Mike Howell
Especialista de Soporte Técnico de EASA

Las dos razones principales para realizar la prueba de núcleo del estator en el centro de servicios son (1) verificar que el núcleo del estator es apto para uso continuo y en caso de rebobinado y (2) verificar que el proceso de rebobinado no ha alterado de forma adversa la condición del núcleo del estator.

El propósito de este artículo es discutir como determinar, evaluar y comparar los resultados de la prueba de núcleo. Es muy importante comprender que la variación de los procedimientos de prueba puede invalidar la comparación.

David Sattler
L&S Electric, Inc.

A no ser que se tenga mucho cuidado, tirar del alambre magneto al desmantelar el estator de un motor a menudo deforma o dobla los dientes de las laminaciones. Estos dientes deformados comprometerán la calidad de la reparación y hay estudios que demuestran que este problema puede reducir la eficiencia del motor. Sin embargo, aunque esta reducción puede ser pequeña, genera altos costos y desperdicio de energía.

Aunque los clientes rara vez notan la merma del rendimiento, nuestro objetivo durante la reparación de los motores es siempre llevar a cabo rebobinados de la más alta calidad posible. Por lo tanto, hemos diseñado e implementado el uso de discos (platos) retenedores para mantener los dientes del estator en su lugar mientras se saca el alambre magneto de las ranuras. Los discos que se ven en las fotografías nos han ayudado a evitar y garantizar dañar los dientes del estator al sacar el alambre del estator.

EASA’s “Recommended Practice for the Repair of Rotating Electrical Apparatus” is designated ANSI/EASA AR100 and was first approved as an American National standard in 1998. Since then, it has been revised and approved in 2001, 2006, 2010, 2015, 2020 and now in 2025.

ANSI/EASA AR100 is a must-have guide to the repair of rotating electrical machines. Its purpose is to establish recommended practices in each step of the rotating electrical apparatus rewinding and rebuilding processes.

The scope of this document describes record keeping, tests, analysis and general guidelines for the repair of induction, synchronous and direct current rotating electrical apparatus. It is not intended to take the place of the customer's or the machine manufacturer's specific instructions or specifications or specific accepted and applicable industry standards or recommended practices.

This document should be supplemented by additional requirements applicable to specialized rotating electrical apparatus including, but not limited to, listed explosion-proof, dust-ignition proof, and other listed machines for hazardous locations; and specific or additional requirements for hermetic motors, hydrogen-cooled machines, submersible motors, traction motors, or Class 1E nuclear service motors.

ANSI recognizes only one standard on a topic; therefore, ANSI/EASA AR100 is the American standard for repair of rotating electrical apparatus.The Recommended Practice is an important publication to distribute both internally and to customers.

Download or Purchase
This document is available as a FREE download (see links below) or printed copies may be purchased from EASA's online store.

DOWNLOAD AR100-2025 BUY PRINTED COPIES

Approval Process
The EASA Technical Services Committee (TSC) reviews the recommended practice and proposes changes; a consensus body group (formerly termed a canvass group) approves and often comments on the TSC proposals. The consensus body group has representation from service centers (producers), end users and those with a gen­eral interest. Per American National Standards Institute (ANSI) requirements, there must be balanced representation among the consensus body group representatives. After the consensus body group and the TSC find consensus agreement, the revised document is approved by the EASA Board of Directors. Following Board approval, ANSI is requested to approve the revi­sion as an American National Standard. The entire process must be completed within five years following the previous revision.

What’s New in 2025?
The 2025 edition of AR100 contains 72 revi­sions, 48 substantive (technical) and 24 editorial. Here, we will focus on the more significant changes, noted in clause order, and some of the reasons for making these changes.

The only revision to AR100 that affected the Accreditation Program Checklist was to clause 3.11.

1.1 Purpose
Added the sentence “Although repairs are normally performed in a service center, this document also applies to onsite repairs.” This clarifies that AR100 applies to onsite as well as service center repairs.

1.4 Condition Assessment and Failure Investigation
The use of photography was added with the sentence “Photographs of all sides of the equipment can be useful in recording the general condition of the equipment as received, the placement of accessories and machine configuration for records and for comparison during the final inspection of the completed repair.” This not only acknowledges that photography should be used, it provides rationale for using it.

1.6 Terminal Leads
Added a sentence describing what to do if customer lead markings differ from NEMA or IEC standards.  This is also the first location in the document with reference to the standard NEMA MG 00001, the successor to NEMA MG 1.

2.1.2 Permissible Runout
Permissible shaft extension runout tolerance Tables 2-3 (NEMA machines) and 2-4 (IEC machines) replaced with Table 2-3 “RPM versus Allowable Total Indicated Runout.  The runout tables from NEMA and IEC were based on shaft dimensions, and the replacement table is more practical and simpler to use, with tolerances based on shaft speed.

2.2.2.1 Sleeve Bearing End-Thrust
Expanded on the topic of sleeve bearing end-thrust to include use of limited end float couplings and added a new table with tolerances for end play and rotor float designated Table 2-8 “End Play and Rotor Float for Coupled Sleeve Bearing Horizontal Motors”.

2.5 Laminated Cores
A good practice action item was provided by adding the sentence “If evidence of hot spots is noted, perform a core loss test.”

2.5.1 Rotating Elements
Separate runout tolerances for 2 pole and for 4 or more pole machines are provided in the two sentences “The runout of the rotating element core outside diameter relative to the bearing journals should not exceed 5 percent of the average radial air gap for machines with 4 or more poles. For 2 pole machines the runout should not exceed 0.003” (0.08 mm).” The previous edition used a single tolerance regardless of poles.

2.7 Slip Rings
Added a tolerance for maximum total indicated runout for speeds below 2500 ft/min (760 m/min) as well as for speeds below 5000 ft/min (1525 m/min) and for greater than 5000 ft/min (1525 m/min). The previous edition provided two tolerances, one for speeds below 5000 ft/min (1525 m/min) and one for greater than 5000 ft/min (1525 m/min).

2.8.2 Undercutting and beveling
Provides a good practice method for chamfering commutator bars with the statement “Both edges of each bar should be chamfered, either by hand-chamfering or by nylon brush designed for that purpose. This minimizes brush chatter and noise in operation, and extends brush life.”

2.11 Brush Setting for DC Machines
A good practice action item was provided indicating to add equalizing jumpers to all brush posts of DC machines that lack them with the statement “Brush posts of the same polarity should have equalizing jumpers connecting them. This applies to positive as well as negative brush posts.” Doing so reduces the likelihood of sparking at the brushes due to unequal voltage at brush posts of the same polarity.

3.3 Stripping of Windings
The sentence “Core temperature should be controlled to avoid degradation of the interlaminar insulation and distortion of any parts” was revised to “Core temperature should be controlled to avoid degradation of the interlaminar insulation and distortion of the stator frame.” The change provides focus and clarifies that core temperature control is intended to avoid distortion of the stator frame.

3.6 Stator, Rotor and Armature Coils
Good practice action item added regarding replacing surge rings with sentence “Surge rings or similar supports should be replaced as found.”

3.6.2 Form-Wound Coils
To harmonize with the change made in clause 3.6 the sentence “Surge rings or similar supports should be secured to the coils and the coils laced to one another as necessary to minimize coil distortion and movement” was deleted.

3.7.1 Stationary Coils
In addition to varnish treatment and vacuum pressure impregnation of stationary field coils, the wet winding method was added to indicate that it is also a treatment option.

3.8 Squirrel Cage and Amortisseur Windings
To help prevent performance issues with motors and generators, particularly when starting, the following caution was added “Synchronous rotors often have amortisseur bars of different materials.”

3.9 Shaping and Lacing of Stator Windings
Good practice guidance for replacing metal surge rings with surge rope is given in the new sentence “Metal surge rings can be replaced with surge rope of the same or larger diameter to avoid inductive heating or potential ground fault.”

3.11 Wedges
With the use of magnetic wedges in form wound stators becoming more prevalent, information and guidance regarding magnetic wedges was expanded on in this clause.  The revised sentence and a new sentence are:

Magnetic wedges should be replaced with equivalent or better magnetic properties magnetic wedges. Caution: Replacing magnetic wedges with nonmagnetic wedges can result in a winding temperature rise of 20°C or more as well as an increase in no-load current, and negatively affect motor performance.

The revised sentence, which added “or better” will be included in the applicable criterion in Item 13 of the revised Accreditation Checklist. Conformance to it will be effective January 2027.

4.2.2 Polarization Index (P.I.) Test
Because the polarization index test often does not apply to random windings the following paragraph addressing this, and providing an alternate test method, was added: This test may not apply to random winding machines since the absorption current becomes negligible in a matter of seconds. A 60/30 second IR ratio test may be performed, with an acceptance ratio of 1.5. (Reference: IEEE Std. 1068, 6.3.1l).

4.2.4 Form-Wound Stator Surge Tests
The following new sentence provides guidance for testing uncured coils so as to help prevent failure due to testing at too high a voltage: Test voltages are reduced for uncured coils and should be agreed upon in advance by the coil manufacturer, service center, and if required, the customer.

4.2.8 Phase Balance Test
The clause text was expanded to provide specific test parameters for the level of voltage to be applied and the time duration. The clause now reads: The phase balance test applies balanced reduced voltage, about 15-20% of rated voltage, 3-phase power to the stator and the current is measured and checked for balance. The test duration should not ex­ceed 5 minutes, and the expected test current should be approximately the rated current.

4.3.3 Armature Windings
Clarified the term “bar-to-bar” by identifying the two types of bar-to-bar test, the high-frequency bar-to-bar test and the low-resistance bar-to-bar test.

4.5.1 Speed
Provided guidance for test running a motor when rated frequency is not available by adding the sentence: When rated frequency is not available, test run at a proportional volts/Hz ratio, without exceeding rated voltage or maximum speed.

Conclusion
The efforts of the Technical Services Committee to revise and improve AR100 are a continual process. Within a year or two, the revision process will become an active agenda item for the TSC. One of the foremost goals with AR100 is to include as many good practices as possible. Further, when it is desired or necessary to add new good practices to the Accreditation Program, AR100 is the conduit. The reason for this approach is that AR100 is the primary source document for the EASA Accreditation Program.

Since AR100 is revised periodically it is a “living document.” Changes to AR100 not only aid with the Accreditation Program, its good practices and other guidance help enable service centers to provide quality repairs that maintain or at times improve rotating electrical apparatus reliability and energy efficiency.

Carlos Ramirez
EASA Technical Support Specialist

¿El motor consume mucha corriente en vacío, aunque los datos del bobinado son correctos? ¿El motor se calienta con carga de forma inusual? Estas son preguntas comunes que pueden ser resueltas verificando la condición del núcleo del estator. En este webinario discutiremos cómo realizar la prueba de lazo en el núcleo de un estator y cómo analizar los resultados obtenidos, proporcionando información sobre los equipos utilizados, consejos para reparar el núcleo del estator y otras pruebas alternativas.

El seminario incluye:

• Teoría de la prueba de lazo (“toroide”)
• Procedimiento de prueba
• Límites aceptables para las pérdidas y las temperaturas en el núcleo
• Equipo asociado
• Consejos para la reparación de núcleos dañados
• Pruebas alternativas

Este webinario es útil para supervisores, bobinadores y personal encargado de realizar las pruebas.

Chuck Yung
EASA Senior Technical Support Specialist

When a core loss test reveals localized hot spots, or visual inspection identifies physical damage, the ability to repair the damage in a cost-effective manner means the difference between repair or replacement.

Topics covered in this recording include:   

• What core loss flux level is correct?
• Clearing small localized hot spots
• What is the best way to clear surface shorting?
• Grinding versus spreading the laminations
• “Watt knocking” or physically manipulating the core
• Debunking the rusting myth — Coreplate, class F red insulator, waterglass
• Restack: complete or partial — Does lamination grade really matter? 

This presentation is intended for owner-managers, shop supervisors, machinists, service center technicians, and safety directors.

David Sattler
L&S Electric, Inc.

Unless great care is taken, pulling magnet wire from a motor stator often bends or splays the lamination’s end teeth. Bent teeth, or teeth that have been splayed outward at the ends of the core stack, will likely compromise the quality of the repair job. Studies¹ show that motor efficiency may be reduced by splaying end teeth. Even if that reduction in efficiency is slight, any reduction in efficiency results in higher costs and wasted energy.

Even though these performance reductions are seldom noticed by customers, our goal in motor repair is always to produce the highest quality rewind possible. Therefore, we have designed and implemented the use of disc clamps to hold the stator tooth tips in place while pulling magnet wire from the slots. The clamping fixtures described in the photos have helped ensure that we avoid damaging the stator teeth during the stripping process.

Cyndi Nyberg Esau
Former EASA Technical Support Specialist

Most rotor, stator and armature laminations used in industrial electric motors and generators are made from non-oriented, cold-rolled electrical steels. However, there is a lot of variation in the specific properties in these electrical steels. This article will discuss properties of electrical steels, as well as the methods used to optimize the magnetic characteristics of the laminations, specifically through the annealing process.

The challenge for every motor repair firm is twofold: to repair the equipment properly; and to demonstrate to their customers by means of adequate testing and documenta­tion that rewound motors retain their operating efficiency. Following the guidelines in the “DOs” and “DON’Ts” below will help you accomplish both.

Numerous studies have been done to determine the effect rewinding has on motor efficiency. These studies identified several variables that can impact the efficiency of a rewound motor, including core burnout temperature, winding design, bearing type, air gap and winding resistance. The following guidelines were developed as a result of those studies, which found that the efficiency of both standard and energy efficient electric motors can be maintained during rebuilding and rewinding. 

To ensure that motors retain their efficiencies when rewound, EASA also strongly recommends that electric motor repair centers comply with ANSI/EASA Standard AR100: Recommended Practice For The Repair Of Rotating Electrical Apparatus and strictly adhere to the “DOs” and “DON’Ts” that follow. These guidelines, which contain safe values (based on available data) and correct procedures, apply to both energy efficient and standard motors. Further study of the matter continues, and these guidelines will be revised if additional information warrants.

Presented by Carlos Ramirez
EASA Technical Support Specialist

Is the motor drawing high no-load amps and winding data are correct? Are you experiencing unusual heating of the stator under load? Those common questions can be answered by checking the stator core condition. This presentation will discuss how to perform a stator core test using a loop test. It also will explain how to analyze the results, providing information about the associated equipment, tips for repairing core damage and explain other alternatives for stator core testing.

The presentation covers:

• Loop test theory
• Testing procedure
• Acceptable limits for losses and core temperatures
• Associated equipment
• Tips for repairing core damage
• Alternative stator core test

This presentation will be useful for supervisors, winders and test technicians.

Much has been written in EASA publications and elsewhere about the consequences of excessive temperature on a motor’s performance. We know that excessive temperature and moisture are the largest contributors to bearing and winding failures. Understanding the source of the increased temperature will help us to correct the problem and improve the machine’s life expectancy.

A chart included in this article illustrates the theoretical impact of increased temperature on the life of the motor insulation system. This chart only addresses the impact of thermal aging and not various other conditions that will affectthe motor’s life. In other words, it says that for every 10ºC increase in operating tem-perature, the expected life is reduced by one-half. Conversely, if we can re-duce the temperature of the motor by 10ºC, we can expect the life to double. Note that this is true at any point on the curve. However, there is the rule of diminishing returns: at some point the cost of designing and operating a motor to run cooler out-weighs the benefts of doing so.  Here we will explore some of the factors that con-tribute to increased temperature.

Topics covered include:

• Overload
• Ventilation
• Voltage
• Electrical steel (core iron)
• Current density
• Circulating currents
• Harmonics

Chuck Yung
EASA Senior Technical Support Specialist

You've just dismantled a special motor for a customer, and the core test indicates the watts loss/pound is excessive.  The high core losses are caused by shorts between the laminations.  This may be the result of a ground failure.  Or excessive temperatures may have caused the deterioration of inter-laminar insulation (called coreplate.)

Whatever the cause, a replacement is 16 weeks away, and your customer wants his motor repaired.  This motor sounds like a prime candidate for a restack, but you are hesitant.  Your company has a reputation for quality, and the finished product has to meet your usual high standards. 

You want to know the best procedure for repairing this core.  Here are some guidelines to help you do the best possible repair. 

La Práctica Recomendada para la Reparación de Máquinas Eléctricas Rotativas está designada como ANSI/EASA AR100 e inicialmente fue aprobada como norma nacional americana en 1998. Desde entonces, ha sido revisada y aprobada cinco veces más en 2001, 2006, 2010, 2015, 2020 y ahora en el 2025.

La norma ANSI/EASA AR100 es una guía indispensable para la reparación de máquinas eléctricas rotativas. Su propósito es establecer prácticas recomendadas en cada etapa de los procesos de rebobinado y reconstrucción de aparatos eléctricos rotativos.

El alcance de este documento describe el registro de datos, las pruebas, el análisis y las directrices generales para la reparación de aparatos eléctricos rotativos de inducción, síncronos y de corriente continua. No pretende sustituir las instrucciones o especificaciones específicas del cliente o del fabricante de la máquina, ni las normas o prácticas recomendadas de la industria, aceptadas y aplicables.

Este documento debe complementarse con requisitos adicionales aplicables a aparatos eléctricos rotativos especializados, incluyendo, entre otros, máquinas antideflagrantes, a prueba de ignición por polvo y otras máquinas certificadas para ubicaciones peligrosas; y requisitos específicos o adicionales para motores herméticos, máquinas refrigeradas por hidrógeno, motores sumergibles, motores de tracción o motores de servicio nuclear de Clase 1E.

ANSI reconoce una sola norma por tema; por lo tanto, ANSI/EASA AR100 es la norma estadounidense para la reparación de aparatos eléctricos rotativos. Esta práctica recomendada es una publicación importante que debe distribuirse tanto internamente como a los clientes.

Descargar
Este documento está disponible para su descarga gratuita (ver el enlace a continuación).

DESCARGAR AR100-2025

Proceso de aprobación
El Comité de Servicios Técnicos (TSC) de EASA revisa la práctica recomendada y propone cambios; un grupo de consenso (anteriormente denominado grupo de consulta) aprueba y, con frecuencia, comenta las propuestas del TSC. Este grupo cuenta con representación de centros de servicio (productores), usuarios finales y personas con intereses generales. Según los requisitos de la American National Standards Institute (ANSI), debe haber una representación equilibrada entre los representantes del grupo de consenso. Tras un acuerdo dentre el grupo de consenso y el TSC, el documento revisado es aprobado por la Junta Directiva Internacional de EASA. Tras la aprobación de la Junta, se solicita a ANSI que apruebe la revisión como Norma Nacional Estadounidense. Todo el proceso se debe completar en un plazo de cinco años contados a partir de la última revisión. 

¿Qué hay nuevo en la versión 2025?
La edición 2025 de la AR100 contiene 72 revisiones, 48 de carácter sustantivo (técnico) y 24 de carácter editorial. En este artículo, nos centraremos en los cambios más significativos, indicados en el orden de las cláusulas, y en algunas de las razones que los justificaron. La única revisión de la AR100 que afectó a la Lista de Verificación del Programa de Certificación de EASA fue la de la cláusula 3.11, que se describe más adelante en la información correspondiente a dicha cláusula.

La única revisión del AR100 que afectó la Lista de Verificación del Programa de Acreditación fue clause 3.11.

1.1 Objetivo
Se añadió la frase “Aunque las reparaciones normalmente se realizan en un centro de servicio, este documento también aplica a las reparaciones in situ” Esto clarifica que la AR100 aplica tanto a reparaciones en los centros de servico como in situ. 

1.4 Condiciones de Evaluación e Investigación de Fallos
Se añadió al uso de la fotografía la frase "Las fotografías de todos los lados del equipo pueden ser útiles para registrar al momento de la recepción, el estado general, la ubicación de los accesorios y la configuración de la máquina, tanto para fines de registro como para compararlas durante la inspección final una vez completada la reparación", Esto no solo reconoce la importancia del uso de la fotografía, sino que también la justifica. 

1.6 Cables de Salida
Se añadió una oración que describe qué hacer si las marcas de los cables del cliente difieren de las normas NEMA o IEC. Esta es también la primera referencia del documento a la norma NEMA MG 00001, sucesora de la NEMA MG 1. 

2.1.2 Excentricidad Permitida
Las Tablas 2-3 (máquinas NEMA) y 2-4 (máquinas IEC) de tolerancia de excentricidad admisible para ejes de salida se reemplazaron por la “Tabla 2-3. RPM versus excentricidades permisibles”. Las tablas de excentricidades NEMA e IEC se basaban en las dimensiones del eje, y la tabla sustituta es más práctica y sencilla de usar, con tolerancias basadas en la velocidad del eje. 

2.2.2.1 Empuje Axial de los Cojinetes de Deslizamiento
Se amplió el tema del empuje axial de los cojinetes de deslizamiento para incluir el uso de acoplamientos con desplazamiento axial limitado y se añadió una nueva tabla con tolerancias para el juego y desplazamiento axial del rotor, denominada "Tabla 2-8. Juego y desplazamiento axial del rotor para máquinas de inducción horizontales con cojinetes de deslizamiento". 

2.5 Núcleos Laminados
Se agregó una buena práctica con la oración “Si se detectan puntos calientes, realice una prueba de pérdidas en el núcleo”. 

2.5.1 Partes Rotativas
Se proporcionan tolerancias de excentricidad independientes para máquinas de 2 y 4 polos o más en las dos frases siguientes: "La desviación del diámetro exterior del elemento rotativo con respecto a los muñones del eje donde se instalan los rodamientos no debe exceder el 5 % del entrehierro promedio para máquinas de 4 o más polos. Para máquinas de 2 polos, la desviación no deberá superar las 0,003" (0,08 mm)". La edición anterior utilizaba una tolerancia única, independientemente del número de polos. 

2.7 Anillos Rozantes
Se añadió una tolerancia para la desviación máxima total indicada para velocidades por debajo de 760 m/min (2500 pies/min), así como para velocidades inferiores a 1525 m/min (5000 pies/min) y superiores a 1525 m/min (5000 pies/min). La edición anterior ofrecía dos tolerancias: una para velocidades inferiores a 1525 m/min (5000 pies/ min) y otra para velocidades superiores a 1525 m/min (5000 pies/min). 

2.8.2 Ranurado y Biselado
Proporciona un buen método para biselar las barras del colector con la siguiente afirmación: "Ambos bordes de cada delga se deben biselar, ya sea manualmente o con un cepillo de nailon diseñado para tal fin. Esto minimiza las vibraciones y el ruido durante el funcionamiento y prolonga la vida útil de la escobilla". 

2.11 Ajuste de las Escobillas para Máquinas de Corriente Contínua
Se proporcionó una buena práctica que indicaba agregar puentes de compensación en todos los postes de escobillas de las máquinas de corriente contínua que no los tuvieran, con la siguiente advertencia: "Los postes de las escobillas de la misma polaridad deben estar conectados entre sí mediante puentes de compensación. Esto se aplica tanto a los bornes de escobilla positivos como a los negativos". Esto reduce la probabilidad de chispas en las escobillas debido a la diferencia de voltaje en los bornes de escobilla con la misma polaridad. 

3.3 Desmantelamiento de los Devanados
La oración “Para evitar degradación del aislamiento interlaminar y la distorsión de cualquiera de sus partes” fue reescrita como: “Para evitar degradación del aislamiento interlaminar y la distorsión de la carcasa del estator”. El cambio proporciona un enfoque y aclara que el control de la temperatura del núcleo tiene como objetivo evitar la distorsión de la carcasa del estator. 

3.6 Bobinas de estatores, rotores y armaduras
Se añade una buena práctica relacionada con el reemplazo de los aros/cordeles de refuerzo o soportes con la oración “Los aros/cordeles de refuerzo o soportes similares deben ser reemplazados tal como fueron encontrados” 

3.6.2 Bobinas de Pletina (Solera)
Para armonizar con el cambio hecho en 3.6 se borró la oración:"Para evitar su movimiento y distorsión, las bobinas deben estar atadas entre si y aseguradas a aros de sujeción u otros medios de soporte similares, tal como se considere necesario" 

3.7.1 Bobinas Estáticas
Adicionalmente al tratamiento con barniz o impreganación al vacio (VPI) se adicionó el método de enresinado para indicar que es otra opción. 

3.8 Bobinados de Amortiguación y Jaulas de Ardilla
Para ayudar a prevenir problemas de rendimiento con motores y generadores, particularmente al arrancar, se agregó la siguiente advertencia: "Los rotores síncronos suelen tener barras amortiguadoras de diferentes materiales" 

3.9 Moldeado y Atado de los Bobinados del Estator
En la nueva oración se proporciona una guía de buenas prácticas para reemplazar los aros o anillos de soporte metálicos por cordones: "Los aros o anillos de soporte metálicos se pueden reemplazar por cordones de al menos el mismo diámetro para evitar el calentamiento por inducción o posibles fallos a tierra". 

3.11 Cuñas
Dado el uso cada vez más frecuente de cuñas magnéticas en estatores de bobinas de pletina, se amplió la información y la orientación sobre ellas en esta cláusula. La oración revisada y la nueva frase son las siguientes: 

“Las cuñas magnéticas se deben reemplazar por cuñas con mejores propiedades magnéticas o equivalente. Precación: Cambiar cuñas magnéticas por otras no magnéticas puede provocar un aumento de la temperatura del bobinado de 20°C o más, así como también un incremento de la corriente en vacío, lo que afectará negativamente el rendimiento del motor”. 

La frase revisada, que añadió "o mejor", se incluirá en el criterio aplicable del punto 13 de la Lista de Comprobación de la Certificación revisada. Su cumplimiento entrará en vigor en enero de 2027. 

4.2.2 Prueba de índice de Polarización (I.P)
Ya que la prueba del índice de polarización no se suele aplicar a bobinados de alambre redondo, se añadió el siguiente párrafo que aborda este tema y proporciona un método de prueba alternativo:"Esta prueba podría no aplicar a las máquinas de alambre redondo, ya que la corriente de absorción se vuelve insignificante en cuestión de segundos. Se puede realizar una prueba de relación de resistencia de aislamiento de 60/30 segundos, con una relación de aceptación de 1,5. (Referencia: IEEE Std. 1068, 6.3.1l)". 

4.2.4 Pruebas de Impulso (Surge) en Estatores con Bobinas de Pletina (Solera)
La siguiente nueva oración proporciona orientación para probar bobinas sin curar a fin de ayudar a prevenir fallos debido a pruebas hechas con un voltaje demasiado alto: 

“Los niveles de prueba se reducen para las bobinas sin curar (green) y deben ser acordados con anticipación entre el fabricante de bobinas, el centro de servicio y, si es necesario, el cliente”.

4.2.8 Pruebas de Equilibrio entre Fases
El texto de la cláusula se amplió para proporcionar parámetros de prueba específicos para el nivel de voltaje aplicado y su duración. La cláusula ahora dice: "En la prueba de equilibrio de fases se aplica al estator un voltaje trifásico balanceado de un 15 a 20% la tensión nominal y se miden las corrientes para comprobar si están balanceadas. La duración de la prueba no debe exceder 5 minutos y la corriente esperada puede ser aproximadamente la nominal". 

4.3.3 Bobinados de Armadura
Se clarifica el término “delga-delga” identificando los dos tipos de pruebas delga-delga: Alta frecuencia y baja resistencia. 

4.5.1 Velocidad
Se proporcionó orientación para la prueba de funcionamiento de un motor cuando no se dispone de la frecuencia nominal, añadiendo la frase: "Si la frecuencia nominal no está disponible se puede utilizar una relación voltio/Hz proporcional, sin exceder el voltaje nominal o la velocidad máxima”. 

Conclusión
Los esfuerzos del Comité de Servicios Técnicos (TSC) para revisar y mejorar la AR100 son un proceso continuo. Dentro de uno o dos años, el proceso de revisión se convertirá en un tema activo en la agenda del TSC. Uno de los principales objetivos de la AR100 es incluir el mayor número posible de buenas prácticas. Además, cuando se desee o sea necesario añadir nuevas buenas prácticas al Programa de Certificación, la AR100 actúa como conducto. La razón de este enfoque es que la AR100 es el documento fuente principal del Programa de Certificación de EASA. 

Dado que la AR100 se revisa periódicamente, es un documento en constante evolución. Los cambios en la AR100 no solo contribuyen al Programa de Certificación, sino que sus buenas prácticas y otras directrices permiten a los centros de servicio realizar reparaciones de calidad que mantienen, e incluso mejoran, la confiabilidad y la eficiencia energética de las máquinas eléctricas rotativas.

Chuck Yung
Technical Support Specialist
Electrical Apparatus Service Association
St. Louis, MO

The paper "Stator Core Repair and Testing" by Chuck Yung, presented at the EASA Convention 2007, provides detailed guidance on the repair and testing of stator cores in electric motors. The paper aims to ensure quality restacks, identify key areas for quality control, and offer useful tips for special cases. It also debunks myths about alternative core repair methods and introduces a new effective alternative for repairing shorted laminations.

When a motor failure includes damage to the laminated core, the decision to repair or replace the motor depends on factors such as price and availability. If a replacement motor is not available, a labor-intensive restack of the stator core may be necessary. The goal of a restack is to dismantle the core, clean and recoat the laminations to minimize heating from eddy currents in shorted laminations, and reassemble the core with the correct geometry.

Core losses are categorized into hysteresis losses, notching stresses, and eddy-current losses. Hysteresis losses are minimized by the annealing process, while notching stresses are relieved during manufacturing. Eddy-current losses occur when adjacent laminations are shorted together, behaving as a single thicker lamination. The stacking factor, which describes the amount of actual lamination steel content over the core length, is crucial for minimizing core losses.

Proper stacking pressure, maintaining the original core length, and using low-loss silicon steel for replacement laminations are essential for reducing eddy-current losses. The paper emphasizes the importance of using laminations of the same thickness as the original to avoid increased losses. Eddy-current losses vary with the square of the frequency, so motors operating at higher frequencies require thinner laminations.

The paper debunks several myths about core repair methods, such as using water to create iron oxide coatings, sodium silicate, and acids. These methods are ineffective and can cause further damage. Instead, the paper recommends using suitable coreplate materials that can withstand burnout oven cycles.

The restack procedure involves drawing a detailed diagram of the stator core, sanding each lamination to remove burrs and residue, coating the cleaned laminations with coreplate, and restacking them to the original configuration. The paper highlights the importance of maintaining stack geometry and using a stacking fixture to minimize irregular lamination surfaces.

An alternative method for repairing cores with localized missing sections of teeth involves using magnetic wedge material to reconstruct the tooth geometry. This method is limited by the reduced ferrous material in magnetic wedges.

The paper introduces a new process called Cure-a-Core, which uses an aqueous solution of phosphoric acid with zinc, manganese, and iron in suspension to etch shorted laminations and form a durable coreplate. This process has successfully reduced core losses and improved power factor in several service centers.

Key Points Covered:

• Factors influencing the repair-replace decision for damaged stator cores
• Core losses: hysteresis, notching stresses, and eddy-current losses
• Importance of stacking factor and proper stacking pressure
• Myths about alternative core repair methods
• Detailed restack procedure
• Alternative repair methods using magnetic wedge material
• Introduction of Cure-a-Core process for reducing core losses

Key Takeaways:

• Repairing stator cores is labor-intensive but necessary when replacements are unavailable.
• Core losses must be minimized through proper stacking and use of suitable materials.
• Myths about core repair methods are debunked, emphasizing the need for effective techniques.
• The restack procedure requires careful attention to detail and maintaining stack geometry.
• Magnetic wedge material can be used for localized repairs but has limitations.
• The Cure-a-Core process offers a new, effective method for reducing core losses and improving power factor.

EASA’s Stator Core Test Form provides a step-by-step procedure for calculating the number of turns and cable size required for a loop test. The form also has provision for recording the meter and temperature readings obtained during the test. Core sketches that show the location of measured dimensions and a wiring diagram of instrument connections are also included.

For more details on stator core testing, see Section 7 of the EASA Technical Manual.

Blake Parker
Technical Education Committee Member
High-Speed Industrial Service

When looking at a stator core that requires repair, it can be easy to jump to conclusions. There are many factors to consider when re-stacking a stator. Those include the materials, core compression, length of the core, vents, spacers, vent construction and more. This article focuses on taking proper measurements when re-stacking a stator core and how to go about stacking the stator to ensure those dimensions are met.

This webinar recording covers: 

• Various types of AC motors and bases for operation
• Squirrel cage induction motor rotor design / construction
• Squirrel cage induction motor stator design / construction

Steve Skenzick
HPS Electrical Apparatus Sales & Service

By this time we should all know that stator core loss testing is a required part of a quality rewind.  A core loss test before and after burn-off is speci­fied in the EASA Recommended Practice for the Repair of Rotating Electrical Ap­paratus (ANSI/EASA AR100-2010) and The Effect of Repair/Rewinding on Motor Efficiency; EASA/AEMT Rewind Study and Good Practice Guide to Maintain Mo­tor Efficiency. I would like to share some core loss testing experiences we have had over the years in our service center.

Austin Bonnett
EASA Education and Technology Consultant
Gallatin, MO

In the paper "The Most Unlucky Things That Can Happen To A Customer’s Motor," presented at the EASA Convention 2004, Austin Bonnett explores the common causes of motor failures and provides insights into how these failures can be predicted, prevented, and repaired. The paper emphasizes the importance of understanding the root causes of motor failures, which are often predictable, repeatable, and preventable.

Bonnett outlines a methodology for identifying the root causes of motor failures, which includes examining the failure mode, failure pattern, appearance, application, and maintenance history. He stresses the importance of recording critical data and measuring results to benchmark performance and make necessary upgrades or revisions.

The paper identifies the most common sources of motor problems, including issues with bearings, stators, rotor cores, shafts, misalignment, and other factors. Bearing problems are often caused by improper lubrication, contamination, and excessive vibration and shock. Improper lubrication can result from using too much or too little lubricant, incompatibility of lubricants, or using the wrong type of lubricant. Contamination can occur due to moisture, foreign materials, and corrosion, leading to bearing damage. Excessive vibration and shock can be caused by rotor unbalance, coupling unbalance, system unbalance, sudden stops or loading, and environmental influences.

Stator problems are typically related to thermal overload, severe electrical abnormalities, and contamination of the insulation system. Thermal overload can result from horsepower overload, excessive ambient temperatures, load cycling, too many starts, or failure to accelerate. Electrical abnormalities include overvoltage, undervoltage, unbalanced voltage, single phasing, transients, and partial discharge. Contamination of the insulation system can be caused by moisture, condensation, abrasion, and foreign materials.

Rotor core failures are often due to poor geometry, out of balance, defective or damaged squirrel cages, and improper joining of bars to end rings. Common shaft failures include metal fatigue, rotational bending, torsional bending, extreme temperatures, residual stress, and environmental factors. Misalignment issues can arise from problems with the motor, coupling, driven equipment, mounting base, and other factors.

Bonnett also discusses other frequent causes of motor failures, such as misapplication, misuse, inappropriate repairs, alteration of the cooling system, hazardous terminal boxes, and coupling failures. He emphasizes the importance of proper maintenance and monitoring to prevent these failures and ensure reliable motor operation.

Key Points Covered:

• Root cause methodology for identifying motor failures
• Common sources of motor problems, including bearings, stators, rotor cores, shafts, and misalignment
• Causes of bearing problems, such as improper lubrication, contamination, and excessive vibration and shock
• Stator problems related to thermal overload, electrical abnormalities, and contamination
• Rotor core failures due to poor geometry, defective squirrel cages, and improper joining of bars to end rings
• Common shaft failures, including metal fatigue, rotational bending, torsional bending, and residual stress
• Misalignment issues and other frequent causes of motor failures

Key Takeaways:

• Motor failures are often predictable, repeatable, and preventable.
• Understanding the root causes of motor failures is essential for effective troubleshooting and repair.
• Proper lubrication, contamination prevention, and vibration control are crucial for bearing health.
• Thermal overload, electrical abnormalities, and contamination are common causes of stator problems.
• Rotor core failures can result from poor geometry, defective squirrel cages, and improper joining of bars to end rings.
• Shaft failures are often due to metal fatigue, rotational bending, torsional bending, and residual stress.
• Misalignment and other factors can lead to motor failures, emphasizing the importance of proper maintenance and monitoring.

 

Chuck Yung
Senior Technical Support Specialist
Electrical Apparatus Service Association
St. Louis, MO

In the paper "Time- and Money-Saving Devices for the Service Center," presented at the EASA Convention 2015, Chuck Yung shares practical tips and innovative ideas to help service centers improve productivity and save money. With the high costs of modern testing equipment, such as surge testers and test panels, it is essential for service centers to find cost-effective solutions. This paper compiles valuable insights from EASA members and others in similar industries, offering a range of tips to enhance efficiency and reduce expenses.

One of the key areas covered is electrical testing. Yung suggests building a large shop growler using a scrap stator or a DC field and pole, which can serve as a custom growler for testing rotors. For performing AC voltage drop tests on machines with inaccessible inter-coil jumpers, he recommends using a "pick up coil" made from a solenoid coil or a small field coil. Armature testing can be simplified by using the end bracket with the brush rigging to perform a voltage drop test between bars, avoiding the need for expensive devices.

Core loss testing can be enhanced by using a surplus 400 Hz generator, which quickly reveals hot spots. Welding machines can serve as low voltage, high current test panels for drop testing interpoles or large synchronous field coils. Additionally, a wound rotor motor can be repurposed as a variable output autotransformer or a variable frequency power supply, providing versatile testing capabilities.

In the machining section, Yung highlights the use of expandable collets to grip the inside diameter of shaft clearance fits, making it faster and safer to handle end brackets. For balancing, he suggests creating a stepped shaft from a scrap shaft to hold commonly balanced fans or impellers. To reduce eye strain and mistakes when chamfering a commutator, a page magnifier mounted on a magnetic base can be used.

For aluminum rotor repairs, Yung offers an alternative to rebarring by drilling through the end ring and inserting a replacement bar, which can be MIG welded to the end ring. This method allows for quick repairs without the need for a complete rebar.

Cleaning processes can be improved with the use of automatic parts washers, which offer significant labor savings and environmental benefits. Dry ice cleaning is recommended for its portability and eco-friendliness, especially for on-site motor cleaning. For removing varnish from machine surfaces, an oxygen-rich flame from a cutting torch can be used to burn off the resin without overheating the part.

Yung also provides tips for cleaning heat exchangers, such as using bottle brushes or taking radiator-type heat exchangers to a local radiator shop for boiling out. Painting the stator core a bright color improves visibility for winders, reducing eye strain and the chance of errors. An inexpensive pull-down shade can protect winding insulation materials from contamination.

Finally, Yung advises against building an induction bearing heater, as it is more cost-effective to purchase one. However, he suggests using the heater to test coils for shorted turns. For replacement parts, local marinas or sheet metal shops can fabricate air baffles and fan covers when the original manufacturer is unavailable.

Key Points Covered:

• Electrical testing tips, including building custom growlers and using pick up coils
• Enhancing core loss testing with surplus 400 Hz generators
• Using welding machines and wound rotor motors for versatile testing
• Machining tips for handling end brackets and balancing
• Alternative methods for aluminum rotor repairs
• Cleaning processes with automatic parts washers and dry ice cleaning
• Tips for cleaning heat exchangers and painting stator cores
• Advice on purchasing induction bearing heaters and sourcing replacement parts

Key Takeaways:

• Cost-effective solutions can significantly improve productivity and reduce expenses in service centers.
• Custom-built tools and repurposed equipment can enhance testing capabilities.
• Proper cleaning and maintenance practices are essential for efficient operations.
• Investing in the right equipment, such as induction bearing heaters, can save time and money in the long run.
• Local resources, such as marinas and sheet metal shops, can provide valuable support for sourcing replacement parts.

 

Blake Parker
Miembro del Comité de Educación Técnica
High-Speed Industrial Service

Al revisar el núcleo de un estator que requiere reparación, puede ser fácil sacar conclusiones precipitadas. Hay muchos factores que se deben considerar al re apilar el núcleo del estator. Estos incluyen los materiales, la compresión y largo del núcleo, los orificios de ventilación, los espaciadores, la construcción de los orificios de ventilación y más. Este artículo se centra en tomar las medidas adecuadas para volver a apilar el núcleo de un estator y cómo garantizar que se cumpla con esas dimensiones.

Mike Howell
Especialista de Soporte Técnico de EASA

El núcleo del estator de un motor de inducción se puede fabricar utilizando laminaciones de una sola pieza (vea la Figura 1 a la izquierda) de hasta un diámetro exterior de 48 pulgadas (1200 mm) aproximadamente. Para estatores más grandes, o cuando se minimiza el material de desecho, las láminaciones del estator son segmentadas (vea la Figura 1 a la derecha). El espacio circunferencial típico entre las láminaciones segmentadas es de solo unas 0,012 pulgadas (0,3 mm), por lo que se exagera en las cifras incluidas. El número de segmentos elegidos por un fabricante para un diseño determinado puede depender de varios factores, algunos técnicos y otros económicos. Para la mayoría de las actividades de reparación del centro de servicio, las máquinas con estatores con laminaciones segmentadas se procesan de la misma forma que aquellas con laminaciones de una sola pieza. Sin embargo, hay algunas áreas que vale la pena explorar que podrían ser útiles cuando se trabaja con estatores con laminaciones segmentadas.

Mike Howell
EASA Technical Support Specialist

The two primary reasons for performing stator core testing in the service center are (1) to verify that the stator core is acceptable for continued use and in the event of a rewind, and (2) to verify that the repair process has not adversely changed the stator core condition.

The purpose of this article is to discuss how we determine, assess and compare stator core test results. It is extremely important to understand that variance in test procedures may invalidate comparison.

Mike Howell
EASA Technical Support Specialist

Induction motor stator cores can be manufactured using single-piece laminations (see Figure 1 left) up to an outside diameter of about 48 inches (1200 mm). For larger stators, or when minimizing scrap material, the stator laminations are segmented (see Figure 1 right). The typical circumferential gap between segmented laminations is only around 0.012 inches (0.3 mm), so it is exaggerated in the included figures. The number of segments chosen by a manufacturer for a given design can depend on several factors, some technical and some economic. For most service center repair activities, machines with segmented lamination stators are processed no differently than those with single-piece laminations. However, there are a few areas worth exploring that could be helpful when working with segmented lamination stators.