INTRODUCTION TO IEEE 841-2001,
IEEE STANDARD FOR PETROLEUM AND CHEMICAL INDUSTRY –
SEVERE DUTY TOTALLY ENCLOSED FAN-COOLED (TEFC) SQUIRREL
CAGE INDUCTION MOTORS – UP TO AND INCLUDING 370 KW (500 HP)
Copyright Material IEEE
Paper No. PCIC 2001-4
Coordinating Authors: Richard L. Doughty
Fellow, IEEE
DuPont (Retired)
31 Old Oak Road
Newark, DE 19711
USA
Working Group Members: J. K. Armintor, A. H. Bonnett, R. L. Doughty, K. Dunn, T. Griffith, W. F. Noel, D. C. Rains,
F. Stack, A. C. Varner, C. J. Fredericks, J. Howard, D. A. Pace, J. Rimer, C. A. Straub, M. Costello, N. K. Ghai, W.
C. Jordan, J. A. Quinn, D. L. Rosen, D. Turney
Abstract – IEEE 841-1994, IEEE Standard for Petroleum
and Chemical Industry Severe Duty Totally Enclosed Fan-
Cooled (TEFC) Squirrel-Cage Induction Motors - Up to and
Including 500 hp, issued in 1994, has been updated and
improved. The scope includes three-phase severe duty
TEFC squirrel-cage induction motors with antifriction
bearings in sizes up to and including 370 kW (500 hp) and
motor rated voltages of 200 V, 230 V, 460 V, 575 V, 2300 V
and 4000 V at 60 Hertz. Changes to the standard are
reviewed in detail. Requirements are identified that improve
motor reliability and increase motor life.
Index Terms – Induction Motor, TEFC Motor, Severe Duty
Motor, Petrochemical Industry Motor, Motor Reliability
I. HISTORY OF DEVELOPMENT
Due to the mutual effort of users and motor manufacturers,
IEEE 841-1986, Recommended Practice for Chemical
Industry Severe Duty Squirrel-Cage Induction Motors - 600 V
and Below (RP841) [1], was completed in September 1985.
RP841 recognized and addressed the special motor
requirements of the continuous-process petrochemical
industry. These requirements included the need for a
reliable motor to reduce costly downtime, a corrosion
resistant motor enclosure, low noise levels, high efficiency
and interchangeability [2]. After adoption of the standard,
motor suppliers began manufacturing motors meeting the
requirements as indicated by the displayed RP841 name-
plate.
In 1990 the P841 Working Group was re-established to
review and update RP841. One of the first tasks of the P841
Working Group was to review the use of RP841 by industry
1
Austin H. Bonnett
Fellow, IEEE
Emerson Electric (Retired)
14546 Gatemont Dr.
Chesterfield, MO 63017
USA
and determine what changes and additional improvements
should be incorporated into the document. Based upon that
review, the P841 Working Group made the decision to
expand the scope of RP841 to include TEFC designs up
through 500 horsepower with anti-friction bearings. Both low
voltage (up to 600 V) random wound and medium voltage
form wound insulation systems were included. Excluded
from the scope were motors with sleeve bearings and
additional specific features required for Division 1 explosion-
proof motors.
Late in the review cycle, the P841 Working Group also
decided to change from a Recommended Practice into a
Standard. A new Project Authorization Request (PAR) was
submitted to the IEEE Standards Board and was approved in
the spring off 1993. RP841 was converted into a standard
with the title: IEEE 841 Standard for Petroleum and
Chemical Industry Severe Duty Totally Enclosed Fan-Cooled
(TEFC) Squirrel-Cage Induction Motors - Up to and Including
500 hp [3]. The title included "Totally Enclosed Fan Cooled"
since that was the predominant enclosure type, even though
there was provision for use of TENV enclosures in small
frame sizes. Possible concern about the overlap with API
541 [4] in the range from 250 to 500 horsepower was largely
deflected by limiting the new standard to motors with anti-
friction bearings. Users desiring a highly reliable motor for a
critical process application would typically select sleeve
bearings unless the application requirements precluded
their use. The user had the option of using either API 541 or
IEEE 841 in the event that antifriction bearings were
specified for motors up to 500 horsepower. The Standard
was successfully balloted, and was approved for issue in
March 1994.
Response of industry to the newly issued IEEE 841
Standard was excellent. Motor manufacturers began
stocking motors that complied with the requirements of the
standard. Demand for IEEE 841motors began to build in the
petrochemical, pulp & paper and automotive industries.
The P841 Working Group was again re-established in
September 1997 to review and update the standard as
required by the IEEE Standards Board. A liaison was formed
between the P841 Working Group and the IAS Pulp & Paper
Industry Committee to insure that the standard was flexible
enough to accommodate the needs of their industry.
Working Group activity was completed and the standard was
balloted and approved by the IEEE-SA Standards Board on
March 17, 2001.
II. PURPOSE OF IEEE 841 STANDARD
The P841 Working Group identified the following purposes
for the IEEE 841 Standard:
1) Eliminate the need for users to purchase severe duty
NEMA frame TEFC motors using internal company
specifications.
2) Standardize on technical requirements desired by most
users so that manufacturers can produce lower cost
standardized designs that can be stocked and made
readily available for routine purchases and emergency
situations. Examples are the requirement for cast iron
frames, bearing caps, and stainless steel nameplates.
3) Introduce technical requirements such as reduced
vibration, reduced shaft run-out, maximum bearing
temperature rise, and improved shaft seals to
significantly reduce bearing failures, the leading cause
of NEMA frame motor failures.
4) Specify additional requirements to improve reliability
and reduce operating cost such as increased terminal
box size, component corrosion resistance, foot flatness
requirements, and minimum motor efficiency levels.
III. CHANGES TO IEEE STANDARD 841-1994
The following significant changes have been made to the
IEEE 841 Standard in the latest edition:
1) References to NEMA MG1 [5] have been updated to the
1998 edition.
2) All English units have been converted into metric units.
3) A provision was added in Section 4.5 to allow drain
fitting holes to be plugged during the motor enclosure
IP54 dust ingress test.
4) Section 5.4 (a) was modified to allow a motor lead wire
having a temperature rating more than 5°C below the
temperature rating of the insulation system (minimum
rating of 125°C) as long as the wire is separated from
the windings by a barrier or envelope of a material
compatible with the insulation system.
5) A new requirement was added in Section 5.4 (b) that the
completed, non-energized stator with leads, without end
2
bells or rotor, shall be capable of passing the
condensation test specified in Appendix 5:
The manufacturer shall perform the following test: Stator
shall be exposed for 168 hours in a 40 °C. closed
chamber, in which an open water vessel is maintained
at an elevated temperature, resulting in 100 percent
relative humidity plus condensation on stator windings.
Insulation resistance at end of test shall be not less than
5 megohm (measured with a 500 volt meg-ohmmeter at
1 minute), at or corrected to 40 ° C. It may be necessary
to provide some variation in water and air temperature to
maintain visible condensation.
6) The requirement in Section 6.1 (g) that “the insulation
system and leads be compatible with mineral oil” was
changed and relocated to Section 5.4 (a)(8) to read:
“The insulation system, including leads, shall be
compatible with mineral oil based lubricants.”
7) A note was added at the end of Section 5.4 to alert the
purchaser that standard and optional winding surge
withstand capabilities are defined in NEMA MG-1-1998,
Parts 30 and 31, respectively.
8) A note was added to Section 6.1 (c) to warn specifiers
that vertical motors purchased in combination with
pumps (vertical overhung and vertically suspended
types) specified in accordance with ANSI/API Standard
610 [6] may have more stringent thrust bearing loading
definition and life requirements than specified in IEEE
841.
9) The requirement was added to Section 6.1 (d) to
consider applicable thrust loading when calculating L-
10 life for vertical motors and horizontal motors mounted
in a vertical position.
10) A new criterion in Section 6.1 (e) requires that antifriction
bearings have a dN factor less than 300,000. The dN
factor is the product of bearing size (bore) in millimeters
and the rated speed in revolutions per minute.
11) The test to measure motor foot-flatness in Section 6.3
(d) references the improved measuring procedure
defined in NEMA MG-1-1998, Section 4.15.
12) Minimum terminal box volume requirements in Section
6.5 (a)(2), while unchanged, are now displayed in a
separate Table 1, rather than being defined as twice the
volume specified in NEMA MG 1.
13) For motors rated above 600 V, the allowable internal
temperature of the terminal box was increased from
75°C to 90°C to be consistent with the rated
temperature of the supply conductors as noted in
Section 6.5 (c).
14) A new requirement in Section 6.6 specifies corrosion-
resistant, replaceable automatic drainage fittings to be
installed in terminal boxes for voltages above 600 V or
for frame sizes exceeding 445T at 600 V.
15) Motor sound tests are now specified in Section 6.8 (a) to
be taken at rated voltage and frequency on sine wave
power.
16) Minimum efficiency levels for low voltage motors (600 V 17) Stainless steel nameplates are now required to be
class) up to 200 horsepower have been increased by stamped, embossed or etched as noted in Section 10.1.
one NEMA efficiency band above EPACT (Energy Policy 18) Section 12 on Data Exchange has been deleted and
Act of 1992) levels. A clarification has also been added replaced with the IEEE 841 Data Sheet developed by
in Section 8 that thrust bearing losses are not included Process Industry Practices (PIP), Construction Industry
in the efficiency determination. A comparison of the new Institute, University of Texas at Austin. The Data Sheet
IEEE 841minimum efficiency levels with EPACT, is shown in Fig. 1.
Consortium For Energy Efficiency (CEE), and design E
levels is shown in Table 1
TABLE 1
COMPARISON OF NOMINAL EFFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS

2-POLE 4-POLE 6-POLE

HP EPACT 841 CEE Design E EPACT 841 CEE Design E EPACT 841 CEE Design E

1.0 --- 77.0 --- --- 82.5 84.0 86.5 86.5 80.0 81.5 82.5 84.0

1.5 82.5 84.0 84.0 86.5 84.0 85.5 86.5 87.5 85.5 86.5 86.5 86.5

2.0 84.0 85.5 85.5 87.5 84.0 85.5 86.5 87.5 86.5 87.5 87.5 88.5

3.0 85.5 86.5 88.5 88.5 87.5 88.5 89.5 88.5 87.5 88.5 89.5 89.5

5.0 87.5 88.5 88.5 90.2 87.5 88.5 90.2 89.5 87.5 88.5 90.2 90.2

7.5 88.5 89.5 89.5 91.0 89.5 90.2 91.7 90.2 89.5 90.2 91.0 91.7

10.0 89.5 90.2 91.7 91.0 89.5 90.2 91.7 91.0 89.5 90.2 91.0 92.4

15.0 90.2 91.0 90.2 91.7 91.0 91.7 93.0 92.4 90.2 91.0 91.7 92.4

20.0 90.2 91.0 90.2 92.4 91.0 91.7 93.0 93.0 90.2 91.0 91.7 92.4

25.0 91.0 91.7 91.7 93.0 92.4 93.0 93.6 93.6 91.7 92.4 93.0 93.6

30.0 91.0 91.7 92.4 93.6 92.4 93.0 94.1 94.1 91.7 92.4 93.6 93.6

40.0 91.7 92.4 92.4 94.1 93.0 93.6 94.1 94.5 93.0 93.6 94.5 94.1

50.0 92.4 93.0 93.0 94.5 93.0 93.6 94.1 95.0 93.0 93.6 94.5 94.1

60.0 93.0 93.6 93.0 94.5 93.6 94.1 94.5 95.0 93.6 94.1 94.5 95.0

75.0 93.0 93.6 93.0 94.5 94.1 94.5 95.4 95.4 93.6 94.1 95.0 95.0

100.0 93.6 94.1 94.1 95.0 94.5 95.0 95.4 95.4 94.1 94.5 95.4 95.4

125.0 94.5 95.0 94.5 95.4 94.5 95.0 95.4 95.8 94.1 94.5 95.8 95.4

150.0 94.5 95.0 94.5 95.8 95.0 95.4 95.8 95.8 95.0 95.4 96.2 95.8

200.0 95.0 95.4 95.4 96.2 95.0 95.4 96.2 96.2 --- 95.4 --- ---

Note – Design E levels, although now obsolete, are also typical of what efficiencies can be obtained with Design A motors.

IV. REVIEW OF FEATURES THAT RESULT IN temperatures experienced by motors in petrochemical

IMPROVED RELIABILITY AND INCREASED plants.
MOTOR LIFE
B. Ratings
This section is dedicated to a review of major
requirements in the standard that result in improved A note recommends that users apply motors within their
reliability and increased motor life. An overview of rating based upon a 1.0 service factor, i.e. not extending
mechanical design features required by the standard is operation in the 1.15 service factor for normal use. This
shown in Table 2. practice provides for long term reliability and still allows for
short-term overload operation (but not more than 15%).
A. Service Conditions Continued operation above 1.0 service factor significantly

The minimum ambient temperature range for "Usual decreases motor life due to increased winding and bearing
Service Conditions" is -25 deg. C., closely reflecting actual temperature rise.

3
 Generally, the standard TEFC motor design has a degree
of protection of IP44. The first digit (4) indicates that the
machine enclosure prevents ingress of solid objects
exceeding 1 mm in diameter, and the second digit (4)
indicates that water splashing against the machine from any
direction shall have no harmful effect. The IEEE 841
specification requires improved protection of IP54 for all
machines and bearing protection of IP55 for frame sizes 320
and larger. Considering NEMA horsepower/frame
assignments, this requirement translates into IP55 bearing
protection for NEMA motors with frame sizes 324T/TS and
above. Protection for terminal boxes is also required to be
IP-55. The first digit (5) indicates that the machine is
protected against dust entry so that dust does not enter in
sufficient quantity to interfere with satisfactory operation of
the machine. The second digit (4) indicates that water
splashing against the machine from any direction shall have
no harmful effect. The second digit (5) indicates that water
projected by a nozzle against the machine from any direction
shall have no harmful effect. If a replaceable shaft seal is
used to achieve IP55 bearing protection, it is required to be

4
 PIP ELSMT01D
IEEE 841 Data Sheet for AC Squirrel Cage Induction Motors
370 kW (500HP) and Below

Client Engineering Org. Spec. No.

Project Title Location Date
Location Contract No. Equip. No.
Unit Specifier Name Tele. No.
P.O. No.

Data provided by: ¨ Buyer with Request for Quotes l Seller With Proposal ♦ Seller After Order

Site Conditions: Data Supplied By Manufacturer:

o Altitude _____________________Meters l Frame Size ________
o Ambient Temperature: Max _____________°C o Min l Full Load Speed _______________ RPM
________°C
o Area Class ___________ Div __________ Group l Full Load Current
________________
o Nonhazardous o Auto Ignition Temp u Locked Rotor Current @ Full Voltage
____________________°C
u Locked Rotor Current @ 90% Voltage
Data Supplied By User: l Allowable Stall Tme @ Full Volt. _______ Sec.
o Power kW l Allowable Stall Time @ 90% Volt. ______ Sec.
HP ___________________________________________________
o Synchronous Speed ____________________________________ l Sound Power Level (No Load): 90 dBA (Max)
o Voltage _____________________________________________ l Insulation System:
o Phase: 3 Class F Minimum
o Frequency: 60 Hz Random /Form Wound
o Insul. System: Random/Form Wound (See Note Below) _________ l Temperature Rise at Rated Load: °C Max.
o Enclosure: TEFC/TENV ________________________________ l Service Factor (See Note Below)
o Coupled Drive: Direct/Belt_______________________________ l Motor Terminal Leads
o Mounting Position: Horizontal/Vertical ____________________
o Shaft Up or Down (Vertical Mtg. Only) Bearing Information:
o Service Factor: (See Note Below) __________________________ l Type
o Motor Thrust Loads ___________________________________ l Lubrication Method
o Special Load Conditions_________________________________ u Recommended Lubricant
o Space Heaters: ________________________________________ l Temp. Rise @ Full Load
o Space Heater Maximum Surface Temperature u Manufacturer & Number
°C
o Space Heater Leads Location _____________________________ ODE _______________ DE
o Rotation Direction ____________________________________ l Motor Guaranteed Min. Eff @ Full Load
o Starting Method: ______________________________________ l Terminal Box(es) Materials of Construction
o Main Terminal Box Location
_____________________________________________
l Fan Material
o Other Data: (Such as Bearing Type, Lubrication Method, Motor l Space Heater Term. Box Location
Mounting Information, l Space Heater Max. Sheath Temperature
etc.)______________________________________
_______________________________________________________ l Other Data
_____

5
 _______________________________________________________
_____
_______________________________________________________
_____
_______________________________________________________
_____
_______________________________________________________
_____
Notes:
1) Motor should be applied within its rating based on service factor of
1.0.
2) Motor insulation system:
- Random wound 600 V class for kW (hp) < 190 (250)
- Random/form wound 600 V class for kW (hp) > 150 (200)
- Form wound 2300 V and 4000 V
Fig. 1 – IEEE 841 Motor Data Sheet
the non-contact or non-contacting-while-rotating type with a
minimum expected seal life of 5 years under usual service
conditions. The requirement to meet IP-55 for bearing
protection results in a significant reduction in bearing
failures due to contamination.
C. Electrical Design
The standard points out the need for consultation with the
manufacturer to avoid problems when using the IEEE 841
motor with adjustable speed drives, and lists the type of
problems one might experience. These problems include
excessive winding temperatures due to higher harmonics
and insufficient cooling, insufficient motor accelerating
torque at reduced speeds, increased noise levels, winding
failures due to repetitive high amplitude voltage spikes,
motor and drive damage due to improper application of
power factor correction capacitors, high shaft voltages, and
mechanical failure of the motor or coupling due to torque
pulsations, mechanical resonance, or operation at excess
speeds.
D. Insulation Systems and Temperature Rise
The thermal rating of the insulation system is Class F with
a permissible temperature rise of 80 deg. C. at 1.0 service
factor.
Vacuum pressure impregnated form windings are required
for 2300 V and 4000 V machines, and are optional for
voltages less than 600 V for motors above 200 hp. Form
wound insulation systems are also required to be sealed
and capable of passing the water immersion test. Additional
requirements include a surge withstand capability of 3.5 per
6
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
Shop Inspection & Tests:
o Shop Inspection Required (Yes/No)
o Final Tests Witnessed by Customer (Yes/No)
o Other Special Tests
______________________________________________
______________________________________________
unit at a rise time of 0.1- 0.2 microseconds and 5.0 per unit
at a rise time of 1.2 micro-seconds or greater.
Phase paper insulation, in addition to varnish or resin, is
required to be used between each phase group of random
windings to improve insulation integrity.
The insulation system, including leads, must be
compatible with mineral oil based lubricants. Some
additional modifications, however, are usually required to
make the IEEE 841 motor suitable for use with oil mist
lubrication systems.
E. Bearings and Lubrication
A major goal of this standard is to specify features that will
extend the bearing life. Hence, improved balancing,
increased bearing life L-10 factor, limiting the dN factor,
improved shaft seals and limiting the bearing operating
temperatures are all aimed at this goal.
Antifriction bearings are required to have a dN factor less
than 300,000. Bearing designs with dN factors higher than
300,000 are considered to be less reliable and have a
shorter life.
Inner bearing caps are required to protect bearings from
dirt and moisture inside the motor as well as to restrict
grease and oil flow from the bearing chamber into the
interior of the motor. A grease drain with plug that extends
beyond the fan cover (if present) is also specifically required
to facilitate re-lubrication.
When direct coupled, the stabilized bearing temperature
rise at rated load must not exceed 45 deg C. (50 deg. C. on
two pole motors). A minimum bearing L-10 life requirement
based on NEMA defined external belt loads is included. The
standard also defines belt loads for determining bearing L-
10 life in above NEMA frame size motors. The limits
imposed by the bearing temperature rise are demanding
and are expected to improve practical bearing life.
F. Rotor and Shaft
Shaft run-out limits are about one-half of those in NEMA
MG-1-1998 Part 4. Motors with shafts that meet these limits
for TIR are easier to properly install and align. The lower
limits also result in reduced bearing loads and system
vibration.
G. Frames and Endshields
H. Terminal Boxes and Terminal Leads
Terminal boxes on 600 V NEMA frame motors are required
to be cast iron. Terminal box volume exceeds the volume
specified in NEMA MG-1-1998, with a minimum volume of
393 cu. centimeters. Terminal boxes for motors with rated
voltages above 600 V must comply as a minimum with
Figure 20-3 in NEMA MG-1-1998. The internal temperature
of the terminal box at rated load and ambient conditions
must allow use of 75 deg. C. rated supply conductors for
motors rated 600 V or below, and 90 deg. C. rated supply
conductors for motors rated above 600 V.

The standard requires that frames, endshields and fan I. Vibration

covers are to be made from cast iron. The standard has
performance requirements on foot flatness (0.005 inch
maximum foot differential) and specifies a maximum draft
angle of 1.5 degrees on the top surface of the casting
surrounding the foot mounting holes. These requirements
are designed to eliminate "soft foot" conditions and shifting
of the motor position during alignment, due to tightening of
the mounting bolt on a sloping surface. Studies indicate that
bearing life can be reduced by as much as 50% with as little
alignment offset as 5 mils [7]. This same study also reveals
that if the motor is misaligned by 10% of the coupling’s
allowance for offset, one can expect a 10% reduction in
inboard bearing life.
The motor unfiltered vibration limits at rated voltage and
frequency are set at 2.03 mm/sec. peak velocity for 2, 4, and
6-pole machines; and 1.52 mm/sec. peak velocity for 8-pole
machines. A limit of 1.27 mm/sec peak is placed on the 2n
and 2f filtered vibration levels. Motor unfiltered axial vibration
is also limited to 1.52 mm/sec. on bearing housings. This
axial vibration limit does not apply to roller bearings. The
reduced vibration levels result in greatly enhanced reliability
and extend the life of severe duty TEFC squirrel cage
induction motors.

TABLE 2
MECHANICAL CONSTRUCTION FEATURES - IEEE 841 MOTOR

COMPONENT REQUIREMENT BENEFIT

BEARINGS REGREASABLE MAINTAINABILITY
GREASE OUTLET EXTERNAL EASE OF RELUBRICATION
TO FAN COVER
INNER BEARING CAP LUBRICANT CONTAINMENT
IP55 PROTECTION ON 324T/TS REDUCED LUBRICANT
FRAMES AND LARGER CONTAMINATION
45 DEG. C. TEMP. RISE LIMIT LONGER LUBRICANT AND
(50 DEG. ON 2 POLE) BEARING LIFE
SHAFT LIMIT ON SHAFT RUNOUT REDUCED VIBRATION
FRAMES, ALL CAST IRON STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY,
ENDSHIELDS & CONSTRUCTION CORROSION RESISTANCE &
FAN COVERS LONGER LIFE
MOTOR FOOT FLATNESS/ REDUCED INSTALLATION TIME &
PLANITY AND DRAFT ANGLE IMPROVED ALIGNMENT

TERMINAL BOXES CAST IRON UP TO 445T FRAMES RUGGED DESIGN

MINIMUM SIZE DEFINED OVERSIZED TO IMPROVE
QUALITY OF TERMINATIONS
DRAIN HOLE ON LARGER BOXES ELIMINATE CONDENSATION

7
J. Corrosion-Resistant Treatment:
A lubricant must be applied during assembly to all
unplated threaded surfaces to facilitate removal. Exposed
internal stator, rotor, and shaft surfaces must be protected
against moisture and corrosion by a suitable protective
coating.
K. Efficiency
High efficiency levels are required for all IEEE 841 motors.
The minimum efficiency levels for 600 V class motors 200
hp and lower exceed by one NEMA band the efficiency levels
required by The Energy Policy Act (1992). The high efficiency
levels generally result in cooler running motors with longer
life [8].
L. Tests
Prior to the time of shipment, manufacturers are required
to take five unfiltered vibration readings (velocity) at no load
using an elastic or rigid mount. Vibration measurements
are made on the drive end (horizontal, vertical, and axial) and
the opposite drive end (horizontal and vertical). Measured
vibration levels must comply with specification levels.
Vibration measurements are recorded and supplied along
with other required test information with each individual
motor, and should assist users in setting up baseline
vibration data for new motors at plant sites.
Prototype tests defined in the Annex are to be utilized for
testing motor performance and resistance to corrosion and
humidity on new or prototype motor designs.
In summary, IEEE 841 motors are robust thermally and as
a result will take more abuse from stall, overload,
unbalanced voltage, high inertia starts, frequent starts, etc.
than other motors typically used for severe duty applications.
The rotors generally run cooler and the speed torque
characteristics are that of a “stiff” motor with less slip. The
windings are also robust due to lower operating
temperatures. Many of the windings have higher copper
content and increased slot fills that prevent coil movement in
the slots and result in better heat transfer due to improved
resin retention. The geometry, vibration levels, foot flatness,
seals, bearing sizes, and limited operating temperatures all
enhance bearing life, which heretofore has been the number
one cause of motor failure.
V. ECONOMIC FACTORS
A survey of current market pricing for IEEE 841 TEFC motor
designs up to 200 horsepower indicates that a 35-50 %
premium is typically required to purchase a new IEEE 841
motor as compared to a typical industrial-duty TEFC motor
meeting EPACT efficiency levels. This increased cost is due
primarily to the improved efficiency and the additional
mechanical design features that result in improved reliability.
8
Industrial motor failure data indicate that bearing failures
represent 51% of all failures for TEFC motors up to 200
horsepower [9]. Many of the design improvements in IEEE
841 are targeted at reducing these bearing failures. Data
from one large chemical plant indicated that because of the
design improvements in IEEE 841 motors, the number of
motor failures decreased to approx. 50 % of failure levels
experienced with industrial-duty TEFC induction motors. If
all motors up to 200 horsepower in a plant facility are
replaced with the IEEE 841 design over a period of time, this
could translate into a doubling of the mean time between
failure for all motors up to 200 horsepower in the plant, and
would result in a significant reduction in production losses
attributable to motor failures.
The additional cost to purchase IEEE 841 motors rated
from 200 to 500 horsepower needs to be evaluated on a
case-by-case basis. One or more of the following factors
may influence the decision to buy an IEEE 841 motor to
replace a failed motor:
1) The age of the existing motor and the number and
severity of previous repairs.
2) The type of repair that is required to restore the motor to
it’s original condition.
3) The availability of an acceptable replacement motor and
available capital. There is always the possibility of a
long wait for a new motor, while the existing motor can
be repaired in a short amount of time. Downtime can be
costly.
4) Interchangeability, particularly if special features are
required. Downtime again is important.
5) Motor efficiency and performance characteristics.[10]
6) Cause of the failure and potential for the same failure to
be repeated if the root cause for failure is not
addressed. A new replacement motor may fail for the
same reason as the original motor if neither motor is
appropriate for the application. Many motor repair
facilities have the capability to upgrade an existing motor
to reduce the potential for a repeat failure.
For motors rated from 200 to 500 horsepower,
repair/replace rules such as “If the cost of repair exceeds 50-
60% of the new motor cost, then replace it,” although simple
to apply, may not provide the necessary in-depth analysis to
make the best decision to repair or replace a failed motor.
Cost is only one factor in the evaluation, and should not
always be the determining factor in the repair/replace
decision.
VI. CONCLUSION
IEEE 841 has been further updated to enhance the
reliability and maintainability of severe duty TEFC motors
used in the petrochemical industry. The challenge for the
future is to introduce these design features into motors
manufactured according to IEC standards.
 VII. REFERENCES
[1] ANSI/IEEE Std. 841-1986, IEEE Recommended Practice
for Chemical Industry Severe Duty Squirrel-Cage Induction
Motors-600 V and Below.
[2] A. W. Smith and P841 WG Members, " Introduction to
IEEE 841-1986, Recommended Practice for Chemical
Industry Severe Duty Squirrel-Cage Induction Motors - 600 V
and Below," IEEE Transactions on Industry Applic., Vol. 24,
No. 1, Jan/Feb 1988.
[3] IEEE Std. 841-1994, IEEE Standard for Petroleum and
Chemical Industry - Severe Duty Totally Enclosed Fan-
Cooled (TEFC) Squirrel Cage Induction Motors - Up to and
Including 500 hp.
[4] API Standard 541, Form-wound Squirrel Cage Induction
Motors - 250 Horsepower and Larger, Second Edition,
November 1987.
[5] NEMA Standards Publication No. MG 1-1998, Motors and
Generators.
[6] ANSI/API 610-1995, Centrifugal Pumps for Petroleum,
Heavy Duty Chemical and Gas Industry Services.
[7] S. Jesse & W. Hines, “Motor Shaft Misalignment Bearing
Load Analysis,” Reliability Magazine, June 2000.
[8] Austin H. Bonnett, “Reliability Comparison Between
Standard & Energy Efficient Motors,” Paper No. PCIC-95-10,
IEEE Petroleum and Chemical Industry Technical
Conference, Sept 1995.
[9] Olav V. Thorsen and Magnus Dalva, “A Survey of Induction
Motors in Offshore Oil Industry, Petrochemical Industry, Gas
Terminals and Oil Refineries,” IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Applications, Vol. 31, No. 5, Sept/Oct 1995.
[10] D. M. Brethauer, R. L. Doughty, and R. J. Puckett, “The
Impact of Efficiency on the Economics of New Motor
Purchase, Motor Repair, and Motor Replacement,” IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applic., Vol. 30, No. 6, Nov/Dec
1994.
VIII. VITA
Richard L. Doughty (M'75-SM'78-F'95) received the B.E.E.
and M.E.E. degrees in electrical engineering from Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, in 1965 and 1966, respectively. He
was employed with E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
from 1966 until 1999. At the time he retired, he served as a
Principal Consultant in the Electrical Technology Consulting
Group of Engineering, specializing in the application of
electric motors and electric power system design.
Mr. Doughty is Chair of the Petroleum Chemical Industry
(PCIC) Motors Working Group (P841), Co-Chair of the PCIC
P1349 Working Group on safe application of motors in
Class I, Div. 2 hazardous (classified) areas, Chair of the
Tutorial Subcommittee, past Chair of the PCIC Chemical
Subcommittee, a past Member on Panel 10 of NFPA 70 -
The National Electric Code (representing Chemical
Manufacturers Association), and a Registered Professional
Engineer in the State of Delaware. He is the recipient of
PCIC and IAS Transactions prize paper awards, the David C.
Azbill Award for extraordinary contributions to PCIC
sponsored standards, and the R. W. Mills Award for
outstanding dedication and service to furthering the objective
of the Petroleum Chemical Industry Committee.
Austin H. Bonnett, born in Los Angeles, November 3, 1936,
received his Bachelor of Science Degree in Electrical
Engineering from California State University at Los Angeles
and his Masters Degree in business from the University of
Phoenix. He is a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and
Electronic Engineers and has published numerous
technical papers on rotating machinery. He serves on
NEMA, IEEE, EPRI, EASA, and DOE Committees and
received the 1994 IEEE Meritorious Award. In 1996 he was
selected for Industrial Application Society of IEEE’s
Outstanding Achievement Award. He also received the IEEE
Third Millennium Medal in the year 2000.
Mr. Bonnett served in the U.S. Navy from 1955 to 1958 as
an electrician aboard the Icebreaker, Burton Island,
stationed in both the Arctic and Antarctic. He joined U.S.
Electrical Motors, Division of Emerson Electric Company, in
1963 and has since held positions in the Service,
Manufacturing, Quality Control, and Engineering
Departments. Presently, he holds the position of Vice
President-Technology Emeritus and has retired from
Emerson Electric. Previously, he held the position of Vice
President of Engineering and directed all of U.S. electrical
Motors Engineering functions for 10 years. Prior to that, he
held the position of Plant Manager of the Prescott Large
Motor Facility for five years.