Radiometric Testing of Germicidal UV Products, Round 1: UV-C Towers and Whole-Room Luminaires (CALiPER Summary Report)

Technical Report · Fri Sep 01 04:00:00 EDT 2023

DOI:https://doi.org/10.2172/2282859· OSTI ID:2282859

Tuenge, Jason ^[1]; Arnold, Gabe ^[1]; Axelson, Margaret ^[1]; Tan, Jianchuan ^[1]

---

1. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)

This summary report analyzes the independently tested performance of 13 germicidal ultraviolet (GUV) products purchased between February and July 2022. A companion full report (DOE 2023) provides additional information and discussion of the tested products, test methods, and results. The products were of three different types: • Seven portable, consumer-oriented GUV towers designed to be placed on the floor or a desk of an unoccupied room to disinfect air and surfaces. Five of these products used LED sources and two products had low-pressure mercury (LPM) sources. • One GUV whole-room luminaire designed to be installed on a ceiling to disinfect air when a room is occupied. This product had LED sources. • Five GUV troffer or high-bay style whole-room luminaires designed to be installed in or suspended from a ceiling to disinfect air and surfaces when a room is unoccupied. All five had LPM sources. Product testing covered radiometric and electrical performance for all 13 products as well as photobiological safety evaluation if product documentation included testable claims. Measurement results enable comparison between products and against manufacturer or vendor claims. Testing identified numerous issues related to the accuracy of claimed GUV product performance. Claims were often untestable, contradictory, ambiguous, or used incorrect units and/or terminology. When claims were testable, they often did not match test results. For example, three LED products that claimed to emit UV-C emitted only UV-A. Product claim issues were more common among consumer-oriented tower products, but all product types exhibited problems with accurate performance claims. The UV-C radiant efficiency (calculated as UV-C output power divided by electrical input power) of the products varied widely, even among similar products using the same source technologies. For example, the UV-C radiant efficiency of LPM products varied by greater than a factor of three for the same product type, indicating a large potential energy savings opportunity for products that are better designed for efficiency. LED products had orders-of-magnitude lower UV-C radiant efficiency than LPM products. This study also identified several testing challenges and limitations. Most significant among these is the capability to accurately test and report the performance of larger GUV products. Whereas integrating spheres are used to quickly measure total radiant flux (i.e., output power) and spectral distribution, goniometers are used to measure radiant intensity distribution (from which radiant flux can be calculated). Integrating spheres require a specialized and costly coating to test UV, and the testing laboratory for this round of products had only a 20-inch diameter hemisphere with this capability. The integrating sphere accommodated just 2 of the 10 UV-C emitting products. Goniometer testing had a different size limitation in that mirrors typically used to increase goniometer test distance to the far field reflect little to no UV. As a result, the study evaluated only 6 of 13 products in the far field. Electronic files of UV-C intensity data for the other 7 products, which would typically be imported into design software for designing GUV applications, may not be reliable for predicting irradiance at arbitrary far-field distances (IES 2022a; CIE 2020). Specifiers and buyers of GUV products need accurate performance claims and data to deploy GUV technology safely and effectively. This CALiPER GUV Round 1 report demonstrates the significant education and training manufacturers and vendors still require to accurately test and report the performance of their GUV products. Further industry standards and guidelines may address testing limitations and improve test methods, product performance, and the accuracy of performance claims.

• Research Organization: US Department of Energy (USDOE), Washington, DC (United States). Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Building Technologies Office; Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
• Sponsoring Organization: USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Energy Efficiency Office. Building Technologies Office
• DOE Contract Number: AC05-76RL01830
• OSTI ID: 2282859
• Report Number(s): PNNL--33959
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

42 ENGINEERING