Introduct|on

lEEE-841 identifies the recommended practice for chem-

ical industry severe duty squirrel-cage induction motors,
600 v and below. lt was first issued in 1986 and was
significantly revised and reissued as a Standard in 1994.
Minor revisions were also made in 2001. The scope has
been increased to severe duty TEFC squirrel-cage induc-
tion motors with anti-friction bearings in sizes up to and
including 500 HP. Motor voltages of 2300 v and 4000
v have been added. Changes to the standard are
reviewed in detail below. Requirements are identified that
improve motor reliability and increase motor life.
H|story
Due to the mutual effort of users and motor manufactur-
ers, lEEE-841-1986, Recommended Practice for Chemical
lndustry Severe Duty Squirrel-Cage lnduction Motors -
600 v and below (RP841j was created. lt recognized and
addressed the special motor requirements of the contin-
uous-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.
lEEE standards are required to be revised and updated
every 5 years. ln 1990, a Project Authorization Request
(PARj was submitted by the lAS Petroleum and Chemical
lndustry Committee to revise RP841. The lEEE Standards
Board approved the PAR and a new P841 Working
Group was formed.
Some shortcomings were noted in the original standard:
1. A significant number of large petrochemical users
were still purchasing severe duty NEMA frame TEFC
motors using internal company specifications.
2. The language used was "should" and not "shall".
This language made it difficult to use it as a specifica-
tion reference in a purchase order.
3. Several important technical requirements were
optional on the part of manufacturers. Examples are the
"preference for cast iron frames" and the "recommenda-
tion" that bearing temperature rise at a rated load not
to exceed 45C (50C on two-pole motorsj.
4. Motor design criteria in a number of areas failed to
meet the need of the petrochemical industry. Areas of
specific concern were vibration levels, terminal box size,
shaft runout and bearing life.
5. Users recognized that bearing failures were the lead-
ing cause of NEMA frame motor failures. Lubricant
contamination and lack of lubrication/overlubrication were
believed to be the primary causes of these failures.
Users wanted new requirements in the revised standard
to significantly reduce bearing failures.
6. There was a demand to expand the scope beyond
NEMA frame sizes. European manufacturers were begin-
ning to compete in the North American marketplace with
TEFC designs up to 500 HP. When purchasing TEFC
designs from 250 to 500 horsepower, users generally
would purchase a custom design based on standard APl
541 or their own specifications. lf the standard could
incorporate requirements up to 500 HP, users felt that
manufacturers would produce lower cost standardized
designs that could be stocked and made readily avail-
able for routine purchases and emergency situations.
Rev|sed Scope
Based on the above recommendations, the decision was
made to expand the scope of the standard to include
TEFC designs up through 500 horsepower with anti-
friction bearings. Both low voltage (up to 600vj random
wound and medium voltage form wound insulation sys-
tems are now included. Excluded from the scope of this
standard are motors with sleeve bearings and additional
specific features required for Division 1 explosion-proof
motors. The user now has the option of using either APl
541 or lEEE 841 in the event that anti-friction bearings
are specified for motors up to 500 horsepower. These
changes were incorporated in 1994.
Rev|ew of IEEE Standard
841-1994
This section will review the new requirements and the
reasons for the changes. An overview of the mechanical
design features required by the standard is shown in
Table 1 on page 2.
Serv|ce Cond|t|ons
The ambient temperature range for "Usual Service
Conditions" was modified by reducing the lower tem-
perature limit from -15 to -25C, more closely reflecting
actual temperatures experienced by motors in petro-
chemical plants.
"Load inertia greater than and/or starting conditions
more severe than specified in Section 12.54 of NEMA
MG-1-1993" was added to the list of "Usual Service
Conditions."
Rat|ngs
A note was added recommending that users apply
motors within their rating based upon a 1.0 service fac-
tor. (Do not extend operation into the 1.15 service fac-
tor for normal use.j This practice provides for long term
reliability and still allows for short-term overload opera-
2003 Clarage
Motor Standards for the
Chem|ca| Process Industry
Standard IEEE-841
ED-2100
/nfo|mat|on and Recommendat|ons fo| t|e Eng|nee|
ENGINEERING DATA
Page 2 Engineering Data 2100
The new standard, in addition to pointing out the need
for consultation with the manufacturer to avoid problems
when using the lEEE-841 motor with adjustable speed
drives, also lists the type of problems one might experi-
ence. These problems include excessive winding tem-
peratures due to higher harmonics and insufficient cool-
ing, 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 cor-
rection capacitors, high shaft voltages, and mechanical
failure of the motor or coupling due to torque pulsations,
mechanical resonance or operation at excess speeds.
Insu|at|on System and Temperature
R|se
The thermal rating of the insulation system, including the
lead cables, has been increased from a minimum of
Class B to Class F with a permissible temperature rise
of 80C at 1.0 service factor. This change reflects the
current insulation system designs provided by most
manufacturers for severe duty motors.
The new standard covers rated voltages up to 4000 v
versus voltages up to only 600 v for RP841. Both form
wound and random wound stator windings are allowed.
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. The thermal classification of the insulation sys-
tem to form windings is per lEEE Std. 275-1992. Form
wound insulation systems are also required for sealed
and capable of passing the water immersion test.
Additional requirements include a surge withstand capa-
bility of 3.5 per unit at a rise time of 0.1 - 0.2 micro-
seconds and 5.0 per unit at a rise time of 5.0 micro-
seconds or greater.
Random windings meeting the thermal classification
requirements of lEEE Std. 117-1974 are the standard
requirements for voltages up to 600 v. Since there is
less evidence of problems with steep-fronted surges in
random winding up to 600 v, the standard imposes no
surge performance requirements for random windings.
Phase insulation, however, in addition to varnish, is
required to be used between the phases of random
windings to improve insulation integrity.
The insulation system, including leads, must be compat-
ible with mineral oil. This provision insures that the motor
tion (but not more than 15%j. Continued operation
above the 1.0 service factor significantly decreases
motor life due to increased winding and bearing tem-
perature rise. Manufacturers still plan to continue market-
ing motors with 1.15 service factor on their nameplate
to meet current market expectations.
Frame assignments continue to be in accordance with
NEMA MG-13-1984. Note that for frame numbers above
445, motor dimensions may not always be uniform from
manufacturer to manufacturer. Ending designations (beyond
the Tj are also subject to individual interpretations.
Rated voltages of 200 v for low voltage systems and
2300 v and 4000 v for medium voltage systems were
added consistent with the revised scope. The standard
lists normally used voltages for 60 Hz systems. Other
voltages may be available by special order or by re-
rating. Dual voltage motors are acceptable only for
2300/4000 v.
The standard limits the enclosure to totally enclosed,
which is the North American designation covering both
enclosure type and cooling style. TEFC is customarily
supplied except when TENv may be the only practical
alternative on smaller frame sizes.
The international lP codes, which classify degrees of
protection by enclosures, are newly referenced. Protection
for terminal boxes is required by lP-55. The first code
digit (5j indicates a machine protected against dust entry.
The second digit (4j indicates protection against splash-
ing water or (5j indicates protection against water jets.
lf a replaceable shaft seal is used to achieve lP-55 bear-
ing protection, it is required to be the noncontact or
noncontacting-while-rotating type with a minimum
expected seal life of 5 years under usual service condi-
tions. The introduction of the new requirement to meet
lP-55 for bearing protection is expected to result in a
significant reduction in bearing failures.
E|ectr|ca| Des|gn
Motors continue to be NEMA design B, with NEMA
starting capabilities and power supply variations in
accordance with the current version of NEMA MG-1-
1993. The specified performance of the machine does
not require a special electrical design that could
adversely impact the availability of new motors.
7ao|e 1. Mec|an|ca| Const|0ct|on Feat0|es /EEE 841 Moto|
Component Requ|rement Benef|t
Regreasable Maintainability
Grease outlet external to fan cover Ease of relubrication
lnner bearing cap Lubricant containment
Bearings lP55 protection on 324 T/TS frames
Reduced lubricant contamination
and larger
45C temperature rise limit
Longer lubricant and bearing life
(50 on 2 polej
Shaft Limit on shaft runout Reduced vibration

All cast iron construction
Structural integrity, corrosion resistance and
Frames, endshields longer life
and fan covers Motor foot flatness/planity and Reduced installation time and
draft angle improved alignment

Terminal boxes
Cast iron up to 445T frames Rugged design
Minimum size defined Oversized to improve quality of terminations
Engineering Data 2100 Page 3
insulation system will be suitable for use with oil mist
lubrication systems. Some additional modifications, how-
ever, are usually required to make the lEEE 841 motor
suitable for use with oil mist lubrication systems.
Bear|ngs and Lubr|cat|on
lnner bearing caps are now 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 presentj is also
now specifically required to facilitate relubrication.
Bearing temperature rise limits are mandatory as
opposed to suggested in RP841-1986. When direct
coupled, the stabilized bearing temperature rise at rated
load must not exceed 45C (50C on two-pole motorsj.
A minimum bearing L-10 life requirement based on
NEMA defined external belt loads was included in
RP841-1994. The new standard also defines belt loads
for determining bearing L-10 life in above NEMA frame
size motors. Bearing life will improve due to the lower
limits imposed on bearing temperature rise.
Rotor and Shaft
The specifications impose no new requirements on the
rotor, but new shaft runout limits are about one-half of
those in NEMA MG-1-1993. Motors with shafts that meet
these limits for TlR should be easier to properly install
and align. The lower limits will also result in reduced
bearing loads and system vibration.
Frames and Endsh|e|ds
RP841-1986 primarily offered suggestions for materials
and performance. The new standard requires that
frames, endshields and fan covers shall be cast iron.
The old standard would have allowed aluminum and
even plastic material for these components. ln addition
to improving the durability and structural integrity of the
motors, the standard has new performance requirements
on foot flatness (0.005 inch maximum foot differentialj
and specifies a maximum draft angle of 1.5 degrees on
the top surface of the casting surrounding the foot
mounting holes. These requirements were designed to
eliminate soft foot conditions and shifting of the motor
position during alignment due to the tightening of the
mounting bolt on a sloping surface. A drilled and tap
hole for a frame ground is also a requirement.
Term|na| Boxes and Term|na| Leads
Terminal boxes on 600 v NEMA frame motors are now
required to be cast iron. Terminal box volume must have
a minimum of at least twice the volume specified in
Section 11.06.2 of NEMA MG-1-1993.
V|brat|on
RP841-1986 referred to ANSl/NEMA-MG1-1978 for vibra-
tion limits. These limits allowed vibration displacements
as high as 1 mil on two-pole motors and 1.5 mils on
four-pole motors (0.1 to 0.14 inches per second veloc-
ity assuming all vibration at running speedj. Users felt
that this level of vibration was excessive and resulted in
unnecessary bearing failures. On the other hand, manu-
facturers were reluctant to reduce vibration levels on
production line motors due to the potential impact on
manufacturing cost.
Data was requested from manufacturers and users on
the average vibration of a large population of motors,
running uncoupled and unloaded. Data provided by one
manufacturer indicated a mean vibration level of 0.03
inches/second for 3,048 new motors rated from 15 to
250 horsepower. One user had also collected data on
vibration levels of several thousand motors rebuilt in a
dedicated repair facility on a plant site. The data showed
that vibration levels significantly below 0.08 inches per
second were achieved on most of the rebuilt motors.
From the data submitted, the P841 Working Group felt
that the overall (unfilteredj vibration limits should be
reduced to about one-half of the levels specified in
NEMA MG1-1978. Accordingly, the unfiltered vibration
limits were set at 0.08 inches/sec.
The other concern of users was the vibration at twice
running speed (2xj and twice line frequency (2fj. At these
frequencies the vibration displacement has a much
greater detrimental effect than the same displacement at
running speed. Also, the twice frequency (2fj vibration is
inherent to the motor design and the user can do noth-
ing to reduce this vibration component after the motor
is manufactured. A consensus was reached to place a
limit of 0.05 inches/sec on the 2x and 2f filtered vibra-
tion levels. Motor unfiltered axial vibration was also
limited to 0.06 inches/sec on bearing housings. This
axial vibration limit does not apply to roller bearings.
Corros|on-Res|stant Treatment
A new requirement was added to apply a lubricant dur-
ing assembly to all unplated threaded surfaces to facili-
tate removal. The provision to protect stator and rotor
air-gap surfaces against moisture and corrosion was
strengthened by including protection for all exposed
internal stator, rotor and shaft surfaces.
Eff|c|ency
During the early 60's, NEMA introduced the T frame
design that increased motor operating temperatures and
had the effect of reducing efficiency and power factor.
Energy conservation programs during the 1980's, due to
the high cost of building new power facilities, fostered
the need to use energy efficient motors.
ln 1992, the Energy Act of 1991 was amended to include
nominal efficiency requirements at full load for most
general-purpose polyphase squirrel cage induction motors
between 1 and 200 horsepower (manufactured for sale
in the U.S.j. The new lEEE-841 standard has a motor
efficiency table, which includes these legislated values of
nominal efficiency. ln addition, the table also includes full
load efficiency requirements for motors above 200 horse-
power at both low and medium voltage levels. Efficiency
values for low voltage motors about 200 horsepower are
derived from Table 12-10 in NEMA MG-1-1993. Efficiency
values for medium voltage motors (2300/4000 vj were
developed by the P841 Working Group.
Two values are defined in the table. The nominal effi-
ciency, which is to be nameplated on the motor, repre-
sents the average efficiency of a large population of
motors of the same design. The second value indicates
the minimum values of efficiency that any motor of that
design would have, due to variations in materials, man-
ufacturing processes and test repeatability.
The standard also revises the test method by which
motor efficiency must be determined. lEEE 112-1991
Page 4 Engineering Data 2100
Method B, which utilizes a dynamometer, is required for
all motor efficiency testing.
The efficiencies also improved for Std. 841-2001 on
some motors that are 200 HP and less. The efficiency
for 2001 revision is given in Table 2.
Space Heaters
Manufacturers are now required to provide on the motor
nameplate the maximum surface temperature of the
heater when operated at a rated voltage in a 40C ambi-
ent. A note was added in the standard to remind users
to specify the maximum heater surface temperature
allowed for gas or vapor involved.
Namep|ate
The nameplate material is now required to be stainless
steel consistent with manufacturers' normal practice.
Motor weight, maximum space heater surface tempera-
ture and guaranteed minimum efficiency have been
added to the nameplate.
Tests
Prior to the time of shipment, manufacturers are now
required to take five unfiltered vibration readings (veloc-
ityj at no load using an elastic or rigid mount. vibration
measurements are made on the drive end (horizontal,
vertical and axialj and the opposite drive end (horizontal
and verticalj. 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.
The standard was modified to clarify that 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.
Cost Benef|ts Ana|ys|s
Cost data obtained from several motor manufacturers
indicates that for TEFC motors up to 200 horsepower,
the cost of a new motor complying with lEEE 841-1994
7ao|e 2. Eff|c|enc|es of Enc|osed Moto|s

Vo|tage
2-Po|e 4-Po|e 6-Po|e 8-Po|e
kW HP
C|ass
Nom. M|n. Nom. M|n. Nom. M|n. Nom. M|n.
Eff|c. % Eff|c. % Eff|c. % Eff|c. % Eff|c. % Eff|c. % Eff|c. % Eff|c. %
.75 1 600 v 77.0 74.0 84.0 81.5 81.5 78.5 75.5 72.0
1.1 1.5 600 v 84.0 81.5 85.5 82.5 86.5 84.0 78.5 75.5
1.5 2 600 v 85.5 82.5 85.5 82.5 87.5 85.5 84.0 81.5
2.2 3 600 v 86.5 84.0 88.5 86.5 88.5 86.5 85.5 82.5
3.7 5 600 v 88.5 86.5 88.5 86.5 88.5 86.5 86.5 84.0
5.5 7.5 600 v 89.5 87.5 90.2 88.5 90.2 88.5 86.5 84.0
7.5 10 600 v 90.2 88.5 90.2 88.5 90.2 88.5 89.5 87.5
11 15 600 v 91.0 89.5 91.7 90.2 91.0 89.5 89.5 87.5
15 20 600 v 91.0 89.5 91.7 90.2 91.0 89.5 90.2 88.5
19 25 600 v 91.7 90.2 93.0 91.7 92.4 91.0 90.2 88.5
22 30 600 v 91.7 90.2 93.0 91.7 92.4 91.0 91.7 90.2
30 40 600 v 92.4 91.0 93.6 92.4 93.6 92.4 91.7 90.2
37 50 600 v 93.0 91.7 93.6 92.4 93.6 92.4 92.4 91.0
45 60 600 v 93.6 92.4 94.1 93.0 94.1 93.0 92.4 91.0
55 75 600 v 93.6 92.4 94.5 93.6 94.1 93.0 93.6 92.4
75 100 600 v 94.1 93.0 95.0 94.1 94.5 93.6 93.6 92.4
95 125 600 v 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 94.5 93.6 94.1 93.0
110 150 600 v 95.0 94.1 95.4 94.5 95.4 94.5 94.1 93.0
150 200 600 v 95.4 94.5 95.4 94.5 95.4 94.5 94.5 93.6

190 250
600 v 95.4 94.5 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 94.5 93.6
2300\4000 v 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1

220 300
600 v 95.4 94.5 95.4 94.5 95.0 94.1 - -
2300/4000 v 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1

260 350
600 v 95.4 94.5 95.4 94.5 95.0 94.1 - -
2300/4000 v 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1

300 400
600 95.4 94.5 95.4 94.5 - - - -
2300/4000 v 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1

340 450
600 v 95.4 94.5 94.5 94.5 - - - -
2300/4000 v 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1

370 500
600 v 95.4 94.5 95.4 94.5 - - - -
2300/4000 v 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1 95.0 94.1
* Minimum efficiency based on 20% loss difference. Nominal efficiency values in this table, up to and including
150 kW (200 hpj, exceed the requirements of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. For the definition of nominal and
minimum efficiencies, see Section 12.59.2 of NEMA MG 1-1998.
Engineering Data 2100 Page 5
will be approximately 10-12% higher than the cost of a
new motor of the same efficiency class that complies
with the original standard RP841. Accurate cost data for
motors in the range of 250-500 horsepower is not avail-
able, since most manufactures have not designed a
sufficient number of motors meeting the new standard
in this size range. Users who elect to make the change
from a standard efficiency motor meeting RP841 to an
energy efficient motor complying with lEEE-841-1994
may expect an increase in price of as much as 35%.
The largest portion of the increase, approximately 25%,
is due to the change from a standard to an energy
efficient design.
Data from one large industrial plant indicates that
because of the design improvements in lEEE-841
motors, the number of motor failures would be expected
to decrease to approximately 50% of failure levels expe-
rienced with older designs of severe duty induction
motors. lf all motors in a plant facility were replaced
with the new design over a period of time, this would
translate into a doubling of the mean t|me oetween fa||-
0|es for motors at the plant, and could result in a sig-
nificant reduction in production losses attributable to
motor failures.
lf the mean t|me oetween fa||0|e for a motor were to
double, say from 5 to 10 years, the minimum savings
(not counting production loss savingsj would be the
avoided cost of repairing the motor one time in 10
years. lf the purchase price of a severe duty motor
meeting lEEE-841-1986 (RP841j is "n" dollars, the incre-
mental additional dollars to purchase a motor meeting
the requirements of lEEE-841-1994 is equal to (0.1nj. lf
the repair cost is equal to "r" per unit of the new motor
cost or (rj(nj, then the calculated return on investment
in percent for the purchase of the new lEEE-841 motor
is:
ROl = (savings per year x 100j/incremental investment
ROl = (rj (nj (1/10j (100j/ (0.1 nj
ROl = 100 r
lf the minimum expected return on investment is 25%,
then the minimum repair cost at which it would be
beneficial to purchase a new lEEE 841 motor would be
25% of the new motor cost "n". Typically, for motors in
NEMA frame sizes, the average repair cost exceeds 25%
of the new motor costs. The conclusion reached is that
purchase of the lEEE-841 motor appears to be attractive
from a business perspective based on the assumptions
made in this analysis.
Users who invest in new lEEE-841-1994 motors should
also remember that to insure continual benefit, motor
maintenance and repair standards should also reflect the
minimum requirements of the new standard. Users
should contact their local motor repair shop and discuss
repair procedures to insure that repaired motors also
comply with applicable sections of the new standards.
Conc|us|on
lEEE-841-1994 has made a number of significant
improvements to RP841 in order to enhance the reli-
ability and maintainability of severe duty motors used in
the petrochemical industry. The initial response to the
new standard has been positive, with inquiries coming
from various other industries such as automotive and
pulp and paper.
References
1. ANSl/lEEE Std. 841-1986, lEEE recommended prac-
tice for chemical industry severe duty squirrel-cage
induction motors-600 v and below. (Also 1994 and
2001j
2. A.W. Smith and P841 WG Members, "lntroduction
to lEEE 841-1986, Recommended Practice for Chemical
lndustry Severe Duty Squirrel-Cage lnduction Motors -
600 v and Below," lEEE Transactions on lndustry
Applic., vol. 2- No. 1, Jan/Feb 1988
3. Richard L. Doughty, "lntroduction to lEEE Standard
for Petroleum and Chemical lndustry- Severe Duty
Totally Enclosed Fan-Cooled (TEFCj Squirrel Cage
lnduction Motors - up to and including 500 HP", 1995
4. NEMA Standards Publication No. MG 1-1993,
Revision No. 1, December 7, 1993, Motors and
Generators
5. APl Standard 541, Form-Wound Squirrel Cage
lnduction Motors - 250 Horsepower and Larger, Second
Edition, November, 1987
6. lEEE Std. 841-1994, lEEE Standard for Petroleum
and Chemical lndustry - Severe Duty Totally Enclosed
Fan-Cooled (TEFCj Squirrel Cage lnduction Motors -up
to and including 500 HP
7. lEEE Std. 522-1992, lEEE Guide for Testing Turn-to-
Turn lnsulation on Form-Wound Stator Coils for
Alternating Current Rotating Electric Machines