Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Mist Elim
Mist Elim
I
N EVERY PROCESS involving contact between liq-
uid and flowing gas, tiny mist droplets are carried eliminators, achieving such benefits requires better
away with the gas. (See Figure 1) This phenome- knowledge on the part of users. It is no longer ade-
non is called entrainment. quate for a designer simply to indicate “mist elimi-
Beginning about 1947, special devices were nator” in a drawing. The results will depend on
developed to remove mist from gas streams. Now proper specification of mist eliminator type (or
known as mist eliminators, these devices provide a combination of types), orientation, thickness, inter-
large surface area in a small volume to collect liquid nal details, support and spacing in the vessel, vapor
without substantially impeding gas flow. Unlike fil- velocity and flow pattern, and many other consider-
ters, which hold particles indefinitely, mist elimina- ations.
tors coalesce (merge) fine droplets and allow the liq- Despite the advances that have been made, mist
uid to drain away. Gas typically flows upward eliminator specification is still as much art as sci-
through a horizontal mist eliminator. ence. For all but the most experienced users, proper
More recently, advances in technology have application depends on consultation with a manu-
enabled substantial progress in mist eliminator facturer’s engineers. Such help should be consid-
designs, materials, and application expertise. New ered for every new mist eliminator application as
products and methods of use have been found highly well as every upgrade or debottlenecking of existing
effective for many purposes, especially the following: applications.
• Increasing throughput
T
O MAKE THE MOST of a mist eliminator invest-
• Downsizing new vessels ment, the designer should become familiar
with the considerations and possibilities
• Improving product purity
involved. The purpose of this publication is to pro-
• Cutting operating costs vide general guidelines and an overview of the field of
• Reducing environmental pollution mist elimination. Due to the numerous variables
involved in specifying mist eliminators, designers
• Reducing downstream corrosion and purchasers should consult with Amistco’s sepa-
• Increasing recovery of valuable liquids ration specialists before making a final decision.
Figure 1. Typical mist eliminator application in Table 1. Typical size range of mist droplets
distillation column created by various processes
(microns, micrometers)
Mechanical
Column packing or trays 5 to 800 mm
Sprays 10 to 1,000 mm
Surface evaporation 3 to 1,000 mm
Chemical
Acid mists 0.1 to 15 mm
Condensation
Blown off heat exchanger surface 3 to 500 mm
In saturated vapor 0.1 to 50 mm
–2–
Types of mist eliminators
Figure 2. Flattened tube Figure 3. “Co-knit” mesh, including multifilament
of knitted 0.011-inch glass fibers knitted along with the wire
wire with diagonal
crimps
T
HERE ARE THREE general types of mist elimina-
tors—mesh, vane, and fiber bed—and Amistco small as 5 microns (micrometers).
makes all three. Each is suited for a different class of For eliminating droplets down to 1 micron in diame-
applications, either alone or combined with another type. ter, multi-filament yarns of various plastics or glass are
knitted into the mesh. The result is called a composite or
co-knit mesh (Figure 3).
Mesh—pads and
Mesh pads
insertion type In the most familiar application of knitted mesh, the
The most widely applicable type of mist eliminator is crimped strips are stacked to form a pad with typical thick-
made of metal or plastic wire with typical diameter of 0.006 ness of four or six inches. (See Figure 4.) Rigidity is provid-
to 0.011 inch, loosely knitted in a form resembling a cylin- ed by a frame—usually metal—consisting of a grid on each
drical net. This tube is flattened to form a two-layer strip side and rods passing through the mesh. Pads larger than
typically 12 inches wide, which is then crimped in a diago- about three feet across are fabricated in sections narrow
nal pattern with ridges as shown in Figure 2. When these enough to pass through a manway for assembly inside a
strips are laid together, the ridges slant in alternate direc- vessel. Mesh pads can be made in almost any shape, but
tions, forming an open structure through which gas flows most are round (as in Figure 4) or rectangular.
–3–
MistFix ™ insertion mist eliminator are sometimes used in combination with mesh pads for
optimum performance in special situations. Amistco’s
In an exclusive Amistco innovation (U. S. Patent
standard vanes (front cover) are available in metal or
Number 5,985,004), knitted wire mesh is wrapped into a
plastics and have various blade spacings and profiles. For
cylindrical core with a flange at one end. (See Figure 5.)
special requirements, Amistco also supplies curved vanes
MistFix mist eliminators extend vertically into a vessel
such as the non-metallic variety shown in Figure 6.
from the vapor exit nozzle. As replacements or substitutes
for pads, they greatly speed turnaround time, avoid entry Double-pocket vanes
of hazardous vessels, and eliminate the need for vessel cut-
Amistco’s high-performance double-pocket vanes
ting where there is no access port. They are ideally suited
(Figure 7) can operate at higher capacity and higher effi-
for existing vessels that do not have mist eliminators.
ciency than conventional vanes. The design features liq-
uid pockets that prevent re-entrainment of the separated
liquid droplets. This helps increase the capacity up to
Typical mist twice that of conventional vanes. The higher gas velocities
eliminator unit also help in obtaining 100% removal of 8-micron droplets.
Horizontal Flow
Typical
installation
Figure 6. Mist eliminator with curved non-metallic vanes Figure 8. Typical fiber mist eliminator candle
–4–
Fundamental considerations
P
ROPER APPLICATION of mist eliminators is based
on understanding how they work. Vane and mesh
devices both employ the same mechanism—known
as inertial impaction—and thus are subject to the same
basic design rules. Fiber mist eliminators, however, cap-
ture submicron droplets (those smaller than one micron)
by an entirely different phenomenon—known as
Brownian motion—leading to very different behavior.
–5–
Inertial capture efficiency
Based on the principle of inertial capture, it is easy to
understand the behavior of a vane or mesh mist elimina-
tor in terms of the efficiency with which it captures mist
droplets. Consider a droplet encountering a mesh strand
or a bend in a vane. (To help imagine the relative dimen-
sions involved in the case of a mesh pad, see Figure 12.)
The following factors determine whether the droplet
strikes the surface or turns and flows around with the gas:
1. Droplet size: The larger the droplet, the greater its
momentum and the straighter its path when surround-
ing gas flows around an obstacle. Consequently, as
seen in Figure 13, the efficiency of a given mist elimina-
tor varies steeply with droplet size (keeping the same Figure 13. Examples of variation of droplet capture
velocity and liquid and gas composition). For the efficiency with droplet size and filament diameter
example mesh pad made of 0.011-inch wire, efficiency
jumps from nearly zero for 2-micron droplets to nearly velocity and liquid and gas composition). This effect
100% for 20-micron droplets. In a real situation, can be seen by comparing the three curves in Figure 13,
droplet sizes will be distributed over a range from less representing mesh pads having different strand thick-
than one micron to well over 100 microns. The distri- nesses. The 279-micron (0.011-inch) wire is 90% effi-
bution curve may be narrow or broad, peaking any- cient for 6-micron droplets, compared to 3-micron
where within that range. droplets for the 152-micron (0.006-inch) wire and 1.5-
2. Strand diameter or corrugation spacing: The smaller micron droplets for 10-micron co-knit glass fibers. (See
the diameter of a mesh strand (or the closer the spacing appendix for efficiency curves for various other types of
between the corrugations of a vane), the more abruptly Amistco mesh and vanes.)
oncoming gas turns aside, and the more difficult it is for 3. Gas velocity: The more rapidly a droplet approaches
mist droplets to follow the gas. Thus, finer strands can a mesh strand or vane corrugation, the greater its
capture smaller droplets (again assuming the same momentum, carrying it in a straighter path. Further-
more, at higher velocities, gas flow streamlines
Figure 12. Relative sizes of droplets and strands approach the obstacle more closely, resulting in tighter
1 micron (mm) = 1 millionth of a meter bends. Thus, the capture efficiency of a mist elimina-
tor increases sharply with velocity until an upper limit
is reached due to re-entrainment or flooding (dis-
cussed later).
4. Liquid density relative to gas density: What causes a
droplet to deviate from curving gas streamlines is not its
momentum alone, but the difference or ratio between
the droplet’s momentum and that of the gas around it.
In cases where the gas is nearly as dense as the liquid—
for instance, at high pressures—the gas sweeps droplets
around the obstacle more strongly, preventing capture.
5. Gas viscosity: The more viscous the gas, the more drag
it exerts on suspended droplets as the gas flows around
mesh strands and vane corrugations, leading to
reduced capture efficiency. The viscosity of a gas gener-
ally goes up with higher temperature.
6. Pad density and thickness: Finally, the efficiency of a
mesh pad also depends on how closely the strands are
packed and on the thickness of the pad. Packing densi-
ty is increased by knitting with more loops per inch and
crimping with narrower ridges. It is measured in terms
of pounds per cubic foot of pad. Thickness, in turn, is
increased by piling on more layers of crimped mesh
sheets. Thicker, denser pads bring trade-offs in terms of
higher pressure drop and susceptibility to re-entrain-
ment and flooding. Typical densities for stainless steel
mesh are 9 and 12 pounds per cubic feet, and typical
thicknesses are 4, 6, and 8 inches.
–6–
Brownian capture
Brownian motion, the main capture mechanism for
submicron droplets in fiber mist eliminators, is the fre-
quent random jerks experienced by microscopic particles
suspended in a gas or liquid. The cause is momentary
inequalities in the number and speed of surrounding
molecules hitting the particle from various directions.
This tiny motion is enough to throw small droplets out of
gas streamlines and against fibers that they would other-
wise flow around. (See Figure 15.) Since flow momentum
is not involved, capture efficiency is not improved by
larger droplets, higher velocity, higher relative liquid den-
sity, or lower gas viscosity as for vanes and mesh. Instead,
efficiency goes up with higher temperature, longer resi-
dence time in the mat (due to greater mat thickness or
lower gas velocity), and closer packing of fibers, and
down with greater droplet size and pressure.
Because fiber mist eliminators are so different from
vane and mesh units in application and specifica-
tion, further technical information about them is
Figure 14. Droplet capture by interception
provided in separate Amistco publications.
–7–
Figure 16. Pressure drop, flooding, and re-entrainment in a typical horizontal mesh pad
result is a thin flooded layer agitated by rising gas, gener- retard drainage within the pad virtually to zero. The mesh
ating a small amount of additional mist that is immedi- is entirely choked with agitated liquid, generating mist
ately captured again. droplets downstream across a wide range of sizes.
Point B, in turn, lies on a “moderate” load line at the Flooding has caused the pressure-drop curve to begin
velocity where a few re-entrained droplets begin to blow turning up sharply. If flow were increased beyond this
upward from the pad—about 11 ft/sec, under these con- point, the line would become almost vertical. For lower
ditions. Re-entrainment is roughly indicated by the dark- liquid loads, flooding occurs at higher velocities.
er background at the right side of the plot. (The darker Similar behavior governs capacity limits also for vane
area on the left, in turn, signifies poor capture efficiency.) mist eliminators and for horizontal flow through vertical
The higher the liquid load, the lower the velocity at which mist eliminators of both types.
re-entrainment occurs. As to the influence of operating variables on these phe-
At Point B, velocity is high enough to detach coa- nomena, flooding is promoted by high liquid load (volume
lesced droplets and lift some of them against the force of percent mist in the incoming mixture), high gas velocity
gravity. Most re-entrained droplets are relatively large— (especially for upward flow as in this example), and high liq-
up to 1,000 microns (1 millimeter). Because of the higher uid viscosity and surface tension (inhibiting drainage).
liquid flow rate in the approaching mist and greater At very light liquid loads, re-entrainment can occur
upward drag on captured liquid due to higher air velocity, without appreciable flooding. However, with or without
the flooded zone fills an appreciable layer. Incoming mist flooding, re-entrainment is promoted by higher gas veloc-
rises higher in the pad before being captured. ity, smaller strand diameter or vane corrugation spacing,
Finally, at Point C, the velocity is high enough not only sharper corrugation angles, greater liquid load, lower liq-
to lift even the largest re-entrained droplets, but also to uid density relative to gas, lower liquid surface tension,
Figure 17. Envisioning stages in mesh pad performance in preceding figure (vertical cross-sections through pad)
–8–
Sizing for gas velocity using
Souders-Brown equation
T
HE FOREGOING fundamental considerations lead
directly to procedures for sizing a mesh or vane
mist eliminator in terms of cross-sectional area, to
handle the throughput for a particular application.
The key variable is gas velocity. In a given applica-
tion, a mist eliminator has a definite operating range,
indicated by the lighter background color in Figure 16. At
velocities above this range, performance is impaired by
re-entrainment, accompanied by flooding for all but the
lightest mist loads. As velocity decreases within the oper-
ating range, droplet capture efficiency declines—more
steeply for smaller droplets than for larger ones. At some
point, the efficiency for droplets at the lower end of the Generalizing Figure 16 by applying Souders-Brown
size range has fallen to an unacceptable level. This is the
equation K = VG /
(rL - rG)/rG
bottom of the operating velocity range. For the typical
case in Figure 16, it is roughly 3 ft/sec. Dividing that into Water and air at 70° F and 1 atmosphere:
the re-entrainment limit of about 11 ft/sec yields an rL = 62.3 pounds per cubic foot
approximate turndown ratio of nearly four to one for the rG = 0.0749 pounds per cubic foot
operating range. K = VG / 28.8
It is generally recommended that the nominal oper- Design K = (10 ft/sec) / 28.8 = 0.35 ft/sec
ating velocity be established toward the top of the Maximum K = (11 ft/sec) / 28.8 = 0.38 ft/sec
range—about 10 feet per second for an air-water applica-
tion such as this. Capture efficiency is higher there than Figure 18. Graphs of Figure 16 in terms of
farther down in the range, and performance is satisfacto- Souders-Brown vapor load factor
ry at velocities from about 30% to 110% of that value.
eliminator and gas-liquid system—typically air and
A certain formula is widely used in sizing a mesh or
water—to be used in sizing mist eliminators of the same
vane mist eliminator for a given throughput. It general-
type for different gases and liquids.
izes the characteristics reflected in Figure 16 (notably
For example, Figure 18 shows the graphs of Figure 16,
excepting the low end of the operating range) from the
with the X axis converted from velocity to vapor load fac-
base case of air and water to other gases and liquids.
tor. The conversion factor is 28.8, calculated as shown in
Called the Souders-Brown equation, it has long been the
the figure. The effect is to shift the graphs of Figure 16
customary tool for predicting the maximum allowable
toward the left by that amount. The recommended
vapor velocity in a trayed vapor-liquid contactor column.
design velocity of 10 feet per second for this mesh pad in
(M. Souders and G. G. Brown, “Design of fractionating
this horizontal configuration corresponds to a load factor
Columns. I. Entrainment and Capacity,” Industrial &
of about 0.35 ft/sec. The top of the operating range, in
Engineering Chemistry, Volume 26 [1934], Pages 98-103.)
turn (11 ft/sec in Figure 16), lies at a load factor of about
The equation is similar in form to Newton’s Law for the
0.38. Amistco publishes graphs such as this as design
terminal velocity of falling spheres.
aids for a number of its products. (See appendix.)
The version of the Souders-Brown equation common-
The point is that re-entrainment, flooding, and log-
ly used for mist eliminators establishes a variable K called
log pressure-drop plots (although not capture efficien-
the vapor load factor—also known as the system load fac-
cy) all correlate well with vapor load factor for different
tor, Souders-Brown velocity, or K factor—as follows:
liquids and gases having various densities. The correla-
K = VG /
(rL - rG)/rG (Equation 1) tion generally holds at pressures from atmospheric up
K = vapor load factor (Souders-Brown velocity) to about 7 atmospheres (100 psia) for gases and liquids
whose surface tension and viscosity vary roughly alike
VG = gas velocity
with density. This includes most light hydrocarbons,
rL = liquid density in same units as rG
for instance.
rG = gas density in same units as rL As an example, consider a TM-1109 mist eliminator
The K factor can be considered an effective gas veloc- in the top of a distillation column or knockout drum as
ity for the purpose of expressing the throughput capacity shown in Figure 19. In this particular case, the square-
limit, adjusted for the effects of liquid and gas density. root divisor in Equation 1 is 11.7. The design velocity
This parameter allows data gathered for a given mist (corresponding to a K-factor of 0.35 ft/sec) is 4.10 ft/sec—
–9–
Table 2. Recommended design values of Souders-
Brown vapor load factor K = VG /
(rL - rG)/rG
Typical wire mesh pad (no co-knit yarn):
Vertical flow . . . . . . . . . . . . .K = 0.35 ft/sec
Horizontal flow . . . . . . . . . .K = 0.42 ft/sec
(For mist loads less than 0.1% volumetric,
equivalent to 0.5 GPM/ft2 at 10 ft/sec)
Typical vane unit
Vertical flow . . . . . . . . . . . . .K = 0.50 ft/sec
Horizontal flow . . . . . . . . . .K = 0.65 ft/sec
Double-pocket vane unit
Vertical & horizontal flow K = 1.0 ft/sec
Typical operating velocity range:
Shell diameter = 7.88 ft (std. 8.0 ft) 30% to 110% of design K above
Effective pressure range:
Derate K as much as 40% for vacuum or
pressures above 7 atmospheres (85 psig)
– 10 –
Mesh versus vanes—or both
ty for long periods without maintenance or replacement.
T
HE EFFICIENCY OF VANE mist eliminators is gen-
erally acceptable only for droplets larger than 10 or Offshore platforms and long-running processes are
20 microns in the case of air and water at ambient prime examples.
conditions. (Compare efficiency curves on Pages 14 and
15.) Furthermore, a vane unit is generally more expensive
than a mesh pad in the same application. However, vanes Mesh-vane combinations
have certain advantages that dictate their selection over
Vane units can be especially valuable in certain appli-
mesh in some situations.
cations when used immediately upstream or downstream
of mesh pads. Figures 20 and 21 illustrate these concepts
Vane advantages with horizontal flow. With vertical flow, capacity will be
– 11 –
Applying mist eliminators
Vertical
vessel,
vertical Horizontal
flow vessel, horizontal
lateral flow,
double banks
Plan view
Horizontal vessel,
vertical flow
Vertical
vessel,
horizontal
flow
Lateral view Axial
view
Axial
Horizontal vessel,
horizontal axial flow Lateral view view
Figure 22. Typical mist eliminator configurations in cylindrical knockout drums. Similar configurations can be
used in other vessels. The mist eliminators may be mesh, vane, or combinations.
dling ability of vanes. The K-factor of the combination is • Liquid holding capacity and drainage method
that of the mesh pad. • Worker access for cleaning, replacement, etc.
• Support beams for large horizontal mist eliminators
T
HE FOLLOWING are some additional considera-
tions that may come into play when applying mesh • Internal flow constraints for efficient operation
and vane mist eliminators in specific situations.
Like other information in this publication, these guide-
lines can be useful for preliminary design purposes. Internal flow guidelines
However, final decisions should not be made without con-
The last consideration in the foregoing list—internal
sulting Amistco’s separation specialists.
flow constraints—is often overlooked but may be of pri-
mary importance. There are two main principles:
Vessel configurations
The simplified diagrams in Figure 22 show several typ-
ical configurations of mist eliminators in vessels. The mist
eliminators may be mesh pads, vane units, or combina-
tions as described on Page 11. The vessels depicted are
cylindrical vapor-liquid separators, often called knockout
drums. However, some of the same concepts may also
apply to mist eliminators in process vessels, such as
vapor-liquid contactor columns, evaporators, chillers, etc.
Considerations affecting selection of a mist elimina-
tor configuration may include the following:
• Mist eliminator cross-sectional area to achieve
design velocity with required vapor throughput
• Space available inside existing vessel
• Plant space available for the vessel Figure 23. Example of mist eliminator performance
• Inlet and outlet locations to fit established piping degradation due to uneven velocity profile
– 12 –
Figure 24. Generally accepted spacing guidelines to maintain even velocity profile and avoid entrainment
in mist eliminators in cylindrical vessels with axial flow
– 13 –
Appendix
– 14 –
Figure A3. Efficiency of 6-inch co-knit and plastic
monofilament mesh pads
Figure A4. Pressure drop for 6-inch Figure A5. Pressure drop for 6-inch plastic
co-knit mesh pads monofilament mesh pads
Figure A6. Efficiency of vane mist eliminators Figure A7. Pressure drop for a typical Amistco vane unit
– 15 –
products, each phase of manufacturing is
A
MISTCO SEPARATION PRODUCTS, Inc.,
manufactures a wide range of phase con- closely monitored to assure that customer
tacting and separation equipment for specifications and performance requirements
both routine replacement and new construction. are satisfied or exceeded. Amistco separation
In addition to mist eliminators, our products specialists are readily available to assist cus-
include liquid-liquid coalescers and tower pack- tomers with technical design questions.
ings and internals. As Begg Cousland’s exclusive Amistco products are sold worldwide
Western Hemisphere licensee, Amistco brings to through a network of marketing representa-
customers over 25 years of fiber mist eliminator tives. For the location of your nearest represen-
manufacturing and application experience. We tative, contact Amistco or visit our Web site.
also fabricate numerous subassemblies and
turnkey separation packages for primary con-
tractors and end users worldwide.
Amistco began manufacturing knitted wire
mesh mist eliminators in Alvin, Texas, in 1991.
With greatly expanded knitting capabilities and
an ever-widening range of products, Amistco
now occupies a new 40,000-square-foot facility. 23147 Highway 6 • Alvin, Texas 77511
Our success was built upon prompt and Phone 281-331-5956 • Fax 281-585-1780
consistent customer service. From the pro- Amistco@Amistco.com • www.amistco.com
curement of materials to delivery of finished 24-hour Emergency Service: 800-839-6374
Bulletin 106 • January, 2004 • Amistco is a licensee of Begg Cousland candle technology. • MistFix is a registered trademark and Tex-Mesh is a trademark of Amistco Separation
Products, Inc. • Amistco has endeavored to assure that all information in this publication is accurate. However, nothing herein is intended as a guarantee or warranty.
– 16 –
AMISTCO
Product Bulletin – IME
Advantages
• NO Cutting
• NO Welding U.S. Patent #5985004
• NO Manway Access
AMISTCO Separation Products manufactures a full line
• NO Hazardous Entry
of tower internals, mist eliminators and other components
• NO ASME re-certification
critical to effective mass transfer and separation.
• NO Scaffolding For more details regarding these products, visit our website
• Minimal Downtime or consult with an AMISTCO Separations representative.
23147 Hwy. 6 Alvin, Texas 77511 • Ph: (281) 331-5956 • Fax: (281) 585-1780 • www.amistco.com • amistco@amistco.com
11/03
AMISTCO
Product Bulletin – VNM-DP
Twice the Separation Capacity and AMISTCO Separation Products, Inc. manufactures a full line
Higher Efficiency Than Standard Vane of tower internals, mist eliminators and other components
critical to effective mass transfer and separation. For more
Offshore platform separators in the Gulf of Mexico, Lake
details regarding these products, visit our website or consult
Maracaibo (Venezuela) and the Java Sea (Indonesia) have
with an AMISTCO Separations representative.
utilized AMISTCO’s Double Pocket Vanes to increase their
gas production. The vane’s unique geometry channels the
collected liquid away from the gas, minimizing reentrain-
ment. The blade geometry also allows for more efficient 100
DP Vane
mist removal. New vessels can be designed much smaller Vane Type Capacity
90
DPVane
saving cost and weight. Horizontal
80
% Efficiency
Vane
Benefits Flow 60
Standard 50
• Increase capacity up to 100% Vane
Horizontal K=0.65 40
• Reduce vessel size and weight 30
Flow
• Increased efficiency Standard 20
Vane 10
• Maintains efficiency at higher pressures Vertical K=0.50
0
Flow 0 4 8 12 16 20
• Debottleneck existing equipment Particle size, microns
Mist Eliminator at atmospheric
Gas conditions with air and water.
Outlet
Gas
Outlet
Gas 4’ Gas 8’
Inlet Inlet
23147 Hwy. 6 Alvin, Texas 77511 • Ph: (281) 331-5956 • Fax: (281) 585-1780 • www.amistco.com • amistco@amistco.com
11/03
AMISTCO
Mist Eliminator
Installation Guide
Table of Contents
New Mist Eliminator Inspection 4
Installation 9-13
Troubleshooting 15
3
Step One New Mist Eliminator Inspection
4
Step Two Removing Existing Mist Eliminator
(For new process vessels proceed to page 6.)
5
Hold Down Options
Caution:
If your mist eliminator is installed
in a critical or severe service,
AMISTCO recommends a more
secure hold down method. Check
with your AMISTCO sales repre-
sentative about optional relief
doors, heavy duty grids and other
special features.
6
Hold Down Options
Through Bolts
Relief Doors
Dual Support Rings Tie Wire w/Offset Ring Relief doors can be incorporated
into your mist eliminator design for
fouling service to prevent blowout
in upset conditions.
Gas
7
Hold Down Options
Expansion Ring
8
Step Three Installation
9
Installing Multi-Section Mist Eliminators in Vertical Vessels
Large Pads:
For large pads, total compression can be several inches. It is very difficult
to “work out” all of the compression when installing the last section.
AMISTCO recommends this easy method: Loop tie wire around adjacent
grids as the sections are installed. This loop should be close to the down
rods, where the mesh is fixed to the grids. Twist the tie wire, pulling the
grids towards each other, until the grids of each section are spaced 11/2”
apart. Using this procedure will ease installation of the last sections.
1 2 3
10
Installing Multi-Section Mist Eliminators in Vertical Vessels
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
11
Installing Multi-Section Mist Eliminators in Horizontal Vessels
Top View
1 2 3 4 5
12
Installing Multi-Section Mist Eliminators in Horizontal Vessels
Final Notes:
Make certain and check your
2 work when you complete
installation procedures.
13
Maintenance and Cleaning
14
Troubleshooting
Monitoring pressure drop across • If pressure drop increases more than an inch of water column
the mist eliminator may be the best above start-up conditions, some sort of plugging is most likely
option for determining acceptable taking place. To rectify the situation, clean the mesh pad.
operation. It is a good practice to
• When pressure drop decreases across the mist eliminator, there are
record initial pressure drop at
likely holes or voids in the pad or significantly reduced mesh density.
start-up under clean conditions
Corrosion over time will reduce the mesh wire diameter, mesh
for future observation.
density and in turn reduce pressure drop. Gaps in the mesh pad will
cause channeling and a significant reduction in collection efficiency.
Note:
For mist eliminator design and
performance information, ask for
AMISTCO’s Mesh and Vane Mist
Eliminator brochure.
15
Other AMISTCO Products
When it comes to effective mass transfer separations and pollution control,
come to AMISTCO Separation Products. With the full range of separation
products, we offer individual components or turnkey systems built to your
specifications and/or performance requirements.
MESH and VANE MIST ELIMINATORS RANDOM PACKINGS STRUCTURED GRID PACKING
from knitted mesh pads to vane mist eliminators to facilitate mass transfer under a wide for severe fouling applications
and candle filters for submicron mist removal. range of applications.
We also manufacture our patented Mist FixTM
insertion cartridge mist eliminator for applications
where vessel access is prohibitive.
LIQUID DISTRIBUTORS
for effective distribution of liquids over the TURNKEY POLLUTION
INLET DISTRIBUTORS packing, AMISTCO offers options to meet CONTROL PACKAGES
many designs available including diffuser a variety of performance requirements. for asphalt, oleum, plasticizers, metal working,
plates and cyclonic type distributors. compressor stations, marine bilge and a wide
range of specialty indoor air cleaning and
outdoor removal of visible plumes. We also
manufacture turnkey systems for separating
a wide variety of gas, liquid and solid regimes.
Candle FILTERS
AMISTCO
AMISTCO is a licensee of Begg Cousland
AMISTCO Separation Products offers superior performing these unique candle filter materials and construction have
candle filters and turnkey submicron mist eliminator packaged increased separating efficiency, lowered pressure drop or in
solutions for Sulfuric Acid production, other processes involv- some cases both in numerous separation applications replac-
ing acids and a wide range of pollution control applications. ing other candle filter technologies.
As the Western Hemisphere licensee for Begg Cousland we
manufacture a proven unique candle filter technology to With the addition of candle filters, AMISTCO provides cus-
complement our comprehensive line of mesh pad and vane tomers with superior new or retrofit separations technologies
type mist eliminators. to handle everything from submicron mists to large droplets.
Our engineering expertise and fabricating capabilities go one
The Begg Cousland candle filter was originally developed in step further to offer customers packaged pollution control and
the laboratories of I.C.I.. After 30 years of proof in the field, product recovery systems assemblies.
Design Criteria 100% Removal > 1 Micron 150-250 MM H2O Less Than 0.2 M/SEC
98% Removal < 1 Micron Pressure loss Bed Velocity
AMISTCO
• Metal Working Operations
Fumes resulting from metalworking lubricants
used in milling, drilling and other metal shaping
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Reprinted from: ROTATING EQUIPMENT/RELIABILITY
October 2004 issue, pgs 77–84
Used with permission.
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com
W
hen the gas approaching a compressor is wet, traces installation, high liquid viscosity, waxy deposits, liquid slugs,
of aqueous or organic liquid may escape the inlet foaming and several other possibilities.
knockout drum—often intermittently—and silently The trouble may even be that no mist eliminator was provided
damage the compressor. Telltale signs include pitting corrosion, in the first place—or perhaps no knockout drum at all. But wher-
salt deposits and diluted lubricants. ever free liquid drops out in a suction drum, it generates some
Instead of trying to repair symptoms, look for the root cause,
which usually involves the mist eliminator in the knockout drum
(Figs. 1, 2 and 3). Problems may include improper mist elimina- ����������������������������������������
tor specifications, overloading, uneven velocity profiles, incorrect
������
������� �������
��������
�����
�������������
����
���� ���
FIG. 1 Typical compressor suction drums. ����
��������
����
FIG. 3 Typical mist eliminators: vane unit (left) and mesh pad FIG. 4 An intermittent spray system can remove deposits.
(right).
FIG. 5 Mesh pad performance degrades as liquid and gas loads increase (vertical cross-sections).
����
���
�����
������� FIG. 7 A vane unit with “double pockets” reduces re-entrainment
������ of captured liquid.
FIG. 6 An inlet cyclone device can be used to break up foam. Designing for droplet size distribution. There are many
different types of mist eliminator elements, and the variety has
greatly increased through the years. Not understanding the liquid
source in the upstream process can cause you to select the wrong
mist that can damage the compressor unless it is removed by a type of mist eliminator or to keep a given type when process
mist eliminator. Even in cases where the feed gas never has any changes make it inappropriate.
free liquid, often fine mist droplets coalesce into large drops on Knowing the process allows you to design for the most efficient
the walls of the inlet pipe or inside the compressor. For all but mist collection. Most important, selection should not be made
the driest gas, a compressor should be protected by an inlet mist until the droplet size distribution is defined in terms of the pro-
eliminator. New high-capacity, high-efficiency mist eliminator portion of droplets of each size. Assuming an incorrect droplet size
technologies pay off the first time you avoid a shutdown. distribution can mean that you have designed for a less-efficient
For optimum separation performance, compressor knockout mist eliminator, and liquid carryover may occur.
drums must be properly designed and sized with appropriate See Tables 1 and 2 for some points of reference and rough
mist eliminator elements in correct configurations, taking into guidelines in this respect. Be aware that capture efficiency of a
account many factors. In multistage compressor installations, given mist eliminator element does not depend only on droplet
proper knockout drum configuration is seldom the same for size. It is also influenced by gas velocity through the element and
all stages. To maintain good performance, design of each drum mist load in terms of liquid flowrate per unit of cross-sectional
should be reviewed whenever there are significant changes in area. Then there are variables such as density and viscosity that
the process. These include appreciable increases or decreases depend on temperature, pressure, and liquid and gas composition.
in throughput, shifts in composition of the gas or mist drop- All else being equal, efficiency generally goes up with higher veloc-
lets, upstream equipment alterations or revisions of operating ity (until re-entrainment occurs), larger droplets, higher liquid
and control procedures. In addition, mist eliminator elements density, lower gas density, smaller liquid load, finer mesh strands,
should be visually inspected occasionally (especially after major closer mesh packing (greater density), closer vane spacing and
process upsets) to make sure they are intact and free of excessive greater mist eliminator thickness.
solid deposits.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING OCTOBER 2004
ROTATING EQUIPMENT/RELIABILITY
� �
�
�
�
� ����
����
�
���� � �
�
� �
����
� �
� �
� ����
FIG. 8 Generally accepted spacing guidelines to maintain even velocity profile and avoid entrainment in compressor suction drums with axial flow.
TABLE 1. Diameter range of mist and other droplets TABLE 2. Droplet sizes (water in air) typically
of various types captured with 99.9% efficiency by mist eliminator
elements of various types
Particle type Size range, microns
Large organic molecules Up to 0.004 Element type Size range, microns
Smoke 0.0045 to 1.0 Fiber candles or panels 0.1 and larger
Condensation fog 0.1 to 30 Mesh with coknit yarn 2.0 and larger
Atmospheric clouds and fog 4 to 50 0.006-in. knitted mesh 5.0 and larger
Generated by gas atomization nozzle 1 to 500 0.011-in. knitted mesh 10 and larger
Atmospheric “mist” 50 to 100 Double-pocket vanes 10 and larger
Atmospheric “drizzle” 10 to 400 Conventional vane arrays 15 and larger
Generated by boiling liquid 20 to 1,000
Generated by two-phase flow in pipes 10 to 2,000 caked solids—consider installing a spray system as shown in Fig.
Atmospheric raindrops 400 to 4,000 4 to clean the vanes online whenever necessary. Adding a high-
efficiency mesh-type mist eliminator downstream of the vane unit
(also shown in Fig. 4) can help make up for the inherently lower
Mesh pad fouling. In some cases, liquid carryover to the droplet capture efficiency of the vanes.
compressor is caused by fouling of a mesh-type mist eliminator
due to the resulting restriction of gas flow and extra liquid holdup Liquid slugs and high liquid loading. In some applica-
in the pad. Vane-type mist eliminators are a better choice for foul- tions, liquid slugs occasionally come in with the gas feed. These
ing applications. Due to the relatively wide-open spaces between surges can temporarily overwhelm the slug-catching capability of
blades, vanes are much less likely to plug. the inlet knockout drum and flood a mesh-type mist eliminator,
If the fouling deposit can be readily dissolved by a suitable causing liquid carryover (Fig. 5).
solvent—as might be the case with viscous oils or waxes or certain When liquid slugs or generally high liquid loading are expected,
OCTOBER 2004 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
ROTATING EQUIPMENT/RELIABILITY
����������
�����������������������
�������
���������
����
����
���������������
��������������
��������������
���������������
��������������� ����������������
�����������������
��������
�������
�����
���
��� ���
FIG. 11 Double expansion rings can be used to retrofit knockout ���������� ��������
drum internals without welding. ����
��������
��������������
it is recommended to use a vane-type mist eliminator upstream of
the mesh pad as shown before in Fig. 4. Vanes can generally handle
up to 10 times more liquid load than mesh pads.
���������������������������
��������
������������ �������
����� �����
�����������
FIG. 13 An inlet diffuser can alleviate poor inlet flow distribution. K factor of 0.35 ft/sec, which corresponds to a velocity of 10 ft/sec
in the reference case of water and air at room conditions.
When a knockout drum’s throughput has grown to exceed its
Overcoming pressure-drop constraints. Processes that capacity, generally two options are:
operate under vacuum or very low pressure immediately upstream of 1. Replace the vessel with a larger one to allow a mist elimina-
the compressor can be very tricky for suction drum design, because tor with greater cross-sectional area, thus reducing the velocity.
pressure drop across the mist eliminator must be kept low. However, 2. Replace the mist eliminator in the existing vessel with one
generally speaking, the lower the pressure-drop characteristics of a using the latest technology to maintain efficiency with higher
mist eliminator type, the lower its efficiency in removing mist. Liquid throughput.
carryover from the suction drum may be a result of selecting a low- Option 2 is generally much more cost-effective and often
efficiency mist eliminator for the sake of low pressure drop. does not require prohibitive down time. In a traditional vertical
When high efficiency is not required, a vane unit or low-density cylindrical vessel, the typical horizontal orientation is no longer
mesh pad may be recommended to achieve low pressure drop. To gain the only solution. Compressor knockout drums can be retrofit-
higher efficiency without much cost in terms of pressure drop, a possi- ted for capacity increases using any of the following alternative
ble solution is a dual-density mesh pad. In such a pad, the downstream techniques:
layer has higher density than the upstream layer. The result is higher • Vertical mist eliminator elements with horizontal flow (K =
separation efficiency with only slight increase in pressure drop. 0.42 for mesh pads, K = 0.65 for vane units)
• Properly engineered baffling for even velocity profiles with
Throughput exceeding design capacity. In designing close spacing
compressor knockout drums, like other gas-liquid separator vessels, • Horizontal mesh pads with drainage layers or multiple zones
conventional mist eliminators are generally selected and sized with that can increase capacity by 10% to 12% (K = 0.40)
a margin of about 10% above the design throughput. Flowrates • Double-pocket vanes that can double capacity of a conven-
beyond the upper operating limit may allow liquid carryover due tional vane unit (K = 0.8 to 1.1)
to high velocities that cause re-entrainment from the mist elimina- • Mesh-vane combinations that can increase efficiency and
tor element. capacity by 10% to 25% (K = 0.5 to 0.65)
More specifically, mist eliminators are typically sized for cross- • Mesh agglomerator followed by double-pocket vanes for
sectional area to achieve a design velocity according to the Soud- highest efficiency (99.9% of 2-micron droplets) and greatest
ers-Brown vapor load factor, K : capacity increase
• Two- or four-bank configurations that allow mist eliminator
VG elements of greater cross-sectional areas.
K=
ρL − ρG Fig. 10 illustrates several of these possibilities: horizontal flow
ρG through vertical mist eliminator elements, use of mesh pads to
agglomerate fine mist into large droplets that are removed by vane
where VG = Gas velocity (volume flow divided by cross-sec- units and a double-bank configuration.
tion)
L = Liquid density Retrofit without recertifying for ASME code. Retrofit-
G = Gas density ting an existing vessel for any of the foregoing suggested remedies has
Conventional horizontal mesh pads are traditionally sized for a one drawback: it often requires welding new support rings, beams,
OCTOBER 2004 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
ROTATING EQUIPMENT/RELIABILITY
clips and other structures to the vessel wall. Most vessels are ASME A thorough review was made of the process conditions and
code certified. Thus, after welding to the vessel wall, the welded area internal geometry of the existing knockout drums. Each drum
must be heat-treated and the vessel must be recertified. was then customized with vertical double-pocket vanes and
To avoid this cumbersome procedure, consider using expan- mesh agglomerators arranged as in Fig. 10 using one, two or
sion rings that are made in sections for passing through a man- four banks as required. To ensure proper gas distribution, inlet
way. Inside the vessel, the rings are bolted together and wedged diffusers were added (Fig. 13), and flow distribution plates were
against the vessel wall without welding. A double-ring design mounted on the downstream side of each vane unit. The result
(Fig. 11) helps ensure that the fixture does not move during was 35% increased capacity while achieving an efficiency of
operation. Once the rings are installed— either in vertical or 99.9% of 1-micron and larger mist droplets.
horizontal vessels — beams can be bolted to the rings, and com- Fertilizer plant capacity boost and amine loss cut. A four-
plete housings can be built up inside the vessel. train fertilizer plant needed more ammonia processing capacity
in one of the trains to increase production capacity. The bottle-
Using inlet diffusers to relieve carryover. Inlet design neck was the overhead knockout drum in two of four carbon
is one of the most commonly neglected aspects of a compressor dioxide absorber towers in that train. Those vessels also served
knockout drum design. It is often the cause of poor performance. as suction drums for the compressors that followed. In addition,
In the example shown in Fig. 12, a poorly selected half-pipe inlet it was desired to reduce excessive loss of valuable amine in the
deflector projecting into the vessel produces the following results form of mist escaping the knockout drums.
when the collected liquid is at a high level: The absorber process conditions and available room in the
• Gas jets to the back wall of the vessel. Without enough knockout drums were carefully studied. Although space in one
space to diffuse the jet, gas utilizes only part of the mist elim- of the drums was very tight, the problem was solved by retrofit-
inator. Due to an uneven velocity profile, liquid carryover ting both of them with a double-bank system (Fig. 10). In each
occurs (Fig. 9). bank, a mesh agglomerator was followed by a double-pocket
• The gas jet agitates the accumulated liquid below, creating vane unit. The result was a 30% capacity increase. In addition,
a higher mist load. the amine loss rate fell to 0.05 gallon per million standard cubic
• Turbulence spoils normal gravity settling of larger liquid ft, which corresponds to savings on the order of $75,000 per
droplets below the mist eliminator. The resulting additional liquid year. Another benefit was eliminating a cause of pitting corro-
load increases likelihood of flooding the mist eliminator. sion in the compressors.
A properly selected inlet diffuser added to an existing knock- Gas production and condensate recovery increase. A large
out drum (Fig. 13) provides more effective liquid separation oil and gas company wanted to revamp several dozen of their
coming in with the gas and distributes the gas evenly through- 30-year-old two-phase field separators (sizes two to five ft OD).
out the vessel diameter. The purpose was to increase capacity and improve condensate
recovery. As in the preceding case, the separators were also suc-
Damage by sudden pressure changes. Carefully review tion drums for compressors.
the transient pressures that occur at the knockout drum and mist The separators were brought from the field to a local fabrica-
eliminator during all phases of operations. The suction drum could tion shop. There, the old internals were removed, the inlet and
see a sudden surge of flow in either direction due to compressor outlet nozzles were enlarged, and the vessels were retrofitted
recycle or opening an antisurge valve. Thus, a mesh-type mist with double-pocket vane units. The separators were ASME-code
eliminator can be subjected to forces not seen in normal operation. recertified, painted and reinstalled in the field with new instru-
This can dislodge the pad sections, leading to compressor damage mentation. This rejuvenation saved the company thousands of
from liquid carryover or even from pad fragments. dollars per unit as compared to purchasing new separators. Gas
Pads and vanes can also be damaged by freezing liquids in capacity increased by up to 50%, and condensate recovery went
cold climates. In natural gas production and pipelining, hydrate up by many thousands of barrels per year.
formation is known to destroy both types of mist eliminators. These cases are typical of many applications where up-
To cope with any of these scenarios, as shown in Fig. 14, to-date separation technology made a big difference. Similar
any or all of the following remedies can be applied to mist results can be achieved for a wide variety of compressor knock-
eliminator elements: out drums in refineries, gas plants, oil and gas exploration and
• Reinforce with heavy-duty material production, and petrochemical plants. HP
• Fasten with bolts instead of traditional tie wires, or pro-
vide an upper support ring in addition to the lower one
• Provide a pressure relief door in the case of mesh.
Bernhard Kalis earned a BS degree in chemical engineering
at The Hague University of Technology in The Netherlands. Since
Case histories. 1998, he has been technical director at Amistco Separation Prod-
Ethylene plant debottleneck. A large ethylene producer ucts, Inc., Alvin, Texas, where he is involved in developing new
needed to debottleneck its six-stage compressor train to increase separation technology, promoting applications of Amistco’s technology and trouble-
shooting difficult separation applications for clients domestically and internationally.
throughout. This project needed to be accomplished with mini- He also negotiates exclusive technology agreements with other companies and is
mal cost and down time. responsible for expanding Amistco’s worldwide network of representatives. Mr. Kalis
Using conventional mist eliminators—horizontal mesh pads lectures throughout the processing industries on liquid-liquid coalescing and gas-
or vane units—the knockout drum before each compressor stage liquid separation and has published numerous articles on separation technology. In
the past 22 years, he has held engineering management positions at Exxon in South
would have to be enlarged. For instance, the 8-ft drum at the first- America, Kuwait Oil in Kuwait, Shell Chemical in The Netherlands and Setpoint, Inc.,
stage inlet would be replaced by a 14-ft vessel. Litwin Engineering and Koch-Otto York in the US.
MESH and VANE MIST ELIMINATORS RANDOM PACKINGS STRUCTURED GRID PACKING
from knitted mesh pads to vane mist eliminators to facilitate mass transfer under a wide for severe fouling applications
and candle filters for submicron mist removal. range of applications.
We also manufacture our patented Mist FixTM
insertion mist eliminator for applications where
vessel access is prohibitive.
I
T’S A SURPRISINGLY COMMON problem in refineries,
petrochemical plants, gas plants, and similar facilities. A
vertical knockout drum, such as the one shown in Figure 1,
removes free liquid from a certain gas stream. In many such
vessels, a mist eliminator is provided to remove fine droplets of
liquid suspended in the gas. The conventional arrangement is
a mesh pad located immediately below the gas exit as in Figure
2. However, at the time the plant was built, that precaution was
not considered necessary in this particular knockout drum.
Now mist is carrying over and causing trouble downstream.
The conventional solution is simply to add a mist elimina-
tor as shown in the diagram. That would be feasible if the drum
–2–
A potential solution: the MistFix™
mist eliminator
However, there is another solution that works in many
cases such as this. It is a patented type of mist eliminator man-
ufactured by Amistco Separation Products, called MistFix™
(U. S. patent number 5,985,004). As seen in Figure 3, a MistFix
unit is a hollow cylinder of the same sort of knitted mesh that
conventional mesh pads are made of. It is designed to be
inserted in a vertical flanged gas exit nozzle, being secured by a
base ring that fits between the flanges. Rigidity is provided by a
cylindrical frame around which the mesh is wrapped (not
shown in the diagram), and the bottom end is closed by a plate.
MistFix units are widely applicable for exit nozzles with inside
diameter no less than about 6 inches, provided that the length
necessary to achieve an efficient gas velocity range is no greater
than about 54 inches. By use of special high-efficiency, high-
density mesh styles, the radial thickness of the mesh can be as
low as two inches—sometimes even less.
Figure 3. MistFix™ insertion mist eliminator Figure 4. Gas flows through the mesh of a MistFix unit
horizontally, as it does through a vertical flat mesh
pad in some knockout drums such as this one.
–3–
choose a mesh style and material and the radial thickness gas velocity begins to cause unacceptably poor droplet capture
of the cylindrical mesh pad to achieve the required sepa- efficiency.
ration at optimum gas velocity. The Souders-Brown equation allows experimental data
4. Choose a design value for the vapor load factor K that is taken with air and water on a certain mist eliminator to be gen-
appropriate for the foregoing assumptions, and calculate eralized to the same type of device with gases and liquids hav-
the optimum design velocity through the mesh using the ing generally similar characteristics but different densities.
Souders-Brown equation (explained next). Once a design value of the vapor load factor K is established for
5. Based on the optimum velocity, the expected volumetric a mist eliminator type, the design velocity can be calculated for
throughput, and the assumed diameter of the MistFix various combinations of gases and liquids.
unit, calculate the necessary cross-sectional area for gas The appropriate design value of K for a MistFix unit
flow through the mesh and thus the length of the unit depends on a number of factors that are beyond the scope of
(also explained below). this paper. As a first approximation in most cases, however, one
can use the figure that is commonly recommended for vertical
6. Estimate separation efficiency and pressure drop within flat mesh pads: 0.42 feet per second. This K factor corresponds
the required turndown range. to a velocity of 12 feet per second in the reference case of water
7. If the estimated results are not acceptable, repeat steps 3 and air at room conditions.
through 6 with a different mesh style, material, or thick- It is assumed that the mist load is less than 0.1% volumet-
ness, or with a different diameter of the MistFix unit if ric, which is equivalent to 0.5 gpm per square foot at 10 feet per
that option is available. second. Greater mist loads require special considerations.
8. Check for conformance with internal gas flow guidelines It is also assumed that the pressure in the vessel is between
and for height available for the MistFix unit inside the atmospheric and about 85 psig. The K value should be de-rated
vessel, and revise as necessary. by 0.1 (24%) for each 100 psi increase above atmospheric pres-
For explanations of those methods as applied to a broad sure.
range of devices, see Amistco’s literature such as “Amistco Mesh
& Vane Mist Eliminators,” Bulletin 106. Sizing a MistFix unit
Regarding Step 3 above, a very wide variety of mesh types
Applying the design velocity to size a MistFix unit (Step 5
are available for conventional pads and MistFix units. Standard
above) is a bit more tricky than with a conventional flat mesh
wire diameters are 0.011 inch and 0.006 inch. Standard alloys
pad. In a flat pad, the velocity is the same throughout the pad—
are 304 and 316 SS, but others such as Inconel and Hastelloy are
at least ideally, to a first approximation. That velocity is simply
often supplied for certain corrosive services. Plastic monofila-
the volumetric flow rate divided by the cross-sectional area of
ments include polypropylene and Teflon. Yarns co-knit with
the pad, which is the same throughout the thickness of the pad.
metal or plastic mesh for capturing very fine mist droplets are
However, in the cylindrical mesh pad of a MistFix unit, the
commonly provided in Dacron, glass fiber, polypropylene, and
cross-sectional area through which the gas enters the mesh at
Teflon. It may be that the optimum mesh selection is a combi-
the outer surface is larger than the area of the inner surface.
nation of different types. For instance, an outer layer of fine,
dense mesh or co-knit yarn may serve to coalesce very small
mist droplets, forming larger entrained droplets that are in turn
captured by an inner layer of coarser bare mesh.
Efficiency and pressure-drop estimations (Step 6 above)
are beyond the scope of this paper, typically requiring consulta-
tion by Amistco engineers. The full spectrum of efficiencies can
be provided by a MistFix unit, from a general-purpose efficien-
cy of 99% of 10-micron and larger droplets to a high efficiency
of 99.9% of 2-micron and larger droplets. Typically the pressure
drop across a MistFix device is 2 to 4 inches of water column.
Step 4 above is conducted for a MistFix unit in the same
way as for a conventional flat mist eliminator. These devices are
sized for cross-sectional area to achieve a design velocity
according to the Souders-Brown vapor load factor K:
–4–
Figure 6. Simplified sizing example
(See Figure 5.) Thus, the velocity increases as the gas flows radi- Flow guidelines in turn, encompass two considerations:
ally inward. maintaining an even velocity profile throughout the length of
Depending on the judgment of the designer, the design the unit, and avoiding strong turbulence and fluid shear around
velocity may be established at the inner or outer surface or any- and below the MistFix unit. Consultation by Amistco engineers
where in between. The most conservative and cautious is especially important in this area.
approach is to set the inner-surface velocity at the design value, To prevent uneven flow through the mesh, the bottom end
to make sure re-entrainment is avoided. Velocities farther out of the device should be well clear of the inlet stream—more
toward the outer surface will be progressively lower. than about half a vessel radius above the top of the inlet nozzle.
Figure 6 depicts the application of Steps 4 and 5 above to a In many cases, undesirable turbulence can be diminished by a
typical simplified design case. A knockout drum with design properly selected inlet diffuser. If a manway is not available for
throughput of 3,600 actual cubic feet per minute has an 18-inch installing such a device, it may be possible to use a diffuser
gas exit nozzle. A MistFix unit is to be inserted in the nozzle, designed for insertion through the inlet nozzle as shown in
and the proper length is to be determined. The pressure is less Figure 7. To control flow inequality along the length of the
than 85 psig. The flowing materials are hydrocarbon vapor and MistFix unit, variation in thickness or density of the mesh may
liquid with densities of 0.31 and 45.2 pounds per cubic foot. be incorporated.
Using a design K factor of 0.42 as discussed before, the
design velocity turns out to be 4.91 feet per second. The cross-
sectional area required to achieve that velocity is 12.2 square
feet. For this MistFix unit, the length to achieve that design
velocity at the outer surface is 31.1 inches. By comparison, if a
conventional round horizontal mesh pad were used, that
design cross-section would correspond to a diameter of 47.3
inches.
–5–
In-line chamber for small these devices have been operating very successfully for several
years. The plant keeps spare MistFix units in inventory and can
gas exit nozzles easily change a fouled MistFix in a few hours.
If the existing gas exit nozzle on the knockout drum is too Refinery capacity increase and
small for inserting a MistFix unit, an in-line chamber can some-
times be provided for the device directly above the knockout
downtime reduction
drum as shown in Figure 8. This expedient comes into play A medium-size Midwestern refinery needed to increase the
when the exit nozzle diameter is smaller than the minimum 6 capacity of three knockout drums by 10%. At the same time,
inches, or when the MistFix unit must be bigger than the nozzle management was looking for ways to reduce the periodic down
to provide enough flow area within the available vessel height. time of the vessels for replacing the horizontal mesh pads. The
drums had an outside diameter of 60 inches and a height of 108
inches. For each vessel, the gas flow rate was 8,000 ACFM. The
gas was fuel gas with a density of 0.15 lb/ft3. The mist consist-
ed of oil with a density of 50 lb/ft3, the liquid load being less
than 0.1%. The exit nozzles were 16 inches in diameter.
One of the knockout drums was chosen for retrofit with a
MistFix unit on a trial basis. Amistco’s design was for a diame-
ter of 16 inches, a length of 48 inches, Monel for the mesh, and
316 SS for the frame. The device has been operating successful-
ly for 16 months. Because of this positive experience, the refin-
ery is considering MistFix units for the other two separators as
well as additional applications in the plant.
Bulletin 108 • August, 2004 • MistFix is a trademark of Amistco Separation Products, Inc. • Amistco has endeavored to assure that all information in this publication is accurate. However, nothing herein is intended as a guarantee or warranty.
–6–
Compressor Suction Drums:
I think I’ve got liquid carryover.
What can I do about it?
Bernhard Kalis, Technical Director
I
T HAPPENS in petrochemical plants, refineries, and any- drum should be reviewed whenever there are significant
where else that the gas approaching a compressor is wet. changes in the process, such as increases or decreases in
Traces of aqueous or organic liquid escape the inlet knock- throughput, shifts in composition of the gas or mist droplets,
out drum—often intermittently—and silently damage the com- alterations of upstream equipment, or revisions of operating
pressor. Telltale signs include pitting corrosion, salt deposits, and control procedures. In addition, mist eliminator elements
and diluted lubricants. should be visually inspected occasionally (especially after
Instead of trying to repair symptoms, look for the root major process upsets) to make sure they are intact and free of
cause, which usually involves the mist eliminator in the knock- excessive solid deposits.
out drum (Figures 1 and 2). Problems may include improper A thorough understanding of the relevant considerations
mist eliminator specifications, overloading, uneven velocity will help you avoid common suction-drum pitfalls—and some
profiles, incorrect installation, high liquid viscosity, waxy not-so-common ones—that could severely damage your com-
deposits, liquid slugs, foaming, and several other possibilities. pressors due to liquid carryover. For detailed explanations of
The trouble may even be that no mist eliminator was pro- mist eliminator selection, sizing, and vessel design for a wide
vided in the first place—or perhaps no knockout drum at all. range of applications, see Amistco’s literature such as “Amistco
But wherever free liquid drops out in a suction drum, it gener- Mesh & Vane Mist Eliminators,” Bulletin 106. This paper pro-
ates some mist that can damage the compressor unless it is vides information that applies specifically to compressor inlet
removed by a mist eliminator. Even in cases where the feed gas knockout drums.
never has any free liquid, there are often fine mist droplets that
coalesce into large drops on the walls of the inlet pipe or inside
the compressor. For all but the driest gas, a compressor should
be protected by an inlet mist eliminator. New high-capacity,
high-efficiency mist eliminator technologies pay off the first
time you avoid a shutdown.
For optimum separation performance, compressor knock-
out drums must be properly designed and sized with appropri-
–1–
Designing for droplet size distribution with higher velocity, finer mesh strands, closer packing of mesh
(greater density), closer spacing of vanes, and greater thickness
There are many different types of mist eliminator elements, of the mist eliminator element.
and the variety has greatly increased through the years. Not
understanding the liquid source in the upstream process can Mesh pad fouling
cause you to select the wrong type of mist eliminator, or to keep
a given type when process changes make it inappropriate. In some cases, liquid carryover to the compressor is caused
Understanding the process allows you to design for the by fouling of a mesh-type mist eliminator, on account of the
most efficient mist collection. Most important, selection should resulting restriction of gas flow and extra holdup of liquid in the
not be made until the droplet size distribution is defined, in pad. Vane-type mist eliminators are a better choice for fouling
terms of the proportion of droplets of each size. Assuming an applications. Due to the relatively wide open spaces between
incorrect droplet size distribution can mean that you have blades, vanes are much less likely to plug. If the fouling deposit
designed for a less efficient mist eliminator, and liquid carryover can be readily dissolved by a suitable solvent, as might be the
may occur. case with viscous oils or waxes or certain caked solids, consider
installing a spray system as shown in Figure 3 to clean the vanes
on-line whenever necessary. Adding a high-efficiency mesh
Table 1. Diameter range of mist and other droplets mist eliminator downstream of the vane unit (also shown in
Particle Type Size range (microns) Figure 3) can help make up for the inherently lower droplet cap-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- ture efficiency of the vanes.
Large organic molecules Up to 0.004 µm
Smoke 0.0045 to 1.0 µm
Condensation fog 0.1 to 30 µm
Atmospheric clouds and fog 4 to 50 µm
Generated by gas atomization nozzle 1 to 500 µm
Atmospheric “mist” 50 to 100 µm
Atmospheric “drizzle” 10 to 400 µm
Generated by boiling liquid 20 to 1,000 µm Typical mist eliminators for reference:
Generated by 2-phase flow in pipes 10 to 2,000 µm vane unit (above)
Atmospheric raindrops 400 to 4,000 µm larger mesh pad (below)
Figure 4. Envisioning mesh pad performance degradation as liquid and gas loads increase (vertical cross-sections)
–2–
Breaking inlet foam
If liquid in the gas approaching the compressor knockout
drum is subject to foaming, it can readily flood a mesh pad and
in severe cases even a vane unit. The end result is massive liq-
uid carryover from the vessel and damage to the compressor. A
vortex-tube cyclone device (Figure 5) can break up foam in the
incoming feed.
–3–
liquid re-entrainment and low velocities with poor efficiency as When a knockout drum’s throughput has grown to exceed
shown in Figure 7. its capacity, there are generally two options:
In an existing conventional drum where the mist elimina- 1. Replace the vessel with a larger one to allow a mist elimi-
tor is too close to the gas outlet, there may not be enough room nator with greater cross-sectional area, thus reducing the
to lower the mist eliminator. The solution then might be a velocity.
properly designed flow distribution device located above the
mist eliminator to create a more uniform velocity profile. 2. Replace the mist eliminator in the existing vessel with
one using the latest technology to maintain efficiency
with higher throughput.
Option 2 is generally much more cost-effective and often
does not require prohibitive down time. In a traditional vertical
cylindrical vessel, the traditional horizontal orientation is no
longer the only solution. Compressor knockout drums can be
retrofitted for capacity increases using any of the following
techniques:
1. Vertical mist eliminator elements with horizontal flow (K
= 0.42 for mesh pads, K = 0.65 for vane units)
2. Properly engineered baffling for even velocity profiles
with close spacing
3. Horizontal mesh pads with drainage layers or multiple
zones that can increase capacity by 10 to 12% (K = 0.40)
4. Amistco Double-Pocket Vanes that can double the capac-
ity of a conventional vane unit (K = 0.8 to 1.1)
Figure 7. Example of mist eliminator performance
degradation due to uneven velocity profile 5. Mesh-vane combinations that can increase efficiency
and capacity by 10% to 25% (K = 0.5 to 0.65)
6. Mesh agglomerator followed by Double-Pocket Vanes for
highest efficiency (99.9% of 2-micron droplets) and great-
Overcoming pressure-drop constraints est capacity increase
7. Two-bank or four-bank configurations that allow mist
Processes that operate under vacuum or very low pressure eliminator elements of greater cross-sectional areas
immediately upstream of the compressor can be very tricky for
Figure 8 illustrates several of these possibilities: horizontal
suction drum design, because the pressure drop across the mist
flow through vertical mist eliminator elements, use of mesh
eliminator must be kept low. However, generally speaking, the
pads to agglomerate fine mist into large droplets that are
lower the pressure-drop characteristics of a mist eliminator
removed by vane units, and a double-bank configuration.
type, the lower its efficiency in removing mist. Liquid carryover
Amistco’s design specialists can help apply such advanced
from the suction drum may be a result of selecting a low-effi-
means of optimizing the efficiency and capacity of existing
ciency mist eliminator for the sake of low pressure drop.
knockout drums to create optimal solutions for particular
When high efficiency is not required, a vane unit or low-
applications.
density mesh pad (Amistco TM-1105) may be recommended to
achieve low pressure drop. To gain higher efficiency without
much cost in terms of pressure drop, a possible solution is a
dual-density mesh pad. In such a pad, the downstream layer For highest efficiency:
has higher density than the upstream layer. The result is higher Amistco Double-Pocket
Vane unit
separation efficiency with only slight increase in pressure drop.
–4–
Retrofit without recertifying for ASME code
Retrofitting an existing vessel for any of the foregoing sug-
gested remedies has one drawback: it often requires welding
new support rings, beams, clips and other structures to the ves-
sel wall. Most vessels are ASME code certified. Thus, after weld-
ing to the vessel wall, the welded area must be heat-treated, and
the vessel must be recertified. It is generally desirable to avoid
this cumbersome procedure. Amistco offers expansion rings
that are made in sections that can be passed through a manway.
(See Figure 9.)
The rings are then bolted together and wedged against the
vessel wall without welding. The unique double expansion
design ensures that the installed ring does not move during
operation. Once the rings are installed—either in vertical or
horizontal vessels—beams can be bolted to the rings and com-
plete housings can be built up inside the vessel.
–5–
Pads and vanes can also be damaged by freezing liquids in Fertilizer plant capacity boost & amine loss cut
cold climates. In natural gas production and pipelining,
A 4-train fertilizer plant needed more ammonia gas pro-
hydrate formation is known to destroy mesh pads and vanes.
cessing capacity in one of the trains to increase production
To cope with any of these scenarios, as shown in Figure 12,
capacity. The bottleneck was the overhead knockout drum in
any or all of the following remedies can be applied to mist elim-
two of four carbon dioxide absorber towers in that train. Those
inator elements:
vessels also served as suction drums for the compressors that
1. Reinforce with heavy-duty material. followed. In addition, it was desired to reduce excessive loss of
2. Fasten with bolts instead of traditional tie wires, or pro- valuable amine in the form of mist escaping the knockout
vide an upper support ring in addition to the lower one. drums.
4. Provide a pressure relief door in the case of mesh. Amistco reviewed the absorber process conditions and the
available space in the knockout drums. Although the space in
one of the drums was very tight, we were able to solve this prob-
lem by retrofitting both drums with a double-bank system as in
Figure 8. In each bank, a mesh agglomerator is followed by an
Amistco Double-Pocket Vane unit. The result was a 30% capac-
ity increase. In addition, the rate of amine loss fell to 0.05 gal-
lon per million standard cubic feet, which corresponds to sav-
ings on the order of $75,000 per year. Another benefit was elim-
ination of a cause of pitting corrosion in the compressors.
T
HESE CASES are typical of many applications where
Amistco’s separation technology made a big difference.
Similar results can be achieved for a wide variety of com-
Compressor knockout drum cases pressor knockout drums in refineries, gas plants, oil and gas
exploration and production, and petrochemical plants.
For information and consultation, call the author,
Ethylene plant debottleneck Technical Director Bernhard Kalis, or any other Amistco separa-
A large ethylene producer needed to debottleneck its six- tion specialist, at the address below.
stage compressor train to increase throughout. This project
needed to be accomplished with minimal cost and down time.
Using conventional mist eliminators—mesh pads or hori-
zontal-flow vanes—the knockout drum before each compressor
stage would have to be enlarged. For instance, the drum at the
inlet to the first stage, eight feet in diameter, would be replaced
by a 14-foot vessel.
Amistco thoroughly reviewed the process conditions and
internal geometry of each knockout drum. We then customized
each existing drum with double-pocket vanes and mesh
agglomerators arranged as in Figure 8, using one, two, or four
banks as required. To ensure proper gas distribution, we added 23147 Highway 6 • Alvin, Texas 77511
inlet diffusers as in Figure 11 and flow distribution plates on the Phone 281-331-5956 • Fax 281-585-1780
downstream side of the vane units. The result was 35%
increased capacity while achieving an efficiency of 99.9% of 1- Amistco@Amistco.com • www.amistco.com
micron and larger mist droplets. 24-hour Emergency Service: 800-839-6374
Bulletin 107 • May, 2004 • Copyright 2004 by Amistco Separation Products, Inc. • Amistco has endeavored to assure that all information in this publication is accurate. However, nothing herein is intended as a guarantee or warranty.
–6–
AMISTCO
Product Bulletin – TEG
12000
Tell Us About Your Process
9000
AMISTCO high efficiency TEG Saver Plus mist eliminators
are designed specifically to meet the particulars of your
6000
process requirements. Experienced separations engineers
are available at any time to assist you in the sizing and 3000
selection of your high efficiency TEG Saver Plus mist
0
elimiator. Remember, when you need it right, and you
need it right now, call AMISTCO.
23147 Hwy. 6 Alvin, Texas 77511 • Ph: (281) 331-5956 • Fax: (281) 585-1780 • www.amistco.com • amistco@amistco.com
06/05