Temperature measurement point layout for the two types of converters
Thread Content
First type: 2 temperature measurement points per segment, symmetrically distributed with equal lengths. The second option: there are 3 temperature measurement points per section, all located on the same side of the converter; the longest distance from these points to the center of the converter is available, while the shortest distance is around 1000 mm from the edge of the converter. The length of the third measurement point is somewhere between those of the first two. I would like to ask my colleagues: what impact does the layout of these two options have on temperature, and which one yields a better result? Thank you for your advice!
It is best to arrange three points on each side. Its advantage is the presence of a reference; for example, uneven airflow inside the converter on one side may cause measurement errors. In particular, a section arranged in upper, middle, and lower sections can visually reflect the progress of the conversion reaction.
What is the size of your converter? Generally, the method of installing temperature measurement points can be determined based on the size of the converter. However, the first installation method is used for setting up these temperature measurement points, mainly to ensure that the temperature is evenly distributed throughout the entire converter.
The model with a diameter of 9024 has not yet been put into production; therefore, I would like to ask those who have used the second layout scheme
We are six meters in diameter and will use the second approach. It feels pretty good!
Arguments in support of sensation. The way to install a thermometer depends on the layout of the air inlets and outlets, the size of the converter, and your understanding of air flow within the device. It is recommended to install it along the entire length of the layer, and then test by determining how many should be used. In fact, no one knows exactly how the gas flows. Since it’s difficult to determine this, it’s hard to know the actual (average or accurately measurable) temperatures at the inlet and outlet. I’ve done experiments, and the difference can be over 20 degrees. Consult the expert boqing_zh on this forum; he has unique insights into this area and catalyst research. Hopefully, you will be fortunate enough to find the solution. This post was last edited by zxg.wylton on 2009-3-6 14:23]
It has a bit of an agnostic flavor to it. :Lol, actually I do know the general trend, but when there is uneven distribution it becomes less clear, which is why multiple thermocouples need to be installed to detect whether such unevenness exists and to determine its extent. The installation of thermocouples should be based on the principle of being able to detect potential uneven distributions, rather than selecting a few points to ensure consistent readings. If your test shows a difference of “more than 20 degrees”, then there is a problem with the gas distribution. This post was last edited by boqing_zh on 2009-3-6 10:24]
Among the methods you listed, the first one is still better than the second; although the second method has one more measurement point, its arrangement is not very reasonable. Personally, I think the approach could be changed; in the third method, arranging the three measurement points in a equilateral triangle might yield better results than the two methods you mentioned. These are my personal opinions; please feel free to correct me.
It depends on the size of the converter. Our converters have a diameter of over 10 meters; there are three of them, arranged in the upper, middle, and lower positions. As long as the catalyst is safe, it doesn’t matter if the temperature is accurate – it’s sufficient to be able to detect any issues and ensure the system’s conversion rate
If temperature measurement is inaccurate, how can one “ensure the safety of the catalyst…, …address the issues, and guarantee the system’s conversion rate”? :For example, if the displayed temperature is 600°C but the actual temperature is 700°C, or if the temperature measured in one location is 600°C while the actual temperature in another location (where no measurement was taken) is 700°C, how can there be any premise of \"ensuring catalyst safety\"? :P Last edited by boqing_zh on 2009-3-10 10:43 ]
There’s nothing to do; his words are contradictory. According to his logic, it can be said that as long as one can see things, it doesn’t matter whether they have eyes or not! If it doesn’t matter whether the instrument measures accurately or not, then won’t you lose your job? :lol