Skip to content

Posts tagged ‘Ani Jayanth’

Simulation Model Breaks the Ice on Meeting Efficiency Targets

anijayanth Ani Jayanth | Director, Product Marketing

Emerson Commercial & Residential Solutions

This blog is a summary of the article Simulation Model Breaks the Ice on Meeting Efficiency Targets from our recent edition of E360 Outlook. Click here to read the article in its entirety.

System simulation models have been widely used for decades to help commercial refrigeration equipment manufacturers test the impacts of various components and design options. By simulating the steady-state operation of the vapor-compression cycle, these models have served as the basis of predictive evaluation in many modern refrigeration applications. Engineers rely on these virtual models to expedite the design process and test prototypes before proceeding with physical equipment development. This has not been the case with ice machine simulation models … until now.

The transient nature of ice machine operation — continually cycling between ice formation and harvest modes — presents challenges in simulating the effects on the system during these transitions. That’s why developing a usable simulation model for the evaluation of ice machines has been historically problematic. It’s also why our engineering team at the Helix Innovation Center decided it was time to tackle this challenge head-on.

The release of this simulation model has timely implications for automatic commercial ice maker (ACIM) manufacturers. In 2015, the Department of Energy (DOE) revised its efficiency standards for machines that produce 50–4,000 pounds of ice per day. The ruling will take effect on Jan. 1, 2018, requiring ACIMs manufactured after that date in the United States to reduce energy consumption by 10–15 percent1.

Since ACIMs are produced in a wide range of capacities and used in restaurants, hotels, convenience stores and hospitals, compliance to the new standard has broad industry implications. The ruling affects the two primary classes of ACIMs: batch ice machines (aka “cubers”); and continuous ice machines (aka “flakers” and “nuggets”).

With the new DOE standard taking effect in a little more than a year, many ACIM manufacturers have either already begun or are planning to kick off the engineering design cycle. Our new ACIM simulation model is available to help our customers meet this fast-approaching deadline.


Rapid prototyping

The ACIM simulation model will enable engineers to perform rapid “what if” analyses, allowing them to quickly evaluate the impact of a variety of system design options, including:

–    The size of the air-cooled condenser and finned surfaces
–    Changes in air/water flow rates, as well as ambient air and inlet water temperature
–    Compressor capacity and/or efficiency during freeze and harvest cycles
–    Evaluation of alternative refrigerants
–    Suction/liquid line heat exchanger
–    Thermal expansion valve properties

To verify the validity of simulation data, results from the model were compared with the experimental data of a standard 500-pound capacity ice machine, operating under various ambient air and water inlet temperatures. Key measures of the ice machine’s performance include: cycle time (duration of freeze and harvest cycles); energy input per 100 lb of ice; and energy usage during a 24-hour period. Against these measures and in a variety of operating conditions, the model achieved accuracy levels within 5 percent.

Now that it’s established, the ACIM simulation model enables the prediction of component performance, evaluation of loads under different operating conditions and assessment of system design changes — all within a virtual environment. We’re looking forward to working with our ACIM OEM partners to help them achieve the efficiency levels set forth by the DOE.

Countdown to Compliance

By Ani Jayanth, Manager, Marketing—Foodservice, Emerson

This blog is a summary of the article Countdown to Compliance from our recent edition of E360 Outlook. Click here to read the article in its entirety.

With the Department of Energy’s (DOE) 2017 energy efficiency deadline now visible on the horizon, foodservice OEMs will be the first to feel the brunt of the regulatory storm targeting commercial refrigeration.

For the last several years, the refrigeration industry has been forced to come to terms with a dynamic and often uncertain regulatory environment. On the one hand, the DOE is mandating significant new energy efficiency improvements. On the other hand, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is phasing out the use of widely used high global warming potential (GWP) refrigerants while sanctioning a growing list of acceptable substitutes via its Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. The convergence of these two regulatory fronts has created the perfect storm: a once-in-a-generation occurrence that promises to permanently reshape the commercial refrigeration landscape.

This tectonic shift in our industry is creating unprecedented challenges for every segment of the commercial refrigeration supply chain, from OEMs, wholesalers and contractors to design consultants and end users.

Foodservice equipment manufacturers find themselves at the leading edge of this transition. March 27, 2017, is the DOE’s energy reductions compliance date for stand-alone commercial refrigeration equipment — an average of 30–50 percent reductions, as measured in kWh per day. Affected equipment architectures include: remote condensing commercial refrigerators and freezers; self-contained commercial refrigerators and freezers with and without doors, as well as open display cases. This means that all new equipment manufactured after this date fall within the purview of this rule. And with the EPA’s decision to phase out commonly used refrigerants, like R-404A and HFC-134a in 2019, OEMs must factor this key design consideration into their engineering equation.

What’s at stake for OEMs?

Important considerations:

One design cycle or two? — When it comes to achieving DOE and EPA regulatory compliance, OEMs face a critical design choice: approach each regulation as a separate engineering effort or combine compliance into a single design cycle.

Compressed design cycle — Regardless of the design cycle decision, OEMs will need to allot sufficient laboratory and testing time to make the necessary design adjustments to achieve DOE compliance and to secure requisite UL, ASHRAE and NSF certifications.

Civil penalties — The details around how the DOE will enforce the ruling remain to be seen, but past performance indicates that they will be prepared to issue civil penalties. After March 27, 2017, equipment manufacturers who are still offering reach-in units that don’t comply with the DOE rule may be subject to these penalties.

Peer scrutiny — As many OEMs will be making significant investments in design changes to achieve compliance, those who are neglecting or avoiding these efforts will likely be subject to the scrutiny of their industry peers. In other words, the industry will also police itself.

Registration in DOE compliance database — It’s important to understand that the DOE maintains a database of commercial equipment for compliance called the Compliance Certification Management System (CCMS). Please see: This database is essentially a record of the baseline energy consumption of equipment prior to making the mandated design changes to achieve new energy efficiency levels. Manufacturers who have not listed their equipment in this database may be subject to civil penalties.

Market pressures — Because design consultants and end users are already seeking refrigeration units that comply with DOE and EPA regulations, OEMs who fail to bring viable products to market may face significant business risks.


The first steps in a larger journey

While many consider the March 27, 2017, DOE deadline on commercial refrigeration equipment the first significant regulatory milestone, it’s important to remember that it’s one of the first steps the industry must take on this journey for compliance. Among the challenges that still lie ahead:

  • 1, 2018: DOE new efficiency targets on automatic commercial ice makers
  • 1, 2018: EPA delisting R-404A for remote condensing unit architectures
  • 1. 2019: EPA begins phasing out R-404A, R-507A, R-410A, R-407A/C/F and HFC-134a in stand-alone units
  • 1. 2020: DOE new efficiency targets for walk-in coolers and freezers

There are many miles ahead of us in this journey, and for many in the industry this is uncharted territory. Emerson is committed effectively navigating this shifting regulatory landscape and helping guide the industry toward the next generation of refrigeration technologies and equipment architectures. Through continued collaboration and innovation, we’ll work with you to create systems that are both economically and environmentally viable.



%d bloggers like this: