Transcript Evaporator Fan Motor Controller (ECM) for Walk

Today’s “Game Plan”
• Two Trial-Runs of a new deemed measure review process
– Deemed measure analysis and review
• Developed by …
– (consultant, RTF member/staff, utility, etc.)
• Reviewed in detail by RTF subcommittee
– Until comfort level is high
– RTF Staff* gives a summary presentation to the full RTF
• Summary of subcommittee review
– Including details of any follow-up that hasn’t been fully vetted by the subcommittee
• Summary of the measure analysis
– Energy savings analysis presented using the (draft) measure summary template
– Measure Cost, Measure Life, O&M, etc.
• The Goals
– Improve and add consistency to the deemed measure review process
– Spend less time “in the weeds” at RTF meetings
*with support from both the subcommittee and the measure analysis developer
3
LED Lighting in Vertical and Semi-Vertical
Open Display Cases
Deemed Measure Proposal
Regional Technical Forum
September 28, 2010
Analysis Prepared By:
PECI (Eric Mullendore and
Michele Friedrich)
RTF Subcommittee Review?
Yes (Sept 2, 2010)
RTF Staff Review?
Yes (Adam Hadley)
Presentation Prepared By:
RTF Staff (Adam Hadley)
Measure Description
•
Measures
– Existing Cases
•
Remove T8, T10, or T12 Fixtures and Ballasts, install LED fixtures and drivers
–
–
–
1-lamp Fluorescent fixture  1 Low-power LED fixture
2-lamp Fluorescent fixture  1 High-power LED fixture
3-lamp Fluorescent fixture  1 High-power LED fixture + “delamp” measure
– New Cases
•
Choose LED fixtures instead of T8 fixtures
–
–
•
1 Low-power LED fixture (baseline = 1-lamp T8 fixture)
1 High-power LED fixture (baseline = 2-lamp T8 fixture)
Savings
– Reduced energy use of lighting system
– Reduced load on the refrigeration system
•
Requirements
– This measure only applies to open vertical or semi-vertical display cases.
•
(does not apply to coffin cases)
– Fluorescent fixture and ballast must be replaced with a permanently installed LED fixture and
driver
– LED ratings: Minimum CRI of 75; minimum of 7% of initial lumens at 50k hours.
– Minimum 3-year manufacturer’s warranty.
– Delamp measure must be combined with an LED retrofit measure
– Baseline controls, or better, must be used
5
Subcommittee Review
• Meeting held September 2, 2010
(meeting notes available at: http://www.nwcouncil.org/rtf/subcommittees/grocery/meetings/meetings.htm )
– Attendees
• PECI: Lagan Todd, Jen Shafter, Dustin Bailey, Ben Cartwright, Paul Schertz, Ben Wright,
Michele Friedrich
• RTF/Other: Diwanshu Shekhar, Charlie Grist, Eric Brateng, Tim Steele, Adam Hadley,
David Baylon
• Meeting Summary:
– PECI generated the analysis and presented its proposal to the subcommittee
– The group reviewed key input parameters and supporting data sources in
detail
– Conclusion: PECI’s savings calculation approach and input assumptions are
reasonable. The only follow-up needed is review of the assumption on
number of ballasts per lamp.
• Meeting Follow-up (not reviewed by subcommittee):
– Ballasts/drivers per lamp is not addressed directly. The calculation determines
energy use of the ballast/driver based on a fixed percentage of the lamp
power draw.
6
Summary of Methdology and Sources for Unit Energy Savings Estimate (Continued)
Measure Classification and Properties
Market Sector
Commercial
New / Existing
Existing and New
Market Segment
Grocery
Measure Category
LED Case Lighting
RTF Workbook:
Grocery_EvaporatorFanControllerECMWalkIn_FY10v1_0.xls
Number of Measures, and UES
Components
8 measures with 2 UES components each
Measure Identifiers
Identifier
Baseline Lamp Type
LED Fixture Power (baseline number
of lamps in fixture)
De-lamp
Possible Values
Existing T8
Existing T12 or T10
New Construction
Further Explanation and Sources
High Power LED Fixture (baseline: 2-lamp fixture)
Low Power LED Fixture (baseline: 1-lamp fixture)
De-lamp
Does not apply to new construction.
LED fixture power is not relevant.
Constant Parameters
Parameter
Hours of Operation
Hours of Operation Weighting
Portion of lamp energy rejected to the
refrigerated space
Lamp location weighting (Applies to
low power only)
Possible Values
18 hours per day
24 hours per day
18 hours per day: 49%
24 hours per day: 51%
Shelf: 100% (Applies to low power only)
Canopy or Rail: 50% (Applies to high or low power)
Shelf: 49%
Canopy or Rail: 51%
Further Explanation and Sources
Assumed
PECI invoice data for 1000 feet of medium
temperature display cases
DOE: Final Rule for Commercial Refrigeration
Equipment
PECI audit data for 398 1-lamp fixtures in open
cases in multiple stores in the PNW
7
Summary of Methdology and Sources for Unit Energy Savings Estimate (Continued)
Unit Energy Savings (UES) Estimation Method, Parameters and Sources
Measure Type UES
Analysis approach
Primary
Component
Parameter /
Adjustment
Factor
Replace
fluorescent
fixture in open
display cases
with LED fixture
Savings is calculated as the
difference between the energy use
of the baseline and replacement
lighting system. Energy use of the
lighting systems is calculated as
the sum of the lamp energy use
Direct lighting
and ballast (driver) energy use.
energy savings
Lamp and ballast (driver) energy
use are both calculated by the
product of their hours of operation
and their power draw. Savings are
calculated for two hours of
operation scenarios and weighted.
Refrigeration
system savings
due to reduced
heat load from
direct lighting
energy savings
Baseline
Description
Efficient
Baseline Source Efficient Case
Case
Source
Description
T-8
1-lamp: 8 watts
2-lamp: 16 watts
Lamp Power
Use (per linear
foot)
T-12/10
1-lamp: 10 watts
2-lamp: 20 watts
Ballast/Driver
Power Use
The approach applies the EER of
the refrigeration system to the
portion of direct lamp energy
savings that would have been
rejected to the refrigerated space.
Portion of lamp energy rejected to
the refrigerated space is based on
EER
lamp location within the case.
Savings are calculated for two
hours of operation scenarios and
weighted. For 1-lamp fixture
baseline measures, savings are
also calculated for two lamp
location scenarios and weighted.
T-8: 5% of fixture
power
T-12/10: 15% of
fixture power
10.9
High Power
7 watts
Low Power
4 watts
10% of fixture
power
Grainger Catalog
32W T8
40W T12
Manufacturers'
Specifications
Grainger Catalog
Manufacturers'
Specifications
DOE2.2R Model from GrocerSmart
3.0
8
Summary of Methdology and Sources for Unit Energy Savings Estimate (Continued)
Unit Energy Savings (UES) Estimation Method, Parameters and Sources
Measure Type UES
Analysis approach
Primary
Component
Parameter /
Adjustment
Factor
Direct lighting
energy savings
"Delamp"
occurring during
replacement of
3-lamp
fluorescent
fixture in open
display cases
with a highpower LED
Refrigeration
fixture
system savings
due to reduced
heat load from
direct lighting
energy savings
Savings is calculated as the sum
of lamp energy use and ballast
energy use of 1 lamp in a 3-lamp
fixture. Lamp and ballast energy
use are both calculated by the
product of their hours of operation
and their power draw. Savings are
calculated for two hours of
operation scenarios and weighted.
Baseline
Description
Efficient
Baseline Source Efficient Case
Case
Source
Description
T-8
1-lamp: 8 watts
2-lamp: 16 watts
Lamp Power
Use (per linear
foot)
T-12/10
1-lamp: 10 watts
2-lamp: 20 watts
T-8: 5% of fixture
power
Ballast/Driver
Power Use
T-12/10: 15% of
fixture power
The approach applies the EER of
the refrigeration system to the
portion of direct lamp energy
savings that would have been
rejected to the refrigerated space.
EER
Portion of lamp energy rejected to
the refrigerated space is based on
a canopy or rail location. Savings
are calculated for two hours of
operation scenarios and weighted.
10.9
High Power
7 watts
Low Power
4 watts
10% of fixture
power
Grainger Catalog
32W T8
40W T12
Manufacturers'
Specifications
Grainger Catalog
Manufacturers'
Specifications
DOE2.2R Model from GrocerSmart
3.0
9
Summary of Methdology and Sources for Unit Energy Savings Estimate (Continued)
Measure Type UES
Component
Install LED
fixture in new
open display
cases
Analysis approach
Savings is calculated as the
difference between the energy use
of the baseline and replacement
lighting system. Energy use of the
lighting systems is calculated as
the sum of the lamp energy use
Direct lighting
and ballast (driver) energy use.
energy savings
Lamp and ballast (driver) energy
use are both calculated by the
product of their hours of operation
and their power draw. Savings are
calculated for two hours of
operation scenarios and weighted.
Refrigeration
system savings
due to reduced
heat load from
direct lighting
energy savings
Primary
Parameter /
Adjustment
Factor
Baseline
Description
Efficient
Baseline Source Efficient Case
Case
Source
Description
Lamp Power
1-lamp: 7 watts
Use (per linear
2-lamp: 14 watts
foot)
Ballast/Driver
Power Use
The approach applies the EER of
the refrigeration system to the
portion of direct lamp energy
savings that would have been
rejected to the refrigerated space.
Portion of lamp energy rejected to
the refrigerated space is based on
EER
lamp location within the case.
Savings are calculated for two
hours of operation scenarios and
weighted. For 1-lamp fixture
baseline measures, savings are
also calculated for two lamp
location scenarios and weighted.
5% of fixture power
10.9
High Power
7 watts
Low Power
4 watts
10% of fixture
power
Manufacturers'
Specifications
28W T8
Manufacturers'
Specifications
Grainger Catalog
Manufacturers'
Specifications
DOE2.2R Model from GrocerSmart
3.0
10
Cost, O&M Savings, and Measure Life
– Cost Based On
• Distributor Pricing, Marked-up 25%
– 4-foot Fixture
» High Power = $119.57
» Low Power = $93.08
– Driver (per fixture) = $28.13
» (assumes 2 fixtures per driver)
– Hardware (per fixture) = $1.63
• Labor @ $25 per fixture
– (not applicable to new cases)
– O&M Savings Based On
• LED Reports (no lamp replacement costs)
– PG&E Application Assessment #0722
– SMUD Report: LED Freezer Case Lighting Systems
– Measure Life Based On
• ~50,000 hour life @ ~24 hours per day
11
Proposed Deemed Measures
Increm ental
Capital Cost
($/unit)
Procost Full Measure Nam e
Increm ental Measure
O&M Costs Life
($/unit)
(years)
Annual
Savings
@ Site
(kw h/yr)
Total
Societal
Benefit /
Cost Ratio
(TRC B/C
Ratio)
Open Case Lights - Low Pow er LED from T12
$
36.96 $
(1.09)
6.0
65
0.9
Open Case Lights - Low Pow er LED from T8
$
36.96 $
(1.09)
6.0
38
0.6
Open Case Lights - High Pow er LED from T12
$
43.58 $
(2.18)
6.0
133
1.5
Open Case Lights - High Pow er LED from T8
$
43.58 $
(2.18)
6.0
81
1.0
Open Case Lights - Delam p T12
$
-
$
-
6.0
100
9,999
Open Case Lights - Delam p T8
$
-
$
-
6.0
74
9,999
Open Case Lights - LED High Pow er - New Case
$
19.22 $
(2.18)
6.0
62
2.5
Open Case Lights - LED Low Pow er - New Case
$
15.98 $
(1.09)
6.0
28
1.4
Incremental Capital and O&M Costs and Annual Savings @ Site are per linear foot of fixture.
DECISION?
12
Evaporator Fan Motor Controller (ECM)
for Walk-in Coolers and Freezers
Deemed Measure Proposal
Regional Technical Forum
September 28, 2010
Analysis Prepared By:
PECI (Lagan Todd)
RTF Subcommittee
Review?
Yes (Sept 2, 2010)
RTF Staff Review?
Yes (Adam Hadley)
Presentation Prepared By:
RTF Staff (Adam Hadley)
Measure Description
•
Standard Practice:
– Evaporator fans run continuously
•
•
Except during the defrost cycle in freezers
Measure
– Install a controller to reduce the speed or turn off of the evaporator fan motors when there’s
no call for cooling
•
Savings
– Reduced energy use of the slower/off motor
– Reduced load on the refrigeration system
•
Requirements
– This measure only applies where
•
•
•
the evaporator fan motor is an ECM
the evaporator is on a circuit with a liquid line solenoid
motors have rated (nameplate) output power capacity of at least 16W
– Controller must reduce motor speed to not more than 600 RPM when there is no call for
cooling.
– If the fan motors are cycled on/off, there must be a provision to prevent stratification.
14
Subcommittee Review
• Meeting held September 2, 2010
(meeting notes available at: http://www.nwcouncil.org/rtf/subcommittees/grocery/meetings/meetings.htm )
– Attendees
• PECI: Lagan Todd, Jen Shafter, Dustin Bailey, Ben Cartwright, Paul
Schertz, Ben Wright, Michele Friedrich, Jamie Anthony
• RTF/Other: Diwanshu Shekhar, Charlie Grist, Eric Brateng, Tim Steele,
Adam Hadley, David Baylon
• Meeting Summary:
– PECI generated the analysis and presented its proposal to the
subcommittee
– The group reviewed key input parameters and supporting data
sources in detail
– Conclusion: PECI’s savings calculation approach is reasonable.
With a few revisions to input assumptions, this measure could
be deemed.
15
Subcommittee Meeting Follow-up
PECI’s follow-up was emailed to the Subcommittee on Sept 16th
•
Measures are now disaggregated by motor size and case temperature
–
•
Refrigeration system savings make up:
–
–
•
(previously, one weighted savings value was proposed)
27% of the total savings for Medium Temp
47% of the total savings for Low Temp
Recommend the following assumptions based on a field study of condenser/compressor runtimes
of 5 LT and 7 MT walk-ins
–
Low Temp
•
•
–
Medium Temp
•
•
•
(savings more conservative than when using 2.7)
Allow on/off type controllers.
–
Savings are only slightly lower (~5%) than full speed/low speed type controllers
•
•
Evaporator Fan at Full Speed: 58%
Evaporator Fan at Low Speed: 42%
Recommend using 2.5 for the exponent in the fan law calculation
–
•
Evaporator Fan at Full Speed: 68%
Evaporator Fan at Low Speed: 32%
1 minute on / 7 minutes off assumed as the control strategy for on/off type controller
EER values based on PECI’s extensive audit data, filtered for eligible applications (nearly 8000
systems)
16
Metered(!) Data on ECM Power
(the following was not reviewed by the subcommittee)
Walk-In Fan Motors - Most, if not all (? the reports were unclear) ECMs are NRM model ME-59
Number of Evap Fan
ECM
Store
Description
Motors
Watts/motor
8
80
Dairy Cooler
8
30
Grocery Store C
Meat Prep
4
60
Beer Cooler
9
48
Produce Cooler
8
51
Fish Cooler
2
15
Yogurt/Juice
4
60
Dairy Cooler
6
62
Grocery Store B
Beer Cooler
4
41
4
63
Produce Cooler
4
50
Meat Prep Closed Area
1
21
Meat Cooler
2
51
Beverage Cooler
8
20
Markus Foods
Dairy Cooler
9
17
Deli Freezer
3
55
Back Freezer
2
16
Produce Cooler
4
43
Pacific PUD
Beverage Cooler
10
93
•
Source: BPA/EMP2 M&V Studies
–
–
–
–
Frank, David. EMP2. "Markus Foods M&V Findings: Anti-Sweat Heater Control and ECM Motors." January 2009
Frank, David. EMP2. "Grocery Store M&V: Grocery Store B." For BPA. Jan 29, 2010.
Frank, David. EMP2. "Grocery Store M&V: Grocery Store C." For BPA. January 29, 2010.
Amundson, Todd. BPA. "Pacific PUD Four Grocery Stores with Vendor Grovery Energy Management System." October
31, 2006.
17
Metered Data from 4 Stores
Walk-in Evaporator Fan ECMotor Power Consumption
n=100 motors; median = 50 W; avg = 49.5 W
14
12
Frequency
10
8
6
4
2
0
ECMotor Input Watts
Note: Most (if not all) motors were model ME-59. All reports did not specify whether some were ME-30 (or ME-25).
18
Proposed Input Power
Assumptions
• 1/20 to 1/10 hp Motor Class
– Input Power = 50 watts
• Based on median from metered data
• 16 to 23 Watt Motor Class
– Input Power = 19.6 watts
• Based on applying the ratio of metered-to-estimated from the large motor class to
the estimated input watts for the small motor class.
– Original motor input estimates were based on the output watts (assumed the middle of the range),
divided by an assumed motor efficiency of 66%
Revised Estimate for 16-23 watt motor class
Original Estimate for 1/20-1/10 hp class
Metered Data for 1/20-1/10 hp class (median)
Ratio (metered to estimated)
Original Estimate for 16-23 watt motor class
Revised Estimate for 16-23 watt motor class
75.4
50.0
66%
29.5
19.6
watts
watts
watts
watts
19
Summary of Methdology and Sources for Unit Energy Savings Estimate
Measure Classification and Properties
Market Sector
Commercial
New / Existing
Existing
Market Segment
Grocery
Measure Category
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller on Walk-ins
RTF Workbook:
Grocery_EvaporatorFanControllerECMWalkIn_FY10v1_0.xls
Number of
Measures, and UES 4 measures with 2 UES components each
Measure Identifiers
Identifier
Motor Size
Case Temperature
Possible Values
Either:
a. within the range of 1/10 to 1/20 horsepower; or
b. within the range of 16 to 23 Watts
Low Temperature
Medium Temperature
Constant Parameters
Parameter
Fan Law Exponent
Possible Values
2.5
Fan Speed at full speed
1550 rpm
Fan Speed at low speed
550 rpm
Performance Degradation Factor
98%
Further Explanation and Sources
Assumed. Theoretical value is 3. Reduced to 2.5 to adjust for
losses.
1550 RPM is the most common rotational speed of WI
evaporator fan motors
An average of two industry-recommended low speed settings
(500 and 600)
PECI assumption from GrocerSmart software
20
Summary of Methdology and Sources for Unit Energy Savings Estimate (Continued)
Unit Energy Savings (UES) Estimation Method, Parameters and Sources
Measure Type
UES
Analysis approach Primary
Baseline
Component
Parameter / Description
Adjustment
Factor
Installation of a
motor controller
on the evaporator
fan motor in a
walk-in cooler or
freezer to either
turn off or reduce
the speed of the
evaporator fan
when there's no
call for cooling.
Baseline energy use
is the product of fan
runtime at full speed
and fan input power
at full speed.
Efficient Case energy
use is the product of
fan runtime at full
speed and fan input
Direct motor
power at full speed,
energy savings
plus the product of
fan runtime at low
speed and fan input
power at low speed.
Affinity laws are used
as the basis for
calculation of fan
input power at low
speed.
Refrigeration
system savings
due to reduced
heat load from
direct motor
energy savings
Fan Duty
Cycle
Full-speed fan
motor input
power
The approach applies
the EER of the
refrigeration system
and with a
EER
performance
degradation factor to
the direct motor
energy savings.
Efficient Case
Description
Medium Temp
Full Speed: 100%
Off: 0%
Medium Temp
Full Speed: 58%
Low Speed: 42%
Low Temp
Full Speed: 96%
Off: 4%
Low Temp
Full Speed: 68%
Low Speed: 32%
50.0 Watts
(for the 1/10 to 1/20 hp motor size
category)
19.6 Watts
(for the 16 to 23 watt motor size
category)
9.60 (Medium Temperature)
4.17 (Low Temperature)
Baseline Source Efficient Case
Source
Assumed based
on "always on"
operation, except
Low Temperature
turns off for
periods of coil
defrost (assumed
at 1 hour per day).
Compressor runtimes
used as a proxy.
Data from: "Analysis
of Cooler Control
energy Conservation
Measures, Final
Report" Submitted to
NSTAR Electric by
Select Energy (Impact
Evaluation of NRM
measures dated
March 3, 2004)
Input power for the larger motor class is
based on data from 100 metered walk-in
evaporator fan ECMotors in 4 grocery
stores (BPA/EMP2).
For the smaller motor class, a ratio of
metered to expected input power for the
lager motor class is applied to the
expected intput power for the smaller
motor class. Expected input power is the
middle of the range of output power (19.5
W), divided by the expected motor
efficiency (66%).
Calculated weighted average from PECI
audit data for estimated applicable
equipment.
Data and weighting occur in a separate
workbook: "Eng-Calc-weighted EER- WI
Evap Fan Control- ECM 100921.xlsx"
21
Cost & Measure Life
Cost: $141 / motor
• Installed Cost: $565
– Controller (Frigitek, Retail): $325 / controller
– Labor: 3 hrs/controller @ $80/hr = $240 / controller
• 4 motors/controller
– On average, > 4 motors per controller
Measure Life: 15 years
Note: Costs are shown in year 2010 dollars.
22
Proposed Deemed Measures
Procost Full Measure Nam e
Increm ental
Capital Cost
($/unit)
Annual
Savings
@ Site
(kw h/yr)
Total Societal
Benefit / Cost
Ratio (TRC B/C
Ratio)
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Medium Tem p - 1/10-1/20 HP
$
129
264
2.1
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Low Tem p - 1/10-1/20 HP
$
129
207
1.6
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Medium Tem p - 16-23 W
$
129
104
0.8
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Low Tem p - 16-23 W
$
129
81
0.6
Incremental Capital Cost and Annual Savings @ Site are per motor.
Note: Costs are shown in year 2006 dollars.
23
Issue:
Cost-effectiveness depends on # motors per controller
Motors per
Controller
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
TRC B/C Ratio
1/10 to 1/20 hp motor
16 to 23 watt motor
Med Temp Low Temp Med Temp
Low Temp
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.2
1.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
1.5
1.2
0.6
0.5
2.1
1.6
0.8
0.6
2.6
2.0
1.0
0.8
3.1
2.4
1.2
0.9
3.6
2.8
1.4
1.1
Alternative RTF Staff Proposal
•
Further disaggregation of the measure:
– Large Motor Class (1/10 to 1/20 HP)
•
3 or more motors controlled per controller
–
•
Average of 5.8 motors per controller
1 or 2 motor per controller
– Average of 1.8 motors per controller
– Small Motor Class (16 to 23 watts)
•
6 or more motors controlled per controller
–
•
Average of 8.2 motors per controller
1 to 5 motors controlled per controller
–
Average of 2.8 motors per controller
Note: This issue and proposal was not reviewed at the subcommittee meeting.
24
Number of Walk-ins with Qty X Fans
Histogram: Number of Fans per Walk-in
(from 7,864 Walk-ins in PNW)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 >20
Number of Fans
Total
Data Source: PECI
MT
LT
25
Alternative (RTF Staff) Proposed Measures
Total
Societal
Annual Benefit /
Incremental Savings Cost Ratio
Capital Cost @ Site
(TRC B/C
($/unit)
(kwh/yr) Ratio)
Procost Full Measure Name
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Medium Temp - 1/10-1/20 HP - 3 or more motors/controller
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Low Temp - 1/10-1/20 HP - 3 or more motors/controller
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Medium Temp - 16-23 W - 6 or more motors/controller
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Low Temp - 16-23 W - 6 or more motors/controller
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Medium Temp - 1/10-1/20 HP - 1 or 2 motors per controller
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Low Temp - 1/10-1/20 HP - 1 or 2 motors per controller
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Medium Temp - 16-23 W - 1 to 5 motors per controller
Evaporator Fan ECMotor Controller - Walk-In - Low Temp - 16-23 W - 1 to 5 motors per controller
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
88
88
63
63
283
283
182
182
264
207
104
81
264
207
104
81
3.0
2.3
1.7
1.3
0.9
0.7
0.6
0.4
Incremental Capital Cost and Annual Savings @ Site are per motor.
Provisionally Deemed:
-18 month sunset period
-Data Collection Should Include:
-Metered ECMotor power input
-Metered ECMotor Runtimes
-Full Speed
-Off/Low Speed
DECISION?
26