Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Energy benchmarking has been recognized as an effective analytical methodology and management tool
Received 12 May 2017 to improve energy efciency and performance. Many approaches to energy benchmarking have been
Received in revised form applied in various elds. Machining systems, which are widely distributed and consume large amounts
29 June 2017
of energy with low efciency, possess considerable potential for reductions in energy consumption.
Accepted 8 July 2017
Available online 9 July 2017
However, current research regarding the use of energy benchmarking for machining systems is insuf-
cient due to the complexity and variety of energy consumption processes used in these systems. This
paper proposes the use of energy benchmarking to strengthen the evaluation of energy demand and
Keywords:
Energy benchmarking
achieve efciency improvements for machining systems. First, it analyses drivers for energy bench-
Machining systems marking and their characteristics. Next, an energy benchmarking framework for machining systems is
Energy assessments presented. Then the concepts of the static, dynamic, single-objective, multi-objective, product-based, and
Energy demand process-based energy benchmarking are discussed from three different perspectives: the motion, object
Energy efciency and application level. This lays a theoretical foundation for further energy benchmarking research.
Energy consumption Finally, methods for developing energy benchmarking are also addressed including the prediction
method, statistical analysis and expert decision. The application of these methods to a real machining
plant allows an analysis of the practicability of potentially saving energy through benchmarking.
2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.039
0360-5442/ 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
W. Cai et al. / Energy 138 (2017) 332e347 333
for machine tools [23]. Currently, studies on energy measurement machine tools [51]. Moreover, to reduce energy consumption and
and monitoring have great success in laying a foundation for further improve the energy efciency of machining systems, other
energy-efcient machining. energy-saving strategies have been presented, such as assessment
and modelling, software-based optimization, control improve-
2.2. Energy modelling and optimization ments, cutting improvement and hardware-based optimization
and design for the environment. Actually, these energy-saving
Energy modelling and optimization are regarded as basic mea- strategies depend on the basic technologies mentioned in sec-
sures for energy-efcient machining. Energy consumption is equal tions 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3. For example, Diaz introduced strategies for
to power multiplied by time, while power is equal to force multi- the minimum energy operation of precision machining [52]. Ara-
plied by speed. This force reects the deformation of metal material mcharoen discussed critical factors for the energy demand
and the speed reects the variation of process parameters [7], modelling of Computer Numerical Control (CNC) milling and the
which is the theoretical basis for building energy consumption impact of toolpath strategies [53]. Yoon reviewed energy-saving
models. strategies and technologies aimed towards developing greener
Existing energy consumption models for machining can be machine tools [54].
roughly divided into three categories: linear type cutting energy
consumption models based on the material removal rate (MRR); 2.4. Energy benchmarking
detailed parameter type cutting energy consumption correlation
models; and process oriented machining energy consumption Energy benchmarking is part of the much wider use of bench-
models [7]. These models can be summarized as shown in Table 1. marks as a tool for evaluating energy demand and energy efciency.
Using these energy consumption models as a basis, extensive The concept of the energy benchmarking was proposed last century
research has also been conducted for energy optimization models and has been studied worldwide since, resulting in remarkable
to reduce the energy demand. For example, Bi proposed the opti- progress for industrial production [55,56]. Currently, a number of
mization of machining processes from the perspective of energy methods for developing energy benchmarking have been success-
consumption and provided an analysis of this case [24]. Wang fully applied to various industries, such as the petrochemical in-
addressed multi-objective optimization of machining parameters dustry, steel and cement industry and coal mining industry as
considering energy consumption [25]. He introduced an energy- shown in Table 2. The study of energy benchmarking has aroused
responsive optimization method for machine tool selection and extensive interest in recent years [57,58].
operation sequences in exible machining job shops [26]. Feng As mentioned previously, the wide distribution and a high
integrated an energy, economy, and environmental analysis and an consumption of low-efciency energy mean that machining sys-
optimization of the energy supply system of a manufacturing plant tems offer considerable energy-saving potential. However, few
[27]. He proposed Pareto fronts for machining parameters as a methods are available for developing energy benchmarking, which
trade-off between energy consumption, cutting force and pro- has resulted in the inadequacy of reduction of energy consumption
cessing time [28]. Hu presented a method for minimizing the and energy efciency improvements for machining systems.
machining energy consumption of a machine tool by sequencing Currently, Liu has proposed a method for dividing manufacturing
the features of a part [29]. Therefore, it is found that the develop- products into a variety of general and individual specic products
ment of energy modelling and optimization tools has been very and has presented this strategy for developing energy bench-
rapid and they have caused concerns about the energy consump- marking for different product types [75]. Cai proposed a new
tion of machining processes. concept called the ne energy consumption allowance (FECA) and a
method for developing FECA for specic workpieces. The FECA may
2.3. Energy evaluation and energy-saving strategy contribute to strengthening energy monitoring and management
and improving energy efciency in the mechanical manufacturing
Energy evaluation of machining systems is rapidly expanding, industry [76]. Zhou proposed an energy consumption model for
however, it is difcult to evaluate the energy efciency of these establishing an energy-consumption allowance for specic work-
systems due to the complexity and variability of energy con- pieces in a machining system, but only introduced a modelling
sumption processes. Despite this, current studies about energy method and did not produce benchmarks [77]. Cai addressed an
efciency in machining systems have made progress, which has energy management approach for the mechanical manufacturing
provided valuable insights into methods for approaching the industry through developing a multi-objective energy benchmark
assessment of energy consumption in machining systems and [78], and further developed a dynamic energy benchmark for mass
selecting efcient process plans; nding potential energy ef- production in machining systems for energy management and
ciency improvements; and developing energy benchmarking. energy-efciency improvement [79]. Realistically, however, these
These studies usually focus on one of two types of evaluations studies are not systematic or comprehensive enough to reveal the
including the holistic energy efciency evaluation of machining nature of energy benchmarking in machining systems such as
systems or a unit energy efciency analysis approach [46]. Holistic characteristic, methods, rules and applications for machining
evaluations comprehensively assess the energy efciency of systems.
machining systems. For example, Bernard proposed a principal
component analysis method for measuring the energy use in- 2.5. Contributions
tensity of manufacturing industries [47]. Duou addressed a pro-
cesses and systems approach for analysing the energy and With regards to the analysis of energy measurement and
resource efciency of manufacturing processes [48]. For a unit monitoring, energy modelling and optimization, as well as energy
energy efciency analysis, Wang presented an integrated method evaluation and energy-saving strategies, these methods provide
for assessing the energy efciency of machining workshops; and assistance for reducing energy consumption and improving energy
Balogun introduced a specic energy based evaluation of efciency. In this paper, we further proposed the application of
machining efciency [49]. Schudeleit and Zst proposed various energy benchmarking to strengthen the monitoring and evaluation
methods for the evaluation of energy efciency of machine tools of energy demand and improve energy efciency in machining
[50]. Schudeleit presented a total energy efciency index for systems. This paper proposes systematic energy benchmarking
Table 1
Summary of existing energy consumption models for machining.
The linear type cutting energy consumption Gutowski et al. [30e32] Proposing a functional relationship P0
P P0 k$MRR SEC MRR k
models based on MRR between energy consumption and the
material removal rate in machining
processes
Kara and Li [33] Proposing a similar empirical model in C1
SEC C0 MRR
which power is inversely proportional
to the mass rate removal
Li et al. [34] Proposing an improved specic energy P k k n k 1 k P
SEC MRR 0 1 MRR 2 MRR 2 standby b
consumption (SEC) model considering
the spindle rotation speed for air-
cutting status
Diaz et al. [35] Proposing a similar model 1 b
SEC k MRR
335
336 W. Cai et al. / Energy 138 (2017) 332e347
Table 2
A selected summary of existing energy benchmarking studies in various energy-intensive Industries from the literature.
using several concepts including the characteristics of energy only this, the constituent of energy consumption for the assembly,
benchmarking, energy benchmarking framework, and classica- the storage, and the transportation is also complex and variable
tion of energy approaches and methods for energy benchmarking, [75]. Fig. 2 shows the energy consumption constituents of a
etc. Understanding the characteristics of energy benchmarking machining product and shows that the energy consumption for the
machining systems enables comprehension of the complex rules machining product possesses a complex energy construction and
and features of this approach. Establishing the energy bench- numerous energy constituents resulting in difculty in the devel-
marking framework is important to provide a useful reference opment of energy benchmarking for machining systems.
point for the further studying of energy benchmarking. The clas- Not only are the constituents of the machining product
sication of energy benchmarking approaches and methods de- extremely complex and variable, but also the energy consumption
nes the different types knowledge about energy benchmarking processes. Taking the bottommost unit (a workpiece) of a
and assists with developing energy benchmarks. The studies machining product for example, the machining processes of this
referred to in this paper provide a solid theoretical foundation for workpiece involves multiple machine tools, processes, and pro-
energy benchmarking research. Meanwhile, this analysis of energy cedures. Even if the same workpiece is to be machined, the differ-
benchmarking not only has application to machining systems but ences of energy consumption may be great because of the different
may also play a role in developing benchmarking studies in other machine tools and machining plans used. Moreover, for just one
elds. machine tool has complex energy consumption processes. The
machining process can be divided into four types including the
3. Characteristics of energy benchmarking for machining standby, starting, idling, and cutting material processes as shown in
systems Fig. 3. Therefore, the energy benchmarking for machining systems
is difcult.
Characterizing the energy benchmarking is an indispensable
step for constructing the benchmarking framework, modelling, and 3.2. Multiple levels of energy benchmarking
determining methods for developing energy benchmarking for
machining systems. Considering the energy consumption laws for a Multiple levels of the energy benchmarking include multiple
machining process, the energy benchmarking of machining sys- levels of objects and applications. From Fig. 4, machining products,
tems has complex, multi-level and correlative characteristics. in general, comprise a number of components and parts. In addi-
tion, the part comprises a number of components and parts, which
3.1. Complexity of energy benchmarking indicates that the machining product, part, and component can
respectively have energy benchmarking with different bench-
Machining products comprise a number of components and marking levels. Energy benchmarking for a component and a part
parts; furthermore, the parts comprise a number of component are regarded as a subset of the energy benchmarking for the
parts; and by analogy, the last remaining part only consists of a machining product. In addition, energy benchmarking of a
number of components. Meanwhile, the energy consumption of the component is the lowest level of energy benchmarking, which is
product to be machined comprises the energy consumption of the also known as the energy benchmarking of a workpiece, which is
component, the part, assembly, storage, and transportation. Energy an important basis for developing an energy benchmarking for a
consumption of the component is composed of the energy con- part or a machining product. Dening an energy benchmarking for
sumption of the machining process and the auxiliary energy con- a workpiece is the primary task for a machining plant or rm to
sumption for the air compressor, ventilation, air-conditioning, and begin an energy benchmarking study.
illumination equipment and so on. Energy consumption of the part Furthermore, for multiple levels of the application of the energy
comprises the energy consumption of the component, the part, benchmarking, taking the mechanical manufacturing industry in
component assembly, assembly, storage, and transportation. Not China, for example, involves a wide range of industries with vast
W. Cai et al. / Energy 138 (2017) 332e347 337
Product
PREC
Component Component Part Part Part AEC TEC and SEC
CEC CEC PEC PEC PEC
SEC
Component Component AEC TEC and SEC
CEC CEC
SEC
Starting procedure
Idling procedure
Standby
procedure
Time (s)
production capacities, resulting in obvious differences in processing 3.3. Relevance of energy benchmarking and production targets
technologies, manufacturing equipment, and energy management
systems for different regions and rms. Therefore, the energy Conventional energy benchmarking is merely concerned with
consumption of machining processes for the each workpiece or the energy consumption of production processes and whether
machining product is obviously different, perhaps even hugely energy consumption meets the energy benchmarking. As we know,
different between different regions and rms. Fig. 4 shows the rms are not only concerned with energy consumption but also
capacity of the mechanical manufacturing industry in different with other factors such as production costs, production efciency,
regions with respect to processing technology, manufacturing completion rates of products, product quality, and environmental
equipment, and energy management systems. Overall, provinces performance. Generally, these production targets are closely
like the JiangSu, ShangHai, GuangDong and ZheJiang possess related to machining plans and production requirements of rms.
advanced processing technologies and manufacturing equipment, Production targets are different between different rms and there
as well as excellent energy management systems. In contrast, are large differences in these targets. Therefore, it is important for
provinces like the XinJiang, HaiNan, NingXia and Tibet possess decisions about the problems experienced by rms to consider all
backward processing technologies and manufacturing equipment, these factors or objectives in terms of the requirements of the
as well as substandard energy management systems. Therefore, entire rm. However, quantifying some of these objectives is
differences in the energy consumption of machining processes for difcult because they are multivariable. For example, the environ-
the same workpiece result in difculties in implementing energy ment performance involves the ecological factors, integrated use of
benchmarking for the same workpiece at the national level. To natural resources, occupational health and safety and security, and
develop a reasonable and advanced energy benchmarking for a these indicators are difcult to quantify. The completion rate of the
workpiece, it is rst necessary to study the energy benchmarking product is closely related to temporal uncertainties (the standby or
for the plant or the rm, and then extend the benchmarking to the idling time) and this uncertainty can be random and difcult to
industry or national level. control. Therefore, the energy benchmarking is closely related to
338 W. Cai et al. / Energy 138 (2017) 332e347
HeiLongjiang
JiLin
XinJiang
GanSu Inner BeiJing LiaoNing
Mongolia TianJin
HeBei
NingXia Shan
QingHai ShanDong
Xi
HeNan S
ShaanXi JiangSu
Tibet
AnHui ShangHai
SiChuan HuBei
ChongQing
Jiang ZheJiang
HuNa Xi
GuiZhou n FuJian
Less-advanced
YunNan TaiWan
Processing technology GuangXi GuangDong
Manufacturing equipment Hong Kong
Energy management system
production targets and this relationship is so complex that these production process, and comprise product-based and
production targets can be difcult to quantify. process-based energy benchmarking.
energy benchmarking to restrict excessive energy consumption in production process to achieve minimum energy consumption.
the machining process. Static energy benchmarking current is one Realistically, besides low energy consumption for the production
of the most widely used approaches. process, mechanical manufacturing industry and machining sys-
Although the static energy benchmarking plays a role in energy tems also aim to lower production costs, increase production
monitoring, energy management, and energy efciency improve-
ments. The effects of static benchmarking still have strong potential
for further improvements to machining systems due to the
complexity energy consumption processes. Dynamic energy
benchmarking is a more advanced energy benchmarking approach
and represents the continued development of the static energy
benchmarking. Dynamic energy benchmarking not only uses the
function of the static energy benchmarking, but also assesses the
energy usage level of the machining process, by determining
standard energy grades through an benchmark rating system, along
with the design of policies to further strengthen energy monitoring
and management and energy efciency improvements, as shown in
Fig. 6 [79].
efciencies, and improve environmental performance as much as sub-process to achieve more effective energy management and
possible. Therefore, the development of energy benchmarking energy efciency improvements as shown in Fig. 8.
should take into account a range of production targets. This gives
the energy benchmarking the advantage of multiple objectives, as 6. Methods for establishing energy benchmarking
shown in Fig. 7. Generally, production targets are different across
different rms or machining systems. Meanwhile, quantication of 6.1. Overview
these objectives is difcult. For example the, environment perfor-
mance involves ecological factors, integrated use of natural re- Methods for establishing energy benchmarking can be divided
sources, occupational health and safety of operators and security. into the prediction method, statistical analysis, and expert decision.
The completion rate of the product is closely related to temporal The prediction method focuses on building a mathematical model
uncertainties such as the standby time and idling time, and these to comprehensively assessing energy consumption and is easier to
uncertainties are often random and difcult to control. Therefore, establish a more operational energy benchmarking focused on an
an important issue is how to consider these production targets in objective. The statistical analysis method is used to acquire an en-
multi-objective energy benchmarking and what decision-making ergy benchmarking by analysing large amounts of energy con-
methods should be used. sumption data related to workpieces. However, acquiring the
energy consumption data is quite difcult, especially for the new
5.3. Application level: product-based and process-based energy workpieces that are unprocessed in the machining plant. For the
benchmarking expert decision method, energy benchmarking is developed by
analysing and assessing previous benchmarking and energy con-
At the application level, energy benchmarking comprises sumption data for other products or workpieces that have similar
product-based and process-based energy approaches. Conven- characteristics for each production process. However, this method
tional energy benchmarking is associated with a product-based requires strong professional capacity and it is difcult to nd
approach, which merely analyses the energy performance of a similar products (workpieces) and data to match with the bench-
target product. Product-based energy benchmarking uses a simple marking objective. Differences between the prediction method,
numerical value to interpret the relationship between a product statistical analysis and expert decision are shown in Table 3 and the
and its energy consumption, similar to the corresponding rela- application and comparison of these three methods are shown in
tionship between machining one workpiece and the energy con- Table 4.
sumption value for one workpiece machined [76]. For product-
based energy benchmarking, unnecessary energy consumption 6.2. Prediction method
for the whole production processes can be identied by comparing
actual energy consumption with the benchmark and identifying Establishing an energy benchmarking for a product using the
useful measures for reducing unnecessary use. This indicates that prediction method comprises three steps including data collection
product-based energy benchmarks are only concerned with the and analysis, modelling and determination of the energy bench-
total energy consumption. Product-based energy benchmarking marking and development of the benchmarking rating system.
have been widely applied in various industries, however, currently,
there is still a lack of this type of energy benchmarking in the Step 1 Data collection and analysis
mechanical manufacturing industry or machining systems.
Process-based energy benchmarking is obviously different to To conduct a problem analysis for the energy consumption of a
product-based energy benchmarking. It is more concerned with the machining system to develop an energy benchmarking, data
benchmarking of each process and sub-process. Process-based collection and analysis are a basic rst step. This includes data
energy benchmarking comprise one or more sets of energy data classication and data collection. Data classication distinguishes
trees for the product rather than a simple energy value and may the energy-related data (RED) and energy-unrelsted data (RUD) to
consider energy, time or process information for each process and facilitate data collection. RED have direct relevance to energy
sub-process. Furthermore, process-based energy benchmarking consumption in machining systems such as the power of the ma-
not only consider the total energy consumption of the workpiece chine tool and power of the ancillary equipment. RUD are a kind of
but also highlights the energy consumption of each process and indirect energy consumption data such as the production time,
Table 3
Differences among prediction method, expert decision, and statistical analysis.
New workpieces Processed workpieces Low High Low Medium High Bad Good Excellent
Prediction Method
Statistical Analysis
Expert Decision
Fig. 9. Decomposition of machining processes for energy consumption using a top-down method.
For the machining process, the energy consumption E and en- Step 3 Development of a benchmark rating system
ergy benchmarking Eb of the base process is:
In terms of energy consumption laws proposed in Eq. (9), the
E Ky (5) benchmark rating system of workpieces in a machining system can
be dened as a total of ve grades from A to E (refer to Fig. 6). This
classication method and grades for a benchmark rating system
Eb K b yb (6) refer to energy labelling. As shown in Fig. 6, the value of the
benchmark rating (0e0.55, 0.56e0.85, 0.86e1.15, 1.16e1.45 and
where K$is the function of calculated energy consumption. over 1.45) is not unique, and the value is determined from actual
Therefore, total energy consumption of the whole machining requirements of the rm, district government or national
b
processes for the workpiece ETotal and energy benchmarking ETotal government.
are: EActual
hBR (13)
EB
X
N
ETotal E1 E2 EN Ei (7)
i
6.3. Statistical analysis
!
b
X
N
ETotal KETotal KE1 E2 EN K Ei (8) Statistical analysis mainly focuses energy consumption data that
i can be acquired or has been acquired to establish energy bench-
marking, and this method includes three steps: (i) data collection,
(ii) statistical analysis and determination of the energy bench-
Step 2.2 Determination of process-based energy benchmarking marking and (iii) development of a benchmarking rating system.
random error. The energy benchmarking is: Decomposition of machining The amount of
Object matching
processes MCPs:N
!
0 0 0
X
k
xi xi
ED EC c1 x1 c2 x2 ck xk E0 ci
Si
i1 high MCPi low
MCPx1 MCPxj
(15) Determination low high Selection of the
similarity
of similar MCPs similar MCPi
MCPx2 MCPx2
where ED is the energy benchmarking; EC is the observed E; ci is a
standardized regression coefcient; xi i 1; 2; ; k are the value
of different factors which affect E, such as manufacturing equip- 2
ment, machining parameters, and production efciency, etc.
MCPi similarity MCPxj Determination of
For multi-objective energy benchmarking, on the basis of data Energy
energy
acquisition, the energy benchmarking may be determined by evaluation of the
consumption for
MCPi
various evaluation methods. In this paper, we will introduce the Ei Exj MCPi
most common and popular entropy-weight and the fuzzy TOPSIS
method. The entropy-weight and the fuzzy TOPSIS method in-
cludes (i) constructing an assessment matrix, (ii) nding yij , (iii)
Acquirement of
calculating the entropy weight, (iv) acquiring a weighted fuzzy Determination of the energy energy
matrix, and (v) calculating the degree of relative similarity. benchmarking consumption for
Therefore, as decision objectives are different among different all MCPi
rms, the decision criteria can be determined in terms of actual
requirements. The relative similarity degree Ci with a value be-
tween 0 and 1 can be calculated by using Eq. (16). The closer this 3 Development of benchmarking rating system
value gets to 1, the closer to the optimal level the assessed
machining plan is. Fig. 10. The process of the expert decision method.
344 W. Cai et al. / Energy 138 (2017) 332e347
This section not only illustrates the establishment process for Eid hni $tid (20)
the energy benchmarking but also demonstrates and analyses the
practicability for a real production process. Due to a wide variety of Ecm hni aPc $tcm (21)
energy benchmarking processes and obvious differences in energy
benchmarking between the rms, this section focuses on product- where EWire wheel is energy consumption of one wire wheel;
based energy benchmarking, dynamic energy benchmarking and Esb , Est , Eid and Ecm are the standby, starting, idling and cutting
their functions. material energy consumption, respectively; Nsb , Nst , Nid and Ncm
Product-based energy benchmarking of a workpiece (a wire are the number of the standby, starting, idling and cutting material
wheel) was established for the Chongqing Machine Tool Works Co., processes, respectively.
Ltd, China, using the prediction method to calculate energy con- Therefore, product-based energy benchmarking of the wire
b
sumption and determine the benchmarking. In this case, the wire wheel can be determined as EWire wheel 5:69 105 J. Furthermore,
wheel is as shown in Fig. 11, and the machining equipment is the for the dynamic energy benchmarking of the wire wheel, using a
CHK560CNC lathe. According to the prediction method, basic data benchmark rating system can be established as shown in Fig. 12.
and databases need to be collected and established beforehand. The energy benchmarking plays a signicant role in the energy
Basic data like machining process parameters are shown in Table 5. assessment and improvement of energy efciency. The operator
Table 5
Machining process parameters for the wire wheel.
Step Content Spindle speed (rpm) Feed (mm/r) Depth of cut (mm)
Table 6
Methods for establishing basic energy consumption databases.
Databases Description
Standby power The standby power database can be established by measuring the standby power of each machine tool before use.
f(Mi) Psbi
Where Mi is the number of the machine tool, Psbi is standby power of the machine tool
Starting energy consumption The starting energy consumption is closely related to the spindle speed of the machine tool. When the
spindle speed of the machine tool is determined, the starting energy consumption will be a constant,
which means there is a functional relationship between energy consumption and spindle speed.
Estj g(nj)
Where nj is spindle speed and Estj is the starting energy consumption.
Idling power Similarly, the idling power is also closely related to the spindle speed of the machine tool. The idling
power can be acquired by measuring the idling power of each level of speed of the machine tool.
Pidj h(nj)
Where nj is spindle speed and j is the series of spindle speed.
Load loss coefcient The load loss coefcient a of a machine tool is the ratio of additional load loss Pa to cutting power Pc [85].
The load loss coefcient is a constant between 0.15 and 0.25. Additional load loss is a linear
or quadratic function of cutting power [75].
The load loss coefcient can be acquired by the methodology described in the literature [85].
can easily grasp the energy consumption requirements of the the benchmark rating system, the rm could be subject to nancial
workpiece, and the benchmark rating and energy grades can be and administrative penalties in accordance with the extent they
analysed via a comparison with the benchmark rating system to breach the grade. Incentive schemes may be implemented for rms
guide operators to avoid unreasonable operating parameters and that satisfy the energy benchmarking and grades. Additionally, the
select more reasonable machining plans and efcient process pa- benchmarki rating system has a vital role in increasing the energy
rameters. On the other hand, energy managers can master the efciency of machining systems. A machine tool spends large
overall energy consumption level of a workpiece and determine amounts of time in the standby and idling states because of poor
whether it meets eligibility criteria. The energy benchmarking and energy-consciousness of operators, resulting in a signicant waste
benchmark rating system also benet the process of conducting of energy. Selected process parameters mainly depend on the
energy audits, a collection of energy statistics, and energy- consciousness and machining experience of the operator and
efciency analysis, aiding the decision-making processes of en- satisfy the machining requirements but usually ignore energy-
ergy managers. The government can use the benchmarking and consumption issues. Through the development of the energy
benchmark rating system to design relevant energy policies and benchmarking, an operator can master achieving the energy con-
standards for machining systems. For example, when the energy sumption objectives and the grade compared with the benchmark
consumption of a machining system is below the energy grade for rating system efciently, they can search for reasons for high en-
ergy consumption and subsequently adjust process parameters. In
conclusion, energy benchmarking for a workpiece in a machining
system is very important for achieving energy-efcient production.
Benchmarking Rating System
Firm Chongqing Machine Tool Works Co., Ltd, China 8. Conclusions
Workpiece Wire wheel
With a wide distribution and high amount of low-efciency
Energy consumption per unit gear energy consumption, machining systems have considerable
energy-saving potential. Currently, massive methods, such as en-
More energy efficient
ergy measurement, monitoring, modelling and optimization, have
been applied to machining systems to improve their performance.
0-55 These methods are useful but are not effective in measuring energy
consumption demand or applying specic constraints. The energy
benchmarking has been recognized as an effective analytical
56-85 methodology and management tool to improve the efciency and
performance of energy use. The study of energy benchmarking for
machining systems is insufcient due to complexity and variety of
86-115 energy consumption processes. This paper proposes the use of
energy benchmarking to strengthen the evaluation of energy de-
mand and energy efciency of machining systems.
116-145 First, this paper summarized some important methods such as
energy measurement and monitoring, energy modelling and opti-
mization, as well as energy evaluation and the development of
Over 145 energy-saving strategies for machining systems and analysed
drivers for the energy benchmarking in machining systems. Sec-
Less energy efficient ondly, analysing three important characteristics of the energy
Energy consumption benchmark for the wire wheel 0.15kWh benchmarking in machining systems including the complex, multi-
Establishment time: 2016.12.02 First edition
level and correlative characteristics and how they contribute to
constructing a framework, for modelling, and determining the
Fig. 12. Benchmark rating system of a wire wheel in the Chongqing Machine Tool methods for energy benchmarking in machining systems was
Works Co., Ltd, China. completed. Then, an energy benchmarking framework for
346 W. Cai et al. / Energy 138 (2017) 332e347
machining systems was developed for inuencing energy bench- [14] Fresner J. Energie-und Ressourcenefzienz in Unternehmen umsetzen.
Nachhalt Prod 2011;2(2):58e61.
marking research. This revealed relevant energy benchmarking
[15] Kara S, Bogdanski G, Li W. Electricity metering and monitoring in
characteristic, functional structures, and application modes. manufacturing systems. Glocalized Solut Sustain Manuf 2011:1e10.
Moreover, this paper discussed the concepts of the static, dynamic, [16] Verein Deutscher Ingenieure VDI. Energiemanagement e Begriffe, No. 4602.
single-objective, multi-objective, product-based and process-based Dsseldorf: Beuth Verlag; 2007.
[17] Vijayaraghavan A, Dornfeld D. Automated energy monitoring of machine
energy benchmarking from the various perspectives of the motion, tools. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 2010;59(1):21e4.
object, and application level This will lay a theoretical foundation [18] Lanz M, Mani M, Leong S, Lyons K, Ranta A, Ikkala K, et al. Impact of energy
for energy benchmarking research. These contexts and applications measurements in machining operations. In: ASME 2010 International design
engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engi-
of these benchmarking concepts were illustrated in detail. Finally, neering conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 2010.
to provide effective measures for the energy benchmarking, this p. 867e73.
paper proposed three methods for developing the energy bench- [19] Li X, Yao X. Multi-scale statistical process monitoring in machining. IEEE Trans
Ind Electron 2005;52(3):924e7.
marking for machining systems including the prediction method, [20] Behrendt T, Zein A, Min S. Development of an energy consumption monitoring
statistical analysis and expert decision. Specic procedures of each procedure for machine tools. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 2012;61(1):43e6.
method were described in detail and a comparison of these three [21] Hu S, Liu F, He Y, Hu T. An on-line approach for energy efciency monitoring
of machine tools. J Clean Prod 2012;27:133e40.
methods was performed, which provided an important reference [22] Bornschlegl M, Bregulla M, Franke J. Methods-Energy Measurement e an
for the energy benchmarking for machining systems. Furthermore, approach for sustainable energy planning of manufacturing technologies.
the energy benchmarking was applied to Chongqing Machine Tool J Clean Prod 2016;135:644e56.
[23] Liu P, Liu F, Qiu H. A novel approach for acquiring the real-time energy ef-
Works Co., Ltd., China, showing that this proposed method was
ciency of machine tools. Energy 2017;121:524e32.
feasible for establishing an energy benchmarking for a workpiece in [24] Bi ZM, Wang L. Optimization of machining processes from the perspective of
a machining system and can play a crucial role in improving energy energy consumption: a case study. J Manuf Syst 2012;31(4):420e8.
management and increasing energy efciency. [25] Wang Q, Liu F, Wang X. Multi-objective optimization of machining parame-
ters considering energy consumption. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2014;71(5e8):
Future studies will focus on two aspects of the energy bench- 1133e42.
marking. First, an energy evaluation standard and certication [26] He Y, Li Y, Wu T, Sutherland JW. An energy-responsive optimization method
process for machining systems will be considered using energy for machine tool selection and operation sequence in exible machining job
shops. J Clean Prod 2015;87:245e54.
benchmarking processes. Second, data acquisition for establishing [27] Feng L, Mears L, Beaufort C, Schulte J. Energy, economy, and environment
more basic databases will be continuously implemented. analysis and optimization on manufacturing plant energy supply system.
Energy Convers Manag 2016;117:454e65.
[28] He K, Tang R, Jin M. Pareto fronts of machining parameters for trade-off
Acknowledgments among energy consumption, cutting force and processing time. Int J Prod
Econ 2017;185:113e27.
The authors acknowledge the technical support from the State [29] Hu L, Peng C, Evans S, Peng T, Liu Y, Tang R, et al. Minimising the machining
energy consumption of a machine tool by sequencing the features of a part.
Key Laboratory of Mechanical Transmission, Chongqing University. Energy 2017;121:292e305.
The project is supported by the National Natural Science Founda- [30] Gutowski, T., Dahmus, J., Thiriez, A., 2006. Electrical energy requirements for
tion of China (Grant No. 51375513), the National Hi-Tech Research manufacturing processes. In: Proceedings of 13th CIRP International Confer-
ence on Life Cycle Engineering. Leuven, Belgium, pp. 5e11.
and Development Program (863) (Grant No. 2014AA041506), and [31] Gutowski T. The carbon and energy intensity of manufacturing. 40th CIRP
the Science and Technology Research Program of the Chongqing International manufacturing systems seminar. Liverpool University; 2007.
Municipal Education Commission (Grant No. KJ1709227). [32] Gutowski T, Branham M, Dahmus J, Jones A, Thiriez A. Thermodynamic
analysis of resources used in manufacturing processes. Environ Sci Technol
2009;43(5):1584e90.
References [33] Kara S, Li W. Unit process energy consumption models for material processes.
CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 2011a;61(1):37e40.
[1] Velchev S, Kolev I, Ivanov K, Gechevski S. Empirical models for specic energy [34] Li L, Yan JH, Xing ZW. Energy requirements evaluation of milling machines
consumption and optimization of cutting parameters for minimizing energy based on thermal equilibrium and empirical modeling. J Clean Prod 2013;52:
consumption during turning. J Clean Prod 2014;80:139e49. 113e21.
[2] Lee YS, Tong LI. Forecasting nonlinear time series of energy consumption [35] Diaz N, Redelsheimer E, Dornfeld D. Energy consumption characterization and
using a hybrid dynamic model. Appl Energy 2012;94:251e6. reduction strategies for milling machine tool use. In: Glocalized Sol. Sustain.
[3] Yoon HS, Kim ES, Kim MS, Lee JY, Lee GB, Ahn SH. Towards greener machine Manuf. Proc. CIRP Int. Conf. Life Cycle Eng; 2011. p. 263e7.
toolseA review on energy saving strategies and technologies. Renew Sustain [36] Munoz AA, Sheng P. An analytical approach for determining the environ-
Energy Rev 2015;48:870e91. mental impact of machining processes. J Mater Process Technol
[4] Pao HT. Forecasting energy consumption in Taiwan using hybrid nonlinear 1995;53(3e4):736e58.
models. Energy 2009;34:1438e46. [37] Kishawy HA, Kannan S, Balazinski M. An energy based analytical force model
[5] Cagno E, Trianni A. Exploring drivers for energy efciency within small- and for orthogonal cutting of metal matrix composites. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol
medium-sized enterprises: rst evidences from Italian manufacturing enter- 2004;53(1):91e4.
prises. Appl Energy 2013;104:276e85. [38] Cuppini D, D'errico G, Rutelli G. Tool wear monitoring based on cutting power
[6] EIA. Annual energy review. 2011. Last visited: March 2015, http://www.eia. measurement. Wear 1990;139(2):303e11.
gov/totalenergy/data/annual/index.cfm. [39] Shao H, Wang HL, Zhao XM. A cutting power model for tool wear monitoring
[7] Zhou L, Li J, Li F, Meng Q, Li J, Xu X. Energy consumption model and energy in milling. Int Int J Mach Tool Manuf 2004;44(14):1503e9.
efciency of machine tools: a comprehensive literature review. J Clean Prod [40] Yoon HS, Moon JS, Pham MQ, Lee GB, Ahn SH. Control of machining param-
2016;112:3721e34. eters for energy and cost savings in micro-scale drilling of PCBs. J Clean Prod
[8] Andrea T, Enrico C, Ernst W. Empirical investigation of energy efciency 2013;54:41e8.
barriers in Italian manufacturing SMEs. Energy 2013;49:444e58. [41] Yoon HS, Lee JY, Kim MS, Ahn SH. Empirical power-consumption model for
[9] Liu F, Xu ZJ, Dan B. Energy characteristic of mechanical machining system and material removal in three-axis milling. J Clean Prod 2014;78:54e62.
its application. Beijing: China Machine Press; 1995 [in Chinese]. [42] Sarwar M, Persson M, Hellbergh H, Haider J. Measurement of specic cutting
[10] Wang QL, Liu F, Li CB. An integrated method for assessing the energy ef- energy for evaluating the efciency of bandsawing different workpiece ma-
ciency of machining workshop. J Clean Prod 2013;52:122e33. terials. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 2009;49(12e13):958e65.
[11] Mouzon G, Yildirim MB, Twomey J. Operational methods for minimization of [43] Guo YS, Loenders J, Duou J, Lauwers B. Optimization of energy consumption
energy consumption of manufacturing equipment. Int J Prod Res and surface quality in nish turning. Proc CIRP 2012;1(1):512e7.
2007;45(18e19):4247e71. [44] Liu Shuang, Liu F. Multi-period energy model of electro-mechanical main
[12] Bogdanski G, Spiering T, Li W, Herrmann C, Kara S. Energy monitoring in driving system during the service process of machine tools. J Mech Eng
manufacturing companies e generating energy awareness through feedback. 2012;48(21):132e40.
In: Dornfeld DA, Linke BS, editors. Leveraging technology for a sustainable [45] Lv JX, Tang RZ, Jia S. Therblig-base d energy supply modeling of computer
world. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer; 2012. p. 539e44. numerical control machine tools. J Clean Prod 2014;65:168e77.
[13] Spiering T, Kohlitz S, Sundmaeker H, Herrmann C. Energy efciency bench- [46] Wang Q, Liu F, Li C. An integrated method for assessing the energy efciency
marking for injection moulding processes. Robot Comput Integr Manuf of machining workshop. J Clean Prod 2013;52:122e33.
2015;36:45e59. [47] Bernard JT, Co ^ te
B. The measurement of the energy intensity of manufacturing
W. Cai et al. / Energy 138 (2017) 332e347 347
industries: a principal components analysis. Energy Policy 2005;33(2): for dump trucks in mines. Appl Energy 2014;113:1382e96.
221e33. [66] Ballantyne GR, Powell MS. Benchmarking comminution energy consumption
[48] Duou JR, Sutherland JW, Dornfeld D, Herrmann C, Jeswiet J, Kara S, et al. for the processing of copper and gold ores. Miner Eng 2014;65:109e14.
Towards energy and resource efcient manufacturing: a processes and sys- [67] Wang N, Wen Z, Liu M, Guo J. Constructing an energy efciency benchmarking
tems approach. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 2012;61(2):587e609. system for coal production. Appl Energy 2016;169:301e8.
[49] Balogun VA, Edem IF, Adekunle AA, Mativenga PT. Specic energy based [68] Laurijssen J, Faaij A, Worrell E. Benchmarking energy use in the paper in-
evaluation of machining efciency. J Clean Prod 2016;116:187e97. dustry: a benchmarking study on process unit level. Energy Efc 2013;6(1):
[50] Schudeleit T, Zst S, Wegener K. Methods for evaluation of energy efciency 49e63.
of machine tools. Energy 2015;93:1964e70. [69] Zhang Y, Hong M, Li J, Chen X, Zeng Z, Liu H. Benchmarking analysis of energy
[51] Schudeleit T, Zst S, Weiss L, Wegener K. The total energy efciency index for efciency indicators in paper mill. BioResources 2016;11(4):9723e40.
machine tools. Energy 2016;102:682e93. [70] Mateos-Espejel E, Savulescu L, Mare chal F, Paris J. Base case process devel-
[52] Diaz N, Helu M, Jarvis A, To nissen S, Dornfeld D, Schlosser R. Strategies for opment for energy efciency improvement, application to a Kraft pulping
minimum energy operation for precision machining. Laboratory for mill. Part II: benchmarking analysis. Chem Eng Res Des 2011;89(6):729e41.
Manufacturing and Sustainability; 2009. [71] Jonasson M. Energy benchmark for wastewater treatment processesea com-
[53] Aramcharoen A, Mativenga PT. Critical factors in energy demand modelling parison between Sweden and Austria. TEIE-5247. IEA; 2007.
for CNC milling and impact of toolpath strategy. J Clean Prod 2014;78:63e74. [72] Krampe J. Energy benchmarking of south Australian WWTPs. Water Sci
[54] Yoon HS, Kim ES, Kim MS, Lee JY, Lee GB, Ahn SH. Towards greener machine Technol 2013;67(9):2059e66.
toolseA review on energy saving strategies and technologies. Renew Sustain [73] Prakash B, Singh RP. Energy benchmarking of warehouses for frozen foods.
Energy Rev 2015;48:870e91. Food Manuf Efc 2008;1(3):9.
[55] Iribarren Diego. Mario Martn-Gamboa, Javier Dufour. Environmental bench- [74] Chauhan NS, Mohapatra PKJ, Pandey KP. Improving energy productivity in
marking of wind farms according to their operational performance. Energy paddy production through benchmarkingdan application of data envelop-
2013;61(1):589e97. ment analysis. Energy Convers Manag 2006;47(9):1063e85.
[56] Zhou XN, Liu F, Cai W. An energy-consumption model for establishing energy- [75] Liu F, Zhou XN, Cai W. The complexity and strategy for establishing product
consumption allowance of a workpiece in a machining system. J Clean Prod energy consumption allowance in discrete manufacturing industry. J Mech
2016;135:1580e90. Eng 2015;10(19):138e45 [in Chinese].
[57] Yang T, Zhang X. Benchmarking the building energy consumption and solar [76] Cai W, Liu F, Zhou XN, Xie J. Fine energy consumption allowance of work-
energy trade-offs of residential neighborhoods on Chongming Eco-Island, pieces in the mechanical manufacturing industry. Energy 2016;114:622e3.
China. Appl Energy 2016;180:792e9. [77] Zhou X, Liu F, Cai W. An energy-consumption model for establishing energy-
[58] Chan DYL, Huang CF, Lin WC, Hong GB. Energy efciency benchmarking of consumption allowance of a workpiece in a machining system. J Clean Prod
energy-intensive industries in Taiwan. Energy Convers Manag 2014;77: 2016;135:1580e90.
216e20. [78] Cai W, Liu F, Xie J, Zhou X. An energy management approach for the me-
[59] a
Rez
c J, Jure
cka P, Riley KE, Cern J, Valdes H, Pluh
ackov
a K, et al. Quantum chanical manufacturing industry through developing a multi-objective energy
chemical benchmark energy and geometry database for molecular clusters benchmark. Energy Convers Manag 2017;132:361e71.
and complex molecular systems (www.begdb.com): a user's manual and [79] Cai W, Liu F, Zhang H, Liu P, Tuo J. Development of dynamic energy bench-
examples. Collect Czechoslov Chem Commun 2008;73(10):1261e70. mark for mass production in machining systems for energy management and
[60] Sardeshpande V, Gaitonde UN, Banerjee R. Model based energy benchmarking energy-efciency improvement. Appl Energy 2017;202:715e25.
for glass furnace. Energy Convers Manag 2007;48(10):2718e38. [80] Xiong JS, Wang J, Liu G. Statistics tutorial. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University
[61] Rikhtegar F. Energy benchmarking: a method incorporating energy optimi- Press; 2007.
zation and its viability is exemplied in a petrochemical application. Chem [81] Kneifel Joshua, Webb David. Predicting energy performance of a net-zero
Eng 2011;118(12):32e6. energy building: a statistical approach. Appl Energy 2016;178:468e83.
[62] Saleh FK, Teodoriu C. The mechanism of mixing and mixing energy for oil and [82] Tang F. Reasonable application of arithmetic mean, mode and median. China
gas wells cement slurries: a literature review and benchmarking of the Stat 2008;03:49e50 [in Chinese].
ndings. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 2016;38:388e401. [83] Xin Y, Lu S, Zhu N, Wu W. Energy consumption quota of four and ve star
[63] Zeng X. Cement grinding technologies and energy benchmarking. In: Pro- luxury hotel buildings in Hainan province, China. Energy Build 2012;45:
ceedings of the 2009 China cement grinding technology forum, Nanjng, 250e6.
Jiangsu, China, April 18th; 2009. 12177667, http://www.ccement.com/news/ [84] Wikipedia, Free Encyclopedia The. Cumulative frequency analysis. 2010.
2009/4-18C. Retrieved on December 30, 2010 from, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
[64] Nadolski S, Klein B, Gong D, Davaanyam Z, Cooper A. Development and Cumulative_frequency_analysis.
application of an energy benchmarking model for mineral comminution. [85] Hu SH, Liu F, He Y, Peng B. Characteristics of additional load losses of spindle
Vancouver: SAG2015; 2015. system of machine tools. J AdvMech Des Syst Manuf 2010;4(7):1221e33.
[65] Sahoo LK, Bandyopadhyay S, Banerjee R. Benchmarking energy consumption