Re:The origins of 60-Hz as a power frequency
by frrlpp on Friday February 07, 2025 @07:52PM
(#42979256)
DC high voltage (200v) is very dangerous and pernicious, and mores difficult to switch on and off because of arcs.
Re:The origins of 60-Hz as a power frequency
by flyinghamster on Friday February 07, 2025 @08:25PM
(#42979464)
Very old US light switches often had both AC and DC current ratings, and the DC rating was noticeably lower due to the arcing problem, even with fast-acting snap action.
My grandfather worked in a Chicago office building that had 110V DC service even into the 1960s. He had to be careful to buy fans, radios, etc. that could run on DC.
Re:The origins of 60-Hz as a power frequency
by stephen_g on Saturday February 08, 2025 @07:59AM
(#42982677)
Yes, it’s more dangerous, but technically “high voltage” doesn’t start until 1500 V DC (and 1000 V RMS for AC) by most standards (e.g. IEC 60038)
Re:The origins of 60-Hz as a power frequency
by Dylan16807 on Friday February 07, 2025 @07:22PM
(#42979064)
Do we really lose much to phase shift? Increasing apparent load only causes a tiny fraction of that much waste, and local compensation isn't very expensive.
DC or a significant frequency boost would be good inside a house for lights and electronic items. Not so great for distribution.
I'm not convinced multiple voltages would be a net benefit outside of the dedicated runs we already do for big appliances.
It would also make sense to have a high voltage and low voltage nets in houses. Low voltage for lighting and other low power equipment. High voltage for power hungry equipment. For example 48V and 480V.