s l lim abb@singapore october 2013 formidable tasks of ... · centrifugal pumps in the eu use 117...

Formidable tasks of improving an energy efficient system made easy with synchronous reluctance motor combined with standard VSD

S L Lim ABB@Singapore October 2013

© ABB Group October 9, 2013 | Slide 2

Synopsis

Over the past few years, rampant use of variable speed drives, VSD happens globally to improve energy efficiency of flow processes.

Industries in Singapore are no different. VSD installed in new installation or to replace conventional motor starters such as direct-on-line, autotransformer starting, etc.

Energy efficiency improves on the average over 35% for such piece-meal method of replacement. As competition continues to grow, making further improvements to reduce costs through energy efficient process installation becomes formidable and challenging.

This presentation is to share how innovation of a synchronous reluctance motor matched with drives could offer further improvement to energy efficiency and yet making replacement easy that also enhances reliability and lowering cost of maintenance.

In short, motor with its well matched drives will optimize the process system. To make believe the innovation, a case study of the flow process in UK will be used to share the benefits of the do-able solutions.

Motors for fans and pumps

Challenge is to better the good.

to remain competitive

to comply with regulations

to be recognized

© ABB GroupOctober 9, 2013 | Slide 3

Energy efficiency is the key


Revolutionary & technological

Challenge – to better the goodEasing the formidable task

Standard motor+

special rotor

Standard drive+

new software

| Slide 4

Conventional


EU study on pumps and motors

Pumps are the single largest user of electricity in industry in the European Union, consuming 160 TWh of electricity per year.

Represents 20% of energy consumed by electric motors.

Equivalent to 14% of the total electricity consumed in industry and commerce.

Centrifugal pumps in the EU use 117 TWh per annum of electricity

Represents 73% of all pump energy consumption.

From the uptake in the EU of the higher efficiency pumps identified, an energy saving of 1.1 TWh per annum could be made in 2015.

This would give a cumulative saving of 8.35TWh by 2015. (Assumption then the cumulative energy saving value is expected to at least double)

Source: EU STUDY ON IMPROVING THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY OF PUMPS IN 2001


Split of motor energy consumption, by application

160 TWh of electricity per annum



Split of sales of all pumps in the EU by type and size


Projected pump energy use and potential savings




Priorities of users and specifiers in 2001

Priorities when purchasing pumps

Though energy efficiency was not a priority they were quite efficient mainly through the use of variable speed drives or VSD.

Energy efficiency was not a priority then


Key Criteria• Price• Delivery• Known name

Secondary Criteria• Reliability• Maintenance

Sometimes considered• Energy costs

©BU LV Motors July, 2010| Slide 10

Timetable for the EU MEPSTypical behavior is to wait till last moment

Phase 1:

From 16 June, 2011

Motors must meet the IE2 efficiency level

Phase 2:

From 1 January, 2015

Motors with a rated output of 7.5 – 375 kW must meet EITHER the IE3 efficiency level OR the IE2 level if fitted with a variable speed drive

Phase 3:

From 1 January, 2017

Motors with a rated output 0.75 – 375 kW must meet EITHER the IE3 efficiency level OR the IE2 level if fitted with a variable speed drive

Note:IE class required by the regulation correspond to IE class defined in IEC 60034-30 standard

Flow process control methodsVSDs were already making system efficient



Flow process control with VSDLet’s refresh how it saves


To improve the energy efficiencyImportant to understand losses in the energy chain


Costs of ownership

But in terms of overall costs of ownership, the order of importance of factors in determining Life-Cycle Costs is actually the opposite of the priorities listed.

Hence it was like having a choice between buying a pump for $100 that would costs $1,000 a year to operate, versus a pump that would costs $1,000 to buy, but would only cost $100 a year to operate. Both pumps cost a total of $1,100 the first year. How about after the 1st year?

Life cycle cost was not the same


Energy makes the biggest stake in LCC, 50...90%

Elements of LCC

Cic Initial cost

Cin Installation cost

Ce Energy cost

Co Operation cost

Cm Maintenance cost

Cs Down time cost

Cenv Environmental cost

Cd Decommissioning cost

Life-cycle costs of a pump (Gylling 2005)

Costs of ownershipElements of life cycle cost



Barriers to improve the efficiency of pumps and motors

There were lots of barriers to the reduction in energy consumption of pumps, but loosely divided are three categories.

Organizational behaviour

Technical/Educational

Economic

Organizational and educational are main factors




Way pumps are soldsold through Distributors and OEM suppliers and driven by customers to supply at lowest cost.

Different responsibility criteriawithin pump users’ organizations, the department responsible for buying the pump is different from that paying the running costs.

Use of unreliable repair serviceFast turnaround expected from downtime means that often non-specialists undertake repairs in a poor way.

Organizational




Trade-offs between efficiency and maintenance effort /safety requirements.

Uncertainty over system characteristics, and allowances for future plant expansion, frequently mean that pumps are considerably over-sized for the duty.

Promoting improved efficiency of pumps should not be divorced from system efficiency considerations.

Skepticism over manufacturers efficiency data.

Pumps with low duty (i.e. low running hours and/or low load) are unlikely to justify the greater costs of being more efficient.

Easier to replace pump with same type as before rather than re-assessing the requirement.

Technical/educational




Most time, users treat energy saving as if it is less important than either first cost, ease of maintenance or reliability.

Payback on a more energy efficient solution is not adequate.

Large sites may either buy or generate low cost electricity which makes payback times unattractive.

Total energy costs as a proportion of total costs may be too low to warrant any significant effort.

Any energy savings made can be difficult to assess.

Lack of capital for purchasing new or more expensive pumps.

Economic



ISO 50001 expected to influence as much as 60 % of the world's energy use.

A framework for industrial plants, commercial facilities and organizations to manage energy.

It can be used for certification, registration and self-declaration of an organization’s energy management system.

Adopted in Singapore

Derived for Green Data Center as SS 564 by IDA, Singapore.

Powering energy efficiency with ISO 50001New global energy management standard


ISO 50001 – Certification & AccreditationLaunched in Singapore in July 2012

Energy Management• Policy, Strategy• KPIs• Measurement, monitoring &

reporting• Energy Manager• Team engagement• ISO50001

KPIs - Energy performance indicators or EPIs and continuous improvement (GAP analysis vs benchmark)


• The case is about an already energy efficient pumping system of one of the UK best water company.

• It is therefore a challenge to reduce further losses down the energy consumption chain by using new technology to beat the own target.

Case studies – using new technologySouth Staffs Water, Somerford pumping station, UK



Background

Utility is one of UK’s most efficient, yet still has a GBP 9 million per annum electricity bill, 90% of which is used for pumping water.

Challenge

20-year old, 115 kW induction motor controlling a single shaft borehole pump needed replacing.

Existing ACS800 VSD gave good energy saving.

Improve efficiency and lower maintenance costs by deploying latest motor technology.



Solution

• Replace existing drive and motor with IE4, 110 kW synchronous reluctance motor retrofitted to borehole pump abstracting 2.5 million litres per day.

Benefits

6 % energy saving over existing induction motor package - when lightly loaded, power consumption even less

58 % reduction in frame temperature hotspot

Lower winding temperature -increases reliability



Benefits (cont’d)

28 % reduction in DE (drive end) bearing hotspot

Lower bearing temperature –extends period between greasing and lifetime of bearings

75 % audible noise reduction

Lowers impact on environment and residents

Used same frame motors for trial to give like-for-like comparison but technology allows for smaller frame size to be deployed.



What the water utility says…

“The results have far exceeded our expectations. Pumping accounts for some 90 percent of our energy spend, so a 6 percent reduction on one pump in a system that was already very efficient is massive news for us. Suddenly other applications that might have had low priority become easy targets within our Investment Program. This is such a sizable leap forward in technology over traditional induction motors that we are now considering other applications across our sites.”.

Keith Marshall, Supply Director,South Staffordshire Water PLC

Savings of GBP 4000 per year

When replicated for all installation savings could amount to GBP 400,000 per year

Energy makes the biggest stake in LCC, 50...90%

Elements of LCC

Cic Initial cost

Cin Installation cost

Ce Energy cost

Co Operation cost

Cm Maintenance cost

Cs Down time cost

Cenv Environmental cost

Cd Decommissioning cost

Life-cycle costs of a pump (Gylling 2005)

Costs of ownershipElements of life cycle cost


Make a study if it is Singapore

SynRM IE2 motor with VSDOutput power, kW 110 110Efficiency, % 96.3 94.9Input power, kW 114.23 115.91Losses, kW 4.23 5.91

SynRM vs IE2 motor with VSD

© ABB Group | BU Motors and GeneratorsOctober 9, 2013 | Slide 28

Calculating the savings per yearReduction in power losses, kW 1.68Motor operating per annum, h 8,000Tariff, S$ 0.17Savings per year, S$ 1.68 x 8,000 x 0.17 =

2,284

© ABB BU LV Motors July, 2010 | Slide 29

Pictorial view and the carbon footprintSynRM vs IE2 motor with VSD

Loss5.91 kWLosses at 94.9 %

Loss4.23 kWLosses at 96.3 %Reduced losses = 1.68 kW

Savings S$2,284 per year = 7.11metric ton of CO2 (0,53kg/kwh)

115.91 kW

110 kW

When the efficiency level increases 1.4 %, the reduction of losses is 28%

114.23 kW

Calculator source: http://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx

Comparison

Singapore UnitedKingdom

Energy saving, % 2.3 6.0Reduction in frame temp. hotspot, %

comparable 58

Reduction in drive end bearing hotspot, %

comparable 28

Noise reduction, % comparable 75

Estimate vs actual

© ABB Group | BU Motors and GeneratorsOctober 9, 2013 | Slide 30

Estimate Actual

© ABB BU LV Motors July, 2010 | Slide 31

In summary, SynRM motors that will perform

Good starting and running performance involves a delicate balance between the following

Efficiency and costBearing, slot and fan designTemperature riseVibrationNoise

Providing maximum benefitsLong service life, while also being of optimum weightReliability to accept even the most ambitious challengesReliability that meets the most specific requirements across a wide range of environments

Energy Conservation Act - 2013

Government requires minimum energy management standards for large energy users of 15GWh or 54TJ per year:

1. appoint energy manager,

2. monitor & report energy use and GHG emissions; and

3. submit energy efficiency improvement plans.

Objectives of Energy Conservation Act:

to help Singapore achieve the target of a 35% improvement in energy intensity by 2030, from 2005 levels.

to improve the energy performance of companies and thus making them more competitive in the global economy.

to complement existing schemes and capability building program which provide support for companies investing in energy efficiency.

to ensure a co-ordinated approach to standards setting for energy efficiency across all sectors.

Mandatory Energy Management Requirements

October 9, 2013 | Slide 32© ABB Group


Design of solutions

Installation and Configuration

Continuous improvement

ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMISO 50001: 2011

Energy Efficiency Assessment

Improvement program

Definition ofEnergy Policy

ACT

CHECK

PLAN

DO

Check-Up Flash Audit Feasibility Study

Design Implementation Follow-Up and monitoring

Energy efficiency challenge Continuous improvement

© ABB STOTZ-KONTAKT GmbHOctober 2009 | 34

ConclusionsSynRM motors that won’t let you down

Indeed a formidable task.

Achievable and reliable.

High efficiency level ensuring the lowest life cycle costs, meaning:

Lower operating costs

Lower maintenance costs

Low CO2 and greenhouse gas omissions

Ease of adaptation for existing installation

Longer life time

Increased reliability

Going forward yet, another reference to share

s l lim abb@singapore october 2013 formidable tasks of ... · centrifugal pumps in the eu use 117...

Documents