Column Relief Load Cals

Reactions Page 1 sur 8
Log off or Change user (SARA DAVIS)

Subscribe to HP magazine!
Advanced search
Reader service request
HPInformer: the new blog from Hydrocarbon Processing
Letters to the editor from our January 2009 issue: The climate change debate rages on
April 2008
Full contents
Distillation column relief loads—Part 1

Compare conventional calculation methodology with dynamic simulation
P. L. Nezami, Jacobs Engineering, Houston, Texas

Comments? Write:
editorial@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Estimating the relief rates for distillation columns is by far the most complex relief load calculation.
The dynamic nature of distillation columns and compositional changes along the column height
make it very difficult to accurately establish relief loads for various contingencies. Additionally, the
inability of regular (steady-state) process simulation software to predict column behavior in a
nonsteady-state condition forces design engineers to create analytical methods that by nature are
conservative. This could result not only in oversized relief valves but also in unnecessarily large
and costly flare systems, which in turn can jeopardize project viability.
The enormous differences between distillation systems, such as column controls, types of
condensers and reboilers, heating and cooling media, pumparounds and side reboilers, etc., make
it impossible to create a universal method for all distillation columns. The suggested techniques
are at best a series of general guidelines and criteria, set forth to provide directions to evaluate
each individual case.
Common methods. The two most prevalent shortcut techniques, which may or may not be
conservative and generally used to estimate order of magnitude relief rates, are:
Flash drum approach. This could be used to estimate the relief rate in a loss of
cooling/condensing scenario. In this method, the feed stream is flashed at relieving pressure with
additional heat input equal to the reboiler duty.
Gross overhead vapor. This is usually used to establish a basis for the flare and flare header
design at early stages in the projects, and it is the simplest way to roughly estimate relief loads.
Although this method seems to be conservative for most cases, it has been argued that it could
result in undersized relief valves.1
For better results, one must analyze relief scenarios in detail on a case-by-case basis. The most
comprehensive conventional method is to estimate relief loads based on mass and energy
imbalance (accumulation) in an upset condition. The bases and assumptions for this method are:
1. At relieving conditions, feeds, products and reflux compositions, as well as top-tray liquid and
bottoms compositions, are unchanged.
2. The column trays are at vapor/liquid equilibrium at relief pressure.
3. Except for the feeds, all streams leaving and entering the column are at vapor/liquid
http://www.hydrocarbonprocessing.com/default.asp?Page=14&S=S&PUB=22&ISS=... 20/01/2009
equilibrium at relieving pressure.
4. Vapors may not be accumulated in the column (after the column reaches the relief pressure)
and must leave the system via a relief valve. Liquids could accumulate in the system by the rise or
fall of liquid levels.
5. Liquids can absorb heat whether they leave or stay in the system.
6. Credit may be taken for product sensible heat absorption when the feed enters the column
below its bubble point at the relieving pressure.
7. The energy imbalance resulting from an upset is converted to mass (vapor) using top-tray
liquid latent heat of vaporization.
8. The vapor distillate control valve, if applicable, stays at its position. Credit may be taken for
vapor distillate unless its path is blocked.
9. The vapor portions of the feed streams, flashed adiabatically at relief pressure, directly
contributes to the relief rate.
10. Credit may be taken for reboiler temperature pinch, if light materials do not reach the column
bottom.
11. Any safety margin used in the actual design must be considered in the relief rate calculations.
12. The properties of the vaporized top-tray liquid at bubble point and relief pressure are used to
size the relief valve.
The relief rate can be defined as:
W = WR + W F – WV – WC – WH (1)
where: W = Relief rate
WR = Reboiler and side reboiler load contributions
WF = Feed vapor phase contributions
WV = Vapor distillate credit
WC = Condenser and pumparound credits
WH = Liquids enthalpy imbalance.
Dynamic simulation. Nevertheless, the best available technique for distillation column relief rate
calculation is dynamic simulation. Dynamic models use a set of mass and energy conservation
equations that account for changes occurring over time. Unlike steady-state simulation, these
equations include an additional accumulation term that is differentiated with respect to time. The
accumulation rate of mass is:
Mass flow into system – Mass flow out of system (2)
And the accumulation rate of total energy is:
Flow of total energy into system – Flow of total energy out

of system + Heat added to system across the boundary + Heat
generated by reaction – Work done by system on surroundings (3)
The inclusion of the accumulation term in the mass and energy conservation equations allows the
dynamic model to rigorously calculate composition changes at each stage and to modify
vapor/liquid equilibrium over time. It also allows integrations of column flowrates, pressures and
temperatures with respect to time. The results lead to a much more accurate relief rate.
Case study. A comparison between the results of the conventional method with those of the
dynamic simulation for a typical distillation column in a loss of condenser scenario will be
presented. Fig. 1 shows the flow diagram of the distillation column system under evaluation.
Fig. 1 Flow diagram for the distillation system.
In a loss of condenser scenario, the reflux drum liquid level drops causing the level control valve
to close. Reflux continues at a constant rate until the drum runs dry. The feed continues at a
constant rate since its pressure, upstream of the control valve, is higher than the relief pressure.
With no liquid distillate product, the only place for light materials in the feed is the column bottoms;
hence, no credit could be taken for reboiler temperature pinch. On flow control, the steam control
valve opens wide and the reboiler chest pressure equalizes with the steam header pressure (a
zero pressure drop is assumed across the control valve). Clean reboiler duty is used for both
calculations.
Conventional method. Table 1 is the summary of the stream properties and column parameters
at normal and upset conditions. Stream properties in upset conditions were obtained by
performing the following flash calculations on the basis of normal stream compositions:
Feed—adiabatic flash at relief pressure

Vapor distillate—dew-point flash at relief pressure
Liquid distillate—bubble-point flash at relief pressure
Decant water—bubble-point flash at relief pressure
Bottoms product—bubble-point flash at relief pressure.
Based on the calculation results listed in Table 1:
WR = 403,980 lb/hr
WF = 0 lb/hr
The vapor distillate pressure control valve at its normal position (normal Cv) can pass 9,128 lb/hr
of the column overhead vapor at relieving pressure.
WV = 9,128 lb/hr
WC = 0 lb/hr
WH = 179,992 lb/hr
The relief rate would be the sum of the above calculated values:
W = 214,860 lb/hr
Dynamic simulation. A dynamic model was developed for the column. Fig. 2 shows the
simulation flow diagram for it. The following parameters were set to generate the initial values of
dynamic simulation variables:
The reboiler UA was set to clean UA value for a zero fouling factor on both sides.
The reboiler chest pressure was adjusted to obtain normal reboiler duty. This emulates
pressure drop across the steam control valve at steady-state conditions.
The reflux drum and column bottom sump dimensions were set to actual values to simulate
liquid level variations in a dynamic mode.
The condenser was set to constant medium temperature mode.
Fig. 2 Dynamic simulation flowsheet.
The initial setting of dynamic parameters, such as reflux drum and column bottom sump
dimensions, reboiler heating medium temperature, column tray hydraulics, etc., are part of the
required data in steady-state simulation. The parameter values will be carried over to the dynamic
simulation as initial variable values when the steady-state simulation is exported to the dynamic
model
In the dynamic model, the condenser failure was initiated after 10 min. of normal (steady-state)
run. At the same time, the reboiler heating medium temperature was set to the steam header
temperature to simulate a zero pressure drop across the steam control valve. The simulation was
run for two hours, and the results were captured and recorded (Figs. 3–8).
Fig. 3 Column overhead pressure for simulated run.
Fig. 4 Simulated stream flowrates.
Fig. 5 Temperature variations during the simulation.
Fig. 6 Reflux drum and bottom sump liquid levels

during simulation.
Fig. 7 Condenser and reboiler duties for dynamic

model.
Fig. 8 Column relief rates for simulation.
Here are some highlights of the simulation results:
The overhead pressure starts to rise right after the upset was introduced. It peaks at 165
psig 12 min. later.
Liquid distillate stops 5 min. after the condenser fails (this interval depends on the level
controller parameters: proportional gain, integral time, derivative time, process variable and
output ranges). The 5-min. duration, in this example, is based on the simulation's PID
controller default parameters.
Reflux continues for another 25 min. at normal flow rate, then practically stops. This is
when the reflux drum dries out.
The relief valve starts relieving 5 min. after the upset, exactly when liquid distillate
completely stops.
The relief rate peaks at about 161,200 lb/hr 12 min. after the upset and keeps at almost a
steady rate for 16 min.. Then it drops for about 7 min. to 8 min. and reaches a new steady
rate of about 122,000 lb/hr very close to the normal liquid distillate rate.
The overhead temperature starts to increase at upset and, after about 6 min. to 8 min., it
reaches a temporary stable condition. It stays steady so long as the relief rate is at its peak.
As the relief rate drops, the overhead temperature rises again to its new maximum and
stays constant through the rest of the simulation time.
The vapor distillate rate increases to double the normal flowrate immediately after the
upset. Its mass flowrate keeps rising slowly due to the change of overhead molecular
weight and reaches its maximum value at the end of the simulation time. The vapor
distillate rate is very comparable to the one calculated in the conventional method.
Reboiler duty spikes to its maximum, right when the upset is initiated. It drops immediately
and keeps flat through the 25 min. of maximum relief rate; then it drops again, this time, to
its minimum steady level.
The column reaches a new steady-state condition approximately 30 min. after the upset
with a constant relief rate of 122,000 lb/hr.
The simulation results are based on hysteresis (opening and closing curves) of a typical relief
valve in compressible fluid service. The relief valve hysteresis is presented in Fig. 9.
Fig. 9 Relief valve hysteresis
The major advantage of dynamic simulation, over the conventional method, is the accuracy of
calculated relief rates. The ability of the dynamic model to integrate simulation variables over time
and to rigorously calculate various column parameters would result in much more realistic relief
load values.
Another advantage is engineering man-hours and project schedule time savings. Given that the
conventional method requires a separate detailed analysis for each relief case, dynamic
simulation can save a great deal of engineering time, since a single dynamic model can be used
for all various relief scenarios. The third advantage of a dynamic model is that, for a great majority
of the cases, the relief loads calculated by dynamic simulation are smaller than the ones
calculated by using the conventional method. This could result in a considerable cost saving,
particularly in cases where there are limitations in the flare system capacities.
In the example, the difference is greater than 33%, which could even be higher (up to 41%) if,
instead of a single large relief valve, two smaller ones were used. With multiple relief valves, the
allowable accumulation pressure would increase to 116% of the design pressure and the
combined relief loads would peak at 152,600 lb/hr. At the end it is worth mentioning that, if the
conventional method relief loads are smaller than the ones calculated by dynamic simulation, one
can be certain that the conventional method results would lead to an undersized relief valve. HP
LITERATURE CITED
1 Bradford, M. and D. G. Durrett, "Avoiding common mistakes in sizing distillation safety valves," Chemical Engineering, July 9,
1984.
The author
Piruz Latifi Nezami is a process engineering section manager with Jacobs
Engineering in Houston, Texas. He holds a BS degree in chemical engineering
from Sharif University of Technology in Tehran, Iran, and has more than thirty
years of experience in the design and engineering of chemical, petrochemical and
refining projects.
Return to top
Copyright © 2009 Hydrocarbon Processing

Copyright © 2009 Gulf Publishing Company
Log off or Change user (SARA DAVIS)

Subscribe to HP magazine!
Advanced search
Reader service request
HPInformer: the new blog from Hydrocarbon Processing
Letters to the editor from our January 2009 issue: The climate change debate rages on
May 2008
Full contents
Distillation column relief loads—Part 2

The conventional method is expanded and a series of guidelines are developed
P. L. Nezami, Jacobs Engineering, Houston, Texas

Comments? Write:
editorial@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
In the first part of this article, a comparison between the two methods for distillation column relief
load calculations was made. In this part, the conventional method will be expanded and a series of
guidelines to predict relief loads for distillation columns in upset conditions will be developed.
The method presented here is based mainly on the mass and energy imbalance at upset
conditions. This method relies heavily on detailed analysis of the contingencies that must be
executed on a case-by-case basis. It also is based on several assumptions that simplify the
complex behavior of distillation columns and make it possible to determine relief loads through a
series of simple calculations and by using regular steady-state process simulation software.
Basic assumptions. There are several suppositions that must be made to enable determining
relief loads:
1. At relieving conditions, feeds, products and reflux compositions as well as top-tray liquid and
bottoms compositions are unchanged. Note that for multi-feed columns this is valid only if all the
feed rates, at relief conditions, vary proportionally to the normal rates. This method cannot be
used if the said condition is not applicable.
2. The column trays are at vapor/liquid equilibrium at relief pressure.
3. Except for the feeds, all streams entering and leaving the column are at vapor/liquid equilibrium
at relieving pressure.
4. Vapors may not be accumulated in the column after reaching relieving pressure and must leave
the system via the relief valve. Liquids could accumulate in the system by means of rising and
falling liquid levels.
5. The liquid phase of feeds can absorb or release heat whether they leave or stay in the system.
6. Credit may be taken for the difference between liquid feed enthalpies and the enthalpies of the
liquid products and accumulated liquids. That is if the total enthalpy of the liquid feeds is less than
the total enthalpy of the liquid products and accumulated liquids. The difference must be
converted to relief load if the total enthalpy of the liquid products and accumulated liquids is less
than the total enthalpy of the liquid feeds (liquids enthalpy imbalance).
7. Energy imbalance, resulting from an upset, is converted to the relief load using top-tray liquid
latent heat of vaporization, calculated at relieving conditions.
8. The vapor portions of the feed streams, flashed adiabatically at relieving pressure, directly
contribute to the relief load.
9. The vapor distillate control valve, if applicable, stays at its position. Credit may be taken for the
vapor distillate flowrate unless its path is blocked.
10. Credit may be taken for reboiler temperature pinch, if light materials can not reach the column
bottom.
11. Any safety margin used in the design of equipment must be considered in the relief load
calculations.
12. The properties of the vaporized top-tray liquid at bubble point and relief pressure are used to
size the relief valve.
The orifice area of any relief valve in vapor service, using API RP-520 equations, is a function of
the relieving fluid temperature, molecular weight and compressibility factor. All of this plus top-tray
liquid latent heat of vaporization change with time during a relief event. The orifice area would be
at maximum value when the following function is at maximum:
where: T = Relieving fluid temperature, °R
Z = Relieving fluid compressibility factor, dimensionless
M = Relieving fluid molecular weight, lb/lb-mol
= Latent heat of vaporization, Btu/lb.
In order to conservatively size a relief valve, one might calculate the maximum value of the
function, f, over the boiling range of the top-tray liquid and use corresponding properties, including
top-tray liquid latent heat of vaporization, in sizing calculations.
Relief load calculation. Based on the above assumptions the relief rate can be defined as:
where: W = Relief rate

WR = Load contribution from reboilers and side-reboilers
WF = Feed streams vapor contributions
WV = Vapor product credits
WC = Condenser and pumparound credits
WH = Liquids enthalpy imbalance credit/contribution.
Load contributions from reboilers. Heat input from the reboilers and side-reboilers is converted
to relief load using top-tray liquid latent heat of vaporization:
where: QR = Reboilers and side-reboilers total duty, Btu/hr

= Top-tray liquid latent heat of vaporization, Btu/lb.
Credit is allowed for reboiler temperature pinch if light materials cannot reach the column bottom
at relieving conditions. The heat transfer coefficients of the reboilers and side-reboilers, however,
must be adjusted to clean (zero fouling factors) values.
Feed streams vapor contribution. The vapor portions of the feeds, flashed adiabatically at relief
pressure, directly contribute to relief load. The compositions of those vapors, however, are
different from that of the relief stream. The [latent] heat contents of the vapor portions of the feeds
must be calculated and converted to relief load.
The assumption is that as the rising vapor feeds come in contact with tray liquids they are partially
condensed while vaporizing some of the tray liquids. This happens all the way to the top tray. The
heat content of each vapor feed, which contributes to relief load, is equal to the feed heat-of-
vaporization at relief pressure. This heat is simply the difference between dew point and bubble
point enthalpies of the vapor feed at relieving pressure.
where: QFV = Vapor feeds total heat of vaporization, Btu/hr

HFVD i = Specific enthalpy of vapor feed i at dew point and relief pressure, Btu/lb
HFVB i = Specific enthalpy of vapor feed i at bubble point and relief pressure, Btu/lb
FFV i = Flowrate of vapor feed i at relief conditions, lb/hr
The relief load contribution from vapor feeds is equal to the total heat of vaporization of the vapor
feeds divided by the top-tray liquid latent heat.
Vapor product credits. If the vapor products and the relieving fluid are of different compositions,
the same method used for the vapor feeds should be applied to convert vapor product (latent)
heat contents to a relief load credit:
and
where: Q PV = Vapor products total heat of vaporization, Btu/hr

= Specific enthalpy of vapor product at dew point and relief pressure, Btu/lb
= Specific enthalpy of vapor product at bubble point and relief pressure, Btu/lb
= Flowrate of vapor product at relief pressure, lb/hr.
Condenser and pumparound credits. Similar to the reboilers and side-reboilers, the condenser
and pumparound duties are converted to relief load credit using the top-tray liquid latent heat of
vaporization:
where: QC = Condensers and pumparounds total duty, Btu/hr
Although the temperature difference (LMTD) in the condensers and pumparounds tends to
increase during relief, it is hard to justify additional credit for the increased duties of the
condensers and pumparound exchangers.
Liquids enthalpy imbalance. The assumption that the product compositions stay unchanged at
relieving conditions logically concludes that the feeds, if continued, will partition into the same
product compositions as in normal conditions. The products will be formed in the column whether
they leave or accumulate in the system. Since the compositions of the products are the same as
the normal compositions, the product rates at relief should be proportional to the normal product
rates.
The heat absorbed or released by the feeds to form products (at their liquid phase) is the enthalpy
imbalance and is equal to the sum of the enthalpies of liquid products and accumulated liquids
minus the sum of the liquid feed enthalpies at relieving conditions. Credit may be taken for the
liquids enthalpy imbalance if the sum of the feed enthalpies is smaller than the sum of the product
and liquid accumulation enthalpies. If the reverse is true, the enthalpy difference must be
converted into and added to the relief load.
It is important to understand that the liquids enthalpy imbalance is the heat required (with a
positive or a negative sign) to form products at their liquid bubble point status. Note that the relief
load calculations are based on the heat input to the system and the latent heat of vaporization,
which is the heat required changing bubble point liquids to dew point vapors. In short, liquid feeds
form bubble point liquid products (using liquids enthalpy imbalance) and bubble point liquid
products form relief load or vapor products (using latent heat of vaporization). It is important to
ensure that while all the input and output heats are accounted for, they are not double dipped in
the calculations.
The basis for enthalpy imbalance, however, must be a balanced mass and applies only to the
liquid portions of the feeds. The vapor phase is directly converted to relief load as previously
explained. The method used to calculate the mass of liquid bubble point products and
accumulations is:
1. The total rate of all feeds (liquids plus vapors) at relieving conditions is distributed to product
streams, proportional to the normal product rates. Obviously, if the feed rates are not changed the
results would be the same as normal product flowrates.
2. The products are sorted by specific enthalpies in a descending order. A rate equal to the sum of
vapor portions of all feeds at relieving conditions is subtracted from the product rates, starting with
product 1 (highest specific enthalpy) and moving to the next product subtracting the balance of the
vapor feed rates. The results are the adjusted liquid product rates the sum of which should be
equal to the total rate of the liquid portions of the feeds. The adjusted rates and the liquid feed
rates are the mass basis for the liquids enthalpy imbalance calculation. Note that the adjusted
[product] rates are independent of the actual liquid product rates at relieving conditions. Once
again, the assumption is that liquids can accumulate in the column by the rise or fall of the liquid
level.
3. The liquids enthalpy imbalance is simply the sum of the enthalpies of the adjusted products
minus the sum of the enthalpies of liquid feeds:
and
where: QH = Liquids enthalpy imbalance, Btu/hr

= Specific enthalpy of liquid product at bubble point and relief pressure, Btu/lb
= Adjusted flowrate of the liquid product lb/hr

HFLi = Specific enthalpy of the liquid phase of the feed i at relief pressure, Btu/lb
FFLi = Flowrate of the liquid phase of the feed i at relief conditions, lb/hr
A numerical example. A typical distillation column is evaluated for a condenser failure scenario.
The column parameters, feed properties and product properties are summarized in Table 1.
Contingency analysis. The reflux drum liquid level drops quickly. Both reflux and liquid distillate
product streams will be lost regardless of either being on level or flow control. The difference is
timing and sequence. The one on level control stops first, and pretty quickly. The feed is on flow
control and its rate stays constant. The vapor distillate product control valve stays at its position
(constant Cv). At relieving pressure, it can pass 135,500 lb/hr (an extra 12%) vapor product. With
no liquid distillate product, the lights in the feed could get to the column bottom; therefore, no
credit may be taken for the reboiler temperature pinch.
Load calculations: Load contribution from reboilers and side-reboilers:
Feed streams vapor contribution:
Vapor product credits:
Condenser and pumparound

credits:
Liquids enthalpy imbalance:
The liquid product specific enthalpies and adjusted rates as well as the sum of the product total
enthalpies, , are summarized in Table 2. HP
The author
Piruz Latifi Nezami is a process engineering section manager with Jacobs
Engineering in Houston, Texas. He holds a BS degree in chemical engineering
from Sharif University of Technology in Tehran, Iran, and has more than 30 years
of experience in the design and engineering of chemical, petrochemical and
refining projects.
Return to top
Copyright © 2009 Hydrocarbon Processing

Copyright © 2009 Gulf Publishing Company

Column Relief Load Cals

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

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

Column Relief Load Cals

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Reactions Page 1 sur 8

Log off or Change user (SARA DAVIS)

Distillation column relief loads—Part 1

P. L. Nezami, Jacobs Engineering, Houston, Texas

2. The column trays are at vapor/liquid equilibrium at relief pressure.

equilibrium at relieving pressure.

The relief rate can be defined as:

where: W = Relief rate

WR = Reboiler and side reboiler load contributions

WF = Feed vapor phase contributions

WV = Vapor distillate credit

WC = Condenser and pumparound credits

WH = Liquids enthalpy imbalance.

Mass flow into system – Mass flow out of system (2)

And the accumulation rate of total energy is:

Flow of total energy into system – Flow of total energy out

Fig. 1 Flow diagram for the distillation system.

Feed—adiabatic flash at relief pressure

Based on the calculation results listed in Table 1:

Fig. 2 Dynamic simulation flowsheet.

Fig. 3 Column overhead pressure for simulated run.

Fig. 4 Simulated stream flowrates.

Fig. 5 Temperature variations during the simulation.

Fig. 6 Reflux drum and bottom sump liquid levels

Fig. 7 Condenser and reboiler duties for dynamic

Fig. 8 Column relief rates for simulation.

Here are some highlights of the simulation results:

Fig. 9 Relief valve hysteresis

Copyright © 2009 Hydrocarbon Processing

Log off or Change user (SARA DAVIS)

Distillation column relief loads—Part 2

P. L. Nezami, Jacobs Engineering, Houston, Texas

2. The column trays are at vapor/liquid equilibrium at relief pressure.

latent heat of vaporization, calculated at relieving conditions.

where: T = Relieving fluid temperature, °R

Z = Relieving fluid compressibility factor, dimensionless

M = Relieving fluid molecular weight, lb/lb-mol

= Latent heat of vaporization, Btu/lb.

where: W = Relief rate

where: QR = Reboilers and side-reboilers total duty, Btu/hr

where: QFV = Vapor feeds total heat of vaporization, Btu/hr

where: Q PV = Vapor products total heat of vaporization, Btu/hr

= Flowrate of vapor product at relief pressure, lb/hr.

where: QC = Condensers and pumparounds total duty, Btu/hr

where: QH = Liquids enthalpy imbalance, Btu/hr

= Adjusted flowrate of the liquid product lb/hr

Load calculations: Load contribution from reboilers and side-reboilers:

Feed streams vapor contribution:

Vapor product credits:

Condenser and pumparound

Liquids enthalpy imbalance:

Copyright © 2009 Hydrocarbon Processing

S-ar putea să vă placă și