Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Briggs & Stratton compressor
I'm rebuilding an old B&S powered compressor for running some light
air tools. The motor is a 5 horse and the air tank is only about 5 gallons. Total wt, around 100 lbs. I see posts about other compressors using 5 horse motors with much bigger tanks. What's the deal? Did the other manufacturers just stick a bigger tank under the compressors to provide a larger reserve/steadier supply? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Briggs & Stratton compressor
In article ,
Offbreed wrote: I'm rebuilding an old B&S powered compressor for running some light air tools. The motor is a 5 horse and the air tank is only about 5 gallons. Total wt, around 100 lbs. I have one of these on a small trailer for around the ranch and elsewhere. It was my second compressor, my first was for airbrushing and much smaller (before that I used a spare tire!). I rebuilt this compressor too, even repainted the tank and mounted it to a mower/ATV type trailer. I think the bigger units keep up the pressure/flow better when using big CFM tools. I see posts about other compressors using 5 horse motors with much bigger tanks. What's the deal? Did the other manufacturers just stick a bigger tank under the compressors to provide a larger reserve/steadier supply? -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Briggs & Stratton compressor
Don Bruder wrote:
That would be the short (and pretty much correct) explanation. The compressor itself (and what powers it) don't really care much one way or the other about what the capacity of the tank they're filling is. A bigger tank (say 50 gallons, versus 5 gallons, just as a "pulled out of thin air" example) will take longer to come up to the same pressure, and will take a correspondingly longer time to empty to a certain level, certainly, but from the "viewpoint" of the power source/compressor, they're effectively the same tank. The only significant difference is the physical capacity of the tank, which will be directly related to how long it takes the motor/compressor to bring the tank up to the desired pressure after the rig is turned on - if you don't mind waiting choose some arbitrary amount of time for the tank to come up to pressure, the same 5 horse motor and compressor unit that pumps up your 5 gallon tank will handle a 50, 500, or 5000 gallon tank just as well as it does the smaller one. The only practical "limits" on tank size are how long you're willing to wait for the tank to hit the pressure you need for it to be useful, how much money you're willing to spend on buying/making/otherwise acquiring the tank, and how much physical space you have available for it. Okay. Thanks to both. "Wait time". Never thought of that for some reason. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Briggs & Stratton compressor
In article ,
Offbreed wrote: I'm rebuilding an old B&S powered compressor for running some light air tools. The motor is a 5 horse and the air tank is only about 5 gallons. Total wt, around 100 lbs. I see posts about other compressors using 5 horse motors with much bigger tanks. What's the deal? Did the other manufacturers just stick a bigger tank under the compressors to provide a larger reserve/steadier supply? That would be the short (and pretty much correct) explanation. The compressor itself (and what powers it) don't really care much one way or the other about what the capacity of the tank they're filling is. A bigger tank (say 50 gallons, versus 5 gallons, just as a "pulled out of thin air" example) will take longer to come up to the same pressure, and will take a correspondingly longer time to empty to a certain level, certainly, but from the "viewpoint" of the power source/compressor, they're effectively the same tank. The only significant difference is the physical capacity of the tank, which will be directly related to how long it takes the motor/compressor to bring the tank up to the desired pressure after the rig is turned on - if you don't mind waiting choose some arbitrary amount of time for the tank to come up to pressure, the same 5 horse motor and compressor unit that pumps up your 5 gallon tank will handle a 50, 500, or 5000 gallon tank just as well as it does the smaller one. The only practical "limits" on tank size are how long you're willing to wait for the tank to hit the pressure you need for it to be useful, how much money you're willing to spend on buying/making/otherwise acquiring the tank, and how much physical space you have available for it. -- Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004. I respond to Email as quick as humanly possible. If you Email me and get no response, see http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html Short form: I'm trashing EVERYTHING that doesn't contain a password in the subject. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Briggs & Stratton compressor
Hi Offbreed,
I've wondered about this myself. I think Don's post is right on. The only other thing I'd add is that manufacturers, in order to save money, might use a motor that develops 5hp but may only have a 20% duty cycle. Make sure the motor/pump combo that you have is capable of running for the extended period of time that would be required if you upgrade your tank. "Don Bruder" wrote in message ... In article , Offbreed wrote: I'm rebuilding an old B&S powered compressor for running some light air tools. The motor is a 5 horse and the air tank is only about 5 gallons. Total wt, around 100 lbs. I see posts about other compressors using 5 horse motors with much bigger tanks. What's the deal? Did the other manufacturers just stick a bigger tank under the compressors to provide a larger reserve/steadier supply? That would be the short (and pretty much correct) explanation. The compressor itself (and what powers it) don't really care much one way or the other about what the capacity of the tank they're filling is. A bigger tank (say 50 gallons, versus 5 gallons, just as a "pulled out of thin air" example) will take longer to come up to the same pressure, and will take a correspondingly longer time to empty to a certain level, certainly, but from the "viewpoint" of the power source/compressor, they're effectively the same tank. The only significant difference is the physical capacity of the tank, which will be directly related to how long it takes the motor/compressor to bring the tank up to the desired pressure after the rig is turned on - if you don't mind waiting choose some arbitrary amount of time for the tank to come up to pressure, the same 5 horse motor and compressor unit that pumps up your 5 gallon tank will handle a 50, 500, or 5000 gallon tank just as well as it does the smaller one. The only practical "limits" on tank size are how long you're willing to wait for the tank to hit the pressure you need for it to be useful, how much money you're willing to spend on buying/making/otherwise acquiring the tank, and how much physical space you have available for it. -- Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004. I respond to Email as quick as humanly possible. If you Email me and get no response, see http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html Short form: I'm trashing EVERYTHING that doesn't contain a password in the subject. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Briggs & Stratton compressor
"David R. McCoy" wrote in message
. com... Hi Offbreed, I've wondered about this myself. I think Don's post is right on. The only other thing I'd add is that manufacturers, in order to save money, might use a motor that develops 5hp but may only have a 20% duty cycle. Make sure the motor/pump combo that you have is capable of running for the extended period of time that would be required if you upgrade your tank. Agree. Don't worry about "HP" advertised on the motor. Years ago it was assumed that the ratings were for continuous duty, now they mean nothing. Read the small print and look for CFM at 125 PSI, or whatever the load you have. Match the compressor rating to the load using real numbers. Brent Wegher |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Briggs & Stratton compressor
Hi Offbreed,
I've wondered about this myself. I think Don's post is right on. The only other thing I'd add is that manufacturers, in order to save money, might use a motor that develops 5hp but may only have a 20% duty cycle. Make sure the motor/pump combo that you have is capable of running for the extended period of time that would be required if you upgrade your tank. "Don Bruder" wrote in message ... In article , Offbreed wrote: I'm rebuilding an old B&S powered compressor for running some light air tools. The motor is a 5 horse and the air tank is only about 5 gallons. Total wt, around 100 lbs. I see posts about other compressors using 5 horse motors with much bigger tanks. What's the deal? Did the other manufacturers just stick a bigger tank under the compressors to provide a larger reserve/steadier supply? That would be the short (and pretty much correct) explanation. The compressor itself (and what powers it) don't really care much one way or the other about what the capacity of the tank they're filling is. A bigger tank (say 50 gallons, versus 5 gallons, just as a "pulled out of thin air" example) will take longer to come up to the same pressure, and will take a correspondingly longer time to empty to a certain level, certainly, but from the "viewpoint" of the power source/compressor, they're effectively the same tank. The only significant difference is the physical capacity of the tank, which will be directly related to how long it takes the motor/compressor to bring the tank up to the desired pressure after the rig is turned on - if you don't mind waiting choose some arbitrary amount of time for the tank to come up to pressure, the same 5 horse motor and compressor unit that pumps up your 5 gallon tank will handle a 50, 500, or 5000 gallon tank just as well as it does the smaller one. The only practical "limits" on tank size are how long you're willing to wait for the tank to hit the pressure you need for it to be useful, how much money you're willing to spend on buying/making/otherwise acquiring the tank, and how much physical space you have available for it. -- Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004. I respond to Email as quick as humanly possible. If you Email me and get no response, see http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html Short form: I'm trashing EVERYTHING that doesn't contain a password in the subject. I believe the OP is talking about a Briggs & Stratton Gasoline Motor driven air compressor - hence duty cycle not applicable.... Ken. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Briggs & Stratton compressor
Ken Sterling wrote in message s.com... Hi Offbreed, I've wondered about this myself. I think Don's post is right on. The only other thing I'd add is that manufacturers, in order to save money, might use a motor that develops 5hp but may only have a 20% duty cycle. Make sure the motor/pump combo that you have is capable of running for the extended period of time that would be required if you upgrade your tank. "Don Bruder" wrote in message ... In article , Offbreed wrote: I'm rebuilding an old B&S powered compressor for running some light air tools. The motor is a 5 horse and the air tank is only about 5 gallons. Total wt, around 100 lbs. I see posts about other compressors using 5 horse motors with much bigger tanks. What's the deal? Did the other manufacturers just stick a bigger tank under the compressors to provide a larger reserve/steadier supply? That would be the short (and pretty much correct) explanation. The compressor itself (and what powers it) don't really care much one way or the other about what the capacity of the tank they're filling is. A bigger tank (say 50 gallons, versus 5 gallons, just as a "pulled out of thin air" example) will take longer to come up to the same pressure, and will take a correspondingly longer time to empty to a certain level, certainly, but from the "viewpoint" of the power source/compressor, they're effectively the same tank. The only significant difference is the physical capacity of the tank, which will be directly related to how long it takes the motor/compressor to bring the tank up to the desired pressure after the rig is turned on - if you don't mind waiting choose some arbitrary amount of time for the tank to come up to pressure, the same 5 horse motor and compressor unit that pumps up your 5 gallon tank will handle a 50, 500, or 5000 gallon tank just as well as it does the smaller one. The only practical "limits" on tank size are how long you're willing to wait for the tank to hit the pressure you need for it to be useful, how much money you're willing to spend on buying/making/otherwise acquiring the tank, and how much physical space you have available for it. -- Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004. I respond to Email as quick as humanly possible. If you Email me and get no response, see http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html Short form: I'm trashing EVERYTHING that doesn't contain a password in the subject. I believe the OP is talking about a Briggs & Stratton Gasoline Motor driven air compressor - hence duty cycle not applicable.... Ken. Hi Ken, You could be right. When the OP used the word "motor" I assumed he was referring to a power plant that runs off of electricity. I've always tried to describe a gasoline driven power plant as an engine. I know that in many cases the two words tend to get used interchangeably. I mix them up sometimes myself. Thanks for the input. David |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Briggs & Stratton compressor
"David R. McCoy" wrote in message
. com... Hi Ken, You could be right. When the OP used the word "motor" I assumed he was referring to a power plant that runs off of electricity. I've always tried to describe a gasoline driven power plant as an engine. I know that in many cases the two words tend to get used interchangeably. I mix them up sometimes myself. Thanks for the input. David There's no mixup; you're using the words correctly either way. An air motor and a steam engine both work in exactly the same way, for example. In fact, the same mechanism can provide mechanical power from either source. You can choose to use popular conventions, but that isn't a case of being mixed up or not on the definitions. It's just being conventional. The original uses of both words support the use of either word for the things we call "engines" and "motors." Ed Huntress |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Phase converter won't spin compressor | Metalworking | |||
Air Compressor Safety? | Metalworking | |||
Old Sears Air Compressor - Help Please | Metalworking |