Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
PTQ Q3 2016 1
28 t/d
1 t/d
0.69 barg
34
Crude tower
15.7 Gcal/h
14.0 Gcal/h
LPG
Gas
80 t/d
Gasoline
splitter
40 t/d
16C
19C
Debutaniser
1200 t/d
930 t/d
470 t/d
300 t/d
6110 t/d
5250 t/d
57C
55C
24
23
20
164C
188C
HN draw
Kerosene stripper
11
10
9
280C
250C
298C
282C
Diesel stripper
5 t/d
2 t/d
Steam
226C
363C
6620 t/d
(49100 BPSD)
5220 t/d
(38700 BPSD)
90 t/d
54 t/d
1080 t/d
940 t/d
Steam
910 t/d
0 t/d
Steam
Wash back
1460 t/d
1300 t/d
280 t/d
200 t/d
137C
7 t/d
0 t/d
2300 t/d
2250 t/d 219C
213C
6.2 Gcal/h
6.0 Gcal/h
315C
308C
720 t/d
690 t/d
134C
136C 360 t/d
250 t/d
17
Crude
feed
C4
1690 t/d
1980 t/d
LVN
HN product
Kerosene
Diesel
362C
362C
1.4 barg
1.0 barg
347C
347C
2400 t/d
1970 t/d
Residue
Table 1
2 PTQ Q3 2016
where UA is the vapour velocity based on the active area, m/s, and G and L,are vapour and
liquid densities in consistent units.
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
762
502
51
Tray 18
Not to scale
Dimensions in mm
2780
89
Tray 17
368
59
89
Tray 16
762
Tray 15
3084
PTQ Q3 2016 3
4 PTQ Q3 2016
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
Flood
Incipient flood
Figure 5 Entrainment index, Trays 1120. Blue, incipient flood; red, flood
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
PTQ Q3 2016 5
6 PTQ Q3 2016
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
Hydraulic gradient, mm
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
PTQ Q3 2016 7
8 PTQ Q3 2016
Operational debottleneck
The solution to the excursion problem in Part 1
also provided an operational debottleneck for
the current flood problem. That solution was
operating in the kerosene mode. Following the
tests, the kerosene mode became the normal
mode of operation. There was little economic
penalty to drawing a relatively small amount of
kerosene product stream, as it could have been
blended with the diesel when not desired as a
product.
Operating at the kerosene mode circumvented
not only the diesel draw bottleneck, which
caused the excursion problem, but also the
flooding bottleneck. With both bottlenecks overcome, the tower charge rates could be raised
from 38 700 b/d (5200 t/d) to 49 100 b/d
(6600 t/d), much closer to the design 52 500
b/d (7070 t/d). At 6600 t/d, the flood limit
re-occurred but the excursion did not. At 6600
t/d charge rate, the capacity loss was tolerable
and an imminent shutdown was avoided.
The red print in Figure 1 shows the tower
material balance following the operational
debottleneck. The diagram permits comparison
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
PTQ Q3 2016 9
Hydraulic gradient, mm
250
Flood
Incipient flood
200
150
100
50
0
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Tray number
Figure 11 Reverse gradients, following operational debottleneck. Blue,
incipient flood; red, flood
00
PTQ Q3 2016
References
1 Kister H Z, Use quantitative gamma scans
to troubleshoot maldistribution on trays,
Chem. Eng. Progr., Feb 2013, 33.
2 Anon, Tray converts dead area to vapour/
liquid contact use,Chem. Proc., 44, Dec
1993.
3 Kister H Z, Can Vapour Cross Flow
Channeling occur on valve trays?, Chem.
Engnr. (London), 24 Jun 1993.
4 Kister H Z, Larson K F, Madsen P E, Vapour
Cross Flow Channeling on sieve trays: fact
or myth?, Chem. Eng. Prog., 86, Nov 1992.
5 Kister H Z, Larson K F, Burke J M, Callejas
R J, Dunbar F, Troubleshooting a water
quench tower, Proc. of the 7th Annual
Ethylene Producers Conference, Houston,
TX Mar 1995.
6 Kister H Z, Clancy-Jundt B, Miller R, Troubleshooting a C3
splitter tower, Part 2: Root cause and solution, PTQ, 39, Q1 2015.
7 Kister H Z, Is the hydraulic gradient on sieve and valve trays
negligible?, presented at Topical Conference on Distillation, AIChE
Meeting, Houston, TX, April 2012.
8 Resetarits M R, Pappademos N, Factors influencing Vapour
Cross Flow Channeling, presented at AIChE Fall Annual Meeting,
Reno, Nevada, Nov 2001.
9 Hartman E L, New millennium, old problems: Vapour Cross
Flow Channeling on valve trays, in Distillation 2001: Frontiers in
a New Millennium, proceedings of Topical Conference, 108, AIChE
Spring National Meeting, Houston, TX 22-26 April 2001.
10 Harrison M E, Gamma scan evaluation for distillation column
debottlenecking, Chem. Eng. Prog. 86 (3), 37-44, March 1990.
11 Davies J A, Bubble trays design and layout, Pet. Ref. 29(8),
93, 1950, and 29(9), 121, 1950.
Henry Z Kister is a Fluor Corp. Senior Fellow and Director of
Fractionation Technology. He is the author of three books, the
distillation equipment chapter in Perrys Handbook, and over
100 articles, and has taught the IChemE-sponsored Practical
Distillation Technology course over 450 times in 25 countries. A
recipient of several awards, he obtained his BE and ME degrees
from the University of NSW in Australia, and is a Fellow of IChemE
and AIChE, and a member of the NAE.
Email: henry.kister@fluor.com
Neasan OShea retired from P66 having served nearly 40 years
with Irish Refining Company as Technical Manager and latterly
Commercial Manager prior to Phillips 66s acquisition of the
company. He holds a BE in chemical engineering from University
College Dublin and a BComm from University College Cork, is a
Chartered Engineer and a Member of
IChemE and Member of the Energy Institute.
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001283
LINKS
More articles from: Fluor
More articles from the following categories:
Crude and Vacuum Units
Mass Transfer
PTQ Q3 2016 11