Easiliner
Easiliner
(OP)
An affiliate of Energy Automation Systems came into my company recently and recommended that we implement Easiliners to some of the larger motors (condensers, etc). Here is the information we were presented with and the demonstration that was performed for us:
ht
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCrJh_zWwVU
I was wondering if anyone here had any knowledge of these and how effective they were at reducing energy consumption. Also if anyone could explain exactly how they work. I have a decent background in electricity, but was alittle confused on why the power was different on each side of the Easiliner.
Thanks in advance






RE: Easiliner
RE: Easiliner
For what its worth, I haven't run into anything yet that does not back up their claims of at least an 8 percent drop in energy consumption.
RE: Easiliner
thanks
RE: Easiliner
All it is is a normal phase compensating capacitor. And as such, it does what phase compensating capacitors have done since dawn of AC distribution.
EASI claims that the capacitor 'never causes dangerous switching voltage transients in an electrical system'. First, the 'the dangerous switching voltage transients' are not a big problem. There are inrush currents associated with switching a capacitor to the mains. All capacitors have that. ESILINER also.
But, and this is the only difference between EASILINER and other capacitors, if a capacitors was separated from the grid when voltage across it was, say, at peak negative voltage and then connected to the grid when voltage is peak positive, then the inrush current will be larger and there will be a negative dip in the sinewave. The transient always goes towards zero and very seldom cause any 'dangerous switching voltage transients'.
Now, what EASI does is to add a discharge path to the capacitor, saying that they have created a unique device. Such discharge paths are always present where phase correction capacitors are used. The path is either the load itself, a resistor or a coil on an iron core. Codes are strict here, discharge paths are compulsory in most applications and countries.
The resistor discharge method is the most common. But it takes some time to discharge the capacitor. Sometimes as much as five minutes.
The coil (reactor) method is a lot faster. The DC resistance of the coil can be very low while the 'AC resistance' (the reactance) is high so that the coil doesn't draw much (reactive) current during operation. The low DC resistance makes the discharge quicker. Seconds are mentioned in the sales papers.
Reactors have also been used as discharge devices for a very long time.
So, if you want to pay a premium for a since long established way of reducing reactive power and if you feel that it would be great to reduce 'dangerous transients' (which are not very dangerous) to half, then go on and buy those 'magic devices'. If you want use your money on something useful - don't.
Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
100 % recycled posting: Electrons, ideas, finger-tips have been used over and over again...
RE: Easiliner
RE: Easiliner
What makes you think they are not widespread?
Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
100 % recycled posting: Electrons, ideas, finger-tips have been used over and over again...
RE: Easiliner
Why Not "Power Factor Correction Capacitors?"
An EasiLiner is not a metal box with a power factor correction capacitor inside. In fact, EASI has made a commitment to never again sell our customers PF capacitors, because of the problems with erratic current draw, noisy voltage and current waveforms and especially, with voltage transient related problems associated with raw PF capacitors. Many well known suppliers will happily sell thier customers these antiquainted devices; EASI will not. Moving to a gas filled, polypropylene film mechanical design, dramatically improved the current waveform drawn by our products. EASI's capacitors are isolated by means of a "coupling reactor" which reduces turn-on, turn-off, voltage spiking and part discharge voltage transients are reduced to negligible levels.
RE: Easiliner
What you are describing doesn't make any sense. The power on the input side has to be higher than the power on the output side. Otherwise, you have just found the holy grail of devices that has over unity efficiency and which also no longer obeys the laws of physics.
Did they use an ammeter? Showing the current is lower is a common way to "prove" the power is less. However, it is a completely invalid test. If you have a decent electrical background then you must know about power factor already. All these things do is change the power factor. They have no effect on the real power (well they add about 0.3W of losses per kVAR of capacitor).
Capacitors have 2 purposes. They can lower the demand charges on your bill by paying for kW demand instead of the higher kVA demand. They can free up some capacity in your power system by correcting at the motor which lowers the upstream current so you can then add more equipment.
FYI, that picture in their brochure shows standard capacitor cans that you can source from many places. They come in 3-phase sizes from about 5kVAR to 30kVAR. The only special this company has is it's deceitful sales practice.
RE: Easiliner
RE: Easiliner
Anyway, you said 'dangerous switching voltage transients' are not a big problem? What problemss/dangers do they pose?
RE: Easiliner
RE: Easiliner
You already bought this cr*p? And now you want to know how good they are?
Or, a thought that comes easily, you are actually trying to sell the device here?
Bad luck - we know better.
Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
100 % recycled posting: Electrons, ideas, finger-tips have been used over and over again...
RE: Easiliner
Sounds to me like an overpriced product meant to be sold to people who don't understand it. It probably does pay off longterm, but judging based on what you have said there are cheaper alternatives that achieve the same thing.
RE: Easiliner
The fact that this is your first and only post in Eng-Tips is also indicative. Most salesmen go here to put 'leading questions', which they then back with salestalk when contradicted.
As I said, the use of PF capacitors is old hat. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_factor The oldest reference in this article is from 1949, but the technology existed long before that.
Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
100 % recycled posting: Electrons, ideas, finger-tips have been used over and over again...
RE: Easiliner
RE: Easiliner
Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
100 % recycled posting: Electrons, ideas, finger-tips have been used over and over again...
RE: Easiliner
Once again, power factor capacitors don't really improve efficiency. The plant I^2R losses due to poor power factor are fairly low and the caps are not lossless so there isn't much if any efficiency gain. The gains are lowering the demand charges and freeing up distribution capacity.
In the place I work, we don't pay demand charges and are under-utilizing our service (about 100kVA on a 1.6MVA service) so there is no economic reason to fix our crappy power factor.