[major]

Yes essentially Input Power so I could calculate how much input power input required for 10 HP

Yes I had to use torque and rpms to extrapolate Continuous HP and it worked out to 4.14 HP. I also extrapolated 10 HP power by using the constant 1020 watts /HP x 10 = 10,200 watts, then factored out current of 222 amps peak.

So where have I gone wrong? Pretty sure I have made an incorrect assumption. I calculated current required based Input Power of 222 amps, so a 200 to 250 amp controller would work. However the manufacture recommends a 400 Amp controller with the motor. OK it occurred to me manufacture might be specifying Stall Current rather than based on 10 HP wattage.

I know peak power values of a motor is a Thermal Limit so max power might be debatable if more cooling factors in. Manufacture did not publish Peak Power watts for motor @ 10 hp.

You are throwing me off converting on mechanical power. In my minds eye Input Power is what a designer needs to know right?
...

Hi Sunking, brian_,

Sun... You know units, right? Like inches and centimeters. Both in. & cm are units of length, or distance. So you have a wire 4 inches long, that same wire is also 10.16 cm long. No difference in the length, just a difference in units of measure. 4 inches = 10.16 cm. Or a conversion factor of one inch = 2.54 cm.

The same is true for power. Both watts and horsepower are units of measure for power. It does not matter in what form the power is, like electrical, or mechanical, or radiant, or average, or peak. Both hp & watts measure the same thing: Power. One horsepower = 746 watts. Here's a good review of power and its units of measure.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(physics)

Efficiency is defined as the power output / power input * 100%. Of course you use the same units of measure for the numerator and denominator. So eff = watts out / watts in * 100%. Or eff = hp out / hp in * 100%.

Also, beware of ratings. Rarely will rated power translate to useful efficiency values. Manufacturers often use worst case tolerance limits on nameplates, or nominal values. And for a motor, peak power (output power) may not be a thermal limit at all.

And the controller current limit is just that. It does not relate to motor stall current or motor rated power. It is the same "5hp rated" motor if I use a controller having a 200, 400, or 1000 ampere current limit.

The peak power output for a motor and controller combination typically occurs at the point where at full throttle the controller transitions to current limit.

Regards,

major

 

[major]

Now that is funny stuff Major, glad you chimed in. I am an EE so think I have units of measure down after 40 years.

Then how can you write this?

First thing it tells me I would be using 48 volts x 88 amps = 4224 watts. From that if I divide 4224 watts / 4.14 HP = 1020 w/hp efficiency.

If I assume a 1020 w/hp efficiency, a 10 HP would be roughly 10,200 watts.

You clearly do not understand power units (hp & watt) and efficiency calculation.

This is where I am at Major, I fully understand if you use a 400 amp controller, is the Maximum Current the Controller cill Sink. Does not mean the motor will ever use that high of a current, just means it can if the Resistance is low enough for the applied voltage.

Disagree. The DC stall current using the equivalent series resistance of the motor is almost always, maybe always, higher, usually much higher, than the current limit of the controller. On any full throttle start, current limit is active. After maybe the first few pulse cycles (like 10 ms), there is no ramp function.

Riddle me this. Everything I know about Series Wound Motors Draw maximum current at 0 RPM's aka Stall Current. The Stall Current is simple Ohm's Law of Battery Voltage / Motors Resistance = Stall Current. Do you agree with that? There is no current higher than Stall Current.

Does not mean mean or imply you should size the controller to handle Stall Current, but is the only way to get maximum torque at very low RPM's. My thinking is select a Controller to some value less than Stall Current for protection. How much I do not know and the reason for this journey. Having said that I do not think any motor speed controllers would allow to apply Full Battery (100% PWM modulation) instantaneously to drive Stall Current. At least the Alltrax Controllers I am familiar with will not do that. They walk the voltage up over a period of time of say a few seconds, so by the time the Controller hits 100% modulation, the motor RPM's will have already spooled up to a few hundred RPM's to where Stall Current is not possible due to back EMF.

I know how to find Rm and have the equipment. Lock the Rotor down, apply 10 amps, and measure the voltage on the motor terminals. I even have a 4-point DRLO that does the same thing. But me thinks I will get a resistance so low on a 48 volt golf cart motor, would exceed any controller current limit out there. Just trying to figure out how to size correctly without a lot of over kill. Say 300 amp is more than sufficient and no reason to pay up for 400 amps. Part of me suspects Stall Current maybe higher than some of the controller current limit. That is what I am trying to nail down.

Hello Sunking,

Realize that the real resistance of a series wound golf cart motor is more on the order of 0.0167 ohms and that of a lift truck motor, half that. It requires a Wheatstone bridge to measure.

I work with AC motors all the time, and that is easy. Voltage specified is the most efficient operating voltage, and the other two numbers I want to know if LRA (which is the exact same thing as Stall Current on a DC motor), and FLA (full load current). Example for a 480 volt motor maybe specified at 470 volts, FLA = 40 amps. That tells me I need to size my wire so I incur a 10 volt drop with 40 amps, and coordinate breakers for LRA start up current if needed. LRA can be as low as 2 x FLA for soft start, and as high as 6 x FLA.

Induction motor LRA is not "the exact same thing as Stall Current on a DC motor." Yes, both values are the respective maximum current draw for the motor across the mains. That's where the similarity ends, IMO.

Regards,

major

 

[major]

Watts per Horsepower also seemed a bizarre declaration of efficiency to me.

But... if we're being picky about units and equivalencies and such...



100% is equal to 1. Yes?

In which case, why would you just multiply something by 1?

I'd amend it to: Efficiency is defined as the power output / power input * 100 ... as measured in percent... if you need that added

Myself I'm fine with saying/reading "Efficiency is 0.75" as it's an implied fraction in the concept of efficiency itself, but most people would want to read "Efficiency is 75%".

But that % should be stricken from the formula, no?

No.

Electric motor efficiency is defined as a ratio of output power divided by input power. It is by far the most common, but not universally so, that the efficiency ratio be represented in written and spoken words using percentage as units.

Search for and download this pdf:

Premium Efficiency Motor Selection And Application Guide - Department of ...
PDFDepartment of Energy (.gov) › 2014/04
In addition, no endorsement is implied by the use of examples, figures, or courtesy photos. ... Overview of U.S. Motor Minimum Efficiency Performance Standards .

Notice in chapter 2 the definition of electric motor efficiency and then a page or two later, figure 2.1 and chart 2.1. As soon as they start referring to actual numerical values of efficiency, the units for efficiency become %. It goes without saying that % is a ratio. So the value would be xx%/100%. "/100%" is implied and not shown in formula. I do show the multiplier (*100%) to avoid confusion and properly introduce the "%" symbol into the calculation. Some authors do this some don't. It is so universal it is redundant to have to define percentage, but I guess you required it.

Regards,

major

 

[major]

Watts per Horsepower also seemed a bizarre declaration of efficiency to me.

But... if we're being picky about units and equivalencies and such...
...

It's not about being picky about units. You miss the point. "Watts per horsepower" is not a "bizarre declaration of efficiency." It is a units conversion equal to 746w/hp, always.

 

[major]

3/4 of the time you "correct" me, you seem to think I misunderstand something that I don't.

I understand that watts and horsepower both are units that measure power, just different scale.

I'm saying I found it bizarre (my opinion) that Sunking tried to express efficiency (which he did, expressly) by using "watts/hp" as that doesn't make much sense.

There is zero confusion and I haven't "missed the point."

I think you miss the point of this thread, certainty the topic. Why did you bother to post here? You criticize me for using percentage to express efficiency, and then to call me nit-picky. I'm sure the OP and all readers appreciate your contribution. NOT.

 

[major]

Don't be silly. The specs state both continuous mechanical hp (Torque and RPM) output = 4.14 hp and specifies electrical input power of 88 amps @ 48 volts. Efficiency = 3088 / 4224 x 100 = 73.1%. Now if I assume an efficiency of 73.1%, to get 1 mechanical hp out will cost me 746 watts / .731 = 1020 watts Electrical Input Power.

From the Specs Max Peak HP is 10 Hp. I assume that is mechanical HP and if I assume 73.1 Efficiency Input Power required is 10 x 1020 watts = 10,200 watts. My assumptions may be wrong, but my math is spot on.

At 73.1% efficiency requires 1020 watts for every HP mechanically out. So how is that wrong?

48 volts x 88 amps = 4224 watts. From that if I divide 4224 watts / 4.14 HP = 1020 w/hp efficiency.

If I assume a 1020 w/hp efficiency, a 10 HP would be roughly 10,200 watts.

w/hp efficiency. O.K. I get it now. My bad. It is as brian_ says; an inverse efficiency and units conversion mixed into one convenient mess.

Funny stuff because you just agreed with me. I said Stall Current = Battery Voltage / Motor Resistance. That is what I asked,and you cannot disagree with that, it is in all university subject matter on motors and boils down to simple Ohm's Law.


Now I agree with you DC Stall Current might, maybe, could, and/or will be higher than the Controller. Allow me to remind you the whole point of the thread was to pair a Controller/Motor. Question boils down to this.



Do you push a motor to DC Stall Current to obtain maximum start-up torque, or do you want to limit it and how much? Should not affect speed, just very low speed torque. I would think limiting Stall Current would be worth giving up some low end torque?

It all depends on your design objectives. The drag racer may well put more value in the launch torque than the golfer.

I've seen controllers modified to 4000A current limits. I don't think I've ever come across a motor and controller combination where the natural motor stall current was less than the current limit.

Well let others decide for themselves. I can define to textbook definitions easily looked up


LRA = Locked Rotor Current aka Start-Up current is the amount of current the Rotor will draw when the Rotor is at 0 RPM or locked. As the RPM's spools up, back EMF will press back on the voltage applied to the Rotar and current will follow Ohm's Law for AC circuits. LRA = Applied Voltage / Rotor Impedance. Sound familar?


DC Stall Current occurs at 0 RPM when full battery is applied. As RPM's spools up Back EMF presses back against the battery, lowering voltage and current of Ohm's Law. DC Stall Current = Battery Voltage / Motor Resistance.


Sounds the same to me. I am just stupid. But you are right, they are different. One use Resistance to determine Current, and the other uses Impedance which will be a little higher than it would be for DC. What do I know?

I don't know why you bring it up. I didn't disagree. What I find vastly dissimilar between LRA on the induction motor and stall current on the series wound DC motor is the shape of the respective torque curves.

Regards,

major

 

[major]

For starters, do like the Europeans; throw away the power unit of hp. All power stated in watts (or kilowatts). Next, keep it simple. Round off to the safe side.

For the sizing of the propulsion components to use with a chosen motor, namely the controller and battery, use current. The system voltage is assumed established, so power ratings are redundant.

In this case, or example, you have a 48V system and a 100A motor. That is the safe rounding of the motor's one hour rating with its design ventilation and normal ambient conditions.

So at minimum I'd use a 100A continuous rated controller. If your intended battery can deliver more than 100A for an hour, you may wish to increase the controller rating (125-150A). Motors are likely able to tolerate overloads of this type more so than controllers.

Also, any increase in controller rating will likely translate into extended life and cooler operation.

As for the current limit of the controller, I like to see at least 5x, that's five times the continuous rated current. So 500A in our example. If the cost was not unreasonable, I'd be tempted to 650 or 800A. Again, more is better and can come in handy if stuck in a pothole.

To me, it is pretty much useless to try to relate controller current limit to motor stall current. Motor stall (at battery voltage) should be like double or triple or more than the controller current limit.

My opinions,

major