Hydrocarbon Processing 08 2016 PDF

HARNESS THE POWER
OF ADVANCED HRSG TECHNOLOGY
The industry leader in Heat Recovery Steam Generators for gas

turbines up to 30 MW, RENTECH offers a full range of HRSG systems
to meet your toughest project requirements. We custom engineer our
crossflow two-drum and waterwall designs to perform superbly in the
most demanding applications and operating conditions. We master every
detail to deliver elemental power for clients worldwide.
HARNESS THE POWER WITH RENTECH.
HEAT RECOVERY STEAM GENERATORS

WASTE HEAT BOILERS
FIRED PACKAGED WATERTUBE BOILERS
SPECIALTY BOILERS
WWW.RENTECHBOILERS.COM
AUGUST 2016 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
FLUID FLOW AND

ROTATING EQUIPMENT
Analyze abnormal operations of an HDS

reactor loop with dynamic simulation
PROCESS ENGINEERING
Choose the most appropriate modeling approach for reactors
Distillation technologyThen and now
MAINTENANCE AND RELIABILITY

Design operations-and-maintenance-friendly pressure vessels
HEAT TRANSFER
Sampling of heat transfer fluid offsets
carbon effects on thermal plant efficiency
Grrrrr. Or as we call it:

784 mbar, 24.4 kg, and 107.3 % Level
6LHPHQV3URFHVV,QVWUXPHQWDWLRQPHDVXULQJHYHU\WKLQJWKDWPDWWHUV
3UHVVXUH:HLJKLQJ/HYHODQGPRUH
2XUUDQJHRISURFHVVLQVWUXPHQWVDUHSDFNHGZLWKVWDWHRI
WKHDUWWHFKQRORJ\:KHWKHU\RXQHHGWRPHDVXUHSUHVVXUH
WHPSHUDWXUHIORZZHLJKWOHYHORUXVHHOHFWURSQHXPDWLF
SRVLWLRQHUVRXULQVWUXPHQWVDUHHQJLQHHUHGWRJLYH\RX
WKHPRVWSUHFLVHPHDVXUHPHQWSRVVLEOH$QGEHFDXVHZH
XQGHUVWDQGDFFXUDWHPHDVXULQJLVWKHNH\WRLQFUHDVLQJ
SODQWHIILFLHQF\DQGLPSURYLQJSURGXFWTXDOLW\ZHRIIHUIXOO\
DXWRPDWHGVROXWLRQVIRUHYHU\VWDJHRIWKHSURFHVV:KLFK
PHDQV\RXFDQUHO\RQRXUSDVVLRQIRUSUHFLVLRQWKURXJKRXW
\RXUHQWLUHSODQW%HFDXVHZHEHOLHYHHYHU\EXVLQHVVVXFFHVV
EHJLQVZLWKJUHDWPHDVXULQJ
VLHPHQVFRPSURFHVVLQVWUXPHQWDWLRQ
Select 75 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
AUGUST 2016|Volume 95 Number 8

HydrocarbonProcessing.com
38
24
10
SPECIAL REPORT: FLUID FLOW AND ROTATING EQUIPMENT
25 Analyze abnormal operations of an HDS reactor loop with dynamic simulation
O. Garcia, R. Shipman, C. Tong and R. E. Palmer
29
Extend ethylene plant run length with compressor chemical treatment

J. M. Hancock and S. Rodrigues
33
Boost capacity of SRUs with mixing devices for oxygen enrichment

M. Rajasekhar, V. D. Thakare, G. Srivardhan, V. K. Jayanti,
D. K. R. Nambiar, S. R. Singh and V. Shukla
BONUS REPORT: LNG

39 Cylindrical hull concept improves design for offshore FLNG production
L. Odeskaug and S. Mokhatab
PROCESS ENGINEERING AND OPTIMIZATION

45 Choose the most appropriate modeling approach for reactors
A. A. Jain and A. Gupta
51
MAINTENANCE AND RELIABILITY

55 Design operations-and-maintenance-friendly pressure vesselsPart 1
G. Murti
PROCESS CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION

59 Utilize genetic programming to develop new point efficiency correlation
N. Kasiri, P. Jouybanpour and M. Reza Ehsani
WATER MANAGEMENT
65 Experience with naphtha in sour water emulsions generated
in a fractionator overhead accumulator
C. McKnight and B. Rumball
ENVIRONMENT AND SAFETY

70 Understand the sources of oil pollution in water
M. Yang
Consider post-design changes to confine a hazardous area

S. V. Bapat
HEAT TRANSFER
77 Sample heat transfer fluids to offset carbon effects on thermal plant efficiency
C. Wright
GAS PROCESSING SUPPLEMENT

GP-1 Technology and Business Information for the Global Gas Processing Industry
Cover Image: MAN Diesel & Turbo North America, headquartered in Houston, Texas, provides the full array
of MAN diesel and gas engines, turbomachinery and after-sales service support. Photo courtesy of
MAN Diesel & Turbo North America Inc.
Industry Perspectives
10
Business Trends
15
Industry Metrics
17
Global Project Data
81
Innovations
83
Marketplace
84
Advertiser Index
85
Events
86
People
COLUMNS
7
Publishers Letter
Editorial Comment
DistillationThen and now

J. C. Gentry, M. Bhargava and M. J. Binkley
73
DEPARTMENTS
The transition into a new era

A historical snapshot of a
complex global industry
19
Reliability
21
Viewpoint
Monitor electric motor vibration

and optimize motor bearing
lubricant application
An engineers guide to networking
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Industry Perspectives
Petchem Tech Forum highlights
advances in US petrochemicals
In mid-July, Hydrocarbon Processing held its inaugural
Petchem Tech Forum. The forum was a two-day event at which
leading technical experts and professionals provided the latest
advances in petrochemical technologies and techniques. It included sessions on topics such as process control and automation, maintenance and reliability, turnarounds/revamps, plant
design, water treatment, analytics and risk management.
These are extraordinary times for the petrochemical sector,
especially in the US. The US petrochemical industry is in the
midst of one of the largest industry expansions to ever occur in
North America. Cheap, readily available shale gas has provided
chemical producers in the US with low-cost feedstocks, fueling
over $135 B in new petrochemical capacity. This investment
includes a sharp increase in the construction of ethane
cracking and derivatives capacity, ammonia and urea plants,
and methanol production. By 2020, the US is forecast to start
up nearly 10 MMtpy of new ethylene capacity, including new
cracker projects, as well as capacity expansions. Companies such
as Chevron Phillips Chemical, Dow, ExxonMobil, Ingleside
Ethylene, Formosa Plastics, LyondellBasell and Sasol will be
instrumental in adding over 8 MMtpy of new US ethylene
capacity by the end of the decade (TABLE 1). This first wave of
investment constitutes a total capital expenditure of nearly $20
B. Additional expansion projects are expected to add over 1
MMtpy of additional ethylene capacity by 2018. A second wave
of new ethane crackers could add 8 MMtpy by the early 2020s.
If built, total capital expenditures could top $50 B.
According to the American Chemistry Council, gross
exports of US chemical products will more than double from
$60 B in 2014 to over $120 B by 2030. Billions of dollars will
be invested in the construction of pipelines, storage terminals
and export capacity through the end of the decade. Hydrocarbon
Processings Construction Boxscore Database is tracking more
than 100 active petrochemical projects in the US. At present,
the US represents approximately 17% of global market share for
active petrochemical projects.
For more information and coverage on Hydrocarbon
Processings inaugural Petchem Tech Forum,
please visit HydrocarbonProcessing.com.
TABLE 1. New ethane crackers under construction in the US
P. O. Box 2608
Houston, Texas 77252-2608, USA
Phone: +1 (713) 529-4301
Fax: +1 (713) 520-4433
HPEditorial@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
PUBLISHER
Catherine Watkins
Catherine.Watkins@GulfPub.com
EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER
Lee Nichols
Lee.Nichols@GulfPub.com
EDITORIAL
Executive Editor
Managing Editor
Technical Editor
Digital Editor
Reliability/Equipment Editor
Contributing Editor
Contributing Editor
Contributing Editor
Adrienne Blume
Mike Rhodes
Bob Andrew
Kyle Kornegay
Heinz P. Bloch
Alissa Leeton
ARC Advisory Group
Anthony Sofronas
MAGAZINE PRODUCTION / +1 (713) 525-4633

Vice President, Production
Manager, Editorial Production
Artist/Illustrator
Senior Graphic Designer
Manager, Advertising Production
Sheryl Stone
Angela Bathe Dietrich
David Weeks
Amanda McLendon-Bass
Cheryl Willis
ADVERTISING SALES
See Sales Offices, page 84.
CIRCULATION / +1 (713) 520-4440 / Circulation@GulfPub.com

Manager, Circulation
Alice Murrell
SUBSCRIPTIONS
Subscription price (includes both print and digital versions): PrintOne year $239,
two years $419, three years $539. Digital formatOne year $239. Airmail rate
outside North America $175 additional a year. Single copies $35, prepaid.
Hydrocarbon Processings Full Data Access subscription plan is priced at $1,695.
This plan provides full access to all information and data Hydrocarbon Processing
has to offer. It includes a print or digital version of the magazine, as well as full
access to all posted articles (current and archived), process handbooks, the
HPI Market Data book, Construction Boxscore Database project updates and more.
Because Hydrocarbon Processing is edited specifically to be of greatest value to
people working in this specialized business, subscriptions are restricted to those
engaged in the hydrocarbon processing industry, or service and supply company
personnel connected thereto.
Hydrocarbon Processing is indexed by Applied Science & Technology Index, by
Chemical Abstracts and by Engineering Index Inc. Microfilm copies available through
University Microfilms, International, Ann Arbor, Mich. The full text of Hydrocarbon
Processing is also available in electronic versions of the Business Periodicals Index.
ARTICLE REPRINTS
If you would like to have a recent article reprinted for an upcoming conference or
for use as a marketing tool, contact Foster Printing Company for a price quote.
Articles are reprinted on quality stock with advertisements removed; options are
available for covers and turnaround times. Our minimum order is a quantity of 100.
For more information about article reprints, call Rhonda Brown with
Foster Printing Company at +1 (866) 879-9144 ext. 194 or e-mail
rhondab@FosterPrinting.com.
Hydrocarbon Processing (ISSN 0018-8190) is published monthly by Gulf Publishing
Company, 2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1020, Houston, Texas 77046. Periodicals postage paid at Houston, Texas, and at additional mailing office. POSTMASTER: Send
address changes to Hydrocarbon Processing, P.O. Box 2608, Houston, Texas 77252.
Copyright 2016 by Gulf Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
Permission is granted by the copyright owner to libraries and others registered
with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) to photocopy any articles herein for
the base fee of $3 per copy per page. Payment should be sent directly to the CCC,
21 Congress St., Salem, Mass. 01970. Copying for other than personal or internal
reference use without express permission is prohibited. Requests for special
permission or bulk orders should be addressed to the Editor. ISSN 0018-8190/01.
Company
Capacity
Startup
Chevron Phillips Chemical
1.5 MMtpy
3Q/4Q 2017
ExxonMobil
1.5 MMtpy
2017
Dow Chemical
1.5 MMtpy
2Q 2017
Sasol
1.5 MMtpy
3Q/4Q 2019
Formosa Plastics
1.5 MMtpy
1Q 2017
Publication Agreement Number 40034765
1Q 2017
Other Gulf Publishing Company titles include: Gas Processing, Petroleum Economist
and World Oil.
Ingleside Ethylene
544 Mtpy
4AUGUST 2016|HydrocarbonProcessing.com
President/CEO
CFO
Vice President
John Royall
Pamela Harvey
Ron Higgins
Sheryl Stone
Printed in USA
people
powered
Through our work, we define opportunity. As an integrated energy and chemicals

company, we are solving global energy challenges.
Continued expansion in our refining and chemicals activities means we are looking
for experienced downstream professionals to join our team. Process engineers,
business development specialists, and others are contributing to world-class projects
with global impact.
Apply now at www.aramco.jobs/hp

Advanced FIBER FILM Contactor Technology
Reduce
Costs
Improve
Efficiencies
Hydrocarbon Treating Made Better

Improve Treating Rates
Reduce Carryover
Reduce Plot Space
Introducing the next generation of FIBER FILM

Contactor technology. FFC Plus is an advancement to
FIBER FILM technology that makes mercaptan extraction
more efficient than ever. The latest innovations to this
commercially proven technology allow for more than
double the treating capacity while reducing overall costs
and plot space.
FFC Plus can also be easily retrofitted into existing
FIBER FILM units as a drop-in solution that is simple to
install during a unit turnaround, requiring less time than a
standard cleaning. In addition, turndown can be
maintained at current levels. Add capacity for tomorrow
without losing operability today.
P. O. Box 2608, Houston, Texas 77252-2608, USA|Phone: +1 (713) 529-4301|HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Dear Reader,
These are unprecedented times in the oil and gas industry. New technologies have
produced gluts of both oil and natural gas, which have provided cheap feedstocks for
the downstream processing industries. The cyclical nature of the oil and gas business
has had vastly different effects on each region. To oil-exporting nations, reduced oil
prices equate to low government revenues. In turn, little money is available to fund
social, industrial or infrastructure projects. To other nations, low oil and natural gas
prices have been a boon to the processing industries. They have seen a boost in the
construction of additional downstream processing capacity, as well as cheap fuel prices
for consumers, which spur consumption.
As with all cyclical industries, sometimes change is a necessity to ensure the
strength and viability of an organization. Change allows a business to build on its
strengths and evolve into an even more exceptional enterprise. Hydrocarbon Processing
is undertaking such a transition. As of August 1, I have assumed the role of Publisher
for two of Gulf Publishing Companys exceptional brands, Hydrocarbon Processing and
Gas Processing.
Most of my life has been spent in and around the oil and gas industry. I was born in Chicago, but was largely raised in the oil
patches of Iran, the UAE and Texas. As a result of my upbringing, I was familiar with drill collars and Christmas trees (assemblies
on surface and subsea wells) before I had heard of Barbie dolls. For the past 20 years, I have represented Gulf Publishing Companys
Hydrocarbon Processing, World Oil and Gas Processing publications in France, Spain, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Belgium and
the Middle East/North Africa regions. My contributions included display and digital advertising sales, organizing industry forecast
presentations and event participation, and conducting marketing seminars for clients.
During this time, I have found no other publication as highly regarded in the downstream industry as Hydrocarbon Processing. This is
not arrogance or by accident; it is based on audited circulation numbers and years of industry professionals testimonials. Hydrocarbon
Processing reached this position by applying the highest levels of editorial integrity. It is proof that, although consumer and industry
publications are largely giving up on editorial standards, our industry still values and needs a trusted source of information.
As we look into the future of our industry and publications, technical content is king. This will never change. We will continue
to bring our readers the highest-quality technical and operating articles in the industry. It is what we have been doing since 1922,
and will continue to do now and into the future. What has, is and will continue to change is how that information is disseminated.
Hydrocarbon Processing wants to engage and listen to the industry to provide editorial and data content in the most useful medium
and format possible. We have already begun this change with the unveiling of the new Hydrocarbon Processing websitebut it does
not stop there. Hydrocarbon Processing is exploring ideas such as podcasts, data products and innovative mobile apps.
I want to thank you for your devotion to Hydrocarbon Processing. It is gratifying to hear how our publication, website and
newsletters provide interesting and, more importantly, sound technical content to make your work and our industry a better place. I
also want to thank all of the advertisers who support this publication. Please share your comments, ideas and news with us; we highly
value your feedback. It is a dynamic time in the downstream industry, and I can guarantee that Hydrocarbon Processing will continue
to be at the forefront of technology, trends and data intelligence.
Catherine Watkins
Publisher, Hydrocarbon Processing and Gas Processing
Hydrocarbon Processing|AUGUST 20167
Editorial
Comment
LEE NICHOLS, EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER

Lee.Nichols@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
A historical snapshot of a complex global industry

As we move into the second half of
2016, we take stock of new project activity in the global downstream processing industry. After all, a detailed trends
analysis on new project construction can
provide great insight into the strength or
weakness of a countrys or regions economy. FIG. 1 provides a macro-level analysis
on new project construction from 2009 to
the present.
Since 2009, new project announcements have gradually declined. Besides a
spike in 2014, which was a direct effect of
the construction boom in the US gas processing/LNG and petrochemical industries, the overall trend shows new project
announcements decreasing over the sample period. However, the drop in project
announcements does not mean that the
sky is falling. While the overall new project counts are lower, many nations are witnessing a boost in project construction.
Factors such as population, economic, and
social class growth; new technologies that
provide better processing economics; and
the move to diversify product portfolios
are the primary drivers behind capital-intensive downstream infrastructure builds.
The high project numbers in 2009

were attributed to a spike in new refining and petrochemical construction projects in Asia, primarily China. During this
time-frame, China was experiencing a
refinery building boom. The Middle East
was also investing heavily (and continues
to do so) in new downstream processing
capacity, a deliberate move to diversify
product portfolios by increasing participation in the refined and petrochemical products market. Over the past few
years, the US has been the leader in new
downstream processing capacity, primarily through the construction of new gas
processing plants, LNG export terminals
and petrochemical complexes.
As we look back on nearly a decade of
project data, the events that lead to the
ups and downs of an industry are quite
extraordinary. This is just a snapshot of a
complex global industry, and it is intended to provide a brief history of the industrys past and clues as to where it might
be headed. For a detailed breakdown and
overview of downstream construction
activity, please see this months Business
Trends on pg. 14.
300
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
250
200
150
100
50
0
Africa
Asia-Pacific
Canada
Europe
Latin America
Middle East
US
FIG. 1. New project announcements by region, 20092016. Source: Hydrocarbon Processings

Construction Boxscore Database.
INSIDE THIS ISSUE
10 Business Trends.
Hydrocarbon Processing
explores the state of the downstream
construction and investment sector.
The review includes a detailed trends
analysis on new and active construction
projects around the world, a market
share analysis and an overview of
each regions project activity and
future outlook.
24 Special Report.
Any problems or failures

in the fluid flow systems of an HPI
facility will impact the entire plants
operation and profitability. Significant
effort is directed to the proper design,
installation, operation and maintenance
of fluid-handling facilities. The special
report investigates the numerous issues
around maximizing plant/process
unit uptime and reliability, and
eliminating leaks and emissions
of process liquids and gases.
55 Reliability.
Useful ideas
are presented to ensure
that the design and selection of
pressure vessels meet functional
safety requirements while providing
operation-and-maintenance-friendly
service to end users for years to come.
65 Water Management.
Syncrude Canadas attempt

to modify an overhead accumulator
drum to improve naphtha/sour water
separation resulted in the formation
of naphtha in sour water emulsion.
The rapid response to alleviate
this problem through the use of a
demulsifier is detailed, along with
the development of potential
mechanical solutions through the
application of computational fluid
dynamics and cold flow modeling.
| Business Trends
Capital-intensive investments are being made in every sector
of the hydrocarbon processing industry, in every region. The
following is an update on the global downstream investment
and construction sector. This overview provides a detailed
trends analysis on new and active downstream construction
projects around the world. This information will help shed some
light on the state of the downstream construction sector, as well
as provide a detailed overview on each regions project outlook.
Photo: Fluor completed the lift of a 250-ft, 570-ton C2 splitter in late 2015.
The column is part of Chevron Phillips Chemicals ethane cracker project
at its Cedar Bayou complex in Baytown, Texas. Photo courtesy of Fluor.

Business Trends
The state of the global downstream
construction sector
terminal final investment decisions, as LNG developers would
be hesitant to invest in heavily capital-intensive terminal construction.
The following is an update on the global downstream investment and construction sector. This overview provides a
detailed trends analysis on new and active downstream construction projects around the world. The following information was developed using Hydrocarbon Processings Construction Boxscore Database. For detailed information on active
downstream construction projects, as well as a resource for
lead generation, market research, trends analysis and planning,
please visit www.constructionboxscore.com.
New projects. According to Hydrocarbon Processings Construction Boxscore Database, over 1,000 new projects have
been announced since 2014. Nearly half of these projects were
announced in 2014, and the trend shows a steady decline in
new project announcements since that time. FIG. 1 shows a Boxscore Database trend analysis on new project announcements
from 20142016. Each year runs from July 1 to the end of June.
New project announcements have fallen from nearly 490 in
2014, to 320 in 2015, to just over 200 within the past year. This
represents a yearly decrease of approximately 35%.
Over the past year, regions such as Africa, Asia and Europe
have gained new project market shares (FIG. 2). Although the
US new project market share has decreased over the past year,
the region still maintains the greatest total number of new project announcements since 2014. The US has announced more
New downstream project announcements by region, 20142016
What is the state of downstream processing capacity? What

regions and sectors are seeing growth, and which ones are stagnant, or possibly shrinking? These simple questions tend to not
have simple answers. In short, capital-intensive investments
are being made in every sector of the hydrocarbon processing
industry, in every region. These investments are ensuring that
global demand for petroleum products will be met in the future.
The present and future of the downstream processing industry
varies immensely by region. The following information will
help shed some light on the state of the downstream construction sector, as well as provide a detailed overview on each regions project outlook.
Along with continued capacity growth in the global refining
sector, new technologies are moving the industry toward cleaner, lower-sulfur fuels for transportation. Refiners are investing
billions of dollars in new units, upgrades/retrofits and expansions to meet new sulfur and emissions regulations. These investments include sulfur-reduction programs such as Tier 3 in
the US and Canada, National V in China and Bharat Stage 6 in
India. Clean-fuels investments promote the reduction of carbon
monoxide, nitrogen oxide, hydrocarbons and particulate matter
in both diesel and gasoline vehicles. Refiners around the world
are making necessary investments to produce high-quality fuels
that meet Euro 4, Euro 5 and Euro 6 specifications. This will
continue to be a major theme through the end of the decade.
Over the past few years, the world has witnessed a surge in
new petrochemical capacity announcements, led by the AsiaPacific, Middle East and US regions. These regions continue
to build up petrochemical capacity to satisfy demand, increase
product export market share and increase downstream product
portfolios. The global petrochemical sector will continue to
see growth through the rest of the decade. However, the petrochemical landscape varies significantly between regions. Many
new construction projects remain active, but the outlook for the
industry is not as bullish as it was 18 to 24 months ago. This
sentiment is reflected in new project announcements over the
past few years, which will be discussed later.
The world is watching natural gas become the fastest-growing fossil fuel. Growth on both the supply and demand sides
has resulted in the announcement of billions of dollars of capital investment. The increase in natural gas usage has caused a
surge in LNG trade over the past few years. However, even with
natural gas demand increasing around the world, LNG supply
capacity is outpacing demand growth. This is leading to a glut
of supplies, which should peak in the early 2020s, according to
forecasts. The present LNG glut could jeopardize future LNG
180
2014
2015
2016
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Africa
Asia-Pacific
Canada
Europe
Latin America Middle East
US
FIG. 1. Total new project announcements by region, 20142016.

Source: Hydrocarbon Processings Construction Boxscore Database.
Business Trends
than 280 projects in the past three years. The overwhelming
majority of these projects are within the gas processing/LNG
and petrochemical industries. In total, nearly 80% of all new
US downstream projects have fallen within these two sectors.
This activity includes the construction of new cryogenic and
gas processing plants, NGL fractionators, hundreds of miles of
new pipeline infrastructure and millions of tpy of new LNG
export capacity. On the petrochemical front, the US has announced millions of tpy of new capacity growth in ethane
cracking and derivative projects, methanol production and
ammonia-urea capacity.
The country has also announced a multitude of new refining
projects to process lighter crude slates produced from US shale
basins, as well as additional secondary units and upgrades to
meet new US Tier 3 regulations, which will take effect in 2017.
The Asia-Pacific region is a close second to the US and has
announced 260 new projects in the past three years. This represents approximately 26% of the total number of new projects announced globally within that same time frame. Nearly
half of all new projects announced in the region are located in
China and India (FIG. 3). Just as China has seen unprecedented
growth over the past decade, India is emerging as the globes
new oil demand center. The countrys burgeoning demand is
providing huge potential for downstream oil and gas growth.
15%, 16%, 17%
4%, 5%, 4%
28%, 32%, 21%
17%, 11%, 11%

3%, 6%, 7%
10%, 6%, 6%
23%, 24%, 34%
FIG. 2. Market share analysis of new project announcements, 20142016.

Source: Hydrocarbon Processings Construction Boxscore Database.
Other 4%
Vietnam 4%
Thailand 4%
Taiwan 3%
South Korea 5%
Singapore 6%
Philippines 1%
Papua New Guinea 1%
Myanmar 1%
Malaysia 6%
Japan 4%
Indonesia 7%
India 18%
China 30%
Bangladesh 1%
Australia 5%
FIG. 3. Total new project market share in the Asia-Pacific region, 2014
2016. Source: Hydrocarbon Processings Construction Boxscore Database.
Indias new project announcements have increased over 140%

since 2014. Within the past year, India accounted for 30% of all
new projects announced in the Asia-Pacific region.
The Middle East has seen a substantial decrease in new
project market share since its wave of new capacity announcements a few years ago. Middle Eastern nations rely heavily on
oil export revenues. With the decrease in oil prices, the regions
oil exporting nations have taken a substantial hit in government revenues. This has delayed the implementation of certain
downstream projects and resulted in multiple project cancellations. Regardless, the region still maintains a vast amount
of capital-intensive projects. Saudi Arabia continues to be the
leader in new project announcements in the region. Like most
Middle Eastern countries, Saudi Arabia is making a deliberate move to increase its participation in the refined and petrochemicals product market. In doing so, the country is diversifying itself away from its reliance on oil export revenues.
Like the Middle East, Latin American nations rely heavily on oil export revenues. The region has seen tremendous
petroleum product demand growth over the past decade. To
satisfy this demand, Latin America has relied heavily on refined project imports, mainly from the US. The region has announced major refining projects to help curb imports, but the
drop in crude oil prices has left little money to fund capacity
expansions. In the short term, Latin American nations would
rather import refined fuels than invest in major expansions or
grassroots facilities. This does not mean that the region is void
of new project announcements. Some of the bright spots include new refining and petrochemical projects in Mexico and
Peru, the growth in Bolivias petrochemical sector, as well as
additional LNG regasification capacity in Colombia, Puerto
Rico, Chile and Jamaica.
In Europe, the majority of new project announcements are
located in Eastern Europe, Russia and the Commonwealth of
Independent States (CIS). These three areas of Europe represent nearly 70% of all new project announcements in the
region since 2014. Major ongoing modernization projects in
Russia, as well as expansions, upgrades and grassroots refinery and petrochemical projects in the CIS, have contributed
to this activity.
Canadas new project market share has hovered around 4%
to 5% for the past couple of years. New project announcements
have centered on Canadas desire to monetize excess natural
gas supplies. Nearly 75% of recent project announcements in
the region were in the gas processing/LNG sector. Historically, Canada has exported almost all of its excess natural gas
to the US by pipeline. However, because of the shale gas boom,
the US no longer needs to import significant volumes of natural gas from Canada. This has caused a considerable drop-off in
Canadian exports to its main customer, with projects showing
substantial decreases over the next 20 years. To offset this financial hit, Canada has announced a multitude of LNG export
terminals. The majority of these projects are located on the
countrys west coast in British Columbia. An additional halfdozen projects have also been announced on the countrys east
coast in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Quebec.
Finally, Africa has seen an incremental increase in new
project market share over the past few years. This increase
includes new refinery construction in Algeria and Uganda,
Business Trends
Boxscore Database, over $60 B in capital projects have been
placed on hold or abandoned within the past year. These projects include capital-intensive projects in every region of the
globe. Some of the more notable project cancellations and
holds include:
Appalachian Resins ethane cracker (Ohio)$1.3 B
Ascend Performance Materials Chocolate Bayou
PDH plant (Texas)$1.2 B
Atyrau petrochemical complex (Kazakhstan)$6.3 B
Barrancabermeja refinery modernization and expansion
project (Colombia)$3.4 B
BASF methanol-to-propylene plant (Texas)$1.4 B
Binh Dinh refinery (Vietnam)$22 B
Browse FLNG
CHS Spiritwood fertilizer plant (North Dakota)$3 B
Douglas Channel LNG (Canada)$600 MM
Downeast LNG (Maine)$2 B
Marathon Petroleums Garyville refinery upgrade
(Louisiana)$2 B
Moin refinery (Costa Rica)$1.2 B
SOCAR OGPC project (Azerbaijan)$8.5 B
Triton LNG (Canada)
Valeros St. Charles methanol project (Louisiana)
$700 MM.
Not all of these projects have been delayed, put on hold or
canceled due to low oil prices, although that has been the case
with many project cancellations over the past few years. Some of
these projects have been shelved due to government sanctions,
the inability to secure financing or necessary feedstocks, capital
expenditure, re-bids of engineering, procurement and construction quotes, public opposition and/or poor economics.
capacity expansions and grassroots refining and petrochemical facilities in Nigeria and Egypt, and new LNG capacity in
countries such as Equatorial Guinea, Egypt, Ghana, Morocco,
Tanzania and Mozambique.
Active projects. At present, the Boxscore Database is tracking more than 2,100 projects around the world (FIG 4). Nearly
80% of total active projects are within the refining and petrochemical sectors. The Asia-Pacific region still dominates in
total number of active projects in all downstream sectors, led
by projects in China and India. These two countries represent
over half of all active projects in the region. Combined, Europe and the US represent approximately 30% of total active
downstream project market share. This activity includes new
petrochemical and LNG capacity in the US, as well as additional refining and petrochemical builds in Eastern Europe,
Russia and the CIS. A detailed breakdown of total active project market share by region is shown on pg. 14.
Approximately 60% of active projects are in the preconstruction stage. A breakdown of active projects by activity level
is listed below:
Engineering18%
Front-end engineering design (FEED)9%
Planning26%
Feasibility study7%
Under construction40%.
Abandons/holds. Although the Boxscore Database is tracking more than 2,100 active projects, market conditions have
caused many projects to be moved from active status to delayed, put on hold or abandoned altogether. According to the
35
14
125
13
101
80
Canada
109
30
94
65
Europe
US
171
75
25
72
34 34
104
66
Refining
Petrochemical
Gas processing/LNG
Other
146
42
28
48
Middle East
31
Latin America
Africa
215
198
102
71
Asia-Pacific
FIG. 4. Total active projects by region and sector, July 2016. Source: Hydrocarbon Processings Construction Boxscore Database.
Business Trends
Breakdown of total
active project market
share by region,
July 2016
Europe
CIS 19%
Russia 31%
Eastern Europe 17%
Western Europe 33%
Source: Hydrocarbon Processings

Construction Boxscore Database
Africa
Other 33%
South Africa 8%
Nigeria 21%
Egypt 24%
Angola 7%
Algeria 7%
Asia-Pacific
Other 4%
Australia 7%
Vietnam 4%
Thailand 2%
Taiwan 2%
South Korea 4%
Singapore 5%
Philippines 2%
Pakistan 4%
Malaysia 5%
China 30%
Japan 2%
Indonesia 8%
India 21%
Canada
Other 17%
British
Columbia 42%
Alberta 41%
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Other 25%
Venezuela 7%
Peru 13%
Mexico 23%
Jamaica 7%
Bolivia 8%
Brazil 17%
Other 8%
UAE 10%
Turkey 9%
Saudi Arabia 20%
Oman 10%
Kuwait 10%
Iraq 17%
Iran 16%
PADD 5
West Coast 8%
PADD 4
Rocky Mountain 6%
PADD 3
Gulf Coast 63%
PADD 2Midwest 15%
PADD 1East Coast 8%
MIKE RHODES, MANAGING EDITOR

Mike.Rhodes@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Industry Metrics
May-16
April-16
Mar.-16
Feb.-16
Jan.-16
Dec.-15
Nov.-15
May-16
April-16
Mar.-16
Feb.-16
Jan.-16
Dec.-15
Nov.-15
June-16
May-16
April-16
Mar.-16
Feb.-16
Jan.-16
Dec.-15
Nov.-15
Oct.-15
Sept.-15
Aug.-15
July-15
June-15
Cracking spread, US$/bbl

Gasoil
Fuel oil
June-16
May-16
April-16
Mar.-16
Feb.-16
Jan.-16
Dec.-15
Nov.-15
Oct.-15
Sept.-15
Aug.-15
30
Dubai
Urals
20
10
Prem. gasoline
Jet/kero
Gasoil
Fuel oil
June-16
May-16
April-16
Mar.-16
Feb.-16
Jan.-16
Dec.-15
Nov.-15
Oct.-15
Sept.-15
Aug.-15
July-15
June-16
May-16
April-16
Mar.-16
Feb.-16
Jan.-16
Dec.-15
Nov.-15
Oct.-15
Sept.-15
Aug.-15
July-15
May-15
-10
-20
June-15
May-15
Prem. gasoline
Jet/kero
Singapore cracking spread vs. Oman, 20152016*
Brent dated vs. sour grades

(Urals and Dubai) spread, 20152016*
Light sweet/medium sour
crude spread, US$/bbl
-10
-20
Source: EIA Short-Term Energy Outlook, June 2016
8
6
4
2
0
-2
-4
10
July-15
2017-Q1
30
20
June-15
2016-Q1
40
May-15
2015-Q1
Stock change and balance, MMbpd
Supply and demand, MMbpd
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
Forecast
Stock change and balance

World supply
World demand
Prem. gasoline
Jet/kero
Diesel
Fuel oil
Rotterdam cracking spread vs. Brent, 20152016*
World liquid fuel supply and demand, MMbpd
2014-Q1
Oct.-15
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
May-15
Oil prices, $/bbl
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
W. Texas Inter.
50
Brent Blend
40
Dubai Fateh
30 Source: DOE
20
M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M
2014
2015
2016
2013-Q1
Sept.-15
US Gulf cracking spread vs. WTI, 20152016*
Selected world oil prices, $/bbl
2012-Q1
Japan
Singapore
Oct.-15
60
Production equals US marketed production, wet gas. Source: EIA.
100
98
96
94
92
90
88
86
84
82
2011-Q1
US
EU 16
70
Sept.-15
M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M
2014
2015
2016
80
June-15
20
2
1
0
Aug.-15
Monthly price (Henry Hub)

12-month price avg.
Production
July-15
40
90
June-15
Utilization rates, %
60
100
May-15
Aug.-15
June-15
May-15
Global refining utilization rates, 20152016*
6
Gas prices, $/Mcf
Production, Bcfd
WTI, US Gulf
Brent, Rotterdam
Oman, Singapore
80
10
US gas production (Bcfd) and prices ($/Mcf)

100
15
July-15
An expanded version of Industry Metrics can be found

online at HydrocarbonProcessing.com.
Global refining margins, 20152016*

20
Margins, US$/bbl
Asia refining margins fell despite strong regional demand. US

gasoline demand continued to rise, and strong export opportunities
have strengthened gasoil and fuel oil crack spreads, supporting refinery
margins. European gasoline crack spread weakened under oversupply
pressure, while the middle and bottom of the barrel recovered amid
export opportunities.
* Material published permission of the OPEC Secretariat; copyright 2016;

all rights reserved; OPEC Monthly Oil Market Report, July 2016.
MAXIMIZE RELIABILITY,
AVAILABILITY & PROFITABILITY
With Ariel API 618 Process Compressors

Global Project Data

New downstream project announcements have continued
to decrease since April. Although the trend in new project
announcements is in decline, the downstream processing industry
has announced more than 250 projects over the past year. The
majority of these projects are located in the Asia-Pacific and US
regions. These two regions account for nearly 65% of all new project
announcements since July 2015. In Asia, new project market share

is dominated by China and India. This activity includes new capacity
builds in the refining and petrochemical sectors, as well as new
LNG import terminal construction. In the US, project developers are
continuing to boost petrochemical capacity and construction of new
LNG export infrastructure.
20
Canada
31
71
Europe
44
US
110
37
Middle East
Africa
25
Number of projects
by region
Asia-Pacific
Latin America
Number of projects by region, with total capital

expenditure greater than $1 B
30
27
22
17
18
27
26
20
18
18
26% Planning
21
15
13
40% Under construction

12
June- July- Aug.- Sept.- Oct.- Nov.- Dec.- Jan.- Feb.- Mar.- April- May- June- July15
15
15
15
15
15
15
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
Boxscore new project announcements,

June 2015present
7% Feasibility study
9% FEED
18% Engineering
Breakdown of active projects by activity level
Detailed and up-to-date information for active construction projects in the refining,
gas processing and petrochemical industries across the globe|ConstructionBoxscore.com
ZymeFlow tough. Refinery and petrochem process unit decontamination.
FASTER. SAFER.
PREPARE PLANT
EQUIPMENT FOR
ENTRY IN
8-12 HOURS
Shorten your turnaround using ZymeFlow Decon.

With 25 years of experience in refining and petrochemical
applications, the ZymeFlow brand of specialty decontamination
chemistries and services is the global leader for fast and safe
vessel entry. The unique ZymeFlow process simultaneously
eliminates benzene, LEL's, hydrogen sulfide, and pyrophoric iron
sulfides, dramatically reducing the time spent to prepare vessels
for entry and hot work. Furthermore, the process is safe for
people, equipment, and wastewater plants.
ZymeFlow Decon is active in over 50 countries, performing about
200 specialized decontamination projects each year.
Save Time. Increase Safety. Choose ZymeFlow.
Tel: +1 281.443.0300
info@zymeflow.com | www.zymeflow.com
2016. United Laboratories International, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
A United Laboratories Internationational Brand
Reliability
HEINZ P. BLOCH, RELIABILITY/EQUIPMENT EDITOR

Heinz.Bloch@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Monitor electric motor vibration and optimize

motor bearing lubricant application
Reader feedback is very important to us. From the many
questions that make their way to our desks, we can sense the
pulse of industry trends, the level of training, professional
competence and issues of concern. We usually send off a reply and later rework the more interesting correspondence into
one of the columns you are reading now.
Keep this in mind as you follow our discourse with a reliability professional employed by an owner-operator with a
number of ammonia and urea plants in locations where blinding sandstorms are prone to occur.
Commendations for an admirably tabulated case
history. To begin with, this reliability professionala.k.a.
the readerdeserves credit for making important observations on a double-ended electric motor. A high-pressure carbamate pump and a booster pump were connected to the motors shaft ends.
Each motor bearing housing had one vertical (y) probe
and one axial (z) probe. Both are seismic probes that
resolve acceleration into velocity. No horizontal (x)
probe was utilized.
The motor tripped on high vibration at one of its
bearings. Initially, only one vertical (y) probe reached
the trip value, but the second one did not. After 30
seconds, both probes reached the trip value of 7.1 mm/
sec and the motor was shut down, exactly as intended.
All bearings are deep-groove style 6317, indicating an
85-mm bore.
The failed motor bearings showed bluish discoloration
on shafts and bearing inner races, pointing to a
lubrication issue. There was no trace of lubricant.
The original design intent was for these bearings to
be lubricated by automatic grease-dispensing devices;
however, no such automation was in place. The bearings
were last (manually) lubricated in September 2014.
No re-greasing was carried out until the bearings failed
after about 10 months of operation.
After rebuilding the motor, the axial (z) probe was
repositioned to the horizontal (x) location.
Our reader inquired about API 670 4th Ed. (2000). This
industry standard mentions dual-voting logic, which, the
reader believes, is adopted by a majority of end users. He
noted that the recently released API 670 5th Ed. (2014) recommends single-voting logic for radial vibrations. Based on
in-house experience, his company favors either monitoring radial vibration excursions without trip logic or, more recently,
two-out-of-two voting logic. The reader sought our advice on
the best voting logic for radial seismic acceleration/vibration

monitoring of motors, and asked us to be mindful of everpresent concerns over plant operational availability and machine reliability priorities.
Treat root causes, not symptoms. Our advice was experience-based. To protect this motor with one transducer per
bearing housing is probably cost-justified because the plant already has all the associated electronic modules. However, the
facilitys objection to using just one transducer was stated in
follow-up correspondence, confirming concerns about spurious trips shutting down a highly profitable plant.
Researching the probability of spurious trips in modern
installations would be appropriate. The readers recollection
of failing transducers may have to be updated. Alternatively,
if those in authority demanded two seismic transducers and
two-out-of-two voting logic, they might plan to install these in
vertical (y) and horizontal (x) directions. Implementing twoout-of-two trip voting logic and installing the two probes in
readily accessible locations should be considered. Both may
be at convenient angles or located at the 12 oclock and three
oclock positions. The first excursion should sound an alarm
Logic cards in BN
Logic cards in BN
Y or X
Hi
And
Y or X
HiHi
Y or X
HiHi
And
Y or X
Hi
Vib probes
X
Vib probes
Rotor
Drive end
Non-drive end
FIG. 1. A squashed orbit with the X-vibration probe shows much less
amplitude than the y-probe, so it is possible that during a vibration
excursion the y-probe could be in a trip state (HiHi) while the x-probe
is indicating normal.
Reliability
if one of the two readings exceeds 7 mm/sec. Automatic trip
activation should be linked to both probes measuring an activity exceeding 7 mm/sec.
A special caveat is illustrated in FIG. 1. The example shows a
squashed orbit with the x-vibration probe showing much less
amplitude than the z-probe. Therefore, it is possible that during a vibration excursion the y-probe could be in a trip state
(HiHi) while the x-probe is indicating normal. Over the years,
we have found that if one end of a rotor is in distress, the other
end should show some change from normal. The probe might
not be in a HiHi alarm state on the non-distressed end, but it
should at least show a Hi alarm on one of its vibration probes
(FIG. 1). It is a bit more costly since more cards must be installed in the monitoring rack, but it is generally worth it.
Generalized vibration guidelines for pumps and
electric motors. The reader may be well aware that the mo-
tor at issue here was driving two carbamate pumps. Because

carbamate services are quite notorious for being installed in
applications with inadequate separation of net positive suction head (NPSHa and NPSHr), it would be of interest to
closely monitor pump vibration in this instance. NPSHa
is a function of the system and must be calculated, whereas
NPSHr is a function of the pump and must be provided by the
pump manufacturer.
Vibration velocity on pump bearing housings is measured,
and conscientious operators are asked to take these readings
once per shift. This compels operators to be in the field where
they can use their senses of smell, hearing, vision and touch
to determine deviations from normal. Certain types of motor
distress are brought on by issues that are rooted in pump deficiencies. As shown online in TABLE 1, the allowable vibration
velocity values are a function of pump style and size.
Of course, many potential causes of excessive pump vibration exist,1 and the most prevalent include:
1. Rotor unbalance (new residual impeller/rotor
unbalance or unbalance caused by impeller metal
removal or wear)
2. Shaft (coupling) misalignment
3. Liquid turbulence due to operation too far below the
pump best-efficiency flowrate (BEP)
4. Cavitation due to insufficient NPSH margin
5. Pressure pulsations from impeller vane-casing
tongue (cutwater) interaction in high-discharge
energy pumps.
Once a pump has been determined to have a high total/
all-pass vibration level, the next step is to identify the cause.
A filtered vibration analysis should be obtained, and the first
step in such an analysis will be to capture, and then evaluate,
the multiples (harmonics) of pump running speed.
Evidence of outdated lubrication technology. This plant
would do well to make reliable bearings and lubrication one

of its priority concerns. We recommend they adopt only bestavailable bearing selection and plant-wide automated lubrication strategies. The plants top technical and mid-level managers
should appreciate why dry sump oil mist has been successfully
used by Best-of-Class (BoC) companies for the past 40 years.
Unless the bearings are lubricated by oil mist, BoCs disal20AUGUST 2016|HydrocarbonProcessing.com
low rolling element bearings for electric motors above 500 hp;
Siemens allows oil mist in motors up to 3,000 kW (4,692 hp).2
For those insisting on grease, details on automatically or manually applied grease lubrication are important but will differ with
the location and orientation of shields (if any) and drain ports.
There is considerable reliability impact, depending on the type
of grease. Moreover, certain grease application methods sometimes result in incorrect fill volume, excessive grease pressure
(deflecting shields), rust or dust in bearing element paths, and
bearing flat spots (in an installed spare pump set) due to shafts
not being rotated, to name just a few. Again, proper greasing
procedures and lubrication management are far more important than placing/mounting/maintaining more monitors on a
rolling element-equipped motor bearing housing.
An electric motor with 85-mm bearings is obviously not
a small machine. It is maintenance-intensive and may require
grease replenishment at least six, and in some cases 16, times
per year. If rivet heads pop off in a riveted-cage bearing, the
motor sometimes grinds to a halt in mere seconds. We refer
the reader to an article describing how BoCs use oil mist on
many electric motor bearings (Hydrocarbon Processing, March
1977fully 39 years ago).
An estimated 26,000 electric motors and 150,000 process
pumps are presently using dry sump oil mist lubrication, and
some of these have not needed bearing replacements in the
past 35 years. Why the readers company is not availing itself
of oil mist lubrication is very difficult to comprehend and not
worth speculating. The one sure thing we know about achieving reliability is that it cannot be obtained with business-asusual mindsets.
Allow us to zero in on the real problem: The reader is probably only responsible for vibration monitoring tasks. His assignment may be limited in scope and he cannot tell higher management that we believe his company is vulnerable in its use
of old lubrication technology. Here is how others solved the
dilemma: At least two companies accepted our recommendation to send four or five managers to a three-day offsite update
session where experts (without allegiance to either vendors or
bosses) candidly briefed them on how BoCs become BoCs.
The value of teaching mid-level managers in small groups is
far greater than trying to present in-plant seminars to 40 disinterested lower-rung folks. Their response, time and time again,
has been, I hear you, but that is how we do things around here,
and I cannot do anything about it.
LITERATURE CITED
Bloch, H. P., Petrochemical machinery insights, Elsevier Publishing, Oxford, UK,
and Waltham, Massachusetts, 2016.
2
Bloch, H. P. and A. Shamim, Oil mist lubrication: Practical applications, Fairmont
Publishing Co., Lilburn, Georgia, 1998.
1
HEINZ P. BLOCH resides in Westminster, Colorado.

His professional career commenced in 1962 and
included long-term assignments as Exxon Chemicals
regional machinery specialist for the US. He has
authored over 650 publications, among them
19 comprehensive books. Mr. Bloch holds BS and
MS degrees in mechanical engineering. He is an
ASME life fellow and maintains registration as a
professional engineer in New Jersey and Texas.
Viewpoint
GOUTAM SHAHANI, Shure-Line Construction, Kenton,

Delaware; and CARL RENTSCHLER, Akron, Pennsylvania
An engineers guide to networking
GOUTAM SHAHANI is VP of sales and marketing

at Shure-Line Construction and former business
development manager at Linde Engineering
North America. Mr. Shahani has over 30 years of
industry experience and specializes in industrial
gases for the energy, refining and chemical
industries. He holds BS and MS degrees in
chemical engineering, as well as an MBA.
CARL RENTSCHLER, P.E., is an engineering

consultant specializing in project management,
business development, client relationship
management and procedure development. He
has over 40 years of varied engineering and
management experience in the energy and
petrochemical industries. He holds a BS degree
in civil engineering from Penn State University
and a master of engineering degree in civil
engineering from Cornell University.
Innumerable articles and training programs have been written on the subject
of networking. Among the younger generation, social networking has become
a primary means of communicating. So,
the question may arise as to why another
article on networking is needed. This
columns purpose is to discuss networking in the context of engineers working in
the global chemical and refining industry.
Typically, engineers tend to network
only when they need something, such
as a career change. Alternatively, the authors recommend networking as an ongoing activity. In todays volatile business
environment with corporate consolidation, corporate restructuring, plant closings and project delays, it is critical for
engineers at every level to have a broadbased, active network of peers, mentors
and coaches. The old adage of, It is not
what you know, but who you know, has
never been more true than in this dynamic industry atmosphere.
Networking is important for many
reasons. It can help engineers stay current with the latest developments, such
as market trends, new technologies and
engineering tools, and industry activities.
Networking with peers to benchmark and
learn new skills helps an engineer expand
their horizons beyond their specialized
work function. This helps people do their
job better and is applicable to every function, including sales, marketing, procurement, project management, process engineering and construction management.
In some disciplines, there is a greater supply of engineers than demand, and networking is one way to differentiate oneself in a competitive employment market.
In other words, networking greatly helps
position a person for the next career
move consistent with industry trends.
Creating a viable network. It is important to consider both the softer, conceptual
issues and the hard mechanistic methods.
Conceptual issues must be approached
with a sincere interest and concern to help

others. The ability to listen and connect
disparate people, facts and figures is very
helpful. People do not forget a kind word
or a helpful act, even after many years. It
is indeed a small world in terms of people
in the capital-intensive process industry.
Networking must be a two-way street, and
is not something that should be turned on
and off only when something is needed.
After working in the industry for several decades and watching it evolve, the
authors stress the importance of having a
strong foundation, in terms of intent, before launching into the nuts and bolts of
developing a network. Some good mechanistic techniques are:
Join Linkedin, Toastmasters
or other media sites
Connect with colleagues,
ex-employees, college alumni,
friends and neighbors
Attend conferences, make
presentations and write articles
Participate in specialized
trade associations and volunteer
for committees.
A good network includes people that
are involved both internally and externally with an organization or company. A
lot of value exists in developing relationships within a company. This is especially
true in large multinational organizations.
By having good contacts within your own
and related functions within an organization, it is possible to learn, exchange information and collaborate. Information can
flow horizontally and directly between
people instead of needing to go up vertically through silos. This is faster and more
effective for all parties concerned.
Sustaining networking as an SOP.
Maintaining and increasing the network
becomes a challenge because everyone is
busy. For networking to be effective, it is
important to conduct it on a continuous
basis. The business world is competitive,
and many good performers are losing
Now in its next generation,

this puppys pedigree is
still best-of-breed.
Our next-generation Model 9900 gas analyzer.

More sensitivity to sniff out emissions without H2O or CO2 interference.
RM
Nothing tracks UV-absorbable gas species better than our new Model
9900RM analyzer. Even moisture and CO2 wont throw it off. Whether
part of your CEM system or a stand-alone gas monitor, its high intensity
line source lamps deliver reliable dry gas analysis with a fixed wavelength,
resolution to 0.02 nm and accuracy to 1% of full scale.
The rugged Model 9900RM meets RATA testing requirements and can be
rack, wall or bench mounted. Its advanced data processing capabilities
include data logging, graphing, on-board diagnostics and more. Its big on
connectivity too, supporting Modbus/RS485 and Ethernet/Web interface.
From performance to sensitivity to reliability, this puppys got it all.
Learn more at: www.ametekpi.com
2016 by AMETEK. All rights reserved.
Viewpoint
their jobs. It is important to distinguish
yourself among the other good performers. Networking is a way to stay current
with technical advances and business
trends. This can add valuable input to
your company and makes you a potential
candidate to other organizations.
Networking should be standard operating procedure for engineers. Each week,
time should be set aside to accomplish it,
and goals should be set as to the level of
networking to be achieved. This is a case
where quality overshadows quantity. Focus on making contact with people and
organizations aligned with your business
and/or technical field. Remember, it is a
two-way street, so always be prepared to
offer information or assistance to others.
Being altruistic is the watchword for effective networking. You will have little
success if you are not willing to do your
part. When carried out conscientiously,
effective networking is a win for you, your
colleagues and your company.
One significant hurdle is that many
technical people find it challenging to
interface and network with others, and
therefore do not attempt communications. These challenges include:
Technical people do not see
communications skills as
essential. Many engineers
believe communication is
something to be endured to
get to the technical meat.
Technical people are not expected
to be strong communicators.
Often, technical people feel that they
are counted on for their knowledge,
and they rely on others to
understand if their communication
is subpar. This is not a positive
approach to promote networking.
Communications are not
considered part of an engineers
makeup. Some technical people
give up on communications
because they feel it is not in their
personality, or because they are
intimidated by the extroverted and
gregarious people around them. It is
inaccurate to assume that introverts
are poor communicators; in truth,
introverts tend to be good listeners
and have the capability to be strong
communicators, if motivated.
Several opportunities exist to find
help in developing communication and
networking skills. Located in nearly ev-
ery city, Toastmasters organizations offer

an opportunity to enhance communication skills through peers. Organizations
with the sole purpose of networking tend
to be open, supportive and non-threatening. If you feel reticent about the idea of
networking, seek out support from colleagues or an appropriate organization.
A proactive approach. As the global
chemical and refinery industries be-
come increasingly more competitive,

professional networking has never
been more important. Make networking part of your professional life, just as
you make a workout part of your daily
regimen. It should become a standard
operating procedure, as it is a win for
all involved and increases your value to
your employer. The payoff may not be
immediate, but many positives will develop over time.
Crude oil fouling testing helps keep your

heat exchangers running longer,
cleaner, and more efficiently.
Drawing on decades of experience, we provide companies throughout the
world with contract fouling services that include
measuring fouling propensity and anticipated
fouling characteristics
Rotating
assessing the impact of additives
Fouling Unit
estimating fouling thresholds at
different temperatures and velocities
evaluating the impact of metallurgy
interpreting chemistry data
assessing primary fouling
mechanisms
HTRI researchers help design a test
plan that best suits your goals.
Once testing is complete, you
receive a report containing
a comprehensive summary of
the tests, analysis of the results,
mitigation strategies, and
recommendations to guide
your project.
High
Temperature
Fouling Unit
High
Temperature
Fouling Unit 2
HTRI engineers use three state-of-the-art research rigs to

provide crude oil fouling testing services to companies worldwide.
Contact us at fouling@htri.net to
learn how we can help you with
your next project.
www.htri.net
HTRI and the HTRI logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Heat Transfer Research, Inc.
All rights reserved.

Hydrocarbon Processing April Fouling Ad.indd 1
23
3/11/2016 1:47:30 PM
| Special Report
FLUID FLOW AND ROTATING EQUIPMENT
Most HPI facilities are continuous processes; therefore, any problems or
failures in the fluid flow systems will impact the entire plants operation and
the companys profitability. Considerable effort is directed on the proper
design, installation, operation and maintenance of fluid handling systems.
Compressors and pumps provide the motive force to convey various process
liquids and gases. Equally important are the support equipment systems,
such as valves, piping and instrumentation, as part of the infrastructure
to manage products and intermediate streams.
This months special report investigates the numerous issues around
maximizing plant/process unit uptime and reliability, and eliminating leaks
and emissions of process liquids and gases.
Siemens single-shaft centrifugal compressors with horizontally split casings in the
STC-SH series can be used for the majority of process applications, including cracked
gas, coker gas, process air and refrigerant duties. Photo courtesy of Siemens.
Special Report
Fluid Flow and Rotating Equipment

O. GARCIA, R. SHIPMAN, C. TONG and R. E. PALMER,
Wood Group Mustang, Houston, Texas
Analyze abnormal operations of an HDS

reactor loop with dynamic simulation
Hydrodesulfurization (HDS) units are
used in a petroleum refinery to process a
variety of feeds to alter composition via
the addition of hydrogen (H2 ). Process
objectives include reducing the sulfur and
nitrogen content for subsequent downstream processing. Often, existing HDS
facilities are modified for higher throughput, feed composition changes and/or increased hydrotreating severity. A revamp
process study is typically undertaken to
identify the changes needed to achieve
these new process objectives.
For the evaluation of the HDS reactor
loop, two abnormal operating conditions
must be considered:
Heatwave to the reactor effluent
equipment and piping caused by
the sudden loss of feed
Settle-out pressure in the reactor
loop after the loss of recycle
gas flow.
Conventional approaches for evaluating the impact on the reactor effluent
system of a heatwave can result in overconservatism in a revamp or new design.
While conventional methods for

calculating the settle-out pressure exist, if the revamped settle-out pressure
exceeds the set pressure of the pressure

safety valve (PSV) protecting the HDS
reactor loop, then there is generally no
Reactor effluent
air cooler
Legend
Reactor feed
Reactor effluent
Recycle/makeup H2
Wash water
PC
FC
FC
Wash water
Separator
LC
LC
FC
Recycle gas
compressor
Recycle gas purge
Product separation
Hydrogen
makeup
Sour water
FC
Hydrocarbon
feed
Charge
pump
Feed/effluent
exchangers
TC
Fuel gas
HDS reactor
Heater
FIG. 1. Typical HDS reactor loop.
TABLE. 1 Peak temperatures calculated for feed/effluent exchanger shells
Exchanger
Feed side
steady state
inlet temp., F
Feed side
steady state
outlet temp., F
Peak feed side

outlet temp., F
Effluent side
steady state
inlet temp., F
Effluent side
steady state
outlet temp., F
Peak effluent side

inlet temp., F
HX Shell 1
448
495
542
550
485
550
HX Shell 2
425
448
524
485
450
538
HX Shell 3
398
425
498
450
426
517
HX Shell 4
365
398
472
426
397
491
HX Shell 5
323
365
448
397
361
465
HX Shell 6
270
323
424
361
315
441
HX Shell 7
203
270
397
315
256
418
HX Shell 8
123
203
350
256
185
389
Air cooler
175
131
325
agreed-upon method for calculating the

relieving rate. Dynamic simulation is the
preferred approach for analyzing these
two contingencies.
Key design information is used to
develop the dynamic simulation. This
includes equipment design details such
as tube/shell size, geometry, nozzle locations and elevations. Centrifugal pumps
and compressors are modeled using the
performance curves. CV data is used to
model control valves, while volumes are
used for piping to model the holdup.
Heatwave caused by loss of feed. In
the HDS unit, a heatwave begins when the

liquid feed flow is lost, resulting in a condition where the heat content in the reactor
effluentwhich normally transfers to the
feed in the feed/effluent exchangeris
not removed. As a result, equipment and
piping in contact with the reactor effluent
will experience higher-than-normal temperatures. Evaluating the peak temperatures for equipment in the reactor loop
with conventional methods may result
in very conservative design conditions.
A dynamic simulation is used to predict
the transient response of the temperatures
and pressures for this condition.
A dynamic simulation of a typical
HDS reactor loop (FIG. 1) is used to demonstrate the heatwave analysis. The hydrocarbon liquid feed is pumped by the
charge pumps to the reactor loop pressure, and the hydrocarbon liquid rate is
regulated by flow control. Liquid hydrocarbon is combined with the recycle H2
from the recycle gas compressor. The

combined feed stream goes through a
series of feed/effluent exchangers, where
the reactor feed absorbs heat from the reactor effluent before being heated to the
reactor inlet temperature in the heater.
The reactor feed inlet temperature to
the HDS reactor is controlled by adjusting the fuel gas flow to the heater burners. The reactor effluent is cooled in the
feed/effluent exchangers and then mixed
with wash water before entering the reactor effluent air cooler. The air cooler
outlet stream enters the separator, which
separates the sour water, liquid hydrocarbon and recycle gas. The liquid hydrocarbon and sour water are pressured
out of the HDS reactor loop. The vapor
stream is split, with some gas purged out
of the HDS reactor loop to maintain H2
purity in the recycle gas. The remaining gas is routed through the recycle gas
compressor and mixed with the hydrocarbon liquid feed.
The following example is for a heatwave resulting from a local power failure
where the reactor feed is lost. It is assumed
that normal control responses stop the H2
makeup and wash water flows. It is also
assumed that fuel gas to the heater is shut
off via safety interlock and that there is
no heat input to the feed. The recycle gas
compressor continues operating and initiates the heatwave. The dynamic model is
run until peak temperatures on the feed/
effluent exchangers are observed and begin to decay. Eight shells are used in series
for the feed/effluent exchangers (TABLE 1).
600
60,000
Comp. suction
Effluent side 1
Heater
Comp. discharge
550
500
450
Separator
Effluent side 2
Feed side 2
Relieving rate
Air cooler
HDS reactor
Feed side 1
50,000
350
30,000
300
250
20,000
200
150
10,000
100
50
0
0
4
Time, min.
FIG. 2. Settle-out pressures and relieving rates.

Relieving rate, lb/hr
40,000
400
Pressure, psig
romance.hoerbiger.com
...R...O...MA...NCE

For a new HDS unit, the peak temperatures can be incorporated into the
selection of the design temperatures for
both the shell and tube sides of the feed/
effluent exchangers and the air cooler.
A conservative approach is to set the
design temperature of the effluent side
of the feed/effluent exchangers to the
same temperature as the HDS reactor.
With the dynamic simulation, the peak
temperatures can be used to reduce the
design temperature, which may result
in cost savings for the feed/effluent exchangers. Also, the dynamic simulation is
useful in the design of the reactor effluent
air cooler in terms of selecting fin tube
type based on the design temperature.
For the examples shown in TABLE 1,
if the peak temperature exceeds the existing equipment design conditions, it
may be possible to rerate the impacted
exchangers or consider reusing some of
the existing exchangers in a different sequence. If rerating or reusing the impacted exchangers is not a viable option, then
the exchangers will need to be replaced.
Calculating the relieving rate. Dynamic simulation can be used to calculate
the required relieving rate of a PSV following the loss of recycle gas if the settleout pressure is greater than the setpoint
of the PSV. For a revamp case, the reactor
throughput may be increased, resulting in
a higher operating pressure in parts of the
reactor loop. The reactor loop settle-out
pressure may increase to a value higher
than the PSV setpoint at the separator.
For the given example, the reactor
loop PSV is located on the separator. The
set pressure is 290 psig, and the normal
operating pressure is 210 psig (FIG. 2).
When the recycle compressor stops, the
PSV opens and the relieving rate peak
flow is approximately 56,000 lb/hr.
The pressure continues to increase
after the PSV initially opens, but the dynamic model does not predict the PSV
to be fully open since the separator pressure does not reach 10% overpressure
(319 psig). The pressure peaks at around
302 psig. The results indicate that the
PSV is adequately sized for this settleout scenario.
Takeaway. Dynamic simulation is the
best method to predict the transient responses of the temperatures and pressures in an HDS reactor loop from the
loss of feed or recycle gas. For loss of

feed, the transient temperature response
predicts the magnitude of the heatwave
needed to evaluate the design temperatures of the effluent side of the feed/effluent exchangers. Dynamic simulation
allows the calculation of a realistic relieving rate from the products separator
during a settle-out pressure caused by
the loss of recycle gas.
OSCAR GARCIA is a process
consultant in downstream process
engineering in the process plants
and industrial business of Wood
Group Mustang, where he has
worked on multiple refining and
chemical projects. Mr. Garcia has
17 years of industry experience. He holds a BS
degree in chemical engineering from The University
of Texas at Austin and an MS degree from Texas
A&M University-Kingsville.
RAY SHIPMAN is a process
manager in downstream process
engineering within the process
plants and industrial business of
Wood Group Mustang. He has
more than 35 years of industry
experience, including 20 years
at Wood Group Mustang, where his responsibilities
include feasibility studies, front-end design and
detailed engineering of refinery and petrochemical
processing units. Mr. Shipman is a registered
professional engineer in Texas and holds a BS degree
in chemical engineering from Rice University.
CHUNG TONG has more than
35 years of industry experience,
including 20 years at Wood Group
Mustang, where he is the process
engineering manager and the
discipline technical authority in
the downstream process
engineering department within the process plants
and industrial business. His responsibilities include
proposal development, feasibility studies, front-end
design and detailed engineering of refinery and
petrochemical processing units. Mr. Tong is a
registered professional engineer in Texas and holds
a BS degree from National Taiwan University and
an MS degree from the University of Houston,
both in chemical engineering.
R. E. (ED) PALMER is the manager
of downstream process
engineering within the process
plants and industrial business
of Wood Group Mustang. He has
more than 40 years of industry
experience, including 20 years with
Wood Group Mustang. He is responsible for directing
all process design activities for downstream projects
and studies, including selecting the lead process
engineer and supporting team for each engagement.
Mr. Palmer is a registered professional engineer in
Texas and a member of the American Institute of
Chemical Engineers. He holds a BS degree in
chemical engineering from the Missouri University
of Science and Technology and has authored
numerous technical articles and presentations
for industry publications and meetings.
DEFINING THE LIMIT

AS STANDARD
Electric actuators for the oil
and gas industry
Safe, explosion-proof,
tough. AUMA offer a large
portfolio of actuator and
gearbox type ranges.
Automating all types of
industrial valves
High corrosion protection
Integration into all
commonly used control
systems
Global certifications and
approvals
Find out more

on our
automation solutions
www.auma-usa.com

anzeige_drittel_seite_hydrocarbon_processing.indd04.02.2016
1
14:26:21
VERSATILE.
Always a leading innovator, ROSEN not only supplies pipeline
customers with the latest diagnostic and system integrity
technologies but also offers exible solutions and all-round
support for plants & terminals.
www.rosen-group.com
Special Report

J. M. HANCOCK and S. RODRIGUES, Nalco Champion,
Oegstgeest, The Netherlands
Extend ethylene plant run length

with compressor chemical treatment
An aging ethylene plant historically suffered from plant run
length limiting compressor fouling that resulted in a loss of
polytropic efficiency and intercooler backpressure buildup. The
target run length of the ethane-fed plant was five years, and the
need to reduce throughput as the end of run approached was not
uncommon. Due to the past performance of the planti.e., the
compressors vulnerability to foulingrun length limiting compressor fouling was expected.
This plant assumption was challenged in 2007, when a revamp expansion project was completed to include a second compressor train (CT-2), which also experienced significant fouling.
This led to a series of events that resulted in better mitigation of
compressor fouling, which, in turn, redefined the limitations of
both plants.
The new mitigation strategy resulted in two milestone successes. The first was a two-year extension of the target run length
from five to seven years. The 2012 scheduled plant shutdown
was rescheduled for 2014, and this record-setting plant run
length was achieved without any load reduction.
The second success was the ability to improve plant margins
by operating at a higher cracking severity. Previously, high coil
outlet temperatures resulted in increased fouling in the compressor. The improved onsite compressor fouling mitigation strategy
keeps this impact under control, and high cracking severity is
now an economic advantage.
The historical compressor fouling and changes to the treatment
philosophy that afforded an extended run length are discussed
here. Lessons learned from this success have resulted in a new approach to operations that will be applied for subsequent runs.
Challenge: Compressor fouling. Although mechanisms of
compressor fouling have been discussed within the industry,14

incidences of unplanned plant shutdowns and lost production
attributed to fouling provide evidence that gaps remain. A delicate balance exists between the cost of a mitigation strategy and
the economic return from the investment.
Further complicating the issue, no singular solution or easy
fix is available. Every plant has a different tendency to foul and
requires a bespoke mitigation strategy to achieve site-specific
goals. Typically, these include various combinations of chemical
approaches: wash oil, attemperation water injection, chemical
inhibitors and/or chemical dispersants.14
To demonstrate the varied approaches, a survey of 36 plants
presented at the 2013 European Ethylene Producers Committee
(EEPC) Conference concluded that 46% of plants reported use

of a chemical antifoulant program, 35% reported use of water injection, and 19% reported use of wash oil injection.5
Despite these mitigation strategies in place within the industry, surveys conducted by the EEPC found that fouling is the second leading cause for compressor failure in an ethylene plant.6 In
terms of monetary losses, blade fouling can cause energy efficiency losses as great as 1%. For turbomachinery, that can use up to
70 MW of power and translate into an annual loss of $300,000.7
The ethylene plant added the second compressor train
(CT-2) in 2007. The five-stage compressor maintains inlet temperatures of 40C45C and outlet temperatures of 80C92C.
Intermittent washing was performed weekly into each compressor section to wet the internal surfaces and minimize the accumulation of polymers.
Attemperation water in the form of boiler feedwater was injected continuously and directly into each compressor to lower
the compressor operating temperature. After three years of operation, the cracked gas compressor (CGC) train exhibited fouling of such severity that the medium-pressure (MP) rotor had to
be replaced. In 2011, the MP rotor was replaced once more after
a mechanical failure, to which fouling was a main contributor.
FIGS. 1 and 2 show the extent of fouling in the intercoolers
and rotors of the machine. A collaboration between the plant
and a chemistry service provider was initiated in August 2011,
after the second rotor replacement, to develop and implement a
complete treatment regime to improve reliability. At startup, the
compressor train was untreated, followed by a brief and unsuccessful treatment program.
Following a compressor audit and deposit analysis, a mitigation strategy was implemented:
Application of a proprietary antifoulant to compressor
Stages 14
Application of a proprietary antifoulant to compressor
intercoolers Stages 24
Intermittent application of wash oil to Stages 14,
with a frequency dependent on fouling tendency
(13 times per week)
Continuous boiler feedwater application to each stage
Proactive performance monitoring coupled with
a well-defined response protocol for adjusting
antifoulant injection rates.
The main contribution to compressor fouling is unwanted
polymerization of reactive monomers present in the cracked

gas stream via Diels-Alder reactions and free-radical polymerization mechanisms. The chemical structures of the main culprits are shown in FIG. 3. These compounds undergo unwanted
polymerization, particularly given the high discharge temperatures of > 90C.24
The chemical composition of foulant differs progressively
throughout the compressor train due to the changing composition of cracked gas. A major contributor to fouling in the early
stages is the unwanted reactions of styrene, indene and cyclopentadiene. In later stages, radical polymerization of butadiene
and isoprene becomes more prevalent. Although each stage of
compression can suffer from fouling, some stages of a plant are
more vulnerable than others.
The proprietary antifoulant includes multifunctional products that mitigate fouling by several approaches:
Chemically reacting with fouling precursors to prevent
unwanted polymerization
Changing the physical interaction between the foulant
and the equipment surface to reduce deposition
Designing dispersants to have favorable intermolecular
interactions with both foulant polymers and solvent to
prevent agglomeration and deposition of foulant.
The antifoulant is either dosed with wash oil when injected
continuously (preferred), with flash water, or into CGC suction lines. The dosage is dependent on fouling severity and
discharge temperatures. Given the impact of temperature on
fouling, a higher antifoulant dose rate is recommended during
FIG. 1. CT-2 fouled interstage cooler before mitigation strategy.
FIG. 2. CT-2 fouled rotor before mitigation strategy.
Styrene
1,3-Butadiene
Divinylbenzene
Isoprene
Indene
Piperylene
Cyclopentadiene
Vinylacetylene
FIG. 3. Chemical structures of reactive monomers that can polymerize

and contribute to compressor fouling.
the summer months in warm climates due to higher compressor

discharge temperatures.
The application of the new treatment program had an immediate impact on compressor performance. Six months after the
mitigation strategy was implemented, improvements in performance were seen:
Stage 1: 15% recovery of polytropic efficiency
Stage 2: Increase of polytropic efficiency from 55% to 90%
Stage 4: Stabilization of polytropic efficiency from
92% to 94%
No P increase observed in Stages 24 intercoolers
Rotor speed dropped by 250 rpm
Steam turbine condensate flow reduced by 3 tph.
Three years after the mitigation strategy was implemented,
the compressor was opened as part of a general turnaround
overhaul. It was found to be remarkably clean, as shown in FIG. 4.
Additionally, during these years the cracked gas load on the compressor was increased by 5%, which translates into a throughput
increase of the complete production unit.
The improvement in reliability and performance is illustrated
in FIG. 5, where the MP rotor casings axial displacement is stabilized following the antifoulant treatment program. The chemical
treatment program was begun on a clean machine following an
unplanned stop due to MP rotor failure. Once applied, severe
fouling was not observed.
The expansion project led to the reevaluation of the existing
compressor train (CT-1) treatment philosophy. The three-casing, five-stage compressor has inlet temperatures of 40C45C
and outlet temperatures of 85C105C. At start of run, the
scheduled plant run length target was five years; however, due to
the expansion project, the forecast turnaround for the plant was
extended by two years. A team was formed to mitigate fouling
of CT-1 to meet this deadline without reduction of throughput.
The existing program was adapted to reflect the following fouling mitigation strategy:
Application of antifoulant to compressor Stages 15
Application of antifoulant to Stage 2 compressor intercooler
Intermittent application of wash oil to Stages 15,
with frequency dependent on fouling tendency
(12 times per week)
Transition between two different wash oils to take
advantage of the higher final boiling point. The wash oil
would remain in the liquid phase at a higher temperature
Continuous attemperation water application to each
stage. A discharge temperature of < 90C is preferred,
but specific constraints interfered with achieving this
objective; < 100C was attained
Close daily performance monitoring, weekly reporting and
proactive response adjusting antifoulant injection rates.
In 2013, diligent monitoring of the compressor indicated a
decline in polytropic efficiency, mainly on Stages 2 and 5. Consequently, another audit was conducted to identify remedial actions
that would allow attainment of the revised seven-year run length
target. A few observations that influenced the performance of the
program are shared here as lessons learned. Discrepancies between theoretical (intended) and actual wash oil injections during
intermittent flushes due to deviation from the desired pump rate
were found. The intermittent wash oil injection rates and frequencies were modified for additional protection of vulnerable stages.
Benchmark.
Weve raised the bar with best-in-class solutions for oil and gas applications.
Welcome to a new standard of innovation and technology.
As you have come to expect, Dresser-Rand provides safe,

reliable and efficient rotating equipment for nearly every
application in the oil and gas market.
But theres more.
The new Dresser-Rand business now has expanded
resources and more experience as a member of the global
Siemens family. The Dresser-Rand business combines
one of the industrys most extensive portfolios of rotating
equipment with a universe of intelligent solutions and one

of the worlds largest technical support and service center
networks. We offer more choiceswhere you need us
all from a single supplier.
So what can you expect from us? High-quality products
and services that turn longer run times for your equipment
into an everyday experience. This, combined with local
around-the-clock support, is the new standard.
dresser-rand.com

selectivityi.e., ethylene product yield is reduced due to an increase in secondary reactions.8 Furnace operating pressure is a
function of CGC suction pressure. Efficiency deterioration on
CGC at the same load results in a suction pressure increase and a
backpressure to radiant coils.
Lessons learned. A high-efficiency furnace and high conversion
C-2 MP casing axial displacement
FIG. 4. CT-2 during scheduled turnaround after antifoulant treatment

program was implemented.
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-0.1
-0.2
Nov.-08
Antifoulant treatment started
July-09 April-10
Dec.-10
Aug.-11 April-12
Date
Dec.-12
Sept.-13 May-14
FIG. 5. CT-2 MP casing axial displacement trend over time.
Antifoulant dosage rates were modified to protect vulnerable stages, as detected by monitoring stage vibrations and intercooler P.
The investment and focus on compressor monitoring and
treatment returned a significant value to the plant; the extended
run-length goal of seven years was achieved successfully without
throughput reduction. The compressor performance achieved
was unprecedented for the plant, with a record-setting plant run
length. Moving forward, the protocol relating to the development and implementation of chemical treatment programs has
been redefined, and a new performance record has been established, altering the previous mindset regarding the limitations
of the CT-1 compressor.
Another success was the ability to improve plant margins by
operating at a higher cracking severity. Before applying the improvements to mitigate compressor fouling, trial periods of high
coil outlet temperatures were showing an unacceptable impact
on fluctuations of intercooler P and rotor axial displacement
an indication of fouling in the compressor train. Therefore, the
cracking severity adjustment was limited by the delicate balance
between yields and compressor reliability.
The new compressor treatment program contributed to the
plants ability to maintain a higher coil outlet temperature than
was previously possible, which resulted in accessing the potential
of recently installed new cracking furnaces, boosting the ethylene yield by 3 vol%4 vol%.
By maintaining the same CGC throughput in the CT-1 and
CT-2, the plant generated a significant production gain of 5%.
The implemented compressor treatment program has decoupled the connection between yields and compressor reliability,
and improved ethylene selectivity is now an economic advantage
for the plant.
The chemical reaction in the cracking furnace is sensitive to
pressure. Higher operating pressure has a negative impact on
are key parameters for the operation of a competitive plant. Although the seven-year run length was successful due to improvements made in controlling compressor fouling, the backpressure
to the furnace was higher than the design suction pressure because the comprehensive mitigation program was not started on
a clean system. The design suction pressure is 0.6 bar, but the suction pressure gradually increased by a factor of almost 2.
Proactive monitoring helped identify this issue at an early
stage, and immediate corrective actions were put in place by increasing the antifoulant dosage to arrest the fouling tendency.
The mitigation strategy applied to the system resulted in stabilization of the backpressure to achieve the plant run-length goal. Stabilizing the backpressure yielded significant savings for the plant.
A lesson learned is to not wait until deterioration of compressor efficiency is observed to develop a comprehensive mitigation
strategy. Although the backpressure was stabilized, a reduction to
the design suction pressure was not possible. The key to achieving the maximum value of an antifoulant program is to apply the
defined strategy at the beginning of run on a clean machine.
Inspection during the scheduled general shutdown showed
that the CT-1 compressor was not severely fouled, despite the
seven-year run. The CT-2 compressor casing and wheels were
found to be very clean. The success at the plant demonstrates
the value of remaining diligent in applying updated fouling mitigation strategies. This approach challenged the existing mindset
of plant limitations, and the plant has a new run-length target of
seven years.
Sharing the experience with the industry is a powerful example of how improved profitability can be achieved without
CAPEX investment in aging plants, and improved fouling control can lead to implementation of operating strategies that were
previously deemed out of reach.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge Walter Militello for his technical expertise and advice during the application of the compressor treatment modifications.
They would also like to thank Dr. Theodore Arnst and Dr. Debby Rossana for their
technical reviews and contributions during the preparation of this article.
LITERATURE CITED
Complete literature cited available online at HydrocarbonProcessing.com.
JESSICA M. HANCOCK joined Nalco Champion in 2009, and is
currently a global marketing manager. She provides technical
support for petrochemical plant process treatment programs
and stewards the development and launch of innovative
treatment programs into the petrochemical industry. She
obtained a PhD in chemistry from the University of Washington.
SEBASTIAN RODRIGUES holds a BS degree in chemistry. He
has 15 years of experience with Nalco Champion, and his
responsibilities include providing technical support to ethylene
producers within the Gulf region.
Special Report

M. RAJASEKHAR, V. D. THAKARE, G. SRIVARDHAN,
V. K. JAYANTI, D. K. R. NAMBIAR, S. R. SINGH and
V. SHUKLA, Engineers India Ltd., New Delhi, India
Boost capacity of SRUs with mixing devices

for oxygen enrichment
The requirement for additional sulfur recovery unit (SRU)
capacity in a refinery may stem from hydroprocessing operations; a refinery expansion project; a shift from lighter to heavier, sourer crudes to improve margins; or the need to remove
extra sulfur content to meet tighter environmental regulations.
To meet this demand, the typical practice has been to enrich
the incoming process air with oxygen (O2 ), thereby reducing
the flow of nitrogen (N2 ) through the SRU and allowing an
increase in the acid gas load that can be handled.
For better utilization of O2 -enriched air, it is important to
ensure complete mixing between the O2 stream and the process air. Incomplete mixing may lead to flame instability in the
main combustion chamber.
The extent of mixing of the two streams in seven different
mixing configurations using computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) is analyzed here. The best of these seven configurations
has been implemented at some of the refineries and is performing to expectations.
SRU operation and capacity augmentation. In refineries,
the SRU is a vital unit that removes gaseous hydrogen sulde
(H2S) from acid gas streams by converting it to elemental sulfur through a modified Claus process.1
In the modified Claus process, the overall reaction is divided into two stepsa combustion reaction followed by the
Claus reaction, as shown in Eqs. 13:
Combustion reaction: H2S + 1.O2 1 SO2 + H2O
(1)
Claus reaction: 2H2S + SO2 1 3S + 2H2O
(2)
Overall reaction: 3H2S(g) + 1.5O2(g) 1 3S(l)+ 3H2O(g)
(3)
Benefits of O2 enrichment. In the event of a refinery expan-
sion or a shift to heavier and sourer crudes to improve margins,

augmenting SRU capacity by adding more trains to meet the
increased load is not always a cost-effective option. Instead,
enriching the process air entering the SRU with O2 proves to
be a successful approach. O2 enrichment is a low-cost process
that increases flame stability and thermal efficiency, with a
negligible space requirement compared to a new SRU.
Besides being a highly flexible method for expanding SRU
capacity, the approach also reduces emissions by decreas-
ing N2 flow into the tail gas treating unit (TGTU). This, in
turn, results in a higher partial pressure of H2S in the amine
absorber, leading to better absorption and lower sulfur emissions. Specic instances can be found where O2 enrichment
has been used solely to increase the furnace temperature.2
SRU capacity enhancement through O2 enrichment.
As per the stoichiometry of the overall reaction (i.e., Eq. 3),
it is evident that 1 kmol/hr of H2S needs 0.5 kmol/hr of O2 .
If all of the O2 is supplied through air, then approximately
1.88 kmol/hr of N2 accompanies the 0.5 kmol/hr of O2 (on
the basis of 21% O2 in air). N2 accounts for more than 55% of
the feed volumetric flow, contributing in no small measure to
the large pressure drop through the SRU.
By increasing the O2 concentration, a drastic increase of
the acid gas flow into the reactor can be realized at the expense
of N2 , as shown in TABLE 1. Therefore, O2 enrichment is a simple yet effective option to overcome SRU capacity limitations
while staying within the same pressure drop limits.
The O2 content in the combustion air can range from 21%
100% through use of appropriate technologies and depending on the level of O2 enrichment. For low-level enrichment
(21%28% O2 ), the O2 feed can be hot-tapped into the
combustion air pipeline while the sulfur plant is in operation,
or through a diffuser, which provides good mixing and completely avoids downtime and associated production losses.
However, this method is not advised for O2 enrichment levels above 28%, as the safe handling of O2 at the resulting high
temperatures requires special burners featuring separate ports
for the entry of air and O2 .3
Care should be taken during O2 enrichment to ensure complete mixing between the O2 and combustion air, or it may
TABLE 1. SRU capacity enhancement vs. level of O2 enrichment
O2 enrichment, %
21
28
50
75
100
Acid gas, H2S
100
121
169
203
225
O2
50
61
85
102
113
N2
188
156
84
33
Total flow
338
338
338
338
338
Flow to reaction furnace, kmol/hr

lead to flame instability in the main combustion chamber.
Any unreacted O2 can result in the formed SO2 being further
oxidized to SO3 , which can then break through to the downstream catalytic convertors and poison the catalyst bed. A
portion of SO3 may also combine with H2O to form H2SO4 ,
which is a highly corrosive agent capable of damaging downstream equipment.2
Many refineries practice direct injection of O2 into the air
line for low-level O2 enrichment without the necessary precautions to prevent improper mixing, and these plants end up
with the aforementioned problems. Mixing devices like static
mixers, oxynators, simple tee mixers and impingement jet
mixers4 are used for continuous mixing of gas/gas streams to
achieve desired levels of mixing, dispersion and heat transfer.
The choice of a suitable mixing device is usually guided by
pressure drop considerations, especially in revamp situations.
Space constraints may also limit the piping length downstream of the mixing device before the air/O2 mixture enters
the main combustion chamber. In such an event, discrimination between various mixing device designs is facilitated by a
tool such as CFD.
The use of CFD simulations to make an informed choice
of a mixing device is illustrated here. Seven different static
mixing configurations were simulated; the best were selected
after ranking them on various parameters, such as the extent
of mixing at various cross-sections downstream of the point of
injection of O2 , pressure drop and ease of installation.
CFD modeling: Assumptions. The flow is assumed to be
steady and incompressible for the CFD simulations. In general, compressibility effects become significant only at Mach
numbers exceeding 0.3. For the flow velocities encountered in
practice, incompressibility can be safely assumed.
FIG. 1. Phase 1 geometric configurations (1, 2 and 3).
FIG. 2. Phase 2 geometric configurations (4 and 5).
Geometrical details. A total of seven different geometrical configurations were simulated in this study, which was carried out in two phases. By way of a preliminary study, three
geometrical arrangements were first explored in Phase 1, and
the best of these was then chosen as the base model to develop
four more variants in Phase 2 studies. In all cases, a pipe length
15 times the diameter of the air pipe and spanning the point
of introduction of O2 into the pipe was modeled in the commercial CFD software.
The dimensions for the main pipe and the O2 inlet pipe,
along with the process operating parameters considered in the
simulations, are as follows:
1. Main pipe for air flow (14-in. nominal bore):
9,500 kg/hr at 0.91 kg/cm2g
2. Branch pipe for O2 introduction (3-in. nominal bore):
500 kg/hr at 1 kg/cm2g.
Phase 1 geometrical configurations. The first arrangement (FIG. 1) considered was a simple T joint in which O2 is
introduced into the main pipe through a branch pipe joined
at an angle of 90. In the second and third configurations (FIG.
1), O2 enters the main pipe through a 90 bend and is released
radially through eight and four rectangular slots of different
dimensions, respectively, provided on the 3-in. pipe.
Phase 2 geometrical configurations. In Configuration 4,
(FIG. 2) as in Configuration 3 (FIG. 1), O2 enters through the
branch pipe and goes through a 1.5-in. diameter, 90 bend.
Further downstream, its velocity is increased by means of a
converging section wherein the pipe diameter is halved; from
that point, it exits tangentially through five slots. Configuration 5 (FIG. 2) differs from Configuration 4 only at the O2 release point, as it contains guide vanes that provide additional
swirl, which promotes better mixing of O2 .
In Configurations 6 and 7 (FIG. 3), O2 is introduced into
the main pipe through four circumferentially placed rectangular and circular
nozzles, respectively. For simplicity, it
has been assumed that the O2 flow distributes uniformly among the four nozzlesin practice, this can be ensured by
providing a suitably sized ring header.
Meshing and boundary conditions.
A fine mesh was used for all of the configurations to ensure that all mesh quality parameters were within specified
bounds. The first three configurations
were simulated with mass flowrates of
9,500 kg/hr of process air and 500 kg/
hr of O2 applied at the respective inlets.
The mass fraction of O2 in the process air
was set at 0.21. The target mass fraction
of O2 for complete mixing was 0.2495,
based on an O2 mass balance.
The best-performing of the three,
along with the four new configurations
of Phase 2, were next simulated at actual
operating conditions from one of the refineriesi.e., a mass flowrate of process
air of 8,390 kg/hr (design value) with

the mass fraction of O2 in the incoming process air at 0.2236
(equivalent to 19.67 vol% O2 ). Mass flowrate of O2 was retained at 500 kg/hr for these simulations. The target mass
fraction of O2 indicating complete mixing works out to be
0.2673 in this case, based on O2 mass balance.
Simulation results and discussion. CFD simulations were
carried out for seven different geometries. Except for the hypothetical case of perfect mixing, at any cross-section downstream of the O2 inlet, the mass fraction of O2 will exhibit a
distribution about the target value computed from an O2 mass
balance. The standard deviation of this distribution provides
a measure of the extent of mixing of the two streams at that
particular location.
It is reasonable to assume satisfactory mixing if the O2 mass
fraction is within 3% of its target value over most of the crosssection. The contour plots of the O2 mass fraction on planes
at respective distances of 1D, 3D, 5D and 7D (D = diameter
of main pipe), from the point of injection of O2 , give a concise
snapshot of the effectiveness of each mixing arrangement.
For Configuration 1 (FIG. 1), the contours of the mass fraction of O2 at these four locations are depicted in FIG. 4. The
range has been limited to 0.20.29 for better clarity. The contours of mass fraction show an accumulation of O2 toward the
top of the pipe, resulting in the stratification of O2 concentration. This accumulation also results in insufficient mixing
along the length of the pipe.
Even after 15D, complete mixing was found to be unachievable in this configuration. The standard deviation of
the spread about the mean value of 0.06 and 0.05 at the 5D
and 7D planes, respectively, confirms the incomplete mixing.
Configuration 2 follows the similar trend of Configuration 1.
For Configuration 3, all of the planes show considerably
improved distribution of O2 , as compared to the previous
configurations. A more uniform concentration of O2 was obtained at the 7D plane. At 7D, the standard deviation is only
0.008, which is nearly 3% of the mean mass fraction on the
plane and meets the defined criteria for complete mixing.
In Phase 2, Configuration 3 was compared with the
four previously discussed configurations. For this purpose,
FIG. 3. Phase 2 geometric configurations (6 and 7).
Enhance Steam
Turbine Performance
Increase reliability and efficiency on your process

steam turbines with the Sentinel FBS, only from Inpro/Seal.
Carbon rings are weak, brittle and wear quickly, making them an ineffective sealing solution by decreasing
equipment reliability and efficiency. The Inpro/Seal Sentinel FBS (Floating Brush Seal) is a drop-in replacement
for existing carbon rings that effectively seals against steam loss, reducing maintenance and downtime,
while also protecting downstream carbon rings from contamination and high pressure.
For more information, visit www.inpro-seal.com or contact +1 309-787-4971.
EXPER T EN G IN EER IN G . PR OV EN R ESU L TS.

Between Configuration 6 and Configuration 7, the latter
is more attractive on parameters like pressure drop in the O2
line and ease of fabrication. As a result of this evaluation, Configuration 7 has been implemented at some refineries and has
been performing to expectations.
LITERATURE CITED
Bishtawi, R. E. and N. Haimour, Claus recycles with double combustion process, Fuel Processing, Vol. 86, No. 3, 2004.
2
Asadi, S., M. T. Hamed Mosavian and A. Ahmadpour, Effect of O2 concentration on the reaction furnace temperature and sulfur recovery using a TSWEET
process simulator, Journal of Chemical Engineering & Process Technology,
Vol. 4, No. 2, 2011.
3
Nasato, E., U. Parekh and P. Morris, Oxygen enrichment of sulfur recovery units
to boost capacity, conserve capital and improve environmental performance,
Sour Oil and Gas Advanced Technology Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 2008.
4
Paul, E. L., Ed., Handbook of Industrial Mixing Science and Practice, John Wiley
and Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, 2004.
1
FIG. 4. Contours of mass fraction of O2 on four planes until x = 2.5 m.
M. RAJASEKHAR is a post-graduate student in chemical

engineering from IIT Roorkee, with more than four years
of experience in CFD and energy efficiency improvement
studies for refineries and petrochemical plants. He works as
a senior engineer at EIL.
FIG. 5. Contours of O2 mass fraction on downstream planes

for Configuration 7.
Configuration 3 simulations were repeated at conditions similar to those considered for the four other geometrical modelsnamely, a mass flowrate of 500 kg/hr for O2 and 8,390
kg/hr for process air, with the mass fraction of O2 in the process airstream set to 0.2236.
As before, a quantitative assessment of the effectiveness
of each of the mixing configurations is facilitated by computing the standard deviation of the spread of O2 concentration
around its mean value at the downstream planes. The deviation on mass fraction of O2 on the 7D plane was observed
to be the lowest for Configuration 4. It is well within the acceptable criteria of 3%, but at the expense of higher pressure
drop (i.e., 729 mbar).
Although Configurations 3, 4, 5 and 6 offer acceptable deviations at the 7D downstream cross-section, with pressure
drops of 113 mbar, 729 mbar, 735 mbar and 79.13 mbar, respectively, Configuration 7 is much simpler and more flexible
in terms of operation and fabrication, and causes minimal
pressure drop of 72.9 mbar. Also, the contours of mass fraction show complete mixing by 7D itself (FIG. 5). O2 is introduced through a ring header sized to ensure uniform distribution of velocity and mass flow to each of the four nozzles at
design, as well as at turndown conditions.
Implementation of new configuration. While both Con-
figuration 3 and Configuration 4 appear to provide a comparable degree of mixing, the latter incurs a higher pressure
drop and is also more difficult to implement in the field.
Among Configurations 3, 6 and 7, the first incurs a higher
pressure drop and higher deviation from the mean compared
to the other two.
V. D. THAKARE is a post-graduate student in chemical

engineering from the National Institute of Technology at Surat.
He works as an engineer at EIL. He is actively involved with
CFD simulations, both for research on new technologies and
troubleshooting operational problems in refinery equipment.
G. SRIVARDHAN is a post-graduate student in chemical

engineering from IIT Kanpur. He works as a senior engineer
at EIL. He has more than six years of experience in CFD projects
and energy efficiency improvement studies for refineries and
petrochemical plants.
V. KAMESH JAYANTI is deputy manager at the R&D division of

EIL. He joined EIL in 2006 after completing his MTech degree
in chemical engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology
(IIT) at Kharagpur. He has more than seven years of experience
in design, adequacy checking for revamp projects,
commissioning and troubleshooting in SRU, TGTU, ARU and O2
enrichment technology for capacity enhancement of the SRU.
D. K. R. NAMBIAR is assistant general manager in the R&D
division of EIL. Dr. Nambiar is a graduate of the Indian Institute
of Technology at Bombay, with a PhD from the Indian Institute
of Science in Bangalore. At EIL, he has been associated with
the establishment of a CFD facility at the R&D center in
Gurgaon. The facility is used to execute projects for both
in-house and external clients.
SHEO RAJ SINGH is a graduate in chemical engineering from
IIT Kanpur. He joined EIL in 1981 and holds the position of
head of R&D. During his long association with EIL, he has
been involved in developing and implementing several
process technologies and computational tools to improve
the design and operation of industrial processes.
VARTIKA SHUKLA is an executive director with Engineers India
Ltd. (EIL), leading its research and development (R&D) division.
She joined EIL after graduating in chemical engineering from
IIT Kanpur in 1988, and was the head of EILs process division
before her current assignment. She has more than 26 years
of consulting experience in the process design of refinery,
gas processing and petrochemical units.
SUPERIOR SPRAY. SERIOUS RESULTS.

OPTIMIZE
VALIDATE
BUILD
PERFORMANCE
DESIGN
TO ORDER
Let us assist with nozzle selection,

determination of injector placement
in the vessel and spray direction to
ensure optimal performance based
on your exact operating conditions.
Prior to fabrication, we can use

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
to validate injector spray performance.
We can also use failure analysis
modeling to verify the injector design
will withstand process conditions such
as thermal stresses, heat transfer,
vortex shedding and more.
Whether you need to cool gas,

dissolve salts in overhead lines
or inject chemicals or torch oil
into a gas stream, we can meet
your needs. Injector types include
hydraulic, gas atomizing and steam
versions equipped with a wide range
of nozzles.
TALK WITH YOUR LOCAL SPRAY EXPERT

TO FIND OUT HOW WE CAN HELP
Companies like Technip, Mustang Engineering, Bechtel, Shell and many others rely on us to
manufacture B31.1, B31.3 and U-Stamp code-compliant injectors and conduct radiographic,
hydrostatic, ferrite tests and more. Let us do the same for you. Our local experts and
Spray Technology Centers are right where you need them in your area.
For unmatched service and support, visit spray.com/localexpert

or call 1.800.95.SPRAY.
| Bonus Report
LNG
Designs for onshore and offshore liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects
are advancing with the rise of floating LNG (FLNG) projects and
small-scale liquefaction technologies, as well as the continued
construction and startup of traditional onshore LNG terminals.
In this bonus report, a cylindrical hull FLNG concept is explored. This
concept is a further development of the proven cylindrical floating
production, storage and offloading (FPSO) design. It provides a more
stable and economical platform for the offshore gas pretreatment
and liquefaction processes. It also introduces a better option for
producing, storing and offloading LNG in challenging operating areas.
Presently, PETRONAS SATU FLNG is moored at the Kanowit gas field, 180 km
offshore Bintulu, Sarawak, Malaysia. With a production capacity of 1.2 MMtpy,
the FLNG facility will change the landscape of the LNG industry and support
PETRONAS global LNG portfolio, as well as enhance its reputation as a preferred
and reliable LNG supplier.
Bonus Report
LNG
L. ODESKAUG, Sevan Marine ASA, Norway; and
S. MOKHATAB, Consultant, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
Cylindrical hull concept improves design

for offshore FLNG production
As demand for natural gas remains high, the development
of offshore stranded gas fields via floating liquefied natural gas
(FLNG) production technology will aid sustained growth.
Offshore FLNG production offers a potential solution for
many projectsin particular, small-scale to mid-scale capacity
(0.5 MMtpy to 3 MMtpy). However, it is only in the last 10
years that a few FLNG projects have progressed to the detailed
design and construction stage. In fact, some special challenges
still exist in design, construction and operation of an offshore
FLNG facility (mainly due to vessel motion, limited space and
weight, facility operations and safety requirements) that require
capital-intensive mitigating designs.
The cylindrical hull FLNG concept, which is a further development of the proven cylindrical floating production, storage
and offloading (FPSO) design, provides a more stable and economical platform for offshore gas pretreatment and liquefaction
processes. The cylindrical hull has significantly less pitch and
roll motions than a conventional ship-shaped hull, and eliminates the need for expensive turret and swivel solutions. Therefore, this design concept introduces a better option for producing, storing and offloading LNG in challenging operating areas.
The development of the cylindrical hull concept is described
with regard to its applicability to offshore FLNG applications.
FLNG background. Floating above an offshore natural gas
field, an FLNG facility will produce LNG at sea. However,
some hurdles must be overcome to make this concept economically viable for offshore FLNG production. The key technical
challenges that a floating gas liquefaction facility must combat
can be summarized below:
Space and weight requirements: Floating systems
are space limited, requiring more compact and lighter
equipment to fit the deck space. These systems have
high equipment density to overcome space and weight
constraints. High equipment density substantially
increases the potential for explosions in the event of
an ignited gas release, which would have higher impact
severities, perhaps escalating to total facility loss.
Facility operations: Bad weather that adversely
impacts operational efficiency should be expected
offshore, and extreme environmental conditions may
require sudden shutdown of the facility.
Feed gas flexibility: The FLNG facility may be required
to handle various feed gas compositions, including
carbon dioxide (CO2 ) and nitrogen (N) contents of

several percent, either during initial operation or at
a future location. This requires increasing the flexibility
and availability of the gas pretreatment processes to
ensure proper operation of the facility without too
many shutdowns or retrofits.
Safety: Design and operation of FLNG facilities
present a set of safety challenges, mainly due to the
potential inventory of hazardous, flammable process and
refrigerant fluids, as well as the consequence of any loss
of containment (resulting from external impacts and
escalation from topside events).
Vessel motion: Vessel motion is a key limiting factor
in deploying FLNG facilities in harsh environments.
Once an FLNG facility is in operation, moving decks
mainly affect the operation and performance of process
equipment having liquid distribution under the effect of
gravity (most notably the separation columns and heat
exchangers) by creating significant liquid maldistribution
that results in a loss of mass or heat transfer efficiency,
process upsets, etc. The seas wave motions may also
cause sloshing in partly filled membrane tanks, leading
to high impact pressures on the thermal insulation. In
addition, safe offloading of LNG product to visiting LNG
carriers under harsh environmental conditions requires
more robust mooring and loading-arm technologies than
those developed for sheltered, land-based ports.
Operation and maintenance: Operating and
maintaining an FLNG facility of any design would
require a substantial workforce. Accommodating,
supplying and providing adequate emergency evacuation
protection for such a large offshore population is
a challenge and would be a major operating cost
component for such a project.
In light of the abovementioned challenges, an essential need
exists to move innovative technical solutions for stranded offshore gas off the drawing board. The key aspect in developing
a successful offshore FLNG project is the proper design of the
hull necessary to provide (1) a seaworthy and stable platform
for production and product offloading, as well as safe accommodation of the crew in a remote, potentially hostile environment; and (2) enough deck area to accommodate the topside
process/utility units, required product storage and offloading
systems, and support facilities.
LNG
The geostationary cylindrical hull concept, as shown in
provides a more stable and economical hull configuration for offshore FLNG production, storage and offloading
than the traditional ship-shaped vessels. It will provide several
advantages compared with conventional ship-shaped hulls, enhancing offshore FLNG project development and operations:
No expensive turret mooring and swivel system.
No need to rotate, even in the harshest environmental
conditions, making it tolerant for weather spreading.
Large LNG storage capacity of approximately 240,000 m.
Large deck area with high load capacity.
Insignificant bending stresses due to global loads on the
hull that eliminate typical wave-induced fatigue loads
and minimize hull deflections, resulting in simplified
topside design.
Favorable motion characteristics (lower pitch and
roll motions), resulting in a stable platform for the
processing units.
Excellent area segregation, resulting in reduced probability
and consequences of major accident hazards. In cases
FIG. 1,
FIG. 1. Cylindrical FLNG production unit.
FIG. 2. Schematic of cylindrical hull arrangement.
where segregation by physical distance is not sufficient,

physical barriers (e.g., fire and blast walls) are provided.
Simple arrangement for lowering seawater intake,
resulting in reduction in size of the cooling water system.
The cylindrical FLNG unit, which has secured approval
from the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), as well as from
DNV-GL, will be capable of operating in water depths of between 30 m and 3,000 m, and in harsh environments such as
extreme cyclonic situations. The unit design is based on environmental load calculations for a 100-yr return storm in the
Barents Sea.
The cylindrical hull design concept has been proven within
the drilling and offshore oil and gas production sectors and
is being considered by several major oil companies for field
development. During 3Q 2015, Sevan Marine was awarded a
feasibility study with an oil major company to explore the use
of cylindrical hull design for a specific FLNG development.
Cylindrical hull design and arrangement. The circular
hull is made up of a double bottom and a double side, varying

in width at the vertical part of the hull. The double bottom has
a slightly larger diameter than the main hull, which gives favorable damping effects (FIG. 2).
The process deck is a fully plated deck and will ensure
proper segregation between the processing areas and the containment system below. The main philosophy is to locate the
part of the process that contains hydrocarbons aft of the deck,
and the non-hydrocarbon systems at the forward part. In the
meantime, the layout of main equipment will follow a homogeneous weight distribution to decrease oscillations and improve stability.
A utility deck (including main utilities) is arranged below
the process deck. The central control room will be protected
inside the living quarters. The flare boom will be located on the
starboard side of the process deck. The FLNG unit will, if possible, be moored so that the flare is downwind of the dominant
wind direction.
The cargo tanks are arranged in the hold space below the double process deck (surrounded by a double bottom and double
sides), and include six LNG, one central LPG and six condensate
storage tanks (FIG. 3). The six LNG tanks (with storage capacity
of between 180,000 m3 and 220,000 m3, and a self-supporting,
prismatic Type B (SPB) or membrane cargo containment system, respectively) will be arranged around the circumference of
the hold space. One tank is arranged in the center for use as an
LPG tank in case of LPG production (with storage capacity of
20,000 m3); it is otherwise used as an LNG tank.
The six condensate tanks (with combined storage capacity of 40,000 m3) are located between the six LNG tanks. The
condensate tanks extend from the top of the double bottom
to the process deck. It should be noted that liquid motions in
tanks are mainly due to roll/pitch and sway/surge motions.
In the case of the cylindrical FLNG unit, the unit is known to
have very reduced motions and, as a consequence, sloshing
loads would be minimized. The remaining heave motion will
introduce some hydrostatic loads, especially due to the height
of the tanks. However, such loads are investigated, and as the
cargo containment system is designed to withstand high sloshing loads, dynamic cargo pressure would not be a critical item.
LNG
Gas processing. The topside processing plant (FIG. 1) comprises the main units illustrated in FIG. 4. All processing units
have been configured as single trains except the liquefaction
unit, which is split into two separate trains.
8P
W.B.
.9
W.B
W.B
.4P
Cond. 1P
LNG2P
LNG3P
2P
W.B.
W.B.1
1P
W.B.5
P
3P
W.B
.10P
Cond. 2P
W.B.6P
.
W.B
LNG1P
Cofferdam
W.B.1P
W.B.12P
W.B.7P
LPG
Cond. AFT
W.B.1S
W.B.12S
LNG2S
0S
Cond. S
W.B
.9
W.B.
8S
W.B.7S
W.B.6S
W.B
.3
.1
W.B
W.B.2
S
LNG1S
LNG3S
11S
W.B.
The LNG offloading area is located aft of the FLNG unit.

Three alternative LNG offloading systems can be used for the
cylindrical FLNG unit: side-by-side (with conventional LNG
carriers), tandem (with dedicated LNG carriers), and the
arc loading system (with conventional LNG carriers). These
would allow loading operations in sea states up to 1.5-m,
5.5-m and 4.5-m significant wave heights, respectively. The arc
loading system is a novel development using an L-shaped dynamic positioning vessel that attaches to the LNG carrier and
guides it during approach and departure, and keeps the LNG
carrier at a safe distance of 150 m200 m from the FLNG
facility during the offloading operation.
The hold space is separated from the process area by the
double, fully plated process deck, acting as a cofferdam between the process deck and the cargo tanks. The hold space
will have a controlled atmosphere to reduce/eliminate the risk
of fire and explosion, and also to avoid condensation and a
humid atmosphere.
The living quarters (LQ) and helideck will be located at
the fore end of the FLNG unit, as far away as possible from the
processing areas. The FLNG unit shall, if possible, be oriented
so that the dominant wind directions will minimize the likelihood of gas release or smoke from a fire drifting toward the
LQ and primary evacuation points from the unit. Due consideration will also be given to the requirements for helicopter
approach, supply boat and export LNG carrier operations,
cold venting and radiation from flaring.
Cond. 1S
5S
W.B.
.4
W.B
FIG. 3. Cargo tank configuration.3
Drier Steam Means Higher Profits

Steam drum design is critical to maintain steam dryness
and water quality for optimum performance of your boiler.
If water is allowed to carryover, then damage can occur
and energy is lost. Carryover is your boilers enemy.
Dyna-Therms high performance steam drums
have been protecting downstream equipment
including superheater tubes and turbines for
decades.
We offer proven designs for the following:
High pressure
Intermediate pressure
Low pressure
Retrofitting of existing drum internals
No steam production rates are too high and no carryover
problems are too difficult for us to solvesteam qualities
of 99.995% with .001 PPM/TDS are possible!
Let us design the steam drum that best fits your system.
Performance is what we guarantee!
High efficiency steam

drums and separators!
281-987-0726
www.dyna-therm.com
SEPARATION AND STEAM DRUM SOLUTIONS SINCE 1961
LNG
and another degree of complexity and safety considerations to
the FLNG unit design.
Dehydration. Molecular sieves are used to dry the gas leaving the AGRU to below 0.1 ppmv to avoid hydrate formation
in the cryogenic systems. They can also be used for removal of
mercaptans and other sulfur compounds (if present in the feed
gas) to meet the product specification of 10 ppm.
The molecular sieve unit utilizes high-quality molecular
sieves in a three-bed adsorber configuration, where two adsorbers are in adsorption mode while the third is undergoing thermal regeneration via a hot, dry gas.
Note that various techniques can be used to reduce the size
and improve the performance of the molecular sieve units in
FLNG projects. For example, using split-bed configurations of
dense molecular sieves can reduce bed voidage and reduce vessel volume. Using high-quality molecular sieves with superior
properties and improved regeneration methods can extend their
lifetime and improve reliability while providing cost savings.
Heavy hydrocarbon removal. Removal of the heavy hydrocarbons (HHCs) from the gas to be liquefied is necessary to
avoid waxing and plugging in the main cryogenic heat exchanger.
The simplest solution is to use a scrub column operating at liquefaction pressure and thermally integrated with the main cryogenic heat exchanger in the liquefaction unit, in which the separated
HHC fraction is recycled to the condensate stabilization unit.
The scrub column is easy to operate and can produce a highpressure residue gas to reduce liquefaction unit horsepower;
however, component separation is not very sharp, and LPG recovery is limited due to the high operating pressure and relatively
high reflux temperature. Increased split, which also raises the efficiency of the LNG production, can be achieved by introducing a
fractionation column. This configuration is selected as base case.
A front-end natural gas liquid extraction unit utilizing conventional turboexpander technology can handle a wide variety
of feed gas compositions and effectively remove HHCs, but it
contains rotating equipment that impacts the capital investment and reliability of the FLNG facility.
Natural gas liquefaction. Two types of refrigeration cycles
(mixed refrigerant and turboexpander) can be proposed for offshore FLNG production using the cylindrical floater. However,
considering the main criteria that influence the commercial acceptance of small- to mid-scale FLNG projects (weight, footprint, vessel motion, cost, equipment count, startup time and
safety), the dual-nitrogen (N2) expander cycle has been selected
as the base case.
A major benefit of using nonflammable N2 as the cycle fluid
is that it is inherently safe and eliminates
Nitrogen-rich
the need for refrigerant makeup and storoffgas to fuel
age of hazardous hydrocarbon refrigerants. This provides the lowest practiLNG to
Liquefaction
Feed gas
storage
cal risk of fire/explosion and allows for
Inlet
Mercury
Acid gas
Dehydration
End-flash
unit (including
separation
removal
removal
more compact equipment spacing on an
scrub column)
FLNG vessel. N2 is also maintained in
Heavy hydrocarbons
LPG (if present
the gaseous phase at all points during the
in feed gas)
refrigeration cycle, so distribution in the
Condensate
to storage
Condensate
To LPG
heat exchangers is not a concern, unlike
stabilization
fractionation
with other refrigeration cycles.
As a result, liquefaction process perFIG. 4. General scheme of gas processing route in cylindrical FLNG unit.
formance is less sensitive to vessel moveOffgas
Field production upon arrival at the FLNG production facility will be processed in a slug catcher, which separates the
gas, hydrocarbon liquids (condensate) and aqueous phase. The
flash gas is further separated in a downstream high-pressure
separator to remove any liquid entrainment prior to entering
the gas pretreatment section. The condensate is processed in
the condensate stabilization unit to reduce the vapor pressure
and allow storage in atmospheric storage tanks.
The following sections discuss proposed gas treatment technologies in treating the sour feed gas to meet LNG feed gas
specifications, as well as the appropriate natural gas liquefaction
process for offshore FLNG applications.
Mercury removal. Removal of mercury is required to avoid
the risks of mercury attack on the brazed aluminum heat exchangers and equipment in the cryogenic section. The mercury
removal unit can be positioned upstream or downstream of the
acid gas removal unit. Installing vessel(s) of non-regenerative
sorbents before the acid gas removal unit removes all the mercury and ensures no mercury contamination through the rest
of the FLNG production system. The mercury-contaminated
wastes should be sent onshore for proper disposal at a hazardous waste facility.
Acid gas removal. The acid gas removal is based on using a
promoted amine solvent process (typically activated methyldiethanolamine), where the amine solvent is continuously regenerated with heat input. In the case that mercaptans (R-SH) and
other organic sulfur components are present in the feed gas, a
mixture of chemical (amine) and physical solvents can be used
to allow for complete CO2 removal, while achieving hydrogen
sulfide (H2S) removal comparable to alkanolamines (amine solvent). Generally, this option will result in an expensive design
with a hydrocarbon coabsorption that may be too large to be acceptable.1 The optimum solution in many cases is the distribution of the mercaptans removal capabilities over the optimized
mixed chemical-physical solvent in the acid gas removal unit
(AGRU), as well as the molecular sieve unit (MSU).
In the case that the feed gas CO2 content is high, membrane
separation is a suitable method for bulk CO2 removal, where
further treatment with amine is required to meet required H2S
and CO2 specifications.
The discharged acid gas stream can be routed to the flare
stack to ensure its safe disposal (in the case of low H2S content),
or reinjected to a suitable reservoir to minimize environmental
impact (if the concentrations and flowrate of acid gas components are too high). However, acid gas injection will require an
additional dehydration/compression system that adds costs
Identify potential motor failures before they happen?

Absolutely.
Motors, like any other machines, are subject to wear and aging. Fortunately, condition monitoring solutions from ABB can
identify possible weaknesses and defects at an early stage, while there is still time to take action.
Life Expectancy Analysis Program (LEAP) assesses the condition of stator winding insulation and evaluates the
insulations remaining life.
MACHsense-R monitors the rotor and bearings of the motor from a remote location, measuring vibration and
temperature across multiple points.
ABB conditioning monitoring services minimizing unplanned downtime, improving reliability and enhancing performance.
So you can identify possible failures before they happen. For more information on condition monitoring services from ABB,
visit new.abb.com/motors-generators/service.
ABB Motors and Generators Service Team

Tel
1-800-Help365
Email US-MotorService@abb.com
LNG
ment in offshore FLNG projects. The N2 expander design is
simple and flexible to changes in feed gas composition, requires
minimal operator intervention, and has good turndown capabilities. An important attribute is the ability to quickly start up
and shut down in a safe and controlled manner.2
Each liquefaction train is driven by a refrigerant cycle compressor powered by an air-cooled aeroderivative gas turbine in
which air cooling is provided by mechanical refrigeration in
standard water chilling packages. The pressure of the liquefied
product is lowered in a flash drum close to the LNG storage
pressure, where N2 (being the lighter component) is flashed
off and removed.
The flashed liquid is then pumped into the LNG storage
tanks. Fuel gas for the liquefaction system drivers and electrical power generation is generated as a mixture of lean-end flash
gas (EFG), natural boiloff gas (BOG) from the LNG storage
tanks and a supplemental fuel gas from the raw feed gas. Excess
BOG/EFG, as well as vapor return during LNG transfer, is recompressed for reliquefaction.
Note: The end-flash N2 removal process is well suited to
feed gases with N2 content of up to 2 mol%, where, for a feed
gas with more N2 content, there is a justification to remove the
N2 content either before or during liquefaction.
FLNG production capacity and performance. The nameplate LNG production capacity for the cylindrical FLNG unit
is 2.45 MMtpy by using the largest-available gas turbines as
drivers in the liquefaction trains and a patented dual-N2 expander cyclea with integrated HHC removal. This is the rundown rate to LNG cargo tanks on a 365-stream-day basis. With
corrections for boiloff loss, transfer loss and availability loss,
the expected offloaded volume will be 2.25 MMtpy.
The plants thermal efficiency, considering only the fuel gas
consumption of the liquefaction systems gas turbines, is 94%.
Total facility efficiency, considering all power consumption in
process systems, marine systems and domestic systems, is 92%
(i.e., 8% of the feed is consumed as fuel, and 92% is converted
to LNG and condensate product).
Takeaway. The cylindrical FLNG production concept offers a safe, reliable and cost-efficient solution to the emerging
FLNG market. It offers a more stable platform for the gas processing plant than the traditional ship-shaped vessels. For all
areas where a turret and swivel arrangement for a ship-shaped
vessel would be required, the geostationary cylindrical hull
eliminates the need for a costly turret mooring and high-pressure swivel system.
The cargo tanks arrangement has been optimized to use a
maximum number of existing standard components for both
the LNG and LPG storage tanks. The SPB cargo containment
system provides better resistance to sloshing loads, while membrane technology leads to an optimum use of the space available.
A large storage capacity is in line with production requirements,
operational good practices and a reduced cargo tank weight.
NOTE
a This dual-N2 expander cycle is used as base case for the topside design and
is based on the proven standard dual-expansion cycle, with optimization that
improves efficiency, availability and operation/startup on large-scale N2 cycles.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Thanks are due to Inga Bettina Waldmann of KANFA Aragon AS (Norway) for
reviewing this manuscript and providing useful comments.
LITERATURE CITED
Mokhatab, S., W. A. Poe and J. Y. Mak, Handbook of Natural Gas Transmission and
Processing, 3rd Ed., Gulf Professional Publishing, Burlington, Massachusetts, 2015.
2
Mokhatab, S., J. Y. Mak, J. Y. Valappil and D. A. Wood, Handbook of Liquefied
Natural Gas, Gulf Professional Publishing, Burlington, Massachusetts, 2014.
3
Odeskaug, L., The cylindrical hull concept for FLNG application, OTC-25703,
Paper presented at the 2015 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas,
May 47, 2015.
1
TRI-CON
TRI-CHECK
TRI-BLOCK
LARS ODESKAUG is the deputy chief operating officer of Sevan

Marine ASA in Norway, with more than 25 years of international
experience in the oil and gas industry at the senior corporate and
project management level. He was the managing director of
Hitec Marine (Norway) from 19942002. From 20022005, he
was the president of Remora Technology AS (Texas, US), and
from 20052011 he was the CEO of TORP LNG AS (Texas, US). Mr.
Odeskaug has given numerous presentations at international energy conferences
and has published several articles related to innovation in the oil and gas industry.
WWW.ZWICK-VALVES.COM
THE NEXT GENERATION
TRI-SHARK
44
TRI-CONTROL
TRI-JACK
SAEID MOKHATAB is an internationally recognized gas

processing consultant who has been actively involved in
several large-scale gas field development projects,
concentrating on design, precommissioning and startup of
processing plants. He has presented on gas processing
technologies worldwide and has authored or co-authored
nearly 250 technical publications, including two well-known
Elsevier handbooks. He has held technical advisory positions in leading
professional journals, societies and conferences in the field of gas processing,
and has received a number of international awards and medals in recognition of
his outstanding work in the natural gas industry.
Process Engineering
and Optimization
A. A. JAIN and A. GUPTA, Reliance Industries Ltd.,
Jamnagar, India
Choose the most appropriate modeling

approach for reactors
The efficient operation and design of any reactor depends
on the know-how regarding the chemical reaction and the hydrodynamics inside the reactor. Mathematical models are developed to understand these complicated phenomena. Model
analysis is carried out to understand the influence of various input parameters on the composition of products and the hydrodynamics inside the reactor. As shown in FIG. 1, such analysis,
along with experimental investigations, plays an important role
in the design and optimization of a commercial reactor.
Various approaches to modeling reactors have been explored.
These models can be divided into three general types: datadriven models, equilibrium/thermodynamic models and ratebased models. The approach to modeling a reactor depends on
the understanding of the hydrodynamics inside the reactor, the
information available with respect to the required kinetics or
equilibrium, and the availability of the required input information. It also depends on the objectives set out before modeling
the reactor through optimization studies, reactor design, scaleup studies, hydrodynamics studies, troubleshooting, etc.
Each modeling approach has its own set of advantages and
disadvantages that are explained here through the examination
of a case study of a fluidized bed gasifier (FBG). This article is
intended to be useful in developing an appropriate strategy to
model reactors.
Data-driven models. The results of data-driven models are
based on data rather than on intuition or on the understanding
of the phenomena. One of the advantages of these models is
that no prior knowledge of the complex phenomena occurring
inside the reactor is required for its formulation.1 Regression
analysis and artificial neural networks (ANNs) are the more
popular types of data-driven models.
Methods based on regression analysis. Here, a data function is assumed. Given two input parameters, x1 and x2 , with
an output of y, a few of the data-fitting functions generally
assumed are:
Multiple linear form, y = a1x1 + b1x2 + f1
Power form, y = a1x1b1x2c1
Exponential form, y = a1 + b1x1c1 + d1x2e1
Quadratic form, y = a1 + b1x1 + c1x2 + d1x1x2
Mixed form, y = a1 + b1 exp(c1 + d1x1 + e1x2).
In these models, the regression coefficients (a1 , b1 , c1 , d1

and e1 ) are extracted using various optimization routines, such
as genetic algorithm, pattern search methods, simulated annealing, etc., by minimization of objective function (Eq. 1yreal,i is
ith experimental data, ysimulated is ith simulated results). The quality of fit is measured by root mean square error (RMSE) (Eq. 2).
Objective function =
n
i=1
( yreal ,i ysimulated ,i )
(1)
Root mean square error (RMSE) =
i=1( yreal ,i ysimulated,i )
(2)
Artificial neural network models. Artificial intelligence
(AI) technology systems are widely accepted and offer an alternative method to tackle ill-defined problems. They have been
used in diverse applications in control, robotics, pattern recognition, forecasting, medicine, power systems, manufacturing,
optimization, signal processing and social/psychological sciences. AI systems comprise areas like expert systems, ANNs,
genetic algorithms, fuzzy logic and various hybrid systems that
combine two or more techniques. The detailed overview of the
algorithm scheme of ANN can be found in literature.2
Geometry
Reactor design
Internals design
Hydrodynamics
Mass/heat/momentum
transfer, etc.
Closure
Mass and energy
balance equations
Kinetic studies
Heterogeneous reactions
Homogeneous reactions
Catalyst activation/
deactivation
Reactor model
Model analysis
Design and
optimization
Design
Model
verification
Pilot plant
Operating
experience
Commercial reactor
FIG. 1. A schematic representation of approach to reactor development.

Process Engineering and Optimization

In an ANN, a certain percentage of the data (typically 70%
75%) is used for training. From the remaining data, a certain
percentage of the data (typically 15% each) is issued for validation and testing of the network. Sigmoid (input layer hidden
layer) and linear (hidden layer output layer) transfer functions (Eq. 3) are used within the network. On this trained, validated and tested network, further simulations are performed to
predict outputs for various cases.
1
S(t)=
(3)
1+e (t )
Equilibrium-based models. The overall mass and energy balance equations are solved using these models, and the main outcomes are the amount, composition and heating values of the
product gases. These models neither take into account the reactor design nor the process and hydrodynamics inside the reactor. The model calculates the chemical equilibrium composition
(most stable composition) by minimization of Gibbs free energy.
One of the key advantages of this model is that no prior
knowledge of complex reactions and hydrodynamics is required. It is computationally inexpensive and can provide a
guideline for process design and evaluation. An equilibrium
model can be used to study the influence of various operating
parameters, as it provides qualitative trends. The two general
approaches for equilibrium models are stoichiometric and nonstoichiometric. While the two approaches are essentially equivalent, the fundamental difference is that stoichiometric models
assume a clearly defined reaction mechanism that incorporates
all the chemical reaction and the major species involved, while
the non-stoichiometric equilibrium model is based on the minimization of Gibbs free energy, where no specific assumptions
on the chemical reactions are made.
The elemental composition of the fuel, which can be obtained from the ultimate analysis and the operating conditions,
Product gases out
Particle level
Cyclone
Solid-gas reactions, pyrolysis,

combustion, gasification
Freeboard
Particles/fly ash
Bubbles
Fluidized bed
Solids feed
Bottom ash
Inlet feed gas
(air/O2/steam)
FIG. 2. A schematic representation of a bubbling fluidized-bed gasifier.
is only required as input to these models. Results of equilibrium

models have shown good agreement with experimental data of
certain reactors because the general assumptions of the models
are in agreement with the actual conditions in the reactor. The
general assumptions for the equilibrium model are that reaction
rates are fast, residence time is long enough to reach equilibrium
state, and the reactor is zero dimensional.
Rate-based models. These models are more realistic compared to the data-driven and thermodynamic models. They take
into account the fluid dynamics, transport processes and chemical reactions inside the reactor. As shown in FIG. 1, depending
on the system, modeling of the chemical reactions involves consideration of heterogeneous and homogenous reactions. Two
types of rate-based models exist: chemical reaction engineering
models (CRE) and computational fluid dynamic (CFD) models. The mass and energy balances are solved in both models.
In the CRE model, the momentum equations are not solved;
instead, semi-empirical correlations are used to describe the fluid dynamics (bubble diameter, bubble velocity, bubble voidage,
velocity of gas in emulsion phase, etc.). In a CFD model, the
momentum equations are explicitly solved. Modeling chemical
reactions (source terms) are common to both models.
Case study. Various prominent coal gasification technologies3 have been developed and are used worldwide, including
moving-bed, fluidized-bed (bubbling and circulating fluidizedbed) and entrained-bed gasifiers. The moving bed and fluidized
bed, among others, are considered more apt for handling highash coal.4 A fluidized bed has certain advantages over a moving
bed in terms of scaling up and environmental issues. Movingbed gasifiers generate tarry products, whereas a fluidized-bed
gasifier yields only gaseous product as the volatiles are cracked,
facilitating more environmentally friendly products and easier
plant operation.5 The advantages of a fluidized-bed gasifier are
well documented.6 Good gas-solid contact, excellent heat transfer characteristics, better temperature control, large heat storage capacity, a good degree of turbulence and high volumetric
capacity are a few prominent advantages.
A schematic representation of a bubbling fluidized-bed continuous gasifier (BFBG) is shown in FIG. 2. Typically, in a BFB
continuous gasification of coal, the coal particles (0 mm5 mm)
are continuously fed into the BFB reactor at a point above the
gas distributor. These particles react with the gasifying, and fluidizing, agentssteam, air/oxygen, carbon dioxide (CO2 )
to produce gases that are primarily composed of syngasi.e.,
carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrogen (H2 )at temperatures
above 800C.
During this operation, multiple reactions (gas-solid heterogeneous and gas-gas homogenous) occur simultaneously in the
reactor. The heterogeneous reactions consist of gas-solid reactions, such as pyrolysis, char combustion and char gasification,
while the homogenous reactions consist of the water-gas shift
reaction, H2 combustion, etc. The product gases coming out of
the bed are passed through a cyclone separator for separation of
elutriated solids. The product gases are further treated using a
gas cleaning system. The superficial gas velocity varies between
three to nine times the minimum fluidization velocity. The key
challenges in the modeling of a BFBG are complex reaction ki-

netics, gas-solid fluid dynamics and particle behavior. The two
main output parameters that gauge the performance of a gasifier
are:
Inlet carbon Outlet carbon
Inlet carbon
Chemical energy
Cold gas efficiency (CGE) =
Coal energy
Carbon conversion (X) =
Chemical energy (MJ/kg) = y H2 141.80 + y CO10.08 + y CH4 55.58

Coal (thermal) energy (MJ/kg) = 33.855C + 144.9H + 10.5S
Here, C, H and S = weight % content, dry basis; and y is the

mass fraction of gases.
A set of 25 experimental data obtained for a high-ash Indian coal in a pilot-scale setup were simulated using the various
modeling approaches. Apart from the operating conditions of
the gasifier, the main input parameters for a gasifier model are
the ultimate and the proximate analysis of the coal (C, H, N, S
and O, volatile matter, fixed carbon, ash and moisture).
Regression analysis. The experimental data could not fit into
any of the regression models, and the relationships between the

input and output parameters were too scattered to fit any of the
models. Similarly, regression-based models (multiple linear regression, power regression analysis) with six inputs from a dataset of 106 experiments (fixed carbon, volatile matter, mineral
matter, air feedrate/kg of coal, steam feed/kg of coal and tem-
perature and output in these cases were the rates and heating
values of the product gases) were developed.7 The model results
did not yield a good match with the experimental data.
Artificial neural network. An ANN model (FIG. 3) that indicated a good match with the experimental data was developed.
The model was later used for sensitivity analysis (effect of carbon
content in coal, effect of temperature, etc.) that did not show the
expected results, even qualitatively. The lack of anticipated results
is due to the lack of a large set of experimental data for training the
ANN model. Similarly, a neural network was created8 with eight
inputs with a single hidden layer, and output of CO, CO2, H2 and
methane (CH4). The network was trained and validated with 18
experimental data obtained from literature for a BFB wood gasifier. It indicated that the developed network showed a good match
with the experimental data, although no results of sensitivity
analysis using the developed model were discussed in the work.
To train an ANN model to be used for optimization studies, an exhaustive set of data is required. ANNs cannot be used
to study effects of parameters if they are out of the range of the
training data and, therefore, are not useful for scale-up studies.
Equilibrium model. Simulation results with a non-stoichiometric approach for calculating the equilibrium compositions
were completed using a commercial process simulation software.
The results showed an error margin of between 20% and 40%
(FIG. 4) with respect to experimental CGE, while the carbon

conversion calculated at equilibrium was always 100%. These
results did not match with the actual experimental results, while
the carbon conversion ranged between 60% and 90%. Although
the model did not match the actual experimental data, it gave
a fair indication of the operational limits and the qualitative
change in the outlet gas composition and generation rate with
changes in various operating parameters. Due to the high temperature at which entrained-flow gasifiers operate, they have
shown gas composition nearly equal to the equilibrium compositions.10 For a BFBG, the modified equilibrium models may
prove to be useful, as shown in the results of previous studies.11
Input layer (i)
C
H
Hidden layer
Output layer
Weights
Wj,i
S
O
Wk,j
VM
j=1
k=1
FC
M
CGE
j=2
k=2
T
O
St
FIG. 3. ANN model structure to predict carbon conversion (x) and

cold gas efficiency (CGE) from coal gasification in a BFB gasifier.
1.0
CGE (CRE)
20 error
CGE (EM)
40 error
0.9
Simulated results, CGE
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Experimental results, CGE
0.8
0.9
FIG. 4. A schematic parity plot comparing the errors obtained

for the simulation of 25 experiments with a CRE model and the
equilibrium model12 adapted for CGE.
1.0
Rate-based models. A CRE model based on the two-phase
theory12 showed a good match with the experimental data

(FIG. 4), with < 20 % error. The two-phase theory assumes
that the fluidized bed is divided into the emulsion and bubble
phases. The emulsion phase consists of solids and the volume of
gases required to keep the solids at minimum fluidization velocity (Umf ), while the bubble phase consists of extra gases flowing
through the bed.
Other theories exist to model a BFBG. They estimate the
fluid dynamics (bubble diameter, bubble velocity, bubble voidage, velocity of gas in emulsion phase, etc.) using different correlations. Nine chemical reactions (four heterogenous and five
homogenous) have been considered in this model. The kinetics
for these chemical reactions have been taken from data reported in literature.13 Experimental studies using TGA, autoclave, a
fixed-bed reactor, etc., can be conducted to estimate the kinetics
for a particular coal. The temperature profiles and the hydrodynamic profile inside the reactor showed a good match with the
experimental results. This model was then used for sensitivity
analysis (including pressure effects) and scale-up studies.
In the past decade, several CFD models for various reactors
have been developed. In the case of a BFBG, based on how the
solids are treated, two major CFD models exist: if the solid has
been assumed as a continuum, then the Eulerian framework
is applied to describe the motion of the solids; and if the solid
particles are individually tracked, then the equation of motions
are solved to track the motion of particles. The gas phase is described by the Eulerian framework and modeled similarly to
single-phase flow, wherein interaction with the solid phase is accounted for by an additional term.
The two approaches are termed as Eulerian-Eulerian (EE) and
Eulerian-Lagrangian (EL) models.14 The source terms (kinetics)
are the same in both the CRE and CFD models, but the main distinction is the handling of the fluid mechanics. In the EL model,
the solid phase exchanges mass, momentum and energy with the
gas phase, where each individual particle is solved in a Lagrangian frame of reference. The discrete element/particle method inspired by molecular dynamics is commonly applied. In a DEM/
DPM model, the collision between particles may either be based
on a hard-sphere or soft-sphere approach.15 Closure relations in
these models are not simple; several equations with semi-empirical parameters must be solved simultaneously. A comparative
analysis of CFD models for a BFBG can be found in literature.14
A CFD model was not formulated due to two main reasons:
it was too computationally intensive, and it involved an extended
simulation time (a BFBG involved complex gas solid hydrodynamics coupled with several chemical reactions). A CRE model
proved a robust computational tool in attaining the objectives for
design/scale-up/optimization studies of a BFBG. In literature,
researchers have simulated a bench-scale BFBG using CFD and
have shown a good match with the experimental data. The simulation time for CRE models is significantly less when compared
to CFD models. The coupling of CRE models with CFD modelswherein the insights (flow and mixing knowledge) obtained
from a CFD model are utilized in quantifying flow and mixing in
a CRE modelhave been reported.16 Similarly, the use of ANNs
to estimate the kinetics in a rate-based model has also been reported. A summary of the advantages and disadvantages of the
various approaches to model the reactor are listed in TABLE 1.
ADVERTORIAL
Shell Global Solutions
WHERE COULD YOU

BE LOSING MONEY?
In recent years, while working with customers around the globe, we have identified several areas in which
businesses like yours could find further opportunities to drive out costs and capture additional margin.
1. COST BASE The pressure to reduce costs is relentless.
However, we lack the tools to monitor and control energy, utility and
waste management costs fully, and I do not believe that our staff
are fully aware of the effects of their actions on plant profitability.
Consequently, we regularly exceed our operating budget.
Realistic targets are vital. It may be useful to evaluate how your
operation performs compared with other similar assets; this can
provide a road map for future improvement projects. Furthermore,
there are tremendous insights to gain from seeking out best practices
and key lessons from other refineries.
2. MAINTENANCE AND AVAILABILITY Any attempt
to enhance the reliability of our assets severely affects our cost
reduction drives. My mandate is to cut costs and simultaneously
improve reliability, but these seem to be conflicting objectives.
The industrys high performers in this area are using various tools and
techniques to strike a balance between good, safe maintenance
practices and higher margins. These include introducing risk-based
rather than time-based processes that focus on the most critical areas
so that you can plan your preventive maintenance to achieve the
desired plant availability for optimal effort.
3. UNIT UTILISATION In our part of the world, the market
for middle distillates is booming and the margins are high, but
throughput constraints on our hydrocracker mean that we cannot
take maximum advantage of this, and we do not have the capital
required to build a new unit.
reactor internals, can often unlock yield improvements for relatively

minor capital expenditure.
4. CRUDE FLEXIBILITY Of course there are cheaper crudes out
there, but they are heavier, sourer and more contaminated. I have
concerns about their impact on our assets, so I will only process the
conventional crudes that we have tried and tested.
Because crude feedstock is such a large component of a refinerys
costs, there are substantial benefits from replacing a small part of
the crude slate with alternative, cheaper crudes. Before changing
the crude diet, it is essential for a refiner to take advice on key
issues such as hardware constraints and crude sourcing, but this can
be an effective way to cut costs for minor capital expenditure if the
risks are mitigated.
In todays volatile refining sector, cost reduction and

margin improvement have become business imperatives
for many refiners. By applying tried-and-tested techniques,
and successful practices from other refineries around
the world, you may be able to identify opportunities to
maintain or enhance your competitiveness. To learn more,
please visit:
In recent years, there has been a strong trend in the industry towards
revamps rather than grassroots capital projects, chiefly because they
offer an enhanced return on investment. One of the simplest types
of revamps, installing higher-activity catalysts and latest-generation
www.shell.com/rapid

TABLE 1. Approaches to model a reactor (Case study: BFBG, adapted)17
Approach
Essential aspects
Results
Advantages
Disadvantages
Types
Data-driven
models
No governing
equations
Outlet gas
composition,
temperature and
carbon conversion
No understanding
of any complex
process in the reactor
is required
1. No insights into the

complex relationships
between the input and
output parameters
2.Quality and quantity
of data is required for
building a robust model
1. Regression analysis
2.Artificial neural
networks (ANN)
3.Fuzzy rule-based
systems (FRBS), etc.
Thermodynamic
models
1. Based on Gibbs
minimization theory
2.Calculates equilibrium
gas composition
and temperature
Outlet gas
composition,
temperature
and carbon
conversion
No understanding of
any complex process
in the reactor is
required
No insight into the

hydrodynamics of
the reactor
1. Equilibrium models
(EM)
2.Modified-equilibrium
models (MEM), etc.
Chemical
reaction
engineering
(CRE) models
1. Based on first
principles, solves the
mass and energy
balance equations
2.Instead of solving the
momentum equations,
semi-empirical
correlations are used
3.Ideal reactors/
combination of ideal
reactor assumptions
for phases (CSTR, PFR,
compartments)
Profile of gas/
solid species
composition,
temperature and
hydrodynamics
across the reactor
1. Computationally
less intensive than
CFD models
2.Can be used to
study the influence
of various input
parameters on the
performance of the
reactor
3.Gives sufficient
details for
engineering
applications
Flow structure and

the range of applicability
depends on the
correlations used
1. Davidson-Harrison
model (DHM)
2.Kunii-Levenspiel
model (KLM), etc.
Computational
fluid dynamic
(CFD) models
1. Mass, energy and

momentum balance
equations are solved
2.Constitutive relations
and closure laws are
adopted
Profile of gas/
solid species
composition,
temperature and
hydrodynamics
across the reactor
Useful for exploring

in-depth hardware
details
1. Computationally very
expensive and timeconsuming solution
2.Uncertainty of various
parameters
3.Availability of in-depth
experimental data to
validate the model results
1. Eulerian-Eulerian
model (EEM)
2.Eulerian-Lagrangian
model (ELM), etc.
Conclusions and summary. The relative advantages and
disadvantages of various approaches to model a reactor were

critically analyzed, and suggestions for potential improvements
in these models have been presented. An ANN is useful when
a large amount of quality data is available to train and test the
neural network. It is also useful when sufficient details of the
hydrodynamics and the kinetics involved in the reactor are not
known. It is not useful for scale-up studies of a reactor.
For reactors where high residence time and rapid chemical
reactions are seen, an equilibrium model may be sufficient to
model the reactor. In the case of a BFBG, an equilibrium model
did not show a good match with experimental data, but it did
provide a fair indication on the operational limits. It is also useful in understanding the qualitative change with alterations in
input parameters.
Results with rate-based models, where the hydrodynamics
and the chemical reactions in the reactor are taken into account,
best described the experimental data of a BFBG. These models
provide sufficient knowledge for the scale-up and optimization
of the reactor.
CFD models are computationally intensive, especially for the
simulation of commercial-scale reactors. However, with the availability of cheap computational power, use of this tool to simulate
reactors is increasing. Models where flow and mixing knowledge
obtained from a CFD model are utilized in quantifying flow and
mixing in a CRE model have been reported in literature.
LITERATURE CITED
Szen, A., E. Arcakliolu and M. zkaymak, Turkeys net energy consumption,
Applied Energy, Vol. 81, No. 2, 2005.
2
Kalogirou, S. A., Artificial intelligence for the modeling and control of combustion processes: A review, Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, Vol. 29, No.
6, 2003.
3
Grbner, M., Industrial coal gasification technologies covering baseline and high-ash
coal, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co., Weinhein, Germany, 2015.
4
Collot, A. G., Matching gasification technologies to coal properties, International
Journal of Coal Geology, Vol. 65, 2006.
1
Complete literature cited available at HydrocarbonProcessing.com.

ANKIT A. JAIN is a research scientist in the refining research
and development department of Reliance Industries Ltd.
His current area of research is the modeling of multiphase
flows and reaction engineering, and he also has experience
working as a process design engineer. Dr. Jain earned his
BS degree and PhD in chemical engineering from the
National Institute of Technology (NIT) at Surat and the
Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) at Bombay, respectively.
AJAY GUPTA is the assistant vice president and head of the
fixed-bed process development group of refining research
and development at Reliance Industries Ltd. in Jamnagar,
Gujarat, India. He earned his BS, MS and PhD degrees in chemical
engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT)
at Delhi. His experience includes the modeling and simulation
of chemical processes; implementation of advanced process
control strategies in fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) and crude distillation units in
several refineries; development of reactor models for various chemical processes,
including effect of scale; and the application of computational fluid dynamics
for solving problems in the petroleum refining and petrochemical industries.
GasProcessingConference.com
AMERICAS
September 1314, 2016

Norris Conference Centers CityCentre
Houston, Texas
Explore the latest gas processing developments,

from field gathering to plant design to LNG technology,
at the 2016 GasPro Americas Conference
Register today for the must-attend event
for the gas processing industry
Join us at the GasPro Americas Conference, scheduled September 1314, 2016 at
Norris Conference Centers - CityCentre in Houston, Texas, USA. The 2016 event
has 18 sessions organized into three tracks that will benefit CEOs, COOs, CTOs,
directors, country managers, regional directors, project managers, technical
directors, and heads of engineering for technology and operating companies.
This conference will focus on gas supply, procurement, purchasing, transportation,
trading, distribution, operations, safety, the environment, regulatory affairs,
technology development, business analysis, LNG, and more. All segments of
the gas processing industrythe upstream, midstream and downstream
sectorswill be discussed.
Session topics include:
The State of Natural Gas in the Americas
Water Treatment
Gas Treating
Separation/Dehydration
Cryogenics: Rejection, Ethane,
Methane and Nitrogen
Syngas Production and Utilization
USB Sponsor:
IOT and the Future of Big Data

for the Natural Gas Industry
NGL Recovery
Fractionation
LNG/FLNG
Liquefaction/Regasification
Metering/Custody
Host Sponsors:
Save 15%
on Registration
when you use code: HP16
Operators
eligible for
a free pass!
Contact Melissa Smith, Events Director,
at Melissa.Smith@GulfPub.com
or + 1 (713) 520-4475 for details.
To attend,
sponsor or
exhibit, visit
Exhibitors:
Supported by:
Industry Insights Knowledge Sharing Access to Experts
Tuesday, September 13 Agenda

7:308:30 a.m.
Registration and Continental Breakfast
8:308:35 a.m.
Opening Remarks: Adrienne Blume, Executive Editor, Hydrocarbon Processing and Editor, Gas Processing
Session 1: The State of Natural Gas in the Americas

8:3510 a.m.
Speakers Include: Lee Nichols, Editor-Associate Publisher, Hydrocarbon Processing

and Construction Boxscore Database
Anne Keller, Manager, NGL Research, Wood Mackenzie
1010:30 a.m.
10:30
11:45 a.m.
11:45 a.m.12:45 p.m.
12:452 p.m.
Coffee and Networking Break
Session 2: Condensate Removal
Session 3: Water Treatment /

HSE
Speakers Include:
Speakers Include:
Haiming Jin, Senior Process

Engineer, SNC Lavalin
Chuck Miller, Director-Global Natural

Gas Processing Sales & Marketing,
Emerson Process Management
Guof Chen, Senior Process Engineer,

Joule Processing
2:304 p.m.
Dewitt Dees, Chief Executive Officer,

RWL Water North America
Session 5: Gas Treating
Session 6: Cryogenics:
Rejection - Ethane, Methane,
Nitrogen
Session 7: Flaring / Emissions
Speakers Include:
Speakers Include:
Speakers Include:
David B. Engel, Managing Director,

Nexo Solutions
Scott Schroeder, PE, Senior

Technical Consultant
Gas Processing, Advisian
Martin Dean Layfield, Global

Segment Leader, Gas Value Chain,
DNV GL
Stephen Morgan, Sales Manager,

Chart Industries
Donald Kendrick, Senior Vice

President of Technology,
ClearSign Combustion Corporation
Jennifer Dyment, Marketing

Manager, AspenPlus, AspenTech
Rafael Aguilar, Senior APC Engineer,

Honeywell Process Solutions
Session 8: Separation /
Dehydration
Session 9: Syngas Production

and Utilization
Session 10: IOT and the Future

of Big Data for the Natural Gas
Industry
Speakers Include:
Speakers Include:
Speakers Include:
Shabbir Husain, Senior Process

Engineer, Chevron Energy
Technology Company
Esben Lauge Sorensen,

Syngas Technology Specialist,
Haldor Topsoe, Inc
Hong Qin, GHG Data Compliance

Lead, Wood Group Mustang
Laura Aiken, Project Engineer,

Bechtel Corporation, USA
Robert Schuetzle, Chief Executive

Officer, Greyrock Energy
Ray Ozdemir, Framergy, Inc

4 p.m.
Steve Arendt, Vice President,

Global Oil, Gas & Chemicals Sector,
ABS Group
Lunch
Scott Alvis, Vice President, Business

Development, Optimized Gas
Treating, Inc
22:30 p.m.
Session 4: Best Practices /

Operations / Project
Management
Christopher Molnar, Vice President,

Industrial Heaters & Systems,
Chromalox
Marcus Wagner, Chief Executive
Officer, AcctTwo
Closing Remarks: John Royall, President and Chief Executive Officer, Gulf Publishing Company
Register at GasProcessingConference.com
Trends & Developments Networking Best Practices

Past Attendees
Include:
Chevron
WorleyParsons Group
Linde Process Plants
Deloitte
Stabilis Energy
Chart Energy & Chemicals

Bechtel Corporation
Optimized Gas Treating
Emerson
Framergy
Enbridge
Atlas Copco
SNC Lavalin
Advisian
Sterne Agee
DNV GL
Honeywell UOP
ClearSign Combustion
Nexo Solutions
Chromalox
AspenTech
Greyrock Energy
Alta Mesa Services
Williams
GasTech Engineering LLC
DOW Chemical
SGC Energia
BP
...to name a few.
Wednesday, September 14 Agenda

7:308:30 a.m.
Registration and Continental Breakfast
8:308:35 a.m.
Opening Remarks: John Royall, President and Chief Executive Officer, Gulf Publishing Company
Session 11: The Future of LNG in America

8:3510 a.m.
1010:30 a.m.
10:30 a.m.
12:20 p.m.
Speakers Include: Andrew Slaughter, Executive Director, Deloitte Center for Energy Solutions, Deloitte
Jason Feer, Global Manager, Poten & Partners
Session 12: LNG / FLNG
Session 13: Fractionation
Session 14: NGL Recovery
Speakers Include:
Speakers Include:
Speakers Include:
Steve Stump, President,

Stabilis Energy
Dr. Rameshwar Hiwale,

Principal Process Engineer,
Linde Process Plants, Inc
Joseph Lillard, Engineering and

Product Manager, Atlas Copco
Jason M. Manning, Principal Process

Engineer, Black & Veatch
Maurice Zickie Allgrove, Vice
President-Transport, America,
Advisian
Sachin Joshi, Technology Process

Manager, GTC Technology US, LLC
Ben Adamson, Engineering Director,

Refrigeration Engineering
International Pty Ltd
Kevin Currence, Technology Manager
Gas Processing, Black & Veatch
Danielle Goldbeck, Process
Engineer, Linde Engineering North
America, Inc
12:201:20 p.m.
1:202:35 p.m.
Lunch
Session 15: Liquefaction /

Regasification
Session 16: Metering / Custody
Session 17: Alternative

Applications / GTL
Speakers Include:
Speakers Include:
Speakers Include:
Thomas Quine, President,

Northstar Industries LLC
Daniel Hackett, Business

Development Director-Ultrasonics,
Emerson Process Management
Robert Walsh, Senior Vice President,

Intrexon Corporation
George Arnett, Systems Sales

Manager, Chart Energy & Chemicals
Dr. Delmar Trey Morrison,
Principal Engineer, Exponent, Inc
2:353:05 p.m.
Seshasai (Sai) V. Yesantharao,

Solutions Architect, Honeywell
Advanced Solutions
Session 18: Policy: The Importance of Legislative and Regulatory Compliance

3:054:30 p.m.
4:30 p.m.
Speakers to be announced
Closing Remarks: John Royall, President and Chief Executive Officer, Gulf Publishing Company
Registration to the two-day

conference includes:
Access to keynote addresses and technology presentations
organized in three tracks
Breakfasts, lunches and refreshment breaks
Access to sponsors and exhibitors throughout conference
Conference proceedings (post-event)
Save 15%
on Registration
when you use code:
Admission
Rates for Single
Attendee
Early Bird
(by August 16)
Regular
Admission
$500
$600
Prices listed above are in $USD. Group discounts available.

Contact Melissa Smith for details.
HP16
Want a free pass to GasPro?

Employees of operating companies, E&P companies,
or refiners may be eligible to attend this event for free.
To see if you qualify for a free pass, contact Melissa Smith,
Events Director, at Melissa.Smith@GulfPub.com
or + 1 (713) 520-4475.
Sponsorship and Exhibit Opportunities

The 2016 GasPro Conference provides an excellent
forum to connect face-to-face with top operators
and technology leaders in the gas processing industry.
Benefits of sponsoring/exhibiting include:
Increase brand awareness
Network face-to-face with decision makers
Attend the conference sessions for free
Generate new sales leads
Contact Melissa Smith, Events Director, at Melissa.Smith@GulfPub.com
or + 1 (713) 520-4475.
Process Engineering
and Optimization
J. C. GENTRY and M. BHARGAVA, GTC Technology
US LLC, Houston, Texas; and M. J. BINKLEY,
GTC Process Equipment Technology, Euless, Texas
DistillationThen and now

Distillation is the most often used means to separate two
or more components, exploiting the physical properties of
different boiling points. Separation by distillation is completed in stages with chemical equilibrium at each point in
the process to build a composition profile. The products are
taken out at the peak of the composition, usually at the top
and bottom of a tower, with intermediate levels of composition between the extremes.
Separating components to increase value. The main
reason systems are designed to separate components is that
separated components have more value than the mixture of
components. The raw material of hydrocarbons is a mixture,
as in crude oil or natural gas condensate. Chemical intermediates and reaction products will have a mix of byproducts or
unreacted components. Separating these byproducts or components permits efficient recycle or use of products as purified substances.
Another reason for separating components is to prepare a
feed for further processing. An example is removing lights and
heavies from an isomerization unit feed. While separations
are used in virtually all chemical process systems, distillation
is the most prominent. It requires a large consumption of energy and capital expenditure, but it remains the most widely
used separation technique because it is well-understood and
proven in a wide spectrum of applications.1
Many academics have developed heuristicsa hands-on
interactive approach to learning that enables a person to learn
something for themselvesfor designing separation systems,
and others have proposed algorithms for finding the perfect
method to design a separation system. These methods are
useful for training purposes, but often get lost or overlooked
within the urgent schedule of producing a process design.2,3
Most designs are created with a series of practical constraints, such as:
Project schedule
Available plot space
Flexibility to handle feedstock variations
Easy understanding and control of operations.
With this in mind, some simplified ideas are proposed here
that build upon previous work, but which may be more practical and useful to todays designers.
Maintain component separation. It seems obvious to fol-
low the basic principle, Once components are separated, do

not remix them again. However, numerous commercial operations do, in fact, have remixing embedded in the process.
One classic example was a C8 aromatics processing plant that
used super-fractionation to separate the ethylbenzene and pxylene ( EB:pX = 1.06). The feed to this unit originated from
three types of processes:
Hydrogenated pyrolysis gasoline comprising
approximately 60% EB
Catalytic reformate comprising approximately 18% EB
Aromatics transalkylation comprising 1%2% EB.
The source material also had benzene/toluene (B/T) fractions, combined in upstream units and operating in parallel to
remove the BT cut. The material then proceeded to a series of
two major EB fractionators with a total number of 600 trays to
remove the ethylbenzene. The first system of three towers in
series concentrated the stream to approximately 50% EB purity. The final two towers in series produced an EB product of
99.3% purity (FIG. 1).
Upon examination of the fundamental separations taking
place in the unit, the stream value was downgraded by the upstream mixing, as the most difficult components to separate
were equalized by combining the streams containing different
Pygas, 60% EB
50% purity
Reformate, 18% EB
300
trays
#1
300
trays
#2
Xylenes
Xylenes
99.3% EB
TDP, 1.5% EB
FIG. 1. Key components are remixed in a series of two major EB

fractionators, with a total number of 600 trays to remove the
ethylbenzene.

EB content. These streams were separated again at substantial
cost. The remedy was to simply segregate the streams from an
upstream fractionation train, permitting complete shutdown of
one of the major super-fractionation towers (FIG. 2).
In older plants, process designs are often created out of expediency and morphed into an inefficient configuration after the
original construction. Evaluating complex systems helps eliminate instances of separation that lead to remixing.
Complete easy separations first. One of the classic heuristics advocated by most scholars, this advice follows common
sense.4 It is natural to follow the path of least resistance.
In a scientific view of multi-component distillation, the easy
first approach is described by a pre-fractionation system followed by a main fractionation system. The pre-fractionation
system removes the clutter, placing the extraneous components into proper zones better suited for broad separations;
Pygas, 60% EB
Reformate, 18% EB
300
trays
#1
300
trays
#2
Xylenes
Xylenes
99.3% EB
TDP, 1.5% EB
FIG. 2. Segregating the streams from an upstream fractionation train

avoids remixing.
A
A,B
B
A,B,C
B,C
C
Prefractionator arrangement
FIG. 3. A prefactionator arrangement places the extraneous
components into proper zones more suited for broad separations.
meanwhile, the main fractionation system will separate the more

difficult components with the closest relative volatility (FIG. 3).
The conventional approach to the three-component separation is to carry out the separations in a series operation using
two fractionation columns. The obscure downside to this approach is the back-mixing of components that takes place in
the bottom of the first column (FIG. 4).
The middle boiling product is concentrated at an intermediate point within the column, only to be downgraded to a lower
concentration at the bottom of the column. Therefore, components that were previously separated have been recombined.
A convenient way to circumvent this thermodynamic inefficiency and follow the concept of prefractionation is to use a
dividing wall within the column to separate the vessel into different functional zones (FIG. 5).a
Dividing wall column (DWC) distillation is not new to the
field of chemical engineering; it traces its roots to 1935. However, DWC technology has failed to achieve popularity due to a
lack of understanding about what is happening inside the column, difficulty in simulating the designs and general inertia in
adopting new technologies. With better understanding, faster
computer simulators and robust mechanical designs, this hesitancy is gradually changing.
Consider functional separation. Many applications can
benefit from DWC technology and alternative types of thermal coupling. The principle of a DW to create separation zones
presents other options for operations inside a column. Consider
the case of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) recovery from refinery fuel gas. The two conventional approaches to remove C3
(or C3/C4) from a mixture of C1 to C5+ components are distillation with refrigeration, and absorption into a heavy oil followed
by stripping of the gases from the absorbing material.
Refrigerated distillation has an additional cost for the refrigeration duty, high-pressure operation and expensive equipment. Absorption followed by stripping requires two columns
to make the separation. The absorption section also builds a
concentration peak of the intermediate component, only to
downgrade the concentration that was achieved by mixing with
the heaviest components (in violation of no remixing). This
process has introduced a new method for making the absorption and stripping in the same column by using a dividing wall.
In this case, the wall separates the top of the column into two
zones: absorption and stripping. The column operates at moderate pressure, with cooling water as the cold utility. The absorption
oil captures the C3+ components and allows the C2 components
to escape as a vapor without condensing. The C3 (or C3/C4)
components are brought to the bottom of the wall near a peak
in composition, where they are passed to the stripping section of
the column on the other side of the wall for removal into the overhead as a condensed liquid product. Ideally, sufficient heavy components in the feed stream that can be recycled to the top of the
absorption zone are available so that no external feed material is
used. As shown in FIG. 6, this method is applied to LPG recovery.b
The general concept of absorption and stripping in the same
column with a TDW can be applied where a non-condensable
stream is mixed with a heavy oil product, such as a hydroprocessing stabilizer.c Different variants of the concept can be used in
revamp situations of existing two-column systems.
Tray number
Column 2
Column 1
Functional separation extended.

Thermodynamic inefficiency as component B is concentrated, then
Continuing with the concept of keeping
diluted within the first column and separated again in a second column
0
components separated, certain applicaA
tions exist where two streams are com5
bined into a common fractionation sys10
Feed
tem out of convenience to separate some
15
(A,B,C)
B
light and heavy components. These
20
grouped fractions may not have the same
25
composition and would be more valuB
30
able if kept segregated. Rather than have
(B,C)
35
two separate fractionation systems, a top
Remixing
40
dividing wall column (TDWC) can be
45
used to segregate the streams in the same
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
column into two overhead products with
Composition: Mole fraction
C
a common bottom product.
Remixing leads to thermodynamic inefficiency
One example is xylene fractionation
within a paraxylene complex. If the FIG. 4. Back-mixing in the bottom of the first column is one of the downsides of separations
paraxylene recovery section is based on in a series operation.
selective adsorption, then a strict requirement exists to keep the C9+ components out of the C8
A
fraction. Multiple feeds enter into a common xylene tower to
accomplish the C9+ removal. However, the C8 fractions will
have different levels of EB or pX comingled together inside
the tower, only to be separated again in the adsorption section
of the plant at a higher cost.
B
If the xylene column was designed with a TDW, then the
streams with low EB (or high pX, for example) could be fed to
AB
a different entry point in the adsorption system to reduce the
ABC
B
separation energy and debottleneck that part of the plant.
Still another application of functional utility within a distillation column is to exploit the potential for heat recovery at
BC
a higher temperature in multi-component distillation. Typically, a three-cut distillation tower using a conventional sidedraw or DW with side-draw will have the lightest component
B
at the top of the column. The latent heat from condensing
duty will be made at the equilibrium temperature of this component at column pressure. Often, this pressure is too low for
recovering useful heat. The side-draw will have only sensible
C
heat to transfer at the intermediate temperature.
FIG. 5. A DW within the column is used to separate the vessel into
One strategy using a TDWC is to intentionally skew the
different functional zones.a
temperature profile, such that the intermediate cut can also
be taken as a distilled product, with latent heat available at a
higher temperature (FIG. 7).
ManufacturingDespite the most clever process design,
manufacturing flaws or installation errors can completely
Here, the feed side will distill the top product at low
negate the benefits of the design. Trusting the party
overhead temperature, while the intermediate cut will be
controlling the entirety of the process design, hydraulic
taken out as overhead from the opposite side of the wall at a
design, manufacturing and installation is recommended.
higher temperature. The enthalpy from the mid-fraction can
Tray spacing and valve typeSome of the earliest types
be used to preheat the main column feed, or to reboil a sepaof contacting devices were bubble cap trays, which were
rate distillation system to save overall energy.
prominent in the 1940s and 1950s. In the 1960s, trays
with moveable valves came into service, affording higher
Back to the basics. Stepping back again into history, the bacapacity and fouling resistance.
sic principles of distillation column design must always be fol InstallationImproved modern tray designs have
lowed, even with advanced schemes. These principles include:
many different features, such as optimized active area
Optimization of feed locationThis avoids pinch in the
and downcomer area, flow promotion, elimination of
stripping vs. rectification zones.
liquid gradient and bubble promotion. The trays may
Balancing the NTS vs R:D ratioRules of thumb, such
be installed at closer spacing, and there may also be
as the recommended R/D being 1.2 minimum R/D,
DWs. High-performance trays require more care
depend on capital costs vs. long-term energy costs and
during inspection and installation.
could change over time.
Top liquid product

Feed
Absorption
zone
Bottoms product
Bottom product is the absorbing medium
FIG. 6. C3 (or C3 /C4) components are passed to the stripping part of the
column on the other side of the wall for removal into the overhead as a
condensed liquid product. This method is applied to LPG recovery.b
Lowest temperature
Feed (A,B,C)
Intermediate temperature
for heat integration

%Flood VLoad + [GPM (FPL/13,000)]
=

(1)
100
AA CAF

Winn combined the classic entrainment flooding C-factor
of Souders-Brown with tray spacing and liquid load variables.
Details of the Souders-Brown entrainment model are thoroughly discussed by Henry Z. Kister.6
Equation 13 is the most reliable flood correlation among the
classics. Recently, Resetarits and Ogundeji tweaked Equation
13 for a slight improvement.7 Their conclusion completely supports the fundamentals of the original F. W. Glitsch model.
Findings. Fractional distillation is a common-sense approach
to separate chemical components. Much can be learned from
the experience of industry predecessors. Many of the original
design principles apply, as the basic mass transfer operations do
not change.
New techniques include:
The concept of an outside-in approach to purifying
an intermediate cut in multi-component distillation,
removing the clutter of light-most and heavy-most
components first, to reach high-purity intermediate
products by pre-fractionation.
DWCs to accomplish the pre-fractionation within the
same column, and advanced thermal coupling systems to
move closer to ideal efficiency.
Extensions of segregated columns to retain the value
of compositional profiles and recover usable heat from
within the distillation system.
These new techniques are based on sound engineering
principles and will undoubtedly become a core part of the
technology base.
NOTES
GT-DWC and GT-TDWC, GTC Technology US LLC (patent pending).
b
GT-LPG MAX, GTC Technology US LLC (patent pending).
c
GT-Advanced Stabilizers, GTC Technology US LLC (patent pending).
a
LITERATURE CITED
Complete literature cited available at HydrocarbonProcessing.com.
C
FIG. 7. Using a TDWC, the intermediate cut can also be taken as a
distilled product, with latent heat available at a higher temperature.
Rating methodsGiven the preponderance of

computer rating methods for trays and packings,
it is prudent to utilize such information. One of the
classic rating methods, and perhaps the best overall tool
for tray design, is an equation (known as Equation 13)
from the Ballast Tray Design Manual Bulletin 4900.5
This model was developed by Francis W. Winn, who
spent years in technical management at Fractionation
Research Inc. before he worked for Fritz W. Glitsch &
Sons in the 1960s (Eq. 1).
JOSEPH C. GENTRY, is vice president of technology, R&D and engineering,

for GTC Technology US LLC. He previously worked for ARCO Chemical Co. and
Lyondell Petrochemical Co. in the olefins and aromatics areas. Mr. Gentry earned a
BS degree in chemical engineering from Auburn University and an MBA from the
University of Houston. He is the inventor of several patented separations technologies
and has specialized in their applications for the petrochemical industry.
MICHAEL J. BINKLEY is a consultant for the GTC Process Equipment Technology
(PET) group. He is a registered professional engineer in Texas. Mr. Binkley has
focused his 45 years of experience in mass transfer/separations equipment
development and applications with Glitsch Inc. (19692001) and GTC (20022016).
His first seven years of process engineering were with the PPG Chemicals Division in
Lake Charles, Louisiana. Mr. Binkley is an inventor of several separations equipment
advancement-related patents, as well as numerous product trademarks. With
several GTC co-inventors, he has seven patent applications pending review by the
US Patent and Trademark Office. Mr. Binkley earned his BS degree in chemical
engineering from Texas Tech University.
MANISH BHARGAVA is licensing manager for advanced distillation systems
for GTC Technology US LLC. Mr. Bhargava has over 15 years of industry experience
in the process industry. Prior to joining GTC, he worked at KBR as the principal
technical professional, and with DCM Shriram Consolidated Ltd. as a process
engineer. He graduated with an MS degree in chemical engineering from the
Illinois Institute of Technology.
Maintenance
and Reliability
G. MURTI, The Augustus Group, Montgomery, Texas
Design operations-and-maintenance-friendly
pressure vesselsPart 1
Many scholarly articles have been
published on the design, selection and
fabrication of pressure vessels.13 The
articles, books and training materials published to date focus on the requirements
of vessel designers and the manufacturers.
None of the published literature appears
to address the needs and concerns of the
ultimate beneficiariesthe end users.
For vessel designers, fabricators and
quality control inspectors, this is a onetime responsibility. They probably never
look back once a vessel is out of their territory. The reason is simple: almost all
pressure vessels are designed per specific
requirements of the asset owners. A few
proprietary designs are exceptional cases,
such as reactors, desalters and coalescer
vessels, etc. However, only the internals
would be proprietary, and the base vessel would still be required to comply with
the owners general specifications. In such
cases, it is important that the end users do
not feel overwhelmed by the proprietary
designs and adhere to their companys
basic vessel specifications.
Note: This article is the first in a series of design articles intended to increase
awareness of operational and maintenancerelated concerns and what design engineers can do to provide user-friendly and
fit-for-purpose equipment for the hydrocarbon processing industry (HPI). This
series is based on the actual implementation of what is narrated and the satisfactory
experiences drawn by the end users.
Readers are advised to make their
own engineering judgment on the validity of the design improvements suggested
herein and to develop their own needs.
If engineering or other professional services and judgments are required, then
the assistance of a competent professional

authority should be sought.
Throughout this article, the terminology vessel is used to represent pressure
vessels, drums, columns, towers, heat
exchanger shells and any equipment designed using pressure vessel codes such
as ASME-VIII, EN 13445, PD 5500,
etc. The terms codes, standards, specifications, regulations and recommended
practices are used to broadly define the
overall design requirements, recommendations and practices prevailing in the
industry. The terms vessel fabricator
or manufacturer have same meaning, as
do the terms owner and end user.
Ensuring functional safety and longterm service. Provided here are useful
ideas to ensure that a vessel meets functional safety requirements and provides
operation-and-maintenance-friendly service to end users over the long term. The
tips provided are simple to implement,
do not interfere with proprietary designs
and do not violate any of the code requirementsrather, they exceed them. The
tips are also generic and do not require
any code-specific calculations. Therefore,
they are applicable to pressure vessels
built to any code. This article essentially
covers what the codes and design books
would not reveal. The tips would lower
ownership cost if implemented at design
stage and assist the end users to meet
their health, safety and environmental
regulations, as well as reduce or eliminate
field modifications during service life of
the vessel. Carrying out field modifications, which invariably requires hot work,
is one of the most painstaking exercises in
operating plants.
There are many reasons why pressure

vessels should be ergonomically designed.
Pressure vessels are probably the longestserving equipment in the HPI. Their life
often exceeds the working life of plant
personnel, and the vessel can be passed
on to the next generation. Even though a
facility may cease oil and gas production,
a well-maintained vessel would survive.
Good pressure vessel design in the initial
stages is also important, as there is practically no involvement of vessel designers and fabricators in subsequent field
modifications, if any are ever undertaken.
For pressure vessels, there are no performance tests to be conducted prior to
dispatch. This is true even for proprietary
designs. During plant commissioning,
vessel manufacturers representatives are
generally not neededunlike rotating
machinery, where the designs are proprietary and machinery manufacturers are
usually involved in site performance tests,
troubleshooting, modifications works,
etc. Many recommendations exist to enhance vessel design.
Design vessels to match outer
diameter to piping specs. With the
advancement of computer-added design

and drafting, the subjective visualization
of the actual size of vessels has diminished. Computer printouts are exchanged,
and the design is prepared with minimal
manual intervention. A typical process
software would carry out the inside diameter calculation of a vessel by taking
various process parameters into consideration. The software is not programmed to
standardize the vessels outside diameter.
The mechanical design software would
determine the inside diameter, calculate
Maintenance and Reliability

made to standardize a vessels outside diameter. A typical plate bending machine
(FIG. 1A) can roll a plate into a cylindrical
373 mm (FIG. 1B). The fabricator used SA516, Gr. 60 plates and rolled the exchanger
shell. This exchanger failed in service, and
replacement exchangers were
ordered. Due to NACE compliance, the plates needed to underA vessel must meet functional safety requirements
go an HIC (hydrogen-induced
and provide operation-and-maintenance-friendly
cracking) test. HIC tests have a
service. These measures in the design stage are simple
28-day soaking period, and fabrication activities came to a standto implement, do not interfere with proprietary designs
still until the results were known.
and often exceed code requirements.
The problem was referred to
the plant engineering team. The
fabricated shell was replaced
The selected plate thickness is added shell with any inner diameter, as long as with 16-in. (nominal pipe size) NPS seam(twice) to the vessels inner diameter, and it is higher than the roller diameter. Plate less pipe, 21.4-mm WT (Sch. 80). Saddle
and nozzle projections were adjusted to
the vessels outer diameter is established thickness is the only limitation.
and passed on to a vessel fabricator. The
ASME-VIII and TEMA do not en- ensure no changes to plant piping. Using
thickness formulae in ASME-VIII, Div. 1, courage standardization of vessels based seamless pipe of appropriate specification
section UG-27, Thickness of shells un- on the outer diameter. This is in contrast avoided HIC test and saved fabrication
der internal pressure is based on vessel to the piping codes to which a vessel is costs, and units were ready within two
inside dimensions. Tubular Exchanger invariably attached. For example, ASME- weeks. Similarly, another exchanger with
Manufacturers Association (TEMA) B31.3, section 304.1.2 and ASME-B31.1, an original shell OD of 440 mm, 22-mm
standard, section N-1.1 1, defines the section 104.1.2 perform calculations thickness was redone using 20-in.-NPS
seamless pipe, 508-mm OD and 26-mm
nominal diameter as the inside diameter based on the outer diameter.
of the exchanger shell.
It is recommended that efforts be made WT (Sch. 80). These examples show the
Supplemented by the American So- to round off the vessels calculated outer importance of engineers reviewing and
ciety of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) diameter to match with the corresponding standardizing the shell dimensions proand TEMA, and assured by the fabrica- pipe outer diameter, e.g., up to 80-in. out- duced by the computers, where possible.
The advantages of vessel OD standardtors that they can build a vessel to match er diameter (OD). Beyond 80 in., it may
any inside or outside diameter, no effort is be rounded off in multiples of 6 in. ASME ization are:
Vessel fabricators can acquire
piping standards B36.10 and B36.19 cover
seamless and welded pipes
pipes up to 80 in. NPS. Seamless pipes are
for vessel fabrication, wherever
available up to 24 in. Submerged arc-weldavailable. Short lengths of pipes
ed pipes (SAW) are available from 16 in.
of approved specifications
to 48 in. in North America and up to 64
are usually readily available at
in. in Asia. Use of pipes in lieu of plates is
fabricators works and with
recommended wherever available.
operating companies. Such pipes
with traceable documentation
Practical examples. A heat exchanger
can be approved for fabrication
shell was designed with an inner diameter
of vessels and exchangers.
(ID) of 337 mm, a wall thickness (WT)
Less time and effort, and lower cost
of 18 mm and an OD = 337 + 18 + 18 =
FIG. 1A. A typical plate bending machine.
at the vessel manufacturers shop.
Standard templates can be used
to verify the OD of rolled plates,
and there is no need to fabricate
custom-made templates for each
ordered vessel.
Saddle design is standardized,
as the outer curvature of vessel
is standardized.
Synchronized pressure/
temperature rating of the connected
piping and the piping components
welded to the vessel, such as nozzleFIG. 1C. The use of pipes in lieu of plates can
save cost and improve integrity. By using singlenecks and welding-fittings.
FIG. 1B. Part of an exchanger GA drawing
piece 24-in. and 18-in. NPS pipes, longitudinal
Extra-long vessels can be fabricated
(non-standard shell diameter).
and circumferential welds can be avoided.
with one piece of pipe. If plates
pressure wall thickness (including allowances) and pick up the next commercially
available plate thickness.

are used, then a limitation of plate
width exists. FIG. 1C shows a typical
pig launcher barrel fabricated using
plates with many longitudinal and
circumferential welds.
If using pipes, a host of timeconsuming and expensive quality
tests can be avoided. Such tests
have already been carried out
as part of pipe quality testing
procedures.
Use standard materials where possible. In a new grassroots project, it is
easy to adhere to exotic specifications,

even for small items. The delivery periods for such materials get overlapped
by big-ticket items. However, when it
comes to maintenance replacements,
procurement of items with exotic specifications in small quantities is a bottleneck. In the example given earlier, forged
tubesheet to SA-266 was used. Ordering
new sheets per SA-266 would take up
to four months for delivery. Recovering
old tubesheet was not an option as the
diameter changed. The tubesheet was replaced with SA-516 plate, which is widely
available, easy to fabricate, permitted by
the code and posed no quality compromise. SA-516 should have been used in
the first instance.
Lack of a stagnant dead area, which

is unnecessary from a design point
of view and detrimental due to the
potential for crevice corrosion
Better liner accuracy for volume
control
Lower costs, as less welding is
involved and a davit is not required,
as shown in FIG. 2B
Time savings: a fabrication shop
would produce dished-end
in 24 hr to 48 hr.
In the case of tall and slim columns, as
shown in FIG. 2C, a split in the middle is
very maintenance friendly. FIG. 2D shows
the original vessel design (simulated image) with a side manway. The change was
incorporated during a mechanical review
of drawings by the maintenance team.
It is recommended to ensure saddle

projection exceeds the bottom nozzles
and boot projection.
The advantages/disadvantage of tall
steel saddles (FIG. 3B) are:
Bottom nozzles/boot should stay

within saddle height. A majority of
company specifications require a 6-in.

high saddle for smaller vessels and a 12in. high saddle for large vessels, as measured at the vertical axis of the vessel.
This design does not consider the nozzles
and boots projecting beyond the saddle.
FIG. 3A shows such a vessel. It is an unnecessary cost-saving exercise and creates
subsequent problems onsite.
FIG. 2C. Manway on the top of a smalldiameter vertical vessel.
Do not provide side manways on

small vessels. Many company specifi-
cations require at least one manway on

a vessel, regardless of the vessel dimensions. Such manways do not serve the
purpose and have many disadvantages:
Technicians cannot easily get inside
Fabrication issues: excessive welding
heat-input on the self-reinforcing
pad tends to distort the vessel
Extra fittings, such as weldolet and
debit arrangement, may be needed
Projection of manway adds extra
dead volume to vessel and may
be a surprise to unsuspecting
process engineers
Crevice corrosion in the deadvolume stagnant area, in FIGS. 2A
and 2B (left).
One recommendation is for small
vessels, perhaps up to 42-in. NPS, to be
provided with either a flanged dishedend or a blind flange, depending on the
availability. FIG. 2B (Option 1 and Option 2) show the suggested configurations. Advantages include:
FIG. 2A. Manway provided on a smalldiameter vessel.
FIG. 2B. Various options for manways on

small vessels.
FIG. 2D. Original design of the vessel manway

on the side (simulated image).

Ease of transportation: In the
upstream industry, a majority
of vessels are generic gas and oil
separators and free-water knockout
drums. Vessels are moved from one
field to another to meet fluctuating
production patterns. In such
scenarios, vessels with tall saddles
are easy to transport and do not
require wooden pallets, in case
nozzles and boots project beyond
the saddles.
If the saddle projection is short,
it must be compensated with an
increased civil foundation height.
While this may look like a better
option from a cost perspective,
it has disadvantages. The piping
stresses are transferred to the
ground via a concrete pedestal.
Concrete is not appropriate for
handling piping stresses, as cracks
that are difficult to repair can
FIG. 3A. Vessel with a short saddle.
FIG. 3B. Vessel with a tall saddle.
FIG. 4. Avoid inside projection on manways.
appear. Steel saddles distribute

loads much more effectively
than concrete. Field preference
is for steel saddles that overlap
all bottom appurtenances by
at least 6 in. (150 mm).
The only disadvantage for tall
steel saddles is that fireproofing
costs are marginally higher and
may require fireproofing per
relevant specification. Tall concrete
pedestals would not require fireproofing, as concrete is treated as
inherently fire-resistant.
vacuum design. The vessel was designed

for a high-altitude location where atmospheric pressure was 93.3 kPa. The design
engineer used the default software value
for an atmospheric pressure of 101.325
kPa. When reduced to 93.3 kPa, the inside projection vanished. It is imperative
that the software default values are not
used without knowing their implications.
What might appear as mundane data at
the vessel design stage may be the root
cause of an unpleasant experience for operation and maintenance personnel.
Avoid inside projection on manways.
an existing vessel is an expensive proposition. It is worth adding a spare nozzle that

can be used at a later date. The most useful spare nozzle is at the top of the vessel,
preferably of the same size as the main
inlet nozzle.
Vessels are usually designed for full

vacuum or half vacuum for steam-out
conditions. Under certain conditions of
full vacuum, the design may dictate the
manway to be strengthened in addition
to an external reinforcing pad. The most
popular method to provide the required
extra strength is to project the neck inside and weld circumferentially, as shown
in FIG. 4 (left). This design makes exiting
the vessel a very unpleasant, if not impossible, exercise. Another disadvantage of
inside projection is that it does not allow
complete vessel drainage. The small hole
in the projected nozzle does not help effective drainage. An inside reinforcing
pad could be a solution, but it would not
drain the vessel completely.
Inside projection can be easily avoided by slightly reducing the vacuum required for steam-out conditions, thereby
eliminating the projection. The vessel
design engineer must adjust the vacuum
numbers and communicate back to the
process engineer for endorsement. A vessel need not be designed for full vacuum,
as it will theoretically not achieve it.
In one case, the vessel design software
dictated inside projection due to full
Spare nozzles. Fitting new nozzles on
Cost implications. The initial vessel

cost should not be evaluated in terms of
CAPEX alone. If maintenance costs and
possible field modifications (OPEX) are
combined, all suggested measures eventually reduce the ownership cost of the
vessel. Traditionally, the OPEX for static
equipment like pressure vessels has been
considered to be very low, as compared
to CAPEX. That is not true for poorly
designed vessels. Producing the correct
products in the first instance is a win-win
situation for all.
LITERATURE CITED
Heinze, A. J., Pressure vessel design for process
engineers, Hydrocarbon Processing, May 1979.
2
Smolen, A. M. and J. R. Mase, ASME pressurevessel code: Which division to choose? Chemical
Engineering, January 1982.
3
Pullarcot, S. K., Practical guide to pressure vessel manufacturing (Mechanical engineering), Ed. 1, FACT engineering and design organization, Mercel Dekker Inc.,
Basel, New York, 2005.
1
D. GOPALKRISHNA MURTI, P.Eng.,

is a senior consultant affiliated with
the Augustus Group. He has more
than 40 years of experience in
design and project engineering;
resolving complex design and code
incompatibility issues; field troubleshooting; and plant safety, integrity and reliability
management. He works within the onshore and
offshore, LNG/NGL processing, refining, petrochemical and power industries. Mr. Murti has to his
credit over 30 revisions/additions/new standards to
API, ASTM, ASME, NFPA, BSI, etc., all based on field
experience, and has authored several articles on
design issues. He obtained his BS degree in
mechanical engineering from Jiwaji University in India.
He is a registered engineer in Canada and India, with
licensing in Texas (TBPE) in process.
Process Control
and Instrumentation
N. KASIRI and P. JOUYBANPOUR, Iran University
of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran; and
M. REZA EHSANI, Isfahan University of Technology,
Isfahan, Iran
Utilize genetic programming to develop

new point efficiency correlation
Distillation is one of the most used separation operations in
the chemical and petroleum industries. It is a process in which a
mixture of some components, with different boiling points, can
be separated by heating the mixture to a temperature between
the boiling points of the components.1 In distillation columns,
one of the most commonly used simplifying assumptions in the
mathematical modeling is the presumption of the existence of
ideal trays on which the equilibrium of phases takes place.
Point efficiency is the single-most important factor in distillation column simulation. The commonly used tray efficiency
evaluation schemes possess little accuracy and are not recommended. The purpose of this study was to develop a new correlation for calculating point efficiency in distillation columns using
genetic programming (GP). Previously published literature was
reviewed and parameters reportedly affecting point efficiency
were selected. The developed equation using GP, which is based
on 52 experimental data sets, differs from published results in description and solution precision. Comparison with experimental
data demonstrates that the new model is capable of generating
point efficiency estimates with less than 1.85% relative error.
Considerable attention has been given to the understanding
and improvement of the performance of distillation trays. The
most important parameter in the design and analysis of traytype columns is tray efficiency.2,3 This is only realistically applicable if a precise method for the estimation of tray efficiency
can be devised. The commonly used tray efficiency evaluation
schemes, providing a single efficiency for each tray, possess little
accuracy and are, therefore, not recommended.
Since efficiency varies from one section to another, it is best
to apply efficiency separately for each section. In practice, efficiency data and prediction methods are often too crude to give
a good breakdown between the efficiencies of different sections, and overall column efficiency is applied over the entire
column.4 This is due to the fact that each point location on each
of the trays provides an opportunity for mass transfer to take
place, from which different components take different opportunities. So, point efficiency has been studied extensively.2,3,5,6,7
One of the first correlations for point efficiency was published
by AIChE4 and is shown in Eq. 1.
EOG = 1- exp (-NOG)
(1)
Standart et al. questioned the validity of these assumptions.

In one case, they observed just one point efficiency greater than
unity, which is inconsistent with the assumptions and Eq. 1.4
Most point efficiency models were developed from the experimental data of systems (Eq. 2).6
0.0029
DG (1e )
1+m MV
ML DL (A H / A B )
EOG =1 exp
0.3195
0.4136
0.6074
A H
hl
V VH h fe
DH
A B
(2)
Its average error is 6.95%, which is too high. The objective in

the present work is to find a mathematical model for point efficiency that adequately fits and describes the available experimental data.
The application of genetic programming. Evolutionary
optimization methods have been applied extensively to problems in computer science. They were proposed by Holland,8
while Goldberg9 contributed most to their practical use in many
areas. GP is the most recent and very promising evolutionary
optimization method. Koza10 demonstrated the applications
of GP to robotics, games, control and symbolic regression.11
These applications are based on the principles of the biological evolution and Darwinist principles, such as genetic combining, natural selection and survival of the fittest. GP is one of
the many computer algorithms that has been shown to provide
reliable solutions to complex optimization problems.1013 It is
also considered a powerful evolutionary optimization method
applicable to many process-based problems. It is used here to
find an appropriate correlation for point efficiency in distillation columns using a set of available experimental data.
Genetic programming application. In this work, the GP
algorithm10 was coded in the MATLAB environment. Initially,
Process Control and Instrumentation

the group of genes expected to reflect unknown mathematical relations, hidden in the experimental data consisting of two parts,
are chosen. The first part contains terminal genes consisting of
dimensionless groups. These genes are, in fact, independent variable symbols, numerical and logical constants. The second part
contains the function genes (i.e., *, , +, /, ^, log, exp, etc.), which
suffice for the efficient connection of the terminal genes. Function genes can take one or more arguments.
Random solutions of various forms and lengths are generated by means of selected genes. Of course, the maximum size of
each solution must be limited to a reasonable value. Then, each
solution is evaluated on the basis of experimental data for independent variables through several fitness cases. The obtained
results are compared with the corresponding experimental data
for the dependent variable. The criterion for fitness of the individual solution is the extent of differences (error). Usually,
better individual solutions are those with errors closer to zero.
The verification of solutions during several iterations,
known as generations, is then performed by means of genetic
operations. It turns out that for the progress of the population,
reproduction, crossover and mutation are used. The reproduction operation ensures the survival of the fittest solutions of
population and their advance in unchanged form into next generation. The crossover is an operation that ensures the exchange
of genetic material between solutions. The crossover point is
randomly chosen, either on function genes or terminal genes.
FIG. 1 shows the crossover of two solutions on function genes.
Two new child solutions result from two parent solutions. They
are, in fact, mathematical expressions usually written as: (x + y)
/ z + xz and x(1 yz). They consist of the genes x, y and z, which
are variable symbols of the solution.
In defining randomly generated crossover points, two parent
crossover fragments are obtained. Child 1 is produced by deleting everything below the crossover point of Parent 1, and then inserting the crossover fragment of Parent 2 at the crossover point
of Parent 1. Child 2 is produced in a similar manner. Therefore,
two child organisms are created: (1 yz) / z + xz and x(x + y).
It can be seen that both child organisms include the genetic mateParent 2
Parent 1
x
Z
1
x
Crossover
Child 1
z
Child 2
FIG. 1. The crossover of two solutions ensures the exchange of

genetic material.
rial from their parents. It is very important to preserve syntactic

structure of the solutions during the crossover operation.
The mutation is an operation that creates a new individual
by randomly altering a single function with a number of the
population. That is, it consists of randomly changing a functional input, or constant, in one of the mathematical expressions making up the present population. This creates one new
child solution for the new population by randomly mutating
a randomly chosen part of one selected solution. FIG. 2 shows
the traditional mutation, which consists of randomly selecting
a mutation point in a tree and substituting the sub-tree rooted
there with a randomly generated sub-tree.
After the completion of reproduction, crossover and mutation, a new generation is obtained that is also evaluated and
compared with the experimental data. The process is repeated
until the termination criterion of the process is fulfilled. This
can be a prescribed number of generations or a sufficient quality of solutions (criterion of success). Of course, because of the
probabilistic nature of GP, the satisfactory solution cannot be
obtained in every run of genetic programming. Several independent runs are needed to reach the given criterion of success.14
Background on point efficiency. A comprehensive composite database for distillation sieve-tray efficiency is used to develop point efficiency based on a model that considers the fluid
on the distillation tray to be contained in a liquid-continuous
region. This model allows estimates of the portion of the mass
transfer that occurs in each region, and the mass-transfer resistance that occurs on the liquid and vapor sides of the interface.
For most cases, most of the mass transfer occurs within the liquid-continuous region. The liquid-side resistance is often significant. Point efficiency touches many parameters, such as physical properties of mixture, hydraulic characters and the geometry
of the column. Some of these parameters, and their influence on
efficiency according to reviewed publications, consist of:
The slope of the equilibrium line, which is a direct
function of relative volatility. Efficiency decreases when
the slope of the equilibrium line and relative volatility
increase. Lower volatility reduces the significance of the
liquid phase resistance, therefore raising efficiency.4
An increase in liquid viscosity is also usually associated
with a decrease in liquid phase diffusivity, and the tray
efficiency will decrease accordingly.4
Lower liquid viscosity usually implies higher liquid
diffusivity and lower resistance to mass transfer in the
liquid phase. Therefore, efficiency increases as liquid
viscosity diminishes.4
With trays operating in froth regime, an increase in weir
height will directly increase the efficiency. Weir height is
especially important in liquid-limited systems, or systems
where a slow chemical reaction is taking place.4
The hole diameter has an important effect on the
efficiency. Trays with large holes have a different
hydrodynamic behavior and are less efficient than trays
with small holes. In the spray regime, entrainment is very
strongly dependent upon the hole diameter.15
Tray spacing has no important effect on tray efficiency
in small columns. Therefore, it is not taken into
consideration in this work.15

The reflux ratio was stated to have a small effect on tray
efficiency. It was not considered in this work.4
At high vapor and low liquid rates, entrainment becomes
significant. The liquid entrainment and Reynolds
Number rise as the vapor velocity rises, and efficiency
increases accordingly.7
Vapor and liquid diffusivity have a direct influence on
efficiency. Increased diffusivities will increase efficiency.
Liquid diffusivities generally increase with pressure.
However, in most distillation systems, the influence of
the vapor diffusivity will dominate the influence of the
liquid diffusivity.4
Generally, diffusivity, density and viscosity are affected by
composition variations and can affect efficiency. In this research, experimental data used is dependent on most of these
parameters, so as to obtain the most descriptive correlation to
be employed in simulations.
Composite database. The correlation has been based on a
generalized model of mass transfer in a five-sieve tray distillation column that was developed to account for experimental
measurements on a 0.6-m diameter sieve tray indicating the
presence of vapor entrainment into the downcomer for three
systems. The databases16 used here consist of the results of
three sets of experiments, all under total reflux conditions.
Two of these demonstrate wide-boiling-point-range systems
of methanol/water and isopropanol/water, and the remaining
set belongs with a close-boiling-point-range system of methylcyclohexane/toluene.

The data was all for binary separations. The entire database
consisted of 52 data sets. On the basis of measured and calculated data, an attempt was made to determine an equation for
the point efficiency of distillation columns using genetic programming. In this work, 47 out of the total 52 data sets were
randomly used to develop the desired correlation, and the rest
were used for error evaluations.
Method to calculate the point efficiency. The modeling
of point efficiency by GP involves finding a mathematical model, in symbolic form, that provides a good fit between independent variables and the associated dependent variable.
Mutation
point
Mutation
point
3
x
Randomly generated
sub-tree
y
x
y
x
FIG. 2. A mutation of one solution.
VIEW ON DEMAND WEBCAST

Operational Excellence by Using Dynamic
Simulation for Steam Shedding Studies
Presenter: Dhaval Dave
Senior Consultant
Schneider Electric Software
The goal of any steam network is to ensure that steam can be provided to all
consumer facility safely, efficiently and without interruption. However, after a steadystate simulation is used to design a steam network, dynamic simulation can be used
to evaluate the as designed process and control strategy to maximize likelihood
that it can provide stable and uninterrupted operation. In fact, dynamic simulation
can be used for:
Design validation
Sensitivity on design boiler rating
Relief valve size & safety validation
Determination of amount of steam to

shed and which unit
Control system validation

Testing/Tuning of feed forward
controllers
Moderator: Lee Nichols
Determination of the duration of steam

shedding.
View on Demand at: HydrocarbonProcessing.com/Webcasts
Editor/Assistant Publisher

TABLE 1. The best genetically evolved model for point efficiency
+, , *, /, ^, log, exp, m, DV /DL, MV/ML, hL/DH, Re, (1-e), EOG, constants
Chosen genes
Genetically evolved model
EOG
Average model error as compared with the rest of the experimental data
1.85%
Average model error as compared with all experimental data
1.75%
For each data set within the column, the point efficiency
(EOG ) is considered to be a function of the slope of the equilibrium curve (m), mass density (), mole density (M), molecular diffusivity (D), molecular viscosity () in both of the phases,
height of the outlet weir (h w ), liquid volumetric flowrate (Q L),
sieve tray perforation diameter (DH), and velocity of the vapor
through a perforation hole (VH) once the velocity of the vapor
over the bubbling surface of the tray has been assumed.57
These factors were organized into dimensionless groups
consisting of the slope of the equilibrium curve (m), Reynolds
number (Re), the proportion of each mole density and molecular diffusivity in both phases, the ratio of the liquid inventory
(hL) to the sieve tray, perforation diameter (DH) and the effective froth density (e).
The Peng-Robinson equation of state was employed to evaluate the densities of gases and liquids for methanol/water and isopropanol/water systems, and a non-random two-liquid (NRTL)
model was used for the methylcyclohexane/toluene system. The
viscosity was evaluated by the Brokaw model for gases and the
Hayduk-Laudie model for liquids.17 To determine these dimensionless groups, the following steps should be taken:5,6
1. The effective froth density includes many factors. The
correlation (Eq. 3) used to calculate the effective froth
density is:
e = exp(12.55K s0.91 )
(3)
where KS is the density-corrected vapor velocity (Eq. 4)

over the bubbling surface of the tray, expressed in m/s;
V 0.5
K s =
VS
L V
(4)
2. The Reynolds number (Eq. 5) includes the direct

proportion of vapor mass density (V), velocity of
the vapor through a perforation hole (VH ), effective
froth height (hfe ) and the inverse of vapor molecular
viscosity (V ).
Re =
V VH h fe
(5)
The effective froth height (Eq. 6), expressed in meters,

is given by:
2
Q
h fe = hW +C L
e
(6)
MV +Re
ML
= 1 exp0.867789

D
V
(1 e ) (exp(m) + 10.6125) 2 D (1 e )
where Q L is the volumetric flowrate of liquid per length

of weir that is expressed in m3/s/m (Eq. 7), and C is
a constant:
C = 0.501+0.439exp(137.8hW )
(7)
The weir height, hW , is expressed in meters.

3. To calculate the ratio of the liquid inventory to the sieve
tray perforation diameter (hL/DH), the liquid inventory
height (Eq. 8) should be expressed in meters and
evaluated from:
h L = h fe e
(8)
4. The slope of the equilibrium curve (m) is an
experimental data.
5. The ratio of vapor mole density to liquid mole density
should be calculated.
6. The ratio of vapor molecular diffusivity to liquid
molecular diffusivity should be calculated.
Therefore, the slope of the equilibrium curve (m), the Reynolds number (Re = VVHhfe/V), the ratio of vapor mole density
to liquid mole density (MV/ML), the ratio of vapor molecular diffusivity to liquid molecular diffusivity (DV/DL), the ratio
of the liquid inventory to the sieve tray perforation diameter
(hL/DH), and 1-e are chosen as independent variables, while
point efficiency (EOG) is the dependent variable.
The best genetically evolved model. The best-fitted correlation of the present work is summarized in TABLE 1. Row 1
shows the chosen genes. Function genes and terminal genes
are separated by commas. Row 2 shows the genetically evolved
models on the basis of chosen genes. In Row 3, the model error
is compared to the rest of experimental data (the five-member
set), and in Row 4, a comparison with all experimental data is
provided, showing the less-relative error compared with other
research.6 FIG. 3 shows the differences between this model and
the experimental data.
TABLE 2 illustrates the composite coverage of the database
and the range of dimensionless group values.
Results and efficiency changes. The influences of the dimensionless factors on point efficiency can now be studied using the GP-based correlation within its validity range, while the
others are kept constant. Some of these factorsconsisting of
the effective froth density, the ratio of the proportion vapor molecular diffusivity to liquid molecular diffusivity, and the slope
of the equilibrium curve (m)have an inverse influence on ef-
REGISTER
45TH TURBOMACHINERY & 32ND PUMP SYMPOSIA
The premier conference for Turbomachinery and Pump professionals.
DEVELOPED FOR THE INDUSTRY, BY THE INDUSTRY.
ONLINE REGISTRATION OPEN NOW

TPS.TAMU.EDU

rest of the experimental data (five data sets) demonstrated that
the new model is capable of generating accurate point efficiency
estimates with an average of 1.85% relative error (TABLE 1).
The results highlighted the fact that new correlation should
be generally applicable for the prediction of sieve tray point efficiency in distillation within its validity range of the initial data
(TABLE 2). This successful fitting supports the assertion that
GP is an effective method for developing various process correlations, especially for the same entity of point efficiency with
more independent variables, such as material property, and
with more comprehensive data sets.
1.00
Calculated point efficiency by new correlation
Experimental data
0.95
0.90
Point efficiency
0.85
0.80
0.75
0.70
0.65
0.60
0.55
0.50
10
20
30
Run number
40
50
60
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to express their gratitude to Dr. J. Ivakpour for his generous assistance.
FIG. 3. The comparison between the model prediction and the

experimental data.
C
D
DH
EOG
hfe
hL
hW
KS
m
QL
Re
VH
VS
TABLE 2. The composite coverage of the database and the

range of dimensionless group values
Parameters
Minimum
Maximum
Max/min
0.224
2.8
12.5
MV/ML
0.0007
0.0047
6.714
DV /DL
1.9407 1.0e + 04
5.1902 1.0e + 04
2.674
hL/DH
3.6305
6.0872
1.677
1-e
0.4533
0.6977
1.539
Re = VVHhfe/V
5.3755 1.0e + 04
2.2822 1.0e + 05
4.245
ficiency, while the others, consisting of the ratio of the proportion of vapor mole density to liquid mole density and Reynolds
number, have direct influence on efficiency.
The factors create exponential changes in efficiency. When
the slope of the equilibrium curve is increased, the mass transfer resistance increases but the molar rate of diffusion decreases,
thereby decreasing efficiency. By increasing the ratio of the densities, the mass transfer resistance is decreased and the molar
rate of diffusion is increased, so efficiency is increased. The
ratio of the diffusivities has an inverse influence on efficiency.
These systems are liquid phase-rate controlled where the mass
transfer is more accomplished, so the liquid diffusivity has more
influence. Therefore, by increasing the ratio of the diffusivities,
the mass transfer resistance is increased and efficiency is decreased. As 1-e increases, efficiency is decreased. When the
effective froth density is decreased, it causes the mass transfer
to decrease, therefore making distillation more difficult. In the
developed equation, the Reynolds number has the largest influence on efficiency. When it is changed within its validity range,
the most significant change occurs on efficiency. Increasing the
Reynolds number causes a decrease in the mass transfer resistance, so efficiency is increased.
The new model. A new correlation to predict the point efficiency of sieve trays was developed by using GP and based on 47
data sets. The genetic process automatically eliminated the superfluous independent variable (hL/DH) from the model. The
developed correlation is highly accurate, as it is based on data
collected from extensive experimentation. Comparison with the
NOMENCLATURE
Constant
Molecular diffusivity, m2/s
Sieve tray perforation diameter, m
Point efficiency
Effective froth height, m
Liquid inventory on tray, expressed in height of clear liquid, m
Height of weir, m
Density-corrected vapor velocity over the bubbling surface, m/s
Slope of equilibrium curve
Volumetric liquid flowrate, m3/min
Reynolds number
Vapor velocity through perforation, m/s
Vapor velocity over bubbling surface of the tray, m/s
Greek letters:
Density, kg/m3
Viscosity, N.s/m2
Froth density
Subscripts:
e
Effective
f
Froth
V
Vapor
L
Liquid
M
Molecular
LITERATURE CITED
Bjorn, I. N., U. Gren and F. Svensson, Simulation and experimental study of intermediate heat exchange in a sieve tray distillation column, Computers and Chemical
Engineering, Vol. 26, 2002.
2
Chen, G. X. and K. T. Chuang, Determining the number of gas-phase and liquidphase transfer units from point efficiencies in distillation, Industrial & Engineering
Chemistry Research, Vol. 33, 1994.
1
Complete literature cited available online at HydrocarbonProcessing.com.

DR. NOROLLAH KASIRI graduated with his BSc degree from Glamorgan University
before pursuing an MSc degree and PhD at Swansea University, Wales, UK.
Dr. Kasiri joined the School of Chemical Engineering at Iran University of Science and
Technology (IUST) as an assistant professor, where he established the CAPE center.
Over the past 20 years of CAPE activity, he has managed professional chemical,
process and reservoir engineers, resulting in the presentation and publication of
over 200 papers, the conclusion of 70 research projects and the development of
14 software packages. He is currently with IUST as an associate professor.
PARVIN JOUYBANPOUR began her career in chemical engineering at the Science
& Research Campus of Islamic Azad University, where she graduated with a BSc
degree, followed by post-graduate studies at the CAPE center at Iran University of
Science and Technology (IUST), where she earned her MSc degree. She earned a
second MS degree in industrial management in Sweden.
DR. MOHAMMAD REZA EHSANI serves as a professor in the chemical engineering
department at Isfahan University of Technology (IUT). He began his career in
chemical engineering at Sharif University of Technology, where he graduated
with a BSc degree. Dr. Ehsani earned his MSc degree and PhD at UMIST University,
Manchester, UK.
Water Management
C. MCKNIGHT and B. RUMBALL,
Syncrude Canada Ltd., Edmonton, Canada
Experience with naphtha in sour water emulsions

generated in a fractionator overhead accumulator
Bitumen processing plant operations. Syncrude Canada
operates an integrated oil sands plant near Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada. The oil sands are mined, and the hydrocarbon
is then extracted as Athabasca bitumen. The bitumen is topped
in atmospheric and vacuum distillation units, and the residue is
converted into lower-boiling materials by either carbon rejection (coking) or hydrogen addition (hydroprocessing). The resulting distillates are further hydrotreated and then blended to
form a sweet premium synthetic crude oil blend.
Fluid coking technology is the engine for pitch conversion
at Syncrude. The three fluid cokers (Labeled 8-1, 8-2 and 8-3)
process 200 Mbpd of resid (with a material boiling temperature above 524C, also called pitch) when operating at design
conditions. Resid is converted to lighter products, coke and
gases by contacting with hot coke solids in a fluidized bed reactor. Any unconverted resid, or recycle, is condensed in the
scrubber and returned to the reactor for further reaction.
Steam and reaction products ranging from light hydrocarbon gases to heavy gasoil are sent from the scrubber to the fractionator for separation. In the fractionator, heavy and light gasoil are fractionated and condensed into liquid products. The
overhead from the fractionator contains steam, light hydrocarbon gases and naphtha. This gaseous stream passes through a
bank of heat exchangers that condenses the water and naphtha.
The resulting gas/liquid/liquid stream is sent to the fractionator overhead accumulator. In this horizontal drum, the large
gas flow is separated from the two liquids, water and naphtha,
which are also separated from one another. The gaseous prod-
ucts are sent to a knockout drum and, eventually, to an offgas

compressor. The water is sent to the sour water processing facilities. A portion of the naphtha is recycled to the fractionator,
and the balance is sent downstream for further processing.
Historically, Syncrude Canada has suffered from poor naphtha/water separation in the overhead accumulators of all three
cokers. Generally, poor separation manifests as high naphtha
content in the sour water stream. Typically, Cokers 8-1 and 8-2
run approximately 1 vol%2 vol% naphtha in the sour water.
However, if the condensing heat exchangers leak recycled cooling water (RCWi.e., water that is recycled from the oil sands
extraction process and contains bitumen and clay fines) into
the stream, then stable emulsions can form. This is thought to
be due to RCW contaminants, most likely the fine solids.
These emulsions then cause much higher naphtha losses to
the water stream. Fortunately, this sour water is directed to a
holding tank, where naphtha can be skimmed and sent to the
light slop system for reprocessing in the cokers and eventual
inclusion into Syncrude Canadas Syncrude sweet premium
hydrocarbon product.
During the first three runs of Coker 8-3, even higher levels
of naphtha were found in the water stream, near 5 vol%. Due
to this poor separation and the apparent potential for improvement, efforts were undertaken to redesign the gas/liquid/
liquid separator internals through the process licensor. These
new internals were installed in 2012 and have been operating
since early July of that year.
8
Demulsifier injected
96/11/15 7:00
7
Naphtha in 8-1, C4 sour water, %
A number of conversion processes, both hydrogen-addition-based and carbon-rejection-based, crack heavy oil into
lighter hydrocarbon products. The lightest products from these
processes include incondensable gases, water from steam, and
light hydrocarbons or naphtha. These products are generally
discharged from the main unit fractionator into a condensing
train and an overhead accumulator drum.
Syncrude Canada Ltd. recently attempted to modify an
overhead accumulator drum to improve naphtha/sour water
separation. Unfortunately, performance declined due to the
formation of naphtha in sour water emulsion. The rapid response to alleviate the problem through the use of a demulsifier is described here. Also included are potential mechanical
solutions developed through the application of computational
fluid dynamics and cold flow modeling.
8-1 naphtha in sour water

16 naphtha in sour water
6
5
Demulsifier injected
96/11/12 7:00
Pumps off
3
2
1
0
96/9/22
0:00
96/10/2
0:00
96/10/12
0:00
96/10/22
0:00
96/11/1
0:00
96/11/11
0:00
96/11/21
0:00
96/12/1
0:00
FIG. 1. Historical experience with chemical demulsifier.

Water Management
After installation of the new internals in 2012, very high
levels of naphtha in the water were observed, approximately
15 vol% to 20 vol%. Samples of the water were taken after the
separator water drawoff pump. The samples showed a milky
appearance, suggesting a strong oil-in-water emulsion. Unfortunately, the naphtha recovery and light slops reprocessing
systems were being overwhelmed due to these large volumes
of naphtha. The work undertaken to find rapid solutions to
the problem and determine how the new internals might have
impacted the emulsion formation is described below.
Rapid response. Initial work focused on options to break the
naphtha/sour water emulsion. The most promising options

included the use of packed-bed coalescers and the addition of a
chemical demulsifier. Fortunately, Syncrude Canada attempted
the use of a chemical demulsifier in the mid-1990s, with some
success, as shown in FIG. 1. Typical naphtha in sour water ranges
from 2 vol% to 5 vol% before the demulsifier addition, and less
than 1 vol% after addition.
Field experimentation was immediately conducted by sampling the emulsion directly into varying amounts of demulsifier. As shown in FIG. 2, the result was remarkable. At the 1-ppm
level, the emulsion broke very quickly.
As a result, efforts were turned toward field implementation. FIG. 3 shows the timeline from the startup of the unit in
July, through the realization of the problem in August, and to
the successful demulsifier injection in September. The graph
shows the light slops generation from the poor naphtha/sour
water separation, as well as the building tank level as the plant
was not able to process the amount generated.
Initially, the demuslifier was injected directly into the accumulator drum liquid. The effect was immediate and allowed
the plant to reduce light slops tank levels through reprocessing.
After a brief outage of the demulsifier, the problem resumed, as
shown by the spike in light slops generated. After this point, the
demulsifier was injected upstream of the accumulator, and the
best effect was observed. The demulsifier is still used to manage
the emulsion problem.
Problem analysis. In parallel to the demulsifier work, effort
was directed at understanding what caused the emulsion formation. Extensive process reviews were undertaken and confirmed
that the unit was operating in the same manner as before the
unit turnaround. This work included radioactive tracer studies
conducted pre- and post-turnaround.
As shown in FIG. 4, bitumen and steam are fed to the fluidized-bed reactor section with thermally cracked products and
steam flowing overhead from the scrubber to the fractionator.
Steam, incondensable gases and naphtha then proceed to the
overhead accumulator. Typical volume ratios are shown, with
99.5 vol% of the flow being gas and only 0.5 vol% comprising
the condensed sour water and naphtha. FIG. 4 also shows that
possible RCW leakage into the process from the condensing exchangers was discounted, as this unit uses regular clean cooling
water and not RCW.
Having confirmed no operating differences, the accumulator
modifications were examined. FIG. 5 shows the simple design
provided with the original plant design. The two inlets impinge
on a shelf with the liquid falling to the pool below, and the vapors turning past the vessel head and back toward the demister
FIG. 2. Samples with demulsifier added and control.

FIG. 4. Schematic of reactor, fractionator and overhead accumulator.
250
Tank almost full
Gpm
Meters of oil in tank
200
100
Demulsifier
injected
July
August
FIG. 3. Injection of demulsifier in 2012.
September
Shelf inlet
Demister
FIG. 5. Original accumulator design.
Water Management
pad, and then proceeding to the single gas exit. Water and naphtha move through the demister pad, the water is collected in the
boot and withdrawn, and the naphtha is taken off from above.
FIG. 6 shows the modified accumulator internals. Instead of
the inlet shelf, a slotted T distributor was used to distribute
the gas and liquids. Furthermore, calming baffles and a packed
bed were provided to improve liquid/liquid separation, and
a less dense demister pad was retrofitted. Of the changes, the
slotted T appeared to be the greatest concern area for generating emulsion. Here, energy from the incondensable gases
could be imparted into the naphtha and sour water.
Bench-scale surrogate experiments. To understand the
emulsification process, an engineering consulting firm was

commissioned to develop rapid bench-scale experiments. To
model the process, it used compressed air to represent the incondensable gases, with canola oil and tap water representing
the naphtha and sour water, respectively. [Using actual materials (sour water and sour naphtha) poses severe safety issues
due to the amount of hydrogen sulfide dissolved in the real
commercial streams.]
Within one month, from commissioning to first operation,
data was generated. Initially, the shelf inlet was modeled, as
shown in FIG. 7. One surprising result was the identification of
emulsion entering from the white inlet tube. It appeared that
some emulsion had formed when canola oil and water were
mixed upstream of the shelf. Clearly, once the oil and water
condense, even turbulence in the piping upstream of an accumulator can cause emulsion formation.
For contrast, FIG. 8 shows the results of passing the flow
through a single-slot simulation of the slotted T. The white
emulsion formed is apparent, although the flowrates being used
were extreme. FIG. 9 shows settling curves for emulsion formed
under varying inlet geometries and operating conditions. Overall, the slotted T geometry appeared to have the potential to
form emulsions, but only under extreme flow conditions.
Inlet gas phase flow structure. As shown in FIG. 4, gas is
the majority of the volume flow in the accumulator. To obtain
a better understanding of the flow structure, a computational
fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation was commissioned. Results
Slotted T inlet
Demister
Calming baffles/packed bed/gap
FIG. 6. Modified accumulator design (slotted T picture inset).
InstruCalc
CONTROL VALVES FLOW ELEMENTS RELIEF DEVICES PROCESS DATA
InstruCalc 9.0 calculates the size of control valves, flow elements and relief devices and calculates fluid
properties, pipe pressure loss and liquid waterhammer flow. Easy to use and accurate, it is the only sizing
program you need, enabling you to: Size more than 50 different instruments; Calculate process data at flow
conditions for 54 fluids in either mixtures or single components and 66 gases, and; Calculate the orifice
size, flowrate or differential range, which enables the user to select the flow rate with optimum accuracy.
NEW VERSION
Order Direct from

the Publisher.
GulfPub.com/InstruCalc
or call +1 (713) 520-4426.
Updates and Whats New in InstruCalc Version 9.0

ENGINEERING STANDARD UPGRADES
Control Valve Revisions:
Updated to ANSII/ISA 75.011.01-2012
Calculation accuracy changed for critical flows
Viscosity correction factor changed
Pressure drop calculation revised to agree
with Crane Technical paper No 410.
Option of Cv Units (English) or Kv units
(Metric) added.
Option of either aerodynamic noise calculation
by ISA 75.17 method or InstruCalc method
Calculation accuracy added (input data within

acceptable limits)
Relief Devices:
Pressure Relief Devices Program follows API 520
Pt 1, 9th edition dated 7/14
OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
The ability to have more than one calculation open
at a time has been added. Each instance of the
program is framed in a different color. The user
can have multiple what if scenarios displayed
for making engineering decisions.
Water Management
FIG. 7. Simplified shelf design operating with air, canola oil and water.
FIG. 10. CFD gas-phase-only simulation of the slotted T distributor.
FIG. 8. Single slot operating with air, canola oil and water.
FIG. 11. Drawings of cold-flow Plexiglas mockups: Original shelf design

(left) and modified internals with slotted T distributor (right).
average. Combining these results with the bench-scale work

suggested that the inlet distributor was capable of forming the
naphtha-in-water emulsion.
FIG. 9. Settling curves for emulsion formed for various conditions.
from this gas-only simulation are shown in FIG. 10 for the

new slotted T inlet. Remarkably, the gas flow was not uniform
but showed peak velocities (red areas) almost four times the
Cold-flow experiments on emulsion formation. The initial work described previously led to a high-level understanding of the potential problems with the new internals. However,
a more detailed look at the geometry was required. As a result, a scaled cold-flow model of the drum was commissioned
and constructed. FIG. 11 shows profile and end-on views of the
original shelf and slotted T designs that were replicated in
Plexiglass. Tap water and Exxsol D95 were used to simulate
the sour water and naphtha, respectively.
Cold-flow observations immediately suggested that mixing in the slotted T was indeed much higher than the original
shelf configuration. The gas and liquid entered the vessel and
Starting oil/water interface
100
90
80
Exxsol D95 oil, vol %
70
60
Froude number match
Oil-free surface
Water Management
Oil draw port
50
40
30
Shelf
Tee
Mod. Tee, no pool baffles
Mod. Tee, with pool baffles
20
FIG. 12. Open-face slotted T design.
impinged on the closed center portion of the slotted T. This

action caused intensive mixing of the gas, with the water/oil
mixture forming an emulsion. A simple solution, requiring
only the removal of the slotted T face, was suggested during
the experiment (FIG. 12).
Sampling of the cold flow unit under various operating
scenarios was also completed. Results shown in FIG. 13 suggest that the slotted T leads to higher oil-in-water content
than the original shelf design. Furthermore, removing the
face of the slotted T can return the separation to the level of
the original shelf. The inset picture shows various samples
of water and oil recovered from the cold-flow experiments.
(Note: In the picture, water is dyed dark blue for contrast
from the clear Exxsol D95).
10
0
0.0 0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

Sample port height, in.
5.5
6.0 6.5
7.0
7.5
FIG. 13. Cold-flow emulsification results for inlet configurations at

different sampling heights.
Energy dissipation, m2/sec3
Original shelf T (50)
Slotted T (97)
Energy dissipation: The key to emulsion formation. Fi-
nally, gas-phase CFD was also used to understand the three

inlet configurations, the original shelf design, the slotted T
design and the open-face slotted T.
Under nominal gas flow conditions, energy dissipation over
the inlets was estimated (FIG. 14). The slotted T design had the
greatest energy dissipation, followed by the original shelf and
open-face slotted T. These results are entirely consistent with
the cold-flow work described in the preceding section.
Recommendations. Great care must be taken when modifying the internals of gas/liquid/liquid separators. Relatively
small changes to internals can lead to increased energy dissipation into the liquids, causing emulsion formation and poor
separator performance.
Fortunately, the demulsifiers have allowed Coker 8-3 to
continue operation. They have been used continuously over
the recent three-year run. Once the accumulator vessel is
available for mechanical work, the face of the slotted T can be
removed to reduce emulsion formation and to minimize the
need for a demulsifier.
Since naphtha in sour water separation has been a longterm issue at Syncrude Canada for all three cokers, this work
suggests that all aspects of separation should be examined.
These aspects include the nature of the naphtha (i.e., higher
density than typical due to fractionator ammonium chloride
deposition issues), energy dissipation in the upstream piping,
and the design of the gas/liquid/liquid separator.
Improving these components, as well as the continued use
of a demulsifier, may be required to solve Syncrude Canadas
naphtha-in-sour-water separation problem.
Open face T (45)
50
100
FIG. 14. Energy dissipation for shelf, slotted T and open-face T.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors greatly appreciate the work provided by R. Carruthers (GE Water
and Process Technologies), A. Gulamhusein (BC Research Inc.) and A. Mezo
(Coanda Research and Development) in support of this project.
CRAIG MCKNIGHT has worked at Syncrude Canada for 29 years.
During that time, he has been responsible for research projects
in all areas of Syncrudes upgrading operations. In 1998, he was
seconded to Syncrudes upgrading expansion project and
worked on flowsheeting options and economics. Mr. McKnight
returned to research activities in 1999 when he was seconded
to ExxonMobil. There, he was named Innovator of the Year
for his work on sulfur removal from gasoline. He is working to improve fluid coker,
LC-Finer and naphtha recovery unit operations. Mr. McKnight graduated from
Queens University in Ontario, Canada in 1987 with an MS degree in applied science.
BOYD RUMBALL has worked at Syncrude Canada for 36 years.
At present, he is a senior associate in operations support for
extraction and upgrade. In this role, he works as the fluid coking
technical advisor in the conversion area. Previously, he served
as the Fluid Coker 8-3 ready-for-operations technical leader
for the Upgrader Expansion (UE-1) project. He was responsible
for the commissioning and initial startup of Coker 8-3. He has
also had work assignments in site engineering services, operations and advanced
control. Boyd holds a BS degree in chemical engineering from the University
of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada.
Environment
and Safety
M. YANG, NEL, Glasgow, UK
Understand the sources of oil pollution in water

Oil in water is one of the most common types of water pollution. It has been previously reported that, in the UK alone,
over one-fourth of all serious water pollution incidents involved oil. Oil is also a highly visible form of pollution that
can easily spread. Even small quantities can potentially cause
harm to any aquatic environment. For example, five liters of
oil can form a film on the surface of a small lake, reducing the
level of oxygen in the water and making it difficult for fish to
breathe. Oil is also a risk to sewage treatment works, where
accidental discharges can be difficult and costly to clean up.
A small quantity of oil can have a disproportionate impact: it
can taint drinking water even at extremely low concentrations.
Many potential sources can lead to water contamination by
oil. It is important that these potential sources are known so
that the prevention, treatment and quantification of oil in water contamination and pollution can be understood.
Sources of oil contamination in water. According to the
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA), the most
common types of oil pollutants are diesel, central heating oil,
waste oil and, to a lesser extent, petrol. The most frequent
causes of oil pollution are spills during delivery, leaks from
poorly maintained or damaged tanks, lack of oil separators,
waste oil disposal into drainage systems, waste oil dumped
onto or into the ground, and, in some cases, waste oil burned
in the open. In the majority of these incidents, no emergency
oil spill response plans and/or equipment are available. Other
sources of pollution include corroding pipelines below and
above ground, and illegal oil discharges at sea.
For large power plant operations, a significant amount of
cooling water is used to cool equipment such as pump motors, compressors and transformers. Oil leaks sometimes
occur, resulting in oil pollution of the cooling water. Oily
wastewater can also come from boiler feed, leaks from lubrication systems and from drip pans, such as those positioned
below transformers.
For oil refineries, a huge amount of water is used for operations that include desalting and cooling. Conservation of
Clear Air and Water in Europe (CONCAWE) reported that
the total aqueous effluent from EU refineries in 2010 reached
1,583 MMt. In particular, process water that results from desalting can contain a significant amount of crude oil.
Legal aspects of oil in water. In many countries, regulations related to aqueous discharges in surface waters set maxi70AUGUST 2016|HydrocarbonProcessing.com
mum values to the quantity of a limited number of contaminants that can be released in the surface waters.
The discharge of water contaminated with oil and hydrocarbons is strictly controlled and regulated. In the EU, mineral
oil and hydrocarbons are List-1 substances under the original
Dangerous Substances Directive 76/464/EEC. The directive
accounted for discharges to inland surface waters, territorial
waters, inland coastal waters and ground water.
The 76/464/EEC directive was integrated into the Water
Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) that was adopted in
September 2000. In 2013, 76/464/EEC was subsequently repealed and has since been codified as 2006/11/EC.
The 2000/60/EC directive is less prescriptive and integrates the various components more effectively. However, it
is very complex, as it takes into account the characteristics
of the water in which the discharge takes place, as well as the
environment, the local species, human activities and their interactions. A priority list of 33 substances, the discharge of
which must be reduced, has been established (EU Decision
2455/2001/CE). Appearing at the top of the list are 11 substances and products that include heavy metals, pesticides and
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). Discharge of these
11 substances and products will be banned by 2021.
Trade effluent, the liquid waste produced in the course of
any trade or industry that is discharged to the wastewater system, requires a consent from representative authorities. Typical consent parameters and quoted example figures are:
pH limits typically fall in the range of 6 pH10 pH,
and 5pH11pH
Suspended solids are typically limited to 1,000 mg/l
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) limit is typically
2,000 mg/l
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) is typically limited
to 1,000 mg/l
Oil must not exceed 100 mg/l.
For surface water dischargesor mineral oil and hydrocarbons contained in the discharge waterthat are discharged to
groundwater, the sea, rivers or lakes, the limits depend on the
potential local environmental impact. Two types of consent
exist: numeric and descriptive. In numeric terms, wastewater
discharge of up to 5 mg/l or 10 mg/l of oil and hydrocarbons,
respectively, into the control water may be permitted by governmental agencies, depending upon the quantity of the discharge and the receiving environment. The descriptive term
no visible oil has also been used.
Environment and Safety

Effluent from industrial processes is normally discharged to
a sewer, subject to the approval of water treatment companies.
Concentration of oil in these discharged waters can vary significantly, from mg/l levels to hundreds of mg/l. For refineries in
Europe, an annual average maximum of 5 mg/l in the effluent
was stipulated in PARCOM Recommendation 89/5.
Discharge of mineral oil and hydrocarbons to the control
water is strictly regulated. Control water covers virtually all
fresh and saline natural waters up to the offshore territorial
limit, including rivers, streams, lakes, estuaries, coastal waters
and ground water.
Oil-in-water treatment technologies. Oil in water can be
present in both dispersed and dissolved forms. Dispersed oils
in water are found in the form of small droplets that may range
from sub-microns to hundreds of microns. Dissolved oils are
those present in a soluble form. Examples include benzene,
toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene (BTEX).
Many treatment technologies can be used to treat oil-contaminated water. They range from mechanical and physical/
chemical to biological. Treatments include:
Gravity and enhanced gravity
Gas flotation
Filtration (sand, walnut shell, membrane, etc.)
Absorption and adsorption
Chemical/oxidation
Biological.
For dispersed oils, gravity, gas flotation and filtration-based
technologies are commonly used. Separation efficiency depends on numerous factors (oil droplet size, density of the oil,
viscosity and density of the water phase, bubble size, flowrate,
temperature, etc.). For dissolved oils, gravity or filtrationbased methods are ineffective. Absorption, adsorption, chemical/oxidation and biological-based technologies are required.
European standards (BS EN 858-1:2002 and BS EN 8582:2003) for the design and use of prefabricated oil separators
are available. These standards refer to two classes. Class 1 separators, which are designed to achieve a concentration of less
than 5 mg/l of oil under standard test conditions, should be
used when removal of very small droplets is required. Class 2
separators are designed to achieve a concentration of less than
100 mg/l under standard test conditions, and are suitable for
handling discharges where a lower quality requirement applies
(e.g., where the effluent passes to a foul sewer). Until recently,
these standards were widely used by UK regulators.
For oil refineries, a typical wastewater treatment plant
consists of primary and secondary oil/water separation to
remove most of the oil, followed by biological treatment
and tertiary treatment (if necessary) to remove the remaining oil and other contaminants. The primary and secondary
oil/water separations are usually achieved with an API gravity separator followed by a dissolved air flotation (DAF) or
induced gas flotation (IAF) unit. Water discharge from the
flotation units is then routed to an aeration tank/clarifier that
constitutes the biological system. A tertiary treatment may be
added prior to the discharge of the treated water. According
to CONCAWE, the concentration of oil in the discharged
effluents from refineries in Europe has consistently been less
than 2 mg/l since 2000.
Oil-in-water analysis methods. Oil in water is a method-
defined parameter, and oil in produced water can be present in

different forms: free oil, dispersed oil and dissolved oil.
Free oil usually refers to oil floating on the surface of water
or very large oil droplets that settle to the surface very quickly.
Dispersed oil is oil in produced water in the form of small droplets that range from sub-microns to hundreds of microns. Dispersed oil may contain aliphatic, aromatic hydrocarbons and
other organicse.g., acids and phenols. Dissolved oil refers to
oil in produced water in a soluble form.
Aliphatic hydrocarbons generally have very low solubility
in water. It is the aromatic hydrocarbonsin particular, the
single-ring BTEXs; two-ring naphthalene, phenanthrene and
dibenzothiophene (NPDs); and those organic acids (e.g., fatty
acids and naphthenic acids) and phenolsthat form the bulk
of dissolved oil (FIG. 1).
The amount of dissolved and dispersed oil in water can
increase or decrease depending on the processing conditions
being utilized (temperature, pressure, flowrate and treatment
technologies). Some of these constituents may be present but
might not contribute to the measured oil in water. The relative
contribution that these components make to the oil in water
content depends on the method used for analysis.
MEASUREMENT METHODS
Three main types of reference oil in water measurement
methods exist: infrared absorption, gravimetric, and gas chromatography and flame ionization detection.
Infrared absorption. In a typical infrared absorption-based
method, an oily water sample is first acidified and then extracted, typically by a chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) solvent. Once
the extract is separated from the water sample, it is dried and
purified by the removal of polar compounds. A portion of the
extract is placed into an infrared instrument, where the absorbance is measured. By comparing the absorbance obtained
from a sample extract to those that are prepared with known
oil concentrations, the oil concentration in the original sample
can be calculated. A well-known example of an infrared-based
reference method is IP 426/98.
Gravimetric. Gravimetric-based methods measure anything
extractable by a solvent that is not removed during a solvent

Total oil
Dissolved
Aromatics
Acids
Dispersed
Phenols
Aromatics
Acids
Aliphatics
BTEX
Fatty acids
BTEX
Fatty acids
PAHs
Naphthenic
PAHs
Naphthenic
FIG. 1. The amount of dissolved and dispersed oil in water can increase
or decrease, depending on the processing conditions being utilized.

evaporation process and is capable of being weighed. In a typical
gravimetric-based method, an oily water sample is acidified and
then extracted by a solvent. After separating the solvent (now
containing oil) from the water sample, it is placed into a flask
that has been weighed. The flask is placed into a temperaturecontrolled water bath, and the solvent is evaporated at a specific
temperature, condensed and collected. After the solvent is evaporated, the flask containing the residual oil is dried and weighed.
If the weight of the empty flask is known, then the amount of
residual oil can be calculated. A good example of gravimetricbased reference methods is the USA EPA Method 1664.
Gas chromatography and flame ionization detection.
Unlike infrared and gravimetric methods, the use of GC-FID
offers the potential for obtaining details of the different types of
hydrocarbons in the oil fraction. Like the other reference methods, an oily water sample is acidified and extracted by a solvent.
The extract is then dried and purified before a small amount is
injected into a GC instrument. With the help of a carrier gas and
the chromatographic column, different groups of hydrocarbons
are detected as they leave the column at different times. Carrier
gas is used to move the components through the column, while
the column acts to separate the different groups of hydrocarbons
so they leave the column and are detected at different times. An
example of a GC-FID-based reference method is the ISO 9377-2.
Choosing the best reference method. It should be emphasized that different methods will produce different results.
Therefore, it is not possible to compare results obtained from
the different reference methods. Also, separate methods require
different instruments and procedures, affecting costs (CAPEX
and OPEX), training, health and safety.
Until recently, infrared-based methods were commonly used
with available portable, fixed-wavelength instruments. Due to
the use of CFC and the lack of compositional details of the measurement method, they are becoming less popular.
Gravimetric methods are simple and relatively cheap, but
again they do not provide details of the composition. Due to the
evaporation procedures involved in gravimetric methods, some
loss of volatile components also occurs.
GC-FID methods do not require the use of CFCs, have no
issues with the loss of volatiles, and have the potential to provide
detailed information on composition. However, they necessitate sophisticated instruments that require skilled operators.
Sampling and sample handling. While measurement meth-
ods are crucial for obtaining good results, it is important to

understand that measurement results are only as good as the
provided samples. If the samples used for the analysis are not
representative of the flow stream, then the results obtained will
be of little use.
To obtain a representative sample, a number of aspects must
be considered:
Location of withdrawn sample
Selection of the appropriate sampling devices
Isokinetic sampling, if samples are taken from a pipe
(isokinetic samples are taken such that the velocity of
fluid in the sampling pipe is the same as that in the
main flow pipe)
Sample bottles, which must be scrupulously clean.

For regulatory compliance monitoring, samples may have to
be taken at specified locations. For process control and optimization, this is not an issue.
Once a representative sample is obtained, the sample must
be properly handled. This will depend on when, where and how
the sample is to be analyzed and whether the samples are for
regulatory compliance or process optimization. Sample handling may include acidification, transportation and storage.
Acidification serves two main purposes: to preserve the
samples by killing bacteria that can degrade oil; and to dissolve
precipitates, such as iron oxide and calcium carbonate, which
can stabilize an emulsion and prevent a complete separation
between solvent extract and water after the extraction process.
Generally, the pH value needs to be lower than 2. This is often
achieved by adding a small volume of diluted HCl solution.
If a water sample is to be transported in addition to acidification, then the sample should be stored and transported in a suitable, sealed container to prevent ingress of light. Exposure to
light may degrade hydrocarbons in the water sample and change
the oil concentration.
Similarly, if oil in water samples are to be stored for whatever
reason, according to the ISO 5667-3 standard, they should ideally be stored in a refrigerator with a temperature of between
1C and 5C. The ISO standard also states that the maximum
recommended preservation time before analysis for an oily water is one month.
Future trends/needs. With increasing environmental aware-
ness, a tighter regulation with a reduced oil discharge limit

(5 mg/l is widely accepted in the EU) may be introduced. A
similar change has already taken place for the offshore oil and
gas industry in the North Sea: the oil in produced water performance standard of 40 mg/l was reduced to 30 mg/l from January 2007. A risk-based approach for the management of produced water in the North Sea has been implemented since 2013.
Treatment technology continues to evolve and improve, particularly membrane technologies that enable oil-contaminated
water to be treated and increasingly made available for reuse for
agriculture, livestock feeding, refill of aquifers and even drinking water. With a rapidly growing world population, water reuse will become increasingly important. Portable oil-in-water
analysis methods and sophisticated online oil-in-water monitors have also been developed, bolstering the monitoring and
optimization of treatment processes.
DR. MING YANG is the environmental consultancy services

manager at NEL, a provider of technical consultancy, research,
testing and program management services. Since joining NEL
in 1998, he has been responsible for over 30 international
conferences related to produced water, oil-in-water
measurement and multiphase separation.
Dr. Yang has also initiated and led several joint industry
projects, and has presented and chaired many produced water-related events.
In addition to publishing a book chapter on oil in produced water measurement, he
has established a one-day training course that has been conducted numerous times
globally. He was one of two authors who originally drafted the UK guidance notes
on sampling and analysis of produced water and other hydrocarbon discharges.
He joined NEL after working at Heriot-Watt University, where he was involved
in research projects related to produced water characterization and re-injection.
He also conducted research projects related to production chemicals and
multiphase separation at the University of Manchester.
Environment
and Safety
S. V. BAPAT, Petrokon Utama Sdn Bhd,
Brunei Darussalam
Consider post-design changes to confine

a hazardous area
Hazardous area classification (HAC) is carried out while
performing basic design engineering, and HAC drawings are
produced as one of the deliverables. The objective of the area
classification is to avoid simultaneous occurrence of a flammable mixture and an ignition source.
HAC drawings are used to select the electrical equipment,
to plan the maintenance activities, to control the traffic movement within internal roads and to make the decisions on facility
layout (FIG. 1). Note: HAC classification does not consider the
toxicity of the handled fluids. The hazardous area and the zone
sizes can be appropriately confined by following the steps outlined in this work.
The hazardous area represents the volume of the plant, which
contains significant quantities of flammable mixtures, as it exists
during normal operating conditions, startup or shutdown.
Flammable mixtures can form when the surrounding air
mixes with the hydrocarbon vapors released from potential leak
sources, such as flanged joints, pump seals, sample points, sumps
and vents. Each source will generate a hazardous area around it.
Its dimensioni.e., the hazard radiuswill depend on the fluid
category (i.e., the nature of the hydrocarbon fluid as liquefied
gas, gas, boiling liquid or stabilized liquid), operating pressure
and release hole size. Determining whether the hydrocarbon
vapor is lighter or heavier than air is also an important criterion.
Each plant consists of many such sources; therefore, several
hazardous areas exist that may overlap each other or remain
independent of one another. Generally, the sources at the periphery govern the boundary of a hazardous area. Depending
on the release duration and type of ventilation, the area will be
designated as Zone 0, 1 or 2 (FIG. 2).
Any ignition source that can provide either ignition energy
(such as the hot surfaces of motors, electric heaters and junction boxes) or generate sparks (such as during maintenance activity or by incoming traffic vehicles) may cause ignition of a
flammable mixture. Therefore, the area is classified so that the
likelihood of a flammable mixture spreading over the ignition
sources is avoided or minimized.
The key steps in area classification are:
1. Identify the release source and establish the size
2. Identify the fluid category that could be released
through each source, along with its operating
temperature and pressure
3. Estimate the hazard radius from the standard,1

or by performing dispersion calculations
4. Establish the duration of release and nature of
ventilation, and determine the zone type
5. Identify the cloud limits and build the hazardous
area boundaries
6. Perform analysis
7. Recommend the gas group (allowable energy)
and the temperature class (allowable maximum
surface temperature) for electrical equipment.
Analysis of HAC classification. Similar to piping and in-
strumentation diagrams (P&IDs), HAC drawings remain live

during the define-and-execute phase, and then throughout
the plant life. Changes in hazardous area may occur at several
different phases, as outlined in the following sections.
1. During the engineering phase, or while performing
the detailed design (DD). During the DD, the
location of each flange and equipment is known,
Uncertified
electrical
items
Internal and
external
roads
Control
room
Suction
intake of
diesel
generator
Suction
intake of air
compressor
Helideck
and boat
landing
Hazardous area
based on various
release sources
Zones 0, 1, and 2
Fla m
Sep
a ra ti
m a ble m ixtur
o n dist a n c e fr o m z
Unrestricted
vehicle
movement
s
one
Admin.
building
Unrestricted
public
movement
FIG. 1. Example of a hazardous area classification.


and the detail of each source of release is available.
Sometimes new equipment is added, or a few flanges
are intentionally introduced to ease the installation.
Sometimes in DD, the flare or vent loads are increased.
The increased number of sources (i.e., new flanges)
changes the previously prescribed hazard boundary,
while the increased quantity of the released gas
increases the zone area.
2. During a capacity revamp, or rejuvenation phase
(brownfield projects). Capacity revamps can be
performed either by changing the operating parameters
of the existing facility or by installing new equipment
(piping, vent stack, etc.) in an existing facility.
When the operating parameters are changed, one
of the governing parameters for the HAC will be an
increase in operating pressure. Usually, an increase in
operating pressure will be followed by the recalibration
of trip setpoints and the installation of new relief valves.
Due to the increase in operating pressure, the release
rate through the existing sources will increase, thereby
also increasing the hazard radii.
When revamping an existing facility, new sources
of release will be added. Depending on the operating
pressure, fluid category and the size of source and its
location, the new hazard radius may stretch the existing
boundary to a new limit. Therefore, the existing HAC
zones extend beyond their current limits and overlap
their surroundings. The zones may even encroach
on existing noncertified electrical equipment, utility
systems (e.g., fire water hydrants safety showers), air
compressor suction ducts, internal and external roads,
and platforms on the helideck.
3. During the temporary operation phase that may
determine the HAC. Examples of these temporary
operations are:
Change in service of equipmentFor example,
a dedicated diesel tank and its associated system
are used for storing and transporting kerosine
Performing intelligent pipeline pigging
Different fluid is used as a pig-driving medium
at higher operating pressures
Zone 1
Flammable atmosphere is
likely to occur in normal
operation
Zone 2
not likely to occur in normal
operation; or, if it occurs,
will exist for short time
Atmospheric roof tank

Zone O
continuously present or
present for long periods
Stored liquid
Example of hazardous area classification
FIG. 2. Hazardous area Zones 0, 1 and 2, based on various release

sources. The sketch shows the objective of area classification to
separate the sources of release from the sources of ignition.
Dyke
Storing and transporting the fuel for temporary

power generationFor example, at the time
of commissioning.
During the operations described, a new fluid
category will be introduced. If it belongs to the
determining category, then the hazard radii and the
zone boundary will also increase.
4. During the reassessment phase, or during the
legacy-as-building phase. In this case, the latest
standards are applied to an existing facility after the
as-building of P&IDs and plot plans, and then the
extent of the HAC zones are reassessed.
The new standards2 may define the zone limit to
lower the flammability limit instead of being previously
applied at the time of plant design. To reduce the
flammability limit, additional air volumes will be
needed. As a result, a larger volume and hazard radius
will be required.
5. During the drawing preparation phase, due
to human error. Human error is common to all
previously described points. Sometimes, the criteria
are applied without completely understanding the
requirements. However, the wrong selection of fluid
category, operating pressure or release hole size will
affect the recommended radii and extend the zone
size. A few examples can be considered:
A new facility was designed to gather production
from onshore wells. It consisted of flowlines,
production and test manifolds, a manual
depressurization facility and a vent. The size of the
Zone 2 cloud generated by the released gas was
so large that it not only went beyond the plant
fence, but also approached a nearby public facility.
To limit the cloud size within the fence, the release
rate and quantity were lowered by reducing the
initial depressurization pressure and installing
an in-line restriction.
An offshore platform was designed to produce fluids
at high pressure (25 barg). It had a transformer
(which was not certified) and was located outside
Zone 2. The new wells to be drilled on that platform
were intended to produce fluids at elevated pressure
(75 barg). Each new flowline had a sample point.
It was observed that the hazardous area generated
from the sample point of the new flowlines
encroached on the transformer. As a result, it was
recommended to not install the sample, to not
produce in the elevated-pressure regime and to
not extend the deck to relocate the transformer.
In an existing onshore gas distribution station,
the manual isolation valve was installed in the
underground valve pit. When the HAC drawing
was created, it was observed that Zone 2 overlapped
the facilities around it, as well as the adjacent
public road. The criterion of the drain sump,
which requires a larger radius, was applied to the
underground pit.
An HAC study was performed during the basic
engineering of an offshore drilling platform.

Based on its outcome, a non-rated distributed
control system (DCS) and instrumented protective
system (IPS) were ordered. During the DD, the
DCS and IPS locations were classified as Zone 2.
It was not possible to relocate the sources of
release. As a result, the procured equipment
was declared unfit. To avoid the procurement of
zone-rated items, a separation distance from
Zone 2 was provided by the deck extension.
In a crude oil export terminal, new crude
transfer pumps were installed between the
existing internal road and the tank dyke.
It was observed during the HAC study that
the edge of Zone 2, generated from the pump
flange, encroached on the road. This meant that
the flammable cloud would remain on the road.
It was not possible to relocate the road or the
flanges. To mitigate this issue, finger gates were
installed to control the traffic movement, and
the vehicles entering the facility were
recommended to be equipped with a muffler.
An onshore hydrocarbon fluid receiving facility
included pig launchers and receivers, as well as
drain sumps. The sumps were designed to receive
the drains after launching and receiving the pigs.
The facility HAC drawings were as-built and
issued to the latest standard. As the size of Zones
1 and 2 overlapped the facility, they encroached
on the road to the facility. However, since pigging
is an irregular operation, it was suggested to block
the roads from traffic when pigging was scheduled
to be performed. Other alternatives included sump
modification to make vapor tight, sump relocation
away from the road and the installation of a vapor
barrier wall. However, these alternatives were not
considered due to practical limitations and the
temporariness of the operation.
Recommendations. The hazardous area and the zone sizes
can be confined under several considerations:
1. First, give weight to HAC requirements while
preparing the basis for design (Bf D) and basic
engineering. Involve competent personnel while
preparing the Bf D and during the engineering phases.
The initial study should address HAC requirements to
avoid major rework.
2. Plan the piping routing study early. Consider
grouping flanges and locating the release sources
away from uncertified ignition sources. Proposals to
locate the new sumps in the existing plant should be
critically reviewed. If a pressurization unit is being
considered, then it will be important to consider
the effect of power loss, the reliability of the power
supply and the possibility of supplying air from
the hydrocarbon-free area.
3. If the controlling hazardous area is generated by
sources that revive only during temporary operations,
sampling, etc., then judge whether operating
procedures can be used to counter this generation.
4. It is also important to select the right fluid category.

The hazard radius depends on the fluid category; do
not apply a worst-case approach. If fluid category C is
selected over fluid category B, then the hazardous area
will be larger than needed. If dispersion calculations are
performed to estimate the radius, then the composition
considered must represent the intended fluid category.
5. Select the operating conditions that are representative of
normal conditions. Sources operating at high operating
pressure require a large radius. If a pressure trip setpoint
or the relief valve set pressure is selected, then verify that
it is representative and not excessively high compared
to the maximum operating pressure range. Explore
the possibility of reducing the initial depressurization
pressure considered for the vent rate calculations.
6. The size of the release source should be precise.
Sources of releases are represented by the flanges,
pump seals, sample points, restriction orifices from
vent lines, and other items. Review each of them and
ensure that their sizes are considered in estimating the
hazard radius and vent rate calculations. Also, ensure
that the dispersion modeling is representative.
7. Consider performing dispersion calculations,
as these will help when the hazard radius becomes
excessively highparticularly when the fluid
category is C and the release size is large.
8. Consider the operation of the pressurization unit.
If an uninterrupted electric supply is available, then
one of the options could be to consider the air
pressurization unit to provide the sufficient number
of air changes. However, this unit has other limitations,
such as the requirement of hydrocarbon-free air,
the location of the suction duct away from the HAC
boundary limit and the requirement of airtight doors.
9. Finally, it is important to isolate all ignition sources.
Ignition sources can include incoming traffic,
maintenance activities, hot surfaces or static
electricity generation.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Gratitude to my family, management and colleagues.
LITERATURE CITED
SPE International, Hazardous area classification for electrical systems, Petrowiki,
June 1, 2015, online: http://petrowiki.org/Hazardous_area_classification_for_
electrical_systems
2
Energy Institute, Area Classification Working Group, Hazardous area classification, 2016, online: https://www.energyinst.org/technical/safety/ei-15-hazardous-area-classification
1
SANJAY V. BAPAT is a process engineering manager at Petrokon

Utama Sdn Bhd in Brunei. He has worked for 25 years in the
process engineering of chemical, petrochemical, fertilizer, and
oil and gas projects. He is a Fellow of IChemE, a chartered
engineer and a Brunei Shell Petroleum-approved Level 2
technical authority. He is responsible for delivering front-end,
conceptual design and detailed design deliverables, along with
assurances of compliance with process safety requirements.
Mr. Bapat develops concepts and methodologies and strategizes design
condition selection, hazardous area classification, flare and blowdown studies,
consequence modeling and surge analysis studies. He has presented papers
at IChemEs Third Hazards AP symposium and the Brunei International
Conference on Engineering and Technology. He holds a postgraduate degree
in chemical engineering.
REFOCUSED
REIMAGINED
REENERGIZED
AFPM Q&A AND

TECHNOLOGY FORUM
Industry Experts.
Peer to Peer Discussions.
Relevant Knowledge Exchanges.
Innovative Formats.
Q&A and Technology Forum

Marriott Waterfront Baltimore
September 26 28, 2016
2016
AFPM
Official Conference
Show Publication
afpm.org/Conferences
Heat Transfer
C. WRIGHT, Global Heat Transfer, Leeds, UK
Sample heat transfer fluids to offset carbon effects

on thermal plant efficiency
The long-term viability of a plant depends on maintaining
continuous output and reducing production costs. Carbon accumulation in a heat transfer plant can lead to a reduction in
plant efficiency. A number of interventions are available to
counteract the buildup of carbon, including the adoption of a
program of routine sampling of the heat transfer fluid (HTF),
which potentially reduces the energy consumed and avoids
unwanted interruptions to production that may occur through
failure of component parts.
An HTF is central to manufacturing and is used as a heat
carrier in the processing of food, chemicals and energy.1 The
main types of HTF media include air and other gases, water
and steam, mineral-based HTFs, synthetic-based HTFs, molten salts and liquid metals. The cost efficiency of any manufacturing plant is critical to its long-term survival and includes the
cost of the HTF, the storage of the energy produced, the cost of
the heater, and the cost of land and property for the operation.2
The efficiency of a plant also includes the HTFs physiochemical properties, such as mechanical and chemical stability,
and the compatibility between the HTF and the heater and/
or storage material. However, efficiency can be measured more
simply as production output vs. the energy consumed to generate the output. Therefore, revenue is equal to the production
output divided by the energy consumed to produce the output.
Energy consumption can be increased by technical inefficiencies, meaning that while output is maintained, the cost of
energy consumption increases. The net effect is an increase in
the cost of operation and a reduction in revenue.
Maintaining continuous output and stable energy consumption are critical to a plants long-term cost efficiency. The
condition of the HTF can negatively impact the energy consumed by a plant, as discussed in this article.
Heat transfer fluid condition. Past research has shown that
the condition of an HTF is improved by regular sampling with
the optimal sampling frequency reported to be once every three
months for a mineral-based HTF. Once sampled, an HTF is
chemically analyzed to assess and ascertain its state of thermal
cracking, the degree of oxidation, the systems safety, the extent
of HTF contamination and the degree of system wear.
Prior research used the tests reported in TABLE 1 and ranked
the occurrence of events. Results showed that total acid number (TAN) and closed flashpoint temperature ranked as the
most frequently occurring events (i.e., 1 in 3 systems). Interestingly, when HTF systems were sampled less frequently (i.e.,
every 23 years), the buildup of carbon was the second-mostcommon event (i.e., 1 in 3 systems). This dropped to 1 in 20
cases when sampled at least once per year.
Carbon occurs as a byproduct of thermal cracking and oxidation of an HTF. All HTFs will degrade over time, and this is
why carbon needs to be routinely monitored. When carbon is
formed, it becomes suspended in the HTF and acts as a sticky
substance that will adhere to the internal surfaces of the HTF
system, including the heater. FIG. 1 depicts a system that uses a
mineral-based HTF. Also shown are the potential sources of
carbon formation, which include:
Adherence of the carbon to the internal pipework,
including the heater, which acts as an insulator,
increasing the heat needed to heat the HTF
Adherence of carbon to internal pipework and
a reduction in the diameter of the pipework
The formation of carbon sludge that accumulates in the
expansion tank and circulates around the HTF system
has the potential to bake onto internal pipework.
Changes in pump efficiency. In normal function, the speed
of the pump in a thermal plant drives the flow of the HTF. The
efficiency of the pump is affected by the buildup of carbon as
Atmosphere
Expansion tank: Carbon sludge formation
1S1
Expansion tank
Pipework: Carbon sludge circulated

through system
Pipework: Carbon buildup and blockages
Oil/gas
separator
TE2
Heater: Carbon baked onto internal surface
Stop valve
Return
Supply
Stop
valve
Heater
PI Pressure gauge
TIC
TEI
Gate valve
Pump
Drain Strainer Stop

valve
FIG. 1. Typical system that uses a mineral-based HTF. Note: The sources
of carbon formation are highlighted.
Heat Transfer
it increases the kinematic viscosity of the HTF. Kinematic viscosity of a non-Newtonian fluid, such as an HTF, is calculated
by dividing the absolute viscosity (also known as dynamic viscosity) by its mass density. The viscosity of an HTF is temperature dependent, so the reference temperature must be standardized for the results to have any meaning. In the laboratory,
kinematic viscosity is normally presented at 40C and 100C.
Increased carbon in the HTF raises kinematic viscosity.
This means the pump must consume more energy, assuming a
constant temperature to pump the HTF and to overcome the
increased resistance to flow presented by the higher viscosity
of the HTF, as shown in the bottom left of FIG. 2. Likewise,
the buildup of carbon on internal pipework reduces the inNormal carbon levels
Normal
kinematic
viscosity
Pump
Pump
This is the case for a virgin HTF and reflects

normal pump speed and resistance to flow
Increased
kinematic
viscosity
Increased carbon levels
Pump speed needs to increase

to sustain the same flow
Pump
Pump
Pump speed needs to increase to

overcome the increase in kinematic
viscosity, which increases the
resistance to flow
Pump speed needs to increase to

overcome the increase in kinematic
viscosity and increased resistance
to flow
FIG. 2. The response of changes in pump speed to changes in HTF

kinematic viscosity and resistance to flow.
Reduce the operating
temperature to reduce the
rate of thermal cracking
temperature
Replace the existing

HTF with a
synthetic-based HTF
recharge
Drain some of the HTF

and top up with a virgin
HTF
dilution
To manage
carbon forming
in the HTF
Install a nitrogen blanket

to reduce the exposure of
the HTF to oxygen, which
can lead to carbon
sludge formation
nitrogen blanket
Install a filter to extract

carbon from the
circulating HTF
filtration
Incorporate a program
of routine sampling and
chemical analysis
sampling
Add antioxidant packs to

reduce oxygenation of the
HTF, which can lead to
carbon sludge formation
antioxidants
FIG. 3. Options for managing the buildup of carbon in an HTF system.
ternal diameter of pipes and increases the resistance to flow.

For turbulent flow, there is increased resistance, and much
higher pressures are required to drive HTF flow. The point at
which turbulent flow occurs is referred to as the critical velocity and calculated as: (viscosity Reynolds number) / (2
density x radius). Therefore, radius and viscosity contribute
to the overall resistance experienced under turbulent flow
conditions. For changes in internal diameter, the pump will
consume more energy to achieve sufficient pressure to drive
flow (FIG. 2, top right).
In real life, viscosity changes and carbon buildup will occur
during the process of thermal degradation, and changes in resistance to flow will occur as a result of the increased viscosity and
reduced conductivity of the pipework. When combined, energy consumption and the demand on the pump are increased
(FIG. 2, bottom right).
The buildup of carbon on the heaters internal surfaces cannot be ignored. While this does not form part of the model
presented in FIG. 2, carbon buildup would lead to carbon lining
the internal surfaces of pipework. As carbon is a good insulator, more energy would be needed to achieve the same operational temperature. The net effect is an increase in the energy
consumed to heat the HTF.
Practical methods to reduce carbon. Monitoring carbon
is important for efficient operations and lower OPEX. A number of options exist to help reduce carbon buildup. These options are outlined in FIG. 3 and include:
SamplingPrior research has shown the effectiveness
of increased sampling, which has been associated
with improved HTF condition. This is based on the
association between fluid cleanliness and component life.
TemperatureHTF manufacturers generally
recommend that an HTF be sampled at least once
per year when operating near its upper operating
temperature. Some manufacturers recommend that this
sampling be conducted twice yearly if the operating
temperature is 20C below its upper operating
temperature. This scenario relates to Arrehenius Law,
which shows that a correlation exists between the rate of
a reaction and temperature, meaning the rate of a fluids
degradation doubles for every 10C rise in temperature.
DilutionThe HTF in the system is partly drained and
then filled with virgin HTF to dilute the existing fluid.
This process effectively removes some of the carbon and
other degradation byproducts.
TABLE 1. Routinely conducted tests when chemically analyzing an HTF

Test
Unit
What this test relates to
Carbon residue
% weight
The extent of thermal cracking and/or oxidation
Total acid number
mg KOH per g HTF
The extent of oxidation
Open and closed flashpoint temperature
The extent of thermal cracking and/or system safety
Kinematic viscosity
mm /s
The extent of thermal cracking and/or oxidation
Water content
ppm
The degree of contamination
Ferrous wear debris (e.g., insoluble debris)
ppm
The degree of system wear
Elements (e.g., silicon)
ppm
The degree of contamination
Heat Transfer
FiltrationFiltration effectively removes
containments from the system. If contaminants are left
in the HTF, then they can catalyze the degradation of
the fluid. In existing systems, filters with finer pores
than the strainer (FIG. 1) can be used as a temporary or
permanent addition to an HTF system and enable the
continuous filtration of particles. The effectiveness of
this approach can be demonstrated by incorporating an
assessment of fluid cleanliness (i.e., ISO 4406:1999)
to quantify the number and distribution of particulates
suspended in the HTF.
RechargeAn option to drain and refill an HTF system
with a virgin HTF always exists. The client can choose to
use either a mineral- or synthetic-based HTF. Syntheticbased HTFs can be used at much higher temperatures
and are more resistant to thermal degradation.
Nitrogen blanketThe effect of oxygen (FIG. 1) is
detrimental to an HTF at temperatures exceeding
60C and leads to the formation of corrosive acids,
carbon sludge and carbon fouling. The use of a nitrogen
blanket to prevent the HTF from coming into contact
with air is an appropriate countermeasure.
AntioxidantsOxygen can significantly increase
the degradation of an HTF and damage HTF system
components. Antioxidant packs or repellents are used to
deplete the oxygen in the HTF.
Recommendations. The revenue from an efficient operation can be understood in terms of the ratio of the revenue
gained from the production output relative to the cost of energy to produce the output, as depicted in FIG. 4. In Scenario 1,
this model assumes that an HTF is not routinely managed and
accepts that the accumulation of carbon will eventually lead
to an increase in energy consumption. In the longer term, this
could also lead to component failures and interrupt operation
output, as seen in FIG. 4.
In Scenario 2, the effect of carbon is still an influencing factor,
but HTF sampling has been incorporated into the model. This
Production output
Energy consumed to produce the output
(and replacement parts)
1
Cost of routine heat transfer fluid
maintenance
Increas
e
Decrease
Kinematic viscosity of the HTF

Diameter of internal pipework
Heater efficiency
Leads to
Increas
Revenue
Expansion tank: Carbon sludge formation

Pipework: Carbon sludge circulated through system
Pipework: Carbon buildup and blockages
Heater: Carbon baked onto internal surface
FIG. 4. The effect of carbon formation on plant efficiency and revenue.

In Scenario 1, carbon accumulation leads to increased kinematic
viscosity and reduced pipework diameter and heater efficiency.
If left unmanaged, carbon accumulation will eventually lead to
reduced production output, increased energy consumption and
an overall decrease in revenue. In Scenario 2, the sources of carbon
are the same; however, routine sampling is incorporated. This process
can be used to maintain kinematic viscosity, internal pipework
diameter and heater efficiency.
scenario represents an additional cost and loss of revenue, but

it is a proactive approach to avoid the longer-term detrimental
effects of carbon accumulation. This scenario works to maintain
constant energy consumption. The net effect is that revenue will
remain relatively constant as output and energy consumption
are consistently maintained. Another advantage is that the cost
of replacing component parts is potentially avoided as routine
maintenance is used to correct increases in the levels of carbon
and sustain the HTF and the HTF system. Options available for
the management of carbon include the management of operating temperature, dilution of the HTF, installation of a temporary or permanent filtration unit, the complete replacement of
the HTF, and strategies to manage oxidation of the HTF.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to acknowledge the writing support provided by Red
Pharm Communications, a part of the Red Pharm Co.
LITERATURE CITED
Wagner, W., Heat transfer technique with organic media, Heat Transfer Media,
2nd Ed., begellhouse, Graefelfing, Germany, 1997.
2
Tian, T. and C. Y. Zhao, A review of solar collectors and thermal energy storage in
solar thermal applications, Applied Energy, Iss. 104, 2013.
1
CHRIS WRIGHT is a research scientist and holds a BSc degree

and a PhD from the University of Leeds in the UK. His research
focuses on the use and maintenance of heat transfer fluids in
manufacturing and processing, including specialist chemicals,
food, pharmaceutical and solar sectors.
Introducing the
US GAS
PROCESSING
PLANT
DIRECTORY
US GAS PROCESSING
PLANT DIRECTORY
500+ Plants with Information about Name,
Capacity, Plant Scope and Detail, and Owner/
Operator Information.
Gain the market knowledge to grow your business
and inform your decisions in the booming United
States gas market. $1,195 per edition. Searchable,
digital format. Group rates and site licenses
are available.
Order at GulfPub.com/GPPD or
call + 1 (713) 520-4426.
www.ConstructionBoxscore.com
Logon for a
FREE ONLINE
DEMO!
,
G
IN
IN
F
E
R
L
A
B
O
L
G
E
H
T
R
O
F
E
MARKET INTELLIGENC
S
IE
R
T
S
U
D
IN
G
N
/L
G
IN
S
S
E
C
O
R
P
S
A
G
D
N
A
L
A
IC
M
E
H
C
O
R
T
E
P
Hydrocarbon Processings Construction Boxscore Database,
the most reliable source to track active construction projects in the refining, petrochemical, gas processing,
LNG and solids industries throughout the world, now reaches further and is more powerful than ever before!
Welcome to the NEW

ase
Construction Boxscore Datab
Project details on thousands of active projects and global

construction contracts, including contact information for
key personnel
Advanced search that filters the listings by project type,
scope, region, investment and more
Daily updates for new and newly updated projects
The weekly Boxscore Update e-newsletter with new listings
and trends analysis
For more information, contact:

Norman Adams at Norman.Adams@GulfPub.com
or +1 (713) 525-4626
JNette Davis-Nichols at Jnette.Davis-Nichols@GulfPub.com
or +1 (713) 520-4426
BOB ANDREW, TECHNICAL EDITOR

Bob.Andrew@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Innovations
Breakthrough in
activation of methane
Turning methane into a high-value
chemical was achieved by German chemical company Grillo after years of intensive
research. The new process leads to highpurity methanesulfonic acid (MSA) by
direct sulfonation of methane with sulfur
trioxide (FIG. 1). Initial large-scale production is planned for 2019.
Methane is the main component of
natural gas and is, thus far, primarily being
burned for heat and energy. Industry and
science have been searching for a material
use for methane. Besides direct sulfonation, which has now been achieved by
Grillo, research focuses on direct oxidation of methane to methanol and oxidative coupling to ethylene.
Grillos chemicals division has solved
the challenge of methanes limited reactivity by utilizing a tailored reaction environment and specific activators. The process
has been continuously optimized and now
achieves almost full conversion at mild reaction conditions.
The process, Grillo-Methane-Sulfonation, is cost-competitive and based on
natural gas and sulfur trioxide (SO3) as
feedstocks. It is free of environmentally
problematic intermediate and byproducts.
MSA is a modern, green product. The
very strong acid is not oxidative and is
readily biodegradable and toxicologically
unproblematic. MSA is being used in
the electroplating, electronics, industrial
cleaning and pharmaceutical industries. It
is experiencing strong overall growth and,
at a significant scale, potential applications are many.
Techniques (HFT)s QuickPurge system

(FIG. 2) reduces waiting times, producing
zero color welds and no loss of corrosion
resistance caused by oxidation.
A 36-in. diameter stainless steel pipe,
for example, can be purged down to 100
ppm of oxygen in under 32 minutes.
This can be compared with purging using foam dams that will outgas heavily
into the weld zone and take hours instead of minutes. High-speed pipe purging system QuickPurge is one of the
leaders in the field of purging tube, pipe
and pipeline joints over a 6-in. diameter,
where oxygen levels are required to be
10 ppm or less.
Combining IntaCal with the integrated PurgeGate device makes it possible to
safely inflate the dams with argon gas and
purge the space between the dams where
the weld joint is located. It is almost impossible for the inflatable dams to burst
as a result of undue pressure or accidental
flow increase. All systems are manufactured as standard with a hose for connecting to Weld Purge Monitor, which
can read oxygen levels down to 10 ppm.
Materials chosen for QuickPurge are
resistant to the higher weld heat present,
while exhibiting lower outgassing rates
to prevent weld contamination. For heattreated chrome steel pipe joints, HFT
manufactures the HotPurge range for the
higher and longer temperature exposure
requirements. The sleeve between the
dams on the QuickPurge systems reduces the volume to be purged by two thirds.
Sleeve lengths for each size have been
carefully calculated so that the QuickPurge systems can be pulled around 90
elbows for purging connecting joints.
FIG. 1. Molecular structure of

methanesulfonic acid.
FIG. 3. Pressure-and-vacuum relief

for storage tanks.
Reduced storage tank

emissions
Pentair Valves & Controls Anderson
Greenwood 4000 Series of pressure and
vacuum relief valves (FIG. 3) are compliant with the latest API 2000 standard.
Developed accordingly, the valves are the
first high-capacity, full lift valves verified
to meet the requirements of the 7th Ed.
of API 2000, which covers normal and
emergency vapor venting requirements
for bulk liquid storage tanks.
FIG. 2. QuickPurge system for welding

large pipelines.
Big pipes welded faster,

less contamination
Time is money, and waiting for pipe
joints to be purged and ready for welding
can take up to four hours, depending on
the diameter of the pipe and the chosen
purging method. Huntingdon Fusion
Innovations
The series has been engineered to
provide increased flow capacities and
will fully open at 10% overpressure, helping protect tanks from physical damage
caused by internal pressure fluctuations.
As a result, the valves can be set more
closely to a storage tanks maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) or
maximum allowable working vacuum
(MAWV), enabling customers to fill and
empty tanks more quickly and operate
them at higher pressures. The 4000 Series
valves remain closed longer and enhance
flow capacity, resulting in increased productivity and reduced evaporation.
New passive
harmonic filters
Common electrical components like
motors, pumps, fans, automation equipment, DC fast chargers, equipment with
front-end, six-pulse rectifiers, among
others, introduce harmonics into the
electrical system.
High harmonic distortion can cause
failures or malfunctions of electrical devices. They also cause a temperature rise
in the electrical network and equipment,
resulting in losses and shorter service
life. Passive harmonic filters, such as the
ECOsine Passive by Schaffner EMC,
tuned to the offending harmonic order

can correct the sine wave before the harmonics can cause damage.
Schaffner EMC introduces the
FN3415, the newest addition to the ECOsine family of passive harmonic filters
for 60 Hz, 480 or 600 VAC applications
(FIG. 4). Available in various NEMA enclosures, they are easily installed and
commissioned, providing immediate
benefit to the electrical system by limiting
the amplitude of the existing harmonics,
reducing losses and allowing equipment
to operate more efficiently with a longer
service life. Proven in industrial settings,
Schaffner passive harmonic filters are ideal for use with virtually any kind of power
electronics with front-end, six-pulse rectifiers, including non-linear loads such as
motor drives/VFDs, factory automation
equipment, fans, pumps, chillers and other HVAC equipment, DC fast chargers,
mission critical systems/datacenters,
water/wastewater equipment, oil and gas
drilling, and more.
Designed to operate at 99% efficiency,
these proven products reduce harmonics
to meet IEEE-519 (2014) with TDD and
THDI performance at full, light and noload conditions below 5%, while THDv
ratings are below 3%. Schaffner also offers
more basic designs for installations with
less critical harmonic mitigation needs.
NEMA 1 and NEMA 3R enclosures, wallmounted or free-standing, are standard.
Noise mapping
software upgrade
FIG. 4. Harmonic filters reduce electrical
distortion.
FIG. 5. Acoustic contours from sound

planning tool.
Following a successful trial in Germany, noise-mapping software developer

SoundPLAN has released version 4.0 of
FIG. 6. Monitoring vibration in gears

and bearings.
its SoundPLANessential software, used

to calculate noise emissions from roads,
railways and industry sources (FIG. 5).
The software is designed for users with an
occasional need for a noise map, helping
them achieve reliable tabular and graphical results for a standard noise calculation
with minimal time investment. SoundPLANessential 4.0 introduced a new rail
standard for noise predictions (Schall
03-2012). Improvements in 4.0 include
better positioning of receiver points, enhanced manipulation of objects within
the maps, better use of colors for clarity
and a new display option of geometry bitmaps in a 3D view.
New vibration technology

boosts maintenance
profitability
Technologies for monitoring machine
vibration levels have been in use for decades. The further development of such
technologies, however, has been slow.
With the rapid advancement of digital
component technologies providing increasing opportunities, time has caught up
with conventional vibration monitoring
methods. HD ENV by SPM is a new vibration enveloping technology using sophisticated digital algorithms to provide earlier
warning of machine faults than conventional vibration monitoring technologies.
HD ENV is extremely sensitive to
changes in vibration levels, making it possible to identify gear and bearing faults
(FIG. 6) at a very early stage and closely
monitor their continued development.
This provides the opportunity to optimize corrective and predictive maintenance scheduling, potentially driving
maintenance profitability to new levels.
The early fault detection capability of
HD ENV is attributed to digital signal processing algorithms that, combined with
low-noise hardware and ICP-compatible
accelerometers, extract and enhance relevant gear and bearing information with
clarity from noisy industrial environments.
HD ENV presents disturbance-free
vibration data in high-definition quality.
Clear spectrums and time signals, where
the source of the signal is easily identified, provide a snapshot of machine condition, alerting maintenance of potential
problems.
MARKETPLACE/Gerry.Mayer@GulfPub.com / +1 (972) 816-3534
Why Should You Filter Your Water?
SALE RENT LEASE

Superheat & Saturated Boilers
to 250,000pph 750psig
Custom Design & Manufacture Too!
Scale formation reduces the heat transfer rate andincreases the water
pressure drop through the heatexchanger and pipes. In fact, one study
has shownthat.002"foulingwillincreasepumpingneedsby20%.
In Stock Assorted Sizes

Ultra Low Nox Available
SCRs Available
The Best Engineered Water Filteration

Solution Always Costs Less
2672SLaCienegaBlvd,LosAngeles,CA90034USA
(800)226-1942(310)839-2828Fax(310)839-6878
www.tekleen.cominfo@tekleen.com
SURPLUS GAS PROCESSING/REFINING EQUIPMENT

25 MMCFD x 1100 PSIG PROPAK REFRIGERATION PLANT
28 TPD SELECTOX SULFUR RECOVERY UNIT
1100 BPD LPG CONTACTOR x 7.5 GPM CAUSTIC REGEN
NGL/LPG PLANTS: 10600 MMCFD
AMINE PLANTS: 603300 GPM
SULFUR PLANTS: 10180 TPD
FRACTIONATION: 100025,000 BPD
HELIUM RECOVERY: 75 & 80 MMCFD
NITROGEN REJECTION: 25100 MMCFD
MANY OTHER REFINING/GAS PROCESSING UNITS
We offer engineered surplus equipment solutions.
pull out all

the stops
4.25" wide x 4" high
ARTICLES FOR
DISTRIBUTIONCMYK color
Repurpose editorial
content for distribution
Electronic Reprints
High-Quality Glossy Handouts
Personalized Direct Mail
Products
Cross Media Marketing
Plaques and Framed Prints
For additional information, please

contact Foster Printing Service,
the ofcial reprint provider
for Hydrocarbon Processing.
Call 866.879.9144 or
sales@fosterprinting.com
Bexar Energy Holdings, Inc.
Phone 210-342-7106Fax 210-223-0018

www.bexarenergy.comEmail: info@bexarenergy.com
Chemical Resistant Epoxy

Room Temperature Curing EP41S
Withstands alcohols and fuels
Fast curing
Abrasion resistant
For high strength coatings,
liners and sealants
Gulf Publishing Company is seeking

an ADVERTISING REPRESENTATIVE
to cover India for World Oil,
Hydrocarbon Processing and
use this logo on white or lighter
backgrounds
Gas Processing. This individual
will be responsible for print, digital
and event sales. They must live
in India and have a background
use this logo on black or darker
inTheadvertising
sales. Experience
backgrounds.
Printing
Service is in white.
in the oil and gas market a plus.
Please forward all resumes to
Resumes@GulfPub.com
C: 56
M: 0
Y: 100
K: 27
PMS 370 C
Hackensack, NJ 07601 USA

+1.201.343.8983 main@masterbond.com
www.masterbond.com
Detailed and up-to-date information for active

construction projects in the refining, gas processing,
and petrochemical industries across the globe
ConstructionBoxscore.com
ADVERTISER INDEX / HydrocarbonProcessing.com

The first number after the company name is the page on which an advertisement appears. The second number is the Reader Service Number. There are two ways readers can obtain product and service information:
go to www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS, follow the instructions on the screen, and your request will be forwarded for immediate action, or go online to the advertiser's website listed below.
Company
Page
RS#
Website
ABB Motors and Generators Service Team..... 43
(63)
(73)
(56)
Auma Riester GmbH & Co Kg ....................... 27 (153)

www.info.hotims.com/61390-153
Gulf Publishing Company

Construction Boxscore Database...............80
HP Webcast .............................................61
HP Marketplace ....................................... 83
(51)
Software ................................................ 67
US Gas Processing Plant Directory............. 79
(63)
Bluebeam Software Inc.................................8
(57)
EventsGasPro..................................... 50A
Baldor Electric Company ............................. 43
Dresser-Rand..............................................31
Heat Transfer Research Inc. ......................... 23 (151)

(69)
Hoerbiger .................................................. 26 (152)
Clock Spring Company ................................ 47 (157)
Inpro / Seal Company ................................. 35 (154)
Company
Page
RS#
Linde Engineering North America ................ 87
(66)
Website
Dyna-Therm ...............................................41 (155)
Axens ........................................................ 88
RS#
AFPM......................................................... 76
Ariel Corporation.........................................16
Page
Website
Ametek Process Instruments ....................... 22
Company
Merichem Company......................................6
(84)
Rosen Swiss AG .......................................... 28
(61)
Saudi Aramco .............................................. 5
(82)
Shell Research Ltd ......................................49
(92)
Siemens AG ................................................. 2
(75)
Spraying Systems Co ...................................37
(67)
Turbomachinery Laboratory........................ 63
Zwick Valves ..............................................44 (156)
ZymeFlow Decon Technology .......................18
(93)
This Index and procedure for securing additional information is provided as a service to Hydrocarbon Processing advertisers and a convenience to our readers. Gulf Publishing Company is not responsible for omissions or errors.
Catherine Watkins, Publisher

Phone/Fax: +1 (713) 520-4421
E-mail: Catherine.Watkins@GulfPub.com
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com
SALES OFFICESNORTH AMERICA
IL, LA, MO, OK, TX
Josh Mayer
Phone: +1 (972) 816-6745, Fax: +1 (972) 767-4442
E-mail: Josh.Mayer@GulfPub.com
AK, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS,
KY, MI, MN, MS, MT, ND, NE, NM, NV, OR, SD, TN,
TX, UT, WA, WI, WY, WESTERN CANADA
Ryan Akbar
Phone/Fax: +1 (713) 520-4449
Mobile: +1 (832) 691-6053
E-mail: Ryan.Akbar@GulfPub.com
CT, DC, DE, MA, MD, ME, NC, NH, NJ, NY, OH, PA,
RI, SC, VA, VT, WV, EASTERN CANADA
Merrie Lynch
Phone: +1 (617) 357-8190, Fax: +1 (617) 357-8194
Mobile: +1 (617) 594-4943
E-mail: Merrie.Lynch@GulfPub.com
CLASSIFIED SALES
Gerry Mayer
Phone: +1 (972) 816-3534, Fax: +1 (972) 767-4442
E-mail: Gerry.Mayer@GulfPub.com
DATA PRODUCTS
JNette Davis-Nichols
Phone/Fax: +1 (713) 520-4426
E-mail: Jnette.Davis-Nichols@GulfPub.com
SALES OFFICESEUROPE
SALES OFFICESOTHER AREAS
FRANCE, GREECE, NORTH AFRICA,

MIDDLE EAST, SPAIN, PORTUGAL,
SOUTHERN BELGIUM, LUXEMBOURG,
SWITZERLAND, GERMANY, AUSTRIA, TURKEY
Jim Watkins
Phone: +33 (0)6 76 35 11 52
E-mail: Jim.Watkins@GulfPub.com
CHINAHong Kong
Iris Yuen
Phone: +86 13802701367 (China)
Phone: +852 69185500 (Hong Kong)
E-mail: Iris.Yuen@GulfPub.com
ITALY, EASTERN EUROPE

Fabio Potest
Mediapoint & Communications SRL
Phone: +39 (010) 570-4948
Fax: +39 (010) 553-0088
E-mail: Fabio.Potesta@GulfPub.com
RUSSIA/FSU
Lilia Fedotova
Anik International & Co. Ltd.
Phone: +7 (495) 628-10-333
E-mail: Lilia.Fedotova@GulfPub.com
UNITED KINGDOM/SCANDINAVIA,
NORTHERN BELGIUM, THE NETHERLANDS
Michael Brown
Phone: +44 161 440 0854
Mobile: +44 79866 34646
E-mail: Michael.Brown@GulfPub.com
REPRINTS
Rhonda Brown, Foster Printing Service
Phone: +1 (866) 879-9144 ext. 194
E-mail: RhondaB@FosterPrinting.com
BRAZILRio de Janeiro
Marco Antonio Monteiro
Mobile: +55 21 99616-4347
Fax: +55 21 2240-5077
E-mail: Brazil@GulfPub.com
INDIA
Catherine Watkins
Phone/Fax: +1 (713) 520-4421
INDONESIA, MALAYSIA, SINGAPORE, THAILAND,
AUSTRALIAPerth
Peggy Thay
Publicitas Singapore Pte Ltd
Phone: +65 6836-2272, Fax: +65 6634-5231
E-mail: Singapore@GulfPub.com
JAPANTokyo
Yoshinori Ikeda
Pacific Business Inc.
Phone: +81 (3) 3661-6138, Fax: +81 (3) 3661-6139
E-mail: Japan@GulfPub.com
KOREA
Young-Seoh Chinn
JES Media, Inc.
Phone: +82 (2) 481-3411/3, Fax: +82 (2) 481-3414
E-mail: Korea@GulfPub.com
ALISSA LEETON, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR

Alissa.Leeton@GulfPub.com
Events
AUGUST
GTL Technology Forum,
Events, Aug. 23, Norris
Conference CentersCityCentre,
Houston, Texas
GTLTechForum.com
(See box for contact information)
NAPE, Aug. 1011,
George R. Brown Convention
Center, Houston, Texas
10th Annual Maintenance
and Reliability Symposium,
The American Chemistry Council
(ACC) Annual Meeting, Aug. 1819,
Moody Gardens, Galveston, Texas
P: 281-538-9996
khefner@bicalliance.com
www.smrphouston.org
AFPM Cat Cracker Seminar,
Aug. 2324, Royal Sonesta
Hotel, Houston, Texas
ONS 2016, Aug. 29Sept. 1,
Stavanger, Norway
P: +47 51-84-90-40
info@ons.no
www.ons.no/2016
SEPTEMBER
World Heavy Oil Congress,
Sept. 69, Stampede Park,
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
P: +1 403-209-3555 or
+1 888-799-2545
mallorymcnab@dmgevents.com
www.worldheavyoilcongress.com
48th Annual ECC Conference,
Sept. 710, JW Marriott Desert
Springs, Palm Desert, California
info@eventsiaregistration.com
www.ecc-conference.org
Oil Sands Trade Show,

Sept. 1314, Suncor Community
Leisure Centre, Fort McMurray,
Alberta, Canada
P: +1 403-209-3555 or
+1 888-799-2545
bradridler@dmgevents.com
www.oilsandstradeshow.com
Gas Pro Americas,
Gulf Publishing Company Events,
Sept. 1314, Norris Conference
CentersCityCentre,
Houston, Texas
AIChE 61st Annual Safety
in Ammonia Plants and
Related Facilities Symposium,
Sept. 1822, Grand Hyatt Denver,
Denver, Colorado
P: +1 800-242-4363
www.aiche.org/conferences
Process Safety Summit,
Sept. 2527, Abu Dhabi UAE,
Sofitel, Abu Dhabi
P: +971 4-364-2975
register@iqpc.ae
www.oilandgasprocesssafety.com
National Association of
Corrosion Engineers
(NACE) Corrosion Technology
Week, Sept. 2529,
Royal Sonesta Houston
Galleria, Houston, Texas
P: 281-228-6413
Lesley.Martinez@nace.org
www.ctw.nace.org
AFPM Q&A and Technology
Forum, Sept. 2628,
Baltimore Marriott Waterfront,
Baltimore, Maryland
EUROCORR 2016European
Corrosion Congress,
Sept. 1115, Le Corum Congress
Center, Montpellier, France
www.eurocorr2016.org
Operational Excellence in
Refining and Petrochemicals,
Sept. 2628, Norris Conference
CentreHouston CityCentre,
Houston, Texas
P: +44 0-20-7036-1300
enquire@iqpc.co.uk
www.opexinrefiningand
petrochem.com
Turbomachinery & Pump

Symposia, Sept. 1215,
George R. Brown Convention
Center, Houston, Texas
P: +1 979-845-7417
info@turbo-lab.tamu.edu
www.pumpturbo.tamu.edu
Polyurethanes Technical
Conference, Sept. 2628, Hilton
Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland
P: 202-249-6121
online@americanchemistry.com
www.polyurethane.
americanchemistry.com
OCTOBER
Yokogawa Users Conference
and Exhibition, Oct. 36,
Renaissance Orlando at SeaWorld
Hotel, Orlando, Florida
www.yokogawausers
conference.com
NAPE, Oct. 1213,
Colorado Convention Center,
Denver, Colorado
National Safety Council (NSC),
Oct. 1521, Anaheim Convention
Center, Anaheim, California
P: +1 630-285-1121
customerservice@nsc.org
www.congress.nsc.org
ACC Annual Meeting,
Oct. 1619, Moscone Center,
San Francisco, California
P: +1 202-293-4103
www.acc.com
The Abu Dhabi International

Petroleum Exhibition &
Conference (ADIPEC),
Nov. 710, Abu Dhabi National
Exhibition Centre
P: +971 0-2-6970-500
GloriaDiaz@dmgeventsme.com
www.adipec.com
API 11th Annual Cybersecurity
Conference for the Oil &
Natural Gas Industry, Nov. 910,
Westin Houston Memorial City,
Houston, Texas
API Fall Refining and Equipment
Standards Meeting, Nov. 1417,
Hyatt Regency New Orleans,
New Orleans, Louisiana
European Autumn Gas
Conference, Nov. 1517,
The Hague, Netherlands
P: +44 0-20-3772-6080
neilhoward@dmgevents.com
www.theeagc.com
49th GOMA Symposium,

Oct. 1921, Jure Hotel,
ibenik, Croatia
P: +385 1-48-73-549
goma@goma.hr
www.fuels.goma.hr
FEBRUARY 2017
Egypt Petroleum Show (EGYPS),
Feb. 1416, CICEC, Cairo Egypt
P: +971 0-4445-3726
clairepallen@dmgeventsme.com
www.egyptpetroleumshow.com
RIO Oil & Gas 2016 Expo and

Conference, Oct. 2427,
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
P: +55 21-2112-9080
eventos@ibp.org.br
www.riooilgas.com.br/en
Emerson Global Users
Exchange, Oct. 2428,
Austin Convention Center,
Austin, Texas
EmersonExchange@Emerson.com
www.emersonexchange.org/
americas/
LARTC 5th Annual Meeting,
Oct. 2527, Mexico City, Mexico
P: +44 0-20-7384-8022
victoria.pope@gtforum.com
www.lartc.events.gtforum.com/
NOVEMBER
Womens Global Leadership
Conference, Gulf Publishing
Company Events, Nov. 12,
Hyatt Regency Houston,
Houston, Texas
WGLconference.com
Hydrocarbon Processing/
Events
P: +1 713-520-4475
Melissa.Smith@GulfPub.com
EnergyEvents@GulfPub.com
American Fuel
& Petrochemical
Manufacturers (AFPM)
P: +1 202-457-0480
meetings@afpm.org
www.afpm.org/Conferences
American Petroleum
Institute (API)
P: +1 202-682-8195
registrar@api.org
www.api.org
NAPE
P: +1 817-847-7700
info@napeexpo.com
www.napeexpo.com
MIKE RHODES, MANAGING EDITOR

Mike.Rhodes@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
People
Courtney McShane has

joined Willbros Group Inc.
as director of business
development for the
Marcellus Shale region
and Eastern Seaboard.
Prior to joining Willbros,
she represented several
pipeline construction
business units for PLH
Group. Ms. McShane will
be responsible for the
continued expansion
of Willbros pipeline
construction and
maintenance services.
Total has named Philippe
Sauquet, the former
head of the refining and
chemicals division, to lead
its newly created gas,
renewables and power
unit. He is also appointed
executive VP of strategy
and innovation and will
remain a member of Totals
executive committee. He
will assume his new role
on September 1. In 2014,
Mr. Sauquet was named
president of refining and
chemicals and joined Totals
executive committee.
Total has made other
executive appointments.
Bernard Pinatel is joining
Total as president of
refining and chemicals
and a member of Totals
Namita Shah will serve as
executive VP, people and
social responsibility, and
as as a member of Totals
Ms. Shah will lead the
HR division and oversee
the newly created Total
Global Services. JeanJacques Guilbaud will
be senior advisor to the
chairman and CEO.
Enerfab Inc. has made

two executive promotions:
Scott Anderson will serve
as chief operating officer
(COO) and president of
Enerfab Process Solutions
and Fabricated Products;
and Robert Sylvester will
serve as COO of Enerfab
Power & Industrial.
Enerfab Process
Solutions and Fabricated
Products serves a
variety of industries,
including chemical,
petrochemical, oil and
refining, natural gas and
water treatment, with
large-scale fabrication
of ASME pressure vessels,
API storage tanks, process
columns and other
industrial equipment.
In his role as COO,
Mr. Anderson will oversee
two subsidiaries, Brighton
Tru-Edge and Enerpipe.
He joined Enerfab in 1990
and was named president
of the division in 2012.
Enerfab Power &
Industrial serves the power
generation and utility
industries, including onsite
construction, fabrication
and maintenance.
Mr. Sylvester previously
served as president of NGS
Investments and president
of Enerfab Electric.
PSG, a Dover company and
a manufacturer of pumps,
systems and related
flow-control solutions, has
appointed Heather Graham
as VP of HR, where she
will report directly to PSG
President Karl Buscher.
Prior to joining PSG, Ms.
Graham was the global HR
director for PetroTechnical
Services at Schlumberger.
Evoniks Oil Additives

business line has
appointed Mukund Bhure
as its Global Industrial
Lubricants marketing
manager. Mr. Bhure joined
Evoniks Oil Additives
business line in April 2010
from Chevron Lubricants.
He has more than 24 years
of sales and marketing
experience with lubricants
and specialty chemicals.
The US Department of
Commerce has confirmed
four appointees to
the newly established
US-Mexico Energy
Business Council. The four
appointees are members
of the National Electrical
Manufacturers Association
(NEMA): Julian Alzate,
director of international
relations at Schweitzer
Engineering Laboratories
Inc.; R. Craig Breese,
president of Honeywell
Mexico, Honeywell Intl.
Inc.; Vernon Murray, VP
and general manager
for Mexico and Northern
Latin America at Emerson
Process Management;
and Darryl Wilson, VP
and chief commercial
officer (CCO) at GE
Energy Connections. All
appointees will serve twoyear terms on the council.
In addition to the
committee of privatesector appointees,
the US-Mexico Energy
Business Council will
include representatives
from the US Department
of Commerce, the
Department of Energy,
the Mexican Ministry
of Energy and the
Ministry of Economy.
Emerald Polymer
Additives, a business
group of Emerald
Performance Materials,
has named John Zuppo
as president of its Polymer
Additives and Nitriles
(PANIT) business group.
Mr. Zuppo has been
serving the Emeralds
PANIT group for the
last five years, most
recently as commercial
vice president. Previously,
he served as VP of
procurement for all
of Emeralds business
groups. Prior to joining
Emerald, Mr. Zuppo
served as director of
direct raw material
procurement for Ferro,
and fulfilled a variety
of roles at The Goodyear
Tire and Rubber Co.,
including procurement,
business development,
sales and marketing,
and research and
development. He earned
a BS degree in chemical
engineering from The
University of Akron and
an MBA from Case
Western Reserve
Weatherhead School
of Management.
Hoover Container
Solutions has announced
three new changes to
its senior management
team: Joseph Levy has
been appointed senior
VP and chief financial
officer (CFO); Johan
Wramsby has been
named senior VP and
chief operating officer
(COO); and Arash
Hassanian will assume the
role of senior VP of global
sales and marketing.
ABB has appointed

Chris Shigas as its
US director of media
relations. He joins ABB
from agency French/
West/Vaughan, where he
was a senior VP working
in media relations,
corporate communication
and crisis communication.
His campaigns have
earned dozens of national
awards. Prior to his
agency experience, he was
an Emmy award-winning
television news producer.
Mr. Shigas has over 20
years of experience in
public relations and
broadcast journalism.
Alan Kelly, president
of ExxonMobil Fuels,
Lubricants and Specialties
Marketing Co., has
announced his intention
to retire effective August
1, after more than 34
years of service. As of this
issues publication, it is
anticipated that the board
of directors of ExxonMobil
Corp. will appoint Bryan
Milton as Kellys successor
and VP of the corporation.
Mr. Milton presently serves
as president of ExxonMobil
Global Services Co. He
joined Exxon Chemical
in 1986, where he
worked in various plant
and developmental
engineering roles, and
held various leadership
positions within
ExxonMobil Chemical
Co. He was appointed
manager of the Baton
Rouge chemical plant in
2006, and in 2008 was
named executive assistant
to the chairman and CEO
of ExxonMobil Corp.
Tighter emissions standards costing you?

Meet or exceed regulations and save with our patented flameless thermal oxidizer.
Selas Linde North Americas Thermatrix flameless
thermal oxidizer is a field-proven, cost effective solution
for destruction of a wide range of VOCs and HAPs. From
skid-mounted units to treat lower flows to large scale,
plant-integrated systems, we have a solution for emission
treatment.
99.99% or greater destruction efficiency

Low NOx: < 5 ppmv @3% oxygen
Undetectable CO emissions
Flameless - can be installed near the emission source
Treats batch or continuous streams
Energy efficient operation
Low cost of ownership
Learn more!
Selas Linde North America

A division of Linde Engineering North America Inc.
Five Sentry Parkway East, Suite 300, Blue Bell, PA 19422 USA
Phone +1 610.834-0300 sales@leamericas.com www.leamericas.com
Technology and Business Information for the Global Gas Processing Industry
GasProcessingNews.com | JULY/AUGUST 2016
Special Supplement to
SMALL-SCALE
PROCESSING
SOLUTIONS
Opportunities and challenges for commercialization
and deployment of small-scale LNG and GTL
FLNG DEVELOPMENTS
Nearshore solutions can cut costs,

reduce technical complexity of floating LNG
GAS TREATING
Design H2S removal and dehydration units

for operation under ultra-high pressure
CONTENTS
EDITORIAL COMMENT
Small-scale gas processing operations
are ramping up around the world, particularly in the LNG sector. New LNG
import terminals are opening in Europe
and Asia as cost-effective, efficient processing technologies are taking hold in
the market. For example, Spain is using
LNG produced on a small scale for bunkering, while Finland recently opened
ADRIENNE BLUME,
the first of several planned small-scale
Editor
LNG import terminals.
According to a report released earlier this year by Visiongain, the small-scale LNG market could see capital expenditures of $2.5 B in 2016. CAPEX for small-scale gas processing
is forecast to increase over the following years in both mature
and emerging markets.
The growing popularity of flexible, less-expensive, smallscale LNG and GTL processing technologies is being driven
by the need for more localized supplies to meet specialized demand, as well as the desire to capitalize on small and stranded
gas reserves. In most cases, these technologies also offer shortened construction timelines. New projects will meet the need
for distributed power and fuel for road and marine transport,
filling the gaps left by gas pipelines and tanker deliveries.
A number of small-scale processing technologies are available from specialized startup companies, as well as from major
oil and gas technology firms. Many of these companies have
seen major progress on commercial installations in recent
years. These developments, which offer promising supply alternatives in today's difficult market and into the future, are
detailed in this issue's Special Report, Executive Viewpoint
and Regional Perspectives articles. GP
www.GasProcessingNews.com
PUBLISHER
EDITORIAL
Editor
Technical Editor
Editor/Associate Publisher,
MAGAZINE PRODUCTION

Manager, Editorial Production
Artist/Illustrator
Senior Graphic Designer
Manager, Advertising Production
P. O. Box 2608
Houston, Texas 77252-2608, USA
Phone: +1 (713) 529-4301
Fax: +1 (713) 520-4433
Editorial@GasProcessingNews.com
Catherine Watkins
Catherine.Watkins@GulfPub.com
Adrienne Blume
Bob Andrew
Lee Nichols
GasProcessingNews.com | JULY/AUGUST 2016
11
SPECIAL REPORT: SMALL-SCALE
PROCESSING SOLUTIONS
17
Opportunities and challenges

for small-scale LNG commercialization
R. S. Bhullar
21
Market development is key to success

for small-scale LNG
S. Bonini and A. Chandra
LNG TECHNOLOGY
25
Develop successful nearshore FLNG solutions

Part 1: Gas pretreatment strategies
S. Mokhatab
GAS TREATING
29
35
Design for ultra-high-pressure

H2S removal from natural gas
P. Roberts
Manage activated carbon effects
on MDEA solution foaming
D. Engel, S. Williams and A. Heinen
PLANT DESIGN
41
Prevent hydrate formation with

high-pressure deethanizer design
C. C. Chen and Y.-S. Liu
DEPARTMENTS
Sheryl Stone
Angela Bathe Dietrich
David Weeks
Amanda McLendon-Bass
Cheryl Willis
Gas Processing News .......................................................... 6

US Industry Metrics ............................................................. 8
New in Gas Processing Technology ................................ 46
COLUMNS
ADVERTISING SALES
See Sales Offices, page 45.
Copyright 2016 by Gulf Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
Publisher's Letter ................................................................. 4

Regional Perspectives.........................................................11
Natural gas monetization options for Iran: LNG or GTL?
President/CEO
CFO
Vice President
John Royall
Pamela Harvey
Ron Higgins
Sheryl Stone
Other Gulf Publishing Company titles include: Hydrocarbon Processing, World Oil
and Petroleum Economist.
Executive Q&A Viewpoint ................................................. 13

Too much of a good thing: Methanol as a solution
to gas oversupply in the Marcellus
Cover Image: The small-scale LNG plant in Kwinana, Australia is an example of

Lindes StarLNG standardized LNG concept. Photo courtesy of The Linde Group.
P. O. Box 2608, Houston, Texas 77252-2608, USA|Phone: +1 (713) 529-4301|GasProcessingNews.com
Dear Reader,
These are unprecedented times in the oil and gas industry. New technologies have
produced gluts of both oil and natural gas, which have provided cheap feedstocks for
the downstream processing industries. The cyclical nature of the oil and gas business
has had vastly different effects on each region. To oil-exporting nations, reduced oil
prices equate to low government revenues. In turn, little money is available to fund
social, industrial or infrastructure projects. To other nations, low oil and natural gas
prices have been a boon to the processing industries. They have seen a boost in the
construction of additional downstream processing capacity, as well as cheap fuel prices
for consumers, which spur consumption.
As with all cyclical industries, sometimes change is a necessity to ensure the
strength and viability of an organization. Change allows a business to build on its
strengths and evolve into an even more exceptional enterprise. Gas Processing is
undertaking such a transition. As of August 1, I have assumed the role of Publisher
for two of Gulf Publishing Companys exceptional brands, Hydrocarbon Processing
and Gas Processing.
Most of my life has been spent in and around the oil and gas industry. I was born in Chicago, but was largely raised in the oil
patches of Iran, the UAE and Texas. As a result of my upbringing, I was familiar with drill collars and Christmas trees (assemblies
on surface and subsea wells) before I had heard of Barbie dolls. For the past 20 years, I have represented Gulf Publishing Companys
Hydrocarbon Processing, World Oil and Gas Processing publications in France, Spain, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Belgium
and the Middle East/North Africa regions. My contributions included display and digital advertising sales, organizing industry
forecast presentations and event participation, and conducting marketing seminars for clients.
During this time, I have found no other publications as highly regarded in the downstream industry as Hydrocarbon Processing
and Gas Processing. This is not arrogance or by accident; it is based on audited circulation numbers and years of industry
professionals testimonials. Both publications reached this position by applying the highest levels of editorial integrity. It is proof
that, although consumer and industry publications are largely giving up on editorial standards, our industry still values and needs
a trusted source of information.
As we look into the future of our industry and publications, technical content is king. This will never change. We will continue
to bring our readers the highest-quality technical and operating articles in the industry. It is what we have been doing since 1922,
and will continue to do now and into the future. What has, is and will continue to change is how that information is disseminated.
Gas Processing is ready to engage and listen to the industry to provide editorial and data content in the most useful medium and
format possible.
I want to thank you for your devotion to Gas Processing. It is gratifying to hear how our publication, website and newsletters
provide interesting and, more importantly, sound technical content to make your work and our industry a better place. I also want
to thank all of the advertisers who support this publication. Please share your comments, ideas and news with us; we highly value
your feedback. It is a dynamic time in the downstream industry, and I can guarantee that Gas Processing will continue to be at the
forefront of technology, trends and data intelligence.
Catherine Watkins
Publisher, Hydrocarbon Processing and Gas Processing
4JULY/AUGUST 2016|GasProcessingNews.com
Modular, scalable,
cleaner energy.
Fueling the future of natural gas.
A skid-mounted, plug-n-play natural gas liquefaction plant
that provides a cleaner more abundant LNG fuel source for
remote locations. GEs small scale LNG plants mean faster
commissioning times and reduced installation costs.
Imagination at work.
www.geoilandgas.com/smallscalelng
GAS PROCESSING NEWS
BOB ANDREW, Technical Editor
GTI celebrates
75 years
Gas Technology Institute (GTI)
recently celebrated an important
milestoneits 75th anniversary.
As a leading research and
development (R&D) and training
organization addressing global
energy and environmental
challenges, GTI spent the last
seven-plus decades developing
high-impact technologies and
providing technical insight to
unlock the potential of natural
gas and other energy resources.
GTIs aim is to make these
technologies economically and
environmentally sustainable
while simultaneously reducing
energy costs for consumers.
GTI also has a solid reputation
for developing gas distribution
tools and technologies that reduce
energy delivery costs. Experts
have created a wealth of solutions
to enhance the safety and integrity
of the nations vast pipeline
infrastructure and target critical
global methane emissions issues.
The organization has achieved
many successes over its history,
focusing on initiatives aligned
with important national priorities.
GTI has provided solutions to
critical challenges along the
entire gas value chain and
improved the ways of producing,
transporting, and using energy
to benefit the general public.
R&D projects through
the decades have expanded
the supply and reduced the
environmental footprint of
unconventional gas production.
Cleaner ways to use abundant
coal resources have been
generated and brought to market
through GTI-patented processes.
Groundbreaking efforts to convert
wood into renewable drop-in
gasoline in GTIs integrated
biorefinery have resulted in a
sustainable biofuel with 74%
lower greenhouse gas emissions
than petroleum-based fuel.
Promoting the clean and
efficient use of energy resources
across all end-use markets
residential/commercial, industrial,
power generation, and alternative
compressed natural gas and
hydrogen transportationand
contributing to the progress
of US green building practices
are among GTIs contributions.
GTI is developing a portfolio
of affordable equipment and
appliances with reduced energy
consumption and emissions,
which will contribute to improving
air quality for decades to come.
Gas jet ejector extends field life

GEA has designed,
manufactured and delivered a
gas jet compressor system for an
offshore platform in the North
Sea consisting of a jet pump
(ejector) with a total length of
4.5 m, and silencers to reduce
the sound pressure level. At a
newly drilled well, natural gas
is available with a pressure of
up to 600 bar. The gas pressure
decreases in the course of
exploitation of the gas field.
At a defined gas pressure, the
gas delivery rate is so low that
the mechanical compressor is
no longer economical.
Gas jet compressors are
designed to increase the natural
gas pressure and to allow
extension of the use of the
installed mechanical compressors.
In this way, the gas field life is prolonged. The system compresses a low-pressure natural gas (8 barg) by
using a high-pressure natural gas (90 barg) to an intermediate gas pressure (12 barg). GEA managed to
increase its portfolio by designing the ejector body for 137 barg, and on the motive side for 213 barg.
The material of construction is corrosion-resistant and corrosion-tested duplex stainless steel, which is
coated with sprayed aluminum. Ejectors are reliable in operation at low operating costs. They are nearly
maintenance-free because they are simply constructed, having no moving parts. Almost any vacuum duty
can be accommodated, including large suction flows.
Engineer chosen
for Elba LNG
project
HDR Inc. has been selected as

the owners engineer for Kinder
Morgans LNG export project
at Elba Island near Savannah,
Georgia. The project is in the
engineering, procurement and
construction phase.
The Elba liquefaction project
will include installation of 10
liquefaction units for an output
capacity of approximately 2.5
MMtpy of LNG, and modifications
to the existing Elba Terminal to
allow for export.
The project will use Shells
small-scale liquefaction units,
which will be integrated into the
existing Elba terminal and enable
rapid construction compared to
traditional large-scale plants.
Kinder Morgan is also
working with ABSG Consulting
Inc., a subsidiary of ABS Group
of Companies Inc., for the
development of a maintenance
and integrity program for the
terminal. ABS Group will
develop the program for the
base plant, balance of plant
and the terminal upgrade.
3D-printed polymer turns methane

to methanol
Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory (LLNL) scientists
have combined biology and 3D
printing to create the first reactor
that can continuously produce
methanol from methane at room
temperature and pressure. The
team removed enzymes from
methanotrophsbacteria that
eat methaneand mixed them with polymers that were then printed or
molded into innovative reactors. LLNL found that isolated enzymes offer
the promise of highly controlled reactions at ambient conditions with
higher conversion efficiency and greater flexibility.
Advances in oil and gas extraction techniques have made vast
new stores of natural gas, composed primarily of methane, available.
However, a large volume of methane is leaked, vented or flared during
these operations, partly because the gas is difficult to store and
transport compared to more valuable liquid fuels. Methane emissions
also contribute approximately one-third of net global warming potential,
primarily from these and other distributed sources, such as agriculture
and landfills.
Existing industrial technologies (such as steam reformation)
to convert methane into more valuable products operate at high
temperature and pressure, require a large number of unit operations
and yield a range of products. As a result, these technologies have a
low efficiency of methane conversion to final products, and can operate
economically only at very large scales.
A technology to efficiently convert methane to other hydrocarbons
is needed as a profitable way to convert stranded sources of methane
and natural gas to liquids for further processing. The only known
catalyst (industrial or biological) to convert methane to methanol
under ambient conditions with high efficiency is the enzyme methane
monooxygenase (MMO), which converts methane to methanol. The
reaction can be carried out by methanotrophs that contain the enzyme,
but this approach inevitably requires energy for upkeep and metabolism
of the organisms. Instead, the LLNL team separated the enzymes from
the organism and used the enzymes directly.
The Green Solution to Sulfur Recovery
The LO-CAT process, available exclusively from Merichem, is a patented liquid redox system that uses a proprietary
chelated iron solution to convert H2S to innocuous, elemental sulfur. The catalyst is continuously regenerated in
the process.
LO-CAT Total Package
Flue Gas
The LO-CAT technology is applicable to all types of gas streams including air, natural gas, CO2, amine acid gas,
2S
concentrations. With over 35 years of continuous improvement, LO-CAT units are very reliable and require minimal
Treated Gas
Chemical
Addition
From engineering and fabrication, to installation

supervision, training, and startup, through process
warranties and onsite service, Merichem provides a total
sulfur recovery solution.
Each system is
Proprietary
Sulfur
Filter
System
Raw Gas
aggressive schedules can be accommodated. Full

equipment packages are provided for stick-built or
ABSORBER
VESSEL
Solution
Circulation
Pump
Sulfur
Slurry
OXIDIZER VESSEL
Air
Direct-Treat
Air Blower
LO-CAT Direct Treatment Scheme

Chemical
Addition
Flue Gas
When treated gas cannot be combined with air, a

direct-treat design is employed. This is achieved by use
of two separate vessels, an absorber and an oxidizer. The
absorber treats the sour gas, producing sweet gas in a
single pass. The oxidizer serves two purposes: The
regeneration of spent catalyst and the concentration of
Raw Gas
Proprietary
Sulfur
Filter
System
system takes the sulfur-rich slurry, washes it and

produces an elemental sulfur cake.
LO-CAT AutoCirc Scheme
When treating a gas that can be mixed with air, the
operating and capital expenses. By combining the
absorber and oxidizer in one vessel, the solution
circulation pump is eliminated resulting in reduced
electrical consumption. The single vessel approach also
minimizes footprint.
Sulfur
Slurry
Air
Air Blower
AutoCirc
Merichem Company
Merichem Process Technologies

5450 Old Spanish Trail
Houston, Texas 77023
Tel: +1 713.428.5000
www.merichem.com
US INDUSTRY METRICS
A. BLUME, Managing Editor
US natural gas spot prices at Henry Hub

and NGL spot prices at Mont Belvieu, $/MMBtu
Oct.
2015
Jan.
2016
April
2016
3
Monthlyprice
price(Henry
(HenryHub)
Hub)
Monthly
12-monthprice
priceavg.
avg.
12-month
Production
Production
J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J
2014
2015
2016
2
1
0
Gas prices, $/Mcf
40
20
US gas plant field production, Mbpd
$/MMBtu
July
2015
60
120
10
80
US natural gas plant field production of NGL,

LPG, ethane/ethylene and propane/propylene, Mbpd
Natural gasoline
Isobutane
Butane
NGPL composite
Propane
Ethane
Natural gas spot prices (Henry Hub)
15
Production equals US marketed production, wet gas. Source: EIA.
25
20
US gas production (Bcfd) and prices ($/Mcf)

100
Production, Bcfd
In the US, Henry Hub natural gas spot prices began climbing in
late June, rising to just under $3/MMBtu by early July. Meanwhile,
prices for NGL bounced up briefly in June, but then slid again
by early July. Domestic production of NGL, LPG, ethane/ethylene
and propane/propylene slipped in April (the latest month of data
available as of the time of publication) from highs in March. In
contrast, natural gas production dropped sharply in March from
a high seen in February. The portion of ethane recovered as a
percent of total NGPL production has been increasing this year
due to higher ethane use by USGC petrochemical producers. GP
July
2016
100
80
NGL
LPG
Ethane/ethylene
Propane/propylene
60
40
20
April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. April
2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 2016
Source: US EIA
Source: US EIA
InstruCalc
CONTROL VALVES FLOW ELEMENTS RELIEF DEVICES PROCESS DATA
InstruCalc 9.0 calculates the size of control valves, flow elements and relief devices and calculates fluid
properties, pipe pressure loss and liquid waterhammer flow. Easy to use and accurate, it is the only sizing
program you need, enabling you to: Size more than 50 different instruments; Calculate process data at flow
conditions for 54 fluids in either mixtures or single components and 66 gases, and; Calculate the orifice
size, flowrate or differential range, which enables the user to select the flow rate with optimum accuracy.
NEW VERSION
Order Direct from

the Publisher.
GulfPub.com/InstruCalc
or call +1 (713) 520-4426.
Updates and Whats New in InstruCalc Version 9.0

ENGINEERING STANDARD UPGRADES
Control Valve Revisions:
Updated to ANSII/ISA 75.011.01-2012
Calculation accuracy changed for critical flows
Viscosity correction factor changed
Pressure drop calculation revised to agree
with Crane Technical paper No 410.
Option of Cv Units (English) or Kv units
(Metric) added.
Option of either aerodynamic noise calculation
by ISA 75.17 method or InstruCalc method
Calculation accuracy added (input data within

acceptable limits)
Relief Devices:
Pressure Relief Devices Program follows API 520
Pt 1, 9th edition dated 7/14
OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
The ability to have more than one calculation open
at a time has been added. Each instance of the
program is framed in a different color. The user
can have multiple what if scenarios displayed
for making engineering decisions.
NEWSLETTER ISSUE 1: July 2016 / www.GasProcessingNews.com
Expanded Panama Canal to boost

gas tanker traffic to Asia
Adrienne Blume, Editor, Gas Processing and Executive Editor,
Panama government officials estimate that 20 MMtpy of LNG will pass through its newlyexpanded waterway (FIG. 1), the equivalent of nearly one tanker per day. Most of the supplies
will travel to Asia, the worlds largest LNG-importing region. The economies of South Korea
and Taiwan stand to benefit greatly from the $5.3-B expansion. Japan and China are also
expected to import LNG through the enlarged canal.
The expansion project, which broke ground in 2007, was completed in late June. Its debut is
serendipitous for US gas producers, as the shale boom has sent domestic supplies surging,
and drillers are looking to send their fuel to markets abroad.
Previously, the Panama Canal could accommodate ships carrying 5,000 containers,
but the expansion will allow vessels with 14,000 containers to pass. The new locks
can able to accommodate vessels up to 160 feet wide and 1,200 feet long, which means
that ships carrying LNG will finally gain access. The larger waterway will help US gas
producers avoid longer trips around South America, cutting transits to Asian markets and
increasing profits.
The volume projected by the Panama Canal Authority represents about 8% of global
LNG trade, equivalent to nearly 300 ships a year. Two shipping alliances, CKHYE and
G6, have already announced plans to upgrade the size of the ships they use for the US-to-Asia
route via the Panama Canal. The Canal expects its total revenues to increase 17% in 2017 to
$2.8 B as a result of the expansion.
FIG. 1. The third set of locks for the expanded Panama Canal (shown at right), and the existing locks
(shown on left) in May 2016. Photo credit: Panama Canal Authority.
In Partnership with
NEWSLETTER ISSUE 1: July 2016 / www.GasProcessingNews.com
In Partnership with
Japan: An unlikely new champion for coal?

Gavin Sutcliffe, Head of Conference and Governing Body, Gastech
Japan is traditionally respected as one of the worlds most efficient
and technologically advanced societies, embracing an inclusive and
responsible approach to economy, society and environment.
However, Japans latest Basic Energy Plan is undergoing major revision
by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), and is now
expected to promote an increased use of coal-fired power generation as
public resistance to nuclear power remains as robust as ever since 2011.
As recently as last year, METI was committed to a balanced energy
roadmap for Japan, with a fuel mix that included around 20% from
nuclear, 26% from coal, 27% from LNG and 22%24% from renewable
energy sources. If nuclear power is to remain offline, other fuels will
have to fill the huge shortfall left if the energy-intensive society is to
remain functional, and METIs revised plans are likely to be made public
in early 2017.
Ironically, this begrudging acknowledgement by the government that
the public will not stomach perceived environmentally risky nuclear
fuel has paved the way for coals resurgence with plans for many new
coal-fired power plants to be built. The likely result is that Japan will
miss its carbon obligations agreements signed during the COP21 in
Paris last year.
Approximately 40 new stations powered by coal are planned to open
over the next decade or so, putting Japans emissions targets in serious
jeopardy. METI plans to make the increased long-term investment in
coal and clean-coal technology, to fill the large gap left by nuclear.
Japan certainly appears isolated among its G7 peers as being the sole
country still building unabated coal-fired power plants.
In May of this year, a report compiled by Oxford Universitys Smith
School of Enterprise and Management called Japans plans to invest
billions of dollars in coal-fired generation flawed, and the reports
main author, Ben Caldecott, remarked, Does Japan seriously think that
there will still be coal-fired power stations in the system in the 2070s?
Because that is what they are committing themselves to with the plans
they have laid out.
The report asserts that the plans to take Japans energy policy in the
opposite direction of other countries will impact the country negatively
over the coming decades. Coal and clean-coal technology industries
are powerful, influential businesses in Japan, where lobbying keeps
coal at the forefront of government policy, even as capital expenditure
costs for renewable energies have fallen between 35% and 45% in the
past decade.
With even the cleanest new-generation coal technology producing
twice the CO2 emissions as gas-fired generation, the heat is now on
the Japanese government, both internally and externally, to reexamine
its commitments to coal and fundamentally review its position as a
leading member of the worlds most industrialized nations.
Coal will continue to challenge the position of natural gasin particular,

LNGas Japans most flexible and economical fuel. This is one of many
key geo-strategic energy debates that will take place at the worlds
largest natural gas and LNG event of 2017, the Gastech Conference
and Exhibition, which arrives in Chiba, Tokyo, April 47. The Japanese
government will be present, and the event is being hosted by 10 of
Japans most important energy stakeholders and investors, including:
Tokyo Gas, JERA, INPEX, Mitsubishi Corporation, Mitsui & Co., JAPEX,
Sumitomo Corporation, JX Nippon and Itochu.
With the Gastech conference now recognized for five decades as the
thought-leadership platform for commercial and technical leaders alike,
the issues of how gas and LNG as primary fuels of a low-carbon energy
mix can continue to stave off challenges from coal and other fossil fuels
will be fiercely debated.
Gastech is calling for global professionals working across technical and
commercial disciplines to provide outstanding and innovative original
submissions to speak at the conference next year, and encourages those
interested to connect with the organizing team as soon as possible.
With more than 40 major technical sessions running over four days and
three days of strategic-level commercial content, the opportunities for
leading gas and LNG professionals to engage with the worlds largest
customer community has never been more exciting or accessible.
Gastechs governing body of 50 leading international professionals will
be voting on the best papers soon. Do not miss out on the chance for
your organization to make an impression to more than 2,500 executive
delegates and many thousands more visitors and exhibitors alike!
Visit www.gastechevent.com/call-for-papers to review themes and
make your submission.
REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES: IRAN
Natural gas monetization options

for Iran: LNG or GTL?
E. SALEHI, APED Engineering Consultants, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Iran has the worlds largest proven natural gas reserves at 1,201 Tcf, according
to BPs Statistical Review of World Energy,1
and it is the fourth-largest natural gas producer in the world. However, it exports
only small amounts of natural gas to Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkeyapproximately 9 Bcmy. Potential exists for Iran
to export approximately 30 Bcmy to the
EU over the long term with the development of LNG facilities.
Iran has so far prioritized its gas allocation to satisfy domestic demand for heat,
power and industry use, and for reinjection
to aging oil fields to maintain production.
With new phases of the giant South Pars gas
field coming onstream, however, any surplus gas will need to be monetized through
pipeline export, petrochemical use, gas-topower, LNG and/or GTL (FIG. 1).
Iran has demonstrated impressive development in the petrochemical and gasto-power industries. However, no significant movement has been seen on LNG
or GTL. The question remains of which
option will be the best pathway for the
monetization of Irans gas reserves.
Iran needs to invest in both LNG and

GTL technologies; however, better opportunities exist to develop GTL over
LNG. The country could become a global
GTL hub if it is willing to embrace emerging and smaller-scale technologies.
Saturated LNG market. The global
LNG market is oversupplied, and is expected to remain so until 2025 due to the
large number of LNG plants anticipated
to come onstream in Australia and the US.
Slowdowns in LNG demand from China,
Japan and South Korea are magnifying
this supply glut. As a result, project developers are hesitant to commit over the
near term to capital-intensive liquefaction
projects. Financing may become more of
a challenge if oil prices remain low.
According to BP statistics,1 global
liquefaction capacity is more than 300
MMtpy, with another 130 MMtpy of capacity under construction. More than 60
LNG projects with a combined liquefaction capacity of 650 MMtpy are expected
to compete for market share between
2020 and 2025. The majority of these
FIG. 1. Irans existing natural gas infrastructure. Source: US Energy

Information Administration, IHS EDIN.
projects are located in the US, Canada

and Australia. By contrast, worldwide
LNG demand has hovered at 240 MMtpy
over the last few years.
For Iran to compete with these large,
emerging LNG players, it would need to
include LNG buyers in the ownership
structure of its liquefaction projects. However, LNG is not necessarily the most economic or practical option for Iran to monetize its natural gas in the present market
situation. The LNG market will continue
to be oversaturated in the foreseeable future, and it will be a challenge for Iran to
finance LNG projects.
Potential in small-scale GTL. The
country has a much better chance of becoming a hub for GTL. Only five commercial GTL plants are in operation
around the world. All are licensed by
either Sasol or Shell and are located in
South Africa, Nigeria, Malaysia and Qatar, with a combined production capacity
of 260 Mbpd.
Sasol and Shell are the pioneers of
the GTL industry, although other GTL
FIG. 2. Small-scale GTL projects, like the ENVIA Energy GTL

plant under construction in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, US, offer
opportunities for alternative GTL industry development across the
world. Photo courtesy of Velocys.
Gas Processing|JULY/AUGUST 201611
REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES: IRAN

technology licensors in the market include Air Liquide/Lurgi and BP/Davy
Process Technology. However, neither
partnership operates a GTL plant at
commercial scale.
The next tier of GTL technology licensors are emerging technology companies that provide mini- and micro-scale
GTL technologies. These technologies
are more efficient compared to conventional GTL technologies, and they are
AdvaSulf
cost-effective for smaller-scale applications like associated gas flaring. In line

with the shale boom in North America,
tremendous advances have been made
in small-scale GTL technology over the
past decade (FIG. 2).
These smaller-scale technologies
convert less-valuable natural gas and associated gases into higher-value liquid
products. At present, large oil and gas
companies are evaluating options for
TM
HySWEET
COSWEET
TM
SweetSulf
TM
Sprex
AdvAmine
TM
A UNIQUE TASTE OF SWEET FOR YOUR GAS

50 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN GAS SWEETENING AND
SULPHUR RECOVERY PROCESSES
With its unique and complete proprietary technologies portfolio,
PROSERNAT offers optimized solutions to bring on specs any
type of gas contaminated with CO2, H2S, COS and organic
sulphur species, while producing sulphur with the most stringent
emissions standards.
www.prosernat.com
investment in these technologies. Iran

could potentially invest in, or acquire,
some of these game-changing emerging
technology companies.
Actions for Iran. Although larger-scale
GTL projects are economically challenging in the present price environment of
below-$50/bbl oil (as of the time of publication), Iran needs to develop a long-term
plan for GTL in its natural gas downstream sector.
One step toward creating a GTL hub
in Iran would be to establish a team of
experts inside the oil ministry. This team
would comprise a mix of market and business analysts, as well as engineers with
specialties in natural gas monetization
techniques. It would define Irans natural
gas monetization roadmap and consult
the oil minister on development options.
The team would also be responsible
for evaluating the most feasible alternatives for Irans natural gas monetization, including residential, industrial,
enhanced oil recovery, pipeline export,
petrochemical, gas-to-power, GTL, LNG
and other options. It is recommended
that the team members seek expertise
from world-scale consulting firms.
Lastly, Iran should carefully watch
how Qatar is changing its strategy for gas
export development amid the downturn
in the oil and gas market. Qatars actions
could serve as a regional model for Irans
development of its new gas reserves going forward. GP
1
LITERATURE CITED
BP, BP Statistical Review of World Energy, June
2015, available online: https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/pdf/energy-economics/statisticalreview-2015/bp-statistical-review-of-world-energy2015-full-report.pdf
EBRAHIM SALEHI is a
business development
and project director at
APED Engineering
Consultants. He is a
chemical engineer with
over 10 years of oil and
gas industry experience
within operating and EPC
companies. Dr. Salehis
specific areas of expertise
include flare gas recovery,
natural gas monetization, conventional and
unconventional oil and gas field development,
and biofuels. His strong research and development
background, combined with a big-picture
understanding of the oil and gas market, has also
led to publication of several articles and patents.
He holds a PhD in chemical engineering from the
University of Calgary.
EXECUTIVE VIEWPOINT
Too much of a good thing: Methanol as a

solution to gas oversupply in the Marcellus
SAM GOLAN, CEO, Primus Green Energy
SAM GOLAN is CEO of Primus Green Energy.

He is a seasoned general manager with
experience as an executive leading multinational engineering, project management and
manufacturing software companies from the
entrepreneurial stage to an established market
presence, mergers and acquisitions, and initial
public offerings.
In the past, he served as the general
manager at Cimatron Technologies in North
America. At Cimatron, Mr. Golan led the development of integrated lean design and manufacturing solutions for the automotive, process
and aerospace industries; provided clients with
comprehensive, cost-effective solutions to
streamline design and manufacturing cycles;
enabled collaboration with outside vendors;
and shortened product delivery times.
He also cofounded and managed Smart
Team, a product lifecycle management company acquired by Dassault Systems SA. Mr.
Golan holds a bachelors degree in economics
and business administration.
The shale revolution has caused a natural gas boom in the Marcellus shale play
that has been a victim of its own success.
The surge in production, along with reduced demand as a result of an unusually
mild winter in the Northeast, has caused
prices to drop by comparison with those
in other regions of the country.
Earlier this year, the price of natural
gas from the Dominion Transmissions
North Point/Leidy Hub in Pennsylvania
was approximately $0.95/MMBtu below
the price at Henry Hub in Louisiana, the
main trading point for US natural gas.
Stock prices for many leading producers
in the Marcellus are also falling. With a
lack of pipelines to transport natural gas to
consumer-rich markets in the Northeast,
Marcellus producers have been forced to
cut production, slash expenditures and
merge with companies with deep enough
pockets to weather the downturn.
Analysts see no relief in sight. Although the spread between Marcellus
and Henry Hub prices has narrowed in
recent months as new pipelines have
drawn down supply, a pipeline buildout
extensive enough to handle the excess is
years away. The same is true of export terminals to ship LNG to foreign markets.
Methanol production as a solution.
What is the answer to this conundrum? In
a word: methanol. Methanol (CH3OH)
is a chemical molecule that can be used
in many waysfrom serving as the basic
chemical building block for paints, plastics and solvents to innovative applications in energy, transportation fuels and
fuel cells. It is one of the top five global
chemical commodities in the world.
At present, the US lower 48 states
import methanol from large methanol plants on the Gulf Coast or abroad.
However, methanol demand can also be
satisfied on a regional basis by producing it from low-cost natural gas through
Primus Green Energys STG+ gas-toliquids (GTL) technology.

Methanol
produced
regionally
through the STG+ technology is competitive with methanol imported from
the Gulf Coast and overseas due to lower-cost natural gas feedstock and reduced
transportation costs. Another advantage
is the ability to react quickly; local producers can meet regional demand in
days, rather than weeks.
The Primus STG+ technology is flexible and produces high-quality gasoline, diluent and chemicals, including
methanol, from natural gas. Due to the
cost savings and advantages afforded by
local methanol production, Primus is
developing a series of North American
methanol plants. These plants range in
size from 160 metric tpd to 640 metric tpd and can be expanded by adding
trains. As a result of its efficient, integrated design, the STG+ methanol technology is cost effective at scales as small
as 2 MMcfd (50 Mcmd) of natural gas,
although it can be expanded into trains
eight times larger.
Unlike traditional, large, stickbuilt
methanol plants, the STG+ systems are
simple to deploy. The modular units
are fabricated at a central location and
then transported to the plant site for final assembly and commissioning. The
methanol system is modular and can be
integrated within existing chemical and
gas processing plants or as a stand-alone
system, depending on requirements. Primus methanol system is inexpensive to
operate, converting 1 MMBtu of natural
gas into 10 gal of methanol at a production cost comparable to that of larger Gulf
Coast methanol plants. The technology
can produce methanol from a variety of
feed gas options, including natural gas,
associated gas, ethane and NGL.
Primus estimates demand for methanol
in the Marcellus region to be at least 500
SMART SOLUTIONS
IN GAS PROCESSING
For more than 40 years, CB&I has excelled at
producing innovative answers for the gas
processing industry. Weve been awarded more
than 300 gas processing projects, including 200
turbo-expander plants. Our installed processing
capacity exceeds 26 BSCFD.
We provide smart solutions for fast-track
modular plants or complete turnkey installations.
Our portfolio of Randall Gas processing
technologies includes very high ethane and
propane recovery, and high propane recovery
while in rejection mode.
Contact CB&I to learn more about our modular
gas plant approach and superior gas processing
technologies. Let us help you improve the
economics on your next gas processing project.
NGL ETHANE RECOVERY TO 99%
LPG PROPANE RECOVERY TO 99.7%
FRACTIONATION
GAS TREATING
LIQUID PRODUCT TREATING
NITROGEN REJECTION
MODULAR GAS PROCESSING PLANTS
A World of Solutions
Visit www.CBI.com
19M052016H
EXECUTIVE VIEWPOINT
metric Mtpy. Through its first announced
project in the Marcellus, Primus plans to
meet about 10% of that demand (about
55 metric Mtpy). When the project comes
online in 4Q 2017, it will be the first GTL
plant in the region. Due to the scalability
of the pre-fabricated systems, additional
trains can be added incrementally, according to need and availability of capital.
Plans call for the addition of three
more trains to Primus Marcellus methanol project, bringing the total capacity to
640 metric tpd in the coming years. Primus is also discussing the development
of purpose-built plants for larger industrial customers and planning four more
methanol plants in North America. These
plants will target areas with cost-advantaged natural gas that are underserved in
terms of methanol production.
Advantages of the STG+ process.
STG+ has low capital and operating costs,
high liquid product quality, zero wastewater, process simplicity and a favorable
conversion yield.
The three-step STG+ process takes
place in a continuous gas-phase closed
loop, with no intermediate condensation
steps. The process starts with steam methane reforming, in which natural gas or
other hydrocarbon gases react with steam
at high temperature and pressure to produce synthesis gas, or syngas (a mixture
of H2 and CO). As mentioned, STG+ can
accommodate a range of natural gas feedstock types, including pipeline gas, wellhead gas with no limits on C2+, gas containing up to 25% CO2 and high-ethane
residue gas from processing plants.
In the second step, the syngas is converted to methanol in a fixed-bed catalytic
reactor. In the third step, the water/methanol mixture is separated from other gases
and fed to a distillation system that is designed to meet the operators methanol
purity requirements. The on-spec methanol is collected from the distillation system and sent to storage. Any unconverted
gas is recycled, with a portion being used
to fuel the reformer. The process water is
recycled as steam for the reformer.
The STG+ technology can also be
used to produce gasoline by replacing the
distillation unit with the back end of the
STG+ natural gas-to-gasoline system, in
which methanol-rich gas is converted to
dimethyl ether (DME), which is converted to raw gasoline. In the fourth and final
step of the natural gas-to-gasoline process, durenes (undesirable components of

gasoline) are removed, producing a highquality gasoline end product with low
benzene and zero sulfur. The ability to
convert to gasoline production adds another layer of flexibility to the technology.
Meeting local methanol demand
with low-cost gas. The combination of
an abundant supply of low-cost natural
gas and a strong demand for methanol is

creating an opportunity in the Marcellus
for STG+ to utilize locally produced gas
to meet regional methanol needs.
The STG+ technology bridges mismatches between abundant natural gas
supply and restricted takeaway capacity. It also delivers profitability, even in
the face of market downturns, by turning low-cost natural gas into liquid end
products. GP
BETTER ECONOMICS
THROUGH INTEGRATED
TURNKEY CAPABILITIES
Greater long-term returns from a single-source provider concept,
engineering, design, fabrication, manufacturing and complete
construction services.
We have the experience, expertise and complete turn-key service capabilities needed
to optimize efficiency and improve your project economics, whether for new or
modified facilities; gathering systems; or compressor stations. The right solution
from the BCCK family of companies: BCCK Engineering, NG Resources and NG Field
Construction will minimize your risks and maximize your project margins.
Dont settle for less, log onto www.bcck/family or contact a representative at 432-685-6095.
Big LNG expertise.

Also available in small LNG plants.
Air Products has contributed to the success of more LNG operations than
any other company. And we bring our full capabilities to LNG projects of
any scale, from peak-shaving plants producing less than 0.1 MMTPA to
the largest base-load facilities, on land or off-shore. Our LNG team can
help you get a plant up and running at the highest efficiencyon time,
on budget, and in any climate. To learn more, call 1-800-654-4567 (US),
1-610-481-4861 (worldwide) or visit us online.
tell me more
airproducts.com/lngplant
DOWNLOAD OUR FREE
GAS WEIGHT & VOLUME
CONVERSION APP.
2015 Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.

Opportunities and challenges

for small-scale LNG commercialization
R. S. BHULLAR, Fluor Corp., Aliso Viejo, California
The rapid development of the unconventional gas supply

chain in North America could have a game-changing impact
on large-scale and mega-gas processing/liquefaction facilities.
However, there are relatively fewer risks and, therefore, greater
opportunities associated with the development of small-scale
gas processing and LNG facilities and infrastructure.
Issues related to large global hydrocarbon development are
different from those related to small-scale gas processing facilities. Gas is anticipated to be the leading fuel of choice in the
future and will play a key development role in Asian and Latin
American economies. New development drivers and regulations
provide great opportunities for small-scale and mid-scale gas and
LNG projects, without regard to supply and demand dynamics.
A comprehensive review of the developing trends and opportunities related to small-scale gas processing and LNG is offered here.
New opportunities are discussed, including traditional power and fuel replacement, marine bunkering, environmental drivers and regulations, feedstock and petrochemicals, and infrastructure opportunities, along with challenges that small-scale
project developers may face. Understanding the issues, drivers,
economics and challenges is vital to the economic leverage and
future success of these projects.
Large-scale projects are capital-intensive and extremely
risky, and they use complex technologies and equipment. Additionally, they face a constantly changing regulatory environment. Presented here are simpler technologies and infrastructures, quick deployment options, smaller sizes for projects and
more targeted approaches for reducing risk and bringing these
projects online with relatively smaller capital requirements.
Evolving LNG supply/demand picture. Natural gas will be a
leading fuel of choice going forward, and LNG will be a significant component of this gas supply chain. However, the industry
faces significant challenges.
Shale gas supply development and the US transition from a
net importer to a net exporter of energy have created a permanent, game-changing market shift. Mega-projects were planned
and completed by overambitious producing nations like Australia to meet the gas needs of the US, which never materialized. At present, an excess of LNG supply exists on the order of
100 metric MMtpy. This excess has created unutilized capacities and a large imbalance in the supply chain that will grow as
more projects come online.
This excess gas supply is shaping the emerging picture of
global LNG supply and trade, as shown in FIG. 1. In the US
and Canada, several LNG receiving and regasification terminals were built and never utilized or brought onstream. Some
of these terminals are being converted to liquefaction facilities
for LNG export. Much of the North American gas is being exported to Japan, Korea, Latin America and Europe. This growth
is being further facilitated by the opening of a parallel Panama
Canal branch, which will lower shipping costs to Asia.
China, on the other hand, is playing a relatively small role
in the global LNG picture. The country is developing pipeline
infrastructure to import Russian gas, while making significant
strides in small-scale LNG and gas supply infrastructure. North
American gas supplies would have a relatively small impact on
the European market, which is well supplied with gas by pipelines and other infrastructure, with supply arrangements already
locked in by long-term sales and purchase agreements (SPAs)
from customers in the Middle East and North Africa.
The biggest challenge to the gas processing/LNG industry
going forward is North American gas supplyspecifically, lowcost shale gas production. At the time of publication, the cost
of shale gas at Henry Hub was in the range of $2/MMBtu to
$2.50/MMBtu, and is expected to hover in that price range for
the foreseeable future. If the cost of liquefaction is added to this
price, along with the costs of pipeline and marine transportation, then the gas can be supplied to Asian-Pacific countries for
less than $6/MMBtu.
These low costs could damage the economics of LNG projects in Australia that are completed or waiting to be brought
onstream. For many Australian and other higher-priced LNG
projects, the breakeven cost is $11/MMBtu$14/MMBtu.
FIG. 1. Global trade flows for LNG, 2015.

SPECIAL REPORT: SMALL-SCALE PROCESSING SOLUTIONS
In the US, small-scale industries

for LNG distribution from micro-LNG
plants are developing. In these projects,
a small-scale or micro-LNG producer
draws feed gas from a gas pipeline grid,
liquefies the gas in a small liquefaction
plant, and then trucks the produced
LNG fuel to local harbors.
shows the breakeven costs for typical projects from a
study by Deutsch Bank. These costs can make participating
in the LNG/gas processing industry very challenging for the
players involved and for future players waiting to join the club.
For future projects, the same approaches as those taken in
the past will not work. New strategies must be developed and
followed. The merits of small-scale to mid-scale LNG projects
are discussed here, although some of these concepts can be applied to larger projects when they again become economical.
FIG. 2
Completely integrated LNG/gas supply chain. Mega-proj-
ects are out of favor at present, and it is inconceivable that new

projects would be financed and executed in a similar manner as
the traditional SPA-based projects. A lack of financing due to
the uncertainty of the long-term SPAs greatly complicates these
project developments.
The structures of the new projects would need to be completely different, from a cost-and-supply point of view. Standalone mega-liquefaction projects with breakeven costs upwards
of $12/MMBtu$14/MMBtu are not feasible at present. The
new bar for future projects is much loweraround $4/MMBtu
$6/MMBtu.
The structures of the new projects must include the total integration of the downstream supply side into the upstream supBrass LNG
FOB cost, breakeven

Shipping cost
LNG Canada
Kitimat LNG
Sabine Pass*
Mozambique
Tanzania
Pluto
Gordon
Ichthys
Prelude FLNG
Wheatstone
OC LNG
Browse
Shtokman
0
8
$US/MMBtu
*Assumes $4/MMBtu Henry Hub spot gas price
10
12
14
16
FIG. 2. Breakeven costs for typical LNG projects. Source: Deutsche Bank.
ply side. Cost distribution, financial risks and rewards must be

shared with all of the stakeholders and beneficiaries in the supply and distribution chain for projects to move forward.
Reducing capital costs of projects. For new projects to be
realized, the overall capital cost of the entire project must be addressed, first and foremost. Several considerations and factors
should be kept in mind:
Formation of alliances and partnerships
Risk-sharing from cradle to grave
Addition of modular capacity as needed or as justified
Next-generation modularization to reduce cost
and schedule
Standardization of design
Minimization of cost on high-cost items
Minimization of time to market
Use of prefabricated equipment like tanks and
compressors, rather than custom-designed, fieldfabricated equipment.
Project financing will need to be much broader and more
complex, with larger alliances and partnerships to share the
risks and rewards of these projects going forward.
The time has come to take a serious look at the rapidly escalating construction costs of large-scale projects in the industry.
One potential idea is to execute project construction differently
to increase cost control availability. Significant advances have
been made to reduce construction costs with the next generation of modularization. The new techniques being developed
lower construction costs by 30% and reduce schedule by 25%,
resulting in quick payout and cost savings.
Everything must be challenged, starting from codes and
standards to the way things are builtfor example, the use of
expensive pipe racks; the optimum use of proper materials; and
even sparing philosophy, reliability and availability.
Project developers have more flexibility in small-scale and
mid-scale LNG facilities due to the smaller sizes of these projects. The highest-cost items for most LNG projects are:
Storage tanks
Jetties
Marine facilities
Boiloff gas (BOG) handling units
LNG vaporization
Infrastructure, including pipe racks.
For small-scale LNG facilities, tremendous opportunities
exist to reduce costs in these critical areas. Unlike the custom,
stickbuilt, large-capacity storage tanks for mega-size LNG projects, the small-scale facilities can use prefabricated tanks. They
can also utilize pressurized storage, whereas large, conventional
LNG terminals must use atmospheric storage. New technologies, such as pressurized storage tanks, are available off-the-shelf
from multiple suppliers in increments of 1,000 m3, which are
suitable for small-scale LNG.
One major advantage is BOG handling. The application of
this technology in small-scale LNG has been demonstrated
and proven. For small-scale LNG facilities, the generated BOG
is put directly into the gas pipeline or into power generation
to supplement utilities. For most small-scale LNG plants, the
BOG handling cost can be significantly reduced by allowing
the pressure to increase in the storage tanks. Then, the high-
OPTIMAL FILTRATION FOR

MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE
Optimize Your
Filtration Performance
Glycol Dehydration
Rich Amine Treatment
Injection Water
Compressor Protection
Turbine Protection
Hydrocarbon Condensate
Molecular Sieve Drier Protection
Optimizing the reliability of your ltration systems is essential in

maximizing your operational performance. At Jonell, our emphasis is
to provide the most advanced technologies to meet your increasing
production and processing needs.
Jonell is a leading designer and manufacturer of ltration/separation
products and services for Gas Processing, Transmission, and LNG
Industries. Regardless of your application, Jonells ltration/separation
products and services can maintain and enhance your operational
performance.
Phone: 254-559-7591
E-mail: infogp@jonellinc.com
www.jonellinc.com

pressure gas can be put into the pipeline or burned for auxiliary
power generation.
Unlike conventional facilities, LNG vaporization for smallscale LNG can be simply executed with an atmospheric vaporizer using ambient air. This technology has been available in
nitrogen facilities for many years.
Drivers for small-scale LNG. The drivers for small-scale LNG
are many and depend largely on geographic location. For Asia

and most of the undeveloped parts of Latin America, the biggest
need is for power to fuel economic growth. Unlike North America or Europe, which have mature and developed gas markets,
these developing regions do not need natural gas in its gaseous
form; they need electric power to sustain their developing standards of living. Some communities are using small, diesel-based
generation, with the obvious negative impact of environmental
pollution (unless they use expensive low-sulfur diesel).
Most developing regions need less than 50 MW of power
generation, with occasional required capacities of between 100
MW and 150 MW. Small-scale LNG is perfectly suited for such
an application. The author has designed modularized LNG facilities for small-scale power generation in a cost-competitive way
that can be brought online relatively quickly, unlike conventional
facilities. The overall cost and complexity must be balanced with
the costs and time needed for turnaround.
One of the biggest drivers in Europe and North America is
diesel replacement, for which natural gas is well suited. The EU
Introducing the
US GAS
PROCESSING
PLANT
DIRECTORY
US GAS PROCESSING
PLANT DIRECTORY
500+ Plants with Information about Name,
Capacity, Plant Scope and Detail, and Owner/
Operator Information.
Gain the market knowledge to grow your business
and inform your decisions in the booming United
States gas market. $1,195 per edition. Searchable,
digital format. Group rates and site licenses
are available.
Order at GulfPub.com/GPPD or
call + 1 (713) 520-4426.
has the major initiative of sulfur emission control areas (SECAs),

and the US has a parallel program. Both initiatives include a large
push for small-scale LNG facilities. Although diesel prices are
somewhat low at present due to the glut of oil being processed,
the natural gas option will be cheaper and better in the long run.
Bunker oil has traditionally been used as marine transport
fuel. The EU and US emissions initiatives mandate the replacement of bunker fuel with natural gas to reduce pollution caused
by marine vessels. This replacement is a crucial milestone for the
industry and has sparked the development of LNG engines for
marine, truck, bus and rail transport across the world. Engines
are already available for commercial use. A large market also exists to convert diesel generator sets into dual-fuel sets using LNG
as an alternative fuel. Furthermore, new crude supply tankers,
cruise ships and passenger ferries are being built to run on LNG.
As these initiatives are realized, opportunities for infrastructure development are emerging. These opportunities include
small LNG terminals that can be supplied by smaller marine vessels, trucks or trains. For domestic gas use, small-capacity ISO
containers are already available that can be trucked to remote
locations, as seen in Northern Europe.
In the US, small-scale industries for LNG distribution from
micro-LNG plants are developing. In these projects, a small-scale
or micro-LNG producer draws feed gas from a gas pipeline grid,
liquefies the gas in a small liquefaction plant, and then trucks
the produced LNG fuel to local harbors, such as Los Angeles or
Long Beach in California, where new environmental initiatives
are being enforced. These small-scale LNG plants can even supply fuel for small trucking or bus fleets.
Takeaway. Although the future for standalone mega-projects is
on shaky ground, tremendous opportunities for growth exist in
small-scale and mid-scale LNG. These opportunities may come
from monetizing small pockets of stranded gas, growing power
and transportation fuel needs, tightening marine fuel regulations, the replacement of diesel with gas, and a host of other
infrastructure and supply chain opportunities.
Additionally, the opening of the second lane of the Panama
Canal will further reduce the timeline of LNG delivery to customers and shipping costs to smaller Asian countries. For serious investors, the opportunities for small-to-mid-scale LNG are
wide-ranging and varied, and limited only by the imagination. GP
ROMEL S. BHULLAR is a senior technical director and a senior
fellow with Fluor Corp.s office in Aliso Viejo, California. As part
of the energy and chemicals group, he has over 35 years of
experience in conceptual development, feedstock, engineering
and construction, commissioning and startup, gas processing,
liquefaction and regasification, pipelines and infrastructure for
both onshore and offshore gas projects. His main focus is
solving complex issues related to technical processes, process control, safety,
process integration, process automation systems and subsystems, control rooms
and other enterprise integration functions.
Mr. Bhullar has executed multiple large- and mega-sized upstream and
downstream projects for national and multinational energy companies.
At present, he is working as a technical advisor on Fluors team for Asias
newest LNG trading terminal in Singapore, operated by SLNG.
Mr. Bhullar has authored several dozen articles in the areas of advanced
process control, process safety, process automation and integration in major
national and international professional magazines. He has also presented at
major technical conferences, including Hydrocarbon Processings International
Refining and Petrochemical Conference (IRPC), and conducted training and
technical workshops around the world.

Market development is key to success

for small-scale LNG
S. BONINI, Muse, Stancil & Co., London, UK; and A. CHANDRA, Muse, Stancil & Co., Houston, Texas
The small-scale LNG (SSLNG) industry continues to grow, driven largely

by rising environmental factors. When
combined with the low cost of natural
gas vs. competing fuels, LNG makes a
good societal and economic choice. The
growth of interest in LNG as a primary
energy source has led to technological developments in end-user markets,
driven foremost by China, with the
US and Europe considerably behind in
terms of installed capacity. This article
examines the factors behind the SSLNG
renaissance and concludes that it is a
sustainable trend.
Although the recent collapse in liquid fuel prices has slowed the conversion rates from diesel and gasoline, the
environmental imperative to improve
air quality in cities around the world
continues. This environmental issue will
determine the SSLNG sectors future.
The collapse in natural gas prices in the
US, and for LNG globally, makes natural
gas an attractive primary energy source
with clear environmental benefits.
Forecasters anticipate that the spread
between oil and gas is likely to open up
again, given that oil prices have more
upside potential than natural gas prices
in most markets.
SSLNG market progress. The SSLNG
industry generally encompasses projects producing less than 1 metric

MMtpy of LNG, which is equivalent
to a natural gas flow of 140 MMscfd,
or 1.72 MMgpd of LNG. The average
SSLNG plant is only one-tenth of this
production; it requires approximately
14 MMscfd of feed gas.
The industry is structurally very different from the large global LNG business, even though the underlying gas
processing needs are the same and are
achieved in similar ways. The primary

challenge for SSLNG lies in developing
the markets and infrastructure downstream of production units.
In terms of capacity, according to International Gas Union statistics, SSLNG
provides approximately 5% of total
LNG production capacity at 20 metric MMtpy of installed capacity. China
has 75% of total SSLNG capacity, with
15 metric MMtpy of total production
across 125 plants, suggesting an average
production of only 0.12 metric MMtpy.
These Chinese plants are liquefying gas
primarily for use in trucks.
The large-scale LNG industry is driven by utility companies and follows a
well-established and readily understood
model. A large-scale LNG project is driven by the presence of substantial natural
gas reserves that are cheap to produce.
These supplies are purchased by a few
buyers, which are typically large, sophisticated industrial utilities and power
companies purchasing under long-term
contracts for at least a decade. The LNG
is imported to terminals, where is it is regasified and sent out into a high-pressure
transmission system. In this scenario,
both the sellers and the buyers are involved in the energy industry.
The small-scale industry is far more
fragmented, with a wide variety of players and drivers. As a result, it is less understood and far less developed. SSLNG
is typically sold to much smaller, fragmented buyers whose motivation could
be environmental and/or economic. In
the small-scale world, LNG will often be
distributed to displace diesel usage. The
buyers are often not energy companies at
all; they are simply buying a fuel for their
own use.
Typical drivers for SSLNG production include:
Air quality issues around

particulate emissions from diesel
engines and, in the marine world,
the introduction of Emission
Control Areas (ECAs)
The drive to reduce natural gas
flaring, particularly in US shale areas
The displacement of liquid fuels
with cheaper LNG (this is the
most prevalent driver for the US).
Marine regulationA key driver. Due
to the sharp increase in world trade, a rise

in air pollution from shipping has been
seen. Unlike the land transport sector,
shipping has historically been much more
lightly regulated and has had minimal air
emissions regulations placed upon it.
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) began work on this problem in 1997 and developed international standards, policies and agreed zones
in which nations could implement
ECAs. In these coastal areas, all marine
traffic is required to control emissions
of some or all of the following: SOx ,
NOx and ozone-depleting substances,
volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
and particulates.
FIG. 1 shows the designated areas for
control. These zones have been agreed
upon internationally, and individual
states are now implementing regulations
within their jurisdictions. The US began
drawing up its regulations in 2009 and is
now beginning enforcement. Europe has
implemented its ECAs in the Baltic and
North Seas.
Meanwhile, China announced at the
end of 2015 that it will be establishing
ECA measures across a large area of the
Pearl River Delta. The regulations will be
tightened over time and differ between
zones, with a trend of stricter controls
and cleaner operations.

The introduction of ECAs has meant
that ships must either fit scrubbers to remove SOx , or switch to expensive ultralow-sulfur-content fuels while in the ECA.
An alternative is to move to fuels such as
natural gas. The LNG carrier fleet has, for
some years, been developing dual-fuel
(diesel/natural gas) propulsion systems.
A tremendous effort is being made globally to develop LNG as a marine transport
fuel, with a strong emphasis on smaller,
nearshore and inland vessels.
The LNG volumes required for the
marine industry are significant when
studied collectively, but they are small on
an individual basis. The LNG fuel tank
for the worlds first LNG-fueled container vessel is 900 m3, or approximately 400
metric t. Existing large-scale LNG export
facilities supply cargoes of 170,000 m3
and larger, and load a ship every three
days. A whole new set of infrastructure
and production units are required to
serve the transportation market. It is an
entirely different business, with different
commercial models.
China: A success story. China represents 75% of installed global capacity and
has experienced strong, rapid growth, despite its comparatively low gas reserves.
The country has achieved success in

SSLNG with strong central policy directives aimed at increasing the use of natural gas as a vehicle fuel, displacing diesel
from larger trucks as part of the effort to
improve air quality in cities.
China has an LNG-fueled heavy truck
fleet of approximately 200,000. Energy
prices are regulated in China, with the
government setting key prices to achieve
particular policy objectives. The country
keeps natural gas prices low and sets locally produced LNG prices to be at least
20% cheaper than diesel, making it more
attractive for end users to switch. When
oil prices were high, the SSLNG producers had a good business model with low
input prices and a significantly higher
LNG price. Recent drops in diesel prices
have caused Chinese regulators to lower
LNG prices to protect the trucking industry at the expense of SSLNG producers,
and the growth has slowed dramatically.
The SSLNG plants are built predominantly alongside pipelines providing pipeline-quality gas. A significant
number of plants take feed from coalbed
methane or stranded inland gas reserves
located away from gas infrastructure.
SSLNG provides a monetization route
for these reserves.
This non-free market approach may

appear strange to US readers. The Chinese have kickstarted the use of LNG as a
transport fuel, rapidly increasing SSLNG
production capacity, the truck fleet and
associated infrastructure. The effort has
been so successful that the Chinese government is looking to repeat the program
for marine transport for inland river traffic. As previously mentioned, China has
announced its first ECA area, as well as its
first LNG marine bunkering facility. The
expectation is that these moves will result in the same sort of growth in SSLNG
serving the Chinese marine sector.
This approach is currently inconceivable in the US, although it is worth
remembering that, until the 1980s, US
wellhead prices were determined by the
federal government. It does show that the
technologies are viable and can be rapidly deployed, if a coordinated approach is
made with clear policy directives.
US experience and outlook. The US
experience has been built on a free-market approach and is helped by a key marine regulation. The countrys SSLNG
industry has received a tremendous
boost in recent years as a result of the
natural gas bonanza. The US also has ac-
New ECA?
ECA
ECA
New ECA?
ECA
New ECA?
New ECA?
New ECA?
New ECA?
Existing ECA
Possible future ECA
FIG. 1. Existing and possible future ECAs. Source: DNV.

cess to large, cheap natural gas reserves
for the foreseeable future.
When oil prices were high, the price
differential between natural gas and gasoline/diesel made switching between the
fuels attractive. Considerable investment
followed in natural gas engine technology and distribution infrastructure, most
notably by oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens
Clean Energy initiative. However, the subsequent crash in oil prices has reduced the
price differential and, therefore, the motivation to switch away from gasoline and
diesel. Nonetheless, progress continues to
be driven by the US gas reserve base and
the move toward greener transportation.
The most notable recent developments
in SSLNG production in the US are taking
place in Florida around interconnected
markets in port and rail infrastructure.
These developments are driven by both
economic and environmental factors.
New Fortress Energy, a wholly owned
subsidiary of New York-based global investment management firm Fortress Investment Group (FIG), also owns Florida
East Coast Railway. The railway has ordered LNG-fueled locomotives from GE
and is actively converting its fleet.
FIG also purchased Raven Transport,
a trucking company with one of the largest LNG-fueled fleets in the US. Raven
owns nearly 200 LNG-fueled trucks and
plans to reach approximately 500 units
by 2019. The chicken-and-egg problem
that faces many small-scale developers
that try to develop downstream markets
with third parties can be alleviated by
partnering or cooperating with a group
of affiliated companies. FIG, which is developing rapidly in the SSLNG space, has
taken the latter approach.
In other developments, the JAX LNG
plant at Jacksonville will shortly be supplying LNG to the port as a bunkering
fuel. This facility was developed and is
owned by Crowley Marine and Pivotal
LNG, with the primary focus on the marine market. It will be the supply source for
the worlds first LNG-powered container
ships based thereIsla Bella and Perla
Del Caribe, planned for use within the Caribbean. Crowley is already shipping 10Mgal ISO tanks to Puerto Rico for use in
the Coca-Cola bottling facility, providing
a cleaner and cheaper alternative to diesel.
European SSLNG efforts. The SSLNG
sector has seen the most activity in north-
Although the recent collapse in liquid fuel prices has

slowed the conversion rates from diesel and gasoline,
the environmental imperative to improve air quality
in cities around the world continues. This environmental
issue will determine the SSLNG sectors future.
ern Europe, around the Baltic and North
Seas, where the first ECAs have been implemented. The Norwegian government
has established a NOx fund that charges
all NOx emitters in the zone while offering subsidies to companies that reduce
emissions using new technologies. In
recent years, this has led to payments of
$58 MM to LNG-fueled vessel owners.
Two offshore platform supply vessels,
three passenger ferries and one gas carrier
are now operating in the region, with 17
more LNG-powered vessels under construction and planned. The LNG-powered fleet is growing rapidly, with 80 or
so forecast to be in operation by the close
of 2016. Of this total, 56 are forecast to
be operating in the Baltic and North Seas.
SSLNG production has grown
around Norway to support the marine
market. Norway also uses SSLNG to
supply remote coastal communities, and
it serves these markets with a number of
SSLNG carriers.
SSLNG for international trade.
This review has looked at the principle
growth areas for SSLNG as a local clean
fuel supply, and where the LNG is produced and consumed within the same
country, or even the same province.
This scenario is quite different from
the large-scale industry, which exists to
transport large, remote and stranded reserves to populous markets.
SSLNG is now carving out niche
markets. As mentioned above, Crowley
Marine is supplying LNG in ISO tanks
to Puerto Rico. The company recently
announced the purchase of 19 additional
ISO tanks to meet increasing demand.
Meanwhile, FIG recently received
approval from the US Department of
Energy to export LNG to Jamaica in
ISO tanks. Also this year, Hawaii Gas
announced its intention to import LNG
from Clean Energy in ISO tanks.
In Thailand, Thai-based LNG Plus
International Co. Ltd. recently complet-
ed a small-scale gas-fired power plant in

Myanmar, supplied with LNG by road
tanker from Thailand. In June, Japans
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism announced that it will
be seeking to trial LNG bunkering in the
port of Yokohama.
All of these developments are significant for SSLNG production and supplychain technologies. It is particularly notable that the US is leading the charge with
new entrants and not with traditional
LNG players. SSLNG is truly a separate
industry with a shared technology. GP
SIMON BONINI has over 30 years
of experience in the LNG and
international energy industries, and
has managed all aspects along the
LNG chain, including developing
and implementing new strategies.
He spent 17 years at BG Group
developing several businesses, including the Trinidad
export project, BGs shipping business, BGs position
in Lake Charles, and the global LNG trading business.
Mr. Bonini also worked at Woodside, establishing its
US LNG strategy, and at Centrica, founding its LNG
import business. Most recently, he has been active as
COO and board member of 4Gas and Dragon LNG. He
was also one of the founding partners of Parallax
Energy and the CEO of Louisiana LNG and Live Oak
LNG. Mr. Bonini holds a first class degree in chemical
engineering from Imperial College in London, and an
MBA degree from INSEAD in France. He is also a
fellow of the Institute of Chemical Engineers.
AJEY CHANDRA is a director at
Muse, Stancil & Co., and the
managing partner of the Houston
office, where he also leads the
midstream practice area for the
firm. He joined Muse in 2014 after
28 years of experience in various
facets of the midstream industry, including operations,
engineering, business development, management
and consulting. During his career, Mr. Chandra has had
a wide variety of assignments covering all aspects of
the energy industry, and he has had several long-term
expatriate assignments overseas, including Europe
and Southeast Asia. His operating, consulting and
management experience includes working at Amoco,
Purvin & Gertz, Hess and NextEra Energy Resources
prior to joining Muse. Mr. Chandra holds a BS degree
in chemical engineering from Texas A&M University
and an MBA degree from the University of Houston.
He has also attended executive education classes at
Harvard Business School and is a registered
professional engineer in Texas.
Same great people.

Same great service.
Same great company.
You know what we do.

We can do more together.
Valerus is becoming SNC-Lavalins

Production & Processing Solutions
Valerus is now a part of the larger SNC-Lavalin family. Together, we
provide unmatched modular equipment facilities on a turnkey basis.
To learn more, visit snclavalin.com/en/oil-gas/processing-treating

2016 SNC-Lavalin.
LNG TECHNOLOGY
Develop successful nearshore FLNG solutions

Part 1: Gas pretreatment strategies
S. MOKHATAB, Consultant, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
Gas pretreatment strategies. In a typical nearshore FLNG

facility (FIG. 1), feed gas is transported via pipeline and flexible
riser to the FLNG facility, where impurities are removed (in the
gas pretreatment section) and the gas is liquefied before being
stored onboard the facility.
Pursuant to LNG, other liquid products (LPG and condensate) will be stored and subsequently offloaded to marine carriers for delivery to market. While each facet of the nearshore
FLNG production facility is important, the gas pretreatment
section of the facility plays a critical role in treating the raw feed
gas to meet final sulfur specifications and purity levels required
by the natural gas liquefaction unit.
The specifications to be met include hydrogen sulfide
(H2S) removal to under 4 ppmv, carbon dioxide (CO2 ) to
below 50 ppmv, total sulfur to under 10 ppmv as S, water to
less than 0.1 ppmv, and mercury (Hg) to the level of 0.01 g/
Nm3. Also, heavy hydrocarbons (HHCs) shall be removed to
below freezing limits in cryogenic heat exchangers (typically
in the range of 0.1 mol% for C6+ and a few ppm for aromatics).
The general nitrogen (N2 ) specification for rundown LNG is
1 mol% maximum.
TABLE 1 shows feed gas impurities in various locations. Different locations require different gas treatment schemes. The
following section briefly discusses the different technologies in
treating sour feed gas to the natural gas liquefaction unit, and
the technology in the removal of contaminants to meet environ-
mental and emissions regulations and LNG feed gas specifications.

Acid gas removal. The acid gas removal unit (AGRU) mainly
removes the acidic components, such as hydrogen sulfide (H2S)

and carbon dioxide (CO2), from the feed gas stream. This process helps meet the sales gas H2S specification and avoid CO2
freezing (and subsequent blockages) in the cryogenic exchanger, respectively. It also removes some amount of carbonyl sulfide (COS), mercaptans (R-SH) and other organic sulfur species that contribute to sulfur emissions.
Three solvent absorption processes (chemical absorption,
physical absorption and the mixed solvents) are commonly
used for acid gas removal. These processes can also be used in
FLNG production facilities. Most commonly, H2S and CO2 are
removed from the natural gas feed stream in a chemical solvent
unit utilizing an aqueous amine solvent.
With the exception of methyldiethanolamine (MDEA),
amines are generally not selective and will remove both CO2
and H2S from the gas. When used in treating sour gases to meet
the tight CO2 specification for LNG production, the activity of
CO2 absorption is too slow with pure MDEA, which must be
enhanced with a promoter (i.e., piperazine). In contrast, a feed
gas with 10 mol% CO212 mol% CO2 can be handled by a promoted MDEA process.
The advantage of the amine technology is that the solubility of
aromatics and heavy hydrocarbons in the aqueous solvent is low,
resulting in lower hydrocarbon losses. However, the disadvantage
is the high energy consumption for the regeneration of aqueous
amine. Physical solvents, which can be applied advantageously
when the partial pressure of the acid gas components in the feed
Flare
Liquefaction
Gas
pretreatment
Inlet
facilities
Helideck
Process
utilities
Power
generation
Turret
swivel
Movement has been seen in offshore floating liquefied natural gas (FLNG) developments. However, nearshore projects that
utilize a barge-based floater located in a nearshore environment,
and that also take advantage of onshore support, may be more
secure than offshore alternatives. One reason for this scenario is
that the offshore projects could face greater technical challenges
and higher costs. As such, great interest exists in developing robust, reliable and innovative natural gas pretreatment and liquefaction solutions for nearshore, lower-cost FLNG projects.
At the nearshore FLNG facility, the need exists for a compact,
flexible and energy-efficient pretreatment package to remove
contaminants. This package must also deliver feed gas with the
required specifications by the natural gas liquefaction unit to
maintain continuous uptime of LNG production.
Part 1 of this article describes the appropriate processing
technologies for designing a robust pretreatment section and
shows how the integration of treatment technologies and expert
know-how make a difference.
LNG storage
tanks
LPG
storage
tanks
Condensate
storage
tanks Feed gas
Electrical rooms
Hull utilities
Buoy
Riser
Mooring line
FIG. 1. Typical layout of a nearshore FLNG facility (modified after

Festen et al., 2009).1
LNG TECHNOLOGY
gas is high (typically greater than 60 psi), will lower the energy
consumption but will coabsorb more hydrocarbons. For this reason, physical solvents are generally suitable to treat lean gases.
When the need exists to treat rich gases, the NGLs must
first be removed by chilling. As an alternative, the use of hybrid
(mixed) chemical and physical solvents is beneficial, where they
can be formulated to allow for complete CO2 removal, while
achieving H2S removal comparable to alkanolamines.
In hybrid systems, mercaptans (R-SH) and other organic sulfur components, if present in the feed gas, can also be removed
by the physical solvent portion. Generally, this option will result
in an expensive design with a hydrocarbon coabsorption that is
too large to be acceptable.3 In many cases, the optimum solution
is the distribution of the mercaptans removal capabilities over
the optimized mixed chemical-physical solvent in the AGRU
and the molecular sieve unit (MSU). In this option, the regeneration of the MSU gas can be integrated with the AGRU using
a shared regeneration system. The treated regeneration gas can
then be recycled either to the inlet of the MSU or the inlet of the
AGRU absorber.3
A number of processes (membranes, cryogenic fractionation
and adsorption) are also available to remove H2S and CO2 from
natural gas. Membrane separation, which offers several advantages compared to an amine unit (i.e., greater turndown capability, and reduced installation costs and plot space) is only suitable for bulk CO2 removal, where further treating with amine is
required to meet H2S and CO2 specifications. The membranes
require a suitable pretreatment system to remove particulates
and to avoid liquid formation in the membranes. Improper pretreatment generally leads to performance decline rather than to
complete nonperformance.
The main limitation of the membrane system is linked to the
significant loss of hydrocarbons in the CO2 discharge. This constriction is partly due to the relatively large membrane surface area
TABLE 1. Feed gas impurities in some areas2
South
America
Southeast
Asia
H2S, ppmv
51,000
5200
250
1,0002,900
Total sulfur,
ppmv
51,000
5250
260
0400 (R-SH)
140 (COS)
Australia
Middle East
CO2, %
255
950
230
27
Hg, g/Nm3
0100
2002,000
50200
050
H2O, ppmv
Saturated
Saturated
Saturated
Saturated
TABLE 2. Molecular sieve vessel size comparison of a typical

molecular sieve unit4
Single-layer
molecular
sieve, 18 in.
Molecular sieve
quantity/vessel, kg
Split configuration
Split
(combining
configuration
1
8-in. and 1 16-in.
using dense
molecular sieves)
particles
27,000
21,250
21,200
Vessel internal
diameter, m
3.3
3.3
3.15
Vessel height, m
4.47
3.65
3.4
Vessel volume, m3
38.2
31.2
26.5
that would be required to reach a 50-ppm CO2 spec. Membrane

systems perform well at reduced feed flowrates, but their performance drops when design flowrates are exceeded. Additional
modules must, therefore, be added in parallel to accept higher
flowrates. As a result, the membrane separation process does not
realize the economies of scale as the flowrate is increased.
Cryogenic fractionation appears to offer a good prospect for
removing CO2 and H2S from natural gas. However, this technology requires substantial energy to provide necessary refrigeration. It also requires pretreatment of feed gas to remove components with a freezing point above the operating temperature to
avoid freezing of lines and blockages of process equipment.
Adsorbents for acid gas removal are generally limited to
small gas streams operating at moderate pressures. For example,
molecular sieve technology may be a cost-effective method to
remove low CO2 contents up to 2 mol% in small-scale facilities
(with a feed gas flowrate of about 40 MMscfd), where an amine
absorption unit is not considered suitable from a capital expenditures (CAPEX) point of view.
Note: The discharged acid gas stream can be routed to the
flare stack to ensure its safe disposal, in the case of low H2S content, or reinjected to a suitable reservoir to minimize environmental impact if the concentrations of acid gas components are
too high. However, acid gas injection will require an additional
system for dehydration, unless water is knocked out at 800
psi900 psi. This injection will prevent corrosion and hydrate
formation, as well as compression, all of which add costs, complexity and safety considerations to the nearshore FLNG facility design. For high H2S contents, the discharged acid gas stream
can also be routed to an onshore plant for sulfur recovery. However, this method poses additional export and handling issues.
Water removal. Molecular sieves are used to dry the gas leaving the AGRU to below 0.1 ppmv to avoid hydrate formation in
the NGL recovery unit. They can also be used for the removal
of mercaptans and other sulfur compounds to meet the product specification of 10 ppm. Molecular sieve units, if properly
designed, can economically handle only feed gases containing a
maximum of 1,500 ppmv RSH.3
While moisture removal is traditionally done with the smaller-pore-sized 3A and 4A molecular sieves, mercaptans/sulfur
removal is accomplished with the larger-pore-sized 5A and 13X
types. The 5A type molecular sieve is used for trace removal of
H2S and the removal of light mercaptans (C1/C2SH), while
the 13X molecular sieve is used for the adsorption of heavy/
branched mercaptans.
However, coadsorption of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene
and xylene (BTEX) components with concentrations higher
than 30 ppmv on 13X molecular sieves will result in increased
length of the molecular sieve bed. These components can also
cause transients in the concentrations of these components in
the regeneration gas. Transients can cause separation problems
in the physical absorption process used to recover the mercaptan species from the spent regeneration gas.
The practical solution for such a purpose is to use a 5A molecular sieve for removing light mercaptans in the gas phase, as
this product has no BTEX capacity. The heavier mercaptans are
then removed with the LPG and condensate (C5+) cuts, which
may be further treated downstream using a caustic scrubber
LNG TECHNOLOGY
process, followed by a molecular sieve unit to dry the treated
liquids to meet the required product specifications.3
The key role of the molecular sieve units in gas pretreatment
increases the need to understand the design principles and operation of such units to optimize the size and improve the performance of the molecular sieve units in FLNG projects. In recent years, various techniques have been proposed to reduce the
unit size. For example, using split-bed configurations of dense
molecular sieves can reduce bed voidage and vessel volume
(TABLE 2). Using high-quality molecular sieves with superior
properties and improved regeneration methods can extend bed
lifetime and improve reliability while providing cost savings.
Mercury removal. Removal of mercury using nonregenerative metal-sulfide sorbents or regenerative silver-impregnated
molecular sieves is required to avoid the risks of mercury attack
on the brazed aluminum heat exchangers and equipment in the
cryogenic section. The mercury removal unit can be positioned
upstream or downstream of the AGRU.
Installing vessel(s) of non-regenerative sorbents before the
amine unit removes all mercury and prevents contamination
through the remainder of the FLNG production facility. Although this method appears to be costly, it is actually very simple,
since no regeneration equipment is required. It is also a very safe
and conservative approach to handling mercury in the feed gas.
Installing a nonregenerative mercury removal sorbent downstream of the amine unit, just before the molecular sieve unit,
reduces the size of the molecular sieve beds to some extent, but
it also poses the risk of mercury contamination of the solvent
system. Adding a silver-impregnated mercury sieve section to
the molecular sieve beds to simultaneously remove water, mercaptans and mercury provides another option with a potentially
longer service life. However, this option requires a separate vessel of nonregenerative metal-sulfide adsorbent for treating a
relatively high mercury content in the regeneration water that
would result in additional costs.5 Note: The mercury-contaminated wastes should be sent onshore for proper disposal at a
hazardous waste facility.
HHC removal and NGL recovery. Removal of HHCs (C6+
and aromatics) from the gas to be liquefied is necessary to avoid
waxing and plugging in the main cryogenic heat exchanger
(MCHE). The usual solution is to use a scrub column ahead
of the liquefaction unit operating at liquefaction pressure and
thermally integrated with the MCHE (FIG. 2).
Although this method has been widely used, it has limitations
in terms of inlet feed gas operating pressure and composition.
In fact, a significant reduction in the scrub column pressure (to
below the critical point) may be necessary, resulting in reduced
liquefaction efficiency and increased power consumption.
In addition, when the gas becomes lean in C2 or C3+, it is
difficult for the column to operate stably and efficiently due to
insufficient liquid reflux in the column. An alternative to using
a scrub column is to use an NGL extraction unit to recover the
C2+ or C3+ hydrocarbons from the treated/dried gas. Conventional turboexpander technology can be used to produce a lean
gas for liquefaction to comply with LNG product specifications.
Although propane and butane pose no freezing problem,
they are removed together with the heavy hydrocarbons and
can be separated and sold as liquid products. In addition, the

extracted ethane is returned to the natural gas stream and used
as refrigerant makeup or to supplement the fuel gas.
Although a front-end NGL extraction unit utilizing conventional turboexpander technology can handle a wide variety of
feed gas compositions and effectively remove HHCs, it contains rotating equipment that impacts the capital investment
and reliability of the FLNG facility. Todays proprietary NGL
recovery processes may reduce capital costs through the use of
high-efficiency expanders/compressors and compact heat exchangers, but they may prove difficult and complex to operate.
This complexity makes these processes less desirable for most
FLNG facilities that prefer operational simplicity and minimum
maintenance designs.
Note: In case the need exists for the removal of small quantities of HHCs from pipeline-quality gas to meet the more stringent specification for LNG, applying a silica-gel-based adsorption
process to adsorb heavy hydrocarbons at high pressure (without
removing lighter ones) is an economical option over other existing processes. In this case, the desorbed heavier components
from the adsorption unit may be preferentially fed to the fuel gas
system, which avoids the need for LPG removal and storage.
Nitrogen removal. The presence of more than approximately
1 mol% of nitrogen (N2 ) in LNG may lead to auto-stratification
and rollover in storage tanks, presenting a significant safety
concern. A higher percentage of N2 content in the feed gas also
impacts the liquefaction process itself by reducing liquefaction
efficiency (additional refrigeration requirements per unit of
LNG produced, due to the need to condense N2 in the feed gas).
In addition, high-N2 -content feed gas may require treatment
of (or the spiking of higher-Btu gas into) the BOG so that it may
be used as the fuel gas for the gas turbine(s) on the FLNG facility. Therefore, the need exists for an efficient technique for the
removal of N2 from LNG, even for relatively low N2 levels.
For feed gas containing N2 levels of approximately 1 mol% to
2 mol%, N2 can be removed in the end-flash section within an
FLNG production facility. When N2 is present in high concentrations (greater than 5 mol%), it should be removed in the front
section of the liquefaction unit to minimize liquefaction energy
requirements. Several N2 rejection methods exist, including cryogenic separation, membranes and molecular sieve technology.
NG
MCHE
NG
LNG
NGL
Reflux
Overhead
Precooling
Dry NG
Propane
refrigerant
Scrub
column
Lean gas
Liquefaction
MCHE
Mixed refrigerant
NGL
FIG. 2. Integrated LNG unit, scrub column.6

LNG TECHNOLOGY
H2S, CO2, RSH
Regen gas
absorber
Common
regenerator
CO2
Feed gas
from HP
separator
Mercury
removal
(nonregenerative
sorbents)
Bulk CO2
removal
(membrane)
H2O
Absorber
(optimized
mixed physical/
chemical
solvent)
H2O and R-SH

removal (molecular
sieve technology)
Hot regen gas
Mercury
To N2 removal/
HHCs removal/NGL recovery liquefaction unit
(conventional turboexpander
technology)
NGL
fractionation
C2
C3
C4
C5+
Treatment/
drying
FIG. 3. Typical integrated pretreatment scheme for nearshore FLNG

facility receiving raw, high-CO2-content feed gas.
Feed gas
from HP
separator
Mercury
removal
(non-regenerative
sorbents)
Mercury
CO2
H2O
CO2 removal
(promoted
MDEA
solvent)
HHCs H2O
removal
(silica gel
technology)
H2O
Residual H2O To N2 removal/
removal liquefaction unit
(molecular
sieve
technology)
HHCs
FIG. 4. Typical integrated pretreatment scheme for nearshore FLNG

facility receiving lean, pipeline-quality gas.
However, the only existing, viable, large-scale rejection

technology is the use of cryogenic separation. In fact, the applications of membranes and molecular sieve technologies are
generally limited to small scales. Membrane systems typically
produce a waste N2 stream with fairly high hydrocarbon content
(revenue loss), and the stream cannot be vented directly to the
atmosphere. Therefore, waste N2 must be reinjected for sequestration or disposed of by other means. Molecular sieve technology is uneconomical when used to remove high levels of N2 .5
Although economic justification exists to remove N2 from the
feed gas before liquefaction, it is possible to remove N2 within
the liquefaction process. When N2 removal is performed in the
liquefaction section, it avoids the N2 rejection unit (NRU) product compression system, with refrigeration provided by a liquefaction unit refrigeration system. It also avoids losses associated
with reheating and cooling feed gas for N2 rejection. However,
in this scheme, a high level of heat integration with the liquefaction system adds to process complexity and operational risk, as
neither the NRU nor the liquefaction system is conventional.7
When an NRU is to be installed in conjunction with the
AGRU and NGL recovery units, the opportunity exists to integrate both facilities by eliminating repeat heat exchange equipment and recompression. For example, the selection of the
NGL recovery unit outlet pressure can be set to match the best
efficiency point of the NRU columns, and the rejected N2 from

the NRU can be used to strip the AGRU solvent.
Such a simple integration concept can be incorporated into
the design to achieve higher energy efficiency and reduce equipment counts while maintaining the operability of the overall
process design.
Integrated pretreatment scheme. Commercial process
technologies, like those discussed above, can be integrated and
configured into various FLNG pretreatment schemes, each offering unique benefits. FIGS. 3 and 4 show typical pretreatment
schemes for nearshore FLNG facilities based on two different
types of supplied feed gas.
In the case of supplying pipeline-quality gas to the facility, a
quick-cycle silica gel adsorption unit allows the single-step removal of both heavy hydrocarbons and water from natural gas;
however, it does not generally achieve the water dewpoint of 0.1
ppm typically required in LNG production facilities.
Although trim layers of molecular sieves could be added to
the bottom of this unit to obtain the required water specification, the large number of repeated cycles would impose a challenge for the molecular sieve by reducing its performance and
lifetime. A more practical approach is to add a small molecular
sieve dehydration unit downstream of the quick-cycle unit to
remove the residual ppm levels of water from the gas.
In these integrated treating schemes, the main objective is
to have an optimized, compact solution that can provide great
process flexibility, safety and systems reliability while providing significant energy and capital cost savings. Note: The optimum solution will vary from project to project, as each feed
gas is different.
Takeaway. A key step in the development of an attractive nearshore FLNG solution is the selection of an appropriate gas pretreatment system that best meets the project objectives. Several
technology options can be integrated into the design of the gas
pretreatment section in nearshore FLNG projects. When determining the optimal integrated pretreatment scheme, safety,
weight, costs (CAPEX and OPEX), reliability and operational
flexibility must be considered.
Next issue. Part 2 of this article will appear in the September/
October issue of Gas Processing. GP
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Thanks are due to Scott Northrop for reviewing this manuscript and providing
useful comments.
LITERATURE CITED
Complete literature cited available at GasProcessingNews.com.
SAEID MOKHATAB is an internationally recognized gas
processing consultant who has been actively involved in several
large-scale gas field development projects, concentrating on
design, precommissioning and startup of processing plants.
He has presented many invited talks on gas processing
technologies worldwide and has authored or co-authored
nearly 250 technical publications, including two Elsevier
handbooks referenced by practitioners in the field. He has held technical advisory
positions for leading professional journals, societies and conferences in the field
of gas processing, and has received a number of international awards and medals
in recognition of his outstanding work in the natural gas industry.
GAS TREATING
Design for ultra-high-pressure

H2S removal from natural gas
P. ROBERTS, formerly with Advisian, WorleyParsons, Twickenham, UK
What are the pressure design limits for natural gas H2S removal and associated dehydration facilities? This question was
asked in the search for facility designs to remove H2S from sour
gas at a pressure of 160 bara. The inlet gas to the facility is at
160 bara, and it requires export with minimum pressure loss
for reinjection.
The existing facilities consist of mixed metal oxide beds to
remove low levels of H2S and non-regenerable molecular sieve
beds to remove the water formed in the reaction to remove
H2S. The level of H2S increased over time, and was close to exceeding the capacity of the beds.
The decision was made to install an acid gas removal unit
(AGRU) and an associated dehydration system to address the
increased levels of H2S in the feed. Two main design options
were presented:
1. High-pressure (HP) design: Pressure letdown to
80 bara AGRU and 80 bara triethylene glycol (TEG)/
molecular sieve dehydration plus compression
(standard technology)
2. Ultra-high-pressure (UHP) design: 160 bara AGRU
and 160 bara TEG/molecular sieve dehydration.
A substantial financial incentive was identified to avoid the

requirement of recompression and operate at UHP design.
Here, the work carried out to validate the design of the UHP
facilities is examined. It also discusses the work undertaken to
verify the design and operation of an AGRU and an associated
dehydration unit at UHP, as well as the challengesboth expected and unexpectedthat were encountered.
At the start of the design, it was anticipated that the main
difficulty in designing the UHP system would be the AGRU,
due to the large increase in pressure from any previous design
for natural gas. Therefore, it came as a surprise that the project
could not move forwardnot from a lack of confidence for an
AGRU to operate at UHP, but due to difficulties in finding a
suitable means of dehydration at this pressure.
Amine unit background. Amine units have been used for
years to treat natural gas as the primary method of acid gas

removal, although very few plants operate at pressures above
80 bara. Two examples exist, both in the North Sea:
100 bara: Statoils Sleipner platform
112 bara: Gaz de Frances K-12B platform.
TABLE 1. UHP amine design challenges

Point number
Challenge
Mitigation actions
Increased amine losses (carryover) and poor

performance of absorber internals due to
a reduced liquid-vapor density difference
The density difference of approximately 50 kg/m3 is greater than

some well-established processes, and not significantly less than
a typical amine absorber
Water wash possible to minimize amine losses
Add a design margin to the absorber diameter
If the absorber is trayed, increase the tray spacing and size
of downcomers
Uncertainty of physical properties
Physical properties of the feed gas are well known at 160 bara
A proprietary Peng-Robinson package can be used in excess of 200 bara
Sour gas injection facilities designed up to 800 bara
Increased hydrocarbon absorption into the amine,

resulting in additional flash gas and potential
for foaming
Published data exists up to 140 bara, showing that methane absorption

is almost linear with pressure and appears suitable for extrapolation
Additional laboratory testing
Accommodate for additional flash gas in the design
Reduced efficiency of H2S absorption and failure

to meet product specification due to hydrocarbon
coabsorption and non-ideal behavior
Published data for CO2 up to 200 bara shows that UHP operation
affects CO2 loadings at fixed partial pressure
Mechanical considerations for 160-bara operation
Use existing refinery plant experience (hydrotreater)

GAS TREATING
Many refining applications exist up to 200 bara, but these
process hydrogen-rich gas rather than natural gas.
Potential challenges of designing and operating an amine
unit in hydrocarbon service at UHP were identified, as shown
in TABLE 1.
The challenges that require more mitigation are Points 3, 4 and
5. Points 3 and 4 concern hydrocarbon absorption into amine at
HP, and Point 5 concerns mechanical considerations. Therefore,
it was decided to obtain further data from the following sources:
A UHP amine literature survey
Additional laboratory testing to meet areas not covered by
published data
Refinery data that may to be used to assess mechanical
and operational issues.
UHP amine literature survey. Literature is available for the ab-
sorption of UHP natural gas and CO2 in amine; however, there

is little information for H2S. Two main sources of data exist:
1. The University of Alberta Gas Liquids Engineering Ltd.
has published data in conjunction with the university
at pressures up to 140 bara1
60
HC absorption, scf/100 gal
50
40
Methane
30
Ethane
20
10
Propane
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60 70 80 90 100 110
Partial pressure, bara
120 130 140 150
FIG. 1. Solubility of C1C3 in aqueous solutions of MDEA.1
100
0.0045
No methane
50 bara
100 bara
150 bara
200 bara
Exp. this work

Carrol et al., 1998
Culberson and McKetta, 1951
Sol. Data Ser., 27/28
0.0040
Partial pressure CO2, bara
0.0035
xch4, mol/mol
2. Statoil, in conjunction with the University of Trondheim,

has published data for pressures up to 200 bara.2,3
University of Alberta. One article1 tabulates the solubilities
of methane, ethane and propane in 35 wt% MDEA for pressures
up to 130 bara. FIG. 1 was developed from the data in the article.
The required partial pressure of methane (for the facility at
160 bara) is 148 bara, which is only slightly in excess of the experimental data. Several conclusions can be drawn:
Methane absorption is approximately linear and, in fact,
flattens out slightly at higher pressures
The absorption of ethane and propane is minor compared
to methane at typical natural gas concentrations.
Statoil research centers laboratory in Trondheim. The
chart in FIG. 2 2 shows that the relationship of methane absorption
to pressure is approximately linear from 70 bara, with some flattening out as the pressure approaches 200 bara. This confirms the
data in the previous paper from the University of Alberta (FIG. 1).
The chart in FIG. 3 3 shows how the equilibrium of CO2 in
amine is affected by high partial pressure and consequent high
absorption of methane. The CO2 equilibrium is shifted to the
left (i.e., reducing the CO2 loading in MDEA) for high pressures
of methane at the same partial pressure of CO2. The methane
effectively displaces the CO2 in solution. This research was used
to stabilize operation on the Sleipner CO2 removal unit. The reduced loading capability at HP was overcome by increasing the
amine circulation and the reboiler duty.4
The results are relevant to the facility, as H2S loading may also
be affected by the high partial pressure of hydrocarbons. The literature survey described above is summarized in TABLE 2.
Experimental results. In addition to the published data, one
company a has provided its own experimental data, summarized
in TABLE 3.
For the facility design case, the following addition data was
commissioned from new experimental measurements:
Confirmation and extension of data of CH4 + CO2 +
MDEA (pressure 120 bara200 bara)
Extension of solubility data for CH4 + H2S + MDEA
for lower temperatures and extension of pressure range
(30C, pressure 120 bara200 bara).
The new experimental results are shown in FIG. 4.
0.0030
0.0025
10
0.0020
0.0015
0.0010
50
70
90
110
170
130
150
Partial pressure, bara
FIG. 2. Solubility of methane in MDEA.2
190
210
230
250
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Loading, molCO2/molMDEA
1.0
FIG. 3. Effect of hydrocarbon absorption on CO2 equilibrium curve.2
1.2
AMERICAS
September 1314, 2016

Norris Conference Centers CityCentre
Houston, Texas
Explore the latest gas processing developments,

from field gathering to plant design to LNG technology,
at the 2016 GasPro Americas Conference
Register today for the must-attend event
for the gas processing industry
Join us at the GasPro Americas Conference, scheduled September 1314, 2016 at
Norris Conference Centers - CityCentre in Houston, Texas, USA. The 2016 event
has 18 sessions organized into three tracks that will benefit CEOs, COOs, CTOs,
directors, country managers, regional directors, project managers, technical
directors, and heads of engineering for technology and operating companies.
This conference will focus on gas supply, procurement, purchasing, transportation,
trading, distribution, operations, safety, the environment, regulatory affairs,
technology development, business analysis, LNG, and more. All segments of
the gas processing industrythe upstream, midstream and downstream
sectorswill be discussed.
Session topics include:
The State of Natural Gas in the Americas
Water Treatment
Gas Treating
Separation/Dehydration
Cryogenics: Rejection, Ethane,
Methane and Nitrogen
Syngas Production and Utilization
USB Sponsor:
Exhibitors:
IOT and the Future of Big Data

for the Natural Gas Industry
NGL Recovery
Fractionation
LNG/FLNG
Liquefaction/Regasification
Metering/Custody
Host Sponsors:
Save 15%
on Registration
when you use code: GP16
Operators
eligible for
a free pass!
Contact Melissa Smith, Events Director,
at Melissa.Smith@GulfPub.com
or + 1 (713) 520-4475 for details.
To attend,
sponsor or
exhibit, visit
Supported by:
GAS TREATING
The existing experimental data, up to 120 bara, shows the
absorbed methane increasing in an approximately linear man
ner with increasing pressure. The new experimental data
showed that the rate of increase declines with increasing pres
sure at UHP. This result reflects the trend shown in FIGS. 1 and 2
for methane absorption at UHP.
A similar equilibrium shift was observed with H2S as CO2 , as
seen in FIG. 3.3 Two main conclusions from the literature survey
and the experimental results were drawn:
Acid gas loading in the amine will be lower than expected
due to the high absorption of methane. The equilibrium
shift reduces the acid gas loading in MDEA. This reduction
will be offset by the higher partial pressure of acid gases
at UHP. A simple mitigation option exists in increasing
the circulation rate by approximately 10%.
Increased hydrocarbon adsorption will result in a higher
flash gas flowrate, which can be accommodated in design.
Reference plants. As previously stated, the highest known
operating pressure of an AGRU treating natural gas is 112 bara;
however, it is common for AGRUs to operate at higher pres
sures in refineries.
The example refinery absorber, situated in the residue
hydrotreating unit (RHU), cannot be used for assessing hydro
carbon absorption since the hydrocarbon content is low. How
ever, it is a good reference for safety/operational issues in a
UHP absorber.
CH4 solubility
Extrapolation of
existing data
Existing data
New experimental
data from company
The biggest safety question for any HP amine unit is the

HP/low pressure (LP) interface, which becomes a larger prob
lem at UHP. The blowby case can usually be designed with
adequate lowlevel protection in the absorber and flash drum
relief for gas breakthrough. TABLE 4 summarizes the UHP re
finery reference and the facility requirements.
A site visit was made to the refinery to gather more informa
tion about the design and operation of the amine unit.
The RHU was commissioned in the 1980s. Apart from
refinery shutdowns, it has operated without interruption
since that time.
The RHU contains an amine unit in a reactor recycle loop.
The amine unit was originally designed with MEA but
switched to MDEA (40 wt%) and MEA (5 wt%).
The amine unit has had high availability and operates
without the problems commonly associated with amine
plants, such as foaming and column flooding.
The main findings from discussions with personnel at the
site were mechanical and operational.
Mechanical. Notes on the mechanical condition of the
amine unit included:
The mechanical integrity of the amine absorber column
after 30 years of operation is very good. The inspection
report illustrates no major repair work to the vessel
shell or head, only minor corrosion and pitting.
The bottom of the vessel is lined with stainless steel
and in good condition.
The high head amine booster centrifugal barrel pumps
(nine stages) are original to the facility and require a
major overhaul only once every 10 years. They have
proven extremely reliable.
The existing highdifferentialpressurerich amine
letdown valves are a MasoneilanLincolnLog type
(designed for HP liquid letdown/cavitation service).
TABLE 3. Internal data for company experimental data
Solute
50
100
150
Total pressure, bar
200
250
FIG. 4. CH4 absorption data against pressure for CH4 + H2S + MDEA.
TABLE 2. Summary of UHP amine literature survey

Reference
Pressure
range up to Solute Results
130 bara
CH4
The methane absorption is

approximately linear and flattens
out slightly at higher pressures
The absorption of ethane and
propane will be minor compared
to methane
200 bara
CH4
CO2
Maximum pressure
Temperature
150 bara
40C100C
CO2 + CH4
130 bara
40C60C
H2S + CH4
160 bara
60C
CH4
TABLE 4. Refinery AGRU reference

Pressure, bara
Gas flow, MMscfd
Amine
Amine circulation, m3/hr
Refinery
Facility requirements
180
160
137
260
MDEA
MDEA
55
80
0.2
Composition, %
The relationship of CH4 absorption

to pressure is approximately linear
from 70 bara up to pressures
in excess of 200 bara
CO2
H2S
0.1
Methane
19
92.7
The CO2 equilibrium line moves

to the left at increased pressure
due the effect of coabsorption of
hydrocarbons and reduced fugacity
Ethane
Propane plus
H2
78
GAS TREATING
Amine conclusions. A firm basis exists in both the experimental and operational data to proceed with the UHP amine unit
design. The published data, supplemented by further experimental work by one company,a covered the range of operation
required. With this data, the UHP AGRU can be designed with
allowances for increased circulation rate and flash gas flow.
The observations at the refinery showed that the same basic
design principles apply to UHP as at HP. At UHP, those problems outside of the normal operating envelopefor instance, in
pump designcan be overcome.
Dehydration. Since amines are in aqueous solution, the sweetened gas leaving the amine column is water saturated and, therefore, must be dehydrated. The process technology options considered were molecular sieve and TEG dehydration. Molecular
sieves have been used for adsorption at UHP; however, no references combine online regeneration. Reference plants exist for
TEG up to 160 bara.
Molecular sieve. A choice of designs exists for molecular
sieves:
Combine gas dehydration with natural gas sweetening,
provided that the H2S loading is not too high.
Locate the sieve downstream of the amine AGRU
for dehydration.
The required inlet H2S concentration (0.1 mol%) is well
within the limit for gas sweetening; therefore, molecular sieves
could be used for combined dehydration and acid gas removal.
This would eliminate the need for the upstream AGR; however,
acid gas removal would be required from the molecular sieve
regeneration gas, which may be at UHP or HP.
COS formation during the adsorption cycle effectively
blocked the use of molecular sieve H2S removal technology,
which directly impacted the total sulfur specification of the
product gas. COS formation is not an issue particularly related
to UHP, but the quantity is a concern for meeting the tight total
sulfur product gas specification.
For the design case with 1,000-ppmv H2S in feedgas up to
80 ppmv, COS would be formed even for low-COS molecular
sieves, which would exceed the treated gas total sulfur specification. Although removing this COS from treated gas is technically possible with mixed metal oxide beds, it is in practice not
feasible as it would require a high bed changeover frequency.
Therefore, it was decided to investigate the use of molecular
sieves for dehydration only. TABLE 5 summarizes the references
for HP molecular sieve units with regeneration.
Gas dehydration by molecular sieve is well established for
pressures up to 70 bara, and some units are operating in the
dense phase (> 100 bara). However, no experience exists of

operating these units at 160 bara with regeneration. The main
concerns of operating at UHP are:
1. Increased coadsorption of hydrocarbons, leading to a
longer mass-transfer zone and the increased possibility
of coke formation on the bed (faster degradation and
reduced bed life)
2. HP regeneration is inefficient
3. LP regeneration increases the regeneration time and
requires compression
4. Increased vessel wall thickness means a longer heating/
cooling cycle.
The following mitigations have been recommended by
vendors for adsorption:
1. Longer bed depth (to counter longer mass-transfer
zone)
2. More bed volume (to counter increased degradation
and reduced bed life)
3. High-strength material and multiple vessels of smaller
capacity (to reduce wall thickness).
Regeneration at a pressure lower than 100 bara has two
advantages:
1. Application of a well-established process for subsequent
treatment of regeneration gas
2. Approximately 30% reduction in regeneration gas
flowrate.
2.4
Proprietary Peng-Robinson package
Jerini
Jerini extrapolation
2.0
TEG in gas, ppmv
These valves operate for 1218 months between

overhauls.
Operation. Notes on the operational condition of the amine
unit included:
Historic measurements gave an H2S concentration of
around 10 ppmv in the treated gas.
The absorber has a chimney tray with a large
disengagement space, but no mesh pad to prevent
carryover of amine. However, little in the way of amine
carryover is observed downstream.
No foaming is observed.
1.6
1.2
0.8
0.2
0.0
0
50
100
Pressure, bara
150
200
FIG. 5. Saturated TEG content in gas at 25C.
TABLE 5. References for HP molecular sieve dehydration units

Project
Operator
Operating pressure
St. Fergus, Scotland
Mobil
116 bara (adsorption/regeneration)

Forcing valve used for
regeneration
Operated well since the early
1990s, no major valve/
mechanical issues
Direct feedback illustrates
excellent operational safety
performance
St. Fergus, Scotland
Shell
110 bara
Norway
Statoil
105 bara (adsorption)/

70 bara (regeneration)
GAS TREATING
TABLE 6. UHP references for TEG units

Project
Operator
Operating pressure
Patricia Baleen
Gas Plant
Santos
160 bara
80 MMscfd
Structured packing
Dry gas water content: 65 ppmv
Initial high glycol losses due to high
operating temperature in the absorber
Improvements reduced TEG losses
Frigg
(offshore)
Elf Petroleum 160 bara

Norge
Trays
Lan Tay,
Vietnam
(offshore)
BP
140 bara
Originally designed to process
350 MMscfd of gas
Increase in TEG loss after the capacity
was increased to 450 MMscfd
CATS
BP-Amoco
105 bara
600 MMscfd
Structured packing
Dry gas water content: 2 ppmv
TEG observed downstream
However, the disadvantages are:

1. Increased cycle time (maximum depression rate
2 bar/min3 bar/min)
2. Requirement of a recompression facility.
During the course of the investigation, it was identified that
molecular sieves with trace amounts of H2S in the feed can cause
spikes of H2S on regeneration. To minimize the adsorption of
H2S, a 3A molecular sieve instead of a 4A sieve should be selected. The pores of the 3A molecular sieve are too small for the H2S
molecule to enter; however, a small amount of H2S is still likely
to be adsorbed on the surface of the molecular sieve (the total
weight adsorbed on the bed will be on the order of 100 g). This
small quantity of H2S is sufficient to increase the concentration of
H2S to approximately 100 ppmv in a spike. This spike will blend
with the feed gas to put off the specification of the treated gas.
To mitigate this problem, it will be necessary to install beds of
mixed metal oxides to remove the H2S spike from the regeneration
gas. The mixed metal oxide beds should be sized to be changed
out every three years in conjunction with the molecular sieve.
Only one supplier was able to estimate H2S levels on which to
base the design; therefore, it was not possible to confirm this value
from experience or from other suppliers. This means that the beds
could be undersized, which would result in additional changeouts.
TEG dehydration. Dehydration of TEG is a proven method of
dehydration at UHP conditions. As the process requires only a

single UHP vessel, it is consequently less expensive than the molecular sieve process. In addition, the gas specification (33 ppmv
water) is achievable by TEG dehydration with gas stripping.
TABLE 6 summarizes the TEG UHP references.
As high TEG losses were observed on the Patricia Baleen, Lay
Tay and CATS projects referenced in TABLE 6, it was decided to
investigate the solubility of TEG in natural gas at UHP by finding

experimental data and validating a proprietary simulation program using Peng-Robinson thermodynamic package against the
experimental results.
Little published data for TEG solubility in hydrocarbons exists.5 This data goes up to only 90 bara, although it shows the
bowl shape, with solubility increasing at higher pressures. The
referenced article5 explains how this is due to a retrograde phenomenon that occurs when the gas approaches the cricondenbar.
Depending on the extrapolation of the experimental data, a
threefold to fivefold increase in TEG solubility will be seen from
50 bara to 160 bara. TEG losses (due to solubility in gas only)
at 160 bara and 25C, at a gas rate of 260 MMscfd, will be in the
range of 40 kg/d50 kg/d. This TEG loss will increase the operating expense of the unit and operator intervention.
Retrograde condensation of liquid TEG in the export pipeline
would also result from the reduction in solubility of TEG with
pressure. Literature warns: TEG will accumulate as a liquid slug,
causing significant plugging of the flow cross-sectional area.5
Dehydration conclusions. Molecular sieve dehydration is
unproven at UHP in regeneration service. The H2S spike uncovered during the analysis, although not connected with UHP
operation, sparks concern over the ability to design an appropriate molecular sieve system for this application.
TEG dehydration technology, with experience at operating
at UHP, should be better suited to this application. However,
concern exists at the high level of TEG loss at UHP. This poses
an operational problem in providing makeup to a small inventory system. It also raises the concern that this would lead to
TEG condensation in the export gas pipeline as the pressure is
reduced (i.e., retrograde condensation). GP
a
NOTE
BASFs OASE Gas Treating Excellence amine treating technology was used in the
generation of the experimental results.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This paper was prepared with support from Dr. Ralf Notz, senior technology manager of OASE Gas Treating Excellence at BASF SE, whom the author also
wishes to thank.
LITERATURE CITED
Carroll, J. J., F. Y. Jou, A. E. Mather and F. D. Otto, Solubility of methane and
ethane in aqueous solutions of MDEA, Journal of Chemical and Engineering Data,
University of Alberta, Canada, July 1998.
2
Jan Addicks, J. and G. A. Owren, Solubility of carbon dioxide and methane in
aqueous MDEA solutions, Journal of Chemical and Engineering Data, Norwegian
University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, May 2002.
3
De Koeijer, G. and E. Solbraa, High pressure gas sweetening with amines for
reducing CO2 emissions, Proceedings (Elsevier) from IEA GHGT-7 Vancouver
2004, Statoil ASA, Research and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
4
Buller, A. T., O. Krstad and G. de Koeijer, Carbon dioxidecapture, storage and utilization, Statoil research and technology memoir No. 5, Stavanger,
Norway, 2004.
5
Jerini, D. et al., The measurement of the triethylene glycol solubility in supercritical methane at pressures up to 9MPa, Elsevier B.V., March 2008.
6
Aspen Technology, Aspen HYSYS v7.3 online manual.
1
PAUL ROBERTS was formerly principal process consultant within

Advisian, the independent consulting business line of
WorleyParsons. He is now an independent consultant. Mr.
Roberts graduated with a BSc degree in chemical engineering
from Birmingham University and is a chartered engineer.
GAS TREATING
Manage activated carbon effects

on MDEA solution foaming
D. ENGEL, S. WILLIAMS and A. HEINEN, Nexo Solutions, The Woodlands, Texas
In the oil and gas industry, activated

carbon (AC) is used in many applications,
both as an adsorbent and as a support
media for chemical reagents. One of the
most common uses is in amine units. The
occurrence of foaming episodes in amine
units is perhaps the single most common
problem leading to operational losses. The
AC has the function of removing soluble
contaminants from the amine solvent,
thereby reducing foaming tendency. However, no systematic study exists of the relative effect of AC adsorption with respect
to foaming reduction in amine solutions.
The work in this article focuses on the
contact times and amounts of AC affecting contaminated methyldiethanolamine
(MDEA) amine solutions, and the effect
on foam stability and foam-reduction
(break) kinetics. The work was carried
out using contaminated MDEA samples
from a US refinery with considerable
foam stability.
The results indicate that contact times
of at least 15 minutes (min) are necessary
for proper foam reduction and solvent
cleaning. Increasing proportions of AC
were also found to reduce foam tendency,
with an almost linear correlation up to 50
wt%. Surface tension experiments also
confirm that contaminated MDEA samples, with stable foam formation, can be
purified to a state that is nearly foam-free
after proper treatment with AC.
Gas treating and amine units. Amine
units are employed in gas processing
plants and petroleum refineries to remove acid gases (H2S and CO2) from gas
streams, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG),
recycled gases and refinery offgases. An
amine unit is also used in CO2 sequestration, metals production and syngas production, among others. The amine unit
(FIG. 1) generally consists of an absorber
or contactor tower, a regenerator tower

and ancillary equipment, such as heat
exchangers, filtration systems, pumps,
valves and instrumentation.
The active liquid medium in an amine
unit is an alkanolamine solution (i.e.,
methyldiethanolamine), typically in a
20%50% concentration in water. The
amine solution recirculates within the
unit. In the absorber, the lean amine solution reacts with the H2S and CO2 via direct
or indirect reactions and absorbs H2S and
CO2 from the gas stream (known as sour
gas) to produce a sweetened or treated gas.
The rich amine solution, high in H2S
and CO2, exits the absorber at the bottom
of the absorber tower. The rich amine solution is routed into the regenerator, generally passing through a flash tank to reduce the pressure and remove offgas and
light hydrocarbon, if present, and a heat
exchanger to heat the rich amine and cool
the regenerated lean amine stream.
The regenerator reverses the reaction
that took place in the absorber and strips
the H2S and CO2 from the amine solution. The stripped gases are then sent to
a number of processes for proper disposal

or recovery. The stripped lean amine solution is sent back to the absorber after
cooling and conditioning with filtration
and AC adsorption.
The main chemical reactions taking
place in the amine unit are:
H2S + CH3 N (C 2H 4 OH)2
(1)
CH3 N H (C 2H 4 OH)2 + HS
CO2 + H2O + CH3 N (C 2H 4 OH)2
+
CH3 N H (C 2H 4 OH)2 + HCO3
(2)
The amine unit is a high-efficiency system that operates under stringent specifications, and any downturn in performance
can lead to products out of specification,
solvent losses and high operational costs.
Contamination in amine units is very detrimental to plant operations. To enable
processing plants to run with minimal
instabilities, increased capacity and high
reliability, it is necessary to condition process streams using proper contamination
Acid gas
Effluent separation
Sweet gas
Lean amine
filtration Cooling
Lean
amine
Pump
Surge
tank
Regenerator
Lean/rich
exchanger
Contactor
Sour gas
Inlet
separation
Reflux
accumulator
Rich amine
Flash tank
Reboiler
Flash gas
Lean amine
Rich amine
filtration
Lean
amine
FIG. 1. Process flow diagram for a typical configuration of an amine unit.

GAS TREATING
control methods. A variety of new and
old technologies can remove certain contaminants efficiently; yet, the complexity
and misinformation associated with many
removal options have led to disconnect
among the needs of end users, recommendations from suppliers and specifications
from engineering companies.
Proper knowledge of feed gas and
amine treating systems is a vital component of unit design and operation. Feed
gas should be conditioned to remove solid
and liquid contaminants before it enters
the amine absorber, and recirculating
amine streams should also utilize correct
filtration and coalescing technologies.
Lean amine streams, in particular, must be
conditioned by filtration, as well as by AC
adsorption before re-entering the amine
absorber to prevent foaming, fouling and a
number of other problems. AC adsorption
removes dissolved contaminants from the
amine stream and is a criticalyet often
overlookedsystem for efficient and reliable amine unit performance.
AC adsorption. AC is an inert solid adsorbent material commonly used to remove a number of dissolved contaminants
from water and process fluid streams. AC
is a porous, inexpensive and readily available adsorbent that provides a large surface area for contaminant adsorption. It
is an extremely effective material for dissolved contamination removal related to
color, odor and foam-promoting species,
among others.
The removal process takes place via

an adsorption phenomenon based on
surface interactions of the contaminant
and the C grain surface. The interactions
occur by weak and reversible Van der
Waals forces and dipole-dipole forces.
As a result, the separation is generally
effective for organic components. It is
important to mention that AC beds are
not intended to be used as filters for suspended solids removal or for the removal
of emulsified liquids. The operation of an
AC bed is specific to removing dissolved
contaminants only. Therefore, AC beds
should not display any meaningful differential pressure increase across the bed.
The properties of AC are associated
with the source of the C and its configuration (FIG. 2). Several different origins of
AC exist with inherent properties, such as
pore structure and size distribution, as well
as different sizes and production methods.
AC can be made from coconut husks,
lignite, coal, bitumen and wood, among
others. The source will determine both
the adsorption capacity and the size distribution of the contaminants it can adsorb. As far as configurations, the AC can
be powder or granular (most common in
amine units), or extruded in forms such
as blocks and pellets.
AC bed systems are commonly used to
remove impurities so that the amine solution can be properly utilized for effective
contaminant removal. If the impurities are
not properly removed from the amine solution, then foaming, corrosion and other
problems may occur in the plant, leading

to considerable negative technical and
economic effects. In general, AC of the bituminous type is chosen for amine units
because of its balance of small, medium
and large pores within the C grain. This
distribution is often the most suitable for
amine streams with a wide distribution of
molecular-size contaminants.
A typical AC bed system is shown in
FIG. 3. The vessel arrangement comprises a
pre-filter for protecting the bed from suspended solids, the AC bed itself, and the
post-filter for capturing the C fragmentation residues. In general, the AC system
is installed in the lean amine circuit after
cooling. Processing into the bed is usually
anywhere from 10% to 50% of the total
amine flow; a minimum of 25% of the total flow is recommended. As far as design
is concerned , most C beds are vertical in
orientation with a top-to-bottom flow and
a minimum of 15 min residence time.
To better understand the functionality of AC, a series of experiments were
performed to measure its effectiveness in
removing impurities that primarily cause
foaming of the amine solution. Contaminated MDEA samples with stable foam
formation were used for the experiment.
The amine solution was taken from a
US Gulf Coast refinery. Additional experiments were also performed with the
objective of determining any potential
correlation between the amount of AC
that an amine solution is exposed to, and
foaming tendency.
It is important to note that it was not
the intention of the work to mimic the
exact conditions in an amine unit, as this
would pose considerable challenges in a
laboratory scale. The testing that follows
was performed under controlled laboratory conditions that resemble the unit
operation and allow for correlations to
be concluded.
Materials and methods. Ten 20-mL
FIG. 2. General schematics of the different types of ACs showing their associated pore structures.
glass vials were used to contact the contaminated lean amine with bituminous
AC (8 30 mesh). Eight of the vials contained 1.5 g of AC, and the other two vials
did not contain any C.
The eight vials with the C were then
mixed with 15 mL of the lean MDEA
amine solution. The MDEA in each vial
was in contact with the C for different
increments of time (5 min, 10 min, 15
min, 30 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 4 hr and 8 hr).
HARD WORKING
ENGINEERS
We have turned things around before.
No matter what the oil price is: The world needs energy.
It is at times like these new technology and new processes see the light
of day. Together we have turned things around before by innovating,
reducing costs, and working in a smarter way. We are all adjusting
once again, to make sure we can succeed in the new market reality.
And we know we can do what it takes.
Now is the time to get together and prepare for the future. ONS 2016
provides you with the latest insights, the new technology and future
business opportunities.
This is the place to be. Welcome to the leading energy meeting place.
www.ons.no
New conference feature:
Build your competence at our new Technical Sessions!
GAS TREATING
The amine was then filtered into a clean
vial to completely remove the AC from
the amine. The ninth vial contained 15
mL of the contaminated lean MDEA that
had not been exposed to the AC, and the
tenth vial contained pure MDEA at 50%
in distilled water.
The 10 vials were then lined up on a
shaking rack (FIG. 4). The rack was mechanically shaken in a consistent manner
for 90 sec to impart energy for foam formation. Pictures were taken at 10 sec, 30
sec, 1 min, 2 min, 5 min, 10 min, 30 min
and 1 hr after shaking was ceased. Control

samples of the untreated MDEA solution
and a pure MDEA in water (50%) solution
were also included in the test, analyzed for
their interfacial tension and compared.
Once the shake-induced foam test was
completed, a second experiment was performed to understand potential effects on
foaming as the amine was contacted with
increasing amounts of C. Five different
samples were made by soaking 15 mL of
the MDEA in 0 g (0%), 0.75 g (5%), 1.5
g (10%), 3.75 g (25%) and 7.5 g (50%) of
FIG. 3. A typical lean amine AC adsorption system with pre-filtration and post-filtration systems.
FIG. 4. Shaking rack set up before agitation.
Effect of AC on amine solvent (MDEA) foaming MDEA foam height vs. break time bottle test
4.0
3.5
Control lean MDEA solvent from a US refinery with stable foam tendency
MDEA foam height, cm
3.0
2.5
Time exposed to AC
0 min
5 min
10 min
15 min
30 min
1 hr
2 hr
4 hr
8 hr
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
Time, sec
2,500
FIG. 5. Graph showing the effect of AC on a lean amine solution.
3,000
3,500
4,000
AC. The MDEA and AC were contacted

for 20 min, and the amine was then filtered
to remove any C residues. The vials were
then subjected to the shake-induced foam
test for 90 sec. Pictures were taken after 10
sec, 30 sec, 1 min, 2 min, 5 min, 10 min, 30
min and 1 hr after shaking was ceased. Control samples of the untreated lean MDEA
solution and a pure MDEA (50%) solution
were also included in the test, analyzed for
their interfacial tension and compared.
Results. After the shake-induced foam was
completed, the pictures were evaluated and
the foaming height was measured using
computer software. The foam height over
time was then plotted (FIG. 5), using the
pictures taken. The graph shows the foaming tendency and foaming stability of nine
of the 10 vials. The tenth vial, pure MDEA,
did not show any foaming tendency.
FIG. 5 shows that the longer the contaminated lean amine solution was contacted
with AC, the more rapidly the foaming was
reduced. Although the foaming was never
completely removed, a substantial difference in the amount of foaming reduction
over time was seen as the amine solution
was contacted with AC.
It could also be observed that contact
times of 10 min, 15 min, and 30 min gave
similar results. Increasing the contact time
increased the foam-reduction kinetics.
Extended contact (8 hr) of the contaminated MDEA with AC eliminated foaming in 30 sec, while the untreated contaminated MDEA displayed foam for up to 4
hr. As part of amine unit best practices, it
is recommended that the contact time of
an amine solution be a minimum of 15
min, consistent with the above obtained
laboratory data.
FIG. 6 shows a marked color change
from the contaminated lean MDEA that
was not exposed to AC, as compared to the
vial that contained the MDEA that was exposed to AC for 8 hr. This is likely because
the AC collected the impurities and clarified the MDEA solution. A change in viscosity was also observed but not measured.
The pictures taken during testing show
that foaming of the contaminated MDEA
that was contacted with the AC dissipated
rapidly compared to the untreated sample.
This can also be observed in FIG. 7, corresponding to the experiments that generated the plot in FIG. 5. The different vials
contained the contaminated lean amine
contacted with AC for increasing periods
GAS TREATING
of time (from right to left). The vial on the
left is the untreated lean amine with the
highest foam formation, and the vial on
the right is the pure amine solution (50%)
control that exhibits no foam formation.
Several of the samples were analyzed
for interfacial tension after the foam-induced shake test. The analysis was carried
out using the pendant drop technique.
The surface tension is one of the contributing factors to foam formation because it
reduces the molecular interaction forces
in the amine solution, enabling liquid to
be released more easily from the bulk solution into the above head-space volume.
The interfacial analysis results are
summarized in TABLE 1. As can be observed, the interfacial tension of the pure
MDEA (50% in distilled water) solution
is significantly higher than that of the
contaminated lean MDEA sample. The
lowering of interfacial tension in the contaminated MDEA sample was caused by
the dissolved contaminants, surfactants
and amine decomposition residues present in the solution. Upon exposure to AC,
it was observed that the interfacial tension
increased, but never reached the levels of
the control pure amine solution.
It can be interpreted from the results
in TABLE 1 that AC plays an important role
in reestablishing the surface tension of a
contaminated lean amine solution and reducing foam tendency. Extended contact
times are also necessary for proper contaminant removal. The extent of increasing the interfacial tension with longer
contact times seems to taper off asymptotically after 15 min, as little difference in interfacial tension was measured in samples
after 5 min and 15 min of exposure to AC.
This correlation should be further confirmed by more comprehensive testing
with other contact times between 5 min
and 8 hr. It should also be noted that interfacial tension of the contaminated lean
MDEA sample did not reach that of the

pure MDEA solution (50% in water) even
after 8 hr of contact time. This aspect implies that a larger proportion of AC is likely
needed for complete purification.
A second experiment was conducted by
exposing the contaminated amine sample
to different amounts of AC. After the amine
was contacted with different percentages
of AC, the foam-induced shake test was
performed. The images from the different
vials were then analyzed, and the foaming
height was determined for each vial in each
picture. The foaming height was then plotted over time, as shown in FIG. 8.
The graph shows that contacting the
contaminated lean MDEA in increasing
amounts of AC decreased foam height
and eliminated foam rapidly. The foam
from the sample that was contacted with
50% AC (on a weight basis) was eliminated within 60 sec. The foam on the
other amine samples exposed to decreasing amounts of AC displayed a slower rate
of foam reduction. This is interpreted in
terms of the faster contaminant adsorption kinetics when larger amounts of AC
are utilized for contacting the amine solu-
tion. Several of the samples from the above

experiment were analyzed for interfacial
tension. The results of these tests are summarized in TABLE 2. The analysis was performed using the pendant drop technique.
It can be observed from the results
that increased proportions of AC in contact with the contaminated lean MDEA
sample restores the interfacial tension of
the sample. The extent of the increase in
interfacial tension with increasing proportions of AC seems to be nearly linear. This
correlation should be further confirmed
by testing different samples with other
proportions of AC between 10% and 50%.
FIG. 6. Vials before (right) and after (left)

contact with AC and filtration. Foam in the
right vial was stable for up to 4 hr.
FIG. 7. Vials after shake test. The top rack shows vials 10 sec after the shake test. The bottom
rack shows vials 5 min after the shake test. The control MDEA is at far right (clear solution).
TABLE 1. Interfacial tension analysis results of lean MDEA samples after varying contact times with AC
Test 1 surface
tension, mN/m
Test 2 surface
tension, mN/m
Test 3 surface
tension, mN/m
Average surface
tension, mN/m
Pure 50% MDEA in water
48.29
48.28
48.3
48.29
0.01
Contaminated lean MDEA
31.63
31.62
31.6
31.62
0.02
Lean MDEA after 5 min

contact with 10% AC
35.26
35.25
35.27
35.26
0.01
Lean MDEA after 15 min

contact with 10% AC
35.79
35.8
35.78
35.79
0.01
Lean MDEA after 8 hr

contact with 10% AC
41.14
41.11
41.11
41.12
0.02
Sample
Standard deviation
surface tension, mN/m
GAS TREATING
TABLE 2. Interfacial tension analysis results of lean MDEA after contact with varying proportions of AC
Test 1 surface
tension, mN/m
Test 2 surface
tension, mN/m
Test 3 surface
tension, mN/m
Average surface
tension, mN/m
50% MDEA
48.29
48.28
48.30
48.29
0.01
Lean MDEA
31.63
31.62
31.60
31.62
0.02
Lean MDEA after 20 min of

contact with 5% AC
32.03
32
32.02
32.02
0.02

contact with 10% AC
35.4
35.38
35.41
35.40
0.02

contact with 25% AC
43.04
43.03
43.04
43.04
0.01

contact with 50% AC
52.1
52.1
52.09
52.1
0.01
Sample
Foaming height vs. time
3.5
Blank
5%
10%
25%
50%
2.5
Foaming height, cm
contact time. On a more simplistic note,

the study shows that AC adsorption plays
a fundamental role in amine solvent foam
reduction, and, by implication, most (if
not all) amine units should properly utilize AC beds for foam prevention. GP
AC
3.0
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
Time, sec
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
FIG. 8. Graph comparing foaming height over time of MDEA soaked in different amounts of AC.
The contaminated lean MDEA contacted with 50% AC was measured to

have a higher interfacial tension than that
measured for the pure MDEA (50% in
distilled water) solution. This is probably
because the contaminated lean amine solution did not have a 50% concentration
in water. The concentration was likely
near 40% in distilled water, which is common in amine units with liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) feed streams. Concentrations above 40% will cause excessive
emulsification, leading to excessive amine
solvent carryover losses.
Takeaway. The various experiments
described here were run under lab conditions, but close to actual process conditions, so that correlations can be established. The data shows that AC, in fact,
assists in the removal of contaminants that
cause foaming and foam stabilization.
The data also shows a foam-reduction
Standard deviation
surface tension, mN/m
correlation between increasing contact

times of the amine solution with the AC.
The contaminated lean MDEA solution
shows less foaming tendency as contact
time increases. Contact times of 15 min
(minimum) were effective in reducing
foam at an acceptable rate. Foaming was
never totally removed during the experiments, but a significant difference was noticed in terms of foam break times.
A correlation was also observed between the weight of AC and the foamreduction kinetics. The contaminated
lean MDEA solution exposed to larger
amounts of AC displayed substantial reduction in foaming tendency compared
to a contaminated lean amine that was
not exposed to AC. It also resulted in an
increase of the solutions surface tension.
Results suggest that lean amine solutions contacted with 25% AC by weight
will reduce foam almost completely at
ambient conditions after only 5 min of
DAVID ENGEL has more than

20 years of industrial experience
in a variety of technical areas.
He is the inventor in 17 US
invention patents and the author of
a number of technical and
scientific papers. Dr. Engel has
developed business and technology for Eastman
Kodak, Eli Lilly, Pentair, General Electric and Sulphur
Experts globally. He has presented a number of
seminars and technical courses on a variety of
process engineering and chemistry subjects.
Recently, he has specialized in advanced process
systems and multicomponent separation methods
for removing or mitigating contaminants in process
streams. Dr. Engel is the cofounder of Sulphur
ExpertsFiltration Division and managing director
of Nexo Solutions. He holds a BS degree in industrial
chemistry and a PhD in organic chemistry. He is
a member of the American Chemical Society and
the Gas Processors Association, president of the
American Filtration and Separation Society
(Southwest Region), a GLC Consulting member,
and a board member (editor) for Elsevier and
Genesis BioHealth.
SCOTT WILLIAMS is a process
engineer at Nexo Solutions. He has
industry experience in many
projects, and has been instrumental
in providing solutions in oil and gas,
petrochemical, chemical and water
treatment applications. As part of
the engineering group, Mr. Williams is responsible
for technical design and solutions development in
engineering and technology applications, and he
also provides support for Nexos analytical and
specialized service projects. His latest focus is in the
area of contaminant removal using novel systems and
chemistries for H2S and mercaptans removal from
gas and liquid streams. Mr. Williams has also recently
worked on projects involving oil-based drilling mud
characterization, inlet separation and coalescer
evaluations, and back-washable metal-based media
for NGL feed filtration systems. He holds a BS degree
in chemical and biological engineering from the
University of Colorado at Boulder.
PLANT DESIGN
Prevent hydrate formation with

high-pressure deethanizer design
C. C. CHEN and Y.-S. LIU, Wood Group Mustang, Houston, Texas
Conventional dehydration: Dry desiccant beds. Typically,
molecular sieve or silica gel beds are used to dehydrate light liquid hydrocarbons, such as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) or natural gas liquids (NGL). As shown in FIG. 1, a dry desiccant system
is batch-operated and consists of adsorption and desorption (regeneration) beds with a complex switching valve arrangement.
The regeneration system includes a regeneration gas heater,
regeneration gas cooler, regeneration gas separator, regeneration gas compressor and other miscellaneous items. The process of periodical switching between adsorption, heating and
cooling cycles is complicated. However, it can be managed by
an automatic timer control.
Glycol contactor. The use of a continuous-operated glycol
dehydration unit is simpler than that of a dry desiccant unit.
However, a glycol unit is commonly used for gas dehydration.
To operate a glycol unit, a vapor stream is drawn from and returned to the deethanizer after it is dehydrated. This means that
the deethanizer column requires an extra length for side vapor/
liquid draws and returns (FIG. 2).
Regen gas from cooling recycle
Hot
regen
gas
Filter
Cold regen
gas
Regen gas heater,

cooler, separator
and compressor
Wet NGL
feed
Regen gas from

heating cycle
Dehydrated
NGL
Molecular sieve #2
regenerating
NGL fractionation design. Natural gas and water can form a

crystalline solid compound commonly known as gas hydrate.
The hydrocarbon gas molecules (e.g., methane, ethane, propane and carbon dioxide) are trapped in a rigid, cage-like lattice of water molecules.1
Gas hydrates can cause pipeline plugs, which lead to safety
and operational issues in the oil and gas industries.2 Furthermore, gas hydrates can plug tower trays and valves, resulting in
tower flooding.3 Gas hydrates can form in high-pressure, lowtemperature conditions where free water is present. Therefore,
the three existing methods to prevent and mitigate hydrate
formation are:
1. Dehydration
2. Maintaining an operating temperature higher than the
hydrate formation temperature
3. Operating at a pressure lower than the hydrate
formation pressure.
In an NGL fractionation plant, a refrigerated deethanizer
condenser is used to separate ethane from heavier components.
If the NGL feed is wet or saturated with water, and if high-purity ethane is to be produced, then hydrates can form in the top
section of the deethanizer and in the chilled deethanizer condenser, where the operating temperature may be lower than the
hydrate formation temperature.
The conventional method of suppressing hydrate formation
in the deethanizer system is to remove water content in the NGL
feed using either dry desiccant beds or a glycol contactor.4 A better approach may be to eliminate the requirement of a dehydration unit by optimizing the operating conditions.
Molecular sieve #1
adsorbing
To produce high-purity ethane from a wet NGL feed, a highpressure deethanizer design has been developed to prevent hydrate formation without using a dehydration unit. Formations
of hydrates, which are crystalline solids composed of water and
light hydrocarbon molecules, can result in issues with operation
and safety. If high-purity ethane is desired as a product, then the
deethanizer condenser and the top tray temperatures may be
lower than the hydrate point. This can cause hydrate formation
at these locations if the wet NGL is not dehydrated.
Conventional methods used to prevent hydrate formation
include removing the content water in a glycol or a dry desiccant dehydration unit. Either way requires a complicated dehydration system. Here, a design method to eliminate the requirement of a dehydration unit is discussed. The deethanizer
condenser temperature increases rapidly while the hydrate formation temperature increases slowly with the pressure. Using
these characteristics, a high-purity ethane can be obtained by
increasing the deethanizer pressure to force the condenser temperature to surpass the hydrate point. This way, the dehydration
process is not required.
The economic analysis and the limitations of this approach
are discussed in detail. This method has been used successfully
in a commercial setting.
Water
Drain
FIG. 1. Molecular sieve dehydration.

PLANT DESIGN
Additionally, a dehydrated gas compressor or a side draw liquid return pump may be needed to compensate for the pressure
drops in the draw piping, return piping and the glycol contactor. A glycol dehydration unit consists of a glycol contactor and
a glycol regeneration system. The glycol regeneration system
usually includes a minimum of a flash drum, a glycol reboiler/
still column, a glycol/glycol exchanger, a high head lean glycol
pump and a glycol cooler. Injecting stripping gas to help regeneration is also necessary, in some cases.
An alternative approach to dehydrating the vapor stream
outside the deethanizer is to integrate the glycol contactor into
the deethanizer (FIG. 3). The lean glycol dehydrates the hydrocarbon vapor leaving from the bottom chimney tray. The diameter of a standalone glycol contactor section is usually smaller
than that of the deethanizer due to the minor amount of glycol
C2 and lighter to condenser
Dry gas
Reflux
Glycol cooler
Lean glycol
Glycol
contactor
Glycol
regeneration
Rich glycol
Wet gas
Liquids
Wet NGL
feed
used. However, in this alternative design, the diameter of the

glycol contactor is typically the same as that of the deethanizer.
These larger dimensions increase capital cost and may also reduce the mass-transfer effect caused by low loadings.
High-operating-pressure approach without dehydration.
The conventional dehydration methods described in the previous section utilize a complex dehydration unit that not only
requires higher CAPEX, but also more plot for the additional
equipment. To simplify the design, a high-pressure deethanizer
that produces 95 LV% ethane from wet NGL without the need
for a dehydration unit has been proposed.
Typically, a deethanizer operates between 200 psig and
400 psig. FIG. 4 shows that when the deethanizer condenser is
operated at low pressure, the condenser temperature is substantially lower than the hydrate formation temperature. In this
case, gas hydrates will form if the stream is not dehydrated.
If pressure increases to approximately 390 psig, then the initial condensing temperature is roughly equal to the hydrate formation temperature. At approximately 490 psig, the overhead vapor can be totally condensed without forming gas hydrates. One
engineering firma has capitalized on this principle by designing
an alternative approach for producing 95 liquid volume percent
(LV%) ethane from wet NGL by operating the bottom of the
Water
TABLE 1. Case 1 results
Inlet
scrubber
Deethanizer
Reboiler
return
C3 and heavier to reboiler and depropanizer
FIG. 2. Deethanizer with glycol dehydration.

Reflux
Bottom pressure, psig
350
400
450
500
Top tray temperature, F
57.1
65.9
73.9
81.1
Condenser temperature, F
46.5
55.9
64.5
72.2
Hydrate formation temperature, F
50.4
56.8
59
60.5
Dehydration required
Yes
Yes
No
No
Reboiler temperature, F
207
222
236
249
Condenser duty, MMBtu/hr
31.4
32.6
34.2
37.1
Reboiler duty, MMBtu/hr
70.9
76
81.4
88.1
DeC3 reboiler duty, MMBtu/hr
57.5
55.4
53.3
51.4
32
41
50
57
2,909
2,634
2,392
2,304
Refrigerant temperature, F
Refrigerant compressor,
brake horsepower
80
Lean glycol
60
40
Wet NGL feed
Deethanizer/dehydrator
Temperature, F
Rich glycol
20
0
Hydrate formation temp.
Initial condensing temp.
50% condensing temp.
Total condensing temp.
-20
-40
Reboiler return
C3 and heavier to reboiler
and depropanizer
FIG. 3. Alternative design of deethanizer with integrated glycol contactor.
-60
90
190
290
Pressure, psig
390
490
FIG. 4. Deethanizer condensing temperatures vs. hydrate formation

temperature. Composition: C1 = 2 LV%, C2 = 90 LV%, C3 = 8 LV%,
saturated with water.
Hosted by
Diamond Sponsor:
4-7 APRIL 2017
80%
Makuhari Messe Chiba,

Tokyo, Japan
EXHIBIT AT THE WORLDS

LARGEST GAS EVENT
exhibition
space sold
Gastech is geared to energy professionals who are operating on a technical and strategic level across
the global gas and LNG sector. By exhibiting at Gastech 2017, you will be part of the worlds largest
and most influential gathering in the natural gas and LNG industry.
54,000+
25,000+ 2,500
750+
600+
350+
Hosted
Meetings
Regional and
International
Exhibitors
CEOs, Government
& Ministers
Square Metres
Exhibition Space
International
Attendees
200+
70+
30
14
Speakers from
Leading Energy
Specialists and
Companies
Countries
representing
the global gas
production, supply,
service & technology
value chain
New Technical
Conference
Sessions
International
Country Pavilions
Days packed with high

quality Commercial
Conference content
Commercial and
Technical Delegates
Who exhibits?
Exhibiting companies represent the following sectors:
IOCs, NOCs, EPCs & FEEDs, Shipbuilders, Marine Engineering,
Gas Processing and LNG Technology & Service Providers.
To discuss your participation please email sales@gastechevent.com or call
Organised by:
LONDON
Damian Howard
T: +44 (0) 203 772 6038
JAPAN
Atsuhiro Furuya (Tony)
T: +81 (3) 6890 0783
www.gastechevent.com/gp3
SINGAPORE
Shunker Goel
T: +65 6422 1489
PLANT DESIGN
deethanizer near 500 psig (FIG. 5). This commercial-scale plant is
in operation and has been running successfully for several years.
The drawback of using a high-pressure deethanizer is that a
higher-pressure vessel requires a thicker wall, and a high-pressure component separation requires increased duties for the
condenser and reboiler compared to a conventional design. The
operating pressure is approximately 225 psi below the critical
pressure at the deethanizer top and approximately 150 psi below
the critical pressure at the deethanizer bottom; therefore, phase
separation is still effective.
To demonstrate the selection of optimum operating conditions for different ethane purities, two case studies were
conducted for a deethanizer processing 90 Mbpd of NGL
containing 50% C2.
Case 1: Desired C2 product is 90 LV% C2. As shown in
TABLE 1, the temperatures of the condenser at 350 psig and 400
psig are below the hydrate formation temperature. Therefore,
NGL dehydration is required when the operating pressure of
the deethanizer bottom is below approximately 410 psig.
Case 2: Desired C2 product is 95 LV% C2. As shown in
TABLE 2, the temperatures of the condenser at 350 psig, 400 psig
Reflux
Wet NGL feed
Deethanizer
Reboiler return
and 450 psig are below the hydrate formation temperatures. In

addition, the temperatures of the top tray at 350 psig and 400
psig are also lower than the hydrate formation temperatures.
Gas hydrates will form in the condenser at a pressure of 450 psig
and lower. Similarly, gas hydrates will also form at the top tray
inside the column at a pressure of 400 psig and lower.
Comparing the results of Cases 1 and 2, higher C2 purity
is associated with lower temperatures of the top tray and condenser at the same pressure. Therefore, the likelihood of gas
hydrate formation increases. In Case 2, NGL dehydration is
not required only when the deethanizer bottom pressure is
near 500 psig.
Economic analysis. For a high-pressure deethanizer with a
bottom pressure of 500 psig, the capital cost of the deethanizer

system is significantly higher. However, savings from not needing a dehydration system, as well as from the reduced capital
cost of the smaller refrigeration unit using higher-temperature
refrigerant, exceed the extra capital cost of the higher-pressure
deethanizer system. TABLE 3 lists the estimated capital costs
that are impacted by the operating pressure of the deethanizer.
The total estimated capital cost of a high-pressure deethanizer
system is approximately $2 MM lower than that of a conventional deethanizer system with a dehydration unit.
OPEX impacted by deethanizer operating pressure. The
main increase of the utility costs for a higher-pressure deethanizer at 500 psig bottom pressure is due to its higher reboiler
duty. Although the condenser duty is also increased, a highertemperature refrigerant can be used for the warmer condenser.
As a result, the hp of the refrigerant compressor is lower, as
shown in TABLE 2. Since the outlet temperature of the deethanizer bottoms becomes higher, the duty of the downstream
depropanizer reboiler is reduced.
TABLE 4 lists the estimated major differences of utility consumptions that are impacted by the operating pressure of the
deethanizer. Some minor differences of utility consumptions
TABLE 3. Capital costs impacted by operating pressure
C3 and heavier to reboiler

and depropanizer
Capital cost,
$MM
FIG. 5. Deethanizer without dehydration.
Deethanizer bottom pressure 400 psig

Glycol dehydration unit
TABLE 2. Case 2 results
Differential
capital cost, $MM
500 psig 500 psig400 psig
12
12
Deethanizer unit
33.3
46.5
13.2
Bottom pressure, psig
350
400
450
500
Refrigeration unit
26.7
23.5
3.2
Top tray temperature, F
43.6
52.7
60.9
68.5
Total
72
70
Condenser temperature, F
36.5
46.2
54.9
62.9
Hydrate formation temperature, F
56.5
58.1
59.4
60.7
Dehydration required
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Reboiler temperature, F
202
217
231
244
Condenser duty, MMBtu/hr
40.6
42.6
45.6
50.1
Deethanizer bottom pressure 400 psig

3,818
4,495
677
2,718
2,514
204
72
72
TABLE 4. Yearly utility costs impacted by operating pressure

Yearly cost,
$1,000/yr
Reboiler duty, MMBtu/hr
77.9
84
90.6
98.9
DeC2 reboiler
DeC3 reboiler duty, MMBtu/hr
62.2
59.8
57.5
55.3
DeC3 reboiler
Refrigerant temperature, F
Refrigerant compressor,
brake horsepower
22
31
40
48
4,460
4,156
3,843
3,705
Glycol dehydration unit
Yearly differential
cost, $1,000/yr
500 psig 500 psig400 psig
Refrigerant compressor
1,240
1,105
135
Total
7,848
8,114
266
PLANT DESIGN
are not included. For example, the hp change of the deethanizer
reflux pump, flow change of cooling water, and glycol makeup
cost are excluded in the OPEX comparison. The natural gas
price for glycol regeneration was assumed to be $3/MMBtu,
the electricity price for the refrigerant compressor was assumed
to be $0.05/kWh, and the steam cost for reboilers was assumed
to be $5/1,000 lb.
The total estimated yearly utility cost of a high-pressure
deethanizer system is approximately $266,000/yr higher than
that of a conventional deethanizer system with a glycol dehydration unit. Based on the estimated capital cost savings for the
high-pressure design, the payback period of using the conventional system with a dehydration unit is approximately 7.5 years,
which is marginal for the economic benefit consideration.
The economic analysis results are strongly influenced by individual equipment design assumptions, and the conclusions
are impacted accordingly. As previously shown, the difference
in capital investment for the two options is small, so the actual
incremental economics may not be compelling or even exist.
The main benefit of the high-pressure deethanizer design is
the ability to eliminate the extra complexity introduced by a
dehydration unit.
Takeaway. A high-pressure deethanizer process for producing
high-purity ethane product without dehydration has been designed and proven to be a successful alternative in commercial
operations, compared to conventional designs. This process
eliminates the need for the installation of a complex molecular

sieve or a glycol hydration unit, providing simplicity for both
installation and operation. GP
a
NOTE
Wood Group Mustang developed the design discussed in this article.
LITERATURE CITED
Gas Processors Suppliers Association, Engineering Data Book, 13th Ed., Tulsa,
Oklahoma, 2012.
2
Hammerschmidt, E. G., Formation of gas hydrates in natural gas transmission
lines, Industrial Engineering & Chemistry, Vol. 26, Iss. 8, 1934.
3
Kister, Henry Z., Distillation Troubleshooting, Wiley Publishing Inc., Hoboken,
New Jersey, 2006.
4
Kohl, A. L. and R. B. Nielsen, Gas Purification, 5th Ed., Gulf Publishing Company,
Houston, Texas, 1997.
1
CHYUAN-CHUNG (C. C.) CHEN is a process manager at

Wood Group Mustang in Houston, Texas, and a registered
professional engineer in Ohio. He has more than 40 years
of engineering experience in oil and gas, gas processing,
refining and other areas. Dr. Chen holds a BS degree from
National Taiwan University and a PhD and MS degree from
the University of Rochester, all in chemical engineering.
YEN-SHAN (AMY) LIU is a process engineer at Wood Group
Mustang in Houston, Texas, and is a registered professional
engineer in Louisiana. Prior to joining Wood Group Mustang,
she was an assistant professor of chemical engineering at
the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, and a senior consultant
at ioMosaic Corp. Dr. Liu holds a BS degree from Mississippi
State University and a PhD from Texas A&M University, both
in chemical engineering.
SALES OFFICESEUROPE
FRANCE, GREECE, NORTH AFRICA, MIDDLE EAST,
SPAIN, PORTUGAL, SOUTHERN BELGIUM,
LUXEMBOURG, SWITZERLAND, GERMANY,
AUSTRIA, TURKEY
Catherine Watkins, Publisher

Phone/Fax: +1 (713) 520-4421
www.GasProcessingNews.com
SALES OFFICESNORTH AMERICA

IL, LA, MO, OK, TX
Josh Mayer
Phone: +1 (972) 816-6745
Fax: +1 (972) 767-4442
E-mail: Josh.Mayer@GulfPub.com
AK, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID,
IN, KS, KY, MI, MN, MS, MT, ND, NE, NM,
NV, OR, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WY,
WESTERN CANADA
Ryan Akbar
Phone/Fax: +1 (713) 520-4449
Mobile: +1 (832) 691-6053
E-mail: Ryan.Akbar@GulfPub.com
CT, DC, DE, MA, MD, ME, NC, NH,

NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI, SC, VA, VT, WV,
EASTERN CANADA
Merrie Lynch
Phone: +1 (617) 357-8190
Fax: +1 (617) 357-8194
Mobile: +1 (617) 594-4943
E-mail: Merrie.Lynch@GulfPub.com
DATA PRODUCTS
JNette Davis-Nichols
Phone/Fax: +1 (713) 520-4426
E-mail: Jnette.Davis-Nichols@GulfPub.com
Jim Watkins
Phone: +33 (0)6 76 35 11 52
Jim.Watkins@GulfPub.com
ITALY, EASTERN EUROPE

Fabio Potest
Mediapoint & Communications SRL
Phone: +39 (010) 570-4948
Fax: +39 (010) 553-0088
E-mail: Fabio.Potesta@GulfPub.com
UNITED KINGDOM/SCANDINAVIA,
NORTHERN BELGIUM, THE NETHERLANDS
Michael Brown
Phone: +44 161 440 0854
Mobile: +44 79866 34646
E-mail: Michael.Brown@GulfPub.com
SALES OFFICESOTHER AREAS

CHINAHong Kong
Iris Yuen
Phone: +86 13802701367 (China)
Phone: +852 69185500 (Hong Kong)
E-mail: Iris.Yuen@GulfPub.com
INDIA
Catherine Watkins
Phone/Fax: +1 (713) 520-4421
JAPANTokyo
Yoshinori Ikeda
Pacific Business Inc.
Phone: +81 (3) 3661-6138
Fax: +81 (3) 3661-6139
E-mail: Japan@GulfPub.com
ADVERTISER INDEX
Air Products & Chemicals Inc. ...................16
BCCK Engineering, Inc. ...............................15
CB&I ..................................................................14
Gastech .......................................................910
Gastech ...........................................................43
GE Oil And Gas ............................................... 5
EventsGasPro ..........................................31
EventsWGLC ...........................................47
Software ........................................................ 8
US Gas Processing Plant Directory......20
Jonell, Inc ........................................................19
Merichem Company ...................................... 7
ONS .................................................................. 37
Pentair .............................................................48
Prosernat .........................................................12
RedGuard ......................................................... 2
SNC-Lavalin ...................................................24
This index and procedure for securing additional information are
provided as a service to advertisers and a convenience to our readers.
Gulf Publishing Company is not responsible for omissions or errors.
NEW IN GAS PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY

BOB ANDREW, Technical Editor
Expanded gasphase filtration

services
Maintenance, repairs
and unplanned downtime in
manufacturing can be costly, and
the corrosive effect of polluted or
contaminated air in production
facilities is often the culprit.
Demand for comprehensive
gas-phase filtration is rising,
and increasingly sophisticated
solutions are required to protect
critical systems.
Corrosion can wreak
havoc on critical systems: an
oxidized printed circuit board
or a defective plug connection
can cripple entire production
processes. Optimized filtration
can prevent such damage.
High-quality gas-phase filtration
systems are especially effective in
contamination control.
Freudenberg Filtration
Technologies is now offering all
of its gas-phase filtration services
from a single source: from onsite
contaminant analysis, to the
selection of filter media and filter
units, to permanent monitoring.
Freudenbergs Viledon
gas-phase filter product line
improves indoor air quality for
the protection of personnel as
well as provides corrosion control
for sensitive products, processes
and equipment. The filtration
technology, which includes
both ChemControl filter pellets
and Freudenbergs Versacomb
honeycomb media, is designed
to protect all sensitive process
areas, including computer
systems and switchgear,
compressors, motor controls
and other essential equipment.
Viledon solutions meet all
relevant international quality
and performance standards,
including the International
Society of Automation (ISA)
71.04-1985 standard for
corrosion levels on electronic
and electrical equipment.
www.freudenberg-filter.com
Modular concept for CHP plants

At Power-Gen Europe 2016,
MAN Diesel & Turbo presented
a new modular concept for
combined-heat-and-power
(CHP) gas engine power plants.
The company is responding
to increasing European
demand for highly efficient,
yet flexible, technologies
for power generation.
The modular design allows
individual units to be switched
on or off, depending on the power
demand. This ensures consistently
more efficient operation and
increased load compared with
non-modular concepts. It also
means that maintenance and overhaul activities can be carried out without shutting down the power plant.
In the gas engine variant, the MAN 35/44G four-stroke gas engine can be specified with either single-stage
or two-stage turbocharging. With the two-stage engines, a low- and a high-pressure compressor are coupled
in series, thereby increasing the efficiency of the engine. The single-stage, turbocharged, 20-cylinder version
has a mechanical power output of 10 MW, while the two-stage version has an output of 12.4 MW. It is also
available in a 12-cylinder V version with a mechanical power output of 7.4 MW.
dieselturbo.man.eu
New PLC aids device integration

Honeywell Process Solutions
has launched its ControlEdge
Programmable Logic Controller
(PLC), a new addition to
Honeywells next-generation
family of controllers designed to
leverage the capabilities of the
Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT).
ControlEdge PLC, combined
with Honeywells Experion Process
Knowledge System, provides connectivity and integration to devices
from multiple vendors. The PLC is said to offer easy configuration,
efficient operations and reduced maintenance. It uses OPC UA protocol
and built-in cyber security for integration to a range of instruments,
equipment and software from multiple vendors. It is claimed to be the
first PLC to offer Universal I/O, providing remote configuration and latedesign-change flexibility for improved project implementation.
ControlEdge PLC is focused on process industries requiring discrete
control for specific PLC applications, such as water treatment, balance of
plant modular equipment, terminal automation and coal/ash handling.
The PLC will be offered to end users; original equipment manufacturers;
and engineering, procurement and construction companies.
The emergence of the IIoT represents a digital transformation of
manufacturing that shifts the source of competitive advantage away
from physical machinery and toward information. ControlEdges
IIoT-ready open platform is said to enable users to better leverage data
across their assets.
www.honeywellprocess.com
Mokveld
commissions
test bunkers
The Netherlands-based
Mokveld Valves BV has
commissioned two new test
bunkers for testing critical, highquality valve systems. The reasons
for building the bunkers are the
increasingly stringent demands of
the industry in terms of quality and
safety, such as fugitive emissions,
PR2 or type approval testing.
The bunkers allow pressure
testing with nitrogen and helium
up to 1,200 bar. Temperature
testing is possible within a range
of 196C to 200C.
The bunkers are fully
automatically controlled and meet
the latest safety requirements.
After the completion of these
bunkers, Mokveld will further
expand its testing facilities with
the construction of two additional
test bunkers in 2016.
www.mokveld.com
US camera for NDT inspections

Imperium Inc. recently announced the availability of its latest
ultrasound camera and controller system, the AcoustoCam i700,
to improve inspections on straight-beam applications. The AcoustoCam
i700 is said to provide higher-resolution C-scan images than automated
ultrasonic testing (AUT) or phased-array systems. It creates images
in flat or curved materials up to 6 in. thick and is fully compliant with
most industry UT codes. The camera produces sub-millimeter images
of an entire field, rather than a single pinpoint, for better detection of pitting, cracking and other defects, while
reducing false positives. The AcoustoCam i700 features Imperiums new controller that is IP-66 rated and has
a 12-in. LED display. In addition, the unit features integrated tools that support real-time video collaboration.
www.imperiuminc.com
Full-Time Students
with a Valid Fall 2016 ID
2016 WOMENS
Get 50% off Your

Pass to WGLC.
November 12, 2016
Contact Tranessa Hunt at

Tranessa.Hunt@GulfPub.com
for information on
how to apply.
Hyatt Regency Houston, Houston, Texas

WGLConference.com/2016
Featured
Speakers
<< KEYNOTE
<< KEYNOTE
<< KEYNOTE
Emeliana Rice-Oxley
VP Exploration,
Upstream
Eva Archer
Smith
Laurie H. Argo
SVP, Crude Oil
& Refined Products
Executive Coach
and Facilitator
Petronas
Enterprise Products Partners LP
<<
<<
<<
<<
Stephanie Cox
Bruce Alastair Tocher
Dolan Gundoju
Lisa Salley
President,
North America
Schlumberger
Head of Unconventional
Technology
Statoil
Managing Consultant Leadership & Performance

Williams
Vice President of Global

Industry Services
American Petroleum Institute
<<
<<
<<
Lorena Fimbres
VP & Chief Business
Dev. Officer
Prajit Ghosh
Research Director at Americas
Power & Renewables Research
Myrtle Jones
Senior Vice President,
Tax
STEMconnector
Wood Mackenzie
Halliburton
Unlock Your Leadership Potential

at WGLC 2016
and
Many More
Sponsored by:
Register Now to Save with Early Bird Rates

The Womens Global Leadership Conference in Energy (WGLC) is the leading event for
women in the oil and gas industry. One of the largest industry events dedicated specifically to
matters of female leadership, WGLC strives to provide a meaningful discussion on all aspects
of responsible stewardship ranging from energy security and geopolitics to personal career
development. The event is an inspiring and motivational forum bringing hundreds of women
in the industry, along with their male supporters, together to: network and exchange valuable
ideas and experiences; foster inclusive and diverse company cultures; encourage women and
minorities to pursue leadership roles; and more.
Topics to be Discussed:
State of the Industry: Upstream,
Midstream and Downstream
The future of energy
Tackling challenges to create opportunity
Networking effectively
Supplier diversity
Big crew change
Women in the C-suite
Renewables
Climate challenges
Big Data
STEM
Stepping into a leadership position
Creating opportunities for women
and minorities
and more
Register + Stay Tuned for Event Announcements

at WGLConference.com/2016
For more information: Contact Tranessa Hunt, Events Program Manager,
at Tranessa.Hunt@GulfPub.com or +1 (713) 520-4470.
Join the Network & Connect

with us:
Facebook/WGLNetwork
Join Womens Global
Leadership Network
on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
@WGLNetwork
#WGLC
IMPROVE
NGL TREATING,
DRAMATICALLY
Smaller footprint and higher efficiency
than Water Wash & Scrubbing Towers
Pentairs breakthrough patented Polarex technology
delivers improved separation of entrained and dissolved
contaminants and product recovery. Gas processors,
chemical manufacturers, and refiners experience higher
efficiency, lower cost and operational flexibility from
nano-fiber technology which creates a single stage, high
efficiency contactor/separator.
Polarex process benefits include:
High efficiency, consistent CO2 removal from NGL
prior to fractionation
6LJQLILFDQWO\ORZHUFDSLWDOFRVWVVPDOOHUIRRWSULQW
and minimized foundation
/RZHURSHUDWLQJFRVWVXWLOLWLHVDQGVROYHQWORVVHV
0RGXODUGHVLJQDQGHDVHRIRSHUDWLRQ
OIL & GAS SEPARATIONS

(936) 788-1000
www.pentairseparations.com

Hydrocarbon Processing 08 2016 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hydrocarbon Processing 08 2016 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HARNESS THE POWER

OF ADVANCED HRSG TECHNOLOGY

The industry leader in Heat Recovery Steam Generators for gas

HEAT RECOVERY STEAM GENERATORS

AUGUST 2016 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com

FLUID FLOW AND

Analyze abnormal operations of an HDS

MAINTENANCE AND RELIABILITY

Grrrrr. Or as we call it:

AUGUST 2016|Volume 95 Number 8

Extend ethylene plant run length with compressor chemical treatment

Boost capacity of SRUs with mixing devices for oxygen enrichment

BONUS REPORT: LNG

PROCESS ENGINEERING AND OPTIMIZATION

MAINTENANCE AND RELIABILITY

PROCESS CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION

ENVIRONMENT AND SAFETY

Consider post-design changes to confine a hazardous area

GAS PROCESSING SUPPLEMENT

Global Project Data

DistillationThen and now

The transition into a new era

Monitor electric motor vibration

MAGAZINE PRODUCTION / +1 (713) 525-4633

CIRCULATION / +1 (713) 520-4440 / Circulation@GulfPub.com

Chevron Phillips Chemical

Publication Agreement Number 40034765

Through our work, we define opportunity. As an integrated energy and chemicals

Apply now at www.aramco.jobs/hp

Advanced FIBER FILM Contactor Technology

Hydrocarbon Treating Made Better

Introducing the next generation of FIBER FILM

P. O. Box 2608, Houston, Texas 77252-2608, USA|Phone: +1 (713) 529-4301|HydrocarbonProcessing.com

The transition into a new era

Hydrocarbon Processing|AUGUST 20167

LEE NICHOLS, EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER

A historical snapshot of a complex global industry

The high project numbers in 2009

FIG. 1. New project announcements by region, 20092016. Source: Hydrocarbon Processings

INSIDE THIS ISSUE

Any problems or failures

Syncrude Canadas attempt

LEE NICHOLS, EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER

What is the state of downstream processing capacity? What

Latin America Middle East

FIG. 1. Total new project announcements by region, 20142016.

15%, 16%, 17%

17%, 11%, 11%

23%, 24%, 34%

FIG. 2. Market share analysis of new project announcements, 20142016.

Indias new project announcements have increased over 140%

Source: Hydrocarbon Processings

MIKE RHODES, MANAGING EDITOR

Cracking spread, US$/bbl

Cracking spread, US$/bbl

Singapore cracking spread vs. Oman, 20152016*

Brent dated vs. sour grades

Source: EIA Short-Term Energy Outlook, June 2016

Stock change and balance, MMbpd

Supply and demand, MMbpd

Stock change and balance

Rotterdam cracking spread vs. Brent, 20152016*

World liquid fuel supply and demand, MMbpd

Publication Agreement Number 40034765