PAPER NO: TP09-18

CATEGORY: FANS

COOLING TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN MOTOR

TECHNOLOGY ALLOW DIRECT DRIVE OF
LOW SPEED COOLING TOWER FANS
ROBBIE MCELVEEN
BILL MARTIN
RYAN SMITH
BALDOR ELECTRIC

The studies and conclusions reported in this paper are the results of the author’s own work. CTI has not investigated, and CTI
expressly disclaims any duty to investigate, any product, service process, procedure, design, or the like that may be described
herein. The appearance of any technical data, editorial material, or advertisement in this publication does not constitute
endorsement, warranty, or guarantee by CTI of any product, service process, procedure, design, or the like. CTI does not
warranty that the information in this publication is free of errors, and CTI does not necessarily agree with any statement or opinion
in this publication. The user assumes the entire risk of the use of any information in this publication. Copyright 2009. All rights
reserved. This paper has been reviewed by members of the Cooling Technology Institute and approved as a valuable contribution
to cooling tower literature; and presented by the author at the Annual Conference of CTI.

Presented at the 2009 Cooling Technology Institute Annual Conference

San Antonio, TX - February 8-12, 2009

1
Abstract - Improved reliability of cooling tower fan line” starts drawing high amps and placing unnecessary
drives is now possible due to new advancements in strain on the mechanical components of the system [2].
motor technology. This paper discusses the While providing some flexibility in the tower control
development of low speed, permanent magnet logic, two speed motors are not optimal when it comes
motors and how they can be used in direct-drive to maximizing energy savings during times of reduced
applications to eliminate the gearbox, NEMA motor, heat load.
driveshaft, and disc couplings from cooling tower
The use of variable frequency drives (VFDs) has
designs. A case study is presented where a tower
become much more commonplace in recent years. Data
was refurbished using a direct-drive motor designed
from a noted cooling tower manufacturer indicates that
to fit the exact footprint and height of the existing
VFDs are being installed in the majority of all new
gearbox. Design considerations, performance data,
towers being constructed. Additionally, most towers
maintenance, and efficiency comparisons will be
being upgraded or refurbished are also being equipped
discussed.
with VFDs. These drives have the advantage of a soft
mechanical start, no large starting current draw, and the
I. INTRODUCTION ability to run the fan at any desired speed from zero to
the maximum design speed for the application [3]. The
The most common solution for driving the fan in energy savings realized by using a VFD are well
current cooling tower designs utilizes an induction recognized and documented, so no further discussion
motor, driveshaft, disc coupling, and gearbox will be introduced here [4]. Several factors that must
arrangement, as shown in Figure 1. Few changes to this be considered when applying a VFD are any critical
design have been made in the last twenty years. speeds of the mechanical system, the cooling ability of
the induction motor at low speed, and the proper
lubrication of the gearbox at slow speeds. For practical
purposes, the fan is generally not run at speeds below
30% of the nominal design speed.
Historically, the mechanical components of the fan
drive system, specifically the right angle gearbox, have
been the largest maintenance issue for cooling tower
installations [5]. Gearbox failures, oil leaks, oil
contamination, failed drive shafts, misaligned drive
shafts and excessive vibration are all significant
problems related to this type of fan drive system [6],
[7].

In this paper, recent developments in motor technology

are presented. It is demonstrated how these innovative
designs can be used to improve the reliability and
Figure 1: Typical Fan Drive Arrangement reduce maintenance associated with today’s cooling
tower installations. The design and installation of a 208
The motor used is normally a standard NEMA rpm, 50 horsepower PM motor for a retrofit application
induction motor. For reduced energy consumption, two is discussed in detail. The possibility of improved
speed motors have been applied for use when full fan efficiency and lower energy consumption with the
speed is not required due to decreased heat load. As the proposed solution is discussed.
horsepower required to drive the fan varies as the cube
of the fan speed, it is advantageous to reduce the fan II. IMPROVEMENTS IN MOTOR
speed when possible. When the heat load decreases TECHNOLOGY
enough, the drive motor can be run at half speed. This
lowers the horsepower required to only 12.5% of the Increased efficiency and improved power density are
rated value [1]. However, when any air flow even being demanded in the motor industry. To achieve
slightly above that provided by half speed operation is these goals, along with lower noise and variable speed
required, a two speed motor must be run at rated operating capability, other technologies beyond simple
horsepower as there is no other speed available. Two induction motors should be considered. Permanent
speed motors do provide some energy savings, but still magnet (PM) motors have long been recognized as
must be cycled on and off to maintain the desired water providing higher efficiencies than comparable induction
temperature. This cycling involves many “across the motors. However, limitations in terms of motor

2
control, as well as magnet material performance and
cost, have severely restricted their use. Due to dramatic
improvements in magnetic and thermal properties of
PM materials over the past 20 years, synchronous PM
motors now represent viable alternatives. Figures 2 & 3
show typical efficiencies and power factors for various
motor types [8].

Energy Efficient Premium Efficiency® PM

98

97

96
% EFFICIENCY

95

94 Figure 4 – Laminated Frame Construction

93
Another advantage of this construction is that the air
used to cool the motor is in direct contact with the
92
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
electrical steel. There is no thermal resistance path as
% LOAD that which exists in a traditional cast iron frame with
contact to the stator lams. The heat transfer mechanism
in a cast iron frame motor is highly dependent upon the
Figure 2 - Typical Partial Load Efficiencies of
stator to frame fit. Laminated frame construction
75 HP, TEFC, 1800 RPM Motors
eliminates this issue.
Energy Efficient Premium Efficiency® PM In recent years, industry drivers have forced the
development of an optimized, finned, laminated motor
95
design. To improve the cooling and increase power
90 density, fins have been added to the exterior of the
85 stator laminations. The addition of the optimized
% POWER FACTOR

80 cooling fins increases the surface area available for heat

dissipation. The result is improved heat transfer and a
75
power increase of 20-25% is typical for a given
70 lamination diameter and core length. Figure 5 shows
65 the increased surface area achieved by including these
60 cooling fins.
55
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
% LOAD

Figure 3 - Typical Partial Load Power Factors of

75HP, TEFC, 1800 RPM Motors

Another innovation which merits discussion is the

laminated frame motor technology used in this design.
Laminated frame motors consist of a stack of
laminations permanently riveted under controlled Figure 5 – Finned vs. Non-finned lamination
pressure. The cast iron outer frame is eliminated,
allowing more room for active (torque producing) It is this improved cooling method, along with the
magnetic material. Figure 4 below is a representation higher efficiency and power factor achieved with the
showing how the stator frame is constructed. PM technology that allows for increased power density
in these motor designs. Power density is the key for
being able to match the height restriction of the existing

3
gearbox. For comparison, a paper study was performed
to determine the approximate sizes and weights of
various motor types for use in this application. The
results are shown in Table 1 below. The rating is 50
horsepower at 208 rpm. Each motor was designed for
the same temperature rise.

Height Width Width Wt.

Motor Type
(in.) (in.) (in.) (lbs.)
Cast Iron Frame
41 28 28 3950
Induction
Finned,
Laminated 28 22 22 2320
Frame Induction
Finned, Figure 6 – Original Installation
Laminated 22 22 22 1670
Frame PM
Table 1 – Motor Size Comparisons

III. CASE STUDY

The case study involves the retrofit of an existing
cooling tower constructed in 1986 at Clemson
University in South Carolina. The tower information is
as follows:

Fan Diameter: 18’-0"

Flow 4,250 gallons per minute (GPM)

Rates: per cell - 8,500 GPM total

Motor Information: Frame – 326T Figure 7 – PM Motor Installed in Place

HP – 50/12.5 of Gearbox & Driveshaft
Speed – 1765/885 rpm
Prior to the installation, the current being drawn by the
Gearbox: Size – 155, Ratio – 8.5:1 two original induction motors was measured with the
fans running at full speed. An ammeter was used and
As shown in the above data, this tower is comprised of the current was measured to be forty seven (47) amps,
two identical cells. For this study, one cell was rms on both induction motors. As the induction motors
retrofitted with the new slow speed PM motor and VFD are identical, this is a good indication that both cells
while the other was left intact as originally constructed. were operating under the same load conditions. After
This allows for a direct comparison of the two fan drive the PM motor and VFD installation was complete, the
solutions. Figure 6 below shows Cell #1 in the original current was again re-checked and found to be only forty
configuration, while Figure 7 shows the PM motor one (41) amps for the PM motor. The induction motor
installed in place of the gearbox in Cell #2. on the original, identical, tower was still drawing forty
seven (47) amps.

A power meter was used to measure the input power to

both solutions. The fans were running at the same
speed. Data was taken at both the input and output of
the drive to allow for a direct comparison of the
induction motor / gearbox combination to the PM
motor. The results of the measurements are shown in
Table 2 below.

4
 Volts, Amps, Input Power
PM Motor/Drive Induction Motor (2-SPEED)/Gearbox
Location mean rms kW Factor (%)
Input to 40.00
477 46.7 31.5 81.7 38.1
Induction 35.00
33.6
Input to
477 44.5 28.5 77.6 30.00

VFD, PM

Input Power (kW)

25.00
Input to
459 40.9 28.0 86.1 20.00
PM
15.00

Table 2 – Power Consumption Comparison, 10.00

Original blade pitch, manufacturer data 5.00

5.6
4.9
0.00
From this data, it was determined that both cells were 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%
Percent Speed
90.00% 100.00% 110.00%

running at less than full load and that the load should be
increased on each cell. To this end, the pitch of the Figure 8 – Input Power vs. Speed, 12° blade
blades on each fan was increased to 12°. This change pitch
of pitch caused the fans to draw more air, thus
increasing the load on each motor. Further, the As shown in Tables 2-4, the PM motor solution requires
increased air flow improved the effectiveness of the less input power for each load point (blade pitch).
overall tower performance. Again, power Figure 8 shows the total input power in kilowatts for
measurements were made and a third party testing each solution over a range of operating speeds from 50-
service was engaged to verify the manufacturer’s 100%. Again, the PM motor has an advantage over the
results. The data is shown in Tables 3 & 4 below. induction motor / gearbox solution. Using an average
price of $.08/kWh, the annual cost savings for various
Location Volts, Amps, Input kW applications and duty cycles are shown in Table 5. This
mean rms table does not account for the additional savings
Input to achieved by using a VFD and having the ability to run
477 54.8 38.1
Induction at speeds between 50% and 100% of rated.
Input to
477 49.8 33.6
VFD, PM Annual Savings
(%High Speed/%Low Speed)
Table 3 – Power Consumption Comparison, 12° Application Daily
blade pitch, manufacturer data 100 / 0 75 / 25 50 / 50
Use
Power Plant 24 hrs. $3154 $2488 $1822
Location Volts, mean Amps, rms Input kW Hospital 18 hrs. $2365 $1866 $1367
Input to University 12 hrs. $1577 $1244 $911
478 54.3 37.9
Induction
Input to Table 5 – Annual Energy Savings Based on
477 49.8 33.0 Various Duty Cycles
VFD, PM
Table 4 – Power Consumption Comparison, 12° IV. ELECTRICAL CONSIDERATIONS
blade pitch, testing service data [9]
PM Control Algorithm
For the final blade pitch, 4.5 kW less power
In addition to the PM motor design features already
consumption was observed on the cell with the PM
detailed, another challenge of this application was that
motor installed. In order to document the savings
the PM motor had to be run sensorless. There was no
realized at various speeds on this application, input
room to install a speed feedback device, such as an
power was recorded at intermediate speeds for the PM
encoder or resolver, and still meet the height restriction
motor cell. Figure 8 below shows the actual measured
of the existing gearbox. In this harsh environment, a
input power for the induction motor / gearbox solution
feedback device would be a liability as far as reliability
and the PM motor solution at various speeds.
is concerned. Therefore, a sensorless PM control
scheme was developed to satisfy the requirements of
this application. Several things had to be considered
when forming this algorithm. One challenge was the
inertia of the fan. This was taken into account to
prevent the motor from falling out of synchronism

5
when starting and changing speeds. Figure 9 is a This trickle current also acts as an internal space heater
portion of a typical start from rest. Note the smooth by raising the winding temperature, preventing
acceleration and low starting current required. A condensation when the motor is not running.
typical 480 volt induction motor started across the line
would draw 347 amps [10], compared to 12 amps for Insulation System
this PM design started on the VFD. Inside the fan stack is an extremely humid environment.
Therefore, the insulation system on the stator windings
Motor Voltage (Volts) Motor Speed (RPM) Motor Current (Amps) must be robust and highly moisture resistant. To this
90 60
end, an insulation system derived from a system
80 originally developed for use by the US Navy was
Voltage (volts) / Current (amps)

50
70 employed. This system utilizes an epoxy compound
60 40 applied via a vacuum pressure impregnation (VPI)

Speed (rpm)
50
system. The VPI system is widely recognized as a
40
30
superior insulation system for harsh applications such
as this. This particular system has been successfully
30 20
employed on “open” motors in tough applications such
20
10
as oil platforms operating in the North Sea.
10

0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
0
V. MECHANICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Time (ms)

Figure 9 – Motor Starting Performance Shaft Seal

Due to the harsh environment inherent with a cooling
Improved Process Control tower application, the motor’s drive end is protected by
As mentioned earlier, the addition of the VFD allows a metallic, non-contacting, non-wearing, permanent
the user to more accurately and efficiently control the compound labyrinth shaft seal that incorporates a vapor
process. Figure 10 shows how the motor speed is blocking ring prevent an ingress of moisture. This seal
changed automatically with control logic as the heat has been proven to exclude all types of bearing
demand on the system changes with time. contamination and meets the requirements of the IEEE-
841 motor specification for severe duty applications.
Current Ambient Speed This type of seal has been successfully used in cooling
45 250.00 tower gearboxes for many years [11].
40
Current (amps) / Ambient Air

35
200.00
Maintenance
Another consideration is overall system maintenance.
Temperature (°C)

30
Speed (rpm)

150.00
25 For motor / gearbox combination drives, the lubrication
20
100.00
interval is determined by the high speed gear set. The
15 recommended lubrication interval for this type of gear
10
50.00
is typically 2500 hours or six months, whichever comes
5
first. In addition, gear manufacturers recommend a
0 0.00
daily visual inspection for oil leaks, unusual noises, or
9:36 12:00 14:24 16:48 19:12 21:36 0:00 2:24
vibrations. As these units are installed in areas which
TIme
are not readily accessible or frequented, this is an
unreasonable expectation and burden on maintenance
Figure 10 – Motor Speed Variation with
personnel. When a gear is to be idle for more than a
Changing Heat Load
week, it should be run periodically to keep the internal
components lubricated because they are highly
Braking and Condensation Control susceptible to attacks by rust and corrosion. When
The use of a VFD also provides the opportunity to offer being stored for an extended period, it is recommended
some additional features that across the line systems do that the gearboxes be completely filled with oil and
not. The drive may be configured to apply a trickle then drained to the proper level prior to resumed
current to the motor windings to act as a brake during operation. Because the high speed input has been
down time. This prevents the fan from free wheeling eliminated with the slow speed PM motor design, the
due to nominal winds or adjacent cooling tower lubrication cycle can now be extended up to two years.
turbulence. However, a mechanical locking mechanism The PM motor need not be inspected daily for oil leaks,
should be using during any maintenance procedures. as the motor contains no oil. As mentioned previously,

6
the VFD can provide a trickle current to heat the stator the biggest influence on the noise level of the tower
windings to a temperature slightly above ambient to itself.
prevent moisture from forming inside the motor.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Vibration
With the elimination of the high speed input to the Cooling tower fan drives have changed very little over
gearbox, the system dynamics from a vibration the past two decades. Failures of the gearbox,
standpoint have been simplified. There are no longer driveshaft, or disc couplings have been the biggest
any resonance issues with the driveshaft. The reliability issue facing tower manufacturers and end
maximum rotational excitation is now limited to the users. Increasing energy costs have placed a premium
rotational speed of the fan. The number of bearings in on power consumption for all motors and applications.
the drive system has been reduced from six to two for a
single reduction gearbox and from eight to two for a Many of the problems associated with cooling tower
double reduction gearbox. This reduces the number of maintenance and reliability are solved with the PM
forcing frequencies present in the system. motor design. The relatively high speed (typically 1750
rpm) induction motor has been eliminated. The motor
Noise Level itself has not historically been a problem, but the
Many cooling towers are in locations where airborne associated resonances and potential vibration concerns
noise can be an issue, such as hospitals and universities. have been an issue. The driveshaft and associated disc
To this end, a third party testing company was engaged couplings have been removed, thus eliminating
to conduct comparative sound tests between the two problems associated with misalignment, improper
cells. Data was taken at both high speed and low speed lubrication, natural frequencies, or delaminating of the
for both cells. The induction motor cell was designated driveshaft itself [12]. The right angle spiral-beveled
as Cell #1 while the PM motor cell was designated as gearbox has been removed. Difficult maintenance
Cell #2. Sound level measurements were taken on Cell associated with changing the oil, proper oil fill levels,
#1 while Cell #2 was turned off. There were twelve 30- contamination of the oil, oil leaks, and gearbox failures
second readings taken at high speed and twelve 30- is no longer a concern.
second readings taken at low speed around the
perimeter of the tower and the fan motor. As there was New motor technology now provides an alternative
no motor outside of the fan stack on Cell #2, only nine solution, the direct drive of cooling tower fans. PM
readings were taken on Cell #2 with Cell #1 turned off. motor technology combined with the finned, laminated
A single point measurement was taken where the old frame design now allows the construction of low speed,
induction motor was mounted on Cell #2 in order to compact motors for use in place of the existing gearbox.
have some reference to Cell #1. It was not possible to Data obtained to date indicates this solution will
turn off the water flow for either cell at any time so eliminate the problems associated with the right angle
there was a significant amount of background noise, but gearbox and drive shaft design. By eliminating the
as this condition was the same for both cells, it should gearbox, which is a significant source of loss in the
not affect the comparative data [9]. Average A- system, improved system efficiencies can be realized.
weighted sound pressure results are shown in Table 6
for both high speed and low speed operation. VII. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A-weighted Average The authors of this paper extend their thanks to

Cell High Speed Low Speed Clemson University and Tower Engineering, Inc. for
Induction 82.3 dBA 74.4 dBA their contributions and participation in the project.
PM 77.7 dBA 69.0 dBA
VIII. REFERENCES
Table 6 – Sound Pressure Data
[1] Benjamin Cohen, “Variable Frequency Drives:
At high speed, the PM motor cell was 4.6 dBA lower Operation and Application with Evaporative
than the induction motor cell. For low speed operation, Cooling Equipment”, Cooling Technology
the PM motor cell was 5.4 dBA lower. Although there Institute Paper No. TP07-22, 2007
may be some slight differences in the background noise
for each cell, these likely do not account for all of the [2] William F. Immell, “Variable Speed Fan Drives
noise level reduction realized with the PM motor for Cooling Towers”, Cooling Technology
solution. The removal of the high speed induction Institute Paper No. TP96-03. 1996
motor from the outside of the fan stack appears to have

7
[3] Rick Foree, “Cooling Towers and VFDs”,
Cooling Technology Institute Paper No. TP01-
07, 2001

[4] M.P. Cassidy and J.F. Stack, “Applying

Adjustable Speed AC Drives to Cooling Tower
Fans,” PPIC, 1988

[5] Jim Horne, “How to Address Your Cooling

System Woes,” PTOnline, 2008

[6] Dave Gallagher, “Condition Monitoring of

Cooling Tower Fans”, Reliability Direct

[7] Philadelphia Gear, “The Cooling Tower Gear

Drive Dilemma: Why Applying Commodity
Products to an Engineered Solution Can Cause
Premature Failure”

[8] Steve Evon, Robbie McElveen and Michael J.

Melfi, “Permanent Magnet Motors for Power
Density and Energy Savings in Industrial
Applications”, PPIC 2008

[9] Dustin Warrington, “Clean Air Engineering

Report: Clemson East Chiller Plant”, July 2008

[10] NEMA MG 1-2006, Motors and Generators

[11] Inpro/Seal Company, “An Introduction to

Bearing Isolators”, March 2005

[12] Robert Poling, “Natural Frequency

Characteristics of Drive Shafts”, Cooling
Technology Institute Paper No. TP05-04, 2005