Comparison of various suction machine performances
Release time:
2021-08-09
Author:
Source:
Abstract
Comparison of Different Adsorption Regeneration Methods
Different adsorption regeneration methods will have differences in drying depth, air consumption, working cycle, equipment structure, etc., each with its own characteristics.
Table 1 Comparison Table of Economic/Technical Performance of Three Types of Adsorption Dryers
|
Dryer Type |
Thermal Regeneration |
Micro-thermal Regeneration |
Non-thermal Regeneration |
|
|
Working Principle |
Temperature Swing Adsorption |
Pressure Swing Adsorption |
Pressure Swing Adsorption |
|
|
Working Half-cycle/Cycle |
Long (8～16h) |
Long (4～8h) |
Short (5～10min) |
|
|
Adsorbed Water Amount per Cycle |
Much |
Much |
Little |
|
|
Outlet Dew Point/℃ |
Expected Value |
Fair |
Fair |
Good |
|
Stability |
Low first, then high |
Low first, then high |
Low and stable |
|
|
Influencing Factors |
Much |
Much |
Less |
|
|
Regeneration Energy Consumption |
Desorption Heat Source |
External Heat |
External Heat Supplement |
Natural |
|
Power Consumption |
Most |
Much |
None |
|
|
Compressed Air Consumption (0.7MPa) |
Desorption: None |
Desorption: 12%～14% |
<15% |
|
|
Overall |
Structure |
Complex |
Complex |
Simple |
|
Dryer Tower Volume |
Large |
Large |
Smaller |
|
|
Adsorbent |
Theoretical Demand |
Much |
Much |
Little |
|
Actual Filling Margin |
Small |
Small |
Large |
|
|
Specific Filling Amount |
Small |
Small |
Large |
|
|
Dynamic Adsorption Amount |
Large |
Large |
Small |
|
|
Life Cycle |
General |
General |
Longer |
|
|
Load Performance |
Inlet Temperature |
Not higher than rated temperature |
Not higher than rated temperature |
Can be slightly higher than rated temperature |
|
Working Pressure |
Can be used at low pressure |
Not suitable for low pressure |
Not suitable for low pressure |
|
|
Overload Capacity |
Poor |
Poor |
Slightly better |
|
|
Control |
Control Method |
Timed Heating Control |
Timed Heating Control |
Timed Control |
|
Controller Structure |
Complex |
Complex |
Simple |
|
|
Control Accuracy |
General |
General |
Better |
|
|
Fault Frequency Ranking |
Heating elements, controller, valves, silencer |
Valves, silencer |
||
|
Influencing Environmental Factors |
Heat radiation, noise |
Heat radiation, noise |
Noise |
|
|
Maintenance |
Number of Spare Parts and Accessories |
Much |
Much |
Little |
|
On-site Maintainability |
More Difficult |
More Difficult |
Easier |
|
|
Economy |
Initial Investment |
Higher |
Higher |
Lower |
|
Operating Costs |
High |
High |
Lower |
|
Table 2 Performance Comparison of Three Adsorption Drying Methods
|
Dryer Type |
Heating Regeneration Method |
Micro-thermal Regeneration Method |
Non-thermal Regeneration Method |
|
Adsorption Tower Volume |
1.0 |
1/3 |
3/4～1/2 |
|
Adsorbent |
Silica gel, activated alumina, molecular sieve |
Same as above |
Same as above |
|
Gas Treatment Capacity/(m³/h) |
100～5000 |
1-5000 |
1-3000 |
|
Working pressure/MPa |
0-30 |
0.3-2 |
0.5-1.5 |
|
Water content/℃ |
20-40 (saturated) |
20-40 (saturated) |
20-30 (saturated) |
|
Working cycle/min |
360-480 |
30-60 |
5-10 |
|
Outlet Dew Point/℃ |
-20 to -70 |
Below -40℃ |
Below -40℃ |
|
Regeneration temperature/℃ |
150-200 |
40-50 |
20-30 |
|
Regeneration energy consumption ratio |
0-8 |
4-8 (0.7MPa) |
15-20 (0.7MPa) |
|
Heater energy consumption |
Large |
Small |
None |
Table 3: Economic and technical comparison of three types of adsorption dryers
|
Dryer type |
Athermal regeneration type |
Microthermal regeneration type |
Thermal regeneration type |
|
|
Working Principle |
Pressure swing adsorption/regeneration |
Pressure swing adsorption/regeneration |
Temperature swing adsorption/regeneration |
|
|
Atmospheric dew point/℃ |
-40～-60 ① |
-40 to -80 |
-40 to -80 |
|
|
Economical processing gas quantity/(m³/min) |
0.3-20 |
10-200 |
10-200 |
|
|
Relative size of adsorption tower |
1 |
1-1.5 |
1.5-2 |
|
|
Minimum working pressure/MPa |
0.4 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
|
|
Regeneration gas temperature/℃ |
20-35 |
150-250 |
200-380 |
|
|
Cycle (full) cycle |
5-20min |
2-8h |
12-24h |
|
|
Adsorbent type |
Aluminum oxide, molecular sieve |
Same as above |
Silica gel, aluminum oxide |
|
|
Heating equipment |
None |
Medium |
Large |
|
|
Regeneration gas consumption 0.7MPa |
12%-16% |
6%-8% |
4%-6% |
|
|
Comprehensive energy consumption index |
1 |
0.85 |
1.15 |
|
|
Price ratio② |
|
1.30 |
1.65 |
|
|
Energy consumption/(kw/h) |
③x④x⑤ |
④+⑥x⑤ |
④+⑥x⑤ |
|
|
Comprehensive evaluation |
Advantages |
Simple structure, low one-time investment |
Combines the advantages of both PSA and TSA, avoiding their weaknesses. It is a third-generation adsorption dryer with good comprehensive economic and technical indicators. |
Low regeneration gas consumption, long working cycle |
|
Disadvantages |
High regeneration gas consumption, frequent replacement |
Complex structure, high manufacturing and operating costs |
||
|
Application scenarios |
Small and medium-sized, medium and high pressure |
Medium and large-sized, low and medium pressure |
Medium and large-sized, low pressure |
|
① If molecular sieve adsorbent is used, and the regeneration gas quantity is greater than 15%, the atmospheric dew point can reach -80℃.
② Taking a 40m³/min dryer as an example for qualitative analysis, the air compressor power is set to 250kw, the pressure dew point is -40℃, and the working pressure is 0.7MPa.
③ Is the compressor power, for example, take 250kw.
④ Is the regeneration gas consumption, such as 14%, 7%, 5% respectively.
⑤ Practical coefficient, taking 90%, 50%, 30% respectively.
⑥ Electric heater (external heating including fan) power, taking 18kw and 78.2kw respectively.
Table 4: Performance comparison of three adsorption drying methods
|
Dryer Type |
Pressure dew point/℃ |
Regeneration gas consumption (%) |
Regeneration inlet temperature/℃ |
Outlet temperature/℃ |
Regeneration time |
Energy consumption composition |
Energy consumption/(kw.h/a) |
|
Athermal regeneration type |
-20 |
15 |
5-50 |
Same as above |
Switch every 10 minutes |
Consumes an additional 15% when angry |
255 636 |
|
Control component 0.05kw |
360 |
||||||
|
Total |
255 996 |
||||||
|
Thermal regeneration type |
-40 |
5 (+70% fan) |
180～220 |
80 |
Switch every 8 hours |
Consumes an additional 5% when angry |
85 212 |
|
Average power consumption 14kw |
100 800 |
||||||
|
Control component 0.2kw |
1 440 |
||||||
|
Total |
187 452 |
||||||
|
Microthermal regeneration type |
-40 |
7 |
160～200 |
100 |
Switch every 4 hours |
Additional consumption when angry |
119 297 |
|
Heater 12.6kw |
45 360 |
||||||
|
Control component 0.1kw |
720 |
||||||
|
Total |
165 377 |
Note: 1. Energy consumption per 1m³ of compressed air is calculated as 0.1315kw.h;
2. Air handling volume is calculated as 30m³/min, and the number of operating days per year is calculated as 300 days.
Keywords:
Gas consumption
Recommended Reading
Applications of low-pressure, high-volume compressed air dryers
2021-08-09
Comparison of various suction machine performances
2021-08-09
2021-08-09
Contact Information
200 meters east of Zhangjiawan Lishan Temple Village Committee, Tongzhou District, Beijing
