Introduce 415/240 V as a standardized voltage

Flicker Index said:
415Y/240 is a silly thing to implement today. This was/is a system in-use in England/Great Britain/United Kingdom places and rest of Europe 380Y/220 before they decide to harmonize to 400Y/230 and adjusting tolerances so it was formalized to 230.
Click to expand...
It is much simpler than all these units that are used in USA.
 
We've got a pretty good idea that at lower voltages (call it under 500), DC is not that good for distribution, so where do you put the rectifiers? If they're at the service entrance, it drops in another conversion right there. What voltage would be distributed through the building? Whatever it is, it's probably wrong for many of the devices using it, so more conversions.

(Taking the average desktop computer, it probably has +/- 12v, +5, +3.3, and something around +1.3. The supply could take in DC, but I expect the electronics are easier with AC and the loss is low.)

BTW, I'm only half way down my coffee at the moment :D .
 
tortuga said:
I would not have both 208Y/120 and 220Y/127 I would just change it, do a coordinated change to all the North American standards at the same time NEC and ANSI C84, CSA, NOM like they did when it was 190Y/110 and we bumped it to 200Y/115.

No need to replace any existing equipment, anything rated for 208 most likely can work on 240.
The problem with bunping 120 to 127 would be 120V rated incandescent lighting and I am not sure what else?
Perhaps old tube tube equipment?
The benefits would be reduced voltage drop, instant energy savings,
and utilities that have always hated delta secondaries can phase out some 240 delta services with a wye 220.

You can still find 200Y/115 and even old 190Y/110 labeled equipment out there, its not like all the 208 stuff would need to be replaced, I think there was a thread a few years back showing a transformer in a theater building that was labeled 190Y/110
Click to expand...

Many newer screw-in low cost LED lamps are made from a long string of LED elements wired in series with an active electronic rheostat regulator that works exactly the same way as old school linear regulator like 7812 and LM317. AC power goes through a rectifier and an optional smoothing capacitors, an electronic rheostat and directly into LED strings.

The Energy Star rating on them are done at rated voltage, fed from a laboratory power supply. The rheostat is designed to maintain constant current through LED elements from normal forward voltage variation within LEDs as well as line voltage variation.
If 127 is applied in place of 120, power consumption will go up and all of the excess is flared off in the ballast. This will lead to increased temperature and cause the bulb to fail early. Some ballast controller will reduce current by dimming the lamp to prevent burning out but it will reduce the output.

Linear resistive ballasted LEDs use a string of LEDs to so the Vf is a tad below the rectified line voltage. Vf changes slightly with temperature and there's variation from one LED element to another. So the electronic rheostat trims off the slight difference to maintain a constant current.

Switch-mode LED ballasts can handle broader range input voltage but they're costlier, however they're often very loud on the RF spectrum and are prone to causing RFI. The reason garage door opener often stops working with LED bulbs is from the interference created by the switch mode LED ballast.
 
Birken Vogt said:
Why do you think it is silly?
Click to expand...
480Y/277 is already in wide use.
Great England of United Britain phased out their 415Y/240v so that they can be harmonious with 400Y/230 EU standard. Why newly implement something that's being phased out?

European 230v is more dangerous than American 240v. It's nearly impossible to get a 240v shock unless it's a corner ground delta. European 230v is more like 277v US, because it's 240v to earth.
 
Last edited:
Flicker Index said:
480Y/277 is already in wide use.
Great England of United Britain phased out their 415Y/240v so that they can be harmonious with 400Y/230 EU standard. Why newly implement something that's being phased out?
Click to expand...
Actually, although 400/230V is the EU system is now in use for all of Europe, the tolerance is a bit wider including UK.
 
Birken Vogt said:
I made the same post a while ago.

One other thing for those out west. In the rest of the world instead of having bare 12,000 volt wires down every country lane, they have one big central transformer and then distribute fairly long distances at 230/400. So less risk of fires from branches and such, low voltage.

Of course most existing global electronics and lighting can already run on 240.

Plus 240 volt kettles for the kitchen are like 3500 watts at 240, get your coffee and tea faster.
Click to expand...
How long are you talking?

Voltage drop at 480 volts is still a pretty common problem and needs to have larger conductors once you get over say 400 or 500 feet than if you have lesser distance. I'm planning an install right now for irrigation loads at nearly 3000 feet from the source @ 480 volts. Will be using 250 KCMIL aluminum, for something that only needs 4 AWG copper if the run were say no more than 100 feet.
 
Birken Vogt said:
That would only be one more standard added to the mix

120/208
127/220
120/240
240/416
277/480
347/600

Of course many of us are already running pretty close to 127/220 because the poco is always inching higher.
Click to expand...
124/215 is pretty common here, when unloaded. It is still considered to be 120/208 nominal though.
 
Flicker Index said:
European 230v is more dangerous than American 240v. It's nearly impossible to get a 240v shock unless it's a corner ground delta. European 230v is more like 277v US, because it's 240v to earth.
Click to expand...

That's mixing voltage with volts-to-ground with danger. It's disingenuous to compare European 400Y230 with US 120/240 (or 208Y120, don't forget that) from a "danger" perspective without actually saying that you're comparing the 230v to ground vs 120v to ground.
 
Flicker Index said:
480Y/277 is already in wide use.
Great England of United Britain phased out their 415Y/240v so that they can be harmonious with 400Y/230 EU standard. Why newly implement something that's being phased out?
Click to expand...

The reason for 240/416 is that in the USA, 240 volt equipment is common, while 277 volt is less common and gets more exotic. Your existing computer and shaver can run on 240 but 277 would be too high.

It could just as easily be 230/400 if you prefer. US equipment would not care.
 
Besoeker3 said:
Because there one, not many. And is 400/230V, not 416/240V anyway.
Click to expand...
Yes, sure, but it is what it is. 120 volts is here to stay in North America. It isn't going away, and therefore its combinations and three phase configurations are too. So wouldn't it be simpler if you stopped wasting bandwidth on this dead horse you love to beat? That's pretty simple.
 
CoolWill said:
Yes, sure, but it is what it is. 120 volts is here to stay in North America. It isn't going away, and therefore its combinations and three phase configurations are too. So wouldn't it be simpler if you stopped wasting bandwidth on this dead horse you love to beat? That's pretty simple.
Click to expand...
Band with? I think you mean various different voltages.
 
CoolWill said:
Yes, sure, but it is what it is. 120 volts is here to stay in North America. It isn't going away, and therefore its combinations and three phase configurations are too. So wouldn't it be simpler if you stopped wasting bandwidth on this dead horse you love to beat? That's pretty simple.
Click to expand...
Band with?? You mean your different voyages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top