OFE 341 22.0kW Large Capacity Fyer Performance Henny Penny 22kw Fryer

User Manual: OFE-341

Open the PDF directly: View PDF .
Page Count: 56

Download
Open PDF In Browser	View PDF

Henny Penny OFE-341 22.0 kW
Electric Fryer Performance Tests
Application of ASTM Standard
Test Method F 1361-99
FSTC Report 5011.05.17

Food Service Technology Center
November 2005

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
Mark Bramfitt
Senior Program Manager
© 2005 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 adicionales 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

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

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

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 representation of findings as reported in the original documentation from
FSTC.

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 Henny Penny for supplying the
FSTC with an electric fryer, Model OFE-341 for controlled testing in the
appliance laboratory.

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, contractors,
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 privately
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 assumes any legal liability of responsibility for the accuracy, completeness,
or usefulness of any data, information, method, product or process discloses 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
Page
Executive Summary ........................................................................... iii
1 Introduction .................................................................................. 1-1
Background ............................................................................. 1-1
Objectives ............................................................................... 1-2
Appliance Description ............................................................. 1-3
2

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

Results .......................................................................................... 3-1
Energy Input Rate ................................................................... 3-1
Preheat and Idle Tests ............................................................ 3-1
Chicken Tests ......................................................................... 3-3
French Fry Tests...................................................................... 3-5
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

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

List of Figures and Tables
Figures

Page
1-1

Henny Penny OFE-341 Frypot ............................................. 1-3

2-1

Equipment configuration ....................................................... 2-1

2-2

Thermocouple placement for testing .................................... 2-2

3-1

Henny Penny OFE-341 Preheat characteristics ................... 3-2

3-2

Chicken cook cycle temperature signature ........................... 3-4

3-3

Frying medium temperature during a heavy-load test for
the OFE-341 fryer.................................................................. 3-6

3-4

Fryer 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

Tables

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

Page
1-1

Appliance Specifications ....................................................... 1-3

2-1

Chicken Load Size ................................................................ 2-3

3-1

Input, Preheat, and Idle Test Results ................................... 3-2

3-2

Chicken Cooking Test Results .............................................. 3-5

3-3

French Fry Test Results ........................................................ 3-10

3-4

Energy Cost Model................................................................ 3-11

Executive Summary
Henny Penny’s OFE-341 large-vat electric fryer features low watt density
ribbon elements, stainless steel construction, and a programmable cooking
computer that controls the input to the fryer and provides for a more consistent product. Figure ES-1 illustrates the OFE-341 fryer, as tested at the Food
Service Technology Center (FSTC).
FSTC engineers tested the fryer under the tightly controlled conditions of the
1

American Society for Testing and Materials’ (ASTM) standard test method.

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 breaded 8-piece cut 2 ¾
pound frying chicken under three load scenarios: heavy—48 pieces per load,
medium—24 pieces per load, and light—8 pieces per load. The OFE-341’s
heavy-load cook time was 15.4 minutes. Production capacity includes the
cooking time and the time required for the frying medium to recover to
320°F (recovery time).
Cooking-energy efficiency is a measure of how much of the energy that an
Figure ES-1.
Henny Penny OFE-341 Fryer.

appliance consumes is actually delivered to the food product during the
cooking process. Cooking-energy efficiency is therefore defined by the following relationship:

Cooking - Energy Efficiency =

Energy to Food
Energy to Appliance

American Society for Testing and Materials. 2000. Standard Test Method for the Performance of Large Open, Deep Fat Fryers. ASTM Designation F 2144-01, in Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, West Conshohocken, PA.
5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

iii

Executive Summary

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

Table ES-1. Summary of Fryer Performance.
Rated Energy Input Rate (kW)

22.0

Measured Energy Input Rate (kW)

21.1

Preheat Time to 325°F (min)

9.93

Preheat Energy to 325°F (kWh)

2.10

Idle Energy Rate @ 325°F (kW)

1.08

Heavy-Load Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

73.0 ± 2.4

Medium-Load Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

72.8 ± 3.6

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

(%)a

51.0 ± 3.9
68.9 ± 4.3

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

The fryer’s 22.0 kW input provided the necessary horsepower to produce a
very competitive heavy-load (48 pieces) cooking-energy efficiency of 73.0%
and a production capacity of 68.9 lbs/h. During testing, the OFE-341 was
able to cook the heavy-load of chicken in a very fast 15.4 minutes.
Figure ES-2 illustrates the relationship between cooking-energy efficiency
and production rate for the fryer.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

Executive Summary

Chicken

French Fries

100

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%) .

Figure ES-2.
Fryer part-load cookingenergy efficiency.

Medium Load

80
70
Heavy Load

60
50

Light Load

40
30
20
10
0
0

Production Rate (lb/h)
Note:

Light-load = 8 pieces/load; Medium-load = 24 pieces/load; Heavy-load = 48 pieces/load.

Figure ES-3 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 contribution for
the fryer in a real-world operation. Average energy consumption rates at 10,
30, and 50 pounds per hour for the OFE-341 fryer are 2.3 kW, 4.9 kW, and
7.5 kW respectively. For an operation cooking an average 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 the OFE-341 fryer would be 3.0
kW.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

Executive Summary

Chicken

French Fries

18
Heavy Load

Figure ES-3.
Fryer cooking energy
consumption profile.

Medium Load

ASTM Production Capacities

Cooking Energy Rate (kW) .

10
8

Light Load

6
4
2
Idle Energy Rate
0
0

Note:

40
50
60
Production Rate (lb/h)

Light-load = 8 pieces/load; Medium-load = 24 pieces/load; Heavy-load = 48 pieces/load.

The classic open deep fat fryer design allows this large vat fryer to be used in
a traditional fashion. FSTC researchers conducted additional French fry tests
on the Henny Penny fryer. Based on the size of the fry vat, the heavy-load
was changed from 3 to 5 pounds. The fryer exhibited an impressive production capacity of 83.6 lbs/hr of frozen French fries, with a cooking-energy
efficiency of 86.1%.

Table ES-3. French Fry Heavy-Load Test Results
Load Size (lbs)
Production Capacity (lb/h)a

5.0
83.6 ± 3.3

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb)

651

Electric Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

16.0

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

86.1 ± 0.9

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

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

Executive Summary

Table ES-4. Estimated Fryer Energy Consumption and Cost.
Preheat Energy (kWh/day)

2.10

Idle Energy (kWh/day)

7.94

Cooking Energy (kWh/day)

23.9

Annual Energy (kWh/year)

12,374

Annual Cost ($/year)a

1,237

a Fryer energy costs are based on $0.10/kWh

Henny Penny's OFE-341 fryer established itself as a versatile open deep fat
electric fryer. Its large vat size provides a restaurateur with the option of
cooking large quantities of breaded product such as fried chicken or traditional French fries. The low watt-density ribbon style elements transfer heat
into the frying medium 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.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

vii

1 Introduction
Background

Fried foods continue to be popular on the restaurant scene. Fryers of a larger
vat size and input typically are used for cooking foods such as 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, appliance 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. By
collaborating with the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and the Gas
Technology Institute (GTI) through matching funding agreements, the test
methods have remained unbiased to fuel choice. 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.
FSTC researchers modified ASTM (F 1964-99) Standard Test Method for
the Performance of Pressure and Kettle Fryers1 to apply to large open vat,
deep fat fryers, which was accepted as a Standard Test Method for Performance of Large Open Vat Fryers (Designation F 2144-01).2

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

1-1

Introduction
Fryer performance is characterized by preheat time and energy consumption,
idle energy consumption rate, pilot energy, consumption rate, cooking energy
efficiency and production capacity.
Henny Penny's OFE-341 electric fryer features low watt-density ribbon elements submerged in the frying oil with a stainless steel frypot, backsplash,
and a programmable cooking computer. An integrated melt cycle prevents
solid frying medium from scorching during preheat.
This report presents the results of applying the ASTM test method1 to the
Henny Penny OFE-341 electric fryer. The glossary in Appendix A is provided so that the reader has a quick reference to the terms used in this report.

Objectives

The objective of this report is to examine the operation and performance of
Henny Penny’s OFE-341, 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
calibrated 325°F.
4. Document the cooking energy consumption and efficiency under
three fry loading scenarios: heavy (48 piece load), medium (24
piece load) and light (8 piece per load).
5. Determine the production capacity during the heavy-load test.
6. Document the cooking energy consumption and efficiency under
three French fry loading scenarios at 350°F: heavy (5 pounds
per load), medium (2 ½ pounds per load), and light (¾ pound
per load).
7. Determine the production capacity and frying medium temperature recovery time during the heavy-load test.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

1-2

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

Appliance
Description

Henny Penny’s OFE-341, 18-inch electric fryer has a power rating of 22.0
kW. The fry pot is of a stainless steel construction and contains submerged
low watt-density ribbon elements that provide a cooking platform within the
fry vat (see Figure 1-1). The elements can lift up to allow for easy cleaning
of the fry vat. A cooking computer allows for individualized programming
for multiple food products. An integrated melt cycle prevents solid frying
medium from scorching during preheat.

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

Figure 1-1.
Henny Penny OFE-341
frypot.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

1-3

Introduction
Table 1-1. Appliance Specifications.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

Manufacturer

Henny Penny

Model

OFE-341

Generic Appliance Type

Open Deep Fat Fryer

Rated Input

22.0 kW

Frying Area

18” x 18” x 15”

Oil Capacity

80 lb

Controls

Programmable cooking computer

Construction

Stainless Steel

1-4

2 Methods
Setup and
Instrumentation

FSTC researchers installed the fryer on a tiled floor under a 4-foot-deep canopy 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
2

ASTM test method. See Figure 2-1.
Researchers instrumented the fryer with thermocouples to measure temperatures 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

Figure 2-1.
Equipment configuration.

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).
5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

2-1

Methods

Power and energy were measured with a watt/watt-hour transducer that generated 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 thermocouples 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.

Figure 2-2.
Thermocouple placement
for testing.

Measured Energy
Input Rate

Rated energy input rate is the maximum or peak rate at which the fryer consumes 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 consumption was monitored for a period of 15 minutes after a full rolling boil

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

2-2

Methods

had been established. Researchers compared the measured energy input rate
with the nameplate energy input rate to ensure that the fryer was operating
properly.

Chicken Tests

The fryer was tested 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, medium and
light-loads of chicken (Table 2-1). Each load comprised an equal number of
breasts, wings, legs, and thighs. The chicken was cooked to an average
weight loss of 27 ± 2%. This ensured fully-cooked chicken with no redness
in the center.

Table 2-1. Chicken Load Size.
Heavy-Load (pieces)

Medium-Load (pieces)

Light-Load (pieces)

During the testing, energy, time and oil temperature were recorded at 5secound intervals. Chicken temperature and weight loss were measured and
recorded for use in energy calculations.
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 incorporated into the cooking procedure. This ensures that the cooking tests are uniformly applied from laboratory to laboratory. Fryer recovery was then based
on the frying medium reaching a threshold temperature of 320°F (measured
at the center of the cook zone).
The chicken tests were run in the following sequence: three replicates of the
heavy-load test, three replicates of the medium-load test, and three replicates
of the light-load test. This procedure ensured that the reported cooking5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

2-3

Methods

energy efficiency and production 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.

French Fry Tests

For additional performance information on the fryer, researchers applied the
French fry test from the ASTM Test Method for Open Deep Fat Fryers
(F1361-99)3. Since the frypot could accommodate a larger load than specified in the test method, the heavy-load size was increased from three to five
pounds of frozen French fries. Medium-loads were also increased in size to
half the weight of the heavy-load, two and one-half pounds.
®

Simplot brand ¼-inch blue ribbon product, par-cooked, frozen shoestring
potatoes were used for the French fry tests. 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 fryers using 5-pound (heavy), 2 ½-pound
(medium), and ¾-pound (light) 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 recovery was then based on the frying medium reaching a threshold temperature 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 average 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.
5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

2-4

Methods
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 production 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 ASTM results reporting sheets appear in Appendix C.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

2-5

3 Results
Energy Input Rate

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 21.1 kW (a difference of 4.1% from the nameplate rating).

Preheat and
Idle Tests

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 beginning of a test day, after the oil had stabilized at room temperature overnight.
Henny Penny’s cooking computer has an integrated melt cycle to prevent
scorching of solid shortening. Henny Penny’s OFE-341 fryer was ready to
cook in 9.93 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 1.08 kW.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

3-1

Results

100

400

80
Temperature (°F) .

300

Thermostat

250

200
40

150

Energy Rate

100
20

Figure 3-1.
Henny Penny OFE-341
preheat characteristics.

Average Energy Rate (kW) .

Oil Temperature

350

50
0

0
0

Time (min)

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

Table 3-1. Input, Preheat, and Idle Test Results.
Rated Energy Input Rate (kW)

22.0

Measured Energy Input Rate (kW)

21.1

Percentage Difference (%)

4.09

Preheat
Time to 325°F (min)

9.93

Preheat Energy (kWh)

2.10

Preheat Rate to 325°F (°F/min)

24.8

Idle Energy Rate (kW)

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

1.08

3-2

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
OFE-341 fryer was used to cook 48 pieces per load (12 of each type of
piece–breast, wings, legs and thighs). Medium-loads comprised one half the
number of pieces used in the heavy load tests. Light-load tests used 8 pieces
per load for all three fryers. Researchers monitored chicken cooking time and
weight loss, frying medium temperature, and fryer energy consumption during these tests.

Heavy-Load Tests
The heavy-load cooking tests were designed to reflect a fryer’s maximum
performance. The fryer was used to cook three or more heavy loads of
chicken–one load after another in rapid succession, simulating a peak cooking period. Cooking-energy efficiency and production capacity were determined from these tests. The characteristic temperature curve, or temperature
signature, during a single heavy-load indicates how well the fryer maintained
the oil temperature during 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. Figure 3-2 shows the temperature signature during a heavyload test.
The heavy-load cook time for the Henny Penny fryer was 15.4 minutes. Production capacity includes the cook time and a 30 second reload time.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

3-3

Results

330
Thermostat

Oil Temperature (°F)

320

Figure 3-2.
Chicken cook cycle
tempeature signature.

310

300
Oil Temperature

290

Chicken removed
from oil

Chicken dropped
in oil

280

270
0

10
Time (min)

Medium- and Light Load Tests
Medium and light load tests represent the fryer’s performance under nonpeak 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 the medium and light-load tests were conducted using a single fry basket. The fryer, during medium- and light-load testing, demonstrated cookingenergy efficiencies of 72.8 % and 51.0%, while producing 37.7 lbs/h and
13.4 lb/h respectively.

Test Results
Energy imparted to the chicken was calculated by separating the various
components of the chicken (water, fat, and solids) and determining the
amount of heat gained by each component (Appendix D). The fryer’s cooking energy efficiency for a given loading scenario is the amount of energy

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

3-4

Results

imparted to the chicken, expressed as a percentage of the amount of energy
consumed by the fryer during the cooking process.
Heavy-load cooking-energy efficiency results were 71.8%, 73.5%, 76.4%
and 70.4%, yielding a maximum uncertainty of 4.1%. Table 3-2 summarizes
the results of the ASTM cooking-energy efficiency and production capacity
tests for chicken.

Table 3-2. Chicken Cooking Test Results.
Heavy-Load

Medium-Load

Light-Load

15.4

14.8

13.6

68.9 ± 4.3

37.7 ± 3.8

13.4 ± 0.5

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

360

390

346

Energy Consumption (kWh)

2.56

1.46

0.60

Electric Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

9.96

5.90

2.67

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb)

494

537

681

73.0 ± 2.4

72.8 ± 3.6

51.0 ± 3.9

Load Size (pieces)
Cook Time (min)
Production Rate

(lb/h)a

Cooking-Energy Efficiency

(%)a

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

French Fry Tests

The fryers were tested under three loading scenarios: heavy (5 pounds of
fries per load), medium (2 ½ pounds of fries per load) and light (¾ pound 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.

Heavy-Load Tests
The heavy-load cooking tests were designed to reflect a fryer’s maximum
performance. The fryers were used to cook six 5-pound loads of frozen
French fries—one load after the other in rapid succession, similar to a batch5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

3-5

Results

cooking procedure. Figures 3-3 shows the average temperature of the frying
medium during the heavy-load tests.

Center Oil

Thermostat

370
Fries placed in oil

Fries removed from oil

Figure 3-3.
Frying medium
temperarture during a
heavy-load test for the
OFE-341 fryer.

Temperature (°F) .

350

330

310

290

270
Run #2

Run #1

Run #3

Run #5

Run #4

250
0

Time (min)

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 2.80 minutes with an average
recovery time of 47.4 seconds. Figure 3-4 illustrates the temperature response of the Henny Penny fryer while cooking a 5-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).

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

3-6

Results

Center Oil

Thermostat

360

350
Fries placed in oil

Temperature (°F) .

Fries placed in oil

Figure 3-4.
Fryer cooking cycle
temperature signature.

340

Fries removed from oil

330

320

310

300
0

Time (min)

Medium- and Light-Load Tests
Medium- and light-load tests represent a more typical usage pattern for a
fryer in cook-to-order applications. Since a fryer is often used to cook single
basket loads in many food service establishments, these part-load efficiencies
can be used to estimate the fryer’s performance in an actual operation.
Both the medium- and light-load tests were conducted using a single fry basket. The medium-load tests used 2½ pounds of fries per load and the light
load tests used ¾ pounds of fries per load. Cooking-energy efficiencies during testing were 78.5% for medium- and 61.4% for light-loads while producing 59.2 lbs/h and 18.4 lbs/h of cooked French fries, respectively.

Test Results
Energy imparted to the French fries was calculated by separating the various
components of the fries (water, fat, and solids) and determining the amount
of heat gained by each component (Appendix D). The fryer’s cooking-energy
efficiency for a given loading scenario is the amount of energy imparted to
5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

3-7

Results

the fries, expressed as a percentage of the amount of energy consumed by the
fryer during the cooking process.
Heavy-load cooking-energy efficiency results were 86.5%, 85.9% and
85.9%, yielding a maximum uncertainty of 0.9%. Table 3-3 summarizes the
results of the ASTM cooking-energy efficiency and production capacity tests
for French fries.

Table 3-3. French Fry Cooking Test Results.
Heavy-Load

Medium-Load

Light-Load

Load Size (lb)

5.0

2½

French Fry Cook Time (min)

2.80

2.30

Average Recovery Time (sec)

47.4

13.8

8.4

Production Rate (lb/h)a

83.6 ± 3.3

59.2 ± 1.3

18.4 ± 0.0

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

560

563

553

Energy Consumption (kWh)

4.77

2.63

1.03

Electric Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

16.0

12.5

5.1

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb)

651

717

934

86.1 ± 0.9

78.5 ± 0.9

60.1 ± 5.9

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

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

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 contains a synopsis of test data for each replicate of the chicken and French fry
cooking tests.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

3-8

Results

Chicken

French Fries

100

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%) .

Figure 3-5.
Fryer part-load cookingenergy efficiency.

Medium Load

80
70
Heavy Load

60
50

Light Load

40
30
20
10
0
0

Production Rate (lb/h)
Note:

Light-load = 8 pieces/load; Medium-load = 24 pieces/load; Heavy-load = 48 pieces/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 electric 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
2.3 kW, 4.9 kW, and 7.5 kW, respectively. For an operation cooking an average 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 3.0 kW.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

3-9

Results

Chicken

French Fries

18
Heavy Load

Figure 3-6.
Fryer cooking energy
consumption profile.

14
12
10
8

Light Load

6
4
2
Idle Energy Rate
0
0

Note:

Energy Cost Model

Medium Load
ASTM Production Capacities

Cooking Energy Rate (kW) .

40
50
60
Production Rate (lb/h)

Light-load = 8 pieces/load; Medium-load = 24 pieces/load; Heavy-load = 48 pieces/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 (readyto-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.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

3-10

Results
Table 3-4. Estimated Fryer Energy Consumption and Cost.
Preheat Energy (kWh/day)

2.1

Idle Energy (kWh/day)

7.94

Cooking Energy (kWh/day)

23.9

Annual Energy (kWh/year)

12,374

Annual Cost ($/year)a

1,237

a Fryer energy costs are based on $0.10/kWh

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

3-11

4 Conclusions
Henny Penny’s OF-341 large-vat electric fryer exhibited strong performance
while cooking both breaded chicken product and traditional French fries.
During the heavy-load tests, the fryer produced 69 lbs/h while demonstrating
a cooking-energy efficiency of 73%. Similarly, during the French fry tests,
the fryer produced 84 lbs/h while achieving an 86% cooking-energy efficiency.
While the OFE-341 fryer really showed its prowess with heavy-loads, it
posted solid medium- and light-load efficiencies as well. During the chicken
tests, the medium-load efficiency was nearly as high as for the heavy-load
tests (72.8% vs 73.0%), and the light-load efficiency was a respectable 57%.
During non-cooking periods, the fryer required only 1.08 kW to maintain a
ready-to-cook state (325°F oil temperature). Since fryers typically spend a
good portion of the day in a ready-to-cook state, this translates to lower operating costs.
The estimated operational cost of the OFE-341 large vat electric fryer is
$1,237 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 Henny Penny OFE-341 fryer has a high input for conventional
pressure fryers and kettle fryers, but this large vat open deep fat fryer offers
versatility without sacrificing performance. This fryer is well suited for institutions requiring high volume production.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

4-1

5 References
1. American Society for Testing and Materials. 1999. Standard Test
Method for the Performance of Pressure and Kettle Fryers. ASTM Designation F 1964-99, in Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Conshohocken, PA.
2. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2001. Standard Test
Method for the Performance of Large Open Deep Fat Fryers. ASTM
Designation F 2144-01, in Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Conshohocken, PA.
3. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2000. Standard Test
Method for the Performance of Open Deep Fat Fryers. ASTM Designation F 1361-99, in Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Conshohocken, PA.
4. Pieretti, G., Blessent, J., Kaufman, D., Nickel, J., Fisher, D., 1990. Cooking Appliance Performance Report - Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Production-Test Kitchen. Pacific Gas and Electric Company Department
of Research and Development Report 008.1-90.8, May.
5. Holliday, J., Conner, M., 1993. Frymaster® Model H-17CSC Electric
Fryer Performance Test: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F
1361-91. Food Service Technology Center Report 5017.93.2, November.
6. Knapp, S., Zabrowski, D., 1996. Pitco Frialator® Model RPB14
Technofry 1™ Gas Fryer: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method
F1361-95. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.94.11, April.
7. Zabrowski, D., Nickel, J., Holliday, J., 1994. TekmaStar Model FD-212
Electric Fryer Performance Test: Application of ASTM Standard Test
Method F 1361-91. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.94.2,
June.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

5-1

References
8. Zabrowski, D., Nickel, J., Knapp, S., 1995. Keating Model 14 IFM Gas
Fryer Performance Test: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method
F1361-95. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.95.32, December.
9. Knapp, S., Zabrowski, D., 1996. Pitco Frialator® Model E14B Electric
Fryer Performance Test: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method
F1361-95. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.95.12, March.
10. Zabrowski, D., Bell, T., 1999. Ultrafryer, Model PAR 3-14 Gas Fryer
Performance Test: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F136199. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.99.78, September.
11. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., 2000. Vulcan 14-inch Fryer Performance
Test: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1361-99. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.00.87, December.
12. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D. 2000. Vulcan High Capacity Fryer Performance Test: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1361-99. Food
Service Technology Center Report 5011.00.88, December.
13. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., Miner, S., 2001. Anets Fryer Performance
Tests: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1361-99. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.01.03, December.
14. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., Miner, S., 2002. Pitco AG14 Fryer Performance Tests: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1361-99. Food
Service Technology Center Report 5011.02.07, September.
15. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., Miner, S., 2002. Pitco SGH50 Fryer Performance Tests: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1361-99.
Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.02.08, September.
16. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., 2003. Counter Top Fryer Performance Testing: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1361-99. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.03.14, May.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

5-2

References
17. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., 2003. Pitco AE14 Electric Fryer Performance Testing: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1361-99.
Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.03.19, July.
18. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., 2003. Pitco SEH50 Electric Fryer Performance Testing: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1361-99.
Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.03.20, July.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

5-3

A Glossary
Cooking Energy (kWh or kBtu)
The total energy consumed by an appliance 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 appliance 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 percentage of the measured energy input
rate.
Duty Cycle =

Average Energy Consumption Rate
x 100
Measured Energy Input Rate

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

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 constituents 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 stabilized operating condition or temperature.
Idle Temperature (°F, Setting)
The temperature of the cooking cavity/surface (selected by the appliance operator 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 input rate.
Idle Duty Cycle =

Idle Energy Consumption Rate
x 100
Measured Energy Input Rate

The peak rate at which an appliance will
consume energy, typically reflected during preheat.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

A-1

Glossary
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 reflected 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 appliance is not being operated (i.e., when
the thermostats or control knobs have
been turned off by the food service operator).
Preheat Energy (kWh or Btu)
Preheat Energy Consumption
The total amount of energy consumed
by an appliance during the preheat period.
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 temperature (75 ± 5°F) to a specified (and calibrated) operating temperature or thermostat set point.

Production Rate (lb/h)
Productivity
The average rate at which an appliance
brings a specified food product to a specified “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 appliance consumes energy as rated by the
manufacturer and specified on the nameplate.
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 interviews, used to develop an energy cost model
for the appliance.

Production Capacity (lb/h)
The maximum production rate of an appliance while cooking a specified food
product in accordance with the heavyload cooking test.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

A-2

B Appliance Specifications
Appendix B includes the product literature for the Henny Penny OFE-341
fryer.

Table B-1. Appliance Specifications.

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

Manufacturer

Henny Penny

Model

OFE-341

Generic Appliance Type

Open Deep Fat Fryer

Rated Input

22.0 kW

Frying Area

18” x 18” x 15”

Oil Capacity

80 lb

Controls

Programmable cooking computer

Construction

Stainless Steel

B-1

Open Fryers
High-volume
OFE-341 Single well, electric
OFE-342 Two well, electric
OFG-341 Single well, gas
OFG-342 Two well, gas
These high volume open fryers feature a larger fry well with
higher efficiency and faster cycle recovery than any fryer of
its size or type. Greater surface area produces more consistent
frying results with items that float when cooking.
Description
The 340 series open fryers from
Henny Penny are high volume open
fryers designed to offer a maximum
frying surface area within a reasonable
footprint.
Controls are fully programmable. Auto
Lift feature automatically lowers load to
begin cycle and raises load to drain at end.
Electric elements are fully immersed.
Induced-draft technology enables over
60% efficiency in gas units.
Configuration
■ Choose from one or two-well models.
■ Available in electric or gas.
■ Also available without Auto Lift
feature.
■ Connector kits available separately
surface area and promotes more
for connecting any combination of
even cooking.
one or two-well units (all electric or ■ Specially designed “beach” accomall gas).
modates shortening displacement
■ Itegrated dump station available on
when lowering the basket.
two well unit.
■ Convenient built-in, single switch
filtering system serves up to two wells.
Main Features
■ Doors swing open for easy access.
■ Electronic controls for each well
feature:
Auto Lift Features
● 12 programmable cook cycles.
■ Separate switch for Auto Lift and
● Digital time and temperature
Pause/Resume.
display.
■ Each well can be programmed to
● Dual timers to time half baskets
operate half baskets independently
separately.
or together at the touch of a button.
● Idle and melt modes.
■ Quiet, low-voltage motor and drive
● Load compensation feature.
built into cabinet—no extra clear● Cook cycle completion signal.
ance needed.
■ Large rectangular well offers greater ■ Easy basket set and release.

Above: OFG-342 two-well with Auto Lift
Left: Large well with specially designed “beach.”

Accessories shipped with unit:
(1) Set of cleaning brushes
(10) Filter envelopes
(4) Heavy-duty casters, two locking.
(2) Half-baskets with handles
OR (1) full basket per well.
(3) third-size baskets are available, but can only be used on
units without Auto Lift. Please
specify when ordering.
(1) Basket support per well.
(1) Installation, operating and
service manual.

Henny Penny Corporation
P.O. Box 60
Eaton, OH 45320
+1 937 456.8400
+1 937 456.8402 Fax
Toll free in USA
800 417.8417
800 417.8402 Fax
www.hennypenny.com

OFE/OFG
341, 342
Specifications

57 in.
(1448 mm)
NOTE:
Height
includes
casters.

Dimensions

41 in. (1042 mm)

Heating format

Product
Shortening OFE
Shortening OFG
Electric
Gas

Shipping weight
Listings

44 1⁄2 in. (1130 mm)

4 in. side, 4 in. back (gas units)

Clearances

Floor space
Capacity

23 1⁄2 in. (591 mm)

OFE
OFG
OFE
OFG

Electrical

Single well
6.6 sq. ft. (.62 m2)
18 lbs. (8.2 kg)
80 lbs. (36 kg)
90 lbs. (41 kg)
Electric immersion
22 kw
Natural or propane gas.
(3) burners
(1) 1/2 in. connection
120,000 BTU/hr (35 kw)
348 lbs. (158 kg) approximate
341 lbs. (155 kg) approximate
UL, UL Sanitation, CUL, CE
CSA, UL Sanitation, CE

Model

Two well
12.7 sq. ft. (1.17 m2)
36 lbs. (16.4 kg)
160 lbs. (73 kg)
180 lbs. (82 kg)
Electric immersion
44 kw
Natural or propane gas.
(6) burners
(1) 3/4 in. connection
240,000 BTU/hr (70 kw)
700 lbs. (318 kg) approximate
665 lbs. (300 kg) approximate
UL, UL Sanitation, CUL, CE
CSA, UL Sanitation, CE

Voltage

Phase

Cycle/Hz

Amps

Electric Units

208
240

3
3

50/60
50/60

22 per well
22 per well

61 per well
53 per well

Gas Units

120
230

1
1

50 or 60
50 or 60

35 per well
70 per well

12 per well
6 per well

All international voltages available.
*Power cord and plug need to be installed on site by a qualified electrician.

Specifications subject to change without notice.
For up to date product information please visit
hennypenny.com

Order from:

Manufactured by:
Henny Penny Corporation
P.O. Box 60
Eaton, OH 45320

C Results Reporting Sheets
Manufacturer:

Henny Penny

Models:

OFE-341

Date:

November 2004

Test Fryer and Elements
Description of operational characteristics: Henny Penny’s OFE-341 electric fryer is rated at 22.0 kW. The
OFE-341 fryer features low watt-density ribbon elements submerged in the frying oil. A cooking computer controls the elements with features such as a melt cycle and multiple programmable cook times.
Apparatus

√

Check if testing apparatus conformed to specifications in section 6.

Deviations: None.

Energy Input Rate
Rated (Btu/h)

22.0

Measured (Btu/h)

21.1

Percent Difference between Measured and Rated (%)

4.09

Thermostat Calibration
Thermostat Setting (°F)

325

Oil Temperature (°F)

325

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

C-1

Results Reporting Sheets
Preheat Energy and Time
Starting Temperature (°F)

79.0

Electric Energy Consumption (kWh)

2.10

Duration (min)

9.93

Preheat Rate (°F/min)

24.8

Idle Energy Rate
Total Idle Energy Rate @ 325°F (kW)

1.08

Heavy-Load Chicken Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Cooking Energy Rate
Load Size (pieces)
Cook Time (min)
Production Capacity (lb/h) a

48
15.4
68.9 ± 4.3

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

360

Energy Consumption (kWh)

2.56

Electric Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

9.96

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb)

494

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

73.0 ± 2.4

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

Medium-Load Chicken Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Cooking Energy Rate
Load Size (lb)
French Fry Cook Time (min)

24
14.8

Production Rate (lb/h) a

37.7 ± 3.8

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

390

Energy Consumption (kWh)

1.46

Electric Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

5.90

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb)

537

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

72.8 ± 3.6

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

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

C-2

Results Reporting Sheets
Light-Load Chicken Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Cooking Energy Rate
Load Size (lb)

French Fry Cook Time (min)
Production Rate

(lb/h) a

13.6
13.4 ± 0.5

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

346

Energy Consumption (kWh)

0.60

Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

2.67

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb)
Cooking-Energy Efficiency

(%)a

681
51.0 ± 3.9

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

Heavy-Load French Fry Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Cooking Energy Rate
Load Size (lb)

5.0

French Fry Cook Time (min)

2.80

Average Recovery Time (sec)

47.4

Production Capacity (lb/h) a

83.6 ± 3.3

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

560

Energy Consumption (kWh)

4.77

Electric Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

16.0

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb)

651

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

86.1 ± 0.9

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

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

C-3

Results Reporting Sheets
Medium-Load French Fry Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Cooking Energy Rate
Load Size (lb)

2½

French Fry Cook Time (min)

2.30

Average Recovery Time (sec)

13.8

Production Rate (lb/h) a

59.2 ± 1.3

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

563

Energy Consumption (kWh)

2.63

Electric Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

12.5

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb)

717

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

78.5 ± 0.9

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

Light-Load French Fry Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Cooking Energy Rate
Load Size (lb)

French Fry Cook Time (min)

2.30

Average Recovery Time (sec)

8.4

Production Rate (lb/h) a

18.4 ± 0.0

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

553

Energy Consumption (kWh)

1.03

Electric Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

5.1

Energy per Pound of Food Cooked (Btu/lb)

934

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

60.1 ± 5.9

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

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

C-4

D Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data
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

Vaporization, Water

970

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

D-1

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data
Table D-2. Heavy-Load Chicken Test Data.
Repetition #1

Repetition #2

Repetition #3

Repetition #4

Test Voltage (V)

208

Energy Consumption (kWh)

2.72

2.66

2.32

2.48

Total Energy (Btu)

9,283

9,079

7,918

8,464

Total Test Time (min)

15.9

16.2

15.4

15.3

Weight Loss (%)

28.53

29.48

25.52

25.56

Initial Weight (lb)

17.914

17.785

17.444

17.257

Final Weight (lb)

12.803

12.542

12.992

12.845

Initial Moisture Content (%)

66.8

Final Moisture Content (%)

55.3

55.7

56.6

56.8

Initial Temperature (°F)

Final Temperature (°F)

192

194

193

194

Water Loss (lb)

4.90

4.31

4.24

Initial Weight of Water (lb)

11.967

11.880

11.653

11.528

Final Weight of Water (lb)

7.080

6.986

7.353

7.296

Sensible (Btu)

1,904

1,905

1,854

Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu)

4,750

4,749

4,182

4,110

Total Energy to Food (Btu)

6,655

6,654

6,036

5,964

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

372

374

346

Total Energy to Fryer (Btu)

9,283

9,079

7,918

8,464

Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb)

518

510

454

490

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)

71.7

73.3

76.2

70.5

Electric Energy Rate (kW)

10.3

9.9

9.06

9.73

Production Rate (lb/h)

67.5

66.1

68.1

67.7

Measured Values

Calculated Values

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

D-2

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data
Table D-3. Medium-Load Chicken Test Data.
Repetition #1

Repetition #2

Repetition #3

Test Voltage (V)

208

Energy Consumption (kWh)

1.52

1.54

1.34

Total Energy (Btu)

5,188

5,256

4,573

Total Test Time (min)

16.7

15.3

12.9

Weight Loss (%)

30.84

31.69

24.45

Initial Weight (lb)

9.417

9.409

9.508

Final Weight (lb)

6.513

6.427

7.183

Initial Moisture Content (%)

66.8

Final Moisture Content (%)

48.8

52.0

57.5

Initial Temperature (°F)

Final Temperature (°F)

195

197

192

Water Loss (lb)

3.11

2.95

2.22

Initial Weight of Water (lb)

6.290

6.285

6.351

Final Weight of Water (lb)

3.178

3.342

5.467

Sensible (Btu)

1,019

1,027

1,002

Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu)

3,021

2,859

2,156

Total Energy to Food (Btu)

4,040

3,885

3,158

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

429

413

332

Total Energy to Fryer (Btu)

5,188

5,256

4,573

Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb)

551

559

481

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)

77.9

73.9

69.0

Electric Energy Rate (kW)

5.47

6.06

6.22

Production Rate (lb/h)

33.9

37.0

44.2

Measured Values

Calculated Values

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

D-3

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data
Table D-4. Medium-Load Chicken Test Data continued.
Repetition #4

Repetition #5

Repetition #6

Test Voltage (V)

208

Energy Consumption (kWh)

1.30

1.66

1.38

Total Energy (Btu)

4,437

5,666

4,710

Total Test Time (min)

13.8

15.8

14.6

Weight Loss (%)

24.81

32.66

28.20

Initial Weight (lb)

8.981

9.259

9.010

Final Weight (lb)

6.753

6.235

6.469

Initial Moisture Content (%)

66.8

Final Moisture Content (%)

53.0

51.0

54.0

Initial Temperature (°F)

Final Temperature (°F)

193

192

194

Water Loss (lb)

2.22

3.01

2.53

Initial Weight of Water (lb)

5.999

6.185

6.019

Final Weight of Water (lb)

3.579

3.180

3.493

952

978

968

Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu)

2,348

2,921

2,452

Total Energy to Food (Btu)

3,301

3,899

3,420

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

368

421

380

Total Energy to Fryer (Btu)

4,437

5,666

4,710

Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb)

494

612

523

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)

74.4

68.8

72.6

Electric Energy Rate (kW)

5.66

6.31

5.66

Production Rate (lb/h)

39.1

35.2

37.0

Measured Values

Calculated Values

Sensible (Btu)

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

D-4

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data
Table D-5. Light-Load Chicken Test Data
Repetition #1

Repetition #2

Repetition #3

Test Voltage (V)

208

Energy Consumption (kWh)

0.58

0.62

Total Energy (Btu)

1,980

2,116

Total Test Time (min)

13.6

13.1

Weight Loss (%)

21.92

28.85

26.74

Initial Weight (lb)

3.078

2.951

3.032

Final Weight (lb)

2.403

2.100

2.221

Initial Moisture Content (%)

66.8

Final Moisture Content (%)

55.6

57.2

Initial Temperature (°F)

Final Temperature (°F)

190

186

Water Loss (lb)

0.72

0.80

0.76

Initial Weight of Water (lb)

2.056

1.971

2.025

Final Weight of Water (lb)

1.336

1.168

1.270

Sensible (Btu)

324

309

306

Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu)

699

780

733

Total Energy to Food (Btu)

1,023

1,089

1,039

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

332

369

343

Total Energy to Fryer (Btu)

1,980

2,116

Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb)

643

671

698

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)

51.7

55.0

49.1

Electric Energy Rate (kW)

2.56

2.85

Production Rate (lb/h)

13.6

13.0

13.9

Measured Values

Calculated Values

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

D-5

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data
Table D-6. Light-Load Chicken Test Data continued.
Repetition #4

Repetition #5

Test Voltage (V)

208

Energy Consumption (kWh)

0.60

0.64

Total Energy (Btu)

2,048

2,184

Total Test Time (min)

13.9

13.7

Weight Loss (%)

23.51

25.93

Initial Weight (lb)

3.122

2.973

Final Weight (lb)

2.388

2.202

Initial Moisture Content (%)

66.8

Final Moisture Content (%)

55.8

57.2

Initial Temperature (°F)

Final Temperature (°F)

192

191

Water Loss (lb)

0.76

0.73

Initial Weight of Water (lb)

2.085

1.986

Final Weight of Water (lb)

1.331

1.260

Sensible (Btu)

329

312

Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu)

733

705

Total Energy to Food (Btu)

1,062

1,017

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

340

342

Total Energy to Fryer (Btu)

2,048

2,184

Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb)

656

735

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)

51.8

46.6

Electric Energy Rate (kW)

2.60

2.81

Production Rate (lb/h)

13.5

13.0

Measured Values

Calculated Values

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

D-6

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data
Table D-7. Heavy-Load Fry Test Data
Repetition #1

Repetition #2

Repetition #3

Test Voltage (V)

208

Energy Consumption (kWh)

4.76

4.80

4.74

Total Energy (Btu)

16,246

16,382

16,178

Cook Time (min)

2.80

Total Test Time (min)

18.1

17.6

18.1

Weight Loss (%)

29.90

29.80

29.60

Initial Weight (lb)

25.000

Final Weight (lb)

17.535

17.542

17.612

Initial Moisture Content (%)

67.1

Final Moisture Content (%)

48.9

48.8

49.6

Initial Temperature (°F)

Final Temperature (°F)

212

Initial Weight of Water (lb)

16.775

16,775

Final Weight of Water (lb)

8.575

8.561

8.736

Sensible (Btu)

3,684

Latent – Heat of Fusion (Btu)

2,416

Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu)

7,954

7,969

7,798

Total Energy to Food (Btu)

14,054

14,069

13,898

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

562

563

556

Total Energy to Fryer (Btu)

16,246

16,382

16,178

Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb)

650

655

647

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)

86.5

85.9

Electric Energy Rate (kW)

15.8

16.4

15.7

Production Rate (lb/h)

82.9

85.2

82.9

Average Recovery Time (sec)

49.2

43.2

49.2

Measured Values

Calculated Values

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

D-7

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data
Table D-8. Medium-Load Fry Test Data
Repetition #1

Repetition #2

Repetition #3

Test Voltage (V)

208

Energy Consumption (kWh)

2.62

2.64

2.62

Total Energy (Btu)

8,942

9,010

8,942

Cook Time (min)

2.30

Total Test Time (min)

12.6

12.8

12.6

Weight Loss (%)

30.00

30.20

29.80

Initial Weight (lb)

12.500

Final Weight (lb)

8.756

8.722

8.775

Initial Moisture Content (%)

67.1

Final Moisture Content (%)

48.7

48.4

49.4

Initial Temperature (°F)

Final Temperature (°F)

212

Initial Weight of Water (lb)

8.388

Final Weight of Water (lb)

4.264

4.221

4.335

Sensible (Btu)

1,842

Latent – Heat of Fusion (Btu)

1,208

Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu)

4,000

4,042

3,931

Total Energy to Food (Btu)

7,050

7,092

6,981

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

564

567

558

Total Energy to Fryer (Btu)

8,942

9,010

8,942

Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb)

715

721

715

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)

78.8

78.7

78.1

Electric Energy Rate (kW)

12.5

12.4

12.5

Production Rate (lb/h)

59.5

58.6

59.5

Average Recovery Time (sec)

13.2

15.6

13.2

Measured Values

Calculated Values

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

D-8

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data
Table D-9. Light-Load Fry Test Data
Repetition #1

Repetition #2

Repetition #3

Test Voltage (V)

208

Energy Consumption (kWh)

1.02

1.06

1.00

Total Energy (Btu)

3,481

3,618

3,413

Cook Time (min)

2.30

Total Test Time (min)

12.2

Weight Loss (%)

29.70

29.80

30.10

Initial Weight (lb)

3.750

Final Weight (lb)

2.638

2.632

2.620

Initial Moisture Content (%)

67.1

Final Moisture Content (%)

49.7

49.3

48.0

Initial Temperature (°F)

Final Temperature (°F)

212

Initial Weight of Water (lb)

2.516

Final Weight of Water (lb)

1.311

1.298

1.258

Sensible (Btu)

553

Latent – Heat of Fusion (Btu)

362

Latent – Heat of Vaporization (Btu)

1,169

1,181

1,220

Total Energy to Food (Btu)

2,084

2,096

2,135

Energy to Food (Btu/lb)

556

559

569

Total Energy to Fryer (Btu)

3,481

3,618

3,413

Energy to Fryer (Btu/lb)

928

965

910

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)

59.9

57.9

62.6

Electric Energy Rate (kW)

5.02

5.21

4.92

Production Rate (lb/h)

18.4

Average Recovery Time (sec)

10.0

Measured Values

Calculated Values

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

D-9

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

Table D-10. Chicken Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Production Capacity Statistics
Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

Production Capacity

Heavy-Load

Medium-Load

Light-Load

(lb/h)a

Replicate #1

71.7

77.9

51.9

67.6

Replicate #2

73.3

73.9

55.1

66.1

Replicate #3

76.2

69.0

49.2

68.0

Replicate #4

70.5

74.4

51.9

68.0

Replicate #5

68.8

46.7

67.7

Replicate #6

72.6

Average

73.0

72.8

51.0

67.4

Standard Deviation

2.58

3.45

3.17

0.85

Absolute Uncertainty

4.10

3.62

3.93

1.35

Percent Uncertainty

5.61

4.98

7.71

2.00

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

Table D-11. French Fry Cooking-Energy Efficiency and Production Capacity Statistics
Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a

Production Capacity

Heavy-Load

Medium-Load

Light-Load

(lb/h)a

Replicate #1

86.5

78.8

59.9

82.9

Replicate #2

85.9

78.7

57.9

85.2

Replicate #3

85.9

78.1

62.6

82.9

Average

86.1

78.5

60.1

83.7

Standard Deviation

0.35

0.38

2.36

1.33

Absolute Uncertainty

0.87

0.94

5.85

3.30

Percent Uncertainty

1.01

1.20

9.73

3.94

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

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

D-10

E Energy Cost Model
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 estimating 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 particular 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- (48
pieces), medium- (24 pieces), and light- (8 pieces) loads. For example, a fryer operating for 12 hours a
day with one preheat cooked 150 pounds of food: 36% of the food was cooked under heavy-load conditions, 48% was cooked under medium-load conditions, and 16% 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:

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

E-1

Energy Cost Model
Table E-1: Electric Fryer Performance Parameters.
Test

Result

Preheat Time (min)

9.93

Preheat Energy (kWh)

2.10

Idle Energy Rate (kW)

1.08

Heavy-Load Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

9.96

Medium-Load Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

5.90

Light-Load Cooking Energy Rate (kW)

2.67

Production Capacity (lb/h)

68.9

Medium-Load Production Rate (lb/h)

37.7

Light-Load Production Rate (lb/h)

13.4

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

36% (× 150 lb = 54 lb)

Percentage of Food Cooked Under Medium-Load Conditions

48% (× 150 lb = 72 lb)

Percentage of Food Cooked Under Light-Load Conditions

16% (× 150 lb = 24 lb)

Step 2—Calculate the total heavy-load energy.
The total time cooking heavy-loads is as follows:
th =

%h × W
,
PC

th =

36% × 150 lb
,
68.9 lb/h

th = 0.78 h
5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

E-2

Energy Cost Model

The total heavy-load energy consumption is then calculated as follows:
Eelec,h = qelec,h × th,
Eelec,h = 9.96 kW × 0.78 h,
Eelec,h = 7.77 kWh

Step 3—Calculate the total medium-load energy.
The total time cooking medium-loads is as follows:
tm =

%m × W
,
PRm

tm =

48% × 150 lb
,
37.7 lb/h

tm = 1.91 h

The total medium-load energy consumption is then calculated as follows:
Eelec,m = qelec,m × tm,
Eelec,m = 5.90 kW × 1.91 h,
Eelec,m = 11.3 kWh

Step 4—Calculate the total light-load energy.
The total time cooking light-loads is as follows:
tl =

%l × W
,
PRl

tl =

16% × 150 lb
,
13.4 lb/h

tl = 1.79 h

The total light-load energy consumption is then calculated as follows:
Eelec,l = qelec,l × tl,
Eelec,l = 2.67 kW ×1.79 h
Eelec,l = 4.78 kWh

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

E-3

Energy Cost Model
Step 5—Calculate the total idle time and energy consumption.
The total idle time is determined as follows:
ti = ton − th − tm − tl −

np × tp
,
60

ti = 12.0 h − 0.78 h − 1.91 h − 1.79 h −

1 preheat × 9.93 min
60 min/h

ti = 7.35 h

The idle energy consumption is then calculated as follows:
Eelec,i = qelec,i × ti,
Eelec,i = 1.08 kW × 7.35 h
Eelec,i = 7.94 kWh

Step 6—The total daily energy consumption is calculated as follows:
Eelec,daily = Eelec,h + Eelec,m + Eelec,l + Eelec,i + np × Eelec,p,
Eelec,daily = 7.77 kWh +11.3 kWh +4.78 kWh +7.94 kWh +1 × 2.10 kWh
Eelec,daily = 33.9 kWh/day

Step 7—Calculate the average demand as follows:
qavg =

Eelec , daily
,
ton

qavg =

33.9 kWh
,
12.0 h

qavg = 2.83 kW

Step 7—The annual energy cost is calculated as follows:
Costannual= Eelec,daily × Relec × Days
Costsnnual = 33.9 kWh/day × 0.10 $/kWh × 365 days/year
Costannual = 1,237 $/year

5011.05.17
Food Service Technology Center

E-4

Source Exif Data:

File Type                       : PDF
File Type Extension             : pdf
MIME Type                       : application/pdf
PDF Version                     : 1.5
Linearized                      : Yes
Encryption                      : Standard V2.3 (128-bit)
User Access                     : Print, Extract, Print high-res
Page Count                      : 56
XMP Toolkit                     : XMP toolkit 2.9.1-14, framework 1.6
About                           : uuid:37d88694-7e5c-45af-8203-3a389fdaa323
Producer                        : Acrobat Distiller 6.0.1 (Windows)
Creator Tool                    : PScript5.dll Version 5.2.2
Modify Date                     : 2005:11:21 09:52:36-08:00
Create Date                     : 2005:11:21 09:50:37-08:00
Metadata Date                   : 2005:11:21 09:52:36-08:00
Document ID                     : uuid:1ab8b22a-9d80-401b-8e93-de452122df1c
Format                          : application/pdf
Title                           : Microsoft Word - OFE-341 22.0kW Large Capacity Fyer Performance Test.doc
Creator                         : David Cowen
Author                          : David Cowen

EXIF Metadata provided by EXIF.tools

OFE 341 22.0kW Large Capacity Fyer Performance Henny Penny 22kw Fryer

Navigation menu

Versions of this User Manual:

Views

Navigation