Design

DESIGN OF A GAS PROCESSING PLANT
Submitted By
Suman Sarkar (0802019)
Abdullah Al Mamun (0802021)
Nilay Kumar Sarker (0802031)
Sabbir Alam (0802034)
A Design submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of

B.Sc. in Chemical Engineering
Under the supervision of

Dr. Dil Afroza Begum
Professor
Department of Chemical Engineering
Bangladesh University of Engineering & Technology (BUET)
Dhaka-1000, Bangladeh
June 2014
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our most sincere gratitude to our supervisor, Professor Dr. Dil
Afroza Begum for her inspiration, guidance, support and drive for progress has been a great
motivation during our work. We are deeply indebted to her for her sincere effort to teach us
the art of doing design works as a group. His patience, enthusiasm, immense knowledge and
encouragements have carried us through to the end of the design. Thank you for being the
greatest mentors. This dissertation would not have been possible without her.
We also wish to thank our parents and family members. Their concern, encouragement, and
advice will always be remembered and welcome.
Sincerely,
Suman Sarkar (0802019)
Abdullah Al Mamun (0802021)
Nilay Kumar Sarker (0802031)
Sabbir Alam (0802034)
Table of Contents
Definition of the Project ....................................................................................................... v
1.1 Definition of the Project............................................................................................................... vi
1.2 Raw Material................................................................................................................................ vi
1.3 Product Specification ................................................................................................................... vi
1.4 Utility .......................................................................................................................................... vii
Selection of Process ............................................................................................................. viii
2.1 Selection of the Process .......................................................................................... ix
2.1.1 Different method of Gas sweetening Process ....................................................................... ix
2.1.2 Different method of Gas Dehydration Process ...................................................................... x
2.2 Selection Criteria ......................................................................................................................... xi
2.3 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... xi
Process Description ................................................................................................................ xii
3.1 Process Description .................................................................................................................... xiii
3.2 Sweetening Plant........................................................................................................................ xiii
3.3 Dehydration Plant .......................................................................................................................xiv
3.4 Stabilizing the Condensates ........................................................................................................xiv
Design Basis .................................................................................................................................. xv
4.1 Design Basis................................................................................................................................xvi
4.2 Product Specification ..................................................................................................................xvi
4.3 Raw Material Specification........................................................................................................xvii
4.4 Specification of Utilities ........................................................................................................... xviii
4.5 Meteorological Condition and Soil Properties of the Plant Site ..................................................xx
Process Block Diagram ....................................................................................................... xxiii
Process Flow Diagram .......................................................................................................... xxv
Engineering Calculation: Material and Energy Balance ........................... xxvii
7.1Equipment List ......................................................................................................................... xxviii
Major Equipment Design ..................................................................................................... xxix
8.1 Glycol Absorber design (1/4 of Total Flow) .............................................................................. xxx
8.2 Sizing of Pumps .......................................................................................................................... xli
8.3 Sizing of Gas Liquid Separator ...................................................................................................xlv
8.3 Heat Exchanger ......................................................................................................................... xlvii
8.4 DEA Contractor Design Calculation ............................................................................................ lvii
Mechanical Design .................................................................................................................. lxix
P & ID .............................................................................................................................................. lxxvii

Plot Plan ................................................................................................................................... lxxxiii
14.1 Estimation of Total Capital .................................................................................................. lxxxvi
Appendix ....................................................................................................................................... xcvii
Reference ........................................................................................................................................ c
Definition of the Project
1.1 Definition of the Project

A Natural Gas processing plant with a capacity of 550 MMSCFDPipeline quality Natural gasis to
be produced using raw Natural Gas from the newly invented gas wellis to be set up at Kailashtilla,
Sylhetin Bangladesh including all off sites, auxiliaries and utilities and supporting facilities.
1.2 Raw Material

Raw Natural Gas from 3 producing gas wells (550 MMSCFD)
DEAmine Solution (32.5 USGPM)
TEG (866 USGPM)
1.3 Product Specification

Composition:
COMPONENTS
MOLE FRACTION
Methane
0.930973
Ethane
0.040237
Propane
0.000658
i-Butane
0.000022
n-Butane
0.000014
n-Pentane
0.000007
n-Hexane
0.000002
H2O
0.000101
Nitrogen
0.002029
CO2
0.012562
Properties of product:
Vapour/Phase Fraction
1.0000
Molar Density (kgmole/m3)
3.319
Mass Density (kg/m3)
57.53
Molar Heat Capacity (KJ/kgmole-C)
36.98
Mass Heat Capacity (KJ/kg-C)
2.133
Thermal Conductivity (W/m-k)
4.095e-002
Viscosity (cP)
1.357e-002
Molecular Weight
17.34
Z Factor
1.000
1.4 Utility
Power
Own power generation of total Capacity of 2 MW
Where one is gas generator (1350KW) & a diesel generator (650KW).
Natural Gas
Raw Natural Gas from 3 gas wells.
Selection of Process
2.1 Selection of the Process

2.1.1 Different method of Gas sweetening Process
a) Solid bed Sweetening Process
b) Aquasorption Process (Wash water process)
c) Selexol Process
d) Chemical Absorption process
e) The Holmes-Stretford Process
2.1.1.a Solid bed Sweetening Process

The processes are based upon physical or chemical of adsorption of acid gases on
solid. Simplicity, high selectivity (only H2S is removed) and process efficiency is
independent of pressure are the main advantages of the process. Solid bed Sweetening
Process are of two type- (i) The Iron Sponge Process, (ii) Molecular sieves Process.
2.1.1.bAquasorption Process (Wash water process)

This is an effective process for application of high pressure gas with high acid gas
content and high H2S to CO2 ratio. For high H2S to CO2 ratio gases, operating and
investment can be reduced by applying this process.
2.1.1.c Selexol Process

In selexol process Dimethyl ether of polyethylene glycol (DMPEG) is used as solvent.
Solubility of the acid gas in DMPEG is directly proportional to the partial pressure of
the acid gas component. H2S gas is more soluble than CO2.. Higher hydrocarbons
have the greater solubility.
2.1.1.d Chemical Absorption process

The alkanol-amin processThe alkanol-amine process are the most prominent and widely used process for H2S
and CO2 removal. They give offer good relatively low cost and good flexibility in
design and operation.
Monoethanolamine (MEA), Diethanolamine
(DMA),
Teriethanolamine (TEA) etc are most common alkanol-amin.
The hot carbonate processAn aqueous potassium carbonate solution is the main reagent of hot carbonate
process. High concentration & temperature of potassium carbonate and high partial
pressure of CO2 gas are required for better performance. It is not applicable for gas
stream which contains only H2S.
2.1.1.e The Holmes-Stretford Process

By this process H2S can be removed as elementary carbon but CO2 content remains
unaltered. This process can be designed for large temperature & pressure range.
Lower operating cost and flexibility is the main advantage of this process.
2.1.2 Different method of Gas Dehydration Process

a) Absorption dehydration Process
b) Adsorption Process
Among these, Glycol process for Dehydration and DEAmine Process for Sweetening are
used in this process design.
2.1.2.a Absorption Process

Absorption dehydrationis a process where a liquid dessicant is used for the removal of
water vapor from a gas. Glycol, Ethylene glycol (EG), diethylene glycol (DEG),
triethylene glycol (TEG), etc are the most common absorbent used in absorption
dehydration process
2.1.2.b Adsorption Process

Adsorption dehydrationis a process where a solid desicant is used for the removal of
water vapor from a gas stream. Alumina, silica gel, alumina silica gel, Molecular
sieves are the most common adsorbent used in adsorption dehydration process.
2.2 Selection Criteria

As there are many variable in Natural Gas treating process, it is difficult to choose an
appropriate application area of the process. However among the several factors the most
significant which are to be considered are
The types and concentrations of impurities present in the gas and degree of removal
desired.
Selectivity of acid gas removal required, if any
Temperature and pressure at which the sour gas is available and at which the sweet
gas is to be delivered.
Volume of the gas to be processed and its hydrocarbon composition.
CO2 and H2S ratio in the gas.
The desirability of sulfur recovery due to environmental problems or economics
2.3 Conclusion
Economic analysis over decades with respect to Bangladesh has proved that among all
processes Glycol Dehydration and Amine sweetening process are the most proven ones. So
nowadays this process is highly adopted throughout the world and involves so many possible
variations in approach. Most of the processing plants in Bangladesh are built on these
processes and have been performing at good condition. So, in this design project Glycol
Dehydration and Amine sweetening process was adopted.
Process Description
3.1 Process Description

The process of producing Pipeline quality Natural Gas is divided into two parts.
1) Sweetening
2) Dehydration
3) Stabilizing the Condensates.
3.2 Sweetening Plant

This process flow scheme varies little, regardless of the aqueous amine solution used as the
sweetening agent. Slight modifications can appear linked to the type of amine which is
selected and to the optimization of the scheme for specific purposes.
The general process flow for an amine sweetening plant is shown in PBD. The feed gas (sour
gas) containing H2S and/or CO2 always must enter the plant through an Inlet Separator to
remove free liquids and/or entrained solids. The gas from this separator enters the bottom of
the Absorber and flows upward trough the column in intimate counter-current contact with
the aqueous amine solution (lean solution). In the column the chemical reaction between the
amine and the feed gas acid gas occurs and the amine solution absorbs the acid gas. The
chemical reaction (due to the heat of reaction between the amine and the acid gas) is
exothermic. It will raise the temperature of the gas. Treated gas (sweet gas) leaves the top of
the column and the amine solution loaded with acid gas (rich solution) leaves the bottom of
the column.
The absorber column operates at the feed gas pressure. A minimum pressure of 4/5 b.a is
required to make the process feasible and operable. There is no limitation on high pressure as
far as the process is concerned. If the feed gas be at high temperature, a gas/gas exchanger
(using the hot treated gas as heating medium) will be provided. This equipment will be
installed upstream of the inlet separator.
The rich solution from the Amine Flash Drum then passes through an Amine/Amine Heat
Exchanger. This heat exchanger serves as a heat conservation device and lowers the total heat
requirements for the process. The rich solution is heated by the regenerated solution (lean
solution) coming from the regenerator. Then the rich solution is let down to the operating
pressure of the Regenerator (generally between 1.2 and 2 b.a) also called stripper is a
fractionation column (with trays or packing) with a condenser (using water or air as cooling
medium) and a reboiler.
3.3 Dehydration Plant

Lean, water-free glycol (purity >99%) is fed to the top of an absorber (also known as a
"glycol contactor") where it is contacted with the wet natural gas stream. The glycol removes
water from the natural gas by physical absorption and is carried out the bottom of the column.
Upon exiting the absorber the glycol stream is often referred to as "rich glycol". The dry
natural gas leaves the top of the absorption column and is fed either to a pipeline system or to
a gas plant. Glycol absorbers can be either tray columns or packed columns.
After leaving the absorber, the rich glycol is fed to a flash vessel where hydrocarbon vapors
are removed and any liquid hydrocarbons are skimmed from the glycol. This step is
necessary as the absorber is typically operated at high pressure and the pressure must be
reduced before the regeneration step. Due to the composition of the rich glycol, a vapor phase
having high hydrocarbon content will form when the pressure is lowered.
After leaving the flash vessel, the rich glycol fed to the stripper (also known as a regenerator).
The glycol is thermally regenerated to remove excess water and regain the high glycol purity.
3.4 Stabilizing the Condensates

The liquid outlets from the 2 phase separators are sent to Stabilizer. Here hydrocarbon
condensates are recovered as NGL Gases from the liquid phase. The NGL gas is the
compressed by a compressor and stored into a storage tank. This NGLs are sent to the LPG
plant for further processing.
Design Basis
4.1 Design Basis

The following is the design basis that has been assumed for the Natural Gas Processing plant
producing 550 MMSCFD pipeline quality gas by using DEAmineProcess for Sweetening and
Try Ethyle Glycol process for dehydration. The process will operate 365 days /yr.
Design basis includes site conditions, utilities and climate conditions etc. which influence the
design of individual unit, equipment or facility of the overall project. Selection of the site
conditions is extremely important in determining the ultimate success of the project.
4.2 Product Specification

Composition:
COMPONENTS
MOLE FRACTION
Methane
0.930973
Ethane
0.040237
Propane
0.000658
i-Butane
0.000022
n-Butane
0.000014
n-Pentane
0.000007
n-Hexane
0.000002
H2O
0.000101
Nitrogen
0.002029
CO2
0.012562
H2S
0.0012
Properties of product:
Vapour/Phase Fraction
1.0000
Molar Density (kgmole/m3)
3.319
Mass Density (kg/m3)
57.53
Molar Heat Capacity (KJ/kgmole-C)
36.98
Mass Heat Capacity (KJ/kg-C)
2.133
Thermal Conductivity (W/m-k)
4.095e-002
Viscosity (cP)
1.357e-002
Molecular Weight
17.34
Z Factor
1.000
4.3 Raw Material Specification

Raw Natural Gas
Composition:
COMPONENTS
MOLE FRACTION
Methane
0.8634
Ethane
0.0392
Propane
0.0088
i-Butane
0.0007
n-Butane
0.0005
n-Pentane
0.0005
n-Hexane
0.0003
H2O
0.0467
Nitrogen
0.0018
CO2
0.0204
Pressure
1400 psi
Temperature
77oF
DEAmine
OH
OH
NH
Composition:
Components
Mole fraction
0.2795
DEAmine
0.7187
H2O
0.0018
CO2
Try Ethylene Glycol (TEG)
OH
O
O
OH
Composition:
Components
Mole fraction
Glycol
0.995
H2O
0.005
4.4 Specification of Utilities

Electric Power
Voltage
380/220 V
Frequency
50 Hz
Phase
3 phases
Process Water
Temperature 25 oC
Pressure
0.5 MPa (G)
Quality:
PH
6.5 - 8.5
Total hardness
5 mg
Total basically
5 mg
Total Fe3+
0.1 mg/l
Turbidity
5 mg/l
Circulating Cooling Water

Inlet
Outlet
Temperature
< 30 oC
38 oC
Pressure
0.5 MPa
0.2 MPa
Fouling factor
6x10-4 M2.hr. oC/kcal
Turbidity
50 mg/l
Chlorine
< 5 ppm
PH
6.5 8
Steam
State Saturated
Pressure
7 kg/cm2
Soft Water
Conductivity
< 1x10-6 Ohm-1.cm-1
4.5 Meteorological Condition and Soil Properties of the

Plant Site
Ambient Temperature
Absolute max. Temperature:
35 oC
Absolute min. temperature:
12oC
Designed max. Temperature:
40oC
Designed min. temperature:
5oC
Atmospheric Pressure
Annual average atm. Pressure:
0.11 MPa
Max. average atm. Pressure:
0.15 MPa
Min. average atm. Pressure:
0.09 MPa
Designed average atm. Pressure:
0.2 MPa
Humidity
Annual average relative humidity:
80 %
Max. monthly average relative humidity:
87 %
Min. monthly average relative humidity:
65 %
Designed relative humidity:
90 %
Wind
Wind direction: Generally wind flows from the north to the south in the winter
season and from the south to north in the summer in our country.
Wind Velocity: 45 knot (45 nautical miles per hour or 52 miles/hr)
Rain
Annual avg. rainfall:
2850 mm
Max. Avg. rainfall:
690 mm
Max. Monthly rainfall:
235 mm
Earth bearing capacity

Load bearing capacity:
The soil has a bearing capacity of 0.38 ton/ft2

required piling is used.
Corrosive tendency:
Non Corrosive
Climate Condition
Summer:
Wet bulb Temperature (max)
29C
Dry bulb Temperature (max)
32C
Relative humidity
84%
Wet bulb temperature (min)
22C
Dry bulb Temperature (min)
25C
Dew point
21C
Relative humidity
80%
Winter:
Wet bulb Temperature (max)
22C
Dry bulb Temperature (max)
26C
Dew point
20C
Relative humidity
72%
Wet bulb temperature (min)
11OC
Dry bulb Temperature (min)
9C
Dew point
9C
Relative humidity
65%
Other Information
Natural catastrophe:
A possibility of storm in the months of April-May.
Value of by-products: No economically feasible by-products are

obtained.
Process Block Diagram
Process Flow Diagram
Engineering Calculation:
Material and Energy Balance
7.1Equipment List
Table 7.1: Table of Equipment List
Designation in the HYSYS
Equipment Name
Quantity
Compressor
K-100
Heat Exchanger
E-100, E-102
Adsorber
T-100, T-102
Separator
V-100, V-101, V-104
Pump
P-100, P-101
Storage Tank
V-106
Stripper Column
V-102, V-103
Stabilizer Column
V-105
silulation
Major Equipment Design
8.1 Glycol Absorber design (1/4 of Total Flow)

TOP
Bottom
Vapor rate, ft3/sec
4.1
3.7
Liquid rate, ft3/sec
0.49
0.84
Vapor Density, lb/ft3
3.6
3.92
Liquid Density, lb/ft3
70.31
52.12
Surface tension, dynes/cm
45.87
22.1
Assumptions:
Clean service, no fouling or suspended material
Tray spacing is to be close as possible, because vertical installation space is a
premium.
All equations and data used here refer to the book A P P L I E D PROCESS D E S I G N
FOR CHEMlCAlAND PETROCHEMICA1 PlANTS, Volume 2, Third Edition by Ernest E.
Ludwig.
Calculation of Tower Diameter

Souders-Brown method
W = C(v)[(l) (v)]
At the Surface Tension 22.1,
From Figure 8-82, C = 280 for 12-inch tray spacing.
In this case Vapor rates are close and vdoes not change much from bottom to top of tower.
W = 280 [3.92(52.12 3.92)]= 3848.796 lbs/hr (ft2)
3848.796
= 3600 2.872= 0.3722 ft3/sec (ft2)

Tower cross-section area, A =
4.1
= 0.3722 ft2 = 11.02 ft2
Diameter, D = 4 3.1416 = 3.75 ft

Using Hunt equation:
Assuming Height clear liquid in bubbling zone on tray, hc = hw + how = 3.5 in.
S' = St 2.5 hc = 12 2.5 3.5 = 3.25 in.
At surface tension = 22.1 dynes/cm,
For Liquid entrained, ew = 5% = 0.05
From Figure 8-121, allowable tower velocity = 1.5 ft/sec

3.7
Required tower area = 1.5= 2.47 ft2 (bottom, largest)

Diameter = 4 1.23 3.1416 = 1.78 ft
Selecting tower diameter = 4.0 ft
Tray Layout Based on 4.0 ftDiameter Tower

Using a segmental downcomer on a cross-flow tray.
From the residence time in downcomers for bubble cap trays and at the tray spacing of 12
inches, selecting an allowable liquid velocity of .4 ft/sec.
Downcomer area = . 84 .4= 2.8 ft2
Total tower area =3.1416 4.02 4= 12.57 ft2
2.8
Percent of tower area = 12.57 100 % = 22.3%

Using Figure 8-100 for segmental downcomers, at 22.3% downcomer area, the weir length is
89% of tower diameter.
Weir length, lw= 0.89 4.0 = 3.56 ft
Since standard details for fabrication are already available for a tray with a 19.5-in. weir in a
30-in. tower (65% of dia.), try this asfirst tray examined. This is 6.8% of tower cross
sectional area.
Downcomer area = 0.068 12.57 = 0.86 ft2.
Hole Size
Assuming 3/16-in. dia. 3/5-in. pitch
This is spacing of 2.66do, and is asclose as good design would suggest. Using 1/2-in. tray
thickness.
do
Ratio,= =
3/16
3/5
= 0.3125
Percent hole area = 13% (of perforation area only) as shown in Figure 8-143.
Minimum Hole Velocity: Weeping

1
Assuming vo (v) /2= 13

Assuming Submergence = 4 in. = hsl= hdl (neglecting /2)
water
Dry Tray Pressure drop, hdt = 0.003(vo2 v)
(1 2)/Co2
L
The hole dia
3/16
ratio=
= 1.5
tray thickness
1/2
From Figure 8-126, = 0.2
From Figure 8-128, orifice coefficient, Co= 0.78
hdt =
0.003132 64.2(1.22 )
= 1 in. liquid
52.12.782
Effective head
For hsl= 4, Fs<14
Reading from Figure 8-130; effective head, he= 2.25 in. liquid
Total Wet Tray Pressure Drop

ht= hdt + he = 1+ 2.25 = 3.25in. liquid
Weep Point
Using Figure 8-131 Curve A, and ht= 3.25 in. liquid
1 /2
Reading Weep point velocity = 16 = vom (v)

1
Because vom (v) /2= 16 is greater than the assumed value of 13, the 13 cannot be used.
1
Assuming new Fs = vo (v) /2= 25

Assuming Submergence = 1.25-in. = hsl= hdl (neglecting /2)
water
(1 2)/Co2
L
The hole dia
3/16
tray thickness ratio= 1/2 = 1.5
From Figure 8-126, = 0.1
hdt =
0.003252 64.2(1.12 )
52.12.782
New Effective head
= 3.75 in. liquid
For hsl= ,Fs<14

New Total Wet Tray Pressure Drop

ht= hdt + he = 3.75+1.35 = 5.1in. liquid

1 /2
Reading Weep point velocity = 24.6 = vom (v)

1
Because vom (v) /2= 24.6 is smaller than the assumed value of 25, the 25.0 is accepted value.
Maximum Hole Velocity at Flood Conditions

1
Assume F, = vo (v) /2= 30 max.

Submergence = 1.25-in. = hsl= hdl (neglecting /2)
hdt =
0.003302 64.2(1.092 )
52.12.782
= 5.4in. liquid
Effective head, he= 1.35 in. liquid, for Fs>14 and hsl= 1.25 inch
Total wet tray pressure drop, ht= 5.4 + 1.35= 6.75 inches liquid
Liquid Back-up or Height in Downcomer
Hd= ht+ (hw+ how) + + hd

Hd= 6.75 + 1.25 + 0 + 0 (assuming and hd to be confirmed)
Hd= 8.0 in. liquid
The limit on Hd for flooding is St/2= 12/2= 6 in.
Therefore Fs= 30 appears to be a good assumption.
Design Hole Velocity

A velocity represented by Fs factor between minimum and maximum limits is to be selected.
30 >Design >25
A median value of Fs= 27.5 is selected, because freedom to operate above and below the
design value is preferred in this case.
Design Basis
Fs= 27.5
1. Weir Height selection: hw= 3.0 inch
2. Weir Length selection:For good design, ratio of weir length to tower diameter is 0.5
to 1.0
Selected weir length lw = 4.0 ft.

Weir length to tower diameter ratio is 1.0
()
2.5
.84448.8
4.02.5
= 11.78
From figure-8-105, correction factor: Fw: 1.0

2/3
()
Francis Formula , how = .092
2/3
.84 448.8
= .092
4.0
in = 1.9 in
3. Submergence: hsl= (Fw) (hw) + how= (1) (3.0) + 1.9 = 4.9 in. liquid
4. Downcomer pressure loss:

Clearance between bottom of downcomer and plate = 3-in. max. Underflow area = (9.5 in.) (3
in.)/144 = 0.2 ft2. Because this is less than the downflow area, it must be used for pressure
drop determination. No inlet weir used on this design.
.84449 2
Lg 2
hdu= 0.56449A = 0.56[449 0.2] = 9.88 in liquid
5. Dry tray pressure drop:

hdt =
0.00327.52 64.2(1.12 )
52.12.782
= 4.55 in. liquid
6. Effective head:hsl= 4.9 in.

he= 2.55 in. liquid for Fs>14, Figure 8-130
7. Total wet tray pressure drop:

8.
ht= 4.55 + 2.55 = 7.10 in. liquid
9. Total tower pressure drop for 19 trays:
(tower)=
7.119(70.31+52.12)
17282
= 4.78 psi
which is not greater than 5 psi. So, it is satisfactory.
10. Number of holes required:

Assumed Hole size = 3/16 in.
Hole spacing or pitch = 3/5 in.
From Figure 8-144, Holes/(in.2 plate area) = 3.25

Area of a 3/16 -in. hole = 0.0276 in.2
At Design condition: Fs = 27.5
27.5
Top Vapor Velocity, vo,Top = () = 3.6 = 14.5 ft/sec
27.5
Bottom Vapor Velocity, vo,Bottom = = () = 3.92= 13.9 ft/sec

Number of holes required =
Vapor Flow rate 144

vo hole area
4.1144
at Top = 14.5.0276= 1476

3.7144
at Bottom = 13.9.0276= 1389

At Flooding condition: Fs = 30
30
30

Vapor Flow rate 144

vo hole area
4.1144
at Top = 15.82.0276= 1353

3.7144
at Bottom = 15.16.0276= 1274

At Weeping condition: Fs = 25
25
25

Vapor Flow rate 144

vo hole area
4.1144
at Top = 13.18.0276= 1624

3.7144
at Bottom = 12.63.0276= 1529

11. Tower Height:
Height of the column
H = (N-1) + Ht + Hb + Htr
Total tray thickness ,Htr=

12
ft =
190.5
12
ft = 0.8 ft
Space at the top typically an additional 5 to 10 ft is needed to allow for disengaging space.
The bottom of the tower must be tall enough to serve as a liquid reservoir. At bottom portion,
top of both inlet and outlet pipes should be at least 400 to 450 mm below the bottom tray.
Additional top height, Ht= 5ft
Additional bottom height, Hb= 2.2ft
Number of tray, N= 19
H = [{(19-1) 12}/12 + 5 + 2.2 + 0.8]ft
= 26 ft
12. Mechanical tray layout details:
A total of 4-in. on diameter for extension of tray ring-type support into the tower. This
reduces available tray area.
Assuming 6.5-in. clearance (no holes) between inlet downcomer and first row of holes. The
6.5 in. could be reduced to 4 in. minimum if an inlet weir were used.
Assuming 4-in. clearance (no holes) between outlet weir and adjacent row of holes.
Downcomer width = .12 4 = 0.56 ft = 5.76 in (From Figures 8-100 at standard 65% weir
length downcomer width is 12% of Tower diameter).
Area determinations:
Area of segment of circle (2) with chord AD:
Diameter circle (2) = 48 - 4 = 44 in.
Height of chord =
44
2
48
( 2 5.76 6.5)= 10.26 in.
Chord height/circle dia. H/D =
10.26
44
= 0.23
Referring to Perrys Handbook, (pg. 32, 3rd Ed.)

Area = 0.133 442= 258 in2
Area of segment of circle (2) width chord BC:
Height of chord =
H/D =
44
2
48
( 2 5.76 4)== 7.76 in
7.76
44
= 0.176
Area = 0.08 442= 155in2

Area of circle (2) = 442= 6028 in.2
Area available for holes = 6028 (258 + 155) = 5615 in.2
Area required for holes =
1624
3.25
holes/in2= 500 in2.
Number of holes = 1624

Area = 5615 in.2
Other Mechanical Designs:

Maximum Operating Temperature = 38oC = 311k
Maximum Operating Pressure = 1250 psi = 88 kg/cm2
a) Shell Thickness:
Material = SA-516-70 Carbon Steel
Specific Gravity, s = 7.7
Maximum allowable stress, fs = 1300 kg/cm2
Welding efficiency, j = 0.9
Design Pressure, PD = 1.5 Operating Pressure = 1.5 88 = 132 kg/cm2
Internal Shell or column Dia, D = 4 ft = 1.2192 m = 1219.2 mm
Here, C = corrosion Allowance = 3 mm
PDD
1321219.2
Thickness, ts= 2 fs j PD + C = 2 1300 .9 132 + 3 = 73mm
b) Tray:
Thickness = 1/2 inch = 0.5 inch
Sieve Tray,
hole size = 3/16 inch,
pich = 3/5 inch,
Triangular.
Tray Spacing = 12 inch
c) Support for trays:

A total of 4-in. on diameter for extension of tray ring-type support into the tower.
Material: Carbon steel.
d) Downcomer and Weir:

Material = Carbon steel.
e) Support for Column:

Skirt type,
Height = 6.6 ft,
f) Heads:
Material = SA-516-70 Carbon steel.
Permissible tensile stress = 1300 kg/cm2
Thickness of Head,
th =
PDRcW
2 fs j
1321219.21.54
2 1300 .9
= 106 mm
= 4.042 inch
g) Insulation and Coating:

Insulating material: Polyurethane
Insulating width: 4 inch
Coating material: Zinc Sulfate

Coating width: 0.06 inch
Rc = Crown Radius =1219.2

1
W = Stress intensification factor = 4 3 +
Rc
Rl
= 1.54 mm
Where, Rl = Knuckle radius = 0.1 Rc
8.2 Sizing of Pumps

Pump (P-100) of Dehydration plant
Given Density, = 972kg/m3 = 60.68 lb/ft3
Viscosity, = 17.48 cP = 11.746 10-3lb/sec.ft
Temperature = 62.370 F
Mass flow rate =14.6487kg/hr = 7110.2 kg/hr = 1.975 kg/sec = 4.35 lb/sec
Volumetric flow rate q =
4.35
0.072 ft3/sec
60.68
= 3.9 q0.45 0.13 [Peters and Timmerhaus]
Di opt
= 3.9 0.0720.45 60.680.13

= 2.035 inch
Let us assume, Nominal diameter = 2 inch and Schedule number = 40
Outer Diameter, OD = 2.38 inch = 0.198 ft
InnerDia, ID = 2.067 inch = 0.172 ft[From table D-13 (Peters and Timmerhaus)]
Area, A = ID2/4 = (0.172)2/4 = 0.0233 ft2
v = q/A =
Re =
Dv
0.072
0.0233
=3.092ft/sec
0.1723.0960.68
11.746 103
= 2814.15
For commercial steel /D = 0.000885 for 2.067 inch dia

page- 68]
From Moody diagram (Franzini, page -226)
Friction factor f = 0.0195
Loss calculation
1. For 90 elbow(2 pcs)
F1= 2k (v2/2g)
=
20.233.09^2
232.2
=0.0682ft
2. For Tee (1pcs)
F2=k (v2/2g)
=
1.83.09^2
232.2
=0.267ft
3. For Gate valve (2 pcs)
F3 = 2k (v2/2g)
20.193.09^2
=
232.2
= 0.0563 ft
4. Entrance loss
F4 = k (v2/2g)
[from Ernest E. Ludwig (vol-1)
0.53.09^2
232.2
= 0.0741ft
5. Exit loss
F5 = k (v2/2g)
=
13.09^2
232.2
= 0.1482ft
6. Friction loss
F6 = f(L/D)(v2/2g)
110
3.09^2
= 0.0195
0.172 232.2
=1.83ft
Total Loss, hL= F = (0.0682+ 0.267+ 0.0563 + 0.0741+ 0.1482+ 1.83)ft
= 2.4438 ft
Energy Calculation:
Using Bernoullis equation
P1/ + Z1 +V12/2g +hA -hL=P2/ +Z2 +V22/2g
Given that
P1= 20 KPa = 2.9 psi
P2= 9020KPa = 1308.6 psi
Z2-Z1= 40ft
V1=V2=3.09ft/sec
= 60% (assume)
P2 P1
hA=
+ (Z2-Z1)+ (V22 - V12)/2g + hL
1308.6 2.9
60.68 32.2
+ 40 + 0 + 2.4438
=43.112ft
P = hq/(500). = (60.6832.20.07243.112)/(5500.6)
= 17.1hp
Assuming over design, shaft power = 17.11.1= 18.8hp
We can select 20 HP centrifugal pump.

So straight centrifugal pump, model DUGL12A-20 was selected.
Specification of pump:
Material: cast iron
RPM: 1750
Flow capacity: 770GPM (max)
Impeller size:
Weight: 255 lbs
Price: $ 4662.00
8.3 Sizing of Gas Liquid Separator

Given,
Vapor density, v= 4.854 lbm/ft3
Liquid density, L = 55.703 lbm/ft3
Molecular weight of vapor, MWvap = 17.766 lbm/ lbmole
Vapor flow rate, V = 18.37 lbmole/sec
k = 0.40for up-flow [Ludwig, vol. 1, Page-256]
Design velocity
l v
v
VD = kv
= 0.40 (
55.703 4.854
4.854
)^0.5
= 1.3 ft/sec
& Actual flow rate
ACFS =
V MWvap
v
= 67.23 ft3/sec
Flow area (cross sectional),
ACFS
Ac= V ft2
D
=
67.23
1.3
= 51.72 ft2
Inner Diameter, ID = (4 Ac /) 0.5 = (4 51.72 /3.14)0.5= 8.12 ft
For vertical separator, (h/D) min = 5

Minimum height, h = 5 8.12 = 40.6 ft
Thickness calculation
Here, operating pressure, P = 800 psi
Design pressure, PD= 1.5 P = 1.5 800 = 1200 psi
Thickness, ts =
PD D
2 j0.2PD
+ Cs
Where
PD = Design pressure
fs= Allowable working stress =1600 psi [ Low-alloy steel for resistance to H2 & He ]
E= Joint efficiency (dimensionless) = 80%
Cs=corrosion allowance= 0.12 inch
ts =
1200 8.12 12
2 1600 0.8 0.2 1200
+ 0.12 = 39.6 inch = 3.3 ft
(Ref: Peter and Timmerhaus, Chap 14, table 3 and 4, page: 537, 538 and 721)
8.3 Heat Exchanger

Thermal Design of Heat Exchanger (E-100)
Tube side (Cold fluid)
Inlet fluid: Glycol to be preheated
Outlet fluid: Preheated glycol to absorber
Inlet temperature: 67.59o F
Outlet temperature: 770F
Tavg = 72.2950F
Density (by interpolation) =70.58 lb/ ft3
Viscosity = 22.52 cP=54.5 lb/ft-hr
Thermal conductivity K= 0.192 Btu/hrft0F
Heat capacity Cp =0.5891 Btu/lb0F
Flow rate, Wg = 4.88 x 105 lb/hr
q = WgCpt = (4.88 x 105 x 0.5891 x 9.41) Btu/hr
= 2.7x 106 Btu/hr
Shell side (Hot fluid)

Inlet fluid: Dry gas
Outlet fluid: Sales gas
Inlet temperature: 99.880 F
Outlet temperature: 94.860F
Tavg = 97.370F
Density (by interpolation) = 3.601 b/ft3

Viscosity = 0.01362 cP=0.0333 lb/ft-hr
Thermal conductivity K = 0.023875 Btu/hrft0F
Heat capacity Cp = 0.5105 Btu/lb0F
Flow rate,Wi = 1.05 x 106 lb/hr
q = WiCpt = (1.05 x 106 x 0.5105 x 5.02) Btu/hr
= 2.7x 106 Btu/hr
Tube side calculation

LMTD calculation:
(First pass counter-current flow)
Hot
Cold
Difference
Higher
99.88 (T2)
67.59 (t1)
32.29
Lower
94.86 (T1)
77 (t2)
17.86
Difference
5.02
9.41
14.43
LMTD =
(22)(11)
(LMTD)' =
(22)
ln(
)
11
4.39
21
S=
5.02
R=
ln(22.88/27.27)
= 25.01oF
21
R=
21
T2t1
S=
9.41
= 0.53
9.41
99.8867.59
= 0.2914
From Fig 18 (kern) Page-828 for 1-Shell pass & 2 or more Tube pass heat exchanger
FT = 0.95 which is satisfactory..
Corrected LMTD = FT x (LMTD)'
= 0.95 25.01
= 24.510F
Calculation of heat transfer area and tube numbers

Q = Uassume Arequired LMTD
For light - heavy organics
Overall U = 10-40 Btu/hr ft20F
Assume, Uassume = 35 Btu/hr ft20F
Q
2.7 10 6
3147.4 ft 2
A=
U assumee LMTD 35 24.51
Iteration- 1
The first iteration is started assuming 1 shell pass & 2 tube pass(np).
Fixed tube plate
1
1in. OD(d0), 14 BWG, 1 4 in. square pitch, ID (di) 0.834 in.

Assuming tube length (Lt) is 20 ft.
So, no of tubes, nt =
d0Lt
= 562
Nearest count from table 9(kern) Page-841 is 574
Now, Reynolds no, Re =
4wgnp
dint
= 892 < 104
Iteration- 2
2nd iteration is started assuming 1 shell pass & 4 tube pass(np).
Fixed tube plate
1
1in. OD(d0), 14 BWG, 1 4 in. square pitch, ID (di) 0.834 in.

d0Lt
= 561

4wgnp
dint
= 1100 < 104
Iteration- 3
3rd iteration is started assuming 1 shell pass & 4 tube pass(np).
Fixed tube plate
9
1.25 in. OD(d0), 16 BWG, 1 16 in. square pitch, ID (di) 1.12 in.
d0Lt
= 259

4wgnp
dint
= 5647 < 104
Iteration- 4
4th iteration is started assuming 1 shell pass & 6 tube pass(np).
Fixed tube plate
7
1.5 in. OD(d0), 16 BWG, 1 8 in. square pitch, ID (di) 1.37 in.
d0Lt
= 178

4wgnp
dint
= 16560 > 104
Therefore, our final tube no 182 & Reynolds no (Re) is 16560 selected shell ID (Ds) is 35 in.
Now,
1
Cp 3
hidi
Nu =
( )0.14
= 0.027 Re0.8
K
k
So, hi = 175.74 Btu/hrft2 0F

hio = hi x
=151.92 Btu/hrft2 0F
Shell side calculation

Assumption:
25 % cut segmental baffles
Baffles spacing, B = 0.5 Ds = 17.5 in = 1.46 ft (half of the shell ID is selected)
7
Pitch, Pt = 1 in. square pitch = 0.15625 ft

8
Clearance, C = Pt do = 0.03125 ft
Shell ID, Ds = 35 in = 2.92 ft

So, flows area, as =
IDshell C B
PT
= 0.8526 ft2
Mass velocity, Gs = Wi / as = 1.23 x 106 lb/hrft2
Equivalent dia, De =
4 P T d 0 2 / 4
d o
= 0.124 ft
Reynolds no, Re =
= 465000
So,
1
Cp 3
hoDe
Nu =
( )0.14
= 0.36 Re0.55
K
k
So, ho = 184 Btu/hrft2 0F

Clean overall heat transfer coefficient (Uc) calculation
Uc =(
+ +
Rd)-1 = 42.3 Btu/hrft20F
Over design calculation:

% of over design =
= 20.86 % < 30 %
So, design is accepted.
Dirt factor calculation

Clean overall heat transfer coefficient, Uc = 42.3 Btu/hrft20F
Assumed overall Coefficient, Ud = 35 Btu/hrft20F

Dirt factor, Rd =
Uc UD
U c U D
= 0.00098
Because for natural gas Rd, allowable=0.001 (Ref: Mechanical Design of Process System (vol2))
Therefore, Rd is acceptable.
Pressure drop calculation

Tube side calculation
Flow area, at=
No of tubes flow area per tube

No of passes
182 0.01021
6
= 0.309 ft2
Mass velocity,Gt = Wg/at = 1.6 104lb/hrft2
For Ret = 16560
From figure 26, tube side friction factors correlation (Kern) Page-836
Friction factor, f = f = 0.288 ft2/ft2
Assume, t =1
So, frictional pressure drop, Pf
f .G 2 t.Lt .np
2.22 Psi
5.22 1010.di.SG.t
Return loss Pr = 1.334 10 (2np 1.5)

-13
.G 2t
= 0.34 Psi
So, total pressure drop in tube side, PT = Pf + Pr = 2.56 Psi < 8.7 psi which is acceptable.
Shell side calculation

7
Pitch, Pt = 1 8 in. square pitch = 0.15625 ft

Clearance, C = Pt do = 0.03125 ft
Shell ID, Ds = 35 in = 2.92 ft
Flows area, as = 0.8526 ft2
Mass velocity, Gs= 1.23 x 106 lb/hrft2
Reynolds no, Re = 465000
No of baffles, nb=
= 30.82 ~ 31
From figure 26, tube side friction factors correlation (Kern) Page-836
Friction factor, f = 0.1296 ft2/ft2
s =1(assuming)
f .G 2 s.Ds.(nb 1)
So, pressure drop = Ps
5.22 1010.De.SG.s
= 9.38 Psi < 14.5 Psi, which is acceptable.
Mechanical design
Tube side properties:
Materials: Stainless Steel
No. of pass: 6
Shell side properties:

Materials: Stainless Steel
No. of shell: 1
Shell dia, Ds = 35 in
Working pressure, P = 1247 Psi
Design pressure, Dp = Wp 1.1 = 1371.7 Psi
Permissible working pressure, f = 11000 Psi
Shell thickness, ts=
P.Ds
2. f . j P
= 2.088 in.
Corrosion allowance =1/8 inch= 3.175 mm
Shell thickness including corrosion allowance = (2.088+1/8)
= 2.205 in.
Nozzles
Take inlet and outlet nozzles as 100mm diameter.
Vent nozzle
Drain nozzle
= 25mm diameter
= 25mm diameter
Relief Valve
= 50 mm diameter.
Nozzle thickness = [ P x Di ] / { 2 f J - P }
= 0.68 mm
Minimum nozzle thickness is 6mm and 8mm is chosen which includes
thecorrosionallowance.
Transverse baffles
Number of Baffles = 31
Baffle cut = 25%
Baffle thickness = 6mm (standard)
Flange design
Flange is ring type with plain face.
Flange material: IS 2004-1962 Class 2 Carbon Steel
Bolting steel: 5% Chromium, Molybdenum Steel
Gasket Material: Asbestos
Shell OD
= 37.205 in
Shell Thickness = 2.205 in

Shell ID
= 35 in
Allowable stress for flange material = 100 N/mm2

Allowable stress of bolting material = 138 N/mm2
Using matche.com we have estimated cost for this heat exchanger is $158900.
8.4 DEA Contractor Design Calculation

TOP
Bottom
Vapor rate, ft3/sec
4.1
3.73
Liquid rate, ft3/sec
0.49
0.85
Vapor Density, lb/ft3
3.65
3.96
Liquid Density, lb/ft3
70.20
52.00
Surface tension, dynes/cm
45.60
22.00
Assumptions:
Clean service,
No fouling or suspended material,
Tray spacing is to be close as possible, because vertical installation space is a
premium.
All equations and data used here refer to the book A P P L I E D PROCESS D E S I G N
FOR CHEMlCAlANDPETROCHEMICA1 PlANTS, Volume 2, Third Edition by Ernest E.
Ludwig.
Calculation of Tower Diameter

Souders-Brown method
W = C(v)[(l) (v)]
At the Surface Tension 22,
From Figure 8-82, C = 280 for 12-inch tray spacing.
In this case Vapor rates are close and vdoes not change much from bottom to top of tower.
W = 280[3.96(52.00 3.96)]= 3862 lbs/hr (ft2)
3862
= 3600 2.872= 0.3735 ft3/sec (ft2)

Tower cross-section area, A =
4.1
= 0.3735 ft2= 10.98 ft2
Diameter, D = 4 3.1416 = 3.73 ft

Using Hunt equation:
Assuming Height clear liquid in bubbling zone on tray, hc = hw + how = 3 in.
S' = St 2.5 hc = 12 2.5 3 = 4.5 in.
At surface tension = 22.0 dynes/cm,

For Liquid entrained, ew = 5% = 0.05
From Figure 8-121, allowable tower velocity = 1.5ft/sec
Required tower area =
3.73
1.5
= 2.49 ft2 (bottom, largest)
Diameter = 4 2.49 3.1416 = 1.78 ft
Selecting tower diameter = 4.0 ft to meet the requirement of both bottom and top
diameter of the absorber.
Tray Layout Based on 4.0ft Diameter Tower

Using a segmental downcomer on a cross-flow tray.
From the residence time in downcomers for bubble cap trays and at the tray spacing of 12
inches, selecting an allowable liquid velocity of 0.3ft/sec.
Downcomer area = 0.85 0.3= 2.83 ft2
Total tower area =3.1416 4.02 4= 12.57ft2
2.83
Percent of tower area = 12.57 100 % = 22.5%

Using Figure 8-100 for segmental downcomers, at 22.5% downcomer area, the weir length is
89% of tower diameter.
Weir length, lw= 0.894 = 3.56 ft
Since standard details for fabrication are already available for a tray with a 19.5-in. weir in a
30-in. tower (65% of dia.), try this asfirst tray examined. This is 6.8% of tower cross
sectional area.
Downcomer area = 0.068 12.57= 0.86 ft2.
Hole Size
Assuming 3/16-in. dia. 1/2-in. pitch
This is spacing of 2.66do, and is asclose as good design would suggest. Use 1/8 in. tray
thickness.
do
Ratio,= =
C= 2.66do
3/16
1/2
= 0.375
Percent hole area = 12.8% (of perforation area only) as shown in Figure 8-143.
Minimum Hole Velocity: Weeping

Assuming Fs= vo (v)1/2= 13
Assuming Submergence = 3 in. = hsl= hdl (neglecting /2)
water
(1 2)/Co2
L
The hole dia
3/16
From Figure 8-126, = 0.128
hdt =
0.003132 64.2(1.1282 )
52.782
= 1.01 in. liquid
Effective head
For hsl= 3, Fs<14
Total Wet Tray Pressure Drop

ht= hdt + he = 1.01+2.1 = 3.11 in. liquid
Weep Point
Reading Weep point velocity = 16.5 = vom (v)
1 /2
Because vom (v) /2= 16.5 is greater than the assumed value of 13, the 13 cannot be used.
Assuming new Fs = vo (v)1/2= 20
Assuming Submergence = 2.25 in. = hsl= hdl (neglecting /2)
water
(1 2)/Co2
L
The hole dia
3/16
ratio=
= 1.5
tray thickness
1/2
From Figure 8-126, = 0.128

hdt =
0.003202 64.2(1.1282 )
52.782
= 2.4 in. liquid
New Effective head

For hsl= 2.25, Fs>14

ht= hdt + he = 2.4 +1.65 = 4.05 in. liquid

1 /2
Reading Weep point velocity = 21.6= vom (v)

1
Because vom (v) /2= 21.6 is greater than the assumed value of 20, the 20 cannot be used.
Assuming new Fs = vo (v)1/2= 25
Assuming Submergence = 1.25-in. = hsl= hdl (neglecting /2)
water
(1 2)/Co2
L
The hole dia
3/16
From Figure 8-126, = 0.128
hdt =
0.003252 64.2(1.1282 )
52.782
= 3.74 in. liquid
New Effective head

For hsl=1.25,Fs>14

ht= hdt + he = 3.74 +1.35 = 5.09 in. liquid

1 /2
Reading Weep point velocity = 24.4= vom (v)
Because vom (v) /2= 24.4 is smaller than the assumed value of 25, the 25.0 is accepted value.
Maximum Hole Velocity at Flood Conditions

1
Assume F, = vo (v) /2= 28 max.

Submergence = 1.25-in. = hsl= hdl (neglecting /2)
0.003282 64.2(1.1282 )
Dry Tray Pressure drop, hdt =
52.782
= 4.65 in. liquid
Effective head, he= 1.35 in. liquid, for Fs>14 and hsl= 1.25 inch
Total wet tray pressure drop, ht= 4.65 + 1.35= 6 inches liquid
Liquid Back-up or Height in Downcomer
Hd= ht+ (hw+ how) + + hd

Hd= 6 + 1.25+ 0 + 0 (assuming and hd to be confirmed)
Hd= 7.25 in. liquid
The limit on Hd for flooding is St/2= 12/2= 6 in.
Therefore Fs= 28 appears to be a good assumption.
Design Hole Velocity

A velocity represented by Fs factor between minimum and maximum limits is to be selected.
28>Design >25
A median value of Fs= 26.5 is selected, because freedom to operate above and below the
design value is preferred in this case.
Design Basis
Fs= 26.5
13. Weir Height selection: hw= 3 inch
14. Weir Length selection:For good design, ratio of weir length to tower diameter is 0.5
to 1.0
Selected weir length lw = 4.0 ft.
Weir length to tower diameter ratio is 1.0
()
2.5
.85448.8
4.02.5
= 11.79
From figure-8-105, correction factor: Fw: 1.0

2/3
()
Francis Formula, how = .092
2/3
.85 448.8
= .092
4.0
in = .92 in
15. Submergence: hsl= (Fw) (hw) + how= (1) (3) + 1.92= 4.92 in. liquid
16. Downcomer pressure loss:

Clearance between bottom of downcomer and plate = 3-in. max. Underflow area =
(43.14161.52 in2.)/144 = 0.2ft2. Because this is less than the down flow area, it must be
used for pressure drop determination. No inlet weir used on this design.
.85448.8 2
Lg 2
hdu= 0.56449A = 0.56[ 449 0.2 ] = 10.1 in liquid
17. Dry tray pressure drop:

hdt =
0.00326.52 64.2(1.1282 )
= 4.25in. liquid
52.782
18. Effective head:

hsl= 4.92 in.
he= 2.55 in. liquid for Fs>14, Figure 8-130
19. Total wet tray pressure drop:

ht= 4.25+ 2.55= 6.8 in. liquid
20. Total tower pressure drop for 20 trays:

(Tower)=
6.820(70.2+52)
17282
= 4.8 psi
4.8 psi is not greater than 5 psi. So, it is satisfactory.
21. Number of holes required:

Assumed Hole size = 3/16 in.
Hole spacing or pitch =1/2 in.
From Figure 8-144, Holes/(in.2 plate area) = 5
Area of a 3/16 -in. hole = 0.0276 in.2
At Design condition: Fs = 26.5
26.5
26.5

Vapor Flow rate 144

vo hole area
4.1144
at Top = 13.87.0276= 1542

3.73144
at Bottom = 13.32.0276= 1461

At Flooding condition: Fs = 28
28
28

Vapor Flow rate 144

vo hole area
4.1144
at Top = 14.66.0276= 1460

3.73144
at Bottom = 14.07.0276= 1383
At Weeping condition: Fs = 25
25
25
Bottom Vapor Velocity, vo,Bottom = = () = 3.96= 12.56ft/sec

Vapor Flow rate 144

vo hole area
4.1144
at Top = 13.09.0276= 1634

3.73144
at Bottom = 12.56.0276= 1550
22. Mechanical tray layout details:

A total of 5-in. on diameter for extension of tray ring-type support into the tower. This
reduces available tray area.
Assuming 8-in. clearance (no holes) between inlet downcomer and first row of holes. The 8
in. could be reduced to 5 in. minimum if an inlet weir were used.
Assuming 5-in. clearance (no holes) between outlet weir and adjacent row of holes.
Downcomer width = .12 4= 0.56 ft = 5.76 in (From Figures 8-100 at standard 65% weir
length downcomer width is 12% of Tower diameter).
Area determinations:
Area of segment of circle (2) with chord AD:
Diameter circle (2) = 48 - 5 = 43 in.
Height of chord =
43
2
48
( 2 5.76 8)= 11.26 in.
Chord height/circle dia. H/D =
11.26
43
= 0.26

Area = 0.121 432= 224 in2
Area of segment of circle (2) width chord BC:
Height of chord =
H/D=
43
2
48
( 2 5.76 5)== 8.26 in
8.26
43
= 0.19

Area = 0.071 432= 131.3 in2
Area of circle (2) = 432= 1849 in.2
Area available for holes = 1849 (244+ 131.3) = 1473 in.2
Area required for holes =
1634
5
holes/in2= 326.8 in2.
Number of holes = 1634

Area = 1473 in.2
23.Tower Height
Height of column Hc = (Nact 1)HS +Ht+ Hb +Plate Thickness
No. Of plates = 20
Tray Spacing HS =12 inch
Ht = 5 ft for vapor disengagement
Hb = 2.5ft for liquid hold up
Minimum height of column Htower= (20-1) 1+2.5+5+200.1042
Htower = 26.7 ft
24.Other Mechanical Designs:

Maximum Operating Temperature = 40oC = 313k
Maximum Operating Pressure = 1290 psi = 90.75 kg/cm2
a) Shell Thickness:
Specific Gravity, s = 7.7
Maximum allowable stress, fs = 1300 kg/cm2
Design Pressure, PD = 1.5 Operating Pressure = 1.5 90.75 = 136 kg/cm2
Internal Shell or column Dia, D = 4 ft = 1.2192 m = 1219.2 mm
Here, C = corrosion Allowance = 3 mm
PDD
1361219.2
Thickness, ts= 2 fsj PD + C = 2 1300.9 136+ 3 = 78.23 mm

ts= 78.23 mm
b) Tray:
Thickness = 1/8 inch = 0.125 inch
Sieve Tray,
hole size = 3/16inch,
pitch =1/2 inch, Triangular.
Tray Spacing = 12 inch
c) Support for trays:

A total of 5 inch on diameter for extension of tray ring-type support into the tower.
Material: Carbon steel.
d) Downcomer and Weir:

e) Support for Column:
Skirt type,
Height = 10 ft ,
f) Heads:
Material = SA-516-70 Carbon steel.
Permissible tensile stress = 1300 kg/cm2
Thickness of Head,
th =
PDRcW
2 fsj
1361219.21.54
2 1300.9
= 109 mm
th = 4.16 inch
g) Insulation and Coating:

Insulating material: Polyurethane
Insulating width: 4 inch
Coating material: Zinc Sulfate

Coating width: 0.06 inch
Rc = Crown Radius =1219.2 mm

1
W = Stress intensification factor = 4 3 +
Rc
Rl
= 1.54 mm
Where, Rl = Knuckle radius = 0.1 Rc
Mechanical Design
8.7 ft
12.0 ft
44.0 ft
Vertical section of gas liquid separator
8.7 ft
12.0 ft
Cross section view of gas liquid separator
Pump
Heat Exchanger
Heat Exchanger
P & ID
V2
Y strainer
V4
PUMP
V5
V3
V1
Figure: P & I diagram for centrifugal pump
0-100
deg
S-4
S-1
mV
10-50
S-3
AC
I-3
Xsp
S-2
AT
P-2
P-4
P-2
Vapor
phase
P-8
LI
P-5
P-7
light
P-1
P-6
feed
V-1
E-1
P-3
Figure: P & I diagram for gas liquid separator
Liquid phase
AC
Heated glycol
To absorber
P/I
TT
Dry gas
TI
Preheated glycol
Sales gas
Figure: P & I diagram for Heat exchanger
Plot Plan
Economic Analysis
14.1 Estimation of Total Capital

Investment and Production Cost
Table 12.1: Equipment cost for Heat Exchanger
Equipment
Identification
No.
Quantity
US $
Floating head HE
E-100
80,000
Floating head HE
E-102
158,000
Total=
238,000
Table 12.2: Equipment cost for Pumps

Equipment
Centrifugal
Pump
Centrifugal
Pump
Identification No.
Quantity
US $
P-101
9400
P-100
12900
Total =
22300
Table 12.3: Equipment cost for Compressor
Equipment
Identification
No.
Reciprocating Compressor K-100
Quantity
US $
35600
Table 12.4: Equipment cost for Storage Tanks

Equipment
Storage Tank
Identification
No.
V-106
Quantity
US $
6300
Table 12.5: Equipment cost for Adsorption Column

Equipment
Identification
No.
Quantity
US $
Glycol Absorber
T-101
220,000
DEA Contractor
T-100
260,000
Total =
480,000
Quantity
US $
Table 12.6: Equipment cost for Regenerator Column

Equipment
Identification
No.
Glycol Stripper
V-103
145000
DEA Stripper
V-102
19000
Total =
164000
Quantity
US $
7600
Table 12.7: Equipment cost for Stabilizer
Equipment
Stabilizer
Identification
No.
V-105
Table 12.8: Equipment cost for 2 phase Separators
Equipment
Identification
No.
Quantity
US $
Separator
V-100
2200
Separator
V-101
1900
Separator
V-104
400
Total =
4500
Total Equipment cost in the year 2002 = $ 958300

index value at present
Total Equipment cost at present (2014) = $ 958300 index value at 2002
= $ 958300
443.26
390.4
= $ 1.088 million.
Table 12.9: Estimation of Capital Investment
Items
Percentage
of
Purchased Cost
Equipment Cost
Million $
Purchased equipment
100
1.088
Purchased equipment installation
47
0.511
Instrumentation and control
20
0.22
Piping (installed)
68
0.74
Electrical (installed)
11
0.12
Building
18
0.196
Yard improvement
10
0.1088
Service facilities
70
0.762
Land
0.0653
Total direct plant cost
350
3.81
Engineering and supervision
33
0.36
Construction & expenses
41
0.45
Contractors fee
22
0.24
Contingency
42
0.46
488
5.32
Indirect Cost
Fixed capital investment

(Indirect + Direct cost)
Working capital investment

73.2
0.8
561
6.12
(15% of total capital investment)
Total Capital Investment
Ref: Plant Design and Economics by Peter and Timmerhaus; page-251
Table 12.10: Manufacturing Expenses

(Working day basis 330day/yr)
Cost /yr
Cost type
Item
$ Million
Major Raw Material
Raw Gas
3.75/1000 scf
7.2
TEG
0.75 $/lb
0.82
DEAmine
0.6 $/lb
0.02
Cost of Raw materials
Direct
$ 8.04
Operating labor
(10% of RM)
0.804
Supervisory & Clerical

labor
(10% of Opt.
labor)
0.0804
Utilities
0.55
Maintenance & repair

(20% of FC)
1.064
Opt. expenses (10% of

resistance & repair)
0.1064
Laboratory charges
0.01064
(10% of opt. labor)
Total direct manufacturing expenses
$ 10.66
Overhead (payroll &

plant), Packing, storage
(50% of opt. labor plus
supervision &
maintenance
0.085
Local taxes (9%of Fixed
0.4788
capital)
Insurance (0.4% of fixed
capital)
Total annual indirect manufacturing expenses
Total manufacturing expenses
0.0213
$ 0.5851
$ 11.24
Depreciation (10%
of fixed capital for
machinery &
equipment)
General Expenses
0.532
Administrative Cost (20% of Operating labor)
0.1608
Distribution of selling cost ( 10% of total

manufacturing expenses)
1.124
Research & development (5% of total expenses)
0.18
Total annual expenses
Economic Analysis
Percent rate of return
Gas production = 2.92 105 ft3/hr = 2.32 109 scf/year
LPG production = 2356 ton/year
Total sale = $31.34 million
Total income =31.34 13.24 = $ 18.1 million
Net profit after tax = $ 15.4 million (15% Tax)
Total investment cost = $ 6.12 million
$ 13.24
Depreciation of fixed capital investment (FCI)

Project life = 20 yr
Salvage value at the end of the project life = 0.15.32= $ 0.532 million
Total depreciation = 0.95.32 = $ 4.788 million
Now depreciation by sinking fund method with 15% interest rate,
= Depreciable FCI (A/P, 15%, 20)
0.15 1.1520
= 4.788 1.1520 1
= $ 0.765 million/yr
Cash flow diagram
Payback period calculation

Formula uses
F = P(1 + ) ,
=
(1 + ) 1
(1 + )
Assumed MARR is 15%

1st yr
P0= - $6.12million
So, F1= -$7.04 million
Cost = -$13.24 million
Profit = $15.4 million
So, net cash P1 = -$4.88 million
2nd yr
P1 = -$4.88 million
3rd yr
P2 = -$3.452 million
4th yr
P3= -$1.81 million
So, net cash P4 = $0.08million
Here, net positive cash flow produced, which indicate the payback period.
By linear interpolation, actual payback period is 3.96 yr (3 yr 11month 15 day)
5th yr
P4= -$0.08 million
So, F5= $0.92 million
So, net cashP5 = $ 2.252 million
IRR calculation
In annual worth (AW) method:
Total annual revenue, R= $ (15.4 13.24) = $ 2.16 million
AW= -$6.12 million (A/P, i%, 20) + $ 2.16 million + $ 0.532 million (A/F, i%, 20)
i% (assumption)
AW($,million)
20
0.903
40
-0.2897
By linear interpolation, for AW is 0 i% = 35.17%> 15% (MARR)
ERR calculation
Ek( P/F, %,k)(F/P, i%, N) = Rk(F/P, %, N-k)
Where,
% = 15 %
N = 20 yr
Using the above equation, i% = 19.67 %> 15% (MARR)
Appendix
Reference
Ludwig, E.E Applied Process Design for Chemical and Petrochemical Plants, 3
volm,2ndedn, Gulf Pub.
Peters and Timmerhaus, Plant Design and Economics from Chemical Engineers,
4thedn, McGraw Hill (1991)
Phillip C. Wankat, Equilibrium stage separations, prentice hall
A.K.M. Abdul Quader, Design and Building of Process Plant, World University
Service.
Bassel, W.D, Preliminary Chemical Engineering Plant Design, Elsevier Pub, New
York (1976)
Rudd, D.F. and C.C Watson, Strategy of Process engineering, Wiley (1968)
Vilbrandt, F.C and C.E Dryden, Chemical Engineering Plant Design, 4thedn,
McGraw-Hill (1959)
Modern cost Engineering: Methods and Data, compiled and edited by Chemical
Engineering , McGraw-Hill(1979)
Ludwig, E.E Applied Project Engineering and Management, 3rdedn,Gulf Pub.
George T. Austin, Shreves Chemical Process Industries, 5thedn, McGraw-Hill (1954)
RifatM.Dakhil, SataK.Ajjam; General Operating Problems and Their Solutions of

Natural Gas Sweetening Process (Amine System).
http://www.lessmytax.com/cost-inflation-index/
http://allinfoindia.com/eLearning/Income%20tax/current%20index%20of%20capital
%20gain.htm

Design

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Design

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

DESIGN OF A GAS PROCESSING PLANT

A Design submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of

Under the supervision of

P & ID .............................................................................................................................................. lxxvii

Definition of the Project

1.1 Definition of the Project

1.2 Raw Material

1.3 Product Specification

Molar Density (kgmole/m3)

Mass Density (kg/m3)

Molar Heat Capacity (KJ/kgmole-C)

Mass Heat Capacity (KJ/kg-C)

Thermal Conductivity (W/m-k)

2.1 Selection of the Process

2.1.1.a Solid bed Sweetening Process

2.1.1.bAquasorption Process (Wash water process)

2.1.1.c Selexol Process

2.1.1.d Chemical Absorption process

Monoethanolamine (MEA), Diethanolamine

Teriethanolamine (TEA) etc are most common alkanol-amin.

2.1.1.e The Holmes-Stretford Process

2.1.2 Different method of Gas Dehydration Process

2.1.2.a Absorption Process

2.1.2.b Adsorption Process

2.2 Selection Criteria

3.1 Process Description

3.2 Sweetening Plant

3.3 Dehydration Plant

3.4 Stabilizing the Condensates

4.1 Design Basis

4.2 Product Specification

Molar Density (kgmole/m3)

Mass Density (kg/m3)

Molar Heat Capacity (KJ/kgmole-C)

Mass Heat Capacity (KJ/kg-C)

Thermal Conductivity (W/m-k)

4.3 Raw Material Specification

4.4 Specification of Utilities

0.5 MPa (G)

Circulating Cooling Water

6x10-4 M2.hr. oC/kcal

< 1x10-6 Ohm-1.cm-1

4.5 Meteorological Condition and Soil Properties of the

Absolute min. temperature:

Designed max. Temperature:

Designed min. temperature:

Max. average atm. Pressure:

Min. average atm. Pressure:

Designed average atm. Pressure:

Max. monthly average relative humidity:

Min. monthly average relative humidity:

Designed relative humidity:

Max. Avg. rainfall:

Max. Monthly rainfall:

Earth bearing capacity

The soil has a bearing capacity of 0.38 ton/ft2

Dry bulb Temperature (max)

Wet bulb temperature (min)

Dry bulb Temperature (min)

Dry bulb Temperature (max)

Wet bulb temperature (min)

Dry bulb Temperature (min)

A possibility of storm in the months of April-May.

Value of by-products: No economically feasible by-products are