Giles EOF 10-10 22.0 kW Electric Fryer Performance Tests · Giles EOF 10-10 22.0 kW Electric Fryer Performance Tests ... or represents that its use will not ... The EOF 10-10 exhibited

Giles EOF 10-10 22.0 kW Electric Fryer Performance Tests

Application of ASTM Standard

Test Method F 2144-07

FSTC Report 5011.07.08

Food Service Technology Center June 2007

Prepared by: David Cowen

David Zabrowski Fisher-Nickel, Inc.

Contributors: Scott Miner

Fisher-Nickel Inc.

Prepared for:

Pacific Gas & Electric Company Customer Energy Efficiency Programs

P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, California 94177

© 2007 by Pacific Gas & Electric Company All rights reserved.

The information in this report is based on data generated at the PG&E Food Service Technology Center.

Acknowledgments

California consumers are not obligated to purchase any full service or other service not funded by this program. This program is funded by California utility ratepayers under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission.

Los consumidores en California no estan obligados a comprar servicios completos o adicio-nales que no esten cubiertos bajo este programa. Este programa esta financiado por los usuarios de servicios públicos en California bajo la jurisdiccion de la Comision de Servicios Públicos de California.

A National Advisory Group provides guidance to the Food Service Technology Center Project. Members include:

Applebee’s International Group

California Energy Commission (CEC)

Denny’s Corporation

East Bay Municipal Utility District

Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc.

EPA Energy Star

Gas Technology Institute (GTI)

In-N-Out Burger

National Restaurant Association

Safeway, Inc.

Southern California Edison

Underwriters Laboratories (UL)

University of California at Berkeley

University of California at Riverside

US Department of Energy, FEMP

Specific appreciation is extended to Giles for supplying the FSTC with an electric fryer, Model EOF 10-10 for controlled testing in the ap-pliance laboratory.

Policy on the Use of Food Service Technology Center Test Results and Other Related Information

• Fisher-Nickel, inc. and the Food Service Technology Center

(FSTC) do not endorse particular products or services from any specific manufacturer or service provider.

• The FSTC is strongly committed to testing food service equipment using the best available scientific techniques and instrumentation.

• The FSTC is neutral as to fuel and energy source. It does not, in any way, encourage or promote the use of any fuel or energy source nor does it endorse any of the equipment tested at the FSTC.

• FSTC test results are made available to the general public through technical research reports and publications and are protected under U.S. and international copyright laws.

• In the event that FSTC data are to be reported, quoted, or referred to in any way in publications, papers, brochures, advertising, or any other publicly available documents, the rules of copyright must be strictly followed, including written permission from Fisher-Nickel, inc. in advance and proper attribution to Fisher-Nickel, inc. and the Food Service Technology Center. In any such publication, sufficient text must be excerpted or quoted so as to give full and fair repre-sentation of findings as reported in the original documentation from FSTC.

Legal Notice

This report was prepared as a result of work sponsored by the California Public Utilities Commission (Commission). It does not necessarily represent the views of the Commission, its employees, or the State of California. The Commission, the State of California, its employees, con-tractors, and subcontractors make no warranty, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor does any party represent that the use of this information will not infringe upon pri-vately owned rights. This report has not been approved or disapproved by the Commission nor has the Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this report.

Disclaimer

Neither Fisher-Nickel, inc. nor the Food Service Technology Center nor any of its employees makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or as-sumes any legal liability of responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any data, information, method, product or process dis-closes in this document, or represents that its use will not infringe any privately-owned rights, including but not limited to, patents, trademarks, or copyrights. Reference to specific products or manufacturers is not an endorsement of that product or manufacturer by Fisher-Nickel, inc., the Food Service Technology Center or Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). Retention of this consulting firm by PG&E to develop this report does not constitute endorsement by PG&E for any work performed other than that specified in the scope of this project.

Contents

5011.07.08 i Food Service Technology Center

Page Executive Summary ........................................................................... iii 1 Introduction .................................................................................. 1-1

Background ............................................................................. 1-1 Objectives ............................................................................... 1-2 Appliance Description ............................................................. 1-2

2 Methods ........................................................................................ 2-1 Setup and Instrumentation ...................................................... 2-1 Measured Energy Input Rate .................................................. 2-2 French Fry Tests ..................................................................... 2-3 Chicken Tests .......................................................................... 2-4 Energy Cost Model ................................................................... 2-5

3 Results .......................................................................................... 3-1 Energy Input Rate ................................................................... 3-1 Preheat and Idle Tests ............................................................ 3-1 Cooking Tests ......................................................................... 3-3 Results Discussion ................................................................... 3-8 Energy Cost Model ................................................................... 3-10

4 Conclusions ................................................................................. 4-1 5 References ................................................................................... 5-1 Appendix A: Glossary Appendix B: Appliance Specifications Appendix C: Results Reporting Sheets Appendix D: Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data Appendix E: Energy Cost Model

Figures

List of Figures and Tables

5011.07.08 ii Food Service Technology Center

Page 1-1 Giles EOF 10-10 Frypot ....................................................... 1-3 2-1 Equipment configuration ....................................................... 2-1 2-2 Thermocouple placement for testing .................................... 2-2 3-1 Giles EOF 10-10 Preheat characteristics ............................. 3-2 3-2 Frying medium temperature during a French Fry heavy-load test

for the EOF 10-10 fryer ............................................................ 3-4 3-3 French fry cook cycle temperature signature ......................... 3-5 3-4 Chicken cooking cycle temperature signature ...................... 3-7 3-5 Fryer part-load cooking-energy efficiency .............................. 3-9 3-6 Fryer cooking energy consumption profile ............................. 3-10

Page 1-1 Appliance Specifications ....................................................... 1-3 2-1 Chicken Load Size ................................................................ 2-4 2-2 Fryer Operation Assumptions ................................................ 2-5 3-1 Input, Preheat, and Idle Test Results ................................... 3-3 3-2 French Fry Cooking Test Results ......................................... 3-5 3-3 Chicken Test Results ............................................................. 3-8 3-4 Energy Cost Model ................................................................ 3-11

Tables

Executive Summary

5011.07.08 iii Food Service Technology Center

Giles’ EOF 10-10 split-vat electric fryer features ribbon elements, a split vat of stainless steel construction and a programmable cooking computer. The fryer’s computer control includes compensating timers for a more consistent product and Giles’ “Cool Mode” setting, which energy savings by reducing the setpoint during standby periods. Figure ES-1 illustrates the EOF 10-10 fryer, as tested at the Food Service Technology Center (FSTC).

FSTC engineers tested the fryer under the tightly controlled conditions of the American Society for Testing and Materials’ (ASTM) standard test method.1 Fryer performance is characterized by preheat time and energy consumption, idle energy consumption rate, cooking-energy efficiency, and production capacity.

Cooking performance was determined by cooking two different products: French fries and chicken. For the French fry tests, the fryer was used to cook 6 pounds of frozen fries per load. For the chicken tests, researchers used breaded 8-piece cut 2 ¾ pound frying chicken under two loading scenarios: heavy (72 pieces per load) and light (8 pieces per load). Production capacity includes the cooking time and the time required for the frying medium to recover to 330°F (recovery time).

Cooking-energy efficiency is a measure of how much of the energy that an appliance consumes is actually delivered to the food product during the cooking process. Cooking-energy efficiency is therefore defined by the fol-lowing relationship:

Appliance toEnergy Food toEnergy EfficiencyEnergy - Cooking =

1 American Society for Testing and Materials. 2007. Standard Test Method for the Perfor-mance of Large Open, Deep Fat Fryers. ASTM Designation F 2144-07, in Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Conshohocken, PA.

Figure ES-1. Giles EOF 10-10 Fryer.

Executive Summary

5011.07.08 iv Food Service Technology Center

A summary of the test results is presented in Table ES-1.

Table ES-1. Summary of Fryer Performance.

Non Cooking Tests

Rated Energy Input Rate (kW) 22.0

Measured Energy Input Rate (kW) 22.5

Preheat Time to 325°F (min) 11.2

Preheat Energy to 325°F (kWh) 4.36

Idle Energy Rate @ 325°F (kW) 1.12

Idle Energy Rate in “Cool Mode” (kW)a 0.83 French Fry Tests

Heavy-Load French Fry Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)b 81.6 ± 2.2

Heavy-Load French Fry Production Capacity (lb/h) b 115.1 ± 1.4 Chicken Tests

Heavy-Load Chicken Cooking Energy Efficiency (%)b 79.5 ± 2.3

Light-Load Chicken Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)b 59.5 ± 3.8

Heavy-Load Chicken Production Capacity (lb/h)b 91.2 ± 8.1 a The fryer will reduce the thermostat set point to approximately 285°F during idle as an energy saving strategy. b This range indicates the experimental uncertainty in the test result based on a minimum of three test runs.

The EOF 10-10 exhibited very high production capacities during both the French fry (115.1 lb/h) and chicken tests (91.2 lb/h), with equally impressive heavy-load cooking-energy efficiencies for both products. Figure ES-2 illu-strates the relationship between cooking-energy efficiency and production rate for the fryer.

Executive Summary

5011.07.08 v Food Service Technology Center

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140Production Rate (lb/h)

Coo

king

-Ene

rgy

Effi

cien

cy (%

) .

Chicken French Fry

Heavy Load

Light Load

Note: Chicken Tests: Light-load = 8 pieces/load; Heavy-load = 72 pieces/load. Note: French Fry Tests: Heavy-load = 6.0 lb/load.

The chicken test results can be used to estimate the annual energy consump-tion for the fryer in a real-world operation. A simple cost model was devel-oped to calculate the relationship between the various cost components (e.g., preheat, idle and cooking costs) and the annual operating cost, using the ASTM test data. For this model, the fryer was used to cook 150 pounds of chicken over a 12-hour day, with one preheat per day, 365 days per year. The cost model incorporates the “Cool Mode” during idle periods.

Table ES-4. Estimated Fryer Energy Consumption and Cost.

Preheat Energy (kWh/day) 4.36

Idle Energy (kWh/day)a 4.72

Cooking Energy (kWh/day) 28.1 Annual Energy (kWh/year) 13,578 Annual Cost ($/year)b 1,358

a Estimate is based on “cool mode” feature during idle. b Fryer energy costs are based on $0.10/kWh

Figure ES-2. Fryer part-load cooking-energy efficiency.

Executive Summary

5011.07.08 vi Food Service Technology Center

Giles’ EOF 10-10 fryer established itself as a versatile split vat deep fat elec-tric fryer. Its split vat design and size provides a restaurateur with the option of separately cooking large quantities of breaded product such as chicken, fish or traditional French fries without mixing flavors. During heavy load chicken testing the EOF 10-10 posted a cook time of 18.1 minutes, while achieving a cooking-energy efficiency result of 79.5% and a chicken produc-tion capacity of 91.2 lbs/h.

Giles’ EOF 10-10 features an idle “Cool Mode” during periods of non-operation. The fryer will reduce the preset idle temperature set point (325°F) to approximately 285°F when not cooking. This reduction in thermostat set point saw a drop in idle energy rate from 1.12 kW to 0.83 kW.

The low watt-density ribbon style elements transfer heat into the frying me-dium easily and effectively. Quick response times and rapid oil temperature recovery during cooking provide a food service operator with a workhorse fryer that can handle seriously high volume.

1 Introduction

5011.07.08 1-1 Food Service Technology Center

Fried foods continue to be popular on the restaurant scene. French fried pota-toes are still the most common deep fried food, along with onion rings, chicken and fish. Recent advances in equipment design have produced fryers that operate more efficiently, quickly, safely and conveniently.

Dedicated to the advancement of the food service industry, the Food Service Technology Center (FSTC) has focused on the development of standard test methods for commercial food service equipment since 1987. The primary component of the FSTC is a 10,000 square-foot appliance laboratory equipped with energy monitoring and data acquisition hardware, 60 linear feet of canopy exhaust hoods integrated with utility distribution systems, ap-pliance setup and storage areas, and a state-of-the-art demonstration and training facility.

The test methods, approved and ratified by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), allow benchmarking of equipment such that users can make meaningful comparisons among available equipment choices. End-use customers and commercial appliance manufacturers consider the FSTC to be the national leader in commercial food service equipment testing and standards, sparking alliances with several major chain customers to date.

Fryer performance is characterized by preheat time and energy consumption, idle energy consumption rate, pilot energy consumption rate, cooking-energy efficiency and production capacity. The ASTM test method for large vat fryers (F 2144-07) specifies two different food products—fried chicken and French fries.1 Based on the testing of several large vat fryers, it was deter-mined that the French fry test produced more repeatable cooking-energy effi-ciency results and demonstrated greater performance differences between large vat fryers. 3-6

Background

Introduction


Giles’ EOF 10-10 electric split vat fryer features elements submerged in the frying oil with a stainless steel frypot (split down the middle), backsplash, and a programmable cooking computer. The cooking computer controls an integrated melt cycle, which prevents solid frying medium from scorching during preheat, a “Cool Mode” feature that reduces the oil set point during idle periods, and individual programs for multiple food products.

This report presents the results of applying the ASTM test method1 to the Giles EOF 10-10 electric fryer. The glossary in Appendix A is provided so that the reader has a quick reference to the terms used in this report.

The objective of this report is to examine the operation and performance of Giles’ EOF 10-10, 18-inch electric fryer at an input rating of 22.0 kW, under the controlled conditions of the ASTM standard test method.1 The scope of this testing is as follows:

1. Verify that the appliance is operating at the manufacturer’s rated energy input.

2. Determine the time and energy required to preheat the appliance from room temperature to 325°F.

3. Characterize the idle energy use with the thermostat set at a ca-librated 325°F.

4. Determine cooking-energy efficiency under three scenarios: Heavy-load French fry tests (6 pounds per load at 350°F), Heavy-load chicken tests (72 piece load) at 335°F, Light-load chicken tests (8 pieces per load) at 335°F. Prior to light-load testing both vats were heated to set point. One fry vat was then turned off during testing.

5. Determine the production capacity and frying medium tempera-ture recovery time during the heavy-load tests.

6. Estimate the annual operating cost for the fryer using a standard cost model.

Objectives

Introduction


Giles’ EOF 10-10, 18-inch electric split vat fryer has a power rating of 22.0 kW. The fry pot is split down the middle and is of a stainless steel construc-tion and contains elements that provide a cooking platform within the fry vat (see Figure 1-1). A cooking computer allows for individualized programming for multiple food products. An integrated melt cycle prevents solid frying medium from scorching during preheat. The fryer features a “Cool Mode” setting, which reduces the thermostat set point during periods of non-operation.

Appliance specifications are listed in Table 1-1, and the manufacturer’s lite-rature is in Appendix B.

Table 1-1. Appliance Specifications.

Manufacturer Giles

Model EOF 10-10

Generic Appliance Type Open Deep Fat Split Vat Fryer

Rated Input 22.0 kW

Frying Area 10″ x 20″ x 12″ per Vat

Oil Capacity 120 lb

Controls Programmable cooking computer

Construction Stainless Steel

Appliance Description

Figure 1-1. Giles EOF 10-10 frypot.

2 Methods


FSTC researchers installed the fryer on a tiled floor under a 4-foot-deep ca-nopy hood that was 6 feet, 6 inches above the floor. The hood operated at a nominal exhaust rate of 300 cfm per linear foot of hood. There was at least 6 inches of clearance between the vertical plane of the fryers and the edge of the hood. All test apparatus was installed in accordance with Section 9 of the ASTM test method.1 See Figure 2-1.

Researchers instrumented the fryer with thermocouples to measure tempera-tures in the cold and the cooking zones and at the thermostat bulb. Two thermocouples were placed in the cook zone, one in the geometric center of the frypot, approximately 1 inch above the fry basket support, and the other at the tip of the thermostat bulb. The cold zone thermocouple was supported from above, independent of the frypot surface, so that the temperature of the cold zone reflected the frying medium temperature, not the frypot’s surface

temperature. The cold zone temperature was measured toward the rear of the frypot, 1/8-inch from the bottom of the pot (See Figure 2-2).

Setup and Instrumentation

Figure 2-1. Equipment configuration.

Methods


Power and energy were measured with a watt/watt-hour transducer that gen-erated an analog signal for instantaneous power and a pulse for every 10 Wh. A voltage regulator, connected to the fryers, maintained a constant voltage for all tests. Control energy was monitored with a watt-hour transducer that generated a pulse for every 0.00001 watt-hours. The energy meters and ther-mocouples were connected to a data logger which recorded data every five seconds.

The fryer was filled with Melfry Brand, partially hydrogenated, 100% pure vegetable oil for all tests except the energy input rate determination test. This test required the fryer to be filled with water to inhibit burner cycling during the test.

Rated energy input rate is the maximum or peak rate at which the fryer con-sumes energy—as specified on the fryer’s nameplate. Measured energy input rate is the maximum or peak rate of energy consumption, which is recorded during a period when the elements are energized (such as preheat). For the purpose of this test, the fryer was filled with water to the frypot’s indicated fill-line. The controls were set to attain maximum output and the energy con-sumption was monitored for a period of 15 minutes after a full rolling boil had been established. Researchers compared the measured energy input rate

Figure 2-2. Thermocouple placement for testing.

Measured Energy Input Rate

Methods


with the nameplate energy input rate to ensure that the fryer was operating properly.

The fryer was tested with ¼-inch blue ribbon product, par-cooked, frozen shoestring potatoes. Each load of French fries was cooked to a 30% weight loss. The tests involved “barreling” six loads of frozen French fries, using fry medium temperature as a basis for recovery. Each test was followed by a 10-minute wait period and was then repeated two more times. Researchers tested the fryer using 6-pound (heavy) French fry loads.

Due to the logistics involved in removing one load of cooked French fries and placing another load into the fryer, a minimum preparation time of 10 seconds was incorporated into the cooking procedure. This ensures that the cooking tests are uniformly applied from laboratory to laboratory. Fryer re-covery was then based on the frying medium reaching a threshold tempera-ture of 340°F (measured at the center of the cook zone). Reloading within 10°F of the 350°F thermostat set point does not significantly lower the aver-age oil temperature over the cooking cycle, nor does it extend the cook time. The fryer was reloaded either after the cook zone thermocouple reached the threshold temperature or 10 seconds after removing the previous load from the fryer, whichever was longer.

The first load of each six-load cooking test was designated as a stabilization load and was not counted when calculating the elapsed time and energy used. Energy monitoring and elapsed time of the test were determined after the second load contacted the frying medium. After removing the last load and allowing the fryer to recover, researchers terminated the test. Total elapsed time, energy consumption, weight of fries cooked, and average weight loss of the French fries were recorded for the last five loads of the six-load test.

The French fry tests were run in the following sequence: three replicates of the heavy-load test followed by three replicates of the light-load test. This procedure ensured that the reported cooking energy efficiency and produc-

French Fry Tests

Methods


tion capacity results had an uncertainty of less than ±10%. The results from each test run were averaged, and the absolute uncertainty was calculated based on the standard deviation of the results.

The chicken tests were conducted with 8-piece cut, 2 ¾-pound, individually quick frozen frying chicken which had been thawed, breaded, and stabilized in a refrigerator at 38 °F. Researchers tested the fryers using nominal heavy and light-loads of chicken (Table 2-1). Each load comprised an equal number of breasts, wings, legs, and thighs. To accommodate the large breast pieces, the chicken was cooked to an average weight loss (including legs, wings, thighs and breasts) of 35 ± 2%. This ensured fully-cooked chicken with no redness in the center.

Table 2-1. Chicken Load Size.

Heavy-Load (pieces) 72

Light-Load (pieces) 8

During the testing, energy, time and oil temperature were recorded at 5-secound intervals. Chicken temperature and weight loss were measured and recorded for use in energy calculations. Thermostat set point was raised from 325°F to 335°F at the request of the manufacturer.

Due to logistics in removing one load of cooked chicken and placing another load into the fryer, a minimum preparation time of 10 minutes was incorpo-rated into the cooking procedure. This ensures that the cooking tests are un-iformly applied from laboratory to laboratory. Fryer recovery was then based on the frying medium reaching a threshold temperature of 330°F (measured at the center of the cook zone).

The chicken tests were run in a minimum of the following sequence: three replicates of the heavy-load test and three replicates of the light-load test. This procedure ensured that the reported cooking-energy efficiency and pro-

Chicken Tests

Methods


duction capacity results had an uncertainty of less than ±10%. The results from each test run were averaged, and the absolute uncertainty was calcu-lated based on the standard deviation of the results.

The ASTM results reporting sheets appear in Appendix C.

Fryer operating cost was calculated based on a combination of test data and assumptions about typical fryer usage. This provides a standard method for estimating fryer energy consumption based on ASTM performance test re-sults. The examples contained in the operating cost model are for informa-tional purposes only, and should not be considered an absolute.

The model assumed a typical twelve-hour day, with the operation being bro-ken down into three operating scenarios; preheat, idle and cooking. One pre-heat is assumed per day with the remainder being split between idle and cooking periods. During the day, 150 lbs. of food would be cooked; 70% under heavy-load (72 pieces) conditions with the remaining 30% under light-load (8 pieces) conditions. The idle time was calculated as the total time of operation minus preheat and cooking times. The total daily energy usage was calculated based on the fryer’s energy consumption in each of these operat-ing scenarios. The cost model assumptions are listed in Table 2-2. Details of this calculation can be found in Appendix E of this report.

Table 2-2: Fryer Operation Assumptions.

Operating Time (h) 12

Number of Preheats 1

Total Amount of Food Cooked (lb) 150

Energy Cost Model

3 Results


Prior to testing, the energy input rate was measured and compared with the manufacturer’s nameplate value. This procedure ensured that the fryer was operating within its specified parameters. The measured energy input rate was 22.5 kW (a difference of 2.1% from the nameplate rating).

These tests show how the fryer uses energy when it is not cooking food. The preheat time allows an operator to know precisely how long it takes for the fryer to be ready to cook. The idle energy rate represents the energy required to maintain the set temperature 325°F, or the appliance’s stand-by losses.

Preheat Energy and Time

Researchers filled the fryer with new oil, which was then heated to 325°F at least once prior to any testing. The preheat tests were conducted at the begin-ning of a test day, after the oil had stabilized at room temperature overnight. Giles’ cooking computer has an integrated melt cycle to prevent scorching of solid shortening. Giles’ EOF 10-10 fryer was ready to cook in 11.2 minutes. Figure 3-1 shows the fryer’s preheat characteristics.

Idle Energy Rate

Once the frying medium reached 325°F, the fryer was allowed to stabilize for half an hour. Time and energy consumption was monitored for an additional two-hour period as each fryer maintained the oil at 325°F. The idle energy rate during this period was 1.12 kW. The EOF fryer features a “Cool Mode” setting, which reduces the thermostat set point from 325°F to approximately 285°F during periods of non-operation (e.g., after approximately

Energy Input Rate

Preheat and Idle Tests

Results


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20Time (min)

Tem

pera

ture

(°F)

.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Ene

rgy

Rat

e (k

W)

.

Left Vat Center Oil Left Vat Thermsotat Right Vat Center Oil Right Vat Thermostat

Preheat Duration

Elecritc Energy Rate

12 minutes). The “Cool Mode” setting reduced the fryer’s idle energy rate by 26% to 0.83 kW. When cooking needs to take place the fryer returns to the original thermostat set point of 325°F.

Test Results

Input, preheat, and idle test results are summarized in Table 3-1.

Figure 3-1. Giles EOF 10-10 preheat characteristics.

Results


Table 3-1. Input, Preheat, and Idle Test Results.

Rated Energy Input Rate (kW) 22.0

Measured Energy Input Rate (kW) 22.5

Percentage Difference (%) 2.07

Preheat

Time to 325°F (min) 11.2

Preheat Energy (kWh) 4.36

Preheat Rate to 325°F (°F/min) 22.4

Idle Energy Rate

Idle Energy Rate at 325°F (kW) 1.12

Idle Energy Rate in Cool Mode (kW)a 0.83 a

The fryer will reduce the thermostat set point to approximately 285°F during idle as an energy saving strategy.

The fryer was tested using two different food products (frozen French fries and 8-piece frying chicken) under three scenarios—heavy-load French fry tests (6 pounds per load), heavy-load chicken tests (72 pieces per load) and light-load chicken tests (8 pieces per load).

French Fry Tests

The fryer was tested under heavy-load scenario at 6 pounds of fries per load. The fries used for the cooking tests consisted of approximately 6% fat and 66% moisture, as specified by the ASTM procedure. Researchers monitored French fry cook time and weight loss, frying medium recovery time, and fryer energy consumption during these tests.

The heavy-load cooking tests were designed to reflect a fryer’s maximum performance. The fryers were used to cook six 6-pound loads of frozen French fries—one load after the other in rapid succession, similar to a batch-cooking procedure. Figures 3-2 shows the average temperature of the frying medium during the heavy-load tests.

Cooking Tests

Results


280

290

300

310

320

330

340

350

360

370

380

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22Time (min)

Tem

pera

ture

(°F)

.

Left Vat Center Oil Right Vat Center Oil Left Vat Thermostat Right Vat Thermostat

Fries placed in oil Fries removed from oil

Run #1 Run #2 Run #3 Run #4 Run #5 Run #6

The first load was used to stabilize the fryer, and the remaining five loads were used to calculate cooking-energy efficiency and production capacity. The heavy-load cook time for the fryer was 2.39 minutes with an average recovery time of 44.4 seconds. Figure 3-4 illustrates the temperature re-sponse of the Giles fryer while cooking an 6-pound load of frozen French fries. Production capacity includes the time required to remove the cooked fries and reload the fryer with a new batch of frozen fries (approximately 10 seconds per load).

Figure 3-2. Frying medium temperarture during aFrench Fry heavy-load test for the EOF 10-10 fryer.

Results


300

310

320

330

340

350

360

0 1 2 3 4Time (min)

Tem

pera

ture

(°F)

.


Fries placed in oil

Fries removed from oil

Fryer recovered

Heavy-load cooking-energy efficiency results were 82.0%, 80.6% and 82.2%, yielding a maximum uncertainty of 2.2%. Table 3-2 summarizes the results of the ASTM cooking-energy efficiency and production capacity tests for French fries.

Table 3-2. French Fry Cooking Test Results.

Heavy-Load

Load Size (lb) 6.0

French Fry Cook Time (min) 2.39

Average Recovery Time (sec) 44.4

Production Rate (lb/h)a 115.1 ± 1.4

Energy to Food (Btu/lb) 559

Electric Cooking Energy Rate (kW) 23.1

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb) 686

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a 81.6 ± 2.2 a This range indicates the experimental uncertainty in the test result based on a minimum of three test runs.

Figure 3-3. French fry cooking cycle temperature signature.

Results


Chicken Tests

The fryer was tested using 8-piece cut, 2 ¾-pound chickens that had been thawed, breaded, and stabilized at 38°F to 40°F. For heavy-load tests, the EOF 10-10 fryer was used to cook 72 pieces per load (18 of each type of piece–breast, wings, legs and thighs). Researchers monitored chicken cook-ing time and weight loss, frying medium temperature, and fryer energy con-sumption during these tests.

The heavy-load cooking tests were designed to reflect a fryer’s maximum performance. The fryer was used to cook a minimum of three heavy loads of breaded chicken, simulating a peak cooking period. Cooking-energy effi-ciency and production capacity were determined from these tests. The cha-racteristic temperature curve, or temperature signature, during a single heavy-load indicates how well the fryer maintained the oil temperature dur-ing a cooking event. This curve is also an indicator of product quality as the chicken pieces begin to absorb more oil at lower cooking temperatures. Fig-ure 3-4 shows the temperature signature during a heavy-load test.

The heavy-load cook time for the Giles fryer was 18.1 minutes. Production capacity includes the cook time and a 30 second reload time.

Results


280

290

300

310

320

330

340

350

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20Time (min)

Oil

Tem

pera

ture

(°F)

.


Chicken removed from oil

Chicken dropped in oil

Light load tests represent the fryer’s performance under non-peak conditions. Since a fryer is often used to cook single-basket loads during slow periods, these part-load efficiencies can be used to estimate a fryer’s performance in an actual operation. Both vats were heated to set point (335°F) prior to the start of testing. Light-load tests were conducted using a single fry basket and vat. Once testing began the vat not being use for testing was turned off. The fryer, during light-load testing, demonstrated cooking-energy efficiencies of 59.5%, while producing 9.1 lbs/h.

Heavy-load cooking-energy efficiency results were 78.5%, 80.3% and 79.4%, yielding a maximum uncertainty of 2.3%. Table 3-3 summarizes the results of the ASTM cooking-energy efficiency and production capacity tests for chicken.

Figure 3-4. Chicken cook cycle tempeature signature.

Results


Table 3-3. Chicken Cooking Test Results.

Heavy-Load Light-Load

Load Size (pieces) 72 8

Cook Time (min) 18.1 20.1

Production Rate (lb/h)a 91.2 ± 8.1 9.05 ± 0.5

Energy to Food (Btu/lb) 469 449

Electric Cooking Energy Rate (kW) 15.8 2.00

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb) 591 2,287

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a 79.5 ± 2.3 59.5 ± 3.8 a This range indicates the experimental uncertainty in the test result based on a minimum of three test runs.

Energy imparted to each food product was calculated by separating the vari-ous components (water, fat, and solids) and determining the amount of heat gained by each component (Appendix D). The fryer’s cooking-energy effi-ciency for a given loading scenario is the amount of energy imparted to the food product, expressed as a percentage of the amount of energy consumed by the fryer during the cooking process.

Figure 3-5 illustrates the relationship between cooking-energy efficiency and production rate for this fryer. Fryer production rate is a function of both the French fry cook time and the frying medium recovery time. Appendix D con-tains a synopsis of test data for each replicate of the cooking tests.

Results Discussion

Results


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Coo

king

-Ene

rgy

Effi

cien

cy (%

) .

Chicken French Fry

Heavy Load

Light Load


Figure 3-6 illustrates the relationship between the fryer’s average energy consumption rate and the production rate. This graph can be used as a tool to estimate the daily energy consumption and probable demand for the fryer in a real-world operation. End-use monitoring studies have shown that an elec-tric appliance’s probable contribution to the building’s peak demand is equal to the appliance’s average energy consumption rate during a typical day.5 Average energy consumption rates at 10, 30, and 50 pounds per hour were 2.6 kW, 5.8 kW, and 9.1 kW, respectively. For an operation cooking an aver-age of 15 pounds of food per hour over the course of the day (e.g., 150 lb of food over a ten hour day), the probable demand contribution for this fryer would be 3.4 kW.

Figure 3-5. Fryer part-load cooking-energy efficiency.

Results


0

5

10

15

20

25

30


Coo

king

Ene

rgy

Rat

e (k

W)

.

Chicken French Fry

AS

TM P

rodu

ctio

n C

apac

ity

Heavy Load

Idle Energy Rate

Light Load


The test results can be used to estimate the annual energy consumption for the fryer in a real-world operation. A simple cost model was developed to calculate the relationship between the various cost components (e.g., preheat, idle and cooking costs) and the annual operating cost, using the ASTM test data. For this model, the fryer was used to cook 150 pounds of chicken over a 12-hour day, with one preheat per day, 365 days per year. The idle (ready-to-cook) time for the fryer was determined by taking the difference between the total daily on-time (12 hours) and the equivalent full-load cooking time. This approach produces a more accurate estimate of the operating cost for the fryer. The cost model incorporates the “Cool Mode” during idle periods, which is the normal operating state for this fryer.

Figure 3-6. Fryer cooking energy consumption profile.

Energy Cost Model

Results


Table 3-4. Estimated Fryer Energy Consumption and Cost.

Preheat Energy (kWh/day) 4.36

Idle Energy (kWh/day)a 4.72

Cooking Energy (kWh/day) 28.1 Annual Energy (kWh/year) 13,578 Annual Cost ($/year)b 1,358

a Estimate is based on “cool mode” feature during idle. b Fryer energy costs are based on $0.10/kWh

4 Conclusions


Giles’ EOF 10-10 split-vat electric fryer was successfully tested at the PG&E Food Service Technology Center. The fryer exhibited strong performance while cooking both breaded chicken product and traditional French fries. During the heavy-load chicken tests, the fryer produced 91.2 lbs/h while de-monstrating a cooking-energy efficiency of 79.5%. Similarly, during the French fry tests, the fryer achieved a cooking-energy efficiency of 81.6%, while producing an impressive 115.1 lbs/h of food.

While the EOF 10-10 fryer really showed its prowess with heavy-loads, it posted impressive light-load efficiencies as well. During the light-load chick-en tests one of the vats was turned off. This contributed to a light-load cook-ing-energy efficiency of 59.5% and a production rate of 9.1 lb/h.

During non-cooking periods, the fryer required only 1.12 kW to maintain a thermostat set point of 325°F. The EOF 10-10 features a “Cool Mode”, which allows the fryer to drop the thermostat set point to approximately 285°F, after the fryer sits idle for a certain period of time. When allowed to enter “Cool Mode” the idle energy rate saw a reduction of 26% (0.83 kW).

The estimated operational cost of the EOF 10-10 large vat electric fryer is $1,358 per year. The model assumes the fryer is used to cook 150 lbs of chicken over a 12-hour day, 365 days a year. The model also assumes one preheat each day with the remaining on-time being an idle (standby) state.

Granted, the Giles EOF 10-10 fryer has a high input for conventional pres-sure fryers and kettle fryers, but this large vat open deep fat fryer offers ver-satility without sacrificing performance. This fryer is well suited for institu-tions requiring high volume production.

5 References


1. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2007. Standard Test Method for the Performance of Large Open Vat Fryers. ASTM Designation F 2144–07, in Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Consho-hocken, PA.

2. Conner, M. M., Young, R., Fisher, D.R. and Nickel, J., 1991. Development and Application of a Uniform Testing Procedure for Fryers. Pacific Gas and Electric Company Department of Research and Develop-ment Report 008.1.89.2, November.

3. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D. 2000. Vulcan High Capacity Fryer Performance Test: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F 1361–99. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.00.88, December.

4. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., Miner, S., 2005. Dean HD-60 Large Vat Gas Fryer Performance Tests: Ap-plication of ASTM Standard Test Method F 2144–01. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.05.11, August.

5. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., Miner, S., 2005. Henny Penny OFE-341 22.0 kW Electric Fryer Performance Testing: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F 2144–05. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.05.17, November.

6. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., Miner, S., 2006. Pitco SSH55 Gas Fryer Performance Tests: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F 1361–05. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.06.17, October.

7. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., Miner, S., 2006. Pitco SSH75 Gas Fryer Performance Tests: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F 2144-05. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.06.18, October.

8. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., Miner, S., 2006. Pitco SSH75R Gas Fryer Performance Tests: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F 2144-05. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.06.19, October.

9. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., Miner, S., 2007. Alto Shaam ASF-75G Gas Fryer Performance Tests: Appli-cation of ASTM Standard Test Method F 2144-05. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.07.03, March.

10. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., 2007. Giles EOF-24 30.0 KW Electric Fryer Performance Tests: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F 2144-07. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.07.07, May.

A Glossary

5011.07.08 A-1 Food Service Technology Center

Cooking Energy (kWh or kBtu) The total energy consumed by an ap-pliance as it is used to cook a specified food product.

Cooking Energy Consumption Rate (kW or kBtu/h)

The average rate of energy consumption during the cooking period.

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)

The quantity of energy input to the food products; expressed as a percentage of the quantity of energy input to the ap-pliance during the heavy-, medium-, and light-load tests.

Duty Cycle (%) Load Factor

The average energy consumption rate (based on a specified operating period for the appliance) expressed as a percen-tage of the measured energy input rate.

Duty Cycle =

RateInput Energy MeasuredRate nConsumptioEnergy Average x 100

Energy Input Rate (kW or kBtu/h) Energy Consumption Rate Energy Rate

The peak rate at which an appliance will consume energy, typically reflected dur-ing preheat.

Heating Value (Btu/ft3)

Heating Content The quantity of heat (energy) generated by the combustion of fuel. For natural gas, this quantity varies depending on the constitu-ents of the gas.

Idle Energy Rate (kW or Btu/h) Idle Energy Input Rate Idle Rate

The rate of appliance energy consumption while it is holding or maintaining a stabi-lized operating condition or temperature.

Idle Temperature (°F, Setting)

The temperature of the cooking cavi-ty/surface (selected by the appliance opera-tor or specified for a controlled test) that is maintained by the appliance under an idle condition.

Idle Duty Cycle (%) Idle Energy Factor

The idle energy consumption rate expressed as a percentage of the measured energy in-put rate.

Idle Duty Cycle = RateInput Energy MeasuredRate nConsumptioEnergy Idle x 100

Glossary

5011.07.08 A-2 Food Service Technology Center

Measured Input Rate (kW or Btu/h) Measured Energy Input Rate Measured Peak Energy Input Rate

The maximum or peak rate at which an appliance consumes energy, typically re-flected during appliance preheat (i.e., the period of operation when all burners or elements are “on”).

Pilot Energy Rate (kBtu/h) Pilot Energy Consumption Rate

The rate of energy consumption by the standing or constant pilot while the ap-pliance is not being operated (i.e., when the thermostats or control knobs have been turned off by the food service op-erator).

Preheat Energy (kWh or Btu) Preheat Energy Consumption

The total amount of energy consumed by an appliance during the preheat pe-riod.

Preheat Rate (°F/min)

The rate at which the cook zone heats during a preheat.

Preheat Time (minute) Preheat Period

The time required for an appliance to warm from the ambient room tempera-ture (75 ± 5°F) to a specified (and cali-brated) operating temperature or ther-mostat set point.

Production Capacity (lb/h)

The maximum production rate of an ap-pliance while cooking a specified food product in accordance with the heavy-load cooking test.

Production Rate (lb/h) Productivity

The average rate at which an appliance brings a specified food product to a speci-fied “cooked” condition.

Rated Energy Input Rate (kW, W or Btu/h, Btu/h) Input Rating (ANSI definition) Nameplate Energy Input Rate Rated Input

The maximum or peak rate at which an ap-pliance consumes energy as rated by the manufacturer and specified on the namep-late.

Recovery Time (minute, second)

The average time from the removal of the fry baskets from the fryer until the frying medium is within 5°F of the thermostat set point and the fryer is ready to be reloaded.

Test Method

A definitive procedure for the identification, measurement, and evaluation of one or more qualities, characteristics, or properties of a material, product, system, or service that produces a test result.

Typical Day

A sampled day of average appliance usage based on observations and/or operator inter-views, used to develop an energy cost model for the appliance.

B Appliance Specifications

5011.07.08 B-1 Food Service Technology Center

Appendix B includes the product literature for the Giles EOF 10-10 fryer.

Table B-1. Appliance Specifications.

Manufacturer Giles

Model EOF 10-10

Generic Appliance Type Open Deep Fat Split Vat Fryer

Rated Input 22.0 kW

Frying Area 10″ x 20″ x 12″ per Vat

Oil Capacity 120 lb

Controls Programmable cooking computer

Construction Stainless Steel

Printed in U.S.A. 4/19/2006 Form 63991-A

Design Features

Automatic Basket LiftThe Automatic Basket Liftenables the operator to loadthe fryer, set the timer andactivate the basket lift inone step. When the fryingcycle is complete, thebasket is automaticallyraised out of theshortening, allowing for safeand easy unloading of theproduct.

Giles Foodservice Equipment A Division of Giles Enterprises, Inc.An ISO 9001 Registered Company2750 Gunter Park Drive West • Montgomery, AL 36109 USAPhone 334.272.1457 • Fax 334.272.3561 • Phone Toll Free 1.800.554.4537Web Site: www.gilesent.com • Email: [email protected]

Listings

Item No.: ___ _Quantity: ___________________

Project Name: ___________________ SIS#: ___________________

AIA/CSI#: ___________________

Automatic OilFiltration SystemDesigned to complete afilter cycle within fiveminutes, the Automatic OilFiltration System, whichuses disposable filter paper,allows the operator towash, rinse, drain and filterthe oil in one motion.Refilling the Fry Vat isautomatic. The system canincrease your shortening lifeby 50%.

Now you’re Cooking!You can increase productivity and takeprofits to the “Bank” with the Giles Banked Fryer. The GilesBanked Fryer is designed for foodservice operations wheregetting large quantities of product cooked quickly is important. Inthe standard configuration (two 10-inch and one 24-inch unit) theGiles Banked Fryer can produce tremendous amounts of friedproducts. With additional components, your Giles Banked Fryercan produce even more product.

The Giles Banked Fryer cooks food quickly, and with our fastrecovery times, you won’t waste time waiting for oil that has lostits temperature. This revolutionary cooking system offers fast anddelicious product.

The Giles Banked Fryer is simple to use. The durable, accuratetiming system is engineered to be user friendly. All controls forthe built-in filtering system are located in a central section of thefryer to minimize workload and make filtering easy.

The Giles Autolift System is standard on each 10-inch fryer andoptional on the 24-inch fryer. Other options include a melt cyclefor Canadian units and customization of the type of cookingcompartments with up to three 24-inch units combined into asingle Giles Banked Fryer.

For more information on the Giles Banked Fryer or any of our otherfoodservice products, call 1-800-554-4537 (in the US or Canada) or 1-334-272-1457.

Banked FryerModel EOF-10-10/FFLT/24 or EOF-10-10/FFLT/24/24

Model: EOF-10-10/FFLT/24

Model: EOF-10-10/FFLT/24/24

Printed in U.S.A. 4/19/2006 Form 63991-A

Construction:

Cabinet and Fry Vat: 20Ga to 16Ga Stainless SteelHeating Element: 10-10 Vats -Stainless Steel Flat, 24 Vat -Stainless SteelRoundCooking Computer:

(1) Adjustable Cooking Temperature, Max. Temperature: 375°F [190°C]24 Vat -(2) Timer Cycles, each cycle with (4) presets10-10 Vats -(1) Timer Cycle per vat, with (4) presetsHigh Limit Thermostat: 450°F [220°C]

Capacity:

10-10 Vats:Shortening Capacity: 58 lbs. [26 kg] per (1) vatProduction Capacity: 12-15 lbs [5-6 kg] of cut chicken (40 pieces) using 3-1/2 lb [1.5 kg] bird per (1) vat.

24 Vat: Shortening Capacity: 170 lbs. [77 kg]Production Capacity: 36-42 lbs [16-19 kg] of cut chicken (96 pieces) using 3-1/2 lb [1.5 kg] bird.

Electrical Specifications:

Available voltages: 208/240/480V -10-10 Vats -24,000 WATTS-24 Vat -30,000 WATTS

10-10 Vats -3 phase - 208/240/480V - 76/66/33 AMPS24 Vat -3 phase - 208/240/480V - 100/87/43 AMPS(No service cord provided)Listings:

UL (US and Canada), UL Sanitation, CEShipping Specifications:

Crated Weight: 1069 lbs [485 kg] EOF-10-10/FFLT/24Crated Weight: 1311 lbs [595 kg] EOF- 10-10/FFLT/24/24Crated Cube Size: 50”D X 108”L X 61”H = 190.6 cu ft

[1270mm X 2743mm X 1549mm = 5.4 cu meters]

How To Specify

SpecificationsWe reserve the right to change specifications and product design without notice. Such revisions do not entitle the buyer to corresponding changes, improvements,additions or replacements on previously purchased equipment.

Banked FryerModel EOF-10-10/FFLT/24 or EOF-10-10/FFLT/24/24

Voltage Hz Phase Model Part Number208 60 3 EOF-10-10/FFLT/24 71116240 60 3 EOF-10-10/FFLT/24 71118480 60 3 EOF-10-10/FFLT/24 71119208 60 3 EOF-10-10/FFLT/24/24 71121240 60 3 EOF-10-10/FFLT/24/24 71123480 60 3 EOF-10-10/FFLT/24/24 71124

Description Part NumberProduct Scoop 70430Basket, EOF-10-10 70420Basket, EOF-24 70421Screen, Crumb, EOF-10-10 71110Screen, Crumb, EOF-24 70084Screen, FFLT 70085Filter Paper, (100) Sheets 60328Filter Powder, (60) packets 72004Boil Out (4) 8 lb containers 72003

Model and Electrical OptionsSpecify the part number from the following:1. 2. Accessories (additional charges)

Specify the part number and quantity of thefollowing accessory items needed:

ShippingSpecify the shipping method3.

Unit is shipped with (4) Fry baskets -if EOF-10-10/FFLT/24 (Product Scoop may be substituted for (2) Baskets), (6) Fry baskets -ifEOF-10-10/FFLT/24/24 (Product Scoop may be substituted for (2) Baskets), (2) Fry Screens, (1) FFLT Drain screen, (1) Drain hosewand, (5) Filter paper sheets, (1) Pot brush, (1) Kettle drain brush, (1) Stir paddle, (1) Crumb shovel, (1) Vat drain clean out bar and (1)Manual.

Accessories Included

Item No.: ___ _Quantity: ___________________

Project Name: ___________________ SIS#: ___________________

AIA/CSI#: ___________________

Giles Foodservice Equipment2750 Gunter Park Drive West • Montgomery, AL 36109 USAPhone 334.272.1457 • Fax 334.272.3561 • Phone Toll Free 1.800.554.4537Web Site: www.gilesent.com • Email: [email protected]

Qty

Inches [millimeters] Front Side

EOF-10-10/FFLT/24

EOF-10-10/FFLT/24/24

BA

SK

ET

LIF

T IN

UP

PO

SIT

ION

10-10 Vats 24 Vat 24 VatFFLT

C Results Reporting Sheets

5011.07.08 C-1 Food Service Technology Center

Manufacturer: Giles

Models: EOF 10-10

Date: March 2007

Test Fryer and Elements

Description of operational characteristics: The Giles EOF-10-10 split vat electric fryer is rated at 22 kW

and features an element in each vat which plugs into the rear wall of the fry vat. Each fry vat has a basket

lift for heavy product during cooking. The fryer is controlled by a solid state thermostat and a cooking

computer which allows the operator to assign multiple cooking profiles for various food products.

Apparatus

√ Check if testing apparatus conformed to specifications in section 6.

Deviations: Thermostat set point was raised from 325 °F to 335°F for heavy- and light-load chicken tests.

Energy Input Rate

Name Plate (kW) 22.0

Measured (kW) 22.5

Percent Difference between Measured and Rated (%) 2.07

Oil Capacity

Single Vat Oil Capacity (lbs) 60.1

Results Reporting Sheets


Preheat Energy and Time

Starting Temperature (°F) 74.6

Energy Consumption (kWh) 4.36

Duration (min) 11.2

Preheat Rate (°F/min) 22.4

Idle Energy Rate

Idle Energy Rate at 325°F (kW) 1.12

Idle Energy Rate in Cool Mode (285°F) (kW) 0.83

Heavy-Load Chicken Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Cooking Energy Rate

Load Size (pieces) 72

Cook Time (min) 18.1

Production Capacity (lb/h) a 91.2 ± 8.1





Light-Load Chicken Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Cooking Energy Rate

Load Size (lb) 8.0


Production Rate (lb/h) a 9.1 ± 0.5


Cooking Energy Rate (kW) 2.00



Results Reporting Sheets


Heavy-Load French Fry Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Cooking Energy Rate

Load Size (lb) 8.0


Average Recovery Time (sec) 44.4

Production Capacity (lb/h) a 115.1 ± 1.4





D Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

5011.07.08 D-1 Food Service Technology Center

Table D-1. Specific Heat and Latent Heat

Specific Heat (Btu/lb, °F)

Ice 0.500

Fat 0.400

Solids 0.200

Chicken 0.688

Frozen French Fries 0.695

Latent Heat (Btu/lb)

Fusion, Water 144

Fusion, Fat 44

Vaporization, Water 970

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data


Table D-2. Heavy-Load French Fry Test Data

Repetition #1 Repetition #2 Repetition #3

Measured Values Test Voltage (V) 208 208 208 Energy Consumption (kWh) 6.00 6.08 6.00 Total Energy (Btu) 20,478 20,751 20,478 Cook Time (min) 2.33 2.42 2.42 Total Test Time (min) 15.6 15.7 15.6 Weight Loss (%) 29.00 29.30 29.20 Initial Weight (lb) 30.000 30.000 30.000 Final Weight (lb) 21.309 21.202 21.238 Initial Moisture Content (%) 69.1 69.1 69.1 Final Moisture Content (%) 51.9 52.5 51.8 Initial Temperature (°F) 0 0 0 Final Temperature (°F) 212 212 212

Calculated Values Initial Weight of Water (lb) 20.730 20.730 20.730 Final Weight of Water (lb) 11.059 11.131 11.001 Sensible (Btu) 4,420 4,420 4,420 Latent – Heat of Fusion (Btu) 2,985 2,985 2,985 Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu) 9,381 9,311 9,437 Total Energy to Food (Btu) 16,786 16,716 16,482 Energy to Food (Btu/lb) 560 557 561 Total Energy to Fryer (Btu) 20,478 20,751 20,478 Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb) 683 692 683

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%) 82.0 80.6 82.2 Electric Energy Rate (kW) 23.1 23.2 23.0 Production Rate (lb/h) 115.6 114.5 115.1 Average Recovery Time (sec) 46.8 43.2 42.6



Table D-3. Heavy-Load Chicken Test Data

Repetition #1 Repetition #2 Repetition #3

Measured Values Test Voltage (V) 208 208 208 Energy Consumption (kWh) 4.68 4.68 4.92 Total Energy (Btu) 15,973 15,973 16,792 Total Test Time (min) 18.1 18.1 18.1 Weight Loss (%) 35.60 37.70 36.70 Initial Weight (lb) 27.061 26.818 28.669 Final Weight (lb) 17.422 16.702 18.141 Initial Moisture Content (%) 68.0 68.0 68.0 Final Moisture Content (%) 48.5 47.8 48.7 Initial Temperature (°F) 37 38 38 Final Temperature (°F) 192 194 193 Water Loss (lb) 9.95 10.3 10.6

Calculated Values Initial Weight of Water (lb) 18.401 18.236 19.494 Final Weight of Water (lb) 8.450 7.984 8.835 Sensible (Btu) 2,886 2,878 3,038 Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu) 9,652 9,944 10,340 Total Energy to Food (Btu) 12,538 12,822 13,378 Energy to Food (Btu/lb) 463 478 467 Total Energy to Fryer (Btu) 15,973 15,973 16,792 Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb) 590 596 586

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%) 78.5 80.6 79.7 Electric Energy Rate (kW) 15.5 15.5 16.3 Production Rate (lb/h) 89.7 89.0 95.0



Table D-4. Light-Load Chicken Test Data

Repetition #1 Repetition #2 Repetition #3 Repetition #4

Measured Values Test Voltage (V) 208 208 208 208 Energy Consumption (kWh) 0.72 0.64 0.68 0.64 Total Energy (Btu) 2,457 2,184 2,321 2,184 Total Test Time (min) 20.1 20.1 20.2 20.0 Weight Loss (%) 33.30 33.00 33.20 33.40 Initial Weight (lb) 3.102 2.941 2.946 3.114 Final Weight (lb) 2.069 1.969 1.969 2.075 Initial Moisture Content (%) 68.0 68.0 68.0 68.0 Final Moisture Content (%) 49.4 49.2 47.3 50.2 Initial Temperature (°F) 39 37 38 38 Final Temperature (°F) 198 189 199 190 Water Loss (lb) 1.09 1.03 1.07 1.08

Calculated Values Initial Weight of Water (lb) 2.109 2.000 2.003 2.118 Final Weight of Water (lb) 1.022 0.969 0.931 1.042 Sensible (Btu) 344 306 324 324 Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu) 1,054 1,000 1,040 1,044 Total Energy to Food (Btu) 1,398 1,306 1,364 1,368 Energy to Food (Btu/lb) 451 444 463 439 Total Energy to Fryer (Btu) 2,457 2,184 2,321 2,184 Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb) 792 743 788 701

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%) 56.9 59.8 58.8 62.6 Electric Energy Rate (kW) 2.15 1.91 2.02 1.92 Production Rate (lb/h) 9.3 8.8 8.8 9.3



Table D-5. French Fry Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Production Capacity Statistics

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a Production Capacity Heavy-Load (lb/h)a

Replicate #1 82.0 115.6

Replicate #2 80.6 114.5

Replicate #3 82.2 115.1

Average 81.7 115.1

Standard Deviation 0.87 0.55

Absolute Uncertainty 2.16 1.36

Percent Uncertainty 2.65 1.18 a This range indicates the experimental uncertainty in the test result based on a minimum of three test runs.

Table D-6. Chicken Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Production Capacity Statistics

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a Production Capacity Heavy-Load Light-Load (lb/h)a

Replicate #1 78.5 56.9 89.7

Replicate #2 80.3 59.8 89.0

Replicate #3 79.7 58.8 95.0

Replicate #4 — 62.6 —

Average 79.5 59.3 91.2

Standard Deviation 0.92 2.38 3.28

Absolute Uncertainty 2.28 3.78 8.13

Percent Uncertainty 2.87 6.35 8.91 a This range indicates the experimental uncertainty in the test result based on a minimum of three test runs.

E Energy Cost Model

5011.07.08 E-1 Food Service Technology Center

Procedure for Calculating the Energy Consumption of a Fryer Based on Reported Test Results

Appliance test results are useful not only for benchmarking appliance performance, but also for estimat-ing appliance energy consumption. The following procedure is a guideline for estimating fryer energy consumption based on data obtained from applying the appropriate test method.

The intent of this Appendix is to present a standard method for estimating fryer energy consumption based on ASTM performance test results. The examples contained herein are for information only and should not be considered an absolute. To obtain an accurate estimate of energy consumption for a partic-ular operation, parameters specific to that operation should be used (e.g., operating time, and amount of food cooked under heavy-, medium-, and light-load conditions).

The calculation will proceed as follows: First, determine the appliance operating time and total number of preheats. Then estimate the quantity of food cooked and establish the breakdown between heavy- (72 pieces) and light- (8 pieces) loads. For example, a fryer operating for 12 hours a day with one preheat cooked 150 pounds of food: 70% of the food was cooked under heavy-load conditions and 30% was cooked under light-load conditions. Calculate the energy due to cooking at heavy-, medium-, and light-load cooking rates, and then calculate the idle energy consumption. The total daily energy is the sum of these components plus the preheat energy. For simplicity, it is assumed that subsequent preheats require the same time and energy as the first preheat of the day.

The application of the test method to an electric fryer yielded the following results:

Energy Cost Model


Table E-1: Electric Fryer Performance Parameters.

Test Result

Preheat Time (min) 11.2

Preheat Energy (kWh) 4.36

Idle Energy Rate (kW) – “Cool Mode” 0.83

Heavy-Load Cooking Energy Rate (kW) 15.8

Light-Load Cooking Energy Rate (kW) 2.0

Production Capacity (lb/h) 91.2

Light-Load Production Rate (lb/h) 9.1

Step 1—The operation being modeled has the following parameters

Table E-2: Fryers Operation Assumptions.

Operating Time 12 h

Number of Preheats 1 preheat

Total Amount of Food Cooked 150 lb

Percentage of Food Cooked Under Heavy-Load Conditions 70% (× 150 lb = 105 lb)

Percentage of Food Cooked Under Light-Load Conditions 30% (× 150 lb = 45 lb)

Step 2—Calculate the total heavy-load energy.

The total time cooking heavy-loads is as follows:

t WPC

hh

=×% ,

lb/h 91.2lb 150 70%th ×

= ,

th = 1.15 h

The total heavy-load energy consumption is then calculated as follows:

Energy Cost Model


Eelec,h = qelec,h × th,

Eelec,h = 15.8 kW × 1.15 h,

Eelec,h = 18.2 kWh Step 3—Calculate the total light-load energy.

The total time cooking light-loads is as follows:

t WPR

ll

l=

×% ,

lb/h 9.05lb 15030%tl ×

= ,

tl = 4.97 h The total light-load energy consumption is then calculated as follows:

Eelec,l = qelec,l × tl,

Eelec,l = 2.00 kW ×4.97 h

Eelec,l = 9.94 kWh Step 4—Calculate the total idle time and energy consumption.

The total idle time is determined as follows:

60tntttt pp

lhoni×

−−−= ,

min/h 60min 11.2preheat 1

h 4.97h 1.15h 12.0ti×

−−−=

ti = 5.69 h The idle energy consumption is then calculated as follows:

Eelec,i = qelec,i × ti,

Eelec,i = 0.83 kW × 5.69 h

Eelec,i = 4.72 kWh Step 5—The total daily energy consumption is calculated as follows:

Energy Cost Model


Eelec,daily = Eelec,h + Eelec,l + Eelec,i + np × Eelec,p,

Eelec,daily = 18.2 kWh + 9.94 kWh + 4.72 kWh +1 × 4.36 kWh

Eelec,daily = 37.2 kWh/day Step 6—Calculate the average demand as follows:

q Et

avgelec daily

on=

, ,

h 12.0kWh 37.2qavg = ,

qavg = 3.10 kW Step 7—The annual energy cost is calculated as follows:

Costannual= Eelec,daily × Relec × Days

Costsnnual = 40.5 kWh/day × 0.10 $/kWh × 365 days/year

Costannual = 1,358 $/year

Documents

Giles EOF 10-10 22.0 kW Electric Fryer Performance Tests · Giles EOF 10-10 22.0 kW Electric Fryer Performance Tests ... or represents that its use will not ... The EOF 10-10 exhibited