HEC decides to establish Pakistan Technology Council

Higher Education Commission (HEC) has decided to establish Pakistan Technology Council (PTC) with the purpose to promoting technological education in the country. Sources in HEC told Business Recorder here on Monday that the decision regarding the establishment of Pakistan Technology Council was taken in a meeting held here on Monday. Sources said that Pakistan needs to have more technological access and the country's universities need to develop their respective curriculum as per requirements of international standards to promote technical education. 

Our neighbouring countries like India, Sri Lanka and China are far ahead than Pakistan in technological education, which is based both on theory and practice, as technological education has always been neglected in Pakistan, despite the fact that the subject has now become the basic pillar of the Information Technology, they added. 

Sources added that HEC has also decided to have a meeting with heads of Inter University Consortium for Promotion of Social Sciences (IUCPSS) in Pakistan, a country's first ever inter university alliance formed by nine leading universities of Pakistan on September 15. Member institutions of Inter University Consortium included Islamia University Bahawalpur, Shah Abdul Latif University Khairpur, Quaid-e Azam University (QAU), University of Gujrat, University of Balochistan Quetta, GC University Faisalabad, Institute of Management Sciences (IMS) Peshawar, and COMSATS Institute of Information Technology Abbottabad. 

"IUCPSS had decided to send a request for the release of Rs 100 million from HEC for establishment of Pakistan Council of Social Sciences Research (PCSSR) in order to improve the research and development activities in social sciences across the country, but it has not put forward any demand formally in front of HEC", sources revealed. 

Sources said that during the upcoming meeting with IUCPSS, the final decision regarding the release of Rs 100 million for PCSSR would be taken. The status of the council will be autonomous and will work under the supervision of Board of Directors and Advisory Board, comprising renowned and experienced social scientists from academia, civil society and research and development organisations. 

IUCPSS has already presented some recommendations in front of the government that include: social science needs experimentations and proper observation, so laboratories to be established, the overall share of scholarships in social sciences should be increased by HEC and Joint research projects of social sciences among different universities should be initiated. 

OUR MISSION (PTC)

When the PEC (Pakistan Engineering Council) had announced that it would not consider the four-year B.Tech degree equivalent to the BSc engineering then PSBTE (Pakistan Society of B-Tech Engineers) decided the government should make a separate council for Engineering technologists (DAE, B-Tech, BS-Tech, M-Tech) and Technicians, named “Pakistan Technologists Council (PTC)".

Now the action Committe of PSBTE decided in his grand meating with all Engineering Technologists Associations of Pakistan and Students that the GOVT of Pakistan should take a serious action on the bill of establishment of "PAKISTAN TECHNOLOGISTS COUNCIL" whose already pending in "Ministery of Science and Technology" due to third-class objections of PEC (Pakistan Engineering Council).

PAKISTAN TECHNOLOGISTS COUNCIL (PTC)

Why we Demand the establishment of PTC (Pakistan Technologists Council):Because PTC is the only forum which will effectively project our true image, contribution in progress and prosperity of pakistan. This forum will eliminate all disparities like

1) Higher Education and Admision in Universities for MS Engineering

2) Equal Empolyement and job Oppertunities as enjoyed by BE Students.

3) Encourage original research in Technical education, conservation and economic utilization of the resources of the country.

4) Scale and Scope should be define in Gazte of Pakistan like different department policies

5) Funds Allocations, Curicula updates and Degree Equivalency

6) This forum will register all Technologist (DAE, B-Tech, BS-Tech, M.Tech Engg) and Technician.

7) This forum will also provide co-ordination between provencial, international and national level technical education authorties, like SDC, NTB, TEVTA, NEVTEC, IET and colleges of technologies

8) This forum will effectively encounter propaganda spread by PEC.

9) Help in the acquisition and exchange of technical knowledge.

10) Promotion of all professional interest and social welfare of its members.

11) To disseminate information and knowledge among technologist, technician and engineers through lectures, conferences, seminars and publication of journal and papers. 

Therefore we request to all Engineering Technologists (DAE, B-Tech, BS-Tech, M-Tech) Students that now be a part of PSBTE (PAKISTAN SOCIETY OF B-TECH ENGINEERS) and unite for the establishment of "Pakistan Technologists Council"

Govt contemplating to resolve  B.Tech degree’s equivalence  issue

SPECIAL REPORT IBD: As the government takes a major policy shift to promote technical and vocational education in the country, setting up of Pakistan Technology Council (PTC) is under active consideration of the government to resolve the issue of educational equivalence of various technical education programmes with the formal education qualification.
An official source told Technology Times that the Ministry of Science and Technology has sought suggestions from the private sector to ascertain the demand of setting up an autonomous body, PTC, to regulate the technical and vocational education. He said that the promotion of technical and vocational education was supported by the donors community, which also wants their wide acceptability to provide job opportunities to the large number of qualified youth.
The need for PTC was felt as the highest technical education qualification of B-Tech is still not accepted as a formal degree equivalent to the B. Sc Engineering by the Pakistan Engineering Council.
Chairman Pakistan Council of Technologists (PCT), Prof. Javed Iqbal told this scribe that Secretary Ministry of Science and Technology Akhlaq Ahmad Tarar in a recent meeting had agreed to establish a separate body to resolve the longstanding issues of B-Tech graduates.
He said that the ministry always invited comments from public departments where engineers were heading the departments, however, they never gave comments in the favour of B-Tech graduates due to their biased approach. Therefore, the proposal was floated to invite the comments from the private sector.
B-Tech graduates are deprived of access to higher studies, job opportunities and promotions in the public departments as their degree of B-Tech (Hons) is not accepted equivalent to BSc/BE from the last 40 years.
“The technologists holding B-Tech qualification have filed several cases in courts and got 17 decisions in their favour, declaring their degree equivalent to B.Sc/BE but no decision is implemented so far. The HEC and FPSC also recognize the B-Techs at par with the BSc engineers,” he explained.
It is to be mentioned that in Punjab, only B.Tech degree is being offered at the Govt. College of Technologies under TEVTA and other private sector universities. These GCTs are affiliated with related UETs that are focusing only on the Engineering Degrees on the directives of PEC.
Engr Waseem Raja , Chairman, Pakistan Society of B.Tech Engineers (PSBTE), told this scribe, “In a recently held meeting, we had explained to the Ministry of Science and Technology that a recently held survey of several technical departments, more than 65 per cent Intermediate and DAE students are getting admission in Engineering Technology (B.Tech/BSc Tech) rather than Engineering Sciences (BE/BSc Engg). So it establishes the fact that PTC establishment is desperately needed in order to protect the future of over 500,000 graduates.”
There is a basic difference between Engineering Sciences and Engineering Technology as the Engineering Sciences are related to designed and analytical field of engineering while Engineering Technology is a field of planning, control and applied engineering.
Experts are of the opinion that in Pakistan, where about 90 per cent of the machines are imported, operated and maintained, B-Tech graduates have more practical experience of handling the equipment that the B.Sc engineers, having skills only of designing machines, have very little scope in the country.
They supported the idea of setting up PTC as it would more successfully handle the qualification issues of technical and vocational education.

FEDERAL PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

RECRUITMENT WING

Subject:- MINUTES OF MEETING CONVENED AT THE FEDERAL PUBLIC 

SERVICE COMMISSION (FPSC) TO DISCUSS THE STATUS/ 

EQUIVALENCE OF DEGREES AWARDED TO TECHNOLOGISTS

On the request of the Chairman, Pakistan Council of Technologists (PCT) 

to the Chairman FPSC to discuss and seek solution to the problems being faced 

by technologists, a meeting on the subject was convened at 10.00 AM on 19-02-

2011 in the FPSC Conference Room.

2.      The meeting was chaired by Maj. Gen. (Retd) Ovais Mushtaq Qureshi, 

Member FPSC. The following officers attended the meeting.

i. Mr. Sadiq Ali Anjum, Director General (Recruitment), FPSC.

ii. Mr. Rahim Baksh Channa, Director General (A&A) HEC.

iii. Mr. M. Javeed Khan, Advisor HEC.

iv. Mr. Anjum Pervez Addl.General Manager, (Infrastructure) Pakistan 

Railways.

v. Brig. Mushtaq Ahmad, DR&S, E-in-C’s Branch DP&A Dte, GHQ, 

Rawalpindi.

vi. Engr. Z.M. Peracha, Secretary/Registrar, Pakistan Engineering 

Council (PEC).

vii. Engr. Dr. Nasir Mahmood Khan, Additional Registrar, PEC.

viii. Mr. Zafar Iqbal Minhas, MTLA, PEC.

ix. Mr. Safdar, Superintending Engineer, Pak. PWD.

x. Mr. Ramiz Ahmad Director (FS), FPSC.

xi. Mr. Azmat Hayat Malik, Director (T&S), FPSC.

xii. A delegation from the Pakistan Council of Technologists 

comprising:-

a. Prof. Javed Iqbal, Chairman,

b. M. Farooq Raja, Secretary,

c. Muhammad Tahir,

d. Abid Bukhari,

e. Ijar Sulehri, 

f. Imam Buksh,

g. M. Yaqoob Raza,

h. Khurshid Shanwari.Page 2 of 5

3.        Mr. Naguib Ullah Malik, Member FPSC could not attend the meeting due 

to his preoccupation.

4.        After recitation from the Holy Quran, the chair welcomed the participants 

and apprised the meeting that the main agenda and purpose of the meeting was 

to take all stakeholders on board on the issue of equivalence of B.Tech (Hons) 

degree and resolve its relationship/equivalence with Bachelor of Engineering.  

Thereafter, representatives of the Pakistan Council of Technologists (PCT) were 

asked to give presentation on the issue. 

5.        Secretary, (PCT) presented that since the inception of B.Tech Programme 

in 1973, the B.Tech (Hons) degree has been treated as equivalent to Bachelor of 

Engineering and as such the B.Tech (Hons) degree holders are being recruited 

for posts where the required qualification is BE.  In support of his claim, he stated 

that the disciplines of engineering and technology overlap each other and there 

are a lot of commonalities between the two.  He also cited a decision of HEC 

wherein HEC had recognized the B.Tech (Hons) degree equivalent to BE 

degree.                                                         

Another justification that was cited was the Judgment of the Supreme Court 

taken in Suo Moto Review Petition 52 of 1993 (Annex-I) which related to 

equivalence of B.Tech (Hons) degree with BE degree.                     

He and the other participants of PCT argued that the degree of B.Tech (Hons) 

should be treated at par with BE and the recruitment of B.Tech (Hons) degree 

holders against the posts where BE is the required qualification be accepted by  

FPSC which had ruled that B.Tech (Hons) degree is not acceptable where B.E. is 

the prescribed qualification on the basis of resolutions passed by the PEC in its 

22

nd

Annual General Body Meeting held on 17.4.2010 and HEC vide their letter 

dated 1.9.2010 (Annexes II & III).

6.        On the issues brought out by Secretary, PCT, the views expressed by 

other stakeholders and their stance on these issues was as under:

HEC: The Adviser HEC reiterated their earlier stance taken in HEC’s 39

th

Meeting held on 12.2.1998 according to which the two degrees do have 

some commonalities of subjects but are not to be treated as equivalent to 

one another. However they contended that the employer is the best judge Page 3 of 5

to determine the type of qualification required for a particular job. (The 

HEC decision is attached as Annex-III):

(i) MES/E-in-C: The representative of E-in-C stated that on the basis of their 

past experience it was the considered opinion of GHQ that the holders of 

B.Tech (Hons) could only be suitably employed in BS-16 posts unless 

otherwise provided in the recruitment rules. But to recruit them directly 

against posts in grade 17 and above where B.E is the required 

qualification is not appropriate because they do not possess the desired

level of knowledge and expertise possessed by holders of BE degree and 

doing so would be unfair for the profession of Engineering. If the two 

degrees are accepted as equivalent then the quality of work relating to 

Engineering is likely to be seriously compromised. 

(ii) Railways: The representative of the Railways was of the view that though 

the technologists are contributing a lot in his department, the absence of 

any regulatory regime to standardize the curriculum and qualification 

standards of B.Tech (Hons) degree inhibits the recruitment of holders of 

B.Tech (Hons) against posts requiring degree of Bachelors of 

Engineering. 

(iii) Pak PWD: The representative was of the view that pre-requisites for 

admission in disciplines of B.Tech and B.E. should also be taken into 

account while taking decision on equivalence of the two degrees which,

according to him, can never be treated as equivalent.

(iv) PEC: The representative of PEC stated that the B.Tech (Hons) degree is 

not accredited by PEC. In fact “Technology” and “Engineering” are two 

separate and distinct streams, with different, distinct syllabi and 

programme objectives. This has also been the considered view of all the 

Vice-Chancellors of UETs, who are themselves the degree awarding 

authorities. Under the provisions of the PEC Act, the “Accredited 

Engineering Qualification” means any of the qualifications included in First 

Schedule or Second Schedule of the Act. The B.Tech (Pass) or B.Tech 

(Hons) had never been included in the said schedules. [In the recent past Page 4 of 5

the PEC in its 22

nd

Annual General Body Meeting has adopted two 

resolutions regarding non acceptance of B.Tech degree as equivalent to 

B.E. degree vide their letter dated 15.11.2010 (Annex-IV).

According to PEC, the regulations and monitoring of “Technology” 

education in Pakistan had not been assigned to any Regulatory Body 

which not only caused deterioration, but resulted in frustration amongst 

the technologists.

7.       Representatives of the FPSC informed the participants that as far as 

recruitment through FPSC is concerned, it is made strictly in accordance with the 

recruitment rules notified by the concerned Ministries/ Divisions/Departments. 

For equivalence/relevance of educational qualifications, FPSC depends on the 

advice of the HEC or other statutory regulatory bodies such as PEC, PMDC, 

PNC, etc. Since PCT is not a statutory body, it does not fall within this category.  

If notified recruitment rules require a BE degree, against it only candidates 

possessing a BE degree can be appointed. The technologists/ PCT may 

approach the users i.e. the departments concerned to provide for the qualification 

of B.Tech (Hons) degree in the recruitment rules of the respective posts, if it suits 

the end users. The department can re-evaluate the requirement of utilization of 

B.Tech (Hons) degree for various posts filled through FPSC and accordingly 

appropriate provisions in the rules for B.Tech (Hons) be created, if so desired. Till 

then the FPSC will continue to be guided by the PEC Act 1976 as amended from 

time to time, and decision of HEC and PEC of not accepting both the degrees as

equivalent will be accepted. The contention of the Technologists that the B.Tech 

(Hons) degree has been accepted as equivalent to B.E. by the HEC has also not 

been proved or supported by the HEC itself. The HEC’s stance is that both the 

degrees have some commonalities and it is for the employer to determine their 

suitability for a particular job. The employers and the major stakeholders i.e. the 

MES, Railways, PWD etc have also categorically reiterated and supported the 

stance taken by the FPSC that the posts be filled strictly in accordance with the 

notified Recruitments Rules and in conformity with the qualifications specified 

therein.Page 5 of 5

8.         After deliberations it was resorted that the Ministry of Science & 

Technology being the regulatory authority of the PEC be asked to regularise the 

B.Tech (Hons) degree programme by enactment in PEC Act or through a 

separate council/act. In case a separate council is created its probable clash on

the interactive points with PEC should not be ignored. Till regularization of 

B.Tech programme and its proper monitoring at certain levels, the quality of its 

degree holders would remain in question.

(Sadiq Ali Anjum)

Director General (R&S)

GE

Energy

Jenbacher gas engines

“Economic utilization of Biomass and Municipal Waste for power generation."

Some energy

lasts for generations

•       100 countries

More than 300,000 employees GE – facts

•       Founded in 1892 by Thomas Edison

•       Operations in more than worldwide; 85,000 in Europe

GE’s portfolio

<>

Energy	Technology	GE	NBC
Infrastructure		Capital
	Infrastructure		Universal

GE Energy … power gen platforms

                       Thermal                     Nuclear         Others

The Type 6 Gas engine

more than 2200 engines since 1989

for power generation

•    Power range: 0.25MW to 4MW,

4 platforms / 11 products

Jenbacher gas engines

•    Fuel flexibility: Natural gas or a variety of renewable or alternative gases

•    Plant configurations: Generator sets, cogeneration systems, container solutions

•    Delivered engines: about 8,500 units / 9,800 MW

•    Business: World wide operations

Headquarters

•   Jenbach premises… 1300 employees

•  Production facilities

•  Global Customer support center

•  Repair shop

•  Training center

•   Engine assembly in China

• Container assembly in Hungary

Austria

•    1,700 world wide employees

•    Business in >60 countries

•    8 Subs + Hubs

•    >60 ITPs (independent 3rd parties)

5 decades of experience

1957     1st gas engine

1979     1st cogeneration module

1985     1st LEANOX^® gas engine

1994     1st 20 cylinder gas engine JW 320

1997 World‘s smallest 20 cylinder gas engine in the 3 MW power

range 2000 Presentation of “High Efficiency Concept” J420 GS

2003     May: GE acquires Jenbacher

2007 world’s 1st 24-cylinde4 MW engine on test bench (J624)

 

Power Factor—

The Basics

OK.  I’ve heard a lot about this power factor stuff.  What exactly is it?

We hope to give you an easy explanation of what power factor is, and to answer the following most asked questions:

Question #1:  What is Power Factor?

Question #2: What Causes Low Power Factor? Question #3: Why Should I Improve My Power Factor?

Question #4:  How Do I Correct (Improve) My Power Factor?

Question #5:  How Long Will It Take My Investment in Power Factor

Correction to Pay for Itself? Question #6: What is the Next Step?

Question #1:

What is Power Factor?

Super.  I’m ready to find out what power factor is.

To understand power factor, we’ll first start with the definition of some basic terms:

KW is Working Power (also called Actual Power or Active Power or Real Power). It is the power that actually powers the equipment and performs useful work.

KVAR is Reactive Power.

It is the power that magnetic equipment (transformer, motor and relay) needs to produce the magnetizing flux.

KVA is Apparent Power.

It is the “vectorial summation” of KVAR and KW.

Let’s look at a simple analogy in order to better understand these terms….

Let’s say you are at the ballpark and it is a really hot day. You order up a mug of your favorite brewsky. The thirst-quenching portion of your beer is represented by KW (Figure 1).

Unfortunately, life isn’t perfect. Along with your ale comes a little bit of foam. (And let’s face it…that foam just doesn’t quench your thirst.) This foam is represented by KVAR.

The total contents of your mug, KVA, is this summation of KW (the beer) and KVAR (the foam).

So, now that we understand some basic terms, we are ready to learn about power factor:

Power Factor (P.F.) is the ratio of Working Power to Apparent Power.

P.F. =   KW

KVA

Looking at our beer mug analogy above, power factor would be the ratio of beer (KW) to beer plus foam (KVA).

P.F. =	KW
	KW + KVAR
. =	Beer
	Beer + Foam

Thus, for a given KVA:

•       The more foam you have (the higher the percentage of KVAR), the lower your ratio of KW (beer) to KVA (beer plus foam). Thus, the lower your power factor.

•       The less foam you have (the lower the percentage of KVAR), the higher your ratio of KW (beer) to KVA (beer plus foam). In fact, as your foam (or KVAR) approaches zero, your power factor approaches 1.0.

Our beer mug analogy is a bit simplistic. In reality, when we calculate KVA, we must determine the “vectorial summation” of KVAR and KW. Therefore, we must go one step further and look at the angle between these vectors.

Let’s look at another analogy ……

Mac here is dragging a heavy load (Figure 2). Mac’s Working Power (or Actual Power) in the forward direction, where he most wants his load to travel, is KW.

Unfortunately, Mac can’t drag his load on a perfect horizontal (he would get a tremendous backache), so his shoulder height adds a little Reactive Power, or KVAR.

The Apparent Power Mac is dragging, KVA, is this “vectorial summation” of KVAR and KW.

The “Power Triangle” (Figure 3) illustrates this relationship between KW, KVA, KVAR, and Power Factor:

                                             

P.F. =	KW		=  COS  θ
	KVA
	KVAR		=  SIN  θ
	KVA
KVA  =		KW2   +  KVAR2		=    KV  *  I  *	3

Figure 3

So….

In order to have an “efficient” system (whether it is the beer mug or Mac dragging a heavy load), we want power factor to be as close to 1.0 as possible.

Note that…in an ideal world…looking at the beer mug analogy:

KVAR would be very small (foam would be approaching zero) KW and KVA would be almost equal (more beer; less foam)

Similarly…in an ideal world…looking at Mac’s heavy load analogy:

KVAR would be very small (approaching zero)

KW and KVA would be almost equal (Mac wouldn’t have to waste any power along his body height)

The angle θ (formed between KW and KVA) would approach zero

Cosine θ would then approach one Power Factor would approach one

Sometimes, however, our electrical distribution has a power factor much less than 1.0. Next, we’ll see what causes this.

Question #2:

What Causes Low Power Factor?

Great. I now understand what power factor is. But I’ve been told mine is low. What did I do to cause this?

Since power factor is defined as the ratio of KW to KVA, we see that low power factor results when KW is small in relation to KVA. Remembering our beer mug analogy, this would occur when KVAR (foam, or Mac’s shoulder height) is large.

What causes a large KVAR in a system?  The answer is…inductive loads.

Inductive loads (which are sources of Reactive Power) include:

Transformers

Induction motors

Induction generators (wind mill generators) High intensity discharge (HID) lighting

These inductive loads constitute a major portion of the power consumed in industrial complexes.

Reactive power (KVAR) required by inductive loads increases the amount of apparent power (KVA) in your distribution system (Figure 4). This increase in reactive and apparent power results in a larger angle θ (measured between KW and KVA). Recall that, as θ increases, cosine θ (or power factor) decreases.

horizantal line is show kva
vertical line is show kw
and third line or resultant vector is show kvar

So, inductive loads (with large KVAR) result in low power factor.

Question #3:

Why Should I Improve My Power Factor?

Okay. So I’ve got inductive loads at my facility that are causing my power factor to be low. Why should I want to improve it?

You want to improve your power factor for several different reasons. Some of the benefits of improving your power factor include:

1)   Lower utility fees by:

a.   Reducing peak KW billing demand

Recall that inductive loads, which require reactive power, caused your low power factor. This increase in required reactive power (KVAR) causes an increase in required apparent power (KVA), which is what the utility is supplying.

So, a facility’s low power factor causes the utility to have to increase its generation and transmission capacity in order to handle this extra demand.

By raising your power factor, you use less KVAR. This results in less KW, which equates to a dollar savings from the utility.

b.   Eliminating the power factor penalty

Utilities usually charge customers an additional fee when their power factor is less than 0.95. (In fact, some utilities are not obligated to deliver electricity to their customer at any time the customer’s power factor falls below 0.85.) Thus, you can avoid this additional fee by increasing your power factor.

2)      Increased system capacity and reduced system losses in your electrical system

By adding capacitors (KVAR generators) to the system, the power factor is improved and the KW capacity of the system is increased.

For example, a 1,000 KVA transformer with an 80% power factor provides 800 KW (600 KVAR) of power to the main bus.

(1000 kva)²  =            (800 KW)²  +  ( ?  KVAR)²

KVAR = 600

By increasing the power factor to 90%, more KW can be supplied for the same amount of KVA.

     (1000)² =            (900 KW)²  +  ( ?  KVAR)²

KVAR = 436

The KW capacity of the system increases to 900 KW and the utility supplies only 436 KVAR.

Uncorrected power factor causes power system losses in your distribution system. By improving your power factor, these losses can be reduced. With the current rise in the cost of energy, increased facility efficiency is very desirable. And with lower system losses, you are also able to add additional load to your system.

3)      Increased voltage level in your electrical system and cooler, more efficient motors

As mentioned above, uncorrected power factor causes power system losses in your distribution system. As power losses increase, you may experience voltage drops. Excessive voltage drops can cause overheating and premature failure of motors and other inductive equipment.

So, by raising your power factor, you will minimize these voltage drops along feeder cables and avoid related problems. Your motors will run cooler and be more efficient, with a slight increase in capacity and starting torque.

Question #4

How Do I Correct (Improve) My Power Factor?

All right. You’ve convinced me. I sure would like to save some money on my power bill and extend the life of my motors. But how do I go about improving (i.e., increasing) my power factor?

We have seen that sources of Reactive Power (inductive loads) decrease power factor:

Transformers

Induction motors

Induction generators (wind mill generators) High intensity discharge (HID) lighting

Similarly, consumers of Reactive Power increase power factor:

Capacitors

Synchronous generators (utility and emergency) Synchronous motors

Thus, it comes as no surprise that one way to increase power factor is to add capacitors to the system. This--and other ways of increasing power factor--are listed below:

1)   Installing capacitors (KVAR Generators)

Installing capacitors decreases the magnitude of reactive power (KVAR or foam), thus increasing your power factor.

Here is how it works (Figure 5)…

Reactive power (KVARS), caused by inductive loads, always acts at a 90-degree angle to working power (KW).

                                                                               Capacitance

(KVAR)

Reactance

(KVAR)

and the third line is kw  Working power

Inductance and capacitance react 180 degrees to each other. Capacitors store KVARS and release energy opposing the reactive energy caused by the inductor.

The presence of both a capacitor and inductor in the same circuit results in the continuous alternating transfer of energy between the two.

Thus, when the circuit is balanced, all the energy released by the inductor is absorbed by the capacitor.

Following is an example of how a capacitor cancels out the effect of an inductive load….

2)   Minimizing operation of idling or lightly loaded motors.

We already talked about the fact that low power factor is caused by the presence of induction motors. But, more specifically, low power factor is caused by running induction motors lightly loaded.

3)      Avoiding operation of equipment above its rated voltage.

4)      Replacing standard motors as they burn out with energy-efficient motors.

Even with energy-efficient motors, power factor is significantly affected by variations in load. A motor must be operated near its rated load in order to realize the benefits of a high power factor design.

 

Question #5

How Long Will It Take my Investment in Power Factor Correction to Pay for Itself?

Super, I’ve learned that by installing capacitors at my facility, I can improve my power factor.  But buying capacitors costs money.  How long will it take for the reduction in my power bill to pay for the cost of the capacitors?

A calculation can be run to determine when this payoff will be. As an example, assume that a portion of your facility can be modeled as in Figure 6 below. Your current power factor is 0.65.

Following are the parameters for your original system:

•       163 KW load

•       730 hours per month

•       480 Volt, 3 phase service

•       5% system losses

•       Load PF = 65%

•       PSE Rate Schedule:

•       Energy Rate = $4.08 per KWH

•       Demand Charge = $2.16 per KW

•       PF Penalty = $0.15 per KVARH

We’ll calculate the total amount the utility charges you every month as follows:

First, we’ll calculate your energy usage:

163 KW   X   730 Hours/Month   X   $4.08/KWH = $4,854.79/Month

Next, we’ll calculate your demand charge:

163 KW   X   $2.16/KW = $352.08/Month

Finally, we’ll calculate your Power Factor Penalty:

190 KVAR   X   730 Hours/Month   X   $0.15/KVARH = $208/Month

Now, let’s say that you decide to install a capacitor bank (Figure 7). The 190 KVAR from the capacitor cancels out the 190 KVAR from the inductive motor. Your power factor is now 1.0.

Following are your parameters for your system with capacitors:

•  Corrected PF = 1.0

•  

You can calculate your loss reduction:
Loss Reduction = 1-(0.652 / 1.002) = 0.58
Therefore, your system loss reduction will be as follows:
0.58	X   0.05 (losses) = 0.029 System Loss Reduction
Your total KW load will be reduced as follows:

163 KW   X   0.029 = 4.7 KW

4.7 KW   X   $2.16/KW = $10.15/Month

Finally, remember that your Power Factor Penalty is zero.

Let’s calculate how long it will take for this capacitor bank to pay for itself.

• Capacitor Cost = $30.00/KVAR Your savings per month are as follows:

♦ $141.00 Energy Usage ♦ $ 10.15 Demand Charge

♦ $208.00 PF Penalty Charge $359.15 Total

Your payback will be at the following time:

$30.00/KVAR X 190 KVAR/$359/Month = 16 Months Installation of your capacitors will pay for themselves in 16 months

Question #6

What is the next step?

Terrific. I think I should take a look at the power factor at my facility and see what I can do to improve it. So what do I do next?

PowerStudies.com can assist you in determining the optimum power factor correction for your facility. We can also help you to correctly locate and provide tips on installing capacitors in your electrical distribution system.

Feel free to call us, fax us, e-mail us, and continue to check us out on the web. We would be happy to talk to you about your specific application. Now we can calculate your savings in energy usage:

we’ll calculate your savings in demand charge