Comparative analysis of IEEE 112-B and IEC 34-2 efficiency testing standards using stray load losses in low voltage three-phase, cage induction motors

Almeida, Anı́bal T. de; Ferreira, Fernando J. T. E.; Busch, John; Angers, Pierre

doi:10.1109/icps.2001.966506

Cited by 31 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The main point of contention was a variation in testing methods [38,63], which in turn caused the different grid supply frequencies (60Hz for most of the Americas and Japan vs. 50Hz for Europe, Asia, Africa and Australia) to lead to different claims depending on the region of applicability. The North American prevailing testing method came from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE 112-B), and was based on direct efficiency measurement.…”

Section: Lack Of Policy Coordination: Minimum Efficiency Performance mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Political-institutional barriers to energy efficiency

Langlois-Bertrand

Benhaddadi

Jegen

et al. 2015

Energy Strategy Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Lack Of Policy Coordination: Minimum Efficiency Performance mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to the attention given to this problem in the late 1990s [63,65], efforts began to revise the IEC 60034-2 standard so that an efficiency classification of motors at the global level would be possible. This led to the IEC 60034-2-1 standard, published in 2007.…”

Section: Lack Of Policy Coordination: Minimum Efficiency Performance mentioning

confidence: 99%

Political-institutional barriers to energy efficiency

Langlois-Bertrand

Benhaddadi

Jegen

et al. 2015

Energy Strategy Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This was a relatively easy standard to apply in practice and required little information in determining the winding temperature and stray-load loss. As a result, it suffered from high measurement uncertainties and had been criticized for many years [4], [9]- [12]. The new standard IEC 60034-2-1 [13] was published in November 2007 and refined from its previous version with significant reference made to IEEE 112.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of IEEE 112 and New IEC Standard 60034-2-1

Cao

2009

IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes a comparative study of induction motor testing standards IEEE 112 and newly published IEC 60034-2-1, primarily used in the United States and Europe, respectively. IEC 60034-2-1 has been refined from its earlier version IEC 60034-2 with reference to the IEEE 112. Six induction motors are tested following the two standards and the results are compared with regard to their instrumental accuracy and testing procedures. Power loss results are validated by the calorimetric method. A quantitative method is devised to evaluate the measurement uncertainty that can be interpreted into an efficiency deviation by quadrature addition. This paper is aimed to provide a guideline on interpreting the measured machine efficiency values using these standards and to validate the new IEC standard.

show abstract

“…However, additional rotor losses do occur due to imperfect winding layout. The measurement of the SSL for an IM has proven to be quite complicated [13]; consequently, normative references such as IEC60034-2-1 give an indication of these losses, which are estimated at 0.5% of its nominal input power [14]. In Section IV, the FEM model is elucidated, and based on FEM, the SLLs are 30 W, which is 0.6% of nominal electric power.…”

Section: Slls In An Lspmmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1, the additional SLLs, which are caused by imperfect winding layout within the stator and the rotor, are excluded. For a standard IM, the estimation of SLL according to the indirect measurement method is still a topic of discussion [13], [14], and the indirect measurement method, which is used to determine SLL, is not straightforward applicable for an LSPMM. Consequently, the SLLs are specifically addressed in Section III-D but are initially eliminated within the fundamental loss analysis.…”

Section: Fundamental Loss Segregation Of An Im and An Lspmm A Mementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Efficiency of Line-Start Permanent-Magnet Machines as a Function of the Operating Temperature

Debruyne

Polikarpova

Derammelaere

et al. 2014

IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-The standard squirrel-cage induction machine has nearly reached its maximum efficiency. In order to further increase the energy efficiency of electrical machines, the use of permanent magnets in combination with the robust design and the line start capability of the induction machine is extensively investigated. Many experimental designs have been suggested in literature, but recently, these line-start permanent-magnet machines (LSPMMs) have become off-the-shelf products available in a power range up to 7.5 kW. The permanent magnet flux density is a function of the operating temperature. Consequently, the temperature will affect almost every electrical quantity of the machine, including current, torque, and efficiency. In this paper, the efficiency of an off-the-shelf 4-kW three-phase LSPMM is evaluated as a function of the temperature by both finite-element modeling and by practical measurements. In order to obtain stator, rotor, and permanent magnet temperatures, lumped thermal modeling is used.

show abstract

Comparative analysis of IEEE 112-B and IEC 34-2 efficiency testing standards using stray load losses in low voltage three-phase, cage induction motors

Cited by 31 publications

References 10 publications

Political-institutional barriers to energy efficiency

Political-institutional barriers to energy efficiency

Comparison of IEEE 112 and New IEC Standard 60034-2-1

Evaluation of the Efficiency of Line-Start Permanent-Magnet Machines as a Function of the Operating Temperature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About