Problem 04 - Tower Sizing & Tray Design

PROBLEM 4
TOWER
INTERNAL
DESIGN
Problem 4 - Page 1
PROBLEM 4 - TOWER SIZING AND TRAY DESIGN
You have completed the final heat and material balance for the T-1 Naphtha
Depentanizer. In this problem you will evaluate different types of contacting
devices for the tower, such as single-pass sieve trays, two-pass sieve trays, and
several types of packing. The basis for selecting amongst the various options will
be minimum tower height and diameter.
A tray loading report for the final heat and material balance is attached for use in
this problem. Note that the liquid loadings are much lower above the feed tray
(enriching section) relative to the loadings below the feed tray (stripping section).
Therefore, you should consider designing two sets of contacting devices - one for
each section of the tower. Also, it may be cost effective to design the tower with
different diameters above and below the feed tray.
The tray numbers in the attached loading report refer to theoretical trays. That is
the theoretical number of stages required to achieve the specified separation. To
determine the actual number of stages required, a tray efficiency must be
calculated. In practice, a few additional stages might be added to play it "safe."
Section III-I of the ExxonMobil Design Practices gives the approved methods for
assessing efficiencies for sieve trays, as well as "typical" values for tray
efficiencies. Note that these typical values should only be used for screening,
since they can lead to serious errors when applied to a specific design. A
correlation based on liquid-phase viscosity is attached for your use in this problem.
Problem 4 - Page 2
For packing, the term HETP (height equivalent of a theoretical plate) is used in lieu
of tray efficiency. The HETP of a packing is the height required to perform the
separation for one theoretical stage. The methods involved in calculating HETPs
are beyond the scope of this course, but are comprehensively discussed in the
ExxonMobil Design Practices, Section III-G.
Part A
Using the Pegasys program, design single-pass sieve trays and determine actual
number of trays and the diameter for the tower. The design for each section
should be based on the tray with the maximum vapour load. Use the following,
typical tray design features:
sieve tray hole size - 13 mm
sieve tray deck thickness - 2 mm
chordal type downcomers
turndown - 60%
tray spacing - 610 mm (based on maintenance preferences)
waste area - 0%
Problem 4 - Page 3
Note that the Pegasys program algorithm may not always produce a balanced design,
although it generally comes very close. You may have to "play" with the program to
produce a design that satisfies all guidelines.
Part B
Using the Pegasys program, design two-pass sieve trays and the diameter for just the
stripping section of tower. Is the tower diameter based on a two-pass tray design the
same as for a one-pass design? Why?
Part C
Using the Pegasys program, determine the required tower diameter for the stripping
section based on 2" and 3" Nutter rings. Which packing gives the smaller diameter?
Why? Which packing would you expect to have the lower HETP (higher efficiency)?
Why?
Problem 4 - Page 4
Part D
If time permits, try running one of the above cases directly from your PRO/II input file.
Some designers prefer this method over using Pegasys when screening revamps or
optimising tower operation. It avoids the possibility of making mistakes when
transferring numbers from PRO/II to Pegasys but there is less control over the
development of a design and the input is "unfriendly". Probably the best advice is to
use within PRO/II for screening then move into Pegasys for the definitive design
cases.
Problem 4 - Page 5
PROBLEM 4 - SOLUTION
Problem 4 - Page 6
SOLUTION 4 - TOWER SIZING AND TRAY DESIGN
Typically the loadings for the maximum vapour-loaded tray are used to design the
trays for a given section of a tower. This can be done, provided that the loadings
do not change appreciably.
From the attached tower profile, it is reasonable to base the design of the
enriching section on tray no. 3. Tray no. 20 can be used for the design of the
stripping section.
Pegasys printouts are attached for parts A, B and C. Compare your results with
the attached sheets.
The following results are taken from these printouts for the stripping section
(based on tray 20):
Type of Internals Tower Diameter (meters)

1-pass sieve trays 2.8
2-pass sieve trays 2.5
2" Nutter rings 2.4
3" Nutter rings 2.3
Problem 4 - Page 7
The above table shows the effect on tower size as the type of contacting device is
changed. Changing from a 1-pass to 2-pass tray reduces the jet flood limit since it
is correlated to the liquid rate per unit of weir length.
Packing further reduces the tower diameter, since more of the tower diameter is
available for vapour flow - no downcomers. The 3" Nutter rings require a lower
diameter vs. the 2" Nutter rings. However, the 2" Nutter rings will have a higher
efficiency (lower HETP). This is because the smaller rings have a higher surface
area to volume ratio (95 vs. 66 M2/M3) which is related to efficiency.
Based on the efficiency correlation, the enriching section has an overall efficiency
of 84% vs. the assumed 85%. The stripping section has an overall efficiency of
75%, as assumed. These efficiencies are calculated within 1133 and note how the
efficiency drops with shorter flow path length going from 1 pass to 2 pass. Since
the final efficiencies are close to those originally assumed, there is no need to
change the number of stages assumed for the simulation.
Problem 4 - Page 8
UNIT 2, 'T1', 'NAPHTHA DEPENTANISER'
TOTAL NUMBER OF ITERATIONS
IN/OUT METHOD 4
COLUMN SUMMARY
---------- NET FLOW RATES ----------- HEATER

TRAY TEMP PRESSURE LIQUID VAPOR FEED PRODUCT DUTIES
DEG C BAR KG-MOL/HR M*KJ/HR
------ ------- -------- -------- -------- --------- --------- ------------
COND 1C 52.6 4.21 471.0 542.0L -24.2681
2 73.6 4.51 487.3 1013.0
3 78.3 4.52 488.7 1029.3
4 79.8 4.53 486.9 1030.8 Design for Top (approximate - Check V1) => use theo 20
5 80.6 4.54 481.7 1029.0
6 81.5 4.55 459.9 1023.8
FEED 7 84.9 4.56 343.0 1002.0
8 104.7 4.57 1863.7 885.0 1373.9L
9 109.9 4.58 1928.7 1031.8
10 112.4 4.59 1961.8 1096.8
11 113.8 4.60 1978.8 1129.9
12 114.5 4.61 1987.9 1146.9
13 115.0 4.62 1993.1 1156.0
14 115.4 4.63 1996.5 1161.3
15 115.8 4.64 1999.0 1164.6
16 116.3 4.65 2001.1 1167.1
17 116.9 4.66 2003.0 1169.2
18 117.6 4.67 2004.3 1171.1
19 118.8 4.68 2003.5 1172.5 Design for Bottom (approximate - Check V1) => use theo 20
20 120.8 4.69 1994.8 1171.6
21 124.9 4.70 1964.5 1163.0
22 134.7 4.71 1897.9 1132.6
23 157.2 4.72 1837.9 1066.1
REBOIL24S 173.4 4.72 3105.3 74.6
25R 196.7 4.72 2173.9 931.5 47.6902
BOT SUMP 196.7 4.72 1342.0 831.9L
VL = qV * [ V ]0.5
[V - L]
Problem 4 - Page 9
UNIT 2, 'T1', 'NAPHTHA DEPENTANISER' (CONT)
TRAY LOADING REPORT
-------------------- VAPOR TO TRAY-------------------- -------------------- LIQUID FROM TRAY -------------------
DENSITY VISCOSITY DENSITY VISCOSITY SURFACE
TRAY TEMP PRESSURE MW RATE AT COND AT COND TEMP MW RATE AT COND AT COND TENSION
DEG C BAR K*KG/HR KG/M3 CP DEG C K*KG/HR KG/M3 CP N/M
---- ----- -------- ------- --------- ------- --------- ----- ------- --------- ------- --------- --------
1 73.6 4.510 64.770 65.61 11.43 0.008530 52.6 64.770 65.61 568.5 0.1483 0.01072
2 78.3 4.520 66.801 68.76 11.70 0.008557 73.6 69.060 33.65 561.4 0.1387 0.00969
3 79.8 4.530 67.332 69.40 11.78 0.008570 78.3 70.174 34.29 561.0 0.1375 0.00953
DESIGN
4 80.6 4.540 67.508 69.46 11.81 0.008582 79.8 70.556 34.36 561.6 0.1374 0.00950
5 81.5 4.550 67.620 69.23 11.82 0.008601 80.6 70.827 34.12 562.6 0.1378 0.00951
6 84.9 4.560 67.826 67.96 11.73 0.008672 81.5 71.427 32.85 565.0 0.1392 0.00958
7 104.7 4.570 68.628 60.74 11.04 0.009095 84.9 74.725 25.63 576.6 0.1485 0.01002
8 109.9 4.580 71.637 73.92 11.47 0.009082 104.7 95.977 178.87 627.8 0.2046 0.01208
9 112.4 4.590 73.132 80.21 11.69 0.009076 109.9 96.007 185.17 622.0 0.1965 0.01161
10 113.8 4.600 73.874 83.47 11.82 0.009075 112.4 96.049 188.42 619.3 0.1927 0.01138
11 114.5 4.610 74.252 85.16 11.89 0.009076 113.8 96.077 190.12 617.9 0.1909 0.01127
12 115.0 4.620 74.458 86.08 11.94 0.009080 114.5 96.097 191.03 617.2 0.1899 0.01121
13 115.4 4.630 74.588 86.62 11.98 0.009085 115.0 96.116 191.57 616.9 0.1894 0.01117
14 115.8 4.640 74.692 86.99 12.01 0.009092 115.4 96.141 191.94 616.8 0.1890 0.01115
15 116.3 4.650 74.801 87.30 12.04 0.009101 115.8 96.177 192.26 616.9 0.1888 0.01114
16 116.9 4.660 74.935 87.62 12.07 0.009114 116.3 96.233 192.57 617.1 0.1886 0.01112
17 117.6 4.670 75.117 87.97 12.10 0.009130 116.9 96.319 192.93 617.4 0.1884 0.01111
18 118.8 4.680 75.384 88.39 12.14 0.009154 117.6 96.461 193.34 618.0 0.1883 0.01110
19 120.8 4.690 75.823 88.84 12.16 0.009191 118.8 96.727 193.79 618.8 0.1882 0.01108
20 124.9 4.700 76.700 89.20 12.19 0.009259 120.8 97.329 194.16 620.1 0.1884 0.01106
DESIGN
21 134.7 4.710 78.876 89.34 12.22 0.009397 124.9 98.902 194.29 622.1 0.1891 0.01102
22 157.2 4.720 85.004 90.62 12.47 0.009631 134.7 103.046 195.57 624.6 0.1901 0.01088
23 195.2 4.720 100.442 101.05 13.67 0.009787 157.2 112.086 206.00 623.3 0.1873 0.01029
24 0.0 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000000 173.4 118.694 368.58 619.9 0.1835 0.00980
25 REBOILER 196.7 126.169 274.27 609.7 0.1720 0.00888
Problem 4 - Page 10
Equilibrium Slope of Pentane
3.5
3
Equilibrium slope
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
-0.5
Sim ulation Stage
Problem 4 - Page 11
Equilibrium Slope of PF1-53
2.5
2
Equilibrium slope
1.5
0.5
0
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
-0.5
-1
Sim ulation Stage
Problem 4 - Page 12
Equilibrium Slope of PF2-100
2.5
Equilibrium slope
1.5
0.5
0
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Sim ulation Stage
Problem 4 - Page 13
Tower Internals Layout - Sieve Tray
_____________________________________________________________________
NAME: Maurice Harp Date: 08 Oct 2000
Company: ExxonMobil Engineering Europe Ltd Time: 10:00
CASE: CETC Problem 4 Part A - Stage 20

_____________________________________________________________________
WARNINGS AND ERROR MESSAGES
---------------------------
****************** NO INPUT ERRORS OR WARNINGS ******************
***** CAUTION ***** DESIGN CASES UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS

MAY NOT BE OPTIMUM
LIQUID RATE IS ABOVE 14 GPM/INCH OF WEIR/PASS (35 DM3/S.M)

- PLEASE CONTACT A FRACTIONATION SPECIALIST CONCERNING
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR HIGH LIQUID RATE OPERATION
Problem 4 - Page 14
1 SIEVE TRAY DESIGN PROGRAM NUMBER 1133

VERS. 7.5
TOWER DIAMETER MILLIM 2743.20

* TRAY SPACING MILLIM 610.000
* NO. OF LIQUID PASSES 1.
HOLE AREA PER TRAY M2 0.2538
FRACTIONAL WEEPAGE (MAX= 0.20) 0.016
DC FILLING, % (MAX= 50.0) 50./ 0.
* JET FLOOD, % (MAX= 90.0) 85./ 0.
ULTIMATE CAPACITY, % (MAX= 90.0) 42./ 0.
SPRAY TRANSITION, % (MAX=100.0) 42./ 0.
ENTRAINMENT, % (MAX= 20.0) 0./ 0.
++ DC INLET VEL M/S (MAX= 0.168) 0.167 / 0.000
DC OUTLET VEL M/S (MAX= 0.183) 0.167 / 0.000
DC INLET CHOKING (MAX= 1.0) 0.374 / 0.000
DOWNCOMER SEAL MILLIM (MIN=-6.35) 5.524 / 0.000
Problem 4 - Page 15
FINAL TRAY DESIGN
-----------------
* NO. OF LIQUID PASSES 1.00
* HOLE SIZE MILLIM 13.000
NO. OF HOLES 1912.
* TRAY DECK THICKNESS MILLIM 2.000
OUTBOARD INBOARD
DC INLET RISE MILLIM 393.700 0.000
DC INLET AREA M2 0.521 0.000
CHORD LGTH AT TOP OF DC MILLIM 1923.489 0.000
DC OUTLET RISE MILLIM 393.700 0.000
DC OUTLET AREA M2 0.521 0.000
CHORD LGTH AT BTM OF DC MILLIM 1923.489 0.000
DC CLEARANCE MILLIM 63.500 0.000
RECESSED BOX NO NO
SHAPED DC LIP YES
DOWNCOMER TYPE CHORDL
OUTLET WEIR HEIGHT MILLIM 38.100 0.000
INLET WEIR HEIGHT MILLIM 0.000 0.000
CROSS SECTIONAL AREA M2 5.910
FREE AREA M2 5.389 0.000
* WASTE AREA M2 0.000 0.000
BUBBLE AREA M2 4.867 0.000
HOLE/BUBBLE AREA PCT 5.2 0.0
BUBBLE/CROSS SECT AREA PCT 82.4 0.0
FLOW PATH LENGTH MILLIM 1955.800 0.000
Problem 4 - Page 16
VAPOR - LIQUID RATES AND PROPERTIES AT CONDITIONS
-------------------------------------------------
KG/S OF VAPOR (DESIGN/MIN) 24.700/ 12.355
KG/M3 OF VAPOR AT COND (DES/MIN) 12.0500/ 11.4200
VAPOR VISCOSITY AT COND MILLIPA.S 0.0092
M3/S OF VAPOR AT COND 2.0498
VAPOR LOAD AT COND M3/S 0.2885
TRAY LIQUID TEMPERATURE CEL 124.2000
OPERATING PRESSURE KILOPA 464.3000
KG/S OF LIQUID (DESIGN/MIN) 53.8556 / 29.8467
KG/M3 OF LIQUID AT COND (DES/MIN) 620.2396 / 627.2404
LIQUID RATE (DESIGN/MIN) DECIM3/S 86.8242 / 47.5808
SURFACE TENSION AT COND MILLIN/M 11.090
LIQUID VISCOSITY AT COND MILLIPA.S 0.189
SYSTEM TYPE NON-FOAMING HYDROCARBON
$ DOWNCOMER FILLING CALCULATIONS (MILLIM ARE OF LIQUID AT CONDITIONS)

------------------------------
OUTBOARD/INBOARD
DRY TRAY PRESSURE DROP (HED) MILLIM 126.45/ 0.00
CLEAR LIQUID HEIGHT (HC) MILLIM 59.54/ 0.00
TOTAL TRAY PRESSURE DROP (HT) MILLIM 185.99/ 0.00
TOTAL TRAY PRESSURE DROP (HT) KPA 1.13/ 0.00
INLET HEAD (HI) MILLIM 59.54/ 0.00
DC HEAD LOSS (HUD) MILLIM 26.84/ 0.00
DC FILLING(DENSITY CORR) (HD) MILLIM 301.99/ 0.00
DC FILLING, % (50.00 MAXIMUM) 49.51/ 0.00
Problem 4 - Page 17
DOWNCOMER VELOCITY CALCULATIONS

-------------------------------
++ INLET VELOCITY, M/S (0.168 MAXIMUM) 0.167/ 0.000
OUTLET VELOCITY, M/S (0.183 MAXIMUM) 0.167/ 0.000
DC INLET CHOKING (1.00 MAXIMUM) 0.374/ 0.000
TRAY CAPACITY CALCULATIONS

--------------------------
* JET FLOOD, % ( 90.0 MAXIMUM) 85./ 0.
ULTIMATE CAPACITY, % ( 90.0 MAXIMUM) 42./ 0.
SPRAY TRANSITION, % (100./ 0. MAX) 42./ 0.
ENTRAINMENT, % ( 20.0 MAXIMUM) 0./ 0.
TRAY FLEXIBILITY CALCULATIONS (AT MINIMUM RATES)

------------------------------------------------
FRACTIONAL WEEPAGE ( 0.20 MAXIMUM) 0.016
$ DOWNCOMER SEAL, MILLIM (-6.35 MINIMUM) 5.524/ 0.000
Problem 4 - Page 18
MISCELLANEOUS CALCULATIONS
--------------------------
DESIGN LIQUID RATE (L) DM3/S /M OF WEIR/PASS 45.141/ 0.000
VAPOR LOAD/FREE AREA M/S 0.054/ 0.000
JET FLOOD (VL/AF) ALLOW M/S 0.063/ 0.000
SURFACE TENSION - VISCOSITY PARAMETER 0.982
MAXIMUM RECYCLED VAPOR, % 0./ 0.
TRAY FROTH DENSITY (OUT/INBOARD) 0.260/ 0.000
(FRACT FROTH VOL OCCUPIED BY LIQ)
EST. LIQUID HOLDUP (DECK+DC), M3 0.447/ 0.000
EST. DOWNCOMER LIQ. HOLDUP, M3 0.157/ 0.000
* DENOTES INPUTTED HARDWARE INFORMATION

++ LOW/MODERATE PRESSURE CORRELATION USED FOR MAX INLET VELOCITY
$ WEEP CORRECTED CLEAR LIQUID HEIGHT NOT USED IN CALCS
Problem 4 - Page 19
SIEVE TRAY EFFICIENCY CALCULATIONS - OUTBOARD PASS
VERS. 7.5
ALL CALCULATIONS ON THIS PAGE ARE MADE AT DESIGN RATES AND
INCLUDE THE EFFECTS OF WEEPING EXCEPT WHERE OTHERWISE NOTED
EQUILIBRIUM PARAMETERS
----------------------
COMPONENT EQUILIBRIUM LAMBDA
SLOPE
KEY COMP NO.1 1.230 0.716
KEY COMP NO.2 1.250 0.728
MASS TRANSFER PARAMETERS

------------------------
VAPOR MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENT, KG MILLIM/S 9.771
LIQUID MASS TRANSFER COEFFICIENT, KL MILLIM/S 0.933
NG 2.126
NL 4.793
COMPONENT NOG PERCENT LIQUID

PHASE CONTROL
KEY COMP NO.1 1.613 24.1
KEY COMP NO.2 1.607 24.4
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES AND LOADINGS

--------------------------------
LIQUID RATE KMOL/S 0.553
LIQUID MOLECULAR WEIGHT KG/KMOL 97.351
LIQUID MOLECULAR DIFF (FRI) MILLIM2/S 0.719E-02
VAPOR RATE KMOL/S 0.322
VAPOR MOLECULAR WEIGHT KG/KMOL 76.679
Problem 4 - Page 20
RESIDENCE TIME CALCULATIONS

---------------------------
FRACTION WEEPING 0.001
CLEAR LIQUID HEIGHT MILLIM 59.529
FROTH DENSITY 0.260
LIQUID RESIDENCE TIME SECONDS 3.337
VAPOR RESIDENCE TIME SECONDS 0.544
--------------------------
EFFECTIVE FLOW PATH LENGTH MILLIM 1955.800
NUMBER OF MIXING POOLS 68.425
INTERFACIAL AREA MM2/MM3 0.400
1
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* DESIGN NO WEEP MIN. RATE *
* POINT TRAY OVERALL OVERALL OVERALL *
* EFFIC. EFFIC. EFFIC. EFFIC. EFFIC. *
* *
* KEY COMP NO.1 72.1 92.0 90.6 90.6 86.5 *
* KEY COMP NO.2 72.0 92.2 90.9 90.9 86.9 *
* *
* * * * * ALL EFFICIENCIES DEBITTED 10% ON POINT EFFICIENCY * * * * * *
Problem 4 - Page 21
___________________________________________________________________
CASE: CETC Problem 4 Part A - Stage 3

_____________________________________________________________________

---------------------------

VERS. 7.5

DC FILLING, % (MAX= 50.0) 39./ 0.
* JET FLOOD, % (MAX= 90.0) 82./ 0.
DOWNCOMER SEAL MILLIM (MIN=-6.35) -0.363 / 0.000
Problem 4 - Page 22
FINAL TRAY DESIGN
-----------------
NO. OF HOLES 1597.
OUTBOARD INBOARD
DC INLET RISE MILLIM 241.300 0.000
DC OUTLET RISE MILLIM 241.300 0.000
RECESSED BOX NO NO
SHAPED DC LIP NO
FREE AREA M2 2.869 0.000
* WASTE AREA M2 0.000 0.000
Problem 4 - Page 23
-------------------------------------------------

------------------------------
OUTBOARD/INBOARD
DRY TRAY PRESSURE DROP (HED) MILLIM 120.68/ 0.00
CLEAR LIQUID HEIGHT (HC) MILLIM 35.76/ 0.00
TOTAL TRAY PRESSURE DROP (HT) MILLIM 156.44/ 0.00
DC FILLING(DENSITY CORR) (HD) MILLIM 240.63/ 0.00
Problem 4 - Page 24
-------------------------------

--------------------------
SPRAY TRANSITION, % (100./ 0. MAX) 72./ 0.

------------------------------------------------
$ DOWNCOMER SEAL, MILLIM (-6.35 MINIMUM) -0.363/ 0.000
--------------------------
DESIGN LIQUID RATE (L) DM3/S /M OF WEIR/PASS 13.244/ 0.000

Problem 4 - Page 25
VERS. 7.5

----------------------
SLOPE
KEY COMP NO.1 0.670 1.406
KEY COMP NO.2 0.200 0.420

------------------------
NG 1.494
NL 12.475

PHASE CONTROL
KEY COMP NO.1 1.279 14.4
KEY COMP NO.2 1.422 4.8

--------------------------------
Problem 4 - Page 26
---------------------------
FROTH DENSITY 0.183
--------------------------
1
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* *
* KEY COMP NO.1 64.9 97.6 98.0 98.0 97.5 *
* KEY COMP NO.2 68.3 77.8 69.1 69.1 65.1 *
* *
Problem 4 - Page 27
_____________________________________________________________________
CASE: CETC Problem 4 Part B - Stage 20

_____________________________________________________________________

---------------------------
***** CAUTION ***** DESIGN CASES UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS

MAY NOT BE OPTIMUM
AN ANTI-JUMP BAFFLE MUST BE PROVIDED ON THE INBOARD

DOWNCOMER IF THE LIQUID RATE EXCEEDS 4.2 GPM/IN
(10 DM3/S/METER) OF DIAMETER/PASS
Problem 4 - Page 28

VERS. 7.5
* TOWER DIAMETER MILLIM 2500.00

DC FILLING, % (MAX= 50.0) 43./ 40.
* JET FLOOD, % (MAX= 90.0) 81./ 72.
DOWNCOMER SEAL MILLIM (MIN=-6.35) 6.855 /10.980
Problem 4 - Page 29
FINAL TRAY DESIGN
-----------------
* TOWER DIAMETER MILLIM 2500.00
NO. OF HOLES 1912.
OUTBOARD INBOARD
* DC INLET RISE MILLIM 310.000 * 240.000 *
* DC OUTLET RISE MILLIM 310.000 * 240.000 *
RECESSED BOX NO NO
SHAPED DC LIP YES YES
FREE AREA M2 4.310 4.209
* WASTE AREA M2 0.000 0.000
Problem 4 - Page 30
-------------------------------------------------

------------------------------
OUTBOARD/INBOARD
DRY TRAY PRESSURE DROP (HED) MILLIM 122.65/122.65
CLEAR LIQUID HEIGHT (HC) MILLIM 44.62/ 37.95 ##
TOTAL TRAY PRESSURE DROP (HT) MILLIM 167.27/160.60
DC FILLING(DENSITY CORR) (HD) MILLIM 259.83/245.15
Problem 4 - Page 31
-------------------------------

--------------------------
SPRAY TRANSITION, % (100./100. MAX) 57./ 62.

------------------------------------------------
$ DOWNCOMER SEAL, MILLIM (-6.35 MINIMUM) 6.855/10.980
--------------------------
DESIGN LIQUID RATE (L) DM3/S /M OF WEIR/PASS 26.345/17.446

## INBOARD PASS CHORD LENGTH USED FOR INBOARD PASS CLEAR LIQUID
HEIGHT CALC AS OF NOV. 1998
Problem 4 - Page 32
VERS. 7.5

----------------------
SLOPE
KEY COMP NO.1 1.230 0.716
KEY COMP NO.2 1.250 0.728

------------------------
NG 1.719
NL 3.166

PHASE CONTROL
KEY COMP NO.1 1.238 28.0
KEY COMP NO.2 1.232 28.3

--------------------------------
Problem 4 - Page 33
---------------------------
FROTH DENSITY 0.208
--------------------------
1
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* *
* KEY COMP NO.1 63.9 78.7 75.7 75.7 73.0 *
* KEY COMP NO.2 63.7 78.7 75.9 75.9 73.2 *
* *
Problem 4 - Page 34
Tower Internals Layout - Packed Tray
_____________________________________________________________________
CASE: CETC Problem 4 Part C - Stage 20

_____________________________________________________________________
1 PACKED TOWER DESIGN PROGRAM 3454, VERSION 7.1
CAPACITY/EFFICIENCY SUMMARY
---------------------------
*PACKING: NUTTER RINGS / METAL / 2
*ACTUAL PCT FLOODING ( 85.% MAXIMUM) 84.
ACTUAL PCT FLOODING AT MIN RATES 35.
PCT ULTIMATE CAPACITY ( 90% MAXIMUM) 56.
DYNAMIC PRESSURE DROP (DESIGN RATE) KPA/M 0.783
STATIC PRESSURE DROP (DESIGN RATE) KPA/M 0.901
COMP1 / COMP2
-------------
HETP (UNDEBITED) MM 630.54/ 630.67
DESIGN HETP (DEBITED 15%) MM 725.12/ 725.27
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*** WARNING *** RESULTS CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED OF SCREENING

QUALITY. INPUT RIGOROUS DIFFUSIVITY INFORMATION
FOR DEFINITVE RESULTS.
HETP CALC VALIDITY SUBJECT TO USE OF GOOD QUALITY LIQUID DISTRIBUTOR

AND VAPOR DISTRIBUTOR WHEN PACKED BED IS DIRECTLY ABOVE VAPOR FEED ENTRY
POINT AND NO MORE THAN 12 THEORETICAL STAGES PER BED.
Problem 4 - Page 35
VAPOR - LIQUID RATES AND PROPERTIES AT CONDITIONS (INPUT)
---------------------------------------------------------
VAPOR FLOW RATE (DESIGN/MIN) KG/S 24.7004/ 12.3552
VAPOR LOAD (DESIGN/MIN) M3/S 0.2885/ 0.1473
VAPOR VOLUME RATE (DESIGN/MIN) M3/S 2.0498/ 1.0819
VAPOR DENSITY (DESIGN/MIN) KG/M3 12.0505/ 11.4204
VAPOR VISCOSITY MILLIPA/S 0.0092
LIQUID FLOW RATE (DESIGN/MIN) KG/S 53.8565/ 29.8472
LIQUID VOLUME RATE (DESIGN/MIN) DM3/S 86.836/ 47.587
LIQUID DENSITY (DESIGN/MIN) KG/M3 620.261/ 627.262
LIQUID VISCOSITY MILLIPA/S 0.189
LIQUID SURFACE TENSION MILLIN/M 11.090
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINAL PACKING DESIGN
--------------------
*PACKING TYPE NUTTER RINGS
*PACKING MATERIAL METAL
*PACKING SIZE 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOWER FLOODING CALCULATIONS
---------------------------
PRESSURE DROP CALCULATIONS
--------------------------
DYNAMIC PRESSURE DROP (MIN RATE) KPA/M 0.078
STATIC PRESSURE DROP (MIN RATE) KPA/M 0.190
Problem 4 - Page 36
EFFICIENCY CALCULATIONS COMP1 / COMP2
----------------------- -------------
&EQUILIBRIUM SLOPE 1.230/ 1.250
&VAPOR MOLECULAR WEIGHT KG/KMOL 76.7
&LIQUID MOLECULAR WEIGHT KG/KMOL 97.4
LAMBDA 0.716/ 0.728
LIQUID MOLECULAR DIFF (FRI) MM2/S 0.719E-02/ 0.719E-02

VAPOR DIFFUSIVITY (SHORTCUT) MM2/S 1.00 / 1.00
HG MM 166.42/ 166.42
HL MM 361.92/ 361.92
HD MM 110.47/ 110.47
HOG MM 536.10/ 540.31
MISCELLANEOUS CALCULATED VALUES

-------------------------------
VAPOR LOAD/M2 (CS) (DESIGN/MIN) M/S 0.0658/ 0.0336
VAP LOAD/M2 FLOOD (CSF) (DES/MIN) M/S 0.0788/ 0.0949
LIQUID RATE (DESIGN/MIN) DM3/S /M2 19.81/ 10.86
FRACTION OF PACKED BED VOLUME OCCUPIED BY LIQUID
(DESIGN/MIN) 0.1180/ 0.0664
SURFACE TENSION-VISCOSITY PARAMETER 0.975
PCT LIQUID PHASE CONTROL (COMP1/COMP2) 48./ 49.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*DENOTES INPUTTED HARDWARE INFORMATION
&DENOTES INPUTTED EFFICIENCY INFORMATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Problem 4 - Page 37
Tower Internals Layout - Packed Tray
_____________________________________________________________________
CASE: CETC Problem 4 Part C - Stage 20

_____________________________________________________________________
PACKED TOWER DESIGN PROGRAM 3454, VERSION 7.1
CAPACITY/EFFICIENCY SUMMARY
---------------------------
*PACKING: NUTTER RINGS / METAL / 3
COMP1 / COMP2
-------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*** WARNING *** RESULTS CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED OF SCREENING

QUALITY. INPUT RIGOROUS DIFFUSIVITY INFORMATION
FOR DEFINITVE RESULTS.
HETP CALC VALIDITY SUBJECT TO USE OF GOOD QUALITY LIQUID DISTRIBUTOR

AND VAPOR DISTRIBUTOR WHEN PACKED BED IS DIRECTLY ABOVE VAPOR FEED ENTRY
POINT AND NO MORE THAN 12 THEORETICAL STAGES PER BED.
Problem 4 - Page 38
VAPOR - LIQUID RATES AND PROPERTIES AT CONDITIONS (INPUT)
---------------------------------------------------------
VAPOR FLOW RATE (DESIGN/MIN) KG/S 24.7004/ 12.3552
VAPOR LOAD (DESIGN/MIN) M3/S 0.2885/ 0.1473
VAPOR VOLUME RATE (DESIGN/MIN) M3/S 2.0498/ 1.0819
VAPOR DENSITY (DESIGN/MIN) KG/M3 12.0505/ 11.4204
VAPOR VISCOSITY MILLIPA/S 0.0092
LIQUID FLOW RATE (DESIGN/MIN) KG/S 53.8565/ 29.8472
LIQUID VOLUME RATE (DESIGN/MIN) DM3/S 86.836/ 47.587
LIQUID DENSITY (DESIGN/MIN) KG/M3 620.261/ 627.262
LIQUID VISCOSITY MILLIPA/S 0.189
LIQUID SURFACE TENSION MILLIN/M 11.090
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINAL PACKING DESIGN
--------------------
*PACKING TYPE NUTTER RINGS
*PACKING MATERIAL METAL
*PACKING SIZE 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOWER FLOODING CALCULATIONS
---------------------------
PRESSURE DROP CALCULATIONS

--------------------------
DYNAMIC PRESSURE DROP (MIN RATE) KPA/M 0.051
STATIC PRESSURE DROP (MIN RATE) KPA/M 0.163
Problem 4 - Page 39
EFFICIENCY CALCULATIONS COMP1 / COMP2
----------------------- -------------
&EQUILIBRIUM SLOPE 1.230/ 1.250
&VAPOR MOLECULAR WEIGHT KG/KMOL 76.7
&LIQUID MOLECULAR WEIGHT KG/KMOL 97.4
LAMBDA 0.716/ 0.728
LIQUID MOLECULAR DIFF (FRI) MM2/S 0.719E-02/ 0.719E-02

VAPOR DIFFUSIVITY (SHORTCUT) MM2/S 1.00 / 1.00
HG MM 227.78/ 227.78
HL MM 509.55/ 509.55
HD MM 153.00/ 153.00
HOG MM 745.73/ 751.66
MISCELLANEOUS CALCULATED VALUES

-------------------------------
VAPOR LOAD/M2 (CS) (DESIGN/MIN) M/S 0.0703/ 0.0359
VAP LOAD/M2 FLOOD (CSF) (DES/MIN) M/S 0.0906/ 0.1058
LIQUID RATE (DESIGN/MIN) DM3/S /M2 21.16/ 11.59
FRACTION OF PACKED BED VOLUME OCCUPIED BY LIQUID
(DESIGN/MIN) 0.0723/ 0.0444
SURFACE TENSION-VISCOSITY PARAMETER 0.975
PCT LIQUID PHASE CONTROL (COMP1/COMP2) 49./ 49.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*DENOTES INPUTTED HARDWARE INFORMATION
&DENOTES INPUTTED EFFICIENCY INFORMATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Problem 4 - Page 40

Problem 04 - Tower Sizing & Tray Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Problem 04 - Tower Sizing & Tray Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PROBLEM 4

Type of Internals Tower Diameter (meters)

---------- NET FLOW RATES ----------- HEATER

Equilibrium Slope of Pentane

Equilibrium Slope of PF1-53

Equilibrium Slope of PF2-100

CASE: CETC Problem 4 Part A - Stage 20

****************** NO INPUT ERRORS OR WARNINGS ******************

***** CAUTION ***** DESIGN CASES UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS

LIQUID RATE IS ABOVE 14 GPM/INCH OF WEIR/PASS (35 DM3/S.M)

1 SIEVE TRAY DESIGN PROGRAM NUMBER 1133

TOWER DIAMETER MILLIM 2743.20

$ DOWNCOMER FILLING CALCULATIONS (MILLIM ARE OF LIQUID AT CONDITIONS)

DOWNCOMER VELOCITY CALCULATIONS

TRAY CAPACITY CALCULATIONS

TRAY FLEXIBILITY CALCULATIONS (AT MINIMUM RATES)

* DENOTES INPUTTED HARDWARE INFORMATION

MASS TRANSFER PARAMETERS

COMPONENT NOG PERCENT LIQUID

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES AND LOADINGS

RESIDENCE TIME CALCULATIONS

CASE: CETC Problem 4 Part A - Stage 3

WARNINGS AND ERROR MESSAGES

****************** NO INPUT ERRORS OR WARNINGS ******************

1 SIEVE TRAY DESIGN PROGRAM NUMBER 1133

TOWER DIAMETER MILLIM 1981.20

$ DOWNCOMER FILLING CALCULATIONS (MILLIM ARE OF LIQUID AT CONDITIONS)

TRAY CAPACITY CALCULATIONS

TRAY FLEXIBILITY CALCULATIONS (AT MINIMUM RATES)

* DENOTES INPUTTED HARDWARE INFORMATION

ALL CALCULATIONS ON THIS PAGE ARE MADE AT DESIGN RATES AND

MASS TRANSFER PARAMETERS

COMPONENT NOG PERCENT LIQUID

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES AND LOADINGS

Tower Internals Layout - Sieve Tray

CASE: CETC Problem 4 Part B - Stage 20

WARNINGS AND ERROR MESSAGES

****************** NO INPUT ERRORS OR WARNINGS ******************

***** CAUTION ***** DESIGN CASES UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS

AN ANTI-JUMP BAFFLE MUST BE PROVIDED ON THE INBOARD

1 SIEVE TRAY DESIGN PROGRAM NUMBER 1133

* TOWER DIAMETER MILLIM 2500.00

$ DOWNCOMER FILLING CALCULATIONS (MILLIM ARE OF LIQUID AT CONDITIONS)

TRAY CAPACITY CALCULATIONS

TRAY FLEXIBILITY CALCULATIONS (AT MINIMUM RATES)

* DENOTES INPUTTED HARDWARE INFORMATION

ALL CALCULATIONS ON THIS PAGE ARE MADE AT DESIGN RATES AND

MASS TRANSFER PARAMETERS

COMPONENT NOG PERCENT LIQUID

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES AND LOADINGS

CASE: CETC Problem 4 Part C - Stage 20

1 PACKED TOWER DESIGN PROGRAM 3454, VERSION 7.1

*** WARNING *** RESULTS CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED OF SCREENING

HETP CALC VALIDITY SUBJECT TO USE OF GOOD QUALITY LIQUID DISTRIBUTOR

LIQUID MOLECULAR DIFF (FRI) MM2/S 0.719E-02/ 0.719E-02

MISCELLANEOUS CALCULATED VALUES

CASE: CETC Problem 4 Part C - Stage 20

PACKED TOWER DESIGN PROGRAM 3454, VERSION 7.1

*** WARNING *** RESULTS CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED OF SCREENING

HETP CALC VALIDITY SUBJECT TO USE OF GOOD QUALITY LIQUID DISTRIBUTOR

PRESSURE DROP CALCULATIONS

LIQUID MOLECULAR DIFF (FRI) MM2/S 0.719E-02/ 0.719E-02

MISCELLANEOUS CALCULATED VALUES

NO INPUT ERRORS OR WARNINGS

* CAUTION * DESIGN CASES UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS

NO INPUT ERRORS OR WARNINGS

NO INPUT ERRORS OR WARNINGS

* CAUTION * DESIGN CASES UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS

* WARNING * RESULTS CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED OF SCREENING

* WARNING * RESULTS CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED OF SCREENING