Page 302 - Mechanical Engineers' Handbook (Volume 4)
P. 302

3 Performing an Energy Audit—Identifying Opportunities for Saving Energy  291

                           Table 5 Comparative Efficiencies and Power Factors (%) for U-Frame, T-Frame,
                           and Energy-Efficient Motors 7
                           For Smaller Motors
                                                 3–30 hp            3–30 hp            1.5–20 hp
                           Horsepower Range:    3600 rpm            1800 rpm           1200 rpm
                                    Speed:
                                     Type:   U     T    EEM     U     T     EEM    U      T    EEM
                           Efficiency
                             4/4 load       84.0  84.7   86.9  86.0  86.2   89.2   84.1  82.9  86.1
                             3/4 load       82.6  84.0   87.4  85.3  85.8   91.1   83.5  82.3  86.1
                             1/2 load       79.5  81.4   85.9  82.8  83.3   83.3   81.0  79.6  83.7
                           Power factor
                             4/4 load       90.8  90.3   86.6  85.3  83.5   85.8   78.1  77.0  73.7
                             3/4 load       88.7  87.8   84.1  81.5  79.2   81.9   72.9  70.6  67.3
                             1/2 load       83.5  81.8   77.3  72.8  70.1   73.7   60.7  59.6  56.7
                           For Larger Motors
                                                40–100 hp           40–100 hp          25–75 hp
                           Horsepower Range:    3600 rpm            1800 rpm           1200 rpm
                                    Speed:
                                     Type:   U     T    EEM     U     T     EEM    U      T    EEM
                           Efficiency
                             4/4 load       89.7  89.6   91.6  90.8  90.9   92.9   90.4  90.1  92.1
                             3/4 load       88.6  89.0   92.1  90.2  90.7   93.2   90.3  90.3  92.8
                             1/2 load       85.9  87.2   91.3  88.1  89.2   92.5   89.2  89.3  92.7
                           Power factor
                             4/4 load       91.7  91.5   89.1  88.7  87.4   87.6   88.3  88.5  86.0
                             3/4 load       89.9  89.8   88.8  87.1  85.4   86.3   86.6  86.4  83.8
                             1/2 load       84.7  85.0   85.2  82.0  79.2   81.1   80.9  80.3  77.8


                           saving is relatively small, replacement of fully loaded motors can still be economical for
                           motors that operate continuously in areas where electricity costs are high. Motors that are
                           seriously underloaded are better candidates for replacement. The efficiency of conventional
                           motors begins to fall sharply at less than 50% load, and replacement with a smaller high-
                           efficiency motor can yield a quick return. Motors that must run at part load for a significant
                           part of their operating cycle are also good candidates for replacement, since high-efficiency
                           motors typically have better part-load performance than conventional motors.
                              High-efficiency motors typically run faster than conventional motors with the same
                           speed rating because high-efficiency motors operate with less slip. The installation of a high-
                           efficiency motor to drive a fan or pump may actually increase energy consumption due to
                           the increase in speed, since power consumption for fans and pumps increases as the cube
                           of the speed. The sheaves in the fan or pump drive should be adjusted or changed to avoid
                           this problem.

                           More Efficient Lighting Systems
                           Conversion of lighting fixtures to more efficient light sources is often practical when the
                           lights are used for a significant portion of the year. Table 6 lists some of the more common
                           conversions and the difference in power consumption. Installation of energy-saving ballasts
                           in fluorescent lights provides a small (5–12%) percentage reduction in fixture power con-
                           sumption, but the cost can be justified by energy cost savings if the lights are on most of
   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307