An Innovative Approach To Controlling Plastic Grinders in Injection-Molding Plants
An Innovative Approach To Controlling Plastic Grinders in Injection-Molding Plants
An Innovative Approach To Controlling Plastic Grinders in Injection-Molding Plants
Injection-Molding Plants
ABSTRACT
The standard plastic-injection molding process utilizes grinders that grind plastic scrap
for re-use in the process. Most commercially-available plastic grinders are turned on and off via
a simple button or switch. Due to the many responsibilities of a machine operator, a grinder is
typically turned on at the beginning of a production shift and then “left alone” to run
continuously. Grinding takes place for usually less than 5% of all production hours, leaving
motors to idle for the remaining 95%+ of time.
To reduce wasted idling energy, grinder-control systems that incorporate proximity
sensors and vibration detectors have been commercially developed. However, due to slow motor
start-up time when a sensor is triggered, plastic scrap often jams the grinder blade before the
motor can reach full speed. To avoid subsequent downtime and maintenance, machine operators
often override or disable this type of control system.
A novel control system has been developed and installed at a plastic injection-molding
plant to substantially reduce grinder idling time without compromising functionality. This
control system allows a user to manually switch on a grinder, and signals through a display light
when the motor has reached full speed and is safe for plastic to be loaded. The system shuts off
the grinder motor after a set period of idle-amperage detection. This control system saved over
95% of grinder energy-use at the injection molding plant, with no machine-jams or maintenance
needed. This paper presents the measured energy-saving results.
Introduction
Plastic grinders (or granulators) are widely-used equipment in the plastics-processing
industry. Grinders are often characterized by their continuous operation throughout production
hours, despite grinding requirements of as little as 5% or less of the total hours. These operating
characteristics make grinders a major contributor to energy used in the plastics industry.
The U.S. plastics industry annually consumes approximately 1,070 trillion Btu of energy,
which equates to about 6% of overall U.S. industrial energy use (US DOE 2005, 3). Plastics
manufacturing plants have become prime targets for industrial energy reduction due to high
energy intensity and savings opportunities in their thermal processes and motor systems. Leading
industrial-energy sources, including the U.S. Department of Energy (2005), Southern California
Edison (2012), Pacific Gas and Electric (2006), Natural Resources Canada (2007), and the
European Commission (2006), have published numerous energy-savings strategies for the
plastics industry. These strategies primarily include improved injection-molding press power-
drive equipment, variable-volume/variable-speed hydraulic pumping control, extruder-barrel
insulation, material-dryer energy improvements, and best practices in lighting, compressed-air,
process cooling, and HVAC.
Grinder motors in most mid-to-large plastics facilities typically range from 1 hp to 25 hp,
but can exceed 50 hp for larger applications. Standard commercially-available grinders are not
built with sophisticated controls, but are simply equipped with a START button and STOP
button. However, aftermarket controllers can be installed as a retrofit on a grinder.
Commercially-Available Controllers
A new controller with unique start/stop triggers was recently designed, built, and installed
on all grinders at a plastic-injection molding plant in El Paso, TX. This controller is designed to
save grinder energy by controlling runtime while eliminating many of the issues associated with
the common commercially-available controller.
The new controller is user-interactive, thus mitigating the possibility of rapidly loading
product into a non-activated grinder out of unawareness or forgetfulness. An operator turns on
the grinder motor via a simple START button located on the controller. Red and green display
lights on the controller’s panel indicate to the operator whether it is safe to load product through
the chute. The red/green light status is controlled by a current transducer connected to the grinder
motor, with a programmed amperage threshold that is slightly higher than the motor’s steady-
state amp-draw. The red light is on when the motor is off. Upon motor startup, amp-draw is
elevated, causing the red light to stay on. When the motor approaches its rated speed after several
seconds, its amp-draw gradually decreases to a steady level; thus activating the green light and
indicating that it is safe for the operator to load product. If product is overloaded, the elevated
motor amp-draw will re-trigger the red light indicating that the operator must delay loading more
product until the grinder has processed enough to return to steady state. This unique feature that
alerts the operator of motor overload can lead to maintenance and productivity savings by
Plant Description
Logging Plan
To quantify grinder energy use before and after the controls retrofit, a sample of six (6)
grinders were each power-logged for a two-week period when not equipped with controllers and
for a two-week period when equipped with controllers. Of these six grinders, three are rated at 5
hp, two are 15 hp, and one is 20 hp. Because the plant is a 24 x 7 operation with consistent
machine runtimes throughout the year, it is assumed that 1) the six logged machines are a
representative sample of the remainder of the grinders, and 2) energy usage and savings can be
extrapolated on an annual basis for all grinders in the plant. Power-logging took place in 30-
second intervals, and the periods when all grinders were collectively drawing the highest
amounts of energy (similar to an electric-utility coincident-peak period) were noted.
The following figures are the time-series pre-retrofit and post-retrofit power readings of
three of the six logged grinders. The remaining three grinders have similar profiles to the ones
shown below.
Figures 4 and 5 show a two-week power profile of Grinder #30 (15 hp) both prior to and
following the controller installation. The figures indicate that the grinder draws approximately 6
kW when idle, and generally between 7 and 12 kW when grinding parts. The power readings
indicate that the grinder ground parts for 2.8% of pre-retrofit logged hours and 4.9% of post-
retrofit logged hours. The grinder was on during the entire pre-retrofit logging period.
Figure 4. Grinder #30 (15 hp) Two-Week Power Profile Prior to Controller Installation
For higher resolution, and to demonstrate the loading cycle, Figures 6 and 7 show a 1-day
power profile of Grinder #30 both prior to and following the controller installation.
Figure 6. Grinder #30 (15 hp) Power Profile on 2/23/11, Prior to Controller Installation
Figure 7. Grinder #30 (15 hp) Power Profile on 10/23/11, Following Controller Installation
Figure 8. Grinder #31 (5 hp) Two-Week Power Profile Prior to Controller Installation
Figure 9. Grinder #31 (5 hp) Two-Week Power Profile Following Controller Installation
Figures 10 and 11 show a two-week power profile of Grinder #40 (5 hp) both prior to and
following the controller installation. The figures indicate that the grinder draws approximately 2
kW when idle, and generally between 2.5 and 5.5 kW when grinding parts. The power readings
indicate that the grinder ground parts for 1.3% of pre-retrofit logged hours and 2.6% of post-
retrofit logged hours. The grinder was off for 12% of pre-retrofit logged hours.
Figure 11. Grinder #40 (5 hp) Two-Week Power Profile Following Controller Installation
The logged data of all grinders analyzed indicate that grinder motors draw substantial
power (25% - 50% of full-load power) when idling due to the friction on the motor shaft and the
air-resistance on the spinning blade. Of the logged grinders, grinding only took place on average
of 2% - 3% of the entire logging period, although the grinders were running for an average of
85% of all hours prior to retrofit. Some grinders were properly shut off during certain periods of
non-use prior to retrofit, but all grinders experienced periods of running idle for several straight
hours or days.
To demonstrate the electricity savings achieved by grinder controllers, Table 1 presents
the 2-week energy usage and coincident electrical demand numbers for all logged grinders prior
to and following controller installation.
The savings results in Table 1 were extrapolated to estimate the overall annual plant
energy and demand savings based on a 40-grinder plant with an aggregate horsepower of 247 hp.
The savings extrapolation assumes that 85% of the grinders typically operate in the plant (i.e. not
down for maintenance or in standby-reserve) for an average of 51 plant operating weeks per
year. Table 2 presents the extrapolated annual energy, demand, and cost savings estimated from
installing a controller on all grinders at the PMT plant.
Based on Table 2, the average annual electricity cost savings for each of the 40 grinders
is approximately $1,455 per grinder. Each controller was built and installed for less than $1,000
for this pilot project, resulting in a payback of less than nine months.
In addition to saving energy, this new controller’s user-friendliness has gained favor
among plant operators. The controller’s mechanism to alert operators when it is ready to accept
product has the potential to increase safety and reduce downtime and maintenance costs. All of
these effects contribute to a more energy-efficient and economical future for the plastics-
processing industry.
Acknowledgements
We would like to give special thanks to the El Paso Electric Company for sponsoring this
work and helping to fund this project through energy-efficiency incentives, and to CLEAResult,
Inc. for the tremendous support in these energy-saving efforts.
References
European Commission, Intelligent Energy Europe. 2006. Low Energy Plastics Processing.
Brussels, Belgium: Rapra Technology, British Plastics Federation, ASCAMM+, Danish
Technological Institute, Pole Europeen de Plasturgie, CRIF-Wallonie, AIMPLAS,
Fraunhofer Institut Chemische Technologie.
Lee, N. 2006. Practical Guide to Blow Moulding. Shrewsbury, UK: Rapra Technology Limited.
Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Industry Program for Energy Conservation. 2007. Guide to
Energy Efficiency Opportunities in the Canadian Plastics Processing Industry. C2007-
980163-3. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Plastics Industry Association.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company. 2006. Plastic Component Manufacturer Gets Serious About
Energy Efficiency. C-0489. San Francisco, CA: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
[US DOE] U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
2005. Improving Energy Efficiency at U.S. Plastics Manufacturing Plants. DOE/GO-
102005-2111. Washington, DC: The Society of Plastics Industry, Inc.