<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Things staying the same
makes it easier for old blokes like me, hi.<br>
<br>
Likewise here with HV/LV transformers having manual tap changers,
with usually 5 steps. We ran a nominally 11,000 volt system so the
tap changer had taps at 10,500, 10750, 11,000, 11250 and 11,500,
but our adjacent neighbour at the time (amalgamated since 1980)
used a nominal supply of 10,500 so their transformers had that
voltage as the centre (middle) setting. I can't remember how many
steps the auto-tap changers in zone sub-stations had. I should
because I calibrated them often enough, but the passage of time
....... rhubarb, rhubarb.<br>
<br>
When I went out as SIO in 1974 the area where I worked still had a
bucket load of 7/.080 copper mains in the air, and sometimes half
a mile of it to the end consumers. Back then the first indication
the consumer had about voltage issues was usually the TV picture
shrinking during the evening peak. All of that 7/.080 is long gone
and so have valve TVs, solving two problems.<br>
<br>
Ray vk2tv<br>
</font><br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 18/02/16 12:41, Matthew Cook wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAE+2d_3xgnte_c_zH55Y_HW+GAOdO_FWHma=wgzWuNRNUaT8vg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Old habits die hard after 27 years in the
Electrical industry I still think of the nominal mains supply
being 240VAC@50Hz.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I perhaps should have been more accurate with; my original
statement "It's better your iGate sips and not sucks on the
nominal mains supply regardless these days o_O"
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Your nominal mains voltage (and frequency for that
matter) will certainly not be the same as mine for the very
reasons Ray has pointed out. I'm sitting here watching the
nominal mains voltage at our industrial building hovering
around 251.2VAC with a mains frequency of 49.557987Hz (with
better a accuracy better than 1e-9 Hz). I'm sure I'll see
that climb back above 50Hz in the next 15 minutes as the
generators correct the loss over the remainder of the day.
There's certainly been a power demand spike somewhere in the
VK5 network today.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I agree with Ray that nothing really changed when the
nominal mains voltage limits in AS60038 were updated, the
limits were effectively still the same, well within a few
volts of the same write that off to minor percentage
differences.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Most of VK5 is still largely manual tapped transformers
between the HV/LV networks. As a result our mains voltage
can vary like a drunk skunk due to network load. Only made
worse by the high prevalence of solar inverters and wind
generation now invested within the electrical network. Our
energy market can see large cloud masses drifting across our
state before our Bureau of Meteorology.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>YMMV<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Now getting back to the APRS hardware Liz asked us all
about.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>73</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Matthew</div>
<div>VK5ZM</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On 18 February 2016 at 07:31, vk2tv
<span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:vk2tv@exemail.com.au" target="_blank">vk2tv@exemail.com.au</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <font
face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Matthew, all,<br>
</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"><br>
AS60038, was published in Australia on 23rd January
2000 to</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times,
serif"> replace the previous 240V standard. This
requires</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times,
serif">, under normal service<br>
conditions, that the</font><font face="Times New
Roman, Times, serif"> voltage at the point of supply
should not differ from the nominal voltage of
230/400V by more than +10%,-6%. <br>
Voltage drop within a customer's premises may reduce
this by another 5%, the maximum permissible under
AS/NZS 3000, known as the Wiring Rules.<br>
Essential Energy therefore say that the total
variation can be as wide as +10%, -11%. Essential
Energy realises that this voltage range may cause
issues with 240V equipment and they, therefore, have
adopted the range of 230V, +10%, -2%, which aligns
very closely with the old 240V standard. When I was
the Supply Irregularity Officer with a County
Council (not Essential Energy) the standard was
240V, ±6%, or 226V-254V. I know that other states
had different standards at the time, and maybe they
still do.<br>
<br>
The current Essential Energy "standard" of 230V,
+10%, -2%, is within AS60038 requirements, and
returns a voltage range of 253V-225V. The AS60038
percentages return 253V-216V. <br>
<br>
During my time in the position of SIO the nominal HV
supply was 11,000V, and that tap setting was chosen
on distribution transformers. Under unloaded network
conditions the LV would be at near the top allowable
figure of 254V, and network load would reduce that
figure.<br>
<br>
Whilst the "nominal" voltage may be 230V according
to AS60038, in practice, it appears little
(nothing?) has changed since the 240V standard. <br>
<br>
Ray vk2tv<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font><span class="">
<div>On 17/02/16 21:30, Malcolm Larkin wrote:
<pre>We haven't had 240V AC in Australia since the 23rd of January 2000. The day we dropped to 230V</pre>
</div>
</span><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">It
is allowed to be +5% / -10% (241.5 to 207)
Previously when 240, it was ± 10% so 264 to 216<br>
</font><span class=""><br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Sent from my iPhone
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>On 17 Feb 2016, at 18:56, Liz VK2XSE <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:edodd55@gmail.com" target="_blank"><edodd55@gmail.com></a> wrote:
QTR Wed, 17 Feb 2016 09:41:42 +1030 Matthew Cook QTC
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>It's better your iGate sips and not sucks on the 240VAC regardless
these days o_O
73
Matthew
VK5ZM
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>Mine is solar powered - radio and the computer setup
The planned one is for a place where the power is provided by my son's
employer at very good rates ;)
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Liz
VK2XSE
_______________________________________________
OZAPRS mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:OZAPRS@aprs.net.au" target="_blank">OZAPRS@aprs.net.au</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs" target="_blank">http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>_______________________________________________
OZAPRS mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:OZAPRS@aprs.net.au" target="_blank">OZAPRS@aprs.net.au</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs" target="_blank">http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span></div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
OZAPRS mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:OZAPRS@aprs.net.au">OZAPRS@aprs.net.au</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
OZAPRS mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OZAPRS@aprs.net.au">OZAPRS@aprs.net.au</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs">http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>