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

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

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 adi-

cionales 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 Henny Penny for supplying the

FSTC with an electric fryer, Model OFE-341 for controlled testing in the

appliance 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 repre-

sent the views of the Commission, its employees, or the State of Califor-

nia. 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 rep-

resent 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 ade-

quacy 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

5011.05.17 i

Food Service Technology Center

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

3 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

List of Figures and Tables

5011.05.17 ii

Food Service Technology Center

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

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

Figures

Tables

Executive Summary

5011.05.17 iii

Food Service Technology Center

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 consis-

tent 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

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 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

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. 2000. Standard Test Method for the Perform-

ance of Large Open, Deep Fat Fryers. ASTM Designation F 2144-01, in Annual Book of

ASTM Standards, West Conshohocken, PA.

Figure ES-1.

Henny Penny OFE-341 Fryer.

Executive Summary

5011.05.17 iv

Food Service Technology Center

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 (%)a 51.0 ± 3.9

Production Capacity (lb/h)a 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.

Executive Summary

5011.05.17 v

Food Service Technology Center

100

0 102030405060708090

Production Rate (lb/h)

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%) .

Chicken French Fries

Heavy Load

Light Load

Medium Load

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.

Figure ES-2.

Fryer part-load cooking-

energy efficiency.

Executive Summary

5011.05.17 vi

Food Service Technology Center

0 102030405060708090

Production Rate (lb/h)

Cooking Energy Rate (kW) .

ASTM Production Capacities

Heavy Load

Light Load

Idle Energy Rate

Medium Load

Chicken French Fries

Note: 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 produc-

tion 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) 5.0

Production Capacity (lb/h)a 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.

Figure ES-3.

Fryer cooking energy

consumption profile.

Executive Summary

5011.05.17 vii

Food Service Technology Center

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.

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 tradi-

tional 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 opera-

tor with a workhorse fryer that can handle seriously high volume.

1 Introduction

5011.05.17 1-1

Food Service Technology Center

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, 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. 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 Perform-

ance of Large Open Vat Fryers (Designation F 2144-01).2

Background

Introduction

5011.05.17 1-2

Food Service Technology Center

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 ele-

ments 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 pro-

vided 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

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 tempera-

ture recovery time during the heavy-load test.

Objectives

Introduction

5011.05.17 1-3

Food Service Technology Center

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

cost model.

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 lit-

erature is in Appendix B.

Appliance

Description

Figure 1-1.

Henny Penny OFE-341

frypot.

Introduction

5011.05.17 1-4

Food Service Technology Center

Table 1-1. Appliance Specifications.

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

2 Methods

5011.05.17 2-1

Food Service Technology Center

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

opy 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.2 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

5011.05.17 2-2

Food Service Technology Center

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

Figure 2-2.

Thermocouple placement

for testing.

Measured Energy

Input Rate

Methods

5011.05.17 2-3

Food Service Technology Center

had been established. Researchers compared the measured energy input rate

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

properly.

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 refrigera-

tor 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) 48

Medium-Load (pieces) 24

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.

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 uni-

formly 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 cooking-

Chicken Tests

Methods

5011.05.17 2-4

Food Service Technology Center

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.

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 speci-

fied 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 fro-

zen 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 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.

French Fry Tests

Methods

5011.05.17 2-5

Food Service Technology Center

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-

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 ASTM results reporting sheets appear in Appendix C.

3 Results

5011.05.17 3-1

Food Service Technology Center

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).

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.

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.

Energy Input Rate

Preheat and

Idle Tests

Results

5011.05.17 3-2

Food Service Technology Center

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Time (min)

Temperature (°F) .

100

Average Energy Rate (kW) .

Oil Temperature

Energy Rate

Thermostat

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) 1.08

Figure 3-1.

Henny Penny OFE-341

preheat characteristics.

Results

5011.05.17 3-3

Food Service Technology Center

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 dur-

ing 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 cook-

ing period. Cooking-energy efficiency and production capacity were deter-

mined 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 cook-

ing temperatures. Figure 3-2 shows the temperature signature during a heavy-

load test.

The heavy-load cook time for the Henny Penny fryer was 15.4 minutes. Pro-

duction capacity includes the cook time and a 30 second reload time.

Chicken Tests

Results

5011.05.17 3-4

Food Service Technology Center

270

280

290

300

310

320

330

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Time (min)

Oil Temperature (°F)

Oil Temperature

Thermostat

Chicken removed

from oil

Chicken dropped

in oil

Medium- and Light Load Tests

Medium and light load tests represent the fryer’s performance under non-

peak conditions. Since a fryer is often used to cook single-basket loads dur-

ing 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 bas-

ket. The fryer, during medium- and light-load testing, demonstrated cooking-

energy 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 cook-

ing energy efficiency for a given loading scenario is the amount of energy

Figure 3-2.

Chicken cook cycle

tempeature signature.

Results

5011.05.17 3-5

Food Service Technology Center

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

Load Size (pieces) 48 24 8

Cook Time (min) 15.4 14.8 13.6

Production Rate (lb/h)a 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

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a 73.0 ± 2.4 72.8 ± 3.6 51.0 ± 3.9

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

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 approxi-

mately 6% fat and 66% moisture, as specified by the ASTM procedure. Re-

searchers 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 batch-

French Fry Tests

Results

5011.05.17 3-6

Food Service Technology Center

cooking procedure. Figures 3-3 shows the average temperature of the frying

medium during the heavy-load tests.

250

270

290

310

330

350

370

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Time (min)

Temperature (°F) .

Center Oil Thermostat

Fries placed in oil Fries removed from oil

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

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 re-

sponse 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 (approxi-

mately 10 seconds per load).

Figure 3-3.

Frying medium

temperarture during a

heavy-load test for the

OFE-341 fryer.

Results

5011.05.17 3-7

Food Service Technology Center

300

310

320

330

340

350

360

012345

Time (min)

Temperature (°F) .

Center Oil Thermostat

Fries placed in oil

Fries removed from oil

Fries placed in oil

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 bas-

ket. 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 dur-

ing testing were 78.5% for medium- and 61.4% for light-loads while produc-

ing 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

Figure 3-4.

Fryer cooking cycle

temperature signature.

Results

5011.05.17 3-8

Food Service Technology Center

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 2 ½ ¾

French Fry Cook Time (min) 2.80 2.30 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

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a 86.1 ± 0.9 78.5 ± 0.9 60.1 ± 5.9

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 con-

tains a synopsis of test data for each replicate of the chicken and French fry

cooking tests.

Results

5011.05.17 3-9

Food Service Technology Center

100

0 102030405060708090

Production Rate (lb/h)

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%) .

Chicken French Fries

Heavy Load

Light Load

Medium Load

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 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

2.3 kW, 4.9 kW, and 7.5 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 3.0 kW.

Figure 3-5.

Fryer part-load cooking-

energy efficiency.

Results

5011.05.17 3-10

Food Service Technology Center

0 102030405060708090

Production Rate (lb/h)

Cooking Energy Rate (kW) .

ASTM Production Capacities

Heavy Load

Light Load

Idle Energy Rate

Medium Load

Chicken French Fries

Note: 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 (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.

Figure 3-6.

Fryer cooking energy

consumption profile.

Energy Cost Model

Results

5011.05.17 3-11

Food Service Technology Center

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

4 Conclusions

5011.05.17 4-1

Food Service Technology Center

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 effi-

ciency.

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 oper-

ating 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 insti-

tutions requiring high volume production.

5 References

5011.05.17 5-1

Food Service Technology Center

1. American Society for Testing and Materials. 1999. Standard Test

Method for the Performance of Pressure and Kettle Fryers. ASTM Des-

ignation F 1964-99, in Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Consho-

hocken, 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 Con-

shohocken, PA.

3. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2000. Standard Test

Method for the Performance of Open Deep Fat Fryers. ASTM Designa-

tion F 1361-99, in Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Consho-

hocken, PA.

4. Pieretti, G., Blessent, J., Kaufman, D., Nickel, J., Fisher, D., 1990. Cook-

ing 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.

References

5011.05.17 5-2

Food Service Technology Center

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, Decem-

ber.

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 F1361-

99. 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 Ser-

vice Technology Center Report 5011.00.87, December.

12. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D. 2000. Vulcan High Capacity Fryer Perform-

ance 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 Ser-

vice Technology Center Report 5011.01.03, December.

14. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., Miner, S., 2002. Pitco AG14 Fryer Perform-

ance 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 Per-

formance 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 Test-

ing: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1361-99. Food Ser-

vice Technology Center Report 5011.03.14, May.

References

5011.05.17 5-3

Food Service Technology Center

17. Cowen, D., Zabrowski, D., 2003. Pitco AE14 Electric Fryer Perform-

ance 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 Perform-

ance Testing: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1361-99.

Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.03.20, July.

A Glossary

5011.05.17 A-1

Food Service Technology Center

Cooking Energy (kWh or kBtu)

The total energy consumed by an appli-

ance 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 appli-

ance 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 per-

centage of the measured energy input

rate.

Duty Cycle = RateInput Energy Measured Rate 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 cav-

ity/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 Measured Rate nConsumptioEnergy Idle x 100

Glossary

5011.05.17 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 name-

plate.

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

5011.05.17 B-1

Food Service Technology Center

Appendix B includes the product literature for the Henny Penny OFE-341

fryer.

Table B-1. Appliance Specifications.

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

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

Open Fryers

High-volume

OFE-341 Single well, electric

OFE-342 Two well, electric

OFG-341 Single well, gas

OFG-342 Two well, gas

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

for connecting any combination of

one or two-well units (all electric or

all gas).

■Itegrated dump station available on

two well unit.

Main Features

■Electronic controls for each well

feature:

●12 programmable cook cycles.

●Digital time and temperature

display.

●Dual timers to time half baskets

separately.

●Idle and melt modes.

●Load compensation feature.

●Cook cycle completion signal.

■Large rectangular well offers greater

surface area and promotes more

even cooking.

■Specially designed “beach” accom-

modates shortening displacement

when lowering the basket.

■Convenient built-in, single switch

filtering system serves up to two wells.

■Doors swing open for easy access.

Auto Lift Features

■Separate switch for Auto Lift and

Pause/Resume.

■Each well can be programmed to

operate half baskets independently

or together at the touch of a button.

■Quiet, low-voltage motor and drive

built into cabinet—no extra clear-

ance needed.

■Easy basket set and release.

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.

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 avail-

able, 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.

Above: OFG-342 two-well with Auto Lift

Left: Large well with specially designed “beach.”

OFE/OFG

341, 342

Specifications

Dimensions

Clearances

Floor space

Capacity Product

Shortening OFE

Shortening OFG

Heating format Electric

Gas

Shipping weight OFE

OFG

Listings OFE

OFG

Electrical

Single well Two well

6.6 sq. ft. (.62 m2) 12.7 sq. ft. (1.17 m2)

18 lbs. (8.2 kg) 36 lbs. (16.4 kg)

80 lbs. (36 kg) 160 lbs. (73 kg)

90 lbs. (41 kg) 180 lbs. (82 kg)

Electric immersion Electric immersion

22 kw 44 kw

Natural or propane gas. Natural or propane gas.

(3) burners (6) burners

(1) 1/2 in. connection (1) 3/4 in. connection

120,000 BTU/hr (35 kw) 240,000 BTU/hr (70 kw)

348 lbs. (158 kg) approximate 700 lbs. (318 kg) approximate

341 lbs. (155 kg) approximate 665 lbs. (300 kg) approximate

UL, UL Sanitation, CUL, CE UL, UL Sanitation, CUL, CE

CSA, UL Sanitation, CE CSA, UL Sanitation, CE

Order from: Manufactured by:

Henny Penny Corporation

P.O. Box 60

Eaton, OH 45320

Specifications subject to change without notice.

For up to date product information please visit

hennypenny.com

41 in. (1042 mm) 231⁄2in. (591 mm) 441⁄2in. (1130 mm)

57 in.

(1448 mm)

NOTE:

Height

includes

casters.

Model Voltage Phase Cycle/Hz KW Amps

Electric Units 208 3 50/60 22 per well 61 per well

240 3 50/60 22 per well 53 per well

Gas Units 120 1 50 or 60 35 per well 12 per well

230 1 50 or 60 70 per well 6 per well

All international voltages available.

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

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

C Results Reporting Sheets

5011.05.17 C-1

Food Service Technology Center

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 com-

puter 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

Results Reporting Sheets

5011.05.17 C-2

Food Service Technology Center

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) 48

Cook Time (min) 15.4

Production Capacity (lb/h) a 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) 24

French Fry Cook Time (min) 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.

Results Reporting Sheets

5011.05.17 C-3

Food Service Technology Center

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

Load Size (lb) 8

French Fry Cook Time (min) 13.6

Production Rate (lb/h) a 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) 681

Cooking-Energy Efficiency (%)a 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.

Results Reporting Sheets

5011.05.17 C-4

Food Service Technology Center

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

Load Size (lb) 2 ½

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) ¾

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.

D Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

5011.05.17 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

5011.05.17 D-2

Food Service Technology Center

Table D-2. Heavy-Load Chicken Test Data.

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

Measured Values

Test Voltage (V) 208 208 208 208

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 66.8 66.8 66.8

Final Moisture Content (%) 55.3 55.7 56.6 56.8

Initial Temperature (°F) 37 38 39 38

Final Temperature (°F) 192 194 193 194

Water Loss (lb) 4.90 4.90 4.31 4.24

Calculated Values

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 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) 372 374 346 346

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

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

5011.05.17 D-3

Food Service Technology Center

Table D-3. Medium-Load Chicken Test Data.

Repetition #1 Repetition #2 Repetition #3

Measured Values

Test Voltage (V) 208 208 208

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 66.8 66.8

Final Moisture Content (%) 48.8 52.0 57.5

Initial Temperature (°F) 37 38 39

Final Temperature (°F) 195 197 192

Water Loss (lb) 3.11 2.95 2.22

Calculated Values

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

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

5011.05.17 D-4

Food Service Technology Center

Table D-4. Medium-Load Chicken Test Data continued.

Repetition #4 Repetition #5 Repetition #6

Measured Values

Test Voltage (V) 208 208 208

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 66.8 66.8

Final Moisture Content (%) 53.0 51.0 54.0

Initial Temperature (°F) 39 38 38

Final Temperature (°F) 193 192 194

Water Loss (lb) 2.22 3.01 2.53

Calculated Values

Initial Weight of Water (lb) 5.999 6.185 6.019

Final Weight of Water (lb) 3.579 3.180 3.493

Sensible (Btu) 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

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

5011.05.17 D-5

Food Service Technology Center

Table D-5. Light-Load Chicken Test Data

Repetition #1 Repetition #2 Repetition #3

Measured Values

Test Voltage (V) 208 208 208

Energy Consumption (kWh) 0.58 0.58 0.62

Total Energy (Btu) 1,980 1,980 2,116

Total Test Time (min) 13.6 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 66.8 66.8

Final Moisture Content (%) 55.6 55.6 57.2

Initial Temperature (°F) 37 39 38

Final Temperature (°F) 190 190 186

Water Loss (lb) 0.72 0.80 0.76

Calculated Values

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 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 2.56 2.85

Production Rate (lb/h) 13.6 13.0 13.9

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

5011.05.17 D-6

Food Service Technology Center

Table D-6. Light-Load Chicken Test Data continued.

Repetition #4 Repetition #5

Measured Values

Test Voltage (V) 208 208

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 66.8

Final Moisture Content (%) 55.8 57.2

Initial Temperature (°F) 39 38

Final Temperature (°F) 192 191

Water Loss (lb) 0.76 0.73

Calculated Values

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

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

5011.05.17 D-7

Food Service Technology Center

Table D-7. Heavy-Load Fry Test Data

Repetition #1 Repetition #2 Repetition #3

Measured Values

Test Voltage (V) 208 208 208

Energy Consumption (kWh) 4.76 4.80 4.74

Total Energy (Btu) 16,246 16,382 16,178

Cook Time (min) 2.80 2.80 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 25.000 25.000

Final Weight (lb) 17.535 17.542 17.612

Initial Moisture Content (%) 67.1 67.1 67.1

Final Moisture Content (%) 48.9 48.8 49.6

Initial Temperature (°F) 0 0 0

Final Temperature (°F) 212 212 212

Calculated Values

Initial Weight of Water (lb) 16.775 16.775 16,775

Final Weight of Water (lb) 8.575 8.561 8.736

Sensible (Btu) 3,684 3,684 3,684

Latent – Heat of Fusion (Btu) 2,416 2,416 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 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

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

5011.05.17 D-8

Food Service Technology Center

Table D-8. Medium-Load Fry Test Data

Repetition #1 Repetition #2 Repetition #3

Measured Values

Test Voltage (V) 208 208 208

Energy Consumption (kWh) 2.62 2.64 2.62

Total Energy (Btu) 8,942 9,010 8,942

Cook Time (min) 2.30 2.30 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 12.500 12.500

Final Weight (lb) 8.756 8.722 8.775

Initial Moisture Content (%) 67.1 67.1 67.1

Final Moisture Content (%) 48.7 48.4 49.4

Initial Temperature (°F) 0 0 0

Final Temperature (°F) 212 212 212

Calculated Values

Initial Weight of Water (lb) 8.388 8.388 8.388

Final Weight of Water (lb) 4.264 4.221 4.335

Sensible (Btu) 1,842 1,842 1,842

Latent – Heat of Fusion (Btu) 1,208 1,208 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

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

5011.05.17 D-9

Food Service Technology Center

Table D-9. Light-Load Fry Test Data

Repetition #1 Repetition #2 Repetition #3

Measured Values

Test Voltage (V) 208 208 208

Energy Consumption (kWh) 1.02 1.06 1.00

Total Energy (Btu) 3,481 3,618 3,413

Cook Time (min) 2.30 2.30 2.30

Total Test Time (min) 12.2 12.2 12.2

Weight Loss (%) 29.70 29.80 30.10

Initial Weight (lb) 3.750 3.750 3.750

Final Weight (lb) 2.638 2.632 2.620

Initial Moisture Content (%) 67.1 67.1 67.1

Final Moisture Content (%) 49.7 49.3 48.0

Initial Temperature (°F) 0 0 0

Final Temperature (°F) 212 212 212

Calculated Values

Initial Weight of Water (lb) 2.516 2.516 2.516

Final Weight of Water (lb) 1.311 1.298 1.258

Sensible (Btu) 553 553 553

Latent – Heat of Fusion (Btu) 362 362 362

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 18.4 18.4

Average Recovery Time (sec) 10.0 10.0 10.0

Cooking-Energy Efficiency Data

5011.05.17 D-10

Food Service Technology Center

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.

E Energy Cost Model

5011.05.17 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 par-

ticular 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 condi-

tions, 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 en-

ergy. 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

5011.05.17 E-2

Food Service Technology Center

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:

=×%,

lb/h 68.9

lb 150 36%

th×

th = 0.78 h

Energy Cost Model

5011.05.17 E-3

Food Service Technology Center

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:

=×

lb/h 37.7

lb 15048%

tm×

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:

=×

lb/h 13.4

lb 15016%

tl×

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

Energy Cost Model

5011.05.17 E-4

Food Service Technology Center

Step 5—Calculate the total idle time and energy consumption.

The total idle time is determined as follows:

tt tttionhml=−−−−×nt

min/h 60

min 9.93preheat 1

h 1.79h 1.91h 0.78h 12.0ti×

−−−−=

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:

avg elec daily

=,,

h 12.0

kWh 33.9

qavg =,

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

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

Navigation menu

Versions of this User Manual:

Views

Navigation