Optimizing ethane recovery in turboexpander processes

Laura Kherbeck; Rachid Chebbi

Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol.21, 292-297, January, 2015

DOI10.1016/j.jiec.2014.02.035 Export Citation

Optimizing ethane recovery in turboexpander processes

Laura Kherbeck, and Rachid Chebbi^†

Department of Chemical Engineering, American University of Sharjah, PO Box 26666, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

E-mail:

Optimization of ethane recovery using the CRR process shows that, except for the case of lean gas at low demethanizer pressure, the CRR process reduces to GSP, in which there is no reflux streamand therefore no added cryogenic compression and heat exchange equipment. Adding a second cold separator, operating at lower temperature, in GSP is found to lead to more or less recovery depending on the NGL content of the feed gas and the demethanizer pressure. GSP is also compared with the conventional turboexpander process. Optimization shows that adding more equipment or even flow splitting may lead to less ethane recovery.

Keywords:Simulation;Ethane recovery;Natural gas liquids (NGL);Turboexpander;Cold residue recycle (CRR);Gas subcooled process (GSP)

[References]

Manning FS, Thompson RE, Oilfield Processing of Petroleum, first ed., PennWell Publishing Company, Tulsa (1991)
McKee RL, Evolution in design, in: Proceedings of the 56th Annual GPA Convention, Dallas (1977)
Pitman RN, Hudson HM, Wilkinson JD, Cuellar KT, Next generation processes for NGL/LPGrecovery, in: Proceedings of the 77thAnnualGPAConvention, Dallas (1998)
GPSA, Engineering Data Book, Sec. 16, twelfth ed., Gas Processors Suppliers Association (2014)
Chebbi R, Al Mazroui KA, Jabbar NMA, Oil Gas J., 106(46), 50 (2008)
Chebbi R, Al-Amoodi NS, Jabbar NMA, Husseini GA, Al Mazroui KA, Chem. Eng. Res. Des., 88(5-6A), 779 (2010)
Mehrpooya M, Vatani A, Mousavian SMA, Chem. Eng. Process., 49(4), 376 (2010)
Wilkinson JD, Hudson HM, Improved NGL recovery designs maximize operating flexibility and product recoveries, in: Proceedings of the 71st Annual GPA Convention, Anaheim (1992)
Bandoni JA, Eliceche AM, Mabe GDB, Brignole EA, Computers & Chemical Engineering, 13, 587 (1989)
Chebbi R, Al-Qaydi AS, Al-Amery AO, Al-Zaabi NS, Al-Mansouri HA, Oil Gas J., 102(4), 64 (2004)

[1] Manning FS, Thompson RE, Oilfield Processing of Petroleum, first ed., PennWell Publishing Company, Tulsa (1991)

[2] McKee RL, Evolution in design, in: Proceedings of the 56th Annual GPA Convention, Dallas (1977)

[3] Pitman RN, Hudson HM, Wilkinson JD, Cuellar KT, Next generation processes for NGL/LPGrecovery, in: Proceedings of the 77thAnnualGPAConvention, Dallas (1998)

[4] GPSA, Engineering Data Book, Sec. 16, twelfth ed., Gas Processors Suppliers Association (2014)

[5] Chebbi R, Al Mazroui KA, Jabbar NMA, Oil Gas J., 106(46), 50 (2008)

[6] Chebbi R, Al-Amoodi NS, Jabbar NMA, Husseini GA, Al Mazroui KA, Chem. Eng. Res. Des., 88(5-6A), 779 (2010)

[7] Mehrpooya M, Vatani A, Mousavian SMA, Chem. Eng. Process., 49(4), 376 (2010)

[8] Wilkinson JD, Hudson HM, Improved NGL recovery designs maximize operating flexibility and product recoveries, in: Proceedings of the 71st Annual GPA Convention, Anaheim (1992)

[9] Bandoni JA, Eliceche AM, Mabe GDB, Brignole EA, Computers & Chemical Engineering, 13, 587 (1989)

[10] Chebbi R, Al-Qaydi AS, Al-Amery AO, Al-Zaabi NS, Al-Mansouri HA, Oil Gas J., 102(4), 64 (2004)