Chemical Processing - December 2007 - (Page 29)

that type of equipment, it’s possible to get an accurate picture of lagging performance. For example, comparing production data on a centrifugal compressor train with manufacturer’s design data showed that a company was losing $800 per hour. Analysis not only revealed the bottleneck compressor but pinpointed the cause to be a faulty recycle valve, which was repaired with minimal downtime. Throughput was immediately boosted by 10%. In another case, performance monitoring identified a rod drop on a reciprocating compressor. Such a fault could have gone unnoticed and might have caused a catastrophic failure of that equipment. Likewise, the operational history developed via performance monitoring pinpointed when a steam turbine needed to be cleaned and led to an optimal washing plan. The approach also identified degraded performance of a boiler. It even showed the section of the boiler where the loss was occurring, the severity of the problem and what needed to be done to correct it. These are areas where plant personnel, in all likelihood, wouldn’t recognize the existence of problems without assistance. Take the challenge Ask yourself four questions: 1. Are your most critical pieces of equipment delivering optimal performance? 2. If not, do you know how much the degraded performance (lost efficiency) is costing in excess energy demand or lower productivity? 3. Can you calculate the losses? 4. Do you know how to prevent them? If most of your answers are “no,” performance monitoring may well be cost-effective for you. One way to find out is to apply the thermodynamicmodel-based technology to one critical asset in your plant for six-to-12 months via a straight service contract. This requires no capital expenditures and minimal staff involvement. (Typically, the cost of developing a thermodynamic model and monitoring is the same per piece of equipment, whether a steam boiler, heat exchanger, compressor or motor-pump train.) You’ll undoubtedly get a clearer understanding of performance losses and the causes of degradation in that equipment. The resulting knowledge and actionable recommendations can be expected to yield improved performance, leading to gains in throughput, lower energy costs or both. Monitoring typically delivers a fast return on investment. CP Todd Anderson is a business development manager for Emerson Process Management, based in Chicago. E-mail him at todd.anderson@ emersonprocess.com. www.chemicalprocessing.com ® ® http://www.westernstates.com http://www.westernstates.com http://www.wyssmont.com http://www.wyssmont.com http://www.chemicalprocessing.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Chemical Processing - December 2007

Chemical Processing - December 2007 Contents From the Editor ChemicalProcessing.com Field Notes In Process Energy Saver Compliance Advisor 2007 Vaaler Award - The Quest Ends Take Equipment Diagnostics to a New Level Better Bellows Boosts Blending Process Puzzler Plant InSites Equipment & Services Product Spotlight/Classifieds Ad Index End Point

Chemical Processing - December 2007

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.