ANALYTICAL STUDY OF

LIQUID/VAPOUR SEPARATION EFFICIENCY

BY

Dr. W.D. Monnery

Chem-Pet Process Technology Ltd.
335 Ranchridge Bay NW
Calgary, AB

Dr. W.Y. Svrcek

Department of Chemical & Petroleum Engineering
University of Calgary
Calgary, AB T2N 1N4

September 5, 2000
 2

SUMMARY

The purpose of this work was to establish the separation efficiency of flare knock-out
drums and determine the expected entrained liquid droplet diameter that is carried over to
the flare. This was accomplished by using a field pilot plant skid at the Prime West East
Crossfield gas plant. The skid consisted of gas and liquid inlets test separators and
entrained liquid collection in a filter/coalescer. The raw test data was entrained liquid
carryover amount as a function of gas velocity data.

Experimental results provide incipient entrained liquid carryover velocities. The data
show that carryover rises sharply after the incipient carryover velocity and separation
efficiency drops below 99.9%. Experimental results indicate that entrained liquid
carryover average droplet diameters are 200 to 600 microns for flare knock-out drums at
10 to 100 psig. Calculations show that the maximum stable droplet size can be very
large at low velocities and the calculated liquid droplet size distribution indicates that
there can be substantial variance in the droplet size and that the latter may not be very
uniform. In order to verify the estimated droplet sizes and distributions, further
experimental work must include the addition of online droplet size and distribution
measurement equipment.

Experimental results provide quantitative data for the relationship between horizontal and
vertical K factors and allowable velocities, which has to date been empirical and
subjective. These results show that the factor between horizontal and vertical K factors
and allowable velocities vary from about 1.33 to 1.67 as L/D varies from 3.5 to 6.5.

Modelling results based on using the experimental data give entrained liquid average
droplet diameters that are consistent with API 521 for flare knock-out drums (300-600
microns) as well as other open literature. To avoid carryover, flare knock-out drums
should be designed using a droplet size of 300 microns.
 3

1.0 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND

This study is part of the Alternative Flaring Technologies program sponsored by

Environment Canada, CAPP and PTAC. This study focuses on the efficiency of gravity
separation as it relates to flare knockout drum design and operation.

One of the critical issues in facilities process design and operation is vapour/liquid
separation. This is also an important issue for the improvement of existing flaring
systems. The problem for flaring systems is that with the uncertainty of design and
operating conditions, liquid carryover droplets may be of such a size and composition
that they are incompletely combusted. This results in the emission of many undesirable
compounds to the atmosphere, as has been outlined in previous studies and of the current
Government and Industry study aimed at mitigating emissions in flares.

There is an abundance of literature available on vapour/liquid separation and equipment

design, yet there has never been a systematic, comprehensive study to verify the accepted
design methodology. Liquid vapour separator design is described in several engineering
and operating company guidelines, the GPSA Engineering Data Book and recent
publications such as Svrcek and Monnery (1993) and Monnery and Svrcek (1994).
Other publications of note are Watkins (1967) and Talavera (1990).

The present design philosophy is to simply attempt to be conservative enough so that

separation equipment will work. Unfortunately, the definition of how conservative
designs are remains in question. Furthermore, equipment that does function properly at
design rates may need to be re-rated for increased rates or at off-design operating
conditions and the above mentioned problem appears again (how conservative?).
Although general design methodology is well accepted, it is the subjectivity of some of
the separation parameters used in the models that are in question.

As such, the purpose of the research is to determine the efficiency of gravity separation.
Specifically, it is to determine the velocity at which carryover occurs and to estimate the
liquid particle size going to flare. This data can also be used to check current design
criteria and estimate liquid carryover at operating conditions.
 4

2.0 THEORY OF GRAVITY SEPARATION AND SIMPLIFIED

COALESCENCE MODELLING
In a liquid-vapour separation vessel, there are typically three stages of separation. The
first stage, primary separation, uses an inlet diverter to cause the largest droplets to
impinge by momentum and then drop by gravity. The next stage is gravity separation of
smaller droplets as the gas flows through the vapour disengagement section of the
separator. The final stage is mist elimination, where the smallest droplets are coalesced
on an impingement device, such as a mist pad or vane pack, followed by gravity settling
of the larger formed droplets. In vessels like flare knockout drums, we are primarily
concerned with gravity separation since they typically have no coalescing internals, such
as mist pads.

For gravity separation, the allowable velocity is determined so that the required
disengagement area can be determined. For a vertical vessel, performing a force balance
on the liquid droplet settling out provides the necessary relationship. When the net
gravity force, given by Eq.1,

M P ( ρ L − ρV ) g
FG =
ρL gc
(1)

Balances the drag force, given by Eq. 2,

(π / 8)C D D P2 U V2 ρV
FD = (2)
gc

the liquid droplets will settle at a constant terminal velocity, UT. Equating Eqs. 1 and 2
results in:

4 g DP ( ρ L − ρV )
UT = (3)
3C D ρ V

Hence, as long as the vapour velocity, UV, is less than UT, the liquid droplets will settle
out. Eq. 3 can be rewritten as Eq. 4, in the well-known Souders-Brown form:

( ρ L − ρV )
UT = K (4)
ρV
where
4 g DP
K= (5)
3C D
 5

The drag coefficient can be calculated from a curve fit of Fig 7-3 in the GPSA
Engineering Data Book as follows:

0.95 ×10 8 D P3 ρV ( ρ L − ρV )
X = (6)
µ2

where DP is in ft (microns × 3.2808× 10-6), densities are in lb/ft3 and viscosity is in cP.

CD = 5.0074 / ln( X ) + 40 .927 / X + 44 .07 / X (7)

The K factor from Eq. 5 is the theoretical value for vertical gravity settling. It requires a
known liquid droplet diameter, DP, and determination of the drag coefficient, CD. For
coalescing devices such as mist eliminators, the droplet diameter changes as coalescence
occurs and cannot be predicted with any accuracy. As such, the K factor for coalescing
devices is usually an empirical value, determined from experiments. A well-known
source of empirical K factors for mist pads is the GPSA Engineering Data Book. Typical
values are given below in Table 1. In addition, values can be obtained from vendors for
their particular coalescing devices.

Table 1 – GPSA K Factors

Separator Type Pressure (psig) K Factor (ft/s)

Horiz with Vert pad 0.40 – 0.50

Vert/Horiz with Horiz Pad Atmospheric 0.35
300 0.33
600 0.30
900 0.27
1500 0.21
Vacuum 0.20

Notes:
1. K = 0.35 at 100 psig; subtract 0.01 for every 100 psi above 100 psig
2. For glycol or amine solutions, multiply above K values by 0.6 – 0.8.
3. Typically use one-half of the above K values for approximate sizing of vertical
separators without mist eliminators.
4. For compressor suction scrubbers and expander inlet separators, multiply K by 0.7 –
0.8.

For horizontal vessels, the forces of gravity and drag no longer oppose each other and a
simple vector analysis is not possible (Talavera, 1990). However, experience has shown
that horizontal velocities can be greater than the vertical terminal values, as shown in the
above table. As such, several literature publications apply multipliers to correct the
vertical terminal velocity or vertical K factor as shown in Eq. 8:
 6

K H = F ×K V
(8)

where subscript H indicates horizontal and subscript V indicates vertical. The factors are
either empirical or based on the fact that the time the liquid droplet takes to drop
vertically through the vapour flow area must be less than the time it takes to travel
horizontally between the inlet and outlet nozzles. This results in the correction factor F
stated as follows, Eq. 9:

F = LE / H V (9)

where LE is the effective horizontal length of travel of the liquid droplet and H V is the
vertical distance from the inlet to the liquid surface.

As such, there is considerable subjectivity in determining horizontal K factors.

3.0 METHODOLOGY
The research program, as outlined originally by Environment Canada, CAPP and PTAC
was as follows:

1. Identify current liquid removal technologies and practices and develop a

standardized testing methodology for knockout systems.

2. Identify acceptable knockout performance:

Knockout efficiency will be the measure of performance. The definition of
“acceptable” knockout efficiency must be based upon what is attainable with the
technology under field conditions. [Is 99% efficiency attainable?]

3. Lab testing of the current technology:

The identified liquid removal system(s) must be tested to confirm that they will
meet proposed regulations and under what operating conditions. The effect of
such parameters as pressure, flow rate, compositions, ambient temperature, water
content and hydrocarbon liquids content on knockout efficiency must be
determined.

4. Field Pilot Testing:

Confirm the successfully lab tested liquid removal systems handle the rigours of
field operations and deliver the rated knockout efficiency.

5. Commercialization
 7

3.1 EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS AND PROCEDURE

To make the results as realistic as possible, all testing was done in the field at the Prime
West (previously Amoco) East Crossfield Gas Plant, with no lab testing done. The
apparatus used for the experiments was a pilot plant scale skid, which is shown in
Figures 1 - 9. The apparatus consists of gas inlet piping, liquid pumping and injection,
test separators and a high efficiency filter/coalescer to collect entrained liquid from the
test separators. There are three horizontal test separators, each a 10 inch nominal outside
diameter (9.13”ID) and lengths of 2’6”, 3’6” and 5’6”, used in order to study the effect
of vessel length on allowable velocity. The test separators each had external cage
throttling level control with the float custom made to work for fine control within the
separator dimensions and for the butane liquid. A manual globe valve located on the gas
outlet piping controls the skid pressure. The gas flow is monitored downstream using a
Haliburton flow indicator and controlled by a manual globe valve on the gas inlet piping.
Gas inlet temperature was that delivered to the skid from the gas plant. The liquid
injection pump is a JAC metering pump with a maximum flow of 37.5 gph at 750 psi.

Experiments proceeded as follows (refer to Figure 1). For each horizontal vessel
experiment at a given pressure, a gas flow rate was calculated, a priori, to give the
desired velocity at the set liquid level for that particular experiment. At the beginning of
the experiment, the gas pressure was set using the outlet manual globe valve and flow
was adjusted using the inlet globe valve thus providing the desired flow at the desired
pressure. Once the gas flow stabilized, the liquid flow was started in an amount known
to over-saturate the gas. At this time, the skid was left until the flows and temperatures
reached a steady operating condition. During the experiment, the gas-liquid mixture
flowed to the selected test separator and the overhead vapour stream leaving the selected
test separator along with any entrained liquid flowed to the filter/coalescer vessel, where
the entrained liquid was collected in the boot. The liquid level in the boot was recorded
at the beginning and at the end of the test period, with the difference being the collected
entrained liquid. The gas leaving the filter/coalescer was metered such that this value
along with the amount of liquid collected provided a “bucket and stopwatch” type
experiment. In order to ensure that entrained liquid was not in the gas downstream of the
filter/coalescer, composition and hydrocarbon dewpoint measurements of the inlet and
outlet gases were taken. In addition, collected liquid was analyzed. The experimental
data (liquid level, gas flow, liquid (carryover) collected) was then used to determine the
gas velocity, corresponding separation efficiency and entrained liquid droplet diameter.
Horizontal Separator A Horizontal Separator B Horizontal Separator C Vertical Separator Filter / Coalescer Separator VAJ Metering Pu
273mm O.D. x 1676mm S/S 273mm O.D. x 1067mm S/S 273mm O.D. x 762mm S/S 114mm O.D. x 1829mm S/S 273mm O.D. x 762mm S/S Max 37.5 GPH @ 5172
D.P. 9930 KPaG @ 38'C D.P. 9930 KPaG @ 38'C D.P. 9930 KPaG @ 38'C D.P. 9930 KPaG @ 38'C D.P. 9930 KPaG @ 38'C 609mm NPSHA
c/w 3.2mm C.A. c/w 3.2mm C.A. c/w 3.2mm C.A. c/w 3.2mm C.A. c/w 3.2mm C.A.

HC(Gas)-2-80 HC-2-80
PI
Gas Inlet FCV
Mixing Chamber --

TI By Pass Valve By Pass Valve

HC-2-80

Vertical
Separator
Separator A
LIC
PI TI
FI
HC(Liquid)-1-80 PI
Liquid Inlet
TI
HC-2-80
PD Pump

Separator C
LIC
PI TI

HC-2-80 LI

Separator B
LIC
PI TI

FI
HC (Liquid)-1-80
Drain LCV
HC-2-80

Figure 1 – Process Flow Schematic For Separator Skid FI

PCV
8
Filter /
Coalescer PI TI
 9

Figure 2 – Skid Front Side Figure 3 – Skid Side View

Showing Inlets and Outlets

Figure 4 – Inlet Manifold/Mixing Chamber Figure 5 – Liquid Injection/Metering

 10

Figure 6 – Separator “A” Figure 7 – Separators “C” and “B”

Figure 8 – Vertical Separator Figure 9 – Filter/Coalescer

 11
For vertical separator, tests were performed using a 4” nominal outside diameter (3.826”
ID)
by 3’0” height vessel fitted with manual level control. The experimental procedure was
the same as for the horizontal separator case. The separator gas velocity was again
determined from the gas rate and vessel diameter. Again, the recorded experimental
data, the gas flow and liquid carryover, were used to determine the entrained liquid
droplet diameter.

3.2 EXPERIMENTAL FEED COMPOSITIONS

Originally, it was proposed to study various liquids to mimic both lean and rich solution
gases, however due to project delays only one set of compositions was used. The
composition was established by adding sales gas and liquids from the de-butanizer
overhead such that the gas was over-saturated and carried free liquid. Since the amount
of gas for each run was different to obtain a different superficial velocity in the test
separators but the liquid amount to over-saturate the gas was constant, the soluble versus
free liquid would be different for each experiment. However, the composition of the
saturated gas was only dependent on the pressure and temperature and would be the same
for all experiments at the given conditions. These saturated gas compositions are given in
Table 2. It can be seen that the 10 psig composition representing the solution gas going
to flare is hydrocarbon liquid rich. This can be considered a worst case situation from
the point of view of a flare knock out drum.
 12
Table 2 – Saturated Gas To Test Separators

Component Mole Fraction

10 psig 100 psig 400 psig
Nitrogen 0.0377 0.0446 0.0454
Methane 0.7573 0.8958 0.9113
Ethane 0.0183 0.0217 0.0221
Propane 0.0055 0.0065 0.0066
i-Butane 0.0231 0.0041 0.0020
n-Butane 0.0766 0.0132 0.0060
i-Pentane 0.0298 0.0051 0.0022
n-Pentane 0.0271 0.0046 0.0021
n-Hexane 0.0157 0.0028 0.0014
n-Heptane 0.0029 0.0005 0.0003
n-Octane 0.0005 0.0001 0.0001
n-Nonane 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000
n-Decane 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
n-C11 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
n-C12 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
n-C13 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
n-C14 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
n-C15 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
n-C16 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Methylcyclopentane 0.0018 0.0003 0.0001
Cyclohexane 0.0014 0.0003 0.0001
Methylcyclohexane 0.0008 0.0001 0.0001
Benzene 0.0009 0.0002 0.0001
Ethyl-Benzene 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
124-Trimethylbenzene 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Toluene 0.0005 0.0001 0.0001
p-Xylene 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000
o-Xylene 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
 13

3.3 DATA PROCESSING

For a given experiment, the experimental data consisted of pressure, temperature, actual
gas flow and the amount of liquid collected/carried over. From the temperature and
pressure and the gas and liquid compositions, density and viscosity values were obtained
from the process simulator (HYSYSTM).

The following describes how data was processed to determine parameters:

Separation Efficiency (%) = [Liquid In (m3/d) – Liquid Collected (L)/Experimental Time

(hr)* 24 hr/d / 1000 L/m3] / Liquid In (m3/d) * 100

Velocity (ft/s) = Actual Gas Flow (ft3/hr) / Flow Area At Set Liquid Level (ft2) /
3600(hr/sec)

Experimental K Factor (ft/s) = Velocity (ft/s) / [(ρL - ρV)/ρV]0.5

Droplet diameter was determined by iterative calculations as follows:

1. Estimate droplet diameter
2. Calculate X from Eq. 6
3. Calculate CD from Eq. 7
4. Calculate K from Eq. 5
5. If Calculated K = Experimental K, done; if not, adjust DP and go to step 2

Note, since the force balance equations are applicable to only the vertical case, vertical
data at incipient carryover was first used to determine the droplet diameters. To
determine droplet diameters from horizontal vessel data, the horizontal experimental K
factor data was related to vertical data at incipient carryover for 100 psig case, Table 3.

In order to further describe the entrained liquid droplets, a statistical analysis was done.
Assuming a normal distribution, to determine the standard deviation, the required
parameters were the maximum and the average liquid droplet sizes. Then using a
translated normal probability table, the standard deviation could be calculated, Eq. 10:

D P , MAX − D P , AVG
3.30 =
σ
(10)

where 3.30 is the translated Z value corresponding to 99.95% of the liquid droplets being
of smaller diameter than DP,MAXES and σ is the standard deviation. The average droplet
diameter was obtained from the experiments and the maximum value was estimated by
the theory shown in Jepson et al. (1989) and provided as Eqs. 11, 12 and 13:
 14
0.6
D P , MAX Re 0.1  ρV  G LE
= 1.91   + 0.4
DPIPE We 0.6 
 ρL

 ρ LU V
(11)

where Re is the Reynold’s Number and We is the Weber Number (characterizes the
maximum stable liquid droplet size in two phase flow):

ρV U V DPIPE
Re = (12)
µV

ρV U V2 DPIPE
We = (13)
σ gc

and GLE is the entrained liquid mass flux in lb/s ft2, σ is the liquid surface tension in lbf/ft
and other variables and units as previously defined.

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

It should be noted that two sets of data were taken. The first set taken in October to
November 1999 indicated that there was no carryover until velocities were high enough
that all liquid entering the test separator was carried over. This was not deemed correct
and was attributed to an extra separation effect from a gas dome on the test separator exit
nozzle and the level control not being sensitive enough. As such, the skid was modified
so that no extra separation effect occurred at the outlet nozzle, liquid level control was
made more sensitive and entrained liquid measurement in the filter/coalescer was
improved with additional valving.

A summary of the raw experimental data along with processed results is presented in
Appendix I. The incipient carryover data and results are summarized below in Table 3.
Note each experiment was repeated at least three times. The raw data is available on
request.
 15
Table 3 – Experimental Data at Incipient Liquid Carryover

Separator Press (psig) Velocity K Factor (ft/s) Droplet Diameter

(ft/s) (microns)
Horiz (L/D: 3.0 - 4.2) 10 8 0.417 761
100 2-4 (3) 0.200-0.398 (0.297) 278-615 (430)
400 1 0.188 219
Horiz (L/D: 6.5) 100 4-5 0.397-0.498 615-830
400 2 0.378 509
Vert 10 5-6 0.272-0.319 460-555
100 3-5 0.300-0.496 439-837
400 2 0.376 509

As would be expected from field measurements there is some scatter in the data but the
trends are correct. For example, the allowable velocity decreases as pressure increases,
as expected from the Souders-Brown equation with a higher vapour density and the
accepted trend of a lower K factor. Both the horizontal and vertical data give this
expected trend. However, the horizontal data appears to be more consistent when the
resulting K factors are examined because they also decrease as pressure increases, as they
should, whereas the vertical values do not. It should be noted that some of the actual
values of the K factors in Table 3 seem somewhat high as values for 10 to 100 psig are
expected to be about 0.175 for vertical separators and slightly higher, about 0.20 to 0.25
ft/s, for horizontal separators. The horizontal vessel data also show the correct trend that
a longer length or higher L/D ratio provides a higher allowable velocity.

Overall, experimental incipient liquid carryover velocity data correspond to theoretically

calculated average liquid droplet sizes that range from about 300 to 800 microns at 10 to
100 psig. These droplet sizes are not unreasonable when compared to literature. For
example, as stated by Capps (1994), gravity separation is only efficient for droplets of
about 375 microns or larger.

In comparing the vertical and horizontal data, we would expect that the vertical incipient
carryover velocities would be lower than the horizontal ones and this is the case for the
10 psig data but not for all the 100 and 400 psig data. Strictly speaking, the force
balance applies to vertical separation and so an adjustment should be made to the
horizontal droplet sizes. In order to compare data from all the separators, the 100 psig
data had to be used as it was the most complete data set. We selected 4 and 5 ft/s data
for the horizontal data versus 3 ft/s for the vertical data. This results in a K factor
adjustment of 1.33 for the 3-4 L/D horizontal data and 1.67 for the 6.5 L/D horizontal
data. This adjustment along with assuming an adjustment of unity for the lowest typical
L/D in horizontal vessels, 1.5, results in the following fit of the data for the “F” factor in
Eq. 8:

F = 0.8644 ( L / D ) 0.350 (14)

 16

These adjustments compare to those previously stated in the literature. For example,
Watkins (1967) stated that the horizontal adjustment should be about 1.25 for horizontal
vessels, commonly designed with an L/D of 3.0. Adjusting the horizontal K factors to
vertical ones using Eqs. 8 and 14 and then applying the force balance equations gives the
entrained liquid droplet diameter results shown in Table 4.

Table 4 – Horizontal Incipient Liquid Carryover – Equivalent Vertical Droplet Size

Separator Press (psig) Velocity Equivalent Vertical

(ft/s) Droplet Diameter
(microns)
Horiz (L/D: 3.0 - 4.2) 10 8 553
100 2-4 219-457
400 1 170
Horiz (L/D: 6.5) 100 4-5 334-431
400 2 270

The data in Table 4 show that the average droplet sizes at incipient carryover for
horizontal vessels at 10 to 100 psig may be more like 200 to 600 microns. Strictly
speaking, applying the vertical force balance to the horizontal case over estimates the
droplet diameter. The logic for this effect, shown in Table 4, is as follows. For a given
velocity, a smaller diameter droplet will settle in the horizontal direction compared to the
vertical direction. This is the same effect that allows a given droplet size to settle in a
higher horizontal velocity then vertical, resulting in higher horizontal K factors.

In addition to average entrained liquid droplet diameter, the maximum stable droplet
diameter and standard deviation of the droplet diameters for the 10 and 100 psig cases
were calculated. The calculation spreadsheet for both unadjusted and adjusted droplet
horizontal diameters is in Appendix II, with the results summarized in Table 5.

Table 5 – Horizontal Incipient Liquid Carryover – Droplet Distribution

Separator Press (psig) Velocity Avg Droplet Max Droplet Std Dev
(ft/s) Dia (microns) Dia (microns) (microns)
Horiz (L/D: 3.0 - 4.2) 10 8 761/553 1512 228/291
100 3 430/338 4448 1218/1245
Horiz (L/D: 6.5) 100 4.5 722/383 2847 644/747

The data in Table 5 shows that there can be substantial variance in the droplet size and
 17
that it may not be very uniform.

In addition to the droplet size and distribution, the separation efficiency was calculated as
a function of the gas velocity. The results are given below in Appendix I. It can be seen
that carryover rises sharply after incipient carryover velocity is reached and the
separation efficiency drops below 99.9%. Capps (1994) quotes typical carryover values
for gravity separation of 0.1 vol%, which is equivalent to about 200 lbs/MMscf of the
butane liquid used in this study. Talavera (1990) quotes Souders-Brown gravity
separation carryover values of 75 to 150 USgal/MMscf. As shown in Appendix I, these
values correspond to 90 – 95% separation efficiency.

Finally, the data can be used for modelling. However, for modelling, the experimental
data with the correct qualitative trends and adjusted for the scatter was used. An anchor
data point was chosen to be a horizontal K factor of 0.225 ft/s at 100 psig, based on the
experimental data and expected values of 0.20 – 0.25 ft/s. The K factor was taken to be
the same at 10 psig and adjusted with pressure as 0.005 ft/s for each 100 psi pressure
change above 100 psig, based on the GPSA rule of taking 1/2 of the values for mist
eliminators. Calculations are given in Appendix III and are summarized in Table 6 for
an L/D = 3 horizontal vessel.

Table 6 – Modelling Droplet Sizes

Press (psig) K Factor (ft/s) Calc’d Dp Calc’d Velocity (ft/s) Exp Velocity (1)
(microns) (ft/s)
10 0.225 332 5.2 8
100 0.225 253 2.4 2-4
400 0.210 193 1.1 1
700 0.195 166 0.8
1000 0.180 147 0.6

Notes:
1. Experimental incipient carryover velocity.

The calculated liquid droplet diameters are based on calculating the K factor to match the
recommended values described above, with the horizontal factor applied as per Eqs. 8
and 14. The droplet diameters in Table 5 at 10 to 100 psig compare relatively well with
API 521 recommended values for flare knock-out drums (300 to 600 microns). In
addition, the values at higher pressures compare well to values recommended by Arnold
and Sikes (1986), who analyzed industrial fabricators guidelines based on field
experience and recommended 140 to 150 microns for liquid-vapour separators.

The values in Table 6 are somewhat lower than the recommended value of 700 microns
for a carryover of 7 lb/MMscf from an unpublished study by an engineering company
(Monnery, 1995).
 18

It should be noted that although some experiments were run with mist eliminator pads,
because they are not used in flare knock-out drums, these results are not discussed in
detail. However, the data show that for the same velocities, mist eliminator pads
decreased the entrained liquid carryover by 20 – 33% of the values for gravity separation
alone for the test separators with an L/D of 3 – 4. For the test separator with an L/D of
6.5, mist eliminator pads decreased the carryover by 33 – 50% of the values for gravity
separation alone.

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusions

1. Although there is some scatter in the data, experimental data verify the accepted
qualitative trends of allowable velocity decreasing as pressure increases and larger
allowable velocity for longer (higher L/D) horizontal vessels.
2. Experimental results indicate that entrained liquid carryover average droplet
diameters are in the range of 200 to 600 microns for flare knock-out drums at 10 to
100 psig.
3. Calculations suggest that the maximum stable droplet size can be very large at low
velocities.
4. The droplet size distribution indicates that there can be substantial variance in the
droplet size and that it may not be very uniform.
5. Experimental results provide quantitative data on the relationship between horizontal
and vertical K factors and allowable velocities, which has to date been empirical and
subjective. These results show that the factor between horizontal and vertical K
factors and allowable velocities vary from about 1.33 to 1.67 as L/D varies from 3.5
to 6.5.
6. Experimental results show that carryover rises sharply after the incipient carryover
velocity and separation efficiency drops below 99.9%.
7. Modelling results based on using the experimental data give entrained liquid average
droplet diameters that are consistent with literature.
 19

5.2 Recommendations

1. To avoid carryover, flare knock out drums should be designed using a droplet size of
300 microns. This is an allowable vapour velocity below the Incipient Carryover
velocity determined in this study.
2. A continuous online droplet size and distribution measurement system must be
installed before any further experimental data is collected.
3. Testing of other separation and coalescing devices should be undertaken.

6.0 Nomenclature

CD, Drag Coefficient

D, Diameter, in or ft
DP, Droplet Diameter, microns
DPipe, Pipe Diameter, in
F, Factor in Eq. 8
FD , Drag Force,
FG , Gravity Force
g, Gravity Acceleration, ft/s2
gc, Dimension Proportionality Constant, (lbf/lbm)(ft/s2)
GLE, Entrained Liquid Mass Flux, lb/s-ft2
HV, Vertical Height, ft
K, K Factor (Eq. 5), ft/s
KH, Horizontal K Factor, ft/s
KV, Vertical K Factor, ft/s
L, Length, ft
L E, Effective Length, ft
MP, Droplet Mass, lb
Re, Reynolds Number
UT, Terminal Velocity, ft/s
UV, Vertical Velocity, ft/s
We, Weber Number
X, Parameter Defined by Eq. 6
Z, Translation Variable in Normal Distribution
µ, Viscosity, cP
π, Pi Number
ρL, Liquid Density, lb/ft3
ρV, Vapor Density, lb/ft3
σ, Surface Tension, dyne/cm
σ, Standard Deviation (Eq. 10)
 20
7.0 REFERENCES

Arnold, K.E. and C.T. Sikes, “Droplet settling theory key to understanding separator-
sizing correlations”, Oil & Gas J., July 21, 1986, p. 60.

Capps, R.W., “Properly Specify Wire-Mesh Mist Eliminators”, Chem Eng Prog,
December 1994, p. 49.

Gas Processors Suppliers Association, “Engineering Data Book”, 10th Edition, Vol. 1,
Ch. 7 (1987), Tulsa, Oklahoma.

HYSYSTM – AEA/Hyprotech Ltd., Calgary, Alberta

Jepson, D.M., B.J. Azzopardi and P.B. Whalley, “The Effect of Gas Properties on Drops
in Annular Flow”, Int. J. Multiphase Flow, Vol. 15. No. 3, 1989, p. 327.

Monnery, W.D. (1995), private communication.

Monnery, W.D. and W.Y. Svrcek, “Successfully Specify Three-Phase Separators”, Chem
Eng Prog, September, 1994, p. 29.

Svrcek, W.Y. and W.D. Monnery, “Design Two-Phase Separators Within the Right
Limits”, Chem Eng Prog, October 1993, p. 53.

Talavera, P.G., “Selecting Gas-Liquid Separators”, Hydrocarbon Processing, June 1990,

p. 81.

Watkins, R.N., “Sizing Separators and Accumulators”, Hydrocarbon Processing,

November, 1967, p. 253.
 Appendix I

Experimental Data Summaries

 Appendix II

Droplet Distribution Calculations

 Appendix III

Modelling Calculations