Equipment nameplate

The quality isn’t good, right? Stainless steel is generally used

It’s probably due to painting; if the requirements and specifications for production are specified during the equipment bidding process, problems like this won’t occur

Quality issues with nameplates are quite normal. . .

Export the equipment and fabricate nameplates according to the drawings: including material, dimensions, and details. It was a nameplate from 2015 that was used for adhesion tests, and there was no issue of peeling or detachment.

The nameplate is for use in the Middle East; is there anything similar?

Equipment nameplates are generally made of stainless steel or aluminum; in some cases, the nameplate is painted or covered with a film； Is the peeling and flaking due to the paint coming off or the film? Nameplates generally cannot be exposed to high temperatures; at such high temperatures, the topcoat or film on them may peel off

The 8D report is shown to the customer. The main contents are as follows: 1 Re-review of manufacturing quality: 1.1 Inspection and analysis: TT currently has labels from 2015 left; they are in good condition. Moreover, the adhesion test conducted yesterday also showed good quality results. 1.2 Conclusion: It is peeling of the nameplate, not a manufacturing issue. The true cause of the risk requires further analysis by the relevant parties; see FMEA. 2 FMEA of factors related to label peeling: Based on the current location of the label, the following risks are analyzed: 2.1 Does the temperature exceed 93 degrees? (This includes the designed cooling capacity, as well as whether there was any misoperation on site – failure to activate WC leading to overheating). 2.2 Salt spray corrosion? And other reasons. 3 Improvement methods--Low-risk nameplate design: 3.1 Choose another nameplate design that uses less paint, thereby reducing the risk of peeling in those areas ； 3.2 Moving the nameplate from the HEATER to the column has two advantages: it prevents peeling caused by saltwater accumulation, and it avoids the impact of overheating of the heat exchanger. (From the diagram, it should be PLAN53B; this is a complete possibility.)