Cost comparison: Airknife drying system vs. compressed air
Cost comparison: Airknife drying system vs. compressed air
Compressed air is an expensive medium. In the distribution of costs for compressed air systems, the energy cost is the biggest cost. Huge savings can be achieved by avoiding the inappropriate use of compressed air.
Of all applications with compressed air, drying is the least efficient. Apart from the energy consumption and cost of filtering oil and condensate the maintenance costs for continuous operating compressor can increase considerably.
A comparison between an airknife drying system and a compressed air system shows that the airknife systems will produce considerable savings on an annual basis.
AIRKNIFE DRYING SYSTEM | COMPRESSED AIR | |
AREA | ||
# Flat Jet Nozzles |
| 16 |
# airknives | 4 |
|
Length | 200 mm | 50 mm |
Total Area | 800 mm² | 800 mm² |
USEAGE | ||
Hours/shift | 8 | 8 |
Shift/week | 5 | 5 |
Weeks/year | 48 | 48 |
Hours/week | 40 | 40 |
Total Hours | 1.920 | 1.920 |
COST | ||
Flow/nozzle @ 5 Bar |
| 36 m³/h |
Total flow/hour | 576 m³/h | |
Cost to produce 1m³ | 0,015 € | |
Power installed | 7,5 kW |
|
Power absorbed | 5,5 kW | |
Cost to produce 1kWh (1) | 0,12 € | |
Operational Cost/hour | 0,66 € | 8,64 € |
Operational Cost/week | 26,4 € | 345,6 € |
Operational Cost/year | 1.267,2 € | 16.588,8 € |
Annual saving | € 15.321,60 | |