Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
U
Introduction
When new motors are purchased, complete tests can be conducted to verify performance and integrity. These tests are not standard and may add to the motor cost without adding significant value to the purchaser. The value of the tests depends on criticality of the application, the users experiences, motor size, motor voltage, etc. There are many standards regarding testing of induction motors. Standards such as NEMA MG1, IEEE 112, IEC 60034-01 & -02, API 541, and IEEE 841 make recommendation as to what tests are required and how they should be performed. There are many different specified methods to performance test induction motors, all requiring that the motor be loaded (i.e., heat run). The different test methods do not necessarily produce the same results. Two common test methods are used today to load motors: coupled load test and dual frequency method. The coupled load test requires that the motor be coupled to a load machine and placed under rated load. The dual frequency test involves applying both 50- and 60-hertz power to the motor at the same time, simulating full-load heating. It is important the user understands the test employed and, if comparing motors from different vendors, that the motors need to be tested using the same test method in order to keep values comparable. A complete test uses a number of individual tests. These individual tests include: Locked-rotor test at a rated frequency Speed-torque curve No-load saturation curve Dual-frequency heat run or coupled heat run These four parts are detailed as follows.
Summer 2004
Speed-Torque Curve
On large motors it is difficult and costly to measure directly torque versus speed at rated voltage. In such cases the test is run first to determine the shape of the speed-torque curve. The curve is then calibrated utilizing the test results from the locked-rotor test to establish the actual speed-torque curve of the motor. A typical speed-torque trace is shown in Figure 1.
The speed-torque trace is normally determined utilizing a tachometer to measure motor speed as it accelerates to its no-load speed. The output of the tachometer is fed into a computer, where it is recorded as a function of time. The output is then differentiated with respect to time to arrive at the rate of change of speed versus time, which is the angular acceleration of the motor. This test is normally done at reduced voltages so as not to damage the test equipment and to get a good sampling. The resulting curve represents the shape of the speed-torque curve but does not yet establish absolute torque. The speed-torque trace is then calibrated using the locked-rotor torque value obtained in the locked-rotor test described above. By assigning this value to the curve at zero speed, a speed-torque curve is now accurately defined in absolute values at all speeds.
Figure 4 Dual-Frequency Power Sources, 50 Hertz Power superimposed on 60 Hertz by Use of a Coupling Transformer
The frequency that the motor sees changes completely 10 times per second. This continuous change causes the revolving magnetic field inside the motor to change its synchronous speed between that of 50 hertz and 60 hertz. When the motor is under the influence of the 60-hertz supply, the motor accelerates towards the 60-hertz synchronous speed, drawing current in the process to achieve the acceleration and operating as a motor under high slip. However, because of its rotor inertia, it cannot reach that speed instantly. One tenth of a second later the motor sees 50-hertz power. The motor then decelerates towards the 50hertz synchronous speed. The slip being negative, the motor now generates current and feeds it back to supply lines as an induction generator. With proper adjustments to input parameters, a steady operating
NETA WORLD
condition can be achieved wherein the motor sees rated root-mean-square (rms) voltage and rated rms line current. The wave shapes are not sinusoidal, but tests show that they produce similar heating in the motor. Table 1 lists comparative test results reported by various manufacturers.
Rise by Resist. Load Dual 56.3 64.3 62.85 63.0 51.5 52.6 62.8 71.1 45.6 49.1 44.3 45.0
Source A B B A A C
Poles 2 4 6 8 10 18
Hz 60 60 60 60 60 50
down rapidly after the auxiliary power is removed. IEEE 112 recommends that the vibrations should be measured while the motor is within 25 percent of the normal operating temperature. Dual-frequency load testing is a cost-effective method for temperature testing of general purpose and vertical induction motors. The test setup is simple no test coupling, rigging, or alignment is required. It takes 50 to 60 percent less time to rig and test the motor than by the conventional coupled load method.
Table 1 Comparative Temperature Rise Between Dual Frequency and Load Test
The rated condition is generally reached when the 50-hertz input voltage reaches 20 to 30 percent of the 60-hertz rated voltage as measured at V1 and V2, respectively, in Figure 3.. During the duration of the heat run, the terminal voltage and current of the motor are maintained at their rated 60-hertz values. Volt, ampere, and kilowatt readings at the motor terminals are recorded along with the motor temperatures. After the machine temperatures (as indicated by stator resistance temperature detectors or auxiliary thermocouples) have stabilized, the voltages of the auxiliary power and the prime power are reduced. After the motor is stopped and all breakers are opened and locked out, resistance is measured to evaluate temperature rise. During the heat run, the motor is being supplied from two power sources at different frequencies, and is subjected to the oscillatory torques associated with these frequencies. Consequently, the vibration will be abnormal during this condition and may not meet the normal limits of vibration. For this reason a no-load cold vibration is measured at rated voltage before the application of the auxiliary power. Then, at the end of the heat run after the temperatures on the machine have stabilized, the auxiliary power is removed, and the vibration at rated frequency and voltage is measured again to determine the vibration of the machine at normal running temperature. This is done without stopping the test motor, which allows the hot vibration to be recorded quickly since the machine especially an open machine cools
Summer 2004
run and efficiency methods should never be implied or assumed. Performance will vary significantly depending on the method used. Efficiency will be accurate and higher if utilizing methods B or E, whereas method F will normally provide slightly less accurate and lower efficiency. Nevertheless, economics frequently outweigh the concern for accuracy, and thus, method F tests are commonly performed. In addition to IEEE 112 test methods, the IEC and JEC also have methods for testing induction motors. These test methods differ from one another in their details and arrive at different results. Cummins, Bowers, and Martiny in 1981 compared in detail these various methods for testing induction motor efficiency. The JEC and IEC methods tend to be less rigorous, and provide less accurate results when compared to IEEE methods, albeit they are less expensive to conduct. Table 2 illustrates the differences in results when the efficiency of a single machine was evaluated per various methods.
IEEE 122 Eff. Test Methods HP <200 200-1500 >1500 B C M M M E M M E1 1.25 .9% F M M M F1 1.6% 1.2% .9% M 1.6%
Conclusion
No matter what tests are chosen, it is important to understand what information is being obtained from the tests specified. The benefit of having information obtained from rigorous tests must be compared against the additional testing cost. Critical applications that have historically been problematic may benefit from a complete test. Alternatively, noncritical, trouble-free applications would add unnecessary cost to the motor if the same tests were specified. By understanding the information delivered by the many different motor tests available, optimal test requirements can be specified.
IEEE-112 Stator I2R, kW Rotor I2R Core Loss kW Wind & Fr., kW Stray, kWQ Total, kW Output, kW Input, kW Efficiency 13.9 11.4 8.0 4.0 13.2 50.5 932.5 983.0 94.9
IEC 34-2 13.9 11.4 8.0 4.0 4.7 42.0 932.5 974.5 95.7
ANSI-C50-41 13.9 11.4 8.0 4.0 11.2 48.5 932.5 981.0 95.1
References
1. Cummings, P. G., Bowers W. D., and Martiny, W. J., Induction Motor Efficiency Test Methods, IEEE Transactions On Industry Applications, Vol. IA-17, No. 3, May/June 1981. 2. IEEE 112 Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction Motors and Generators, 1996. 3. ANSI C50.41-2000 Polyphase Induction Motors for Power Generating Stations. 4. NEMA Standards Publication No. MG 1-1998 (Rev. 1) Motors and Generators, 2000. 5. IEEE 522-1992 Guide for Testing Turn-to-Turn Insulation on Form-Wound Stator Coils for Alternating-Current Rotating Electric Machines. 6. Finley, W. R., Hodowanec, M. M., Holter, W. G., An Analytical Approach to Solving Motor Vibration Problems, IEEE Transactions, Vol. 36, No. 5, September/October 2000.
Table 2 Table of Stray versus Test Method M=Measured (1)- in this case stray is a percentage of the input, which makes the levels a little higher.
A point of interest is the variation in stray load loss used in the different methods. Please see Table 3. In IEEE 112, one has the option either to test for the load loss (such as in method B or the Morgan test also known as reverse-rotation test in methods E and F), or use an assigned value to the load loss (such as in methods E1 and F1). Tested values of stray load loss provide the most accurate measurement of the efficiency as compared to using assigned values, but the cost could be prohibitive.
William R. Finley received his BS in Electrical Engineering from the University of Cincinnati. Present responsibilities for Siemens Energy and Automation include being the operations manager for the NEMA product out of Little Rock, Arkansas, and manager of engineering for the same NEMA product where he is responsible for design, development, and quality assurance out of Norwood, Ohio. He is a Senior Member of IEEE and has previNETA WORLD
ously published over 12 technical papers, which resulted in one first place, two second place, and one honorable mention award. Most of the papers were included in the IEEE transactions. He is currently active in over ten NEMA and IEC working groups and subcommittees. He is Chairman of NEMAs Large Machine Group and International Standardization Group. Mark M. Hodowanec received BS and MS degrees in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Akron, Ohio. Currently, he is the manager of mechanical engineering for ANEMA induction motors built in the US at Siemens Energy and Automation, Inc., Cincinnati. For the past ten years he has worked in a variety of engineering positions including design, product development, order processing, shop testing, and field support. He is currently active on various NEMA, IEEE, and API working groups. In addition to his ANEMA motor experience, Mr. Hodowanec has worked on a wide assortment of induction motors such as NEMA, submersible, and MSHA motors. He is the author of numerous published technical articles.
Khursheed S. Hussain received his BS from University of Poona, India, and his MS in Electric Power Engineering from Rensselar Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY. Currently, he is the principal product engineer for ANEMA induction motors built in the US at Siemens Energy and Automation, Inc., Cincinnati. He has over thirty-five years of engineering and project management experience in motors and generators for industrial, nuclear, and government applications, including ten years in application, design, and development of ship service generators for the US Navy. He is an IEEE member, and member of the working group on IEEE Std. 112, Standard Test Procedures for Induction Motors and Generators. John A. Larabee received his BS in Electrical Engineering from Florida International University, Miami. Currently, he is manager of product engineering and testing for Siemens Energy and Automation, Inc., Cincinnati. He has a background of design engineering, process engineering, and information technology within Siemens.
Summer 2004