Evaluation of progressive distillation l.jpg
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 67

EVALUATION OF PROGRESSIVE DISTILLATION PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 88 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

EVALUATION OF PROGRESSIVE DISTILLATION . Dan Dobesh – Jesse Sandlin Dr. Miguel Bagajewicz 04.29.2008. This presentation is not about this Insurance Company. Not about this one either… . Our Mission.

Download Presentation

EVALUATION OF PROGRESSIVE DISTILLATION

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


EVALUATION OF PROGRESSIVE DISTILLATION

Dan Dobesh – Jesse Sandlin

Dr. Miguel Bagajewicz

04.29.2008


This presentation is not about this Insurance Company


Not about this one either…


Our Mission

“Analyze progressive crude fractionation, a technology patented in 1987 that claims to be more energy efficient than conventional fractionaltion.”


Punchline

“Progressive Distillation can reduce the heat duty requirement of the distillation process by 17% for a heavy crude, and use 16% less furnace heat utility while producing more valuable products for a light crude.”


Overview

  • Background:

    • Distillation Specifications

    • Conventional Crude Distillation

    • Progressive Crude Distillation

  • Methodology

  • Results

  • Accuracy & Limitations


Petroleum Value Chain

Petroleum Refining

Petroleum Products

Petroleum Production

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_refinery

www.freddiesasphaltoval.com/

Fuels

Solvents

Lubricants

Plastics

Detergents

Nylon

Polyesters

http://www.lakewoodconferences.com/direct/dbimage/50241031/Plastic_Toy.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Oil_well.jpg

www.ehow.com/how_2041839_siphon-gas-car.html


Oil Refinery Schematic

Over 2% of the energy content in a crude stream is used in distillation.*

Distillation accounts for about 40% of energy use in a refinery.**

Diagram Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_refinery

* Bagajewicz, Miguel and Ji, Shuncheng. “Rigorous Procedure for the Design of Conventional Atmospheric

Crude Fractionation Units. Part I: Targeting.” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2001, 40, 617-626

**Haynes, V.O. “Energy Use in Petroleum Refineries.” ORNL/TM-5433, Oak Ridge NationalLaboratory, Tennessee, September (1976).


Overview

  • Background:

    • Distillation Specifications

    • Conventional Crude Distillation

    • Progressive Crude Distillation

  • Methodology

  • Results

  • Accuracy & Limitations


Light Crude Feed

  • Petroleum crude component boiling points range from -161 C (CH3) to over 827 C (C40H82+)


Heavy Crude Feed

  • Petroleum crude component boiling points range from -161 C (CH3) to over 827 C (C40H82+)


ASTM D86-07b, “D86 Point”

  • American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM): international organization that is a source for technical standards

  • Rigorously developed method for quantitatively testing the boiling range of a petroleum product

(1) Oil sample heated in glass flask using electric heater

(2) Vapor is condensed and collected

(3) Temperature versus amount collected is recorded

  • Not applicable to products containing large amounts of residual


ProductSpecifications

Generated from Pro/II Computer Model

This graph compares the boiling point range of the five products


Product Gaps Explanation

D86 5% point heavy component

- D86 95% point light component

390⁰ C

- 360⁰ C = 30⁰ C

D86 95% point light component

D86 5% point heavy component

Positive gaps indicate more distinct separation.


Overview

  • Background:

    • Distillation Specifications

    • Conventional Crude Distillation

    • Progressive Crude Distillation

  • Methodology

  • Results

  • Accuracy & Limitations


Conventional Distillation


Conventional Distillation Simulation


Gaps – Conventional Distillation

D86 95% point anchors products on the right side, gaps change the left side


Conventional = Indirect

Takes the heaviest component as the bottom product in each column. Lighter components are sent to the next column.

Source: Smith, Robin, Chemical Process Design


Conventional = Indirect

Stacking these columns on top of each other is essentially conventional distillation.

Bagajewicz, Miguel and Ji, Shuncheng. “Rigorous Procedure for the Design of Conventional Atmospheric

Crude Fractionation Units. Part I: Targeting.” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2001, 40, 617-626


Conventional = Indirect

Stacking these columns on top of each other is essentially conventional distillation.

Stacked columns from the indirect sequence.

Bagajewicz, Miguel and Ji, Shuncheng. “Rigorous Procedure for the Design of Conventional Atmospheric

Crude Fractionation Units. Part I: Targeting.” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2001, 40, 617-626


Overview

  • Background:

    • Distillation Specifications

    • Conventional Crude Distillation

    • Progressive Crude Distillation

  • Methodology

  • Results

  • Accuracy & Limitations


Patent: Process for Distillation of Petroleum by Progressive Separations

  • This is an expired patent for crude fractionation that is now being commercialized by Technip.

  • Main idea is to heat components only as much as necessary.

  • Several companies are excited by this concept that promises large energy savings.

  • A new refinery is being built in central Germany using this concept.


Progressive Crude Distillation Patent


Progressive Crude Distillation Patent


Technip’s Progressive Brochure


Technip’s Progressive Brochure


Technip’s Progressive Brochure


Progressive Crude Distillation - Gaps


Gaps – Progressive Distillation

Light Crude


Progressive = Direct

Takes the lightest component as the top product in each column. Heavier components are sent to the next column.

Source: Smith, Robin, Chemical Process Design


Conventional vs. Progressive

Summary

One main column

Many columns

Direct

Indirect

Recover heavy components first

Recover light components first


Overview

  • Background:

    • Distillation Specifications

    • Conventional Crude Distillation

    • Progressive Crude Distillation

  • Methodology

  • Results

  • Accuracy & Limitations


Simulation Development Method

  • Build PRO/II progressive crude simulation

  • Obtain correct D86 95% points

  • Synchronize product gaps

  • Mimimize heat duty

  • Compare to conventional heat duty

  • Determine areas for improvement


Simulation Assumptions

  • SRK is a valid thermodynamic model for hydrocarbon systems

  • Pseudocomponents represent crude composition

  • PRO/II provides a close representation of reality


Basis of Comparison

PRO/II Conventional Simulation, 260 ⁰C steam


PRO/II Computer Model(s)

Progressive Model – 4 column direct

Furnace heat duty = 89 MW

This is higher than 58.7 MW for conventional distillation

Previous work suggested that this setup provided no furnace heat utility benefit over conventional distillation. Our results verify this.


Initial Complex Simulation

  • Unnecessarily complicated

Too many products for conventional comparison


PRO/II Computer Model

Patent

Vacuum distillation for residual product is not important for comparison


Second Type Simulation

  • Too much furnace heat utility: 200+ MW

Each column has a reboiler


Third Type Simulation

  • Furnace utility is lower, but steam utility his very high

All seven columns have steam input


Heating Supply-Demand

F*Cp MW

Temperature ⁰C

  • Demand Curve – dark line showing heat needed by system

  • Supply boxes – heat utility able to be recovered from system

  • Heat can be transferred down and left by second law

  • Heat can only move right across pinch via a pumparound


Final Type Simulation

Replaced steam with reboilers in the first series of columns


Heating Supply-Demand

F*Cp MW

Temperature ⁰C


Specifications


Variables


Controller-Variable Systems

  • Naphtha-kerosene gap varies with steam flowrate in Column 1

  • Kerosene-diesel gap varies with steam flowrate in Column 2

  • Diesel-gas oil gap varies withsteamflowrate in Column 3

  • D86 95% points are obtained by varying the condenser duty

Column 2

Column 1

Column 3


days…

MONTHS

weeks

After hours of red simulations and Red Bulls…

After hours of red simulations and Red Bulls…

After hours of red simulations and Red Bulls…

After hours of red simulations and Red Bulls…

Happy hour


Final Simulations

  • Conventional: four simulations

    • 260 ⁰C steam, 135 ⁰C steam

    • Heavy feed, light feed

  • Progressive: eight simulations

    • Reboilers, steam

    • 260 ⁰C steam, 135 ⁰C steam

    • Heavy feed, light feed

    • High heat exchanger temperatures, low heat exchanger temperatures


Overview

  • Background:

    • Distillation Specifications

    • Conventional Crude Distillation

    • Progressive Crude Distillation

  • Methodology

  • Results

  • Accuracy & Limitations


Conventional vs. Progressive

Light Crude

9% Decrease

15% Decrease


Light Crude


Progressive Heat usage

Light crude heat utility diagram

Hot Utility

Cold Utility

The intersection that is unaccounted for is the cold and hot utility


Progressive Heat usage

Light Crude

F*Cp MW

Temperature ⁰C


Conventional vs. Progressive

Heavy Crude

9% Decrease

14% Decrease


Progressive Heat usage

Heavy crude heat utility diagram


Progressive Heat usage

Heavy Crude

F*Cp MW

Temperature ⁰C


Our Conclusion

“Progressive Distillation can reduce the heat duty requirement of the distillation process by at least 17% for a light crude, and at least 16% for a heavy crude, while producing similar amounts of products.”


Economic Analysis

  • 120,000 BPD plant

  • Gross profit = Product sales – Utility costs

  • Progressive provides gross profit increase of $10.2 million each year using light crude feed and $27.3 million each year using a heavy crude feed


Vacuum Economic Analysis

  • Gas oil and residue profits are recovered in equal amounts in both cases

  • Progressive provides gross profit increase of $25.7 million each year using light crude feed and $57.2 million each year using a heavy crude feed


Overview

  • Background:

    • Distillation Specifications

    • Conventional Crude Distillation

    • Progressive Crude Distillation

  • Methodology

  • Results

  • Accuracy & Limitations


Limitations

  • Different column sequences and setups may offer lower heat utility

  • Optimum setup is based on composition of crude feed

  • Simulations are a simplification of reality

  • Heat exchanger network in the simulation is not optimized


Accuracy

  • D86 95% point comparisons between conventional and progressive are within 0.1 degrees Celcius

  • Product gap comparisons between conventional and progressive are within 1.0 degrees Celcius

  • Flowrate comparisons between conventional and progressive are within 10 cubic meters per hour


Questions


  • Login