IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 65, NO.

12, DECEMBER 2016 2701

Uncertainty Issues in Direct and Indirect Efficiency

Determination for Three-Phase Induction Motors:
Remarks About the IEC 60034-2-1 Standard
Giovanni Bucci, Member, IEEE, Fabrizio Ciancetta,
Edoardo Fiorucci, Senior Member, IEEE, and Antonio Ometto

Abstract— Electric motors and the systems they drive are

the single largest electrical end-use; it is estimated that they
consume between 43% and 46% of all global electricity con-
sumption. Recent studies show that efficiency values of induction
motors can be successfully increased, with improvements up
to 20%–30%. In 2009, the European Commission published
a new regulation (640/2009) concerning requirements for the
eco-compatible design of electric motors. In such a scenario,
the experimental determination of induction motor efficiency
is getting more and more important, because of the need of
placing these motors in the right energy efficiency levels defined
by international regulations. The correct motor classification
strictly depends on the uncertainty associated with the efficiency
determination. According to the IEC 60034-2-1 standard, the
efficiency of three-phase induction motors can be determined Fig. 1. Comparison among international levels for efficiency of induction
by applying the direct or indirect efficiency technique. The motors.
direct procedure is suggested for low uncertainty efficiency
measurements of single-phase induction motors and three-phase
motors with rated power ≤1 kW. In this paper, we propose
a comparative analysis between direct and indirect efficiency majority of electricity is consumed by the electric motor itself
determination for three-phase induction motors, according to and only a small amount by ancillary circuits. Electric motors
the IEC 60034-2-1 standard. The contribution of this paper and the systems they drive are the single largest electrical
consists in the comparison between the uncertainty calculations
in indirect and direct efficiency determination for induction end-use; it is estimated that they consume between 43%
motors, to investigate the advisability of adopting the direct and 46% of all global electricity consumption, giving rise to
efficiency determination as reference method, because it is easier about 6040 Mt of CO2 emissions [1]. In several industrial
to implement and it has a good accuracy. This task is carried applications, electric motors consume more than 70%–80%
out starting from the accuracy requirements for measurement of all electrical energy, representing a considerable share of
equipment, as demanded by the Guide to the Expression of
Uncertainty in Measurement GUM. Some experimental results their budget. The U.S. Department of Energy estimates power
obtained with the indirect and direct efficiency determinations cost over the 20-year life of an electric motor to be 90%,
on a 3-kW three-phase two-pole induction motor are presented with downtime costs estimated at 5%; rebuild costs at 4%,
and discussed. A final suggestion related to a future version of and purchase price at 1% [1].
IEC 60034-2-1 is also reported. Recent studies showed that efficiency values of induction
Index Terms— Induction motors, losses, power measurement, motors can be successfully increased, with improvements up
resistance measurement, uncertainty. to 20%–30%. In 2009, the European Commission published
I. I NTRODUCTION a new regulation (640/2009) [2] concerning requirements
for the eco-compatible design of electric motors. In detail,
A. Today’s Induction Motors’ Efficiency Scenario this regulation applies to single-speed three-phase 50-Hz or

E LECTRIC motors convert electrical power into mechani-

cal power within a motor-driven system, where the great
50/60-Hz squirrel cage induction motor, with two, four, and
six poles, rated voltage up to 1000 V, rated output power
between 0.75 and 375 kW, and continuous duty operation.
Manuscript received June 14, 2016; revised July 25, 2016; accepted
August 1, 2016. Date of publication August 24, 2016; date of current version Three levels of efficiency are proposed: 1) IE2—high effi-
November 8, 2016. The Associate Editor coordinating the review process was ciency (equivalent both to Eff1 and to U.S. EPAct for 60 Hz);
Dr. Wendy Van Moer. (Corresponding author: Edoardo Fiorucci.) 2) IE3—premium efficiency, a new level for European market
The authors are with the Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale
e dell’Informazione e di Economia, Università dell’Aquila, 67100 L’Aquila, (equivalent to NEMA Premium for 60 Hz) (Fig. 1); and
Italy (e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; 3) IE4–super premium efficiency: a new efficiency class from
[email protected]; [email protected]). 2013 as defined in IEC 60034-30-1 [3] that also includes
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. motors from 0.12 to 1000 kW, with two, four, six, and eight
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIM.2016.2599459 poles. As an example in Fig. 2, we reported the efficiency
0018-9456 © 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2702 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 65, NO. 12, DECEMBER 2016

Fig. 3. Induction motor losses.

Fig. 2. IE1–IE4 efficiency curves for two-pole induction motors.

previous version of [4] states that in different countries, the
basis for using the indirect method is not univocal, but is in
curves defined in the IEC 60034-30-1 for two-pole induction the range 70%–90%.
motors. According to these observations, the previous version of
Moreover, the following time table has been defined and standard, in paragraph 18.2, prescribed as preferred test
will be mandatory. method for the efficiency determination of polyphase induction
1) Since January 1, 2015, all the motors with rated power machines the indirect method, based on the summation of
between 7.5 and 375 kW must comply IE3 efficiency losses evaluated separately as constant losses at no-load test
(IE2 if equipped with a variable speed drive). at rated voltage, load losses, and additional load losses.
2) Since January 1, 2017, all the motors with rated power As a consequence to this indirect approach, the torque mea-
between 0.75 and 375 kW must comply with IE3 surement was not prescribed in this version of the standard, as
efficiency (IE2 if equipped with a variable speed drive). shown in Section III, where the accuracy prescription seems to
It is estimated that this measure will save 135 TWh per year be defined only for the measurement of electrical quantities;
in 2020. an accuracy of 0.5 or better (IEC 51) is required for measuring
devices and accessories, while for three-phase wattmeters and
B. Remarks About Direct and Indirect Efficiency wattmeters for low power factor, an accuracy class of 1.0 or
Measurements better is required.
The efficiency of a motor is defined as the ratio of mechan- To confirm that, it can be noted that the torque is not present
ical output power to electrical input power. It should be mea- in the list of symbols, even if the evaluation of working points
sured accurately while testing high-efficiency systems, since (in terms of percentage of rated power) for the measurement
slight measurement errors can lead to significant deviations of load losses requires the torque measurement.
in the efficiency class. Efficiency can be either measured or Therefore, the existing standard has been written coherently
determined directly or indirectly. Direct measurement is based with the classical approach for the efficiency measurement
on the evaluation of input power from voltage and current, of rotating electrical machines, for which the measurement
and output power from rotational speed and torque. In order of torque should be avoided to obtain a higher accuracy
to avoid the complexity and associated expenses of torque efficiency evaluation. Coherently, the additional load losses
measurement, the motor efficiency can also be indirectly are also quantified as 0.5% of the rated output power that is
obtained by measuring the input power and calculating the not measured but estimated by means of the stator current
output power on the basis of the losses within the motor. Motor measurement.
losses can be split into five major areas (Fig. 3): The present version of the IEC 60034-2-1 [4] shows an
1) iron losses; effort to increase the accuracy in the efficiency determination
2) stator winding losses; by introducing a qualitative classification for the different
3) rotor winding losses; testing methods. In fact, in [4, paragraph 5.2], it is stated
4) windage and friction losses; that: “Uncertainty as used in this standard is the uncertainty of
5) additional load losses (PLL ). determining a true efficiency. It reflects variations in the test
More in detail, the previous version of [4], released in 1999, procedure and the test equipment. Although uncertainty should
in Section 12, states that, in general, the guaranteed efficiency be expressed as a numerical value, such a requirement needs
of a machine is that which is based on the determination sufficient testing to determine representative and comparative
of separate losses; nevertheless, if the measuring method can values. This standard uses the following relative uncertainty
be chosen, the evaluation of efficiency is to be based on the terms: – “low” applies to efficiency determinations based
accuracy obtainable from the method, the efficiency, and the solely upon test results; – “medium” applies to efficiency
type of machine involved. In the following note, the same determinations based upon limited approximations; – “high”

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 BUCCI et al.: UNCERTAINTY ISSUES IN DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION FOR THREE-PHASE INDUCTION MOTORS 2703

applies to efficiency determinations based upon assumptions.” 4) rotational speed; and 5) torque. The temperature of external
In the same document, in paragraph 5.3, it also argued that: motor surface is also measured, to guarantee that the thermal
“It is difficult to establish specific rules for the determination equilibrium has been reached before starting the test. The only
of efficiency. The choice of test to be made depends on the quantities to be used for the efficiency processing are the
information required, the accuracy required, the type and size three-phase active power, the rotational speed, and the torque.
of the machine involved and the available field test equipment The other (indirect) method requires the measurement of the
(supply, load or driving machine).” following quantities: 1) winding resistance and temperature;
The direct method is preferred only for all single-phase 2) inlet coolant temperature; 3) three-phase rms voltages;
induction motors and for three-phase motors whose rated 4) three-phase rms currents; 5) three-phase active power;
power is ≤1 kW, according to the previous version of the 5) rotational speed; 6) torque; and 7) temperature of the
standard, and clearly stated in Section 5, Table II Induction external motor surface.
machines. The preferred method for the efficiency determina- These quantities are monitored during and at the end of
tion of three-phase machines whose rated power is >1 kW and the test, and their values utilized to evaluate the separate
up to 150 kW is still the indirect one based on the summation losses: 1) constant losses during the no load test, involving
of losses, with a new approach for the determination of the the measuring of winding resistance, three-phase voltage and
additional load losses. current rms values, active power, and slip, at least seven times
Many critical issues related to the efficiency determina- at different fractions of the rated rms voltage; 2) friction and
tion of induction motors have been discussed by several windage losses, obtained adopting a linear regression analysis
researchers. Some topics concerning the measurement of based on the expression of losses as function of square of
efficiency in accordance with [4] have been investigated rms voltage; 3) iron losses, for each load point (at least six)
in [6]–[15]; other interesting results about calorimetric mea- obtained from the curve processed for the friction and windage
surements for determining losses in electrical machines are losses, by introducing a correction of the rms voltage due
proposed in [16] and [17]. A critical analysis of the stray-load to the voltage drop caused by the stator current; 4) stator
loss determination is in [18]. Other issues in this field have winding losses, by measuring winding resistance and stator
been focused in [19]–[25]. current rms values during the load test; 5) rotor winding losses,
obtained by measuring active power and slip and subtracting
C. Introduction of the Torque Measurements in the from the active power the stator winding losses and iron losses;
Evaluation of Additional Losses and 6) additional load losses, obtained by measuring active
power, rotational speed, and torque, and subtracting from the
As outlined in the previous section, the output torque
active power the output mechanical power, the stator winding
measurement has always been considered as a critical task to
losses, the rotor winding losses, the friction and windage
be avoided when the power exceeds 1 kW. However, the avail-
losses, and the iron losses.
ability of high-performance transducers at relatively low costs
The last step is the most questionable for the indirect
makes possible today to commonly execute this measurement.
efficiency evaluation, because the additional losses are usually
Moreover, the right measurement of high efficiencies suggests
about 0.5% of the rated output power, and the measurement
the direct measurement of all the motor parameters. For these
of small quantities by subtraction is always a low-accuracy
reasons, the torque measurement has been introduced in [4]
procedure. To guarantee the significance of the obtained addi-
for the additional load loss evaluation. This new approach
tional losses values, the standard requires the evaluation of
can involve an overtaking of the traditional method of the
the correlation factor between the obtained losses and the
summation of losses, because the torque transducer required
square of load torque. If the obtained correlation factor is not
for the measurement of additional losses can also be adopted
satisfactory, all the tests must be repeated, and the cause of
for the direct evaluation of efficiency. In actual fact, the
the low accuracy in the test execution should be investigated.
indirect method based on the summation of losses is proposed
As previously introduced, the main goal of this paper
by the standard as a low uncertainty method, even if its
is to analyze the levels of accuracy related to both direct
implementation is quite complex when compared with the
and indirect methods for the efficiency evaluation of three-
direct method, and also because a large amount of data must
phase induction motors. More specifically, in the following,
be acquired and processed.
we analyze the possibility to “extend” the applicability of
In this paper, we evaluated the accuracies related to the
direct method guaranteeing the same if not better levels of
two (direct and indirect) methods by applying the GUM
accuracy of the indirect method. This analysis is carried out
requirements, in order to better understand the limits of these
starting from general considerations about the combined stan-
techniques.
dard uncertainty in Section II and the accuracy requirements
of measurement equipment in Section III. Successively, the
D. Overview About Measurement Quantities and uncertainties related to the measurement of main motor para-
Processes Involved in the Efficiency Calculation meters are evaluated in Section IV. In Sections V and VI, the
The efficiency evaluation with the direct method requires us overall uncertainty related to the indirect and direct efficiency
to monitor and measure during the load tests (for at least six determination is analyzed, with respect to the uncertainty prop-
points) the following quantities: 1) three-phase rms voltages; agation rules [5], [26], discussed in Section II. In Section VII,
2) three-phase rms currents; 3) three-phase active power; we report and compare the results obtained with both “low

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2704 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 65, NO. 12, DECEMBER 2016

uncertainty” direct and indirect determinations, discussing the TABLE I

main remarks. R EQUIRED A CCURACIES FOR THE I NSTRUMENTATION

II. G ENERAL C ONSIDERATIONS A BOUT THE C OMBINED

S TANDARD U NCERTAINTY

As reported in [5], when the quantity of interest cannot be

obtained with a direct measurement and exists a functional
relationship between the measurand y and N other directly
measurable independent quantities x i , the measurand can
be determined by combining the measured quantities using
y = f (x 1 , . . . , x N ). In this case, the combined standard
uncertainty of y is given by [5]

 N 
 ∂ f 2
u c (y) =  · u 2 (x i ) (1)
∂ xi
i=1

where u(x i ) are the uncertainties related to the measured

quantities x i .
In the case of correlated quantities, as the iron losses and
additional losses that are estimated by applying extrapolation
Fig. 4. Expectation value xi lies in the center of a uniform distribution of
methods in accordance with the standard [4], the correct possible values.
expression for the combined uncertainty, according to [5], is
(2), as shown at the bottom of this page.
The parameter u(x i , x j ) is the covariance of x i and x j , Cov According to [5], a correlation coefficient r (x i , x j ) can be
(x i , x j ); if x i = x j , covariance coincides with the variance. introduced
The covariance expresses the degree of statistical dependence u(x i , x j )
between the estimations of two quantities and is void if they r (x i , x j ) = . (5)
u(x i ) · u(x j )
are not related. The covariance is estimated starting from N
joint measurements of x i and x j and given the mean values Substituting (5) into (2), the final expression is obtained (6),
of X i = E(x i ) and X j = E(x j ) by as shown at the bottom of this page.

Cov(x i , x j ) = E{[x i − E(x i )] · [x j − E(x j )]} III. R EQUIRED ACCURACY FOR T EST I NSTRUMENTS
= E(x i · x j ) − E(x i ) · E(x j ) (3) The standard [4] defines the instrument accuracy for
motor characterization: measuring instruments must have an
1 
N
Cov(x i , x j ) = (x i − X i )(x j − X j ). (4) accuracy class of 0.2 according to [27], while for rou-
N tine tests, the accuracy class can be 0.5 as described
i= j =1
in [28, Sec. 9.1].
Cov(x i , x j ) is positive if x i and x j vary on average in the Instrument transformers must have accuracy in compli-
same way (when x i exceeds the average value, x j also exceeds ance with [29] so that their measurement error does not
the average value), negative if they vary in opposite way, and exceed ±0.5% for common tests and ±0.3% for induction
zero if they undergo independent oscillations. Therefore, it is machines.
necessary to determine the covariance in the case of related Equipment for torque measurements must have an accuracy
quantities. of ±0.2% of full scale. A torque correction test is required

 
 N N      N   N    
  ∂ f ∂f  ∂ f 2  
N−1
∂f ∂f
u c (y) =  · · u(x i , x j ) =  · u 2 (x i ) + 2 · · · u(x i , x j ) (2)
∂ xi ∂x j ∂ xi ∂ xi ∂x j
i=1 j =1 i=1 i=1 j =i+1

 N N    
  ∂ f ∂f
u c (y) =  · · u(x i , x j )
∂ xi ∂x j
i=1 j =1

 N   N    
 ∂ f 2  
N−1
∂f ∂f
=  · u (x i ) + 2 ·
2 · · u(x i ) · u(x j ) · r (x i , x j ) (6)
∂ xi ∂ xi ∂x j
i=1 i=1 j =i+1

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 BUCCI et al.: UNCERTAINTY ISSUES IN DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION FOR THREE-PHASE INDUCTION MOTORS 2705

TABLE II
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES OF R ESISTANCES AND T EMPERATURES

when the shaft torque is measured by means of a dynamome- [4, paragraph 5.7.2], the direct measurement of temperature
ter, to estimate the torque offset. This is also required when a by means of ETD or thermocouple, the determination of
joint is interposed between torque measuring device and motor temperature on a duplicate machine of the same features and
shaft. design.
Equipment for frequency measurement must have an accu- Winding temperature during the test can be obtained starting
racy of ±0.1% of full scale. Speed should be measured with from the following expressions:
an accuracy of 0.1% or 1 r/min, adopting the method that Rw
provides the minor error. θw = (235+θ0 ) −235 (8)
R0
To measure winding temperature, the required accuracy
is ±1 °C. where θ0 is the initial winding temperature in thermal equilib-
These values are synthesized in Table I. rium with the ambient air, before executing the test, measured
Starting from these accuracy requirements, to assess type- on the motor shell with an uncertainty u(θ0 ); R0 is the winding
B components of uncertainty with respect to the propagation resistance measured at θ0 , whose uncertainty is u(R0 ), and Rw
of uncertainty, we considered a rectangular probability dis- is the winding resistance measured at the end of the test with
tribution (Fig. 4) for each source of uncertainty, under the uncertainty u(Rw ).
hypothesis that the actual value is reasonably included in a The uncertainty in the measurement of winding temperature
band of width 2a. is (9)–(12), as shown at the top of the next page.
In this case, the standard uncertainty is given by
B. Uncertainty in the Measurement of the Temperature
a
u= √ . (7) Correction Factor
3 The resistance values measured during the test shall be
referred to a standard reference temperature of 25 °C,
IV. U NCERTAINTIES IN THE M EASUREMENT OF M AIN
according to [4]. The temperature correction factor kθ for
E FFICIENCY PARAMETERS
windings resistance (as well as for slip s of induction
Efficiency is measured implementing the methods outlined machines) shall be determined as
in [4] for the determination of single losses. In the following,
235+θw +25−θc
the uncertainties related to the measurement of main efficiency kθ = (13)
parameters are examined. 235+θw
where kθ is the temperature correction factor for windings, θc
A. Uncertainty in the Measurement of Winding Resistance is the is the inlet coolant temperature during the test, measured
and Temperature with uncertainty u(θc ), θw is the winding temperature accord-
ing to [4, paragraph 5.7.2], whose uncertainty u(θw )has been
Winding resistance should be measured and referred at a
previously determined. The thermal constant is 235 for copper
specific temperature. For polyphase ac machines, the resis-
windings and 225 for aluminum winding. When the primary or
tance between pairs of stator or armature winding terminals
secondary coolant is water, the reference temperature is 25 °C,
R = Rll is measured. For wound rotor induction machines, the
according to [28, Table 4].
resistance between pairs of rotor terminals Rr,ll is required.
The uncertainty of kθ can be expressed as (14)–(16), shown
The test resistance at the end of each test shall be determined
at the top of this page.
as required by IEC 60034-1 [28, paragraph 8.6.2.3.3], adopting
an extrapolation method. The shortest possible time should
be adopted, because a quick shutdown is required for the C. Uncertainty in the Measurement of Constant Losses
measurement of the temperature after each thermal test, by During the No-Load Test
a carefully planned procedure. By analyzing [4, paragraph 9.1.1.3], the no-load test is
When winding resistance (under load) cannot be measured similar to that defined in the previous version of the standard.
directly, the test resistance value shall be adjusted by the Four or more measurement points shall be considered in the
difference between the temperature of measured resistance range from 60% to 125% of rated voltage, at regular intervals;
and the temperature derived according to the methods in three or more points shall be considered in the range from 20%

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2706 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 65, NO. 12, DECEMBER 2016

∂θw θ0 +235
= (9)
∂ Rw R0
∂θw Rw · (θ0 +235)
=− (10)
∂ R0 R02
∂θw Rw
= (11)
∂θ0 R
0
 
 θ0 +235 2 Rw · (θ0 +235)
2  2
u c (θw ) =  · u (Rw ) + −
2 · u 2 (R0 ) +
Rw
· u 2 (θ0 ) (12)
R0 R02 R0
∂kθ 1 235+θw +25−θc
= − (14)
∂θw 235+θw (235+θw )2
∂kθ 1
=− (15)
∂θc 235+θw
   2
1 235+θw +25−θc 2 2 1
u c (kθ ) = − · u (θ w ) + − · u 2 (θc ) (16)
235+θw (235+θw )2 235+θw
∂ Pk
=1 (18)
∂ P0
∂ Pk
= −6R0 · I0 (19)
∂ I0
∂ Pk
= −3 · I02 (20)
∂ R0
2
u c (Pk ) = u 2 (P0 ) + (−6R0 · I0 )2 · u 2 (I0 ) + − 3 · I02 · u 2 (R0 ) (21)

to 50%. The test shall be carried out as quickly as possible constant losses Pk as a function of U02 :
with the readings taken in descending order of voltage.
From this test, both iron losses P f e and friction and windage Pk = C · U02 + Pfw . (22)
losses Pfw are evaluated; their sum represents the constant
losses Pk The parameter C can be determined in analogy with the def-
inition of coefficient A in [4, paragraph 8.2.2.5.1.2], adopting
Pk = P f e + Pfw = P0 − Ps = P0 − 1.5 · I02 a linear regression analysis based on the expression of losses
· R110 = P0 − 3 · I02 · R0 (17) as a function of square of load torque; this approach will be
discussed later in this paper. Therefore, C can be expressed as
where R=R110 is the line-to-line resistance of the sta- N N N
tor winding, measured in no-load conditions, according to N · i=1 Pki · U0i2 − i=1 Pki · i=1 U0i2
C= N N (23)
[4, paragraph 3.6.3]. N · i=1 U0i4 − 2 2
i=1 U0i
Given the values of uncertainty in the P0 , I0, and R0
measurements equal to u(P0 ), u(I0 ), and u(R0 ), respectively, and
the uncertainty in the measurement of Pk can be expressed N N 2 N
by means of the following relationship, according to (1) and i=1 Pki i=1 U0i
Pki
Pfw = −C · = i=1
(18)–(21), as shown at the top of this page. N  N N
N
N
N
N · i=1 Pki · U0i2 − i=1 Pki · i=1 U0i2
− N 
N · i=1 U0i4 − N 2 2
D. Uncertainty in the Measurement of Friction i=1 U0i
 N
and Windage Losses 2
i=1 U0i
To perform the losses separation in no-load test according · . (24)
N
to [4], the friction and windage losses Pfw are obtained with
a graphical method. Specifically, among the values of no-load Given the values of uncertainty in the measurements of
losses measured in the considered points, all that showing U0i and Pki equal to u(U0i ) and u(Pki ), respectively, the
no significant saturation effect can be used to create a curve uncertainty of Pfw can be expressed according to (2) and (3),
of constant losses Pk against the voltage squared U02 . By because the considered quantities are correlated as (25) and
extrapolating a straight line to zero voltage, the intercept with (26), as shown at the bottom of this page.
zero voltage axis identifies the desired friction and windage Thus, according to (2) and (3), the uncertainty u c (Pfw )
losses Pfw . To evaluate the uncertainty in the measurement of Pfw is (27), as shown at the bottom of this page, where
of Pfw , the following relation can be considered, defining the r (Pki , U0 j ) is the correlation factor of U0 and Pk , included in

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 BUCCI et al.: UNCERTAINTY ISSUES IN DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION FOR THREE-PHASE INDUCTION MOTORS 2707

the range [−1, +1] [4, paragraph 8.2.2.4.4]. Specifically, voltages measured in the
range from 60% to 120% of rated voltage are considered, and
u(Pki , U0 j )
r (Pki , U0 j ) = (28) the curve P f e = Pk − Pfw against voltage U0 is drawn. The
u(Pki ) · u(U0 j ) iron losses at the desired load point can be obtained from the
where u(Pki , U0 j ) is the covariance of U0 and Pk . curve at voltage Ur with which the resistive voltage drop due
Similarly, the uncertainty of C factor can be expressed as to the no-load current I in the primary winding is taken into
(29) and (30) as shown at the bottom of this page. account.
Thus, according to (2) and (3), the uncertainty u c (C) of C Given the phase ϕ of no-load current I where P1 , I , R, and
is (31)–(34), as shown at the bottom of the previous page. U are defined according to [4, paragraph 6.4.4.2], in which the
load curve test is described.
Given the values of uncertainty in the measurements of P1
E. Uncertainty in the Measurement of Iron Losses equal to u(P1 ), I equal to u(I ), R equal to u(R), and U equal
As concerning the losses in active iron and additional to u(U ), the uncertainty u c (U ) in the measurement of Ur can
no-load losses in other metal parts P f e , the effect of voltage be obtained by means of the following relations as (35)–(39),
drop due to the resistance of stator windings is introduced in shown at the top of this page.

N N
∂ Pfw 1 2
1=1 U0i− N · U0i2 · N1 1=1 U0i2
= + N N (25)
∂ Pki N N · 1=1 U0i4 − 2 2
1=1 U0i
N
N 2
U0i
∂ Pfw 2 · U0i · 1=1 Pki −2N · U0i · Pki · 1=1 N
= N N
∂U0i N · 1=1 U0i4 − 2 2
1=1 U0i
N N N
2 · U0i N · 1=1 Pki · U0i2 − 1=1 Pki · 1=1 U0i2
− N 
N · N · 1=1 U0i4 − N 2 2
1=1 U0i
N
N 2
U0i N N N
4 · N·U 30i − 4 · U0i · 1=1 U0i2 · 1=1 N · N · 1=1 Pki · U0i2 − 1=1 Pki · 1=1 U0i2
+ N  (26)
N · 1=1 U0i4 − N 2 2 2
1=1 U0i
u c (Pfw )

 N   N   N    
 ∂ Pfw 2  ∂ Pfw 2 2  
N−1
∂ Pfw ∂ Pfw
= · u 2 (Pki ) + · u (U0i ) + 2 · · · u(Pki ) · u(U0 j ) · r (Pki , U0 j )
∂ Pki ∂U0i ∂ Pki ∂U0 j
i=1 i=1 i=1 j =i+1
(27)
N
∂C N · U0i2 − i=1 U0i2
= N N (29)
∂ Pki N · i=1 U0i4 − 2 2
i=1 U0i
N
∂C 2N · Pki · Uoi − 2 · U0i · i=1 Pki
= N N
∂U0i N · i=1 U0i −4 2
i=1 U0i
N N N N
4N · U0i − 4 · U0i · i=1 U0i2 · N · i=1
3 Pki · U0i2 − i=1 Pk i · i=1 U0i2
−  N   (30)
N · i=1 U0i4 − N 2 2 2
i=1 U0i

 N   N   N    
 ∂C 2  ∂C 2 2  
N−1
∂C ∂C
u c (C) =  · u (Pki )+
2 · u (U0i ) + 2 · · · u(Pki ) · u(U0 j ) · r (Pki , U0 j )
∂ Pki ∂U0i ∂ Pki ∂U0 j
i=1 i=1 i=1 j =i+1
(31)
P1
cos ϕ = √ (32)
3·U · I
 2
P1
sin ϕ = 1− √ (33)
3·U · I

 √ ⎡√ ⎤2
 2  2
 3 P1 3 P1
Ur =  U− ·I ·R·√ +⎣ ·I ·R· 1− √ ⎦ (34)
2 3·U · I 2 3·U · I

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2708 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 65, NO. 12, DECEMBER 2016

   
R· P1 R· P1 R 2 · P12
∂Ur 2· U − 2·U · 2·U 2 +1 + 2·U 2
=   (35)
∂U  2 P12
3·R 2 ·I 2 · 2 2 −1
R· P1 3·I ·U
2· U− 2·U − 4
 
P12 R 2 · P12
3 · I · R2 · −1 −
∂Ur 3·I 2 ·U 2 2·U 2 ·I
=−   (36)
∂I  2 P12
3·R 2 ·I 2 · −1
R· P1 3·I 2 ·U 2
2· U− 2·U − 4
 
P12  
3·I ·R 2 · 3·I ·U −1 R·P
P1 · U − 2·U1
∂Ur 2 + U
=−   (37)
∂R  2 P12
3·R 2 ·I 2 · −1
R· P1 3·I 2 ·U 2
2· U− 2·U − 4
 
R·P1
R· U − 2·U R 2 · P1
∂Ur U + 2U 2
=−   (38)
∂ P1  2 P12
3·R 2 ·I 2 · −1
R· P1 3·I 2 ·U 2
2· U− 2·U − 4
 2   2
 
∂Ur ∂Ur ∂Ur 2 2 ∂Ur 2 2
u c (Ur ) = · u 2 (U ) + · u (I )+
2 · u (R) + · u (P1 ) (39)
∂U ∂I ∂R ∂ P1
     
p · kθ 2 2 p · n · kθ 2 2 p·n 2 2
u c (sθ ) = − u (n) + u (f)+ 1− u (kθ ) (44)
60 · f f 60 · f 2 60 · f

From (22), the iron losses can be expressed as where kθ is according to [4, paragraph 5.7.3.].
Given the uncertainties on the measured quantity I equal to
P f e = C · Ur2 (40)
u(I ), R N equal to u(R N ), and kθ equal to u c (kθ ) in (16),
whose uncertainty is according to (1), the uncertainty u c (Psθ ) in the measure-
ment of Psθ can be expressed as (44), shown at the top of
uc P f e = Ur2 · u 2c (C) + (2 · C · Ur )2 · u 2 (Ur ) (41) this page.
and uncertainty u c (C) is (30).
V. U NCERTAINTY IN THE M EASUREMENT OF
THE ROTOR W INDING L OSSES
F. Uncertainty in the Measurement of
Stator Winding Losses According to [4, paragraph 8.2.2.4.1.3], the uncorrected
rotor winding losses Pr for each load value are
According to [4, paragraph 8.2.2.4.1.2], the
uncorrected stator winding losses for each load value Pr = (P1 − Ps − P f e ) · s (45)
are p·n
s = 1− (46)
f
Ps = 1.5 · I 2 · R (42)
where p is the number of motor pole pairs, P1 is according
where I and R are defined in [4, paragraph 6.4.4.1]. to [4, paragraph 6.4.4.1], Ps , n, and f are in [4, paragraph
The load variations shall be in the range from 25% to 6.4.4.1], and P f e is according to [4, paragraph 8.2.2.3.3].
150% of rated load; four load points shall be set to evenly By measuring the rotational speed in revolutions per minute,
distributed between at least 25% up to 100% of rated load. (45) becomes
The remaining load points, approximately evenly distributed, p·n
shall be chosen above 100% and below 150% of rated s =1− . (47)
60 · f
load. The test shall be performed starting with the high-
The corrected rotor winding losses for each load point
est load and proceeding in descending order to the lowest
are obtained with the slip measured for each load point and
load.
corrected to a reference coolant temperature of 25 °C, and
The corrected stator winding losses for each load
with the corrected rotor winding losses for each load point
point are evaluated with the stator winding resistance
R N , corrected to a reference coolant temperature Pr,θ = (P1 − Ps,θ − P f e ) · sθ (48)
of 25 °C
where Ps,θ is according to [4, paragraph 8.2.2.4.1.2], P f e is
Ps,θ = 1.5 · I 2 · R N · kθ (43) according to [4, paragraph 8.2.2.3.3], and sθ = skθ is the

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 BUCCI et al.: UNCERTAINTY ISSUES IN DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION FOR THREE-PHASE INDUCTION MOTORS 2709

     
p · kθ 2 2 p · n · kθ 2 2 p·n 2 2
u c (sθ ) = − u (n) + u (f)+ 1− u (kθ ) (50)
60 · f f 60 · f 2 60 · f
u c (Pr,θ ) = (sθ )2 · u 2 (P1 ) + u 2c (Ps,θ ) + u 2c (P f e ) + (P1 − Ps,θ − P f e )2 · u 2c (sθ ) (51)

u c (PLr ) = u 2 (P1 ) + u 2 (P2 ) + u 2 (Ps,θ ) + u 2 (Pr,θ ) + u 2 (Pfw ) + u 2 (P f e ) (54)

slip corrected to a reference coolant temperature of 25 °C The uncertainty in the measurement of the output
according to [4, paragraph 5.7.3] power P2 is
 
p·n u c (P2 ) = (2πn)2 · u 2 (T ) + (2π T )2 · u 2 (n) (53)
sθ = 1 − · kθ. (49)
60 · f
where u(T ) and u(n) are the uncertainties of torque and
Given the uncertainty values in the measurement of n equal to rotational speed measurement.
u(n), f equal to u( f ), and kθ equal to u c (kθ ), the uncertainty For each value of PLr , the uncertainty is (54), as shown at
u c (sθ ) in the measurement of sθ is expressed as (50), shown the top of this page.
at the top of this page. Given the additional load losses (51), evaluated for each
The uncertainty in the measurement of Pr,θ is expressed load point, [4, paragraph 8.2.2.5.1.2] establishes a linear
given the uncertainties of P1 equal to u(P1 ), Ps,θ equal regression analysis of losses expressed as a function of square
to u c (Ps,θ ), P f e equal to u c (P f e ), and sθ equal to u c (sθ ) of load torque, according to the relationship
in (51), as shown at the top of this page.
PLr = A · T 2 + B (55)
where T is defined in [4, paragraph 8.2.2.5.1.1],
A. Uncertainty in the Measurement of while A and B are obtained according to
Additional Load Losses [4, paragraphs 6.4.4.2 and 8.2.2.5.1.1], by considering
In the previous version of [4], the additional load losses at least six load points and by means of the following
were evaluated from an assigned value, by considering 0.5% relations:
of rated power multiplied by the squared ratio of the measured N N N
N · i=1 PLri · Ti2 − i=1 PLri · i=1 Ti2
load current and the rated current for each load point. This A= N N (56)
N · i=1 Ti4 − 2 2
approach is now considered with medium or high uncertainty i=1 Ti
N N
in [4, Table 2]. T2
i=1 PLri
The new approach for low-accuracy measurement of addi- B = − A · i=1 i . (57)
N N
tional load losses requires the direct measurement of output
mechanical power, by defining a procedure for evaluating the Equations (54) and (55) are meaningful when PLri and Ti are
difference between the active power absorbed by the motor correlated; the check of these important conditions [4] requires
and all the remaining power losses. From a metrological point the evaluation of correlation factor γ in (58), as shown at the
of view, this approach should not be recommended because top of this page.
when a low value (as 0.5%) is measured by difference, the If γ is lower than 0.95, the operator is suggested to remove
relative error increases. from (55) the worst measurement point, and to repeat the
According to [4, paragraph 8.2.2.5.1.1], the additional load regression processing; if γ increases to ≥ 0.95, this second
losses PLr shall be evaluated for each load point by subtracting regression can be used. If γ remains below 0.95, the test can
from the input active power: 1) the output power; 2) stator be considered unsatisfactory. The causes of low precision in
winding losses measured with the actual stator resistance; load test execution should be investigated and the test repeated,
3) iron losses; 4) friction and windage losses; and 5) rotor according to [4, paragraph 6.4.4.2].
winding losses measured with the actual slip Given the value of A, for γ ≥ 0.95, the additional losses
PLL against the torque T of each load point are
PLr = P1 − P2 − Ps,θ − Pr,θ − Pfw − P f e (52) PLL (T ) = A · T 2 (59)
where, as in [4], P2 = 2πnT and P1 is the input active where A and T are according to [4, paragraph 8.2.2.5.1.2].
power; T and n are the torque and rotational speed in the The evaluation of factor A is with uncertainty, according
load test, according to [4, paragraph 6.4.4.2]; Ps are the stator to (2); it can be obtained by taking into account the statements
winding losses, according to [4, paragraph 8.2.2.4.1.2]; P f e in [5] concerning the uncertainty propagation for correlated
are the iron losses according to [4, paragraph 8.2.2.3.3]; Pfw quantities, as PLri e Ti seems to be in agreement with [8].
are the friction and windage losses, according to [4, paragraph Starting from the uncertainties defined in (6) and (54), given
8.2.2.3.2]; and Pr are the rotor winding losses according A from (55), the partial derivatives for PLri are Ti as in
to [4, paragraph 8.2.2.4.1.3]. (60) and (61), as shown at the top of this page.

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2710 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 65, NO. 12, DECEMBER 2016

N N N
N· i=1 PLri · Ti2 − i=1 PLri · i=1 Ti2
γ =    (58)
N 2 N 2 2 · N · N P 2 −  N P 2
N · i=1 Ti2 − T
i=1 i i=1 Lri i=1 Lri
N
∂A N · Ti − i=1 Ti
2 2
= N N (60)
∂ PLri N · i=1 Ti4 − 2 2
i=1 Ti
N
∂A 2N · PLri · TLri − 2 · TLri · i=1 PLri
= N N
∂ Ti N · i=1 Ti − 4
i=1 Ti
2

 N N N N
4N · Ti3 − 4 · Ti · i=1 Ti2 · N · i=1 Pi · Ti2 − i=1 Pi · i=1 Ti2
−  N   (61)
N · i=1 Ti4 − N 2 2 2
i=1 Ti

 N   N   N    
 ∂ A 2  ∂A 2 2  
N−1
∂A ∂A
u c (A) =  · u 2 (PLri ) + · u (Ti ) + 2 · · · ·u(PLri ) · u(T j ) · r (PLri , T j )
∂ PLri ∂ Ti ∂ PLri ∂ Tj
i=1 i=1 i=1 j =i+1

(62)

u c (η)
           
∂η 2 ∂η 2 ∂η 2 ∂η 2 ∂η 2 ∂η 2
= ·u(P1 )2 + ·u(Ps,θ )2 + ·u(Pr,θ )2 + · u(Pfw )2 + ·u(P f e )2 + ·u(PLL )2
∂ P1 ∂ Ps,θ ∂ Pr,θ ∂ Pfw ∂ Pf e ∂ PLL
(68)

  
 Ps,θ + Pr,θ + Pfw + P f e + PLL 2
1 2
u c (η) =  · u (P1 ) + −
2
· (u(Ps,θ )2 + u(Pr,θ )2 + u(Pfw )2 + u(P f e )2 + u(PLL )2 )
P12 P1
(69)

The uncertainty of A is (62), as shown at the top of this And the uncertainty u c (η) is (68), from which
page, where the correlation factor r (PLri , Ti ) for PLri and Ti we get (69), as shown at the top of this page,
is from which we get (69), as shown at the top of
u(PLri · T j ) this page.
r (PLri , T j ) = (63)
u(PLri ) · u(T j )
VII. U NCERTAINTY IN THE D IRECT E FFICIENCY
where u(PLri , T j ) is the covariance of PLr and T .
D ETERMINATION
The uncertainty in the measurement of the additional losses
PLL according to (58) is The direct efficiency determination requires the direct mea-
surement of motor output power P2 and input power P1
u c (P LL ) = T 4 · u 2c (A) + (2 · A · T )2 · u 2 (T ). (64) P2
ηd = (70)
P1
VI. U NCERTAINTY IN THE I NDIRECT
whose uncertainty is
E FFICIENCY D ETERMINATION 
 2 
The indirect determination of efficiency η in [4] requires the  1 2
u c (ηd ) =  P2
· u(P2 ) + − 2
2
· u(P1 )2 . (71)
measurement of total amount of losses for each load point, so
P1 P1
it can be expressed as
Ps,θ + Pr,θ + Pfw + P f e + PLL The uncertainty of P2 is expressed in (52).
η =1− . (65)
P1
The uncertainty of η, according to (2), is obtained VIII. C OMPARISON B ETWEEN T YPE -B S TANDARD
U NCERTAINTIES FOR THE D IRECT AND I NDIRECT
with the same approach used for the quantities above,
E XPERIMENTAL D ETERMINATIONS OF I NDUCTION
so
M OTOR E FFICIENCY: A C ASE S TUDY
∂η Ps,θ + Pr,θ + Pfw + P f e + PLL
= (66) To obtain the experimental uncertainty contributions
∂ P1 P12
required for the efficiency determination of a real induction
∂η ∂η ∂η ∂η ∂η 1 motor, all the above-mentioned quantities have been measured,
= = = = =− . (67)
∂ Ps,θ ∂ Pr,θ ∂ Pfw ∂ Pf e ∂ PLL P1 according to the procedures and requirements defined in [4].

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 BUCCI et al.: UNCERTAINTY ISSUES IN DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION FOR THREE-PHASE INDUCTION MOTORS 2711

TABLE III
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES FOR AVERAGE rms V OLTAGE IN N O -L OAD T EST

TABLE IV
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES FOR AVERAGE rms C URRENT IN N O -L OAD T EST

TABLE V
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES FOR T OTAL A CTIVE P OWER IN N O -L OAD T EST

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2712 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 65, NO. 12, DECEMBER 2016

TABLE VI
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES FOR AVERAGE rms V OLTAGE IN L OAD T EST

TABLE VII
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES FOR AVERAGE rms C URRENT IN L OAD T EST

6001 unit that also performed the acquisition of torque and

rotational speed. During the no-load test, the rotational speed
has been measured with a PROVA tachometer RM-1000. The
required voltage levels have been obtained by using a three-
phase voltage induction regulator ISGEV RT 250 MB 4 with
output voltage 20–770 Vrms and output current 0–100 Arms.
The rms value of voltage and current and the active power have
been measured with the Yokogawa WT1800, whose accuracy
in active power measurement @ 50 Hz is ±(0.1% of reading
+ 0.2% of range). Their related measurement uncertainties
have been processed with a Yokogawa Excel application [30].
Fig. 5 depicts the block diagram of the measurement setup.
In Table XII, the central values and the standard uncertain-
ties for the derived quantities are reported, with reference to
the expressions adopted to process them.
Fig. 5. Block diagram of the measurement setup. The results tabulated in Table XII are also shown graphically
in Fig. 6 to better compare the difference between the two
techniques.
According to [5], the accuracies in Table I represent an The graph clearly shows that standard uncertainties obtained
interval of amplitude 2ai around the quantity X i (rectangular with direct and indirect methods have the same order of
distribution), and the standard uncertainty is as in (7). magnitude and trend. At the highest load points, the direct
To compare the type-B standard uncertainties, we per- method presents a lower uncertainty, even if at the rated
formed the direct and indirect efficiency determinations on a output power, the difference between the central values
three-phase two-pole induction motor, whose rated values are obtained with the indirect and direct determinations is only
380–420 V, Y-connected, 6.10 A, 3.00 kW, 2920 r/min, 50 Hz, of 0.074%.
and 0.86 PF. The uncertainty in the direct method can be reduced using
In the following, we reported all the measured quanti- a torque meter with higher accuracy, as shown in Table XIII
ties, with the corresponding measurement range and stan- where the standard uncertainties for indirect and direct meth-
dard uncertainty. The temperature of cooling air and motor ods are compared for torque meters with accuracies of
chassis has been measured with a Fluke 971 temperature ±0.2% and ±0.1% of full scale. These results show that
humidity meter and a Fluke 61 IR thermometer, respectively. the standard uncertainties obtained with a ±0.1% torque
The stator winding’s resistance has been measured with a meter are lower than the corresponding of indirect method
Keithley model 2001 multimeter. The load has been carried out for power values starting from the rated output power. This
adopting the Magtrol HD 815 hysteresis brake dynamometer aspect produces important effects in the reduction of test costs,
equipped with a Magtrol vibro-meter TM 108 torque and speed by considering the complexity of measurement procedures
transducer. The brake has been controlled with a Magtrol DSP (measure of resistance at load and no-load conditions) and

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 BUCCI et al.: UNCERTAINTY ISSUES IN DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION FOR THREE-PHASE INDUCTION MOTORS 2713

TABLE VIII
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES FOR T OTAL A CTIVE P OWER IN L OAD T EST

TABLE IX
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES FOR T ORQUE IN L OAD T EST

TABLE X
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES FOR ROTATIONAL S PEED IN L OAD T EST

Fig. 6. Comparison between the efficiencies with standard accuracies obtained with the indirect and direct methods.

amount of measurement data to process in the indirect method, motor’s manufacturers, suppliers, consumers, and mar-
as described in Section I-D. ket surveillance authorities, as required by EC regulation
n. 640/2009 [2].
IX. C ONCLUSION In this paper, we carried out a comparative analysis between
The efficiency measurement is a critical issue in direct and indirect efficiency determination for three-phase
the market of induction motors that concerns electric induction motors, according to both the IEC 60034-2-1 stan-

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2714 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 65, NO. 12, DECEMBER 2016

TABLE XI
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES FOR THE D ERIVED Q UANTITIES

TABLE XII
C ENTRAL VALUES AND S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES FOR THE E FFICIENCIES , D ETERMINED
W ITH I NDIRECT AND D IRECT M ETHODS , IN F UNCTION OF L OAD

dard [4] and the GUM [5], by focusing on the execution of In the IEC 60034-2-1, the direct efficiency determination
testing procedures implementable in certification laboratories, is suggested as the preferred low uncertainty method for all
and not for in-service motors, because high-performance mea- single-phase induction motors and three-phase ones whose
suring devices and loads are needed. rated power is ≤1 kW. To better compare the obtained uncer-

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 BUCCI et al.: UNCERTAINTY ISSUES IN DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION FOR THREE-PHASE INDUCTION MOTORS 2715

TABLE XIII
C OMPARISON A MONG S TANDARD U NCERTAINTIES

tainties, we performed the direct and indirect efficiency deter- [9] W. Cao, “Assessment of induction machine efficiency with comments
minations on a 3-kW three-phase two-pole induction motor, on new standard IEC 60034-2-1,” in Proc. 18th Int. Conf. Elect.
Mach. (ICEM), Sep. 2008, pp. 1–6.
by implementing the law of propagation of uncertainty [5], [10] W. Cao, “Comparison of IEEE 112 and new IEC standard 60034-2-1,”
starting from the instrumentation accuracies required by [4]. in Proc. Int. Conf. Elect. Mach. Syst. (ICEMS), Oct. 2008, pp. 259–264.
The obtained results showed the same order of magnitude. [11] E. B. Agamloh, “A comparison of direct and indirect measurement of
induction motor efficiency,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Electr. Mach. Drives
The direct determination of efficiency should be adopted for Conf. (IEMDC), May 2009, pp. 36–42.
all induction motor sizes, because it is easier to implement [12] H. Zhang, P. Zanchetta, C. Gerada, K. Bradley, and J. Liu, “Performance
and it has a good accuracy; in fact, because the accuracy of evaluation of induction motor efficiency and in-service losses measure-
ment using standard test methods,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Electr. Mach.
the direct method is appreciably influenced by the torque and Drives Conf. (IEMDC), May 2011, pp. 913–917.
rotational speed accuracies, it can take advantage from the [13] M. Andriollo, M. De Bortoli, and A. Tortella, “Procedures for the
increasing performance of torque transducers (for example, additional losses assessment and analysis in high-efficiency induction
machines,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Clean Elect. Power (ICCEP), Jun. 2011,
the Magtrol TM series) that are today available on the market, pp. 389–394.
with rated torques in the range 0.1–10 000 Nm and accuracy [14] A. Boglietti, A. Cavagnino, and S. Vaschetto, “Induction motor EU
class <0.15% and rated speeds at least 5000 r/min. Thus, the standards for efficiency evaluation: The scenario after IEC 60034-2-1,”
in Proc. 37th Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. (IECON), Nov. 2011,
observations we propose for the 3-kW motor can be extended pp. 2786–2791.
to higher size induction motors. [15] C. P. Salomon et al., “Induction motor efficiency evaluation using a
Moreover, these results can also aid in the definition of new concept of stator resistance,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 64,
no. 11, pp. 2908–2917, Nov. 2015.
future requirements for the IEC 60034-2-1, from a measure-
[16] B. Szabados and A. Mihalcea, “Design and implementation of a
ment point of view. It is our opinion that the IEC 60034-2-1 calorimetric measurement facility for determining losses in electrical
should be improved by introducing a quantitative analysis machines,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 51, no. 5, pp. 902–907,
of the accuracy, besides the generic observations reported in Oct. 2002.
[17] W. Cao, K. J. Bradley, and A. Ferrah, “Development of a high-precision
Section 5.2 and 5.3, because this is the only way in which calorimeter for measuring power loss in electrical machines,” IEEE
a quantitative classification of the different testing methods Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 570–577, Mar. 2009.
could be correctly carried out. [18] A. Boglietti, A. Cavagnino, M. Lazzari, and M. Pastorelli, “International
standards for the induction motor efficiency evaluation: A critical
analysis of the stray-load loss determination,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,
R EFERENCES vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 1294–1301, Sep./Oct. 2004.
[19] S. Karrer, “Measurement and simulation of induction motor character-
[1] P. Waide and C. U. Brunner, “Energy-efficiency policy oppor- istics,” Measurement, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 134–140, Jul./Sep. 1989.
tunities for electric motor-driven systems,” in Proc. Int. Energy [20] G. Bucci, C. Landi, and S. Nuccio, “Experimental comparison between
Agency (OECD/IEA), 2011. [Online]. Available: http://www.iea.org/ direct and indirect measurement techniques for the characterization of
[2] Implementing Directive 2005/32/EC of the European Parliament and of linear induction motors,” Measurement, vol. 21, nos. 1–2, pp. 47–56,
the Council With Regard to Ecodesign Requirements for Electric Motors, May/Jun. 1997.
document 640/2009, Commission Regulation (EC), Jul. 2009. [21] Z. Lazarevic, R. Radosavljevic, and P. Osmokrovic, “A novel approach
[3] Rotating Electrical Machines—Part 30-1: Efficiency Classes of Line for temperature estimation in squirrel-cage induction motor without
Operated AC Motors (IE Code), document IEC 60034-30-1 ed1.0, sensors,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 753–757,
Mar. 2014. Jun. 1999.
[4] Rotating Electrical Machines—Part 2-1: Standard Methods for Deter- [22] E. B. Agamloh, “The repeatability of IEEE standard 112B induc-
mining Losses and Efficiency From Tests (Excluding Machines for tion motor efficiency tests,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Electr. Mach. Drives
Traction Vehicles), document IEC 60034-2-1 ed1.0, Feb. 2011. Conf. (IEMDC), May 2009, pp. 1119–1126.
[5] Evaluation of Measurement Data—Guide to the Expression of Uncer- [23] A. G. Siraki, P. Pillay, and P. Angers, “Full load efficiency estimation
tainty in Measurement GUM, document BIPM JCGM 100:2008, 2008. of refurbished induction machines from no-load testing,” IEEE Trans.
[6] A. I. de Almeida, F. J. T. E. Ferreira, J. F. Busch, and P. Angers, Energy Convers., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 317–326, Jun. 2013.
“Comparative analysis of IEEE 112-B and IEC 34-2 efficiency testing [24] E. B. Agamloh and A. S. Nagorny, “An overview of efficiency and
standards using stray load losses in low-voltage three-phase, cage loss characterization of fractional horsepower motors,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
induction motors,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 608–614, Electron., vol. 60, no. 8, pp. 3072–3080, Aug. 2013.
Mar./Apr. 2002. [25] S. Santos, P. R. V. Felipe, J. R. G. Sarduy, N. A. Lemozy, A. Jurado,
[7] A. Boglietli, A. Cavagnino, M. Lazzari, and M. Pastorelli, “Induction and E. C. Quispe, “Procedure for determining induction motor efficiency
motor efficiency measurements in accordance to IEEE 112-B, IEC 34-2 working under distorted grid voltages,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.,
and JEC 37 international standards,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Electr. Mach. vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 331–339, Mar. 2015.
Drives Conf. (IEMDC), vol. 3. Jun. 2003, pp. 1599–1605. [26] A. Ferrero and S. Salicone, “Measurement uncertainty,” IEEE Instrum.
[8] W. Cao, K. J. Bradley, H. Zhang, and I. French, “Experimental uncer- Meas. Mag., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 44–51, Jun. 2006.
tainty in estimation of the losses and efficiency of induction motors,” in [27] Direct Acting Indicating Analogue Electrical Measuring Instruments
Proc. IEEE Ind. Appl. Conf. 41st IAS Annu. Meeting. Conf. Rec., vol. 1. and Their Accessories—Part 1: Definitions and General Requirements
Oct. 2006, pp. 441–447. Common to All Parts, document IEC EN 60051-1, Dec. 1997.

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2716 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 65, NO. 12, DECEMBER 2016

[28] Rotating Electrical Machines—Part 1: Rating and Performance, Edoardo Fiorucci (S’02–M’04–SM’11) received
Edition 12.0V, document IEC 60034-1, Feb. 2010. the Ph.D. degree in electrical and information engi-
[29] Instrument Transformers—Part 1: Current Transformers, neering from the University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila,
document EN 60044-1, Dec. 1996. Italy, in 2004.
[30] Yokogawa. (2013). Power Analyzer Accuracy and Basic Uncertainty He is currently an Associate Professor of Electri-
Calculator R511.xls. [Online]. Available: http://tmi.yokogawa.com/ cal Measurement with the University of L’Aquila.
He has authored over 100 scientific papers in his
Giovanni Bucci (M’93) received the Degree in elec- research fields. His current research interests include
trical engineering from the University of L’Aquila, power measurements, testing of electrical machines
L’Aquila, Italy, in 1985. and power systems, pc-based instrumentation, mea-
He was a Designer of Automatic Test Equipment surement systems for power quality evaluation, and
with Selenia Spazio until 1989. He has authored smart web sensors for distributed measurement applications. He is currently an
over 180 scienti?c papers in his research ?elds. Associate Editor of the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON I NSTRUMENTATION AND
His current research interests include smart sen- M EASUREMENT.
sors, multiprocessor-based measuring systems, digi-
tal measurement stations operating in real-time, and
power measurements.

Fabrizio Ciancetta (M’03) was born in Pescara,

Italy, in 1977. He received the M.S. degree in elec-
tronic engineering and the Ph.D. degree in electrical
and information engineering from the University Antonio Ometto was born in Rieti, Italy, in 1958.
of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy, in 2003 and 2009, He received the Degree in electrical engineering
respectively. from the University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy, in
He was with the Department of Electrical Engi- 1986.
neering, University of L’Aquila in 2003, where he He is currently an Associate Professor with the
was involved in the development of digital and University of L’Aquila, where he is involved in
distributed measurement systems. Since 2009, he teaching courses on electrical machines and power
has been holding a post-doctoral position with the electronics. He has authored over 60 technical papers
University of L’Aquila. He has authored about 60 journal and conference in his research fields. His current research interests
papers in his research fields. His current research and technical interests include modeling, fault diagnosis, and control of
include cover several aspects related to distributed measurement systems, rotating and linear electrical machines and power
signal processing, and multilevel inverters. converters for electrical drives.

Authorized licensed use limited to: VEL TECH MULTI TECH Dr RR Dr SR ENGG. COLLEGE. Downloaded on April 03,2024 at 09:55:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.