AMSTERDAM MANUFACTURING FACILITY
A manufacturing facility in Amsterdam collaborated with SMARTCAir (and utilizing VP Instruments flow monitoring) to optimize its compressed air system. The site operates two 110 kW (150 hp) compressors and one 180 kW (240 hp) variable-speed compressor to supply air for its processes. With energy costs high in the Netherlands, our customer’s goal was to reduce electricity usage and costs for compressed air while maintaining adequate air supply. The project leveraged detailed data logging (via VP Instruments) to analyze performance and identify improvements in compressor control and system efficiency.
Current Issues
High Energy Baseline:
Suboptimal Compressor Staging:
Excess Air Leaks or Demand:
The three-compressor system was consuming about 710,000 kWh per year, costing approximately €162,500 annually in electricity (with energy prices around €0.23/kWh). Compressed air was a major portion of the plant’s energy bill. The specific energy performance was averaging 6.2 kW per m³/min of air (~17.5 kW/100 CFM), which indicated room for improvement.
Excess Air Leaks or Demand:
Suboptimal Compressor Staging:
Excess Air Leaks or Demand:
Analysis indicated roughly a 35% leakage or excessive demand rate, estimated at about 10 m³/min of air being wasted. This means over one-third of generated air was not productively used. These leaks or unregulated uses forced compressors to work harder than necessary, driving up energy use
Suboptimal Compressor Staging:
Suboptimal Compressor Staging:
Suboptimal Compressor Staging:
In the base scenario, one of the 110 kW compressors (referred to as C3 GA110) was running almost fully loaded most of the time, providing the base air needs, while the larger GA 180 VSD unit was trimming (adjusting output to meet changes in demand). The second GA110 compressor was mostly idle or used as backup. However, because the trim compressor (GA 180 VSD) was quite large relative to the needed trim, it sometimes ran at very low loads or even concurrently with the other GA110 in an inefficient manner. Essentially, the coordination between the VSD and the fixed-speed unit wasn’t perfectly tuned, leading to periods where the system wasn’t operating at best efficiency.
Idle Backup Running Time:
Idle Backup Running Time:
Suboptimal Compressor Staging:
It was observed that the non-VSD GA110 compressor (when used as backup or during high loads) contributed to over 70% of total system energy in some periods. This suggested that at times both GA110s were running together, which should ideally be avoided if the GA180 VSD can handle the load variation. Having two big compressors on at once (when one could suffice) was causing avoidable energy consumption and wear.
Pressure Fluctuations:
Idle Backup Running Time:
Pressure Fluctuations:
The system pressure was maintained between 5.6 and 6.5 bar (81–94 psi), averaging around 6.2 bar (90 psi). There was at least one noted low pressure drop to 4.9 bar (71 psi) during a peak event, indicating the system struggled momentarily with a surge (peak flows reached ~51 m³/min, or 1,800 CFM). To avoid such drops, the pressure setpoint may have been kept higher than needed most of the time, which means extra energy expended as a safety margin.
Proposed Solution
Optimize Pressure Setpoints (Case 1):
By lowering and fine-tuning the compressor pressure setpoints, the GA 180 VSD could be made to take on the primary load alone for longer periods. SMARTCAir adjusted the control so that the GA110 units had a lower cut-in pressure – effectively, the GA 180 VSD would ramp up and handle almost all demand until it nearly reaches capacity, and only then would a GA110 kick in. In the model, this change resulted in the GA 110 compressor’s utility dropping by 96% – it hardly needed to run at all. The plant was able to run on a single compressor (the GA 180 VSD) most of the time, which is more efficient. This case required no physical changes, just control strategy improvements, yielding about 5% energy savings (€8.3k/yr) immediately.
Introduce a Smaller Base-load Compressor (Case 2):
Another scenario evaluated adding a new smaller compressor (e.g., a GA 55 ~ 75 hp) to run continuously as base load, with the GA 180 acting as trim on top of that. The idea is that a smaller compressor running at full load can be more efficient for the lower end of demand, while the big VSD only provides additional air when needed. This configuration gave a slight improvement – around 5.9% energy reduction, saving $9.6k (€9k) per year – but not markedly better than just optimizing the original setup. It also involves capital cost for the new compressor, so it was considered optional.
Reduce Air Consumption by 10% & Increase Storage (Case 3):
The most impactful scenario combined operational fixes. SMARTCAir targeted a 10% reduction in average air demand by aggressively fixing leaks and eliminating any excessive uses. In tandem, they suggested adding about 3–5 m³ of receiver volume (15–20% more storage). The extra storage helps buffer demand swings, which improves compressor efficiency (the VSD can run steadier). With ~10% lower demand and more storage, the model showed around 15.7% total energy savings, equating to roughly €25,000/year saved. The breakdown was ~10% from demand reduction and ~5–6% from better efficiency and reduced compressor cycling.
Implement Case 3 (Recommended):
The recommended path for HEP was essentially Case 3. That is: conduct a leak reduction program to cut demand by about 10%, add additional air receiver capacity, and continue to use the GA 180 VSD as the primary compressor with the GA110 only rarely supporting. This plan gives significant savings and requires relatively modest investment (leak repairs and a new air tank are far cheaper than a new compressor). It also preserves full backup capability – if the GA 180 were ever down, the two GA110s together could supply the plant.
Monitoring and Ongoing Optimization:
With VP Instruments flow meters in place, SMARTCAir also emphasized the importance of ongoing monitoring. They set up the system so that the plant could observe when the second compressor comes on and how much air is being used, to continually track leaks or inefficiencies. This data-driven approach ensures that the gains are maintained over time, and any deviations can be corrected by adjusting controls or repairing new leaks.
Savings
Energy Savings:
Reduced Compressor Wear:
Energy Savings:
Up to 15–16% reduction in annual energy use for compressed air. From the baseline ~710,000 kWh/year, this would be about 110,000 kWh/year saved. Achieving this level of savings moves the specific efficiency from 6.2 kW/m³ to much closer to 5.2 kW/m³ – a significant efficiency improvement for a system of this size.
Cost Savings:
Reduced Compressor Wear:
Energy Savings:
Approximately €25,000 per year in electricity cost savings (15.7% of €162.5k). The plant’s compressed air electricity costs were trimmed substantially, easing the impact of high energy prices. Even the immediate low-cost tweaks (pressure optimization alone) yielded nearly €8–10k in savings, with the full leak repair and optimization package quadrupling that benefit.
Reduced Compressor Wear:
Reduced Compressor Wear:
Reduced Compressor Wear:
Perhaps just as important as the energy savings, the new strategy reduced the runtime of the second GA110 compressor by 95+%. Essentially, one compressor (GA 180 VSD) now does the bulk of the work, and it’s designed to handle variable load efficiently. The other compressors hardly run except as emergency or occasional peak support. This consolidation of load onto the VSD means fewer start/stop cycles on the fixed-speed machines, lower maintenance needs, and likely longer equipment life. The GA 180 itself, running at steadier load, will also experience less stress than previously when it had to rapidly adjust for big swings.
Improved Stability:
Emissions Reduction:
Reduced Compressor Wear:
With additional air storage and better leak control, the system experiences fewer pressure swings. The lowest pressure observed is higher now (no more dropping to 4.9 bar unexpectedly). The plant can even consider lowering the normal operating pressure slightly to save more energy, knowing that the buffer tank and efficient controls will keep pressure within acceptable range. Overall, the compressed air supply is more dependable and easier to manage.
Emissions Reduction:
Emissions Reduction:
Emissions Reduction:
The energy savings correspond to roughly a 16% reduction in CO2 emissions from the compressed air system. Given the carbon intensity of the Dutch grid, this could mean on the order of 45 fewer tonnes of CO2 emitted per year. For HEP, this contributes to corporate sustainability goals and is a positive outcome to communicate to stakeholders.
Conclusion
By combining advanced measurement from VP Instruments with SMARTCAir’s analytical approach, the manufacturing facility in Amsterdam achieved a smarter, leaner compressed air system. The project identified that simple adjustments – like re-sequencing compressors, lowering pressure, fixing leaks, and adding storage – can yield about 15% energy savings in a large industrial air system. In tangible terms, this customer is saving around €25k each year on electricity and has greatly reduced the unnecessary operation of its backup compressor. The compressed air system now mostly runs on one high-efficiency machine, with others as true backup, which is an ideal scenario for reliability and efficiency. This case study underscores how data-driven optimization can uncover hidden inefficiencies and resolve them with minimal cost, ultimately enhancing both the economic and environmental performance of the plant’s operations.
SMARTCair
Copyright © 2025 SMARTCair - All Rights Reserved.
This website uses cookies.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.