Last year, the Department of Energy (DoE) held framework meetings to investigate how efficiency regulations might be established for motor-driven systems in fan, pump, and air compression applications. Since industrial motor efficiency is nearing its theoretical maximum, system efficiency is the next logical focus for improvement. Recent regulations for 1-HP to 500-HP three-phase motors, as well as the Small Motor Rule for 0.25-HP to 3-HP single- and three-phase open drip-proof motors, are expected to complement the system regulations.
The issues the DoE has been discussing include how efficiency would be measured, what components would be in the system, and what installation practices should be followed. Some of these systems are already regulated in Europe, so harmonization with those standards may be a possibility. Industry trade associations for these groups are also involved in the discussions.
There is likely to be a multi-year study before the DoE proposes any standards. However, new negotiated regulation procedures may speed along the process.
"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.
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.
"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.
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.
"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.
Iterative design — the cycle of prototyping, testing, analyzing, and refining a product — existed long before additive manufacturing, but it has never been as efficient and approachable as it is today with 3D printing.
People usually think of a time constant as the time it takes a first order system to change 63% of the way to the steady state value in response to a step change in the input -- it’s basically a measure of the responsiveness of the system. This is true, but in reality, time constants are often not constant. They can change just like system gains change as the environment or the geometry of the system changes.
At its core, sound is a relatively simple natural phenomenon caused by pressure pulsations or vibrations propagating through various mediums in the world around us. Studies have shown that the complete absence of sound can drive a person insane, causing them to experience hallucinations. Likewise, loud and overwhelming sound can have the same effect. This especially holds true in manufacturing and plant environments where loud noises are the norm.
The tech industry is no stranger to crowdsourcing funding for new projects, and the team at element14 are no strangers to crowdsourcing ideas for new projects through its design competitions. But what about crowdsourcing new components?
It has been common wisdom of late that anything you needed to manufacture could be made more cost-effectively on foreign shores. Following World War II, the label “Made in Japan” was as ubiquitous as is the “Made in China” version today and often had very similar -- not always positive -- connotations. Along the way, Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, and other Pacific-rim nations have each had their turn at being the preferred low-cost alternative to manufacturing here in the US.
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.