Energy-saving renovation of fans
Thread Content
I haven’t posted for a while; just chatting casually with friends. Previously, I helped a friend who worked in the field of water pump energy efficiency to examine a fan. You don’t realize the issue until you see it – it was quite shocking:D The installed power of the fan on site was 3600 kilowatts, and its actual shaft power was also close to 3600 kilowatts. After making the modifications suggested by my plan, the shaft power dropped to 2800 kilowatts. There is actually a potential for energy savings of 800 kWh in just one hour. So the question is, why is there such a large space? There are basically two points: 1. Too much margin is allowed in both design and selection. 2. The efficiency of the fan itself is very low. Regarding model selection, most domestic fan manufacturers just look at samples; many of them probably don’t know how to convert between operating conditions and standard conditions either, so don’t hold your breath. Regarding the efficiency of the fans themselves, there are several manufacturers in China that produce single-stage high-speed blowers, and their technology and products are of high quality. As for low-pressure fans (with a pressure rise of 30 kPa or less), they are truly disappointing; the truly skilled blower manufacturers are focusing on developing larger fans, and those factories that only know how to imitate others cannot make any substantial improvements. Some high-pressure fans that are commonly used in China, such as those with model numbers like 9-26, have forward-curved impellers; their performance is much worse compared to those with backward-curved impellers. Yet no manufacturer makes an effort to improve this situation. Although there are thousands of fan manufacturers in China, perhaps not even dozens of them possess the capability to design such fans. Speaking of energy-saving upgrades in China, it seems that for mechanical equipment, people are opting for frequency conversion upgrades – haha. There might be a savings of around 10 percent in energy consumption, and this is also due to the poor choice of model, with the operating conditions being too far away from the curve representing maximum efficiency. Perhaps it’s because the prices of high-voltage frequency converters in the domestic market are too low, that such poor-quality products can still be profitable; it’s really hard for me to understand. I watched a few on-site installations recently and found that there was huge room for energy-saving upgrades; a vacuum pump with a capacity of 350 kilowatts only required 200 kilowatts of installed power after the upgrade. I wonder whether the people who selected the equipment back then really didn’t understand or just pretended not to understand! Anyway, I don’t think he understands. Friends who are interested in this topic can leave a message to discuss it together.
I think what you said makes quite sense. However, in my opinion, when it comes to the site itself, low-cost energy-saving upgrades that can be achieved through improvements or changes to certain auxiliary facilities will surely be the preferred option. Major renovations present challenges for companies that already have production capabilities or are currently in production, as opposed to those that are still under construction or in the planning stage. These challenges include investment costs and the impact on production. Therefore, taking everything into account, it is necessary to choose options that require minimal investment and have little or no impact on production. It’s not that reformers lack a long-term vision – everyone wants to minimize costs and maximize benefits – but in the face of reality, one must be extremely cautious!
That makes sense; many companies, out of fear of risks, fail to take proactive steps for improvement even when they are aware of the problems. There are some new technologies related to equipment; I’ve seen energy-saving modifications that replace vacuum generators, and they can save up to 80% on energy consumption – it’s hard to believe when I hear about it.
Many modifications are easy in theory, but there are still some risks involved in carrying them out.
That makes sense; many companies, out of fear of risks, fail to take proactive steps for improvement even when they are aware of the problems. There are some new technologies related to equipment; I’ve seen energy-saving modifications that replace vacuum generators, and they can save up to 80% on energy consumption – it’s hard to believe when I hear about it. What is a substitute for a vacuum generator?
If it’s about fan renovation, people can actually pay attention to screw fans. At pressures above 50 kPa, energy consumption can be reduced by more than 30%. In China, it is currently mainly used in sewage treatment; those who are interested can get in touch with me~
This is a blower; the fans we usually refer to are of low pressure, below 30 KPA
I’m not just some expert who only talks the talk: lol
This post was last edited by hvlif@sohu.com on 2016-8-17 at 18:27
Are you from Atlas? 30% – Atlas likes to say: lol. Atlas’ single-stage blower has too low an air volume; its efficiency is roughly on par with that of a screw rotor blower