Jump to content

Talk:Electric power quality

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

nominal voltage

[edit]

What is an example of nominal voltage? Does this mean the voltage nominated appropriate to the situation? Sholto Maud 12:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's nominal as in named. Examples are 120, 240, 480, 600 and 115, 230, 460, 575. They are voltages that are the intended values for various equipment, as shown on the equipment's label or nameplate for instance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronpeters (talk • contribs) 02:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Wikipedia is telling me that adding the following case studies is against their spam regulation. These case studies offer a real-life example of how power quality issues can be resolved. I'm interested to hear other's comments.

216.151.19.9 (talk) 19:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting a discussion on this. The relevant policies/guidelines are WP:EL, WP:SPAM, and WP:NOT#LINK. --Ronz (talk) 19:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merge

[edit]

Power quality compression algorithm, once you remove the "et als" and boil it down to its actual content, doesn't say much about its subject and could usefully be merged here; it hardly seems a topic for a free-standing article in a general-purpose encyclopedia. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:38, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

recent edits (2016)

[edit]

I rewrote the first paragraph of the article because the first sentence was both grammatically unclear and used a technical quote. Clearer explanations and simplified concepts are more appropriate for an introduction to the topic. I split the introduction into another category called Power Quality Deviations to make navigating easier, and reorganized the bullet points into sub sections for clarity- mimicking the concept of power quality as a function of voltage, frequency and waveform. Added an explanation for harmonics to better illustrate how waveform effects power quality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maiacossey (talk • contribs) 08:04, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Electric power quality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:38, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Active and reactive power, or, phase differences.

[edit]

I hesitate to adjust the lead paragraph, but there is no mention of the desire that a good power supply works with only a small difference between the phase of the current and voltage in the power it supplies to its load. In AC systems this is so important that causes of discrepancy are sought out and suppressed! In a transmission line the power delivered is the product of the RMS voltages and currents in the usual manner, times the cosine of the phase difference. If this difference is small (less than ten degrees, say) as it usually is then Watts = V*I, but, to maintain the capacity of a transmission line when there is a larger phase difference, the voltage cannot be raised (because the insulation might break down) so the current must be raised. But the resistive loss is given by the resistance times the square of the current and so the loss soon becomes too great, if not damaging to the transmission line - though power lines in New Zealand have been briefly overloaded so as to melt off ice... Generators thus supply not just active power but also "reactive power" (or consume: sign conventions!) and the modern appearance of electronic waveform generation (especially supplied by large DC batteries) not only supplies voltage support (and frequency stabilisation) when a system's normal generation is being overloaded and the voltage and frequency is falling, but also can supply reactive power. Or the reverse if the system load falls faster than normal generators can back off. NickyMcLean (talk) 10:16, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is covered under power factor and presents rather distinct AC-specific problem. The topic of “electric power quality” is not ohmic losses of power in transmission lines. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:03, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Should this article also cover DC power quality?

[edit]

There's a fair amount of information about analogous quality attributes of DC power systems (e.g. voltage sag, ripple), especially in the context of computer power supplies. I'm not sure whether the term "power quality" is ever used to describe AC though. Should it be added here? If not, we should still link to where it's covered somewhere else. 2620:15C:7C:200:8593:DB48:3FD2:2404 (talk) 23:42, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Electric_power_quality&oldid=1194736986"