DOE Part III-LED产品测试流程标准翻译：Page-09

888888

d. 灯具处理和跟踪 Lamp Handling and Tracking
能源部建议按照IES-LM-84-14第7.2节的规定来处理、运输和储存LED灯，该节指出应注意防止任何可能影响测试结果的损坏或污染。这些处理要求是实用的，可以防止灯管损坏而影响测量结果，而且不会给制造商带来负担。
DOE proposed that LED lamps be handled, transported, and stored as specified in Section 7.2 of IES–LM–84– 14, which states that care should be taken to prevent any damage or contamination that may affect the test results. These handling requirements are practical, prevent lamp damage that could affect the measured results, and would not be burdensome to manufacturers.

能源部还建议，在流明维护测试期间，对LED灯的标记和跟踪的要求应符合IES-LM-84-14第7.3节的规定。IES-LM-84-14第7.3节规定，每个LED灯必须在维护测试期间进行跟踪，并通过直接应用于LED灯的标记或可在运输、操作和评估期间粘贴的标签或LED灯占据的测试架位置来识别。它进一步规定，所选择的识别方法还应该考虑暴露在光和热下的影响，因为这可能会改变或损害标记或标签。IES-LM-84-14的第7.3节还提供了几种可能的标记方法和材料，包括耐用的条形码、陶瓷墨水标记、高温标记或任何其他能在测试期间持久存在或能定期更新的方法。这些要求确保了LED灯在整个流明维持测试过程中能够被正确地追踪和识别。80 FR at 39652-39653。能源部没有收到任何关于拟议的灯管处理和跟踪要求的意见，因此采用了本最终规则中的描述。
DOE also proposed that the requirements for LED lamp marking and tracking during lumen maintenance testing be as specified in section 7.3 of IES–LM–84–14. Section 7.3 of IES–LM– 84–14 specifies that each LED lamp must be tracked during the maintenance test and identified by marking applied directly to the LED lamps or by labels that can be attached during transport, operation, and evaluation, or to the test rack position occupied by the LED lamp. It further provides that the chosen identification method should also consider the effect of exposure to light and heat, as this may alter or compromise the marking or label. Section 7.3 of IES–LM–84–14 also offers several possible marking methods and materials, including durable bar coding, ceramic ink marking, high-temperature markers, or any other method that endures or can be periodically renewed for the duration of the test. These requirements ensure that the LED lamp can be tracked and identified correctly throughout lumen maintenance testing. 80 FR at 39652–39653. DOE did not receive any comments on the proposed lamp handling and tracking requirements and therefore adopts them as described in this final rule.

e. 操作周期 Operating Cycle
其他类型的灯的寿命测试程序有时需要 "循环"，这意味着在测试期间以特定的时间间隔打开和关闭灯。因此，在2015年7月的SNOPR中，DOE建议在流明维持测试中不要求LED灯的循环，参考IES LM-84-14的7.4节，其中指出LED灯应连续运行。80 FR at 39653.
Lifetime test procedures for other lamp types sometimes require ‘‘cycling,’’ which means turning the lamp on and off at specific intervals over the test period. However, industry has stated that unlike other lighting technologies, the lifetime of LED lamps is minimally affected by power cycling.13 Thus, in the July 2015 SNOPR, DOE proposed that cycling of the LED lamp not be required during lumen maintenance testing by referencing section 7.4 of IES LM–84– 14, which states the LED lamps shouldbe operated continuously. 80 FR at 39653.

DOE没有收到关于保持连续运行的建议的任何意见。然而，为了要求连续运行，而不是建议连续运行，能源部删除了对IES LM-84-14第7.4节的参考，并采用语言代替，说明连续运行集成LED灯。这一要求与之前的行业意见相一致，并消除了关于操作周期的任何混淆。80 FR 39644, 39653（2015年7月9日）。
DOE did not receive any comments on the proposal to maintain continuous operation. However, in order to require continuous operation rather than recommend it, DOE removes the reference to section 7.4 of IES LM–84– 14 and adopts language in its place that states to operate the integrated LED lamp continuously. This requirement aligns with previous industry comments and eliminates any confusion regarding operating cycle. 80 FR 39644, 39653 (July 9, 2015).

f. 时间记录 Time Recording
准确记录运行时间对流明维护测试程序至关重要。因此，能源部建议采用IES LM-84-14的第7.5节，该节指出，经过的时间记录装置必须连接到特定的测试位置，并且只有在LED灯管工作时才会累积时间。只有在灯管通电的情况下，LED灯才会工作。如果灯管被关闭（可能是为了运送到另一个测试区域或在停电期间），DOE建议关闭状态下的时间不包括在记录的运行时间中。IES LM-84-14第7.5节还指出，可以使用视频监控、电流监控或其他手段来确定经过的工作时间。所有用于测量经过的操作时间的设备都将被校准，并且总的最小时间分辨率为±0.5%。这些要求可以在最小的测试负担下实现，并提供合理的严格性，通过商业上可用的时间记录仪器可以实现。同上。能源部没有收到任何关于拟议的时间记录要求的意见，因此采用了本最终规则中的描述。
Accurate recording of the elapsed operating time is critical for the lumen maintenance test procedure. Therefore, DOE proposed to adopt section 7.5 of IES LM–84–14, which states that elapsed time recording devices must be connected to the particular test positions and accumulate time only when the LED lamps are operating. The LED lamp is operating only when the lamp is energized. If lamps are turned off (possibly for transport to another testing area or during a power outage), DOE proposed that the time spent in the off state not be included in the recorded elapsed operating time. Section 7.5 of IES LM–84–14 also indicates that video monitoring, current monitoring, or other means can be used to determine elapsed operating time. All equipment used for measuring elapsed operating time would be calibrated and have a total minimum temporal resolution of ± 0.5 percent. These requirements are achievable with minimal testing burden and provide reasonable stringency that is achievable via commercially available time recording instrumentation. Id. DOE did not receive any comments on the proposed time recording requirements and therefore adopts them as described in this final rule.

g. 灯具故障 Lamp Failure
能源部还建议，按照IES LM-84-14第7.8节的规定，定期检查LED灯的故障，该节要求至少在流明维护测试开始时和每次间隔测量期间，通过视觉观察或自动监测来检查LED灯的运行。IES LM-84-14的第7.8节进一步规定，必须对每个不工作的LED灯进行调查，以确定它实际上是一个故障，并且不是由测试设备或电气连接的不当操作造成的。能源部提议，如果LED灯的流明维持率被测量为0.7或低于0.7，或者LED灯故障导致完全失去光输出，就已经达到了故障时间，因此不得使用下面III.D.4节中描述的程序进行预测。相反，失效时间等于最后一次流明输出测量记录大于或等于初始流明输出的70%的经过时间测量。同上。
DOE also proposed that LED lamps be checked regularly for failure as specified in section 7.8 of IES LM–84–14, which requires that checking for LED lamp operation either by visual observation or automatic monitoring be done at a minimum at the start of lumen maintenance testing and during every interval measurement. Section 7.8 of IES LM–84–14 further specifies that each non-operational LED lamp must be investigated to make certain that it is actually a failure, and that it is not caused by improper functioning of the test equipment or electrical connections. DOE proposed that if lumen maintenance of the LED lamp is measured at or below 0.7 or an LED lamp fails resulting in complete loss of light output, time to failure has been reached and therefore it must not be projected using the procedures described in the following section III.D.4. Instead, the time to failure is equal to the last elapsed time measurement for which the recorded lumen output measurement is greater than or equal to 70 percent of initial lumen output. Id.

关于能源部在第430部分B附录BB第4.6.2节中的建议，NEMA建议将文本改为 "对于流明维持值小于0.7，包括导致完全失去光输出的灯管故障，故障时间等于流明维持值大于或等于70%的最后监测间隔的中点"。(NEMA, No. 42 at p. 5)
Regarding DOE’s proposal in section 4.6.2 of appendix BB to subpart B of part 430, NEMA recommended changing the text to read ‘‘For lumen maintenance values less than 0.7, including lamp failures that result in complete loss of light output, time to failure is equal to the midpoint of the last monitoring interval where the lumen maintenance is greater than or equal to 70 percent.’’ (NEMA, No. 42 at p. 5)

能源部指出，如果灯管比预期的时间早出现故障，制造商可能无法准确知道LED灯管何时达到70%的流明维持率。NEMA的建议是以流明维持率大于或等于70%的最后一个监测区间的中点来计算该时间，这可能会高估失效时间。DOE的方法确保实际故障时间等于或大于计算中使用的数值。因此，DOE坚持其在2015年7月SNOPR中的建议，即确保故障时间代表流明维持值为70%或更高。
DOE notes that if a lamp fails earlier than expected, manufacturers may not know exactly when the LED lamp reached 70 percent lumen maintenance. NEMA’s proposal to calculate that time as the midpoint of the last monitoring interval where the lumen maintenance is greater than or equal to 70 percent may overestimate the time to failure. DOE’s approach ensures that the actual time to failure is equal to or greater than the value used in calculations. Therefore, DOE maintains its proposal in the July 2015 SNOPR, which ensures that the time to failure represents a lumen maintenance value of 70 percent or greater.

h. 压力测试 Stress Testing
在2015年7月的SNOPR中，DOE注意到，工业界表示，与其他照明技术不同，LED灯的寿命受电源循环的影响很小。13此外，DOE对现有文献和工业测试程序的研究表明，没有任何文献和程序使用快速循环压力测试来预测整个LED灯的故障。因此，在2015年7月的SNOPR中，DOE建议保留LED灯的测试条件，不进行快速循环压力测试。DOE也没有提议修改测试条件以适应基于高温的压力测试方法。80 FR 39650.
In the July 2015 SNOPR, DOE noted that industry has stated that, unlike other lighting technologies, the lifetime of LED lamps is minimally affected by power cycling.13 Further, DOE research of existing literature and industry test procedures indicated that none are available that use rapid-cycle stress testing to predict the failure of the complete LED lamp. Therefore, in the July 2015 SNOPR, DOE proposed to retain the testing conditions that LED lamps operate without rapid-cycle stress testing. DOE also did not propose to modify the testing conditions to accommodate a stress testing method based on elevated temperatures. 80 FR 39650.

DOE收到了来自EEA和CA IOUs对其提议的LED灯测试条件的评论，指出它应该重新考虑采用LED灯的加速寿命测试方法。这些组织指出，加速寿命测试通常用于其他电子行业，以确定在受压操作条件下的产品缺陷（例如，高温和高湿度）。(EEAs, No. 43 at p. 2; CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 6) EEAs评论说，由于集成的LED灯主要由电子元件构成，它们的寿命经常受到极端环境条件的影响。(EEAs, No. 43 at p. 2) CA IOUs同意，并补充说，LED灯利用电子驱动器来调节电流，在不同的环境条件下，其性能可能会有所不同。(CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 6)
DOE received comments from EEAs and CA IOUs on its proposed testing conditions for LED lamps, stating that it should reconsider adopting an accelerated life test method for LED lamps. The organizations noted that accelerated life testing is commonly used in other electronic industries to identify product flaws under stressed operating conditions (e.g., high temperature and high humidity). (EEAs, No. 43 at p. 2; CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 6) EEAs commented that because integrated LED lamps are primarily constructed of electronic components, their lifetime is often affected by extreme ambient conditions. (EEAs, No. 43 at p. 2) CA IOUs agreed, adding that LED lamps utilize electronic drivers to regulate current, which may vary in performance under different ambient conditions. (CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 6)

CA IOUs和EEAs参考了先前关于LED行业压力测试的研究。CA IOUs指出，85/85测试已在行业内使用，即在测试期间，LED灯被置于85℃和85%的相对湿度的环境中。(CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 6) CA IOUs和EEAs引用了DOE发表的一项研究，该研究使用75/75测试方法来分析LED灯具在压力条件下的寿命。
CA IOUs and EEAs referenced prior studies on stress testing in the LED industry. CA IOUs noted that 85/85 testing has been utilized in the industry, which is when the LED lamp is subjected to an ambient environment of 85°C and 85% relative humidity during testing. (CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 6) CA IOUs and EEAs cited a study published by DOE that used a 75/75 testing method for analyzing LED luminaire lifetime under stressed conditions.

该研究的结论是，光是流明折旧并不能代表预测LED的寿命，并建议使用压力测试来确定产品的缺陷和制造缺陷。CA IOUs和EEAs还参考了能源之星灯具规范V2.0的最新草案，10详细说明了EPA计划包括对打算在嵌入式或封闭式灯具中运行的灯具进行高温测试。为了识别和防止制造缺陷和劣质产品，加州的IOUs和EEAs要求DOE开发一个加速寿命测试方法，以配合EPA的能源之星计划或基于LED灯具研究的方法。(EEAs, No. 43 at pp. 2-3; CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 6) CA IOUs指出，目前DOE提出的寿命测试方法没有解决安装在嵌入式或封闭式灯具中的灯的操作条件，建议DOE在其测试程序中解决这个问题。(CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 6)
The study concluded that lumen depreciation alone is not a proxy for predicting LED lifetime and recommended the use of stress testing to identify product flaws and manufacturing defects. CA IOUs and EEAs also referenced the most recent draft of the ENERGY STAR Lamps Specification V2.0,10 detailing EPA’s plan to include elevated temperature testing for lamps intended to operate in recessed or enclosed fixtures. In order to identify and prevent manufacturing defects and poor quality products, CA IOUs and EEAs requested that DOE develop an accelerated life test method to align with EPA’s ENERGY STAR program or one based on the LED luminaire research study. (EEAs, No. 43 at pp. 2–3; CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 6) CA IOUs noted that the current lifetime test method as proposed by DOE does not address operating conditions for lamps that are installed in recessed or enclosed fixtures and recommended that DOE address this in its test procedure. (CA IOUs, No. 44 at p. 6)

DOE指出，在市场上保持高质量的产品是很重要的。然而，DOE在这个测试程序中没有采用压力测试或高温测试。DOE对现有文献和行业测试程序的研究表明，没有任何文献可以预测整个LED灯的故障。DOE发表的分析LED灯具在受压条件下的寿命的研究报告14不适用于本测试程序，原因有几个。虽然该研究提供了关于LED灯具的宝贵见解，但它没有确定具体的磨损机制，量化故障模式，或确定加速因素，以提供LED灯的寿命估计。此外，该研究特别指出，其目标是提供对灯具故障模式的洞察力，而不是要成为灯具的通用加速寿命测试。因此，DOE目前不能利用这项研究来为LED灯的测试程序制定加速寿命测试方法。最后，DOE指出，所采用的寿命测量方法充分地测试了所有的LED灯，包括打算在封闭式或嵌入式灯具中运行的灯。DOE在这个测试程序中加入了寿命，以支持FTC照明事实标签，而且所有类型的灯都采用一致的测试方法，使消费者可以直接比较灯的寿命。因此，DOE在这个测试程序中没有采用压力测试或高温测试。
DOE notes that it is important to maintain high quality products on the market. However, DOE is not adopting a stress test or elevated temperature test in this test procedure. DOE’s research of existing literature and industry test procedures indicate that none are available that predict the failure of the complete LED lamp. The study published by DOE analyzing LED luminaire lifetime under stressed conditions 14 is not applicable to this test procedure for several reasons. While the study provided valuable insights on LED luminaires, it did not determine specific wear-out mechanisms, quantify failure modes, or determine acceleration factors to provide lifetime estimates for LED lamps. Further, the study specifically notes that its goal was to provide insight into failure modes of luminaires and was not intended to be a universal accelerated life test for luminaires. Therefore, DOE cannot use this study to develop an accelerated lifetime test method for the LED lamps test procedure at this time. Lastly, DOE notes that the adopted approach for lifetime measurements adequately tests all LED lamps, including lamps intended to operate in enclosed or recessed fixtures. DOE included lifetime in this test procedure to support the FTC Lighting Facts Label, and a consistent test method across all lamp types enables consumers to directly compare lamp lifetimes. Thus, DOE is not adopting a stress test or an elevated temperature test in this test procedure.