PROCESS EQUIPMENT

DESIGN II
ASSIGNMENT-I
SUBMITTED TO:
PROF. JAYANTA CHAKRABORTY
SUBMITTED BY:
GROUP 8
RAHUL KUMAR
RAHUL YADAV
RAJA BARNWAL
RAKESH CHHIPA

13CH10034
13CH10035
13CH10036
13CH10037

TABLE OF
CONTENTS

CONTENT
PROBLEM STATEMENT
BASIC THEORY
PROCESS DEISGN
MECHANICAL DESIGN
REFERENCES

PAGE
03
04
05
14
21

PROBLEM STATEMENT
A sieve plate column is to be designed to separate 8000 kg/hr of feed
having 40 mole % Methanol (A) & 55 mole % Water (B) into an
overhead product containing 96 mole % A and a bottom product
containing mole 98 mole % B. The feed enters as an equilibrium
mixture of 30% liquid & 70% vapor. A reflux equal to 1.5 times the
minimum is to be used. Also an external reboiler is necessary to
remove the bottom product from the reboiler. The condensate
C & the
reflux enters the column at this temperature. Assume the Murphree
P
ffi i y 70%. Gi
AB=3.91
(a) Complete the process design calculation.
(b) Mechanical design of the column.
(c) Enclose a drawing showing the details of the column.

BASIC THEORY
Optimization stems from the need for improvement. Typical problems in
chemical engineering arise in process design, process control, model
development, process identification, and real-time optimization.
Distillation, being the most common industrial process for separation of
chemical components, is the focal unit of petroleum refining. While distillation
can be economically and easily scaled to different production levels, it is highly
energy intensive, consuming up to 80-90% of the total energy of a typical
petrochemical process. This makes the need for optimization essential to
maximize profitability of the entire process.
The performance of a distillation column is determined by many factors, such
as distillation feeds, internal liquid and fluid flow conditions, state of trays and
even ambient conditions which change over time, which makes the response
of real-time optimization to these changes a key contributor to successful
operation. In this particular process, detailed analysis of the operation and
design of the distillation column is performed involving the optimisation of
reflux ratio subject to various practical constraints and also the different
problems and cost analysis regarding the setting up of a distillation column in
real time.
In this design problem our task is to first find optimum value of reflux ratio at
which the total cost (operating + fixed cost) for setting up the distillation
facility for required separation of methanol is minimum. There are two
opposite factors contributing to the total cost. As the reflux ratio is increased
the number of trays required for a given degree of separation reduces which in
turn reduces the column height. However because of higher liquid and vapour
flow rates there is a increase in column diameter. Also the operating cost
increases because of higher heat duty of both the re-boiler and the condenser.
The optimum value of reflux ratio is determined by determining the minima in
a plot of Total cost Vs reflux ratio. The total cost calculated in our case is
actually annualised total cost which is calculated by dividing the total cost by
im
if f
q i m
f
ki g into account the interest
rates on various cost items.

PROCESS DESIGN
In this problem, we need to separate methanol from a mixture of water and
methanol by using a bubble cap distillation column.
Given Data
Mol. Wt. (Methanol)(MWm)
Operating Pr.
Temperature (T)
Liquid Density (rhoL)
Vapour Density (rhoV)
Liq. Surface Tension(sigma)
Liquid Rate(L)
Vapour Rate(V)

32.04
14.7
148.5
47.1645
0.08
19.3
14875
25581

gm/mol
Psig
F
lb/ft3
lb/ft3
dyne/cm
lb/hr
lb/hr

Liquid rate (expressed in gpm) = 39.32 gpm

Vapour rate (expressed in cfs) = V*1/rhoV*3600
= (25581*1)/(.08*3600)
= 88.82292 cfs

Cost optimization
F = 8000/(0.45*32+0.55*18) = 329.2181 kmol/hr
D = =(0.45-0.02)/(0.96-0.02)*F = 150.5998 kmol/hr
B = F-D = 178.6183 kmol/hr
Roptimum = Rmin * (R/Rmin)optimum
Refer to Excel sheet for detailed calculations. The optimization has been done
in MATLAB. The following is the result)
Roptimum = 1.3984
Theoretical number of trays have been derived from McCabe Thiele method.
For calculation of column diameter, qc, qr, and cost of column, condenser,
reboiler, reboiler, cooling water and total annual cost, refer attached excel
sheet. Also refer [4]
Theoretical number of trays = 20

McCabe Thiele (Equilibrium curve and Equilibrium line)

Cost Optimization
239000

238000

Total Annual Cost

237000

236000

235000

234000

233000

232000
1

1.02

1.04

1.06

R/Rmin

R/Rmin |optimum = 1.0393

1.08

1.1

1.12

Calculation of tower diameter:

F(lv) = (L /V)*sqrt(rhoV/rhoL)
= 0.023948418
Assume tray spacing = 24 inch
Cab= 0.4 [1](Figure 14.4)
Cab(corrected) = 0.4*(sigma/20)0.2
= 0.4*(19.3/20)0.2
= 0.397159956 (No measurable change)

Vapour velocity term (Un) = 0.4/(sqrt(rhoV/(rhoL-rhoV)))

= 0.4/((sqrt(0.08/(47.1645-0.08)))
= 9.704071311 fps
Take flooding = 75%
Net tray area (An) = (1/0.75)*(88.82292/9.704071311)
= 12.20933562 ft2
Take 12% for downcomer
Column cross section area (At) = An/0.88
= 13.87424503 ft2
Dt = sqrt(4*At/pie)
= 4.203003381 ft
Next available standard diameter, Dn = 6 ft
From [1] Table 14.5, we get 24 inch tray spacing is suitable for a 6 ft diameter
tower
Area (new), An = pie* Dn2/4
= 28.27433388 ft2
From [1] Table 14.2, we get REVERSE FLOW
We take,
Riser area
Down flow area

0.1 * At
0.12 * At

Max. active area

Side weir length
Max liq. flow path
Dynamics slot submergence of 1.5 inch

0.88 * At
0.62 * Dn
0.3 * Dn
(Assumed)

Estimated tray pressure drop (ht)

= 0.53*(rhoV/rhoL)*(V/(0.1*An))+0.8*1.5+1
= 0.53*(0.08/47.1645)*(88.82292/(0.1*28.27433388))+0.8*1.5+1
= 2.228241208 inch of fluid

Tray Layout
Tower diameter, Dn = 6 ft
Tray spacing
= 24 inch
Flow Type
= Reverse Flow
Layout
= Triangular
Bubble Cap Calculations
Bubble cap diameter = 4 inch
Area of 1 cap = pie*42/4
= 12.56637061 in2
Total bubble area, ABt = 0.7*An
= 19.79203372 ft2
Total number of bubble caps = ABt*144/area of 1 cap
= 226.8
Actual number of bubble caps = 227
Service is non-corrosive. We use CARBON STEEL A 53B

Weir Calculations
Length of side weir
Cap Pitch
Cap spacing
Cap Skirt Clearance
Static seal slot

0.5
1 to 3
0.25
1
0.5

Dn
in. (triangular)
* Cap Dia.
in
In

Weir length, lw = 36 inch

Downcomer width = 0.068*12*Dn
= 4.896 inch
Downcomer area / Downcomer = 0.028*An
= 0.791681349 ft2
Downcomer area / tray = 0.791681349 ft2
Central Baffle = 80% of Tower diameter (Assumed)
= 0.8*Dn
= 57.6 inch
Weir Setting
Skirt clearance
Shroud ring
Slot height
Static seal
Total weir height
Downflow apron seal
Clearance under baffle
Area under baffle

1
0.25
1
0.5
1+0.25+1+0.5 = 2.75

In
In
In
In
In

1 In
2 In
(36*2/144)ft2 = 0.5 ft2

Summary (areas)
Area
Riser Area
Slot Area
Downcomer Area
Active Area
Area under apron
Tower area
Net area

Formulae
4.8*227/144
8.12*227/144
0.12*An
0.88*An
Area under baffle
An
0.88*An

Per tray (ft2)

7.566666667
12.80027778
3.392920066
24.88141382
0.5
28.27433388
24.88141382

% of An
26.76160895
45.27172181
12
88
1.768388257
100
88

Flooding
Vapour velocity based on net area, U = V/An
= 88.82292 cfs/24.88141382 ft2
= 3.569850062 ft/s
% flooding = U/Un = 36.787 % (Under limits)
Entrainment
Phi = 0.055 [1] (Figure 14.5)
It is well within limits
Shape factor = Rs = 0.167/0.333 = 0.501501502
For Rs = 0.50, we have Cs = 0.74 [1] (Figure 14.6)
Qmax = Cs*Slot area*sqrt(slot height*(rhoL-rhoV)/rhoV)
= 229.7973954 cfs
Vapour load = 100*V/Qmax = 38.65 % of slot capacity
Slot opening = 55% [1] (Figure)
Slot height = 1*0.55 = 0.55 inch

Liquid crest over weir

Liquid load = 39.32 gpm
HOW = 0.48*(L/lw)2/3 = 0.51 inch
From Figure 14.7 [1],
L/lw2.5 = 2.2522
Weir correction = Fs = 1.04
HOW (corrected) = Fs*HOW = 0.53 inch
Liquid gradient
Arithmetic average flow width = 2.5 ft (approximated)
Liquid load per unit width = L/2.5 = 15.728 gpm/ft
CD = 0.75 [1] (Figure 14.9 and 14.10)
Hl = 2.75+0.53+1 = 5 (approximated)
Del = 0.5 inch (using figure 14.9 and 14.10)
Vapour pressure Drop
hcd = 0.53*(0.08/47.1645)*(D15/(0.1*B30)) = 0.03 inch of liquid
Mean dynamic slot seal, hda = 0.5+0.53+0.5/2 = 1.28 inch of liquid
Fva = 1.62 [1](Equation 14.40)
hal = 0.6*hda = 0.98 inch of liquid [1](figure 14.15 and equation 14.37)
Total tray pressure drop, ht = 0.03+0.51+0.98 = 1.52 inch of liquid
Vapour distribution Ratio
hc = 0.03+0.51 = 0.54 inch of liquid
Rcd = 0.5/0.54 = 0.925

Downcomer dynamics
had = 0.2 inch of liquid [1](using Equation 14.41 and 14.42)
hdc = 6.2 inch of liquid [1](using Equation 14.43)
hfd = 6.2/.4 =15.5 inch of liquid
tdc = 3.8 seconds [1](using Equation 14.47)

TRAY AND BUBBLE CAP DESIGN (all dimensions in mm)

MECHANICAL DESIGN

Shell ID (Di)
No. of trays
Tray spacing (t)
Hole Diameter (dh)
Plate Thicknes (tp)
Weir height (hw)
Material for tray
Shell material
Allowable stress for shell mat.(Pa)
Density of shell mat
skirt height
Operating pr (p)
Design pr (pD)
Operating temp
Design temp
Top disengaging space
Bottom separator space
Insulation material taken
Insulation thickness considered
Density of insulation

1828.8 mm
20
609.6 mm
101.6 mm
101.6 mm
69.85 mm
Carbon Steel A 53B
Carbon Steel A 53B
1.03E+08 Pa
7850 kg/m3
25.4 Mm
112405 Pa
123645.5 Pa
64.7 to 100 *C
110 *C
609.6 mm
1000 mm
Asbestos
50 mm
270 kg/m3

Formulae source: [2] and [6]

Shell thickness
J = 0.8
Minimum shell thickness, ts = p*Dt/(2*f*J-p)
= 1.367819 mm
After adding corrosion allowance, ts = 8mm
Do = Di+2*ts
= 1844.8 mm
th = pD*Di/(2*J*Pa-0.2*pD)
= 1.367001 mm

Adding corrosion allowance, th = 8 mm

Column height = (t + 19*t + 20*tp + 1000)/1000 = 15.224 m
(Refer to Excel sheet along with this file for the calculations)
Formulae
Source [2]

Stresses developed in column

Axial Stress (fas)
Circumferential Stress (fcs)

8910204 Pa
17820408 Pa

Compressive stresses caused by dead loads

Wshell
Mshell

54066.25 N
6620.357 kg

f(dead wt shell)

29434.89 Pa

M(insulation)
f(dead wt insulation)
Active Area
Liquid depth on trays
Mass of liquid
f(dead wt liquid)

1191.137
955285
2.31
83.2977
5002.86
4012265

Stress induced by column attachments

f(dead wt attachments)

5309488 Pa

Eq. 9.3.5

10306473 Pa

Eq. 9.3.6

f(dead total)

kg
Pa
m2
mm
Kg
Pa

Eq. 9.3.1
Eq. 9.3.1

Eq. 9.3.2

Eq. 9.3.3

Eq. 9.3.4

f(dead total) << allowable stress for shell material, hence permissible
Axial streses due to wind loads
Above the guy ring
Pw is assumed to be
M(w,H)
F(wind, H above guy)

2000 Pa
450746.6 N
84316785 Pa

Eq. 9.3.7

Below the guy ring

(Formulae used, [2] Eq. 9.3.8-9.4.4)
M(w,H,guy)(max)
f(wind,H,below guy)

26723.1 N
5269799 Pa

f(com guy)

641969.5 Pa

Analysis of stress
For upwind side
Total stress

82920516 Pa

For downwind side

Total stress

92472689 Pa

Torispherical Head has a range of 0.1 to 1.5 MPa. It is, therefore,

suitable to use for our column design.
Design of head
Do
ro
ho
Do2/4*Ro
(Do*ro/2)^0.5
hE, the minimum of above 3
hE/Do

1844.8
110.688
312.394
461.2
319.5287
312.394
0.169338

mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm

0.06*Do
Eq. 4.2.22

As the diameter of the vessel is not very large, head can be fabricated
from single plate, therefore J = 1
t/DoC
C
t/Do
t
Corrosion allowance

0.000544
3.679807
0.002
3.689856 mm
2 mm

Table 4.1A
Eq. 4.2.20

Uncorroded plate thickness

6 mm

Torispherical Head Volume

0.623133 m3

Skirt Support Design

Mshell
Wshell
Desity of Carbon Steel
WD
Wmin
Wi
Wl
Wmax

6620.357
64879.5
7850
47937.64
112817.1
11673.14
391901.7
516392

Kg
N
Kg/m3
N
N
N
N
N

Period of vibration at min dead wt

Tmin
Therefore K2 = 1

0.178766 s

<0.5 s
Eq. 9.3.9

Tmax
Therefore K2 = 1

0.382461 s

<0.5

Stress due to wind load

K1 = 0.7 for cylinderical surface
Pw(min)
Pw(max)

38978.31 N
39319.33 N

Minimum and Maximum wind moments

Mw(min)
Mw(max)

296.7029 kJ
299.2987 kJ

Stresswm(min)*t
Stresswm(max)*t

0.112953 MN/m2 Eq. 9.3.13

0.113942 MN/m2 Eq. 9.3.13

Eq. 9.3.11
Eq. 9.3.11

Dead Load Stress

Stressw(min)*t
Stressw(max)*t

0.019636 MN/m2
0.08988 MN/m2

Maximum tensile stress without any eccentric load

Stress(tensile)*t
0.093317 MN/m2 Eq. 10.2.1
t

1.289267 mm

Stress(compression)*t

0.203822 MN/m2

Stress(compression)/t

13670.17

0.003861 m
3.861343 mm
7 mm

Minimum corroded skirt thickness [3]

Design of skirt bearing plate

Stress_max(compressive)

0.099138 MN/m2

Thickness of bearing plate, tbp

According to IS code [3]
As thickness is <20mm no gasket is required

5.363147 mm
7 mm

Stress_min(compressive)
0.024795 MN/m2
J
0.294613
as this value <1.5 the vessel will not be steady by its own weight

Anchor bolt design

P(bolt),N
Hot rolled carbon steel is selected for bolts
therefore f = 57.3 MN/m2
Area of bolts x no. of bolts
M12x1.5 bolts
No. of bolts
Actual number of bolts

0.013467 MN

0.000235
235.0243
63
3.730545
4

Nozzle Design
(Refer to attached Excel sheet for details and formulae) [2]
Area to be compensated, A
Outsite diam. Of nozzle, do
Nozzle wall thickness, tn
d
c
p
Do
f
j

(d+2c)tr

tr
Area to be compensated, A

0.030702806 m
0.006877428 m2

0.25
0.016
0.218
0.003
3.5
1.8448
103.4
1

m
m
m
m
MN/m2
m
MN/m2

m2
mm2
mm2
bolts

Area available from shell reinforcrment

As
0.003650572 m2
Area available from nozzle
reinforcrment, An
tr'

2H1(tn-tr'-c)
0.004160723 m

H1
An

0.05396295 m
0.000953987 m2

Reinforcement area available from shell and

nozzle is
As+An
0.004604559 m2
Area remained to be
compansated
A-(As+An)
0.00227287 m2
Ar >=
0.00227287 m2
tp
0.010538229
Ring Pad dimension
Inner Diameter, do
Outer diameter
Thickness

0.25 m
0.448 m
0.025 m

REFERENCES
[1] Smi , B.D., D ig f Eq i ib i m S g P
, M G w-Hill Book Co.
[2] Introduction to Chemical Equipment Design by B.C Bhattacharya, 2012
[3] IS : 2825-1969, the Indian Standard codes
[4] Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers Fourth Edition
by Max S. Peters & Klaus D. Timmerhaus
[5] R.H.P y, D.W.G
; P y C mi E gi
H
b k7 E ii
[6] R. K. Si
,C
Ri
Chemical Engineering: Chemical
Engineering Design (vol. 6), Butterworth-Heinemann, 3rd ed. 1999