HCBBS Forum (English)
Submit Chemical Projects / Find Solutions
Amplify Your Requirements on a Broader Chemical Platform *Engineering · Technology · Equipment · Solutions*
Submit Request

Analysis of water pressure leakage in high-pressure plate heat exchangers

2015-10-27View Original

Thread Content

Recently, I was testing a 5-flow plate heat exchanger with a capacity of 30 bar for a DN300 system by applying static pressure to the equipment alone; this unit consists of around 500 plates. But after 4 attempts at pressure testing, it still didn’t pass. The details are as follows: 1. When the test pressure was applied, water dripped from one spot; upon disassembly, it was found that the glue applied under the rubber strip was a bit thick. 2. After removing the rubber strip and replacing it, when the pressure reached 20, one of the rubber strips suddenly popped out of its position, causing severe water leakage. 3. The rubber strip was checked and found to be fine; it was reinstalled with an additional 10 mm of compression. At a pressure of 30, there was no leakage, and after holding the pressure for two minutes, yet another rubber strip popped out of its position. 4. The rubber strip was checked again and found to be okay; the position of the plate was changed along with the rubber strip, but at a pressure of 28, another rubber strip popped out of its position. The equipment was inspected, and the plates and rubber strips seemed to be fine; the fixing plates and movable plates were 110 mm thick with no signs of deformation. What could be the reasons for such sudden heavy leakage? Additionally, when performing strength calculations, the use of a screw that is one size smaller resulted in insufficient strength. I wonder if it has anything to do with this? Please give me some advice! Why did the rubber strip suddenly pop out?
Reply #22015-10-28
Is the number of plates too large, and is the gasket groove design reasonable? Moreover, even if it is possible to achieve compression at 30 kilograms, its practicality remains to be proven
Reply #32015-10-28
Two suggestions: 1. There are too many plates; it is recommended to use plates of a larger size to increase the heat exchange area per plate, thereby reducing the total number of plates to less than 350. 2. The thickness of the fixed baffle and the movable baffle is insufficient. Personally, I think it’s a matter of the sales staff choosing the right model; the equipment itself should be fine!
Reply #42015-10-29
Thank you for your suggestion. The key issue is that the customer is already pressing for delivery, and there’s no time to change the plan anymore.
Reply #52015-10-29
There are indeed quite a few panels, and the quality of the panels and gaskets should be fine. The plate thickness is calculated, and it does not deform under compression.
Reply #62015-11-04
Personal opinion: 1. The thickness of the pressing plate is too thin. 2. There are too few threaded tie rods.
Reply #72015-11-17
A screw one size larger was installed, and the pressure test was successful. Thank you everyone.

Submit a Project

**Looking for Chemical Technology, Equipment & Solutions?** No Registration Required Broader Platform Exposure | Global Chemical Service Provider Connections

Submit Request — Free Consultation

Disclaimer

This is an automated machine translation of the original thread. Some technical terms may have inaccuracies; the original text shall prevail. Click "View Original" at the top right to access the source page, which supports IP-based automatic real-time language translation. Please watch out for contact details and sales inducements to prevent fraud. All content and translations are for reference only, representing solely the poster's personal views. For enquiries, email service@hcbbs.com.