Motor Input and Output Power

It will be interesting to see if the development of l'affaire VW has any effect on the acceptance of this sort of "mine is bigger than yours" specmanship. UK and European law has lots of pretty big teeth which are supposed to deal with this sort of thing but are routinely ignored because its too expensive / too much hassle to make a prosecution stick and even then the punishment isn't effective. At the time of my motor episode I had informal access to high powered legal folk, the right person owed me big time for a favour, and the big beast consulted positively salivated at the prospect of getting some interpretations into law via what he claimed to be a slam dunk case. Like I was going to drop a hundred grand or so to prove fraud over a £55 (I think) motor. My experience is that legal beagles have no sense of proportion.

Given there are UK, European and International standards for pretty much everything you can think of I would hope that l'affaire VW will lead to all power and similar performance claims being, by law, to be made in relationship to a recognised standard whose requirements are accessible to any member of the public on demand. (Its surprising how many standards joe public simply can't get at even via library services.) Inducement to purchase by unsupported or irrelevant claims could then be considered criminal fraud with automatic custodial sentences for upper management of the companies responsible. Impossible to deal with the Chinese suppliers directly but there ought to be ways of cutting repeat offenders off at the knees by creative use of the import control legislation. I understand there is a lot of powerful legal stuff that has never been repealed, just kicked into the long grass and much precedent that has been tacitly ignored to avoid embarrassing les politicos.

Other side of the coin is does Ketan actually want the sort of customer who doesn't make specification checks or even bother to search out the relevant information. Nice though extra sales are the wilfully ignorant can be even more demanding than the excessively perfectionists (like me!). Given that Ketan made his good reputation by going that bit further and that bit better than other purveyors of similar equipment maybe its prudent to accept that most of those swayed by overhyped specifications are initially at least lost customers. Odds are that those disappointed folk who want something better will find their way to fora such this or other knowledgable advice "Should have gone to Arc Euro mate. Ketan will see you right". Being prepared to make like Rikki-Tikki-Tava and run and find out seems to be indispensable to anyone intending to make fist of this hobby. Hardly matters how fictional the motor spec is on the bought on a whim and left in the shed machine. Regrettable though it may be the fact is that the capabilities of the machines in the cheap seats always came with significant airbrushing and hype. I started with a Portass S which barely made it onto the lathe performance scale, about half a rung above Adepts.

Clive.

A lot of what you guys are saying came up in my discussions with the SIEG and the competitors factory.

So, the guys at SIEG told me that they came across the same problem during last year, and they addressed it via

http://www.siegind.com/new/&i=3&comContentId=3.html

link. It is a bit Chinglish, but it gets the message across.

The motor making arm of the factory does have specialist equipment for testing the motor output as MichaelG suggests. The results are the output power figures which the SIEG factory state, and in turn which ARC states.

The figures which the big brand manufacturers state, especially the Germans when they buy from the Chinese manufacturers are what they want the factory - their sub-contractor to state on the machines - which as I said before, they are not wrong in stating, even though the idea is a bit questionable. In turn, the 'smaller' piggyback 'brand' manufacturers prefer to carry on using and stating input power, for better marketing. In the majority of cases, it is not the manufacturer who is specifying what is to be written for marketing. There are a few 'so called' Chinese factories which have been mentioned on this forum who also use the same input power marketing language, but on the whole, the importers do play a significant part in this....more then they care to admit.

Perhaps the way forward can be through educating the potential buyer in the ways suggested here, and stating both input and output power. I will discuss this further with the factory and see how it may be possible to address this in time.

Ketan at ARC.

Edited By Ketan Swali on 13/10/2015 20:29:44

Prony brake.

Neil

Clive,

With the right presentation and marketing patter it is possible to project a picture which a potential buyer chooses to believe or accept. More than 50% of the buyers are begginers, and many fail to understand the difference between AC, DC, 3-Phase motors with/without inverters. I include myself in this when I first started. It is a lovely learning experience for anyone. So, if questioned, one could quite rightly say, 'I am not an engineer' as the VW U.K. Chairman said to the Parliamentary Committee yesterday

Joking aside, the probability of the buyer figuring out anything about anything are low, because at the end of the day, the motor is just one component in the assembly, and experience or lack of, are regularly discussed on various forums. ARC has a reputation, and we try to be open as far as possible. We are no saints - depending on the buyers experience with ARC, and SIEG is no saint when it comes to assembly. One also has to consider 'expectations for the price paid' (a new tool in the sale of goods law amendment) which adds to the loopholes available.

I guess it boils down to the word 'choice'. The manufacturer - biggest or smallest chooses what they feel is right for them to say. The buyer chooses to believe what they want to. This is the one thing which will remain a constant.

Ketan at ARC.

Ketan wants to sell Clive. That's how he makes his living and Rolls Royces are expensive to run.

I know that certain problems are caused by the importers changing specs and not really caring if it interfers with it's use as a lathe. The extra 2in centre distance gained by shortening the tail stock is one that was followed on lots of lathes - can't turn up to a centre because it wont reach - tough buy and fit and often poorly made morse extension sleeve and finish up with less centre distance than the lathe originally had.

I feel input and output powers are the best option as people will wonder if others don't follow. I'm not at all surprised by the comment about the German importers at all. I mentioned why in another thread also how wonderful a Wabeco 4000E is. It has it's pluses but for cost design wise it's seriously flawed - the term rip off springs to mind bought new. The same is true of a number of what might be called their big boys toys and a number of other things including some factors of their more famous cars. As I have followed lathes for some years I also know they were the first to mention micron level spindle bore run out which in terms of axial alignment means nothing at all. Misleading to say the least.

John

-

Now now John, don't care much for Rolls Royces. I have a VW diesel for which I just received the introduction recall letter today 'Service Actrion: EA189 diesel engines' for which I feel really privileged

Ketan at ARC.

Hello Ketan, I have a VW diesel and my car was upgraded on Thursday last, the engine no longer has the Ooomph it had before so I am determined to claim for miss selling and performance loss.

Clive

Oh dear Clive, that sounds bad. Mine is a Tiguan, but I can't be asked to bomb about in it. Has your car lost any Oomph for example when trying to take off/get quickly away at roundabouts?. The GM at the SIEG factory has a Toureg. I know that he will not be a happy bunny if his vehicle has lost the Oomph.

Ketan at ARC.

Are you really sure about that or imagining it Clive? The press is making a right meal of it all. All types, are worse in use on the roads but petrol hasn't been mentioned. The so called cheat device is probably a piece of software and nothing more than that.

There are other factors too. I have actually seen road tests being done at MIRA on the track many times. Soon it will emerge that they tape up the joints which actually isn't a bad thing to do. It already has actually a few weeks ago on the TV. It's very difficult to get repeatable conditions. The tape helps smooth out variations due to wind and other aspects and makes a negligible difference to the tests.

I doubt if there is any need for them to alter the oomph. I'm not familiar with the tests they have to meet but would strongly suspect that they are under static conditions as adding other factors would get far to complicated. What gear, how steep a hill and all sorts of other things. Number of people in the car, load in the boot, anything being towed and etc. I keep meaning to try and dig the rules out. The companies have a tough life. I know of one make where the software said oh dear the cat is suffering so cut engine power immediately, didn't matter if the car was doing 70mph on a crowded motor way. Things get ever so complicated a more and more situations arise. That one had to be fixed quickly.

One thing for sure diesels are increasingly efficient year by year and that signifies less pollution. It's a pity about nitrous oxide but I understand that there are ways of dealing with that and suspect the situation was similar to petrol when cats were introduced. Lean burn was getting there but "gov" said no use cats. One company was talking about squirting urea into the exhaust on diesels and I suspect that is the best option, not sure, however that company unlike Ford for instance didn't produce diesel engines that let out a lot of smoke. I have noticed that a number of newer models various makes now put out puffs smoke following a period when they never did. This might be done to keep the cat happy. They do something similar on petrol engines - squirt too much in on purpose at times. On cars like suburu's it's a nice easy way to get stacks of oomph for a while too. Many motor bikes run like that all of the time.

What is needed really is a statement as to what the cheat actually does. Not loads of rubbish that is pretty obvious and rather difficult to do anything about. I actually wonder if it's just a cheat for an MOT style smoke test. A pretty stupid test introduced to get round problems on older designs of engine and also force improvements. It can still be used. Manufacturer's probably do play with fuelling at certain constant speeds which is a cheat but this does meet legislation.

I heard on the TV that Ford were warned about this sort of thing some years ago. It's pretty easy to guess why VW are having a tougher time. Others will as well because if one major manufacturer is others will be doing it too. The real road testing results are mainly of news worthy interest to the unrealistic at times green people and are a separate problem. They can help to formulate legislation - maybe adding auto stop start in traffic jams for instance. Legislation has to be more realistic otherwise no cars. As I understand it euro ever increasing n will help in the on the road aspect as it implies better fuel consumption. Things have already gone a long way on diesels. They are way better than the early gas guzzling turbo's that were about when they started to become more popular.

One interesting oomph aspect about diesels is the gain on the throttle - set to make them feel more powerful than petrol cars. They are also good at providing low speed torque and offer better load variation performance than petrol appear to be able to do. The manufacturers get up to all sorts of tricks at times. One thing on diesels is that hardly any of them take steps to cause the engine to heat up in a reasonable time. That's bad really and signifies can't be bothered. Once the diesel engine for a car was totally different to the petrol one. That sadly isn't the case any more. They now tend to be very similar in all sorts of ways.

John

-

JohnWI, Volks. already do a system called Adblue. which you have to put a liquid in another tank when you refuel. Yes, I am sure it's a Urea mixture and it is only in certain models of VW. All round I am extremely pleased with the new VW Passat and now it seems it has been de-graded slightly on engine acceleration.. Everything else is the same,

I have now been in contact with a Legal company called, 'Leigh Day' who have responded back to me telling they have been inundated with legal enquiries over the VW's. This is not sour grapes on my part but a miss selling by VW through their Agencies here in the UK and Worldwide. I have not now a car that was advertised in their brochures as , 'Low pollution', they broke the law and sit, awaiting massive payouts to customers and they themselves will now sue VW GMBH.

Clive

"Cheat" software is not new. Guess where it was first used? By U S engine manufacturers. One of whom, I believe, boasted that the software detected when the engine was running at the speed and load for a particular part of the test cycle, and then adjusted the engine parameters, (fuel delivery, timing etc) to bring the emissions within the limits set for that part of the test.

Quoting "big" power outputs is merely marketing. MANY years ago, it was found that engine powers were affected by temperature of the air inhaled, and of the fuel supplied. Obvious, when you think of the specific gravity or density of the air and the fuel. Cold air contains a greater mass of Oxygen, so can be used to burn more fuel. Similarly, for a given volume, cold fuel has a greater mass. Hence standard test cycles were developed, (such as BS649, BS Au 141 etc) and observed powers were corrected by calculation to give a level corresponding to the appropriate Standard.

In smaller Diesel engines, running on Gas Oil, power was usually quoted at 40'C fuel inlet . One manufacturer claimed greater power. Reading the small print, they were quoting at 20'C fuel inlet! So an engine delivering 300 hp under those conditions would actually deliver about 282 hp under the more realistic 40'C operating condition. So, one does it, and everyone, not to be outdone, follows suit!

Small air compressors quote Displacement, because it is a larger, more impressive figure. Free Air Delivery, which is what you are actually looking for is less. Internal leakage and volumetric efficiency, (always less than 100%), cause the reduction

All this is Marketing, (dare I say "hype"?) intended to make the product look superior at a quick glance.

And, Yes, you do suffer for telling the truth; unless, (and sometimes, despite) explaining the detail behind the figures.

Input Power says how much power is consumed; Output Power says how much is delivered. The ratio between the two signifies the efficiency of the motor. A figure may be quoted, and in small print, say Intermittent. The Continuous output will be less. What then appears at the tool/workpiece contact will be even less because of losses in the transmission, (gears or belts) and bearings.

The Pennsylvania Railroad GG Electric locomotive was rated, from memory at 3,300 hp, but for short periods would deliver 5,000, to produce rapid acceleration or to climb a fairly short gradient.

Electric Hand Tools, intended for D I Y use will be designed for intermittent use. Those designed for Industrial use will be more likely to withstand Continuous use, with larger bearings, gears and better cooling. But will cost more, and so may appear to be less efficient.

Enzo Ferrari once said that the ideal racing car would disintegrate as it crossed the Finish line. It was intended to deliver maximum performance for the length of the race, not for 150,000 miles. Which is why our 1.5 litre cars cannot do 200 mph, but can carry our families for huge mileages.

If Ketan quotes Input AND Output powers he is being truthful, and providing the information with which a buyer can make an informed judgement.

"The sour taste of poor quality will linger, long after the sweet taste of low price"

Howard

I wonder if this is correct

**LINK**

Or quote to save reading it

How does a 'defeat device' work?

Modern diesel cars use a fluid called urea that's then pumped into the exhaust system which in turn reduces the amount of nitrogen oxide that's released into the atmosphere.

A 'defeat device' is a piece of software that can detect when the car is undergoing emissions testing at which point it will start pumping more urea into the system.

The problem is that it's not sustainable. Under normal driving conditions the fluid would run out extremely quickly.

For short periods of time though such as say, in a laboratory, the system can make the car appear to be far more environmentally friendly than it actually is.

That sounds highly illegal?

You would be right, it absolutely is.

Last time my car was MOT'd I didn't see any signs of a laboratory. News bullshit.

One way of detecting if the car is being tested would be to say hey I've been ticking over for a while and do it then. From a pollution point of view that actually makes a lot of sense. Cars spend loads of time ticking over in modern traffic conditions. On the other hand the abs ecu might tell the engine management that something weird is going on here, each axle has been brake tested so more urea. Or even that plus all of the lights have been tested. The engine management might also squirt more in each time the car accelerates. Good for pollution again. They are extremely efficient at constant speed so less of a problem.

John

-

Then comes this statement, from the link

Both the UK and the EU have far stricter testing methods so it's less likely that any car manufacturer would have been able to use this same method to hide their emissions figures.

In a statement, the Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin said:

"We are closely monitoring the situation and have been pushing for action at a European level for more accurate tests that reflect driving on the road."

"It's vital that the public has confidence in vehicle emissions tests and I am calling for the European Commission to investigate this issue as a matter of urgency."

LOL. As some one from the SMMT put it the cars do meet regulations. Put it all together and it's odd that there is a recall really but when the cat is out of the bag the auto industry is very keen on public relations. They may even have recalls and in real terms change something other than what the recall seems to be for. That doesn't seem to be the case this time.

Mitsubishi were talking about using urea before cat's were fitted to diesels. I don't know if they did. Not long after I bought a V6 Passat that had been fitted with an uncontrolled cat system. Because they got that aspect wrong they later altered the engine management software, result a 10% drop in fuel consumption. There is no way my driving pattern needed the change. Later they put some sub standard cam belt replacement parts on the market. As I'm a private motorist I have to keep my cars for a significant length of time. The replacement lasted for under 20,000 miles not 60,000 as per the time to change for the original.

No problem with my Jaguar X type so far, touch wood, other than the usual one on many these days - new clutch at about 40,000 and a couple of I suspect odd recalls. The clutch seems to be a Ford / GM thing as the same thing happened on a SAAB but they replaced for free. Trouble even though suspension settings differ from a Mondeo the X type still drives a bit like one.

I'm running out of manufacturers I trust.

It'll be interesting to see what happens long term. Legal aspects could be distinctly different in the USA compared with the UK and Europe.

John

-

Interesting analogy Howard. I will have to investigate the temperature issue more with the factory.

Ketan at ARC.

The temperature issue was brought to my attention during the discussion of how SIEG measured the output power when using a specific machine - similar to the one suggested by Michael G. At the time my head was already full of other Wattage stuff that I was failing to take in what they were saying, but apparantly if you make motors, you have this testing equipment. So, I will look into this more.

John W - if possible, could I please request you to carry on with the VW story on a new thread?. I dont mind small comments about comparison here where there is a link, and I know that I did start off by mentioning my VW, for which I apologise. It is just that I would like to stay focused on the subject of input and output motor power on this thread rather then it being hijacked into the VW story.

Ketan at ARC.

The brake in the link is a joke as is the general idea. If the lathe has an 180v motor regulated for speed via a controller from 240 I don't think that type of meter would give a correct current reading. It would need a true rms meter with a decent frequency range which clamp on meters like that aren't as far as I'm aware. As an electronic hobbyist I have often looked at them. I suspect even a so called true rms dvm could have problems.

John

-

What on earth are about John?

A prony brake is entirely mechanical and can be used to accurately measure the output power of any rotating shaft..

... and if you mean Ketan's link the meter has got "Fluke True RMS Meter" written on it - and fluke aren't cheap or crap...

Hi Ketan, Have you think about re-introducing the SIEG brushed motor range? It is cheaper so make my life easier here in Australia for selling Brushed and HiTorque Brushless

Steven at AUSEE

As [predominantly low-usage] end-users, I'm sure we are most interested in the output power and contolability of our motors ... But, in the global arena, efficiency is the 'big thing'.

It's worth reading this EU document [don't worry, it's only 12 pages] to get a flavour of the political angle.

MichaelG.

The addition of Urea to the exhaust gasses is a fairly recent means if reducing tailpipe emissions, to comply with Euro 6 standards.

So software to adjust the fuelling, boost pressure and/or timing has been around for a long time.

Other reasons for turbocharging a Diesel engine, apart from increasing power because of the increased mass of Oxygen available for combustion, is to provide excess air to cool the cylinder components, and, more recently, to deliver excess air to dilute the exhaust gasses and reduce the emission seen at the tailpipe.

This can also be done on a petrol engine if the fuel injection is timed, rather than continuous.

If used with continuous fuel injection, or a Carburretor, mixture would lost to the exhaust, and would show up as excess fuel consumption, and on an Emissions test as excess Hydrocarbons. There would probably be some explosions in the exhaust system as well!

The process is often referred to as "Blow Down".

As Neil says, a Prony brake is merely a rope running around the Flywheel, from a fixed point to a Spring Balance. Since the power of the prime mover is being converted into heat, the Flywheel includes a hollow portion. Into this is added water, which removes the heat energy by evaporating. The water is held inside the Flywheel by the centrifugal force resulting from its rotation.

Knowing the diameter of the Flywheel, the Spring balance reading allows the Torque output of the machine to be calculated, and hence the power output.

If you are in UK and you want to see such a Flywheel go to see the single cylinder Blackstone engine in the Southall Wing of the The WaterWorks Museum at Hereford! This engine was, at one time, in a Technical College, and also carries a Dobbies McKinney indicator to draw an Indicator Diagram of the Cylinder Pressures during the operating cycle.

Howard