What is the production capacity of the φ1000 synthesis tower?
Thread Content
Can a φ1000 synthesis tower produce 300 tons of ammonia per day?
The ammonia synthesis production capacity is related not only to the diameter of the tower but also to the choice of ammonia synthesis process and other factors. However, the φ1000 synthesis tower cannot produce 300 tons of ammonia per day; therefore, a tower diameter of at least φ1200 is required.
Agree with the comment above; it definitely won’t reach 300 – usually it’s around 210 tons (for a standard tower)
For a φ1000 tower, once it is in operation, the daily production should reach 260–280 tons, and occasionally it can reach 300 tons per day.
There are many factors that affect the output of a single tower, but it’s very difficult to achieve 300 tons per day with a φ1000 tower! ! !
It cannot be achieved; with our two φ800 methanol reactors and two φ1000 methanol reactors, as well as two φ800 synthesis reactors and two φ1000 synthesis reactors, the total ammonia production is 150 kt/a.
For a φ1000 synthesis tower, if no heat exchanger is installed inside the tower and instead the heat exchanger is placed outside, with only the internal components including catalyst frames inside the tower, it is possible to achieve a production rate of 300 tons of ammonia per day. However, if a heat exchanger is still used inside the tower, it is almost impossible to reach a production rate of 300 tons of ammonia per day.
Reply to 7# HZG: Even by moving the internal heat exchanger of the tower outward in a φ1000 synthesis tower, it is still not possible to achieve a production rate of 300 tons per day. Our unit has two φ1000 synthesis towers; one of them features an external heat exchanger installed as a result of moving the internal heat exchanger outward, and the highest production rate achieved with this setup was not more than 520 tons.
It can’t be reached; at most, it will be 80,000 tons
It is possible to achieve this by modifying the internal components, increasing the amount of catalyst used, raising the space velocity and inlet pressure, etc.; yet after all these modifications, it is still better to build a new synthesis tower.
These days, low-pressure ammonia synthesis is advocated to save energy, reduce consumption, and lower costs; why then does the original poster do the opposite? Is it cost-effective to increase the production capacity of a single synthesis tower by raising the energy consumption in the preceding processes?