Consultancy.

Project Delivery.
Innovation.

Case Study: Column Relief Study

Using Dynamic Simulation for in-depth relief study
Client: Milford Haven Refinery
Who are we?

Process engineering consultancy

Specialising in advanced modelling techniques, to give answers that
are more accurate, reliable and robust
Expertise in HYSYS Dynamics and Dynsim
Decades of process and mechanical engineering experience
Combine cutting edge simulation with real world understanding, to
provide you with solutions that are effective and practical.
Core team of eight engineers, supported by a wide network of
associates.
Extensive simulation experience across a range of industries

Page  2
Project Background

Naphtha Splitter Column throughput increased, required significant

hardware changes
Installed new relief valves and a high pressure trip as part of project
Project flare study had inconsistencies picked up by HSE audit
Recent site power failure resulted in liquid droplets in flare stack, the
suspicion was that could originate from Naphtha Splitter Column
Site decided to complete a comprehensive dynamic study of tower to
properly understand complex flare scenarios

Page  3
Column and Relief Valves

New Pilot Relief Valves

Page  4
Hardware Improvements
New Pilot Relief Valves
New Pressure Control

New High Pressure Trip

Additional Condenser Area

New Relief Valve

New Trays

Larger Bottoms Pumps

Page  5
Column Interconnection

12 barg
(Design 13.7 barg)

Debutaniser

Naphtha Splitter
1.5 barg
(Design 5.0 barg)

Pressure Transfer

Debutaniser bottoms feeds

Naphtha Splitter Column

Page  6
Dynamic Modelling

Model Developed in Dynsim 5.0

High Fidelity – included all control response, liquid and vapour holdup,
e.g. characteristics of thermosyphon reboiler
Important to model the response of pilot relief valves with significant flare
backpressure effects
Important to model all equipment directly upstream and downstream of
column
Model rating using actual plant data, reveals hidden features, such as
position of bypass valves and controller settings

Page  7
Main Relief Scenarios

External Fire
Partial Power Failure

Total Power Failure

Tube Failure

High to Low
Depressurisation

Page  8
Main Findings

Effect of pressuring the column and accumulating lights in overheads

helps to pinch reboiler and reduce relief load. Justifies the large margin
between operating and design pressure.
Liquid tends to relieve first via the reflux drum and then by main pilot
relief valves creating hazardous two phase in the flare header (which
may explain previous site event)
On power failure: Liquid accumulates in the tower as upstream column
depressurises, exceeding design pressure at column base (static head +
column top pressure)
Inadequate fire relief for reflux drum
Inadequate relief capacity for tube fracture. Complex steam stripping
effect occurs

Page  9
Main Recommendations

Increase size of relief valve

Re-rate column to on reflux drum and design
withstand for backpressure
accumulating liquid
during a relief case
Re-rate reflux drum to
prevent liquid preferentially
relieving via low point in
overheads

Page  10
Summary

Dynamic simulation explains complexities such as reduction in heat

transfer rate as thermosyphon recycle rate slows or the effects of steam
entering the column on tube fracture
Complex interconnected events modelled: column to reflux drum, or
column to column that are not intuitive, particularly when pressure and
composition are changing with time.
Visualisation of relief events helps all parties understand the issues
The sensitivity/robustness of the results can be checked by modifying
the assumptions
All recommendations can be checked out using the model before
implementation

Page  11
Summary

Consultancy.
Project Delivery.
Innovation.

Please get in touch to find out how we can help your

business today.
E: enquiries@flexprocess.co.uk W: flexprocess.co.uk
T: +44 1454 629 689
Page  12