054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

054416 Design Project Tender

Your group is being offered the opportunity to take over the management of a design of a process
for the manufacture of ethylbenzene from feedstocks of benzene and ethylene for International
Chemicals Incorporated (the other ICI), after the termination of the services of the previous company
working for ICI, Emek Projects Ltd (EPL). Your design should produce 90,000 metric tons/year (T/yr)
of ethylbenzene with a purity of at least 99.5 mol %, at the market price of $1.00/kg, from benzene, at a
cost of 90 cents/kg, and ethylene, at a cost of $0.30/kg. Note that both of the feedstocks contain
impurities (the benzene contains 2 mol % toluene, and the ethylene contains 7 mol % ethane).
The process must be designed to maximize its profitability, quantified in terms of the following
measures: (a) Return on Investment (ROI); (b) Payback Period (PBP); (c) Venture Profit (VP), which
estimates the annual profit above the return of 20% interest to our venture profit partners. Figures 1 and
2 show the design proposed by EPL, with a VP of -$9,130,000, that is an annual loss of over 9 million
dollars. The EPL flowsheet can be simulated in UNISIM using the file EB_PROCESS_V1.usc, which
we are supplying to your group. EPL stated in their report that “This poor economic performance is due
to the relatively low market price for ethylbenzene, in comparison to the high prices of the raw materials
required. It is impossible to make the process more profitable without a significant increase in this
price.” We believe that it is possible to make a profit and that poor engineering practice is the reason
for the EPL failure, and for that reason, EPL are no longer working with us.
This document provides detailed technical information about the ethylbenzene process, lists the
modifications to the flowsheet that are allowed, the product specifications, process constraints, costs of
raw materials and selling prices of the products, and equipment and utility costs.
Your design is to be submitted as a technical report, supported by UNISIM and MS Excel files,
emailed to me (jmactavish15@gmail.com) no later than Monday, 21st January 2019, 12:00. The
specifications for the report are also given in this document.

Sincerely,

Joe McTavish
Vice President and Chief Technology Officer (CTO)
International Chemicals Incorporated
Project_2019_v1.doc 15/09/2018

Page 1 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

Figure 1. The EPL design for the reactor section of the ethylbenzene process (see EB_PROCESS_V1.usc).

Page 2 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

Figure 2. The EPL design for the separations section of the ethylbenzene process (see EB_PROCESS_V1.usc).

Page 3 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

The rest of this document provides the following information:

a) Process Description.
b) Reaction Kinetics.
c) Hints to get you started.
d) Modifications to the flowsheet that are allowed and modification that are not
acceptable.
e) Definition of profitability measures.
f) Product specifications and revenues.
g) Costs of raw materials.
h) Estimated equipment purchase costs.
i) Utility costs.
j) References.
k) Deliverables.

Page 4 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

a) Process Description (Turton et al, 2013).

Ethylbenzene (EB) is produced from direct reaction between benzene and ethylene, in a process
involving two connected sections: the reaction section (see Figure 1) and the separations section (see
Figure 2). The objective is to produce the required amount of EB, while restricting the production of
diethylbenzene (DEB).

The design proposed by EPL achieves these objectives: A refinery cut of benzene is fed from storage to
an on-site process vessel (V-301), where it is mixed with the recycled benzene. From V-301, it is
pumped to a reaction pressure of approximately 2000 kPa (20 atm) and sent to a fired heater (H-301) to
bring it to reaction temperature. The preheated benzene is mixed with feed ethylene just prior to entering
an adiabatic packed-bed reactor (R-301), where reaction occurs in the gas phase and is exothermic. The
hot, partially converted reactor effluent leaves R-301, and is fed to E-301, where the stream is cooled to
350°C while generating high pressure steam (HPS), and then to E-302, where it is cooled to 255°C,
while generating intermediate pressure steam (IPS). The effluent stream leaving the reactor contains
products, by-products, unreacted benzene, and small amounts of unreacted ethylene and other
noncondensable gases. The reactor effluent is further cooled in two waste-heat boilers (E-303 and E-
304), in which high-pressure and intermediate-pressure steam, respectively, are generated.

The two-phase mixture leaving E-304 is sent to a trim cooler (E-305), where the stream is cooled to
80°C, and then to a two-phase separator (V-302), where the light gases are separated and sent overhead
as fuel gas. The condensed liquid is then sent to the Benzene tower, T-301, where the unreacted benzene
is separated as the overhead product and returned to the front end of the process. The bottoms product
from the first column is sent to T-302, where product EB is taken as the top product. The bottoms product
from T-302 contains all the DEB and trace amounts of ethylbenzene. This stream is mixed with recycle
benzene, pumped at 20 bar through a fired heater (H-302) prior to being sent to a second packed-bed
reactor (R-302), in which the excess benzene is reacted with the DEB to produce EB and unreacted
benzene. The effluent from this reactor is mixed with the liquid stream entering the waste-heat boiler
(E-303).

b) Reaction Kinetics (Turton et al, 2013).

The production of EB takes place via the direct addition reaction between ethylene and benzene:
C6 H 6 + C 2 H 2 → C6 H 5 C 2 H 5
Benzene Ethylene Ethylbenzene
(1)

The reaction between EB and ethylene to produce DEB also takes place:
C6 H 5 C 2 H 5 + C 2 H 2 → C6 H 4 ( C 2 H 5 )2 (2)
Ethylbenzene Ethylene diethlbenzene

Additional reactions between DEB and ethylene yielding triethylbenzene (and higher) are also possible.
However, in order to minimize these additional reactions, the molar ratio of benzene to ethylene is kept
high (this must be maintained at 3:1 or higher). The production of DEB is undesirable, and its value as
a side product is low. In order to maximize the production of the desired EB, the DEB is separated and
returned to a separate reactor in which excess benzene is added to produce EB via the following reaction:

Page 5 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

C6 H 4 ( C2 H 5 )2 + C6 H 6 → 2C6 H 5 C2 H 5 (3)
diethlbenzene Benzene Ethylbenzene

The incoming benzene contains a small amount of toluene impurity. The toluene reacts with ethylene
to form ethyl benzene and propylene:
C6 H 5 CH 3 + 2C2 H 2 → C6 H 5 C2 H 5 + C3 H 6
Toluene Ethylene Ethylbenzene Propylene
(4)

The reaction kinetics derived for a new catalyst are given as:
− ri =k0,i e − Ei RT a
CEthylene b
CEB c
CToluene d
CBenzene e
CDEB (5)

where i is reaction number (i) above, and the following relationships pertain:

Ei
i k0,i a b c d e
kcal/kmol
1 22,500 1.00×106 1 0 0 1 0
2 22,500 6.00×105 1 1 0 0 0
3 25,000 7.80×106 0 0 0 1 1
4 20,000 3.80×108 2 0 1 0 0

The units of ri are kmol/s/m3-reactor, the units of Ci are kmol/m3-gas, and the units of k0,i vary
depending upon the form of the equation.

c) Hints to get you started.

Your general task is to answer the question: “How can the proposed flowsheet be modified to make it
as profitable as possible?” To investigate this question, you need to carry out the following steps:
STEP 1. Redesign the flowsheet, by instigating changes that improve profitability. There are a large
number of changes that could be made to the flowsheet, and changes that can be made to
key parameter values. As you should already have some experience with this flowsheet, you
should be able to make informed decisions, and by imposing appropriate specifications,
obtain better results. In this step, do not make changes regarding the heat integration.
Study Modifications to the Flowsheet that are Allowed and Disallowed – carefully!
STEP 2. Design the heat integrated network (HEN) for maximum energy recovery (MER) based on
the given ∆Tmin:
a) Extract the stream-data.
b) Obtain the problem table (manually). You may check this result using the LNG module
in UNISIM if you wish, but this is not mandatory.
c) Design a network that meets the MER targets by hand.
d) Implement your HEN in UNISIM using the real streams. All the stream-stream heat
exchangers in the HEN must be of the “Shell & Tube” type. The heat exchanger areas
required should be computed as described in detail below (See Estimated Equipment
Purchase Costs – Heat Exchangers).
e) As a final step, now improve your design by accounting for trade-offs between
equipment and utility costs to find the best economical solution (In this step, ∆Tmin is

Page 6 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

free to be chosen as you see fit – and this may be selected to be different for each heat
exchanger).
Before beginning work on the project, you need to sign up your group by sending Joe MacTavish a list
of your group members by email, and I will assign you a group number. Each group number has an
assigned value of ∆Tmin for STEP 2, parts (a)-(d), as per Table A.

Table A. Definition of ∆Tmin for STEP 2 by Group.

Group 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
∆Tmin 5 oC 5.5 oC 6 oC 6.5 oC 7 oC 7.5 oC 8 oC 8.5 oC 9 oC 9.5 oC

Group 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
∆Tmin 10 oC 10.5 oC 11 oC 11.5 oC 12 oC 12.5 oC 13 oC 13.5 oC 14 oC 14.5 oC

Getting help.
1. ICI staff other than Mr. Joe McTavish (Prof. Lewin, Ms. Abigail Landman and Mr. Oren
Elishav) can be contacted only for consulation on technical issues concerning UNISIM usage.
In this regard, please note that none of these individuals will offer suggestions concerning
engineering judgement, which is your responsibility. Note also that the multimedia support
materials on UNISIM usage is available on site, and you are expected to review these materials
before seeking assistance from the staff.
2. Any questions regarding the rules of the project tender, should be addressed only to the CTO of
ICI, in writing, by email to: jmactavish@gmail.com. Joe intends to open a forum thread, where
he intends to reproduce general questions that you raise, with his responses. Please see also
Modifications to the Flowsheet that are Allowed and Disallowed.

d) Modifications to the Flowsheet that are Allowed and Disallowed.

The following changes are allowed:
1. Changing the operating temperatures and pressures of all unit operations. Operating
temperatures cannot exceed 600 oC anywhere in the plant. Please note that the operating
pressures must lie in the range 2 – 20 bar.
2. Changing the dimensions of unit operations, and in particular, the vessel diameters and lengths
of all PFRs, noting that the vessel sizing will effect their performance as well as their costs.
3. Removal of existing adiabatic PFRs, heat exchangers and separations devices (flash units and
distillation columns), and addition of new ones, accounting for their equipment and utility costs.
4. Changing the heat management (in STEP 2). The current design calls for ten heat exchangers,
none of which performs heat exchange between a hot process stream and a cold process stream.
The number of process-process heat exchangers can be changed, through the addition of new
heat exchangers, and/or the removal of those in the current design. The cost of any new item
needs to be accounted for.
Please note the following:

Page 7 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

1. EuroSI units are to be used throughout, with the exception of certain spreadsheets that perform
costing of vessels, which use field units.
2. There are two types of adiabatic catalytic PFR reactors which can be used:
a. A reactor in which the catalyst promotes the main reaction to ethylbenze (Reaction 1),
together with side reactions (Reactions 2 and 4). The molar feed ratio of
benzene/ethylene must be 3:1 or higher.
b. A reactor in which the catalyst promotes the reaction of DEB to ethylbenzene to
ethylbenze (Reaction 3), together with side reactions (Reaction 1 and 4).
The only reactors that can be used are adibatic PFRs using one of the two sets of reactions as
above. Both reactors must be operated at 20 bar.
3. Pressure drops in reactors, furnaces, distillation columns and heat exchangers are neglected.
4. Column and reactor heights must be no greater than 175 ft. For distillation columns, note that a
tray spacing of 2 ft must be adhered to.
5. Keep in mind that UNISIM does not have the capability of modelling solid phases – if a stream
is cooled below the melting temperature of one or more chemicals in that stream, it will still
incorrectly show up in UNISIM as a liquid. It is your responsibility to do reality checks in
such circumstances.

e) Definition of profitability measures.

The gross profit is computed as follows:
GP= S − C (6)

where GP is the gross profit in $/year, S are the revenues on products (sales) in $/year, and C are the
total production costs, consisting of the sum of the following components (as shown in Week 4):
F – the annual cost of feedstocks (cell C10 in the spreadsheet ECONOMICS)
W – the annual penalty for CO2 emissions penaties (cell C11)
U – the annual cost of utilities (cell C15)
O – the annual cost of labor-related operations. As shown in class, for this fluid-processing
process, which involves two plant sections, this component costs $973,000/year (cell C16).
M – the annual cost of maintenance (8.05% of CTDC, the total depreciable capital) (cell C17)
OV – the annual operating overhead (22.8% of the sum of O and M) (cell C18)
T&I – the annual taxes and insurance (2% of CTDC) (cell C19)
D – the annual depreciation (8% of CTDC) (cell C20)
GEN – general expenses, taken here as 5% of S (cell C22)
The Economic Potential (EP) is a useful preliminary indicator for feasibility (cell C13):
EP = S − F − W , (7)
as a positive EP is simply in indication that the cost of raw materials and of waste disposal do npot
exceed the revenue from sales of products.

Page 8 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

Obviously, we are interested in designing a process that maximizes GP, while minimizing the
total capital investment (TCI), computed using Guthrie’s method:
CTCI = CTDC + CWC = 1.15CTDC
1.18 ( CTBM + Csite + Cbuildings + Coffsite facilities ) 1.18 (1.14CTBM ) (8)
=
CTDC =
where CTBM is the sum of the bare modules costs of each equipment item (accounting for material and
pressure factors) and, noting separate bare-modules factors for each type of equipment (as shown in
the lecture notes for Week 3). Note that the total depreciable capital, CTDC, is also computed using
Guthrie’s method, and, like the TCI, is used for profitability analysis.
The revenues and raw materials costs are estimated on the basis of 24 hr/day, 330 day/year
operation of the process, and using the material balances obtained from UNISIM, and the itemized
materials listed in sections (f) and (g) below. Methods for the estimation for equipment purchase costs
are itemized in section (h). Finally, the cost of utilities is estimated using Table B in section (j), which
lists the annual cost per 106 kcal/hr or kW for each utility.
The three profitability measures that will be used to assess the design are as follows:
a) ROI – Return on investment, computed as:
GP (1 − t )
ROI = 100 [%] (9)
CTCI
where t is the tax rate (we will use a value of t = 0.25). Note that the above expression does not account
for the time value of money. More rigorous expressions will be used next semester 1. For the assessment
of the design, the expression of Eq. (9) suffices. A value of 25% for ROI is considered promising.
b) PBP – Pay back period, approximated by the expression:
CTDC
PBP = [years]
GP (1 − t ) + D
(10)

As stated in Seider et al (2004), it is unlikely that a project with a PBP of more than 4 years would be
considered.
c) VP – Venture profit, approximated by:
= GP (1 − t ) − im CTCI [$/year]
VP (11)
where im is the minimum acceptable rate of return payable to venture capitalists that finance the
project, take here as im = 0.2. Clearly, we are interested in a large positive value for VP.

f) Products Specifications and Revenues.

Ethylbenzene
Specifications: 90,000 T/yr of Ethylbenzene should be supplied at 2 bar or above and 40 oC, with a purity
of at least 99.5 mol%.
Revenues: $1.00/kg.

Fuel Gas

1
See the course notes for 054416 and Chapter 17 of Seider et al (2017) for more details.
Page 9 © D. R. Lewin 2019
 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

Specifications: A gaseous stream of variable organic composition can be used as fuel gas. There are no
restrictions on its flowrate, temperature and pressure, provided it is a gas.
Revenues: $0.30/kg.
CO2 Emissions Penalty
The furnaces used in the process are powered by burning fuel gas, which generates CO2 emissions, taxed
at 2 cents per kg of CO2 emitted. The flow rate of CO2 emissions is estimated at 4.3181×10-4 kg/hr, for
each kcal/hr of furnace duty.

Waste Streams
Other than the ethylbenzene product and fuel gas by-product that generate revenue, any other liquid
effluent stream is subject to a disposal cost of $0.50/kg.

g) Costs of Raw Materials.

Benzene
Specifications: An unlimited supply of benzene (including 2 mol % toluene) is available at 2 bar and
25 oC, at a cost of $0.90/kg.
Ethylene
Specifications: An unlimited supply of ethylene (including 7 mol % ethane) is available at 20 bar and
25 oC, at a cost of $0.30/kg.

h) Estimated Equipment Purchase Costs

The purchase costs of the following items need to be included: furnaces, reactor vessels, all heat
exchangers, separation columns, flash vessels, compressors and turbines. Note that the purchase costs
of reflux drums, pumps and valves, which are considered negligable, are not included in the capital
investment estimate in this project. The following pages give details on how the purchase costs each of
the chargable items are estimated. Note that all of these costing expressions have been implemented in
the UNISIM file EB_PROCESS_V1.usc, either in the spreadsheet ECONOMICS or in other
spreadsheets as indicated.

A word on materials of construction: Most of the processing equipment can be constructed from
carbon steel. Stainless steel should be used for reactors that operate above 300oC, and for the furnace
tubes, given their high operating temperatures, and also for the distillation column trays.

Page 10 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

CPI (Chemical Price Index) – In the following sections, all equipment costs and costs of energy are
given for a CPI index of 567 (for the year 2013). To update these to current prices, use an index of 700.
Thus for example, to estimate the current purchase cost of an equipment item listed below as $ CX , the
cost is caclulated as follows:
700
C2019 = Cx (12)
567
In the spreadsheet ECONOMICS, Eq. (12) is implemented on the total cost of all equipment and the
total cost of all utilities in cells I18 and J18, respectively.

A word on the computation of TBM for equipment: In what follows, you will find equations for the
computation of FOB costs of equipment items. To calculate the bare modules costs (TBM), one needs to
multiply the FOB purchase cost with the appropriate the bare modules factors (FBM) for each equipment
item, as covered in Lecture 3. For your convenience, these factors are reproduced here:

Page 11 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

Furnaces (in the current design – H-301 and H-302)

These are gas-fired furnaces in which the process fluid is fed to an array of pipes arranged on the internal
walls of the chamber. The purchase cost of a furnace is estimated using the expression:
CFURN =exp ( −0.1541 + 0.785log(Q) ) FM [$ f.o.b.] (13)

where Q is the furnace duty in Btu/hr, and FM = 1.7 for stainless steel tubes (recommended for furnaces).
The above equation holds for furnace duties in the range 10-500 million Btu/hr.
Low pressure reaction vessels (in the EPL design – R-301 and R-302).
These are packed bed reactors, and can be designed as either vertical or horizontal vessels. The purchase
costs include the cost of the pressure vessels and platforms and ladders (to allow operator access), and
also the cost of the catalyst at $500/ft3. The purchase cost of a pressure vessel is computed as a function
of its weight (in lb), which is estimated using:
π ( Di + tS )( Li + 0.8 Di ) tS ρ [lb]
W= (14)
where Di and Li are the vessel diameter and length, respectively (in inches), ρ is the density of steel
(0.284 lb/in3) and tS is the shell thickness (in inches), computed using:
Pd Di
tS = [inch] (15)
2 SE − 1.2 Pd

where the allowable stress is taken as S = 13,750 psi, the weld efficiency is taken as E = 0.85, and the
design pressure, Pd (in psig), is estimated using the expression in Seider et al (2003), pg. 529:
Pd exp 0.60608 + 0.91615 ln ( PO )  + 0.0015655 ln ( PO )   [psig]
2
= (16)
 
where PO is the vessel operating pressure (in psig). Note that the shell thickness, computed using Eq.
(13) for low operating pressures may be too small to give sufficient rigidity to vessels. Accordingly, the
following minimum wall thicknesses should be used:

For a vertical pressure vessel, the purchase cost is estimated using the expression (valid for 4,200 < W
< 1,000,000 lb):
= exp 7.139 + 0.18255 ln (W )  + 0.02297 ln (W )   FM [$ f.o.b.]
2
CV ,VERT (17)
 
where FM is the material factor (1.0 for carbon steel, and 2.1 for stainless steel). A vertical vessel is also
equipped with platforms and ladders, whose costs are estimated using the expression (valid for 3 < D <
21 ft and 12 < L < 40 ft):
CPL = 410 D 0.73960 L0.70684 [$ f.o.b.] (18)

where D is the vessel diameter (in feet). For horizontal pressure vessels, the purchase cost is estimated
using the expression (valid for 1,000 < W < 920,000 lb):
= exp 5.6336 + 0.4599 ln (W )  + 0.00582 ln (W )   FM [$ f.o.b.]
2
CV , HORIZ (19)
 
Page 12 © D. R. Lewin 2019
 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

where FM is the material factor, as in Eq. (17). Horizontal vessels are also equipped with platforms and
ladders, whose costs are estimated expression (valid for 3 < D < 21 ft):
CPL = 2, 275 D 0..2094 [$ f.o.b.] (20)
See the spreadsheet REACTORS COST, where it can be noted the reactor in the EPL design is a vertical
vessel.

Distillation Columns (in the current design, T-301 and T-302).

The purchase cost of these, and any additional columns required by your redesign, are estimated using
Seider et al (2017), pg. 465, (valid for 9,000 < W < 2,500,000 lb):
CCOL exp 10.5449 − 0.4672 ln (W )  + 0.05482 ln (W )   FM [$ f.o.b.]
2
= (21)
 
where CCOL is purchase cost of the distillation column in $ (excluding condenser and reboiler, whose
purchase cost is estimated as with heat exchangers), FM is the material factor (1.0 for carbon steel, and
2.1 for stainless steel) and W (in lb) is the weight of the pressure vessel, estimated using Eq. (14). The
diameter of the column is estimated using the UNISIM Tray Sizing Utility (make sure to run the utility
so that only one section is computed for each column – see Ronen’s column sizing guide on the Moodle
site). The column height in ft, is computed as the product of the number of actual trays, NT (see below),
and the tray spacing, usually taken as 2 ft. The shell thickness accounts both for the operating pressure
and wind stress (see below). The number of actual trays, NT, is computed by estimating the tray
efficiency for the column, using the O’Connell correlation: NT, = NT0 /E0 where NT0 is the number of
E0 0.492 ( µ L α )
−0.245
=
ideal trays and the tray efficiency, E0, is given by: , with the viscosity, µ L , and
relative volatility, α, computed as geometric averages of the top and bottom trays in the column. In
addition to the cost of the pressure vessel for the tower, we also need to account for the cost of platforms
and ladders and of the trays following Seider et al (2017), pp. 465 and 467):
CPL =
341 ⋅ D 0.63316 ⋅ L0.80161 [$ f.o.b.] (D and L in feet) (22)
CBT = NT ⋅ FNT ⋅ FTT ⋅ FTM ⋅ 468 ⋅ exp ( 0.1482 D ) [$ f.o.b.] (D in feet) (23)
Eq. (22) is valid for 3 < D < 24 ft and 27 < L < 170 ft, and Eq. (23) is valid for 2 < D < 16 ft. In Eq. (23),
FNT = 1 for NT ≥ 20, with FNT = 2.25/1.0414NT for NT < 20, FTT accounts for the type of tray:
Tray Type FTT
Sieve 1.0
Valve 1.18
Bubble cap 1.87

The factor FTM, which depends on the column diameter in feet, corrects for the material of construction:
Material of Construction FTM
Carbon steel 1.0
303 Stainless steel 1.189 + 0.0577D
316 Stainless steel 1.401 + 0.0724D
Carpenter 20CB-3 1.525 + 0.0788D
Monel 2.306 + 0.1120D
It is recommended to install 303 Stainless steel sieve trays for this process.

Shell thickness: To estimate the shell thickness for a tower, we need to account for both the effect of
vessel pressure and the need to withstand wind loads. Following the procedure suggested by Mulet et
Page 13 © D. R. Lewin 2019
 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

al. (1981), for positive design pressures (i.e., not for vessels operating under vacuum), the wall thickness,
tS, to withstand the design pressure is given in Eq. (15), with the vessel design pressure estimated using
Eq. (16). For tall vertical vessels such as distillation columns, it is necessary to account for wind loads.
The thickness necessary to withstand wind load is calculated assuming that the wind acts with a uniform
intensity over the entire height of the vessel. Assuming a wind velocity of up to 140 miles/hr, the
required thickness to withstand the wind load is:
0.22 (12 D + 18 ) L2
tW = [inch] (24)
SD 2
where D is outside shell diameter (ft), L is vessel height (tangent to tangent length, in ft), and the factor
of 18 allows for the column cage ladders, which adds additional effective diameter to the column. When
there is wind load, the girth seam must withstand the combined load of the wind and the internal
pressure, the latter computed using:
Pd Di
tG = [inch] (25)
2 SE − 1.2 Pd
The estimated thickness of the bottom of a vertical vessel is then given by:
t=
B tW + tG (26)
To estimate the vessel thickness (assumed constant), use the average of the top and bottom thicknesses,
plus the corrosion allowance, tC, usually 0.125". Thus the values of wall thickness are computed as
follows:
tSC= 0.5 ( t B + tS ) + tC (27)

Note that as with reactor vessel walls, the shell thickness, computed using Eq. (27) for low operating
pressures and/or relatively short towers may be too small to give sufficient rigidity to vessels.
Accordingly, the following minimum wall thicknesses should be used:

For complete details for the EPL design, see the spreadsheets T-301 Costing and T-302 Costing.

Flash Vessels (in the EPL design: V-301 and V-302).

Flash vessels are generally designed to be nominally half-full of liquid and to allow for a liquid residence
time of 10 minutes. Thus, the required vessel capacity is:
Q 10 min Q
V= × = (28)
0.5 60 min/hr 3
where Q (m3/hr) is the volumetric flow of liquid in the flash liquid effluent. Assuming a vertical
cylindrical vessel of diameter DL (m) and height L (m), and assuming the standard geometry with a
vessel height three times the diameter, the vessel height is determined as:
πD 2 L π ( L 3) L
2 13
 36V 
=
V = ⇒=
L   (29)
4 4  π 

Page 14 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

In special cases, different geometries can be used. The purchase cost for a vertical pressure vessel is
estimated using the expression (valid for 4,200 < W < 1,000,000 lb):
exp 7.139 + 0.18255 ln (W )  + 0.02297 ln (W )   FM [$ f.o.b.]
2
CV ,= (30)
VER
 
where FM is the material factor (1.0 for carbon steel, and 2.1 for stainless steel) and W (in lb) is the
weight of the pressure vessel, which is estimated using Eq.(16). Each vessel is also equipped with
platforms and ladders, whose costs are estimated using:
CPL = 410 D 0.73960 L0.70684 [$ f.o.b.] (31)

The cost of a demister, CDM , is estimated by assuming a mesh of diameter equal to that of the vessel,
3
with a height of 1/2 ft, and a cost of $500/ft . Note that V-301 is a surge drum that processes liquid
feeds only, and therefore does not require a demister. For complete details for the EPL design, see the
spreadsheets V-301 Costing and V-302 Costing.

Heat Exchangers (in the current design: E-101 to E-106 as well as the two reboilers and two
condensers of T-301 and T-302).
These, and any additional heat exchangers required by your redesign, are fixed-head, shell-and-tube
type heat-exchangers, with purchase costs estimated using Seider et al (2017), pg. 462:

CHEX exp 11.4185 − 0.9228 ⋅ ln ( A ) + 0.09861 ⋅ ln ( A )   FM FP [$ f.o.b.]

2
= (32)
 
2
In the above, CHEX is the cost of the heat exchanger, A is the heat exchanger surface area, in ft , and the
equation applies for areas in the range 150 to 12,000 ft2. FM is a factor accounting for materials of
construction for various combinations of tube and shell materials, computed using the expression:
FM = a + ( A 100 )
b
(33)
with values of the coefficients a and b as given in the table below:

Material of Construction Shell/Tube a b

Carbon steel/carbon steel 0.00 0.00
Carbon steel/stainless steel 1.75 0.13
Stainless steel/stainless steel 2.70 0.07

FP is a factor accounting for operating pressure. For operating pressures below 100 psig, FP = 1. For
pressures in the range 100 to 2,000 psig, use the correlation:
2
 P   P 
FP =
0.9803 + 0.018   + 0.0017   [ P in psig ] (34)
 100   100 
The heat transfer area is computed using:
Q
A= m 2 ← Pay attention to units here! (35)
U ∆Tlm
In the above, Q is the heat exchanger heat transfer duty in kcal/hr, and U is the heat transfer coefficient
2o
(assumed to be 300 kcal/m C in all heat exchangers). The log mean temperature difference, ∆Tlm (in
o
C), for counter-current heat transfer, is computed as:

Page 15 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

(Th,in − Tc,out ) − (Th,out − Tc,in )

∆Tlm =
T −T  (36)
ln  h ,in c ,out 
 Th ,out − Tc ,in 
Note: In the case of a heater fed by a condensing heat utility stream (e.g., steam) or an evaporating cold
utility stream (refrigerants), the utility stream inlet and outlet temperatures are taken as equal to the
utility supply temperature. In the case of a cooler fed by non-condensing cold utility streams (cooling
o
water, chilled water, or refrigerated brine), a 20 C temperature rise is assumed for the utility stream.
o o
Thus, for example, CW enters at 20 C and exits at 40 C.

Compressors (not installed in the current design).

The purchase cost of centrifugal compressors can be estimated using the following expression (valid for
the range 200 < PC < 30,000 Hp):
CCOMP =exp 9.1553 + 0.63 ⋅ ln ( PC )  FM [$ f.o.b.] (37)

where PC is the power consumption of the compressor in Hp and FM is a factor accounting for materials
of construction. For compressing hydrogen-free gas, FM = 1, for carbon steel, while for all other
applications, FM = 2.5, for stainless steel.

Gas Turbines (not installed in the current design).

You may consider the installation of a gas turbine to recover electrical power from a gaseous process
stream, through reduction in the stream pressure. The adiabatic efficiency of this device is assumed to
be only 35%. The purchase cost of this equipment item, valid for the range 20 < PT < 5,000 Hp, is:
= 600 ⋅ PT0.81 FM [$ f.o.b.]
CTURB (38)

where PT is the recovered duty in Hp and FM is a factor accounting for materials of construction. For
compressing hydrogen-free gas, FM = 1, for carbon steel, while for all other applications, FM = 2.5, for
stainless steel. If not used directly in the flowsheet, electricity generated is credited as $196/kW/year.

i) Utility Costs.
The table below indicates the annual cost of a unit of enegy consumption rate in $/year, as well as the
temperature of the utility, if relevant. For example, the usage of high pressure steam (HPS) implies a
hot utility temperature of 251.8 oC (saturated steam at 41 bar), costing $244,600 per year for each 106
kcal/hr consumed. In contrast, using BFW as a coolant at 251.8 oC to produce HPS, makes a profit of
$122,300 per year for each 106 kcal/hr of coolant duty. Note that producing steam at a given pressure
gives a revenue of only half of the cost of using steam at the same pressure!

Page 16 © D. R. Lewin 2019

 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

Table B. Data for Utility Streams (Prices for CE Plant Cost Index of 567 – 2013 average).
Feed Exit Unit of energy Annual cost
Utility Type C/H
Temperature Temperature consumption rate ($/year)
Compressor power n/a n/a n/a 1 kW 196
Cooling water, CW C 20 oC 40 oC 106 kcal/hr 8.6×103
Chilled water, CH C 10 oC 30 oC 106 kcal/hr 2.59×104
Refrigerated brine, RB C 0 oC 20 oC 106 kcal/hr 5.76×104
Ammonia refrig, AR C -30 oC -30 oC 106 kcal/hr 2.159×105
Ethane refrig, AR C -90 oC -90 oC 106 kcal/hr 3.598×105
Methane refrig, MR C -160 oC -160 oC 106 kcal/hr 7.195×105
Nitrogen refrig, NR C -190 oC -190 oC 106 kcal/hr 1.439×106
Boiler feed water,
C 184.1 oC 184.1 oC 106 kcal/hr -1.008×105
BFW@11 bar
Boiler feed water,
C 251.8 oC 251.8 oC 106 kcal/hr -1.223×105
BFW@41 bar
Fuel Gas (furnace), FG H n/a n/a 106 kcal/hr 1.655×105
Low press. steam,
H 143.6 oC 143.6 oC 106 kcal/hr 1.871×105
LPS@4 bar
Inter. press. steam,
H 184.1 oC 184.1 oC 106 kcal/hr 2.015×105
IPS@11 bar
High press. steam,
H 251.8 oC 251.8 oC 106 kcal/hr 2.446×105
HPS@41 bar

j) References.
Seider, W. D., D. R. Lewin, Widagdo, S., Gani, R. and Ng, K. M, Product and Process Design Principles, 4th Ed.,
John Wiley and Sons, New Jersey (2017)
Turton, R., R. C. Bailie, W. C. Whittingf, J. A. Shaeiwitz and D. Bhattacharya, Analysis, Synthesis and Design of
Chemical Processes, 4th Ed., Pearson Education International, Appendic B.2 (2013)

k) Deliverables.
1) Each project should be packed as a zip file with the following initial da and the I.D number of the
student who submits the project. i.e. student with I.D. number 123456789 should submit a file by
the name da123456789.zip
2) The zip file should contain:
a. Typed engineering report file in MS WORD format. Use the template provided on the website.
b. UNISIM files supporting your solutions.
c. A simple ASCII/ANSI file “readme.txt” should be provided with the short purpose description
of all relevant files in the packaged (can be prepared by NOTEPAD). For example:

case1.hsc - the solution of the MER for DT=7C

case2.hsc -the final (best) solution
…and so on.
3) The cover of the report should indicate the names and I.D numbers of the students who submit the
project and the group number.
4) No late submission will be allowed.
5) You are allowed to work in groups of up to five students.
6) Each group should work independently. The sharing of files and data between groups is not allowed.

Submission deadline is Monday 21st January 2019 at 12:00

Grading:
Page 17 © D. R. Lewin 2019
 054416 – Integrated Process Design – Design Project Definition 2019

Technical Presentation. Correct report structure (including executive summary, description of work
done, results, summary and conclusions, appendices). Care in presentation (neatness, clarity, use of
graphics as appropriate). Be concise in your project write-up! [Max. grade = 10].
Part 1 - Improvements to the EPL Design. The grade given here will depend on the number of new
features implemented successfully and the degree to which they improve the profitability of the design.
We are also looking for demonstration of correct engineering practice. This is by far the most important
part of this project [Max. grade = 40].
Part 2 - HEN Design and Implementation. The expectations from this part of the project are: (a) Data
extraction of all principal hot and cold process streams with an adequate resolution to ensure accurate
MER targeting; (b) Well-designed HEN to meet the MER targets for the ∆Tmin assigned to your team,
while minimizing utility costs through well-chosen matchings; (c) Implementation of the MER HEN on
the UNISIM model such that each of the target duties are reproduced to within 1%. [Max. grade = 25].
Part 3 - Solution Refinement. Examine the existing trade-off between equipment and utility costing
and modify the design to maximize VP, with no restrictions of the value of ∆Tmin used. This part of the
grade depends on how your design compares to those of your peers.
Performance ≡ VP [Max. grade = 25].
The “performance” grade in Part 3 given to each group will be computed on the basis of the venture
profit attained relative to those of competing solutions of other groups (i.e., the best solution will get
100% of 25, and the worst will get 0% of 25). If all of the groups provide similar solutions, the grade
will be calculated from comparing the students’ solutions to the one obtained by Joe MacTavish 

Page 18 © D. R. Lewin 2019