### CHAPTE R 5. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

5.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 5-1

5.2 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK............................................................... 5-1

5.3 GENERAL SERVICE FLUORESCENT LAMPS.......................................................... 5-3

5.3.1 Four-Foot MBP GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K...................................................... 5-6

5.3.1.1 Baseline Models.......................................................................................5-7

5.3.1.2 Efficacy Levels ........................................................................................5-8

5.3.1.3 System Power Rating............................................................................. 5-14

5.3.1.4 Results....................................................................................................5-23

5.3.2 Eight-foot SP Slimline GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K.........................................5-31

5.3.2.1 Baseline Models.....................................................................................5-31

5.3.2.2 Efficacy Levels ......................................................................................5-32

5.3.2.3 System Power Rating............................................................................. 5-35

5.3.2.4 Results....................................................................................................5-39

5.3.3 Eight-Foot RDC HO GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K............................................ 5-43

5.3.3.1 Baseline Models.....................................................................................5-43

5.3.3.2 Efficacy Levels ......................................................................................5-43

5.3.3.3 System Power Rating............................................................................. 5-47

5.3.3.4 Results....................................................................................................5-49

5.3.4 Four-foot T5 MiniBP SO GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K..................................... 5-53

5.3.4.1 Baseline Models.....................................................................................5-53

5.3.4.2 Efficacy Levels ......................................................................................5-53

5.3.4.3 System Power Rating............................................................................. 5-56

5.3.4.4 Results....................................................................................................5-57

5.3.5 Four-foot T5 MiniBP HO GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K .................................... 5-60

5.3.5.1 Baseline Models.....................................................................................5-60

5.3.5.2 Efficacy Levels ......................................................................................5-60

5.3.5.3 System Power Rating............................................................................. 5-63

5.3.5.4 Results....................................................................................................5-63

5.4 INCANDESCENT REFLECTOR LAMPS................................................................... 5-65

5.4.1 Baseline Models for IRL With Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V..............................................................................................5-66

5.4.2 Efficacy Levels ..................................................................................................5-66

5.4.3 Results................................................................................................................5-71

5.5 SCALING TO PRODUCT CLAS SES NOT ANALYZED .......................................... 5-74

5.5.1 General Service Fluorescent Lamps .................................................................. 5-75

5.5.1.1 2-foot U-Shaped GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K.......................................5-75

5.5.1.2 Lamps With CCTs Above 4,500K......................................................... 5-76

5.5.2 Incandescent Reflector Lamps........................................................................... 5-80

5.5.2.1 Modified-Spectrum IRL......................................................................... 5-80

5.5.2.2 IRL With Diameters Less Than or Equal To 2.5 Inches........................ 5-81

5.5.2.3 IRL With Operating Voltages Greate r Than or Equal to 125 Volts ......5-82

5-i

### 5.6 SUMMARY OF ALL EFFICACY LEVELS FOR COVERED PRODUCTS .............5-83

5.6.1 Summary of All Efficacy Leve ls for Covered GSFL ........................................ 5-83

5.6.2 Summary of All Efficacy Leve ls for Covered IRL............................................5-84

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... .....5-86

LIST OF TABLES

Table 5.3.1 DOE Final Rule Product Classes for General Service Fluorescent Lam ps ..............5-4 Table 5.3.2 Baseline Lamps for Commercial and I ndustrial 4-Foot MBP Engineering Analysis . 5-

8 Table 5.3.3 Baseline Lamps for Residentia l 4-Foot MBP Engineering Analysis .......................5-8 Table 5.3.4 4-Foot MBP Lamp Designs ................................................................................... 5-11 Table 5.3.5 Summary of the ELs for 4-F oot MBP Fluorescent Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K . 5-13 Table 5.3.6 Lamp Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Three-Lamp 40W T12, 4,100K System in the Commercial and Industrial Sectors ..................................................................... 5-24 Table 5.3.7 Lamp and Ballast Replacement Engi neering Analysis for a Three-Lamp 40W T12, 4,100K System in the Commercial and Industrial Sectors ........................................................ 5-25 Table 5.3.8 Lamp Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 40W T12, 4,100K System in the Residential Sector ................................................................................................ 5-26 Table 5.3.9 Lamp and Ballast Replacement Engi neering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 40W T12, 4,100K System in the Residential Sector ................................................................................... 5-27 Table 5.3.10 Lamp and Ballast Replacement Engi neering Analysis for a Three-Lamp 34W T12, 4,100K System in the Commercial and Industrial Sectors ........................................................ 5-29 Table 5.3.12 Lamp and Ballast Replacement Engi neering Analysis for a Three-Lamp 32W T8, 4,100K System in the Commercial and Industrial Sectors ........................................................ 5-30 Table 5.3.13 Baseline Units of Analysis for 8-Foot SP Slimline Lamps .................................5-32 Table 5.3.14 8-Foot SP Slimline Lamp Designs ........................................................................ 5-34 Table 5.3.15. Summary of the ELs for 8- Foot SP Slimline Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K .......5-35 Table 5.3.17 Lamp-and-Ballast Replacement E ngineering Analysis for a 75W T12, 4,100K System

............................................................................................................................... ......... 5-40 Table 5.3.18 Lamp-and-Ballast Replacement E ngineering Analysis for a 60W T12, 4,100K System

............................................................................................................................... ......... 5-41 Table 5.3.19 Lamp Replacement Engineering An alysis for a Two-Lamp, 59W, T8, 4,100K System

............................................................................................................................... ......... 5-42 Table 5.3.20 Lamp-and-Ballast Replacement Engin eering Analysis for a Two-Lamp, 59W, T8, 4,100K System ........................................................................................................................... 5-42 Table 5.3.21 Baseline Units of Analysis for 8-Foot RDC High-Output Lamps .......................5-43 Table 5.3.22 8-Foot RDC HO Lamp Designs ............................................................................ 5-45 Table 5.3.23 Summary of the ELs for 8-Foot RDC HO Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K ............5-47 Table 5.3.24 Lamp Replacement Engineeri ng Analysis for a 110W T12, 4,100K System .....5-50 Table 5.3.25 Lamp-and-Ballast Replacement E ngineering Analysis for a 110W T12, 4,100K System

............................................................................................................................... ......... 5-51 Table 5.3.26 Lamp-and-Ballast Replacement E ngineering Analysis for a 95W T12, 4,100K System

............................................................................................................................... ......... 5-52 Table 5.3.27 Baseline Unit of Analysis for 4-Foot T5 MiniBP Standard-Output Lamps ........5-53

5-ii

### Table 5.3.28 4-Foot T5 MiniBP SO Lamp Designs .................................................................. 5-55 Table 5.3.29 Summary of the ELs for 4- Foot T5 MiniBP SO Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K ..5-56 Table 5.3.30 Lamp Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 28W T5, 4,100K System

............................................................................................................................... ......... 5-59 Table 5.3.31 Lamp and Ballast Replacement Engi neering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 28W T5, 4,100K System ........................................................................................................................... 5-59 Table 5.3.32 Baseline Unit of Analysis fo r 4-Foot T5 MiniBP High-Output Lamps ..............5-60 Table 5.3.33 4-Foot T5 MiniBP HO Lamp Designs .................................................................. 5-62 Table 5.3.34 Summary of the ELs for 4- Foot T5 MiniBP HO Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K ..5-63 Table 5.3.35 Lamp Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 54W T5, 4,100K System

............................................................................................................................... ......... 5-64 Table 5.3.36 Lamp and Ballast Replacement Engi neering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 54W T5, 4,100K System ........................................................................................................................... 5-64

Table 5.4.1 Product Classes for Incandescent Reflector Lamps ............................................... 5-65 Table 5.4.2 IRL Representative Pr oduct Class and Baseline Lamps ........................................ 5-66 Table 5.4.3 Summary of the Els for Standard-Spectrum IRL With Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V ....................................................................... 5-71 Table 5.4.4 IRL Engineering Analysis 50W PAR30 ................................................................ 5-72 Table 5.4.5. IRL Engineering Analysis for 75W PAR38 ......................................................... 5-73 Table 5.4.6 IRL Engineering Analysis for 90W PAR38 .......................................................... 5-74 Table 5.5.1 Efficacy Requirements for 2-Foot U- Shaped Lamps With CCTs Less Than or Equal To 4,500K

............................................................................................................................... ... 5-76 Table 5.5.2 Efficacy Requirements For 4- Foot MBP Lamps With CCTs Above 4,500K .......5-78 Table 5.5.3 Efficacy Requirements For 8-Foot SP Slimline Lamps With CCTs Above 4,500K . 5-

78 Table 5.5.4 Efficacy Requirements For 8-F oot RDC HO Lamps With CCTs Above 4,500K . 5-79 Table 5.5.5 Efficacy Requirements For 4-Foot T5 MiniBP SO Lamps With CCTs Above 4,500K...............................................................................................................................

......... 5-80 Table 5.5.6 Efficacy Requirements For 4-Foot T5 MiniBP HO Lamps With CCTs Above 4,500K...............................................................................................................................

......... 5-80 Table 5.5.7 Efficacy Levels For 2-Foot U-Sh aped Lamps With CCTs Greater Than 4,500K . 5-80 Table 5.5.8 Summary of the ELs for Modified-S pectrum IRL With Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V ....................................................................... 5-81 Table 5.5.9 Summary of the ELs for Standard-S pectrum IRL With Diameters Less Than or Equal To 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V ................................................. 5-82 Table 5.5.10 Summary of the ELs for Standard Spectrum IRL With Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Gr eater Than or Equal to 125V ............................................... 5-83 Table 5.6.1 Summary of All Effi cacy Levels for Covered GSFL ............................................ 5-84 Table 5.6.2 Summary of Coe fficients for All Efficacy Levels for Covered IRL .....................5-85

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 5.3.1 Initial Efficacy Levels for 4- Foot MBP Fluorescent Lam ps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K . 5-

10

5-iii

### Figure 5.3.2 Three-Lamp 32W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.95, and BEF

0.98-1.05

............................................................................................................................... ..... 5-14 Figure 5.3.3 Three-Lamp 30W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.95, and BEF

1.07-1.12

............................................................................................................................... ..... 5-15 Figure 5.3.4 Three-Lamp 28W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.98, and BEF

1.16-1.20

............................................................................................................................... ..... 5-15 Figure 5.3.5 Three-Lamp 25W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, and BEF 1.31-1.34 .. 5-

16 Figure 5.3.6 Two-Lamp 32W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.95, and BEF

1.40-1.53

............................................................................................................................... ..... 5-17 Figure 5.3.7 Two-Lamp 30W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.95, and BEF

1.56-1.67

............................................................................................................................... ..... 5-17 Figure 5.3.8 Two-Lamp 28W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.98, and BEF

1.69-1.73

............................................................................................................................... ..... 5-18 Figure 5.3.9 Two-Lamp 25W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.98, and BEF

1.91-1.97

............................................................................................................................... ..... 5-18 Figure 5.3.10 Two-Lamp 40W 120V Ballasts w ith <20 Percent THD, PF >0.95, and BEF 1.20-

1.22 in the Commercial and Industrial Sectors .......................................................................... 5-19 Figure 5.3.11 Three-Lamp 40W 12 0V Ballasts Linear Fit (Based on Slope Change from TwoLamp to Three-Lamp Ballasts for 32W T8 App lied to T12 and Common T12 Electronic Ballast)

............................................................................................................................... ..................... 5-20 Figure 5.3.12 Two-Lamp 34W 120V Ballasts w ith <20 Percent THD, PF >0.95, and BEF 1.42-

1.44 in the Commercial and Industrial Sectors .......................................................................... 5-20 Figure 5.3.13 Three-Lamp 34W 12 0V Ballasts (Based on Slope Change from Two-Lamp to Three-Lamp Ballasts for T8 Applied to T12 and Common T12 Electronic Ballast) ................5-21 Figure 5.3.14 Two-Lamp 40W Ballasts with <4 0 Percent THD, PF >0.55, and BEF 1.12-1.18 in

the Residential Sector ................................................................................................................ 5-22 Figure 5.3.15 Two-Lamp 34W Ballasts with <5 0 Percent THD, PF >0.53, and BEF 1.37-1.56 in

the Residential Sector ................................................................................................................ 5-22 Figure 5.3.16 Initial Efficacy Levels fo r 8-Foot SP Slimline Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K ....5-34 Figure 5.3.17 Two-Lamp 75W T 12 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.64-0.66; Linear Fit: m=100.0, b=47.0 .................................................................................... 5-36 Figure 5.3.18 Two-Lamp 60W T12 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.79-0.80; Linear Fit: m=100.0, b=22.0 .................................................................................... 5-37 Figure 5.3.19 Two-Lamp 59W T8 120V Ballast s with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.77-0.79; Linear Fit: m=123.7, b=4.0 ...................................................................................... 5-38 Figure 5.3.20 Two-Lamp 57W T8 120V Ballast s with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.80-0.81; Linear Fit: m=50.0, b=63.5 ...................................................................................... 5-38 Figure 5.3.21 Two-Lamp 55W T8 120V Ballasts w ith THD <10 percent, and BEF 0.86; Linear Fit: m=118.4, b=-2.2 .................................................................................................................. 5-39 Figure 5.3.22 Initial Efficacy Levels for 8-Foot RDC HO Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K ........5-45 Figure 5.3.23 Two-Lamp 110W T12 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.42-0.43; Linear Fit: m=307.7, b=-65.4 ................................................................................... 5-47 Figure 5.3.24 Two-Lamp 95W T 12 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.48-0.52; Linear Fit: m=433.3, b=-204.3 ................................................................................. 5-48

5-iv

### 5-v Figure 5.3.25 Two-Lamp 86W T8 120V Ballast s with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.54-0.55; L inear Fit: m=128.6, b=46.9 .................................................................................... 5-49 Figure 5.3.26 Initial Efficacy Levels for 4- Foot T5 MiniBP SO Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K, 35° C Operation ......................................................................................................................... 5-55 Figure 5.3.27 Two-Lamp 28W T5 Ballasts wi th THD <10 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 1.52-1.67

............................................................................................................................... ..................... 5-57 Figure 5.3.28 Two-Lamp 26W T5 Ballasts wi th THD <10 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 1.67-1.71

............................................................................................................................... ..................... 5-57 Figure 5.3.29 Initial Efficacy Level for 4-Foot T5 MiniBP HO Fluorescent Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K, 35° C Operation ........................................................................................................... 5-62 Figure 5.4.1 Initial Efficacy Levels for Standa rd-Spectrum IRL With Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V ................................................................. 5-69

### CHAPTE R 5. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

5.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter provides the t echnical support docum entation fo r the engineering analyses of general service fluorescent lamps (GSFL) and incandescent reflector lamps (IRL). Generally, the purpose of the engineering analysis is to de velop efficacy levels (ELs) that encompass the range of products affected by a standard, from the baseline pr oducts to the maximum technologically feasible products, and develop power rating es timates for the products analyzed. The outputs from the engineering analysis are critical inputs to subs equent cost-benefit

calculations for individual consumers.

The engineering analysis follows the screeni ng analysis (chapter 4), in which the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) identifies design op tions that are later used for the rulemaking analyses. Design options include discrete techno logies, such as krypton fill gas, that improve efficacy. DOE develops product effi cacy levels associated with la mp designs that incorporate a range of design options.

While some engineering analyses for other rulemakings discuss ma nufacturer production costs or selling prices and rela te cost or price to efficacy, th is engineering analysis does not address manufacturer costs or mark-ups. In this rulemaking, DOE develops end-user prices for lamp and lamp-and-ballast designs analyzed by discounting published list prices (i.e., “blue book pricing”). The product price determination (c hapter 7) discusses th e pricing methodology and results. By combining the results of the engineering analysis and the product price determination, DOE derives the nece ssary inputs for use in the life- cycle cost (LCC) analysis and national impacts analysis (NIA). In particular, DOE develops lamp and lamp-and-ballast designs associated with particular ELs and end-user prices.

This chapter starts with an outline of the engineering analysis (section 5.2 ), followed by specifics on the engin eering analysis for GSFL (section 5.3 ) and IRL (section 5.4 ). Each section provides detailed information on the baseline lam ps and representative product classes DOE chooses to analyze, the development of ELs, and th e results of the engineering analysis. Section

5.5 discusses how DOE extends its results from the representative pr oduct classes to those products it does not analyze.

5.2 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK

To the extent possible, DOE bases the engi neering analysis on commercially-available

lam ps that incorporate the design options identi fied in the technology assessment and screening analysis (chapter 4). For GSFL and IRL, DOE also bases the majority of the engineering analysis on commercially available lamps. Ho wever, where needed, DOE supplements these lamps with additional model lamps that use commercially-available technologies.

5-1

### The engineering analysis for each of the two categories of lamps DOE analyzes in this rulemaking (i.e., GSFL and IRL) follows a similar approach:

Step 1. Representative Product Classes . DOE reviews covered lamps and the associated product classes. When a product has multip le product classes, DOE selects certain classes as “representative” and concentrates its analytical effo rt on these. DOE selects representative product classes primarily because of their high market

volumes. Section 5.5 discusses how DOE extrapolated from representative product classes to other product classes.

Step 2. Baseline La mps . DOE selects baseline lamps fr om the representative product classes. Generally, a baseline lamp is one that just meets existing mandatory energy conservation standards or represents the typical lamp sold. DOE selects specific

characteristics such as certain correlat ed color temperatures (CCTs), operating lifetimes, and light outputs to characte rize the most common lamps consumers purchase. DOE selects multiple baseline lamps in each product class to ensure

consideration of different high-volume lamps and th eir associated consumer

economics.

Step 3. Lamp-and-Ballast Designs . DOE selects more efficacious lamps for each baseline lamp in the representative product cl asses by considering technologies not eliminated in the screening analysis. DOE considers these technologies either explicitly as design options or implicitly as design options incorporated into commercially-available lamps at the efficacy levels evaluated. In identifying more efficacious lamp-and-ballast designs, DOE r ecognizes that a lamp’s lumen package and performance characteristics are importa nt design criteria for consumers. For example, if consumers do not have the option to purchase substitution lamps or lamp-and-ballast systems with similar lumen packages under an energy conservation standard, consum ers would need to change the lighting design to maintain a similar light output. Ther efore, DOE establishes lamp-and-ballast designs for the engineering analysis so that potential light output is equal to, greater than, or no more than 10 percent less than the light output of the baseline system. DOE also chooses substitute lamps with performance characteristics similar to those of the baseline lamps.

In identifying more efficacious substitute s, DOE uses a database of commerciallyavailable lamps. For GSFL, DOE develops the engineering analysis based on two

substitution cases in which consumers can maintain light output while decreasing energy consumption. In the first case, the consumer replaces the baseline lamp with a more-efficacious, lower-wattage lamp that operates on the existing ballast. In the second case, the consumer replaces the lamp-and-ballast system with a moreefficacious same- or lower-wattage lamp a nd a different ballast. For example, a

5-2

### lam p-and-ballast system with a more efficacious, same-wattage lamp and lower

ballast factor a 

### (BF) ballast will consume less en ergy and maintain light output.

For IRL, DOE uses some commerciall y-available lamps, but also developed “model” lamps. These models incorporate designs that may not be commercially available for certain lamp types and wa ttages, but use commercially-available technologies.

Step 4. Efficacy Levels . After identifying the more efficaci ous substitutes for each baseline lamp or lamp-and-ballast system, DOE deve lops ELs based on three factors: (1) the design options associated with the speci fic lamps being studied (e.g., grades of phosphor for fluorescent lamps, the use of halogen capsules for IRL, etc.); (2) the ability of lamps across wattages to comply with the EL of a given product class; b


### and (3) the maximum technologicall y-feasible efficacy level.

The sections that follow discuss how DOE a pplies this methodology to each product class to create the engineering analysis.

5.3 GENERAL SERVICE FLUORESCENT LAMPS

As discussed in the m arket and technology assessment (chapter 3), DOE revised the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) table of standards for fluorescent lamps to twelve product classes, as shown in Table 5.3.1 . Of these twelve product classes, DOE chose to analyze the five classes that represent high shipm ent vol umes–4-foot medium bipin (MBP), 8-foot single pin (SP) slimline, 8-foot recessed double contac t (RDC) high output (HO), 4-foot miniature bipin (MiniBP) standard output (SO), and 4-foot Mini BP HO –all with a CCT less than or equal to 4,500 Kelvin (K). The 4-foot MBP lamps constitute the vast majority of GSFL sales. These are followed, in order of unit sales, by 8-foot SP slimline lamps and 8-foot RDC HO lamps. Shipments of 2-foot U-shaped lamps have accounted for less than five percent of GSFL unit sales historically and have re mained stable at that level. 1 

### Given the relatively small market share of U-shaped lamps, DOE did not explicitly analyze these lamps. While total shipments of 4-foot MiniBP SO and HO lamps (often referred to as T5 lamps) currently have a relatively small market share, shipment trends indicate that th e market for these lamps is rapidly increasing. Therefore, DOE directly analyzed 4-foot MiniBP SO and 4-foot MiniBP HO lamps.. In addition, as lamps with CCTs greater than 4,500K represent small market shar es of total GSFL sales, DOE only analyzed lamps with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K. DOE discusses each of the five representative product classes separately in the sections that follow.

a The “ballast factor” of a ballast is the ratio of the light output of a fluorescent lamp or lamps operated on a ballast to the light output of the lamp(s) operated on a reference ballast. Ballast factor depends on both the ballast and the lamp type; a single ballast can have several ballast factors depending on lamp type. The light output of a single fluorescent lamp is measured on a ballast with a ballast fact or of 1.0. One can reduce the light output of a lamp-andballast system by operating a lamp on a ballast with a lower ballast factor.

b Efficacy levels span multiple lamps of different wattages. In selecting ELs, DOE co nsidered whether lamps of different wattages can meet the efficacy levels prescribed by those ELs.



### 5-3

### Although DOE did not create a separate engineer ing analysis for 2-foot U-shaped lamps

or lam ps that have a CCT greater than 4,500K , DOE established standards for these product classes, based on the represen tative product classes directly analyzed. For instance, DOE extended its proposal for the 4-f oot MBP product class to the 2-f oot U-shaped product class. This was possible because 2-foot U-shaped lamps generally operate in the same way and typically span the same wattage s as 4-foot MBP lamps. For lamps with CCTs greater than 4,500K, DOE extended proposed standards from simila r lamp types with a CCT of less than or equal to 4,500K as they operate in a similar fa shion and generally span the same wattages.

Section 5.5 provides more information on extending st andards to the product classes DOE did not analy ze.

Table 5.3.1 DOE Final Rule Product Classe s for General Servi ce Fluorescent Lamps

Lamp Type For CCT ≤ 4,500K Minimum Lamp Efficacy

lm/W* For CCT > 4,500K Minimum Lamp Efficacy

lm/W

4-foot MBP Representative product class Scaled from ≤ 4,500K

2-foot U-shaped Scaled from 4-foot MBP Scaled from ≤ 4,500K

8-foot SP slimline Representative product class Scaled from ≤ 4,500K

8-foot RDC HO Representative product class Scaled from ≤ 4,500K

4-foot T5 MiniBP SO Representative product class Scaled from ≤ 4,500K

4-foot T5 MiniBP HO Representative product class Scaled from ≤ 4,500K

* lm/W = lumens per watt



### In the engineering analysis for GSFL, DOE based its ELs on lamps because the energy conservation standards only apply to lamps. However, DOE used a systems approach in analyzing these representative product classe s because both lamps and ballasts determine a system’s energy use and light output. DOE pair ed a lamp with a ball ast to develop lamp-andballast systems. By using a systems approac h, DOE was able to demonstrate the actual energy consumption and light output of an operating lamp.

Using this systems approach, DOE selected a variety of energy-saving lamp-and-ballast systems per EL. In general, DOE chose its lamp designs (which refer to lamp substitution options) and lamp-and-ballast designs (which re fer to lamp-and-ballast substitution options) by selecting commercially-available fluorescent lamps at higher efficacies than the baseline lamps. Higher efficacies are achieved through a variety of technologies. As discussed in the screening analysis (chapter 4), DOE considered commercia lly available GSFL that use highly-emissive electrode coatings, higher-efficacy lamp fill gas composition, higher-efficacy phosphors, glass coatings, or higher-efficacy lamp diameter to achieve higher-efficacy lamp designs.

For the LCC, DOE analyzed lamp-and-ballast systems that both save energy and maintain comparable light output. In particular , DOE considered lamp-and-ballast designs that emit mean lumens equal to, greater than, or no more than 10 percent less th an the light output of the baseline system. DOE maintained light output across efficacy levels to ensure that products supply equivalent service in the base case and standards case.

5-4

### In assessing light output, DOE m ade a distinction between mean and initial lumens. DOE used initial lumens in its test procedures to measure compliance with a standard. This is consistent with consensus industry standards on efficacy measurements. Therefore, DOE used initial lumens to calculate ELs. However, the light output of a lamp d ecreases over time. To account for this real-world depreciation in lu mens, DOE used mean lumens to determine equivalent substitutes in the LCC and to determ ine the light output of GSFL in the NIA.

For GSFL, energy savings can be achieved e ither through lamp replacements or lampand-ballast replacements. For lamp replacements, DOE analyzed reduced-wattage, higherefficacy lamps for use on the existing ballast. For lamp-and-ballast replacements, DOE used a variety of lamp-and-ballast combinations to ob tain energy savings and maintain comparable

mean lumens. These combinations included both reduced-wattage lamps and same-wattage lamps. For example, energy savings could be achieved using a same-wattage, higher-efficacy lamp with a lower BF ballast while maintaining mean lumen output.

Some consumers may operate non- energy-saving systems. For example, a consumer who pairs a same-wattage, higher-efficacy lamp with an existing ballast will ge t more light output but will not save energy. DOE did not consider such non-energy-saving systems in the LCC because energy savings determine whether a consumer can recoup any higher first costs of replacement products. However, DOE did take into account the use of both energy-saving and non-energysaving systems as well as systems that may over- or under-light when aggregating market

behavior in the NIA. This reflects the fact that DOE cannot require consumers to change their ballast along with their lamp. Appendix 5A shows lamp-and-ballast designs considered in the

NIA.

Because DOE is using a systems approach, the system power rating is an important result of the engineering analysis. The system power rating represents the ener gy consumption rate of both the lamp and ballast, and therefore is greate r than the rated power of the lamp alone. While the rated lamp power affects the system power, the system power is also affected by the type of ballast used, the BF of that ballast, an d the number of lamps operated per ballast.

DOE calculated the system power data usi ng published catalog information. For each lamp wattage and ballast type, DOE linearly fitted the system power rating of a lamp on several different ballasts with varying ballast factors. DOE used this linear fit to derive the system power rating of the lamp on the ballasts used in the analysis. The linear fit follows the equation

below:

bBFmSPR   * 

### Eq. 5.1

where:

SPR = System Power Rating

BF = Ballast Factor

m = Slope of Linear Fit

b = Y-Intercept of Linear Fit

DOE considered both magnetic and electronic ba llasts. For 4-foot T8 and 4-foot T12 systems, DOE used system power data from manuf acturer literature to develop a linear fit for lamps on three-lamp and two-lamp, 120V, electronic instant-start ballasts with similar ballast

5-5

### efficacy factors (BEF). c 

### For some 4-foot T12s, DOE also used one-lamp and two-lamp 120V, magnetic, rapid-start ballasts w ith common ballast efficacy fact ors. A linear fit was not necessary for these magnetic systems because DOE used only one type of magnetic ballast in the analysis. For 8-foot T8 and 8-foot T12 SP slimline and RDC HO lamps, DOE used system power data from manufacturer literature to develop a linear fit for lamps on two-lamp, 120V,

electronic instant-start ballasts. DOE also used data for some 8-foot T12 SP slimline and RDC HO lamps on two-lamp, 120V, magnetic, instant-st art ballasts. Again, a linear fit is not necessary for the magnetic systems because DOE used only one ballast per lamp type in the analysis. For T5 lamps, DOE used system power data from manufacturer literature to develop a linear fit for lamps on a two-lamp, 120V , electronic programmed-start ballast.

5.3.1 Four-Foot MBP GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

DOE selected the 4-foot MBP with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K product class as a representative product class for GSFL because it has the h ighest volume shipments of all the product classes for fluorescent lamps. DOE review ed the range of commercially available lampand-ballast combinations to pair each lamp it an alyzed with a ballast. DOE found that ballasts

for 4-foot MBP ballasts are available in a variet y of lamp-per-ballast designs. For example, electronic ballasts are typically manufactured in one-, two-, th ree-, and four-lamp versions. According to the 2000 rule on GSFL ballasts (“2000 Ballast Rule”), 2 

### there are on average 2.8 lamps per 4-foot MBP system. 62 FR 56740 (S eptember 19, 2000). To most accurately represent the market and simplify the analysis, DOE used a three-lamp system for 4-foot MBP lamps operating on electronic balla sts in the commercial sector. (This decision effectively spreads the cost of a new ballast over the average number of la mps per system). To make a comparison between electronic and magnetic 4- foot MBP systems, and because three-lamp magnetic ballasts typically are not sold, DOE de veloped a system that combines a two-lamp magnetic and one-lamp magnetic ballast. This allowed DOE to compare similar light output packages and make a level comparison on energy use. d 

### As a review of manufacturer catalogs indicated that two-lamp ballasts were most prevalent in the resi dential sector, DOE developed a separate engineering analysis for 4-foot MBP lamp s in the residential sector based on these twolamp systems.

c Energy-efficient ballasts are characterized as having high er ballast efficacy factors (BEF). The BEF is directly related to the quotient of the BF and the power consumed by the ballast, such that a ballast maintaining BF while reducing power consumption will have a higher BEF and be a more energy-efficient ballast. In its analysis, DOE varied the ballast BF, not the BEF (given the same lamp wattage and ballast type (“electronic” or “magnetic”)), in its assessment of standards for fluorescent lamps. DOE will be considering new and amended BEF standards in a separate fluorescent lamp ballast rulemaking.

d DOE recognizes that the combined cost of a one-lamp and two-lamp magnetic system would be higher than the cost of a three-lamp system if it were manufactured. However, the comparative economics between a one-lamp and two-lamp magnetic ballast versus a three-lamp electronic ba llast is not an issue in DO E’s calculation of the LCC.

Since ballast standards will be effective in 2010 for non-res idential 4-foot ballasts, DOE assumes that all new 4-foot

non-residential ballast sales are electronic.



### 5-6

### 5.3.1.1 Baseline Models

The 4-foot MBP product class represents high-volum e T12 and T8 4-foot MBP lamps operating on various ballasts. To reflect the most common lamp and wattage combinations for this product class in the commercial and indus trial sectors, DOE sel ected three baseline lamp/wattage combinations: a 32W T8, a 34W T12, and a 40W T12 lamp. In 2005, T8 lamps represented 57 percent of the 4- foot MBP shipments, of which the 32W lamp was the most common. The 2005 shipments of 4-foot T12 lamps represented 43 percent of all 4-foot MBP shipments. The 34W T12 lamp comprised approximately two-thirds of these shipments and the 40W T12 was approximately one-third. Therefore, these three baseline lamps represent the three highest volume lamp diameter and wattage combin ations for the 4-foot MBP product class in the

commercial and industrial sectors. DOE also found that a signifi cant portion of T12, 4-foot MBP lamps operate in the residential sector. Co nversations with industry experts as well as a published study prepared for the utility Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E 3 

### ) revealed that residential consumers are most likely to buy a 40W T12 lamp; 32W T8 lamps and 34W T12 lamps are less common. Therefore, in the residential sector , DOE only analyzed the 40W T12 lamp as a baseline lamp.

For each of these baseline model lamps, DOE developed a set of typical performance characteristics. For the 32W 4-foot T8 MBP lamp, DOE selected a lamp using a 700 series rare earth phosphor. These lamps typically have a co lor rendering index (CRI) of 70 to 79. During discussions with industry experts, DOE found that this lamp represen ts the majority of 4-foot T8 MBP lamps sold. Typically, a baseline product is a unit that just m eets the existing energy conservation standard for that pr oduct (75.0 lm/W for this product class). However, there are no T8 lamps in this product class with an efficacy as low as 75.0 lm/W. Therefore, DOE selected a lamp with an efficacy of 86.2 lm/W because it is the most common T8 lamp sold. For new system installations, DOE selected T8 lamps operati ng in three-lamp fixtures . These fixtures are assumed to operate on a 120V instant-start electr onic ballast with a 0.88 BF . Together, the lampand-ballast combination in this three-lamp sy stem has a light emission of approximately 6,650 mean lumens (and 7,390 initial lumens) when operating with the baseline lamp.

For the 34W 4-foot T12 MBP lamp, DOE select ed a cool white lamp with an efficacy that is slightly above the minimum efficacy st andard (77.9 lm/W). A review of the product catalogs found there are no covered 34W 4-foot T12 MBP lamps that are just compliant with the standard (75.0 lm/W), or any with an efficacy between 75.0 and 77.9 lm/W. For the 40W 4-foot T12 MBP lamp in the commercial and industrial sectors, DOE selected a lamp using 700 series rare earth phosphor and an efficacy of 78 lm/W. DOE paired both commercial and industrial 4- foot T12 MBP lamps with a rapid-start 120V ma gnetic ballast, which exhibits a 0.88 BF when operating the 34W lamp and a 0.95 BF when oper ating the 40W lamp. This combination of lamp and ballast represents the most common co nfiguration for this lamp in existing and new installations. Together, this lamp-and-ballast combination in a three-lamp fixture creates a system package of over 6,070 mean lumens (and n early 7,000 initial lumens) for the baseline 34W lamps and approximately 8,210 mean lumens (and 9,120 initial lumens) for the baseline 40W lamps. As mentioned earlier, DOE assume d the three-lamp fixture is wired using two magnetic ballasts – a one-lamp and a two-lamp ba llast connected in tandem with an adjacent

fixture.

5-7

### In the residential sector, DOE only analyzed the 40W 4-foot T12 MBP lamp as a baseline lamp. After reviewing available catalog in formation, DOE found that the most common 40W T12 lamp sold in the residential sector is di fferent from the 40W T12 baseline lamp for the

commercial and industrial sectors. DOE chose a 40W 4-foot T12 MBP baseline lamp for the residential sector that has a slightly lower effi cacy and shorter lifetime th an the typical 40W T12 lamp sold in the commercial sector: 76.8 lm/W and 15,000 hours. A review of catalog information and a PG&E study revealed that the mo st common residential sector ballast is a lowpower factor 2-lamp magnetic rapid-start T12 system with a ba llast factor of 0.68. 3



### For all baseline lamps and the more efficaci ous lamp designs, DOE analyzed fluorescent lamps with a CCT of 4,100K. DOE selected this CCT because it represents the highest volume CCT for this category of lamps and because it fall s within the CCT span of the analyzed product class (2,500K to 4,500K). Additionally, the typical li fetime for the three baseline models for this product class in the commercial and industria l sectors is 20,000 hours (using a 3-hour on-off testing cycle). In the residential sector, th e typical lifetime was found to be 15,000 hours (using a 3-hour on-off testing cycle). While there are lamps in this product class that have other lifetimes under the 3 hour on-off testing cycle, such as 18,000 or 24,000 hrs, these lamps do not represent the typical unit sold for these three lamp types.

Table 5.3.2 Baseline Lamps for Commercial and Industrial 4-Foot MBP Engineering
Analysis

Nominal Wattage CCT Rated Efficacy* Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life Lamp

Diameter

W CRI

K lm/W lm lm hr

T12 40 70 4,100 78.0 3,200 2,880 20,000

T12 34 62 4,100 77.9 2,650 2,300 20,000

T8 32 75 4,100 86.2 2,800 2,520 20,000
* Rated efficacy is based on the rated wattage of the la mps, which for T12 lamps is 41W and 34W an d for the 32W T8 lamp is 32.5W.



### Table 5.3.3 Baseline Lamps for Residentia l 4-Foot MBP Engineering Analysis

Nominal Wattage CCT Rated Efficacy* Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life Lamp

Diameter

W CRI

K lm/W lm lm hr

T12 40 70 4,100 76.8 3,150 2,860 15,000

* Rated efficacy is based on the rated wattage of the lamps, which for T12 lamps is 41W.



### 5.3.1.2 Efficacy Levels

For the 4-foot MBP with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K product class, DOE established ELs around design options that are consistent across a ll baseline lam ps. Because these lamps have different efficacy values and some represent various design options, some ELs affect only three of the four baseline lamps. Ho wever, the full range of ELs ultimately specifies

5-8

### requirem ents that are above the efficacy values of all the baseline lamps sold, and therefore affect all four baseline lamps.

In selecting ELs, DOE considered two diffe rent paths to energy savings. The first involves reduced-wattage replacement lamps that c ould be installed in a socket and operate on the existing ballast. These lower-wattage re placement lamps have a higher efficacy and therefore produce approximately the same light out put as the baseline la mp (i.e., light output never drops below 10 percent of the baseline system).

The other path to energy savings involves lamp s that have the same or lower wattage in comparison with the baseline lamp, but operate on a new ballast with a different BF so the system power rating is lower. DOE selected a ba llast with a particular BF in conjunction with the more efficacious lamp to produce approximately the same light output as the baseline lamp (i.e., light output never drops below 10 percent of the baseline system).

Below is a summary of the ELs considered for 4-foot MBP lamps. The following discussion identifies the steps a nd technologies associated with each EL DOE considered. As discussed in the screening analys is (chapter 4), DOE used desi gn options that achieve a higher efficacy with highly-emissive electrode coatings, higher-efficacy lamp fill gas composition, higher-efficacy phosphors, glass coatings, or hi gher-efficacy lamp diameter. Because highefficacy phosphors and lamp diameter are comm on methods to achieve higher efficacies, DOE identified the diameter and phosphor associated with each EL:

EL1 . This level affects the three T12 baseline lamps. Because the baseline T8 lamp is above this efficacy level, consumers using the T8 lamp are not affected. The 34W T12 moves from a cool white halophosphor to a 700 series rare earth phosphor. The 40W T12 lamp moves

from the 700 series rare earth to either an improved 700 series rare earth phosphor or 800 series lamp.

EL2 . This level also only affects T12 lamps. For the 34W T12, the lamps change from 700 series to 800 series rare earth phosphor. Th e 40W T12 lamp at this level uses a premium 800 series rare earth phosphor.

EL3 . This level affects all four baseline lamp s. The 32W T8 lamp that used 700 series rare earth phosphor in the baseline migrates to an 800 series rare earth phosphor in a 32W lamp. The 34W T12 lamp uses an 800 series rare earth phosphor, and may incorporate other design options to enhance efficacy, such as a different gas fill or increased thickness of the bulb-wall phosphor. At this level there are no 40W T12 lamps that are commercially available.

EL4 . This level affects all four baseline la mps. No 4,100K T12 lamps are commercially available that meet this efficacy requirement. Th erefore, users of T12 lamps would be forced to replace their ballasts and operate T8 lamps instea d. This level requires the use of an improved 800 series rare earth phosphor in full-wattage (32W) T8 lamps. A 30W T8 and 25W T8 lamp that produces an equivalent amount of light as the baseline unit on a similar ballast meet this EL.

EL5 . This level affects all three baseline lamp s. However, no T12 lamps that can meet this efficacy requirement are commercially availa ble. Therefore, users of T12 lamps would be forced to replace their ballasts and operate T8 lamps instead. For the T8 lamps, this level

5-9

### repres ents “max-tech,” the highest efficacy level available today. It us es premium 800 series rare earth phosphor and may incorporate other effi cacy improvements, such as a different gas fill or increased thickness of the bulb-wall phosphor. The 28W T8 lamp that produces an equivalent amount of light on the same ballast as the baseline unit meets this EL.

DOE then developed five initial ELs based on catalog values of commercially-available fluorescent lamps that DOE selected to analyze. Figure 5.3.1 illustrates the five initial ELs on a plot of the efficacies of these lam ps vs. their rated wattages. A line at 75 lm/W denotes the existing energy conservation standard (from th e Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT 1992)). Square boxes and labels identify the four base line lamps. The plot also shows replacement lamps DOE considered for each lamp at higher e fficacies. Some lamps are at the same wattage, but have a higher efficacy; others have a comb ination of lower wattage and higher efficacy so that the lamp-and-ballast system produces light output no less than 10 percent of the baseline.

EPACT 1992

72.0 74.0 76.0 78.0 80.0 82.0 84.0 86.0 88.0 90.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 98.0 100.0

24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)

Rated Wattage (W) 

### 4-foot T12 medium bipin 4-foot T8 medium bipin

40W T12 Commercial Baseline 34W T12 Baseline 32W T8 Baseline

40W T12 Residential Baseline



### Figure 5.3.1 Initial Efficacy Levels for 4-Foot MBP Fluorescent Lamps With CCTs ≤
4,500K

Table 5.3.4 provides detailed information on the 4- foot MBP lam p designs used in the engineering analysis an d subsequent analyses.

5-10

### Table 5.3.4 4-Foot MBP Lamp De signs

Nominal Wattage Rated Wattage Rated Efficacy Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life CRI

EL Lamp

Diameter

W W lm/W lm lm hr

Baseline/0* T12 40 41.0 76.8 3,150 2,860 15,000 70

Baseline/0** T12 40 41.0 78.0 3,200 2,880 20,000 70

Baseline/0** T12 34 34.0 77.9 2,650 2,300 20,000 62

1 T12 40 41.0 80.5 3,300 3,000 20,000 80

1 T12 34 34.0 82.4 2,800 2,460 20,000 70

1 T12 40 41.0 82.9 3,400 3,060 24,000 80

2 T12 34 34.0 85.3 2,900 2,610 20,000 80

Baseline/2 T8 32 32.5 86.2 2,800 2,520 20,000 75

2 T12 40 41.0 87.8 3,600 3,250 24,000 85

3 T8 32 32.5 90.8 2,950 2,710 20,000 82

3 T12 34 34.0 91.2 3,100 2,790 24,000 85

4 T8 32 32.5 92.3 3,000 2,850 24,000 85

4 T8 25 26.6 93.0 2,475 2,350 30,000 85

4 T8 30 30.4 93.8 2,850 2,680 20,000 82

5 T8 32 32.5 95.4 3,100 2,915 24,000 82

5 T8 28 28.4 96.0 2,725 2,560 18,000 82

*This baseline lamp is used only in the residential sector. **These baseline lamps are used only in the commercial and industrial sectors.



### As seen above, DOE used commercially-available lamps and their associated rated efficacies (rated initial lumen out put divided by the ANSI rated wa ttage) to determine the design options required to meet each efficacy level. However, to establish the minimum efficacy requirements for each efficacy level, DOE coupled catalog data on commercially-available lamps with data submitted to DOE by manufacturers for the purpose of compliance with existing energy conservation standards for general service fluorescent lamps. By analyzing manufacturer compliance reports, DOE found that efficacies of lamps when reported for the purpose of compliance often vary from catalog-rated values . Because the test procedures for GSFL incorporate a tolerance factor comparing meas ured lamp wattage to ANSI-rated wattage, the measured efficacy of the lamps may be signifi cantly different from the rated efficacy. In addition, using rated lamp efficacy does not acco unt for lot-to-lot production variability which does affect the efficacy at which the lamps compl y. As the efficacy reported for compliance is related to the lower limit of the 95-percent confidence interval, significant variability in production may result in compliance efficacies th at are lower than rated efficacies.

For these reasons, to establish GSFL minimum efficacy requirements associated with each efficacy level, DOE used lamp efficacy values submitted to DOE for the purpose of compliance with existing energy conservation st andards. Specifically, DOE determined the compliance efficacies of commercially-available lamps used in the engineering analysis. For example, as seen in Figure 5.3.1 , DOE established EL2 such that three specific lamps comply:

5-11

### the baseline 32W T8 lamp, the 34W T12 800 seri es lamp with initial lumen output of 3,100 lumens, and the 40W T12 800 series lamps with initial lumen output of 3,250 lumens. Through examining compliance report data, DOE found that the 34W T12 lamp had the lowest compliance efficacy of the three (81 lm/W), and therefore, set EL2 at 81 lm/W. Because DOE did not have compliance report data on every lamp design analyzed, in such situations DOE used compliance report data of lamps with similar design options to determine the appropriate minimum efficacy requirement. Figure 5.3.2 below shows all compliance report data for 4-foot

MBP lam ps with CCTs less th an or equal to 4,500K.

70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0

24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)



### Rated Wattage (W) 4ft MBP <=4500 HALO 4ft MBP <=4500, 700 SERIES 4ft MBP <=4500, 800 SERIES



### Figure 5.3.2 All Compliance Report Data fo r 4-Foot MBP Fluorescent Lamps with CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Although DOE obtained compliance reports submitted over the past 15 years, DOE only considered the most recent data when verifying efficacy levels. DOE believes that data contained in compliance reports submitted 2007 and 2008 accurately account for adjustments over the past 15 years to photometry facilities us ed for NIST and NVLAP testing that may have resulted in a reduction of reported lumens for some products. Figure 5.3.3 only shows

com pliance report data submitted in 2007 and 2008 for 4-foot MBP lamps with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K.

5-1270.00 75.00 80.00 85.00 90.00 95.00 100.00

24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)



### Rated Wattage (W) 4ft MBP <=4500 HALO 4ft MBP <=4500, 700 SERIES 4ft MBP <=4500, 800 SERIES



### Figure 5.3.3 2007 and 2008 Compliance Report Data for 4-Foot MBP Fluorescent Lamps

with CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Table 5.3.5 summarizes the resulting efficacy requirem ents at each lev el, after accounting for compliance report data, for 4-foot MBP lamp s with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K.

Table 5.3.5 Summary of the ELs for 4-Foot MBP Fluorescent Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Efficacy Level Efficacy Requirement

lm/W

EL1 78

EL2 81

EL3 85

EL4 89

EL5 93



### Section 5.3.1.4 provides additional information on the lam p-and-ballast systems DOE uses in the engineering analysis.

5-13

### 5.3.1.3 System Power Rating

The system power rating is an important result of the engineering analysis. DOE calculated the system power rating, which represents the energy consumption rate of the lamps in combination with a ballast, using published catalog information. For each lamp wattage and ballast type, DOE applied a linear fit to several points identifying the sy stem power rating of a lamp on a ballast and the ballast f actor of the ballast. The fit fo llows the form of Eq. 5.1 where

SPR = m * BF + b . DOE used a linear form because th e relationship is approximately linear over the range of BFs and wattages considered.

The ballasts DOE used typically have a to tal harmonic distortion (THD) less than 20 percent, power factors (PF) greater than 0.95, a nd typical ballast efficacy factors. Because ballast efficiencies naturally increase as lamp wattages decrease, there is a natural progression to higher typical BEFs at lower wattages. Also, because there is less ma nufacturer literature on system power ratings of ballasts with lower wattage lamps, DOE used fewer points to develop a linear fit for the energy-saving lamp wattages. Figure 5.3.4 to Figure 5.3.7 show the linear fit

and ballast characteristics DOE uses to derive the system power rating for 3-lamp, 4-foot T8 lamps on electronic ballasts.



## y = 88.5x + 8 .9

60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0 110.0

0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=88.5, b=8.9

Figure 5.3.4 Three-Lamp 32W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.95, and

BEF 0.98-1.05

5-14y = 82.522x + 7.7509

60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0 120.0

0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W)



### Figure 5.3.5 Three-Lamp 30W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.95, and

BEF 1.07-1.12

y = 77.701x + 6.9252

55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0

0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=82.5, b=7.8

Linear Fit: m=77.7, b=6.9

Figure 5.3.6 Three-Lamp 28W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.98, and

BEF 1.16-1.20

5-1540.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

0.50 0.70 0.90 1.10 1.30

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=70.8, b=4.2

Figure 5.3.7 Three-Lamp 25W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, and BEF 1.31-

1.34

Figure 5.3.8 to Figure 5.3.11 show the linear fit and ballast characteristics DOE used to derive the system power rating for two-lamp, 4- foot T8 MBP lamps on electronic ballasts DOE used the system power rating for these ballasts to derive both the system power rating for 4-foot T8 systems in the residential sector, 4-foot T12 electronically ballasted systems and for additional systems DOE used in the national imp act analysis. The ballasts DOE used typically have a THD less than 20 percent, PFs greater than 0.95, and typical BEFs. Because ballast efficiencies naturally increase as lamp wattages d ecrease, there is a natura l progression to higher typical BEFs at lower wattages. Also, because th ere is less manufacturer literature on system power ratings of ballasts with lower wattage lamps, DOE used fewer points to develop a linear fit for the energy-saving lamp wattages.

5-1640.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0

0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=69.1, b= -2.24

Figure 5.3.8 Two-Lamp 32W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.95, and BEF

1.40-1.53

40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0

0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=56.8, b=4.6

Figure 5.3.9 Two-Lamp 30W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.95, and BEF

1.56-1.67

5-17

### 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0

0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=56.2, b=1.8

Figure 5.3.1 0 Two-Lamp 28W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.98, and

BEF 1.69-1.73

30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0

0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=49.2, b=2.1

Figure 5.3.1 1 Two-Lamp 25W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 Percent, PF >0.98, and

BEF 1.91-1.97

5-18

### Figure 5.3.12 to Figure 5.3.15 show the linear fit and ballast characteristics DOE used to derive the system power rating for three-lamp, 4-foot T12 MBP lamps on electronic ballasts.

Because manufacturer literature for these lamps is uncommon, DOE extrapolated linear fits from the two-lamp, 4-foot T12 based on the relative di fference between the three-lamp and two-lamp 32W T8 slopes. To develop the y-intercept, DOE used a data point from manufacturer literature for three-lamp, 4-foot T 12s with a common BEF.

68.0 69.0 70.0 71.0 72.0 73.0 74.0 75.0

0.80 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.90 0.92 0.94

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=50.5, b=28.5

Figure 5.3.1 2 Two-Lamp 40W 120V Ballasts with <20 Percent THD, PF >0.95, and BEF

1.20-1.22 in the Commercial and Industrial Sectors

5-19

### 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0 110.0 115.0 120.0

0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W)



### Figure 5.3.13 Three-Lamp 40W 120V Ballasts Line ar Fit (Based on Slope Change from Two-Lamp to Three-Lamp Ballasts for 32W T8 Applied to T12 and Common T12 Electronic Ballast)

54.0 56.0 58.0 60.0 62.0 64.0 66.0 68.0

0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=67.9, b=47.9

Linear Fit: m=50.0, b=17.5

Figure 5.3.1 4 Two-Lamp 34W 120V Ballasts with <20 Percent THD, PF >0.95, and BEF

1.42-1.44 in the Commercial and Industrial Sectors

5-20

### 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0 110.0

0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00

ANSI Input Power (W)Ballast Factor 

### Linear Fit: m=67.9, b=31.9

Figure 5.3.1 5 Three-Lamp 34W 120V Ballasts (Based on Slope Change from Two-Lamp to Three-Lamp Ballasts for T8 Applied to T12 and Common T12 Electronic Ballast)

Figure 5.3.16 and Figure 5.3.17 show the linear fit and ballast characteristics DOE used to derive the system power rating for two-lam p, 4-foot T12 MBP lamps on electronic ballasts in the residential sector. To develop the linear fit, DOE used parameters of two 40W T12 and

34WT12 residential electronic ballasts.

5-21

### 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0

0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W)



### Figure 5.3.16 Two-Lamp 40W Ballasts with <40 Percent THD, PF >0.55, and BEF 1.12-

1.18 in the Residential Sector

30 40 50 60 70 80

0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=70.0, b=12.5

Linear Fit: m=140.0, b=-57.0

Figure 5.3.1 7 Two-Lamp 34W Ballasts with <50 Percent THD, PF >0.53, and BEF 1.37-

1.56 in the Residential Sector

5-22

### 5-23 5.3.1.4 Results

As discussed above, DOE evaluated multiple b aseline lamps for each product class to provide a comprehensive understanding of the consumer economics. For each baseline lamp, DOE considered only energy-saving op tions that result in approxima tely the same light output as the baseline lamp system. Energy savings could either be achieved through lamp or lamp and ballast replacements. Appendix 5A provides information on the additional lamp-and-ballast designs DOE uses in the NIA.

Table 5.3.6 presents the engineering characteris tics of lam p replacement options for a baseline 40W 4-foot T12 MBP 4,100K lamp in th e commercial and industr ial sectors. Although a 34W T12 lamp is often consid ered a reduced-wattage replacem ent of the 40W T12 lamp, there are no lamp options that emit enough lumens to fa ll within 10 percent of the baseline system lumens. The highest efficacy 34W T12 lamp replacement is shown below in Table 5.3.6 . The light output of this lam p-and-ball ast design is 10.3 percent less than that of the baseline system. The same drop in lumen output is also exhibited by the 34W T12 lamp on an electronic ballast of

the same BF.

Table 5.3.7 presents the engineering characteri stics of lam p and ballast replacement options for a 40W 4-foot T12 MBP, 4,100K lamp in the commercial and industrial sectors. Note that at the higher ELs, DOE considered some T8 substitutes for th e 40W T12 lamp. As discussed earlier, DOE adjusted the BF so that the combination of lamp and ballast maintains light output so that potential lig ht output is equal to, greater tha n, or no more than 10 percent less than the light output of the baseline system. All standards-case lamps for lamp and ballast replacements are placed on electronic T12s or balla sts since ballast standards will be effective in

2010 for the commercial and industrial sectors.Table 5.3.6 Lamp Replacement Engineering Analysis fora Three-Lamp 40W T12, 4,100K System in the Commercial andIndustrial SectorsNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMean LightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactor*WlmlmBaselineT124041.078.03,2002,88020,000Magnetic0.95129.09,1208,208EL3T123434.091.23,1002,79024,000Magnetic0.88108.08,1847,366*Note: This difference in BFs does not represent a ballast replacement. Instead, the BF of magnetic ballasts changes when a different wattage lamp is installed.5-24Table 5.3.7 Lamp and Ballast Replacement EngineeringAnalysis for a Three-Lamp 40W T12, 4,100K System in theCommercial and Industrial SectorsNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWLm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT124041.078.03,2002,88020,000Magnetic0.95129.09,1208,208BaselineT124041.078.03,2002,88020,000Electronic0.88107.78,4487,603EL1T124041.080.53,3003,00020,000Electronic0.88107.78,7127,920EL1T124041.080.53,3003,00020,000Electronic0.87107.08,6137,830EL1T124041.082.93,4003,06024,000Electronic0.87107.08,8747,987Baseline/EL2T83232.586.22,8002,52020,000Electronic1.18113.39,9128,921EL2T124041.087.83,6003,25024,000Electronic0.87107.09,3968,483EL3T123434.091.23,1002,79024,000Electronic0.8891.78,1847,366EL3T83232.590.82,9502,71020,000Electronic1.0097.48,8508,130EL4T83232.592.33,0002,85024,000Electronic0.8886.87,9207,524EL4T83030.493.82,8502,68020,000Electronic1.0090.38,5508,040EL4T82526.693.02,4752,35030,000Electronic1.1887.78,7628,319EL5T83232.595.43,1002,91524,000Electronic0.8886.88,1847,696EL5T82828.496.02,7252,56018,000Electronic1.0084.68,1757,680Table 5.3.8presents the engineering characteristics of lamp replacement options fora baseline 40W 4-foot T12 MBP, 4,100Klamp in the residential sector. The highest efficacy 34W T12 lamp replacement is shown below inTable 5.3.8. The mean light outputof this lamp-and-ballast design is 5.3 percent less than that of the baseline system.5-25Table 5.3.9presents the engineering characteristics of lamp and ballast replacement options for a 40W 4-foot T12 MBP,4,100K lamp in the residential sector. Notethat at the higher ELs, DOE considered some T8 substitutes for the 40W T12 lamp.Asdiscussed earlier, DOE adjusted the BF sothat the combination of lamp and ballastmaintains light output so that potential light outputis equal to, greater than, or no more than10 percent less than the light output of the baseline system. There is one 34W T12standardscase lamp at EL3 that is placed on a magnetic ballast. Magnetic ballasts will continue to be sold in the residential sector under currentregulations so consumers have the option topurchase a magnetic ballastin the standards case if itis an energy-saving option.DOEunderstands that certain residential ballasts cannot operate reduced-wattage (e.g., 34W T12) lamps. However, because someresidential ballasts can operate reduced-wattage lamps, DOE is considering these lamp-and-ballasts systems as an option for someconsumers in the residential sector. Consumers can also purchaselower ballast factor ballasts in order to maintain an equivalent lumenpackage to the baseline 40W T12magnetic system. However, DOE did not consider other lamps on magnetic ballasts apart from the34W T12 standards-case lamp at EL3 shown in the table because the systems either do not save energy or are not within 10 percentlumen output of the baseline system. All other standards-case lamps for lamp and ballast replacements are placed on electronicballasts.Table 5.3.8 Lamp Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 40W T12, 4,100K Systemin the Residential SectorNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMean LightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactor*WlmlmBaselineT12404176.83,1502,86015,000Magnetic0.6870.04,2843,890EL3T12343491.23,1002,79024,000Magnetic0.6660.04,0923,683*Note: This difference in BFs does not represent a ballast replacement. Instead, the BF of magnetic ballasts changes when a different wattage lamp is installed.5-26Table 5.3.9 Lamp and Ballast Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 40W T12, 4,100K System in the ResidentialSectorNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT124041.076.83,1502,86015,000Magnetic0.6870.04,2843,890EL1T124041.080.53,3003,00020,000Electronic0.6558.04,2903,900EL1T123434.082.42,8002,46020,000Electronic0.8562.04,7604,182EL1T124041.082.93,4003,06024,000Electronic0.6558.04,4203,978EL2T123434.085.32,9002,61020,000Electronic0.7548.04,3503,915EL2T83232.586.22,8002,52020,000Electronic0.7851.64,3683,931Baseline/EL2T83232.586.22,8002,52020,000Electronic0.8858.64,9284,435EL2T124041.087.83,6003,25024,000Electronic0.6558.04,6804,225EL3T123434.091.23,1002,79024,000Magnetic0.6660.04,0923,683EL3T123434.091.23,1002,79024,000Electronic0.7548.04,6504,185EL3T83232.590.82,9502,71020,000Electronic0.7549.64,4254,065EL3T83232.590.82,9502,71020,000Electronic0.7851.64,6024,2285-27Table 5.3.9 Lamp and Ballast Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 40W T12, 4,100K System in the ResidentialSector(continued)NominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmEL4T83232.592.33,0002,85024,000Electronic0.7549.64,5004,275EL4T83232.592.33,0002,85024,000Electronic0.7851.64,6804,446EL4T83030.493.82,8502,68020,000Electronic0.7547.24,2754,020EL4T83030.493.82,8502,68020,000Electronic0.7848.94,4464,181EL4T82526.693.02,4752,35030,000Electronic0.7840.53,8613,666EL4T82526.693.02,4752,35030,000Electronic0.8845.44,3564,136EL5T83232.595.43,1002,91524,000Electronic0.7146.84,4024,139EL5T83232.595.43,1002,91524,000Electronic0.7549.64,6504,373EL5T82828.496.02,7252,56018,000Electronic0.7845.64,2513,994Table 5.3.10presents the engineering analysis results for the replacement lamp-and-ballast combinations for the 34W 4-footT12 MBP baseline lamp in the commercial andindustrial sectors. DOE has not identifiedany lower-wattage direct lamp replacementdesigns that could operate on the same ballast and save energy.In this table, T8 lamp and ballast replacements are consideredfor thebaseline lamp, and the BF is selected so that the new system’slight output never drops below10 percent of the baseline system.5-28Table 5.3.10 Lamp and Ballast Replacement EngineeringAnalysis for a Three-Lamp 34W T12, 4,100K System in theCommercial and Industrial SectorsNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT123434.077.92,6502,30020,000Magnetic0.88108.06,9966,072BaselineT123434.077.92,6502,30020,000Electronic0.8891.76,9966,072EL1T123434.082.42,8002,46020,000Electronic0.8891.77,3926,494EL1T123434.082.42,8002,46020,000Electronic0.8690.37,2246,347EL2T123434.085.32,9002,61020,000Electronic0.8690.37,4826,734Baseline/EL2T83232.586.22,8002,52020,000Electronic0.8886.87,3926,653EL3T83232.590.82,9502,71020,000Electronic0.7877.96,9036,341EL3T123434.091.23,1002,79024,000Electronic0.8690.37,9987,198EL4T83232.592.33,0002,85024,000Electronic0.7575.36,7506,413EL4T83030.493.82,8502,68020,000Electronic0.7872.26,6696,271EL4T82526.693.02,4752,35030,000Electronic0.8866.56,5346,204EL5T83232.595.43,1002,91524,000Electronic0.7171.76,6036,209EL5T82828.496.02,7252,56018,000Electronic0.7867.56,3775,990Table 5.3.11presents the engineering analysis results for the32W4-foot T8 MBP baseline lamp replacement in thecommercial and industrial sectors. As shown below inTable 5.3.11, there are no lamp replacement options at EL3 because the systemlumens of reduced wattage lamp replacement options below this EL are not maintained.Table 5.3.12presents the engineering analysis results for the replacement lamp and ballast combinations for the 32W 4-foot T8MBP baseline lamp in the commercial andindustrial sectors. For lamp-and-ballast replacement combinations, the BF is selectedsothat the new system’s light output is equal to, greater than, or no more than 10 percent less than the light output of the baseline system.5-295-30Table 5.3.11 Lamp Replacement Engineering Analysis fora Three-Lamp 32W T8, 4,100K System in the Commercial andIndustrial SectorsNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmLmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaseline/EL2T83232.586.22,8002,52020,000Electronic0.8886.87,3926,653EL4T83030.493.82,8502,68020,000Electronic0.8880.47,5247,075EL4T82526.693.02,4752,35030,000Electronic0.8866.56,5346,204EL5T82828.496.02,7252,56018,000Electronic0.8875.37,1946,758Table 5.3.12 Lamp and Ballast Replacement EngineeringAnalysis for a Three-Lamp 32W T8, 4,100K System in theCommercial and Industrial SectorsNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaseline/EL2T83232.586.22,8002,52020,000Electronic0.8886.87,3926,653EL3T83232.590.82,9502,71020,000Electronic0.7877.96,9036,341EL4T83232.592.33,0002,85024,000Electronic0.7575.36,7506,413EL4T83030.493.82,8502,68020,000Electronic0.7872.26,6696,271EL4T82526.693.02,4752,35030,000Electronic0.8866.56,5346,204EL5T83232.595.43,1002,91524,000Electronic0.7575.36,9756,559EL5T82828.496.02,7252,56018,000Electronic0.8875.37,1946,758

### 5.3.2 Eight-foot SP Slimline GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

5.3.2.1 Baseline Models

The 8-foot SP slim line lamps with CCTs le ss than or equal to 4,500K are commonly

manufactured in both T8 and T12 diameters. As discussed in chapter 3, the T12 diameter represents approximately 85 per cent of all 8-foot SP slimline lamp shipments. However, DOE projects that by 2011, T8s will account for 26 percen t of all 8-foot SP slimline lamp shipments. Therefore, DOE selected its base line models for this product class from both the T12 and T8 diameter. The two most popular wattages associat ed with the 8-foot T12 SP slimline lamp type

are the 60W and 75W. For th e 60W lamp, the cool white halophosphor is the most popular. Therefore, DOE selected this as the baseline. The most comm on 75W T12 lamp purchased uses a rare earth 700 series phosphor. For T8 lamps, the most popular wattage is 59W. The most common lamp purchased at this wattage uses a ra re earth 700 series phosphor. As with the 4- foot MBP, DOE selects a CCT of 4,100K because it is the most common CCT for this lamp type.

When selecting baseline lamps, DOE found sma ll variances in the re ported lumen outputs (and therefore efficacies). DOE selected the leas t efficacious baseline lamps to ensure that all the major manufacturers have a product available at the baseline.

DOE’s review of product literature for 8-f oot T12 SP slimline lamps indicated that a 12,000-hour lifetime is typical, although this is shorter than the lifet ime of the 4-foot MBP. T12 lamps with a 15,000-hour lifetime for a 3-hour cy cle are marketed as extended performance products. Therefore, DOE used a lifetime of 12 ,000 hours for a 3-hour cycle for the baseline unit of analysis for T12 lamps.

DOE’s review of product literature for 8-foot T8 SP slimline lamps indicated that 15,000 hours is a typical lifetime. T8 lamps with a 24,000-hour lifetime for a 3-hour cycle are marketed as extended performance products. Therefore, DOE used a lifetime of 15,000 hours for a 3-hour cycle for the baseline unit of analysis for T8 lamps.

The most common ballast for 8-foot T12 SP s limline lamps is a two-lamp, instant-start, 120V, magnetic ballast. This ballast typically has a 0.94 BF wh en a 75W 8-foot T12 SP slimline lamp is installed and a 0.88 BF when a 60W 8-fo ot T12 SP slimline lamp is installed. The most

common ballast used for 8-foot T8 SP slimline lamps is a two-lamp, instant-start, 120V,

electronic ballast with a 0.88 BF. The 75W T12 baseline lamp-and- ballast combination creates a lumen package of approximately 11,100 mean lumens (and 12,070 initial lumens). The 60W T12 baseline lamp-and-ballast combination cr eates a lumen package of approximately 8,210 mean lumens (and 9,330 initial lumens). The 59W T8 baseline lamp-and-ballast combination creates a lumen package of al most 9,030 mean lumens (and more than 10,030 initial lumens).

5-31

### Table 5.3.13 Baseline Units of Analys is for 8-Foot SP Slimline Lamps

Nominal Wattage CCT Rated Efficacy* Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life Lamp

Diameter

W CRI

K lm/W lm lm hr

T12 75 70 4,100 85.6 6,420 5,906 12,000

T12 60 62 4,100 87.6 5,300 4,664 12,000

T8 59 70 4,100 94.8 5,700 5,130 15,000

* Rated efficacy is based on the rated wattage of the la mps, which is 75W and 60.5W for T12 lamps and 60.1W for T8 lamps.



### 5.3.2.2 Efficacy Levels

As with the previous product class, DOE established ELs for design options that are

consistent across the three base line 8-foot SP slim line lamps. However, not every EL affects every baseline lamp. Because the three baseline lamps have different efficacy values, the first EL only affects the 75W lamp. However, for EL4 and above, the requirements affect all three baseline lamps.

In selecting ELs, DOE considered two differe nt paths to energy savings. One involves reduced-wattage replacement lamps, which could be installed in a socket and operate on the existing ballast. These lower-wattage replacemen t lamps have a higher efficacy and therefore produce about the same light output as the baselin e lamp (i.e., light out put never drops below 10 percent of the baseline system). The other path to energy savings involves lamps that have the same or lower wattage in comparison with the baseline lamp, but operate on a new ballast with a different BF so the system energy is lower. DOE selected the BF with the more-efficacious lamp to produce approximately the same light output as the baseline la mp (i.e., light output never drops below 10 percent of the baseline system).

The following discussion identifies the steps and technologies associated with each EL DOE considered. As discussed in the screening analysis (chapter 4), DOE used design options with highly emissive electrode coatings, hi gher efficacy lamp fill gas composition, higher efficacy phosphors, glass coatings, or higher effic acy lamp diameter to achieve a higher efficacy level. Because high-efficacy phosphors and lamp diameter are common methods to achieve higher efficacies, DOE identified the diameter and phosphor associated with each EL based on an analysis of catalog data:

EL1 . This level affects just the 75W T12 baseline lamp, moving this technology from a 700 series rare earth phosphor to an 800 series rare earth phosphor. This level does not affect the 60W T12 baseline lamp since it is above the baseline efficacy.

EL2 . This level represents the highest effi cacy for the T12 lamp at 75W. At that efficacy, the lamp incorporates premium 800 series rare earth phosphor. For the 60W lamp, this level requires a 700 series rare earth phosphor.

EL3 . DOE selected this level because it represents the only viable 60W replacement that would operate on a 75W ballast with the same CC T as the baseline lamp (4,100K). No lamps at

5-32

### 75W can achieve this EL. For the 60W lamp, th is level requires an improved 700 series rare earth phosphor.

EL4 . At this level, ballast changes may be re quired for those users who need a lamp with a CCT of 4,100K, since only 4,100K T8 lamps are compliant. T8 lamps transition from a 700 series rare earth phosphor at EL3 to an 800 series rare earth phosphor.

EL5 . At this level, ballast changes are required for T8 t echnology. Also, at this level lamps use the premium 800 series rare earth phosphor . This level represents the highest efficacy level available, or max-tech for 8-foot SP slimline lamps.

Figure 5.3.18 illustrates five initial ELs based on catalog values of commerciallyavailable flu orescent lamps on a plot of selected 8-foot SP slimline lamps analyzed by DOE to determine efficacy level requirements. A line at 80.0 lm/W denotes the existing energy conservation standard (from EPACT) . Square boxes and labels id entify the two baseline lamps. The plot shows the replacement lamps DOE consid ered. Some are the same wattage, but have a higher efficacy; others have lo wer wattage and higher efficacy so that the lamp-and-ballast system maintains light output at no less than 10 percent of the baseline lamp-and-ballast system.

EL1 EL2 EL3 EL4 EL5

EPACT 1992

75.0 77.0 79.0 81.0 83.0 85.0 87.0 89.0 91.0 93.0 95.0 97.0 99.0 101.0 103.0 105.0

52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)

Rated Wattage (W) 

### 8-foot T12 single pin slimline 8-foot T8 single pin slimline

75W T12 Baseline 60W T12 Baseline 59W T8 Baseline



### 5-33

### Figure 5.3.18 Initial Efficacy Levels fo r 8-Foot SP Slimline Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Table 5.3.14 provides detailed information on the 8-foot SP slimline lamp designs used in the engin eering analysis and subsequent analyses.

Table 5.3.14 8-Foot SP Slimline Lamp Designs

Nominal Wattage Rated Wattage Rated Efficacy Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life CRI

EL Lamp

Diameter W W lm/W lm lm hr

Baseline/0 T12 75 75.0 85.6 6,420 5,906 12,000 70

1 T12 75 75.0 87.3 6,550 6,157 12,000 80

Baseline/1 T12 60 60.5 87.6 5,300 4,664 12,000 62

2 T12 75 75.0 92.0 6,900 6,370 15,000 80

2 T12 60 60.5 92.6 5,600 5,152 12,000 70

Baseline/3 T8 59 60.1 94.8 5,700 5,130 15,000 75

3 T12 60 60.5 97.5 5,900 5,480 15,000 73

4 T8 59 60.1 98.2 5,900 5,428 15,000 82

5 T8 59 60.1 101.5 6,100 5,795 18,000 85

5 T8 57 57.0 101.8 5,800 5,450 24,000 81

5 T8 55 55.0 103.6 5,700 5,415 18,000 82



### As seen above, DOE used commercially-available lamps and their associated rated efficacies (rated initial lumen out put divided by the ANSI rated wa ttage) to determine the design options required to meet each efficacy level. However, to establish the minimum efficacy requirements for each efficacy level, DOE coupled catalog data on commercially-available lamps with data submitted to DOE by manufacturers for the purpose of compliance with existing energy conservation standards for general service fluorescent lamp s. DOE’s use of compliance report data is discussed in further detail in section 5.3.1.2

. Figure 5.3.19 below shows all

com pliance report data for 8-foot SP slimline lamps with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K.

As discussed in section 5.3.1.2 , DOE considered only recent compliance report data in

estab lishing minimum efficacy requirements. Figure 5.3.19 depicts compliance report data from the years 2007 and 2008 in gray circles. For 8-foot SP slim line lamps, DOE found that not enough data existed from compliance reports su bmitted in 2007 and 2008 to establish several of efficacy levels with reasonable certainty. Theref ore, DOE adjusted these levels to reflect the minimum efficacy requirements recommended by NEMA in their written comments. Table

5.3.15 summarizes the resulting efficacy requireme nts for 8-foot SP slim line lamps with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K, after accounting fo r compliance data.

5-3480.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0 110.0

54.0 56.0 58.0 60.0 62.0 64.0 66.0 68.0 70.0 72.0 74.0 76.0Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)



### Rated Wattage (W) 8ft Slimline <=4500 HALO
8ft Slimline <=4500, 700 SERIES
8ft Slimline <=4500, 800 SERIES



### Figure 5.3.19 All Compliance Report Data fo r 8-Foot SP Slimline Lamps with CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Table 5.3.15. Summary of the ELs for 8-Foot SP Slimline Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Efficacy Level Efficacy Requirement

lm/W

EL1 86

EL2 92

EL3 95

EL4 97

EL5 98



### Section 5.3.2.4 presents additional information about the lamp and ballast system s DOE develops in the engineering analysis.

5.3.2.3 System Power Rating

For each lamp wattage and ballast type, DOE linearly fit the system power rating of a lamp on several different ballasts with varying BFs.

5-35

### Figure 5.3.20 to Figure 5.3.21 show the linear fit and ballast characteristics DOE used to derive the system power rating for 2-lamp, 8-foot T12 SP slimline lamps on electronic ballasts. The fit follows the form of Eq. 5.1 where SPR bBFm   * 

### . The ballasts DOE chose for these calculations typically have a THD less than 20 per cent, PF greater than 0 .95, and typical BEF. Because ballast efficiencies naturally increase as lamp wattages decrease, there is a natural progression to higher typical BEFs at lower wattages.

126.0 128.0 130.0 132.0 134.0 136.0 138.0 140.0 142.0

0.78 0.80 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.90 0.92 0.94

ANSI Input Power (W)Ballast Factor



### Figure 5.3.20 Two-Lamp 75W T12 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.64-0.66; Linear Fit: m=100.0, b=47.0

5-36

### 100.0 102.0 104.0 106.0 108.0 110.0 112.0 114.0 116.0

0.78 0.80 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.90 0.92 0.94

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W)



### Figure 5.3.21 Two-Lamp 60W T12 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.79-0.80; Linear Fit: m=100.0, b=22.0

Figure 5.3.22 to Figure 5.3.24 show the linear fit and ballast characteristics DOE used to derive the system power rating for two-lamp, 8-foot T8 SP slimline lamps on electronic ballasts. The ballasts DOE used for these calculations ty pically have a THD less than 20 percent, PF greater than 0.95, and typical BEF. Because balla st efficiencies naturally increase as lamp wattages decrease, there is a natu ral progression to higher typical BE Fs at lower wattages. Also,

because there is less manufacturer literature on system power ratings of ballasts with lower wattage lamps, DOE used fewer points to develop a linear fit at the energy saving lamp wattages.

5-37

### 100.0 110.0 120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0 160.0

0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W)



### Figure 5.3.22 Two-Lamp 59W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.77-0.79; Linear Fit: m=123.7, b=4.0

105.0 105.5 106.0 106.5 107.0 107.5 108.0

0.84 0.85 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.89

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W)



### Figure 5.3.23 Two-Lamp 57W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.80-0.81; Linear Fit: m=50.0, b=63.5

5-38

### 5-39 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W)



### Figure 5.3.24 Two-Lamp 55W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <10 percent, and BEF 0.86; Linear Fit: m=118.4, b=-2.2

5.3.2.4 Results

DOE evaluated three baseline lam ps for the 8-foot SP slimline product class: a 75W T12 lamp, a 60W T12 lamp, and a 59W T8 lamp. For each baseline lamp, DOE considered both direct-replacement lamps that operate on the existing ballast and lamp-and-ballast replacement designs that result in approximately the same li ght output as the baseline lamp. As discussed earlier, DOE adjusted the BF so that the light output of the lamp-and-balla st design system never drops below 10 percent of the baseline system.

Table 5.3.16 and Table 5.3.17 present the engineering characteristics of the lamp replacem ent and lamp-and-ballast replacement de signs for the baseline 75W 8-foot T12 SP slimline, 4,100K lamp system. Although a 60W T12 lamp is often consider ed a reduced-wattage replacement of the 75W T12 lamp, there are no lamp options with a CCT of 4,100K that emit enough lumens to fall within 10 percent of the baseline system mean lumens. The highestefficacy 4,100K, 60W T12 lamp replacement is shown below in Table 5.3.16 . The light output of

this lam p-and-ballast design is 13 percent less th an that of the baseline system. DOE also included lamp-and-ballast replac ement options for a 75W T12, 4,100K lamp. Note that at the higher ELs, DOE considers some T8 substitutes for the 75W T12 lamp.Table 5.3.16 Lamp Replacement EngineeringAnalysis for a 75W T12, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystem InitialLight OutputSystemMean LightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactor*WlmlmBaselineT127575.085.66,4205,90612,000Magnetic0.94158.012,07011,103EL3T126060.597.55,9005,48015,000Magnetic0.88126.010,3849,645*Note: This difference in BFs does not represent a ballast replacement. Rather, the BFof magnetic ballasts changes when the lower wattage lamp is installed.Table 5.3.17 Lamp-and-Ballast Replacement Engineering Analysis for a 75W T12, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT127575.085.66,4205,90612,000Magnetic0.94158.012,07011,103BaselineT127575.085.66,4205,90612,000Electronic0.88135.011,29910,395EL1T127575.087.36,5506,15712,000Electronic0.85132.011,13510,467EL2T127575.092.06,9006,37015,000Electronic0.85132.011,73010,829Baseline/EL3T85960.194.85,7005,13015,000Electronic1.18149.913,45212,107EL5T85960.1101.56,1005,79518,000Electronic0.88112.810,73610,1195-40Table 5.3.18presents the engineering analysis results for the replacement lamp-and-ballast combinations for the 60W 8-footT12 SP slimline baseline lamp. DOE did notidentify any lower-wattage direct lamp replacement designs that could operate on thesame ballast as a 60W T12 and save energy.In this table, DOE considered T8 lamp-and-ballast replacements for the baseline lamp,and selected the BF so that the lightoutput of the new system never drops below 10 percent of the baseline system.Table 5.3.18 Lamp-and-Ballast Replacement Engineering Analysis for a 60W T12, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaseline/EL1T126060.587.65,3004,66412,000Magnetic0.88126.09,3288,209Baseline/EL1T126060.587.65,3004,66412,000Electronic0.88110.09,3288,209EL2T126060.592.65,6005,15212,000Electronic0.85107.09,5208,758EL3T126060.597.55,9005,48015,000Electronic0.85107.010,0309,316Baseline/EL3T85960.194.85,7005,13015,000Electronic0.88112.810,0329,029EL4T85960.198.25,9005,42815,000Electronic0.78100.49,2048,468EL5T85757.0101.85,8005,45024,000Electronic0.78102.59,0488,502EL5T85960.1101.56,1005,79518,000Electronic0.78100.49,5169,040Table 5.3.19andTable 5.3.20present the engineering analysis results for the lamp replacement and lamp-and-ballastreplacement options for the 59W 8-foot T8 SP slimline baseline lamp. InTable 5.3.19, no lamp replacement options at EL4 areshown because the system lumens of reduced-wattage lamp replacement options below this EL are more than 10 percent less than thatof the baseline system. For lamp-and-ballast replacement combinations, DOE selected the BF so that the light output of the newsystem is equal to, greater than, or no more than 10 percent less than the light output of the baseline system.5-415-42Table 5.3.19 Lamp Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp, 59W, T8, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaseline/EL3T85960.194.85,7005,13015,000Electronic0.88112.810,0329,029EL5T85757.0101.85,8005,45024,000Electronic0.88107.510,2089,592EL5T85555.0103.65,7005,41518,000Electronic0.88102.010,0329,530Table 5.3.20 Lamp-and-Ballast Replacement EngineeringAnalysis for a Two-Lamp, 59W, T8, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattage*RatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaseline/EL3T85960.194.85,7005,13015,000Electronic0.88112.810,0329,029EL4T85960.198.25,9005,42815,000Electronic0.85109.110,0309,228EL5T85757.0101.85,8005,45024,000Electronic0.85106.09,8609,265EL5T85960.1101.56,1005,79518,000Electronic0.78100.49,5169,040EL5T85555.0103.65,7005,41518,000Electronic0.88102.010,0329,530

### 5.3.3 Eight-Foot RDC HO GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

5.3.3.1 Baseline Models

The 8-foot RDC HO lamps with CCTs ≤ 4,500K are m anufactured in both T8 and T12 diameters. As discussed in chapter 3, the T12 di ameter represents the majority of 8-foot RDC HO lamp shipments today and will continue to re present the majority in 2011. Therefore, DOE

selected its baseline models fo r this product class from the T12 diameter, which represents the most popular lamp type.

The two most popular wattages associated w ith the 8-foot T12 RDC HO lamp type are the 95W and 110W. For the 95W lamp, the cool white halophosphor lamp is the most popular. Therefore, DOE selected this lamp as the baseline 95W lamp. For the 110W T12 lamp, the most common lamp purchased uses a rare earth 700 se ries phosphor. The efficacy of both baseline lamps is approximately 2 lm/W greater than the EPACT 1992 standard level of 80 lm/W, but no other lamps met the EPACT 1992 CRI requirements, which are lower than either baseline lamp. As with the baseline fluorescent lamps in other covered product classes, DOE selected a CCT of 4,100K because it is the most common CCT for this lamp type.

The typical operating lifetime for these lamps is the same as that of the 8-foot SP slimline T12 lamps. The lamp lifetime is typically 12,000 hours. Lamps with a 15,000-hour lifetime on a 3-hour cycle are marketed as extended performan ce products. Therefore, DOE used a lifetime of 12,000 hours for a 3-hour cycle for the baseline un it of analysis for 8-foot RDC HO lamps.

DOE used a rapid-start, 120V , magnetic ballast for the baseline 8-foot T12 RDC systems as current regulations do not ban magnetic cold-temperature ba llasts, which operate a large portion of the installed base of 8-foot T12 RDC HO lamps. The ballast has a ballast factor of 0.95 when used with 110W lamps and a ballast fa ctor of 0.91 when used with 95W lamps. Together, the 110W T12 baseline lamp-and-balla st combination creates a lumen package of approximately 15,480 mean lumens (and 17,200 initial lumens), while the 95W T12 baseline lamp-and-ballast combination creates a lumen package of approximately 12,650 mean lumens (and 14,560 initial lumens).

Table 5.3.21 Baseline Units of Analysis for 8-Foot RDC High-Output Lamps

Nominal Wattage CCT Rated Efficacy* Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life Lamp

Diameter W CRI

K lm/W lm lm hr

T12 110 70 4,100 80.1 9,050 8,145 12,000

T12 95 62 4,100 82.5 8,000 6,950 12,000

* Rated efficacy is based on the rated wattage of the la mps, which is 97W for the 95W T12 and 113W for the 110W

T12.



### 5.3.3.2 Efficacy Levels

As with the previous product class, DOE established ELs around de sign options that are

consistent across the tw o baseline lamps. In selecting ELs, DOE considered two different paths to energy savings. The first involves reduced-watta ge replacement lamps that could be installed

5-43

### in a socket and operate o n the existing ballast . These lower-wattage replacement lamps have a higher efficacy and therefore produce approximately the same light output as the baseline lamp (i.e., light output never drops be low 10 percent of the baseline syst em). The other path to energy savings involves lamps that have the same rate d wattage as the baseline lamp, but operate on a new ballast with a different BF, so system energy is lower. DOE selected the BF with the more efficacious lamp to produce approximately the same light output as the baseline lamp (i.e., light output never drops below 10 percen t of the baseline system).

The following discussion identifies the step s and technologies associated with each EL DOE considered. As discussed in the screening an alysis (chapter 4), DOE used design options with highly-emissive electrode coatings, higher-efficacy lamp fill gas composition, higherefficacy phosphors, glass coatings, or higher-efficacy lamp diameter to achieve higher efficacy levels. Because high-efficacy phosphors and lamp diameter are common methods to achieve higher efficacies, DOE identified the diamet er and phosphor associated with each EL:

EL1 . This level requires a 110W T12 lamp to use 800 series rare earth phosphor.

EL2 . This level cannot be achieved by any 110W T12 lamp. This leve l also requires the 95W T12 lamp to move to a rare earth 700 series phosphor.

EL3 . This level cannot be achieved by any 110W T12 lamp. For a 95W T12 lamp, this level requires a shift to the 800 series rare earth phosphor.

EL4 . This level eliminates all T12 lamps; only T8 lamps comply which requires a ballast change. This standard level can be achieved with a 700 series rare earth phosphor in the T8 lamp.

EL5 . This level also eliminates all T12 la mps; only T8 lamps comply, which requires a ballast change. This standard level represents the highest efficacy level available, or max-tech for 8-foot RDC HO lamps. This level can on ly be achieved with an 800 series rare earth phosphor in the T8 lamp.

Figure 5.3.20 illustrates five initial ELs that DOE selected to analyze based on catalog values of commercially-available fluorescent lamp s on a plot of selected fluorescent lamps. A line at 80.0 lm/W denotes the existing energy conservation standard (from EPACT 1992). Square boxes and labels identify the two baseline lamps. The plot also shows the high-efficacy replacement lamps DOE considered for each baseline lamp. Some are at the same wattage, but have a higher efficacy; others have a combination of lower wattage and higher efficacy so that the light output never drops below 10 percent of the baseline system.

5-44EL1 EL2 EL3 EL4

EPACT 1992 EL5

75.0 77.0 79.0 81.0 83.0 85.0 87.0 89.0 91.0 93.0 95.0 97.0 99.0 101.0 103.0 105.0

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106 108 110 112 114Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)

Rated Wattage (W) 

### 8-foot T12 recessed
double contact HO 8-foot T8 recessed
double contact HO

110W T12 Baseline 95W T12 Baseline



### Figure 5.3.25 Initial Efficacy Leve ls for 8-Foot RDC HO Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Table 5.3.22 provides detailed information on the 8-foot RDC HO la mp designs used in the engineering analysis and subsequent analyses.

Table 5.3.22 8-Foot RDC HO Lamp Designs

Nominal Wattage Rated Wattage Rated Efficacy Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life CRI

EL Lamp

Diameter W W lm/W lm lm hr

Baseline/0 T12 110 113 80.1 9,050 8,145 12,000 70

Baseline/0 T12 95 97 82.5 8,000 6,950 12,000 62

1 T12 110 113 83.2 9,400 8,648 12,000 80

2 T12 95 97 86.1 8,350 7,515 12,000 70

3 T12 95 97 87.6 8,500 7,650 12,000 80

3 T12 95 97 88.9 8,625 7,750 12,000 85

4 T8 86 86 91.9 7,900 7,100 24,000 78

4 T8 86 86 93.0 8,000 7,200 18,000 75

5 T8 86 86 95.3 8,200 7,800 18,000 86



### As seen above, DOE used commercially-available lamps and their associated rated efficacies (rated initial lumen out put divided by the ANSI rated wa ttage) to determine the design

5-45

### options requ ired to meet each efficacy level. However, to establish the minimum efficacy requirements for each efficacy level, DOE coupled catalog data on commercially-available lamps with data submitted to DOE by manufacturers for the purpose of compliance with existing energy conservation standards for general service fluorescent lamp s. DOE’s use of compliance report data is discussed in further detail in section 5.3.1.2

.

As discussed in section 5.3.1.2 , DOE considered only recent compliance report data in

estab lishing minimum efficacy requirements. Figure 5.3.26 depicts compliance report data from the years 2007 and 2008 in gray circles. For 8- foot RDC HO lam ps, DOE found that not enough data existed from compliance reports submitted in 2007 and 2008 to establish several of efficacy levels with reasonable certainty. Therefore, DOE adjusted these levels to reflect the minimum efficacy requirements recommended by NEMA in their written comments. Table 5.3.23

summarizes the resu lting efficacy requirements for 8-foot RDC HO lamps with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K, after accounting for compliance data.

80.0 82.0 84.0 86.0 88.0 90.0 92.0 94.0 96.0 98.0 100.0

85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0 110.0 115.0Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)



### Rated Wattage (W) 8ft RDC HO <=4500 HALO 8ft RDC HO <=4500, 700 SERIES 8ft RDC HO <=4500, 800 SERIES



### Figure 5.3.26 All Compliance Report Data for 8-Foot RDC HO Lamps with CCTs ≤ 4,500K

5-46

### Table 5.3.23 Summary of the ELs for 8-Foot RDC HO Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Efficacy Level Efficacy Requirement

lm/W

EL1 83

EL2 86

EL3 88

EL4 92

EL5 95



### Section 5.3.3.4 presents additional information on the lam p-and-ballast systems DOE develops in the engineering analysis.

5.3.3.3 System Power Rating

For each lamp wattage and ballast type, DOE linearly fit the system power rating of a lamp on several different BFs versus the BF of each ballast. Figure 5.3.27 to Figure 5.3.28 show

the linear fit and ballast characteristics DOE us ed to derive the systempower rating for twolamp, 8-foot T12 RDC HO lamps on electronic ballasts. The fit followe d the form of Eq. 5.1

where SPR = m * BF + b. The ballasts DOE chose for these calculations typically have a THD less than 20 percent, PF greater than 0.95, and ty pical BEF. Because ballast efficiencies naturally increase as lamp wattages decrease, th ere is a natural progres sion to higher typical BEFs at lower wattages.

185.0 190.0 195.0 200.0 205.0 210.0 215.0 220.0

0.83 0.85 0.87 0.89 0.91

Ballast FactorSytem Power Rating (W)



### Figure 5.3.27 Two-Lamp 110W T12 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.42-0.43; Linear Fit: m=307.7, b=-65.4

5-47

### 155.0 160.0 165.0 170.0 175.0 180.0 185.0 190.0

0.84 0.85 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.89 0.90

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W)



### Figure 5.3.28 Two-Lamp 95W T12 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.48-0.52; Linear Fit: m=433.3, b=-204.3

Figure 5.3.29 shows the linear fit and ballast characteristics DOE used to derive the

system power rating for two-lamp, 8-foot T8 RD C HO lamps on electronic ballasts. The ballasts DOE used for these calculations typically have a THD less than 20 percent, PF greater than 0.95, and typical BEF.

5-48 145.0 147.0 149.0 151.0 153.0 155.0 157.0 159.0 161.0 163.0 165.0

0.8 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.9

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W)

### 5-49 Figure 5.3.29 Two-Lamp 86W T8 120V Ballasts with THD <20 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 0.54-0.55; Linear Fit: m=128.6, b=46.9

5.3.3.4 Results

DOE evaluated two baseline lam ps for the 8-foot RDC HO with CCTs ≤ 4,500K product class: a 110W T12 lamp and a 95W T12 lamp. For each baseline lamp, DOE considered only energy-saving options that result in approximately the same light output as the baseline lamp. Energy savings can either be achieved thr ough lamp replacements or lamp-and-ballast replacements. Additional lamp-and-ballast designs that DOE uses in the NIA are available in appendix 5A.

Table 5.3.24 and Table 5.3.25 presen t the engineering characteristics of lamp replacement and lamp-and-ballast replacement de signs for a baseline 110W 8-foot T12 RDC HO, 4,100K lamp. There are no lamp replacement de signs at EL1 because the system lumens of the 95W lamp replacement options below EL3 em it less than 10 percent of the baseline system.

For lamp-and-ballast replacement options, DOE considered some T8 substitutes for the 110W T12 lamp at higher ELs. In events of ne w construction and renovation, for instance, DOE assumed that some of these 8-foot T8 RDC HO syst ems will be spaced closer together so that the potential light output is equal t o, greater than, or no more than 10 percent less than the light output of the baseline system.

As discussed earlier, DOE also adjusted the BF such that the syst em light output of the lamp-and-ballast design is equal t o, greater than, or no more than 10 percent less than the light output of the baseline system.Table 5.3.24 Lamp Replacement EngineeringAnalysis for a 110W T12, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT1211011380.19,0508,14512,000Magnetic0.95237.017,19515,476EL3T12959787.68,5007,65012,000Magnetic0.91203.015,47013,923EL3T12959788.98,6257,75012,000Magnetic0.91203.015,69814,1055-50Table 5.3.25 Lamp-and-Ballast Replacement Engineering Analysis for a 110W T12, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT1211011380.19,0508,14512,000Magnetic0.95237.017,19515,476EL1T1211011383.29,4008,64812,000Electronic0.88205.416,54415,220EL2*T12959786.18,3507,51512,000Electronic0.90185.617,19515,476EL2*T12959786.18,3507,51512,000Magnetic0.91203.017,19515,476EL3T12959787.68,5007,65012,000Magnetic0.91203.015,47013,923EL3T12959788.98,6257,75012,000Magnetic0.91203.015,69814,105EL3T12959788.98,6257,75012,000Electronic0.90185.615,52513,950EL3*T12959787.68,5007,65012,000Electronic0.90185.617,19515,476EL4*T8868691.97,9007,10024,000Electronic0.88160.017,21915,476EL4*T8868693.08,0007,20018,000Electronic0.81151.017,19515,476EL5T8868695.38,2007,80018,000Electronic0.88160.014,43213,728EL5*T8868695.38,2007,80018,000Electronic0.81151.016,26915,476* These systems are used only in the new construction/renovation scenario in the LCC analysis. Under this event, slightly more(between 1.12 and 1.33) of thesesystems are installed where there would have been one baseline system to be within 10 percent mean lumens of the baseline system. Therefore, the LCC andlumen output of these systems are multiplied by a factor (between 1.12 and 1.33) in the LCC analysis.Table 5.3.26presents the engineering analysis results for the replacement lamp-and-ballast combinations for the 95W 8-footT12 RDC HO baseline lamp. DOE did not identify any lower-wattage direct lamp replacement designs that could operate on the sameballast as a 95W T12 and save energy. In this table, DOE considered T8 lamp-and-ballast replacements for the baseline lamp, andselects the BF so that the new system has a light output of no less than 10 percent of the baseline system.5-515-52Table 5.3.26 Lamp-and-Ballast Replacement Engineering Analysis for a 95W T12, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacyInitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT12959782.58,0006,95012,000Magnetic0.91203.014,56012,649EL2T12959786.18,3507,51512,000Electronic0.89181.314,86313,377EL3T12959788.98,6257,75012,000Electronic0.88177.015,18013,640EL3T12959787.68,5007,65012,000Electronic0.88177.014,96013,464EL3T8868691.97,9007,10024,000Electronic0.88160.013,90412,496EL4T8868693.08,0007,20018,000Electronic0.88160.014,08012,672EL5T8868695.38,2007,80018,000Electronic0.81151.013,28412,636

### 5.3.4 Four-foot T5 MiniBP SO GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

5.3.4.1 Baseline Models

Currently, o nly 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lamps utilizing rare-earth phosphors are sold on the US market. DOE recognizes, however, that 4-fo ot T5 MiniBP SO halophosphor lamps may be introduced to the US market and purchased widely by consumers if efficacy standards for 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lamps are not established. Because 4-foot T5 halophosphor MiniBP SO lamps do not exist currently, DOE developed a baselin e model 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO halophosphor lamp by applying efficacy data from shorter length halophosphor SO T5 lamps that are currently available and creating a relati onship between length and effi cacy. The baseline 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lamp that DOE modeled is a 28W halophosphor lamp with an efficacy of 86 lm/W when operated at 35° C. The lamp has a CCT of 4,100K, a CRI of 62, a nd a rated lifetime of 20,000 hours. Although this lamp is not commercial ly available today, it is the least efficacious lamp that may be commercially available when standards take effect. For further information on the development of the 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO halophosphor baseline, see appendix 5B of this

TSD.

DOE found that a range of ballast factors are available for th e 4-foot T5 product classes, and the most common ballast is a 2-lamp ballast. Because the light out put of the 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO halophosphor baseline lamp is much lower than T5 lamps sold on the market today, DOE chose the highest ballast factors available. Thus, DOE paired its baseline 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lamp with 1.15 ballast factor and 1.0 0 ballast factor progra mmed-start electronic ballasts. Together, the 28W lamps and 1.00 BF ballast combination creates a lumen package of 3,348 mean lumens (and 4,782 initial lumens), while the 28W lamps and 1.15 BF ballast combination creates a lumen package of 3,850 mean lumens (and 5,499 initial lumens).

Table 5.3.27 Baseline Unit of Analysis for 4-Foot T5 MiniBP Standard-Output Lamps

Nominal Wattage CCT Rated Efficacy (at 35°

C)* Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life Lamp

Diameter

W CRI

K lm/W lm Lm hr

T5 28 62 4,100 86.0 2,391 1,674 20,000

* Rated efficacy is based on the rated wattage of the lamp, which is 27.8W.



### 5.3.4.2 Efficacy Levels

In selecting ELs, DOE c onsidered two diffe rent paths to energy savings. The first concentrated on reduced-wattage replacement lamp s that could be installed in a socket and operate on the existing ballast. These lower-wat tage replacement lamps have a higher efficacy and therefore produce approximately the same light output as the baseline lamp (i.e., light output never drops below 10 percent of th e baseline system). The other path to energy savings involved lamps that have the same rated wattage as the baseline lamp, but operate on a new ballast with a different BF, so system energy is lower. DOE se lected the BF with the more efficacious lamp to

5-53

### produce approxim ately the same light output as th e baseline lamp (i.e., light output never drops below 10 percent of the baseline system).

For the 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO with CCTs ≤ 4,500K product class DOE analyzed two efficacy levels: the first efficacy level prevents the introduction of less efficacious halophosphor lamps on the market, while the second efficacy le vel raises the efficacy of the current highest volume 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lamps on the market.

The following discussion identifies the steps and technologies associated with each EL DOE considered. DOE is aware that many T5 st andard-output lamps are operated at 35° C; because DOE is most interested in the efficacy of lamps at typical operating conditions, DOE developed initial efficacy levels for T5 standard -output lamps based on 35° C catalog data. As discussed in the screening analys is (chapter 4), DOE used desi gn options with highly-emissive electrode coatings, higher-efficacy lamp fill gas composition, higher-efficacy phosphors, glass coatings, or higher-efficacy lamp diameter to ach ieve higher efficacy levels for GSFL. For 4- foot T5 MiniBP SO, the primary design opti on DOE assessed was the use of higher-efficacy phosphors. No other diameters than T5 were available as design options for this product class. DOE identified the phosphor associated with each EL:

EL1 . This efficacy level is characterized by lamps that use 800-series phosphors and have a rated catalog efficacy (ini tial lamp lumens divided by ANSI rated wattage) of 104 lm/W at 35° C operation. They are the most common 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lamps currently on the

market.

EL2 . This level characterizes higher efficacy 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lamps that use improved 800-series phosphors. Specifically, th ere is a reduced-wattage (26W) 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lamp (with a rated efficacy of 112 lm/W at 35° C operation) and a full-wattage (28W) lamp (with a rated efficacy of 110 lm/W at 35° C operation) that are more efficacious than the lamps that just meet efficacy level 1.

Figure 5.3.30 illustrates two initial ELs based on catalog values of commerciallyavailable flu orescent lamps that DOE selected to an alyze on a plot of select ed fluorescent lamps. A square box and a label identifies the baseline lamp. The plot also shows the high-efficacy replacement lamps DOE is consider ing for the baseline lamp. Some are at the same wattage as the baseline lamp, but have a higher efficacy; one lamp has a combination of lower wattage and higher efficacy.

5-54

### EL1 EL2

75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0 110.0 115.0 120.0 125.0

20 22 24 26 28 30Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)



### Rated Wattage (W) 

### 28W T5 Baseline



### Figure 5.3.30 Initial Efficacy Levels for 4-Foot T5 MiniBP SO Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K, 35° C Operation

Table 5.3.28 provides detailed information on the 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lam p designs used in the engineering analys is and subsequent analyses.

Table 5.3.28 4-Foot T5 MiniBP SO Lamp Designs

Nominal Wattage Rated Wattage Rated Efficacy (at 35 ° C) Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life CRI

EL Lamp

Diameter

W W lm/W Lm lm hr

Baseline/0 T5 28 27.8 86.0 2,391 1,674 20,000 62

1 T5 28 27.8 104.3 2,900 2,660 20,000 85

2 T5 28 27.8 109.7 3,050 2,898 20,000 85

2 T5 26 26.0 111.5 2,900 2,660 25,000 85



### As seen above, DOE used commercially-available lamps and their associated rated efficacies (rated initial lumen out put divided by the ANSI rated wa ttage) to determine the design options required to meet each efficacy level. However, similar to previously discussed product classes, these rated efficacy values do not necessarily correspond to how these lamps may comply under energy conservation standards. As discussed further detail in section 5.3.1.2 , DOE

used com pliance report data to establish mini mum efficacy requirements for the 4-foot MBP, 8-

5-55

### foot SP slimline, and 8 -foot RDC HO efficacy le vels. Because 4-foot MiniBP SO lamps have been not been regulated by DOE in the past, 4-foot MiniBP SO compliance reports do not exist. Therefore, to establish appropriate minimum efficacy requirements for each 4-foot MiniBP efficacy level, DOE computed the percentage difference between the rated efficacy and compliance efficacy for the highest-efficacy 4- foot MBP lamps, and applied that same percentage reduction to the 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO rated efficacies. In addition, the DOE test procedure for T5 lamps requires the lamps to be tested at 25°C. When operated at 25°C, the lumen output of T5 lamps is approximately 10 percent lower than the lumen output of such lamps when operated at 35° C. Because the test procedure will be used to determine compliance with DOE energy conservation standards, DOE developed EL requirements for T5 standardoutput lamps that take into account 25° C testing. Table 5.3.29 summarizes the resulting efficacy lev els for 4-foot MiniBP SO lamps with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K, taking compliance data and 25° C testing into account.

Table 5.3.29 Summary of the ELs for 4-Foot T5 MiniBP SO Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Efficacy Level Efficacy Requirement

lm/W

EL1 86

EL2 90



### Section 5.3.4.4 presents additional information on the lam p-and-ballast systems DOE develops in the engineering analysis.

5.3.4.3 System Power Rating

DOE calculated the system power rating, whic h represents the energy consumption rate of both the lamps and ballast, using published cat alog information. For each lamp wattage and ballast type, DOE applied a linear fit to several points identifying the sy stem power rating of a lamp on a ballast and the ballast f actor of the ballast. The fit fo llows the form of Eq. 5.1 where

SPR = m * BF + b . DOE used a linear form because th e relationship is approximately linear over the range of BFs and wattages considered.

The ballasts DOE used typically have a to tal harmonic distortion (THD) less than 10 percent, power factors (PF) greater than 0.95, and typical ballast efficacy fa ctors (BEF). Because ballast efficiencies naturally increase as lamp wattages decrease, there is a natural progression to higher typical BEFs at lower wattages. Also, because there is less ma nufacturer literature on system power ratings of ballasts with lower wattage lamps, DOE used fewer points to develop a linear fit for the energy-saving lamp wattages. Figure 5.3.31 to Figure 5.3.32 show the linear fit

and ballast characteristics DOE used to derive th e system power rating for 2-lamp, 4-foot T5 SO lamps on electronic ballasts.

5-56

### 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0

0.85 0.95 1.05 1.15

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=47.3, b=16.3

Figure 5.3.3 1 Two-Lamp 28W T5 Ballasts with THD <10 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 1.52-

1.67

50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0

0.85 0.95 1.05 1.15

Ballast FactorSystem Power Rating (W) 

### Linear Fit: m=52.4, b=7.2

Figure 5.3.3 2 Two-Lamp 26W T5 Ballasts with THD <10 percent, PF >0.95, and BEF 1.67-

1.71

5.3.4.4 Results

For the 4-foot T5 MiniB P SO with CCTs ≤ 4,500K product class, DOE assessed one model baseline lamp. DOE considered only ener gy-saving options that result in approximately the same light output as the ba seline lamp system. Energy savi ngs could either be achieved

5-57

### 5-58 through lamp or lamp and ballast replacements. Appendix 5A provides information on the additional lamp-and-ballast desi gns DOE uses in the NIA.

Table 5.3.30 presents the engineering characteristics of lamp replacement options for a baseline 28W 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO, 4,100K lamp. Table 5.3.31 presents the engineering

characteristics of lam p and ballast replacement op tions for the same lamp. As discussed earlier, DOE adjusted the BF so that the combination of lamp and ballast maintains light output so that potential light output is equal t o, greater than, or no more than 10 percent less than the light output of the baseline system. All T5 balla sts that DOE considered are electronic.Table 5.3.30 Lamp Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 28W T5, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacy(at 35°C)InitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMean LightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT52827.886.02,3911,67420,000Electronic1.1570.75,4993,850EL2T52626.0111.52,9002,66025,000Electronic1.1567.56,6706,118Table 5.3.31 Lamp and Ballast Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 28W T5, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacy(at 35°C)InitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWLm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT52827.886.02,3911,67420,000Electronic1.1570.75,4993,850EL1*T52827.8104.32,9002,66020,000Electronic0.9661.25,5105,054EL2*T52827.8109.73,0502,89820,000Electronic0.90109.75,4905,216EL2*T52626.0111.52,9002,66025,000Electronic0.9054.45,2204,788* These systems are used in the new construction/renovation scenario in the LCC analysis. Under this event, slightly less (between 0.74 and 0.80) of thesesystems are installed where there would have been one baseline system to be within 10 percent mean lumens of the baseline system. Therefore, the LCC andlumen output of these systems are multiplied by a factor (between 0.74 and 0.80) in the LCC analysis.5-59

### 5.3.5 Four-foot T5 MiniBP HO GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

5.3.5.1 Baseline Models

Sim ilar to 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lamps, currently, only 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO lamps utilizing rare-earth phosphors are sold on the US market. DOE recognizes, however, that 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO halophosphor lamps may be introduced to the US market and purchased widely by consumers if efficacy standards for 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO lamps are not established. Because 4-foot T5 halophosphor MiniBP HO lamps do not exist currently, DOE developed a baseline model 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO halophosphor lamp by applying efficacy data from shorter length halophosphor fluorescent T5 lamps that are currently available in the market and creating a relationship between length and efficacy. The baseline 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO lamp that DOE modeled is a 54W halophosphor lamp with an efficacy of 76.6 lm/W at 35° C operation. The lamp has a CCT of 4,100K, a CRI of 62, and a rated lifetime of 20,000 hours. Although this lamp is not commercially available today, it is the least efficacious lamp that may be commercially available when standards take eff ect. For further information on the development of the 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO halophosphor ba seline, see appendix 5B of this TSD.

DOE found that the most common ballast is a 2-lamp ballast with a 1.0 ballast factor. Thus, DOE paired its baseline 4- foot T5 MiniBP HO lamp with a 1.00 ballast factor programmed

start electronic ballast. Together, the 54W lamps and 1.00 BF ballast combination creates a lumen package of 5,770 mean lumens (and 8,244 initial lumens).

Table 5.3.32 Baseline Unit of Analysis fo r 4-Foot T5 MiniBP High-Output Lamps

Nominal Wattage CCT Rated Efficacy (at 35°

C)* Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life Lamp

Diameter

W CRI

K lm/W lm Lm hr

T5 54 62 4,100 76.6 4,122 2,885 20,000

* Rated efficacy is based on the rated wattage of the lamp, which is 53.8W.



### 5.3.5.2 Efficacy Levels

In selecting ELs, DOE c onsidered two paths to energy savings. The first concentrated on reduced wattage replacement lamps that could be in stalled in a socket and operate on the existing ballast. These lower-wattage replacement lamps have a highe r efficacy and therefore produce approximately the same light output as the baseline lamp (i.e., light out put never drops below 10 percent of the baseline system). The other pa th to energy savings i nvolves installing a higher efficacy lamp on the same ballast factor ballast to increase light output. For new construction, users can install fewer lamp-and-ballast systems in the case of a standard due to their higher light output. DOE could not consider inst alling a lamp on a lower ballast factor ballast to save energy

as ballasts with a ballast factor lower than 1.0 are not commercially available.

For the 4-foot T5 miniature bipin HO with CCTs ≤ 4,500K product class DOE analyzed one efficacy level preventing the introduction of less efficacious halophosphor lamps on the

market. For the 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO with CCTs ≤ 4,500K product class, DOE found that only

5-60

### one full-wattage (54W ) lamp exists on the mark et today. Because DOE based its ELs on fullwattage lamps due to the limited utility of re duced-wattage lamps, DOE did not analyze an additional EL for this product class. DOE, however , was able to identify a reduced-wattage lamp and a full-wattage 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO lamp featuring 800-series phosphors.

The following discussion identifies the step s and technologies associated with the EL DOE considered. Because DOE believes that many T5 high-output lamps are operated at 35° C, DOE developed an efficacy level that reflects 35° C operation. As discussed in the screening analysis (chapter 4), DOE used design options with highly-emissive el ectrode coatings, higherefficacy lamp fill gas composition, higher-efficacy phosphors, glass coatings, or higher-efficacy lamp diameter to achieve higher efficacy levels for GSFL. For 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO lamps, the primary design option DOE assessed was the usag e of higher-efficacy phosphors. DOE also identified the phosphor associated with the EL:

EL1 . This efficacy level is characterized by lamps that use 800-series phosphors. There is a full-wattage (54W) lamp with a rated cata log efficacy (initial lamp lumens divided by ANSI rated wattage) of 92.9 lm/W at 35° C and a redu ced-wattage (51W) lamp with a rated catalog efficacy of 98.0 lm/W at 35° C.

Figure 5.3.33 illustrates an initial EL based on catal og va lues of commercially-available fluorescent lamps on a plot of selected fluorescent lamps. A square box and a label identify the baseline lamp. The plot also shows the high-e fficacy replacement lamps DOE considered for the baseline lamp. One is at the same wattage, bu t has a higher efficacy; the other has a combination of lower wattage and higher efficacy.

5-61

### EL1

75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0 110.0

45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)



### Rated Wattage (W) 

### 54W T5 Baseline



### Figure 5.3.33 Initial Efficacy Level for 4-F oot T5 MiniBP HO Fluorescent Lamps With

CCTs ≤ 4,500K, 35° C Operation

Table 5.3.33 provides detailed information on the 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO lam p designs used in the engineering analys is and subsequent analyses.

Table 5.3.33 4-Foot T5 MiniBP HO Lamp Designs

Nominal Wattage Rated Wattage Rated Efficacy (at 35 ° C) Initial Light Output Mean Light Output Life CRI

EL Lamp

Diameter

W W lm/W lm lm hr

Baseline/0 T5 54 53.8 76.6 4,122 2,885 20,000 62

1 T5 54 53.8 92.9 5,000 4,600 20,000 85

1 T5 51 51.0 98.0 5,000 4,600 20,000 85



### As seen above, DOE used commercially-available lamps and their associated rated efficacies (rated initial lumen out put divided by the ANSI rated wa ttage) to determine the design options required to meet each efficacy level. However, similar to previously discussed product classes, these rated efficacy values do not necessarily correspond to how these lamps may comply under energy conservation standards. As discussed further detail in section 5.3.1.2 , DOE

used com pliance report data to establish mini mum efficacy requirements for the 4-foot MBP, 8- foot SP slimline, and 8-foot RDC HO efficacy le vels. Because 4-foot MiniBP HO lamps have

5-62

### 5-63 been not been regulated by DOE in the past, 4-fo ot MiniBP HO compliance reports do not exist. Therefore, to establish appropriate minimum efficacy requirements for each 4-foot MiniBP efficacy level, DOE calculated the percentage difference between the rated efficacy and compliance efficacy for the highest-efficacy 4- foot MBP lamps, and applied that same percentage reduction to the 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO rated efficacies. In addition, the DOE test procedure for T5 lamps requires the lamps to be tested at 25°C. When operated at 25°C, the lumen output of T5 lamps is approximately 10 percent lower than the lumen output of such lamps when operated at 35° C. Because the test procedure will be used to determine compliance with DOE energy conservation standards, DOE developed EL requirements for T5 high-output lamps that take into account 25° C testing. Table 5.3.34 summarizes the resulting efficacy level for 4-foot MiniBP HO lamps with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K.

Table 5.3.34 Summary of the ELs for 4-Foot T5 MiniBP HO Lamps With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Efficacy Level Efficacy Requirement

lm/W

EL1 76



### Section 5.3.5.4 presents additional information on the lam p-and-ballast systems DOE develops in the engineering analysis.

5.3.5.3 System Power Rating

The ballasts DOE used typically have a tota l harmonic distortion less than 10 percent, power factors greater than 0.95, a nd typical b allast efficacy factors. The 54W lamp has one

available ballast that results in a system power rating of 120.0W during 35° C operation, while the 51W lamp has one available ballast that re sults in a system power rating of 117.0W during 35° C operation.

5.3.5.4 Results

For the 4-foot T5 MiniB P HO with CCTs ≤ 4,500K product class, DOE assessed one model baseline lamp. DOE considered only ener gy-saving options that result in approximately the same light output as the ba seline lamp system. Energy savi ngs could either be achieved through lamp or lamp and ballast replacements.

Table 5.3.35 presents the engineering characteristics of lamp replacement options for a

baseline 54W 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO, 4,100K lamp. Table 5.3.36 presents the engineering

characteristics of lam p and ballast replacement opti ons for the same lamp. As discussed earlier, DOE adjusted the BF so that the combination of lamp and ballast maintains light output that is equal to, greater than, or no more than 10 per cent less than the light output of the baseline system. All T5 ballasts that DOE considered are electronic.Table 5.3.35 Lamp Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 54W T5, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacy(at 35°C)InitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMean LightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWlm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT55453.876.64,1222,88520,000Electronic1.00120.08.2445,770EL1T55151.098.05,0004,60025,000Electronic1.00117.010,0009,200Table 5.3.36 Lamp and Ballast Replacement Engineering Analysis for a Two-Lamp 54W T5, 4,100K SystemNominalWattageRatedWattageRatedEfficacy(at 35°C)InitialLightOutputMeanLightOutputLifeSystemPowerRatingSystemInitialLightOutputSystemMeanLightOutputEfficacyLevelLampDiameterWWLm/WlmlmhrBallastTypeBallastFactorWlmlmBaselineT55453.876.64,1222,88520,000Electronic1.00120.08,2445,770EL1*T55453.892.95,0004,60020,000Electronic1.00120.06,2725,770EL1T55151.098.05,0004,60025,000Electronic1.00117.010,0009,200EL1*T55151.098.05,0004,60025,000Electronic1.00117.06,2725,770* These systems are used in the new construction/renovation scenario in the LCC analysis. Under this event, slightly less (0.63) of these systems areinstalled where there would have been one baseline system to be within 10 percent meanlumens of the baseline system. Therefore, the LCC andlumen output of these systems are multiplied by a factor (0.63) in the LCC analysis.5-64

### 5.4 INCANDESCENT RE FLECTOR LAMPS

As discussed in chapter 3, the m arket a nd technology assessment, DOE created eight separate incandescent reflector lamp product classes w ith three subdivisions: standard-spectrum IRL and modified-spectrum IRL, diameter greater and less than or equal to 2.5 inches, and voltage less than and greater than or equal to 125V. DOE chose to analyze the standardspectrum, voltage less than 125V, diameter greate r than 2.5 inches IRL product class due to its prevalence in the market. Discussions with i ndustry experts and a re view of manufacturer literature for IRL revealed that standard-spectru m lamps represent the vast majority of IRL. Discussions also revealed that the majority of consumers purchase 120V PAR30 or PAR38 IRL (the most common lamps with a diameter greater than 2.5 inches). Modified-spectrum IRL, PAR20 IRL (the most common lamps with a diamet er less than or equal to 2.5 inches) and IRL that operate at 130V are not as common in the marketplace. Thus, DOE extrapolated its findings on standard-spectrum 120V IRL with diameters gr eater than 2.5 inches to the other product

classes. Section 5.5.2 provides details on this extrapolation.

Each IRL product class consid ered spans the full range of wattages covered. DOE considered ELs for each product class with efficacy that v aries with wattage. Given that the IRL product classes are not divided by wattage, DOE did not choose a representative wattage bin for IRL. However, rather than selecting one base line lamp, DOE chose to analyze lamps of multiple wattages in the standard-spectrum product class to prevent oversimplificat ion of the analysis. DOE concentrated on analyzing the most popular reflector lamps in terms of lamp size, wattage, and lumen package. DOE examined existing product on the market at multiple wattages to select baseline lamps. DOE used product at multiple wa ttages to derive efficacy equations that span wattage. Therefore, DOE was able to apply the analysis performed on the most popular lamps to the other, less-common lamps. Section 5.4.2 prov ides further details on the ELs DOE developed

for IRL.

Table 5.4.1 Product Classes for Incandescent Reflector Lamps

Lamp Type Diameter Voltage

≥ 125 > 2.5 inches < 125 (representative)

≥ 125 Standard-spectrum

≤ 2.5 inches
< 125

≥ 125 > 2.5 inches
< 125

≥ 125 Modified-spectrum

≤ 2.5 inches
< 125



### As with GSFL, DOE analyzed lamp designs for the LCC that both save energy and maintain comparable light output. DOE considered lamp designs that emit initial lumens equal to the light output of the baseli ne system, or less than that syst em by no more than 10 percent. DOE maintained light output across efficacy leve ls to ensure that products supply equivalent

service under the base case and standards case sc enarios. To account fo r the purchase of more5-65

### efficacious lam ps at the same wattage as the ba seline lamp wattage (thu s with greater light output), DOE considered non-energy-saving lamp s in the NIA. Appendix 5A shows lamp designs considered in the NIA.

In assessing light output, DOE distinguished between mean and initial lumens. DOE used initial lumens in its test procedures for incandescent lamps to measure compliance with a

standard. This is consistent with consensu s industry standards on efficacy measurements. Therefore, DOE used initial lumens to calcul ate efficacy. For incandescent lamps, DOE also used initial lumens when predicting consumer purchase decisions. Consumers generally make purchase decisions based on initial lumens and not mean lumens for incandescent lamps. Therefore, DOE lists initial lumens in its tables . Over time, the light output of an incandescent lamp decreases slightly. To account for this real-world depreciation in lumens, DOE also

monitored mean lumens in the NIA.

5.4.1 Baseline Models for IRL With Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V

DOE selected three baseline lam ps of va rying wattage and shapes to provide a comprehensive understanding of consumer economi cs. DOE included parabolic reflector (PAR) halogen baseline lamps of three different wattages. These baseline lamps are currently regulated by EPCA and meet the EPCA standard.

DOE identified three IRL lumen packages that are popular in the commercial and residential sectors. DOE also identified power ra tings and lifetime character istics of these lamps,

as listed in Table 5.4.2 . The three light output packages are 630, 1050, and 1,310 lumens, corresponding to a 50W PAR30, 75W PAR38, a nd 90W PAR38 lamp, respectively. These lamps represent the most common reflector lamps so ld and used today; thus, they represent highvolume wattages and diameters. Since these lamp s capture a range of wattages, lumen packages, and lamp diameters, they cover a range of applications. Table 5.4.2 presents the representative product class and the three ba seline lam ps DOE selected for its IRL analysis.

Table 5.4.2 IRL Representative Product Class and Baseline Lamps

Representative Product Class Baseline Lamps Lamp Category Representative

Product Class Descriptor Wattage

W Efficacy

lm/W Initial Light Output

lm Lifetime

hr

IRL StandardSpectrum, Voltage < 125V, Diameter

> 2.5 Inches PAR30

PAR38

PAR38 50

75

90 12.6

14.0

14.6 630 1,050 1,310 3,000 2,500 2,500



### 5.4.2 Efficacy Levels

For IRL with diam eters greater than 2.5 inches and operati ng voltages less than 125V, DOE observed natural efficacy divisions in the marketplace corresponding to a variety of design options utilized to increase lamp efficacy. DOE considered these efficacy divisions in selecting ELs by using the efficacy levels of commercia lly-available lamps as a guide. However,

5-66

### commercially-available product does not exist at a ll of the E Ls for all of the lumen packages. For example, the 50W PAR30 baseline lamp with 630 lumens only has commercially-available product at two of the five ELs. Because it is technically feasible to incorporate the commercially-available technologies in lamp types that correspond to all of the baseline lamps, and to have a continuous range of efficacies to analyze, DOE developed some model IRL based on commercially-available lamp lumen packages. Using efficacy information for the commercially-available lamp designs (which substitu te for certain baseline lamps) or efficacy information from manufacturer interviews, DOE developed a relationship between efficacy and wattage. This allowed DOE to develop lamp de signs that are not comm ercially available for certain wattages, but that would be substitutes fo r other baseline lamps. Generally, the lamp design substitutes for baseline lamps are based around the lumen output of the baseline lamp, plus or minus 10 percent.

In reviewing published catalog data, DOE obs erved that higher-effi cacy, reduced-wattage IRL, which maintain light output within 10 per cent, can substitute for a number of baseline lamps. Furthermore, these reduced-wattage designs span a range of design options considered in this rule. These design options, discussed in th e screening analysis (c hapter 4), include the tungsten-halogen regenerative cycle (hereafter “halogen”) and halogen infrared (HIR) technologies that uses both ha logen and glass coatings that reflect infrared light.

The commercially-available halogen IRL fa ll within three tiers of efficacy. To distinguish the efficacies of these halogen IRL, DOE designated them as halogen and improved halogen. Improved halogen can be achieved using xenon, a higher-efficacy inert fill gas. In addition, an even-more-efficacious improved halogen can be ach ieved by using a silverized reflector, a higher-efficiency re flector coating. The baseline halogen IRL employ neither xenon nor the higher-efficiency reflector coating. DOE also observed four tiers of efficacy for HIR IRL. To distinguish the efficacies of these IR L, DOE designated them as long-life HIR, HIR, improved HIR (4,000 hour), and improved HIR plus (4,200 hour). HIR is more efficacious than long-life HIR due to the higher operating te mperature. Improved HIR (4,000 hour) can be achieved by using the additional design options di scussed in the screening analysis. These design options include higher-efficac y filaments as well as efficien t filament coiling, filament configuration, capsule design, high-pressure capsu les, or higher-efficacy reflector coating. Improved HIR plus (4,200 hour) can be achieved w ith further use of these design options. DOE observed lifetime changes across these reduced-w attage IRL. For example, a halogen IRL typically has a lifetime of around 2,000 to 3,000 hour s, while an HIR IRL typically lives for 3,000 to 6,000 hours. DOE maintained the lifetime attributes of the commercially available product for its analysis. DOE also considered the possibility that manufacturers would not produce more efficacious improved HIR or HIR pl us products with longer lifetimes than the baseline lamps analyzed by DOE. To incorporate this possibility into its analysis, DOE modeled lamps at EL4 and EL5 that have shorter lifetim es and lower prices th an the 4,000 hour and 4,200 hour lamps at these efficacy levels. For the lifeti mes, see the efficacy level presentation below. For a discussion of prices, see chapter 7 of this TSD.

DOE established ELs for IRL using an approach similar to the one it uses for GSFL. DOE developed continuous equations that set a minimum efficacy requirement across wattage. Each equation represents the potential efficacy a lamp achieves using a particular design option.

5-67

### These “technology contour lines” represent the sam e IRL design option across the wattage range of a product class. For example, an EL based on a halogen design option is a curve rather than a step function, and denotes a haloge n standard at all wattages. In general terms, DOE based the ELs on the following progression of design options:

EL1 . This efficacy level can be achieved by an improved halogen lamp which utilizes xenon, a higher-efficiency inert fill gas. Such a la mp is currently not commercially available at any of the three lumen packages that DOE analy zed, but is technologically feasible to produce. To create EL1, DOE developed a model of a lamp with xenon gas using information from

technical literature and confidentia l information from manufacturers.

EL2 . This efficacy level can be achieved by two lamps: the long-life HIR lamp and the improved halogen lamp with a silver reflector coating. The long-life HIR lamp employs a halogen capsule with an infrared reflective coatin g and a lamp lifetime of 6,000 hours. An improved halogen lamp that utilizes a silver reflective coating has a lifetime of 3,000 hours.

EL3 . This efficacy level can be achieved with an HIR lamp (a lamp containing a halogen capsule with an infrared reflect ive coating) with a lamp life time of 3,000 hours. Decreasing the lamp lifetime from 6,000 to 3,000 hours with highe r temperature operation effectively improves the efficacy of the tungsten filament.

EL4 . This efficacy level can be achieved by an improved HIR lamp that may employ improved reflector coatings, improved HIR coatings or improved capsule designs. This level is based on an HIR lamp with a lifetime of 4,000 hour s. DOE also models an EL4 lamp for the Baseline Lifetime scenario (see chapter 10) that utilizes the same tec hnology but features the same lifetime as the baseline lamp in each lumen package (2,500 hours, 2,500 hours, and 3,000 hours for the 90W, 75W, and 50W lumen packages, respectively).

EL5 . This efficacy level can be achieved by the improved HIR plus lamps that may utilize additional improvements in reflector coat ings, HIR coatings, or filament and capsule designs that produce higher-temperature operation. This level is based on an HIR lamp with a lifetime of 4,200 hours. DOE also models an EL 5 lamp for the Baseline Lifetime scenario that utilizes the same technology as the commercially-a vailable EL 4 lamp but features a lifetime of 2,500 hours for all lumen packages.

Figure 5.4.1 plots the results of the IRL engin eering analy sis for the three lumen packages (represented by 50W, 75W, and 90W baseline lamps) al ong with five initial ELs. Square boxes and labels represent the three baseline lamps in the plot; triangles represent higherefficacy lamp designs. Maintaining light output on this plot of efficacy versus wattage meansthat lamp designs are always higher in efficacy than the baseline lamp (i.e., moving up on the yaxis) and lower in wattage (i.e., moving to the left on the x-axis). This trend is evident for all three lumen packages analyzed As illustrated in Table 5.4.4 through Table 5.4.6 , the Els correspond to efficacy levels asso ciated with lamps with particular design options.

5-68Baseline
EPCA EL 1 EL 2 EL 4

EL 3 EL 5

9.0 11.0 13.0 15.0 17.0 19.0 21.0 23.0

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)



### Lamp Power (W) Baseline/EPCA: Halogen (2,500 hr; 3,000 hr for 50W lumen package) EL1: Improved Halogen (Xenon) (3,000 hr) EL2: Long-Life HIR (6,000 hr) Improved Halogen (Silver) (3,000 hr) EL3: HIR (3,000 hr) EL4: Improved HIR (4,000 hr) Short-Life Improved HIR (2,500 hr; 3,000 hr for 50W lumen package) EL5: Improved HIR Plus (4,200 hr) Short-Life Improved HIR Plus (2,500 hr)

PAR38 90W Baseline

PAR38 75W Baseline

PAR30 50W Baseline



### Figure 5.4.1 Initial Efficacy Levels for St andard-Spectrum IRL Wi th Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V

As seen above, DOE used the efficacies of commercially-available lamps and model lamps to determine the design options required to meet each efficacy level. However, to establish the minimum efficacy requirements for each efficacy level, DOE coupled catalog data on commercially-available lamps with data submitted to DOE by manufacturers for the purpose of compliance with existing ener gy conservation standards for incan descent reflector lamps. By analyzing manufacturer compliance reports, DOE found that efficacies of lamps when reported for the purpose of compliance often vary from catalog values.

For these reasons, DOE adjusted the init ial efficacy levels for IRL such that commercially available IRL using design options associated with each EL comply with those ELs. Specifically, DOE adjusted EL4 based on the reported efficacy of a PAR38 improved HIR lamp. Also, DOE adjusted EL5 based on the repo rted efficacies of a PAR38 improved HIR plus lamp as well as a PAR38 improved HIR lamp that DOE analytically increased in efficacy by modeling what the efficacy of the improved HIR la mp (EL4 lamp) would be if the manufacturer shortened the life of the lamp. DOE found that all of the lamps incorporating EL2 and EL3

5-69

### design options com plied with the initial EL2 and EL3 levels, respectively, when the compliance reports for these lamps were taken into account. Thus, DOE did not adjust the initial EL2 or EL3 levels. Because EL1 is based on a model lamp (and thus there are no compliance reports for lamps incorporating the EL1 design options), DOE also did not adjust the EL1 level. Figure

5.4.2 presents the compliance report data us ed to develop th e IRL efficacy levels. Table 5.4.3 shows the resulting efficacy levels for standard-spectrum IRL w ith diameters greater than 2.5 inches and operating voltages less than 125V.

10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0

35 45 55 65 75 85 95 105ReportedEfficacy

Reported Wattage EL1 EL5

EL4

EL3

EL2



### Figure 5.4.2 Compliance Report Data for Standard-Spectrum IRL With Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V

5-70

### Table 5.4.3 Summary of the ELs for Standa rd-Spectrum IRL With Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V Efficacy Requirement Efficacy Level

lm/W

EL1 4.6P 0.27



### EL2 4.8P 0.27



### EL3 5.4P 0.27



### EL4 5.9P 0.27



### EL5 6.4P 0.27

P = rated wattage



### 5.4.3 Results

After selecting baseline lam ps and ELs, DOE selected lamp designs associated with the ELs for each of the three baseline lamps. Like GSFL, DOE considered IRL that produce more light but do not save energy in the NIA. Th is reflects the fact that DOE cannot require consumers to switch to a reduced-wattage lamp. Appendix 5A shows the characteristics of lamp designs that both meet the EL a nd exhibit a higher wattage than or the same wattage as the baseline lamp.

The following table presents the engineering analysis for the 50W PAR30 IRL baseline lamp. This baseline lamp is based on a 630-lumen lamp, plus or minus 10 percent. The 40W improved PAR30 HIR lamp at EL4 and the 46W long- life HIR at EL2 are th e only lamps that are commercially available. The 47.8W PAR30 im proved halogen (xenon) lamp (EL1), 45W PAR30 improved halogen (silve r) lamp (EL2), 41.8W PAR30 HI R (EL3), baseline-life 40.0W PAR30 improved HIR (EL4), and basline- and non-baseline-life 40.0W PAR30 improved HIR plus lamps (EL5) are model lamp designs. e 

### These lamps are designed to have approximately the same lumen package as the baseline lamp (i.e ., 630 lumens), and to have a minimum efficacy just above each efficacy level.

The 40W improved HIR plus PAR30 produces 21 percent more light output than the 50W PAR30. For the technology employed in these lamps at this efficacy level, DOE believes lamps employing similar design options could no t be manufactured (and still achieve similar performance) at wattages below 40W. f 

### Therefore, DOE analyzes a 40W lamp that produces greater lumen output at EL5.

e Model lamp designs represent lamps that are not commercially available at this time. DOE developed these lamps

based on technical literature and confidential information from manufacturers on incandescent design lamp options. DOE developed these model lamp designs in order to have a more-continuous range of ELs to analyze across the three lumen packages. DOE differentiates between model lamp designs and commercially-available lamp designs by showing the wattage of the model lamp design to th e tenths decimal place. Commercially-available lamps are shown in the same way they appear in the product catalog s, with wattages rounded off to the nearest whole number.

f Through conversations with technical experts, DOE believes that when operating at 120V, an incandescent filament must become thinner as the wattage of the lamp decreases. When operating at 120V below 40 watts, the filament becomes so thin that its structural integrity becomes compromised. In an HIR lamp, this lower structural integrity causes the filament to produce light in a spot of the reflector lamp that is not ideal for optimum light



### 5-71

### Table 5.4.4 IRL Engineering Analysis 50W P AR30

Wattage Efficacy Initial Light Output Lamp

Life Efficacy

Level Design Option Lamp Descriptor W lm/W lm hr

Baseline Halogen PAR30 50 12.6 630 3,000

EL1 Improved Halogen (Xenon)* PAR30 47.8 13.2 630 3,000

EL2 Long-Life HIR PAR30 46 13.5 620 6,000

EL2 Improved Halogen (Silver)* PAR30 45.0 14.0 630 3,000

EL3 HIR* PAR30 41.8 15.1 630 3,000

EL4 Improved HIR PAR30 40 17.0 680 4,000

EL4 Baseline-Life Improved HIR* PAR30 40.0 17.0 680 3,000

EL5 Improved HIR

Plus* PAR30 40.0 19.1 765 4,200

EL5 Baseline-Life Improved HIR

Plus* PAR30 40.0 19.1 765 2,500

*IRL lamp designs with an asterisk are model lamp designs.



### The following table presents the engineering analysis for the 75W PAR38 IRL baseline lamp. This baseline lamp and its lamp design substitutes are based on a 1,050-lumen lamp, plus or minus 10 percent. DOE developed three mode l lamps that match the lumen package of this baseline lamp. The 71.7W improved halogen (xe non) PAR38 at EL1 is a model lamp design.

DOE used information from technical literature and confidential information from manufacturers to develop this model lamp. In addition, th e 68.8W long-life HIR PAR38 lamp at EL2 is a model lamp design. This lamp is based on a 6,000 hour HIR lamp with a different wattage and lumen package. DOE used information from tec hnical literature in or der to develop a 6,000 hour HIR lamp with a 1,050-lumen package. The base line-life improved 55.0W HIR lamp at EL4 is a model lamp design based on a commercially -available improved HIR lamp. The 51.7W improved HIR plus PAR38 lamp at EL5 is a model lamp design that DOE created based on commercially-available HIR lamp s with the same lifetime (4,200 hours). Finally, the baselinelife 51.7W improved HIR plus PAR38 lamp at EL5 is a model lamp design that DOE created to have the same lamp lifetime as the baseline lamp (2,500 hours). The improved halogen lamp at EL2 and the lamps at EL3 and EL4 are commercially available.

extraction. Because of the loss in effi cacy due to the placement of the filament in the HIR capsule, it is not practical to produce an HIR IRL below 40W.



### 5-72

### Table 5.4.5. IRL Engineering Analysis for 75 W PAR38

Wattage Efficacy Initial Light Output Lamp

Life Efficacy

Level Design Option Lamp Descriptor W lm/W lm hr

Baseline Halogen PAR38 75 14.0 1,050 2,500

EL1 Improved Halogen (Xenon)* PAR38 71.7 14.6 1,050 2,500

EL2 Long-Life HIR* PAR38 68.8 15.3 1,050 6,000

EL2 Improved Halogen (Silver) PAR38 66 15.9 1,050 3,000

EL3 HIR PAR38 60 17.5 1,050 3,000

EL4 Improved HIR PAR38 55 19.1 1,050 4,000

EL4 Baseline-Life Improved HIR* PAR38 55.0 19.1 1,050 2,500

EL5 Improved HIR

Plus* PAR38 51.7 20.3 1,050 4,200

EL5 Baseline-Life Improved HIR

Plus* PAR38 51.7 20.3 1,050 2,500

*IRL lamp designs with an asterisk are model lamp designs.



### The following table presents the engineering analysis for the 90W PAR38 IRL baseline lamp. This baseline lamp and its substitute la mp designs are based on a 1,310-lumen lamp, plus or minus 10 percent. The 85.7W improved halogen (xenon) PAR38 at EL1 is a model lamp design. DOE used information from technical literature and confiden tial information from manufacturers to develop this model lamp. In addition, the 82.5W long- life HIR PAR38 model lamp at EL2 is a model lamp design. This lamp is based on a 6,000 hour HIR lamp with a different wattage and lumen package. DOE used in formation from technical literature in order to develop a 6,000 hr HIR lamp with a 1,310 lumen p ackage. The baseline-life and non-baselinelife 66.0W improved HIR PAR38 lamps at EL4 are also model lamp designs. DOE scaled these lamp designs from a relationship between th e 75W halogen PAR38 and the 55W improved HIR PAR38. The improved halogen lamp (silver) at EL2, the HIR lamp at EL3, and the nonbaseline-life improved HIR plus lamp at EL5 ar e commercially available. The baseline-life improved HIR plus lamp at EL5 is a model lamp based on the commercially-available improved HIR plus lamp.

5-73

### Table 5.4.6 IRL Engineering Analysis for 90 W PAR38

Wattage Efficacy Initial Light Output Lamp

Life Efficacy

Level Design Option Lamp Descriptor W lm/W lm hr

Baseline Halogen PAR38 90 14.6 1,310 2,500

EL1 Improved Halogen* PAR38 85.7 15.3 1,310 2,500

EL2 Long-Life HIR* PAR38 82.5 15.9 1,310 6,000

EL2 Improved Halogen PAR38 79 16.6 1,310 3,000

EL3 HIR PAR38 70 18.0 1,260 3,000

EL4 Improved HIR* PAR38 66.0 19.8 1,310 4,000

EL4 Baseline-Life Improved HIR* PAR38 66.0 19.8 1,310 2,500

EL5 Improved HIR

Plus PAR38 60 21.0 1,260 4,200

EL5 Baseline-Life Improved HIR

Plus* PAR38 60.0 21.0 1,260 2,500

* IRL lamp designs with an asterisk are model lamp designs.



### 5.5 SCALING TO PRODUCT CLAS SES NOT ANALYZED

DOE identified and selected ce rtain product classes as “repre sentative” product classes to concentrate its analytical effort. DOE chose thes e representative product classes primarily due to their high market volumes. The following sect ion discusses how DOE scales ELs from the analyzed product classes to those produc t classes that it did not analyze.

5-74

### 5.5.1 General Service Fluorescent Lamps

5.5.1.1 2-foot U-Shaped GSFL With CCTs ≤ 4,500K

Two-foot U-shaped lam ps generally are less efficacious than 4-foot MBP lamps due to the bend of a 2-foot U-shaped lamp. This dr op in efficacy often depends on the wattage and diameter of the lamp in question. DOE assessed manufacturer catalogs containing commercially-available 2-foot U-shaped lamps with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K to develop standard levels with a similar technolog y impact at each EL as 4-foot MBP lamps (see

section 5.3.1.2 for these technology impacts). DOE used compliance report data for 2-foot Ushaped lam ps to determine the efficacies at which commercially-available products would comply with standards. Figure 5.5.1 shows all compliance report data for 2-foot U-shaped lamps with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K. The point s within the gray circ les represent com pliance report data submitted in 2007 or 2008.

60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0

28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)



### Rated Wattage (W) 2ft U-Shaped <=4500 HALO 2ft U-Shaped <=4500, 700 SERIES 2ft U-Shaped <=4500, 800 SERIES



### Figure 5.5.1 All Compliance Report Data for 2-Foot U-Shaped Lamps with CCTs ≤ 4,500K

When considering recent compliance re port data, as described in section 5.3.1.2 , DOE

found that n ot enough data existed from compliance reports submitted in 2007 and 2008 to justify some of its proposed efficacy levels. Specifically, DOE did not have any compliance reports from those years that contained data for U-shaped 34W T12 lamps. Therefore, DOE adjusted EL1 through EL3 to reflect the levels proposed by NEMA in response to the March

5-75

### 2008 ANOPR. (NEMA, No. 26 at p. 7) For EL4 and EL5, NEMA did not propose levels for Ushaped lam ps. Thus, DOE used NEMA’s suggested 8-percent value as a scaling factor from the linear 4-foot medium bipin efficacy levels. (N EMA, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 38.4 at pp. 123-124) The final efficacy levels for 2-foot U- shaped lamps with CCTs less than or equal to 4,500K are summarized in Table 5.5.1

.

Table 5.5.1 Efficacy R equirements for 2-Foot U-Shaped Lamps With CCTs Less Than or Equal To 4,500K Efficacy Requirement (lm/W) EL 4-foot MBP 2-foot U-Shaped Reduction

1 78 70 10.3%

2 81 72 11.1%

3 85 76 10.6%

4 89 84 5.6%

5 93 87 6.5%

5.5.1.2 Lamps With CCTs Above 4,500K

As discussed in section 5.3 , DOE did not analyze GSFL with a CCT above 4,500K and 2- foot U-shaped lam ps. As discussed in the ma rket and technology assessment, the efficacy of lamps with higher CCT values is lower due to the quality of blue light emitted. A technical committee of the National Electrical Manufacturers Association analyzed efficacy levels for GSFL product classes and recommende d efficacy levels for high CCT lamps. 4 

### DOE assessed compliance report data for high-CCT lamps when available and compared compliance report data to NEMA’s suggestions. For lamps where there was not sufficient compliance report data, DOE adopted NEMA’s suggestions. Utilizing this approach, DOE modified its proposed efficacy levels as described below.

Figure 5.5.2 shows all compliance report data for 4-foot MBP lam ps with CCTs greater than 4,500K.

5-7670.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0

24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)



### Rated Wattage (W) 4ft MBP >4500, 700 SERIES 4ft MBP >4500, 800 SERIES

TSL1 4ft MBP



### Figure 5.5.2 All Compliance Report Data for 4-Foot MBP Lamps with CCTs > 4,500K

Although DOE obtained compliance reports submitted over the past 15 years, DOE only considered the most recent data when verifying efficacy levels. DOE believes that data contained in compliance reports submitted 2007 and 2008 accurately account for adjustments over the past 15 years to photometry facilities used for NIST and NVLAP testing that have resulted in a reduction of reported lumens for some products. Figure 5.5.3 only shows

com pliance report data submitted in 2007 and 2008 for 4-foot MBP lamps with CCTs greater than 4,500K.

5-7770 75 80 85 90 95 100

24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0Rated Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)



### Rated Wattage (W) 4ft MBP >4500, 700 SERIES

4ft MBP >4500, 800 SERIES



### Figure 5.5.3 2007 and 2008 Compliance Report Data for 4-Foot MBP Lamps with CCTs > 4,500K

DOE believes that sufficient data was submitted in 2007 and 2008 to justify its selection of efficacy levels for this representative product class and therefore did not adopt the levels proposed by NEMA. Table 5.5.2 summarizes the resulting efficacy levels for 4-foot MBP lamps with CCTs greater than 4,500K.

Table 5.5.2 Efficacy R equirements For 4- Foot MBP Lamps With CCTs Above 4,500K

Efficacy Requirement (lm/W) EL CCT ≤ 4,500K CCT > 4,500K Reduction

1 78 77 1.3%

2 81 79 2.5%

3 85 82 3.5%

4 89 88 1.1%

5 93 92 1.1%

When considering recent compliance report da ta for 8-foot lamps, DOE found that not enough data existed from compliance reports su bmitted in 2007 and 2008 to justify some of its proposed efficacy levels. Specifically, DOE iden tified EL1, EL2, and EL5 for 8-foot SP slimline

5-78

### lam ps and EL2 for 8-foot RDC HO lamps as lack ing sufficiently current data. Therefore, DOE adjusted these levels to reflect those levels proposed by NEMA. Table 5.5.3 and Table 5.5.4 summarize the resulting efficacy req uirements fo r 8-foot SP slimline lamps and 8-foot RDC HO lamps with CCTs greater than 4,500K, after accounting for compliance data.

Table 5.5.3 Efficacy Requirements For 8-Foot SP Slimline Lamps With CCTs Above
4,500K

Efficacy Requirement (lm/W) EL CCT ≤ 4,500K CCT > 4,500K Reduction

1 86 83 3.5%

2 92 87 5.4%

3 95 91 4.2%

4 97 93 4.1%

5 98 94 4.1%

Table 5.5.4 Efficacy Requirements For 8- Foot RDC HO Lamps With CCTs Above 4,500K

Efficacy Requirement (lm/W) EL CCT ≤ 4,500K CCT > 4,500K Reduction

1 83 80 3.6%

2 86 83 3.5%

3 88 84 4.5%

4 92 88 4.3%

5 95 91 4.2%

NEMA did not provide efficacy level recomm endations for 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO and HO lamps with color temperatures greater than 4,500K. For this reason, DOE reviewed product literature for 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO and HO lamps. By comparing catalog ratings for 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO and HO lamps with a CCT of 4,100K with similar T5 lamps of a 6,500K CCT, DOE determined average efficacy reductions for 4-f oot T5 MiniBP SO and HO lamps of high CCT. For 4-foot T5 MiniBP SO lamps of high CCT, DOE reduced EL1 by 6.0 percent to 81 lm/W and EL2 by 6.0 percent to 85 lm/W. For 4-foot T5 MiniBP HO lamps of high CCT, DOE reduced EL1 by 5.0 percent to 72 lm/W. Table 5.5.5 and Table 5.5.6 show the efficacy levels for these

lam ps.

5-79

### Table 5.5.5 Efficacy R equirements For 4-Foot T5 MiniBP SO Lamps With CCTs Above
4,500K

Efficacy Requirement (lm/W) EL CCT ≤ 4,500K CCT > 4,500K Reduction

1 86 81 6.0%

2 90 85 6.0%

Table 5.5.6 Efficacy Requirements For 4-Foot T5 MiniBP HO Lamps With CCTs Above
4,500K

Efficacy Requirement (lm/W) EL CCT ≤ 4,500K CCT > 4,500K Reduction

1 76 72 5.0%

For 2-foot U-shaped lamps with CCTs above 4,500K, DOE lacked sufficiently current compliance report data to justify its proposed efficacy levels. NEMA recommended minimum efficacy requirements for EL1 through EL3 only. NEMA, however, also suggested a general scaling factor from linear 4-foot medium bipin levels for U-shaped lamps. 5 

### DOE used NEMA’s suggestions to derive the efficacy levels for 2-foot U-shaped lamps with CCTs greater than 4,500K, as DOE did not have enough compliance da ta for such lamps to adequately assess manufacturing variabil ity of existing products on the market.

Table 5.5.7 Efficacy Levels For 2-Foot U-Shaped Lamps With CCTs Greater Than 4,500K
Efficacy Requirement (lm/W) EL CCT ≤ 4,500K CCT > 4,500K Reduction

1 70 65 7.1%

2 72 67 6.9%

3 76 71 6.6%

4 84 81 3.6%

5 87 85 2.7%

5.5.2 Incandescent Reflector Lamps

5.5.2.1 Modified-Spectrum IRL

DOE analyzed standard-spectrum lamps, but set separate standards for modifiedspectrum IRL. As with higher CCT GSFL, m odified-spectrum IRL achieve their modified spectra through selective filtering of the spectra, thereby inherent ly lowering their efficacies. Manufacturers achieve this specific spectrum in modified-spectrum IRL by applying a coating, or introducing neodymium or other additives into the cover glass of the IRL. Manufacturers may change the thickness of the coating or the cont ent of neodymium to modify the spectrum to different degrees, and this modifi cation changes the lumen output of the IRL. DOE assessed the efficacy differences between standard- and modi fied-spectrum IRL by m easuring the efficacies

5-80

### of comm ercially-available st andard- and modified-spectrum lamps. DOE correlated the measured color point data of the lamps with lamp light output reduction and lamp spectral power distribution. By analyzing the da ta, DOE established that a reduc tion of 15% from the standardspectrum efficacy levels would be appr opriate for modified-spectrum IRL. Table 5.5.8 shows a summary of the ELs for modified-spectrum IRL with diameters greater than 2.5 inches and operating voltages less than 125V. See appendix 5C for further details on DOE’s modifiedspectrum IRL analysis.

Table 5.5.8 Summary of the ELs for Modifi ed-Spectrum IRL With Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V
Efficacy Requirement (lm/W) EL Standard Spectrum Modified Spectrum Reduction

1 4.6P 0.27 

### 3.9P 0.27 

### 15.0%

2 4.8P 0.27 

### 4.1P 0.27 

### 15.0%

3 5.4P 0.27 

### 4.6P 0.27 

### 15.0%

4 5.9P 0.27 

### 5.0P 0.27 

### 15.0%

5 6.4P 0.27 

### 5.4P 0.27 

### 15.0%

P = rated wattage



### 5.5.2.2 IRL With Diameters Less Than or Equal To 2.5 Inches

A sm aller-diameter IRL has an inherently lo wer optical efficacy than a larger-diameter lamp given a similar filament size. To determin e an appropriate scali ng factor for IRL with diameters less than or equal to 2.5 inches, DOE examined the inherent efficacy differences between the PAR20 lamp and its PAR30 or PAR 38 counterpart by comparing catalog efficacy data of each lamp type from several lamp manuf acturers. In its anal ysis, DOE found that the reduction in efficacy caused by the reduction in la mp diameter was approximately 12 percent for IRL. DOE thus established EL1 through EL3 sm all-diameter IRL requirements that are 12 percent less than the efficacy requir ements for large-diameter IRL.

DOE developed EL4 and EL5 for large-diam eter IRL based on IRL that featured a double-ended HIR capsule. Single-ended capsules feat ure a lead wire inside of the capsule that

carries current between the fila ment and the electrical connec tion in the IRL’s base. The presence of this wire inside of the capsule pr events a certain amount of energy from reaching the capsule wall and being reflected (recycled) back to the capsule filament. A double-ended burner, on the other hand, features a lead wire outside of the capsule, wher e it does not interfere with the reflectance of energy from the capsule wall back to the capsule filament. The double-ended HIR capsule configuration does not ge nerally fit into a PAR20 lamp due to its reduced size, however. Thus, DOE developed the EL4 and EL5 efficacy requirements for small-diameter IRL by assuming that the double-ended burner technology c ould not be used. In order to determine the efficacy reduction that would result from using a single-ended burner instead of a double-ended burner in a lamp, DOE obtained a commercially -available single-ended HIR capsule and

measured the location of the lead wire inside of the capsule. DOE then developed a model that computed how much energy is prevented from being reflected against the capsule wall and recycled due the the “shadowing e ffect” of the lead wire inside of the capsule. DOE was also

5-81

### able to d etermine the slight change in IRL power consumption due to the reduction in energy recycling. Finally, DOE simulated manufacturin g variability by modeling the effects of changing the capsule dimensions and lead wire positioning by small amounts. Using the modeled data, DOE computed that an efficacy reduction of approximately 3.5 percent would result from the usage of a single-ended burner in stead of a double-ended burner in a lamp. This 3.5-percent reduction is in addition to the 12-perc ent-lower optical efficacy featured by smalldiameter IRL in comparison with large-diameter IRL.

Table 5.5.9 shows a summary of the ELs for sta ndard-spe ctrum IRL with diameters less than or equal to 2.5 inches and operating voltages less than 125V.

Table 5.5.9 Summary of the ELs for Standard -Spectrum IRL With Diameters Less Than or Equal To 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltages Less Than 125V
Efficacy Requirement (lm/W) EL ≥ 2.5 Inches < 2.5 Inches Reduction

1 4.6P 0.27 

### 4.0P 0.27 

### 12.0%

2 4.8P 0.27 

### 4.2P 0.27 

### 12.0%

3 5.4P 0.27 

### 4.8P 0.27 

### 12.0%

4 5.9P 0.27 

### 5.0P 0.27 

### 15.5%

5 6.4P 0.27 

### 5.4P 0.27 

### 15.5%

P = rated wattage



### 5.5.2.3 IRL With Operating Voltages Greater Than or Equal to 125 Volts

As discussed in chapter 3, the Market and Technology Assessm ent, when operated under 120V conditions, lamps rated at 130V in compliance with existing IRL efficacy standards are generally less efficacious than lamps usi ng equivalent technology rated at 120V. In

consideration of the diff erent test procedures for IRL rated at 130V than those rated at 120V, and by using published manufacturer literature, conf idential information on incandescent design, and equations from the IESNA Lighting Handbook

, 6 

### DOE derived an efficacy scaling factor which would result in equivalent performance of bot h classes of IRL when operating under the same voltage conditions (as they most often are). The equations DOE used from the IESNA lighting

handbook are as follows:

d 

### volts VOLTS

LIFE

life )(  Eq. 5.2

k


### VOLTS

volts

LUMENS

lumens )(  Eq. 5.3

n 

### VOLTS

volts

WATTS

watts )(  Eq. 5.4



### Capital letters represent normal rated values while lower-case letters represent changed values. By using published manu facturer literature on IRL lume n, wattage, and voltage ratings,

5-82

### DOE found that the m ost typical values for d, k, and n in the above equations for the IRL analyzed are as follows: d=8.7, k=3.4, n=1. 6. From this information and confidential information on incandescent lamp design, DOE was able to determine that a lamp operating at 130V would be 15-percent more efficacious than a lamp of a similar wattage operating at 120V. Therefore, DOE implements a 15-percent increas e in the efficacy requirement for lamps rated with a voltage gr eater than or equal to 125V. Table 5.5.10 shows a summary of the ELs for standard spectrum IRL with diam eters greater than 2.5 inches a nd operating voltages greater than or equal to 125V.

Table 5.5.10 Summary of the ELs for Standa rd Spectrum IRL With Diameters Greater Than 2.5 Inches and Operating Voltage s Greater Than or Equal to 125V
Efficacy Requirement (lm/W) EL < 125 Volts ≥ 125 Volts Increase



### 1 4.6P 0.27 

### 5.3P 0.27 

### 15.0%

2 4.8P 0.27 

### 5.5P 0.27 

### 15.0%

3 5.4P 0.27 

### 6.2P 0.27 

### 15.0%

4 5.9P 0.27 

### 6.8P 0.27 

### 15.0%

5 6.4P 0.27 

### 7.4P 0.27 

### 15.0%

P = rated wattage



### 5.6 SUMMARY OF ALL EFFICACY LEVELS FOR COVERED PRODUCTS

5.6.1 Summary of All Efficacy Levels for Covered GSFL



### Table 5.6.1 shows a summary of the efficacy levels for all general service fluorescent

lam ps affected by this rulemaking. The table shows the ELs for GSFL with CCTs less than as well as greater than/equal to 4,500K ; the table also shows the associ ated ELs for 2-foot U-shaped lamps. “N/A” is shown where no ELs exist, such as for T5 lamps (which do not have five ELs). Representative product classes are shown in grey squares.

5-83

### Table 5.6.1 Summary of All Efficacy Levels for Covered GSFL

Efficacy Level CCT Lamp Type 1 2 3 4 5
4-foot medium bipin 78 81 85 89 93
2-foot U-shaped 70 72 76 84 87 8-foot single pin

slimline 86 92 95 97 98

≤ 4,500K 8-foot recessed double

contact HO 83 86 88 92 95

4-foot T5 miniature bipin SO 86 90 N/A N/A N/A

4-foot T5 miniature bipin HO 76 N/A N/A N/A N/A

4-foot medium bipin 77 79 82 88 92
2-foot U-shaped 65 67 71 81 85 8-foot single pin

slimline 83 87 91 93 94

> 4,500K 8-foot recessed double

contact HO 80 83 84 88 91

4-foot T5 miniature bipin SO 81 85 N/A N/A N/A

4-foot T5 miniature bipin HO 72 N/A N/A N/A N/A



### 5.6.2 Summary of All Efficacy Levels for Covered IRL



### Table 5.6.2 shows a summary of the coefficien ts of the efficacy levels for all

incandes cent reflector lamps aff ected by this rulemaking. The various combinations of IRL features such as standard-spectrum vs. modifi ed-spectrum, diameters greater than or less than/equal to 2.5 inches, and operating voltage s greater than/equal to or less than 125V are shown in the table. The representative IR L product class is shown in grey squares.

5-84

### Table 5.6.2 Summary of Coefficients for All Efficacy Levels for Covered IRL

Efficacy Level Lamp Type Diameter Voltage 1 2 3 4 5

≥ 125V 5.3 5.5 6.2 6.8 7.4

> 2.5 inches < 125V 4.6 4.8 5.4 5.9 6.4

≥ 125V 4.7 4.9 5.5 5.7 6.2Standardspectrum

≤ 2.5 inches < 125V 4.0 4.2 4.8 5.0 5.4

≥ 125V 4.5 4.7 5.3 5.8 6.3

> 2.5 inches < 125V 3.9 4.1 4.6 5.0 5.4

≥ 125V 4.0 4.1 4.6 4.9 5.3Modifiedspectrum

≤ 2.5 inches < 125V 3.4 3.6 4.0 4.2 4.6



### 5-85

### 5-86 REFERENCES

1 

### National Electrical Manufacturers Association. 2006. No. 12 at p. 7. This written comment, Document Number 12, is available in Dock et #EE–2006–STD–0131. For more information,

contact Brenda Edwards-J ones at (202) 586-2945.

2 

### U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Effici ency and Renewable Energy Office of Building Research and Standards. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Energy Cons ervation Program for Consumer Products: Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Standards for C onsumer Products: Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Proposed Rule. Appendix B. Marginal Energy Pr ices and National Energy Savings. Table B.6. January, 2000. Washington, D.C.

< http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/applianc e_standa rds/residential/pdfs/appendix_b.pdf

.

3 

### Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative For PY2008: Title 20 Standards Development. Analysis of Standards Options fo r Linear Fluo rescent Fixtures. Prepared for: PG&E Prepared by: ACEEE, Lighting Wizards, a nd Energy Solutions Last Modified: May 14,

2008.

4 

### National Electrical Manufacturers Association. 2008. No. 26 at p. 7. This written comment, Document Number 26, is available in Dock et #EE–2006–STD–0131. For more information,

contact Brenda Edwards-J ones at (202) 586-2945.

5 

### National Electrical Manufacturer s Association. 2009. No. 37 at pp. 123-124. This public meeting transcript, Document Number 37, is available in Docket #EE–2006–STD–0131. For more information, contact Brenda Edwards-Jones at (202) 586-2945.

6 

### Rea, M. S., ed., The IESNA Lighting Handbook: Referen ce and Application, 9th Edition . New York: Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. IESNA (2000).