Jump to content



Featured Articles

Check out the latest featured articles.

File Library

Check out the latest downloads available in the File Library.

New Article

Product Viscosity vs. Shear

Featured File

Vertical Tank Selection

New Blog Entry

Low Flow in Pipes- posted in Ankur's blog

Water Jet Ejector


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
7 replies to this topic
Share this topic:
| More

#1 hemantwarhekar

hemantwarhekar

    Brand New Member

  • Members
  • 8 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 02:11 PM

Experts,

For 1000 m3/hr  non condensable load out of it 10% is only condensable load at 470 torr, can I use water jet ejector. I got some inputs , for such huge non condensable load, water jet ejector should not be used.

Your view please  



#2 PingPong

PingPong

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 1,466 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 04:57 AM

Consider a water ring pump.

 

Or otherwise a compressor.



#3 ankur2061

ankur2061

    Gold Member

  • Forum Moderator
  • 2,484 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 05:28 AM

hemant,

 

Where did you get the information that liquid jet ejectors cannot handle large non-condensable loads? I have used liquid jet ejectors for evacuating process reactors containing large amount of non-condensables and they work fine. Korting is one of the leading manufacturers of ejectors (liquid / steam) and their brochure clearly mentions that liquid ejectors can be used for evacuating a process system containing process vapors (condensables) + air (non-condensables). Refer the links below:

 

http://www.koerting....-vacuum-ejector

 

https://www.koerting...s.pdf?sfvrsn=14

 

Since ejector design is still proprietary in nature and based on a lot of actual testing, manufacturers specializing in this field can provide you a tailor-made design which can suit your application.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Regards,

Ankur.



#4 PingPong

PingPong

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 1,466 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 06:29 AM

Choice between ejector and water ring pump is purely economical.

 

If it is only used to evacuate equipment at unit start-up then an ejector is fine.

 

For continuous operation with large quantity of noncondensables it becomes a more difficult choice.


Edited by PingPong, 23 January 2014 - 06:34 AM.


#5 katmar

katmar

    Gold Member

  • ChE Plus Subscriber
  • 689 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 07:35 AM

It is all a balance between purchase cost and running cost.  An ejector is cheap to buy, but expensive to run.  Relative to this, a liquid ring pump is more expensive to buy, but cheaper to run.  An ejector requires very little technical expertise to run it, but a liquid ring pump requires skilled maintenance staff.  You have to evaluate each case on its merits.



#6 gegio1960

gegio1960

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 518 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 10:37 AM

Dear PingPong and Katmar,

maybe I'm wrong but liquid ejectors are very different from liquid ring vacuum pumps...

Kind regards



#7 PingPong

PingPong

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 1,466 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 11:20 AM

Yes, we know.

 

To produce and maintain a vacuum one can use a liquid ejector, or a steam ejector, or a liquid ring pump, or a more conventional compressor.

 

Each has its advantages and disadvantages with respect to investment cost, operating costs, maintenance, .......



#8 breizh

breizh

    Gold Member

  • Admin
  • 6,733 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 10:39 PM

Consider this literature  to support .

 

Breizh






Similar Topics