UK industry has to challenge convention on compressed air May 1st 2007 Most Plant Managers, Maintenance
Engineers, Facilities Managers,
Production Managers, Energy
Managers, and anyone else with
responsibility for improving plant efficiency
will know that compressed air is one of the
areas where savings can be made, but
making changes is not always an easy or
comfortable process. According to Peter
Tomlins of compressor control specialist
EnergAir it is essential that people in this
position challenge convention in order to
make the right decision and ensure that
any available savings are actually realised.
"First there are the old conventions: The
majority of compressor houses still employ
fixed speed compressors and a cascaded
pressure switch control system. This
arrangement will be familiar to many, but it is
outdated and inefficient, and needs to be
changed. There is a comfort factor with
familiar technology, which is exacerbated by
constant time pressure due to other day-today
responsibilities and a lack of information
and good advice on what can be achieved."
"Secondly there are new conventions
forming that are little better, and can be
misleading: Operators are receiving mixed
messages from the compressor
manufacturers themselves, while most
branded air compressors are good
machines, an incorrectly sized new
compressor can have a negative effect on
overall system efficiency. The current trend
towards buying variable speed drive (VSD)
compressors does offer the potential to
generate compressed air more efficiently,
but a VSD compressor that is not controlled
as part of a coherent compressor
management system (e.g. connected to a
EnergAir compressor management system)
that can optimise it's use alongside other
compressors in a system is unlikely to
deliver any energy savings whatsoever, or
worse still, could contribute to a
deterioration in overall system efficiency."
These conventions old and new have to
be challenged if the operator is going to see
real benefits, an old cascade pressure switch
control system does have to be replaced,
don't assume a new compressor will solve
your problems - where new compressors
are required, pay close attention to
compressor sizing and in particular the
relationship between individual compressor
output and the variation this provides when
taken together and compared to
compressed air consumption patterns.
It is important not to assume that a VSD
compressor alone will solve all your
problems, the big energy saving claims of
circa 30% from the compressor
manufacturers relate to the comparison of a
single fixed speed compressor with its VSD
equivalent and not how this compressor will
perform in the typical customer's multi
compressor house environment. It has to
be integrated with existing units under
some form of management control in order
to deliver significant savings. If you have
enough compressors already, consider
retrofitting a VSD to an existing compressor
rather than making another compressor
purchase. A retrofit VSD from a specialist
such as EnergAir will be cheaper to buy,
cheaper to install and make better use of
the existing equipment.
Peter Tomlins adds, "other conventions
about sizing compressors can also have a
big impact on system efficiency; air
demand tends to be erratic, follow shift
patterns and in some cases even seasonal
trends, we've seen literally hundreds of
sites where the demand for compressed
air often falls in between the generating
capacity of available compressors. This
leads to increases in 'off load' running in
the case of fixed speed compressors,
which is inefficient, and where VSD
compressors are installed some hunting or
'dead banding' can occur (See figure 1).
When selecting VSD compressors, users
should pay close attention to its minimum
speed as well as maximum speed. Its
output span, efficiency across its output
span and the inverter reaction time are also
considerations. EnergAir sees a lot of
examples of VSD compressors with
relatively slow reaction times. The result is a
compressor that's simply incapable of
reacting effectively to fluctuations in demand
patterns i.e. its intended purpose, (like
pulling away from the lights in fourth gear).
Example 1 is a typical compressor
system of 3 equally sized compressors. A
conventional lead, top up and standby
compressor arrangement and in recent
times, one of the compressors is likely to be
a VSD compressor. Conventional thinking
is that the VSD compressor will satisfy
primary demand. When demand increases
above one compressor, a fixed speed
compressor is loaded. The VSD reacts
accordingly by reducing its output to satisfy
demand above that which the fixed speed
compressor is now delivering. However, if
demand for compressed air falls between
100% and 150% then 'dead banding' will
occur where the VSD compressor cannot
regulate down to a speed proportional to
demand. Further to that, what intelligence
is going to make the decision about which
compressor to run and when?
Old conventions are to choose multiple
compressors of the same size in a
compressor house. New convention is to
choose machines of the same size and
make one a VSD compressor. To
Challenge convention would be to consider
Example 2. Here, instead of three equally
sized compressors a fourth smaller
compressor has been added. Like new
convention, one of the three equally sized
compressors is a VSD. However, note how
dead banding has all but
been eliminated through
the introduction of an
alternative size of
compressor. Here supply
and demand can be
satisfied across the entire
demand spectrum.
Orchestrating it would be
some form of
Management Technology
such as that offered by
EnergAir.
Rising costs are
providing the stimulus to
change, and so EnergAir
believes that challenging
convention should take
the form of asking
questions about plant
equipment and of suppliers: Has the
demand profile been mapped? Are the
compressors on the site the right
combination of sizes? Has energy use
been recorded and benchmarked so that
the impact of any changes made can be
validated? Are multiple compressors being
controlled by an effective management
system? Is a new VSD compressor the
right solution, and can it's capability for
energy savings actually be realized?
Finding answers to these questions will
involve challenging convention, but it should
ensure that the available savings for
compressed air generation are actually
realized. EnergAir has made the first step as
simple as possible by producing a free
online Compressed Air Energy Saving
Estimator – at www.energair.com. Users
need only spend a minute of their time
using drop down selection boxes to pick the
compressors they have on site and enter
the shift pattern, the calculator will then
provide a fairly accurate estimate of the
energy usage in kWh and the saving that
can be achieved in a range of currencies.
Taking three 150 kW air compressors as
an example; working two 8hour shifts, 5
days a week uses ~1,728,000 kWh of
electricity per annum, prior to the recent
price rises the annual running cost would
be just over £77,760 per year (based on an
average £0.045kWh). At what is now a
common tariff rate of £0.07kWh the cost
has leapt up to £120,960. The cost
differential of £43,200 will remove profit
directly from the company's bottom line
unless the facilities and operational staff are
able to challenge conventional thinking and
look for a more efficient way of managing
the compressed air generation system.
By installing an intelligent compressor
control and management system, the cost
of running the compressors in this
example could be reduced by £40,800,
recouping the vast majority of the money
lost due to the price increases. Since
companies such as EnergAir are providing
the tools to accurately judge savings,
without committing significant time and
resources to it, there is even less of an
excuse for companies not to challenge
convention on compressed air. If any more
incentive were needed, companies such
as Britvic, Delphi, GSK and Walkers Crisps
have already done so. More articles from EnergAir Solutions Ltd.: |