To return to where this started_
Dufas said "Another common high voltage power feed in the U.S. is 13,800
volts." I really think everyone knew exactly what he was talking about.
If he had said "Another common medium voltage power feed in the U.S. is
13,800 volts" what he said would have been less intelligible.
gfretwell might have replied something like "You might be interested
that the utility guys call it medium voltage."
Instead Evan said 'it is medium voltage for people who know what they
are talking about.' People who know what they are talking about
apparently doesn't include Dufas.
Also 'it is only be considered "high voltage" to someone who is only
familiar with "low voltages" less than 600 volts" '. (Which Dufas has
demonstrated is untrue - electricians also work on "high voltage" 13.8kV
It is the classical Evan - pompous and condescending - that particularly
Well shucks, Evan doesn't bother me but what we both wrote was true
depending on the context. To me, any voltage of a level that would
allow it to jump from a conductor to me any distance through air of
a normal humidity is darn well "high voltage". An electrical engineer
I knew was killed some years ago when a door locking rod in the cabinet
door of a piece of 4,160 volt switch gear slipped out of its retainer
and fell into the energized buss as he opened the door, it was quite
an explosion that took out a wonderful guy and family man. Very high
current and high voltage power is nothing to relax and be comfortable
around. Too many good people have made that horrible mistake. o_O
On 2/29/2012 10:39 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
As I wrote, it depends on who is using the term.
For this newsgroup I don't see correcting Dufas being at all useful,
particularly when Evan said Dufas did not know what he was "talking
about". Perhaps in an electrical engineering forum....
Somewhere like here I would likely use transmission, distribution, and
Totally irrelevant to what dennis asked.
In the urban area here the primary return is by the continuous secondary
neutral, which attaches to the primary neutral at the feed point. It is
multi-grounded, but the wire is lower resistance than the earth (or at
least lower resistance than the earth connection). In rural areas I
don't remember anywhere there wasn't another wire on the pole in
addition to 1 or 3 distribution wires. Transmission wires don't
necessarily have a neutral because it can be created at a substation.
There may be solely earth return somewhere in the state, but I don't
remember seeing it.
"Continuous Secondary Neutral" if by that you mean it is
connected to all service points fed by each separate
transformer, then ok, if you mean that all the secondary
neutrals on all transformers are connected in common,
not where I am from...
You can clearly see on some streets which used to
be fed from only one transformer that now have more
than one now feeding the houses, that the original
wires have been cut, drawn back and taped up to
break the circuit in the areas fed by the new
As far as what I said not applying to the OP's
question, it does, the transformer breaking down
power from intermediate distribution voltages
down to residential 240 volt service is providing
single phase power with a center tapped
secondary winding providing the neutral which
allows for 120 volt loads...
The distribution FPL uses is wye primary feeding the regular center
tapped secondary. The neutral is common with all of the transformers
and the neutrals on the secondary which is a bus feeding several
This is a place where they cut into the bus and set an additional
transformer. Notice the insulators in the secondary bus to the down
stream houses. The neutral was not cut
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.