It all comes down to the operating principle

Rotary vane vacuum pump wins vacuum efficiency test by direct comparison

Vacuum pumps are important components in the packaging of fresh foodstuffs. Which vacuum pump achieves the highest efficiency factor? A direct comparison can answer this question, as long as the test setup has been designed sensibly. A recently published comparison study suggests the superiority of an oil-sealed screw vacuum pump. However, this result only came about using a test setup that seems very unrealistic. Now, the independent testing organization TÜV Süd has also carried out a comparison of the vacuum pumps involved. This entailed the realistic simulation of a standard industrial process. Under these conditions, the result is clearly in favor of the oil-lubricated rotary vane vacuum pump.

ID: 1552248
recent pressrelease next pressrelease

(businesspress24) - This article compares two comparison tests. For the sake of clarity, they are referred to as Test 1 and Test 2 below. For better readability, the oil-sealed screw vacuum pump is abbreviated as SVP and the oil-lubricated rotary vane vacuum pump as RVVP.


Test 1: Demand-driven control vs. full-load operation
This test was initiated by the manufacturer of the oil-sealed screw vacuum pump (SVP). The company mainly specializes in compressors, and the machine in question is a derivative of compressor technology. It was compared to an R 5 RA 0630 C oil-lubricated rotary vane vacuum pump (RVVP) from Busch. However, the test setup does not allow a realistic comparison for several reasons.
The test cycle simulated various vacuum-supported processes. However, production breaks, including nightly down times during which the RVVP, unlike the SVP, continued to run, were obviously also included. In the test, the SVP was operated as part of a system with frequency converters and integrated control system that stopped the vacuum pump during breaks. On the other hand, the RVVP was apparently connected as an isolated machine that ran continuously at full power.
Test 1 proverbially compared apples with oranges. The continuously running vacuum pump naturally consumed more electricity than its regulated counterpart, which was automatically stopped in the breaks. The RVVP could also have been equipped with a frequency converter and a control system
Due to its design, a RVVP has in general the highest power consumption in the start-up phase between atmospheric pressure and approximately 300 mbar. However, the power consumption decreases drastically as the inlet pressure decreases. A SVP, on the other hand, consumes approximately the same amount of power between atmospheric pressure and ultimate pressure. This means that a RVVP requires considerably less power in the operational range between ultimate pressure and 100 mbar than a SVP.


Test 2: Equal conditions


The second comparison test was recently carried out by the independent testing organization Tindustry. As is often the case with such applications, both vacuum pumps were additionally supported by an identical vacuum booster. In addition, the test setup and procedure were checked by a well-known manufacturer of vacuum packaging machines and confirmed as a realistic simulation.
As an application example, a packaging machine with a large chamber volume was chosen, such as is used in the packaging of meat or cheese products. Typically, such a machine with automatic product supply handles several cycles per minute.
In the test, the machine was simulated using a 300-liter chamber and an 11.5-meter long pipe system between the chamber, vacuum booster, and vacuum pump. The chamber was evacuated cyclically to a vacuum level of 5 mbar.
The time for evacuation depended on the performance of the vacuum pumps. The time between evacuation cycles was set at 14 seconds

Unambiguous results
The results of the various test runs were consistently unambiguous: the rotary vane vacuum pump (RVVP) evacuates faster and consumes less energy than the screw vacuum pump (SVP). Depending on the set speed of the RVVP, this results in further shortened pump-down times or increased energy savings. For example, the RVVP is 11 percent faster in 40 Hertz mode and saves 42 percent in power consumption by comparison.

In addition to the pump-down time and the energy consumption, the pumping speed and energy consumption were also measured during the test as a function of the inlet pressure. The specific energy consumption (SEC) at different vacuum levels was calculated from these measured values. This gives precise information about how many watts are needed to extract one cubic meter of air per hour to reach a certain vacuum level. Here, too, the RVVP is superior to the SVP in all vacuum levels. The energy savings are between 13 and 73 percent. At the vacuum level of 10 mbar (typical in practice), the RVVP consumes 38 percent less energy than the SVP.

A question of principle
The results are surprisingly unambiguous. The RVVP is a classic in vacuum pump technology. The R 5 RA 0630 C used here benefits from decades of technical optimization for vacuum generation. In contrast, the SVP is basically a converted compressor. Although both vacuum generation and compression are about gas extraction, the different objectives require different technical solutions.
For compressors the compression ratio is usually 1:10; for vacuum pumps it is 1:100 to 1:1000 internal leakage. However, this is only because it is compensated by much higher rotation of about 7000 rpm at full load. The RVVP, on the other hand, is a pure vacuum pump with precision parts and minimal tolerances that reduce internal leakage rates to a minimum and ultimately enable a much higher compression ratio. It therefore provides constant performance from the beginning to the end of the evacuation with low energy consumption. It therefore only runs at a maximum speed of 1000 rpm. The lower speed reduces the mechanical load and thus the maintenance requirement. This also makes it possible to achieve significantly longer service lives and lower machine life cycle costs.
The SVP, on the other hand, requires separate pressure control by means of an inlet control valve to prevent overloading the vacuum pump in the range between 1000 and 300 millibar. Between atmospheric pressure and rough vacuum, it works with significantly reduced performance. This and the design adopted from compressor construction make a significant contribution to extending the pump-down time.
It is precisely these differences that ultimately had an impact on the results of the comparison test.


Conclusion
Test 2 was performed under realistic conditions. Apples were compared with apples ime and energy consumption. The test results confirm the superiority of the best-selling vacuum pump in this performance class.



More information:
https://genzdigitalbandaid.com/ https:// https:// https:// https://www.directmbbsadmission.com/mbbs-in-bangladesh/ https://genzdigitalbandaid.com/ https://knifetribe.com/best-bowie-knives/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/luka-grubisa-soccer http://go.stock



Keywords (optional):



Company information / Profile:

Busch Vacuum Pumps and Systems is one of the world’s largest producers of vacuum pumps, vacuum systems, blowers and compressors.
Its extensive product portfolio comprises solutions for vacuum and overpressure applications in all industries, including the chemical, semiconductor, medical technology, plastics, and food sectors. It also covers the design and construction of customized vacuum systems, as well as a global service network.
The Busch group is a family-owned company and is still managed by the Busch family. Busch Vacuum Pumps and Systems has 3,000 employees in more than 60 companies in over 40 countries worldwide. Busch is headquartered in Maulburg, in southwest Germany. This is the location of Busch SE headquarters, as well as the German production facility and German sales company. In addition to Maulburg, Busch also has its own production plants in Switzerland, the UK, Czech Republic, Korea and the USA.

Busch Vacuum Pumps and Systems was founded by Dr.-Ing. Karl Busch and his wife Ayhan Busch in 1963. Dr.-Ing. Karl Busch developed the “Huckepack”, which was the first vacuum pump that could be used for vacuum packaging of foodstuffs. The follow-up product, the compact “R 5” rotary vane vacuum pump, revolutionized food packaging. A further milestone represented the development of the “COBRA” screw vacuum pump. In 1971 the international expansion of the Busch group started with the founding of a sales company in the UK. The first production plant outside Germany was established in the USA in 1979.

PressRelease by

Requests:

Jasmin Markanic

Busch Vacuum Pumps and Systems
Global Marketing / Marketing Services
Coordinator Global Press & Media Relations

Schauinslandstraße 1
DE 79689 Maulburg
Phone: +49 7622 681 3376
Jasmin.Markanic(at)busch.de
www.buschvacuum.com



PressContact / Agency:



published by: SabrinaHeinecke
print pressrelease  send to a friend  

Date: 09/12/2019 - 03:17
Language: English
News-ID 1552248
Character count: 3649
Kontakt-Informationen:
Firma: Busch Vacuum Pumps and Systems
Ansprechpartner: Jasmin Markanic Feedback to businesspress24.com about Pressrelease-id:
Stadt: Maulburg
Telefon: +4976226813376

Meldungsart: Success
Versandart: send
Freigabedatum: 12.09.2019
Comments:



Number of hits: 59

Linking-Tips:



Direct Link to this PressRelease:






We would appreciate a link in your News-, Press- or Partner-Site.

Comments on this PressRelease






All members: 9 418
Register today: 0
Register yesterday: 6
Members online: 0
Guests online: 59


Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.