Thermal Oxidizer Modeling Using Combustion CFD Analysis

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Jagadeesh Unnam CAMERON Process Systems Technology Center

Agenda
Introduction to CAMERON Thermal Oxidizer Motivation for CFD Simulation Modeling process

Parameter variations
Results used towards product development

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

CAMERON Thermal Oxidizer (SHV Combustor)

Emission control device
Designed for > 99.9 % DRE (Destruction Removal Efficiency)
Chamber Sample Ports

Primary applications:
Glycol dehydration off gases
Shield

Other applications:
Tank vapors, Amine unit off gases, Casing gases

Non-assisted, natural draft combustion chamber Designed to provide the three essential Ts
Temperature Time Turbulence

Burner Nozzle Air Damper (secondary & Tertiary) Educt or Waste gas from SHE Inline Arrestor

Pilot

Fuel gas

Liquid Drip Pot Air Inlet (Flame Arrestor) To blowcase

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Motivation for CFD Simulation

Verification of theoretical assumptions and test data Observation of performance
Temperature profile Combustion zone Wall Hydrocarbon concentrations Flow dynamics of air inlet & exhaust flue gases

Optimization of combustion air flow Air dampener adjustments Chamber size reduction Chamber wall Insulation

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Geometric Details
Sizing basis from existing filed operated unit
66 x 30 external chamber
SA 516-70 (Material)

32 x 12 Internal shield
309 SS (Material)

CAMERON SHV Eductor & Burner Design Adjustable air inlets

Primary Secondary Tertiary

Flame Arrestors

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Flow Conditions and Fluid Properties

Simulation case based on field operating unit

Gas Properties:
Flow rate : 2.6 lb/min (constant) Gas Inlet Temp : 275 F Gas velocity out of the nozzle: 30 fps

Assumptions
Constant gas flow inlet Gas as 100% methane Ambient atmosphere Constant convective heat transfer

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Modeling Details
Solver Settings 2D axis symmetric, Steady Sate Standard k- model Models used

Discrete Ordinates (DO) Radiation Model

Eddy-Dissipation model

Mesh Size 143,232

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Type of Analysis & Optimization

Temperature

Velocity
Flow vectors Hydrocarbon concentration Air dampener opening Wall temperature profiles Effects of external chamber size reduction

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Cases Studied - Variations in air dampener setting

Flow Rate

Chamber

Chamber

(lb/min)

(lb/min)

(lb/min)

% Stoic.

% Stoic.

% Stoic.

Sheild

Sheild

1. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 50%) 2. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 25%) 3. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 12.5%) 4. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 6.25%) 5. FA Closed

5 5 6 6 4

17% 17% 17% 17% 12%

91 99 106 114 17

282% 305% 327% 351% 53%

92 80 62 42 18

284% 248% 192% 129% 55%

3100 3100 3100 3100 700

1600 1600 1600 1600 2000

810 499 792 506 764 525 749 550 580 1062

2 2 2 3 2361

Note: Due to orientation of the dampener plates, 50% open equals the maximum achievable opening

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

ppm

Cases (w.r.t FA - Flame Arrestors orientation)

Pri. Air

Sec. Air

Ter. Air

Estimated Peak Temp. (F)

Peak wall temp. (F)

Avg. CH4 Mass

Chamber Temperature Profile Variations in air dampener setting

Case 1: Sec. 50% Ter. 50% Case 2: Sec. 50% Ter. 25% Case 3: Sec. 50% Ter. 12.5% Case 4: Sec. 50% Ter. 6.3% Case 5 : FAs Closed Case 5: Sec. 50% Ter. 50%

10

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Wall Temperature Profile Variations in air dampener setting

11

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Chamber Size Reduction

52
Sample Ports Chamber

As reduced air damper setting resulted in acceptable performance, a new sizing basis was simulated for confirmation Reduced external chamber: 52x 30

30
Shield

21% reduction in diameter

Adjustment to air inlet orientation

30

Burner Nozzle Air Damper (secondary & Tertiary) Educt or Waste gas from SHE Inline Arrestor

Pilot

Fuel gas

Liquid Drip Pot Air Inlet (Flame Arrestor) To blowcase

12

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Chamber Size Reduction

Reduced Chamber Dia. (Non-Insulated)

1000 900 800 Wall Temp., F 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 5 10 15 Height, ft Chamber Wall Sheild Wall 20 25 30

13

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Chamber Size Reduction - Performance

Temperature Contours
14 2011 ANSYS, Inc. April 12, 2012

Velocity Contours

Velocity Vectors

Chamber Size Reduction - Performance

Flow Rate Estimated Peak Temp. (F) Peak wall temp. (F) Avg. CH4 Mass

Chamber

Chamber

(lb/min)

(lb/min)

(lb/min)

% Stoic.

% Stoic.

% Stoic.

Sheild

Sheild

1. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 50%) 2. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 25%) 3. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 12.5%) 4. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 6.25%) 5. FA Closed

5 5 6 6 4

17% 17% 17% 17% 12%

91 99 106 114 17

282% 305% 327% 351% 53%

92 80 62 42 18

284% 248% 192% 129% 55%

3100 3100 3100 3100 700

1600 1600 1600 1600 2000

810 499 792 506 764 525 749 550 580 1062

2 2 2 3 2361

Reduced Chamber Cases (with FA's Sec. 50%, Ter. 50%) 6. Uninsulated Outer Chamber 7. Insulated Outer Chamber 6 6 19% 20% 140 142 431% 173 533% 438% 181 558% 3100 3100 1600 1600 755 889 515 884 2 2

15

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

ppm

Cases (w.r.t FA - Flame Arrestors orientation)

Pri. Air

Sec. Air

Ter. Air

Chamber Size Reduction - Performance

Verification of the three Ts Velocity vectors enable to optimize air inlets & avoid recirculation High combustion efficiency

0-100%
16 2011 ANSYS, Inc. April 12, 2012

0-5%

Hydrocarbon Contours

Chamber Wall Non-Insulated vs. Insulated

Chamber Wall Temperature (Insulated & NonInsulated)
1000 900 800 700

Wall Temp., F

600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Height, ft

Non-Insulated
Non-Insulated
17 2011 ANSYS, Inc.

Insulated

Insulated
April 12, 2012

Chamber Wall Non-Insulated vs. Insulated

Flow Rate

Chamber

Chamber

(lb/min)

(lb/min)

(lb/min)

% Stoic.

% Stoic.

% Stoic.

Sheild

Sheild

1. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 50%) 2. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 25%) 3. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 12.5%) 4. with FA (Sec. 50%, Ter 6.25%) 5. FA Closed

5 5 6 6 4

17% 17% 17% 17% 12%

91 99 106 114 17

282% 305% 327% 351% 53%

92 80 62 42 18

284% 248% 192% 129% 55%

3100 3100 3100 3100 700

1600 1600 1600 1600 2000

810 499 792 506 764 525 749 550 580 1062

2 2 2 3 2361

Reduced Chamber Cases (with FA's Sec. 50%, Ter. 50%) 6. Uninsulated Outer Chamber 7. Insulated Outer Chamber 6 6 19% 20% 140 142 431% 173 533% 438% 181 558% 3100 3100 1600 1600 755 889 515 884 2 2

18

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

ppm

Cases (w.r.t FA - Flame Arrestors orientation)

Pri. Air

Sec. Air

Ter. Air

Estimated Peak Temp. (F)

Peak wall temp. (F)

Avg. CH4 Mass

Conclusions
Able to study performance & system limitations

Incorporated both flow & combustion models

Results in accordance with filed data Size reduction to standard models Wall insulation effects

19

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Questions ?

20

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Appendix - 1

Modeling process Boundary Conditions

21

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012

Appendix - 2

22

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

April 12, 2012