projects:air-for-workshops
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
projects:air-for-workshops [2011/08/05 21:01] – [The solution] spinery | projects:air-for-workshops [2014/04/02 06:57] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | + | Disregard | |
- | ====== Compressed air for small flexible workshops ====== | + | |
- | + | ||
- | I have limited experience with pneumatics, so it would be pretty nice if someone could read this and provide some criticism. If the opinion is positive, I will build this system, and publish the results, performance and issues | + | |
- | + | ||
- | ===== Summary of the problem ===== | + | |
- | + | ||
- | I was researching the possibility of most cost-effective, | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -pneumatic tool operation (better than electric - lighter, more powerful, less moving elements, easier to provide air than electricity) | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -sanding (most universal abrasive processing method) | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -vacuum generation (electronics, | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -injection (moulding, oiling) | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -spray-coating | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -hi-quality spray painting | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -refrigeration through vortex tube | + | |
- | + | ||
- | I want this to be as simple as possible, with fewest elements, and ability to power the setup through different means (in case there is no electricity available) | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Generation of huge volumes of air require a lot of power, and use of screw compressors. They are good for continuous work, and the variable rotation speed compressors are prohibitively costly. Additionally, | + | |
- | + | ||
- | I decided to go a different path - contain huge volumes of highly compressed air, generated by underloaded hi-pressure compressor. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | ===== The solution ===== | + | |
- | + | ||
- | The solution fits within 16000 PLN net sum total. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Compressor: Atlas Copco LT 3-30 or 4-30 (10000-12000 PLN, 2000 PLN net price difference, higher model has doubled FAD (Free Air Delivery - the amount of air the compressor can generate))(brochure: | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Why: It's an industrial compressor, fit for continuous work. It should last forever in our application, | + | |
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | Tank: http:// | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Why: The tank is relatively small (compared to the volume of air it can house), and is relatively mobile - two people (or a single stron person) can load it onto a vehicle in a horizontal position by simply tipping it. It is not the best money/ | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Benefits: | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -Dry air. The pressure in the installation is suited for power tools and other general tasks, therefore it's lower than the pressure in the tank. Because the pressure is reduced, the water is not gathering in the pneumatic plumbing/ | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -No air pulsation | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -If inlet of air is at the bottom of the tank, the water present in the tank will act as a filter. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | -Heavier particles (oil) will have time to settle down into the water during the time the tank is unused. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Additional elements: Tank exit air warming. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | The working air that exits onto your tools is heated up with heat from compression, | + | |
- | + | ||
- | The aim of this setup should allow for a very good performance in short tasks, and relatively cheap and sturdy expandability if prolonged use is required (buying additional tanks). | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Additionally, | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Opinions please. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | UPDATE: | + | |
- | I was doing a quick comparison between screw compressors from different companies and piston compressors, | + | |
- | + | ||
- | I was also doing volumetric calculations - the suggested 300 litre tank @ 30 bar holds: | + | |
- | 1125 litres of 8 bar air (8 bars per litre) | + | |
- | 1500 litres of 6 bar air (6 bars per litre) | + | |
- | and feed from compressor can counter up to 330 litres of air per hour. | + | |
- | If we would like to contain such volumes in appropriate tanks, the available tanks are slightly more cost-effective for 8 bar, and less cost-effective for 6 bar, at the same time, taking up considerable space (2,5 metre height, and almost a metre in diameter, weighting 1/3 and 1/2 as much). | + | |
- | Increasing the pressure further to 55 bar, increases the compressor related costs, while providing not much benefit in terms of storage or efficiency. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Ensuring large capacities for air, the compressor won't have to start and stop every time you knock down the air a few bars like it is in case of normal compressors. It will be doing long cycles of work, to counter the exiting air, and replenish the air in the tank. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | I also expect that reheating of the working air using compressor heat will dramatically increase efficiency because of the high compression rates. It would be ideal if we could completely cool the compressor with working air in air-heavy applications such as sanding (at least for short periods of time, when the amount of expelled air exceeds the compressor' | + | |
- | + | ||
- | The amount of heat created could also be used to generate energy that can, in turn, provide several different tasks (turbocharge the compressor, precool air entering the compressor, etc). I have no data regarding temperatures generated bu the compressor, but it's a two-stage compressor. While it is crucial to maintain as low temperature as possible of the air that enters the second piston, beyond that, we have place for experimentation. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | I have a crazy idea regarding hi-volume sanding using this setup. Obviously, with large volumes of air running out of the sander' | + |
projects/air-for-workshops.1312578078.txt.gz · Last modified: 2014/04/02 06:57 (external edit)