jorge m. plaza the university of texas at austin january 10-11, 2008
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Jorge M. PlazaThe University of Texas at Austin
January 10-11, 2008
![Page 2: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
OutlinePrevious Work
Intercooling effect
Conclusions
Future Work
![Page 3: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
![Page 4: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Modeling K+/PZCullinane K+/PZ (2005)
e-NRTL to predict VLE and speciation
Equilibrium and interactions regressed in FORTRAN
Experimental rate constants and diffusion coefficients
Hilliard K+ /PZ(2005)
Thermodynamics into ASPEN Plus ®
Chen
Pilot plant testing (2004 – 2006)
4 Campaigns 5m/2.5m, 6.4m/1.6m K+/PZ and 7m MEA
Absorber Model developed for K+/PZ (2006)
![Page 5: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
System ModelingFreguia MEA (2002) - Ratefrac
Aspen Plus® rate-based model based on Dang (2001)
Equilibrium by Jou et al. (1995)
Intercooling for MEA absorber
Ziaii MEA (2006) - RateSepTM
Developed rate-based model for MEA in Aspen Plus ® based on Freguia (2002), Hikita (1977) and Aboudheir (2002)
Plaza K +/PZ(2006 – 2007)Activity based kinetics for 4.5m/4.5m K+/PZ
Intercooling with split feed
![Page 6: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Approaches to Absorber modeling
Lj-1
Lj
Gj
Gj+1
Lj-1
Lj
Gj
Gj+1
Lj-1
Lj
Gj
Gj+1
Lj-1
Lj
Gj
Gj+1
Lj-1
Lj
Gj
Gj+1
Rate-based ApproachReaction equilibrium
Rate-based ApproachReaction KineticsEnhancement Factor
Rate-based ApproachReaction KineticsFilm Reactions
Equilibrium ApproachReaction Equilibrium
Equilibrium ApproachReaction Kinetics
Reaction
Mass Transfer
Enh
R RR
Kenig et al. Reactive Absorption: Optimal Process Design Via Optimal Modeling. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2001, 56, 343-350.
Rate BasedReaction equilibrium
Rate BasedReaction kineticsEnhancement factor
Rate BasedReaction kineticsFilm Reactions
EquilibriumReaction equilibrium
EquilibriumReaction kinetics
![Page 7: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Gas Film
PG
Pi = H[CO2]i
P*i P*B
[CO2]*i [CO2]*B
Bulk Gas Bulk LiquidInterface
Rxn Film Liquid Film
Film Discretization
![Page 8: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Absorber ReactionsPZCOO-
PZ(COO-)2
b= OH-, H2O, PZ, CO3-2, PZCOO-
HCO3-
b=PZ, PZCOO-, OH-
bHPZCOObCOPZ 2
2 2PZCOO CO b PZ COO bH
bHHCObCO 32
![Page 9: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
![Page 10: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Effect of Intercooling for 4.5m K+/4.5m PZ
Gas Out
Q
Lean
Rich5.48 kmol/s
H=15 m D=9.8 m
CMR-MTL metal NO-2P
5% V. Liquid Hold up
90% removal
12.7% mol CO2
(500 MW Plant)
Gas in
Variable ldg & flow
![Page 11: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Intercooling with 4.5m K+/ 4.5 m PZ
![Page 12: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Rich loading vs. lean loading. 4.5m K+/ 4.5 m PZ
![Page 13: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
T and CO2 rate profiles 4.5m/4.5 m K+/ PZ . Loading = 0.44
No Intercooling
![Page 14: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
T and CO2 rate with intercooling 4.5m/4.5 m K+/ PZ. Loading=0.44
![Page 15: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
T and CO2 rate profiles. 4.5m/4.5 m K+/ PZ. Loading = 0.21
No Intercooling
![Page 16: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
T and CO2 rate with intercooling. 4.5m/4.5 m K+/ PZ Loading=0.21
![Page 17: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
T and CO2 rate profiles. 4.5 m K+/ 4.5 m PZ. Loading=0.315
No Intercooling
![Page 18: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
T and CO2 rate with intercooling. 4.5m/4.5 m K+/ PZ Loading=0.315
![Page 19: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Effect of Intercooling for 11m MEA
Gas Out
Q
Lean
Rich5.48 kmol/s
H=15 m D=10.6 m
CMR-MTL metal NO-2P
1% V. Liquid Hold up
Variable removal
12.7% mol CO2
(500 MW Plant)
Gas in
0.40
Semi Lean
Q
0.46
![Page 20: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
T and CO2 rate profiles for no intercooling. 11 m MEA.
85% Removal85% Removal
![Page 21: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
T and CO2 rate profiles with intercooled semilean feed. 11 m MEA.
92.3% Removal92.3% Removal
![Page 22: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
T and CO2 rate profiles with intercooled semilean feed & intercooling. 11 m MEA.
93.0% Removal93.0% Removal
![Page 23: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
CO2 removal results for MEA absorber with split feed
Intercooling CO2 Removal (%)
None 85.0
Single 92.3
Double 93.0
![Page 24: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
![Page 25: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Conclusions
Optimum intercooling is related with T bulge position
Tbulge = pinch then intercooling efficientTbulge = pinch then intercooling efficient
Tbulge away from pinch then not much Tbulge away from pinch then not much
improvementimprovement
![Page 26: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
ConclusionsFor a simple absorber system intercooling allows
increase in solvent capacity as high as 45%. Intercooling improves performance for MEA split
feed as high as 10% Intercooling offers a benefit in energy
consumption in the stripper thanks higher rich solvent loading
Intercooling is most effective for operations in the range of 0.27 to 0.40 loading for the lean feed.
![Page 27: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Future WorkSubstitute new Hilliard (2007) thermodynamics
Model Aboudheir laminar jet to extract kinetics with
RateSepTM
Fix ASPEN to represent physical properties : ρ, D, H
Regress MEA pilot plant data to validate model
![Page 28: Jorge M. Plaza The University of Texas at Austin January 10-11, 2008](https://reader037.vdocument.in/reader037/viewer/2022103007/5697c0011a28abf838cc2b0e/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)