|

Depressurising Study.
#1
Guest_Jaimin Patel_*
Posted 17 August 2007 - 02:47 AM
This is my first post so if something is wrong pls don't mind and guide me.
My question:
I want to fix Minimum Design Temperature of Absorber Column and accociated piping of Acid Gas Removal unit of LNG plant. I have made depressurising calculation for natural gas in HYSYS. Which temperature(Min. vessel fluid temp., Min innerwall temp. etc..) I should take as a base for fixing Minimum Design Temperature? Natural Gas is at pre. of 70 bara so I assume MDT will be governed by depressuring of gas.
Thanking in advance,
#2
Posted 17 August 2007 - 10:59 PM
Warm welcome to you...
Before get into your question, can you advise the following ?
i) Did you consider settle-out condition (mean system settle out to minimum ambient temperature prior to blowodnw) for low temp blowdown ? Probably this condition will give you worst MDT.
ii) Did you include the metal mass effect in blowdown ? How you define the "vessel" in Depressuing Module ? It may affect the calculated MDT.
iii) Do you consider minimum, normal, maximum level in the module ? Liquid level significantly affect MDT.
iv) Did you conduct cold blowdown by fixing the time e.g. 15 miniute ? if you did that, you will undersize you RO for fire blowdown.
v) What is the isentropic exponent you have considered ? 70% per HYSYS default ?
Dear Brian Lim.
I would like to invite you to drop some notes on the definition of Min. vessel fluid temp., Min inner wall temp. etc... to help us understand further. Thanks.
Note : I hope you are the Brian Lim in HYSYS Singapore. Otherwise forget about it and forgive me.
JoeWong

#3
Guest_Jaimin Patel_*
Posted 19 August 2007 - 07:22 PM
Please find my requirement as below to your question.
i) Did you consider settle-out condition (mean system settle out to minimum ambient temperature prior to blowodnw) for low temp blowdown ? Probably this condition will give you worst MDT.
-----> No. I have to fix the MDT based on blowdown starting at normal operating temperature.
ii) Did you include the metal mass effect in blowdown ? How you define the "vessel" in Depressuing Module ? It may affect the calculated MDT.
-----> No. Does it require to include?
iii) Do you consider minimum, normal, maximum level in the module ? Liquid level significantly affect MDT.
-----> No. Fix level of liquid, 1 mtr.
iv) Did you conduct cold blowdown by fixing the time e.g. 15 miniute ? if you did that, you will undersize you RO for fire blowdown.
-----> I cant get this. I have to depressureing vessel to 50% of design pre. in 15 min.
v) What is the isentropic exponent you have considered ? 70% per HYSYS default ?
-----> 93%
#4
Posted 19 August 2007 - 08:40 PM
-----> No. I have to fix the MDT based on blowdown starting at normal operating temperature.
You may try blowdown from Normal operating temperature. Please also conduct second check on settle out condition.
-----> No. Does it require to include?
You may end-up a VERY conservative design without inclusion of metal mass. Of course there are more complication by inclusion of metal mass.
-----> No. Fix level of liquid, 1 mtr.
Why fixed at 1m ? Any specific reason ? You may have to answer to your client why this level is taken.
Suggest you try run with minimum, normal, maximum level. You will see the impact of varying level.
-----> I cant get this. I have to depressureing vessel to 50% of design pre. in 15 min.
I hope your 50% of design pressure is lower than 6.9 barg in compliance to API521 (If you have to compliy to this code]. If not, please read API Std 521, 2007, section 5.20 to see if you need to comply to minimum pressure of 6.9 barg.
-----> 93%
Any specific rule guiding you to 93% ?
Above questions mainly to trigger you to think more on setting up you model. Peoples has said rubbish-in-rubbsih-out. Detail understanding of your problem and correct inputs to the model will yield a better results for interpretation.
Back to your question, generally liquid having better heat transfer efficiency as compare to vapor. Those you may experience lowest fluid temperature at the bottom of vessel. In most cases, the metal may see this temperature.
Hope this help
JoeWong
#5
Guest_Jaimin Patel_*
Posted 19 August 2007 - 09:06 PM
I feel I am far away then what should be done correctly.
As I am doing this first time, I am not much aware of codes and standards.I am just following the instructions.
Can you give me the steps for fixing the MDT using HYSYS when depresurising is deciding the lowest temp?
#6
Posted 20 August 2007 - 08:18 AM
Huh...it can form a long article...Let me know your email address. I will drop you some simple note.
JoeWong
#7
Guest_Jaimin Patel_*
Posted 20 August 2007 - 10:55 PM
My email id is: jp_process@indiatimes.com
Waiting for your help.
#8
Posted 21 August 2007 - 08:36 AM
JoeWong
#9
Guest_Jaimin Patel_*
Posted 21 August 2007 - 07:50 PM
Thanks for mail.
After performaing all this(as stated in mail) and modeling in hysys using depressuring utility which temp, MIN VESSEL FLUID TEMP. or MIN INNER WALL TEMP. should be taken as Minimum Design temp?
#10
Posted 21 August 2007 - 09:13 PM
Any big differences between them? I believe you should base on MIN VESSEL FLUID TEMP. Please take note that the liquid temperature will be worst.
JoeWong
#11
Guest_Jaimin Patel_*
Posted 22 August 2007 - 01:24 AM
This simulation shows MIN. VESSEL FLUID TEMP is -74.86 C where as MIN. INNER WALL TEMP is
13.81 C. Considering MDT based on -74.86 C will be realastic/good engineering in such case?
#12
Posted 22 August 2007 - 03:38 AM
My feeling is the temperature on low side.
JoeWong
#13
Posted 22 August 2007 - 05:06 AM
Thanks for sharing, can sent me the dep article to me as well?
I can be reached at cheekuan76@yahoo.com
Thanks and regards
#14
Posted 23 August 2007 - 05:10 AM
Please check you mail box.
JoeWong
#15
Posted 30 August 2007 - 02:13 PM
Acutally i posted a question about Depressuriztion by HYSYS in this forum before. However, could send me the depressurization procedure.
my e-mail id: sureshreddy325@gmail.com
Thanks
#16
Posted 06 September 2007 - 09:55 PM
Cud u pls also drop me the procedure.... just wanna check wether its similar to my understanding... tq

#17
Posted 07 September 2007 - 11:32 PM
I have drop some note in your mailbox.
JoeWong
#18
Posted 08 September 2007 - 04:23 AM
As promised early, I had sent you the depressuring guideline and you said you will come back to me with your valuable comment...
When can I received your feedback????
Thanks
#19
Posted 09 September 2007 - 08:06 PM
Please check you mail box.
JoeWong
#20
Posted 09 September 2007 - 09:14 PM
Sorry since I didn't get a copy of it.... could you please resend to me again. appreciate your help...tq
#21
Posted 24 October 2007 - 06:45 AM
I'd appreciate a copy of any DEP articles or materials or comments you have available.
My e-mail address is: n1pa@ghg.net
Thanks!
===========================
Do you have a guideline about terminology? For example, what is your definition of "blowdown" and what is your definition of "depressurizing"? They are related, but in my view, "blowdown" usually refers to plant-size units or vessels, whereas "depressurizing" can mean whole systems, such as an entire plant or a long feeder pipeline, etc.
Best,
Armentor
#22
Posted 24 October 2007 - 11:31 AM
Can you please send me the article on depressurizing / blowdown.
Thanks and Regards
Benoy
My Email : benoy.john@mottmac.com.om
#23
Posted 25 October 2007 - 03:17 PM
Can you forward the article to me as well.
Thanks
xiruo98@hotmail.com
#24
Posted 30 October 2007 - 01:09 AM
I have sent some simple procedures to Jaimin instead of article... I know some of you would like to have a very comprehensive procedure... i am not sure this is available...I am in the process of compiling some information for those who are interested in depressuring...Hope you can wait...
Will only post them when it is properly done.
JoeWong

#25
Posted 26 November 2007 - 09:30 AM
Appreciate your efforts in helping us all with your experience. Would you be able to share those depressurising procedures (as sent to Jaimin/latest) with me. Ofcourse i shall be waiting for the detail procedures too.
regards
Similar Topics
Water Hammer Study: Hysys Dynamics Vs PipenetStarted by Guest_powerox29_* , 07 Apr 2025 |
|
![]() |
||
Flare Study And Pump SealsStarted by Guest_Sue N_* , 21 Aug 2023 |
|
![]() |
||
Feasibility StudyStarted by Guest_krishnamurthy_* , 22 May 2023 |
|
![]() |
||
![]() Aspen Plus - Sensitivity Analysis / Case Study - Need AssistanceStarted by Guest_SickPuppy0_* , 07 Feb 2023 |
|
![]() |
||
Aspne Hysys Case Study IssuesStarted by Guest_Daniel89_* , 05 Apr 2022 |
|
![]() |