请问谁有关于水泵节能控制的英文文献。谢谢
作者&投稿：端凝 （若有异议请与网页底部的电邮联系）
寻求化工泵和水泵的中英文说明书 或者英文都可以 谢谢~
While most centrifugal pumps operate at the fixed flow established by the hard-piped “free system” needs, many systems require variable flow to meet changing process demands. The two most common methods for controlling variable pump system output are a control valve (throttling) and a variable speed drive.
Controlling the flow with a throttling valve is like modulating the speed of a car using only the brake pedal. You set the accelerator pedal at a fixed point and use the brake to change speed. The engine works at nearly the same rate, but applying the brake restricts the work output by changing the resistance of the drive train. At low speed, the engine strains, the brakes overheat and reliability suffers — while consuming fuel at a nearly constant rate. Of course, this is a silly way to control your car, but most varying pumping systems are controlled in an analogous manner. The pump speed is fixed and a control valve adds system resistance, changing the system curve and thus restricting the output of the pumping system — while consuming nearly the same amount of energy.
ADVERTISEMENT
Using variable-speed control, on the other hand, can be compared with the way people drive cars, changing vehicle speed by changing the engine’s output. Variable-speed pumping uses the same principle. Instead of changing the system resistance to modulate flow, the pump speed changes. This shifts the pump’s head-capacity (HQ) curve to alter the point at which it crosses the system curve. Variable-speed control changes the energy input rather than relying on a valve to strip system energy. The result is often a dramatic energy savings.
While a throttled pump consumes slightly less power than it would running free, it continues to rotate at the same speed, thus maintaining high velocity in the mechanical seal and bearings, and velocity directly determines bearing and mechanical seal life. Moving the operation of a centrifugal pump equipped with a constant pressure volute (the most common centrifugal pump type) away from BEP alters the hydraulic balance between the volute and impeller. The pump develops ever-increasing radial thrust loads, which increases radial forces that produce high bearing loads and shaft deflection. That affects mechanical seal alignment and, therefore, reduces bearing and mechanical seal life.
Centrifugal pumps and the affinity laws
Energy usage decreases with throttling as shown by the valve throttling curve in Figure 1. However, speed reduction results in a more significant energy reduction. The larger the flow reduction from the free operating point, the larger the energy savings. The advantage is that centrifugal pumps performance follows the affinity laws. Flow rate is directly proportional to pump speed. The differential pressure is directly proportional to the square of the pump speed. Power usage is directly proportional to the cube of the pump speed.
For example, reducing speed by 50% requires only 12.5% of the power needed at full speed. Determine the new operating point by using the affinity laws to generate a new pump curve and finding where it intersects the system curve. Adjust the flow, head and power at several points along the original pump curve to find the new curve.
Follow the energy
System curves combine the effects of both static and frictional head. Static head is the height to which fluid is being pumped plus the surface pressure at the outlet less the height of the supply tank and its surface pressure. Frictional head is the frictional pressure loss in the pipe, fittings and valves.
In systems exhibiting only frictional head loss, flow rate can be reduced by slowing the pump. The power savings mount as the pump slows. In systems with high static head, the operational flow point is continuously moving toward the pump minimum flow as speed drops. A minimum operating speed is required to overcome the static pressure difference, Therefore, the energy savings are limited.
Because systems with only friction head provides the most likely energy-saving scenario and those with greater static head provide the least, making a decision on VFD or throttling appears simple. However, most applications fall somewhere in the middle, making the economics less clear.
Running the test
To develop some energy savings guidelines, we configured a 40-hp, pump/motor/drive system and measured energy consumption for various static-versus-friction head scenarios. We then compared the various scenarios to each other and to the throttled base case. Figure 2 shows the test configuration.
These tests used a two-pole, 3,560 rpm, 40-hp, totally enclosed fan-cooled motor with a NEMA nominal nameplate efficiency of 94.1% matched with a pump having a 3-in. suction, 2-inch discharge and 8-inch impeller. The VFD was rated at 40-hp. Both the drive and motor are three-phase 460 VAC. Figure 3 shows the system curves for the five-test regimen that recorded the input power and power factor as a function of flow rate.
The first test used no VFD. The pump was throttled to move along the pump curve. The VFD was used in the remaining tests to vary the flow rate and move along one of the four system curves. The system curves represent 0, 60, 140 and 210 feet of static head. Each curve intersects the pump curve at approximately 340 gpm.
Experimental results
The greatest energy savings occur in low-static-head applications that use a VFD in place of a throttling valve. However, using a VFD to operate at reduced flow rate against high static head still produces savings over throttling, though the result is not as dramatic.
Table 1 shows flow and energy consumption for various flow conditions. These savings follow the curves shown in Figure 4, which compare the savings of each test scenario to the valve throttling base case. Notice that when using a VFD at points near full flow and speed, energy use actually increases because of VFD losses, typically 3%. Thus, if flow will never be reduced and the system is sized properly for the application, the most efficient system would be across-the-line power.
Table 1. Power Consumption Flow (gpm)
Flow (%)
Throttled
VFD
0 ft. static head
60 ft. static head
140 ft. static head
210 ft. static head
170
50%
19.70 kW
3.20 kW
6.35 kW
10.44 kW
14.08 kW
204
60%
20.95
5.46
8.70
12.70
16.02
238
70%
22.21
8.68
11.75
15.42
18.30
272
80%
23.47
13.06
15.58
18.61
20.90
306
90%
24.73
18.83
20.31
22.31
23.77
340
100%
25.99
26.19
26.02
26.52
26.89
Economics
A pump operating 30% below the free system flow rate consumes 61% less power (13.53 kW) than by throttling it to the same flow rate. If the pump operates at this level only 25% of the time in a 24-hr. shift for 250 days per year when power cost is 6 cents per kW-hr, the savings would be about $1,217 per year. If the pump also had to overcome 60 ft. of static head (47% of the total head), the savings would be $941 per year.
Using a VFD to operate a pump against variable static head not only saves energy, it also reduces bearing and seal wear, which reduces downtime and maintenance costs.
VFDs also provide nearly unity power factor. For these tests, the displacement power factor with the VFD was about 0.97 to 0.98 versus a range of 0.72 to 0.87 when operating the motor across the line. This may be important if the local utility has penalties for poor power factor.
Using a VFD requires that the motor insulation system be designed and manufactured to handle the high switching frequencies used in today’s IGBT (insulated gate bipolar transistor) drives. Lead lengths also should be minimized to prevent reflected waves from damaging the motor.
Finally, if most of the energy for a centrifugal pump isn’t needed to overcome static head, using a VFD instead of a throttling valve to control flow will produce energy savings.
请问你需要这个干嘛？
水泵节能技术在我国已应用多年，其途径有两类，一是改进水泵结构，这是水泵生产厂要研究的，目前我国的水泵制造技术在国际上不算落后，大型水泵、低噪声的效率和功耗有的可以和进口水泵相抗衡。二是提高控制水平，这是使用单位经常应用的，最早的控制方法就是通过关闭阀门、降低输出来减少功耗，后来，也就是在80年代末，我国引进了“变频器”控制技术，此时水泵节电技术得到突破性进展，到90年代末，“水泵节电器”控制技术像雨后春笋遍布神州大地，鱼目混珠的产品也铺天盖地而来，例如干扰电表、降压运行等等欺骗手段遍布大街小巷。
进入新世纪以后，真正的“水泵智能控制系统”不再是“变频器”控制技术的演变。在有效利用变频器的同时，水泵节电控制技术还加入了PLC、人机界面、滤波等等，都加入其中，使水泵节电更具科学化、智能化。
While most centrifugal pumps operate at the fixed flow established by the hard-piped “free system” needs, many systems require variable flow to meet changing process demands. The two most common methods for controlling variable pump system output are a control valve (throttling) and a variable speed drive.
Controlling the flow with a throttling valve is like modulating the speed of a car using only the brake pedal. You set the accelerator pedal at a fixed point and use the brake to change speed. The engine works at nearly the same rate, but applying the brake restricts the work output by changing the resistance of the drive train. At low speed, the engine strains, the brakes overheat and reliability suffers — while consuming fuel at a nearly constant rate. Of course, this is a silly way to control your car, but most varying pumping systems are controlled in an analogous manner. The pump speed is fixed and a control valve adds system resistance, changing the system curve and thus restricting the output of the pumping system — while consuming nearly the same amount of energy.
ADVERTISEMENT
Using variable-speed control, on the other hand, can be compared with the way people drive cars, changing vehicle speed by changing the engine’s output. Variable-speed pumping uses the same principle. Instead of changing the system resistance to modulate flow, the pump speed changes. This shifts the pump’s head-capacity (HQ) curve to alter the point at which it crosses the system curve. Variable-speed control changes the energy input rather than relying on a valve to strip system energy. The result is often a dramatic energy savings.
While a throttled pump consumes slightly less power than it would running free, it continues to rotate at the same speed, thus maintaining high velocity in the mechanical seal and bearings, and velocity directly determines bearing and mechanical seal life. Moving the operation of a centrifugal pump equipped with a constant pressure volute (the most common centrifugal pump type) away from BEP alters the hydraulic balance between the volute and impeller. The pump develops ever-increasing radial thrust loads, which increases radial forces that produce high bearing loads and shaft deflection. That affects mechanical seal alignment and, therefore, reduces bearing and mechanical seal life.
Centrifugal pumps and the affinity laws
Energy usage decreases with throttling as shown by the valve throttling curve in Figure 1. However, speed reduction results in a more significant energy reduction. The larger the flow reduction from the free operating point, the larger the energy savings. The advantage is that centrifugal pumps performance follows the affinity laws. Flow rate is directly proportional to pump speed. The differential pressure is directly proportional to the square of the pump speed. Power usage is directly proportional to the cube of the pump speed.
For example, reducing speed by 50% requires only 12.5% of the power needed at full speed. Determine the new operating point by using the affinity laws to generate a new pump curve and finding where it intersects the system curve. Adjust the flow, head and power at several points along the original pump curve to find the new curve.
Follow the energy
System curves combine the effects of both static and frictional head. Static head is the height to which fluid is being pumped plus the surface pressure at the outlet less the height of the supply tank and its surface pressure. Frictional head is the frictional pressure loss in the pipe, fittings and valves.
In systems exhibiting only frictional head loss, flow rate can be reduced by slowing the pump. The power savings mount as the pump slows. In systems with high static head, the operational flow point is continuously moving toward the pump minimum flow as speed drops. A minimum operating speed is required to overcome the static pressure difference, Therefore, the energy savings are limited.
Because systems with only friction head provides the most likely energy-saving scenario and those with greater static head provide the least, making a decision on VFD or throttling appears simple. However, most applications fall somewhere in the middle, making the economics less clear.
Running the test
To develop some energy savings guidelines, we configured a 40-hp, pump/motor/drive system and measured energy consumption for various static-versus-friction head scenarios. We then compared the various scenarios to each other and to the throttled base case. Figure 2 shows the test configuration.
These tests used a two-pole, 3,560 rpm, 40-hp, totally enclosed fan-cooled motor with a NEMA nominal nameplate efficiency of 94.1% matched with a pump having a 3-in. suction, 2-inch discharge and 8-inch impeller. The VFD was rated at 40-hp. Both the drive and motor are three-phase 460 VAC. Figure 3 shows the system curves for the five-test regimen that recorded the input power and power factor as a function of flow rate.
The first test used no VFD. The pump was throttled to move along the pump curve. The VFD was used in the remaining tests to vary the flow rate and move along one of the four system curves. The system curves represent 0, 60, 140 and 210 feet of static head. Each curve intersects the pump curve at approximately 340 gpm.
Experimental results
The greatest energy savings occur in low-static-head applications that use a VFD in place of a throttling valve. However, using a VFD to operate at reduced flow rate against high static head still produces savings over throttling, though the result is not as dramatic.
Table 1 shows flow and energy consumption for various flow conditions. These savings follow the curves shown in Figure 4, which compare the savings of each test scenario to the valve throttling base case. Notice that when using a VFD at points near full flow and speed, energy use actually increases because of VFD losses, typically 3%. Thus, if flow will never be reduced and the system is sized properly for the application, the most efficient system would be across-the-line power.
Table 1. Power Consumption Flow (gpm)
Flow (%)
Throttled
VFD
0 ft. static head
60 ft. static head
140 ft. static head
210 ft. static head
170
50%
19.70 kW
3.20 kW
6.35 kW
10.44 kW
14.08 kW
204
60%
20.95
5.46
8.70
12.70
16.02
238
70%
22.21
8.68
11.75
15.42
18.30
272
80%
23.47
13.06
15.58
18.61
20.90
306
90%
24.73
18.83
20.31
22.31
23.77
340
100%
25.99
26.19
26.02
26.52
26.89
Economics
A pump operating 30% below the free system flow rate consumes 61% less power (13.53 kW) than by throttling it to the same flow rate. If the pump operates at this level only 25% of the time in a 24-hr. shift for 250 days per year when power cost is 6 cents per kW-hr, the savings would be about $1,217 per year. If the pump also had to overcome 60 ft. of static head (47% of the total head), the savings would be $941 per year.
Using a VFD to operate a pump against variable static head not only saves energy, it also reduces bearing and seal wear, which reduces downtime and maintenance costs.
VFDs also provide nearly unity power factor. For these tests, the displacement power factor with the VFD was about 0.97 to 0.98 versus a range of 0.72 to 0.87 when operating the motor across the line. This may be important if the local utility has penalties for poor power factor.
Using a VFD requires that the motor insulation system be designed and manufactured to handle the high switching frequencies used in today’s IGBT (insulated gate bipolar transistor) drives. Lead lengths also should be minimized to prevent reflected waves from damaging the motor.
Finally, if most of the energy for a centrifugal pump isn’t needed to overcome static head, using a VFD instead of a throttling valve to control flow will produce energy savings.
水泵节能概述
答：在我国，水泵节能技术的应用已经历了多个发展阶段。首先，从技术改进的角度来看，我国的水泵制造行业在结构优化方面取得了显著成果。大型水泵和低噪声产品的能效与国际水平相当，部分甚至可以匹敌进口产品，这得益于持续的研发和技术创新。其次，控制技术的进步对节能起到了关键作用。早期，通过关闭阀门和降低...
水泵有哪些主要的节能措施
答：(5)采用调速装置节电。水泵的耗电量与机组的转速的 三次方成正比，所以根据实际需要的负荷状况，改变机组转 速，可大大节约电能。(6)改造水泵叶轮。当使用中的泵流量比实际所需要的 流量大，而又不能采用调速控制或调速装置价高不合算时, 可将原有泵的叶轮车削一段或更换叶轮，以降低流量及减小扬程，...
风机水泵节能原理及实用技术?
答：由于容量和工艺的原因，一半以上的风机、水泵类负载都存在着不同程度上的电能浪费，在能源供应日益紧张的今天，减少浪费，节约电能已经是重中之重，寻求 一种有效的节电产品显得尤为重要。“国佳”GJ风机水泵变频节能控制柜就是针对我国风机、水泵应用缺陷而研发的节能产品。由变频器加外部的控制、保护、...
节能泵领域,有哪些水泵品牌做得好?
答：格兰富，来自丹麦的水泵企业是全球泵业领导者之一，企业的节能泵产品具有高效节能、低噪音、低维护等特点，广泛应用于建筑、工业、市政等领域，节能解决方案在全球范围内都享有盛誉。2、南方CNP 南方泵业是中国知名的节能泵企业，其节能泵产品服务着环保水处理、给水排水等行业，产品拥有节能认证，主要有不锈钢...
水泵改变频控制节能怎么算
答：可以把水泵的电机线u v w 接在变频器输出端子上，把参数设置改成端子有效，在外接电位器就行了，原理是靠变频器模拟电压或电流来控制电机转速。
中央空调水泵怎么做节能,如果我是流量不能变的情况下
答：中央空调调节冷冻/冷却泵转速的节电原理：采用交流变频技术控制冷冻/冷却泵的运行，是目前中央空调系统节能改造的有效途经之一。泵的负载功率与转速成3次方比例关系，即P∝N3，其中P为功率，N为转速；可见用变频调速的方法来减少水泵流量的经济效益是十分显著的，当所需流量减少，水泵转速降低时，其电动机的...
全国民用建筑工程风机和水泵的节能措施建筑工程介绍?
答：全国民用建筑工程设计技术措施是对于工业企业建筑工程的节能设计，应结合其工程实际使用。全国民用建筑工程设计技术措施电气节能专篇重点介绍建筑电气工程的系统配置、设备选择、电气控制的节能措施。其中，全国民用建筑工程设计技术措施电气节能专篇对于风机和水泵的节能措施要求是怎样的？下面是建筑网带来的关于全国...
冷冻泵同频变频的节能原理和依据
答：由于系统中的许多环节，特别是温度、水泵、冷水管道、都存在着非线性，故变频节能系统的调节方式一般采用的PID调节方式。从PID控制的原理可知，带有积分（I）调节器的系统，具有很高的稳定精度，再由于水系统中的瞬间扰动不大，实际中可仅采用PI调节方式。冷冻和冷却水系统温度有变化时，PID闭环会对出现的...
水泵节能改造,除了变频与改变构造还有什么方法可以达到?
答：水泵节能改造，除了变频与改变构造还有过流部位喷涂防腐憎水涂层的办法：水泵腐蚀、汽蚀和冲刷是避免不了的，进而出现过流表面出现蜂窝状点蚀和沟槽，造成水流阻力加大，耗能也相应增加。防腐憎水涂层是利用材料本身对水的排斥性能和表面超光滑度，降低摩擦系数，从而降低轴功率。憎水涂层可以节能5%---10%左右...
为何要进行水泵节能改造?
答：水泵节能改造的必要性主要体现在以下几个方面：节约能源：水泵在许多工业和民用系统中都有广泛应用，其能耗占据了很大比例。通过对水泵进行节能改造，可以降低能耗，提高能源利用率，从而减少运行成本。提高效率：随着水泵技术的发展，新型的高效节能水泵逐渐出现。通过对旧水泵进行节能改造，可以提高整个系统的...
