HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Blogs
Guest Blogs

Future Efficiency Regulations May Focus on Systems

NO RATINGS
View Comments: Newest First|Oldest First|Threaded View
Page 1/2  >  >>
Mydesign
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Energy Efficency
Mydesign   4/2/2014 4:28:52 AM
NO RATINGS
1 saves
"To figure out the life cost of a motor, simple calculations use hours operated, motor energy consumption to see the cost of energy over a 20 year life for the motor. We know the motor purchase price and another guide gives us the average repair cost for replacing motor bearings and cleanup in the middle of the motor's life"

John, thanks now I got it. it's a best assumption by considering the various factors and neglecting the fact that Motor won't stop work in between.

John Malinowski
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Energy Efficency
John Malinowski   3/28/2014 8:54:27 AM
NO RATINGS
To figure out the life cost of a motor, simple calculations use hours operated, motor energy consumption to see the cost of energy over a 20 year life for the motor. We know the motor purchase price and another guide gives us the average repair cost for replacing motor bearings and cleanup in the middle of the motor's life. These are the 3 slices of the pie.

A program to assist with energy usage on electric motors is available at http://www.baldor.com/support/software_download.asp?type=BE$T+Energy+Savings+Tool

The NEMA carbon study is available at http://www.nema.org/news/Pages/NEMA-First-Phase-Carbon-Footprint-Report-Now-Available-for-Member-Review.aspx

Mydesign
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Energy Efficency
Mydesign   3/28/2014 5:00:08 AM
NO RATINGS
1 saves
"If I understood better how I might be able to post a pie chart here, the one would show motor purchase at about 2%, electricity at around 97% and maintenance of the motor at a little less than 1% over its life cycle. We created this graphic about 25 years ago. A recent study by NEMA and MIT showed the lifetime carbon footprint from a motor as about 99% from electricity usage"

John, thanks for the details, but still not convinced how you figure out these values.

John Malinowski
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Energy Efficency
John Malinowski   3/27/2014 8:52:38 AM
NO RATINGS
You bring up two important items. The first is changing the paradigms for purchasing folks. We historically have rewarded them for saving money on purchases, but that does not play well with today's idea to increase productivity and reduce downtime and energy consumption. Its like the old oil filter commercial, you can pay a little more now or a lot more later. Purchasing folks need to be on the team to know that cutting corners has a big effect on the bottom line.

If I understood better how I might be able to post a pie chart here, the one would show motor purchase at about 2%, electricity at around 97% and maintenance of the motor at a little less than 1% over its life cycle. We created this graphic about 25 years ago. A recent study by NEMA and MIT showed the lifetime carbon footprint from a motor as about 99% from electricity usage.

Mydesign
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Energy Efficency
Mydesign   3/27/2014 6:01:04 AM
NO RATINGS
1 saves
"In the past, OEMs would concentrate on first cost, specifying lower efficiency less expensive motors and components. Users have demanded a more robust machine that increases productivity and lower life cycle cost. The life cost of a motor is only 2%; over 97% is energy cost."

John, how and on what parameters these figures have arrived. Actually for a motor investment si more and we have to account wear & tear, interest part of the investments etc.

Mydesign
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Energy Efficency
Mydesign   3/27/2014 5:58:56 AM
NO RATINGS
1 saves
"The proposal is to use a motor with an efficiency as high or higher then the original that was certified with the fan as static pressure changes and larger motors are needed."

Thanks John for your clarification.

William K.
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Energy Efficency
William K.   3/24/2014 12:25:36 PM
NO RATINGS
J.M. You are certainly correct on the costs. But like many other times the challenge is to make the purchasing people understand that reality. That task can require  a bit of effort.

John Malinowski
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Energy Efficency
John Malinowski   3/24/2014 9:34:53 AM
NO RATINGS
Thanks for the comments guys.

In the past, OEMs would concentrate on first cost, specifying lower efficiency less expensive motors and components. Users have demanded a more robust machine that increases productivity and lower life cycle cost. The life cost of a motor is only 2%; over 97% is energy cost.

  

TJ McDermott
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Energy Efficency
TJ McDermott   3/23/2014 11:11:37 PM
NO RATINGS
End users are becoming motor conscious, specifying premium efficiency motors to decrease their electric bills.

Enough end users asking for better motors will force OEMs to step up.

William K.
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Energy Efficency
William K.   3/23/2014 10:14:59 PM
NO RATINGS
In another discussion it was pointed out that some OEMs would choose the cheaper less efficient motors to use in thier products to gain a price advantage. So probably any rules would have to include having the motor efficiency information included in the product advertising materials. Sort of an enforcing of "truth in advertising", which I am sure would pain some folks a lot.

Page 1/2  >  >>
Partner Zone
More Blogs from Guest Blogs
The age of touch could soon come to an end. From smartphones and smartwatches, to home devices, to in-car infotainment systems, touch is no longer the primary user interface. Technology market leaders are driving a migration from touch to voice as a user interface.
Soft starter technology has become a way to mitigate startup stressors by moderating a motor’s voltage supply during the machine start-up phase, slowly ramping it up and effectively adjusting the machine’s load behavior to protect mechanical components.
Despite the astronomical benefits offered by 3D modeling, it is quite surprising that nearly 75% of the manufacturing industries still perform design operations using 2D CAD systems. What is the reason that keeps companies hesitant from adopting 3D technology?
Energy harvesting in particular seems to be moving at an accelerating pace. We now seem to be at a point where it is possible to run low-power systems primarily from energy harvesting sources. This is a big shift from even just a couple of years ago. Three key trends seem to have accelerated this dramatic shift.
ABI Research, a firm based in the UK that specializes in analyzing global connectivity and other emerging technologies, estimates there will be 40.9 billion active wirelessly interconnected “things” by 2020. The driving force is the usual suspect: the Internet of Things.
Design News Webinar Series
3/31/2015 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
2/25/2015 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
12/11/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
5/7/2015 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
May 4 - 8, Designing Low Power Systems using Battery and Energy Harvesting Energy Sources
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6 |  7


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Last Archived Class
Sponsored by Proto Labs
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2015 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service