In addition to Regulatory tests and the hundreds of customer tests conducted world-wide PermaFrost recognises the further importance of independent third-party testing which is why in September of 2004 we enlisted the services of NSF International, The Toxicology Group, LLC to conduct a thorough test on the effects of PermaFrost within a refrigeration system.
STANDARDIZED TESTS
An Evaluation of the effects of PermaFrost on a Manitowoc Commercial Ice Machine
Prepared by Marilyn Sanders, The Toxicology Group, LLC - September 2004
OBJECTIVE
The objectives of the study were to verify the benefits afforded users of the PermaFrost product in an ice machine application, in terms of reduction in energy consumption and the reduction of the bin fill time. These benefits, in this application, can be translated into direct cost savings in the production of ice in the hospitality industry.
TEST PROCEDURE
-
The ice machine was allowed to stabilize for a minimum of 6 cycles to
establish a baseline of production time and energy consumption levels. -
1 oz of PermaFrost was added directly into the refrigerant line of the ice machine
-
The water feed for the ice machine was standard tap water. The unit was operated under standard room temperature and humidity conditions (73° and 50% humidity) during the entire testing period.
-
The energy consumption and bin fill times and any additional observations were measured and recorded before and after the addition of PermaFrost.
-
Testing continued for a maximum of 24 hours after the addition of PermaFrost to the ice machine.
RESULTS
Test details: an ice cuber model Manitowoc GR0150A was tested before and after the introduction of 1 oz of PermaFrost. This machine continuously circulates water over a cooled ice trough. When the ice reaches a certain adjustable point it completes a circuit that triggers the reverse hot cycle that heats the ice trough. The ice slides off the trough and into the bin. By doing so the ice actuates a baffle connected to a switch that signals the compressor to resume the cooling cycle. For this test the ice production time was measured and it was triggered off this switch. The energy consumption was monitored on the incoming power supply to the entire unit. Both prior to and after the introduction of PermaFrost the ice bin was completely empty so that the cycle times were run under the same conditions.
The ice cycle time decreased from 20 minutes to 13 minutes, with a portion (approximately 2 minutes) of this being attributed to a cooler bin due to ice presence. A 25% reduction in ice production time was attributed directly to the additive itself. The energy consumption decreased by approximately 6% after the addition of PermaFrost.
Table 2 - Manitowoc GR0150A
|
Average Interval |
Rate of Energy |
Pre-addition of PermaFrost |
20 |
491 |
Post-addition of PermaFrost |
15 |
458 |
CONCLUSION / SUMMARY
Over the 24-hour testing period the results indicated a decrease in ice production cycle time with a corresponding decrease in energy consumption when PermaFrost was added to the Manitowoc GR0150A (cuber type ice machine).
OBSERVATION
The above test is a two-fold demonstration of the efficiency improvements resulting from the use of PermaFrost within an ice machine as follows:
- Four cycles of ice production were produced within an hour compared to three cycles before PermaFrost,
- It took less energy to produce four cycles of ice after the use of PermaFrost than it did to produce three cycles before PermaFrost.
As such, the Manitowoc ice cuber machine now uses less kW’s and at the same time produces more ice in other words more cooling (ice production) for less energy (kWh’s).
