Karl Vacek wrote:
> So are you
> telling us that this wonderful piece of Chinese technology
> takes the equivalent of over 25 amps at 220 volts ?
Effectively, yes. Air tools are terribly inefficient from an energy
standpoint; just look at how hot the compressor gets. All that heat (and
liquefied water, etc.) is energy that is NOT going into the tool. And the
air exhausted from the tool is still at considerably more than atmospheric
pressure (until it expands at the tool exhaust, of course).
> To the CFM point, I suggest the fifth paragraph in the
> "example" section:
>
> "When a compressor pumps one "CFM" (cubic foot per minute),
I agree entirely ... note please it says "a compressor", NOT "an air tool".
Both are rated for cfm at the intake; but the compressor takes in air at
lower pressure than the tool does.
It's easy enough to measure for yourself. Run your compressor until it
shuts off, note the tank pressure, turn off the motor, then start running
your choice of air tool continuously. Time how long until the tank pressure
drops to some lower pressure. A little simple math will give you
approximately how many scfm came out of the tank.
Or to put it another way, my 8 cfm compressor has no hope of keeping up with
my 4 cfm die grinder when it's used continuously. In less than a minute,
even with the compressor running continuously, the pressure is so low that I
have to stop and take a break.
It's certainly possible that not all air tool makers rate their tools the
same way, but I've had the same experience with all sorts of them, including
the professional grade paint gun that a (professional) friend of a friend
tried to run with my compressor. He refused to ever set foot in my garage
again until I got a "real" compressor <G>
Randall
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
Shop-talk mailing list
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shop-talk
http://www.team.net/archive
|