Temporary Emergency Cooling

System
for
Polystyrene Reactor R205
By:
Naveen Krishnan
Ioan Iordanov
Adam Lui

University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

Department of Chemical Engineering
CHBE 421 Group 4
April 23, 2015

Table of Contents:
I.

Executive Summary
2

II.

Background

III.

Analysis
Schematic
Water and Heat Transfer
Water Tanks
Piping and Pipe Rack
Valves and Elbows
Mechanical Energy Balance and Simplifications
Pumping and Afterwards

3
3
3
3
4
4
4
5

IV.

Recommendation

V.

Appendix
Equations
Calculations
Images
Sources

6
6
7
9
14

I. Executive Summary:
This project entails designing an emergency cooling system for R-205, a polymerization
reactor. After reviewing the schematic, cost supplement, and heat transfer information, it was
determined to use schedule 40 welded carbon steel pipe of 4in diameter. The plant should build
two 30,000-gallon water tanks with close proximity to R-205 (Appendix: Image 2 & 3). One of

the tanks would be designated as the cool water tank, filled with 20C water, and then pumped
with a single centrifugal pump through a cooling jacket on R-205. The warmer water will exit the
cooling jacket at 40C and enter the designated exit tank. The exit tank would initially be empty
and it would receive water that exits from the cooling jacket. The water in the exit tank, in case
any contaminants mixed into it, can be taken to a water treatment plant via water tank truck. A
truck is used because it is cheaper than installing pipes and piping racks to move the water to
the treatment plant. This plan will be the most cost-effective way to design an optimum
emergency cooling system for R-205 with a total cost of $115,000.
II. Background:
The backdrop for the problem statement involves the cooling of a polymerization reactor.
The present system, a water tower which uses a pressure head to force water into a cooling
jacket, will be undergoing maintenance for four months and the plant will require a backup
temporary cooling system in case there is an emergency shutdown. The shutdown will need
cooling as the reactor will still have reactions for another thirty minutes after launching shutdown
procedures. The cooling power usually required is given to be 12.5MMBtu/hr and should drop
down from there due to slowing reactions during shutdown, but a worst case scenario can be
assumed where there will be a constant need for a removal of that energy rate. Heat transfer
equations will be used to calculate a mass flow rate of a coolant in order to meet that cooling
energy. A given contact area of 1540ft^2 was also given which will help calculate a better heat
transfer coefficient and temperature change for the coolant.
Piping material, length, and diameter will be determined using a mechanical energy
balance, and depending on the system, pipe rack will be needed to hoist piping in non racked
areas at $2200/100ft. Old piping and valve pricing data was provided per diameter of pipe and
material. A factor of 4.9 will be multiplied by the pipe costs due to inflation and installation costs.
Costs of various pumps were given with a logarithmic function based off material, pressure
range, and shaft power provided. Costs per diameter and material of piping will be used to
determine the best diameter piping for the new system as using uniform diameter will be easier
to purchase and install.
Assumptions:
Steady State the moment the system is activated
The maintenance will be done in the summertime with ambient average
temperature of 25C
Water density is constant 998kg/m^3
Water viscosity is constant .001kg/ms

III. Analysis:
Schematic:
The original design (Appendix Image 1) was used to devise a local cooling system
(Appendix Image 2 & 3). The system will have 2 new water tanks constructed and will use water
as the coolant because of its high heat capacity (Appendix Source 1) of 4.18J/gC. This means
it will absorb more heat per change in temperature. The length of pipes to be constructed was
determined to be 2170ft total including horizontal and vertical length, and 50ft of pipe racks will
2

be needed to support the pipes to the new water tanks. The water tanks are located about 100ft
east of R-205, the closest location with quick access to the pipe racks (25ft distance from) and
also alongside the roads. The cold water tank will initially be the only one filled with water and at
the bottom, there will be a pump to pump it up to the cooling jacket. Assumptions that the inlet
and outlet of the cooling jacket were the same height, no loss work nor pressure drop, and that
the cooling jacket is well mixed were made to simplify the energy balance and to ignore any
uneven distribution of heat. The water, leaving the jacket warmer than it went in, will then have
enough energy to travel and fill the second water tank.
Water and Heat Transfer:
The water will be stored in a water tank and be at 20C. Although the ambient air will be
assumed to be 25C, water regulates its steady state ambient temperature to be cooler due to
its high heat capacity. Reactor R-205 requires 12.5MMBtu/hr to be maintained at its
temperature of 340F/171.1C. The first assumption is that the cooling water will be pumped to
the jacket and pumped out with an overall change in temperature of 20C and be at 40C. It
should not exceed 40C because of fouling affects. With that given change in temperature, a
known heat transfer rate, and a given constant heat capacity coefficient (Appendix Equation 1 &
Calculation 1), the volume flow rate was determined to be about 11.6 gal/s or 20827 gal/30min.
To check the accuracy of this change in temperature, the heat transfer coefficient was
calculated (Appendix Equation 2 & Calculation 2) to be 180.96W/m^2/K which is comparable to
real transfer values between 150-1200 for a heat exchanger with liquid interior and exterior
(Appendix Source 2).
Water Tanks:
Reactor R-205 is assumed to be already connected to the nearby pipe racks, so the
design of the recommended emergency system was designed to take advantage of them by
minimizing the building of new pipe racks. A paneled water tank assembly listed online
(Appendix Source 3) at 1000$ for a corrosive resistant panelling assembly of capacity 20,000
gallons. 3 assemblies will be purchased for a total of 3000$ and an assumed multiplicative
factor of 4 will price the total to be 12000$ to include transportation, installation, and setup
(filling with water) fees. The panelling components will be assembled into 2 tanks with capacity
of 30,000 gallon each. It will be also assumed that loss work due to water friction and on the
walls of the tank will be 0 to simplify calculations and is also due to waters low viscosity. The
pressure differential of filled tanks at the top of water to the bottom will be neglected due to the
fact that draining the tank will decrease the water pressure and the pump should be able to do
most of the work by itself. The assembled dimensions of each tank will be 7m/22ft tall with a
4*4m^2/13.1*13.1ft^2 base. The initial tank will be filled to ensure there is enough to cool for a
little over 30 minutes if need be.
Piping and Rack:
The determined pipe rack needed would only include connecting the 2 new water tanks
to the current pipe racks. The determined distance was eyed to be 50ft total.
The pipe material was set to Schedule 40 welded carbon steel. Carbon steel was
chosen over cheaper alternatives like PVC due to PVC being degradable to UV radiation since

the pipes will be outdoors and that carbon steel operates at a pressure higher than PVC is
detailed to operate at; schedule 80 PVC is rated to 60psig or about 4 bars whereas schedule 40
carbon steel is rated to be in the 1000-3000psig or 70-200 bars depending on diameter
(Appendix Source 4). Schedule 40 was chosen over schedule 80 due to being cheaper and the
pressure rating difference wouldnt be too high given this system. The length of the pipes was
determined to be about 2170 ft in the horizontal and vertical directions. This piping would follow
the pipe rack directly to R-205 from both water tanks. Rusting will be ignored as the system will
only stand for a short 4 months with no guarantee the system will even be used. Also, heat loss
from pipes to air will be ignored to assume worst case heat exchange.
Valves and Elbows:
Two gate valves will be used more so as safety and to prevent contamination from when
the emergency system is not in use. They will be placed right in between the connection from
both the inlet and outlet piping and the cooling jacket (Appendix Image 3). They will be opened
immediately when the emergency system is needed and started.
Six elbows can be seen in the ground view and four can be seen in birds eye view of the
emergency cooling system for a total of 10 elbows. These will be assumed long radius to
support higher pressure. 10 elbows and 2 gate valves have an equivalent total length value of
214*Diameter of pipe (Appendix Image 4).
Mechanical Energy Balance and Simplifications:
It is assumed the pressure at the top of the initial cold water tank and the pressure outlet
of the pipe into the holding exit tank are 1 atm (net change in pressure is 0). Kinetic energy and
potential energy can be ignored because the length of piping of more than 2000ft or 600m will
cause the loss work term to be significantly bigger. The shaft work of the pump is equivalent to
the change in pressure times the waters volume flow rate. Also, the loss work and pressure
drop in the cooling jacket is ignored, and thus, the balance is simplified (Appendix Equation 4).
Pumping, and Afterwards:
The energy balance, reynolds numbers, material roughness, and pipe length, diameters
of 1in to 8in were iterated to determine the most cost efficient system dimensions(Appendix
Equation 5, Calculations 3, 4, 5, 6, & Image 5, 6, 7, 8). A pipe diameter of 4in was determined to
be the best. Diameters 2 and 3 were also low costs, but the power ratings were too high for any
pump. Pumps were compared and the most cost efficient pump was the centrifugal pump.
Although it might have uneven flow rates compared to positive displacement, this system
already overcounts the flow rate by assuming it needs a constant flow to cool the constant
12.5MMBtu/hr, and the centrifugal pump is a lot cheaper with its lower coefficients (Appendix
Image 7 & Source 5).
After the system is run, most of the water will be in the exit tank. The water can be
cooled naturally and transported back into the first tank, given enough time, or be taken back to
the water treatment building (Appendix Image 1) by means of a truck rental. Because the
system is already cooled at this point, and assuming the system won't be needing the water
immediately, a truck rental can be called at about $2000/week and after factoring 175% to

account for shipping, tax, wages, and gas, it comes out to be $3500/week which should be
enough to transport all the water to the water treatment building (Appendix Source 6).
IV. Recommendations:
The final recommendation would be to build the design given in Appendix Image 2 & 3.
The pipes would be made of Schedule 40 Welded Steel piping which, including gate valves and
long radius elbows, would have a length equivalence of 2250.67ft and cost $60505. 50ft of pipe
rack would be needed which would cost $1100. The water tanks would be a total of $12,000
which includes buying, shipping, and setup costs. The centrifugal pump installation would cost
$26848.
Anytime the emergency system is used, the calculated kiloWatt hours would be 54.3
given a pump efficiency of 70% as stated in Perrys Chemical Engineering Handbook. That
would cost about 8$ (Appendix Source 7). Backup generators in the case of a power outage
Renting a truck for the week the system was used would transport the water to the water
treatment building, and would be much cheaper than building pipes, racks, and a stronger
pump.
Total Costs
Item

Cost ($)

System
Piping (with inflation/installation factor 4.9)

60,505

Centrifugal Pump

26,848

Pipe Rack

1,100

Water tanks (with installation/shipping)

12,000

Total

100,453

Electricity (15cents/kWh with 54kWh/30min)

8.1

Truck rental (with wage/gas/shipping for 1

week)

3,500

Total

3,508.1

Total Cost (Assuming 1use/mo for 4mo)

114,485.4

Per use

V. Appendix:
Equations:
1) Heat transfer 1: q=mC p T Where q is the heat transfer rate, m is mass
flow rate, Cp is heat capacity, and T is the change in temperature.
2) Heat Transfer 2: q=UA T lm Where U is the heat transfer coefficient, A is the

T lm is the log mean temperature change given

( T 2 T 1)/ln ( T 2/ T 1) .

contact area, and

3) Mechanical Energy Balance: P/ + g z + u /2+W s /m+ lw=0

Where lw

is loss work of the pipes and equals 2 f (Leq/ D)U b and Ub is bulk velocity
(volume flow rate/area) and D is diameter.
4) Simplified Energy Balance: P=(lw)
5) Reynolds Number = UbD/( / ) Where is the fluid viscosity

Calculations:
1) Total mass/volume flow rate:
q = 12.5MMBtu/h = 3663388.4 J/s
Cp = 4.18 J/gC
T = 20C
q=mC p T => m = 43.820kg/s => (density of water 998kg/m^3 * m^3/264.2gal)
=> Volume flow rate = 11.6gal/s = 20827gal/30min
2) Heat Transfer Coefficient:
q = 3663388.4 J/s
A = 1540 ft^2 = 143.7 m^2
Difference in outlet temperatures: T 2 = 171.1111C - 40C = 131.1111C =
131.1111K
Difference in inlet temperatures: T 1 = 171.1111C - 20C = 151.1111C = 151.1111K
T lm = ( T 2 T 1)/ln ( T 2/ T 1) = 140.87K

q=UA T lm

=> U=180.96W/m^2/K

3) Pipes Cost/Diameter
Pipes

=2170+217D

Diameter( Diameter
in)
(m)
EqLength(ft)

Carbon Steel Welded

EqLength(m) $/meter/Diameter

Total Cost (based

on Leq)

Total Cost + inflation/install

(*4.9)

0.0254 2200.666667

670.7632

2.6

1743.98432

8545.523168

0.0508 2217.333333

675.8432

4055.0592

19869.79008

0.0762

2234

680.9232

10

6809.232

33365.2368

0.1016 2250.666667

686.0032

18

12348.0576

60505.48224

0.127 2267.333333

691.0832

21

14512.7472

71112.46128

0.1524

2284

696.1632

30

20884.896

102335.9904

0.1778 2300.666667

701.2432

40

28049.728

137443.6672

0.2032 2317.333333

706.3232

50

35316.16

173049.184

4) Pipe Loss Work

Pipe Loss Work

Volume

Diameter(in)

e/D

Reynold's = D*Ub*p/u

F (chart)

Bulk Velocity[Ub] (m/s)

0.002

2192095.62

0.0056

86.47592903

0.001

1096047.81

0.005

21.61898226

0.0006666666667

730698.54

0.0045

9.608436559

0.0005

548023.905

0.0044

5.404745564

LW To

0.0004

438419.124

0.0043

6
7
8

3.459037161

0.0003333333333

365349.27

0.0042

2.40210914

0.0002857142857

313156.5172

0.0042

1.764814878

0.00025

274011.9525

0.0042

1.351186391

5) Mechanical Energy Balance

MEB

Shaft
Work(J/s) =
Pressure(Pa)
* Volume
Rate(M^3/s)

Equation 4

Diameter Diameter Pump

(in)
(m)
Pressure (Pa) (bar)

(PSI)

Shaft
Work(J/s)

kWh/30min
70% efficiency

kWh/30min

0.0254

2207369460 22073.6946 320068.5718 96722515.02

48361.2579

69087.51128

0.0508

62058374.61

620.583746
1 8998.464319 2719273.859

1359.63694

1942.338486

0.0762

7412506.576

74.1250657
6 1074.813454 324801.2131

162.4006079

232.0008684

0.1016

17.3464009
1734640.098
8 251.5228142 76008.45981

38.00423021

54.29175744

0.127

561260.0312

5.61260031
2 81.38270452 24593.29205

12.29664612

17.56663732

0.1524

223411.5292

2.23411529
2 32.39467174 9789.446389

4.894723233

6.992461762

0.1778

105425.7357

1.05425735
7 15.28673168 4619.544888

2.309772463

3.299674947

0.2032

0.55648634
55648.63473
73 8.069052036

1.219205948

1.741722783

2438.411877

6) Pump Cost Using Image 7

Pump
Cost
D(in)

Bar

Recip
Fp

Pos Dis
Fp

Centrif
Fp
kW

Recip Cp

Cost
Total

Pos Dis Cp

Cost
Total

Centrif Cp

Cost
Total

22073.69
46

96722.515 300534593. 2119850

3489918
02
8
811 53010878.75
19.2

10932.050 74540.18
81
846

620.5837
461

2719.2738
1748591
2853576
59 2479005.88
5.87 433450.3019
.717

5684.6137 38760.53
5
886

74.12506 1.5534 1.553495 2.1804 324.80121 271097.532 2476646

444465.
576 95182
182 31702
31
8
.069 52879.93047
019

4176.7951 45866.60
72
907

17.34640 1.1341 1.134133 1.2398 76.008459 78656.1586 594495.

122002.
098 33778
778 94136
81
8
6452 17367.17675
4701

3502.8628 26847.64
02
526

5.612600
312

24.593292 35093.8011 247537.

57739.5 3115.28941 21241.60
05
3
6356 8770.468641
0325
4
087

2.234115
292

9.7894463 20069.3843 141561.

89
5
4094

37192.6
3192

2866.8282 19547.46
12
817

1.054257
357

4.6195448 13600.8558 95934.9

28105.1
88
9
9707 4269.098868
8549

2701.5669 18420.63
89
452

8 0.556486

1 2.4384118

5649.4565

10238.739 72219.9 3555.561165 23407.6

2583.7688 17617.42

3473

77

6945

8138

65

801

Images/Charts:
Image 1: Original Plant Layout

Image 2: Recommended System 1

Image 3: Recommended System 2 [hot water tank = exit tank]

Image 4: Pipe Fittings Leq/D

10

Image 5: Friction Factor Chart

11

Image 6: Pipe Pricing

12

Image 7: Equations and Charts for total Pump Price

13

Image 8: Cost of Piping and Pump per Diameter

Sources:
1) Water Data:
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/water-thermal-properties-d_162.html
2) Realistic Heat Transfer Coefficient: http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/heat-transfercoefficients-exchangers-d_450.html
3) Water Tank:
http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Top-quality-popular-20000-gallonwater_60179148243.html
4) Carbon Steel Piping Pressure Rating:
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/a106-carbon-steel-pipes-d_370.html
5) Pump Priority:

14

http://www.blackmersmartenergy.com/comparativedata/centrifugal-pumps-vs-positivedisplacement-pumps.html
6) Truck Rental:
http://www.machinerytrader.com/listingsdetail/detail.aspx?OHID=10503433
7) Electricity Cost:
http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_6_a

15