Increase C2 Splitter Capacity with ECMD Trays

and HIGH FLUX Tubing

Mohamed S. M. Shakur
Raymond E. Tucker
Kevin J. Richardson
Michael R. Sobczyk
UOP LLC
Tonawanda, New York, U.S.A.

Richard D. Prickett, Technology

Charles Polito, Technology
Steve E. Harper, Plant Operations
Chevron Chemical Company, Port Arthur, Texas, U.S.A.

Presented at the
Ethylene Producers Conference Session
American Institute of Chemical Engineers
“Ethylene Revamps & Retrofit Technology”
George R. Brown Convention Center, Houston, Texas, U.S.A.
March 18th, 1999

Copyright © 1999 by UOP LLC and Chevron Chemical Company All rights reserved.
Unpublished

AIChE shall not be responsible for statements

or opinions contained in papers or printed in its publications
Increase C2 Splitter Capacity with ECMD Trays
and HIGH FLUX Tubing
Mohamed S. M. Shakur UOP LLC, Tonawanda, New York, U.S.A.
Raymond E. Tucker UOP LLC, Tonawanda, New York, U.S.A.
Kevin J. Richardson UOP LLC, Tonawanda, New York, U.S.A.
Michael R. Sobczyk UOP LLC, Tonawanda, New York, U.S.A.
Richard D. Prickett Chevron Chemical Company, Texas, U.S.A.
Charles Polito Chevron Chemical Company, Texas, U.S.A.
Steve E. Harper Chevron Chemical Company, Texas, U.S.A.

ABSTRACT

The Enhanced Capacity Multiple Downcomer (ECMD) tray is a significant improvement

over an MDϑ tray, which has been the mainstay in difficult separations and column
revamps for the last 40 years. With the use of improved hardware to redirect vapor, an
ECMD tray can achieve as much as 20 % more capacity than an MD tray.

Doubly enhanced HIGH FLUXϑ tubes utilize boiling and condensing/sensible

enhancements to increase the overall heat transfer coefficients of exchangers by 3 to 5
times that of conventional bare tubes. The existing bare tube reboilers and condensers of
the Chevron C2 splitter were revamped with doubly enhanced HIGH FLUX tubes, resulting
in increased heat duties and reduced temperature differences across the exchangers.

By using ECMD trays, doubly enhanced HIGH FLUX tubes and ethylene unit
expansion, the ethylene production of the Chevron Chemical C2 Splitter located at Port
Arthur, Texas, U.S.A. was increased by 70%.
 EXPANSION BACKGROUND

Ethylene production at the Chevron, Port Arthur ethylene plant was increased by 70% in
1997 1. The revamp required significant modifications to the C2 splitter system. The
economics of the expansion required the use of the existing column and exchanger shells.
The refrigeration compressors were replaced with higher capacity machines on the same
footprint. Due to the large capacity increase, and with the new machines in place, the
energy consumption of the C2 splitter column had to be minimized because of refrigeration
limitations. A revamp of the C2 splitter system with ECMD trays and HIGH FLUX tubes
met the capacity and energy requirements for this large expansion project.

Figure 1 shows the simplified process flow diagram for the C2 splitter system. A
revamp of the column with ECMD trays maximized the number of theoretical trays and
minimized the energy required for the separation and throughput. Revamping the overhead
condensers and bottoms reboilers with doubly enhanced HIGH FLUX tubing reduced the
temperature difference across the exchangers, thereby unloading the propylene refrigerant
compressor.

Prior to the revamp, the column was operating at an ethylene production rate of
54.4 mt/h. After the revamp, an ethylene production of 90.5 mt/h was achieved. The
addition of the second feed accounted for approximately a 20% increase in ethylene
production.

The design for the column and exchanger revamps was carried out in two steps.
First, an ECMD revamp scheme that maximized column capacity and minimized energy
requirements was established. The energy required for the column revamp was then used as
the design basis for HIGH FLUX tubes in the reboilers and condensers.
 Figure 1. Simplified Process Flow Diagram After the Revamp

EA-410A EA-410B EA-410C

Vent
1

8 EA-444
9

Feed 1

C2H4
Feed 2 Product

164

EA-411A/B/C/D

C2H6
Recycle
 ECMD TRAYS

BACKGROUND

The ECMD Tray was developed in 1989. The first commercial application into an Austrian
deethanizer 2 occurred the same year. At the end of 1998, the ECMD tray has been installed
and successfully operated in 110 columns.

The ECMD tray was developed to achieve higher capacity than an MD tray. A
photograph of an ECMD tray is shown in Figure 2. An ECMD tray has a significantly
higher capacity than other types of trays. The ECMD tray utilizes features that are common
to an MD tray, that result in high capacity. These features include a large number of
downcomers, a large weir length, and no receiving pans. In addition the ECMD tray has
enhanced sieve decks and downcomer features that allow a 20% capacity increase over an
MD tray. An early commercial application proved the higher capacity of the ECMD tray
when a 20 % capacity increase was achieved by replacing flooded MD trays in a
deethanizer 3 with ECMD trays.

Figure 2. ECMD Tray Showing Enhanced Deck and Downcomers

 High-pressure columns with high liquid to vapor ratios, such as demethanizers,
deethanizers, C2 splitters, and C3 splitters are ideal for ECMD trays. The ECMD tray
provides significant benefits in a new column where the diameter and shell length can be
reduced, and in the revamp of a column where the internal loads can be increased. Total
installed costs for a new column can be reduced by as much as 40%. Difficult separations
that require a large number of trays, such as ethylene-ethane, propylene-propane and para-
orthoxylene, can be done in a single tower shell. Production can be increased by as much as
40% on a revamp.

ECMD trays are used in column revamps to increase both capacity and theoretical
tray count. For maximum capacity, the trays can replace original trays on a tray for tray
basis. On many revamps, reducing the tray spacing increases the number of trays.
Customers often perceive an increased number of ECMD trays as necessary because of the
lower efficiency of the ECMD tray when compared to a conventional tray. However, the
main reason for increasing the number of trays in a column is to improve the purity of a
product, and reduce energy requirements. In a Gulf Coast C3 splitter 4, the tray count was
increased by installing twice the number of existing trays at spacings of 254 mm. The
propylene product purity improved from 95% (chemical grade), which has low commercial
value, to 99.6% (polymer grade), which has significantly higher value. In a Gulf Coast C2
splitter 5, the tray count was increased by 25%. Ethylene production rate increased by 25%
and the contaminants in the ethylene decreased from 1,000 ppm to less than 400 ppm.

In 1991, Chevron’s C3 splitter column located at Port Arthur, Texas, U.S.A., was
revamped with 325 ECMD trays with a diameter of 5486 mm. Operating data obtained
from the column showed that a 40% increase in capacity was achieved 6. Based on this
experience, ECMD trays met Chevron’s requirements for a debottleneck of the C2 splitter
(see Figure 3).
 Figure 3. Chevron C2 Splitter Column

REVAMP OPTIONS FOR THE COLUMN

The main goal of the revamp was to maximize the ethylene production and minimize the
energy requirements. The UOP analysis started with a determination of the separation
characteristics. The relationship between the number of theoretical trays below the product
side draw to the condenser duty required to make the desired separation was determined
(see Figure 4). This curve was used to establish the required theoretical tray count for the
revamp.

The energy required for a tray-for-tray revamp was too high for the available
refrigerant load. From Figure 4, it can be seen that energy savings can be realized by
increasing the number of theoretical trays (NTT) in the column. UOP used a design point
of 101 theoretical trays. At this theoretical tray count, the capacity could be achieved
within the system’s energy limitation. A full performance warranty for the column revamp
was issued by UOP based on this design point. UOP expected the ECMD trays to generate
112 theoretical trays. A revamp of the column with conventional high capacity trays could
not achieve this.
 Figure 4. Minimizing Energy Required for the C2 Splitter
160

150

Number of Theoretical Trays Below Side Draw

140

130 E C M D E x p e c ted Operation

120
E C M D G u a rantee Point
110

100

90

80

70

60

50
130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Main Condenser Duty,GJ/h

REVAMP STRATEGY AND INSTALLATION TIME

The ECMD trays were installed in the C2 Splitter in 1997. UOP estimated a revamp time
of 22 days (17,500 man-hours) based on similar experiences 7. The column was worked on
sporadically since it was not the critical path item. A multi-tray revamp of the C2 splitter
column in an ethylene plant should not extend the shutdown schedule, or delay the planned
startup. The new rings were seal-welded to the column wall and new feed and product
nozzles were cut into the column shell.

The original column contained 126 conventional 2-pass valve trays at typical tray
spacings of 508 and 610 mm. The 13 trays in the pasteurization section at the top of the
column were at 610 mm tray spacings. The side draw location was moved higher in the
column to maximize the number of trays used for the ethylene-ethane separation. The
number of trays in the pasteurization section was reduced. After the revamp, the ethylene
product was drawn below tray 8 with tray 1 being the top tray.
 The ECMD trays replaced the original trays on a 1 for 1 basis in the pasteurization
section. The trays above the bottom feed point were replaced on a 4 for 3 basis. A 3 for 2
revamp strategy was used below the bottom feed point. Table 1 summarizes the tray
spacings before and after revamp. Figure 5 shows a typical ECMD tray installation.

Table 1. Revamp Strategy

Section Revamp type Tray spacing, mm Tray spacing, mm

before after
Pasteurization 1-for-1 609.6 609.6
Above feed 4-for-3 508 381
Below feed 3-for-2 508 338.7

Figure 5. Typical ECMD Tray Installation

COLUMN TESTING

UOP personnel assisted Chevron in identifying an optimized control scheme that allowed
the column to reach stable operation at very high rates in order to maximize ethylene
production. Operating data were taken at the same time. Samples for the feed, ethylene,
and bottoms product streams were obtained and analyzed. For the product streams, the
results of the lab analysis were almost identical to those from the on-line analyzers.
Therefore, the on-line analyzers were believed to be accurate. The feed compositions were
taken from lab analysis and were assumed to be constant throughout the data collection
period.

Operating data was collected for evaluation.

SIMULATION OF THE OPERATING CONDITIONS

A discrepancy was observed in the material balance that may be attributable to an

inaccuracy in the calibration of the flow meters. UOP assumed that the ethylene product
rate is correct. UOP theorized that the lower feed (Feed 2) rate was higher than the data
indicated because more ethane was measured coming out than was going into the column.

The operating data were simulated using UOP’s proprietary C2 splitter model. To
match the product rates at the observed compositions, the Feed 2 rate was increased by
4.5% (see Table 2). Despite this increase, the bottom rate obtained from the simulation is
4.2% lower than the measured value.

In the design phase, a conservative efficiency value of 65% was used. UOP’s
simulations required 118 theoretical trays to match the measured reflux rate and the
product compositions for an efficiency of 73.1%. This observed efficiency is consistent
with the efficiency observed for MD trays in a Gulf Coast C2 splitter column 6.

An evaluation of the simulated conditions shows that the trays were operated at the
hydraulic requirements of the design. The analysis also showed that the column is limited
by the trays located between the ethylene product draw and Feed 1.
 Table 2. ECMD Tray Performance After Revamp

Data of Dec. 8th, 1997 Design Data Simulation

Feed 1 rate, kg/hr 37,021 33,820 33,820
Feed 2 rate, kg/hr 112,220 110,055 115,007
Side draw rate, kg/hr 96,044 90,709 90,485
Side draw ehane, mol ppm 261 150 150
Bottoms rate, kg/hr 52,932 60,414 58,006
Bottoms ethylene, mol% 1.00 0.25 0.25
External reflux rate, kg/hr 434,597 445,233 445,596
Reflux temperature, °C -35.0 -31.0 -30.7
Reflux pressure, bara 18.7 19.36
Bottom temperature, °C -7.1 -6.5 -7.2
Top pressure, bara 19.6 19.6 19.6
Bottom pressure, bara 20.4 20.3 20.3
Main condenser duty, GJ/hr 146.4 143.4
Reboiler duty, GJ/hr 94.3 92.5

COMPARISON OF ECMD TRAYS AND CONVENTIONAL TRAYS

Prior to the ECMD tray revamp, the C2 splitter column had only one feed point. A second
feed stream, richer in ethylene, was added increasing the total feed rate by 50% (Reference
SWEC & Chevron Paper, “Chevron Revamp Achieves 70% Ethylene Expansion”). By
adding a new split feed scheme, increasing the number of trays in the column and
revamping to ECMD trays resulted in over a 65% increase in the ethylene production at
only a 40% increase in the required reflux rate. Table 3 compares the typical operating
conditions before and after the revamp.

Table 3. Chevron’s Operation After Revamp

Before After
Total Feed rate, t/h 95.94 143.87
Ethylene product rate, t/h 54.4 90.5
Reflux rate, t/h 308.0 445.2
 HIGH FLUX TUBES

BACKGROUND

When Chevron’s Port Arthur, Texas ethylene plant started up in the late 1960’s, the energy
requirements of the C2 splitter were met using conventional shell and tube heat exchangers.
Three horizontal kettles were used for condensing the column overheads, and four vertical
thermosyphons were used for partially vaporizing the column bottoms. In 1988, one of the
three bare tube C2 splitter condensers was revamped with an equal number of UOP’s OD
coated / bare ID HIGH FLUX tubing. Because of the higher overall heat transfer
coefficient of the HIGH FLUX tubing, the required heat duty was achieved at a lower
LMTD. Operational savings from this lower LMTD were realized by maximizing the
pressure and temperature of the propylene refrigerant boiling on the shellside of the
exchanger. This increased the suction pressure and unloaded the propylene refrigerant
compressor, up to its hydraulic limit.

For the 1997 expansion project, the C2 splitter reboilers and condensers needed to
be modified for increased duties and reduced temperature approaches.

REVAMP OF THE HEAT EXCHANGERS

Chevron’s objectives for the revamp of the C2 splitter condensers and reboilers were to
minimize the total installed cost, achieve an increase in capacity at minimum energy, and
utilize the capacity and level of refrigeration available from a modified propylene
refrigeration compressor. UOP’s doubly enhanced HIGH FLUX tubes met all these
objectives.

C2 Splitter Condenser

A revamp of the overhead condensers was necessary to meet the increased reflux
requirement of the C2 Splitter and alleviate the load on the propylene refrigerant
compressor. A 1 for 1 revamp of the conventional bare exchangers with doubly enhanced
OD coated / ID finned HIGH FLUX tubes made it possible for Chevron to minimize costs,
by re-using the one HIGH FLUX exchanger and revamping the two bare tube exchangers.
Further savings were realized by re-using all of the associated piping, along with the inlet
and outlet heads of the bare tube exchanger. The existing exchanger containing OD coated
/ bare ID HIGH FLUX tubes would now operate in parallel with the two revamped
exchangers containing OD coated / ID finned HIGH FLUX tubes. A comparison between
the original bare tube exchangers and the proposed HIGH FLUX design is presented in
Table 4.

The heat transfer performance obtainable with OD coated / ID finned HIGH FLUX
tubing made it possible to meet the increased capacity of the C2 splitter, with a reduced
temperature difference across the exchangers. Therefore, propylene refrigerant at a higher
temperature and pressure could be utilized. Because the compressor suction pressure is
now higher, the compression ratio, and therefore the compressor horsepower can be further
reduced to its hydraulic limit, resulting in additional energy savings.

Table 4. HIGH FLUX Revamp of the C2 Splitter Condenser

Original design Proposed revamp

EA-410 A,B,C EA-410 A, C EA-410 B
OD coated / OD coated /
Type tubing Bare ID finned bare ID
Total duty, GJ/hr 101.9 108.2 43.4
Cond. temp. (in), °C -28.9 -30.8
Cond. temp. (out), °C -34.4 -33.6
Boiling temp, °C -37.2 -37.2(1)
LMTD (design), °C 6.9 5.6
LMTD (minimum), °C 6.9 4.3(1)
U-value (design), W/m²-°C 610 1,563 1,246
TEMA type CKN
Exchanger size, mm 1,450 / 2,440 x 12,192
Number of shells 3 2 1
Total area 6,720 4,480 2,240
(1) At minimum LMTD, maximum boiling temperature expected is -36.0°C.

C2 Splitter Reboiler

Before the 1997 revamp, four vertical shell and tube reboilers provided heat input to the C2
splitter. These reboilers could not supply the required duty for the expansion loads.
Modifications had to be accomplished at a minimum cost, by maximizing the use of
existing equipment.
 Because of piping complications, the shell diameters could not be changed. With
HIGH FLUX tubes, the four existing shells along with their inlet and outlet heads could be
re-used. In addition, the piping transporting the tubeside and shellside fluids was
maintained with the exception of the column return piping. The size of the column return
piping was increased to permit adequate circulation within the thermosyphon loop.

The revamp proposed by UOP involved the use of 31.75 mm ID coated / OD fluted
tubes to replace the original 19.05 mm conventional bare tubes. Optimizing the tubecount
allowed a total of 764 ID coated / OD fluted HIGH FLUX tubes to fit into the existing
1,245 mm shell diameters. Because of the significant improvement in heat transfer
performance, the HIGH FLUX exchangers could achieve a capacity increase over 50%,
even though the heat transfer area was reduced by 40%. UOP’s evaluations showed that
three of the four exchangers needed to be revamped to meet the new reboiler duty
requirement. Chevron decided to retrofit all the four reboilers in order to minimize
concerns about flow distribution and control. Additional energy savings were achievable
because propylene refrigerant at a lower temperature and pressure could be used to drive
the reboilers. Again, this results in compressor horsepower savings, up to the hydraulic
limit of the propylene refrigeration system.

Table 5. HIGH FLUX Revamp of the C2 Splitter Reboilers

Original design Proposed revamp

Conventional ID coated / OD fluted
bare tubes HIGH FLUX tubes
Total duty, GJ/hr 66.1 101.8
Cond. temp., °C 3.3 2.9
Boiling temp, °C -6.1 -7.4
LMTD (design), °C 9.4 10.2
LMTD (minimum), °C 9.4 7.8(1)
U-value (design), W/m²-°C 619 2,056(1)
TEMA type CEN
No. & size, mm 4 Shells of 1,245 x 6,096
Tube OD, mm. 19.05 31.75
Total area, m² 3,160 1,765
(1) Design U-value of proposed revamp can be achieved at minimum LMTD
PRODUCT DESCRIPTION AND EXPERIENCE

UOP HIGH FLUX tubes have been used in the reboilers and main condensers of C2
splitters for over 25 years. Over 300 HIGH FLUX exchangers are in operation in various
ethylene plants throughout the world.

HIGH FLUX tubing utilizes a porous metal matrix that is metallurgically bonded to
either the inside or outside surface of a bare tube. The manufacturing process ensures a
mechanically strong surface that is highly resistant to abrasion and erosion. The HIGH
FLUX surface works by providing a large number of cavities or pores that function as ideal
nucleation sites for the generation of vapor bubbles 8. With a highly extended mircosurface
area and good matrix thermal conductivity, this surface produces boiling coefficients that
are 10-30 times greater than bare tubes, while extending the nucleate boiling range to very
low temperature differences. High performance is maintained because of the high internal
circulation rates that occur as liquid continually replaces the escaping vapor within the
porous structure. The high boiling coefficients achieved with the porous surface usually
shift the controlling heat transfer resistance to the condensing/sensible side, and create
substantial incentive to enhance those sides for full exploitation of the boiling technology.

In grassroots applications, one HIGH FLUX exchanger could be used in place of

three bare tube exchangers. Total installed costs are reduced because of the reduction in
number of shells, lower installation costs, smaller foundations, less piping &
instrumentation, and smaller plot space. Lower capital cost was achieved when HIGH
FLUX tubing was used in the reboiler and condenser of a C2 Splitter, for a 500,000 MTPY
ethylene plant in Scotland in 1986 9.

Using HIGH FLUX tubing in revamps can result in a significant increase in duty,
while re-using the shell, heads and piping from the existing exchangers. Operational
savings are realized when HIGH FLUX tubing make it possible for exchangers to operate
at reduced temperature differences.

Two types of doubly enhanced HIGH FLUX tubes were used in the Chevron
ethylene expansion project to meet the increased capacity requirements:
1. OD coated / ID finned
2. ID coated / OD fluted
OD Coated / ID Finned HIGH FLUX Tubing

OD coated / ID finned HIGH FLUX tubes utilize a condensing/sensible enhancement on

the inside of the tube to improve the film coefficient. On the inside of the tube, a spiral fin
geometry is used to create an extended surface area that promotes turbulence. The overall
heat transfer coefficient can be increased by 2.5 to 5.0 times that of bare tubes. There is a
20% to 40% improvement over the standard OD coated / bare ID HIGH FLUX tube.

Figure 6. Doubly Enhanced OD Coated / ID Finned HIGH FLUX Tube

The doubly enhanced OD coated / ID finned HIGH FLUX tube was developed in
1990 and has been used in eight horizontal shell and tube heat exchangers since its first
application in an MEK/toluene chiller in 1994. Seven additional units are expected to start
up in 1999. Chevron was the second company to use this product.

In addition to the C2 overhead condenser, other potential applications include the C2

refrigerant condensers, deethanizer condensers and feed chillers, heat pumped propylene
and isobutane fractionators, quench water or oil driven reboilers, and natural gas chillers.

ID Coated / OD Fluted HIGH FLUX Tubing

The second doubly enhanced HIGH FLUX product used in the Chevron ethylene
expansion project is the ID coated / OD fluted tube as shown in Figure 7. This tube has
been used in over 200 vertical thermosyphon reboilers found in olefin plants, refineries,
glycol, methanol, and aromatics plants throughout the world.
 Figure 7. Doubly Enhanced ID Coated / OD Fluted HIGH FLUX Tubes

This HIGH FLUX tube has the porous boiling surface applied to the inside of the
tube and a condensing enhancement on the outside. The exterior surface of the tube has
longitudinal flutes that provide an extended surface area that reduces the condensate film
thickness. The reduction in condensate film thickness occurs as surface tension forces
exert a pressure at the crest of the flutes causing liquid to drain into the valley between the
flutes. Because of this condensing enhancement, the condensing coefficient is 5 to 6 times
greater than bare tubes. The overall heat transfer coefficients are 3 to 5 times higher than
bare tubes.

HIGH FLUX OPERATING DATA

UOP’s evaluation of the operating data indicates that the condenser and reboiler have met
their design requirements, and have the ability to either handle higher capacities, or operate
at lower temperature differences. The OD coated / ID finned condensers were designed
with an overall heat transfer coefficient (U-value) of 1,563 W/m²-°C. Operating data
indicates these exchangers are performing at a U-value of 1,606 W/m²-°C. The ID coated /
OD fluted reboilers were designed with a U-value of 2,056 W/m²-°C at an LMTD of
10.2°C, while performance has been measured to be 2,109 W/m²-°C at an LMTD of 7.2°C.
Further testing and data collection is on-going to confirm how well the predicted exchanger
performance is matching plant data.
C2 Splitter Condenser

Vapor leaving the top of the column is directed to the condenser train where three HIGH
FLUX shell and tube heat exchangers operating in parallel condense the vapor and provide
the reflux for the column. Two of the exchangers contain OD coated / ID finned HIGH
FLUX tubing, while a third exchanger contains OD coated / bare ID HIGH FLUX tubing.
The geometry of all three exchangers is identical.

Liquid propylene refrigerant is vaporized on the shellside of the exchangers, as the

column overheads are condensed inside the tubes. Varying the refrigerant liquid levels in
the shells regulates the amount of reflux subcooling, and allows the column pressure to be
controlled. A photograph of the three condensers is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Chevron C2 Splitter Overhead Condensers

Doubly enhanced HIGH FLUX tubes produce higher heat transfer coefficients than
the standard OD coated HIGH FLUX tubes, and are therefore capable of handling higher
capacities. Because the hydraulics within the condenser train differ between the two types
of exchangers, flow balancing is required.

Operating data indicate that the revamp of the bare tube exchangers with doubly
enhanced HIGH FLUX tubing has allowed the reflux requirement of the column to be met.
In addition, the propylene refrigerant boiling on the shellside of the exchangers is above the
design temperature of -37.2°C for each of the three exchangers.

C2 Splitter Reboiler

Liquid from the bottom of the C2 splitter is fed to four vertical thermosyphon reboilers
operating in parallel. Propylene refrigerant vapor used as the heating medium is directed
downward through the shellside of the reboilers, where it is desuperheated, condensed, and
then partially subcooled. Liquid from the bottom of the column enters the exchangers and
is partially vaporized inside the tubes. A photograph of the HIGH FLUX reboilers is
shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9. Chevron C2 Splitter Reboilers.

A comparison between the design conditions and the operating data presented in
Table 6 shows the exchangers have exceeded their performance requirement while
operating at an LMTD 30% below design. This reduction in temperature difference across
the exchangers was accomplished by reducing the pressure of the 3rd stage propylene
refrigerant. This in turn reduced the load on the compressor, allowing for additional energy
savings up to the hydraulic limit.
 Table 6. HIGH FLUX Operating Data for the C2 Splitter Reboiler

Data of Nov. 19, 1998 Design Data

Total duty, GJ/hr 101.8 96.5
Condensing temp. (BPT), °C 2.9 0.8
Outlet temp. (subcooled), °C 2.9 -6.4
Condensing pressure, barg 5.4 4.9
Boiling temp. (avg), °C -7.4 -6.7
Bottoms press., barg 19.4 19.2
LMTD, °C 10.2 7.2
LMTD (minimum), °C 7.8 ---
Total area, m² 1,765
U-value, W/m²-°C 2,056 2,109
(1) Design U-value is achieved at minimum LMTD

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge the outstanding efforts of Martin D. Johnson, Gregory J.
Wisniewski, and Robert S. Lubelski of UOP, who provided invaluable insight into the
design and installation phase of the project. The authors also wish to acknowledge the
outstanding efforts of the UOP, Chevron and Stone & Webster engineers, tray installers,
and drafters who provided invaluable assistance as the Chevron C2 Splitter column was
simulated, revamped, recommissioned, and performance tested.
 REFERENCES

1. R. D. Prickett, K. E. Bush, G. Cruey, “Retrofit your Ethylene Unit: The Chevron

Experience,” Hydrocarbon Processing, March 1998.

2. M. R. Resetarits, R. J. Miller, J. L. Navarre, M. Linskeseder and P. Reich-Rohrwig,

“New Enhanced Capacity MD Tray Debottlenecks Deethanizer,” I. Chem. E.
Distillation and Absorption Conference, Birmingham, U.K., Sept. 7, 1992.

3. P. J. McGuire, M. S. M. Shakur and J. Valverde, “Deethanizer Revamp with ECMD

Trays” AIChE 1997 Spring Meeting, Houston, TX, Mar. 22, 1997.

4. M. S. M. Shakur, P. J. McGuire and L. G. Bayer, “Converting UTP’s Chem-grade C3

Splitter to Poly-grade using 10-inch Tray Spacings” AIChE 1997 Spring Meeting,
Houston, TX, Mar. 22, 1997.

5. D. R. Summers, S. T. Coleman, and R. M. Venner, “Splitter Revamp Results in

Significant Capacity Increase,” AIChE 1992 Spring Meeting, New Orleans, LA, Apr. 1,
1992.

6. D. R. Summers, P. J. McGuire, M. R. Resetarits, E. G. Graves, S. E. Harper and S. J.

Angelino, “Enhanced Capacity Multiple Downcomer ECMD Trays Debottleneck C3
Splitter,” AIChE 1995 Spring Meeting, Houston, TX, Mar. 22, 1995.

7. J. R. Ulmer and M. D. Manifould, “Comparing the Turnaround Time Required and

Cost of Installing Various Types of Distillation Trays,” AIChE 1998 Fall Meeting,
Miami Beach, FA, Nov. 15, 1998.

8. J. R. Thome, Enhanced Boiling Heat Transfer, Hemisphere Publishing Corp., New

York, 1990.

9. P.S. O’Neill, “HIGH FLUX Tubing Application Case History at the Exxon Chemical
Olefins Inc. Fife Ethylene Plant (Mossmorran, Scotland), January 1987.