ExxonMobil Proprietary Design Practices for Fractionating Towers

ExxonMobil Proprietary
RESTRICTED ACCESS NOTICE

DESIGN PRACTICES DUE TO THIRD PARTY PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
This practice may contain third party information with confidentiality

and use restrictions. EMRE's Law Department should be consulted
prior to its release to any entity other than a 50% or more owned
affiliate of Exxon Mobil Corporation who has an appropriate
agreement (e.g. Standard Research Agreement, Upstream Cost
Sharing Agreement) in place and their employees (this does not
include in-house contractors, consultants, etc.)
Any questions regarding Third Party Restricted Access should be

directed to the appropriate contact in EMRE's Legal Department. A
list of contacts can be found at:
http:\\159.70.37.160\patents\assignresp91800.pdf
To continue within this practice CLICK HERE
ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company – Fairfax, VA

FRACTIONATING TOWERS DESIGN PRACTICES
DIRECT CONTACT HEAT TRANSFER Section Page
EXXON III-F 1 of 29
ENGINEERING Date
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION - For Authorized Company Use Only December, 1998
Changes shown by ç
CONTENTS
Section Page
SCOPE .................................................................................................................................................... 3
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................... 3
BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................... 3
DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................................................... 3
EQUIPMENT TYPES AND APPLICATIONS ............................................................................................. 3

TRAYS............................................................................................................................................. 4
BAFFLE AND SHED SECTIONS ...................................................................................................... 4
GRID................................................................................................................................................ 4
PACKING......................................................................................................................................... 4
BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS........................................................................................................ 4

BASIC INFORMATION REQUIRED .................................................................................................. 4
DEFINITIONS OF HEAT TRANSFER DUTIES .................................................................................. 5
SIZING HEAT TRANSFER SECTIONS ............................................................................................. 6
DETERMINING PUMPAROUND DRAWOFF TEMPERATURES........................................................ 6
OPTIMIZING HEAT TRANSFER SECTIONS .................................................................................... 7
LIMITATIONS OF HEAT TRANSFER CORRELATIONS.................................................................... 7
SELECTION OF MATERIALS........................................................................................................... 8
TOWER SECTIONING ............................................................................................................................. 8

PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................... 8
HOW TO SECTION A TOWER ......................................................................................................... 8
CALCULATION PROCEDURES..............................................................................................................10
PART 1 - PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS......................................................................................10
PART 2 - SPECIFIC DEVICE CALCULATIONS................................................................................11
Trays............................................................................................................................................11
Baffle and Shed Sections ..............................................................................................................12
Packing and Grid ..........................................................................................................................12
SAMPLE PROBLEM ...............................................................................................................................14

FOR TRAYS (SIEVE, JET, BUBBLE CAP, VALVE) ..........................................................................16
FOR BAFFLE AND SHED SECTIONS .............................................................................................17
FOR PACKING................................................................................................................................18
NOMENCLATURE ..................................................................................................................................21
COMPUTER PROGRAMS.......................................................................................................................22
AVAILABLE PROGRAMS................................................................................................................22
EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

DESIGN PRACTICES FRACTIONATING TOWERS
Section Page DIRECT CONTACT HEAT TRANSFER
III-F 2 of 29 EXXON
Date ENGINEERING
December, 1998 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION - For Authorized Company Use Only
CONTENTS (Cont)
Section Page
TABLE
Table A .................................................................................................................................... 7
FIGURES
Figure A Pumparound Streams and Temperatures ...................................................................... 5
Figure B Method of Sectioning Tower for Heat Transfer Calculations ........................................... 9
Figure 1A Heat Transfer Correlation for Sieve, Valve, Bubble Cap, and Jet Trays (Customary
Units) ......................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 1B Heat Transfer Correlation for Sieve, Valve, Bubble Cap, and Jet Trays (Metric Units) ... 23
Figure 2A Heat Transfer Correlation for Baffle and Shed Sections (Customary Units) ................... 24
Figure 2B Heat Transfer Correlation for Baffle and Shed Sections (Metric Units) .......................... 25
Figure 3A Heat Transfer Correlations for Countercurrent Contacting Devices (Customary Units).. 26
Figure 3B Heat Transfer Correlations for Countercurrent Contacting Devices (Metric Units)......... 27
Figure 4 ∆TIm Nomograph (Same for Customary and Metric Units) ............................................ 28
Figure 5 Multicomponent Correction Factor, km (Same for Customary and Metric Units)............. 29
Revision Memo
12/98 Highlights of this revision are:
1. More definition provided for limitations to heat transfer correlations.
2. Reference made to technology for estimating heat transfer at low vapor rates.
3. Updated references to computer programs.
4. Reference made to Design Practices III-A for hardware selection in heat
transfer services.

EXXON III-F 3 of 29
ENGINEERING Date
SCOPE
This section provides methods for sizing direct contact heat transfer sections containing trays, baffle sections, grid or packing.
It deals with the design of equipment for pumparound services only. For other types of direct contact heat transfer applications
(such as condensable blowdown drums, barometric condensers, drying towers, and water cooling and condensing towers)
consult your FRACTIONATION SPECIALIST for help.
The hydrodynamic performance characteristics of these devices are discussed in the following sections:
III-B Sieve Trays
III-C Bubble Cap Trays
III-D Jet Trays
III-E Valve Trays
III-G Packing and Grid
III-J Baffles and Sheds
REFERENCES
1. C. J. Colwell, New Direct Contact Heat Transfer Correlations for Towers, Report No. EE.98E.76 (September, 1976).
ç 2. C. J. Colwell, Direct Contact Heat Transfer Methods Enhanced, 96CET190 (October 24, 1996).
BACKGROUND
In large towers, such as pipestills and catalytic cracking unit fractionators, one or more heat transfer or “pumparound” sections
are often provided to recover heat effectively from the tower. The use of pumparounds results in a better distribution of tower
loadings than would be the case if the entire cooling duty were assigned to the overhead condenser. This, in turn, permits the
use of smaller tower diameters in the upper sections of these columns and recovery of high temperature level heat. The heat is
removed from the tower by direct contact heat transfer between the hot, ascending vapor and the descending liquid, which is
externally cooled and returned, i.e., “pumped around.”
Specifying internals for heat transfer service requires calculations that account for simultaneous heat and mass transfer effects
in which fundamental temperature driving forces are often difficult to evaluate. The Multi-component Correction Factor, km,
described under SIZING HEAT TRANSFER SECTIONS introduces an easily applied term into the heat transfer procedure that
accounts for condensation effects and corrects the log-mean temperature to a more realistic average driving force in
hydrocarbon pumparounds.
For other, less frequently used types of direct contact heat transfer applications (such as condensable blowdown drums,
barometric condensers, FCCU slurry sections, steam cracker fractionator overhead condensers, and water cooling and
condensing towers) the heat transfer methods described here can be applied provided the designer formulates an appropriate
sectioning technique. (See discussion under TOWER SECTIONING.) With this approach, localized log-mean temperatures
that closely reflect true driving forces can then be determined for each section, whereas use of a log-mean temperature from
terminal conditions could result in significantly undersizing the number of trays or the amount of packing required. In several
water cooling and condensing towers, graphical or numerical integration techniques described in most Unit Operations texts for
simultaneous heat and mass transfer may be required. Your FRACTIONATION SPECIALIST can provide assistance in setting
up these calculations via a computerized procedure.
The sample calculation provided in this section addresses only the method needed to sizing pumparound sections of a tower.
DEFINITIONS
See NOMENCLATURE.
ç EQUIPMENT TYPES AND APPLICATIONS

In non-fouling fractionation services, heat transfer may be accomplished with trays, packing, or grid. Fouling services are
encountered in several washing or scrubbing operations, where the fluids may contain solids such as coke, catalyst, or scale,
and when polymer formation tends to plug the internals. For such services, baffle sections (sheds or discs-and-donuts) should
be used. For non-fouling services where pressure drop is critical (e.g., vacuum pipestills), packing (random or structured types)
should be used. Design Practices Section III-A, Table 5A should be consulted for proper internal selection.

III-F 4 of 29 EXXON
Date ENGINEERING
EQUIPMENT TYPES AND APPLICATIONS (Cont)
TRAYS (SEE SECTIONS III-A, B, C, D, E)

Since the factors affecting direct-contact, vapor-liquid heat transfer are similar to those affecting fractionation, it follows that
fractionating trays are usually suitable for heat transfer service in nonfouling pumparound sections. Indeed, it is often
convenient to use the same tower diameter in the pumparound section as in the fractionating section immediately above or
below. While jet trays are frequently used in heavy hydrocarbon pumparound service, the proper tray choice also depends on
considerations of capacity, turndown, hydraulics and maintenance.
BAFFLE AND SHED SECTIONS (SEE SECTION III-J)

Baffle or shed sections are normally used only in dirty or coking services. An important application is in the heat transfer
section at the bottom of catalytic and fluid coker fractionators. In these cases, the tower bottoms are cooled and recirculated
over the baffles to desuperheat the reactor vapors and to scrub out any entrained catalyst or coke.
GRID (SEE SECTION III-G)

The grid types available include Glitsch Grid, SNAPGRID by Nutter, Flexigrid by Koch, and Intalox Grid by Norton. The
advantages of these grids are low-pressure drop at high capacity, good particulate removal efficiency and low susceptibility to
fouling and coking (low liquid holdup). Grids should therefore be considered for washing or scrubbing services where: (a) low
pressure drop is critical, (b) entrainment is serious and must be minimized, and/or (c) coking or fouling is likely to be a problem
because of high liquid residence time. Examples are the wash sections of atmospheric and vacuum pipestills and cat
fractionators. The disadvantage of grid compared to trays and packing is very low fractionation and heat transfer efficiency.
Nevertheless, their efficiency is still better than baffle or shed sections. While grid has been used in some vacuum pipestill
pumparounds, recent studies have shown that 2 in. (50 mm) size random packings (such as Pall rings, IMTP, or Nutter rings)
are more economical for most cases.
PACKING (SEE SECTION III-G)

Packing is economically attractive in non-fouling services requiring low-pressure drop, good heat transfer or fractionation
efficiency, and capacity. Their most common application is in pumparound sections of vacuum pipestills. Compared to grid,
tower sections with lower packed heights can usually be designed with random or structured packing, because of their better
efficiency. Therefore, packed beds may have a lower overall pressure drop and somewhat lower investment and operating
costs than a grid bed.
For revamps of capacity-limited pumparound sections (atmospheric pipestills, cat fractionators, vacuum pipestills), packing
may be an economical replacement for trays if higher vapor and liquid throughputs are required with no loss in heat transfer
efficiency. If trays must be respaced to provide the desired capacity, an excessive amount of downtime may be required.
Under these conditions, packing may be especially attractive because of the relative ease of installation.
For both packing and grid, the height required for heat transfer is proportional to the relative HETP for the various types and
sizes. The bed height sizing procedure, therefore, uses the same relative HETP factor, fp, that is used in Section III-G for
mass transfer. In this way, the packing requirement for 2 in. (50 mm) Pall rings is extended to all packings and grids for which
the fp factor has been defined.
BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
BASIC INFORMATION REQUIRED

The calculation method for designing or rating direct contact heat transfer sections is based on a “transfer unit” approach. This
method is analogous to the mass transfer unit approach to fractionation efficiency. The number of trays (for tray or baffle
internals) or the height of packing (for packing and grid) can be determined on the basis of heat duty, tower loadings,
temperature driving forces and tower area. It is assumed that the designer already has heat and material balance information
for the heat transfer section and has completed a tray or packed tower design. To obtain heat and material balance
information, heat transfer sections can be included on plate-to-plate computer programs such as PRO/II or PROVISION.

EXXON III-F 5 of 29
ENGINEERING Date
BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS (Cont)
DEFINITIONS OF HEAT TRANSFER DUTIES

1. Exchanger Duty Qo - The exchanger duty Qo is the amount of heat that is removed in the external pumparound circuit of a
heat transfer section in a column. The exchanger reduces the pumparound liquid temperature from the drawoff
temperature to to the return temperature tPA (see Figure A). In a normal design, Qo and to are usually set by the heat and
material balances and the designer must select appropriate values of tPA and the pumparound rate LPA. Methods for
selecting these quantities are outlined in subsequent paragraphs. These variables are related by the following equation:
Qo = LPA CPL (to – tPA) Eq. (1)
where: Qo = Exchanger duty, Btu/hr (kW)
LPA = Pumparound liquid rate, lb/hr (kg/s)
CPL = Liquid specific heat at average liquid temperature, Btu/lb°F (kJ/kg°C)
to = Pumparound liquid drawoff temperature, °F (°C)
tPA = Pumparound liquid return temperature, °F (°C)
FIGURE A
PUMPAROUND STREAMS AND TEMPERATURES
RI
Go at t R LPA at t PA
at
To LI at t I
Heat Transfer Section

(Tray, Packing, Grid or Qo
Baffles)
Po at t o
GI Lo at t o LPA + Po at t o
at
TI
Ro at t o
DP3Ffa
2. Heat Transfer Required - In general, the overall amount of heat transferred within the heat transfer section is not the
same as the exchanger duty. The difference between the internal and external heat transfer requirements can be
visualized for systems involving net condensation of vapor if one recognizes that the reflux entering the section, RI,
provides some cooling in addition to that of the pumparound liquid. Likewise, in systems with net vaporization, the latent
heat required to vaporize the liquid provides cooling in addition to that of the pumparound.
For systems involving net condensation of vapor, the total number of heat transfer units required, NGH, can be calculated
by the following equation:
∆T G 
NGH = + ln  I  Eq. (2)
∆Tlm  Go 
where: NGH = Total number of heat transfer units required

∆T = Vapor phase temperature difference, TI – To, °F (°C)
∆Tlm = Log mean temperature difference, (LMTD), °F (°C)
GI = Vapor rate entering heat transfer section, lb/hr (kg/s)
Go = Vapor rate leaving heat transfer section, lb/hr (kg/s)

III-F 6 of 29 EXXON
Date ENGINEERING

For systems involving net vaporization of liquid (such as pipestill wash zones and cat fractionator desuperheating
sections) the total number of heat transfer units required is given by Eq. (3).
∆T
NGH = Eq. (3)
∆Tlm
SIZING HEAT TRANSFER SECTIONS

The required number of trays, baffles, or the height of packing / grid required are calculated from the equations below:
1. For trays and baffle sections:
NGH km
NA = Eq. (4)
NGH
where: NA = Number of actual trays or baffle (shed) sections

NGH = Total number of heat transfer units required
km = Multi-component correction factor (from Figure 5)
NGH = Number of heat transfer units per tray (from Figure 1) or per baffle (shed) section
(from Figure 2)
Note: In FCCU and coker fractionator baffle sections, where the gas enters at high velocity through
a flush side nozzle or the snout of a cyclone, a significant amount of contacting occurs in the
“raining” section below the baffles. To account for this effect, subtract one heat transfer unit
from the total number required. That is, replace NGH with ( NGH – 1) in Eq. (4).
2. For packing or grid:
 ZS ZB 
Z = HGHP  k m NGH − −  Eq. (5)
 HGHS HGHB 
where: Z = Height of packing required, ft (m)

HGH = Height of a gas phase heat transfer unit, ft (m) (from Figure 3)
subscripts - P for packing
- S for sprays
- B for accumulator tray space
ZS = Vertical distance between top of bed and bottom surface of spray nozzles, ft (m)
ZB = Vertical distance between the bottom of the bed and the high liquid level on the
accumulator tray, ft (m)
For packed pumparound heat transfer sections, the heat transfer associated with the spray distributors and the open area
below the bed is included in the packed height calculation [see Eq. (5) above]. This can reduce the required packed height
by as much as 10 - 20%.
The methods for calculating NGH for trays or baffles and HGH for the various counter-current devices are given later under
the subheading CALCULATION PROCEDURES.
DETERMINING PUMPAROUND DRAWOFF TEMPERATURES

The pumparound liquid drawoff temperature, to, is equal to the bubble point of the liquid leaving the pumparound section. This
temperature is set by the rate and cut range of the product (if any) immediately below the pumparound, the amount of
fractionation in the tower below the pumparound, and the amount of fractionation within the pumparound. Liquid drawoff
temperatures are accurately predicted by the plate-to-plate computer programs used for definitive process design of all
fractionation towers. Drawoff temperatures for heavy hydrocarbon towers such as atmospheric and vacuum pipestills and cat
fractionators should be obtained from a PRO/II or PROVISION simulation.

EXXON III-F 7 of 29
ENGINEERING Date
OPTIMIZING HEAT TRANSFER SECTIONS

The optimum number of heat transfer trays (or packed height) is based on an economic study involving tower height and
diameter, external heat exchange surface, and pump and power costs. The variables involved in an optimization study are
pumparound return temperature tPA and pumparound rate LPA.
Increasing the pumparound rate LPA increases the temperature driving force in the exchanger and thus reduces heat
exchanger costs. However, increasing LPA also increases the return temperature tPA. This effect reduces the temperature
driving force in the tower which, in turn, may increase the amount of tray surface or packed volume required. In addition,
increasing LPA increases pumping costs and may cause tower hydraulics problems, especially in revamps.
LIMITATIONS OF HEAT TRANSFER CORRELATIONS

The following table lists the recommended ranges of applicability of the heat transfer correlations. These ranges were
established based on the heat transfer data available to develop the correlations. It should be recognized that these data were
taken under acceptable hydraulic conditions. Therefore, if a design falls outside the ranges shown in Table A, your
FRACTIONATION SPECIALIST should be consulted.
ç TABLE A
CUSTOMARY METRIC
Packing or Grid
Liquid Rate, QL / As 1 to 50 gpm/ft2 0.7 to 35 dm3/s/m2
Vapor Rate CS = 0.05 ft/s to 85% of flood CS = 0.015 m/s to 85% of flood
Sieve, Valve, Bubble Cap, Jet Trays
Liquid Rate, QL / Np lo 0.5 to 25 gpm/ in. 1.25 to 60 dm3/s/m
Baffle Tray (Sheds)
Vapor Rate CS = 0.05 ft/s to 90% of flood CS = 0.015 m/s to 90% of flood
Horizontal Free Area 30 to 60% of As 30 to 60% of As
Sprays, Space Below Packing
Vapor Rate CS = 0.05 to 0.3 ft/s CS = 0.015 to 0.09 m/s
In addition to the above ranges, the following limitations should also be observed.
1. A FRACTIONATION SPECIALIST should be consulted to determine the potential impact of liquid or vapor maldistribution if
any of the following are true:
a. Approach temperature is less than 5°F (3°C).
b. Design number of theoretical stages is greater or equal to three.
c. The liquid rate is less than 110% of the minimum rate as determined as the liquid rate needed to meet the gas
temperature specification using an infinite (large) number of theoretical stages.
d. A venturi scrubber or venturi scrubber separator is immediately upstream.
2. At very low vapor loadings, the heat transfer coefficient asymptotes to a finite constant value and not zero as predicted.
Thus, heat transfer rates may be significantly underpredicted when nearly total condensation of vapor occurs. To
determine if fewer trays or packed bed heights are needed, consult your FRACTIONATION SPECIALIST and see
Reference 2 when vapor rates are below 100 lb/hr ft2 (0.1 kg/s/m2).

III-F 8 of 29 EXXON
Date ENGINEERING

3. For all types of cross-flow trays, check that the number of trays predicted is not less than 1.2 times the theoretical
minimum. The predicted value can, at times, be too low due to the use of the LMTD driving force. This effect comes from
the fact that the LMTD is really intended for true countercurrent contacting whereas these trays operate in a cascading
crossflow mode. An estimate of the theoretical minimum number of trays is given by the following equation:
T − to 
ln  I 
 To − tI 
NA(min) = Eq. (6)
T − To 
ln  I 
 to − tI 
SELECTION OF MATERIALS
The materials of construction for tower internals must be appropriate for each fractionation service. Some considerations
affecting the choice of materials are cost, required corrosion resistance, temperature operating range, and mechanical strength.
The design engineer should consult with the MATERIALS SPECIALIST for the final selection.
For example, aluminum Pall rings have performed satisfactorily in several vacuum pipestill top pumparound sections.
However, for new designs, corrosion and temperature considerations should still be checked with the MATERIALS
SPECIALIST.
Additional information concerning the various types of packing and grid is given in Section III-G.
TOWER SECTIONING
In some direct contact heat transfer applications, it is necessary to divide the tower into two or more sections for calculation
purposes, depending on the relative amounts of latent and sensible heat transfer in each section. Separate heat transfer
calculations are then made for each section. Typical situations which require tower sectioning are: (1) cooling of superheated
vapor below its dew point, and (2) cooling a vapor containing hydrocarbon and steam below the water dew point. Pumparound
sections of pipestills and primary fractionators usually do not require sectioning whereas FCCU and coker slurry pumparounds
do.
PURPOSE
The reason for sectioning a tower is to obtain realistic temperature driving forces (∆Tlm) for heat transfer. In general, different
values of ∆Tlm are obtained for each tower section.
HOW TO SECTION A TOWER

Consider the vapor, as it is cooled in a heat transfer tower. Logical break points occur wherever hydrocarbon or water dew
points are encountered and wherever condensables are depleted from the vapor. The best way to determine sectioning points
is to construct a vapor condensation curve, in which the points appear as abrupt changes of slope in the curve. Data for
constructing this plot can be generated from a series of successive flash calculations on the vapor passing through the heat
transfer zone. Unlike conventional T-Q curves, however, the flash calculations must account for changes in vapor composition
resulting from condensation or vaporization to and/or from the liquid cooling medium.
Figure B shows a vapor condensation curve with five general regions. Each has different heat transfer characteristics, as
stated on the figure. In practice, most towers that require sectioning will exhibit only two or three of these regions. As an
example, a direct contact condenser involving steam mixed with hydrocarbon vapor would have Sections II, III, and IV.

EXXON III-F 9 of 29
ENGINEERING Date
TOWER SECTIONING (Cont)
FIGURE B
METHOD OF SECTIONING TOWER FOR HEAT TRANSFER CALCULATIONS
Hydrocarbon
Dew Point
Water Bottom
Dew Point of Tower
II I
Sensible Sensible
cooling of cooling of
Bulk of vapor plus superheated
water Condensation vapor by
Condensed of hydrocarbon evaporation
Bulk of of liquid
Increasing Vapor Rate
Hydrocarbon III
Top of Tower Condensed Sensible
cooling of
vapor plus
IV Condensation
Sensible cooling of hydrocarbon
V
of vapor plus and water
Sensible
cooling of Condensation of
non-condensibles hydrocarbon and
some water
DP3FfB Increasing Vapor Temperatures
The following outline may be used for designing heat transfer zones that require sectioning:
1. Generate a vapor condensation plot by doing a series of sequential flash calculations on the entering vapor. PRO/II or
PROVISION can be used for these calculations. Section the tower according to break points in this plot.
2. Select a value of To based on the desired approach to TI.
3. Assume tPA and calculate LPA required to remove Qo.
4. Obtain liquid rates and liquid temperatures for each section dividing point from heat and material balances. When the
lowest (hottest) section consists of cooling superheated vapor, assume constant liquid temperature and that cooling is
provided only by evaporating liquid. Note that this liquid temperature cannot exceed the adiabatic saturation temperature
of the entering vapor.
5. Calculate the required number of trays or baffle sections or packed/grid height for each section, using the methods given
previously.

III-F 10 of 29 EXXON
Date ENGINEERING
CALCULATION PROCEDURES
The calculation procedure for sizing heat transfer sections outlined below has been divided into two parts. PART 1 contains
calculations common to all types of contacting devices. PART 2 is divided into three sections for designing heat transfer
sections containing trays, baffles, or packing/grid, respectively. The designer should perform the preliminary calculations in
PART 1 first and then, depending on the contacting device to be used, choose the appropriate method from PART 2.
PART 1 - PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS

1. Determine operating conditions from the heat and material balance calculations (PRO/II or PROVISION computer
programs). The required values are: Go, To, RI, tR, GI, TI, Ro, and Qo. Also, determine the required physical properties
(pumparound API gravity, pumparound mean average boiling point, and pumparound characterization factor).
2. Obtain the pumparound liquid drawoff temperature to from PRO/II or PROVISION.
3. Assume a pumparound return temperature, tPA and calculate the pumparound rate, LPA, required to remove Qo.
(These depend mainly on the exchanger design. Normally, tPA should exceed the water condensation temperature at the
top tray in a pumparound by 50°F (30°C). Also, refer to OPTIMIZING HEAT TRANSFER SECTIONS under BASIC
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS.)
Qo
LPA = from Eq. (1)
CPL (t o − tPA )
4. Calculate tI by enthalpy balance using Eq. (7) or the simplified Eq. (8). Eq. (7) may require trial-and-error calculation,
since an estimated value of tI must be used for looking up specific heats. Often, (CPL)R is nearly equal to (CPL)PA and RI is
much smaller than LPA. Under these conditions using Eq. (8) results in negligible error.
R I [ CPL ] R tR + LPA [ CPL ] PA tPA
tI = Eq. (7)
R I [ CPL ]R + LPA [ CPL ] PA
or
R I tR + LPA tPA
tI = Eq. (8)
RI + LPA
where: (CPL)R = Specific heat of entering internal reflux RI at average temperature given by:
 t I + tR  Btu  kJ 
 2  , lb ° F  kg ° C 
   
(CPL)PA = Specific heat of pumparound return liquid LPA at average temperature given by:
 t I + tPA  Btu  kJ 
 2  , lb ° F  kg ° C 
   
5. Calculate ∆Tlm by the following equation or from Figure 4.
∆Tlm =
[ To − t I ] − [ TI − to ] Eq. (9)
 [ T − t I ]
ln  o 
 [ TI − t o ]
6. Calculate the total number of gas phase heat transfer units, NGH , required using either Eq. (2) or Eq. (3).
For net condensation:
∆T G 
NGH = + ln  I  from Eq. (2)
∆ Tlm  Go 

EXXON III-F 11 of 29
ENGINEERING Date
CALCULATION PROCEDURES (Cont)

For net vaporization:
∆T
NGH = from Eq. (3)
∆Tlm
7. Obtain the multi-component correction factor (km) from Figure 5 and λH.
to − tI
λH = Eq. (10)
TI − To
8. Calculate the average volumetric liquid rate, QL.

L I = LPA + R I Eq. (11)
Lo = LPA + Po + Ro Eq. (12)
t I + to
t AV = Eq. (13)
2
ρL @ tAV From PRO/II or PROVISION or from Blue Book Section 8
LI + Lo
L AV = Eq. (14)
2
Customary Metric
L AV 1000 L AV
QL = QL = Eq. (15)
8.02 ρL ρL
PART 2 - SPECIFIC DEVICE CALCULATIONS
Trays
The following procedure should be used to size heat transfer sections containing sieve, jet, bubble cap or valve trays.
9. Determine the outlet weir length, lo, and the number of tray passes, NP, using the appropriate tray’s section or computer
program for that device.
10. Calculate the number of transfer units per stage, NGH using Eq. (16) or Figure 1.
Customary Metric
0. 21 0. 21
 Q   1000 QL 
NGH = 1.18  L  NGH = 0.98   Eq. (16)
 NP Io   NP Io 
11. Calculate the number of trays required. (For design calculations, multiply the number of transfer units per stage, NGH, by
0.85. Then, substitute this corrected value in Eq. (4) below.)
NGH k m
NA = from Eq. (4)
NGH
Round up to the next whole number of trays for new designs. For revamps, the designer may be willing to accept the risk
of rounding down if the whole number of trays is not more than 10% lower.

Date ENGINEERING

12. Check theoretical minimum number of trays.
 T − to 
ln  I 
NA(min) =  To − TI  from Eq. (6)
 T − To 
ln  I 
 to − tI 
NA should be at least 1.2 x NA(min).
Baffle and Shed Sections

9. Determine the tower cross-sectional area, As, and the "effective" vertical spacing between baffles, H. See Section III-J for
definition of "effective" vertical spacing.
10. Determine the average vapor velocity in the heat transfer section, Vs from:
Vs(top) + Vs(btm)
Vs = Eq. (17)
2
Customary Metric
where:
Go Go
Vs(top) = Vs(top) =
3600 ρv A s ρv A s
GI GI
Vs(btm) = Vs(btm) =
3600 ρv A s ρ v As
Note:
The vapor density used in the above equations should be obtained from the process calculation computer
program for conditions at the top and bottom of the section.
11. Determine the number of transfer units per row, NGH (Figure 2A or 2B) or
Customary Metric
0 .5 0.5 0.5
Q  H  Q 
NGH = 0.068  L  (Vs ) 0.3 2 NGH = 0.15  L  (Vs ) 0.3 [ H] 0.5 Eq. (18)
 As     As 
12. Calculate the number of rows required. (For design calculations, multiply NGH by 0.85. Insert this corrected value in Eq.
(4) below.)
NGH km
NA = from Eq. (4)
NGH
Note: For baffle sections in FCCU and coker fractionators, see the earlier note associated with Eq. (4) under SIZING
HEAT TRANSFER SECTIONS.
Packing and Grid

The following procedure should be used to size heat transfer sections containing packing or grid.
9. Determine the following additional process information: vapor density leaving the pumparound, ρVo ; liquid density at inlet
and outlet of pumparound, ρL o and ρL I . Also, determine the spacing between the spray nozzle tip and the top of the
packed bed, ZS, and between the bottom of the bed and the high liquid level on the accumulator tray, ZB.

ENGINEERING Date

10. Determine volumetric liquid rates for sprays, packing and bottom sections.
Customary Metric
LI 1000L I
QL I = QL I = from Eq. (15)
8.02 ρL I ρL I
L AV 1000L AV
QL = QL = from Eq. (15)
8.02 ρL AV ρL AV
Lo 1000Lo
QL o = QL o = from Eq. (15)
8.02 ρLo ρLo
11. Calculate the vapor load leaving the pumparound section, CS.
Customary Metric
Go Go
Vs = Vs = Eq. (19)
3600 ρVo A s ρVo A s
0 .5 0 .5
 ρV   ρV 
CS = Vs  o
 CS = Vs  o
 Eq. (20)
 ρL I − ρ Vo   ρL I − ρ Vo 
12. Calculate the height of a heat transfer unit, HGH.

For sprays, HGHS: [If ZS < 2 ft (0.6 m), use ZS = 2 ft (0.6 m) for this equation.]
Customary Metric
−0 .84 −0.84
 QL   QL 
HGHS = 14.5  I  CS0.33 ZS0.29 HGHS = 6.68  I  CS0.33 ZS 0.29 Eq. (21)
 A s   A s 
For packing, HGHP:

Customary Metric
−1 / 4 −1 / 4
Q  Q 
HGHP = 1.12 fp  L  HGHP = 0.31 fp  L  Eq. (22)
 As   As 
where: fp can be found in Table 1 of Section III-G

For bottom section, HGHB:
Customary Metric
−0 .46 −0 .46
 QL   QL 
HGHB = 7.27  o  HGHB = 1.85  o  Eq. (23)
 A s   A s 
For bottom pumparound sections in towers larger than 20 ft (6 m) in diameter that contain a tangential feed inlet,
multiply each HGH by 1.5.
13. Calculate the height of packing required. (For design calculations divide each HGH by 0.85.)
 ZS ZS 
Z = HGHP km NGH − −  from Eq. (5)
 HGHS HGHB 
Bed depths are typically rounded up to the next 3 in. (0.1 m) increment.

Date ENGINEERING
SAMPLE PROBLEM
The following example, which involves a top pumparound section for a cat fractionator, illustrates the methods for obtaining the
number of trays or the packed height required for the desired heat transfer. To make the example more general, reflux into the
pumparound is also included. Refer to the NOMENCLATURE and Figure A in the text for the definitions of the terms used in
the calculations.
Customary Metric
1. Given:
Operating Conditions
External pumparound duty, Qo 72,000,000 Btu/hr 21,100 kW
Vapor rate leaving, Go 235,000 lb/hr 29.6 kg/s
Vapor temperature leaving, To 286°F 141.1°C
Internal reflux entering, RI 35,000 lb/hr 4.41 kg/s
Internal reflux entering temp., tR 230°F 110°C
Vapor rate entering, GI 711,000 lb/hr 89.6 kg/s
Vapor temp. entering, TI 380°F 193.3°C
Internal reflux leaving, Ro 511,000 lb/hr 64.4 kg/s
Product withdrawal rate, Po 0 lb/hr 0 kg/s
Pressure @ vapor outlet 32.6 psia 224.8 kPa
Physical Properties
Pumparound gravity 35.0 API 850 kg/m3
Pumparound mean avg. boiling point 395°F 201.7°C
Pumparound characterization factor 11.16 11.16
Tower Specifications
Diameter, Dt 13.5 ft 4,110 mm
Cross-sectional area, As 143 ft2 13.3 m2
2. Pumparound withdrawal temperature, to 360°F 182.2°C
3. Assume a pumparound return temperature, tPA 130°F 54.4°C
Calculate the pumparound liquid rate, LPA
Customary
Qo 72,000,000
LPA = = = 585,000 lb/hr
CPL (to − tPA ) 0.535 (360 − 130)
Metric
21,100
LPA = = 73.7 kg/s
2.24 (182.2 − 54.4)

ENGINEERING Date
SAMPLE PROBLEM (Cont)

4. Calculate the blended liquid inlet temperature, tI
Customary
tI =
R I t R + L PA t PA
=
(35,000 )(230) + (585,000)(130 )
R I + L PA 35,000 + 585,000
= 136°F
Metric
=
(4.41)(110) + (73.7)(54.4)
4.41 + 73.7
= 57.5°C
5. ∆Tlm
Customary
∆Tlm =
(To − t I )− (TI − t o )
=
(286 − 136) − (380 − 360 )
 To − t I   286 − 136 
ln   ln  
 TI − t o   380 − 360 
= 64.5°F
Metric
=
(141.1 − 57.5) − (193.3 − 182.2)
 141.1 − 57.5 
ln  
 193.3 − 182.2 
= 35.9°C
6. Calculate the number of gas phase heat transfer units required, NGH
Customary
∆ T G  380 − 286  711,000 

NGH = + ln  I  = + ln  
∆ Tlm  Go  64.5  235,000 
= 2.56
Metric
193.3 − 141.1  89.6 

= + ln  
35.9  29.6 
= 2.56
7. Obtain the multi-component correction factor, km, using λH and Figure 5
Customary Metric
to − t I 360 − 136 182.2 − 57.5

λH = = =
TI − To 380 − 286 193.3 − 141.1
= 2.38 = 2.38
km (from Figure 5) = 3.05

Date ENGINEERING

8. Calculate pumparound flow rates, temperatures, etc.
a. Liquid rate entering pumparound, LI
LI = LPA+ RI
Customary Metric
= 585,000 + 35,000 = 620,000 lb/hr = 73.7 + 4.41 = 78.1 kg/s
b. Liquid rate leaving the pumparound, Lo
Lo = LPA + Ro + Po
Customary Metric
= 585,000 + 511,000 + 0 = 1,096,000 lb/hr = 73.7 + 64.4 + 0 = 138.1 kg/s
c. Average liquid rate, LAV
Customary Metric
L I + Lo 620,000 + 1,096,000 78.1 + 138.1

L AV = = =
2 2 2
= 858,000 lb/hr = 108.1 kg/s

d. Average liquid temperature, tAV
Customary Metric
to + t I 136 + 360 57.5 + 182.2

t AV = = =
2 2 2
= 248°F = 119.9°C
ρL @ tAV (Blue Book Section 8) = 47.4 lb/ft3 (759 kg/m3)
e. Volumetric liquid rate, QL

Customary Metric
QL =
L AV
=
858,000
= 2257 gpm QL =
1000 L AV
=
(1000 ) (108.1) = 142.4 dm3 /s
8.02 ρL
AV
(8.02)(47.4) ρL
AV
759
FOR TRAYS (SIEVE, JET, BUBBLE CAP, VALVE)

9. Outlet weir length, lo = 124 in. (3150 mm)
Number of liquid passes, Np = 1
Note: Obtain these values from the appropriate computer program for that tray.
10. Calculate NGH

Customary
0.21
 Q   2257 
0.21
NGH = 1.18  L  = 1.18   = 2.17
 Np I o   (1)(124) 

ENGINEERING Date

Metric
0.21
 1000 QL   (1000) (142.4) 
0.21
NGH = 0.98   = 0.98   = 2.17
 Np Io   (1) (3150) 
multiply by 0.85 contingency factor (for both Customary and Metric)

Therefore, NGH = 0.85 x 2.17 = 1.84
11. Number of trays required (same for Customary and Metric)
NA =
NGH k m
=
(2.56)(3.05)
NGH 1.84
N A = 4.24
For new designs, round up to the next whole number of trays. For revamps, the designer may be willing to accept the risk
of rounding down if the whole number of trays is not less than 90% of the calculated value.
Therefore, use 5 trays
12. Check minimum trays
Customary Metric
 380 − 360   193.3 − 182.2 

ln   ln  
 286 − 136   141.1 − 57.5  = 2.32
NA(min) = = 2.32 =
 380 − 286   193.3 − 141.1
ln   ln  
 360 − 136   182.2 − 57.5 
Since NA > 1.2 NA(min), the predicted value of 5 trays is valid.
FOR BAFFLE AND SHED SECTIONS

9. Shed vertical spacing, H 2 ft (0.61 m)
10. Average vapor velocity, Vs
Customary Metric
Go Go
Vs(top) = =
3600 ρv As ρv A s
ρv = 0.268 lb/ft3 = 4.30 kg/m3 (ideal gas law)
235,000 29.6
Vs(top) = =
(3600 ) (0.268) (143) (4.30 ) (13.3 )
= 1.70 ft/s = 0.518 m/s
Customary Metric
GI GI
Vs(btm) = =
3600 ρv As ρ v As
ρv = 0.388 lb/ft3 = 6.23 kg/m3 (ideal gas law)
711,000 89.6
Vs(btm) = =
(3600) (0.388 ) ( 143 ) (6.23) (13.3)
= 3.56 ft/s = 1.08 m/s

Date ENGINEERING

Vs(top) + Vs(btm)
Average Vs =
2
1.70 + 3.56 0.518 + 1.08

Vs = =
2 2
= 2.63 ft/s = 0.80 m/s

11. Calculate NGH
Customary Metric
0 .5 0.5 0.5
Q  H Q 
NGH = 0.068  L  [Vs ] 0.3 2 NGH = 0.15  L  [Vs ] 0.3 [H] 0.5
 As     As 
0 .5 0. 5 0 .5
 2257  2   142.4 
= 0.068   [2.63 ] 0.3 2  = 0.15   (0.80) 0.3 [0.61] 0.5
 143     13.3 
= 0.36 = 0.36
Multiply by 0.85 contingency factor (for both Customary and Metric)
NGH = 0.85 x 0.36 = 0.305
12. Number of stages required (same for Customary and Metric)
NGH k m (2.56)(3.05)
NA = =
NGH 0.305
NA = 25.6
Therefore, use 26 stages.
Note: For baffle sections in FCCU and coker fractionators, see the earlier note associated with Eq. (4) under SIZING
HEAT TRANSFER SECTIONS.
FOR PACKING
Assume packing type to be 2 in. (50 mm) metal Pall rings (fp = 1.0)
Customary Metric
9. Vapor density leaving pumparound, ρVo 0.268 lb/ft3 4.30 kg/m3
Liquid density entering pumparound, ρL I 50.7 lb/ft3 812 kg/m3
Liquid density leaving pumparound, ρL o 44.0 lb/ft3 705 kg/m3

Height of spray nozzle tip above packed bed, ZS 1.5 ft 0.457 m
Space between packed bed and accumulator tray high liquid level, ZB 4.0 ft 1.22 m

ENGINEERING Date

10. Volumetric liquid rates
Customary Metric
LI 620,000 1000 L I (1000 )(78.1)

QL I = = = =
8.02 ρL I (8.02)(50.7) ρL I 812
QL I = 1525 gpm QL I = 96.2 dm3 /s
QL I = 2257 gpm [Step 8, Eq. (15)] QL I = 142.4 dm3 /s [Step 8, Eq. (15)]
Customary Metric
Lo 1,096,000 1000 Lo (1000)(138.1)

QL o = = = =
8.02 ρL o (8.02)(44.0) ρLo 705
QL o = 3106 gpm = 195.9 kg/s
11. Vapor load leaving pumparound

Customary Metric
Go 235,000 Go 29.6
Vs = = = =
3600 ρVo A s (3600)(0.268)(143 ) ρVo A s (4.30)(13.3)
= 1.70 ft/s = 0.518 m/s

Customary Metric
0. 5
 ρV   0.268 
0. 5
 4.30 
0.5
CS = Vs  o
 = 1.70   = 0.518  
 ρL I − ρVo   50 . 7 − 0.268   812 − 4.30 
= 0.124 ft/s = 0.0378 m/s

12. Heights of a heat transfer unit
a. SPRAYS
ZS is < 2 ft (0.6 m), use ZS = 2 ft (0.6 m) for this equation
Customary
− 0 .84 − 0 . 84
 Q LI   1525 
H GHS = 14.5   C S 0.33 Z S 0.29 = 14.5   (0.124 )0.33 (2 )0 . 29
 A s   143 
= 1.22 ft
Metric
−0.84 −0 .84
 QL   96.2 
HGHS = 6.68  I  CS 0.33 ZS0.29 = 6.68   (0.0378)0.33 (0.6)0.29
 A s   13.3 
= 0.373 m

Date ENGINEERING

b. PACKING
Customary Metric
−1 / 4 −1 / 4
Q  Q 
HGHP = 1.12 fp  L  = 0.31 fp  L 
 As   As 
−1 / 4 −1 / 4
 2257   142.4 
HGHP = 1.12 x 1.0   = 0.31 x 1.0  
 143   13.3 
= 0.562 ft = 0.171 m
c. BOTTOM SECTION
Customary Metric
−0 .46 −0 .46
 QL   QL 
HGHB = 7.27  o  = 1.85  o 
 A s   A s 
−0. 46 −0.46
 3106   195.9 
HGHB = 7.27   = 1.85  
 143   13.3 
= 1.76 ft = 0.537 m
Divide each HGH by 0.85 for design
Customary Metric
HGHS = 1.22/0.85 = 1.44 ft 0.373/0.85 = 0.439 m
HGHP = 0.562/0.85 = 0.661 ft 0.171/0.85 = 0.201 m
HGHB = 1.76/0.85 = 2.07 ft 0.537/0.85 = 0.632 m
13. Height of packing required
Same equation for Customary & Metric
 ZS ZB 
Z = HGHP km NGH − − 
 HGHS HGHB 
Customary Metric
  1.5   4    0.457   1.22  

= 0.661 (3.05)(2.56) −   −  2.07   = 0.201 (3.05)(2.56) −   −  0.632  
  1.44      0.439   
= 3.2 ft = 0.97 m

ENGINEERING Date
NOMENCLATURE
As = Tower cross-sectional area, ft2 (m2)
CPL = Liquid specific heat, Btu/lb°F (kJ/kg°C)
CPV = Vapor specific heat, Btu/lbºF (kJ/kg°C)
0.5
 ρv 
CS = Vapor load/ft2 or (m2), = Vs   , ft/s (m/s)
 ρL − ρv 
Dt = Tower diameter, ft (mm)
fp = HETP factor relative to 2 in. (50 mm) Pall Ring (obtained from Table 1, Section III-G)
G = Vapor rate, lb/hr (kg/s)
H = "Effective" vertical spacing between baffle or shed rows, ft (m)
HGH = Height of a gas phase heat transfer unit, ft (m)
km = Multi-component correction factor, dimensionless
L = Liquid rate, lb/hr (kg/s)
lo = Tray outlet weir length, in. (mm)
NA = Number of actual trays, dimensionless
NGH = Number of gas phase heat transfer units per tray, dimensionless
NGH = Total number of heat transfer units required, dimensionless

Np = Number of liquid passes per tray, dimensionless
P = Pressure, psia (kPa)
Po = Product withdrawal from pumparound section, lb/hr (kg/s)
QL = Volumetric liquid rate, gpm (dm3/s)
Qo = External pumparound (exchanger) duty, Btu/hr (kW)
R = Internal reflux, lb/hr (kg/s)
T = Vapor temperature, °F (°C)
∆T = TI – To, °F (°C)
∆Tlm = Log-mean temperature difference (LMTD), °F (°C)
t = Liquid temperature, °F (°C)
Vs = Vapor velocity based on tower cross-sectional area, ft/s (m/s)
Z = Height of packing required, ft (m)
ZB = Vertical spacing between packed bed and accumulator tray high liquid level, ft (m)
ZS = Vertical spacing between spray nozzles and packed bed, ft (m)
to − tI
λH = , dimensionless
TI − To
ρL = Liquid density, lb/ft3 (kg/m3)
ρv = Vapor density, lb/ft3 (kg/m3)
Subscripts
AV = Average of heat transfer section inlet and outlet conditions
B = Open contacting space between packed bed and accumulator tray high liquid level
I = Inlet to heat transfer section
O = Outlet from heat transfer section
PA = External pumparound
R = Internal reflux
S = Open contacting space between sprays and packed bed

Date ENGINEERING
ç COMPUTER PROGRAMS
For up-to-date information on available programs and how to use them, affiliate personnel should contact their
FRACTIONATION SPECIALIST. A site's TECHNICAL COMPUTING CONTACT can also provide help on accessing available
programs. Direct contact heat transfer programs can be accessed through two sources.
AVAILABLE PROGRAMS
SOURCE PROGRAM NAME OR NUMBER VERSION NUMBER

PEGASYS (Under
Fractionating Towers) Direct Contact Heat Transfer 3.2
Jet Tray 2.4
Packed Tower 7.1
Stand-Alone #3019 (Jet Tray) 2.4
#3454 (Packed Tower) 7.1
The Direct Contact Heat Transfer program will determine the height of packing or number of shed rows or trays needed for heat
transfer. In contrast, the Jet Tray program will calculate only the number of jet trays needed, and the Packed Tower program
will only calculate the packed bed height needed; however, these latter two programs will do hydraulic calculations at the same
time.
An input form for the stand-alone program #3019 is available in "Computer Program Update, Jet Tray Design Program #3019,"
CPEE-7, December 1989. An input form for the stand-alone program #3454 is available in "Computer Information
Memorandum Packed Tower Design Program #3454," EE.36E.89, June, 1989.

ENGINEERING Date
FIGURE 1A
HEAT TRANSFER CORRELATION
FOR SIEVE, VALVE, BUBBLE CAP, AND JET TRAYS
(CUSTOMARY UNITS)
3
NGH , Number of Heat Transfer Units
6)
EQ (1
0.
5
0.5 1 2 5 10 20 30
DP3Ff1a QL / Nplo, gpm / in.
FIGURE 1B
HEAT TRANSFER CORRELATION
FOR SIEVE, VALVE, BUBBLE CAP, AND JET TRAYS
(METRIC UNITS)
3
NGH, Number of Heat Transfer Units
6)
EQ (1
0.5
1 2 5 10 20 50 100
DP3Ff1b QL / Nplo, dm3 / s / m

Date ENGINEERING
FIGURE 2A
HEAT TRANSFER CORRELATION FOR BAFFLE AND SHED SECTIONS
(CUSTOMARY UNITS)
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
)
(18
0.4 c. EQ
/se
0 ft
=1
Vs
5
0.3
2
1
0.2
0.5
Baffle or Shed Multiply

Spacing, H, ft NGH by
3 1.22
0.1 2.5 1.12
2 1.0
1.5 0.866
1 0.707
0.5 0.500
0.05
1 2 5 10 20 30 50
DP3Ff2a QL / As, gpm / ft 2

ENGINEERING Date
FIGURE 2B
HEAT TRANSFER CORRELATION FOR BAFFLE AND SHED SECTIONS
(METRIC UNITS)
0.8
0.5 18)
Q(
/s E
= 3m
Vs
2
0.3
1
0.5
5
0.2 0.2
Baffle or Shed Multiply

Spacing, H, m NGH by
0.1
0.8 1.15
0.6 1.0
0.4 0.816
0.2 0.577
0.5
1 2 5 10 20 30
3 2
QL / As, dm / s / m
DP3Ff2b

Date ENGINEERING
FIGURE 3A
HEAT TRANSFER CORRELATIONS
FOR COUNTERCURRENT CONTACTING DEVICES
(CUSTOMARY UNITS)
BT
MS
2 ect
ion
EQ
(23
HGH = Height of Heat Transfer Unit, ft
)
Sp
ra
ys
C (Z
S =
0. ≤2
C 1 ft)
S = C
1 0. S =
05 0.
2
EQ
(2
1)
2 in.
Pall R
ings *
EQ (2
2)
0.5
0.2
2 3 4 5 7 10 20 30 50
QL / As, gpm / ft 2
* For different packings or grids, multiply the HGH

for 2 in. Pall Rings
by fp obtained from Table 1A or 1B, Subsection III -G.
Note: For vacuum pipestill bottom pumparound sections with diameter greater than 20 ft multiply H GH by 1.5
DP3Ff3a

ENGINEERING Date
FIGURE 3B
HEAT TRANSFER CORRELATIONS
FOR COUNTERCURRENT CONTACTING DEVICES
(METRIC UNITS)
3.0
2.0
1.0
HGH = Height of Heat Transfer Unit, m
BT
MS
ect
Sp ion
ra EQ
ys (23
C C )
s = s = (Z
0. 0. ≤
C 04 08 0.
0.5 s = 6m
0. )E
02 Q
(2
1)
50mm
Pall R
0.2 ings *
EQ (22)
0.1
1 2 5 10 20 30
QL / As, dm3 / s/ m2
* For different packings or grids, multiply the HGH

for 50 mm Pall Rings
by fp obtained from Table 1A or 1B, Subsection III -G.
Note: For vacuum pipestill bottom pumparound sections with diameter greater than 6 m multiply H GH
by 1.5
DP3Ff3b

Date ENGINEERING
FIGURE 4
∆TIm NOMOGRAPH (SAME FOR CUSTOMARY AND METRIC UNITS)
10
(To – tI) – (TI – to)
0
100
∆Tlm =
90
To – tI 90
ln
80
TI – to 80
°C
70
or: or 70
30
,°
∆T1 – ∆ T2 F
60
0
60
LMTD = ∆T1 TD
LM
50
ln 50
∆T2 ce
ren
40
e 40
iff
20
D
0
e
ur
at
30
r 30
pe
Smaller Terminal Temperature Difference ∆ T2, ° F or ° C

15
em
0
T
n
ea
20
M 20
g
Lo
10
15
0
90
80
70
10
10
60
9
50
8
7
40
6
30
4
20
3
15
2
10
9
8
7
6
5
1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 400 500 600 800 1000
Greater Terminal Temperature Difference ∆ T1, ° F or ° C
Note: When ∆T1 or ∆T2 is outside the range of this chart, these values may be multiplied by a factor, such as 0.5,
2.0, etc., and the resulting LMTD divided by the same factor.
For example:
Given ∆T1 (actual) = 200° and ∆T2 (actual) = 150°. Using a factor of 0.5, ∆T'1 = 100° and ∆T'2 = 75°.
From the chart, LMTD = 87°
87 o
Then LMTD (actual) = = 174o Reference: Figure T-3.1, TEMA Standards, 5th Ed., 1968
0.5
DP3Ff04 Reprinted by permission.

ENGINEERING Date
FIGURE 5
MULTICOMPONENT CORRECTION FACTOR, km
(SAME FOR CUSTOMARY AND METRIC UNITS)
3
km
For λ H >5,
Use km = 3.7
1
0 1 2 3 4 5
to – tI
λ H
=
TI – To
Note: There is no equation provided for this curve.

DP3Ff05

ExxonMobil Proprietary Design Practices for Fractionating Towers

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ExxonMobil Proprietary Design Practices for Fractionating Towers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ExxonMobil Proprietary

RESTRICTED ACCESS NOTICE

This practice may contain third party information with confidentiality

Any questions regarding Third Party Restricted Access should be

To continue within this practice CLICK HERE

ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company – Fairfax, VA

EQUIPMENT TYPES AND APPLICATIONS ............................................................................................. 3

BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS........................................................................................................ 4

TOWER SECTIONING ............................................................................................................................. 8

SAMPLE PROBLEM ...............................................................................................................................14

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

ç EQUIPMENT TYPES AND APPLICATIONS

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

EQUIPMENT TYPES AND APPLICATIONS (Cont)

TRAYS (SEE SECTIONS III-A, B, C, D, E)

BAFFLE AND SHED SECTIONS (SEE SECTION III-J)

GRID (SEE SECTION III-G)

PACKING (SEE SECTION III-G)

BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

BASIC INFORMATION REQUIRED

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS (Cont)

DEFINITIONS OF HEAT TRANSFER DUTIES

Heat Transfer Section

where: NGH = Total number of heat transfer units required

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS (Cont)

SIZING HEAT TRANSFER SECTIONS

where: NA = Number of actual trays or baffle (shed) sections

where: Z = Height of packing required, ft (m)

DETERMINING PUMPAROUND DRAWOFF TEMPERATURES

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS (Cont)

OPTIMIZING HEAT TRANSFER SECTIONS

LIMITATIONS OF HEAT TRANSFER CORRELATIONS

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS (Cont)

HOW TO SECTION A TOWER

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

TOWER SECTIONING (Cont)

DP3FfB Increasing Vapor Temperatures

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

PART 1 - PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS

5. Calculate ∆Tlm by the following equation or from Figure 4.

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

CALCULATION PROCEDURES (Cont)

8. Calculate the average volumetric liquid rate, QL.

Lo = LPA + Po + Ro Eq. (12)

ρL @ tAV From PRO/II or PROVISION or from Blue Book Section 8

PART 2 - SPECIFIC DEVICE CALCULATIONS

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

CALCULATION PROCEDURES (Cont)

Baffle and Shed Sections

Packing and Grid

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

CALCULATION PROCEDURES (Cont)

12. Calculate the height of a heat transfer unit, HGH.

For packing, HGHP:

where: fp can be found in Table 1 of Section III-G

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

EXXON RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING COMPANY - FLORHAM PARK, N.J.

SAMPLE PROBLEM (Cont)