Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Rationale
The task at hand is to develop a relationship between reboiling duty and C4% in
the debutanizer bottom product so that C4% can be controlled by adjusting the
reboiling duty. However, other operating parameters also affect the reboiling duty,
which include feed conditions (rate and composition), feed preheating (feed
temperature), and tower conditions (overhead temperature and pressure). If a
correlation of reboiling duty against the above influencing parameters could be
generated, reboiling duty can be adjusted according to any of the changes in the
related parameters and thus avoid the need for trial and error.
Solution
There are a couple of ways to develop such correlations. The simplest way
is the use of a data historian. This method can be applied if three conditions are
met: (i) The related parameters are measured and data available in the historian.
(ii) The measured data must reflect the operation at the time the butane content
was measured. (iii) The historian data cover all possible operating scenarios. After
all, online data are the true representation of real simulation!
The second option is to use the step test method usually for developing
parametric relations for control systems. By making a small step change to the
manipulatable (independent) variable (for example, feed rate), a response from the
control variable (dependent variable; reboiling duty in this case) can be recorded
after reaching the steadystate condition. This response can be called an energy
response. Finally, the regression method is applied to derive the correlation of
reboiling duty against all related variables.
However, in many cases, the conditions above for using a data historian
are difficult to satisfy. It could be also labor intensive and inconvenient in
operation to adopt the step test method. Thus, the most common method is to use
the simulation method for developing relationship correlations. To do this, a
simulation model for the tower can be developed readily based on the feed
conditions (rate and compositions) and tower conditions (temperature, pressure,
theoretical trays) with product specifications (C4% in the bottom and C5% in the
overhead) established as set points in simulation. Operating parameters such as
reflux rate and reboiling duty can be adjusted to meet product specifications. The
simulation model is verified and revised against high-quality performance test
data.
Reducing reflux drum pressure will reduce reboiling duty with the trend as
shown in Figure 4.3a. C4% in the bottom is the specification that the gasoline
product must meet. However, too low C4% is not necessary because it does not
generate commercial benefit for the cost of extra reboiling duty due to the steeper
part of the curve (Figure 4.3b). This product specification giveaway operation
must be avoided by all means. C5% in overhead product (Figure 4.3c) is the
indication of gasoline blending component lost in LPG, which should be avoided
as well. Feed preheat also reduces reboiling duty but raises condensing duty
(Figure 4.3d).
One must be aware of the capacity limit at the existing condenser when
increasing feed preheating, which requires extra condensing. On the other hand,
when the feed composition changes such as butane concentration, the reboiling
duty is affected for the separation of C4 from the C5þ materials. There is no
control for the feed composition for the debutanizer operation because the feed
composition is the consequence of different raw feeds processed in the
hydrocracking unit and the processing severity. For the other four parameters
above, operators can make changes to reflux drum pressure, C4% in the bottom
product, C5% in the overhead product, and feed preheating. Optimizing these
parameters could give around 5% reduction in reboiling duty than operated based
on experience only, which is very significant. Reboiling and condensing duty can
be described based on the relationship with individual parameters as shown in
Figure 4.3a–d. If assuming a polynomial form of correlations with order of 3 is
used, we have
relationship of reboiling duty (Ri) and xi. The incremental effect (DRi) from
individual parameter (Dxi) can be determined as
(4.2)
If there are no interactions among these four operating parameters, the total effect
of changes in these parameters on reboiling duty would be the simple summation
of individual effects:
µ = ∑x/N, (4.4)
∑(𝑥−µ)2
σ= (4.5)
𝑁
where x is the value of the key indicator obtained from the historian, while N is
the number of sample data points for the key indicator.
Vi = Ci . xi . f i: (4.6)
For example, C5% in the debutanizer overhead product represents the high value
component C5 lost in LPG. The key indicator could be defined as the difference of
actual C5% in LPG and C5 specification. If LPG produced from the column is
1000 bpd with C5% in LPG at 1% higher than the specification or xi¼1% with
frequency of occurrence as fi¼30%, and C5 is valued at $75/barrel, the economic
value to avoid this occurrence is:
Similarly for other occurrences when C5%in LPG could be lower or higher than
1%, the economic values can be calculated accordingly.
The concept of KEI and targets can be readily implemented into an energy
dashboard, which can quickly show the performance gaps between current and
targets on the computer screen. The level of a gap indicates the severity of
deviations and forms the basis to assign a “traffic light” for each KEI—that is, a
green light implying the current performance is acceptable as it is within the target
range; a yellow light, a warning sign indicating that a gap occurs and requires
attention; or a red light, an alarm sign urging for taking action at the earliest time
possible. An example tool of monitoring key indicators is Honeywell’s Energy
Dashboard (Sheehan and Zhu, 2009). This tool could be tremendously valuable to
operators and engineers as to what to watch, what to focus on, and which knobs to
turn and when.
Overall site view shows the site-wide energy consumption and greenhouse
gas (GHG) emission versus overall targets. At the same screen, the overall
site view shows the energy consumptions and GHG emissions in each
process unit. Traffic light color is assigned to indicate which processes are
furthest away from the targets.
Process unit view indicates the process performance, which can be
measured by around 20 key energy indicators. These key energy indicators
are developed from a combination of design, process simulation, and
historical data. These predicated energy targets are automatically adjusted
to reflect current operating conditions such as feed rate and compositions,
operating mode, product yields, and so on. Color coding is assigned to
each KEI, which could indicate the need for drill down in the next level of
key indicators for identifying root causes and actions.
Equipment view describes equipment performance via several key
operating parameters with indications of current values versus
corresponding targets. The operators may decide to perform a more
detailed investigation for the root causes if the gap is large.
Deviation trends view allows operators to review over the time periods
when the KEI deviates significantly from the targets and to determine the
major causes of the deviation. By building up a history of causes,
operators are able to look back over time and see the most common causes
of deviations. This can lead to recommendations about remediable actions
for improving equipment performance and, hence, overall process
performance.