Guidance: With the same equipment and the same workers, why can you only manufacture one type of heat exchanger?

Because they want to be together for the whole time! ;P

It’s likely that the design of heat exchangers and the related technical calculations were done by people who aren’t good at them or don’t possess the necessary skills. They merely came into contact with certain types of heat exchangers in specific industries, saw potential in them, and then started working on just those types of heat exchangers based on the available blueprints. By doing this, the heat exchangers produced will definitely be problem-free, as extensive production experience and facts have already proven this. As for new types of heat exchangers, we are not currently able to deal with them; I think that once the manufacturers reach a certain scale, they will pay attention to this aspect. Or they will simply get the blueprints from the company and build according to them. As for the design, it’s not necessary; it’s just a trade-in. The design of the new equipment can be left to design institutes or others.

It’s just a desire for quick success and instant benefits; the initial investment in developing new products is quite high.

It’s also good to excel at something by focusing on details; having too many technical resources without the right expertise will only lead to failures

This post was last edited by letitbe on 2018-2-9 at 08:49. 1. Knowing how to perform process calculations does not equate to being able to carry out engineering design; there are many universities that teach process calculation, but few that can actually do proper process design – in fact, such institutions often lack even the necessary qualifications. It’s also a matter of process calculation – Tiantai University is indeed excellent at designing tower internals, but the process conditions for the ordinary heat exchangers they submit have many issues. Has Tian Da been rejected? 2. There are many companies that can design and manufacture gas-liquid and liquid-liquid heat exchangers, but not high-temperature shell-and-tube waste heat boilers, due to challenges related to the design of flexible gaskets and the use of materials capable of withstanding high temperatures. On the other hand, companies that are capable of designing and manufacturing high-pressure heat exchangers with diaphragm seals or threaded lock-seal mechanisms also lack the ability to design and manufacture high-pressure vessels using multi-layer plate structures – do they simply not have the necessary capabilities? 3. API and Alfalaval only handle plate exchangers; they don’t even know how to work with shell-and-tube exchangers, let alone shell-and-tube waste heat boilers ； Manufacturers of medium and low-pressure filters, such as EATON, which is one of the Fortune 500 companies, also produce pressure-bearing equipment; they are not capable of designing and manufacturing high-pressure vessels ； These huge dome-shaped storage tanks with a capacity of over 100,000 cubic meters for LNG – such high-end storage facilities – are not capable of designing spherical tanks or gas holders; they are still just storage containers after all ； Are all these companies bad? 4. As for the development of chemical process packages, the well-known company that develops fibers is W.L.Gore & Associates, Inc., which created the famous Gore-TEX fabric used in jackets; INVISTA is responsible for the popular quick-drying Coolmax fabric, while DuPont developed Lycra, the famous fabric used in underwear. These companies are not involved in coal chemistry or pharmaceutical manufacturing ； And the Belgian researcher in coal chemistry (I can’t remember his name) doesn’t do pharmaceuticals or fiber synthesis. . . Did these companies go bankrupt? 5. Switch to another industry, such as companies that work with 3D games or Unity programming for 3D model creation; they can’t handle PLC programming using microcontrollers in the field of instrumentation and control. Are all these companies that deal with 3D model creation of poor quality? For another example, to date, the main PC-based systems have been DOS, Windows, Unix, and Linux. Only a few companies developed these systems using primitive machine language; they did not create the embedded languages used in smartphones and tablets, such as Android, iOS, Symbian, Windows Phone, and BlackBerry OS. And those companies that develop programming languages for embedded systems did not develop any PC systems either – are they all incompetent? 6. As for healthcare related to people’s well-being, should a neurosurgeon who performs operations not be allowed to practice acupuncture or use herbal medicines, just because they lack the appropriate qualifications? Don’t traditional Chinese medicine practitioners perform surgeries? Are they all sent to farms to work as veterinarians? Vets won’t treat pediatrics – are they all going to forced labor? 7. Initially, it was said to be in the chemical industry; many of the Class A qualifications held by central state-owned enterprises are comprehensive Class A qualifications that cover various sectors such as civil construction, bridges, water resources, airports, roads, and so on. But do they also include design work for hotels and office buildings? 8. As for the issue of the staff in chemical engineering design institutes, only a part of the entire equipment design team is capable of conducting analysis and design work; while other equipment design engineers, including those with senior titles, who are only qualified for Category A reviews, lack the necessary skills? 9. Returning to the aspect of engineering design: it’s not that a manufacturing plant is inferior just because it lacks such expertise. Yet why are there so many designs that, in an attempt to be novel and unique, create structures that go beyond conventional design standards? This forces reliance on analytical design methods, which increases the cost of equipment design and thus the overall cost of the project – all just to show off the sophistication of the engineering calculations and material selections used In summary, Industry 4.0 isn’t about having more capabilities to be considered impressive; in my opinion, a process design that relies on copying foreign technologies in larger enterprises or copying those of other enterprises in smaller ones is what constitutes low quality

Industrial 4.0 isn’t about having more capabilities to be considered impressive; in my opinion, a truly autonomous set of manufacturing processes cannot be developed, and process designs that involve copying foreign technologies or those of other companies are what truly indicate a low level of understanding I admire it!

Now, many manufacturing companies no longer focus on what they are capable of doing or how well they can do it; they simply think about how many projects they can take on, and then subcontract them out or have others replicate the work. Every company should strive to improve itself

This post was last edited by letitbe on 2018-2-27 at 11:27. I just can’t understand some of the illogical reasoning these days; I wrote this out of sheer frustration. The construction drawings for the equipment sector come from two sources: one is the data sheets prepared by the process engineering teams of patent holders/design firms/engineering companies, which are then submitted to the equipment design and construction teams at those design firms and engineering companies ； Another approach is for the process specialists from the patent holder/design institute/engineering company to prepare data sheets, which are then submitted to the manufacturing plant; the equipment specialists there design the construction drawings, after which the equipment specialists from the design institute or engineering company review the design documents prepared by the equipment manufacturer. The former and the so-called processing based on provided drawings correspond to the former category, while the latter and the so-called design management correspond to the latter category; for design institutes and engineering companies, the latter requires a shorter timeline and is simpler. Chemical processing equipment is divided into two main categories: custom-made equipment and standard equipment. For non-standard equipment such as shell-and-tube heat exchangers, can the process engineering department produce the equipment construction drawings directly without providing data sheets and condition diagrams? Does the design capability in the equipment field include process calculations? Without process calculations, is it because the design capabilities of the equipment team are insufficient? For standardized equipment such as plate-fin heat exchangers and plate heat exchangers, it is the equipment manufacturers who carry out the heat transfer calculations and selection processes. In my opinion, this is due to insufficient expertise in the process engineering field; given how highly regarded this field is, why should equipment manufacturers be tasked with performing heat transfer calculations and selection? The original process conditions set by the process engineering team were poor, resulting in low efficiency; as a consequence, the conditions improved inadequately, leading to overcapacity and severe pollution, which caused the decline of the industry. Then people blame the equipment engineering team – what kind of logic is that? If that’s the case, then what’s the need for a process engineering team at all!

There are still many people expressing their thoughts on the 8th floor! !

It’s all due to the imbalance between effort put in and the rewards received. For any task, there are surely people who can do it; the reason they don’t do it is simply that the pay is too low! A company that can’t find people to do the work might not be offering high enough salaries!