Improved Energy Efficiency in

CDUs through Fouling Control

Jimmy D Kumana*, Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas
Dr. Graham T Polley, University of Guanajuato, Mexico
Simon J Pugh, IHS-ESDU, London, UK
Dr. Edward M Ishiyama, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK

AIChE Spring National Meeting, paper 99a

San Antonio, Tx (20-25 March, 2010)

* SPEAKER

OUTLINE

• Cost of HX Fouling

• Causes of Fouling

• Fouling Control & Mitigation

• HEN Cleaning case study

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 2

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 1

 REFINERY ENERGY ISSUES

• Energy inefficiency due mainly to

ƒ Poor operating practices
ƒ Sub-optimal heat recovery (HEN design)
ƒ HX fouling Focus of this presentation

• Typ. energy costs = 59% of Opex

≈ 0.36 MMBtu/bbl
= $3.65 /bbl @ $60/bbl

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 3

Impact of Fouling on Energy Efficiency

Composite U Trend for hot end of HEN (post Desalter) Composite Fouling Factor Trend for the HEN
450 0.0070

400
0.0060

U
Fouling Resistance, ft2-h-f/Btu

350

300
0.0050 Rf
U, Btu/ft2-h-F

250 0.0040

200 0.0030

150
0.0020
100

50 36 months SOR Æ EOR 0.0010

0 0.0000
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time scale, months Time scale, months

Simulation for 200 MBD Refinery, at $ 6/MMBtu

Fuel Penalty compared to Target FIT Furnace Inlet Temp
140 620

120 600

100 $ lost 580 FIT

80
560
FIT, F
MMBtu/h

60
540

40
$12 MM 520

20
500
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 480
-20 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time scale, months Time scale, months

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 4

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 2

 Fouling can also cost Production Loss

22 125
capacity limit
20 120

115
18

Heat duty [MW]

110
Production loss
16 105

100
14 95
Costs [M$]

12 90
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Pumping costs
10 Time [days]

8
Energy costs
6
Emission costs
4
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Time units
Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 5

CDU Fouling: post-Desalter is worst

Asphaltenes,
Clay, Fe gums, clay
sulfides

Sludge +
Corrosion

Coke

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 6

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 3

 INFLUENCE OF O2 CONTENT

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 7

FOULING RATE = FN of BLEND COMP.

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 REF. E and Watkinson (2007) 8

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 4

 FOULING RATE IS TEMP SENSITIVE

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 REF. E and Watkinson (2007) 9

ASPHALTENE FOULING

Well described by the deposition-removal model of Ebert &

Panchal. Generalized 3-parameter form (Polley et al, 2009):

dR A ⎛ −E ⎞
= exp⎜ ⎟ − γτ w Asphaltene Fouling
dθ α ⎜ RT f ⎟
⎝ ⎠
6
Fouling
threshold temp Deposition
5 at given velocity rate
Relatiive deposition rate

4 Removal
rate
3

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Temperature, F

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 10

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 5

 FOULING THRESHOLD CONCEPT

Film Temperature

Wall shear stress

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 11

FOULING MITIGATION & CONTROL

SEVERAL TOOLS & TECHNIQUES:

ƒ Crude oil blending

ƒ Parameter control for S&T hx (shear rate, temp)
ƒ Tube inserts
ƒ Low-fouling HX – twisted tube, compabloc,
helical
ƒ Anti-fouling additives
ƒ Optimize HX cleaning schedule
ƒ Restructure HEN configuration

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 12

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 6

 CRUDE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 13

HX PARAMETER CONTROL, using Fouling Map

Existing HX
operating point

Fouling zone

Velocity
(and ∆P)
Target too high
operating zone

Black line = acceptable (target) fouling rate

Fouling rates increase rapidly at higher temps

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 REF. Screenshot, ExpressPlus® s/w from IHS-ESDU (2006) 14

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 7

 HX modification strategy

Fouling zone

Velocity
(and ∆P)
Target too high
operating zone

Goal = Move operating point towards Target Zone

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 REF. Screenshot, ExpressPlus® s/w from IHS-ESDU (2006) 15

TURBULENCE PROMOTION, INSERTS

hiTRAN from
Cal Gavin - suitable
for residues
(sedimentation) - but
not crude (chem
reaction)

TURBOTAL from Petroval (suitable for crude oil)

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 16

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 8

 SHELL-SIDE HELICAL BAFFLES

BETTER TEMP
PROFILE AND
FLOW PATTERN

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 17

TWISTED TUBE BUNDLES

Benefits: baffle-free design; lower DP; no dead spots; less fouling; cleanable;
higher tube density; no vibration; true counter-current flow in “F-shell” config.

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 18

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 9

 TWISTED TUBE BUNDLE GEOMETRY

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 19

COMPABLOC HX (ALFA LAVAL)

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 20

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 10

 Optimizing HX Cleaning Schedule - 1

Cleaned

U Trend for a HX

Traditional method: 500

450

• Calculate U for each 400

HX from plant data 350

U, Btu/ft2-h-F
300
• Plot U vs time 250

• Clean HX (usually 200

hydrodrilling) when U 150

falls below some 100

50
target value 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time scale, months

• U may be low for reasons other than fouling, eg. low flow rates,
change in fluid properties, etc
• This HX may not be the main cause of low FIT
Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 21

Optimizing HX Cleaning Schedule - 2

Better method:
ƒ Calculate U for each HX from plant data
ƒ Calculate clean film ht & hs using correlations
ƒ Estimate Rf = 1/U – 1/ht – 1/hs
ƒ Plot Rf vs time
ƒ Predict impact on FIT w/ hi-fidelity HEN sim model
ƒ Monitor ∆P (both sides) across each HX
ƒ Apply fouling suppression techniques
ƒ Clean when cost of extra energy or lost production
capacity exceeds Cleaning cost

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 22

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 11

 Smart HX Cleaning software

REF. Ishiyama, “Scheduling & desalter control in CDUs”, Schaldming conf (2009)
Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 23

CDU Case Study (2009)

14

13

12
HEX Number

11

10

8
0 6 12 18 24 30 36
Time (months)

220

210
CIT (oC)

Furnace coil inlet temp (CIT) was 200

maintained within Target range

190
0 6 12 18 24 30 36
Time (months)
REF. Ishiyama, “Fouling mitigation options in ref preheat”, Energy & Fuels (2009)
Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 24

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 12

 HEN REVAMPS

• Resequencing of HX matches to keep tube-wall temps

below fouling limit (goes against temp profile philosophy
of Pinch Analysis)

• Generally not advisable unless done in conjunction with

major process modification or capacity expansion

• Installed spares are expensive (and take up valuable

real estate)

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 25

HEN Restructuring, based on DFP

Hot End
Cold End

C
B
A

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 (Screen shot from Integrity® software, IHS-ESDU) 26

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 13

 Design HEN and HX within Zones

• Section A – non-fouling regime, follow

Pinch Design method (using DFP)

• Section B – velocity control (may

require HX mods) to suppress fouling

• Section C – needs special

consideration

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 27

Transition between Sections B & C

Tubewall temp limit Note max

is typically ~ 450oF Criss-cross matches Tw = 500F
600

500
450 F
400

Zone C
300
T

Zones A+B H1
200 H2
cold

100
DH = 100 – 25 = 75 Tw 1
Tw 2

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
DH, MMBtu/h

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 28

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 14

 Idea: what if we did Criss-cross matching?

Criss-cross matches

600

500
450 F
400

300
T

H1
200 H2
cold

100
DH = 75 Tw 1
Tw 2

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
DH, MMBtu/h

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 29

Tw stays within limit for extended ∆H range !

Criss-cross matches
Follow DFP
600

500
450 F
400

300
T

H1
200 H2
cold
100
DH = 112 -25 = 87 Tw 1
Tw 2

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
DH, MMBtu/h

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 30

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 15

 Note that max Tw also drops

Criss-cross matches Max Tw

= 475F
600

500
450 F
400
Zone C
300
T

For HX in Zone C,
H1
use Tube Inserts
200 H2
cold
100 Tw 1
Tw 2

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
DH, MMBtu/h

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 31

Implications for HEN structure + economics

• Smaller HX area for high-∆T cross-match

• More HX area for low-∆T cross-match
• Reduced overall fouling rate over a larger heat
transfer range, which helps to extend run time
(extremely valuable)
• Tube inserts can reduce fouling rates even
further
• No energy penalty
• Furnace capacity maintained

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 32

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 16

 FOULING CONTROL: EXPECTED BENEFITS

20

18 Capacity
CO2 credits
16
Energy
14

~ US$ 1 MM/yr 12

MM$
10

8
for every 10 MBD
6

0
2 4 6 8 10 12
Avoidable lost production, equiv Days/yr

ASSUMPTIONS

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 33

SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS

• Historically Refinery Fouling has been accepted as

unavoidable & uncontrollable
• Research progress in past 10-15 years shows that it is
mostly due to asphaltene deposition
• Portfolio of techniques for mitigation and control:
• Crude oil blending
• Parameter control for S&T hx (shear rate, temp)
• Tube inserts
• Low-fouling HX – twisted tube, compabloc, helical
• Anti-fouling additives
• Optimize HX cleaning schedules
• Restructure HEN configuration
• Potential Energy savings ~5 cents/bbl

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 34

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 17

 Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 35

Operating Expense Breakdown (2006)

All Other
Fixed Costs, Energy,
1% 59%
T/A
Maintenance,
7%
Non-
Non-T/A
Maintenance,
7%
Non-
Non-
Maintenance
Personnel,
8% Other Volume--
Volume
Related, Chemicals, Catalysts &
4% 3% Catalyst Additives,
11%

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 REF. Solomon Assoc pres at IAPG Conf, Mendoza, Argentina (2006) 36

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 18

 REFINERY FOULING

• Dirt or other insulating layers build up on processing equipment

• Energy efficiency falls; Furnace becomes capacity-limiting
• An age-old problem that is getting worse as average API drops

7000 43

6000 42
medium
5000 heavy 41

4000 40
MBD
3000 39
light
°API
2000 38

1000 °API (w/o NGL)

37

0 NGLs 36
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Chart courtesy of IHS-CERA, Cambridge, Mass

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 37

MULTIPLE MECHANISMS

• Iron sulfides (generally upstream of desalter/dehy)

• Clays – physical sedimentation of fine particles

• Polymer gums – caused by presence of N, S, O

• Asphaltenes (poly-aromatic rings) – chemical

reaction, generally occurs at hot end of CDU
preheat train

ANALYSIS OF DEPOSITS TYPCALLY SHOWS ABOUT 80% ORGANICS,

AND 20% INORGANICS

Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas © 2010 38

(c) Kumana & Associates, 10-2009 19