Seeking guidance on the design concept for a gasification furnace

I would like to learn more about the design of gasification furnaces; I hope experts can provide some guidance. Are there any **standards** for coal gasification furnaces? How to design a two-section furnace? I’m not sure if this is a relevant question, but I hope for a brief overview of the current status of gasification furnace applications. Thank you very much. This post was last edited by jensse on 2009-3-23 08:02.]

For the design of new gasification furnaces, there are no established design standards; instead, each company carries out scale-up designs based on extensive theoretical calculations as well as pilot and laboratory tests, and then develops engineering designs, ultimately creating standards that are the property of those companies.

There are lots of materials pinned at the top of this forum: for fixed-bed reactors, there are Ruhlig and BGL; for fluidized-bed reactors, there are Wenkler and high-temperature Wenkler types; for fluidized-bed gas reactors, there are Shell, Texaco, GSP, etc. There are also information on domestic two-stage furnaces, multi-nozzle systems, and imitation versions

It is more reasonable to manufacture it ourselves using foreign technology now.

Technical licensing fees abroad are very high, while they are relatively cheaper domestically. Several companies offer technologies that are already well-developed, and these can be chosen as options.

Space furnaces are still quite controversial; it seems they were developed without going through pilot or proof-of-concept tests first. Moreover, I think using the term “aerospace” is inappropriate; ovens have little to do with aerospace – it’s just an attempt to give the product a more impressive name. I don’t know much about technology, so I won’t give an opinion.

The three main gasification technologies in use in China at present are Shell, Lurgi, and Texaco – all of these are foreign technologies. In China, there are technologies such as the fluidized bed, space furnace, and Wuhuan furnace, all of which represent improvements and adaptations based on the adoption of foreign technologies.

Haven’t heard of the Five-Ring Furnace; could it be produced by Five-Ring Company? ?

I’ve heard of space furnaces, but this is the first time I’ve heard of five-ring furnaces.

Among domestic and foreign brand gasifiers such as Shell, the multi-nozzle gasifier holds a dominant position! All performance indicators have reached and exceeded international advanced levels, and it has been operating safely in industrial applications for several years; it is gradually being recognized by peers both at home and abroad!

Space furnaces are Chinese inventions; we should support them and promote their development

In another month, good news regarding space furnaces should be available, and by then it will be possible to determine which type of furnace is better

The Chinese are the smartest and most adaptable people. I believe that in the near future, space furnaces will become stable, as they draw on the advantages of Shell and Texaco to a large extent. Everything takes some time to adapt to; just as Shell has not been very stable in China, it’s only a matter of time. I support the Chinese

No, do we need to discuss the design? I want to know how to design it

How are the diameter and height of a Texaco gasifier calculated?

There’s no difference; if you’re talking about dry powder gasification, it corresponds to a dry powder furnace. I’ll roughly fool you a bit – I’m only talking about dry powder; if you want to try other things, we can discuss that separately. 1. First of all, there is a principle: the higher the furnace temperature, the better the composition of the reactive gases (CO+H2). There’s nothing you can do about it – chemical equilibrium dictates this. 2. Based on the amount of coal fed in, the furnace area and thermal volume are calculated; you understand this already. If further explanation is needed, it’s the Goulvich formula. The outlet temperature of the furnace should be set between 1200 and 1400 – it depends on your preference. If you say you understand how to calculate smoke volume as well, then there’s no need for any further talk – of course, I won’t teach that. 3. The burner should be placed at a height of around 33-35% of the furnace’s total height; since liquid slag removal is required, it’s better to position it slightly lower. 4. You might say, “Bro, in the second step we only get an area or volume – we don’t know the diameter yet, so how can we determine the furnace height?” 5. As for the diameter of the furnace, if a doctor or expert were to explain it to you, they would at least talk about the flame length. Let’s not go into that detail anyway. It’s simply something that those who work in this field understand well – for dry powder and pure oxygen combustion, the flow rate is between 7-10 M/s. You can just ask any average person this question: if the burner’s diameter is 50, what is 50 multiplied by itself? The answer should be 2500. 6. These so-called complex problems are actually simple for us who work in this field. As for other structural elements like flanges and similar high-tech components, they’re beyond our understanding. Let doctors, academicians, and experts handle those – otherwise, it could even be dangerous. 7. The above stuff is just meant to bring a smile to your face. Seeing your youthful talent and intelligence, as well as your eagerness to learn, I posted a message that attracted numerous factions from various martial arts communities to argue over the merits of that furnace. I really couldn’t stand it, so the old beggar had no choice but to show off a bit. Oh no, that’s bad – the Shaolin School, the Wudang School, and all the other legitimate martial arts schools have arrived. Run away quickly! Don’t let them see me with you! ! ! !