The absorption stabilization system wants to up-convert
Thread Content
For stable systems that take up-conversion into account, which devices are more cost-effective? Will it have an impact on the process? Now the company requires that systems with a capacity of over 22 kW be approved – what is the basis for this? Personally, I think it is related to investment and return rates; could everyone discuss this? Thank you!
I don’t think the up-conversion effect of the absorption stabilization system is very significant. Variable frequency is mainly used in situations where flow rate and head vary significantly; it is suitable for applying variable frequency to the reflux pumps in distillation systems. If it must be installed, I think an absorbent pump and a stabilizer overhead reflux pump would be more appropriate.
Agree with the opinion from the second floor. In addition, economic factors also need to be taken into consideration. Because up-conversion facilities cost money, and for small loads the amount of electricity saved is very limited, making it somewhat not worth it!
It is recommended not to use it; it’s not very functional
I have a different view: I believe that variable frequency conversion serves not only to save electricity, but also to reduce erosion and corrosion on equipment, valves, and pipelines, thereby extending the service life of these devices. It saves electricity and protects the equipment – why not do it? Our factory has installed frequency converters on all the spare pumps after making calculations!
I also think it would be best if your company provided it; a lower rotation speed is beneficial for the long-term operation of the pump. For our absorption process, except for the pumps in Absorption Tower 1 and 2 which do not use variable frequency drives, all the other pumps do
The up-converter not only saves electricity and energy, but also reduces the pressure at the pump outlet, thereby extending the service life of the pump.
An up-converter helps save power and reduce energy consumption; however, it is necessary to choose a pump whose load is less than 80% of the pump’s rated load. Considering investment, for our system we will install one pump in operation and one as a backup; only one pump will be used continuously, and it will be a variable-frequency pump, operating for 8 hours per month when not using variable frequency.
I believe that variable frequency conversion serves not only to save electricity, but also to reduce erosion and corrosion on equipment, valves, and pipelines, thereby extending the service life of these devices. It saves electricity and protects the equipment; in our factory, for most pumps that operate in a one-in-one-backup configuration, only one frequency converter is used. The backup pump was started on a scheduled basis to run for 4 hours; if no abnormalities were detected, the frequency converter continued to operate.
Very good judgment: the flow rate varies, and the valve opening is small. Choose one of the two – in this case, you’ll only make money and never lose anything.