### Federal Register / Vol. 51, No. 192 / Friday, October 3. 1986 

## I Notices 

### 35403

Office of Conservation and Renewable Energy [CaseNo. CAC-(I01] Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products; Decision and Order Granting Waiver From Test Procedures for Central Air Conditioners, Including Heat Pumps, to CarrierCorp.

AGENCY: Department ofEnergy. ACTION:Decision and order.

SUMMARY: Notice illgiven ofthe Decision and Order (Case No. CAC-ool) granting Carrier Corporation a waiver for its variable speed (VSP) model carrier air conditioners and heat pumps for existingDOE test procedures for central air conditioners and heat pumps. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael

### J. McCabe, U.S. Department of

Energy, Office ofConservation and Renewable Energy. Mail Station CE132, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW

.. Washington. DC 20585. (202) 252-9127 Eugene Margolis. Esq., U.S. Department

ofEnergy, Office ofGeneral Counsel. Mail Station Gv12. Forrestal Building. 1000 Independence Avenue SW

.. Washington. DC 20585. (202) 252-9513 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.: In accordance with 10 CFR 430.27(g). notice is hereby given ofthe issuance ofthe Decision and Order set out below. Inthe Decision and Order. Carrier Corporation has beengranted a waiverfor its variable speed central air conditioners and heatpumps. permitting the company to use an alternate test method.

Issued inWashington. DC. September 19. 1986. 

### John R. Berg, Principal. DeputyAssistantSecretary, ConservationandRenewableEnergy.

In the Matter of: Carrier Corporation. The Energy Conservation Program for ConsumerProducts was established pursuant to the Energy Policy and ConservationAct, Pub. L 94-163. 89 Stat. 917. as amended by the National Energy Conservation PolicyAct, Pub. L 95-619, 92 Stat. 3266, which requires the Department ofEnergy (DOE) to prescribe standardized test procedures to measure the energy consumption of certain consumerproducts. including central air conditioners. The intent of the test procedures is to provide a comparablemeasure ofenergy consumption that will assist consumers in making purchase decisions. These test procedures appear at 10 CFR Part 430. SubpartB.

The Department ofEnergy amended the prescribed test procedure regulations by adding paragraph 430.27 to allow the Assistant Secretaryfor Conservation andRenewable Energy to waive temporarily test procedures for a particularbasicmodel when a petitioner shows that the basic model contains one ormore design characteristics which prevent testing ofthe basic model according to the prescribed test procedures orwhen the prescribed test proceduresmay evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative ofits true energy consumption characteristics 8S to provide materially inadequate comparative data. 45 FR 64108 (September 26. 1980).

Carrier Corporation (Carrier) fjled a "Petition for Waiver" in accordance with paragraph 430.27 of 10 CFR Part 430. DOE published in the Federal Register Carrier's petition and solicited comments. data. and information respecting the petition. Comments wer", received from Lennox Industries Inc

.. Rheem Manufacturing Company. and Borg-Warner Air Conditioning. all manufacturers ofair conditioners and heat pumps. Comments were also received from Coil Company. Inc

.. manufacture ofheat transfer and air hC\ndling systems. The comments received byDOE were sent to the petitioner on March 25. 1986. The petitioner submitted DOE a rebuttal statement to the comments on April 11. 1986. DOE consulted with the Federal Trade Commission on May 23. 1986. concerning the Carrierpetition.
Aasertations 

### and Determinations

Carrier's petition seeks a waiver from the DOE test procedures for central air conditioners and heat pumps for Carrier's variable speed units. The petition requests authorization to substitute the test and calculation methods inAppendix B ofthe Air Conditioning andRefrigeration Institute (ARI) Standard 210/240-84 for the test and calculation methods in Appendix M to SubpartB of 10 CFR Part430. In addition. the petitionrequests five modifications to Appendix BofARI Standard 210/240-84 to be included in the waiver to allow proper representation ofthe unique operating characteristic ofthe equipment.

All interested parties, including DOE. agree that the existing test and calculationmethods ofApendix M to SubpartBof 10 CFR Part430 are inappropriate for variable speed units. All interested parties also agree that appropriate test and calculation methods ofvariable speed units would be those based onAppendix BofARI Standard 210/240-84 with modifications. However, there is nol total agreement with Carrier's requested modifications to AppendixBofARI Standard 210/240- 84. Consequently, the following five determinations are made regarding the five modifications requested by Carrier.

1. The ARJ Standard210/240 includes a'cyclic test pattern which represents 20 percentcompressor "on" time, i.e

.. the compressorruns for six minutes ofa 30 minute cycle (6/30=.2). Since efficiency isthe quotient ofoutput capacity and input energy, the cyclic efficiency is determined by actual measurement of cooling capacity and electric energy

### 35404 

### Federal Register"Vol. 51. 

### No. '192 

## I Friday. October 3. 1986 

## I Notices

'during this cyclic test. Since cooling can continue after the compressoris off. the 'ARI standard allows cooling capacity to be measured for the compressor·"on" period plus an additional two minutes. i.e.• a capacity integration period of eight minutes.
,

Carrier states that the microprocessor. control on its variable speed units has a minimum run time of12minutes; and as such. itis not possible for an "on" period ofless than 12 minutes to occur in normal operation ofthe equipment. Consequently Carrierrequests that the cyclic test patternrepresenting a 20 percent "on" time fraction consisting of six minutes "on" and 24 minutes "ofP' be replacedby a cyclic test pattern representing a 20.percent "on" time fraction consisting of12 minutes "on" and48 minutes "off." Regarding the capacityintegration period. Carrier requests 14 minutes. which is consistent with the ARI standard. i.e.• compressor run time plus two minutes.

In their comments. Lennox and Rheem suggested different "on" time fractions from that simulated by a six minutes "on" and 24 minutes "ofr' cycle. Although Lennox agteed to the requested 12 minutes "on" time. Lennox suggested 18minutes "ofP' time asmore realistic. substantially shorterto run and providing necessary repeatability. BorgWarner supported 12 minutes "on" and. 48 minutes "ofP' cyclic test with the reservation that this test cycle is only appropriate for variable speed systems that can operate down to approximately 50 percent compressor speed orlower. Borg-Warner also commented in support ofthe 14-minute capacityintegration period requested by Carrier.

Responding to the Lennox andRheem comments. Carrier agreed that it is the intent ofthe cyclic test to model a unit satisfying a building load. Therefore. it is not necessary to perform the test with' the same fractional run time (loading) as single speed and two speed units. In response to the Borg-Warnercomment,

. Carrier agreed that the proposed 12

minutes "on" and 48 minutes "ofP' cycle test should be allowed only for systems which have ability to modulate capacity to approximately 50 percent orless of maximum capacity.

The National Bureau ofStandards (NBS) andDOE reviewed this request in terms ofcompatibility with variable speed system operation. existing DOE procedures and the thermostat theory. The analysis showed that 12 minutes "on" time. ·18 minutes "ofP' time will

.constitute a cycle that is compatible with a residential thermostat curve

.while 12 minutes "on" and 18 minutes

"ofP' cycle will not. Furthermore. the cyclic test requested by Carrier , represents an,"on" time fraction, 20 " }:I,ercent, that is consistent with the existing DOE test procedures. It also appears that a cyclic test with a longer "ofP' period will provide conservative ,(lower) efficiency results. DOE
, considers such conservative results appropriate until the Department addresses this issue thoroughly in the test procedure amendment process.

Carrier's request to set the capacity integration period to 14 minutes allows for a two-minute capacityintegration after compressor shut-off. as does the ARI method. However, DOE believes that the capacity integration time should not be extendedbeyond the ' compressor's time ofoperationbecause itwould result in over-estimations of unit capacity. Furthermore. in the current test procedure, the capacity integration time equals the compressor's time ofoperation.

Based on all ofthe above, DOE has determined that Carrier should be " granted a waiver to perform a cyclic test ofits variable speed systems at 12 minutes "on" and48 minutes "ofP' compressor operation and a 12-minute capacity integration time, with' limitation thatthis waiver apply onlyto systems that canmodulate down to approximately 50 percentmaximum capacity or lower.

2. The primary efficiency advantage of'
a variable speed unit is the ability to avoid cycling losses for most ofthe cooling (or heating) season. Specifically, cycling losses are avoided when the unit modulates its speed to meet a partial load rather thancycle on and off. The range ofoutdoortemperatures for which the unit does not cycle is called the load matching region. To capture this advantage in the analytic geometry of the SEER calculations, ARI procedures require an additional test point termed the intermediate test point. This test is in addition to the already required high speed/high outdoor temperature test and the lower speed/lower outdoor temperature test. All agree that the intermediate test should be reflective of the loan matching region. However, specifying the laboratory test conditions for the intermediate testis a difficult matter, since cooling load and the unit's cooling capacitybothvary with outdoor temperature.

The ARI procedures require the intermediate test to be conducted at an intermediate outdoor temperature of 87°F. The capacityofthe unit during this test is to be 67 percent ofthe capacity measured during the high speed/high outdoor temperature test. This specification method requires the conductor ofthe laboratory test to "hunt" interactive!y for the correct i '." -'I 

## ! intermediate compressor speed to "

. satisfy the specifications. In lieu ofthe

ARI method ofspecification, Carrier requests a less burdensome specification based on outdoor temperatures'and compressor

### speed. Specifically, Carrierrequests testing at the intermediate outdoor temperature of 87°F, identical to the ARI procedures, 

### i and any compressor speedbetween i maximum and minimum speeds. Carrier lcontends that the capacity and power ;for an appropriate intermediate test

,point can be determined using the

:minimum speed, intermediate speed and

i maximum speed test points to find the 

## !outdoor temperature at which the

. ;equipment capacity intersects the load i line (respective equations are included ;in the petition). The capacity and power :values for this intersection can be then ;used as the intermediate speed test '.results for determining SEER. Carrier 

### istates that the present specificalionof
:the intermediate testpoint by the 

### itemperature conditions and equipment ;capacity requires an iterative test and is

,unnecessarily burdensome.Lennox,

. . :Rheem, andBorg-Warner commented on ;this request. Lennox considered an

·arbitrary speed test as unacceptable and

• questioned the technical feasibility of 'auditing such a test point. Lennox also
was concerned that such a testwould be ;run at the lowest possible speed to

· increase the SEER. Rheem also opposed

·the petitioner's request and insisted that the intermediate testpoint be specified ,by the temperature conditions and ,capacity. Rheem suggested 

### ± 2percent, ;allowance for variation from the test 'value to the calculated building load 'value. Rheem also contended that allowing the compressor speed to vary between the minimum andmaximum :value would introduce excessive errors 'when attempting to adjust the test ivalues. Borg-Warner requested sample ,calculations that would allow better understanding ofCarrier's proposal.

.Inits,rebuttal to these comments," Carriermaintained again that specification ofthe intermediate speed point by capacity was impractical.

. However, Carrier suggested that an improvement to its requested method for the intermediate speed test would be to bracket the speed range from 

### Va to 1f2 between minimum and maximum speed in lieu ofany speed betweenminimum and maximum. Carrier also stated that verification ofthe efficiency claim by an "audit test," conducted by ARI in its certification program, maybe conducted. ' at any speed. Carrier explained that the adjustment method based on high speed

.. and low speed test points will always match the intermediate speed point to

### Federal Register 

## I Vol. 51, No. 192 

## I Friday, October 3, 1986 

## I Notices 35405

the load line, and the effect ofchanging corrected with respect to temperature to the intermediate speed value from test find the intersection with the heating to test should be within the uncertainty load line in the same manner as the ofthe test data. Carrier's rebuttal also intermediate speed cooling point. contained an example ofcalculations for Carrier contends that the frost the intermediate speed point as accumulation test run at maximum requested by Borg-Warner. speedis notwell-matched to the load

DOE accepts Carrier's argument lhat line and, as a result, has almost no an intermediate speed test specified, in influence on the HSPF.

. part, by equipment capacityis Lennox, Rheem and Borg-Warner

excessively burdensome. Also, after commented on this request. Lennox reviewing information prepared by the commented that maximum speed petitioner and in consultation with NBS, capacity is well-matched to the load line DOE accepts the bracketed speed since 35 °

### temperature is very close to provision ofthe intermediate test point the balance point in most residences. As suggested by Carrier and agrees that with the intermediate test point for correcting the capacity and powerbased cooling, Lennox expressed concern on low and high speed test points is a about the technical feasibility of reasonable method for evaluating the auditing an arbitrary speed test point. intermediate performance ofa variable Lennox also was concerned that the speed unit. However, DOE concluded intermediate test point would berun at that material submitted by the petitioner lowest possible speed to increase the does nol support entirely its statement coefficient ofperformance (COP).: that verifying the intermediate speed Rheem suggested that the test canbe done by running the "audit intermediate speed should be specified test" at any speed. Consequently, DOE in relationship to building load, which has determined that verification ofthe would parallel the cooling intermediate intermediate cooling test should be speed determination. Borg-Warner also performed by testing at the same speed recommended that the frost
as the manufacturer's test. accumulation test be conducted at the

3. In its petition Carriermaintained same compressor speed as that used for that, in order to evaluate fairly its the 95 OF outdoor temperature for the variable speed unit, an appropriate cooling mode. intermediate test point is needed for the Responding to Lennox's comment. heating performance procedures as well Carrier stated thatwhile maximum
as the cooling performance procedures. speed capacitymay be well matched to However, because ofthe added the load line at 35 OF in actual complexities ofthe heating performance residences, it

### is not true for the evaluation procedures. an appropriate prescribedheating load line. Rebutting intermediate test point is not easily Rheem's comment. the petitioner defined. Specifically, unlike cooling proposed to bracket the speed at the performance which is based on a single intermediate heating point, as for the sizing, i.e., the relationship ofthe cooling mode, in the range from 

### %to % 

### capacity ofthe unit to the cooling load betweenminimum and maximum speed. at design conditions, heating In response to the Borg-Warner performance is based on several comment, Carrier stated that the different sizing possibilities. Also, the building load at 35 OF, as shown in the heating evaluation procedures already example, is only slightly greater than the include a test point at an intermediate unit capacity atminimum speed. Carrier outdoor temperature, called the frost contended thatrunning a defrost test at accumulation test point. This test point l 

### the maximum speed would mean • is designed to capture the degradation in requiring variable speed heatpumps to performance due to the frosting and satisfy a different load line than it

### is defrosting ofa heat pump and is required forsingle- and two-speed heat specified in ARI and DOE procedures to pumps. be run at maximum speed with 35 OF DOE analyzed Carrier's request in outdoor temperature. Carrier claims the consultation with NBS and determined 3S0F outdoor temperature is·appropriate that an intermediate speed frost for an intermediate test point but the accumulation test is appropriate for the maximum speed provision is Carrier variable speedunit in lieu ofthe inappropriate. Carrier is seeking maximum speed frost accumulation test modifications to Appendix Ballowing contained in DOE and ARI procedures. the test to beperformed at an However, where Carrier felt the intermediate speed specified as a value compressor speed for the intermediate between the minimum and maximum test could be specified as any speeds for the equipment. Carrier states compressor speed between maximum that the capacity and power ofthe and minimum. DOE and NBS believe intermediate speed testpoint may be more guidance is needed regarding this intermediate speed specification. Specifically, today's Decision and Order requires.the intermediate compressor ' speed to be high enough to obtain system capacitythat is.95 percent or
more ofthe building load at 35 OF for which the HSPF is being calculated. It 

### is believed this specification is necessary to avoid testing atunrealistically low compressor speeds which could
, overstate the performance improvement due variable speed units.

4. Carrierrequests that HSPF for variable speedheatpumps that employ
a demand defrost control be increased

. by four percent instead ofmaking any· adjustments to the frost accumulation test point data as provided in the current test procedure. Carrier contends that a simple increase ofthe capacity at the frost accumulation test by seven percent (AppendixM to SubpartBof Part430, § 

### 5.2) is not appropriate since the HSPF calculation method for variable speed systems is substantially different from thatfor single speed systems. Carrier's request for a four percent HSPF credit is based on an analysis ofcomments on the proposed rule aspublished in the December 1979 final rule. 44 FR 76703 (December 27, 1979).

Lennox and Borg-Warner commented
on this request. Lennox stated that a demand defrost credit should be applied to the testpoint which it 

### affects and should be consistent with the test procedures currently being used. BorgWarner supported the HSPF enhancementrequested by Carrier.

The enhancementfactor for a demand defrost control system wasintroduced byDOE in order "to compensate for improved performance not measured in the FrostAccumulationTest". 44 FR 76714 (December 27,1979). The enhancementfactor was introduced for· single-speed and two-speed systems because otherwise the calculation would
assume that a system with a demand defrost controlwould defrost as often as a system with a time defrost control, while at weatherconditions other than those specified in the Frost AccumulationTest, a system with a demand defrost control would defrost only when necessary.

Based on available evidence, DOE has concluded that in the case ofa variable speedheatpump, most ofthe performance improvement due to a demand defrost control would be measured in the Frost Accumulation Test run at intermediate speed. For example, it appears that a frost accumulation test run at a low speed to match the minimum prescribedbuilding load with system capacity would result

### 35406

.Federal Register 

## I Vol. 51. 

### No. 192 

## I Friday, October 3, 1986 

## I Notices

: ..; 

### in minimal orno frostorelated. degradation.ifthe system is equipped with a demanddefrost control. If

### the system will not defrost during the test. the maximum improved performance will be measured by the test.

In conclusion. DOE determined not to grant Carrier's request for 

### a flat four percent HSPF enhancement factor for demand defrost control system. Instead. DOE is granting anenhancement factor ranging from zero to four percent,

.adjustable according to the numberof

· defrost cycles in a 12-hourperiod.

Accordingly. today's Decision and Order·

· included anequation allowing a full

· enhancement credit for heatpumps

having the defrost test period less than

· 90 minutes, and linearly. based on the

numberofdefrost cycles saved. prorates the enhancement credit for longer test periods resulting in zero credit if

### a testedheat pump does notgo into defrost during a 

### 12-hour test.

5. 

### In addition to varying the compressor speed. Carrier'S unit also varies the Indoor airfan speed with various partloads, Carrierrequested

· that the indoor airflow rate atfan

· speeds less than the maximum speedbe

.

determined 8S 

### the ratio offan speed to maximum fan speed multiplied by air' flow atmaximum fan speed. The

.petitioner states thatpresentstandards. DOE's andARl's, do notprovide
, instructions for determining the indoor
mass flow ofairatintermediatefan speeds.

Borg-Warner commented in support of this request stating that the Carrier. requested method for determining air

. mass flow rate was used by Borg-::

..., .., Warneron its variable speedheat pumps.

Based on the information provided by the petitionerand the commenters. DOE has determined to grant Carrier's request for the method for determining indoor air mass flow rate.

It

### is, therefore ordered that: (1) 

### The "Petition ofWaiver" filed by Carrier Corporation (CAC-{)Ol) iR hereby granted as set forth in paragraph (Z) below, subject to the provisions of paragraphs (3) and (4).

(2) 

### Notwithstanding any contrary provisions ofAppendix M 

### of 10 CFR Part 430 Subpart B, Carrier Corporation shall be permitted to test its vat'iable speed (VSP) model heatpumps and cooling units on the basis specified in 10 CFR Part 430, wilh the modifications set forth below:

(i) Test

### Procedure. Testprocedures shall be as specified in section 5ofARI Standard 210/Z40-84 and in section 8.0 ofANSI/ASHRAE Standard 116-1983, with the inclusion ofthe following conditions. (Al Cooling GIld

### heatingcycletests . " shall be conducted by cycling the compressor 12 minutes "on" and48 minutes "off'.The capacity and all electrical energy shall be measured for the compressor "on" time or12 minutes. All off-cycle electrical energy shallbe measured for the compressor48 minutes "off' time. Off-cycle electrical energy does notinclude fan power.

(B) 

### Intermediate coolingandheating steady-statetests shall beconducted at indoor coil andoutdoor coil air conditions selected for the intermediate cooling steady-state test and heating' frost accumulation test. respectively, in TableB1 ofARI StandardZ10/240-84. The tolerances for the dry-bulb and wetbulb temperatures ofthe air entering the indoor and outdoorcoils shall bewithin the test operating tolerance and test condition tolerance specified in

### Table

when·:. CFMv 

### = volumetric speed less

CFMmax = 

### volumetricIII-A ofANSIIASHRAE Standard 116- 1983. the intermediate compressorspeed' during the cooling test shall beinthe

. range from '13 to 'Iz between the minimum andmaximum speed.The intermediate compressor speed during

. the frost accumulation test shallbe high

.. enough to obtain system capacity that is 95 percent ormore ofthe building load at 35 

### OF for which HSPF is to be calculated. Determination ofthe compressor speed shall be conducted by

. a methodwhichhas the ability to provide results withless than two percent error.'

'The air volumetric flow rate at fan speeds less than the maximum speed shallbe determined u'sing the fanlaws for a fixed resistance sytems. The ' following equation shallbe used to calculate the flow rate ofair:

flow rate of air at fan. than maximum speed

flow rate of air at the:



### .max imum. fan ,speed "**RPM~** 

## ,. the fan speed for: which air: flQw. rate is'

calculated:



### = the max imum·.,fan speed'

Fan speed shallbe determinedby a methodhaving the ability-to**provid~** 

### results with uncertaintyless than.two compressorunits, as specified in 

### ANSI/

. ASHRAEStandard.116-1983 andARI;

. Standard**ZlO/Z4(),-84.an~** 

### in accordap.ce·, wLth the following changes.The

....,'
._ . capacity for the unit modulating at the intermediate compressor speed (k=v) at percent.

.

(ii) 

### SeasonalEnergyEfficiencyRatio, SEER. The SEER shall be determinedby the method for two-speed ortwo

- any temperature 

### (tal shallbedefined as:

wherel Q"<"(87) flS +

tl>e capacity of the unit at 870F**det~rmined** by the intermediat.e cooUna steady-state test Mq • slope of the capacity curve for the intermediate compressor speed (k=v)

M 

## =

a k= I kc< 1 

### ess (62)

- Qss (67)

62

- 67



### * k=2 k=2 

# °

55 (95)

- 055 (82)
95- 82

Ok=2(87)

ss k= 1 - Qss (67)

k=v Where: All O's, except for Q (87), are determined by**AN5I/ASH~** 116-1983 ana ARI**Standar~** 2107240-64 by test or linear interpolation.

### Federal Register 

## I Vol. 51, No. 192 

## I Friday, October 3, 1986 

## I Notices 

### 35407

Once the equation for Qk=V(t.lhas been determined, the lemperature where Qk=V(I.)=BL(I.) can be follnd. This temperature is designated as Iv. and replaces 87 ofin the equations for Case II in Appendix BofARI Standard 210/ 240-34. Th,e electrical powerinput for the unit operating at the intermediate compressor speed (k=v) and the temperature (tve) shall be defined!as:

"I . • f**~** ;**~,** 0> ! .!



### :: .'

. ,j' • . ! ; :**~'.** where: k=v k=v ESg (tvc ) =**E~5** (87) + ME (tvc - 87)

### E~:v(87) z the electrical power input of the urit at 87 0 F determined by the intermediate cooling steady-state test

ME 

## = slope of the electrical power input curv'e for the intermediate compressor speed (k-v)

k"v Whetp:' All'E's, except Es (87),are'determined'from ANSI/AbHAAt:. 116-1983. and ARI Stannard i!0/240-84 by test or linear interpolation.

Once**E~;2(tvc)** has been netermined, 

### 'it replaces Ek"'v(87) in the equations for Case II in Appendix B of AId

55 . '**Stand~td** 210/240-84. "';

, (iii) Heating SeasonalPerformance ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 116-1983 and ARI Standard 210/240-84, and in accordance with the following changes. The capacity for the unit modulating at the intermediate compressor speed (k=v) at any temperalure (t,,) shall be defined as: Factor. HSPF. ,The HSPF shall be determined by the method for two-speed

or two compressor units, .as specified in

k=v where: 0nef (35) 

## = ,the capacity of the unit at J50p determined at the interme(liate compressor speed (k=v) in defrost accumulation test



## = slope of the capacity curve for the intermediate compressor speed (k=v)



### = Ok=1(62) -Ok=1(47) 55. 5S 62 47

(lk=l(47)

- Ok=2(17)

55 55
47

- 17

### O~:¥(35) -

### O~;1(35)**0~~2(J5) Q~~1(35)**  wnere: All O'!O', exc/>ot**O~=¥** (35), are determined from ANSI/ASIlAAE Standard i16-1983 and ARI Standard 210/24u-84**lip~ar** interpolation. by test or ,,:

### 35403 Federal'Register 

## I Vol. 51, No. 192 I-Friday, Octollcr 3, 1986 / Notices

Once the equation for Qk=V(tx)=BL(t.)

..has been determined, the temperature

where Qk=·(t.=BL{t.) canbefound. This temperature is designated as IvlI• A



## where: ala U _
separate tv" shall be determined for each design heating requirement.

The electrical power input for the unit operating at the intermediate compressor speed {k=v) and at the temperature (tvlI) shall be defined as:



## the electrical power input of the unit at 3SoF determined at the intermediate compressor speed (k=v) in the frost accumulation test

= slope of the electrical power input curve for the intermediate compressor speed (k=v) Ek=1(62)

_ Ek=l (47) ME 

# = ss ss 

# * (1 - N E) 62

- 47 Ek=2- (47)


# - Ek=2 (17) 

## + 

## NE ss ss 47

- 17 Ek=v (35) _ Ek=l (35) NE 

# = ss ss J:;k=2 ss (35) Ek=l ss (35)

Where: All E's except Ek: V

## (35) are determined from ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 116-1983 and ART 

## Standard 210/240-84 bv test or linear interpolation.

-

The following sectionreplaces Case II in section 2.2 ofARI 210/240-84. 

### Casell

, When the compressor speed varies between the maximum speed (k=2) and minimum speed (k=l) suchthat k=v to satisfy the building load at temperature tJ evaluate the following equations:

BILLING CODE 64S0-01-M

### Federal Register 

## I Vol. 51. No. 192 

## I Friday. October 3. 1986 

## I Notices



## where:

where: Ek=v{t·) 

## ss , J.

Ek=v (t. )

S9 JH 2. U 

### Qk=v(t.) = BL (t.)



## ss J J



## steady-state capacity delivered by the unit at any speed between the minimum and maximum compressor speeds at temperature tj



# .. Ek=v 

## (tVH)

ss 

# * '-'r



# = the electrical power input required by the

unit at temperature t· and at a variable compressor speed

## betw~en**tH~** minimum and maximum compressor speeds



# = the electrical power input required by the unit at temperature tVH and at the intermediate compressor speed (k=v), as determined above '



# = the electrical power input required by the unit at temperature t3 and at the minimum compressor speed 

# r

t3.=

## temperat~re at which

## Q~:l (tj) 

# = BL (tj)



## +

where: the electrical power input required by the unit at temperature t4 and at the maximum compressor speed

=**temperatur~** 

## at which Qk=2 

## (t·) = BL(t·) 

## t4 ss J J

BllllNr;; CODE 6450-o1-C 

### 35409

a

### 35410 Federal Register 

## I Vol. 51, No. 192 

## I Friday. October 3. 1986 

## I Notices

For air-source units with variablespeed compressors that are equipped with "demand defrost control systems", the value for HSPF. as determined above shall be multiplied by an enhancement factor. 

### Ecsef' to compensate for improved performance not measured in the Frost Accumulation Test.

## F~ef 

# = 1 + 

## 0.04 N;l

where: n 

# = 720/t, or 8, whichever is smaller The factor. Fder• depends on the number ofdefrost cycles in a 12-hour period (n) and should be calculated as follows:



## t 

# = length of the frost accumulation test period in minutes

(3) The waiver shall remain in effect from the date ofissuance ofthis Order until the Department ofEnergy prescribes final test procedures appropriate to the type ofvariablespeed central air conditioners and heat pumps manufactured by Carrier Corporation.

(4) This waiver is based upon the prescribed validity ofstatements. allegations. and documentary materials submitted by the applicant and commenters. This waivermay be revoked or modified at any time upon a determination that the factual basis underlying the application is incorrect.
IFR Doc. 65-22354 Filed 10-2-66; 6:45 am]

BlWNG CODE 6450-01

....