The paper bulids a countercurrent multi-effect drying process model which can be expressed as a linear programming(LP) problem with the minimum total energy consumption as target function. Based on the model it can be...The paper bulids a countercurrent multi-effect drying process model which can be expressed as a linear programming(LP) problem with the minimum total energy consumption as target function. Based on the model it can be conventient to solve the heat load , degree of drying and other drying parameters of each effect. And it realizes the mathematical simulation an analysis of multi-effect drying process. Such process not only reuses the secondary steam but also utilizes the high energy grade. Drying silica sand using 1-effect drying to 5-effect drying is presented as an example. The energy consumption and energy saving rate are compared by using co-current multi-effect drying and countercurrent multi-effect drying. As a summary, the countercurrent multi-effect drying is better than co-current drying. Considered the equipment investment and energy conservation, the study also concluded that the countercurrent 4-effect drying is the optimum selection, and it can save 57.6% energy compared to countercurrent 1-effect drying.展开更多
文摘The paper bulids a countercurrent multi-effect drying process model which can be expressed as a linear programming(LP) problem with the minimum total energy consumption as target function. Based on the model it can be conventient to solve the heat load , degree of drying and other drying parameters of each effect. And it realizes the mathematical simulation an analysis of multi-effect drying process. Such process not only reuses the secondary steam but also utilizes the high energy grade. Drying silica sand using 1-effect drying to 5-effect drying is presented as an example. The energy consumption and energy saving rate are compared by using co-current multi-effect drying and countercurrent multi-effect drying. As a summary, the countercurrent multi-effect drying is better than co-current drying. Considered the equipment investment and energy conservation, the study also concluded that the countercurrent 4-effect drying is the optimum selection, and it can save 57.6% energy compared to countercurrent 1-effect drying.
