Ethylene Back End Separation

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Performing Column Sizing and Rating Calculations
Table of Contents
Background ................................................................................................................................................... 3
Performing Sizing Calculations for a Demethanizer Column ........................................................................ 4
Objective ................................................................................................................................................... 4
Description ................................................................................................................................................ 4
Task 1 – Open Startup File ........................................................................................................................ 4
Task 2 – Preliminarily Assess Number of Sections .................................................................................... 5
Task 3 – Select Section Specifications ....................................................................................................... 6
Task 4 – Enter Packing Specifications for Top Section .............................................................................. 9
Task 5 – Enter Tray Specifications for Middle Section .............................................................................. 9
Task 6 – Enter Tray Specifications for Bottom Section ........................................................................... 10
Task 7 – Rating Mode and Updating Pressure Drop ............................................................................... 12
Performing Rating Calculations for a Deethanizer Column ........................................................................ 13
Objective ................................................................................................................................................. 13
Description .............................................................................................................................................. 13
Task 1 – Open Startup File ...................................................................................................................... 13
Task 2 – Design the Deethanizer ............................................................................................................. 13
Task 3 – Switch to Rating and Update the Pressure Drop ...................................................................... 14
Task 4 – Evaluate Turn-up Case .............................................................................................................. 14
Task 5 – Introduce Operational Changes ................................................................................................ 15
Review ......................................................................................................................................................... 17
Background
Ethylene (C2H4) is a hydrocarbon produced in high volume in petrochemical complexes. It is
most frequently produced via steam cracking. The feed to a steam cracking furnace is typically
a combination of gases (LPG, naphtha, etc.) which are converted into olefins (ethylene,
propylene, etc.). This mixture of resulting gases is separated into relatively pure components to
allow for subsequent downstream processing.

To achieve this separation, a series of distillation columns are used. With ethylene as the
desired product, the first distillation column separates methane and hydrogen from the system
(demethanizer), the second separates heavy hydrocarbons from the system, while the third
distillation column separates ethane from ethylene. This is all in the context of a low-
temperature refrigeration loop, shown in the Aspen Plus file.

When operating these systems, column performance is critical in both the design phase and when
evaluating potential process improvements. These expensive units produce millions of dollars in
profitable products on a continuous basis. A processing plant cannot typically afford a
prolonged shutdown due to operational issues (e.g. column flooding, excessive pressure drop).

In this Aspen Plus example, we will design a distillation column using the new Column Analysis
feature. Further, we will be performing rating studies to investigate the feasibility of
management’s request to increase ethylene throughput. These studies will all be in the context of
a feasibility operating envelop based on hydraulic constraints. The new Column Analysis tool
gives intuitive visual insights and feedback regarding potential design/operation issues.
Performing Sizing Calculations for a Demethanizer Column
Objective
Design the internals of a demethanizer column based on the liquid/vapor flow profile from
process simulation.
Description
The Column Analysis feature in Aspen Plus will be used to design the internals of a
Demethanizer Column. Use 85% jet flood and 65% downcomer backup as a design basis.
Assume system factor = 1.

This workshop includes the following tasks:

 Task 1 – Open Startup File

 Task 2 – Assess Number of Diameters & Sections
 Task 3 – Select Section Specifications
 Task 4 – Enter Packing Specifications for Top Section
 Task 5 – Enter Tray Specifications for Middle Section
 Task 6 – Enter Tray Specifications for Bottom Section
 Task 7 – Rating Mode and Updating Pressure Drop

NOTE: In Interactive Sizing mode for Column Analysis, a user can always revert back to the
sizing defaults after input edits by using the “Delete” key.
Task 1 – Open Startup File
 Open the file Ethylene Demo Base Case.bkp.
Task 2 – Preliminarily Assess Number of Sections
The current Demethanizer RADFRAC Column has 50 stages defined. For all intents and
purposes, let us assume this refers to the actual number of stages, not theoretical stages. This is
important in order to perform sizing and rating calculations properly.

 Run the model

 Right click on the Demethanizer Column (1DEMETH) and click Results
 To get a preliminary view on the column sectioning, view the flow rate results by stage,
located in the Column Design ribbon

 From a brief look at the flow profile, it appears likely that there may be THREE distinct
column sections for the demethanizer. These distinct flow regimes are separated with red
dashed vertical lines.
Task 3 – Select Section Specifications
 Return to the main flowsheet, and double-click on the RADFRAC for the Demethanizer
(1DEMETH). To begin defining the internals, click “Design and specify column
internals”

 Once this is clicked, click “Generate” to run the model and calculate hydraulic data as a
pre-requisite for Column Analysis

 From here, use the auto sectioning tool to auto section “Based on Flows”
 o You will notice that Column Analysis performed preliminary sectioning and
sizing of the column, with sieve trays as the basis. The assessment from Task 1
found that THREE sections were likely, from stage 2 to 14, from stage 15 to 24,
and from stage 25 to 49.
 With this in mind, the first two sections can likely be combined into one
section, since the diameters are so similar.
 As a common rule of thumb, tray diameters under 2 feet (0.6096 meters)
are typically made into packing sections, due to the high fabrication cost
of small trays.
 Delete Section CS-1 and change the start stage of CS-2 to 2
 Under “Internal Type”, switch CS-1 from “Trayed” to “Packing”.
 Select BERL ceramic packing, with GENERIC vendor and packing height of 6 meters
 View the hydraulic plots to verify the diameters and number of passes. Click the “View
Hydraulic Plots” button under the column diagram.

 Investigate all of the warnings/errors in the column sections. Use the carousel and click
on the error and status icons above the carousel to view status messages.
o Error: Weeping detected stage 15-20
o Warning: Stage 21-24 downcomer exit velocity is greater than 0.56 m/s
o Error: Weeping detected at stage 25 (incipient)
o Warning: Stage 26-49 downcomer exit velocity is greater than 0.56 m/s
o NOTE: Until future tasks where the internals are defined further (such as the
downcomer geometry), let’s ignore all messages except the weeping error for
stage 15-20.
 Increase number of passes for CS-3 from 2 to 4
o Viewing stages 15-20, the constant V/L crosses the maximum weir loading
boundary. This will be problematic if the column flows are increased. Increasing
the number of passes may also distribute the weir loading and also prevent
weeping (by decreasing the active area).
o Once the change is implemented, the operating point now lies within the feasible
operating envelope.
 Return to the sections sheet (close plots or click “Internals” in the Column Design ribbon)
 Change diameters for CS-2 and CS-3 to 2.2 meters (~7 feet), since they are nearly
identical by default
 Change the diameter for CS-4 to 3.5 meters (~11.5 feet).
Task 4 – Enter Packing Specifications for Top Section
 On the Sections form, click “View” next on the CS-1 row to define the geometry and
design parameters
o In the design parameters form, set the minimum liquid flow rate per unit area
to 1 cum/hr/sqm
 All of the defaults are OK in this case, but review the geometry and design parameters
o NOTE: By default, when the operating point is within 10% of a system limit or
hydraulic plot limit, Column Analysis will flag a warning.
Task 5 – Enter Tray Specifications for Middle Section
 On the Sections form, click “View” next on the CS-3 row to define the geometry and
design parameters
 First, move to the design parameters tab
o Set the maximum % jet flood to 85% as a hydraulic plot limit
o Set the maximum % downcomer backup to 65% as a hydraulic plot limit
 NOTE: This is based on the aerated DC backup calculation

 Return to the Geometry form and review inputs. Check hydraulic plots as reinforcement.
The defaults are OK, the incipient weep at Stage 15 is OK for design – the individual tray
may be manually modified in reality.
o NOTE: Utilizing two monitors (if available) is extremely beneficial here –
displaying the hydraulic plots on one monitor and the geometry form on the other.
That way, you can see the hydraulic plots update as you are updating the
geometry, in Interactive Sizing mode.
Task 6 – Enter Tray Specifications for Bottom Section
 Repeat the first two steps from the above step:
o On the Sections form, click “View” next on the CS-4 row to define the geometry
and design parameters
o First, move to the design parameters tab
 Set the maximum % jet flood to 85% as a hydraulic plot limit
 Set the maximum % DC backup to 65% as a hydraulic plot limit
 NOTE: this is based on the aerated DC backup calculation
 Alternatively, export CS-3 as an XML template, then import it to CS-4.
o Erase the new section diameter and return to the initial value of 3.5 meters.
 From earlier, there was a warning on every tray in this section regarding the downcomer
exit velocity. For recollection, open the hydraulic plots and view the warnings/errors.

o There are a number of ways these potential issues can be avoided.

 First, increasing the tray spacing may be a viable option to reduce the
downcomer exit velocity by resizing the weirs and downcomers. The
major drawback here is that the effective column height will increase,
drastically increasing the cost. Another alternative is simply increasing
the weir height and downcomer clearance.
 Further, the number of holes in the active area can be decreased to limit
the amount of weeping occurring on feed stage 25 and the subsequent
stages.
  Increase the weir height to 60 mm and the downcomer clearance to 55 mm (to maintain a
liquid seal).
 Decrease the hole area / active area from 0.1 to 0.09.
o Now, the warnings and errors are gone, with only incipient weep remaining on
feed stage 25, which is likely OK

Task 7 – Rating Mode and Updating Pressure Drop

Now that the column has a preliminary design, it is time to update the results based on the
hydraulic pressure drop results.
 Return to the Internals Manager (Sections form)
 Switch all sections from Interactive Sizing to Rating
 Choose to Update pressure drop from the top stage
 Run the model
o Before running the model, you can check the column’s pressure profile (Blocks
 1DEMETH  Profiles) and notice that there is a constant pressure drop along
the entire column. This will update post-run.
 Save the file as Ethylene Demo Demeth Design.bkp
Performing Rating Calculations for a Deethanizer Column
Objective
Perform rating studies of a deethanizer column to evaluate if the column can handle a 20
tonne/hr increase in feed (management directive to increase ethylene throughput).
Description
The Column Analysis feature in Aspen Plus will be used to perform rating studies on a
deethanizer column. For initial sizing, use 85% jet flood and 65% downcomer backup as a
design basis and assume system factor = 1.

Management has a directive to increase ethylene throughput by 10%. Use the Column Analysis
feature to evaluate the feasibility of this request for the deethanizer. If infeasible, suggest
process changes to push feasible column operation. Assume the increased ethylene throughput is
always directly proportional to the feed flow rate.

This workshop includes the following tasks:

 Task 1 – Open Startup File

 Task 2 – Design the Deethanizer
 Task 3 – Switch to Rating and Update the Pressure Drop
 Task 4 – Evaluate Turn-up Case
 Task 5 – Introduce Operational Change

NOTE: In Rating Mode, the geometry is considered fixed. Deleting most geometry values will
not revert back to the sizing defaults.

Task 1 – Open Startup File

 Open the file Ethylene Demo Demeth Design.bkp
Task 2 – Design the Deethanizer
 Double-click on the RADFRAC form for the Deethanizer (2DEETH). To begin defining
the internals, click “Design and specify column internals”
 Auto section the column
 View Hydraulic Plots
 Set the diameter for both sections to 3.3 meters, to have a single diameter column
 Increase the number of passes for CS-1 from 1 to 2
 Increase the weir height to 60 mm and the downcomer clearance to 55 mm for both CS-1
and CS-2.
 Increase the design parameters for both sections to have hydraulic plot limits of 85% jet
flood and 65% downcomer backup.
Task 3 – Switch to Rating and Update the Pressure Drop
Now that the column has a preliminary design, it is time to update the results based on the
hydraulic pressure drop results.

 Return to the Internals Manager (Sections form)

 Switch all sections from Interactive Sizing to Rating
 Choose to Update pressure drop from the top stage
 Run the model
o Before running the model, you can check the column’s pressure profile (Blocks
 2DEETH  Profiles) and notice that there is a constant pressure drop along
the entire column. This will update post-run.
Task 4 – Evaluate Turn-up Case
 View the Hydraulic Plots

 Keep this view tabbed or docked.

 Increase the feed rate for stream COMP-OUT from 170 tonne/hr to 190 tonne/hr.
  Open the hydraulic plots and run the model
o After a few moments after the run, the plots will change to reflect the process
change. From here, jet flood is detected on the trays in the bottom section. This
is due partially to the excessive vapor buildup in the bottom of the column
(pushing the stage’s liquid into jet flood conditions). One way to alleviate this
would be to condition the column feed.

Task 5 – Introduce Operational Changes

 Prior to the feed inlet, open the Heater input form (HX1).
 Increase the duty of the heater to 2 MW.
o This will increase the vapor fraction of the feed entering the column, which will
change the flow distribution for the bottom section – which will impact the %
flooding. This is just one feed conditioning strategy that may alleviate issues.
  Run the model and view the Hydraulic Plots.

o With the given changes of using 2 MW of heat to pre-condition the feed stream,
the column now operates within the defined operating envelope.

 Save this case as Ethylene Demo Turnup.bkp

Additional**: Notice that the Demethanizer column (the column designed at the start of the
demo) is still operating feasibly with the given feed rate increase. To save on time during
tasks, this was not shown. In a typical engineering setting, the impact of changes on the
demethanizer would also be investigated. In this specific case, the operation was OK.
Review
Using the new Column Analysis features, distillation columns were efficiently designed around
hydraulic constraints, rating calculations were performed, and process improvements were
evaluated in the context of feasible operation.
 Column Design
o Utilized the interactive sizing capabilities to achieve an initial design for a
distillation column
o Used the visual cues and messaging to alter the design in order to meet hydraulic
constraints
 Used design standards and templates to guide column design (e.g. 85% jet
flood constraint)
 Increased downcomer clearance and weir height to reduce an excessive
downcomer exit velocity
 Reduced the hole area in the active area of trays to avoid weeping
conditions
 Column Rating
o Utilized the column rating capabilities to update the pressure drop of the
simulation, giving a more accurate depiction of the overall separation
o Evaluated the feasibility of increasing product throughput, per management’s
directive – avoiding a costly shutdown due to jet flooding.
 Process Improvements
o Studied the effects of process changes to allow for increased production
 Introduced pre-heating to a column feed in order to avoid flooding
conditions
o Verified the feasibility of management’s directive and evaluated one execution
strategy