MPEC, Inc.

MCDANIEL PROCESS ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.

 How to Contact Us

MCDANIEL PROCESS
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS

William D. (Doug) McDaniel

Chemical Engineering Consultant

MPEC, Inc.
1020 Bay Area Blvd. Office: (281) 280-0363
Suite 222 Fax: (281) 280-8468
Houston, Texas 77058 E-Mail: wdmcdaniel@mpec-inc.com
 Introduction to MPEC, Inc.
Purpose
„ MPEC, Inc. is a chemical engineering
consulting and design firm
„ We supply proven and cost-effective
design engineering and consulting to the
refining and petrochemical industries
„ Our typical work product ranges from a
few hours of consultation through detailed
“Schedule A” packages
 Introduction to MPEC, Inc.
Strengths
„ MPEC’s strength is process design and
optimization of refining units
„ We are specialists in debottlenecking
existing units through innovative solutions
„ We view ourselves as extensions of your
engineering staff, working for the benefit of
your company.
 Profile - W. Doug McDaniel
MPEC, Inc. - Houston, Texas - February, 1988 to Present

Doug McDaniel is the founder and President of MPEC. He is responsible for all of the business activities of MPEC, but more importantly, he
directs all of the process engineering design, computer applications, and economic appraisal studies of the company. Doug has worked on
numerous projects involving the design and specification of all types of process equipment. In one of his recent assignments, he was the
process design leader for a refinery expansion from 25,000 to 55,000 BPSD. This effort involved not only MPEC, but also a supervisory role
over the process engineering of several other large engineering and construction firms. At MPEC, Doug has written the computer programs
“2PDP” and “MPEC” to solve process hydraulic problems. “2PDP” is used to calculate two-phase pressure drops through piping, heater, and
exchanger networks. “MPEC” is a collection of various process calculations for sizing compressors, pumps, orifices, control valves, reactors,
etc.

PCI Consultants, Inc. - Houston, Texas - March, 1974 to February, 1988

Doug was a general engineer for PCI from 1974 to 1979, the Manager of Process Design from 1979 to 1987, and then Vice President of Process
Design until leaving in 1988.

During his 14 years with PCI, Doug worked on numerous petrochemical and refining design assignments ranging from conceptual process
selections through operator training and startup. Doug also worked on writing and implementing linear program (LP) models, economic
analyses, plant appraisals and new computer software development. Doug authored PCI-HEXN, a heat exchanger network simulator which was
sold through PCI and now through MPEC.

Texas Petrochemicals - Houston, Texas - February, 1970 to March, 1974

At Texas Petrochemicals (formerly Petro-Tex Chemical Corporation), Doug was Technical Services Engineer from February, 1970 to March,
1973 and then the Assistant Production Supervisor of the OXO Unit (oxidative dehydrogenation of butylenes to butadiene) from March, 1973 to
March, 1974.

Education: Bachelor of Science in Chemical Engineering, January, 1970

University of Houston
Houston, Texas

Personal: Registered Professional Engineer in Texas

Married with three children
Born May, 1947
 Profile - Howard S. Pollicoff
MPEC, Inc. – Houston Texas – February, 2000 to Present

Howard Pollicoff is Vice President of MPEC. He is a senior consultant for conceptual process design, technology selection and evaluation,
process design (for both new and revamp projects), economic analysis of processing alternatives, market studies, capital project planning,
plant economics and appraisals, project management/owner’s engineer, environmental risk assessment, and general management consulting.
He has performed client studies in a variety of industries including chemicals, petroleum refining, gas processing, and oil production.

PCI International, Inc and related subsidiaries– August, 1976 to February, 2000

Howard Pollicoff served as Vice President and manager of PCI’s consulting engineering business activities. In addition to his management
role, he led client studies involving economic feasibility, plant expansion, process design, computer model development, linear program
models of refinery and petrochemical plants, plant startup and operator training, plant appraisal and valuation, gasoline blending models,
environmental permit coordination, litigation support services to legal, financial, and insurance companies, and owner’s engineering
representative. Industries served included petroleum refining, chemicals, gas processing, and oil production.

TEXACO, INC. – Houston, Texas – May, 1973 to August, 1976

Howard Pollicoff served as a process design engineer in TEXACO’s Houston Engineering Department where he provided process design and
technical services to TEXACO client departments worldwide. During this time, he was primarily involved in the design of Distillate
Hydrotreating Units.

Education: Master of Science, Chemical Engineering, 1976 Bachelor of Science, Chemical Engineering, 1973
University of Texas at Austin Texas A&M University
Austin, Texas College Station, Texas

Professional: Registered Professional Engineer - Texas

Michigan
Illinois
New Mexico

Member, AIChE
 Profile - Charlie Jacobs
MPEC, Inc. - Houston, Texas – March, 2000 to Present

After taking early retirement from Simpson, Charlie joined MPEC, Inc. where he provides expertise in computer systems, and computer and
data methods. He does general engineering work and runs simulation and optimization studies.

Champion International / Simpson Paper Company - Pasadena, Texas - June, 1968 to January, 2000

Charlie joined Champion International as a Process Engineer. Because of his computer background, he was selected to form the new process
control department, where he was to conceptualize, design and implement computer process controls. He worked along with IBM who was
developing their first process computer. This was some of the first computerized process control developed. He was promoted to Senior
Process Engineer and Manager of Process Controls. Under his direction, the roll of computers was expanded from process control to
production systems to information systems with true millwide computer control. He instituted predictive controls, self-tuning, advanced feed-
forward algorithms and many other high level controls which were not yet commercially available. He also developed the first closed loop color
control in the paper industry. This included the development of the prototype color sensor. Through an association with online sensor
vendors, the controls he developed have been incorporated into their sensor and control packages. He was recognized by TAPPI for this work.
During this time he was a frequent lecturer at TAPPI-ARKLATEX.

In 1989, Simpson purchased the Pasadena Mill from Champion. Charlie’s employment with Simpson began with technology identification and
vendor selection for millwide conversion from discrete analog pneumatic instrumentation controlled by process computers to electronic DCS
systems and Plantwide Information systems. He has experience with Foxboro and Fisher DCS systems. The new systems incorporated all
previously developed higher level controls and was highly integrated into a total millwide control system. All process, quality, production and
financial information was presented as a single system to both mill personnel, corporate personnel and the customer base. Both Total Quality
and Statistical Methods were incorporated to enhance the overall picture. Personal Computers and plantwide networks provide users with an
interactive graphic interface for operations. He has been Chairman of the Managers Quality Council and the Managers Safety Council. He
worked as an Evaluator and Change Manager during several different corporate reorganizations. When the Mill sold in January, 1999, Charlie
opted for early retirement, but remained an employee with Simpson till January, 2000.

Education: Bachelor of Science in Chemical Engineering, January, 1970

University of Houston
Houston, Texas

Personal: Married with four children

Born February, 1947
 Profile – W. Ross McDaniel
MPEC, Inc. – Houston, Texas – May, 2005 to Present

Ross McDaniel works as a Process Design Consultant on process optimization and/or expansions typically for refineries and petrochemical
plants. His work includes running computer simulations, pump hydraulic calculations, vessel sizing, writing equipment specs, and compiling
reports. He has also served as an on-site contractor as general process engineering help and Turnaround process engineering help.

Equistar Chemicals (Now Lyondel-Basell) – Channelview, Texas – June, 2003 to May, 2005

Ross worked as the Utilities Production Engineer at the Channelview North Plant. He oversaw the day to day operations of basic utilities, the
plant’s Environment Control Unit (ECU or wastewater treatment plant), waste disposal, and monitoring the emissions on cooling towers, flare,
and water outfall. He also worked on several capital project groups to implement future utility units.

Lubrizol Corporation – Deer Park, Texas – (1st term) June, 2000 to August, 2000; (2nd & 3rd Term) January, 2001 to August, 2001

Ross worked 3 Co-Op terms during college with Lubrizol as a Production Engineer Co-Op working on various projects he was given by his
supervisors including looking at heater efficiencies, Muratic Acid Recovery Unit (MUA) optimization, and creating the plants first PI Historian
“board” pages for observation (to mimic DCS screens).

Education: Bachelor of Science, Chemical Engineering, May, 2003

University of Lamar
Beaumont, Texas

Professional: Registered Professional Engineer - Texas

 An Example Experience

In El Paso, Texas, an independent bought an 18 MBPSD refinery from a major. The Crude
Unit’s heater was being overfired, the column was flooded, the overhead condensers were
overloaded, and the preheat exchangers were being so overpressured that the relief valves
were being blocked in. Three months before a turnaround, MPEC was asked if the unit could be
revised for higher capacity. The answer, based on previous experience, was yes! Time was
short, so MPEC outlined piping changes that were engineered in conjunction with the process
design engineering. Three and one-half months later, the turnaround / expansion was
completed, and the Crude Unit started up to run at 25 MBPSD (a 40% expansion) without a
single new piece of major equipment, and at essentially the same absolute energy consumption!

The secret lay in understanding Crude Unit optimization through use of a pre-flash drum to allow
flashing of the light crude to unload the heater, the Crude Column, and its overhead. Based on
this success, MPEC was used exclusively for all process evaluations in the refinery for the next
5 years (until it re-changed ownership to a major). This entailed revising all the downstream
units to handle the higher Crude Unit capacity, and eventually expanding the refinery to 55
MBPSD.

Reference: Mr. William (Bill) G. Miller

International Alliance Group (IAG)
Houston, Texas
 Partial Listing of MPEC's Design Experience -- Page 1/3
Unit Project Scope Client Location
Alkylation -- H2SO4 Expansion El Paso Refining Co., Ltd. (Now Western Refining) El Paso, TX
Expansion Chevron Products Co. El Segundo, CA

Alkylation -- HF Debottlenecking Williams Refining, LLC (Now Valero Refining) Memphis, TN

Debottlenecking Western Refining Gallup, NM
Debottlenecking Navajo Refining Artesia, NM

Alky Splitter Grass Roots Navajo Refining Artesia, NM

Benzene Removal Unit Grass Roots Williams Alaska Petroleum, Inc. (Now Flint Hills Resources) North Pole, AK

Butane Fractionation Process Design Chevron U.S.A. Products Company (Now Western Refining) El Paso, TX

C5/C6 Isomerization Debottlenecking Williams Refining, LLC (Now Valero Refining) Memphis, TN

Chemicals Processing Troubleshooting Texmark Chemicals, Inc. Galena Park, TX

Crude Expansion El Paso Refining Co., Ltd. (Now Western Refining) El Paso, TX
Project Engineering Ergon Refining, Inc. Vicksburg, MS
Conceptual Process Gulsby Engineering, Inc. Houston, TX
Troubleshooting Clark Refining Blue Island, IL
Exchanger Optimization Montana Refining Company Great Falls, MT
Debottlenecking Williams Alaska Petroleum, Inc. (Now Flint Hills Resources) North Pole, AK
Debottlenecking Williams Refining, LLC (Now Valero Refining) Memphis, TN
Expansion Universal Refining N.V. (Now Petroplus) Antwerp, Belgium
Debottlenecking Frontier Refining El Dorado, KS
Debottlenecking Mažeikiu Nafta, AB Mažeikiai, Lithuania
Debottlenecking Chevron Products Co. Kapolei, HI
Debottlenecking Western Refining Gallup, NM
Expansion Coffeyville Resources Coffeyville, KS

Cryogenic Gas Recovery Expansion Williams Refining, LLC (Now Valero) Memphis, TN
Grass Roots Valero Refining Memphis, TN
 Partial Listing of MPEC's Design Experience -- Page 2/3
Unit Project Scope Client Location
Delayed Coker Expansion Coffeyville Resources Coffeyville, KS
Debottlenecking Frontier Refining Cheyenne, WY

Diesel Hydrotreater Debottlenecking Clark Refining Hartford, IL

Debottlenecking Western Refining El Paso, TX
Debottlenecking Williams Refining, LLC (Now Valero Refining) Memphis, TN

Ethanol Debottlenecking Giant Refining (Now Abengoa Bioenergy) Portales, NM

FCC Gasoline Hydrotreating Grass Roots--Monitor Western Refining El Paso, TX

FCCU M.C. & Gas Plant Debottlenecking El Paso Refining Co., Ltd. (Now Western Refining) El Paso, TX
Grass roots El Paso Refining Co., Ltd. (Now Western Refining) El Paso, TX
Troubleshooting Clark Refining Blue Island, IL
Debottlenecking Clark Refining Hartford, IL
Debottlenecking Western Refining Gallup, NM
Expansion Coffeyville Resources Coffeyville, KS
Debottlenecking Clark Refining (Now Valero Refining) Port Arthur, TX
Debottlenecking Williams Refining, LLC (Now Valero Refining) Memphis, TN
Optimization Montana Refining Company Great Falls, MT
Expansion Chevron Products Co. El Segundo, CA
Debottlenecking Mažeikiu Nafta, AB Mažeikiai, Lithuania

Hydroprocessing Startup Troubleshooting Ergon Refining, Inc. Vicksburg, MS

Project Engineering Ergon Refining, Inc. Vicksburg, MS
Debottlenecking Mažeikiu Nafta, AB Mažeikiai, Lithuania

JP-4 Treating Expansion El Paso Refining Co., Ltd. (Now Western Refining) El Paso, TX

LPG Treating Expansion El Paso Refining Co., Ltd. (Now Western Refining) El Paso, TX

LSR Hydrotreater Grass Roots Western Refining El Paso, TX

 Partial Listing of MPEC's Design Experience -- Page 3/3
Unit Project Scope Client Location
Naphtha Hydrotreating Debottlenecking Williams Refining, LLC (Now Valero Refining) Memphis, TN
Debottlenecking Western Refining El Paso, TX
Debottlenecking Mažeikiu Nafta, AB Mažeikiai, Lithuania

Natural Gas Processing Debottlenecking Endevco Natural Gas Dubach, LA

Oligomerization Unit Debottlenecking Mažeikiu Nafta, AB Mažeikiai, Lithuania

Poly Unit Debottlenecking Williams Refining, LLC (Now Valero Refining) Memphis, TN
Process H&MB Montana Refining Company Great Falls, MT

Refinery Reactivation Process Design Triangle Engineering Nederland, TX

Reforming Conceptual Process Gulsby Engineering, Inc. Houston, TX

Conceptual Expansion Montana Refining Company Great Falls, MT
Debottlenecking Williams Refining, LLC (Now Valero Refining) Memphis, TN
Debottlenecking Western Refining El Paso, TX
Debottlenecking Mažeikiu Nafta, AB Mažeikiai, Lithuania

SATS Gas Debottlenecking Chevron U.S.A. Products Company Now Western Refining) El Paso, TX
Grass Roots Frontier Refining Cheyenne, WY
Debottlenecking Universal Refining N.V. (Now Petroplus) Antwerp, Belgium
Debottlenecking Mažeikiu Nafta, AB Mažeikiai, Lithuania
Debottlenecking Valero Refining Memphis, TN

Transmix Fractionation Process Design Direct Fuels, Inc. Dallas, TX

Vacuum Project Engineering Ergon Refining, Inc. Vicksburg, MS

Grass roots El Paso Refining Co., Ltd. (Now Western Refining) El Paso, TX
Troubleshooting Clark Refining Blue Island, IL
Expansion Coffeyville Resources Coffeyville, KS
Expansion Chevron Products Co. Kapolei, HI

Visbreaking Expansion Mažeikiu Nafta, AB Mažeikiai, Lithuania

 References – Page 1/2

James Resinger Holly Frontier Corp. Rick Chavez Stancil & Company
2828 N. Harwood #1300 15455 Dallas Parkway, Suite 350
Dallas, TX 75201-1507 Addison, TX 75001
(214) 871-3555 (214) 954-1521

Chris R.Heimbuch Chevron Products Company Robert Haugen CVR Energy

2351 North 1100 West 2277 Plaza Drive, Suite 500
Salt Lake City, UT 84116 Sugar Land, TX 77479
(801) 539-7543 (281) 207-3200

Steve Hunkus Murphy Oil Corp. Ken Jinkerson Murco Petroleum Ltd.
200 Peach Street Milford Haven Refinery
El Dorado, AK 71730 PO Box 10
(901) 573-6045 Milford Haven
Pembrokeshire
SA73 3JD
Tel: 01646 690300
 References – Page 2/2

Weldon Lybarger Mustang Engineering, Inc. Shannon Melton TPE, Inc.

16001 Park Ten Place 951 West Main, Suite 200
Houston, TX 77084 Jenks, OK 74037
(713) 215-8000 (918) 296-3391

Ron Murrell Western Refining Jeff Peterson Valero Refining

212 N. Clark St. 543 West Mallory Ave.
El Paso, TX 79905 Memphis, TN 38109
(915) 775-3300 (901) 947-8304

Ralph Thompson Chevron Products Company Jeffrey K. Warmann Monroe Energy, LLC
324 West El Segundo Blvd. 4101 Post Road
El Segundo, CA 90245 Trainer, PA 19061
(310) 615-4115 (610) 364-8000
M Equipment Data Collection
When preparing a process study, MPEC normally first goes to the unit and collects the equipment
P data. Summaries of the major equipment data are then prepared such as this exchanger data table.
E Equipment No. 26-13-002 26-13-003 26-13-019 26-13-038 26-13-039 26-13-040

C
Service SS Rx Feed Rx Feed Stripper Btms. NHDS Feed NHDS Feed NHDS Feed
TS Rx Effl. Rx Effl. CW Stripper Btms. Stripper Btms. Stripper Btms.

Type BEU BEU M.T.D.P. AEU AEU AEU

Shell Side:
Design Pressure (PSIG) 550 550 500 514 514 514

D
Design Temp (°F) 640 550 650 500 500 500
Inner Diam. (In.) 25.0 25.0 21.0 21.0 21.0

e
Baffle Spc.(In.) In/Norm/Out 17.0 17.0 None 15.5 15.5 15.5
Baffle Cut - % of Shell I.D.
Baffle Thickness (In.)

l Nozzle Size (In.)

Arrangement
8 8
< - - - - - -2S- - - - - ->
3
N/A
6 6 6
<- - - - - - - - - - - - - -3S- - - - - - - - - - - - ->

i Passes Per Shell

Tube/Baffle Dia. Clear.(in.)
1
0.01
1
0.01
1 1
0.01
1
0.01
1
0.01

v
Shell/Baffle Dia.Clear.(In.) 0.175 0.175 0.1875 0.1875 0.1875
Bundle/Shell Dia. Clear. (In.) 0.125 0.125 0.4375 0.4375 0.4375
No.Pairs of Sealing Strips
e No.Internal.Bypass Lanes
Width of Lanes (In.)
1
0.625
1
0.625
1
2.25
1
2.25
1
2.25

r Metallurgy
Tube Side:
1/2 Mo. C.S. C.S. C.S. C.S. C.S.

a Design Pressure (PSIG)

Design Temp (°F)
500
750
500
640
500
650
659
500
659
500
659
500

b
No. Holes Per Tubesheet 356 356 7 (1) 340 340 340
Nom. St. Length (ft., in.) 16 16 20.5 20 20 20
Outer Diam. (In.) 0.75 0.75 0.875 0.75 0.75 0.75
l Thickness (In.)
Pitch (In.)
16 BWG
1.0 Sq.
14 BWG
1.0 Sq.
0.083
?
0.083
0.9375 Δ
0.083
0.9375 Δ
0.083
0.9375 Δ

e Nozzle Size (In.)

Passes Per Shell
8
2
8
2
2-1/2
1
6
2
6
2
6
2

s
Area Per Shell (ft²) 1,162 1,162 67(b) 262(f) ? 1,319 1,319 1,319
Metallurgy 17 Cr. S.S. 1/2 Mo. C.S. C.S. C.S. C.S.
 MPEC Deliverables – PFD Overview

After reviewing plant operations, an up to date PFD of the unit is

then drawn and the typical current operating data is shown,
including feed and product distillations and/or compositions.

MPEC’s PFD’s contain all the essential information needed by a

process engineer. For example, all line sizes, vessel sizes, and
number of trays are included. Also, all vessels are drawn to the
same scale. All control valves and control schemes are included
as well as all flow meters. Information such as temperature,
pressure, vapor flow, and liquid flow are shown in flags
connected to the process lines.
MPEC Deliverables
Typical PFD
 MPEC Deliverables
Typical PFD with Plant Data

Stream Reformer Recycle Gas (from SP-202) Ref. Stab. Pre-Flash Drum Offgas (from SP-207) Reformer Stabilizer OH Offgas (from T-202) Reformer Stabilizer OH Offgas (from T-202)
Date November 13, 2000 November 6, 2000 November 6, 2000 November 13, 2000
Mol. Wt. ? (From Lab) 7.80 (From Below) ? (From Lab) 9.27 (From Below) ? (From Lab) 32.11 (From Below) ? (From Lab) 64.58 (From Below)
Comp. Mol% t/d (metric) Lb Mol/h Wt% LV% Mol% t/d (metric) Lb Mol/h Wt% LV% Mol% t/d (metric) Lb Mol/h Wt% LV% Mol% t/d (metric) Lb Mol/h Wt% LV%
H2 78.00 391.89 17856.37 20.17 58.64 73.50 2.16 98.26 15.99 52.01 20.00 1.41 64.10 1.26 7.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N2 0.14 9.77 32.05 0.50 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.45 1.47 0.40 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C1 9.86 394.22 2257.23 20.29 13.76 10.88 2.54 14.55 18.83 14.29 8.03 4.49 25.74 4.01 5.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C2's 6.75 505.84 1545.26 26.03 14.87 8.52 3.73 11.39 27.64 17.66 29.20 30.64 93.59 27.35 33.06 2.68 5.21 15.92 1.25 2.10
H2S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C3's 3.72 408.82 851.61 21.04 8.43 5.06 3.25 6.76 24.07 10.80 25.62 39.42 82.11 35.19 29.87 13.74 39.10 81.46 9.38 11.07
C4's 1.22 176.72 279.29 9.10 3.23 1.65 1.40 2.21 10.34 4.11 13.11 26.58 42.02 23.73 17.81 30.63 114.93 181.64 27.57 28.63
C5's 0.31 55.74 70.97 2.87 0.93 0.33 0.35 0.44 2.57 0.94 3.53 8.89 11.31 7.93 5.47 40.74 189.72 241.54 45.51 43.51
C6+ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.56 0.19 0.05 0.15 0.16 0.13 0.09 12.21 67.91 72.39 16.29 14.70
Total 100.00 1943.02 22892.78 100.00 100.00 100.00 13.49 133.69 100.00 100.00 100.00 112.02 320.50 100.00 100.00 100.00 416.88 592.94 100.00 100.00

Stream Hydrotreated Naphtha Reformate

Analysis Date November 11, 2000 November 13, 2000
3
t/m (SG 68°F) 0.7320 0.7990
°API (60°F) 60.76 44.71
Wt ppm Sulfur 0.2 0
RVP ? ?
MON ? 86.5
RON ? 97
Distillation D-86 D-86
LV% Over °C °F °C °F
0 (IBP) 75 167 72 162
10 90 194 85 185
50 108 226 114 237
90 140 284 154 309
100 (EP) 164 327 188 370
% Recovery 98 98
% Residue 0.9 0.9
 MPEC Deliverables – Simulation Overview
Next, a base case simulation of the unit is prepared using either “PRO/II” by Simulation Sciences
or “DS03” by Oleson & Associates. (Typical “PRO/II” Simulation Flowsheet)
59
135 110 86
AIRR-304
116 116 49 53
STABOH2 AO-304

Q = 28.91
STABOH3 CWR-312
Q = 9.18 AIRR-308 Stabilizer /
A = 8676 106
V12
AIR-304
A = 22449 AV-312
U = 40.9 R / 74.8 E 220
AO-306
Q = 14.26 Depropanizer
U = 18.6 R / 59.1 E A = 16837
FT = 0.963
41 FT = 0.977 CWS-312
DEP-OH2 AIR-306
U = 15.4 R / 86.8 E
68 FT = 0.989 100
STABOH4 1001 GPM
140 6.8 MM #/Hr 50 220
V14
41
139
41.43 STABOH 88 113 5.1 MM #/Hr DEP-OH3
88
115 252
Q = -38.09 115 104 °F Bubble Point
23.00 Q = -15.69 75
K-304 1
DEPROFD
10244
K-306
DEP-OH
1 50
92
Stabilizer 2
4
S-323
92
DEPROFD1

V11 255 Depropanizer 2 C3PROD

81
DEP-H2O
6 STAB-H2O 0 #/Hr H2O 4 220
Q = 1.43
310 GPM 385 ---
Trays @ 35 %
6 CWR-316

Trays @ 25 %
8 8 0 #/Hr H2O 3830
10 10244 10 10050 A = 6039
12 Flood (per ProII) 12 AV-316
Flood (per 14 17500 14 L/D = U = 14.0 R / 33.5 E
@ 1.0 SF 16
316.27 Met T/Day
ProII) 16
252 18 2.6243 CWS-316 FT = 0.926
18 L/D = 1.7083 20
@ 1.0 SF 20 145 22
22 24
24 EDUCTOR
STABFD1 DEPROPFD4 26 90.49 % Recovery C3=
STABFD4
26 28
30
DEP-OH4 68 400 GPM
28 252 DEBFLSHOH1
30
32 50
145 34
32
Closed Block Valve Q = 12.05 36
34
12.78 V2 38 Trays @ 40 %
36 A = 9903 40
38 25226 Pinched Block 42 Flood (per ProII)
40 0 U = 23.2 R / 53.8 E 44
Trays @ 29 % 42
DEBFLSHOH Valve 46 @ 1.0 SF
44
SDGASOLDR
FT = 0.882 48 81 102 °F Bubble Point
Flood (per ProII) 46
50
52 220
SDGASOLDR1 T-305 TK-315
@ 1.0 SF 48
50 601 V1 160
54
56
52 58
53 338 262 50 60
61
146 87 216
K-304 54 Q = 33.32 Q = 1.06 Q = 20.24
23709 STABBTM7
256 K-306 62
STABBTM V9 CAUSTIC2
TO317 A = 1130 29239 217 Q = 4.64
305 TK-325 U = 18.6 R / 25.0 E TO314 256 A = 1871
Reboiler Feed 75
146 FT = 0.618 C4PROD1 6414 U = 28.9 R / 84.7 E
223 46172
To TK-317 SDGASOL
139 Reboiler Feed 69
STABBTM2
CAUSTIC AIRR-308-2S
FT = 0.931
C4PROD2
146 STABBTM6
87 75 To TK-314 AO-308-2S C4PROD4 40
25 GPM
4.90 STABFD 50 V13 204 93
31107 STABBTM8
220 218
262 255
AIR-308-2S CWR306
1446 0.85 Q = 0.48
144 86 93
262 5805 41 AV-306 A = 1690
601 0 77 84 69
V10 146 262 U = 18.1 R / 58.4 E
23709 AIRR-308-1-2 23709 40 566452 #/Hr
SP2 22263 86 CWS306 FT = 0.987
STABBTM11 AO-308-9SEC STABBTM9
STABBTM-BP STABBTM-BP-2 CWR307
M17 Q = 0.85
V8
Q = 22.00 AIR-308-1-2 A = 6910
SDGASOL1
AV-307
C4PROD5 68 770 GPM
51 66
68 A = 8418 41 U = 5.9 R / 61.4 E 50
AIRR-308-S1 84 U = 26.7 R / 67.5 E F = 0.998
50 CWS307 T 78
228 AO-308-S1 FT = 0.933 2.5 MM #/Hr
SDGASOL2 STABBTM10 218
84
Q = 0.68 Q = 0.0045 68 2874 GPM
CWR-304
0.14 50
Temperature - °F A = 935
AIR-308-S1 A = 4758
493 600.81 Met T/Day
Pressure - PSIG U = 8.5 R / 30.5 E AV-304 U = 0.87 R / 14.0 E
DEBBTMSPL
Vapor Flow - MMSCFD @ 68°F 41 FT = 0.930 FT = 1.0
Liquid Flow - BPSD @ 60°F CWS-304 5450 86 85
GASOL-REC1
283226 #/Hr 68 84 18259 84
Q = MMBTU / Hr 50 801 GPM GASOLINE 18860 RVP = 8.0 psi
A = Ft2 GASOL-PROD

U = BTU / (Ft2 - °F - Hr) SDGASOL3

M10
FT = Dimensionless (LMTD Correction Factor) 68 2195.63 Met T/Day
84
M Typical “DS03” Simulation Stream Summary
P
E PAGE 144
DISTILLATION SIMULATION-03 DATE 10-19-98

C PROJECT
PROBLEM
18-073-94
65ECU2
CUSTOMER MAPCO-M
ENGINEER WBH
IV-B. STREAM SUMMARIES
STREAM NO. 14 - PF OVFL

TEMPERATURE 452.87 DEG. F LIQUID FROM STAGE 7 OF UNIT 4

PRESSURE 20.86 PSIG TO STAGE 8 OF UNIT 4

* STREAM PROPERTIES * * LABORATORY DISTILLATION *

D
DEG API 37.6 VOL TBP D-86 D-1160
WATSON K 11.87 PCT F ASTM ASTM
MOLEC. WT. 208.1

e
MABP (DEG F) 493. 0. 119. 207. 144.
VABP (DEG F) 525. 5. 332. 312.
S.G. .8369 10. 350. 379. 368.
LB/GAL 6.978 20. 430.

l LB/BBL

MOL/HR
293.09

61.373
30.
40.
50.
482.
521.
550.
493.

542.
490.

550.

i
M-LB/HR 12.774 60. 574.
MM-BTU/HR 4.204 70. 596. 575. 596.
BPSD 1046. 80. 621.
GAL/MOLE 29.8 90. 657. 625. 657.

v LB/FT3 T,P 42.3

95.
100. 768.
652.
715.
690.
768.

e
* PROPERTIES AT OTHER TEMPERATURES *
DEG F S.G. VISC, CP BTU/FT2/HR BTU/LB MM-BTU/HR GPM
/DEGF/FT
453. .6784 .37 .0706 329.10 4.204 37.62

r 450.
400.
350.
.6799
.7042
.7266
.37
.42
.49
.0707
.0719
.0731
327.15
294.02
262.29
4.179
3.756
3.350
37.54
36.25
35.13

a
300. .7474 .59 .0744 231.96 2.963 34.15
250. .7671 .74 .0756 203.03 2.593 33.27
200. .7859 .99 .0768 175.50 2.242 32.48

b
150. .8043 1.48 .0780 149.37 1.908 31.74
100. .8224 2.61 .0793 124.65 1.592 31.03

* PROCESS LINE SIZES *

l NOM.
SIZE
PRES DROP
PSI/100FT
VEL HD
PSI
VELOC.
FT/SEC
RE/
1000
FRIC
FACT
I.D.
INCHES

e
1 38.33 1.29 16.8 228.0 .0238 .9570
1.5 3.75 .21 6.8 145.4 .0220 1.5000
2 .73 .06 3.6 105.5 .0213 2.0670
3 .10 .01 1.6 71.1 .0211 3.0680

s 4 .03 .00 .9 54.2 .0215 4.0260

 MPEC rigorously simulates each piece of major equipment using a variety of programs. “PRO/II” can
M rigorously do shell and tube exchangers and generate outputs such as this.

P SIMULATION SCIENCES INC.

PROJECT DHDS
PROBLEM Nap to DHDS
R
PRO/II VERSION 5.11
OUTPUT
PAGE P-30
386/EM
PTW

E
RIGOROUS HEAT EXCHANGER SUMMARY 7 Sep 2000
=====================================================================================================================

C
SHELL AND TUBE EXCHANGER DATA SHEET FOR EXCHANGER 'E-1-2-3-4'
I----------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I EXCHANGER NAME Rx-Fd-Effl UNIT ID E-1-2-3-4 I
I SIZE 36 - 249 TYPE BEU HORIZONTAL CONNECTED 2 PARALLEL 2 SERIES I
I AREA/UNIT 12856.FT2 AREA/SHELL 3214.FT2 I
I----------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I PERFORMANCE OF ONE UNIT SHELL-SIDE TUBE-SIDE I
I----------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I FEED STREAM ID COMB-FD1 EFFL1 I
I FEED STREAM NAME Rx Feed Rx Effl I
I TOTAL FLUID LB/DAY 18950509. 18950462. I

D I
I
I
VAPOR (IN/OUT) LB/DAY
LIQUID
STEAM
961202. / 2134977.
LB/DAY 17989224. / 16815533.
LB/DAY /
4172816. / 1647494. I
14777647. / 17302981. I
/ I

e
I WATER LB/DAY / / I
I NON CONDENSIBLE LB/DAY I
I TEMPERATURE (IN/OUT) DEG F 408.4 / 561.6 646.0 / 507.8 I
I PRESSURE (IN/OUT) PSIG 816.00 / 804.53 720.00 / 711.43 I

l I----------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I SP. GR., LIQ (60F/60F H2O)
I VAP (60F/60F AIR)
0.853 /
0.227 /
0.853
0.486
0.846 /
0.985 /
0.846
0.426
I
I

i
I DENSITY, LIQUID LB/FT3 45.196 / 40.273 36.045 / 41.490 I
I VAPOR LB/FT3 0.571 / 1.027 1.742 / 0.844 I
I VISCOSITY, LIQUID CP 0.293 / 0.156 0.104 / 0.188 I

v
I VAPOR CP 0.019 / 0.030 0.036 / 0.027 I
I THRML COND,LIQ BTU/HR-FT-F 0.0508 / 0.0429 0.0384 / 0.0453 I
I VAP BTU/HR-FT-F 0.1157 / 0.1166 0.1001 / 0.1105 I
I SPEC.HEAT,LIQUID BTU/LB-F 0.6041 / 0.6710 0.7191 / 0.6515 I

e
I VAPOR BTU/LB-F 1.3733 / 0.9630 0.7927 / 0.9885 I
I LATENT HEAT BTU/LB 101.51 87.37 I
I VELOCITY FT/SEC 19.09 19.21 I

r
I DP/SHELL PSI 5.74 4.28 I
I FOULING RESIST HR-FT2-F/BTU 0.00200 0.00200 I
I----------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I TRANSFER RATE BTU/HR-FT2-F SERVICE 82.89 CLEAN 133.42 I

a I HEAT EXCHANGED MM BTU/HR 86.467 MTD(CORRECTED) 81.1 FT

I----------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I CONSTRUCTION OF ONE SHELL SHELL-SIDE TUBE-SIDE
0.884 I

b
I----------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I DESIGN PRESSURE PSIG 885. 785. I
I NUMBER OF PASSES 1 2 I
I MATERIAL CARB MLY 321 S.S. I

l I INLET NOZZLE ID
I OUTLET NOZZLE ID
IN
IN
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
I----------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I
I

e
I TUBE: NUMBER 832 OD 0.750 IN BWG 14 LENGTH 20.8 FT I
I TYPE BARE PITCH 1.0 IN PATTERN 90 DEGREES I
I SHELL: ID 35.75 IN SEALING STRIPS 2 PAIRS I
I BAFFLE: CUT 0.164 SPACING (IN/CENT/OUT): IN 25.00/ 11.50/ 17.00,DOUBLE I

s I RHO-V2: INLET NOZZLE

I TOTAL WEIGHT/SHELL,LB
4402.3 LB/FT-SEC2
23918.1 FULL OF WATER 47895.3 BUNDLE 16252.6 I
I----------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I
 MPEC can also rigorously do entire networks of exchangers using our in-house “HEXN” program.
M “HEXN” also has the capability of calculating air coolers and G-fin exchanger.
Typical “HEXN” Heat Exchanger Summary
P CRUDE VS COLD BTMS - 013/014 - (WITH NEW BUNDLES)

.xXXXXx.
(EXCH. NO. 2 )

E
DEG.F. XX XX DEG.F.
469.79 --> XX /\/\/\/\ XX --> 307.47 348,542.0 #/HR ATM BOTTOMS, API= 21.42, K= 11.86,
FROM EXCH. NO. 14
229.92 <-- XX XX <-- 157.00 843,552.0 #/HR CRUDE CHARGE + 4.44 LV% WATER, (Cp

C
WAS INPUT), FROM SOURCE
XX XX
`^XXXX^'

A = 3,820.186 SQ.FT.
U = 47.312 BTU/HR-FT2 (AT 100.00 % OF RIG.U CALC.)
Q = 34.183 MMBTU/HR
LMTDc = 189.100 DEG.F
Ft = 0.986 (DIM.) (BASED ON 2 SHELL PASS)

RIGOROUS U CALCULATION SUMMARY :

D
EXCHANGER TYPE = SHELL AND TUBE
SHELLS IN SERIES = 2 , SHELLS IN PARALLEL = 1 , TOTAL SHELLS = 2

Uclean = 77.462 BASED ON BARE TUBE OUTSIDE SURFACE AREA

e Uservice =
Uservice =
47.275 BASED ON BARE TUBE OUTSIDE SURFACE AREA
47.275 BASED ON FINNED OUTSIDE SURFACE AREA

TOTAL SHELLSIDE PRESSURE DROP = 12.5204 PSI.

l TOTAL TUBESIDE PRESSURE DROP =

GEOMETRY DATA FOR ONE SHELL

SHELL I.D. = 31.0000 IN.
38.7801 PSI.

BAFFLE SPC.(IN/NORM/OUT)-IN. = 24.0000 / 21.0000 /

i 21.0000
NO. OF SHELL PASSES = 1

BAFFLE TYPE = SINGLE SEGMENTAL

NO. OF TUBE PASSES = 4

v BAFFLE CUT = 25.0000 % OF SHELL I.D. BAFFLE THICKNESS = 0.312500 IN.

TUBE-TO-BAFFLE DIAMETRICAL CLEARANCE (BAFFLE HOLE I.D. - TUBE O.D.) = 0.031250 IN.
SHELL-TO-BAFFLE DIAMETRICAL CLEARANCE (SHELL I.D. - BAFFLE O.D.)
BUNDLE-TO-SHELL DIAMETRICAL CLEARANCE (SHELL I.D. - BUNDLE O.D.)
= 0.250000 IN.
= 0.812500 IN.

e EACH.)
NO. OF PAIRS OF SEALING STRIPS BETWEEN BAFFLES = 0.000 ( 21.9205 TUBE ROWS CROSSED
BETWEEN BAFFLES)
NO. OF BUNDLE INTERNAL PARALLEL BYPASS LANES = 1.000 ( AT 0.6642 INCHES WIDE

r BUNDLE: DIAMETER
CROSSFLOW AREA
WINDOW HYD DIA
30.1875 IN.
1.6119 FT2
1.1606 IN
TUBES IN CROSSFLOW
WINDOW AREA
379.25
0.6738 FT2

a
TUBE-BFL LEAK AREA 0.1262 FT2 SHELL-BFL LEAK AREA 0.0564 FT2

TUBE LENGTH = 16.000 FT. TUBE O.D.= 0.7500 IN. TUBE I.D.= 0.5800 IN. TUBE
THICKNESS = 0.0850 IN.

b
NO.OF TUBES = 608 TUBE PITCH = 1.0000 IN. SQR. ROT.
TUBE THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY (k) = 26.00 BTU/(HR)(FT2)(DEG.F/FT)
BARE TUBE SURFACE AREA = 1910.093 FT2

l
INTERMEDIATE CALCULATION RESULTS SHELLSIDE (BELL) TUBESIDE
FLUID CALORIC TEMP.-DEG.F. 186.80 373.64
FLUID VELOCITY - FT./SEC. 2.94 6.79
FLUID SG. @ CAL. TEMP. 0.7927481 0.8199199

e
FLUID VIS. @ CAL. TEMP. - CP. 1.89306 2.69489
FLUID k @ CAL. TEMP. (OPT) 0.07263(4) 0.06572(4)
FLUID Cp @ CAL. TEMP. 0.55208 0.59619
CALCULATED WALL TEMP.-DEG.F. 269.26 269.26

s
FLUID VIS. @ WALL TEMP. - CP. 1.03906 6.92910
HEAT TRANS.COEF. (BARE,O.D.) 225.113 122.026
TOTAL RETURN BEND PRESSURE DROP-PSI -- 4.078
FOULING FACTOR 0.0040 0.0040
 Pumps and their suction and discharge circuit pressure drop profiles are
M documented on summary sheets such as this. A pump curve, with the
P operating point marked, is also included with this sheet.
E PUMP
CALCULATION SHEET
Job No.: 18-111-97 Item No: 12-15-025 / 026
Case:
Page:
1

C
Client: Location: Service: Lean Oil Str. Ovhd.

80

90
Δ Elev.
Δ Elev. 12-10-021 10'
51' 11"

12-10-036

D
1250

e
136
1200 12-15-025/026
Lt. FCCU

l
Gasoline
12-13-043

Case Reflux to FCCU Light

i
Suction Pressure 12-10-036 Gasoline Pumped Fluid
+ Origin Press., psia: 94.70 94.70 Lean Oil Str. Ovhd. Normal
+ Static Head, psi: 2.72 2.72 Pumping Temp., F: 106.0
- Exch & Line. Loss, psi: 0.20 0.20 Viscosity, cp @ T&P: 0.24

v
Pump Suct. Press., psia: 97.22 97.22 Vap. Press., psia @ T&P: (3) 94.7
Net Pos. Suction Head S.G. @ T&P: 0.6273
+ Origin Press., ft: 348.57 348.57 Normal Flow , bpsd @ 60F: 2450
+ Static Head, ft: 10.00 10.00 Normal Flow , gpm @ T&P: 74.4

e
- Exch & Line. Loss, ft: 0.74 0.74
- Vap. Press., ft: 348.57 348.57
Available NPSH, ft: 9.26 9.26 Reference Conditions
Discharge Pressure Barometric Pressure, psia: 14.7

r
Delivery Press., psia: 104.70 150.75 <-------Delivery to CV inlet
Static Head, psi: 14.10 Pump Performance
Line Loss, psi: 0.45 0.26 Pump NPSHR, ft: 5.0
Control Valve DP, psi: 28.75 Pump max DP, psi: 53.8

a
Exchanger DP, psi: Pump max Suct., psig: 127.6
Furnace DP, psi: Pump max Disch., psig: 181.4
Orifice DP, psi: 3.00
Valves DP, psi:

b
Pump Disch. Press., psia: 151.01 151.01 Horsepower
Differential Pressure Normal Hydraulic Hp: 2.3
Disch. Press., psia: 151.01 151.01 Normal Efficiency, %: 62.0
Suct. Press., psia: 97.22 97.22 Normal Flow BHP: 3.8

l
Total Pump DP, psi: 53.79 53.79 End of Curve BHP: 7.2
Total Pump DH, ft: 198.00 198.00 Existing Driver Hp: 10.0
Notes:
1) Clean pipe assumed.

e
2) Pipe lengths approximated from P&ID's and Plot Plan
3) Fluid is greatly subcooled, but w as assumed to be at BPT for NPSH Calc.

Revision: 0

s Date:
By/Review ed:
10/05/2000
PTW/WDM
 Also attached to each pump calculation sheet is the pump suction and discharge pressure drops using
M MPEC’s liquid DP spreadsheet as shown here. The liquid pressure drops are rigorously calculated
using the formulas in Crane’s Technical Paper No. 410.
P
E MPEC's Liquid Pressure Drop Worksheet
Version 1.0 By WDM 5/12/98

C
CLIENT:
UNIT: Gas Con
SYSTEM: Lean Oil Str. Ovhd.
DATE / BY: 10/05/2000 PTW
CASE: 69000 BPD Normal
PUMP: 12-15-025 / 026
REV. NO. 0

INPUT CASE Suction Discharge Product Stream

Line LOSLTLQ (GC) LOSLTLQ (GC) LOSLTLQ (GC)
From 12-10-021 12-15-025/026 Split

D
To 12-15-025/026 Split Contrl. Vavle
Input BPSD60 OR Lb/Hr BPSD60 2,450 2,450 1,200
Lb/Hr
Sp. Gr. @ 60°F 0.6527 0.6527 0.6527

e
Sp. Gr. @ Temp. 0.6273 0.6273 0.6273
Temperature °F 106 106 106
Visc. @ Temp. cP 0.21 0.21 0.21
Pipe I. D. Inches 3.068 3.068 3.068

l
Roughness Feet 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015
Straight Feet Of Pipe 20.0 10.0 10.0
Sq. Flush Entrance 1.0
T-Run No.

i
T-Branch No. 1.0 1.0 1.0
45 Welded Elbow No.
90 Welded Elbow No. 4.0 6.0 4.0
180 Welded Elbow No.
Gate No. (Full Size) 1.0 1.0 2.0

v
Butterfly No. (Full Size)
St. Globe No.(Full Size)
Ang. Globe No. (Full Size)
Fl.Check Valve No.(Swing) 1.0

e
Exit
Source of Misc. Fittings K 3X2 Red; 2X1.5 Red
Misc Fitttings K 0.915
Total Fittings K 3.058 4.114 3.612

r
SOURCE of Misc. DP
Misc. Delta P PSI

RESULTS Flowrate: BPSD60 2,450 2,450 1,200

a
Lb/Hr 23,335 23,335 11,429
GPMh 74.4 74.4 36.4
Density LB/FT3 39.124 39.124 39.124

b
Reynolds No. 229,474 229,474 112,394
Friction f 0.019051 0.019051 0.020416
Total Resistance K 4.549 4.859 4.410
Total Equivalent Feet 61.04 65.21 55.23

l Velocity
ΔP / 100 Eq. Ft.
ΔP / K
Ft/Sec.
PSI
PSI
3.23
0.3277
0.0440
3.23
0.3277
0.0440
1.58
0.0843
0.0106

e ΔP - Str. Pipe
ΔP - Fittings
ΔP - Misc.
ΔP - TOTAL
PSI
PSI
PSI
0.0655
0.1345
0.0000
0.0328
0.1810
0.0000
0.0084
0.0381
0.0000

s
PSI 0.2001 0.2137 0.0465
ΔP - Sect. Tots. PSI 0.2001 0.2137 0.0465
M Compressors and column tray hydraulics, and many other calculations can be done using MPEC’s

P in-house “MPEC” program. Presented here is the opening menu of this program. Copies of “MPEC”
are typically given to clients upon request, so that their own engineers can calculate these items on
E the same basis as MPEC.

***** MPEC-I ** 1 OF 2 MPEC PROCESS ENGR. CALC. PROGRAMS *****

(BY W.D.MCDANIEL, MPEC, INC., HOUSTON, TEXAS, OCT 6, 99)
D (Phone (281) 280-0363, Fax (281) 280-8468)
THIS COMPLIMENTARY PROPRIETARY COPY PROPERTY OF W.D. MCDANIEL
e MPEC, Inc. - HOUSTON, TEXAS

l (MPEC,INC. IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY USE OF THIS PROGRAM BY OTHERS.)

i 1 - Single Phase Pipe/Duct Delta P 10 - Vapor Orifice

2 - Two-Phase Flow Calculations 11 - Liquid Orifice
v 3 - Compressible Vapor Flow 12 - Valve Tray Diameter
4 - Flashing Pure Comp. Pipe Delta P 13 - Valve/Sieve Tray Hydraulics
e 5 - K Resistances of Pipe Fittings 14 - Compressor BHP Calculation
6 - Control Valve 15 - Centrifugal Compressor
r 7 - Pump BHP Calculation 16 - Reciprocating Compressor
8 - Drop Settling D - Exit to DOS
a 9 - Time Value of Money (Type 'EXIT' to return to
calcs)
b
NOTE: REFER TO MPEC-II FOR THE FOLLOWING CALCULATIONS.
l - Heat Exchanger - Maxwell's Shortcut Fractionation
- Bubble Point, Dew Point & Flash
e
s
M A typical reciprocating compressor output is shown here.
P
E ********************* MPEC'S RECIPROCATING COMPRESSOR CALC *****************
CYL.NO. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |

C 1-Cyl. name
2*Flow-MMSCF/D
|
|
CYL # 1 |
9.188 |
|
0.000 |
|
0.000 |
|
0.000 |
3-Gas mol. wt. | 80.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| | | | |
4*Inlet PSIA | 100.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
5-Inlet temp - F. | 100.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
6-Inlet Z factor | 0.990 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |

D
7-Inlet k (Cp/Cv) | 1.300 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Inlet ACFM | 999.990 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| | | | |
e 8-Disch PSIA
THEORET.Tout-F. |
| 350.000 |
287.725 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |

l EST.ACT Tout-F. |
9-Disch Z factor |
326.097 |
0.930 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
10-Disch k (Cp/Cv) | 1.300 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
i |
11-Poly.eff.%(OPT) |B/P
Note: B/P = By Program; Set@ = Set by User
85.244 |B/P 0.000 |B/P 0.000 |B/P
|
0.000 |

v Calc. cly. GHP |

12-Mech.Loss-HP(OPT)|B/P
740.195 |
37.010 |B/P
0.000 |
0.000 |B/P
0.000 |
0.000 |B/P
0.000 |
0.000 |

e
Total Cyl. BHP | 777.205 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
TOTAL COMPRESSOR BHP FOR ALL CYLINDERS COMBINED = 777.205
13-Speed-RPM | 500.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
r Speed-FT/MIN
14*Cyl I.D.-in.
|
|
750.000 |
19.1889 |
0.000 |
0.0000 |
0.000 |
0.0000 |
0.000 |
0.0000 |

a 15-Cyl STROKE-in. |
16-F.E.Rod I.D.-in. |
9.0000 |
9.0000 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |
17-H.E.Rod I.D.-in. | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
b Pist. Displ-CFM |
18*F.E.% CL. Vol. |
1,340.552 |
10.0000 |
0.000 |
0.0000 |
0.000 |
0.0000 |
0.000 |
0.0000 |

l 19*H.E.% CL. Vol.

F.E Vol. Eff.
|
|
10.0000 |
74.5960 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |
0.0000 |

e
H.E.Vol. Eff. | 74.5960 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
Comp. Rod Load | 78,660.38 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Tens. Rod Load | 50,032.62 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
s 20-Solved for... | CYL ID | IDLE | IDLE | IDLE |
 MPEC Deliverables
A typical tray hydraulics calculation is shown here.

**** MPEC'S GLITSCH VALVE OR TREYBAL SIEVE TRAY HYDRAULICS ****

1V-VAP.TO TRAY-LB/HR 30,000.000
2V-VAP.DEN-LB/FT3.......... 0.2500
ACFS VAPOR............. 33.333
3A-SYSTEM FACTOR 1.000
4A-TRAY SPACING-IN.......... 24.000
5A-FLOW PATH LEN-IN........ 32.00
6A-WEIR HEIGHT-IN.......... 2.0000
7A-DC CLEARANCE-IN......... 1.5000
8A-NO.VALVES/TRAY (OPT)...... 114
9A-VALVE MET.DEN-LB/FT3....... 500
10-ACTIVE AREA-FT2.(OPT). 9.813
1L-LIQ.FR.TRAY-LB/HR 50,000.000
2L-LIQ.DEN-LB/FT3.......... 45.000
GPM LIQUID......... 138.519
3B-COL.DIAMETER-FT......... 4.0000
4B-NO.LIQ.PASSES............... 1
5B-TOT.TOP DC AREA-FT2... 1.377
5C-TOT.BTM DC AREA-FT2... 1.377
6B-TOT.WEIR LENGTH-IN...... 35.78
7B-TOT.DC BTM.LENGTH-IN.... 35.78
8B-TYPE OF VALVES............. V-1
9B-VALVE THICKNESS-IN....... 0.0740
11-K2 FACTOR ................. 0.86

DRY TRAY DP-IN.LIQ....... 2.517 % DRY TRAY ALLOW DP======== 52.441

TOT.TRAY DP-IN.LIQ....... 4.303 TOT.TRAY DP-PSI............ 0.1121
HT.OVER WEIR-IN.LIQ...... 0.986 ACT.DC.VEL-GPM/FT2........ 100.594
HT.UNDER DC-IN.LIQ....... 0.446 DSN.DC.VEL-GPM/FT2........ 245.790
DC.BACKUP-IN.LIQ........ 7.762 %LIQ.(DC VEL) FLOOD======== 40.927
DC.BACKUP-%TS........... 32.341 VLOAD..................... 2.4915
MAX.ALLOWED-%TS......... 60.000 CAFo (FIG 5b).............. 0.4545
% OF MAX.DC BACKUP====== 53.902 % VAPOR (JET) FLOOD======== 63.513
(NOTE: DC AREA IS LESS THAN MIN. REC. 11% OF COL. AREA)
M Two-phase pressure drops through pipes, heaters, and exchangers can be
rigorously calculated using MPEC’s in-house “2PDP” program. Shown here is
P a typical “2PDP” summary.
E "2PDP" SUMMARY FOR CRUDE COLUMN OH

C PHASE 3

Section Number Δ Q (mmbtu/hr) Δ P (psi)

30"
10 0 0.497

D 15.7
20"
9 0 0.298

e
l
8 0 0.403
14"

i E-050 E-051
7 -22.197 1.214

v 18"
6 0 0.833

e E-065 E-067 5 -42.940 2.388

r 12"
E-066 E-068
4
3
0
-18.321
0.100
1.617
a 14"

b 2 0 0.024

l 8.0
14" 1 0 0.325

e PSIG
OH ACCUM
Totals -83.458 7.7

s USED 100CCOH6.SD
100CC0H6.PD WBH, MPEC INC, 3/4/98, 100CC0H6.VSD
 MPEC Deliverables – Typical 2 Phase Output — Page 1/2
Shown here are typical pages of “2PDP” output. As shown below, several different exchanger
tube vibration analyses are built into the “2PDP” program to help detect the potential for this
problem.
PIPE SECTION NAME = E-019 SHELLSIDE
PIPE SECT. NO. 2 FLOW/PASS = 339.293 MLBS/HR.
( 1 PASS SECTION) EXIT PRESS. = 42.8671 PSIA.
(EXCH SHELLSIDE) EXIT TEMP. = 447.42 DEG.F.
EXIT ENTH. = 118.199 MMBTU/HR.
EXIT VEL. = 25.215 FT/SEC.
SONIC VEL. = 690.030 FT/SEC.
SHELL PASSES/SHELL = 1.00 TUBE LENGTH = 16.00 FT.
TUBE O.D. = 0.75 IN. TUBE ID = 0.5320 IN.
TUBE THICKNESS = 0.10900 IN. TUBE PITCH SPACING = 1.0000 IN.
TYPE TUBE PITCH = 3 (WHERE 1=SQ., 2=TRI., 3=SQ.ROT., 4=TRI.ROT.)
NORMAL BAFFLE SPACING = 20.0000 IN. BAFFLE TYPE = SINGLE SEG.
BAF.PASSES/SHELL PASS = 9.00 SHELL I.D. = 31.000 IN.
NO. TUBES/SHELL = 608 TOTAL SECTION DUTY = 9.350 MM BTU/HR.
SHELLSIDE DELTA P CORR. = BELL TUBESIDE FLUID DENSITY = 47.3100 LB/FT3
TUBE-TO-BAFFLE DIA.CLEAR = 0.015625 IN. TUBE-BAF LEAK AREA = 0.05706 FT2.
SHELL-TO-BAFFLE DIA. CLEAR. = 0.250000 IN. SHELL-BAF LEAK AREA = 0.05238 FT2.
BUNDLE-TO-SHELL DIA. CLEAR. = 0.812500 IN. BUNDLE DIAMETER = 30.18750 IN.
No. PAIRS SEALING STRIPS = 0 BAFFLE THICKNESS = 0.375000 IN.
BAFFLE CUT - % OF SHELL I.D.= 31.650000 %
No. OF PAR. BYPASS LANES = 1 WIDTH PAR BYP LANES = 0.664200 IN.
TUBES IN CROSSFLOW = 284.691 CROSSFLOW AREA = 1.529159 FT2.
WINDOW AREA = 0.92824 FT2 WINDOW HYD. DIA. = 1.17514 IN.
RUN BASIS: 34.38 % OF THE STREAM DATA FLOWRATE, 100 % OF THE PIPE DATA FLUX RATE.
NOTE: BP = BAFFLE PASSES PER SHELL = BAFFLE PASSES PER SHELL PASS x NO. OF SHELL PASSES PER SHELL.
SECT AVE INCR AVE AVE AVE AVE AVE FRICT ACCUM VIBRATIONAL ANALYSIS No's.
INCR PRESS DELTA P TEMP ENTHALPY VAP MIX DEN VEL DELTA P FR LEN ----------------------------------
NO PSIA PSI DEG F MMBTU/HR WT% LBS/FT3 FT/SEC PSI/BP NO. BP V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7
---- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------ -------- ------- ------- -------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
1 43.30 0.86 446.86 117.999 17.72 2.4923 24.73 2.188 0.39 5.4 1.1 0.3 0.1 1.8 0.9 0.6
2 44.16 0.87 445.68 117.584 17.24 2.5923 23.78 2.104 0.81 5.2 1.1 0.3 0.1 1.7 0.9 0.6
3 45.04 0.89 444.37 117.139 16.76 2.6995 22.83 2.020 1.25 5.0 1.1 0.3 0.1 1.6 0.8 0.5
4 45.95 0.91 442.96 116.667 16.26 2.8145 21.90 1.937 1.72 4.8 1.0 0.3 0.1 1.6 0.8 0.5
5 46.86 0.93 441.43 116.164 15.74 2.9379 20.98 1.856 2.22 4.6 1.0 0.3 0.1 1.5 0.7 0.5
6 47.80 0.95 439.76 115.629 15.22 3.0708 20.07 1.776 2.75 4.4 1.0 0.3 0.1 1.4 0.7 0.5
7 48.76 0.97 437.94 115.057 14.68 3.2145 19.17 1.696 3.32 4.2 1.0 0.2 0.1 1.4 0.7 0.5
8 49.73 0.98 435.97 114.447 14.13 3.3703 18.29 1.618 3.93 4.0 1.0 0.2 0.1 1.3 0.6 0.4
9 50.73 1.00 433.81 113.794 13.56 3.5400 17.41 1.540 4.58 3.8 0.9 0.2 0.1 1.2 0.6 0.4
10 51.74 1.02 431.46 113.093 12.98 3.7256 16.54 1.464 5.28 3.6 0.9 0.2 0.1 1.2 0.6 0.4
11 52.78 1.05 428.89 112.341 12.39 3.9298 15.68 1.388 6.03 3.4 0.9 0.2 0.1 1.1 0.5 0.4
12 53.83 1.07 426.07 111.530 11.77 4.1556 14.83 1.312 6.85 3.2 0.9 0.2 0.1 1.0 0.5 0.3
13 54.91 1.09 422.97 110.655 11.14 4.4070 13.99 1.237 7.73 3.0 0.8 0.2 0.1 1.0 0.5 0.3
14 56.01 1.11 419.57 109.707 10.49 4.6892 13.14 1.163 8.68 2.9 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.9 0.4 0.3
15 56.74 0.35 417.03 109.015 10.04 4.8973 12.59 1.113 9.00 2.7 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.9 0.4 0.3
--------------------------- THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE AT THIS PIPE SECTION'S INLET --------------------------
0 56.91 0.00 416.42 108.849 9.94 4.9488 12.45 1.102 9.00 2.7 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.8 0.4 0.3
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
IBRATIONAL ANALYSIS EXPLANATION: | | | | | | |
V1 - VORTEX SHEDDING FREQUENCY TO NATURAL TUBE FREQUENCY RATIO - DO NOT EXCEED 5.0 | | | | | |
V2 - CROSS FLOW VELOCITY TO CONNOR'S CRITICAL VELOCITY RATIO - DO NOT EXCEED 0.69 --' | | | | |
V3 - BAFFLE DAMAGE No. (FOR DOUBLE SPAN TUBES) - DO NOT EXCEED 1.0 --------' | | | |
(DIVIDE BY 4 FOR SINGLE SPAN BAFFLE DAMAGE NO.) | | | |
V4 - COLLISION DAMAGE No. (FOR DOUBLE SPAN TUBES) - DO NOT EXCEED 1.0 -------------' | | |
(DIVIDE BY 16 FOR SINGLE SPAN COLLISION DAMAGE NO.) | | |
V5 - VORTEX SHEDDING TO ACOUSTICAL FREQUENCY RATIO - 1ST MODE - AVOID 0.8 TO 1.2 (VAPOR ONLY) ------' | |
V6 - VORTEX SHEDDING TO ACOUSTICAL FREQUENCY RATIO - 2ND MODE - AVOID 0.8 TO 1.2 (VAPOR ONLY) -----------' |
V7 - VORTEX SHEDDING TO ACOUSTICAL FREQUENCY RATIO - 3RD MODE - AVOID 0.8 TO 1.2 (VAPOR ONLY) ----------------'
THE TOTAL THERMAL CRACKING FOR THIS PIPE SECTION IS 0.000000 %
THIS IS BASED ON 1.95347 SECONDS RESIDENCE TIME.
 MPEC Deliverables – Typical 2 Phase Output — Page 2/2
Shown here are typical pages of “2PDP” output. As shown below, a typical “2PDP” heater
analysis.

CASE DESCRIPTION: PHASE 3 CRUDE COL HTRS (FROM RUN 100ECU6.TWR)

PIPE SECTION NAME = 24" TRANSFER LINE
PIPE SECT. NO. 1 FLOW/PASS = 989.888 MLBS/HR.
( 1 PASS SECTION) EXIT PRESS. = 33.5000 PSIA.
(NORMAL PIPE) EXIT TEMP. = 667.80 DEG.F.
EXIT ENTH. = 503.390 MMBTU/HR.
EXIT VEL. = 73.780 FT/SEC.
SONIC VEL. = 556.064 FT/SEC.
STRAIGHT FT = 410.00 FT. (DELTA P IS AFFECTED BY FRICTION FACTOR)
TOT.FIT. K = 5.4500 (DELTA P NOT AFFECTED BY FRICTION FACTOR)
FLUX LEN. = 410.00 FT.
PIPE O.D. = 24.000 IN.
PIPE I.D. = 23.250 IN.
FLUX RATE = 0.00 BTU/HR-FT2
RUN BASIS: 100 % OF THE STREAM DATA FLOWRATE, 78.727 % OF THE PIPE DATA FLUX RATE.
THE ABSOLUTE PIPE ROUGHNESS CHOSEN WAS .00015 ( VS. 0.00015 FOR CLEAN COMMERCIAL STEEL )
( NOTE THAT THE ABSOLUTE PIPE ROUGHNESS AFFECTS STRAIGHT FEET DELTA P, BUT NOT FITTING DELTA P.)
THE NORMAL WEIGHTED-DENSITY, LIQUID-VISC PRESSURE CALCULATION WAS CHOSEN FOR THIS RUN.
THE INCREMENTAL LENGTHS WERE THEREFORE BASED ON THE 9TH COLUMN PRESSURE DROPS BELOW.
SECT AVE INCR AVE AVE AVE AVE AVE ST.PIPE ACCUM BAKER MAP / R. KERN CALCS
INCR PRESS DELTA P TEMP ENTHALPY VAP MIX DEN VEL DELTA P ST. FT. ---------------------------------
NO PSIA PSI DEG F MMBTU/HR WT% LBS/FT3 FT/SEC PSI/100 + K Bx By REG. PSI/100
---- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------ -------- ------- ------- -------- -------- ---------- ----- -------
1 33.83 0.67 668.05 503.390 42.80 1.2812 72.79 0.588 43.45 36.33 63246.14 DISP 0.923
2 34.51 0.68 668.54 503.390 42.41 1.3162 70.86 0.573 88.97 37.47 62142.54 DISP 0.903
3 35.20 0.70 669.03 503.390 42.02 1.3523 68.96 0.557 136.69 38.67 61049.32 DISP 0.883
4 35.91 0.71 669.53 503.390 41.62 1.3896 67.11 0.543 186.69 39.90 59966.45 DISP 0.864
5 36.62 0.73 670.02 503.390 41.22 1.4281 65.30 0.528 239.12 41.19 58893.88 DISP 0.845
6 37.36 0.74 670.53 503.390 40.82 1.4679 63.54 0.514 294.07 42.53 57831.55 DISP 0.826
7 38.10 0.75 671.03 503.390 40.42 1.5089 61.81 0.500 351.70 43.92 56779.41 DISP 0.807
8 38.87 0.77 671.53 503.390 40.01 1.5513 60.12 0.486 412.13 45.37 55737.41 DISP 0.789
9 39.27 0.04 671.80 503.390 39.80 1.5741 59.25 0.479 415.45 46.15 55195.43 DISP 0.779
--------------------------- THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE AT THIS PIPE SECTION'S INLET --------------------------
0 39.29 0.00 671.81 503.390 39.79 1.5753 59.20 0.479 415.45 46.19 55168.14 DISP 0.779
THE TOTAL THERMAL CRACKING FOR THIS PIPE SECTION IS 0.004102 %
THIS IS BASED ON 6.25451 SECONDS RESIDENCE TIME.
M Vapor pressure drops can be calculated using MPEC’s vapor DP spreadsheet as shown here. The vapor

P pressure drops are rigorously calculated using the formulas in Crane’s Technical Paper No. 410.

E
MPEC VAPOR ΔP SPREADSHEET C.PIPEFLOW, Version 2.0, Jan. 9, 1997
CLIENT: Based on C.Pipeflow by J. L. Bravo of S&B December 1981.
UNIT: Revised by W.D.McDaniel of MPEC Jan.,1997. Program uses
SYSTEM: Bernoulli equation for isothermal compressible flow in pipes.

C
DATE / BY: Crane Tech. Paper No. 410, Equation 1-6 & 3-7
CASE:
REV. NO.

Barometric Atm. Press in PSIA 14.70

INPUT CASE Example
From Inlet Point A
To Point A Outlet
Given Flow Lb/Hr 177422 177422
Or SCFM (60°F, 14.7Psia) SCFM
CALCULATED FLOW Lb/Hr 177422 177422
SCFM 10389 10389

D
SCFH 623326 623326
Molecular Wt MW 108.00 108.00
Ht Cap Ratio Cp/Cv 1.10 1.10
Compress Fac Z 0.850 1.000

e
Temperature °F 420.0 420.0
Viscosity cP 0.018 0.018
Pipe I Diam Inches 7.981 10.020
Roughness Feet 0.00015 0.00015

l
Straight Feet Of Pipe 5.00 40.00
Sq. Flush Entrance 1.0
T-Run No.
T-Branch No. 1.0 1.0

i
45 Welded Elbow No.
90 Welded Elbow No. 5.0 3.0
180 Welded Elbow No.
Gate No. (Full Size) 1.0 2.0

v
Butterfly No. (Full Size)
St. Globe No.(Full Size)
Ang. Globe No. (Full Size)
Fl.Check Valve No.(Swing) 1.0

e
Exit 1.0
Misc Fitttings K 0.262 0.223
Source of Misc. K 8X6 8X10
Total Fittings K 3.122 3.719

r
SOURCE of Misc. DP
Misc. Delta P PSI
Destination Pr. PSIG 121.000 15.000

a
RESULTS Reynolds No. 7797451 6210724
Friction f 0.01420 0.01362
Total Resistance K 3.2285 4.3719
Total Equivalent Feet 151.226 267.965

b P in
Density in
Vel. in
PSIG
Lb/Ft3
Ft/Sec
124.849
1.878
75.55
25.858
0.464
194.01

l
Mach No. in 0.113 0.291

P out (in pipe) PSIG 121.000 15.000

Density out Lb/Ft3 1.826 0.340

e Vel. out
Mach No. out

ΔP - Str. Pipe
Ft/Sec 77.69
0.116
264.94
0.397

s
PSI 0.127 1.621
ΔP - Fittings PSI 3.721 9.238
ΔP - Misc. PSI 0.000 0.000
ΔP - Sonic PSI 0.000 0.000
ΔP - TOTAL PSI 3.849 10.858
M Column feed spargers can be designed or evaluated with the in-house spreadsheet
shown here. This spreadsheet is used to calculate the sparger pressure drops and
P percent maldistribution for vapor, liquid, or two-phase flows.
E
C
FEED PIPE SPARGER CALCULATION SUMMARY
(Vapor, Liquid, or Two-Phase)

Vessel No./ Service: 26-10-035 / NHDS FRACTIONATOR Spreadsheet is by:

Nozzle: Feed to Tray # 24 (per Fig 1) WDM of MPEC, Inc.
Client / Location Houston,Texas
Rev. No. / Date / By: 1 / 1-25-99 / PTW (281) 280-0363
Case / Comment Intermediate / Run 400INT1 done 11/24/98 Rev. 0, 1/14/99

TOTAL NORMAL FLOW TO SYSTEM OF SPARGERS = Inputs

(Remember to do pumparounds at column return conditions.)
Vapor Liquid Mixture Comment Operating Cond. Basis :
Wt. Flow - Lbs/Hr 58,869 429,946 488,815 °F Pin, Psig
Density (ρ) - Lb/Ft3 (at Cond.) 1.218 36.830 8.146 (Note 1) 345 112

D
Visc. ( µ ) - cP (at Cond.) 0.016 0.140 0.040 (Note 2)
Flow as BPSD (at 60°F) 39,815.67 46,018.21 (Optional)
Surf. Ten. ( σ ) - dynes/cm 8.60
Vol. Flow - Ft3/s (at Cond.) 13.426 3.243 16.668
% of Vol. Flow (at Cond.) 80.546 19.454 100.000

e
Flow as GPM (at Cond.) 6,025.45 1,455.33 7,480.79
API Gr. - (as 60°F Liq) 59.71 62.88 from Wt & BPSD

Set Actual Number and Size of Spargers and Holes ( Revise, if desired to meet recommendations below.) :

l
2 Number of parallel spargers in system (Total flow above will be divided by this.)
7.981 dp - ID of pipe - in.
8.17 L - length of single sparger pipe - Ft.
33 N - Number of holes in single sparger
1.5000 do - Diameter of holes - in.

i
0.00015 ∈ - Pipe Roughness ( Clean Commercial Steel is 0.00015 ) - Ft.
1.166 Ratio of total hole area in sparger to its pipe cross sectional area

Calculate Flow Conditions per Sparger ( Use "Mixture" Flows and Properties ) :
244,407.5 W - Flow per sparger - lb/hr

v
3,740.4 Q - Flow per sparger - as GPM at Cond.
23.990 Vp - Velocity in pipe sparger at inlet - Ft/s

Calculate Intermediate Sizing Results :

e
By = "Y" axis on Baker two-phase map = 396 x w.f. vap x W / dp2 / √(ρG x ρL) = 27,322 (Note 1)
Bx = "X" axis on Baker two-phase map = 530.7 x w.f. liq. / w.f. vap. x ρG1/2 x µL1/3 / ρL1/6 / σL = 141.6 (Note 1)
Re = Reynold's No. = 6.31 x W / dp / µ = 4,816,037
RR - Roughness Ratio = ∈ x 12 / dp = 0.000226
f - Friction Factor = { -2 x Log [ RR/3.7 - 5.02/Re x Log ( RR/3.7 + 14.5/Re ) ] } -2 = 0.014275 (Note 3)

r
J Head Loss Factor = 0.3335 + 0.4904/N + 0.1891/N2 = 0.349
C Orifice Flow Coefficient, If Re > 40,000 = 0.6 / √ [ 1 - (do/dp)4 ], otherwise input here 0.600 (Note 4)
α Vel. Corr. Factor ( 1.1 if Re > 4000, 2.0 if Re <= 4000 ) = 1.1
b - Coefficient for Y factor below, b = 0.23 if do/dp < 0.2, otherwise b = 0.23 + 0.2 x do/dp = 0.230 (Note 5)
Y - Vapor Expansion Factor, Use 1.0 if liquid > 5 vol%, otherwise = 1 - b(above) x ΔPo / (Pin +14.7) =

a
1.00 (Note 5)
Ek - Kinetic Energy Per Unit Vol (psi) = 2.8x10-7 x α x W 2 / ρ / dp4 = 0.5567
ΔPp - Pressure Drop along pipe sparger length (psi) = [(12 x f x L x J / α / dp ) -1] x Ek = -0.5258

Calculate Recommendations for < 5% Maldistribution :

b
Recommended minimum hole ΔPo = Greater of (10 x Ek) or (10 x ABS(ΔPp) ) or 0.25 psi = 5.57
So the max. rec. Ao total hole area ( in2) = 0.000415 x W / C / Y / √ ( ρ x rec. min.ΔPo ) = 25.09
Min. prefered do (hole dia.) (in) = 0.15 x dp ( but not less than 0.5" which is the min. permitted ) = 1.1972
Maximum recommended do (hole dia.) (in) = 0.2 x dp = 1.5962
Max. no. of holes (N) at min. rec. do (hole dia.) = (max. rec. Ao) / [ ( min. rec. do / 2 ) ^ 2 x π ] = 22.3

l
Max. no. of holes (N) at max. rec. do (hole dia.) = (max. rec. Ao) / [ ( max. rec. do / 2 ) ^ 2 x π ] = 12.5
More small holes prefered over fewer large holes. Space hole centers at least 2 hole diameters apart.

Calculate Actual ΔP and Maldistribution for Set Actual Holes @ 3 Flowrates : @ 50% @100% @200%

e
Ao - Actual hole area (in2) = N x (do/2)2 x π = 58.32 58.32 58.32
Vo - Hole Velocity (Ft/s) = W / ρ / (Ao/144) / 3600 10.29 20.58 41.16
ΔPo - Hole ΔP (psi) = [ 0.000415 x W / (act. Ao) / C / Y] 2 / ρ = WANT 0.25 MIN (Note 6) 0.26 1.03 4.12
% Maldistribution = ABS ( 100 x { √ [ { ΔPo - ABS (ΔPp) } / ΔPo ] - 1 } ) = 30.02 30.02 30.02

s
Note 1) Homogeneous (non-slip) flow is assumed (if 2-phase). Size pipe for spray or bubble flow. ( prefer By >30,000 on Baker Map )
Note 2) Use Liquid viscosity for mix if vapor is < 5 vol%. Otherwise average mix viscosity on a volume basis.
Note 3) If Re <= 2000, then flow is laminer and this cell uses f = 64 / Re instead.
Note 4) If Re <40,000 Look up C factor for square-edge orifices on page A-20 of Crane's and put in box provided.
Note 5) If ΔPo / Pin(in psia) > 0.5, then vapor systems become sonic and this calculation becomes incorrect.
Note 6) Do not design for less than 0.25 psi (ΔP)o @ 100% of flow, and preferably at 50% of flow.
 Whenever hydrotreating reactors are involved in the process study, they can be
M calculated using MPEC’s in-house “Hydrotreating” spreadsheet. The spreadsheet
P (presented here) and the chart on the following page, present 2 of this program’s 8
pages of output.
E MPEC DIESEL HYDROTREATING CORRELATION

C
Based on correlations used with permission of J Y Livingston Consultant of Pasadena, Texas
And PCI Consultants, Inc Of Houston, Texas
(As Modified By W.D.M., 10/10/96)
NOTE: = Req. Input Data
DIESEL FEED DATA
Name BPSD API SG Lb/Hr UOP K VABP-°F D-86 EP,°F MW Wt% S Wt% N Wt % Olef Anil Pt Calc. C.I.

FCCU LCO 18,480 26.80 0.8939 241,010 10.97 490 713 183.7 0.6000 0.0500 10.00 98.0 32.05
WCU DSL(Stg) 635 37.91 0.8353 7,739 11.91 528 713 213.7 0.1100 0.0000 0.00 165.0 53.94
WCU DSL(Live) 19,000 37.91 0.8353 231,547 11.91 528 713 213.7 0.1100 0.0000 0.00 165.0 53.94
ECU K/D 385 41.14 0.8196 4,604 11.91 478 709 189.3 0.0700 0.0000 0.00 157.0 53.30

TOTAL 38,500 32.43 0.8632 484,900 11.45 509 713 197.4 0.3532 0.0249 4.97 134.8 42.76

D NOTE: The Calculations Below Are Based Only on The Total Stream Properties Above.

Input Operating Conditions:

e
Rx. Inlet Press., PSIG: 755
Rx. Exit Press., PSIG 705
Ave. Rx. Temp., °F 660
Recycle Gas, MMSCFD 23.0

l
Recycle Gas m% H2 70.0
Makeup Gas, MMSCFD 10.0
Makeup Gas m% H2 78.0
Catalyst Vol., Ft3 4524
Catalyst Activity 1.25 ( Normally 1.0 for 1/8" extrusion, 1.25 for 1/16" extrusion, 1.5 for 1/16" spheres )

i
Catalyst Type 1.00 ( Input 1.00 for Cobalt Moly or 1.50 for Nickel Moly - Used for Nitrogen Removal activity)

Calculate Reaction Severities Calculate Data Points For Reaction Sensitivity Curves
(See Attached Graphs)

v
Moles/Hr Oil Feed to Rx. = 2456.03 Sulfur:
Moles/Hr Gas Feed to Rx. = 3623.19 Product Sulfur at Other LHSV's And Temperatures
Moles/Hr H2 Feed to Rx. = 2624.07 LHSV 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Rx. Inlet H2 Partial Pressure, PSIA = 332.2 Temp-°F % S in Product Oil HDS Kt
LHSV, 1/Hr = 1.99 600 0.0041 0.0182 0.0382 0.0596 0.0802 1.5451

e
625 0.0027 0.0138 0.0311 0.0505 0.0698 1.6893
HDS Kt = 1.9139 650 0.0017 0.0102 0.0248 0.0421 0.0600 1.8468
HDN Kt = 0.4914 675 0.0011 0.0073 0.0193 0.0346 0.0509 2.0190
Olefin Sat Kt = 2.2493 700 0.0006 0.0051 0.0147 0.0278 0.0425 2.2074

r
725 0.0003 0.0034 0.0110 0.0219 0.0349 2.4132
Wt.% S in Product Oil 0.0222 750 0.0002 0.0022 0.0079 0.0169 0.0281 2.6383
Wt.% DES (% Sul.Removal) 93.71
Wt.% N in Product Oil 0.0122 Nitrogen:

a
Wt.% DEN (% Nit. Removal) 50.85 Product Nitrogen at Other LHSV's And Temperatures
Wt.% Olefins in Product oil 0.1924 LHSV 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Wt.% DEO (% Olef. Removal) 96.13 Temp-°F % N in Product Oil HDN Kt
600 0.0098 0.0133 0.0156 0.0171 0.0182 0.3242
625 0.0082 0.0119 0.0143 0.0159 0.0172 0.3855

b
650 0.0066 0.0103 0.0128 0.0147 0.0160 0.4585
675 0.0052 0.0087 0.0113 0.0133 0.0147 0.5452
700 0.0038 0.0072 0.0098 0.0118 0.0133 0.6484
725 0.0027 0.0057 0.0082 0.0102 0.0119 0.7711
750 0.0018 0.0043 0.0066 0.0086 0.0103 0.9170

l Olefins:

LHSV
Product Olefin at Other LHSV's And Temperatures
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

e
Temp-°F % Olefin in Product Oil Olef Sat Kt
600 0.0424 0.2074 0.4589 0.7390 1.0153 1.6555
625 0.0221 0.1345 0.3317 0.5700 0.8178 1.8810
650 0.0106 0.0823 0.2294 0.4244 0.6395 2.1373

s
675 0.0046 0.0471 0.1509 0.3035 0.4837 2.4284
700 0.0018 0.0249 0.0937 0.2074 0.3521 2.7592
725 0.0006 0.0121 0.0546 0.1345 0.2455 3.1350
750 0.0002 0.0053 0.0295 0.0823 0.1630 3.5621
 MPEC Deliverables -- Correlations
Chart showing Product Sulfur vs. Temperature & LHSV inside MPEC’s Diesel Hydrotreating Correlation.

Product S ulfur Vs. Temperature & LHS V

0.060

0.055

0.050

0.045
LHSV = 3.0
0.040
Wt % Sulfur in Product

0.035
LHSV = 2.5
0.030

0.025 LHSV’s
LHSV = 2.0 1.0
0.020
1.5
0.015 2.0
LHSV = 1.5 2.5
0.010
3.0
0.005 LHSV = 1.0

0.000
600 610 620 630 640 650 660 670 680 690 700 710 720 730 740 750
Average Reactor T emperature - °F
 MPEC Deliverables – Base Case PFD

After using any or all of these programs as

appropriate, MPEC prepares a base case PFD to
summarize the calculated plant operations. The PFD
can be compared to the actual plant data to identify
plant problems and set turnaround priorities.

As mentioned before, MPEC’s PFD’s contain all the

essential information needed by a process engineer.
Our base case PFD also contains a heat exchanger
table which shows the duty, area, heat transfer
coeff., LMTD, and pressure drop of each exchanger.
MPEC Deliverables
Typical Base Case PFD
 Vessels are evaluated for adequacy in our base case report and documented on
M vessel loading summary sheets. Vessel holdups, liquid-vapor separations, and water-
P hydrocarbon separations are checked.

E Vessel Process Summary Sheet

12-10-005 High Pressure Receiver Loadings

C Basis:

Case
Operating Conditions:

Loadings Lbs/Hr. BPSD60

ο
106 F,

GPMh ACFS
200 PSIG

Lbs./Ft3 Visc.,cP.
Normal Vapor 106429 27.2 1.08 0.01
LEP Vapor 106427 27.0 1.09 0.01
HC Liquid

Overhead Vapor: Normal LEP

Vc = Critical Vel. = 0.157((pL -pv)/pv)0.5 = 0.93 ft./sec 0.92 ft./sec
Actual Vapor Vel. = ACFS / C.S. Area = 0.35 ft./sec 0.34 ft./sec
Actual Vapor Vel. as % of Vc 38 % 37 %

D
25'-0"
HC Liquid In Bottom of Vessel: (Based on Normal Case)
NLL HC Holdup in Vessel = 7931 gal., 3.97 min. (turnover)
14" Inlet 2 Assumed Instrument Span = 24 in., 1735 gal.

e
1 12" Vap. Out
Net HC Prod. or Feed Rate= 65852 BPSD60, 1999 GPMh
Instrument Span Holdup = 0.87 min.(total)

1'-0"
NLL to HLL = 0.43 min.
NLL to LLL = 0.43 min.

l
N.L.L.
Water Decant In Vessel: (Based on Normal Case)
10'-0"

15'-3" 3'-6" Design Water Droplet Diameter 0.005 in.

3'-11"
Water Settling Velocity = Vs = 25.60 in./min. (Intermediate Law)

i
( Note that 10 in./ min. is the max. recommended for new designs.)
Vertical distance required to Settle = Dv = 60 in.
4 Hor. Liq. (HC + H2O) Vel. in Drum = Vh = 6.82 ft./min
7'-6"

N.L.L. 3"-9" Required Length to settle = Dx X Vh / Vs = 15.98 ft.

12" Liq. Out

v
Required Length as % of Available Length = 85 %

Elevation to Center Line Water Liquid in Boot: (Based on Normal Case)

25'-0" Water Holdup in Boot = 296 gal., 38.09 min.

e
Instrument Span in Boot = 24 in., 170 gal.
3 Net Water Prod. or Feed Rate = 7.77 GPMh
Instrument Span Holdup = 5.82 min.
3" Drain
18' - 9" HC Decant in Boot: (Based on Normal Case)

r
Assumed Water Settling Length Design HC Droplet Diameter = 0.005 in.
HC Settling Velocity = Vs = 11.52 in./min. (Stokes Law)
(Note that 10 in/min. is the max. recommended for new designs.)
Water Velocity in Boot = 1.29 in./min.

a
Water Velocity as % of Allowable Settling Velocity = 11 %

Nozzle Velocities and ΔP's:

b
Normal Case LEP Naphtha Case
No. ft./sec. psi/100' No. ft./sec. psi/100'
1 33.15 0.955 1 32.65 0.878
2 34.64 0.186 2 34.44 0.185

l
3 0.34 0.009 3 0.37 0.011
4 5.76 0.193 4 5.35 0.165

e
Vessel Process Summary Sheet
12-10-005 High Pressure Receiver
SCALE: NTS APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY ERD
DATE: 10/04/2000 REVISED

s 69,000 BPD Case Loadings

DRAWING NUMBER
 MPEC Deliverables -- Recommendations

Once the unit’s existing capabilities and problems are

understood, MPEC can then reuse these same
computer tools to improve the unit’s performance
and/or expand its capacity without making any
unnecessary changes to the unit.

Typically better column internals, better heat

exchanger bundles, and more optimized piping can be
installed to substantially improve unit capacities with
little or no major equipment additions or replacements.
 MPEC Deliverables -- Revisions
MPEC will then complete the study by issuing a report of recommendations with revised PFD’s showing all the
suggested revisions and the improved or expanded heat and material balance. Process specifications for all the
new or revised equipment will be included so that the client can submit these items to vendors for quotations.
Shown here is a typical vessel specification.
MPEC Deliverables – PFD with Revisions
Shown here is a typical PFD with revisions noted in red.

B-6 Refining Horizons
Doug McDaniel Aims to Provide Alternatives for Small Refiners
By Susie T. Parker
William D. “Doug” McDan-
iel likes the challenge of hav-
ing to come up with real so-
lutions to the problems that
many independent domestic
refiners face today.
“People come in with real
problems and you work them
out. I enjoy that because
that’s real engineering,” he
tells Refining Horizons. After
20 years in the business, he
said it’s still a “sobering
thought” to see a refinery put
into effect changes he’s pro-
posed.
Somewhat of a refining
troubleshooter, McDaniel said
he began his own consulting
and process engineering firm,
MPEC Inc., in 1988 to focus
on a “niche market” that was
not, and is not, being handled
properly by the larger engi-
neering companies. That
market is the process engi-
neering requirements of the
small independent refiners.
Major engineering compa-
nies “are dedicated to (jobs)
that are the biggest and cost-
liest,” said McDaniel.
As such, he added, they
often suggest changes that
are not in the best interests of
small refiners, many of whom
simply want to maximize the
MPEC -- Providing Alternatives
output of their existing plants
in the least costly manner
possible.
Not Really Needed
In short, McDaniel believes
the major engineering firms,
who concentrate on mega-
projects, often propose
changes to small refineries
that aren’t really needed.
They “do a bunch of work
and run up big bills,” he said.
“The smaller refiners’ needs
require more interest and
time that the majors are
willing and able to give them,”
he adds. Houston-based
MPEC tries to fill that void by
doing the work “more effec-
tively and cheaper.”
In one instance, McDaniel
said El Paso Refining Co. in
El Paso, Texas, sought the
help of larger engineering
companies in boosting the
capacity of its refinery.
“The other engineers said
(the plant) was bottlenecked
out and running at full limit.
We suggested some piping
changes that raised the ca-
pacity from 18,000 barrels a
day to as high as 27,000b/d,”
said McDaniel.
The job, which took place
in 1988, saved El Paso $1
million per month at the re-
finery, he noted.
THEOILDAILY
Acts as Advance Team
McDaniel said MPEC
doesn’t take away business
from major engineering firms.
Instead, it acts as sort of an
advance team by doing the
process engineering work for
the small refiners. The large
engineering firms usually
then follow and perform de-
finitive engineering work.
“I believe that the major
engineering (companies)
would just as soon have
someone give them the proc-
ess designs: so they can focus
on definitive engineering,” he
said. The reason: “Most of the
money is made on the defini-
tive design.”
McDaniel estimates that
process design work accounts
for only 2 percent of the total
costs of a stand-alone grass-
roots facility, while definitive
engineering accounts for 12
percent.
“We cater to the small re-
fineries that don’t have proc-
ess expertise,” he noted.
Like an Architect
McDaniel likens a process
engineer’s job to that of an
architect. He works on com-
puters and doesn’t go near
“any of the hard stuff such as
steel and concrete.” The “dirty
work” is left up to the defini-
tive engineer, whose job is
like that of a builder.
For a refinery, the process
engineer’s job is to examine
“the jillions of questions that
go into the actual design.
There are a lot of little ques-
tions that the process engi-
neer needs to ask in laying
out the game plan. These can
only be answered by the in-
terplay between the owner
and the process engineer,”
said McDaniel.
Because of all the consid-
erations, he noted, “there are
no two refineries that are the
same. They are almost always
custom-designed for the indi-
vidual customer.”
On the other hand, the
definitive engineer’s work
includes things such as the
foundation, structural work,
column thickness and piping.
“All their work amounts to
mechanical work,” said
McDaniel.
Limited Clientele
He indicated that his
three-man firm has a limited
clientele, with only five or six
clients: “I’m just known in the
business among a few select
refiners, and that keeps me
busy.”
The “hardest thing is to get
finished the work I’ve prom-
ised in the time allowed,”
observed McDaniel. But, he
acknowledged, “I’m in the
kind of business where a
March 24, 1992
busy schedule can quickly
turn into a not-so-busy
schedule.”
He said his work can be-
come “very limited” as inde-
pendent refiners close down
capacity due to the high cost
of implementing federal and
state environmental regula-
tions. If that happens, he said
he may have to go to work for
a major engineering com-
pany. “That’s just a fact of
life.”
Cites Peter Principle
In the meantime, McDan-
iel, 45, said he has yet to
succumb to the Peter Princi-
ple, “where guys get promoted
until they’re incompetent.”
He adds that he won’t get
rich doing what he does, but
rather collects a manage-
ment-type salary. He sees
himself as the general practi-
tioner rather than the spe-
cialized heart surgeon, who
makes the big bucks.
McDaniel, who is president
of MPEC, is joined by partner,
Joe Musumeci, and his wife,
Sharon, who is secretary and
treasurer.
“She allows me to do
nothing but process design
and optimization work.
Thanks to her, I can dedicate
my full time to engineering.
That’s a valuable partner in a
small business.”