Posted by Mike Poole on 11/04/2018 09:21:27:
We all too often seem to forget that maintaining torque at low rpm is not maintaining power. …
Mike
Far worse than just forgetting in my case! I have hazy notions of the relationship between Work, Power and Torque and find the whole thing slippery. Doesn't help that 'work' and 'power' both have day-to-day meanings adrift from their precise scientific/engineering definitions. Or that torque is sometimes defined as 'turning power', I think(?), with power used in it's unscientific sense. Confusion abounds.
Here's my attempt at visualising what's going on in a Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor:
- Unlike motors depending on eddy currents or field windings to provide a magnetic field, a permanent magnet is always full on, ready to go.
- Power is the rate at which the motor can do work. The work (scientific definition) doesn't vary, so a tiny motor running all day can do as much work as a large motor does in 5 minutes. But being less powerful it takes longer to do it. A stopped motor does no work safely. A stalled motor also does no work; instead it converts it's energy input into heat and magic smoke. Perhaps this leads to the (wrong?) idea that a stopped motor has no torque. I believe it might.
- Torque is a measure of a motors ability to push, and it's rotor doesn't have to move to have force behind it. Imagine holding a breeze block over your head; you and it are not doing any work – no power is developed. But even though it's not moving the breeze block has the potential to do work, it is applying force. Drop it on your foot and different rules apply – work and power are delivered to your toes.
The ability of different types of motor to deliver torque across the range varies considerably. When stopped IC engines provide no torque at all: they have to be cranked up to start and run quite fast before they can turn anything. A clutch and gearbox are needed to make an IC engine's limited torque useful at the wheels. Likewise a steam-turbine; hopeless at low speeds, brilliant at high, and again the need for a gearbox. IC and turbines can deliver lots of power, but they ain't good at torque. Conversely reciprocating steam engines provide excellent starting torque, but aren't efficient, or easy to scale to deliver very high powers. Electric motors are even better than reciprocating steam, and the PMSM type is particularly good.
Although I find it easier to visualise the difference between torque and power when nothing is moving, torque and power coexist at all times. Once a motor is turning belts and gears can be used to increase torque (the ability to make slow deep cuts) or increase speed ( fast shallow cuts). We manipulate our machines to deliver a good combination of torque and power to do the job, fortunately without needing a University qualification.
I'm not too worried about the possibility of overheating when a PMSM is running slowly or stopped. Conventional 3-phase motors are delightfully robust but the best that can be done for them is a temperature cut out and current overload. Many installations are only protected by a fuse. You might say they are strong in the arm and thick in the head! In contrast a PMSM requires a controller with a brain the size of a planet. It's not difficult to imagine a controller clever enough to keep the motor inside it's safe zone.
Grateful for comments and criticism – I really struggle with this stuff. Wikipedia has a good entry on torque but the maths is way over my head. For me it's like trying to open a door without the key.
Dave
Edited By SillyOldDuffer on 11/04/2018 11:07:51