120V vs 240V
Locked
12
12
 
|
> If the receptacles are wired using the "backstab" holes rather then
> having the wires secured under the screws, that is a possible cause... Good point, Don. For me, it's hard to believe that using "back-stab" receptacle connections is still NEC/UL compliant. At least in recent years, use is limited to only #14 AWG, meaning (thankfully), they cannot be used on a feeder or branch circuit above 15A. If I had a home using those, I would take the time to rewire every receptacle and use the screw terminals instead. For just a bit more cost over the 50-cent contractor-grade receptacles, industrial-grade receptacles can be purchased. These receptacles may look like they have back-stab pin holes but in fact use a clamp together with the side terminal screw to solidly hold the conductor in place. Better wire grip, safer than back-stabs, and install quickly without the need for a J-hook around the screw terminal. Paul, W9AC ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
Paul,
Yes Don Cunningham mentioned that he bought some home receptacles with that type clamp. I have previously only seen them in industrial applications - they make very solid connections. I had to grin a bit at the electrician that wired a new rental house for us (I was not permitted to do my own work because I would not live in it for a year) and I specified #12 wire for all the receptacles, thus preventing the use of the backstab holes. All the receptacles in my home are also #12 wire to keep the voltage drop down, and the screws are well tightened (I had to check the ones the XYL connected) 73, Don W3FPR On 2/16/2011 3:10 PM, Paul Christensen wrote: >> If the receptacles are wired using the "backstab" holes rather then >> having the wires secured under the screws, that is a possible cause... > Good point, Don. For me, it's hard to believe that using "back-stab" > receptacle connections is still NEC/UL compliant. At least in recent years, > use is limited to only #14 AWG, meaning (thankfully), they cannot be used on > a feeder or branch circuit above 15A. If I had a home using those, I would > take the time to rewire every receptacle and use the screw terminals > instead. > > For just a bit more cost over the 50-cent contractor-grade receptacles, > industrial-grade receptacles can be purchased. These receptacles may look > like they have back-stab pin holes but in fact use a clamp together with the > side terminal screw to solidly hold the conductor in place. Better wire > grip, safer than back-stabs, and install quickly without the need for a > J-hook around the screw terminal. > > Paul, W9AC > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
In reply to this post by VTuff59795
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
|
|
|
In reply to this post by P.B. Christensen
Hi,
Agree, those "backstab" holes are a fire waiting to happen. As I renovated each room in my house I always replaced each outlet and switch and wrapped the wires around the screw. I have never used any of those the "industrial grade" receptacles though. AB2TC - Knut
|
|
|
In reply to this post by P.B. Christensen
"If the receptacles are wired using the "backstab" holes rather then having
the wires secured under the screws, that is a possible cause..." Everything in the house was originally wired using the "backstab" holes in the switches and sockets. I've been gradually replacing them over the years. My ham shack is diagonally opposite the breaker-box, with (I estimate) 80-feet of #14 wire running through I don't know how many outlets and switches to get there. The ALS-600 switcher draws right at about 15-amps at 120VAC (the ALS-600 unregulated linear supply draws about 13 amps at 120VAC). As the AC voltage drops, the AC current increases (the switcher keeps the FET drain voltage constant). So key down I was drawing in excess of 15 amps. That's why I put in a 240VAC line. But I've been doing all my KPA500 testing on the 120VAC line and it works great - the KPA500 only draws 9-amps at 120VAC (low enough for my 27 year old house wiring). I'll eventually put it on the 240VAC line though. Phil - AD5X ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
In reply to this post by ab2tc
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Jeff Cochrane - VK4XA
Hi,
I was born in Norway and lived there until emigrating here as a young adult. Norway also has 240V as the only electrical domestic voltage. It's used for for everything from lamps to heavy duty kitchen stoves or clothes dryers. In Norway any work on the electrical wiring in a dwelling had to be done by a certified (and expensive) electrician. Supplies such as wire, receptacles and switches were simply unavailable to the general public. I don't know, but suspect that the same may apply to the UK and Australia. While I agree that the 240V system is technically superior to the 115/230V system used in North America, I do enjoy the ability to do my own work on the wiring. It certainly saves a lot of money. AB2TFC - Knut
|
Re: 120V vs 240V
|
|
In reply to this post by Jeff Cochrane - VK4XA
What's cute? The Philippines, where they use standard US-type
receptacles -- with 240 volts. The receptacles that I looked at were all rated at 10A. I think the US is paying the price of being "early-adopters". And I don't think the US standard will change- the current (no pun intended) system is too well entrenched, and the costs would outway the very real advantages. Note that the Japanese use very similar voltage and receptacles. 73, doug On 16-Feb-11 13:32, Jeff Cochrane - VK4BOF wrote: > Ditto for Australia. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [hidden email] > To: [hidden email] > Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 4:07 AM > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] 120V vs 240V > > > Guys, > you should all emigrate to the UK! > > We have 240V AC as standard ;-) > > 73's > > Vic > G7PYR > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
In reply to this post by AC7AC
Not only were they 6V, but positive ground, if I recall correctly. (My
preference was Triumphs, however, not MGs.) 73, Dave KQ3T On 2/16/2011 2:13 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote: > As does much of Europe (just next door to you :-) > > Us OT's remember when almost all automobiles (including my British MGA) had > 6-volt batteries. As more electronics were added to cars it eventually > forced a shift to 12 VDC to avoid requiring huge cables attached to gigantic > terminals to avoid excessive resistive losses. (A lot of us working in > aerospace wondered why they didn't just jump to the 24VDC system already in > use then by the military and aircraft.) ... ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
On 2/16/2011 2:38 PM, Dave KQ3T wrote about 6V vehicles:
> Not only were they 6V, but positive ground, if I recall > correctly. (My preference was Triumphs, however, not MGs.) IIRC all of the British 6 volters were positive ground. When I needed an isolation block (2 big diodes on a heat sink) to power my K2 from either of two 12V sources, I had to get the British version of a dual-battery charger. Several decades ago I had a 6V (neg ground) VW beetle that I converted to 12V to be able to run my 12V radio equipment (pre-Elecraft). I was able to get all of the necessary components including a real alternator at a VW "custom" parts place, and I replaced everything except the starter motor. The engine turned over very quickly running the 6V motor on 12V! -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
Phil,
I am stretching my memory a bit, but I "think" I remember my 1951 Ford (my first car) had a 6 volt positive ground system as well - even if my memory is "fuzzy", I do know there was one domestic car manufacturer that used a 6 volt positive ground. My 1973 MG Midget was 12 volts negative ground. 73, Don W3FPR On 2/16/2011 6:38 PM, Phil Kane wrote: > On 2/16/2011 2:38 PM, Dave KQ3T wrote about 6V vehicles: > >> Not only were they 6V, but positive ground, if I recall >> correctly. (My preference was Triumphs, however, not MGs.) > IIRC all of the British 6 volters were positive ground. When > I needed an isolation block (2 big diodes on a heat sink) to > power my K2 from either of two 12V sources, I had to get the > British version of a dual-battery charger. > > Several decades ago I had a 6V (neg ground) VW beetle that I > converted to 12V to be able to run my 12V radio equipment > (pre-Elecraft). I was able to get all of the necessary > components including a real alternator at a VW "custom" parts > place, and I replaced everything except the starter motor. The > engine turned over very quickly running the 6V motor on 12V! > > -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane > Elecraft K2/100 s/n 5402 > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
I own a 1929 Hudson Town Sedan. Its OEM electrical system was 6 volt positive ground. Later Hudsons were 12 volt negative ground. From my contact with the old car restoration community, my sense is that in the early years (up to about 1950) the industry was about evenly split between positive and negative ground. They finally standardized on 12 volt negative, more or less in the 60s.
Someone raised the question why the auto industry didn't just go to 24 volts. The answer is battery size. Trucks, boats, and planes are mostly 24 volts, but they mostly have more room "under the hood" than most autos. There were only a couple of standard cell sizes available in lead acid batteries, and scaling up to 24VDC even with the smallest of them required dedicating a lot of space to batteries. Those older vehicle engines were not very compact or efficient, by today's standards. There's room under the hood of my Hudson for a 12 volt battery, but not for twice that volume. Most vehicles that have 24VDC systems get there by strapping a pair of 12 volt batteries in series, rather than by employing a single (and more compact) 24 volt battery. That's the situation with a military surplus vehicle I also own, a 1975 Pinzgauer, which serves as a great platform for my VHF/UHF rover contesting station (which is based on my K3, and thus qualifies this post not OT...;-) ) Lew K6LMP On Feb 16, 2011, at 4:33 PM, Don Wilhelm wrote: > Phil, > > I am stretching my memory a bit, but I "think" I remember my 1951 Ford > (my first car) had a 6 volt positive ground system as well - even if my > memory is "fuzzy", I do know there was one domestic car manufacturer > that used a 6 volt positive ground. > > My 1973 MG Midget was 12 volts negative ground. > > 73, > Don W3FPR Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
On 2/17/2011 12:45 AM, Lew Phelps K6LMP wrote:
> I own a 1929 Hudson Town Sedan. Its OEM electrical system was 6 volt positive ground. Later Hudsons were 12 volt negative ground. From my contact with the old car restoration community, my sense is that in the early years (up to about 1950) the industry was about evenly split between positive and negative ground. They finally standardized on 12 volt negative, more or less in the 60s. I had a 1953 Dodge truck in college at the end of the 50's. 6V, positive ground, fairly beat up, bad brakes. I ran a 40m ARC-5 off of a vibrator power supply with a Gonset "converter" feeding the AM radio with an outboard BFO for CW. The vehicles we had in SE Asia in the US military were mainly 12V by 1964. Our multi-fuel 5-ton trucks were 24V, I think to get the engines started. Stupid question: I was under the impression that the KPA500 was solid state, no-tune. A couple of references on this long "Voltage Thread" have caused me to wonder. Fact would be welcome. 73, Fred K6DGW Auburn CA PS S9DX is S9 on 14011 as I type, up 3 got him for me, they leave tomorrow I think ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Don Cunningham-2
On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 13:34:53 -0600
"Don Cunningham" <[hidden email]> wrote: > I guess I'm getting old. Sorry about the blank message!! Don, I > found something interesting in doing some "remodeling" and replacing > receptacles. The old ones were ivory, and with the new white trim, I > had to please the XYL, hi. Anyway, since my wiring days in the > sixties, I have avoided the "backstab" type receptacle myself, > knowing that spring HAD to wear out over the years. I found some > receptacles at Lowe's, made by Cooper Industries that had the > "backstab" feature. I was going to wrap the wire under the screws as > I always have BUT these new back entry plugs now use the screw on the > side to run a clamping mechanism against the wire, making a really > good connection!! If one looks at the new plugs, you may be > pleasantly surprised to find this new feature (maybe old by now, but > my first experience with it). I did a "test room" with that method, > but will do the rest of the place the old fashioned way, hi. Don and all. Our house, a 1972 vintage four level split, was full of back-stab receptacles. We had one fail in an upstairs bedroom so after the electrician left I went down to the hardware barn and purchased a box or two of of the receptacle that Don Cunningham references. I just finished changing out the last two this last weekend. I did a little test. I wrapped a length of 14/2 Romex around my bench vise in the garage and clamped it down tight. Connected the other stripped ends to one of the new receptacles using the "back-stab+screw" connection and started pulling. As expected the wire stayed put and more importantly didn't let go when there was slack on the cable after the pulling exercise. This house has all new receptacles now. Now all I have to worry about is the 39 year old wiring and the "creative" wiring the builder did when he put this thing up. Lets just say the kitchen has all new Romex in it after a kitchen remodel exposed the fact that the builder ran all of the Romex for the kitchen through the ceiling soffits (considered living space by our code) rather than the walls. -- R. Kevin Stover AC0H ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
I discovered some of the same issues in my 1972 house, plus most of the wiring was copper-clad aluminum which has a nasty tendency to break when replacing a receptacle.
Bob N7XY On Feb 17, 2011, at 5:31 AM, R. Kevin Stover wrote: > On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 13:34:53 -0600 > "Don Cunningham" <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> I guess I'm getting old. Sorry about the blank message!! Don, I >> found something interesting in doing some "remodeling" and replacing >> receptacles. The old ones were ivory, and with the new white trim, I >> had to please the XYL, hi. Anyway, since my wiring days in the >> sixties, I have avoided the "backstab" type receptacle myself, >> knowing that spring HAD to wear out over the years. I found some >> receptacles at Lowe's, made by Cooper Industries that had the >> "backstab" feature. I was going to wrap the wire under the screws as >> I always have BUT these new back entry plugs now use the screw on the >> side to run a clamping mechanism against the wire, making a really >> good connection!! If one looks at the new plugs, you may be >> pleasantly surprised to find this new feature (maybe old by now, but >> my first experience with it). I did a "test room" with that method, >> but will do the rest of the place the old fashioned way, hi. > > Don and all. > > Our house, a 1972 vintage four level split, was full of back-stab > receptacles. We had one fail in an upstairs bedroom so after the > electrician left I went down to the hardware barn and purchased a box > or two of of the receptacle that Don Cunningham references. > > I just finished changing out the last two this last weekend. > > I did a little test. I wrapped a length of 14/2 Romex around my bench > vise in the garage and clamped it down tight. Connected the other > stripped ends to one of the new receptacles using the "back-stab+screw" > connection and started pulling. > > As expected the wire stayed put and more importantly didn't let go when > there was slack on the cable after the pulling exercise. > > This house has all new receptacles now. Now all I have to worry about > is the 39 year old wiring and the "creative" wiring the builder did > when he put this thing up. > > Lets just say the kitchen has all new Romex in it after a kitchen > remodel exposed the fact that the builder ran all of the Romex for the > kitchen through the ceiling soffits (considered living space by our > code) rather than the walls. > > -- > R. Kevin Stover > AC0H > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
Re: 120V vs 240V [END of Thread]
|
Administrator
|
Let's end the 120V vs 240V thread for now. Its getting way too long ;-)
73, Eric Elecraft list moderator ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
In reply to this post by K6LMP
A story I heard which I wish I could confirm is that a number of
states outlawed 24 volt systems in autos after people bought surplus aircraft landing lights which were super bright but also wide beam. They blinded oncoming drivers. David K0LUM At 4:45 PM -0800 2/16/11, Lew Phelps K6LMP wrote: > >Someone raised the question why the auto industry didn't just go to >24 volts. The answer is battery size. Trucks, boats, and planes >are mostly 24 volts, but they mostly have more room "under the hood" >than most autos. There were only a couple of standard cell sizes >available in lead acid batteries, and scaling up to 24VDC even with >the smallest of them required dedicating a lot of space to >batteries. Those older vehicle engines were not very compact or >efficient, by today's standards. There's room under the hood of my >Hudson for a 12 volt battery, but not for twice that volume. Most >vehicles that have 24VDC systems get there by strapping a pair of 12 >volt batteries in series, rather than by employing a single (and >more compact) 24 volt battery. That's the situation with a military >surplus vehicle I also own, a 1975 Pinzgauer, which serves as a >great platform for my VHF/UHF rover contesting station (which is >based on my K3, and thus qualifies this post not OT...;-) ) > >Lew K6LMP Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
In reply to this post by Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ
Thanks Eric, My question about 120 vs. 240 was asked and answered almost a month ago. I was surprised to see it resurrected and the number of replies lately to my email (about cars, houses etc.) was astounding. Keep up the good work herding this amazing group. 73, Joe W8JH K3 1713 From: Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft [via Elecraft] [mailto:[hidden email]] Let's end the 120V vs 240V thread for now. Its getting way too long ;-) If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/120V-vs-240V-tp5964845p6037111.html To unsubscribe from 120V vs 240V, click here.
73,
Joe, W8JH K3s, KPA 500, KAT 500 and KX3 happy user. |
«
Return to [QRO]
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |