Talk:Nitrogen generator

[Untitled]

This article was supplied by a Russian company called Grasys. Grasys lack technology to be able to compete with Pressure Swing Absorbers (PSA), or Distillation units, and so would like to tell the world that these are obsolete. Nothing could be further from the truth, since PSA can achieve higher purity, and Distillation is certainly more economic for larger quantities. The only applications where membrane units are not challenged, is for mobile units (e.g. Truck mounted), and for low purity, low volume uses.

So my recommendation would be to delete the article. It is incorrect and deliberately misleading.

The claim was: "In advanced economies, membrane nitrogen plants have almost entirely ousted alternative processes of nitrogen generation in all cases where nitrogen is not required in commercial volumes."...it's been marked as "Dubious" since 2012 and nobody came up with a reference.

I don't see a need for deleting the entire article. I have, however removed the claim from the introduction. Looking around on the web, it's very clear that both kinds of plant are being bought and sold (both new and used) all around the world and in sizes from a few CFM to hundreds of CFM...so this is at best a highly dubious claim.

Here on Wikipedia, any statement of fact that's open for debate (as this one surely is) has to be backed up with references. Since that line is both disputed and unreferenced - it has to go.

Please don't replace it without providing a reference for it.

SteveBaker (talk) 12:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

=Distillation

I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of nitrogen is produced by cryogenic distillation plants, whereas the lead section claims they have been "ousted" by membrane plants. Maybe you could argue that "plants" are big and "generators" are small, that most small generators use membranes, and that there are a lot more small membrane generators than big distillation plants. But I don't think membrane units making a dent in the overall nitrogen market. Mentioning "commercial volumes" doesn't help - who on earth would use "personal volumes" of nitrogen? I have no cites for any of this any more than the existing text does; I just think there's a problem to look at here.--Yannick (talk) 18:47, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Poor explanation?

"At the adsorption stage oxygen, H2O and CO2 molecules diffuse into the pore structure of the adsorbent whilst the nitrogen molecules are allowed to travel through the adsorber–adsorbent-containing vessel."

This doesn't say anything about what happens to the O2 in the input air? -- Dough34 (talk) 15:18, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

"At the adsorption stage oxygen, H20 - MrOllie (talk) 15:32, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Missing Diagrams

The nitrogen generator article is lacking in data and information visualization methods, diagrams, and graphics. Please review the web pages of the network links added in this discussion and add the appropriate ones to the nitrogen generator article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagram

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chart

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_and_information_visualization

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infographic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_visualization

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_graphical_methods

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Diagrams_by_type

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Specific_diagram_types

https://www.google.com/search?q=nitrogen+generator+diagram&udm=2 78.190.165.222 (talk) 14:59, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

PSA: inherently limited to "50%" duty cycle per column; absolutely require valve control and parallel column redundancy or offline storage. Membrane require neither

PSA systems are inherently restricted to a "50%" duty cycle per column. The quotes are to indicate that the measurement of duty cycle is, at minimum, specifically tied to system design, chemistry, and process. Luckily comparison to membrane technology, in the "hypothetical" at least, doesnt involve duty cycle. Membrane systems are inherently 100% duty cycle. The difference requires that PSA systems include at minimum: a multiport/path valve and (to compare like for like, requires both be continuous) either a storage tank for continuous supply during the 50% "off" time, or a cyclical >2-column per stage (at least 1 column loaded, 1 column purging; possibly 3 columns depending on the design). There is possible caveat: the 2+ column design can in theory be operated in a sequential-mode to produce higher purity, at reduced or discontinuous output within the same mechanical system, ie as an "extra feature." Membrane systems can ALSO do this, but require the same valve-control that is a fundamental requirement of a PSA system. In practice a tank/accumulator is also required (in practice tanks - or rather "accumulators" that are not used for supply storage - are basically always required in PSA systems as well). In membrane systems, the same effect is achieved by simply recirculating the permeate back into the membrane. The analysis above has 2 basic results: 1) membrane systems are the simplest possible fundamental design and 2) both PSA and membrane systems allow for the possibility of a "continuous 1 stage" mode and a small-supply "high purity" mode achieved by sequential output from each column or recirculation of the membrane. this analysis assumes and predicts nothing about real world performance or practicality, where PSA is favored in most contexts related to ambient air concentration. ~2026-11343-92 (talk) 07:44, 20 February 2026 (UTC)