Is multi-effect concentration or thin-film concentration better for the concentration of caustic sulfide?
Thread Content
The last edit to this post was made by *a*ebing on 2009-12-28 at 10:24. Currently, manufacturers that produce caustic soda use three main methods for concentrating it: 1. Direct concentration in a flat pan, which involves using coal fire for direct heating and evaporation in an open pan. This method has the advantages of low investment costs and easy removal of residue, but it results in poor working conditions and high levels of pollution； 2. Film concentration: This method uses a film concentrator for concentration, which can be carried out in one or two stages. Steam or heat transfer oil can be used as the heating source. It has advantages such as high investment costs, good operating conditions, but also disadvantages such as a tendency to clog ； 3. Multi-effect negative pressure concentration: This method uses multi-effect forced concentration evaporators for negative pressure concentration, with steam being the common heating source. It is environmentally friendly, but it consumes more electricity and it is difficult to control the concentration of the output product. Each of the above methods has its own advantages and disadvantages; fellow sailors, please discuss which one is the best
I’ve studied it*; could you be more specific? What kind of materials are generally used for equipment related to caustic sulfide? What phenomena occur during evaporation until the end?
I think negative pressure concentration is better; using heat transfer oil is more energy-efficient! Concentration adjustable! ! !