Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #154911 > unrolled thread

off topic: old house wiring?

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers

Contents

  off topic:  old house wiring? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-09 11:01 -0800
    Re: off topic:  old house wiring? Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-12-09 14:17 -0600
      Re: off topic:  old house wiring? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-12-09 16:18 -0500
        Re: off topic:  old house wiring? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-09 13:38 -0800
          Re: off topic: old house wiring? philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2015-12-09 17:38 -0600
          Re: off topic:  old house wiring? Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-12-10 13:54 -0600
    Re: off topic:  old house wiring? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-12-09 21:43 +0100
      Re: off topic:  old house wiring? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-09 13:19 -0800
        Re: off topic:  old house wiring? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-12 10:38 -0600
          Re: off topic:  old house wiring? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-12-12 16:53 +0000
          Re: off topic:  old house wiring? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-12-12 18:06 +0100
            Re: off topic:  old house wiring? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-12 11:31 -0600
            Re: off topic:  old house wiring? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-12 11:25 -0800
          Re: off topic:  old house wiring? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-12-12 18:41 +0000
            Re: off topic:  old house wiring? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-12 17:14 -0600
              Re: off topic:  old house wiring? Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-12-12 23:31 +0000
              Re: off topic:  old house wiring? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-12 21:42 -0500
      Re: off topic: old house wiring? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-09 16:22 -0500
        Re: off topic: old house wiring? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-09 13:42 -0800
          Re: off topic: old house wiring? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-09 17:11 -0500
          Re: off topic: old house wiring? cmadams@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) - 2015-12-09 19:41 -0600
        Re: off topic: old house wiring? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-12-10 01:54 +0100
          Re: off topic: old house wiring? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-12-09 22:42 -0600
            Re: off topic: old house wiring? Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-12-14 17:28 -0600
              Re: off topic: old house wiring? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-12-15 08:19 +0000
                Re: off topic: old house wiring? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-12-15 09:48 +0100
                Re: off topic: old house wiring? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-16 09:53 -0800
          Re: off topic: old house wiring? "Ranger" <r5432@gmail.com> - 2015-12-10 17:44 +1100
          Re: off topic: old house wiring? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-10 15:23 -0500
            Re: off topic: old house wiring? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-12-10 20:49 +0000
            Re: off topic: old house wiring? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-12-10 23:48 +0000
              Re: off topic: old house wiring? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-10 23:12 -0500
                Re: off topic: old house wiring? mausg@mail.com - 2015-12-11 10:12 +0000
                Re: off topic: old house wiring? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-11 08:31 -0600
                  Re: off topic: old house wiring? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-12-11 14:47 +0000
                    Re: off topic: old house wiring? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-11 09:06 -0600
                      Re: off topic: old house wiring? "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-12-11 15:49 +0000
                        Re: off topic: old house wiring? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-11 09:37 -0800
              Re: off topic: old house wiring? mausg@mail.com - 2015-12-11 10:08 +0000
                Re: off topic: old house wiring? cmadams@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) - 2015-12-11 08:38 -0600
                  Re: off topic: old house wiring? mausg@mail.com - 2015-12-11 16:24 +0000
                Re: off topic: old house wiring? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-12-11 15:17 +0100
                  Re: off topic: old house wiring? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-11 09:30 -0800
                    Re: off topic: old house wiring? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-11 12:43 -0600
                      Re: off topic: old house wiring? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-11 11:09 -0800
                        Re: off topic: old house wiring? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-12-11 22:56 +0000
                      Re: off topic: old house wiring? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-12-11 14:47 -0500
                        Re: off topic: old house wiring? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-12-11 15:13 -0600
        Re: off topic: old house wiring? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-09 22:39 -0600
          Re: off topic: old house wiring? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-09 23:12 -0600
            Re: off topic: old house wiring? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-10 00:59 -0600
          Re: off topic: old house wiring? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-12-10 09:48 +0100
            Re: off topic: old house wiring? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-12-10 12:40 +0000
            Re: off topic: old house wiring? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-10 11:02 -0600
              Re: off topic: old house wiring? Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2015-12-11 22:01 -0600
                Re: off topic: old house wiring? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-12-12 00:48 -0600
                  Re: off topic: old house wiring? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-12-12 11:16 +0100
        Re: off topic: old house wiring? Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-12-14 17:25 -0600
          Re: off topic: old house wiring? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-12-16 09:45 -0800
      Re: off topic:  old house wiring? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-12-10 14:06 +0000
      Re: off topic:  old house wiring? "capek@ieee.org <Peter Capek>" <peter.capek@gmail.com> - 2015-12-12 11:50 -0800
        Re: off topic:  old house wiring? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-12-12 16:56 -0600

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#154934 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

Once upon a time,  <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> said:
>A lot of folks got heat pumps, which do save some energy, but the
>units do seem to require frequent repairs and last only about
>12 years, and are very expensive.  I question if the energy
>saved (over plain resistance heat) justifies the higher maint
>and purchase cost.

It varies by region.  In the southeastern US, just about every home
built has air conditioning (and homes typically have a 200A main service
of split-phase 240V).  It is not that much more expensive to have a heat
pump, so that's the norm.

Some people get gas heat (either where natural gas is available, or
getting propane delivered), and a few use wood-burning stoves and such,
but I would say electric heat is the most common.  In areas where
sub-freezing temperatures are not common (or at least are usually just a
few hours overnight), and you're going to have air conditioning anyway,
heat pumps make sense.

Also, the reliability isn't necessarily as bad as you say.  I've had my
HVAC system for over 13 years and have one issue with the compressor
(had to be replaced, under warranty) and one with the fan blower motor
(new starter capacitor, also under warranty).  The first would probably
have been an issue if I just had air conditioning (although maybe not,
because the compressor would have run less), and the second would have
been an issue with any central ducted heating/cooling system.

-- 
Chris Adams <cmadams@cmadams.net>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154932 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

In article <1829973952.471388425.524289.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
Peter Flass  <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <4bfe5610-cbb3-4dd2-a711-f9af1720f640@googlegroups.com>,
>>  <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>> At the end of WW II, in the late 1940s and early 1950s, a
>>> zillion houses were built for the returning servicemen and
>>> their new families.  Actually, during the war itself a 
>>> fair number of "defense" housing units were built to
>>> house workers at key defense plants.
>>> 
>>> Anyway, based on the other thread, I was wondering 
>>> what kind of shape is their electrical wiring in?
>>> It's been 60-65 years, and insulation can decay
>>> over time.
>>> 
>>> While I suspect most homeowners have upgraded their
>>> main service to more power, I don't think they 
>>> underwent the expense to rewire every room in the
>>> house--they could get rather expensive, especially
>>> for simple houses and modest-income residents.
>>> 
>>> (As mentioned, our family didn't bother upgrading
>>> to 100 amp as it was rather expensive, we could
>>> make do with our one a/c and 60 amp.  but we no 
>>> longer live in that house.)
>>> 
>> I am a little taken aback by these numbers. We have
>> a three-phase 63A intake, which is HUGE in Europe.
>> We do get 63 x 235 x 1.71 ~= 25 kW. by that. Enough
>> for several rapid electric car chargers plus a lot
>> of house.
>> 
>
>100 amps seems to have been the minimum here for many years.  I don't know
>if newer construction supports more, though I wouldn't be surprised.

I boggle at the amount of metal in your distribution network.
63 amps takes 16mm2, 12 in air spans. That is for copper cable, 
al is 1.3 times more. Easily half a kg per meter for the cable.

200A is three times that, and then the pure raw material price
of the copper or aluminium will start to matter, going into 
double digit dollars per meter.

-- mrr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154942 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

On 12/9/2015 6:54 PM, Morten Reistad wrote:
> In article <1829973952.471388425.524289.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Peter Flass  <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>>> In article <4bfe5610-cbb3-4dd2-a711-f9af1720f640@googlegroups.com>,
>>>  <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>> At the end of WW II, in the late 1940s and early 1950s, a
>>>> zillion houses were built for the returning servicemen and
>>>> their new families.  Actually, during the war itself a 
>>>> fair number of "defense" housing units were built to
>>>> house workers at key defense plants.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, based on the other thread, I was wondering 
>>>> what kind of shape is their electrical wiring in?
>>>> It's been 60-65 years, and insulation can decay
>>>> over time.
>>>>
>>>> While I suspect most homeowners have upgraded their
>>>> main service to more power, I don't think they 
>>>> underwent the expense to rewire every room in the
>>>> house--they could get rather expensive, especially
>>>> for simple houses and modest-income residents.
>>>>
>>>> (As mentioned, our family didn't bother upgrading
>>>> to 100 amp as it was rather expensive, we could
>>>> make do with our one a/c and 60 amp.  but we no 
>>>> longer live in that house.)
>>>>
>>> I am a little taken aback by these numbers. We have
>>> a three-phase 63A intake, which is HUGE in Europe.
>>> We do get 63 x 235 x 1.71 ~= 25 kW. by that. Enough
>>> for several rapid electric car chargers plus a lot
>>> of house.
>>>
>>
>> 100 amps seems to have been the minimum here for many years.  I don't know
>> if newer construction supports more, though I wouldn't be surprised.
> 
> I boggle at the amount of metal in your distribution network.
> 63 amps takes 16mm2, 12 in air spans. That is for copper cable, 
> al is 1.3 times more. Easily half a kg per meter for the cable.
> 
> 200A is three times that, and then the pure raw material price
> of the copper or aluminium will start to matter, going into 
> double digit dollars per meter.

Yes, but that's only the service drop to the house, which is probably
mostly an air span, maybe 20m or so. At the panel, it will be split
into 20A circuits. And we're mostly 2-phase, so that could be at 240V
for a stove, water heater, or heating plant. I can't think of any
other use that would require 240V here.

Out at the pole, it's going to be within a hundred feet or so (if not
right at) a transformer, feeding from a 4KV(? or more) line.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155201 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

Dave Garland wrote:

> On 12/9/2015 6:54 PM, Morten Reistad wrote:

>> I boggle at the amount of metal in your distribution network.
>> 63 amps takes 16mm2, 12 in air spans. That is for copper cable,
>> al is 1.3 times more. Easily half a kg per meter for the cable.
>> 
>> 200A is three times that, and then the pure raw material price
>> of the copper or aluminium will start to matter, going into
>> double digit dollars per meter.
> 
> Yes, but that's only the service drop to the house, which is probably
> mostly an air span, maybe 20m or so. At the panel, it will be split
> into 20A circuits. And we're mostly 2-phase, so that could be at 240V
> for a stove, water heater, or heating plant. I can't think of any
> other use that would require 240V here.
> 
> Out at the pole, it's going to be within a hundred feet or so (if not
> right at) a transformer, feeding from a 4KV(? or more) line.
Yes, our 200 A feed is less than 100 m, and we have our own, personal 
transformer on the pole.  Not all houses get their own transformer, but in 
places where the houses are not real close together it makes sense.
Our HV feed is 7200 V.

Jon

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155210 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

On 2015-12-14, Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> wrote:

> Yes, our 200 A feed is less than 100 m, and we have our own, personal 
> transformer on the pole.  Not all houses get their own transformer, but
> in places where the houses are not real close together it makes sense.

I happened to glance up at the power poles recently, and noticed that
while there used be two transformers on our street, one to feed the
houses at each end, they had been replaced by a single large transformer
in the middle of the street that fed everybody.  (Our street is only one
block long.)

> Our HV feed is 7200 V.

I think most of them around here are 14.4kV.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155212 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

In article <n4oif211km6@news7.newsguy.com>,
Charlie Gibbs  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>On 2015-12-14, Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> wrote:
>
>> Yes, our 200 A feed is less than 100 m, and we have our own, personal 
>> transformer on the pole.  Not all houses get their own transformer, but
>> in places where the houses are not real close together it makes sense.
>
>I happened to glance up at the power poles recently, and noticed that
>while there used be two transformers on our street, one to feed the
>houses at each end, they had been replaced by a single large transformer
>in the middle of the street that fed everybody.  (Our street is only one
>block long.)
>
>> Our HV feed is 7200 V.
>
>I think most of them around here are 14.4kV.

Which is 60 and 120 x 120 V respectively.

Around here the local distribution network is 10 kV (25 times
400) or 21kV  (really 20800, 52x400V).

You would want this to be an even multiplier to make the transfomer
design simpler.

A very small pole transformer may have just 8 windings on the 
secondary, thus needing 480 on the primary (US, 7200) or 200 (EUrope, 
10kV). Keeping them pretty even makes the winding easier.

-- mrr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155262 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 3:21:25 AM UTC-5, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> I happened to glance up at the power poles recently, and noticed that
> while there used be two transformers on our street, one to feed the
> houses at each end, they had been replaced by a single large transformer
> in the middle of the street that fed everybody.  (Our street is only one
> block long.)

I found an archive pictures of old our block from 1955 and there was 
a utility pole with a transformer on it.  In google streetview,
the pole is still there, but the transformer on it is obviously 
newer.  Also, the wiring for the block was redone, as was the
telephone cable (once sheathed in lead, now in hard rubber).  In
addition, there is now a cable TV line, too.

When the block was built in 1948, many people still chose to
have a party line to save money.  By the 1960s, almost everyone
upgraded to a private line, and a few families even got
multiple lines.  I wonder if the telco had to upgrade capacity
to meet that transition.  Unfortunately, today probably a lot
of that cable is no longer needed as so many people have 
dumped their landline.  Of course, Verizon has been accused
of letting its landline cables rot away without needed
maintenance.

Also, I wonder if the electric company had to upgrade distribution
capacity from its original installation in 1948.  While window
A/C units were available back then, they were pretty rare until
the early 1960s.  By 1970, almost every house at least one
window unit, and several houses got central a/c.  Add to that
electric typewriters, hair dryers, high end stereos/TV's, so
the summer load probably went up significantly.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154946 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

"Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message 
news:n2vmjc-nme.ln1@sambook.reistad.name...
> In article 
> <1829973952.471388425.524289.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Peter Flass  <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>>> In article <4bfe5610-cbb3-4dd2-a711-f9af1720f640@googlegroups.com>,
>>>  <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>> At the end of WW II, in the late 1940s and early 1950s, a
>>>> zillion houses were built for the returning servicemen and
>>>> their new families.  Actually, during the war itself a
>>>> fair number of "defense" housing units were built to
>>>> house workers at key defense plants.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, based on the other thread, I was wondering
>>>> what kind of shape is their electrical wiring in?
>>>> It's been 60-65 years, and insulation can decay
>>>> over time.
>>>>
>>>> While I suspect most homeowners have upgraded their
>>>> main service to more power, I don't think they
>>>> underwent the expense to rewire every room in the
>>>> house--they could get rather expensive, especially
>>>> for simple houses and modest-income residents.
>>>>
>>>> (As mentioned, our family didn't bother upgrading
>>>> to 100 amp as it was rather expensive, we could
>>>> make do with our one a/c and 60 amp.  but we no
>>>> longer live in that house.)
>>>>
>>> I am a little taken aback by these numbers. We have
>>> a three-phase 63A intake, which is HUGE in Europe.
>>> We do get 63 x 235 x 1.71 ~= 25 kW. by that. Enough
>>> for several rapid electric car chargers plus a lot
>>> of house.
>>>
>>
>>100 amps seems to have been the minimum here for many years.  I don't know
>>if newer construction supports more, though I wouldn't be surprised.

> I boggle at the amount of metal in your distribution network.
> 63 amps takes 16mm2, 12 in air spans. That is for copper cable,
> al is 1.3 times more. Easily half a kg per meter for the cable.

They have a lot more small transformers in their system.
Often called pole pigs.

> 200A is three times that, and then the pure raw material price
> of the copper or aluminium will start to matter, going into
> double digit dollars per meter.
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154985 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
> In article <1829973952.471388425.524289.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Peter Flass  <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>>> In article <4bfe5610-cbb3-4dd2-a711-f9af1720f640@googlegroups.com>,
>>> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>> At the end of WW II, in the late 1940s and early 1950s, a
>>>> zillion houses were built for the returning servicemen and
>>>> their new families.  Actually, during the war itself a 
>>>> fair number of "defense" housing units were built to
>>>> house workers at key defense plants.
>>>> 
>>>> Anyway, based on the other thread, I was wondering 
>>>> what kind of shape is their electrical wiring in?
>>>> It's been 60-65 years, and insulation can decay
>>>> over time.
>>>> 
>>>> While I suspect most homeowners have upgraded their
>>>> main service to more power, I don't think they 
>>>> underwent the expense to rewire every room in the
>>>> house--they could get rather expensive, especially
>>>> for simple houses and modest-income residents.
>>>> 
>>>> (As mentioned, our family didn't bother upgrading
>>>> to 100 amp as it was rather expensive, we could
>>>> make do with our one a/c and 60 amp.  but we no 
>>>> longer live in that house.)
>>>> 
>>> I am a little taken aback by these numbers. We have
>>> a three-phase 63A intake, which is HUGE in Europe.
>>> We do get 63 x 235 x 1.71 ~= 25 kW. by that. Enough
>>> for several rapid electric car chargers plus a lot
>>> of house.
>>> 
>> 
>> 100 amps seems to have been the minimum here for many years.  I don't know
>> if newer construction supports more, though I wouldn't be surprised.
> 
> I boggle at the amount of metal in your distribution network.
> 63 amps takes 16mm2, 12 in air spans. That is for copper cable, 
> al is 1.3 times more. Easily half a kg per meter for the cable.
> 
> 200A is three times that, and then the pure raw material price
> of the copper or aluminium will start to matter, going into 
> double digit dollars per meter.
> 

It matters now.  During the foreclosure crisis thieves were breaking into
vacant houses and stripping out the  copper wire.  Most plumbing now is
PVC, but where it was copper they were taking that too.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154988 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <1829973952.471388425.524289.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> Peter Flass  <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>>>> In article <4bfe5610-cbb3-4dd2-a711-f9af1720f640@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>>> At the end of WW II, in the late 1940s and early 1950s, a
>>>>> zillion houses were built for the returning servicemen and
>>>>> their new families.  Actually, during the war itself a 
>>>>> fair number of "defense" housing units were built to
>>>>> house workers at key defense plants.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Anyway, based on the other thread, I was wondering 
>>>>> what kind of shape is their electrical wiring in?
>>>>> It's been 60-65 years, and insulation can decay
>>>>> over time.
>>>>> 
>>>>> While I suspect most homeowners have upgraded their
>>>>> main service to more power, I don't think they 
>>>>> underwent the expense to rewire every room in the
>>>>> house--they could get rather expensive, especially
>>>>> for simple houses and modest-income residents.
>>>>> 
>>>>> (As mentioned, our family didn't bother upgrading
>>>>> to 100 amp as it was rather expensive, we could
>>>>> make do with our one a/c and 60 amp.  but we no 
>>>>> longer live in that house.)
>>>>> 
>>>> I am a little taken aback by these numbers. We have
>>>> a three-phase 63A intake, which is HUGE in Europe.
>>>> We do get 63 x 235 x 1.71 ~= 25 kW. by that. Enough
>>>> for several rapid electric car chargers plus a lot
>>>> of house.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 100 amps seems to have been the minimum here for many years.  I don't know
>>> if newer construction supports more, though I wouldn't be surprised.
>> 
>> I boggle at the amount of metal in your distribution network.
>> 63 amps takes 16mm2, 12 in air spans. That is for copper cable, 
>> al is 1.3 times more. Easily half a kg per meter for the cable.
>> 
>> 200A is three times that, and then the pure raw material price
>> of the copper or aluminium will start to matter, going into 
>> double digit dollars per meter.

200A service is usually fed using AWG 3/0 (85 mm2) or 4/0 wire.  My 100A
service is fed by AWG 2 AL (90C) (33 mm2) underground.

You're 16mm2 is about AWG5, which is rated for 63/75/85A depending
on the temperature rating (60/75/90 degrees C) of the insulation.

Most wire larger than AWG2 is AL, not Cu around here.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154994 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

On 2015-12-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I boggle at the amount of metal in your distribution network.
>> 63 amps takes 16mm2, 12 in air spans. That is for copper cable, 
>> al is 1.3 times more. Easily half a kg per meter for the cable.
>> 
>> 200A is three times that, and then the pure raw material price
>> of the copper or aluminium will start to matter, going into 
>> double digit dollars per meter.
>
> It matters now.  During the foreclosure crisis thieves were breaking into
> vacant houses and stripping out the  copper wire.  Most plumbing now is
> PVC, but where it was copper they were taking that too.

We had a local vacant house flooded this way; the thieves didn't even
bother shutting the water off before taking the pipes.

I heard of a bit of poetic justice when a copper thief tried to make
off with what turned out to be a ground wire at a local substation.
He earned a Darwin Award.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155007 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

On Thu, 10 Dec 2015, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> On 2015-12-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> I boggle at the amount of metal in your distribution network.
>>> 63 amps takes 16mm2, 12 in air spans. That is for copper cable,
>>> al is 1.3 times more. Easily half a kg per meter for the cable.
>>>
>>> 200A is three times that, and then the pure raw material price
>>> of the copper or aluminium will start to matter, going into
>>> double digit dollars per meter.
>>
>> It matters now.  During the foreclosure crisis thieves were breaking into
>> vacant houses and stripping out the  copper wire.  Most plumbing now is
>> PVC, but where it was copper they were taking that too.
>
> We had a local vacant house flooded this way; the thieves didn't even
> bother shutting the water off before taking the pipes.
>
> I heard of a bit of poetic justice when a copper thief tried to make
> off with what turned out to be a ground wire at a local substation.
> He earned a Darwin Award.
>
One local church lost its roof to such people, and it cost the church more 
to have it replaced than the cost of the stolen copper, since the thieves 
were more concerned about speed and efficiency than being careful.

I remember reading in a surplus column in a ham magazine decades ago that 
the US Navy had a very low frequency transmitter, and they had to keep 
replacing the radials because beachcombers would come upon the wire buried 
in the sand (apparently so long that it wasn't all on government land) and 
cut off pieces of it.


   Michael

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155014 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

On 2015-12-11, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2015, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2015-12-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I boggle at the amount of metal in your distribution network.
>>>> 63 amps takes 16mm2, 12 in air spans. That is for copper cable,
>>>> al is 1.3 times more. Easily half a kg per meter for the cable.
>>>>
>>>> 200A is three times that, and then the pure raw material price
>>>> of the copper or aluminium will start to matter, going into
>>>> double digit dollars per meter.
>>>
>>> It matters now.  During the foreclosure crisis thieves were breaking into
>>> vacant houses and stripping out the  copper wire.  Most plumbing now is
>>> PVC, but where it was copper they were taking that too.
>>
>> We had a local vacant house flooded this way; the thieves didn't even
>> bother shutting the water off before taking the pipes.
>>
>> I heard of a bit of poetic justice when a copper thief tried to make
>> off with what turned out to be a ground wire at a local substation.
>> He earned a Darwin Award.
>>
> One local church lost its roof to such people, and it cost the church more 
> to have it replaced than the cost of the stolen copper, since the thieves 
> were more concerned about speed and efficiency than being careful.
>
> I remember reading in a surplus column in a ham magazine decades ago that 
> the US Navy had a very low frequency transmitter, and they had to keep 
> replacing the radials because beachcombers would come upon the wire buried 
> in the sand (apparently so long that it wasn't all on government land) and 
> cut off pieces of it.
>

I read of this very low frequency transmissions years ago, that time it was
for contacting submerged submarines. The article was  concerned that it was 
intefering with whales communications


-- 
greymaus
 .
  .
...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155023 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

"Michael Black" wrote:

> I remember reading in a surplus column in a ham magazine decades ago that 
> the US Navy had a very low frequency transmitter, and they had to keep 
> replacing the radials because beachcombers would come upon the wire buried 
> in the sand (apparently so long that it wasn't all on government land) and 
> cut off pieces of it.

That reminds me that I *still* don't know what the heck a counterpoise is 
all about. The list of unknowns continues to grow. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155025 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote in message 
news:dd051aF475qU1@mid.individual.net...
> "Michael Black" wrote:
>
>> I remember reading in a surplus column in a ham magazine decades ago that 
>> the US Navy had a very low frequency transmitter, and they had to keep 
>> replacing the radials because beachcombers would come upon the wire 
>> buried in the sand (apparently so long that it wasn't all on government 
>> land) and cut off pieces of it.
>
> That reminds me that I *still* don't know what the heck a counterpoise is 
> all about. The list of unknowns continues to grow.


A counterpoise is a wire, usually connected to earth at one end, and running 
on top of the earth
or quite close to it, so that an end-fed antenna behaves more like a 
balanced antenna so as  to
keep the high voltage part of the standing wave AWAY from the transmitter.

Think about the standard dipole, the high voltages are at the ends, the low 
or zero voltages of the standing
wave are in the middle

Gareth G4SDW

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155026 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

"gareth" wrote:

> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote in message 
> news:dd051aF475qU1@mid.individual.net...
>> "Michael Black" wrote:
>>
>>> I remember reading in a surplus column in a ham magazine decades ago 
>>> that the US Navy had a very low frequency transmitter, and they had to 
>>> keep replacing the radials because beachcombers would come upon the wire 
>>> buried in the sand (apparently so long that it wasn't all on government 
>>> land) and cut off pieces of it.
>>
>> That reminds me that I *still* don't know what the heck a counterpoise is 
>> all about. The list of unknowns continues to grow.
>
>
> A counterpoise is a wire, usually connected to earth at one end, and 
> running on top of the earth
> or quite close to it, so that an end-fed antenna behaves more like a 
> balanced antenna so as  to
> keep the high voltage part of the standing wave AWAY from the transmitter.
>
> Think about the standard dipole, the high voltages are at the ends, the 
> low or zero voltages of the standing
> wave are in the middle

I know how to *build* one, I just don't see the point.  It seems like a 
complicated way to do a simple thing. The ones I read about were radial 
spokes about three feet off the ground,  In the early days of TV, there were 
steel rods, with a copper appearance used in serious (expensive) 
installations.   I don't know if all that money was wasted or just most of 
it.   I imagine a guy standing on a stepladder, outdoors, hammering away at 
that thing. Sounds nasty. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155032 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote in message 
news:dd073fF4n97U1@mid.individual.net...
> "gareth" wrote:
>
>> "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote in message 
>> news:dd051aF475qU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> "Michael Black" wrote:
>>>
>>>> I remember reading in a surplus column in a ham magazine decades ago 
>>>> that the US Navy had a very low frequency transmitter, and they had to 
>>>> keep replacing the radials because beachcombers would come upon the 
>>>> wire buried in the sand (apparently so long that it wasn't all on 
>>>> government land) and cut off pieces of it.
>>>
>>> That reminds me that I *still* don't know what the heck a counterpoise 
>>> is all about. The list of unknowns continues to grow.
>>
>>
>> A counterpoise is a wire, usually connected to earth at one end, and 
>> running on top of the earth
>> or quite close to it, so that an end-fed antenna behaves more like a 
>> balanced antenna so as  to
>> keep the high voltage part of the standing wave AWAY from the 
>> transmitter.
>>
>> Think about the standard dipole, the high voltages are at the ends, the 
>> low or zero voltages of the standing
>> wave are in the middle
>
> I know how to *build* one, I just don't see the point.

High RF voltages around the transmitter get in everywhere, including giving 
the
operators nasty RF shocks.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155041 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

On Friday, December 11, 2015 at 10:49:49 AM UTC-5, gareth wrote:

> High RF voltages around the transmitter get in everywhere, including giving 
> the
> operators nasty RF shocks.

When the Penn Central Metroliner self-propelled electric trains
were built in 1968, they used electronic control for the propulsion.
Unfortunately, the high energy power supply interfered with
the propulsion control circuits, and other control circuits.
It took several years to debug all the systems to get them to work.

While these trains turned out to be very popular with the public,
technically they were a failure.  Eventually Amtrak took the motors
out and made them plain coaches hauled behind a locomotive.


In the U.S., they attempted to deploy a lot of new propolusion
and control technology in the late 1960s onward.  Unfortunately,
they abandoned the past practice of building a small number
of test cars and seeing how they worked in actual service
before committing to an entire fleet.  Many of the new
high tech trains were maintenance nightmares and had 
relatively short service lives.  (Part of this was
government sponsorship, who pushed high tech from
aerospace onto the transit carriers).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155013 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

On 2015-12-10, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2015-12-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> I boggle at the amount of metal in your distribution network.
>>> 63 amps takes 16mm2, 12 in air spans. That is for copper cable, 
>>> al is 1.3 times more. Easily half a kg per meter for the cable.
>>> 
>>> 200A is three times that, and then the pure raw material price
>>> of the copper or aluminium will start to matter, going into 
>>> double digit dollars per meter.
>>
>> It matters now.  During the foreclosure crisis thieves were breaking into
>> vacant houses and stripping out the  copper wire.  Most plumbing now is
>> PVC, but where it was copper they were taking that too.
>
> We had a local vacant house flooded this way; the thieves didn't even
> bother shutting the water off before taking the pipes.
>
> I heard of a bit of poetic justice when a copper thief tried to make
> off with what turned out to be a ground wire at a local substation.
> He earned a Darwin Award.
>

The most daring robbery I have heard of recently was an East European
gang that was stealing mains electricity wires.


-- 
greymaus
 .
  .
...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#155024 — Re: off topic: old house wiring?

Once upon a time,  <mausg@mail.com> said:
>The most daring robbery I have heard of recently was an East European
>gang that was stealing mains electricity wires.

That is (sadly) not uncommon.  There have been cases here where a couple
of Bubbas with a pickup truck and a shotgun have shoot a wire off a
pole, figured out which end is dead, hitch it to their truck, and drive
down the street, pulling more wire down.  When they get all they can
handle, they pile it in the truck and drive off to the scrap metal
dealer.

Occasionally, they don't know how to figure out which end is live, and
there's a Darwin award.

About 15 years ago, $DAYJOB had a fiber optic network link go down in
the middle of the night because the Bubbas didn't know the difference
between power and network cables (and their respective heights on the
poles).  They pulled down a good chunk of it before they figured out
they had the wrong thing, so it took most of a day for the cable company
to repair the section.

-- 
Chris Adams <cmadams@cmadams.net>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers

csiph-web