Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PTRL5005 2016 Group30 FinalReport GOSP PDF
PTRL5005 2016 Group30 FinalReport GOSP PDF
Submitted By
Group 30
Muhammad Dawood Paracha (z5058615)
Table of Contents
Section 1
Executive Summary.................................................................................................................... 7
SECTION 1 .................................................................................................................................. 9
1.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 9
1.2. Problem Statement .................................................................................................. 10
1.3. Processes and Equipment’s involved in a GOSP .................................................. 11
1.3.1. Three Phase Separator: ................................................................................................. 11
1.3.2. Heat Exchanger: ............................................................................................................. 14
1.3.3. Two Phase Separator: .................................................................................................... 15
1.3.4. Water Oil Separator ....................................................................................................... 16
1.3.5. Dehydrator ....................................................................................................................... 17
1.3.6. De-salter .......................................................................................................................... 18
1.4. Processes and Equipment’s involved in a Gas Plant ........................................... 19
1.4.1. Gas Dehydration: ............................................................................................................ 19
1.4.2. Gas Sweetening Unit ...................................................................................................... 20
1.4.3. Gas Fractionating Columns ........................................................................................... 20
1.5. Literature Review ..................................................................................................... 20
1.5.1. Separators: ...................................................................................................................... 20
1.5.2. Horizontal separators: ................................................................................................... 21
1.5.3. Vertical separators: ....................................................................................................... 22
1.5.4. Separator selection: ...................................................................................................... 22
SECTION 2 ................................................................................................................................ 24
2.1. Mass Balance Calculations ....................................................................................... 24
2.1.1.Computing mass flow rates ............................................................................................ 24
2.1.2. Three-Phase Separator: ................................................................................................ 26
2.1.3. Two-Phase oil/gas Separator ....................................................................................... 28
2.1.4. Water Oil Separator ....................................................................................................... 29
2.1.5. Dehydrator ....................................................................................................................... 31
2.1.6. De-salter .......................................................................................................................... 33
2.1.7. Gas Plant .......................................................................................................................... 35
2.1.8. Scrubber / De-Hydrator................................................................................................. 35
2.1.9. Gas Sweetening Unit ...................................................................................................... 36
2.1.10. Gas Fractionating Columns ......................................................................................... 38
Executive Summary
This report comprises three sections Mass balance, Simulation and Economic analysis. In
mass balance section our sole purpose was to calculate final mass flow rate of separated
gas and oil which have been pass through separators, dehydrator and distillation columns.
Oil, gas and water are separated by using three and two phase separators followed by
Dehydrators and Heat exchangers by keeping in mind Reid vapour pressure of 30 kPa,
20PTB salt content, 0.3 vol % water and less than 70 ppm hydrogen sulphide. After
calculating mass balance and energy calculations final products are computed which is
elucidated below.
Description Quantity
Feed (crude oil + water + gas) 1215000 bbl/day
Water cut 24.655 % by volume
Remnant water 5.234 % by volume
Associated gas 7.45 % by weight
Salt Content 27567 ppm
Mass balance calculations are not accurate due to assumptions, now to compute precise
results we simulate separation plant in HYSYS v8.8 by neglecting salt content and
hydrogen sulphide because our selected fluid package “Peng-Robinson” does not support
salt removal process and sweetening process. Due to this reason we encounter near 100 %
separation of water from feed after three phase separator which is not realistic. To solve
Hydrogen sulphide (H2S) composition we added its percentage to methane (C1)
composition.
Feed properties enter into HYSYS thermodynamics package are shown in table below
Feed Temperature o C 85
Final products after carrying out HYSYS simulation are shown below
The three economic indicators above tell us that the project is economically viable and
should be considered for development. However, it is important to note here that
abandonment costs and uncertainty are ignored in the analysis. For a more detailed
analysis, we should be including abandonment costs and find the analysis at different
levels of probability such as P10, P50 and P90. However, as initial screening criteria, the
project is profitable and should be considered for further development.
SECTION 1
1.1. Introduction
Gas and water present alongside crude oil in underground reservoirs provides the driving
force for oil production to the surface through water-drive and gas cap expansion.
However, this associated gas and water complicates process arrangement downstream of
the well-head.
The consequence of the associated gas and water is that when crude oil is produced at the
surface, it is accompanied by water and gas. As such, crude oil produced at the well-head
cannot be sold until and unless gas and water is separated from it. Separation of
Hydrocarbon gases is necessary to recover valuable products and make crude oil safer for
handling and storage purposes. Water produced from reservoirs is a brine solution with
considerable dissolved salt and as such necessitates removal to overcome corrosion and
problems in handling and refining equipment. This separation is achieved at the Gas-Oil
Separation plant located near the oil field.
Crude oil in its raw form produced from wells undergoes the following three processes in
order to yield useful petroleum products:
1. Surface oil operations for gas-oil-water separation and further treatment of crude
oil
2. Treatment of associated natural gas
3. Fractionating the crude oil into different products
This report deals with the first two aspects of processing operations. Separation of crude
oil into oil, gas and water phases is achieved in mechanical devices called ‘separators’
where gas is flashed from oil and free water is separated through gravity. Once
separated, the three phases are further treated to an acceptable standard. Once treated,
valuable products (crude oil and gas) are discharged to refineries for further processing.
Water is either disposed in an environmentally friendly manner or injected back into the
reservoir to maintain reservoir pressure.
The first section of the report defines the problem statement and numerous unit
operations occurring in the Gas-Oil separation plant. Moreover, this section also presents a
schematic of the plant and operating principles behind each equipment.
The second section defines the design of the Gas-Oil separation and Gas plant on the basis
of the input parameters provided. The design is based on engineering knowledge,
assumptions and mass balances carried around each unit.
This section provides details of the input parameters that are considered for the design of
the Gas-Oil Separation Plant (GOSP) and the objectives of the design project. The table
below lists composition and properties of the crude oil:
Description Quantity
Description Quantity
The crude described above is from a reservoir located in Kern County, California. 1215,000
bbl/day of crude oil is to be received by the GOSP. Total water cut accounts to 24.655 %
by volume of the total feed. Of this 5.234 % by volume is remnant water. Salt
concentration is 27567 ppm. Moreover, the crude contains 0.45% Sulphur and 0.289%
Nitrogen.
Associated gas accounts for 7.45 wt % of the feed and consists of methane, ethane,
propane, butane and hydrogen sulphide. The individual compositions of these components
are given above.
GOSP will be designed to handle the above described crude and shall bring the crude to
the required sales criteria. Through this process, the following shall be achieved:
1. Oil stabilization by reducing the Reid Vapour Pressure below 5 psi of one-third atm.
2. Water content to be less than 0.3% by vol.
3. Salt content lower than 20 PTB.
4. Hydrogen Sulphide content less than 70 ppm.
Most often, the well head fluid consists of a wide range of hydrocarbons from gas (C1 to C4
usually), condensates (medium weight hydrocarbons) to crude oil. To add to, there will
also be a variety of unwanted components such as water, carbon dioxide, salts, sand and
sulphur. The purpose of GOSP is to thus process well flow and separate unwanted
components and hydrocarbons into clean marketable products, commonly named as: oil,
natural gas and condensates.
Separation of gas from oil is an important objective of the GOSP. In the formative days of
the oil industry, this gas was considered waste and flared off. However, the need for
cheaper and cleaner fuel has elevated the demand for natural gas in recent past. Thus,
natural gas represents a key product of the GOSP.
The quantity of gas produced with the oil dictates the processing arrangements and
particularly the size of the equipment. The gas separated from crude is sent to the Gas
Plant where any remaining water, natural gas liquids, carbon dioxide and hydrogen
sulphide is separated. Following this, the gas is fractionated into components such as
methane, ethane, propane, butane etc. in order to be sold to the customers.
Water present with crude oil exists as either free water (large water droplets) or as
emulsions. Free water is easily separable through gravity. On the contrary, emulsions can
be difficult to treat and require application of heat, electricity or chemicals. Emulsions
create number of operational challenges such as tripping of electrical grids in de-salters,
production of off-specification crude and high pressure drops in flow lines. The emulsions
have to be treated in order to remove dispersed water and salt associated with water so
that crude oil meets market specifications and reduces corrosion in equipment’s and pipe
lines.
A manifold is an arrangement of pipes that receives oil from flowlines and trunk lines and
re-distributes it to process trains. These headers have production and testing valves which
control flow of each well. The fluid is first sent to the three phase separator.
assists in the removal of gas (flashing) whilst separation of water from the oil is achieved
by the force of gravity.
[http://www.emersonprocessxperts.com/2014/01/importance-of-flow-measurement-for-separators/]
Wet crude flows into the inlet. Usually there is a diverter tube
which redirects the flow providing interference that allows water
to settle at the bottom due to force of gravity
Oil then pours into the oil chamber while water remains behind.
The separated liquids are then drained from the bottom of the
vessel for further processing.
For crude with high gas oil ratio, we need to increase the retention time or install more
than one separator to ensure better efficiency in the separation process and minimize
liquid carry over to the gas stream. Since three phase separators are not highly efficient,
there is some quantity of oil which is carried with the gas stream when flashed. The oil
stream will also have some gas dissolved within it and also contains remnant water as the
dispersed phase. Moreover, some percentage of oil will also leave with the water stream.
The oil stream from the outlet then flows to the two phase separator for further gas-oil
separation. A heat exchanger may be required prior to the two phase separator to heat
the fluid stream to allow efficient separation.
The two most commonly used separators by the oil and gas industry are vertical and
horizontal types. The schematic below lists the advantages and disadvantages of vertical
Figure 2: Different types of three phase separators. From left to right: Vertical, Horizontal, Spherical
and horizontal type separators.
Three phase
separators
Vertical Horizontal
Higher liquid
handling
operating range
Figure 3: Different types of heat exchangers. From left to right: Co-current, Counter-current
oil.
Determination of the area needed for the double pipe heat exchanger is done using the
basic heat exchanger equation:
𝑸𝑸 = 𝑼𝑼𝑼𝑼∆𝑻𝑻𝑳𝑳𝑳𝑳𝑳𝑳𝑳𝑳
Where,
Q is the rate of heat transfer between the two fluids (KJ), U is the overall heat transfer
coefficient (W/m2°C), A is the heat transfer surface area (m2), Tlmtd is the log mean
temperature difference between the inlet and outlet temperatures of both fluids
The liquid (oil and emulsion) leaves the vessel at the bottom through a level-control or
dump valve. The gas leaves the vessel at the top, passing through a mist extractor to
remove any liquid droplets present in the gas.
[http://www.jmcampbell.com/tip-of-the-month/2014/12/troubleshooting-gas-liquid-separators-removal-of-liquids-from-
the-gas/]
[http://www.aneclecticmind.com/2014/08/01/the-oilwater-separator/]
1.3.5. Dehydrator
The oil stream from the two phase separator and water oil separator is fed into the
dehydrator. The function of the dehydrator is to remove associated water with the oil.
This water is usually in the form of emulsions. Two main reasons for dehydrating oil are:
Dehydration
methods
Chemical injection
Heating and
Heating and electrostatic
chemical injection
separation
The methods depicted above rupture the oil film surrounding the water. Once the film is
ruptured, the water droplets coalesce into larger droplets. This coalescence is enhanced
by electric field, water washing or heating. Once the droplets have coalesced, force of
gravity leads to the settling of water.
Figure 6: Dehydrator
[http://www.cherd.ichemejournals.com/article/S0263-8762(13)00535-2/fulltext]
1.3.6. De-salter
If the separated oil contains unacceptable amounts of dissolves salts, the oil is sent to the
de-salter. The salts, which may be sodium, calcium or magnesium chlorides come from the
reservoir water and are also dissolved in the oil. The de-salters are usually placed after
the first or second separator depending on Gas Oil ratio and water cut.
Once crude has passed through the de-salter, the salt content within the crude must be
reduced less than 20 PTB and the Reid Vapour Pressure should be below 5 psi. If the above
conditions are met, the stabilized crude is transported to downstream refineries for
further processing.
[http://encyclopedia.che.engin.umich.edu/Pages/SeparationsMechanical/ElectrostaticPrecipitators/ElectrostaticPrecipi
tators.html]
The gas collected from the overhead streams of the three phase separator and two phase
separator is then sent to the Gas Plant for gas processing.
1. Prevention of hydrate formation. A hydrate is a solid that can plug and retard flow
of gaseous hydrocarbon streams formed by physical combination of water and other
small molecules.
2. Prevent corrosion of pipelines and processing equipment.
3. Prevent catalyst poisoning through side reactions involving water.
1. Absorption using liquid solvents. The most commonly used is Ethylene Glycol.
Dehydration is carried out in a vertical absorption tower divided into sections using
horizontal trays. Lean Tri-Ethylene Glycol is spread from the top of the vessel while
gas flows upwards. Intimate contact between gas and Tri-Ethylene Glycol leads to
water absorption causing the dry gas to emerge from the top of the tower.
2. Adsorption using solid desiccants such alumina, silica gel, calcium chloride etc.
3. Cooling below dew point.
4. Inhibition using hydrate depressants such ammonia, glycol, methanol etc.
[http://www.armaxgaz.ro/en/company/top-projects.html]
University of New South Wales
PTRL 5005-Design Project P a g e | 20
1. Claus process which involves combusting H2S to SO2 and then reacting H2S and SO2
to produce elemental S.
2. Adsorption using molecular sieves.
3. Physical absorption using liquid solvents such as Di-glycol amine, dimethyl ether
etc. The unit consists of a tower (similar to the one used in gas dehydration)
containing packing elements filled with lean solvent. Intimate contact between
process gas and solvent leads to H2S removal. The rich solvent accumulates at the
base of the vessel and is removed and sent to the regeneration unit.
Separation is based on boiling points. A temperature which is between the boiling points
of the two fractions is used. This allows lighter component nearly 98-99% pure to be
distilled out. The remainder of the gas is then sent to the next column operated at higher
temperature to facilitate removal of the heavier component.
1.5.1. Separators:
3 stage separator works on rule that all 3 components have different densities, which
permits every component to settle in layer when moving gradually with water on the
bottom, gas on the top and oil between them. Other solids like sand will also settle in the
base of separator. These types of separators are utilized close to oil production well to
separate crude oil into different components like gas, oil and water.
Separators are generally classified by their function like 2-stage and 3-stage separator and
their shape like vertical, horizontal and vertical (Saeid, 2006). 2-stage separator separates
only gas from liquid feed and 3-stage also separates liquid stream in to water and crude oil
phase (Ken Arnold, 1998). Moreover, separators are also classified according to the
operating pressure like high, medium and low pressure separators. Furthermore, they may
be categorized by temperature and principles like centrifugal, gravity and coalescing.
In centrifugal separator, forces acting on droplets are quite larger than gravity forces in a
cylindrical separator. Centrifugal separators are employed to remove droplets of size
larger than 100 micron in diameter (Talavera, 1990). Therefore, centrifugal separators are
very useful for gas streams with more particles loading. Small droplets like mist or fog
cannot be isolated by gravity but by coalescence two or more droplets merge to form a
large droplets can be separated easily. In coalescing device, gas is forced to pass through
complex paths which results in collision to form large droplets and can be separated due
to gravity.
Furthermore, as represents in Figure 10 there are four zones in the 3-phase horizontal
separator (Ken Arnold, 1998). Zone 1 between inlet and first baffle is the primary
separation which separates liquid from gas. Zone 2 is the gravity settling zone which is
employed to settle droplets out of the liquified gas stream. Zone 3 is the droplet
coalescing zone contains parallel plates, mesh, vane packs and demisters to eliminate
smallest droplets. Zone 4 is the liquid collection point where we control the system by
maintaining minimum liquid level.
Figure 10: Four zones in the 3-phase horizontal separator (Ken Arnold, 1998)
1. It requires fewer diameters for the same gas capacity in contrast to vertical
separators.
2. No counter stream: gas flow never resists drainage of demister.
3. Larger surface area for foaming which decreases turbulence.
4. Larger capacity for surging.
Vertical separators are employed in below conditions:
SECTION 2
In Section 2, Mass balance calculations are carried out along the separation plant using
engineering assumptions. Moreover, mass flow rate and percentages of gas, water and oil
are calculated at every stage.
5.615 ft 3 1m3
Feed = 1,215,000 bbl ∗ = 6,822,225 ft 3 × = 193,168.81 m3 /day
1 bbl 35.314ft 3
m3
Volume flow rate of free water = % of free water ∗ feed = 0.194 ∗ 193,168.81 = 37,515.31
day
Volume flow rate of Remnant water = % of Rem. water ∗ feed = 0.052 ∗ 193,168.81
m3
= 10,110.46
day
m3
Volume flow rate of total water = 37,515.31 + 10,110.46 = 47,625.77
day
To calculate the mass of water, let us consider the density of fresh water.
mass flow rate of fresh water in feed = ρfresh water ∗ Vfresh water = 1,000 ∗ 47,625.77
kg
= 47,625,770
day
27,567 kg
mass flow rate of salt = ∗ 47625770 = 1,312,899.602
1,000,000 day
kg
mass flow rate of salt water = 1,312,899.602 + 47,625,770 = 48,938,669.6
day
We know that,
ρHC
SG =
ρwater
kg
ρfeed = SG × ρwater = 0.854 × 1000 = 854
m3
(Density of salt water * vol %of water)+ (density of oil* vol% of oil) = density of feed
854−(1027.567∗0.2465) kg
Density of oil = 0.7535
= 797.219
m3
kg
= 116,035,193.12
𝑑𝑑
Mass flow rate of feed=116,035,193.12+ 48,938,669.6 = 164,973,862.56 kg/day
kg
= 12,290,552.76
day
kg
Mass flow rate of oil in feed = 116,035,193.12 − 12,290,552.76 = 103,744,640.36
day
Mass flow rate of free water = ρsalty water × Vfree water = 1,027.57 × 37,515.31
kg
= 38,549,499.05
day
Mass flow rate of Remnant water = ρsalty water × VRemnant water = 1,027.57 × 10,110.46
kg
= 10,389,170.38
day
kg
1. Oil mass flow rate = 103,744,640.36 � �
day
kg
2. Gas mass flow rate = 12,290,552.76 � �
day
kg
3. Remnant water mass flow rate = 10,389,170.38 � �
day
kg
4. Free water mass flow rate = 38,549,499.05 � �
day
Assumptions:
1. 93% of gas goes to the gas stream, 7% to oil stream and 0% to water stream.
2. 3% of oil goes to gas stream, 92% to oil stream and 5% to water stream.
3. 0% of free water goes to gas stream (since the water is much denser than gas), 4%
to oil stream and 96% to water stream.
4. 95% of remnant water goes to oil stream and 5% of remaining remnant water will
be transported with the separated free water.
5. The feed is at pressure of 100 psia and temperature of 150 °F.
6. H2S is present only in the associated gas and not in crude oil.
kg
93% of gas goes to gas outlet stream = 0.93 × 12,290,552.76 =11,430,214.07
day
kg
3% of oil goes to gas outlet stream = 0.03 ×103,744,640.36 = 3,112,339.21
day
kg
92% of oil goes to oil outlet stream = 0.92 × 103,744,640.36 = 95,445,069.13
day
kg
4% of free water goes to oil outlet stream = 0.04 × 38,549,499.05 = 1,541,979.96
day
kg
95% of Remnant water goes to oil outlet stream = 0.95 × 10,389,170.38 = 9,869,711.86
day
Total oil outlet mass flow rate = 860,338.69 + 95,445,069.13 + 1,541,979.96 + 9,869,711.86
kg
= 107,717,099.65
day
kg
96% of free water goes to water outlet stream = 0.96 × 38,549,499.05 = 37,007,519.09
day
kg
5% of Remnant water to water outlet stream = 0.05 × 10,389,170.38 = 519,458.52
day
Remnant=6.30%
Remnant= 1.22 %
Oil outlet stream then enters to the two phase separator (LPPT) for further separation.
The water stream enters water oil separator, while gas stream goes to Gas Plant.
Input:
kg
1. Total mass flow rate= 107,717,099.65
day
kg
2. Gas mass flow rate= 860,338.69
day
kg
3. Oil mass flow rate= 95,445,069.13
day
kg
4. Free water mass flow rate= 1,541,979.96
day
kg
5. Remnant water mass flow rate= 9,869,711.86
day
Assumptions:
Outlet Streams:
kg
100% of gas goes to gas stream = 1 × 860,338.69 = 860,338.69
day
kg
1% of oil goes to gas stream = 0.01 × 95,445,069.13 = 954,450.69
day
kg
Total mass flow rate = 860,338.69 + 954,450.69 = 1,814,789.38
day
kg
= 0.99 × 95,445,069.13 = 94,490,618.44
day
kg
100% of free water goes to oil stream = 1 × 1,541,979.96 = 1,541,979.96
day
kg
100% remnant water goes to oil stream = 1 × 9,869,711.86 = 9,869,711.86
day
kg
Total mass flow rate = 94,490,618.44 + 1,541,979.96 + 9,869,711.86 = 105,902,310.27
day
Gas stream
Gas= 47.41%
Total = 107,717,099.65
Oil= 52.59%
kg/day
Free water= 0%
Gas= 0.80%
Remnant= 0 %
Oil= 88.61% Oil stream
Oil= 89.22 %
Remnant= 9.32 %
Oil stream from the two phase separator is then sent to the dehydrator for removal of
emulsions. The separated gas stream combines with the gas stream from the three phase
separator and is fed to the Gas Plant.
Input:
kg
1. Total mass flow rate= 42,714,209.63
day
kg
2. Gas mass flow rate= 0
day
kg
3. Oil mass flow rate= 5,187,232.02
day
kg
4. Free water mass flow rate= 37,007,519.09
day
kg
5. Remnant water mass flow rate=519,458.52
day
Assumptions:
kg
99% of oil goes to oil stream = 0.99 × 5,187,232.02 = 5,135,359.70
day
kg
99% of remnant water goes to oil stream = 0.99 × 519,458.52 = 514,263.93
day
kg
1% of free water goes to oil stream = 0.01 × 37,007,519.09 = 370,075.19
day
kg
Total = 5,135,359.70 + 514,263.93 + 370,075.19 = 6,019,698.82
day
kg
1% of oil goes to water stream = 0.01 × 5,187,232.02 = 51,872.32
day
kg
1% of remnant water goes to water stream = 0.01 × 519,458.52 = 5,194.59
day
kg
99% of free water to water stream = 0.99 × 37,007,519.09 = 36,637,443.90
day
kg
Total mass flow rate = 51,872.32 + 5,194.59 + 36,637,443.90 = 36,694,510.80
day
Oil stream from the water oil separator is mixed with the oil stream from two phase
separator and is received at the dehydrator. The water stream from water oil separator
can be treated further or re-injected for secondary recovery operations.
Oil stream
Gas= 0%
Gas= 0 %
Oil= 0.14 %
Remnant= 0.01 %
2.1.5. Dehydrator
Electric heating and chemical injection techniques are employed in the dehydrator to
break the emulsions and cause the water droplets to coalesce.
Input:
kg
The total inlet mass flow rate = 8,067,278.95 + 137,588,635.70 = 145,655,914.65
day
The total oil mass flow rate flowing to dehydrator = 126,488,618.98 + 6,874,381.47 =
kg
133,363,000.45 day
kg
The total free water flowing to dehydrator = 1,541,979.96 + 370,075.19 = 1,912,055.15
day
Assumptions:
kg
99.9% of oil goes to oil stream = 0.999 ×99,625,978.14=99,526,352.16
day
kg
25% of remnant water goes to oil stream = 0.25 ×10,383,975.80=2,595,993.95
day
kg
Total oil outlet stream = 99,526,352.16 + 2,595,993.95 =102,122,346.11
day
kg
0.1% of oil goes to water stream = 0.001 × 99,625,978.14 =99,625.98
day
kg
100% free water goes to water stream =1,912,055.15
day
kg
75% of remnant water goes to water stream = 0.75 ×10,383,975.80=7,787,981.85
day
kg
Total water outlet stream = 99,625.98 + 1,912,055.15 + 7,787,981.85 =9,799,662.98
day
Oil stream
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 102,122,346.11
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 9,799,662.98
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Oil= 1.02 %
From the dehydrator all the crude oil proceeds to the de-salter.
2.1.6. De-salter
In this process, the salinity of oil stream is reduced to less than 20 PTB by the removal of
the remnant water in order to make it stable.
Input:
kg
Total mass flow rate= 102,122,346.11
day
kg
Oil mass flow rate= 99,526,352.16
day
kg
Remnant water mass flow rate= 2,595,993.95
day
Assumptions:
kg
99.8% of oil goes to oil stream = 0.998 × 99,526,352.16 =99,327,299.46
day
kg
8% of remnant water goes to oil stream = 0.08 × 2,595,993.95 =207,679.52
day
kg
Total oil stream mass flowrate = 99,327,299.46 + 207,679.52 =99,534,978.97
day
kg
92% of remnant water goes to water stream = 0.92 × 2,595,993.95 =2,388,314.43
day
kg
Total water stream mass flow rate = 199,052.70 +2,388,314.43 =2,587,367.14
day
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 99,534,978.97
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Oil= 99.79 %
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Feed =102,122,346.11 Remnant Water=0.21%
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Oil= 97.46 %
Water stream
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 2,587,367.14
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Oil= 7.69 %
The oil stream exits the de-salter 20 psi pressure and 120°F temperature.
salt mass in oil stream= water mass in oil stream × salt content
27,567 2.2046 Ib
= 207,679.52 × × = 12,621.558 Ib
1,000,000 1 kg
99,327,299.46 kg
� �
kg
854 3 bbl
= m = 731,498.8
0.159 day
207,679.52 kg
� �
kg
1027.57 3 bbl
= m = 1271.1195
0.159 day
bbl
Total volume of oil stream = 731,498.8 + 1271.1195 = 732,769.9
day
As we know that salinity is the amount of salt in pounds per 1000 barrels of oil
Reduction of water content in oil to nearly 0.15 % of the volume, the salinity of the crude
has reduced to 12.87 PTB. Thus sales specifications have been met and 980,481.97 bbl/day
of dry crude will be pumped to the refineries or sent to storage tanks based on hands
calculations and taking into account the assumptions stated.
Input:
kg
1. Total Feed to Scrubber/De-Hydrator = 16,357,342.66
day
kg
2. Mass of oil in the feed = 4,066,789.90
day
kg
3. Mass of Gas (C1 - C4 + H2S) in the Feed = 12,290,552.76
day
Assumptions:
kg
100 % of Gas goes to Gas stream = 1 × 12,290,552.76 = 12,290,552.76
day
kg
3 % of Oil (C5) goes to Gas stream = 0.03 × 4,066,789.90 = 122,003.70
day
kg
Total mass flowrate of Gas Stream = 12,412,556.4612
day
kg
97% of oil is separated out = 97 × 4,066,789.90 = 3,944,786.21
day
kg
Total liquid stream flow rate = 3,944,786.21
day
Gas Stream
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 12,412,556.46
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Gas(C1-C4+H2S) = 99.02%
C5+ =0.98%
Feed
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
= 16,357,342.66
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
C5+= 24.86%
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 3,944,786.21
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Oil= 100 %
Input:
kg
Total Feed to Gas Sweetening Unit = 12,412,556.4612
day
kg
Mass of C5 in the feed = 122,003.70
day
kg
Mass of Gas in the Feed = 12,290,552.76
day
kg Kg
Mass of H2S = 2.3% × 12,290,552.76 = 282682.71
day day
kg
Mass of Gas w/o H2S = 12,290,552.76 − 282682.71 = 12,007,870.05
day
Assumptions:
kg
100 % of Gas w/o H2S goes to Gas stream = 1 × 12,007,870.05 = 12,007,870.05
day
kg
100 % of Oil (C5) goes to Gas stream = 1 × 122,003.70 = 122,003.70
day
kg
0.21 % of H2S remains in the Gas = 0.21 % × 282,682.71 = 593.63
day
kg
Total mass flowrate of Gas Stream = 12,007,870.05 + 122,003.70 + 593.6 = 12,130,467.38
day
Bottom stream
kg
99.79% of H2S is separated out = 0.9979 × 282,682.71 = 282,089.08
day
kg
Total Bottom stream flow rate = 282,089.08
day
Gas stream
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 12,130,467.38
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Gas = 98.99%
Oil =1.01%
Oil= 0.98%
Bottom Stream
Gas= 96.74%
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 282,089.08
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
H2S = 100 %
593.63
PPM of H2S in Gas = mass of H2S / mass of Gas × 1,000,000 = × 1,000,000 =
12,007,870.05
49.437PPM
H2S content from the gas is reduced to less than 70 PPM as per requirements.
Input:
kg
Total mass flow rate=12,290,552.76
day
kg
Mass flow rate of C5+=122,003.70
day
kg
Mass flow rate of (C1, C2, C3, C4+H2S) = 12,008,463.68
day
Methane = 57.32%
Ethane = 19.45%
Propane = 14.33%
Butane = 8.90%
H2S = 0.0049%
2.1.11. De-Methanizer:
Assuming that the De-Methanizer operates at -130 °C (between the Boiling points of C1 &
C2).
Input:
kg
1. Methane = 0.5732 × 12,008,463.68 = 6883251.382
day
kg
2. Ethane = 0.1945 × 12,008,463.68 = 2335646.186
day
kg
3. Propane = 0.1433 × 12,008,463.68 = 1720812.845
day
kg
4. Butane = 0.0890 × 12,008,463.68 = 1068753.268
day
kg
5. H2S = 0.000049 × 12,008,463.68 = 588.4147204
day
kg
6. C5+ =122,003.70
day
kg
7. Total mass flow rate=12,130,467.38
day
kg
8. Mass flow rate (C1, C2, C3, C4)= 12,008,463.68
day
Assumptions:
Mass flow rate of C1 & C2 flowing to top the stream = 0.99 × 6,882,709.55 + 0.01 ×
kg
2,335,205.02 = 6,837,234.50 day
Mass flow rate of C1, C2, C3, C4,H2S & C5+ flowing to the bottom stream
kg
= 14,934,876.59 − (0.99 × 8,466,390.51 + 0.01 × 2,872,525.35) = 5,293,232.88
day
Outlet Stream
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 5,293,232.88
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
C1=1.3%
C2=43.68 %
C3=32.51%
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 C4=20.20%
Feed =12,130,467.38
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Separated Stream
Oil= 1.01% 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 6,837,234.50
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Gas= 98.99 %
C1=99.66%
University of New South Wales
C2=0.34 %
PTRL 5005-Design Project P a g e | 40
Methane is distilled from the column while the heavier stream heads towards De-
Ethanizer.
2.1.12. De-Ethanizer:
Let’s assume that the De-Ethanizer operates at -65 °C (between the Boiling points of C2 &
C3).
Input:
kg
Methane = 68,827.10
day
kg
Ethane = 2,311,852.97
day
kg
Propane = 1,720,677.39
day
kg
Butane = 1,069,278.09
day
kg
H2S = 593.63
day
kg
C5 =163,318.64
day
kg
Total mass flow rate=5,293,232.88
day
Assumptions:
2. The remaining components do not flash and are carried forward to the next column
for further fractionation.
3. Bottom stream has the remaining gases and C5.
kg
= 0.99 × 2,311,852.97 + 0.01 × 1,720,677.39 = 2,305,941.22
day
Mass flow rate of (C1, C2, C3, C4 ) flowing to the bottom stream
kg
= 5,293,232.88 – 0.99 × 2,311,852.97 + 0.01 × 1,720,677.39 = 2,987,291.66
day
Ethane is distilled from the column while the other stream is fed to the De-Propanizer.
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 Total = 2,987,291.66
Feed =5,293,232.88 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
C1=2.30%
C1=1.30%
C2=0.77 %
C2=43.68 %
C3=57.02%
C3=32.51%
C4=35.79%
C4=20.20%
C5=4.08%
C5=2.30%
H2S = 0.02%
H2S = 0.011%
Separated Stream
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total =2,305,941.22
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
C2=99.25%
C3=0.75 %
2.1.13. De-Propanizer:
Let’s assume that the De-Propanizer operates at 25°C (between the Boiling points of C3 &
C4).
Input:
kg
Methane = 68,827.10
day
kg
Ethane = 23,118.53
day
kg
Propane = 1,703,470.61
day
kg
Butane = 1,069,278.09
day
kg
H2S = 593.63
day
kg
C5 =122,003.70
day
kg
Total mass flow rate=2,987,291.66
day
Assumptions:
2. The remaining components do not flash and are carried forward to the next column
for further fractionation.
3. Bottom stream has the remaining gases and C5.
Mass flow rate of C3 & C4 flowing to the top stream = 0.99 × 1,703,470.61 + 0.01 ×
kg
1,315,314.24 = 1,697,128.69 day
Mass flow rate (C1, C2, C3, C4 ) flowing to the bottom stream
kg
= 2,987,291.66 – 1,697,128.69 = 1,290,162.97
day
Propane is distilled from the column while the other heavier components head towards
De-Butanizer.
Outlet Stream
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Feed =2,987,291.66 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
Total = 1,290,162.97
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
C1=2.30%
C1=5.33%
C2=0.77 %
C2=1.79 %
C3=57.02%
C3=1.32%
C4=35.79%
C4=82.05%
C5=4.08%
C5=9.46%
H2S = 0.0198%
H2S = 0.05%
Separated Stream
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 1,697,128.69
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
C3=99.37%
C4=0.63 %
2.1.14. De-Butanizer:
Let’s assume that the De-Butanizer operates at 12°C (boiling point of C4).
Input:
kg
Methane = 68,827.10
day
kg
Ethane = 23,118.53
day
kg
Propane = 17,034.71
day
kg
Butane = 1,058,585.31
day
kg
H2S = 593.63
day
kg
C5 =122,003.70
day
kg
Total mass flow rate=1,290,162.97
day
Assumptions:
2. The remaining components do not flash and are carried forward to the next column
for further fractionation.
3. Bottom stream has the remaining gases and C5.
kg
Mass of C3 & C4 flowing to the top stream = 1 × 17,034.71 + 0.99 × 1,058,585.31 =
day
kg
1,065,034.16
day
Outlet Stream
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Total = 225,128.81
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Feed =1,290,162.97 C1=30.57%
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
C1=5.33% C2=10.27 %
C2=1.79 % C4=4.70%
C3=1.32% C5+=54.19%
C3=1.60%
C4=98.40%
Assumptions:
mo × CPc × Δ Tc = ms × Lh
kg Kg
mo = 139,924,597.33 = 1619.49
day s
kg
ms = 34.718
s
Mass of steam required is 34.718 kg/s
mo × CPc × Δ Tc = U × A × Δ TLMTD
ΔT1 − ΔT2 35 − 17
Δ TLTMD = = = 24.92 °C
ΔT 35
ln �Δ T1 � ln �17�
2
Hence:
The area of the heat exchanges obtained here is quite large and impractical. The output
stream from the three phase separator can be split into more than one streams and
multiple heat exchangers of available sizes can be employed to serve the purpose.
120
83°C
Tempearture (Degree C)
80
60 Steam
Wet Crude
65 °C
40
20
0
Stage
2.3.1. GOSP:
SECTION 3
This section involves simulation of Gas Oil Separation process for which we employed
Aspen HYSYS V8.8, is a commercial software adopted by the oil and gas, process and
refining industries because it
• Is User-friendly
• Improves designing and performance
• Evaluates economics and identifies energy savings
• Observes operation and safety issues
• Improves operating conditions and capacity
HYSYS models wellhead fluid (Feed) which contains oil, water and gas. Firstly HYSYS
defines feed properties for instance viscosity at different temperatures, TBP (Temperature
Boiling Point) data and percentage of light ends. We have selected “Peng Robinson” fluid
package which is a thermodynamic model precisely calculates “Vapour Equilibrium Data”
Firstly we input feed data in to composition list which are shown in Table 6; we add
methane, ethane, propane, butane and H2O. Salt is not added in the composition because
HYSYS package cannot simulate salt content. There is a significant quantity of H2S is
present in the feed which requires sweetening unit for its treatment and “Peng Robinson”
doesn’t model sweetening process alone for that multiple fluid packages need to run
concurrently. For simplification we are ignoring H2S content and adding its composition
percentage to methane as new conditions shown in Table 7 but we cannot ignore H2S in
real life operation.
• Oil characterization is carried out in oil manager and defines composition and
thermodynamic properties of feed as shown in Table 8.
• HYSYS Inputs: Bulk properties and light ends are converted and introduced into oil
manager and light ends or gases (C1, C2, C3, and C4) can be added into manager in
mass fractions. Total composition of light ends equals 7.28% of total.
Finally we input Assay percent and temperature in distillation. Oil properties are
calculated according to the “Peng Robinson” fluid package and True Boiling Points (TBP)
plot is shown in Figure19 in which green curve presents inputs and red curve is the
calculated model. Ideally green and red curves need to be close as much as possible.
After installing crude stream into simulation we input water composition per mass fraction
and keep normalising until we achieve same percentages of light ends including water
which is elucidated in Figure 18.
After installing feed into the simulation, we will separate feed into oil, gas and water.
Feed coming out of well is coming into three phase separator, due to decrease in pressure
gas or light ends liberate out of oil and free water goes out from the bottom due to gravity
effect. We have considered retention time of 60 seconds as plant is treating with medium
to heavy oil. Operating conditions for feed (wellhead stream) and three phase separator (3
phase Sep) are shown below
In real life practice, to avoid rapid pressure drop along three phase separator, two
separators are employed in series because steady pressure drop helps in flashing lighter
ends or gas efficiently. Different pressures at lower stage separation can be resolute on
the basis of equal pressure fractions between stages (Campbell, 1976).
1
𝑃𝑃1 𝑛𝑛
𝑅𝑅𝑝𝑝 = � �
𝑃𝑃𝑠𝑠
In equation, 𝑛𝑛 is the number of stages, 𝑅𝑅𝑝𝑝 is the pressure ratio, 𝑃𝑃1 is the first stage pressure
and 𝑃𝑃𝑠𝑠 is the stock tank pressure which is mostly101.3 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘.
Pressure at the medium stages can be calculated by using equation below
𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖−1
𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖 =
𝑅𝑅𝑃𝑃
In equation 𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖 is the pressure at initial stage.
As we are using three and two phase separators along which Reid vapour pressure of oil
outlet stream after three phase separator is 39.96 kPa whereas under 30 kPa after two
phase separator.
Pressure along three phase separator is 750 kPa and along two phase separator is 450 kPa.
As pressure difference drop along two separators is less than 500 kPa. Operating
conditions of two separators are shown below
It is important to note here that final crude oil must be able to transport for which
industry has standard conditions and requirements which are shown below in Figure 22.
Conditions Requirements
Salt content Less than 20 PTB
Water content 0.1 vol%
o
Reid vapour pressure@37.8 C Under 30 kPa
We have selected fluid package “Peng-Robinson” in which we cannot quantify salt content
so it’s not possible to simulate for salt removal or other electrolytes in this package. Due
to this reason desalting is not taken into account for our design.
3.2 . Equipments:
We used this exchanger to use cool methane stream to decrease the temperature of gas
feed from 83.6o to 1oC and we also reduced duty by avoiding cooler to make it energy
efficient.
HE-101:
We used heat exchanger-101 by using hot water stream of 85oC to increase temperature of
dehydrated gas feed from 3.7oC to 55oC to make it vaporise and then directed into de-
methaniser to separate lighter C1 as shown in figures below
Table 10: Operating conditions of HE-101
Dehydrator:
Gas stream coming out of two separators contains water and other constituents of oil
which needs to be removed before distillation. Before distillation we employed
absorber/dehydrator to remove water from gas stream.
In the absorber we shower Ethylene glycol to absorb water because it has high affinity
towards water and high boiling point. Composition of gas after passing through absorber is
shown below
3.2.3. De-Methaniser:
3.2.4. De-Ethaniser:
3.2.5. De-Propaniser:
3.2.6. De-Butaniser:
SECTION 4
4.1. SIZING
In each sizing calculation, the measurement values are rounded up to the nearest 0.25
metres to ensure the constructions and measurements done are easier and precise.
The three phase separator capacity is largely determined by retention time. The volume
of the three phase separators is a function of volumetric flow divided by retention time.
Volume of three phase separator = (2)* Volumetric Flow Rate/ Retention Time
The value is multiplied by two because of there need to be ample space for the vapour
phase to disengage from the liquid stream. Half volume of the three phase separator will
be occupied by liquid phase and another half will be occupied by gas phase.
From my assumptions, L = 4D
L = 4*4.3959 m
L = 17.5836 m
The formula, assumptions, reasons of the calculations of the two phase separator is
basically the same as the three phase separator.
Assumption
1. L/D = 4
2. Vessel is a perfect cylinder
145.567m3 = Pi*D3
D = 3.591 m
Since length,
L= 4D
L = 4 * 3.591 m
L =14.367 m
4.1.3. Absorber/Dehydrator
Data for calculating the size of the absorber is obtained from HYSYS.
Wl = 500 kg/h
Wv = 661194.72 kg/h
Density of v = 4.858kg/m3
Density of L = 1126 kg/m3
To calculate Flv
𝑊𝑊𝐿𝐿 𝜌𝜌𝑉𝑉
𝐹𝐹𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 = �
𝑊𝑊𝑉𝑉 𝜌𝜌𝐿𝐿
From the graph, value of capacity factor for flooding, Csb is 0.41
𝜎𝜎 0.2
𝐾𝐾 = 𝐶𝐶𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 � �
20
Value of surface tension = 49.76 dyne/cm
K = 0.491
𝜌𝜌𝑙𝑙 − 𝜌𝜌𝑣𝑣
𝑢𝑢𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = 𝐾𝐾 �
𝜌𝜌𝑣𝑣
4 × 4.413 × 105
= �
3.142 × 0.9 × 6.150 × 0.9 × 5.46 × 3600
= 5.122 m
Diameter = 5.25 m
Calculating the height of the absorber by using the number of trays from HYSYS after
rounding it to a realistic number. The formula below is used to calculate the column
height.
Top: usually ranges from 2 to 3 which is the space between the ceiling of the absorber and
most top tray. We will choose 2.
Bottom: usually ranges from 3 and 5 which is the space between the bottom of the
absorber and lowest tray. We will choose 3.
𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯 = [(𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏 − 𝟏𝟏) + 𝟐𝟐 + 𝟑𝟑] × 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 = 𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑𝟑 𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 = 𝟖𝟖. 𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓 = 𝟖𝟖. 𝟕𝟕𝟕𝟕 𝒎𝒎
Q = UAΔTLMTD
All the data for the calculating the area of the heat exchanger is obtained from HYSYS.
Q = 220616892.22 kJ/h
ΔTLMTD = 106.04 oC
HE-100 HE-101
79769424
220616892.22
Q kJ/h
28578.01
OVER ALL U 34488.89
(kJ/C.m2.h)
46.27574
ΔTLMTDC 106.04
A m2 60.50 60.50
De-methanizer column
V =L+D
= 148779.6 + 2.976 × 105
= 446338.8 kg/h
To calculate Flv
𝑊𝑊𝐿𝐿 𝜌𝜌𝑉𝑉
𝐹𝐹𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 = �
𝑊𝑊𝑉𝑉 𝜌𝜌𝐿𝐿
𝐹𝐹𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 = 0.083
From the graph, value of capacity factor for flooding, Csb is 0.35
𝜎𝜎 0.2
𝐾𝐾 = 𝐶𝐶𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 � �
20
Value of surface tension = 8.861 dyne/cm
K = 0.297
𝜌𝜌𝑙𝑙 − 𝜌𝜌𝑣𝑣
𝑢𝑢𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 = 𝐾𝐾 �
𝜌𝜌𝑣𝑣
4 × 549150
= �
3.142 × 0.9 × 6.16298 × 0.9 × 0.715 × 3600
𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯𝑯 = [(𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏 − 𝟏𝟏) + 𝟐𝟐 + 𝟑𝟑] × 𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 = 𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒 𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊 = 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏. 𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓𝟓 = 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏. 𝟕𝟕𝟕𝟕 𝒎𝒎
Constants
Flv 0.083 0.077 0.0672 0.089
Capacity Factor, Csb 0.35 0.36 0.35 0.34
Factor K 0.297 0.322 0.3108 0.299
uflood (ft/s) 2.359 2.76 2.551 2.381
n (neta) 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
fraction, uflood 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
No of trays 15 23 30 12
Figure 31: Displays all the values of the sizes of each distillation column
Section 5
5. Costing
Based on our previous calculations data, we can use the data to determine the Bare
Module Cost (BMC). The real cost will be obtain by multiplying by a factor of 4. The cost
calculated will be in Australian Dollar (AUD$).
5.1 Separator
5.1.1 Three Phase Separator
= 210,000 + ((V-10)^1.1)*1200
= 746859.1889 x 4
= 2987436.756 $
= 210,000 + ((V-10)^1.1)*1200
= 475797.3399 x 4
= 1903189.359 $
5.2.1 De-methanizer
Calculated diameter of column (D) in meter = 6.75 m
= 400,000+ ((N)^1.2)*24,000+((D)^2)*(3.1416/4)*(N+5)*0.5*0.05*180,000
= 4239388.769 x 4
= 16957555.08 $
5.2.2 De-ethanizer
Diameter of column (D) in meter = 3.75 m
= 400,000+ ((N)^1.2)*24,000+((D)^2)*(3.1416/4)*(N+5)*0.5*0.05*180,000
= 2825069.144 x 4
= 11300276.58 $
5.2.3 De-propanizer
Diameter of column (D) in meter =3.0 m
= 400,000+ ((N)^1.2)*24,000+((D)^2)*(3.1416/4)*(N+5)*0.5*0.05*180,000
= 2934836.85 x 4
= 11739347.4 $
5.2.4 De-butanizer
Calculated diameter of column (D) in meter = 2.0 m
= 400,000+ ((N)^1.2)*24,000+((D)^2)*(3.1416/4)*(N+5)*0.5*0.05*180,000
= 1113732.927 x 4
= 4454931.708 $
5.3 Absorber
Diameter of column (D) in meter =5.25m
= 400,000+ ((N)^1.2)*24,000+((D)^2)*(3.1416/4)*(N+5)*0.5*0.05*180,000
= 2241586.522 x 4
= 8966346.09 $
For A>50 m2
= (A^0.9)*5,000 + 80,000
= 280701.141 x 4
= 1122804.564 $
= (A^0.9)*5,000 + 80,000
= 280701.141 x 4
= 1122804.564
Now that we have done sizing and determined the cost of equipment’s, we would jump
into economic analysis to find whether our project is economically viable or not? To help
us answer this question, we would use economic indicators, namely, Net Present Value
(NPV), Internal rate of return (IRR) and Payback period, to reduce the Net cash flow into a
single number representative of the economic viability of the project. In doing this, the
following process would be followed:
Is the project
No
Revisit inputs or
economically
viable? abandon
Yes
Move into
Move into
production phase
production phase
Furthermore, we are using formula given to estimate each equipment and components
used in designing the GOSP since Cap Cost software is not available. The bare module
costs obtained from the calculation was then multiplied by a factor of 4 to take into
account transportation, installation charges on the equipment.
We are dividing the CAPEX into cost of GOSP equipment and other facilities.
Table below exhibits the approximate cost needed to set up the plant with assumption
that the spending of the total CAPEX is done in year 1 of the project.
Cost of plant main equipment calculated using the formula defined in Costing section
For second part of CAPEX, assumptions of additional CAPEX are required in order to set up
the GOSP and other facilities. The table below illustrates the cost of additional CAPEX
needed. The following assumptions are used in calculating this:
1) Cost of land in Australia is – AUD$ 40 / m2.
2) Land area of the plant is 169 hectares.
3) Other equipment such as mixers and valves are assumed to be 50% of the
total equipment cost.
4) Cost of infrastructure (roads, house for workers, recreation areas, safety
equipment’s, and security) is assumed.
5) Cost of building is assumed.
6) Miscellaneous expenses such as company vehicles, laundry, food,
households and furniture are all assumed.
CAPEX
Land
Pipelines, mixers, valves
Infrastructure
Buildings
Miscellaneous
GOSP equipment
* This includes lum sum cost for desalting and sweetening unit.
= 85329638.59 + 65464819.00
= 150794457.59 $
• Labour costs
• Utilities (electricity, steam, coolant etc.)
• Chemicals
• Maintenance
• Insurance
Since there are 3 shifts in a day of 8 hours each, the total numbers of operators come up
as 5.85. Rounding of this figure gives us a total of 6 operators. This is shown in the table
below including that for other personnel’s.
Total 7.30E+08
The following table shows the cost of steam required for the re-boilers of the four
distillation columns. Since this is a recurring cost, we have included in the OPEX.
Description Total Flow rate of Unit Price ($/1000 Total Cost ($)
steam (kg/hr) kg)
Steam for the four 2.12E+05 4.400 8171328
distillation columns
The condensers for the four distillation columns need coolant to reduce the temperature
of the incoming streams. In calculation of the amount of coolant required, we use duties
and heat of vaporization of the particular coolant to give us an estimate of cost. These
raw materials are purchased annually
Cost of coolants
OPEX
Labour
Electricity
Maintenance and Insurance
Cost of Glycol
Cost of Steam
Cost of coolants
These are:
1) Price of crude oil is fixed (AUD$ 61/bbl) while for natural gas:
C1= AUD$ 1/bbl
Gross Revenue
less
equals
6.6. Assumptions
Before going into deriving the Net Cash Flow, it is important that we define certain
assumptions to be used. The assumptions are listed as shown below:
1) The GOSP is expected to run for 20 years and is located offshore Australia.
Units 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Withdrawal Rate MMbbl/year 0.00 441.12 419.06 398.11 378.21 359.29 341.33 324.26 308.05 292.65 278.02 264.11 250.91 238.36 226.45 215.12 204.37 194.15 184.44 175.22
Revenue (Inflated) $MM/year 0.00 411.50 406.56 401.68 396.86 392.10 387.40 382.75 378.15 373.62 369.13 364.70 360.33 356.00 351.73 347.51 343.34 339.22 335.15 331.13
Tax
Inflation Factor 1.00 0.96 0.92 0.89 0.85 0.82 0.79 0.76 0.73 0.70 0.68 0.65 0.62 0.60 0.58 0.56 0.53 0.51 0.49 0.47
New Gross with Inflation $MM/year 0.00 411.50 406.56 401.68 396.86 392.10 387.40 382.75 378.15 373.62 369.13 364.70 360.33 356.00 351.73 347.51 343.34 339.22 335.15 331.13
Depreciation $MM/year 0.00 30.16 30.16 30.16 30.16 30.16
OPEX (Inflated) $MM/year 0.00 43.38 45.11 46.92 48.79 50.75 52.78 54.89 57.08 59.37 61.74 64.21 66.78 69.45 72.23 75.12 78.12 81.25 84.50 87.87
CAPEX $MM/year 150.79
Total Expense 150.79 73.54 75.27 77.08 78.95 80.90 52.78 54.89 57.08 59.37 61.74 64.21 66.78 69.45 72.23 75.12 78.12 81.25 84.50 87.87
Taxable Income (BTNCF) $MM/year 0.00 337.96 331.29 324.61 317.91 311.20 334.62 327.86 321.07 314.25 307.39 300.49 293.55 286.55 279.50 272.39 265.22 257.97 250.65 243.25
PRRT $MM/year 0.00 135.19 132.52 129.84 127.16 124.48 133.85 131.14 128.43 125.70 122.96 120.20 117.42 114.62 111.80 108.96 106.09 103.19 100.26 97.30
income tax $MM/year 0.00 60.83 59.63 58.43 57.22 56.02 60.23 59.01 57.79 56.57 55.33 54.09 52.84 51.58 50.31 49.03 47.74 46.44 45.12 43.79
Total tax $MM/year 0.00 196.02 192.15 188.27 184.39 180.49 194.08 190.16 186.22 182.27 178.29 174.29 170.26 166.20 162.11 157.99 153.83 149.63 145.38 141.09
NPV
New Gross with Inflation $MM/year 0.00 411.50 406.6 401.7 396.9 392.1 387.4 382.7 378.2 373.6 369.1 364.7 360.3 356.0 351.7 347.5 343.3 339.2 335.1 331.1
CAPEX $MM/year 150.79
OPEX $MM/year 0.00 43.38 45.11 46.92 48.79 50.75 52.78 54.89 57.08 59.37 61.74 64.21 66.78 69.45 72.23 75.12 78.12 81.25 84.50 87.87
Total tax $MM/year 0.00 200.33 196.46 192.58 188.70 184.80 194.08 190.16 186.22 182.27 178.29 174.29 170.26 166.20 162.11 157.99 153.83 149.63 145.38 141.09
Total Deductions $MM/year 150.79 243.71 241.57 239.50 237.49 235.55 246.86 245.05 243.30 241.63 240.03 238.50 237.04 235.65 234.34 233.10 231.95 230.87 229.87 228.96
After Tax Net Cash Flow (ATNCF) $MM/year -150.79 167.79 164.99 162.18 159.37 156.55 140.54 137.70 134.85 131.99 129.10 126.21 123.29 120.35 117.39 114.41 111.39 108.35 105.27 102.17
Escalated After Tax Net Cash Flow $MM/year -150.79 161.34 152.54 144.18 136.23 128.67 111.07 104.64 98.53 92.73 87.22 81.98 77.01 72.28 67.79 63.53 59.47 55.62 51.97 48.49
NPV ($MM) $715.47
IRR 101%
Payback Period Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
ATNCF -150.79 161.34 152.54 144.18 136.23 128.67 111.07 104.64 98.53 92.73 87.22 81.98 77.01 72.28 67.79 63.53 59.47 55.62 51.97 48.49
Cumalative ATNCF -150.79 10.54 163.09 307.27 443.50 572.17 683.24 787.88 886.42 979.15 1066.37 1148.35 1225.36 1297.64 1365.43 1428.95 1488.43 1544.05 1596.02 1644.51
1.93461014 Years
Assumptions
1. The discount rate is set at 10%
The calculated NPV is $715.47 MM. This means that in order to generate the same net cash
flow as the project, we would need to deposit an extra $715.47 MM into an alternate
investment with an interest rate of 10%. In other words, our project is $715.47MM more
profitable than alternate investment. This indicates that the project is viable and should
thus be undertaken.
$800.00
$600.00
$400.00
$200.00
$0.00
($200.00) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Discount Rate
From the above graph it can be seen that NPV becomes zero at a discount rate of
101%.i.e. internal rate of return. Since this number is higher than discount rate of bank,
project is economically profitable. It is important to note here that IRR gives only no
comparison with alternate investment and is only indicative of speed of return. The
exceptionally high IRR for the project is attributable to the fact that abandonment costs
are ignored. These costs can make up-to half of the project revenue and if included will
result in a realistic IRR. Moreover, the effect of risk and uncertainty is ignored in this
analysis. This is also attributable to the unrealistic IRR.
The payback period is the time taken for the project’s net cash flow to recoup the initial
capital expenditure. Therefore, a project with high net cash flow will have a short
payback period. The project that we have simulated has a relatively large net cash flow
when compared to the OPEX and CAPEX of the project. Moreover, abandonment costs and
uncertainty are ignored. Hence a short payback period is to be expected.
Payback calculation
Year 1 2 3 4
150.79
1+ = 1.93 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦
161.34
This means that the initial capital expenditure will be recovered in a period of 1.93 years
The three economic indicators above tell us that the project is economically viable and
should be considered for development. However, it is important to note here that
abandonment costs and uncertainty are ignored in the analysis. For a more detailed
analysis, we should be including abandonment costs and find the analysis at different
levels of probability such as P10, P50 and P90. However, as initial screening criteria, the
project is profitable and should be considered for further development.
7. Conclusion
GOSP is essential in order to bring crude oil to sellable configurations. In this report, basic
unit operations and equipment used in GOSP are described and block diagrams of the plant
were presented. The objective of this report was to ensure that crude oil leaving the
facility has Reid Vapour Pressure less than 5 psi, water content below 0.3% by vol and Salt
content less than 20 PTB and hydrogen sulphide below 70 ppm.
Based on the problem statement provided, a GOSP and Gas plant were designed and mass
balance calculations were carried out on each unit based on engineering assumptions.
The accuracy of the calculated values is debateable since they are based on assumptions.
In the second part of the project, the design presented was simulated in HYSYS, where
thermodynamics were taken into account totally.
Moreover, economic analysis of the field and design was carried out to determine whether
the design is economically feasible.
It is concluded that the project is economically viable and should be considered for
development. However, it is important to note here that abandonment costs and
uncertainty are ignored in the analysis. For a more detailed analysis, we should be
including abandonment costs and find the analysis at different levels of probability such as
P10, P50 and P90. However, as initial screening criteria, the project is profitable and
should be considered for further development.
8. References
[1] http://petrowiki.org/Oil_and_gas_separators
[3] Manning, F. a. (1995). Oil Field Processing. Tulsa, OK: Pennwell Publishing Company.
[8] http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/en/Terms/h/header.aspx
[10] http://nptel.ac.in/courses/103103032/11
[11]http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/en/Terms/t/two_phase_separator.aspx
[12] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_evaporation
[13] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API_oil-water_separator
[14]http://www.cherd.ichemejournals.com/cms/attachment/2020816020/2040974875/gr
1.jpg
[15]http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Crude_oil_desalter
[16]http://www.csgnetwork.com/h2odenscalc.html