Scribd
Upload
138 views12 pages

Hydrodealkylation Equipment Design Guide

This document provides heuristics from tables to estimate the size of major equipment for a toluene hydrodealkylation process, including a high-pressure separator, product cooler, pump, compressor, distillation column, and furnace. The heuristics are used to analyze each piece of equipment and generally agree with the actual designs provided in tables within 20%. The heuristics allow an engineer to check calculations and identify potential issues or inconsistencies without requiring an exact match.

Uploaded by

Thabo Thabo
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
138 views12 pages

Hydrodealkylation Equipment Design Guide

This document provides heuristics from tables to estimate the size of major equipment for a toluene hydrodealkylation process, including a high-pressure separator, product cooler, pump, compressor, distillation column, and furnace. The heuristics are used to analyze each piece of equipment and generally agree with the actual designs provided in tables within 20%. The heuristics allow an engineer to check calculations and identify potential issues or inconsistencies without requiring an exact match.

Uploaded by

Thabo Thabo
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

RDCHB2- Tutorial 4

Based on the PFD and flow stream information of the above ( production of Benzene via the hydrodealkylation of Toluene production Using
Heuristic estimate the size of the equipment and other operating parameters for the following units . Compare your results on those provided on
Table 2.
a. V-102
b. E-105
c. P-101
d. C-101
e. T-101
f. H-101

Figure 1.5
Table 1.5 Stream table

Table 1.7
Solution
. V-102 High-Pressure Phase Separator
From Table 11.6, the following heuristics are used:
Rule 3 → Vertical vessel
Rule 4 → L/D between 2.5 and 5 with optimum at 3.0
Rule 5 → Liquid holdup time is 5 min based on 1/2 volume of vessel
Rule 9 → Gas velocity u is given by
pl
√
u=k (
pv
¿−1)m/s ¿

where k = 0.0305 for vessels without mesh entrainers


Rule 12 → Good performance obtained at 30%–100% of u from Rule 9; typical value is 75%
From Table 1.5,
Vapor flow = Stream 8 = 9200 kg/h, P = 23.9 bar, T = 38°C
Liquid flow = Streams 17 + 18 = 11,570 kg/h, P = 2.8 bar, T = 38°C
ρv = 8 kg/m3 and ρl = 850 kg/m3 (estimated from Table 1.7)
From Rule 9, u = 0.0305[850/8 – 1]0.5 = 0.313 m/s
Use uact = (0.75)(0.313) = 0.23 m/s
Now mass flowrate of vapor = uρυπD2/4 = 9200/3600 = 2.56 kg/s
Solving for D, D = 1.33 m
From Rule 5, the volume of liquid = 0.5 LπD2/4 = 0.726L m3
5 min of liquid flow = (5)(60)(11,570)/850/3600 = 1.13 m3
Equating the two results above, L = 1.56 m
From Rule 4, L/D should be in the range 2.5 to 5. For this case L/D = 1.56/1.33 = 1.17
Because this is out of range, change to L = 2.5D = 3.3 m.
Heuristics from Table 11.6 suggest that V-102 should be a vertical vessel with D = 1.33 m, L =3.3 m
From Table 1.7, the actual V-102 is a vertical vessel with D = 1.1 m, L = 3.5 m
It should be concluded that the design of V-102 given in Chapter 1 is consistent with the heuristics given in Table
11.6. The small differences in L and D are to be expected in a comparison such as this one.
b. E-105 Product Cooler
From Table 11.11 use the following heuristics:
Rule 1: Set F = 0.9
Rule 6: min. ΔT = 10°C
Rule 7: Water enters at 30°C and leaves at 40°C
Rule 8: U = 850 W/m2°C
It is observed immediately from Table 1.5 and Figure 1.5 that Rule 6 has been violated because
ΔTmin = 8°C.
For the moment, ignore this and return to the heuristic analysis:
ΔTlm = [(105 – 40) – (38 – 30)]/ln[(105 – 40)/(38 – 30)] = 27.2°C
Q = 1085 MJ/h = 301 kW (from Table 1.7)
A = Q/UΔTlmF = (301,000)/(850)/(27.2)/(0.90) = 14.46 m2
From Rule 9, Table 11.11, this heat exchanger should be a double-pipe or multiple-pipe design.
Comparing this analysis with the information in Table 1.7 shows
Heuristic: Double-pipe design, area = 14.5 m2
Table 1.7: Multiple-pipe design, area = 12 m2
Again, the heuristic analysis is close to the actual design. The fact that the minimum approach
temperature of 10°C has been violated should not cause too much concern, because the actual
minimum approach is only 8°C and the heat exchanger is quite small, suggesting that a little extra area
(due to a smaller overall temperature driving force) is not very costly.
c. P-101
From Table 11.9, use the following heuristics:
Rule 1: Power(kW) = (1.67)[Flow(m3/min)]ΔP(bar)/ε
Rules 4–7: Type of pump based on head
From Figure 1.5 and Tables 1.5 and 1.7,
Flowrate (Stream 2) = 13,300 kg/h
Density of fluid = 870 kg/m3
ΔP = 25.8 – 1.2 = 24.6 bar = 288 m of liquid (head = ΔP/ρg)
Volumetric flowrate = (13,300)/(60)/(870) = 0.255 m3/min
Fluid pumping power = (1.67)(0.255)(24.6) = 10.5 kW
From Rules 4–7, pump choices are multistage centrifugal, rotary, and reciprocating. Choose
reciprocating to be consistent with Table 1.7. Typical ε = 0.75.
Power (shaft power) = 10.5/0.75 = 14.0 kW → compares with 14.2 kW from Table 1.7.
d. C-101
From Table 11.10, use the following heuristics:
Rule 2: Wrev adiab = mz1RT1[(P2/P1)a–1]/a
From Table 1.7, flow = 6770 kg/h, T1 = 38°C = 311 K, mw = 8.45, P1 = 23.9 bar, P2 = 25.5
k = 1.41 (assume) and a = 0.2908
m = (6770)/(3600)/(8.45) = 0.223 kmol/s
Wrev adiab = (223)(1.0)(8.314)(311){ (25.5/23.9)0.2908 – 1)/0.2908 = 37.7 kW using a
compressor efficiency of 75%
Wactual = (37.7)/(0.75) = 50.3 kW → This checks with the shaft power requirement given in
Table 1.7.
e. T-101
From Table 11.13, use the following heuristics:
Rule 5: Optimum reflux in the range of 1.2–1.5Rmin
Rule 6: Optimum number of stages approximately 2Nmin
Rule 7: Nmin = ln{ [x/(1 – x)]ovhd/[x/(1 – x)]bot}/ln α
Rule 8: Rmin = {F/D}/(α – 1)
Rule 9: Use a safety factor of 10% on number of trays.
Rule 14: Lmax = 53 m and L/D < 30
From Table 11.14, use the following heuristics:
Rule 2: Fs = uρυ 0.5 = 1.2 → 1.5m/s(kg/m3) 0.5
Rule 3: ΔPtray = 0.007 bar
Rule 4: εtray = 60 – 90 %
xovhd = 0.9962, xovhd = 0.0308, αovhd = 2.44, αbot = 2.13, αgeom ave = (αovhdαbot)0.5 = 2.28
Nmin = ln{ [0.9962/(1 – 0.9962)]/[0.0308/(1 – 0.0308)]}/ln (2.28) = 10.9
Rmin = {142.2/105.6}/(2.28 – 1) = 1.05
Range of R = (1.2 →1.5)Rmin = 1.26 → 1.58
Ntheoretical ≈ (2)(10.9) = 21.8
εtray = 0.6
Nactual ≈ (21.6/0.6)(1.1) = 40 trays
ρυ = 6.1 kg/m3
u = (1.2 → 1.5)/6.10.5 = 0.49 → 0.60 m/s
Vapor flowrate (Stream 13) = 22,700 kg/h
Vol. flowrate, v = 1.03 m3/s
Dtower = [4v/πu]0.5 = [(4)(1.03)/(3.142)/(0.49 → 0.60)]0.5 = 1.64 – 1.48 m
ΔPtower = (Nactual)(ΔPtray) = (40)(0.007) = 0.28 bar
A comparison of the actual equipment design and the predictions of the heuristic methods are given below.
From Tables 1.5 and 1.7 and From
Figure 1.5 Heuristics
Tower diameter 1.5m 1.48-1.64m

Reflux ratio, R 1.75 1.26-1.58

Number of Trays 42 40

Pressure drop, ΔP 0.30bar 0.28bar

f. H-101
From Table 11.11, use the following heuristics:
Rule 13: Equal heat transfer in radiant and convective sections
Radiant rate = 37.6 kW/m2, convective rate = 12.5 kW/m2
Duty = 27,040 MJ/h = 7511 kW
Area radiant section = (0.5)(7511)/(37.6) = 99.9 m2 (106.8 m2 in Table 1.7)
Area convective section = (0.5)(7511)/(12.5) = 300.4 m2 (320.2 m2 in Table 1.7)
From the earlier worked examples, it is clear that the sizing of the equipment in Table 1.7 agrees well with the
predictions of the heuristics presented in this chapter. Exact agreement is not to be expected. Instead, the heuristics
should be used to check calculations performed using more rigorous methods
and to flag any inconsistencies.
In this chapter, a number of heuristics have been introduced that allow the reasonableness of the results of
engineering calculations to be checked. These heuristics or guidelines cannot be used to determine absolutely
whether a particular answer is correct or incorrect. However, they are useful guides that allow the engineer to flag
possible errors and help focus attention on areas of the process that may require special attention. Several heuristics,
provided in the tables at the end of this chapter, were used to check the designs provided in Table 1.5 for the
toluene hydrodealkylation process.

Common questions

Powered by AI

The volumetric flow rate directly affects the power requirements of a pump because it determines the amount of fluid needing movement per unit of time, impacting the energy needed to overcome friction and pressure differentials. For P-101, a higher volumetric flow rate requires more power to achieve the necessary pressure rise (ΔP) for efficient flow through the system. The calculated power requirements are based on the product of flow rate, pressure increase, and pump efficiency parameters .

Gas velocity is crucial in determining the phase separator dimensions as it directly influences the separator's diameter, ensuring adequate separation by controlling residence time and dispersion. For V-102, the calculation of gas velocity based on density differences helps derive the diameter (D) ensuring gas-liquid separation efficiency while maintaining mechanistic stability. Proper sizing helps avoid issues like entrainment or inadequate phase disengagement, critical for both the process efficacy and downstream process requirements .

In the T-101 distillation column design, heuristics help to validate choices regarding reflux ratios and the number of trays. By following rules such as the optimal reflux range (1.2–1.5Rmin) and confirming tray numbers with a 10% safety margin, engineers can ensure effective separation efficiency and operational stability. This approach facilitates confirming theoretical calculations against practical guidelines, providing confidence in both the design itself and its economic efficiency .

Pump selection impacts both efficiency and reliability significantly. For instance, choosing a reciprocating pump for P-101 aligns with the heuristics for high-pressure differentials and efficiency at lower flow rates. Reciprocating pumps are suitable for such conditions, providing consistent flow and high pressures, vital for maintaining steady operation and minimizing energy consumption. Moreover, such choice prevents mechanical failures commonly associated with centrifugal pumps under similar conditions, ensuring more reliable process operation .

The heuristic method ensures optimal sizing by providing guidelines that check calculations made with more rigorous methods and flag potential inconsistencies. For instance, in the design of V-102, heuristics suggest configurations like the vertical vessel with specific diameter (D) and length (L) ratios based on flow characteristics and pressure, ensuring design efficiency. Although exact alignment with theoretical calculations isn't expected, heuristics facilitate detecting deviations that might indicate design errors .

Adiabatic work efficiency significantly impacts energy consumption and equipment sizing in process design. With C-101's compressor needing optimal efficiency to meet process demands without excess energy loss, achieving a higher adiabatic efficiency minimizes fuel consumption and operational costs. Poor efficiency requires over-designing the system or accepting higher energy costs. Thus, selecting compressors with a high efficiency is crucial for balancing performance with economic feasibility in chemical processing .

Equal heat transfer rates in both radiant and convective sections balance thermal stresses and optimize heat utilization. In H-101, splitting the total heat duty equally helps ensure that the process does not over-rely on either section, reducing risks such as hot spots or inefficient heating. This distribution minimizes energy losses, promotes uniform temperature distribution, and enhances overall heater efficiency and longevity .

Precise ΔTlm calculations are critical as they determine the actual temperature driving force for heat transfer, directly influencing the heat exchanger's size and efficiency. For E-105, ΔTlm governs the surface area needed to achieve the energy exchange, impacting material costs and thermodynamic efficiency. Any miscalculation can lead to either oversized designs (increased costs) or undersized systems (inefficiency), emphasizing the importance of accurate ΔTlm in both economic and operational performance .

Challenges when the minimum approach temperature doesn't meet the guideline include a potential decrease in the heat exchanger's efficiency, leading to larger required surface areas to achieve the same heat transfer capacity. For the Product Cooler E-105, the heuristic suggests ΔTmin of 10°C, but with an actual approach of only 8°C, there may be concerns about heat transfer efficiency. The impact, however, is mitigated by the small size of the heat exchanger, implying that the additional area required is not costly .

Heuristics facilitate error detection by providing standardized checks against which design parameters can be compared. For instance, in designing V-102, dimensional heuristics provide a range within which vessel dimensions should fall, allowing for easy identification of deviations that may indicate calculation errors or unrealistic expectations. These heuristics act as practical benchmarks to ensure that designs remain feasible and adhere to industry standards without exhaustive recalculations, thus highlighting inconsistencies before implementation .

You might also like