This standard establishes uniform test methods for a laboratory test of a fan or other air moving device to determine its aerodynamic performance in terms of airflow rate, pressure developed, power consumption, air density, the speed of rotation, and efficiency for rating or guarantee purposes.




Comments:

Armin Hauer on 2021-09-23 21:00:00

Section/Figure/Table No.: Table 2 + Sect. 5.2 onward

Type of Comment: Technical (substantive)

Comment (justification):
The standard uses the terms "equivalent duct diameter" and "equivalent diameter". In total "equiv. ___ diameter" is used over twenty times.

Proposed Change:
Consolidate to one term and add a definition.

Armin Hauer on 2021-09-23 19:59:00

Section/Figure/Table No.: Figures 11+12

Type of Comment: Technical (substantive)

Comment (justification):
What is the equivalent discharge diameter of fans if the fan outlet is anything else than a simple circle or a rectangle?

Proposed Change:
for the committee to decide; considering figures H.4 though H.6 the answer is likely not trivial. Maybe we can point to an external standard that defines equiv. diameters for odd shapes?

Richard A Meigs on 2020-11-26 17:31:00

Section/Figure/Table No.: 7.3.1.5 and G.3 Step 1.1

Type of Comment: Editorial

Comment (justification):
Formulas for Reynolds number 7.17, 7.18, and G.3 step 1.1 have alpha in them instead of mu. Prior versions of AMCA 210 are correct with mu.

Proposed Change:
Correct from alpha to mu.

Mike Steele on 2020-08-18 19:59:44

Section/Figure/Table No.: Various

Type of Comment: Technical (substantive)

Comment (justification):
Thirteen equations throughout use 1097.8, one uses 1097 (w/o .8). 500-D-18 uses 1097 (w/o .8), 500-L-20 use 1097 (w/o .8) in similar equations. Looking at an old 210-99, all used to be w/o the .8. I don't know why it was updated, but documents should be consistent. Note that and old 200-95-Rev11 (only one I had) uses 1096. When checking the equation, I think the actual answer is 1097.9.

Proposed Change:
Update 13 equations to use 1097 (w/o .8). If not, please submit comments to all other standards to update to the desire value.

Armin Hauer on 2020-06-19 16:35:26

Section/Figure/Table No.: general

Type of Comment: Editorial

Comment (justification):
Does "common part" and "common segment" mean the same?

Proposed Change:
Consistently either use the one expression or the other.

Armin Hauer on 2020-08-09 20:25:43

Section/Figure/Table No.: 7.9.3 Conversion formulae for new densities and new rotational speeds

Type of Comment: Editorial

Comment (justification):
measurement of electrical power does not prevent conversion of pressure and flow for a different speed.

Proposed Change:
See email with revised language (tracked changes) to Shruti, Tim and Joe

Armin Hauer on 2020-05-29 19:53:00

Section/Figure/Table No.: 4.4

Type of Comment: Technical (substantive)

Comment (justification):
need more substantial description of electrical power measurements, analogous to ASHRAE 37 section 5.4. AHRI 430 needed a workaround because of thsi shortcoming in AMCA 210

Proposed Change:
for the committee to decide and draw elements from ASHRAE 37 https://ashrae.iwrapper.com/ViewOnline/Standard_37... and possibly ASHRAE 41.11.

Armin Hauer on 2019-02-28 10:41:00

missing reference to [23]

Larry West on 2018-12-21 07:50:00

When using a VFD to power a calibrated motor a sinusoidal filter should be applied to the power measurement in all cases. Filtering the output of the VFD will not lead to accurate measurements unless the filter is matched specifically to the VFD\Motor combination for all points of operation to be tested.

Submit your comments: