You are on page 1of 11

Back to Basics

Control Column Pressure


via Hot-Vapor Bypass
Henry Z. Kister Hot-vapor bypass employs a flooded
Fluor Corp.
condenser located at ground level to control
Daryl W. Hanson distillation tower pressure. It offers capital cost
Valero Energy
savings, but can be tricky to implement.
This article offers guidance on designing and
troubleshooting a hot-vapor bypass system.

P
ressure is the most important variable for controlling condenser schemes, this arrangement delivers subcooled
distillation columns, because pressure affects every liquid for the reflux and product pumps, maximizing their
aspect of a distillation system: vaporization, conden- available net positive suction head (NPSH) and lowering
sation, temperatures, volatility, etc. An unsteady pressure platform height requirements.
typically results in an unsteady column. A survey of distillation tower failures (1, 2) identified
There are several ways to control tower pressure, the hot-vapor bypass as the most troublesome pressure and
depending on how the tower is configured. If a tower has condenser control method. About one-third of the pressure
an overhead vapor product, manipulating the vapor flow- and condenser control malfunctions reported in the litera-
rate usually controls pressure. If the tower has no vapor ture were problems with hot-vapor bypass schemes, many
product (i.e., it has a total condenser and liquid product in refineries. Most problems were due to poor configura-
only), tower pressure can be controlled by partially flood- tion of hot-vapor bypass piping, which evolves from poor
ing the condenser and manipulating the liquid level in the understanding of its principles — principles that have been
condenser. Another alternative for either vapor or liquid discussed in the literature for decades (3–7).
products is to manipulate the coolant flowrate (or tempera- However, even if a hot-vapor bypass scheme is config-
ture) to control the tower pressure. Coolant manipulation ured correctly, you may experience problems with tower
is popular in refrigerated towers but is usually avoided in pressure control. This article describes our experiences, find-
cooling-­water condensers, as it can cause accelerated foul- ings, and lessons learned that may be valuable for trouble­
ing and corrosion. shooting and design of hot-vapor bypass schemes.
Among the flooded-condenser control methods, the
hot-vapor bypass employing condensers mounted at ground Flooded-condenser control schemes
level is one of the most popular for large cooling-water The main flooded-condenser control methods (3, 6, 7)
condensers. The popularity of the hot-vapor bypass scheme manipulate the condenser flooding to control column pres-
with large total condensers stems from its major capital sav- sure using one of the following configurations:
ings. Locating large condensers at ground level eliminates • a condenser elevated above the reflux drum with a
the need for massive condenser support structures and for control valve in the condensate line or in the vapor line to
piping cooling water to high elevations, and provides easy the condenser
access for maintenance. The piping is simple, the control • a flooded reflux drum with a control valve at the drum
valve is small, and the response is fast. These advantages condensate outlet (or no drum)
can translate into significant savings in steelwork, platforms, • a condenser located at ground level and a valve in the
and maintenance. Capital savings can be significant in bypass from the overhead vapor line to the drum vapor space
large installations, especially where a battery of condensers (hot-vapor bypass).
rather than a single exchanger is used. Like other flooded-­ In all of these methods, the condenser area is partially

Copyright © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) CEP  February 2015  www.aiche.org/cep  35
Back to Basics

flooded by condensate. The flooded tubes do not contact the liquid and from the vapor space to the atmosphere.
vapor and perform little condensation. Column pressure is The liquid lift is manipulated to control the tower pres-
controlled by manipulation of the flooded area. Raising the sure. Opening the hot-vapor bypass valve heats the drum liq-
liquid level in the condenser floods additional tubes, which uid surface, raising the liquid’s vapor pressure and therefore
reduces the condensation area, thereby raising tower pres- the drum pressure. This pushes liquid from the drum into
sure. Conversely, lowering the liquid level in the condenser the condenser, flooding more tubes, reducing condensation,
exposes more tubes, which increases condensation area, and and raising the tower pressure. Conversely, closing the valve
subsequently lowers tower pressure. Although the flooded cools the drum liquid surface, reducing its vapor pressure
area performs little condensation, it serves the vital purpose and therefore the drum pressure, and drawing liquid from the
of subcooling the condensate before it leaves the exchanger. condenser into the drum. This exposes additional condensing
Hot-vapor bypass systems. Figure 1 shows a correctly area and lowers tower pressure.
configured hot-vapor bypass for column pressure control.
Unlike other flooded-condenser control schemes (in which Configuring a hot-vapor bypass correctly
the condenser is elevated above the reflux drum), in the Hot-vapor bypass schemes can be troublesome, mostly
hot-vapor bypass scheme, the condenser is at ground level due to poor configuration of the hot-vapor bypass piping.
and the drum is elevated, often mounted on the lowest The following techniques can help avoid some of the com-
platform. The liquid level in the condenser is 10–20 ft mon pitfalls.
below that in the drum (which may be horizontal or verti- • Configure the piping correctly (2, 4–8). Bypass vapor
cal). The condensate is lifted by the difference between the must enter the vapor space of the reflux drum (Figure 1).
vapor pressure at the condenser liquid surface, which is at The bypass should be free of pockets where liquid can
the bubble point temperature, and the vapor pressure at the accumulate; any horizontal runs should drain into the reflux
drum liquid surface, which is colder due to the condensate drum. Liquid from the condenser must enter the reflux drum
subcooling. well below the liquid surface, near the bottom of the drum.
Even a few degrees of subcooling can raise the conden- If the entry nozzle is at the top of the drum, the liquid line
sate 50 ft to 100 ft, or more. To limit the liquid lift to the needs to be extended so that it discharges near the bottom of
desired height (i.e., to the reflux drum), hot vapor from the the drum. Any other liquid streams entering the drum, such
tower overhead is used to heat the liquid surface in the drum. as the reflux pump’s minimum flow recycle, must also enter
The vapor pressure in the drum is set by the liquid surface near the bottom of the drum.
temperature, not the subcooled temperature. The surface Figure 2 depicts one case (9) in which violation of this
temperature, and therefore the vapor pressure in the drum, practice led to severe pressure fluctuations, inability to con-
are determined by the heat balance between (1) the hot vapor trol tower pressure, and a capacity bottleneck. In the original
inflow and (2) the heat outflows from the surface to the bulk scheme (Figure 2, top), subcooled liquid mixed with vapor
at its dewpoint, and vapor collapse occurred at the site of
Detail of Liquid
Surface
the mixing. The rate of vapor collapse varied with changes
in subcooling, overhead temperature, and condensation rate.
dPbypass Hot Vapor
PC Hot-Vapor Bubble Point Liquid Variation of this collapse rate induced pressure fluctuations
P1 Bypass Valve
Subcooled Liquid
and control valve hammering.
The red piping in the bottom configuration shows the fix
P2 that eliminated the problem. The liquid and vapor lines were
LC
Signal to
separated, and the vapor line was modified so that it intro-
Tower Reflux
H Drum Distillate-Reflux duced the vapor into the top of the reflux drum. The liquid
Controller line was extended to discharge below the drum liquid level.
After these changes were made, the tower pressure no longer
fluctuated, and the problem was completely solved.
Condenser Product plus References 2, 5, 7, 8, 10, and 11 report other experiences
Reflux in which incorrect piping led to instability, poor control, and
p Figure 1. In a typical hot-vapor bypass, tower pressure is controlled hammering.
by manipulation of the liquid level in a partially flooded condenser located • Do not agitate the drum liquid surface. Operation may
at ground level. The valve in the vapor bypass is opened to raise the liquid be troublesome if the drum liquid surface is agitated (5, 6).
level in the condenser. Raising the condenser liquid level floods additional
High-velocity impingement of the hot-vapor jet on the liquid
heat exchanger tubes, which reduces the condensation area and raises
tower pressure. Closing the valve lowers the condenser’s liquid level, surface or currents introduced by improper design of the liq-
increases condensation area, and lowers tower pressure. uid inlet can produce agitation. Agitation may also occur if

36  www.aiche.org/cep  February 2015  CEP Copyright © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)
vapor condenses on the ceiling of the drum and condensate this control system (4). On the other hand, insulating the
drips down onto the drum liquid surface. drum often raises concerns of water-trapping and corrosion
• Vent any noncondensable gases. Hot-vapor bypass underneath the insulation.
controls are suitable only for total condensers. The liquid leg • Tune the pressure controller tighter than the drum level
between the condenser and drum prohibits venting of any controller. Because of the liquid leg between the condenser
noncondensables. To handle small amounts of noncondens- and the drum, hot-vapor bypass schemes can suffer from
ables, such as those trapped in the condenser during start- interactions between the drum and the condenser liquid
ups or upstream upsets, a vent (not shown on Figure 1) is levels (7, 13–15) and from U-tube oscillations (7, 14, 15). To
required at their accumulation point(s). The condenser vent minimize such interactions, the pressure controller should be
can be directed to the vapor space of the drum or elsewhere. tuned much tighter than the drum level controller (13, 15).
If a vent line is absent, instability and capacity bottlenecks This can be an issue if the reflux drum is small and the level
may result (12). controller needs to be tuned fast to avoid overflow or loss of
• Insulate the reflux drum. Insulating the reflux drum level. This is uncommon; we have encountered the situation
vapor space tends to minimize temperature swings due to only once, although it was reported in one other case (16).
rain and snow (5–7). This issue is more pronounced for • Ensure that the bypass valve does not leak. Leakage
narrow-boiling-range mixtures (5, 6), and at high pressure of vapor through the bypass valve when it is closed can
(5), where small temperature changes have a large effect on substantially reduce condenser capacity (17).
the split of overhead flow between the condenser and the • Size the bypass valve correctly. An undersized bypass
bypass. With wide-boiling mixtures, Rayleigh fractionation control valve may not be able to maintain the tower pressure
(preferential condensation of heavy components without high enough on cold winter days. The effects of undersizing
mixing with the remaining mixture) can also interfere with the valve are most severe when the drum is not insulated.
In one case (18), poor pressure control due to undersizing
PC was improved by installing a throttling valve in the liquid
line from the condenser to the drum. In another case (19),
pressure fluctuations and instability due to excessive sub-
cooling at low rates, during plant startups, and on cold nights
LC
was countered by controlling the cooling water flowrates to
Tower prevent excessive subcooling.
The amount of subcooling and the vapor bypass rates
can only be determined empirically, and sizing the valve is
difficult. Simplified sizing procedures are available (5, 20),
Four
but they are based on heating all the subcooled liquid to its
Condensers FC bubble point and are, therefore, grossly conservative. An
interesting approach proposed recently (19) models the drum
surface as a heat exchanger, but the method is based on vari-
ation of surface temperature along the drum length, which
PC has not been observed in well-functioning drums.
• Watch out for a possible inverse response. When
pressure rises, it closes the bypass valve, which initially
increases pressure until the condenser level begins to
LC
change (21).
Tower • Control tower pressure, not drum pressure. In some
cases, the hot-vapor bypass control valve is manipulated
by the drum pressure instead of the tower pressure (18).
This type of control is dynamically inferior, because the
volume of vapor in the drum is much smaller than the vapor
FC volume in the tower, and the drum vapor is more variable in
response to ambient changes.
The discussion that follows is based on a well-configured,
p Figure 2. In this hot-vapor bypass scheme, the incorrect piping
well-designed, hot-vapor bypass scheme that does not violate
configuration at the top experienced pressure fluctuations. Modifying the
piping, as shown on the bottom in red, ensures good pressure control. these piping configuration guidelines. Nonetheless, some of
(Based on Ref. 9.) these guidelines will be revisited in the following sections.
Article continues on next page

Copyright © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) CEP  February 2015  www.aiche.org/cep  37
Back to Basics

Hydraulics of hot-vapor bypass schemes In typical hot-vapor bypass schemes, the liquid level in
For the correctly configured hot-vapor bypass arrange- the reflux drum is about 10–20 ft above the liquid level in
ment in Figure 1, assuming negligible line pressure losses, the condenser. So subcooling of less than 10°F is sufficient
the pressure balance is: in most practical applications. Since the actual subcooling
is typically 10–50°F, the vapor pressure difference will tend

to pump the condensate to a much higher elevation than
where P1 is the pressure at the intersection of the line to needed.
the condenser and the condenser bypass (psia), P2 is the The hot vapor provided by the bypass regulates the vapor
pressure inside the reflux drum vapor space (psia), H is the pressure in the drum by maintaining the liquid surface tem-
head difference between the reflux drum liquid level and perature at a value that produces the desired liquid head, H.
the condenser liquid level (psi), and ΔPcond is the condenser The hot vapor condenses onto the drum liquid surface and
pressure drop (psi). heats it up. At steady state, opening the valve adds sufficient
Because the condenser inlet line contains a static leg vapor to maintain the drum liquid surface temperature at the
of vapor, the head differential H is calculated using the value corresponding to the desired vapor pressure P2 that
difference between the liquid and vapor densities. The vapor satisfies Eq. 1. There is a net heat flow from the hot liquid
density is based on P1 and the condenser inlet temperature. surface to the subcooled liquid below the surface. This heat
The liquid density is best approximated as the density of the flow and the atmospheric heat losses need to be matched by
subcooled liquid leaving the condenser. condensing the hot vapor.
According to Eq. 1, the driving head required to pump The pressure difference in the bypass can be written in
the condensate into the drum is supplied by the pressure terms of the pressure difference across the bypass control
difference between the condenser liquid surface and the valve, ΔPbypass:
drum liquid surface. P1 is the vapor pressure at the liquid ∆
surface in the condenser, which is the bubble point pressure
at the condensing temperature. P2 is the vapor pressure at Combining Eq. 1 and Eq. 2 gives:
the reflux drum surface. For P1 to be higher than P2, the ∆ ∆ a
temperature at the drum surface needs to be lower than the
temperature at the condenser liquid surface. When the line friction losses are significant, Eq. 3a needs
It does not take much subcooling to significantly lower to include them:
the vapor pressure in the drum. Table 1, derived from physi-
cal property data for hydrocarbons (22), lists vapor pressure ∆ ∆ - b
and liquid head variations with temperature for three com- ∆ ∆ ∆
mon applications. - -
Table 1 shows that for a C3-C4 splitter, subcooling of 1°F where ΔPbypass-line is the pressure drop in the hot-vapor
can lift the liquid 15 ft. A debutanizer needs just over 2°F of bypass vapor line excluding the pressure drop across the
subcooling to lift the liquid the same distance. A dehexanizer control valve (psi), ΔPliq-line is the pressure drop in the liquid
requires a bit more subcooling (10°F), but even that is well line from the condenser to the reflux drum (psi), and
within the subcooling capability of the condenser. A typical ΔPvap-line is the pressure drop in the tower overhead vapor
subcooling range for a condenser is 10°F to 50°F. line to the condenser downstream of the point where the hot-
vapor bypass splits off (psi).
For clarity, the following
Table 1. Small changes in temperature can have large effects on vapor pressure and
liquid head in hot-vapor bypass applications. Source: (22). discussion is based on Eq. 3a.
However, all of the following
Vapor Pressure Liquid Liquid Head
Application Pressure Temperature Change Rate Density Change Rate
equations can be expanded to
include the line pressure drop
C3-C4 Splitter 305 psia 126°F 3.2 psi/°F 28.3 lb/ft3 15 ft/°F terms in Eq. 3b.
(72%/28% 218 psia 99°F 30.2 lb/ft3
In hot-vapor bypass schemes,
Liquid Volume
Propylene/Propane) the vapor pressure differ-
3
ences directly manipulate the
Debutanizer 150 psia 175°F 1.5 psi/°F 31.2 lb/ft 7 ft/°F
(Butane) 76 psia 125°F 33.7 lb/ft 3 flooded height in the condenser.
Equation 1 states that the vapor
Dehexanizer 40 psia 220°F 0.4 psi/°F 36.0 lb/ft3 1.6 ft/°F pressure difference is balanced
(Hexane) 15 psia 158°F 38.3 lb/ft3
by the liquid head lift plus the

38  www.aiche.org/cep  February 2015  CEP Copyright © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)
condenser pressure drop. To raise the pressure in the tower, Eq. 3a will keep rising, in some situations until it draws all
additional tubes in the condenser need to be flooded, so the of the liquid out of the condenser. (This is illustrated by the
liquid head lift H needs to be reduced. To achieve this, the case study discussed later in the article.)
vapor pressure differential P1 – P2 also needs to be reduced A good solution for both imbalance issues is to increase
(per Eq. 1). Because P1 is constant, this is achieved by open- the pressure drop at the outlet of the condenser, such as by
ing the hot-vapor bypass valve to heat the liquid surface in adding a throttling valve as illustrated in Figure 3.
the drum, which raises the drum vapor pressure P2. The addition of this valve requires the addition of the
Conversely, to reduce the tower pressure, the liquid throttling valve pressure drop, ΔPout, to Eq. 1:
level in the condenser is lowered, so the liquid head lift H ∆ ∆
is raised. This is achieved by closing the bypass valve. The
reduction in hot-vapor flow allows the liquid surface in the Combining Eq. 4 with Eq. 2 (which remains unchanged)
drum to cool, lowering P2. The larger P1 – P2 difference gives:
pulls liquid from the condenser into the drum, exposing ∆ ∆ ∆ a
more condenser area for condensation.
Equation 5a can be expanded to include the line friction
Hydraulic imbalances terms in Eq. 3b:
According to Eq. 3a, when the liquid head and the con-
denser pressure drop are small, the bypass pressure drop will ∆ ∆ - b
also be small. Under these conditions, the hot-vapor-bypass ∆ ∆ ∆ ∆
control system becomes vulnerable to hydraulic imbalances. - -
To the best of our knowledge, this vulnerability has not been The throttling valve permits a larger pressure drop
previously reported. through the bypass valve. The additional pressure drop
At low heads and small pressure drops, the valve tends retards the sudden movement of the mass of liquid from the
to open. If the pressure drop across the bypass valve exceeds condenser to the drum upon a strong pull from a disturbance
the right-hand side of Eq. 3a even at 80–90% open, the at the drum liquid surface. If the control valve is close to
valve will tend to open widely and cause a loss of control. fully open, the additional pressure drop helps to return the
To match the large pressure drop on the left-hand side of valve to its normal operating range. Finally, the additional
Eq. 3a, the liquid head H will tend to rise. In some situations pressure drop counters the tendency for U-tube oscillations
it will keep rising until it sucks all of the liquid out of the mentioned earlier.
condenser. A hydraulic imbalance can develop when the tower’s
Imbalances can also develop because different factors overhead is condensed by an elevated air condenser fol-
govern the valve pressure drop and the valve opening. The lowed by a ground-level cooling-water condenser (Figure 4).
valve pressure drop is largely governed by the drum liquid This system generally works well when the liquid remains
surface temperature, whereas the valve opening is governed in the cooling-water condenser. However, during cold or wet
by the tower pressure controller. While normally the two ambient conditions, at low plant throughput rates, or when
governing mechanisms vary in unison, a strong disturbance the condensers are clean (not fouled), the air condenser may
that causes sudden cooling of the liquid surface in the drum easily provide all the needed condensation area. The pres-
may throw the mechanisms out of balance. The drum pres-
PC dPbypass
sure falls quickly, while the tower pressure, and therefore
the valve opening, remains temporarily constant. The bypass P1

pressure drop increase renders the left-hand side of Eq. 3a P2


larger than the right-hand side. The higher pressure differ- LC

ential increases the vapor flow through the bypass. Also, per Tower
Signal to
Eq. 3a, H increases, exposing condenser tube area and caus- H Distillate-Reflux
Controller
ing the tower pressure to fall. The reduction in tower pres-
sure opens the valve, further increasing the hot-vapor flow. If
the combined increase in hot-vapor flow is sufficiently large dPcond

to reheat the liquid surface and quickly reinstate the drum


pressure, the drum will return to steady state following the Product plus
dPout
bump. In contrast, if the increase in flow does not balance Reflux
the decrease in drum pressure fast enough, or if it interacts in p Figure 3. The addition of a throttling valve at the condenser outlet
a manner that aggravates the initial surface disturbance, H in reduces the bypass valve’s vulnerability to hydraulic imbalances.

Copyright © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) CEP  February 2015  www.aiche.org/cep  39
Back to Basics

sure controller will open the bypass, pushing liquid up into temperature corresponding to P2. This hot temperature does
the air condenser. When this occurs, Eq. 1 becomes: not extend deep below the liquid surface (see the enlarged
∆ ∆ detail in Figure 1). The vapor film heat-transfer coefficient
for condensation at the liquid surface is high (19). Since
and Eq. 3a becomes: most process liquids are good thermal insulators, most of the
∆ ∆ ∆ temperature gradients occur within a thin hot-liquid layer,
which can be as thin as 1 in. (4). Experience with thermal
where ΔPcond,air is the pressure drop across the air condenser scans confirms that the hot layer is only a few inches thick
(psi), ΔPcond,water is the pressure drop across the water in a well-designed system. Below this hot surface, the liquid
condenser (psi), and h is the liquid head between the air remains at its subcooled temperature.
condenser and the reflux drum (psi). The heat transferred from the surface to the bulk liquid
For this arrangement to work, the sum of the condensers’ by conduction and convection through quiescent liquid,
pressure drops needs to be well above the liquid head h. Qcond, is:
This is unlikely, because the feed to the water condenser
is all liquid, so the condenser pressure drop is low. The air
condenser pressure drop will most likely not be high enough where hQHL is the heat-transfer coefficient for conduction and
to keep ΔPbypass in Eq. 7 within the valve control range, and convection through the hot-liquid layer (Btu/hr-°F per ft2 of
the bypass valve will open fully. However, even full opening drum liquid surface area), AS is the area of the liquid surface
of the valve will not provide enough heat to keep the liquid in the reflux drum (ft2), and T is the temperature (°F) with
level in the drum low enough. The drum will fill up and the subscript surface denoting the drum liquid surface and
control will be lost. subcool denoting the subcooled bulk liquid.
The simplest solution is to ensure that the liquid always The heat supplied by the hot-vapor bypass also needs
remains in the water condenser by reducing the air condenser to offset the heat lost from the wall of the drum above the
duty during winter. This is achieved by turning off fans, liquid surface to the atmosphere, Qloss. Assuming the drum
closing louvers, and controlling the air condenser’s outlet liquid surface is at about the same temperature as the drum
temperature by manipulating the fan motor speed or the vapor space (usually a good assumption), the loss of heat
pitch of the blades. Alternatively, although not commonly from the wall of the drum is:
practiced in this scenario, additional pressure drop (e.g., a
throttling valve) can be added in the condensate line from the
cooling-water condenser outlet or in the condenser inlet line. where hatm is the heat-transfer coefficient for convection and
radiation from the exposed drum wall area above the liquid
Steady-state heat transfer to the atmosphere (Btu/hr-°F per ft2 of drum wall area), ADW
At steady state, the heat supplied by the hot-vapor bypass is the area of the drum wall above the liquid surface (ft2),
balances the heat flow from the drum liquid surface to the and the subscript ambient denotes the ambient temperature
drum bulk liquid plus any heat losses from the vapor space outside the drum.
of the drum:
PC
P1 dPbypass

where QHVB is the total heat supplied by the condensation dPcond,air


of vapor supplied by the hot-vapor bypass (Btu/hr), Qcond is h
LC
the heat transferred from the drum liquid surface to the drum Signal to
bulk (subcooled) liquid (Btu/hr), and Qloss is the heat loss Distillate-Reflux
Controller
from the exposed drum wall area above the liquid surface to
the atmosphere (Btu/hr).
dPcond,water
As long as the liquid surface in the reflux drum is smooth
and unagitated, most of the heat flow from the surface into Product plus
Reflux
the subcooled liquid, Qcond, is by conduction. In reality, some
convection and bulk movement also occur and provide addi- p Figure 4. A naphtha splitter tower had an air condenser in series with a
tional heat transfer from the surface to the subcooled liquid. cooling-water condenser. On cold winter days, the liquid level rose into the
air condenser and it became difficult to maintain a stable pressure in the
All of the heating, cooling, and vapor pressure adjust-
tower. This issue was solved by turning off fans and shutting louvers in the
ment processes take place at the liquid surface. The vapor air condenser and raising the setpoint on the air cooler’s outlet temperature
space and the liquid surface are hot — at the condensing control.

40  www.aiche.org/cep  February 2015  CEP Copyright © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)
Combining Eq. 9 with Eq. 10 allows for comparison of vative design, the value calculated can be multiplied by a
the two mechanisms: safety factor of two or even three.
• Generously sized bypass valves render hot-vapor
bypass systems with uninsulated drums more robust to
ambient disturbances. The vapor-film heat-transfer coef-
ficient for condensation at the liquid surface is high (19),
Due to the drum’s curvature, the wall area above the so as long as the liquid surface remains undisturbed and the
liquid surface ADW in a horizontal drum exceeds the liquid valve is not close to fully open or fully closed, the additional
surface area AS. In a vertical drum, the length usually is about heat supplied upon valve opening can quickly catch up with
three times the diameter, so unless the liquid level is near the
top, ADW again exceeds the liquid surface area. In either case,
the area ratio term AS/ADW in Eq. 11 is less than 1. In most Nomenclature
situations, the ambient temperature, especially during a cold
winter night, can be much lower than the subcooled tem- ADW = area of the drum wall above the liquid
perature, so the temperature difference ratio term in Eq. 11 is surface (ft2)
less than 1, often by a large factor. At the same heat-transfer AS = area of the liquid surface in the reflux
drum (ft2)
coefficient, the atmospheric heat losses usually exceed the
h = liquid head between the air condenser and the
heat flow from the liquid surface to the drum liquid, often reflux drum (psi)
quite significantly. hatm = heat-transfer coefficient for convection
For uninsulated vessels, the ambient-loss heat-transfer and radiation from the exposed drum wall
coefficient, hatm, varies widely with the ambient conditions. area above the liquid to the atmosphere
Over the temperature range of 100–200°F, heat-transfer (Btu/hr-°F per ft2 of drum wall area)
coefficients for ambient heat loss typically range from about hQHL = heat-transfer coefficient for conduction and
convection through the hot-liquid layer
2–3 Btu/hr-°F-ft2 in still air to 5–7 Btu/hr-°F-ft2 on a windy
(Btu/hr-°F per ft2 of drum liquid surface area)
day (23, 24). On a rainy day, the coefficient may be as high H = head difference between the reflux drum
as 15–20 Btu/hr-°F-ft2. With still liquid at the drum surface, liquid level and the condenser liquid level (psi)
the heat-transfer coefficient for conduction plus convection P1 = pressure at the intersection of the line to the
at the hot-liquid layer in the drum is on the order of condenser and the condenser bypass (psia)
2–10 Btu/hr-°F-ft2. It follows that for uninsulated drums, P2 = pressure inside the reflux drum vapor
the ambient heat losses exceed the heat flow from the space (psia)
ΔPbypass = pressure difference across the bypass
surface to the bulk liquid even under favorable ambient
control valve (psi)
conditions. On a stormy day, the ambient heat losses can be ΔPbypass-line = pressure drop in the hot-vapor bypass vapor
more than an order of magnitude higher than the heat flow line excluding the pressure drop across the
from the surface to the bulk liquid. control valve (psi)
Insulating the drum can reduce the ambient heat losses ΔPcond = condenser pressure drop (psi)
by an order of magnitude compared to the losses in still air. ΔPcond,air = pressure drop across the air condenser (psi)
For well-insulated process vessels (with about 3–4 in. of ΔPcond,water = pressure drop across the water condenser (psi)
ΔPliq-line = pressure drop in the liquid line from the
fiberglass or mineral wool insulation and no large exposed
condenser to the reflux drum (psi)
metal surfaces), the ambient-loss heat-transfer coefficient is ΔPout = throttling valve pressure drop (psi)
0.25–0.3 Btu/hr-°F-ft2 (23). However, many plants prefer not ΔPvap-line = pressure drop in the tower overhead vapor line
to insulate the drum for fear of water-trapping and corrosion to the condenser downstream of the point where
underneath the insulation. the hot-vapor bypass splits off (psi)
There are four implications of ambient heat losses: Qcond = heat transferred from the drum liquid surface
• For uninsulated vessels, ambient changes, especially to the drum bulk (subcooled) liquid (Btu/hr)
QHVB = total heat supplied by the condensation of
sudden rain or thunderstorms, can generate instability in
vapor supplied by the hot-vapor bypass (Btu/hr)
hot-vapor bypass schemes. This problem is most severe in Qloss = heat loss from the exposed drum wall
winter and in cold climates. area above the liquid surface to the atmosphere
• Bypass sizing should be based on the total heat lost on (Btu/hr)
a cold and rainy winter night. Use Eqs. 9 and 10 with the Tambient = ambient temperature outside the drum (°F)
appropriate heat-transfer coefficients based on the coldest Tsubcool = subcooled bulk liquid temperature (°F)
conceivable ambient and subcooled temperatures to avoid Tsurface = drum liquid surface temperature (°F)
gross oversizing of hot-vapor bypass valves. For conser-

Copyright © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) CEP  February 2015  www.aiche.org/cep  41
Back to Basics

the additional cooling generated by an ambient disturbance. magnitude lower. During these warm and calm periods, the
(This is illustrated in the case study discussed later.) control valve may operate in a nearly closed position, mak-
• For insulated vessels, a much smaller bypass valve is ing it prone to leakage and unstable control. Drum insulation
required. helps eliminate the need for control valve oversizing.
The leaking valve that limited condenser capacity in
Loss of condenser heat-transfer capacity Lieberman’s case was a butterfly valve (17). This type of
References 17 and 25 report cases in which leakage valve is prone to leak, especially when the valve is over-
through a hot-vapor bypass, even when the valve was fully sized. Lieberman highlights the importance of designing the
shut, significantly reduced the condenser’s heat-transfer bypass to prevent excessive leakage. The valves used for
capacity. In one instance (17), Lieberman reported that hot-vapor bypasses should have a tight-shut-off design.
blocking-in the bypass increased condenser capacity by
50%, eliminating the need for a larger condenser. Case study:
As stated earlier, the heat supplied to an uninsulated Condenser outlet throttling mitigates instability
drum, and therefore the size of the control valve, is primar- The problem. In a C3-C4 splitter column, the hot-vapor
ily dictated by the ambient heat losses during periods of bypass was correctly configured (as in Figure 1). The con-
cold, rainy, or snowy weather. Most control valves sized denser liquid level was 10–12 ft below the liquid level in the
for such conditions tend to be oversized for periods of calm drum, and the drum was not insulated. The control usually
and warm weather, when the heat losses may be an order of worked well when the tower overhead flowrate (reflux plus
100
product) was less than 25,000 bbl/day. At higher flowrates,
the drum would often suddenly fill up and the drum level
80 controller would increase the reflux rate. The drum level
Outlet Temperature, °F

would then dive, the reflux rate plummet, and the reflux
Level and Valve %

60 pump cavitate. The only way to restore stability was to cut


back overhead flowrate. This restricted the column capacity.
40
The problem was more severe in summer.
20
A similar instability occasionally occurred at lower over-
head flowrates. Figure 5 shows the operating charts for such
0 an event. During this event, the reflux-plus-product flowrate
was 17,000 bbl/day. At about 10:40 pm, the hot-vapor-
14 bypass differential pressure (green triangles) jumped from
the normal 4.5 psi to 7 psi in about 1 min, and to 12 psi
12 295 within 5 min. Over the same 5 min, the tower top pres-
Reflux, C3, and LCO Flowrate, Mbpd

sure declined only slightly, from 289.5 psig to 288.5 psig,


10
increasing the valve opening from 50% to 80% (red
Top Pressure, psig

290 squares), while the drum liquid level jumped from 40%
Pressure, psi

8
to 80% (light blue diamonds). Over the next 15 min, the
6
hot-vapor-bypass differential pressure, valve opening, and
285 drum liquid level returned to their pre-event values, while
4 the column pressure rose slightly, to 290.5 psig. Throughout
the event, there was little change in the boilup, reflux, and
2 product flowrates or in the condenser outlet temperature.
280
Testing. Pressure gages were installed to measure the
0 change in pressure across the condenser. Field measure-
9:28 10:04 10:33 11:02 11:31 ments taken during an instability at high reflux and product
Time, pm flowrates showed that the condenser pressure drop rapidly
Reflux Flowrate, Mbpd
Condenser Outlet Temp, °F decreased (due to reduced head) and condensate temperature
Hot-Vapor-Bypass Valve Opening, % Light Cycle Oil Flowrate, Mbpd
Tower Top Pressure, psig
quickly rose as the liquid slugged from the condenser to the
Drum Level, %
Hot-Vapor-Bypass dP, psi drum, suggesting that the condensate seal in the condenser
C3 Production, Mbpd could have been broken.
Hydraulic analysis. The event in Figure 5 was considered
p Figure 5. During the unstable event depicted in this operating chart, the
differential pressure across the hot-vapor bypass valve jumps and the liquid most suitable for hydraulic analysis because the reflux and
level in the reflux drum increases from 40% to over 80%. product flowrates were low and the condensate seal was not

42  www.aiche.org/cep  February 2015  CEP Copyright © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)
broken, as evidenced by the condenser outlet temperature The incremental amount of vapor condensation in the
remaining unchanged. Because the line losses were signifi- drum during heavy rain can be calculated from Eq. 10. As
cant, Eq. 3b was used for the pressure balance. Table 2 pres- stated earlier, ambient-loss heat-transfer coefficients for
ents the calculated pressure drops based on measurements uninsulated drums vary from about 2–3 Btu/hr-°F-ft2 in dry,
just prior to the event in Figure 5. The 1.1-psi discrepancy is windless conditions to about 15–20 Btu/hr-°F-ft2 in rainy
probably due to inaccuracy in the measurement of the pres- and windy conditions. Based on a change in heat-transfer
sure drop across the control valve or in the calculations. coefficient of 15 Btu/hr-°F-ft2 upon the onset of a sudden
Figure 6 is a plot of flowrate vs. valve opening at various heavy rain, the increase in the condensation rate is calcu-
valve pressure drops based on the control valve characteris- lated to be about 3,000 lb/hr. This would diminish to about
tics and the physical properties for the vapor. Figure 6 shows 2,000 lb/hr when the drum liquid level rises to 80% and the
that opening the valve from 50% at a 4.5-psi pressure drop drum shell area exposed for condensation, ADW in Eq. 10,
to 80% at a 12-psi pressure drop increased the vapor flow- decreases. Over the 5-min event, heavy rain accounts for
rate through the valve from 5,500 lb/hr to 31,000 lb/hr. Thus, additional liquid generation of a mere 200 lb, which does
over the 5-min event, with approximately a linear increase little to explain the 18,000 lb liquid movement.
in valve opening and pressure drop, the additional vapor that One conceivable source remains: liquid from the con-
entered the drum (above the normal rate) was about 1,000 lb. denser was drawn into the drum. There are two condenser
The drum is 9 ft in diameter and just over 20 ft long shells in parallel, each 46 in. in diameter and 20 ft long.
(tangent to tangent). Raising the drum liquid level from 40% Allowing for the tube volume, the condensers hold approxi-
to 80% requires 21,000 lb. Adding this quantity of liquid to mately 8,000 lb of liquid when full. During the low-­flowrate
the drum over 5 min is a tremendous movement of liquid, operation prior to the event (with a reflux-plus-product flow-
increasing the amount of liquid entering the drum by a factor rate of 17,000 bbl/day), and at the relatively cold ambient
of 3, from 17,000 bbl/day to about 50,000 bbl/day. The key temperatures, condensation occurred over only about 25%
to understanding the mechanism is to determine where this of the condenser’s heat-transfer area. So the condensers con-
huge amount of liquid came from. tained only about 6,000 lb of liquid. By itself, this falls short
Mechanism. The additional vapor entering the drum of explaining the large liquid movement of 18,000 lb.
accounts for about 1,000 lb. This may be augmented by However, there was a large augmenting factor. As
condensation of the vapor present in the drum vapor space, liquid is drawn out of the condensers, additional tube area
which is replaced by the liquid during the event. Condensa- is exposed, increasing condensation. Emptying all of the
tion of the drum vapor accounts for another 2,000 lb. That liquid from the condensers would quadruple the condensa-
leaves 18,000 lb to be explained. tion area. The liquid generated by raising the condensation
One explanation may be the onset of heavy rain. Concise area from 25% at the beginning of the event to 100% 5 min
records of the ambient conditions at the refinery at the time later is calculated to be about 16,000 lb. This liquid together
of the event were not available, but records from the nearby with the 6,000 lb drained from the condenser exceeds the
New Orleans airport show light rain throughout the evening, 18,000 lb increase in drum liquid. This means that some
with periods of easing off and others of intensifying. The
ambient temperature was about 63°F and wind was about 50,000
Valve dP, psi
4 mph, occasionally gusting to 20 mph. 15
40,000 13
Table 2. This table shows the pressure balance, 11
with calculated pressure drops and liquid heads 9
30,000
Flow, lb/hr

for both sides of Eq. 3b, for the conditions just prior to 7
5
the disturbance observed in the case study. 3
20,000
Left-Hand Side Right-Hand Side 1
Term of Eq. 3b of Eq. 3b
10,000
ΔPbypass, psi 4.5
ΔPbypass-line, psi 0.1 0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
ΔPcond, psi 0.5
Valve Opening, %
ΔPliq-line, psi 0.4
p Figure 6. This plot of flowrate vs. valve opening at various valve
ΔPvap-line, psi 0.5
pressure drops is based on the control valve characteristics and the
H, psi 2.1 physical properties of the vapor in the case study. Opening the valve from
50% at a 4.5-psi pressure drop to 80% at a 12-psi pressure drop increased
Total, psi 4.6 3.5
the vapor flowrate through the valve from 5,500 lb/hr to 31,000 lb/hr.

Copyright © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) CEP  February 2015  www.aiche.org/cep  43
Back to Basics

liquid remained in the condensers, retaining their liquid seal 285 psig, the liquid surface was at 125°F, while the bulk
and the subcooled outlet temperature, as shown in Figure 5. subcooled liquid in the drum was at about 66°F. As little
The intensified condensation rate reduced the tower as 1.5% of the hot drum liquid surface being replaced by
pressure. To reinstate the tower pressure, the hot-vapor subcooled liquid can explain a temperature drop of 1°F and
bypass valve opened rapidly as the pressure fell. Eventually a consequent pressure decrease of 2.5 psi.
the hot-vapor flowrate caught up with the disturbance. The This brings us to the liquid entry. The liquid enters via a
drum liquid surface heated up, the drum vapor pressure rose, 6-in. nozzle at the bottom of the drum, discharging upward
the differential pressure across the valve declined, the liquid at 5.7 ft/sec at the beginning of the event, a velocity exceed-
returned to the condenser, column pressure went back up, ing the good design practice of 4 ft/sec maximum. Normally,
and normal operation resumed. this would not be an issue, but here, the drum liquid level
During the disturbance event, the low-flowrate operation was only 3.7 ft above the liquid entry. The initial momentum
and the low cooling-water temperature (inferred from the low may have carried some of the subcooled liquid jet to the
condenser outlet temperature) created a relatively large liquid surface and caused it to pierce the hot-liquid surface.
inventory in the condensers and sufficient condensation Instability may occur when the subcooled liquid reaches
capacity to cushion against total emptying of the condensers. the drum surface. Figure 5 shows that just prior to the pres-
Had the tower overhead flowrates been higher or the ambient sure differential rise, the tower pressure fell by about 0.5 psi
temperature warmer, the liquid inventory in the condens- and the drum level rose by 2–3%. Both indicate an increase
ers would have been smaller, and it would have been much in the condensation rate, possibly initiated by heavy rain
easier to lose the condenser liquid seal, which would have hitting the drum above the liquid level (i.e., the part of the
resulted in loss of subcooling and compounded the upset. drum corresponding to the vapor space). The drum pressure
Initiation. Up to this point, we followed the movement fell, drawing liquid from the condenser. A 2% increase in the
of liquid produced by a strong suction. However, we did liquid level is equivalent to about 1,000 lb. Pulling 1,000 lb
not address the cause of this suction. To move 18,000 lb of from the condensers would raise the exposed condensation
liquid in 5 min takes a very strong suction force. area by about 50%, quickly reducing tower pressure. The
Figure 5 shows a fast rise in the differential pressure bypass pressure drop remained constant at that time, mean-
across the hot-vapor bypass control valve (green triangles). ing that both the drum and tower pressures fell by the same
This value is the difference between the tower pressure and 0.5 psi. The additional liquid flow, about 1,000 lb in 2 min,
the drum pressure, and since the tower pressure changed would increase the drum liquid inlet velocity from 5.7 ft/sec
only slightly, most of the pressure change occurred in the to 7 ft/sec. The intensified jet raised more subcooled liquid
drum pressure — 8 psi over 5 min. The drum pressure is the to the liquid surface, generating a fountain effect that cooled
vapor pressure of the liquid surface in the drum. An 8-psi the surface. The drum pressure fell, more liquid was drawn
reduction in vapor pressure corresponds to cooling of the liq- from the condenser, the jet and the fountain intensified, the
uid surface by only 2.5°F (Row 1 in Table 1). The problem surface cooled further, more liquid was drawn from the con-
now is to identify the source of that 2.5°F cooling of the denser, and so on. This process was self-accelerating. At the
drum liquid surface. pressure differential peak, the liquid rate had tripled and the
One possibility is heavy rain. However, as stated earlier, liquid jet velocity had exceeded 15 ft/sec, high enough for
the heavy rain would have increased the condensation rate the jet to break through the liquid surface, even at the higher
by only 2,000–3,000 lb/hr, which would be easily offset level of 80%.
by the additional 25,000 lb/hr flow through the hot-vapor At the pressure differential peak, the hot-vapor bypass
bypass during the same period. Furthermore, there were flow reached 31,000 lb/hr, the vapor inlet velocity 34 ft/sec,
many other events (including the tests) that took place under and ρvV2 3,300 lb/ft-sec2, while the level rose to 80%, which
dry conditions. was 2.1 ft below the vapor inlet. At some time during the
Another possibility is that hot-vapor impingement event, vapor impingement on the liquid surface caused
agitated the liquid surface. However, at the beginning of more subcooled liquid to rise to the surface, augmenting the
the event, the vapor velocity was about 6 ft/sec, making instability.
ρvV2 = 100 lb/ft-sec2 — too low to ruffle the liquid surface Solution. The low pressure drop due to friction in the
5 ft below (ρv is vapor density [lb/ft3] and V is vapor velocity condenser and its inlet vapor and outlet liquid lines, a total of
at the drum inlet nozzle [ft/sec]). Also, the column was com- 1.4 psi (Table 2), offers little hydraulic resistance to counter
monly operated at this vapor velocity without any problems. the self-accelerating fountain effect. Adding a throttling
During the first minute of the event, the valve pressure valve in the lines leaving the condenser can mitigate the
drop rose from 4.5 psi to 7 psi, corresponding to a drop in self-accelerating process by creating additional resistance to
drum surface temperature of 1°F. At the drum pressure of the liquid flow being drawn into the drum. The line pressure

44  www.aiche.org/cep  February 2015  CEP Copyright © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)
drop, which increases with the square of the flow, severely
limits the increase in liquid flow to the drum, giving the hot Literature Cited
vapor a chance to catch up. 1. Kister, H. Z., “What Caused Tower Malfunctions in the Last 50
Years?,” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 81 (1),
A manual throttling valve was installed in the line from pp. 5–26 (Jan. 2003).
the condenser to the drum, as in Figure 3. The differential 2. Kister, H. Z., “Distillation Troubleshooting,” Wiley InterScience,
pressure across the valve is measured locally and maintained Hoboken, NJ (2006).
at 2 psi. The operators check the differential pressure across 3. Smith, C. L., “Distillation Control — An Engineering Perspec-
the valve and adjust it as needed. This completely eliminated tive,” Wiley, Hoboken, NJ (2012).
disturbance events. The modified system can now run with 4. Whistler, A. M., “Locate Condensers at Ground Level,” Petro-
leum Refinery, 33 (3), pp. 173–174 (1954).
a reflux-plus-product flowrate up to 40,000 bbl/day during
5. Hollander, L. “Pressure Control of Light-Ends Fractionators,”
both summer and winter with no instability. ISA Journal, 4 (5), pp. 185–187 (1957).
Adding the throttling valve raised the hot-vapor bypass 6. Chin, T. G., “Guide to Distillation Pressure Control Methods,”
pressure drop from about 1.4 psi to 3.4 psi. The throttling Hydrocarbon Processing, 58 (10), p. 145 (1979).
valve slows the rate of drainage from the condenser, making 7. Kister, H. Z., “Distillation Operation,” McGraw-Hill, NY (1990).
it more difficult to suck the condenser liquid into the drum. 8. Sloley, A. W., “Effectively Control Column Pressure,” Chemical
Engineering Progress, pp. 38–48 (Jan. 2001).
Closing thoughts. This case demonstrates that hydraulic
9. Kister, H. Z., and J. F. Litchfield, “Distillation: Diagnosing
instability can be eliminated by adding a throttling valve in Instabilities in the Column Overhead,” Chemical Engineering,
the condensate outlet line. Ideally, the valve should have a 111 (9), pp. 56–59 (Sept. 2004).
pressure drop greater than 3–4 psi and should be installed 10. Schneider, D. F., and M. C. Hoover, “Practical Process
more than 10 line diameters away from the drum liquid inlet Hydraulic Considerations,” Hydrocarbon Processing, 78 (8),
pp. 47–54 (Aug. 1999).
to minimize turbulence at the drum inlet. The hydraulic
11. Duguid, I., “Take this Safety Database to Heart,” Chemical Engi-
analysis also suggests that it should be possible to mitigate neering, 108 (7), pp. 80–84, and the accompanying Case MS16
similar hydraulic disturbances by keeping the liquid inlet (July 2001).
velocity low, installing a horizontal baffle or a stilling cham- 12. Sloley, A. W., “Simple Methods Solve Exchanger Problems,”
ber above the liquid inlet, and/or extending the liquid inlet Oil and Gas Journal, 96 (16), p. 85 (April 20, 1998).
into the drum and directing it horizontally. (These changes 13. Shinskey, F. G., “Distillation Control for Productivity and
Energy Conservation,” 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, NY (1984).
were not incorporated in this case.) Another good practice
14. Lupter, D. E., “Distillation Column Control for Utility Econ-
is to install a horizontal baffle in front of the vapor nozzle to omy,” Presented at the 53rd Annual Gas Processors Association
disperse the vapor flow and prevent it from impinging on the Convention, March 25–27, Denver, CO, (1974).
liquid surface upon intensification. CEP 15. Nisenfeld, A. E., and R. C. Seemann, “Distillation Columns,”
Instrument Society of America, Research Triangle Park, NC
(1981).
Henry Z. Kister is a Fluor Corp. Senior Fellow and Director of Fractionation 16. Laird, D., and J. Cornelisen, “Control-System Improvements
Technology (Phone: (949) 349-4679, Email: henry.kister@fluor.com). He Expand Refinery Processes,” Oil and Gas Journal, 98 (39),
has over 30 years of experience in design, troubleshooting, revamping, pp. 71–74 (Sept. 25, 2000).
field consulting, control, and startup of fractionation processes and 17. Lieberman, N. P., “Troubleshooting Process Operations,”
equipment. He is the author of three books, the distillation equipment
chapter in Perry’s Handbook, and over 100 articles, and has taught 4th ed., PennWell Books, Tulsa, OK (2009).
the IChemE course “Practical Distillation Technology” about 450 times 18. Hartman, E. L., and T. Barletta, “Reboiler and Condenser
in 25 countries. A recipient of several awards, Kister obtained his BE Operating Problems,” Petroleum Technology Quarterly, 8 (4),
and ME degrees from the Univ. of New South Wales in Australia. He is pp. 47–56 (Summer 2003).
a Fellow of AIChE and IChemE and a member of the National Academy
of Engineering, and he serves on the Fractionation Research, Inc. (FRI) 19. Souza, L. L. G., “Model Devised for Plant Hot-Gas Bypass Sys-
Technical Advisory and Design Practices Committees. tems,” Oil and Gas Journal, 108 (33), pp. 118–123 (Sept. 6, 2010).
20. Durand, A. A., “Sizing Hot Vapors Bypass Valve,” Chemical
Daryl W. Hanson is a technology advisor (Phone: (210) 345-5929,
Email: daryl.hanson@valero.com) at Valero Energy and is focused on Engineering, pp. 111–112 (Aug. 25, 1980).
distillation, fractionation, and separation issues. He is responsible for 21. Buckley, P. S., et al., “Design of Distillation Column Control
design, troubleshooting, and operation/startup issues at 14 refineries Systems,” Instrument Society of America, Research Triangle
and many ethanol plants. His previous experience includes positions
Park, NC (1985).
at Glitsch, Koch-Glitsch, and Process Consulting Services. He has
authored over 20 articles and has a BS in chemical engineering from 22. The American Petroleum Institute, “API Technical Data
Texas A&M Univ. Book,” 7th ed., The American Petroleum Institute and EPCON
International Publishing Services, Washington, DC (2005).
23. Lieberman, N. P., “Process Equipment Malfunctions,” McGraw-
Acknowledgments Hill, NY (2011).
The authors wish to thank Chad Jones (presently at Motiva) for his assis- 24. Kern, D. O., “Process Heat Transfer,” McGraw-Hill, NY (1950).
tance in gathering the field data for this article, Mark Murphy at Fluor for his
analysis of control valve characteristics, and Walter Stupin at Fluor for his 25. Lieberman, N. P., “Troubleshooting Process Plant Control,”
invaluable input to the hydraulic analysis. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ (2009).

&RS\ULJKW‹$PHULFDQ,QVWLWXWHRI&KHPLFDO(QJLQHHUV $,&K( CEP  February 2015  www.aiche.org/cep  45