On Thu, Jan 7, 2016, at 03:56 PM, andy pugh wrote:
> On 7 January 2016 at 20:49, Stephen Dubovsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The lack of torque multiplication by removing a variator/gearbox can be
> > partially solved by just using a bigger motor.
> 
> Not really an option on 240V domestic power.
> 3HP is almost certainly enough, with the reduction gear for big work.
> 

Actually, the domestic (input) power is not an issue.  The only factor is
the cost of the oversized motor and VFD.  Anyone lucky enough to 
find a really good deal on a motor/VFD rated significantly more than 
the nominal HP of their machine can take advantage of it to get more
torque at low speeds.

Think about what a VFD does:

The rectifier section of the VFD converts fixed frequency and voltage
input power into fixed voltage DC power and stores it in a capacitor bank. 

The inverter section of the VFD converts fixed voltage DC power from
the capacitor bank into variable voltage variable frequency AC power
and sends it to the motor.

The power delivered to the motor contains two components - real and
reactive power.  The real power is converted to mechanical power at
the shaft.  The reactive power provides the magnetic fields needed to
make the motor work.  The reactive power sloshes back and forth
between the motor phases and the power line (if across-the-line) or
between motor phases and the cap bank (if VFD), with no net power
transfer.

Lets say the original motor on the machine was 2HP, three phase.  
Connected across-the-line on a big industrial 3-phase line, and loaded
to 2HP, it might draw 6A - this reflects both real and reactive power.  
Uncouple the shaft, and the no load current reflects only the reactive
power.  Typically 30-50% of full load current - let's say it is 40% for this
motor, so 2.4A.  So the reactive power required or this motor is 
2.4A*240V*sqrt(3) = 1kVA.  This is constant, regardless of the load
on the shaft.

Put the 10HP motor across that same big industrial line, and load it
down to 10HP.  The full load phase current might be 30A.  No-load
current might be 40% of that, or 12A.  The reactive power requirement
is 12*240*sqrt(3) = 5kVA.  Again, it is constant regardless of load.  

If you had a three phase 6A power line capable of running the 2HP
motor without a VFD at full load, it couldn't even run the 10HP motor
at NO load, because it couldn't supply the 12A of reactive power.

But with the VFD things change.  Since the inverter provides all the
reactive power, the line never sees it.  The line and the rectifier section
only have to handle the real power.  So the 10HP VFD can spin up
the unloaded 10HP motor, while drawing next to no power from the
2HP power line.

If you are running at rated speed (say 1500 RPM) and start to apply
load torque, the line will have to supply the real power.  When the 
torque reaches 7 ft-lbs, the shaft power will be 2HP.  At that point
you need to stop increasing the torque, or you will overload the line.

But the motor and drive were both designed to deliver 10HP.  That
means the motor COULD deliver 35 ft-lbs of torque at any speed 
from zero (with adequate cooling) to 1500 RPM.

If you drop the speed from 1500 RPM to 300 RPM, you can increase
the torque from 7 ft-lbs to 35 ft-lbs and the real power is still only 2HP.
Since the real power is 2HP, the power line can deliver it.  An ammeter
on the single phase input line might show 8-9 amps, but the same
ammeter on the motor connections could show 30 amps.  

This is rarely ever done in industry because industry doesn't want
to pay for the extra iron, copper, silicon, and capacitors needed
to build a 10HP motor and VFD when they're only going to get
2HP from the shaft.  But for a one-off where you find the motor
and/or VFD cheap on eBay or a scrap-heap, it can work very well.

-- 
  John Kasunich
  [email protected]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Emc-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users

Reply via email to