| Three phase power IS widely available in the USA, even in many rural | districts. Just about every PUD in my region, (the Pacific | Northwest), has a special tariff for true three-phase service. | | It's just not available everywhere and unlike continental Europe, the | houses in the rural US are often not clustered together in settlements | and crossroads. US farmhouses are more often found in isolated | areas. Most of these isolated areas are economically served by | single-phase distribution feeders.
Suburban distribution also tends to have a lot of single phase running down a street or even a whole neighborhood ... while the next street or neighborhood gets a different phase. I've seen single phase outages take out selected chunks of large suburban areas. I've also seen a case where it was apparently single phase outage on a D-Y substation leaving 2/3 of the suburbs at half voltage.
| You present an interesting discussion for what the "best" system would | be if all the world had the ability to start over and develop "new" | standards from scratch. | | One such way that the "best" system can be described is by its | simplicity and whether it has been successful from a standpoint of | widespread adoption, safety and economy. | | For example, one might criticize the US-North American system of plugs | and sockets as being less rugged than the British or Euro-Continental | counterparts like the "Shuko" system, for example. | | As far as I can determine, the history of the European system of | multiple incompatible plugs and sockets is simply a big mess. I know | they are trying to standardize things, but holy cow, it's enough to | drive you nuts.
They could adopt one of most of them and have a decent system. But it would be a political problem for one of the EU countries to specifically benefit from that choice. But if it had to be one of them, I would prefer the Shuko.
| Looking at it another way, the US NEMA flat, simple sockets are | inexpensive and aesthetically pleasing. They don't need on-off | switches on them for safety like some of the outlets I've seen in the | UK. The plugs mate snuggly with the socket yet there is seldom the | risk of damaging the outlet if you trip over a flex (cord). The plug | will simply come out of the socket if it yanked hard enough. Also, | you get more of outlets per square inch (or cm) of outlet strip, a | distinct advantage of for those of us whose home offices power needs | runneth over.
The switch adds some safety. It would add more in the US than it would in Germany. OTOH, I think a switch should be optional, not mandatory.
I've seen quite a variation in plug tightness in the US, from ones that just fall right out in a breeze, to one where I broke the receptacle trying to get the plug out (and I have one right now that looks like I'm going to have to kill the power and pull the receptacle when I finally decide to remove the night light I put in it that won't come out and won't finish going in all the way). It's a GFCI one in the bathroom.
| Although the Euro pins can theoretically carry more current then the | flat US blades, the blades are generally safe enough, easy to align, | and allow for an aesthetically pleasing, relatively flat outlet that | can be mounted in a horizontal or vertical position. They also are | 100% backwards compatible in that the 3 - prong outlets accept 2 or 3 | prong plugs. The US-NA system allows for enforcement of hot-neutral | polarity but it is compatible with older or (newer) double-insulated | appliances that don't use it.
The Shuko and some others accept the ungrounded plugs, too.
| Similarly, the widespread adoption of cheap (about $5 each) | outlet-substitute GFCI (ground fault circuit interrupters) has greatly | increased the safety of branch circuits in the US. With this system, | customers don't need to spring for an expensive and potentially | dangerous centrally-located RDC that will kill all or most of all the | power to a residence in the event of a simple fault.
Agreed. That's a big hassle.
|>I'd be happen if the USA were to switch to 480/277 for everything. |>But that'd never happen. |>
| No, even in a climate of rising copper prices, going to | higher-and-higher voltages sounds desirable (theoretically, to a | trained electrical-engineer perhaps), but I don't think the USA would | ever switch to 480/277. Why stop there, how about 830/480? (I could | run my vacuum cleaner with bell wire perhaps? :)
I think the maximum to L-N branch circuits should be no more than 277 volts, and no more than 554 volts L-L. But for service drop to a building dry transformer and special hard wired high power loads not common in homes, I could accept a little higher and maybe 832/480 for that.
| My point is that, at least with 120 volts, your life is less dependant | on the failure of one RDC device. You can still hope for the | downstream GFCI or a short circuit to ground to open up the breaker.
Then go with something lower, like 24 volts.
Remember the system I suggested a while back has:
- 288 volts L-L derived from a 144-0-144 split phase secondary on single phase, or from a 166 volt star/wye three phase, with no neutral carried in the branch to always have a single common voltage for all big appliances. The plug would have a metal shroud somewhat like a GR-874 shield, but with 2 rectangular prongs inside, oriented like the US plug but without polarizing. The opening for prongs would have the wider side even wider for the higher current circuit. These would be 16 or 25 amps.
- 24 volts L-N derived from a transformer fed by 288 volts, used for incandescent lighting and casual small appliances like a shaver or drills. The transformer shall be electrostatically shielded. The plug would be a rectangular, larger, longer, form of the kind plug you see on DB-25, DB-15, etc, male connectors, but with 2 prongs, one rectagular, one round. The shroud one be rounded on the end with the round prong. Current max would be 25 amps.
- The next higher voltage would be 499/288 for industrial or special service drops to a building transformer.
- 72 Hz.
| If you must take a shock, 120 V. feels a whole lot less intense than | 240 volts and the difference just might be for you to be able to let | go before your heart kicks off.
60 volts feels even less intense. Where to draw the line is in part a matter of opinion.
I know the difference between 120 volt shock and 277 volt shock. With the latter one, a few choice words got loose.
But I do believe the electrical safety has advanced to the point where even 480/277 is plenty safe to handle, more so than 400/230 was just a decade or so ago. Most things would be connected to 277 L-N if this were used, not 480 L-L.
| Also note that with the US-NA system, bathrooms do not need to use | isolation transformers for shaver outlets, which I understand in | common in the UK. I don't think that the British can claim that their | bathrooms are safer than the bathrooms in the US, especially with all | those electric showers.
But at 24 volts, a shaver would be even safer, isolation or not, GFCI or not, all other things being equal.
| Of all the systems, the French standards scare me the most with TT | earth systems and time-coordinated RDC's that may open up on a high | resistance earth-fault (that is, if your lucky, and the RDC has been | tested recently, and the moon is in the proper phase). What am I | missing here? Why is this a better system? | | I think everyone thinks the system that they grew up with is best. If | your system is better or has more desirable features, I'd like to hear | you state your case.
There are many aspects of the US/North American system I don't like. The 60 Hz is about the only thing I do like about it. I'd rather go on up to 72 Hz.
All in all, though, if just the snap of fingers would instantly replace the entire North American system with 400/230 at 60 Hz and Shuko plugs, I would do it. Still, I like my 288/24 system design best.