che 2012 project
TRANSCRIPT
To: D. DiBiasio, VP Process Development
From: M. Lundgren, M. Bodanza
Date: November 20, 2015
Subject: Cameroon Renewable Energy Project: Assessment of E85-Biofuel Production
Introduction
The African Centre for Renewable Energy and Sustainable Technology (ACREST) and French
investor, Donalalé Boye, have hired our team to investigate the feasibility of high-grade ethanol
production from palm wine in a process facility located in Cameroon, Africa.1 E85, if refined
properly, can heavily impact Cameroon’s transportation industry by providing efficient, clean-
burning and well-resourced biofuel, thus increasing energy availability.
Our objective will be exploring the practicality of ethanol-fuel production in Cameroon. ACREST
has provided our team with design parameters and a product goal. With this, we must determine
the feasibility of attaining these constraints using theoretical efficiencies and data from a pilot
fractionator. In addition, we must provide estimates for the amount of vehicles which benefit
annually from the E85-Biofuel, and recommendations for safe and novel ways to repurpose and/or
recycle the waste water from the ethanol-water separation. Along with these considerations, we
must prove this process is not only possible within the given design parameters, but is also
economically reasonable.
Fig. 1. Pilot Column Diagram. Operation at total reflux.
Qc
Qr
V
L
𝑉
1
2
3
𝐿
11
For our pilot distillation column running at total reflux, interns from the Cameroon Academy of
Petrochemical Engineering1 have collected data, for analysis, in order to find the information
(ethanol-water concentrations, efficiency, etc.) to design a full-scale column. This column will be
presented, along with other data to ACREST and Donalalé Boye for use in the Mbouta process
facility.
Methodology
For a proper analysis on the given design column parameters and pilot plant, certain concepts must
be used. For the pilot column analysis, constant molar overflow (CMO) needs to be valid. With
that in mind, energy balances can be done around the reboiler and condenser, and using data
collected by the CAPE interns we can determine heat differentials. While realistically the
condenser and reboiler are not adiabatic, the heat loss from either will be considered insignificant
for our purposes. With the heat duties on the reboiler and condenser known, we can find the molar
vapor flow rates from the reboiler and top of the column through the appropriate relationship
between heat duty, flow rate, and enthalpy changes. Assuming the column operates at atmospheric
pressure, an appropriate x-y diagram was used in conjunction with a McCabe-Thiele analysis to
find the theoretical number of stages. With this result and the actual number of stages in the pilot
plant, the overall efficiency of the pilot column can be determined. This efficiency will be
important later for the design column.
With the above data analyzed, attention must be turned to the design column investigation. As
before, a CMO validation must be done in order for us to make any further assumptions within the
column. With this condition met, we can construct operating lines for the column. In order to
complete this, several assumptions must be made which include the following: q-value and optimal
reflux ratio. The former was found after comparing a few different values and their effects on the
design. The later was determined from standard operating conditions for most economical
conditions.2 With these assumptions McCabe-Thiele analysis was conducted on the VLE data to
obtain the theoretical number of stages. From the efficiency obtained above, the actual number of
stages was determined. This result was compared to the efficiency obtained from O’Connell’s
correlation
Additionally, ACREST has requested other information, including heat duties on the design
fractionator, column diameter, and the amount of vehicles benefited from the given production
rate. The heat duties were found using independent energy balances around the condenser and
reboiler. The column diameter was found utilizing the Souders-Brown equation. Finally, the
amount of vehicles benefited was found by considering average car tank sizes.
Results and Discussion
Pilot Column Analysis
Refer to Appendix I (AI)
To begin our analysis, we first had to validate CMO conditions. First, the latent heats of water and
ethanol were found to be within ~5% of each other. Then, the heat duties and heat loss were
determined. The overall heat loss from the column was found to be 2.371 kW. As the column is
completely uninsulated and open to the atmosphere at the top of the column, CMO cannot strictly
be applied here. However, for the sake of this column being a first pass at the operation, we
assumed CMO. The following tables and figures summarize these results and other required values
of the column.
Percent difference of latent heats: 5.44%
QR QC QLoss
4.832 kW -2.461 kW -2.371 kW
Vapor flow rate at top of column Vapor flow rate from reboiler
174 mol/hr 404 mol/hr
Fig 2. McCabe-Thiele Analysis of VLE Data for Pilot Plant..
Column Efficiency: 36%
Design Column Analysis
Refer to Appendix II (AII)
Similar to the pilot column, CMO was validated using the comparison of the latent heats. However,
for the design of this column, the column will be considered adiabatic, fully validating CMO.
As stated prior, many assumptions were made in the design of the column, chiefly the quality of
the feed. Two values, 0.25 and 1.0, were of particular interest and individual McCabe-Thiele
analyses were carried out. A quality of 0.25 was considered more economically practical, as it
required less stages. Additionally, the optimal reflux ratio was heavily assumed. From published
guidelines,2 it was considered that 1.3*Rmin was a reasonable estimate. To allow for more
flexibility in operation, a reflux ratio above the optimal was used. These results are summarized
below in the following figures and graphs as well as other pertinent values.
With the reflux ratio, an energy balance can now be done around the condenser to find Qc with
the vapor flow rate (V) and the enthalpy change. With Qc and the total energy balance of the
column, Qr can be calculated: 𝐹ℎ𝐹 + 𝑄𝐶 + 𝑄𝑅 = 𝐷ℎ𝐷 + 𝐵ℎ𝐷
However in order to prove the actual stage calculation is correct within one standard deviation, a
comparison must be made to industry standard column. The O’Connell Efficiency plot gives
different average efficiencies depending on the column’s temperature, relative volatility and
viscosity.
Table R.3
Above is the data calculated when finding the O’Connell correlation. It is clear the actual number
of stages found through the O’Connell correlation and the VLE diagram are very close (21 vs. 25
stages). This difference is within one standard deviation thus failing to disprove our Nactual
computation, making it statistically accurate for indursty use. The reason why the O’Connell
correlation number of stages is different then what was calculated is because the O’Connell
efficiency plot is made up of averages and does not consider other factors (such as feed quality)
which impacts the result.
With the validation of the design column’s internal schematics the diameter of the column was
another valuable construction parameter to calculate. To do this the Souders-Brown Equation
was used:
V = k√ρl−ρv
ρv
This equation describes the relationship between the the relative densities of vapor and liquid in the
column along with a constant k. From this V can be calculated and then used along with the volumetric
flow rate to calculate the area at the top of the column.
Avg. Temp.
Column (ºC) EWavg mix (cP) O’Connell
Correlation NActual
85 4.956 0.3542 44% 21 Stages
A =vapor volumetric flow rate
V
With the area, the diameter can be calculated assuming a perfectly cylindrical column.
A =π
4d2
It was found that under the given parameters, a column with a diameter of around 0.338 meters is
required. If a higher q (1) was chosen at the beginning of the design column analyses, a larger
diameter would be expected because of the higher flow rates.
Finally, along with all the above data for the column design specifications, ACREST had
requested an estimate to how many vehicles would benefit annually from a 5,000,000 L/yr
product. An E85-Biofuel average fuel consumption and tank size was assumed in order to
calculate about 302 car-tanks/day or around 110,230 car-tanks/yr would benefit.
Figure 3. Design Column Diagram.
Percent difference of latent heats: 5.44%
QR QC QLoss
968,000 kJ/hr -4,270,000 kJ/hr 0 kJ/hr
Qc
Qr
V
L
𝑉
1
2
3
𝐿
25
D
B
Quality Theoretical Number of Stages Actual Number of Stages
1.0 15 41
0.25 9 25
Fig 4. McCabe-Thiele Analysis of VLE Data for Design Column. Feed quality of 0.25
Feed Line: y = −(0.25
0.75)x + (0.0891
0.75)
Rectifying Line: y = (0.8982)x + (1 − 0.8982) ∗ 0.8181
Column Diameter: 0.338 m
Cars that benefit from biofuel: 302 car tanks/day
Conclusions and Recommendations
The purpose of the proposed column is to provide Cameroon with a viable, new alternative energy
supply that will hopefully benefit the economy of this restricted country. As the country faces strict
export policies concerning oil and petrol, a readily available and renewable energy supply is the
advantage Cameroon needs to flourish and grow economically. However, the plant will have its
demands on the local area, and its benefit does not come without cost. It is important to further
consider the impacts on both the current energy demands and environment.
While further investigation is necessary, our analysis provides hope for alternate fuel sources. It is
our recommendation that further studying of design parameters be considered to optimize the
column to peek operation. Such parameters could include the conditions of the feed which have a
high influence on the column as a whole in terms of its energy cost and capital cost.
Appendices
Appendix I: Pilot Column Analysis
Energy Balances
QR = −msteam∆Hsteam
QR = −(130g
min) (
1 kg
1000g) (−2,230.088
kJ
kg) (
1 min
60 s) = 4.832 kW
QCoolant = mH20Cp,H20∆T
QCoolant = (1.4 gpm)(3785 cc
1 gal) (
1.00 g
1 cc) (4.184
J
g℃) (6.66℃) (
1 kJ
1000 J) (
1 min
60 s) = 2.461 kW
Qc = −Qcoolant = −2.461 kW
QLoss = −QC − QR = −2.371 kW
CMO Validation
𝑸𝑳𝒐𝒔𝒔 ≠ 𝟎
λH20 = 40.66 kJ
mol
λEtOH = 38.56 kJ
mol
λH2O−λEtOH
λEtOH= 5.44%
Assumed CMO to obtain an approximation.
Molar Vapor Flow Rate at Top of Column
QC = mV(hL − HV)
−2.217 kW = mV (−259.02kcal
kg) (
4.184 kJ
1 kcal)
mV = (0.002046 kg
s) (
3600 s
1 hr) = 7.36
kg
hr
nV = mV/MWavg
nV =7.36 kg
hr
42.42 kgkmol
× 1000𝑚𝑜𝑙
𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙= 174
mol
hr
Molar Vapor Flow Rate from Reboiler
QR = mLΔH
L
4.832 kW = mL (526.4kcal
kg) (
4.184 kJ
1 kcal)
mL= (0.002193
kg
s) (
3600 s
1 hr) = 7.90
kg
hr
nL = mL/MWavg
nL=
(7.90 kghr)
(19.56 kgkmol)
× 1000𝑚𝑜𝑙
𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙= 404
mol
hr
Overall Efficiency
Eo =Ntheoretical
Nactual=
4
11= 36%
Theoretical equilibrium stages considered to be four rather than three because the reboiler is not a true
equilibrium stage.
Appendix II: Design Column Analysis
CMO Validation
𝑸𝑳𝒐𝒔𝒔 = 𝟎
λH20 = 40.66 kJ
mol
λEtOH = 38.56 kJ
mol
λH2O−λEtOH
λEtOH= 5.44%
Overall Mass/Molar Balances
ρavg = wEtOHρEtOH + wH2OρH2O = (0.92 ∗ 0.789 g
mL) + (0.08 ∗ 0.9982
g
mL) = 0.8057
g
mL
Dm = ρavgDV = (0.8057 g
mL) (
1000 mL
1 L) (5 M
L
yr) (
1 yr
365 days) (
1 day
24 hrs) (
1 kg
1000 g) = 459.9
kg
hr
MWavg = wEtOHMWEtOH + wH2OMWH2O = (0.92 ∗ 46.07 g
mol) + (0.08 ∗ 18.02
g
mol) = 43.826
g
mol
Dn = Dm/MWavg = (459.9 kg
hr)/(43.826
kg
kmol) = 10.49
kmol
hr
xD =
wEtOHMWEtOH
[( wEtOHMWEtOH
) + ( wH2OMWH2O
)] =
0.92
46.07kg
kmol
[( 0.9246.07kgkmol
) + ( 0.08
18.02kg
kmol
)]
= 0.8181
All other mole fractions can be found in a similar process.
F = D + B
Fz = DxD + BxB
F = (xD−xB
z−xB)D = (
0.8181−0.00394
0.0891−0.00394) (10.49
kmol
hr) = 100.3
kmol
hr
B = 89.81 kmol
hr
VLE Data and Operating Lines
Feed Line
y = −(q
1−q) x + (
z
1−q)
Assumed q = 0.25.
y = −(0.25
0.75) x + (
0.0891
0.75)
Reflux Ratio
Minimum: at pinch point
(L
V)min
= (y2−y1
x2−x1)
Where the two points are on y=x line at xD and the y-intercept for the line that makes a pinch point with
the VLE curve.
(L
V)min
= (0.8181−0.105
0.8181−0) = 0.8717
Rmin = (L
D)min
=L V⁄
1−L V⁄=
0.8717
1−.8717= 6.784
Optimal
Ropt = (1.1 − 1.4)Rmin = 1.3 ∗ 6.784 = 8.8192
Range of multipliers used in senior design textbook in Haley’s presentation.
(L
V)opt
=Ropt
1+Ropt=
8.8192
1+8.8192= 0.8982
Rectifying Operating Line
y = (L
V) x + (1 −
L
V) xD
y = (0.8982)x + (1 − 0.8982) ∗ 0.8181
Stripping line specified by intersection of feed and rectifying line and bottom composition.
Overall Energy Balance
𝑉 = (𝑅𝑜𝑝𝑡 + 1)𝐷 = (8.8192 + 1) (459.9 𝑘𝑔
ℎ𝑟) = 4519
𝑘𝑔
ℎ𝑟
QC = V1(hD − H1) = (4519 𝑘𝑔
ℎ𝑟) (−225.64
𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙
𝑘𝑔) (4.184
𝑘𝐽
𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙) = −4,270,000
𝑘𝐽
ℎ𝑟
𝐹ℎ𝐹 +𝑄𝐶 + 𝑄𝑅 = 𝐷ℎ𝐷 +𝐵ℎ𝐷
𝑄𝑅 = 𝐷ℎ𝐷 + 𝐵ℎ𝐵 − 𝐹ℎ𝐹 −𝑄𝐶
𝑄𝑅 = [(459.8𝑘𝑔
ℎ𝑟) (51.28
𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙
𝑘𝑔) + (1742.4
𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙
ℎ𝑟) (89.47
𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙
𝑘𝑔) − (2202.2
𝑘𝑔
ℎ𝑟) (439.47
𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙
𝑘𝑔)] [4.184
𝑘𝐽
𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙] + 4,266,287
𝑘𝐽
ℎ𝑟
𝑄𝑅 = 968,000 𝑘𝐽
ℎ𝑟
Required Stages
Theoretically, 10 equilibrium contacts are needed – 9 column stages and 1 reboiler.
Pilot Efficiency
Eo =Ntheoretical
Nactual
Nactual =Ntheoretical
Eo=
9
0.36= 25 stages
O’Connell Efficiency
Tavg,column = 85℃
αEW,avg,column = 4.956
ln μmix = xEtOH,f ln μEtOH,85℃ + xH2O,f ln μH2O,80℃
ln μmix = (0.0891) ln(0.40) + (0.9109) ln(0.35)
μmix = 0.3542 cP
Note: viscosity of water is at 80ᵒC; this is highest available viscosity of water from table.
O’Connell Correlation:
Eo = 50.3(αμ)−0.226 = 50.3(4.956 ∗ 0.3542)−0.226 = 44%
Nactual =Ntheoretical
Eo=
9
0.44= 21 stages
Column Diameter
Souders-Brown Equation:
V = k√ρl−ρv
ρv
Where k = 0.107 m/s.
ρv =P∗MWavg,vapor
RT=
(1.01325 bar)(43.826g
mol)
(83.14bar∗ccmol∗K
)(358 K)(1000000cc
1 m3 ) (1 kg
1000 g) = 1.4919
kg
m3
ρL =mEtOH+mH2O
mEtOH/ρEtOH+mh2O/ρH2O=
1 g + 99 g
1 g/0.789 gmL
+ 99 g/.992 gmL
(1000000 mL
1 m3 )(1 kg
1000 g) = 989.5
kg
m3
V = (0.107m
s)√
989.5−1.4919
1.4919= 2.766 m/s
A =vapor volumetric flow rate
V=
0.089887 m3/s
2.766 m/s= 0.08988 m2
A =π
4d2
d = √4A
π= 0.338 m
Gas Tanks Filled on a Daily Basis
𝐷 = (5,000,000𝐿
𝑦𝑟) (
1 𝑦𝑟
365 𝑑𝑦) (
1 𝑔𝑎𝑙
3.785 𝐿) = 3619 𝑔𝑎𝑙/𝑑𝑎𝑦
𝑉𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘𝑠 = (3619 𝑔𝑎𝑙
𝑑𝑎𝑦) (
1 𝑐𝑎𝑟 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘
12 𝑔𝑎𝑙) = 302 𝑐𝑎𝑟 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘𝑠/𝑑𝑎𝑦
References
1 DiBiasio, D., and VP Process Development. Memo Report: African Centre for Renewable
Energy and Sustainable Technology. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Nov. 2015. 2 Henley, Ernest J., Junior D. Seader, and D. Keith. Roper. "Chapter 7." Separation Process
Principles. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2011. 384. Print.