Saw thickness impact on ginning energy

Authors: Funk, Paul; Thomas, Joseph; Yeater, Kathleen; Armijo, Carlos; Whitelock, Derek; Wanjura, John; Delhom, Christopher - Chris

Submitted to: National Cotton Council Beltwide Cotton Conference
Publication Type: Proceedings
Publication Acceptance Date: 1/5/2022
Publication Date: 5/1/2022
Citation: Funk, P.A., Thomas, J.W., Yeater, K.M., Armijo, C.B., Whitelock, D.P., Wanjura, J.D., Delhom, C.D. 2022. Saw thickness impact on ginning energy. National Cotton Council Beltwide Cotton Conference, January 4-6, 2022, San Antonio, Texas. p. 246-249.

Interpretive Summary: Cotton gin saws have long been available in three thicknesses: 0.036, 0.037, and 0.045 inches. Yet no experiments have been published which compares the effect of saw thickness on the economically important performance measures gin processing rate and energy consumption. We compared the thickest and thinnest available cotton gin saws in our laboratory gin stand, carefully measuring the energy consumption at normal and fast settings. Thicker saws used 35% more energy per pound for the fiber-seed separation function we call ginning.

Technical Abstract: Cotton gin saws have long been available in three thicknesses: 0.036, 0.037, and 0.045 inches. Yet no published experiments present the effect of saw thickness on the economically important performance measures gin processing rate and energy consumption. Two cylinders with 16-inch diameter saws of either 0.036 or 0.045 inch thickness were tested on a reduced-width (46-saw) Continental Double Eagle gin stand with constant rib spacing at the USDA-ARS Southwestern Cotton Ginning Research Laboratory in Las Cruces, New Mexico. Energy consumption was recorded for target processing rates 0.0108 and 0.0134 pounds per saw per second using pre-cleaned seed cotton grown in New Mexico, Texas, and Mississippi in a randomized complete block experiment with five replicates. On this equipment we found that the thicker saws averaged 90% (0.0103 pounds per saw per second) the processing rate of the thinner saws (0.0115 pounds per saw per second). Net ginning energy of the 0.045-inch gin saws was 12.02 W-h per pound compared to 8.94 W-h per pound for the 0.036-inch saws, or about 34% more energy. Results were consistent for cottons from all three regions. Thicker saws are less likely to break under harsh conditions at the ends of the gin stand and are still recommend for use there, but there appears to be no advantage with regard to processing rate or energy use to installing thicker saws across the full width of the gin stand if rib spacing remains unchanged.