Using a common NTC for two individually timed motors doesn't seem right. I doubt that an inrush current limiter is necessary for a motor with 14 A peak current
Yes, the behaviour is equivalent. A popular setup to do the test with a current/power limited lab supply.What stumped me is tfat the test circuit in the documentation discharges Ctest into the NTC. In other words, a finite charge or energy is dumped into the NTC.
Is that the same as said capacitor being charged through the NTC?
I suppose it is but why then show it like they do, back to front?
I only just managed to verify that now. Yes, it is the same part used for 240V.240V version is using same S235/6 PTC?
Presume the supply voltage variants are also using different motors and hence have different inrush current magnitude. This is probably the reason why you don't experience failure of the 230V design, may be just by chance.120Vac = 2 x the current than for the 230Vac, = 4 x the heat in the ntc, both for the starts and the run time
Starting with hot NTC (stop period < NTC cooling time) should not happen (or at least only very rarely) with NTC inrush limiter, otherwise early failure is likely to happen. As previously mentioned, the intended current limiting purpose isn't achieved in this mode of operation, you can better run it without NTC.Regarding the second load starting after the first load has caused the NTC value to drop, that is very possible.
But I It would be similar to one load restarting with hot NTC also.
What I do not understand in that case if that could overload the NTC or not. Since it is only a short surge, I can't see that condition falling under the max steady state current. Or?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?