# ASRAC Commercial and Industrial Fans and Blowers Working Group (WG) Meeting Summary

Washington DC, 950 L’Enfant Plaza, June 3

- 4 , 2015

1. Homework

- AHRI: Data collection results for next meeting (06/22)

- AHRI to send Laura G. Petrillo

- Groh’s PowerPoint (06/22)

- AHRI to provide a recommendation to the Working Group regarding testing configurations and scope considerations for embedded fans (06/22)

- CTI to list unique design features that would differentiate cooling tower fans (06/22)

- DOE to send link to Motors DOE test procedure (06/22)

- DOE to send revised ratings and representation PowerPoint ( 06/22)

- DOE to provide a summary of the edits to the definition for the equipment classes and will circulate to the WG (06/22)

- DOE to send a list of analys is NODA revisions and sensitivities (Done, see below)

- AMCA to provide responses to the Test Procedures issues (AMCA 210)

- DOE to circulate Tim Mathson’s PowerPoint (06/22)

2. Meeting Summary

June 3, 2015

Exhaust fans Presentation by Henry (Skip) Ernst

– Daikin

Additional issues discussed:

- The metric needs to account for fans operating at low pressures

.

- OEMs would be negatively impacted if a regulation led to having increased fan

sizes.

Air Handlers: William Smiley

– Smiley Engineering LLC

Additional issues discussed:

- How does the WG wish to rate fans in air handlers?

o T wo t esting configurati ons were discussed: f an only (AMCA 210) and f an in a box (AHRI 430)

. The performance of the fan would be different depending on the testing configuration (impacts of cabinet and coils configurations)

o AHRI to provide a recommendation

.

AHRI: Laura G. Petrillo

- Groh Presentation

- AHRI

Additional issues discussed :

- Robert Whitwell expressed that if a fan in a covered equipment is already regulated as part of a metric for that covered equipment, he would like that fan to be exempted from the fan regulation. The example of condenser fans in commercial unitary air conditioners was provided.o Two situations were then discussed: (a) exemption of fans purchased by OEM equip ment manufacturers and integrated in OEM equipment as well as exemption of fan s integrated by the OE M manufacturer in its equipment; (b) exemption of fan integrated by OEM equipment

manufacturers only

.

o The issue of being able to physically identify fans going into specific applications and covered/non covered equipment was also discussed.

o DOE asked AHRI to provide a recommendation.

Cooling Towers: Larry Burdick

– CTI/SPX

Additional issues discussed:

- W hat are the physical features that differentiate cooling tower fans? ( e.g. third party certification, la rge tip clearance)

Motors/Drives: Dan Delaney

– NEMA/Regal Beloit

Additional issues discussed:

- The WG will provide feedback on what the preferred approach for calculating

default motor and control losses.

June 4, 2015

Definitions: Wade Smith

– AMCA

Additional issues discussed:

- AMCA recommends using a limit of 25kj/kg to differentiate between compressors

and fans.

- DOE will provide a summary of t he edits to the definition for the equipment

classes and will circulate to the WG

NODA Analysis

– DOE

- Input lists for which WG members need to provide alternative input for sensitivity analyses:

o MPC increase by EL for all fan equipment classes (NODA uses no increase for some equipment classes)

o Cost recovery period (NODA uses 30 years)

o Annual o perating hours in commercial sector (NODA uses operating hours derived from Energy +)

o Load profile assumption for some fan selections expressed as a percentage of design flow and percentage of operating hours (NODA uses 100% of annual operating hours at 100% design flow)

o Lifetime (NODA uses a lifetime between 6 and 60 years)

Ratings and Representation

– DOE

Additiona l issues discussed:

- DOE will send a revised PowerPoint to the WG.