DOE Part III-LED产品测试流程标准翻译：Page-12
如果至少有3,000小时但少于6,000小时的整灯流明维持数据，IES TM- 28-14建议采用综合推断法。该方法使用IES TM-21-11来推算从IES LM-80-08收集到的数据，该方法测量LED光源组件的流明维护。然后，如果在整灯测试中观察到额外的流明维护损失，该方法将对完整的集成LED灯进行修正。If at least 3,000 hours but less than 6,000 hours of whole-lamp lumen maintenance data is available, IES TM– 28–14 recommends a combined extrapolation method. This method uses IES TM–21–11 to project the data collected from IES LM–80–08, which measures lumen maintenance of the LED source component. This method then corrects for additional lumen maintenance losses in the complete integrated LED lamp, if they are observed during whole-lamp testing.
能源部建议在有至少3000小时但少于6000小时的整灯流明维护测试数据的情况下，不参考IES TM-28-14第5.2节所述的综合推断方法。要求使用LED光源组件的流明维护数据需要拆卸灯管，这可能需要对灯管进行不可逆转的修改，并在测量中引入潜在的错误和变化。同上。此外，正如许多利益相关者在对NOPR测试程序的评论中所描述的那样，集成LED灯的故障通常是由LED源以外的部件决定的。79 FR 32030.
DOE proposed not to reference the combined extrapolation method described in section 5.2 of IES TM–28– 14 for tests where at least 3,000 hours, but less than 6,000 hours, of whole lamp lumen maintenance test data are available. The requirement to use lumen maintenance data of the LED source component would require disassembly of the lamp, which could necessitate irreversible modifications to the lamp and introduce potential for error and variation in the measurements. Id. Furthermore, failure of an integrated LED lamp is often determined by components other than the LED source, as many stakeholders described in comments to the NOPR test procedure. 79 FR 32030.
对于至少3000小时但少于6000小时的测试时间，DOE建议使用IES TM-28-14第5.1节规定的直接外推法，但要降低允许的最大失效时间要求。IES TM- 28-14第5.1.5节提供了如何根据样本大小限制故障索赔时间的指导。因为DOE要求至少有10个LED灯的样本量，所以IES TM-28-14第5.1.5节的表1中规定的预计失效时间，对于测试时间大于或等于6000小时的情况，将被限制在不超过测试时间的6倍。然而，为了考虑到将直接外推法的阈值降低到3000小时所增加的不确定性，DOE建议根据测试持续时间减少失败索赔的最大时间。对于这个测试时间范围，DOE提出了一个最大的推算限制，从测试时间的1倍（测试时间小于3000小时的有效限制）到测试时间的大约6倍（测试时间大于或等于6000小时的限制），呈线性缩放。80 FR at 39654.
In place of the combined extrapolation method for test durations of at least 3,000 hours but less than 6,000 hours, DOE proposed to use the direct extrapolation method specified in section 5.1 of IES TM–28–14 but to lower the maximum allowed time to failure claim. Section 5.1.5 of IES TM– 28–14 provides instruction for how to limit time to failure claims depending on sample size. Because DOE requires a sample size of a least ten LED lamps, the projected time to failure, as specified in Table 1 in section 5.1.5 of IES TM–28– 14, would be limited to no more than six times the test duration for test durations greater than or equal to 6,000 hours. However, to account for the increased uncertainty in lowering the threshold for the direct extrapolation method to 3,000 hours, DOE proposed to reduce the maximum time to failure claims based on the test duration. For this test duration range, DOE proposed a maximum projection limit that scales linearly from one times the test duration (the effective limit for test durations less than 3,000 hours) to approximately six times the test duration (the limit for test durations greater than or equal to 6,000 hours). 80 FR at 39654.
总之，能源部建议用以下程序来确定失效时间。
In summary, DOE proposed to determine time to failure using the following procedures:
(1) 如果测试时间少于3,000小时。不允许预测流明维持率数据，失效时间等于测试时间或记录的灯管达到70%流明维持率的时间，以数值较小者为准。关于在流明维持测试中如何记录灯管故障的更多细节，请参见III.D.3.g节。
(1) If the test duration is less than 3,000 hours: No projection of lumen maintenance data is permitted, and time to failure equals the test duration or the recorded time at which the lamp reaches 70 percent lumen maintenance, whichever is of lesser value. See section III.D.3.g for more details on how lamp failure is recorded during lumen maintenance testing.
(2) 如果测试时间大于或等于3,000小时，小于6,000小时。必须使用IES TM-28-14第5.1.3和5.1.4节中规定的直接推断方法。最大失效时间的要求是通过将测试时间乘以下式计算的极限乘数来确定的。其中测试时间以小时表示。
(2) If the test duration is greater than or equal to 3,000 and less than 6,000 hours: The direct extrapolation method specified in sections 5.1.3 and 5.1.4 of IES TM–28–14 must be utilized. The maximum time to failure claim is determined by multiplying the test duration by the limiting multiplier calculated in the following equation: Where test duration is expressed in hours.
********************************计算公式参考原文***********************************************
这个方程是一个线性函数，当测试时间等于3000小时时等于1，6000小时时等于6。举例来说，如果一个LED灯被测试了4500小时，根据这种方法可以报告的最大失效时间是15750小时（测试时间4500小时的3.5倍）。限制乘数随着测试时间的增加而增加，直到测试时间等于6000小时时，它被设定为6的值。
This equation is a linear function that equals one when the test duration is equal to 3,000 hours and six at 6,000 hours. As an example, if an LED lamp is tested for 4,500 hours, the maximum time to failure that could be reported based on this approach is 15,750 hours (3.5 times the test duration of 4,500 hours). The limiting multiplier increases as the test duration increases until the test duration equals 6,000 hours where it is set at a value of six.
(3) 如果试验时间大于或等于6,000小时。必须利用IES TM-28-14第5.1.3和5.1.4节中规定的直接推断方法。预计的失效时间被限制在不超过试验时间的六倍。
(3) If the test duration is greater than or equal to 6,000 hours: The direct extrapolation method specified in sections 5.1.3 and 5.1.4 of IES TM–28–14 must be utilized. The projected time to failure is limited to no more than six times the test duration.
DOE收到了一些关于LED灯测试程序的建议寿命预测方法的评论。EEAs支持DOE的建议，即不允许测试时间少于3000小时的灯具预测故障时间。(EEAs, No. 43 at p. 2) CA IOUs同意，并补充说DOE提供的确定最大允许寿命要求的公式是适当的，他们不会建议只根据测试时间来增加最大允许寿命要求。(CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 4-5)
DOE received several comments regarding the proposed lifetime projection methods for the LED lamps test procedure. EEAs supported DOE’s proposal of not allowing lamps with test durations less than 3,000 hours to project time to failure. (EEAs, No. 43 at p. 2) CA IOUs agreed, adding that the formulas provided by DOE to identify the maximum allowable lifetime claim are appropriate, and they would not recommend the maximum allowable lifetime claim to be increased based only on test duration. (CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 4–5)
关于测试时间大于或等于3,000小时但小于6,000小时的灯具，DOE正在删除对IES TM-28-14第5.1.3节的参考，该节描述了直接外推法所使用的数据。DOE指出，该部分的大部分内容是指6000小时或以上的测试时间，因此并不相关。然而，DOE保留了不考虑运行时间在1000小时之前收集的数据的指示，因为这一要求适用于测试时间大于或等于3000小时和小于6000小时的灯具。
Regarding lamps with test durations greater than or equal to 3,000 and less than 6,000 hours, DOE is removing the reference to section 5.1.3 of IES TM–28– 14 to describe the data used for the direct extrapolation method. DOE notes that most of that section refers to test durations of 6,000 hours or greater and is therefore not relevant. However, DOE is maintaining the instruction to disregard data collected prior to 1,000 hours of operating time as this requirement would be applicable to lamps with test durations greater than or equal to 3,000 and less than 6,000 hours.
NEMA评论说，IES TM-28-14不应该被用来预测整个灯的寿命，因为该标准的目的是预测流明的维持，而不是灯中可能出现的电子故障。(NEMA, No. 42 at p. 6) CA IOUs同样指出，DOE的建议有可能在寿命要求上产生误导性的结果，因为它目前没有考虑到驱动LED光源的电子器件的耐久性。CA IOUs引用了一项研究，声称LED电子器件更有可能在LED光源之前失效。
NEMA commented that IES TM–28– 14 should not be used to project lifetime for the entire lamp, as the standard is intended to project lumen maintenance and not electronic failures that may occur in the lamp. (NEMA, No. 42 at p. 6) CA IOUs similarly noted that DOE’s proposal has the potential to derive misleading results in lifetime claims, as it currently does not account for the durability of the electronics that drive the LED source. CA IOUs cited a study that claimed LED electronics are more likely to fail before the LED sources.18(CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 3)
DOE意识到，灯中的电子元件可能在LED本身之前就失效。正如III.D.4节所述，这就是为什么DOE采用测试程序来测量整个灯的性能，而不仅仅是LED组件。虽然业界可能普遍认为电气元件会在LED元件之前失效，但在现有的文献或行业标准中，仍然没有方法来预测LED灯的电子元件的失效。能源部将继续监测行业出版物，如果将来有这样的方法出现，可能会更新测试程序以包括这样的方法。在这个最终规则中，能源部将采用前面描述的流明维持率预测方法来确定失效时间。
DOE is aware that electronic components in lamps may fail before the LEDs themselves. As described in section III.D.4, this is why DOE is adopting a test procedure that measures performance of the whole lamp rather than just the LED component. While there may be a general belief in the industry that electrical components will fail before the LED component, there remains no method in existing literature or industry standards to predict the failure of the electronic components of the LED lamp. DOE will continue to monitor industry publications and may update the test procedure to include such a method if it is introduced in the future. In this final rule, DOE is adopting the lumen maintenance projection methods described earlier to determine time to failure.
页:
[1]