Labeled Definition and NFRC Labels - 2018 IECC

[redbird11]

LABELED Equipment, materials or products to which have been affixed a label, seal, symbol or other identifying mark of a nationally recognized testing laboratory, approved agency or other organization concerned with product evaluation that maintains periodic inspection of the production of the labeled items and whose labeling indicates either that the equipment, material or product meets identified standards or has been tested and found suitable for a specified purpose.

C303.1.3
U-factors shall be determined by an accredited, independent laboratory, and labeled and certified by the manufacturer.

Does this leave any approach not involving NFRC labels or certificates?

 

[RLGA]

Yes, read further on. You have to use the U-factors in Tables C303.1.3(1) or (2).

 

[redbird11]

I should have stated that the project is going the performance route not the prescriptive route. The default values in the tables will not work for passing the performance route.

I think my question is whether there is a

"nationally recognized testing laboratory, approved agency or other organization"

that implements the standards of the NFRC tests, and issues labels or certificates, but does not formally participate in an NFRC program?

 

[RLGA]

I think to be able to say it was tested to NFRC standards the lab must be accredited by NFRC.

 

[redbird11]

C303.1.3
U-factors shall be determined by an accredited, independent laboratory, and labeled and certified by the manufacturer.

Is there anyway to meet this requirement with a thermal simulation report conducted to the NFRC 100 test standards by an independent third-party? The report would be a simulation only, there would not be a physical laboratory test to confirm the simulation.

 

[RLGA]

Look at NFRC's Component Modeling Approach: https://nfrc.org/industry/certifica.../the-component-modeling-approach-program-cma/

 

[redbird11]

Yes, I've become familiar with the Component Modeling Approach and the Product Certification Program. I'm not seeing a way to read the text in the IECC and find that a simulation report from an NFRC simulator is equivalent to a label or certificate. I am finding that the simulation report would need to be given to an inspection agency, an independent lab would perform a physical test to validate the simulation, then the inspection agency would authorize the manufacturer to label. This is the PCP route.

Under the CMA path, the manufacturer would need to have the components physically tested in a lab and follow the procedures to get the approved products into a database. Then an Approved Calculation Entity (ACE) could run reports and authorize the manufacturer to label.

I'm not finding any gray area in the IECC text to think that a simulation report alone satisfies the requirements.

 

[RLGA]

With the CMA, you get a certificate/label to print out after building your system within their database of certified materials. This is acceptable for compliance with the IECC. If you're planning to use noncertified components, then there would be no path for compliance with the IECC unless you get it tested and see if it's accepted at the local level as a code modification.