Investigation of an industrial scale absorption and stripping

of CO2 in a packed column using aspen plus

Mohamed Ali Mohamed

Irfan Amjad Javed

Supervisors:
Dr. Abdulghanni H.Nhaesi
Dr. Hasan Al Hammadi
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Bahrain
Introduction

Validation of Simulation results

Optimization

In ammonia synthesis plant, carbon dioxide is removed

from the process gas because it acts as a poison for the
catalyst. Carbon dioxide capture from process gas is
accomplished by using hot potassium carbonate solution
(Benfield process). The main objective is to reduce the
concentration of CO2 to less than 0.1 mole % in the treated
outlet gas. In an absorber column, the process gas flows
counter flow to the potassium carbonate solution; which
leads to the formation of potassium bicarbonate via the
reaction of potassium carbonate with carbon dioxide. The
CO2 rich solution is then regenerated in a reboiled stripper
column accompanied by the addition of steam.
During absorption process
K2CO3 + H2O + CO2 2KHCO3

Validation of results is by comparing treated gas

composition (Fig.3) and flow rate (Fig.4) by GPIC plant
data.

The pressure of the absorber column is optimized (Fig. 9)

to minimize the operation cost (Table.2).

Potassium bicarbonate is then decomposed to potassium

carbonate:
2KHCO3 K2CO3 + H2O + CO2

80

Plant Data
Simulated

0.36

0.3

0.27

72.53 72.67
70
0.28

0.25

50
0.19

0.2

40

0.15

26.45 26.48

30

0.1
0.1

20

0.05

10

0.03

0.003

Plant Operating
Pressure

0.0025

Optimum Pressre

0.002
0.0015
0.001
0.0005
0
0

10

20

CO

CO2

CH4

Ar

H2

30

40

50

60

70

80

Pressure, bar

N2

Figure 9: optimization of absorber column pressure.

Figure 3: Validation of treated gas composition.

Table 2: annual savings operating at optimum pressure.

52300
52272
52250

60

0.27

0.0035

Mole fraction

0.37

H2 and N2 Composition (mole

%)

Dry basis Composition (mole%)

0.4
0.35

Utility cost, $/yr

Plant Data

52200

kg/hr

Simulated

Optimum Pressure (23.2 bar)

10,967,470

Plant Operating pressure (29.5 bar)

11,112,528

Annual saving

145,057

52150
52100
52100

Conclusions

52050

Practicing team work, literature review, independent

learning, the use of software are accomplished.

52000

Treated Gas Flowrate

Figure 4: Validation of treated gas mass flowrate.

Figure 1: schematic diagram of Benfield process.

Simulation tool: Aspen Plus

Property method: ELECNTRL
Absorber and Stripper model: Rate based model
Solution: hot potassium carbonate solution, 30 wt%.

A sensitivity analysis on the CO2 Absorption unit is

performed by varying primary parameters: Pressure of
Absorber (Fig 5), Pressure of Stripper (Fig 6), and Solution
Concentration (Fig 7).

Reboiler Duty, kW

Simulated Model

Sensitivity Analysis

116000

0.0035

115000

0.003

114000

0.0025

113000

Reboiler Duty

0.002

112000
0.0015

CO2
molefraction

111000

0.001

110000

CO2 molefraction

Materials and methods

0.0005

109000
108000

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Pressure, bar

Figure 2: The simulated model in Aspen Plus of Benfield Process.

Results

CO2 mole percentage (dry basis)

Figure 5: effect of absorber column pressure on

absorption rate of CO2 and reboiler duty.
0.45
0.4
0.35

CO

0.36

CO2

0.03

H2

72.67

CH4

0.19

N2

26.48

AR

0.27

Flow rate (kg/hr)

52100

Literature cited
Aroonwilas A. and Tontiwachwuthikul P. (2000)
, Mechanistic Model for Prediction of Structural
Packing Mass Transfer Performance in CO2 Absorption
with chemical Reactions,Chemical Enginerring
Science, 55, pp.3651-3663
Kohl A. and Nielson R. (1997), Gas Purification, 5th
edition.
Rahimpour M. and Kashkooli A. (2004), Enhanced carbon
dioxide removal by promoted hot potassium carbonate
in a split-flow absorber, Chemical Engineering and
Processing 43, 857865
Seader J. and Henley E.(2006) , Separation process
principles, 2nd Ed., chapter 12, pp.452

Acknowledgments

0.1
0.05
0
1

1.5

2.5

3.5

Figure 6: effect of stripper column pressure on

the absorption rate of CO2 .
0.18
0.16

Mole Fraction of CO2

mole% (Dry
Basis)

Optimization of the process shows that the optimum

pressure which satisfies the constraint is 23.2 bar.
Increasing the pressure gives more absorption rate but
increases the utility requirements.

0.2
0.15

Stripper Pressure, bar

Components

As the pressure of the absorber increases, the absorption

rate of CO2 increases. On the other hand, increasing the
pressure of stripper results in lower absorption.

0.3
0.25

The obtained results from simulation are shown below:

Table 1: Treated gas Flowrate and Composition.

The comparison between values obtained from simulation

and plant data shows a close agreement.

3 wt%
0 wt%

0.14
0.12

We would like to express our gratitude to University of

Bahrain and the Department of Chemical Engineering for
granting us the opportunity to complete the Senior Project.
Special thanks to GPIC for the help and support. Our
grateful thanks go to our supervisors Dr. Abdulghanni
Nhaesi and Dr. Hassan Al Hammadi for all the assistance
they gave which truly helped in the progression and
smoothness of our Senior Project. Special thanks to the
course coordinator Dr. Raed Aljowder for keeping us
aware of the requirements of the senior project. Thanks
also due to Mr. Mohamed Faqihi from GPIC for providing
information needed.

For further information

0.1
0.08

Please contact binali666@hotmail.com

Irfan_coulguy@hotmail.com
More information on this and related projects can be
obtained on request.

0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0

20

40

60

80

100

Column Height%

Figure 8: effect of DEA concentration in the

solution on the absorption rate of CO2 .