HCBBS Forum (English)
Submit Chemical Projects / Find Solutions
Amplify Your Requirements on a Broader Chemical Platform *Engineering · Technology · Equipment · Solutions*
Submit Request

Control of flue gas temperature at the inlet of the catalytic flue gas extractor

2011-07-23View Original

Thread Content

I usually keep the inlet temperature of the flue gas extractor in my catalytic unit below 680 degrees, but it’s easy for the temperature to exceed this level during normal operation. In such cases, the only solution is to add CO as a combustion aid; the control methods used are indeed effective, though they can only reduce the amount of coking that occurs. I ask the experts, what other specific measures are there?
Reply #22011-07-24
Adding a set of cooling steam before the smoke inlet will suffice. It can generally be kept below 660°C.
Reply #32011-07-24
Under normal circumstances, the inlet temperature of the flue gas machine can be reduced by adjusting the blending ratio. At the same time, it is not recommended to use rear cooling methods, as this will increase the likelihood of scaling on the smoke extractor, affecting its long-term operation!
Reply #42011-07-24
I agree with the person above; the fundamental reason is that the load associated with charring exceeds that associated with burning, and this often leads to residual combustion. Cooling the rear part only provides a temporary solution rather than addressing the root cause
Reply #52011-07-25
The oxidizer should be added continuously; it shouldn’t be added only when the temperature rises. Cooling the steam at the inlet of the flue gas extractor is not recommended, as this can lead to scaling and affect long-term operation
Reply #62011-07-25
Reply to 6# zhaojiong1999: Adding it continuously is a real waste of additives, as it increases energy consumption!
Reply #72011-07-25
In fact, once the concentration is reached based on the stored amount, only a few kilograms of combustion aid need to be added per day thereafter (depending on the size of the device), and the benefits are significant: it reduces the temperature at the back; The regeneration temperature was increased, the carbon content decreased, and CAT activity increased ; Recycling the heat energy from CO, as well as avoiding incomplete combustion and similar issues, brings many potential benefits. If there are no other alternatives, using an oxidizer can be a solution; this is for reference only
Reply #82011-07-25
In recent years, my system has involved adding both flame retardants and fresheners together into the freshener tank, with automatic adjustment via a small feeder
Reply #92011-07-25
Check whether tail combustion occurs during the addition of small quantities of additives.
Reply #102011-07-26
Sometimes it is a equipment issue, such as a small burning space in the regenerator or an excessive feed rate

Submit a Project

**Looking for Chemical Technology, Equipment & Solutions?** No Registration Required Broader Platform Exposure | Global Chemical Service Provider Connections

Submit Request — Free Consultation

Disclaimer

This is an automated machine translation of the original thread. Some technical terms may have inaccuracies; the original text shall prevail. Click "View Original" at the top right to access the source page, which supports IP-based automatic real-time language translation. Please watch out for contact details and sales inducements to prevent fraud. All content and translations are for reference only, representing solely the poster's personal views. For enquiries, email service@hcbbs.com.