Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

4hp single phase motor problem 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

jemjack

Civil/Environmental
Jul 25, 2011
17
I have a high pressure compressor for filling air cylinders for diving, and a little while ago I asked about 5 hp motors for it, and got many helpful replies from you , thanks very much. I did have a mental block, as when I read the blurb a bit more carefully I saw that it really only required a 4 hp motor. Sorry about that.

The compressor at startup runs very freely and in the past I was using it with a 3 hp motor which worked well but after 40 minutes or so the motor got very hot, so I had to stop it. As time went on the motor would cut out after less and less time until it would only run for 15 minutes which was not enough time to fill a bottle, and I felt that soon I would burn out the motor! I had it connected through a DOL and it was this that cut out, presumably because the amperage rose to high?

I have just bought a new 4hp motor 220 volts ( I live in Spain) single phase 3000 rpm, which is the required motor for this compressor. Also new DOL for it.

The compressor is supposed to run at 1300 rpm but my pulleys are letting it run at rather less, So to my reckoning it should not need 4 hp to drive it!

All connected up and when I press the green button it starts up and runs for about 5 seconds or so and blows the 25 amp fuse at the mains. By the sound of the motor, it is up to the speed that it will run at, i.e. it has stopped accelerating, but has not tripped out the centrifugal switch . This is the problem . which I would very much like some help on please.
The motor runs at 2900 rpm when it has nothing attached to it, the voltage is 215 volts and the centrifugal trips out with no problem.
When the compressor is attached to it by the belt and pulleys the motor runs up to 1950 rpm but the centrifugal switch does not trip out at this speed. The amperage is way off the scale of my meter which only reads up to 50 amps the voltage drops to 180 volts. and the compressor is running at 725 rpm. The pulley ratio is 1: 2.76 I realize that this is so because the started windings are still in circuit.

So it would seem to me that
1 the motor is not producing 4 hp or
2 the centrifugal switch should trip out , then the voltage would rise, and the currant would drop to somewhere around 20 amps. and the motor would produce more power, and accelerate to somewhere near 2800 rpm
3 Or am I missing something here.

I have no way of having 3 phase, the cables from motor to meter are heavy duty about 6 mm so there should be no volt drop in them at 20 amps or so. The start windings have a 400 µf condenser and the windings have a resistance of about .7? and the running windings have a 60 µf condenser and the windings are about 1.9 ?.

Any help or advice would be very gratefully received,
Best wishes

Jemjack
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

@Jemjack,
It really is very complicated with that cap-start, cap-run single-phase motor you got! That is an induction machine where you get to separate the rotor circuit calculations because there is a forward and reverse mmf significantly making motor circuit modeling a bit bloody.

BTW, you posted the nameplate specs of FLA = 18.2 amps; Volts = 220V and the pf = 0.95. But if you make a quick calc: P = 220 X 18.2 X 0.95 = 3,804 watts or 3.8 kW! If you use pf=0.749, then you get the rated output of 3kW. If indeed the FLA and pf is correct, it is safe to say your vendor gave you a 5HP motor instead of a 4 HP (3.8kW ~ 3.7kW ~5HP).
 
burnt2x,

IEC motors are rated based on their mechanical output. Our motors also have losses. You need to factor in the efficiency, which in a small machine is relatively low, and in a single phase machine is lower still.


----------------------------------
image.php

If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!
 
ScottyUK,

If I will factor-in the motor efficiency in my calcs, I get 78.87% efficiency! (0.95/0.749 = 0.7887 or 78.87%)! Is that within the normal range of efficiencies of IEC motors?
 
Good grief.. PF times efficiency... To get efficiency... I think it is better close this thread - or just delete it.

Gunnar Englund
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.
 
Oh dear have I stirred up a hornets nest here? Thanks anyway.
 
No, not a hornet's nest - just a bumble-bee.

Gunnar Englund
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.
 
It may be that the problem is not electrical but mechanical nature. Assuming for the moment that the centrifugal switch is not at fault it could be a slight misalignment of the pulleys or excess tension in the belt that is causing the bearings to bind enough to create an additional load on the motor thereby limiting its ability to accelerate properly. Considering that the motor performs properly when the belt is removed, I would be looking to make sure that:

1. the centerline of the pulley grooves are in the same plane,

2. the belt tension is not excessive,

3. the motor is intended for this use as opposed to direct drive; i.e., are there ball bearings, roller bearings, and or thrust bearings, since each is intended for a different loading.

4. there's enough of the right grease in the bearings and lubricant in the compressor (assuming this isn't an oil-less system).

 
There needs to be a good clearing-up job there. Sorry for the inadvertent typo in last post. Here:

Pout = V x I x (PF x eff)

The initial formula used was:

Pout = V x I x (pf), the result of my initial calc was 0.749.

If one wants to know the efficiency, the Pout, V and I cancels out leaving:
pf x eff = PF
PF, the power factor arrived at neglecting the motor efficiency and pf = the nameplate PF rating of the motor. The resulting equation should have been:

eff = PF/pf = 0.749/0.95 = 0.788 or 78.8%

Now, that should absolve me of whatever mistake I made!
 
I'll buy you a coffee in the Pub, Gunnar. Time to change the subject.
Yours
Bill (grin)

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter
 
Thank you RamConsult I am afraid that it is an electrical problem, as all your suggestions that you have made have been attended to and all is in order mechanically. Hi Burnt2x now I know.

Thanks once again. Who wants a coffee in a pub?

Jemjack.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor