View Single Post
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-02-2013, 11:48
Mark McLeod's Avatar
Mark McLeod Mark McLeod is offline
Just Itinerant
AKA: Hey dad...Father...MARK
FRC #0358 (Robotic Eagles)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Hauppauge, Long Island, NY
Posts: 8,800
Mark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond reputeMark McLeod has a reputation beyond repute
Re: AM Compressor versus Thomas Compressor

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr V View Post
To summarize

Flow
Viair 1.03 CFM @ 0psi
Thomas .80 CFM @ 0psi
There's something wrong with the Viair spec sheet you used.
The Viair itself carries a label stating:
"Flow Rate @ 0 psi (13.8 volts): 0.88CFM"

The spec sheets of the two devices also do not appear to be comparable, because different criteria were used in the measurements, e.g., the VIair measurement is based on 13.8 volts, while the Thomas is based on 12v.

Somewhere around I have timed compression tests we ran with both the older Thomas model compressor vs. the VIair 90. I'll see if I can dig them up and post them.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	VIAir90-label.jpg
Views:	34
Size:	455.3 KB
ID:	14150  
__________________
"Rationality is our distinguishing characteristic - it's what sets us apart from the beasts." - Aristotle

Last edited by Mark McLeod : 23-02-2013 at 12:11.