BIOGAS SWEETENING AND FRACTIONATIONسامح

Alexandria University
Faculty of Engineering
Mechanical Engineering Department
BIOGAS SWEETENING AND FRACTIONATION
A Thesis Submitted to the

Faculty of Engineering - Alexandria University
In partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
In
Mechanical Engineering
By
Eng/ Sameh Tawfik Abdel Fattah Mahmoud
2016
Alexandria University
Faculty of Engineering
BIOGAS SWEETENING AND FRACTIONATION
By
Eng/ Sameh Tawfik Abdel Fattah Mahmoud
Examiner's Committee Approved
Prof Dr /Medhat Mohamoud Sorour .................................

Faculty of Engineering- Alexandria University
Prof Dr /Abdel Hamid Attia Elsaid .................................

Chairman of Mechanical Engineering Department
Prof Dr / Mohamed Ahmed Moawad .................................

Faculty of Engineering- Banha University
Vice Dean for Graduated Studies and Research

Prof. Dr/ Magdy Mohamed Abd Elazeem .................................
Advisor's Committee Approved
Prof Dr /Abdel Hamid Attia Elsaid .................................

Chairman of Mechanical Engineering Department
Dr/ Yehya Abdel Monem Eldrainy .................................

ii
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................... iv
Abstract ............................................................................................................................................. v
Nomenclature and Terminology .................................................................................................... vi
List of Symbols ............................................................................................................................... vii
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ viii
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER 1(INTRODUCTION) ...................................................................................... 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1.1 Biomethane................................................................................................................. 2
1.1.2 Compressed Biogas .................................................................................................... 2
1.1.3 Biohydrogen ............................................................................................................... 2
1.1.4 Syngas ........................................................................................................................ 2
1.2 OBJECTIVE ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 sCOPE .............................................................................................................................................................. 5
1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS ............................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 2 (LITERATURE REVIEW) ......................................................................... 7

2.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 7
2.2 biogas purification ............................................................................................................................................ 7
2.2.1 Reasons for Sweetening ............................................................................................. 8

2.2.2 Sweetening Cycle Quality Requirements ................................................................... 8
2.2.3 Sweeting Cycle Amine Type Selection ...................................................................... 8
2.2.4 Measurement of Heat of Absorption ........................................................................ 10
2.3 Dehydration Cycle .......................................................................................................................................... 11
2.3.1 Effect of Water Content ........................................................................................... 12

2.3.2 Ways of Hydrate Prevention .................................................................................... 12
2.3.3 Measuring Units of Biogas Water Content .............................................................. 13
2.3.4 Methods of Dehydration........................................................................................... 13
2.4 Separators ....................................................................................................................................................... 13
In an oil field separation system, the substances to be separated are oil, water and gas. It
depends on the difference of densities between oil containments . .......................................... 13
i
2.4.1 Separator Types ........................................................................................................ 13
2.4.2 The Separation Principle .......................................................................................... 14
2.4.3 Factors Affecting Separator Performance ................................................................ 14
2.4.4 The Separator Inlet ................................................................................................... 14
2.4.5 The Separator Outlet ................................................................................................ 15
2.4.6 Separation Procedure................................................................................................ 15
2.4.7 Phases of Separator .................................................................................................. 15
2.5 DISTILLATION COLUMNS ........................................................................................................................ 17
2.5.1 Absorption and Reaction Mechanisms ..................................................................... 18

2.5.2 Equilibrium Models.................................................................................................. 18
2.5.3 Column Models in Simulation Programs ................................................................. 19
2.5.4 Column Convergence ............................................................................................... 20
2.5.5 Flow Sheet Convergence .......................................................................................... 20
2.5.6 Columns Sizing ........................................................................................................ 21
2.5.7 Gravity Separators .................................................................................................... 21
2.5.8 Hydro Cyclone ......................................................................................................... 21
2.5.9 CO2 Removal Sensitivity Calculation ...................................................................... 21
2.5.10 Circulation Rate........................................................................................................ 21
2.5.11 Number of Absorption Stages .................................................................................. 22
2.5.12 Absorber Inlet and Outlet ......................................................................................... 23
2.5.13 Reboiler .................................................................................................................... 24
2.5.14 Condenser ................................................................................................................. 24
2.5.15 Distillation Column .................................................................................................. 24
2.5.16 Cap Layout ............................................................................................................... 24
2.5.17 Bottom Strainer ........................................................................................................ 25
2.5.18 Efflux Distributor ..................................................................................................... 25
2.5.19 Top Tower Demister ................................................................................................ 26
2.6 Heat Exchanger (HTEX) ................................................................................................................................ 27
2.7 egyptian waste statistics .................................................................................................................................. 27
CHAPTER 3 (METHODOLOGY) .................................................................................. 30

3.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 30
3.2 METHODology .............................................................................................................................................. 30
3.2.1 Typical Acid Gas Sweetening Cycle ........................................................................ 31

3.2.2 Sweetening Cycle Explanation ................................................................................. 31
ii
3.3 Dehydration and purification Cycle ................................................................................................................ 36
3.4 Part Load OPERATION CYCLE ................................................................................................................... 36
CHAPTER 4 (RESULTS AND DISCUSSION).............................................................. 40

4.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 40
4.2 EFFECT OF DIFFERENT AMINES ON ACIDIC GASES REMOVAL ..................................................... 40
4.3 EFFECT OF DEA CONCENTRATION ON H2S, CO2 AND METHANE CONTENTS .............................. 45
4.4 EFFECT OF FEED GAS TEMPERATURE ON CO2 AND METHANE CONTENTS ................................ 48
4.5 EFFECT OF PSA WORKING PRESSURE ON H2S, CO2 AND METHANE CONTENTS......................... 49
4.5.1 Effect of NG PSA Working Pressure on CO2 Content............................................. 49

4.5.2 Effect of NG PSA Working Pressure on H2S Content ............................................. 49
4.5.3 Effect of NG PSA Working Pressure on Methane Content ..................................... 50
4.5.4 Effect of Biogas PSA Working pressure on CO2 Content........................................ 51
4.5.5 Effect of Biogas PSA Working pressure on H2S content ......................................... 52
4.5.6 Effect of Biogas PSA Working Pressure on Methane Content ................................ 52
4.6 EFFECT OF PSA GEOMETRY ON H2S, CO2 AND METHANE CONTENTS .......................................... 54
4.6.1 The Effect of Absorber Diameter ............................................................................. 54

4.6.2 Effect of Absorber Number of Stages ...................................................................... 56
4.6.3 Effect of Absorber Tray Spacing.............................................................................. 57
4.7 EFFECT OF DEHYDRATION ON PURE METHANE H2O CONTENT AND METHANE PURITY ....... 58
4.8 Fractionation and purification ......................................................................................................................... 59
4.9 Part Load OPERATION CYCLE ................................................................................................................... 60
4.10 Plant feasibility ............................................................................................................................................... 60
CHAPTER 5 (CONCLUSION AND RECOMONDATION FOR FUTURE WORK)62

5.1 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................. 62
5.2 Recomondation for future works .................................................................................................................... 63
APPENDEX-1 (Part Load Inlet Valve Opening) ........................................................... 68
ARABIC SUMMERY ....................................................................................................... 74
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I feel always indebted to Allah, the most merciful and most compassionate and I ask him to
make this thesis useful for all who read it.
My deep heartfelt thanks to my great family especially my parents for their love,
understanding, patience and encouragement.
I would like to express my extreme gratitude to all those who contributed practically and
morally to the achievement of this research. No words can adequately express my sincere
appreciation to Prof. Dr. Abdelhamid Attia El-Sayed and Dr. Yehia A. Eldrainy for their
patience, motivation, and immense knowledge. I feel greatly honored to have been working
under their supervision.
My grateful appreciation and deepest thanks are further extended to Prof. Dr. Medhat
Sorour, Dr. Wael Elmeghlany, Dr. Maged E.Elnady, Eng. Ahmed Dyab and Eng. Ahmed
Mokhtar for their helpful advice, constant support and generous effort and assistance
during various phases of this work.
I would also like to thank all the professors and staff members of Mechanical Engineering
Department, Faculty of Engineering, University of Alexandria, and everyone who
cooperated with me in this work.
iv
ABSTRACT
Many problems such as energy crisis, water crisis and waste accumulation threaten the
Egyptian economy to a great extent. Undoubtedly, finding an integrated solution to these
problems is essential for both economic and environmental development in the status of
Egypt. Therefore, this study aims to propose an integrated solution that would be of
noticeable benefit to these problems. Among the proposed solutions is finding a suitable
way for the recycling of the accumulated waste. The objective of this study is to produce
pure methane with more than 99 % purity which can be used in different applications and
specifically in calibration and sophisticated devices. These devices, such as X-Ray material
analyzer, use very high pure methane after mixing with argon gas to analyze different
materials and alloys in different states such as solids, liquids and gases. In addition, in this
investigation; the Aspen HYSYS simulation program was used to simulate a biogas
upgrading plant. This plant can operate at part load, and it is designed especially for
upgrading the Egyptian biogas which is extracted from available waste in Egypt and
consists mainly of methane, carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide with an approximate
percentage of 70, 25 and 3, respectively. Moreover, this plant contains very little amount of
other gases such as water vapor, hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen. This simulation used the
DEA amine solvent at 30 % strength for sweetening. This process requires the removing of
acidic gases CO2 and H2S simultaneously from an amount of feed biogas which has a total
volume flow rate of around 13 m3 / h. The process utilizes a 20-stage PSA absorption
column having a pressure range from 25 to 26 bar, at a temperature about 43 C. After the
removal of CO2 and H2S, there is another simulation process of dehydration and
purification for the sweet gas containing methane, carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide
with a percentage 99.5, 0.0 and 0.0, respectively. However, it has a little percentage of
water vapor 0.0042 %, 0.0001 %, 0.0003 % and 0.0004 % of hydrogen nitrogen and
oxygen respectively. The dehydration process used e-glycol at 0.9 strength, 25 bars and 20
C. The final process is the purification process in which an activated carbon module that
contains 20 kg carbon has been used. The results of this simulation process were methane
with purity of 99.99 %, 0.0 % of CO2, H2S and H2O. The consumed power was 4549
kW.hr/m3 for producing the pure methane. In case of feed gas shortage, the upgrading
cycle can operate by 20 % part load operation.
v
NOMENCLATURE and TERMINOLOGY
AGRU …………………………. Acid Gas Removal Unit
BH …………………………. Compressed Biogas
BM …………………………. Bio Methane
BS …………………………. Bio Syngas
C.V …………………………. Calorific Value
CB …………………………. Separation
CS …………………………. Cryogenic
DEA …………………………. Di-Ethanol-Amine
DGA …………………………. Di-Glycol-Amine
EM …………………………. Murphree efficiency
FAO …………………………. Food and Agriculture Organization
HPWW …………………………. High Pressure Water Wash
HTEX …………………………. Heat exchanger
LIC …………………………. Level Control
L/R ………………………… Lean/Reach heat exchanger
MDEA …………………………. Methyl-Di-Ethanol-Amine
MEA …………………………. Mono-Ethanol-Amine
MMSCF …………………………. MillionStandard Cubic Feet
MS …………………………. Membrane Separation
NRTL …………………………. Non-Random-Two-Liquid
O.P …………………………. Valve Opening
ORFC …………………………. Oxy Reforming Fuel Cell
PA …………………………. Physical Absorption
PIC …………………………. pressure control
ppm …………………………. Part Per Million
PR …………………………. Peng Robinson
PSA …………………………. Pressure Swing Absorber
RPR …………………………. Residue to Product Ratio s
RA …………………………. Reactive Absorption
S.P …………………………. Set Point
SRK …………………………. Soave Redlich Kwong
SRU …………………………. Sulfur Recovery Unit
UK …………………………. United Kingdom
UNCCD …………………………. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
vi
LIST OF SYMBOLS
a …………….. Gas liquid interface area ( m2/m3)
CH4 …………….. Methane
CO2 …………….. Carbon Dioxide
COS …………….. Carbon sulphide
CS2 …………….. Carbon disulphide
h …………….. Liquid hold up ( m3/m3)
H2 …………….. hydrogen
H2O …………….. Water
H2S …………….. Hydrogen Sulfide
N2 …………….. Nitrogen
O2 …………….. Oxigen
ORFC …………….. Oxy Reforming Fuel Cell
ptot …………….. is the total pressure of the gas mixture
px …………….. is the partial pressure of gas (X)
Vtot …………….. is the total volume of the gas mixture
Vx …………….. is the partial volume of an individual gas component (X) in the mixture
y …………….. mole fraction of CO2 in the gas leaving the stage
y* …………….. mole fraction CO2 in equilibrium with the liquid leaving the stage
…………….. mole fraction leaving the stage below
yn-1
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 The sustainable strategy for municipal solid waste.............................................. 3
Figure1.2 The contribution of biogas energy conversion to solving global warming ......... 4
Figure 2.1 CO2 absorption curves of the 30 wt % aqueous amine solutions ...................... 11
Figure 2.2 Biogas and contamination ................................................................................. 12
Figure 2.3 Hydrates formation ........................................................................................... 13
Figure 2.4 Two-phase separator ......................................................................................... 14
Figure 2.5 Three-phase separator ....................................................................................... 14
Figure 2.6 Separation procedure ......................................................................................... 15
Figure 2.7 Separation sectors .............................................................................................. 16
Figure 2.8 Straightening vanes ........................................................................................... 17
Figure 2.9 Regenerator ....................................................................................................... 18
Figure 2.10 Definition of Murphree efficiency ................................................................... 20
Figure 2.11 Circulation rate dependence ............................................................................ 22
Figure 2.12 Number of stages dependence ......................................................................... 22
Figure 2.13 Absorber temperature dependence .................................................................. 23
Figure 2.14 Cap layout ....................................................................................................... 25
Figure 2.15 Bottom strainer ................................................................................................ 25
Figure 2.16 Reflux distributor ............................................................................................ 26
Figure 2.17 Top tower demister ......................................................................................... 26
Figure 2.18 Proposed integrated solution for accumulated waste in Egypt ........................ 28
Figure 2.19 Utilization of centralized biogas plant ............................................................ 28
Figure 3.1 Schematic of simple acid gas sweetening cycle ................................................ 31
Figure 3.2 Typical Aspen HYSYS natural gas sweetening cycle ...................................... 33
Figure 3.3 The absorber column ......................................................................................... 34
Figure 3.4 Acid gas dehydration and purification Cycle ..................................................... 38
viii
Figure 3.5 Part load operation cycle .................................................................................... 39
Figure 4.1 The ability of different amines to remove CO2 .................................................. 41
Figure 4.2 The ability of different amines to remove H2S .................................................. 41
Figure 4.3 The ability of different amines to remove H2O.................................................. 42
Figure 4.4 The ability of different amines to remove H2..................................................... 42
Figure 4.5 The ability of different amines to remove O2..................................................... 43
Figure 4.6 The ability of different amines to remove N2..................................................... 43
Figure 4.7 The ability of different amines to purify methane ............................................. 44
Figure 4.8 The Effect of DEA Concentration on H2S Contents .......................................... 46
Figure 4.9 The Effect of DEA Concentration on CO2Contents .......................................... 46
Figure 4.10 The Effect of DEA Concentration on Methane purity ..................................... 47
Figure 4.11 Optimization of DEA concentration ................................................................ 48
Figure 4.12 The effect of feed gas temperature on CO2 and methane contents................... 48
Figure 4.13 The effect of NG PSA working pressure on CO2 content ................................ 49
Figure 4.14 The effect of NG PSA working pressure on H2S content ................................ 50
Figure 4.15 The Effect of NG PSA working pressure on methane purity........................... 51
Figure 4.16 Effect of biogas PSA working pressure on CO2 content.................................. 51
Figure 4.17 Effect PSA biogas working pressure on H2S content ...................................... 52
Figure 4.18 Effect of biogas PSA working pressure on Methane content .......................... 53
Figure 4.19 Effect of absorber diameter H2S content.......................................................... 55
Figure 4.20 Effect of Absorber Diameter on Methane Content .......................................... 55
Figure 4.21 The effect of absorber number of stages on rich amine CO2 contents ............. 56
Figure 4.22 The Effect of Absorber Number of Stages on Rich Amine H2S Contents ...... 57
Figure 4.23 Effect of absorber number of stages on methane content ................................ 57
ix
List of Tables
Table 1.1 The negative effects of biogas components .......................................................... 5
Table 2.1 The physical properties of MEA, DEA and MDEA ............................................. 9
Table 2.2 Typical operating conditions and data for amines ................................................ 9
Table 2.3 Solubility of CO2 in the aqueous amine solutions .............................................. 11
Table 2.4 Types of agricultural waste that could be collected from Egypt ........................ 27
Table 2.5 Typical composition of biogas in Egypt ............................................................. 29
Table 3.1 Feed natural gas composition in mole and volume fraction ............................... 35
Table 3.2 Feed Egyptian biogas composition ...................................................................... 35
Table 3.3 Feed Egyptian biogas conditions ......................................................................... 35
Table 3.4 Lean amine conditions ......................................................................................... 36
Table 3.5 Lean amine composition...................................................................................... 36
Table 3.6 Sweet gas dehydration cycle composition ........................................................... 37
x
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter begins by giving a general overview about waste accumulation and energy
crisis that are considered some of the recurrent problems in Egypt. Based on the study of
these problems, this chapter attempts to propose an integral solution that would help in
solving them via biogas generation and fractionation. An explanation of the objective of
this study and the scope used to achieve it follows. Finally, the chapter ends by a detailed
organization plan of the thesis.
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Egypt total land area is one Million Km2, and 97% of the total area is a hyper arid desert,
which is totally exposed to drought and desertification disasters. More than 90 million
people, representing more than 1.16% of the total world population, occupy only 4% of the
total area. In other words, nearly 1 of every 86 people on the planet is a resident of Egypt.
One must put into consideration, therefore, that Egypt is among the countries that
drastically suffer from numerous problems that threaten its economy and its national
security.
Biogas can eventually be upgraded and fractioned into many components, which can be
used separately for other useful applications [1] for example:
1. Extraction of methane gas [2], which represents the largest percentage/portion of
biogas components and can be used in many applications. The most important can be
used directly as a means to generate thermal energy required for the operation of
power plants and the operation of vehicles as methane, which is also included in
many petrochemical industries.
2. Extraction of carbon dioxide gas [3], which is used in many industries such as dry
ice, fire extinguishers and soft drinks.
3. Extraction of sulfur dioxide gas [4], which is used in the preparation of sulfuric acid.
It is also required for the manufacture of acid batteries in addition to many other
applications such as glass and heat exchanger cleaning.
4. Using solid waste remains after extracting the basic components of biogas as a
fertilizer to increase the fertility of the agricultural land. This contributes
significantly to the increase of the cultivated land area all over the Arab Republic of
Egypt [5].
Despite the large energy production potential, Egypt has become dependent on
hydrocarbon imports because of the structural increase in domestic consumption and the
stagnation of investment. The negative consequences are substantial: a deteriorating trade
balance, swelling budget deficit and disrupted economic activity. Recent support from the
oil producing countries has helped reduce short-term pressures. Thereafter, an investment
in Egypt energy sector should be reformed to be more attractive.
Biogas fuel can also be upgraded to marketable gaseous fuels such as bio methane,
compressed biogas, bio hydrogen and syngas [6]. This technological option enables energy
accumulation, which is very problematic with electrical energy.
1.1.1 Biomethane
Biogas can be upgraded to biomethane (BM) and injected into natural gas grids [7]. The
treatment of biogas generally involves:
1. A cleaning process, in which the harmful components to the natural gas grid are
removed [8].
2. An upgrading process, in which CO2 is removed to adjust the calorific value [9] and
relative density [10] in order to meet natural gas specifications (Wobbe Index) [11].
After the transformation, the final biomethane typically comprises 95‫ط‬97% CH4 and 1‫ط‬3%
CO2. The main technologies for CO2 removal include pressure swing adsorption (PSA)
[12], high-pressure water wash (HPWW), reactive absorption (RA), physical absorption
(PA), membrane separation(MS)[13], and cryogenic separation (CS) [14]. In 2009, in
Europe, the dominating technologies were PSA (33 installations) and HPWW. The
deployment of RA , PA, MS and CS were less popular [15].
1.1.2 Compressed Biogas
Compressed biogas (CB), much like natural gas, can be used to power motor vehicles such
as city buses [16]. However, biogas cleaning is usually required due to impurities [17].
1.1.3 Biohydrogen
Another alternative for biogas is a biogas-to-H2 process for biohydrogen (BH) production
[18] via water electrolysis [19] for example. Budzianowski has proposed another biogas-
to-electricity cycle involving a H2 step—a decarbonized oxy-reforming fuel cell (ORFC)
cycle. According to the ORFC cycle, biogas undergoes catalyticoxy-reforming followed by
shifting to a H2/CO2 mixture which is then separated. The produced hydrogen is consumed
in a fuel cell which supplies a part of generated electricity to water electrolysis for oxygen
production. Oxygen is conveniently consumed for biogas oxy-reforming thus eliminating
nitrogen dilution problem in the system [20].
1.1.4 Syngas
Biogas can also be upgraded to bio-syngas (BS) [21] via reforming [22]. Syngas is then
well-suited for fuel cell applications. Both Figure 1.1 and Figure1.2 illustrate the
sustainable strategy for municipal solid waste management involving sorting, incineration
and digestion steps. Moreover, the contribution of biogas energy conversion to solving
global warming occurs via ‗negative net‘ CO2 atmospheric emission routes. Also biogas
composition contains some other components has negative effects as shown in Table 1.1.
3
Figure 1.1 The sustainable strategy for municipal solid waste management involving sorting, incineration and digestion steps[23]
4
Figure1.2 The contribution of biogas energy conversion to solving global warming [23]
Table 1.1 The negative effects of biogas components [24]
Component Negative Effect
1 Has no BTU value

N2
2 Just takes up space in the gas stream.
1 Reduces the BTU rating of the gas
CO2
2 Corrosive.
1 Corrosive
H2S
2 Toxic
1 Corrosive to pipeline
H2O
2 Can lead to the formation of hydrates
1.2 OBJECTIVE
This research aims to enhance the typical aspen HYSYS natural gas processing cycle in
order to produce pure methane (more than 99 % purity) from Egyptian biogas produced
from available waste in Egypt, especially agriculture waste.
1.3 SCOPE
To fulfill this objective successfully, the following scopes are taken in consideration:
1. Statistical work of the types of waste in Egypt and its availability.
2. Selecting the most suitable available materials in Egypt that can be used in biogas
generation.
3. Confirmation the Aspen HYSYS natural gas processing cycle is possible to treat the
Egyptian biogas instead of natural gas.
4. Making sure the Aspen HYSYS natural gas processing cycle is possible to operate all
year round, especially in the case of low material feeding (part load operation).
5. Optimization of power consumed in pure methane production.
1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS

This thesis consists of five chapters organized as follows:
Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter contains a short explanation of some problems in Egypt such as waste
accumulation and energy crisis. Based on the study of those problems this chapter suggests
an integral solution to solve these problems via biogas generation and fractionation. After
this explanation, the chapter discusses the objective of this study and the scope used to
achieve it. Chapter one ends with a detailed explanation of the organization of this thesis.
Chapter 2: Literature review
This chapter thoroughly surveys the cycles and equipment that are used for natural gas and
biogas treatment and upgrading. The internal design and theory of operation of these cycles
5
and equipment are monitored. At the end of this chapter there is an intricate review of
literature of a number of previous researches dealing with biogas treatment.
Chapter 3: Methodology
This chapter deliberately examines the HYSYS design simulation of biogas treatment
cycles (sweetening, dehydration and purification). It also provides an explanation for cycle
part load operation to insure the cycle operation all year long even in the shortage of raw
materials needed for the biogas treatment.
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
This chapter points out the obtained results of the research and the obtained curves of these
results via the study of the effects of the main parameters (pressure, temperature, DEA
concentration, equipment geometry) on the methane purity. This chapter also explains the
treatment plant visibility study.
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendation
This chapter contains the conclusion of the research to ensure the objective achievement
and results validation. This is attained through a comparison between the research results
and the previous results that were obtained from the literature review. The Chapter
additionally reviews the future work based on the results obtained from the previous work.
The research ends with a complete list of references used to come up with the results
achieved.
6
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter thoroughly surveys the cycles and equipment that are used for natural gas and
biogas treatment and upgrading. The internal design and theory of operation of these cycles
and equipment are monitored. At the end of the chapter there is a review on a number of
previous researches dealing with biogas treatment.
2.2 BIOGAS PURIFICATION

Biogas has to be purified to meet the quality standards specified by the major pipeline
transmission and distribution companies [25]. This goes back to the fact that biogas
contains other impurities such as liquids (water, heavier hydrocarbons), sand, mercury and
other gasses like nitrogen, helium. Moreover, these impurities also include acid gases (CO2
and H2S) which are the main acid gases that may require complete or partial removal
because they can cause corrosion, reduce the heating and sales value of the gas to meet gas
purchaser‘s acceptance in distribution specification, safety and transport requirement.
Those quality standards vary markets from one pipeline to the other and are usually a
function of a pipeline system‘s design that serves it. Generally, one of the standards
specifies that natural gas contains no more than trace amounts of components such as acid
gases. In general pipeline specification does not allow more than 4.0 ppm H2S and 1.0%
CO2 [26]. At 0.13 ppm by volume, H2S can be sensed by smell. The smell is quite
noticeable at 4.6 ppm. However, the method of adjusting the operational procedures to
meet the dynamic and future demands of customers remains a long challenge. Thus, acid
gas removal simulation is an essential tool for controlling operations in a gas processing
plant because it can be used to stimulate and analyze the acid gas removal unit (AGRU)
under different operating conditions. Analyses of chemical and phase equilibrium are
needed whenever significant changes in patterns and magnitudes of demand or supplies
occur. In the absence of such analyses, the operational procedures may not be optimal,
resulting in unnecessarily high operating cost. The main removal processes are based on
absorption and selectivity of the solvent with respect to acid gases which is based on an
affinity of the chemical or physical type. Removal of H2S and CO2 from biogas by using
alkanolamines technology has been around for decades. By simply changing their amine
solutions, many inefficient acid gas removal units can be optimized. Suitable amine
selection can drastically reduce the regeneration energy requirement and solution
circulation rate. Hence, the process conditions can have a dramatic impact on the overall
costs associated with AGRU. Industrially important alkanolamines for this AGRU are
monoethanolamine (MEA), diethanol amine (DEA) and methyldiethanol amine (MDEA).
Monoethanolamine (MEA), a primary amine, has been used extensively because of its high
reactivity and low solvent cost. MEA is used in solution with the concentration of 10 % to
15% by weight. On the other hand, MEA reacts irreversibly with COS, CS2 and
mercaptans. It proves that it is very reactive; it absorbs H2S and CO2 at once and no
selectively. Its relatively high vapor pressure causes larger losses compared to the other
amines, and for this reason it is mainly used for intensive purification. Diethanolamine
(DEA) helps to overcome the limitation of MEA, and can be used in the presence of COS
and CS2. Methyl diethanolamine (MDEA) is commonly used as the chemical solvent for
the removal of CO2 from gas mixtures or in gas sweetening processes for the extraction of
CO2 and H2S. It has become the industry‘s standard for selective treating application which
do not require the removal of significant quantities of COS, mercaptans and other trace of
sulfur containing contaminant. Process modeling, simulation and optimization are
practiced to reduce production cost, shorten research and development period, increasing
the process effectiveness, improving product quality, and handling the sophisticated
problems in the industry. Process simulator, such as Aspen HYSYS simulator, plays an
important role to accomplish these objectives. The simulator can also be used to design and
scale up a new plant, or optimize an existing plant. It is also important to note that H2S and
CO2 can cause problems with solids formation in compression and cooling. Both of H2S
and CO2 these are acid gases and are removed by similar ―sweetening‖ processes.
2.2.1 Reasons for Sweetening
Sour gas is supplied to the inlet separator and the condensate stabilizer. Sour products
recovered in this process are further processed in a sulfur recovery unit (SRU). If the
volume is low enough (less than 1 ton of sulfur per day in the inlet gas), the gases are
incinerated and released to atmosphere as CO2 and SO2. Various types of sweetening
processes are employed in industry today. All processes utilize a solid or liquid desiccant
to recover the sour component. After the desiccant has recovered the sour component it
must be regenerated to release the sour components so it can be reused. The most common
liquid desiccants in use are amines.
The reasons behind the sweetening are:
o Safety and environmental protection
o Product specification
o Corrosion prevention
o Heating values improvement
o CO2 solid formation (cryogenic operations)
o Economics (sometimes)
2.2.2 Sweetening Cycle Quality Requirements
The sweetening cycle should follow the quality standard and concentration of sour product
in the final state should be limited to the standard values [27]:
o H2S concentration less than 23 mg/m3.
o Sulfur concentration less than 115 mg/m3.
o CO2 concentration less than 2% on volume basis.
2.2.3 Sweeting Cycle Amine Type Selection
One of the most common encountered operations in the process industry is the removal of
acid gas components such as H2S, CO2 and other sulfur species (COS, CS2 and
mercaptans) from biogas, refinery gas or biogas liquid by aqueous. The removal of acid
gases from biogas is important either to meet certain process specifications or to keep
emission limits. The major approach towards acid gas removal is absorbed into the solution
of alkanolamines or potassium carbonate. In the practical application, such absorption
plants consist of two gas-liquid reactors operated at different temperatures and pressures:
absorber and regenerator. The choice of the type of amine has three main consequences.
First, it will affect the required circulation rate of amine solution. Second it will alter the
energy consumption for the regeneration. Third, it will also influence the ability to
selectively remove either H2S alone or CO2 alone if desired. Notably, it is more practical
and economical to use simulation to evaluate and optimize each process with different
types and concentrations of amines.
2.2.3.1 Acid Gases
Acid gas is a component of biogas that contains significant amounts of hydrogen sulfide
(H2S), carbon dioxide (CO2), or similar contaminants. Natural gas is usually considered
8
sour if it contains more than 5.7 milligrams of H2S per cubic meter, which is equivalent to
approximately 4 ppm by volume [28].
a. Hydrogen Sulfide
It is a colorless, flammable, extremely hazardous gas with a ―rotten egg‖ smell. Some other
names for H2S include sewer gas, stink damp, swamp gas and manure gas. It occurs
naturally in natural gas and it is produced by the bacterial break down of organic materials
and human and animal wastes. It is nearly as toxic as hydrogen cyanide, and it is five to six
times more toxic than carbon monoxide. H2S is slightly heavier than air, and a mixture of
H2S and air is explosive. H2S is soluble in water and acts as a weak acid. A solution of H2S
in water is initially clear but over time it turns cloudy. This is due to the slow reaction of
H2S with the oxygen dissolved in water, yielding elemental sulfur which precipitates out.
When burned, it produces sulfur dioxide (SO2) which is also obnoxious and corrosive. Its
presence in synthesis gases may result in catalyst poisoning and product contamination.
b. Carbon Dioxide
The CO2 present in the natural gas needs to be removed in consideration of increasing the
heating value of the gas, and preventing the corrosion of pipeline and gas process
equipment and crystallization of CO2 during the cryogenic process (liquefaction process).
2.2.3.2 Amines
Amines are compounds and functional groups that contain a basic nitrogen atom with a
lone pair. Amines are formally derivatives of ammonia, wherein one or more hydrogen
atoms have been replaced by a substituent such as an alkyl or aryl group. These may
respectively be called alkylamines. The important amines include amino acids, biogenic
amines, and trimethylamine. Table 2.1 shows the physical properties of MEA, DEA and
MDEA. Table 2.2 shows the typical operating conditions of these amines. The types of
amines which have been selected and compared in this study due to its availability are
monoethanolamine, Diethanolamine and Methyl diethanolamine.
Table 2.1 The physical properties of MEA, DEA and MDEA [29]
Properties Unit MEA DEA MDEA
Overall chemical formula - C2H7NO C4H11NO2 C5H13NO2
Molecular weight kg/kmol 61.08 105.14 119.17
Melting point °C 10.5 28.0 -23.0
Boiling point at 101 Pa (°C) °C 170.6 269.2 247.4
Specific gravity at 20 °C - 1.0179 1.0919 1.0418
Absolute viscosity at 20 °C Pa.S 0.0241 0.3800 0.1010
Specific heat at 15.6 °C J/kg.K 2546 2512 2238
Flash point °C 93.3 137.8 129.4
Table 2.2 Typical operating conditions and data for amines [30]
Amine Type MEA DEA MDEA
Solution strength (wt%) 15-20 25-35 20-50
Acid gas loading (mole/mole) 0.30-0.35 0.30-0.35 Unlimited
Under limited Under most
Ability for selective absorption of H2S No
conditions condition
2.2.3.3 Comparative Study of MEA, DEA and MDEA as Chemical Solvent

A rate-based model has been developed for the design of acid gas absorbers using aqueous
alkanolamine solutions [31]. The model adopts the film theory and assumes that
thermodynamic equilibrium exists in the bulk liquid among the reacting species. The
9
program was developed to handle either monoethanolamine (MEA) or diethanolamine
(DEA) as chemical solvents. As shown in the result, the number of stages required to meet
the H2S specification is less for MEA as compared with DEA. This is primarily due to the
higher reactivity of MEA with the acid gases. The concentration of H2S drops down to
almost zero at about stage 16 for MEA as compared to stage 18 for DEA. Additionally, as
the pressure is lowered, MDEA becomes less capable of picking up sufficient CO2 to meet
pipeline specification. When large amounts of CO2 are being passed through to the sweet
gas at relatively low pressures, it becomes difficult for MDEA to reach pipeline
specification for H2S especially if the inlet gas contains more than about 1000 ppm H2S.
The solution ability to remove CO2 is enhanced clearly by the addition of a more reactive
amine at these lower pressures. Thus, in areas where MDEA cannot meet the residual gas
requirements, mixture of different amines will be usually used to improve the plant
performance. Jerry and Bullin have made a comparison of few amines such as MEA, DEA,
Diglycolamine (DGA) and mixed amines (MEA, DEA and MDEA). Their main selection
was based on the pressure and the acid gas content of the sour gas as well as the purity
specification of the sales gas. Due to MEA high heat of reaction and lower acid gas
carrying capacity per gallon of solution, it was proven that MEA is usually not the best
amine considered. However, MEA is still used for plants where the inlet gas pressure is
low and pipeline specification gas or total removal of the acid gases is desired. DEA is
known as the "workhorse" of the industry in late 1960s and early 1970s by virtue of its
lower heats of reaction, higher acid gas carrying capacity and resultant lower energy
requirements. DEA has potential for selective H2S removal from streams containing CO2
under certain conditions. Depending on the application, MDEA has some outstanding
capabilities. By cause of its low heat of reaction, it can be used in pressure swing plants for
bulk acid gas removal. MDEA is currently best known for its ability to preferentially
absorb H2S. It is also used in tail gas clean up units since it is desirable to slip as much CO2
as possible while absorbing the maximum amount of H2S to be recycled back to the Claus
unit. Mixed amines are typically mixtures of MDEA and DEA or MEA which enhance
CO2 removal while retaining desirable characteristics of MDEA such as reduced corrosion
problems and low heats of reaction. MEA is effective at removing almost all hydrogen
sulfide and carbon dioxide, but requires a large quantity of heat to regenerate. MEA is used
when the specification requires maximum hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide removal,
particularly at low pressure. MEA reacts with carbonyl sulfide and carbon disulfide,
forming non-regenerative degradation products. DEA is used when the specification allows
for some carbon dioxide to be left in the treated gas and adjusts for gas streams with less
stringent product specifications. DEA does not form non-regenerative degradation products
with carbonyl sulfide, which makes it a suitable choice for treating refinery gases. MDEA
is a weak base that reacts much faster with hydrogen sulfide than with carbon dioxide,
making it particularly selective under the proper design conditions. MDEA is used
selectively on higher-pressure gas steams (20.6 bars and above) for deep hydrogen sulfide
removal with only moderate carbon dioxide removal. MDEA can also be used non-
selectively for the bulk removal of carbon dioxide from gas streams, but a bulk removal
requires the aid of absorption enhancing additives. MDEA is well suited for selective
absorption on high-pressure gas streams.
2.2.4 Measurement of Heat of Absorption
In the absorption/regeneration process using an aqueous alkanolamine solution, the
solution should be regenerated in order to achieve continuous process [32]. The
regeneration energy indicates that the thermal energy is necessary to remove binding
between amine and carbon dioxide. The entire equation can be explained as the sum of
three conditions as shown in Equation (2.1).
qreg = qsens + qvap + qabs (2.1)
10
Where:
qsens is the sensible heat which is defined as the quantity of heat necessary to
increase the temperature of the absorbent input into the stripper to the regeneration
temperature. In general, regeneration occurs at high temperatures of at least 373 K and the
solution evaporates as a result
qvap is the generated evaporation heat plus the regeneration of the absorbent. When
the temperature of the solution reaches the regeneration temperature, the binding between
the absorbent and CO2 molecule is broken. This reaction occurs as a reverse reaction to the
absorption reaction. Therefore, the regeneration energy and the absorption energy of CO 2
are similar, and the quantity of heat necessary for regeneration can be predicted through
the heat of absorption qabs. In this study, the decrease in the right-hand side resulting from
the heat of absorption can be noticed. Table 2.3 shows the solubility of CO2 in the aqueous
amine solutions at T =313, 333, 353 K and P = 1.15 bar. Figure 2.1 demonstrates the CO2
absorption curves in 30 wt % aqueous amine solutions.
Table 2.3 Solubility of CO2 in the aqueous amine solutions [33]

CO2 loading (mol CO2/mol amine)
Temperature
MEA DEA TEA AMP
(K)
30 % wt 30 % wt 30% wt 30% wt
313 0.469 0.502 0.266 0.626
333 0.426 0.404 0.141 0.466
353 0.384 0.279 0.090 0.285
Figure 2.1 CO2 absorption curves of the 30 wt % aqueous amine solutions [33]
2.3 DEHYDRATION CYCLE

The purpose of the dehydration process is as follows:
1. The term dehydration means the removal of water vapor [34].
2. All biogas downstream from the separators still contain water vapor to some
degree. Water vapor is probably the most common undesirable impurity found in
untreated biogas.
11
3. The main reason for removing water vapor from biogas is that water vapor
becomes liquid water under low temperature and/or high-pressure conditions
(causing the formation Hydrates).
4. Drying the gas to a water content of less than 0.5 ppmv is required to prevent water
freezing.
5. Water content in untreated gas is equal to a few hundreds of Ibm/MMSCF.
6. Water content in treated gas is in the range of 6-8 of Ibm/MMSCFD.
2.3.1 Effect of Water Content
The following facts [65] manifest the long distance transmission of biogas:
1. Liquid water and biogas can form hydrates that may plug the pipeline and other
equipment.
2. Biogas containing CO2, H2S is corrosive when liquid water is present as seen in
Figure 2.2.
3. Liquid water in a biogas pipeline potentially causes slugging flow conditions
resulting in lower flow efficiency of the pipeline.
4. Water content decreases the heating value of biogas being transported.
Figure 2.2 Biogas and contamination [35]
2.3.2 Ways of Hydrate Prevention

There are different methods used in industry to prevent the hydration formation which is
shown in Figure 2.3. These methods are:
1. Removal of the water phase [36].
2. Increase of the temperature.
3. Decrease of the pressure.
4. Addition of chemicals (inhibitors).
12
Figure 2.3 Hydrates formation [37]
2.3.3 Measuring Units of Biogas Water Content

The biogas water content has different measuring units as explained below:
1. Mass of water per volume of gas, Ibm/MMSCF (mg/cm3) (used with gasses).
2. Dew point temperature which is the point that liquid water, factually or
hypothetically sub-cooled, will condense out of the hydrocarbon phase (used with
gasses).
3. Concentration, parts per million by volume (ppmv) (used with gasses).
4. Concentration, parts per million by mass (ppmw) [used with liquid] [38].
2.3.4 Methods of Dehydration
The common ways to dehydrate or dry the biogas are absorption dehydration[39][40] and
dehydration by cooling [41]. The procedure of absorption dehydration is performed by
passing another fluid which has high affinity for water towards the non-dehydrated biogas
so it absorbs water, and then it is regenerated in a separated circuit while the biogas is
dehydrated towards 10 pmm.
2.4 SEPARATORS
In an oil field separation system, the substances to be separated are oil, water and gas. It
depends on the difference of densities between oil containments [37].
2.4.1 Separator Types
There are two main types of separators according to phases of fluid present as will be
explained in the next sections.
2.4.1.1 Two-phase liquid separation
In the two-phase liquid separator, gas is separated from the liquid with the gas and liquid
being discharged separately as shown in Figure 2.4. Oil and gas separators are
mechanically designed such that the liquid and gas components are separated from the
hydrocarbon steam at specific temperature and pressure.
13
Figure 2.4 Two-phase separator [42]
2.4.1.2 Three-Phase Separation

Figure 2.5 shows three-phase separation process in which the target fluid is separated into
gas, oil, and water with the three fluids being discharged separately. The gas-liquid
separation section of the separator is determined by the maximum removal droplet size.
Figure 2.5 Three-phase separator [42]
2.4.2 The Separation Principle

Both gas and liquid reach a state of equilibrium at the existing conditions (within the
vessel) of pressure and temperature. Consequently, this is the basis of gas liquid separation
[43].
2.4.3 Factors Affecting Separator Performance
Separation depends upon the effect of gravity to separate fluids. If they are soluble to each
other, no separation is possible with gravity alone. The separation depends also on the
difference between the densities of the separated fluid.
2.4.4 The Separator Inlet
At the separator inlet, a removal of liquids and/or solids should be performed. The
separator should be sized to handle surge capacity. A poor separator design can cause
14
problems in the treating facilities.
2.4.5 The Separator Outlet
The sweetened gas is passed through a separator to remove any amine solution (or liquid
water) that may be travelling with the gas flow. The gas is now saturated with water and
must proceed through dehydration facilities to lower the water dew point before sale.
From the contactor, the amine enters a flash drum [44] to give an opportunity for any
hydrocarbon gas to be released from the amine solution [45].
2.4.6 Separation Procedure
As shown in Figure 2.6 separation takes place in the following steps:
1. Droplets of liquid mist will settle out from gas provided.
2. The gas remains in the separator is long enough for mist to drop out.
3. The flow of the gas through the separator is slow enough (no turbulence) which will
keep the gas stream stirred up so that the liquid has a chance to drop out.
Figure 2.6 Separation procedure [42]
2.4.7 Phases of Separator

Figure 2.7 shows the major sectors of the separator that can be divided into four major
sectors which are:
5. Primary separation sector.
6. Secondary separation sector.
7. Mist extraction sector.
8. Liquid accumulation sector.
15
Figure 2.7 Separation sectors [42]
2.4.7.1 Primary Separation Section

As the fluids enter the vessel, an initial separation of gas and liquid takes place. This
happens because of:
a. Reduction in velocity
The velocity of the inlet stream is reduced as the fluid flow from a relatively small
diameter pipeline into the large volume separator.
b. Reduction in pressure
The pressure is reduced by maintaining a controlled pressure on the vessel lower
than that of the inlet stream
c. Change in flow direction
The change in flow direction is accomplished by placing some form of deflector at the inlet
to the separator.
2.4.7.2 Secondary Separation Section
As shown in Figure 2.5, in the secondary separation process liquid droplets are removed
from the gas stream. Liquid droplets, which are suspended in the gas stream, will tend to
settle by gravity towards the bottom of the vessel. The ease of which the droplets will settle
down from the gas stream and accumulate into the liquid accumulation section of the
separator depends on the following factors:
1. The size of the droplets, which are determined by the composition of the inlet fluid
streams.
2. The density of the liquid droplet, compared to the density of the gas.
3. The velocity at which the gas stream is traveling through the separator, which is
determined by the size of the separator.
4. The turbulence which exists in the flowing gas stream can be reduced by having
devices called straightening vanes built into the separator to make the gas flow
more streamlined as shown in Figure 2.8.
16
Straightening vanes
Figure 2.8 Straightening vanes [42]
2.4.7.3 Mist Extraction Section

The secondary separation of liquid droplets from the gas by gravity settling will not usually
remove very small particles. These particles tend to remain in the gas stream in the form of a
mist. Therefore, a final mist extraction section is built into the vessel to successfully make
the gas to leave the separator as free as possible from the liquid.
2.4.7.4 Liquid Accumulation Section
The lowermost section of a separator is where the liquids from the other three sections
accumulate before being discharged from the vessel. Initially, this liquid will have gas
bubbles entrained within it which must be removed. Just as liquid droplets tend to fall
through a gas stream, gas bubbles tend to rise to the surface of liquids due to density
differences.
2.5 DISTILLATION COLUMNS
A CO2 absorption column as shown in Figure is a unit where gas flows up and liquid (DEA
amine solutions) flows down. CO2 is transferred from the gas phase to the liquid phase
where it reacts with the DEA amine solution. The gas and liquid phases are made to get in
contact with the help of column plates or random or structured packing. The CO2 absorber
column also has plates or packing [46]. In case of regenerator column which is shown in
Figure 2.9, it has a reboiler [47] at the bottom to provide heating, and a condenser at the
top to provide cooling [48].
17
Figure 2.9 Regenerator [49]
2.5.1 Absorption and Reaction Mechanisms

The details of the mechanisms of CO2 absorption into an amine solution in an absorption
column are quite complex. There are many references about the chemistry involved in the
process [50]. There are also many references and models comprising mass transfer
mechanisms and chemical reaction kinetics. First, CO2 has to be transported from the gas
to the liquid surface, and then it is absorbed in the liquid solution. The main parameters in
describing such mechanisms are the gas liquid interface area, a measured in m2/m3 and
liquid holdup h measured in m3/m3. In the liquid, the CO2 may react chemically with other
components. The following reactions are normally assumed to take place when CO2 reacts
in a primary amine like MEA in an aqueous solution. In the case of MEA (NH2C2H2OH), it
is C2H2OH.
CO2 + NRH2 → RH2+NCOO (2.2)
RH2+NCOO- + NRH2 → RH2NCOO-NRH2 (2.3)
According to equations (2.2) and (2.3), two moles of MEA are necessary to absorb one
mole of CO2. A simple overall description of the combined absorption and reaction
process is as in Equation (2.3).
CO2 )gas( → CO2 (absorbed) (2.4)
The removal of CO2 is not 100 %. The percentage CO2 removal is limited both by low
absorption and reaction rates, and by the equilibrium conditions. If the kinetics in the
reactions should be calculated, more details about the intermediate reactions in Equations
(2.1) and (2.2) should be included. This is done in the MEA property insert model in
Aspen Plus. The simulation program Aspen HYSYS is mainly based on equilibrium
calculations. In that case, Equation (2.4) is sufficient to calculate the absorption process
[51].
2.5.2 Equilibrium Models
The concentration of CO2 in the gas may be expressed by the partial pressure PCO2 (eg. in
bar) and the concentration in the liquid may be expressed by CCO2 (eg. in mole/m3). The
equilibrium between the concentrations of CO2 in gas and liquid may be represented as a
function [52].
PCO2 = f(CCO2) (2.5)
18
This expression might be a function of temperature, pressure and concentrations of the
components in the solution. There are many models available to describe this function in
Aspen HYSYS, gas/liquid equilibrium for a component (i) it is normally calculated using
k-values defined by Equation (2.6) [53].
Ki = yi/xi (2.6)
Where
yi and xi are the mole fractions of (i) in the gas and liquid phase, respectively.
For general purpose use, equation of state models like SRK (Soave Redlich Kwong) and
PR (Peng Robinson) are often used. Aspen HYSYS recommends Peng Robinson which is
regarded to be suitable to handle systems containing hydrocarbons, water, air and
combustion gases, which are the typical components in a natural gas based power plant.
The traditional equations of state models are not regarded as suitable for non-ideal liquid
systems. An amine solution is an electrolytic system and also comprises chemical
reactions. This is not expected to be well described by traditional equations of state. Within
the Amines Property Package in Aspen HYSYS, one of the two models, Kent Eisenberg or
Li-Mather, can be selected. The models are quite complex, but in principle they are models
to describe the equilibrium of the CO2 concentrations in the gas and the liquid (Equation
(2.5)). Aspen Plus has an electrolytic package to calculate liquid systems containing ions.
Different electrolyte equilibrium models can be used. Using an MEA property insert
model, equilibrium models can be combined with reaction kinetic models, including rate
expressions of chemical reactions like Equations (2.2) and (2.3).
2.5.3 Column Models in Simulation Programs
A CO2 absorption column is a unit where gas flows up and liquid (e.g. An amine solution)
flows down. CO2 is transferred from the gas phase to the liquid phase where it reacts with
the amine solution [54]. The gas and liquid phases are made to get in contact with the help
of column plates or random or structured packing. The CO2 stripping column also has
plates or packing. This column also has a reboiler at the bottom to provide heating, and a
condenser at the top to provide cooling. The traditional way to model such columns is by
using equilibrium stages. One plate can be calculated assuming equilibrium between the
CO2 concentration in the gas and liquid leaving the plate. In a packed column, a certain
height of packing can be modeled as one equilibrium stage. The equilibrium stage model
can be refined by introducing stage efficiency. Murphree efficiency for stage number n is
defined by:
EM = (y - yn-1) / (y* - yn-1) (2.7)
Where:
y is the mole fraction of CO2 in the gas leaving the stage.
yn-1is the mole fraction leaving the stage below.
y* is the mole fraction CO2 in equilibrium with the liquid leaving the stage.
This is illustrated in most process simulation programs which have models for
implementing Murphree efficiency in a column model (Figure 2.10).
19
Figure 2.10 Definition of Murphree efficiency[42]
The Amines property package in Aspen HYSYS has a special estimation method for
predicting this Murphree efficiency. This model is based on experience with CO2 removal
from high-pressure natural gas. In Aspen Plus, it is also possible to specify these
efficiencies explicitly in an absorption or distillation column model. Aspen Plus has a
column model (RateFrac) which can include kinetic rate expressions in chemical reactions
at each stage.
2.5.4 Column Convergence
In order to converge a column model in a process simulation program, all the equations
describing the equilibrium and gas and liquid flows must be solved for each calculation
stage. This involves rate expressions for chemical reactions which results in a further
complication of the calculations. This often leads to convergence problems. The column
model in Aspen HYSYS has a default set of convergence criteria, and a default set of
calculation parameters. Different calculation models are also available. The inside-out
algorithm is default, and a modified HYSIM inside-out algorithm is available. A damping
parameter for the column iteration is adjustable, and the damping can be specified to be
adaptive.
2.5.5 Flow Sheet Convergence
All process simulation programs are based on modules for calculating different unit
operations like heat exchangers, pumps, distillation columns, etc. Process simulation
programs are traditionally divided into either sequential modular or equation-based
programs. In a sequential modular program, the in-streams of each calculation module
must be known prior to the calculation, and the out-streams are the result of the module
simulation programs which can have an ability to calculate in-streams based on out-
streams. Aspen HYSYS is an equation based simulation program. However, also in Aspen
HYSYS, the column models are based on specified in-streams. Because of this, flow sheets
with columns in practice have to be calculated in a modular sequential manner calculation.
The programs, Aspen Plus and Provision are sequential modular. The equation based in
many cases is of interest to calculate in-streams also into columns. This can be done by
iteration methods. In the case of recycled streams, the flow sheet can be solved including
recycle blocks. A recycle block compares the in-stream to the block with the out-stream
from the block in the former iteration. In the case of convergence problems in a column
20
model, recycle iterations complicate the calculations further. In some cases, a recycle block
will not converge due to parameters of minor interest. An example of such a parameter is
the concentration of a trace component. In such cases, iterating manually on the main
parameter (e.g. The CO2 concentration) by replacement, and accepts the errors in the
parameters of minor importance becomes possible.
2.5.6 Columns Sizing
Distillation column diameters were sized by two methods [55]. An initial diameter was
estimated from the F-Factor Method. If the column diameter was calculated to be greater
than 0.90 m (2.95 ft), it was specified as a tray tower. Thus, it is calculated from the
flooding velocity using the fair correlation. Columns with diameters calculated at less than
0.9 m were specified as a packed tower. The diameter of each packed column was
calculated from the flooding velocity obtained from the Leva correlation. Tray tower
height was calculated by multiplying the number of actual stages by the tray spacing, and
then increasing the result by 20% to provide height for the condenser and reboiler. Packed
tower height was calculated by multiplying the height equivalent of a theoretical plate
(HETP) by the number of stages calculated for the tower. HETP was assumed to be equal
to the column diameter. As for the height of a tray tower, the packed height was increased
by 20%.
2.5.7 Gravity Separators
The gravity separators [56] in the heterogeneous acid-catalyzed and super critical
processes were designed as vertical process vessels with an aspect ratio of two. They were
sized to allow for continuous operation, with a residence time of 1 h.
2.5.8 Hydro Cyclone
The initial dimensions of the hydro cyclone [57] (used to separate the solid catalyst from
the product stream in Process III) were calculated by the unit block in HYSYS. Those
dimensions were then manipulated slightly to obtain the complete removal of the catalyst
in the hydro cyclone underflow.
2.5.9 CO2 Removal Sensitivity Calculation
The model has been used to evaluate the effects of changing the most important
parameters. In most of the calculations, the CO2 removal and the stripping heat
consumption were calculated, while keeping all the other parameters in table 2 constant.
From a calculation viewpoint, this is probably the simplest. Another possibility had been to
keep the % CO2 removal constant, and calculate the heat duty and the necessary column
height. This would give the possibility to optimize the trade-off between operation cost
(due to heat consumption) and capital cost (due to column height). In the cases where the
default Inside-Out algorithm did not converge, the Modified HYSIM Inside-Out algorithm
with adaptive damping was tried to obtain convergence.
2.5.10 Circulation Rate
The effect of increased circulation rate proves the increase of the removal grade. The
results of the simulations are shown in Figure 2.11.
21
Figure 2.11 Circulation rate dependence [58]
2.5.11 Number of Absorption Stages

The height of the absorption column is varied by changing the number of stages. The
Murphree stage efficiency of CO2 is kept constant at 0.25. The height can also be changed
by varying the stage efficiency. Expectedly, removal grade increases and heat requirement
decreases with increased column height as shown in Figure 2.12. The calculation was
diverged when more than 12 stages was used in the column. HYSYS software estimated
EM (Equation 2.7) for a plate, and the resulting EM for a plate varied between 0.08 and
0.13.
Figure 2.12 Number of stages dependence [58]
22
2.5.11.1 Absorption Temperature
An increase in gas and liquid inlet temperature leads to a reduced absorption at
equilibrium. Figure 2.13 shows simulation results based on constant stage efficiency. In
practice, a higher temperature will give a higher absorption and reaction rate, but the
equilibrium results will not show this effect.
.
Figure 2.13 Absorber temperature dependence [58]
2.5.11.2 Absorption Pressure

The absorption pressure is set to atmospheric pressure at the outlet and atmospheric
pressure plus pressure drop at the inlet. The pressure inlet in the base case was 1.1 bars. In
the case of a pressure drop of 0.5 bar, the % CO2 removal increased to 87.1 % and the
energy consumption was reduced to 3.59 MJ/kg CO2 removed.
2.5.12 Absorber Inlet and Outlet
Sour gas enters the bottom of the tower and moves upward through the trays. H2S and CO2
in the gas react with the liquid amine solution and are removed from the gas stream. The
reaction is often assisted by placing fresh lean amine on various trays down the tower. This
ensures that the gas will contact lean amine a few times as it moves up the tower. As the
sweet gas leaves the tower, it is often contacted with water to remove any amine that has
vaporized and is travelling with the gas. The top 2 or 3 trays may be used for this function.
This is considered a ―water wash‖ section of the tower. The water wash is often used if the
contactor temperature is especially high or if MEA is used as the amine.
2.5.12.1 Properties of Absorbent
The absorbent material should be characterized by the following properties:
o A high affinity for water and a low affinity for hydrocarbons.
o A low volatility at the absorption temperature to reduce vaporization losses.
o A low viscosity for ease of pumping and good contact between the gas and liquid phases.
o A good thermal stability to prevent decomposition during regeneration.
o A low potential for corrosion.
2.5.12.2 Advantages of Absorption Method
This research selects the absorption method for the upgrading the Egyptian biogas because
of the following advantages:
o Low initial cost.
23
o Low pressure drop across absorption towers.
o Recharging of towers presents no problems.
o Materials that cause fouling of some solid adsorbents can be tolerated in the contactor.
2.5.12.3 Disadvantages of Absorption Method
Although the absorption method has great advantages, it still has shortcomings which
could be summarized as follows:
o Suspended matter, such as dirt, scale, and iron oxide may contaminate glycol
solutions.
o Overheating of solutions may produce both low and high boiling decomposition
products
o The resulting sludge may collect on heating surfaces, causing some loss in
efficiency, or, in severe cases, complete flow stoppage
When both oxygen and hydrogen sulfide are present, corrosion may become a problem.
This goes back to the formation of acid material in the glycol solution. Liquids such as
water, light hydrocarbons or lubrication oils in inlet gas may require installation of an
efficient separator ahead of the absorber. Highly mineralized water entering the system
with inlet gas may crystallize and fill the re-boiler with solid salts over long periods.
Foaming of solution may occur with a resultant carry-over of liquid. The addition of a
small quantity of anti-foam compound solves this problem.
2.5.13 Reboiler
The amine at the bottom of the stripper tower is heated to the suitable temperature
depending on the type of amine being used. This causes the acid gas/amine reaction to
reverse and the acid gas vaporizes with steam from the amine solution. The acid gas/steam
vapor re-enters the stripper and contacts new rich amine on its way out the top. Amine
carried with the acid gas/steam vapor tends to reunite with the rich liquid amine, thereby
removing it from the vapor flow.
 After leaving the top of the stripper tower, the acid gas/steam vapor is cooled to remove
2.5.14 Condenser
heat and condense out the water from the flow. The water is separated in a reflux drum and
returned to the stripper tower as a liquid. The acid gas vapor is sent downstream to a Sulfur
Recovery Unit (SRU). If the plant has a gas sulfur inlet rate of less than 1 ton/day (this is
a very small pollutant amount), the acid gas may be incinerated. Burning the H2S creates
SO2, which is a monitored.
2.5.15 Distillation Column
The distillation column components are listed below:
1. Trays
2. Bottom Strainer
3. Reflux distributor
4. Top Tower Demister
2.5.16 Cap Layout
Figure 2.14 shows that the cap should be arranged on the tray in 60° equilateral layout,
with the liquid flowing into the apex (top) of the triangle rather than parallel to the base.
The liquid flows normal to each row of caps. Liquid Bypass Baffles, these short stub
baffles guide the liquid flow path to prevent excessive bypassing of the bubble-cap field or
activity area.
24
Figure 2.14 Cap layout [59]
2.5.17 Bottom Strainer

During the operation of a tower which is shown in Figure 2.15, the bubble caps, bolts, and
other foreign objects may be dislodged and carried along with bottom stream. To prevent
this object leaving the tower and damaging pumps, a strainer is installed in the bottom
outlet line. Strainers must have openings small enough to catch small objects, but large
enough not to hinder the flow of liquid, or product, or oil out of the tower. The holes in the
strainers must be kept open so that the flow of liquid out of the tower will not be stopped,
or hindered.
Figure 2.15 Bottom strainer [59]
2.5.18 Efflux Distributor

A reflux distributor is simply a plate or baffle as shown in Figure 2.16 which prevents
liquid from spraying across the tray. In order to avoid dead spots, the reflux entering the
25
top of the tower should be spread evenly across the top tray. One way to disperse reflux is
to place a reflux distributor in front of the inlet line. Reflux entering the tower is forced to
flow under the baffle so that the liquid is distributed evenly across the tray.
Figure 2.16 Reflux distributor [59]
2.5.19 Top Tower Demister

Sometimes small drops of liquid suspended in vapor are carried up from one tray to the
other or into the overhead vapor line in a process called an entrainment process. When the
overhead product must be a dry vapor or gas, the entrainment is more serious problem.
Entrainment between trays can be usually prevented by controlling vapor velocity.
Entrainment at the top of a tower shown in Figure 2.17 can be cut down by placing a
demister on the vapor outlet line. Demisters are constructed of fine-gauge wire knitted into
the mesh. Demisters must be kept clean of dirt and foreign matter, or the flow of vapor will
be restricted, or stopped.
Figure 2.17 Top tower demister [59]
26
2.6 HEAT EXCHANGER (HTEX)
The rich amine passes through a heat exchanger where it picks up heat from the hotter lean
amine on its way to the contactor [60]. Even though this service is clean; plate and frame
exchangers can be used, it is more likely to use a more common shell and tube exchanger
is put in service.
2.7 EGYPTIAN WASTE STATISTICS

Most of biogas researches especially in Egypt focus only on utilization feasibility and
production of the biogas from local resources without concentration on biogas quality
improvement or biogas fractionation. Ahmed [61], statistically studied Egyptian waste and
discussed the biogas production in Egypt. He focused on agricultural wastes and related
applications such as cattle feed and fertilizer as well as biogas. However, he did not
provide a solution to the purification of biogas itself. In other words he did not deal with
the biogas improving methods. Table 2.4 shows the types of agricultural waste that could
be collected from Egypt [61].
Table 2.4 Types of agricultural waste that could be collected from Egypt [61]
Jan- June- Nov-
Aug-Nov
Ser Governorate Type May Type Aug Type Type Dec Total
(Ton)
(Ton) (Ton) (Ton)
1 Alexandria 5 18,282 3,814 5,701 27802
2 Beheira 260 96,159 197,94 103,957 398370
3 Gharbia 1,246 35,951 151,732 20,519 209448
Kafr el-
4 76 28,705 304,554 77,822 411160
Sheikh
5 Dakahlia 284 30,652 416,038 53,480 500454
6 Damietta 22 1,135 62,896 5,726 69779
7 Sharqia 30 107,362 287,629 34,543 429564
8 Ismailia 0 20,308 4,014 827 25149
9 Menofia 26 86,,798 0 4636 91460
10 Qaliubiya 627 40104 23,053 1,821 65605
Cotton stalks
Maize stalks
Sugar husks
Rice straw
Total North Area 2,678 468,524 1,469,960 310,684 2251846

11 Giza 4,082 37,077 0 0 41159
12 Beni swaif 2,488 227,173 1,270 16,367 247298
13 Fayoum 1.077 86,403 25,715 19,900 133095
14 Menia 100,428 400,511 0 11,484 512423
Total Middle Area 108,075 751,164 26,985 47,751 933975
15 Assiut 4.692 174,437 165 9,778 189072
16 Sohag 35,275 173,060 0 2,908 211243
17 Qena 330,004 72,714 0 0 40718
18 Luxor 50,830 19,031 0 0 6986
19 Aswan 172.596 18319 0 0 190915
Total Upper Area 594153 548,323 7,372 18,137 1,167,985
Total waste that
638,303 1,543,275 1,487,818 331,483 4,000879
can be collected
Erik [62] discussed biogas upgrading methods to remove acidic contents (CO2 and H2S) in
order to match the universal standard for different applications, especially the operation of
engines and power stations. He studied the CO2 removal from biogas contents to be able to
run engines and power plants. However, a specific method to determine the optimum DEA
strength to extract pure methane from biogas was not provided in this paper. Moreover,
Rumyantseva and Watanasiri [63] meticulously studied the use of simulation programs in
27
the purification process of acid gases. However, they did not provide a recommendation on
how to get highest degree of purity. The suggested solution in this research, based on the
literature review, focuses on the creation of integrated solutions to the problem of
accumulated waste in Egypt as proposed in Figures 2.18 and 2.19.
Figure 2.18 Proposed integrated solution for accumulated waste in Egypt[64]
Figure 2.19 Utilization of centralized biogas plant [64]

Hamed et al. also focused on methods of biogas generation without concentrating on how
to upgrade it [65]. Lars used Aspen HYSYS to simulate of CO2 removal by amine
absorption from a gas based power plant. He focused on biogas upgrading and methods
used to remove acidic contents to match the universal standard for different applications,
especially the operation of engines and power stations. Nevertheless, this paper did not
provide a specific recommendation to use a certain type of amine, and did not provide the
optimum conditions for the process of treatment in terms of temperature, pressure, and the
equipment dimensions [62]. Rumyantseva and Watanasiri used Amine solvents acid in
28
gas cleaning [63] but they did not recommend the ways in which the highest degree of
purity can be obtained as well as the operation of the plant at partial load. The components
of biogas extracted of the Egyptian waste are mentioned in Table 2.5.
Table 2.5 Typical composition of biogas in Egypt [66]
Component %
Methane CH4 50-75
Carbon dioxide 25-50
Nitrogen, N2 0-10
Hydrogen, H2 0-1
Hydrogen sulfide, H2S 0-3
Oxygen, O2 0-3
H2O 0-1
A recommendation to use gases that are disposed from biogas in a particular purpose was
not found in the review of literature. In addition, research concerned with the optimization
of power consumed in the purification processes, especially while maintaining a required
degree of purity was not found too. Based on the previous literature review, this study aims
to enhance the typical aspen HYSYS natural gas processing cycle to produce pure methane
(more than 99 % purity) from Egyptian biogas produced from available waste in Egypt
specially agriculture waste.
29
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the scientific methods used in the Egyptian biogas treatment to
obtain pure methane based on the literature review in the previous chapter. These methods
include the sweetening, and dehydration and part load operation cycle design.
3.2 METHODOLOGY
This study is mainly concerned with explaining the process of purification and
fractionation of biogas generated from different sources in order to maximize benefit from
it. The following points [67] are the steps that should be followed to obtain successful
results:
1. Propose an integrated solution based on the study of existing problems in Egypt,
such as finding suitable way for recycling accumulated waste especially
agricultural waste.
2. Reviewing of previous studies that focused on ways to benefit from agricultural
waste in Egypt (as previously mentioned in chapter 2).
3. Selecting the most suitable available materials in Egypt that can be used in biogas
generation especially agriculture waste such as (beet).
4. Studying the methods of natural gas treatment in order to remove the acidic gases
and obtain methane from it.
5. Selecting an advanced simulation program (Aspen HYSYS) to simulate the biogas
processing cycle and using it to simulate the cycle as follows:
i. Define all cycle equipment and their initial size.
ii. Select the suitable fluid package (Acid gas fluid package).
iii. Select the suitable amine solution which used to remove acidic components.
The partial pressure of both natural gas and Egyptian biogas affects the gas treatment cycle
especially the PSA working pressure. According to Amagat's law of additive volume
which deals with Partial volume [32], the partial volume of a particular gas in a mixture is
the volume of one component of the gas mixture.
(3.1)
Where
Vx is the partial volume of an individual gas component (x) in the mixture.
Vtot is the total volume of the gas mixture.
px is the partial pressure of gas (x).
ptot is the total pressure of the gas mixture.
The steps of the simulation process are defined as follows:

1. Define the initial cycle working conditions (pressure, temperature and flow rate).
2. Run the simulation cycle to insure all equipment conversion.
3. Run the cycle in part load to make sure it is possible to operate all year round and
in the case of low material feeding.
4. Record all results and discuss it to ensure its validation and make suitable
recommendations.
3.2.1 Typical Acid Gas Sweetening Cycle
Figure 3.1 shows the typical acid gas sweetening cycle which consists mainly of multi
stage absorber (PSA) which takes the raw gas from the bottom and the amine solution from
the top. After the absorbing process takes place, the clean gas (sweet gas) is extracted from
the top of the absorber. Furthermore, another important process takes place in parallel with
sweetening. This process is amine enrichment and regeneration. In order to make a proper
design for biogas sweetening cycle, it is important to discuss the typical natural gas
sweetening cycle, which is plugged in Aspen HYSYS Simulation program. Efforts to
enhance it are essential to make it suitable for bio gas treatment. This can be achieved by
pressure, temperature and equipment geometry recalculation, taking in consideration the
difference between natural gas and biogas in both composition and partial pressure.
Figure 3.1 Schematic of simple acid gas sweetening cycle [42]
3.2.2 Sweetening Cycle Explanation

Figure 3.2 describes the typical complete acid gases removal cycle (sweetening cycle)
which is plugged in Aspen HYSYS 8.6 library and is used for natural gas NG upgrading.
absorber at a temperature of 38 C, pressure of 20 bars and volume flow rate of 13.5 m3/hr
The feed NG gas, which has the composition as mentioned in Table 3.1, enters the
column at conditions of 43 C, 36 bars and 54 m3/hr. The amine DEA can absorb CO2 and
from the bottom of the absorber column. The lean amine (DEA) enters at the top of the
H2S from the feed NG gas simultaneously. The sweet feed gas, which is free from CO2 and
Then the rich amine passes through the expansion valve in order to expand to 46 C and 5
H2S, exits from the top of column and the rich amine exits from the bottom of the absorber.
bars and then it enters the separator. Rich amine exits from the separator by the same fore
mentioned conditions to enter a Lean amine/Rich amine heat exchanger (L/R). The L/R
heat exchanger transfers heat from lean amine into rich amine. The hot rich amine which
to lean it for reusing it. The lean amine enters a make-up tank at 87 C and a 2.3 bar which
exits from the exchanger enters a regeneration column to extract CO2 from the rich amine
is above the atmospheric pressure by 1.3 bars. It also exits at 87 C and 2.3 bars which
equal the same inlet conditions of the make-up tank. Then it is pumped to 88 C and 36
31
bars successively and it is cooled at constant pressure process to 43C to be sent to a
recycler. Lean amine exits from recycler at 43C and 36 bars. Finally, a sweet gas is
obtained from the absorber after removing both CO2 and H2S. Figure 3.3 describes the
absorber column which was selected from Aspen HYSYS model pallet. This column is the
main component in the Egyptian biogas sweetening cycle.
32
33
Figure 3.2 Typical Aspen HYSYS natural gas sweetening cycle [52]
33
Figure 3.3 The absorber column [52]
The composition of the NG is shown in Table 3.1. After recording the NG sweetening cycle
initial conditions and final results, and repeating the same steps by using the Egyptian biogas
composition as mentioned in Table 3.2, instead of NG, will be obtained. The simulation cycle
is run to insure absorber conversion using Aspen HYSYS for the purpose of PSA working
pressure optimization. Table 3.3 shows the feed Egyptian biogas conditions.
The optimum PSA working pressure needed for Egyptian biogas cleaning from acidic gases is
found at 20 bars. The final composition of sweetening gas which is obtained from Egyptian
bio gas will be the same as in Table 3.2. In order to achieve the above methane purity, the
enhanced acid gas removal cycle as mentioned in Figure 3.2 will be used after all parameters
adaptation to be suitable for biogas treatment. One of the main objectives of this study is to
model the acid gas removal unit (AGRU) using suitable amine as the solvent by using Aspen
HYSYS as computer simulations. In this study, software for the acid gases removal unit will
be needed, that is Aspen HYSYS. This software can be used to simulate the acid gas removal
plant. One reactive absorption and desorption columns will be used to perform this simulation
program. Afterwards, studies on Monoethanolamine (MEA), Dietanolamine (DEA) and
Methyl diethanolamine (MDEA) and the other types of amines (which in HYSYS acid gases
fluid package) as the chemical solvent in the absorption column in the simulated acid gas
removal process. Tables 3.4 and 3.5 show the condition and the compositions of the lean
amine, respectively. One of the aims of this study is to indicate the ability of the different
types of amines to remove the undesired components of biogas to reach the maximum purity
of methane.
Table 3.1 Feed natural gas composition in mole and volume fraction [68]
Component Mole fraction Range of volume fraction

Methane 0.9500 87.0 - 96.0
Ethane 0.0025 1.8 - 5.1
Propane 0.0020 0.1 - 1.5
I-Butane 0.0003 0.01 - 0.3
N-Butane 0.0003 0.01 - 0.3
I-Pentane 0.0001 Trace - 0.14
N-Pentane 0.0001 Trace - 0.04
H2 S 0.0001 Trace - 0.06
Nitrogen 0.0016 1.3 - 5.6
CO2 0.0070 0.1 - 1.0
O2 0.0002 0.01 - 0.1
Table 3.2 Feed Egyptian biogas composition
Component Mole Fraction Volume Fraction

Amine 0 0
H2O 4.03×10 -4 4.03×10 -4
CO2 0.25 0.25
H2S 4.05×10 -4 4.05×10 -4
Methane 0.75 0.75
Hydrogen 1.01×10 -4 1.01×10 -4
Nitrogen 2.02×10 -4 2.02×10 -4
Oxygen 3.03×10 -4 3.03×10 -4
Table 3.3 Feed Egyptian biogas conditions
Feed gas Conditions

Vapour / Phase Fraction 1
Temperature [C] 43
Pressure [bar] 20
Molar Flow [kgmole/h] 250
Mass Flow [kg/h] 5755
Std Ideal Liq Vol Flow [m3/h] 13
Heat Flow [kJ/h] -38550878.88
Liq Vol Flow @ Std Cond [m3/h] 22
Fluid Package Acid gas
Table 3.4 Lean amine conditions
Lean Amine Conditions
Vapour / Phase Fraction 0
Temperature [C] 43
Pressure [bar] 40
Molar Flow [kmole/h] 2306
Mass Flow [kg/h] 55286
Std Ideal Liq Vol Flow [m3/h] 54
Heat Flow [kJ/h] -688275045.40
Liq Vol Flow @Std Cond [m3/h] 53
Fluid Package Acid Gas
Table 3.5 Lean amine composition

Component Mole Fraction
Amine 0.3
H2O 0.7
CO2 0
H2S 0
Methane 0
Hydrogen 0
Nitrogen 0
Oxygen 0
3.3 DEHYDRATION AND PURIFICATION CYCLE
Sweet gas enters the separator at conditions of 50 C and 25.08 bars. Then sweet gas exits
Figure 3.4 depicted the acid gas dehydration and Purification Cycle with using E-glycol [69].
from the separator at the same conditions mentioned above in order to enter the bottom of the
absorber. E-glycol enters the top of the absorber at conditions (T = 4 0C and P =25 bar). E-
glycol exits from the absorber to enter the expansion valve. E-Glycol exits from expansion
valve at 12 bars to enter the top of another absorber. E- glycol exits from the bottom of the
absorber to enter recycler and pump. E-Glycol enters the first absorber again after
purification module. The end product is pure methane 0.9999 at conditions of 4 C and 25
regeneration. Dry sweet gas exits from the first absorber to enter the activated carbon
bars.
3.4 PART LOAD OPERATION CYCLE

Figure 3.5 shows the part load operation cycle, which contains valves in cycle main inlet and
the inlet of all equipment. The purpose of the installation of these valves is to ensure the cycle
operation, even in the lack of feed gas conditions.
Table 3.6 Sweet gas dehydration cycle composition
Dry
Component mole Sweet Water Pure
E-glycol Sweet
fraction Gas Out methane
Gas
DEA 0 0.7949 0 0.7915 0
H2O 0.0042 0.2051 0 0.2083 0
CO2 0 0 0 0 0
H2S 0 0 0 0 0
Methane 0.995 0 0.9992 0.0001 0.9999
H2 0.0001 0 0.0001 0 0
N2 0.0003 0 0.0003 0 0.0001
O2 0.0004 0 0.0004 0 0
38
Figure 3.4 Acid gas dehydration and purification Cycle

39
Figure 3.5 Part load operation cycle

CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the different parameters that effects on methane purity which
includes:
1. Effect of DEA concentration on sweet gas CO2 contents and methane purity.
2. Effect of feed gas temperature on sweet gas CO2 contents and methane purity.
3. Effect of absorber working pressure on Methane Purity.
4. Effect of absorber geometry on methane purity.
5. Effect of regenerator number of stage on the regenerated DEA quality.
6. Effect of e-glycol strength on methane purity.
7. Effect of e-glycol temperature on methane purity.
8. Effect of e-glycol pressure on methane purity.
Based on the previous discussion and literatures, it can be concluded that DEA is one of
the best amine solvent, which achieves the highest degree of purity of methane at the same
conditions of temperature, pressure and flow rate and HYSYS acid gas fluid package is the
optimum simulation fluid package for biogas sweetening process. Therefore, both of them
are selected for this research. The biogas which can be produced from the available waste
in Egypt has high methane percentage (70-75%) and this provides a good indication of the
possibility of extracting high purity methane. The stages of the biogas purification process
which were considered in the simulation included the sweetening, dehydration and
fractionation.
4.2 EFFECT OF DIFFERENT AMINES ON ACIDIC GASES

REMOVAL
Figure 4.1 to Figure 4.7 compare the ability of different amines in the removal of undesired
species of the biogas to reach the highest levels of methane concentration. The comparison
is performed among the different types of the amines at the same conditions of amine
concentration, temperature, pressure and flow rate.
Figure 4.1 shows that that DEA, DGA, MEA and piperazine are the most amines that have
the highest capability of CO2 removal while Figure 4.2 and 4.3 show that DGA and
piperazine are the most efficient amine in removal of H2S and H2O. TEA amine has the
highest efficiency in cleaning biogas from the volatile traces gases H2, O2 and H2 as shown
from Figures 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6, respectively. Figure 4.7 confirmed that DEA is one of the
best amine which achieves the highest degree of purity of biogas. Although the DEA is not
the most efficient amine in biogas sweetening process, it is selected in this study due to its
availability in the Egyptian market with low price in comparing with other amines.
Figure 4.1 The ability of different amines to remove CO2
Figure 4.2 The ability of different amines to remove H2S
4
Figure 4.3 The ability of different amines to remove H2O
Figure 4.4 The ability of different amines to remove H2

Figure 4.5 The ability of different amines to remove O2
Figure 4.6 The ability of different amines to remove N2

Figure 4.7 The ability of different amines to purify methane
Based on the previous results and analysis DEA amine solvent is select for its ability to
clean the biogas from undesired components, its availability, and low cost. Therefore a
case study with the following inlet mole fraction of each component of feed gas
composition is listed in Table 4.1. Table 4.2 shows the inlet and outlet conditions for the
pressure swing absorber which was used in the simulation.
Table 4.1 Absorber components mole fraction

Mole fraction Feed Gas Lean Amine Rich AmineSweet Gas
DEA 0 0.0685 0.0667 0
H2O 0.0004 0.9309 0.9058 0.0042
CO2 0.2522 0.0006 0.0271 0
H2S 0.0004 0 0 0
Methane 0.7464 0 0.0004 0.995
H2 0.0001 0 0 0.0001
N2 0.0002 0 0 0.0003
O2 0.0003 0 0 0.0004
Table 4.2 Absorber inlet and outlet conditions
Condition Unit Feed Gas Lean Amine Rich Amine Sweet Gas
Vapor Fraction 1 0 0 1

Temperature C 43.4 43.33 66.01 43.37
pressure bar 25.18 25 25.18 25
Molar Flow kmol/h 249 2306 2369 185.9
Mass Flow kg/h 5765 5.53E-04 5.81× 10- 4 2986
Table 4.3 shows the relation between DEA lean amine strength and methane purity. It is
clear from this table that Figure 4.730 % of DEA concentration resulting in methane
concentration more than 0.99 therefore; it is decided to use 30% of DEA as it achieved the
desired purity of the biogas in this research.
Table 4.3 The relation between DEA lean amine strength and methane purity
DEA Lean Amine strength Methane Purity
0.30 0.9958
0.36 0.9960
0.44 0.9961
0.52 0.9963
0.59 0.9965
0.66 0.9968
0.73 0.9969
4.3 EFFECT OF DEA CONCENTRATION ON H2S, CO2 AND

METHANE CONTENTS
Figure 4.8 shows that there is a reverse proportion between increasing the DEA
concentration and H2S mole fraction. The mole fraction of H2S reaches a value of 0.0025
at 0.11 of DEA concentration. When a concentration of DEA increases up to 0.27, it has
no effect upon the H2S mole fraction in this range. At a concentration of 0.27 of DEA,
there is a sudden decrease in H2S mole fraction then the H2S mole fraction reaches to a
value of zero beyond this concentration. Therefore, a concentration 0.27 of DEA is
considered an optimum concentration of the DEA amine for completely cleaning the
biogas from H2S gas.
Figure 4.8 The Effect of DEA Concentration on H2S Contents
Figure 4.9 shows that there is also a reverse proportion between increasing the DEA
concentration and CO2 content. The CO2 mole fraction reaches a value of zero when the
concentration of DEA increases to a value of 0.28. After a concentration 0.28 of DEA, it is
clear from the figure that there is no effect of DEA concentration upon the sweet gas CO2
mole fraction.
Figure 4.9 The Effect of DEA Concentration on CO2Contents

Figure 4.10 demonstrates the relation between the DEA concentration and the biogas
purity representing in the percentage of methane gas in the final product of the biogas. It
can conclude from this figure that a percentage of 30 % of the DEA is sufficient for
upgrading the biogas with high purity that contains more than 99 % of methane gas.
Figure 4.10 The Effect of DEA Concentration on Methane purity
The previous figures emphasize on the importance of optimizing the DEA concentration
in order to meet the maximum biogas purity with minimum acidic gases H2S and CO2. In
addition these figures show the DEA concentration has a fast effect on H2S content than
CO2 due to H2S content in the Egyptian biogas is small and it is removed as soon as the
upgrading process is started i.e. it has less importance than CO2 gas in optimization
process. Furthermore, Figure 4.11 shows that a concentration of 0.3 of DEA is the
optimum selection for the sweetening process.
Figure 4.11 Optimization of DEA concentration
4.4 EFFECT OF FEED GAS TEMPERATURE ON CO2 AND

METHANE CONTENTS
Figure 4.12 shows that the feed gas temperature has an insignificant effect on the
upgrading process of biogas since the main parameter that has a dominant effect on the
upgrading process of biogas in the pressure swing absorber is the pressure. Therefore in the
following sections, the effect of feed gas pressure on the upgrading process will be
explained in details
Figure 4.12 The effect of feed gas temperature on CO2 and methane contents
4.5 EFFECT OF PSA WORKING PRESSURE ON H2S, CO2
AND METHANE CONTENTS
The typical natural gas sweetening cycle which was built in Aspen HYSYS simulation
program to produce pure Methane was adapted to be used with the biogas and this
adaptation has been clearly explained in Chapter 3. The cycle was modified by
determination the pressure and temperature required to process the biogas generated from
the agriculture waste available in Egypt, which is different from natural gas in its
composition which leads to difference in partial pressure mainly for methane, CO2 and
H2S. Regarding to the importance of partial pressure difference of methane, CO2 and H2S
in both of natural gas and biogas, It was necessary to study the effect of PSA working
pressure on both of natural gas and bio gas. The study of pressure effect can help in
determination of the optimum pressure of biogas treatment with minimum simulation
process.
4.5.1 Effect of NG PSA Working Pressure on CO2 Content
Figure 4.12 shows that there is a reverse relation between PSA working pressure and CO2
% in the NG final product gas. At the point in which the absorber PSA working pressure
increased to 36 bars, the CO2 percentage tends to be 0.0. There is a very little effect of PSA
working pressure on the CO2 contents if the pressure is more than 36 bar. Therefore 36
bars can be considered an optimum value for cleaning the NG from CO2.
Figure 4.13 The effect of NG PSA working pressure on CO2 content
4.5.2 Effect of NG PSA Working Pressure on H2S Content

It is clear from the previous figure and Figure 4.14 that the PSA working pressure has a
significant effect on the upgrading process. Figure 4.14 shows as the PSA working
pressure increases to 5 bars the H2S content is eliminated completely from the final
product. So that, a pressure of 36 bars is appropriate to clean the NG from CO2 and H2S
simultaneously.
Figure 4.14 The effect of NG PSA working pressure on H2S content
4.5.3 Effect of NG PSA Working Pressure on Methane Content

It can be noted from Figure 4.15 that there is a direct proportion between PSA working
pressure and methane purity in the NG final product gas. At PSA working pressure of 36
bars, the methane purity tends to be 96 % which is the maximum value can be obtained.
There is a very little effect of PSA working pressure on the methane purity if the pressure
is increased more than that value. Therefore, a working pressure of 36 bars is sufficient to
upgrade the NG and reduce the initial cost for absorber construction.
5
Figure 4.15 The Effect of NG PSA working pressure on methane purity
4.5.4 Effect of Biogas PSA Working pressure on CO2 Content

It can be deduced from Figure 4.16 that the PSA working pressure has a significant effect
on the reduction of CO2 % from the biogas final product. When the PSA working pressure
reaches 20 bars, the CO2 percentage tends to be 0.0. There is a very little effect of PSA
working pressure on the CO2 content beyond this value.
Figure 4.16 Effect of biogas PSA working pressure on CO2 content
4
4.5.5 Effect of Biogas PSA Working pressure on H2S content
Figure 4.17 shows that the H2S content can vanish completely from Egyptian biogas final
product when the working pressure of PSA reaches 3 bars. This leads to conclude that the
pressure value of 20 bars which is needed to clean CO2 from Egyptian biogas is proposed
to clean both of CO2 and H2S species.
Figure 4.17 Effect PSA biogas working pressure on H2S content
4.5.6 Effect of Biogas PSA Working Pressure on Methane Content
Figure 4.18 confirms that at the absorber PSA working pressure to 20 bars, the methane
purity leans towards 99 % which is the maximum value that can be obtained. There is very
little effect of PSA working pressure on the methane purity after this value.
Figure 4.18 Effect of biogas PSA working pressure on Methane content
The previous figures described the effect of the PSA working pressure on methane purity
for the NG and Egyptian biogas. It is obvious that the optimum pressure which is needed to
achieve highest methane purity from NG is 36 bar, while the optimum pressure which
needed to achieve highest methane purity from Egyptian biogas is 20 bar. If the pressure is
lower than the value of the biogas treating cycle can produce methane with lower purity in
range between 85% to 98 % which can be used in power generation but cannot be used in
scientific research applications. There is a difference between the PSA working pressure
needed for removing CO2 and H2S from natural gas composition, and the PSA working
pressure needed to remove the same gases from Egyptian biogas composition. This is due
to the difference between partial pressure of CO2 and H2S in both NG and Egyptian biogas
as shown in Table 4.4Table 4..
Table 4.4 Partial pressure of CO2 and H2S in both of NG and biogas
Natural Gas Egyptian Biogas
CO2 Partial pressure 0.5 bar CO2 Partial pressure 0.2522 bar
H2S Partial pressure 0.1431 bar H2S Partial pressure 4.05 × 10-4
The main reason of the difference between the partial pressure of NG and biogas is that the
NG has many components such as methane, CO2, H2S, butane and ethane, while Egyptian
biogas has mainly Methane, CO2, H2S and very little traces of other gases which can be
neglected. This leads to the possibility of obtaining pure methane from the Egyptian biogas
at lower PSA working pressure.
4.6 EFFECT OF PSA GEOMETRY ON H2S, CO2 AND
METHANE CONTENTS
4.6.1 The Effect of Absorber Diameter
Figure 4. shows the relation between the absorber diameter and CO2 % in the treated
biogas. At an absorber diameter equals to 1.7 m, the CO2 reached to 0.0%. Therefore, an
absorber diameter of 1.7 m is selected for the maximum treatment process.
Figure 4.19 Effect of absorber diameter on CO2 content
Figure 4.19 shows that H2S reaches its minimum value of 0.0 at an absorber diameter of
0.2 m. This leads to select the same previous diameter of 1.7 m, which achieves the
minimum value of both CO2 and H2S contents in sweet gas product.
Figure 4.19 Effect of absorber diameter H2S content
Figure 4.20 shows the methane content in the biogas against the absorber diameter. When
the absorber diameter equals to 1.7 m, the methane content tends to be constant. As a
result, 1.7 m absorber diameter is selected as the optimum value to achieve maximum
methane purity from Egyptian biogas.
Figure 4.20 Effect of Absorber Diameter on Methane Content

4.6.2 Effect of Absorber Number of Stages
Figure 4.21 shows the effect of the number of trays stages upon the content of CO2. The
rate of decreasing of CO2 with the number of stages is high at lower numbers of stages, and
it decreases with the increase of stages number. There is no effect on the concentration of
CO2 if the stages number increases than 20 stages, thus that it is taken as an optimum
number. In Figure 4.23, the effect of stages number upon the amount of H2S is shown. It is
clear from the figure that there no effect on the H2S content if the stages numbers increase
more than 20. Therefore it is taken as optimum number for eliminating H2S to its minimum
value.
Figure 4.21 The effect of absorber number of stages on rich amine CO2 contents
Figure 4.22 The Effect of Absorber Number of Stages on Rich Amine H2S Contents
Figure 4.23 emphasizes that the optimum number of absorber number of stages is 20 at
which the maximum methane purity is achieved.
Figure 4.23 Effect of absorber number of stages on methane content
4.6.3 Effect of Absorber Tray Spacing

Simulation results show that the tray spacing has no effect on the percentage of the CO2 or
methane purity. This is due to the pressure inside the absorber which helps to push the
gases easily inside the column trays‘ holes during the absorption process. Therefore, the
main factors that should be taken into consideration are the geometrical dimensions of the
trays, the even distribution of the trays in the absorber and the right numbers of trays. In
addition, easy replacement of the blocked trays and easy service of them will affect the
treatment process. Table 4.5 shows the final volume fractions of the sweet gas after
treatment process.
Table 4.5 Composition of Upgraded Egyptian Biogas
Component Mole fraction Volume fraction
Methane ( CH4) 0.9949 0.9949
Carbon dioxide ( CO2) 0 0
Hydrogen sulfide ( H2S ) 0 0
Water vapor ( H2O) 0.0042 0.0042
Hydrogen ( H2) 0.0001 0.0001
Nitrogen ( N2) 0.0003 0.0003
Oxygen ( O2) 0.0004 0.0004
4.7 EFFECT OF DEHYDRATION ON PURE METHANE

H2O CONTENT AND METHANE PURITY
The simulation results show that as the concentration e-glycol increases the purity of the
biogas increases. These results also show the best e-glycol concentration is 0.92 for the
conditions are 6 C and 18 bars for maximum purity of biogas. The main parameters of
highest concentration of methane. In addition it is found that the optimum operating
dehydration absorption process conditions and compositions are listed in Table 4.6 and
Table 4.7, respectively.
Table 4.6 Dehydration absorber inlet and outlet conditions
Absorber inlet streams Absorber outlet streams
Parameter Unit Dry Sweet
Sweet Gas E-Glycol-1 H2O out
Gas
C
Vapor Fraction 1 0 1 0
Temperature 50 19.84 19.87 30.68
Pressure bar 25.08 25 25 25.08
Molar Flow kmol/h 185.9 148.85 185.25 149.50
Mass Flow kg/h 2985.51 9067.03 2975.45 9077.08
Liquid Volume
m3/h 9.93 8.17 9.92 8.18
Flow
Heat Flow kJ/h -13949416.07 -67356041.1 -13976790.49 -67328678.46
Table 4.7 Dehydration absorber inlet and outlet composition
Absorber inlet streams Absorber outlet streams
Component mole
Sweet Dry
fraction E-Glycol- H2O out
Gas Sweet Gas
E-Glycol 0 0.000004 0.973553 0.969308
H2O 0.0042 0.000011 0.025459 0.030556
CO2 0 0 0 0
H2S 0 0 0 0
Methane 0.995 0.998389 0 0.000133
Hydrogen 0.0001 0.0001 0 0
Nitrogen 0.0003 0.000301 0 0
Oxygen 0.0004 0.0004 0 0.000002
4.8 FRACTIONATION AND PURIFICATION

It is recommended also to remove the other remaining gases H2, N2 and O2. HYSYS
special module containing activated carbon is used to simulate the biogas purification
process.
Table 4.Tables 4.8 and 4.9 show the purification module inlet and outlet conditions and
compositions, respectively.
Table 4.8 Purification module inlet and outlet conditions

Module inlet Module outlet
conditions conditions
Parameter Unit
Pure Methane
Dry Sweet Gas
0.9999 %
C
Vapor Fraction 1 1
Temperature 19.872427 4.192533
Pressure bar 25 25
Molar Flow kmole/hr 185.248913 185.1
Mass Flow kg/hr 2975.454916 2969.762372
Liquid Volume
m3/hr 9.919974 9.918155
Flow
Heat Flow kJ/hr -13976790.49 -14097622.23
Table 4.9 Purification module inlet and outlet Composition

Module inlet Module outlet
composition Composition
Component mole fraction
Dry Sweet Pure Methane 0.9999
Gas %
E-Glycol 0.000004 0
H2O 0.000011 0
CO2 0 0
H2S 0 0
Methane 0.998389 0.9999
Hydrogen 0.0001 0
Nitrogen 0.000301 0.0001
Oxygen 0.0004 0
4.9 PART LOAD OPERATION CYCLE

With the aim of checking the ability of the sweetening plant to operate at different loading
capacity, the inlet valve opening is reduced to 20 percent from its fully opened position. In
this the case the mass flow rate of the feed biogas is reduced consequently to 5755 kg/h.
the simulation is performed to this case and the simulation results show that the plant under
the same operating and dimensions of the PSA and use the same quantities of the solvent
and other chemical could produce methane gas with high purity.
4.10 PLANT FEASIBILITY

In order to estimate the feasibility of the biogas sweetening plant in producing the pure
methane the net power can obtained from the output methane should be calculated. The net
power means the difference between the power that can be produced from the final product
of the cycle and the power consumed in producing the pure methane from the sweetening
plant. The case study as shown in Table 4.10 is taken in for the purpose of feasibility
possibility.
Table 4.10 Feasibility case study
Methane mass flow rate 2970 kg/h

Methane volume flow rate 10 m3/ h
Methane H.V. 55137 kJ/kg
The total consumed power for plant operation can be calculated from the following
equation:
Qconsumed = Q condenser+ Q Reboiler+ Q Cooler+ Q Pump (4.1)
Table 4.Table 4.11 shows the plant consumed power in for each component in kW
Table 4.11 Plant consumed power
Equipment Consumed Power Unit
Q condenser 2547 kW
Q Reboiler 4982 kW
5
Q Cooler 2439 kW
Q Pump 48.96 kW
Therefore the consumed power for this case study is 10016.96 kW. The total thermal
power output of methane can be calculated based on the following equation:
Qo/p = ̇ . H.V (4.2)
Where ̇ is the methane flow rate and H.V is the heating value of the methane fuel,
respectively. Table 4.12 shows the methane thermal power in kW.
Table 4.12 Methane thermal power
Total thermal power output of methane 163758953 kJ/h

Total thermal power output of methane in kW 45488.6 kW
Since the plant useful thermal energy is the difference between the total thermal power
output of methane and total consumed power therefore the useful energy is 35471.6 kW
and if it is estimated for kg of methane it will be 15.32 kW.h/kg. Consequently, the
deduction from these calculations manifest that the feasibility of the biogas fractionation
plant from both points of view (useful power).
4
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMONDATION FOR

FUTURE WORKS
5.1 CONCLUSION
A numerical simulation using Aspen HYSYS simulation software was performed to
upgrade the Egyptian biogas to follow the natural gas network standard and to be used in
special application such as calibration and material analysis process. The sweetening
process of the biogas was done using the Pressure Swing Absorber PSA technique. The
major purpose of the simulation was to determine the optimum conditions and dimensions
of the Pressure Swing Absorber in order to achieve the highest methane purity from
H2S contents of 0.0004, a temperature of 30 C, a pressure of 1.1 bars, and a flow rate of
Egyptian Biogas. The feed sour gas was supplied to the PSA with CO2 contents of 0.25,
13 m3/hour. Diethanolamine (DEA) solvent with different strength was used to remove the
CO2 and H2S simultaneously. The following conclusion can be derived from this research:
1. Various types of Amine solvents were compared and it is found that Diethanol
Amine (DEA) is one of the best amine that has a great capability to clean the biogas
from CO2 and H2S simultaneously.
2. A concentration of 30 % of diethanol amine solvent is sufficient to get the target
purity of the biogas.
3. The effect of temperature is very minor compared to the effect of the working
pressure.
4. Ethylene glycol is one of the best materials that can be used to remove H2O traces
from sweet gas and the optimum concentration of it is 90%.
5. The activated carbon has an efficient ability to remove the traces of O2, H2 and N2
from sweet gas.
6. The proposed biogas treatment cycle was proofed that it is able to operate
efficiently even at 20 % of its full capacity.
7. The optimum DEA strength to obtain methane concentration of 99 % is 0.3.
8. The optimum PSA working pressure to obtain methane of 95 % purity is 5 bars and
for methane of 99 % concentration is 20 bars.
9. The optimum PSA column diameter and number of stages are 1.7 m and 20 stages.
10. There is no effect of trays spacing on the performance of the sweetening cycle.
All the parameters and conditions of the sweetening cycle plant were optimized and
showed feasibility of building up a bio-plant capable of producing pure methane with 99 %
purity or more which can be used in different applications and specifically in calibration
and sophisticated devices.
5.2 RECOMONDATION FOR FUTURE WORKS
The following work is recommended for the future research:
1. Design of an enhanced automatic control system for the biogas processing plants.
2. Design of small units to treat the waste can be used domestically.
3. Design of liquefaction system for Methane generated from biogas.
REFERENCES
[1] P. Bhat, H. Chanakya, N. Ravindranath, Biogas plant dissemination: success story of
Sirsi, India, Energy for sustainable development, 5 (2001) 39-46.
[2] h.o.t.I.o. Prof. Dr. agr. habil. Friedrich Weißbach, G.a.F.R.a.t.f.F.R.C. of, A.F.
Braunschweig, Gas production potential of fresh and ensiled sugar beets in biogas
production, Weissbach, Friedrich, LANDTECHNIK (2009) 4.
[3] C.-Y. Kao, S.-Y. Chiu, T.-T. Huang, L. Dai, L.-K. Hsu, C.-S. Lin, Ability of a mutant
strain of the microalga Chlorella sp. to capture carbon dioxide for biogas upgrading,
Applied Energy, 93 (2012) 176-183.
[4] M. Herva, E. Roca, Ranking municipal solid waste treatment alternatives based on
ecological footprint and multi-criteria analysis, Ecological Indicators, 25 (2013) 77-84.
[5] M.S. Islam, A. Islam, M. Islam, Variation of biogas production with different factors in
poultry farms of Bangladesh, in: Developments in Renewable Energy Technology
(ICDRET), 2014 3rd International Conference on the, IEEE, 2014, pp. 1-6.
[6] M.K.A. Hamid, N. Ibrahim, K.A. Ibrahim, A. Ahmad, Simulation of hydrogen
production for mobile fuel cell applications via autothermal reforming of methane, (2006).
[7] M.K.B.G. Sompop Jarungthammachote *1, Thermochemical Study of Biogas
Autothermal Reforming, International Conference on Energy Security and Climate
Change: Issues, Strategies, and Options (ESCC 2008) Sofitel Centara Grand, Bangkok,
Thailand. 6-8 August 2008.
[8] E. Elkanzi, Simulation of the process of biological removal of hydrogen sulfide from
gas, (2009).
[9] R. Chizzolini, E. Zanardi, V. Dorigoni, S. Ghidini, Calorific value and cholesterol
content of normal and low-fat meat and meat products, Trends in Food Science and
Technology, 10 (1999) 119-128.
[10] A. Skempton, Standard penetration test procedures and the effects in sands of
overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, ageing and overconsolidation,
Geotechnique, 36 (1986) 425-447.
[11] J. Klimstra, Interchangeability of gaseous fuels-The importance of the Wobbe-index,
in, Research Dept., NV Nederlandse Gasunie, Groningen, 1986.
[12] L.E. Øi, Aspen HYSYS simulation of CO2 removal by amine absorption from a gas
based power plant, in: SIMS2007 Conference, Gøteborg, October, Citeseer, 2007.
[13] J. Mulder, Basic principles of membrane technology, Springer Science and Business
Media, 2012.
[14] N.A. Downie, Industrial gases, Springer Science and Business Media, 2007.
[15] J. Rouquerol, F. Rouquerol, P. Llewellyn, G. Maurin, K.S. Sing, Adsorption by
powders and porous solids: principles, methodology and applications, Academic press,
2013.
[16] Compressed Natural Gas and Compressed Biogas An Overview of the Technology,
Economics and Project Development Process December 2012 SEH.
[17] M. Ungarish, Hydrodynamics of suspensions: fundamentals of centrifugal and gravity
separation, Springer Science and Business Media, 2013.
[18] W. Wukovits, A. Drljo, E. Hilby, A. Friedl, Integration of biohydrogen production
with heat and power generation from biomass residues, Chem. Eng. Trans, 35 (2013)
1003-1008.
[19] S.V. Ginkel, S. Sung, J.-J. Lay, Biohydrogen production as a function of pH and
substrate concentration, Environmental science and technology, 35 (2001) 4726-4730.
[20] P. Gupta, R.S. Singh, A. Sachan, A.S. Vidyarthi, A. Gupta, A re-appraisal on
intensification of biogas production, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16
(2012) 4908-4916.
[21] D. Hickman, L. Schmidt, Production of syngas by direct catalytic oxidation of
methane, SCIENCE-NEW YORK THEN WASHINGTON-, 259 (1993) 343-343.
[22] U. Balachandran, J. Dusek, R.L. Mieville, R. Poeppel, M. Kleefisch, S. Pei, T.
Kobylinski, C. Udovich, A. Bose, Dense ceramic membranes for partial oxidation of
methane to syngas, Applied Catalysis A: General, 133 (1995) 19-29.
[23] W.M. Budzianowski∗, W.e.W.n. Wrocław University of Technology, 50-370
Wrocław, Poland, Sustainable biogas energy in Poland: Prospects and challenges,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, (2012ScienceDirect).
[24] Importance of reduced sulfur for the equilibrium chemistry andkinetics of Fe(II),
Co(II) and Ni(II) supplemented to semi-continuousstirred tank biogas reactors fed with
stillage, Journal of Hazardous Materials, (2014).
[25] M.S. Shannon, J.E. Bara, Reactive and reversible ionic liquids for CO2 capture and
acid gas removal, Separation Science and Technology, 47 (2012) 178-188.
[26] E. Barea, C. Montoro, J.A. Navarro, Toxic gas removal‫ط‬metal‫ط‬organic frameworks
for the capture and degradation of toxic gases and vapours, Chemical Society Reviews, 43
(2014) 5419-5430.
[27] R.C. Zanardo, V. Brancaleone, E. Distrutti, S. Fiorucci, G. Cirino, J.L. Wallace,
Hydrogen sulfide is an endogenous modulator of leukocyte-mediated inflammation, The
FASEB journal, 20 (2006) 2118-2120.
[28] M. Mohammed, A. Salmiaton, W.W. Azlina, M.M. Amran, A. Fakhru‘l-Razi, Y.
Taufiq-Yap, Hydrogen rich gas from oil palm biomass as a potential source of renewable
energy in Malaysia, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15 (2011) 1258-1270.
[29] H. Lepaumier, D. Picq, P.-L. Carrette, New amines for CO2 capture. I. Mechanisms
of amine degradation in the presence of CO2, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Research, 48 (2009) 9061-9067.
[30] F.W. Sanggie, Process Modeling And Comparison Study Of Acid Gas Removal Unit
By Using Different Aqueous Amines, in, Faculty of Chemical and Natural Resources
Engineering Universiti Malaysia Pahang, 2011, pp. 26.
[31] D.P. Alex H. West, Naoko Ellis *, T.U.o.B.C. Department of Chemical and Biological
Engineering, 2360 East Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z3, Assessment of four
biodiesel production processes using HYSYS.Plant, in: Bioresource Technology, 2008.
[32] K.A.H.a.T.M. Inna Kim0F0F0F*, P.B. SINTEF Materials and Chemistry, 7465
Trondheim, Norway, Heat of Absorption of CO2 with Aqueous Solutions of MEA: New
Experimental Data http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610214019699
,8/9/2015.
[33] Y.E. Kim, J.A. Lim, S.K. Jeong, Y.I. Yoon, S.T. Bae, S.C. Nam, Comparison of
carbon dioxide absorption in aqueous MEA, DEA, TEA, and AMP solutions, Bull. Korean
Chem. Soc, 34 (2013) 783-787.
[34] A.M.S.E.p.f.A.U.E.A. Dan Laudal Christensen, Gas dehydration, Thermodynamic
simulation of the water/glycol, (2009) 95.
[35] S. Zarinabadi, A. Samimi, Problems of hydrate formation in oil and gas pipes deals,
Journal of American Science, 8 (2012).
[36] E.D. Sloan, C.A. Koh, A. Sum, Natural gas hydrates in flow assurance, Gulf
Professional Publishing, 2010.
[37] E.E. Ludwig, Applied process design for chemical and petrochemical plants, Gulf
Professional Publishing, 1997.
[38] Biohydrogen, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biohydrogen 425/8/2015.
[39] Z. Karaca, Water absorption and dehydration of natural stones versus time,
Construction and Building Materials, 24 (2010) 786-790.
[40] L. Xiaojun, L. Xiaotian, W. Shuhua, Application of Molecular Sieve Adsorption
Method for Dehydration of High Sour Natural Gases [J], Chemical Engineering of Oil and
Gas, 2 (2007) 008.
[41] M. Netusil, P. Ditl, Comparison of three methods for natural gas dehydration, Journal
of Natural Gas Chemistry, 20 (2011) 471-476.
[42] B. Shimekit, H. Mukhtar, Natural gas purification technologies-major advances for
CO2 separation and future directions, INTECH Open Access Publisher Croatia, Europe,
2012.
[43] S. Sridhar, S. Bee, S.K. Bhargava, Membrane-based Gas Separation: Principle,
Applications and Future Potential.
[44] S. Reddy, J. Scherffius, S. Freguia, C. Roberts, Fluor's Econamine FG Plus SM
Technology, in: Proceedings of the second annual conference on carbon sequestration,
Citeseer, 2003, pp. 5-8.
[45] B. Azzopardi, D. Colman, D. Nicholson, Plant application of a T-junction as a partial
phase separator, Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 80 (2002) 87-96.
[46] S.T.A. Elfattah, Y.A. Eldrainy, A. Attia, Numerical Simulation to Optimize Di-
Ethanol-Amine (DEA) Strength for Achieving the Highest Methane Purity from Biogas.
[47] T.H. Russell, transferring heat energy from a waste heat source to a processing unit,
using pump-free closed hydrostatic flow steam or water system; for alkanolamine
regeneration unit using an amine reboiler, in, Google Patents, 2009.
[48] V. Stegmann, K. Massonne, M. Maase, E. Uerdingen, M. Lutz, F. Hermanutz, F.
Gaehr, Solvent system based on molten ionic liquids, its production and use for producing
regenerated carbohydrates, in, US Patent 20,080,269,477, 2008.
[49] W. Coetzee, R.L. Coetzer, R. Rawatlal, Response surface strategies in constructing
statistical bubble flow models for the development of a novel bubble column simulation
approach, Computers and chemical engineering, 36 (2012) 22-34.
[50] A. Jamal, A. Meisen, C.J. Lim, Kinetics of carbon dioxide absorption and desorption
in aqueous alkanolamine solutions using a novel hemispherical contactor—I. Experimental
apparatus and mathematical modeling, Chemical engineering science, 61 (2006) 6571-
6589.
[51] H. Ahn, M. Luberti, Z. Liu, S. Brandani, Process configuration studies of the amine
capture process for coal-fired power plants, International journal of greenhouse gas
control, 16 (2013) 29-40.
[52] a. tech, Jump Start: Aspen HYSYS® V8 A Guide for Getting Started in Aspen
HYSYS Lauren Sittler, Product Management Dinu Ajikutira, Aspen HYSYS Product
Manager, (2014).
[53] J. Jung, Y.S. Jeong, U. Lee, Y. Lim, C. Han, New Configuration of the CO2 Capture
Process Using Aqueous Monoethanolamine for Coal-Fired Power Plants, Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Research, 54 (2015) 3865-3878.
[54] N. Dotzenrod, S. Fong, V. Kenny, M. Leung, M. Nathal, J. Plaxco, S. Saldaña, M.
Zuckerman, E. Zuehlke, From processdesign Jump to: navigation, search Team H Final
Report.
[55] B.M. Devereux, System and method for mapping component bases using a chemical
process simulator, in, Google Patents, 2015.
[56] T. Frising, C. Noïk, C. Dalmazzone, The liquid/liquid sedimentation process: from
droplet coalescence to technologically enhanced water/oil emulsion gravity separators: a
review, Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology, 27 (2006) 1035-1057.
[57] D. Bradley, The Hydrocyclone: International Series of Monographs in Chemical
Engineering, Elsevier, 2013.
[58] R.S. Subramanian, How to Design a Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchanger, in, Web, 2010.
[59] E. Wijn, The effect of downcomer layout pattern on tray efficiency, The Chemical
Engineering Journal and The Biochemical Engineering Journal, 63 (1996) 167-180.
[60] S.T.M. Than, K.A. Lin, M.S. Mon, Heat exchanger design, World Academy of
Science, Engineering and Technology, 46 (2008) 604-611.
[61] E.-G.F.P. Prof . Dr. Ahmed Abd El-Ati Ahmed Thermal and Biogas Production In
Egypt in, 2014.
[62] L.E. Øi, Aspen HYSYS Simulation of CO2 Removalby Amine Absorption from a Gas
Based Power Plant, in: SIMS2007 Conference Gøteborg, 2007.
[63] P.M. Irina Rumyantseva, Aspen Technology, Inc., S.D.R.D. Suphat Watanasiri,
Aspen Technology, Inc, Acid Gas Cleaning using Amine Solvents: Validation with
Experimental and Plant Data, in, Aspentech, pp. 16.
[64] M. Teodorita Al Seadi, Research coordinator,University of Southern Denmark,
Agricultural biogas production in Denmark, in: BiG<EAST, Esbjerg, 2009, pp. 54.
[65] b. Hamed M. El-Mashad a, Ruihong Zhang b,*, Biogas production from co-digestion
of dairy manure and food waste, elsivier, (2010) 9.
[66] M.G.H. Mohamed El Zayat1*, C.l.T.a.S.E. Haggar4, A. 1Environmental Engineering
PhD Program, E. University in Cairo, A.U. 2Energy and Petroleum Engineering, E. in
Cairo, L. 3Chemical Engineering Department, U. University, A. 4Department of
Mechanical Engineering, E. University in Cairo, Feasibility of Biogas Utilization in
Developing Countries: Egypt a Case Study, Austin Journal of Chemical Engineering,
(2015).
[67] D. Dueblein, A. Steinhauser, Biogas from waste and renewable resources, KGaA:
Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH and Co, (2008).
[68] D. Flowers, S. Aceves, C. Westbrook, J. Smith, R. Dibble, Detailed chemical kinetic
simulation of natural gas HCCI combustion: gas composition effects and investigation of
control strategies, Journal of engineering for gas turbines and power, 123 (2001) 433-439.
[69] D. a Central InstituteofMiningandFuelResearch(CSIR), Jharkhand826015,India, B. b
Department ofBiotechnology, Mesra,Ranchi,Jharkhand,India, A re- Priyanka Gupta a,n,
RajShekharSingh a, AshishSachan b, AmbarishS.Vidyarthi b, AshaGupta a,
RenewableandSustainableEnergyReviews, (2012).
1
Case Name: Biogas Dynamic cycle with case studies.hsc
2 LEGENDS
3 Burlington, MA Unit Set: DEA
4 USA
Date/Time: Mon Aug 03 02:22:46 2015
5
6
7 Valve: VLV-103
8
9
CONNECTIONS
10
11
Inlet Stream
12
13 STREAM NAME FROM UNIT OPERATION
14 sour gas
15
Outlet Stream
16
17 STREAM NAME TO UNIT OPERATION
18 Feed Gas Absorber Absorber
19
PARAMETERS
20
21
Physical Properties
22
23 Pressure Drop: 1000 kPa *
24
User Variables
25
26
RATING
27
28
Sizing
29
30 Sizing Conditions
31 Inlet Pressure 45.58 bar Molecular Weight 23.11 Current
32 Valve Opening 20.00 % * Delta P 1000 kPa * Flow Rate 5755 kg/h
33 Valve Manufacturer and Valve Type
34 Manufacturer: Universal Gas Sizing Type: ---
35 Valve Operating Characteristic and Sizing Method
36 Linear Sizing Method: Cg
37 C1 25.00 Km 0.9000 Cv 61.75 USGPM(60F,1psi) Cg 1544 *
38
Nozzle Parameters
39
40 Base Elevation Relative to Ground Level 0.0000 m *
41 sour gas Feed Gas
42 Diameter (m) 5.000e-002 5.000e-002
43 Elevation (Base) (m) 0.0000 0.0000
44 Elevation (Ground) (m) 0.0000 0.0000
45 Elevation (% of Height) (%)
46
CONDITIONS
47
48 Name sour gas Feed Gas
49 Vapour 1.0000 1.0000
50 Temperature (C) 40.1488 35.0000 *
51 Pressure (bar) 45.5800 35.5800 *
52 Molar Flow (m3/h_(gas)) 5888.3018 5888.3018 *
53 Mass Flow (kg/h) 5755.1661 5755.1661
54 Std Ideal Liq Vol Flow (m3/h) 13.3343 13.3343
55 Molar Enthalpy (kJ/kgmole) -1.554e+005 -1.554e+005
56 Molar Entropy (kJ/kgmole-C) -86.64 -84.78
57 Heat Flow (kJ/h) -3.8693e+07 -3.8693e+07
58
PROPERTIES
59
61 Molecular Weight 23.11 23.11
62 Molar Density (kgmole/m3) 1.947 1.518
63 Mass Density (kg/m3) 44.99 35.08
64 Act. Volume Flow (m3/h) 127.9 164.0
65 Mass Enthalpy (kJ/kg) -6723 -6723
66 Mass Entropy (kJ/kg-C) -3.749 -3.668
67 Heat Capacity (kJ/kgmole-C) 42.59 41.11
68 Mass Heat Capacity (kJ/kg-C) 1.843 1.779
69 Aspen Technology Inc. Aspen HYSYS Version 8.6 (32.0.0.8628) Page 1 of 3
Licensed to: LEGENDS * Specified by user.
1
2 LEGENDS
4 USA
5
6
7 Valve: VLV-103 (continued)
8
9
PROPERTIES
10
12 LHV Molar Basis (Std) (kJ/kgmole) 5.993e+005 5.993e+005
13 HHV Molar Basis (Std) (kJ/kgmole) 6.606e+005 6.606e+005
14 HHV Mass Basis (Std) (kJ/kg) 2.858e+004 2.858e+004
15 CO2 Loading --- ---
16 CO2 Apparent Mole Conc. (kgmole/m3) --- ---
17 CO2 Apparent Wt. Conc. (kgmol/kg) --- ---
18 LHV Mass Basis (Std) (kJ/kg) 2.593e+004 2.593e+004
19 Phase Fraction [Vol. Basis] 1.000 1.000
20 Phase Fraction [Mass Basis] 1.000 1.000
21 Phase Fraction [Act. Vol. Basis] 1.000 1.000
22 Mass Exergy (kJ/kg) 396.0 371.9
23 Partial Pressure of CO2 (bar) 11.50 8.973
24 Cost Based on Flow (Cost/s) 0.0000 0.0000
25 Act. Gas Flow (ACT_m3/h) 127.9 164.0
26 Avg. Liq. Density (kgmole/m3) 18.68 18.68
27 Specific Heat (kJ/kgmole-C) 42.59 41.11
28 Std. Gas Flow (STD_m3/h) 5888 5888
29 Std. Ideal Liq. Mass Density (kg/m3) 431.6 431.6
30 Act. Liq. Flow (m3/s) --- ---
31 Z Factor 0.8989 0.9148
32 Watson K 14.29 14.29
33 User Property --- ---
34 Partial Pressure of H2S (bar) 1.823e-002 1.423e-002
35 Cp/(Cp - R) 1.243 1.254
36 Cp/Cv 1.465 1.432
37 Heat of Vap. (kJ/kgmole) 3.192e+004 3.253e+004
38 Kinematic Viscosity (cSt) 0.3154 0.3911
39 Liq. Mass Density (Std. Cond) (kg/m3) 263.8 263.8
40 Liq. Vol. Flow (Std. Cond) (m3/h) 21.82 21.82
41 Liquid Fraction 0.0000 0.0000
42 Molar Volume (m3/kgmole) 0.5137 0.6587
43 Mass Heat of Vap. (kJ/kg) 1381 1407
44 Phase Fraction [Molar Basis] 1.0000 1.0000
45 Surface Tension (dyne/cm) --- ---
46 Thermal Conductivity (W/m-K) 3.094e-002 3.029e-002
47 Viscosity (cP) 1.419e-002 1.372e-002
48 Cv (Semi-Ideal) (kJ/kgmole-C) 34.27 32.80
49 Mass Cv (Semi-Ideal) (kJ/kg-C) 1.483 1.419
50 Cv (kJ/kgmole-C) 29.07 28.71
51 Mass Cv (kJ/kg-C) 1.258 1.242
52 Cv (Ent. Method) (kJ/kgmole-C) --- ---
53 Mass Cv (Ent. Method) (kJ/kg-C) --- ---
54 Cp/Cv (Ent. Method) --- ---
55 Reid VP at 37.8 C (bar) --- ---
56 True VP at 37.8 C (bar) --- ---
57 Liq. Vol. Flow - Sum(Std. Cond) (m3/h) 21.82 21.82
58 Viscosity Index --- ---
59
DYNAMICS
60
61
Dynamic Specifications
62
63 Total Delta P (kPa) 1000 * Not Active
64 Pressure Flow Relation Active
65
Dynamic Parameters
66
67 Valve Opening (%) 20.00 * Mass Flow (kg/h) 5755
68 Conductance (USGPM(60F,1psi)) 61.75 Friction Delta P (kPa) 1000
1
2 LEGENDS
4 USA
5
6
8
9
Pipe Model Parameters
10
11 Material Cast Iron Darcy Friction Factor ---
12 Roughness (m) 2.590e-004 Pipe k (kg/hr/sqrt(kPa-kg/m3)) 0.0000
13 Pipe Length (m) 0.0000 * Velocity (m/s) 18.10 *
14 Feed Diameter (m) 5.000e-002 Reynolds Number 2.869e+006 *
15
Hold-Up Volume: 0.0000 m3 *
16
17 Phase Accumulation Moles Volume
18 (m3/h_(gas)) (kgmole) (m3)
19 Vapour 0.0000 0.0000 * 0.0000
20 Liquid 0.0000 0.0000 * 0.0000
21 Aqueous 0.0000 0.0000 * 0.0000
22 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
23
Actuator Parameters
24
25
Parameters Mode: Instantaneous
26
27 Actuator Time Constant (seconds) 1.000 * Actuator Linear Rate 1.000 *
28 Valve Stickiness Time Constant (seconds) ---
29
Activator Position
30
31
Fail Position: None
32
33 Min Max Current Desired Offset
34 (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
35 Valve 0.00 * 100.00 * 20.00 * --- 0.00 *
36 Actuator 0.00 * 100.00 * 20.00 * 20.00 * ---
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
1
2 LEGENDS
4 USA
5
6
7 Valve: VLV-103
8
9
CONNECTIONS
10
11
Inlet Stream
12
13 STREAM NAME FROM UNIT OPERATION
14 sour gas
15
Outlet Stream
16
17 STREAM NAME TO UNIT OPERATION
18 Feed Gas Absorber Absorber
19
PARAMETERS
20
21
Physical Properties
22
23 Pressure Drop: 1000 kPa *
24
User Variables
25
26
RATING
27
28
Sizing
29
30 Sizing Conditions
31 Inlet Pressure 45.58 bar Molecular Weight 23.11 Current
32 Valve Opening 20.00 % * Delta P 1000 kPa * Flow Rate 5755 kg/h
33 Valve Manufacturer and Valve Type
34 Manufacturer: Universal Gas Sizing Type: ---
35 Valve Operating Characteristic and Sizing Method
36 Linear Sizing Method: Cg
37 C1 25.00 Km 0.9000 Cv 61.75 USGPM(60F,1psi) Cg 1544 *
38
Nozzle Parameters
39
40 Base Elevation Relative to Ground Level 0.0000 m *
41 sour gas Feed Gas
42 Diameter (m) 5.000e-002 5.000e-002
43 Elevation (Base) (m) 0.0000 0.0000
44 Elevation (Ground) (m) 0.0000 0.0000
45 Elevation (% of Height) (%)
46
CONDITIONS
47
49 Vapour 1.0000 1.0000
50 Temperature (C) 40.1488 35.0000 *
51 Pressure (bar) 45.5800 35.5800 *
52 Molar Flow (m3/h_(gas)) 5888.3018 5888.3018 *
53 Mass Flow (kg/h) 5755.1661 5755.1661
54 Std Ideal Liq Vol Flow (m3/h) 13.3343 13.3343
55 Molar Enthalpy (kJ/kgmole) -1.554e+005 -1.554e+005
56 Molar Entropy (kJ/kgmole-C) -86.64 -84.78
57 Heat Flow (kJ/h) -3.8693e+07 -3.8693e+07
58
PROPERTIES
59
61 Molecular Weight 23.11 23.11
62 Molar Density (kgmole/m3) 1.947 1.518
63 Mass Density (kg/m3) 44.99 35.08
64 Act. Volume Flow (m3/h) 127.9 164.0
65 Mass Enthalpy (kJ/kg) -6723 -6723
66 Mass Entropy (kJ/kg-C) -3.749 -3.668
67 Heat Capacity (kJ/kgmole-C) 42.59 41.11
68 Mass Heat Capacity (kJ/kg-C) 1.843 1.779
1
2 LEGENDS
4 USA
5
6
8
9
PROPERTIES
10
12 LHV Molar Basis (Std) (kJ/kgmole) 5.993e+005 5.993e+005
13 HHV Molar Basis (Std) (kJ/kgmole) 6.606e+005 6.606e+005
14 HHV Mass Basis (Std) (kJ/kg) 2.858e+004 2.858e+004
15 CO2 Loading --- ---
16 CO2 Apparent Mole Conc. (kgmole/m3) --- ---
17 CO2 Apparent Wt. Conc. (kgmol/kg) --- ---
18 LHV Mass Basis (Std) (kJ/kg) 2.593e+004 2.593e+004
19 Phase Fraction [Vol. Basis] 1.000 1.000
20 Phase Fraction [Mass Basis] 1.000 1.000
21 Phase Fraction [Act. Vol. Basis] 1.000 1.000
22 Mass Exergy (kJ/kg) 396.0 371.9
23 Partial Pressure of CO2 (bar) 11.50 8.973
24 Cost Based on Flow (Cost/s) 0.0000 0.0000
25 Act. Gas Flow (ACT_m3/h) 127.9 164.0
26 Avg. Liq. Density (kgmole/m3) 18.68 18.68
27 Specific Heat (kJ/kgmole-C) 42.59 41.11
28 Std. Gas Flow (STD_m3/h) 5888 5888
29 Std. Ideal Liq. Mass Density (kg/m3) 431.6 431.6
30 Act. Liq. Flow (m3/s) --- ---
31 Z Factor 0.8989 0.9148
32 Watson K 14.29 14.29
33 User Property --- ---
34 Partial Pressure of H2S (bar) 1.823e-002 1.423e-002
35 Cp/(Cp - R) 1.243 1.254
36 Cp/Cv 1.465 1.432
37 Heat of Vap. (kJ/kgmole) 3.192e+004 3.253e+004
38 Kinematic Viscosity (cSt) 0.3154 0.3911
39 Liq. Mass Density (Std. Cond) (kg/m3) 263.8 263.8
40 Liq. Vol. Flow (Std. Cond) (m3/h) 21.82 21.82
41 Liquid Fraction 0.0000 0.0000
42 Molar Volume (m3/kgmole) 0.5137 0.6587
43 Mass Heat of Vap. (kJ/kg) 1381 1407
44 Phase Fraction [Molar Basis] 1.0000 1.0000
45 Surface Tension (dyne/cm) --- ---
46 Thermal Conductivity (W/m-K) 3.094e-002 3.029e-002
47 Viscosity (cP) 1.419e-002 1.372e-002
48 Cv (Semi-Ideal) (kJ/kgmole-C) 34.27 32.80
49 Mass Cv (Semi-Ideal) (kJ/kg-C) 1.483 1.419
50 Cv (kJ/kgmole-C) 29.07 28.71
51 Mass Cv (kJ/kg-C) 1.258 1.242
52 Cv (Ent. Method) (kJ/kgmole-C) --- ---
53 Mass Cv (Ent. Method) (kJ/kg-C) --- ---
54 Cp/Cv (Ent. Method) --- ---
55 Reid VP at 37.8 C (bar) --- ---
56 True VP at 37.8 C (bar) --- ---
57 Liq. Vol. Flow - Sum(Std. Cond) (m3/h) 21.82 21.82
58 Viscosity Index --- ---
59
DYNAMICS
60
61
Dynamic Specifications
62
63 Total Delta P (kPa) 1000 * Not Active
64 Pressure Flow Relation Active
65
Dynamic Parameters
66
67 Valve Opening (%) 20.00 * Mass Flow (kg/h) 5755
68 Conductance (USGPM(60F,1psi)) 61.75 Friction Delta P (kPa) 1000
1
2 LEGENDS
4 USA
5
6
8
9
Pipe Model Parameters
10
11 Material Cast Iron Darcy Friction Factor ---
12 Roughness (m) 2.590e-004 Pipe k (kg/hr/sqrt(kPa-kg/m3)) 0.0000
13 Pipe Length (m) 0.0000 * Velocity (m/s) 18.10 *
14 Feed Diameter (m) 5.000e-002 Reynolds Number 2.869e+006 *
15
Hold-Up Volume: 0.0000 m3 *
16
17 Phase Accumulation Moles Volume
18 (m3/h_(gas)) (kgmole) (m3)
19 Vapour 0.0000 0.0000 * 0.0000
20 Liquid 0.0000 0.0000 * 0.0000
21 Aqueous 0.0000 0.0000 * 0.0000
22 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
23
Actuator Parameters
24
25
Parameters Mode: Instantaneous
26
27 Actuator Time Constant (seconds) 1.000 * Actuator Linear Rate 1.000 *
28 Valve Stickiness Time Constant (seconds) ---
29
Activator Position
30
31
Fail Position: None
32
33 Min Max Current Desired Offset
34 (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
35 Valve 0.00 * 100.00 * 20.00 * --- 0.00 *
36 Actuator 0.00 * 100.00 * 20.00 * 20.00 * ---
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
‫ملخص ال سالة باللغة الع بية‬
‫تنقية وتكسي الغا الحي‬
‫ك‬ ‫‪,‬‬ ‫طق ‪,‬‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ق ‪,‬‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ا‬

‫ف‬ ‫ا ‪.‬‬ ‫إ‬ ‫ع ‪ .‬ك‪ ,‬ك‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ف‬
‫إ‬ ‫‪,‬‬ ‫قئ ف‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ض ع‬ ‫ع‬ ‫إ ق‬
‫إ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫ا ف‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ق ق أق‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ف‬ ‫إع‬ ‫ق‬
‫ط ق‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ق ع ‪%99‬‬ ‫ا ق‬ ‫قء‬ ‫ع‬ ‫غ‬ ‫إ‬
‫ف‬ ‫فع ظ ا‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ب‬ ‫طق ‪,‬‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ف عا ع‬
‫ئع‪,‬‬ ‫ئك‬ ‫ف‬ ‫أش‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ط ‪,.‬‬ ‫أ‬
‫ك‬ ‫ك ‪Aspen HYSYS‬‬ ‫ب‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫ب ب‬ ‫أ‬ ‫كب خ غ‬
‫ط ق‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ق‬ ‫بغ‬ ‫ط ق غ‬
‫‪.‬‬ ‫ف ف‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ق غ‬ ‫خ‬
‫ب ب ق‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ب ف ئ‬ ‫غ‬
‫‪%2‬‬ ‫إ‬ ‫ف ا‬ ‫غ‬ ‫بب ط‬ ‫ب إض ف‬ ‫‪ ٪3 ٪25 ,٪70‬ع‬
‫ء‪ .‬ق غ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ق ك اك‬
‫)‬ ‫ب‬ ‫(‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ب‬ ‫أك‬ ‫غ‬ ‫ا‬
‫إ‬ ‫خ إ ب‬ ‫غ‬ ‫ك ‪% 30‬‬ ‫‪ DEA‬ب‬ ‫ا‬
‫ضغ ‪ 25‬ب‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫فق ‪ /3 13‬ع ع‬ ‫‪ PSA‬ب‬ ‫أ‬ ‫غ‬ ‫بظ‬
‫ض‬ ‫ع‬ ‫إ ‪ %99‬غ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ف‬ ‫غ‬
‫ف إ‬ ‫فف‬ ‫خا‬ ‫ء ‪0.00042‬‬ ‫ب‬
‫ك‬ ‫‪ 20‬ضغ ‪ 20‬ب ‪.‬‬ ‫ع‬ ‫إ‬ ‫خ ف ب‬ ‫ك ‪% 90‬‬ ‫ب‬
‫غ‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ئب‬ ‫ب‬ ‫بق‬ ‫ق غ‬ ‫أخ‬
‫غ‬ ‫كب‬ ‫ب ‪ 0.0004. 0.0003 0.0001‬ع‬ ‫أك‬
‫ق‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ق‬ ‫‪ .‬ب ء‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ش‬ ‫ع‬
‫ف‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ع‬ ‫غ‬ ‫ق ء ‪0.995‬‬ ‫ب‬
‫‪.‬‬
‫‪4‬‬
‫إ‬
‫ك‬
‫ق‬
‫ع‬
‫إ‬ ‫ط‬ ‫‪-‬ك‬ ‫ق‬
‫ع‬ ‫ق‬ ‫فء‬
‫ف ف ف‬ ‫ك‬
‫ق‬
‫ف‬ ‫فقع‬ ‫‪/‬‬

‫إ‬ ‫ط‬ ‫طك‬
‫‪2016‬‬
‫إ‬
‫ك‬
‫ق‬
‫ق‬
‫ف‬ ‫فقع‬ ‫‪/‬‬
‫إ‬ ‫ط‬ ‫طك‬
‫فق‬ ‫ق‬
‫‪......................................‬‬ ‫ـ‬ ‫ـ‬ ‫ـ‬ ‫أ‪/ .‬‬

‫إ‬ ‫‪-‬‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ف‬ ‫أ‬
‫ئ‬
‫‪......................................‬‬ ‫عط‬ ‫أ‪ / .‬ع‬

‫إ‬ ‫‪-‬‬ ‫طك‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ئ‬
‫ف ع‬
‫‪......................................‬‬ ‫ـــ‬ ‫أ ــ‬ ‫أ‪/ .‬‬

‫ب‬ ‫‪-‬‬ ‫ب‬ ‫أ‬
‫ع‬
‫‪......................................‬‬ ‫ظ‬ ‫ع‬ ‫أ‪/ .‬‬

‫إ‬ ‫ط‬ ‫ك ك‬
‫‪2016‬‬
‫فق‬ ‫إش ف‬
‫عط‬ ‫أ‪ / .‬ع‬

‫‪......................................‬‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ئ‬
‫إ‬ ‫‪-‬‬ ‫ك‬
‫‪/‬‬
‫‪......................................‬‬ ‫ع بق‬ ‫أ‬
‫إ‬ ‫‪-‬‬ ‫ك‬

BIOGAS SWEETENING AND FRACTIONATIONسامح

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

BIOGAS SWEETENING AND FRACTIONATIONسامح

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Alexandria University

BIOGAS SWEETENING AND FRACTIONATION

A Thesis Submitted to the

BIOGAS SWEETENING AND FRACTIONATION

Eng/ Sameh Tawfik Abdel Fattah Mahmoud

Examiner's Committee Approved

Prof Dr /Medhat Mohamoud Sorour .................................

Prof Dr /Abdel Hamid Attia Elsaid .................................

Prof Dr / Mohamed Ahmed Moawad .................................

Vice Dean for Graduated Studies and Research

Prof Dr /Abdel Hamid Attia Elsaid .................................

Dr/ Yehya Abdel Monem Eldrainy .................................

Nomenclature and Terminology .................................................................................................... vi

List of Symbols ............................................................................................................................... vii

List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ viii

List of Tables .................................................................................................................................... x

CHAPTER 1(INTRODUCTION) ...................................................................................... 1

1.3 sCOPE .............................................................................................................................................................. 5

1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS ............................................................................................................... 5

CHAPTER 2 (LITERATURE REVIEW) ......................................................................... 7

2.2 biogas purification ............................................................................................................................................ 7

2.2.1 Reasons for Sweetening ............................................................................................. 8

2.3.1 Effect of Water Content ........................................................................................... 12

2.5.1 Absorption and Reaction Mechanisms ..................................................................... 18

2.7 egyptian waste statistics .................................................................................................................................. 27

CHAPTER 3 (METHODOLOGY) .................................................................................. 30

3.2 METHODology .............................................................................................................................................. 30

3.2.1 Typical Acid Gas Sweetening Cycle ........................................................................ 31

3.4 Part Load OPERATION CYCLE ................................................................................................................... 36

CHAPTER 4 (RESULTS AND DISCUSSION).............................................................. 40

4.2 EFFECT OF DIFFERENT AMINES ON ACIDIC GASES REMOVAL ..................................................... 40

4.5.1 Effect of NG PSA Working Pressure on CO2 Content............................................. 49

4.6.1 The Effect of Absorber Diameter ............................................................................. 54

4.8 Fractionation and purification ......................................................................................................................... 59

4.9 Part Load OPERATION CYCLE ................................................................................................................... 60

4.10 Plant feasibility ............................................................................................................................................... 60

CHAPTER 5 (CONCLUSION AND RECOMONDATION FOR FUTURE WORK)62

5.2 Recomondation for future works .................................................................................................................... 63

APPENDEX-1 (Part Load Inlet Valve Opening) ........................................................... 68

ARABIC SUMMERY ....................................................................................................... 74

Figure 2.2 Biogas and contamination ................................................................................. 12

Figure 2.3 Hydrates formation ........................................................................................... 13

Figure 2.4 Two-phase separator ......................................................................................... 14

Figure 2.5 Three-phase separator ....................................................................................... 14

Figure 2.6 Separation procedure ......................................................................................... 15

Figure 2.7 Separation sectors .............................................................................................. 16

Figure 2.8 Straightening vanes ........................................................................................... 17

Figure 2.9 Regenerator ....................................................................................................... 18

Figure 2.10 Definition of Murphree efficiency ................................................................... 20

Figure 2.11 Circulation rate dependence ............................................................................ 22

Figure 2.12 Number of stages dependence ......................................................................... 22

Figure 2.13 Absorber temperature dependence .................................................................. 23

Figure 2.14 Cap layout ....................................................................................................... 25

Figure 2.15 Bottom strainer ................................................................................................ 25

Figure 2.16 Reflux distributor ............................................................................................ 26

Figure 2.17 Top tower demister ......................................................................................... 26

Figure 2.19 Utilization of centralized biogas plant ............................................................ 28

Figure 3.1 Schematic of simple acid gas sweetening cycle ................................................ 31

Figure 3.3 The absorber column ......................................................................................... 34

Figure 3.4 Acid gas dehydration and purification Cycle ..................................................... 38

Figure 4.1 The ability of different amines to remove CO2 .................................................. 41

Figure 4.2 The ability of different amines to remove H2S .................................................. 41

Figure 4.3 The ability of different amines to remove H2O.................................................. 42