Preliminary Supermarket Measure Matrix -- New Construction

5/28/2010
Revisions: 5/28/2010
Removed measures with standards addressed by Title 20 or Federal Requirements
6/25/2010
Updated priority comments
7/1/2010
Updated priority comments

Item
Description
Condensers and Control

Current Practice

Savings By Design Basis

Notes

1.1

Floating head pressure control

Nearly standard practice

Base case: partial FHP to 80 F SCT with Implementation and savings vary;
fixed setpoint; EEM: typical FHP to 70 F probably <50% realization vs. ideal

1.2

FHP using ambient-following logic

Common use

SBD EEM vs. fixed setpoint

Implementation and savings vary

1.3

Condenser fan variable speed

Essentially standard for evap

condensers, fairly common on aircooled.

SBD EEM vs. fan cycling (air) or two

speed (evap)

Savings highly related to 1.1 and 1.2.;

emerging use of BLDC motors

1.4

Condenser size (approach)

Air cooled standard practice 10 F (LT

and 15 F (MT) approach; approx. 20 F
for evap

SBD base case approx. same, with

evap varying with WBT; EEM for larger
condenser

Issue of ratings not per standard, not

certified

1.5

Condenser specific efficiency

Wide variance; above and below the

SBD base case

Base case values established for aircooled and evap (BTUH/W)

Issue of ratings not per standard, not

certified; low power condensers larger
and higher charge; energy contrasts
with 1.3

Compressors, Suction Groups and Control

Scroll less efficient, improving; system
desigh is bigger issue; rating point
issue (65 F RGT)

2.1

Compressor type

Reciprocating, scroll and screws, in that Base case: recip, with exception to
order
allow scroll base in distributed

2.2

System configuration

Parallel (multiplex), distributed miniparallels, 1-2 compressor "satellites"

added; 2-6 suction groups, more with
distributed

Conditions for systems worse or better Highly variable; efficiency relates to

than average design; occasional,
match of suction group to load
project-specific
temperature rqmts

2.3

Suction group control (capacity

control)

Multipe compressors, uneven sizing,

unloaders on recips, occasional
variable speed, digital (PWM)
modulation (proprietary)

Load varies continously, little

Conditions for systems worse or better
capacitance; very wide range of
than average design; occasional,
designs and capability to match
project-specific
capacity with load

2.4

Suction setpoint automation

(floating suction pressure)

Approx. 50% adoption, in use since 80's SBD EEM vs. fixed setpoint

2.5

Mechanical subcooling

Essentially standard for LT (cost a

wash), less frequent on MT, variations
in methods

Base case: LT subcooling on parallel

systems and on scrolls (inherent
economizer) with some exceptions;
EEM for MT subcooling

Implementation, savings vary -realizing approx third of technical

potential; requires fine-tuning
Various benefits; savings greatest at
peak ambient, varies with refrigerant,
allows smaller piping; detail methods
are system specific

1 of 6

Item
Description
Refrigerant, Direct vs Indirect Design

Current Practice

Savings By Design Basis

3.1

Type of refrigerant

404A or 507 are nearly 100%; some

407 and 410A emerging

Allows any appropriate refrigerant as

base

3.2

Low side indirect (i.e. chiller) vs.

direct design

95% direct refrigerant (DX); some

Base case allows glycol on MT with
glycol on MT, a few phase-change CO2 certain assumptions; LT CO2 assumed
on LT
identical net SST to DX

Notes
Interest in A2L ASHRAE category
allowing more options; more options
with indirect systems
Glycol systems to date appear to have
numerous inefficiencies vs. comparable
DX stores; revisit

Fixtures and Control

4.2
4.3

Reach-in door antisweat heater

control
LED lighting in reach-ins
LED lighting in open cases

4.4

Display case cooling means

4.5

Night curtains, night covers

Occasional use on non-24 hour stores

SBD EEM vs. no curtains

Savings may be lower than perception;

defrost impacts; may require
automation; NA for 24 hour stores

4.6

Defrost method (gas vs. electric);

applies to direct systems

Both used on LT and MT that requires

positive defrost vs air defrost

Either method can be used for base

case

Resistance heat use vs. system issues

with gas defrost; increased piping and
leaks with gas defrost

4.7

Demand defrost (frost sensor)

Time initiated, time or temperature

terminated

SBD EEM, but very infrequent

Proven in past, usually 75% reduction

in defrosts

4.8

Liquid-suction heat exchangers

(direct refrigerant)

Nominal (small) LSHX in LT cases only;

requires HX mfgrs to test, develop
models

Studied but not used as an EEM

Large savings, especially with newer

close-approach coils, will incr
performance under AHRI 1200

Use may be 10%

SBD EEM, relates to floating suction

pressure

4.1

Electronic expansion valves/case

controllers
Walk-ins, Unit Coolers and Controls
4.9

Trend has been to use low watt doors

instead, without control
Rapid increase in use ~50% now

EEM in certain situations only

Standard fixtures
Limited use to date
Secondary cooling excluded from AHRI
1200 test std for Fed rule

5.1

Unit cooler size (approach)

8 F to 15 F TD based on application, for Base case follows standard practice, no

Issues with not rated to a standard and
proper humidity and vs. defrost
EEM since bigger coil means bigger
not certified, commercialization
frequency (glycol coils different)
motors

5.2

Unit cooler specific efficiency

Wide variance

No base case or EEM for supermarket

size coils

Issue of ratings not per standard, not

certified

5.3

Variable speed fan control

Little or no adoption on supermarket

size evaporators

Studied but not used as an EEM

High savings potential, control

integration issues w/suction valves and
floating suction

5.4

Liquid-suction heat exchangers

(direct refrigerant)

Nominal (small) LSHX in LT cases only

Studied but not used as an EEM

Large savings, especially with newer

close-approach coils, Fed WI standard?

2 of 6

Item
HVAC

Description

Current Practice

Savings By Design Basis

Notes

Space heating from refrigeration

(heat recovery)

Small fraction of heat delivered from

refrigeration

SBD EEM for heat recovery vs. natural

gas (net of slight increase in electric)

Large savings potential; conflict with

refrigerant charge; numerous methods
possible, focus on those that don't
increase charge volume and variability

7.1

DHW heat recovery from

refrigeration

Very frequent use for many years.

EEM in certain instances.

With 404A/507 and misapplication,

often no or little savings. Better fit
with other refrigerants or address
misapplication.

7.2

Piping insulation

DX: long lines, insulate to avoid

dripping; indirect -- 1/2" or 3/4" on
glycol

No base case or EEM, some study

Technical issue of DX=RGT superheat

vs. indirect being actual load

7.3

Trunk vs. individual piping

Still large fraction of individual piping,

No base case or EEM, some study on
due to need to do so on hot gas defrost
RGT benefit
systems

6.1

Other

Lower RGT, lower charge, better cost

effectiveness of more insulation vs. hot
gas defrost -- may be important
comparison

SBD: Savings By Design

EEM: Energy Efficiency Measure
BLDC: Brushless DC (EC or ECM) motor
RGT: compressor return gas temperature

3 of 6

Title 24 Priority

High
High (allowing other methods?)
High (compare favorably with low
power condenser)
Valuable but unlikely by 2011 (requires
stds development)
High Important but requires standards
development; tradeoffs; Possible to set
a reasonable initial limit using
existing ratings.

Understand performance trade-offs for

distributed systems (low priority)
Not feasible without a performance
compliance option

No universal metric to represent control

capablity (low priority)
High (low cost but good results take
skill/time)
High (particularly valuable on
404A/507, LT only) MT system
specific, benefit from performance
method

4 of 6

Title 24 Priority
Challenge to combine GWP, efficiency,
charge quantity and leak rate
goes with refrigerant item; possible
prescriptive rationale (rating method
issue)
Low priority, effort directed to low power
heaters rather than control
High
High (rapidly evolving technology)

HIgh priority (automatic control

required?)
Requires a performance method to
address trade-offs; evaluate economics
to support HFC impacts.
Combine with 4.6; determine if electric
can to be more efficient
High (low cost) Requires regaining
pre-R-22 vendor interest and better
engineering
Low priority, situation specific.

Low priority for 2011 (requires stds

development); will drive revision to
selection practice
High (set reasonably met limits
since no certified ratings) goes with
5.6
High, potentially 2011, depends on
BLDC motor speed option and controls
High, likely no net capital cost
Requires regaining pre-R-22 vendor
interest and better engineering

5 of 6

Title 24 Priority
High potential but uncertain for 2011
(many potential methods requires
performance apporach) or set a
flexible requirement to use a small
percentage.

Uncertain, needs field investigation.

May not be viable with 404A/507

Important part of indirect package or

prescritive requirements
Potential high value, if not as a
regulation, as design information. Ties in
with electric vs. gas defrost noted above.

6 of 6