What are the similarities and differences between David’s methanation process and Topsoe’s methanation process?
Thread Content
What are the similarities and differences between David’s methanation process and Topsoe’s methanation process? What are their respective advantages?
For those who are not familiar with Topso, let’s talk about DAVY: its overall process layout is quite well-designed. As for other equipment, especially those related to methane processing, fire-resistant linings are currently used, which is somewhat behind other similar process installations; for example, the ammonia synthesis technology used in Cassali has comparable process conditions. I hope experts can provide more insights on this topic.
This post was last edited by xjner Liu Junliang on 2016-8-5 at 16:13. For projects involving the production of SNG from coke oven gas, the main difference between David and Topso methaneation processes is that the former uses compressors for circulation, while the latter uses steam injectors; circulation is employed to control the bed temperature in the main methaneation reactor.
The similarity is that they are both adiabatic + cyclic processes
I don’t know what the main process promoted by Topsoo is now. . . . . Differences: 1. The catalysts differ, which leads to variations in conversion efficiency and high-temperature resistance, thereby affecting the design of subsequent processes. 2. During the discussions at that time, Topso still favored the use of non-cyclic compressor designs, while David recommended a four-stage counterflow + cyclic compression approach
Topso controls the bed temperature by using a compressor for circulation. Atlas compressors are used here.