(鼎恒石油資訊)  對泵系統(tǒng)進行總成本分析時，容易被忽視的因素之一就是能量損耗。

而在使用AOD泵時，大多數(shù)人都不會考慮壓縮空氣的高成本。

近，Roper業(yè)務(wù)員在訪問一家正在泵送瀝青乳液封層產(chǎn)品的密封涂層制造廠時證實了這一點。當(dāng)時他們正在使用2寸AOD泵在1000 SSU的50 PSI下轉(zhuǎn)移60 GPM，略帶研磨液體。該廠大約每天運行8小時，每年50周(2000小時/年)。

工廠經(jīng)理對3600 EVO與隔膜泵進行對比后，對高采購成本開始有一些疑慮。然而，在進行能源消耗比較時，只要經(jīng)過一年運營后，3600 EVO就變得相對較為劃算。

為了進行計算，我們使用了一些關(guān)于空氣系統(tǒng)的(大膽)假設(shè)。使用的是無泄漏或損耗的125 PSI工廠空氣，螺旋壓縮機負(fù)載92%。AOD泵的等效電動制動馬力為17.5 bhp。相反，以545 RPM運行的3611EGHBFRV EVO泵為3.5bhp。假設(shè)工業(yè)用電每千瓦時為5美分，那么運營商每年將節(jié)省超過1,000美元。而這還不包括與隔膜泵相關(guān)的其他成本，例如運行空氣管路，脈動阻尼器，空氣調(diào)節(jié)器，空氣干燥器等。

對比運行EVO泵與氣動隔膜泵后發(fā)現(xiàn)，大大減少停機時間和更少的備件要求可以使用戶獲得更大的成本優(yōu)勢。在這個特例中，由于液體的磨損性質(zhì)，AOD泵潤濕部件需要按季度進行更換。包括停機時間在內(nèi)，每次維修造成的凈損失約為1,000美元。而在這個應(yīng)用中，預(yù)計3600 EVO及其極耐磨襯套和軸桿在一年內(nèi)不需要任何維護。基于這些預(yù)期的成本節(jié)約，該工廠現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)用Roper 3600 EVO泵替換了幾臺AOD泵。

關(guān)于鼎恒石油

四川鼎恒石油是Roper Pumps的授權(quán)代理商，若需要購買Roper Pumps產(chǎn)品或需要了解產(chǎn)品詳細(xì)參數(shù)及相關(guān)疑問，可直接進入鼎恒石油官網(wǎng)咨詢網(wǎng)站客服或者撥打銷售熱線18000522697。

四川鼎恒石油機械設(shè)備有限公司(http://www.xiaowancha.cn)是一家擁有進出口經(jīng)營權(quán)，長期從事國內(nèi)外石油天然氣設(shè)備和配件的專業(yè)銷售公司。鼎恒石油公司總部設(shè)在四川成都，在加拿大大不列顛哥倫比亞省成立了分公司。我公司與多家世界知名制造廠商建立了緊密的合作關(guān)系。

注：該文章由鼎恒石油編譯，轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)須注明出處。

附英文原文：

3600 EVO PUMP VS. AOD PUMP

One of the most overlooked factors when doing a total cost analysis on pumping systems is energy consumption.

In the case of AOD pumps, most do not consider the high cost of compressed air.

This was evidenced recently by a Roper salesman when visiting a sealcoat manufacturing plant that was pumping an asphalt emulsion sealcoat product. They were using a 2” AOD pump to transfer 60 GPM at 50 PSI of the 1000 SSU, slightly abrasive liquid. The plant ran the pump roughly 8 hrs./day, 50 weeks per year (2,000 hours/year).

The plant manager had some initial misgivings about the high acquisition cost of the 3600 EVO versus a diaphragm pump. However, when shown the energy consumption comparison, the 3600 EVO was a relative bargain after only one year of operation.

To do the calculation we used some (generous) assumptions about the air system. Using 125 PSI plant air with no leaks or losses, and a screw compressor at 92% loading. The equivalent electrical brake horsepower for the AOD pump was 17.5 bhp. Conversely, a 3611EGHBFRV EVO pump running at 545 RPM had a bhp of 3.5. Assuming an industrial electricity rate of 5¢ per kWh, the operator would save over $1,000 per year! And this speaks nothing of the other costs associated with diaphragm pumps such as running air lines, pulsation dampener, air regulator, air dryer, etc.

An even larger cost benefit that a user could capture by running an EVO pump versus an air operated diaphragm pump is derived from greatly reduced downtime and fewer spare parts requirements. In this particular example, the abrasive nature of the liquid resulted in required replacement of the AOD pump wetted parts roughly quarterly. Including downtime, this resulted in a net loss of approximately $1,000 per repair. In this application, the 3600 EVO with its extreme wear resistant bushings and shafts is expected not to require any maintenance within the year. Based on these anticipated cost savings, the plant has now replaced several AOD pumps with the Roper 3600 EVO.