Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

4894

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
technology will not be considered further.
3 Impacts on product utility or product availability. If it is determined that a technology would have a significant adverse impact on the utility of the product to significant subgroups of consumers or would result in the unavailability of any covered product type with performance characteristics including reliability, features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as products generally available in the United States at the time, it will not be considered further.
4 Adverse impacts on health or safety. If it is determined that a technology would have significant adverse impacts on health or safety, it will not be considered further.
5 Unique-Pathway Proprietary Technologies. If a design option utilizes proprietary technology that represents a unique pathway to achieving a given efficiency level, that technology will not be considered further due to the potential for monopolistic concerns.
10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, 6c3 and 7b; 10 CFR 431.4.
In summary, if DOE determines that a technology, or a combination of technologies, fails to meet one or more of the above five criteria, it will be excluded from further consideration in the engineering analysis.
Table IV3 provides a summary of all the technology options DOE considered for improving SEM efficiency. For a description of how each of these technology options improves SEM
efficiency, see final determination TSD
chapter 3. For the April 2020 NOPD, DOE initially screened out three of the identified technology options: Reducing the air gap below .0125 inches, amorphous metal laminations, and plastic bonded iron powder PBIP.
Reducing the air gap between the rotor and stator can improve motor efficiency. For SEMs, the air gap is commonly set at 15 thousandths of an inch. A reduction in air gaps is technologically feasible and DOE is unaware of any adverse impacts on health or safety associated with reducing the radial air gap below 12.5
thousandths of an inch. However, this technology option fails the screening criterion of being practicable to manufacture, install, and service. Such a tight air gap may cause problems in manufacturing and service, with the rotor potentially coming into contact with the stator. This technology option also fails the screening criterion of avoiding adverse impacts on consumer utility and reliability, because the motor may experience higher failure rates in
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:33 Jan 17, 2021

Jkt 253001

service when the manufactured air gaps are less than 12.5 thousandths of an inch.
Using amorphous metals in the rotor laminations is another potential technology option to improve the efficiency of SEMs. Amorphous metal is extremely thin, has high electrical resistivity, and has little or no magnetic domain definition. Because of amorphous steels high resistance, it exhibits a reduction in hysteresis and eddy current losses, which in turn reduces overall losses in SEMs.
However, amorphous steel is a very brittle material which makes it difficult to punch into motor laminations.11
Although amorphous metals have the potential to improve efficiency, DOE
does not consider this technology option technologically feasible, because it has not been incorporated into a working prototype of a small electric motor. Furthermore, DOE is uncertain whether amorphous metals are practicable to manufacture, install, and service, because a prototype amorphous metal-based SEM has not been made and little information is available on the feasibility of adapting this technology for manufacturing SEMs to reach any conclusions regarding the practicability of using this option. DOE is not aware of any adverse impacts on consumer utility, reliability, health, or safety associated with amorphous metal laminations.
Using PBIP to manufacture SEMs could cut production costs while increasing production output. Although other researchers may be working on this technology option, DOE notes that a research team at Lund University in Sweden published a paper in 2007
about using PBIP in manufacturing, which is the most recent applicable paper on the subject. This technology option is based on an iron powder alloy that is suspended in plastic, and is used in certain motor applications such as fans, pumps, and household appliances.12 The compound is then shaped into motor components using a centrifugal mold, reducing the number of manufacturing steps. Researchers claim that this technology option could cut losses by as much as 50 percent. The Lund University study, which is the most recent research paper to address the use of PBIP in the production context, indicated that its study team 11 1 S.R. Ning, J. Gao, and Y.G. Wang. Review on Applications of Low Loss Amorphous Metals in Motors. 2010. ShanDong University. Weihai, China.
12 Horrdin, H., and E. Olsson. Technology Shifts in Power Electronics and Electric Motors for Hybrid Electric Vehicles: A Study of Silicon Carbide and Iron Powder Materials. 2007. Chalmers University of Technology. Goteborg, Sweden.

PO 00000

Frm 00018

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

already produced inductors, transformers, and induction heating coils using PBIP, but had not yet produced a small electric motor. In addition, it appears that PBIP
technology is aimed at torus, claw-pole, and transversal flux motors, none of which are with in the regulatory definition of SEMs at 10 CFR 431.442.
DOE has found no evidence of any significant research or technical advancement in PBIP methodologies that could be applied to SEMs since publication of the March 2010 Final Rule or the April 2020 NOPD.
Although PBIP has the potential to improve efficiency while reducing manufacturing costs, DOE does not consider this technology option technologically feasible because it has not been incorporated into a working prototype of a small electric motor.
Also, DOE is uncertain whether the material has the structural integrity to form into the necessary shape of a SEM
steel frame. Specifically, properties of PBIP can differ depending on the processing. If the metal particles are too closely compacted and begin to touch, the material will gain electrical conductivity, counteracting one of its most important features of preventing electric current from developing, which is critical because this essentially eliminates losses in the core due to eddy currents. If the metal particles are not compacted closely enough, its structural integrity could be compromised because the resulting material will be very porous.
Furthermore, DOE is uncertain whether PBIP is practicable to manufacture, install, and service, because a prototype PBIP SEM has not yet been made and little information is available on the feasibility of adapting this option for manufacturing SEMs.
DOE continues to be unaware of any adverse impacts on product utility, product availability, health, or safety that may arise from the use of PBIP in SEMs.
In the April 2020 NOPD, DOE
tentatively determined that the remaining technology options listed in Table IV2 are technologically feasible.
The evaluated technologies all have been used or are being used in commercially available products or working prototypes. These technologies all incorporate materials and components that are commercially available in todays supply markets for the SEMs that are the subject of this document.
DOE did not receive comments on the screening analysis in the April 2020
NOPD. Accordingly, DOE considered the same screening analysis from the
E:FRFM19JAR1.SGM

19JAR1