01
Adaptive PID control
Cooling and heating output follow the real test load—without fighting each other at steady state.
SCI ENERGY SAVING
SAME
PERFORMANCE.
LESS POWER.
SCI chambers match cooling output to the real test load, helping laboratories reduce operating energy by 30% or more—without compromising temperature control.
Internal comparative tests · Real meter readings · Profile-specific review
MEASURED EXAMPLETEST DATA
33%
less energy at −20°C hold
1 m³ rapid temperature-change chamber · 1 hour
30%+
typical energy-saving target
3
coordinated control layers
24/7
savings accumulate while running
1:1
review against your test profile
WHY IT USES LESS
Stop paying for
energy conflict.
Conventional hot–cold balance control may keep refrigeration at high output, then add heat to hold the setpoint. SCI changes the cooling source itself—so the chamber receives only the energy it needs.
TRADITIONAL CONTROLEnergy conflict
FULL COOLING
WASTE
REHEATING
Excess cooling is cancelled by electric heating just to maintain the target temperature.
SCI ADAPTIVE CONTROLDemand matched
SETPOINT
OUTPUT FOLLOWS LOAD
Cooling capacity tapers with the real load, with little or no reheating during stable holds.
02
Variable-frequency cooling
Compressor speed and output are continuously matched to demand, reducing repeated starts and wasted capacity.
03
Electronic flow control
Fast refrigerant regulation keeps control precise across low-temperature and high-load conditions.
REAL CONTROLLER EXPORTS
Two chambers. One direct comparison.
Profile A is the reference competitor chamber. Profile B is the SCI chamber. Both are multi-day controller exports used to compare measured energy consumption at corresponding temperature and humidity hold points.
REFERENCE CHAMBERConventional hot–cold balance
SCI CHAMBERAdaptive cooling control
HOW TO READ THE TEST
Do not compare individual colors as two brands. Compare the two complete panels.
First, identify the two chambers
Panel A is the competitor reference. Panel B is the SCI chamber. The multiple colored traces inside each panel are controller channels—not separate brands.
Then, align the same hold point
Compare corresponding temperature or humidity plateaus. Both chambers must reach and hold the required condition before their consumption is judged.
Finally, compare measured kWh
The electricity channel records real consumption on the same timeline. At the matched hold points, SCI generally uses fewer kWh—showing that cooling output is reduced when full capacity is unnecessary.
WHAT THE DATA SHOWS
Energy savings increase when the control system no longer has to fight itself.
Selected values below come from the supplied 1 m³, −70°C temperature-humidity chamber comparison. Each temperature point was held for two hours; the combined 85°C / 85% RH point was held for one hour.
ALL 14 SUPPLIED TEST POINTS
Every point is shown—including the neutral 23°C / 30% RH result—to avoid cherry-picking.
−60°C18%energy saved
−40°C64%energy saved
−20°C25%energy saved
0°C38%energy saved
25°C75%energy saved
50°C90%energy saved
85°C90%energy saved
100°C50%energy saved
125°C50%energy saved
150°C50%energy saved
23°C / 30% RH0%energy saved
23°C / 50% RH20%energy saved
23°C / 95% RH25%energy saved
85°C / 85% RH80%energy saved
Test profileSCIConventionalSaving
−40°C hold2 hours5 kWh14 kWh−64%
25°C hold2 hours2 kWh8 kWh−75%
85°C hold2 hours1 kWh10 kWh−90%
85°C / 85% RH1 hour1 kWh5 kWh−80%
“The important number is not installed power. It is the energy actually consumed over your real test cycle.”
Source: SCI internal comparative measurement records for a 1 m³, −70°C temperature-humidity chamber. Results are not a guarantee; actual savings vary by model, test profile, ambient conditions and specimen load.
SECOND MEASURED DATASET
Fast-changing tests.
Even larger savings.
A separate 1 m³ rapid temperature-change humidity chamber was measured under low-temperature holds, high temperature, high humidity and a −40°C to 85°C cycle at an average 15°C/min.
ALL-PROFILE AVERAGEMEASURED
64%
average energy saving across the supplied temperature and humidity profiles
TEST PROFILEENERGY / SAVING
−40°C hold1 hour
15 vs 24 kWh−38%
−20°C hold1 hour
14 vs 21 kWh−33%
85°C hold1 hour
2.5 vs 25 kWh−90%
40°C / 95% RH1 hour
10 vs 22 kWh−55%
−40°C ↔ 85°C15°C/min cycle
13 vs 60 kWh−78%
What this adds to the evidence:
SCI’s advantage is not limited to steady-state operation. It remains visible during high-load temperature cycling, where conventional control consumed 60 kWh versus 13 kWh in the supplied test.
SIX TEMPERATURE HOLD POINTS
Lower power while
holding temperature.
Each point was tested for five hours. Values show average energy used per hour under the same 1 m³ no-load comparison.
Lowest result at 5 of 6 hold points
Lower than SCI only at −40°C
SCI uses 45% less on average
SCI chamberImported comparisonDomestic comparison
−40°C
−20°C
0°C
25°C
35°C
45°C
Transparent comparison: the imported unit is lower at −40°C, while SCI records the lowest consumption at the other five supplied hold points. Actual project results depend on chamber configuration, load and ambient conditions.
INTERACTIVE LIFECYCLE VALUE MODEL
What Could 30% Lower Energy Use Be Worth Across Your Lab?
Enter the number of chambers and baseline average energy use per chamber, then set actual operating days and peak / standard / off-peak hours.
Tariff presets are editable planning references—not utility quotations. Replace them with your actual invoice rates for a project estimate.
ESTIMATED ANNUAL ELECTRICITY SAVINGMYR 2,988
One-year progress toward the entered machine value9%
7.0 baseline kWh/h × 30% × 1 chamber(s) × 16.0 h/day × 300 days = 10,080 kWh avoided / year.
Planning estimate only. Actual savings vary by chamber model, temperature profile, specimen load, ambient conditions and local tariff.
SEND US YOUR TEST PROFILE