Iain
You need to be very careful when considering any of the inexpensive import compressors as many of the specifications are contradictory. Often flat out impossible.
The smallest quiet compressor that I know to be capable of running a proper sandblaster is the Hydrovane 502. I have one on my Guyson blast cabinet. It is capable of keeping up with the blast gun demand at 110 -120 psi.using the smallest size nozzle. I'd prefer a bigger nozzle to work faster but it gets the job done.
Hydrovane 502 specifications are 3 Hp / 2.2 kW motor, 8 cfm air delivery at 140 psi / 10 bar. Sound level 69 dBA, probably at 1 metre. At lower pressure I get a little more air. Pretty typical numbers for a proper industrial compressor. My experience is that Hydovanes seem to give a little more air in practice than conventional piston compressors of the same rating. The 502 replaced a Vee twin rated at 9 cfm which occasionally struggled a touch on the blast cabinet.
Sanity check figures for evaluating compressor specifications are:-
4.5 cfm per Hp at 100 psi / 7 bar output, input air draw about 6 to 6.5 cfm
3.5 cfm per Hp at 140 psi / 10 bar output, input air draw about 7 to 8 cfm
However specifications referring to input air draw will be unreliable as such are usually used to make an inefficient compressor with poor delivery at the rated output preesure look better than it is.
Sanity check for single phase motor current draw:-
4.3 amps per Hp, 5.5 amps per kw on single phase.
If the numbers on the specification are vastly out of line odds are someone is telling porkies.
Saw one of those twin head diaphragm jobbies rated at 9.6 cfm, maximum pressure 116 psi, 3.5 Hp motor, current draw 5 amps. Does not compute.
Diaphragm compressors tend to be rather inefficient at higher pressures delivering significantly less air than would be expected from the input volume. Especially the inexpensive ones where great internal sophistication cannot be afforded. An inherent characteristic of the breed as the very short stroke combined with diaphragm curvature makes it very difficult to minimise residual volume at the end of the compression cycle.
Screw types are most efficient at converting input air to compressed air at decently high pressures due to the continuous flow. Hydrovanes and the other vane types are almost as good but there is some pulsation in the flow. Then come piston types with diaphragm ones bringing up the rear. No great surprise to discover that efficiency follows price! Piston compressors are a very broad church with considerable variation in efficiency, capbility and price.
Compressor selection is a minefield really. Even the respected names are badging up made down to a price units whose often short lives aren't doing their reputation any good in the lower end of the industrial market.
Clive
Edited By Clive Foster on 03/11/2020 23:24:00
Edited By Clive Foster on 03/11/2020 23:24:49
Edited By Clive Foster on 03/11/2020 23:25:46
Edited By Clive Foster on 03/11/2020 23:26:20