Reconditioning techniques of electrical machines aiming the

preservation of original efficiency

Tom Reid

Raj N. Rajmohan,

IPS-Integrated Power Services, USA,

Baldor Advanced Technology, USA

Waqas M. Arshad

Godofredo Winnischofer

ABB Corporate Research, USA

ABB Ltda, Brazil

Abstract
Efficiency of reconditioned motors is of interest since in addition to the number of new machines
purchased and installed by the industry every year; nearly the same number of motors is repaired and
reemployed. A literature review of rewound low and medium voltage motors is discussed.The
efficiency of a rewound motor is found to increase, decrease or even remain the same following a
rewinding operation based upon the actual practices employed. It is nevertheless shown that a
carefully monitored rewinding procedure can indeed allow a replication of the efficiency of the original
motor. This applies to a single as well as to multiple rewinds. The stator core (iron and stray losses)
treatment including the actual procedure of removing the winding and the new winding details are
found to be the key factors that influence a reconditioned motor efficiency. Of these, while removal of
the winding is related to procedural delicacy, operator experience, correct temperature limits, etc., and
while the new winding details are related to the motor operation and customer expectations, the real
uncertainty lies in the stator core properties. This is thus studied further in detail. Stator cores of
motors that are to be rewound are thus tested with various core loss test methods and at various
locations to determine their suitability for reuse. Red flags such as losses exceeding acceptable limits,
existence of localized hot spots and temperature rise of the core when exceeding acceptable limits
are studied and remedies to address those are listed. Various stator core loss test methods like,
EASA (Electrical Apparatus Service Organization) Loop Test, Phenix & Lexseco automated stator
core loss test systems and Electromagnetic Core Imperfection Detector are reviewed and discussed.
Of these, the first three are further investigated with the help of measurements and their differences
documented. Recommendations are provided in establishing a pass fail criteria for preserving,
restacking or replacing a stator core. This is identified as the key topic in preserving the efficiency of a
reconditioned motor. The efficiency improvement opportunity is also shown to be made possible
through a redistribution of the losses during rewinding and making the maximum efficiency occur at
the actual operating point (load) of the motor. The paper discusses the economics of repair cost
versus a new machine acquisition. Statistical data that illustrate the number/rating of motors that are
repaired in Brazil every year and how this picture is evolving is provided for illustration purposes.

1. Introduction
This section provides background regarding the need and past experiences on the rewinding topic [133].
1.1

Motor repair statistics (in Brazil)

Around 21% of electricity in Brazil is consumed by industrial motors, which corresponds to 92

TWh/year [38]. In a 5% growth scenario, Brazil has an increase of 525 MW of new motors yearly.
Also, it is estimated that around 250 MW of electric machines are repaired every year. For the case of
large machines, for every 6 or 7 new electric machine, one old machine is repaired. The costs of an
electric machine repair for such large machines are usually from 65% to 75% to that of a new
machine. However, the key reason behind a repair decision is the reduced delivery time, usually of 6

to 8 weeks for a big machine repair as compared to 6 to 7 months for a new one. In such instances,
usually efficiency isnt the main concern involved during reconditioning procedure. Depending on the
procedure taken, 1% to 5% of the original efficiency of one electric machine can be lost during
reconditioning if not done properly [37]. So, for an amount of 250 MW of reconditioned machines
yearly, 2.5MW to 12.5 MW could be permanently lost, until machine replacement, after the next 10 to
20 years. This represents a cumulative increase of losses of 22 GWh to 110 GWh a year.

1.2

Efficiency opportunity through rewinding

In the industry, nearly 70% of the electricity is consumed by some type of motor-driven systems [1]
most of whom employ induction motors. In addition to the new machines purchased and installed by
the industry every year, nearly the same number of motors is repaired and reemployed [3]. According
rd
th
to American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEE), some 1/3 to 1/4 of all repaired
th
motors may be rewound and the repaired motor numbers could be as high as 4/5 of all installations.
As a result, even a small improvement in the efficiency of an existing induction motor will lead to
significant energy savings and environmental benefits. In the European Union, a 1.5% increase in the
energy efficiency of the electrical machines would produce electricity savings of over $2 billion per
year [2] and contribute 2.75% to the reduction of CO2 emissions as agreed under the Kyoto Protocol.
Many motors are designed for best efficiency at or near full load. Through tests it has been observed
that the standard motors achieved their maximum efficiency near rated load and suffered an
appreciable decline in efficiency as the load is reduced. The high-efficiency motors on the other hand
achieved their peak efficiency at approximately 75% of rated load and maintained a high efficiency
over a wider range of load than did the standard [3]. Typically half of all motors in the U.S. operate at
less than 60% of rated load, and a third below 50% [3, 5]. Thus the rewinding of a motor allows this
unique opportunity to rewind the motor in a way so that the new distribution of losses could lead to the
best efficiency at the actual operating point of the motor [26, 28].
Dependaning on the age and vintage of the insulation system that is being replaced it is often
possible to increase the operating efficiency and thermal class rating of the rewind. Advancements in
insulating materials and manufacturing processes facilitate these gains. Improvements to resins, slot
liners, insulating tapes and advances in coil manufacturing processes contribute to provide higher
dielectrics, improved thermal transfer and increases in the conductor fill factor.
1.3

Rewinding or a new motor decision

The decision to go for a rewound or to have a new motor installed is a complex one and is defined by
many factors. The state of degradation of a motor, availability of budgets by either the procurement
(new motor) or service/maintenance entities (a rewound motor), time criticality, any prevalent or
upcoming efficiency regulations, expectations from an actual rewound procedure are some of these
factors. With the efficiency regulations getting tougher, flow of cheaper new motors from low cost
countries, the cross-over rating, at which a new motor would make economic sense over a rewound
motor keep increasing. Having said this, the de-facto regime is still rewinding, especially in developing
countries. Estimates vary on what should be right motor rating for this choice with estimates varying
from a few HP to 10s of HP.
1.4

Impact of loss redistribution

The efficiency of a rewound motor is found to increase, decrease or even remain the same following a
rewinding operation based upon the actual practices employed. It is nevertheless shown in literature
that a carefully monitored rewinding procedure can indeed allow a replication of the efficiency of the
original motor. This applies to a single as well as to multiple rewinds. In addition, it is also debatable
that the significant efficiency improvements claimed by certain rewinding techniques e.g. unity-plus, in
fact result in an improvement in the power factor and not in the efficiency. The efficiency improvement
opportunity is also shown to be made possible through a redistribution of the losses during rewinding
and making the maximum efficiency occur at the actual operating point (load) of the motor in question.
The total power loss in a machine is normally divided up into the component parts of a statorconductor loss, rotor-conductor loss, core loss, windage and friction losses, and stray load loss. The
2

proportions of these component losses change with the machine size and the pole number with small
machines having the stator-conductor loss as their dominant loss.
The stator core (iron and stray losses) treatment including the actual procedure of removing the
winding and the new winding details are found to be the key factors that influence a reconditioned
motor efficiency. Of these, while removal of the winding is related to procedural delicacy, operator
experience, correct temperature limits, etc., and while the new winding details are related to the
motor operation and customer expectations, the real uncertainty lies in the stator core properties
1.5

Test procedure

The possibility of new measurements is investigated. It is found that to have any interpretable results
the efficiency measurements needed are: (Using IEEE-112B test method or similar)
1. Test on a newly manufactured machine
2. Repeatability test on this newly manufactured machine
3. Test after first rewinding
4. Test after 2nd rewinding
5. Test on an identical but old machine
6. Test after a rewinding operation on this old machine
For validation purposes of the tests for the older machine that has been in service to the new motor
one must also verify that no design or material changes have occurred. This is sometimes impossible
based upon the age of the older motor.
To isolate the influence of the burnout and stripping of the stator core, core loss tests should be
performed using the same test method for the following:
1. Perform core loss test on new stator core before winding
2. Repeat test on new stator core
3. Repeat core loss test on stator core in frame after winding
4. Test stator core after burnout and stripping of winding
5. Repeat test on stator core after rewinding
6. Repeat steps (4) and (5) for second rewind of stator
Hence, at the very least 6 motor performance and core loss tests are needed. The tests on the older
machine are necessary, since, a rewinding operation is usually performed on an older motor which
already has some deterioration to its core losses. The drop in efficiency for such motors is not only
due to rewinding but also due to the natural aging of the core.
1.6

The stator core losses

Stator core iron loss is traditionally segregated into two major categories:

Hysteresis Losses

Eddy Current Losses

The remaining unexplainable losses of the total core loss are bundled as anomalous losses.
Hysteresis loss is a heat loss caused by the magnetic properties of the material. When a material
such as an armature core is in a magnetic field, the magnetic domains of the core tend to line up with
the magnetic field. In the stator of an electric machine, the magnetic field keeps changing direction.
The continuous movement of the magnetic domains, as they try to align themselves with the magnetic
3

field, produces molecular friction, which is the hysteresis loss. Both eddy and hysteresis losses are
explained by the hysteresis loop in figure 1. The right side of the loop represents the energy required
to establish the magnetic field on the positive slope of the AC waveform. The graph to the left
represents the energy required to collapse the magnetic field on the negative slope of the AC
waveform. The area between the two curves is proportional to total losses in the electrical steel and
is dissipated in the form of heat. When the hysteresis loop is traced with DC input, the energy
enveloped by the loop represents the hysteresis loss.

Figure 1: Hysteresis Loop

Eddy Current losses are defined as circulating currents that occur as a result of the magnetic field
produced in the lamination. Circulating eddy currents flow perpendicular to the main flux field and are
proportional to the cross sectional area of the laminate conductor (fig. 2). Using thinner laminations
minimizes circulating eddy currents and associated losses. Increasing the silicon/aluminum content
increases the resistivity and reduces the eddy-current losses. However, this is usually employed in
larger machines. Eddy current losses are directly proportional to the square of the frequency, peak
flux density and thickness of the lamination. They are inversely proportional to the resistivity of the
material.

Figure 2: Eddy Current Diagrams

Eddy current losses increase between laminations when the inter-laminar insulation begins to break
down (fig. 3). The circulating eddy currents in the individual lamination couples with adjacent
laminations and increases the effective loss. The eddy current, hysteresis and anomalous losses are
dissipated in the form of heat.

Figure 3: Eddy Current Inter-Laminar Flow

The summation of all these losses comprises the W/lb. loss in the stator core.
1.6.1 Influence of temperature
All the components of iron losses as well as the permeability are impacted by temperatures, a key
parameter in motor stator rewinding procedure. In [35] it is shown that the permeability increases with
temperature until the knee of the curve, then it decreases. The variation of the magnetic
characteristics with temperature can be explained by the decrease of the magnetocrystalline
anisotropy, the magnetostatic energy and the saturation magnetization with the increase of
temperature. For a given flux density, iron losses are influenced by the operating temperature. The
losses decrease with an increasing temperature. This is due to the fact that resistivity increases with
temperature and hence the eddy current losses decrease. A rise of the temperature from 20 to 80
degrees (Epstein test) could give a loss density decrease of 3% [34].
1.6.2 Influence of other parameters
In [36] details are provided of how the various other parameters like punching, welding, laser cutting,
etc. influence the iron losses. The spread in material properties of the sourced materials (lamination
rolls) as well as the spread in loss figures as interpreted by different measurement techniques
(specified by standards and otherwise) is also documented in detail.
1.7

Earlier findings

It is the conventional wisdom that a rewound motors efficiency is deteriorated with each rewind, due
to core damage incurred during the rewinding process. Estimates vary, ranging from no loss to 5
percentage points lower per rewind [27]. Rewinding electric motors requires the removal of the
original winding, which is normally very solidly located by a synthetic varnish. The process of
removing the winding for a random wound stator requires the cutting-off of one of the two end
windings, the heating of the stator in an oven to at least 350C to soften and burn off the varnish, then
the mechanical withdrawal of the remaining winding and finally, the cleaning up of the stator core. The
heating of the core may damage the inter-lamination insulation, increasing iron loss if the burnout
temperature is too high. The mechanical removal of the winding and the cleaning up of the slots may
also cause inter-laminar short circuits, which give rise not only to increased core loss but also to
increased stray load loss since most of this loss occurs in stator and rotor teeth at the air gap surface
[14]. Various studies looking at rewinding efficiency have revealed contrasting results [26, 28]. It has
been shown that the loss figure after rewinding is less than 1% [4], about 1% [5], 2% [6], or up to 6%
[7] of the efficiency. It is also found that each rewind would result in a 1% loss for multiple rewinds.
The opposing view is that, a little or negligible loss [8][11] in the efficiency or even an improvement
[12] may occur. The majority of the rewind studies were based on the small machines, which
emphasizes one aspect of the loss.

2. Stator Core Loss Tests

The stator core (iron and stray losses) treatment including the actual procedure of removing the
winding and the new winding details are found to be the key factors that influence a reconditioned
motor efficiency. Of these, while removal of the winding is related to procedural delicacy, operator
5

experience, correct temperature limits, etc., and while the new winding details are related to the motor
operation and customer expectations, the real uncertainty lies in the stator core properties. This is
thus studied further in detail. Stator cores of motors that are to be rewound are thus tested to
determine their suitability for reuse.
2.1 Suitability of the stator core
Stator core loss tests are performed in the motor repair industry to determine the suitability of a stator
core for reuse. For a typical repair/recondition the motor or generator is disassembled and the rotor is
removed. The wound stator is subjected to a series of electrical tests to determine if any dielectric
impairment to the electrical windings is present. If the windings exhibit acceptable readings for
resistance, megohm, (megohm readings may be low but acceptable due to contamination) and surge
tests the wound stator assembly is typically reconditioned.

During reconditioning a stator core loss test is performed to determine if the stator core has excessive
core loss or hot spots. There are various ways of doing this as reported in the literature [3-12]. If the
stator core exhibits excessive core loss (typical core loss of about 4 W/lb to 6 W/lb) the stator core
should be evaluated further to determine if this is typical or if core plate erosion in the back iron is the
cause. The repair facility may attempt to clear localized hot spots and retest.
If dielectric impairments to the electrical windings are present the stator is core loss tested as above
to determine if it be reused. If the stator core loss tests are acceptable the stator is placed in a
burnout oven (650 F - 700 F) to remove the insulation and resin securing the electrical windings in
the stator core. After the insulation has been burned the windings are stripped from the stator core.
The stator core is retested for core loss to insure the inter-laminar core plate insulation was not
impaired. General standard for the industry is that core loss in W/lb. did not increase pre and post
burnout by more than 10%. Typical results for the increase in core losses are 1% to 2%.
2.2 Stator Core Loss Testing:
Stator core loss tests are performed to determine if any of the following conditions exist:
1. Stator core loss in W/lb. exceeds acceptable limits.
2. If the Stator core exhibits localized hot spots.
3. If the Stator core temperature rise exceeds acceptable limits.
Stator core loses in W/lb. are generally reflective of the ASTM (American Society for Testing and
Materials) grade of electrical steel and condition of the inter-laminar core plate specifically in the back
iron of the stator core. General industry standard for maximum core loss values are 4 W/lb to 6 W/lb.
If the stator core measures above this limit the stator core should be replaced or un-stacked and the
laminations recoated with an inorganic core plate.
Localized hot spots are an indication of circulating eddy currents resulting from a lack of inter-laminar
insulation. Hot spots are defined as any region of the stator exhibiting a 10 C or 18 F temperature
rise above the stabilized stator core temperature during an extended core loss or over saturation test.
Extended 30 minute core loss tests are the preferred method in the motor repair industry. If the hot
spot is localized it can generally be cleared by one of the following methods:
1. Bumping the stator core to separate the laminations in the affected region and application of
an oxidious inorganic coating or similar.
2. Fanning the laminations out and application of an inorganic coating.
3. Machining the surface of the stator in the region of the hot spot.
If the hot spot covers a larger region it can sometimes be cleared by baking the stator core at 350 F
and applying an inorganic coating while the laminations are thermally expanded. The stator core is
allowed to cool and retested.
2.3 Stator Core Loss Test Methods:
Stator core losses can be measured by one of three methods in the motor repair industry (see Fig. 4).
6

1. The EASA loop test.

2. Commercial stator core testers such as Lexseco and Phenix.
3. An EL CID (Electromagnetic Core Imperfection Detector)

Figure 4: Picture of the EASA Loop Test and commercial core loss testers.
The EASA loop test is typically conducted at a magnetization level of 85,000 lines of flux per square
inch or 1.32 Tesla. This is accomplished by applying 9 ampere turns of excitation per inch based on
the mean stator core diameter. To determine the number of loop turns based on this requirement
using a fixed single phase AC source voltage supply the number of turns required for the test loop can
be calculated and current estimated. (Ampere - Turns = X D X H). Commercial core loss testers test
at the same magnetization level, 85 K lines/in, as the EASA loop test using a single turn. The same
calculations apply as earlier and the required test voltage can be calculated based on a single turn.
The required current can be calculated based on the diameter of the stator and a constant equating
the requirements to achieve an excitation level of 9 ampere turns per inch for the mean stator core
diameter Because a single turn is used the required current for the test is much higher.
Both the EASA loop test and commercial core loss testers can be used to detect hot spots. This is
accomplished by extending the duration of the core loss test typically to thirty minutes. Temperature
profiles should be taken every five minutes with an infrared camera. The prescribed maximum hot
spot allowance is 10 C or 18 F. The hot spot should be removed and the stator core retested.
An alternative method, EL CID (Electromagnetic Core Imperfection Detector), to detect faults in the
inter-lamination core insulation was developed by the Central Electrical Research Laboratory of the
UK. Instead of the previous full flux working level the newer method uses only a small fraction of rated
excitation to generate fault currents within the core body which are sensed by a pick-up coil. This
avoids the testing problems usually found with high excitation, yet still gives an accurate indication of
damaged areas along tooth tips and walls, as well as possible sub-surface damage.
The EL CID equipment tests a core for faults by exciting the core using a toroidal winding to produce
a ring flux similar to the conventional method (see figure 5 below), but only to 4% of its normal
working level of excitation. A sensing head is then passed over the surface of the core to detect
magnetically the presence of fault currents themselves rather than the heating effect they produce.
The power required is low enough to be within the capacity of standard workshop outlets for quite
large machines. Only 2 to 3 KVA of test power is required to test for an alternator that could be as
large as several 100 MW.

Figure 5: Core Excitation Winding and Flux Path

2.4 Test results
To characterize the different core loss test results discussed above for a certain 800 HP, 4160 V, 4
Pole frame stator assembly with the winding removed was studied with the different test methods
used at various locations. Results are provided in Table 1
Table 1: Stator Core Loss Test Results

As can be seen from Table I, the EASA loop test and Phenix core loss test produced comparable
results. Both use regulated power supplies that provide sinusoidal waveforms to the test coil and
produce near sinusoidal waveforms with minimal ordered harmonics during the core loss test. The
core loss test is performed at 85 kilo lines/in or 1.32 Tesla. With minimal ordered harmonics the
measured watts lost is reflective of the fundamental waveform.
The Lexseco tester uses a saturable core reactor as an input power supply to regulate current during
the core loss test. The voltage and current input waveforms are not sinusoidal and have significant
ordered harmonics. The core loss test is performed at 85 kilo lines /in or 1.32 Tesla based on the
fundamental waveform. The ordered harmonics increase losses in the core that are in addition to
those produced at 85 kilo lines/in. This results in a higher W/lb. result when compared to the EASA
loop or Phenix core loss test. In order to evaluate how the harmonics are influencing flux density a
Fourier analysis was completed on the voltage and current waveforms. The associated phase angle
of the harmonics to the fundamental waveform was evaluated to determine if they are additive and
creating higher flux density or additional loses comparable to those produced by a VFD. It should be
noted that 3rd order harmonics are not typical in a 3-phase motor.
Based on the Fourier analysis the total harmonic distortion produced by the Lexseco tester is
contributing to higher losses in the stator core during the core loss test and is in addition to those
produced by the fundamental waveform at 85 kilo lines/in. This results in a higher W/lb. core loss
value, as can be seen from Table I. The resulting W/lb. core loss will not be linear/scalable for larger
and smaller stators. The smaller the stator core the greater the difference will be between the test
methods. This occurs as a result of the amount of saturation the reactor is operated at to test a
smaller stator core. The IPS Cleveland Lexseco core loss tester has a 300 KVA saturable core
reactor. 1.2KVA was required for the core loss measurement on the test stator. Operating the reactor
in a significantly saturated mode produces higher harmonics in addition to the fundamental
8

waveforms. This is because of saturation of the core that causes non-linear behavior and thus higher
harmonics. The reactor will approach a sine wave output only at rated load. Due to the different test
methods core loss results for the EASA loop and Phenix core loss test will not be comparable to or
linear/scalable to the Lexseco core loss test results.
2.5 Observations
The three core loss test methods (EASA, Phenix and Lexseco) reviewed in this study do not reflect
the actual core loss the motor or generator will incur during operation. The only reliable means to
make this determination is to complete an IEEE - 112B segregation of losses test. Testing at 85 kilo
lines/in of flux density in the back iron is a good average for comparisons but is not representative of
the actual flux produced by the winding and associated influence of the rotor. Typical design flux
densities can range from 65 kilo lines/in to 110 kilo lines/in.
Each of the three core loss test methods is a reliable means to determine if stator core degradation
occurred pre and post burnout. They provide a reliable method to check for localized hot spots and
total stator core temperature rise as a result of inter-laminar insulation breakdown, specifically in the
back iron during an extended core loss test. They also provide a reliable way to evaluate duplicate
stator cores from the same design or model number series if tested with the same test method.
In order to establish a maximum W/lb. core loss test result the following variables would need to be
taken into account.
1. Electrical steel type, grade, thickness.
2. Influences of stacking factor, welds and method of capture in the frame.
3. Actual flux density that the stator will operate at.
4. Winding data is required to determine Bc flux density for a full flux test.
5. Actual operating temperature rise
6. Method of core loss test.
Each of these factors should be considered when establishing an acceptable maximum value for
W/lb. core loss. Based on these variables it is extremely difficult to establish a generic pass fail
criteria in W/lb. for the EASA loop, Phenix or Lexseco core loss test.
2.6 Pass-fail criteria recommendations
The authors propose to establish a pass fail criteria for preserving, restacking or replacing a stator
core based on the following criterion.
1. If a known value for core loss in W/lb. can be derived across a statistically significant
population of identical stator cores a maximum watts/lb core loss can be established using +/2 standard deviations of the population. This assumes the same test method will be
employed for all core loss tests.
2. Conduct an independent study of existing core loss test results to determine if a confidence
level can be established to set a maximum acceptable core loss value using any of the three
test methods. i.e. - 6.0 W/lb.
3. Perform an extended core loss test at 85 kilo lines/in for a minimum of 30 minutes or until the
stator core's thermal rate of rise is less than 1 F for a ten minute period. Minimum extended
core loss test time is 30 minutes.
4. Check the back iron and base of the slot cell cavity using an infrared camera every 5 minutes
and record temperature gradients. Review for localized hot spots. Hot spots are defined as
any region of the stator exhibiting a 10 C or 18 F temperature rise above the stabilized
stator core temperature during an extended core loss test.

3. Conclusions
This paper provides some insight into the topic of rewinding motors, especially in relevance to stator
core losses. By taking Brazil as an example developing country, it is mentioned that the repair motor
market share (in MW) is half of that of new motors commissioned every year, even if the cost of repair
could be 65-70% as compared to that of a new machine. Rewinding also provides an opportunity of
improving the efficiency of a motor, if done properly by redistributing the motor losses. The importance
of measurements is emphasised. Since the core may be affected through burnout or stripping during
the motor rewinding process, adequate knowledge of core losses is thus necessary. This in turn
depends upon core loss test methods, which have been discussed in detail.
Three methods for measuring core losses are studied (EASA, Phenix and Lexseco) through detailed
experimentation. Results on a certain 800 HP motor are provided. Each of the three core loss test
methods is a reliable means to determine if stator core degradation occurred pre and post burnout. It
is nevertheless found that based upon the particular test method, the core losses would be different,
primarily dependent upon the power supply of the employed equipment. It is thus necessary that the
old motor and the rewound motor is measured with the same test equipment, as otherwise
discrepancies may occur. The differences increase as the core gets deeper into saturation. Since the
EASE loop and Phenix employ a similar power supply, the results from these two tests are closer and
will not be comparable to or linear/scalable to the Lexseco core loss test results. Various factors
should be considered when establishing an acceptable maximum value for W/lb. core loss, thus
making it extremely difficult to establish a generic pass fail criteria in W/lb. Still, the authors do
propose to establish a pass fail criteria for preserving, restacking or replacing a stator core, the key
being have consistency in the core loss test method.

References
[1] P. E. Scheihing, U.S. Department of Energy, United States Industrial Motor-Driven Systems Market
Assessment: Charting a Roadmap to Energy Savings for Industry. [Online]. Available:
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/us_industrial_motor_driven.html
[2] D. G. Walters, I. J. Williams, and D. C. Jackson, The case for a new generation of high efficiency motorssome problems and solutions, in Proc. 7th Int. Conf. Electr. Machines and Drives, Sep. 1113, 1995, pp.
2631.
[3] W. P. Brithinee, Electric motor repair industry upgrade, IEEE Electr. Insul. Mag., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 2324,
Jul./Aug. 1993.
[4] EASA,
Maintaining
Efficiency
During
Electric
Motor
Repair.
[Online].
Available:
http://www.nwfpa.org/eweb/docs/Energy_Portal_Doc / Efficiency _ Practices /Process_ Efficiency
/Motors / Fact% 20Sheets/Maintaining%20Efficiency%20During%20Electric%20Motor%20Repairs.pdf
[5] ,"Motor repair," Drivepower. [Online] Available: http://www.esource.com/public/pdf/Drivepower.pdf
[6] H. W. Penrose and B. Bauer, Time savings and energy efficiency through alternate electric motor rewind
methods, in Proc. Elect. Electron. Insul. Conf. and Elect. Manuf. and Coil Winding Conf., Sep. 1821, 1995,
pp. 457460.
[7] J. C. Hirzel, Impact of rewinding on motor efficiency, in Conf. Rec. Annu. Pulp and Paper Ind. Tech. Conf.,
Jun. 2024, 1994, pp. 104107.
[8] R. S. Colby and D. L. Flora, Measured efficiency of high efficiency and standard induction motors, in Conf.
Rec. IEEE Ind. Appl. Soc. Annu.Meeting, Oct. 712, 1990, vol. 1, pp. 1823.
10

[9] E. S. Darby, Managing electric motors, in Proc. IEEE Annu. Text, Fiber, and Film Ind. Tech. Conf., May 15
16, 1996, pp. 17.
[10] A. Bonnett and B. Gibbon, White paper, The Results are in: Motor Repairs Impact on Efficiency. EASA.
[Online]. Available: http://www.reliabilityweb.com/excerpts/excerpts/motor_repair_efficiency.pdf
[11] H. W. Penrose, Repair Specification for Low Voltage Polyphase Induction Motors Intended for PWM
Inverter Application, 2nd ed. Aurora, IL: Kennedy-Western Univ., 1997.
[12] EASAs Technical Services Committee, Guideline for Maintaining Motor Efficiency during Rebuilding.
[Online]. Available: http://www.easa.com/indus/eemtr_rpr999.pdf
[13] W. Cao, Accurate measurement and evaluation of losses and efficiency of new and rewound induction
motors, Ph.D. dissertation, School Electr. Electron. Eng., Univ. Nottingham, Nottingham, U.K., Sep. 2004.
[14] K. Yamazaki and Y. Haruishi, Stray load loss analysis of induction motorComparison of measurement
due to IEEE Standard 112 and direct calculation by finite element method, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 40,
no. 2, pp. 543549, Mar./Apr. 2004.
[15] EASA,
Understanding
Energy
http://www.easa.com/indus/ee_399.pdf

Efficient

Motors.

[Online].

Available:

[16] De Almeida, A.T., Bertoldi, P., and Falkner, H.: Preface to energy efficiency improvements in motors and
drives (Springer, ISBN3-540-67489-6)
[17] De Almida, A.T., and Fonseca, P.: Characterization of EU motor use. Proc. Conf. on Energy Efficiency in
Motor Drive Systems, London, Springer, ISBN 3-540-67489-6, September 1999.
[18] MacLeod, P., Bradley, K.J., Ferrah, A., Magill, R., Clare, J.C., Wheeler, P., and Sewell, P.: High precision
calorimetery for the measurement of the efficiency of induction motors. Proc. IAS 98, St. Louis, MO, USA
[19] Chalmers, B.J., and Williamson, A.C.: Stray loss in squirrel-cage induction motors, Proc. IEE, 1963, 110, pp.
17731778
[20] Bonnett, A., and Gibbon, B.: The results are in: motor repairs impact on efficiency. Proc. EASA
Convention 2002, Cincinnati, OH, USA
[21] Kline, J.A.: Experience factors when testing for efficiency and correlating results with design. Proc. Conf.
on Energy Efficiency in Motor Drive Systems, London, Springer, ISBN 3-540-67489-6, September 1999
[22] Association of Electrical and Mechanical Trades (UK): The Repair of Induction Motors Best Practices to
Maintain Energy Efficiency AEMT 1998 ISBN. AEMT 0 9509409 3 3
[23] Gray, G.G., and Martiny, W.J.: Efficiency testing of medium induction motors a comment on IEEE Std 1121991, IEEE Trans.Energy Convers., 1996, 11, (3), pp. 495499

11

[24] Christofides, N.: Origin of load losses in induction motors with cast aluminum rotors, Proc. IEEE, 1965,
112, pp. 23172322
[25] Umans, S.D., AC induction motor efficiency, Proceedings of the 19th Electrical Electronics Insulation
Conference, 1989. Chicago '89 EEIC/ICWA Exposition, 25-28 Sept. 1989, pp. 99 - 107
[26] Wenping Cao Bradley, K.J., Assessing the impacts of rewind and repeated rewinds on induction motors: is
an opportunity for Re-designing the machine being wasted?, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications,
July-Aug. 2006, Volume: 42 , Issue: 4, pp. 958 - 964
[27] Colby, R.S. Flora, D.L., Measured efficiency of high efficiency and standard induction motors, IEEE
Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, 7-12 Oct. 1990, pp. 18 - 23 vol.1
[28] Cao, W. Bradley, K.J. Allen, J. , Evaluation of additional loss in induction motors consequent on repair
and rewinding, IEE Proceedings Electric Power Applications, 1 Jan. 2006, Volume: 153 , Issue: 1, pp. 1 6
[29] The State of the Art: Drive power, April 1989, Competitek Information Service, Rocky Mountain Institute,
Snowmass, Colorado.
[30] IEEE standard 112-2004: IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction Motors and Generators.
[31] Unity-Plus is a trademark of R.E.M.C America, Inc., 180 Wright Brothers Drive, Salt Lnke City, Utah 84116.
[32] Canadian Standards. Association (CSA) C390-98 Energy Efficiency Test Methods for Three-Phase Induction
Motors.
[33] International Electro-technical Commission (IEC) 34-4 Standard.
[34] A.C. Smith and K. Edey, 1995, Influence of manufacturing processes on iron losses, Electrical Machines
and Drives, Conference Publication No. 412
[35] A. Mouillet, J.L. Ille, M. Akroune and M.A. Dami, Magnetic and loss characteristics of nonoriented siliconiron under unconventional conditions, IEE Proc.-Sci. Meas. Technol., Vol. 141, No. 1, January 1994.
[36] W. Arshad, T. Ryckebusch, F. Magnussen, H. Lendenmann, B. Eriksson, J. Soulard, and B. Malmros,
Incorporating lamination processing and component manufacturing in electrical machine design tools, in
Industry Applications Conference, 2007. 42nd IAS Annual Meeting. Conference Records, 2007, pp.94102.
[37] OECD/IEA, Energy-efficiency policy opportunities for electric motor-driven systems, 2011
[38] Information retrieved/ analysed from Empresa de Pesquisa Energtica - EPE bulletins, at
www.epe.gov.br/mercado (http://www.epe.gov.br/mercado).

12