Efficiency Impact of Rewinding

A poorly executed rewind can reduce motor efficiency by 1–3%. The main causes of efficiency reduction:

  • Core burn-off temperature too high: Stripping old windings by burning off insulation in an oven at >350°C degrades the lamination steel, increasing core losses. EASA recommends <315°C and time-limited cycles.
  • Copper fill reduction: Rewinders may use slightly smaller wire to fit the groove, reducing conductor cross-section and increasing resistance losses.
  • Insulation quality: Using lower-grade insulation materials reduces dielectric strength and can reduce cooling efficiency.

A quality rewind following EASA/IEC 60034-23 guidelines should preserve original efficiency within ±0.5%. Ask the rewinder for their documented rewind procedure and what oven temperature and time they use for core strip.

Cost Analysis: Rewind vs Replace

Key variables: rewind cost, replacement motor cost, energy cost (£/kWh), operating hours/year, efficiency difference.

Motor powerTypical rewind costIE3 replacement costEfficiency gain (IE1→IE3)Annual saving (6,000 h)Simple payback for replacement
7.5 kW£300–500£400–600~4.6%~£48~4–6 years over rewind
15 kW£500–700£700–1,000~3.9%~£74~3–4 years
37 kW£800–1,200£1,500–2,200~2.8%~£150~3–5 years
75 kW£1,500–2,500£3,000–5,000~2.4%~£260~4–6 years
200 kW£3,000–6,000£9,000–15,000~2.0%~£540~8–12 years

Based on £0.15/kWh, full-load operation, IE1 original motor

Decision Criteria

Replace with IE3 when:

  • Motor is <37 kW and runs >4,000 h/year on continuous duty
  • Original motor is IE1 (standard efficiency) — the efficiency gap is largest
  • Motor has failed multiple times (rewind history exists) — indicates underlying problem
  • Replacement availability is assured (stock item vs 6-week delivery for a non-standard frame)
  • Regulatory compliance: replacing an IE1 with a rewind now requires the rewind to meet IE3 levels in some jurisdictions

Rewind when:

  • Motor is >75 kW and replacement lead time would cause unacceptable downtime
  • Motor is a special design (vertical shaft, marine duty, non-standard frame) where replacement is expensive or unavailable
  • Motor is IE2 or higher — efficiency gain from replacement is marginal
  • Rewind cost is less than 50% of replacement cost and annual operating hours are low (<2,000 h/year)

Specifying a Quality Rewind

If rewinding, specify to the rewinder:

  1. Core strip method: chemical strip or oven at <315°C maximum, for minimum time
  2. Core loss test before and after strip — losses must not increase by >20%
  3. Same wire gauge and turns per coil as original design (provide original test report if available)
  4. Class F or H insulation system (even if original was Class B)
  5. Full load test after rewind — compare efficiency to original nameplate data
  6. EASA Q certification or equivalent — indicates rewinder follows the AC Motor Repair Standard