CHEE3004 : PROJECT 2

Design of Heat Exchanger Equipment

Robert O’ Malley 43******

Faizzi Lokman 43******
Lu Ran ********
Farah Liyana Zaini 43078770
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 2
Process Concept Design of Heat Exchanger ........................................................................................... 3
Lean Amine Cooler ......................................................................................................................... 3
Lean-Rich Heat Exchanger ............................................................................................................. 4
Condenser ....................................................................................................................................... 5
Reboiler ........................................................................................................................................... 6
Thermal and Hydraulic Rating Design (Lean Amine Cooler) ................................................................ 7
Thermal Calculations with Brief Descriptions.................................................................................... 7
Energy Balances, Corrected LMTD, Overall Heat Transfer Coefficients and Heat Transfer Area 7
Initial Specifications ....................................................................................................................... 8
Calculation of Surface Area Required by Correlation .................................................................... 9
Verification ..................................................................................................................................... 9
Hydraulic Calculations...................................................................................................................... 10
Tube Side Pressure Drop............................................................................................................... 10
Shell Side Pressure Drop............................................................................................................... 11
Heat Exchanger Summary ................................................................................................................ 12
Sketches ............................................................................................................................................ 13
Discussion and Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 14
CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................... 18
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 19
APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................... 20

Page |1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In this report, the acid removal gas system via amine and the energy requirement of each heat
exchanger in the system is discussed. Other than that, the heat duty and surface area of each heat
exchanger is calculated. However, the lean amine cooler is chosen is chosen for a more vigorous
calculation in Part B.

The preliminary report consists of the simple calculations of each heat exchanger. They are the lean
amine cooler, lean-rich heat exchanger, condenser and reboiler. From the simple calculation, the
surface area of each heat exchanger is determined. The surface area of lean amine cooler is
determined to be 94m2, whereas the lean rich heat exchanger needs 63.6 m2. Condenser, on the other
hand, is calculated to have a surface area of 16.9 m2 while the reboiler needs 167 m2.

For Part B, a more vigorous calculation is done on the lean amine cooler. The surface area heat
transfer is calculated to be 428m2. This value is compared to the one in Aspen ONE. Other than that,
the specifications on the lean amine cooler are also determined based on the pressure drop which is
extracted via hydraulic calculations. The pressure drop is calculated to be 1.76 psi on the tube side and
0.237 psi on the shell side.

Other than that, the discussion of the operating problems, new technologies, and recommendations are
also further discussed. The corrosion problem is one of the main concerns in the amine system. One of
the recommendations would require the use of stainless steel as the construction material. The change
in amine solvent from DEA to MDEA is also discussed, as the MDEA has further advantages such as
lesser heat of reaction than DEA. The effects of doubled sour gas flow rate on the system are also
discussed.

Page |2
Process Concept Design of Heat Exchanger
Lean Amine Cooler
Design Brief and Purpose
The purpose of this heat exchanger is to cool
the recycled lean amine to the acceptable
temperature of below 35°C. The rich amine is
recovered in the solvent regenerator and the
lean amine is produced from the reboiler
bottom at a temperature of about 255°C before
being fed into the Lean Amine Cooler.
Special Issues
Heat is lost due to the difference between the
enthalpy input (𝐻̇ 𝑖𝑛) and the heat duty
̇ ). The heat duty is found to be 9828151
(𝑄𝑑𝑢𝑡𝑦
kg/h. The heat exchange efficiency values at
99.45%. Hence, heat loss can be neglected.
The calculation for heat duty can be found in
Appendix A.1.
The overall heat exchange coefficient is to be
estimated by considering factors including the
Figure 1: Schematic Design of Lean Amine Cooler
Corrected Log Mean Temperature Difference
Exchanger Type
Fluid Placement
Estimated Heat Transfer Area Required
Initial Specification for Material of
Construction
Table 1: Other Properties of Lean Amine Cooler Heat Exchanger
conduction/convection resistances and fouling.
It was found that the fouling factors for the
Lean Oil and the jacket Water are 0.002 ℎ ⋅
𝑓𝑡 2 ⋅ °𝐹/𝐵𝑡𝑢 and 0.001ℎ ⋅ 𝑓𝑡 2 ⋅ °𝐹/𝐵𝑡𝑢. A
detailed estimation is elaborated in later
sections.
Key Assumptions
Some of the key assumptions are the
temperature of water at 25°C and 1atm is
selected as the coolant and the thinness of the
heat exchanger wall is which made the
conduction resistance is neglected. Other than
that, a heat transfer coefficient value of
170𝐵𝑡𝑢/ℎ ⋅ 𝑓𝑡 2 ⋅ °𝐹 (965.2858982𝑊/𝑚2 ⋅ 𝐾)
is used from a typical range of 140-200 𝐵𝑡𝑢/
ℎ ⋅ 𝑓𝑡 2 ⋅ °𝐹. It is also assumed that the
operation is in steady state and the thermal
properties are uniform and constant.
̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝐹𝐺 ×△ 𝑇𝑙𝑚 = 27.46704734 K × 0.93 =
25.54435402 K93 ( L., McCabe, & C., 1993)
1 Shell and 2 Tube Heat Exchanger
Shell Side: 6.25% DEA
Tube Side: Jacket Water
94.11035213 𝑚2
Shell: Stainless Steel
Tube: Low Carbon Steel
Page |3
Lean-Rich Heat Exchanger
Design Brief and Purpose
The purpose of this heat exchanger is to heat
up the rich amine feed to the regenerator,
while cooling down the regenerator bottoms.
This heat exchanger reduces the duty of the
reboiler in the regenerator column, and also
decreases the pump duty and water
requirements for the lean amine cooler.
Key Assumptions, Type of HEX,
Instrumentation and Special Issues
It is assumed that the heat exchanger tube wall
is thin with negligible resistance. The phase
change is also negligible in heat calculations
as there is only a small amount.
The heat exchanger consists of 1 shell and 2
tube pass. Rich DEA goes at the tube side as it
has more acid gasses in the stream. Both Rich
and Lean Amine flows have sumps to avoid
the need for bypass valves.
Other than that, the overall heat transfer
coefficient is assumed to be 1000W/m2.C from
literature values. Other fluid properties can be
found in Appendix A.2.

Figure 2: Schematic Design of Lean-Rich Heat Exchanger

Duty (kW) 1649

Rich Amine Inlet Temperature (°C) 60
Rich Amine Outlet Temperature (°C) 93.3
Lean Amine Inlet Temperature (°C) 124.2
Lean Amine outlet Temperature (°C) 90.9
Corrected log mean temperature difference (°C) 25.92
Rich Amine Inlet Flow rate (kg/hr) 47070
Rich Amine Outlet Flow rate (kg/hr) 47070
Lean Amine Inlet Flow rate (kg/hr) 43650
Lean Amine outlet Flow rate (kg/hr) 43650
Exchanger Type Shell and Tube Heat exchanger
Fluid Placement Rich Amine / Regenerator Feed – tube side
Estimated overall Heat Transfer Coefficient 1000
(W/m2.°C)
Estimated required area of heat transfer (m2) 63.6
Initial specification for materials of construction Tubes: Low carbon Stainless Steel eg.
2205 Duplex Stainless steel
Shell: Stainless Steel
Table 1: Other Properties of Lean-Rich Heat Exchanger

Page |4
Condenser
Design Purpose and Description

The function of condenser is to recover water
and small amount of amine that is vaporised in
the regenerator, aside from cooling the
overhead gases from the stripper. There are
two streams coming out of the condenser
which consist of the vapour stream and the
liquid stream. The liquid stream that is
composed of 99% water is returned to the
stripper. On the other hand, the acid gases end
up at the vapour stream and are vented or
incinerated.
Special Issues, Type of HEX, Fluid
Placement, and Material of Construction.
A simple counter-current 1-2 shell and tube
heat exchanger is used as the condenser. The
coolant chosen, the cooling water is placed at
the tube side of heat exchanger. Due to the
corrosive nature of the acid gases, the acid gas
is more suitable to be placed at the shell side
of heat exchanger. The material that is
appropriate for the condenser would be
stainless steel, as it is more corrosion-resistant.
Basic Control and Instrumentation
Basic control of the condenser includes a
pressure valve which could control the outlet
temperature of the stream and monitor the
physical condition due to fouling. There are
also temperature sensor, which is connected to
temperature transmitter and flow controller.
Key Assumptions
Includes no heat loss to the environment, the
amount of non-condensable in outlet liquid
stream and mass of liquid vaporised out of the
system are negligible.

Figure 3 : Schematic Design of Condenser

Components Values Notes/Justifications

Duty 904.34 kJ/s
Inlet Temperatures Steam 15oC *An assumption made
o
Acid Gas 104 C
Outlet Temperatures Steam 40oC *An assumption made
Acid Gases 82oC *Assumed as saturation
Reflux 82oC temperatures
o
LMTD 53 C
Coolant Flowrate Water 8.64 kg/s At the tube-side of HEX.
Acid Gas Flowrate To Condenser 1.33 kg/s
Acid Gas 0.95 kg/s
Reflux 0.38 kg/s
U 1000 From Coulson-Richardson
2
A 16.89 m
Table 3: Other Properties of Condenser (Calculations in Appendix A.3)

Page |5
 Reboiler
Design Purpose and Description Key Assumptions

Reboilers are used to generate a flux of vapor
to be fed to a distillation tower; the vapor rises
up the tower contacting a downwards-flowing
liquid stream (Whalley, 1983). Proper reboiler
operation is vital for effective distillation. In a
typical classical distillation column, the entire
vapor driving the separation comes from the
reboiler. The reboiler receives a liquid stream
from the column bottom and may partially or
completely vaporize that
stream. Steam usually provides the heat
required for the vaporization (Perry, 1984)
Includes steady state system, steady flow, no
heat loss to the environment, negligible
pressure drop, and negligible temperature
change on the process.
Special Issues
The main problems for kettle reboiler are that
of ensuring proper disentailment of liquid from
the outgoing vapor and the problem of the
collection of scale and other solid materials in
the tube bundle region over long periods of
operation. (Whalley,1983).

Figure 4: Schematic Diagram of Reboiler

Duty (kW) 4864.8

Mean temperature differences (0C) 15.7544

Exchanger types Kettle

Fluid placement Tube – Steam Shell – Liquid inlet

Estimated overall heat transfer coefficient (W/m2.0C) 1845.3 [3]

Estimate heat transfer area (m2) 167.3350

Initial specification of materials of construction Shape – Cylinder

Volume – 2 m3

Diameter – 1.193 m

Material – Stainless steel

Table 4: Other Properties of Reboiler(Fluid Properties and Calculations in Appendix A.4)

Page |6
Thermal and Hydraulic Rating Design (Lean Amine Cooler)
Thermal Calculations with Brief Descriptions
Energy Balances, Corrected LMTD, Overall Heat Transfer Coefficients and Heat Transfer Area
The total surface area required by the heat exchanger is calculated from the general energy balance.

𝑄̇𝑑𝑢𝑡𝑦 = 𝑈𝐴𝐹 ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅

△ 𝑇𝑙𝑚 (1)

The legend table for the above equation can be found in Appendix D. Before obtaining ‘A’, ′𝐹 ′, ′ ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
△ 𝑇𝑙𝑚′ and
2
′𝑈′ are to be found. For initial design, a ′𝑈′ value of 170 𝐵𝑡𝑢/ℎ ⋅ 𝑓𝑡 ⋅ °𝐹 is selected from a range of typical
values from 140-200 𝐵𝑡𝑢/ℎ ⋅ 𝑓𝑡 2 ⋅ °𝐹.

𝐵𝑡𝑢
140 − 200 ⋅ 𝑓𝑡 2 ⋅ °𝐹 = 794.94 − 1135.63 𝑊/𝑚2 ∙ 𝐾
ℎ

The other two parameters can be evaluated by the temperature conditions following the assumptions in
previous sections (see Figure 1).

Figure 5: Temperature Conditions for the Lean Amine Cooler

To calculate ′ ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
△ 𝑇𝑙𝑚 ′,

△ 𝑇1 − △ 𝑇2 9.18 − 61.36
̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
△ 𝑇𝑙𝑚 = = 𝐾 == 27.46704734 𝐾 (2)
△𝑇 9.18
ln(△ 𝑇1 ) ln(61.36)
2

Where, △ 𝑇1 = 𝑇ℎ𝑏 − 𝑇𝑐𝑎 = (34.18 − 25)°𝐶 = 9.18 °𝐶 and △ 𝑇22 = 𝑇ℎ𝑎 − 𝑇𝑐𝑏 = (91.36 − 30)°𝐶 =
61.36 °𝐶

To evaluate′𝐹 ′ , Z and 𝜂𝐻 are to be calculated to locate the corresponding value in Appendix B.1.
𝑇ℎ𝑎 −𝑇ℎ𝑏 91.36−34.18
𝑍= 𝑇𝑐𝑏 −𝑇𝑐𝑎
= 30−25
= 11.436 (3)

𝑇𝑐𝑏 −𝑇𝑐𝑎 30−25

ηH = = = 0.0753 (4)
𝑇ℎ𝑎 −𝑇𝑐𝑎 91.36−25

Page |7
As 𝐹 = 𝐹𝐺 = 0.93, the correlated LMTD is calculated by using the equation 𝐹 ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
△ 𝑇𝑙𝑚 , which is found to be
5.554 K. Hence, the surface area required can be determined by equation below.

𝑄̇𝑑𝑢𝑡𝑦 9828151.88499674 𝑘𝑔/ℎ

𝐴= ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑈 𝐹△𝑇𝑙𝑚
= 25.54435402 𝐾×249.3284057 𝑊/𝑚2 ∙𝐾
= 428.6498481 𝑚2 (5)

Initial Specifications
The Shell and Head were chosen as AES because Diethanolamine (DEA) is a solid at room temperature and a
viscous liquid when mixed with water (see Appendix 2). Frequent mechanical cleaning is required by treating
the 6.25% DEA. There are two common options for the two ends, bonnet or channel for the front end and
fixed tube-sheet or floating head for the rear end. Bonnet heads are cheap and avoids leakage but more
difficult for maintenance compared to the channelled ones. A fixed tube-sheet shares the similar advantages of
the bonnet head but it also brings difficulties in cleaning. The other reason of this selection is the temperature
difference between the two inlet streams is a considerable value of 91.36 − 25 = 66.36 °𝐶 = 151.448 °𝐹,
which is larger than the limit of 100°𝐹 suggested by Dr. Serth (Serth, 2010). To mitigate the differential
thermal expansion between the tube and shell, an expansion joint is to be added. This cost would overwhelm
the savings by choosing the fixed tube-sheet type.

A 14 BWG tube size was selected to handle fouling fluids. Both the cooling water and the 6.25% DEA tend to
experience fouling. For non-fouling hydrocarbon services, ¾ in. 14 BWG is recommended by Dr. Serth
(Serth, 2010). By increasing the tube diameter, the fouling factor inside the tube can be brought down.

Square Pitch was evaluated to be suitable for this operation. There are 3 conventional layouts, triangular,
square and rotated square (see Appendix B.3). Triangular pitch is restricted by clean fluids; rotated square
gives higher heat transfer efficiency while raising the pressure drop demands (Serth, 2010).

Baffles were specified to minimise the surface area required and sealing strips was kept at the lowest possible
number for lower capital cost. Firstly, the baffle cut and spacing were set to be 20% and 8 in. Thus, from
Appendix B.4, a baffle thickness of 0.25 in. was corresponded. In addition, if the heat exchanger length is
200
equal to the tube length, the number of baffles required to be installed will be 8
= 25 approximately. On the
other hand, an assumption of minimum bundle bypass outside the tubes was made to make 1 pair/10 tube-
rows a selection from the typical range from 1 pair/4 tube-rows to 1 pair/10 tube-rows.

Steels were selected as the construction materials. For 0.625 to 1.5 in. tubing, low carbon steel, Admiralty,
copper, copper-nickel, stainless steel, Hastelloy, Inconel, or titanium can be good choices (Southwest Thermal
Technology, 2014). In terms of the shell side, stainless steel is commonly utilized (Serth, 2010).

The number of tubes was an estimated value from Appendix B.5. It depends on all the factors specified prior.
Dr. Serth provides the tube count table for estimation purposes. Shell side interior diameter and the TEMA
designation are required in this table (Serth, 2010).

Exchanger Type 1 Shell Pass and 2 Tube Pass Heat Exchanger

Fluid Placement Shell Side: 6.25% DEA
Tube Side: Jacket Water
Shell & Head Type TEMA Designation: AES
Channelled Floating Head with 1 Pass Shell and
Backing Device
(see Appendix 6)
Tubes Outside Diameter (OD): 0.75 in.
Inside Diameter (ID): 0.584 in.
BWG: 14

Page |8
 Tubing Layout Square Pitch: 1 in.
Baffles Single Segmental Baffle (see Appendix 7)
Baffle Cut: 20%
Baffle Spacing: 8 in.
Baffle Thickness: 0.25 in.
Sealing Strips One Pair per 10 Tube Rows
Initial Specification for Material of Shell: Stainless Steel
Construction Tube: Low Carbon Steel
Estimated Number Tubes 918
Table 5 Initial Specifications for the Lean Amine Cooler

Calculation of Surface Area Required by Correlation

The overall heat transfer coefficient was evaluated by the following formula (Serth, 2010). The legend table
for Equation (6) is in Appendix D.
𝐷
𝐷𝑜 ln( 𝑜) 𝑅𝐷𝑖 𝐷𝑜
𝐷 𝐷𝑖 1
𝑈𝐷 = [ℎ 𝑜𝐷 + 2𝑘
+ℎ + 𝐷𝑖
+ 𝑅𝐷𝑜 ]−1 (6)
𝑖 𝑖 𝑜

Following the assumption of thin wall in the earlier estimation, the formula is reduced (Serth, 2010).
1 1
𝑈=[ + + 𝑅𝐷𝑖 + 𝑅𝐷𝑜 ]−1 (7)
ℎ𝑖 ℎ𝑜

Thus,ℎ𝑖 , ℎ𝑜 , 𝑅𝐷𝑖 and 𝑅𝐷𝑜 are to be found.

𝐹
𝑅𝐷𝑖 and 𝑅𝐷𝑜 values can be obtained from Appendix B.8. 𝑅𝐷𝑖 = 0.001ℎ ⋅ 𝑓𝑡 2 ⋅ ° for Jacket Water and
𝐵𝑡𝑢
𝐹
𝑅𝐷𝑜 = 0.002ℎ ⋅ 𝑓𝑡 2 ⋅ ° for the Lean Oil.
𝐵𝑡𝑢

ℎ𝑖 and ℎ𝑜 were evaluated using the method prescribed by Incropera (Incropera, 2011). The basic idea of this
method is to follow the convection correlation table in Appendix 9. The reasoning logic is shown below.

(1) Geometry of a Forced Internal Convection

(2) Finding or Estimating the Dimensions and Specifications of the Model
(3) Calculation for the Prandtl number, Reynolds number
(4) Determination of the Nusselt number
(5) Obtaining the Convective Heat Transfer Coefficient
Notably, step 2 needs valid data and reasonable assumptions and is critical for accurate evaluation. The
assumptions made and a detailed worksheet of calculation is attached in Appendix B.10.

From this method, a more accurate overall heat transfer coefficient of 249.3284057 𝑊/𝑚2 ⋅ 𝐾 was obtained.
The calculated surface area was 428.6498481𝑚2 .

Verification
The error between the calculated and the estimated error was calculated.

𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝐵𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑇𝑤𝑜 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑠 317.9317869

𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟% = × 100% = × 100% ≈ 74.17%
𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐶𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 428.6498481

The result obtained was bigger than expectation. Even if 140 𝐵𝑡𝑢/ℎ ⋅ 𝑓𝑡 2 ⋅ °𝐹 from the typical range of 140-
200 𝐵𝑡𝑢/ℎ ⋅ 𝑓𝑡 2 ⋅ °𝐹 was taken, the estimated value will be raised to 134.4433601𝑚2 . The error will be
brought down to 68.64% which is still a large deviation.

Page |9
The result suggested the systematic defects of the evaluation method. Firstly, most of the key data such as the
superficial velocity at the tube side and the viscosity correlation term ‘(μ/μwall)0.14, were assumed values. The
tube-side superficial velocity is supposed to be calculated from the mass flow rate of the cooling water and
accounted in the actual tubing cross-sectional area which is the difference between the overall cross-sectional
area and the shell-passing area. While in terms of viscosity correlation, if the difference between μ and μwall is
large, it will contribute to a considerable impact on the Nusselt number estimation. Secondly, the method of
evaluation from Incropera is not suitable for this model. The large deviation itself is evidence. The other
approach using AspenOne gave a more accurate result (see Appendix 11). However, an investigation is to be
conducted to abstract the method of AspenOne.

Hydraulic Calculations
Tube Side Pressure Drop
The tube side pressure drop was calculated following the method in Serth (Serth, 2010), by summing the
pressure drops due to frictional losses, minor losses and nozzle losses.

∆𝑃𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = ∆𝑃𝑓 + ∆𝑃𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑜𝑟 + ∆𝑃𝑛 (8)

The frictional losses tube side

𝑓𝑛𝑝 𝐿𝐺 2
∆𝑃𝑓 = (9)
7.50×1012 𝐷𝑖 𝑠∅

The legends for the equations and the values of the variables for the calculations for tube side pressure drop
can be found in Appendix D and Appendix B.12.

From both of the equations above, ∆𝑃𝑓 is found to be 1.091 psi.

To calculate minor losses, velocity heads are estimated, such that in turbulent flow:

𝛼𝑟 = 2𝑛𝑝 − 1.5 (10)

Where 𝛼𝑟 is the velocity head and np is number of tube passes. As this design includes 2 tube passes, 𝛼𝑟 =
2.5.

This velocity head is used to estimate the minor losses with the equation

∆𝑃𝑟 = 1.334 × 10−13 𝛼𝑟 𝐺 2⁄𝑠 (11)

∆𝑃𝑟 = 0.1234 psi

For Nozzle losses in turbulent flow regimes

∆𝑃𝑛 = 2 × 10 −13 𝑁𝑠 𝐺 2 𝑛 (12)

Where Ns is the number of shell passes, and Gn is the mass flux through the nozzle.

∆𝑃𝑛 = 0.723psi.

Giving a total pressure loss for the tube side at ∆𝑃𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 1.76 𝑝𝑠𝑖

P a g e | 10
Shell Side Pressure Drop

Shell side pressure drop excluding nozzle losses was calculated using the Simplified Delaware method laid
out in Serth (Serth, 2010). This is given by the equation

𝑓𝑑 𝐺 2 (𝑛 +1)
𝑠 𝑏
∆𝑃𝑓 = 7.50×1012 𝑑 (13)
𝑒 𝑠∅

This results in a pressure drop of ∆𝑃𝑓 = 0.231 𝑝𝑠𝑖

To include the nozzle pressure drop the same equation to calculate tube side nozzle loss was used, with the
mass flux reflecting the shell side, ∆𝑃𝑛 is calculated.

∆𝑃𝑛 = 0.006475psi.

Total loss shell side is then calculated.

∆𝑃𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 0.231𝑝𝑠𝑖 + 0.006475 𝑝𝑠𝑖

∆𝑃𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 0.237 𝑝𝑠𝑖

Summing up :

Shell Side (psi) Tube Side (psi)

Total Pressure drop 0.237 1.76
Table 6: Total Pressure Drop Across heat Exchanger

Refer to Appendix B.11 for calculation spreadsheet

P a g e | 11
Heat Exchanger Summary

Figure 6 Heat Exchanger Data Sheet in metric units

P a g e | 12
Sketches
Aspen was used to produce the sketches of the heat exchanger.

435
19 .0 5

25 .4 000

435

Shell inside diameter mm 939.8

374.65 mm
Front head inside diameter mm 939.8

Outer tube limit mm 892.175

Tube number (calcs.) 870
Tube number (layout) 870
Tube length mm 5080.
Tube O.D. mm 19.05

Tube pit ch mm 25.4

Tube pattern 90
Tube passes 2
Tie rod number 8

Tie rod diameter mm 12.7

374.65 mm
Sealing strips (pairs) 6
Baffle type Single segmental
Centre to outer baffle cut mm 323.85

Centre to inner baffle cut

Impingement protection None
Shell Side Inlet Nozzle Inside Diameter mm 254.508
Shell Side Outlet Nozzle Inside Diameter mm 254.508

Aspen Shell & Tube

Design Codes Tube Layout

ASME Code Sec VIII Div 1
TEMA R - refinery service
Drawing Number
Customer Specifications

Revis ion Date Dwg. App.

30/10/2014

Views on arrow A
A
6255 Overall
T2
330 407 317 4337
684

T2 S1
684

T1

S1
684

T1 S2
684
722

407 1016 3048

S2 Pulling Length 4420

51 51
208

208
833

833

102 102
2 Bolts 2 Bolts
Fixed Sliding

Nozzle Data Design Data Units Shell Channel

Ref OD Wall Standard Notes Design Pr essure bar 3.45 3.45 Aspen Shell & Tube Exc hanger
S1 273 mm 9.3 mm 150 ANSI Slip on Design Temperature C 126.67 126.67
S2 273 mm 9.3 mm 150 ANSI Slip on Full Vacuum
T1 273 mm 9.3 mm 150 ANSI Slip on Corrosion Allowance mm 3.175 3.175 Setting Plan
T2 273 mm 9.3 mm 150 ANSI Slip on Test Pressure bar
Number of Passes 1 2 Design Codes AES 940 - 5080
Radiography ASME Section VIII Div. 1
PWHT TEMA R
Internal Volume m³ 3.5849 0.639 Draw ing Number
Customer Specifications
Weight Summary
Empty Flooded Bundle Revision Date Dwg. Chk. App.
7914 kg 12083 kg 4854 kg 30/10/2014

Figure 7: Sketches of the Heat Exchanger

P a g e | 13
Discussion and Analysis
1.

Natural gas contains H2S and C02 which are corrosive in the presence of water. Due to this factor and the
toxicity of H2S and the lack of heating value of C02, sales gas is required to be sweetened to contain no more
than a quarter grain H2S per 100 standard cubic feet (4 parts per million). The most widely used processes to
sweeten natural gas are those using the alkanolamines such as DEA and MEA. They are used as aqueous
solvents to selectively absorb H2S and C02 from sour natural gas streams. The amine is described as being
lean in acid gas as it enters the top of the absorber, and rich as it exits the bottom, loaded with acid gas.

The rich solvent is preheated before entering the stripper. The lean amine exiting from the reboiler is then
cooled in a shell and tube lean/rich heat exchanger with the rich solvent passed through the tubes before
entering the absorber, which would reduce the heat load on the reboiler. The tubes are usually made of
stainless steel. A recommended maximum velocity to minimize corrosion in the tubes is 3 or 3.5 feet/sec
(Kohl)

The overhead condenser, the reboiler tube bundle, and the upper third of the stripping column shell are all
susceptible to high corrosion rates, and may need to be manufactured out of stainless steel (Butwell, 1982).
Thermal degradation, which can contribute to corrosion, can be minimized by designing the reboiler to use a
low temperature heating medium such as low pressure steam.

A filtration scheme of mechanical and activated carbon filters is important in maintaining good solution
control. Mechanical filters such as, cartridge filters or precoat filters remove particulate material while call
filters remove chemical contaminants such as entrained hydrocarbons and surface-active compounds.
Locating the filters in the rich line upstream of the lean rich heat exchanger will protect both the heat
exchanger and the stripper from plugging, and reduce the erosion/corrosion rate in the heat exchanger. In
terms of safety for the workers who dismantle, inspect and clean out the filters, it is far more hazardous to
locate the filters in the rich line than in the lean line. In many plants, it is specifically for this safety reason that
the filters are placed in the lean line.

Corrosion is a problem experienced by many alkanolamine gas sweetening plants. When loaded with C02 and
H2S, aqueous amine solutions can become corrosive to carbon steel. Corrosion rates are increased by high
amine concentration, high acid gas loading, high temperatures, degradation products, and foaming. There are
certain areas of amine sweetening plants which are more susceptible to corrosion than others, and, as a result,
are often constructed of corrosion-resistant materials such as Type 304 stainless steel (Kohl). These areas
include, the lean/rich heat exchanger tube bundle, the reboiler tube bundle and the reflux condenser.

In terms of design, a number of measures can be taken to minimize corrosion. Solution velocities should not
exceed 3 or 3.5 ft/sec (Kohl). The rich solution should be on the tube side of the lean/rich heat exchanger, and
pressure should be maintained on the exchanger to prevent acid gases from flashing, creating an
erosion/corrosion cycle. A low temperature heating medium should be used in the reboiler, thereby preventing
accelerated corrosion rates and thermal degradation of the amine. All equipment should be stress relieved.

Amine gas treating is an energy consuming process because the amine absorbs the components at low
temperature and high pressure and then releases the components at high temperature and low pressure. The
main objective is to gain an optimum balance between capacity, energy and corrosion. Tranter has suitable
heat transfer equipment for all the duties involved in the main process such as rich/lean amine interchanger,
lean amine cooler, stripper reboiler and overhead condenser.

P a g e | 14
The main heat exchanger, often referred to as the rich/lean amine interchanger, has the task of preheating the
rich amine prior to it entering the stripper, thus reducing the reboiler workload, and also precooling the lean
amine prior to reentry into the absorber. The main heat exchanger requires good heat recovery; therefore the
thermal length of the heat exchanger is a key feature (refer Appendix C.2). Since the rich amine side often
creates fouling in the heat exchanger, it is important to allow a high pressure drop to keep the shear stress high
and thus minimize fouling tendencies. It is also important to choose a heat exchanger that is easy to open for
cleaning. A single pass gasketed plate heat exchanger with a tall plate will give a high shear stress if there is
pressure drop and facilitates easy maintenance. A single pass heat exchanger is also preferred as it is common
with partial vaporization on the rich amine side in this process.

In the stripper reboiler, the amine is heated to the requisite temperature for the acidic components to be
evaporated and to allow stripping of components from the amine. Accurate temperature control is required for
efficient stripper operation. An overview optimization of the heat exchanger can help reduce the reboiler duty
and thus reduce capital investment and the running costs of the amine plant.

There are other technology options for the reboiler aside from the shell and tube heat exchanger. One of them
is the shell and plate heat exchanger. By using a shell and plate heat exchanger as a reboiler, small
temperature difference is allowed between the hot and cold sides. This will prevent the amine from becoming
overheated and suffering degradation, thereby increasing the overall efficiency of the amine plant.

Other equipment that can be optimized would be the condenser. In the condenser, condensate has to be
separated from the non-condensable acid gases. This is best achieved by using a separator vessel following the
heat exchanger. Separation can also be achieved in condensor itself by using a reflux condenser. However, the
main disadvantage of reflux condensers is the limited flooding velocity allowes. To achieve reflux in a
condenser, the maximum velocity of the gas where the condensate will be able to fall back into the column
against the counter current gas stream has to be known. The velocity in the condenser’s channels needs to
allow for condensate runback.

Looking at capital investment, weight and size, the best result is often to use shell and plate heat exchanger
followed by a separator vessel. This way the reflux is ensured and the total capital investment, size and weight
of the installation remains far lower compared to a conventional vertical shell and tube reflux condenser.

Another compact solution is to have a spiral reflux condenser integrated into the column. The wide, single
channel arrangement of the spiral heat exchanger easily allows for reflux of the condensate back into the
column. The capital expenses are higher when compared to a shell and plate heat exchanger in combination
with separator vessel, but the execution provides space saving and neat separation of condensate.

Selecting a fit purpose heat exchanger for the gas sweetening process will improve the performance of the
amine plant, reduce investment costs and overall costs of ownership. Efficiency can be increased with a
correctly selected plate heat exchanger, while maintenance costs and intervals can be reduced. Refineries
industries nowadays are starting to enjoy the advantage of shell and plate heat exchangers over shell and tube
heat exchangers.

3.

Comparison between MDEA and DEA

DEA is a secondary amine whereas MDEA is a tertiary amine. MDEA is a better option in removing H 2S as
it is highly selective towards H2S in preference to CO2 in a non-equilibrium situation. MDEA would react
with H2S as instantaneous as possible by proton transfer, but MDEA reacts quite slowly with CO2. This

P a g e | 15
occurrence is due to the absence of hydrogen atom attached to the nitrogen atom in MDEA. Hence, the
reaction of CO2 with the amine can only occur as CO2 has reacted with water to form bicarbonate (Burr B.,
Lyddon L., n.d.).

DEA, on the other hand, is non-selective towards both H2S and CO2. Hence, these contaminants can be
removed from the feed stream.

Circulation Flow Rates

In order to remove most of H2S in the sour gas, high rate of DEA is needed. MDEA, on the other hand, needs
a lower circulation rate. This is because MDEA is more specifically targeted towards H 2S. Hence, MDEA
needs a higher contact time with CO2 for the reaction between the both of the substances to occur. The lower
circulation flow rates would then ensure that more CO2 would be absorbed from the sour gas stream.

MDEA also has higher solution concentration (35wt% compared to 28wt%) and higher loading than DEA
(0.45 mole/mole of pure MDEA compared to 0.07mole/mole of pure DEA).

Effects to the Heat Exchangers

Due to the lower amine circulation, many factors such as the temperature of feed coming into each heat
exchangers and the duty would change. The reflux ratio has also been lowered. Hence, the energy
requirements for the heat exchangers can be minimised. Other than that, smaller equipment sizing is required
to get the same product using DEA.

By using MDEA, the degradation of amine is lessened. Hence, the corrosion rate in these heat exchangers can
be reduced as well. Other than that, the heat duties of all of these exchangers can be decreased.

Below are the other effects to each of the heat exchangers.

Reboiler and Condenser

The amine reboiler and condenser duty would be lower due to the lower heat of reaction for both H2S and CO2
combination and lower amine circulation rate. The heat of reaction of DEA and H 2S and CO2 are 1290 kJ/kg
and 1700 kJ/kg respectively, whereas the heat of reaction of MDEA and H2S and CO2 are 1230 kJ/kg and
1420 kJ/kg respectively. The inlet temperature of the regenerator would also be reduced, as the heat of
reaction is lower, which affects the reboiler duty, as well.

Lean –Rich Heat Exchanger and Lean Amine Cooler

The lean amine stream and the lean rich heat exchanger streams can be operated at a higher temperature as
MDEA has lesser risk of degradation. Hence, the reduction of temperature of these streams would not be as
significant as using DEA as the solvent. Again, the duties of these exchangers would decrease, aside from the
reduction of the energy consumption of the AGRU.

Other than that, lean amine cooler limitations in the summer are eliminated. Hence, the processing capacity in
warmer periods of the year is improved.

4.

Basically, the Acid Gas Removal Unit (AGRU) removes CO2 and H2S from the system to make sure that the
natural gas’s quality is not compromised. Other than that, it is important to get the sour gas out of the system
to decrease the risk of corrosion in pipeline and equipment.

P a g e | 16
However, as the concentration of the sour gas is doubled, certain changes would definitely happen to the
amine system. It is highly likely for less CO2 slippage to occur as higher proportion of CO2 would be
dissolving into the water. If the amine solvent flow rate is kept as constant, excess CO2 which dissolves into
the water would form carbonic acid by the hydroxylation reaction. The carbonic acid would then dissociate
slowly to bicarbonate, which is very acidic, hence increasing the corrosion risks of the solution.

Aside from that, as the concentration of CO2 increases, the CO2 recovered by the DEA would then increases
as well. This is due to the equilibrium shifts which are resulted by the increasing concentration of CO 2
(Nuchitprasittichai, 2012). Hence, the product of carbamate or bicarbonate ion would be higher, causing
higher loading of CO2. Higher amounts of CO2 would then enter the regeneration column. Therefore, higher
purge requirement for CO2 downstream from the condenser would be expected.

Higher concentration of CO2 would imply on the higher amount of non-condensables coming into the
condenser from the top stream of the stripper. This would affect the efficiency of the condenser, as it would
increase the heat transfer resistance from the amine to the cooling water. Hence, a larger heat transfer area
would be needed to achieve the same degree of separation. Other options available in order to achieve
maximum efficiency of the condenser would be to change the coolant flow rates and the inflow stream. As
this happens, a higher log mean temperature difference can be found; hence the resistance of heat transfer due
to the non-condensables would be less significant.

Other option would be increasing the amount of amine solvent in order to remove the CO 2 to its pleasurable
concentration in the sweetened gas. Hence, the extra DEA would definitely increase the energy required for
the separation of both CO2 and H2S from the sour gas. The energy required could be controlled by increasing
the stream flow rate through the reboiler. The energy requirement can also be decreased by using a high
pressure steam flow rate. The disadvantages to these options would again be the increasing risks of
degradation and corrosion of DEA.

Other effects due to the increasing concentration of CO2 would be the degradation products which are resulted
out of the promotion of irreversible side reactions between DEA and CO2.

Due to these corrosion and degradation problems, appropriate materials should be opted to design the heat
exchangers and other equipment. ASTM A199 is a good option to be made into the condenser tubes
(Thulukkanam, 2013). ASTM A199 is a seamless cold-draw intermediate alloy which consists of Cr-Mo
alloying element. This alloy is very resistant towards crevice corrosion, and the hydrogen attack.

P a g e | 17
CONCLUSION

From this report, it can be concluded that with lower surface area, the energy requirement would be lower for
each heat exchanger as well. Other than that, new technologies such as the use of shell and plate heat
exchanger should be utilised to gain a lower energy requirement, hence making the overall costs for the whole
plant to be lower. The common, and most important operating problem, which is the corrosion should also be
addressed. There are so many recommendations that are suggested in this report. One of them is the use of
stainless steel as the material construction.

The change of the amine solvent from DEA to MDEA is discussed, and it is concluded that the change of the
amine solvent would definitely bring more advantages than disadvantages. One of the advantages is the lower
heat of reaction, which would lower the heat duty in reboiler. Furthermore, the use of MDEA would definitely
increase the percentage of H2S absorbed due to its selectivity towards H2S. This would decrease the
composition of H2S in the sweetened gas.

The change of sour gas flow rate is also discussed. As the sour gas flow rate is doubled, the non-condensables
coming into the system increases as well. This would increase the heat transfer resistance. Hence, the energy
requirement would increase for all of the heat exchangers. Pumping in higher DEA flow rate is suggested to
ensure the amount of the H2S and CO2 in the sweetened gas is as low as possible. However, again, the energy
requirement is the main concern in this condition.

P a g e | 18
REFERENCES

Aroonsri Nuchitprasittichai, S. C. (2012). Sensitivity of amine-based CO2 capture cost: The influences of CO2
concentration in flue gas and utility cost fluctuations. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control .

Arthur Kohl, R. N. (1997). Gas Purification (5th ed.). Gulf Professional Publishing.
S. D. Daptardar, V. V. (1994). On degradation of chemical solvents for bulk removal of CO2.

Butwell,Kubek ad Sigmund, “Alkanolamine Treating”, Hydrocarbon Processing, March (1982)

Edwards, J. E., 2008. Design and Rating of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers. [Online]
Available at: http://www.chemstations.com/content/documents/Technical_Articles/shell.pdf
[Accessed 26 10 2014].

Incropera, F. P., 2011. Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer. Jefferson: John Wiley & Sons.

Kohl, Riesenfeld, “Gas Purification” 3rd edition, Gulf Publishing Co,Houston

L., W., McCabe, H. P. & C., S. J., 1993. Unit Operations in Chemical Engineering. Singapore: McGraw-Hill Higher
Education.

Thomas Cassirer, Tranter international AB, Swedeen “sweet treat”, Hydrocarbon Engineering (2012)

Thulukkanam, K. (2013). Heat Exchanger Design Handbook (second ed.). CRC Press.

Perry, Robert H. and Green, Don W. (1984). Perry's Chemical Engineers' Handbook (6th Edition ed.). McGraw-
Hill.ISBN 0-07-049479-7.

Serth, R. W., 2010. Process Heat Transfer: Principles, Applications and Rules of Thumb. Oxford: Elsevier
Academic Press.

Southwest Thermal Technology, 2014. Heat Exchanger: Materials & Construction, Shell & Tube. [Online]
Availableat: http://www.shell-tube.com/Materials-and-Construction.html
[Accessed 26 10 2014].

Whalley, P. P. and Hewitt, G. F. (1983) Reboilers, Multiphase Science and Technology, Vol. 2, Hemisphere
Publishing Corporation, New York.

P a g e | 19
APPENDICES
Appendix A.1

Heat Duty Calculations

𝐻̇ 𝑖𝑛 = 𝑚̇ℎ × 𝐶𝑝 × (𝑇ℎ𝑎 − 𝑇ℎ𝑏) = 1.0127 × 107 𝑘𝑔/ℎ

̇ = 9828151.88499674 𝑘𝑔/ℎ
𝑄𝑑𝑢𝑡𝑦

𝑄𝑑𝑢𝑡𝑦
The heat exchange efficiency is obtained as𝜂 = 𝐻̇𝑖𝑛
× 100%= 99.8492813%. The heat loss can be
neglected.

P a g e | 20
Appendix A.2

Stream Flow Temperature Specific Average Change in Duty

Rate (K) heat Cp Cp Temperature Requirement
(kg/s) (kJ/kg.K) (K) (kW)
(kJ/kg.K)

Rich Amine 13.075 333.15 3.409 3.5235 33.3 1534

Inlet

Rich Amine 13.075 366.45 3.638

Outlet

Lean Amine 12.125 397.35 4.164 4.085 33.3 1649

Inlet

Lean Amine 12.125 364.05 4.006

Outlet

P a g e | 21
Appendix A.3

Calculation of Heat Duty, Q

Table of Fluid Properties of Acid Gases Stream

Components Inlet (To Condenser) Outlet 1 (Acid Gas) Outlet 2 (Reflux)

Mass Flow Rate (kg/hr) 4781 3428 1353

Mass Enthalpy (kJ/kg) 457.12 337.72 -1646.59

Qh = minHin - moutHout

= 3255628.08 kJ/hr

= 904.34 kJ/s

Calculation of LMTD

𝑇2 − 𝑇1
∆𝑇𝑙𝑚 =
𝑇 −𝑇
ln(𝑇𝑠𝑎𝑡 − 𝑇1 )
𝑠𝑎𝑡 2

Where Tsat is saturation temperature of the vapour

T1 is the inlet coolant temperature

T2 is the outlet coolant temperature

∆𝑇𝑙𝑚 is the log mean temperature difference

Components Tsat T1 T2 LMTD

Temperature (oC) 82 15 40 53

Calculations of Cooling Water Flowrate

Assuming: Qh = -Qc

𝑄 = 𝑚̇𝑐𝑝 ∆𝑇

Where 𝑚̇ is the mass flow rate of water

𝑐𝑝 is the specific heat capacity of water

∆𝑇 is the temperature difference

Q is the heat transferred

P a g e | 22
 Components Values

𝒎̇ (kg/s) 8.64

𝒄𝒑 (kJ/kg K) 4.187

∆𝑻(K) 25

Calculation of Area of Heat Transfer

Where U is the overall heat transfer coefficient

∆𝑇𝑙𝑚 is the log mean temperature difference

Q is the heat transferred

A is the area of heat transfer

Area is known to be 16.89 m2 from the value of U = 1000 W/K

P a g e | 23
Appendix A.4

Fluid and system properties

Properties Vapor stream Liquid stream Inlet reboiler Sources

Enthalpy [kJ/h] 4741072.442 -35885197.09 -45453053.37 Aspen HYSYS

Enthalpy of 50494.11952 45159.75428 44573.33232 Aspen HYSYS

vaporization

Matlab code for area calculation.

%section A Reboiler
%calculate Q in kJ/h

%Q = enthalpy out - enthalpy in

Fin = 2210.302325; %kmol/h
Fvap = 357.7332022;
Fliq = 1852.569123;

Hin = -20564.17932; %kJ/kmol

Hvap = 13253.09592;
Hliq = -19370.50372;

Hvapin = 44573.33232; %kJ/kmol

Hvapvap = 50494.11952;
Hvapliq = 45159.75428;

Q1=(Fvap*(Hvap+Hvapvap)+Fliq*(Hliq+Hvapliq))-Fin*(Hin+Hvapin); %kJ/h
Q = Q1/3600 %kW

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%calculate LMTD.
%References : Week 8 tutorial Q2

Tsat = 124.2455976; %C saturation temp of lean amine

T1 = 140; % inlet temp of steam
LMTD = T1 - Tsat

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%calculate Heat transfer coefficient

U = 325*5.678 %W/m2C taken from [3]

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%Calculate A

A = Q*1000/(U*LMTD) %m2

P a g e | 24
Appendix B.1

P a g e | 25
Appendix B.2

P a g e | 26
Appendix B.3

P a g e | 27
Appendix B.4

P a g e | 28
Appendix B.5

P a g e | 29
Appendix B.6

P a g e | 30
Appendix B.7

P a g e | 31
Appendix B.8

P a g e | 32
Appendix B.8

P a g e | 33
Appendix B.9

P a g e | 34
Appendix B.10

Detailed Worksheet of Calculation

To determine 'hi'
p k Cp Di Li v
1000 μ (Pa.s) 0.00089 μ/μwall 1 0.61141 4180 0.584 200 4
(kg/m3) (W/m.K) (J/kg.K) (in.) (in.) (ft/s)
Pr 5.83
Re 20320.3653
Nu 130.118925
hi
5363.230232
W/m2.K

To determine 'ho'
p μ k Cp Di Do
1011.85 0.001402 μ/μwall 1 0.3604 3895 37 40 m(kg/h) 44195.22
(kg/m3) (Pa.s) (W/m.K) (J/kg.K) (in) (in.)
v (m/s) 0.254130923
Pr 15.15202553
Re 186345.6862
Nu 855.3119088
ho
303.4000117
W/m2.K

To obtain 'U'
Rdi Rdo
Rdi 0.00 Rdo
0.001 (°F.ft2.h 0.000176114 (K.m2/ 0.000352227
(K.m2/W) 2 (°F.ft2.h/Btw)
/Btw) W)
U
249.3284057
(W/m2.K)

P a g e | 35
Appendix B.10

Temperature Conditions
Tha (°C) 91.36 Tca (°C) 25
Thb (°C) 34.18 Tcb (°C) 30
Cph (J/kg.K) 3895 Cpc (J/kg.K) 4180
mh (kg/s) 12.27645 mc (kg/s) 130.624028
Hin (W) 2734163 Qduty (W) 2730042.19 η 99.85%

To determine LMTD
△T1 (K) 9.18 △T2 (K) 61.36
LMTD 27.46704734

To determine 'F'
Z 11.436 ηH 0.07534659
F 0.93

To obtain 'UA'
UA (W/K) 106874.5832

To obtain 'A'
Calculated A (m2) 428.6498481 Estimated A (m2) 110.7180613
Error % 74.17%

P a g e | 36
Appendix B.10
Tables of Assumptions
Location Parameter
Tube Side Viscosity of Cooling Water ‘μ (Pa.s)’
Viscosity Correlation ‘μ/μwall’
Conductivity of Cooling Water ‘k
(W/m.K)’
Heat Capacity of Cooling Water ‘Cp
(J/kg.K)’
Inside Diameter of the Tube ‘Di (m)’
Length of the Tube ‘Li (m)’
Superficial Velocity in the Tube side ‘v
(m/s)’
Prandtl number of the Cooling Water
Shell Side Viscosity of 6.25%DEA ‘μ (Pa.s)’
Heat Capacity of 6.25%DEA ‘Cp
(J/kg.K)’
Conductivity of 6.25%DEA ‘k
(W/m.K)’
Viscosity Correlation ‘μ/μwall’
Shell Diameters
‘ID’for Inside and ‘OD’ for Outside
Superficial Velocity in the Shell side ‘v
(m/s)’
Prandtl number of the Cooling Water
Assumption
Water @ 1atm & 27.5 C
0.00089 Pa.s from NIST
1
Water @ 1atm & 27.5C
0.61141 W/m.K from NIST
Water @ 1atm & 27.5C
4180 J/kg.K from NIST
ID 0.584 in, 14 BWG for Fouling Fluids
(Serth, 2010)
200 inches
4 ft/s that is 1.2192 m/s
From the ange of 3-8 ft/s (Serth,2007)
Water @1atm & 27.5 (Incropera, 2011)
Means of the Inlet and Outlet Data from
Aspen HYSYS
1
ID: 37 inches
OD: 40 inches that is 1/5 times of the tube
length
From the range of 5-10 times (Edwards,
2008)
Calculated from the Mass Flow Rate of
44195.220295457 kg/h using the available
cross-sectional area of the shell
Data from Aspen HYSYS
Calculated from μ, k and Cp,
𝜇 𝐶𝑝
Pr = = 15.15202553
𝑘
Formula from (Incropera, 2011)
P a g e | 37
Appendix B.11

Figure 1Hydraulic Calculation spreadsheet

P a g e | 38
Appendix B.12

Table For Tube-Side Losses and its Values

Notation Definition Value

∆𝑃𝑓 Pressure drop due to friction *To be calculated
(psi)
f Darcy friction factor 0.02911
np Number of tube passes 2
L Tube length (ft) 16.67
G mass flux (lbm/h.ft2) 6.07 X 105
Di Tube ID (ft) 0.04867
s Specific Gravity of fluid 0.9965
φ Viscosity correction factor 1.078
(µ/µwall)0.14

Table for Shell-Side Losses and its Values

Notation Definition Value

∆𝑃𝑓 Pressure drop due to friction ?
(psi)
f friction factor 0.1254
nb Number of baffles 25
ds Shell diameter (in.) 37
G mass flux (lbm/h.ft2) = ṁ/as 1.014 X 105
as Flow area across tube bundle 0.5139
(ft2) = dsC’B/(144PT)
C’ Gap between tubing (in.) 0.25
B Baffle Spacing (in.) 8
PT Tube Pitch (in.) 1
de Equivalent diameter (in.) 1.645
s Specific Gravity of fluid 0.9832
φ Viscosity correction factor 0.988
(µ/µwall)0.14

P a g e | 39
Appendix C.2

Figure: Typical relation between shear stress and fouling build up in a plate heat exchanger.

P a g e | 40
APPENDIX D

LEGEND TABLES FOR EQUATION

EQUATION (1)

𝑳𝒆𝒈𝒆𝒏𝒅
𝑄̇𝑑𝑢𝑡𝑦 Heat Duty of the Heat Exchanger
𝑈 Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient
𝐴 Surface Area Required
𝐹 Correction Factor
△ 𝑇𝑙𝑚 Log Mean Temperature Difference (LMTD)

EQUATION (2)

EQUATION (6) & (7)

𝑳𝒆𝒈𝒆𝒏𝒅
𝑈𝐷 Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient, also known as ‘𝑈’
𝐷𝑜 The Outside Diameter of the Tube/Shell
𝐷𝑖 The Inside Diameter of the Tube/Shell
ℎ𝑖 Heat Convection Coefficient Inside the Tube/Shell
ℎ𝑜 Heat Convection Coefficient Outside the Tube/Shell
𝑘 Heat Conduction Coefficient Through the Wall
𝑅𝐷𝑖 Fouling Factor Inside the Tube/Shell
𝑅𝐷𝑜 Fouling Factor Outside the Tube/Shell

EQUATION (8), (9), (10), (11), (12)

Legend Definition
∆𝑃𝑓 Pressure drop due to friction (psi)
∆𝑃𝑟 Pressure drop due to minor losses (psi)
∆𝑃𝑛 Pressure drop due to nozzle losses (psi)
f Darcy friction factor
np Number of tube passes
L Tube length (ft)
G mass flux (lbm/h.ft2)
Di Tube ID (ft)
s Specific Gravity of fluid
φ Viscosity correction factor (µ/µwall)0.14
𝛼𝑟 Velocity head
np Number of tube passes
Ns Number of shell passes
Gn Mass flux through the nozzle.

P a g e | 41
EQUATION (13)

Notation Definition
∆𝑃𝑓 Pressure drop due to friction (psi)
f friction factor
nb Number of baffles
ds Shell diameter (in.)
G mass flux (lbm/h.ft2) = ṁ/as
as Flow area across tube bundle (ft2) = dsC’B/(144PT)
C’ Gap between tubing (in.)
B Baffle Spacing (in.)
PT Tube Pitch (in.)
de Equivalent diameter (in.)
s Specific Gravity of fluid
φ Viscosity correction factor (µ/µwall)0.14
∆𝑃𝑟 Pressure drop due to minor losses (psi)
∆𝑃𝑛 Pressure drop due to nozzle losses (psi)

P a g e | 42