Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in
  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

VFD partial load efficiencies 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
BigInch

BigInch

Petroleum
Jun 21, 2006
15,161
I have this table for VFD efficiencies I extracted from an NREL publication and I'd like to calcualte line power on the VFD.

VFD Efficiency at
VFD | % Full Load
HP | 25 33 50 66 75 100
------|----------------------------------------------
1 | 0.12 0.28 0.52 0.68 0.75 0.92
2.5 | 0.21 0.36 0.58 0.73 0.79 0.93
5 | 0.27 0.42 0.63 0.76 0.82 0.94
10 | 0.33 0.48 0.67 0.80 0.85 0.96
25 | 0.42 0.55 0.74 0.84 0.89 0.97
50 | 0.48 0.61 0.78 0.88 0.92 0.98
100 | 0.55 0.67 0.83 0.91 0.95 0.99
250 | 0.63 0.75 0.89 0.96 0.98 1.01

Is the % Load of the VFD calculated as,
VFD%Load = Motor Load / Motor Nameplate Rated Power?

Like this,

Motor Rated Power = 100 HP
Load = 50 HP
Motor Reduced Load = 50%
Motor Reduced Load Eff = 0.89
Motor Brake Power = 50/0.89 = 56.2 HP (41.9 kW)

VFD Rated Power = 75 kW
VFD Load% = 41.9/75 = 55.8 %
100 HP VFD eff = (50%,0.83) (66%, 0.91)
giving a VFD Eff = 83 + (55.8-50)*(0.91-0.83)/(66-55)*100
VFDreduced eff = 87.2%

So,

Line Power = 41.9 kW / 0.872 = 48 kW

Right?

Thanks




"We have a leadership style that is too directive and doesn't listen sufficiently well. The top of the organisation doesn't listen sufficiently to what the bottom is saying." Tony Hayward CEO, BP

**********************
"Being GREEN isn't easy" ..Kermit

 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Sort by date Sort by votes
That chart makes no sense to me, you would have to ask the person who developed it what they mean. Given the .92 value at 100% speed, I would venture to guess that they are saying the 1HP VFD is only 92% efficient at 100% speed. That would make it a very old chart.

But then they imply that same VFD drops down to being only 12% efficient at 25% speed? What kind of VFD did they use to come up with that kind of horrific value?

That leads me to believe that their use of the term "VFD Efficiency" is not what I think of it as being.


"If I had eight hours to chop down a tree, I'd spend six sharpening my axe." -- Abraham Lincoln
For the best use of Eng-Tips, please click here -> faq731-376
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That what it means. It's probably is an old chart. Its the only one I've ever been able to find. I've been looking for an updated one. I sure would like a new one. (Hint Hint)

Uh, and the question?

"We have a leadership style that is too directive and doesn't listen sufficiently well. The top of the organisation doesn't listen sufficiently to what the bottom is saying." Tony Hayward CEO, BP

**********************
"Being GREEN isn't easy" ..Kermit

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You inspired me to do another search.
This one does have better values.

"We have a leadership style that is too directive and doesn't listen sufficiently well. The top of the organisation doesn't listen sufficiently to what the bottom is saying." Tony Hayward CEO, BP

**********************
"Being GREEN isn't easy" ..Kermit

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
101% efficiency is pretty good. I agree with Jeff - the chart doesn't appear, on the surface, to make much sense.

But yes, if you know the VFD efficiency, the input kW would be computed as you suggest.



David Castor
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks. I'll go with it.

Yes I thought the 101 was a bit strange.
The new chart looks more reasonable in all aspects.
Thanks to both for the help.

"We have a leadership style that is too directive and doesn't listen sufficiently well. The top of the organisation doesn't listen sufficiently to what the bottom is saying." Tony Hayward CEO, BP

**********************
"Being GREEN isn't easy" ..Kermit

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I want qty 1000 of those 101% efficiency drives. We have solved the world's energy crisis!

I like the information in your 2nd link a lot better, that's more of what I would expect to see. It looks to be a well thought out study. Thanks for that by the way, it may come in useful to me too.

Just out of nosy curiosity, what is the purpose behind you gathering this info? Are you evaluating the efficacy of an energy saving VFD installation?


"If I had eight hours to chop down a tree, I'd spend six sharpening my axe." -- Abraham Lincoln
For the best use of Eng-Tips, please click here -> faq731-376
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Right now I'm doing a study of VFD-pump installations in a generic sense that will classify and rank systems that might save energy costs by installation of VS controls.

"We have a leadership style that is too directive and doesn't listen sufficiently well. The top of the organisation doesn't listen sufficiently to what the bottom is saying." Tony Hayward CEO, BP

**********************
"Being GREEN isn't easy" ..Kermit

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Biginch (and Jeff)
There is a new standard trying to get out into the big wide world that covers, amongst other things, VFD efficiency. It is owned by the organisation AHRI (Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute) and will be known as "Standard 1210, Performance Rating of Variable Frequency Drives". The intention is that this standard will be used by consultants and institutes who are looking to advise their clients and contractors alike regarding performance of the VFD's used on Green Buildings to ensure that complying with higher level of performance in the building is in line with the products being supplied.
It is taking forever to be released but when it is, I feel it will be suitable for many other industries looking at the products and their performance. Hopefully it will provide clarity and demystify certain thoughts such as "all VFD's are the same...".
It will also include factors such as recommended limits of harmonic (current) distortion levels from the product, stresses on the motor insulation as a result of PWM waveform etc.
At the moment it is still in draft form and not released. When it's released I will try and remember to advise the forum
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think it would be interesting to see any generic results showing the difference between a valve and a VFD.

Looking at the paper for a VFD, it appears that there is about 3-4% extra losses at full speed and load and the losses increase to about 6% to 7% as the speed reduces to 75% speed. The relative efficiencies track with load fairly well so the load doesn't really matter. So, a system with a valve with less than about 4% to 5% losses would compete very well with a VFD.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yes, except I think you mean beat a VFD. And efficiencies only track with load when there is no static head, which is shall we say, "unusual" in petroleum and water pipelines. And it's also not all that often that you really want to run these facilities to deliver less product than what you can at 100% speed anyway. Product delivered = Revenue! Nobody wants 75%a revenue, so we don't want to run there often. Multi-product lines usually maximize revenue when you just turn them on and don't use any pressure or flow control of any kind. But I thought I'd classify them in regards to percentage of static head in relation to BEP head, to see where the inflection point really is.

"We have a leadership style that is too directive and doesn't listen sufficiently well. The top of the organisation doesn't listen sufficiently to what the bottom is saying." Tony Hayward CEO, BP

**********************
"Being GREEN isn't easy" ..Kermit

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm talking efficiency of the VFD and motor combo which basically follows the same curve as the motor by itself.

The VFD adds about 3% extra losses (motor + VFD) best case and it increases from there. In the common range where a pump or fan would operate the extra losses appear to increase to around 6% or 7%. This is assuming the typical range would be around 70% speed to 100% speed.

One other thing to consider is that paper did not include any type of harmonic mitigation or vfd to motor filtering. Typically, you'll see at least one line reactor in the package. As a general rule of thumb you could assume 2 reactors (input and output) will double the VFD package losses. More complex filters will add even more losses.

Sure, you don't want to lower the speed of a motor if the process allows for more revenue producing output at full speed but you may have to lower the speed of the motor if the process itself requires less output.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks Lionel. Yes I got that. There are some cases where its useful to flow at lower speeds, they're just a bit more unusual for my applications. It would most likely be an unforecast product demand reduction that would force a slowdown in delivery until a distribution tank empties, providing a pipeline shutdown wasn't convenient. They're usually not.

That filter effect on power is quite interesting. I wasn't aware of that effect. By doubling the "VFD package" losses, do you mean multiply the VFD partial load efficiency values in the table by 2? And how would addtional filters affect that factor?

BTW, I'm trying to develop an equation to duplicate the VFD partial load efficiencies in that table. Its hard to come up with something that is within 1 or 2 percent of all those values, even if you ignore the lowest power ratios and the 1 HP motor. If anyone comes up with one, its good for a virtual beer.

"We have a leadership style that is too directive and doesn't listen sufficiently well. The top of the organisation doesn't listen sufficiently to what the bottom is saying." Tony Hayward CEO, BP

**********************
"Being GREEN isn't easy" ..Kermit

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'd think that line reactor losses would be about proportional to current. I'd also think the extra loss to account for the reactors could just be added when the motor torque is above about 50%.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That's going to be always for my apps ... almost.

"We have a leadership style that is too directive and doesn't listen sufficiently well. The top of the organisation doesn't listen sufficiently to what the bottom is saying." Tony Hayward CEO, BP

**********************
"Being GREEN isn't easy" ..Kermit

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
  • Question
VFD with 'partial' support for PM motors
Replies
3
Views
3K
lmarcantonio
L
SamuelB
  • Question
Starting and load sharing between VFD and soft-starter
Replies
7
Views
4K
SamuelB
SamuelB
CuriousElectron
  • Question
VFD(VSD) on sluice gates 2
Replies
9
Views
614
waross
waross
edison123
  • Locked
  • Question
Motor VFD open loop no-load current is much higher than closed loop no-load current. Why? 2
Replies
14
Views
5K
edison123
edison123
jraef
  • Question
Excitation current on induction motor as a generator via VFD 2
Replies
9
Views
3K
LionelHutz
LionelHutz

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top Bottom