Why are odd diameters such as 1100, 1300, and 1500 not recommended for shell-and-tube heat exchangers with a diameter of over 1000 mm?
Thread Content
As the title suggests, is there any problem with the choice for manufacturing? Thank you
It is possible to use them if one insists, but the book on Sinopec’s formats and parameters does not recommend using such diameters; it’s not clear why
Not only heat exchangers, but pressure vessels are the same. My understanding is that since the end caps in the past were all molded, it is recommended to choose from the commonly used series. The diameter of the equipment abroad is arbitrary, and the head is spun. There are no problems in the domestic market now either; you can choose whatever size you want.
It was previously limited by the head mold, but now there are no issues. We have designed various types of heat exchangers with diameters of 1100, 1300, 1500, 1700, 1900, and 2100
The standard specifications for commonly used equipment flanges, supports, and end caps all include the dimensions mentioned by the original poster, so it shouldn’t be a problem. There is a standard called “nominal diameter of pressure vessels,” which provides recommended sizes that can be used as a reference.
Sure, we have produced heat exchangers with similar diameters