A HP case study
Existential Angst
So apropos of the dialogue with the idiot Salty Dog on fraudulent hp ratings
in ahr, and after some links in the other rcm thread, I did another test.
Larry moe curly said:
They quit lying because of this lawsuit:
http://classactionworld.com/Air+Compressor+Litigation/saaoc/891.html
Unfortunately the cutoff date for filing was Oct. 24, 2004.
-------------------------------------
Unfortunately, they apparently have not stopped lying, at least in wet-dry
vacs.
But inyway, Salty Dogshit, there's your cite. Read it and enjoy..... You
can apologize to me later, and don't forget to thank larry moe curly.
amdx posted:
Rated 6.5 peak hp, That's 40 amps at 120 Volts if you ignore inefficiency.
http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00917066000P?vName=Tools&cName=Shop+Vacs+%26+Dust+Collection&sName=Wet-Dry+Vacuums
-----------------------------------------------------
I realized that I actually had one of those units in the corner of my shop,
except mine was a Rigid, also rated at 6.5 hp.
6.5 hp????? Holy shit....
So I took it apart, put a vise grip on the rotor, plugged the unit into my
ampprobe adapter, put an ampprobe on it, turned on the switch, and hung on
for dear life.
Holy shit.... 35 amp locked rotor current!! That was surprising, given how
light the motor part of the unit was.
And 9 amp running current -- more on that later.
Doing the calcs, the locked-rotor hp is 5.4 hp, not 6.5, altho there might
have been some voltage drop in the cord -- 35 amps in a 16 ga cord,
donchaknow.
But, factor in an 80% motor efficiency, and that drops to 4.3 locked-rotor
hp -- so these muthafuckas are misrepresenting even their locked-rotor
power figures!!! Figgers.....
Oh, and we haven't even put in the *power factor*, inherent in all
electric motors (from inductance, capacitance), which further diminishes the
hp -- proly by another 20%.
So, what IS the TRUE hp, in a wet-dry vac?
Well, it turns out, that when disassembled, vacs draw the *most* current,
cuz of the least resistance to air flow -- in this case, 9 amps. If you
BLOCK the air inlet, the rpm goes way up, and the current draw drops to 6
amps.
So, 9 amps is the FUNCTIONAL MAXIMUM current draw of a vac, and it proly
drops to 8 amps when re-assembled, with the cannisters, filters, hoses,
etc..
So the REAL operational hp of this vac is not 6.5 hp, not 5.4, and not 4.3
hp.
It is ACTUALLY 8 x 120 x .8 x .8/746 (amps x volts x motor eff x power
factor/ watts per hp) which calcs out to about .8 hp. Not 8.0, but 0.8.
Holy shit.....
So the FUNCTIONAL MAXIMUM HORSEPOWER of this unit is not 6.5, 5.4, 4.3, 3,
2, or 1 -- it's 0.8 hp.
There is NO WAY this type of unit can generate any more than this, unless
you fundamentally changed the unit by opening up ports, hoses, filters, etc.
MAYBE you can tweak the calcs to get this hp number up to 1.0. Still......
Thus, a claim of 6.5 hp is not only physically impossible on a 120 V
circuit, it is a fraudulent exaggeration by 800 percent.
Imagine if your effing taxes went up by 800%.
The situation for other tools may be somewhat more ambiguous, but for vacs
it is CRYSTAL CLEAR, because of the nature of the current draws vs air flow:
T
The usable hp CANNOT get any higher than in the totally disassembled,
unclogged state, which is how it was tested.
Use of a vac actually REDUCES the hp requirement -- think of the above drop
to 6 amps under 100% clogging, which is the least power draw of this vac.
So claiming 6.5 hp is quadruply irresponsible, gratuitous, nonsensical, and
fraudulent.
No doubt, none of this is good enough for disingenuous kneejerk assholes
like Salty Dog, Shitty Two, and Ricodjour, who are no doubt going to bleat
Liar, Where are the cites, blah blah blah.
They are so quick to call others liars because they themselves are
inveterate and incorrigible effing liars, as Ricodjour just proved in the
Major score thread, with the resurrection of the Climb vs Conventional /
Dual Saw topic.
So inyway, there are the numbers for a 6.5 hp wetdry vac.
Not that it's really a practical biggie -- the unit seems functional enough,
altho a neighbor's wife begged me to take out of her garage -- hubby wadn't
too pleased when he found out, but since sed wife has a butt crack butterfly
tattoo about 1 foot square that he apparently finds perty aphrodesiacal, he
didn't say much. I myself prefer the vac.....
It also has a detachable leaf-blower top -- ingenious design.
It appears that compressors are more conservatively rated as a result of the
above lawsuit, but virtually all of these big-box asshole companies will lie
to the fullest extent of the law.
The trick is to find the smallest bunch of lies for your consuming buck.
--
EA
JIMMIE
wrote:
> Awl --
>
> So apropos of the dialogue with the idiot Salty Dog on fraudulent hp ratings
> in ahr, and after some links in the other rcm thread, I did another test.
>
> Larry moe curly said:
> They quit lying because of this lawsuit:
>
> http://classactionworld.com/Air+Compressor+Litigation/saaoc/891.html
>
> Unfortunately the cutoff date for filing was Oct. 24, 2004.
> -------------------------------------
>
> Unfortunately, they apparently have not stopped lying, at least in wet-dry
> vacs.
> But inyway, Salty Dogshit, there's your cite. Read it and enjoy..... You
> can apologize to me later, and don't forget to thank larry moe curly.
>
> amdx posted:
Probably less than the .8hp you calculated. These motors are crap and
not very efficent. Tear one apart and you will find about half the
windings that are normally in a good motor.
Jimmie
Existential Angst
news:4b4556ed$0$5011$607e...@cv.net...
Oh, the fact that these companies can't even get the locked rotor lie
correck, and then the fact that their lie is an 800% exaggeration over
reality, suggests that perhaps 3 Sears hp is indeed = to 1 Porter Cable hp.
This would be a mere exaggeration of 300%, which in comparison is a relative
bargain.
--
EA
> --
> EA
>
Gerald Miller
<UNfi...@UNoptonline.net> wrote:
>
>Oh, the fact that these companies can't even get the locked rotor lie
>correck, and then the fact that their lie is an 800% exaggeration over
>reality, suggests that perhaps 3 Sears hp is indeed = to 1 Porter Cable hp.
>This would be a mere exaggeration of 300%, which in comparison is a relative
>bargain.
Sounds a lot like the latest advertising blurb from one of the big
three auto makers-
" Our quality is as good as Toyota and Honda"
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada
sa...@dog.com
<UNfi...@UNoptonline.net> wrote:
>Awl --
>
>So apropos of the dialogue with the idiot Salty Dog on fraudulent hp ratings
>in ahr, and after some links in the other rcm thread, I did another test.
>
>Larry moe curly said:
>They quit lying because of this lawsuit:
>
> http://classactionworld.com/Air+Compressor+Litigation/saaoc/891.html
>
>Unfortunately the cutoff date for filing was Oct. 24, 2004.
>-------------------------------------
>
>Unfortunately, they apparently have not stopped lying, at least in wet-dry
>vacs.
>But inyway, Salty Dogshit, there's your cite. Read it and enjoy..... You
>can apologize to me later, and don't forget to thank larry moe curly.
>
You shoulda read the cite. It doesn't mention Sears even once, Nitwit!
E Z Peaces
35 Amps RMS would be 50 Amps peak, which would be 8 HP if it were in
phase.
That's not how they test universal motors. They remove the blower and
use a pulley that will let it turn much faster. They watch the current
with a scope, and adjust the load for maximum peak current. It's not
useful information because the motor would burn out in seconds or minutes.
George
But how about those great prices...?
George
Normally I don't care for folks who insult us by using slang and not
normal words when writing but does "SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO" count?
Hint: all browsers have a find function.
Master Betty
"George" <geo...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:hi4st4$dmr$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
LOL..You can't make this stuff up.
Existential Angst
news:3ehbk5ttck2jrrguo...@4ax.com...
Well, as others pointed out, it does.
And even if it didn't, that wasn't the point. The point is, motor rating
fraud WAS litigated. Dudn't matter if it was compressors, routers, or vacs.
AND, *litigation* doesn't even matter! I showed, again, that the fraud
continues.
That you are so devoid of character that you are compelled to clutch at
straws no matter how backed into a corner you are with your own false
assertions, allegations, concepts, etc, is something you should talk to yer
mom about, or get therapy for.
If you are going criticize, or throw stones, or nitpick, do something
legitimate like EZ Peaces, who brought up the excellent excellent point
about peak vs rms -- he's absolutely right!! Peak voltage on a 120 V 60 Hz
sine wave is 177 V, with a similar rise in the current!!! Heh, I forgot
about that!
Now, because EZ has a brain+character, and understands the nature of
inneresting discussion, while you haven't a clue about any of this, he
didn't use this to dismantle my argument, but to contribute to the
discussion.
My points still stand, and you still don't have an effing clue -- about
anything, apparently.
I am glad, finally, that *others* are now acknowledging your own fraud.
Now, go away, and fix sumpn in yer mom's house, and try not screw it up or
rip her off.
--
EA
Existential Angst
news:hi4st4$dmr$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
How do you make it thru my posts, then? Must be torture!
--
EA
Existential Angst
news:hi4i83$mao$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Excellent point!
So then I guess they were conservative and modest, within their own
fraudulent ground rules, eh?
>
> That's not how they test universal motors. They remove the blower and use
> a pulley that will let it turn much faster. They watch the current with a
> scope, and adjust the load for maximum peak current.
Why adjust the load for peak current? Isn't peak current *always* at zero
rpm for *any* motor?
What you describe is how they *should* test for max mechanical power --
torque x rpm, or sumpn.
It's not
> useful information because the motor would burn out in seconds or minutes.
Funny, even for the brief amount of time the rotor was locked to get the
ampprobe reading -- mebbe one second?? times a few readings -- I thought I
started to smell the motor!
Also, revving up the motor by blocking inlet air, on any vacuum, will
rapidly over-heat the motor, even tho the current is substantially reduced.
You know, I wan't even thinking this was a universal motor, cuz the brush
screws are buried beneath another plastic housing -- IF you can even change
the brushes!
It would be a hoot if you can't -- I should check this out -- think of the
implications if this is so!!!
--
EA
Master Betty
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:sb1ck5df6d3pk8mmi...@4ax.com...
> compressor and a router. Is that your problem as well?
>
>
I didn't read the previous thread. What was the gist of the discussion?
Jim
Existential Angst
news:oc9ck5t7gjt8t4l78...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 13:13:42 -0500, "Existential Angst"
> a few days ago over something so unimportant. You still haven't
> stopped howling.
>
> Please continue!
Hey, it's inneresting stuff, that all consumers should be aware of.
Don't flatter your post-pubescent self with thinking I gave flying fuck
about you or what you think.
I used your idiocy to better flesh out arguments for other readers/googlers,
because unbeknownst to your self-preoccupied mind, it IS important, on
numerous levels.
I did the same with Ricodjour and the dual saw, except his idiocy was SO
profound that it would really be a lot of work to address his bullshit, and
not worth it if no one else was really innerested.
He is the Zen Master of Obfuscation, and you should fellate him, I mean,
study under him. Well, mebbe both....
Also important is that readers learn to recognize the techniques that lying
dishonest deceptive assholes like you, Ricodjour, and Shitty Two employ.
These techniques may get you all over in whatever streetcorner, bar, or
basement you all hang out in, circlejerking each other, but it's damaging
and counterproductive anywhere else.
Oh, yeah, I forgot -- these techniques are also good on Wall Street....
Oh, the nipple thing:
Aren't you confusing me with your mom? Sheeit, I'll bet you bit her like
crazy as a baby, which is why you proly wound up being bottle-fed. Who knew
you'd still be doing dat shit past puberty? Poor woman....
Now, go make it up to her, and fix her trailer -- if she doesn't have a TRO
filed on you.
--
EA
>
Existential Angst
news:hi596n$dap$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Salty Asshole's answer was essentially correct, except the "tail" I was
chasing was his artful idiocy.
More specifically, I said that 3 Sears hp = 1 Porter Cable hp, and then
revised that to 1.1 Porter Cable hp.
Considering that 6.5 Sears hp in a vacuum is actually about 0.8 hp (assuming
it's the same vac as my 6.5 hp Rigid, and it proly is), you can see I was
actually being pretty generous.
Salty Asshole then proceeded to demonstrate that he has absolutely no clue
about how to measure power, how to use an ampprobe, and has no power tools
to speak of, cuz his mom will only by him children's hand tools, with no
sharp edges.
Actually the discussion was perty inneresting, as it addressed the diffs
between mechanical power and electrical power, also way over SaltyAss's
head.
This asshole, when a cite was provided, wouldn't even acknowledge that, and
clutches at straws.
Now he spins this as him playing with my head, cuz he now knows he has
exposed his fraudulent ass to TWO respectable ngs, which he apparently likes
to participate in.
--
EA
>
> Jim
spaco
wire directly to the brushes. They can also go to 129 vac. They have
to read the amp meter fast, of course.
Pete Stanaitis
E Z Peaces
inductance to limit current. I think when a universal motor overspeeds,
the phase relationship between stator and rotor changes so that there is
less inductance than when the rotor is locked. The current seems to
have a jagged waveform so that the peak would be far higher than the
reading of an ordinary meter.
Twayne
Existential Angst <UNfi...@UNoptonline.net> typed:
> Awl --
>
> So apropos of the dialogue with the idiot Salty Dog on fraudulent hp
> ratings in ahr, and after some links in the other rcm thread, I did
> another test.
> Larry moe curly said:
> They quit lying because of this lawsuit:
>
> http://classactionworld.com/Air+Compressor+Litigation/saaoc/891.html
Old, outdated, and about AIR COMPRESSORS! Good grief!
>
> Unfortunately the cutoff date for filing was Oct. 24, 2004.
> -------------------------------------
>
> Unfortunately, they apparently have not stopped lying, at least in
> wet-dry vacs.
> But inyway, Salty Dogshit, there's your cite. Read it and enjoy.....
> You can apologize to me later, and don't forget to thank larry moe
> curly.
>
> amdx posted:
> Rated 6.5 peak hp, That's 40 amps at 120 Volts if you ignore
> inefficiency.
> http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00917066000P?vName=Tools&cName=Shop+Vacs+%26+Dust+Collection&sName=Wet-Dry+Vacuums
The 6.5 HP is PEAK horsepower!! Look up how peak horsepower is rated: It is
NOT the running HP. And, lol, it has nothing to do with locked rotor. But,
it IS a measure of comparison between machines, which includes ALL of the
necessary details including momentum of moving parts and so on that none of
your points even comes close to. Anything that spins is a flywheel in design
and adds to the momentum.
E x I does NOT equal POWER with an ac ckt! That only works with DC ckts
where you have no phase angles to consider.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> I realized that I actually had one of those units in the corner of my
> shop, except mine was a Rigid, also rated at 6.5 hp.
> 6.5 hp????? Holy shit....
6.5 PEAK HP! Learn what you're talking about.
>
> So I took it apart, put a vise grip on the rotor, plugged the unit
> into my ampprobe adapter, put an ampprobe on it, turned on the
> switch, and hung on for dear life.
> Holy shit.... 35 amp locked rotor current!! That was surprising,
> given how light the motor part of the unit was.
And? It's just electro-magnetics at work, during a locked rotor case.
>
> And 9 amp running current -- more on that later.
>
> Doing the calcs, the locked-rotor hp is 5.4 hp, not 6.5, altho there
> might have been some voltage drop in the cord -- 35 amps in a 16 ga
> cord, donchaknow.
Locked rotor is only good for getting the locked rotor CURRENT for safety
testing and specifications. To be acceptable to UL, CSA and all the rest,
the motor must open an element or be able to sustain locked rotor
indefinitely without creating an unsafe situation (fire, shock, etc.).
>
> But, factor in an 80% motor efficiency, and that drops to 4.3
> locked-rotor hp -- so these muthafuckas are misrepresenting even
> their locked-rotor power figures!!! Figgers.....
Wrong side: You're on the other side of the efficiency loss; it's already
done where you measured it.
>
> Oh, and we haven't even put in the *power factor*, inherent in all
> electric motors (from inductance, capacitance), which further
> diminishes the hp -- proly by another 20%.
Nothing to do with the DC calcs here that you're trying to apply to ac.
>
> So, what IS the TRUE hp, in a wet-dry vac?
Who cares? It has nothing to do with the suction power of the vacuum. It's
not even good for real comparison numbers due to a number of factors,
momentum being the most prevalent.
>
> Well, it turns out, that when disassembled, vacs draw the *most*
> current, cuz of the least resistance to air flow -- in this case, 9
> amps. If you BLOCK the air inlet, the rpm goes way up, and the
> current draw drops to 6 amps.
A straining/loaded ac electric motor INCREASES its current draw as the load
on it increases. So under the condition stated above, the current would not
have "dropped". It would have increased. Somehow you got a bad reading or
misread our meter.
>
> So, 9 amps is the FUNCTIONAL MAXIMUM current draw of a vac, and it
> proly drops to 8 amps when re-assembled, with the cannisters,
> filters, hoses, etc..
Not likely: Unless you changed the air path and direction of the vacuum
path, it changed very little if at all and most likely wasn't measurable.
>
> So the REAL operational hp of this vac is not 6.5 hp, not 5.4, and
> not 4.3 hp.
>
> It is ACTUALLY 8 x 120 x .8 x .8/746 (amps x volts x motor eff x
> power factor/ watts per hp) which calcs out to about .8 hp. Not 8.0,
> but 0.8. Holy shit.....
Again, you are applying Direct Current mathematics to Alternating Current.
They are NOT the same by a long shot. Most often they're not even in the
same ballpark for results. You're measuring an INDUCTIVE load here which
means DC math doesn't work because it doesn't account for E or I phase
angles. You need to look up some AC 101 courses.
>
> So the FUNCTIONAL MAXIMUM HORSEPOWER of this unit is not 6.5, 5.4,
> 4.3, 3, 2, or 1 -- it's 0.8 hp.
> There is NO WAY this type of unit can generate any more than this,
> unless you fundamentally changed the unit by opening up ports, hoses,
> filters, etc.
lol, well, I have to admit, you're right: it hasn't generated that! The
numbers by the time you get here are so off as to be meaningless! While
you're researching stuff, look up brake horsepower, ac power calculations
and waveform analysis.
I mention waveform analysis because, depending on WHERE you are measuring
the current in the ckt, you may or may not be getting reliable indications
from your meter, depending on whether the power is still a pure sine wave, a
cupped wave, brush spiked, squaring or sawtoothing, which only expensive
meters can cope with.
>
> MAYBE you can tweak the calcs to get this hp number up to 1.0. Still......
Nothing there worth tweaking: It's all wrong to begin with so tweaking would
mean nothing, as do the original figures.
>
>
> Thus, a claim of 6.5 hp is not only physically impossible on a 120 V
> circuit, it is a fraudulent exaggeration by 800 percent.
> Imagine if your effing taxes went up by 800%.
No, it's not; not at all. It's just that you don't have the background to be
able to accuretly and reasonably account for any of the numbers, especially
the HP rating or even how it was assessed. IF the box admits it, it's going
to be peak HP, something you haven't come close to measuring and which lasts
for only very short periods of time. You would need running HP, specced at
specific operating points and specific electrical points, and using the
correct analytical mathematics.
>
> The situation for other tools may be somewhat more ambiguous, but
> for vacs it is CRYSTAL CLEAR, because of the nature of the current
> draws vs air flow: T
> The usable hp CANNOT get any higher than in the totally
> disassembled, unclogged state, which is how it was tested.
> Use of a vac actually REDUCES the hp requirement -- think of the
> above drop to 6 amps under 100% clogging, which is the least power
> draw of this vac.
lol, yes, think about that 6 amps, would you? Then get some education about
the whole situation. The test failed miserably due to gross misapplication
of tools and measurements.
>
>
> So claiming 6.5 hp is quadruply irresponsible, gratuitous, nonsensical,
> and fraudulent.
No, not at all. It's a meaningless figure I admit, but it CAN be calculated
and it IS a measure of comparison between machines but even that isn't
linear. It's simply the WRONG spec for a vacuum cleaner, that's all. It's
nearly meaningless to the amount of vacuum produced.
>
> No doubt, none of this is good enough for disingenuous kneejerk
> assholes like Salty Dog, Shitty Two, and Ricodjour, who are no doubt
> going to bleat Liar, Where are the cites, blah blah blah.
You're probably right, because anyone knowing the difference between
calculating AC and DC power wouldn't likely bother to even respond again,
let alone having done so once. In my haste I've probably even made a couple
of not quite correct statements too, but I consider too unimportant to worry
about based on the misapplication of math and demonstrated understanding of
HP without units to accompany it.
>
> They are so quick to call others liars because they themselves are
> inveterate and incorrigible effing liars, as Ricodjour just proved in
> the Major score thread, with the resurrection of the Climb vs
> Conventional / Dual Saw topic.
Now you're demonstrating your trollishness, your refusal to learn, your
refusal of information from others more knowledgeable than yourself and what
I consider to be intentional ignorance.
>
> So inyway, there are the numbers for a 6.5 hp wetdry vac.
Even though they are far from accuate.
>
> Not that it's really a practical biggie -- the unit seems functional
> enough, altho a neighbor's wife begged me to take out of her garage
> -- hubby wadn't too pleased when he found out, but since sed wife has
> a butt crack butterfly tattoo about 1 foot square that he apparently
> finds perty aphrodesiacal, he didn't say much. I myself prefer the
> vac.....
lol, I'll bet you would!
>
> It also has a detachable leaf-blower top -- ingenious design.
>
> It appears that compressors are more conservatively rated as a result
> of the above lawsuit, but virtually all of these big-box asshole
> companies will lie to the fullest extent of the law.
LOL, don't look now, but CAMPBELL HAUSFELD, : DEVILBISS AIR POWER CO., :
INGERSOLL-RAND CO. and : COLEMAN POWERMATE, INC aren't big vacuum cleaner
makers! They are COMPRESSOR manufacturers. Vacuum does not equate to
Compressor. That link is worthless to your points.
>
> The trick is to find the smallest bunch of lies for your consuming
> buck.
You'll find that, in order to legally sell product in North America, using
"lies" such as you indicate very, very seldom happen and when they do, they
find themselves in quite a bit of hot water.
In order to legall sell a product in the USA or Canada you need UL, CSA,
ECL, ET, EU or one of a host of other safety approvals or even MOUs on the
equipment. The electrical specs they toot have been verified for safety
reasons and putting anything else on the equipment, once they've passed all
the tests and can legally sell the product, would get it pulled from the
shelves.
There are so many errors and missed assumptions in your post that it's not
even worth looking at any of the followups, really. HP isn't measured at
stalled rotor, open/closed/normal assumptions are totally screwed up among
several other points you raise.
The REAL problem with vac's isn't lies: their numbers are all going to be
repeatable with proper testing, I'm sure. The "problem" is that vacuum
cleaners, to have an accurate measurement that means anything to the average
consumer have to be stated in SUCTION POWER, not amps or HP. You could have
a 30 HP motor and/or a 30Amp motor, each of which creates only a few bars of
suction or enough suction to suck up the carpets! The motor is irrelevant
for the most part: It's the design of the vacuum creating parts that
matters, like rotor speed, vane design, port size and cleanliness of the air
flow, etc. etc. etc..
Suction is easy to measure for anyone or any company. It's just how many
inches of (water, mercury, whatever they decide to use) in a certain sized
pipe and how far up the pipe the liquid can be pulled.
Twayne
--
--
Live in the moment;
be open to the possibilities
that life has to offer.
Twayne
In news:4b4556ed$0$5011$607e...@cv.net,
Existential Angst <UNfi...@UNoptonline.net> typed:
--
Tony
I can feel the love in the air!
Tony
sa...@dog.com
sa...@dog.com
wrote:
>Dang, I thought this was about a Hewlett-Packard printer.
Yeah, some twit is making a big stink about them exagerating about how
many copies they print per minute. He says they cheat by using smaller
paper.
Master Betty
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:ggack5lga3jj2qact...@4ax.com...
> labled as being 3hp was probably not truly 3 hp.
>
> I twisted his nipple by asking him for a cite, which he of course
> can't produce, and he has been chasing his tail and turning himself
> inside out over it for days now.
>
Sounds like a lover's quarrel.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
<JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>On Jan 6, 10:37 pm, "Existential Angst" <UNfit...@UNoptonline.net>
>wrote:
>> Awl --
>>
>> So apropos of the dialogue with the idiot Salty Dog on fraudulent hp ratings
>> in ahr, and after some links in the other rcm thread, I did another test.
>>
>> Larry moe curly said:
>> They quit lying because of this lawsuit:
>>
>> http://classactionworld.com/Air+Compressor+Litigation/saaoc/891.html
>>
>> Unfortunately the cutoff date for filing was Oct. 24, 2004.
>> -------------------------------------
>>
>> Unfortunately, they apparently have not stopped lying, at least in wet-dry
>> vacs.
>> But inyway, Salty Dogshit, there's your cite. Read it and enjoy..... You
>> can apologize to me later, and don't forget to thank larry moe curly.
>>
>> amdx posted:
>> Rated 6.5 peak hp, That's 40 amps at 120 Volts if you ignore inefficiency.http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00917066000P?vName=Tools&cNa...
>> EA
>
>Probably less than the .8hp you calculated. These motors are crap and
>not very efficent. Tear one apart and you will find about half the
>windings that are normally in a good motor.
>
>Jimmie
However there is some faulty logic in his testing. The motor draws
MORE POWER with the fan installed and moving air than it does without
the fan, and genreally about the same "stalled" - that is running with
the fan and not moving air, as with no fan. (within a couple percent,
generally)
Also - not defending the crooked liars - but they don't rate vacuums
by locked rotor current, or by current draw, but by some strange
magical unit called "air horsepower" :
"air horsepower ['er 'h?rs‚pau?·?r]
(mechanical engineering)
The theoretical (minimum) power required to deliver the specified
quantity of air under the specified pressure conditions in a fan,
blower, compressor, or vacuum pump. Abbreviated air hp.
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms, 6E,
Copyright" © 2003 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
The basic formula for static air pressure is CFM X Static
Pressure/6356.
The basic formula for total air HP is CFM X Total Pressure/6536.
see
http://books.google.ca/books?id=G47biva6gtwC&pg=PT605&lpg=PT605&dq=%22air+horsepower%22+define&source=bl&ots=vL6QFR3egb&sig=DoN0OAvhUW_bCv1eG8jcnDmYqRI&hl=en&ei=GJBGS8fGMc6j8Ab6xdnuAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CBYQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=&f=false
for more information or just google "air horsepower" define
They could still very well be lying, and at the very least are
misleading.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Not necessarily true.
The "lamb" motor on my Beam central cac, and many. many others have
"bypass cooling" meaning they have a separate cooling fan so they do
NOT overheat when they run "plugged".
Virtually all the higher quality vacuums are built this way.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
Amp meter? Digital storage scope connected to the current sensing
shunt or current transformer.
Michael A. Terrell
Existential Angst wrote:
>
> sa...@dog.com wrote:
> >
> > You shoulda read the cite. It doesn't mention Sears even once, Nitwit!
> >
> >
>
> Well, as others pointed out, it does.
>
> And even if it didn't, that wasn't the point. The point is, motor rating
> fraud WAS litigated. Dudn't matter if it was compressors, routers, or vacs.
>
> AND, *litigation* doesn't even matter! I showed, again, that the fraud
> continues.
> That you are so devoid of character that you are compelled to clutch at
> straws no matter how backed into a corner you are with your own false
> assertions, allegations, concepts, etc, is something you should talk to yer
> mom about, or get therapy for.
>
> If you are going criticize, or throw stones, or nitpick, do something
> legitimate like EZ Peaces, who brought up the excellent excellent point
> about peak vs rms -- he's absolutely right!! Peak voltage on a 120 V 60 Hz
> sine wave is 177 V, with a similar rise in the current!!! Heh, I forgot
> about that!
You also forgot that you were testing an old motor, not a brand new
one with bright, shiny copper segments & new brushes like they used.
Higher contact resistance limits the maximum current.
--
Greed is the root of all eBay.
Michael A. Terrell
sa...@dog.com wrote:
>
> George wrote:
> >
> >Normally I don't care for folks who insult us by using slang and not
> >normal words when writing but does "SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO" count?
> >
>
> itself.
>
> http://www.sears.com/
Sigh. They were "SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO" for over 100 years. Can you
really be that stupid?
Existential Angst
news:hi5kh6$dm0$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Normally, I would appreciate such a detailed response/critique, but it seems
you and SaltyDog are two peas in the same pod.
In this VERY first paragraph, you've *already* made TWO fundamental and
EGREGIOUS errors.
1. Peak HP, at least the way Sears/Rigid are doing it, has EVERYTHING to do
with LRC.
If you paid attention to the fukn CONCEPTS, instead of bristling and just
looking to pounce on something/anything, you'd see that there is no other
way BUT to use LRC to generate that magnitude of faux horsepower.
It is also common knowledge in the trade that this is what is done.
Conspicuously absent from you, if you disagree with LRC, is an alternative
way to ""calculate"" peak hp.
2. E x I ABSOLUTELY DOES EQUAL POWER IN AC CIRCUITS.... when the circuit
is *purely resistive*, and when the frequency is not mega-high (skin
effects, capacitance, etc).
Read EZ Peaces excellent correction to my initial analysis.
YOU don't understand, apparently, what "peak" even means, in AC circuits.
Look up "rms".
Phase angles result from *impedance*, ie, inductances and capacitances added
in to the circuit.
Having said that, AC motors DO have substantial inductance. THAT'S WHAT THE
POWER FACTOR IS FOR.
The power factor IS the cosine of the phase angle, which I included in my
calcs.
That's all I'm going to say, because the rest of your erroneous sarcastic
self-righteouis drivel is just too tedious to address.
It's one thing to jerk yourself off in public -- many of us do that here,
still with good intention, and sometimes with good humor -- but goddamm,
you're trying to get your ejaculate in my goddamm hair, ferchrissakes. I
hate that....
I make the same offer I made regarding SaltyAsshole's chronic idiocy:
If anyone ELSE wants me to address the errors in your tedium, I will.
But it's clearly pointless to discuss it with you.
Goodgawd..... get a life.
--
EA
Wild_Bill
--
WB
.........
metalworking projects
www.kwagmire.com/metal_proj.html
"Existential Angst" <UNfi...@UNoptonline.net> wrote in message
news:4b4556ed$0$5011$607e...@cv.net...
> Awl --
>
> So apropos of the dialogue with the idiot Salty Dog on fraudulent hp
> ratings in ahr, and after some links in the other rcm thread, I did
> another test.
>
> Larry moe curly said:
> They quit lying because of this lawsuit:
>
> http://classactionworld.com/Air+Compressor+Litigation/saaoc/891.html
>
> Unfortunately the cutoff date for filing was Oct. 24, 2004.
> -------------------------------------
>
> Unfortunately, they apparently have not stopped lying, at least in wet-dry
> vacs.
> But inyway, Salty Dogshit, there's your cite. Read it and enjoy..... You
> can apologize to me later, and don't forget to thank larry moe curly.
>
>
> amdx posted:
> Rated 6.5 peak hp, That's 40 amps at 120 Volts if you ignore inefficiency.
> http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_00917066000P?vName=Tools&cName=Shop+Vacs+%26+Dust+Collection&sName=Wet-Dry+Vacuums
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> I realized that I actually had one of those units in the corner of my
> shop, except mine was a Rigid, also rated at 6.5 hp.
> 6.5 hp????? Holy shit....
>
> So I took it apart, put a vise grip on the rotor, plugged the unit into my
> ampprobe adapter, put an ampprobe on it, turned on the switch, and hung on
> for dear life.
> Holy shit.... 35 amp locked rotor current!! That was surprising, given
> how light the motor part of the unit was.
>
> And 9 amp running current -- more on that later.
>
> Doing the calcs, the locked-rotor hp is 5.4 hp, not 6.5, altho there might
> have been some voltage drop in the cord -- 35 amps in a 16 ga cord,
> donchaknow.
>
> But, factor in an 80% motor efficiency, and that drops to 4.3 locked-rotor
> hp -- so these muthafuckas are misrepresenting even their locked-rotor
> power figures!!! Figgers.....
>
> Oh, and we haven't even put in the *power factor*, inherent in all
> electric motors (from inductance, capacitance), which further diminishes
> the hp -- proly by another 20%.
>
> So, what IS the TRUE hp, in a wet-dry vac?
>
> Well, it turns out, that when disassembled, vacs draw the *most* current,
> cuz of the least resistance to air flow -- in this case, 9 amps. If you
> BLOCK the air inlet, the rpm goes way up, and the current draw drops to 6
> amps.
>
> So, 9 amps is the FUNCTIONAL MAXIMUM current draw of a vac, and it proly
> drops to 8 amps when re-assembled, with the cannisters, filters, hoses,
> etc..
>
> So the REAL operational hp of this vac is not 6.5 hp, not 5.4, and not 4.3
> hp.
>
> It is ACTUALLY 8 x 120 x .8 x .8/746 (amps x volts x motor eff x power
> factor/ watts per hp) which calcs out to about .8 hp. Not 8.0, but 0.8.
> Holy shit.....
>
> So the FUNCTIONAL MAXIMUM HORSEPOWER of this unit is not 6.5, 5.4, 4.3, 3,
> 2, or 1 -- it's 0.8 hp.
> There is NO WAY this type of unit can generate any more than this, unless
> you fundamentally changed the unit by opening up ports, hoses, filters,
> etc.
>
> MAYBE you can tweak the calcs to get this hp number up to 1.0.
> Still......
>
>
> Thus, a claim of 6.5 hp is not only physically impossible on a 120 V
> circuit, it is a fraudulent exaggeration by 800 percent.
> Imagine if your effing taxes went up by 800%.
>
> The situation for other tools may be somewhat more ambiguous, but for
> vacs it is CRYSTAL CLEAR, because of the nature of the current draws vs
> air flow: T
> The usable hp CANNOT get any higher than in the totally disassembled,
> unclogged state, which is how it was tested.
> Use of a vac actually REDUCES the hp requirement -- think of the above
> drop to 6 amps under 100% clogging, which is the least power draw of this
> vac.
>
>
> So claiming 6.5 hp is quadruply irresponsible, gratuitous, nonsensical,
> and fraudulent.
>
> No doubt, none of this is good enough for disingenuous kneejerk assholes
> like Salty Dog, Shitty Two, and Ricodjour, who are no doubt going to bleat
> Liar, Where are the cites, blah blah blah.
>
> They are so quick to call others liars because they themselves are
> inveterate and incorrigible effing liars, as Ricodjour just proved in the
> Major score thread, with the resurrection of the Climb vs Conventional /
> Dual Saw topic.
>
> So inyway, there are the numbers for a 6.5 hp wetdry vac.
>
> Not that it's really a practical biggie -- the unit seems functional
> enough, altho a neighbor's wife begged me to take out of her garage --
> hubby wadn't too pleased when he found out, but since sed wife has a butt
> crack butterfly tattoo about 1 foot square that he apparently finds perty
> aphrodesiacal, he didn't say much. I myself prefer the vac.....
>
> It also has a detachable leaf-blower top -- ingenious design.
>
> It appears that compressors are more conservatively rated as a result of
> the above lawsuit, but virtually all of these big-box asshole companies
> will lie to the fullest extent of the law.
>
> The trick is to find the smallest bunch of lies for your consuming buck.
> --
> EA
>
Existential Angst
news:uo3dk553furnme16p...@4ax.com...
I agree. I thought I basically said that. "Clogged", the current drops
from 9 amps to 6 amps.
I stated that the *maximum* power a vacuum can *possibly* draw (or develop)
is in the free-flowing, unclogged state -- which in this case calc'd out to
be 0.8 hp. Unless you change porting, hosing, fan dimensions, etc. on the
same motor.
>
> Also - not defending the crooked liars - but they don't rate vacuums
> by locked rotor current, or by current draw, but by some strange
> magical unit called "air horsepower" :
>
> "air horsepower ['er 'h?rs,pau?�?r]
> (mechanical engineering)
> The theoretical (minimum) power required to deliver the specified
> quantity of air under the specified pressure conditions in a fan,
> blower, compressor, or vacuum pump. Abbreviated air hp.
> McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms, 6E,
> Copyright" � 2003 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
>
> The basic formula for static air pressure is CFM X Static
> Pressure/6356.
>
> The basic formula for total air HP is CFM X Total Pressure/6536.
>
>
> see
> http://books.google.ca/books?id=G47biva6gtwC&pg=PT605&lpg=PT605&dq=%22air+horsepower%22+define&source=bl&ots=vL6QFR3egb&sig=DoN0OAvhUW_bCv1eG8jcnDmYqRI&hl=en&ei=GJBGS8fGMc6j8Ab6xdnuAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CBYQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=&f=false
> for more information or just google "air horsepower" define
>
>
> They could still very well be lying, and at the very least are
> misleading.
This is inneresting, but.... they DO call it "peak hp", not air hp or even
"peak air hp".
According to your def, the air hp for this vac would in fact be 0.8 hp, no?
--
EA
>
Existential Angst
news:lr4dk5ljrg23hqhiv...@4ax.com...
That's a good idea/design. No doubt it would add cost to these "commodity
units".
--
EA
Existential Angst
news:05eck5lhn70ua9bb3...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 13:52:27 -0500, "Existential Angst"
>
> Please stop before you hurt my feelings!
I do realize your feelings can't be hurt, you and your ilk can't be
embarrassed.
Proly from all those communal showers you took with your mom and her
boyfriends, in that cramped trailer shower.
Saved water, eh? You think y'all ever wound up showering with your
biological dad?
--
EA
>
Master Betty
"Existential Angst" <UNfi...@UNoptonline.net> wrote in message
coffee -> monitor
sa...@dog.com
wrote:
>
Laughing at something as dull-witted as that doesn't say much for your
intellect.
And if he is (as he claims) smart enough to realize he can't hurt my
feelings, he must be prety stupid himself, to keep trying anyway.
George
OP mentioned they had a 3 HP Sears router. And the discussion turned
into the fact that Sears is well known for being the original big box
store that intentionally lied to people concerning the specs of
appliances/tools that had an electric motor since they always touted the
meaningless to the end user locked rotor specs.
George
I guess you missed this:
"This page is dedicated to the Air Compressor Litigation class action.."
Existential Angst
news:b14ek55clepuclhlk...@4ax.com...
Yeah, well, the least I can do is take a shot that
1. yer mom can read and
2. she might be monitoring yer ng activity,
and thusly offer her my condolances.
Also, if she has any interest in finding out who yer dad really is, I could
poss. be of service there, as well.
Plus, you proly dint get the joke, inyway... sheeit, you still don't get
*hp*, do you?? Which is OK, bec yer ignerint soulmate Twayne don't get it
either, and HE spent a whole lot more time not getting it!
Heh, it *was* perty funny, and, in your case, an unnerving possibility of
being true.
--
EA
Existential Angst
news:8aeek5h2uv46t2ap1...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:02:30 -0500, "Existential Angst"
>
And you are the poster child for why moms who can't read should not be
allowed to home school their inbred children.
Heh, but mebbe one or two of her boyfriends could read, which is how you
are now able to peck out post after nonsensical post.
--
EA
Existential Angst
news:7vhek51u9bkdtq5dm...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:40:13 -0500, "Existential Angst"
> your good material so quickly?
>
> What's next? A series of "Your mama is so fat" jokes?
>
You've got a point -- even tho the above WAS new material.....
.
But the other point is, are you really worth anything other than dredging up
my old JHS shtick?
Do you want to get back to hp?
Of course you don't.
Because you were wrong in every single one of your assertions.
As were the intellectual rejects Shitty Two, Ricodjour, and now the new
intellectual reject Twayne, who really worked *hard*, yo, to be so
outstandingly incorrect -- very very impressive.
It's astounding to me that someone can lecture on how wrong I am on AC
circuits by bringing in DC circuits, and then shows he understands neither!
But, somewhere along the line, he learned the words "phase angle", just like
Ricodjour learned the words "climb cutting", and you have some vague idea of
watts and hp.
But none of you can put anything together correctly, but you spout off
anyway!
.
How do y'all do it?
WHY do y'all do it? Oh, that one's easy: cuz yer all assholes.
You got a cite, you got another "case study", and it's STILL not good enough
for your salty dishonest ass.
What, cuz it wadn't *specifically* about routers? Gimme a fukn break.
Goodgawd, you have nary a clue.
Go buy yer mom a bottle, or go check on her still.
--
EA
RicodJour
wrote:
>
> Ricodjour learned the words "climb cutting", and you have some vague idea of
> watts and hp.
> But none of you can put anything together correctly, but you spout off
> anyway!
Don't you have a chin up bar to design or something...?
Seriously, if you were petting a pussy other than some damn cat, you'd
be far less irritable about life. Go volunteer somewhere, or go to a
bookstore and hang out in the cafe. You'll meet someone for sure!
R
Tony
LOL!! Smaller paper.....
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Not likely
More likely quite a bit higher because air horsepower is GENERALLY
used for compressors and vacuum cleaners running free move air with
less restriction than compressors. I've never run the numbers, but
screw compressors have much higher "efficiency " than piston
compressors when comparing air HP to power consumed.
So no idea what the REAL air HP of the vacuum might be, but assuming
it is close to 0.8HP (either above or below) (either brake HP or
electrical) would be a GIANT leap of faith.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
<UNfi...@UNoptonline.net> wrote:
At the base cost level, today, a bypass cooled motor can be built for
pennies more per unit than the cheapest direct cooled unit.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
wrote:
Actually, on a router the locked rotor spec means a lot more than it
does on a vacuum cleaner. A router WORKS at close to locked rotor on
occaision, and the better the locked rotor power, the better the
"overload" torque will be. You need to remember that a universal motor
is essentially a DC Sries wound motor in its character - maximum tork
at minimum RPM and minimum torque at maximim rpm. The AC Hysteresis /
eddy currrents etc tend to limit the free-running RPM of a universal
motor run on AC to significantly lower than a DC only series motor run
on DC. The newer stuff has feedback controlled speed control as well
If the locked rotor power (and therefore torque - as they are closely
related in a series wound motor) is too low the router will stall
instead of "catching up".
Some of the cheaper and older units more closely resemble a shunt
wound motor - with inherently steady speed that will just keep drawing
more and more power as the load tries to slow them down. - so their
"underspeed" current draw, approaching locked rotor, is also
significantly higher than their normal load running speed power
consumption.
The fact is that the "advertized" horsepower is often either
misleading or totally irrelevent to the operation of the machine -
whether it is in error, fraudulent, or wildly exagerated
cl...@snyder.on.ca
>On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:02:30 -0500, "Existential Angst"
>U.S. schools really need to eliminate social promotion.
AND start teaching spelling again.
perty
prolly
inneresting
Existential Angst
news:dvlfk51n7vd2mj2as...@4ax.com...
Excuse me.... it's "proly"... which is short for "proberbly".
Oh, you forgot "ignerint" -- one of my personal favs.
--
EA
Existential Angst
news:ntkfk51e58humjf1q...@4ax.com...
I don't know about giant.... once you measure volts and current, your only
leaps are a motor efficiency, and a phase angle. .8 for either is
reasonable, and proly quite generous for sears stuff.
So in my mind, altho 0.8 hp is not etched in stone, it's a very real
ballpark for the this wetdry vac *at max load*, ie, max air flow.
The point being, 0.8 is a far cry from 6.5.
--
EA
Existential Angst
news:1alfk5dic9c2514en...@4ax.com...
???????????????????????
Routers "work" at 20,000+ rpm!!!
Just how close to zero rpm do you think a working router gets?
and the better the locked rotor power, the better the
> "overload" torque will be. You need to remember that a universal motor
> is essentially a DC Sries wound motor in its character - maximum tork
> at minimum RPM and minimum torque at maximim rpm. The AC Hysteresis /
> eddy currrents etc tend to limit the free-running RPM of a universal
> motor run on AC to significantly lower than a DC only series motor run
> on DC. The newer stuff has feedback controlled speed control as well
> If the locked rotor power (and therefore torque - as they are closely
> related in a series wound motor) is too low the router will stall
> instead of "catching up".
>
> Some of the cheaper and older units more closely resemble a shunt
> wound motor - with inherently steady speed that will just keep drawing
> more and more power as the load tries to slow them down. - so their
> "underspeed" current draw, approaching locked rotor, is also
> significantly higher than their normal load running speed power
> consumption.
>
> The fact is that the "advertized" horsepower is often either
> misleading or totally irrelevent to the operation of the machine -
> whether it is in error, fraudulent, or wildly exagerated
True, in a sense. The tool will function, or it won't function, regardless
of what the label says or doesn't say.
But....
This type of marketing reflects the corporation's opinion of the consumer,
which often manifests in a variety of other ways.
The unwillingness -- and often inablility -- to hold corps accountable --
for anything -- is ultimately what led to the recent debacle, and this
debacle is really just one of many.
--
EA
Master Betty
<sa...@dog.com> wrote in message
news:b14ek55clepuclhlk...@4ax.com...
Ah come on....
For a flamer you sure are thin skinned. See...that's funny. That's called
"irony".
sa...@dog.com
wrote:
It might help if you know what irony was.