Why is FLC higher than FLA?

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LPS

Member
Location
Florida
I’ve always assumed the FLC in the tables were higher than the typical FLA on the motor to allow a little extra circuit capacity in case a motor was swapped out with a less efficient one. Does anyone know why FLC is higher? If you do know, can you provide a reference? Thanks…
 
LPS said:
I’ve always assumed the FLC in the tables were higher than the typical FLA on the motor to allow a little extra circuit capacity in case a motor was swapped out with a less efficient one. Does anyone know why FLC is higher? If you do know, can you provide a reference? Thanks…
Click to expand...
I've always known it as FLC, not FLA. But then I'm just a Brit.............................:)
 
LPS said:
I’ve always assumed the FLC in the tables were higher than the typical FLA on the motor to allow a little extra circuit capacity in case a motor was swapped out with a less efficient one. Does anyone know why FLC is higher? If you do know, can you provide a reference? Thanks…
Click to expand...
That is what I read also by
 
The code is a conservative code and the FLC values in Tables 430.247 through 430.251 are intended to be worst case and allow for the replacement of an existing motor with a less efficient motor without requiring new conductors and OCPDs.

You use the FLC from the tables to size the conductors and the branch circuit OCPDs for the motor, and you use the nameplate FLC to size the overload protection.
 
Besoeker3 said:
I've always known it as FLC, not FLA. But then I'm just a Brit.............................:)
Click to expand...
The NEC agrees with you as Article 430 only used FLC. It never uses FLA.
Those two terms are used by many instructors to differentiate between the table current and the nameplate current.
I prefer to use "Table FLC" and "nameplate FLC" for that purpose when I teach as that leaves no question what current value you are talking about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LPS
don_resqcapt19 said:
The NEC agrees with you as Article 430 only used FLC. It never uses FLA.
Those two terms are used by many instructors to differentiate between the table current and the nameplate current.
I prefer to use "Table FLC" and "nameplate FLC" for that purpose when I teach as that leaves no question what current value you are talking about.
Click to expand...
Thank you Mr Don.
I watched the presentation by Mike Holt and the different tables. We usually have just the nameplate and not the tables.
 
Besoeker3 said:
Thank you Mr Don.
I watched the presentation by Mike Holt and the different tables. We usually have just the nameplate and not the tables.
Click to expand...
You are required to use the table currents to size the conductors, and are permitted to use them to size the branch circuit OCPD.
 
Besoeker3 said:
Um....................I'm British.
I just use the FLC from the nameplate.
Click to expand...
We are not permitted to do that under the rules of the NEC.
[/quote]430.22 Single Motor.
Conductors that supply a single motor used in a continuous duty application shall have an ampacity of not less than 125 percent of the motor full-load current rating, as determined by 430.6(A)(1) ....

430.6(A)(1) Table Values.
Other than for motors built for low speeds (less than 1200 RPM) or high torques, and for multispeed motors, the values given in Table 430.247, Table 430.248, Table 430.249, and Table 430.250 shall be used to determine the ampacity of conductors or ampere ratings of switches, branch-circuit short-circuit and ground-fault protection, instead of the actual current rating marked on the motor nameplate. ....[/quote]
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
We are not permitted to do that under the rules of the NEC.
Click to expand...
430.22 Single Motor.
Conductors that supply a single motor used in a continuous duty application shall have an ampacity of not less than 125 percent of the motor full-load current rating, as determined by 430.6(A)(1) ....

430.6(A)(1) Table Values.
Other than for motors built for low speeds (less than 1200 RPM) or high torques, and for multispeed motors, the values given in Table 430.247, Table 430.248, Table 430.249, and Table 430.250 shall be used to determine the ampacity of conductors or ampere ratings of switches, branch-circuit short-circuit and ground-fault protection, instead of the actual current rating marked on the motor nameplate. ....[/quote]
[/QUOTE]
Yes, I'm aware of that. Mike Holt explains it in detail and rather well.
 
I teach, so I was hoping someone had some inside info on the logic that went into coming up with the numbers… As electricians we just follow the rules, but when you teach it’s helpful when you can answer the questions that arise.
Thanks for the replies.
 
Carultch said:
Do you still use the horsepower unit on motors for the British market? Or do you follow the lead of the rest of Europe, and use kW for both electrical and mechanical power?
Click to expand...
Yes we do. Power is just power. Not specifically mechanical or electrical.
When I was at secondary school, high school you would call it, we used 33,000 ft·lb for horsepower. But that about 60 years ago.
Now we just use kW. It's simpler. In fact, a lots of units are are much simpler. SI or International System.

US units are the unusual compared to the rest of the world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top