Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!dimacs.rutgers.edu!mips!samsung!emory!ox.com!fmsrl7!art-sy!news
From: chap@art-sy.detroit.mi.us (j chapman flack)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics
Subject: Re: polarity
Message-ID: <9105031453.aa04286@art-sy.detroit.mi.us>
Date: 3 May 91 18:53:56 GMT
References: <11864@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> <1991Apr23.152315.22825@news.larc.nasa.gov> <1991Apr24.111307.2296@dcs.simpact.com> <2226@gold.gvg.tek.com> <1991Apr26.035007.2804716@locus.com>
Sender: chap@art-sy.detroit.mi.us (j chapman flack)
Reply-To: chap@art-sy.detroit.mi.us (j chapman flack)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Appropriate Roles for Technology
Lines: 18

In article <1991Apr26.035007.2804716@locus.com> dana@locus.com (Dana H. Myers) writes:
>
>  I know I'm the one who claimed that power is dissipated in capacitors a
>while back (ugh!), but I do not believe 120VRMS is 340V p-p. It is 170V p-p.

According to a peak-reading meter I just stuck in the wall outlet (here in
the usa), I have a nice symmetrical -163.4  -  163.4, or 326.8 V p-p.

Check it:  120 VRMS  *  sqrt(2)  ==>  170 V peak  (assumes a sinusoidal wave)
           170 V peak * 2        ==>  340 V peak-to-peak

So my line voltage is a mite low in the middle of the afternoon, which isn't
too surprising....
-- 
Chap Flack                         Their tanks will rust.  Our songs will last.
chap@art-sy.detroit.mi.us                                   -Mikos Theodorakis

Nothing I say represents Appropriate Roles for Technology unless I say it does.