Persistent illumination issue of the carbonization level electrode
Thread Content
After being in use for a period of time, the liquid level electrodes in the carbonization tower experience the problem of continuous illumination. The main issue is the formation of scabs at the location of these electrodes inside the tower. Thanks to the decarburization system, the load on our carbonization tower with a diameter of 2600 should not be high; the actual volume of gas processed is roughly less than 10,000 NM3/h. Nevertheless, we still insist on adjusting the tower every 8 hours in order to dissolve the scabs present within it. Yet, even the liquid level electrodes start to exhibit continuous illumination after less than a month of use. When we switch to pressure relief treatment for the tower, the scabs end up covering the electrodes completely, preventing them from being removed. We spray ammonia directly into the tower, and we also add composite fertilizer additives. The temperature in the tower is generally kept between 30 and 35°C. We’re not sure what exactly is causing this problem – how do you guys solve the issue of continuous illumination in the carbonization tower’s liquid level electrodes? I hope all experts will kindly share their insights...! Thank you!
1. Adjust the tower at the specified time； 2. Strictly control the carbonization degree of the main and auxiliary towers (especially the auxiliary tower and the carbonization liquid) ； 3. Appropriately increase the concentration of concentrated ammonia solution ； 4. If nothing else works, then the only option is to use a steam cooking tower ； 5. Control the content of additives in concentrated ammonia solution within the process specifications, etc.
Could it be related to the device or the way the electrodes are installed? For example, could it be due to the electrode not being at the proper height above the water tank, the electrode having an insufficient length, an incorrect inclination when the electrode is installed, or an improper angle between the electrode and the liquid feeding tube, which results in the electrode not being exposed to ammonia spray over an extended period of time? It could also be related to the manufacturing process. For example, maybe the temperature in the upper part of the tower is controlled too low, leading to premature crystallization; or improper control of additives may result in the crystals inside the tower becoming soft and floating, thereby blocking the electrodes Haha, I hope all of you experts can discuss this from various perspectives and share your own solutions! Thank you
Yes. The level lights in our factory also fail to turn off, resulting in false level readings that cause significant inconvenience in operations. I hope the expert can give some guidance
It is quite common for the liquid level lights in carbonization towers to remain on continuously or for the tower to become clogged. I would like to share a few thoughts; please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong: 1. From what the original poster has described, it seems that the load on your tower is relatively light, right? This is the situation where clogging is most likely to occur; I wonder if you have summarized this before. The greater the load, the better the crystallization inside the tower can be handled. During reduced-load operation, the volume of gas entering the tower decreases. To control the exhaust gases from the main tower, the residence time of the liquid inside the tower becomes too long, leading to the formation of scale; in severe cases, ammonium carbonate is generated, which is even more difficult to remove ； 2. After adjusting the tower, increase the liquid level in the secondary tower and maintain a prolonged period of immersion; at the same time, raise the temperature of the secondary tower (increase it as much as possible, though not excessively). 3. Adjust the ammonia concentration as appropriate according to load changes. 4. Minimize CO2 content in the ammonia solution. 5. When removing material from the main tower intermittently, the residence time should not be too long; it is advisable to remove material frequently in small amounts to maintain stability in the reaction layer
I hope everyone will continue to discuss this and share more opinions, especially by providing information on the measures taken by our own unit and their effectiveness. Thank you