The Compressed Air Challenge® Fundamentals and Advanced training discuss the benefits of using central controllers to efficiently control system compressors. These systems are called “System Master” controls. Modern day System Master Controls use advanced technologies to network air compressors in a preprogrammed sequence. A properly configured network with the right size and type of trim compressor can typically hold the supply air pressure in a tight band of +/- 2 psi. Because of this capability, many users feel the application of System Master Control negates the benefit of applying Pressure-Flow Control to stabilize the plant air pressure.
An industrial manufacturing plant (producing commercial water meters and valves) had engaged us to conduct an ‘on-site’ Energy & Utilities Assessment of their facility. The annual ‘spend’ for electricity, natural gas, fuels and water was about $ 2.0 million.
In many industrial plants there are one or more applications with intermittent demands of relatively high volume. One example is the use of dense phase transport systems to convey the cement. Dense phase systems can cause severe dynamic pressure fluctuations affecting quality of the end product in a plant.
Sitting on his desk the day Brian began his new job as Plant Engineer for Carbo Ceramics’ McIntyre, GA facility was a proposal to purchase a new 150 HP air compressor as a backup machine. The facility already had six of these machines and, yes, all six ran almost continuously.
Roxane Laboratories, Inc., a subsidiary of Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation located in Columbus, Ohio, created a world-class air system that generated $61,314 per year in electrical energy cost savings (1,156,868 kWh), improved productivity and quality, and allowed the successful completion of a significant plant expansion.
This aluminum mill spends $369,000 annually in energy costs to operate their compressed air system. This system assessment recommends actions reducing annual energy costs by $120,000 and improving productivity and quality by delivering clean, dry compressed air.
This major mill complex upgraded their compressed air system and thereby eliminated $500,000 in annual rental compressor costs, reduced annual cooling-water costs by $500,000, and reduced electrical energy costs by $135,000 per year.
Perhaps your facility recently had a compressed air system survey, conducted by an air systems services company, that resulted in a couple of major recommendations, such as: • Install a new smaller compressor and new control systems on all of the units • Repair the many air leaks (identified as 30% of your system capacity)
The Compressed Air Challenge® (CAC) is a voluntary collaboration of industrial users; manufacturers, distributors and their associations; consultants; state research and development agencies; energy efficiency organizations; and utilities. This group has one purpose in mind - helping you enjoy the benefits of improved performance of your compressed air system. The mission of the Compressed Air Challenge (CAC) is to provide resources that educate industrial users about optimizing their compressed air systems.
This refinery currently spends $735,757 annually on the electricity required to operate the compressed air system at its plant. The group of projects recommended in the system assessment will reduce these energy costs by an estimated $364,211 (49% of current use). Estimated costs for completing the recommended projects total $435,800. This figure represents a simple payback period of 14.4 months. The firm also reduced compressed air demand by 732 scfm allowing them to save $441,544 by down-sizing the back-up rental diesel air compressors.
This article presents a case study of Grimmway Farms; a carrot growing and packing firm located in California’s Central Valley that was able to improve its compressed air system efficiency after implementing system automation and making relatively small equipment and piping changes.