Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations Method B and CSA C39010 and 2
that IEC 6003421:2014 Method 21
1A 16 be approved for section 431.444 of 10 CFR part 431 as an alternative to IEEE 1122004 Test method A, IEEE
1142010, and CSA C74709. UL, No.
29.1 at p. 1 The NEMA and UL
petitions included and referenced papers that compare the testing methodologies presented in IEC 60034
21:2014 to the IEEE and CSA standards currently referenced in the small electric motors and electric motors test procedures at 10 CFR part 431.
The NEMA petition included a work paper that summarizes an evaluation conducted by the NEMA Motor and Generator Section technical committee, which found that IEC 6003421:2014
Method 211B was a suitable alternative to the IEEE 1122004 Test Method B and CSA C39010 test methods. NEMA, No. 28.3 at p. 1 This evaluation relied on 1 comparison of instrumentation accuracy, test method, and calculation approach among the IEC, IEEE, and CSA industry standards, 2 analysis of test results from over 500
motors tested at the Hydro-Quebec Research Institute, and 3 reference to one scientific research paper the Angers et al. study, which also concluded that all three methods provide results that are very closely aligned. NEMA, No. 28.3 at pp.
13
The UL petition included two papers comparing the IEC 6003421 test methods with the respective IEEE and CSA standards. The first paper was the Angers et. al. study, which concluded that the IEC 6003421:2014 Method 2
11B test method provides results that are very closely aligned with the IEEE
1122004 Test Method B and CSA
C39010 test methods. UL, No. 29.2 at pp. 18 The second paper, written by IEEE member Wenping Cao, compared the IEEE 112 and IEC 6003421
standards and concluded that the resulting efficiency values were found to be equal or otherwise closely aligned.
UL, No. 29.3 at p. 7 UL requested that DOE incorporate IEC 6003421:2014
Method 211B as an alternative to IEEE
1122004 Test Method B and CSA
C39010 because of an increased use of the IEC 6003421:2014 Method 21
1B. UL, No 29.1 at p.1 In its comments, UL did not quantify how broadly IEC
6003421:2014 Method 211B is currently being used.
In the April 2019 NOPR, DOE
proposed to permit use of IEC 600342
16 IEC 6003421:2014 Method 211A 2014, Rotating Electrical MachinesPart 21: Standard methods for determining losses and efficiency from tests excluding machines for traction vehicles, Direct Measurement of Input and Output.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:17 Dec 31, 2020

Jkt 253001

1:2014 Method 211A, with certain limitations regarding torque measurement, as an alternative to IEEE
1122004 Test Method B and CSA
C39010. 84 FR 17004, 1701217013.
DOE also proposed to permit use of IEC
6003421:2014 Method 211B as a permitted alternative to the test methods IEEE 1122004 Test Method B and CSA
C39010. 84 FR 17004, 17014. DOE
requested comment on its proposals regarding IEC 6003421:2014 Method 211A and Method 211B, including data comparing test results of those standards with the corresponding CSA
and IEEE test procedures. 84 FR 17004, 1701317014.
The CA IOUs questioned whether alternative testing standards are truly equivalent to one another and commented that DOE should evaluate the possibility that one equivalent test procedure may produce a disproportionately favorable result compared to another. The CA IOUs recommended that, to avoid confusion in the market and maintain consistency in results, the DOE should specify a single version of a test procedure to be used for enforcement testing. CA IOUs, No. 86 at p. 23
As discussed in the April 2019 NOPR
and in the following sections, DOE
evaluated the various industry tests as well as the results of comparative testing and concludes that the relevant test methods in IEC 6003421:2014 are equivalent to the corresponding industry standards currently referenced in the test procedures for small electric motors and electric motors. Permitting use of the test methods in IEC 60034
21:2014 further harmonizes DOEs test standards with industry and reduces test burden while ensuring that the test procedure reflects the energy efficiency of the relevant motors during a representative average use cycle.
a. Method 211A
Among multiple testing methods provided in IEC 6003421:2014, Method 211A Direct measurement of input and output is the standards preferred testing method for singlephase motors. It is based on direct measurement of electrical input power to the motor and mechanical output power in the form of torque and speed from the motor. This approach is analogous to the methods of the other industry standards, IEEE 1142010 and CSA C74709, currently incorporated by reference for testing single-phase motors, and IEEE 1122004 Test Method A, currently incorporated by reference for the purpose of testing polyphase motors of output power less than or equal to one horsepower.

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

11

In the April 2019 NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined that IEC 60034
21:2014 Method 211A is likely to produce accurate and reproducible results that are consistent with results from the other test methods permitted under subparts X and B of 10 CFR part 431. 84 FR 17004, 17013. DOE proposed to incorporate by reference IEC 60034
21:2014 Method 211A as an alternative to the currently incorporated industry testing standards IEEE 112
2004 Test Method A and CSA C74709
in 10 CFR 431.443. Id. However, DOE
also initially determined that the process for dynamometer torque correction in section 6.1.2.2 of IEC
6003421:2014, Method 211A is insufficiently described. 84 FR 17004, 17013. Specifically, IEEE 1142010 17
and CSA C74709 18 contain more detailed descriptions of torque correction procedures, but both state that torque correction is not required when torque is measured using either an inline, rotating torque transducer or stator reaction torque transducer. The insufficient specificity of IEC 600342
1:2014 Method 211A regarding dynamometer torque correction can be avoided by using a torque measurement method that does not require correction.
Consequently, DOE proposed to permit use of IEC 6003421:2014 with limitations to limit torque measurement to methods that do not require dynamometer torque correction i.e., either in-line, shaft-coupled, rotating torque transducers or stationary, stator reaction torque transducers. 84 FR
17004, 1701217013.
In response to the April 2019 NOPR, NEMA reiterated its support to have the option of using IEC 6003421:2014
Method 211A. NEMA, No. 84 at p. 3
DOE did not receive any other comment on the incorporation of IEC 600342
1:2014 Method 211A generally, or regarding the proposal to limit torque measurement.
For the reasons discussed in the April 2019 NOPR, DOE is referencing IEC
6003421:2014 Method 211A as an alternative to the referenced industry testing standards IEEE 1122017 Test Method A per the amendment in this final rule and CSA C74709 in 10 CFR
431.443. As proposed, this final rule requires torque measurement, when using IEC 6003421:2014 Method 21
1A, to be made using either in-line, shaft-coupled, rotating torque transducers or stationary, stator reaction torque transducers. This change will 17 Section 5.2.1.1.1 of IEEE 1142010 addressees when torque correction is required.
18 Section 6.7.1 of CSA C74709 addresses when torque correction is required.

E:FRFM04JAR1.SGM

04JAR1