Conversion rate issue
Thread Content
When I arrived at work today, the lab technician reported that the conversion rate had dropped from 99.75% during yesterday’s 4 p.m. shift to 98.38%. I was surprised; I thought there would be a leak at stage 5, but the analysis by the lab technician showed that the level at the exit of stage 5 was even higher than that at the exit of stage 5 itself, indicating no significant leakage at stage 5. We are using a 3+2 five-stage conversion process, and we are providing the temperatures for each stage to assist with analysis. It reaches 420°C on entry and 572°C on exit. Inlet: 475°C, outlet: 576°C. Three inputs give 446, three outputs give 482. Four inputs give 426, four outputs give 436. Five inputs give 412, five outputs give 410. Could fellow sailors help analyze what other problems exist, aside from one particular issue? How to solve it? Thanks first.
It dropped by a little over one percent; theoretically, the temperature difference is only 2 to 3 degrees. If it’s possible to determine something just from the current set of data, then that would be amazing. Hehe, buddy, you’ll also need to provide the normal temperature values from before for comparison – maybe someone will be able to spot some issues.
I’ll check and upload it. Thank you, Engineer Shen. . . . . .
Your reactor may not be properly sealed, causing the solvent to evaporate; moreover, it’s impossible to collect all of the sample. As a result, it appears that although the concentration of the material per unit volume has been converted, its concentration actually increases. Of course, there are many other situations as well; for example, if the sealing is good but the gas carries away some of the reaction solvent, and at the same time the catalytic efficiency is not high, then this loss of solvent will have a significant impact on your conversion rate values
Now let’s compare the various figures from the 18th of this month with today’s figures: On the 18th, the entry value was 420 and the exit value was 573; today, the entry value is 432 and the exit value is 593. For the second entry, the value was 470 with an exit value of 570; today, it’s 481 with an exit value of 566. The third entry had a value of 444 and an exit value of 475; today, it’s 440 with an exit value of 473. The fourth entry had a value of 425 and an exit value of 443; today, it’s 434 with an exit value of 440. The fifth entry had a value of 416 and an exit value of 410; today, it’s 413 with an exit value of 412. The conversion rate was 99.79% on the 18th, while it’s 98.0% today. Acid production: Before the 23rd, little acid was produced during the first two pumping cycles; today, more than 3 tons of acid were produced per hour during the second pumping cycle. I suspect there’s a problem with the second heat exchanger (the third one has been ruled out). Please ask experienced sea travelers to help make a judgment.
I have a question: which process stage’s conversion rate is this?
Acid production conversion system using smelting flue gas. . . . . .
The conversion rate of the system for producing acid from smelting flue gas is a matter of considerable interest; how do you measure this conversion rate in your production processes?
The reason for sampling is either excessive gas concentration or an error in the testing
It has been determined that it was caused by a suction pump issue.
What is your gas concentration? Why is the temperature rise so high in both stages?