PRODUCTION OF UREA-FORMALDEHYDE

RESIN

CPE 604: PLANT DESIGN AND ECONOMICS

PREPARED FOR

PUAN NORMADYZAH AHMAD

PREPARED BY

NOORUL SAADAH QURAISYAH MOHD ALI (2018657138)

NADHRAH MUNIRAH BINTI ZAINI (2018680848)
MUHAMMAD SHAMMIL ASHMAN BIN MOHD SAUPI (20184411592)
MOHAMAD IQMALHANIF BIN MOHAMAD AFANDI (2018287548)
NUR SABRINA BINTI NAZARUDDIN (2018694194)
TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................................. 4
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 1 ................................................................................................................................... 6
1.1 PROCESS SELECTION ..................................................................................................... 6
1.2 PROCESS BACKGROUD ................................................................................................ 10
CHAPTER 2 ................................................................................................................................. 12
2.1 SITE LOCATION .............................................................................................................. 12
2.2 MARKET ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 21
CHAPTER 3 ................................................................................................................................. 24
3.1 BLOCK DIAGRAM ............................................................................................................... 24
3.2 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM ............................................................................................... 25
3.3 MASS BALANCE ............................................................................................................. 27
3.3.1 PACKED BED REACTOR ........................................................................................... 27
3.3.2 ABSORBER ................................................................................................................... 29
3.3.3 SEPARATOR................................................................................................................. 31
3.3.4 CONTINUOUS-STIRRED TANK REACTOR ............................................................ 32
3.4 ENERGY BALANCE ....................................................................................................... 34
3.4.1 VAPORIZER / HEAT EXCHANGER ................................................................................ 34
3.4.2 AFTER COOLER / HEAT EXCHANGER ................................................................... 36
3.4.3 PACKED BED REACTOR ........................................................................................... 42
CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................................................. 45
4.1 EQUIPMENT SIZING AND DESIGN .................................................................................. 45
4.1.1 VAPORIZER ....................................................................................................................... 45
4.1.2 AFTER COOLER / HEAT EXCHANGER ........................................................................ 47
4.1.3 PACKED BED REACTOR ................................................................................................. 49
4.1.4 CONTINUOUS STIRRED TANK REACTOR .................................................................. 51
4.1.5 ABSORBER ........................................................................................................................ 53
CHAPTER 5 ................................................................................................................................. 55
5.1 BARE MODULE COST OF EQUIPMENT .......................................................................... 55
5.1.1 VAPORIZER ....................................................................................................................... 55
5.1.2 AFTER COOLER / HEAT EXCHANGER ........................................................................ 57
5.1.3 PACKED BED REACTOR ................................................................................................. 59
5.1.4 CONTINUOUS STIRRED TANK REACTOR .................................................................. 61
5.1.5 SEPARATOR ...................................................................................................................... 63
5.2 OPERATING LABOR COST ................................................................................................ 65
5.3 EQUIPMENT SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 68
5.4 UTILITIES SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ 69
5.5 COST OF MANUFACTURING SUMMARY ...................................................................... 70
5.6 CASH FLOW ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................... 72
6.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 74
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In performing our group project, we had to take the help and guideline of some respected
persons, who deserve our greatest gratitude. The completion of this assignment gives us much
Pleasure. We would like to show our gratitude Ir. Dr. Madyzah Ahmad for giving us a good
guideline for assignment throughout this semester. We would also like to expand our deepest
gratitude to all those who have directly and indirectly guided us in writing this assignment. Last
but not least, thank you to all of our group members for cooperation along the journey.
INTRODUCTION

Resin is not just a fancy word for average glue. It is a polymer chemistry in a highly viscous
substance of plant or synthetic origin that is typically convertible into polymers. These resins are
valued for the production of varnishes, plastics, glazing agents and especially in the production of
adhesives. This report will be focused on adhesives specialty in furniture making. There are many
resins that could be a good adhesive such as phenol-formaldehyde resin, melamine-urea resin and
urea formaldehyde concentrate resin. These resins undergo different processes but using the same
raw materials which is formaldehyde. Based on the articles and research journals from various
resources, we conclude that the best resin for furniture making is urea formaldehyde concentrate
resin (UFCR). Hence, why we chose process called battery limit for our production plant.
CHAPTER 1

1.1 PROCESS SELECTION

Concept screening is a selection matrix that is prepared by listing a set of criteria to be used
to evaluate the alternatives. Then, one alternative is chosen as a reference alternative.
Hydroxymethylolation act as reference for catalytic pyrolysis oil and methylation of melamine.
The criteria used for this method is raw material availability, cost of production, ease of
manufacture, process safety, catalyst usage and product quality. All of these criteria we chose were
based on articles from various resources. The raw material availability for 3 processes are easy to
obtain (Foo, 2015) which one of it is formaldehyde. It is stated in (Gadhave, Mahanwar, &
Gadekar, 2017) the cost production for hydroxymethylolation is the lowest as it is a simple process.
The catalytic pyrolysis of oil is a complicated process (Nakos, Tsiantzi, & Athanassiadou, 2000).
As for the product quality, UFC resin has the highest demand for wood adhesives (M Ethanol and
M Arket O Verview / U Ses, n.d.).

Type of Process:

1. Hydroxymethylotion (urea formaldehyde concentrates resin)

2. Catalytic Pyrolysis Oil (phenol-formaldehyde resin)
3. Methylation of Melamine (melamine-urea resin)

Screening Criteria:

1. Raw materials availability

2. Cost of production
3. Ease of manufacture
4. Process safety
5. Catalyst usage
6. Product quality
Table 1.1.1: Concept Screening

Process Hydroxymethylolation Catalytic Pyrolysis Oil Methylation of

(Urea formaldehyde (Phenol-formaldehyde Melamine
concentrated resin) resin) (Melamine-urea resin)
Criterion

Raw materials + + +
availability

Cost of production + - -

Ease of manufacture + - +

Process safety + + +

Catalyst usage 0 - +

Product Quality + 0 0

Sum of ‘+’ 5 2 4

Sum of ‘-’ 0 3 1

Sum of ‘0’ 1 1 1

Total Score 4 -1 3

Rank 1 3 2
 Concept scoring is using the same matrix, but only on those alternatives that have survived
the screening process. The result is now more quantitative.

Table 1.1.2: Weightage for Concept Scoring

No Criteria Weight

1 Raw materials availability 10%

2 Cost of production 25%

3 Ease of manufacture 15%

4 Process safety 15%

5 Catalyst usage 5%

6 Product quality 30%

Table 1.1.3: Rating for Concept Scoring

Criteria Rating

Excellent 5

Good 4

Average 3

Fair 2

Poor 1
Table 1.1.4: Concept Scoring

PROCESS

Hydroxymethylolation Catalytic Pyrolysis Methylation of

(Urea formaldehyde Oil (Phenol- Melamine
CRITERION WEIGHT
concentrated resin) formaldehyde resin) (Melamine-urea
resin)

Rating Weighted Rating Weighted Rating Weighted

Score Score Score

Raw materials 10% 4 0.4 4 0.4 4 0.4

availability

Cost of 25% 4 1.00 2 0.5 2 0.5

production

Ease of 15% 4 0.6 2 0.3 4 0.6

manufacture

Process safety 15% 5 0.75 5 0.75 5 0.75

Catalyst usage 5% 3 0.15 2 0.10 4 0.2

Product quality 30% 5 1.5 4 1.2 4 1.2

Total Score 4.4 3.25 3.65

Rank 1 3 2

Based on the score from concept screening and concept scoring, we can conclude that the best
process is hydroxymethylolation to produce the urea formaldehyde concentrate resin (UFCR) as
the best resin for the furniture and wood adhesive.
1.2 PROCESS BACKGROUD

Process Battery Limit (PBL) was used in order to produce high quality resin with low costs.
The PBL plant produces Urea-Formaldehyde concentration (UFC) and uses methanol and urea as
major raw materials. The output for the UFC process is based on the methanol flowrate, which
ranges from a minimum of 25 kg/min to a maximum designed capacity of 44.0 kg/min based on a
yield of 93%. Methanol liquid is pumped from its storage and heated in the methanol vaporizer to
the desired temperature. The methanol vapor is then mixed with air (containing approximately
12% oxygen) before or at the inlet of the After cooler. The mixture of methanol vapor and air are
then heated in a pre-heater prior to the entry into the formaldehyde reactor from the top. In the
formaldehyde reactor, methanol and air reacts in the presence of molybdenum-iron oxide catalyst
to form formaldehyde in gas form.

The vapor phase oxidation takes place in the tubular packed bed reactor where hydrocarbon
to air ratio is 4:1. Safe operation is usually achieved by maintaining low concentration of oxidizing
agent (i.e. oxygen) and lower temperatures by using catalysts. These will also be minimized
undesired reactions such as complete combustion and unwanted side reactions.

The main product from the formaldehyde reactor is formaldehyde, produce as follows:

2CH3OH + O2 → 2HCHO + H2O

This reaction is highly exothermic. Apart from the main reaction above, there are several side
reactions producing several by-products of dimethyl ether, formic acid, carbon monoxide and
carbon dioxide.

The production process involves the use of a batch resin reactor. UFC manufactured in the
PBL plant is charged into the reactor along with urea (solid) and water. The synthesis of urea-
formaldehyde resin takes place in two stages:

1. Hydroxymethylolation
2. Condensation (or polymerization)
Hydroxymethylolation

Since the hydroxymethylolation reaction to produce monomers proceeds in alkaline

conditions, sodium hydroxide is also charged into the reactor to adjust pH to the desired condition.
The hydroxymethylolation reaction is a series of reaction that lead to the formation of mono-, di-,
and tri-methylolureas.

Urea + formaldehye → mono-methylolurea + di-methylolurea + tri-methylolurea

The reaction rate for the addition of formaldehyde to urea to successively form one, two, and
three methylol groups is estimated to be in the ratio of 9:3:1.

Condensation / Polymerisation

The second stage of the synthesis consists of the condensation of the methylolureas to high
molecular weight polymers. This reaction occurs at acidic pH (i.e. 4.5 – 5.0) and this achieved by
addition of formic acid. The polymerization reaction is highly exothermic. The increase in
molecular weight of the UFCR under acidic conditions is predicted to be a combination of reactions
leading to the formation of:

The condensation reactions are carried out until a desired viscosity is reached. Then, the
reaction mixture is cooled and neutralized by addition of sodium hydroxide to stop the
polymerisation reaction. Urea (solid) is added to lower the final formaldehyde urea (F/U) ratio,
thereby reducing the formaldehyde emissions. Sodium borate (buffer agent) is also added to the
condition the mixture to a certain pH value to stop polymer growth. After conditioning stage, the
urea-formaldehyde product is pumped to the storage.
CHAPTER 2

2.1 SITE LOCATION

There 3 places that have been decided which are Gurun Kedah (UFC Resin), Kuantan Pahang
(melamine resin) and Lunas Kedah (phenol resin).

1. Market availability

The market must be available to make sure that the product can be sold to gain profit. The
proximity to the major markets is a vital need for the site selection. It will give advantages to the
customer to buy from nearby areas. In order the get high market value, the location need to be near
to the targeted market due to reduce the cost of distribution and time required for shipping.

2. Transportation

There are lots of transportation that can be considered in industrial concern such as water,
railroads and highway. The local freight rates and existing railroad lines should be considered. The
proximity to railroad centers and the possibility of ocean transport must be considered. The kind
and number of products and raw materials determine the most suitable type of transportation
facilities.

3. Availability of labor

For every plant labor supply is one of the reasons to be selected in choosing the site location.
Labour supply is needed for construction of the plant and its operation. There should be an adequate
pool of skilled and unskilled labor locally and the labor is suitable to be trained for enhancement of
their skill. The prevailing pay scales, restrictions on number of hours worked per week should also
be considered.

4. Utilities and Facilities

Utilities supply is one of the important requirements in choosing the site for plant. Power and
water supply are the most common for every plant. Power supply will be received from the nearest
 Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) as TNB is the main electricity power generator and supplier in
Peninsular Malaysia.

5. Climate

Every plant has their own need for the weather. The extreme condition of a place is required
for consideration since excessive humidity or extremes of hot or cold weather will induce a need
for the plant to have a special consideration on the plant equipment.

6. Raw material availability

The raw materials availability is an important aspect in the site selection consideration.
Without raw material, there will be no product. Thus, the associates’ factor of the raw material
resources should be determined at the considered location. The location must be closed with the
raw materials source in order to reduce the transportation and storage charges. The price of the raw
materials must be low, and the raw material must be pure. The storage requirements should also be
considered for this part.

7. Land estimation

Land and soil structure should be examined carefully before selecting the site. The difference
in soil structure should be study earlier because it can be divided into three types of soil which are
loam-type, laterite-type and sandy-type. Topography of land must also be considered as it will affect
the construction cost. This is because if a plant is built on a hilly area, there will be an extra cost to
levelling the hills. Thus, a study on the topography of the site must be inspected as well and a
satisfying area which is a flat area, should be first to be chose as the site of the plant. Additional
space is required for a preparation in future changes.
Table 2.1.1: Site Selection

No Selection criteria Site suggestion

Gurun, Kedah Kuantan, Pahang Lunas, Kedah

1 Market availability 4 3 3

2 Transportation 4 3 3

3 Availability of labour 3 3 3

4 Utilities and facilities 4 4 4

5 Climate 4 4 4

6 Raw material 5 3 3
availability

8 Land estimation 4 3 3

28 23 23

1= Very Bad, 2=Bad, 3=Moderate, 4=Good, 5=Very good

 8. Market availability

The growth of formaldehyde is increasing throughout the year. Formaldehyde consumption

globally by end use for the historic study period, reinforces the importance of resins to
formaldehyde demand. On a global basis, approximately 55% of all formaldehyde consumed is
used in resins. There are three major products are urea formaldehyde resin (UFC) phenol resin and
melamine resin. As resin becoming a high demand in this modern world, the UF resins are
economically cost-effective in nature thus making it more popular. The figure shows global
formaldehyde demand by derivative.

Figure 2.1.1: The Global Formaldehyde Demand by Derivative

This figure shows that, UFC is the highest compared to phenol and melamine resins. To support
the statement. Figure 2.1.1 show the growth in the formaldehyde demand.
 Figure 2.1.2: Growth in Formaldehyde Demand (metric tons) 2011-2015

It can be concluded that it is very promising to the profits due to increase of formaldehyde
especially UFC resin. In conclusion, selecting UFC resin as our product is the best because of the
promising future of the product.
9. Utilities and facilities

Electric and water supply are the most crucial needed in every plant. They need both of the
supply in order to operate their factory. Figure below show the tariff electric TNB for the industrial
aspects.

Figure 2.1.3: The Industrial Tariff

Figure 2.1.4: Water Tariff

10. Climate

The climate in Gurun is hot, oppressive, and overcast. Over the course of the year, the
temperature typically varies from 22.7°C to 32.7°C and is rarely below 22°C or above 34.4°C.
Meanwhile, as generally the case in Peninsular Malaysia, Pahang is warm and humid throughout the
year with temperatures ranging from 21 degrees to 33 degrees Celsius. The highlands are definitely
cooler with temperatures falling down to 16 degrees Celsius at night. The temperature rarely exceeds
23 degrees Celsius at night. The temperature rarely exceeds 23 degrees Celsius during the day. The
rainy seasons in the coastal areas are caused by the monsoons that usually occur between November
to February. Annual rainfall is high, averaging over 200 centimeters.

11. Raw material availability

For UFC resin in Gurun Kedah, the raw materials is from nearby factory. It will transport using
pipeline from the company to select site location. Moreover, it will reduce the cost of construction
and cost of transportation or cost of distribution. This way will increase the profits of the company.
Meanwhile for phenol and melamine, both selected areas need to import the raw materials and it will
increase the cost of production. In conclusion, production of UFC resin is the best compare to others
because we can get much profit due to the raw materials availability is near to the selected plant in
Gurun kedah.

12. Transportation

Three site locations have their own benefits of transportation. All of them have access to the
nearest highway in order to transport their product to consumers. It also give benefits to the workers
to go to work because they will face difficulties in order to go to their workplace.

13. Availability of labor

Three of the location do not have problems of shortage of workers. They are many people who
will applied to work. Fresh graduates are the best candidates because they have the knowledge and
opportunity to polish their skills.
14. Land estimation

In Kuantan Pahang, at the industrial area the land price is at RM 15.00 per square feet.
Meanwhile in Gurun Kedah, RM 6.50 per square feet. It shows that land price in Gurun Kedah is
much cheaper than Kuantan Pahang.
Gurun, Kedah

Kuantan Pahang
2.2 MARKET ANALYSIS

Urea formaldehyde resin is a non-transparent, cross-linked thermoset resin or plastic, which is

a chemical mixture of urea and formaldehyde. It is used extensively in different end-user industries
as it provides high reactivity and performance at a relatively low cost. The overall demand for this
resin type is highly influenced by the infrastructure and furniture industry. The global urea
formaldehyde resin market is driven by the growing demand from furniture industry and increasing
consumption by end use applications, such as plywood, medium density fiberboard, adhesives and
coatings, and particle board.

The top three evolving trends driving the global urea formaldehyde market according to Technavio
Chemicals and Materials Research analysts are:

1. Remarkable growth in APAC

2. Expanding furniture market worldwide
3. Growing demand for construction materials

Asia-Pacific conquered the market in 2018 across the globe with the largest consumption from
countries such as China and India. China is the largest producer of urea formaldehyde in the world.
With the increasing population, need and demand for food is increasing day-by-day, due to which,
the advancements in the agriculture activities are changing, gradually. To achieve these deviations,
fertilizer performance and efficiency are necessary, resulting in increased consumption of urea
formaldehyde. The furniture industry has been rising steadily over the last decade. The production
furniture industry accounts for around 39% of the world's furniture production in 2018.

Market demand for construction material is growing in the global market, the consumption of
urea formaldehyde will also be accelerated during the forecast period. As resin becoming a high
demand in this modern world, the UF resins are economically cost-effective in nature than other
resins such as phenol-formaldehyde resins, thus making it more popular.
 Global Market Production (Annual) 8.041 million tons

Global Market Demand 8.771 million tons

Global Phenol Market (2019) 8.843 billion USD (RM36,782,458,500.00)

Global Phenol Market (2023) 10.913 billion USD (RM45,392,623,500.00)

Percentage Contribution 5.4%

5% of (demand – production) 730, 000 tons divided by 5 which equals to

146, 000 tons

Production in ton/day 25 ton/day

Market price per ton 3560

According to the table above, our UFC resins market is the largest and accounted for 8.843
billion USD of the global urea formaldehyde market and reached 10.913 billion USD in 2023. The
analysis of market value shows that our product is expected to grow at a Compound Annual Growth
Rate (CAGR) of around 5% by value from 2019 to 2023 worldwide. Moreover, the global growth
production of UFC Resin is 8.041 million tons in 2019 and global market that is forecasted in 2023
is 8.771 million tons. We will be contributing for at least 5.4% which finalized our production of
UFC resins to be 146, 000 tons per year. The graph below shows the increment of market volume
for UFC resins globally.
 9
8.771
8.8

market volume in million tons

8.6 8.479

8.4 8.333
8.187
8.2
8.041
8

7.8

7.6
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Years

Figure 1: Market Volume of UFC Resins worldwide from 2019 to 2023 (in million tons)
CHAPTER 3

3.1 BLOCK DIAGRAM

Figure 3.1.1: Process Block Diagram

3.2 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
 Table 3.2.1: Stream table for PFD

Stream
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
number
Temperature 60 100.8 100 66 173.7 274 140 65 115 60 88 90 90 32
Pressure 2.5 2.5 2 0.2 0.4 0.05 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Vapor
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
fraction
Mass flowrate
44 44 11 48.96 48.96 68.267 68.267 44.0365 17.2125 28.57 35.59 4.0365 40 46.36
(kg/min)
Molar
flowrate 1.375 1.375 1.719 1.719 1.719 2.9256 2.9256 1.4346 0.7124 1.1984 1.972 0.13455 1.25 1.6564
(kmol/min
Components
Methanol 1.375 1.375 1.375 1.375 1.375 0.09625 0.09625 - - - - - - -
Oxygen - - - 0.07219 0.07219 - - - 0.09625 - - - - -
Nitrogen - - - - - 0.2718 0.2718 - - - - - - -
Formaldehyde - - - 0.2718 0.2718 1.2788 1.2788 - - - - - 0.75 0.2213
Water - - 0.611 - - 1.2788 1.2788 0.9346 0.2718 1.0317 1.9772 0.13455 0.3333 1.2422
Urea - - - - - - - 0.33 0.3443 0.1667 - - 0.1667 -
Urea-
Formaldehyde - - - - - - - 0.1667 - - - - - 0.1929
Resin
3.3 MASS BALANCE

3.3.1 PACKED BED REACTOR

Methanol + Air Packed Bed Reactor

CH3OH HCHO
Yield: 93%
O2 H2O
N2 CH3OH
N2

Component In Out

ṁ (kg/min) ṅ (kmol/min) ṁ (kg/min) ṅ (kmol/min)

CH3OH 44 1.375 3.08 0.09625

O2 1.155 0.07219

N2 3.805 0.2718 3.805 0.2718

HCHO - 38.364 1.2788

H2O - 23.018 1.2788

CH3OH + ½ O2→HCHO + H2O

Output components in extent of reaction, ξ

HCHO: ξ

H2O: ξ

CH3OH: (1.375 – ξ)
 actual yield
Yield % =
theoretical yield

CH3OH,

kg kmol kmol
44 =1.375
min 32kg min

Theoretical HCHO yield,

1 mol CH3OH : 1 mol HCHO
1.375 kmol/min CH3OH: 1.375 kmol/min HCHO

Actual HCHO yield,

Actual = theoretical×% yield

=1.375 mol HCHO×0.93
=1.2788 mol HCHO

∴ ξ=1.2788 mol

CH3OH out,

1.375 – ξ=1.375-1.2788 =0.09625 mol

Air,
4 mol methanol : 1 mol air
1.375 kmol/min methanol : 0.344 kmol/min air

N2,
kmol N2 kmol air kmol
0.79 ×0344 =0.2718
kmol air min min
O2,
kmol O2 kmol air kmol
0.79 ×0344 =0.07219
kmol air min min
3.3.2 ABSORBER

ṁ3
ṁ1
0.6 HCHO
0.35 Urea
a CH3OH
0.65 H2O
b N2

ṁ4
Absorber
c HCHO
H2O=6
Urea=10

ṁ5 H2O
ṁ2

HCHO H2O
CH3OH N2

Component In Out

ṁ1 (kg/min) ṁ2 (kg/min) ṁ3 (kg/min) ṁ4 (kg/min) ṁ5 (kg/min)

HCHO 38.364 10.3275 28.0365

Urea 10 10

CH3OH 3.08 3.08

H2O 18.571 23.018 6 35.589

N2 3.805 3.805

Total 28.571 68.267 17.2125 44.0365 35.589

Balance at ṁ3
ṁ3 = 0.6ṁ3 + 𝑏ṁ3 + 𝑐ṁ3
ṁ3 = 0.6ṁ3 + 3.08 + 3.805
ṁ3 (1 − 0.6) = 6.885
ṁ3 = 17.2125

Balance on urea,
0.35ṁ1 = 10

10
ṁ1 = = 28.571
0.35

Balance on H2O,
0.65ṁ1 + 23.018 = ṁ5 + 6

0.65(28.571) = 18.571

ṁ5 = 18.571 + 23.018 − 6 = 35.589

Balance on HCHO
38.364 = 0.6ṁ3 + 𝑐ṁ4
0.6(17.2125) = 10.3275
𝑐ṁ4 = 38.364 − 10.3275 = 28.0365
Balance at ṁ4
ṁ4 = 𝑐ṁ4 + 10 + 6 = 28.0365 + 16 = 44.0365
Overall balance
ṁ1 + ṁ2 = ṁ3 + ṁ4 + ṁ5
28.571 + 68.267 = 17.2125 + 44.0365 + 35.589
96.838 = 96.838
3.3.3 SEPARATOR

HCHO (formalin)

UFC
Urea Separator

HCHO
H2O

0.25 Urea
0.6 HCHO
0.15 H2O

Component In Out

ṁ (kg/min) ṁ (kg/min) ṅ (kmol/min)

HCHO 28.0365 4.0365 24

H2O 6 6

Urea 10 10

Total 44.0365 4.0365 40

0.25 Urea=0.25(40)=10
0.15 H2 O=0.15(40)=6
0.6 HCHO=0.6(40)=24
3.3.4 CONTINUOUS-STIRRED TANK REACTOR

Urea

UFC CSTR Reactor

Urea UFR
HCHO H2O
H2O HCHO
H2O

Component In Out

ṁ (kg/min) ṁ (kg/min) ṁ (kg/min) ṁ (kg/min)

Urea 8 10

HCHO 24 6.64

H2O 6 5 22.36

UFR 17.36

Urea + HCHO→mono-methylolurea + di-methylolurea→ UFR + H2O

Output components in extent of reaction, ξ

UFR: ξ

H2O: ξ

HCHO: (24 – ξ)
 tonnes 1000kg 1day 1hr kg
UFR produced = 25 =17.36
day 1ton 24hrs 60mins min

∴ ξ=17.36 kg/min

HCHO out,

kg
24-ξ=24-17.36=6.64
min
3.4 ENERGY BALANCE

3.4.1 VAPORIZER / HEAT EXCHANGER

Steam

130OC , p = 2 barg

Methanol (l) Vaporizer Methanol (v)

44kg/min 44kg/min

60OC , P = 2.5 barg 100.8OC

Condensate

130OC

In Out

Component ṁ (kg/min) ṅ Ĥ (kJ/mol) ṁ (kg/min) ṅ Ĥ (kJ/mol)

(kmol/min) (kmol/min)

CH3OH 44 1.375 Ĥ1 = 0 44 1.375 37.469

H2O 11 0.611 2706.3 11 0.611 2706.3

**Reference: CH3OH (l): T= 60oC, P= 2.5 barg. H2O(l): T= 0.01oC, P= 0.00611 barg
 1. CH3OH (v), T= 100.8oC, P= 2.5 barg
64.7
𝑘𝐽
Ĥ𝐴 = ∫ (75.86 𝑥 10−3 ) + (16.83 𝑥 10−5 )𝑇 𝑑𝑇 = 0.4059
𝑚𝑜𝑙
60
𝑘𝐽
Ĥ𝑣 = 35.27
𝑚𝑜𝑙
100.8

Ĥ𝐵 = ∫ 42.93 + 8.301𝑇 − 1.87𝑇 2 − 8.03𝑇 3 𝑑𝑇 = 1.7929

64.7
𝑘𝐽
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = Ĥ3 = 37.469
𝑚𝑜𝑙

2. H2O (l), T= 0.01oC, P= 0.00611 barg H2O (v), T= 130oC, P= 2 barg

From steam table, P= 2 bar

𝑘𝐽
Ĥ2 = 2706.3
𝑘𝑔

3. H2O (l), T= 0.01oC, P= 0.00611 barg H2O (l), T= 130oC, P= 2 barg

From steam table, P= 2 bar

𝑘𝐽
Ĥ = 2706.3
𝑘𝑔

Heat transfer rate:

Q= ΣṅĤ (out)- ΣṅĤ (in)

kJ kmol mol
Q= (37.469 x 1.375 x 1000 )
mol min kmol
kJ 1min
Q=(51519.88) x =858.66kW
min 60s
 3.4.2 AFTER COOLER / HEAT EXCHANGER

Cool in (CH3OH, O2,

N2)

66.1OC, p = 0.2 bar

Hot in (HCHO, H20, O2, N2,

CH3OH) Heat Exchanger
Hot out (HCHO, H20, O2,
N2, CH3OH)
274OC, P = 0.05 bar
140OC, P = 1.0 bar

Cool out (CH3OH, O2, N2)

173.7OC, P = 0.4 bar

Species ṅ Ĥ ṅ Ĥ ṅ Ĥ ṅ Ĥ

CH3OH 1.375 0 1.375 5.6632 0.09625 11.3110 0.09625 3.7462

HCHO - - - - 1.2788 0 1.2788 -5.7623

H2 O - - - - 1.2788 8.6447 1.2788 3.928

O2 0.07219 1.225 0.07219 4.49 - - - -

N2 0.2718 1.1972 0.2718 4.357 0.2718 7.3426 0.2718 3.366

Ref: CH3OH (g), 66℃, 0.2 bar, HCHO (g), 274℃, 0.05 bar, H2O (g), O2 (g), N2 (g), 25℃, 1 atm
1) CH3OH (g), 66℃, 0.2 bar → CH3OH (g), 173.7℃, 0.4 bar

1 𝑚3 8.314 𝑘𝐽 𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝐾 32𝑘𝑔

ĤA = (0.4 − 0.2)𝑏𝑎𝑟 ( ) = 8.08 × 10−4
792 𝑘𝑔 0.08314 𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝐾 𝑚3 𝑏𝑎𝑟 1000𝑚𝑜𝑙

173.7
ĤB = ∫66 (42.93 × 10−3 ) + (8.301 × 10−5 )𝑇 − (1.87 × 10−8 )𝑇 2 − (8.03 × 10−12 )𝑇 3 𝑑𝑇 =
5.6624 kJ/mol

Ĥ4 = ĤA + ĤB = 5.6632 kJ/mol

2) CH3OH (g), 66℃, 0.2 bar → CH3OH (g), 274℃, 0.05 bar

1 𝑚3 8.314 𝑘𝐽 𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝐾 32𝑘𝑔

ĤA = (0.2 − 0.05)𝑏𝑎𝑟 ( ) = 6.06 × 10−4 kJ/mol
792 𝑘𝑔 0.08314 𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝐾 𝑚3 𝑏𝑎𝑟 1000𝑚𝑜𝑙

274
ĤB = ∫66 (42.93 × 10−3 ) + (8.301 × 10−5 )𝑇 − (1.87 × 10−8 )𝑇 2 − (8.03 × 10−12 )𝑇 3 𝑑𝑇 =
11.3104 kJ/mol

Ĥ7 = ĤA + ĤB = 11.3110 kJ/mol

3) CH3OH (g), 66℃, 0.2 bar → CH3OH (g), 140℃, 1 bar

1 𝑚3 8.314 𝑘𝐽 𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝐾 32𝑘𝑔

ĤA = (1.0 − 0.2)𝑏𝑎𝑟 ( ) = 3.23 × 10−3 kJ/mol
792 𝑘𝑔 0.08314 𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝐾 𝑚3 𝑏𝑎𝑟 1000𝑚𝑜𝑙

140
ĤB = ∫66 (42.93 × 10−3 ) + (8.301 × 10−5 )𝑇 − (1.87 × 10−8 )𝑇 2 − (8.03 × 10−12 )𝑇 3 𝑑𝑇 =
3.743 kJ/mol

Ĥ7 = ĤA + ĤB = 3.7462 kJ/mol

4) HCHO (g), 274℃, 0.05 bar → HCHO (g), 140℃, 1 bar

1 𝑚3 8.314 𝑘𝐽 𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝐾 30𝑘𝑔

ĤA = (1.0 − 0.05)𝑏𝑎𝑟 ( ) = 0.0037 kJ/mol
815 𝑘𝑔 0.08314 𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝐾 𝑚3 𝑏𝑎𝑟 1000𝑚𝑜𝑙

140
ĤB = ∫274 (34.28 × 10−3 ) + (4.268 × 10−5 )𝑇 − (8.694 × 10−12 )𝑇 3 𝑑𝑇 = −5.766 kJ/mol

Ĥ7 = ĤA + ĤB = -5.7623 kJ/mol
For ideal gases H2O, O2 and N2, data was taken from table B.8

5) H2O (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → H2O (g), 274℃, 0.05 bar

T Ĥ

200 6.01

274 x

300 9.57

x = Ĥ8 = 8.6447 kJ/mol
6) H2O (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → H2O (g), 140℃, 1 bar

T Ĥ

100 2.54

140 x

200 6.01

x = Ĥ12 = 3.928 kJ/mol

7) O2 (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → O2 (g), 66℃, 0.2 bar

T Ĥ

25 0

66 x

100 2.24

x = Ĥ2 = 1.225 kJ/mol

8) O2 (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → O2 (g), 173.7℃, 0.4 bar

T Ĥ

100 2.24

173.7 x

200 5.13

x = Ĥ5 = 4.49 kJ/mol
9) N2 (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → N2 (g), 66℃, 0.2 bar

T Ĥ

25 0

66 x

100 2.19

x = Ĥ3 = 1.1972 kJ/mol

10) N2 (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → N2 (g), 173.7℃, 0.4 bar

T Ĥ

100 2.19

173.7 x

200 5.13

x = Ĥ6 = 4.357 kJ/mol

11) N2 (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → N2 (g), 274℃, 0.05 bar

T Ĥ

200 5.13

274 x

300 8.12

x = Ĥ10 = 7.3426 kJ/mol

12) N2 (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → N2 (g), 140℃, 1.0 bar

T Ĥ

100 2.19

140 x

200 5.13

x = Ĥ14 = 3.366 kJ/mol

Species ṅĤout (kJ/mol) ṅĤin (kJ/mol)

CH3OH 8157.47 1088.68

HCHO -7368.83 -

H2O 5023.13 11054.84

O2 - 88.4328

N2 2099.11 2321.12

Total 7910.88 14553.07

𝑄̇ = ΣṅĤout − ΣṅĤin
𝑘𝐽
= (7910.88 − 14533.07)
𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑘𝐽 1𝑚𝑖𝑛
= −6622.19
𝑚𝑖𝑛 60𝑠
= −110.37 𝑘𝑊
3.4.3 PACKED BED REACTOR

Methanol + Air Packed Bed Reactor

HCHO (g) O2 (g)
CH3OH (g)
CH3OH (g)
O2 (g)
H2O (g) N2 (g)
N2 (g)

In Out
ṅ (kmol/min) Ĥ (kJ/mol) ṅ (kmol/min) Ĥ (kJ/mol)
CH3OH 1.375 7.5781 0.09625 13.6408
O2 0.07219 4.49 - -
N2 0.2718 4.357 0.2718 7.3424
HCHO - - 1.2788 10.1159
H2 O - - 1.2788 8.6447
**Reference state: CH3OH (g), H2O (g), HCHO (g), O2 (g), N2 (g), 25℃, 1 atm

1. CH3OH (g), 25℃, 1 atm → CH3OH (g), 173.7℃, 0.4 bar

1 𝑚3 8.314 𝑘𝐽 𝑚𝑜𝑙𝐾 32𝑘𝑔
ĤA = (1.013 − 0.4)𝑏𝑎𝑟
0.08314 𝑚𝑜𝑙.𝐾 𝑚3 𝑏𝑎𝑟 1000𝑚𝑜𝑙
= 0.002497
792 𝑘𝑔

ĤB = 7.5756
Total = 7.5718

2. CH3OH (g), T= 25oC, P= 1 atm → T= 274oC, P= 0.05 bar

ĤA = 6.06 x 10-4
ĤB = 13.6402
Total = 13.6408

3. HCHO (g), T= 25oC, P= 1 atm → T= 274oC, P= 0.05 bar

1 8.314 30
ĤA =
815
𝑥 (1.013 − 0.05)𝑥 𝑥 = 3.696 𝑥 10−3
0.08314 1000

ĤB = 10.1123
Total = 10.1159
4. O2 (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → O2 (g), 173.7℃, 0.4 bar
T Ĥ

100 2.24

173.7 x

200 5.13

x = Ĥ5 = 4.49 kJ/mol

5. N2 (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → N2 (g), 173.7℃, 0.4 bar

T Ĥ

100 2.19

173.7 x

200 5.13

x = Ĥ6 = 4.357 kJ/mol

6. N2 (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → N2 (g), 274℃, 0.05 bar

T Ĥ

200 5.13

274 x

300 8.12

x = Ĥ10 = 7.3426 kJ/mol

13) H2O (g), 25℃, 1.013 bar → H2O (g), 274℃, 0.05 bar

T Ĥ

200 6.01

274 x

300 9.57

x = Ĥ8 = 8.6447 kJ/mol

Species ṅĤout (kJ/mol) ṅĤin (kJ/mol)

CH3OH 10419.89 1312.93

O2 324.13 -

N2 1184.23 1995.66

HCHO - 12936.21

H2O - 11054.84

Total 11928.25 27299.64

𝑄̇ = ΣṅĤout − ΣṅĤin
𝑘𝐽
= (27299.64 − 11928.25)
𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑘𝐽 1𝑚𝑖𝑛
= 15371.39
𝑚𝑖𝑛 60𝑠
= 256.19 𝑘𝑊
 CHAPTER 4

4.1 EQUIPMENT SIZING AND DESIGN

4.1.1 VAPORIZER

Hot in (Steam)

130OC , p = 2 barg

Cool in (Methanol) Heat Exchanger Hot out (Methanol)

60OC , P = 2.5 barg 100.8OC , P = 2.5 barg

Cool Out (Steam)

130OC , P = 2 barg

Rule 1: Set F = 0.85 as there is phase change in the process.

Rule 6: Min. ΔT = 10oC. Obtained from the calculation is 30.8℃.

Rule 8: U = 60 W/m2.oC as it is liquid to gas as vaporizer turned liquid to vapor.

∆𝑇1 − ∆𝑇2
∆𝑇𝑙𝑚 =
𝑇
ln ( 1 )
𝑇2
∆𝑇1 = 130℃ − 60℃ = 70℃
∆𝑇2 = 130℃ − 100.8℃ = 28.2℃
40℃ − 30.8℃
∆𝑇𝑙𝑚 = = 46.66℃
70℃
ln 29.2℃
 𝑄 = 𝑈𝐴𝐹∆𝑇𝑙𝑚
𝑄 858.66
𝐴= = = 360.83 𝑚2
𝑈𝐹∆𝑇𝑙𝑚 0.06 𝑥 0.85 𝑥 46.66

Rule 9: Double pipe heat exchanger is competitive at duties requiring 9.3-18.6m2.

**According to the rules, it is not suitable for double pipe heat exchanger as it is outside the range. The
heat exchanger used is multiple pipe heat exchanger.

Comparing these analyses, vaporizer used should be multiple pipe heat exchanger.
4.1.2 AFTER COOLER / HEAT EXCHANGER

According to Table 11.11 which is the heuristics for Heat Exchanger cited from The Fourth
Edition of Analysis, Synthesis and Design of Chemical Principle Processes, there are several rules that
need to be taken into consideration mainly:

• Rule 1 → F = 0.9 for shell and tube exchangers with no phase change. (gas to gas)
• Rule 6 → Minimum temperature approach should be 10°C (Tmin=10°)
• Rule 8 → Heat transfer coefficients for estimating purpose, gas to gas U = 30W/m2. OC
• Rule 9 → Double pipe exchanger is competitive at duties requiring 9.3m2 – 18.6m2.

Referring to rule 6,
∆T1 = 274 OC – 66.1 OC
= 201.9 OC > 10 OC
∆T2 = 173.7 OC - 140 OC
= 33.7 OC > 10 OC
Then, the log mean temperature of the heat exchanger is calculated using below equation

∆T1 − ∆T2 201.9°C − 33.7°C

∆Tm = = = 94°C
∆T1 201.9°C
ln ( ) ln ( )
∆T2 33.7°C

Q = - 100.87 kW
𝑤
1𝑘𝑤 𝑘𝑊
U = 30 𝑚2.0 𝑐 = 0.03
1000𝑤 𝑚2 .°C

Taking rule 1 into consideration,

𝑄 100.87 kW
𝐴= =
𝑈𝛥𝑇𝑙𝑚𝐹 (0.03 kW/m2°C )(94°C)(0.9)

= 39.74 m2.
Therefore,

• Minimum approach temperature 10°C , should not be a problem to us since it isn’t violated as our
∆Tmin = 173.7 OC - 140 OC = 33.7 OC > 10 OC

• According to rule 9, double pipe exchanger is competitive at duties requiring 9.3m2 – 18.6m2.
Nevertheless, the area for our heat exchanger is 39.74m2 which is out of the range. Hence, we
need to use the floating head design. The heat exchanger (cooling) used CH3OH, O2 and N2 as
the cooling inlet (medium for cooling) instead of water.
4.1.3 PACKED BED REACTOR

HCHO
Packed Bed Reactor
Methanol + Air H2O
Yield: 93% CH3OH
44 kg/min CH3OH
CO2
1.155 kg/min O2
O2
3.805 kg/min N2
N

Methanol, CH3OH Oxygen, O2 Nitrogen, N2

44 kg/min x 1.155 kg/min x 3.805 kg/min x
Mass Flowrate 60min/1hr = 2640 60min/1hr = 60min/1hr =
Inlet kg/hr 69.3 kg/hr 228.3 kg/hr

Density 792 kg/m3 1.429 kg/m3 1.251 kg/m3

Reaction Phase Liquid phase Gas phase Gas phase

Converting mass flowrate to volumetric flowrate:

2640 kg/h
Vo (methanol) = = 3.33 m3 /h
792 kg/m3

69.3 kg/h
Vo (oxygen) = = 48.5 m3 /h
1.429 kg/m3

228.3 kg/h
Vo (nitrogen) = = 182.49 m3 /h
1.251 kg/m3

Total volumetric flowrate, Vo = 234.32 m3/h

For working volume of reactor: V = Vo x τ
 We assumed that, 𝜏 = 0.5 min (based on the heuristic of reactor, rule 8 where tubular flow
reactors are suited to high production rates at short residence times & typically for tubular in between
[0.5s to 1h for production 50 to 5x106 tons/yr])

m3 1h
Hence, V = (234.32 ) × (0.5 min) ( ) = 1.95 m3
h 60 min

For every run, the volume of feed enters the reactor is 1.95 m3. The reactor design is ¾ of its
volume. Also, for safety purpose, the reaction volume is limit to 75% of the reactor volume.

Therefore, volume of reactor:

1.95 m3
V= = 2.6 m3
0.75

(Assume the vessel is cylinder in design)

πD2 L
V=
4

From Table 11.6:

RULE 4: Optimum ratio of length to diameter = 3, but the range 2.5 to 5 is common.

From Rule 4, L/D is between 2.5 and 5 with optimum 3. So, L = 2.5D

Substitute L = 2.5D into equation to find D,

πD2 (2.5D)
2.6 m3 =
4

2.5D3 = 3.31 m3

D = 1.1 m
L = 2.17 m

Check for L/D,

L 2.75 m
= = 2.5
D 1.1 m
4.1.4 CONTINUOUS STIRRED TANK REACTOR

Urea

8 kg/min Urea

CSTR Reactor
UFC

10 kg/min Urea UFR

24 kg/min HCHO HCHO
6 kg/min H2O HO
H2O

5 kg/min H2O

Urea HCHO H2 O
(10 + 8) kg/min x 24 kg/min x (6 + 5) kg/min x
Mass Flowrate 60min/1hr = 60min/1hr = 60min/1hr =
Inlet 1080 kg/hr 1440 kg/hr 660 kg/hr

Density 1320 kg/m3 815 kg/m3 997 kg/m3

Reaction Phase Liquid phase Liquid phase Liquid phase

Converting mass flowrate to volumetric flowrate:

1080 kg/h
Vo (Urea) = 3
= 0.82 m3 /h
1320 kg/m

1440 kg/h
Vo (HCHO) = = 1.77 m3 /h
815 kg/m3

660 kg/h
Vo (H2 O) = = 0.66 m3 /h
997 kg/m3

Total volumetric flowrate, Vo = 3.25 m3/h

For working volume of reactor: V = Vo x τ
 We assumed that, 𝜏 = 50 min (typically for CSTR reactor is in between [10min to 4h for
production 10 to 3,000,000 tons/yr])
m3 1h
Hence, V = (3.25 h
) × (50 min) ( ) = 2.71 m3
60 min

For every run, the volume of feed enters the reactor is 2.71 m3. The reactor design is ¾ of its
volume. Also, for safety purpose, the reaction volume is limit to 75% of the reactor volume.

Therefore, volume of reactor:

2.71 m3
V= = 3.61 m3
0.75

(Assume the vessel is cylinder in design)

πD2 L
V=
4

From Table 11.6:

RULE 4: Optimum ratio of length to diameter = 3, but the range 2.5 to 5 is common.

From Rule 4, L/D is between 2.5 and 5 with optimum 3. So, L = 2.5D

Substitute L = 2.5D into equation to find D,

πD2 (2.5D)
3.61 m3 =
4

2.5D3 = 4.60 m3

D = 1.23 m

Then, substitute D = 1.1m into L = 2.5D,

L = 2.5 (1.23 m)

L = 3.1 m
Check for L/D,
L 3.1 m
= = 2.52
D 1.23 m
 4.1.5 ABSORBER

4.0365 kg/min HCHO (formalin)

UFC
Separator
10 kg/min Urea
28.0365 kg/min HCHO
6 kg/min H2O

10 kg/min Urea
24 kg/min HCHO
6 kg/min H2O

Urea HCHO H2 O

10 kg/min X 60 min/hr = 28.0365 kg/min X 6 kg/min X 60min/1hr =

Mass Flowrate Inlet 600 kg/hr 60min/1hr =1682.19 360 kg/hr
kg/hr

(Formalin) 4.0365 kg/min X 60

min/1hr = 242.19 kg/hr
Mass Flowrate outlet
(top)

Mass Flowrate outlet 10 kg/min X 60 min/hr = 24 kg/min X 60 min/hr = 6 kg/min X 60 min/hr =

(bottom) 600 kg/hr 1440 kg/hr 360 kg/hr

Density 1320 kg/m3 815 kg/m3 997 kg/m3

Reaction Phase Liquid phase Liquid phase Liquid phase

** Density UFC = 1500 kg/m3

We assume that the diameter to be at 1.39 m (1).

• Rule 3: horizontal vessel

• Rule 4: L/D between 2.5 and 5 with optimum 3.0
• Rule 5: liquid holdup time is 5 min based on ½ vessel

D=1.39 m

Volume of liquid = 0.5LπD2/4

= 0.5L (1.39)2/4

= 0.759Lm2

5 min of liquid flow = 5(60s) (0.667 kg/s)/1500 kg/m3

= 0.1334 m3

Equating the two results above L= 0.1758

From rule 4, L/D should be in the range 2.5 to 5

For this case,

L/D = 0.1758/1.39

= 0.126

Because this is out of range, change L = 2.5D = 3.5 m

L = 3.5m

D = 1.39m
CHAPTER 5

5.1 BARE MODULE COST OF EQUIPMENT

5.1.1 VAPORIZER

Given CEPCI for year 2001 is 394 and CEPCI found for January 2019 is 619.

Area = 𝟑𝟔𝟎. 𝟖𝟑 𝐦𝟐

From Table A.1, Equipment data cost data for heat exchanger/vaporizer is;

K1 3.3444

K2 0.2745

K3 -0.0472

From Equation A.1,

𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 𝐂 𝐨 𝐩 (𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟏) = 𝐊 𝟏 + 𝐊 𝟐 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐀) + 𝐊 𝟑 [𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐀)]𝟐

log10 Co p (2001) = 3.3444 + 0.2745log10 (9.83) + (−0.0472)[log10 (360.83)]2

Co p (2001) = $5466.40

The CEPCI for year 2019 is to be found as 619, so below is the calculation for 𝐂°p(2019):

619
𝐂 𝐨 𝐩 (𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟗) = $3718.4 ( ) = $𝟖𝟓𝟖𝟖. 𝟎𝟕
394

Table A.5 shows,

Equipment type Equation for Bare Module Cost

Evaporators and Vaporizers 𝐶𝐵𝑀 = 𝐶𝑃𝑂 𝐹𝐵𝑀 𝐹𝑃

From Table A.6, MOC = Copper; identification number = 30, at Figure A.19, FBM = 3.4.

From Equation A.4,

(𝐏 + 𝟏)𝐃
+ 𝐂𝐀
[(𝟐)(𝟗𝟒𝟒)(𝟎. 𝟗) − 𝟏. 𝟐(𝐏 + 𝟏)]
𝐅𝐏,𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐥 =
𝐭 𝐦𝐢𝐧

Where,

CA = 0.00315 m and tmin = 0.0063 m

P = 2.5 barg and D = 14 m, L= 4.5

(2.5 + 1)14
+ 0.00315
[(2)(944)(0.9) − 1.2(2.5 + 1)]
FP,vessel =
0.0063

𝐅𝐏,𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐥 = 5.17

To obtain the Bare Module Cost for this equipment, Equation A.5 is used as following;

𝐂𝐁𝐌 = 𝐂 𝐨 𝐏 𝐅𝐁𝐌 𝑭𝑷

𝐂𝐁𝐌 = $𝟖𝟓𝟖𝟖. 𝟎𝟕 𝒙 𝟑. 𝟒 𝒙 𝟏𝟒 = $𝟏𝟓𝟎𝟗𝟒𝟗. 𝟗𝟎

5.1.2 AFTER COOLER / HEAT EXCHANGER

Given CEPCI for year 2001 is 394 and CEPCI found for January 2019 is 619.

𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐚 = 2𝜋𝑟 2 + 2𝜋rL = 39.74 m2

From Table A.1, Equipment data cost data for double pipi heat exchanger is;

K1 4.8306

K2 -0.8509

K3 0.3187

From Equation A.1,

𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 𝐂 𝐨 𝐩 (𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟏) = 𝐊 𝟏 + 𝐊 𝟐 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐀) + 𝐊 𝟑 [𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐀)]𝟐

log10 Co p (2001) = 4.8306 + (−0.8509)log10 (39.74) + (0.3187)[log10 (39.74)]2

log10 Co p (2001) = 4.285

Co p (2001) = 104.285 = $19, 275.25

The CEPCI for year 2019 is to be found as 619, so below is the calculation for 𝐂°p(2019):

619
𝐂 𝐨 𝐩 (𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟗) = $19, 275.25 ( ) = $𝟑𝟎, 𝟐𝟖𝟐. 𝟔𝟖
394

Table A.3 and Table A.4 shows,

B1 1.63

B2 1.66

FM 1.7
From Table A.3, MOC = Copper shell & tube; identification number = 3, at Figure A.18, FM = 1.7.

From Table A.4, Heat Exchangers (floating head); B1 = 1.63, B2 = 1.66

From Equation A.3,

𝐅𝐁𝐌 = 𝐁𝟏 + 𝐁𝟐 𝐅𝐏 𝐅𝐌

From Equation A.

𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 𝑭𝒑 = 𝐂𝟏 + 𝐂𝟐 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐏) + 𝐂𝟑 [𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐏)]𝟐

Where,

From table A-2, for Heat Exchangers (floating head) in which P<5 barg,

C1 = C2 = C3 = 0

𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 𝑭𝒑 = 𝟎

619
Fp = 100 = 1 ( ) = 1.571
394

Thus,

𝐅𝐁𝐌 = 1.63 + [1.66(1.7)(1.571)] = 𝟔. 𝟎𝟔

To obtain the Bare Module Cost for this equipment, Equation 7.6 is used as following;

𝐂𝐁𝐌 = 𝐂 𝐨 𝐏 𝐅𝐁𝐌

𝐂𝐁𝐌 = ($𝟑𝟎, 𝟐𝟖𝟐. 𝟔𝟖) × (6.06) = $𝟏𝟖𝟑, 𝟓𝟏𝟑. 𝟎𝟒

5.1.3 PACKED BED REACTOR

Given CEPCI for year 2001 is 394 and CEPCI found for January 2019 is 619.

πD2 L π(1.1m)2 (2.75m)

𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐦𝐞 = = = 𝟐. 𝟔 𝐦𝟑
4 4

From Table A.1, Equipment data cost data for vertical process vessels is;

K1 3.4974

K2 0.4485

K3 0.1074

From Equation A.1,

𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 𝐂 𝐨 𝐩 (𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟏) = 𝐊 𝟏 + 𝐊 𝟐 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐀) + 𝐊 𝟑 [𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐀)]𝟐

log10 Co p (2001) = 3.4974 + 0.4485log10 (2.6) + 0.1074[log10 (2.6)]2

log10 Co p (2001) = 3.7020

Co p (2001) = 103.7020 = $5,035.12

The CEPCI for year 2019 is to be found as 619, so below is the calculation for 𝐂°p(2019):

619
𝐂 𝐨 𝐩 (𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟗) = $5,035.12 ( ) = $𝟕, 𝟗𝟏𝟎. 𝟓𝟏
394

Table A.3 and Table A.4 shows,

B1 2.25

B2 1.82

FM 1.00
From Table A.3, MOC = Carbon Steel; identification number = 18, at Figure A.18, FM = 1.

From Table A.4, Vessel (vertical including tower); B1 = 2.25, B2 = 1.82

From Equation A.3,

𝐅𝐁𝐌 = 𝐁𝟏 + 𝐁𝟐 𝐅𝐏 𝐅𝐌

From Equation A.4,

(𝐏 + 𝟏)𝐃
+ 𝐂𝐀
[(𝟐)(𝟗𝟒𝟒)(𝟎. 𝟗) − 𝟏. 𝟐(𝐏 + 𝟏)]
𝐅𝐏,𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐥 =
𝐭 𝐦𝐢𝐧

Where,

CA = 0.00315 m and tmin = 0.0063 m

P = 0.4 barg and D = 1.1 m

(0.4 + 1)1.1
+ 0.00315
[(2)(944)(0.9) − 1.2(0.4 + 1)]
FP,vessel =
0.0063

0.004057
𝐅𝐏,𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐥 = = 0.644
0.0063

Thus,

𝐅𝐁𝐌 = 2.25 + [1.82(1)(0.644)] = 𝟑. 𝟒𝟐𝟐

To obtain the Bare Module Cost for this equipment, Equation 7.6 is used as following;

𝐂𝐁𝐌 = 𝐂 𝐨 𝐏 𝐅𝐁𝐌

𝐂𝐁𝐌 = ($7,910.51) × (3.422) = $𝟐𝟕, 𝟎𝟔𝟗. 𝟕𝟕

5.1.4 CONTINUOUS STIRRED TANK REACTOR

Given CEPCI for year 2001 is 394 and CEPCI found for January 2019 is 619.

πD2 L π(1.23m)2 (3.1m)

𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐦𝐞 = = = 𝟑. 𝟔𝟏 𝐦𝟑
4 4

From Table A.1, Equipment data cost data for vertical process vessels is;

K1 3.4974

K2 0.4485

K3 0.1074

From Equation A.1,

𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 𝐂 𝐨 𝐩 (𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟏) = 𝐊 𝟏 + 𝐊 𝟐 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐀) + 𝐊 𝟑 [𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐀)]𝟐

log10 Co p (2001) = 3.4974 + 0.4485log10 (3.61) + 0.1074[log10 (3.61)]2

log10 Co p (2001) = 3.7808

Co p (2001) = 103.7808 = $6,037.03

The CEPCI for year 2019 is to be found as 619, so below is the calculation for 𝐂°p(2019):

619
𝐂 𝐨 𝐩 (𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟗) = $6,037.03 ( ) = $𝟗, 𝟒𝟖𝟒. 𝟓𝟕
394

Table A.3 and Table A.4 shows,

B1 2.25

B2 1.82

FM 1.00
From Table A.3, MOC = Stainless Steel; identification number = 20, at Figure A.18, FM = 3.1.

From Table A.4, Vessel (vertical including tower); B1 = 2.25, B2 = 1.82

From Equation A.3,

𝐅𝐁𝐌 = 𝐁𝟏 + 𝐁𝟐 𝐅𝐏 𝐅𝐌

From Equation A.4,

(𝐏 + 𝟏)𝐃
+ 𝐂𝐀
[(𝟐)(𝟗𝟒𝟒)(𝟎. 𝟗) − 𝟏. 𝟐(𝐏 + 𝟏)]
𝐅𝐏,𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐥 =
𝐭 𝐦𝐢𝐧

Where,

CA = 0.00315 m and tmin = 0.0063 m

P = 1 barg and D = 1.23 m

(1 + 1)1.23
+ 0.00315
[(2)(944)(0.9) − 1.2(1 + 1)]
FP,vessel =
0.0063

0.0045998
𝐅𝐏,𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐥 = = 0.73
0.0063

Thus,

𝐅𝐁𝐌 = 2.25 + [1.82(3.1)(0.73)] = 𝟔. 𝟑𝟔𝟗

To obtain the Bare Module Cost for this equipment, Equation 7.6 is used as following;

𝐂𝐁𝐌 = 𝐂 𝐨 𝐏 𝐅𝐁𝐌

𝐂𝐁𝐌 = ($9,484.57) × (6.369) = $𝟔𝟎, 𝟒𝟎𝟕. 𝟐𝟑

5.1.5 SEPARATOR

Given CEPCI for year 2001 is 394 and CEPCI found for January 2019 is 619.
πD2 L π(1.39m)2 (3.5m)
𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐦𝐞 = = = 𝟓. 𝟑𝟏𝟏 𝐦𝟑
4 4
From Table A.1, Equipment data cost data for horizontal process vessels is;
K1 3.5565
K2 0.3776
K3 0.0905
From Equation A.1,
𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 𝐂 𝐨 𝐩 (𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟏) = 𝐊 𝟏 + 𝐊 𝟐 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐀) + 𝐊 𝟑 [𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 (𝐀)]𝟐

log10 Co p (2001) = 3.5565 + 0.3776log10 (5.311) + 0.0905[log10 (5.311)]2

log10 Co p (2001) = 3.8775

Co p (2001) = 103.7808 = $7,542.09

The CEPCI for year 2019 is to be found as 619, so below is the calculation for 𝐂°p(2019):
619
𝐂 𝐨 𝐩 (𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟗) = $7,542.09 ( ) = $𝟏𝟏, 𝟖𝟒𝟗. 𝟏𝟏
394
Table A.3 and Table A.4 shows,
B1 1.49
B2 1.52
FM 3.10
From Table A.3, MOC = Carbon Steel; identification number = 20, at Figure A.18, FM = 3.10.
From Table A.4, Vessel (vertical including tower); B1 = 1.49, B2 = 1.52
From Equation A.3,
𝐅𝐁𝐌 = 𝐁𝟏 + 𝐁𝟐 𝐅𝐏 𝐅𝐌

From Equation A.4,

(𝐏 + 𝟏)𝐃
+ 𝐂𝐀
[(𝟐)(𝟗𝟒𝟒)(𝟎. 𝟗) − 𝟏. 𝟐(𝐏 + 𝟏)]
𝐅𝐏,𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐥 =
𝐭 𝐦𝐢𝐧
Where,
CA = 0.00315 m and tmin = 0.0063 m
P = 1 barg and D = 1.39 m
(1 + 1)1.39
+ 0.00315
[(2)(944)(0.9) − 1.2(1 + 1)]
FP,vessel =
0.0063
0.004788
𝐅𝐏,𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐥 = = 0.76
0.0063
Thus,
𝐅𝐁𝐌 = 1.49 + [1.52(0.76)(3.10)] = 𝟓. 𝟎𝟕𝟏𝟏
To obtain the Bare Module Cost for this equipment, Equation 7.6 is used as following;
𝐂𝐁𝐌 = 𝐂 𝐨 𝐏 𝐅𝐁𝐌

𝐂𝐁𝐌 = ($11849.12) × (5.0711) = $𝟔𝟎, 𝟎𝟖𝟖. 𝟎𝟖

5.2 OPERATING LABOR COST

A year consists of 52 weeks. A single operator will work on average of 48 weeks per year with 3 weeks
off on 8 hours per shift and 5 shift per week.

Thus,

weeks shifts shifts/operator

(48 ) × (5 ) = 240
year week year

days shifts shifts

(336 ) × (3 ) = 1008
year day year

shifts shifts/operator
(1008 ) ÷ (240 ) = 4.2 operators (for a single shift)
year week

Four point 2 operators are hired for each operator needed in the plant at any time.

In order to find the value of number of operating labor required to run the process unit per shift, equation
as stated below is used.

𝐍𝐎𝐋 = (𝟔. 𝟐𝟗 + 𝟑𝟏. 𝟕𝐏 𝟐 + 𝟎. 𝟐𝟑𝐍𝐧𝐩 )𝟎.𝟓

Where,

NOL = Number of operating labors operating per shift

P2 = Particulate processing steps

Nnp = Non-particulate processing steps

Table 5.2.1 Shows the Result for the Estimation of Operating Labor Requirement for the Process Using
the Equipment Module Approach

Equipment Type Number of Equipment Nnp

Compressors 1 1

Heat Exchangers 7 7

Heaters/Furnaces 1 1

Pumps* 6 -

Reactors 2 2

Towers 1 1

Vessels* 4 -

TOTAL 12

*Pumps and vessels are not counted in evaluating Nnp

P2 = 0 because there is no particulate processing steps in this process.

NOL = (6.29 + 31.7(0)2 + 0.23(12))0.5

NOL = 3.01

Number of operators required per shift is 3.01.

Number of operators needed as operating labor:

3.01 × 4.2 operators = 12.64 (Rounding up yields 13 operators)

For all equipment, cost of operating labor per year:

Hourly rate for plant and system operators: RM 15

RM 15 hours
( ) × (8 ) = RM 120 per day
hour day

RM 120 days
( ) × (336 ) = RM 40,320 per year
days year

𝐂𝐎𝐋 = (RM40,320) × (13) = 𝐑𝐌 𝟓𝟐𝟒, 𝟏𝟔𝟎 𝐩𝐞𝐫 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫 = $ 𝟏𝟐𝟔, 𝟕𝟕𝟒. 𝟎𝟓 per year
 5.3 EQUIPMENT SUMMARY
User Added Equipment
Shell Pressure Tube Pressure Purchased Equipment Bare Module Base Equipment Base Bare Module
Exchangers Exchanger Type MOC Area (square meters)
(barg) (barg) Cost Cost Cost Cost
E-101 Fixed, Sheet, or U-Tube 0 2 Copper / Copper 361 $ 109,000 $ 287,000 $ 64,800 $ 213,000
E-102 Multiple Pipe 2.5 Copper / Copper 39.7 $ 35,500 $ 91,600 $ 21,000 $ 69,100
E-103 Double Pipe 1 Carbon Steel / Carbon Steel 1 $ 3,450 $ 11,300 $ 3,450 $ 11,300
E-104 Double Pipe 1 Carbon Steel / Carbon Steel 1 $ 3,450 $ 11,300 $ 3,450 $ 11,300
E-105 Double Pipe 1 Carbon Steel / Carbon Steel 1 $ 3,450 $ 11,300 $ 3,450 $ 11,300
E-106 Double Pipe 0.1 Carbon Steel / Carbon Steel 9.3 $ 5,740 $ 18,900 $ 5,740 $ 18,900
E-107 Double Pipe 2 Carbon Steel / Carbon Steel 9.3 $ 5,740 $ 18,900 $ 5,740 $ 18,900

Fans / Gas Flowrate Pressure Rise Purchased Equipment Bare Module Base Equipment Base Bare Module
Type # Spares MOC
Blowers (cubic meters/s) Across Fan (barg) Cost Cost Cost Cost

F-101 Centrifugal Radial 13 0 Stainless Steel 0.16 $ 26,300 $ 72,000 $ 7,800 $ 21,000

Heat Duty Steam Pressure Purchased Equipment Bare Module Base Equipment Base Bare Module
Heater Type MOC
(MJ/h) Superheat (°C) (barg) Cost Cost Cost Cost
H-101 Water Heater 2340 1 $ 43,200 $ 93,800 $ 43,200 $ 93,800

Power Discharge Purchased Equipment Bare Module Base Equipment Base Bare Module
Pump Type # Spares
(kilowatts) Pressure (barg) Cost Cost Cost Cost
P-101 Centrifugal 1.5 1 Carbon Steel 0.13 $ 12,200 $ 31,400 $ 7,900 $ 25,600
P-102 Centrifugal 1 3 Carbon Steel 0.1 $ 23,700 $ 60,900 $ 15,300 $ 49,500

Storage Volume Purchased Equipment Bare Module Base Equipment Base Bare Module
Tank Type
Tanks (cubic meters) Cost Cost Cost Cost

Tk-101 Fixed Roof 90.8 $ 66,100 $ 72,700 $ 66,100 $ 72,700

Height Diameter Purchased Equipment Bare Module Base Equipment Base Bare Module
Towers Tower Description Tower MOC Demister MOC Pressure (barg)
(meters) (meters) Cost Cost Cost Cost
T-101 0.45 meters of 304 Stainless 6.47 1.82 Carbon Steel 6 $ 42,100 $ 130,000 $ 25,700 $ 103,000

Length/Height Diameter Purchased Equipment Bare Module Base Equipment Base Bare Module
Vessels Orientation MOC Demister MOC Pressure (barg)
(meters) (meters) Cost Cost Cost Cost

R-101 Vertical 2.75 1.1 Carbon Steel 2 $ 7,870 $ 32,000 $ 7,870 $ 32,000
V-102 Horizontal 3.5 1.39 Stainles Steel 1 $ 36,600 $ 73,200 $ 11,800 $ 35,400
V-103 Vertical 3.1 1.23 Stainles Steel 2 $ 29,600 $ 75,300 $ 9,520 $ 38,700
D-104 Vertical 3.5 1 Carbon Steel Stainless Steel -0.1 $ 10,500 $ 35,300 $ 10,500 $ 35,300

Totals $ 464,500 $ 1,126,900 $ 313,320 $ 860,800

Total Module Cost $ 1,330,000

Total Grass Roots Cost $ 1,760,000
Total Equipment Cost $ 464,500 `

Lang Factor 4.74

Lang Factor Cost $ 2,200,000
5.4 UTILITIES SUMMARY

Name Total Module Cost Grass Roots Cost Utility Used Efficiency Actual Usage Annual Utility Cost

D-104 $ 41,700 $ 59,300 NA

E-101 $ 339,000 $ 446,000 Low-Pressure Steam 63.5 MJ/h $ 1,073
E-102 $ 108,095 $ 143,000 Refrigerated Water 399 MJ/h $ 15,840
E-103 $ 13,400 $ 19,000 Cooling Water 0 MJ/h $ -
E-104 $ 13,400 $ 19,000 Cooling Water 0 MJ/h $ -
E-105 $ 13,400 $ 19,000 Cooling Water 0 MJ/h $ -
E-106 $ 22,284 $ 31,700 Cooling Water 0 MJ/h $ -
E-107 $ 22,000 $ 31,700 Low Thermal Source 250 MJ/h $ 8,220
F-101 $ 85,000 $ 121,000 Electricity 0.7 297 kilowatts $ 167,000
H-101 $ 111,000 $ 158,000 Unspecified 0.9 2600 MJ/h $ -
P-101 $ 37,100 $ 49,900 Electricity 0.86 1.74 kilowatts $ 978
P-102 $ 72,000 $ 97,000 Electricity 0.86 1.16 kilowatts $ 652
R-101 $ 37,800 $ 53,800 NA
R-103 $ 45,700 $ 65,000 NA
T-101 $ 154,000 $ 207,000 NA
Tk-101 $ 86,000 $ 122,000 NA
V-102 $ 86,000 $ 104,000 NA

Totals $ 1,290,000 $ 1,750,000 $ 194,000

5.5 COST OF MANUFACTURING SUMMARY

Economic Options
Cost of Land $ 542,509
Taxation Rate 25%
Annual Interest Rate 15% Economic Information Calculated From Given Information
Salvage Value 0 Revenue From Sales $ 9,174,041 material
Working Capital $ 790,000 CRM (Raw Materials Costs) $ 6,491,160 material
FCIL $ 1,240,000 CUT (Cost of Utilities) $ 194,000 COM
Total Module Factor 1.18 CWT (Waste Treatment Costs) $ - custom
Grass Roots Factor 0.50 COL (Cost of Operating Labor) $ 126,774 custom
 Factors Used in Calculation of Working Capital
Working Capital = A*CRM + B*FCIL + C*COL
A 0.10
B 0.10
C 0.10

Project Life (Years after Startup) 10

Construction period 2
Factors Used in Calculation of Cost of Manufacturing (COM d )
Comd = 0.18*FCIL + 2.76*COL + 1.23*(CUT + CWT + CRM) Distribution of Fixed Capital Investment (must sum to one)
Multiplying factor for FCIL 0.18 End of year One 60%
Multiplying factor for COL 2.76 End of year Two 40%
Facotrs for CUT, CWT, and CRM 1.23 End of year Three
End of year Four
COMd $ 8,795,843 End of year Five
5.6 CASH FLOW ANALYSIS

Discounted Profitibility Criterion Non-Discounted Profitibility Criteria

Net Present Value (millions) (0.70) Cumulative Cash Position (millions) 1.91

Discounted Cash Flow Rate of Return 8.17% Rate of Return on Investment 15.37%

Discounted Payback Period (years) 6.9 Payback Period (years) 3.8

 Cash Flow Cash Flow Cumulative Cash Flow Cumulative Cash Flow
Year Investment dk FCIL-Sdk R COMd (R-COMd-dk)*(1-t)+dk
(Non-discounted) (discounted) (discounted) (Non-discounted)
0 0.54 1.24 (0.54) (0.54) (0.54) (0.54)
1 0.74 1.24 (0.74) (0.65) (1.19) (1.29)
2 1.29 1.24 (1.29) (0.97) (2.16) (2.57)
3 0.18 1.06 9.17 8.80 0.33 0.33 0.22 (1.95) (2.24)
4 0.18 0.89 9.17 8.80 0.33 0.33 0.19 (1.76) (1.92)
5 0.18 0.71 9.17 8.80 0.33 0.33 0.16 (1.60) (1.59)
6 0.18 0.53 9.17 8.80 0.33 0.33 0.14 (1.45) (1.26)
7 0.18 0.35 9.17 8.80 0.33 0.33 0.12 (1.33) (0.93)
8 0.18 0.18 9.17 8.80 0.33 0.33 0.11 (1.22) (0.60)
9 0.18 - 9.17 8.80 0.33 0.33 0.09 (1.13) (0.28)
10 - 9.17 8.80 0.28 0.28 0.07 (1.06) 0.01
11 - 9.17 8.80 0.28 0.28 0.06 (1.00) 0.29
12 - 9.17 8.80 0.28 1.62 0.30 (0.70) 1.91
6.0 REFERENCES

Analysis, I. (2019). Urea Formaldehyde Resin Market - Global Industry Analysis , Size , Share , Growth
, Trends and Forecast 2017 - 2025. 2025, 1–5.

Foo, D. C. Y. (2015). The Malaysian chemicals industry: From commodities to manufacturing. Chemical
Engineering Progress, 111(11), 48–52. Retrieved from
https://www.aiche.org/resources/publications/cep/2015/november/malaysian-chemicals-industry-
commodities-manufacturing

Gadhave, R. V., Mahanwar, P. A., & Gadekar, P. T. (2017). Factor Affecting Gel Time/Process-Ability
of Urea Formaldehyde Resin Based Wood Adhesives. Open Journal of Polymer Chemistry, 07(02), 33–
42. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojpchem.2017.72003

M Ethanol and M Arket O Verview / U Ses. (n.d.).

Nakos, P., Tsiantzi, S., & Athanassiadou, E. (2000). Wood adhesives made with pyrolysis oils.

Proceedings of the 3rd European Wood-Based Panel Symposium, (August), 1–2.

Resin, F. (2019). Urea Formaldehyde Resin Market.

Stories, T., & Meridian, H. (2019). Urea Formaldehyde Concentrate ( UFC ) Market 2019 In-Depth
Analysis of Industry Share , Size , Growth Outlook up to 2024. 1–7.

Wire, B., & Wire, B. (2019). Top 3 Emerging Trends Impacting the Urea Formaldehyde Market -
Technavio. 1–5.