Energy Efficient Pumps - Save Electricity, Save Money.
Along with the purchase price and the cost of spare parts, energy consumption - and therefore electricity consumption - is becoming an increasingly significant cost factor for companies when estimating and calculating life cycle costs. High energy efficiency is therefore a very strong argument for the use of positive displacement pumps, in particular for electric diaphragm pumps. This cost advantage due to energy savings becomes particularly apparent when comparing with compressed air diaphragm pumps, as the required compressed air is expensive to produce. The advantage in terms of efficiency a positive displacement pump offers over centrifugal pumps is mainly explained by its closed and practically backflow-free design.
||In practice, centrifugal pumps reach the BEP (best efficiency point) only under very favourable conditions and therefore use more energy and cost more to operate.
POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT PUMPS VS. CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS WITH REGARD TO ENERGY EFFICIENCY. The crucial, energy-saving advantage positive displacement pumps offer over centrifugal pumps when it comes to efficiency lies in their inherent higher overall efficiency. The efficiency of a multiple-acting ABEL positive displacement pump is generally more than 80 % - independent of the operating point. Centrifugal pumps on the other hand, reach an efficiency between 20 % and 80 %; depending on how easily they reach the desired operating point.
In practice, poorer results - apart from the lack of a backflow-free centrifugal pump design - result from the fact that the design of many centrifugal pumps is either oversized or inadequate. Indeed, their best efficiency point (BEP) is frequently difficult to reach without the use of frequency converters. Apparently, for many companies it seems to be easier to accept higher energy consumption rather than to accept the centrifugal pump's failure to fulfil its pumping tasks whenever it deviates from the best efficiency point. Due to their design, electricity-saving positive displacement pumps like the ABEL EM electric diaphragm pumps, do not have this significant problem of deviation from the BEP.
ABEL electric diaphragm pumps require less electrical energy than centrifugal pumps for two reasons. Firstly, thanks to their design, they generally have a higher efficiency, and secondly, they do not depend on reaching an optimum BEP in order to work efficiently, so they save on electricity and cost. This allows for a much more energy-efficient integration into a pumping system.
ABEL EM ENERGY SAVING ELECTRIC DIAPHRAGM PUMP VS. COMPRESSED AIR DIAPHRAGM PUMP.
At first sight, it is tempting to opt for a compressed air diaphragm pump. Its purchase price is significantly lower than that of an electric diaphragm pump. Only one year later, however, the cost balance often looks very different: the significantly lower electricity consumption of an ABEL EM pump compensates for its higher purchase price after a short time. And in the years that follow, a lot of money can be made, simply by owning an ABEL diaphragm pump rather than a compressed air diaphragm pump.
EXAMPLE: USING AN ENERGY EFFICIENT ABEL DIAPHRAGM PUMP FOR GLUE TRANSPORT. To convey warm (35-40 掳C), high viscosity starch adhesive, a corrugated cardboard manufacturer used compressed air diaphragm pumps - facing the correspondingly high energy consumption due to the relatively high costs for compressed air as well as having to accept considerable noise pollution. After having replaced these pumps with frequency-controlled electromechanical diaphragm pumps of the type ABEL EM, energy costs were significantly reduced. The corrugated cardboard manufacturer's investment paid for itself in energy savings after only a few months.