:

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe").

Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.

AC doesn't have the same losses as DC because it can be
transferred at a higher voltage. If you sent AC from the
generating station to your house at 120V you'd have the
same losses as with DC. The wires on the utility pole
outside your house are 4600V (or something in that range,
different utilities use various distribution voltages).

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

John

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:YPydndGe9p2PjuzFnZ2dnUU7-
:

Cars used to have 6 volt systems but switched to 12 volt so that the
cables could be smaller.

Sort of. The real reason it was done was because tetra-ethyl
lead was invented.

(Tetra-ethyl lead allows higher octane gasoline. Higher octane
gasoline allows higher compression engines. Higher compression
engines require more power from the starter motor to get them
started, which requires more current from the battery. During
the 1950's compression ratios went from ~6:1 to ~9:1, which
became a problem for both the battery and the cables. Hence
the switch to 12 volt electrical systems.)

John

wrote in :

On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 14:52:52 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

Oddly I think 440 volt is still normal

It's often called that but it is 480V.

Now let's really confuse everyone by talking about the
difference between RMS voltages and P-P voltages :-)

John

On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:21:42 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Q9idnQchSrQoje3FnZ2dnUU7-
:

On 1/6/2017 3:40 PM, John McCoy wrote:

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe").

Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.

AC doesn't have the same losses as DC because it can be
transferred at a higher voltage. If you sent AC from the
generating station to your house at 120V you'd have the
same losses as with DC. The wires on the utility pole
outside your house are 4600V (or something in that range,
different utilities use various distribution voltages).

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

"Safe" is considered to be anything less than 52V. There was once
talk about the automotive industry moving to a 48V battery. The
reason for 48V was that it was just below the "safe" limit. Of course
it never happened because it would have caused more problems than it
solved.

On 1/7/2017 10:21 AM, John McCoy wrote:
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Q9idnQchSrQoje3FnZ2dnUU7-
:

On 1/6/2017 3:40 PM, John McCoy wrote:

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe").

Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.

AC doesn't have the same losses as DC because it can be
transferred at a higher voltage. If you sent AC from the
generating station to your house at 120V you'd have the
same losses as with DC. The wires on the utility pole
outside your house are 4600V (or something in that range,
different utilities use various distribution voltages).

FWIW I was speaking about the time when electricity was just starting to
be used in homes. DC was not practical as there had to be way too many
generation stations. Only the affluent were served in the early days,
they could afford to have/pay for a DC generation station near by.

The wires out side my home on utility poles are maybe 480 volt NOT forty
six thousand. Now the voltage on the hi power transmission lines are
much much higher but they are not near by and they go to transformer
stations where the voltage is dropped and sent to consumers and still
more power pole transformers.. The closest transformer station to me is
8 miles away.





Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

John

On 1/7/2017 10:29 AM, John McCoy wrote:
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:YPydndGe9p2PjuzFnZ2dnUU7-
:

Cars used to have 6 volt systems but switched to 12 volt so that the
cables could be smaller.

Sort of. The real reason it was done was because tetra-ethyl
lead was invented.

(Tetra-ethyl lead allows higher octane gasoline. Higher octane
gasoline allows higher compression engines. Higher compression
engines require more power from the starter motor to get them
started, which requires more current from the battery. During
the 1950's compression ratios went from ~6:1 to ~9:1, which
became a problem for both the battery and the cables. Hence
the switch to 12 volt electrical systems.)

John



Not sure I follow.

Both lead and higher octane fuels reduce precognition knock. Lead did
not allow higher octane, it boosted the octane. Lead's main feature was
that it lubricated the valves, boosting octane was a perk. Hence in the
early 70's when unleaded fuel was introduced only vehicles with modern
engines could run unleaded fuel with out damage to the valve train.

Knock is caused by a number of reasons, compression being only one of
them. Hotter running engines also create more compression and running
more advance on the spark timing will cause an engine to run hotter.

In the early 80's American built vehicles had relatively low compression
ratio engines, in the 6's, and engine knock was a constant problem.
Enter the computers and knock sensors to retard the ignition timing.

On 1/7/2017 10:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:21:42 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Q9idnQchSrQoje3FnZ2dnUU7-
:

On 1/6/2017 3:40 PM, John McCoy wrote:

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe").

Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.

AC doesn't have the same losses as DC because it can be
transferred at a higher voltage. If you sent AC from the
generating station to your house at 120V you'd have the
same losses as with DC. The wires on the utility pole
outside your house are 4600V (or something in that range,
different utilities use various distribution voltages).

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

"Safe" is considered to be anything less than 52V. There was once
talk about the automotive industry moving to a 48V battery. The
reason for 48V was that it was just below the "safe" limit. Of course
it never happened because it would have caused more problems than it
solved.



When was that talk? No doubt, there is always something in the air but
I never read or heard of that back when I was in the automotive business.

I'm sure it was intended to help make vehicles lighter in weight.

On 1/7/2017 1:39 PM, Leon wrote:

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

"Safe" is considered to be anything less than 52V. There was once
talk about the automotive industry moving to a 48V battery. The
reason for 48V was that it was just below the "safe" limit. Of course
it never happened because it would have caused more problems than it
solved.



When was that talk? No doubt, there is always something in the air but
I never read or heard of that back when I was in the automotive business.

I'm sure it was intended to help make vehicles lighter in weight.



Coming soon, evidently


Not every electrical component will switch to 48-volt. Lights, radios,
electric windows and door locks, for example, would stay 12-volt. And
Delphi’s vision is that vehicles with 48-volt systems would also have a
strong regenerative braking system to capture much of the energy lost
when a vehicle slows down.

Read mo
http://autoweek.com/article/technolo...#ixzz4V6czYRqB

On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:31:26 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

wrote in :

On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 14:52:52 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

Oddly I think 440 volt is still normal

It's often called that but it is 480V.

Now let's really confuse everyone by talking about the
difference between RMS voltages and P-P voltages :-)

Just multiply peak by .707.

On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:21:42 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Q9idnQchSrQoje3FnZ2dnUU7-
:

On 1/6/2017 3:40 PM, John McCoy wrote:

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe").

Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.

AC doesn't have the same losses as DC because it can be
transferred at a higher voltage. If you sent AC from the
generating station to your house at 120V you'd have the
same losses as with DC. The wires on the utility pole
outside your house are 4600V (or something in that range,
different utilities use various distribution voltages).

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.


Whether AC or DC is safer was Edison's point when he electrocuted an
elephant with AC. But DC was a dead by then.

John McCoy wrote:

" wrote in
:

Not being an officially trained electrician, I've never looked into
the 220-230-240 volt or 120-115-110 volt issue. I'm pretty sure those
are all identical and interchangeable, but why are all the numbers
used interchangeably? Why don't we pick one number and use it? Why
does everyone talk about 120 volt outlets in their house, but the
outlet says 115 volts.

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe"). When Tesla
and General Electric developed AC systems, they picked 120V
as the "household" voltage, but because 110 was already in
the public conciousness, people continued to call it 110V.

115V comes about because the utility is allowed 5% tolerance
for line loss, and 115 just sounds better than 114 (which is
what 120 less 5% would be).

110V is a legacy term left over from the war of currents that
Tesla/Westinghouse won.

115V comes from the 'design side', equipment is normally designed to
run on 115V ±10%

120V comes from the 'supply side', under standard conditions electrical
utilities deliver electricity at 120V ±5%

http://i.imgur.com/7tkZ2mm.jpg


230V is a different animal - that's a 3 phase voltage in the
US.

Not necessarily, my Unisaw is 3hp single phase, 60HZ, 230V as are
these and countless others:

SawStop
https://s3.amazonaws.com/vs-lumberjocks.com/lymffnt.jpg

Jet
https://s3.amazonaws.com/vs-lumberjocks.com/nl7owop.jpg

On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 12:39:52 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/7/2017 10:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:21:42 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Q9idnQchSrQoje3FnZ2dnUU7-
:

On 1/6/2017 3:40 PM, John McCoy wrote:

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe").

Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.

AC doesn't have the same losses as DC because it can be
transferred at a higher voltage. If you sent AC from the
generating station to your house at 120V you'd have the
same losses as with DC. The wires on the utility pole
outside your house are 4600V (or something in that range,
different utilities use various distribution voltages).

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

"Safe" is considered to be anything less than 52V. There was once
talk about the automotive industry moving to a 48V battery. The
reason for 48V was that it was just below the "safe" limit. Of course
it never happened because it would have caused more problems than it
solved.



When was that talk? No doubt, there is always something in the air but
I never read or heard of that back when I was in the automotive business.

About 10-15 years ago. The purpose was to save weight in the wiring
and starter. It would have caused all sorts of other grief, though.

I'm sure it was intended to help make vehicles lighter in weight.

Exactly.

On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 14:32:13 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/7/2017 1:39 PM, Leon wrote:

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

"Safe" is considered to be anything less than 52V. There was once
talk about the automotive industry moving to a 48V battery. The
reason for 48V was that it was just below the "safe" limit. Of course
it never happened because it would have caused more problems than it
solved.



When was that talk? No doubt, there is always something in the air but
I never read or heard of that back when I was in the automotive business.

I'm sure it was intended to help make vehicles lighter in weight.



Coming soon, evidently

It's not. It causes the electronics all sorts of grief and will
increase costs significantly.

Not every electrical component will switch to 48-volt. Lights, radios,
electric windows and door locks, for example, would stay 12-volt. And
Delphi’s vision is that vehicles with 48-volt systems would also have a
strong regenerative braking system to capture much of the energy lost
when a vehicle slows down.

Read mo
http://autoweek.com/article/technolo...#ixzz4V6czYRqB

On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 11:33:15 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 1/7/2017 10:21 AM, John McCoy wrote:
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Q9idnQchSrQoje3FnZ2dnUU7-
:

On 1/6/2017 3:40 PM, John McCoy wrote:

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe").

Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.

AC doesn't have the same losses as DC because it can be
transferred at a higher voltage. If you sent AC from the
generating station to your house at 120V you'd have the
same losses as with DC. The wires on the utility pole
outside your house are 4600V (or something in that range,
different utilities use various distribution voltages).

FWIW I was speaking about the time when electricity was just starting to
be used in homes. DC was not practical as there had to be way too many
generation stations. Only the affluent were served in the early days,
they could afford to have/pay for a DC generation station near by.

The wires out side my home on utility poles are maybe 480 volt NOT forty
six thousand. Now the voltage on the hi power transmission lines are
much much higher but they are not near by and they go to transformer
stations where the voltage is dropped and sent to consumers and still
more power pole transformers.. The closest transformer station to me is
8 miles away.

More like eleven thousand (maybe twenty-two thousand).


Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

John

On Sat, 07 Jan 2017 15:44:46 -0600, Markem
wrote:

On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:21:42 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Q9idnQchSrQoje3FnZ2dnUU7-
:

On 1/6/2017 3:40 PM, John McCoy wrote:

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe").

Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.

AC doesn't have the same losses as DC because it can be
transferred at a higher voltage. If you sent AC from the
generating station to your house at 120V you'd have the
same losses as with DC. The wires on the utility pole
outside your house are 4600V (or something in that range,
different utilities use various distribution voltages).

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.


Whether AC or DC is safer was Edison's point when he electrocuted an
elephant with AC. But DC was a dead by then.

Tesla's induction motor put the nail in Edison's DC power coffin.

On 1/7/2017 1:32 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 1/7/2017 1:39 PM, Leon wrote:

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

"Safe" is considered to be anything less than 52V. There was once
talk about the automotive industry moving to a 48V battery. The
reason for 48V was that it was just below the "safe" limit. Of course
it never happened because it would have caused more problems than it
solved.



When was that talk? No doubt, there is always something in the air but
I never read or heard of that back when I was in the automotive business.

I'm sure it was intended to help make vehicles lighter in weight.



Coming soon, evidently


Not every electrical component will switch to 48-volt. Lights, radios,
electric windows and door locks, for example, would stay 12-volt. And
Delphi’s vision is that vehicles with 48-volt systems would also have a
strong regenerative braking system to capture much of the energy lost
when a vehicle slows down.

Read mo
http://autoweek.com/article/technolo...#ixzz4V6czYRqB



Jeez even more reason to do work on you car yourself, especially
electrical. I recall electrical being so touchy in the early 80's that
factory standards called to replace a broken wire, like to a signal
lamp, with the complete socket and wires that came with the socket.
shortening or lengthening the existing broken wire would set off error
codes. I'm clueless how one determined if the new pigtail would shorten
or lengthen the run being observed by the ECM.

On 1/7/2017 5:37 PM, wrote:



When was that talk? No doubt, there is always something in the air but
I never read or heard of that back when I was in the automotive business.

About 10-15 years ago. The purpose was to save weight in the wiring
and starter. It would have caused all sorts of other grief, though.

I'm sure it was intended to help make vehicles lighter in weight.

Exactly.



Here we go, spend millions and pass onto the consumer to save the
consumer a couple of gallons of gasoline every year.

On 1/7/2017 6:26 PM, Spalted Walt wrote:


230V is a different animal - that's a 3 phase voltage in the
US.

Not necessarily, my Unisaw is 3hp single phase, 60HZ, 230V as are
these and countless others:

SawStop
https://s3.amazonaws.com/vs-lumberjocks.com/lymffnt.jpg

Jet
https://s3.amazonaws.com/vs-lumberjocks.com/nl7owop.jpg


Motor rating. You are probably getting 240 across the wires.

On 1/7/2017 5:58 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/7/2017 1:32 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 1/7/2017 1:39 PM, Leon wrote:

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

"Safe" is considered to be anything less than 52V. There was once
talk about the automotive industry moving to a 48V battery. The
reason for 48V was that it was just below the "safe" limit. Of course
it never happened because it would have caused more problems than it
solved.



When was that talk? No doubt, there is always something in the air but
I never read or heard of that back when I was in the automotive
business.

I'm sure it was intended to help make vehicles lighter in weight.



Coming soon, evidently


Not every electrical component will switch to 48-volt. Lights, radios,
electric windows and door locks, for example, would stay 12-volt. And
Delphi’s vision is that vehicles with 48-volt systems would also have a
strong regenerative braking system to capture much of the energy lost
when a vehicle slows down.

Read mo
http://autoweek.com/article/technolo...#ixzz4V6czYRqB




Jeez even more reason to "NOT" do work on your car yourself, especially
electrical.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/7/2017 6:26 PM, Spalted Walt wrote:


230V is a different animal - that's a 3 phase voltage in the
US.

Not necessarily, my Unisaw is 3hp single phase, 60HZ, 230V as are
these and countless others:

SawStop
https://s3.amazonaws.com/vs-lumberjocks.com/lymffnt.jpg

Jet
https://s3.amazonaws.com/vs-lumberjocks.com/nl7owop.jpg


Motor rating.

Obviously.

You are probably getting 240 across the wires.

The point is a designation of 230V being exclusively "a 3 phase
voltage in the US" is wrong.

I remember 110 being standard then moving to 115.
Then 117 and then 120. In some places 125 and 130 is common.

It all is the expanding current / power use on the far end
of the power house. Same copper increase the voltage and more power.

All you have to do is change a tap at the transmitter and downflow is
automatically changed by ratio.

Martin

On 1/6/2017 2:52 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/6/2017 1:59 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 8:16:13 AM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 1/5/2017 8:00 PM, wrote:

I suggested the OP put a sub-panel out in his garage. This can
come off the main feed into the house. I'm not sure what a
220amp breaker is that you mentioned.

I think he means 220V breaker. If the main panel is full, then
space has to be made for the breaker feeding the sub. At least
that's how I read it.


Maybe even he meant 240 volt.

Not being an officially trained electrician, I've never looked into
the 220-230-240 volt or 120-115-110 volt issue. I'm pretty sure
those are all identical and interchangeable, but why are all the
numbers used interchangeably? Why don't we pick one number and use
it? Why does everyone talk about 120 volt outlets in their house,
but the outlet says 115 volts.




IIRC it was 110/220, now it is 120/240 in the USA. Why that changed I
do not know unless it was to be able to save on the gauge of cables and
wires. And most home electrical devices will run on slightly less than
and or slightly higher than the stated voltage.

Oddly I think 440 volt is still normal

400 cycles was invented for Airplanes. Smaller transformers.
28 cycles was invented for ships. It was never implemented. Large
transformers were ok - they were ballast. The 28 cycle was dangerous
to the human body. It entered the body on a body short.

My dad lost the marrow in one of his arms when he was bumped into a 28
hz generator. His arm went out in front to protect his fall and across
two buss bars. Two burn holes and it goes to the center. He was
working on Naval Radar and other Naval power needs.

60 cycle / Hz is skin effect. So it is far safer. Consider 28 with
left arm to right leg - burn a heart out. 60 hz stops the lungs typically.

Martin

On 1/7/2017 10:29 AM, John McCoy wrote:
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:YPydndGe9p2PjuzFnZ2dnUU7-
:

Cars used to have 6 volt systems but switched to 12 volt so that the
cables could be smaller.

Sort of. The real reason it was done was because tetra-ethyl
lead was invented.

(Tetra-ethyl lead allows higher octane gasoline. Higher octane
gasoline allows higher compression engines. Higher compression
engines require more power from the starter motor to get them
started, which requires more current from the battery. During
the 1950's compression ratios went from ~6:1 to ~9:1, which
became a problem for both the battery and the cables. Hence
the switch to 12 volt electrical systems.)

John

Just wait - 56v is coming to auto. Local switchers for voltages.
Martin

On 1/7/2017 10:51 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:21:42 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:Q9idnQchSrQoje3FnZ2dnUU7-
:

On 1/6/2017 3:40 PM, John McCoy wrote:

It's a variety of historical reasons. 110V is what Edison
originally used for his first DC systems (for reasons no
longer understood, that was considered "safe").

Probably considered safe because DC lost voltage quickly the farther
from the generator the lines went. IIRC there had to be a generator
within a few miles of the consumer. AC on the other hand still had
quite a bight many miles away.

AC doesn't have the same losses as DC because it can be
transferred at a higher voltage. If you sent AC from the
generating station to your house at 120V you'd have the
same losses as with DC. The wires on the utility pole
outside your house are 4600V (or something in that range,
different utilities use various distribution voltages).

Today "safe" is considered to be around 12V. I can't think
of any situation where you'd consider 110V to be "safe",
unless you're comparing it to something like 1200V.

"Safe" is considered to be anything less than 52V. There was once
talk about the automotive industry moving to a 48V battery. The
reason for 48V was that it was just below the "safe" limit. Of course
it never happened because it would have caused more problems than it
solved.

On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 8:51:51 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:21:42 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

"Safe" is considered to be anything less than 52V. There was once
talk about the automotive industry moving to a 48V battery. The
reason for 48V was that it was just below the "safe" limit. Of course
it never happened because it would have caused more problems than it
solved.

At full charging rate, the terminals would be well over 52V; what I remember, the
auto buzz was about '42V', which is a 36V battery and allowance for
overvoltage during heavy charging.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a2198/4226979/

Changing standards can be an engineering nightmare, because so many
decisions have already been optimized for 12V. There aren't 'too many
problems' so much as too many decisions to be remade.

On 1/4/2017 12:31 PM, Gramps' shop wrote:

Get an electrician to upgrade me to 200 amp service.

Hey, look! ... a wRec electrical thread to jump in with another opinion.

What -MIKE- originally said ... think SUB-PANEL!

When spending the money to upgrade your home's electrical service to a
more modern 200A, the addition of a sub panel (60A is ideal) to your
shop is the most cost effective time to do it; and would add utility for
both your home, your shop, and you.

Just like you can't have too many clamps, a serious Normite woodworker
requires a sub panel in his shop PERIOD, end of story.

.... it's 240v ...

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
https://www.facebook.com/eWoodShop-206166666122228
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On 1/7/2017 10:09 PM, Martin Eastburn wrote:
Just wait - 56v is coming to auto. Local switchers for voltages.
Martin


Thinking about this more, The hybrids and especially the all electrics
,like Tesla, have much much higher voltage.

On 1/8/2017 2:59 AM, whit3rd wrote:
On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 8:51:51 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jan 2017 16:21:42 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote:

"Safe" is considered to be anything less than 52V. There was once
talk about the automotive industry moving to a 48V battery. The
reason for 48V was that it was just below the "safe" limit. Of course
it never happened because it would have caused more problems than it
solved.

At full charging rate, the terminals would be well over 52V; what I remember, the
auto buzz was about '42V', which is a 36V battery and allowance for
overvoltage during heavy charging.

That is pretty common with any battery. 12 volt batteries, when fully
charged, have about 13.2 volts. In the industry it is called a surface
charge. That extra 1.2 volts dissipates pretty quickly after initial
use. Basically the cells in an automotive type battery can have 2.2
volts with a surface charge.


Now with the new lithium batteries I am clueless as to how much more
voltage they can carry.

On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 5:26:45 PM UTC-6, Spalted Walt wrote:

SawStop
https://s3.amazonaws.com/vs-lumberjocks.com/lymffnt.jpg

Completely unrelated to the electrical discussion in this thread. But I am shocked by the picture of the SawStop motor. Made in Taiwan. On another forum I read people are always talking about how wonderful and professional and heavy duty their SawStop saws are. I would never have guessed they use an Asian motor. Foolishly assumed a US company would use a Marathon, Baldor, Leeson motor. I looked on their website and it says this:

"The combination of safety, unparalleled design and craftsmanship has made SawStop the #1 cabinet saw in North America.

SawStop is a privately owned company based in Tualatin, Oregon, just south of Portland. We are proud to be 100% U.S. owned and engineered."

Apparently US owned and engineered does not mean Made in USA. I guess its just another Asian made saw with a US invented safety device on it. Kind of like the current Jet, General, Delta, Powermatic, Grizzly, etc. saws are all Asian made saws designed to resemble the original American made Unisaw and 66 saws from many decades ago. I'm not too confident in the quality and reliability of Asian products. I don't associate quality and Asia together. Not sure I would trust the SawStop safety feature to even work when I needed it. A safety saw that cuts your fingers off.

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in news:7vadnaMfj97Q6u_FnZ2dnUU7-
:

On 1/7/2017 10:09 PM, Martin Eastburn wrote:
Just wait - 56v is coming to auto. Local switchers for voltages.
Martin


Thinking about this more, The hybrids and especially the all electrics
,like Tesla, have much much higher voltage.


Not only that, but they've got DUAL VOLTAGE! Just wait until the
marketers get ahold of that. (Dear marketers, if you want to use that,
please contact me for terms and conditions.)

I'm wondering when we'll get rid of the awful cigarette lighter power
plug design and go with something better suited for the purpose like
Anderson Powerpoles.

Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!

On 1/8/2017 3:13 PM, wrote:

Apparently US owned and engineered does not mean Made in USA. I guess its just another Asian made saw with a US invented safety device on it. Kind of like the current Jet, General, Delta, Powermatic, Grizzly, etc. saws are all Asian made saws designed to resemble the original American made Unisaw and 66 saws from many decades ago. I'm not too confident in the quality and reliability of Asian products. I don't associate quality and Asia together. Not sure I would trust the SawStop safety feature to even work when I needed it. A safety saw that cuts your fingers off.


That's a broad statement. Yes, some junk comes from China but look
around you. Asia takes in a lot of countries. Who has been making the
best camera equipment, sound equipment and some medical devices and
equipment for the past few dozen years?

I've been in my industry for 46 years. We've bought tooling from the
US, Germany, Austria, Italy. The best is now coming from China at 2/3
the price and half the lead time.

On 1/8/2017 2:13 PM, wrote:
On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 5:26:45 PM UTC-6, Spalted Walt
wrote:

SawStop https://s3.amazonaws.com/vs-lumberjocks.com/lymffnt.jpg

Completely unrelated to the electrical discussion in this thread.
But I am shocked by the picture of the SawStop motor. Made in
Taiwan. On another forum I read people are always talking about how
wonderful and professional and heavy duty their SawStop saws are. I
would never have guessed they use an Asian motor. Foolishly assumed
a US company would use a Marathon, Baldor, Leeson motor. I looked on
their website and it says this:

"The combination of safety, unparalleled design and craftsmanship has
made SawStop the #1 cabinet saw in North America.

SawStop is a privately owned company based in Tualatin, Oregon, just
south of Portland. We are proud to be 100% U.S. owned and
engineered."

Apparently US owned and engineered does not mean Made in USA.

Did you think differently? American automobiles are built elsewhere
too. Some Buicks are built in China and only sold here.


I
guess its just another Asian made saw with a US invented safety
device on it. Kind of like the current Jet, General, Delta,
Powermatic, Grizzly, etc. saws are all Asian made saws designed to
resemble the original American made Unisaw and 66 saws from many
decades ago.

Not like those saws at all. The internals are totally different than
the brands you listed above. It looks nothing like the others saws on
the inside. The trunion slides straight up and down on two large steel
dowels.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

Those gears for tilt and raising the trunion are an inch and a half in
diameter.

chttps://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/8680321455/in/dateposted-public/




I'm not too confident in the quality and reliability of
Asian products. I don't associate quality and Asia together. Not
sure I would trust the SawStop safety feature to even work when I
needed it. A safety saw that cuts your fingers off.


Ignorance is bliss I guess, Honda, Toyota, Lexus, Acura are Asian
products and pretty much at the top of the hill.