> >Sorry, that's me who got restricted to be not free to
> comment this kind
> >of statements (perhaps due to I live in "wrong" i.e.
> "uncivilized" from
> >someone's point of view part of the world).
>

I don't understand what you're saying?!?



> The powerline frequency is only correct in the long term. (hours)
>
> I remember watching our school clocks visibly slow, when the
> local steel mill fired up.
>

That's interesting, but suprising. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but...

Every generator set that contributes to the grid has to be running in
perfect frequency and phase with the grid. Therefore, if immense loading on
the grid would slow down the frequency, it must correspondingly slow down
all of the connected generator sets and in turn, the turbines or engines
that drive them. Which seems odd.

Furthermore, since "anyone" can contribute supply to the grid, and can only
connect their generator set when it is perfectly in phase with the grid,
then how on earth can someone realistically expect to get their generator in
phase with a significantly changing frequency or phase?

Although, I could be getting the wrong end of the stick. Perhaps it's the
frequency of the grid (hence, the inertia of the spinning generators /
turbines / flywheels) that provides the "buffer" of energy needed to cope
with continually fluctuating supply and demand. Perhaps therefore, short
term frequency variance is "designed in".

It would be interesting if someone who knew more about this would comment.

Jon

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu