Energy-saving renovation of compressors

Hehe, energy-saving. Apart from motor frequency conversion, there isn’t much that can be relied on. For equipment that operates continuously and stably, it’s unlikely to achieve any energy savings. In the end, the result is either being misled or going through a lot of hassle for no real benefit. It’s not advisable to install a variable-frequency motor on equipment that is already stable, unless the process involves varying loads during production; in that case, it’s acceptable.

This post was last edited by sdwfsgyykai on 2019-10-22 08:23. Do turbine-driven compressors have energy-saving rotors? Either the turbine or the compressor can be of an energy-saving type – how much room is there for improvement in terms of energy savings?

This post was last edited by symc on 2019-10-19 at 14:18. You simply don’t have enough understanding.

If you merely focus on highlighting your energy-saving advantages in terms of optimizing individual rotors or whatnot, to be honest with you, it’s completely useless. All true energy savings always start with the system as a whole; looking at a single device in isolation or expecting optimization of one component to achieve so-called energy savings is a sign of insufficient technical expertise.

Replacing water ring vacuum pumps with turbines is a successful example of energy conservation; it can reduce energy consumption in a paper production line by about 10–30%. So, just how much is that? A larger paper machine requires about over 1 megawatt-hour of electricity to power the vacuum pumps it uses. So, why is it energy-efficient to use turbines instead of water rings? Simply put, water ring vacuum pumps have low efficiency... But that’s just a simplistic explanation. To actually implement this energy-saving measure, one must consider the entire process flow as well. Therefore, when you start viewing energy conservation in isolation, it actually shows that you simply don’t understand what energy conservation is all about. The same goes for power plants: replacing seals saves energy, flow optimization also saves energy, and modifying the non-condensable gas extraction system likewise leads to energy savings. These are indeed energy-saving measures; however, each of them involves numerous aspects... Whether or not energy savings can be achieved depends on how well you understand the entire system—from the turbine, to its drive mechanisms, to all the conditions related to each pump, as well as the user’s processes.

Simply stating that turbine drives save energy compared to electric motors reflects a lack of deep understanding of the technical system.

For older devices, you can compare their energy consumption with that of newer devices of the same type. If the difference is significant, it’s necessary to consider whether to phase out and replace the equipment. If it’s a new type of equipment, and the manufacturers of similar products have managed to meet the required standards, it’s advisable not to try to make changes, as the manufacturers of the equipment in question have already achieved those standards. They are manufacturers specializing in equipment design and production; one could say they’re absolute experts in the field. Equipment energy efficiency has now become the biggest selling point for gaining market share. Would they possibly hold back on this? Leave it for you to improve? ? ? I don’t believe it. Just from this question you asked, it’s clear that you’re not an expert when it comes to equipment. My advice is to refrain from doing anything; it’s best to stick to what you can do. With all due respect. Here, I’d also like to mention some corporate parasites who act disloyally—they rely on outside collaborators to take things out of context within the production process and promote so-called energy-saving equipment. There are many such incidents; be cautious and take precautions. Work in this area requires market research and consultation with manufacturers. Following trends blindly can lead to serious problems; with all due respect.

Approach problems in a systematic manner, rather than analyzing them in a one-sided way. Energy conservation is beneficial for individual devices, but it is not necessarily good for the entire system! Regarding all these so-called \"four new things,\" we need to keep a sharp eye and use our brains; many of them are nothing but old things repackaged in new forms.

It is impractical to modify the rotor; energy-saving upgrades for the unit should be carried out by changing the control method

We have now carried out energy-saving upgrades to the ammonia compressor; as a result, the speed of the unit has decreased and the energy consumption of the turbine has been reduced, resulting in significant energy savings