How does field rheostat resistance affect the speed of a DC shunt motor?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between field rheostat resistance and the speed of a DC shunt motor. When the field rheostat is set to 10Ω, the motor operates at 1500 rpm, while increasing the resistance to 100Ω results in a speed of 1700 rpm. However, upon restarting the motor, it will not run at 1700 rpm due to reduced starting torque from lower field current, leading to less acceleration and a lower steady-state speed. The mathematical relationship governing this behavior is derived from the equations for counter electromotive force (EMF) and torque, confirming that the motor's speed is contingent upon the field current and load torque.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of DC shunt motor operation
  • Familiarity with field rheostat and its impact on motor performance
  • Knowledge of electrical engineering principles, specifically counter EMF and torque equations
  • Basic algebra for manipulating motor equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the effects of field excitation on DC motor performance
  • Learn about the mathematical modeling of DC motors, focusing on counter EMF and torque equations
  • Explore the implications of armature resistance on motor speed and torque
  • Investigate practical applications of rheostat adjustments in motor control systems
USEFUL FOR

Electrical engineers, motor control specialists, and students studying electrical machinery who seek to understand the dynamics of DC shunt motors and the effects of field rheostat adjustments on performance.

cnh1995
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Messages
3,487
Reaction score
1,163
Suppose a motor is run at 1500 rpm and field rheostat is at minimum position (say 10Ω). Then the field rheostat resistance is increased to 100Ω and the speed obtained is 1700 rpm. Now the motor is shut down and started again. Will it now run at 1700 rpm?
My logic: No it won't, because:
the field current is less⇒starting torque is less⇒load torque is same⇒torque difference is less⇒acceleration is less⇒steady state speed is less.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.(I recently had an argument with my friend with whom I'm going to give a presentation on this method.He disagrees and my professor backed him.)
I don't understand how it will run at higher speed when started at lower field current. By that logic, at no field current, the motor should run at infinite speed. Am I missing something?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
cnh1995 said:
I don't understand how it will run at higher speed when started at lower field current.

What is nature of the source for armature current?
The motor will simply draw more armature current to make whatever torque is necessary.

Long thread on that here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...c-motor-increase-when-flux-is-reduced.804006/
cnh1995 said:
By that logic, at no field current, the motor should run at infinite speed.
It'll try. Remember this picture?
pot.com%2F-_pGliNArb3Q%2FUPwvsdT_RHI%2FAAAAAAAAO1s%2FXhTXTlDj64U%2Fs640%2Fimage_1358694250175816.jpg
 
So it won't run at 1700 rpm and will draw more current to produce same torque right?
 
cnh1995 said:
So it won't run at 1700 rpm and will draw more current to produce same torque right?
Or will it just accelerate more gently? Looks to me like you've already established (by measurement) the rpm for that particular applied voltage, field current and torque.
cnh1995 said:
when the field rheostat resistance is increased to 100Ω and the speed obtained is 1700 rpm.

does your observation agree with the math ?

Go back to your basic motor equations

Counter EMF = KΦ X RPM
so RPM = Counter EMF / KΦ
RPM = (Vapplied - Iarmature X Rarmature ) / KΦ

Torque = 7.04 K X Φ X Iarmature (Torque in foot pounds)
Iarmature = Torque / 7.04KΦ

Substitute that Iarmature into RPM formula

RPM = (Vapplied - (Torque/7.04KΦ) X Rarmature) / KΦ

RPM = Vapplied / KΦ - (Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2first term is unloaded speed
second term is how much slower it runs because of load torque.

field rheostat sets KΦ,
load's speed-torque curve sets torque...

Play with the algebra ? What's RPM/Torque ?
 
jim hardy said:
Or will it just accelerate more gently? Looks to me like you've already established (by measurement) the rpm for that particular applied voltage, field current and torque.

does your observation agree with the math ?

Go back to your basic motor equations

Counter EMF = KΦ X RPM
so RPM = Counter EMF / KΦ
RPM = (Vapplied - Iarmature X Rarmature ) / KΦ

Torque = 7.04 K X Φ X Iarmature (Torque in foot pounds)
Iarmature = Torque / 7.04KΦ

Substitute that Iarmature into RPM formula

RPM = (Vapplied - (Torque/7.04KΦ) X Rarmature) / KΦ

RPM = Vapplied / KΦ - (Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2first term is unloaded speed
second term is how much slower it runs because of load torque.

field rheostat sets KΦ,
load's speed-torque curve sets torque...

Play with the algebra ? What's RPM/Torque ?
Whatever values I mentioned are not experimentally obtained. I just took some random values, just to reduce wording.

Will this train of thought work? For both the cases below, starting armature current will be same.
For case 1(rheostat at minimum):

Starting field current is higher ⇒Starting torque is higher⇒acceleration will be higher⇒steady state speed is higher⇒Steady state armature current is smaller.
For case 2(rheostat value increased):
Starting field current is smaller⇒Starting torque is smaller⇒acceleration will be smaller⇒steady state speed is smaller⇒steady state armature current is higher.
To produce the same load torque in both the cases,field flux*armature current product,i.e. Φ*Ia product should be same.
In case 1, Φ is more, Ia is less and in case 2, Ia is more,Φ is less, keeping the product constant.
So no way the motor should run at higher speed when started at smaller field excitation.

Is this logic okay? This can be proven by algebra.
 
cnh1995 said:
Will this train of thought work?
go back to those two equations, they won't let you down.
CounterEmf = KΦRPM
Torque = 7.04 KΦIarmature

cnh1995 said:
For case 1(rheostat at minimum):
Starting field current is higher ⇒Starting torque is higher⇒acceleration will be higher⇒steady state speed is higher reached more quickly ⇒Steady state armature current is smaller.

cnh1995 said:
For case 2(rheostat value increased):
Starting field current is smaller⇒Starting torque is smaller⇒acceleration will be smaller⇒steady state speed is smaller reached less quickly ⇒steady state armature current is higher.

Acceleration has nothing to do with final speed, only how quickly you reach it.

cnh1995 said:
Is this logic okay? This can be proven by algebra.
show that algebra ?

cnh1995 said:
So no way the motor should run at higher speed when started at smaller field excitation.

my algebra says
RPM = Vapplied / KΦ - (Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2

Halving KΦ doubles the first term and quadruples the second.
RPMcase1 = Vapplied / KΦ - (Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2
RPMcase2 = 2Vapplied / KΦ - 4(Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2

RPMcase2 - RPMcase1 = Vapplied / KΦ - 3(Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2

That's the speed increase from halving excitation.
So long as Torque X Rarmature/7.04KΦ is less than 1/3 Vapplied, it'll be positive.
Speed increase will be zero when Vapplied / KΦ - 3(Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2 = 0
Vapplied / KΦ = 3(Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2
Rarmature = Vapplied X 7.04KΦ/(3 X Torque)
.
Assume some per-unit values
Torque = 1
Vapplied = 1
KΦ= 1

Rarmature = 1 X 7.04 X 1 / (3 X 1) = 234 % ?
Real motors have small Rarmature on purpose, a few percentbetter check my algebra, I'm challenged.
Show me yours?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cnh1995
Actually i should have treated KΦ as a single term
and written

[Q RPM = Vapplied / KΦ - (Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04(KΦ)2
 
jim hardy said:
go back to those two equations, they won't let you down.
CounterEmf = KΦRPM
Torque = 7.04 KΦIarmatureAcceleration has nothing to do with final speed, only how quickly you reach it.show that algebra ?
my algebra says
RPM = Vapplied / KΦ - (Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2

Halving KΦ doubles the first term and quadruples the second.
RPMcase1 = Vapplied / KΦ - (Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2
RPMcase2 = 2Vapplied / KΦ - 4(Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2

RPMcase2 - RPMcase1 = Vapplied / KΦ - 3(Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2

That's the speed increase from halving excitation.
So long as Torque X Rarmature/7.04KΦ is less than 1/3 Vapplied, it'll be positive.
Speed increase will be zero when Vapplied / KΦ - 3(Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2 = 0
Vapplied / KΦ = 3(Torque X Rarmature) / 7.04K2Φ2
Rarmature = Vapplied X 7.04KΦ/(3 X Torque)
.
Assume some per-unit values
Torque = 1
Vapplied = 1
KΦ= 1

Rarmature = 1 X 7.04 X 1 / (3 X 1) = 234 % ?
Real motors have small Rarmature on purpose, a few percentbetter check my algebra, I'm challenged.
Show me yours?
Well you are right as always! I made three major mistakes while thinking, which now make me want to kill myself...
1. I assumed back emf to be constant in both the cases, which actually isn't since the field is reduced. This was the reason I was saying speed won't increase..
2. Wrong understanding of starting torque.
3. I totally overlooked
P=2*pi*NT
If the field is reduced and load torque is same, that must draw more power from the source. So with T constant, N must increase with reduction in field.

Thats how my "train of thoughts" got derailed..

Thanks a lot for putting up with my nonsense..My apologies..!
 
Don't apologize at all - you made me straighten out my thinking !

Thanks for working through my ineloquent presentation.

It is heartwarming to see "The Light Come On"

I distinctly remember the morning Professor Grimm derived those two formulas for us boys , my immediate thought was "How Delightfully Intuitive ! " . Both fall out naturally from QVcrossB and right hand rule.
Complications from armature reaction you add in later.

Thanks for the feedback ! helps an old guy feel useful.

old jim
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dlgoff

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
25K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
12K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K