HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
Feature
Automation & Motion Control

# Optimization of Total Operating Costs Using Electric Linear Drives

NO RATINGS
Page 1 / 3 Next >
User Rank
Iron
Response
5/8/2014 4:27:32 PM
NO RATINGS
Figure 4 on the second page of the article shows the sizing diagram for ISO standard cylinders from the market leader in pneumatics.  As this figure shows, the comment of "maxthrottle" is correct for static or very slow movements.  For more dynamic movements with higher piston speeds (our example requires 1m/s), bigger bore diameters are needed.  In our example with 15kg payload and 1m/s the sizing diagram (Figure 4 on page 2) for a standard ISO cylinder indicates a 50mm bore diameter cylinder.

According to the calculation and the measurements on a real machine, the pneumatic cylinder in this example has 30 times higher energy requirement compared to the electric solution with an Industrial Linear Motor.

Now let's assume that the same application could have been done with a smaller 25m bore diameter cylinder (let's just assume, although figure 4 shows that it would not be possible at the required speed).  With only halve the bore diameter, the air and therefore the energy consumption of the pneumatic cylinder could theoretically be reduced to 1/4 of the calculated value with the correct sized 50mm bore diameter cylinder.  This means that the smaller 25mm pneumatic cylinder would still have a 7.5 times higher energy consumption compared to the linear motor solution.

Even with a smaller bore diameter pneumatic cylinder, the energy consumption is well above the electric linear motor solution.  This is the point of the article.  If you desire pneumatics for medium to high performance actuator applications, be prepared to pay a lot more money to operate your machinery.  In addition, it helps to know that an electric linear motion solution requires minimal to no maintenance and increases plant up time considerably.

User Rank
Iron
This math is way off !
5/8/2014 2:15:46 PM
NO RATINGS
First, I'll admit to working for a pneumatics company so I have a bias :-)

This didn't pass the sniff test so I looked a little deeper.  This article has a lot of givens that are suspect.  Using pneumatic simulation tools, I find that the selection of a 50mm cylinder is too large, a 40mm is adequate, either piston rod type or rodless, and at 5 bar, not 6, it is still possible to reach the 400mm in 500ms target.

Secondly, the math is way off.  Again, using tools from our website, I estimate the air consumoption for a rodless cylinder (which has higher consumption than a piston rod type) 30 cycles per minute, 8000 hours per year to be just over 100,000 LITERS per year, not 150,000 CUBIC METERS per year.  Since there are 1,000 liters in a cubic meter, that would be 100 cubic meters per year, not 150,000.

And it's not just the air calculations.  The figure of 0.13 kWh per cubic meter to compress to 6 bar seems too good to be true, making the cost per liter \$0.00013.  That would mean the 100 cubic meters of air needed would cost \$13 (~10 Euro)per year, and I'm sure that's not right either.

User Rank
Iron
Savings of Electric Actuator vs. Pneumatic are Overstated
4/16/2014 3:58:06 PM
NO RATINGS
Although electric actuators can be more efficient than pneumatic actuators, This author has overstated the savings of using an electric actuator vs a pneumatic actuator.

The autor suggests it is necessary to use a 50mm bore air cylinder at 6 bar to move a 15Kg load.  An actuator of this size will move 128 Kg, 8.5 times more than the load!  If the electric actuator was sized with a 850% safety factor I would imagine the pneumatic actuator would have the advantage over the electric actuator.  Pneumatics as a automation solution is falling out of favor due to many economic reasons but it still places a huge amount of power in a small package without the worry of electrical concerns.   With fast cycle rates and light payloads, and over the long term, there is often a good argument and economic advantage for using electric actuators vs. pneumatics.  Why do so many electric actuator manufacturers find it neccessary to distort the economic advantages of electric actuators?

 Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
Siemens and Georgia Institute of Technology are partnering to address limitations in the current additive manufacturing design-to-production chain in an applied research project as part of the federally backed America Makes program.
Most of the new 3D printers and 3D printing technologies in this crop are breaking some boundaries, whether it's build volume-per-dollar ratios, multimaterials printing techniques, or new materials types.
Check out these gifts that will make you the hero of your Secret Santa party.
Voting has closed on our 2015 Gadget Freak of the Year contest, but it is not game over yet for two competing projects.
Independent science safety company Underwriters Laboratories is providing new guidance for manufacturers about how to follow the latest IEC standards for implementing safety features in programmable logic controllers.
More:Blogs|News
Design News Webinar Series
11/10/2015 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
10/29/2015 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
10/20/2015 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
12/2/2015 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Jul 6 - 10, Building Raspberry Pi Controllers with Python
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6 |  7

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.