Move workpiece or hold position?

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

However, if the driver needs to be kept in a specific position, the energy consumption of the electric cylinder will soar to 247ws, 22 times that of the cylinder (11ws). This is because the cylinder only needs to consume energy in a short period of time to establish the air pressure, while maintaining the position itself does not need intake air pressurization, so there is no energy consumption. On the contrary, the electric cylinder needs constant power consumption to maintain its position. Compared with the electric cylinder, the higher the energy consumption of the cylinder. The measurement results show that even if there is a slight leakage, it has little effect on energy consumption.

Understanding claw hand

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

The air claw needs only one intake pressurization when it continues to grasp. There is no need to consume more energy during the holding process. The electric claw needs to consume electric energy continuously in the whole grasping process. Only when the grasping period is short and the number of times is large, the electric claw is more energy efficient than the air claw.

As far as efficiency is concerned, it is difficult to say simply which is better. "The energy efficiency of automation technology depends on the industrial application." Roland Volk, an energy efficiency consultant at FESTO, explains. Only by directly comparing the cylinder and electric cylinder with the same size and specification can the bias brought about by this problem be eliminated.

First of all, the real answer to which drive is the most energy efficient is often in the middle. Energy efficiency depends entirely on the application of a drive. We can see the difference through testing: for simple sports 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 force, the cylinder has a significant advantage.

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

It all depends on the application

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