Customization: | Available |
---|---|
Manufacturing Process: | CNC Milling |
Surface Treatment: | Without Processing |
Still deciding? Get samples of US$ 10/Piece
Request Sample
|
Suppliers with verified business licenses
Audited by an independent third-party inspection agency
Comparison of Common Conventional Tray | ||||
TRAY TYPE | BUBBLE CAP | DUALFLOW | SIEVE | VALVE |
Capacity | Moderate | Very High | High | High to very high |
Pressure Drop | High | Low to Moderate | Low to Moderate | Moderate.Older designs were somewhat higher.Recent designs same as sieve trays. |
Efficiency | Moderate (0.6 - 0.8) | Lower compared to others (0.5 - 0.7) | High (0.7 - 0.9) | High (0.7 - 0.9) |
Turndown | Very high Can handle very Can handle very low liquid rates | Low. Not suitable for suitable for varying loads | Approx. 2:1. Unsuitable for Unsuitable for varying loads operation | Approx. 3-5:1 Higher turndown Higher turndown designs can be provided on request. |
Maintenance | Relatively high | Low | Low | Low to moderate |
Fouling Tendency | High. Tends to accummulate solid particles | Extremely low. Best choice for Severe fouling | Low | Low to moderate |
Main Application | Very low flow conditions where leakage needs to be minimized | Capacity revamps where efficiensy and turndown not critical high fouling and corrosive servies | Most columns where trundown not important | Most Columns services where turndown important |
Cost | High -approx 2~3 times that for sieve trays | Low | Low | Marginally higher than sieve trays |