Dear worng100,
I would prefer to turn this discussion into a cooperation effort to mutually benefit of each other knowledge.
The ferroresonance principles, as you pointed out, does not change with the application since this is the result of the interaction of the resistance, inductive and capacitive of any RLC circuit. It is also truth your statement that “. Voltage , current, power, is only relative to itself”
On the other hand, I am afraid not to be 100% agree with your statement [red] “O K so you are 100 million times large in power. I do not remember anything that implies that when you go from .1 watts to 1 million watts that the concepts change” .[/red] This is because the likelihood of ferroresonance in power distribution systems is significant different at different voltage level, transformer size, type of lines, system connection and other factors because that change the inherent values of the RLC parameters: For example:
a) Voltage Levels:
Up to 7,200/12,470V: Unlikely
>14,400/24,900 V potential problem
b) Transformer Size: Smaller transformers are more susceptible to ferroresonance problems than larger transformers. For instance < 30 kVA units there is potential problem in system > 7.2/12.5kV.
c) Type of Line: “The capacitance to ground of cable may be 50 or more times that of overhead line, and this fact greatly increases the probability that the capacitances will be above the lower bound of the range at which ferroresonance can occur with the connections in Table 2” bellow.
d) System Connections: Transformer banks with certain connections are more likely than others to experience ferroresonance when the bank is energized or de-energized with single-pole switches at a location remote from the transformer, or when a conductor or fuse at a remote location opens. There are three phase configurations more prone to other to produce ferroresonance. See the enclose figures for sample from the C57 Standard .