Jetomat vs. Traditional Steam Control: Efficiency Comparison

HOW TRADITIONAL STEAM CONTROL WORKS

In a typical steam system without thermocompressors, control of pressure and distribution relies on devices like Pressure Reducing Valves (PRVs), flow control valves, and mechanical traps.

For example, if a process needs 3 bar steam from a 10 bar supply, a PRV throttles the steam down to 3 bar. The excess energy from 10→3 bar mostly turns into extra steam velocity and heat, often causing the steam to become superheated (drier) after the drop. To ensure effective heating, plants might add Desuperheaters (injecting water) to cool that steam back to saturation.

Meanwhile, any steam that isn’t used may accumulate and get vented through relief valves or bleed-off controls. Condensate formed in process equipment is removed by traps but often flashes to a lower pressure, and that flash steam may also be vented if not captured.

This traditional approach meets process requirements, but it inherently Wastes Energy: pressure energy is dissipated across PRVs & flash steam latent heat is lost. It also requires a greater number of components (valves, traps, vents), each of which introduces a point of inefficiency (e.g., leaks, imperfect control) or maintenance.

THERMOCOMPRESSOR APPROACH

When using a Jetomat ejector as a control element, the philosophy changes to Energy Conservation While Controlling.

To supply 3 bar steam from a 10 bar source, the Jetomat also drops pressure – but it does so by converting that excess pressure into kinetic energy used to entrain Low-Pressure Steam (like return or flash steam) into the flow. Instead of one stream throttled and one stream vented, the two streams are combined.

The result is 3 bar steam that contains a mix of fresh and recovered vapor. Any needed desuperheating can be achieved inherently by the mixing, or via a small water injection in the ejector if required.

The key distinction is that Jetomat Recycles Energy That a PRV System Would Waste. As noted in Baelz’s studies, this approach “saves primary energy by re-using low pressure steam” and even reduces capital needs compared to a conventional PRV plus desuperheater arrangement

EFFICIENCY FACE OFF

PRESSURE ENERGY UTILIZATION

PRV: Dumps energy across a valve, often requiring downstream cooling; energy is lost as heat/turbulence.

Jetomat: Uses pressure energy to do work (entraining low-pressure steam), delivering useful heat to the process. Virtually no pressure drop energy is “wasted” – it’s redirected to compress cooler steam. This means more of the boiler’s output is utilized for heating the product rather than just heating the valve and pipe walls.

STEAM CONSUMPTION

PRV: All process steam comes from the boiler (live steam). Any process that needs lower pressure might not use all energy in that steam, and excess ends up as low-pressure exhaust.

Jetomat: A portion of the process steam demand is met by reclaimed steam. Thus, less live steam is required for the same process load. In effect, Jetomat systems Reduce The Total Steam Consumption for a given process output, often by 10–20% or more as seen in earlier examples. This directly translates to lower fuel usage.

VENTING & WASTES

PRV: Commonly has continuous or intermittent venting of low-pressure steam (e.g., from flash tanks, receivers). This is literally steam (and money) out the door.

Jetomat: Greatly reduces or eliminates routine venting by recompressing what would be vented. Low-pressure steam becomes a useful resource instead of a waste product

SYSTEM COMPONENTS

PRV: Requires separate PRVs, sometimes desuperheaters, many traps (each major equipment has one), and safety/vent valves to maintain stability. Each component is a potential inefficiency (pressure drops, heat losses, leak points).

Jetomat: Can consolidate functions – one ejector can take the place of a PRV and a desuperheater, and allow fewer traps as discussed in multi-effect systems. The overall system can be simpler, with fewer points of failure and leakage (see Post 7 on simplification). Fewer components also often mean lower heat losses from pipe fittings and less need for oversight.

DYNAMIC CONTROL

PRVs and control valves respond to pressure changes by throttling; they have limits in how fast and how accurately they can respond, and they might struggle with wide load swings (often requiring a bleed or vent to stabilize low loads).

Jetomat: A controllable ejector responds by adjusting its nozzle or motive flow, maintaining pressure by actively drawing in more or less vapor as needed. It inherently accommodates a wider range of flows while holding pressure, because any surplus steam is automatically pulled in from or returned to the system. This can mean more stable pressures and temperatures for the process, improving control quality.

MAINTENANCE & RELIABILITY

PRVs have springs or pilots that wear, control valves have trim that can erode, traps fail open or closed – all leading to efficiency losses when not in top shape. Regular maintenance is needed to keep performance.

Jetomat: Has no intricate moving parts in the steam path (just the nozzle needle if it's variable). It’s largely a fixed geometry device, so as long as it isn’t fouled, it will perform consistently. There’s less to wear out. Many thermocompressors run for years with virtually no performance degradation, contributing to sustained efficiency over time

Quantitative Comparison: To put numbers on it, imagine a process needing 1,000 kg of 3-bar steam. A traditional system might take 1,000 kg of 10-bar steam, drop it through a PRV, and end up venting perhaps 100 kg as low-pressure steam elsewhere (net 900 kg effectively used, 100 kg wasted). The Jetomat system might take 800 kg of 10-bar steam, entrain 200 kg of reclaimed steam, and deliver 1,000 kg at 3-bar, with essentially zero venting. The boiler produces 200 kg less steam in this scenario.
This simplistic example reflects what has been noted: Jetomat can save around 10–20% of live steam by using recovered steam. In terms of energy efficiency, that’s a huge gain – the boiler’s efficiency in supplying that process is higher when a chunk of output is recycled steam.

CONCLUSION

In head-to-head comparison, Jetomat-based control outperforms traditional steam control in efficiency. By design, it captures and recirculates energy that traditional methods discard.

The result is lower fuel consumption for the same heat delivered, fewer emissions, and often a simpler, more robust system. Traditional steam control methods certainly get the job done, but they do so with inherent inefficiencies.

Jetomat thermocompressors refine the process by marrying control with energy recovery. For plant engineers evaluating upgrades, the message is clear: replacing or supplementing conventional pressure control with a Jetomat is a compelling way to drive up efficiency and drive down waste in steam operations.