Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Process STD 105 PDF
Process STD 105 PDF
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
APPENDIX
FIGURES
TABLES
References 47
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Many forms of the fractionating trays have been devised over the years, but only
three have achieved widespread commercial acceptance. These are the sieve or
perforated tray, the valve tray, and the bubble cap tray.
The purpose of this standard is to provide a source for the material most
commonly used by the process engineer when specifying fractionating
trays. It is intended as a summary of the various calculation methods and
computer models that are currently available, and contains rules and
guidelines that can be used for quickly checking a particular tray design.
It should be noted that the rules and guidelines contained in Section 2.0
are intended as “rules of thumb” and any discrepancies between results
obtained from the use of this section and the results obtained from other
sources, such as a tray manufacturer, should be thoroughly investigated
before any action is taken.
In this type of tray, the individual holes or orifices in the tray deck
are covered with a cap that opens and closes with variation in
vapor flow rate. As the vapor load increases, the cap will open to
permit more vapor to pass through the orifice. As the vapor load
decreases, the cap will tend to close. Since the peripheral area
between the cap and the tray deck changes for different process
loadings, the amount of liquid leaking downward through the
orifices at turndown, or weeping, is minimized.
For this reason, valve trays are widely used throughout the
industry, since they will tend to handle a wider range of capacity
variation (turndown) than do sieve trays. Valve trays can
generally be designed for a pressure drop equivalent to sieve
trays.
In this type of tray, the cap (bubble cap) is situated directly above
a fixed riser extending up from the tray deck. The vapor flows up
through the riser, changes direction, and flows down and out
through the slot at or near the base of the bubble cap. The slots
are submerged within the liquid on the tray, which is where the
vapor-liquid contact occurs. This type of cap offers essentially
infinite turndown, and can operate with peak efficiency at very low
loads.
Bubble cap trays are therefore used mostly where the vapor/liquid
(V/L) ratio is large, and where liquid distribution on the tray deck is
a problem due to low liquid rates.
Two types of bubble caps, the FRI Bubble Cap and the
conventional bubble cap, are shown in Figure VI.
Until the late 1950's, this was the most widely used type of
fractionating tray. Since that time, it has been replaced, almost
completely, by other types of trays such as the valve tray, which
offer higher capacities and higher efficiencies at a lower cost, with
some sacrifice in tray flexibility.
In all cases the process engineer is required to issue a tray loading data
sheet and a process vessel sketch for all fractionating towers. These
sketches are invariably required, by other specialty groups, well before
final data is available from tray vendors. It is required that the number of
trays, their diameters, spacing, and the number of passes specified is not
expected to significantly change so that revision to the basic design is
minimized.
The purpose of the anti-jump baffle is to direct the liquid into the
downcomer at very high rates. By observation, vapor expansion
at the outlet weir pumps the liquid over the weir. At sufficiently
high vapor rate, the trajectory carries the liquid completely over
the downcomer and onto the opposite side of the tray. The tray
then floods prematurely due to increased liquid hold-up caused by
the cycling of the liquid across one side of the tray and back to the
other. Anti-jump baffles deflect the liquid into the downcomer, as
does the tower shell when the flow is towards the side.
Bubbling area is the area enclosed by the tower walls, the outlet
weir and inlet edge of the tray. The bubbling area is also referred
to as the active area, as this is the area in which the vapor-liquid
contact occurs. The bubbling area is equal to the tower area
minus the sum of the downcomer area plus the downcomer seal
area.
above. For most designs, it is set at 1.5” to 2", but should never
exceed the height of the outlet weir. The downcomer clearance is
generally ¼” to ½” less than the outlet weir height in order to
provide a liquid seal on the tray outlet. In designs where the
downcomer back up exceeds the allowable percentage of the tray
spacing, a curved downcomer outlet can be used to reduce the
head loss under the downcomer, thereby reducing the downcomer
back up.
The downcomer seal area is the area below the bottom of the
downcomer and is used to seal the downcomer and distribute the
liquid to the tray. In some designs, the downcomer seal area is
recessed below the tray deck to reduce downcomer back up and
provide a positive liquid seal for all operating conditions.
The flow path length is defined as the distance from the inlet edge
of the tray to the outlet weir or outlet edge of the bubbling area
(see Figure I). The minimum flow path length is approximately 17
inches if internal manways are required. FRI Studies indicate no
change in tray performance when the flow path length is varied
from 15 inches to 70 inches. Normally the flow path length should
not exceed 100-120 inches.
The free area is defined as the area on the tray that is available for
vapor flow. The free area is equal to the tower area minus the
maximum area at the top of the downcomer.
Most tray designs incorporate the one or two-flow trays. Four flow
trays are used in designs where the liquid rates are extremely
high, and the vapor rates are relatively low. Three flow trays are
not used in Foster Wheeler designs, due to difficulties in
controlling liquid flow equally to each pass. A diagram indicating
the flow paths for one through four flow trays is shown in Figure
IV. The maximum number of tray passes for various diameters is
shown in Table I. The maximum number of tray passes that can
physically fit into a given diameter is largely a function of tray
manway and minimum flow path length requirements.
The tower area is the total cross-sectional area within the tower
shell. The tower area is equal to the sum of the downcomer area,
bubbling area, and downcomer seal area, or the sum of the free
area plus the downcomer area.
The minimum tray spacing is set by the desire to have a crawl (3)
space across each tray. (This would not normally apply to
“welded-in” or “cartridge” trays.) This space should be about 14
inches high. The presence of major and minor beams, of bent-
down plate, and of tray hardware (caps or valve assemblies),
establishes the minimum spacing. Table 1.1. shows the minimum
spacing increasing in 6-inch increments. In borderline cases, 3-
inch increments should be considered.
2.1.20 V-Load
This term appears in the Glitsch Tray Program Printout, and in the
Glitsch Tray Design Manual, Bulletin 4900. It is used by Glitsch to
establish a minimum active area and is a function of vapor
volumetric flow and vapor and liquid densities.
Below are valve tray criteria which can be used to quickly check the tray
design as offered by the various valve tray vendors. These criteria are
intended only to be used to quickly evaluate tray designs or spot check
inadequacies, with the final check, as required, based on the more
rigorous procedures.
As the liquid flows over the weir and into the downcomer, it exists
as a froth. Time must be allowed for the vapor portion of the froth
to disengage before the liquid enters the downflow clearance area
and flows to the next tray. Also, any foam that is created by the
liquid turbulence in the downcomer must be allowed to collapse
and dissipate. As a guideline for checking vendor designs, Foster
Wheeler has established 5 seconds as the minimum downcomer
residence time, with not more than 50% of the downcomer to be
backed up. Glitsch, however, prefers to use the downcomer
O wo > 1.0 hi t
O wi > 1.7 hi t
The term “Flooding” is used quite often when referring to the upper
The term FF, or Flood Factor, is used in the Glitsch Ballast Tray
Design Manual Bulletin 4900 for purposes of estimating the
minimum active area and minimum downcomer area. This term is
the “design percent of flood” expressed as a fraction. A value of
not more than 0.77 is normally used for vacuum towers and a
value of not more than 0.82 is used for other services. These
values are intended to limit entrainment to approximately 10%
entrainment. Higher flood factors may result in excessive
entrainment and/or a column sized too small for effective
FOSTER WHEELER ENERGY LIMITED 2002
PROCESS STD 105A
FOSTER WHEELER VESSELS PAGE 14
TOWERS-TRAYS REV 10
PROCESS PLANTS DIVISION DATE JULY 2002
operation.
The percent of flood for sieve and bubble cap trays can be
determined by the appropriate hand or computer calculation
methods outlined in Sections 3.0 and 5.0, respectively. The
percent of flood for valve trays should be determined from the
appropriate tray manufacturer’s design manuals, several of which
are outlined in Section 4.0. A generalized flooding calculation
procedure, included in Appendix IV, can be used to estimate the
percent flood of valve trays if the appropriate tray manufacturer’s
tray design manual is unavailable. A sample hand calculation is
also included in Appendix IV.
System factors are used in the Glitsch Ballast Tray Design Manual
Bulletin 4900 to represent the degree of foaming for a particular
system. The system factor is actually a safety factor applied to
downcomer velocities to prevent premature flooding by
downcomer backup. It is also used in conjunction with the
Capacity Factor (Section 2.1.4) for sizing columns and calculating
the percent flood of a given tower diameter. A table listing the
system factors that should be used for various systems is shown
in the Glitsch Ballast Tray Design Manual Bulletin 4900. Other
tray vendors use other values.
Establishing the hole area for sieve trays, slot area for valve trays,
or slot area for bubble cap trays is generally the responsibility of
the tray vendor. The amount of perforated area on a tray deck is
a function of turndown and pressure drop requirements. Also, the
size and arrangement of the perforations can influence the rate of
entrainment and flooding. The tray vendor has conducted
extensive research in these areas, and will generally guarantee
tray flexibility.
vapor flow and the area of the opening around the valve
periphery (fully opened). As a rule, the slot area for Koch
and Glitsch valves is equal to approximately 0.012 sq. ft. per
valve; but this should be checked with the vendor particularly
for Nutter Trays.
This section serves as a summary of a few of the methods now available to the
process engineer to design and rate sieve trays. The user manuals for all of the
computer programs are available in the Process Design Library unless otherwise
noted. The sieve tray vendor shall provide the final design.
The design methods most often used to rate sieve trays by hand
calculations are:
With given specific sieve tray design, vapor and liquid loading
conditions and physical properties, the program evaluates the usual
design parameters for one and two pass trays only, utilizing
procedures given in the FRI Design Handbook. The program will
accept either English or Metric (SI) units. This is the program
distributed to FRI members. This program can be run with cards
(batch) and is also available on TSO. P1096 can also be accessed
via PDQ.
3.3 Recommendations
The P1096 FRI Sieve Tray Program (Section 3.2A) or the Glitsch Sieve
Tray Rating Program (Section 3.2C) can both be used to design and rate
one or two pass trays. Quick results can be obtained from either program,
via the TSO or the CRT. For critical designs, the FRI program should be
used.
The Glitsch Sieve Tray Rating Program and the P1115 FRI multipass
Sieve Tray Rating Program (Section 3.2B) can both design & rate three or
four pass trays. If quick results are required, the Glitsch program should be
used, as the results appear directly on the CRT. As with the one and two
pass tray designs, critical three and four pass trays should be designed
using the FRI Program. The final selection should be made in conjunction
with or approved by the Chief Process Engineer/Manager or the Process
Supervisor. Avoid three-pass trays.
It should be noted that the Glitsch calculation methods can only be used to
determine the basic hydraulic parameters used in tray design, such as
percent flood, downcomer backup, and pressure drop. If additional
detailed design information is required, such as weep points, dump points,
entrainment values or tray efficiencies, the FRI calculation method must be
used.
This section serves as a summary of a few of the methods now available to the
process engineer to use for design and rate valve trays. The valve tray vendor
shall provide the final design.
The design methods most often used to rate valve trays by hand
calculations are:
All of these design manuals are in the Technical File, Index No. 442.112.
4.3 Recommendations
The hand calculation method that should be used depends upon the type
of valve unit under investigation. Normally, the Glitsch Ballast Tray Design
Manual (Section 4.1A) is used for most new Foster Wheeler designs. The
design manuals for the other proprietary trays mentioned in Sections 4.1B
and 4.1C should be used if those particular types of trays are being
checked for new loadings as in a revamp. See Section 1.2.4 for additional
information on additional proprietary trays.
This section serves as a summary of a few of the methods now available to the
process engineer to design and rate bubble cap trays. The bubble-cap tray vendor
shall provide the final design. The user manuals for all of the computer programs
are available in the Process Design Library unless otherwise noted. The procedure
required to access these programs, either on batch or TSO, including PDQ, can be
found in the Process Design Department Computer Users Manual.
The design methods most often used to rate bubble cap trays by hand
calculations are:
This is the FRI rating program to rate bubble cap trays of one or two
pass design, with no cascading of trays. Output is in either English
or metric (SI) units. This program can only be run batch.
5.3 Recommendations
The Glitsch Bubble Cap Tray Rating Program (Section 5.2B) or the P1080
FRI Bubble Cap Tray Rating Program (Section 5.2A) can be used as
computer methods to design bubble cap trays. If quick results are
required, the Glitsch Bubble Cap program should be used, as the results
appear directly on the CRT. If the design is critical, the FRI Bubble Cap
program should be used, as the FRI method appears to be more rigorous
than the Glitsch method. The final selection should be made in
conjunction with or approved by the Chief Process Engineer/Manager or
the Process Supervisor.
It should be noted that the Glitsch calculation methods can only be used to
determine the basic hydraulic parameters used in tray design, such as
percent flood, downcomer backup, and pressure drop. If additional
detailed design information is required, such as weep points, dump points,
entrainment values or tray efficiencies, the FRI calculation methods must
be used.
This section includes instructions for use of Form No. 135-110A, Tray Data
Requisition Form, which accompanies the process vessel sketch for
towers. This data sheet contains 51 numbered lines of data that are
required to allow the tray vendor to satisfactorily design a fractionating
tray. These data sheets are issued by Process Engineering to the Vessel
Engineering group, whose function is to complete the data sheet and
subsequently coordinate purchase of the trays. In addition, the data
sheets should be sent directly to the tray manufacturer by the Process
Design and Development Department to confirm the results obtained by
using the in-house computer methods.
6.2 Guidelines for Providing Tray Data for Tray Data Requisition Form
This section includes guidelines for completing the Tray Data Requisition
Form. A copy of a completed Tray Data Requisition Form has been
included in Appendix III for reference. A line by line description of the
information required to complete the form has been included here.
When sections of a tower are given, specify the maximum and minimum
loading points of the section. Should the P1086 computer program be
employed to simulate the tray loads, these points are readily identified in
the tray loading table under the heading VLoad.
In specifying the top tray, and for trays involving transition from
fractionation to pump around service, data for both the vapor to/liquid from
and vapor from/liquid to those particular section should be given. This also
applies to selected towers such as strippers, in which case the maximum
traffic in the top of the tower lies somewhere between the rates calculated
as entering the top stage, and the rate calculated as leaving the tower.
The heat duty for pump around trays should be supplied as an additional
item.
The maximum vapor and liquid rates may not occur at the same point.
Rather than specifying both sections, pick the maximum vapor loading and
specify that section with the corresponding liquid load. As a footnote,
inform the vendor to assure that the downcomers are guaranteed to
handle the maximum liquid rate, unless the maximum liquid rate is very
different from the rate corresponding to the Max VLoad point, such as pump
around design rates. If so, complete loadings for both should be supplied.
Title Box - Fill in the client name, contract number, site and date. Also
include the name and item number of the tower you are supplying data for
where “Tray Data For” is noted. The requisition number and the vessel
drawing number are left blank. They will be provided later by the Vessel
Engineering group. The boxes marked C1 through C6 refer to the dates of
future process revisions of the data sheet.
Lines 1 and 2 - Indicate the operating case that you are providing tray data
for. These may include different tower feeds, or different tower operations.
Where a tower has many different operating cases, only those cases that
will control tray design should be included. These cases should be
selected in conjunction with or approved by the Chief Process
Engineer/Manager.
Line 3 - Indicate the tray numbers of the section that you are providing
data for. This can be the entire tower, in the case of a stripper, or any
particular section of a tower. Typical sections are those between different
feed locations or between pump around sections, or where there is any
other abrupt change in loadings, such as a liquid or vapor drawoff tray.
Trays are usually numbered consecutively from bottom to top, and should
be so indicated as in “1 (bottom) to 7”
Line 4 - Indicate which tray number or loading point you are providing data
for. This loading point should agree with the tray numbers shown in Line
3.
Line 5 - Indicate the type and number of trays in the section noted in Line
3.
Line 8 - Indicate the number of tray passes of the section noted in Line 3.
Line 9 - Indicate the maximum allowable pressure drop for the entire
section noted in Line 3.
The value specified in Line 9 should only be for the fractionating trays, the
pressure drop for other internals such as mist eliminators or packed
sections should not be included here.
Line 12 - The direction of the vapor flow is indicated here. Normally, trays
are designed for the vapor load entering the tray, therefore the word
“(from)” should be crossed out.
Line 20 - The direction of the liquid flow is indicated here. Normally, trays
are designed for the liquid load leaving the tray, therefore the word “(to)”
should be crossed out.
Note that there are two possible units of liquid viscosity that can be used in
Line 24. Be sure to cross out the inappropriate unit.
Line 28 - This line can be used to supply any additional information that
would be helpful to the tray vendor.
Line 30 - Select the proper System Factor, for example, the ones given in
Tray Design Manual Bulletin 4900 (see Section 2.2.5). The selection
should be based on past designs for the same type tower, and should be
approved by the Chief Process Engineer/Manager.
1) Check that the input used by the vendor to design the trays is correct. This
input can include any or all of the following:
c) Tray spacing
e) System Factor
f) Turndown requirements
g) Tray metallurgy
These data are normally specified on the Foster Wheeler Tray Data Requisition
Form 135-110A.
3) All of the hydraulic parameters outlined in Section 2.2 referring to tray design
should be checked.
4) Ensure that a statement appears in the proposal that the tray vendor will
guarantee hydraulic performance for the operating ranges specified in Lines
31 and 32 on the Tray Data Requisition Form.
APPENDIX I
This appendix cites an old calculation method developed within Foster Wheeler to design
Bubble Cap Trays. This method has been included for historical interest, as the more
recent design methods and computer models listed in Section 5.0 are available and should
be used instead.
For the old bubble cap tray calculation method, see the old Process Standards, Volume I,
Section 200 (Towers), pages 3 through 30.
APPENDIX II
This appendix cites an old calculation method developed within Foster Wheeler to design
sieve trays. This method has been included for historical interest, as the more recent
design methods and computer models listed in Section 3.0 are available and should be
used instead.
For the old sieve tray calculation method, see the old Process Standards, Volume I, Section
200 (Towers), pages 31 through 40.
APPENDIX III
This appendix contains a sample of a completed Tray Data Requisition Form 135-110A.
Also contained in this appendix are P1086 sample computer printouts of the Tray Loading
Table, Table II-E and Stage Liquid Properties, Table II-B.
STAGE M LB/HR MOL WT T,DEG F P, PSIA COMP Z FT3/S LB/FT3 DEN**.5 VL,FT3./S M LB/HR HOT SG T,DEG F HOT GPM MOL WT
1 81.783 43.01 105.14 211.00 0.7942 12.044 1.886 0.2597 3.13 52.014 0.4782 99.39 217.22 43.01
2 82.795 43.25 107.16 211.22 0.7938 12.153 1.892 0.2614 3.18 53.027 0.4739 105.14 223.44 43.38
3 82.813 43.51 109.53 211.43 0.7936 12.116 1.899 0.2618 3.17 53.044 0.4740 107.16. 223.50 43.80
4 82.796 43.83 112.39 211.65 0.7934 12.070 1.905 0.2622 3.16 53.028 0.4745 109.53 223.20 44.31
5 82.775 44.22 115.78 211.86 0.7932 12.017 1.913 0.2625 3.16 53.006 0.4753 112.39 222.73 44.93
6 82.773 44.66 119.57 212.08 0.7929 11.962 1.922 0.2629 3.14 53.004 0.4763 115.78 222.23 45.63
7 82.810 45.12 123.55 212.29 0.7926 11.909 1.932 0.2632 3.13 53.041 0.4775 119.57 221.84 46.40
8 82.889 45.58 127.45 212.51 0.7923 11.862 1.941 0.2636 3.13 53.121 0.4786 123.55 221.64 47.16
9 82.995 46.00 131.04 212.72 0.7919 11.823 1.950 0.2639 3.12 53.227 0.4797 127.45 221.61 47.86
10 83.102 46.36 134.19 212.94 0.7916 11.792 1.958 0.2642 3.12 53.333 0.4806 131.04 221.64 48.46
11 83.184 46.65 136.88 213.15 0.7914 11.767 1.964 0.2644 3.11 53.416 0.4814 134.19 221.62 48.96
12 83.227 46.88 139.16 213.37 0.7912 11.746 1.968 0.2645 3.11 53.458 0.4821 136.88 221.47 49.36
13 83.223 47.06 141.12 213.58 0.7911 11.726 1.971 0.2646 3.10 53.454 0.4827 139.16 221.16 49.66
14 83.172 47.20 142.86 213.80 0.7910 11.706 1.974 0.2645 3.10 53.403 0.4833 141.12 220.66 49.91
15 83.077 47.31 144.51 214.00 0.7910 11.685 1.975 0.2644 3.09 53.308 0.4840 142.86 219.96 50.11
16 88.501 47.50 145.79 214.30 0.7904 12.397 1.983 0.2648 3.28 132.530 0.4847 144.51 546.03 50.31
17 89.009 47.73 147.36 214.60 0.7896 12.412 1.992 0.2656 3.30 133.037 0.4842 145.79 548.74 50.46
18 89.589 48.02 149.35 214.90 0.7888 12.428 2.002 0.2665 3.31 133.617 0.4837 147.36 551.72 50.67
19 90.301 48.40 151.53 215.20 0.7879 12.448 2.015 0.2676 3.33 134.330 0.4832 149.35 555.23 50.94
20 91.213 48.90 155.22 215.50 0.7867 12.476 2.031 0.2688 3.35 135.242 0.4827 151.93 559.55 51.29
21 92.398 49.55 159.32 216.1 0.7853 12.517 2.051 0.2704 3.38 136.426 0.4822 155.22 565.02 51.75
22 93.924 50.34 164.17 216.10 0.7836 12.577 2.074 0.2722 3.42 137.952 0.4817 159.32 571.98 52.31
23 95.821 51.26 169.58 216.40 0.7816 12.661 2.102 0.2744 3.47 139.850 0.4810 164.17 580.62 52.96
24 98.036 52.25 175.21 216.70 0.7795 12.768 2.133 0.2768 3.53 142.065 0.4802 169.58 590.81 53.66
25 100.424 53.25 180.65 217.00 0.7773 12.890 2.164 0.2792 3.60 144.453 0.4793 175.21 601.93 54.36
26 102.760 54.17 185.59 217.30 0.7753 13.013 2.194 0.2816 3.66 146.789 0.4782 180.65 613.00 55.01
27 104.833 54.97 189.82 217.60 0.7735 13.121 2.219 0.2837 3.72 148.862 0.4773 185.59 622.88 55.57
28 106.510 55.61 193.34 217.90 0.7720 13.203 2.241 0.2854 3.77 150.539 0.4766 189.82 630.80 56.03
29 107.753 56.12 196.25 218.20 0.7709 13.259 2.257 0.2867 3.80 151.782 0.4761 193.34 636.68 56.39
30 108.588 56.50 198.78 218.50 0.7701 13.290 2.270 0.2876 3.82 152.618 0.4758 196.25 640.60 56.66
31 109.060 56.80 201.30 219.00 0.7693 13.284 2.280 0.2884 3.83 153.089 0.4757 198.78 642.66 56.88
32 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.029 0.4759 201.30 184.78 57.08
1 43.013 142.48 14.388 167.620 201.46 202.21 646.62 651.36 0.2753 0.088 0.0 0.3913 1.1338
2 43.384 141.86 14.377 166.122 203.54 204.69 642.99 650.25 0.2755 0.089 4.975 0.3962 1.1306
3 43.801 141.03 14.358 166.135 205.84 207.57 639.43 650.29 0.2757 0.090 4.961 0.3986 1.1284
4 44.310 139.88 14.327 166.302 208.69 211.13 635.58 650.79 0.2759 0.092 4.955 0.4009 1.1259
5 44.925 138.39 14.283 166.590 212.19 215.43 631.29 651.24 0.2761 0.095 4.954 0.4034 1.1231
6 45.634 136.62 14.229 166.961 216.32 220.36 626.61 651.16 0.2763 0.097 4.955 0.4060 1.1201
7 46.396 134.68 14.169 167.368 220.88 225.62 621.78 650.26 0.2766 0.100 4.955 0.4087 1.1170
8 47.155 132.71 14.106 167.767 225.55 230.84 617.14 648.55 0.2768 0.103 4.953 0.4114 1.1141
9 47.858 130.86 14.046 168.128 230.03 235.71 613.04 646.33 0.2769 0.105. 4.949 0.4138 1.1115
10 48.465 129.21 13.992 168.443 234.10 240.01 609.68 644.02 02770 0.108 4.944 0.4159 1.1093
11 48.962 127.79 13.944 168.717 237.64 243.69 607.13 641.97 0.2771 0.110 4.941 0.4175 1.1076
12 49.356 126.57 13.903 168.962 240.67 246.80 605.31 640.40 0.2771 0.111 4.941 0.4188 1.1063
13 49.663 125.54 13.867 169.191 243.27 249.45 604.10 639.36 0.2770 0.113 4.945 0.4198 1.1053
14 49.906 124.63 13.835 169.415 245.55 251.80 603.35 638.82 0.2769 0.114 4.953 0.4204 1.1045
15 50.110 123.81 13.806 169.645 247.65 253.99 602.87 638.74 0.2768 0.116 4.965 0.4209 1.1039
16 50.305 123.00 13.778 169.900 249.72 256.20 602.50 639.10 0.2767 0.117 4.983 0.4213 1.1034
17 50.463 122.80 13.774 169.708 250.68 257.03 601.06 636.80 0.2768 0.118 4.952 0.4226 1.1027
18 50.668 122.50 13.768 169.527 251.93 258.14 599.35 634.16 0.2769 0.119 4.921 0.4241 1.1018
19 50.939 122.04 13.756 169.356 253.59 259.64 597.28 630.98 0.2769 0.120 4.885 0.4258 1.1008
20 51.295 121.39 13.738 169.189 255.80 261.63 594.75 627.06 0.2771 0.122 4.844 0.4278 1.0995
21 51.751 120.51 13.712 169.019 258.65 264.19 591.71 622.20 0.2772 0.124 4.795 0.4302 1.0979
22 52.310 119.39 13.677 168.830 262.16 267.32 588.16 616.27 0.2773 0.126 4.736 0.4329 1.0961
23 52.958 118.07 13.636 168.603 266.26 270.92 584.22 609.31 0.2775 0.128 4.665 0.4360 1.0941
24 53.658 116.63 13.589 168.322 270.73 274.76 580.12 601.61 0.2777 0.130 4.583 0.4393 1.0920
25 54.359 115.17 13.542 167.988 275.24 278.57 576.14 593.68 0.2778 0.133 4.494 0.4425 1.0900
26 55.010 113.81 13.497 167.623 279.50 282.11 572.57 586.16 0.2779 0.135 4.404 0.4455 1.0882
27 55.574 112.61 13.456 167.292 283.27 285.20 569.61 579.57 0.2780 0.136 4.324 0.4482 1.0866
28 56.034 111.58 13.421 167.054 286.47 287.81 567.36 574.22 0.2780 0.138 4.261 0.4503 1.0854
29 56.392 110.72 13.391 166.876 289.15 290.01 565.79 570.19 0.2780 0.139 4.212 0.4519 1.0845
30 56.664 109.96 13.364 166.770 291.44 291.95 564.85 567.41 0.2780 0.140 4.178 0.4531 1.0838
31 56.878 109.25 13.338 166.748 293.58 293.84 564.43 565.75 0.2779 0.141 4.157 0.4539 1.0833
32 57.076 108.48 13.311 166.798 295.88 296.03 564.37 565.11 0.2777 0.142 4.146 0.4545 1.0829
APPENDIX IV
This appendix contains a sample hand calculation using the method presented by Glitsch
for estimating the flood point of valve trays. A sample computer output sheet of the Glitsch
Valve Tray Rating Program (Section 4.2A) for the same tray design used for the sample
hand calculation has also been included for comparative purposes.
APPENDIX IV (Cont’d)
Sample Run for C3/C4 Splitter Tray Loads with Glitsch Design
Tray Number 40 (Top) 21 1 (BTM) 20 (Feed)
Vapor Lbs/Hr 82795 83077 109060 88501
Vapor Cu Ft/Sec 12.2 11.7 13.3 12.4
Vapor Density 1.8920 1.9750 2.2800 1.9830
Vload 3.179 3.092 3.834 3.285
Liquid Lbs/Hr 53027 53308 153089 132530
Gallons per Min 223.7 220.2 643.3 546.6
Liquid Density 29.56 30.19 29.67 30.23
Tray Spacing 24.00 24.00 24.00 24.00
Vload/AA Entrainment
Vload/AA Operating 0.1686 0.1639 0.2033 0.1742
Capacity Factor (Caf) 0.3648 0.3637 0.3597 0.3636
Percent Flood Eq. 13 51.46 50.26 71.83 60.77
DC Loading 0/0 of Allow 28.35 27.63 81.95 68.56
DCBU-Inches Clear Liquid 6.17 6.11 8.88 8.04
D C Baffle Factor 2.07 2.12 1.39 1.63
DC Baffles Advisable NO NO NO YES
GPM/MFW 1.73 1.70 4.97 4.23
GPM/Weir Length (side(s)) 2.17 2.14 6.25 5.31
Unit Reference 76 75 92 80
VH2 DV/DL 1.33 1.26 1.91 1.42
Dry Tray Drop 1.66 1.62 1.78 1.65
Height Over Weir (Ave.) 0.60 0.60 1.22 1.10
Pressure Drop, Inch Liq. 3.07 3.02 3.80 3.55
Pressure Drop, MM HG 2.72 2.74 3.38 3.22
APPENDIX IV (Cont’d)
Specified by Customer
Pressure Drop MM HG/Tray Downcomer Area Sq. Ft.
Weir Height Inches Downcomer Clearance Inches
Max Operating Rate Percent Min Operating Rate Percent
Results
The value of the percent flood obtained by the hand calculation method is in reasonable
agreement with the value obtained by using the Glitsch Valve Tray Rating Program.
Hand Calculation
Glitsch Valve Tray Rating Program
Method
Percent Flood 80 72
The discrepancy between the two methods is attributed to the simplified equation used in
the hand calculation method for establishing flow path length.
Tower Diameter * 9
FPL =
Number of Passes
The rigorous program optimizes the flow path length in order to either provide equal active
area, or equal downcomer widths, depending on customer preference. This frequently
generates a FPL different from that calculated by hand. In any event, the hand calculation
method gives a good estimate of the tower diameter.
TABLE 1.2
MINIMUM DOWNCOMER RESIDENCE TIME
AND MAXIMUM DOWNCOMER BACKUP(4)
REFERENCES
1) Glitsch Ballast Tray Design Manual, Glitsch, Inc., Dallas, Texas, Bulletin 4900,
Third Edition, 11th printing, December 1981.
5) Process Design of Bubble Cap Trays for Distillation of HC Mixtures, Middleton and
Kutler of Foster Wheeler Corporation, New York, April 1954, Technical File
442.111.
7) Contact Form, Adam Lee of Glitsch, 27 October 1982, Technical File 442.111.
8) Bubble Trays, Design and Layout, Part II, J. Davies, Petroleum Refiner, September
1950.