5 Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA)

Mass Balance

Total annual production requirement: 168,496 tonne H2

The mean daily design rate is calculated based on the following equation

PAnnual
MDDR = ( ) (I )
365 − S F

Where:

PAnnual = Annual Production Rate

S = Scheduled Shut Down Days Per Year

IF = Integration Factor

By assuming that the plant will shut down for 30 days for maintenance, and the integration
factor as 1, the MDDR is as followed:

168496 tonne H2 𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐧𝐞 𝐇𝟐

MDDR = [ ] (1) = 𝟓𝟎𝟑
(365 − 30)days 𝐝𝐚𝐲

By taking ±20% of the mean production rate, the low and high daily design rate can be
calculated as followed.

tonne H2 𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐧𝐞 𝐇𝟐
𝐿𝑜𝑤 𝐷𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 = 0.8 × 503 = 𝟒𝟎𝟐. 𝟒
day 𝐝𝐚𝐲

tonne H2 𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐧𝐞 𝐇𝟐
𝐻𝑖𝑔ℎ 𝐷𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 = 1.2 × 503 = 𝟔𝟎𝟑. 𝟔
day 𝐝𝐚𝐲
The mass balance of pressure swing adsorption (PSA) at low, mean and high daily production
rate obtained from the HYSYS simulation are shown in Table 5.1 below.

Table 5.1: Mass balance of streams entering and exiting PSA under low, mean and high daily
production rate

Mass Flow
Stream
(kg hr-1) (kg day-1)
Water-gas-shift
Mass In
Low Daily Production Rate

Downstream 1.807E6 4.338E7

(Stream 7)

Hydrogen 1.677E4 4.025E5

Mass Out

Waste Gas
1.790E6 4.296E7
(Stream 8)

Water-gas-shift
Mass In
Mean Daily Production Rate

Downstream 2.080E6 4.992E7

(Stream 7)

Hydrogen 2.097E4 5.033E5

Mass Out

Waste Gas
2.059E6 4.942E7
(Stream 8)

Water-gas-shift
In
High Daily Production Rate

Downstream 2.382E6 5.717E7

Mass

(Stream 7)

Hydrogen 2.515E4 6.036E5

Mass Out

Waste Gas
2.356E6 5.654E7
(Stream 8)
 Energy Balance

The energy balance of the PSA for low, mean and high daily production rate of biohydrogen
is taken from HYSYS simulation and tabulated in Table 5.2.

Table 5.2: Energy balance of streams entering and exiting PSA under low, mean and high
daily production rate

Heat Flow
Stream
(kJ hr-1) (kJ day-1)
Water-gas-shift
Mass In
Low Daily Production Rate

Downstream -8.124E9 -1.950E11

(Stream 7)

Hydrogen -1.238E4 -2.971E5

Mass Out

Waste Gas
-8.124E9 -1.950E11
(Stream 8)

Water-gas-shift
Mass In
Mean Daily Production Rate

Downstream -9.571E9 -2.297E11

(Stream 7)

Hydrogen -1.548E4 -3.715E5

Mass Out

Waste Gas
-9.571E9 -2.297E11
(Stream 8)

Water-gas-shift
In
High Daily Production Rate

Downstream -1.118E10 -2.683E11

Mass

(Stream 7)

Hydrogen -1.856E4 -4.454E5

Mass Out

Waste Gas
-1.118E10 -2.683E11
(Stream 8)
 Rating and Sizing

5.3.1 Preliminary Design Analysis

The design process requirements and working conditions of the pressure swing adsorption
(PSA) is listed in Table 5.3.

Table 5.3: Design process requirements and working conditions

Design Process Operating Conditions Values

Pressure in Feed 30 bar
Pressure in Purge/Product 10 bar
Temperature 430ºC
Adsorption time 116 s
Hydrogen Purity 99.99%
Hydrogen Recovery 90%
Adsorbents Zeolite 5A

Assumptions for Design Process

1. The PSA is to operate at isothermal condition.

2. The system is treated as a binary component system, where the largest amount of
impurities of the stream is considered. Since the major impurity from stream 7 is
carbon dioxide, therefore it will be assumed that the other impurities of lower amount
will be adsorbed with the amount of adsorbents designed.
3. The designed PSA equipment is a 2-bed PSA with 4 steps cycle where the time of
adsorption equals to the time of regeneration.
4. The 4 steps cycle of the PSA unit are adsorption, depressurization, blow down and
purge
5. The head space of the vessel is left empty and 20% of the volume between the tangent
lines of the vessel is packed with inert materials for uniform flow distribution at the
feed and exit
6. The maximum fraction of the adsorbate saturated in the adsorbent bed is 0.7 (Towler
& Sinnott 2013)
7. The adsorption time is taken to be 166 s which is the recommended breakthrough time
for hydrogen purification process (Asgari et al. 2014)
 8. Minimum height-diameter ratio of a PSA design is given to be 3:1 and a maximum of
10:1 (Jain et al. 2003)

Adsorbent Selection

The adsorbent selected for the PSA unit is Zeolite 5A because it is capable of adsorbing
carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, methane and nitrogen. The physical properties of Zeolite
5A is shown in Table 5.4 (Auerbach, Carrado & Dutta 2003). The equilibrium isotherms of
Zeolite 5A from experimental data are listed in Table 5.5.

Table 5.4: Physical properties of Zeolite 5A (Auerbach, Carrado & Dutta 2003)

Bulk Density, Particle Density, Effective Diameter,

Types
𝜌𝑏 (𝑘𝑔𝑚−3 ) 𝜌𝑝 (𝑘𝑔𝑚−3 ) 𝐷𝑝 (𝑚𝑚)
Beads 740 1130 1.6 – 2.5

Table 5.5: Equilibrium isotherms data of carbon dioxide adsorption on Zeolite 5A (Yavary,
Ale Ebrahim & Falamaki 2016)

Equilibrium Pressure (bar) Adsorbed Amount of CO2 (mmol/g)

1.995 0.6959
4.54 1.0475
9.532 1.4032
12.633 1.5325
16.69 1.6621
18.59 1.7178

5.3.2 Mass of Adsorbents Calculation

The mass of adsorbents per bed that is required for the biohydrogen plant is found by using
the mass balance on the adsorbent bed which gives:

(𝐹1 𝑦1 − 𝐹2 𝑦2 )𝑀𝑤 𝑡𝑎 = 1000(𝑚1 − 𝑚2 )𝑀𝑎𝑑𝑠 𝑓𝐿

(Towler & Sinnott 2013)

The material streams are obtained from HYSYS which gives:

𝐹1 = 6.598E4 kmol/h
𝐹2 = 1.04E4 kmol/h
𝑦1 = 0.367
𝑦2 = 0.0001
𝑦𝐶𝑂2 𝑎𝑡 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑚 8 = 0.4356

The partial pressure of CO2 in the feed and off gas is calculated to obtain the isotherms from
Table 5.5.

𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑂2 𝑖𝑛 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑑

= 𝑃𝐻 × 𝑦1
= 30 𝑏𝑎𝑟 × 0.367
= 11.01 𝑏𝑎𝑟
𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑂2 𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑓𝑓 𝑔𝑎𝑠
= 𝑃𝐿 × 𝑦𝐶𝑂2 𝑎𝑡 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑚 8
= 10 × 0.4356
= 4.356 𝑏𝑎𝑟

Using the partial pressure of CO2 and isothermal equilibrium data from Table 5.5, m1 and m2
can be found by interpolation.

At 11.01 bar:

(12.633 − 9.532)𝑏𝑎𝑟 (11.01 − 9.532)𝑏𝑎𝑟

−1
=
(1.5325 − 1.4032)𝑚𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑔 (𝑚1 − 1.4032) 𝑚𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑔−1
𝑚1 = 1.4648 𝑚𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑔−1
= 1.4648 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑘𝑔−1

At 4.356 bar:

(4.540 − 1.995)𝑏𝑎𝑟 (4.356 − 1.995)𝑏𝑎𝑟

=
(1.0475 − 0.6959)𝑚𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑔−1 (𝑚2 − 0.6959) 𝑚𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑔−1
𝑚2 = 1.0221 𝑚𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑔−1
= 1.0221 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑘𝑔−1
Substituting all values into the mass balance equation:

1000 𝑚𝑜𝑙 1ℎ
{(6.598𝐸4 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙ℎ−1 × 0.367) − (1.040𝐸4 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙ℎ−1 × 0.0001)} × ×
1 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙 3600 𝑠
× 166 𝑠
1 𝑘𝑔
= 1000 × (1.4648 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑘𝑔−1 − 1.0221 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑘𝑔−1 ) × × 𝑀𝑎𝑑𝑠 × 0.7
1000 𝑔
𝑀𝑎𝑑𝑠 = 3602945.96 𝑘𝑔

The mass of adsorbents required for a single bed PSA is 3602945.96 kg. Since a single unit
of PSA requires two bed for a continuous flow, therefore the total mass of adsorbents needed
in this process is 7205891.92 kg.

5.3.3 Dimension of Vessels Calculation

𝑀𝑎𝑑𝑠
𝑉𝑎𝑑𝑠 =
𝜌𝑏
3602946.95 𝑘𝑔
= −1
740 𝑘𝑔𝑚3
= 4868.8 𝑚3
20% of the total volume of the vessel is used in the packing of inert materials. Therefore, the
volume of the vessel is:

𝑉𝑎𝑑𝑠
𝑉𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 =
0.8
4868.8 𝑚3
=
0.8
= 6086 𝑚3
The H:D ratio is taken to be 4:1. Therefore the diameter of the vessel can be calculated.

𝐻𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 = 4𝐷𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟
2
𝜋𝐷𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝐻𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟
𝑉𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 =
4
3
= 𝜋𝐷𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟
3
𝜋𝐷𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 = 6086 𝑚3
𝐷𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 = 12.47 𝑚
𝐻𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 = 49.86 𝑚
Since the diameter of the vessel also equals to the diameter of the bed, therefore, the height of
the adsorbent bed is:

2
𝜋𝐷𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝐻𝑎𝑑𝑠
𝑉𝑎𝑑𝑠 =
4
𝜋(12.47)2 𝐻𝑎𝑑𝑠
3
4868.8 𝑚 =
4
𝐻𝑎𝑑𝑠 = 39.87 𝑚

The thickness of the vessel can be calculated from equation specified by the ASME BPV
Code (Sec VIII D.1 Part UG-27).

𝑃𝑖 𝐷𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟
𝑡𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙 =
2𝑆𝐸 − 1.2𝑃𝑖

The vessel is to operate at 30 bar (absolute) and 430ºC (806ºF). Therefore, the material
selected is Stainless Steel 18Cr Grade 304, which has property as shown in Table 5.6.

Table 5.6: Physical properties of stainless steel 18Cr Grade 304

Material Grade Min Min Maximum Maximum Allowable Stress at

Tensile Yield Temperature Temperature ºF (ksi = 1000 psi)
Strength Strength (ºF) 100 300 500 700 900
(ksi) (ksi)
Stainless 304 75 30 1500 20.0 15.0 12.9 11.7 10.8
steel
18CR,
8Ni

The maximum allowable stress of Stainless Steel 18 Cr Grade 304 at 900ºF, S = 10.8 ksi.
The minimum corrosion allowance for alloy steels is 2mm.

The welds are fully radiograph which leads to the maximum allowable joint efficiency, E =
1.0.

The maximum allowable pressure is taken as the design pressure, which is taken to be 5% to
10% higher than the normal working gauge pressure.

(CITE: Textbook Chapter 14)

The design pressure for the PSA is taken to be 10% above the operating gauge pressure.

𝑃𝑔𝑎𝑢𝑔𝑒 = 𝑃𝑎𝑏𝑠 − 𝑃𝑎𝑡𝑚

= 30 𝑏𝑎𝑟 − 1 𝑏𝑎𝑟
= 29 𝑏𝑎𝑟
𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒, 𝑃𝑖 = 𝑃𝑔𝑎𝑢𝑔𝑒 × 110%
= 29 𝑏𝑎𝑟 × 110%
= 31.9 𝑏𝑎𝑟
= 3.19 𝑁𝑚𝑚−2
3.19 𝑁𝑚𝑚−2 × (12.47 × 103 ) 𝑚𝑚
𝑡𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙 = + 2𝑚𝑚
(2 × 74.46 𝑁𝑚𝑚−2 × 1.0) − (1.2 × 3.19 𝑁𝑚𝑚−2 )
= 276.17 𝑚𝑚
= 0.27617 𝑚

The thickness of the vessel will be taken to be 0.28 m for construction convenience.

5.3.4 Closures of the Vessels

There are four major types of closures for vessels namely flat heads, hemispherical heads,
ellipsoidal heads and torispherical heads. Table 5.7 shows the different application and cost
comparison among four head closures. Flat heads are relatively cheap but can only applied to
low pressure and vessels of small diameters.

Table 5.7: Types of vessel closures and its cost and applications

Types of Application Cost

Closure
Flat Heads Low pressure and small diameter vessels Lowest
Hemispherical Strongest shape and can withstand pressure Very costly
Heads 2 times more than torispherical head using
same thickness
Torispherical Common and able to withstand pressure up Less economical for the use
Heads to 15 bar of pressure greater than 10
bar
Ellipsoidal Able to withstand high pressure Most economical for high
Heads pressure application
(CITE: Textbook Chapter 14, page 579)
 Figure 5.1: Ellipsoidal head closures
Therefore, the choice of head closure will be ellipsoidal heads.

The minimum thickness of the head can be calculated from the equation given by ASME
BPV Code Sec. VIII D.1 Part UG-32.

𝑃𝑖 𝐷𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟
𝑡=
2𝑆𝐸 − 0.2𝑃𝑖
3.19 𝑁𝑚𝑚−2 × (12.47 × 103 ) 𝑚𝑚
=
(2 × 76.46 𝑁𝑚𝑚−2 × 1.0) − (0.2 × 3.19 𝑁𝑚𝑚−2 )
= 268.27 𝑚𝑚
= 0.26827 𝑚

Since the minimum thickness of the ellipsoidal head is almost the same as the thickness of the
vessel, the thickness of the ellipsoidal head will be 0.28 m.

The straight face of the head and inner depth of the head is calculated by:

𝑆𝐹 = 3.5𝑡𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙
= 3.5 × 0.28 𝑚
= 0.98 𝑚
𝐷𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟
ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑝 =
4
12.47 𝑚
=
4
= 3.1175 𝑚
3D Drawing of Equipment

Figure 5.2: 3D view of the PSA design

Figure 5.3: Inner cross section of the PSA

Figure 5.4: 2D dimension of the PSA design using ratio of 1:100
 Equipment Control

The pressure control system has been installed for the PSA unit. The feedback control system
was used to design the control loop on the PSA unit. The loops were installed with the alarm
in order to provide detection and warning. The Figure 5.5 below has depicted the control
system for the PSA unit.

Figure 5.5: Control loops and instruments for PSA unit

The control objective was to prevent PSA overpressure in the PSA unit. To avoid
overpressure of the PSA, a pressure element (PE) will detect the pressure of the unit and
transfer the signal by transmittance element (PE). The pressure alarm (PAH, PAL) will be
trigger if detect a low or high pressure in the unit. The transmittance will send the signal to
control the pressure by adjusting the flow rate of the valve (V-2). Besides that, the by-passed
valve had been installed to prevent the malfunction of automated control valve (V-2).
 Equipment Safety: Hazard Analysis (HAZAN)

5.6.1 Fault Tree Analysis of PSA

Figure 5.6: FTA of PSA unit having explosion

Table 5.8:Failure probability of respective events

Basic Events Probability

Operator failure 0.01 x e-6
Operator fails to respond 0.9 x e-6
Control valve failure 30 x e-6 (Lees 1986)
Pressure sensor failure 2 x e-6
Relief valve blocked 0.5 x e-6 (Lees 1986)
Pressure alarm siren failure 1 x e-6
Level alarm siren failure 1 x e-6
Fault tree analysis has been done on the possibility of the explosion or rupture of the pressure
swing adsorption unit. The probability of the rupture or explosion of the PSA unit which is
caused by tank overflow is higher. The failure of this unit by this event is mostly due to the
failure of the control system as well as the failure of materials. The failure of the control
system is mostly due to the faulty control valve system. Material failure of the PSA unit can
be caused by the harsh operating conditions within the vessel as well as the chemical contact
within the vessel. Methods and safety tools used in the reduction of the risk of having
explosion or rupture in the PSA unit is tabulated as follows.

Table 5.9: Safety tools or methods to reduce risk of explosion of PSA unit

Event Analysis Safety Tools or Methods

Overflow Vessel
 Regular check/maintenance the
High level indicator alarm failure functionality of the sensor.
 Allocate extra alarm unit for
emergency
 Regularly check the condition of the
Inlet overflow pipeline and control valve
 Allocate a flow meter on the pipeline
before entering the reactor.
Over-pressured Vessel
 Regular check/maintenance the
functionality of the sensor.
High pressure indicator alarm failure  Install a barometer in plenum region,
bed region and freeboard region to
alert the operator.
 Regularly check and conduct
Pressure Relief Valve Failure maintenance on the functionality of
the valve to avoid mechanical failure.
5.6.2 Event Tree Analysis of PSA

Figure 5.7: ETA of having fire/explosion from the PSA unit

Table 5.10: Failure rate of each events

Events Frequency per year

Over pressuring of tank 2 x e-3
Operator notices high pressure 0.075
Pressure relief valve activation 0.099
Leakage and ignition control 0.2
Explosion control 0.6

The possible outcomes of an explosion occurrence of a PSA unit is analyse through the event
tree analysis. These risks can be regulated using the suggested safety tools and methods. The
safety tools for the risk mitigation are shown in the table below.
 Table 5.11: Mitigation system for the fire/explosion of PSA unit

Alternative Safety Tools / Methods for

Mitigation
Risk Mitigation
 Sufficient fire extinguishers provided
for any small fire event.
Ignition Control  Install automatic fire sprinkler system
throughout the building
 Locate and remove the source of
ignition.
 Measure the area coverage during
explosion
Explosion Control  Minimising the inventory of potential
ignition fuels and materials
 Add on more explosion-suppression
barriers
 Install alarm to provide detection and
warning
Individual Exposure Control  Arrange of evacuation.
 Provide an assembly point
 Conduct fire drill for awareness
 Provide first aid kits for minor
Individual Injuries Control injuries.
 Provide emergency call station

Optimization Study

Since the dimension of the PSA is relatively big, the tall height of the vessel could lead to
high pressure drop across the bed.

1 unit of PSA is composed of two beds. Taking 2 units of 2 bed PSA, the volume and
dimension of the vessel will be,

6086 𝑚3
𝑉𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 =
2
= 3043 m3
3
𝜋𝐷𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 = 3043 𝑚3
Dvessel,inner = 9.89 𝑚
𝐻𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 = 39.58 𝑚
(4868.8 𝑚3 )
𝑉𝑎𝑑𝑠 =
2
= 2434.4 𝑚3
 3
𝜋(9.89 𝑚)2 𝐻𝑎𝑑𝑠
2434.4 𝑚 =
4
𝐻𝑎𝑑𝑠 = 31.69 𝑚

The pressure drop across the bed can be calculated by the Ergun equation.

∆𝑃 (1 − 𝜀)2 𝜇𝑢 1 − 𝜀 𝜌𝑓 𝑢2
= 150 ( ) ( ) + 1.75 ( )( )
𝐻𝑎𝑑𝑠 𝜀3 𝑑𝑝2 𝜀3 𝑑𝑝
𝜌𝑏
𝜀 =1−
𝜌𝑝
740𝑘𝑔𝑚−3
=1−
1130𝑘𝑔𝑚−3
= 0.345
129200𝑚3 ℎ−1
𝑄̇ =
2
= 64600𝑚3 ℎ−1
𝑢 = 𝑄̇ × 𝐴

3 −1
𝜋(9.89𝑚)2
= 64600𝑚 ℎ ÷
4
= 840.91𝑚ℎ−1
= 0.23𝑚𝑠 −1
∆𝑃 (1 − 0.345)2 (0.00003284𝑁𝑠𝑚−2 )(0.23𝑚𝑠 −1 )
= 150 ( )( )
31.69𝑚 0.3453 (0.0016𝑚)2
1 − 0.345 16.1𝑘𝑔𝑚−3 (0.23𝑚𝑠 −1 )2
+ 1.75 ( )( )
0.3453 0.0016𝑚
∆𝑃 = 632956.7𝑃𝑎
 Pressure Drop through bed with
different number of PSA units
1300
1200
1100
1000
Pressure Drop, kPa

900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
No. of PSA Units

Figure 5.8: Pressure drop through the adsorbent bed with different number of PSA units
The pressure drop of the adsorbent bed at different number of PSA units shows that the
relationship of the pressure drop against the number of PSA units decreases exponentially.
Judging from the graph in Figure 5.8, the pressure drop shows insignificant decrease starting
from the 6th number of PSA units. Hence, the optimization of the PSA will be done by
employing 6 units of PSA for the process.

Sensitivity Study

5.8.1 Sensitivity of Porosity to the Pressure Drop

The Ergun equation is govern by the height of the porosity of the solids of the fixed bed. The
pressure drop across the bed can be calculated by:

∆𝑃 (1 − 𝜀)2 𝜇𝑢 1 − 𝜀 𝜌𝑓 𝑢2
= 150 ( ) ( 2 ) + 1.75 ( 3 ) ( )
𝐻𝑎𝑑𝑠 𝜀3 𝑑𝑝 𝜀 𝑑𝑝

Different particle density and bulk density could result in different porosity of the bed.

The height and diameter of the adsorbent bed is taken to be constant.

 Pressure Drop through bed
with different Porosities
40000
35000
30000
Pressure Drop, kPa

25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Porosity

Figure 5.9: Pressure drop through bed of different porosities

From the graph depicted in Figure 5.9, the pressure drop across the bed drops significantly
after the porosity of 0.15. The recommended bed porosity to be used in a PSA unit for the
hydrogen purification process is 0.3 to 0.5 (Asgari et al. 2014).

5.8.2 Sensitivity of H:D Ratio to the Pressure Drop

The recommended H:D ratio for a PSA unit is 3:1 to 10:1. The variation in height of the bed
will alter the pressure drop through the bed. Ergun equation can be applied again but keeping
porosity and diameter constant.

It can be seen from Figure 5.10 that the pressure drop increase with the increase in height-
diameter ratio.
 Pressure Drop through bed
with different H:D Ratios
8000
7000
6000
Pressure Drop, kPa

5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
H:D Ratio

Figure 5.10: Pressure drop through bed using different H:D ratios

Materials of Construction

The factor that is to be considered in the material selection of the PSA unit includes corrosion
resistivity, hydrogen embrittlement, tensile strength, working temperature and pressure.
Haynes-230 and Alloy-625 have suggested to be used for as the materials of construction for
PSA unit.

5.9.1 Haynes-230

Haynes 230 is an alloy that made up from nickel-chromium tungsten-molybdenum. It

possesses excellent oxidizing resistance and withstand high temperature up to 1149˚C.
Noteworthy, Alloy-230 has the ability to withstand in a high pressure condition. It provided a
low thermal expansion which a high temperature operation and a pronounced resistance to
grain coarsening with prolonged exposure to high temperature. Besides that, it has a high
availability because it was readily fabricated and formed. Despite that, Alloy-230 has an
excellent forming and welding characteristic which enhanced the progress of installation.

5.9.2 Alloy-625

Alloy-625 is the material that made up of nickel-chromium-molybdenum. Its excellent

oxidation and corrosion resistances have promoted it to be used in the construction. These
properties are suitable to be use in the construction of PSA, which deals with high corrosive
gaseous like CO2 and H2O. Apart from that, its excellent strength and toughness at elevated
temperature of up to 1093 °C making it able to withstand in a harsh environment.
Furthermore, it easy weldability which allowed it to be readily welded by conventional
processes had promoted it to be selected as the material for fluidised bed reactor construction.

Auxiliary Equipment

5.10.1 Control Valves

Control valves are extremely important in the control system of any operating vessels or
reactors. A control valve is used to control the flow rate of the fluid by changing the size of
the flow way whenever the controller sends a notifying signal to it. The purpose of a control
valve is to ensure stable flow throughout the process as well as to prevent overflow of a tank.
The control valve which controls the flow rate of the flowing fluid will consequentially
control certain process quantities such as pressure and liquid level.

5.10.2 Skirt Support

The skirt support are widely used in vessels especially pressure vessels. Skirts support are
mostly used for taller vessels due to its ability to give sufficient support requiring the least
amount of design skills. The design of the skirt is basically a cylinder of large diameters.
The skirt thickness designed must be sufficient to withstand the dead weight loads and
bending moment imposed on it by the reactor. According to Wilkie (2017), the lower flange
of the vessel support skirt is bolted to the upper flange of the ring girder. After that, the ring
girder is fastened to the concrete support pedestal by means of steel anchor bolts set in the
concrete with the threads extending upward above the horizontal surface. The steel sole plates
are set flat and level on the concrete during the construction. The lower flange of the ring
girder is then set on top of the sole plate and shimmed as necessary to level the ring girder.
Lastly, the anchor bolts are extended through both the sole plate and the bottom flange of the
ring girder.

5.10.3 Flanges

Flange is a ring that forms a ring at the end of the pipe when fastened with the pipelines. A
blind flange and a flange joint is required for a fluidised bed reactor. A blind flange is a plate
used to cover the end of a pipe and the flange joint is used to connect in between the pipe
where the connecting pieces have flanges by which the parts are bolted together. The pipes
which installed with flanges can be assemble and disassembled easily. A flat face type with
full-face gasket is used to flange for pipe connection in order to minimize the bending stress.
The flange is a Class 150 type which is dimensionally accurate and highly resistant to
corrosion so that it can reduce the maintenance required (Ruinata 2012).

5.10.4 Pipe Fittings

Pipe fittings such as bends, elbows, reducing and enlargement sections as well as tee
junctions are the few pipe fittings that are widely used throughout any piping system. The
direction of the fluid flow in a pipe can be changed with the use of fittings. Direction
changing fittings include elbows and bends as well as tee junctions. According to Ruinata
(2012), the joints or fittings for the pipe connection are generally connected in 90˚ and 45˚
elbow joint which are necessary for bends in pipes during transfer of fluids from one
reactor to another.

Minor Equipment: Conveyor for Char Removal from Cyclone

The most suitable conveyor for the transport of char from the cyclone is a scraper conveyor.
Scraper conveyor is widely used in the bulk handling of solids such as cements, ashes, grains,
chars and much more.

The char produced from the cyclone for the daily production of 503 tonne of hydrogen is
around 1000 tonne a day. The volume of daily char production is also equivalent to 30 m3/h
which is also around 720 m3 of char produced a day. The specification of the industrial
scraper conveyor is shown in the figure below.

From the specification data, the suitable scraper conveyor for the process is selected to be a
double strand scraper conveyor with hold down rail and chain width of 400mm.
Figure 5.11: Specification of scrapper conveyor (Entecomsystem 2017)

Figure 5.12: Schematic diagram of a scrapper conveyor design

 Piping System

The optimum velocity given by Simpson (1968) based on the fluid density for piping system
are given by the table below.

Table 5.12: Simpson (1968) correlation of optimum velocity based on the fluid density

Fluid Density kg/m3 Velocity m/s

1600 2.4
800 3.0
160 4.9
16 9.4
0.16 18.0
0.016 34.0

The fluid density from Stream 7 into the PSA unit is 16.1 kg/m3. Therefore, the inner
diameter of the pipe can be calculated by,

4𝐴
𝐷𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 = √
𝜋

𝐴 = 129200 𝑚3 ℎ−1 ÷ 3600 ÷ 9.4 𝑚𝑠 −1 = 3.818 𝑚2

4 × 3.818 𝑚2
𝐷𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒,𝑖𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑟 = √ = 2.2 𝑚 = 2200 𝑚𝑚
4

The NPS can be calculated by

2200
𝑁𝑃𝑆 = = 88 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ
25

The thickness stainless steel type 304 pipe can be determined by the following equation:

𝑃 ( 𝐷 + 2𝐶)
𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑘𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒, 𝑡 =
2 ( 𝑆𝐸 − 𝑃 (1 − 𝑌) )

Whereas,

𝐶 = 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑠 = 0.08 𝑖𝑛

𝑃 = 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 (𝑙𝑏⁄𝑖𝑛2 ) = 435.11 psi
𝐷 = 𝑛𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑡𝑒𝑟⁄𝑁𝑃𝑆 = 22 𝑖𝑛
𝑆 = 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑖𝑐 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐴𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑒𝑙 , (𝑙𝑏⁄𝑖𝑛2 ) = 11250 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐸 = 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = 1.0
𝑌 = 𝑐𝑜𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑘𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 (𝐴𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐) = 0.4

435.11 𝑝𝑠𝑖 (22 𝑖𝑛 + 2(0.08))

𝑡=
2 ( 11250 𝑝𝑠𝑖 × 1 − 435.1 𝑝𝑠𝑖 (1 − 0.4) )
= 0.439 𝑖𝑛 = 11.15mm

Table 5.13: Summary of Piping System for Stream

Properties Unit Stream 7

ASME Standard - ASME B 31.3
Pipe Schedule - Schedule 40
Density kg/m3 16.1
Volumetric Flow
m3/hr 129200 𝑚3 ℎ−1
Rate
Pressure kPa 3000
Flow velocity m/s 16.10
Area of pipe, A m2 3.82
Pipe inner diameter m 2.20
NPS inch 22
Mechanical
inch 0.08
corrosion allowance
Austenitic Austenitic
Material of
Stainless Stainless
construction
Steel 304 Steel 316
Allowable stress, S psi 11250 17500
Thickness
- 0.4 0.4
coefficient, Y
Quality factor, E 1 1
Pipe thickness mm 11.15 2.27
Pipe outer diameter mm 2211.15 2512.27
Asgari, M, Anisi, H, Mohammadi, H & Sadighi, S 2014, 'Designing a commercial scale
pressure swing adsorber for hydrogen purification', Pet. Coal, vol. 56, no. 6, p. 552.
Auerbach, SM, Carrado, KA & Dutta, PK 2003, Handbook of zeolite science and technology,
CRC press.
Jain, S, Moharir, A, Li, P & Wozny, G 2003, 'Heuristic design of pressure swing adsorption:
a preliminary study', Separation and Purification Technology, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 25-43.
Ruinata, RJ 2012, Fluidized Bed Reactor, Prezi Inc., viewed 24 May, <https://prezi.com/-
ujspjo4n8v9/fluidized-bed-reactor/?webgl=0>.
Towler, G & Sinnott, R 2013, 'Chapter 16 - Separation of Fluids', in Chemical Engineering
Design (Second Edition), Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, pp. 753-806.
Wilkie, D 2017, Reactor Vessel Support Skirt Concerns, SimplyInfo.org, viewed 24 May,
<http://www.fukuleaks.org/web/?page_id=12603>.
Yavary, M, Ale Ebrahim, H & Falamaki, C 2016, 'Competitive Adsorption Equilibrium
Isotherms of CO, CO2, CH4, and H2 on Activated Carbon and Zeolite 5A for Hydrogen
Purification', Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data, vol. 61, no. 10, pp. 3420-3427.