6.

СОВЕТУВАЊЕ
Охрид, 4 - 6 октомври 2009

Drago Ban
Damir Žarko
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, Unska3, HR-10000 Zagreb,
Croatia
Slobodan Mirčevski
University Ss. Cyril & Methodius, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Information Technologies,
Karpos 2, PO Box 574 – Skopje, Republic of Macedonia

STATE OF THE ART AND TENDENCY FOR INCREASED POWER EFFICIENCY

OF ELECTRIC MACHINES AND DRIVES

ABSTRACT
The paper considers the latest trends in design of electric machines and drives from the aspects
of power efficiency and the increasing cost of electric energy. The most important issue thereby is the
amount by which the power losses can be reduced, i.e. the efficiency of the motor can be increased,
when new materials and advanced knowledge, construction and technology are utilized. The special
interest is paid to industrial induction motors since they consume most of the generated electric energy
and are widely used in electric drives with or without speed control. Two examples of induction
motors have been considered. The ratings of the first motor are 22 kW, 400 V, which is a typical low
power motor for wide applications. The ratings of the second motor are 2500 kW, 6000 V, which is a
high power motor manufactured and utilized piecemeal. The possibility of reducing the power losses
in the motor by means of design, i.e. by increasing the volume of its active parts, and the influence of
the increased volume on the price of the motor and the reduction of pollution of the environment have
been analyzed in detail.
Keywords: Power efficiency, energy efficient motor, motor design, scaling laws.

1. INTRODUCTION
The increase of the power efficiency in the process of electromechanical energy conversion in
all kinds of electric machines is a very important and complicated engineering task. Approximately
99 % of all produced electric energy is obtained from electric generators by converting mechanical
energy into electrical. Around 65 % of that energy is converted into mechanical work by electric
motors. In distribution of electric energy (power lines, transformers and cables) from the source
(power plant) to the motor, significant losses (up to 10 %) are generated. The tendency is to minimize
those losses.
Considering the vast amounts of produced energy and the energy consumed by electric drives,
the question arises how much energy can be saved in those conversions. Whether to build a cheap
motor with high power losses (low efficiency) or to build a more expensive motor with small power
losses (high efficiency) is a complex economic and technical question.
When considering the construction of an electric machine the dominating cost pertains to built-
in material, which depends on the type, size and characteristics of the machine, as well as on the
economy of the country where the machine is being manufactured. If power losses in the machine are
to be reduced by increasing its volume, it is necessary to evaluate the cost of the built-in material and
labour compared to the cost of the electric energy saved during the lifetime of the motor.

A1-2R 1/11
 MAKO CIGRE 2009 A1-2R 2/11

Since the beginning of industrial manufacture of electric machines and transformers (the end
of 19th century) the guiding rule was to minimize the investment, which led to the concept of building
the machines with minimum mass and procurement cost. The power losses in the motor were
considered only to an extent allowed by the basic criterion of a minimum procurement cost. The
tendency for building electric motors with minimum mass and cost resulted in their reduction by one
half every 20 years. Such trend continued until the beginning of the Second World War [1], [2].
The questions of energy efficiency related to the current political and economic subject of
“economic crisis” in the world had been considered neither from the technical nor economic aspect
until the seventies in the 20th century. This is understandable if one compares the prices of energy and
electric machines until that period. The sudden disproportional increase of the price of electric energy
compared to the prices of electric machines and other industrial products, and especially the growing
prices of oil linked to the global politics, had initiated changes in basic principles of construction of
electric machines.
The concept is to reduce power losses in electric machines, i.e. increase the efficiency of
electromechanical energy conversion, and at the same time achieve all other required characteristics of
the machine. The tendencies are directed towards standardization of the values of efficiency required
in advance. For serial products, like low-voltage induction motors of power rating up to a hundred kW,
the European and American standards already define the categories of motors with respect to their
efficiency [4]-[6].
The reduction of power losses while minimizing the amount of used material and labour for
production of an electric machine is accomplished by constant advancement of knowledge about
physics of electromechanical energy conversion, the implementation of newer and better materials and
the advancements in construction and technology. Since materials used in electric machines (magnetic
and insulating) have not significantly changed in the last thirty years, with an exception of permanent-
magnet materials, the remaining possibility to increase the efficiency is to increase the general
knowledge about electric machines and improve their construction. Therefore, the rest of this paper
demonstrates in a simplified manner one possibility of increasing the efficiency by redesigning the
machine, i.e. by changing the dimensions and specific electric and magnetic loads while keeping the
power and voltage rating constant. At the same time one must consider that reduction of power losses
leads to reduced pollution of the environment, which is crucial for the preserving life on Earth.
2. MOTOR DESIGN FOR INCREASING THE EFFICIENCY
Assuming that we have applied all the knowledge in machine design to reduce power losses in
an induction motor (sizing of the air-gap, shape and number of slots, magnetic wedges, optimal choice
of the cooling fan, squirrel-cage made of copper instead of aluminium etc.), the possibility of further
reduction of losses by increasing the motor size within reasonable limits (motor frame size, shaft
height) will be analyzed.
The scaling laws used for design of electric machines will be applied for the increase of its
linear dimensions [1]-[3].
If linear dimensions of the active part of an electric machine are changed “a” times, then
according to scaling laws the stator inner diameter D, the stator outer diameter Dv, the stack length lFe,
the total conductor length lv and the pole pitch σp will change proportionally (symbol ∴ ) to “a”.
Therefore,
D, Dv, lFe, lv, σp ∴ a (1)
The area of copper in the slot SCu and the area of the active part of the magnetic iron core SFe
will change proportionally to the squared change of linear dimensions.
SCu ∴ a2 and SFe ∴ a2 (2)
The masses of the active parts of the copper winding mCu and the iron core mFe change
proportionally to the cubed change of linear dimensions.
mCu ∴ a3 and mFe ∴ a3 (3)
 MAKO CIGRE 2009 A1-2R 3/11

It can be roughly estimated that the volume of electrically inactive parts of the machine (frame,
bearing shields, bearings, shaft) will increase proportionally to the increase of volume of the active
parts. The mass of the machine is roughly proportional to its volume. The built-in material and labour
time are approximately proportional to the volume of the machine.
Let us analyze the possibilities of increasing the efficiency of an induction motor by changing
the design of its active part while keeping the rated power, voltage, speed and the types of mechanical
protection and cooling the same.
If, according to scaling laws for electric machines, the specific magnetic load (flux density B)
is changed according to
1
B∴ T (4)
an
where n is the exponent of the change of linear dimension “a”, the specific electric load (current
density Г) will change according to
1 1 1
Г∴ 2 2- n
∴ 4-n A/mm2 (5)
a a a
With flux density and current density changed according to (4) and (5), the number of turns of
the stator winding for unchanged rated voltage of the motor will be
1
N∴ (6)
a 2-n
The copper losses PCu and iron losses PFe for the machine whose linear dimensions are
increased “a“ times and specific magnetic and electric loads are changed according (4) and (5) will be
1
= kCu1a(
2 n -5 )
PCu = kCu mCu Γ 2 = kCu1a 3 (7)
(a ) 4- n 2

1
PFe = k Fe mFe B 2 = k Fe1a 3= k Fe1a (3-2 n ) (8)
a2n
The efficiency of the motor η can be calculated according to
P
η= (9)
P + Pg
where P is the rated mechanical shaft power and Pg are the total losses in the motor which consist of
the stator and rotor copper losses PCu, the iron losses PFe, the friction and windage losses Pmeh and the
additional losses Pdod = 0,005 P1 (P1 is the electric power input from the grid).
Pg = PCu + PFe + Pmeh + Pdod (10)
For the machine of the same power and voltage rating whose linear dimensions are increased
“a” times and specific magnetic and electric loads are changed according to (4) and (5), the efficiency
will be changed according to
P
η= ( 2 n -5)
(11)
+ k Fe1a (
3-2 n )
P + kCu1a + Pmeh + Pdod
It is assumed that mechanical losses due to friction and windage will not change significantly
due to increased dimensions.
The variation of efficiency as a function of changes of linear dimensions “a” and of the
exponent n for versions that make sense is shown in (12).
 MAKO CIGRE 2009 A1-2R 4/11

1 1
n=2 B∴ Γ∴
N = const
a2 a2
1 1 1
n = 1,5 B ∴ 1,5 Γ∴ 2,5 N ∴ 0,5
a a a
1 1 1
n =1 B∴ Γ∴ 3 N∴ (12)
a a a
1 1 1
n = 0,5 B ∴ 0,5 Γ∴ 3,5 N ∴ 1,5
a a a
1 1
n=0 B = konst. Γ∴ 4 N∴ 2
a a
The variation of efficiency according to (11) has been analyzed for two manufactured and
tested motors. One motor is a typical serial product found in the catalogue and the other is a large
motor which is manufactured by customer order. The motor ratings are:
A: 22 kW, 380 V, 50 Hz, 2p = 2, PFe = 597 W, PCu =1098 W, Pmeh = 870W, Pdod =110 W,
B: 2500 kW, 6000V, 50 Hz, 2p = 2, PFe = 20,1 kW, PCu = 31,259 kW, Pdod = 12,5 kW.
The efficiency of the motor A obtained from (11) and from its ratings given as a function of
“a“ and “n“ will be
22000
η= (13)
22980 + 1098a(
2 n -5 )
+ 597a (
3-2 n )

The results of analysis according to (13) are illustrated in Table 1 (fine accuracy) and
graphically in Figs. 1 and 2.

Table 1 Variation of efficiency for various dimensions of motor A

a
1 1,05 1,1 1,15 1,2 1,25 1,3 1,35 1,4 1,45 1,5
n Efficiency η
0 0,89159 0,89681 0,89956 0,90039 0,89969 0,89775 0,89477 0,89092 0,88630 0,88101 0,87512
0,5 0,89159 0,89644 0,89971 0,90174 0,90278 0,90303 0,90262 0,90169 0,90031 0,89856 0,89649
1 0,89159 0,89594 0,89937 0,90206 0,90417 0,90578 0,90700 0,90788 0,90849 0,90887 0,90906
1,5 0,89159 0,89529 0,89853 0,90137 0,90388 0,90611 0,90809 0,90986 0,91146 0,91289 0,91419
2 0,89159 0,89452 0,89719 0,89965 0,90192 0,90401 0,90595 0,90776 0,90944 0,91101 0,91248

a
1,55 1,6 1,65 1,7 1,75 1,8 1,85 1,9 1,95 2
n Efficiency η
0 0,86868 0,86173 0,85432 0,84647 0,83821 0,82957 0,82057 0,81123 0,80158 0,79164
0,5 0,89414 0,89156 0,88876 0,88578 0,88263 0,87934 0,87590 0,87234 0,86867 0,86489
1 0,90908 0,90897 0,90874 0,90840 0,90798 0,90748 0,90692 0,90631 0,90564 0,90493
1,5 0,91537 0,91644 0,91742 0,91831 0,91914 0,91989 0,92059 0,92123 0,92182 0,92237
2 0,91387 0,91517 0,91639 0,91754 0,91864 0,91967 0,92065 0,92158 0,92246 0,92330
 MAKO CIGRE 2009 A1-2R 5/11

η
0.920

0.900

0.880
n=0
0.860

0.840

0.820

0.800

0.780 a
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 1.65 1.7 1.75 1.8 1.85 1.9 1.95 2 2.05

η
0.905
0.900
0.895
0.890 n = 0,5
0.885
0.880
0.875
0.870
0.865
0.860 a
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 1.65 1.7 1.75 1.8 1.85 1.9 1.95 2 2.05

η
0.910
0.908
0.906
0.904
0.902 n=1
0.900
0.898
0.896
0.894
0.892
0.890 a
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 1.65 1.7 1.75 1.8 1.85 1.9 1.95 2 2.05

η
0.925

0.920

0.915

0.910
n = 1,5
0.905

0.900

0.895

0.890 a
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 1.65 1.7 1.75 1.8 1.85 1.9 1.95 2 2.05

η
0.925

0.920

0.915

0.910

0.905 n=2

0.900

0.895

0.890 a
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 1.65 1.7 1.75 1.8 1.85 1.9 1.95 2 2.05

Figure 1 Variation of efficiency as a function of linear dimensions a with a constant parameter n

 MAKO CIGRE 2009 A1-2R 6/11

η
0.940

0.920

0.900

0.880

0.860
n=0
0.840 n = 0,5
n=1
0.820
n = 1,5
0.800 n=2

0.780 a
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 1.65 1.7 1.75 1.8 1.85 1.9 1.95 2 2.05

Figure 2 Family of curves showing efficiency η as a function of changes of linear dimensions a and of
the parameter n for motor A
The power rating of motor B is more than 100 times higher than the rating of motor A.
Although this motor is available in the catalogue, it is manufactured only by customer order and hence
cannot be considered as a serial product.
The efficiency of motor B after combining (11) and the motor ratings is given by
2500
η= (14)
2530,5 + 31, 259a(
2 n -5 )
+ 20,1a (
3-2 n )

The variation of efficiency for this motor is shown in Table 2 and Fig. 3. The individual curves
for each parameter n are not given, but they are similar to the ones shown in Fig. 1.

Table 2 Variation of efficiency for various dimensions of motor B

a
1 1,05 1,1 1,15 1,2 1,25 1,3 1,35 1,4 1,45 1,5
n Efficiency η
0 0,9683 0,9696 0,9702 0,9702 0,9698 0,9689 0,9678 0,9664 0,9647 0,9627 0,9606
0,5 0,9683 0,9696 0,9704 0,9708 0,9710 0,9709 0,9707 0,9702 0,9697 0,9690 0,9682
1 0,9683 0,9695 0,9704 0,9711 0,9717 0,9721 0,9724 0,9726 0,9727 0,9728 0,9729
1,5 0,9683 0,9693 0,9703 0,9711 0,9718 0,9725 0,9731 0,9736 0,9740 0,9744 0,9746
2 0,9683 0,9692 0,9700 0,9708 0,9715 0,9721 0,9727 0,9733 0,9738 0,9743 0,9747

a
1,55 1,6 1,65 1,7 1,75 1,8 1,85 1,9 1,95 2
n Efficiency η
0 0,9582 0,9557 0,9529 0,9500 0,9469 0,9436 0,9401 0,9364 0,9326 0,9285
0,5 0,9674 0,9664 0,9654 0,9643 0,9632 0,9620 0,9608 0,9595 0,9581 0,9568
1 0,9727 0,9726 0,9725 0,9723 0,9721 0,9719 0,9717 0,9715 0,9712 0,9710
1,5 0,9751 0,9754 0,9756 0,9760 0,9762 0,9764 0,9766 0,9768 0,9770 0,9777
2 0,9751 0,9755 0,9759 0,9762 0,9766 0,9769 0,9772 0,9775 0,9777 0,9782
 MAKO CIGRE 2009 A1-2R 7/11

η
0.990

0.980

0.970

0.960
n=0
0.950 n = 0,5
n=1
0.940
n = 1,5
0.930 n=2

0.920
a
1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 1.65 1.7 1.75 1.8 1.85 1.9 1.95 2 2.05

Figure 3 Family of curves showing efficiency η as a function of changes of linear dimensions a and of
the parameter n for motor B
A short comment on the results for motors A and B shown in Figs. 1, 2 and 3 can be given.
From individual curves in Fig. 1 and the family of curves in Fig. 2 it is apparent that the optimal
efficiency η for predefined increase of linear dimensions of active parts “a” is obtained at different
values of specific loads “n”. This can be confirmed for each individual case by finding the maximum
value of function (11).
For motor A it is apparent that the efficiency can be increased by 3,171 %, i.e. that the losses
will be reduced by 18.51 % if linear dimensions are increased 2 times with n = 2. This roughly means
that the mass of active parts of the motor will be increased 8 times. The inherent property of low-
power motors (up to 22 kW) is relatively low efficiency (50-90 %), which is a consequence of
physical laws applied to electric machine design. In the case of small motors it pays off to increase
efficiency by increasing the size of the motor. This technical opportunity has already been used in
Europe and ESA where standards define the classes of induction machines for power ratings up to
90 kW (Table 3).
In the case of motor B it can be concluded that the possibility of increasing its efficiency by
increasing the size of the motor is considerably smaller than in the case of motor A. From Table 2 and
Fig. 3 it can be found that the increase of dimensions by the factor of 2 with n = 2 would increase the
efficiency by only 0,99 %. The reason for that is the fact that the efficiency naturally increases as the
power rating increases. This is proven by scaling laws applied to electric machines and transformers. It
is well known that the efficiency of large transformers and synchronous generators can reach up to
99 %. The efficiency of a large synchronous motor (e.g. 10 MW or higher) can be increased by 1 %
using superconductive technology.
3. ENERGY SAVINGS BY DESIGNING THE MOTOR FOR OPTIMAL EFFICIENCY
3.1 Energy savings
The electric energy saved due to increased efficiency of an electric motor can be calculated
from
⎛1 1⎞
ΔWyear = Pr tr ⎜ - ⎟ kWh (15)
⎝ ηn η v ⎠
where ΔWyear is the annual energy savings in kWh, Pr is the actual power load in kW, tr is the number
of operating hours per year, ηn is the lower efficiency of the motor and ηv is the higher efficiency.
Let us consider a realistic case, motor A. If dimensions are increased by 25 % (a = 1,25), in
Table 1 it can be found that the efficiency can be increased at maximum from 0,89159 to 0,90611, i.e.
by 1,452 %. The annual energy savings thus obtained is
 MAKO CIGRE 2009 A1-2R 8/11

( 0,89159 0,90611 )
1 1
ΔW year = 22 × 6000 × 0.85 - = 2016, 6 kWh (16)

If the exploitation period of the motor is 20 years, the total energy savings equals 40320 kWh.
If the average price of electric energy is 0,07 EUR/kWh, the annual energy savings amounts to
141 EUR, and during exploitation period of 20 years it equals 2822 EUR.
3.2 Price of the motor compared to the price of consumed energy
If the exploitation period of motor A is 20 years, the average number of operating hours is
6000, the average load of the motor is 0,85 of the rated load, and the average η of the motor is 0,8915,
the motor would consume Wel = 20 × 22 × 0,85 × 6000 / 0,8915 = 2 517106 kWh . With the average
price of electric energy equal to 0,07 EUR/kWh, the total cost would be Cel = 176197 EUR. The
relationship between the retail price of the motor, Cm = 900 EUR, and the price of electric energy it
converts into mechanical work is Cel/Cm = 195,8. This particular information is very interesting and it
can be shown that the price of electric energy consumed by industrial motors can be from 100 to 200
times greater than their retail price.
3.3 Savings of the primary fuel in thermal power plants
If we assume that the consumed electric energy is produced from oil in a thermal power plant
and that 1 litre of oil contains 11 kWh of energy, and that the efficiency of the power plant is 40 %
while the total losses in transmission and distribution of electric energy to the motor are around 12 %,
then the total savings of oil during exploitation period of the motor (20 years) would be
40331
Δ oil = = 10416 litres (17)
11 × 0, 40 × 0,88
3.4 Reduced emission of detrimental gases
The annual reduction of emission of detrimental gases like CO2 due to consumption of fossil
fuels in a thermal power plant with estimated average emission factor of 0,5 kg/kWh [9] amounts to
1008 kg or in the assumed period of exploitation of 20 years it equals 20160 kg. This reduction should
be decreased by the amount of gases emitted due to manufacture of increased amount of material and
increased labour required for the motor of higher efficiency.
3. 5 Cost-effectiveness and the time for return of investment
For the motor which has been analyzed it has been assumed that for the increase of efficiency
by 1,452 % all linear dimensions must be increased 1,25 times. At the same time the volume and mass
must be, in theory, increased by 1,253, i.e. around two times.
Let us assume that in the price of such motor, which is a serial product with large number of
identical components and high degree of automation in fabrication, the average cost of built-in
material is around 60 %, and the remaining 40 % refers to the cost of labour, energy and revenue. The
price of motor A, marked as CA, according to the information from the manufacturer is around
900 EUR. By increasing the motor dimensions for the purpose of increasing the efficiency according
to (12) and using the assumed structure of the motor price, the price would increase to CAn = 1,6 CA,
i.e. to 1440 EUR, which is an increase of 540 EUR.
The approximate time for return of investment of 540 EUR can now be calculated. The
calculated annual energy savings is 141 EUR and the increase of motor price is 541 EUR. The time for
return of investment would be 540/141 ≈ 4 years. If instead of this simplified calculus the cost-
effectiveness of the motor with reduced losses is calculated more accurately, then one would require
information about the annual interest rate for invested capital, the annual growth of prices, the inflation
and revenues, all for some concrete national economy. We do not have such information, and in the
ongoing global economic crisis it is highly variable and unpredictable.
The motor manufacturer will always try to build the required motor with minimal material and
labour using the latest knowledge and technology available, while the customer will most often choose
the cheapest motor which satisfies the requirements.
 MAKO CIGRE 2009 A1-2R 9/11

4. CLASSES OF EFFICIENCY FOR INDUCTION MOTORS

In the year 2000 the classification of motors in three levels (EFF1, EFF2 and EFF3) for power
ratings from 1,1 to 90 kW had been introduced on the European market. Table 3 and Fig. 4 contain all
the relevant data. It is apparent from Fig. 4 that the largest difference in efficiency occurs at low power
ratings and with increase of power this difference is significantly reduced.
Table 3 Efficiency of electric motors EFF1-EFF3 (according to EuroDEEM)
Four-pole motors, 2p = 4 Two-pole motors, 2p = 2
Power
Efficiency, % Efficiency, %
kW EFF 3, ηEFF 2, ηEFF 1, ηEFF 3, ηEFF 2, ηEFF 1, η
1,1 < 76,2 >= 76,2 >= 83,8 < 76,2 >= 76,2 >= 82,8
1,5 < 78,5 >= 78,5 >= 85,0 < 78,5 >= 78,5 >= 84,1
2,2 < 81,0 >= 81,0 >= 86,4 < 81,0 >= 81,0 >= 85,6
3,0 < 82,6 >= 82,6 >= 87,4 < 82,6 >= 82,6 >= 86,7
4,0 < 84,2 >= 84,2 >= 88,3 < 84,2 >= 84,2 >= 87,6
5,5 < 85,7 >= 85,7 >= 89,2 < 85,7 >= 85,7 >= 88,6
7,5 < 87,0 >= 87,0 >= 90,1 < 87,0 >= 87,0 >= 89,5
11,0 < 88,4 >= 88,4 >= 91,0 < 88,4 >= 88,4 >= 90,5
15,0 < 89,4 >= 89,4 >= 91,8 < 89,4 >= 89,4 >= 91,3
18,5 < 90,0 >= 90,0 >= 92,2 < 90,0 >= 90,0 >= 91,8
22,0 < 90,5 >= 90,5 >= 92,6 < 90,5 >= 90,5 >= 92,2
30,0 < 91,4 >= 91,4 >= 93,2 < 91,4 >= 91,4 >= 92,9
37,0 < 92,0 >= 92,0 >= 93,6 < 92,0 >= 92,0 >= 93,3
45,0 < 92,5 >= 92,5 >= 93,9 < 92,5 >= 92,5 >= 93,7
55,0 < 93,0 >= 93,0 >= 94,2 < 93,0 >= 93,0 >= 94,0
75,0 < 93,6 >= 93,6 >= 94,7 < 93,6 >= 93,6 >= 94,6
90,0 < 93,9 >= 93,9 >= 95,0 < 93,9 >= 93,9 >= 95,0

100

95

90 EFF 1
Efficiency, %

85 4 poles
2 poles
2 and 4 poles
EFF 2
80

EFF 3
75

70
1 10 100
Power, kW

Figure 4 Efficiency of induction motors according to EuroDEEM classification

 MAKO CIGRE 2009 A1-2R 10/11

5. GLOBALIZATION OF THE MOTOR MARKET

On the global motor market various national motor classifications (e.g. NEMA, EPACT,
CEMP, …) have been applied, and in some countries (India, China,…) they will be introduced in the
near future. In order to simplify the procedure and facilitate the motor manufacture for global market,
IEC is working on a unique classification of motor efficiency for 50 Hz and 60 Hz applications [6].
Three classes of motors have been proposed: IE1, IE2 (high) and IE3 (premium). The Annex A of the
new IEC standard also defines the class IE4 (super premium). The class IE4 is shown in Fig. 5 and
Table 4. All the data was taken from [4]-[6]. The attainment of class IE4 depends on the development
of new technologies and implementation of new materials. The expectancy to attain such high values
of efficiency while keeping the mechanical dimensions compatible with the existing motors of lower
efficiency are rather questionable (EN 50347, NEMA MG1).
Table 4. Efficiency of motor class
IE4 (Future IEC 60034-30)
kW 2p = 2 2p = 4 2p = 6
98.0
0,75 86,8 88,0 86,0
1,1 88,0 89,2 86,7 96.0
1,5 88,6 89,7 88,1
2,2 89,1 90,8 88,7 94.0
3,0 90,2 91,3 90,0
Efficiency, %

4,0 90,7 91,7 90,6

92.0 2 poles
5,5 91,7 92,6 91,1
7,5 92,1 93,0 92,2 4 poles
11 93,0 93,8 93,1 90.0 6 poles
15 93,4 94,1 93,6
18,5 93,8 94,4 94,0 88.0
22 94,1 94,8 94,4
30 94,5 95,0 94,7 86.0
37 94,8 95,3 95,0
45 95,1 95,6 95,3 84.0
55 95,4 95,8 95,6 Power, kW
1 10 100 1000
75 95,6 96,0 95,8
90 95,9 96,2 96,0
110 96,1 96,4 Figure 5 Efficiency of motor class IE4 "super premium"
132 96,2 96,5
160 96,3
200 96,5
6. CONCLUSION
Induction motors are the largest industrial consumers of electric energy. The optimization of
their design from the aspect of minimization of power losses in the process of electromechanical
power conversion is still very attractive.
The cost of energy during the exploitation period of the motor can be from 100 to 200 larger
than the price of the motor.
Since knowledge and technology of electric motor construction are known and perfected, the
remaining possibility of reducing the power losses is by means of design, i.e. by increasing the volume
of active parts of the motor.
The possibility of increasing the efficiency is significantly greater for small motors than for
large motors.
On an example of a 22-kW motor it has been shown that the increased price of the motor due
to increased volume of its active parts can be compensated through reduced cost of electric energy in
the period of around 4 years and that the emission of detrimental gases can be reduced by 20 tons
during the exploitation period of the motor.
The greatest possibility for saving energy is to implement variable-speed electric drives.
 MAKO CIGRE 2009 A1-2R 11/11

7. REFERENCES
[1] D. Ban, B. Jurković. “Neka pitanja ekonomike gradnje i izbora električnih motora za energetska
postrojenja.” (in Croatian), Simpozij: Izvori energije i tehničko tehnološki razvoj opreme za energetiku,
Belgrade, 12-14 January 1983.
[2] B. Jurković. Elektromotorni pogoni. (in Croatian), Zagreb, Školska knjiga Zagreb,1986
[3] T.A. Lipo. Introduction to AC Machine Design. University of Wisconsin, 2004
[4] M. Kostić. “Efficiency classes induction motors and saving energy.” 14th International Symposium on
Power Electronics - Ee 2007 (Invited paper IP4-1). Novi Sad, 2007.
[5] EU/CEMEP agreement.
[6] Rotating Electrical Machines-part XY: Efficiency classes of single- speed three-phase cage induction
motors. Future IEC 60034-30
[7] W. R. Finley, B. Veerkamp, D. Gehring, Ph. Hanna. “Improving motor efficiency levels globally.”
IEEE Industry Applications Magazine. Vol. 15. No. 1, pp. 39-49, January/February 2009
[8] The European Motor Challenge Programme
(http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/energyefficiency/motorchallenge/index.htm )
[9] 100 Top Energy Saving. ABB, REV D EN 2002
[10] J.F. Fuchloch, W.R. Finely & Reinhard, W.Walter. “The next generation motor.” IEEE Industry
Applications Magazine.Vol.14, No.1, January/February 2008