the US was originally wired this way so it's difficult to change now. On the other hand, if you stick your finger accidently into a socket at 110v, it will give you a jolt but it won't kill you and you'll let go. 220V causes your muscles to tighten which causes higher fatality rates.
Originally posted by: BrownTown
there is nothing subjective about the fact that the amount of energy wasted by 220V is half that of 110V, thats is just true. However the US was origionally wired at 110 and its alot easier to just keep it that way so that everything is the same and you don't mess up and fry your stuff. Practically speaking it really isn't that big of a deal just means that you are wasting a little bit mroe power than you would at 220V. But I guess on the other hand it don't hurt as much if you stick you finger in the plug.
EDIT: oh yeah, and of course lets not forget that you get 120-240 so in the US the big appliances like the dryer and AC run on 240, not 120.
Actually, from what I understand, 110V is enough voltage that you "stick" to whatever's shocking you, and are exposed for longer, causing serious damage or death. With 220V, the charge is enough to throw you back with a bit of force, and thus causing less damage as you only get a momentary shock.
At least this is what I was told. Could be total hogwash.
EarthwormJim
Diamond Member
- Oct 15, 2003
- 3,239
- 0
- 76
Originally posted by: astrosfan90
Originally posted by: BrownTown
there is nothing subjective about the fact that the amount of energy wasted by 220V is half that of 110V, thats is just true. However the US was origionally wired at 110 and its alot easier to just keep it that way so that everything is the same and you don't mess up and fry your stuff. Practically speaking it really isn't that big of a deal just means that you are wasting a little bit mroe power than you would at 220V. But I guess on the other hand it don't hurt as much if you stick you finger in the plug
EDIT: oh yeah, and of course lets not forget that you get 120-240 so in the US the big appliances like the dryer and AC run on 240, not 120.
Actually, from what I understand, 110V is enough voltage that you "stick" to whatever's shocking you, and are exposed for longer, causing serious damage or death. With 220V, the charge is enough to throw you back with a bit of force, and thus causing less damage as you only get a momentary shock.
At least this is what I was told. Could be total hogwash.
You only stick if you actually are able to grab onto the object from your hand muscles contracting. If you jam you're finger into an outlet, you won't magically stick.
I think 120V can cause more problems, since the voltage isn't enough to throw you. From what I've heard, 440V can throw you a good distance and make you crap your pants. They should do a test on Jackass and see what happens.
GuitarDaddy
Lifer
- Nov 9, 2004
- 11,465
- 1
- 0
In most modern US houses power is supplied to the main breaker panel as two legs of 110v, 220v is achieved by bridging across both legs. Thats how US houses have access to both 110v and 220v.
Are the 220v countries supplied as one leg of 220v?, or is it supplied the same way as the US but all breakers bridge the two legs?
Are the 220v countries supplied as one leg of 220v?, or is it supplied the same way as the US but all breakers bridge the two legs?
So
Lifer
- Jul 2, 2001
- 25,921
- 14
- 81
Originally posted by: MichaelD
Really?
Americans do have 110 nominal and 240.
1. 110 is much less dangerous. I've been shocked by 110 before and it sucked, but it wasn't death. 220 is death, period.
2. for most applications, there isn't enough line resistance in the house to make the higher current worth it.
3. As said, the world is more like 60/40 on voltages (and you talk about ignorant amercians)
4. I wonder why you guys foolishly use needlessly high voltages and put yourself at risk.
MichaelD, your PSU is a switch mode PSU, there isn't much current diff between the two, except at the very input. It's all in your head.
So
Lifer
- Jul 2, 2001
- 25,921
- 14
- 81
Urban legend. When people get injured by shocks, they lose muscle control and clamp down. So 240 volts is the same in that respect, since you are just as liable to swamp the signals from your brain to let go. And then it's more deadly, quicker, so 240 is much more dangerous.
Teh Wiki:
That was the first power line built for an actual purpose, and was in Germany.
The article does not specify that any one country developed a 'power grid' before another.
Not that I think it matters where it was developed... I answer only because, given his usual posts, I think Spidey was probably not actually being sarcastic.
Wiki is hardly a source for reliable information. We invented power and electricity. in addition to most of the modern world. Benjamin Franklin.
So
Lifer
- Jul 2, 2001
- 25,921
- 14
- 81
Wikipedia is probably correct about the specific case of the first three phase high voltage AC power transmission application, but:
from http://www.eei.org/industry_issues/indu...rview_and_statistics/history/index.htm
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternating_current#History
No. In most countries that use 220-240 V, home electricity is supplied as a single phase. This means there's only a single voltage available in a home.
Industrial customers can get a 3 phase supply - again, while the US has several different ways of delivering 3 phase - wye, grounded delta, centre-tap grounded delta, etc. (giving a frighteningly long list of possible voltages/configs). In other coutries, you just get wye. This means you can use a single phase and get 230 V, or bridge 2 phases to get 400 V.
Delivering power at higher voltage has a number of advantages - it improves efficiency of power transmission (so lower costs), it provides better voltage regulation (less voltage drop) and allows transformers to be sited further away from customers (Instead of having lots of inefficient small pole mounted transformers - you can have 1 big high-efficiency transformer supplying a 1000 yard radius).
It also allows better flexibility in circuit sizing - in the UK, a standard home circuit has 7200 W of capacity. Problems of circuits overloading because too many PCs or appliances are plugged into it are essentially unheard of.
Some devices are more efficient when run on higher voltage - PC PSUs are a classic example. Running at 110 V instead of 230 can carry a 2-3% efficiency penalty (especially if you have a PFC PSU) - you use less energy, and generate less heat at the higher voltage.
As for safety - yes, 230 V is more dangerous. However, 230 V exposure isn't always fatal (I've had several such shocks) - and 110 V exposure can be fatal. Perhaps more important than the voltage are the circumstances in which the shock occurs. In the case of accidental (brushing) contact with a live wire, you are unlikely to receive a fatal shock - not enough current will flow. The most common situation of a hot-ground shock is easily protected against with an RCD (ELCB) - this is a code requirement in many countries. Dangerous shocks are most likely to occur where water is involved, as the currents that can flow are much, much higher. In the case of water, the 230/110 debate becomes moot as either voltage can result in currents 3-4x greater than needed to deliver a fatal shock.
The number of accidental electrocutions in the UK (230 V) is 0.4 / million / year - in the US, where it is primarily 110 V the rate is 0.63 / million / year.
You see, I _knew_ you were serious...
Franklin's kite experiment is either an exaggeration or simply made up. Check it out.
Purely in the field of electricity, Faraday (British) and Tesla (Austrian) dwarf Franklin's contribution!
And most of the modern world? Give me a break! How about the entire industrial age? The internal combustion engine, the steam engine, the electric engine, the jet engine, steel manufacturing, steel ships and planes, a million other things - British my friend.
So
Lifer
- Jul 2, 2001
- 25,921
- 14
- 81
Tesla was American/Canadian when he made his major practical breakthroughs. Faraday deserves credit, but the US did do a huge chunk of the work in making modern power systems possible. Many scholars (especially european scientists -- IDK about British ones.) derided an electrical power system as unworkably complex.
He was born in Austria. You might as well claim Einstein was American.
Yea, I'm not arguing with that, I'm arguing with Spidey's 'most of the modern world' thing.
No. Why do you think they step voltages up to insane levels when carrying power across transmission lines? It's because resistance across a wire is i^2 * R. You want to minimize the current used so the power wasted is at a minimum.
Using 220V, we'll waste 1/4 of the power as we do at 110 (theoretically).
So
Lifer
- Jul 2, 2001
- 25,921
- 14
- 81
I guess I shouldn't say Tesla was "American" but that he was an American when he made his breakthroughs. That he was a citizen of the US, he was living in America and working for an American company during that period, and that he lived out his life here.
In many "Americans" world view, anyone who freely immigrates here, gets citizenship and remains here is as American as someone born here. Einstein was an American too, but he made his biggest discoveries when he was still a German.
But tesla was a serbian From croatia, that was controlled by austria-hungary empire.
He doesn't get nearly enough Credit for what he has done. Its too bad.
Mr. AC himself
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
Facebook
Twitter