Jump to content


Photo

Power Factor Controllers


  • Please log in to reply
65 replies to this topic

#61 Macabenta

Macabenta

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2 posts

Posted 27 March 2008 - 05:44 AM

Hi members,

I am new to the forum and I have read all of your quotes which is also a big help as an additional knowledge. I am working as an electrical designer at GEA Grasso Philippines Inc. a contractor and manufacturer of Industrial Refrigeration and our main office is GEA Grasso International at The Netherlands.

Much has been said and comments from the article of Mark. GEA Grasso line of business consist of majorities of motors. Majority of Operating Cost for Refrigeration plants come from power consumption.

If it is true that energy savings are more or less not apllicable. WHAT then is the best way we could suggest to our costumer if they are asking for help in order to REDUCE there POWER BILLS. To be honest for every project we built, costumer are always begging for help to cut Energy cost.

Or during the feasibility study we would immediate suggest to install

1. Power factor correction. - to reduce energy lost
2. Use Softstarter and Variable frequency drives - to prevent high starting current.
3. Good maintenance of the motor to become efficient.
4. Or install energize saving device you trust and has been tested.

What would you suggest Mark.



#62 Mikie

Mikie

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3 posts

Posted 26 December 2008 - 10:01 PM

Hi Mark,

Great thread. Back to the original discussion from many moons ago... Have you ever proved or disproved Siena's technology? You had mentioned that you had several private converstaion on this topic. I was hoping to learn more of that.

This is quite an old topic, but the underlying desire to save power is all the same. We are analyzing the entire process to have it optimized, and have fat cut out. Additional to that, I'd like to see what these "magic boxes" are all about.

Did Siena ever send you their website?

Thanks!

Michael

#63 marke

marke

    Posting Freak

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,603 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted 27 December 2008 - 03:58 AM

Hi Mikie

The product being offered by Sienna was the Somar PowerBoss and there are a number of threads about this type of product.

The concept is based on an initial patent by Frank Nola of NASA back in the 1970s where the iron loss in the motor was reduced by reducing the voltage applied to the motor.
The algorithm proposed by Frank Nola was to monitor the power factor of the motor and if the power factor was low, reduce the voltage to maximize the power factor. The effect of this is to minimize the magnetizing current and therefore minimize the iron loss.

On small single phase inefficient motors, this principle works well, but on larger three phase motors, the iron loss is already very small and any reduction is insignificant. Additionally, the principle only really works when the load current is less than or equal to the magnetizing current.

Have a look at the efficiency of modern motors. In many cases there is very little improvement possible.

Have a look at http://www.LMPhotonics.com/energy.htm

Best regards,
Mark.

#64 TTC

TTC

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 12:17 AM

QUOTE (marke @ Dec 26 2008, 11:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Hi Mikie

The product being offered by Sienna was the Somar PowerBoss and there are a number of threads about this type of product.

The concept is based on an initial patent by Frank Nola of NASA back in the 1970s where the iron loss in the motor was reduced by reducing the voltage applied to the motor.
The algorithm proposed by Frank Nola was to monitor the power factor of the motor and if the power factor was low, reduce the voltage to maximize the power factor. The effect of this is to minimize the magnetizing current and therefore minimize the iron loss.

On small single phase inefficient motors, this principle works well, but on larger three phase motors, the iron loss is already very small and any reduction is insignificant. Additionally, the principle only really works when the load current is less than or equal to the magnetizing current.

Have a look at the efficiency of modern motors. In many cases there is very little improvement possible.

Have a look at http://www.LMPhotonics.com/energy.htm

Best regards,
Mark.


Mark,
Everything old is new again...
We have recently gotten involved with "The Next Generation" of this energy saving equipment and it does not rely on the "Lost Iron" as previously stated. I have not developed or patented the technology and am only trying to offer it to the United States.
Basically, our system uses transducers (Pumps) or thermocouples (HVAC) to determine process load requirements. This data is fed into a "Smart Controller" (Patented algorithm) that interprets the data, and adjusts the motor cycles (VFD, between 30-60 Hz.) to meet the operational needs. The proprietary electronics also adjusts (Conditions/aligns) the electrical signal being supplied to the motor. This equipment has been designed to work with non-VFD type motors and equipment.
I know (From the selections I have read here) that you are not a big proponent of this type of equipment. However, we have collected actual motor data that confirms the energy savings. Additionally, the manufacturer has hundreds of successful installations that have shown a significant reduction of electricity consumed by using this equipment.
If you can discredit this equipment, I welcome this information. I need to know how my potential clients may address and view our claims and operational explanation.
Please bear in mind that I am a Mechanical Engineer and all of my electrical knowledge of this product has been obtained through osmosis...
Thank you for your input and analysis,
Ron>



#65 marke

marke

    Posting Freak

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,603 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Christchurch, New Zealand

Posted 12 August 2010 - 07:20 AM

Hello Ron
Welcome to the forum.

You can only save energy that is being wasted.
The technology referred to in this thread, is based on a patent taken out by Frank Nola of Nasa and more latterly variations have been patented by numerous people claiming superior systems.
I patented a three phase implementation of the NASA algorith around 1980 so am well familiar with this technology and applications.

The Nola system relies on reducing the voltage on a motor that is not operating at maximum efficiency and therby reducing the iron loss. This technology can only reduce the losses in the motor and on three phase motors, particularly larger three phase motors this is very small as the motor efficiency cna be well above 90%.

A better energy saving can be achieved in some applications by slowing the machine down. Pumps and fans are good examples where the fan or pump can be wasting energy as they are not operaing efficiently. Slowing the pump or the fan down, is effectively the same as reducing the fan or impellor size and is a means of increasing the efficiency if the machine is oversized. This technique is well known and used globally.
The energy saved is not by increasing the efficiency of the motor, rather ist is by increasing the efficiency of the driven load.
Variable speed technology is only of value as an energy saving technique where the output of the machine is less than the machine is capable. For example a pump that is designed to pump 100L/s and is operating for significant periods at say 45L/s. At this flow, the pump efficiency falls considerably, so slowing the pump down will reduce the losses and increase the efficiency.

Best regards,
Mark.

#66 TTC

TTC

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 01:24 PM

Mark,

I agree with your assessment and analysis; thank you for the validation...

Our equipment began development in 2003 with over four years of R&D. This product was only offered to industrial/commercial clients (3-Ph.) in 2008. We now have approximately four hundred successful installations, and continue to improve and refine our productů

We are conducting discussions with BMW where they have been putting oversize sheaves on their air-handlers (AH) in an effort to reduce power consumption. The problem with this method is while it is a cheap solution; it is also a highly inefficient one. When the air-handler (AH) requires extra cooling (Airflow) it is no longer available. Our system will slow down the AH Motor when it is appropriate, but will still be able to run "Full-speed" when required.

A better application was reviewed for Michelin tire; where they have a 125 HP boiler feed water pump that only operates (Feeds the Boiler) 60% of the time. The rest of the time, this pump re-circulates water into a tank in bi-pass mode. This is a 24 hour/365 day application; we have shown a 40% savings in this application.

Our equipment is similar to the latest Ultra-high (23+) SEER HVAC (High Efficiency) equipment currently offered by Mitsubishi and Trane (DDC, with improvements). However, our system is "Stand-alone" equipment and can be installed onto any brand of existing HVAC system and emulate the savings of these new (U/H SEER) systems.

We have recently gathered motor data for a current (Domestic) HVAC Installation by using a Hioki 3169-20 power analyzer/recorder (Certified 4/30/2010). The electrical consumption data comparison is as follows:

Normal HVAC Operation from 12:15 on 5/13 until 9:45 on 5/14; Equaling: 21.5 hours.

Consumption Averages: Current (A): 7.831, Active Power: 5.124 (kW), Reactive Power: 4.288 (kvar), Power Factor: 0.7649, Apparent Power: 6.689 (kVA)

Energy Saving Operation from 12:15 on 5/15 until 9:45 on 5/16; Equaling: 21.5 hours.

Consumption Averages: Amperage: 4.949, Active Power: 2.197 (kW), Reactive Power: 0.153 (kvar), Power Factor: 0.9976, Apparent Power: 2.202 (kVA)

We save similar amounts (30%) of electrical energy on pumps, compressors, fans, chillers, elevators/escalators, etc. Since the electrical consumption of this higher horsepower equipment is greater, the savings and the ROI are also higher.

Our biggest problem is getting clients to believe the methods we are using really do WORK and are not typical "Smoke-and-mirrors" like a lot of the other "Energy Saving Equipment" offered by our competition.

Do you have any ideas on a good method to educate/convey this method/technology/information to prospective clients? No matter how much data, client reports, or "Success Stories" we provide, our U.S. customers are a skeptical bunch (Thanks to the "Junk systems" on the market)...

Have a great day; and Best Regards,

Ron>







3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users