Energy efficiency depends on Application -- accurate comparison between electric cylinder and cylinder

Move workpiece or hold position?

The energy consumed by these two applications is totally different. For the movement without external force, the energy consumption of electric cylinder (25ws) is only one third of that of cylinder (78ws). For applications requiring thrust force, the energy consumption of the two drives is awesome, between 20Ws and 30Ws.

However, if the drive needs to be kept in a specific position, the energy consumption of the electric cylinder will soar to 247ws, 22 times the energy consumption of the cylinder (11ws). This is because the cylinder only needs to consume energy in a short time of establishing the air pressure, while the holding position itself does not need the air inlet pressurization at all, so there will be no energy consumption. The electric cylinder is the opposite, and it needs to be constantly consumed to keep the position. Compared with the cylinder, the longer the time to keep the position, the higher the energy consumption of the electric cylinder. The measurement results show that even if there is a slight leakage, it has little effect on energy consumption.

Understand claw hands

The comparison results of electric claw and pneumatic claw are similar to the above conclusions. The comparison results show that the correct choice depends on a clear understanding of the application situation. For the energy consumption of the grab process, when the grab cycle is long and the number of times is not much, the air claw is more advantageous.

The air claw only needs to be pressurized once when the air claw is continuously grabbed. No more energy is required to maintain the grab. The claw needs to consume electricity continuously during the whole process of grasping. Only when the grab period is short and the number of times is too high, the electric claw is more energy efficient than the pneumatic claw.

. it is difficult to simply say that the cylinder and electric cylinder are superior or inferior“ The efficiency of automation technology depends on industrial applications. " Roland Volk, energy efficiency consultant at FESTO, explained. Only comparing two cylinders with the same size and electric cylinder directly can the bias caused by this problem be eliminated.

First, which drives are the most efficient, the real answer is often between. Energy efficiency is entirely dependent on the application of a drive. We can understand the difference by testing: for simple motion applications, the electric cylinder is more economical. In the stamping process, the awesome size and duration of the feed force determine which actuator is better. However, if the application requires retention, the cylinder has a clear advantage.

In this comparison, the order of motion is from point a to point B. These movements can be used in most cases by cylinders. Even so, the cylinders are also used in large numbers to perform this movement. But if the application requires free and flexible positioning, the electric cylinder has more advantages.

It's all about the application

Any industrial application has its own specific requirements for technical standards such as speed, load capacity, power weight ratio, precision, control characteristics, load rigidity, efficiency and robustness; And for economic considerations, such as purchase costs (including purchase price, installation and commissioning costs) and operating costs (maintenance, service life, energy consumption), the requirements are different.