CHEE3004 Semester 2 2015

Group Project 2
OVERVIEW: Starting in Week 10 your team must use the process equipment design decision making process to
design a new Greenfields Saturates Gas Processing Plant. You should start Project 2 in the tutorial class.
SUBMISSION: Due at 17:00 Friday 30 October. There are two sets of deliverables:
1. Group Deliverables to be uploaded to Blackboard in Project 2 Group Deliverables.
1.1 Brief technical summary including the overall scope of the design project and a brief description of the
key design features of the individual unit operations,
1.2 Blcok Flow Diagram & Process Flow Diagram (PFD) for your teams proposed process design, showing
key mass and energy data where appropriate.
Submit 1.1 and 1.2 in a single PDF document.
2. Individual Deliverables to be uploaded to Blackboard in Project 2 Individual Deliverables. Each student
needs to submit these items for their subunit:
2.1 Technical summary for individual column and heat exchanger(s),
2.2 Distillation column - CHEE3004 Unit Operations Design Decision Making Template including a log of
assumptions,
2.3 Heat exchanger - CHEE3004 Unit Operations Design Decision Making Template including a log of
assumptions,
2.4 P&ID with key control instruments identified for the selected distillation column,
2.5 Supporting calculations/results
2.6 A copy of the final Hysys model(s) for your distillation column.
Submit 2.1-2.5 in a single PDF document. Submit the Hysys model file as a separate file.
ASSESSMENT:
This project accounts for 25% of the course grade. Each student will receive an individual grade with approximate
weightings being 25 % group work and 75 % individual work. The allocation of marks for individual components
and group components of this project are shown in the attached rubric. Your project grade will count towards the
Course criteria grades for A: Process design knowledge and skills, B: Communication and C: Manage your
work and that of your team.
Peer Review. Your work through Project 2 will be reviewed by your teammates using a survey in the final week of
semester. The survey will ask about how each member performed across areas such as team communication
(including listening to others), delivering work on time, quality of work, and leadership of the team. Peer review
surveys will be used by the teaching staff as additional data to assess your performance under course criteria C:
Manage your work and that of your team. Peer review for Project 2 will not be a peer assessment factor used
multiplier of your Project 2 grade.
After Semester 2 results are released, students may ask to view the comments made in these surveys please be
balanced and constructive and ground any feedback with specific examples in any comments you make in the
surveys.

Background
Refco, is intending to construct and operate a new oil refinery in the Gladstone region of Australia. Crude oil from
Australia, Asia, West Africa and the Middle East will be imported for processing into a number of products including
Gasoline (3 Octane grades), Diesel, Jet Fuel, LPG (Propane) & Autogas (mixture of Propane and Butane).
As part of the design team you have been asked to prepare the preliminary design for the Saturates Gas Plant. Refco
have provided a brief process description of what the plant needs to achieve and provided a fully specified feed
stream, product specifications and feed/product valuations.

The Brief
Your team needs to:

Identify the key unit operations required from the process description and any other equipment that may be
required to make the plant work.
Determine the key mass and energy flows in the plant
Develop process designs for the De-ethaniser, De-Propaniser and De-Butaniser subunits.
o Minimum expectation is that one distillation column and one heat exchanger within the chosen
subunit will be designed per team member.
o The distillation column design needs to specify column pressure, number of idea stages, feed stage
location, reboiler and condenser duties and reflux ratio/flowrate in addition to a detailed mass
balance. McCabe-Thiele drawings of your column are also required showing the number of stages and
location of the feed stage.
o The heat exchanger design needs to be to a thermal rating standard (ie Stage 3 calculations required).
Generate an NPV analysis of each subunit using the supplied economic data.
Communicate your findings in a brief design document as specified in the deliverables below

Deliverables
You are asked to produce a concise design document which incorporates:
The group must prepare these items:
1.1 Brief technical summary including the overall scope of the design project and a brief description of the key
design features of the individual unit operations,
1.2 Block Flow Diagram & Process Flow Diagram (PFD) for your teams proposed process design, showing key
mass and energy data where appropriate.
Submit 1.1 and 1.2 in a single PDF document.

Each student in the group must prepare these items for an assigned subunit:
1.1 Technical summary for individual column and heat exchanger(s),
1.2 Distillation column - CHEE3004 Unit Operations Design Decision Making Template including a log of
assumptions,
1.3 Heat exchanger - CHEE3004 Unit Operations Design Decision Making Template including a log of assumptions,
1.4 P&ID with key control instruments identified for the selected distillation column,
1.5 Supporting calculations/results
1.6 A copy of the final Hysys model(s) for your distillation column.
Submit 2.1-2.5 in a single PDF document. Submit the Hysys model file as a separate file.

Resources
Process Description page 3 below
Product Specifications - page 4 below
Marking rubric pages 6-7 below and Blackboard under Assessment - Project 2
Instructions on Generating VLE data with Hysys on Blackboard (Available 8 October 2015)

CHEE3004 Project 2

Page 2 of 7

Process Description

The Saturates Gas Plant receives light hydrocarbons from a range of units in the first half of the refinery including
the Crude Distillation Units, Naphtha Hydrotreaters and Isomerisation Units. Light gases (such as methane and
ethane) are compressed and condensed before being mixed with other light liquid streams. This material is then
contacted with DiEthanolAmine (DEA) in the Amine Treater to scrub out Hydrogen Sulphide before being sent to
the Saturates Gas Plant (SGP).

The SGP consists of three distillation columns:
De-Ethaniser
De-Propaniser
De-Butaniser

The feed, at 60C and 1500 kPa, leaving the Amine Treater, is preheated and enters the De-ethaniser. The
overhead product (mostly Methane and Ethane) is directed to the refinery Fuel Gas system while the bottom
product continues to the De-Propaniser.

The De-Propaniser receives feed from the De-Ethaniser and produces a Liquidfied Propane Gas, LPG, stream
consisting mostly of Propane. The LPG is cooled to 30C before being sent to the LPG Bullets on site. The bottoms
product continues to the De-Butaniser.

The De-Butaniser column removes the Butane components from the feed, producing a De-Butanised product.
Butane stream is cooled to 30C before being sent to the Butane Spheres where it is then drawn upon by a
number of processes. The Butane product can be further split to extract i-Butane which is used in an Alkylation
process with Butene to make a liquid gasoline component. Remaining n-Butane and surplus i-Butane is used in
Autogas (a mixture of Propane and Butane). Butane is also blended into Gasoline products. Approximately 50%
of the n-Butane ends up in Autogas with the remainder being blended to gasoline. The Pentane stream leaving
the bottom of the De-Butaniser is cooled to 30C before being transferred to a sphere where it is used as a
gasoline blend component.

CHEE3004 Project 2

Page 3 of 7

Feed & Product Specifications and Prices

Specifications

Feed Stream (Design Conditions)

Temperature: 60C
Pressure:
1500 kPag
Flowrate:
550 tpd

Typical Composition
Component
Methane
Ethane
Propane
n-Butane
i-Butane
n-Pentane
i-Pentane
n-Hexane

Mass Fraction

0.0028
0.0259
0.0763
0.2004
0.1552
0.2199
0.1244
0.1951

Fuel Gas Stream

Only requirement is to have no condensable materials in the fuel gas system which operates at 650 KPag
and 80C.

LPG Stream
Temperature: 30C (Max)

Composition
Ethane: 2wt% (Max)
Butane: 5wt% (Max)

Butane Stream
Temperature: 30C (Max)

Composition
Propane: 2wt% (Max)
Pentane: 5wt% (Max)

Pentane Stream
Temperature: 30C (Max)

CHEE3004 Project 2

Page 4 of 7

Pricing Data

Products
Feed


Fuel Gas


LPG/Autogas

Gasoline/Pentane Stream

$400/tonne
$440/tonne
$800/tonne
$1500/tonne

Utilities

Steam

Cooling Water
Electricity

$20.73/tonne
$1.54/m3
$40/MWh

Capital Costs

Total Installed Cost of all equipment is estimated to be $750 000 per ideal stage.

30 years

Project Life
Economic Assumptions

Inflation
2.5% per year

Project Life
30 years
Assume capital expenditure occurs all in the first year (year 0) with operating revenue/costs starting in
year 1.

CHEE3004 Project 2

Page 5 of 7

CHEE3004 Project 2 Marking Rubric: Approximate weighting Individual components 75% + Group components 25%

A: Process design knowledge and skills

Total for Criteria

/50

Problem Framing and Metrics (x4)

The purpose, scope, and constraints of the design

problem are clearly stated. Design criteria are
specific, clear, logical, and realistic. Takes into
account the impact of other systems and equipment
items when necessary.

Purpose, scope or constraints are mostly

defined. Design criteria have some minor
contradictions or incorrect choices made
but are still mostly realistic. Objectives
and/or metrics could be more clearly
defined. There is some room for minor
improvements.

There may be some ambiguity and

contradiction in the problem framing.
Design criteria have some contradiction or
incorrect choices made but are still mostly
realistic. Some consideration is given to
other systems but there can be considerable
improvement.

The teams definition of the problem was

absent or vague. Design criteria are
specified without clear justification and are
often wrong and sometimes completely
unrealistic. Other systems have barely been
considered.

Individual Components

Creative design alternatives (x1.5)

A set of feasible, compelling options are fully

described to solve the problem. The options span
the full range of possible options.

A set of feasible options are described. May

lack some minor details to clarify the
designs.

A set of options are described. May lack

some details to clarify the designs.

Only one option described, the options are

not clearly explained or not feasible.

Assess Options, including supporting calculations

(x4)
Key inputs to design are identified with assessment
of uncertainty levels and impact provided.
Calculations are appropriate for the level of detail
required and are essentially correct. Assumptions
and simplifications are correctly applied essentially
all the time.

Key inputs identified but one or two minor
errors in assessment of impact on outputs.
1-3 minor mistakes are evident but these
are not very serious and/or some systems
have been simplified more than is
necessary.

Key inputs identified but minor errors in
assessment of impact on outputs. One or
two significant mistakes are evident and/or
some systems have been simplified more
than is necessary.

1


Key inputs identified but one or two minor
errors in assessment of impact on outputs.
1-3 minor mistakes are evident but these
are not very serious and/or some systems
have been simplified more than is
necessary.

Evaluate Solutions (x 3)

Section 5 complete and based on logical reasoning

with a high level of insight to the impact on other
systems and equipment items in the process.

Section 5 complete and based on logical

reasoning with some insight to the impact
on other systems and equipment items in
the process. Can be minor improvements.

Section 5 complete. Some minor errors in

logical reasoning, or contradictions between
solution and stated objectives. Some
consideration given to other systems but
there can be considerable improvement.

Lacks clear justification of why a solution

was selected. Impact on other systems
barely considered

Individual Components

C: Communication

Total for Criteria

/25

General Writing Style including individual technical

summary (x2.5)

The work is presented in an accurate, concise and

coherent fashion. Scientific and technical style. No
spelling or grammar errors. Appropriate referencing
to a correctly formatted bibliography. Appropriately
acknowledges the work of others.

Some inaccuracies or lack of detail in

presentation of work. Neat, but minor
spelling or grammar errors. Occasional
errors in referencing or bibliography
formatting. Appropriately acknowledges the
work of others.

Some inaccuracies or lack of detail in

presentation of work. Neat, frequent minor
spelling mistakes or grammar errors.
Occasional failures to appropriately
acknowledge the work of others..

Considerable lack of detail in presentation

of work. Many spelling or grammar errors.
many errors in referencing or bibliography
formatting. Occasional failures to
appropriately acknowledge the work of
others.

Drawings: P&ID (x3.75)

Neat and clear drawing describing all the key

elements of the design including equipment items,
control valves, key instrumentation and stream
entering/leaving to other systems. Shows extra
levels of detail than a Credit score. e.g.
appropriately placed isolation valves or other
details.

Neat and clear drawing describing all the

key elements of the design including
equipment items, control valves, key
instrumentation and streams
entering/leaving to other systems

Drawing shows most of the key elements,

but may be missing some details or is poorly
presented.

Drawing missing, incomplete or not legible.

Major errors in the style and content of the
drawing.

Group Components

C: Communication

Total for Criteria

/25

Technical Summary (x3.75)

A clear and complete description of the problem

and recommended solution is provided. The tech
summary describes the relevant features of the
recommended design and justification for selecting
this option over other options. The limitations of
the design process or recommended solution are
described show a deep level of understanding.

A clear and complete description of the

problem and recommended solution is
provided. Minor errors or lacking some
detail about the methods or recommended
solution. Summary may be too long
exceeding the page limit (1-2 pages max).
Recommendations show some insight into
limitations of the design.

The problem and recommended solution

are adequately described. Minor errors or
lacking some detail about the methods or
recommended solution. Summary may be
too long exceeding the page limit (1-2 pages
max). Lacks insight in the recommendations.

Summary is a presented as a summary of

the task, rather than as a summary of the
recommendation. Recommendation is very
unclear or no recommendations made. No
insight into limitations of the design of
recommended solution.

Drawings: BFD & PFD (x2.5)

Neat and clear drawing describing all the overall

process. Complete and feasible material balance of
overall process. Shows extra levels of detail than a
Credit score e.g. temperatures, pressures, basic
sizing (eg duties, # of trays) for equipment.

Neat and clear drawing describing all the

overall process. Complete and feasible
material balance of overall process.

Drawing shows most of the key elements,

but may be missing some

Drawing missing, incomplete or not legible.

details or is poorly presented.

Major errors in the style and content

(including material balance) of the drawing.
1