Wenzhou Reliabo Culture & Technology Co., Ltd. , https://www.reliabogroup.com
Choose the best traps coup
In a seven-year monitoring and piloting of Trap performance at Royal Bank of the British Chemical Industry Industrial Estate in Huddersfield and Grangemouth (England), a first-class trap performance and fresh steam loss monitoring at two producer laboratories On the basis of the experiment and the experiment, Royal Chemical Industry Chemical Company finally modified the content of the trap selection in its "Engineering Design Guideline". The old selection criteria have a number of disadvantages, most notably the lack of mention of the type of hydrophobic device and the method of hydrophobicity. The chosen trap often does not match the actual load. In particular, thermodynamic disc traps, the foundations of the old selection criteria, were mistakenly considered as universal traps by people, especially shop floor personnel. Back in 1980, trawl performance monitoring was started in Grangemouth, England, as engineering maintainers complained about the short life span of steam-trap traps. Two years later, the same monitoring was done at the Huddersfield plant. In the monitoring, the trap was first investigated, to understand the type of existing traps, and check the selection of load. At the same time also conducted a related test. The initial result is astonishing. Tests performed on 415 traps in a shop showed that 19% of the traps had failed and 63% of the load sizing did not match. Inspection of 132 drafts of steam supervisors showed that 42% of traps worked. Inspection of the life of the trap also started in 1980 and has continued until now. Table 2-1 lists the average life span of various traps. To test the energy-saving benefits of various traps, fresh steam loss tests were carried out on the traps that are being used in the labs of both manufacturers. The test is carried out in the laboratory state, ie at 20 ° C, still air. The experiment did not detect the heat loss of the trap body. Condensate load in the test is 10-20 kg / hr (22-44 lb / hr) common. The test results are summarized in Table 2-2. The most interesting thing about these two tables is that they are the most versatile, most widely used thermodynamic disk traps, which have the lowest energy savings and are extremely short-lived compared to inverted bucket traps. In the heat less demanding situations, the use of thermostatics to replace the thermodynamic disc traps will improve energy efficiency, while ensuring the service life. These experiments also revealed that mechanical traps (ie, inverted buckets and float traps) can ensure that steam does not contain condensed water, either at high condensate load or at low load, Easy to accumulate condensed water. In addition, bimetal traps easily unstable. After the change of the new "guidance" includes trap selection table. Selection Recommended: 1 inverted bucket traps: As the first choice for all process loads and steam main traps, that is, all need to steam hydrophobic occasions. Table 2-1. Average Life of Traps Trap Type High Pressure 4.5mpa (650psig) Medium Pressure 1.4mpa (200psig) Low Pressure 0.2mpa (30psig) Thermodynamic Disc Steam Traps 10-12 months 12 months 5 - 7 years Float Thermostatic Trap ... × 1-6 months 9 months - 4 years Inverted bucket Traps 18 months 5-7 years 12-15 years Pressure Balance Traps ... 6 months 5- 7-year Bimetal Traps × 3-12 months 2-3 years 7-10 years × Depending on model 2, Float Thermostatic Traps: Used for process hydrophobics, especially under controlled loads of up to 3.5 kg (50 psig ) Applications or air content is high, the installation of inverted bucket traps have the problem of the occasion. 3, the balance pressure trap: used as an important heating or heating system. 4, bimetal thermosyphon trap: for heating pipelines or heating system low temperature or frost conditions. This type of trap allows to maximize the use of sensible heat in the condensate or to prevent overheating of the product. The valve body is all stainless steel. 5. Thermodynamic Disk Traps: As an alternative to inverted bucket traps, as long as proven by previous experience, they are used with limited liability on steam mains and tracing pipes under pressures up to 17 kg, or as products Replace for higher vapor pressure. Not recommended because of its low energy efficiency and short lifetime (and not allowed at Huddersfield and Grangemouth). Table 2-2. Loss of Fresh Steam - Kilograms per Hour Trap Type Mid-Pressure 1.4mpa (200psig) Low Pressure 0.2mpa (30psig) Thermodynamic Disk Trap 1.09 (2.4) 0.84 (1.9) Valve 0.44 0.42 (0.93) Pressure Balance Trap Untested 0.10 (0.22) Bimetallic Traps None None Semi-Cooled Bimetallic Thermosyphons None None Table 2-1. Average Life of Traps Type High pressure 4.5mpa (650psig) Medium pressure 1.4mpa (200psig) Low pressure 0.2mpa (30psig) Thermodynamic Disc Traps 10-12 months 12 months 5-7 years Float Thermostatic Steam Traps ... × 1- 6 months 9 months - 4 years Reversing bucket Traps 18 months 5-7 years 12-15 years Pressure balance trap ... 6 months 5-7 years Bimetal traps × 3-12 months 2- 3 years 7-10 Years × Depending on model Table 2-2. Loss of Fresh Steam - Kilograms / Hour Trap Type Medium Pressure 1.4mpa (200psig) Low Pressure 0.2mpa (30psig) Thermodynamic Disk Traps 1.09 (2.4) 0.84 (1.9) Inverted bucket trap 0.44 0.42 (0.93) Pressure balance trap not measured 0.10 (0.22) Bimetallic Semi-cooled trap None None bimetallic thermostatic traps None None