shop-talk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Shop-talk] single vs. dual stage compressors

To: <shop-talk@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: [Shop-talk] single vs. dual stage compressors
From: "Randall" <tr3driver@ca.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:00:27 -0800
 Karl Vacek wrote :

> be aware that 
> horsepower ratings are often a complete fairy tale, 

Now what could I add to that ? <G>

Things have improved somewhat in that regard, since someone successfully
sued for false advertising a few years ago, but I still wouldn't pay any
attention to "horsepower" ratings for an air compressor.  The cfm is what
matters.

As far as energy efficiency goes; I'm not convinced that single stage units
have that much advantage even at 90 psi.  The example given (15% more air on
5% less apparent power from the 2-stage unit) seems more typical of the spec
sheets I've looked at.  I don't know, but I suspect this is the same problem
as before : it's impossible to build a perfect compressor (infinite
compression ratio), and any unswept volume wastes energy on every cycle.
How much it wastes depends on the pressure ratio; and 2-stage compressors
have a lower ratio (for the same output pressure) than single-stage units
do.

But there is something to be said for not pumping a big tank up to 175 psi
if you don't need it.  I just can't imagine not needing it.  Even a small
die grinder typically needs at least 4 cfm @ 90 psi; which translates to
some 28 scfm in compressor-speak.  And even if I could afford a 28 cfm
compressor, I don't have enough electrical power to turn it!

Randall - in the middle of adding a 30 amp circuit for a measly "7 hp"
compressor, rated under 20 cfm.
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net  http://www.team.net/donate.html


Shop-talk mailing list

http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shop-talk

http://www.team.net/archive

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>