- Joined
- 17 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 2,889
- Reaction score
- 507
- Country
Good grief! Well I can't stop you. Crack on.Does it matter what we call it, as long we use the right formula? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet!
Good grief! Well I can't stop you. Crack on.Does it matter what we call it, as long we use the right formula? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet!
I willGood grief! Well I can't stop you. Crack on.
Where does that idea come from?No! The difference is – with a motor, if the voltage is increased, the power stays constant, so the current falls.
You appear to be talking about a 'notional voltage'. As far as the supply is concerned, its voltage is its voltage. Within the 'black box' that we call a motor, the effect of the back EMF impacts on the behaviour of the motor, and essentially changes the 'effective impedance/resistance'. The 'effective voltage' (supply voltage MINUS back EMF) which the innards of the motor 'sees' is not something that one can usually measure.Yes, but you must also use the correct voltage. A motor generates a back-EMF (as I mentioned before) so the voltage for Ohm is supply volts minus back-EMF. On the assumption that back-EMF = supply voltage at synchronous speed, and proportional to speed, with typical 3% slip at full load, back-EMF = 97% supply volts and Ohm only sees 3%.
Fair enough - but, regardless of whose name one associates with it, would it make any less sense for a statement that power was proportional to voltage multiplied by current to be regarded as 'a law'?Yes, but with the justification that the original statement that current was proportional to applied voltage made sense as being referred to as a law. And the formulaic representation encapsulates that law into a useful tool by including the definition of the constant as 'resistance'.
Although I made some attempt to rationalise/explain this, I'm really completely 'with you' about this. As I said, until two days ago I'd never seen or heard any reference to "Watt's Law" - and I confess that when I started replying to CBW's post, my very sentence was something like "There is, of course, no such thing as Watt's Law ...". However, I then looked at the calculator he had linked to and found them using the term, so decided not to post thatOh come now. Watt was a mechanical engineer who never did an electrical experiment in his life. He died before Ohm publicised his discovery of the constant relationship between voltage and current. His name was associated with power when they started assigning 'scientists' names to units. It is disappointing when people propagate incorrect history with no facts to back it up. This is the down side of the internet.
It's not just my idea, it's published in motor catalogues. I'll try to scan a couple of sheets and post them.Where does that idea come from?
Yes, within the design voltage range, and probably some way outside it in practice. I've tried to explain several times. The motor manufacturer is testing his machine. He supplies it at say 400v and adjusts the load (a dynanometer say) to rated power. He then increases the voltage to 415v. The speed increases (see #27) and so does the load. So he readjusts the load back to the rated power, and hey presto the current is then lower than before, in accordance with I*V = W. That of course is input power whereas rated power is shaft output power, but eff and PF won't change enough to alter things.Are you really suggesting that the power produced by a motor is independent of the voltage it is supplied with, and that if one increases the voltage of the supply, the current drawn from that supply will fall?
Yes, there's a nominal voltage, but the motor can accept nominal +/-5%. Just as well, as otherwise if there were any problem and the volts weren't exactly right they'd say sorry, not my problem guv.You appear to be talking about a 'notional voltage'. As far as the supply is concerned, its voltage is its voltage.
I think you're agreeing with what I said.Within the 'black box' that we call a motor, the effect of the back EMF impacts on the behaviour of the motor, and essentially changes the 'effective impedance/resistance'. The 'effective voltage' (supply voltage MINUS back EMF) which the innards of the motor 'sees' is not something that one can usually measure.
No, inside the black box is a pre-determined load, so no-load or locked rotor conditions do not arise.If you measured the voltage being supplied to that 'black box', it would obviously be the same whether the motor was stalled (hence no back EMF) or running at high speed (high back EMF).
Data sheets attached, as photo and pdf. Information might be on the internet these daysIt's not just my idea, it's published in motor catalogues. I'll try to scan a couple of sheets and post them.
Doesn't always work like that.Data sheets attached, as photo and pdf. Information might be on the internet these days
I've explained the circumstances when it doesDoesn't always work like that.
Yes, there's a nominal voltage, but the motor can accept nominal +/-5%. Just as well, as otherwise if there ware any problem and the volts weren't exactly right they'd say sorry, not my problem guv.
Yes you have but not explained the circumstances when it doesn'tI've explained the circumstances when it does
There is a difference between the maximum power a motor can produce, and the amount it's actually producing.Are you really suggesting that the power produced by a motor is independent of the voltage it is supplied with, and that if one increases the voltage of the supply, the current drawn from that supply will fall?
Historically I've have lots of pics of motor plates but changing a PC recently I had a major clean out so think all gone. My recollection of more recent motors- which may be totally discombobulated - is something like; 380-420V 10HP 15A (not a real motor!). My domestic heating pump shows 220-240V 70W-0.29A, 60W-0.26A, 50W-0.23A (I haven't done any calcs but those current figures feel like a narrow spread).Many of the motors I came across, had the +/-5% stamped on the plate.
That's up to anybody else who can be bothered. All I said was a motor doesn't obey Ohm's law.Yes you have but not explained the circumstances when it doesn't
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local