Are you Midea?

Claim this page from the app's Company page: register as a supplier (company name and contact email), open the Profile sub-tab and claim the brand. We confirm each claim by hand before it takes effect; from then the page and its listings are yours — attributed to your company, quote requests for designs that use them reach whoever you name with the design attached, and any listing is yours to edit or withdraw. No charge, no commission. Open the Company page

Systems modelled on Midea's published data

Built in this model on the maker's own published data — not verified by Midea. Each page names the document it was read from and what the model was held to.

Midea MDV-D252W/DN1 (8 HP, 25 kW, V4+) — modelled	Midea VRF selection software v3.7 (2017 database, Midea's own distribution) — MDV-D252W/DN1 cooling grid, 100 % combination at 19 °C indoor wet bulb, total capacity and power input against outdoor dry bulb, and the spec row's cabinet and airflow (docs/midea-vrf-source.json)
Midea V6 MV6-560WV2GN1 (20 HP, 56 kW) — modelled	Midea V6 engineering data book, Table 2-8.7 — MV6-560WV2GN1 capacity and power input against outdoor temperature at 19 °C indoor wet bulb and a 100 % combination ratio (docs/vrf-outdoor-source.json)

How the model reads against Midea's data

An air-to-water heat pump against a certified unit's rating points	2 rating points; the published plant modulated to the certified duty at each, and the same graph re-run with a real inverter (the Danfoss VZH052CJ and its eighteen published speed steps) scaled to the same class	capacity is not the comparable quantity — the published plant is a 15 kW-class machine — so it is modulated to the certified duty, which is what an inverter rating is anyway, landing at 0.74 and 0.81 of full output. Its COP then reads 4.56 against 4.95 and 2.79 against 3.05: 8 % under the certified unit at both points, and never over it, identical to a tenth of a point on both property backends. The two water rises differ, 5 K and 8 K, and assuming 5 K throughout flattered the second point by five points of COP before the conditions were read off a document. The miss is the compressor, not the model: at the first point the model settles on a 34 K lift where Carnot's COP is 8.1, so the certified unit takes 61 % of it and this model 56 %, both inside the 40–60 % band a real machine occupies — a 2026 R32 residential heat pump at the top of it, a generic R410A commercial scroll in the middle. Swapping in the real inverter does not close the gap either (12–14 % under), so it is not the part-load model. Not anchored: the EN 14825 seasonal grid, because the leaving water at each part-load temperature follows a curve the paywalled standard defines and no maker prints
Heat-pump frost/defrost derate	43, from five makers	RMS 0.023, where the makers stand 0.029 from each other at the forty temperatures they share — the one generic curve is closer to each of them than they are to one another, and none is served much worse than any other (0.019–0.028 apiece). The EnergyPlus model this replaced had the shape inverted (deepest just below its 5 °C cutoff, then a 29-point step across it) and read up to 0.15 low
What a run of refrigerant pipe costs a machine's capacity	23 lengths from one maker's table, plus three makers' figures at one common point	the model carries LG's table rather than fitting it, so it reproduces all 23 points: 0.91 at 100 m, 0.82 at 225. At the one point a second maker can be compared — sixty metres with forty of lift — the three lines read 0.898 (Midea V6, Trane), 0.927 (Midea V8S) and 0.94 (LG), and the model sits at LG's end of that band on purpose, because LG publish 575 cells with their conventions stated where the others are single points off a chart. The height turned out not to be worth a field: across LG's whole grid a hundred metres of level difference moves the factor by one point
VRF outdoor unit: power input against outdoor air temperature	six outdoor temperatures, 25–35 °C	the published example pair — the 56 kW outdoor unit with four of the 14 kW indoor units on it — modulated to the maker's rated duty the way the control modulates it, draws within +0.5 to +3.6 % of the maker's power at every point, at a 9.5 °C evaporating temperature and 0.62–0.70 of full compressor output. Both of those are physical rather than fitted: flat out the same machine is 15–20 % adrift, and given three times a VRF's real indoor airflow it evaporates at 15 °C and looks 19 % too efficient
VRF (multi-split): capacity against the connected-capacity ratio	eight makers	they agree on a two-regime law — exactly linear below 100 % connection, saturating above it by +2 to +8 % at 130 %, with Samsung allowing no credit above 130 % — and the model reproduces both without a correction term: below full connection each indoor coil caps its own take, above it the outdoor unit's map is the ceiling (+0 %, the conservative end of the band). The standards themselves rate only at unity connection (±5 %)
A compressor bank — an inverter and a fixed-speed scroll on one circuit — against a maker's 12 HP grid	8	the published bank example (a catalog JPV066AC inverter as lead, a catalog ZP67KZE fixed scroll as partner, the condenser declared from the 12 HP cabinet) modulated to the grid's capacity draws −9 % at 25 °C, −7 at 27, −5 at 29 and within 5 % from 31 to 39 °C — the fixed scroll flat out as base load with the inverter trimming, nothing fitted. As one inverter the same frame read 3–7 % under the grid throughout; the bank closes the warm end and misses the cool end, where the real controller runs its fixed scroll harder than the staging rule. Outside the 6 % band a maker's name needs, so it is published as the generic bank with the miss stated
Midea MDV-D252W/DN1 (8 HP, V4+), modelled — a small frame declared from its own cabinet, against Midea's selection-software grid	8	the condenser declared from the cabinet and airflow — not the 20 HP scaled — and the machine modulated to the grid's capacity draws −2 to +1 % of the grid's power input at every temperature, the compressor at 0.58–0.65 of full output. The 10 and 12 HP frames in the same cabinet read 3–8 % under the grid and the 14 and 16 HP frames 13–20 % under, and are not published; the selector's own spec table disagrees with its grid on rated power by −20 to +9 % across the range, and the physics sides with the grid on the one frame it lands on

From the validation page; every row is held by a test.

Listed from published data with the source named on every entry; a listing's figures are the manufacturer's, the model that runs them is ours. Solver results never depend on who has claimed what.