Previous in Forum: Residual Current   Next in Forum: IP Code
Close
Close
Close
16 comments
Member

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Goshen, Oregon
Posts: 9

400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

03/21/2011 2:25 PM

Hello. My question is what is the difference in cost to run a 400HP motor or a 200HP motor? Is the cost difference worth trying to make a 200HP work.

Thank you for your time,

David Cassano

Login to Reply
Interested in this discussion?
You can "subscribe" to this discussion to be notified of new comments.
Click on the Subscribe menu at the top of the page.

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".

Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, rate them!
Anonymous Poster #1
#1

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in cost to run.

03/21/2011 2:33 PM

What is the normal load and what is the worst load?

The decision has to be based on these two factors.

It is not only the cost of the motor, the efficiency of the motor will be highest (as will be power factor) near the rated load.

Login to Reply
2
Guru
India - Member - New Member Engineering Fields - Electromechanical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: India, 200 Km. North of Delhi.
Posts: 1387
Good Answers: 52
#2

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in cost to run.

03/21/2011 2:44 PM

Is the cost difference worth trying to make a 200HP work.

If actual requirement is 400 HP and you try with 200 HP then cost to run is

(Cost of 200 HP motor + cost of HP consumed till it burnt) - (scrap value of burnt 200 HP motor)

__________________
Jesus gave me message, Gandhi gave me method, M.L.K
Login to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru
United States - Member - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: California, USA, where the Godless live next door to God.
Posts: 4642
Good Answers: 794
#3
In reply to #2

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in cost to run.

03/21/2011 3:25 PM

Bingo!

I gave you a GA because you also saw the flaw in the way the question was asked.

__________________
** All I every really wanted to be, was... A LUMBERJACK!.**
Login to Reply
Guru
United Kingdom - Member - New Member

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Resting under the Major Oak
Posts: 4348
Good Answers: 180
#4

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in cost to run.

03/21/2011 3:29 PM

Correction (Cost of 200 HP motor + cost of HP consumed till it burnt) - (scrap value of burnt 200 HP motor) + (Cost of 400 HP motor)

You could have a play with a 300 HP motor to while away the time

__________________
The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.
Login to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 42259
Good Answers: 1659
#5
In reply to #4

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in cost to run.

03/21/2011 4:10 PM

"Correction (Cost of 200 HP motor + cost of HP consumed till it burnt) - (scrap value of burnt 200 HP motor) + (Cost of 400 HP motor)"(cost of lost production)(manpower to change burnt motor/motors)(etc)

Login to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Member

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Goshen, Oregon
Posts: 9
#6

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

03/21/2011 6:23 PM

Well I did figure it out. Kind of a dumb question. Thanks for your answers though, I think.

David Cassano

Login to Reply
2
Power-User

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 476
Good Answers: 32
#7
In reply to #6

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

03/21/2011 10:34 PM

Someone should mention (without humour or condescension) that if your requirements are less than 200 HP then a 200 HP will be cheaper to run than a 400 HP. Motors running significantly under their rated power are less efficient than those running at or near rated power.

__________________
johny451
Login to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Anonymous Poster #1
#12
In reply to #7

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

03/23/2011 3:25 PM

Someone has Already mentioned it in #1.

And that is along with the another factor (worst load condition) not only normal load.

Login to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Power-User

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Cypress, California.
Posts: 239
#8

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

03/21/2011 11:00 PM

400 is twice (2X) & 200 is half (1/2)...

Login to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Cypress, California.
Posts: 239
#11
In reply to #8

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

03/22/2011 7:59 PM

What R.P.M.? What Voltage? What Amp's? What Killowatt Hrs.? ( What is your Project that you are working on...)

Login to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Power-User

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Cypress, California.
Posts: 239
#13
In reply to #11

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

03/23/2011 8:00 PM

Useing 200 V / 100 amps for a 400 h.p. Motor to opperate a Generator that developes 100 Amps. is Perpetual Motion ( Not Yet Discovered!)

Login to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Oman
Posts: 612
Good Answers: 14
#9

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

03/22/2011 12:46 AM

If the application demands 400 hp constant load then you have to use 400 hp. In case if the application demands fluctuation in loads you can have 2 nos 200 hp and install a system to monitor the loads and the motors for efficient operation.

Login to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: OZ, otherwise known as Oklahoma were the wind comes sweeping down the plains.
Posts: 159
Good Answers: 4
#10

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

03/22/2011 11:26 AM

If your load does not exceed the service factor of the 200HP motor, then the 200HP motor should be more efficient to use. Also, the purchase cost of a 200HP motor should be less. If the 400HP motor is working at half capacity, then its efficiency and power factor will be much lower. Match your motor to your load for the best efficiency.

Login to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: May 2008
Location: CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU, INDIA.
Posts: 1854
Good Answers: 64
#14

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

04/02/2011 12:05 PM

Dear Mr. davecassano,

The basis for selection of 400 H.P. in place of 200 H.P IS NOT SPELT. What is the condition that dictates to use 400 H.P in place of 200 H.P is to be made known.

Reasons may be heavy starting torque or Gd^2 value, long duration reaching full speed, etc. to be understood. Motor at 80 % Load will give good efficiency.

If 400 H.P is used the load may be 40 % or slightly more and over-all efficiency will be less, power factor will be less/ line current will be more, heating of winding will be more. etc.

DHAYANANDHAN.S

Login to Reply
Guru
United Kingdom - Member - Indeterminate Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: In the bothy, 7 chains down the line from Dodman's Lane level crossing, in the nation formerly known as Great Britain. Kettle's on.
Posts: 29931
Good Answers: 808
#15

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

01/07/2021 2:10 AM

What is the cost of not running them?

__________________
"Did you get my e-mail?" - "The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place" - George Bernard Shaw, 1856
Login to Reply
Guru
United States - Member - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: California, USA, where the Godless live next door to God.
Posts: 4642
Good Answers: 794
#16
In reply to #15

Re: 400HP vs. 200HP in Cost to Run

01/07/2021 7:48 PM

7 years later? Do you think the IP still cares?

__________________
** All I every really wanted to be, was... A LUMBERJACK!.**
Login to Reply
Login to Reply 16 comments
Interested in this discussion?
You can "subscribe" to this discussion to be notified of new comments.
Click on the Subscribe menu at the top of the page.

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".

Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, rate them!
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Anonymous Poster (2); Bert Cundle (3); davecassano (1); dhayanandhan (1); Grand Poobah (1); Johny451 (1); JRaef (2); lyn (1); mrswamy (1); PWSlack (1); rakesh_semwal (1); TonyS (1)

Previous in Forum: Residual Current   Next in Forum: IP Code

Advertisement