Discussion on the nutrients in compound fertilizers

In some markets, a 19-19-19 formula has also been seen; it’s really unclear how that is achieved !

It can be produced, but the output is relatively low. I have the formulas; however, it’s easy for the moisture content to be too high, which may result in variations in the levels of individual nutrients, and the cost is quite high

It’s simply not possible to produce 57; the formula can’t be developed either – experiments were tried long ago

We can use drum granulation to produce 16-16-16 compositions, but the quality isn’t good; for 18-18-18 compositions, a high tower granulator should be used

Can this fertilizer with a high content be produced using blending methods?

19-19-19 is just a way to deceive the public; it’s impossible to achieve such a ratio. Not only will the total nutrient content not meet the requirements, but there will also be significant deviations in the individual nutrients as well!

Regarding this issue, I have some questions: is there a specific process that must be used for 18-18-18 production, or can pellets, slurry, or high towers all be used? I have colleagues working at different compound fertilizer factories; one of them uses the ammonium acid–drum method in the granulation process, and they say it’s not possible to produce 3*18, so no production has taken place there ； The colleagues from the semi-slurry-spraying plant, however, said they are producing this specification. Weren’t they saying that spraying is limited by the process and that it’s difficult to increase the N content? It’s all so confusing! I would like to ask: Additionally, is there any way to distinguish, just by looking at the product’s appearance, between the same product produced by the spraying process and that produced by the granulation method or the ammonium acid–drum process, such as 3*15?

There is a significant difference between the 15 varieties produced by spray granulation and those made by drum granulation; it’s easy to tell at a glance. Generally, the particles resulting from spray granulation are not round, while those from drum granulation are more rounded. The 3 grades of 18 are mainly produced via drum processing; amino acids and spray applications result in a certain amount of sulfuric acid being introduced, which reduces the nutrient content and thus prevents it from meeting the specified standards.

So, do the companies currently selling 18-18-18 products on the market, such as Kim Jong-dae and Stanley, all use the physical drum method? Or is it theoretically impossible to achieve this specification using spraying and tall towers? Can it still be achieved through local adjustments? Will the particles of ammonium acid that are not suitable for use in rollers also have a rounder appearance compared to those of slurry? (I read in a book that slurry-based products have round particles, high strength, and a smaller average particle size.) ； But it is difficult to increase the nitrogen content)? Does the moderator have any comparison photos for beginners like me to learn from?! ! Thank you!

18-18-18 really doesn’t work; I’ve calculated the formula. I’m thinking that unless high-quality, high-specification raw materials are used, the cost will be too high. The production of 17-17-17SOP is not feasible, but 17-17-17MOP can be produced; however, it is also quite difficult to do so. Regarding what the member on the 5th floor mentioned about 16-16-16, I’m not sure whether you meant SOP or MOP. If it’s SOP, I suggest using a small amount of DAP to increase yield, as this won’t result in a significant increase in costs – it’s totally doable. The above applies to drum granulation