Compressor Maint List
Compressor Maint List
Compressor Maint List
By Herv Ferraris
WWW.CTSSNET.NET CTSS
TECH brief
ate for periods ranging from 8000 hours to
more than 24,000 hours between maintenance shutdowns, but they all have one thing
in common: their reliability depends on the
reliability of its individual parts. The weakest
link in the chain of components determines
the overall performance of the compressor.
The possibilities for upgrading start with
simply replacing valves, packings or piston
rings. More complex, yet still often cost-effective, is to improve the design of any problem
components these include rods, pistons,
cylinders and crossheads.
Careful attention to a few key components and how they match process and
operating conditions can often improve the
reliability of older reciprocating compressors dramatically.
Maintenance options
Compressor operators have several ways to address maintenance. The simplest is to allow the compressor to run until an
essential part fails, and then to overhaul it completely. This may
be acceptable for a machine that is not critical to production,
but it is clearly a bad idea when the compressor is essential
and the timing of the failure cannot be predicted.
The second option is to carry out maintenance based on
And so do modern components
experience, periodically examining known weak points and
Significant energy losses also occur at other points
replacing any worn or damaged components before they fail. The drawback is
that components may be replaced before
they reach the end of their useful lives.
The third method combines a dedicated monitoring system for reciprocating
compressors, such as RecipCOM, using
historical records and a proactive approach to optimize performance and reliability. This approach takes into account
both the long-term effects of the process
conditions and the current state of the
compressor. This, in turn, allows maintenance intervals to be extended and shutdowns to be scheduled for times that will n Figure 4. This shows the energy balance for a typical reciprocating compressor.
have the least impact on production.
Flow control losses typically dominate, but worthwhile savings are available from
Most reciprocating compressors oper- improved valves.
2015 EDITION
WWW.CTSSNET.NET CTSS
TECH brief
within the compressor (Figure 4).
The valves, for
instance, are responsible for energy
losses of 1 to 10%.
Valves with profiled
seat geometries,
such as Hoerbigers
CP valves, have
lower losses than
poppet or even plate
valves and can cut
energy consumption
by 3 to 8%.
For example, upgrading a 1290 hp
(962 kW) compressor operating 8253
hours a year at a
n Figure 5. This was the old hydrogen power cost of E93/
MWh (2013 induscompressor configuration.
try price according
to Eurostat) to a better control system combined with highperformance valves resulted in a 30% loss reduction and an
annual savings of E221,500.
WWW.CTSSNET.NET CTSS