In this second part of our blog series on energy consumption in the glass tempering process, we'll dive deeper into the science behind heating and cooling glass, and how understanding these principles can help you navigate the complexities of energy consumption in tempering. Knowing how to interpret various metrics will ensure you can evaluate energy usage accurately and avoid falling for misleading performance claims.
Energy Consumption and the Laws of Physics
To truly grasp energy consumption in the tempering process, we must first understand the fundamental principles behind heating and cooling glass.
Heating Energy Calculation
The energy required to heat glass can be calculated using the formula:
E = ΔT c m,Where:
E = Energy required to heat the glass
ΔT = Temperature change
c = Specific heat capacity of the glass
m = Mass of the glass
Let’s calculate the energy for a 1 m² sheet of 4 mm thick glass:
ΔT = 610 °C (from 20 °C to 630 °C)
c = 1.1 kJ/kg * °C
m = 1 m² 2500 kg/m³ 0.004 m = 10 kg
(Note: The specific heat capacity of glass changes with temperature. At room temperature, it’s about 0.78 kJ/kg °C, but between +20 °C and +630 °C, it averages 1.1 kJ/kg °C.)
Substituting the values into the formula, we get:E = 610 °C x 1.1 kJ/kg °C 10 kg = 6710 kJ = 1.9 kWh = 0.475 kWh/m²*mm
So, it’s impossible to heat a 4 mm glass sheet from 20 °C to 630 °C using less than 1.9 kWh. In practical terms, the minimum energy required for heating is 0.475 kWh/m²*mm, which will vary with glass thickness.
But remember, this is just for heating. To calculate total energy consumption, we must also consider energy loss, convection blowers, and the quenching process.
Quenching Energy
The quenching phase is where glass processors can most significantly influence total energy consumption. Modern tempering furnaces tend to maintain consistent energy efficiency, regardless of how much glass is being processed (up to the machine’s maximum loading capacity). However, loading efficiency plays a critical role in quenching energy consumption.
For example, if you’re only utilizing 5% of the furnace’s capacity, much of the energy generated by the quench blowers is wasted. Ideally, you should aim for a higher loading efficiency, as this will lower energy consumption per square meter of glass processed.
For 4 mm clear glass, under ideal loading efficiency (90%) and modern blower technology, quenching energy would typically require around 0.45 kWh/m². For 6 mm glass, this reduces to 0.25 kWh/m².
Here’s an example table showing how loading efficiency affects total energy consumption for 4 mm glass:
Loading Efficiency | 9% | 61% | 87% |
Utilized Loading Area | 1 m² | 7 m² | 10 m² |
Heating Energy | 1.9 kWh | 13.3 kWh | 19.0 kWh |
Energy Loss | 0.6 kWh | 0.6 kWh | 0.6 kWh |
Quenching Energy | 5.8 kWh | 5.8 kWh | 5.8 kWh |
Energy Consumption per m² | 8.3 kWh | 2.8 kWh | 2.5 kWh |
As you can see, increasing loading efficiency drastically reduces the energy consumed per square meter of glass. This highlights the importance of optimizing loading efficiency for energy savings.
The Importance of Furnace Technology
Furnace technology is crucial for maximizing loading efficiency. When selecting a tempering furnace, ensure it allows for optimal use of the loading area without compromising glass quality. A well-designed furnace will enable higher loading efficiency and better energy savings.
Additionally, the machine’s connected power plays a significant role here. If your furnace lacks sufficient power, it won't be able to handle large loads efficiently. Your furnace must recover quickly from previous loads to avoid energy waste. The faster it recovers, the higher the capacity and the lower the energy consumption per square meter.
In summary, by understanding the heating and quenching processes and factoring in key variables like loading efficiency and furnace technology, you’ll be better equipped to evaluate energy consumption and avoid being misled by false data. When selecting your next tempering line, this knowledge will be invaluable, helping you make a more informed, cost-effective decision.
Comments