From the SelectedWorks of ali ali

2009

Simple methodology for sizing of absorbers for

TEG (triethylene glycol) gas dehydration systems
ali ali

Available at: http://works.bepress.com/bahadori/6/

Energy 34 (2009) 19101916

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Simple methodology for sizing of absorbers for TEG (triethylene glycol) gas
dehydration systems
Alireza Bahadori*, Hari B. Vuthaluru
Department of Chemical Engineering, Curtin University of Technology, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845 Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 19 May 2009
Received in revised form
30 July 2009
Accepted 30 July 2009
Available online 31 August 2009

Natural gas is an important source of primary energy and it is saturated with water vapor under normal
production conditions. In the design of natural gas dehydration systems, correct estimation of absorption
column size is crucial. Once the lean TEG (Triethylene glycol) concentration has been established, the
circulation rate of TEG and number of trays (height of packing) must be determined. The current
methods to correlate the TEG circulation rate, TEG purity, water removal efciency, number of equilibrium stages (or height of packing) and the diameter of contactor employs rigorous calculation techniques
involving more complicated and longer computations. The aim of this study is therefore to develop
a simple-to-use method, by employing basic algebraic equations to correlate water removal efciency as
a function of TEG circulation rate and TEG purity for appropriate sizing of the absorber at wide range of
operating conditions of TEG dehydration systems. Estimates from simplied approach were found to be
quite reliable and accurate, as evidenced by the comparisons with literature data where the average
absolute deviation percent from reported data in the literature shown to be around 0.05%.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Natural gas
Gas dehydration
Absorber
Triethylene Glycol (TEG)

1. Introduction
Most natural gas producers use TEG (triethylene glycol) to
remove water from the natural gas stream in order to meet the
pipeline quality standards, Natural gas is saturated with water
vapor. Water vapor increases natural gases corrosivity, especially
when acid gases are present [1]. Extensive literature is available on
common gas dehydration systems including solid and liquid
desiccant and refrigeration-based systems[14]. Glycols are very
good absorbers for water because the hydroxyl groups in glycols
form similar associations with water molecules [2]. The contact
between a wet gas and glycol can be made in any gasliquid contact
device. Liquid desiccant systems are very established dehydration
systems. They are relatively simple to operate and maintain and it is
possible to automate them for unmanned operations [2,5]. Natural
gas usually contains water, in liquid or vapor form, at source or as
a result of sweetening with an aqueous solution. Operating experience and thorough engineering have proved that it is necessary to
reduce and control the water content of gas to ensure safe processing and transmission. Removal of the water vapor that exists in
solution in natural gas requires a more complex treatment. This
treatment consists of dehydrating the natural gas, which is

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 61 8 9266 1782; fax: 61 8 9266 2681.

E-mail address: alireza.bahadori@postgrad.curtin.edu.au (A. Bahadori).
0360-5442/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2009.07.047

accomplished by lowering the dewpoint temperature of the gas at

which vapor will condense from the gas. There are several methods
of dehydrating natural gas. The most common of these are liquid
desiccant (glycol) dehydration and solid desiccant dehydration
[6,7].
Among these gas dehydration processes, absorption is the most
common technique, where the water vapor in the gas stream
becomes absorbed in a liquid solvent stream. Glycols are the most
widely used absorption liquids as they approximate the properties
that meet commercial application criteria. Several glycols have
been found suitable for commercial application. TEG is by far the
most common liquid desiccant used in natural gas dehydration as it
exhibits most of the desirable criteria of commercial suitability
[8,9].
Summarizing the ow path of natural gas and TEG in a typical
TEG dehydration unit, wet natural gas rst enters an inlet separator
to remove all liquid hydrocarbons from the gas stream. Then the gas
ows to an absorber (contactor) where it is contacted countercurrently and dried by the lean TEG. TEG also absorbs VOC (volatile
organic compounds) that vaporize with the water in the reboiler.
Dry natural gas existing the absorber passes through a gas/glycol
heat exchanger and then into the sales line. The wet or rich glycol
exiting the absorber ows through a coil in the accumulator where
it is preheated by hot lean glycol. After the glycolglycol heat
exchanger, the rich glycol enters the stripping column and ows
down the packed bed section into the reboiler. Steam generated in

A. Bahadori, H.B. Vuthaluru / Energy 34 (2009) 19101916

Nomenclature
A
B
C
D
Cb
Cp
Db
Dp
G
_
m
N
NOP
R
W
X

rv
rL
j

coefcient
coefcient
coefcient
coefcient
coefcient for bubble cap column
coefcient for packed column
bubble cap Diameter, m
packed column Diameter, m
mass velocity, kg/(m2 h)
mass ow rate, kg/h
number of theoretical stages
number of data points
water removal efciency
water content of gas, mg/(Sm3)
triethylene glycol purity, mass fraction
vapour density, kg/m3
liquid density, kg/m3
TEG circulation rate, TEG, m3/kg H2O

the reboiler strips absorbed water and VOCs out of the glycol as it
rises up the packed bed [6,7]. The water vapor and desorbed natural
gas are vented from the top of the stripper. The hot regenerated
lean glycol ows out of the reboiler into the accumulator (surge
tank) where it is cooled via cross exchange with returning rich
glycol; it is pumped to a glycol/gas heat exchanger and back to the
top of the absorber. Fig. 1 illustrates a typical TEG-Natural Gas
Dehydration System [7].
Traditionally, the glycol absorber (contactor) contains trays that
provide an adequate contact area between the gas and the glycol.
One other option to the trayed TEG contactor is the use of structured packing. Structured packing was developed as an alternative
to random packing to improve mass transfer control by use of
a xed orientation of the transfer surface. The combination of high
gas capacity and reduced height of an equilibrium stage, compared
with trayed contactors, makes the application of structured packing
desirable for both new contactor designs and existing trayed-

Fig. 1. Water removal efciency vs. TEG circulation rate at various TEG concentrations
(Number of theoretical stages, N 1) in comparison with data [3].

1911

contactor capacity upgrades. Hence, the structured packing may

offer potential cost savings over trays [10].
Conversion from equilibrium stages to actual trays can be made
assuming an overall tray efciency of 2530%. For random and
structured packing, HETP (Height of Packing Equivalent to a Theoretical Plate) varies with TEG circulation rate, gas rate, gas density,
and packing characteristics but a value of about 1.5 m is usually
adequate for planning purposes [3].
In addition widening the absorber column and generating nearatmospheric pressure steam are cost-effective options to incorporate environmental objectives into the design of plants such as
absorption systems. [11,12].
In view of the above mentioned possible applications it is
necessary to formulate a simple method to correlate the TEG
circulation rate j Cubic meter of TEG=kg H2 O, TEG purity
(X, mass fraction of TEG), water removal efciency
R Win  Wout =Win , number of equilibrium stages (or height of
packing) and the diameter of contactor.

2. Methodology to develop simple correlation

The proposed simple approach, correlates the TEG circulation
rate, TEG purity, water removal efciency, number of equilibrium
stages (or height of packing) and the diameter of contactor with
ease and computationally less time consuming unlike conventional
simulation approaches involving of rigorous and time consuming
calculations and plotting of graphs etc. A number of commercial
simulation softwares and mathematical models have been reported so far [11]. However, according to the authors knowledge, no
simplied approach exists in the literature for correlating the TEG
circulation rate, TEG purity, water removal efciency, number of
equilibrium stages (or height of packing) and the diameter of
contactor. In view of this necessity, our efforts have been directed at
formulating simple-to-use method that can help engineers for
rapid estimation of the water removal efciency as a function of
TEG circulation rate and TEG concentrations. The correlation
proposed in the present work is simple and unique expression,
which is non-existent in the literature.
The required data to develop this correlation includes the
reported data [3] for the water removal efciency as a function of
TEG circulation rate j Cubic meter of TEG=kg H2 O, and TEG
concentrations (X). In this work, the water removal efciency is
predicted rapidly by proposing a simple correlation. The following
methodology has been applied to develop this correlation:
Firstly, water removal efciencies (R) are correlated as a function of TEG circulation rates j Cubic meter of TEG=kg H2 O,
for different TEG concentrations (X). Then, the calculated coefcients for these polynomials are correlated as a function of TEG
concentrations. The derived polynomials are applied to calculate
new coefcients for equation (2) to predict the water removal
efciency. Tables 1 and 2 show the tuned coefcients for equations (3)(6).
In brief, the following steps are repeated to tune the correlations coefcients.
1. Correlate the water removal efciency as a function of TEG
circulation rate j Cubic meter of TEG=kg H2 O, for
a given TEG concentration (X).
2. Repeat step 1 for other TEG concentrations (X).
3. Correlate corresponding polynomial coefcients, which are
obtained in previous steps versus TEG concentrations (X), So
a,b,c and d coefcients are correlated as a function of
triethylene glycol purity (X), in mass fraction. (See equations
(3)(6)).

1912

A. Bahadori, H.B. Vuthaluru / Energy 34 (2009) 19101916

Table 1
Tuned coefcients for various number of theoretical stages N 1, 1.5 and 2.
Coefcient

Number of theoretical stage (N) 1

Number of theoretical stage (N) 1.5

Number of theoretical stage (N) 2

A1
B1
C1
D1
A2
B2
C2
D2
A3
B3
C3
D3
A4
B4
C4
D4

1.51750000734  105
4.5287844071  105
4.50515787525  105
1.49387377624  105
1.1316270524  104
3.3777842508  104
3.3607087  104
1.11455135941  104
2.4475093673  102
7.3073793526  102
7.2722549748  102
2.41238559437  102
1.62668383278
4.85801145745
4.8359647407
1.6046374352

1.36318190812  104
4.1087635096  104
4.1278286256  104
1.38224984469  104
1.07128653518  103
3.22852999323  103
3.24270631055  103
1.08546448915  103
3.97385136272  101
1.19123690208  102
1.1902390712  102
3.96388087735  101
3.76154014912  101
1.1251621391
1.1218236382
3.7281593611  101

1.27155870163  105
3.78535979271  105
3.75616159919  105
1.24236038846  105
1.16335738747  104
3.46339151846  104
3.43686140202  104
1.1368271474  104
3.3397932662  102
9.94295556513  102
9.8669620555  102
3.2637991018  102
2.856748838
8.50453031755
8.4391925267
2.7914105909

Equation (1) illustrates equation to calculate water removal

efciency as a function of inlet and outlet water content values.
Equation (2) represents the proposed governing equation in
which four coefcients are used to correlate the water removal
efciency as a function of TEG circulation rate and TEG concentration where the relevant coefcients have been reported in
Tables 1 and 2.

W  Wout
R in
Win

(1)

Circulation rate is dened as:


Cubic meter of TEG
kg H2 O

So water removal efciency R Win  Wout =Win is calculated

by equation (2):

ln R a

j2

j3

(2)

Where:

a A1

B1 C1 D1
2 3
X
X
X

(3)

b A2

B2 C2 D2
2 3
X
X
X

(4)

c A3

B3 C3 D3
2 3
X
X
X

(5)

d A4

B4 C4 D4
2 3
X
X
X

(6)

These optimum tuned coefcients help to cover the water

removal efciency for TEG circulation rate and TEG concentration
up to 0.06 cubic meter of TEG over kg of water and 0.9999 mass
fraction respectively. The optimum tuned coefcients given in
Tables 1 and 2 can be retuned quickly according to the proposed
approach if more data are available just by quick readjusting the
tuned coefcients. Typical example is given in the results section to
illustrate the simplicity associated with the use of proposed
correlation for estimating water removal efciencies and contactor
sizing in gas dehydration plants. The correlation proposed in the
present work is novel and unique expression, which is non-existent
in the literature. This is expected to benet process engineers and
making design decisions which could lead to informed decisions on
the selection of appropriate TEG circulation rate and sizing for
a given application in gas industry. Equations (7)(9) are applied to
predict the diameter of contactor (absorber).

Table 2
Tuned coefcients for various number of theoretical stages N 2.5, 3 and 4.
Coefcient

Number of theoretical Stage (N) 2.5

Number of theoretical stage (N) 3

Number of theoretical Stage (N) 4

A1
B1
C1
D1
A2
B2
C2
D2
A3
B3
C3
D3
A4
B4
C4
D4

3.65792068453  104
1.09019787644  105
1.08309529773  105
3.58689467686  104
2.59663054678  103
7.74050225267  103
7.69127114067  103
2.54739956763  103
5.39404855899  101
1.60845322929  102
1.59871276975  102
5.29664543317  101
3.3504537023  101
9.9951682574  101
9.93899634714  101
3.2942824495  101

1.72521576917  106
5.16460399496  106
5.1535751573  106
1.7141869357  106
1.26805051527  105
3.79545983218  105
3.78677891486  105
1.25936959826  105
3.20022637366  103
9.57833625744  103
9.5560237605  103
3.1779138752  103
2.45377077254  101
7.34407625715  101
7.3268643351  101
2.43655884304  101

7.38643001783  107
2.21479386633  108
2.21365910392  108
7.37508239331  107
4.97389685515  106
1.49140002987  107
1.4906312923  107
4.96620947993  106
1.049098764  105
3.14566557041  105
3.14403546725  105
1.04746866096  105
6.77322483974  102
2.030910371004  103
2.02985369484  103
6.7626580778  102

A. Bahadori, H.B. Vuthaluru / Energy 34 (2009) 19101916

1913

0.95
0.9
0.85

0.8
0.75

TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.985

Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.990
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.995
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.999
Data

0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045

0.05

Triethylene Glycol (TEG) Circulation Rate, (Cubic meter of TEG)/(kg H2O)

Fig. 2. Water removal efciency vs. TEG circulation rate at various TEG concentrations (Number of theoretical stages, N 1.5) in comparison with data [3].

G Cb

p
rv rL  rv

(7)

r
4m
Db
Gp

(8)

For structured packing:

s
Cb
 Db
DP
CP

(9)

simple method has an average absolute deviation percent around

0.05% so the estimates are quite reliable and accurate. This simpleto-use approach can be of immense practical value for the engineers to have a quick check on sizing of the absorber for wide range
of operating conditions. The developed method is easier than
existing approaches requiring more complicated and longer
computations. Results demonstrate that a designer may consider
this correlation as an appropriate estimation tool during the design
of a gas dehydration system utilizing TEG solvent.

4. Example
3. Results
Figs. 27 compare the results of new proposed correlation for
predicting the water removal efciency vs. TEG circulation rate at
various TEG concentrations and number of theoretical stages with
some of the reported data [3]. As can be seen, there is a good
agreement between predicted and reported values. The proposed
simple method shows consistently accurate results within the
investigated range for number of theoretical stages up to 4 and
glycol purity up to 0.9999 mass fraction. Table 3 shows the accuracy
and the error analysis of proposed method in terms of average
absolute deviation percent. This table illustrates that the proposed

This typical example illustrates the simplicity associated with

the use of proposed correlation for sizing TEG absorber: 0.85 million Sm3/day of a 0.65 relative density natural gas enters a TEG
contactor at 4100 kPa (abs) and 38  C. Inlet water content is
1436 mg H2O/Sm3 and outlet water content specication is 110 mg
H2O/Sm3. The TEG circulation rate is 25 l TEG/kg H2O. Estimate the
contactor diameter and number of bubble cap trays or height of
structured packing required to meet this requirement. Consider
z 0.92, at T 38  C lean TEG concentration z 99.0 mass%, H2O
Dewpoint 4  C, which is equivalent to a water content of 110 mg
H2O/Sm3 at 4100 kPa (abs).

0.95
0.9
0.85

0.8
0.75

TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.985

Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.990
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.995
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.999
Data

0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045

0.05

Triethylene Glycol (TEG) Circulation Rate, (Cubic meter of TEG)/(kg H2O)

Fig. 3. Water removal efciency vs. TEG circulation rate at various TEG concentrations (Number of theoretical stages, N 2) in comparison with data [3].

1914

A. Bahadori, H.B. Vuthaluru / Energy 34 (2009) 19101916

1
0.98
0.96
0.94

0.92
0.9

TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.985

Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.990
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.995
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.999
Data

0.88
0.86
0.84
0.82
0.8

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045

0.05

0.055

0.06

Triethylene Glycol Circulation Rate,(Cubic meter of TEG)/(kg H2O)

Fig. 4. Water removal efciency vs. TEG circulation rate at various TEG concentrations (Number of theoretical stages, N 2.5) in comparison with data [3].

4.1. Solution

From equations (2)(6) and coefcients from Table 1 (N 2) at

25 l TEG over kg H2O and 99 mass% TEG:

4.1.1. Estimate number of theoretical stages

a 6:1685987  102 from equation 3

Win  Wout
1436  110

0:922
Win
1436

b 1:2677203  103 from equation 4

From equations (2)(6) and coefcients from Table 1 (N 1.5) at

25 l TEG over kg H2O and 99 mass% TEG:

c 6:701629  105 from equation 5

d 3:991632  107 from equation 6

a 4:71903584  102 from equation 3

b 7:8915523  104 from equation 4

Win  Wout
0:9115062770from equation 2
Win

c 3:035954  105 from equation 5

From equations (2)(6) and coefcients from Table 2 (N 2.5) at

25 l TEG over kg H2O and 99 mass% TEG:

d 8:4835929  108 from equation 6

a 3:95145722  102 from equation 3

Win  Wout
0:885from equation 2
Win

b 6:4588395  104 from equation 4

1
0.98
0.96
0.94

TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.985

Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.990
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.995
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.999
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.9995
Data

0.92
0.9
0.88
0.86
0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045

0.05

0.055

0.06

Triethylene Glycol Circulation rate, (Cubic meter of TEG)/(kg H2O)

Fig. 5. Water removal efciency vs. TEG circulation rate at various TEG concentrations (Number of theoretical stages, N 3) in comparison with data [3].

A. Bahadori, H.B. Vuthaluru / Energy 34 (2009) 19101916

1915

0.99

0.98

0.97

TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.995

Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.999
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.9995
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.9999
Data

0.96

0.95

0.94
0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045

0.05

0.055

0.06

Triethylene Glycol Circulation rate,(Cubic meter of TEG)/(kg H2O)

Fig. 6. Water removal efciency vs. TEG circulation rate at various TEG concentrations (Number of theoretical stages, N 4) in comparison with data [3].

1
0.999
0.998
0.997

0.996
0.995
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.999
Data
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.9995
data4
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.9999
data6
TEG Purity, Mass fraction=0.99995
data8

0.994
0.993
0.992
0.991
0.99
0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045

0.05

0.055

0.06

Triethylene Glycol Circulation Rate, (Cubic meter of TEG)/(kg H2O)

Fig. 7. Water removal efciency vs. TEG circulation rate at various TEG concentrations (Number of theoretical stages, N 4) in comparison with data [3].

Table 3
Error analysis and accuracy of proposed method for prediction water removal efciency at various TEG circulation rates and TEG concentrations in comparison with the
reported data [3].
TEG circulation rate,
cubic meter per kg H20

TEG purity in
mass fraction

0.02
0.985
0.05
0.999
0.013
0.99
0.045
0.995
0.06
0.985
0.03
0.99
0.015
0.999
0.013
0.985
0.03
0.99
0.05
0.9995
0.05
0.995
0.03
0.999
0.015
0.9999
0.013
0.999
0.02
0.9999
0.05
0.99995
Average absolute deviation percent (AADP)a
a

Absolute Deviation PercentAADP

1
NOP

Number of
theoretical stages

Proposed correlation results for

Water removal efciency

Reported data
Water removal [3] K

Absolute
deviation percenta

1
1
1.5
1.5
2
2
2
2.5
2.5
2.5
3
3
3
4
4
4

0.7093
0.9086
0.7796
0.9479
0.9211
0.9239
0.9098
0.8749
0.9445
0.9969
0.9772
0.9928
0.9816
0.99035
0.9981
0.99948

0.71
0.91
0.78
0.95
0.921
0.925
0.91
0.875
0.945
0.997
0.977
0.993
0.981
0.9904
0.9982
0.9995

0.1
0.15
0.051
0.22
0.01
0.12
0.02
0.01
0.05
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.06
0.005
0.01
0.002
0.05

PNOP reported
n1 

valuescalculated values

reported values

 100.

1916

A. Bahadori, H.B. Vuthaluru / Energy 34 (2009) 19101916

c 8:34654235  106 from equation 5

d 1:4448143  107 from equation 6
R

Win  Wout
0:9405953from equation 2
Win

So, use N 2.
2 theoretical stages are approximately 8 bubble cap trays at
0.6 m tray spacing.
2 theoretical stages is approximately 3 m of structuring packing.
4.1.2. Size the contactor
Bubble caps, 0.6 m tray spacing, so mass velocity (G) is
calculated:

G Cb

p
rv rL  rv

G 176

p
321119:7  32 32 800 kg=m2 h

Calculate mass ow rate:

:m

0:85  106 Sm3

day

28211

!



1 kmol
0:65  28:97 kg
1 day
23:64
kmol
24h

kg
h

Then, calculate cross sectional area:

m
28211

0:86 m2
G
32800

Bubble cap diameter is calculated:

Db

r
4A

r
4  0:86
1:05 m

p
3:14

Diameter for structured packing will be:

s
r
Cb
176
 Db
 1:05 0:73 m
DP
CP
366
5. Conclusions
The correlation proposed in the present work is novel and
unique expression, which is non-existent in the literature and is
recommended for appropriate sizing of the absorber at wide range
of conditions of TEG dehydration systems. Results illustrate that
a designer may consider this correlation as appropriate estimation

tool during the design of a gas dehydration system utilizing TEG

solvent. The proposed correlation is simple to use, employing basic
algebraic equations that can easily and quickly be solved by
spreadsheet. In addition, the estimates are quite accurate, as evidenced by the comparisons with literature data with average
absolute deviation being around 0.05%. This approach would be
useful in the design of absorbers at wide range of conditions of TEG
dehydration systems. In particular, process and chemical engineers
would nd the proposed method to be of practical value and user
friendly involving no complex expressions with transparent
calculations.

Acknowledgement
The lead author acknowledges the Australian Department of
Education, Science and Training for Endeavour International Postgraduate Research Scholarship (EIPRS), the Ofce of Research &
Development at Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western
Australia for providing Curtin University Postgraduate Research
Scholarship and the State Government of Western Australia for
providing top up scholarship through Western Australian Energy
Research Alliance (WA:ERA). Useful comments from anonymous
reviewers and the editor are also acknowledged which led to
improvements in the original version of the paper.

References
[1] Gandhidasan P, Al-Farayedhi AA, Al-Mubarak AA. Dehydration of natural gas
using solid desiccants. Energy 2001;26:85568.
[2] Karimi A, Abdi MA. Selective dehydration of high-pressure natural gas using
supersonic nozzles. Chemical Engineering and Processing 2009;48:5608.
[3] Gas Processors Suppliers Association. GPSA engineering data book. 12th ed.
Tulsa, OK: Gas Processors Suppliers Association; 2004. Section 16, p. 113.
[4] Bahadori A, Mokhatab S. Simple correlation accurately predicts densities of
glycol solutions. Petroleum Science and Technology 2009;27:32530.
[5] Bahadori A. New model predicts solubility in glycols. Oil Gas J
2007;105(8):505.
[6] Bahadori A. BTEX solubility in TEG. International Gas Engineering and
Management 2006;46(7):157.
[7] Bahadori A. New model calculates solubility of light alkanes in triethylene
glycol. Petroleum Chemistry 2009;49:1719.
[8] Bahadori A, Vuthaluru HB. Explicit numerical method for prediction of
transport properties of aqueous glycol solutions. Journal of the Energy Institute 2009;82:18892.
[9] Bahadori A, Vuthaluru HB, Mokhatab S. Analyzing solubility of acid gas and
light alkanes in triethylene glycol. Journal of Natural Gas Chemistry
2008;17:518.
[10] Kean JA, Turner HM, Price BC. Structured packing proven superior for TEG gas
drying. Oil Gas J 1991;89(38):416.
[11] Bernier E, Marechal F, Samson R. Multi-objective design optimization of
a natural gas combined cycle with carbon dioxide capture in a life cycle
perspective. Energy 2009;. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2009.06.037.
[12] Mofarahi M, Khojasteh Y, Khaledi H, Farahnak A. Design of CO2 absorption
plant for recovery of CO2 from ue gases of gas turbine. Energy 2008;33:
13119.