Leland Teschler
Editor
Despite media hoopla about energy-
efficient lighting, the real opportunity
to save energy for many
businesses and even for homes is
in motors. Motorized equipment
accounts for 64% of the electricity
U.S. manufacturers consume.
The Federal government began
mandating energy efficiency for
motors in 1992. Motor-efficiency
standards (MEPS) went into effect
five years later. However, MEPS
only covered general-purpose ac
motors. Specifically, the Energy
Policy Act, or Epact, which took
effect in 1997, listed minimum
efficiency levels for polyphase acinduction
motors between 1 and
200 hp having rigid mounting
bases.
The regulations stuck to basemount
motors because “regulators
felt this was the most common
configuration and they didn’t want
to get into specialty motors,” says
Baldor Electric Co. Motor Product
Manager John Malinowski. “It
was a starting point. Industry anticipated
follow-up specs but they
never happened.”
That situation changed last year
with the enactment of the Energy
Independence and Security Act of
2007. The Act applies to motors
made after Dec. 19, 2010. It boosts
mandated efficiency levels for motors
covered under the old Act and
applies standards to seven motor types formerly excluded. Motor
makers say this fills a gap in the
original legislation.
“The 1992 standards missed a lot
of common motors throughout industry,”
says Baldor’s Malinowski.
“One example is round-body Cface
motors which are the most
common type for conveyor systems.
(In motor-mount parlance, a
C-face attachment lets a gearbox or
pump connect to a motor.) Pump
motors are another example. For
some industries they are the main
source of electricity use. These represent
literally millions of dollars
of annual motor sales that the old
Act missed.”
With the new Act taking effect
in less than three years, OEMs
should start designing for new efficiency
levels today, even for equipment
destined to be sold overseas.
“The overseas markets are rapidly
catching up to the motor regulatory
environment in the U.S.,”
says Emerson Motor Co. Director
of Marketing Robert Boteler.
“If you are exporting, it would be a
wise decision to get your products
aligned with U.S. energy-efficiency
regulations.”
In one regard, some of the distinctions
spelled out in the Epact
legislation have become less important.
The Act sets efficiency requirements
for general-purpose motors
of both A and B designs. The difference
is that design-A motors can
handle higher locked-rotor or inrush
current. In practice, however,
the two types of motors perform
much the same.
“For the most part, everyone
has gone to IEC starters. These
starters can handle the higher inrush
of premium motors,” says
Malinowski. “There is even less
consequence when the motor is used with a drive because the drive
functions as a soft starter.”
The legislation enacted last year
basically moves integral-horsepower
motors having up to 200 hp
from efficiencies specified in Epact
to efficiencies dubbed NEMA Premium
level. These levels are spelled
out in table 12-12 of a NEMA standard
called MG-1. The efficiencies
are more stringent than those Epact
dictated. Meanwhile, generalpurpose
motors in the 1 to 200-hp
range that Epact didn’t cover must
now comply with the efficiencies
spelled out in the old Epact legislation.
Similarly, those in the range of
201 to 500 hp must comply with table
12-11 of the same NEMA MG-1
standard.
Motor s abl e to me e t the
NEMA Premium levels have been
around for some time. But they
are more expensive than conventional
motors because they use
pricey materials.
“Premium motors are trying
to eliminate losses. So they use a
better grade of steel to minimize
magnetic and load losses. They
also use more copper in the windings
to keep down resistance,” says
Malinowski.
“In the lower horsepower ranges
the cost differential is likely to be
between 15 and 20%. In the 150
to 200-hp range it might be 12 to 15%,” says Emerson’s Boteler. “In
lower horsepower motors, material
costs can exceed 50% of the total
cost,” he says.
Motor manufacturers emphasize
that motor economics should not
be judged just on the initial cost, but
rather on the total cost over a typical
20-year life span. The purchase
price of an industrial motor is only
about 2% of what users ultimately
spend. Energy accounts for 97% of
total expenses.
Despite the higher cost, about
25% of the general-purpose motors
now sold in North America
carry Premium efficiency ratings.
And industry analysts say their use
is growing at a high rate.
Motor manufacturers feel future
legislation will eventually boost the
efficiency ratings of motors now
covered by the old Epact tables
to NEMA Premium levels. That
shouldn’t be a problem, however,
because NEMA Premium motors
can already be had for these
categories. That includes C-face
and vertical pump mount, explosionproof,
wash-down duty, and
so forth. In general, manufacturers
say, NEMA Premium models can
handle almost any application that
can use a design B motor.
But there will be adjustments
on the part of some motor manufacturers.
“A certain percentage of NEMA Premium motors today are
hand wound where similar Epact
motors are machine wound. Going
forward, motor manufacturers will
have to switch from having NEMA
Premium product being perhaps
25% of their volume to roughly
90%,” says Boteler.
There are other reasons to go
NEMA Premium besides energy
conservation. The motors run
cooler so bearings and grease last
longer. Most Premium motors use
finned cast-iron frames which help
minimize noise and vibration. And
some states offer end users incentives
to install equipment that is
more energy efficient.
Bigger role for three phase
The majority of capital equipment
runs from three-phase motors.
But motor manufacturers say
ancillary apparatus is often driven
by single-phase motors, and there
may be an opportunity to cut energy
use by swapping them out for
three-phase units. Conventional
single-phase motors typically exhibit
about 80% efficiency. In contrast,
Premium three-phase units
can hit 90.2%, and even ordinary
three-phase motors come in at
87.5%.
The same argument may be
made for replacing large, brush-dc
motors with efficient ac versions.
The best large dc motors, as used
for powering equipment such as
plastic extruders, have efficiencies
of about 92%. That’s not bad, but the equivalent NEMA Premium
three-phase ac units can hit 96%,
say motor manufacturers. Elimination
of brush maintenance is another
plus, they point out. And ac
drives are somewhat less expensive
than the SCR drives necessary for
big dc-brush units.
Another avenue for energy savings
is in running motors at variable
speeds. The ability to work
efficiently at less than rated speed
brings obvious benefits. Permanentmagnet-
rotor motors can have efficiencies
exceeding those of NEMA
Premium units by a few percentage
points, even at sizes of 500 hp and
larger. And industrial firms seem to
be installing these units despite their
higher purchase price.
One approach where caution is
in order concerns use of older ac
motors with modern variable-speed
drives. This is particularly true for
motors built over 20 years ago.
“The Premium motors have been
designed with enough room in their
thermal rise to accommodate pulsewidth-
modulated power supplies,”
says Malinowski. “And they have
insulation that will withstand the
PWM waveform spikes. But older
motors have insulation that may not
hold up. You will see energy savings
but they will run hotter and may fail
prematurely.”
The loss budget of
an electric motor
Six factors account for most of
the energy lost in an ordinary induction
motor: iron-core losses,
stator resistance, rotor resistance,
windage and friction, and stray
load losses. NEMA Premium
motors minimize these factors
in a variety of ways, usually
through use of high-grade steel
and increased use of active materials.
For example, high-grade
steel in the rotor lets manufacturers
use thicker laminations
that take less time to manufacture,
but which still reduce ironcore
losses caused by circulating
currents. Similarly, manufacturers
reduce stator resistance by
boosting the amount of copper
in the stator windings. |
Will there ever be an Energy
Act that applies to variable-speed
motors? Probably not. “It’s unlikely
you’ll ever see regulations in this
area,” says Boteler. “The range of variable-speed applications is pretty
much infinite. So it is tough to regulate
that and not run the risk of damaging
someone’s application.”
Variable-speed motors are also
looked on as a means for realizing
energy efficiency in residential settings.
One example of the trend is
the recently developed imPulse motor
from Marathon Electric Commercial
Motors. This is a brushless-
dc unit designed to power the
water pump on a hot tub.
The 1.8-hp, 230-V motor runs
a 2-hp pump at speeds down to
400 rpm as well as in jet mode for to 64% fewer watts than the standard
permanent split-capacitor induction
motor it replaces, The savings
can be about 100 W/hr, says
Marathon, because a typical hot
tub runs nearly 22 hr daily in lowspeed
circulation mode.
Similarly, variable-speed motors
are viewed as one means of
meeting mandated efficiency levels for HVAC systems and refrigeration
units. “The compressor and
circulating motors are the two
items that are most key to SEER
(seasonal energy-efficiency ratio)
ratings. Variable-speed motors are
one of the levers designers can pull
to lower their watts and improve
their efficiency,” says Paul Selking,
Regal-Beloit Corp. industry leader
for residential ECM products.
Nevertheless, the majority of
HVAC units still employ ordinary
split-capacitor induction motors
rather than variable-speed units.
Selking estimates that less than
30% of all residential HVAC systems
make use of variable-speed
technology. The majority of units
hit SEER targets by simply increasing
the size of condenser coil real
estate and of other heat-transfer
components.
That design strategy may change,
however, as the effects of last year’s
energy act start to kick in. The Act
forces HVAC manufacturers to establish
guidelines for maximum
electrical energy consumption. The
thought is that actual limits won’t become
law for perhaps 10 years, but
manufacturers predict this schedule
could get accelerated.
The U.S. isn’t the only country
scrutinizing the energy that
HVAC systems consume. “Canada
is looking at similar legislation by
the end of next year that would
require HVAC manufacturers to
record power consumption as a
step toward limiting it later on,”
says Regal-Beloit’s Selking.
Other applications where variable-
speed motors are showing up
include blower motors in refrigeration units. Some manufacturers are
also looking at the idea of variablespeed
motors for a/c compressors.
Variable-speed a/c compressors
have been a power-saving necessity
in China because residences there
have much less electrical capacity
than in the U.S. One advantage of
variable-speed compressors is that
they may potentially eliminate the
need for a second compressor in
central ac units. (See Motors Move
Toward More Efficiency, Machine
Design, Apr. 8, 2008)
Finally, updates of power-transmission
components can enhance
efficiency regardless of motor technology.
For example, speed reducers
with helical gears can be significantly
more efficient than those
with worm gears. Potentially this
could let a motor with less horsepower
produce the same output
torque as a larger model.
“Something as simple as going
from a solid V belt to notched
V belt is good for 2% more efficiency,”
points out Baldor’s Malinowski.
“The more you can back
away and look at how you are driving
the load from a systems viewpoint,
the more you will save when
you select components for the best
efficiency.”
Make Contact
Baldor Electric Co., Ft. Smith, Ark.,
baldor.com
Emerson Motor Co., St. Louis, Mo.,
emerson.com
Marathon Electric Commercial
Motors, Wausau, Wis.,
marathonelectric.com
Regal-Beloit Corp., Beloit, Wis.,
regalbeloit.com