Process Equipment Design

Group 6

Detailed design of various components for a CO2 to ethanol

converter

University of Twente.
Process equipment design
A.G. Kamphuis (s1728784)
R.C.M. Tak (s1733532)
J.M.A. Maathuis (s1677357)
R. Asad (s188955)

May 7, 2019
Contents

1 Introduction 1

2 Compressor 3
2.1 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2 Degree of Freedom Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3 Flow Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4 Polytropic Head . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.5 Designing the compressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.6 Type of Impeller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.7 Optimization of the setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.8 The Centrifugal Compressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

3 Heat Exchanger 11
3.1 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.2 Duty and physical properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.3 Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.4 Degree of freedom analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.5 Type of heat exchanger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.6 Initial calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.6.1 Logarithmic mean temperature difference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.6.2 Required surface Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.7 Layout of Heat exchanger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.7.1 Tube . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.7.2 Shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.7.3 Baffles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.7.4 Material Heat Exchanger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.8 Individual heat transfer coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.8.1 Heat transfer coefficient tube . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.8.2 Heat transfer coefficient shell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.9 Pressure loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.10 Optimisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.11 Mechanical Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.11.1 Vibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.11.2 Buckling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.11.3 Wall thickness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.12 Final design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.12.1 Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2
4 Distillation column 23
4.1 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.2 Pseudo-binary system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.3 Stream calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.4 Pressure calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.5 Temperature calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.6 Equilibrium line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.7 McCabe-Thiele Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.8 Flow inside column . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.9 Column design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.9.1 Column internals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.9.2 Design of column internals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.9.3 Plate hydraulics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.9.4 Pressure drop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.10 Mechanical design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.10.1 Wind induced vibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.10.2 Internal pressure load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.10.3 Wind induced bending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.10.4 Dead weight stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.10.5 Total stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.10.6 Buckling stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

5 Conclusion and recommendations 36

5.1 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.1.1 Compressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.1.2 Heat Exchanger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.1.3 Distillation Column . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.2 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.2.1 Compressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5.2.2 Heat Exchanger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5.2.3 Distillation Column . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Bibliography 39

Appendices 39

A Transforming data 40

B TEMA 41
Chapter 1

Introduction

Over the years the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has raised, with as result global warming
of the earth. According to the climate goals set by the Paris agreement, is only reducing CO2
emission not enough. So, a process which extracts CO2 from air or flue gases will become very
important, by which the CO2 can be reused to create chemicals or fuels.
One of the examples is by converting CO2 into ethanol. Current research on CO2 capture
focuses on absorption using amines (mainly monoethanolamine MEA). CO2 is captured form a
125 MW power plant. Using solar power, water will be electrolyzed into oxygen (which will be
used as an oxidizing agent in the power plant) and hydrogen. Next, the hydrogen will be added
to a concentrated CO2 stream after which it will be pressurized in a compressor from 10 to 20
bar. After pressurizing, it will be heated to 250 ◦ C and will be lead into a series of reactors.
In the reactors the mixture will be converted following the 2 reaction steps into ethanol and
methanol, shown in reactions 1.1 and 1.2 respectively.

2CO2 + 6H2 −→ C2 H5 OH + 3H2 O (1.1)

CO2 + 3H2 −→ CH3 OH + H2 O (1.2)

The effluent of the reactor can be used to heat up the reactor feed due to the exothermic
reactions of the formation of ethanol and methanol. The overall conversion inside the reactor
system is relatively low (around 21% of CO2 ), resulting in the need of a recycle to make the
process economically viable. As can be seen in the reaction overview a lot of water is produced
in order to get ethanol. In order to make the ethanol valuable, the water should be separated.
This purification is done by a train of distillation columns.
In this report a compressor, heat exchanger and distillation column where designed keeping
the costs as low as possible. In figure 1.1 the process flow diagram can be seen schematically,
where the gray colored equipment has to be designed.

1
Figure 1.1: Process flow diagram of the CO2 to ethanol process

2
Chapter 2

Compressor

A Compressor is a process equipment that increases the pressure of a flow. The purpose of this
chapter is to create a design for a compressor that contains a flow mixture of two components.
After designing, it is necessary to analyse how the process can be optimized in order to achieve
the highest possible efficiency. In addition, the reliability of the compressor must also be taken
into account in order to obtain the lowest possible costs on maintenance or operating cost.
However, this compressor must comply with various constraints that arise from other systems
of the cycle. These constraints are shown below:

• The diameter must be less than 1.5 meter

• The temperature increase must be lower than 150 [◦ C]

• The operating rounds per seconds (rps) must be lower than 200 rps

• Consideration of the mechanical strength of the compressor

• Consideration of the Sound velocity

In addition, there are also operating conditions known that are necessary to develop a design
for a compressor:

• Inlet Pressure 10 [Bar]

• Outlet Pressure 20 [Bar]

• Inlet Temperature 20 [◦ C]

2.1 Methodology
In order to achieve an efficient design, a clear method must be established, presented in figure
below
1. Problem Definitions
2. Limitations and Constraints
3. Calculations (Density of mixture, Avg. Mol. mass, Volume Flow)
4. Determine Poly Tropic Efficiency
5. Polyropic Head calculations
6. Shaft Power Calculations
7. Calculate increase of temperature, if temperature increase > 150 return to step 5
8. Calculate Compression rate

3
 9. What type of rotodynamic compressor
10. Type of impeller
11. Specific Speed and outer diameter calculation
12. System Check, are requirement met? Else return to step 10
13. Design of compressor

2.2 Degree of Freedom Analysis

In order to achieve an efficient design for the compressor, various calculations have to be carried
out. In order to solve these calculations, it must be ensured that the degrees of freedom are
equal to zero. This means that no friable is dependent on another variable. In the table below
this paragraph there area variables shown, which in combinations with different equations and
with the help of a specific diameter make the system solvable.

Parameter Variable Known(s)

Average Molar Mass M x i , Mi
Inlet Density ρin Pi , Tin , R, M
Inlet Volume Flow Qin min , ρin
Polytropic Head H Pin , Pout , R, Tin , M, m
Shaft Power P min , H
Outlet Temperature Tout Pin , Pout , Tin
Specific Diameter ∆ σ
Rounds per Seconds N H, Qin , σ
Diameter D H, Qin ,∆

Table 2.1: Degrees of freedom

2.3 Flow Properties

The design process of the compressor starts with setting up the flow properties. The table below
shows the flow in kilograms per hour. The flow has to be translated into a volume flow because
this is a parameter used to calculate polytropic efficiency and the polytropic head. First, the
density must be calculated in order to calculate the volume of the gas to be compressed

Material Stream [kg/h] Mole Mass [kg/Kmol] Material Stream [kmol/h]

CO2 24000 44.01 545.328
H2 3298 2.015 1636

Table 2.2: Properties

As it stated, the value of the pressure Pin , inlet temperature Tin and the gas constant R
are given. In the equation below it shows that the solve this calculation only the average mole
M needs to be determined. To calculate the average mole mass is calculated as follows:
N
X
M= xi Mi = 46.026kg/kmol (2.1)
i=1

Pin M
ρin = = 1.89kg/m3 (2.2)
RTin

4
With the help of the mass flow and the inlet density, the volume flow that is found at the inlet
can be determined. The equation follows:
min
Qin = = 4.012m3 /s (2.3)
ρin

2.4 Polytropic Head

The power that is needed to compress the pressure from 10 bar to 20 bar, a new parameter
is introduced: head. head is a concept that relates the energy in an incompressible fluid to
the height of an equivalent static column of that fluid. From Bernoulli’s Principle, the total
energy at a given point in a fluid is the energy associated with the movement of the fluid, plus
energy from static pressure in the fluid, plus energy from the height of the fluid relative to an
arbitrary datum. the polytropic head is calculated as:
  m−1 !
m RTin Pout m
gH = − 1 = 124144m2 /s2 (2.4)
m−1 M Pin

with
m K −1 1
= ·
m−1 K ηpol
Cp
KM ixture = = 1.33
Cv
ηpol = 0.75
This results into a polytropic head of 12655m. With help of the polytropic head and the mass
flow φ [ kg/s] the power going into the compressor’s shaft can be calculated.

P = φ · g · H = 183733.12W = 183.7KW (2.5)

However, account must also be taken of mechanic, transmission, motor, hydraulic efficiency
(98% , 98% , 95% , 90% ). This results that the required power increased to 238.3KW

2.5 Designing the compressor

First, the outlet temperature need to be calculated before the compressor can be designed. The
outlet temperature value depends on the pressure increase.
  m−1
Pout m
Tout = Tin 368.5K (2.6)
Pin

In the first section, it has been given that there is a constraint in respect with temperature
increase. As the outgoing temperature was determined in the previous section. The temperature
difference is equal to:
∆T = Tin − Tout = 368.5 − 293 = 75.5K. (2.7)
So it can be concluded that that the constraint is fulfilled.If there was a situation that the
temperature increase ∆T > 150 [◦ C] it is possible to use series of compressors or higher poly
tropic compressor efficiency.
With the help of the calculated volume flow (section 2.3) and compression rates a selection
can be made what type of compressor can be used. There is two different types of compressors

5
 Pout / Pin > 10 QV ol <1m3 /s Type of compressor(s)
Yes Yes Displacement
Yes No Turbo machine+ Displacement
No Yes Displacement
No No Turbo machine

Table 2.3: rotodynamic of compressor

that can be used: displacement and turbo machines. Table 2.3 shows which type compressor
can be used in which regime of volume flow and their compression rate. The compression rate
in the compressor of this cycle is equal to 2 and the volume flow is equal to 4.012 m3 /s
From table 2.3, it shows that a turbo machine fits the best with this system. Figure 2.1
shows that a centrifugal layout is used. This is due to the compression ratio (2) and the volume
flow (1.48m3 /s).

Figure 2.1: Operating range of compressors

2.6 Type of Impeller

The impeller of a compressor is a rotor used to increase the pressure and flow of a fluid. A cen-
trifugal compressor can consist of axial or radial impellers. The benefit of using a radial impeller
is that they can have a higher head , while a axial impeller can achieve higher volume flows.

6
This section the type and configuration of these impellers will be determined. To determine
which type of impeller should be used, a calculation needs to be made for two non-dimensional
values φ and ψ. The equations for these two numbers are:
2gHmax
Ψ= (2.8)
(π N 2 D2 ) max
2

4Qmax
Φ= (2.9)
(π N D3 ) max
2

The dimensionless head and flow coefficients for radial and axial impellers are respectively:

Type Impeller ψ φ
Radiaal Impeller 1 0.1
Axiaal impeller 0.2 0.3

Table 2.4: Coefficients

The diameter and the rotational speed on their term are rely on the sound velocity, mechan-
ical strength and dimension constrains.
KRTin 0.5
(πN D) ≤ 0.7( ) ≤ 185.68ms−1 (2.10)
M

(πN D) ≤ 270ms−1 (2.11)

Dmax ≤ 1.5m (2.12)

Concluded is that of the two velocity limitations the sound velocity (equation 2.10) is more
limiting. The limitation due to Mechanical strength is irrelevant since it exceeds the velocity
limit caused by the sound velocity. Furthermore, the maximum impeller diameter is 1.5 m, this
results to a maximum speed of:
185.68
N= = 39.2s−1 (2.13)
πD
Substituting the values for D and N in the expressions for the head and flow coefficients, leads
to:
ψπ 2 N 2 D2
Hmax = (2.14)
2g

φπ 2 N D3
Qmax = (2.15)
4

Calculated is that an radial setup, in these operating conditions would result a theoretical
maximum head of 1739.2 m and a maximum volume flow of 32.64 m3 /s. An axial setup would
have a theoretical maximum head of 347.8 m and a maximum volume flow of 97.93 m3 /s.
From this can be concluded that a radial compression would need 8 serial stages to meet
the required head of 12655m while an axial setup need 37 stages to reach the required head.
In respect with the volume flow, both setups can deliver enough volume flow. This results that
radial set-up (in series) is used.

7
2.7 Optimization of the setup
The optimalisation of the radial compressors involves the use of the cordier diagram, figure 2.2.
This diagram plot the specific speed on the y-axis and on the x-axis the specific diameter ∆.
The values of ψ are visualized with the diagonal lines. The highest efficiency is obtained by
having a high σ which determine the the specific diameter.

√ Q1/2
σ=2 π N (2.16)
(2gH)3/4
√
2 π (2gH)1/4
∆= D (2.17)
2 Q1/2
1
σ= (2.18)
∆
The volume flow is defined as Q, The polytropic head is defined as H. N stands for rps and D for
diameter of the compressor. With help of the the variables Q and H and the Cordier diagram
a design can be made for the right amount of stages their dimensions. However, there is limit
on σ and ∆:
0.15 < σ < 0.3 (2.19)

3.33 < ∆ < 6.66 (2.20)

Figure 2.2: Operating range of compressors

8
 In the end of section 2.6 it has been stated that there is need of 8 stages to fulfill the required
head. However, an optimization is by using more stages in order to decrease the total rotational
speed of the impellers. It is assumed that every stage delivers the equal amount of work. This
means that each stage of the setup is around 25 RPS and that each stage increase the head of
1739.2 meter.
For the optimization, we let N, D be variable and determine volume flow Q, the head H,
specific speed σ.and specific diameter ∆.

ψπ 2 N 2 D2
Hideal = (2.21)
2g

φπ 2 N D3
Qideal = (2.22)
4
3 1
σ = ψ − 4 φ− 2 (2.23)
In the table 2.5 the optimization results are shown when ψ is constant at 1 and that is is
desired to have an impeller which is as (diameter wise) as possible. in general, cost will increase
exponential with the impeller diameter. Therefore, is is decided to use a maximum rotation
speed of 50 RPS.In addition, the maximum tip speed may not exceed 188 m/s due to safety
reasons. Therefore a safety factor of (5%) is used.

Setup Stages D(m) N(rps) H(m) Q(m3 /s) φ ψ σ ∆ V (m/s)

1 7 0.5 50 3140.8 3.081 0.2 1 0.447 2.236 78.5
2 2 0.6 50 4522.752 2.268 0.085 1 0.292 3.426 94.2
3 2 0.7 50 6155.968 3.399 0.08 1 0.284 3.527 109.9
4 1 0.8 50 8040.449 4.764 0.076 1 0.275 3.639 125.6
5 2 0.9 50 10176.193 6.352 0.071 1 0.266 3.761 141.3
6 2 1 50 12563.201 8.118 0.066 1 0.257 3.896 157
7 1 1.1 50 15201.473 10.013 0.061 1 0.247 4.048 172.7
8 1 1.2 50 18091.009 11.971 0.056 1 0.237 4.218 188.4
9 1 1.3 50 21231.809 13.912 0.051 1 0.227 4.412 204.1
10 1 1.4 50 24623.874 15.742 0.047 1 0.216 4.635 219.8
11 1 1.1 50 15201.473 6.844 0.042 1 0.204 4.896 172.7
12 1 1.2 50 18091.009 7.856 0.037 1 0.192 5.206 188.4
13 1 1.3 50 21231.809 8.681 0.032 1 0.179 5.585 204.1
14 1 1.4 50 24623.874 9.209 0.027 1 0.165 6.06 219.8
15 1 1.5 50 28267.202 9.359 0.023 1 0.15 6.667 235.5

Table 2.5: Optimization solutions

The best result that can be delivered with these constant values is setup 2 (bolded). The
sigma of 0.275 is between the limit (equation 2.19) and it can be seen that the tip speed of the
impeller blade is below the limiting value of 188 m/s. This setup can be validated of taking the
rotor speed, with the use of a 2 stage radial setup it is possible to rotate N = 60 rps (see table
2.6) and still deliver the required head and power. This means the system can run at 60 rps
and when the cycle ask for more volume flow, this results in more flexibility. Furthermore, the
head and volume flow are within the requirement including the safety factors. As stated before,
the tip speed is also within the limitation of the system. Increasing the number of stages does
give a slight boost but in return the costs will increase significantly. On top of that, the system

9
will become heavier thus more force on the bearings. This result in a smaller lifespan of the
bearings thus more cost in the long term. There is an option to choose lower specific speed, this
translate in a decrease of rps significantly but this result in a higher tip speed due the increase
of the impeller diameter.

Stages D(m) N(rps) H(m) Q(m3 /s) V (m/s)

2 0.8 50 8040.449 5.073 125.6
2 0.8 60 11578.246 5.717 150.72
2 0.8 70 15759.279 6.67 175.84

Table 2.6: Results of N = (50 — 60 — 70 rps)

2.8 The Centrifugal Compressor

In this section, a short explanation will be given about the design and the manufacturing of the
compressor.
As it stated before, for this cycle a dynamic 2 staged centrifugal compressor radial impellers
are needed. For the compressor, rotating impellers are used to increase the flow velocity with
help of a diffuser to increase the pressure. As mentioned in section 2.6 and optimized in section
2.7 a multistage compressor is used. A multistage compressor ensures that the compressed gas
is fed into the next impeller.
Impellers is a rotating component which transfers the energy from the motor that drives
the compressor to the mixture being compressed by accelerating the fluid outwards from the
centre of rotation. The blades that are attached to the impellers can be chosen from three
different types: forward leaning, backward leaning and radial. In general, backward leaning
blades are the most used. This does mean that there are extra internal stresses. Although, it
is assumed that this is included in the system constraints (mechanical and limited impeller tip
speed). Because the mixture is not corrosive, the blades can be manufactured from a cheaper
high-strength alloy steel. However, an increase of the life span can be realised if an expensive
high-strength alloy steel is chosen. To ensure that rotor assembly stay in it configuration, radial
bearings and thrust bearing are installed to ensure that assembly is fixed. Possible leakage of
the mixture can be prevented by using seals.

10
Chapter 3

Heat Exchanger

The transfer of heat to and from process fluids is an essential part of most chemical processes. In
the process of the conversion of CO2 to ethanol a chemical reaction is required in order to make
the conversion possible. Because both the formation of methanol and ethanol are exothermic
reactions, which means that heat will be produced during conversion, is it valuable to reuse this
heat. So can the reactors effluent may be used to heat up the reactor feed, as some chemical
reactions improve when pre-heated. For the transfer of heat from the effluent to the reactor
feed a heat exchangers (abbreviated: HEX ) can be used. In this chapter the design of the heat
exchanger for the CO2 to ethanol process is designed.

3.1 Methodology
In order to come with a good design for the heat exchanger a good methodology is advised to
use. The prime objective in the design of an exchanger is to determine the surface area required
for the specified duty (rate of heat transfer) using the temperature differences available. In
order to reach this goal the following steps will be taken:
1. Define the duty: heat-transfer rate, fluid flow rates and temperatures.
2. Collect the fluid physical properties required: density, viscosity, heat capacity and thermal
conductivity.
3. Decide on the type of exchanger to be used.
4. Select a trial value for the overall coefficient, U .
5. Calculate the mean temperature difference, ∆Tm .
6. Calculate the area required from equation 3.4.
7. Decide the exchanger layout.
8. Calculate the individual coefficients.
9. Calculate the overall coefficient and compare with the trial value. If the calculated value
differs significantly from the estimated value, substitute the calculated for the estimated
value and return to step 6.
10. Calculate the exchanger pressure drop; if unsatisfactory return to steps 7 or 4 or 3, in
that order of preference.
11. Optimize the design: repeat steps 4 to 10, as necessary, to determine the cheapest ex-
changer that will satisfy the duty. Usually this will be the one with the smallest area that
satisfies the pressure drop constraint.
A graphical representation of this process can be seen in figure 3.1.

11
 Figure 3.1: Flow chart on how to come to a good design for a Heat Exchanger

3.2 Duty and physical properties

In tables 3.1 and 3.2 the physical properties and flow conditions are shown, respectively. These
values are given by the assignment. There are however some blank spaces that should be filled
in. For example are the pressures of the outflow of the cold and hot flow (P6 and P8 , respectively)
unknown and should be determined later. The pressure should however stay within boundaries,
discussed in the next section about constraints.
Sign Value hot stream Value cold stream Unit
Cp 2.548 2.608 [kJ/kgK]
λ 0.149 0.145 [W/mK]
µ 2.182·10−5 1.831·10−5 [P a · s]

Table 3.1: Given physical data by the assignment

Also the temperature out of hot flow (T8 is unknown. T8 can be determined by setting up a
heat balance of the hot and the cold flow. The heat transfer rate of the hot to the cold side is
determined by: Q̇hot = Q̇cold + Q̇loss , where Q̇loss is a potential loss to the environment. For an
ideal case there is no loss to the environment making the heat transfer balance: Q̇hot = Q̇cold .
The heat transfer is determined by: Q̇ = ṁCp (Th − Tc ). So the heat balance will be:

ṁ · Cp,cold (T6 − T5 ) = ṁ · Cp,hot (T7 − T8 ) (3.1)

35.02 × 2.548 × (523.15 − 313.15) = 35.02 × 2.608 × (623.15 − T8 ) (3.2)

Where Q̇ is found to be 19.2 MW. Using equation 3.2 the ideal temperature of T8 is found to
be 408.20 K. The mass flow shown in table 3.2 can be transformed to volume flow, molar flow
and density. This is discussed in appendix A.

12
 COLD FLOW HOT FLOW
Stream number 5 6 7 8
Pressure [kPa] 2000 ≥1800 1800 ≥1600
Temperature [K] 313.15 523.15 623.15 ≥408.20
CO2 [kg/s] 30.29 30.29 23.87 23.87
H2 [kg/s] 4.20 4.20 3.31 3.31
CH3 OH [kg/s] 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03
C3 H5 OH [kg/s] 0.42 0.42 3.77 3.77
H2 O [kg/s] 0.11 0.11 4.04 4.04
Total mass flow [kg/s] 35.02 35.02 35.02 35.02

Table 3.2: Duty of the heat exchanger

3.3 Constraints
The design of the heat exchanger has a couple of constraints on the dimensions and performance.
For the dimensions should the total area of heat transfer not exceed 1500 m2 , should the length of
the heat exchanger (LHEX ) be equal or larger than 4 times the baffle spacing (lb ) (LHEX ≥ 4lb ),
should the ratio of the baffle spacing and the shell diameter (Ds ) stay in between 0.2 and 1
(0.2 ≤ Dlbs < 1) and should the ratio of the length of the heat exchanger and shell diameter stay
in between 2 and 10 (2 ≤ lHEX
Ds < 10).
Loss of pressure in the heat exchanger is very costly and should be minimised as much as
possible. As the system gauge pressure is above 10 bar, it is advised to have no loss more than
0.1 times the gauge pressure. [1] The inlet pressure of the cold flow in 20 bar (or 2000 kPa), as
shown in table 3.2, which means that the pressure loss ∆P should not exceed 200 kPa (or 2 bar).
Furthermore, should the flow in the heat exchanger be turbulent which reduces the required
area of heat transfer at the cost of larger pressure loss. If done correctly can the reduction of
area of heat transfer and loss of pressure be very cost effective. If the flow is either turbulent or
laminair determined by the Reynolds Number (Re). In this case should Ret and Res > Relam ,
where for turbulent flow the Reynolds number should stay way above 2000 [1]. Last but not
least should vibrations and buckling avoided at all cause.

3.4 Degree of freedom analyses

The design of heat exchanger does not follow the normal path that is used designing a general
piece of equipment. Of course there are some fundamental equations which determine things like
heat transfer rate, density and other flow properties. The design will however be designed using
emperical data and an iterative process will be used in order to find the optimum configuration.
Parameters such as length, baffle spacing, type of HEX, material, overall heat transfer coefficient,
various factors are all determined and put to test via trial and error. If a value has been found
not suited then this value is then re-assessed and changed. Because of this, technically there
are more degrees of freedom and variables then is maximum required.

3.5 Type of heat exchanger

There are various types of heat exchangers available, having both advantages and disadvantages.
Depending on the duty of the heat exchanger a best type can be chosen. The possible heat
exchangers are:

13
 1. Double-pipe exchanger
2. Shell and tube exchangers
3. Plate and frame exchangers
4. Plate-fin exchangers
5. Spiral heat exchangers
The most commonly used type of heat-transfer equipment is the shell and tube heat exchanger,
as it has proven to reduce required space for the heat transfer to happen. Furthermore has the
shell and tube heat exchanger been studied a lot and has a lot of data availible. [1] Advantages
of a shell and tube heat exchanger are:
1. The configuration gives a large surface area in a small volume.
2. Good mechanical layout: a good shape for pressure operation.
3. Uses well-established fabrication techniques.
4. Can be constructed from a wide range of materials.
5. Easily cleaned.
6. Well-established design procedures
In the book of Chemical Engineering Design [1] a couple of TEMA types have been discussed.
Standard TEMA type shell and tube heat exchangers are described by a three-letter code. The
first letter denotes the tube-side head type, also known as the front end. The second letter
identifies the shell type and the third letter defines the rearend. The TEMA nomenclature is
shown in appendix B figure B.1. The simplest and cheapest type of shell and tube exchanger is
the fixed tube-sheet design, type BEM. This type of heat exchanger is capable to be cleaned.
Furthermore is there no provision for differential expansion of the shell and tubes, making it
limited to a temperature difference of 80 ◦ C and 8 bar pressure. A BEU type TEMA exchanger
makes use of U-tube and is also relative cheap, but has the same problems as the BEM type.
Other exchangers with an internal floating head (TEMA types AET and AES) are suitable for
higher temperature differences and are easier to clean. Disadvantages are however that there is
more clearance required between the tubes and the shell, making it prone to bypassing of the
tubes. The external floating head design (TEMA type AEP) is suitable for higher temperatures
and pressures, compared to the BEM and BEU type. The limited pressure is 20 bar, making it
suitable for this project. For that reason the AEP type shell and tube heat exchanger has been
chosen, shown in figure 3.2

Figure 3.2: External floating head, type AEP [2]

14
3.6 Initial calculations
After that the type of heat exchanger has been decided (which in the end may can change, as it
could be found that this type will not fulfill its duty), will the next step be to select a trial value
for the overall coefficient U0 (step 3, section 3.1), the mean temperature difference ∆Tm (step
4) and the area A required (step 5). The general equation for heat transfer across a surface is:

Q = U · A · ∆Tm (3.3)

U and Tm are determined by equations 3.4 and 3.5, respectively.

do ln ddoi


1 1 1 do 1 do 1
= + + + + (3.4)
U0 ho R 2kw di R di hi

∆Tm = ∆Tlm · FT (3.5)

Where ∆Tlm is the logarithmic mean temperature difference and FT is the temperature correc-
tion factor. From the book of G. Towler and R. Sinnot, Chemical Engineering Design - 2nd
edition, in figure 19.1 [1] the first guess for the overall heat transfer coefficient is found to be
U0 ≈ 100 W/mK.

3.6.1 Logarithmic mean temperature difference

For the mean temperature difference first the logarithmic mean temperature difference ∆Tlm
has to be determined, as can be seen in equation 3.5. The ∆Tlm is determined by:

∆T1 − ∆T2 (T − t2 ) − (T2 − t1 )

∆Tlm = h i = 1 h i (3.6)
(T1 −t2 )
ln ∆T 1
∆T2 ln (T2 −t1 )

where T1 and T2 are the temperatures of the hot in- and outflow, respectively.
t1 and t2 are the temperatures of the cold in- and outflow, respectively.
For the given duty shown in table 3.2 ∆Tlm has been found to be 97.5 K.

Correction factor
To get to the mean temperature difference ∆Tm a correction factor FT is multiplied with the
logarithmic mean temperature difference ∆Tlm , equation 3.5. This correction factor is found
in the book of G. Towler and R. Sinnot [1] in figures 19.19, 19.20, 19.21 and 19.22, depending
on the type of shell and tube heat exchanger. In these figures the correction factor FT can be
found using two dimensionless temperature ratios R and S, shown in equation 3.7.

(T1 − T2 ) (t2 − t1 )
R= , S= (3.7)
(t2 − t1 ) (T1 − t1 )

For the given duty shown in table 3.2 R and S has been found to be 1.0236 and 0.6774,
respectively. As a first guess only one shell and one tube is considered, which means that FT is
1.

15
3.6.2 Required surface Area
Now that Q (section 3.2), U0 and ∆Tm have been determined, will it be possible to determine
the area of heat transfer A using equation 3.3. As discussed in section 3.3 is that the surface
area may not exceed 1500 m2 . At this moment it was recognised that the initial heat transfer
coefficient of 100 W/mK exceeds the constraint heat transfer area already. In order to stay
within the boundary it is changed to an initial overall heat transfer coefficient of 170 W/mK,
such that the area is approximate 1500 m2 . The overall heat transfer coefficient is kept as low
as possible, as higher overall heat transfer coefficient comes at the cost of higher pressure drop.
In the end a balance of the pressure drop and required heat transfer area should be found in
order to have a cost effective design.

3.7 Layout of Heat exchanger

The next step is to decide how the exchanger layout will be. The shell and tube heat exchanger
consist of a number of tubes, a shell and baffles in order to strengthen the structure. Using
TEMA standards it is preferred to have lengths of tubes for heat exchangers of 6ft (1.83m), 8ft
(2.44m), 12ft (3.66m), 16 ft (4.88m), 20ft (6.10m) or 24ft (7.32m).

3.7.1 Tube
In the assignment initial tube dimensions according to TEMA standards are given as. The
inner diameter of the tube (di ) and the outer diameter (do ) is set to be 15 mm and 19.2 mm,
respectively. The total contact area inside the tube is then: Atube = πdi L. The contact area is
then used to determine the number of tubes required (Nt ) using equation 3.8. Here Areq is the
required surface area calculated in section 3.6.2.
Areq
Nt = (3.8)
Atube
The distance between the tubes is called the pitch. The tubes can be arranged in various
patterns such as square, rotated square and triangular. The triangular and rotated square
patterns give higher heat-transfer rates, but at the expense of a higher pressure drop than the
square pattern. A square, or rotated square arrangement, is used for heavily fouling fluids,
where it is necessary to mechanically clean the outside of the tubes. In the end the triangular
pattern has been chosen. The pitch is taken to be 1.25 × do or 24 mm.
The diameter of the whole bundle of tubes is determined by equation 3.9. This equation is
an empirical equation dependent on constants shown in figure 3.3. The constants are dependent
on the number of passes. As a first guess a 1:1 shell and tube heat exchanger is used, meaning
that there is only 1 pass. Looking at figure 3.3 constants K1 and n1 have been found to be
0.319 and 2.142, respectively.
 1/n1
Nt
Db = do (3.9)
k1

3.7.2 Shell
The required shell diameter is determined by: Ds = Db + clearance. The clearance is found by
figure 19.12 [1] depending on the type of TEMA standard is used. As discussed in section 3.5 is
that the external floaring head design TEMA type AEP will be used, for which a clearance of
50 to 80 mm is advised to be used depending on the bundle diameter. For a given surface area,

16
 Figure 3.3: Caption [1]

the use of longer tubes will reduce the shell diameter. This will generally result in a lower-cost
exchanger, particularly for high shell pressures, but will lead to an increase in pressure drop and
pump work. The optimum tube length to shell diameter ratio ( LD tube
s
) will usually fall within
the range of 5 to 10. [1]

3.7.3 Baffles
Baffles are used to strengthen and lead the flow in the heat exchanger. The baffles will strengthen
the heat exchanger by preventing buckling and optimising the eigenfreqeuncy of the tubes. Baffle
spacing will also influence the overall heat transfer coefficient and the pressure drop in the heat
exchanger: close baffle spacing higher U, but at the expense of higher pressure drop. The
optimum spacing will usually be between 0.3 to 0.5 times the shell diameter. [1] The baffle
spacing is, however, also constraint to be minimum one fourth of the length. This should be
kept in mind for the design of the baffle spacing in the end.

3.7.4 Material Heat Exchanger

The choice of material is important for the performance and the cost of the design. As can be
seen later is that a couple of material properties are important for the design performance and
economics. Material has been chosen by using a program called CES Edupack [3].
For the tubes, baffles and the shell stainless steel is used, as it is low cost (≈ 5 e/kg) and
strong material with okay thermal properties. Furthermore has it excellent durability against
water and ethanol and is weldable. The maximum service point is at 750 ◦ C, which is wel
below operating temperature. Properties of the stainless steel have been found by using CES
Edupack [3]. Important properties can be found in table 3.3.

Property Value
Youngs Modulus (E) 189-210 GP a
Yield Strength (σy ) 170-1000 M P a
Density (ρ) 7.6 - 8.1 ·103 kg/m3
Thermal Conductivity (kw ) 12 - 24 W/mK
Thermal Expension Coefficient (α) 13 - 20 µstrain/K

Table 3.3: Important mechanical and thermal properties of stainless steel [3]

17
3.8 Individual heat transfer coefficients
In order to determine if the guessed overall heat transfer coefficient is correct, should the
individual heat transfer coefficient be determined. In equation 3.10 the relation of the overall
coefficient with the individual heat transfer coefficients hi and ho , the fouling coefficient R and
the thermal conductivity of the heat exchanger material kw is shown again.
do ln ddoi


1 1 1 do 1 do 1
= + + + + (3.10)
U0 ho R 2kw di R di hi
The fouling coefficient is determined via empirical data shown in table 19.2 of Chemical Engi-
neering Design [1]. As the flow mainly consist of CO2 and H2 is it considered as a flue gas. In
this table it is found that for flue gasses to be between 2000 and 5000 for , taking the lowest
value will result in R = 2000 W/m2 K.
The individual heat transfer coefficients are determined using:
N uλ N uλ
hi = , ho = (3.11)
di do
Where hi is the heat transfer coefficient in the tube and ho is the heat transfer coefficient on
the outside of the tube.

3.8.1 Heat transfer coefficient tube

In order to determine the individual heat transfer coefficient of the tube (hi ) the Nusselt number
(N u) has to be determined. This can be done via Kern’s method, discussed in the book Chemical
Engineering Design [1]. This method was based on experimental work on commercial exchangers
with standard tolerances and will give a reasonably satisfactory prediction of the heat-transfer
coefficient for standard designs. The Nusselt is determined by equation 3.12. The Nusselt
is an emperical equation, which is dependent on the Reynolds number (Re) and the Prandtl
number (P r). The coefficients C, a, b and c are found empirically. The Reynolds and Prandtl
number are determined by equations 3.13 and 3.14. The viscosity factor in equation 3.12 may
be neglected, as this factor is close to 1.
 c
a b µ
N u = CRe P r (3.12)
µw
ρVtube di
Ret = (3.13)
µ
µCp
P rt = (3.14)
λ
1/3
For the tube the following equation is used: N u = jh Ret P rt , where jh is the friction factor.
The value of jh can be found in figure 19.29 of Chemical Engineering Design [1] and is determined
by the Reynolds number and the ratio of length of the tube and the diameter of the tube.
Furthermore is the friction factor dependent on the percentage of baffle cut. Generally, a baffle
cut of 20% to 25% will be the optimum, giving good heat-transfer rates, without excessive
pressure drop [1].
In order to determine the Reynolds number is the linear velocity in the tubes required.
First the mean density, temperature and volume flow of the in- and outflow is determined. The
linear velocity is determined by: vt = Gs /ρ, where Gs is the mass velocity in kg/m2 s and is
determined by the mass flow ṁ divided by the total cross sectional area of the tube. The cross
section of the tube is: Atube = 14 πd2i ≈ 0.18 · 10−3 m2 . Using the number of tubes Nt from
equation 3.8 the total flow area is determined.

18
3.8.2 Heat transfer coefficient shell
For the shell side is the heat transfer coefficient determined by a similar way. Also Kern’s
method is used, however the equation for the Nusselt number is given by the assignment:
 0.14
0.55 1/3 µ
N u = 0.36Res P rs (3.15)
µw
Still the Reynolds and Prandtl number needs to be determined, which is done by equation 3.16
and 3.17, respectively. In equation 3.16 is De the equivalent shell side diameter in m determined
by equation 3.18.
ρVshell de
Res = (3.16)
µ
µCp
P rs = (3.17)
λ
p2t −πd2o

4 4
de = (3.18)
πdo
The linear velocity is again determined similar: vs = Gs /ρ = ṁs /As ρ. To determine the cross
sectional area for the shell (As ) the following equation will be used:
(pt − do )Ds lb
As = (3.19)
pt

3.9 Pressure loss

Also for the pressure loss will the Kern’s method be used. Kern’s method gives a prediction of
pressure drop which purely indicative and is less satisfactory compared to the calculations for
the heat transfer coefficient, as pressure drop is more affected by leakage and bypassing than
heat transfer. In the heat exchanger there occur two pressure drops, in the tubes and in the
shell. For the tubes the pressure drop is determined by:
    2
Lt ρut
∆Pt = Np 8jf + 2.5 (3.20)
di 2
Where Np is the number of passes, jf is the friction factor and Lt is the tube length. The
friction factor can be determined from figure 19.24 [1].
For the shell side the following equation is used:
   2
Ds L ρus
∆Ps = 8jf (3.21)
de lb 2
Where the friction factor is determined via figure 19.30 [1].

3.10 Optimisation
Optimisation was done by following the methodology discussed in section 3.1. In the end it was
found to adjust the overall heat transfer coefficient again to 450 W/mK as this will result in
a balance of the pressure drop and the heat transfer coefficient. The standard lengths of the
heat exchanger have been tried and the results can be found in table 3.4. In the end the 2.44
m length heat exchanger has been chosen as this almost fulfilled all the constraints and was
economically more feasible. Further optimisation will be done in the next sections.

19
 Tube
2.44 3.66 4.88 6.10 [m]
length
U0 450 450 450 450 [W/mk]
A 437.15 437.15 437.15 437.15 [m2 ]
Nt 3802 2535 1901 1521 [#]
Ds 1.69 1.42 1.26 1.15 [m]
lb 0.61 0.91 1.22 1.15 [m]
Ucalc 468.19 458.09 447.4 464.91 [W/mk]
vt 6.77 10.15 13.54 16.92 [m/s]
vs 27.96 22.19 18.81 22.01 [m/s]
∆Pt 7.33 24.23 56.87 130.18 [kP a]
∆Ps 237.21 125.48 102.58 170.04 [kP a]

Table 3.4: Optimisation looking at various standard TEMA lengths

3.11 Mechanical Design

The heat exchanger should be strong enough to withstand all the forces occurring in and on
the heat exchanger. These forces are caused by the fluid, pressure in the heat exchanger and
thermal expansion of the structure. Also fatigue may cause problems so vibrations should be
avoided.

3.11.1 Vibrations
In order to avoid vibrations should the eigenfrequency of the tube (ftube ) be larger than the
frequency induced by the fluid flowing in the shell (ff luid ). These frequencies are determined
using:
  s
1 3π 2 EIx vwater
ftube = > ff luid = Str (3.22)
2π 2L m/L Db
Where Str is the Strouhal number and is usually between 0.2 and 0.3. Db is determined by
equation 3.9. In the end an eigenfrequency of the tube is found to be 311.9 Hz, which is larger
than the frequency of the fluid: 309.43 Hz.

3.11.2 Buckling
The thermal expansion will cause that the tubes will buckle. In order to avoid this should the
force on the tube be larger than the force that causes buckling (FT ):
EIπ 2
Fbuckling = > FT = σA = αE∆T A (3.23)
lb2
Where ∆T is the maximum difference, which is found at the inlet of the hot flow and outlet
of the cold flow and is found to be 100 K. A and I are determined by: Atube = π4 (d2o − d2i ),
π
and Ix = 64 (d4o − d4i ). Optimisation is mainly done by adjusting the baffle spacing lb such that
Fbuckling > FT . Another thing that has been looked at is the material, as it is for buckling more
valuable to have high stiffness and low thermal expansion has the stainless steel been explored
more. Shown in figure 3.4 a chart of the Youngs modulus vs. Thermal expansion coefficient can
be found. It was then chosen to select the Stainless Steel AL29-4C annealed (UNS S44735), as
this is still weldable, which Stainless steel FV535 is not. [3] The thermal expansion coefficient is
set to 10 µstrain/K and the Youngs modulus to 208 GP a. This resulted in a Fbuckling of 24.4
kN and a smaller FT of 23.7 kN, which means that buckling is avoided.

20
Figure 3.4: Various types of stainless steel, Youngs modulus vs. Thermal expansion coefficient
[3]

3.11.3 Wall thickness

In order to withstand the pressure should the wall thickness be thick enough. In order to
determine the minimum thickness of the tube will equation 3.24 be used, where the maximum
allowed stress (σ) can be found in table 3.3. The pressure in the tube is equal to 20 bar To be
sure that the tube will withstand the stress is the minimum value used, which is 170 MPa. In
the end a minimum thickness of 8.82·10−2 mm is found, which is way below the initial thickness
of the tube.
PD
σ= (3.24)
2t
For the shell the following equation has been used to determine the minimum thickness:
P Ds
tmin = (3.25)
2σ − P
The pressure inside the shell is 18 bar and results in a minimum shell thickness of 8.8 mm.
When a safety marge of 10% on the maximum allowed stress is used a thickness of 9.8 mm
is found. As it is easier to have 10 mm thick plate, as it is a standard dimension it has been
decided to pick this.

3.12 Final design

In the end the the have the results from section 3.10 in combination with the results from
section 3.11 have been used to come up with a final design. In the end a shell and tube with
with one tube and one shell has been designed. The TEMA standard configuration has been
chosen to be an AEP type, as discussed in section 3.5. Important dimensions and performance
parameters can be found in table 3.5. Although the pressure drop in the shell side is larger
than constraint, was this still chosen as it was more cost effective and the best result achievable
during this project.

21
 General Tube Side Shell Side
Q 19.2 [M W ] L 2.44 m Ds 1.66 m
Tm 97.50 [K] Nt 3612 # lb 0.60 m
U0 486.52 [W/mk] di 15 mm vs 29.22 m/s
A 404.33 [m2 ] do 19.2 mm ∆Ps 259.16 kP a
Type One Shell and vt 7.13 m/s ts 10 mm
One tube (1:1) ∆Pt 8.12 kP a

Table 3.5: Final design: important parameters

3.12.1 Cost
Also cost has been taken into account when optimising the heat exchanger in the end the
following costs have been determined:

Operation cost
Assumed is that the annual cost a heat exchanger is 70 e/m2 yr. In the end a total heat
transfer area of 404.33 m2 has been found, resulting in a cost of 29072.44 eannually. The costs
of pressure drop is 0.05 e/kW h. As it is hard to transform kP a to kW h is it assumed that it
is 1:1. In the end a total pressure drop of 267.28 kPa was found costing 133364.08 e.

Material cost
Stainless steel is used for the heat exchanger, as discussed in section 3.7.4. The cost of this
material is approximate 2.38 e/kg [3]. The total volume of stainless steel used is 0.056 m3 or
445.8 kg, costing 1179.27 e.

Insulation
In this project it was assumed for ideal situation in section 3.2 is that there is no heat loss
to the environment. Insulation is very economical and can be achieved by simple insulation
method, which cost around 20 e/m2 . [4] In the end has the shell a total area of 12.77 m2 , which
cost estimated 255.37 eto insulate with simple insulation material. This insulation will not be
perfect, however will reduce the heat loss to the environment enormously.

Total cost
The total cost can be found in table 3.6. This cost estimate excludes installation and production
cost and is only indicative and used for cost effective design optimisation.

Cost Insulation 255.37 e

Cost Material 1179.27 e
Cost Annual 29072.44 e
Cost Pressure drop 13364.08 e +
Total Cost 43615.79 e

Table 3.6: The total cost of the Heat Exchanger

22
Chapter 4

Distillation column

In this chapter the design of the Distillation column will be treated. In the entire process a lot
of water is produced along with the desired ethanol. These two substances have to be separated
from each other using a series of distillation columns. In the first distillation column CO2 is
extracted from the water and ethanol, in the second column also the water is extracted to
purify ethanol. This design focuses on the last distillation column, namely separating ethanol
and water.

4.1 Methodology
The design methodology for the distillation column can be seen in figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1: Design methodology

23
4.2 Pseudo-binary system
The composition of stream 17 looks as follows:

Stream 17 (kg/hr) Tboiling (K) Molar mass (kg/kmol)

CO2 23 - 44.01
H2 0 - 2.02
CH3 OH 93 337.85 32.04
C2 H5 OH 12017 351.52 46.07
H2 O 14165 373.15 18.02

It can be seen that the stream mostly exists of water and ethanol. So, the system will be reduced
to a pseudo-binary system consisting of water and ethanol. The CO2 , CH3 OH and C2 H5 OH
can be combined to one component with the physical properties of ethanol. This is done not
only because of the small amounts of these substances, but also because these substances are
very volatile. The boiling temperature of methanol is less than the temperature of ethanol and
therefore taking the properties of ethanol is a valid assumption. So, now the system consists of
2 components: ethanol and water.

4.3 Stream calculations

Now the composition of stream 17 is simplified to a pseudo-binary system of ethanol and water,
the compositions of stream 18 and 19 needs to be calculated. From the requirements it is known
that the amount of ethanol in stream 18 has to be less than 0.025 wt% and the amount of water
in stream 19 has to be less than 6 wt%. From this it can be concluded that the desired amount
of ethanol at the top is xD = 0.00025 and at the bottom is xB = 0.94. These values can be
used in order to determine the streams using the following formulas:
x D − zf
B= F
xD − xB
(4.1)
z f − xB
D= F
xD − xB

Here B is the stream 18 in kg/s, D is stream 19 kg/s, F is the total mass flow of stream 17 (7.31
kg/s) and zf is the amount of ethanol in the feed stream which can be calculated using:

Ethanol in stream 17
zf = (4.2)
Total stream 17
The found value for zf is 0.4570 kg/s. The calculated streams can be found in the table below.
Depending on the units of xD , xB and zf the result is in kg/s or mol/s.

kg/s mol/s
F (stream 17) 7.31 291.82
B (stream 18) 3.55 77.02
D (stream 19) 3.75 214.79

24
4.4 Pressure calculation
Now the pressure in the bottom of the column need to be calculated for a minimum temperature
of 100 C using: X X
Ptot = Pi = xi Pi0 (4.3)
i i

This is called Raoult’s law, which gives the relation between the partial pressure of a component
and its concentration in the liquid phase. Here, xi is the mol fraction in the liquid phase of
component i, Pi0 is the saturation pressure of component i in bars. The saturation pressure can
be calculated using the Antoine equation which is defined as:
B
log Pi0 = A − (4.4)
T +C
T is the temperature in K and A, B and C are the Antoine parameters which are looked up
using the book: Chemical Engineering Design, Appendix C. These Antoine parameters are
dependent on the temperature. 100 C (373.15 K) is the highest temperature in the column,
therefore temperature ranges lower than this value are obtained. The found Antoine parameters
are stated in the table below. The temperature range here indicates in which range these Antoine

Ethanol Water
Temperature Range (K) 292.77 - 366.63 344-373
A 5.24677 5.08354
B 1598.673 1663.125
C -46.424 -45.622

parameters are valid. Now in order to find the total pressure, first Equation 4.4 needs to be
rewritten such that it can be used in Equation 4.3. In the end a final total pressure of 1.044
bar was found.

4.5 Temperature calculation

The next step is calculating the temperature in the top of the column assuming a constant
pressure of the column (Pf eed = Ptop = Pbottom ).
The following equation for the pressure is known:
Be Bw
Ptot = x1 ∗ 10Ae − T +Ce + x2 ∗ 10Aw − T +Cw (4.5)

Here, Ptot is 1.044 bar as given in the previous section, x1 is the mol fraction of ethanol in
stream 19 which is 0.8597 mol, x2 is the mol fraction of water in stream 19 which is 0.1403 mol
and the Antoine parameters where already specified in the previous section. This equation can
be solved for T, which results in a temperature at the top of 354.33 K. The same can be done
for the feed, but now with a mol fraction of 0.2483 of ethanol and 0.7484 of water. So, the
temperature at the feed is 366.68 K.
An overview of the temperatures can be seen in the table below:

Bottom Feed Top

Temperature (K) 374 366.68 354.33

25
4.6 Equilibrium line
In this section the equilibrium line will be designed. The equilibrium line is needed in order
to use the McCabe-Thiele method in the next section to calculate different parameters. The
equation for the equilibrium line is as follows:
αx
y= (4.6)
1 + (α − 1)x

This equation expresses the concentration of a component in the vapor phase as a function
of its concentration in the liquid phase (x) and relative volatility (α). α is defined as the
relative volatility of 2 components in an ideal mixture, which shows that the relative volatility
is independent of pressure and composition in the ideal case. But because most mixtures are
not ideal a correction factor, the liquid phase activity coefficient (γ), needs to be added, such
that α is defined as:
γ1 P10
α12 = (4.7)
γ2 P20
Here subscript 1 stand for ethanol and 2 for water. Now, is the relative volatility dependent of
composition. The value for γ1 and γ2 can be found using:
A12
ln(γ1 ) =
(1 + xx12 A 12 2
A21 )
(4.8)
A21
ln(γ2 ) =
(1 + xx21 A 21 2
A12 )

By taking the exponent of these equations and filling in the Van Laar constants A12 = 1.6798
and A21 = 0.9227, the values for γ1 and γ2 can be found. These values are used to calculated
α12 and so the values of y can be calculated which gives the figure shown in Figure 4.2. The

Figure 4.2: Equilibrium line vs Dechema data

equilibrium line has to be compared to the experimental data from the Dechema Data sheet

26
which can be found in the library of the University of Twente. From this graph it can be seen
that there is a difference between the theoretical and experimental data. Due to this difference
the theoretical value can not be used for the McCabe-Thiele method. But it could also be
that the wrong experimental data was selected and therefore it is chosen to continue with the
theoretical equilibrium line.

4.7 McCabe-Thiele Method

Now the equilibrium line is made, the McCabe-Thiele method can be used to calculate the
following parameters [5]:
1 Nmin , minimum number of stages

2 Rmin , minimum reflux ratio

3 Neq , number of equilibrium stages for R = 1.3Rmin

In order to use this method a couple assumptions needs to be made:
• The system is in equilibrium

• There is a equal molar overflow, due to this assumption V (mol/s) and L (mol/s) are
independent of the axial position. So, constant velocity over the column.
heavy light
• ∆Hvap = ∆Hvap

• Heat of mixing is negligible

• The column is well insulated

Minimum Reflux Ratio The reflux ratio is a measure of what goes back into the distillation
column. A high reflux ratio means more feedback into the column. In order to calculate the
reflux ratio the equilibrium line of Figure 4.2 is used. First, a tangent line with the equilibrium
line is drawn through the point xD = 0.94 on the linear line and see where this line intersects
the y-axis. This is at y = 0.315, which has to be equal to the following formula:
xD
y= (4.9)
R+1
Now, solving this equation for R gives a minimum reflux ratio of 1.984.

Number of minimum equilibrium stages The number of minimum equilibrium stages is

determined using an alternative method called the Frenske equation.
xD
ln[( 1−x / xB ]
D 1−xB
Nmin = (4.10)
ln αav
This equation is valid when the relative volatility can be approximated by a constant value.
For now it is assumed that this is the case for this situation and α12 is the average value of the
relative volatility. The average value of the relative volatility can be calculated using:
√
αav = αB αD (4.11)

This results in an αav of 2.27. Filling in all the values results in a minimum number of 14
(13.474) equilibrium stages.

27
Optimal Feed Location A thermal condition of the feed (q) is chosen to be 1. This means
that the feed enters as a liquid at bubble point and therefore does not extract heat from the
system. For the optimal feed location, the tray of the feed needs to be determined. Because
drawing the trays did not work out, a proper conclusion about the feed location could not be
made. In the rectifier section a lot of trays are needed to come to the feed, because this is a
very small part. The stripper section need much less trays and therefore it can be said that
the feed location is more in the bottom part of the column. But because the trays where not
plotted in the graph an exact location of the feed can not be given.

In the figure below the McCabe-Thiele diagram can be seen. The operating lines are deter-
mined by hand using the tangent line. Operating lines give the relation between the solute
concentration in the vapor passing upward between to stages and the solute concentration in
the liquid passing downward between the same two stages. Whereas, the equilibrium line gives
the relation between the concentration vapor and liquid leaving the same stage.

Figure 4.3: McCabe-Thiele Method

4.8 Flow inside column

In this section the flows inside the column are calculated to see how the process behaves inside
the column. In the tables below the mass flow of stream 17, 18 and 19 can be found expressed
in mol/s, kg/s and m3 /s.

17 (F) 18 (B) 19 (D)

C2 H5 OH 72.4562 0.0204 72.4358
H2 O 218.4103 208.3752 11.8237

Table 4.1: mass flow mol/s

28
 17 (F) 18 (B) 19 (D)
C2 H5 OH 3.3381 0.0009 3.3371
H2 O 3.9347 3.7539 0.2130

Table 4.2: mass flow kg/s

17 (F) 18 (B) 19 (D)

C2 H5 OH 0.0033 0.0000 0.0033
H2 O 0.0050 0.0048 0.0003

Table 4.3: mass flow m3 /s

The mass flow in mol/s can be converted to kg/s by using the molar mass and the mass
flow in kg/s can be converted into m3 /s by using the density. The total mass flow for F, B and
D can be found by adding the mass flows, depending on which values are used the result is in
mol/s, kg/s or m3 /s:

Ftot = Fethanol + Fwater

Btot = Bethanol + Bwater (4.12)
Dtot = Dethanol + Dwater

Now F, B and D are found, L, V, L’ and V’ (see Figure 4.4) can be found using:

Figure 4.4: Streams inside column

L = RDtot
V = Dtot + L
(4.13)
L0 = qFtot + L
V 0 = V − (1 − q)Ftot

29
 Here, R is the reflux ratio (2.579), Dtot is the total mass flow in stream 19, q is the thermal
condition of the feed (1), Ftot is the total mass flow in stream 17. Using these values the mass
flows in the column are calculated. The result can be found in the table below.
mol/s kg/s m3 /s
Feed flow 290.87 11.37 0.014
Top flow 84.26 3.55 0.004
Bottom flow 208.40 3.75 0.004
V 143.27 6.04 4.25
L 59.01 2.49 0.002
V’ 143.27 11.04 4.34
L’ 349.88 14.80 0.015

Table 4.4: Mass flows

4.9 Column design

4.9.1 Column internals
It is difficult to make a decision on plates or packings without costing each desing. However,
based on some advantages and disadvantages the decision can be made. A packing design is
not suitable for low liquid rates. Plates on the other hand can be designed to cope with a larger
range of liquid and gas flow rates. Furhermore the efficiency of a plate column can be calculated
with more certainty. Plate column also give more certainty when using a big column, which
is the case. Below 0.6 meter in diameter the column should always be a packed column, but
with a diameter of around 6 meters, plates is the better option. Therefore in the end plates are
chosen for the column internals.
Next the type of plate is chosen, a couple of options are available. Cross flow type of plates
are considered, this means that the liquid flows horizontally over the plate where the gas goes
through the plate and liquid vertically. Sieve plates, valve plates, moving valve plate and bubble
cap plates are considered. Bubble cap is the most expensive one because it is the most difficult
to manufacture. This option is very good in case of low gas flow rates. However, because it is
expensive it is not chosen as the best option. Fixed valve plates are almost as cheap as sieve
plates but have a better performance. Therefore the final chosen plates are fixed valve plates.

4.9.2 Design of column internals

After the selection has been made between plates or packing, the rest of the column internals can
be calculated. In the end this results in the final diameter and height of the column. Starting
with O’Connel’s correlation to calculate the average tray efficiency, see equation 4.14.

η0 = 0.503(µL α)− 0.226 (4.14)

In these equation values for the average volatility (α) and the molar average liquid viscosity
(µL ) have to be determined. The average relative volatility is determined by the following
√
equation : α12 = αB αD . The average liquid viscosity is calculated by looking up the values
for the viscosity of water at the three different temperatures (bottom, feed, top) and average
that. α12 = 2.27 and µL = 0.00031297. With these values η0 = 13.4735.
The next step is to calculate the flooding velocity using the flow factor. The flow factor can
be calculated using equation 4.15. ρL and ρV are the density of water and ethanol respectively.

30
FLV = 0.3664. r
L ρV
FLV = (4.15)
V ρL
Using a trail value for the tray spacing (S) of 0.5 m, the flooding velocity can be calculated
using equation 4.16 and 4.17. Later the tray spacing is changed to 0.6 meter.
0.26S − 0.029S 2
CSB = 2 S 0.7498 )0.5 (4.16)
(1 + 6FLV
r
σ 0.2 ρL − ρV
uf = CSB ( ) (4.17)
0.02 ρV
In these equation σ is the liquid surface tension in N/m. This is the surface tension of water to
ethanol and equals 0.6. In the end uf = 0.2671. Once these values are known, calculations on
the different areas inside the column can be done using the equations below.

un = 0.85uf (4.18)

V
An = (4.19)
un
1
Ac = πD2 (4.20)
4

An = Ac − 2Ad (4.21)

l
a= (4.22)
D
Finally the diameter of the column can be determined using equation 4.23.
s
An
D=2 sin−1 (a)
(4.23)
π(1 − 90 ) + 2acos(sin−1 (a))
The diameter of the column turned out to be 6.4077 meters. The heigth of the column equals
26.9471 meters.

4.9.3 Plate hydraulics

The next step in the design process is to check what happens at the plates. How quickly is the
fluid flowing through, what is the pressure drop over the plate and so on. The design has to
meet certain constraints concerning these plate hydraulics. These constraints are listed below.
Flooding: Zd ≤ 0.4(S + zs ), (0.3291 ≤ 0.8200) (4.24)

Downcomer liquid velocity: ul,d ≤ 0.3m/s, (0.2270 ≤ 0.3m/s) (4.25)

Downcomer width: wl ≤ wd , (0.0747 ≤ 0.9158) (4.26)

Weeping: zp + zb ≥ 0.005 + 0.15zl , (0.2190 ≥ 0.0133) (4.27)

Calculations show that the design meets all these constraints. The values can be seen after the
constraints. The governing equations are given below. Where:

31
 • zs = height of weir

• zo = Height of weir crest

• zw = Hydraulic gradient

• zl = Liquid hight on plate

• zp = Pressure drop through dry plate

• zb = Pressure drop by bubble formation

• zt = Total pressure drop across plate

• zv = Head loss in downcomer

• zd = Liquid height in downcomer

L2
z0 = 0.75 /3 (4.28)
ρl
0.41σ
zb = (4.29)
ρL Dg
ρV 2 Ag Ag 2
zp = 0.058 ug (0.4(1.25 − ) + (1 − ) ) (4.30)
ρL An An
L
zv = 0.166( )2 (4.31)
Ad · ρL

zd = 2zL + zp + zb + zv (4.32)

z l = zs + z0 + zw (4.33)

p
Wl = 0.8 z0 (S + zs − zd ) (4.34)

Wd = 0.5D(1 − cos(sin−1 (a)) (4.35)

4.9.4 Pressure drop

In the beginning of the design process the assumption was made that the pressure drop across
the distillation column is zero. To check if this assumption is valid, the actual pressure drop is
calculated. The pressure drop across one plate is calculated using equation 4.36.

z t = zl + zp + z b (4.36)

This pressure drop across one plate is then used in the following equation.

∆P = 9.81 · 10−3 zt · 10−3 ρL (4.37)

The final pressure drop over the entire column equals 3.6 % (0 of the overall pressure. So
the assumption is valid to neglect the pressure drop.

32
4.10 Mechanical design
To start the mechanical design of the column a material has to be chosen. The material chosen
is stainless steel. The reason for choosing this material is the weldability and the corrosion
resistance. The material has to be weldable to construct the entire column, all the different
parts have to welded together. Furthermore, the material should be corrosion resistant to be
able to withstand the outside weather. The column height and width are determined in the
previous section. Using these parameters, further calculations are done on the forces acting on
the entire structure. No specific stainless steel is chosen. Therefore the average of the general
properties of stainless steel is used for the calculations. The program CES edupack is used, the
used properties can be seen in table .

Properties Value Unit

Density (ρ) 7900 kg/mˆ3
Yield strength (σyield ) 1 GPa
Young’s modulus (E) 200 GPa
Price 4.9 Euro/kg

Table 4.5: Table showing the average properties of stainless steel

4.10.1 Wind induced vibrations

The first mechanical check is the wind induced vibrations. The vibration frequency caused by
the wind blowing against the column has to be lower then the first natural frequency of the
column. To calculate both of these frequencies, equations 4.38 and 4.39 are used.
s
1 1.875 2 EIx
fcolumn = ( ) mtot (4.38)
2π Hcol Hcol

Str · swind
fwind = (4.39)
D
These equations contain a couple of unknowns. First of all the mass of the entire column.
The total mass consists of the column, the trays and the liquid inside the column, see equation
4.40. The individual masses are calculated using equations 4.41, 4.42 and 4.43.

mtot = mliq + mcol + mtray (4.40)

2
mliq = ρliq · Htray · πrin (4.41)

4
mcol = ρstain · Hcol · π(rout − rin4 ) (4.42)

2
mtray = ρtray · Htray · πrin (4.43)
The inertia of the column is determined using equation 4.44.
1 2 2
Ix = mtot (rout − rin ) (4.44)
2
The next value which has to be determined is the Strouhal number. This can be determined
by first calculate the reynolds number using equation 4.45. The viscosity of the air is assumed

33
to be 14.61 · 10−6 [m2 /s] at 15 degrees Celsius. The velocity of the wind is assumed to be 25
m/s.

swind D
Re = (4.45)
vair

103 < Re < 105 , Str = 0.2 (4.46)

Re > 105 , Str = 0.35 (4.47)

With these values the reynolds number equals 1.1 · 107 and therefore the Strouhal number
equals 0.35. Along with the height and diameter calculated in previous section, the wind induced
frequency equals 1.3655 Hz and the first eigen frequency of the column equals 1.4408.
This calculation show that the requirement holds, the column is strong enough to withstand
the wind induced vibrations.

4.10.2 Internal pressure load

The pressure in the column differs from the pressure outside the column. Due to this pressure
difference stresses occur. The two types of stresses are longitudinal stress and circumferential
stress. These are calculated using equation 4.48 and 4.49.
PD
σLong = (4.48)
4t

PD
σcircum = (4.49)
2t
Where the pressure difference equals 0.833 bar, D the diameter of the column and t the
thickness of the column. The thickness equals 10 mm. From this it follows that σlong =
13.34M P a and σcircum = 26.69M P a.

4.10.3 Wind induced bending

Next to the vibration induced by the wind, the wind also causes the column to bend. These
bending forces result in stresses in the wall of the column. Of course the column should also be
able to hold these stresses. This stress is calculated using equation 4.50.
2
1 ρair s2wind Hcol
σwind = · (4.50)
π tD
The wind is again blowing at a velocity of 25 m/s. With this velocity, σwind = 2.76M P a.

4.10.4 Dead weight stress

Besides the wind, the column also has to withstand the force due to its own weight. These
forces are of course the largest at the bottom of the column because that is where the entire
structure rests upon. To calculate this stress, equation 4.51 is used.
mtot · g
σweight = (4.51)
Awall
In this equation, Awall equals the surface area of the wall and g is the gravitational acceleration.
The final stress equals: σwieght = 1.79 · 104 P a.

34
4.10.5 Total stress
The total stress in the column should not exceed the yield stress of the used material, in this
case stainless steel. The total caused stress is due to the wind, longitudinal stress and weight.
The total stress equals: σtot = 16.12M pa. This value is far below the yield strength of the
material (σyield = 1GP a) so the column will not fail due to the mechanical stresses.

4.10.6 Buckling stress

The final mechanical check is the buckling stress. The critical buckling stress should be above
the total stress experience by the column. The buckling stress is calculated using equation 4.52.

π 2 EIx
σbuck = (4.52)
(K · Hcol )2 · Awall
In this equation K is the column effective length factor which in this case equals 2. σbuck =
30.14GP a Which is far above the σtot so the entire column will not buckle.

35
Chapter 5

Conclusion and recommendations

5.1 Conclusions
In this report the design of a compressor, a heat exchanger and a distillation column for the
process of conversion of CO2 to ethanol has been made in great detail. As a small summary are
the conclusion of each equipment discussed below.

5.1.1 Compressor
The power that is needed to compress the pressure from 10 bar to 20 bar is equally to 183.7KW.
To calculate the power, the head needs to be calculated. The poly tropic head of this system is:
12655 meter. However, account must also be taken of mechanic, transmission, motor, hydraulic
efficiency . This results that the required power increased to 238.3KW.

In the first section, it has been given that there is a constraint in respect with temperature
increase. As the outgoing temperature was Tout = 368.5K and Tin = 293.This results in a
the temperature difference of ∆T = 75.5 K.So it can be concluded that that the constraint
is fulfilled. For the calculation, it has been decided that to use a maximum rotation speed of
50 RPS.In addition, the maximum tip speed may not exceed 188 m/s due to safety reasons.
Therefore a safety factor of (5%) is used. The best result that can be delivered with these
constant values is:

Stages D(m) N(rps) H(m) Q(m3 /s) φ ψ σ ∆ V (m/s)

2 0.8 50 8040.449 5.073 0.08 1 0.284 3.527 125.6

Table 5.1: Results of N = 200 rps

The sigma of 0.275 is between the limit of: 0.15 < σ < 0.3 and that the delta of 3.63 is
between: 3.33 < ∆ < 6.66 . The tip speed of the impeller blade is below the limiting value
of 188 m/s. Backward leaning blades are used for this the rotor blades. This does mean that
there are extra internal stresses. Although, it is assumed that this is included in the system
constraints (mechanical and limited impeller tip speed). Because the mixture is not corrosive,
the blades can be manufactured from a cheaper high-strength alloy steel.

This setup can be validated of taking the rotor speed, with the use of a 2 stage radial setup it is
possible to rotate N = 60 rps (see table 2.6) and still deliver the required head and power.This
means the system can run at 60 rps and when the cycle ask for more volume flow, this results in
more flexibility. Furthermore, the head and volume flow are within the requirement including

36
the safety factors. As stated before, the tip speed is also within the limitation of the system.
Increasing the number of stages does give a slight boost but in return the costs will increase
significantly. On top of that, the system will become heavier thus more force on the bearings.
This result in a smaller lifespan of the bearings thus more cost in the long term. To ensure
that rotor assembly stay in it configuration, radial bearings and thrust bearing are installed to
ensure that assembly is fixed.

5.1.2 Heat Exchanger

The design of the heat exchanger has been done by an iterative process using emperical data.
In the end an attempt of designing a well performing and cost effective design has been done.
In table 5.2 important parameters are shown again. An AEP TEMA type of has been chosen
as configuration. In the end a total cost of 43615.79 ehas been found, excluding installation
and production.

General Tube Side Shell Side

Q 19.2 [M W ] L 2.44 m Ds 1.66 m
Tm 97.50 [K] Nt 3612 # lb 0.60 m
U0 486.52 [W/mk] di 15 mm vs 29.22 m/s
A 404.33 [m2 ] do 19.2 mm ∆Ps 259.16 kP a
Type One Shell and vt 7.13 m/s ts 10 mm
One tube (1:1) ∆Pt 8.12 kP a

Table 5.2: Final design: important parameters

5.1.3 Distillation Column

For the distillation column a psheudo-binary system is assumed consisting of ethanol and water.
From this the stream velocities in the feed, distillate and bottom where calculated. The pressure
in the bottom of the column was calculated using Raoult’s law, which resulted in an final total
pressure of 1.044 bar. From then a constant pressure in the column was used. With this
assumption the temperature in the top was calculated. Here, a temperature of 354.33 K. Next,
the equilibrium line was determined in order to see whether the theoretical value is good enough
compared to the experimental data. It was assumed that this is the case. After that the Reflux
ratio was determined using the McCabe-Thiele Method and the minimum number of equilibrium
stages was determined using Frenske equation. The minimum reflux ratio turned out to be 1.984
and the minimum number of stages is 14. With this number of stages, the diameter, height and
further internals of the column are calculated. A diameter of 6 meters and height of 27 meters
was found. Checks were done concerning the internals of the column on the plate hydraulics.
These checks show the system is valid. The last step was to do calculations on the mechanical
part of the column. The column does not fail due to wind induced vibrations. The column is
also able to withstand the induced stresses. A final overview of all the calculated parameters
can be seen in the datasheet supplied with this report.

5.2 Recommendations
Below a few recommendations are given concerning the three different aspects.

37
5.2.1 Compressor
For further research, it is advised to look into if there is an better optimization setup. In this
setup the rotational speed is N = 50 rps, this results on heavy forces on the bearings. There
are two options:

• Is there a better optimization or configuration?

• By using the right bearings and the thrust bearings can it withhold the high rotational
speed and its high forces on them

There is an other option the choose a lower specific speed, this translate in a decrease of rps
significantly but this result in a higher tip speed due the increase of the impeller diameter.
It is also stated in the conclusion that the mixture is not corrosive thus the blades can be
manufactured from a cheaper high-strength alloy steel. However, to extend the longevity of the
blades a more expensive quality high-strength alloy steel can be used.

5.2.2 Heat Exchanger

As the process of designing the heat exchanger was an iterative process, which is determined by
a lot of emperical data should this be verified using detailed experiments. Also has the design
a couple of flaws such as a to huge pressure drop on the shell side, which should be improved if
proven unacceptable. Also has only the one tube and one shell configuration been considered
as results where okay and time was limited. It could be that other configuration have better
performance and is more cost effective.

5.2.3 Distillation Column

The distillation column has some design flaws. The first one is due to the mccabethiele method.
It was difficult to construct the number of stages inside the x-y plot because the operating
line was very close to the equilibrium line. Therefore to obtain the minimum number of stages
another method was used, not completing the mccabethiele method. To make this design
more perfect, it could be useful to search for some kind of function which is able to calculate
these number of stages from the x-y plot for this specific case. The last remark has to do
with optimisation. The column is designed and checked with the given constraints. If the
constraint was reached, no further optimisation is done. If not, the values were changed until
the constraints where met. However, these values might still not be the optimal values. It could
be done to make this design better.

38
Bibliography

[1] G. Towler and R. Sinnott, Chemical Engineering Design - Principles, Practice and Eco-
nomics of Plant and Process Design, 2nd edition. Elsevier, 2013.

[2] WERMAX, “Heat transfer by heat exchangers tema design.” http://www.wermac.org/

equipment/heatexchanger_part5.html.

[3] “Stainless steel.” CES Edupack.

[4] Insulation-info.co.uk, “Roof insulation: info costs.” https://www.insulation-info.co.

uk/roof-insulation.

[5] A. B. de Haan and H. Bosch, Industrial Separation Processes. ISBN 978-3-11-030669-9: DE

GRUYTER, 2013.

39
Appendix A

Transforming data

The assignment has provided a number of data in the form of pressure, temperature and mass
flow per hour. This data is however in bars, degree Celsius and kilograms per hour, which are
not always use-full units. For that reason has the date been transformed to useful units like
Kelvins, Pascals and kilogram per second. Furthermore is the density, volume flow and the
molar flow determined.
The conversion of bars to Pascal and degree Celsius to Kelvin is quite easy and are the
multiplication of 105 and the addition of 273.15, respectively. For the conversion of kg/hr
to mol/s, kg/m3 and m3 /s the molar mass (M ) is required. The molar mass of the various
components in this assignment can be seen in table A.1.

Molecule Molar Mass

CO2 44.01 [kg/kmol]
H2 2.01588 [kg/kmol]
CH3 OH 32.04 [kg/kmol]
C2 H5 OH 46.07 [kg/kmol]
H2 O 18.01528 [kg/kmol]

Table A.1: Molar mass of various components in the CO2 to ethanol conversion unit

As it is better to use the unit kg/s instead of the kg/hr will this also be used. The kg/s
will be divided by the molar mass M to get the molar flow in moles per second. Density ρ can
be found using equation A.1, shown below.
PM
ρ= (A.1)
RT
Where R is the universal gas constant (8.314 J/Kmol). The volumetric flow Q is then be found
by dividing the kg/s by the density kg/m3 .

40
Appendix B

TEMA

Figure B.1: TEMA designations for shell and tube heat exchangers [1]

41