Critical power: Motors, variable

frequency drives (VFDs), and

variable speed drives (VSDs)
#CSEmotordrive
John Yoon, PE, LEED AP ID+C
McGuire Engineers, Chicago
Ken Lovorn, PE
Lovorn Engineering Associates, Pittsburgh

Sponsored by:
About the Viewer Panel
Technical problems?
•Click on the “Question Mark Symbol” on the upper right hand corner of your
screen, where you will be directed to a list of system checks
•Send a question from the “Ask a Question” window. Individual technical
questions will be answered in the “Answered Questions” on the left hand side
of your screen
Slides:
•Click the four pronged arrow button at the top right corner of the slides to
view an expanded window
•Slides should change automatically
•Click on “Download Webcast Slides” under “Event Resources” for a PDF of
all slides
• Warning: The PDF will be a large file
Archive:
•Within 7 days, an archive with Q&A will be posted
•We will send an email to registered attendees with hyperlink
•Can also access from www.csemag.com home page
AIA CES Learning Units (LU)
• To obtain AIA CES learning units:
• Go to the “Learning Unit Exam” tab at the top of your
screen and click on the exam link
• Take a 10-question exam for 1 LU (learning unit)
• Get 8 answers correct to pass
• Certificate available to download once you pass
• You must be registered for the Webcast to take the
exam and qualify for continuing education credits
• If attending as a guest of a registrant:
• Access the archive at www.csemag.com
• Complete the registration form
• View the archive and download slides
• Take the exam to obtain learning units (LU)
Quality Assurance
Consulting-Specifying Engineer, as a publication of CFE Media, is
registered provider 70118100 with The American Institute of
Architects Continuing Education Systems. Credit earned on
completion of this program will be reported to CES Records for
AIA members. Certificates of Completion for non-AIA members
are available on request.
This program is registered with the AIA/CES for continuing
professional education. As such, it does not include content that
may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement
by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or
manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material
or product.
Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will
be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.
Learning objectives

The audience will understand the requirements of the

applicable codes and standards, including ASHRAE
Standard 90.1: Energy Standard for Buildings Except
Low-Rise Residential Buildings; International Energy
Conservation Code (IECC); Energy Policy and
Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA-1975); Energy Policy
Act of 1992 (EPAct-1992); Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (EISA-2007); and NEMA MG-1-
2011 motor standard for manufacturers.
Learning objectives

• Evaluate the design criteria for appropriate electrical

room size to accommodate present and future
needs.
• Analyze the requirements for coordinating with
structural, architectural, fire protection, and HVAC
requirements.
• Outline the requirements for foreign systems such
as ductwork and piping.
Now a word from our sponsors
Speakers
Presenter:
John Yoon, PE, LEED AP ID+C
Senior Electrical Engineer
McGuire Engineers Inc., Chicago

Presenter:
Kenneth Lovorn, PE
President, Chief Engineer
Lovorn Engineering Associates Inc., Pittsburgh

Moderator:
Jack Smith
Content Manager
Consulting-Specifying Engineer
Evolution of codes and standards
Federal legislation acts as the catalyst for energy codes and efficiency standards. The
conservation of energy is considered a national security issue. Federal legislation is updated at
fairly regular intervals but key game changer milestones related to equipment efficiency are:

• 1973-74 energy crisis

– Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA-1975)
– Original standard: ASHRAE Standard 90-1975
• First Gulf War
– Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct-1992), which enacted earlier legislation (ECPA)
• 1992 Model Energy Code (MEC precursor to IECC) and ASHRAE 90.1-1989 adopted as model standards for
residential and commercial, respectively
• Revised minimum motor efficiency requirements for 1 to 200 hp general purpose motors effective 1997
(NEMA MG-1 – standard for general purpose industrial ac small and medium squirrel-cage induction motors)
• 2nd Gulf War
– Energy Independence and Security Acts of 2005 and 2007 (EISA-2005, EISA-2007)
• EISA-2007—dramatic changes in mandated equipment efficiency
• Updated minimum motor efficiency requirements, making similar to NEMA Premium as defined by MG1.
Expanded motors affected to 500 hp. Effective 2010.
– ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010—major standard revision
• Extensive revisions with the goal of reducing energy cost by 30% compared to ASHRAE 90.1-2004.
Energy code goals
U.S. Dept. of Energy is responsible for national energy policy and has federal
statutory authority for evaluation of energy codes and standards per the United
States Code, Title 42 (Public Health and Welfare).

Energy codes and standards help ensure the public health and welfare by:
• Reduced dependence of foreign energy by increasing efficiency and promoting
alternate sources of energy.
• Protecting consumers through adoption of consistent standards.
• More reliable electrical utility grid.
• Promoting economic development.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that electric motor driven systems
account for 43% to 46% of global electricity consumption (7,108 TWh/year). Most of
this is in the industrial sector. However, commercial usage still accounts for 1,412
TWh/year.

Small changes in motor efficiency can dramatically impact global energy

consumption.
Criteria for if an energy code or standard is
adopted
The following evaluation criteria for the DOE is directly from EPCA-1975:

1. Economic impact on manufacturers and consumers.

2. Lifetime operating cost savings comparted to increased cost for the product.
3. Energy savings resulting from implementation.
4. Lessening of utility or performance of products.
5. Impact of any lessening of competition.
6. Need for national energy conservation.
7. Other “factors”: environmental, economic, etc.

Example: Although motors less than 1 hp represent the majority of motors in use,
these motors only account for about 9% of total motor electrical use. Does it make
sense to regulate these as tightly as large polyphase induction motors?

Note that in the 2013 code revision cycle, motors for fans 1/12 to 1 hp have minimum
efficiency requirements (IECC 2015: C403.4.4.4 ECM or 70% efficient).
Why aren’t we following the most current
version of the energy codes?
Federal statutory authority under Title 42 of the United States Code (Public
Health)
• Both ASHRAE 90.1 and IECC are recognized by the federal government as the
benchmarks.
• U.S. Department of Energy requires by federal legislation to determine no more
than 12 months after revision to the applicable standard (IECC and ASHRAE
90.1) if the revised code/standard would cost-effectively improve energy
efficiency.
• After determination is made, each state is required to certify within 2 years that
its commercial code is in compliance with the revised standard. Compliance
must include a demonstration that its commercial code meets or exceeds the
revised standard.
• This is a worst-case scenario under the federal code. Many states will adopt
early (e.g. Vermont, Maryland).
• Note: The U.S. does not have a national energy code or standard. Codes and
standards are adopted on the state level.
• Motor manufacturers are bound by standards, not energy codes.
• For further reading: U.S. Department of Energy Building Energy Codes
Program.
Standards for motors/VFDs
• NEMA MG-1 is the federally recognized manufacturers’ standard for general-
purpose small and medium squirrel-cage induction motors.
• Applicable to most motors from 1 to 500 hp, less than 600 V.
• Updated on a regular basis.
• Last major revision is attributed to EISA 2007, which became effective Dec. 19,
2010.
• EISA 2007 expanded the motor efficiency requirements from that in EPAct1992.
• EISA 2007 mandated NEMA Premium efficiency levels.
• NEMA Premium motors represent low to mid-single digit efficiency
improvements over pre-EPAct motors.
• New minimum full-load motor efficiency tables in IECC 2015 and ASHRAE 90.1-
2013 are from MG-1-2009 (incorporated by reference into DOE 10 CFR 431
Code of Federal Regulations).
• There is no corresponding manufacturers’ efficiency standard for VFDs (sort of).
• European standard for efficiency in 2013 (IEC 60034-2-3).
Energy codes for motors and VFDs
• NEMA MG-1 minimum motor efficiency requirements
are now in the energy code starting with ASHRAE
90.1-2013 and IECC-2015.

• Moot point—all applicable new motors in the

marketplace comply with MG-1.

• ASHRAE 90.1-2013 and IECC-2015 both have speed

control requirements for motors in certain systems.

• ASHRAE 90.1-2016 slightly different.

ASHRAE 90.1-2016 requirements related
to VFDs
Supply fan airflow control (6.5.3.2.1)
Applicable to:
• Chilled water and evaporative cooling units, greater than 0.25 hp and
greater than 65 mbh.
• DX units any horsepower, any capacity.
Must have:
– 2-stages of control, low speed not exceeding 66% of full speed and not
drawing more than 40% of full speed power where mechanical capacity is
controlled.
• Modulating fan control, minimum speed not to exceed 50% of full speed and
not drawing more than 30% of full speed power where space temperature is
controlled by modulating airflow.
Where air side economizer is required, need a minimum of 2 speeds.
• Code does not specifically state that solid-state VFDs are required for
compliance.
• Section changed from ASHRAE 90.1-2013.
Savings using variable speed drives

• Variable frequency drives (VFDs) come in

various types and have varying savings
potentials.
– Variable torque loads.
– Constant torque loads.
– Constant power loads.
Variable torque loads
Constant torque loads
Constant power loads
Saving potentials
• Variable torque: Energy reduction is
proportional to the cube of the speed
reduction.
• Constant torque: Energy reduction is
linearly proportional to the speed
reduction.
• Constant power: No savings potential.
Motor efficiencies
• Integral horsepower motors vary from 80% to more than
95% efficiency for loads of 25% to 100%.
• VFD efficiency is around 97%.
• Using VFDs increases motor efficiency.
• System efficiency is increased to 92% to 97% for 50% to
100% load.
• Motor efficiency = mechanical output/electrical input.
• Using VFD saves energy by:
– Matching motor horsepower to the load.
– Increasing efficiency of the motor system.
Operating cost calculations

• 25 hp motor operating at 90% load or 25 kW.

• System operates 8,000 hr/yr.
• 50% at full flow, 50% at 50% flow.
• Power used without VFD: kWh = 25 x 8,000 = 200,000
kWh/yr.
• Power used (50% load): P = 25 (0.25) = 6.25.
• Power used with VFD: kWh = 25 x 4,000 + 6.25 x 4,000
= 125,000 kWh/yr.
• Savings: 200,000 – 125,000 kWh = 75,000 kWh/yr.
• Power at 15 cents/kWh yields $11,250 per year savings.
 Variable frequency drives versus
variable speed drives
• Variable speed drives (VSDs):
– For dc motors, speed is proportional to input dc
voltage.
– May be electromechanical using conical pulleys with
belt drive or gears.
• Variable frequency drives (VFDs):
– Used for ac motors only
– Motor speed is proportional to input frequency.
– VFDs are a subset of variable speed drives.
VFD basics
• VFDs are solid-state power conversion devices that
can function as a motor starter and speed control
device.
• All protection provisions according to Article 430 apply
to VFDs. See NFPA 70-2017: National Electrical Code
(NEC).
• Section X of Article 430 does have some very generic
guidance regarding adjustable speed drive systems.
• Solid-state power devices typically are current limited.
Protection requirements are significantly more
restrictive than standard across-the-line starters.
VFD topology
• Basic design topology consists of 3 parts:
1. Input rectifier.
2. dc bus.
3. Output inverter.
• Most VFDs are double conversion type devices .
– ac-dc-ac.
• Speed of load is changed by adjusting the
frequency of the VFD output.
• Output of VFD is not a true sinusoidal wave. It is
formed via pulse-width modulation (PWM).
• Speed of switching devices used for PWM is
both a good and bad thing.
– Faster switching allows for improved PWM
resolution and associated improved dynamic
response and low speed torque control.
– Faster switching means lower rise time dV/dt,
which can increase the change of reflected wave
phenomenon.
• Insulated-gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs) are
typically used in the output inverter section due
to their switching speed.
6-pulse VFD topology
12-pulse VFD topology
18-pulse VFD topology
Other VFD topologies
• Active front end.
– “New” technology.
– Requires fast-switching front end.
– Active “canceling” of harmonics—equal and opposite.
– Performance similar to 18-pulse drives.
– Expensive.

• ac-ac (matrix-type) drives.

– Proprietary technology.
– Does not convert to dc.
– 9 bi-directional IGBTs instead of 6 silicon-controlled rectifiers (SCRs).
– Multiple samples per cycle.
– When running at full speed, no conversion takes place, which improves
efficiency.
– Performance similar to 18-pulse drives.
– Expensive.
Inverter-duty motors
• Reflected wave/EDM destroys bearing
races.
• NEMA MG-1 Part 31.
– Improved insulation system.
– Improved lubrication system.
– Higher operational temperature.
– Peak voltage withstand: 1,600 V, dV/dt: 1 ms.
– Part 30 motors only rated to 1,000 V and 2
ms.
Harmonic mitigation
• Line reactors
– Adds characteristic impedance to the circuit.
– Changes dV/dt.
– Typically 3% or 5% impedance.
– Affects efficiency of system.
– Typically applied with one set for every VFD.
• Active filter.
– Inserts opposite amplitude on line side of VFD.
– Can be specified with one filter for multiple VFDs.
• Active front end design VFD.
– IGBT front end instead of SCRs.
– Harmonics controlled via switching action.
– Bi-directional current flow.
• ac-ac matrix-type VFD.
Causes of harmonics
• Results of the electrical distribution system
attempting to respond to SCR switching.
• Systems with infinite fault duty will not
have harmonic issues.
• Current versus voltage wave harmonics.
• For a given motor size, harmonics will be a
greater problem on small systems.
Harmonic mitigation
• Passive harmonic filters on each VFD will normally
protect from harmonic interference.
• Using a single harmonic filter on a group of VFDs will
protect the system, but not prevent mutual interference.
• Drive isolation transformers are not good for harmonic
interference.
• Series reactors most beneficial for VFD reflected wave
mitigation.
– Use when more than 25 feet between VFD and motor.
– Maximum distance varies between VFD manufacturers.
VFD versus harmonics
• VFD began operating erratically.
• All printers stopped working.
• 6-pulse UPS without input filters.
• No harmonic filters on any equipment.
• Failed power factor capacitor bank.
• VFD and printers began functioning.
Submitting Questions, Exit Survey and Archive
Question?
Type your question in the “Ask a Question” box on the Webcast Console and
click “Send.” We will get to as many questions as we have time for.
Questions that are for today’s presenters will be answered verbally during the
Q&A session.

Exit Survey:
Please take a moment to answer a few questions on our exit survey that will
pop up on your screen at the conclusion of the webcast. We use the answers
to help make improvements to our webcast program.

Archive:
• Within 7 days, an archive with Q&A will be posted
• We will send an email to registered attendees with hyperlink
• Can also access from www.csemag.com home page
Want more continuing education?
Visit CFE Edu for information
about online courses today!
Speakers
Presenter:
John Yoon, PE, LEED AP ID+C
Senior Electrical Engineer
McGuire Engineers Inc., Chicago

Presenter:
Kenneth Lovorn, PE
President, Chief Engineer
Lovorn Engineering Associates Inc., Pittsburgh

Moderator:
Jack Smith
Content Manager
Consulting-Specifying Engineer
 Critical power: Motors, variable
frequency drives (VFDs), and
variable speed drives (VSDs)
#CSEmotordrive
John Yoon, PE, LEED AP ID+C
McGuire Engineers, Chicago
Ken Lovorn, PE
Lovorn Engineering Associates, Pittsburgh

Sponsored by: