QFuel Contractor

Email: [email protected]

Distillation Column Design

Report

Ayman Arif, Nafisa Masrur

Submitted To:
Dr. Easa Musleh

Table of Contents
1. Objectives........................................................................................................................3
2. Process Description..........................................................................................................3
3. Assumptions & Constraints..............................................................................................4
4. Procedure........................................................................................................................6
5. Summary of Results.......................................................................................................15
6. Software Design............................................................................................................17
6.1 Top section..........................................................................................................................19
6.2 Bottom Section...........................................................................................................................21
7. Conclusion.....................................................................................................................22
8. References.....................................................................................................................23

List of Tables
Table 1: Distillation column specifications.....................................................................................4
Table 2: Physical properties.............................................................................................................6
Table 3: Top section results- Excel...............................................................................................15
Table 4: Bottom section results- Excel..........................................................................................16
Table 5: Column summary- HYSYSTM.........................................................................................18
Table 6: Top section summary- HYSYSTM....................................................................................20
Table 7: Bottom section- HYSYSTM..............................................................................................23

List of Figures
Figure 1: Typical distillation column setup. [1]................................................................................3
Figure 2: Distillation column from HYSYSTM................................................................................4
Figure 3: Distillation column sections- HYSYSTM........................................................................18
Figure 4: Typical cross flow sieve plate. [1]...................................................................................18
Figure 5: Top section plate details- HYSYSTM..............................................................................19
Figure 6: Hydraulic plot of top section plate.................................................................................21
Figure 7: Bottom section plate details- HYSYSTM........................................................................22
Figure 8: Hydraulic plot of bottom section plate...........................................................................24

1. Objectives
 To carry out a detailed design for distillation columns
 To size distillation columns and design distillation column trays
 To compare the design calculations from Excel with the one obtained from the software
 2. Process Unit Description
Distillation columns are the most widely used for separation processes. The driving force for the
separation of the liquid mixture is the difference in volatilities for binary mixtures or boiling
points for multi components. The basic equipment used for continuous distillation is a feed
stream, condenser, reboiler and product streams. This can be seen in Figure 1 below. Vapor
flows up the column and the liquid flows down the column with gravity. In order to have mass
transfer, the vapor and liquid need to be in contact with each other. This contact is made by
either plates or packing material in the column. The condenser is used to bring some liquid back
into the top of the column and a reboiler is used to provide the vapor flow. The top section of the
column is known as the rectifying section and the bottom of the column is known as the stripping
section.

Figure 1: Typical distillation column setup. [1]

The distillation column picked for the mechanical design is T-102. The distillation column T-102
from HYSYSTM is shown in Figure 2 below. The distillation column is optimized by specifying a
reflux ratio, number of stages, product flow rates and the condenser and reboiler pressure. In
order to estimate these parameters a shortcut distillation column was first designed.
 Figure 2: Distillation column from HYSYSTM

This distillation column has an important role in the refinery as it removes the lighter
hydrocarbons after the naphtha has passed through the HP and LP separator. The distillation
column is part of the purification process and makes the product match the required
specifications. The distillation column is the last stage in our process and so its importance is
amplified since it determines whether the product is ready to be sold. The feed stream is liquid
naphtha and enters the column at 134.1 ◦C and 500 KPa. The pure sweet naphtha product stream
leaves at 154.2 ◦C and 550 KPa. The total number of trays is 25 and there are two sections in the
distillation column. The top section has 11 trays and the bottom section has 14 trays. A summary
of the specification is shown below in Table 1.

Table 1: Distillation column specifications

Distillation column specifications

No. of stages Feed stage location Reflux ratio Type of plates
25 12 3.5 Sieve

3.Assumptions & Constraints

Assumptions:

1. Choice of Plates or Packing: Plates

  A wider range of liquid and gas flow rates can be handled as compared to packed
columns.[1]
 Plates are more suitable for low liquid flowrates which is the case in the top
section.[1]
 Plates are easier to clean in case of fouling.[1]

2. Choice of trays: Sieve plate

 Sieve plates have the lowest cost amongst all other plate types. [1]
 There are different sizes available to use. [1]
 There is low pressure drop when sieve plates are used.[1]
 Sieve plates are less prone to fouling. [1]

3. Carbon steel as material of construction

 Commonly used in industry.

4. Cartridge type construction

 Most common type.[1]
 Usually used when the column diameter is too small for a worker to assemble the
plates.

5. Torispherical head type

 Operating pressure range is low (< 15 bar) [1]
 Most commonly used end [1]

Constraints:

1. Tray spacing has to be between the recommended range: 0.15-0.90 m [1]

2. The flooding factor has to be within the recommended range: 70-90 % [1]
3. The Downcomer area has to be within the recommended range: 10-12 % [1]
 4. The Hole area has to be within the recommended range: 5-10 % [1]
5. The turndown is 70 % [1]
6. Residence time criteria : 3-5 sec [2]
7. Fractional entrainment should be lower than 0.1: Ψ<0.11[1]
8. The Correlation factor should be within the range: 2.5< lp/dh < 4[1]
9. Perform in the satisfactory performance region of the hydraulic plot.

3. Procedure & Sample Calculations

The required physical properties shown below are estimated after optimizing column T-102
using the software HYSYSTM.
Table 2: Physical properties

Top Section Bottom

Physical Property
(#) Section (#)
ρ v (kg/m3) 11.56 16.22
ρ l (kg/m3) 558.9 593.2
V (Kmol/hr) 244.6 263.3
L (Kmol/hr) 187.1 1142
V (Kg/s) 4.292 7.091
L (kg/s) 3.389 31.684
(Surface Tension)
9588 8673
(N/m)
MW (v) 64.01 91.11
MW (l) 65.21 99.87

Temperature (C) 56.75 145.9

Pressure (KPa) 450 550

The sample calculations for the design of the top section is discussed below in detail. The same
process is used for the bottom section.

Step 1: Calculating column diameter

1. Vapor – Liquid Flow Factor

 L ρV 187.075 11.56
 F LV =
V √ ρL
=
244.589 558.9√= 0.1100

2. Correction for Surface Tension

Assumption: Plate spacing is assumed to be 0.5 m

Justification: It’s in the middle of the allowed range (0.15-0.9 m) so that there is sufficient crawl
space for tray cleaning and repair.

 ¿ Figure 11.34 of CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN book ( Sinnott et al, 2009,

pg. 743)
 K1 = 0.0800
0.2 0.2
σ 0.009588
 KC = K 1 ( )
0.02
= 0.0800 ( 0.02 ) = 0.0691

3. Flooding Velocity

ρ L −ρ V 558.9−11.56
 u f =K 1
√ ρV
= 0.0800
√
11.56
= 0.5505 ms-1

4. Velocity at Maximum Flow Rate

 u v =uf × flooding % = 0.5505 × 0.85 = 0.4679 ms-1

5. Maximum Volumetric Flow Rate

V × Mw 544.589× 64.01
 V V , max = ρ = = 0.3762 m3/s
V 11.56

6. Net Area

V V ,max V V ,max 0.3762

 An = = = = 0.8040 m2
uv uv 0.4679

7. Column Cross-sectional Area

 An 0.8040
 Ac = = = 0.9137 m2
(100 %− A d %) (1−0.12)

8. Column Diameter

4 × AC 4 × 0.9137
 D C ,top =
√ π
=
√ 3.1415
= 1.078 m

Step 2: Liquid flow pattern

1. Maximum Volumetric Liquid Flow rate

L× Mw 187.075× 65.21
 V L, max= 3
ρ L = 558.9 × 3600 = 0.0061 m /s

2. Liquid flow arrangement: Cross flow (single pass) From Figure 11.35 of CHEMICAL
ENGINEERING DESIGN book ( Sinnott et al, 2009, pg.744 )

3. Initial values:
Assumptions:
Weir height, hw= 50 mm
Hole diameter, dh= 10 mm
Plate thickness, t= 10 mm

Step 3: Provisional plate design

1. Cross Sectional Area of Down comer

 Ad = A d % × A c = 0.12 × 0.9137 = 0.1096 m2

2. Net Area for Vapour-Liquid Disengagement

 An =A c − A d = 0.9137-0.1096 = 0.8040 m2
3. Active Area
 Aa =A c −2 × A d = 0.9137 -2×0.1096 = 0.6944 m2
4. Hole Area
 Ah =A h % × A a = 0.1× 0.6944 = 0.0694 m2

5. Weir Length
Ad 0.1096
 %= = 12%
Ac 0.9137 %
 ¿ Figure 11.39 of CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN book ( Sinnott et al, 2009, pg.
748) lw/Dc = 0.75
lw
 l w =DC × ( )
D top
= 1.078× 0.75 = 0.8089 m

Step 4: Weeping check

1. Minimum liquid rate at 70% turn-down

 Lmin =( 70 % × L ) = 0.70 × 3.389 = 2.37 kg/s

2. Maximum and minimum height of liquid crest over down comer weir
2 2
L 3.389
 max . h ow =750 × (
ρL × l w
3
= 750 )
×
558.9 × 0.8089 (
3
= 28.73 mm )
2
Lmin 2.37
2
 min . how = 750 × (
ρL ×l w )
3
= 750× ( 558.9× 0.8089 ) = 22.65 mm
3

3. Minimum Vapor Velocity Through The Holes

 h w + min. h ow = 50 + 22.65 = 72.65 mm
 ¿ Figure 11.37 of CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN book (Sinnott et al,
2009, pg. 746 ) K2 = 0.75
K 2 −0.9(25.4−d h ) 0.75−0.9 (25.4−5)
uh =
 1 = 1 = 3.57 ms-1
2 2
ρ V 11.56
4. Actual Minimum Vapor Velocity
turndown %−V V ,max 0.7−0.3762
 u v= = = 3.79 ms-1
Ah 0.0694
 uh < uv ----- √

Step 5: Plate pressure drop check

1. Maximum Vapor Velocity through The Holes

V V ,max 0.3762
 uh , max= = = 5.418 ms-1
Ah 0.0694

2. Orifice Coefficient

Plate thickness 5
 dh = mm = 1
5

Ah 0.0694
 %= × 100 = 10%
Aa 0.0694
 ¿ Figure 11.42 of CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN book (Sinnott et al,
2009, pg. 751)
 CO = 0.843

3. Pressure Drop through the dry plate

uh , max 2 ρV 5.418 2 11.56
 h d=51 ( )Co
×
ρL
= (
51 )
0.843
×
558.9
= 43.57 mm

4. Residual Head
12.5× 103 12.5× 103
 hr = = = 22.37 mm
ρL 558.9

5. Total Pressure Drop

  ht =h r +hw +h ow +h d = 22.37+ 50+ 28.73 +43.57 = 144.66 m
6. Total Plate Pressure Drop
 ∆ Pt =(9.81× 10 )× ht × ρ L = (9.81 ×10−3)×144.66 ×558.9 = 793.15 Pa
−3

Step 6: Down comer liquid back up

1. Height of the Bottom Edge of the Apron

 h ap=hw −10 mm = 50-10 = 40 mm

2. Area under the Down comer

 Aap =hap ×l w = 40 × 0.8089 = 0.0324 m2

3. Head loss in Down comer

2 2
L 3.389
 h dc=166 ( ρL × A ap ) = 166 ( 558.9 ×0.0324 ) = 5.8 mm
4. Back-up in Down comer
 h b=ht + hw +h ow +h dc = 144.66 + 50+28.73+5.8 = 229 mm

5. Recalculate head loss and back-up and check Plate Spacing

 ρl , aerated ,top =50 % ρ L = 0.5 × 558.9 = 279 kg/m3
2 2
L 3.389
 h dc=166 ( ρL × A ap ) = 166 ( 279 ×0.0324 ) = 23 mm
 h b=ht + hw +h ow +h dc = 144.66 + 50+28.73+23 = 247 mm
 Plate spacing check: hb < 0.5×(plate spacing+ weir height) = 247 < 275 √

6. Check Residence Time

hb × ρL × A d 229× 558.9× 0.1096
 t r= = = 4.144 s > 3 s √
L 3.38
 Step 7: Entrainment check
1. Actual Velocity
V Vmax 0.3762
 u v= = = 0.467 ms-1
An 0.8040

2. Flooding Percentage
uv 0.467
 percentage flooding %= ×100 = ×100 = 85%
uf 0.5505

3. Fractional Entrainment
 ¿ Figure 11.36 of CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN book (Sinnott et al, 2009,
pg. 751),
 Ψ = 0.02
 ¿ˇ Ψ < 0.1 √

Step 8: Trial layout

 Assumption:
 Construction type: Cartridge type
 Unperforated plate edge = 50 mm
 Calming zone = 50 mm

Step 9: Perforated Area

1. Finding the angle subtended by chord

 ¿ Figure 11.40 of CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN book (Sinnott et al, 2009,
pg. 749), 𝜃c, top = 98

2. Angle subtended by edge of plate

 Angle= 85
3. Mean length of unperforated edge strips
(D¿¿ c−unperforated strip round plate edge) π × θnew
 Mean length = ¿=
180

(1.078−50× 10−3 )π ×82

= 1.472 m
180

4. Area of Unperforated Edge Strips

 Area = unperforated strip round plate edge∗meanlength , unperforated edge strips =

50×10-3 × 1.4720=0.0736 m2

5. Mean length of calming zones=l w + with of unperforated strips = 0.8089+50 × 10-3 =

0.8589 m

6. Area of Calming Zones

 Acalming zone=2 ×mean length of calming zones× with calming zones= 2× 0.8589 × 50 ×
10-3 = 0.0859 m2

7. Total Area for Perforations

 A p =A a , − Areaof unperforated edge strips−A calming zone = 0.6944-0.0736-0.0859 =
0.5349 m2
 Ah / A p = 0.0694/0.5349 = 0.1298
 ¿ Figure 11.41 of CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN book (Sinnott et al, 2009,

lp
pg. 750), = 2.7
dh
lp
ˇ
 2.5< <4 √
dh

Step 10: Number of holes

1. Area of one hole
 π 2 π
 Aone hole= × t = × ¿ = 1.963 × 10-5 m2
4 4
2. Number of holes
Ah 0.694
 number of holes= = = 3536
A one hole 1.963× 10−5

Step 11: Column Head Height

Assumption:
Head type: Torispherical head
Justification: Since our operating range is low pressure: <15 bar

1. Calculate Column Head Height

 CR = 1Dc = 1× 1.078 = 1.078 m
 KR = 0.1Dc = 0.1× 1.078 = 0.11 m
5
 SF = 3.5t = 3.5× = 0.0175 m
1000
5
 DH =0.1935 D c −0.455 t = 0.1935 × 1.078 – 0.455 × = 0.2064 m
1000
 Thi= SF + DH = 0.0175 + 0.2064 = 0.2239 m

Step 12: Column Height

1. Column Height
 H c =( N ac −1 ) × H s + ∆ H = (15.71-1) × 0.5+ 0.2239 = 8 m
top

 H cbottom=10 m

2. Overall Column Height

 8 m + 10 m= 18 m

Step 13: Calculation of Column wall Thickness

1. Shell Internal Pressure
450
 Pi = = 0.45 N/mm2
1000

2. Shell internal diameter

 Di = 1.078 × 1000 = 1078.57 mm
3. Design Stress
Assumption:
Carbon steel for material of construction
Justification: most common material used in industry
 S = 12.9 × 6.8948 = 88.94 N/mm2

4. Minimum shell required thickness

Pi D i 0.45× 1078.57
 t= = = 2.73 mm
2 S−Pi 2× 88.94−0.45

5. Corrosion Allowance
Assumption:
Corrosion allowance= 2 mm as this is the value used in the standard table in page 1004
 Corrosion allowance = 2 mm

6. Thickness of column
 Thickness = 2.73 +2 mm = 4.73 mm
 According ¿ standards ∈ page 1004
 Thickness=5 mm
4. Summary of Excel Results
Table 3: Top section results- Excel

Top Section
Tray type Sieve  
Head type Torispherical  
Stages 11  
Liquid flow arrangement Cross flow (Single pass)
Plate spacing 0.5 m
Flooding 85 %
Weir height, hw 0.05 m
Hole diameter, dh, top 0.005 m
Plate thickness, t 0.005 m
Diameter, Dc, top 1.07 m
Weir length, lw,top 0.8089 m
Plate pressure drop, Pt, top 793.15 Pa
Section height, Hc 8 m

Table 4: Bottom section results- Excel

Bottom Section
Tray type Sieve  
Torispherica
Head type l  
Stages 14  
Liquid flow arrangement Double pass
Plate spacing 0.8 m
Flooding 70 %
 Weir height, hw 0.06 m
Hole diameter, dh, bottom 0.01 m
Plate thickness, t 0.01 m
Diameter, Dc, bottom 1.46 m
Weir length, lw,bottom 1.0500 m
Plate pressure drop, Pt, bottom 1595.40 Pa
Section height, Hc 10 m

The tray type of the column was picked to sieve trays since they are inexpensive, easy to clean
and have lower pressure drop. The choice of the head is torispherical since the operating pressure
range is relatively low. The number of stages in the top section is 11 and 14 in the bottom
section. The physical properties as well as the number of stages in each section was determined
by HYSYSTM. Excel calculations are carried out to find the dimensions of the column internals
and the plate designs. The excel calculations are based on iterations with parameters picked
within the specified recommended ranges and trial plate layout. The liquid flow arrangement was
determined by the liquid flow rate and the diameter of the column.

The top section has a single pass cross flow arrangement due to the low column diameter and
moderate liquid flow rate. The plate spacing was picked to be 0.5 m since it is in the middle of
the range and is recommended for an initial estimate. The weir height, hole diameter and plate
thickness is picked as an initial estimate and can be revised later if the design doesn’t match the
recommended criteria. The total plate’s pressure drop is 0.79 kPa which is low compared to the
operating pressure in the column. The column diameter was found to be 1.07 m which is heavily
dependent on the vapor flow rate. The diameter would be rounded up to the nearest standard so a
pre-formed head can be used. The column height was found to be 8 m for the top section.

The bottom section required 2 iterations since some of the recommended ranges were not met in
the first iteration. The results from the 2nd iteration fit the design criteria and are displayed in
Table 4 above. The plate spacing was picked to be 0.8 m. The flooding was 70%. The liquid flow
arrangement was double pass according to the figure and this is justified since a high liquid flow
rate is in the section. The weir height, hole diameter and plate thickness is picked as an initial
estimate and can be revised later if the design doesn’t match the recommended criteria. The total
plate’s pressure drop is 1.6 kPa which is low compared to the operating pressure in the column.
The column diameter was found to be 1.46 m which is heavily dependent on the vapor flow rate.
The diameter would be rounded up to the nearest standard so a pre-formed head can be used. The
column height was found to be 10 m for the bottom section.

5. Software Design
In order to compare the excel calculations, the distillation column was design using HYSYSTM.
Auto-sizing was done and the following design was generated:

Figure 3: Distillation column sections- HYSYSTM

Figure 4: Typical cross flow sieve plate. [1]

Figure 3 displays the different sections in the distillation column and the number of stages in
each section. Figure 4 shows a typical cross flow sieve plate. The sieve plate can be seen with
the holes to allow for vapor flow. The plates have to be designed in order to avoid significant
flooding, weeping and coning.
Table 5: Column summary- HYSYSTM

Column Summary
Number Of Stages 25
Total Height [m] 16.5056
Total Head Loss [mm] 2842.106818
Total Pressure Drop [mbar] 162.3738788
Number Of Sections 2
Number Of Diameters 2

The distillation column had an overall height of 16.5 m with the combination of the top and
bottom sections. The excel design gave an overall height of 18 m. The values are close and the
deviation is mostly due to the top section height in the excel calculations being a bit higher than
the one the one from HYSYS. This differences are due to different design decisions explained in
the sections below.

5.1. Top section

 Figure 5: Top section plate details- HYSYSTM

Figure 5 shows the dimensions of the plate such as the downcomer as well as the weir. These
parameters are calculated in HYSYSTM. The liquid flow pattern can be observed and it can be
seen that there is 1 pass. The drawings help visualize the processes occurring in the plates. The
results are discussed in more details below.

Table 6: Top section summary- HYSYSTM

Top Section

Simulation %
Description Excel Results
Results Difference
Section Starting Stage 1 1 -

Section Ending Stage 11 11 -

Tray Type Sieve Sieve -

Number Of Passes 1 1 -

Flooding [%] 80 85 5%
 Tray Spacing [m] 0.61 0.50 18.0 %
Hole Diameter [mm] 12.7 5.00 60.6 %
Weir Height (mm) 50.8 50.0 1.6 %
Weir Length (m) 0.69 0.81 18.0 %
Net Area [m2] 0.63 0.80 27.7 %
Section Diameter [m] 0.94 1.08 14.3 %
Section Height [m] 6.71 8.00 13.1 %
Section Pressure Drop
75.3 87.3 15.9 %
[mbar]

In general, the results obtained from the simulation is very similar to the one obtained in the
excel calculations for the top section. This is summarized above in Table 6. The liquid flow
arrangement from the software and excel is both cross flow single pass which validates the excel
calculations. The design parameters such as the column diameter and height are very similar to
the generated design with a % difference in the section diameter and height as low as 14 and 13
%. The slight differences in the excel calculations and the software could be due to the different
design decisions made such as plate spacing and the hole diameters since this impacts the rest of
the calculations. The difference in column diameter could be due to the error in the net area
which then impacts the cross sectional area and then the diameter. The weir dimensions on the
simulation are very similar to the one assumed in the trials which lead to close results. The hole
diameter is larger in the simulation results which may be preferred since it is reduces fouling.
The difference in pressure drop can be due to the difference in hole diameter and area.

Hydraulic Plot:
 Figure 6: Hydraulic plot of top section plate

The hydraulic plot is shown in Figure 6 above for tray 1 from HYSYSTM. The operating point is
well within the area of satisfactory operation. The plates should provide a sufficient design to
provide vapor liquid contact. Moreover, there should be enough liquid hold up, spacing and area
to keep everything within the recommended ranges and avoid significant entrainment and
pressure drop. The vapor flow range is restricted so that there will be no significant flooding or
weeping. The liquid flow area is restricted by coning and downcomer backup limitation. As
expected for the top section, the vapor flow rate is high since vapor flows up the column and the
liquid flow rate is low

5.2 Bottom Section

 Figure 7: Bottom section plate details- HYSYSTM

Figure 7 shows the dimensions of the plate such as the downcomer, hole as well as the weir.
These parameters are calculated in HYSYSTM. The drawings help visualize the processes
occurring in the plates. The liquid flow pattern can be observed and it can be seen that there are 2
passes. The results are discussed in more details below.

Table 7: Bottom section- HYSYSTM

Bottom Section
Simulation Excel %
Description
Results Results Difference
 Section Starting Stage 12 12 -
Section Ending Stage 25 25 -

Tray Type Sieve Sieve -

Number Of Passes 2 2 -

Flooding [%] 80 70 12.5 %

Tray Spacing [m] 0.70 0.80 14.3 %

Hole Diameter [mm] 12.7 10 21.3 %

Weir Height (mm) 60 60 0%

Weir Length (m) 1.04 1.05 1.3 %

Net Area [m2] 1.21 1.51 24.9 %

Section Diameter [m] 1.40 1.46 4.3 %

Section Height [m] 9.80 10.00 2.0 %

Section Pressure Drop [mbar] 87.1 212.6 144.25%

In general, the results obtained from the simulation is similar to the one obtained in the excel
calculations for the top section. This can be seen in Table 7 above. The liquid flow arrangement
from the software and excel is both double pass flow which validates the excel calculations and
is logical since the liquid flow rate is very high. The design parameters such as the column
diameter and height are extremely similar to the generated design with a % difference in the
section diameter and height as low as 4 and 2 %. The weir dimensions on the simulation are the
same to the one assumed in the trials which lead to close results. The hole diameter is large in
both the simulation and excel which is good since it reduces fouling. The high difference in
pressure drop can be due to the difference in hole dimensions, flooding and tray spacing. The
larger difference in the results is also the net area. The net area difference can be justified by the
difference in the flooding % of the section.

Hydraulic Plot:
 Figure 8: Hydraulic plot of bottom section plate

The hydraulic plot is shown in Figure 8 above for tray 24 from HYSYSTM. The operating point is
well within the area of satisfactory operation. The plates should provide a sufficient design to
provide vapor liquid contact. Moreover, there should be enough liquid hold up, spacing and area
to keep everything within the recommended ranges and avoid significant entrainment and
pressure drop. The vapor flow range is restricted so that there will be no significant flooding or
weeping. The liquid flow area is restricted by coning and downcomer backup limitation. As
expected for the bottom section, the vapor flow rate is low and the liquid flow rate is high.

6. Conclusion
A distillation column was designed and sized by hand calculations using Excel and then
HYSYSTM. The distillation column plays an important role in the refinery since it removes the
lighter hydrocarbons and increases purity of naphtha before it is packaged and sold. The
distillation column has two sections: the top section had 11 trays and the bottom section had 14
trays. Sieve trays were used since they have low cost and would reduce fouling as well as
pressure drop. The results from excel calculated the column height of the top and bottom section
as 8 and 10 m respectively. The results from HYSYS gave the column height of the top and
bottom section as 6.7 m and 9.8 m. The height of the bottom section was closer to the excel value
as the % error is very less. The total height was determined to be 18 m from excel and 16.5 m
from HYSYS. The deviation in the results is due to the different design decisions made. These
include the flooding factor, the tray spacing and the weir dimensions. The designs were validated
and it was found that the top and bottom trays operated in the region of satisfactory performance
in the hydraulic plots.
 7. References

[1]- Sinnott, R., & Towler, G. (2013). Chemical engineering design. Oxford: Butterworth-
Heineman.
[2]- Retrieved from www.ou.edu/class/che-design/design%201-2013/Column%20Tray
%20Design.pdf