FEATURE Machine building


Beckhoff servo drive systems


A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO MATCHING YOUR DRIVE AND MACHINE


   


T


he instinct to over-specify servo drive technology is understandable, but it carries hidden costs, which is why it’s important to choose the


right size from the start. When a single vendor  to start at the top and work down only if the  real costs, and they’re not always visible at the point of selection.


For example, we often see cabinet space consumed by drives running at a fraction of their rated current and thermal management requirements that wouldn’t exist with a lighter-duty solution, not to mention the additional commissioning complexity that doesn’t add useful performance.  which servo drive to use, but whether a servo drive is the right answer at all. If it is, then ask which tier of performance the application genuinely requires. There are three questions that will narrow down the drive tier most suitable for each axis. Firstly, does this axis require closed-loop feedback? If speed regulation under a variable load isn’t critical and position accuracy isn’t required, a variable frequency drive (VFD) is   per axis.


Secondly, what are the real dynamic


 speed with gentle acceleration for 95 per cent of its cycle doesn’t need the same drive as one synchronising with four others at high throughput. Peak torque requirements and


12 April 2026 | Automation


continuous RMS (root mean square) torque are both important, but it’s the ratio between them and how often the peak is actually reached that determines the appropriate drive tier. Finally, what does the control architecture


require? The communication protocol, cycle time requirements and whether the drive needs to close its own position loop or receive     allowing higher-performance drives to be introduced later without requiring a complete redesign of the motion system.


These questions tend to sort axes into three


groups, and a well-designed drive portfolio gives each group a natural home. Consider a packaging line with eight axes. Two axes are the primary pick-and-place arms, which are high-speed, tightly synchronised and running  times. Two more axes are infeed and outfeed conveyors that simply need to run at a set speed. The remaining four axes are positioning axes like labellers, pushers, perhaps a reject gate, that need repeatability but aren’t dynamically demanding.


Specifying all eight axes identically would be simple but provide unnecessary capacity.  reduce cost, especially for a machine built at volume.


For the conveyor axes, where there’s not


  


synchronous, asynchronous and reluctance motors without a feedback system, handles   rest of the machine.


For the four positioning axes, the traditional choice was essentially between a full-spec servo drive and something less capable. Now, there’s a third option that sits between the VFD and the premium servo,  The economy servo system, pairing the   with a compact footprint, integrated 24 V generation (eliminating an external power supply), and One Cable Technology that reduces cabling to a single connection per axis.


For the two high-performance arms, mid- to-high performance servo drives like the  now the engineer can justify them, because they haven’t spent the budget getting there. Where a central control cabinet isn’t practical, distributed drive systems like the  drive directly into the motor, eliminating the need for drive hardware in the cabinet altogether.


 actually needed, understand the real duty cycle rather than the theoretical peak and  On a typical machine build, that process will identify axes that don’t need a servo, axes where an economy servo is the right answer and axes where the full-performance range    can start with a lower-tier drive and upgrade later without redesigning the entire control architecture. The result is a machine that costs less to build and leaves room, both in the cabinet and in the budget, for the engineering challenges that actually demand high- performance drive technology.


  automationmagazine.co.uk


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40