VFD on Non "Inverter Duty" Motor CIID1

Status
Not open for further replies.
The nuts and bolts of the issue here is the motor is TEFC (totally enclosed fan cooled). Slowing the motor down with a VFD means that cooling fan won't move as much air as it does at full speed - this could result in higher surface temperature on the motor - which temperature is an ignition concern in a hazardous location. If the motor were designed to operate below ignition point even if running on the VFD it might be ok. Said motor might also be ok to use on a drive if not in a hazardous location. It is the hazardous location that creates the concerns here.

Though not in a hazardous location, I have installed inverter duty motors on drives before that had an aux cooling motor/fan integrated into them simply because the thing was normally run at low enough speed a typical TEFC wasn't going to produce enough cooling air flow at low speeds.

I imagine there may be such things out there for hazardous locations as well.
 
bwat said:
So what exactly is it that you wish others to see?

This thread looks pretty clear from outside perspective. rbalex made basic statements about manufacturer's documentation only applying to products from that manufacturer. Basic stuff. You can try to say that he was saying (or implying) something else, but we can all read what he actually said...



No... he clearly said that NIDEC docs only apply to NIDEC products.

I truly don't see how you infer anything else out of that. It's almost like you are arguing with words that just aren't there.
Click to expand...
bwat said:
So what exactly is it that you wish others to see?

This thread looks pretty clear from outside perspective. rbalex made basic statements about manufacturer's documentation only applying to products from that manufacturer. Basic stuff. You can try to say that he was saying (or implying) something else, but we can all read what he actually said...
No... he clearly said that NIDEC docs only apply to NIDEC products.

I truly don't see how you infer anything else out of that. It's almost like you are arguing with words that just aren't there.
Click to expand...

When quoting someone in response to another person' s assertion . . . it is not a personal attack. And you have not cited any instance that would lead to that.

In civilized discussion (which is what this thing is)--there are four types of philosophical reasoning.

1. Ethics
2. Logic
3. Metaphysics
4. Epistemology

Failure to find the right place (type of reasoning ) would only lead to nowhere. That is what I mean when I say: "you are not seeing" the whole picture.

By dismissing the response as personal attack-- that is caused by lack of a better response . . .that is more sensible. A response on the part of the responder.

I looked at the list of responders and I noticed the aggressive and even adversarial responses are coming from MODERATORS.
More than a thousand views on a single topic means readers are picking up interest and MODERATORS should not blow it.

Mods don't like what they see. . .and they only espouse comments that they want to read.

Like having fetish for a creamy cake with the pudding on top.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top