A selection method of a biomass mixed combustion electric dust collector

Abstract

The application discloses a selection method of biomass mixed combustion electric dust collector, comprising the following steps: S1. obtaining influence factors of total dust removal efficiency, wherein the influence factors specifically include the following parameters: S11. analyzing ash form, and giving a correction value K1 according to the ash form; S12. obtaining high-voltage power supply type, and giving a correction value K2 according to the power supply type; S13. analyzing ash composition, and calculating an approaching speed value W; S14. analyzing flue gas composition, and obtaining a correction value K3; S15. obtaining polar arrangement type, and obtaining a correction value K4; S2. obtaining a parameter A required by selection of the electric dust collector according to total dust removal efficiency, wherein the calculation formula of the total dust removal efficiency is: wherein e is a natural logarithm, A is an effective dust collection area of the electric dust collector, and the unit is m 2 ; Q is actual working condition flue gas volume entering the electric dust collector, and the unit is m 3 / s; and W is an approaching speed, and the unit is cm / s.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of flue gas pollutant treatment, particularly to the technical field of a method for selecting a biomass co-firing electrostatic precipitator.

Background Art

[0002] Electrostatic precipitators are well-known for their simple maintenance and stable performance, and are one of the main equipment for industrial dust treatment. Abroad, electrostatic precipitators are generally used for the dust removal equipment of biomass combustion including sludge combustion. In China, large-scale coal-fired power units have begun to co-fire biomass (including sludge) and other renewable energy sources. The selection technology of the biomass co-firing electrostatic precipitator directly determines whether its performance can meet the standards and the investment cost.

[0003] At present, the sludge after sewage treatment in wastewater treatment plants begins to be treated by co-firing in coal-fired power units. After the sludge is co-fired, some pollutants enter the electrostatic precipitator along with the flue gas. Since the water content and the content of chloride ions in the flue gas increase after the sludge is co-fired, it has an obvious impact on the electrostatic precipitation efficiency. The conventional selection design method of the electrostatic precipitator supporting coal-fired power units is no longer applicable to the flue gas conditions after sludge co-firing.

[0004] The existing methods for selecting electrostatic precipitators have the following defects:

[0005] 1. The selection of existing coal-fired power units and industrial flue gas dust treatment electrostatic precipitators generally uses the Deutsch formula for calculation, calculates through the coal ash composition, and does not consider factors such as the power supply type and ash morphology.

[0006] 2. Some equipment manufacturers directly apply similar projects to the selection of electrostatic precipitators and consider margins, resulting in rough selection, the performance of the electrostatic precipitator being too good or too bad, and large investment costs, etc.

[0007] 3. The selection design of the electrostatic precipitator for biomass co-firing or pure biomass combustion flue gas is based on the flue gas of coal-fired power units, resulting in poor selection accuracy.

Summary of the Invention

[0008] The purpose of the present invention is to solve the problems in the prior art, and propose a method for selecting a biomass co-firing electrostatic precipitator, which can design the selection of the electrostatic precipitator more precisely and accurately for specific working conditions, especially applicable to the flue gas conditions after sludge co-firing.

[0009] To achieve the above purpose, the present invention proposes a method for selecting a biomass co-firing electrostatic precipitator, including the following steps:

[0010] S1. Obtain the influencing factors affecting the total dust removal efficiency, and the influencing factors specifically include the following parameters:

[0011] S11. Analyze the ash morphology and assign a correction value K1 according to the ash morphology;

[0012] S12. Obtain the high-voltage power supply type and assign a correction value K2 according to the power supply type;

[0013] S13. Analyze the gray composition and calculate the approach velocity value W;

[0014] S14. Analyze the flue gas composition to obtain the correction value K3;

[0015] S15. Obtain the perfect match pattern and get the correction value K4;

[0016] S2. Obtain the parameter A required for selecting the electrostatic precipitator based on the total dust removal efficiency. The formula for calculating the total dust removal efficiency is:

[0017]

[0018] In equation (1), e is the natural logarithm, and A is the effective dust collection area of ​​the electrostatic precipitator, in m². 2 Q represents the actual flue gas volume entering the electrostatic precipitator under operating conditions, in cubic meters per second (m³). 3 / s; W is the approach velocity, in cm / s.

[0019] Preferably, the ash morphology includes a comparison of particle size distribution before and after biomass co-firing. When the total weight of particles smaller than PM1.5 increases by 20%, 50%, 100%, 150%, and 200% after biomass co-firing, the correction value K1 is taken as 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5, respectively. Other total weight increase ratios are calculated by linear interpolation to obtain the correction value K1.

[0020] Preferably, the high-voltage power supply type includes power frequency power supply, high frequency power supply, pulse power supply, and three-phase power supply, with corresponding correction values ​​K2 of 1.0, 0.97, 0.9, and 0.94, respectively.

[0021] Preferably, the ash composition includes the content of silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide, and sodium oxide. An approach rate value W is assigned based on the content of silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide, and sodium oxide. The following conditions are checked row by row to determine if they are met; if they are met, the corresponding W value is selected:

[0022] Na₂O > 0.4 and S ar >1 and AL2O3+SiO2<90 and AL2O3≤40, W is taken as 7.0;

[0023] Na₂O > 1 and S ar >0.4 and AL2O3+SiO2<90 and AL2O3≤40, W is taken as 6.5;

[0024] Na₂O > 0.3 and S ar>1 and AL2O3+SiO2<80 and AL2O3≤40, W is taken as 6.3;

[0025] Na₂O > 0.4 and S ar >0.4 and AL2O3+SiO2<80 and AL2O3≤40, W is taken as 6.0;

[0026] Na₂O > 1 and S ar >0.3 and 85<AL2O3+SiO2<90 and AL2O3≤40, W is taken as 5.6;

[0027] Na₂O > 0.3 and S ar >0.3 and 85<AL2O3+SiO2<90 and AL2O3≤40, W is taken as 5.4;

[0028] Na₂O > 1 and S ar >0.45 and 85<AL2O3+SiO2<90 and AL2O3≤40, W is taken as 5.3;

[0029] 0.3 < Na₂O < 1.7 and 0.1 < S ar <0.9 and 80<AL2O3+SiO2<90 and AL2O3≤40, W is taken as 5.1;

[0030] Na₂O ≤ 0.4 and S ar ≤1 and 90<AL2O3+SiO2 and AL2O3>40, W is taken as 4.7;

[0031] Na₂O ≤ 0.4 and S ar ≤0.6 and 80≤AL2O3+SiO2 and AL2O3>40, W is taken as 4.5;

[0032] Na₂O ≤ 0.2 and S ar ≤1.4 and 75<AL2O3+SiO2 and AL2O3>40, W is taken as 4.3;

[0033] The content of each component is expressed as a weight percentage, and W is measured in cm / s.

[0034] Preferably, the flue gas component is the H2O content, and a correction value K3 is given based on the proportion of H2O in the flue gas after biomass co-firing.

[0035] When the H2O content is ≤5%, K3 is taken as 1.5;

[0036] When the H2O content is ≤7% and 5% < H2O, K3 should be 1.5 to 1.3.

[0037] When the H2O content is ≤9% and 7% < H2O, K3 should be 1.3 to 1.2.

[0038] When the H2O content is ≤11% and 9% < H2O, K3 should be 1.2 to 1.0.

[0039] When the H2O content is less than 11% and less than or equal to 13%, K3 should be taken as 1.0 to 0.95.

[0040] When the H2O content is ≤15% and 13% <, K3 should be taken as 0.95 to 0.9.

[0041] When the H2O content is less than 15% and less than or equal to 18%, K3 should be taken as 0.9 to 0.8.

[0042] When the H2O content is less than 18% and less than or equal to 20%, K3 should be taken as 0.8 to 0.9.

[0043] When the H2O content is ≤23% and 20% < H2O, K3 should be taken as 0.9 to 1.0;

[0044] When the H2O content is less than 23% and less than or equal to 26%, K3 should be taken as 1.0 to 1.1.

[0045] When the H2O content is less than 30% and the H2O content is less than 26%, K3 should be taken as 1.1 to 1.2.

[0046] When the H2O content is ≥30%, K3 is taken as 1.2.

[0047] Preferably, the polarity configuration includes the type of cathode wire and anode plate, as well as the configuration of the cathode wire and anode plate, and is given a correction value K4.

[0048] Preferably, when the extreme matching type is barbed wire + 480C anode plate, needle-punched wire + W-shaped wave plate anode plate, or spiral wire + 480C anode plate, K4 is 1.0, 1.05, and 0.95 respectively.

[0049] The beneficial effects of this invention are:

[0050] 1. Based on a large number of experiments and test data, the main influencing factors affecting the dust removal performance of flue gas after biomass co-firing were obtained, and the key factors were quantitatively studied, resulting in a highly operable and accurate electrostatic precipitator selection and design method.

[0051] 2. It can be used for renovation and new construction projects, and is highly adaptable to various types of electrostatic precipitators on the existing market.

[0052] The features and advantages of the present invention will be described in detail through embodiments and in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. [Attached Image Description]

[0053] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of a selection method for a biomass co-firing electrostatic precipitator according to the present invention;

[0054] Figure 2This is a schematic diagram showing the particle size of flue gas dust after pure coal combustion of the coal type calculated in Example 1.

[0055] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram showing the particle size of flue gas dust after the coal type was co-fired with sludge in the project calculated in Example 1.

[0056] Figure 4 This is a comparison table of the electrostatic precipitator industry standard JB / T 5910-2013.

Detailed Implementation Methods

[0057] See Figure 1 The present invention provides a method for selecting a biomass co-firing electrostatic precipitator, comprising the following steps:

[0058] S1. Obtain the influencing factors affecting the overall dust removal efficiency, wherein the influencing factors specifically include the following parameters:

[0059] S11. Analyze the gray morphology and assign a correction value K1 based on the gray morphology.

[0060] The ash morphology includes a comparison of particle size distribution before and after biomass co-firing. When the total weight of particles smaller than PM1.5 increases by 20%, 50%, 100%, 150%, and 200% after biomass co-firing, the correction value K1 is set to 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5, respectively. Other total weight increases are determined by K1.

[0061] S12. Obtain the high-voltage power supply type and assign a correction value K2 based on the power supply type.

[0062] The high-voltage power supply types include power frequency power supply, high frequency power supply, pulse power supply, and three-phase power supply, with corresponding correction values ​​K2 of 1.0, 0.97, 0.9, and 0.94, respectively.

[0063] S13. Analyze the ash composition and calculate the approach rate value W, wherein the ash composition includes the contents of silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide and sodium oxide;

[0064] S14. Analyze the flue gas composition to obtain a correction value K3. The flue gas composition is the H2O content. The correction value K3 is given according to the proportion of H2O content in the flue gas after biomass co-firing.

[0065] When the H2O content is ≤5%, K3 is taken as 1.5;

[0066] When the H2O content is less than 5% and less than or equal to 7%, K3 should be between 1.5 and 1.3 (within this range, the higher the H2O content, the lower the K3 should be).

[0067] When the H2O content is less than 7% and less than or equal to 9%, K3 should be between 1.3 and 1.2 (within this range, the higher the H2O content, the lower the K3 should be).

[0068] When the H2O content is less than 9% and less than or equal to 11%, K3 should be between 1.2 and 1.0 (within this range, the higher the H2O content, the lower the K3 should be).

[0069] When the H2O content is less than 11% and less than or equal to 13%, K3 should be between 1.0 and 0.95 (within this range, the higher the H2O content, the lower the K3 should be).

[0070] When the H2O content is less than 13% and less than or equal to 15%, K3 should be taken as 0.95 to 0.9 (within this range, the higher the H2O content, the lower the K3 should be).

[0071] When the H2O content is less than 15% and less than or equal to 18%, K3 should be between 0.9 and 0.8 (within this range, the higher the H2O content, the lower the K3 should be).

[0072] When the H2O content is less than 18% and less than or equal to 20%, K3 should be taken as 0.8 to 0.9 (within this range, the higher the H2O content, the higher the K3 should be).

[0073] When the H2O content is less than 20% and less than 23%, K3 should be between 0.9 and 1.0 (within this range, the higher the H2O content, the higher the K3 should be).

[0074] When the H2O content is less than 23% and less than or equal to 26%, K3 should be between 1.0 and 1.1 (within this range, the higher the H2O content, the higher the K3 should be).

[0075] When the H2O content is less than 30% and less than 26%, K3 should be between 1.1 and 1.2 (within this range, the higher the H2O content, the higher the K3 should be).

[0076] When the H2O content is ≥30%, K3 is taken as 1.2.

[0077] S15. Obtain the perfect match pattern and get the correction value K4.

[0078] The polarity configuration includes the type of cathode wire and anode plate, as well as the configuration of the cathode wire and anode plate. When the polarity configuration is barbed wire + 480C anode plate, needle wire + W-shaped wave plate anode plate, or spiral wire + 480C anode plate, K4 is 1.0, 1.05, and 0.95 respectively.

[0079] S2. Obtain the parameter A required for selecting the electrostatic precipitator based on the total dust removal efficiency. The formula for calculating the total dust removal efficiency is:

[0080]

[0081] In equation (1), e is the natural logarithm, and A is the effective dust collection area of ​​the electrostatic precipitator, in m². 2 Q represents the actual flue gas volume entering the electrostatic precipitator under operating conditions, in cubic meters per second (m³). 3 / s; W is the approach velocity, in cm / s.

[0082] Example 1

[0083] Step 1: Clarify the project background and basic information

[0084] A newly built 1000MW coal-fired unit at a power plant in Shanghai requires that, in accordance with local environmental protection policies and the overall design of the power plant's downstream pollutant removal system, the dust concentration at the electrostatic precipitator outlet be controlled at 15 mg / Nm³. 3 At and below, all power supplies for electrostatic precipitators are high-frequency power supplies, and all electric fields in the polarized type use barbed wire + 480C anode plates.

[0085] The main design of this project is shown in Table (1) below. The project adopts biomass (sludge) co-firing with a co-firing ratio of 10%. The parameters and performance target requirements of the inlet flue gas of the electrostatic precipitator are shown in Table (2) below.

[0086] Table (1) Main Coal and Ash Composition Table

[0087]

[0088] Table (2) Electrostatic precipitator inlet flue gas parameters and performance target requirements

[0089]

[0090] Step 2: Select the formula for calculating overall dust removal efficiency

[0091] This invention considers factors such as high-voltage power supply type and polarity configuration, and more importantly, the adverse effects of biomass co-firing on electrostatic precipitators. It is applicable to the precise selection of electrostatic precipitators and the calculation of dust removal efficiency after co-firing non-fossil energy under the current dual-carbon policy. In this embodiment, the following formula for calculating the total dust removal efficiency is used:

[0092]

[0093] In equation (1): e is the natural logarithm, with a value of 2.71828; A is the effective dust collection area of ​​the electrostatic precipitator, in m². 2 Q represents the actual flue gas volume entering the electrostatic precipitator under operating conditions, in cubic meters per second (m³). 3 / s; W is the approach velocity, in cm / s.

[0094] Step 3: Calculation of driving speed W

[0095] Method: Check whether the elements in step one meet the conditions row by row in the order of top to bottom in Table (3), and select the corresponding W value. That is: when all the elements in the horizontal row meet the conditions, the difficulty level can be judged. The position that meets the conditions in this example is shown in the bold part of Table (3), and the W value is selected as 6.0cm / s.

[0096] Table (3)

[0097]

[0098] Step 4: Analyze the gray morphology and calculate the correction value K1.

[0099] Morphological analysis was performed on the ash from biomass co-firing and the ash from non-co-firing. When the total weight of particles smaller than PM1.5 increased by 20%, 50%, 100%, 150%, and 200% after biomass co-firing, the correction value K1 was set to 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5, respectively.

[0100] See Figure 2 and Figure 3 By comparing the particle size of flue gas dust after pure coal combustion and the particle size of flue gas dust after sludge co-firing, it can be seen that the total weight of particles smaller than PM2.5 after co-firing in this project increased from 0.2mg to 0.4mg, an increase of 100%, and the correction value K1 is taken as 1.3.

[0101] In addition to the morphology of the ash, factors affecting the dust removal efficiency of electrostatic precipitators also include the sphericity and viscosity of the ash particles. The rounder the particles, the lower the dust removal efficiency. The stronger the particle viscosity, the lower the dust removal efficiency. Particle sphericity and particle viscosity can both be obtained through laboratory testing and can be used to qualitatively determine the dust removal efficiency of electrostatic precipitators.

[0102] Step 5: Analyze the power supply type and calculate the correction value K2.

[0103] The main factors affecting the efficiency of electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) are the average voltage and instantaneous high-voltage pulse value provided by the power supply. Higher values ​​for both result in higher dust removal efficiency. Ignoring factors such as power quality and compatibility with the ESP's discharge device, a quantitative estimate of the impact of power supply type on ESP efficiency is obtained. The correction values ​​K2 for power frequency, high-frequency, pulse, and three-phase power supplies are 1.0, 0.97, 0.9, and 0.94, respectively. This example project uses a high-frequency power supply, with a correction value of 0.97 for K2.

[0104] Step 6: Analyze the H2O content of the flue gas to obtain the correction value K3.

[0105] The humidity content of conventional fly ash flue gas is generally between 6% and 18%. Within this range, the higher the humidity, the higher the electrostatic precipitator efficiency. After biomass co-firing, due to the high water content of biomass, the humidity remains very high even after dehydration treatment. After co-firing, the flue gas content can generally reach about 10%-30%. Experiments have shown that after the humidity exceeds 15%, the higher the humidity, the lower the electrostatic precipitator efficiency. This rule is different from the flue gas dust removal rule of coal combustion without biomass co-firing, and it needs to be specially considered when calculating the electrostatic precipitator efficiency. The relationship between the H2O content ratio in the flue gas after biomass co-firing and the electrostatic precipitator efficiency is shown in Table (4).

[0106] Table (4)

[0107] <![CDATA[H2O content (%)]]> <![CDATA[Correction value K3]]> <![CDATA[H2O≤5]]> 1.5 <![CDATA[5<H2O≤7]]> 1.5～1.3 <![CDATA[7<H2O≤9]]> 1.3～1.2 <![CDATA[9<H2O≤11]]> 1.2～1.0 <![CDATA[11<H2O≤13]]> 1.0～0.95 <![CDATA[13<H2O≤15]]> 0.95～0.9 <![CDATA[15<H2O≤18]]> 0.9～0.8 <![CDATA[18<H2O≤20]]> 0.8～0.9 <![CDATA[20<H2O≤23]]> 0.9～1.0 <![CDATA[23<H2O≤26]]> 1.0～1.1 <![CDATA[26<H2O<30]]> 1.1～1.2

[0108] By analyzing the H2O content ratio in the flue gas after biomass co-firing, the H2O content ratio in the flue gas after co-firing sludge in this example project is 20%. From Table (4), the correction value K3 is 0.9.

[0109] Step 7: Obtain the perfect match pattern and get the correction value K4. The correction value K4 corresponding to the perfect match pattern is as follows:

[0110] The correction value K4 for the barbed wire + 480C anode plate is set to 1.0.

[0111] The correction value K4 for the needle-punched wire + W-shaped corrugated plate anode plate is set to 1.05.

[0112] The correction value K4 for the spiral +480C anode plate is set to 0.95.

[0113] This example project uses barbed wire + 480C anode plate, and the correction value K4 is set to 1.0.

[0114] Step 8: Calculate the dust collection area A of the electrostatic precipitator using the formula for calculating the dust removal efficiency of the electrostatic precipitator.

[0115] The formula for calculating the total dust removal efficiency of this project is as follows:

[0116]

[0117] In equation (1), e is the natural logarithm with a value of 2.71828, and A is the effective dust collection area of ​​the electrostatic precipitator, in m². 2 Q represents the actual flue gas volume entering the electrostatic precipitator under operating conditions, in cubic meters per second (m³). 3 / s; W is the approach velocity, in cm / s.

[0118] Substituting the values ​​obtained from the above steps—K1 = 1.3, K2 = 0.97, K3 = 0.9, K4 = 1.0, W = 6.0 cm / s—and setting the target dust removal efficiency η to be greater than 99.94%, into equation (1), we calculate that the required dust collection area A for the electrostatic precipitator is not less than 143703 m². 2 .

[0119] If the conventional method is used, and the effects of K1, K2, K3, and K4 are not considered, the obtained dust collection area A is not less than 141422m². 2 The dust collection area A obtained by conventional methods is smaller than the electrostatic precipitator model of this patent method. If the electrostatic precipitator selected by conventional methods is directly applied to this project, it will lead to the problem that the dust removal efficiency of the electrostatic precipitator does not meet the standard.

[0120] On the other hand, if the required dust collection area A of the electrostatic precipitator obtained by other methods is greater than that of the method of the present invention, it will lead to problems such as wasted investment in the electrostatic precipitator and high energy consumption, thus affecting economic efficiency.

[0121] Step Nine: Selecting the Electrostatic Precipitator Model

[0122] Principles: 1. The site requirements for the flue gas treatment system where the electrostatic precipitator is located (the length and width must meet the requirements).

[0123] 2. Flue gas velocity (by controlling the height and width of the electrostatic precipitator).

[0124] 3. Flue gas velocity (by controlling the height and width of the electrostatic precipitator).

[0125] According to the industry standard JB / T 5910-2013 for electrostatic precipitators, the model designation method for electrostatic precipitators is as follows: Figure 4 As shown. Through calculation, the model number of this example project is obtained as: 2D 5×4.5(400)—3×14.5—15.0. The specific integration area of ​​this model is 144855m². 2 The requirements are met.

[0126] The above embodiments are illustrative of the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention. Any simple modifications to the present invention are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for selecting a biomass co-firing electrostatic precipitator, characterized in that: It comprises the following steps: S1. Obtain the influencing factors affecting the total dust removal efficiency, which specifically include the following parameters: S11. Analyze the ash morphology and assign a correction value K1 according to the ash morphology; S12. Obtain the high-voltage power supply type and assign a correction value K2 according to the power supply type; S13. Analyze the ash composition and calculate the approach speed value W; S14. Analyze the flue gas composition and obtain the correction value K3; S15. Obtain the electrode arrangement type and obtain the correction value K4; S2. Obtain the parameter A required for selection of the electrostatic precipitator according to the total dust removal efficiency, and the calculation formula of the total dust removal efficiency is: （1）； In formula (1), e is a natural logarithm, A is an effective dust collection area of the electric dust collector, and a unit is m 2 ; Q is an actual working condition flue gas amount entering the electric dust collector, and a unit is m 3 / s; W is an approach speed, and a unit is cm / s; the flue gas component is a content of H2O, and a correction value K3 is given according to a content proportion of H2O in the flue gas after the biomass is mixedly burned, When the content of H2O is ≤5%, K3 takes 1.5; When 5% < content of H2O ≤7%, K3 takes 1.5~1.3; When 7% < content of H2O ≤9%, K3 takes 1.3~1.2; When 9% < content of H2O ≤11%, K3 takes 1.2~1.0; When 11% < content of H2O ≤13%, K3 takes 1.0~0.95; When 13% < content of H2O ≤15%, K3 takes 0.95~0.9; When 15% < content of H2O ≤18%, K3 takes 0.9~0.8; When 18% < content of H2O ≤20%, K3 takes 0.8~0.9; When 20% < content of H2O ≤23%, K3 takes 0.9~1.0; When 23% < content of H2O ≤26%, K3 takes 1.0~1.1; When 26% < content of H2O <30%, K3 takes 1.1~1.2; When the content of H2O is ≥30%, K3 takes 1.

2.

2. The method for selecting a biomass co-combustion electric dust precipitator according to claim 1, wherein: The ash morphology includes the comparison of particle size distribution before and after biomass blending, when the total weight of particle size below PM1.5 increases by 20%, 50%, 100%, 150%, and 200% after biomass blending, the correction value K1 takes 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 respectively, and the correction value K1 for other total weight increase ratios is calculated by linear interpolation method.

3. The method for selecting a biomass co-combustion electric dust precipitator according to claim 1, wherein: The high-voltage power supply type includes power frequency power supply, high-frequency power supply, pulse power supply, and three-phase power supply, and the corresponding correction value K2 takes 1.0, 0.97, 0.9, and 0.94 respectively.

4. The method for selecting a biomass co-combustion electric dust precipitator according to claim 1, wherein: The ash composition includes the content of silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide, and sodium oxide, and the approach speed value W is given according to the content of silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide, and sodium oxide. Whether it meets the conditions is judged row by row in the following order, and the corresponding W value is selected if the conditions are met: Na20 > 0.4 and S ar > 1 and AL203 + Si02 < 90 and AL203 < 40, W takes 7.0; Na20 > 1 and S ar > 0.4 and AL203+Si02< 90 and AL203≤ 40, W takes 6.5; Na20 > 0.3 and S ar > 1 and AL203 + Si02 < 80 and AL203 < 40, W takes 6.3; Na20 > 0.4 and S ar > 0.4 and AL203+ Si02< 80 and AL203≤ 40, W takes 6.0; Na20 > 1 and S ar > 0.3 and 85 < AL203+ Si02< 90 and AL203≤ 40, W takes 5.6; Na20 > 0.3 and S ar > 0.3 and 85 < AL203+ Si02< 90 and AL203≤ 40, W takes 5.4; Na20 > 1 and S ar > 0.45 and 85 < AL203+ Si02< 90 and AL203≤ 40, W takes 5.3; 0.3 < Na2O < 1.7 and 0.1 < S ar <0.9 and 80 < AL2O3 + SiO2 < 90 and AL2O3 < 40, W taken as 5.1; Na20 < 0.4 and S ar < 1 and 90 < AL203+ Si02and AL203> 40, W takes 4.7; Na2O < 0.4 and S ar ≤0.6 and 80 < AL2O3+ SiO2and AL2O3> 40, W takes 4.5; Na20 < 0.2 and S ar < 1.4 and 75 < AL203+ Si02and AL203> 40, W takes 4.3; The content of each component is in weight percentage, and the value of W is in cm / s.

5. The method for selecting a biomass co-combustion electric dust precipitator according to claim 1, wherein: The electrode arrangement type includes the types of cathode wire and anode plate, as well as the configuration of cathode wire and anode plate, and a correction value K4 is given.

6. The method for selecting a biomass co-combustion electric dust precipitator according to claim 5, wherein: When the electrode arrangement type is thorn wire + 480C anode plate, needle wire + W-shaped wave plate anode plate, and spiral wire + 480C anode plate, K4 takes 1.0, 1.05, and 0.95 respectively.

Images