Jump to content


Photo

Distance Between Vsd And Motor


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 chaterpilar

chaterpilar

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 171 posts

Posted 02 October 2006 - 03:35 AM



Hi !!

What is the maximum distance ( cable length) allowed between a 100 Hp motor and its Variable speed drive...?

I want to locate the VSD panel based on this info.

Any thoughts....

Chaterpilar

#2 Gigger

Gigger

    Intermediate Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 02 October 2006 - 04:59 AM

QUOTE(chaterpilar @ Oct 2 2006, 04:35 PM) View Post

Hi !!

What is the maximum distance ( cable length) allowed between a 100 Hp motor and its Variable speed drive...?

I want to locate the VSD panel based on this info.

Any thoughts....

Chaterpilar


Hello Chaterpilar,

Most VSDs I have worked with allow for a cable length of 150meters if screened cable, or 300meters if unscreened cable between the VSD and motor.If a greater length is required install a output choke.

Hope this is of some help.

Gigger


#3 mariomaggi

mariomaggi

    Senior Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milan, Italy
  • Interests:electric vehicles http://www.evlist.it , 3-phase AC sources to test PV inverters, high-power AC/DC power supplies up to 1500 VDC to test photovoltaic inverters, bidirectional AC/DC power supplies to test and simulate big batteries, infrared windows for thermography, renewable energies, special electric motors, special inverters, energy savings, power quality

Posted 02 October 2006 - 05:45 AM

Dear Chaterpillar,
I've had some bad experiences with long lines.
I cannot recommend a general lenght for all types of inverters and for all voltages and power ranges and type of final load.
Also the motor insulation is important, in certain conditions, when voltage reflections are possible.
Regards
Mario

Mario Maggi - Italy - http://www.evlist.ithttps://www.axu.it


#4 jOmega

jOmega

    Senior Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest, USA

Posted 02 October 2006 - 05:04 PM

Chaterpillar,

Each case must stand on its own merits. There is no Rule of Thumb that can be applied to all situations; not even to most situations. Each one must be examined on its own. Parameters for every case are different.

If you must have a general rule..... I don't think you could go too far wrong with keeping the motor within a meter or two of the VFD. Otherwise ..... you could add a dV/dt (dU/dt) filter at the output of the VFD. Filter connets to VFD output terminations ..... motor connects to filter terminations provided thereon.

See my post of October 1, 2006 to Boby ..... Speed Control of Slip Ring Induction Motor Using Vfd for information on such filters.

Kind regards,



p.s. Don't forget to give consideration to IR drop in wires going out to the motor..... Voltage lost in wire run means less voltage at motor terminals....

#5 kens

kens

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 02 October 2006 - 08:27 PM

Chaterpillar, each drive manufacturer will state max cable length for each of their drives. Their can be a large difference in capabilities in this area. Depending on where you are situated there may be other requirements regarding RFI. The cable lengths that are allowable with regard to RFI are often shorter than the maximum allowable. This is very dependant on the local regulations. I agree with jOmega, you cant go wrong having the drive within a few meters of the motor.
Ken
An expert is one who knows more and more about less and less until he knows absolutely everything about nothing

#6 jOmega

jOmega

    Senior Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest, USA

Posted 03 October 2006 - 04:25 AM

Chaterpillar,

Came upon this article in my library that is written by the folks at Yaskawa Drives.

Think you'll find it informative.

Kind regards,


AC Drive/Motor Long lead Issues

#7 chaterpilar

chaterpilar

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 171 posts

Posted 03 October 2006 - 06:40 AM

Thanks everybody for the inputs.

Chaterpilar

#8 jraef

jraef

    Posting Freak

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA, California

Posted 03 October 2006 - 07:35 PM

QUOTE(jOmega @ Oct 2 2006, 09:25 PM) View Post

Chaterpillar,

Came upon this article in my library that is written by the folks at Yaskawa Drives.

Think you'll find it informative.

Kind regards,


AC Drive/Motor Long lead Issues


Excellent paper, thanks jΩ.
I have similar papers provided by reactor manufacturers and they have an obvious bias towards selling more reactors. This paper seems to use a more balanced approach. What I particularly liked was confirmation of my own history with this issue, that being the initial recommendations of 300 feet, then later 150 ft., then 50 ft., now 25 ft. as the maximum without mitigation of some sort. I see know where all this was coming from. 300 ft. came from the days of Darlingtons, 150 ft. must have been the "best case scenario" promoted by salesmen when IGBTs first came out, 50 ft. was likely the correction insisted upon by the engineering departments because that was where a reflected wave COLUD start, now 25 ft. is the conservative number to be sure that there is no reflected wave regardless of other conditions. Makes sense to me now.

I have been seeing recent accounts of newer IGBT switching technologies that purport to allow longer lead lengths without additional mitigation. I am skeptical, but if I can find something in writing I will share it here. They came from salesmen, so if I apply that experience noted above to these new claims, I would suspect a reduction factor of 88% is in order!
"He's not dead, he's just pinin' for the fjords!"

#9 jOmega

jOmega

    Senior Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest, USA

Posted 06 October 2006 - 04:20 PM

QUOTE(jraef @ Oct 3 2006, 02:35 PM) View Post
I have been seeing recent accounts of newer IGBT switching technologies that purport to allow longer lead lengths without additional mitigation. I am skeptical, but if I can find something in writing I will share it here. They came from salesmen, so if I apply that experience noted above to these new claims, I would suspect a reduction factor of 88% is in order!


JR,

Per chance, are you referring to "Soft Switching" ????

#10 jraef

jraef

    Posting Freak

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA, California

Posted 07 October 2006 - 10:34 PM

Yes. Schneider is one manufacturer who has gone on and on about it.
"He's not dead, he's just pinin' for the fjords!"

#11 jOmega

jOmega

    Senior Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest, USA

Posted 08 October 2006 - 02:58 AM

QUOTE(jraef @ Oct 7 2006, 05:34 PM) View Post

Yes. Schneider is one manufacturer who has gone on and on about it.



Danfoss has had it in the VLT 5000/6000/8000 products up thru 7-1/2 hp since back in the late 90's

Doing some research on it as I recall an IEEE ISA journal piece on the subject some time ago and am looking for it . Hope to have some more to say in the near future and will post in a separate thread.



#12 jOmega

jOmega

    Senior Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest, USA

Posted 13 October 2006 - 05:02 AM

QUOTE(jraef @ Oct 7 2006, 05:34 PM) View Post




JR ...

see new thread on Soft Switching.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users