Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
June 2007
Overview
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Motivation Modelling framework Process overview New PSA cycles Results Conclusions
1. Motivation
Why H2: Increasing demand for H2, particularly in petroleum refineries and in the petrochemical processes (99.99+%). Why PSA: Since hydrogen is adsorbed much less than almost any other components, PSA has a clear advantage over almost all other possible approaches. Several ways to improve the separation quality and power requirements:
Multibed PSA configurations Multilayered adsorbents Adsorbent mixture Hybrid systems (such as hybrid PSA and membrane units) Specially designed multibed PSA process for the simultaneous production of pure H2 and CO2 from SMROG (Sircar and Golden, 2000; Sircar and Kratz, 1988)
Generic PSA modelling framework is being developed to support all the above features.
3
2. Modelling framework
All feasible inter-bed connectivities Hierarchical model decomposition
Flowsheet model Operating procedures of the whole plant are easily generated by an auxiliary program
V(i)-4
Arbitrary number of beds (main building block can V(i)-5 be replicated through an input parameter)
Layer (n)
SourcePurge(i) SinkHeavy(i)
Ni qi
r
Layer (1)
V(i)-3
Model of the main building block All PSA steps are supported
V(i)-5
V(i)-4
SourcePurge(i) SinkHeavy(i)
Ni qi
r
Layer (1)
V(i)-3
Boundary conditions (N-1) connections from the other beds for all PSA steps
V(i)-4 V(i)-5
SourcePurge(i) SinkHeavy(i)
Layer (n)
Layer inter-connections
Ni qi
r
Layer (1)
V(i)-3
Adsorbent layer model Mass and heat transfer through the particle surface is the only information exchanged between the interstitial fluid and the adsorbent particles
V(i)-4
Layer (n)
Ni qi
r
Layer (1)
V(i)-1
r ( 0, R p ) , z [ 0, L ] , i = 1, , N comp
SourcePurge(i) SinkHeavy(i) Source StrongPurge(i)
Mass and heat flux through the particle surface Mass transfer within the particle can be described by any Layer (1) transport mechanism (LEQ, LDF, SD, PD)
Layer (n)
Ni qi
r
Example:
Co-current pressurization Adsorption Pressure equalization 1 Pressure equalization 2 Blowdown Purge Pressure equalization 2 Pressure equalization 1
B group:
Adsorption Pressure equalization Blowdown Purge Counter-current pressurization
No
Success?
Yes
No
Success?
Yes
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Bed Bed Bed Bed Bed Bed Bed Bed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
CoCP EQR1 EQR2 Purge Blow EQD2 EQD1 Ads Ads CoCP EQR1 EQR2 Purge Blow EQD2 EQD1 EQD1 Ads CoCP EQR1 EQR2 Purge Blow EQD2 EQD2 EQD1 Ads CoCP EQR1 EQR2 Purge Blow Blow EQD2 EQD1 Ads CoCP EQR1 EQR2 Purge Purge Blow EQD2 EQD1 Ads CoCP EQR1 EQR2 EQR2 Purge Blow EQD2 EQD1 Ads CoCP EQR1 EQR1 EQR2 Purge Blow EQD2 EQD1 Ads CoCP
2
A E B B A P
3
R E E B E P
4
R P+ E B B P+
5
B A E B B A
9
B B A E A B
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
B E E B B B A R R E ER1 P+ A ED1 B P P P+ E B B A B A E ER1 B E B B A R P P A ED1 P+ E B R P+ B
B B B A R R E ER1 P+ B E E B P P A ED1 B
3. Process overview
Two types of beds (called type A and B) Each type contains different adsorbent and undergoes different cycle steps
A activated carbon B zeolite 5A
Pressure equalization between A-B and B-B beds to ensure mass conservation of the interstitial fluid.
10
(2+1)
1 B-1 B-2 A E B B A B 2 A E B B A P
A B A
3 R E E B E P
4 R P+ E B B P+
5 B A E B B A
6 B A E B B A
7 B R ER1 E P ED1
8 B R P+ E P B
9 B B A E A B
10 B B A E A P
11 E B R ER1 ED1 P
12 E B R P+ B P+
13 E B B A B A
14 E B B A P A
15 ER1 E B R P ED1
16 P+ E B R P+ B
(4+2)a
1 B-1 B-2 A E B B A P
2 A E B B A P
3 R P+ E B ER1 ER1
4 R P+ E B B P+
5 B A E B P A
6 B A E B P A
7 B R P+ E ER1 ED1
8 B R P+ E P+ B
9 B B A E A P
10 B B A E A P
11 E B R P+ ED1 ER1
12 E B R P+ B P+
13 E B B A P A
14 E B B A P A
15 P+ E B R ER1 ED1
16 P+ E B R P+ B
(4+2)b
12
5. Results
High H2/CO2 purity & recovery comparable to the original process Good quality tertiary product (suitable for a fuel gas) Lower capital cost
Products N beds (2+1) (4+2)a (4+2)b (6+3)
Purity, % Recovery, % Purity, % Purity, % Recovery, % Purity, % Recovery, % Recovery, %
H2
99.992 82.289 99.997 85.560 99.991 86.038 99.99+ 87.10
CO2
99.948 85.664 99.940 85.731 99.938 86.209 99.40 94.00
13
6. Conclusions
A previously developed generic PSA modelling framework for PSA flowsheet generation is successfully employed in the process of simultaneous H2 and CO2 production from SMROG under high product purity and recovery requirements. In order to improve the separation performance, new complex PSA cycle configurations have been designed and simulated. In the proposed configurations two different types of beds have been employed, which contain different adsorbents and undergo different steps during the process cycle. Comparable primary and secondary product purities, recoveries and power requirements with the conventional PSA cycles are obtained. Capital costs are lower due to the lower number of beds. The proposed PSA cycle configurations exhibit comparable separation performance with the conventional cycles at a lower capital cost 14
Acknowledgements
Financial support from PRISM EU RTN (Contract number MRTN-CT-2004-512233)
15