Regarding the pressure issue of the burner cooling water

Can this be used to eliminate the online analysis at the burner cooling water outlet? Is a separate tank for export required?

From a safety perspective, the pressure of the burner cooling water should be higher than that of the gasifier, in order to prevent syngas from entering the cooling water system in case of leaks in the coiled tubes or return pipes. In such a case, it seems unnecessary to have an online analysis system; the separation tank can also be made smaller, sufficient only to provide for the separation of non-condensable gases and a small amount of buffering capacity. The total investment remains roughly the same, but the safety level improves significantly

This post was last edited by qihuajingling on 2010-3-28 at 11:25. The Texaco process is already very mature, and natural safety considerations are taken into account to a great extent. Therefore, the pressure of the burner cooling water must be lower than that in the gasification furnace; otherwise, if the cooling water coils or jackets of the burner are punctured, the burner cooling water will flow into the gasification furnace. If the amount of such water is significant, it could lead to the shutdown of the gasification furnace. Moreover, in practice they are all much lower than those of gasification furnaces; I have never seen any with a pressure higher than that of gasification furnaces. As for online analysis, its role isn’t that significant, but it’s better to have it than not. I’ve seen a company have to shut down its operations due to high levels of carbon monoxide in the coolant water used for the burners, while other parameters such as flow rate and temperature remained unchanged. After shutting down the system, it was found that cracks had appeared in the burners; thus, online analysis is quite sensitive. The investment required is not large, so there’s no need to abandon it.

How can one then determine and detect coil ruptures?

Has the poster never operated a vaporizer? This is the simplest chain. Generally, it’s a choice of two out of three: low flow rate, high outlet temperature, and high absolute value of the flow rate difference. Some companies also include the carbon monoxide content in this calculation.

It is possible to design it with a pressure higher than that of the gasification furnace; this prevents syngas from leaking into the cooling water system in the event of a leak in the coiled tubes or return pipes, thus avoiding harm to maintenance personnel and preventing safety accidents. However, a interlock based on the difference in inlet and outlet flow rates must be installed to prevent shutdown in cases of severe leaks in the coiled tubes or return pipes.

If we set up the safety interlock for the burner cooling water system, so that it activates in case of a fault with the burner cooling water, it will cause little damage to the refractory bricks. It is actually less harmful than syngas leaks.

The pressure of the burner cooling water is designed to be higher than the operating pressure of the gasifier. From a design perspective, there are no issues; I think it’s also a good approach to ensuring safety. I’m not sure if any manufacturers design and operate in this way.

The GSP design features high cooling water pressure