# -. **- .' -.

* C
.

DRAFT REPORT ON DESIGN OPTIONS FOR CLOTHES WASHERS

October 1996

LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY Energy & Environment Division Technology and Market Assessment Group Berkeley, CA 94720

Prepared for U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office ofCodes and Standards 

# ,. 4-



### DRAFTREPORTON DESIGN OPTIONS FORCLOTHESWASHERS

October 1996

LAWRENCE BERKELEYNATIONAL LABORATORY Energy & Environment Division Technology and Market Assessment Group Berkeley. CA94720

. Prepared for 

## u.s. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office ofCodes and Standards

### TABLE OF CONTENTS
DRAFT REPORT ON DESIGN OPTIONS FOR CLOTHES WASHERS 1. INTRODUCTION
.. 1..
.. ............ . 1 :2. PRODUCT CLASSES
.. .. ............. : ................. 1 3. DESIGN OPTIONS
............. ... ...................... 2 4. CONCLUSIONS
............................................ 15
LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Current Product Classes & Efficiency Standards
....................... 2 Table 2 Proposed Product Classes
........ . ... .. ....... ...... ... 2 Table 3 Design Options
..................................... ....... 3 Table 4 Design Options Eliminated from'Further Analysis
...................... 15 Table 5 Remaining Design Options
........................................ 15

; .\

i

-S*

' ' -v. 

### TABLE OFCONTENTS
DRAFT REPORT ON DESIGN OPTIONS FORCLOTHES WASHERS

. '.

. . '.
- . .

. ... . 1. INTRODUCTION
...................... :.**~** ...... , ..........'
......**~** .. 1 2, PRODUCT CLASSES
................. i ••••••••• : ••••••••••••••. , .. '. 1 3. DESIGN OPTIONS
... : .........,; , , : . , , .. , , , , , " , , , , , , , , , , , ; , , , , , . , , 2 4, CONCLUSIONS ".,',.,."
... ,., .. , .. "
.... ".,.,",
.. ,.,""" -" " 

### 15'


### LIST OFTABLES Table 1 Current Product Classes & EfficiencyStandards, .', , , , ............ , ... , . 2 . Table 2 Proposed Prod!Jct Classes '
.. , , , , , " , ,
..... , , , , , ... , . , . , , " , , , , "
... , , 2 Table 3 Design Options '.""'.""',
.. ,',.".,',".'
.. ,,",',
.. ,"'," 3 Table 4 Design Options Eliminated from'Further Analysis, , ' " , , , , . , ,'. , , , . , , , , " 15 Table 5 Remaining Design Options , , . , , , . , . , . , '.' . , . , , , , , . , , , , , , . , , , , , , , " 15

\ \\

' .. . . i

### DraftReport On Design Options for Clothes Washers
1.INTRODUCTION This report discusses possible design options for improving the energy efficiency ofstandard capacity, residential clothes washers. The procedure used in this design option analysis is based on a Department ofEnergy (DOE) interpretive ruling outlining process improvement measures [1]. After the different appliances subject to possible regulation are ranked, potential design options are identified as the next step in the process ofpromulgating appliance efficiency standards. Screening factors are then used to determine ifany design options should be eliminated fromfurther consideration. Much ofthe input used for screening design options was provided by clothes washer manufacturers. Other sources include tradepublications and the Association ofHome Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM). Although (under the new process) the design option stage ofthe analysis now precedes an Advance Notice ofProposed Rulemaking (ANOPR), responses to the original ANOPR [2], data previously collected from manufacturers, and existing input from AHAM and other stakeholders will still be considered'in this report. The DOE intends to issue a Supplemental Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the future. 

### 2.PRODUCT CLASSES Appliance features that provide utility to the consumer are incorporated into the analysis through the creation'ofproduct classes. Classes are a subset ofappliance types. For example, clothes washers are an appliance type, but a compact clothes washer is a product class. Appliance types are segregated into separate classes to which different energy-efficiency standards apply. DOE differentiates classes by capacity or other performance-related features that provide utility to the consumer and affect efficiency. In general, classes are defined using data collected in discussions with appliance manufacturers, trade associations, and other interested parties. Those classes for which no DOE test procedure has been specified are omitted from further analysis. Currently, clothes washers are separated into the product classes shown in Table 1. The corresponding minimum efficiency requirements which became effective May 14, 1994 are also provided [3].

N~~~~~~~~~ 

### DraftReport On Design Options for Clothes Washers
1. INTRODUCTION

,This report discusses possible design options for improving the energy'efficiency ofstandard
. -capacity, residential clothes washers. The procedureused in this design option analysis is based on a Department ofEnergy (DOE) interprelive ruling outlin!ng process improvement measures [1].' Afterthe different appliances subject to possible regulation areranked, potential design options are identified as the next step in the process ofproniulgating appliance efficiency standards. Screeningfactors arethen used tpdetermine ifany design options should beeliminated from further consideration
..Much ofthe input used for screening design options was provided by clothes washer manufacturers. Other**sourc~s** include. trade·
. publicationsand the Association ofHome Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM). Although (underthe new process) the design option stage ofthe analysis now precedes an Advance Notice ofProposed Rtdemaking (ANOPR), responses to the original ANOPR [2], data previously collected from manufacturers, and existing input from AHAM and other stakeholders will still be considered'in this report. The DOE intends to issue a Supple'mental Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the future. 

### 2. PRODUCT CLASSES Appliance features that provide utility to the consumer are incorporated into the analysis '. throughthe creationiofproduct classes.**CICl$~s** are a subset ofappliance types. Forexample, Clothes

washers are an appliance type, but a compact clothes washer is a produCt class. Appliance types are' segregated into separate:classes to which .different energy-efficiency standards apply. DOE differenti(!.tes classes by capacity or other performance-related features that provide utility to the

. consumer and 

### affect efficiency. Ingeneral, classes are defined using data collected in di'scussions with

appliance manufacturers, trade associations, and otherinterested parties. Those classes for which no DOEtest procedure has been specified are omitted from further analysis. Currently, clothes washers?fe separated into the product classes shown in Table 1
..The

. corresponding minimum efficiency requirements which ·became effective May 14, 1994 are also

provided [3].

1

### Table 1. CurrentProduct Classes & Efficiency Standards ProductClass Efficiency Standard Compact top loading EF 2 0.90 ft'/(kWh/cycle) Standard top loading EF 21.18 ft'/(kWh/cycle) Semi-automatic top loading Must have unheated rinse option Frontloading Must have unheated rinse option Suds saving Must have unheated rinse option 

### In a previous rulemaking [4], the terms top loading and front loading were used to refer to vertical and horizontal axis clothes washers, respectively. Since horizontal axis machines can be manufactured in a top loading configuration, product class distinction-based on how clothes are loaded-is no longer made. Instead, vertical and horizontal axis washers are considered as design strategies that manufacturers can use to achieve different efficiency levels. For the present analysis, the product classes inTable 2 were considered. Table 2. Proposed Product Classes ProductClass Definition Compact less than 1.6 ft' capacity Standard 1.6 ft' or greater capacity 

### In this report, since data were not available for the compact class, only standard capacity clothes washers will be discussed. 3. DESIGN OPTIONS Design options are changes in clothes washer design that may have the potential to save energy. The DOE issued an ANOPR on November 14, 1994, that proposed design options for increasing clothes washer efficiency [5]. A questionnaire based on these design options was sent to AHAM for distribution to its clothes washer manufacturer members. The questionnaire requested data on the energy use and cost ofdesign options. After the initial questionnaire was distributed, workshops were held between stakeholders including AHAM, manufacturers, and DOE. These interactions resulted in modifications and additions to the initial design option list. Several ofthe original ANOPR design options wererenamed tobetter define their technology. Microprocessor controls & fuzzy logic was renamed advanced controls/sensor. Configuration/tolerance ofinner and outer tubs was changed to tighter tub tolerance. Higher spin speed was redefined as improved water'extraction and was separated into four different values for
2 ,. 

### Table 1. CurrentProduct Classes & Efficiency Standards Product Class Compacttop loading Standardtop loading Semi-automatictop loading Frontloading Suds saving Efficiency Standard EF**~** 0.90 t't'/(kWh/cycle) EF**~** 1.18 ft'/(kWh/cycle) Musthave unheated rinse option Musthave unheated rinse option Musthave unheated rinse option



### - . . In a previous rulemaking [4], the terms top loading and front loading were used t6 refer to vertical and horizontal axis clothes washers, respectively. Since horizontal axis machines can be manufactured in a top loading configuration, product class distinction-based on how clothes are loaded-is no longer made. Instead, vertical and horizontal axis washers are considered as design strategiesthat manufacturers can use to achieve different efficiency levels. Forthe present analysis, the product classes in Table 2 were considered. 

### Table 2. Proposed Product Classes Product Class Definition Compact less than 1.6 ft' capacity Standard 1.6ft' or greatercapacity In this report, since data were not available for the compact class, only standard capacity clothes washers will be discussed. 

### 3. DESIGN OPTIONS Design options are changes in clothes washer design that may have the potential to save energy.The DOE issued an ANOPR on November 14, 1994; that proposed design options for increasing clothes washer efficiency [5]. A questionnaire based onthese design options was sent to AHAM for distribution to its clothes washer manufacturer members. The questionnaire requested data on the energy use and cost ofdesign options. After the initial questionnaire was distributed, workshops were held between stakeholders including AHAM, manufacturers, and DOE. These interactions resulted in modifications and additions tothe initial design option list. Several ofthe original ANOPRdesign optionswererenamed tobetterdefine theirtechnology. Microprocessor controls & fuzzy logic was renamed advanced controls/sensor. Configuration/tolerance ofinner and outertubs was changed to tighter tub tolerance. Higher spin speed was redefined as improved water'extractionand was separated into four different values for
2

### remaining moisture content (RMC); 50%, 40%, 35%, and 30%. The RMC design option is the same in all four cases but it varies in the amount offinal moisture content ofthe cloth. Different costs and energy usages are required to achieve the different levels ofRMC. Several design.options were split into two or more options. Improved fill control was originally interpreted differently by individual manufacturers (with large differences in cost and energy savings) and was therefore split into two options: improved fill control and automatic fill control. The horizontal axis design option was separated into two design options: horizontal axis and horizontal axis with recirculation. Table 3 shows the final design options considered in this analysis.
Table 3. Design Options Improved fill control Tighter tub tolerance Added insulation Increased motor efficiency Thermostatically controlled mixing valves (TCMV) Improved water extraction (remaining moisture content; RMC = 50%,40%,35%, 30%) Horizontal axis design Horizontal axis with recirculation Advanced controls/sensor (soil load sensor) Suds saving Direct drive motor Automatic fill control Reduced thermal mass Electrolytic disassociation ofwater Ultrasonic washing Bubble action Ozonated laundering


### Some of the design options in Table 3 are eliminated from further consideration (later in this report) ifone ofthe following criteria are not met [6]: 3 . . remaining moisture content (RMC); 50010, 40010, 35%, and 30010. The RMC design option is the·same in all four casesbutitvaries in the amount offirial moisture content ofthecloth. Different costs and energy usages are required to achieve th,e di£J:erent levelsofRMC
..

. 

### .. Several design .options were split into two or more options
.. Improved fill control was originally interpreted differentlybyindividual manufacturers (with large differences in'cost and energy· savings) and was therefore split into tWo options: improved fiU control and automatic fill control.

. The horizontal axis design option was separated into two design options: horizontal axis and

horizontal axis with recirculation. Table 3 shows the fjnal design options considered in this analysis.


### Table 3•. Design Options Improved fill control Tighter tub tolerance Added insulation Increased motor efficiency Thermostatically <?<>ntrol1ed mixing valves (TCMV) Improved water extraction (remaining moisture content; RMC 

### =50%,40%,35%, 30%). Horizontalaxis design Horizontal axis with recirculation Advanced controls/sensor (soil load sensor) Suds saving Direct drive motor Automatic fill control Reduced thermal mass Electrolytic disassociation ofwater

. Ultrasonic washing

Bubble acti9D Ozonated laundering

Some ofthedesign options in Table 3 are eliminated from further consideration (later inthis report) ifone ofthe following critena are riot met [6]: 3

--:"_,,-_.----- 

### - ...... 

### -- 

### --. -- ..**~** 

### .,--..**--.--~-** ... 

### -.**-"~-'-'-~"---"---'** 'r.
o t;

### I) Technological Feasibility. Technologies incorporated in commercial products or in working prototypes will be considered technologically feasible. 2) Practicability to Manufacture, Install and Service. Ifmass production ofatechnology in commercial products and reliable installation and servicing of technology could be achieved on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the time ofthe effective date ofthe standard, then that technology will be considered practicable to manufacture, install and service. 3) No adverse Impacts on Product Utility or Product Availability. 4) No adverse Impacts on Health or Safety. The reasons for eliminating a design option shown in Table 3 (or keeping for further consideration) are discussed in the individual descriptions ofthe design options outlined below. The design options that are not recommended for elimination in this report will be analyzed further in a later report. In this later report, theefficiency and cost ofdesign options and combinations ofdesign options will be analyzed. Included in the discussion ofdesign options are limiting performance factors (ifthe same factor was submitted by two or more manufacturers). These limiting performance factors describe parameters affected by a design option. Typically, these factors affect the utility ofthe clothes 'washer. A limiting performance factor does not necessarily exclude a design option from further analysis but describes performance factors that are affected by a design option and should be taken into consideration. BaselineModel A clothes washer baseline model is used as a reference for evaluating the energy saving potential and increased manufacturing costs ofvarious design options. The potential for energy savings is based on a proposed future DOE test procedure (Appendix J1) [7]. This test procedure will take effect only when a new clothes washer standard is enacted. The baseline represents the typical vertical axis washer with an energy efficiencyjust above theminimum allowable, as specified by updates to the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act (NAECA). Currently, all standard size washers must achieve the minimum allowed energy factor of 1.18 ft'kWh, as rated according to the existing DOE test procedure. The baseline model will be assumed to have a plastic tub, non-thermally controlled mixing valves, an unheated rinse and the capability to achieve a 62% remaining moisture content on the normal spin cycle.



### 4 I) Technological Feasibility. Technologies "incorporated in commercial products or in working'prototypes will be considered technologically feasible
.

.2) Practicabilityto**ManufaCture,~** Install and. Service. Ifmass.**produ~tionofa** technology in commercial products 'and reliable installation and servicing oftechnolqgy could be achieved on the scale necessary.to servethe relevant market at the time ofthe effective date ofthe standard, then that technology will becpnsidered practicable to manufacture, install and service. .' 3) No adverse Impacts onProduct Utility orProduct Availability. 4) No adverse Impacts on Health or Safety. The reasons for eliminating a design option shown in Table' 3 (or keeping for further consideration) are discussed in the individual descnptions ofthe design options outlined below. The design options that are not recommended for elimination in this report will be analyzed further in a later report. Inthis laterreport, the efficiency and cost'ofdesign options and combinations ofdesign options will be analyzed. '

.Included in the discussion ofdesign options are limiting performance factors (ifthe same factor was submitted by two ormore manufacturers). These limiting performance factors describe parameters**~ected** by a design option. Typically, these factors affect the utility ofthe clothes washer. A limiting performance factor does not necessarily exclude a design option from further ;malysis but describes performance factors that are affected py a design option and should be taken Jinto consideration. ' . BaselineModel . A clothes washer baseline model is used as a reference for evaluating the energy saving potential and increased manufacturing costs ofvarious design options. The potential for**en~rgy** savings is based on a proposed future DOEtest procedure (Appendix 11) [7]. This test procedure 

### will take effect only when a new clothes washer standard is enacted.

. . . The'baseline represents**th~** typical vertical axis washer with an energy efficiencyjust above lrhe minimum allowable, as specified by updates to theNational Appliance Energy Conservation Act (NAECA). Currently, all standard size washers must achieve the minimum allowed energy factor of l.18 fWkWh, as rated according to the existing DOE test procedure. The baseline model will be assumed to, have a plastic tub, non-thermally controlled mixing valves, an unheated rinse and the c;apability to achieve a 62% remaining moisture content onthe normal spin cycle.

4

..**--.----'-----------:----~-**

### .nmproved fill control Thisdesign option is defined as improving the tolerance on existing wash water fill sensing. This can be accomplished by reducing tolerances ofpresently used pressure sensors or improving switch design. .This design option relates primarily to vertical axis design washers, although it is sometimes applicable to horizontal axis washers depending on the specific fill control design. In a typical vertical axis washer, one end ofan air hose is connected near the bottom ofthe washer tub and the other end is connected to a pressure switch. As water fills the tub, air in the hose is forced into a smaller volume, thereby increasing the air pressure. The air pressure increases until it activates a pressure switch, which in turn shuts offthe water inlet valve. A more accurate water level setting system would avoid overfilling thewash tub,thereby reducing the amount of water and energy used. Limiting performance factors mentioned by manufacturers include: 1) soil removal, 2) gentleness of action, and 3) wear. One manufacturer said itwas not aware ofany opportunity to reduce tolerances ofpresently used pressure sensors. But because several manufacturers provided cost and efficiency data for' improving the fill control, it was analyzed as a method to improve clothes washer efficiency. Tightertub tolerance This design option reduces the space (the annulus) between the inner wash basket and the outer tub. This annulus fillswith water,but does not add to the clothes washer capacity. Having less space between the inner wash basket and the outer tub reduces the amount ofwater required for a fill, thereby saving the energy required to heat it. This option applies primarily to vertical axis washers. In a horizontal axis washer, water only occupies the lower portion ofthe annulus. Since most ofthe annulus in a horizontal axis washer is filled with air, a smaller annulus does not yield significant energy savings. Other considerations are also important in determining an appropriate clearance between basket and tub. Manufacturers state that ifthe annulus is too small there maybe problems with "suds lock", where suds from the wash water remain between the inner wash basket and outer tub. Clearance is also needed to drain water during the spin dry cycle. Also, enough space must be retained to allow for deflection ofbaskets with out-of-balance loads. Increasing the spin speed ofthe washer basket during the spin dry cycle may also require a larger space between tub and basket to allow for greater deflection at higher spin speeds. For this reason, tighter tub tolerance was not combined withthe improved water extraction design options. Other limiting performance factors mentioned by manufacturers include: 1)noise, 2) vibration, and 3).sand removal. One manufacturer stated that the space between inner and outer tubs is already at the minimum. However, tub tolerances vary among manufacturers. Therefore, manufacturer supplied cost and efficiency data were used to estimate the benefit oftightening the tub tolerance.

5 Jmproved fill control

. This'design option is defined as improving the tolerance on existing wash waterfill sensing. This can be accomplished by reducingtolerances of**pr~sently** used**pr~ssure** sensors or ilJlproving switch design.
.This design option relates primarily to vertical axis design washers," although It is sometimes applicable to horizontal axis washers depending on the specific fill control design. In a typical vertical axis washer, one end ofan air hose is connected nearthe bottom ofthe washertub· and the ptherend is connected to a pressure switch. Aswaterfills the tub, 

### air in the hose is forced into a smallervolume, thereby increasing the 

### airpres.sure.. The air pressure increases until it activates a pressure switch, which in tum shuts offthe waterinlet valve
..A more accurate waterlevel setting systemwould avoid overfilling thewashtub, thereby reducing the amoUlit of 'water and energy used. Limitingperformancefactors mentioned by manufacturersinclude: .1) soil removal, 2) gentleness of action,,and 3)wear. . . One manufacturer said it was notaware ofany opportunity to reducetolerances ofpresently used pressure sensors. But because several manufacturers**provid~d** cost and efficiency data for'
. improving the fill control, it was analyzed as a method to**i~prove** clothes washer efficiency. Tighter tub tolerance
. This design option reduces the space (the annulus) betweenthe inner wash basket and the outertub. This annulus fills with water, but does not add tothe clothes washer capacity. Having less space betweenthe inner wash basket and the outertub reduces the amount ofwaterrequired for a fill, thereby**savi~g** the energy required to heat it. This option applies primarily to vertical axis washers. In a horiZontal axis washer, water only occupies the lower portion ofthe annulus.'**Sin~e** most ofthe annulus in a horizontal axis washer is filled with air, a smaller**~ulus** does not yield significant energy savings. Other considerations are also important in determining an appropriate clearance between basket and tub. Manufacturers statethat 

### if the annulus is too small there maybe problems with "suds lock", wher:e suds from the wash water remain between the inner wash basket and outer tub. Clearance is also needed to drain water during the spin dry**cycle~** Also, enough space must be

.retained to allow for deflection ofbaskets with out-of-balance loads. Increasingthe spin speed ofthe washer basket during the spin dry cycle may also require a larger spacebetweentub and basket to allow for greater deflection at higher spin speeds. For this reason, tighter tub tolerance was not combined withthe improved water extraction design options. Other limiting performance factors mentioned by manufacturers include: 1) noise, 2)vibration, and 3).sand removal. One manufacturer stated that the space between inner and outer tubs is already' at the minimum. However, tub tolerances vary among manufacturers. Therefore, manufacturer supplied cost and efficiency data wereused to estimatethebenefit oftightening the tub tolerance.

I' 5 /

### Added insulation This design option adds insulation around the outer wash tub. Because some heat energy is lost through the shell ofthe clothes washer, adding insulation around the outer tub slightly reduces the water temperature needed for a hot wash. However, since the wash cycle is short, the thermal mass ofthe water is very high, and the temperature ofthe tub is relatively low there is very little change in water temperature from adding insulation. Computer simulations performed for a 20- minute wash cycle at 140°F showed that adding one inch offiberglass insulation relative to no insulation resulted in only a 1

- 2°F increase inwater temperature during parts ofthe wash [8]. Some manufacturers stated that this design option would produce little savings and should be eliminated. Since several manufacturers supplied cost and efficiency data for this design option, it was analyzed as a method to improve clothes washer efficiency. Increased motor efficiency About 10% ofthe total electrical energy consumed by a typical clothes washer is used by the electric motor. The typical washing machine has a 1/2-% 

### horsepower motor. One manufacturer states that replacing a split-phase motor with a capacitor start motor may increase the efficiency ofthe motor by 10% [9]. Limiting performance factors mentioned by manufacturers include: 1)physical size and 2) servicing/installation. Manufacturers supplied data for this option but suggested that since the motor energy is a small part ofthe total energy, even a 10% reduction in motor energy would result in only a 1% reduction in overall energy consumption. Although only small energy savings would be realized by improving the motor efficiency, it was still considered as a method to improve clothes washer efficiency. Thermostaticallycontrolledmixing valves (TCMVs)' This design option'achieves energy savings by more accurately controlling inlet water temperature forhot orwarm fills. In atypical non-thermostatically controlled water inlet system, two solenoid valves are used; one valve controls hot water fills while the other controls cold water fills. Both solenoid valves are opened ifa warm water setting is selected. In the warm wash mode, a fixed fraction ofhot and cold water are controlled by flow control devices. For example, a manufacturer may decide to let warm water be 50% hot and 50% cold. To reduce hot water energy use, some manufacturers have reduced the warm water temperature by using other ratios such as 40% hot and 60% cold. Athermostatically controlled mixing valve (TCMV) refers to a set ofclothes washer valves which sense water temperature and adjust the supply ofhot and cold water to maintain a desired

'Also referred to as "Thermostatically Controlled Water Valves". 

### 6. Addedinsulation This design option adds insulation around the outerwash tub. Because some heat energy is lostthroughthe shell ofthe clothes waSher, adding insulation ar<;>und the outertubslightly reduces the watertemperature needed for a hot waSh. However, since the wash cycle is short, the thermal mass ofthe water is very high, and the temperature ofthe tub is relatively low there is very little change in water temperature from adding insulation. Computer simulations performed for a 20- minute wash cycle at 14QoF showed that adding**~ne** inch .of**fiberg~ass** insulation relative to no insulation resulted in only a 1-2°Fincrease in watertemperature'during parts ofthe wash [8]. Some manufacturers stated that this design option would produce little savings**.~nd** should**b~ ~liminated.**  Since several manufacturers supplied cost and efficiency datafor this design option,

, it was analyzed as a method to improve clotheswasher efficiency
.

.Increasedmotorefficie"cy About 

### 10010 ofthetotal electrical energy consumedby atypical clothes washer is used bythe electric motor. The typical washing machine has a Y2-2J3 horsepowermotor. One manufacturer states !that replacing a split-phase motor with a capacitor start motor may increase the efficiency ofthe motor by 10% [9]. Limiting performance factors mentioned by manufacturers include: 1) physical size and 2) servicinglinstallation. ' " 'I Manufacturers supplied data for this option but suggested that since the motor energy is'a small part ofthe total energy, even a 10% reduction in motor energy would result in only a 1 % l'edu¢onin overall energy consumption. Although only small energy savings)Vould berealized by improving the motor efficiency, it was still considered as a method to improve clothes washer (!fficiency. Thermostatically controlledmixingvalves (TCMVsjI , This design option'\achieves energy savings by more accurately controlling inlet water temperaturefor hot orwarm fills, In a typical non-thermostatically controlled water inlet system, two

, solenoid valves are**used~** onevalve controls hot waterfiUs while the other controls cold water fills.

Both solenoid valves are opened ifa warm water setting is selected. In the warm wash mode, a fixed fraction ofhot and cold water are controlled by flow control devices. For example, a manufacturer may decide tolet warm waterbe 50% hot and 50% cold. To reduce hot water energy use, some manufacturers have reduced the warm watertemperature by using otherratios such'as 40% hot and 60% cold. '

, , Athermostatically controlled mixing valve (TCMV) refers to a set ofclothes washervalves which sense water temperature and adjust the supp!y ofhot and cold water to maintain

# a desired ,

1**~so** referredto as "Thermostatically ControlledWater Valves". 6,

### warm water temperature [10]. In the June 1996 comments to the DOE test procedure, AHAM commented that it is not necessary to define thermostatically controlled water valves but to define clothes washers with thermostatically controlled water valves. It is likely that DOE will revise the aforementioned definition to that recommended by AHAM: "Clothes washers with thermostatically controlled water valves refer to clothes washers which sense water temperature and adjust the hot water and cold water supplies appropriately to maintain,a mixed water temperature" [11]. Energy can be saved with aTCMVby either reducing the hot water temperature or reducing the warm water temperature. For example, the TCMV could be used to lower the hot wash temperature from 135 °

### F to 130°F by mixing hot water (at 135°F test inlet conditions) with cold water. Warm water temperature could be similarly reduced.' The energy savings can vary widely depending onthe test standard's specified inlet hot water temperature and the selected temperature ofthe tempered water. A TCMV design option hasthe potential to overstate the actual in-home energy savings when tested under laboratory conditions. The magnitude ofthe discrepancy depends on the proximity of the waterheater to the clothes washer. When tested under laboratory conditions, the clothes washer is next to the hot water source, whereas this is generally not the case in the home. As a result ofthe distance between the hot water source andthe clothes washer, there is a temperature drop due to line losses. As a result ofthe line losses, a clothes washer with a TCMV mayuse more hot water than predicted under the laboratory testing. Similarly, in a real world application savings will also vary with the temperature ofincoming cold water (i.e. ground water). The unheated water temperature will vary with both geographic location andtime ofyear. More energy would likely be saved in cases ofwarmer inlet water as a TCMV would then reduce the amount oftime a hot water valve is open. The amount of savings is also dependent on the set point ofthe TCMV, the water heater set point, the temperature selection ofthe wash (hot or warm cycle), and the location ofthe sensing thermostat controlling the inlet water valves. A limiting performance factor mentioned by more than one manufacturer was soil removal. Because TCMV's are commercially available on high end machines they were considered as away to increase clothes washer efficiency. Manufacturers supplied cost and efficiency data for this design option. iniproved water extraction There are several ways to reduce the remaining moisture content (RMC) in the laundry load after the final spin cycle. One method is to increase the spin speed ofthe wash basket for the final spin cycle. Other ways include: 1) changing the direction ofrotation to more evenly distribute clothes, 2) having a longer spin Cycle, and 3) increasing the size ornumber ofdrainage holes in the washer drum. Since mechanical drying is more efficient than using heat to dry, energy consumption for the combined wash and dry process is reduced.

7 warm water temperature (10]. In the June 1996 comments to the DOE test procedure, AHAM c:omniented that it is not necessary to define thermostatically controlled water valves but to define

.dothes washers with thermostatically controlled water valves. It is likely that DOEwill revise the**~lforementioned** definitionto that recornrnended by

## AllAM: "Clotheswasher&.with thermostatically. c;ontroHed watervalves refer to clotheswashers which sense watertemperature and adjust the hot
. water and cold water supplies appropriately to maintain,a mixed watertemperature" [11]. Energy canbe saved with

### a: TCMVby either reducing the hot watertemperature orreducing the warm water

### te~peratu·re. For example, the TCMV could be used to lower the hot wash temperature from 135°F to 130°F by mixing hot water (at 135°Ftest inlet conditions) with cold water. Warm watertemperature could be similarly reduced.· The energy savings can vary widely depending onthe test standard's specified inlet hot water temperature and the selected temperature ()fthetempered water. A TCMVdesign option has thepotential t6 overstatethe actual in-home energy savings when tested under laboratory conditions. The magnitude ofthe discrepancy depends on the proximity of the waterheatertothe clothes washer. When tested under laboratory conditions, the clothes washer is next tothehot water source, whereas this is generally not the caseinthe home. As a result ofthe distancebetweenthehot water source and the clothes washer, there is a temperature drop due to line losses. As a result ofthe line losses, a clothes washer with a TCMV may use more hot water**t~an** predicted under the laboratory testing. Similarly, in a real world application savings will also vary 'mththetemperature ofincoming cold water (i.e. giound water). The unheated watertemperature 

### ,WI vary with bothgeographic location and time ofyear. More energy would likely be saved in cases ()fwarmerinlet water as a TCMVwould thenreduce the amount oftime a hot water valve is open. The amount ofsavings is also·dependent on the set point·oftheTCMV, the waterheater set point, thetemperature selection ofthe wash (hot orwarm cycle), and the**locat~on** ofthe sensing thermostat c;ontrolJing the inlet water valves. A limiting performancefactor mentioned by more than one manufacturer was soil removal. BecauseTCMV'sare commercially available on high end machines they were**consid~red** as itwaytoincrease clothes washer efficiency. Manufacturers supplied cost and efficiency data for this design option. lnprol'edwfltereJ..'1raction

. There are several ways to reduce the remaining moisture content (RMC) in the laundry load afterthe final spin cycle. One method is to increase the spin speed ofthe washbasket for the final spin cycle. Other.ways include: 1) changing the direction ofrotation to more evenly**d~stribute** dothes; 

### 2) having a longer spin cycle, an.d 3) increasing the size ornumber ofdrainage holes in the washer**druIIi~** Since mechanical drying is more efficient than using heat to dry, energy consumption for the combined wash and dry process is reduced.
.

7

### Limiting performance factors mentioned by manufacturers include: 1) greater wrinkling of clothes, 2) noise and, 3) vibration. Manufacturers state that the washing machine structure would have toberedesigned to handle greater dynamic loads, stresses, deflections, and increased braking. In addition, different spin cycle options would have to be.available on a washer to account for the iload type. Different fabrics require different maximum spin speeds to avoid clothes damage. The probable, future test procedure (Appendix J1) will most likely assume that the improved water extraction feature will not be used for 25% ofthe time that the clothes washer is in use (based on AHAM response to the test procedure Supplemental ANOPR) [12]. Since this feature can be consumer selectable, clothes subject to wrinkling canbe washed with a conventional spin cycle option to avoid a wrinkling problem. Some manufacturers were doubtful that RMCs of35% and 30% could be practically obtained. In laboratory testing, RMCs on commercially available horizontal axis washers ranged from 49% to 36% with a 50/50 cotton/polyester cloth load. For the same test load, a vertical axis machine had a 52% RMC. The washers for the above testing were loaded at 3 pounds per cubic foot of basket capacity [13]. The future DOE test procedure (Appendix J1), generally based on AHAM recommendations, specifies the test load as being closerto 4 pounds per cubic foot ofbasket capacity 1[14]. Since the amount ofcloth test load has an effect on the RMC achieved, it is unknown whether the above laboratory tested machines can achieve their stated RMC values under future DOE test conditions. Some manufacturers already have models which can achieve 40% RMC levels. For example, General Electric applied for a test procedure waiver for a vertical axis washing machine that can achieve RMC levels of less than 40% [15]. Several European horizontal axis models are able to achieve 40% RMC including: Asko model 20005; Creda model CWA242; and Miele models W1903, W1918, and W1930 [16]. There do not appear tobe any commercially available or known prototype clothes washer that achieves RMCs of35% or 30% and, therefore, these two RMC levels will be eliminated from any further analysis. RMC levels of 50% and 40% are analyzed with manufacturer supplied cost and efficiency data. Horizontalaxisdesign Horizontal axis machines rotate the drum (wash basket) and clothes about a horizontal axis. With this design, the drum does not have to be filled with water to cover the top ofthe clothes. Therefore, horizontal axis machines use much less water than conventional vertical axis machines. ][n some designs the washer is first filled to a specified level, As clothes absorb the water, a water level sensor allows more water to enter to maintain the specified level. Inthis way the water level is matched to the laundry load. Washing performance appears to be equal to that ofvertical axis machines. In laboratory testing, horizontal axis machines used on average 40% less energy and 25% less water when normalized to clothes container volume. The horizontal axis machines also had a greater soil removal effectiveness [17]..
8 Limiting**perform~ce** factors mentioned by manufacturers include: 1) greater wrinkling of Iclothes, 2) noise and, 3) vibration. Manufacturers statethat the washing machine structure would have toberedesigned to handle greater dynamic loads, stresses, deflections; and increased braking. In addition, different spin cycle options"would have to be,available on a washer to account for the iload type. Different fabrics require different maximum spin speeds to avoid clothes damage. The ;probable, future test procedure (Appendix 11) will most likelY'assume that the improved ,water

, lextraction feature will not,be used for 2S% ofthe time that the clothes washeris in use (based,on

AllAM response to the test procedure Supplemental ANOPR) [12]. Since this feature 

### can be lconsumer selectable, clothes subjecttowrinkling calibewashed with a conventional spin cycle option ito avoid a wrinkling problem. Somemanufacturers were doubtful thatRMCs of3S% and 30% could be practically obtained 

### In laboratorytesting, RMCs on commercially available horizontal axis washers ranged from**4~1o** to 36%with a SO/SO cotton/polyester cloth load. Forthe same test load, a vertical axis machine had a 52% RMC. The washers for the above testing were loaded at 3 pounds per cubic foot of basket capacity [13]. The future DOE test procedure (Appendix JI), generally based on AllAM Irecommendations, specifies thetest**lo~d** as being closerto4 pounds per cubic foot ofbasketcapacity 1[14]. Since the amount ofclothtest load has**~** effect oritheRMC achieved, it is unknown whether lthe above laboratory tested machines**c~** achieve their stated RMC values under future DOE test conditions.
. Some manufacturers already have models which 

### can achieve 40% RMC levels. Forexample, General Electric applied for a test procedure waiver for a vertical axis washing machine that can " achieve RMC levels of less than 40% [15]. Several European horizontal axis models

# are able to achieve 40% RMC including: Asko mode12000S; CrecIamodel CW A242; and Miele modelsW1903, W1918,**an~** W1930[16].

, \ There do not appearto**~e** any commercially available orknown prototype clotheswasherthat achieves RMCsof35% or 30% and, therefore, these two RMC levels will be eliminated from any further analysis. RMC levels of SO% and 40% are analyzed with manufacturer supplied cost and dIiciency data, 

### Hori,zontal axis design

, 'Horizontal axis machines rotate**th~** drum (wash basket) and clothes about a horizontal axis. With this design, the drum does not have to be filled with water to cover the top ofthe clothes. Therefore, horizontal axis machines use much less waterthan conventional vertical axis machines. l[n some designs the washer is first filled to a specified level, As clothes absorb the water, a water level sensor allows more water to enterto maintain the specified level. In this way the water level is matched to the laundry load. Washing performance appears to be equal to that ofvertical axis machines. 

### Inlaboratorytesting, horizontal axis machines used on average 40% less energy and 25% less water when normalized to clothes container volume. The horizontal axis machines also had a greater soil removal effectivene!:ls [17]..
. , ,
8



## -

.. _--- ----_.--- 

### ------ ',-...

### _--

....

## -...

## -**-~--~--** ...

## -----

### In a previous analysis, it was estimated that less detergent would be needed based on some detergent manufacturers' recommendations [18]. New information now suggests that if a low sudsing detergent is sold in theU.S., detergent use would remain unchanged [19][20]. Inthe May 8, 1995 data submittal by AHAM [21], one manufacturer commented that there will be many consumer utility issues impacted bythe use ofa horizontal axis design including:- * Clothes washer water bath will still not be at household water heater settings: A greater portion ofthe fill water will be affected by thermal losses (since lesshot water is. used) dueto 1)household supply piping, 2) washing machine structure, and 3) clothes load. * There will be an increased cycle time to complete the washing process: This manufacturer states that there is the need to tumble clothes longer as there is less mechanical action in tumbling than agitation. Multiple rinses will be required to remove higher detergent concentration versusrinses in horizontal axiswashers. More time is required to heatwater ifan internal heater is utilized. * Loading/unloading accessibility is impaired: There is a need to stoop to load front loader style horizontal axis washers. A small opening (to load clothes) is required to avoid water leaks. The door is locked to avoid water spillage and therefore garments cannot be added after the cycle has been initiated without draining water. Top-loading horizontal style horizontal axis washers have an "unfriendly" springloaded trap door. In addition, excessive reach is required to retrieve garments at bottom of cylinder on top loading style horizontal axis machine. * Rewiring ofelectrical system may be required: A financial impact to consumers mayresult from having to rewire the electrical system ofthe home to 240V in the washer area ifan internal heater isutilized. * A new low-sudsing formulated detergent would be required: Leading detergent manufacturers are still developing detergents for horizontal axis machines: As compared to horizontal axis designs, the detergent cost per load will increase. The dosage is the same orslightly less than horizontal axis designs, not one third ofvertical axis designs as claimed by advocates ofhorizontal axis designs. Limiting performance factors mentioned by more than one manufacturer include: 1) soil removal, 2) consumer interface (ergonomics), 3) tangling, 4) cycle time, 5) rinsing and 6) suds sensitivity. Horizontal axis machines are currently commercially available in the United States, and although manufacturers have several concerns over this design, it is analyzed as a method to improve clothes washer efficiency.

9 In a previous analysis, it was estimated that less detergent would be needed based on some detergent manufacturers' recommendations [18]. New information now suggests that ifa low su"dsiilg detergent is sold in theU.S.,**de!ergen~use** would remain unchanged [19][20].
. IntheMay 8, 1995 data submittal by

### AIJAM [21], onemaimfacturer commented that there will.be many consumerutility issues**impacte~** bythe·use, ofa horizontal axis design including:··,
• Clothes washer waterbath will still not be at household waterheater settings: A greaterportion ofthe fill water will be affected bythermal losses (since less hotwateris. used) dueto 1) household supply**p~ping,** 2) washing machiI).e structure, and 3)clothesload.

• There will be

# an increased cycle time to complete the washing process: This manufacturer states-that there is the need t() tumble clothes longer as there is less mechanical action in tumbling than agitation. Multiple rinses will be required to remove - higher detergent concentration versus rinses in horizontal axis washers.· Moretime is required to.heat wateriraninternal heater is utilized.
.
• Loading/unloading accessibility is impaired: There is a need to stoop to load front loader style horizontal axis 'washers. A small opening (to load clothes) is required to avoid water,leaks
.. The qoor is locked to avoid water spillage and therefore garments cannot be added after the cycle has been initiated**~ithout** draining water. Top-loading horizontal style horizontal axis washers have an "unfriendly" springloaded trapdoor. In addition, excessive reach is required to retrieve garments at bottom

### c:>f
. cylinder on top·loading style horizontal axis machine.

• Rewiring ofelectrical system may be required: . Afinancial impact to consumers may result from having to rewire the electrical system ofthe

home to240V in the washer area ifan internal heater is utilized. • A new low-sudsing formulated detergent would berequired: Leading detergent manufacturers are 

### still developing detergents for honzontal axis machines: Ascompared to horizontal axis designs, the detergent cost perload will increase. The dosage is the same or slightly less than horizontal axis designs, not one third ofvertical axis designs as claimed by advocates ofhorizontal axis designs. ' Limiting performance factors mentioned by more than one manufacturer include: 1) soil removal,. 2) consumer interface (ergonomics), 3) tangling, 4) cycle time, 5) rinsing and 6) suds sensitivity. Horizontal axis machines are currently commercially available in the United States, and although manufacturers have several concerns overthis design, it is analyzed as a method to improve clothes washer efficiency.
.

9

..

# _--_._---- -

# -- -

. .,,'

. ';

### Horizontal axis.with recirculation This design option is a variation on the horizontal axis design option.. It differs in thatthis design uses a pump to circulate water from a sump underneath the rotating drum through a spray nozzle into the interior ofthe rotating drum. The small amount ofwater inthe bottom ofthe drum ofa standard horizontal axis washer isnot required. Less hotwater is needed per wash cycle, thereby saving energy. In the May 8, 1995 data submittal by AHAM, one company commented that theyhave not been able to verifythat a savings exists with recirculation. Limiting factors mentioned by more than one manufacturer include: 1) soil removal, 2) tangling, 3), cycle time, 4) rinsing, and 5) suds sensitivity. Manufacturers submitted data on cost and energy use for this design option. Electrolux models EW 1550, EW1450, and EW 1250 use direct spray (eight liters per minute ofwater/detergent solution is sprayed into the drum by means ofa supply valve above the porthole) [22]. Advanced controls/sensor (soilloadsensor) According to the future DOE test procedure (Appendix J1), "an adaptive control system refers to a clothes washer control system which is capable ofautomatically adjusting washer operation or washing conditions based on characteristics ofthe clothes load placed in the clothes container, without allowing orrequiring consumer intervention and/or actions." This design option would use sensorsto measure the soil load to adjust the wash temperature, agitation and/or tumble cycle time, number ofrinse cycles, spin speed, and other parameters. Water and energy use can then be tailored to the load, thereby avoiding washing the clothes more than necessary. The future DOE test procedure (Appendix J1) would account for energy savings due to this design option, and in some cases would allow for specific field test procedures to'measure energy consumption [23]. The Electrolux Intuition and Zanussi Dialog washing machines use fuzzy logic to weigh laundry loads and regulate the length ofthe cycle, water level, number ofrinses, and drying time [24].AEG unveiled the Oko-Lavamat 6953 in mid-1993. This washing machine incorporates fuzzy logic to optimize the washing process while conserving water usage. The fuzzy logic control determines the absorbency ofthe items being washed at the earliest stage possible after the start of the washing cycle. The system determines the correct water quantity for clear-water washing and the subsequent rinsing (the phase ofwashing that uses a majority ofthe water) [25]. Manufacturers submitted cost and energy data for this design option, therefore, this option will be included in further analysis. Suds saving 

### A suds saving feature allows water from one wash cycle tobe reused in the next wash cycle. After agitation, sudsy wash water is pumped into a separate storage tub, remaining there until the

.10 la Horizontal axis_with recirculation This design option is a variation'onthe horizontal axis design opt,ion., Itdiffers in thatthis design usesa pump to circulate water,from a sump underneath the rotating drum through a spray nozzle into the interior oftherotating drum. The,small amount,ofwaterin thebottom ofthedrum ofa standard horizontal axis washeris not required. Less'hotwateris needed perwash cycle, thereby saVIng energy.**~** , In the May 8,'**1~95** data submittalby

## AHAM" one company comr:nented that theyhave not been able to verifY that a saVings exists with recirculation; Limiting factors mentioned by more than one manufacturer include: 1) soil removal, 2) tangling, 3). cycle time, 4) rinsing, and 5) suds .sensitivity. Manufacturers submitted,data on cost and energy use for this design option.' Electrolux models EW 1550, EW1450, and EW 1250use direct spray(eight liters perminute ofwater/detergent solution is sprayed into the drum by means ofa supply valve above the porthole) [22]. , Advancedcontrols/sensor (soil/oadsensor) ,According to the future DOE test procedure (Appendix 

### II), "an adaptive control system refers to a clothes washer control'sy&tem which is capable ofautomatically adjusting washer operation or washing conditions based on characteristics ofthe clothes load placed in the clothes Container, without allowing orrequiring consumerintervention and/or actions."**Th~s** design option would use sensorsto measure the soil load to adjust the wash temperature,_agitation and/or tumble cycle time, number of

### rinse cycles, spin speed, and other**paramet~rs.** Water and energyuse can thenbe tailored to the load, thereby avoiding washing the clothes more than necessary. The future DOE test procedure (App,endix II) would account for energy saVingsdue to this design option, and in some

, cases would allow for specific field testprocedures to'measure energy consumption [23]. The Electrolux Intuition and Zanussi Dialog washing machines use fuzzy logic to weigh laundry loads and regulate the length ofthe cycle, water level, number ofrinses, and drying time [24].AEGunveiled the qko-Lavamat 6953 in mid-1993. This washing machine incorporates fuzzy logic to optimize the washing process while conserving water usage. The 

### fuzzy logic control determines the absorbency ofthe, itemsbeingwashed attheearliest stagepossible after the start of the washing cycle. The system determines the correct,waterquantity for clear-waterwashing and the subsequent ,rinsing (the phase ofwashing that uses a majority ofthe water) [25]. Manufacturers submitted cost and energy datafor this design option, therefore, this option will be included in further analysis. ' ,Sudssaving 

## Asuds saving feature allows waterfromonewash cycle tobereused in the next wash cycle'.' ,After agitation, sudsy wash water is pumped into a separate storage tub,'remaining there until the
10

-- ...-- -, •. 

### --.------. -._ ..

# _------**-------~-------.**

### next wash cycle. While the water is stored, soil settles to the bottom ofthe tub. During the next wash cycle, all but an inch ofthe water is pumped back into the washer tub for use again [26]. Manufacturers have commented that this option saves water but not energy. They also believe that there is low consumer demand for this option and would, therefore, not be used often. In addition, this option cannot be used for all loads or soil conditions. This option is useful only when there is more than one wash cycle per load oflaundry, e.g., a pre-wash (which is not typically the case), or if the consumer washed more than one wash load at a time. Subsequent washes could receive diminishing benefits, sincethe water in the holding tubwould cool ifleft standing too long. A limiting performance factor mentioned by more thanone manufacturer forthis design option was soil removal. This design option is currently commercially available. An example is AB Electrolux's Recycle 40. It uses water from the final rinse ofone load to use again as the prewash ofthe next cycle [27]. Maytag features this option as a water saving option on one ofits washers. The future (Appendix J1) DOE test procedure will no longer provide an energy saving benefit for this design option. The two interested parties that commented on this provision during the comment period for the test procedures, were not in favor ofretaining credit for this design option [28][29]. In addition, because this option requires an external wash tub, consumer utility is affected. This option is eliminated from further consideration for the above stated reasons. Directdrivemotor This design option is primarily intended for use in vertical axis machines. A conventional vertical axis clothes washer uses an induction motor, a mechanical transmission, and sometimes a pulley belt. A direct drive motor can replace a conventional motor/transmission system. Rather than using a belt and/or transmission, a motor could be directly connected to the agitator, thereby avoiding transmission (gearbox) losses. Eaton, a motor manufacturer,_ claims that this will result in less mechanical energy required, i.e., less energy needed to run the agitator motor. This is accomplished by using a Brushless DC (BLDC) motor with electronic controls. Cleanability was not measured by Eaton. In addition, other parameters such as cycle time or spin speed were not kept constant in a comparison test with aconventional washer. For the machines tested, Eaton found savings ofabout 140 W-hr percycle or64% ofmotor energy use. When adjusted for the direct drive standby power, this difference drops to about 35 W-hr per cycle or 16%. The direct drive standby power is the energy consumption when the machine is "off'. Inthe "off' mode, the direct drive motor system has a power drain of4.78 watts. The current DOE test procedure does not account for standby power use. Energy savings could be improved ifthe standby power loss was decreased [30]. One company submitted a comment that energy losses in the drive system are a very small percent oftotal energy use. Therefore, savings from a direct drive motor would be minimal. A limiting performance factor mentioned by more than one manufacturer for this design option was physical size.

11 next wash cycle. While the water is stored, soil settles to thebottom ofthetub. Duringthe next wash cycle, all but an inch ofthe water is pumped back into the washer tub for use again [26]. Manufacturershave commented that this option saves water.but not energy. They also believethat there is low consumer demand for this option and would, therefore, notbeused often. In addition, this option cannotbe used for all loads or soil conditions. This option is useful onlywhen there is more than onewash cycle perload oflaundry, e.g., a pre-wash (which is nottypically the case), or ifthe consumer washed more than one wash load at a time. Subsequent washes could receive diminishing benefits, sincethewaterin theholdingtubwould cool ifleft standing too long. A limiting· performancefactor mentionedby morethan onemanufacturerforthis design option was soil removal. This design option is currently commercially available. An example is AB Electrolux's Recycle 40. It uses water from the final rinse ofone load to use again as the prewash ofthe next cycle [27]. Maytag features this option as a water saving option on one ofitswashers. Thefuture (Appendix II)DOEtest procedure will no longerprovide an energy saving benefit for this design optiqn. The two interested parties that commented on this provision during the comment period for the test procedures, werenot in favor ofretaining credit for this design option [28][29]. Inaddition, becausethis optionrequires an external washtub, consumerutility is affected. This optionis eliminated from further consideration for the above stated reasons. Directdrive motor This design option is primarily intended for use in vertical axis machines. A conventional vertical axis clothes washeruses an induction motor, a mechanical transmission,**an~** sometimes a pulley belt. A direct drive motorcan replace a conventional motor/transmission system. Ratherthan using abelt and/ortransmission, a motorcouldbe directly connected to the agitator, thereby avoiding transmission (gearbox) losses. Eaton, a motor manufacturerL claims that this will result in less
. mechanical energy required, ie., less energy needed to run the agitator motor. This is accomplished byusing a BrushlessDC (BLDC) motorwith electronic controls. Cleanability was not measured by Eaton. In addition, other parameters such as cycle time or spin speed were not kept .constant in a comparisontest with a conventional washer. Forthe machines tested, Eatonfound savings ofabout 140W-hrpercycle or64% ofmotorenergy use. When adjusted for the direct drive standby power, this difference drops to about 35 W-hr per cycle or 16%. The direct drive standby power.is the energyconsumptionwhenthe machine is "off'. Inthe "off" mode, the direct drive motor system has a powerdrain of4.78 watts. The current DOE testprocedure does not account for standby power use. Energy savings could be improved ifthe standby powerloss was decreased [30]. One company submitted a comment that energy losses in the drive system are a very small percent oftotal energy use. Therefore, saVings from a .direct drive motor would be minimal. A limiting performance factor mentioned by more than one manufacturer for this design option was physical size
..

11

### In Japan, Australia, and Asia, vertical axis direct drive washers are currently available. Some horizontal axis machines also use a direct drive motor. Thus, using manufacturer supplied cost and efficiency data, this design option is analyzed as a method to improve the clothes washer efficiency. Automatic fill control2 

### This design option incorporates advanced control technologies to sense the clothes load and adjust thewater level accordingly. For a'vertical axis machine, this may mean setting the water level tojust submerge the clothes load. This design option would overcome the tendency ofconsumers to manually select a water level greater than required.. Energy is saved in eitherthe vertical or horizontal axis designs by reducing the amount ofhot water used in the wash cycle. The future (Appendix J1) DOE test procedure (unlike the existing DOE test procedure) uses an actual clothes load and, therefore, possible savings due to this design option can be measured. Limiting performance factors mentioned by more than one manufacturer for this design option were: 1)gentleness ofaction and 2) wear. Washing machines with automatic fill control are available. Test procedure waivers for this design option have been applied for, and in some cases a decision or order has been issued by the DOE. Using manufacturer supplied cost and efficiency data, this design option is analyzed as a method to improve clothes washer efficiency. Reduced thermalmass This'design optionuses a plastic tub to reduce the thermal mass that would be heated by the water. Tests by manufacturers indicate that very little energy can be saved this way because the bulk ofthe thermal mass is contained in the hot water. One manufacturer compared the impact ofboth porcelain enameled steel and polypropylene outer tubs on water temperature. Both machines were filled with 16 gallons of 140°F water and agitated for ten minutes. After ten minutes, there was no significant difference inwater temperature between thetwo machines. Calculations show that ifthere were no heat losses through the outer tub, the equilibrium temperature for the tested steel tub described above would be 138.9°F. Therefore, there is little to be gained by decreasing the thermal mass ofthe outer tub [31]. Plastic outertubs are commonly used by manufacturers and can be considered'as part ofthe baseline model. There is no practicable way to manufacture washing machines with a lower thermal mass beyond the current practice. Therefore, this design option is eliminated from further analysis.

2In the test procedure the terminology used is "adaptive water.fill control". 

### 12

N., * InJapan, Australia, and Asia, vertical aXis direct drive washers are currently available: Some horizontal axis machines also use a direct drive motor. Thus, using manufacturer supplied cost and. efficiency data, this design option is analyzed as**~**method to improve the clothes washer efficiency. 

### Automatic.fillcontrol Z /. This design optionincorporates advanced control technologies to sensetheclothes load and adjust the waterlevel accordingly. Fora'vertical axis machine, this may mean settingthe waterlevel tojust submerge the clothes load. This design optionwould overcome the tendency ofconsumers to manually select a water level greaterthat) required..
. Energyis saved in eitherthevertical orhorizontal axis designs by reducing theamount ofhot ,water used in the wash cycle. The future (Appendix 11) DOE test procedure (unlike the eXisting DOE test procedure) uses an actual clothes lo'ad and, therefore, possible savings due to this design option can be measured. Limiting performance factorsmentioned'by more than onemanufacturer for this'design option were: 1) gentleness ofaction and 2) wear. Washing machines with automatic fill control are available. Test procedure waivers for this ,design option have been applied for, and.in some cases a decision or order has been issued by the DOE. Using manufacturer supplied cost and efficiency data, this design option is analyzed as a method to improve clothes washer efficiency.
. " Reducedthermalmass This design option uses a plastic tub to reduce the thermal mass that would be heated by the water. Tests by manufacturers indicate that very little energy can be saved this way because thebulk ofthe thermal mass is contained in thehot water. One manufacturer compared the impact ofboth porcelain enameled steel and polypropylene outertubs on water temperature: Both machines were filled with 16 gallons of 140°Fwater and agitated for ten minutes. After ten minutes, there was no significant difference in water temperaturebetweenthetwomachines. Calculations showthat

### ifthere were no heat losses through the outer tub, the equilibrium temperature for the tested steel tub described above would be 138.9°F. Therefore, there is little to begained by decreasing thethermal

,mass ofthe Quter tub [31). Plastic outertubs are commonly used by manufacturers and can be considered'as part ofthe baseline model. There is no practicable way to**man~facture** washing machines with a lowerthermal mass beyond the current practice. Therefore, this design option is eliminated from further analysis.

2In the test procedure the tenninology used is "adaptive waterfill control"
.

. ,-.f 12

### Electrolyticdisassociation of water The goal ofelectrolytic dissociation ofwater is to reduce hot water usage by substituting the electrolytic production ofbleaching agents for the water heatingprocess. A prototype clothes washer with electrolytic dissociation ofwater has been successfully tested [32]. Although commercial detergents perform better at high temperatures, the same hypochlorite concentration obtained by addingbleaching agents to water canbe achieved at low temperatures, ifthe agents are produced by. electrolytic disassociation within the machine. The bleaching action is due to the chemical reaction of the oxygen (derived from the chemical decomposition ofthe hypochlorite) with the insoluble organic compounds that constitute the soil in the clothes. Together they make soluble compounds that are dissolved in the water. Electrolytic dissociation was tested in a laboratory.electrochemical cell. Medium soiled clothes and whitematerials were used inthe test. The washing cycle test was conducted in.two steps. The first waswith electrolytic action, which was performed by adding 4 gm/liter ofsalt to the room temperature water. The second stage was with a commercial detergent at a temperature of95°F to 113°F. The usual rinses, spinning, and drainage followed. Initial tests showed that energy use dropped from about 2.65 kWh/cycle for a typical washing machine to 1.35 kWh/cycle for the new electrochemical method. The costs ofsuch a system are not-available. Manufacturers do not feel that electrolytic dissociation is a workable approach. Primary concerns are negative effects on garments resulting from thebleaching process and poor consumer acceptance due to their inability to control the chemistry and temperature in the wash part ofthe cycle [33]. Since there are no commercially available or working prototypes for residential use, this design option is eliminated from further consideration. Ultrasonic washing The addition ofmechanical energy can reduce the need for hotwater (or chemical energy) in the cleaning action ofclothes washers. One potential method ofdelivering the mechanical energy is through ultrasonic vibrations that loosen and remove some ofthe dirt on the soiled clothes. Such washingmachines havebeen produced by a Japanese firm and were to be marketed in the U.S. One U.S. manufacturer ofclothes washers investigated the Japanese product and found that it did not successfully clean clothes. The U.S. firm stated that the Japanese company is an excellent manufacturer ofultrasonic transducers, but does not have experience with clothes washing. One of the problems with ultrasonic vibration is that clothes are not uniformly exposed to the vibrations generated by the transducers, which means that some areas remain soiled. Additionally, the wash solution and the submerged.clothes appear to dissipate much ofthe energy without being cleaned. Although ultrasonic vibration may be technically feasible, a design producing adequate. cleaning action does not appear to have been developed [34].

13**---~---------** -------::-----------:----------

. Electrolyticdisassociation of water Thegoal ofelectrolytic dissociation ofwateris to reduce hotwaterusage

## by substitutingthe
. electrolytic production ofbleaching agents for thewaterheating.process. A prototype clothes washer with electrolytic dissociation ofwater has been Successfully tested [32]. Although commercial detergents perfonn better at high temperatures, the same hypochlorite concentration obtained by addingbleaching agents towater

### Canbe achieved atlow temperatures, ifthe agents are producedby'
. electrolytic disassociation within the machine.. Thebleaching action is due to the chemical reaction ofthe oxygen (derived from the chemical decomposition ofthe hypochlorite) with the il1soluble organic compounds that constitute the soil in the clothes. Togetherthey make soluble compounds that are dissolved in the water.
. Electrolytic dissociation was tested in a laboratory.electrochemical cell. Medium soiled clothes andwhite materials were

### used inthetest. Thewashing cycletestwasconducted in.two steps
.. ,

. The

## first waswith electrolytic action, which was performed by adding 4 gmlliter ofsalt to theroom

. temperaturewater. ,The second stage was with a commercial detergent at a temperature of95

### OF to

113

### OF. The usual rinses, spinning, and drainage followed. Initial tests showed that energy use' dropped from about 2.65 kWh/cycle for

# a typical washing.machine to 1.35 kWh/cycle for the new electrochemical method. The costs**~f**such a system are not-available.

. , Manufacturers do not feel that electrolytic dissociation is a workable approach. Primary
..

.concerns are negative effects ongarments resulting from the bleaching process and poorconsumer acceptaflce due to theirinabilityto control the chemistry and temperature in the wash part ofthe cycle [33]. Sincethere are no commerciallyavailable or-working prototypes for residential use, this design
. option is**eliminat~d** from further consideration.
. Ultrasonic washing The addition ofmechanical energy can reduce the need for hotwater (or chemical energy) inthe cleaning action ofclothes washers. One potential methodofdelivering the'mechanical energy is

. through ultrasonic vibrations that loosen and remove sollie ofthe dirt on the soiled clothes. Such

washing machines have been produced by aJapanese firm and were to be marketed in the U.S. One U.S. manufacturer ofclothes washers investigated the Japanese product and fomid that it did not successfully clean clothes. The U.S. firm stated that the Japanese company is an'excellent manufacturer pfultrasonic transducers, but does not have experience with clothes washing.
. One oftheproblems with ultrasonicvibration is that clothes are not uniformly exposed to the

. vibrations generated by the transducers, which means that some areas remain soiled. Additionally, lite wash solution and the submerged.clothes appear to dissipate much ofthe energy without being cleaned. Although ultrasonic vibration may be technically feasible, a design producing adequate. cleaning action does not appearto have been developed [34].
.

13

--**---~------'------**

### Since there does not appear to be a commercially available product or a working prototype (that successfully cleans clothes), this design option is eliminated from further analysis. Bubbleaction Daewoo Electronics, Ltd. has developed an air bubble washing machine. This machine uses a low-profile bottom-hugging impeller typical in Asian-style vertical axis washers and combines it with a six-winged, rotating pulsator shaped to direct water in four directions. This pulsator also distributes airbubbles in different directions. Thebubbles are generated by a vibrating bellows which is driven by anelectromagnet. Bubbles are reported to increase the cleaning power ofthe washer in several ways: 1) byinducing a high-frequency pressure fluctuation near the clothes, 2) by increasing the dissolution ofdetergent, 3) by increasing the amount ofdissolved oxygen which increases the activity ofthe detergent, and 4) by lowering the viscosity ofthe wash water [35][36]. The Sharp Corporation also makes a bubble washer in which the bubble-generating device uses neuro-fuzzy logic controls. From a nozzle located at the bottom ofthe washer, air bubbles are generated by a computer-controlled pulsator and circulated upward in vertical and horizontal swirling motions. The controls adjust the amount ofwater use by using a single-tub design that washes the same amount oflaundry as a typical dual-tub (inner and outer) configuration. Water and detergent use are only 70% ofthat used in conventional dual-tub designs. Although sold in Japan, this machine is not yet marketed in the United States [37]. Standardized and independent tests have yet to be conducted on the performance ofthe bubble-action system, therefore the energy saving potential and performance ofa bubble action design option is unknown. This design option was proposed because of reports that such a machine was being manufactured in Korea and Japan. However, since there do not appear to be any energy savings studies from this design option, this design option is eliminated from further analysis. Ozonatedlaundering Currently, three manufacturers make ozonated laundering systems for commercial/institutional washers. The ozone, manufactured from ambient air, is injected into the water. There is some debate as to how the process ofthe ozonated cleaning exactly works, Some claim the ozone reacts with soluble soils, making them insoluble, after which the mechanical action ofthe washing separates the soils from the fabric. One manufacturer proposed that the energy inherent in ozone reduces water tension, makingthe water a better solvent. Energy is saved with this system because the water is not heated for light to moderately soiled laundry; in fact colder water retains a higher concentration of ozone for alonger time. Forheavily soiled laundry, temperatures'of 100-110°F are used. Also, since less chemicals are used, the rinsetime is minimized thereby reducing thetotal wash time. Economical ozone production is critical to the potential energy savings. One manufacturer estimates savings of 25% on "utility expenses" with installation ofits system. The expected cost and energy consumption for a residential ozonated wash system are unknown [38].

14 Since there does not appeartobea commercially available product ora working prototype
. (that successfully cleans clothes), this design optionis eliminated fromfurther analysis. Bubbleaction DaewooElectronics, Ltd. has developed an air bubble washing machine. This machine uses 

## . alow-profile bottom-hugging impeller typical in Asian-style vertical axis washers and combines it

with a six-winged,.rotating pulsator shaped to direct'Water in four directions. This pulsator also distributes airbubbles in different directions. Thebubbles are generated by a**~brating** bellows which is driven by an electromagnet. Bubbles are reported to increase the cleaning power ofthe washer in several ways: 1)byinducing a high-frequency pressure fluctuation near the clothes, 2) by increasing the dissolution ofdetergent, 3) by increasing the amount ofdissolved oxygen which increases the activity ofthe detergent, and 4)bylowering the viscosity ofthe wash water [35][36]. The Sharp Corporation also makes a bubble washer in which the bubble-generating device uses neuro-fuzzy logic controls. From a nozzle located at the bottom ofthe washer, air bubbles are generatedby a computer-controlled pulsatorand circulated upward in vertical and horizontal swirling motions. The controls adjust the amount ofwateruse by using a single-tub design that washes the same amount oflaundry as a typical dual-tub (inner and outer) configuration. Water and detergent use are only 70% ofthat used in conventional dual-tub designs. Although sold in Japan, this**m~chine** is n01 yet marketed in the United States [37]. Standardized and independenttests have yet to be conducted on the performance ofthebubble-actioIJ system, thereforethe energy saving potential and performance ofa bubble action design optionis unknown. This design option was proposed because of reports that such a machine was being manufactured in Korea and Japan. However, since there do not appear to be any energy savings studies from this design option, this design option is eliminated from further analysis. Ozonatedlaundering Currently, three manufacturers make ozonated laundering systems for**~mmerciaVinstitutional**

. washers. The ozone, manufactured from ambient air, is injected into the water. There is some debate as to how the process ofthe ozonated cleaning exactly works; Some claim the ozone reacts with soluble soils, making them insoluble, after which the mechanical action ofthe washing separates the soils from the fabric. One manufacturer proposed that the energy inherent in ozone reduces water tension, making the water abetter solvent. Energy is saved withthis system because the water.is not heated for light to moderately soiled laundry; in fact colderwaterretains a higher concentration of ozone for a longertime. Forheavily soiled laundry, temperatures·of100-110OF are used. Also, since less chemicals areused, the rinse time is 

### minimized therebyreducing the**tot~** wash time. Economical ozone production is critical to thepotential energy savings. One manufacturer estimates savings of 25%on "utility expenses" with installation ofits system. The expected cost and energy consumption for a residential ozonated wash system are unknown [38].
..



### .. 14

### There does not appear to be any commercially available or working prototype residential clothes washer using this design option. Therefore, this design option is eliminated from further analysis. 4. CONCLUSIONS For previously stated reasons, the design options in Table 4 were eliminated from further consideration. Table 4. Design Options Eliminated from FurtherAnalysis Improved WaterExtraction for RMC's of35% & 30% Suds Saving Reduced Thermal Mass Electric Disassociation ofWater' Ultrasonic Washing Bubble Action Ozonated Laundering


### Table 5 shows the design options remaining for further analysis. Table 5. Remaining Design Options Improved Fill Control Tighter tub tolerance Thermostatically controlled mixing valves (TCMV) Improved Water Extraction for RMC's of50% &40% Horizontal axis design Horizontal axis design with recirculation Automatic Fill Control Increased Motor Efficiency Direct Drive Motor Advanced Controls/ Sensors Added Insulation


### 15

N.* 

# "

There does not appear to be any

### co'mme~cially avaiiable or working prototype residential cloth.es washer using this design option. Therefore,,this design option is eliminated from further analysis. 

### 4. CONCLUSIONS For previously stated reasons, the design options in**Tabl~** 4 were eliminated from further

" ' consideration. 

### Table 4. Design Options Eliminated from FurtherAnalysis Iinproved WaterExtractionfor RMC's of3S% & 30% Suds Saving Reduced Thermal Mass Electric DisassociationofWater" Ultrasonic Washing Bubble Action Ozonated Laundering

Table 5 shows the design options remaining fO'r further analysis. 

### Table 5. Remaining Design Options, ImprovedFill Control Tightertub tolerance Thermostaticallycontrolledmixing valves (TCMV) Improved WaterExtraction for RMC's of50% &40% Horizontal axis design Horizontal axis design with recirculation Automatic Fill Control IncreasedMotorEfficiency Direct DriveMotor Advanced ControlsI Sensors Added Insulation
15 , I**.~.**

. r:

### REFERENCES 1. U.S. Department ofEnergy (DOE). 1996a. Procedures,Interpretations and Policiesfor Consideration of New orRevised EnergyConservationStandards for ConsumerProducts; Final Rule. Federal Register Vol. 61 No. 136, Appendix A to Subpart C ofPart 430

-- July 15, 1996. 2. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1994. Advance Notice ofProposedRulemaking, Federal Register, Vol. 59, No. 218, 10 CFR Part,430, Docket No. EE-RM-94-403, November 14, 1994. 3. U.S. Department ofEnergy (DOE). 1991. Energy ConservationProgram for Consumer Products:FinalRule Regarding Energy ConservationStandards for Three Types of ConsumerProducts. Code ofFederal Regulations, Title 10 Part 430, Vol. 56, No. 93, May 14, 1991. Docket No. CE-RM-88-101. 4. Ibid 5. U.S. DOE. 1994. Op cit. 

### 6. U.S. DOE. 1996a. Op. cit. 7. U:S. DOE. 1996b. Energy Conservation Program for ConsumerProducts:TestProcedure for ClothesWashersand ReportingRequirement for Clothes Washers,ClothesDryers, and Dishwasher.(61 Federal Register 17589, April 22, 1996.), 10CFR, Part 430, Docket No. EERM-94-230A. 8. Science Applications Inc., 1977. EnergyEfficiencyProgram for Clothes Washers, Clothes Dryersand Dishwashers,SAI-77-839, LaJolla, CA. p.4-45. 9. Association ofHome Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM). 1995. Commentson theAdvance Noticeof Proposed Rulemaking. DOEDocket No. EE RM-94-403, comment #27, May 8, 1995. 10. U.S. DOE. 1996b. Op cit. 11. AHAM. 1996. Comments on the SupplementalNotice of Proposed Rulemaking, Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedure for Clothes Washers Test Procedure, DOE Docket No. EE-RM-94-230A, comment #7, June 6, 1996. 12. Ibid 13. Arthur D. Little, Inc. (ADL). 1995. LaboratoryTestingof ClothesWashers,p.3-8, December, 1995, EPRI Report No. TR-105098.
16 , 

### REFERENCES 1.
. 'U.S" Department,ofEnergy (riDE). 1996a. Procedures, Interpretations andPoliciesjor
. Consideration oj New .orRevisedEnergyConservation Standards jor Consu"!erProducts; FinalRule. Federal Register Vol. 61 No. 136, Appendix A to Subpart C ofPart 430

-- July .15, 1996. ' 2. ,U,S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1994. Advance Notice ofProposed Rulemaking, 'Federal Register, Vol. 59, No. 218, 10 CFR Part,430, Docket'No. EE-RM-94-403,

November 14, 1994. 3. U.S. Department ofEnergy (DOE). 1991. Energy Conservqtion Programfor Consumer Products: f'inal Rule Regarding Energy ConsenJation Standardsfor Three Types of ConsumerProducts. Code ofFederal Regulations, Title 10 Part 430, Vol. 56, No. 93, May 14, 1991. DocketNo. CE-RM-88-101. 4. Ibid 5. US. DOE. 1994. Opcit. 6. US. DOE. 1996a. Op. cit. 7, US. DOE. 1996b. Energy.conservationProgram for ConsumerProducts: Tes! Procedure for Clothes Washers andReportingRequireme1Jt for Clothes Washers, ClothesDryers, and Dishwasher.-(61 Federal Register 17589, April 22, 1996.), lOCFR, Part 430, DocketNo. EERM-94-230A.
. . 8, Science Applications Inc., 1977. EnergyEffiCiencyProgramfor Clothes Washers, Clothes Dryersan4Dishwashers, SAI-77-839, LaJolla, CA. p.4-4S.

,- 9.
.Association ofRomeAppliance Manufacturers (AHAM). 1995. Comments on theAdvance Notice of ProposedRule.making. DOEDocket No, EE RM-94-403, comment #27, May 8, 1995. 10. US. DOE.' 1996b. Opcit.

. 11. AHAM. 1996. Comments on the SupplementalNotice of ProposedRulemaking, Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Prod,ucts: Test Procedure for Clothes Washers Test Procedure, DOEDocketNo. EE-RM-94-230A, comment #7, June 6, 1996. 12. Ibid



### . , 13. ArthurD. Little, Inc. (ADL). 1995. Laboratory Testing of Clothes Washers, p.3-8,**December~** ,1995, EPRI Report No. TR-I05098.
16

_
"-,



### ---- 

## --**-~.-~-- t';.-~-~~;r-------------'** 

### 14. U.S. DOE. 1996b. Op. cit. 15. U.S. DOE. 1996c. Federal Register, April 24, 1996, Volume 61, Number 80, Office ofEnergy Efficiency and Renewable Energy [Case No. CW-004]. Energy Conservation Program for ConsumerProducts:Granting oftheApplicationforInterim WaiverandPublishingofthe Petition for Waiver ofGeneral ElectricAppliances from the DOEClothes Washer Test Procedure. 16. Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE). High Efficiency Clothes Washer Initiative, Qualifying Products as of7/9/96. 17. ADL. 1995. Op. cit. 18. B. Lebot, I. Turiel, G.Rosenquist. 1990. "Horizontal Axis Domestic Clothes Washers: An Alternative Technology that CanReduce Residential Energy and Water Use". Proceedings of theACEEE 1990 SummerStudy onEnergyEfficiency inBuildings,Volume 1, Building Equipment and Appliances, p.1.147-1.156. 19. A. Cahn. 1994. The Laundering Process, handout presented at the Workshop on Home Laundry Energy Standards Regulatory Issues, Washington, D.C., November 11, 1994. 20. Procter & Gamble, Commentson theAdvanceNotice of Proposed Rulemaking, DOE Docket No. EE RM-94-403, comment #9, January 20, 1995. 21. AHAM. 1995. Op. cit. 22. Electrolux product literature. Newfor '93,Domotechnica. 23. U.S. DOE. 1996b. Op. cit. 24. Appliance Manufacturer, April 1995, p.27. 25. Appliance Manufacturer, February 1995, p.E-58 26. Appliance, "New Ways ofWashing", September 1992, Vol. 49, No. 9, p.75. 27. Appliance, September 1995, p.51. 28. Maytag 1996. Comments on the SupplementalNotice of Proposed Rulemaking, Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedure for Clothes Washers Test Procedure, DOE DocketNo. EE-RM-94-230A, comment #8, June 6, 1996. 29. Raytheon 1996. Comments on the SupplementalNoticeofProposed Rulemaking, Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedure for Clothes Washers Test Procedure, DOE Docket No. EE-RM-94-230A, comment #9, June 6, 1996.
17 14. U.S. DOE. 1996b. Op. cit. 15. U.S. DOE. 1996c. FederalRegister, Apri124, 1996, Volume 61, Number 80, Office ofEnergy Efficiency and Renewable Energy [CaseNo. CW-004]. Energy C;onservation Programfor ConsumerProducts: Grantingof theApplicationforInterim Waiver andPublishingof the Petitio'; for Waiver ofGeneralElectricAppliances from the DOE Clothes Washer Test Procedure. 16. Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE). High Efficiency Clothes Washer Initiative, QualifyingProductsas of7/9/96. 17. 

### ADL. 1995: Op. cit. 18. B. Lebot, I. Turiel, G. Rosenquist. 1990. "Horizontal Axis Domestic Clothes Washers: An Alternative Technology that Can ReduceResidential Energy and WaterUse". Proceedings of theACEEE 1990 Summer Study onEnergyEfficiency inBuildings, Volume 1, Building Equipment and Appliances, p.1.147-1.156. 19. A. Cahn. 1994. The LaunderingProcess, handout presented at the Workshop on Home**L~undry** Energy Standards Regulatory Issues, Washington, D.C., November II, 1994. 20. Procter& Gamble, Commentson theAdvanceNotice of ProposedRulemaking, DOEDocket No. EE RM-94-403, comment #9,**J~nuary** 20, 1995. 21. AHAM. 1995. Op. cit. 22. Electrolux product literature. New for '93, Domotechnica. 23. U.S. DOE. 1996b. Op. cit. 24. Appliance Manufacturer, April 1995, p.27. 25. Appliance Manufacturer, February 1995, p.E-58 26. Appliance, "NewWays ofWashing", September 1992, Vol. 49, No.9, p.75. 27. Appliance, September 1995, p.51. 28. Maytag 1996. Comments on the Supplemental Notice of ProposedRulemaking, Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedure for Clothes Washers Test Procedure, DOE DocketNo. EE-RM-94-230A, comment #8, June 6, 1996. 29. Raytheon 1996. Comments on the SupplementalNotice of ProposedRulemaking, Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test Procedure for Clothes Washers Test Procedure, DOE DocketNo. EE-RM-94-230A, comment #9, June 6, 1996.
17

### 30. S. Kristic, J. Pardee, "Direct" Comparison Assessing the Energy Efficiency Impact ofa Transmission-Less Motor-Drive System for Conventional Clothes Washers, Proceedings of the 44thAnnualInternational Appliance.TechnicalConference,p. 101, May 1993. :31. U.S. DOE. 1990. Technical SupportDocument: Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Products:Dishwashers,Clothes Washers, andClothesDryers,p.3-14, DOE/CE0299P, December 1990. 32. Ibid p.3-15. 33. Ibid.p.3-15. 34. Ibid.p.3-15. 35. ApplianceManufacturer,"Big Plans for Tiny Bubbles", p.32, December 1994. 36. Appliance, "Sorting Through Laundry", p.35, September-1994. 37. I. Turiel, et al., Evaluationof Advanced Technologies for ResidentialAppliances and Residential and Commercial Lighting, January 1995, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, LBL-35982. 38. ElectricPower Research Institute (EPRI). 1996. OzoneLaundering:A Better Wash Process for CommercialLaundries,TechnicalBrief RP2890,March 1996.

18 30. S. Kristic, 

### J. Pardee, "Direct" Comparison Assessing the Energy Efficiency Impact ofa Transmission-Less'Motor-Drive System for Conventional Clothes Washers, Proceedings of the 44thAnnualInter.natio1Ui1Appliance.Technical Conference, p.101, May 1993. '

. . . . 

### :31. U.S. DOE. 1990. Technical Support Document: Energy Conservation Standardsfor ConsumerProducts: Dishwashers, Clothes Wt;lShers,ahdClothesDryers, p.3-14, DOE/CE0299P, December 1990. 32. Ibid p.3-15. 33. Il!id p.3-15. 34. ' ,Ibid p.3-15. 35. ApplianceManufacturer, "BigPlans for Tiny Bubbles", p.32, December 1994. 36. Appliance, "Sorting ThroughLaundry", p.35, September·1994. 37. I. Turiel, et al., Evaluation of Advanced Technologiesfor ResidentialAppliances and Residential and Commercial Lighting, January 1995, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, LBL-35982. 38. ElectricPowerResearch Institute (EPRI). 1996. Ozone Laundering:A Better Wash Process for CommercialLaundries. TechnicalBrief RP2890, March 1996.

18