Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Word count:
Up to a maximum of 5,000 words.
Objective:
To demonstrate a depth of theoretical and practical knowledge of chemical engineering and its underlying principles.
Your technical report should demonstrate that your chemical engineering knowledge and understanding is of a high
standard, showing how you make effective use of chemical engineering science and principles in creating designs
and solving problems. This should be done through an ordered and critical description of aspects of chemical
engineering practice where you have made a significant contribution.
You may submit as your technical evidence one of the following:
1. a report written specifically for the application, which addresses the objectives of the technical report;
2. a pre-existing technical report, accompanied by a narrative which details how the report demonstrates
that your knowledge and understanding is at the required academic level;
3. a collection of published academic papers along a common theme, accompanied by a narrative which
details how the papers demonstrate that your knowledge and understanding is at the required
academic level.
You should state on the reports title page which option you have chosen and identify the narrative if it is required.
Cover sheet:
Please complete the document Cover sheet: technical report or academic papers to assist assessment, and use as an
aid in structuring your report. The cover sheet must include a signed confirmation from someone familiar with your
work, that the report is a true demonstration of your knowledge and understanding of chemical engineering.
Guidance:
The purpose of a technical report is to provide evidence that your knowledge and understanding is of the minimum
required level for a Chartered Member (MIChemE).
Your technical report should:
1. be a substantive work of your choice that is sufficiently complex to challenge your chemical engineering
capabilities;
5. include key calculations, engineering drawings, flow sheets, diagrams and appropriate references;
6. show objectives, problems or development aims addressed by the selected project;
7. include analytical and quantitative processes used in reaching and evaluating a specified solution;
8. be concise, not exceeding the guidance on word count;
9. clearly reference any material which is copied into the report, you should show the application of such
material to demonstrate your knowledge of chemical engineering principles, and their application, at
the required advanced level.
Your report is not:
10. a review of your training, employment and experience;
11. a report on your managerial or organisational competency and experience.
ensure that the information contained in the report is sufficient to demonstrate that your chemical
engineering knowledge and understanding meets the minimum required level for Chartered Member;
please complete and submit the Cover sheet: technical report or academic papers to refer the assessors to
the relevant information within your report and as an aid to structure;
if your technical report:
practical and common sense solutions are a useful contribution but must be supported by science or
appropriate theory the report must demonstrate a level above catalogue engineering;
acronyms and sector or company specific terms must be defined, either within the document if it is written
for IChemE assessment, or with use of a glossary;
the use of imported or adopted information, standards or guides must be clearly referenced as such;
your report must be in English. IChemE is sympathetic to minor errors where English is not your first
language, however, please ask someone to review your report, or use spell check software carefully to
ensure your meaning is always clear;
do not submit a report in excess of 20% more than the stated word count;
ensure that you will remember the work in your report well enough to discuss at interview.
Avoid:
technical content
description
personal involvement
observation
explanation
discussion
analysis
opinion
evaluation
commercial detail
1130_!5
www.icheme.org
a pre-existing technical report, accompanied by a narrative which details how the report
demonstrates that your knowledge and understanding is at the required academic level;
3.
You should state on the reports title page which option you have chosen and identify the narrative if it is required.
ADVANCING
CHEMICAL
ENGINEERING
WORLDWIDE
1. Introduction
Page reference(s)
Provide a clear introduction to the activity, giving an explanation of the methodologies used and/or
background information.
2. Main content
Required elements
nb: Outputs from computer programmes used during the described work should not be included without
explanation of the chemical engineering principles and equations used within those programmes.
Signature:
Job title:
This report is a true account of my professional activities:
Date:
5. Confirmation
Please also obtain the signature of someone familiar with your work at the time of activity and ideally a chemical
engineer:
Family name:
Given Name:
Title:
Job title:
Affiliation (company/university or other organisation):
Relation to applicant:
Email:
To the best of my knowledge, this is a true account of the applicants activities
Signature:
Date:
6. Appendices
Provide inputs to computations and adequate explanation of background or supporting theory to worksheets or
programmes.
Flowsheets, for example, process flow diagram (PFD), process and instrumentation diagrams (P&ID)
Engineering drawings
Diagrams
References to published texts, standards or papers which were used during the work described
Safety and environmental aspects
Other (please specify):
www.icheme.org
www.getchartered.org
Complete your technical report, ensuring it meets the requirements outlined in the
guidance, and submit along with your Competence and Commitment report* to apply for
Chartered Member
* See Review process for competence and commitment (C&C) report for further details
0620_12
ADVANCING
CHEMICAL
ENGINEERING
WORLDWIDE
a pre-existing technical report, accompanied by a narrative which details how the report
demonstrates that your knowledge and understanding is at the required academic level;
3.
You should state on the reports title page which option you have chosen and identify the narrative if it is required.
ADVANCING
CHEMICAL
ENGINEERING
WORLDWIDE
1. Introduction
Page reference(s)
Provide a clear introduction to the activity, giving an explanation of the methodologies used and/or
background information.
2. Main content
Required elements
nb: Outputs from computer programmes used during the described work should not be included without
explanation of the chemical engineering principles and equations used within those programmes.
Signature:
Job title:
This report is a true account of my professional activities:
Date:
5. Confirmation
Please also obtain the signature of someone familiar with your work at the time of activity and ideally a chemical
engineer:
Family name:
Given Name:
Title:
Job title:
Affiliation (company/university or other organisation):
Relation to applicant:
Email:
To the best of my knowledge, this is a true account of the applicants activities
Signature:
Date:
6. Appendices
Provide inputs to computations and adequate explanation of background or supporting theory to worksheets or
programmes.
Flowsheets, for example, process flow diagram (PFD), process and instrumentation diagrams (P&ID)
Engineering drawings
Diagrams
References to published texts, standards or papers which were used during the work described
Safety and environmental aspects
Other (please specify):
www.icheme.org
Further information
The criteria IChemE refers to when assessing an individuals knowledge and understanding against the
level required for a Chartered Member are those used to characterise a degree for accreditation to Masters
level, where we look for attainment of knowledge and understanding against defined standards. IChemEs
expectations for delivering this standard are set out in our accreditation guide.
0618_12
Guidance
The required level
IChemE upholds a minimum level of knowledge and understanding required for qualification as a Chartered
Member (MIChemE).
As well as core chemical engineering knowledge, this includes:
an advanced breadth and depth of chemical engineering knowledge and its application; and
a sufficient capability to aggregate learning into a complex open ended project (such as design or
research work).
The main areas of knowledge and understanding IChemE looks for when assessing an individual, or accrediting a
degree against the standard required for a Chartered Chemical Engineer, are:
engineering practice;
design practice;
IChemE does not publish a definitive guide of the precise knowledge and understanding required because the
content of degree programmes and/or an individual engineers learning experience will differ and yet may attain
outcomes of an equally and acceptably high standard.
Check
Please use the online self diagnosis tool www.getchartered.org/selfdiagnosis to check what to provide
as evidence of your chemical engineering knowledge and understanding in support of an application to get
chartered and read any suggested further guidance or information.
If further clarification is required, a chargeable preliminary appraisal service is available.
degree title(s);
work experience;
current employment.
and reviews:
It may be helpful to know that because national education systems vary across the world, our appraisal is not
based on:
degree title;
country of study;
method of learning.
Following this preliminary appraisal we will confirm whether any additional learning is advised, what evidence to
submit in support of your application (eg a technical report), or whether we have sufficient existing evidence.
If the preliminary appraisal indicates a need for further learning in one or more specific areas, we will advise on
how to address the gap(s). This may be:
Please note that a career appraisal will only determine your application requirements and is not an application in
itself. If you are able, we therefore strongly recommend that you follow the guidance provided through the self
diagnosis tool.
Find out how to request a career appraisal www.icheme.org/careerappraisal
Providing evidence
You will need to submit evidence that your chemical engineering knowledge and understanding meet the
minimum level for a Chartered Chemical Engineer, as indicated in the self diagnosis. The main ways in which we
will ask you to provide evidence are as follows:
1.
2.
course transcript(s);
3.
technical report;
4.
technical report focused on demonstrating the ability to integrate knowledge into design or similar complex
project eg research;
5.
6.
A technical report would be a piece of written work, normally based on a project completed in industry. Academic
faculty can present a collection of relevant academic papers. Further guidance is provided on the requirements
for each report type.
You are strongly advised to use the self diagnosis tool to determine what specific evidence is required according
to your individual circumstances.
Assessment
If a technical report is required this should be submitted as part of a full application (including evidence of
professional experience www.GetChartered.org/professional_experience), except in the case of a technical
report focused on further learning in industry. A technical report focused on further learning should be submitted
for review and interview during your early career and before a full application to get chartered.
0618_12
www.icheme.org
ADVANCING
CHEMICAL
ENGINEERING
WORLDWIDE
Example A
Technical Report
Contents
1.
Definitions .................................................................................................................................... 4
2.
Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 5
3.
Setup ............................................................................................................................................. 6
4.
5.
6.
My involvement ......................................................................................................................... 10
7.
8.
9.
8.3.
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 21
9.1. Equipment Performance.................................................................................................. 21
9.2.
9.3.
Commissioning.................................................................................................................. 21
9.4.
Economics.......................................................................................................................... 22
2 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Product Specifications
5.
Economic Evaluation
3 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
1. Definitions
ATU
CDU
CFC
DHDS
Diesel Hydrodesulphurisation
FEED
HP
HT
Hydrotreater
H&MB
ISBL
KBPSD
LCO
LP
LPG
MMTPA
P&ID
PFD
SGCU
VDU
VGO
4 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
2. Introduction
Over the last few years, the price of the crude oil has escalated manifolds. One of the
main reasons for this price rise is the increased demand of distillates from the
developing countries like China, India and Brazil, which is mainly spurned by the
great strides made by these countries economically.
In order to meet this ever increasing demand of distillates in the world, a number of
refineries are being built around the world. In one of these new refineries, there are
two crude columns. The crude distillation units produce many distillate cuts, which
are mainly blended into various products. The overhead from the atmospheric
distillation column is condensed in a partial condenser. The uncondensed vapor is
either routed to the fuel gas header or to the flare header. A part of this condensate is
routed back to the crude column as reflux, while the rest of it is further processed in
the Saturated Gas Concentration Unit (SGCU). This condensate is the unstabilised
naphtha, which is containing dissolved LPG fraction. In the proposed refinery, there
are two Saturate Gas Concentration Units, Unit 3 and 4 (SGCU 3 & 4), catering to
the two crude columns.
One of the main requirements of the SGCU is to extract this valuable liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG). The LPG has a very high commercial value in many countries.
For example, in India, LPG is imported regularly to meet the domestic demand and
any increased production of LPG is highly profitable. The LPG demand in India
during the 2006-07 has been estimated at 10.57 million tons, whereas the indigenous
availability during this period is 8.64 million tones. The shortfall of 1.93 million
tones will have to be imported. It is also expected that the demand for LPG will
increase by approximately 4.5% during the 2007-08 to 11.05 million tones. The cost
of LPG in the international market is US$467 / ton. LPG is sold at a subsidized price
to the domestic consumers in India. The LPG is sold to Indian consumers in a 14.5
kg cylinder. The cost of each cylinder is US$ 6.55 (US$ 452/ton) and this selling
cost includes the processing and retail marketing costs also. It is estimated that
Indian nationalized oil firms are loosing US$3.4 for the sale of each 14.5 kg cylinder,
while the government is providing a subsidy of US$0.50 per cylinder. It can easily
be seen from the above figures that if LPG is imported into India, the shortfall in
price for the imported LPG would be much higher.
For the present design of the new refinery, the LPG yield from the SGCU 3 & 4 is as
low as 86.95 mole %. In view of the great commercial advantage, the task was to
improve this recovery to >90 mole%.
5 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
3. Setup
The Saturated Gas Concentration Units 3 and 4 (SGCU 3 & 4), has been designed as
a modified repeat design based on SGCU 1 & 2 of an existing refinery belonging to
the same owners. The new SGCUs were envisaged to process about 10% higher
throughput.
In the new refinery there is a Clean Fuels Complex (CFC) having diesel
hydrodesulphurization units (DHDS 1 & 2) and a LCO hydrocracker. This complex
produces low sulfur diesel and other distillates which are sold in the international
market at a premium. The light ends from this complex are needed to be further
processed in a Light Ends Recovery Unit (LERU). The modified repeat design of the
SGCU 3 & 4 has been made to accommodate these additional loads from the CFC wild naphtha from DHDS 1, 2 and LCO Hydrocraker. This inclusion has eliminated
the need for a new Light Ends Recovery Unit (LERU).
A simple schematic of the SGCU feed scheme is given below (kindly refer to fig 1).
The SGCU 1 & 2 of the existing refinery does not have the streams from the CFC.
The operating pressure of the HP receiver for the existing unit (SGCU 1 & 2) is 14.4
kg/cm2g. However, in order to accommodate for the new streams from CFC, which
are operating at a lower pressure of 9 kg/cm2g, in the SGCU 3 & 4, the overall
operating pressure of the whole unit has to be decreased. The operating pressure of
the HP receiver is considerably decreased to 8.1 kg/cm2g. The feed composition to
the system is given in Attachment 1.
101
WILD NAPHTHA
FROM CDU
103
104
WILD NAPHTHA
FROM VGO HTU
110
WILD NAPHTHA
FROM DHDS 1
WILD NAPHTHA
FROM DHDS 2
107
WILD NAPHTHA
FROM LCO HC
102
OFF-GAS FROM
VGO HTU
FEED PREPARATION
108
309
111
106
112
CW
C05
OVHD
Receiver
(V12)
117
161
305
C05 Ovhd
Condenser
HP Cooler
OFF-GAS FROM
DHDS 1
OFF-GAS FROM
DHDS 2 HTU
OFF-GAS FROM
LCO HC
Example A
Technical Report
7 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
Feed
Preparation
142
307
S14
304
309
3
2
3
S01 A/B
161
203
A02
C
0
2
V01
310
CW
301
182
C
0
3
233
S13
Condensate
CW
204
MP Steam
CW
209
S08 A/B
313
145
S03
P03 A/B
Naphtha to
OSBL
181
180
CW
Lean oil
from CDU
S04
C
0
5
C
0
6
231
S06
P05 A/B
312
P06 A/B
S09/S10
170
S12
CW
122
302
S11
229
303
S05
S15
CIRCULATING
DIESEL TO CDU
202
P01 A/B
CW
212
225
187
210
Rich oil to
CDU
8 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
The liquid stream (unstabilised naphtha) from the bottom of V01 (stream 122) is
pumped to a Stripper (C05). This stream is heated against the hot outlet stream in
Stripper Feed/Bottoms Exchanger, S05 and further against the stabiliser bottom
stream in S15.
The purpose of the stripper (C05) is to strip off the absorbed light vapours in stream
122. The heat requirement for this column is provided by a steam heated reboiler,
S06. The vapour is routed back to the feed preparation section and passing through
the HP cooler is routed to the V01 (kindly refer to fig 1).
The naphtha from the bottom of the Stripper (C05) is then passed through Stripper
Feed/Bottoms Exchanger, S05 (where it provides heat to the inlet stream to C05) and
routed to a Stabilizer, C06. The C06 is a distillation column where LPG faction is
separated from the stabilised naphtha faction. The overhead from this column is
passed through a total condenser. A part of this condensate is fed to the column as
reflux while the other part is taken out as a LPG product.
The detailed stream summary of this section is given in Attachment 1. The process
schematic is shown in fig 2.
The product properties are listed in Attachment 4.
5. The problem
The C3 & C4 brought in with the feed streams to SGCU are either routed to the LPG
faction (stream 212), or to naphtha from C06 bottom (stream 312), or with the rich
oil going to the crude column (stream 187) or with the fuel gas going to the ATU
(stream 142).
The desired routing of the C3 & C4 content is to LPG faction (stream 212). However,
if it is routed with the rich oil (stream 187) and sent back to the crude column, then
also it is recoverable from the crude unit.
However, when the C3 & C4 content is routed to the ATU then it is lost to the fuel
gas system. Also, when it is routed with the naphtha then also it is lost to the naphtha
stream.
The C3 & C4 content of the various feed streams (including that carried in with the
lean oil) is 789.35 kg-moles/hr. The C3 & C4 which is recovered from this content
(with streams 187, 212, 316) is 686.05 kg-moles. Hence, the recovery is only 86.92
mole%. Due to introduction of the CFC vapour streams at a lower operating
9 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
pressure, and resultant lower operating pressure in the overall unit, the LPG recovery
is way below the desired recovery of 90 vol.%. Hence, the refinery will be loosing a
substantial amount of money in a costly product.
6. My involvement
I was involved in the process of accommodating the new CFC loads within the
existing framework. I was given the additional task to evaluate the system and make
a study to provide a solution to improve the LPG yield from the system. While doing
the study, I have extensively used the process simulator ProII to evaluate the
process conditions and feasibility of making changes. I have also used the
programmes HTRI Xchanger Suite, and KG towers to evaluate the exchanger
performances as well as the column performances in the changed operating
conditions.
Operating Pressure
In the existing refinery, the recovery is above 90 vol. %. An obvious difference between the
existing refinery and the new refinery was the addition of the liquid wild naphtha streams
(stream nos. 102,107,110) and the vapour streams (stream nos. 106,111,112) from the CFC.
This has resulted in a lower operating pressure of the feed section V01 and hence C02 &
C03. In the existing refinery, the operating pressure of the V01 is 14.4 kg/cm2g while that in
the new refinery it is only 8.1 kg/cm2g.
Obviously, V01 is one of the critical sections of the whole recovery process because higher
the operating pressure of V01, more the LPG faction will dissolve in the liquid phase and
more will be routed to C05 & C06. In the existing refinery the mole% of LPG carried away
with the vapour phase (stream 121) is 11.3 mole%. However, in the new design this loading
is 20.8 mole%. When this relatively excess amount of LPG goes into the vapour phase, the
extraction possibility of this faction in the absorbers decreases appreciably.
I started my analysis from this point. I could easily see that the best solution for this problem
is to increase the operating pressure of the system. Since, most of the procured equipment
for the new refinery has been copied from the existing refinery (to save fabrication time) the
design pressures of these equipment are quite high. Hence, my first task was to arrive at new
operating pressures within the framework of the existing design pressures.
10 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
7.2.
11 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
Operating Pressure
The LPG recovery of appx. 87mole % is not acceptable to the client. However, the plant can
be started up with the design scenario (in low pressure operation mode) but recovery is to be
increased for continuous operation.
As I found out through a number of simulations, the basic tool to improve the LPG recovery
was in increasing the operating pressure of the whole system. As the unit was designed as
per the design pressures of the existing refinery, there was limited scope to increase the
operating pressure if other constraints were tackled well.
Now, the most optimum operating pressure would be governed by V01 pressure. The design
pressure of V01 is 16.5 kg/cm2g. As per ASME Section VIII, Div 1 and API 520
requirement, the highest operating pressure for V01 can be 14.85 kg/cm2g. This is assuming
a 10% margin between operating and design pressure.
Hence, in order to achieve this higher operating pressure, the first part of the problem was to
bring in the feedstocks at higher pressures. The liquid streams may easily be provided at a
higher pressure if the pumps were suitably rated. I have checked that a couple of the
procured pumps may be limiting in providing the higher discharge pressure. But, this can
easily be achieved by changing the impellers of the pumps within the existing casing. Also, I
found out that a booster pump would be required for the CFC liquid streams.
The off-gas from the VGO hydrotreater can be provided at a higher pressure as the high
pressure separator inside VGO hydrotreater unit (from where this off-gas is routed) is
operating at a pressure of 18.6 kg/cm2a.
The only problem is to bring in the CFC gases at higher pressure. I proposed that a
compressor need to be procured and provided ISBL the SGCU. It would be a common
compressor for both the SGCU (SGCU 3 & 4).
The discharge pressure for this compressor was decided to be 16.2 kg/cm2a. This was
assuming a suction pressure of 9.8 kg/cm2a. After, considering appropriate pressure drops in
the system, the operating pressure of the V01 was found to be 15.2 kg/cm2a. The revised
feed system would be:
12 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
101
WILD NAPHTHA
FROM CDU
103
104
WILD NAPHTHA
FROM VGO HTU
110
WILD NAPHTHA
FROM DHDS 1
WILD NAPHTHA
FROM DHDS 2
FEED PREPARATION
107
WILD NAPHTHA
FROM LCO HC
108A
102
309
OFF-GAS FROM
VGO HTU
111
106
112
CW
C05
OVHD
Receiver
(V12)
117
161
305
OFF-GAS FROM
DHDS 1
OFF-GAS FROM
DHDS 2 HTU
OFF-GAS FROM
LCO HC
C05 Ovhd
Condenser
HP Cooler
S01 A/B
121
CW
To Primary
Absorber
307
301
HP RECEIVER
V01
302
To Stripper
I estimated using ProII simulation that due to higher operating pressure of the V01, the
vapour load decreased from 23,188 kg/hr to 17,300 kg/hr. Most importantly, the LPG
content of the V01 vapour was 181.9 kg-mole/hr, which decreased to 107.9 kg-mole/hr in
the high pressure operation mode.
The operating pressures of the various columns in the LP operation vis--vis HP operation is
summarised below. This higher operating pressure meant that the actual vapour load in the
columns was lesser and the columns operated better hydraulically. Of course, this increase
in the operating pressure in the HP operating case could be achieved because the unit was a
repeat unit and had enough margins the design pressure.
13 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
Columns
Design Pressure
Operating Pressure
Operating Pressure
(LP operation)
(HP operation)
8.2.
Kg/cm g
Kg/cm a
Kg/cm2a
C02
16.5
8.75/9.05
14.8/15.1
C03
16.3
8.5/8.6
14.6/14.7
C05
17.7
16.1/16.4
16.5/16.8
C06
15.0
10.5/10.8
13.0/13.3
Column Performance
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
TEMP
PRESSURE
DEG C
54.8
56.5
56.6
56.2
55.1
52.6
53.5
53.9
53.9
52.9
49.8
KG/CM2
8.75
8.78
8.81
8.84
8.87
8.9
8.93
8.96
8.99
9.02
9.05
LIQUID
812.7
830.3
834.9
836.4
605.5
855.2
861.8
866.6
870.9
875.8
FLOW
VAPOR
RATES
FEED
KG-MOL/HR
684.0L
990.1
1007.7
1012.3
1013.8
1014.7 231.8P
1032.5
1039.2
1044
1048.2
1053.2 1068.0V
0.1W
HEATER
PRODUC
T
DUTIES
M*KCAL/H
R
861.4V
231.8P
-0.1843
890.7L
TEMP
DEG C
60.8
63.3
63.7
63.4
62
58.4
59.2
59.7
59.9
59.2
PRESSURE
KG/CM2
14.8
14.83
14.86
14.89
14.92
14.95
14.98
15.01
15.04
15.07
LIQUID
852.1
879.9
887.7
890.5
649.3
915.1
922.2
927.1
932.4
940.7
FLOW
RATES
VAPOR
FEED
KG-MOL/HR
684.0L
955.1
982.8
990.6
993.5
994.9 242.7P
1018.1
1025.1
1030.1
1035.4
14 of 33
HEATER
PRODUC
T
DUTIES
M*KCAL/HR
787.0V
242.7P
-0.241
Example A
Technical Report
11
55.6
15.1
1043.6
1073.5V
0.4L
0.5W
971.4L
As can be expected the pumparound cooling duty for C02 has increased for the HP case 9as
compared to the LP operating case. The net vapour product from C02 has come down
(stream 141), which would in turn decrease the load in C03.
8.2.2. Sponge Absorber (C03)
The sponge absorber is a packed column. It has been formulated in the calculation as a 3
tray column. The summary of loads for low pressure operation is as follows:
NET
TRAY
1
2
3
TEMP
PRESSURE
DEG C
52.4
58
61.8
KG/CM2
FLOW
LIQUID
8.5
8.55
8.6
RATES
VAPOR
FEED
KG-MOL/HR
191.2L
818.3
833.9 861.4V
238.1
253.7
HEATER
PRODUC
T
DUTIES
M*KCAL/H
R
771.4V
281.2L
TRAY
1
2
3
TEMP
PRESSURE
DEG C
50.9
56.3
62.5
KG/CM2
14.6
14.65
14.7
----------
NET
FLOW
LIQUID
KGMOL/HR
244
257.4
VAPOR
FEED
RATES
PRODUC
T
191.2L
693.7V
787.0V
284.5L
746.5
759.9
HEATER
DUTIES
M*KCAL/H
R
The summary of the column flows for the LP operation is given below
FEED AND PRODUCT STREAMS LP Operation
TYPE
STREAM
PHASE
FEED
FEED
PROD
PROD
182
310
143
313
LIQUID
VAPOR
VAPOR
LIQUID
FROM
TRAY
TO
TRAY
1
3
LIQUID
FRAC
1
0
1
3
FLOW
RATES
KG-MOL/HR
191.19
861.38
771.41
281.15
HEAT
RATES
M*KCAL/HR
0.7346
2.7552
2.1055
1.3842
The summary of the column flows for the HP operation is given below
TYPE
STREAM
PHASE
FEED
FEED
PROD
PROD
182
310
143
313
LIQUID
VAPOR
VAPOR
LIQUID
FROM
TRAY
TO
TRAY
1
3
LIQUID
FRAC
1
0
1
3
15 of 33
FLOW
RATES
KG-MOL/HR
191.19
786.96
693.66
284.49
HEAT
RATES
M*KCAL/HR
0.744
2.317
1.665
1.396
Example A
Technical Report
8.2.3. Stripper (C05)
The stripper is a column with valve trays. The column internals has been designed for the
LP operation case. However, for the HP operation case, the liquid flows are much higher.
The summary of tray loads for low pressure operation is as follows:
Rigorous
COLUM
N
TRAY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17R
Column
321_C05,
SGCU
Stripper
NET
FLOW
SUMMARY
TEMP
PRESSURE
LIQUID
DEG C
KG/CM2
KG-MOL/HR
109.5
110
110.2
110.5
110.9
111.5
112.4
113.5
114.8
116.3
117.9
119.6
121.5
124.3
129.6
141.1
168.3
16.1
16.12
16.14
16.16
16.17
16.19
16.21
16.23
16.25
16.27
16.29
16.31
16.33
16.34
16.36
16.38
16.4
VAPOR
4541.6
4575
4594
4613.6
4640
4678.2
4732.7
4806.3
4897.9
5001.4
5107.6
5209.7
5310
5418.7
5545.1
5651.1
2022.7
RATES
HEATER
FEED
PRODUC
T
4437.6
L
993.4V
DUTIES
M*KCAL/H
R
913.2
946.6
965.6
985.1
1011.6
1049.8
1104.3
1177.9
1269.5
1372.9
1479.2
1581.3
1681.6
1790.3
1916.6
3628.4L
16.0269
SUMMARY
NET
TRAY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
TEMP
PRESSURE
DEG C
92.7
93.3
93.7
94.1
94.7
95.5
96.6
98.3
100.3
102.5
104.9
KG/CM2
16.5
16.52
16.54
16.56
16.58
16.59
16.61
16.63
16.65
16.67
16.69
FLOW
LIQUID
4886.6
4909.5
4933.5
4967
5017.6
5093.2
5200.6
5339.7
5500
5662.8
VAPOR
KGMOL/HR
4845.9
1154.2
1194.9
1217.8
1241.7
1275.3
1325.9
1401.4
1508.9
1648
1808.3
16 of 33
RATES
HEATER
FEED
PRODUC
T
4715.3L
1481.6V
DUTIES
M*KCAL/H
R
Example A
Technical Report
12
13
14
15
16
107.2
109.9
113.9
121
135.4
166.8
17R
16.71
16.73
16.74
16.76
16.78
16.8
5813.8
5951.6
6086.8
6222.6
6289.3
2597.5
1971.1
2122.1
2259.8
2395
2530.9
3691.7L
20.0952
Although the pressure level of the HP operation for the Stripper is not much higher than the
LP operation case, but the higher pressure in V01 has resulted in higher liquid loads in this
column.
8.2.4. Stabilizer (C06)
The stabilizer is a column with valve trays. However, in view of the heavy loads, the
internal trays have been changed to proprietary trays from Koch Glitsch called the
Superfrac trays. These trays are used where the vapour and the liquid loads are
appreciably high.
The column summary in LP operation is given below:
Rigorous
COLUM
N
Column
321_C06,
Stabiliser
SGCU
SUMMARY
TRAY
TEMP
PRESSURE
LIQUID
DEG
1C
KG/CM2
NET
FLOW
VAPOR
FEED
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
47
66.2
71.9
75.3
77.9
80.6
83.8
87.5
91.4
95
98.2
100.8
102.9
104.9
107.2
110.9
119.5
9.6
10.5
10.51
10.52
10.53
10.54
10.55
10.56
10.57
10.58
10.59
10.6
10.61
10.62
10.63
10.64
10.65
KG-MOL/HR
2299.8
2488
2487
2467.4
2430.5
2380.9
2325.8
2274.6
2234.3
2206.1
2186.7
2170.7
2152.2
2122.5
2059.7
1897.4
1527.5
2978.8
3167
3166
3146.5
3109.5
3059.9
3004.8
2953.7
2913.4
2885.2
2865.7
2849.7
2831.2
2801.6
2738.7
2576.4
18
19
20
21
22
23
140.4
142.3
143.8
145.2
146.5
147.7
10.65
10.66
10.67
10.68
10.69
10.7
4808
4889.1
4952.5
5004.8
5051.5
5096.3
1859.3
1858.6
1939.8
2003.1
2055.4
2102.2
17 of 33
RATES
PRODUC
T
679.1L
347.2V
3281.2
L
HEATER
DUTIES
M*KCAL/H
R
-13.0539
Example A
Technical Report
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
149
150.3
151.6
153.1
154.9
157.4
162.1
172.3
181.3
197.1
32S
33R
10.71
10.72
10.73
10.74
10.75
10.76
10.77
10.78
10.79
10.8
5140.9
5186
5231
5274.5
5312.9
5336.4
5316.8
5202.8
5262
3111
2146.9
2191.5
2236.6
2281.6
2325.1
2363.5
2387
2367.4
102.4
2151
2949.54L
16.1217
STREAM
PHASE
FEED
FEED
PROD
PROD
PROD
170V
170L
VAPOR
LIQUID
LIQUID
WATER
LIQUID
210
316
225
OTHER
PRODUC
T
STREAMS
TYPE
STREAM
PHASE
NET
TOTAL
209
203
FROM
TRAY
LIQUID
VAPOR
TO
TRAY
17
18
LIQUID
FRAC
0
1
1
1
32
FLOW
RATES
KG-MOL/HR
347.19
3281.23
679.1
2949.5
FROM
TRAY
1
2
TO
TRAY
LIQUID
FRAC
FLOW
RATES
KG-MOL/HR
2299.86
2978.89
HEAT
RATES
M*KCAL/HR
3.585
26.539
1.0413
0
32.1505
HEAT RATES
M*KCAL/HR
3.5267
17.6218
FLOW
TEMP
PRESSURE
LIQUID
DEG C
KG-MOL/HR
2632.6
3038.7
3037.3
3016.4
2974
2915
2848.2
1C
2
3
4
5
6
7
47
73.7
79.9
83.8
86.7
89.6
92.9
KG/CM2
12.1
13
13.01
13.02
13.03
13.04
13.05
8
9
96.7
100.7
13.06
13.07
VAPOR
2784.6
2733.7
18 of 33
RATES
FEED
HEATER
PRODUC
T
726.5L
3359.1
3765.2
3763.8
3742.9
3700.5
3641.6
3574.7
3511.1
DUTIES
M*KCAL/H
R
-14.9108
Example A
Technical Report
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
104.6
108
110.9
113.4
115.6
118.2
122.3
131.4
13.08
13.09
13.1
13.11
13.12
13.13
13.14
13.15
2697.6
2672.6
2652.1
2628.1
2588.5
2503.5
2292.2
1850.4
3460.2
3424.1
3399.1
3378.6
3354.7
3315
3230
3018.7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32S
33R
151.7
153.9
155.6
157.1
158.5
159.8
161
162.2
163.5
164.9
166.7
169.4
174.3
184.9
194.1
208.7
13.15
13.16
13.17
13.18
13.19
13.2
13.21
13.22
13.23
13.24
13.25
13.26
13.27
13.28
13.29
13.3
5105.3
5202.4
5279.6
5342.9
5397.5
5447.2
5494.2
5539.4
5582.6
5622.7
5655.7
5670.8
5638.7
5515.8
6029.6
3579.5
2141.5
2140.1
2237.1
2314.4
2377.7
2432.3
2482
2529
2574.2
2617.4
2657.4
2690.5
2705.6
2673.4
100.5
2450.1
FEED AND
PRODUCT
STREAM
PHASE
FEED
FEED
PROD
PROD
170V
170L
210
316
VAPOR
LIQUID
LIQUID
WATER
FROM
TRAY
17
18
1
1
225
LIQUID
32
OTHER
PRODUCT
STREAMS
TYPE
STREAM
PHASE
FRO
M
LIQUID
VAPOR
TRAY
1
2
NET
TOTAL
2965.2L
17.311
STREAMS
TYPE
PROD
435.4V
3256.3
L
209
203
TO
TRAY
0
1
726.51
0
2965.2
2
LIQUID
FRAC
435.44
3256.29
1.1042
FLOW
RATES
KG-MOL/HR
4.7184
28.9406
HEAT
RATES
M*KCAL/HR
FLOW
RATES
HEAT
RATES
M*KCAL/H
R
4.0013
20.0164
34.9549
TO
LIQUID
TRAY
FRAC
KG-MOL/HR
2632.7
3359.3
The reboiler duty in the HP case is higher as expected. The reboiler has been checked
and is found to be adequate for the higher load. The vapour load in the rectifying section
is also higher. The liquid load is higher in the overall column. The tray supplier was
contacted and they have confirmed that the Superfrac trays can accommodate such
19 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
changes in the loads.
8.3.
Exchanger Performance
While performing the study, I found that a few of the exchangers were limiting and hence
did not allow any manipulation.
Example A
Technical Report
limits of the exchanger, I have maximised the process flow through the exchanger to 18220
kg/hr from 16220 kg/hr. With increasing the flow further, I found that there were vibration
problems in the shell side (process side).
8.3.4. Stabilizer reboilers (S09/S10)
The heat required for S09/S10 is provided by hot diesel stream from the crude unit. The
S09/S10 heat transfer area was another limiting factor. I used HTRI calculation to get the
maximum possible duty from these reboilers. The S09 / S10 are parallel heat exchangers.
The duty required by the column C06 was to be provided by either S09/S10 or had to be
carried along with the feed, which was preheated by S05. I distributed the heat between S05
and S09/S10 after finding the limiting duty for S09/S10.
It was a challenging job to distribute the overall heat load in the system so that I could
utilise the maximum available area of the various exchangers and perform the desired
function.
9. Conclusion
9.1.
Equipment Performance
I could successfully rerate the unit for the higher operating pressure. All the exchangers
were checked for predicted performance (using HTRI program) and they were found to be
adequate for the HP operation. The separators were also checked. Since, the operating
pressures were higher; the separator diameters did not cause concern, as expected. The
alarm set points of the liquid levels in the separators were re-checked and some of them
were changed.
After checking the predicted column performance, I could confirm that the HP operation
would work within the purchased equipment.
9.2.
LPG Recovery
After the re-rating of the unit, the LPG recovery improved to 92.9 mole%, which was higher
than the desired recovery. The brief stream summaries of the feeds and the product are given
in Attachment 2 for the LP operating case & Attachment 3 for the HP operating case.
9.3.
Commissioning
The plant will be commissioned in the LP operating case. However, the plant shall be
designed in a fashion that the operation will be switched over to the HP operating case
21 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
without any lengthy downtime.
9.4.
Economics
For the high pressure operation case, 38550.8 kg/hr of LPG is recovered as against 36536.7
kg/hr for the LP operating case. This means that by increasing the operating pressure, there
was an increased recovery of 2014.1 kg/hr (kindly refer to Attachment 6 for details).
Now, LPG is priced at US$ 467/ton in the international market. The compressor is expected
to be a small compressor with 750 kWh motor. The electricity cost is expected to be US$ 58
per hour (at an estimated cost of Rs.3.5 / kWh of electricity consumed). Hence, there is an
increased recovery of US$ 890.59 / hour.
It is considered that there will be 8000 operating hours per year (a service factor of 91%).
Hence, the excess money made due to the higher operating case would amount to US$ 7.06
million per year.
Now, it is estimated that the installation of the compressor would cost US$ 4 million. I have
assumed that the associated additional equipment would cost another US$ 750,000. An
additional US$ 250,000 may be assumed for the engineering and piping. Hence, I could
show that after the re-rating of the unit for higher operating case, the payback is expected to
be less than 1 year.
22 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
Feed Composition
Attachment 1
Stream Name
Phase
Total Stream
Rate
Std. Liq. Rate
Temperature
Pressure
Molecular Weight
Mole Fraction Liquid
Sp. Gravity
Vapor
Rate
Molecular Weight
Liquid
Rate
Molecular Weight
Total Molar Comp. Rates
H2O
AIR
H2
NH3
H2S
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
PROPENE
IBUTANE
BUTANE
1BUTENE
IPENTANE
PENTANE
KG-MOL/HR
KG/HR
M3/HR
C
KG/CM2
101
Liquid
102
Liquid
103
Mixed
104
Liquid
106
Mixed
107
Liquid
108
Mixed
110
Liquid
111
Mixed
112
Mixed
113
Liquid
2,052.8
200,947
288.2
51
12.02
97.89
1.000
0.7
277.4
18,174
29.5
39
14.02
65.52
245.0
6,931
15.9
54
11.03
28.29
0.011
0.4
165.5
15,329
22.5
73
17.23
92.60
1.000
0.7
257.2
5,839
14.1
40
10.03
22.71
0.012
0.4
368.7
33,935
49.3
39
14.02
92.03
1.000
0.7
539.8
13,640
31.4
39
9.88
25.27
0.015
0.4
160.9
13,225
19.8
39
14.02
82.20
1.000
0.7
153.6
4,277
9.1
40
10.03
27.84
0.008
0.5
129.1
3,523
8.2
40
10.03
27.29
0.037
0.4
807.0
65,334
98.6
39
14.02
80.96
1.000
0.7
152.41
4,171
386.1
27.37
124.34
3,152
316.6
25.35
1.000
0.6
KG-MOL/HR
KG/HR
M3/HR
KG-MOL/HR
KG/HR
M3/HR
242.26
6,664
583.0
27.51
254.13
5,536
655.5
21.78
531.95
12,922
1378.9
24.29
2,052.8
200,947
301.4
97.89
277.4
18,174
30.8
65.52
2.8
268
0.4
96.15
165.5
15,329
24.4
92.60
3.0
303
0.4
100.37
368.7
33,935
50.8
92.03
7.9
717
1.1
90.82
160.9
13,225
20.5
82.20
1.2
106
0.2
87.43
4.7
370
0.6
78.39
807.0
65,334
102.0
80.96
4.45
5.64
0.79
0.00
21.75
1.41
26.45
120.75
0.00
43.65
180.42
0.00
108.90
181.34
0.36
0.00
1.37
0.02
1.41
1.37
5.91
42.52
0.00
47.05
47.65
0.00
34.68
21.38
2.06
0.00
76.73
0.01
20.80
24.59
48.60
24.17
0.00
23.88
12.04
0.00
5.82
3.75
0.78
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.44
1.14
0.00
29.44
28.92
1.57
0.00
89.30
0.00
42.39
45.34
38.30
23.36
0.00
3.65
7.82
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.42
0.00
0.99
0.00
20.90
3.29
14.13
27.88
0.00
9.90
29.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.48
0.00
187.99
0.03
77.03
72.01
62.66
72.78
0.00
24.33
23.86
0.00
4.35
2.03
0.19
0.00
0.44
0.00
11.36
0.88
3.84
21.36
0.00
16.96
18.47
0.00
9.52
4.63
1.04
0.00
45.33
0.00
32.58
15.50
14.14
25.29
0.00
8.92
7.09
0.00
1.58
0.62
0.87
0.00
53.35
0.03
2.06
11.17
10.22
24.14
0.00
11.76
8.94
0.00
2.77
1.41
0.96
0.00
2.80
0.02
33.67
5.54
23.88
91.76
0.00
73.91
95.88
0.00
44.20
26.01
KG-MOL/HR
23 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
C6+
1357.24
73.66
2.60
104.82
5.43
261.47
9.30
73.23
101
Liquid
103
Mixed
104
Liquid
106
Mixed
107
Liquid
108
Mixed
110
Liquid
111
Mixed
112
Mixed
408.37
117
Mixed
121
Vapor
143
Vapor
180
Liquid
187
Mixed
212
Liquid
301
Mixed
312
Liquid
2,053
277
245
166
257
369
540
161
154
129
4,812
876
771
191
281
679
5,502
200,947
51
12.02
18,174
39
14.02
6,931
54
11.03
15,329
73
17.23
5,839
40
10.03
33,935
39
14.02
13,640
39
9.88
13,225
39
14.02
4,277
40
10.03
3,523
40
10.03
400,686
62
10.21
23,188
39
9.10
16,563
52
7.73
43,000
268
11.00
49,001
148
6.45
36,399
42
16.82
423,255
39
9.10
2,265
243,14
7
41
10.24
H2O
AIR
4.45
5.64
0.36
0.00
2.06
0.00
0.78
0.00
1.57
0.00
0.42
0.00
3.48
0.00
0.19
0.00
1.04
0.00
0.87
0.00
13.86
6.94
6.97
5.43
7.21
5.57
0.51
0.01
0.61
0.09
0.00
0.00
18.21
6.98
0.00
0.00
H2
0.79
1.37
76.73
0.00
89.30
0.99
187.99
0.44
45.33
53.35
89.86
266.33
267.67
0.00
0.64
0.00
277.90
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.07
0.05
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.00
21.75
1.41
26.45
120.75
0.00
43.65
180.42
0.00
108.90
181.34
1357.24
1.41
1.37
5.91
42.52
0.00
47.05
47.65
0.00
34.68
21.38
73.66
137.2
3
20.80
24.59
48.60
24.17
0.00
23.88
12.04
0.00
5.82
3.75
2.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.44
1.14
0.00
29.44
28.92
104.82
42.39
45.34
38.30
23.36
0.00
3.65
7.82
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.43
20.90
3.29
14.13
27.88
0.00
9.90
29.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
261.47
11.36
0.88
3.84
21.36
0.00
16.96
18.47
0.00
9.52
4.63
73.23
32.58
15.50
14.14
25.29
0.00
8.92
7.09
0.00
1.58
0.62
1.54
2.06
11.17
10.22
24.14
0.00
11.76
8.94
0.00
2.77
1.41
2.34
265.59
55.10
243.08
457.88
0.00
217.97
403.25
0.00
258.08
326.78
2473.49
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.00
0.03
0.20
0.00
0.19
0.40
189.77
11.68
1.38
7.79
11.72
0.00
1.06
1.82
0.00
12.37
14.37
217.63
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.44
17.94
0.00
170.05
223.68
1851.4
34.83
67.53
56.79
41.30
44.84
1079.10
82.91
0.29
14.60
1.20
0.00
0.86
220.71
0.00
160.14
290.60
0.00
5.08
0.34
0.14
671.4
5
361.40
127.80
318.24
562.54
0.00
256.20
450.39
0.00
272.47
340.10
2509.79
1.58
136.38
98.98
145.71
120.42
0.00
26.24
35.25
0.00
9.81
9.51
14.88
181.9
1
140.38
102.17
152.94
77.11
0.00
2.60
3.20
0.00
5.41
4.07
3.00
60.09
77.03
72.01
62.66
72.78
0.00
24.33
23.86
0.00
4.35
2.03
9.30
120.9
7
1269.13
20.39
Temperature
Pressure
Total Molar
Comp. Rates
KG-MOL/HR
102
Liquid
2.34
Attachment 2
1.54
KG/HR
C
KG/CM2
KG-MOL/HR
NH3
H2S
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
PROPENE
IBUTANE
BUTANE
1BUTENE
IPENTANE
PENTANE
C6+
LPG content
LPG in with feed
LPG with Lean oil
Total LPG in
LPG out
344.81
kg-mole/hr
Stream 180
789.00
0.29
789.29
212
143
312
187
671.45
82.91
20.39
14.60
LPG
recoveredout
212
187
24 of 33
671.45
14.60
686.05
kg-mole/hr
kg-mole/hr
kg-mole/hr
Example A
Technical Report
789.35
Stream No
Phase
Total Stream
Rate
Temperature
Pressure
Total Molar Comp.
Rates
H2O
AIR
H2
NH3
86.92%
% LPG recovered
126
Liquid
145
Liquid
161
Vapor
170
Liquid
182
Liquid
202
Mixed
203
Vapor
204
Liquid
209
Liquid
4,622
399,988
110
19.95
891
81,321
50
9.05
993
47,044
109
16.10
3,629
352,958
168
16.40
191
43,000
44
9.20
3,629
352,958
148
11.00
2,979
159,674
66
10.50
2,979
159,674
47
9.70
6.81
1.55
1.15
0.28
6.81
1.55
0.00
0.00
0.51
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11.57
1.96
11.57
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
KGMOL/HR
KG/HR
C
KG/CM2
225
229
Liquid
231
Liquid
233
Liquid
302
Liquid
303
Liquid
2,300
123,275
47
17.12
2,949
316,559
181
10.79
2,949
316,559
123
10.49
684
73,412
123
10.49
684
73,412
43
10.09
4,622
399,988
40
20.65
4,622
399,988
57
20.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.81
1.55
6.81
1.55
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11.57
11.57
Liquid
KG-MOL/HR
0.05
0.01
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.05
H2S
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
PROPENE
IBUTANE
BUTANE
1BUTENE
IPENTANE
PENTANE
C6+
225.02
28.82
172.53
442.12
0.00
229.96
415.14
0.00
262.66
330.59
2494.92
42.71
4.67
31.66
76.11
0.00
32.42
47.46
0.00
46.00
61.18
545.11
1.20
0.00
0.86
220.72
0.00
163.32
313.96
0.00
226.47
291.56
2410.48
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.00
0.03
0.20
0.00
0.19
0.40
189.77
1.20
0.00
0.86
220.72
0.00
163.32
313.96
0.00
226.47
291.56
2410.48
5.25
0.00
3.79
968.21
0.00
702.48
1274.77
0.00
22.29
1.51
0.63
5.25
0.00
3.79
968.21
0.00
702.48
1274.77
0.00
22.29
1.51
0.63
4.05
0.00
2.93
747.50
0.00
542.32
984.14
0.00
17.21
1.16
0.48
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
3.18
23.36
0.00
221.39
291.21
2410.34
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
3.18
23.36
0.00
221.39
291.21
2410.34
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.74
5.42
0.00
51.34
67.53
558.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.74
5.42
0.00
51.34
67.53
558.97
225.02
28.82
172.53
442.12
0.00
229.96
415.14
0.00
262.66
330.59
2494.92
225.02
28.82
172.53
442.12
0.00
229.96
415.14
0.00
262.66
330.59
2494.92
LPG content
1087.22
155.99
223.84
28.82
171.67
221.45
0.00
66.66
101.21
0.00
36.21
39.05
84.49
389.3
2
698.00
0.29
698.00
2945.47
2945.47
2273.96
26.55
26.55
6.16
6.16
1087.22
1087.22
25 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
Stream No
Phase
Total Stream
Rate
308
Vapor
309
Vapor
310
Vapor
313
Mixed
343
16,220
109
16.10
1,068
30,474
39
9.05
651
30,824
109
16.10
861
22,565
55
8.60
281
49,001
62
6.80
H2O
AIR
2.35
0.53
8.45
5.92
4.46
1.02
7.30
5.64
0.61
0.09
H2
3.99
270.26
7.58
268.31
0.64
Temperature
Pressure
Total Molar Comp.
Rates
NH3
H2S
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
PROPENE
IBUTANE
BUTANE
1BUTENE
IPENTANE
PENTANE
C6+
LPG content
304
Vapor
0.02
0.07
0.03
0.06
0.00
77.18
9.94
59.19
76.35
0.00
22.98
34.90
0.00
12.48
13.46
29.13
134.23
194.76
108.22
192.40
164.87
0.00
35.32
46.86
0.00
12.25
11.69
17.00
247.05
146.66
18.89
112.48
145.10
0.00
43.68
66.32
0.00
23.72
25.59
55.36
255.09
152.06
103.55
160.73
88.76
0.00
3.64
4.82
0.00
17.59
18.04
30.86
97.22
11.68
1.38
7.79
11.72
0.00
1.06
1.82
0.00
12.37
14.37
217.63
14.60
26 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
Attachment 3
Summary of streams for HP operating case
Stream No.
Phase
Total Stream
Rate
Temperature
Pressure
Total Molar Comp.
Rates
H2O
AIR
H2
NH3
H2S
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
PROPENE
IBUTANE
BUTANE
1BUTENE
IPENTANE
KG-MOL/HR
KG/HR
C
KG/CM2
102
Mixed
103
Mixed
104
Liquid
106
Mixed
107
Liquid
108A
Vapor
110
Liquid
111
Mixed
112
Mixed
117
Mixed
121
Vapor
143
Vapor
180
Liquid
187A
Mixed
212
Liquid
301
Mixed
2053
200947
51
16.5
277
18174
39
16.5
245
6931
54
16.5
166
15329
73
17.23
514
11679
40
10.03
369
33935
39
16.5
532
12912
73
15.944
161
13225
39
16.5
307
8555
40
10.03
258
7045
40
10.03
5824
429617
65
15.944
755
17301
39
15.2
694
13104
49
8.43
191
43000
268
11
285
48358
150
12.55
727
38556
42
11.8
5936
436131
39
15.3
4.45
5.64
0.79
0.00
21.75
1.41
26.45
120.75
0.00
43.65
180.42
0.00
108.90
0.36
0.00
1.37
0.02
1.41
1.37
5.91
42.52
0.00
47.05
47.65
0.00
34.68
2.06
0.00
76.73
0.01
20.80
24.59
48.60
24.17
0.00
23.88
12.04
0.00
5.82
0.78
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.44
1.14
0.00
29.44
3.13
0.00
178.61
0.00
84.79
90.68
76.60
46.71
0.00
7.30
15.64
0.00
0.00
0.42
0.00
0.99
0.00
20.90
3.29
14.13
27.88
0.00
9.90
29.76
0.00
0.00
3.47
0.00
187.96
0.03
76.63
71.94
62.43
71.97
0.00
23.68
23.02
0.00
4.01
0.19
0.00
0.44
0.00
11.36
0.88
3.84
21.36
0.00
16.96
18.47
0.00
9.52
2.08
0.00
90.67
0.00
65.16
31.01
28.27
50.58
0.00
17.84
14.19
0.00
3.15
1.75
0.00
106.70
0.06
4.12
22.33
20.45
48.28
0.00
23.52
17.89
0.00
5.55
18.17
8.49
289.92
0.14
534.77
153.48
453.42
620.84
0.00
241.72
422.16
0.00
267.81
3.58
5.28
264.78
0.05
125.02
95.34
134.74
76.37
0.00
13.61
17.95
0.00
5.17
4.07
5.50
267.08
0.05
130.44
100.97
146.90
33.83
0.00
0.38
1.26
0.00
1.43
0.51
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.00
0.03
0.20
0.00
0.19
0.67
0.16
1.21
0.01
21.19
2.52
13.97
10.19
0.00
0.34
1.67
0.00
10.61
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.27
0.00
0.52
264.70
0.00
162.11
292.01
0.00
5.35
18.45
8.52
289.97
0.14
551.88
154.06
464.35
644.00
0.00
250.79
437.52
0.00
275.11
181.34
21.38
3.75
28.92
0.00
0.00
1.83
4.63
1.24
2.82
333.89
4.99
1.00
0.40
11.63
0.45
342.13
2.60
245.04
60.09
104.82
165.54
1.58
10.86
514.31
69.66
261.47
368.72
67.53
4.83
531.81
118.67
73.23
160.88
56.79
3.07
307.25
82.60
4.67
258.13
89.68
2479.02
5823.83
1284.72
7.81
754.68
107.93
0.85
693.76
35.48
189.77
191.19
0.29
210.33
284.50
12.20
0.16
726.56
718.82
2498.71
5935.65
1332.32
KG-MOL/HR
PENTANE
C6+
Total
LPG content
LPG in with feed
LPG with Lean Oil
LPG in
LPG out
101
Liquid
1357.24
73.66
2052.79
277.39
344.81
137.23
Kg-mole/hr
Stream 180
212
143
312
187
786.70
0.29
786.99
718.82
35.48
20.53
12.20
787.03
LPG recovered
% LPG recovered
27 of 33
212
187
Total
718.82
12.20
731.02
92.89%
Example A
Technical Report
Stream No.
Phase
Total Stream
Rate
Temperature
Pressure
Total Molar Comp.
Rates
H2O
AIR
H2
NH3
H2S
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
PROPENE
IBUTANE
BUTANE
1BUTENE
IPENTANE
PENTANE
C6+
KGMOL/HR
KG/HR
C
KG/CM2
KGMOL/HR
126
Mixed
145
Liquid
161
Mixed
170
Liquid
182
Liquid
202
Mixed
203
Vapor
204
Liquid
209
Liquid
225
Liquid
229
Liquid
231
Liquid
233
Liquid
302A
Liquid
303
Liquid
5173
418694
92
18.40
971
83810
56
15.10
1482
62573
92
16.50
3692
356114
167
16.80
191
43000
44
9.20
3692
356114
161
13.65
3359
178264
74
13.00
3359
178264
47
12.20
2633
139708
47
12.10
2965
317559
194
13.29
2965
317559
135
12.99
684
73254
135
12.99
684
73254
47
19.17
5173
418694
40
29.85
5173
418694
40
18.70
7.37
3.24
25.18
0.10
426.87
58.72
329.61
567.63
0.00
237.18
419.58
0.00
269.95
1.23
0.55
3.79
0.02
80.26
8.36
58.79
97.52
0.00
25.50
35.62
0.00
49.29
7.37
3.24
25.18
0.10
425.58
58.72
329.08
302.87
0.00
71.47
104.47
0.00
36.90
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.27
0.00
0.52
264.71
0.00
165.70
315.09
0.00
233.04
0.51
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.00
0.03
0.20
0.00
0.19
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.27
0.00
0.52
264.71
0.00
165.70
315.09
0.00
233.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.87
0.00
2.39
1223.86
0.00
749.53
1350.10
0.00
24.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.87
0.00
2.39
1223.86
0.00
749.53
1350.10
0.00
24.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.60
0.00
1.87
959.16
0.00
587.42
1058.09
0.00
19.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
3.59
23.09
0.00
227.69
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
3.59
23.09
0.00
227.69
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.83
5.33
0.00
52.52
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.83
5.33
0.00
52.52
7.37
3.24
25.18
0.10
426.87
58.72
329.61
567.63
0.00
237.18
419.58
0.00
269.95
7.37
3.24
25.18
0.10
426.87
58.72
329.61
567.63
0.00
237.18
419.58
0.00
269.95
337.15
64.54
38.79
298.34
0.40
298.34
2.07
2.07
1.62
297.90
297.90
68.72
68.72
337.15
337.15
2490.91
545.98
77.85
2413.04
189.77
2413.04
0.72
0.72
0.56
2412.88
2412.88
556.60
556.60
2490.91
2490.91
28 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
Stream No.
Phase
Total Stream
Rate
Temperature
Pressure
Total Molar Comp.
Rates
H2O
AIR
H2
NH3
H2S
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
PROPENE
IBUTANE
BUTANE
1BUTENE
IPENTANE
PENTANE
C6+
304
Mixed
306
Mixed
431
18220
92
16.50
320
11716
45
16.25
112
6504
45
16.25
1075
29017
39
15.20
1050
44353
92
16.50
787
18461
61
14.70
285
48358
63
12.90
2.15
0.94
7.33
0.03
123.92
17.10
95.82
88.19
0.00
20.81
30.42
0.00
10.74
1.87
0.91
7.29
0.03
106.87
16.52
84.93
65.11
0.00
11.75
15.08
0.00
3.45
0.27
0.04
0.04
0.00
17.05
0.58
10.89
23.09
0.00
9.06
15.34
0.00
7.29
5.46
6.19
272.07
0.07
231.89
111.86
219.67
141.48
0.00
25.36
33.02
0.00
8.62
5.23
2.30
17.85
0.07
301.66
41.62
233.26
214.68
0.00
50.66
74.05
0.00
26.15
4.23
5.64
268.28
0.06
151.63
103.49
160.87
43.96
0.00
0.69
2.73
0.00
11.85
0.67
0.16
1.21
0.01
21.19
2.52
13.97
10.19
0.00
0.34
1.67
0.00
10.61
11.30
3.06
8.24
8.04
27.50
12.22
11.63
22.67
2.98
19.69
10.79
55.18
21.41
210.33
29 of 33
307
Mixed
308
Mixed
309
Mixed
310
Vapor
313
Mixed
Example A
Technical Report
Attachment 4
Product Specifications
1) Off Gas ex Sat Gas Unit (Stream 143)
Quality
Required Quality
Quality
Achieved
LP Operation
HP Operation
C5+ Content
0.39 mol%
0.35 mole%
C3 Content
10.75 mol%
5.11 mole%
LPG recovery
Required Quality
Quality
Achieved
LP Operation
HP Operation
89.2 mole%
92.9 mole%
739 kPa
773 kPA
1050
kPa
max
< 1% mol
0.82 mole%
0.82 mole%
H2S
Quality
Achieved
LP Operation
HP Operation
Required Quality
C4- content
< 1% mol
0.9 mole%
0.9 mole%
156.8oC
157oC
30 of 33
Example A
Technical Report
Economic evaluation
Attachment 5
LP operating case
Stream No.
Phase
Total Stream
Rate
Temperature
Pressure
Total Molar
Comp. Rates
H2O
AIR
H2
NH3
H2S
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
PROPENE
IBUTANE
BUTANE
1BUTENE
IPENTANE
PENTANE
C6+
LPG content
101
Liquid
KG-MOL/HR
KG/HR
C
KG/CM2
102
Liquid
103
Mixed
104
Liquid
106
Mixed
107
Liquid
108
Mixed
110
Liquid
143
Vapor
180
Liquid
187
Mixed
212
Liquid
312
Liquid
2,053
200,947
51
12.02
277
18,174
39
14.02
245
6,931
54
11.03
166
15,329
73
17.23
257
5,839
40
10.03
369
33,935
39
14.02
540
13,640
39
9.88
161
13,225
39
14.02
771
16,563
52
7.73
191
43,000
268
11.00
281
49,001
148
6.45
679
36,399
42
16.82
2,265
243,147
41
10.24
4.45
5.64
0.79
0.00
21.75
1.41
26.45
120.75
0.00
43.65
180.42
0.00
108.90
181.34
1357.24
0.36
0.00
1.37
0.02
1.41
1.37
5.91
42.52
0.00
47.05
47.65
0.00
34.68
21.38
73.66
2.06
0.00
76.73
0.01
20.80
24.59
48.60
24.17
0.00
23.88
12.04
0.00
5.82
3.75
2.60
0.78
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.44
1.14
0.00
29.44
28.92
104.82
1.57
0.00
89.30
0.00
42.39
45.34
38.30
23.36
0.00
3.65
7.82
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.43
0.42
0.00
0.99
0.00
20.90
3.29
14.13
27.88
0.00
9.90
29.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
261.47
0.19
0.00
0.44
0.00
11.36
0.88
3.84
21.36
0.00
16.96
18.47
0.00
9.52
4.63
73.23
7.21
5.57
267.67
0.05
140.38
102.17
152.94
77.11
0.00
2.60
3.20
0.00
5.41
4.07
3.00
0.51
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.00
0.03
0.20
0.00
0.19
0.40
189.77
0.61
0.09
0.64
0.00
11.68
1.38
7.79
11.72
0.00
1.06
1.82
0.00
12.37
14.37
217.63
137.23
7364
60.09
3147
1.58
92
34.83
1693
67.53
3526
56.79
2995
82.91
3729
0.29
16
14.60
683
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.20
0.00
0.86
220.71
0.00
160.14
290.60
0.00
5.08
0.34
0.14
671.4
5
35854
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.44
17.94
0.00
170.05
223.68
1851.37
344.81
18309
3.48
0.00
187.99
0.03
77.03
72.01
62.66
72.78
0.00
24.33
23.86
0.00
4.35
2.03
9.30
120.9
7
5997
LPG out
212
187
35854.11
682.57
36536.67
KG-MOL/HR
KG-MOL/HR
kg/hr
Kg-mole/hr
LPG in with feed
(With streams
101+102+103+104+107+108+110)
LPG with Lean oil
Stream 180
Total LPG in
LPG out
212
143
312
187
kg/hr
789.00
41429.54
0.29
789.29
671.45
82.91
20.39
14.60
16
41445.54
35854
3729
1182
683
31 of 33
kg/hr
kg/hr
kg/hr
20.39
1182
Example A
Technical Report
789.35
41448.54
HP operating case
Stream Name
Phase
Total Stream
Rate
101
Liquid
102
Mixed
103
Mixed
104
Liquid
106
Mixed
107
Liquid
108A
Vapor
110
Liquid
143
Vapor
180
Liquid
187A
Mixed
212
Liquid
312
Liquid
2053
200947
51
16.5
277
18174
39
16.5
245
6931
54
16.5
166
15329
73
17.23
514
11679
40
10.03
369
33935
39
16.5
532
12912
73
15.9444
161
13225
39
16.5
694
13104
49
8.43
191
43000
268
11
285
48358
150
12.55
727
38556
42
11.8
2281
244304
42
12.7103
4.45
5.64
0.79
0.00
21.75
1.41
26.45
120.75
0.00
43.65
180.42
0.00
108.90
0.36
0.00
1.37
0.02
1.41
1.37
5.91
42.52
0.00
47.05
47.65
0.00
34.68
2.06
0.00
76.73
0.01
20.80
24.59
48.60
24.17
0.00
23.88
12.04
0.00
5.82
0.78
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.44
1.14
0.00
29.44
3.13
0.00
178.61
0.00
84.79
90.68
76.60
46.71
0.00
7.30
15.64
0.00
0.00
0.42
0.00
0.99
0.00
20.90
3.29
14.13
27.88
0.00
9.90
29.76
0.00
0.00
3.47
0.00
187.96
0.03
76.63
71.94
62.43
71.97
0.00
23.68
23.02
0.00
4.01
0.19
0.00
0.44
0.00
11.36
0.88
3.84
21.36
0.00
16.96
18.47
0.00
9.52
4.07
5.50
267.08
0.05
130.44
100.97
146.90
33.83
0.00
0.38
1.26
0.00
1.43
0.51
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.00
0.03
0.20
0.00
0.19
0.67
0.16
1.21
0.01
21.19
2.52
13.97
10.19
0.00
0.34
1.67
0.00
10.61
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.27
0.00
0.52
264.70
0.00
162.11
292.01
0.00
5.35
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
2.76
17.76
0.00
175.17
PENTANE
181.34
21.38
3.75
28.92
0.00
0.00
1.83
4.63
1.00
0.40
11.63
0.45
229.18
C6+
Total
LPG content
1357.24
2052.79
344.81
18308.57
73.66
277.39
137.23
7363.76
2.60
245.04
60.09
3146.84
104.82
165.54
1.58
91.65
10.86
514.31
69.66
3386.10
261.47
368.72
67.53
3526.44
4.83
531.81
118.67
5875.12
73.23
160.88
56.79
2994.91
0.85
693.76
35.48
1583.88
189.77
191.19
0.29
16.00
210.33
284.50
12.20
565.07
0.16
726.56
718.82
37985.70
1856.28
2281.16
20.53
1190.61
kg-mole/hr
kg/hr
212
143
312
786.70
0.29
786.99
718.82
35.48
20.53
41307.28
16.00
41323.28
37985.70
1583.88
1190.61
212
187
Total
kg/hr
37985.70
565.07
38550.77
187
12.20
565.07
Temperature
Pressure
Total Mol. Comp. Rates
H2O
AIR
H2
NH3
H2S
METHANE
ETHANE
PROPANE
PROPENE
IBUTANE
BUTANE
1BUTENE
IPENTANE
KG-MOL/HR
KG/HR
C
KG/CM2
KG-MOL/HR
Kg-mole/hr
Kg/hr
Stream 180
LPG recovered
2014.1
0
which @ US$467/ton is
940.58
US$/hr
Example A
Technical Report
787.03
41325.26
Cost
33 of 33
1. INTRODUCTION
purposes
(1)
dh
= Fo F
dt
(2)
At
4. MODELLING ROUTE
Dynamic tank level modelling was carried out using the high
fidelity hydraulic simulator TLNET, which is a component
of Energy Solutions Pipeline Studio V 3.0. The following
assumptions are made for the transient simulation:
2. OBJECTIVE
Emulsion
14.8
Tank60A_Oil_Outlet
14.6
14.4
14.2
Pipe0026
14.0
13.8
P-060A/B/D/E
13.6
Pipe0001
Pipe0027
13.4
13.2
13.0
Tank60B_Oil_Outlet
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
3500
4000
4500
5000
4500
5000
TK-60B
Tank Level Variation
used.
15.0
14.8
14.6
14.4
14.2
14.0
5. SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT
13.8
13.6
13.4
1000
1500
2000
2500
Elapsed Time (seconds)
3000
3500
4000
TK-60B_Emulsion
Tank60A_Oil_Outlet
Pipe0026
P-060A/B/D/
Pipe0001
Pipe0027
Supply0003
500
Tank60A_Inlet
Tank60B_Oil_Outlet
Pipe0024
Pipe0025
Pipe0017
Blkv0003
Pipe0004
Pipe0019
Pipe0005
Regu0001
Pipe0020
Blkv0002
Tank60A_Water_Outlet
Pipe0018
Pipe0012
Pipe0029
Pipe0016
P-066A/B
Supply0004
Pipe0003
Pipe0030
Pipe0013
Blkv0001
Pipe0014
Tank60B_inlet
Pipe0015
Tank60B_Water_Outlet
Pipe0006
Pipe0023
Blkv0004
Pipe0007
Pipe0008
Regu0002
Pipe0021
14.0
13.8
13.6
13.4
13.2
13.0
0
1000
2000
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
4000
5000
TK-60B
Tank Level Variation
15.0
14.8
14.6
14.4
14.2
14.0
13.8
13.6
13.4
13.2
0
1000
2000
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
4000
5000
14.99
14.98
14.97
14.96
14.95
14.94
14.93
14.92
14.91
14.90
0
500
1000
1500
3500
4000
4500
5000
4500
5000
TK-60B
14.8
14.6
15.09
14.4
15.08
14.2
M
2000
2500
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
15.07
14.0
15.06
M
13.8
13.6
15.05
15.04
13.4
15.03
13.2
15.02
1000
2000
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
4000
5000
15.01
15.00
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
3500
4000
15.0
14.8
14.6
14.4
M
14.2
14.0
13.8
13.6
13.4
13.2
0
1000
2000
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
4000
5000
TK-60A
TK-60A
15.000
15.00
14.998
14.98
14.996
14.96
14.94
14.994
14.92
M
14.992
14.90
14.990
14.88
14.988
14.86
14.986
14.84
14.984
14.82
14.982
14.80
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
3500
4000
4500
5000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
3500
4000
4500
5000
4500
5000
TK-60B
15.018
15.20
15.18
15.014
15.16
15.012
15.14
15.010
15.12
M
15.016
15.008
15.10
15.08
15.006
15.06
15.004
15.04
15.002
15.02
15.000
15.00
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
3500
4000
4500
5000
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
3500
4000
TK-60A
Tank Level Variation
15.000
14.995
14.990
14.985
14.980
14.975
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
3500
4000
4500
5000
4500
5000
15.025
15.020
15.015
15.010
15.005
15.000
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Elapsed Time (seconds)
3500
4000
6. CONCLUSIONS
The simulation results demonstrate that under certain and
non-frequent operating conditions a maximum tank level
imbalance of 0.4m may occur. The introduction of two extra
24 balance lines (intended for the oil and water phases) can
improve the situation. However, since the tank level
difference is not considered to be significant under the worst
case conditions, further consideration of additional lines or a
flow inlet balancing system is not required.
ADVANCING
CHEMICAL
ENGINEERING
WORLDWIDE
CONTENTS
PAGE
ABBREVIATIONS
1.1
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.2
2.
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
3.
TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT
3.1 Project Constraints
3.2 Project Approach
3.1
3.1
3.1
4.
4.2
4.2
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.6
4.7
4.10
5.
5.12
5.12
5.12
6.
REFERENCES
6.13
APPENDICES
6.14
6.14
6.15
6.16
6.17
6.18
6.20
C1 - BLOWDOWN VOLUME
6.21
C2 - BLOWDOWN: DISPERSION
6.22
C3 - RADIATION: ISOPLETHS
6.23
ABBREVIATIONS
BDV
DP
EOS
HTC
ID
LFL
LHV
NB
OD
OP
PCV
PFD
PID
PSV
SP
SRK
TCV
UFL
WFL
Blowdown Valve
Design Pressure
Equation of State
Heat Transfer Coefficient
Inside Diameter
Lower Flammability Limits
Lower Heating Value
Nominal Bore
Outside Diameter
Operating Point
Pressure Control Valve
Process Flow Diagram
Proportional, Integral, Derivative Controllers
Pressure Safety Valve
Set Point
Soave-Redlich-Kwong
Temperature Control Valve
Upper Flammability Limits
Woodhill Frontier
1.1
1.
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the design of a fuel gas processing and distribution system for an onshore oil pumping
facility operated by XXX Petroleum Co.
The pumping station will be designed for a throughput of 60,000bbls of oil per day and includes processing
units such as; storage tanks for oil and water, pumps, water bath heaters, metering skid and other utilities
and services such as power generation, plant and instrument air, industrial water systems and drain systems.
Fuel gas is the primary fuel source for power generation and the water bath heaters and is imported by
pipeline from a nearby facility.
2.
2.1
The fuel gas will be required to be treated to ensure that the fuel gas specification requirements advised by
the heater and generator vendors is met, such that no power loss occurs due to fuel gas quality. The system
in designed for 2.5MMscfd gas.
The scope of work is to design the fuel gas treatment and distribution for the pumping station. This includes
review of fuel gas heater and scrubber, heat/material balance, line sizing and associated instruments, etc.
2.2
Process Description
A process flow diagram of the fuel gas system is given in Appendix A1. The incoming fuel gas will be
heated to 45oC in a heating coil in a water bath heater to prevent hydrate formation before pressure
reduction to the required distribution pressure.
After pressure reduction, water/hydrocarbon condensates are removed in a scrubber before the gas is heated
to about 15oC by a second heating coil in the same heater, prior to distribution. Separated liquids from the
scrubber will flow via level control to the produced water tank.
The water bath heater will be dual-fired by fuel gas. Diesel will be used for black-start, when fuel gas is not
available.
2.3
Base Data
The base data for the fuel gas system is summarised below.
2.3.1
142 barg
6.9 barg
80 oC
100 oC
100 barg
5.7 barg
10 oC
50 oC
2.2
2.3.2
The fuel gas is expected to be supplied to the users at 100barg and at 25oC with the following composition
listed in Table 1.
Table 1: Fuel Gas Composition
Component
N2
CO2
C1
C2
C3
i-C4
n-C4
i-C5
n-C5
C6+
Total
Mol %
0.37
1.06
89.64
3.52
2.77
0.68
1.24
0.42
0.07
0.23
100.00
Mass %
0.55
2.46
75.84
5.58
6.44
2.08
3.80
1.60
0.27
1.39
100.00
Property
Vapor fraction
Mass density
Molecular weight
HHV
LHV
Hydrate formation temp
HC dewpoint
Water dewpoint
Cp/Cv
@ 0.7 C
& 5.7barg
Unit
kg/m3
MMBtu/gal
MMBtu/gal
o
C
o
C
o
C
-
@ 25 C
& 100barg
0.997
5.75
18.96
15230
13770
1.00
97.22
-4.7
20.78
20.59
22.98
-8.4
1.30
24.6
1.79
2.3
3.
3.1
TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT
Project Constraints
The client has provided existing facilities for use for the fuel gas system distribution. These are:
The supplied equipment/instruments are constraints in the process design and the system will be modified
to optimally utilize them. The system design capacity is 2.5MMscfd.
3.2
Project Approach
The following approach has been used to assess the fuel gas system requirements and develop an optimal
design.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
3.1
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
4.
4.1
The fuel gas consumers are as follows: 2 x Inlet Heaters; 6 x Export Heaters; 1 x Fuel Gas Heater; 3 x Gas
Generators. There are also 2 Bi-Fuel Generators which use diesel and can also use gas. The fuel gas
flowrate required per consumer is obtained as follows:
Heaters:
Eqn 4-1
Where,
Duty = 6.30, 5.67 and 1.0MMBtu/hr (for inlet, export and fuel gas heaters)
Efficiency = 69%
Generators:
Eqn 4-2
Gen. Duty (mmbtu / hr ) = (Output (kW ) FuelConsumption 10 6 (btu / kW .hr ) Eqn 4-3
Where,
Output = 0.975 and 1.20kW (for the gas generator and bi-generator respectively)
Fuel consumption = 10,720 Btu/kW-hr
Efficiency = 95%
The bi-fuel generator runs primarily on diesel and is used for start-up and as backup generator. It can also
run on fuel gas.
Table 3: Flowrate for the individual heaters
Heaters
Heater Duty
(MMBtu//hr)
1
2
6.30
6.30
Heater Duty
(MMBtu//hr)
@69% LHV Eff.
9.13
9.13
3
4
5
6
7
8
5.67
5.67
5.67
5.67
5.67
5.67
1.00
FG LHV
(Btu/sm3)
FG Flowrate
(sm3/hr)
36214.67
36214.67
252.12
252.12
8.22
8.22
8.22
8.22
8.22
8.22
36214.67
36214.67
36214.67
36214.67
36214.67
36214.67
226.91
226.91
226.91
226.91
226.91
226.91
1.45
36214.67
Total
40.02
1905.71
FG Flowrate
mmscfd
0.21
0.21
0.43
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
1.15
0.03
1.62
% of Total
17.92
48.37
1.42
4.2
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
Output
(MW)
Eff.
(%)
Heating
Value
(BTU/kg)
Heat Rate
(BTU/kW-hr)
FG
(kg/hr)
FG
(sm3/hr)
FG Flow
(mmscfd)
0.975
95%
45,153
10,720
244
302.95
0.2568
=generators
FG Design
(mmscfd)
% of
Total
0.2568
0.7703
32.29
Unit Rate
(mmscfd)
0.21
0.19
0.03
0.26
No of
Units
2
6
1
3
Total
(mmscfd)
0.43
1.15
0.03
0.77
2.39
Prorated to
2.5mmscfd
0.45
1.21
0.04
0.81
2.50
Ratio
(%)
17.92
48.37
1.42
32.29
100.00
Figure 1: Summary
4.3
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
4.2
The process was simulated using Aspen HYSYS to obtain the heat and material balance. The SRK property
package was selected.
The Heat and Material is given in Appendix A2.
Figure 2: Aspen HYSYS Simulation PFD
4.4
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
4.2.1
Phase Envelope
The fuel gas composition has been used to generate a phase envelope in order to determine the dewpoint
conditions at the supply pressure of 5.5barg.
Figure 3: Hydrocarbon Envelope for Composition
Fuel Gas Envelope
120
100
Pressure (bar)
80
Bubble Pt.
Dew Pt.
60
Hydrate
40
20
0
-150 -140 -130 -120 -110 -100 -90
-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
10
20
30
40
Temp (oC)
The envelope indicates that at a fuel gas supply pressure of 5.5barg the dew point for the fluid is about
15oC. This is the minimum temperature the fuel gas is to be heated to by the water bath heater. The fuel gas
scrubber is installed before the heater to knock out any liquids resulting from the pressure drop thus
increasing the gas dew point.
4.3
The heat and transport properties of the heater are obtained via simulation using the heater characteristics
from vendor data (Ref 1, Table 6).
Table 6: Data for Heaters
Duty (MMBtu/hr)
Efficiency (%)
Coil N.D (in)
Spec.
Schedule
2
Heating Surface (ft )
Coil Length (ft)
2
Overall HTC (Btu/hr-ft -F
Inlet Heaters
(2x100%)
6.30
69
4
A-106B
40
1431
40
Export Heaters
(6x100%)
5.67
69
4
A-106B
40
2456
40
4
A-106B
160
18
29
4.5
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
The fuel gas heater has two coils; the first for preheating the import gas and the second one for heating the
gas prior to distribution. A TCV is situated on the outlet of the second coil. The heater is a water bath type
with heating coils immersed in water at 93oC.
The gas is preheated to compensate for any heat loss from the pressure letdown. A reduction in the inlet
pressure from 100barg to 5.7barg results in the temperature falling from 25oC to -26.11oC.
The target for the heater is to preheat the fuel gas to 45oC in the first coil thus compensating for the heat
loss across the control valves. The hydrate formation temperature for the gas is -5oC.
The results of the simulation show that when the heater preheats the fuel gas to approximately 45oC the
temperature across the control valves drops to 0.7 oC. Thus the water bath heater is adequate for the process
requirement.
The heating effect of the second coil is limited to about 15oC by the use of a three-way TCV supplied with
the heater.
4.4
1.219
2.438
19.0
3.32
83.0
100.0
0.7
212 max / -20MMDT
0.375
0.125
Sweet Service, (Oil, Gas, Water, Wax)
2 Fiberglass with 0.020 aluminum clad
Calculations (Appendix B1) show that the size of scrubber required for 2.5MMscfd fuel gas is 0.6m (ID) x
2.15m (H). The scrubber is also provided with a pressure safety valve and a blowdown valve which are
adequately sized. Thus the supplied scrubber is adequate for the project requirements.
4.5
Process Control
The letdown station consists of two pressure control valves in series. Refer to Fuel Gas System PFD
(Appendix A1). The detailed sizing for the control valves are in Appendix B. The outlet temperature of the
second PCV is 0.7oC. This is within acceptable limits of the fluids hydrate formation temperature of -4.7oC.
Table 8: Summary of Results
C v , valve flow coefficient
Valve Type
Valve Body Size (inch) *
PCV-1
1.51
Globe
1
PCV-2
8.33
Globe
1
Two control valves in series are required to reduce the import pressure of 100barg to 5.7barg based on the
sizing criteria for control valves and because of the large pressure differential required.
Apart from the pressure letdown station the outlet of the fuel gas coil is controlled to a minimum of 15oC by
a three-way TCV. The first coil inlet is uncontrolled. Both of the controls are traditional feed forward PID
controllers.
Figure 5: Temperature Control Valve
Heater
TC
Outlet Header
4.6
Inlet Header
Process Safeguarding
4.6.1 Depressurization
All process equipment operating above 7barg or containing at least 4m of butane or a more volatile liquid
under normal operating conditions shall need to be provided with remotely operated vapour
depressurisation valves (Ref. 4).
The BDV is also actuated automatically by a signal from the emergency shutdown system, initiated by fire
or gas detection. A restriction orifice is usually used in conjunction with a BDV to restrict flow.
The Scrubber is operated at 83 psig (5.7barg) and the pressure of the inlet stream is controlled by two
pressure control valves in series.
Under emergency conditions the fuel gas system (i.e., fuel gas inlet line, heater, PCVs and scrubber) can be
isolated. The fuel gas scrubber is blown down to atmosphere via a 2 ball valve (Ref. 13).
4.7
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
The scrubber operates at pressures below 7barg and would not ordinarily require depressurization; however
the blowdown of the vessel via the provided valve is examined.
The BDV and vent sizing has been based on the total inventory as a worst case. This is estimated to be
40Sm3 of gas (See Appendix C). Depressurisation calculations have been carried out for the design as it is
and also with the use of a restriction orifice.
Aspen HYSYS is used to determine the maximum vent rate obtainable and minimum temperatures. The
requirement is to blowdown this inventory to 2.86barg (50% of the operating pressure of 5.7barg) within
15mins. The depressurisation profiles are attached in Appendix C.
The minimum temperature obtained is -9.4C. The piping specification for ASME Class 150 (carbon steel)
pipework has a minimum operating temperature of -29C (Ref. 8). Thus carbon steel piping will be
adequate for depressurisation requirements.
4.6.2 Dispersion
Dispersion modelling has been carried out for the vented gases using PHAST. The vented gases comprise a
mixture of hydrocarbons which can form a potentially flammable mixture when mixed with air, i.e.,
between 5% and 15% methane in air; the lower and upper flammability limits (LFL and UFL). The
dispersion calculation determines the location of the vent.
PHAST is third-party consequence modelling software used to analyse hazards resulting from leaks and
emissions of fluids.
PHAST is used to determine the hazardous area around the vent, i.e., the horizontal and vertical distance
from the vent to the edge of the LFL gas cloud (Ref. 12). The scenarios for gas dispersion are given in
Table 9.
Table 9: Relief/Blowdown Scenarios Fuel Gas System
Case
Scenario
Flowrate (kg/s)
Pressure(barg)
Temp. C)
A1
0.341
8.34
107
A2
0.658
7.58
76.2
A3
0.636
5.73
0.7
A4
2.466
5.73
0.7
A5
0.026
5.73
0.7
Case A4 is the worst case scenario. Modelling was carried out under the worst case weather conditions
obtainable on site with the following results:
Table 10: Fuel Gas Venting Dispersion Distances from Vent Outlet (Case A4)
Horizontal distance to dispersion (m)
100% LFL
50% LFL
100% LFL
50% LFL
1.77
4.66
+9.74
+13.37
1.82
4.49
+10.81
+15.17
2.41
6.11
+5.42
+7.29
2.94
7.07
+3.47
+4.56
4.8
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
Conditions
Value at design flare release at any location to which people have access; exposure
should be limited to a few seconds, sufficient for escape
Structures/areas where operators are not likely to be performing duties and where
shelter from radiant heat is available
The radiation levels from an ignited vent were modelled using FLARESIM - a third-party software used for
the design and rating of flare stacks.
The height of the vent will be determined based on the radiation level measured at grade being below
4.73kW/m in order to protect personnel. Case A4 is used as basis and the vent is a simple 4 NB
unimpeded pipe work vent stack venting to atmosphere.
Appendix C contains the radiation contour plots for Case A4. It was determined that a 10.25m high vent
would be required. The 4.73 kW/m, 6.31 kW/m and 15.7 kW/m radiation contours would sit at their
lowest point at approximately 0m, 3m and 7.5 m above grade, respectively. The flame length was
estimated to be approximately 23.65 m. The horizontal distances (i.e. the radii) to radiation levels of
4.73kW/m and 6.3kW/m were estimated to be approximately 17.1m and 10.2 m (at head height).
The distances to these radiation contours may affect personnel on location and thus the vent height may
need to be increased. The rate of decay of the radiation was also investigated with the following results.
Table 12: Radiation Decay (Case A4)
Time (sec)
2.466
Distance(m)
4.7 kW/m
6.3 kW/m
9.46 kW/m
1.921
16.8
9.7
1.711
1.497
13.4
10
1.202
1.168
9.75
15
0.805
0.9353
20
0.605
0.7536
Notes: The distances are the horizontal radii from the centre of the vent stack at head height (2 m above grade).
4.9
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
Table 12 shows that despite the fact that the initial distance to radiation level of 4.7kW/m and 6.3kW/m
are high, this configuration of the vent stack may still be acceptable because the intensity of the radiation
decreases rapidly. The radiation intensity around the vent stack decreases to within acceptable levels within
20 seconds because the vented flow is unrestricted.
Radiation modelling was also carried out for Case A2, Fuel Gas Scrubber closed outlet. It was determined
that the 4.73 kW/m, 6.31 kW/m and 15.7 kW/m radiation contours would sit at their lowest point at
approximately 2.2 m, 3.5 m and 9 m above grade, respectively. The flame length was estimated to be
approximately 12.6 m. This result was for the same vent stack of 10.5 m. On further investigation if the
stack height were to be reduced to 9m, the 4.73 kW/m, 6.31 kW/m and 15.7 kW/m radiation contours
would sit at their lowest point at approximately 1.4 m, 3 m and 6.3 m above grade, respectively.
However, the Case A2 vent radiation scenario is only applicable if the relief/vent piping is modified to
include a restriction orifice downstream the blowdown valve thus restricting its flow.
4.6.4 Over-Pressure Protection
In addition to the blowdown system there is a PSV on both the Fuel Gas Scrubber inlet line and the
scrubber itself, both are set at 100psig.
The over-pressure relief devices (PSVs) protecting the fuel gas system have been sized in accordance with
API RP 520 (Ref. 5) and API RP 521 (Ref.4) for the most severe individual relief condition. Table 13
identifies the applicable relief conditions considered for the sizing of the PSVs.
Table 13: PSV Relief Conditions
Case
1.
2.
3.
4.
External fire
The relief valve has been selected in accordance with API Standard 526 (Ref. 6).
The operating pressure of the scrubber is 83psig (5.7bar). The PSVs are 3 x 4 and calculations are carried
out to determine the suitability of these safety valves for the process. The minimum size of PSV required is
1.5 x 3 thus the pre-installed PSVs are adequate. See Appendix B3 for detailed calculations.
4.7
Line Sizing
The sizing of lines for the project was done as per company practice and principles which were based on
engineering standards (Ref 8 and Ref 9). The equations and correlations used are as follows:
vd 2
Line velocities are estimated using: Q =
4
Eqn 4-4
Where:
Q = Flowrate (m3/s)
V = velocity (m/s)
D = inside pipe diameter (mm)
4.10
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
The pressure drop for liquid or gas lines are calculated using the Darcy formula:
P100 m =
w2 62530 f
d5
Eqn 4-5
Where:
P100m = Pressure drop (kPa/100m)
W = Mass flow (kg/hr)
= Density (kg/m3)
f = Moody friction factor
d = internal diameter
The Moody friction factor is a function of the Reynolds number and the surface roughness of the pipe. The
Moody diagram (Ref. 8) may be used to determine the friction factor once the Reynolds number is known:
Re =
dv
Eqn 4-6
Where:
Re = Reynolds number
= Density (kg/m3)
v = Velocity (m/s)
d = internal diameter (mm)
= Viscosity (cP)
Finally, erosional velocities are calculated as per Ref. 7: Ve =
m 0.5
Eqn 4-7
Where:
V e = Erosional velocity (ft/s)
C = Constant (100 for continuous flow)
m = Gas/Liquid density (lb/ft3)
The inlet line to the fuel gas system is 4, ASME CL 900. From calculations this size is adequate. The
inter-connecting lines within the process are also 4 (and ASME CL 150) and the distribution lines are 2
ASME CL 150 lines. The line sizing and calculations are given in Appendix B4.
4.11
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
5.
5.1
1. Fuel gas demand is expected to be 2.39MMscfd, which is within the design rate of 2.5MMscfd.
2. The supplied scrubber is adequate for project requirements.
3. The supplied heater is adequate for project requirements.
4. The minimum temperature on blowdown is -9.4oC which does not exceed the ASME CL 150 piping
specification.
5. Dispersion - the 50% LFL from the Fuel Gas Vent was estimated to be 7m horizontally. This is not
expected to pose a hazard to personnel or equipment so long as the fuel gas vent is higher than any
equipment within 7m of the vent.
6. Radiation - A Fuel Gas Vent of 10.25m high will expose personnel and equipment to radiation levels of
not more than 4.73kW/m. This radiation level has a radius of approximately 17.1 m and will last for
less than 20 seconds.
5.2
Recommendations
1.
2.
Modifying the vent piping downstream of the BDV to include a restriction orifice will mean that the
vent height can be reduced to 9 m.
5.12
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
6.
REFERENCES
1. Client Scope of Work and Vendor Data
2. Perrys Chemical Engineering Handbook, Vol. 1 & 2, 7th Ed.
3. Coulson and Richardsons Chemical Engineering, 5th Ed.
4. American Petroleum Institute: API RP 521: Guide for Pressure Relieving and Depressurising
Systems, 4th Ed, March 1997.
5. American Petroleum Institute: API RP 520: Sizing, Selection and Installation of Pressure
Relieving Devices, 7th Ed, January 2000.
6. American Petroleum Institute: API Standard 526: Flanged Steel Pressure Relief Valves, 5th Ed,
June 2002.
7. American Petroleum Institute: API RP 14: Design and Installation of Offshore Production
Platform Piping Systems, 5th Ed, Oct 1991.
8. GPSA: Engineering Data Book, 12th Ed. 2004.
9. Woodhill Frontier Engineering Standards
10. Masoneilan Control Valve Sizing Handbook, bulletin OZ1000, 2000
11. The Centre for Marine and Petroleum Technology (CMPT): A Guide to Quantitative Risk
Assessment for Offshore Installations, Publication 99/100.
12. Energy Institute: Model Code of Safe Practice Part 15: Area classification code for installations
handling flammable fluids, 3rd Edition, July 2005.
13. Fisher Vee Ball Rotary Valves, Doc. No. D350004X012/MS11-CD171/4-06
6.13
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
APPENDICES
A1: FUEL GAS SYSTEM - PFD
6.14
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
NORMAL
VAPOUR
DESIGN
VAPOUR
NORMAL
VAPOUR
DESIGN
VAPOUR
NORMAL
MIXED
DESIGN
MIXED
2267
97.44
18.96
100.0
25
2370
97.44
18.96
100.0
25
2267
85.17
18.96
100.0
45.6
2370
85.55
18.96
100.0
44.8
2240
5.66
18.96
26.11
701.26
5.7
1.7
2341
5.68
18.96
28.3
701.51
5.7
0.7
NORMAL
VAPOUR
DESIGN
VAPOUR
NORMAL
VAPOUR
DESIGN
VAPOUR
NORMAL
VAPOUR
DESIGN
VAPOUR
NORMAL
VAPOUR
DESIGN
VAPOUR
2240
5.66
18.79
0
701.26
5.7
1.7
2341
5.68
18.78
0.0
701.51
5.7
0.7
2240
4.63
18.79
5.7
58.8
2341
4.66
18.78
5.7
57.0
2240
5.38
18.79
5.7
15.0
2341
5.38
18.78
5.7
15.0
0
5.38
18.79
5.7
15.0
1552
5.38
18.78
5.7
15.0
NORMAL
VAPOUR
DESIGN
VAPOUR
NORMAL
VAPOUR
DESIGN
VAPOUR
1517
5.38
18.79
5.7
15.0
1585
5.38
18.78
5.7
15.0
1084
5.38
18.79
5.7
15.0
1132
5.38
18.78
5.7
15.0
12
NORMAL DESIGN
VAPOUR VAPOUR
723
5.38
18.79
5.7
15.0
13
NORMAL DESIGN
VAPOUR VAPOUR
756
5.38
18.78
5.7
15.0
0
5.38
18.79
5.7
15.0
592
5.38
18.78
5.7
15.0
10
NORMAL DESIGN
VAPOUR VAPOUR
401
5.38
18.79
5.7
15.0
420
5.38
18.78
5.7
15.0
14
NORMAL DESIGN
VAPOUR VAPOUR
32
5.38
18.79
5.7
15.0
33
5.38
18.78
5.7
15.0
11
NORMAL DESIGN
VAPOUR VAPOUR
723
5.38
18.79
5.7
15.0
756
5.38
18.78
5.7
15.0
15
NORMAL
MIXED
DESIGN
MIXED
0
1.25
99.16
25.73
707.51
0.0
-0.4
0
1.26
98.73
27.9
707.84
0.0
-1.5
6.15
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
Worst case
Temperature (T)
Pressure (P)
Fluid Property
o
C
Kpa
Unit
0.70
673
-26.11
673
Liquid Density ( l )
kg/m
701.6
688.0
Vapor Density ( v )
kg/m
5.68
8.78
Mixed Density ( m )
kg/m
5.75
6.45
kg/h
28.3
59.6
kg/h
2341
2302
kg/h
2370
2362
m/h
4.03E-02
8.65E-02
m/h
412.4
366.2
A=
0.5
Eqn. B1-1
QV
Q T
and Ll = l
VV
A
Where:
VV =
K=
v =
A=
l =
T=
Ll =
QV =
Ql =
For a vertical separator of height < 3 m,K = 0.037m/s, From (Eqns. 10 - 12), the following is calculated:
Unit
Normal case
Worst case
Vv
A
D
T
m/s
m2
mm
mins
0.41
0.28
597
10
0.33
0.31
631
10
Ll
2.38E-02
5.10E-02
Sketch
600mm
0.15 (Min)
1=
2=
3=
4=
0.4
1
0.60
0.15
m
m
m
m
Tan-Tan =
2.15
Liquid Level
0.15m (Min) (4)
6.16
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
w
N 8 FP P1Y
T1Z
XM
Eqn. B2-1
X
3Fk X T
Eqn. B2-2
(Y should not be less than 0.67. Also X should not exceed FkXc for gas)
Where, Fk, ratio of spec. heats is calculated by: Y = 1
X
and X T = (P / P1 )
3Fk X T
Two-phase flows:
The valve sizing equation used is: Cv =
where,
w
N 6 Fp
ff
p f f
fg
p g g Y 2
Eqn. B2-5
Actual pressure drops are used for Dpf and Dpg, but with individual limiting pressures:
p f = FL ( p1 FF pv ) and p g = Fk xT p1
2
Summary of results:
Inlet temperature
Outlet temperature
Inlet pressure
Outlet pressure
CV
Valve type
oC
oC
barg
bar
-
PCV 1
44.84
9.33
100
19
1.51
Globe
PCV 2
9.33
0.70
19
5.73
8.33
Globe
6.17
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
83.0
100
100
492.6
psig
psig
psig
R
5.7
6.9
6.9
0.50
Fire
21
121
8.3
684.8
107.3
225.1
Non-fire
10
110
7.6
629.2
76.4
169.5
%
psig
barg
R
C
F
barg
barg
barg
C
Relieving temperature: T1 = 1 Tn
Pn
Eqn. B3-1
Where:
P 1 = Relieving pressure
P n = Operating temperature
T n = Operating temperature
Closed Outlet Case: Relieving rate (vapour relief)
k +1
W
A=
CK d P1 K b K c
TZ
2 k 1
, where C = 520 k
M
k +1
W (relief load)
k (ratio of specific heats)
C (co-efficient)
Kd (co-efficient of discharge)
Kb (capacity correction factor)
Kc (rupture disc correction)
Z (compressibility)
M (molecular weight)
T (relieving temperature)
P1 (relieving pressure)
A (effective discharge area)
2,341
1.255
342.7
0.975
1.0
1.0
0.9906
19.0
629.2
124.5
0.711
kg/hr
R
psia
in
5,161lb/hr
76.4C
A=
Q
38 K d K w K c K v
G
p1 p2
Q (flow rate)
Kd (co-efficient of discharge)
Kw (back pressure correction)
Kc (combination correction)
Kv (viscosity correction)
G (specific gravity)
p 1 (relieving pressure)
p 2 (back pressure)
A (preliminary discharge area)
Eqn. B3-4
28.3
0.65
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.702
kg/hr
-
110
psig
3.0
0.001
psig
in
6.3bbl/d
0.2USGPM
API RP 520 [3.8.1.2]
API RP 520 [3.8.1.2] - assuming P2 / P1 > 0.15
API RP 520 [3.8.1.2]
API RP 520 [3.8.1.2] - preliminary estimate
at flowing temperature
(assumed)
6.18
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
Re =
Q(2800 G )
A
Eqn. B3-5
(absolute viscosity)
A (effective discharge area)
Re (Reynold's Number)
0.555
0.11
1.95E+3
cP
in
-
Kv (viscosity correction)
A (effective discharge area)
0.941
0.001
in
0.712
in
0.712
H
150
1.5 x 3
in
Ref. 6
lb
Minimum size
at flowing temperature
from API Std 526 (standard orifice areas)
N Re adjusted value
PSV selection
A (maximum discharge area)
Relief orifice designation
Valve body rating
Valve body size
Note: the PSV was sized for other cases such as fire and control valve failure. The closed case was the
largest relief load.
6.19
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
Unit
5/6
15
Vapor
10100
25.00
18.96
24.32
97.44
6.08
2370
0.015
120
4
3.62
92.05
100
Vapor
10100
45.00
18.96
27.61
85.85
5.36
2370
0.015
120
4
3.62
92.05
100
Mixed
674
0.70
18.96
412.29
5.68
0.35
2341
0.04
701.50
43.79
5.75
28.28
0.011
0.4302
40
4
4.03
102.26
100
Vapor
674
0.70
18.78
412.15
5.68
0.35
2341
0.011
40
4
4.03
102.26
100
Vapor
674
15.00
18.78
435.13
5.38
0.34
2341
0.010
40
4
4.03
102.26
100
Liquid
674
0.70
98.73
-
(m/s)
1.02
1.15
13.94
13.94
14.72
0.01
(ft/s)
(m/s)
40.55
12.36
43.20
13.17
166.97
50.89
167.93
51.19
172.55
52.59
5.98E+05
0.0195
21.18
0.01
1.90E+04
0.0256
0.14
7.70E+05
0.0175
17.11
0.09
7.94E+05
0.017
16.62
0.10
3.47E+0
2
0.031
59.05
5.54E-06
45.72
0.45-1.13
45.7-61
0.11-0.22
45.7-61
0.11-0.22
45.7-61
0.11-0.22
0.6-1.8
0.09
(kPa)
(C)
(m/h)
(kg/m)
(lb/ft3)
(kg/h)
(m/h)
(kg/m)
(lb/ft3)
(kg/m)
(kg/h)
(cP)
(cP)
(in)
(in)
(mm)
(bar/100m)
6.01E+05
0.0175
19.01
0.01
(m/s)
(bar/100m)
45.72
0.45-1.13
Note
1. The lines are selected such that they meet the criteria for P (bar/100m) and velocity. The companys
internal standard for is used.
2. The distribution lines are to be a piping minimum size of 2 (NB)
6.20
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
0.04
701.50
43.79
28.28
0.549
80
2
2.07
52.50
C1 - BLOWDOWN VOLUME
Section
OD
WT
in
1
2
3
Preheater Inlet
Preheater
Preheater Outlet
4
5
6
7
Scrubber Inlet
Scrubber
After heater
Heater Outlet
Vol
3
Pressure
barg
ID
in
in
Area
m
passes
ft
Total L
ft
2.375
2.375
4.5
0.344
0.344
0.531
1.687
1.687
3.438
0.0428
0.0428
0.0873
0.0014
0.0014
0.0060
150
18
20
4
-
150
72
20
45.72
21.95
6.09
4.5
4.5
4.5
0.237
0.237
0.237
4.026
48
4.026
4.026
0.1023
1.2192
0.1023
0.1023
0.0082
1.1675
0.0082
0.0082
5
8
18
150
4
-
5
8
72
150
1.52
2.44
21.95
45.72
Vol @ atm
3
@ 6.9 barg
m3
0.07
0.03
0.04
100
100
100
6.59
3.16
3.65
0.96
0.46
0.53
0.01
3.32
0.18
0.38
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
0.09
22.92
1.24
2.59
0.01
3.32
0.18
0.38
Sections 4 / 5 / 6 / 7
Total:
All Sections Total:
26.84
40.25
3.89
5.83
6.21
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
C2 - BLOWDOWN: DISPERSION
Figure 6: Dispersion Envelope Showing UFL and LFL (Upper and Lower Flammability Limits)
6.22
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009
C3 - RADIATION: ISOPLETHS
Pressure (bara)
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Time (seconds)
6.23
IChemE_Technical Report_August 2009