With a constant volume for pressure vessels, does choosing a vessel with a smaller diameter save on costs? Seeking advice from experts.
Thread Content
As the title suggests, let’s all share our thoughts.
Not necessarily; it depends on the situation. For medium and low-pressure vessels, no savings are achieved. Theoretically, the wall thickness of a pressure vessel is proportional to its diameter. When the volume remains constant, the height of the vessel is inversely proportional to the square of its diameter. Reducing the diameter of the pressure vessel causes its wall thickness to decrease proportionally, while the height increases in inverse proportion to the square of the diameter. The weight of the vessel’s cylinder remains unchanged; this applies to medium and low-pressure vessels with elliptical end caps. For high-pressure containers, this leads to cost savings, because: 1. A smaller diameter helps to address high-pressure sealing issues ； 2. Flat lids are commonly used at both ends of high-pressure vessels, and the weight of such lids is proportional to the cube of their diameter. Increasing the diameter of the lid results in a significant increase in its weight. Moreover, the materials used for extremely large and heavy lids are usually forged as a single piece, which makes them expensive, and their availability is limited by the need for large-scale forging equipment.
Regarding the design of containers, there is generally an unwritten rule regarding the length-to-diameter ratio; a specific value is established for this ratio. When considering the length-to-diameter ratio, two factors need to be taken into account: practicality and ease of manufacture.
When pressure and volume are constant, the design of the container’s cylinder can employ optimization methods. If it is the best solution, it can indeed save a considerable amount of money.
Some savings should be possible; the end caps at both ends of the container are different, and those that are larger cost more. It’s just my opinion; I’m not sure if it’s correct
Not necessarily; usually, the optimal length and diameter can be determined through calculation, while also taking aesthetic appearance into account.
What was said on the second floor is very good. Every design involves optimization, and the requirements of the manufacturing process must be taken into account; cost is secondary, and it doesn’t make much sense to discuss it in isolation.
We should save some costs; even if the cylinder length is increased, the flanges and end caps can be made smaller, and the wall thickness can also be reduced