convert auto bay to tunnel?

[Wash-A-Roo]

Has anyone turned a automatic bay into a small tunnel? Would it be worth it? Whats the shortest tunnel made? Why not get a soft touch automatic....would'nt it wash as fast? 3-4 minutes a wash?

 

[RykoPro]

Has anyone turned a automatic bay into a small tunnel? Would it be worth it? Whats the shortest tunnel made? Why not get a soft touch automatic....would'nt it wash as fast? 3-4 minutes a wash?

Most tunnels are modular so the "shortest tunnel made" is subjective and there are SO MANY variables. I would not try it with less than 60' of building because of needed drip space and loading area. Short tunnels will benefit by putting the coinbox and some conveyor sections outside the building for loading. In the winter months, Northern areas that encounter freezing, must pay constant attention to the sections of conveyor placed outside of the building. Front wheel pull should also be utilized to save conveyor length. Tunnels are faster than rollovers but they are only as fast as the loading. We have many non attended tunnels and loading time depends on the customer. Signage helps with loading time, but it is not the cure all; there is always someone who does not get it. A short tunnel needs to at least have: rocker panel brushes, wrap-a-round brushes, top brush (or at the very least a miter curtain) and of course rinse/wax arches and an EFFICIENT dryer. The quality of each chemical is even more important with a short tunnel. The new surface sealants will help with drip space if applied properly. Considering the cost to tear out the floor and the completion of all the concrete work, I would stick with a good washing rollover rather than a marginal wash quality short tunnel.

This is a nicely operating 85', front wheel pull, unattended tunnel with all of the track (including the correlator) inside the doors.

 

[Chiefs]

I have to disagree slightly with Rykopro, he says "tunnels are fatser than rollovers". While true that conveyor can easily wash (per hour) 4-6 times the number a rollover can wash, the track speed of in-bay automatics is 4-5 times faster. Its the inability to wash more than one car at a time and number of passes that per wash cycle that it must make that kills the volume of in-bay automatics.

The difference is that while one vehcile is going throught say the dryer, another would be in the wash process and a third would be being prepped and loaded onto the conveyor. In short, you're washing more than one car at a time in a tunnel. Also, if you compare the track speed of a in-bay to that of a tunnel you will find that out of necessity (i.e hourly wash volume), the feet per second of an in-bay to be anywhere from 3-4 times faster than ones conveyor speed. Translated into practical terms, every piece of equipment in a tunnel spends far more time cleaning, rinsing and drying vehicles than does an in-bay.

As far unattended tunnels are concerned, they are for the birds. Hell, we've been exterior only for 10 years now and there is no way on God's green earth that we could wash 100-120 cars per hour with customer loading themselves onto the conveyor. next, what happens when soemone puts their foot on the brakes, jumps rollers and causes a multiple vehicle pile-up or worse yet jumps the conveyor entirely? While fine to philosophise about "If a tree falls in the woods and no one is there does it make a sound?" Its another thing to try and run your car wash that way. I know there are supposed success stories with this format but the inherent dangers of a tunnel car wash combined with the utter stupidity of many motorists.

Lastly and I don't mean to put too fine a point on this, but the kind of quality wash put out by most in-bay automatics doesn't hold a candle to the quality that is expected, demanded and delivered by a conveyorized wash. Whether its washing, rinsing or drying, no in-bay can contend with the quality of a tunnel.

 

[Earl Weiss]

I think the term "unattended tunnel" is used somewhat loosely. The operations can and do work without humans, but their is usualy someone around to troubleshoot issues. It's just that this person has duties other than simply "attending" the tunnel.

 

[smokun]

SAFETVEYR Inbay Express Helps

The SAFETVEYR INBAY EXPRESS combines a moving-floor flat-belt conveyor with an inbay operation, yielding a 40% increase in throughput.

It utilizes a combination of fixed arches and a rollover for an accelerated yet thorough wash & dry, and starts the customer queue just outside the inbay. Vehicles are conveyed through a fixed soaper arch at the doorway, thus eliminating a rollover step.

By having the vehicle under the control of a conveyor, time-wasting customer delays and hesitations are eliminated. No guide rails or cradles. Instead, the vehicle simply glides through, stops for a few cycles, and continues on through a fixed air dryer. The concept seems great.

 

[Greg Pack]

Sonny's has started their "extreme" line of products but I don't think any fit in a typical IBA footprint- more like 55'. I have heard rumors that one manufacturer is working on a tunnel that would fit in about 40 feet and it may be ready for display at the upcoming show .

IMO, Whether a tunnel would make more sense or not totally depends on your volume you are dealing with. If you have throughput issues with two autos, then maybe you are a good candidate for a tunnel. Personally I would prefer dual IBAs up until about 4000 cars per month. But the belt conveyor may eventually change that to where a short conveyor with a single set of wraps and a top brush running at 40-50cph would do a great job of cleaning without attending.

 

[robert roman]

1) I have seen several. 16?w by 50?l bldg w/IBA converted into a drive-thru, touch-less and a 16?w by 35?l bldg w/IBA (inverted L) converted by installing a 60? rear-wheel push conveyor.

2) Worth it is when the benefit of something is greater than its cost. This can only be determined on a case-by-case basis. What works for someone else many not make sense in your circumstance.

3) The shortest is the drive-thru, wash-bay (tunnel) that is used by some auto dealers. The bldgs for these systems are 25?l to 30?l.

4) Throughput is a function of the layout pattern. Consequently, you can end up with apple to orange comparisons when considering ?tunnel? versus in-bay wash-bay.

IBA use a fixed-position layout that keeps the product (vehicle) in one position because of its bulk and weight and materials and energy are brought to it. This pattern allows for a smaller footprint by eliminating space consuming handling equipment like a conveyor. Consequently, in-bay equipment must go around and/or back and forth over a vehicle. This takes time which varies and is affected by service recipe, delivery system and drying system. Consider a 20? area with POS and a 30? long bldg with a soft-cloth in-bay with on-board dryer that takes 4 min to cycle through soap, wash, wax/rinse and dry. Add in 30 sec for the sales transaction, 30 sec to enter and exit the bay and you have a total time of 5 min. Since the acceptance rate of carwash is the time on the machine and total time to complete one car, this wash would be able to produce about 12 cph.

Conversely, tunnel wash-bays use a product pattern where the production components are arranged according to the steps required to clean a vehicle. This pattern is normally used in continuous production systems where the number of products is small. In theory, the throughput of a conveyor wash is 10 cph for every 10' length. As such, a 55? conveyor would have a service rate of 55 cars per hour. Even if we handicap this to say, a realistic rate of 36 cars per hour, this would still be 3 times more volume as could be achieved with the in-bay example.

Given the difference in the characteristics of an in-bay and conveyor wash, a fair and meaningful comparison would need to be based on wash-bay buildings of similar length.

Robert Roman
www.carwashplan.com

 

[RykoPro]

I was refering to more cars per hour rather than actual track speed. When I refer to unattended tunnels I am refering to the same situation as most of our rollovers: one or two cashiers operating a C-store/gas station with more often then not, no line of site to the car wash. The only indication of a problem would be either a customer walk in complaint, a call from the coin box through an intercom or a code generated by the PLC and sent to an inside controller (the CAW4). This is about as unattended as it gets without actually having no one on site. Sometimes we will get calls without anyone on site even looking at the wash. I agree, someone at the coinbox sending people through will speed things up, but the washes we service do surprising well without much help from anyone. Instruction signs and the CMD or "custom message display" sign (an interactive programable LED instruction display) seem to help most people through the loading process. Most repeat customers do not have any problems loading themselves in a timely manner. Our largest customer always goes with the unattended tunnel if building new. Of their 20 or so sites, one unattended tunnel outsells all of their other 4unattended tunnels and rollover sites by quite a margin.

CAW4 controller:

Stainless instruction sign:

[/IMG]

 

[Ben's Car Wash]

Sonny's does have a small set up that would fit inplace of a IBA or slighly larger than an IBA more like a FLEET WASH SYSTEM...the FLEET-O-MATIC line can be adapted to wash 40-60 CPH with a 50-60' length with a surface conveyor and a auto pay station. The price would be at the same of a high end rollover while having 3-5X the potential for volume without prepping to speed up the IBA as some have done to get 40 CPH out of an IBA.

Robert Roman has thought a lot about "mini tunnels" but has not "disclosed" to much about it. If you were serously looking at it... I'd spend time talking to him.

 

[Chiefs]

Steve,

Are they using the rollover for a high pressure application? Does the vehicle stop moving in the tunnel and then the rollover washes the car and then it proceeds? Lastly how can this conveyor increase my throughput from 120 to 170 cars per hour?

 

[Earl Weiss]

Bill,

I made this same mistake (I think) when I first read the post thinking it related to increasing conveyor thru put. I then read it again and now think it relates to an increase in thru put over an IBA. Realisticaly if an IBA can thru put 12-15 CPH this results in 17-21 CPH.

It would be nice if we could increase our tunnel throughput 40% and maintain quality. I think if i did that I could guarnatee to get every car wet

 

[smokun]

Increased InBay Production

Earl has it right, whereby the increase is an improvement over the inbay throughput essentially by upgrading an inbay process into a hybrid roll-over/conveyorized system.

Different inbay units take varying times to cycle a vehicle, so some units will do better than others. Likewise, some manufacturers are developing different improvements to augment their existing equipment by using fixed arches for applying soap, rinsing, applying premium products and drying the vehicle.

The biggest complaint that inhibits rollover units from increasing their production (given their set cycle times) is the elimination of time wasted due to customer hesitation, slow positioning, and lackluster exiting. Placing the entire process on a conveyor takes the control of movement out of the customers' hands (and foot) and xreates a process queue just outside the inbay.

Various equipment manufacturers are applying their own twists that further improve both time and performance. The elimination of guide rails and correlators removes the risk of wheel and tire damage because the moving-floor conveyor is a flat-belt.

 

[Wash-A-Roo]

Tons of great information....thanks.....another ?????? By placing the dryers out far enough that a car can be dried off while another is washing in a soft touch or touchless how much time could be made up by doing this? How much faster could the wash be than having the dryers close(like my wash is now!)?
OH yea...If we could all get together and develop the ultimate carwash....what would we call it?

 

[DavidM]

The biggest complaint that inhibits rollover units from increasing their production (given their set cycle times) is the elimination of time wasted due to customer hesitation, slow positioning, and lackluster exiting. Placing the entire process on a conveyor takes the control of movement out of the customers' hands (and foot) and xreates a process queue just outside the inbay.

I heard this same information from the SafeTveyr announcement. What type of inbays are you referring to? Our customers are not unusually smart or talented and yet they do not seem to have this difficulty entering and exiting. We could pick up one, maybe 2 cph, if every customer currently wasted 15 seconds entering and 15 seconds leaving the automatic. I can tell you they don't waste nearly that much time. We do have two automatics with no rails, floorplates, treadles, etc. Our third type of automatic has rails but customers still do not take an excessive amount of time to enter and exit.
Bottom line is that a conveyor is far too expensive if the improvements are all about customer load and unload time.

The key to this system being successful is going to be proving that it will have advantages over both an inbay and a short tunnel, at least for certain situations.

David

 

[smokun]

Hybrid Conveyorized Inbay Is Definitely Outside-The-Box

david...

I agree that simply enhancing the loading & exiting of an inbay would offer a weak case for ROI. However, by taking control of the vehicle prior to entering the bay, a conveyorized system accelerates the process by incorporating various fixed arches that allow the manufacturer to reconfigure the process cycles.

Apparently, time-in-motion projections have indicated a considerable savings in processing, and in the inbay paradigm... time is money. Obviously it isn't an application that will make sense to many existing low-volume locations unless they lose considerable business during peak times resulting in costly turn-aways. But for some, this may offer an intelligent alternative to purchasing a second or third inbay to capture more volume. And if you don't have the room for expansion, this concept may be your best option. I concur that numbers must be crunched to ensure the proper ROI.

 

[rph9168]

The problem here is not only throughput. If designed properly you would probably need at least 55 - 60' (5-10+' for Presoak arch; 35' for IBA; 10+' for dryer). You could probably fit a standard short tunnel in almost the same footprint, increase throughput and probably do it for less money. The belted conveyor would only make sense for the IBA setup since the standard conveyor equipment requires continuous flow. It might also better allow for touch free washing since dwell times could be better controlled by a belt in that short of an area.

There is definitely merit to increase volume potential in an IBA or to shorten the length needed to wash a vehicle. I am not sure this is the way to go at this time. It needs more study and some real field testing for it to advance beyond the concept/experimental stage.

 

[smokun]

Not Necessarily The Case

The problem here is not only throughput. If designed properly you would probably need at least 55 - 60' (5-10+' for Presoak arch; 35' for IBA; 10+' for dryer). You could probably fit a standard short tunnel in almost the same footprint, increase throughput and probably do it for less money. The belted conveyor would only make sense for the IBA setup since the standard conveyor equipment requires continuous flow. It might also better allow for touch free washing since dwell times could be better controlled by a belt in that short of an area.

There is definitely merit to increase volume potential in an IBA or to shorten the length needed to wash a vehicle. I am not sure this is the way to go at this time. It needs more study and some real field testing for it to advance beyond the concept/experimental stage.

You're presupposing the case, but maybe you're frame of reference is a bit tilted.

Many feel that an inbay automatic can provide a better wash than a short tunnel, especially if the short tunnel has an operator who throttles the conveyor speed when things get busy. And the prevailing thought on self-serve (no attendant) washing aided by automated cash controls, inbays offer less potential trouble. Yes, anything mechanical brings with it the associated "trouble" but the washing cycles have been refined to a superior level of performance... as long as the proper chemicals are utilized (as is also the case in a tunnel).

If you have a blank piece of paper, optimum planning will benefit every type of wash. But if you're handcuffed by an existing footprint... or the limited availability of land, you'll find that each type of washing has its place in the economy. Fewer and fewer really big carwashes are being built... and some feel the trend is for smaller, shorter, lower volume formats are easier to achieve... and sustain acceptable profitability.

As for the flat-belt conveyor, it will probably replace the conventional steel guide rail & rollers eventually... and tunnel washes will benefit from the reduced risks. Granted, it won't happen overnight, but it is inevitable. IMO, once the consumer experiences the difference, they will provide the necessary motivation for the industry to upgrade.

 

[JMMUSTANG]

The thing that bothers me about the flat belt conveyor is it seems to be similiar to the people conveyors at airports.
My problem is that in my travels I see quite a few not working in airports.
These are only carrying people and they seem to be having problems.
What happens to them when their carrying cars over the long run?

 

[Wash-A-Roo]

What should the traffic count be to even justify a small tunnel?