Cyclic hydrogen purification scheme
Thread Content
Who has used the cyclic hydrogen membrane separation purification method? Could you share how it’s being used? What are the advantages and disadvantages compared to PSA?
For the purification of recycled hydrogen, PSA is recommended. Our company has a membrane recovery system, but its design capacity is limited and the recovery rate is less than 80%, which is considered quite low. The cost of the membranes as well as the maintenance costs are high. With PSA, the hydrogen recovery rate can reach 90%, or at least 85%. As for the engineering costs, it seems that PSA will be more expensive. This is just my opinion for reference only
This post was last edited by Catalyzing a Grain on 2019-10-11 at 20:01. If high-purity hydrogen with a certain degree of purity is required, and pressure loss cannot be tolerated, then PSA must be used. For simple concentration of hydrogen where the purity requirement is not so high, and pressure loss is acceptable (since hydrogen is in the permeate phase at low pressure), membrane separation can be employed; after all, membrane separation requires less space, involves lower investment costs, and is simpler to operate. We can handle both processes, and we have a large volume of completed projects in these areas.
This year, a unit was put into use for continuous reforming, and the results have been good. Small-scale operations are more energy-efficient than PSA, while larger scales still prefer PSA.
Membrane separation is more appropriate for small flow rates; PSA can be used when the flow rate is very high or when high hydrogen concentration requirements exist.
We have one set here; it’s very stable, with a lower failure rate than PSA