This is the ideal plug, you may not like it, but this is what

>>1233910
I always assumed your ideal plug is the one you have in your anus all day.

>>1233910
Expect its fuckhuge and uses 5x more material than necessary to power 95% of home appliances.

>Inefficient use of materials
>ideal
Okay anon

File: plug-foot-509716[1].jpg (30KB, 620x413px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 620x413px

>>1233910
>ideal
Bong must be the only country where 'plugfoot' is a recognized national disease.

>>1233951
What the fuck

>>1233951
Brits have weird code requirements. No way murican inspectors would let you put an outlet that close to flammable carpets.

>>1233971
>>1233956
he stepped on the plug leads like a lego, you brainlets.

Nobody has ever done that. Ever.

>>1233951
Fake as fuck
stepped on plenty of plugs and they never even bruised

you cant even plug it upside down


gaaaaay

>>1234391
>cut the ground pin
>can now plug it upside down

>>1233910
too big

>>1234396
>t. manlet who can't handle big plugs

>>1233910
Peak plug performance is found in industrial twistlock sealed plugs, the high end variety, and Amphenol and Cannon connectors.

Consumershit is garbage.

>>1234402
twistlock is a horrible idea for any space people walk through and cannon doesn't make much sense for 2 or 3 pins carrying that much

>>1233915
>>1233927
Retarded argument, you would rather have a house full of things you can only plug into certain outlets? Plug costs less than £1 for rewireable, less for moulded. Poor much?
>>1233971
Megan's
Burgers weird voltage and local transformer impedances makes current heating and contact arcing (why you need arc fault breakers) a big problem. Not so in UK

>>1234357
Don't need to unplug, large power availability on breakers and circuits allows many more outlets, no need to unplug all the time, just use the switch on 99% of sockets to turn it off if you need to also don't be a dirty fucking tinky cunt and living in a shitheap and pick up behind your lazy arsehole and you wouldn't have a problem.

>>1234394
Incorrect troll. Earth pin is required to unlock and open shutters covering live sockets.

>>1234404
>earth pin is required

I plugged some Polish plugs into the UK socket, just use a pencil or something to unlock

>>1234407
Pencil is too wide.
Ironically you can get some plastic safety plug inserts that are designed to stop kids playing with sockets when actually they are more dangerous than not having them, turn it upside down and bend it a little to get it in.
I would have assumed stuko? Pins were too big,I don't know what Poland uses.

>>1234402
everything consumer grade is shit
IEC 60309 masterrace

>>1233915
WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

GOT DAMN

>>1234412
This. 125A connectors with a safety pilot for motor trips. Sexy.

>>1233910
>sticks an inch out from the wall
>ideal

>>1234869
At least the cable isn't coming straight from the back like an americuck plug

>>1233910
Wrong sir, pic related
-no arcing
-no exposed conductors
-can supply appliances with whatever voltage they need
-isolated so inherently safe

File: 2017-08-29 14.52.19.jpg (2MB, 1726x1994px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1726x1994px

>>1235225
*pic related

>>1235225

Clever idea, but the plugs would have to be obscenely expensive.

Worse, do you have any idea how big even a normal toroidal transformer has to be to handle the 1kW+ that the average medium appliance needs? 'Cause it's sure as fuck not something you can fit in a wall wart, much less a plug.


Personally, I've always figured a multi-sleeved barrel connector with a positive detent would be good. +hot on the external tip, -hot on the internal tip, neutral/ground on exterior rings.

The advantages:

1.) Any-angle plug. 90° plugs can now be pointed in any direction needed.
2.) Safety. Because the live contacts are buried in the socket, it's virtually impossible for a child to stick something in there and hit those contacts. Even if they did, it's almost certain that they will also contact the neutral/ground, which will either trip the breaker or fuse whatever's stuck in it.
3.) Retention. Adding a ring detent (think like what you see on an air hose quick connect) would keep the plug securely in the socket. As an added bonus, you don't need a separate locking version of the plug; instead of spring-loaded detents, the socket itself could be (again, like an air hose) made to lock the plug in it until manually released.
4.) Foot-safe. No pointy bits to stab you, fumbling in the dark. Even an angle plug would be much less painful than the prongs of a euro or US plug.
5.) Dual-voltage. You'll note that I mentioned a +hot and -hot in the brief. Both 120V and 240V is now available from the same socket. A 240V plug will have the other hot in the internal ring; a 120V plug simply won't have that contact. Having both hots at the end prevents any potential dangers when the plug is partially inserted; the main issue with a plain TRS connector (like a headphone or 1/4" audio plug).

Disadvantages:

1.) Cost. Literally the only thing. The additional complexity would make it pricier than the normal US plug. Then again, cost is the only thing the US plug has going for it...

>>1233910
I just have this feeling that if my devices/appliances are so sketchy that I need a second power switch on the wall to safely use them, maybe I should move or import from somewhere safer.

>>1235260
The switches are there for convenience kinda like how basically all power strips have them.

>>1235227
and exactly how are you closing the loop?

>>1235314

what you mean by ''closing the loop''?

you plug it in, the transformer action goes into effect and you get power out. (it's like having a wall-wart where you only need the secondary winding). you unplug it and it goes into low-power mode naturally, as the secondary load is not longer reflected onto the primary.

File: 1493621824021.png (29KB, 982x820px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 982x820px

>>1235589
>low-power mode
Zero-power mode is the correct standard. Trying to start a fire?

>>1235253
Like Pic related? (outlet side, not necessarily to scale)

>>1235589
by closing the loop i mean if you insert a conductor into the centre of a coil as you propose the electromagnetic field will induce a voltage across that conductor. there will be a potential difference along the axis of insertion.

in order to turn that potential difference into current you need to connect BOTH ends of the inserted conductor to the load. the connection made to the inserted end CANNOT return through the centre of the coil without cancelling out the imposed voltage.

how do you propose to close the loop == how do you connect to the inserted end without drawing it back through the coil?

i suppose some arrangement taking inspiration from rogowski coils, but certainly not the arrangement you have there.

>>1235628
>the connection made to the inserted end CANNOT return through the centre of the coil without cancelling out the imposed voltage.

Uh...yes, it can. In the worst-case scenario, it'd be a single turn worth of reverse voltage vs. hundreds or thousands in the desired polarity. As drawn, a conductor though the center would be oriented parallel to the lines of flux, which means it produces no voltage at all (ideally).

>>1235635
>idle outlets consume power
>idle extension cords consume power
>power strips consume power
>power transfer is lossy
Half-baked, m8. Back to the drawing board with you.

>>1235635
ok i was being retarded while assuming you were. sorry, continue.

>>1235645

that's not so different from the current situation where pretty much every gadget draws power all the time. as i look around, the only things i can see with a proper cuts-off-all-power switch is my fan and the printer, everything else uses soft switches.

my kill-a-watt shows 55W with everything shut down.

File: hqdefault.jpg (11KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 480x360px

>>1233951
Jesus

>>1235728
That can change quickly and easily, if needs be. A new plug standard couldn't.
Outlets in use still experience transformer losses, and even completely unused outlets are still on and drawing power. A house that draws literally half a kilowatt with nobody home?
There's a reason that almost everything these days has a switching power supply in it rather than a giant 50/60Hz mains transformer.

>>1235733
Different poster here, why not add switches like those in the OP to the sockets? They're already going to be expensive/complicated.

File: best plug.png (390KB, 792x670px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 792x670px

>>1235619

I'd have to play with the exact dimensions, but this should be close.

I actually have the capability to make these and the matching receptacle. I'll have to do so at some point and see how it works out. At worst, it'll make for decent YouTube fodder.

>>1235856
>expensive/complicated
You could do that, if expense and complication were an asset to something that might be mass-produced and nationally standardized.

>>1235870
Ahhhh. So the groove between the outermost and center outside terminals protects the two inner terminals from casual contact, then? I might recess the inner (neutral?) pin deeply and maybe make it male, and lengthen or shorten the space between the tip and first ring terminals to prevent ground faults until fully seated. Otherwise, this is really good shit and it's a shame you weren't around with this 100 years ago.

>>1235875
>Ahhhh. So the groove between the outermost and center outside terminals protects the two inner terminals from casual contact, then?

No, that's the detent. A couple bearings and a spring clip in the plug grip it until pulled, or, in the locking version, lock onto it until manually released. Strictly speaking, it would work fine without the detent, but I've had too much issue with old, cheap, and shitty sockets to rely on the spring force of the contacts alone. Plus, I quite like the idea of having the normal and locking version of the plug simply _be_ the same plug. None of that NEMA 6-20 vs. L6-20 crap. Guess if you wanted to cheap out hardcore, you could simply leave out the detent on the receptacle; the plug would still work with it as-is.

The spacing of the sleeves themselves is slightly greater than their width. It is thus impossible for there to be an undesired contact position when partially inserted. It doesn't show there (because I forgot to model it), but the spacing and width of the sleeves is such that the plug should always make contact in the order of ground, neutral, hot(s).

The center pin is deliberately female. Were it not, the receptacle would simply be an open hole. This presents a potential hazard, since it would be far easier to (accidentally or deliberately) manipulate a conductive object onto the live contacts, when compared to a plug that has a non-conductive pin in the middle helping to obstruct those points.

>>1235882
>non-conductive pin
I didn't even think of that. Berry gud!

File: but what if it was better.png (1MB, 2785x1780px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2785x1780px

After some consideration, moved outermost pin to inside of barrel, changed the detent location, and fattened the barrel up.

This allows the plug to be more compact, and also allows an easier contact arrangement that allows no other contact combination combinations (yes, that's right) other than the final one. Until the plug is fully inserted, no more than one pair of contacts is ever engaged.

Looks pretty slick as an axial plug, I have to admit...

>>1235893
if this is supposed to be the future of mains power connectors then 1)how does the socket conform to IP4X? 2)where does the fuse go?

>>1236028
>1)how does the socket conform to IP4X?

Hmm...I hadn't really considered this, however the design is already fairly resistant to ingress by default. A simple gasket could make the assembly high water-resistant when it's plugged in. The plug itself is already completely resistant to ingress, since it's just some contacts overmolded in PVC or whatever (same as most coaxial plugs). If necessary, I don't imagine it would be too difficult to do the receptacle in a similar manner, though I don't think it would be a simple overmold in that case. Cost may start to become an issue if there are too many operations in an IP68 version, at least for the bog-standard indoor ones.

Still, if you DID need an IP68 receptacle for outdoor applications or whatever, it should be plenty doable without breaking the bank.


I'm on the fence about the fuse. I'd have to look up some raw data on them before I made a choice either way. On the one hand, yeah, not bad idea, and there are plausible scenarios in which they're useful (obvious one being damage to the cord/plug). On the other, how often do they actually save something vs. the extra cost of manufacture and nuisance tripping?

I just don't know, man.

File: yu-key-plug.jpg (38KB, 644x432px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 644x432px

>>1233910
Fuck yeah

These cunt sockets are loose inside and therefore keep sparking.

It's also an idiot idea to have a power plug that doesn't recede. The standard used in Germany is the proper one. But you fags won't get it because you seceded ;)

>>1236055
no, not ip5(+)x, ip4x. dumb kid sticking their finger in there. just make it small i guess.

in my entire life i have never been had a nuisance fuse nor a lifesaving fuse. in fact i have never had a fuse in a plug blow at all.
but if you want a decent feed - appliance cable ratio its a necessity. at least the plug is polarised so i think you should at least give it a try, no excuses.

>>1236070
actually the square pins allow a much more secure mating than round pins, if you have loose connections its because they are poor quality brand.
the plug receding is not an argument, for what purpose or reason?

File: mainland_yurp_plug.jpg (18KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 350x350px

>>1236073
Because if the socket is receded you can't plug it in at an angle and make the hole bigger inside.

>>1236075
absolutely not an issue with bs1363, i suggest you try it sometime. the receiving contacts are sprung, they are not malleable

>>1236071
>no, not ip5(+)x, ip4x. dumb kid sticking their finger in there. just make it small i guess.

Thought that might have been what you meant, wasn't sure.

I don't actually know. It would depend on how thick the barrel is. That's going to be a tricky one; I want to make the barrel nice and thick for durability, but I want to make it thin so the receptacle is difficult to get into unintentionally.

I could get around that by using a shutter, but I want to avoid that if I can because it's another failure point and another thing to add to the BoM.


>you should at least give it a try, no excuses.

Isn't really anything to try. Just do it the same way it's done in existing fused plugs. The exact location is fairly arbitrary. I expect I can just sort of toss it in after the fact with no or minimal change.

>>1236071
>no, not ip5(+)x, ip4x. dumb kid sticking their finger in there. just make it small i guess.
Socket anon should draw up the receptacle. As I understand it there's a non-conductive pin sticking out of the middle that should prevent dumb kid fingers from touching anything hot.

>>1236261
>shutter
Or just a sprung annulus that the plug pushes back into the receptacle.
Or make the plug longer and keep the hots deep. Also, your detent helps shield the deeper terminals on the receptacle side from inadvertent connection.
Or just add a sliding shutter to the front of the receptacle that closes whenever the receptacle is empty and there's no finger actuating it.

>>1235314
He'd just use really big capacitors on the other side of the circuit and use ac. Obviously.

File: best receptacle.jpg (146KB, 1184x1961px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1184x1961px

>>1236265
>Socket anon should draw up the receptacle.

My modelling on this is just getting lazier and lazier.

Adjusted width and spacing of rings. NOW they never make unwanted circuits until their final position. Rings now color-coded for your viewing pleasure.

The opening ring is 1/8". Outermost edge of the live ring is at 0.74" depth. You'd be hard pressed to hit one of them without also hitting something else that would short the plug and trip the breaker.


Which brings me to the glaring issue: "Plug of the Future" is designed in imperial units.

HUEHUEHUE

>>1233910
>>1235227

This thread is crazy.

Id like to see that break the circuit while saturated or how a sensitive load would survive with this fashion of isolation. I'm not 100% sure atm but my head is screaming dn/dt and dI/dt....

I also don't think you will enjoy a +90% efficiency for power transfer. Can you provide some detail on how you plan on winding this thing so you can take advantage of the b and h fields at 60hz with an air core?

>>1235253
It would be interesting if this plug could withstand over voltage scenarios for a residence. Typically the conductors stop at the handle of the plug and the conductors turn into plates to meet the rings. I suppose it would make a crude, partial coaxial capacitor this way. Furthermore I'm curious how the slip ring connections would fair with a 15 amp residential load. How would one control the arcing from the swivel action?

Clever ideas but it's not clear if they could handle the trials and tribulations of electrical plugs and sockets in stride.

File: wireless charging toothbrush.jpg (18KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 700x700px

>>1236309
>Can you provide some detail on how you plan on winding this thing so you can take advantage of the b and h fields at 60hz with an air core?

have you been living on another planet for the last 10 years? almost every home now has some wireless charging gadget based on the principle you seem so incredulous about.

File: 1496609048001.png (7KB, 741x40px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 741x40px

>>1236300
Velly intellesting.
Next question: is there enough room in the annulus on the outlet to pass two conductors through?

>>1236351
If those wireless chargers turn out to run at a much higher frequency than 60Hz, will you take your half-baked idea back to the drawing board already?

>>1236355
>Next question: is there enough room in the annulus on the outlet to pass two conductors through?

In theory, there's enough space to cram the cross-sectional equivalent of like 4AWG for each conductor in there. I'm much more limited by the contacts themselves, I think.

File: how-induction-charger-works.png (17KB, 490x340px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 490x340px

>>1236355

many run at 60Hz, just as shown in this pic.

File: no complex HF electronics here boss, just a fucking coil.jpg (43KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 600x600px

>>1236355

no complex high frequency electronics here boss, just a fucking coil.

File: how-cellphone-charger-works.png (13KB, 490x340px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 490x340px

>>1236378
taking pictures from this site is a great way to discredit yourself

>>1236379
Do you have efficiency figures on those? If they're not 100% you may as well give up.

>>1236380
My
secondary
coils
are
in
orbit

>>1236381
>If they're not 100% you may as well give up.

dude, it's a half-transformer that replaces a full transformer. the big selling point is that it will still work 48 years from now, as opposed some complex circuit that will die in less than 10. efficiency is hardly relevant if you have to keep paying for brand new gadgets coz the old ones keep dying.

>>1236385
>it's a half-transformer that replaces a full transformer
Nobody cares about a 50 year product lifetime. What they care about is zero power loss. But you are welcome to try to convince every regulatory agency in the industrialized world that spinning eddy currents in dozens of coils in every household is a great and safe idea. Lern2scale

>>1236389

i have four power bars beneath my desk with 14 wall-warts total. what's the difference?

and people do care about longevity if it's something in the wall, that might require (by law) the services of a shyster electrician that charges $100 just to get out of bed.

>>1236070

Those cracks and burns are likely from people forcing type C&F plugs into the type G receptacle.

The cracks are because the type C&F polars are just a little too big for the type G but you can get them in through some wiggling and the burns are because of a cylinder on a flat contact doesn't create a good contact.

t. I do this sometimes

>>1236351
I'm not criticizing you, it's a valid question. I'm not questioning the concept of induction, I'm asking you how you are applying it. It's called Maxwell's equations.

Also you didn't answer any of my questions you just took my inquiry as personal attack, which is giving me and this thread alot of perspective.

>>1236355
I dunno who this guy is.

>>1234402
twist lock plugs are good.
However they are clearly designed by an American.
the same family of plugs have straight pins also.
son when you look at the plug you don't know if it is straight pins or a twist plug or a straight pin plug that's stuck.

I have experienced severe pain

>had wisdom teeth rotting, was painful
>crushed thumb under a concrete block, was very painful
>stood on a plug, EXTREMELY painful

I came in half pissed and put all my weight on an upturned plug, and the pain was indescribable.

>>1236610
was that the night you were out drinking cocktails, you big nancy?

>>1236395
>what's the difference
Do you even into off-line switching power supplies? If you don't, you are absolutely not fit to discuss power conversion in the 21st century. Return thee to thine Arduino.

>>1236514
>I dunno who this guy is.
Hi, I'm anon. How are you?

>>1236652
Good thank you. How are you?

Also u did have a point back there.

>>1236663
Quite well, thank you.
Also thank you! Magical Transformer anon just doesn't know what he doesn't know.

>>1236664
Like emag vector calc and field experience? I concur. This isn't the first time someone thought of this concept either.

I'm trying to humor him but he's eyeballing it and taking it personally.

>>1236610
should have tidied up before you went out
not the plugs fault you are a tink

>>1236055
It could could just have a thread and o-ring at the base since you can rotate it in the socket

>>1234404
We're you fucking high when you wrote this? Half the replies don't seem to be to the posts you quoted.

>>1236070
Square pins make a better connection than round pins, larger contact area. Back to school Hans

>>1236075
The pins are square, It's not possible to put them into the socket at an angle unless you deliberately and forcefully damage it.

>>1236810
first ref was a mistake i was on mobile.
the rest of them make sense if you can be bothered to work them out

File: where_is_pancakes_house.jpg (48KB, 590x674px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 590x674px

>>1238768
>unless you deliberately and forcefully damage it.

I am taking notes here.

You're saying that's a bad thing, right?

Sorry if I come off as stupid.

>>1233951
Fuuuu

>>1238776
Good. Because buttplug is best plug.