Consultation on hydraulic turbine and lean liquid pump solutions for hydraulic recovery in ammonia synthesis decarburization?
Thread Content
As the title suggests, the hydraulic turbine is used for the recovery of high-pressure rich liquid energy in the ammonia synthesis decarburization process, thereby driving the operation of the lean liquid pump. After checking some information, it seems that the following types are currently in use in China: 1. Turbine + overrunning clutch + motor + pump; 2. Turbine + coupling + pump. Solution 1 appears to be more widely used, but the overrunning clutch has a higher failure rate. Solution 2 requires higher technical standards but is more stable. According to the information available, Sichuan Meifeng uses this approach for its 200,000-ton synthetic ammonia production facility, with a power recovery rate of 370 kW. Both the turbine and the pump are products from Niigata Worthington in Japan. The website of Lanzhou Xiyu Pump Industry also lists such products, but no examples of their use in China have been found. I would appreciate some advice: for higher-power energy recovery, if the operating conditions are relatively stable, which approach is better? Additionally, for example, if the recovered power is 1000 kW, how much would each of the two solutions cost approximately? Does the coupling in Option 2 also have a clutch function to prevent high speeds? What form is that type of coupling usually adopted? Can a diaphragm type be used? What’s the general price range? Thank you!
This post was last edited by Wind0’s Voice on August 15, 2011, at 07:08. The first and second scenarios have certain limitations in terms of applicability. For hydraulic turbines, if the available energy on site is exactly sufficient to drive a single pump, then the second scenario represents the most reasonable application method. This has little to do with the actual power level; what matters is whether there is a proper match between them. However, as far as I know, there are hardly any large-scale equipment that perfectly fits this criterion; generally, such equipment with suitable specifications can be found only for power levels below 500 kW. It’s quite difficult to find such a matching setup on site. Sometimes, to meet the requirements, the on-site pipeline layout has to be very complex. At the same time, while it is true that the first scenario makes the clutch more prone to problems, there is a misconception in this regard: it’s not so much that the clutch has serious issues, but rather that there are problems with its use and selection. There is a lot of skill involved in selecting clutches; moreover, an improper selection of hydraulic turbines on-site is also a major factor that leads to clutch damage. Firstly, a hydraulic turbine is a device for releasing energy; generally, a large amount of gas is released as pressure decreases, especially with carbon-removal and desulfurization media. Choosing the wrong ones can cause vibrations that can directly damage the clutch. I believe many users already have valuable experience in using them. Therefore, choosing between the two is crucial. Furthermore, it is necessary to determine whether the pumps and turbines are devices that must operate continuously over the long term (for some users, such devices are essentially just for show; in such cases, it is advisable not to waste money on them). If these are devices that cannot be stopped at the site, then the use of clutches is necessary, although this will require the investor to spend more money. I have also set up the first type of setup without a clutch; to be honest, I don’t think it’s very good – driving control and tuning are both extremely complicated, and any problem in one of these aspects can lead to serious consequences. The foreigners insist on having it done according to their methods, so there’s nothing I can do. Incidentally, in the second case, a clutch is not necessary; a coupling is sufficient. With this type of connection, it is only necessary to monitor the speed. In the past, mechanical speed protection devices were commonly used, but such devices have been phased out due to cost considerations, as electronic technology has developed more rapidly and offers greater precision, making it easier to implement overload protection through sequential control. When selecting a 1000kw recovery turbine, many detailed considerations must be taken into account; it’s not something that can simply be connected and then work properly. As for the amount of investment required, it depends on what the medium being transported is; otherwise, it’s impossible to calculate it. Additionally, the annual benefits are calculated based on 8,000 hours of operation, which amounts to 8,000*1,000 = 8,000,000 kW/h. At a cost of 1 yuan per unit of electricity, that would equal 8 million yuan. If imported equipment is used, it will take a little over a year to recoup the costs, while domestic-made equipment should allow for cost recovery in around 8 months. Given the domestic technical level, it is basically possible to manufacture energy recovery turbines for various existing devices. It’s a pity, however, that the tendency to admire foreign technologies has not been eliminated! What’s even more detestable is the fear of taking responsibility; they’re willing to spend tens of millions just to import it. If it’s broken after being imported, they won’t be held responsible! Funny logic! Also, the poster’s understanding of certain aspects could be further explored.
LS has done quite a lot of research on hydraulic turbines; is there any relevant material that can be shared?~