Boilers & BISCUITS?

SOURDOUGH BISCUITS WERE A STAPLE ON THE FRONTIER...

Sourdough biscuits anchored chuck wagon meals, because biscuits kept
the cowboys fed and on the job. Just as biscuits kept things going on the
frontier, Rentech boilers can be depended upon today. Whatever trail your
company is riding, our boilers can fit. Your inspection of our engineering
and manufacturing facilities will show you why our boilers have earned
a reputation for dependability from Dallas to Dubai. In a wide range of
applications, our boilers improve efficiency, reduce shutdowns and address
environmental issues. Biscuits or boilers, reliability is paramount. Ours will
leave a good taste in your mouth.

Fired Package Boilers / Wasteheat Boilers / Heat Recovery Steam Generators

www.rentechboilers.com Maintenance & Service Strategies / Boiler Repair Services / SCR and CO Systems

BOILERS FOR PEOPLE WHO KNOW AND CARE

5025 E. BUSINESS 20 • ABILENE, TEXAS 79601 • 325.672.3400 • SALES@RENTECHBOILERS.COM
 NOVEMBER 2009

HPIMPACT SPECIALREPORT BONUSREPORT

Methanol rides out PLANT SAFETY WATER MANAGEMENT

economic difficulties AND ENVIRONMENT
New technology
Misguided policies Methods to avoid improves operations
interfere with global fires and accidents for plant water systems
energy market

www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Boilers WELL DONE.
Cowboys enjoyed sizzling, delicious,
mesquite-grilled steaks cooked to order.
They satisfied the heartiest appetite in camp. And boilers
made to order at Rentech satisfy the most demanding
requirements of your particular project. Our custom-designed
boilers will help your plant run more efficiently and safely.
So come to Texas to tour our facilities, and we’ll treat you to
the best steak you’ve ever tasted.

Fired Package Boilers / Wasteheat Boilers / Heat Recovery Steam Generators

www.rentechboilers.com Maintenance & Service Strategies / Boiler Repair Services / SCR and CO Systems

BOILERS FOR PEOPLE WHO KNOW AND CARE ®

5025 E. BUSINESS 20 • ABILENE, TEXAS 79601 • 325.672.3400 • SALES@RENTECHBOILERS.COM
Select 58 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 NOVEMBER 2009 • VOL. 88 NO. 11
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com

SPECIAL REPORT: PLANTY SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT

Cover Industrial clients from around the
35 Prevent storage tank fires
Implementing these safety rules can reduce risk
world participate in one of over 130
customized training courses offered by
TEEX-ESTI. Since 1929, TEEX-ESTI has been
R. Ritchie
renowned for providing quality hands-on,

41 Avoid confusion when performing safety integrity levels

Here’s how to differentiate safety instrumented fuction demand modes
realistic, and safety oriented training to
over 81,000 personnel each year. TEEX is
a member of The Texas A&M University
Y. A. Khalil and H. Cheddie System, one of the largest systems of
technical training and higher education
45 Software tools are never a substitute for competency
Sound practice, experienced-based judgment and teamwork are still
in the US. www.teex.org/fire.

needed for safety engineering success

S. Kozma

49 Requirement engineering and management—

Part 1—safety critical elements identification
Use these guidelines to determine the safety-critical elements and tasks.
Free software modules are available to engineer and manage the requirements HPIMPACT
F.-F. Salimi 17 Methanol industry rides
out economic difficulties
19 How misguided policies
interfere with global
market and future
BONUS REPORT: WATER MANAGEMENT supplies

61 Update management of your cooling water systems

New ‘fit-for-purpose’ biocide program provides broad-spectrum biofilm control
G. Laxton and R. Hernandez-Mena

67 Wastewater treatment: A refinery case study

This refiner used an in-house initiative to troubleshoot plant-wide process water problems
M. Shafique, Z. U. Kirmani, A. Khurshid, N. Alam and N. Ahmed COLUMNS
PROCESS ANALYZERS 9 HPIN RELIABILITY
Feedback from a pump
73 Fine tune accuracy in analytic measurement—Part 2
Follow these
person
recommendations for correct 11 HPINTEGRATION
analyzer calibration VR DAO STRATEGIES
(100) (89) Ebullated-bed Products (74)
SDA at 75%
D. Nordstrom and DAO lift hydrocracker at Installing machine
85% conversion
T. Waters protection systems in
Asphalt (26) hazardous areas
REFINING DEVELOPMENTS Overall conversion on
Unconverted DAO (15) Ural feed: 74%
13 HPIN CONTROL
79 Hydrocracking
solutions squeeze
Page 79 SDA plus residual ebullated-bed
APC for min
maintenance or max
more ULSD from hydrocracking recycle scheme. profit?—Part 2
heavy ends
25 HPI VIEWPOINT
New processing alternatives enable upgrading vacuum residuals into higher-value products
Forecast for process
F. Morel, J. Bonnardot and E. Benazzi safety in the 21st
ENGINEERING CASE HISTORIES century
27 HPI VIEWPOINT
89 Case 53: Electrical faults can cause shaft and gear failures
This technique allows transient torques in geared units to be determined
Ozone destruction
major cause of
T. Sofronas warming!— Part 2
15 HPIN ASSOCIATIONS
Refiners take stock of
the new reality, looking
within and without the
HPI
DEPARTMENTS 94 HPIN WATER
MANAGEMENT
7 HPIN BRIEF • 17 HPIMPACT • 29 HPIN CONSTRUCTION • Are your decisions based
33 HPI CONSTRUCTION BOXSCORE UPDATE • 90 HPI MARKETPLACE • on obtained data?
93 ADVERTISER INDEX
 www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Houston Office: 2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1020, Houston, Texas, 77046 USA
Mailing Address: P. O. Box 2608, Houston, Texas 77252-2608, USA
Phone: +1 (713) 529-4301, Fax: +1 (713) 520-4433
E-mail: editorial@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Publisher Bill Wageneck bill.wageneck@gulfpub.com

EDITORIAL
Editor Les A. Kane
Senior Process Editor Stephany Romanow
Process Editor Tricia Crossey
Reliability/Equipment Editor Heinz P. Bloch
News Editor Billy Thinnes
European Editor Tim Lloyd Wright
Contributing Editor Loraine A. Huchler
Contributing Editor William M. Goble
Contributing Editor Y. Zak Friedman
Contributing Editor ARC Advisory Group (various)
MAGAZINE PRODUCTION
Director—Editorial Production Sheryl Stone
Manager—Editorial Production Chris Valdez
Artist/Illustrator David Weeks
Manager—Advertising Production Cheryl Willis
ADVERTISING SALES
See Sales Offices page 92.
CIRCULATION +1 (713) 520-4440
Director—Circulation Suzanne McGehee
E-mail: circulation@gulfpub.com

SUBSCRIPTIONS
Subscription price (includes both print and digital versions): United
States and Canada, one year $140, two years $230, three years $315.
Outside USA and Canada, one year $195, two years $340, three
years $460, digital format one year $140. Airmail rate outside North
America $175 additional a year. Single copies $25, prepaid.
Because Hydrocarbon Processing is edited specifically to be of greatest
value to people working in this specialized business, subscriptions are
restricted to those engaged in the hydrocarbon processing industry, or
service and supply company personnel connected thereto.
Hydrocarbon Processing is indexed by Applied Science & Technology
Index, by Chemical Abstracts and by Engineering Index Inc. Microfilm
copies available through University Microfilms, International, Ann
Arbor, Mich. The full text of Hydrocarbon Processing is also available
in electronic versions of the Business Periodicals Index.
ARTICLE REPRINTS
If you would like to have a recent article reprinted for an upcoming
conference or for use as a marketing tool, contact us for a price quote.
Articles are reprinted on quality stock with advertisements removed;
options are available for covers and turnaround times. Our minimum
order is a quantity of 100.

For more information about article reprints, call Cheryl Willis at +1

(713) 525-4633 or e-mail EditorialReprints@gulfpub.com

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING (ISSN 0018-8190) is published monthly by Gulf Publishing Co., 2 Greenway Plaza,
Suite 1020, Houston, Texas 77046. Periodicals postage paid at Houston, Texas, and at additional mailing office.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Hydrocarbon Processing, P.O. Box 2608, Houston, Texas 77252.
Copyright © 2009 by Gulf Publishing Co. All rights reserved.
Permission is granted by the copyright owner to libraries and others registered with the Copyright Clearance Center
(CCC) to photocopy any articles herein for the base fee of $3 per copy per page. Payment should be sent directly to
the CCC, 21 Congress St., Salem, Mass. 01970. Copying for other than personal or internal reference use without
express permission is prohibited. Requests for special permission or bulk orders should be addressed to the Editor.
ISSN 0018-8190/01.
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com

GULF PUBLISHING COMPANY

John Royall, President/CEO
Ron Higgins, Vice President
Pamela Harvey, Business Finance Manager
Part of Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC.

Other energy group titles include:

World Oil®
Petroleum Economist
Publication Agreement Number 40034765
Printed in U.S.A

䉳 Select 151 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

 INT ENS E HE AT. A GGR E S S IVE CHE MICALS . E XT R E ME COLD.

WE’RE PUSHING THE

LIMITS OF ENDURANCE.
NOT YOUR PATIENCE.

MATERIAL TECHNOLOGY
ENGINEERED FOR
REFINERIES
THERMICULITE®
835 Spiral Wound Filler

UÊÊ>˜`iÃÊ̅iÊ̜Õ}…iÃÌÊ>««ˆV>̈œ˜Ã
UÊÊ"ÕÌ«iÀvœÀ“ÃÊ}À>«…ˆÌiÊ>˜`ÊwLiÀ
UÊÊ*ÀœÛˆ`iÃÊ̜Ì>ÊvÀii`œ“ÊvÀœ“ʜ݈`>̈œ˜
UÊÊ"vviÀÃÊÌÀÕiʜÕÌ>}i‡Ìœ‡œÕÌ>}iÊ>ÃÃÕÀ>˜Vi
UÊÊ,i`ÕViÃʈ˜Ûi˜ÌœÀÞÊÀiµÕˆÀi“i˜ÌÃ

UR GLOBAL
YO

AS
R
G

K ET DE
P R O VI

log onto:
ALSO AVAILABLE IN: www.flexitallic.com
U 815 Tanged Sheet or call:
U 815 Cut Gaskets US +1 281.604.2400
UÊ845 Flexpro™ (kammprofile) Facing UK +44 (0) 1274 851273

Select 93 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
IÊÓäänÊÀœÃÌÊEÊ-ՏˆÛ>˜Ê œÀ̅Ê
“iÀˆV>˜Ê*Àœ`ÕVÌÊ6>ÕiÊi>`iÀň«ÊœvÊ̅iÊ9i>ÀÊ
Ü>À`Ê,iVˆ«ˆi˜Ì°
 Do you see a ladybug?
We also see an opportunity for industry
to benefit from protecting the environment.
Managers within the industrial sector face the never-ending issue of balancing
business performance and environmental compliance goals. As the world reference
in environmental services, Veolia Environnement helps industry achieve
sustainable objectives through our four core service areas: water services and
technologies, waste services, energy and facility management, and
transportation and logistics.

The environment is our universal challenge.

veolianorthamerica.com
 HPIN BRIEF
BILLY THINNES, NEWS EDITOR

BT@HydrocarbonProcessing.com

BASF recently outlined its Asia-Pacific strategy through the year 2020. ■ The potential
The company aims to grow on average two percentage points faster than the Asia-Pacific
chemical market each year. With expected market growth of 4% to 5% per year, this for natural gas
would double its regional sales by 2020. Under its new strategy, BASF will initially target
five growth industries in the region and it intends to generate 70% of regional sales from The president of BP shared his out-
local production. BASF will also invest €2 billion in the region between 2012 and 2013, look on the role of gas in the future
and aims to create efficiency improvements that are expected to save at least €100 million of energy during a speech at the
annually by 2012. The investment amount includes BASF’s 50% share of the $1.4 billion World Gas Conference in Buenos Aires,
expansion of its integrated chemical production joint venture in Nanjing, China, which Argentina. Tony Hayward said that BP
was approved by the Chinese national government in July 2009. In Chongqing, China, projects the world will need 45% more
BASF is in the planning phase for a 400,000-tpy plant for diphenylmethane diisocyanate, energy in 2030 than it uses today. To
a precursor for polyurethanes. BASF and the Chongqing authorities aim for mechanical meet this increased energy need, Mr.
completion of the plant by the end of 2013 and commercial operation by early 2014. Final Hayward predicted an investment of
approval of the project by Chinese regulators is expected in 2009. $25–$30 trillion. As far as oil fits into
this concept, he remarked that “declin-
The European Commission (EC) is urging industry, academia and gov- ing production from existing fields,
ernment entities to collaborate in developing new low-carbon energy technologies by 2020. coupled with new demand, means
In a recently released proposal, the EC estimates that an additional investment of €50 bil- we’ll have to bring on nearly 50 mil-
lion in energy technology research will be needed over the next 10 years to develop a reason- lion bpd of new production over that
ably priced, low-carbon economy. To reach this goal, it would require tripling the annual time—almost twice the current level
investment in alternative energy in the European Union (EU), from €3 to €8 billion. The of production in the Middle East.”
EC has drawn up technology “roadmaps” which identify key low-carbon technologies
with strong potential in six areas: wind, solar, electricity grids, bioenergy, carbon capture While he acknowledged that alterna-
and storage and sustainable nuclear fission. “Upgrading investment in research in clean tive energy will play a role in address-
technologies is urgent if Europe is to make the road to Copenhagen and beyond cheaper. ing future energy issues, Mr. Hayward
Increasing smart investments in research today is an opportunity to develop new sources of urged a dose of pragmatic realism,
growth, to green our economy and to ensure the EU’s competitiveness when we come out as the transition to a lower carbon
of the crisis,” said Janez Potčnik of the EU's Commission for Science and Research. economy will not happen overnight.
This is due to the sheer scale of the
Significant amounts of greenhouse gases are emitted through the energy industry.
disturbance and/or removal of biocarbons that overlay the oil sands of Alberta, Canada,
according to a recent report from Global Forest Watch. These emissions have not previously Mr. Hayward spoke in optimistic tones
been measured or reported by governments and industry, the report says. The total area of about the potential for natural gas.
natural ecosystems that are planned to be removed by oil sands extraction is 1.6 million According to BP’s Statistical Review of
hectacres and these areas store 579 million tons of biological carbon, mostly in peatlands. World Energy in 2008, proven glob-
As a result, the report says 873 million tons of CO2 may be emitted into the atmosphere al gas reserves reached more than
over the next 100 years under the scenario of full oil sands development. The resulting 6,500 tcf, with enough reserves in
annual average emissions of 8.7 million tons of CO2 will raise the normally reported emis- place to provide the equivalent of 60
sions from the oil sands industry activities. years of consumption at current rates.
He also noted that natural gas was
ASTM International recently released a new specification that fully the only hydrocarbon to increase in
approves the use of gas-to-liquids (GTL) kerosine blends for powering commercial air- consumption in both OECD and non-
craft. The new specification, known as ASTM D7566 or “Aviation turbine fuel containing OECD countries. Further, the number
synthesized hydrocarbons,” approves jet fuel containing up to 50% GTL kerosine for use of countries that import LNG has risen
in civil aviation. The blends will be known as GTL jet fuel. GTL kerosine is one of five from nine in 1999 to 22 today. “Gas
GTL products that will be produced in commercial volumes by the Pearl GTL project, is becoming a global commodity—
currently under construction by Qatar Petroleum and Shell in Ras Laffan, Qatar. The proj- more flexible, more tradable and more
ect will produce around 1 million tpy of GTL kerosine, enough to power a typical com- secure,” he said. “Natural gas has been
mercial airliner for 500 million kilometers when used in a 50% blend to make GTL jet described as a ‘bridge fuel’ to a lower
fuel. Construction of Pearl GTL is planned to be complete around the end of 2010 with carbon future. It can be much more.
project ramp up then taking about 12 months. GTL kerosine is supposed to be available Greater use of natural gas can provide
starting in 2012. The publication of the specification follows two years of research and us with the quickest, most realistic
discussion by the ASTM specification group, a consensus body consisting of producers, path to achieving the largest emissions
equipment manufacturers and consumers of aviation fuel. HP reductions at the lowest cost.” HP

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I7
The Inpro/Seal Company has been in the business of bearing
protection for rotating equipment for 32 years and counting. We
have been supplying bearing protection for the IEEE-841 motors
since they were first introduced to industry. It is only logical that
we would expand into the field of motor shaft current mitigation to
protect motor bearings. The CDR is:

ROBUST Machined entirely out of solid corrosion resistant

and highly conductive bronze, the CDR/MGS is
capable of carrying 12+ continuous amps. They
are made exclusively by the Inpro/Seal Company
in Rock Island, IL, to ensure consistent quality
and same-day shipments when required.

RELIABLE The CDR and MGS (Motor Grounding Seal)

products were developed in our own Research and
Experimentation Laboratory and then extensively
tested and evaluated by professional motor
manufacturing personnel. Our standard guarantee
of unconditional customer satisfaction of product
performance applies. We stand behind our products.

REALISTIC When you order a CDR or MGS from Inpro/Seal,

you are assured of the complete responsibility
for technology and performance from a single
source. We want to earn the right to be your first
choice for complete bearing protection.

For more information visit www.inpro-seal.com/CDR or

contact 800-447-0524 for your Inpro/Seal Representative.
Select 78 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 HPIN RELIABILITY
HEINZ P. BLOCH, RELIABILITY/EQUIPMENT EDITOR

HB@HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Feedback from a pump person

In early 2009, we responded to a reader’s request for data; he
wanted to use it in a site-wide benchmarking project for pump
reliability. The reader was employed at a company location that
encompassed close to 1,000 centrifugal process pumps.
We shared our response in a “Letter to the Editor” in an earlier
issue of HP. In essence, we mentioned that the reader’s company
managers had wanted to know—in the 1980s—why they were
not among “best-of-class” in pump MTBF. At that time, the
shortcomings of their practice of stilt-mounting base plates, “stan-
dardizing” on certain seals and couplings, disregarding specific
lubricant application weaknesses, etc., were pointed out to his
employers. Regrettably, but not totally unexpectedly, pointing
out these and other flaws and impediments to high reliability had
caused defensive reactions.
Additional follow-up correspondence resulted with our reader,
who is to be commended for taking the time to do this type of
networking. He wrote, saying he had often run into the “defensive
thinking” we had described in his company and that, unfortunately,
overbearing pride or presumption can blind us to reality. To quote:
“I have no illusions that this will be a quick-fix situation or
that I would have time to question many of the current pump
installations that we have on site. I am working closely with our
two primary ANSI pump suppliers to look at parts costs and
obsolescence. At the same time, I am doing an overall reliability FIG. 1 Power end (drive-end) of a centrifugal pump, shown here
growth study on all of the pumps at our site. As part of this effort, with a modern bearing housing seal. Note also how the
thrust-bearing cartridge is sized to allow insertion of a
we are developing plans to consolidate our current rebuild-by- steel flinger disc.
parts philosophy and to use a “Power End* Consignment” rebuild
system instead. This is because of several factors, including an
aging workforce with a resultant loss in maintenance expertise or later industry and serious individuals will have to question the
due to retirement. In turn, this has caused us to have a growing premise that pump failures are unavoidable. Meanwhile, there is
number of pumps in the past few years that have experienced no rationale for not investigating and understanding the root-
“sudden death” due to poor overhaul practices. In many cases, causes of pump failures. Next to electric motors, pumps are the
simple things such as not checking bearing housing and seal tol- simplest machine category found in a process plant, and to not
erances have led to failures within days, weeks or a few months. understand a failure cause leads to costly repeat incidents. Sooner
Like many companies, we are in the throes of trying to reduce or later managers must insist on inculcating a loathing for repeat
costs and maintenance manpower pressures in the face of the cur- failures. Repeat failures are the surest sign of an entire workforce
rent economic environment. We also have a number of problems not being trained in root-cause failure analysis.
with older pumps becoming obsolete, to the point that it is less Granted that, given the reader’s situation, his resorting to
expensive to buy a new pump as opposed to buying the parts to power-end rebuilds may be a step in the right direction. But it
rebuild the existing pump. Additionally, the older pumps just will not cure underlying weaknesses such as pipe stress, or base
don’t incorporate many of the reliability upgrades that now come plate support deficiencies, or using 30-year-old bearing housing
standard with the new-design pumps available.” sealing technology, or oil rings instead of flinger discs and a host
The reader’s observations are undoubtedly correct. However, of other causal possibilities. HP
for the edification of our readers, HP would like to add that there
is one thing that’s less expensive than changing out an entire
pump: It’s to take steps to avoid repair incidents altogether. Sooner The author is HP’s Reliability/Equipment Editor. A practicing engineer and ASME
Fellow with close to 50 years of industrial experience, he advises process plants on
maintenance cost-reduction and reliability upgrade issues. Ten of his 17 textbooks
* A “power end” is the non-hydraulic portion of a centrifugal pump (Fig. 1).
on machinery reliability improvement subjects are still in print and updated editions
We elected to show it here with an advanced rotating labyrinth seal upgrade have been released as recently as 2009.
(LabTecta, TM).

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I9
INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES
PROVEN RESULTS
+##2',%r7-30r20#2',%r!&**#,%#1

Select 86 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 HPINTEGRATION STRATEGIES
WIL CHIN, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR
wchin@arcweb.com
Installing machine protection systems in hazardous areas
The plant asset management (PAM) market for production
assets, which includes protection and prediction solutions, has spread
from traditional turbomachinery to virtually every asset essential for
efficient production. ARC Advisory Group’s recently released PAM
study pegged the market for PAM for production assets at more than
$1.4B in 2008 and expects this to be one of the faster-growing auto-
mation investments through 2013. The study identified the growing
need for integrated predictive health solutions to complement the
core protection functionality required for high-end equipment.
Machinery protection systems have been a common sight in
the HPI and other heavy process industries ever since the intro-
duction of sophisticated high-value turbomachinery. These sys-
tems consist of many components, including software, intrinsi-
cally safe (IS) barriers and sensors that require a large nest of
wires that connect to a bank of rack-mounted electronic control
equipment, often located in environmentally protected rooms or
the plant control room.
Most legacy machinery protection systems installed in exist-
ing plants have point-to-point connections that require as many
as eight or more separate wiring runs between plant hazardous
and safe areas. As plants increase in size, every inch of free space
for new components has long since been filled with overloaded
cable trays. This makes upgrading to new equipment of any kind
increasingly difficult, since there simply is no space. Even replacing
older equipment with newer units is a chore due to the increasing
probability of damaging equipment and connections adjacent to
or close to the slot being worked on.
Designed to meet the highest reliability standards for protection
systems, particularly API-670, legacy machinery protection systems
have previously resisted the inclusion of IS communications net-
works, despite their widespread use in the process industries. And
unlike PAM systems for other classes of process assets, little in the
way of predictive asset management functionality was included in
these solutions. Predictive technologies provide an alert well before
a protection system shutdown is required, providing operators with
sufficient warning to take action to prevent the economic conse-
quences of an abrupt failure and shutdown.
These and other reasons prompted SKF Reliability Systems (San
Diego, California) to introduce a compact, locally mounted, IS
integrated protection and predictive asset health solution for plant
machinery (Fig. 1) The company, no stranger to PAM solutions for
production assets, provides PAM hardware, software and services
that aimed at improving asset reliability and availability. SKF has
partnered with IS interface equipment leader, Pepper+Fuchs, to
develop a field-mounted IS protection and predictive condition
monitoring solution suitable for installation close to the equipment
it protects. The SKF Multilog DMx system accepts inputs from a
multitude of sensors that measure vibration, acceleration, velocity,
displacement and other process variables, and its digital commu-
nication requires only a single- or dual-pair cable set, reducing
FIG. 1 In addition to highly reliable machinery protection
functionality, SKF’s Multilog DMx solution provides users
with critical equipment diagnostic information that can be
used to predict and avoid problems, even for equipment
located in hazardous environments requiring intrinsic safety.
installation costs and startup time. Field installation in hazardous
areas, particularly for legacy equipment retrofits, is simplified and
can reduce the number of cabinets and isolation barriers.
Successful applications include critical and noncritical turbo-
machinery and pumps in pipelines, refineries, chemical and water
and wastewater plants. End users value the low installed cost and
its ability to quickly migrate old legacy systems to DMx’s dis-
tributed architecture close to the machinery, without disrupting
plant operation. The IS design allows installation without special
authorization, and the DMx has garnered a number of agency
approvals, including ATEX, CE, UL and others. This validates its
applicability for both hazardous and conventional environments.
Additionally, the ability to use the RS-485 signal to connect
operators in the control room to the intelligence embedded in
the DMx provides needed insight into equipment health that was
previously unavailable using legacy systems.
The configuration and data display software provides intuitive
management of transducers, equipment health data and alarms.
The interface can access scalar value, time-waveform, FFT and
orbit data from a multitude of DMx monitor channels. Users can
also deploy SKF’s @ptitude Monitoring Suite for additional data
analysis, as needed. HP
The author leads the field device consulting team at ARC covering process mea-
surement technologies. He is responsible for pressure, flow, level, temperature and
related markets. Mr. Chin also covers field device communication protocols, plant
asset management (PAM) and laboratory information management systems (LIMS).
He has nearly 30 years’ experience in the areas of sales management, product mar-
keting and engineering in industrial field instruments.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 11
Select 60 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

PIERRE R. LATOUR, GUEST COLUMNIST
clifftent@hotmail.com
APC for min maintenance or max profit?—Part 2
While I have promoted proper control system performance
indicators18–25 since 1964, like Dr. Y. Zak Friedman,1 I also am
aware of some deeper problems with realizing its full commercial
potential.3,8–10,17,26 Friedman once publically claimed Clifftent24
was no panacea,27 without seeing it in action. Moreover, he
charged, without any basis, that Clifftent, a mathematical pro-
cedure, could lead to burning down a furnace. My experience is
proper deployment of Clifftent to operate the HPI would mitigate
such events26 because it mandates careful modeling of the financial
consequences of exceeding properly set limits like burning down
furnaces, so operators would be using better information and
models to make appropriate setpoint decisions for risky tradeoffs.
Determining such effects rather than ignoring them is the main
idea of science, mathematics and engineering. I refrain from blam-
ing MVC, PID, LP, SQC, feed-forward, inferentials, six-sigma,
statistics, calculus or mathematics for burning down furnaces.
I have published practical examples of using Clifftent to calcu-
late APC benefits many times for real applications6,7,18–25,28 since
the low-sulfur fuel oil example24 in HP, December 1996. I have
a library of commercial oil refinery, olefin, aromatics, polymer,
synfuels, chemicals and gas processing applications now. Every
single one is a success because it determines a profit improvement
(sometimes small) and how to achieve it. I recently showed23 how to
quantify the value of Friedman’s alkylation control approach.29
As for how Clifftent works, I have published that
too6,7,18,19,24,25,28 and will repeat it here. Every controlled vari-
able (CV ) has a risky profit tradeoff. Calculus and statistics teach
integration of the product of a data frequency distribution with
its associated profit function gives its average (expected value)
profit. Repeated integrations with incremented data means give
the average profit profile vs. data mean; a smooth hill (for any
standard deviation >0). It’s easy to locate the hilltop max profit
and corresponding optimum data mean. That’s how all HPI
setpoints, limits, targets and specs are set now, although with less
rigor. That's also how CV /KPI profit meters can be built.19 The
HPI received the panacea in 1996.24
A Canadian University ChE Department included deter-
mining dynamic system financial performance, Clifftent, in
its process control course in September 2009. Hopefully this
rekindled academic interest in process control and research on
building Clifftent models for integrated alarm management,
process maintenance and safety. Once a set of candidate CV s
and related manipulated variables (MV s) are established and
the process operation and economics are known, good process
control engineering practice3,6,7,16–19,21–25,28 calls for determining
the economic sensitivity of each CV, their Clifftents and a vari-
ance reduction claim for each control system design, providing
the appropriate setpoint determination method and benefit for
that variance reduction. Then the process control engineer is in a
solid position to design, maintain and improve the instruments
HPIN CONTROL
and control system, the process operator is in a sound position to
use it and operating company management understands its role
and value. They finally have a chemical engineering method for
operation that is pragmatic, prudent and profitable.
In fact, I claim had one or two computer-integrated manufactur-
ing (CIM) solution suppliers adopted performance-based licensing
when it was commercialized in the mid-1990s,2–17,24,25 the land-
scape of the APC and CIM business in the HPI today would be
healthier, more significant and more profitable for those suppliers
and their operating company partners. And much misguided effort
and expense would have been avoided. Friedman would certainly not
be proposing in a 2009 HP editorial forgoing 30% of APC perfor-
mance, worth >$0.30/bbl crude refined, to reduce APC maintenance
costs. It would not be pragmatic, prudent or profitable.
Dr Y. Zak Friedman’s HPIn Control editorials continue to
serve the HPI. I hope I can add to them on occasion. HP
LITERATURE CITED
18
Latour, P. R., “Why Invest in PROCESS CONTROL?”, CONTROL, Vol.
XV, n5, May 2002, pp. 41–46.
19 Latour, P. R., “Why tune control loops? Why make control loops?”, edito-
rial guest columnist, Hydrocarbon Processing, V81, n9, September 2002, pp.
11–12.
20 McMahon, T. K., (& P. R. Latour), “CLIFFTENT For Process Optimization,”
CONTROL, V17, n12, December 2004, p. 66.
21 Latour, P. R., “Decisions about risk reduction,” Letter to Editor, Hydrocarbon
Processing, V80, n6, June 2001, p. 39.
22 Latour, P. R., “Quantifying financial values”, HP In Control Guest Columnist,
Hydrocarbon Processing, V80, n7, July 2001, pp. 13–14.
23 Latour, P. R., “Align alkylation separation to economics,” HPIn Control
Editorial, Hydrocarbon Processing, V88, n1, January 2009, p. 98.
24 Latour, P. R., “Process control: CLIFFTENT shows it’s more profitable than
expected,” Hydrocarbon Processing, V75, n12, December 1996, pp. 75–80.
Republished in Kane, Les, Ed, Advanced Process Control and Information
Systems for the Process Industries, Gulf Publishing, Co, 1999, pp. 31–37.
25 Latour, P. R., “CLIFFTENT: Determining Full Financial Benefit from
Improved Dynamic Performance,” Paper C01, Third International Conference
on Foundations of Computer-Aided Process Operations, Snowbird, Utah,
July 5–10, 1998. Proceedings published in AIChE Symposium Series No.
320, V94, 1998, pp. 297–302.
26 Baker, J. A. et al, “The Report of The BP U.S. Refineries Independent Safety
Review Panel,” January 2007.
27 Friedman, Y. Z., (& G. D. Martin, P. R. Latour), “APC Survey,” Exchange of
Letters to the Editor, Hydrocarbon Processing, V85, n10, October 2006, pp.
45-46 and V85, n11, November 2006, pp. 45-52.
28 Latour, P. R., “Align Olefin Operations to Economics – Clifftent optimizes
setpoints,” presented at 2007 Spring AIChE Meeting Ethylene Producers
Conference, Houston, Texas, April 23, 2007. Published in Conference
Proceedings CD.
29 Friedman, Y. Z., “Alkylation product separation control,” HPIn Control
editorial, Hydrocarbon Processing, V87, n9, September 2008, p. 178.
The author, president of CLIFFTENT Inc., is an independent consulting chemical
engineer specializing in identifying, capturing and sustaining measurable financial
value from HPI dynamic process control, IT and CIM solutions (CLIFFTENT) using
performance-based shared risk–shared reward (SR2) technology licensing.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 13
Select 59 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

BILLY THINNES, NEWS EDITOR
bt@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Refiners take stock of the new reality,
looking within and without the HPI
Last month, the NPRA convened its
yearly technical forum in Fort Worth,
Texas. Papers were presented, introduc-
tions were made and business was done.
As attendees milled around the anterooms
of the new downtown Omni Hotel and
hospitality suites percolated with activity,
Hydrocarbon Processing monitored it all
with an understated efficiency.
Transportation fuels outlook. Jeff
Morris, CEO of Alon USA, offered a key-
note address on fuels and made it clear
that refiners are completely intertwined
with the automotive industry.
“Before we can have a view on the
future of transportation fuels, we must
first have a view on the future of vehicles,”
Mr. Morris said. “What we need to think
about as an industry is if are we going into
a new normal or reverting to the vehicle
buying habits of the past.”
Looking at an overview of the automo-
tive industry and why things are the way
they are with current vehicle manufacture
trends, Mr. Morris said, “The automak-
ers are going to meet CAFE standards and
want to be the greenest out there, but they
don’t have any money to retool so they are
pushing what they’ve got. The Europeans
are pushing diesel. The Asians have the
hybrids and they are pushing them. Detroit,
unfortunately, did neither, so they went the
ethanol route and that didn’t work, so now
they are going to a plug-in hybrid, which
might be the right approach.”
Refiners can address the loss in gaso-
line consumption by turning to distil-
lates. Mr. Morris cited statistical data that
would indicate that as industrial produc-
tion improves, distillate demand should
improve. Thus, as the US and the rest of
the world slowly emerge from the current
recession, diesel demand will be back.
Experts from the EIA, to Purvin and Gertz
suggest that from 2015 to 2030, there is
the possibility for a net gain of 1 million
barrels per day of distillate consumption.
HPIN ASSOCIATIONS
Jeff Morris of Alon USA addressed the future
of transportation fuels during the 2009 NPRA
Q&A and Technology Forum.
“What that means is that we have to
retool a million barrels a day of our pro-
duction capacity from gas to diesel,” Mr.
Morris said.
A report from the Argonne National
Labs analyzing fuel efficiency and green-
house gas emissions on a well-to-wheels
basis per month shows that, if you want to
improve fuel efficiency for the US fleet by
2020, clean diesel is 20% better and plug-
in hybrids are 55% better. But for the plug-
ins, this assumes a 40-mile range and an
average commute of less than 40 miles.
Still, crude oil is going to be impor-
tant for global transportation. “Crude oil
will continue to be the basic feedstock for
transportation fuels,” he said.
Legislative overview. Greg Scott,
the new executive vice president and gen-
eral counsel for the NPRA, delved into the
NPRA’s key public policy areas in Wash-
ington, DC, which are federal climate
change legislation; fuel regulations like
renewable fuel standards (RFS2), E15 and
low carbon fuel standards (LCFS); taxes;
chemical facility anti-terrorism standards
(CFATS); and reform of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act (TSCA).
Regarding the cap and trade legisla-
tion that passed the US House in June,
Mr. Scott pointed out that refiners make
up 36–38% of the inventory of CO 2
emissions in any given year. “And yet we
received from the House, in a fascinating
political dynamic, only about 2¼% of the
allowances in year one and that declines
over time,” he said.
Mr. Scott continued this train of
thought by pointing out that electric-
ity generators are responsible for 35%
of overall US emissions and yet they
received a 38% allowance of credits. He
thinks rationale for this credit imbalance
is because House members did not want
the electricity interests to pass the costs
through to consumers and then have the
consumers react unfavorably, thereby cre-
ating a political backlash.
“There is something wrong here when
they are giving free allowances to utilities
and no allowances to the oil companies
and producers of motor fuel for consumer
emissions,” Mr. Scott said.
Plant automation session. Dustin
Beebe and Darwin Logerot of Pro-
Sys discussed optimization and carbon
caps. They pointed out that CO 2 lim-
its will begin for refineries in 2014. Two
approaches to reducing CO2 emissions
were discussed: advanced process control
(APC) and CO2 sequestration.
APC, using multivariable predictive
control (MPC), was cited as the most
cost-effective method to increase plant
efficiency and thus reduce emissions. The
problem with current APC implementa-
tion is that it is typically applied to indi-
vidual process units with little coordina-
tion between process units. A solution is
real-time optimization (RTO). RTO has
been discussed for several years but there
are few installations because the models
weren’t accurate enough and implemen-
tation was too expensive to yield a good
return on investment (ROI). However,
with improved models running on lower-
cost computer hardware, the economics of
implementing RTO is improving. HP
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 15
Select 73 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 HPIMPACT
BILLY THINNES, NEWS EDITOR

BT@HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Methanol industry rides mostly imported from the US. Recently, onstream in 2009 and 1010. Most of this
out economic difficulties Chile has become a major MTBE consumer. new capacity is located in the ME. China
In SA, MeOH capacity is approaching 10 is forecast to add 5 MM mtons by 2013;
The global MeOH market has more MM mtons. A new MeOH facility in Ven- however, commissioning of the new capac-
capacity than demand, according to remarks ezuela is scheduled for startup during the ity can be delayed.
made by Jim Jordan at the 2009 Methanol first half of 2010. Chile has approximately Data associated with the global reces-
Forum in Houston, Texas. A gap exists 3.8 MM mtons of capacity. Unfortunately, sion and the recent, ongoing capacity
between global supply and demand and a Chile lacks sufficient natural gas supplies to expansion suggests that MeOH producers
number of factors are contributing to the operate all available capacity. should be going out of business at a record
present situation. Interestingly, the global In North America (NA), MeOH pace. Operating rates of 70% or less nor-
supply and demand graph indicates a very demand has declined substantially in mally spell disaster for most commodities.
long MeOH market, especially during 2009 response to the removal of MTBE from Nevertheless, MeOH prices around 75¢/
and 2010 (Fig. 1). Demand is forecast to the gasoline blending pool. Formaldehyde gal to 80¢/gal ($249–$266/metric ton) are
increase in 2009, even though two major has always been the mainstay for MeOh providing reasonable returns for most pro-
consuming regions (US and Europe) have demand in NA. Unfortunately, demand for ducers. Even most Chinese plants can run
seen sharp declines in demand due to the this petrochemical was severely impacted profitably at present prices.
recession. In contrast, MeOH demand in by the current recession. Formaldehyde In China, several plants have not oper-
China has overshadowed all recession-driven demand is closely linked to the housing ated in 2009. Low prices earlier this year
losses in other regions this year. industry and recent low housing starts have forced many plants to shut down at a time
Looking ahead, the growing alternative had a negative impact on formaldehyde when China’s MeOH demand was actually
fuels market will drive most of the new demand. Losses in the MTBE market and growing. Imports filled the gap between
MeOH demand in 2011–2013. a downturn in formaldehyde demand has domestic production and demand.
caused several US MeOH plants to close. China’s MeOH capacity is growing,
The Middle East. The Middle East (ME) but so is demand. In 2005, China’s MeOH
is the “bread-basket” for the global MeOH New capacity. Approximately 10 to demand and capacity was 4 MM mton. At
industry. When Africa is included, MeOH 15 MM mtons of new MeOH capacity is present, China’s annual MeOH demand
capacity in this region exceeds 15 milllion approved or under construction to come will reach 15 MM mton. In a high-price
metric tons (MM mtons). Yet, environment, the major portion
the ME only consumes about 70 of this demand will be produced
3 MM mtons, most of which is internally, but the longer term
World capacity
for methyl tertiary butyl ether pattern remains unclear.
60
(MTBE). The rest of the regional
MeOH production is exported, Pricing trends. MeOH
MeOH demand, million metric tons

with a significant portion as 50 prices have risen and should

MTBE. The ME’s MTBE pro-
duction is forecast to increase
over the next 10 years in reac-
tion to lower MTBE production
in the US.
The Americas. Similar to the
ME, South America (SA), includ-
ing the Caribbean, remains a sig-
nificant MeOH producer but
not a large consumer. In the late
1980s, most MeOH capacity was
built in Chile, Trinidad and Ven-
ezuela, but that trend is chang-
ing. Argentina exports sizeable
amounts of biodiesel to Europe
and is increasing biodiesel usage as
a fuel substitute. MTBE contin-
ues to be produced and consumed
in Venezuela. Mexico consumes a
significant volume of MTBE—
exceed $250/metric ton. This
40 will stimulate US production.
Yet, MeOH is an energy prod-
30
uct and will ultimately follow
energy prices. With MeOH
moving more and more directly
20 into energy applications, this
becomes even more evident. The
10 global MeOH market now has
more capacity than is required to
0 meet present demand, with addi-
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010E 2011E 2012E 2013E tional capacity coming onstream.
Others Methanethiol (methyl mercaptan)
As global economies recover and
Methanol-to-Olefins Dimethyl terephthalate (DMT) MeOH demand increases not
Fuel Cells Methyl methacrylate only in China, but globally, the
Alternative fuels Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) overhang of supply will decrease.
Methyl chloride (Chloromethane) Acetic acid
Methylamines Formaldehyde
Until then (probably through at
least 2011 and possibly 2012),
FIG. 1 World MeOH demand and capacity, 2006–2013. price volatility for MeOH will
continue. —Stephany Romanow
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 17
Where do You Want to be
on the Performance Curve?

P = People
M= Methodologies
T = Technologies

Your Company + KBC Produces NextGen Performancen

We collaborate with our clients to create unique solutions to their specific
challenges. Some of these challenges may include:
Strategic Challenges Operating Challenges
U Effective Business Strategy/Decisions U Improved Organisational Effectiveness
U Increased Return on Investments U Reduced Maintenance Costs
U Enhanced Returns on U Improved Energy Efficiency
Acquisitions/Divestitures U Behaviour-based
U Reduced Risk (Strategic, Capital, Other) Reliability/Performance
Market Challenges U Improved Safety Performance For more information on how
U Enhanced Yields U Operational Risk Management KBC can help you achieve
U Effective Responses to Crude/Feedstock Environmental Challenges NextGen Performance,
and Product Markets U Reduced Emissions contact us at:
U Improved Financial Performance U Enhanced Compliance AMERICAS +1 281 293 8200
U Market Risk Management
EMEA +44 (0)1932 242424
For 30 years, KBC consultants have provided independent advice and expertise
ASIA +65 6735 5488
to enable leading companies in the global energy business and other processing
industries manage risk and achieve dramatic performance improvements. answers@kbcat.com U www.kbcat.com
Select 82 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 HPIMPACT
How misguided policies 350,000
interfere with global 300,000
Top 25 reserves oil, NGL and natural gas Majors

market and future 250,000

supplies
200,000

MMboe
Rice University convened its 12th 150,000
annual global engineering and construc-
tion forum in mid-September. One of the 100,000
featured speakers was Dr. Michael Econo- 50,000
mides, a professor of chemical and bimo-
lecular engineering in the Cullen College of 0

Aramco (Saudi)
NIOC (Iran)
INOC (Iraq)
QP (Qatar)
Gazprom
(Russia)
KPC (Kuwait)
PDV
(Venezuela)
Adnoc (Abu
Dhabi)
NNPC (Nigeria)
Sonatrach
(Algeria)
Libya NOC
CNPC (China)
Petronas
(Malaysia)
Exxon Mobil
Rosneft
(Russia)
BP
Turkmengas
Lukoil
Pemex
(Mexico)
Shell
Chevron
Petrobras
ConocoPhillips
Total
Surgutneftegas
Engineering at the University of Houston.
Dr. Economides gave an engaging presen-
tation on how misguided policies interfere
with global market and future supplies. Source: Energy Intelligence Group 2008
Dr. Economides began his remarks by
offering an overview of the global energy FIG. 2 Top 25 global reserves for oil, NGL and natural gas.
market, touching on energy sources from
hydrocarbons to solar power. He said that
international demand decline for natural gas Climate change. Regarding climate Axis of energy militants. Dr. Econo-
has been larger than anticipated. Because change, he said it is highly politicized, with mides included Iran, Venezuela, Russia, Iraq
of LNG developments in Qatar, Egypt and everyone having an opinion on what to do, and China in his proposed axis of energy
Sakhalin 2, there could be 10 Bcf/d of excess wondering if anything at all can be done and militants. In Russia’s case, he pointed out that
natural gas supply. This would create con- what the cost might be. He said there is some- with the crash in oil prices, the bright spot is
siderable impact on prices in Europe and times confusion, at times deliberate, between waning in the Russian economy. He also sees
the US, he said. global warming and man-made effects. Dr. a “re-Sovietization” happening in the county,
A major geopolitical problem facing the Economides remarked that it is “prepos- with corruption running rampant, the press
world currently is that oil and gas reserves are terous” to believe that “science is all in” in under lock down and a cooling investment
not easily accessible by independent oil com- relation to global warming. He is offering climate. Dr. Economides believes that pro-
panies (IOCs). These companies only have $10,000 for one peer-reviewed paper showing duction in Russia is bound to decline. He
access to 7% of the world’s reserves (Fig.2). causality between CO2 and increased tem- also discussed Russia’s energy re-centraliza-
perature, because he believes no link exists. tion, with the central government running
The new energy economy. As He then cited a study in which two roughshod over private companies like BP,
society moved from the 1800s to pres- South Florida scientists assert that warm- Shell, Yukos and Sibneft. Finally, Dr. Econo-
ent day, energy sources and carbon out- ing ocean temperatures actually translate to mides points to indicators showing Russia
put changed, Dr. Economides said. In the fewer Atlantic hurricanes menacing the US. is moving to control even more of Europe’s
1800s, humans were using wood, which Their argument is that higher ocean surface natural gas market, a market it already domi-
had high carbon content. As time went temperatures increase wind shear, and wind nates. Gazprom provides Europe with over
on, the transfer was made to coal and oil shear makes it difficult for large storms to 25% of its natural gas, and a series of business
which can be classified as having medium maintain their integrity. deals with Iran and Libya point to efforts to
carbon content. Now, society is increase this share.
evolving to natural gas (low-car- 8
bon content) and the envisioned China’s oil production and consumption China. The big question that has
Production and consumption, million bpd

hydrogen solution would have 7 yet to be answered is if China can

no carbon content.
The professor then delved into
a series of slides showing news
stories discussing new energy pos-
sibilities. These included extract-
ing hydrogen from vegetable
matter by heating the vegetable
matter to 437°F, golf resorts using
hydrogen fuel cells, cattle brains
being turned into biofuels and
robotic lawnmowers.
“There are no alternatives
to hydrocarbon energy sources
in the foreseeable future,” Dr.
Economides said.
Production keep its lights on. Energy very well
6 Consumption
could be China’s choke point, Dr.
5 Economides said. Since the early
1990s, China’s consumption of
4 oil has far outweighed its produc-
3 tion, as show in Fig. 3. To make
up that growing difference, China
2 has become an assertive, if not
1
belligerent player in cutting deals
for oil with countries like Sudan,
0 Nigeria, Canada and Venezuela.
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year
In conjunction with those deals,
Dr. Economides believes that
FIG. 3 China’s oil production and consumption, 1980–2010. China’s energy future is directly
linked to Russia. HP
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 19
Select 99 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

SELECTED BY HYDROCARBON PROCESSING EDITORS
editorial@gulfpub.com
Sustainable hydrogen process
announced
The Linde Group is developing an inno-
vative process for the sustainable hydrogen
production from biogenic raw materials.
Hydromotive GmbH, a subsidiary of The
Linde Group, plans to build a demonstration
plant at the chemical site in Leuna, Germany,
which will produce hydrogen from glycer-
ine—a byproduct of biodiesel production.
Promising opportunities for the sustain-
able cost-effective hydrogen production
are possible by using biogenic raw materi-
als. The new technology can provide an
innovative step toward low-emission energy
supply using hydrogen.
The plant will reprocess, pyrolyse and
reform raw glycerine; the facility is fore-
cast to come onstream in mid-2010. This
facility will produce a hydrogen-rich gas,
which will be fed to the existing Leuna II
hydrogen plant for the purification and
liquefaction. The “green” liquefied hydro-
gen produced will initially be used in Ger-
man centers such as Berlin and Hamburg
where hydrogen is distributed as a trans-
portation fuel.
Due to high hydrogen content, raw glyc-
erine, produced from biodiesel manufac-
turing, is particularly suited for hydrogen
production. Biogenically produced glyc-
erine will not compete with food produc-
tion and is available all year round. As the
world’s largest manufacturer of hydrogen
plants, Linde has access to the full-range of
technology required for using hydrogen as
an energy carrier.
Select 1 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Specialty heat exchanger
wins award
Alfa Laval has a new technology that
can increase efficiency and reduce energy
consumption for chemical production with
the first plate reactor, called ART PR49.
This development implies a revolutionary
technology shift for chemical production
processing methodology.
Competitive pressure and environ-
mental legislation are forcing the chemical
industries to find new production tech-
niques for safer, cleaner and more efficient
means of manufacturing. Alfa Laval’s latest
innovation changes one of the most essen-
tial organic chemical processes—the reac-
tion between two or more substances.
The ART PR49 combines the proper-
ties of a chemical reactor with those of a
plate-heat exchanger. Traditionally, you cre-
ate a reaction by adding one substance to
another. The reaction can generate intense
and damaging heat. To minimize the nega-
tive impacts, the reacting substance is either
diluted or added over a longer time. The
new plate reactor reduces the time needed,
and the reaction can be performed with
higher concentrations. The continuous flow
of reactants creates optimal reaction condi-
tions, and the plate technology removes
any excess heat. Alfa Laval’s new continu-
ous plate reactor ART PR49 was shown
during the international process industry
exhibition ACHEMA 2009, and won the
“Process Innovation Award.”
Select 2 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
New elastomers for film
applications released
ExxonMobil Chemical has introduced
three new grades of Vistamaxx specialty elas-
tomers, which exhibit a very low gel count,
making them ideal for high-performance
film and fiber applications. Like all Vista-
maxx specialty elastomers, these grades can
be blended with polyethylene (PE) and poly-
propylene (PP), or used as interfacing layers
with PE and PP structures, to deliver excel-
lent tie layer and lamination performance.
Offering very low seal-initiation temper-
atures combined with high seal strength,
they are ideal for use as a sealing layer in
coextruded structures. Easy to process and
available as free-flowing pellets, Vistamaxx
3020FL, Vistamaxx 3980FL and Vistamaxx
6102FL elastomers also offer good optical
properties and good chemical resistance.
Additionally, the melt flow and eth-
ylene co-monomer content of the Vis-
As HP editors, we hear about new products,
patents, software, processes, services, etc.,
that are true industry innovations—a cut
above the typical product offerings. This sec-
tion enables us to highlight these significant
developments. For more information from
these companies, please go to our Website
at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/rs and
select the reader service number.
HPINNOVATIONS
tamaxx 3020FL and Vistamaxx 3980FL
grades makes them perfectly suited for
other polymer modification applications.
“These grades to the Vistamaxx elastomer
portfolio further increases the ability of
compounders and converters to develop
innovative solutions and tailor properties
to better meet the needs of many applica-
tions,” according to Lynell Maenza, spe-
cialty elastomers Asia Pacific market man-
ager, ExxonMobil Chemical.
Vistamaxx specialty elastomers are
suited for all polyolefinic blends and can
also be a partial substitute for a variety of
other polymers including styrene block co-
polymers and polyisobutylene. Using Vis-
tamaxx elastomers can reduce compound
cost and improve performance where a
balance of flexibility, impact strength and
transparency is required. Typical applica-
tions include calendered or extruded sheet-
profiles, extrusion coating, nonwovens and
injection- or blow-molded goods.
Select 3 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Thermoplastic pipe
is easier to maintain
Evonik has introduced, for the first time
in North America, a new high-performance
thermoplastic polyamide pipe that is less
expensive to install and easier to maintain
than traditional steel pipe.
VESTAMID LX9030 PA12 (VESTA-
MID PA12) offers exceptional performance
for high-pressure applications, which helps
gas companies effectively design their
underground infrastructure without sac-
rificing flow capacity. Researchers estimate
that PA12 pipe has significant labor and
installation savings over steel.
It is an excellent alternative to steel pipe in
high-pressure applications up to 250 psi for
gas distribution lines. The material is light-
weight and allows for faster construction than
steel, while maintaining higher volumes asso-
ciated with higher pressures. Installation can
be accomplished using a smaller construction
crew, saving time and money.
Low initial investment is required for
construction teams because the same equip-
ment and processes are used when install-
ing VESTAMID PA12 pipe (Fig. 1) as
with other plastic pipe. Traditional steel
pipe must adhere to corrosion control and
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 21
 HPINNOVATIONS
FIG. 1 VESTAMID PA12 pipe coils reduce
labor and installation costs.
cathodic protection requirements, which
adds to a company’s expense. PA12 is corro-
sion resistant and has labor and installation
savings over steel.
In research performed by GTI and
sponsored by Operations Technology
Development, NFP (OTD), PA12 has been
evaluated for use as gas-distribution piping
in North America and technical support
necessary to obtain regulatory approval for
its use in the US was developed. Extensive
testing of materials resulted in a compre-
hensive database of the physical properties
of PA12 pipe and demonstrated conformity
to ASTM standards.
Select 4 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Video software records exactly
what was on HMI screens
Longwatch announces the Operator’s
Console Recorder, a software module that
automatically records images being shown
on multiple HMI or SCADA operators’
displays. The module takes its signals
directly from each HMI screen’s video soft-
ware driver, so it records the actual video
being sent to the HMI. The software can
accommodate video signals from an unlim-
ited number of HMIs to show what opera-
tors were watching at the time of an event,
alarm or process upset.
Video images can be combined with
the automatic data mapping capability of
Longwatch’s Video Historian, so the Con-
sole Recorder can automatically retrieve
and replay operator displays simply by
clicking on a time-based alarm or system
message. Playing back what the operator
was seeing at the time of an event can be a
valuable tool for training and analysis pur-
poses, and can help mitigate insurance and
regulatory issues by eliminating guesswork
and conjecture.
Select 152 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Videos used for monitoring plant activities
can also be combined with the operator con-
sole videos and data from a process historian.
This enables engineers, analysts or investiga-
tors to see what was happening in the plant,
what the operator was seeing on the HMI
screen at the time, and all relevant real-time
data that occurred at the time of an event.
Capturing the actual video feed to
the operator HMI is a much better solu-
tion than traditional methods, says Steve
Rubin, president of Longwatch. “Before
Longwatch, recording and playback of an
operator’s HMI was clumsy and limited.
One method was to put a camera over the
operator’s shoulder. This is intrusive and
intimidating, and the camera has a lim-
ited ability to read what’s on the screen,” he
explains. “In an installation with multiple
HMIs, this solution would require a camera
on each screen.”
Select 5 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
‘Universal Process Identifier’
Cutler Technology introduces a new par-
adigm in process control that provides the
automated means to capture new revenue
from existing operations while enhancing
the control room operators’ ability to manu-
ally contribute to the overall success of the
operation. The same Universal Process Iden-
tifier creates models for advanced process
control, online operator advisory systems
and the operator training simulator. Clients
in the oil refining and chemicals industries
are enjoying increased profits while lowering
their cost of ownership and maintenance
compared to similar stand-alone solutions.
Specific benefits include improved control-
ler performance by mitigating regulatory
control problems caused by tuning and valve
saturation. Use of the controller’s model as
a basis permits simulation speeds of 100 to
150 faster than real time for the online advi-
sor and the offline training simulator.
A high-frequency multivariable control-
ler using an all-valve dynamic process model
with adaptive valve transformations and
unmeasured disturbance rejection can pro-
vide satisfactory control of a complex process
such as an FCCU. More importantly, the
new controller delivered more economic
benefit than the classic DMC application.
The use of the same basic model for
advanced process control, advising the
operator on future alarms, and offline
simulations with training scenarios, solves
many of the problems with maintenance of
these type of systems.
Select 6 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Exceptionally reliable
H2 compression
Innovation involves more than good ideas!

P a s s i o n f o r C o m p re s s i o n

Head Office:
Havelandseweg 8-a
PO Box 99
6990 AB Rheden
The Netherlands
Tel: + 31 26 4975200
Fax: + 31 26 4975201
E-mail tcs@thomassen.com www.thomassen.com
Select 106 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Welcome to the Future
iPRSM® is what your company needs to achieve PSM compliance and meet
OSHA’s 29 CFR 1910.119 standard. A powerful engineering calculation
platform from Farris Engineering
Services, iPRSM:
• Creates the foundation for a

comprehensive pressure relief

management solution
• Minimizes operational interruptions and losses by identifying

overpressure risks
• Models engineering changes at any stage of a process with the

Impact Analysis Tool

• Provides a complete documentation package which can supplement

a MOC policy
• Features patented web-based technology for quick integration into

your plant or multi-site corporation

Coupled with the resources of iPRSM, the Farris Engineering

Services team can provide you with:
• Comprehensive pressure relief system evaluation

• Proven process safety management audit methodology

• Pressure relief device mitigation and recommendation for

corrective action

Welcome to your future. Proactive, cost-effective

effective solutions
for a safe and hazard-free work environment.
ment.

For more information, visit us on the webb at

http://fes.cwfc.com

Select 74 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 HPI VIEWPOINT
SANJEEV SARAF, GUEST COLUMNIST

ssaraf@exponent.com

Forecast for process safety in the 21st century

The 20th century was a time of great technological change. 600
551
Such changes that have forever altered how we live and work. The
1970s brought the creation of the US Environmental Protection 500
Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Agency. The

Number of incidents
400
1980s witnessed one of the greatest tragedies in the last century—
an estimated 4,000 people died in the 1984 Bhopal accident. 300 270
Following Bhopal, we saw the birth and development of the field
of Process Safety Management. Since then, the process safety com- 200
munity has evolved in its approaches and methodologies to manage
risks. But what have we, as process safety professionals, learned 100
49 39
from the experiences of the 20th century, and how can we use that 16
0
learning to make the process industry safer in the 21st Century? Total Zero One Two Three
incidents fatalities fatality fatalities fatalities
Historic incident data. Based on data from Lee’s Loss Preven- Number of fatalities
tion Handbook, during the 81 years from 1911–1995 , there were FIG. 1 Fatalities in the process industry by number of incidents,
551 process incidents (Fig. 1).1 By no means is this incident data 1911–1995.
comprehensive. Additionally, some of the incidents cannot be
strictly categorized as process incidents.
1,000
• Out of the 551 incidents, 270 (49%) had zero fatalities.
281 incidents with one or more fatalities
• One out of every five (19%) of the total incidents resulted
f, frequency of incidents with

in less than four fatalities.

A more elegant way to analyze the accident data is to construct a
N or more fatalities

100
fN curve, where f is the cumulative frequency of incidents leading to
N or more fatalities. In this fN curve, the first point represents the 281
incidents that resulted in one or more fatalities. The last point is the
Bhopal accident that is estimated to have resulted in 4,000 fatalities. 10
Based on the 20th century fN curve (Fig. 2), we see that in
the 1911–1995 timeframe there were 100 process incidents that Bhopal
resulted in 10 or more fatalities—an average of 1.2 incidents/yr
in which 10 or more people were killed. There were 14 incidents 0
(2.5%) in which more than 100 people died—an average of 1 inci- 1 10 100 1,000 10,000
N, number of fatalities
dent every six years. There were 3 incidents (0.5%) In which more
than 1,000 died—an average of 1 incident per every 28 years. FIG. 2 Frequency of fatalities in the process industry, 1911–1995.

Incomplete incident database. The accident data in Fig. 2

by no means is comprehensive. For example, in 2008, there were in petrochemical/chemical facilities in various countries. The
35 incidents within the manufacturing sector (petroleum, coal increased reliability of risk mitigation measures that are being
products, chemical, plastics and rubber products) in the US alone, applied in the process industry for high-consequence incidents
according to the Fatal Occupational Injuries Data from Bureau considerably minimizes the occurrence of catastrophe. Industrial
of Labor Statistics. Assuming an average of 35 fatal incidents/yr insurance providers in various parts of the world will contribute to
for US processing plants would imply 3,500 fatal incidents over a risk reduction. All of these factors indicate increased risk manage-
period of 100-years. Thus, the total fatal incidents in the fN curve ment practices, and I believe that likelihood of major incidents will
in Fig. 2 are significantly under represented; yet, major incidents reduce in the coming decades...only time will tell. HP
with 100+ fatalities are adequately captured.
Dr. Sanjeev Saraf is a Senior Associate in Exponent’s Engineering Management
Will there be another Bhopal? Increasing industrial activi- Practice.
Tim Dr. Saraf’s
Lloyd Wrightprimary focus
is HP’s is on evaluating
European processes/products
Editor and foraincreased
has been active as reporter
ties, particularly in countries such as India and China, and prox- safety, reliability, and
and conference economic
chair in the feasibility.
EuropeanDr. Saraf holds aindustry
downstream PhD in chemical engineering
since 1997, before
from
whichTexas A&Ma University,
he was where
feature writer he reporter
and worked atforthethe
Mary
UKKay O’Connorpress
broadsheet Process
andSafety
BBC
imity of facilities to the neighboring population does present a Center (MKOPSC). You in
can read more
radio. Mr. Wright lives Sweden andabout process
is founder of safety
a localand risk management
climate from
and sustainability
significant potential for major incidents. Also, there appears to the author on his blog at http://risk-safety.com.
initiative.
be increased awareness with respect to process safety particularly
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 25
THE AVERAGE LECTRUS EQUIPMENT CENTER
CONTAINS 1.3 MILES OF WIRE—AND A MILLION
MILES OF ELECTRICAL INTEGRATION EXPERTISE.
As a leading electrical systems integrator and custom metal enclosure manufacturer, the Lectrus bottom-line
is reliability. We deliver on that promise with a team of engineers, project managers and skilled craftsmen
who collectively represent hundreds of years of experience, and—figuratively speaking—a million miles of
integration expertise.

Call or visit: 800 445 8791 // lectrus.com

Lectrus—formerly Metal Systems (MSI)

EQUIPMENT CENTERS // OPERATOR CENTERS // CUSTOM ENCLOSURES // SKIDS

Select 71 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 HPI VIEWPOINT
ROBERT A. ASHWORTH, GUEST COLUMNIST

bobashworth@earthlink.net

Ozone destruction major cause of warming!— Part 2

Warming of the stratosphere is caused by the reaction of ultra-
violet light with ozone. However, loss of ozone in the stratosphere
will cause it to cool and the earth to warm. The direct effect of
ozone concentration on stratospheric temperature is shown in
Fig. 1.1 Whenever ozone concentration drops, the temperature
drops and vice versa. This effect can be seen from 1995 to 2005
when there were no large volcanic eruptions like that seen with El
Chichón and Pinatubo that increased stratospheric temperatures
due to release of fine particulate.
A NASA team led by Drew Shindell at the Goddard Institute
for Space Studies found that ozone destruction was responsible
not only for heating the lower atmosphere, but also for cooling
the upper atmosphere.2
Considering CFC-11 (trichlorofluoromethane), the predomi-
nant CFC reaction in destroying ozone is:
CCl3F + UV-C light+
CCl 2 F + Cl + O3
ClO + O2
A continuous destruction of ozone occurs because the chlo-
rine atoms are not sequestered but get freed up to react with
more ozone:
ClO + O
Cl + O2
Though the concentration of CFCs in the stratosphere is only
around 3 ppbv, one CFC molecule can destroy some 100,000
ozone molecules during its lifetime there. When CFC refrigerants
and aerosols were produced and released to the atmosphere in the
1960s, the stratosphere started to cool and the earth started to
warm. The Montreal Protocol banned CFCs in developed coun-
tries in 1978 and the earth started cooling in 1998.
Proof through mass and energy balance analysis.
The sun’s thermostat modulates in short-term cooling–warming
cycles of approximately 11 years.3 The period chosen for analysis
to negate this effect was 1966 to 1998. At these two points in
time, the solar irradiance reaching the earth was approximately
the same (1,368.8 Watts/m2).
500
The lower stratosphere–upper troposphere was 1.37°C cooler
in 1998 than it was in 1966. By subtracting the energy in the
lower stratosphere–upper troposphere found in 1966 from that
found in 1998, the loss in UV light energy absorption was calcu-
lated. The amount of stratospheric heating from UV-B light in
1998 was 1.7123 x 1018 Btus less than it was in 1966. The lower
troposphere–earth temperature in 1966 was used as a base and the
added UV-B light (1.7123 x 1018 Btu) that passed through the
lower stratosphere–upper troposphere in 1998 was added to the
lower troposphere–earth. That increase was sufficient to heat the
lower troposphere and 10 in. of earth (land and sea) by 0.48°C.
Conclusion. Many factors can influence the earth’s temperature.
However, the effect of CO2 appears insignificant due to an earth
temperature drop of around 0.6°C from 1998 to 2008, when CO2
concentration in the atmosphere increased some 20 ppmv. It should
be obvious to anyone who has analyzed climate change that climate-
driving forces, other than CO2, control the earth’s temperature.
CFCs appear to be the dominant cause of greater than normal
earth warming. One can account for most, if not all, of the 0.48°C
rise in earth’s temperature from 1966 to 1998 with the additional
UV light that hit the earth due to loss of ozone in the stratosphere.
CFC destruction of ozone is a simple mechanism that can explain
all of the observed earth and atmosphere temperature anomalies
seen from 1966 to 1998. HP
Note: An expanded version of this article may be found at
http://omsriram.com/GlobalWarming.pdf.
LITERATURE CITED
1 United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) Vital Ozone Graphics,
p. 13, ISBN 978-92-807-2814-9.
2 Shindell, D. T., et. al., “Increased Polar Stratospheric Ozone Losses and Delayed
Eventual Recovery Owing to Increasing Greenhouse-gas Concentrations,”
Nature 392 589–592, April 9, 1998.
3 Lean, J., “Evolution of the Sun’s Spectral Irradiance Since the Maunder mini-
mum,” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 27, No. 16, pp. 2425–2428, Aug. 15,
2000.
The author is a chemical engineering graduate from West Virginia University (BS
225
1960) and has presented over 50 technical papers on fuels and environmental con-
Stratospheric temperature, K

trols. Relating to the subject of global warming, he has written two papers, “CFC
Temperature Destruction of Ozone—Major Cause of Recent Global Warming” and “No Evidence
220
Total ozone, DU

450 to Support Carbon Dioxide Causing Global Warming.” Mr. Ashworth is a member
of the American Geophysical Union. He is a dissenter in the US Senate Minority
215 Report: More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global
Warming Claims—Scientists Continue to Debunk “Consensus” in 2008 and 2009.
400 Mr. Ashworth was one of 115 scientists who signed the Cato Institute newspaper
Ozone 210 advertisement to President-Elect Obama’s attention debunking CO2 causing global
El Chichón Pinatubo warming. In his present position as senior vice president—technology for ClearStack
350 205 Combustion
Tim LloydCorp.,
Wright Houston,
is HP’sTexas, his fortes
European Editor are
and conceptual design,
has been active as amass and
reporter
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 energy
and balances and
conference chairdata analysis.
in the Mr. Ashworth
European downstream holdsindustry
16 US patents. ClearStack
since 1997, is
before
Calendar year working
which hetowas
commercialize two of
a feature writer andhisreporter
patents, for
a three-stage oxidation press
the UK broadsheet technique that
and BBC
reduces
radio. sulfur
Mr. dioxide,
Wright nitrogen
lives in Sweden oxides
and isand mercury
founder of aand a dry
local scrubber
climate that removes
and sustainability
FIG. 1 Ozone concentration versus stratospheric temperature. nitrogen and sulfur oxides from flue gas. In 2001, Governor Paul Patton commis-
initiative.
sioned him a Kentucky Colonel for his work on clean coal technology.

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I 27
© 2009 Swagelok Company
In addition to tube fittings,
we also make valves,
regulators, filters,
and happier customers.
Select 65 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Contrary to what you may think, we’re much more than a tube fitting company.
And we have our obsession with Customer Focus to thank for that. Yes, we’re
known throughout the world for our tube fittings. And yes, we’ve been at it for over
60 years. But when companies are looking harder than ever for greater value, it’s
our broad range of products, including orbital welders, modular systems, and a
complete line of hose, that helps us offer more than you expect. See for yourself
at swagelok.com/moreproducts.

BILLY THINNES, NEWS EDITOR
BT@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
North America
BP recently announced that construc-
tion, equipment purchases and engineering
related to an expansion of its refinery in
Whiting, Indiana, is about one-third com-
plete. Construction began in May 2008
and the project is scheduled for completion
in early 2012. The budget for the expan-
sion is still targeted to $3.8 billion, with a
majority of the allocated money dedicated
to helping BP process high-sulfur crudes
from the tar sands of Canada.
Central America
CB&I has a contract in excess of $100
million with Petroterminal de Panama,
S.A. (PTP) to engineer, procure and con-
struct the Phase 2 expansion of the Trans-
Panama pipeline facilities. The work scope
includes the design and construction of
5.4 million barrels of crude oil storage and
the associated civil, mechanical and elec-
trical work at PTP’s terminal facilities in
Chiriqui Grande on Panama’s Atlantic coast
and Puerto Armuelles on the Pacific coast.
CB&I, which built the original PTP stor-
age tanks in the late 1970s, was awarded
the EPC contract for Phase 1 of the expan-
sion project in May 2008.
Europe
CB&I has a contract valued in excess of
$60 million by Royal Dutch Shell for the
engineering, procurement and construction
of a diesel hydrotreater at the Pernis refin-
ery in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. The
hydrotreater will reduce the sulfur content
in the diesel to meet European environ-
mental standards and increase the refinery’s
capacity to produce clean diesel fuel.
CB&I has received a contract from a
Serbian oil refinery worth more than $70
million. The contract from NIS Petroleum
Industry to upgrade its Pancevo refinery
includes engineering, construction man-
agement and associated support and aux-
iliary work.
Lurgi’s hydrogen generation unit for
Grupa LOTOS S.A. is ready for start-
up, according to recent company reports.
Grupa LOTOS S.A. incorporated the unit
as a strategic decision within the further
HPIN CONSTRUCTION
development of the refinery in Gdansk,
Poland. Following the successful startup of
a HDS unit, the refinery’s hydrogen needs
increased significantly, so Lurgi delivered,
in under 29 months, the new H2 unit. The
plant went onstream in the last days of Sep-
tember and it brings a substantial increase
in H2 capacity to the site.
Middle East
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. has a
contract with Abu Dhabi Polymers Co.
(Borouge) to develop front-end engineer-
ing and design (FEED) for a section of the
“Borouge 3” project, a grassroots polypro-
pylene/polyethylene facility in Abu Dhabi,
UAE. Jacobs’ section will involve the com-
pounding, soaking and product handling
line. The project’s FEED portion is sched-
uled to be complete by mid-2010.
SNC-Lavalin has a front-end engi-
neering and design (FEED) and project
management services contract with Saudi
Aramco for the Wasit gas development
program. The program will provide for
TREND ANALYSIS FORECASTING
Hydrocarbon Processing maintains an
extensive database of historical HPI proj-
ect information. Current project activity
is published three times a year in the HPI
Construction Boxscore. When a project
is completed, it is removed from current
listings and retained in a database. The
database is a 35-year compilation of proj-
ects by type, operating company, licen-
sor, engineering/constructor, location, etc.
Many companies use the historical data for
trending or sales forecasting.
The historical information is available in
comma-delimited or Excel® and can be cus-
tom sorted to suit your needs. The cost of
the sort depends on the size and complex-
ity of the sort you request and whether a
customized program must be written. You
can focus on a narrow request such as the
history of a particular type of project or
you can obtain the entire 35-year Boxscore
database, or portions thereof.
Simply send a clear description of the data
you need and you will receive a prompt
cost quotation. Contact:
Lee Nichols
P. O. Box 2608
Houston, Texas, 77252-2608
Fax: 713-525-4626
e-mail: Lee.Nichols@gulfpub.com.
the production and processing of up to 2.5
billion standard cubic feet per day of gas
from the Aribiyah and Hasbah offshore
non-associated sour gas fields to meet the
future demands of Saudi Arabia. This is a
five-year contract.
Air Products, working with Sam-
sung Engineering, announced that it has
secured a contract for an air separation unit
(ASU) to supply National Industrial Gases
Co. (NIGC), a subsidiary of Saudi Basic
Industries Corp. The ASU will produce
3,550 tpd of oxygen, 3,600 tpd of nitrogen
and 150 tpd of argon. It will be located at
NIGC’s facility in Al Jubail, Saudi Arabia,
and is to be onstream in 2011.
Foster Wheeler AG’s Global Engineer-
ing and Construction Group has a process
design contract with SETE Energy Sau-
dia for Industrial Projects Ltd. (SETE
Energy) for the expansion of an indus-
trial wastewater treatment plant in Saudi
Arabia. The plant is owned by Power &
Water Utility Co. for Jubail & Yanbu
(MARAFIQ). MARAFIQ is the authority
responsible for providing power genera-
tion, water supply and treatment utilities
for the industrial complexes of Jubail and
Yanbu in Saudi Arabia. SETE Energy is the
engineering, procurement and construction
contractor for this project.
Foster Wheeler will undertake the pro-
cess design and provide technical assistance
during pre-commissioning, commissioning
and startup phases.
Asia-Pacific
Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals
(GSFC) has given Burckhardt Compres-
sion an order for a compressor that will be
used for oxygen compression in its methanol
plant in Baroda, Gujarat, India. Delivery of
the compressor will take place at the end of
September 2010. The compressor will be
installed in the 525-Mtpd methanol plant
that is scheduled for startup in March 2011.
The process used in the methanol plant was
designed by Haldor Topsøe.
KBR recently announced the establish-
ment of a KBR office in Gurgaon, India.
KBR will offer its process technologies
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 29
HPIN CONSTRUCTION
for the refining, petrochemicals, fertilizer,
transportation fuels and coal gasification
industries from this location. KBR was
recently awarded a contract from Hindu-
stan Petroleum Corp. Ltd. (HPCL) to
provide licensing and engineering services
and proprietary equipment for augmenting
the capacity of an existing de-asphalting
unit in its Mumbai refinery in India. At this
refinery, KBR will also perform a revamp
on an existing propane de-asphalting unit
Select 153 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
30
(PDA) using its proprietary technology
and internals to achieve the key objective
of improving refinery margins.
Recon Technology, Ltd., has received
over $1 million in new equipment orders
from China National Petroleum Corp.
(CNPC). Recon received a $981,000 order
from the CNPC Qinghai oilfield in China’s
Gansu Province. Crude petroleum from this
area contains impurities including water and
natural gas that must be removed before the
petroleum can be sold. The order includes
11 patented oilfield furnaces that remove
these impurities and prevent solidification
and blockages in oil pipelines. According to
Recon, its furnaces highly operate with 90%
heating efficiency. Recon also received a
$67,000 order from the CNPC Sebei natu-
ral gas field in China’s Gansu Province. This
included 7,300-kilogram welding rods and
welding wires used for gas transport pipes.
Aker Solutions’ contract with Chev-
ron Australia Pty. Ltd. has been extended
to include the delivery of a monoethylene
glycol system to the Gorgon project located
on the Australian northwest shelf. The total
contract value for Aker Solutions is approx-
imately NOK300 million.
CB&I has a contract valued at approxi-
mately $550 million with Chevron Austra-
lia Pty. Ltd. for the LNG and condensate
storage tanks at the Gorgon LNG liquefac-
tion project on Barrow Island in Australia.
CB&I’s scope of work includes the engi-
neering, procurement, fabrication and con-
struction of two 180,000-cubic meter full
containment LNG tanks, four condensate
tanks and the associated piping, electrical,
instrumentation and civil works. CB&I’s
portion of the project is scheduled to be
completed in the third quarter of 2013.
An Air Products joint venture com-
pany based in Sichuan, China, has signed
an agreement to build an air separation unit
(ASU) for PetroChina Co. Ltd. The ASU
will supply oxygen and nitrogen to Petro-
China’s main refinery and ethylene com-
plex in Sichuan, as well as produce liquid
products for Air Products’ merchant gases
customers in the Chengdu area. The ASU
is to be onstream in late 2011.
Correction
In the section of the October issue detail-
ing HPI Construction Boxscore updates
(page 29), the engineering company for
Staatsolie’s refinery expansion project in
Suriname was incorrectly identified. The
basic engineering and FEED for this project
is being done by CB&I Lummus Nether-
lands, while Aker Solutions Houston is
the PMC tasked with the support of the
Staatsolie team, assisting in the management
of the EPC tendering process. Detailed
Engineering will be performed by an EPC
contractor that has yet to be selected. Hydro-
carbon Processing regrets the error. HP
 You Get More Than Just a Process Gas Compressor
Lubricated up to 1’000 bar, non-lubricated up to 300 bar

For longest running time: We recommend our own designed,

in-house engineered compressor valves and key components

Designed for easy maintenance

We are the competent partner with the full range

of services – worldwide

Your Benefit:
Lowest Life Cycle Costs

More benefits: www.recip.com/api618

Select 55 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Looking for
clean fuel solutions?
W W W. T O P S O E . C O M

Check out Topsøe catalysts and technologies

Hydroprocessing Hydrogen
Major supplier of clean fuels catalyst and licensed Leading supplier of hydrogen plant catalysts and the
technology. Low pressure, low cost revamps for ULSD. most efficient and feed flexible technology.

WSA Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)

Cost effective and environmentally friendly method for For FCC and all other flue gas streams. Superior
turning sulphur containing waste streams and spent NOx removal with low SO2 oxidation. High poison
alkylation acid into clean concentrated sulphuric acid. tolerance and low pressure drop.

Select 69 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 HPI CONSTRUCTION BOXSCORE UPDATE
Company Plant Site Project Capacity Est. Cost Status Licensor Engineering Constructor

UNITED STATES
Oregon Jordan Cove Energy Coos Bay LNG Terminal 1 Bcf E 2014 Black & Veatch
Texas Motiva Enterprises LLC Port Arthur Coker 95 Mbpd U 2011 Shell
CANADA
Alberta Enerkem/Greenfield Ethanol JV Edmonton Waste to Biofuel Plant 36 MMl/y U
Alberta Total E&P Canada Ltd Edmonton Crude Unit None F 2015
LATIN AMERICA
Panama Petroterminal De Panama, S.A. Chiriqui Grande Storage, Crude 2.7 MMbbl 100 E 2010 CB&I
Panama Petroterminal De Panama, S.A. Puerto Armuelles Storage, Crude 2.7 MMbbl 100 E 2010 CB&I
EUROPE
England LyondellBasell Industries Carrington Polyethylene, LD 185 kty
Netherlands Shell Royal Dutch Pernis Hydrocracker 9 Mtpd E 2012 Shell Global
Netherlands Shell Royal Dutch Pernis Hydrogen Gasification 1650 tpd E 2012 Shell Global
Netherlands Shell Royal Dutch Pernis Hydrotreater, Diesel None E 2013 CB&I
Netherlands Shell Royal Dutch Pernis Polygeneration 117 MW E 2012 Shell Global
Poland Grupa Lotos SA Gdansk Hydrogen 7 m-t/hr C 2009 Lurgi Lurgi
Portugal REN-Atlantico Sines Terminal, Gas 390 Mm3 238 E 2012 Somague Engenharia SA|
TGE Gas Engineering GmbH
Russian Federation Rosneft Tuapse generator, gas turbine (1) 47 MW 135 U 2010 Siemens Energy
Russian Federation Rosneft Tuapse generator, gas turbine (2) 47 MW 135 U 2010 Siemens Energy
Russian Federation Rosneft Tuapse generator, gas turbine (3) 47 MW 135 U 2010 Siemens Energy
Russian Federation Rosneft Tuapse generator, gas turbine (4) 47 MW 135 U 2012 Siemens Energy
Russian Federation Rosneft Tuapse generator, gas turbine (5) 47 MW 135 U 2012 Rosneft
Russian Federation Rosneft Tuapse generator, gas turbine (6) 47 MW 135 U 2012 Siemens Energy
Serbia NIS a.d. Novi Sad Pancevo Hydrocracker/Hydrotreater Unit None 450 E 2012 CLG CB&I
Sweden Domsjo Fabriker AB Domsjo Bio-Dimethyl Ether 40 MMgpy 440 F 2012 Chemrec AB
Sweden Chemrec AB Pitea Bio-Dimethyl Ether 4 tpd 20 U 2010 Haldor Topsøe|Chemrec AB Haldor Topsøe|Preem AB Haldor Topsøe|Preem
AB|Total
Uzbekistan Sasol/Petronas/Uzbekneftegaz Undisclosed GTL 1.3 MMtpy S 2014
AFRICA
Ivory Coast Société Ivoirian Refining Co (SIR) Abidjan Gas Emission Reduct. Srvcs None S 2009 Axens|Orbeo
MIDDLE EAST
Kuwait KNPC Mina Al Ahmadi LNG Regasification Vessel 500 MMcfd C 2009 Excelerate Energy Excelerate Energy
Saudi Arabia SABIC Al Jubail Air Separation Unit (1) 3.5 tpd E 2011 APCI Samsung Eng|APCI
Saudi Arabia Dammam 7 Petrochemicals Jubail 2 Ind Zone Acrylic acid\acrylates None S 2014 Aker Solutions Aker Solutions

See http://www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/bxsymbols for licensor, engineering and construction companies’ abbreviations,

along with the complete update of the HPI Construction Boxscore.

Select 154 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 33
 the art of science

Imagination, innovation and discovery—inspired by

experience.

As the global leader in technology solutions for the petroleum

refinery industry since 1914, UOP understands what it takes to
help our customers achieve and sustain success. Today, with the
support of our new parent company, Honeywell, we reaffirm our
commitment to leadership in customer satisfaction and innovation.
From equipment design and consulting to process technology and
products like high-performance catalysts and adsorbents, UOP is the one global company that
can consistently add value to your project.

Process Technology • Catalysts • Adsorbents • Performance Equipment • Profitability Consulting

UOP LLC, 25 East Algonquin Road, Des Plaines, IL 60017-5017, USA phone: +1-847-391-2000 fax: +1-847-391-2253 www.uop.com
©2007 UOP LLC. All Rights Reserved.
 PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
Prevent storage tank fires
Implementing these safety rules can reduce risk
R. RITCHIE, SGS North America Inc., Bartlesville, Oklahoma
M
ost storage tank fires are not on the same scale as the Bunce-
field Oil Depot accident in Hertfordshire, UK, since they
are common occurrences. Although each oil storage facility
must be individually evaluated with regard to its overall safety, there
are general principles that can be applied to reduce the risk of storage
tank fires and mitigate the extent of damage if a fire does occur. In
discussing these principles, it must be recognized that risk can be man-
aged to achieve acceptable levels, but it cannot be totally eliminated.
Types of storage tanks. Above-ground atmospheric hydrocar-
bon storage tanks come in a wide range of types and sizes, each with
its own sets of fire hazards. Generally, these tanks range from 3 m to
over 100 m in diameter and they average 16 m high.1 Individually,
they are capable of holding up to 1.5 MM barrels of hydrocarbons
each. However, a single facility may have over 100 storage tanks.
Generally, the tanks are separated from each other by earthen or
concrete dikes, or bunds. However, several tanks may be surrounded
by a single dike. In this case, the tanks are usually grouped based on
similar contents. The dike height walls are generally set so that the
dike can contain the entire tank’s contents plus a safety margin.
The above-ground storage tanks can be broadly classified into
several major categories based on roof design. Design specifica-
tions for most large atmospheric above-ground storage tanks are
covered by standards from the American Petroleum Institute
(API) and the British Standards Institute.2,3
Fixed-roof tanks. Fixed-roof tanks have a roof permanently
attached to the tank’s vertical side walls. The roof may be cone
shaped, domed or relatively flat, and it may or may not have
prominent ribs. Regardless of shape, the roof side-wall weld is left
intentionally weak so that if an incident occurs, the tank roof will
separate from the tank rather than the floor or side-wall joints rup-
turing. This allows the tank to retain its contents. These tanks are
usually vented to allow for expansion and contraction as a result
of loading, unloading and temperature or pressure changes.
Floating-roof tanks. Floating-roof tanks have a layer of steel,
aluminum, or plastic, that floats directly on the tank’s liquid
contents, or floats just above the contents using pontoons. These
roofs rise and fall with the tank’s liquid level. Floating-roof tanks
have seals between the side walls of the tank and the roof. These
seals serve to reduce evaporation of the tank’s contents.
According to API 2021, “tank designers consider the floating
roof to be the single most important design variable affecting the
potential for, and severity of, a tank fire.”4 As long as the floating
roof remains buoyant, the roof limits the evaporation of the tank
contents, and limits the potential for fire to the gap between the
SPECIALREPORT
INCIDENT AT BUNCEFIELD OIL DEPOT
On Sunday, December 11, 2005, a filling gauge on tank 912
at the Buncefield Oil Depot in Hertfordshire, UK, got struck
by lightning. The safety system, which should have automati-
cally stopped the flow of unleaded gasoline into the tank, failed.
Approximately 300 tons of gasoline poured over the tank sides and
began to fill the containment dike. Eventually, the vapor cloud
above the gasoline flowed over the dike and spread out through
the facility and beyond its perimeter. At 6:01 a.m. there was an
explosion. It appeared to have been centered in the car parking
lot to the west of the facility.5 This and the subsequent explosions
were the largest explosions in the UK since the end of WW II. The
smoke cloud was so large it could be seen from space.
It took five days for the last fire to be finally extinguished.
A total of 23 storage tanks had been involved in the fire and
the majority of the terminal was destroyed. British government
investigations and recommendations documented significant
effects from the incident and they concluded that:5–8
• Forty-three people were injured with no fatalities.
• Homes and businesses as far as five miles away were dam-
aged or destroyed.
• There was a temporary evacuation of over 2,000 people.
• Fuel delivery to Heathrow Airport was impacted.
• Economic cost from the incident was estimated at 894
million British pounds.
• Criminal proceedings were commenced against five
defendants, relating to the causes of the fires and the environ-
mental impact.
floating roof and the tank shell. Generally, this is 2% of the tank
surface. This is further reduced by the presence of a seal between
the floating roof and the tank shell.
Floating-roof tanks can be further classified based on whether
there is an additional roof to protect the floating roof from expo-
sure to wind and rain. These may be classified as:
• Open-top external floating-roof tanks. In these tanks, the
floating roof is directly exposed to the elements. The tanks are often
referred to as “open floaters,” and are often used to store crude oil.
Generally, there are no vents visible on the tank’s side walls.
• Covered internal floating-roof tanks. In these tanks, there
is a fixed roof above the floating roof that protects the floating roof
from exposure to the elements. The tanks have vents to allow the
space between the floating and fixed roofs to “breathe,” as well
as overfill ports that prevent the liquid level to exceed the tank’s
capacity. The tanks are usually used for the storage of highly flam-
mable materials such as gasoline.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 35
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
• Domed external floating TABLE 1. Common tank-type fire hazards
roof tanks. These tanks are essen-
tially external floating roof tanks
where a domed roof has been
retrofitted to provide weather
protection to the external roof.
They are typically used to store Tank type
finished or refined products. Floating roof
Internal
Storage tank fire causes
and prevention. There External
are hundreds of above-ground Domed
atmospheric pressure hydro-
carbon storage tank fires every Fixed roof
year.9 Table 1 shows the primary
fire hazards associated with each
standard tank type.1
Overfill fires. Overfill fires occur on
the ground in the dike around the tank as
a result of piping or tank leakage. All above
ground storage tanks are subject to these
types of fires. The majority of these fires
are caused by equipment malfunction or
operator error, or both. This leads to the
tank and spillage of the hydrocarbon into
the diked area. The Buncefield fire was this
type of fire. If the overfill is detected, igni-
Select 155 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
36
mixture. Investigation of a 2003
tank fire in Glenpool, Oklahoma,
found that a static charge was gen-
full surface fire
Obstructed full
Unobstructed
erated as a result of the operator
Rim-seal fire
surface fire
Overfill fire
using flowrates that were too high
Vent fire
for the transfer operation.10 The
subsequent static discharge ignited
the vapors being vented from
beneath the floating roof into the
Yes Yes Yes Yes No
space between the internal float-
Yes No Yes Yes Yes ing roof and the fixed roof of the
Yes Yes Yes Yes No tanks. API RP 2003 identifies the
proper flowrates and conditions to
Yes Yes No Yes Yes prevent static discharge in storage
tanks.11 Vent fires can occur in all
tank types except external floating-
tion sources should be isolated to prevent roof tanks, which do not have vents.
the fire. In the Buncefield situation, the
overfilling continued for 40 mins before Rim-seal fires. Rim-seal fires are the
ignition occurred.5 most common type of fire for floating-
roof tanks, especially external floating-roof
Vent fires. Vent fires occur as a result of tanks.9 It is estimated that 95% of rim seal
ignition of the plume from hydrocarbon fires are the result of lightning strikes and
gases exiting tank vents, typically during 0.16% of all tanks with rim seals will expe-
tank filling. These fires are usually caused by rience a rim-seal fire in any given year.12
lightning. However, electrical arcing, static Fig. 1 shows the global distribution of
discharge and human activities around the lightning strikes based on satellite moni-
tank can all cause ignition of a flammable toring. 13 This shows that all regions of
the world are subject to lightning strikes,
although Europe and northern Asia have a
lower probability of strikes.
To comply with NFPA 780, opera-
tors install roof shunts to dissipate light-
ning energy to prevent fires.14 However,
tests for the API RP 545 task group have
shown that, rather than reducing the fire
risk from lightning strikes, they may actu-
ally be increasing the risk. 9,12 Tests have
shown that both above-roof and submerged
shunts can produce arcing at the shunt-shell
interface under all lightning conditions.4
Shunts above the roof produce a greater risk
because the arcing occurs where there may
be a flammable vapor-air mixture.
Recent studies indicate that the risk of
rim-seal fires can be reduced by ensuring
that:
• Tight-fitting primary and secondary
seals are in place and are effectively prevent-
ing vapors escaping from the tank12
• Submerged grounding cables are
installed that directly connect the tank
roof and shell. This is shown to be more
effective than roof shunts, which, due to
wall coating, corrosion or an out-of-round
shell, may not effectively connect the roof
to the shell.9
The API RP 545 task group is planning
additional studies to evaluate alternative
methods of connecting the tank roof to
the wall.9
 Black & Veatch’s PRICO® LNG technology
unlocks the value of stranded gas.

Now we are taking it to the high seas.

reliable | efficient | proven

www.bv.com
Select 56 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT

FIG. 1 Global distribution of lightning April 1995–February 2003.

Monitoring systems and firefight- ■ While it is impossible to eliminate 65 mins of suppression activity at
ing systems are typically installed the end of 13 hr. The total amount
around the tank rim to detect rim the risk of storage tank fires, the of water used was 50% greater than
fires and allow for rapid response. risk can be substantially reduced the total amount of water available
These must be regularly inspected to at the Buncefield site.
ensure that they are in good working by ensuring that proper design,
order to prevent small rim-seal fires operation and maintenance guidelines Fire risk reduction. While it is
from escalating. impossible to eliminate the risk of
are in place and are followed. storage tank fires, the risk can be
Full-surface fires. Full-surface substantially reduced by ensuring
fires occur when the entire liquid vent tank fires.14 that proper design, operation and
surface in the tank is on fire. They can be Unobstructed full-surface fires occur maintenance guidelines are in place and are
further divided into obstructed full-surface when there is ready access to the entire followed. Completing proper inspections
fires and unobstructed full-surface fires. tank surface. For tanks 45 m or smaller according to the API 653 standard is essen-
Obstructed full-surface fires are those in diameter, these are generally readily tial in identifying design and maintenance
where access to a portion of the burning extinguished as long as there are sufficient issues with existing storage tanks. There are
surface is blocked by the roof or pan, and resources (water, foam, etc.) and personnel three types of inspections detailed in API
happen when the roof or pan sinks. Roof available. In tanks greater than 45 m, the 653 and they are:
sinking occurs due to a variety of reasons, fires are generally very difficult to fight due
such as: to the large amount of resources required Monthly routine in-service inspec-
• Rain buildup on the roof, where there to extinguish such a large tank. These fires tions. These include a visual inspection
is inadequate drainage either from plugging usually occur in fixed-roof tanks without of the tanks, exterior surfaces looking for
of the drains or the rain amount received internal roofs, where, as a result of an inci- evidence of leaks, shell distortions, settle-
exceeds the design standards for the tank dent, the weak roof-shell weld is broken ment, corrosion, foundation condition,
• In pontoon roofs, where the pontoons and the roof is lifted off the tank. These paint coating, insulation systems and
have become filled with the tank liquid as a fires may also occur in external floating- appurtenances.
result of corrosion or other failure roof tanks, where heavy rains may exceed
• Improper application of firefighting the design capacity for water removal from Formal in-service external inspec-
materials during a rim-seal fire, causing the the roof. The largest successfully extin- tions. These must be done every five
roof to sink. guished full surface tank fire occurred on years or sooner if the remaining corrosion
Drain plugging and pontoon failure can June 8, 2001 in Norco, Louisiana. A tank allowance for the tank is less than 20 years.
be identified as part of the regular inspec- 82 m in diameter and 10 m high with a In the latter case, the inspection must be
tion programs prescribed for storage tanks 325,000 barrel capacity was struck by done at the interval that is one quarter of
in API 653. These components must be lightning associated with Tropical Storm the remaining estimated tank life. The areas
maintained in excellent condition to pre- Allison.15 The tank was extinguished in inspected include the dike, foundation,
38
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
 PLANTY SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
shell, shell appurtenances, access structure,
wind girder, roof, internal floating deck, fire
protection system and the tank mixer.
Out-of-service internal inspec-
tions. These must be done a minimum
of every 20 years unless a risk-based inspec-
tion system is in place, or at one quarter of
their calculated remaining life. If they do
not have an established corrosion rate, they
must be inspected within 10 years. To per-
form these inspections, the tanks must be
emptied and cleaned. In addition to visual
inspection, a combination of leak testing,
magnetic flux, and ultrasonic thickness test-
ing are employed. The primary purpose of
the inspection is to assure continued tank
integrity by verifying that the bottom is not
severely corroded, gather the data for mini-
mum bottom and shell thickness assess-
ments, and identify and evaluate any tank
bottom settlement. Furthermore, the inte-
rior shell walls and the roof are inspected
for general corrosion and localized pitting.
If the tank has pontoons, these are inspected
to evaluate them for fracture and corrosion
that could lead to their failure.
In addition to these inspections, it is
essential that proper procedures are in place
within a storage facility, and that they are fol-
lowed. In the Glenpool tank explosion, the
written operating procedures, if followed,
would probably have prevented the tank fire.
However, the incident that led to the fire
didn’t follow the operator’s procedures or the
recommended industry practices.
API RP 2021 identifies a number of
other publications that can assist in the
design, operation, maintenance and inspec-
tion of storage tanks to prevent storage-
tank fires:4
• Control of spills and protecting
against overfill (API RP 2350)
• Environmental ignition factors such
as lightning, especially relevant to open
floating-roof storage tank seal fires (API
RP 2003 and NFPA 780)
• Proper arrangement and spacing of
tanks (NFPA 30)
• Providing fire, control and extin-
guishment equipment and systems (API
RP 2001 and NFPA 11) to help prevent
small fires from escalating
• Safe cleaning of storage tanks (API
Standard 2015 and RP 2016).
All these standards and reference materials
are meant to support the efforts of operators
and personnel in the safe operation of stor-
age tanks. However, they are not a substitute
for informed and diligent safe operation by
personnel who are properly trained. HP
LITERATURE CITED
1 Shelley, C. H., A. R. Cole and T. E. Markley,
Industrial Firefighting for Industrial Firefighters,
PennWell Corp, Tulsa, Oklahoma, pp. 294–298,
2007.
2 “Welded steel tanks for oil storage,” API 650,
Tenth Edition, American Petroleum Institute,
1998.
3 “Specification for the design and manufacture
of site-built, vertical, cylindrical, flat-bottomed,
above-ground, welded, steel tanks for the storage
of liquids at ambient temperature and above,” BS
EN 14015, British Standards Institution, 2004.
4 “Management of Atmospheric Storage Tank
Fires,” API Recommended Practice 2021, Fourth
Edition, American Petroleum Institute, May
2001.
THE
5 “The final report of the Major Incident
Investigation Board,” Buncefield Major Incident
Investigation Board, Vol. 1, The Office of Public
Sector Information, Information Policy Team,
Kew, Richmond, Surrey UK, 2008.
6 “Recommendations on the emergency prepared-
PERFECT
ness for, response to and recovery from incidents,”
Buncefield Major Incident Investigation Board, FIT FOR
Vol. 2, The Office of Public Sector Information,
Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey
UK, 2007.
PARTS.
7 “Recommendations on land use planning and
the control of societal risk around major hazard Expertise. Properly designed
sites,” Buncefield Major Incident Investigation parts maximize the performance
Board, The Office of Public Sector Information,
Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey of your rotating equipment. At
UK, 2008 Dresser-Rand, we have extensive
8 “Recmmendations on the design and operation
of fuel storage sites,” Buncefield Major Incident knowledge about parts materials,
Investigation Board, www.buncefieldinvestiga- dimensions, surface finishes,
tion.gov.uk/reports/index.htm, 2007.
9 “Lightning Protection: Floating-Roof Tank and coatings. And we use that
Shunts,” Industrial Fire World, Vol. 21, No. 6, knowledge to manufacture parts
www.fireworld.com/ifw_articles/lightning.php,
that will help keep your equipment
2006.
10 “Storage Tank Explosion and Fire in Glenpool, running longer and more reliably.
Oklahoma, April 7, 2003, Pipeline Accident
Report, NTSB/PAR-04.02,” National
So don’t settle for generic parts.
Transportation Safety Board, Washington, DC.
11 “Protection Against Ignition Arising Out of Static, Protect your equipment investment
Lightning and Stray Currents,” API RP, American with genuine Dresser-Rand
Petroleum Institute, 2003.
12 Breitweiser, C., “AST Lightning Protection—API brand parts.
545 Update,” American Petroleum Institute Tank
Conference Proceedings, 2008.
13 “NFPA 780: Standard for the Installation of
Lightning Protection Systems,” National Fire
Protection Association, 2004.
14 “Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration and
Reconstruction,” Includes Addendum 1 (2003),
Addendum 2 (2005), Addendum 3 (2008) and
Errata (2008), Third Edition, American Petroleum
Institute. The Americas: (Int’l +1) 713-354-6100
15 Crawford, K. E., “Tank Fire Suppression/Tank
ESA: (Int’l +33) 2-35-25-5225
Overfill Prevention,” American Petroleum
Institute Storage Tank Conference, September Asia-Pacific: (Int’l +60) 3-2093-6633
2008. info@dresser-rand.com
www.dresser-rand.com
Richard Ritchie is the director
of global programs for asset integrity
management in the SGS AIM Compe-
tence Center. He has 19 years experi-
ence in the specialty chemical, and
inspection and testing industry. Mr. Ritchie received a
BS and an MS degree in mechanical engineering from
Virginia Tech and MIT respectively.
Select 156 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Select 105 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT SPECIALREPORT

Avoid confusion when performing

safety integrity levels
Here’s how to differentiate safety instrumented fuction demand modes
Y. A. KHALIL, Zakum Development Company, Abu Dhabi and H. CHEDDIE,
Cteris Consulting Inc., Ontario, Canada

S
afety integrity levels (SIL) are allocated to safety instru- IEC 61508-4, is where the frequency of demands for operation
mented functions (SIFs) to establish how the said functions made on a safety-related system is no greater than one per year
have to be realized, operated, maintained and modified. It is and no greater than twice the proof test frequency. Otherwise, it
a lifecycle parameter. Two modes of operation have been defined is considered to be operating in the high or continuous demand
for SIFs, i.e., low demand mode of operation and high demand mode. In other words, in the high or continuous demand mode,
or continuous mode of operation. demands are placed on the SIF much more frequently than in the
In the low demand mode each SIL relates to an average prob- low demand mode.
ability of failure on demand (PFDavg) range, while in the high or
the continuous demand mode a SIL relates to the probability of Avoid confusion while performing a SIL for various
dangerous failure per hour (PFH) range. The relation between a demand modes. After discussions with a number of engineers
SIL and PFDavg and their correspondent risk reduction factor is in the field of process industries, they revealed that there is a bit of
displayed in Table 1 for low demand mode. The relation between confusion among them in assigning SIL for SIFs operating in high
a SIL and PFH is displayed in Table 2 for high or continuous or continuous demand mode. Some are dealing with these SIFs as
demand mode. if they were operating in low demand
For a safety function operating in mode and others don’t give them any
low demand mode and when a hazard- weight in preventing the occurrence of
ous event or incident occurs, a demand ■ Errors can arise when using the hazardous event.
has to be placed on the SIF and the SIF In low demand mode, SIL is deter-
has to fail to respond satisfactorily.
low demand SIL selection mined by calculating the amount of
• Hazard rate (h) = demand rate techniques such as LOPA, Risk risk reduction the SIF has to provide to
(d) x average probability of failure on achieve the tolerable risk criteria. But,
demand (PFDavg) of SIF. matrix or Risk Graph for SIFs in the high or continuous demand
For a safety function operating in mode, the overall dangerous unde-
high or continuous demand mode, a operating in high demand mode. tected failures rate ␭DU of the SIF must
hazardous event or incident will occur be less than or equal to the associated
whenever the safety related control tolerable frequency.
system fails. The following example has been specifically modified and
• Hazard rate (h) = probability of a dangerous failure per hour simplified to emphasize the differences and shows how to assign a
of SIF SIL for SIFs operating in high or continuous demand mode.
The formulas assume no other safeguards exist.
Problem: A pressure transmitter (PT) is located on an air receiver
Here’s how to distinguish between various modes vessel (shown in Fig.1) and is used to activate the load/unload control
of operation. Low demand mode, as defined in 3.5.12 of mechanism (blow-off valve) of an instrument air centrifugal compres-

TABLE 1. Safety integrity levels for low demand mode TABLE 2. Safety integrity levels for high or continuous
of operation demand mode of operation
SIL PFDavg RRF SIL PFH
4 ≥10–5 to < 10–4 >10,000 to ≤100,000 4 ≥10–9 to < 10–8
3 ≥10–4 to < 10–3 >1,000 to ≤ 10,000 3 ≥10–8 to < 10–7
2 ≥10–3 to < 10–2 >100 to ≤ 1,000 2 ≥10–7 to < 10–6
1 ≥10–2 to < 10–1 >10 to ≤ 100 1 ≥10–6 to < 10–5

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I 41
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT

TABLE 3. Layer of Protection Analysis assigning a SIL level

Most credible consequences: Compressor surge and damage due to high pressure
Tolerance frequency goal: 1.00E–03 per year
SIF being reviewed Pressure transmitter (PT) located on an air receiver vessel
used to activate the load/unload control mechanism (blow-off valve)
Likelihood IPL #1 Unmitigated
of each vibration vent
Cause(s) of initiating event cause/yr system IPL PSV frequency
Blockage downstream 0.01 1 0.03 3.00E–04
piping or system
PCV fail close 0.02 1 0.03 6.00E-04
High pressure in the receiver vessel 3,000 1 0.03 9.00E+01
due to varying air consumption rates
Total unmitigated event frequency due to all causes: (Ftotal unmitigated frequency ) 9.00E+01
PFDavg 1.111E–05
RRF 90,000.9
SIL 4

sor with 3,000 on/off operations/yr and with no automatic diagnostic Vibration system (XE/XT) PFD =1
of failures. Compressor surge and damage due to high pressure is Pressure safety/relief valve (PSV) PFD = 0.03
the worst case scenario if the PT failed to unload the compressor.
A hazard assessment team estimated a major consequence with an Note: The team estimated that the vibration system as well as
associated maximum target frequency of 1 x 10–3/yr. The layers of the MCC protections were not fast enough to protect against
protection that can prevent the occurrence of this accident are: this incident.

To keep pace with the demanding quality requirements of

modern fuels, advanced, precise and easy to use analytical

Elemental Analysis
technology is required. With a complete range of XRF and ICP
spectrometers, SPECTRO’s unique solutions for at-line and
laboratory elemental analysis are capable of meeting the
most demanding product specification testing requirements.

of Fuels Measure your fuels

- at sub 10-15 ppm levels of sulfur to ensure federal
government agency compliance
- at trace ppm levels for metal elements such as Cu, Ca, Mg,
Na, K, and P, to ensure low engine emissions as well as
trouble-free motoring
- with reliability, speed and accuracy for any particular
application

You can find further information

about the SPECTRO solutions for
fuels analysis at
www.spectro.com/fuels
spectro.info@ametek.com and
Determination of Sulfur and other elements Tel +49.2821.892-2102.
at-line and in the laboratory

Select 157 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

42
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
How can we get by with less when the
whole world keeps asking for more?

Getting more and more energy from fewer and

fewer resources is our never-ending mission.
In addition to excellent availability and utmost reliability, efficiency is a
key requirement when it comes to supplying energy for the world’s steadily
growing megacities. Basically, it’s all about making best use of all resources.
We apply this principle across the entire energy conversion chain to take
efficiency to totally new levels. Our new 800 kV transformer, for example,
makes possible the efficient transmission of electric energy in the gigawatt
range over distances of 1,000 kilometers and more. And our new generation
of gas turbines makes combined cycle power plants deliver a record-breaking
efficiency of more than 60 per cent. www.siemens.com/energy

Answers for energy.

Select 81 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT

protection layers must be less than or equal

to the target frequency.
Air intake ATM Load/unload Plant shutdown
filter Thus, FPT (dangerous failures rate of
ATM
SIFPT) x PFD XE/XT (1) x PFD PSV (0.03)
PSV
Vibration
must be less than the Ftolerable (1 x 10–3 /yr)
PSLL To instrument
monitoring Alarm air distribution Therefore, the dangerous failures rate of
system Local control Trip network the SIFPT (␭D) must be less than or equal to
panel (LCP)
PT 1 x 10–3/3 x 10–2 = 3.33333 x 10–2 failures
PCV
XT or 3.8 x 10–6 failures/hr.
Blow-off Air
Trip

valve PSHH receiver

The team performed continuous mode
XE Air SIL assignment according to Table 2. The
Trip

Cooler dryer dangerous failures rate of 3.8 x 10–6/hr falls

M
in between 10–5 and 10–6, so the SIL associ-
Scrubber ated with the calculated failure is SIL 1.
Therefore, this SIF (SIF PT) should be
designed with overall dangerous failures
FIG. 1 Compressor package diagram. (␭D(PT) + ␭D(LCP) + ␭D(blow-off valve) ) less than
3.8 x 10–6 failures/hr.

Methodology No.1. The SIL assessment team applied the
Layer of Protection Analysis (LOPA) technique to assign the SIL
level for the SIFPT , as follows:
It became obvious to the team that the SIFPT operated in a
high demand mode; hence the results using the LOPA methodol-
ogy were unacceptable.
Methodology 2. The team realized that the PT is the SIF
operating in continuous demand mode; and recognized that it’s
dangerous failures rate multiplied by the PFD values of all other
Conclusion. Errors that can arise when using low demand SIL
selection techniques such as LOPA, Risk Matrix or Risk Graph for
SIF operating in high demand mode could be in the magnitude
category of the required Risk Reduction Factor.
Clearly, Methodology 2 is the correct approach for SIFs operat-
ing in high or continuous demand mode. In the previous example,
there was another protection layer (PSV) that contributed in
preventing the occurrence of the incident, but, in many other
cases the availability of other protection layers may not exist. In
this case, the dangerous failure of the SIF leads to an immediate
incident. Designers should ensure that the overall undetected
dangerous failures rate of the SIF (␭DU) is less than or equal to the
associated maximum target frequency (FTolerable).
In the process industry it is normally assumed (incorrectly) that
all SIFs operate in a low demand mode. This assumption can and
will lead to errors in the SIL determination and SIL verification
since the mode of operation affects both the SIL determination
and SIL verification methodology. HP

Yasser Ali Khalil is senior instrument and control engineer at

Zakum Development Company (ZADCO) based in Abu Dhabi. He
has over 20 years of experience in the oil and gas industries in the
fields of engineering design, commissioning and operation support.
Mr. Yasser has worked with internationally reputed engineering
and operating companies on petrochemicals, oil and gas projects. In 2002 he joined
ZADCO which operates one of the largest offshore oil fields in the world. Mr. Yasser
specializes in instrumentation, safety and control systems engineering related to oil
and gas processing plants. He holds a BSc degree in electrical (computer and auto-
matic control) engineering from Ain-Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. Mr. Khalil is also
a CFSE and TÜV Certified Functional Safety Expert, and was a member of ZADCO
who received the runner-up ADNOC HSE award, for safety in 2004.

Harry Cheddie P.Eng., CRE, CFSE is director of engineering for

Cteris Consulting Inc. located in Ontario, Canada. He is presently
responsible for completing reliability, HAZOP and safety studies
for end users, developing training programs, and teaching safety
courses with an emphasis on IEC 61508 and IEC 61511.Mr. Ched-
die graduated from Salford University in the UK with a BSc degree in electrical engi-
neering. He is a registered Professional Engineer in the province of Ontario, Canada.
Mr. Cheddie is certified by the American Society for Quality as a Quality Engineer and
as a Reliability Engineer. He is also a TÜV Certified Functional Safety Expert.

Select 158 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

44
 PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT SPECIALREPORT

Software tools are never

a substitute for competency
Sound practice, experienced-based judgment and teamwork
are still needed for safety engineering success
S. KOZMA, exida Canada Ltd., Calgary, Alberta

W
e’ve witnessed it; we’ve probably even experienced it. when, what to document, and how to best document it. This
The “it” is the amazing effectiveness that safety life higher level of competency provides the necessary understanding
cycle software tools produce in the hands of compe- of the software’s results, and more importantly, it helps to deter-
tent users. As a result, there is a growing list of such tools on the mine if the results are actually correct and useful. This is especially
market specifically designed to help ensure that potential hazards, important in the critical front end analysis activities leading up to
safety instrumented functions (SIFs) and safety instrumented equipment specification since these activities are shown to cause
systems (SISs) are identified, assessed, designed, tested, installed, the greatest fraction of major industrial accidents.
and operated in accordance with regulatory requirements and So, before giving into temptations such as using a software
international safety standards. Unfortunately we’ve also likely tool to automatically extract the results of a process hazard analy-
witnessed and/or experienced the other extreme; poor results that sis (PHA) to determine safety integrity level (SIL) target values,
exactly the same software tools may produce if used by someone first consider the processes and overall competencies required to
who has the software user’s manual lying in their lap. So don’t properly execute these critical front end tasks.
think for a minute that automated software tools are a substitute
for having a competent set of eyes to review both the software’s PHA competency. PHA studies employ proven risk-man-
input and its corresponding output. agement principals to help form the foundation on which to
construct safe and effective processes. Frequently used PHA tech-
Overall competency. Scattered throughout internationally niques include:
accepted safety standards International • Checklist analysis
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) • DiGraph analysis
■ HAZOP studies are based on
61508 and IEC 61511 is language • Failure modes and effects analysis
emphasizing the importance of using the principle that a team approach (FMEA)
competent persons to properly assess, • Fault tree analysis
design and periodically verify that the to hazard analysis will identify • H A Za rd a n d O Pe r a b i l i t y
safety system continues to meet its (HAZOP) studies
design criteria throughout its life.
more problems than individuals • Safety system checklists
IEC 61508, Part 1, Paragraph working independently with • What-if studies.
6.2.1 (h) states, “...ensuring that The most notable of these is the
applicable parties involved in any of combined results. HAZOP study. A common miscon-
the overall E/E/PE or software safety ception is that HAZOP studies focus
life cycle activities are competent to carry out activities for which specifically on safety and environmental concerns. The reality is
they are accountable.” that 50–60% of recommendations resulting from a HAZOP study
IEC 61511 (ISA S84-2004), Part 1, Paragraph 5.2.2.2 states, focus on issues related to product quality and process operability.
“Persons, departments or organizations involved in safety life cycle HAZOP studies are based on the principle that a team
activities shall be competent to carry out the activities for which approach to hazard analysis will identify more problems than
they are accountable.” individuals working independently with combined results. The
Upon reading these statements, each seems sound enough team approach prevents decisions from one discipline having
but the more you learn about IEC safety standards, the more you a potentially adverse effect on a process or piece of equipment
realize those statements are woefully insufficient to fully specify (e.g., an instrument engineer wanting to raise a trip set point
the competencies necessary to produce an effective SIS solution. may not know the resulting effect on the overall design). This
Certainly the growing number of safety life cycle software tools direct teamwork also promotes rapid and effective brainstorming
helps ensure that the math is done correctly and consistently and to ensure that a wide breadth of possible scenarios is considered
that transcription errors are reduced. However, overall safety life from a wide range of perspectives in a way that isolated individuals
cycle competency is required to know which math to do and simply cannot match.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 45
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
The HAZOP team typically consists of “senior” representatives
from process engineering including chemists, operations, instru-
mentation and controls, mechanical maintenance, health and
safety, and other assorted technical specialists. Led by seasoned
HAZOP facilitators, HAZOP teams typically meet in 3–6 hour
sessions over several days or weeks, systematically examining the
process under study, one node at a time.
The team examines the process parameters (flow, temperature,
pressure, level, etc.) of each node by applying pre-defined guide-
words such as “no/low” or “more/high” with the parameter “flow”
to produce a “no flow” deviation condition.
The team will discuss the potential consequence of the “no
flow” condition for the node under study. Depending on team
makeup, authority and time constraints, the team may also cat-
egorize (rank) each identified initiating cause according to the
owner/operator’s pre-defined risk management guidelines.
HAZOP teams will frequently record possible safeguards and
corrective actions with the understanding that these, along with
other possible safeguards, will be evaluated at a later time by per-
sons other than the HAZOP team. Thus, the value delivered by a
good team based HAZOP can be significant.
The results produced by such a HAZOP study typically include:
• Identification of possible deviation states
• Identification of the possible causes for deviations
• Probable worst-case consequence
• Documentation of existing and possible safeguards
• Action(s) required to reduce risk
• Assignment of follow-up actions to an individual or group.
HAZOP study teams do identify environmental and safety
risks but most of a team’s focus is on identifying ways to improve
product quality and overall process operability. In fact, it’s not
uncommon for the HAZOP facilitator to periodically remind
the team that he or she is there to identify issues, not to engineer
a final fix. Similarly, environmental and safety (and often asset
or commercial) related issues often end up requiring additional
analysis delegated to ensure the proposed preventive and/or miti-
gating safeguards are adequate. A competent facilitator will strike
the best balance of identifying, engineering and delegating while
automated software will simply allow a poor facilitator to look
good on the surface and hide the problems, which may grow and
fester until they are inevitably found later.
SIL determination competency. The next critical front
end safety life cycle activity builds directly on the results of the
FIG. 1 Independent layers of protection—typical.
46
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
PHA. SIL target determination is the first step in the design,
specification, installation and operation of any SIS that may be
needed to manage the risk identified in the PHA. SIL determi-
nation or SIL target selection is the process of determining the
mitigation amount required to reduce each identified risk to a
tolerable level.
IEC safety standards suggest a number of SIL determination
techniques, but most safety system experts endorse the Layers of
Protection Analysis (LOPA) approach (see Fig. 1).
LOPA has repeatedly proven to be an effective and powerful
method for assessing the adequacy of Independent Protection
Layers (IPLs) such as:
• Alarms with defined operator response
• Basic process control systems
• Blast walls and dikes
• Deluge systems
• Fire and gas systems
• Pressure relief devices
• SISs
• Standard operating procedures.
LOPA is not just another hazard or risk assessment idea; it
is a detailed engineering tool that builds upon the foundation
established during the PHA.
Using initiating event frequencies and IPL effectiveness esti-
mates, known as Probability of Failure on Demand (PFD), LOPA
evaluates the risk of each scenario under consideration. The major
actions and documentation required to complete the LOPA are:
• Clearly identify all reference documentation (i.e., PHA,
rupture disk and relief valve designs and inspection reports, etc.)
including dates and revision numbers.
• Clearly document the links between specific process devia-
tions (i.e., node-by-node evaluations conducted during the
HAZOP study) and hazard scenarios.
• Use regulatory- and industry-accepted data to establish
acceptable and traceable frequency and failure rate for each device,
system and/or person included in the mitigating solution.
• Use federally, locally and industrially-accepted data to deter-
mine the likely environmental and safety consequences of each
hazardous scenario.
• Use company-accepted data to determine the likely eco-
nomic impact of each hazardous scenario.
• Identify each IPL capable of preventing and/or mitigating
each initiating cause.
• Ensure that each IPL under consideration is independent,
specific, dependable and auditable.
• Assemble as many recommendations as possible, each with
reasonably detailed implementation documentation.
That last bullet surprises many people, but a LOPA analysis
does not always develop “the” mitigation answer to each identified
risk. Instead LOPA semi-quantifies multiple possibilities so that
the project team can make informed decisions.
The key benefits for using LOPA over other SIL determination
methodologies are that it can:
• Expose additional risks not revealed by other methodologies
• Provide an effective, numerical means of resolving disagree-
ments about “the” best solution
• Help identify acceptable and less costly risk–mitigation
alternatives, such as procedural changes or adding additional
protection layers
• Provide a clear link between identified hazards and mitiga-
tion actions.
Make a smart turn and
take days off your turnaround.

BJ Services’ new suite of SmartTurn™ services is the shortest route

to improved efficiency and time saving during plant turnarounds.
BJ Services’ SmartTurn™ engineered approach reduces the time and effort required to cool down and
clean equipment, extending time available for repairs, inspections and upgrades. Using industrial gases,
BJ technicians cool reactors and furnaces in hours, not days. Our cryogenic industrial cooldowns have
been proven in both sulfur recovery and ethylene production units.
BJ Services’ applied chemical procedures remove contaminants and volatile gases from piping, heat
exchangers and towers to reduce, or eliminate, the need for mechanical cleaning of crude, asphalt and
FCC heat exchangers. SmartTurn chemistry also removes hydrocarbon contamination, hydrogen sulfide
and pyrophoric contaminants.
BJ Services’ years of chemical and engineering experience gets treated equipment ready for entry and
hot work quickly. So, take the right turn with BJ’s SmartTurn approach to plant turnarounds.

Real world. World class. Worldwide.

www.bjservices.com

Select 52 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
Blindly following an automated software menu without the
detailed understanding of the technique on its own puts all of these
benefits at risk and more importantly it puts the entire plant staff
at an even greater risk. Similarly using such software automation to
fully combine the HAZOP and LOPA activities into a single one is
also filled with potential problems. Instead of speeding things up,
it actually can have the opposite effect of over burdening the team
and causing errors which take much more time and effort to fix
later, or worse, end up getting designed into the plant.
Integration competency. The international acceptance of
IEC safety standards has produced a growing number of soft-
ware tools. Some of these software tools have been “certified”
by independent third-parties. This means that the software has
been tested and verified to accurately perform the calculations
the manufacturer says it will do. In the hands of competent indi-
viduals, each of these software tools can improve efficiency and
eliminate “silly” calculation and transcription errors between
project elements. But, the secret is knowing when and how to
use these software tools and how to best integrate them into
the overall engineering process. Simply understanding prob-
ability mathematics does not demonstrate the competency level
required to perform LOPA. Simply being able to read through
a list of parameters and guide words does not make a HAZOP.
And, simply bolting two techniques together does not make an
effective engineering process. As one can see, a significant amount
of knowledge must go into each equation element and how the
equations are linked together.
Select 159 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
48
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
Before buying into the notion of using a software tool to
extract the results of a PHA to “automatically” calculate the SIL
target value, competently consider:
• A list of environmental and safety risks that the PHA team
produced
• The competencies of the persons that participated in the
PHA.
1. Are you confident that the list identifies ALL the possible
mitigation possibilities?
2. Did the makeup of the PHA team have all the right creden-
tials to evaluate every possible risk?
3. Did the PHA facilitator allow sufficient time to develop
multiple mitigation possibilities for each risk?
If you’ve answered no to even one of these three questions, then
the competency level acquired proves that you are not ready to
proceed with a SIL determination tool. HP
Sam Kozma is the managing partner for exida Canada Ltd. in
Calgary, Alberta, and is responsible for process safety and safety
instrumented design and verification projects. Mr. Kozma has a
diploma in electrical engineering technology from the Southern
Alberta Institute of Technology. Before joining exida, Mr. Kozma
owned a safety services company. He has more than 20 years of safety services
experience including a variety of processes with a special emphasis in the Western
Canadian oil & gas sector. Mr. Kozma is a Certified Functional Safety Expert and is
actively engaged in several Canadian functional safety committees.
 PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT SPECIALREPORT

Requirement engineering and

management—Part 1—safety
critical elements identification
Use these guidelines to determine the safety-critical elements
and tasks.
F.-F. SALIMI, ADEPP Academy, France

W
hen a project is susceptible to the risk of major acci- • Define clearly and exactly the project expectations in con-
dent hazards, modern industrial regulations call for cise, comprehensive, traceable and auditable performance stan-
a rigorous approach to determine the safety-critical dards at least for all the SCSs, subsystems, elements and related
systems (SCSs), subsystems, elements and related tasks. tasks. This is called “requirement engineering.”
The requirements for the SCSs, subsystems, elements and tasks • Monitor and audit if these performance standards are
shall be engineered and managed during the project life cycle. applied properly throughout the project. This is called “require-
Defining the exact expectations of project management toward ment management.”
the numerous contractors and subcontractors that are located at With a reliable secure online system, the project can easily
the physically remote locations is one of the most challenging communicate and follow-up the performance standards to the
tasks of modern project managers. Any miscommunication or project team wherever they work at the right time. The efficient
missing information/requirement could cause high costs and and cost-effective Web meetings could be organized to involve all
significant project delays. parties to quickly review and approve the updated performance
Part 1 of this article explains explains how the prescriptive standards and assigned tasks.
approaches like API 14C and API 581 can be used in combination This article explains the approach and method used by the
with risk-based approaches such as the safety integrity level (SIL) ADEPP monitor to:
assessment described in IEC61508 and IEC61511 to determine • Identify the SCSs, subsystems, elements and related tasks
the safety-critical elements (SCEs) and tasks. • Produce the performance standards for them
Part 2 of this article describes how SCSs and their performance
standards can be managed by available online tools such as the
ADEPP monitor.
Leadership and commitment
The ADEPP monitor is an online secure tool and offers a
robust, efficient and user-friendly tool to engineer and manage
performance standards of the SCSs, subsystems, elements and Policy and strategic objectives
tasks.
This approach has been applied by the author and her collabo- Audit
Organization and resources
rators since 1996 for various major oil and gas projects.1,2 and
SCORE
assessment Evaluation and risk
Introduction. Any hazardous industrial project consists of a by management
ADEPP Supervisory Management
large number of SCSs, subsystems, elements and related tasks. corrective corrective
They shall be determined and managed with a systematic action action
Planning, standards
approach. and procedures
Most hazardous projects are realized by the contractors located
in physically remote offices. Sometimes the applicable codes Implementation and ADEPP monitor
and standards, regulations, risk criteria and the methodology for
determining SCEs are different. The inconsistency between the
Management review
assumptions and perceptions about the methods and approaches
Continuous improvement
could lead to inconsistent performance standards and expensive
communication and correction efforts.
To overcome the complex project configuration, management FIG. 1 SCORE assessment by the ADEPP monitor and the HSEMS
should establish a reliable, secure online system to: model.

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I 49
K T I C O R P : F I R E D H E AT E R S & S C R S Y S T E M S

World Leader in Fired Heaters and SCR Systems

ENGINEERING - FABRICATION - CONSTRUCTION
Fired Heaters: SCR Systems:
Refinery Applications Gas Turbines
Steam Reformers Heaters
Petrochemical Applications Boilers
OTSGs FCC Units
Global E-3 Services other fired sources

Please visit www.kticorp.com for a complete list of KTI Corporation

our products, services & contacts. 1990 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1000, Houston, TX 77056
Tel: (281) 249-2400 Fax: (281) 249-2328 E-mail: sales@kticorp.com

KTI - KOREA
#612, Kolon Science Valley II, 811, Guro-dong, Guro-gu, Seoul, 152-050, Korea
Tel: 82-2-850-7800 Fax: 82-2-850-7828 E-mail: BSKim@kti-korea.com
Select 96 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
• Monitor the application and development of the perfor-
mance standards during the project life cycle as required by the
adopted verification process.
Project HSE management system. The projects with a
potential major hazard shall be demonstrated to have an effective
management system to minimize the risk to the health and safety
of people and the environment during all project phases.
A typical HSE management model is shown in Fig. 1. Accord-
ing to this model, once the HSE policy is defined, the project will
progress based on an iterative cycle of:
• Planning work
• Doing work
• Checking through appropriate measurement that work is
being done as per the HSE plan
• Acting on the findings to improve the system.
The project HSE policy states what it intends to achieve on the
projects with respect to HSE.
The project team shall perform their tasks in compliance with
HSE policy. The processes and procedures primarily dictate how
the project team will work. Therefore, appropriate work processes
and procedures must be available and integrated with the overall
project management system.
The processes and procedures could be implementing successfully
only if the following fundamental issues are effectively covered:
• Knowing what should be done (i.e., communication of
responsibilities)
• Being competent to do it (i.e., sufficiently qualified, trained
and experienced)
• Being encouraged to do it (through the company’s culture)
• Being managed effectively so that it gets done.
To achieve these goals, a major hazard project will plan for:
1. SCE identification. Determine and rank SCEs and tasks
during the project life cycle including design, construction, pro-
curement, operation, maintenance and inspection.
2. Performance standards. Define the requirements, assump-
tions and domain knowledge about an SCE such as:
• Functionality
• Reliability/availability
• Survivability
• Dependency/interaction with other systems
• Constructability
• Maintainability/accessibility
• Operability
• Procurement criticality rating and options.
3. Verification. Develop and implement a suitable verification
scheme to ensure that SCEs are suitable and will remain in good
repair and condition during operation.
The SCEs’ performance is assured in two complementary ways:
by routine checking of their design, maintenance, inspection and
testing, and also by independent and competent verification of
these activities.
Routine checking of design, maintenance and inspection are
covered in:
• Integrity reviews—design
• Integrity reviews—fabrication, construction, installation
and commissioning
• Operation
• Maintenance
• Modification and repair
• Decommissioning and disposal
SPECIALREPORT
• Inspection, test and examination (written scheme of exami-
nation).
Independent and competent verification provides further
assurance that the SCEs are, and remain, suitable, i.e., they meet
appropriate performance standards.
4. Action tracking and follow-up. Make sure that verification
recommendations are traceable and auditable for the SCEs and
safety-critical tasks and comply with the requirements defined in
their performance standards.
What is a safety-critical system? An SCS is any part of an
establishment or installation that has a significant role with the:
a. Prevention of major process hazards
b. Control of major process hazards
c. Limitation and recovery from containment loss
d. Limitation and recovery from fire and explosion
e. Escape and refuge
f. Evacuation and rescue.
A major accident means an “uncontrolled occurrence” in
the operation of a site that leads to severe or catastrophic con-
sequences to people, assets, the environment and/or company
reputation. The consequences may be immediate or delayed and
may occur outside as well as inside the site. There will also be a
high potential for escalation.
Examples of “major accidents” are:
• Containment loss of flammable and/or toxic fluids leading
to a fire, explosion and/or toxic injury
• Events resulting in structural failure that could lead to fur-
ther progressive collapse
• Loss of stability of a mobile offshore installation
• Well blowouts
• Ships colliding with offshore installations or onshore jetties
used for bulk loading explosive, flammable or toxic substances
• Service vessel colliding with or otherwise affecting offshore
installations
• Other external hazards affecting offshore and onshore sites,
e.g., accommodation/work barges alongside fixed installations,
helicopters and aircraft, and road/marine product tankers.
Once the hazardous events are identified, safety barriers are pro-
vided to prevent or mitigate the consequences of the major hazards.
Event tree is one of the assessment techniques of hazardous
scenarios (Fig. 2). The event tree is used to represent the sequence
of the events in a hazardous scenario. A typical event tree consists
of an initiating event, arrows that show the event sequence, bar-
rier functions realized by barrier systems and possible outcomes.
A horizontal arrow indicates that a barrier system functions (i.e.,
fulfills its function), whereas a downward arrow indicates failure
to fulfill the barrier function.
If the system failure in the event tree:
• Causes a major accident, or
• Contributes substantially to a major accident, or
Initiating event Works
Preventive/protective
(deviation from “Safe state”
safety barrier
normal situation)
Fails Undesirable
event
FIG. 2 Typical event tree with a safety barrier.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 51
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT

Initiating event Barrier functions Consequences ESD system

Detect release prior failure
Detect failure
to normal production
Or A subsystem
Incorrect fitting of Self-control/ “Safe state”
flanges or bolts checklist failure revealed
during maintenance
Initiation ICSS ESD valve Common-
Or Or failure failure failure cause failure

And Or

And And
Fire and Valve body Actuator
Manual
gas detection failure failure

Control of work/ And Or Or

inspection

Or Gas Fire Control Local Mechanical SOV

detection detection room failure failure

Leak test “Safe state”

failure revealed Or
And
Or No person Action
Release
An element
And
And
Communication Push-button

FIG. 3 Barrier block diagram—“incorrectly fitted equipment.”3 FIG. 4a Fault-tree analysis for the ESD system.

• Prevents or limits the mitigation of the consequences of a

major accident,
Then it shall be considered as the SCS.
Sometimes more than one safety barrier are required. Fig. 3
shows an example for multiple safety barriers. In this case, apply-
ing the wrong fittings during maintenance can be detected during
inspection and leak test prior to operation and avoid the undesir-
able event of the hydrocarbon release.
If a series of subsystems (hardware) and related tasks (software)
are associated with the SCS fault-tree analysis could be used to
show how these subsystems and tasks are related and contribute
to the failure of the whole safety barrier.
If the fault tree of the SCSs is combined with the event tree
of the hazardous event then the effect of each element of the fault
tree on the risk of each branch or entire event tree can be measured
and the criteria of safety criticality could be set as follows:
FIG. 4b Proof Test Optimisation with ADEPP risk models.
“If failure of a system, subsystem or element increases more than
10% the risk of scenario or more than 1% the risk of the whole instal-
lation then it shall be considered as safety critical.”
These are the arbitrary criteria and are set based on the experience and gas detectors as well as manual detection must fail at the same
and judgment of the operator and designer. These criteria have been time to cause the failure of the whole ESD function.
applied for the safety criticality test of the Judy Joanne Platform.1 Event trees from QRA and Fault trees can be combined in the
ADEPP risk models. The safety criticality of each system and its
Safety-critical subsystems. A safety barrier such as ESD, subsystems are tested using the above or any other safety-criticality
blowdown and firewater systems consists of the various subsys- test criteria. One of the advantages of this approach is that the
tems and elements. effect of time of test or repair on the risk of scenario, risk of instal-
Fault-tree analysis could be used to present the configuration lation and criticality of systems can also be assessed (Fig 4b).
of the subsystems and elements. If a subsystem or element failure
causes the failure of the whole SCS then it is considered as critical SIL classification and safety-critical elements. SIL is
and it is required to develop the performance standards for them. a simple way to relate the reliability/availability of a safety barrier
Fig. 4a shows that if any part of the ESD valve or ICSS fails in terms of probability of failure on demand to the risk of the
the whole ESD function will fail. But for initiation failure, the fire hazardous event.
52
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
 K T I C O R P : R E VA M P G RO U P

Fired Heater
Global E-3 Services
EVALUATE - ENGINEER - EXECUTE

FIRED HEATER STUDIES

ENGINEERED REVAMPS
EMERGENCY REBUILDS
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
REPLACEMENT PARTS
KTI Corporation KTI - KOREA
1990 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1000, Houston, TX 77056 #612, Kolon Science Valley II, 811, Guro-dong, Guro-gu, Seoul, 152-050, Korea
Tel: (281) 249-2400 Fax: (281) 249-2328 E-mail: sales@kticorp.com Tel: 82-2-850-7800 Fax: 82-2-850-7828 E-mail: BSKim@kti-korea.com

Please visit www.kticorp.com for a complete list

of our products, services, and contacts.
Select 97 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT

Fig. 5b shows the event tree for over-

pressure protection. Traditionally, the
Consequence overpressure protection system consists of
of hazardous a high-pressure trip as the primary pro-
event Non-
Instrument- instrument- Safety- tection and a relief valve as the secondary
Process based critical Tolerable
risk protection
based
tasks and risk
protection.
protection IEC 61508 and IEC 61511 provide the
layer layer procedures
Frequency guidelines to increase the resolution of the
of hazardous Necessary risk reduction prescriptive approach of API 14C by a risk-
event
based approach as shown in the Fig. 6.
In Fig. 6, three independent categories
Safety integrity of non-SIS prevention/mitigation
of the protective systems as instrumented
Process and the
basic process protection layers, other protection layers and SIS based, noninstrumented based and proce-
control system matched to the necessary risk reduction dural based can be distinguished.
When the required SILs are assigned a
FIG. 6 Protection layers affect either the frequency of occurrence or the severity of the SIL verification is performed to verify if the
consequence of an undesirable event.
required SIL can be achieved with the actual
design. If not then the different options are
examined by trial and error and changing the following:
Process Primary Secondary Outcome
upset protection protection • Time of test/repair
• Protective system type, their number or configuration
Yes Safe state
• Basic design.
Overpressure The risk models with the combined event and fault trees could
Over-temperature
Over-filling No Yes Safe state be applied for SIL verification. When one of the above parameters
Gas blowby is changed the risk of scenario will change. The iteration is con-
Vacuum tinued by the time that the risk of scenario reaches to as low as a
Under-temperature
Etc. No Undesirable reasonably practicable level (ALARP).
Fig. 7a shows how that the manifold isolatable section is iso-
FIG. 5a Safety barriers for the process upset according to API 14C lated by the ESD valve upstream of the heat exchanger and ESD
recommendations.
valves on the outlet of injection compressor trains in a gas process-
ing plant. The author applied this quantitative SIL assessment and
Remain
verification method for this project.
Shut off Pressure The author applied the combined event tree and fault tree
Overpressure containment Outcome
inflow relief
integrity analysis for the quantitative SIL assessment and verification
method for this project.
Pressure Primary pressure “Safe state” without Fig. 7b illustrates this risk model for the medium gas release. As
over (PAHH) protection (PSD) environmental impact shown in the event tree, the amount and duration of gas release could
be limited if the ESD system can be isolated. Otherwise a continuous
Secondary pressure “Safe state” with
release will cause the more severe consequences and escalation.
protection (PSV) environmental impact The different ignition control systems such as hazardous-area
classification, compliance with ATEX regulations, bonding, ground-
ing, etc., reduce the risk of delayed ignition and further explosions.
Residual strength “Safe state” pressure Table 1 summarizes the possible noninstrumented-based sys-
in steel < tolerable level
tems that are applied to reduce the risk of scenario. This example
shows that even with the ESD function fire duration will be more
Release, risk of than the failure time of the adjacent equipment. Therefore, if
fire and explosion
there is no passive fire protection the domino effect and escalation
will be unavoidable.
FIG. 5b Safety barriers for release due to overpressure.
Fig. 7c shows the subsystems and elements of the fire and gas
and ESD systems. Because of the small amount of gas inventory
If the SIL of a single safety barrier is not sufficient to reduce in the heat exchanger the SSSV and a wing valve could be con-
the risk of the hazardous scenario to a tolerable level then another sidered as the back up for the ESD valve downstream of the heat
independent and diverse safety barrier shall be considered. exchanger. But the streams from the injection compressors are
API 14C (ISO 10418) recommends providing at least two isolated by just one ESD valve. With this isolation configuration
independent and diverse safety barriers for all those undesirable not more than SIL1 can be achieved while quantitative SIL assess-
events that could lead to a major accident on an offshore installa- ment calls for an SIL2 ESD system.
tion. This concept has been broadly accepted and adopted by the To increase the ESD system integrity level to SIL2 the following
other hydrocarbon processing projects. option is proposed:
Fig. 5a illustrates the API 14C concept in the form of an event If a solenoid valve is added to the control valve on the stream
tree for the typical process upset scenarios like over pressure, from the injection compressors then it can provide the dual func-
overtemperature, etc. tions of control and ESD.
54
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
T HE COL D, HARD FACTS
Pro t e ct in g Co m p a n ies and
The ir Pe o p le Wo r ld wid e
Our insulation systems are performance proven for use
in below-ambient and cryogenic applications. But, we
also provide peace of mind for you and your company. Be
assured that, in addition to saving energy dollars, using
FOAMGLAS® insulation provides the precise process control
you require. Because it is 100% glass, it will not burn, and it
is impermeable to moisture in liquid and vapor forms, thereby
ensuring constant thermal efficiency for LNG applications.

Contact our technical experts today to learn how FOAMGLAS®

insulation can be the solution for your projects.

800-545-5001 • www.foamglas.com

Select 76 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT

As the control valve is continuously on line and its operational • Verifying the SCEs by competent third parties
failures like blockage are revealed we assumed that failure-on-demand • Verifying the specifications and/or communications to con-
for the ESD function will be limited to “fail to close on demand.” tractors and subcontractors
Fig. 7d compares the integrity of isolating one injection com- • Testing the products for both material and functional aspects
pressor line for the base case for this option. It also shows that at delivery time
SIL4 compressor isolation can be achieved by adding a solenoid • Testing the function of the equipment during operation
valve to the control value. • Inspection and routine maintenance procedures
• Specific operational procedures related to the SCEs
Safety-critical integrity tasks. Safety-critical integrity • Specific training and communication with operators
tasks and activities are defined to assure the integrity of an SCE • Continuous improvement and updating the design and opera-
during the project life cycle including the design, construction, tion after a specified period of time (e.g., every three or five years)
installation, commissioning, operation, modification, repair, Generic failure frequency is an average value. It could be
inspection, testing or examination phases. more or less for the plant under study considering the specific
Sometimes even with provision of the required instrumented- conditions and the plant management. Fig. 8, from API 581,
and mechanical-based safety barriers, the risk of scenario remains summarizes the parameters that affect the adjusted equipment
high. In these cases operator interventions get more important failure frequency.
and are classified as the safety-critical tasks. Safety-critical tasks are considered to reduce the adjusted fail-
Typical safety-critical tasks are: ure frequency and, therefore, reduce the residual risk of scenario
• Performing the specific studies or calculations that affect the to the minimum possible.
design and performance standards of the SCEs Sometimes even with provision of the required instrumented-
• Interdisciplinary SCE design verification and mechanical-based safety barriers, the risk of scenario remains
high. In these cases operator interventions get more important
From injection compressor
and are classified as the safety-critical tasks.
1E-3n01 1ESD-3110 Typical safety-critical tasks are:
1MV-3n03 1ESD-2110 1PCV-2110 • Performing the specific studies or calculations that affect the
Train-1 design and performance standards of the SCEs
Wing valve
1MV-3n111 • Interdisciplinary SCE design verification
1ESD-2215 1PVC-2215
MeOH • Verifying the SCEs by competent third parties
Train-2 • Verifying the specifications and/or communications to con-
1SSSV-3n01 1ESD-2315 1PVC-2315 tractors and subcontractors
Train-3
• Testing the products for both material and functional aspects
at delivery time
• Testing the function of the equipment during operation
FIG. 7a Schematic for isolation section (IS-01). • Inspection and routine maintenance procedures
• Specific operational procedures related to the SCEs
• Specific training and communication
Initial event Safety barrier Safety barrier Outcome for actual Outcome for modified
with operators
(ESD) (ignition control) design with: design with: • Continuous improvement and updat-
- SIL1 ESD - SIL2 ESD
- No automatic BD - No automatic BD ing the design and operation after a speci-
- Not enough safety distance - No enough safety distance
- No passive fire protection - J30 passive fire protection fied period of time (e.g., every three or five
- No flange guard - Flange guard
Limited release - No compact flange - Compact flange years)
Release, M ESD system Ignition probability Event Jet fire Event Jet fire
CA 100,000 CRed 100
Fr (1/yr) 3,7E-02 State Works Jet fire 0.105
3,7E-03 FRed 3,7E-04
Identifying the safety-critical sys-
Consequence IS-01 Gas 0.9562 Explosion 0.001 F
Module Medium F&G 0.9562 Flash fire 0.030 RA 367 Risk reduction RRed 0.04 ALARP
tems. The SCSs must be identified from
required
M, kg 26,948 the conceptual phase. At this stage, based
Rate, kg/s 12.0 Event Explosion Event Explosion on the contract and feasibility studies, the
BD rate, kg/s CA 100,000 CRed 100,000
Automatic BD? No F 3,2E-05 FRed 3,25E-07 typical layout and technology options are
T,min, m 37 RA 3.2 Risk reduction
required RRed 0.03 ALARP selected. Within these initial inputs the
TPFP, min, m preliminary SCSs are identified by a coarse
TBD, min, m - Continuous release Event Jet fire escalates Event Jet fire escalates
Lflame @ 5min, m 21 ESD system Ignition probability 100,000 CRed 10,000
SCE identification. The roles of SCEs for
CA
DJet-Target, m 10 State Fails Jet fire 0.105 F 1,7E-04 FRed 2,30E-05 the inherently safer options and the impact
X340 mbar, m 22 Gas 0.0438 Explosion 0.009 RA 16.8 Risk reduction
required
RRed 0.23 ALARP on the public living nearby and the environ-
Flange guard No F&G 0.0438 Flash fire 0.301 ment are the governing criteria at this stage
Event Explosion escalates Event Explosion escalates of the project.
SIL assessment for ESD 100,000 CRed 100,000
CA At the basic engineering phase of the
Max. risk 383 F 1,5E-05 FRed 2,03E-06
without ESD
Risk reduction
project, the requirements for the safety bar-
Target risk 1 RA 1.5 RRed 0.2 ALARP
required riers could be determined based on either:
Required PFD 2,61E-03
Required SIL SIL2
• A code-based approach such as API
14C and API 14J
FIG. 7b Event tree for quantitative SIL assessment of fire and gas and ESD systems to protect • A risk-based approach such as a fire
against the medium gas release in a gas plant. and explosion study or SIL assessment.
56
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
 PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT SPECIALREPORT

TABLE 1. Noninstrumented-based safety barriers to

ESD system reduce the risk of fire and explosion
failure
Ranking Other risk-reduction measures
Or Reduction
Case Initial Final factor Description
Jet fire
Fire and gas ICSS Isolation
detection failure failure Consequence S5 S2 1,000 1—factor of 10 for flange guards
2—factor of 100 for PFP30min
where required
Frequency PC PB 10 Compact flange
Heat exchanger Injection compressor Risk High ALARP 10,000
isolation (x 3 train) Isolation Explosion
And And Consequence S5 S5 1
Frequency PA PA 100 1—factor of 10 for compact
Wellhead flanges (reduction of the flange
ESDV ESDV PCV number)
Isolation
2—factor of 10 for flange guards
And (increase the probability of safe
gas dispersion)
Risk High ALARP 100
SSSV Wing valve
Escalation of jet fire

Fault tree for the ESD system. Consequence S5 S4 10 1—factor of 10 for flange guards
FIG. 7c
2—the factor of 100 for
PFP 30min cannot be considered
because duration of continuous
release could be more than the
Injection compression 30 minutes passive protection

No. 3 Frequency PB PA 7 Improvement of ESD system from

SIL
PFD 1,27E-02
Risk High ALARP 73
CSU 1,27E-02
Escalation of explosion
SIL SIL1
Consequence S5 S5 1
PFD(M) 9,46E-05
Frequency PA PA 7 Improvement of ESD system from
CSU(M) 9,48E-05 SIL1 to SIL2
SIL(M) SIL4 Risk High ALARP 7

And It is necessary that the designers, operators and verification

bodies get involved for review and comments on SCEs and their
Compressor output ESD Compressor output control valve performance standards. A brainstorming session has proven to be
the most effective approach to involve all the relevant parties in
No. 1 No. 0 identification of the SCEs.
Change the 1PCV-2p15 to dual During the detailed design, the performance standards must
Tag 1ESD-2p10 Mod-1 ESD, control functions valve be completed for constructability, maintainability/accessibility,
PFD 1,27E-02 No(M) 1 procurement criticality ranking and operability during commis-
CSU 1,27E-02 Tag 1PCV-2p15 sioning and normal operation.
SIL SIL1 PFD 7,45E-03
p =1 to 3 CSU 7,46E-03
Brainstorming sessions. The brainstorming session is a
multidisciplinary exercise and involves all the key personnel in the
SIL SIL2
discussion. The SCE identification team consists of:
FIG. 7D Fault tree for isolating injection compressor line. The red Facilitator: to facilitate the identification process with a sys-
part shows the modifications for the proposed option. tematic approach. All team members are encouraged to give the
essential inputs and comments about the SCEs.
At this stage the SCSs get more detailed for the subsystems, Secretary: to record reasons for selecting or rejecting items and
elements and required tasks. The bow-tie technique using a com- the scope of SCE requirements.
bination of event and fault-tree analysis could also be used to Technical HSE experts: to provide information about major
identify the required SCSs. accident hazards, interpreting local legislative requirements or
During the basic design, the functionality, reliability/availabil- practices and safety study results.
ity, survivability and dependency of the SCSs are defined based on Disciplines leaders: to provide the information about the basis
the risk assessment, codes, standards, industrial guidelines, specific of design, assumptions, accuracy and limitations, credible undesir-
requirements and know-how of the company and contractor. able events and provision of the mandatory safety requirements.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 57
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT

Generic failure Equipment modification Management system

X X
frequency factor evaluation factor

(FE ) Technical module subfactor (FM )

Damage rate
Inspection effectiveness
Universal subfactors
Plant condition
Cold weather
Seismic activity
Mechanical subfactor
Equipment complexity
Construction code
Life cycle
Safety factor
Vibration monitoring
Process subfactor
Continuity FIG. 13 The first ADEPP monitor interface lists the results of the
Stability HSE critical assessment.
Relief valves
Frequencyadjusted = Frequencygeneric X (FE ) X (FM )

FIG. 8 Calculating the adjusted failure frequencies (from Fig. 8-1

of API 581).

Operator and maintenance representatives: to provide

details on current operational arrangements and ensure owner-
ship of the performance standards and provide a detailed work-
ing knowledge of the installation equipment and its operating
conditions.
Independent verification body (IVB): to ensure that the cri-
teria, experience and comments of the IVB has been considered.
During the SCE identification sessions the following questions
shall be answered and recorded:
Main questions:
• Does the system/equipment prevent or limit the effect of a
major accident?
• Would system/equipment failure cause or contribute sub- FIG. 19 Results of the QRA and dynamic simulation are attached to
stantially to a major accident? the performance standard.
Further questions:
• Are there any specific local regulatory requirements or expec- 2. The possibility of linking the results (curves, tables, texts
tations for specific barriers and SCEs? and images) of important supporting documents such as the fire
• Are there other SCEs that are considered to be good practice and explosion study and dynamic simulation to each require-
within the region or wider industry? ment.
• Are there specific features of the design and operating phi- 3. The possibility of linking the other relevant project data-
losophy of an installation which means that specific equipment bases like HAZID, FIREPRAN, etc., to the SCE identification
or systems should be considered as SCEs? worksheets (see Fig-19).
The discussions and eventual actions and recommendations 4. Efficient online action tracking and follow up.
are summarized and recorded in the worksheets.
Fig. 13 shows the online ADEPP monitor interface for the The ADEPP monitor can be applied for any hazardous plant
SCE identification brainstorming sessions. including upstream onshore and/or offshore installations, pipe-
The main advantages of using ADEPP monitor for the SCE lines, hydrocarbon processing, chemical, power and nuclear
identification are as follows: plants, railway and aeronautics.
1. Cost-effective solution for communication between people The ADEPP monitor could also be applied to monitor all the
involved in the project prior, during and post brainstorming ses- HSE-related subjects such as HAZID, HAZOP, SIL and bow-tie,
sions. The new inputs or comments are added as an independent and produce an online HSE case for the project.
and traceable entry. The team members are informed by an auto- To evaluate the prototype of the ADEPP monitor, please enter as
matic e-mail about the new updates. a guest at the following Website: http://www.adepp.webexone.com.
58
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
Select 91 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
SPECIALREPORT PLANT SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
2 Dr. Salimi Fabienne-Fariba, Mutiplan R&F, France and Martin C. Rogers,
each) are available in http://www.adepp.com/demo.html. Free soft- Kvaerner Oil & Gas, UK, Use of Quantified Risk Assessment for the deter-
ware modules are available at http://adepp.com/demo. HP mination of Safety Integrity Levels (SIL) utilised in the design of offshore oil
and gas installation, ERA Technology, Dec. 1999.
3 SINTEF REPORT No STF38 A04419, Safety barriers to prevent release of
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
hydrocarbons during production of oil and gas, 2004
The author thanks the valuable comments of Mr Frederic Salimi on this article 4 ISO 10418, Analysis, design, installation and testing of basic surface safety systems
and developing the ADEPP monitor. Mr Frederic Salimi obtained his MSc in for offshore production platforms. (Replaces API RP14 C).
dependability from “Ecole Centrale Paris” and has been the HSE leader for various 5 ISO 13702, Petroleum and natural gas industries—Control and mitigation
major oil and gas projects. of fires and explosions on offshore production installations—Requirements and
guidelines.
6 IEC 61508, Functional Safety of Electrical/Programmable Electronic Safety
ACRONYMS
ADEPP Analysis and dynamic evaluation of project Processes Related System, (all parts)
7 IEC-61511-3, Functional safety—Safety instrumented systems for the process
ALARP As low as reasonably practicable
industry sector—Part 3: Guidance for the determination of the required safety
CSU Critical Safety Unavailability
integrity levels, 2003.
ESD Emergency shut down 8 Stevens, Richard and James Martin, “What is requirement management,”
HSEMS Health, safety and environmental management system Quality System and Software Ltd. Jan. 1995.
ICSS Integrated control and safety system 9 Fitch, John, Requirement management workshop, Systems Process Inc., Feb
PAHH Pressure trip alarm high-high 1995.
PFD Probability of Failure on Demand
PSD Process shut down
PSV Pressure safety valve
SCE Safety-critical element Fabienne F. Salimi is a senior HSE consultant and has more
than 20 years of experience in process safety engineering in the
SCS Safety-critical system
chemical and oil and gas industries, both onshore and offshore.
SIS Safety instrumented system
She has a particular expertise in risk-base design and identifying
SIL Safety integrity level
safety-critical systems and developing their performance standards
SOV Solenoid valve for the life cycle of the major hazardous projects. Since March 1994, Dr. Fabienne
has been the project manager of Multiplan R&F in France and later the ADEPP Acad-
LITERATURE CITED emy in the UK. She is also the codeveloper and project manager for developing the
1 Roger, M. C., Bamforth, P., Salimi, A., Thomas, E. J., “Determination of ADEPP monitor, an online innovative tool for identifying safety-critical equipment and
safety critical equipment, safety critical procedures and softwares utilising management of their performance standards. Dr. Salimi obtained her PhD in chemi-
quantitative risk assessment data,” Offshore structures hazards & integrity cal engineering from “Ecole Centrale Paris” in 1996. Her main qualifications were
management, International conference of ERA Technology, London/UK, 4-5 obtained in Iran and France and she is member of the American Institute of Chemical
December 1996. Engineers (AICHE) and the International Society for Instrumentation (ISA).

Need to Blind?

Use an Onis Blind,

One Person, No Tools, Blinded in minutes.
Invest in your plant for the Long-Term
Onis Blinds are used by operators in Chemical Plants and Refineries around the world, for
over 30 years. Onis Blinds increase production, improve safety, minimize downtime, and
reduce emissions each time they are used. Onis Blinds can be used in any process (feed and
bypass lines, decoke, nitrogen, H2S, benzene; reactor, pump, and furnace isolation). Every
Onis Blind is engineered and designed for specific processes.
Line Blind
One Riverway Ste 1700 • Houston, TX, 77056 • Phone: 713-840-6377 • onisinc@onislineblind.com
www.onislineblind.com
Select 160 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
60
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
 WATER MANAGEMENT
Update management of your
cooling water systems
New ‘fit-for-purpose’ biocide program provides broad-spectrum
biofilm control
G. LAXTON and R. HERNANDEZ-MENA, Baker Hughes Inc., Sugar Land, Texas
H
ydrocarbon processing industry (HPI) processes require tem-
perature control to maintain chemical reactions needed to
manufacture a wide variety of products and to ensure opera-
tions safety. HPI facilities rely on process cooling water to achieve
these goals. New developments have discovered more effective bio-
cides to prevent biofilm formation in cooling water systems. Several
presented case histories show how efficient and effective biofilm
control can be achieved in refining and petrochemical applications
while reducing corrosion rates within the cooling water system.
Better slime control. Chlorine dioxide as a biocide has been
used effectively as a disinfectant for over 65 years, in municipal
markets. On the contrary, it has not been widely used in the HPI
as an alternative to more common oxidants due to perceived cost
and safety issues. However, over the past 10 years, chlorine diox-
ide has been successfully applied to treat either severe microbial
fouling issues or to maintain control in both once-through and
recirculating cooling systems.
From this experience, several key insights have been identi-
fied as to why this biocide is so effective against surface “biofilm”
populations, and why its unique characteristics make it a truly
“fit-for-purpose” biocide for the HPI. One such insight is chlorine
dioxide’s lower reactivity with hydrocarbons when compared to
other oxidants. When process hydrocarbon leaks occur, most oxi-
dant usage costs tend to skyrocket, due to increased demand from
the hydrocarbon and sudden microbial growth in cooling water
systems. Chlorine dioxide, however, delivers efficient biocide con-
trol by reacting, almost preferentially, with microorganisms—not
with the hydrocarbon. Chlorine dioxide has also been shown to
actually reduce corrosion rates in cooling water systems.
Chlorine dioxide—’Fit-for-purpose’ biocide. Chlorine
dioxide is a broad-spectrum microbiocide that is effective over a
wide pH range. While chlorine and sodium hypochlorite (bleach)
are shifted toward the less effective hypochlorite state at pH ranges
typical of most modern cooling water programs, chlorine dioxide
remains a potent biocide.
Unlike other oxidants under these conditions, chlorine dioxide
is less reactive with hydrocarbons and does not form chloramines
when ammonia-nitrogen compounds are present. This makes it
a particularly “fit-for-purpose” biocide for the HPI. Being less
reactive is especially important during system leaks that raise the
hydrocarbon concentrations in the cooling water. Chlorine dioxide
BONUSREPORT
is also less reactive with most treatment chemicals (corrosion and
scale inhibitors) commonly used in cooling tower programs.
Mechanism for biofilm attack. Field experience indicates
that more than 80% of all cooling water system problems are due,
either directly or indirectly, to microbiological control problems,
specifically biofilms. Corrosion, scaling and fouling are all affected
significantly by the presence of biofilm. Therefore, it should be a
priority to eliminate biofilm within cooling water systems.
There are two general classifications of microorganisms in cool-
ing water systems: planktonic and sessile. Planktonic organisms are
free floating in circulating water while the sessile organisms adhere
to system surfaces. Sessile bacteria are the ones that cause the
major problems in cooling systems, such as loss of heat transfer,
corrosion, and accelerated fouling and scaling rates.1 Fig. 1 shows
the insulating potential of biofilms with respect to other scaling
or fouling materials. Microbial biofilms are the most insulating
of the scaling or fouling mechanisms studied.1
In most cases, planktonic species are the only ones tested on a
routine basis, as it is often more difficult to accurately sample sessile
bacteria. Unfortunately, testing for planktonic bacteria does not
always provide a true indication of the amount of biofilm present
in a system. Result: There is frequently sufficient halogen present
to give a low planktonic bacteria count, while allowing significant
60
Thermal conductivity, W/m/°K
50
40
30
20
10
0
Carbon Stainless Titanium CaCO3 Iron Biofilm
steel steel scale oxide
Materials
FIG. 1 Thermal conductivity of heat exchanger construction
materials, biofilms and scale.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 61
BONUSREPORT WATER MANAGEMENT
amounts of sessile bacteria to flourish. Fig. 2 shows a pictorial
representation of the progression of a microbial biofilm.
Biofilm develops in a cooling system by the formation of an
organic monolayer, and organisms attach to the surface. Plank-
tonic organisms drop from the bulk water to the surface and begin
attachment. The attachment process at this point is weak, result-
ing in some reversible adhesion. Some microbes, however, remain
on the surface and begin to develop an exopolysaccharide sheath.
This sticky substance entraps nutrients and debris.
Continued growth of the bacterial population results in surface
colonization and continued growth of the biofilm. The biofilm
continues to grow until shear forces and physiological changes
limit its size.2 However, low-flow velocities can result in plugging,
as is sometimes observed in heavily fouled heat exchanger tubes.
The end results of biofilm formation include:
• Heat transfer loss. Biofilm is the most highly insulating
material in a cooling system.
• Corrosion. Conditions are created for differential oxygen
concentration cell corrosion of underlying metal.
• Limited ability of corrosion inhibitors to contact and
thus passivate metal surfaces. A biofilm layer of only 10 to 12
organisms thick (too small to be seen with the naked eye) can cre-
ate anaerobic conditions that foster the growth of many bacterial
populations, such as acid-producing bacteria and sulfate-reducing
bacteria (SRB), such as Desulfovibrio desulfuricans. These bacteria
impact both general and pitting corrosion rates by generating
hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and iron sulfide deposits.
• Increased scaling for once-through cooling systems. The
negative surface charge of biofilms attracts scale-forming ions
(Ca2+, Mg2+, etc.) and results in localized concentrations that
exceed solubility limits for these materials. These conditions could
initiate scaling where biofilms are present.
FIG. 2 Progression of biofilm formation over time.
(a) CIO2 biofilm kill mechanism (b)
CIO2 biofilm kill mechanism
Negative ClO2 reacts
ClO2 HOCl- HOBr - surface with bacteria
pentrates repelled repelled charge
Biofilm
Substrate
FIG. 3 a.) Initial penetration of ClO2 on a biofilm; b.) ClO2 reaction with bacteria under the biomass, and c.) Destruction of the polysaccharide
layer by ClO2.
62
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
• Higher fouling rates. The “sticky” polysaccharide layer
produced by biofilms acts as an adherent for foulants such as mud,
silt and corrosion products.
Chlorine dioxide biofilm control model. Chlorine, in
the form of gas or liquid (sodium hypochlorite), has tradition-
ally been used to control microbial growth in cooling systems.
However, there are many instances where, even in systems with
consistent chlorine residuals, biofilms are present and the prob-
lems listed earlier are encountered. During extensive field work,
chlorine dioxide has shown the ability to consistently remove
biofilm, prevent its regrowth and thus significantly improve sys-
tem performance.
Both research and field experience indicate the effectiveness
of chlorine dioxide on biofilms and can best be explained by the
mechanisms illustrated in Fig. 3.
It has long been known that biofilms have a negative sur-
face charge.3,4 Thus, hypochlorous acid and hypobromous acid
(formed when chlorine, sodium hypochlorite or bromine are
dissolved in water), being negative ions, are repelled. This results
in a higher dosage required to penetrate the biofilm. Chlorine
dioxide (ClO2) is a molecule, with a neutral charge that is not
repelled; thus, providing improved penetration at a lower dosage
(see Fig. 3a).
Upon reaction with the biomass, most of the chlorine dioxide
(50% to 70%) reverts back to the chlorite ion (ClO2–) as shown
in Fig. 3b. Biofilms can have acidic conditions underneath, due to
a common mixed population containing acid-producing bacteria
and other microbes. The chlorite ions are able to undergo recon-
version to chlorine dioxide via the acid/chlorite reaction:
5NaClO2 + 4HCl
4ClO2 + 5NaCl + H 2O
The chlorine dioxide generated inside the biomass quickly kills
it and destroys the polysaccharide protective layer (Fig. 3c). By
removing the biofilm from the system, conditions causing the vast
majority of system performance problems are eliminated.
State-of-the-art chlorine dioxide generators. Wide-
spread adoption of chlorine dioxide biocide has been hampered
by concerns over safety and unrealistic treatment costs. Effec-
tive application of chlorine dioxide requires onsite generation.
Older generator systems, by their design, were plagued with leaks,
incomplete reaction products, reduced chlorine dioxide genera-
tion efficiencies and high maintenance requirements.
New state-of-the-art generators rely on vacuum-eductor sys-
tems that are inherently safe and are designed to withstand the
(c)
CIO2 biofilm kill mechanism
Most reverts Microbes ClO2- acid Targeted kill
back to ClO2- under biofilm produces ClO2 of biofilm
produce acid
ClO2 + MBgClO2- ClO2 + MBgClO2- + H+ gClO2
Substrate Substrate Microbes
 SOx NOx

ACID MIST PARTICULATES

MANY SOLUTIONS, ONE SOURCE. IT’S A BELCO® WORLD.
Reducing refinery emissions has never been so easy.
BELCO® is a leader in complete air pollution From consulting to design, fabrication,
control solutions, ready to serve your facility installation, training and maintenance, the
anywhere in the world. Thousands of refinery, world turns to Belco Technologies Corporation.
industrial and municipal clients trust us for For more information and online access to
proven technology leadership and customized, our extensive Technical Library of white papers
turnkey services. and brochures, visit www.belcotech.com.

%NTIN2OAD0ARSIPPANY.*53!s0HONE  s&AX  sE MAILINFO BELCOTECHCOMsWWWBELCOTECHCOM
Copyright © 2009 DuPont. The DuPont Oval Logo, DuPont™, and BELCO® are registered trademarks or trademarks of E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company or its affiliates. All rights reserved.

Select 64 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
BONUSREPORT WATER MANAGEMENT

FIG. 5 a.) Heavy microbial growth in the high-efficiency fill of a

US refinery, and b.) Clean structured packing of the cooling
tower fill following two months of ClO2 treatment.

FIG. 4 State-of-art chlorine dixoide generator simple, compact

design ensures reliability and safe ClO2 generation.

rigors of an industrial environment. These design characteristics FIG. 6 a.) Heavy microbial growth in a large ammonia plant
can ensure the safety of chlorine dioxide generation: cooling water system; and b.) Clean cooling water system
• Motive water through the eductor produces a vacuum that following ClO2 treatment.
pulls the precursors into the generator.
• Since no pumps are required, no head failures and leaks will cost savings to the refinery were $850,000 for fill replacement and
occur, which can reduce maintenance requirements and costs. in excess of $1 million/yr for recovered heat transfer capability.
• If water flow is lost to the eductor, no vacuum is produced.
Therefore, no chemicals are fed and the reaction stops. Case history 2: Large southern US ammonia plant.
Improved chlorine dioxide generation efficiencies are obtained This large ammonia plant refitted its cooling tower with high-
using various types of feedback control mechanisms, which efficiency film fill and experienced an immediate increase in
include online monitoring of chemical flow, chlorine dioxide chlorine gas feed to maintain the free residual. This was attributed
residual, pH and/or bleach concentration. When coupled with the to increased microbial growth in the new fill media. A chlorine
added ability to maintain wireless communications, this new gen- dioxide program was instituted to address this problem. Shortly
eration of equipment is extremely safe and reliable. Fig. 4 shows thereafter an ammonia leak occurred that further increased micro-
examples of a sophisticated chlorine dioxide generation system. bial growth.
Cost efficiencies for chlorine dioxide programs are realized by At this facility, chlorine dioxide was fed at 0.8 ppm for three
the additional advantage that it is fed intermittently and continues hours per day. The system ran for 15 months before the cus-
to provide clean system surfaces. Field experience has taught us tomer was able to shut down for repair. When inspected after this
that total application time is typically one to two hours, twice extended leak, the cooling water system was cleaner than it had
per day. Depending on the system (open-recirculating or once- ever been before (see Figs. 6a and 6b).
through) and level of contamination, the dosage may vary from
0.2 ppm to 1 ppm during the application. Only heavily fouled Case history 3: Large Middle East seawater cool-
recirculating systems require dosages approaching 2 ppm. ing system. A very large central once-through cooling water
system used seawater to provide process water cooling capability
Case history 1: Large southern US refinery. This refiner to numerous large industries at a Saudi Arabian HPI complex.
had a cooling tower with a water recirculating capacity of 45,000 This system had historically used electrolytic generation of sodium
gal/min. A process leak was present, and the
refinery was unable to shut down and repair
the leaking heat exchanger. The system was
being treated with sufficient chlorine (Cl2)
gas to obtain 0.5 ppm free available chlo-
rine (FAC). In addition, two biocides and a
biodispersant were fed in an effort to control
microbiological growth. There was heavy
microbial growth in the high-efficiency
film fill (Fig. 5a). The refiner was planning
a shutdown to replace the cooling tower fill
due to heat transfer loss.
Chlorine dioxide was applied for 30 min-
utes, three times per day to achieve a 0.5 ppm
residual. Over a two-month period, the fill FIG. 7 a.) Heavy microbial growth in the large once-through sea-water cooling system, b.)
was cleaned completely (Fig. 5b), thus elimi- ClO2 generating system treating microbial growth, c.) Marked improvement and
nating the need for the fill replacement. The control of algae growth in the cooling systems.

64
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
 WATER MANAGEMENT

M.E. refinery cooling tower

Cycles of concentration, (CoC)

2.0 5
Begin CI02
Total iron 4
1.5 Calcium CoC
Iron, ppm

3
1.0
2
0.5
1
0.0 0
5/5/2007

6/4/2007

6/19/2007

7/4/2007

7/19/2007

8/3/2007

8/20/2007
Date

FIG. 8 Decreased iron levels and consistent cycles of

concentration indicate lower corrosion rates.

hypochlorite from seawater to dose the system for microbial con-

trol. Due to the extensive nature of the open distribution system,
it was not possible to feed sufficient hypochlorite to eliminate
algae growth in the back portion of the canals during the sum-
mer. A chlorine dioxide generation system was installed in areas
with poor algae control. The product was fed at 0.25 ppm to 0.5
ppm for two hours per day. The algae were effectively controlled
(see Figs. 7a–7c).

Case history 4: Middle East refinery cooling tower.

At this refinery, the cooling water system is an open-recirculating,
fresh-water cooling tower whose makeup water source is city
secondary wastewater with high organic and ammonia content.
This system had historically experienced heavy biofouling and
very high corrosion rates. The refiner had used all other micro-
biological control options at various times in the past (chlorine,
Select 161 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
bromine, non-oxidizing biocides and combinations of oxidizing
and non-oxidizing biocides). The most recent treatment program
consisted of continuous bromine feed, two non-oxidizing bio- 3Shibley, G. S., “Studies in Agglutination —The Relationship of Reduction
cides, an algaecide and a biodispersant. of Electrical Charge to Specific Bacterial Agglutination,” Department of
Chlorine dioxide was applied three hours per day at 1.2 ppm Medicine of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University,
dosage (approximately 0.5 ppm residual). There has been a docu- and the Presbyterian Hospital, New York, 1924.
4 Burke, V., and F. Gibson, “The Gram Reaction and the Electric Charge of
mented 3 to 5 log (99.9% to 99.999%) reduction in both sessile
Bacteria,” Bacteriological Laboratories, State College of Washington, 1932.
and planktonic aerobic bacteria, as well as a 2 to 3 log (99% to
99.9%) reduction in both sessile and planktonic anaerobic bacte-
ria. Heat exchangers and coupons are now biofilm free. As shown
in Fig. 8, the iron levels in the cooling water are much lower,
indicating reduced corrosion rates.

New treatment option. Chlorine dioxide is a broad-spec- Garry Laxton is a chlorine dioxide technical consultant in the Baker Petrolite
Industrial Technology Group with Baker Hughes. He has 33 years experience with
trum microbiocide that is effective over a wide pH range. Unlike utilities and water treatment including seven years in utilities engineering and opera-
other oxidants, chlorine dioxide is less reactive with hydrocarbons tions, and 26 years in industrial water treatment (cooling, boiler and wastewater).
and does not form chloramines when ammonia-nitrogen com- Mr. Laxton served as a technical manager with Baker Petrolite; and was the technical
pounds are present. Chlorine dioxide is more effective than other manager for the Middle East from 2004 through 2006. He has specialized in chlorine
dioxide technology for the past 18 years, working in North America and the Middle
halogens during system leaks, which raise levels of hydrocarbons East. He has authored or co-authored numerous technical papers on chlorine dioxide
in the cooling water. and holds one US patent. Mr. Laxton graduated from Texas A&M University in 1976
The neutral charge of the chlorine dioxide molecule allows it to with a BS degree in mechanical engineering.
better penetrate the negatively charged biofilm structure, resulting
in more effective biofilm control. HP
Roy Hernandez-Mena is a microbiologist in the Baker Petrolite Industrial
LITERATURE CITED Technology Group with Baker Hughes. He has over 25 years of industrial experience in
1 Characklis, W. and K. Marshall, Biofilms, Wiley Interscience Publications, the control of microbiological problems in cooling systems. Mr. Hernandez-Mena has
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1990. conducted research to develop novel methods to control biofilms, and holds three US
2 Sauer, K., A. K. Camper, G. D. Ehrlich, J. W. Costerton and D. G. Davies, patents. His research interests include biofilm control and online monitoring of biofilm
“Pseudomonas aeruginosa Displays Multiple Phenotypes During Development growth and he has published in peer-reviewed publications. Mr. Hernandez-Mena
as a Biofilm,” Journal of Bacteriol, Vol. 184, pp. 1140–1154, 2002. holds a bachelors degree in biology from the University of Pennsylvania.

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I 65
ARE YOU A
SUBSCRIBER?
Order by December 15 to receive these
items in the coming months.
BSCRIBE
SU

/R
CLICK
Subscriber Benefits

ENEW
12 monthly issues in print or digital
format, and premium access to
HydrocarbonProcessing.com, including:
• All the latest issues and Process
Handbooks
• HP’s extensive archive containing
eight years of back issues
• A subject/author index of print articles
with links to articles currently available
online.
• Monthly e-newsletters providing
an early preview of upcoming special
editorial features, which provide
operational and technical insights.

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING is the

leading monthly magazine serving the
hydrocarbon processing industry. Published
since 1922, HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
provides operational and technical
information to improve plant reliability,
profitability, safety and end-product quality.
The editors of HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
bring you first-hand knowledge on the
latest advances in technologies and
technical articles to help you do your job
more effectively.
Upcoming Highlights:
January 2010: Gas Processing
Developments
• Sulfur removal technologies
• Liquefied natural gas (LNG) and
gas-to-liquid (GTL) advances
• Catalyst developments
• Reactor developments

2
February 2010: Clean Fuels
• Biofuels
simple ways • Catalyst technologies
to subscribe: • Sustainability
• Processing heavy crudes
• Visit www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com • Distillation methodology, towers,
• Call +1 (713) 520-4440 trays, packings
March 2010: Asset Performance
Management
• Process control and automation
• Fieldbus systems and networks
• Safety systems
• Maintenance and retrofitting
 WATER MANAGEMENT BONUSREPORT

Wastewater treatment:
A refinery case study
This refiner used an in-house initiative to troubleshoot plant-wide
process water problems
M. SHAFIQUE, Z. U. KIRMANI, A. KHURSHID, N. ALAM and N. AHMED,
Attock Refinery Ltd., Rawalpindi, Pakistan

A
ll refineries produce wastewater with varying contaminant 10 to 64. These crude oils are processed in four different crude
levels that require further treatment before discharge. Because mixes: light-sweet, light-sour, heavy and high total acid number
wastewaters are collected from various processes, problems (TAN) crudes. This refinery has a nameplate crude capacity of
do arise. Hydrocarbon-processing facilities must comply with local 40,000 bpsd and uses four distillation units namely HBU-20,000
and federal standards on water quality exiting the facility. Exceeding bpsd and HBU-5,000 bpsd—both processing light sweet crudes;
such limits will trigger an incident and fine in most cases. CDU-5,000 bpsd processes a light sour crude; and HCU-10,000
In this case history, the Attock refinery used two wastewater bpsd capacity processes heavy crude and a reforming unit.
streams: oily and non-oily to carry process wasterwater to treat- Wastewater produced from these crude distillation units
ment facilities. Unfortunately, this refiner exceeded discharge (CDUs), desalters and crude/product tanks is categorized as oily
limits for the facility and needed a plan to handle high pH and wastewater. Wastewater from boilers and cooling towers is cat-
chemical oxygen demand (COD) from spent caustic and oil/water egorized as the non-oily stream. Oily wastewater after leaving the
emulsion formation in wastewater. plant battery limit is collected in the API oil-water separators and
finally collected in the equalization tank. From the equalization
The facility. Attock Refinery Limited (ARL) is based at Rawal- tank (C-sump), the oil is collected from the top and the oil-water
pindi, Pakistan. ARL is one of the few refineries that can process a emulsion is sent to primary treatment—the slant-rib coalescer
complicated mix of 70 different crude oils with APIs ranging from (SRC) and dissolved air flotation (DAF) units. Fig. 1 is a detailed
scheme of oily/non-oily streams at ARL.
Heavy crude Distillation
Previously, wastewater exiting the refinery premises occasionally
Boiler house violated pH and oil & grease (O&G) values as well as exceeded
unit (HCU) unit
COD limits set by the National Environmental Quality Standards
HBU-I Spent and Pakistan Environmental Protection Act 1997.1,2 Table 1 sum-
(distillation caustic
unit) treater marizes the wastewater quality results from the ARL facility.
Desalter
cuff header
HBU-II The approach. The main concerned parameters to be con-
(distillation Reformer
unit) trolled were pH, total suspended solids (TSSs), O&G and COD.
Cooling Therefore, these parameters were analyzed in all effluent streams
tower
API- API- to gauge their total impact on the main refinery effluent streams.
separator separator
From Fig. 1, boiler blowdown water was sent to the non-oily
Tanks stream, and it was the main contributor for high pH and TSS val-
drain
TABLE 1. Wastewater quality before treatment
C-sump Sample No. Parameter NEQS limits ARL values
Legend
1. Red (non-oily wastewater 1 Temperature, °C (Max) 40 30
stream) 2 pH value 6 to 9 9.5
2. Black (oily wastewater Two SRC DAF
stream) units (100 unit (100 3 O&G, ppm (Max) 10 20
gpm each) gpm each)
4 COD, ppm (Max) 150 300
5 BOD, ppm (Max) 80 40
Refinery API-
exit separator 6 TSSs, ppm (Max) 200 180
7 TDSs, ppm (Max) 3,500 2,500
FIG. 1 Block diagram of refinery process units and wastewater
streams at ARL. 8 Phenols, ppm (Max) 0.1 0.05

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I 67
 Spray Spray Spray Spray
Nozzles Control Analysis Fabrication

Spray Injector Solutions

Improve Performance, Extend Service
Life and Reduce Maintenance
We have dozens of ways to help optimize the performance of your spray injectors,
quills and spool pieces. Here are just a few:
U Assistance with nozzle selection and injector placement in the gas stream –
critical factors to application success
U Validation using 3D modeling capabilities and spray testing in our labs
based on your operating conditions ensure performance goals are met
U Recirculating, air- or liquid-cooled, multiple nozzle designs and more
to meet any quality standard or extreme engineering requirement
U Retractable, flexible and multi-directional designs are available
to minimize maintenance and service interruptions

Learn More at spray.com/injectors

Visit our web site for helpful literature on key considerations in
spray injector design and guidelines for optimizing performance.

Our solutions include injectors for: Computational Fluid Dynamics

(CFD) is often used to help fine
U Distillation columns tune injector performance
requirements and placement
U Regenerator bypass
U FCCU water wash
U Fractionator water wash
U Pollution control equipment
U Steam quench
U And more

In the US and Canada: 1-800-95-SPRAY | 1-630-665-5000 | spray.com | info@spray.com

Select 62 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 WATER MANAGEMENT BONUSREPORT

ues. The treating plant for naphtha and kerosine generated spent wastewater streams, which pass through the pre-treatment and
caustic that was disposed of in the oily stream. This wastewater primary treatment along with oily water. The high pH of the
stream was the main contributor for high pH, COD and O&G caustic was also responsible for creating strong oil/water emulsions
levels. The quality of the oily stream impaired the total efficiency that directly decelerated operating efficiencies for the API separa-
of the pretreater. Wastewater from the heavy crude unit (HCU) tors, equalization tanks, and SRC and DAF efficiencies.
had a high oil content. The oily water, rich in surfactants with a high COD (700
Characteristics of the process wastewater at ARL include: ppm), is produced from the HCU desalter and was another source
• Blowdown water produced from three boilers and softener strong of oil-and-water emulsions that impaired API separator
backwash is rich in TSS and total dissolved solids (TDSs) with efficiency and downstream SRC and DAF treatments.
a pH value greater than 12. Water treatment chemicals used in • Blowdown water from three cooling towers is another
boilers are phosphate based for scaling control, sulfite based as stream that is directed to the non-oily wastewater stream. The con-
oxygen scavenger and ammonia to control pH in boilers. Before cerned parameters for this stream include pH, TSSs, TDSs, COD
the study, blowdown water with high pH and TSS values was and occasional O&G. Water treatment chemicals used in cooling
sent to the non-oily wastewater stream and it was mixed with towers are phosphate based to control scaling, biosperse and deo-
the treated oily wastewater before exiting sperse to control oil, sodium hypochlorite
the refinery. This stream exceeded the ■ ARL’s quality circle designed for bacterial contamination, and sulfuric
total wastewater quality specifications acid for pH control.
and resulted in violations of the National and implemented cost-effective All of these streams were individually
Environmental Quality Standards. indigenous solution of refinery analyzed for their physical and chemical
• Spent caustic is produced from a properties on a laboratory scale.
naphtha treating plant. This downstream wastewater to meet National
sweetening unit processed sour naphtha Environmental Laws. Action plan. First, the boiler blow-
and kerosine; alkyl mercaptans in the down water was analyzed for its neutral-
naphtha and kerosine oil were converted into alkyl disulfides. By ization with hydrochloric acid and sulfuric acid. However, to
combining caustic soda solution in the presence of charcoal and be more cost-effective and to reduce chemical consumption,
catalyst, nearly 99% of all mercaptans, as well as oxygen and nitro- sulfuric acid was selected for further studies. Table 3 summarizes
gen compounds, can be dissolved from petroleum fractions. neutralization results with sulfuric acid to control pH, and TSSs
The refinery kerosine treater had a design capacity of 1,600
bpd; the naphtha treater was designed for 4,400 bpd. The main TABLE 4. Analysis of spent caustic
reactions involved in the sweetening process are: 3
Sample Initial Initial RSH, Phenol, COD,
H 2 S + 2NaOH
Na 2 S + 2H2 O source % spent pH temp., °C ppm ppm ppm
LWK. settler 16 13 26 382 2.5 9,331
Na 2 S + H 2 S
2NaHS
LWK. prewash 14.19 11.86 26 875 1.1 55,209
RSH + NaOH
NaSR + H 2 O Naphtha settler 15.68 12.46 30 4,129 1.6 6,026
2NaHS + 2O2
Na 2 S2 O3 + H 2 O Naphtha prewash 50.9 9.44 30 3,025 1 –
2RSNa + O2 + H2 O
2NaOH + RSSR
TABLE 5. BBDW and spent caustic neutralization
The treater used 3% caustic strength for the naphtha/kerosine results
pre-wash, and 8%–10% caustic strength for the naphtha/kerosine
Sample source pH COD, ppm
settler. The quantity and drainage frequency of caustic from the
prewash and settler is listed in Table 2. Spent caustic soda (SCS) with oily layer 11.8 55,209
Before the study was conducted, the plant spent caustic, with Spent caustic soda (SCS) after oil removal 11.8 4,600
high pH (12) and COD (~50,000 ppm), was directed to oily Boiler blowdown water (BBDW) 11.66 88
98% BBDW + 2% SCS 11.76 180
TABLE 2. Sources and quantity of caustic drainage
98% BBDW + 2% SCS + 0.3% H2SO4 7.0 190
Caustic source Strength, % Qty, m3 Monthly disposal
Naphtha prewash 3 to 4 6 6 times
TABLE 6. Final effluent water quality after
Naphtha settler 8 to 10 6.5 6 times implementation
Kerosine prewash 3 to 4 3 4 times
Sample No. Parameter NEQS limits ARL values
Kerosine settler 8 to 10 3 2 times
1 Temperature, °C (Max) 40 30
2 pH value 6 to 9 8
TABLE 3. Lab scale BBDW H2SO4 treatment results 3 O&G, ppm (Max) 10 10
Sample source pH TSS, ppm 4 COD, ppm (Max) 150 140
Boiler blowdown water (BBDW) – Blank 11.13 96 5 BOD, ppm (Max) 80 40
BBDW + 0.30 ml H2SO4 10.01 45 6 TSSs, ppm (Max) 200 80
BBDW + 0.40 ml H2SO4 8.60 15 7 TDSs, ppm (Max) 3,500 2,500
BBDW + 0.50 ml H2SO4 6.95 10 8 Phenols, ppm (Max) 0.1 0.05

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I 69
BONUSREPORT WATER MANAGEMENT

12
2008 results NEQS limit min
10 2007 results NEQS limit max

pH
6

2
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
600
2008 results
500 2007 results
NEQS limit
400

COD, ppm
FIG. 2 New treatment pit installed to improve management of 300
oily and non-oily wastewater with high pH.
200

100
Heavy crude Distillation
Boiler house
unit (HCU) unit 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
HBU-I Spent
(distillation caustic 2 1 500
Treatment 450
unit) treater 3 4 pit 2008 results
Desalter 2007 results
cuff header 400
HBU-II NEQS limit
350
(distillation Reformer
TSSs, ppm

unit) 300
Cooling 250
tower 200
API- API-
separator separator 150
100
Tanks
drain 50
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
C-sump
Legend FIG. 4 Refinery trends for COD, pH and TSSs at ARL before and
1. Red (non-oily wastewater after new wastewater management initiatives.
stream)
2. Black (oily wastewater Two SRC DAF
stream) units (100 unit (100
gpm each) gpm each) The heavy-crude-unit desalter oil-water emulsion was tested. The
problems from this wastewater stream were sourced to the presence
of a surfactant in the crude oil received from the Chanda oil field.
Refinery API- The surfactant aided in creating in a strong oil/water emulsion.4
exit separator

Testing. Laboratory-scale experimentation results were evaluated

FIG. 3 Revised refinery process wastewater management system
and new installations at ARL.
are listed, too. Laboratory scale studies concluded that 0.4 ml of
98% pure H2SO4 per liter of boiler blowdown water (BBDW) is
required to lower the pH < 9 as required by the National Envi-
ronmental Quality Standard.
In the second phase, detailed analysis of spent caustic from the
treating plant was conducted and Table 4 summarizes the test-
ing results. From the initial test results, it was observed that high
COD values were attributed to the oily layer from the spent caustic
discarded by the sweetening process. Therefore, by removing the
oily layer from the spent caustic, a reduction of 80% to 90% of
spent caustic COD was obtained. The remaining portion of spent
caustic was mixed with boiler blowdown water since the spent
caustic was only 2% of the total boiler blowdown water. Table 5
lists the boiler blowdown water and spent caustic neutralization.
70
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
and used to develop optimization plans for the ARL facility. From
the testing results, a neutralization pit with a total capacity of 0.1
million gallons (Fig. 2) would be installed. Boiler blowdown water
would be collected in the first half of the pit. Temperature at the
collection pit ranged from 80°C to 90°C. The wastewater was
allowed to cool and settle in the first two pits for two hours. The
spent caustic was collected in a vessel from which it was pumped
to the third half of the pit at a rate of 1 tpd. Sulfuric acid was
added in the third half of the pit to neutralize the pH to 8. After
neutralization, the water was settled in the third and fourth half
of the pit before disposal.
At the HCU, the surfactant-rich Chanda crude oil was diverted
to a light-sweet crude pool. With this change, operations of the
desalter oil and water separator improved. Fig. 3 shows the scheme
adopted for treating boiler blowdown water and spent caustic.
The revised treatment program was very successful and
enabled 100% compliance to the National Environmental Qual-
 WATER MANAGEMENT
ity Standards for pH, TSSs, O&G and COD. Moreover, the
total efficiency of wastewater treatment increased. Fig. 4 shows
the improvements in wastewater pH and COD with the water
management changes for the last two years.
The boiler blowdown water, with high pH and TSSs, and
plant spent caustic with high pH and COD levels were treated
via an onsite neutralization pit. Whereas, the operational controls
applied at heavy-crude-unit desalter controlled oil-and-water
emulsion formation. Spent caustic that was earlier drained into
the oily drain was diverted to non-oily drain after removing oil.
The neutralization treatment was successful in many ways:
• National Environmental Quality Standards limits were met
for pH, O&G, COD and TSSs.
• The strong oil/water emulsion was broken by removing the
high pH spent caustic from the oily drain.
• Efficiency of API separators increased with reduced loading
on the treatment plants.
Quality of ARL wastewater after the new treatment program
is summarized in Table 6. Applying an in-house initiative can
identify cost-effective solutions that can be implemented in a
short time and reusing spare equipment. HP
LITERATURE CITED
1 Pakistan Environmental Protection Council, “National Environmental
Quality Standards,” December 28, 1999.
2 The Gazette of Pakistan, “Pakistan Environmental Protection Act 1997,”
December 16, 1997.
3 Ahmed, I., “Merox catalyst impregnation,” Merox Operating Manual.
4 Kirmani, Z. U., A. Khurshid, N. Alam, N. Ahmed and S. Gul, “Crude
incompatibility problems at heavy crude unit desalter,” Hydrocarbon Asia,
July/August 2007, pp. 68–70.
Select 162 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
BONUSREPORT
Mansoor Shafique is the assistant general manager in opera-
tions, at Attock Refinery Ltd. He has 34 years of experience in plant
operations and has done two master startups. His main interests are
plant optimization and value addition with minimum investment.
He holds a BE degree in chemical engineering from the University
of the Punjab.
Zia Uddin Kirmani is the manager of health, safety, envi-
ronment and quality at Attock Refinery Ltd. He has more than 20
years of diversified experience in petroleum refining, fertilizer and
paper industries. He has authored seven research publications in
environment, petroleum and chemical fields. Mr. Kirmani holds
master degrees in chemistry and business administration.
Amir Khurshid is the senior chemist for environment and
quality at Attock Refinery Ltd. He has more than nine years of diver-
sified experience in the field of quality control and environment.
Mr. Khurshid holds an MS degree in chemistry from Quaid-i-Azam
University, Islamabad.
Naveed Alam is the senior chemist at Attock Refinery Ltd.
He has more than 11 years of diversified experience in the field of
quality control and environment. Mr. Alam holds an MS degree in
chemistry from Peshawar University.
Naveed Ahmed is a senior engineer in operations at Attock
Refinery Ltd. He has 10 years of experience in plant operations
and troubleshooting. Mr. Ahmed holds a BE degree in chemical
engineering from Punjab University, Lahore.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 71
Tower Power

The new Baldor RPM AC® Cooling Tower Direct
Drive Motor sets a new standard in cooling
tower motors. Designed exclusively for cooling
tower applications, the RPM AC motor mounts
directly to the cooling tower fan, eliminating
high-maintenance gearboxes, drive shafts and
couplings. Combined with Baldor’s VS1CTD
proprietary adjustable frequency drive, this slow
speed, high torque combination operates at
variable speeds to maximize system efficiency
and minimize noise. Perfect for new installations
or for retrofitting older, less efficient cooling tower
systems, the RPM AC Cooling Tower motor and • Energy Efficient
VS1CTD Cooling Tower drive offers improved
reliability while greatly reducing maintenance • Unmatched Quality
costs and energy consumption.
• Superior Reliability
Check out our website for case studies,
installation photos and additional information
about the revolutionary new RPM AC Cooling
• Low Maintenance
Tower technology from Baldor. We are truly
changing the future of cooling tower technology! • Quiet Operation
baldor.com/CoolingTower • Made in the USA

©2009 Baldor Electric Company

Select 77 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 PROCESS ANALYZERS

Fine tune accuracy in analytic

measurement—Part 2
Follow these recommendations for correct analyzer calibration
D. NORDSTROM and T. WATERS, Swagelok Company, Solon, Ohio

I
n many analytical instrumentation systems, the analyzer does
not provide an absolute measurement. Rather, it provides a rel-
ative response based on settings established during calibration,
which is a critical process subject to significant error. To calibrate
an analyzer, a calibration fluid of known contents and quantities
is passed through the analyzer, producing measurements of com-
ponent concentration. If these measurements are not consistent
with the known quantities in the calibration fluid, the analyzer is
adjusted accordingly. When the process samples are analyzed, the
accuracy of the analyzer’s reading will depend on the the calibra-
tion process accuracy. It is imperative to understand how error
or contamination can be introduced through calibration; when
calibration can—and cannot—address a perceived performance
issue with the analyzer; how atmospheric pressure or temperature
fluctuations can undo the calibration work; and when and when
not to calibrate.
small amount of calibration gas may leak into the sample stream
and throw off the measurements.
In some applications, the US Environmental Protection
Agency requires that the calibration fluid be introduced at an
early point in the sampling system, usually near the probe. The
reasoning is that the calibration fluid should be subjected to the
same variables as the sample stream. This makes good sense,
and such a set up will provide, in addition, a fair estimate of the
amount of time it takes for a sample to travel from the probe to
the analyzer. As noted in the first article in this series, that time
period is often underestimated or unknown.
However, a relatively large quantity of calibration fluid is
required if it is to run through the entire sampling system. It is
not surprising that many facilities cannot entertain this option.
A good compromise is to run the calibration fluid through the
stream selection system, dedicating one stream to the fluid. Here

System design. One common problem in calibration is incor-

rect system configuration. In many cases, the calibration fluid is
Analyzer
mistakenly introduced downstream of the stream selection valve
system and without the benefits of a double block and bleed
(DBB) configuration (Fig. 1). A better place to introduce the cali-
bration fluid would be through the sample stream selection system
illustrated in Fig. 2. The purpose of a sample stream selection
Calibration gas

system is to enable rapid replacement of sample streams without Sampling

conditioning
the risk of cross-contamination. In Figs. 1 and 2 in the sample system
stream selection system, each stream is outfitted with two block
valves and a bleed valve (to vent) to ensure that only one stream
is making its way to the analyzer one at a time.
Over the years, stream selection systems have evolved from
DBB configurations composed of conventional components to
modular, miniaturized systems (New Sampling/Sensor Initiative,
ANSI/ISA 76.00.02). The most efficient systems provide fast To vent
purge times, low valve actuation pressures, and enhanced safety Stream
characteristics, together with high-flow capacity and consistent selection
pressure drop from stream to stream for a predictable delivery system
time to the analyzer.
A stream selection system provides the greatest insurance
against the possibility of the calibration fluid leaking into a
Sample Sample Sample
sample stream. Nevertheless, some technicians will bypass this stream stream stream
assembly and locate the calibration fluid as close as possible to #1 #2 #3
the analyzer with the intent of conserving this expensive fluid. If
a single ball valve is employed, as in Fig. 1, the attempt to con- FIG. 1 In this configuration, calibration gas is incorrectly
serve calibration gas may result in biased analyzer readings. The introduced downstream of the stream selection system
analyzer may be properly calibrated, but there is the risk that a without the benefits of a DBB assembly.

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I 73
PROCESS ANALYZERS
Analyzer
Sampling
conditioning
system
To vent
Stream
selection
system
Sample Sample
stream stream
#1 #2
Calibration gas
FIG. 2 As shown in this configuration, the calibration gas is
best introduced through the sample stream selection
system, where a DBB assembly guards against the risk of
contamination.
it stands the best chance of reaching the analyzer without being
contaminated by the sampling streams, and, when not in use,
two block valves will prevent it from contaminating the sample
streams. With miniature modular platforms, the calibration fluid
amount required will be minimal.
Calibration limitations. To effectively calibrate an analyzer,
the operator, technician or engineer should understand, theoretically,
what calibration is, what it can correct and what it cannot. Let’s start
with the difference between precision and accuracy. A shooter’s target
is a good metaphor for explanatory purposes. In Fig. 3, the shooter
has produced a series of hits (in red) on the target. Since the hits
are very close together in one cluster, it can rightly be said that the
shooter is precise. Time and again, the shooter is hitting the target
in the same place. Precision yields repeatable outcomes. However,
the shooter is not hitting the target center and, therefore, has low
accuracy. If the shooter makes an adjustment and lands all of the hits
in the target center, the shooter is both precise and accurate.
The same terms can be applied to analyzers. An analyzer must
first be precise. It must yield repeatable results when presented
with a known quantity in the form of a calibration fluid. If it
does not, then the analyzer is malfunctioning or the system is not
maintaining the sample at constant conditions. Calibration can-
not correct for imprecision.
If the analyzer produces consistent results but the results are
not the same as the known calibration fluid composition, then the
analyzer is said to be inaccurate. This situation can and should be
addressed through calibration. This is called correcting the bias.
74
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
Bias
FIG. 3 The shooter is precise but not accurate. If the bias is
corrected, the shooter will be both precise and accurate.
Even if the analyzer is found to be precise and accurate when
tested with calibration fluids, it is still possible that it will yield
inaccurate results when analyzing the sample stream. If the analyzer
is programmed to count red molecules and it encounters pink
ones, what does it do? The pink molecules look red to the analyzer
so it counts them as red, resulting in an inflated red count. This is
called positive interference: A molecule that should not be counted
is counted because, to the analyzer it looks similar to the molecule
that should be counted. For example, in a system designed to count
propane molecules, propylene molecules may show up as well. It’s
possible that the analyzer will count them as propane because it was
not configured to make a distinction between the two.
No analyzer is perfect, but they all strive for “selectivity,”
which means they respond to just the molecules you want them
to and not to anything else. Some analyzers are more complex
and are programmed to chemically inhibit certain types of inter-
ference. For example, a total organic compound (TOC) analyzer
is designed to measure carbon content in waste water so it can
be determined if hydrocarbons are being disposed of inappro-
priately. To do so accurately, the analyzer removes a source of
positive interference—such as inorganic carbons, like limestone,
which are present in hard water. Then, it measures the organic
carbons only. Without this initial step, the analyzer would mea-
sure both organic and inorganic carbon, confusing hydrocarbons
with hard water.
Another type of interference is negative interference: A mol-
ecule that should be counted isn’t counted because another molecule
is hiding it. For example, in fluorinated drinking water, an elec-
trode is used to analyze the fluoride amount in the water. However,
hydrogen ions, which are common in drinking water, hide the
fluoride so the count is inaccurately low. The analyzer may read 1
ppm, which is a standard dose, but, in fact, the water may contain
10 ppm. The solution is to remove the interference source. By
introducing a buffer solution, the hydrogen ions are removed and
the electrode can accurately measure the fluoride.
With an understanding of positive and negative interference,
as well as precision and accuracy, we begin to grasp the formidable
challenges we face in enabling analyzers to yield desired results. In
the field, you will often hear something like this: “The analyzer
is not working. It needs calibrating.” There is an easy assumption
:PVS
FRVJQNFOU
JTOµU
UIF
POMZ
UIJOH

PQFSBUJOH
VOEFS
QSFTTVSF
:PVµSF
VOEFS
NPSF
QSFTTVSF
UIBO
FWFS
UP
JODSFBTF
QSPEVDUJPO


FWFO
XJUI
OFX
FOWJSPONFOUBM
SFHVMBUJPOT
BOE
B
TIPSUBHF
PG

TLJMMFE
NBOQPXFS
4,'
DBO
IFMQ
%SBXJOH
PO
PWFS

ZFBST
PG
FYQFSJFODF
XJUI

SF¾OFSJFT
XPSMEXJEF

XF
QSPWJEF
B
TJOHMF
TPVSDF
GPS
B
SBOHF


PG
JOUFHSBUFE
TPMVUJPOT
EFTJHOFE
UP
FYUFOE
TFSWJDF
MJGF
BOE


JNQSPWF
QFSGPSNBODF
PG
UVSCJOFT

QVNQT

NPUPST

GBOT



DPNQSFTTPST

BOE
PUIFS
FRVJQNFOU
DSJUJDBM
UP
ZPVS
PQFSBUJPO
4PMVUJPOT
SBOHF
GSPN
CFBSJOH
VQHSBEFT
UP
IJHIMZ
BEWBODFE

BTTFU
NBOBHFNFOU
BQQSPBDIFT

BOE
GSPN
BVUPNBUJD

MVCSJDBUJPO
TZTUFNT
UP
UIF
JOEVTUSZµT
MFBEJOH
DPOEJUJPO

4,'
IFMQFE
B
SF¾OFSZ
SFEF¾OF
JUT
NBJOUFOBODF
NPOJUPSJOH
TZTUFNT

CPUI
IBOEIFME
BOE
POMJOF
TUSBUFHZ
GPS
NFDIBOJDBM

FMFDUSJDBM

BOE
TUBUJD

'PS
B
OPQSFTTVSF
EJTDVTTJPO
PG
ZPVS
DIBMMFOHFT
BOE
IPX
XF

FRVJQNFOU
5IF
QMBOU
XBT
BCMF
UP
DVU
NBJOUFOBODF

DBO
IFMQ
ZPV
NFFU
UIFN

UBML
UP
ZPVS
4,'
SFQSFTFOUBUJWF
DPTUT
CZ
GPVS
NJMMJPO
FVSPT
QFS
ZFBS

BOE
BDIJFWFE


B

JODSFBTF
JO
BWBJMBCJMJUZ
Select 54 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

5IF
1PXFS
PG
,OPXMFEHF
&OHJOFFSJOH

XXXTLGDPNIQJ
PROCESS ANALYZERS
that if the analyzer is not producing the desired result, calibration
is the answer. But as we have just seen, calibration has its limita-
tions. It is not the answer to all problems.
Controlling for atmospheric changes in gas analyz-
ers. Gas analyzers are essentially molecule counters. When they
are calibrated, a known concentration of gas is introduced, and
the analyzer’s output is checked to ensure that it is counting cor-
rectly. But what happens when the atmospheric pressure changes
by 5–10%, as it is known to do in some climates? The number of
molecules in a given volume will vary with the change in atmo-
spheric pressure and, as a result, the analyzer’s count will change.
There is a common misperception that atmospheric pressure is a
constant 14.7 psia (1 bar), but, based on the weather, it may fluc-
tuate as much as 1 psi (0.07 bar) up or down. For the calibration
process to be effective, absolute pressure in the sampling system
during calibration and sample analysis must be the same. Abso-
lute pressure may be defined as the total pressure above a perfect
vacuum. In a sampling system, it would be the system pressure as
measured by a gauge, plus atmospheric pressure.
To understand the degree of fluctuation in measurement that
may be brought about by changes in absolute pressure, refer to
the perfect gas law:
PV = nRT
where P = pressure, psia; V = volume, in.3; n = number of moles
(molecules); R = gas constant; and T = absolute temperature, °F.
Rearranging this equation to read n = PV/RT shows that as
temperature and pressure change, the number of molecules pres-
Deliquescent Drying Technology
UBLES
TR O deliver reliable and safe performance
me
So
D RY I NG
fo r ASOIL ...
RO , G
r KE
you
www.newton-s.com
Select 166 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
76
ent in the standard volume also changes. Pressure changes are
more critical than temperature fluctuations. One atmosphere of
pressure is defined as 14.3 psi. Therefore, a 1 psi variation in pres-
sure can change the number of molecules in the analyzer volume
by about 7%. Temperature, on the other hand, is measured on
the absolute scale, keeping in mind that absolute zero is –460°F
(–273°C), so a 1°F (0.5°C) temperature variation changes the
number of molecules by only about 0.3%. In summary, it is prob-
able that one might get a large change in pressure in percentage
terms. It is not probable that one would get a large temperature
change in percentage terms.
If pressure is so critical, how does one control for it? Some
analyzers, especially infrared and ultraviolet, allow atmospheric
pressure to affect the reading but then later correct for it elec-
tronically. However, many analyzers, including nearly all gas
chromatographs, do not correct for atmospheric pressure fluc-
tuations; most systems do not correct for it, and many system
engineers or operators are satisfied to ignore it. Some believe that
atmospheric fluctuations are not significant. Others maintain that
any atmospheric fluctuations are compensated for by other related
or unrelated variables affecting the analyzer, and it all comes out in
the wash. Nevertheless, atmospheric fluctuations can be extremely
significant. Let’s suppose that, when you calibrate your analyzer,
the atmospheric pressure is X, but, later, when you inject the
process gas, the atmospheric pressure is X + 1 psi (0.07 bar). The
answer may be as much as 7% off the measured value.
With environmental regulations, most analyzer systems now
vent to flare stacks or other return points. Since pressure fluctua-
BEGEMANN® Excellent
Minerals
Centrifugal Process Pumps Solutions
Weir Minerals France MINERALS
Precision Engineered for API 610
Delivering flawless performance in the
demanding petrochemical environment
requires a product that you can trust to
under the toughest conditions.
With 40 years of experience doing
exactly that, the Begemann range of
centrifugal pumps delivers where it
matters.
Weir Minerals France
Europarc du Chêne - 11 rue Pascal - 69500 BRON France
Tel : +33 472 817 272 - Fax : +33 472 817 643 - www.weirminerals.com
Select 167 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

tions from such destinations will affect pres-
sure upstream in the analyzer, there are vent
systems, equipped with educators and regu-
lators, designed to control for these fluctua-
tions. Unfortunately, these systems employ
regulators that are referenced to atmosphere.
As a result, while these systems control for
fluctuations from the vent, they do not con-
trol for fluctuations in atmospheric pressure,
which, by far, could be the greater of the
two sets of fluctuations. For such a system to
control for atmospheric as well as vent pres-
sure fluctuations, an absolute pressure regula-
tor is required. Unlike a normal regulator, an
absolute pressure regulator is not comparing
pressure inside the system to pressure outside
the system, which is itself fluctuating accord-
ing to the weather. Rather, it is comparing
pressure inside the system to a constant set
pressure that does not fluctuate at all (or very
little). Often, this set pressure is actually 0
psia (0 bar).
Validation vs. calibration. The best
method for calibration is one that employs
an automated system of regular validation,
with statistical process control. Validation is
the process of checking the analyzer at regu-
lar time intervals to determine whether it is
on or off the target. In validation, a reading
is taken and that reading is recorded. It is
the same process as calibration, except that
no correction is made.
An automated system will run a vali-
dation check at regular intervals, usually
once a day, and analyze the outcome for any
problem that would require an adjustment
or recalibration. The system will allow for
inevitable ups and downs, but if it observes
a consistent trend—one that is not correct-
ing itself—then it alerts the operator that
the system could be going catastrophically
wrong.
A human being can manually validate
a system at regular intervals, just like an
automated system, but, more often than
not, the human being will also make an
adjustment to the analyzer, even if the
system is just 1% off. The result is a series
of occasional and minor adjustments that
introduce additional variance and make
it difficult to analyze trends and deter-
mine when the system is truly running off
course. It is better to allow an automated
system to run unattended until a statistical
analysis of the results suggests that atten-
tion is required.
Conclusion. Calibration is an impor-
tant process and an absolute requirement in
analytical systems, but care must be taken
BORSIG
PROCESS ANALYZERS
to perform this process properly. The oper-
ator, technician or engineer should under-
stand how best to introduce the calibration
gas into the system (i.e., through a DBB
configuration so that the possibility of
cross-stream contamination is minimized)
and how to control for atmospheric fluc-
tuations in gas analyzers (i.e., through an
absolute pressure regulator). Further, the
technician or operator should understand
the calibration limitations—what prob-
lems it can address and what problems it
cannot—and how frequent adjustments to
the analyzer based on incomplete data can
introduce error. If the analyzer is regularly
validated with an automated system and is
properly calibrated when a statistical analy-
sis justifies it, then calibration will function
as it should, and will provide an important
service in enabling the analyzer to provide
accurate measurements. HP
Next month: Part 3. The article will
discuss major issues leading to an unrepre-
sentative sample and provide recommen-
dations on how to avoid a compromised
sample. Items covered will be: dead legs and
dead spaces; component design and place-
ment; adsorption and permeation; internal
and external leaks; cross contamination in
stream selection; and phase preservation.
Membrane Technology
for Processes and
Doug Nordstrom is the mar-
keting manager for analytical instru-
Environment
mentation at Swagelok Company,
focusing his efforts on advancing the Emission Control Systems
company’s involvement in sample - BORSIG Vapour Recovery Units
handling systems. He previously worked in new prod- - BORSIG Carbon Retrofit Units
uct development for Swagelok and earned a number - BORSIG Vent Recovery Systems
of Swagelok patents in products including the SSV and Product Recovery Units
MPC. Mr. Nordstrom graduated with a BS degree in
mechanical engineering from Case Western Reserve Gas Conditioning
University and with an MS degree in business adminis- Advanced Separations
tration from Kent State University.
Other BORSIG Products:
Compressors, Pressure Vessels,
Heat Exchangers, Boilers,
Power Plant Technology,
Industrial Services
Tony Waters has 45 years of expe-
rience with process analyzers and their
sampling systems. He has worked in
BORSIG GROUP
engineering and marketing roles for Egellsstrasse 21
an analyzer manufacturer, an end- D-13507 Berlin/Germany
user and a systems integrator. Mr. Waters founded three Phone: +49 (30) 4301-01
companies that provide specialized analyzer services to Fax: +49 (30) 4301-2236
the process industries and he is also an expert in the E-mail: info@borsig.de
application of process analyzers in refineries and chemi- www.borsig.de
cal plants. He is particularly well known for presenting
process analyzer training courses in Asia, Europe and the
Member of KNM Group Berhad
Middle East, as well as in North and South America.
Select 164 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 SUPERSIZE
ME! Here’s one size that fills your sulphuric
acid processing needs no matter how
many gallons/minute you want to pump–
with the power to match. Able to pump
up to 14,000 gallons/minute (3,200 cubic
meters/hour) with 800 hp (600kw), the
18H Lewis Supersize pump can easily
accommodate the processing needs of the
largest sulphuric acid plants in the world.

Standard replacement parts always

available. Emergency service or parts to
any major airport worldwide within
72 hours. Guaranteed!

Lewis Pumps – Serving molten sulphur

and sulphuric acid plants everywhere
since 1891. Customers in over
100 countries can’t be wrong.
Select 67 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

And If the Lewis “Supersize” is a little too much for you, we have the pump to fit your specific needs. Guaranteed!

CHAS. S. LEWIS & CO., INC.ÊUÊnÈÓxÊÀ>˜ÌÊ,œ>`ÊUÊ-̰ʜՈÃ]ʈÃÜÕÀˆÊÈΣÓÎÊ1°-°
°

/ii«…œ˜i\ʭΣ{®Ên{·{{ÎÇÊUÊ/iiv>Ý\ʭΣ{®Ên{·ǙÈ{ÊUÊ ‡“>ˆ\ÊÃ>iÃJi܈ëՓ«Ã°Vœ“Ê
 REFINING DEVELOPMENTS

Hydrocracking solutions squeeze

more ULSD from heavy ends
New processing alternatives enable upgrading vacuum residuals
into higher-value products
F. MOREL, J. BONNARDOT and E. BENAZZI, Axens, Rueil-Malmaison, France

D
espite the present economic crisis, demand for diesel fuels (Fig. 2). By 2020, demand is projected to expand by 24% and reach
is forecast to increase through 2020, albeit at a slower rate. 16.8 MMbpd. Within this increase, fuel consumption by LDVs will
Various forecasts indicate that world demand for diesel have grown by 82%, and will account for 19% of total demand.
fuels should reach about 28.2 million bpd (MMbpd) by 2020
as compared to the present demand of 24.3 MMbpd. It is fore- Asia-Pacific and EU-25 regions’ fuel demand. The
seen that the gap between demand for diesel and gasoline, which highest demand growth for diesel is expected in Asia-Pacific and
during 2008 was 2.6 MMbpd, will double to approximately EU-25 regions, expanding by 0.7 MMbpd and 1.04 MMbpd,
5 MMbpd by 2020. respectively, over a 12-year period (see Fig. 3). Consequently, the
worldwide ratio of gasoline to on-road diesel will decrease from
Diesel market. There are two elements within the diesel mar- 1.9 in 2000, to about 1.3 by 2020. Europe will continue its estab-
ket: off-road, and on-road sales. Off-road sales relate to diesel for lished trend, falling to a very low ratio of 0.4. Conversely, North
marine inland waterways, for heating, and for locomotives and America will remain a gasoline-oriented marketplace.
tractors. This market is expected to experience an annual 0.4% Specifications will continue to be tightened, with an on-road
growth rate. On-road use of diesel fuel for light-duty vehicles ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) with less than 10 parts per mil-
(LDVs), heavy-goods vehicles (HGVs) and buses is anticipated lion (ppm), low polyaromatics content and high cetane. These
to increase 1.8% annually through 2020. requirements appear necessary to meet the environmental targets
Off-road diesel consumption will decline as a proportion of for nitrous oxide (NOx) and particulate matter (PM) imposed
total sales. By 2020, off-road diesel usage will represent only on engine emissions in regions such as Europe. During the next
40% of the global market, compared to 58% in 1990. This 15 years, sulfur will virtually disappear from all diesel fuels. To
change is mainly due to reduced gasoil consumption for domes- complete the fuel market picture, jet fuel demand will increase,
tic heating (Fig. 1). while heavy-fuels demand will diminish.
Worldwide on-road diesel consumption is essentially due to Differential price between diesel and heavy fuel oil will con-
freight movement via trucks. In 2008, HGVs accounted for 74% tinue to make resid and vacuum gasoil (VGO) hydrocracking pro-
of diesel purchases, with buses and LDVs each consuming 13% cesses attractive opportunities. The challenge will be to produce
more quality middle distillates, to convert refractory feeds and to
upgrade lower-quality refinery streams.
100
On-road diesel
Worldwide diesel/consumption, %

t
-JHIU
EVUZ
WFIJDMFT
-%7T
 10% 19%
80 Heavy goods vehicles (HGVs)

t
)FBWZ
HPPET
WFIJDMFT
)(7T

Buses

t
#VTFT
Light-duty vehicles (LDVs)
60 AAGR 08–20
58% +1.8 %/y 13% 13%

40 44%
Off-road diesel 40% 71%
AAGR 08–20 +24%

t
.BSJOF +0.4 %/y 2020: 16.8 MMbpd
20
t
3BJMXBZT

t
)FBUJOH
PJM

t
0UIFST 74%
0
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2008: 13.5 MMbpd
*LDVs = Passenger cars (PCs) + sports utility vehicles (SUVs) + light trucks (LTs) *LDVs = Passenger cars + Sports utility vehicles + Light trucks
Source: Axens & other sources (2009) Source: Axens (2009), World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2004)

FIG. 1 Worldwide on-road and off-road diesel consumption. FIG. 2 Worldwide on-road diesel demand.

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I 79
REFINING DEVELOPMENTS

Technical way forward. Hydrocracking

technology offers an excellent solution to
these issues that can upgrade a variety of feed-
stocks to be upgraded, including VGO from
conventional and heavy crude, deasphalted
0.10 MMbdoe
FSU
oil (DAO) from solvent deasphalting (SDA)
unit of vacuum residue (VR), coker distil-
0.7 MMbdoe lates, light-cycle oil (LCO), and heavy-cycle
0.41 MMbdoe Europe
North America oil (HCO) from fluid catalytic cracker (FCC)
units and vacuum distillates from vacuum
0.46 MMbdoe resid (VR) hydrocracking units (Fig. 4).
0.29 Middle East 1.04 MMbdoe
Asia Pacific
Depending on the feedstock impuri-
MMbdoe
Africa ties and conversion level required, several
0.29 MMbdoe proven hydrocracking processes can pro-
Latin America vide upgrading from low to medium con-
Global on-road diesel incremental
version through high to full conversion and
Source: Axens demand 2008–2020 + 3.3 MMbdoe yields of high-quality middle distillates.
There is no universal solution. So, different
FIG. 3 On-road diesel incremental demand. hydrocracking technologies are required to
meet various refinery conversion needs.
Mild-hydrocracking. For example, a
mild hydrocracking process integrated with a finishing middle-
Crude
distillate hydrotreater can upgrade VGO and DAO -based feeds,
Topping
oil LCO and light and heavy coker gasoil (LCGO and HCGO)
streams. This process increases the refinery’s ULSD production
while minimizing capital expenditure (CAPEX). In addition,
VGO unconverted VGO is an excellent FCC feedstock, having a lower
CFHT*
FCC
MHC** sulfur and higher hydrogen content.
High-pressure high-conversion hydrocracking processes. To
Vac. dist. Hydrocracking
achieve higher conversion levels, a high-pressure (HP) high-conver-
LCO sion fixed-bed hydrocracking can provide full conversion of VGO-
based feedstocks, HCGO, or light C3 or C4-DAO, mainly to top-
quality middle-distillate products. This method can upgrade FCC
RDS*** Residue
FCC effluents such as LCO and HCO. The technology can be engineered
Ebullated bed
VR hydrocracking for liquid recycle, one-stage and two-stage processes. HP high-con-
version fixed-bed hydrocracking processes have successfully produced
DAO Ebullated bed ULSD from VGO when integrated with a VR hydrocracking unit.
SDA Ebullated-bed technology can be applied for deep con-
DAO hydrocracking
HCGO version of high refractory feedstocks such as C5-DAO-based
*CFHT = Cat feed hydrotreating; Pitch feeds—particularly difficult VGOs mainly converting them to
**MHC = Mild hydrocracking middle distillates.
***RDS = Residual desulfrization unit
In addition, new-generation hydrocracking catalysts have been
FIG. 4 VGO and residue conversion processes. developed for a wide range of feedstock characteristics, product

TABLE 1. Arabian heavy derived feeds

VGO + HCGO LCO C5 DAO
Conradson Carbon Residue in feed, %

Heavy DAO-based feeds Yield on VR, wt% — — 70

MHC with Sp. gr. 0.943 0.945 0.996
guard bed Ebullated bed
hydrocracking Sulfur, wt% 3.36 0.13 4.45
Nitrogen, ppm 1,550 100 2,600
Conradson carbon residue, wt% <1 < 0.1 12
Mild
hydrocracking Integrated hydrocracking/ Nickel + vanadium, ppm <2 < 0.1 52
hydrotreating C7 insolubles, wt% < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05
Low asphaltene VGO/DAO feeds
ASTM distillation, °C
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 T 5% 366 239 529
Net conversion, %
T 50% 459 281
FIG. 5 VGO and DAO conversion mapping. T 95% 555 350
Note: The VGO–HCGO blend is a typical hydrocracking feed containing 24% HCGO.

80
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
 REFINING DEVELOPMENTS

TABLE 2. The refractory nature of diesel from MHC is

due to high nitrogen and aromatics contents
Lights,
naphtha SR diesel already Converted diesel
hydrotreated from MHC
Sulfur, ppm 265 340
4,6-DBT, % of total sulfur 37.4 35.7
Nitrogen, ppm 14 254
VGO
Aromatics, wt% 25 56

H2 Diesel Low S TABLE 3. Mild hydrocracking product results

HDT VGO
VGO section Polishing section
Diesel from Feed Characteristics
CDU, FCC, VB, 10 ppm S
coker, etc. diesel to Sp. gr. 0.9317 0.889
stripping
Sulfur, wt% 2.67 2.0
Nitrogen, ppmw 1,392
FIG. 6 Integrated MHC and diesel hydrotreater process.
TBP cut point, °C 350–570 200–360
Yields vs. feed, vol%
slates and quality targets. These catalysts can maximize diesel Naphtha 3.4 0.5
selectivity, improve diesel and jet fuel quality, as well as upgrade Diesel 28.7 99.0
the quality of the unconverted bottoms for lube-oil production. Hydrotreated VGO 70.7 —
Guidance for selecting these technologies is listed in Fig. 5. The
H2 consumption, wt% 1.17 1.08
X-axis represents the conversion level. The Y-axis defines the refrac-
HDT VGO (FCC feed) properties Diesel properties
tory level of the feedstock to be converted, expressed as Conradson
Carbon Residue (CCR) content. VR hydrocracking and residue Sp. gr. 0.897 < 0.845
desulfurization technologies will not be discussed in this article. Sulfur, ppm < 400 < 10
Cetane number — > 51
Integrated solution for ULSD production. Conven- Hydrogen, wt% 13.0 —
tional mild hydrocracking (MHC) has a low to medium conver-
sion rate within typically 20% to 40% of the feedstock being
converted mainly to diesel. Unconverted oil is a high-quality FCC cycle. Disassociating diesel quality from the MHC operation
feedstock producing higher gasoline yields, higher octane reten- makes it possible to improve other characteristics such as density
tion and low-sulfur products. Although providing remarkable or polyaromatics content.
improvements in FCC operations, MHC is not a panacea. In engineering terms, the integrated MHC process elimi-
The low hydrogen partial pressure (typically, 40 bar to 80 nates two compressors and an air cooler, while providing better
bar) do not achieve a ULSD below 10 wt ppm. The diesel heat integration than would two separate units. Systems can be
obtained, owing to higher aromatics and organic-nitrogen con- designed to co-process other difficult refinery feedstocks, typically
tent, is more refractory to hydrotreating than straight-run (SR) LCO, LCGO and visbroken GO.
diesel and requires further hydrotreating. This has resulted in Commercial experience. Over 40 MHC units have been
the integrated MHC development. The integrated MHC pro- licensed four of which use integrated diesel hydrotreating tech-
cess resolves the problem by disassociating the quality of the niques. CAPEX ranges between $1,700/bbl and $3,200/bbl
diesel cut from the conversion level, thereby achieving ULSD depending on capacity, feedstock properties and conversion levels.
specifications while avoiding the production of over-quality Table 3 lists the results of a commercial integrated MHC unit
FCC feed. Table 2 shows the higher aromatics and organic using a blend of heavy VGO from Arabian/Russian crude, oper-
nitrogen species between MHC and SR diesel, which inhibit ating at 30% conversion and processing at the same time in the
hydrodesulfurization reactions, making it more suitable for integrated polishing section a blend of heavy SRGO with LCO.
refractory than for further hydrotreating.1 The diesel cut exiting the VGO section is not inline with
In the integrated MHC process flow diagram (Fig. 6), VGO Euro V specifications. This diesel cut is then co-hydrotreated in
feedstock is fed to the MHC reaction section. The reactor efflu- the polishing section with a blend of LCO and heavy SRGO.
ent is stripped and fractionated. The hydrotreated VGO cut is The final diesel cut achieves Euro-V specification with a specific
dispatched to the FCC unit or storage, while the MHC diesel gravity lower than 0.845, a cetane number higher than 51 and a
receives the entire hydrogen make-up required for both reaction sulfur content under 10 ppm.
sections, after which it is polished with the reactor in a once- The unconverted oil (UCO) is used as an FCC feedstock, with
through mode. hydrogen content of 13 wt% providing a gasoline production
The highest hydrogen partial pressure within the polishing boost to the FCC of about 14 wt%. Additional UCO hydrogen
reactor enables to convert the highly refractory nitrogen and sulfur content would only lead to a small increase in gasoline yield. In
compounds remaining in the hydrocracked diesel cut. Regard- that case, the integrated MHC technology can produce at the
less of operating variations in the MHC section, diesel quality same time, optimum feed to FCC and Euro-V specification diesel
is guaranteed to remain constant throughout the entire process stream while minimizing CAPEX and hydrogen consumption.
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 81
REFINING DEVELOPMENTS

FG/LPG FG/LPG
Naphtha
Naphtha pool/CCR CCR/Isom
Kerosine
Kerosine Jet A1 Jet A1
Feed Integrated Feed Fixed-bed
HDT hydrocracking/ SEP HDT SEP Diesel
Diesel Euro V hydrocracking
hydrotreating Euro V
Frac Frac
2nd stage
Liquid recycle Purge Fixed-bed Purge
hydrocracking
FIG. 7 Single-stage high-pressure hydrocracking process
once-through or with liquid recycle.
FIG. 9 Two-stage high-pressure hydrocracking process.

H2S + NH3 FG/LPG Single-stage once-through configuration. Feedstock flow

Naphtha
pool/CCR is sent through two reactors in series containing hydrorefining
and hydrocracking catalysts, respectively. Up to 90% feedstock
Hydrocracking

Kerosine
Jet A1 conversion is attained, as shown in Fig. 7.
Feed
HDT1 SEP1 HDT2 SEP2 Diesel When needing to process feedstocks with nitrogen content
Euro V of 5,000+ ppm, the refining technology licensor proposed the
Integrated reaction section addition of a hydrotreatment reactor and separator, to reduce
Frac UCO ammonia pressure in the main process section, can be installed to
Lube oil maximize hydrocracking activity (Fig. 8).
Single-stage with liquid recycle. By recycling unconverted
FIG. 8 Single-stage high-pressure hydrocracking process using
once-through with intermediate separation.
residue to the hydrocracking reactor (Fig. 7) a full-conversion level
can be reached. Conversion-per-pass is typically around 60 vol%,
and higher selectivity to middle distillation is achieved compared to
High-conversion hydrocracking solutions. The HP a once-through configuration. A small purge prevents heavy poly-
high-conversion, fixed-bed hydrocracking technology is appropri- nuclear-aromatics (PNAs) accumulating in the recycle oil loop.
ate when maximizing middle distillate production from VGO and Two-stage hydrocracking. The first stage operates as a once-
light DAO, and it can provide excellent characteristics and high through process for a mild conversion, and the unconverted frac-
conversion rates for distillates. Twenty-five HP high-conversion, tion is separated for second-stage processing (Fig. 9). The process
fixed-bed hydrocracking units, including all three configurations, offers a maximum yield of middle distillates, along with a good
have been licensed. Investment cost per barrel of feedstock is diesel vs. kerosine ratio.
$4,100 to $6,700. The choice of configuration is determined by
product slate and investment strategy. Case study—three process configurations. The three
different process configurations were com-
TABLE 4. HP high-conversion fixed-bed hydrocracking results pared using the VGO + HCGO feedstock,
as defined in Table 1. In all instances, the
Feed VGO + HCGO VGO+HCGO+LCO VGO + HCGO VGO + HCGO
Scheme 1-stage 1-stage 1-stage 2-stage middle distillate products, including kero-
Once-through Once-through Recycle sine, jet fuel and a ULSD cut, surpassed the
Conversion% 85 85 Full Full international specifications. Table 4 lists the
Yields vs. feed, vol% Base
yields and product properties.
Naphtha 30–35 Base -2 Base +0.5 Base -8
Single-stage once-through config-
Middle distillate (kerosine + diesel) 65–70 Base +2 Base +15 Base +24 uration. This is the lowest-cost configura-
UCO 14–20 Base -3 <4 <2 tion and it provides high yields of naphtha-
H2 consumption, wt% 2.5–2.9 Base +0.2 Base +0.1 Base +0.1 plus-middle distillates along with UCO.
Middle distillate properties (kerosine + diesel) With a typical octane of 80, the light naph-
Sp. gr. 0.820 0.829 0.823 0.826 tha is sent to the gasoline pool, while the
heavy naphtha, with a naphthene content
Sulfur, ppm < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10
of over 50%, makes an excellent catalytic
Cetane number 53 50 54 56
reforming feedstock.
UCO properties Middle distillates yield typically is
Sp. gr. 0.835 0.835 0.838 between 65 vol% and 70 vol% and meets
Sulfur, ppm < 50 < 50 < 50 ULSD specifications. The product can be
Hydrogen, wt% 14.3 14.3 14.3 divided between on-specification kerosine
BMCI < 10 < 10 < 10
with a smoke point of 25 mm, and heavy
diesel with a cetane number higher than 60
Viscosity Index after dewaxing > 120 > 120 > 120
(Table 4, column 1).
82
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
 REFINING DEVELOPMENTS

UCO with a Bureau of Mines Correla-

tion Index number less than 10 is indicative
of a highly hydrogenated product that can
be used as a steam-cracker feedstock.2 After
dewaxing, UCO exceeding 120 on the vis-
cosity index is suitable as a Group III lube
oil base stock.
To meet middle distillates demand, some
refineries maximize LCO production from
the FCC unit, despite needing to upgrade
the LCO before being blended with the
diesel pool. One solution is to co-process
LCO with a VGO-based stream in the same
hydrocracker. LCO content in the feedstock
depends on the capacity of the FCC and HP
high-conversion, fixed-bed hydrocracking
units. Column 2 of Table 4 indicates yields
FIG. 10 Comprehensive reaction progress—3D gas chromatography.
and products obtained when 20% LCO is
blended with VGO+ HCGO, and hydro-
cracked in a once-through mode. Most of the LCO remains as able for full-feed conversion. Each produce similar volumes
middle distillate, with the rest converted to naphtha. The overall of C5+, but the two-stage configuration yields a higher diesel/
gasoline quantity is reduced, with middle distillate yields increased kerosine ratio.
as compared to the previous case. The cetane number of the With the single-stage and liquid recycle scheme, the middle
middle distillate is lower, but it remains acceptable. Hydrogen distillates yield is typically 80 vol% to 85 vol%, and the qual-
consumption is marginally higher, owing to the higher aromatic ity remains high. A small purge is needed to prevent heavy PNA
level in the LCO stream. concentration in the recycle loop, and the purge can subsequently
be processed as part of the FCC feedstock, or as feed for a steam
Single-stage configuration with liquid recycle. cracker. Hydrogen consumption is slightly higher than consump-
Single-stage recycle and two-stage configurations are both suit- tion for the once-through configuration.
THE

This full-day conference will encompass both

Downstream and Upstream forecasts for 2010.

FORECAST FORUM
The first half of the day will be the downstream
industry forecast. It will include the Hydrocarbon
DECEMBER 3, 2009 | OMNI HOUSTON HOTEL | HOUSTON, TEXAS Processing Market Data information and expert
analysts will discuss the future of the downstream
industry for 2010.
A lunch with a keynote presentation will close
the downstream and lead into the upstream.
The second half of the conference will focus on
where the upstream industry will be in 2010.

REGISTER TODAY
AND SAVE!
Sponsored by: www.GulfPub.com/IFF
Single Attendee: USD $450
Half day (plus lunch): USD $250
Team of Two: USD $800
Hosts: Table of Eight: USD $3,275

For more information,

please visit www.GulfPub.com/IFF,
email Events@GulfPub.com or
call +1 (713) 520-4475

Select 165 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 83
REFINING DEVELOPMENTS

Gas to hydrogen
H2 separation and purification
1st stage 2nd stage 3rd stage
Common HP To FG
Common makeup compressor and MP amine
Catalyst addition
PSA and MPU
H2 rich gas Separator

Oil to separation
and fractionation

VGO full Naphtha Ebullated-bed

VGO hydrocracker
conversion
separation and
fixed-bed
VGO fractionation
hydrocracking Euro V ULSD
VDU VGO

Naphtha and gasoil

VR Ebullated-bed
Separation and Catalyst withdrawal
hydrocracker Ebullating pump
fractionation LSFO
reactor
Hydrogen

FIG. 11 Simplified scheme for ebullated-bed VR hydrocracking with

Feed
VGO hydrocracking.
FIG. 13 Ebullated-bed hydrocracking reactor system.

FG
SRGO LPG better UCO characteristics in high VI base lube oil production.
CDU HDT Very high activity and selectivity coupled with full conversion,
C3=
VGO Integrated even with refractory feedstocks, are provided by a new genera-
FCC Naphtha tion of zeolite-based catalysts (HYK series) as shown in Fig. 10.
AR
VDU Fixed-bed Gasoline Product quality remains excellent throughout the cycle without
hydrocracker Middle a noticeable change in cetane number, or kerosine smoke point.
distillate Depending on the level of metal and other impurities in the feed-
VR VGO
stock, a demetallization catalyst could be required at the top of
Ebullated-bed LSFO the first reactor to ensure long cycle length.
hydrocracker
Knowledge of inhibiting species, refractory compounds, and
HCO
feedstocks is necessary to determine pretreatment operating con-
C3 1% LPG 7% ditions and select the most adapted catalysts. An understanding
Existing/revamped LSFO 7% of the relative kinetic reactivity of feedstock molecules is desir-
New
33% able to accurately tune the hydrogenation/acidity balance, which
Naphtha improves middle distillate selectivity and qualities (Fig. 10). These
and
Middle distillate 52% gasoline are key parameters for a successful unit design and catalyst selec-
tion providing higher operability and profitability.
FIG. 12 Refinery configuration selected.
Integrating high conversion VGO hydrocracking
process with VR hydrocracking technology. Residue
Two-stage hydrocracking configuration. This con- hydrocracking processes use ebullated-bed technology to manage
figuration provides an optimum yield of middle distillates that heavy feedstock containing high metal traces, sulfur, nitrogen,
can surpass 90 vol% with a maximum share of diesel in middle asphaltenes and solids. They can achieve conversion without
distillates. Product quality exceeds the fuel specifications. A producing coke material.
limited purge is needed, and hydrogen consumption is similar The VR ebullated-bed hydrocrackers reactor converts over
to other configurations. 75% of residue, while producing high-quality distillate VGO, and
unconverted bottoms that can be incorporated to low- or medium-
Hydrocracking catalyst developments. A typical sulfur fuel oil storage. Further hydroprocessing units are necessary
hydrocracker can use three new-generation catalysts developed to to upgrade primary products from residue hydrocracking.
treat a wide variety of feedstocks for the production of diverse prod- Integrating HP high-conversion, fixed-bed hydrocracking
uct slates, with high quality outcomes.3 Hydrorefining catalysts are methods with ebullated-bed technology is an interesting solu-
highly stable and promote hydrodenitrogenation (HDN) reactions tion to convert both VGO resulting from residue hydrocracking
to protect the downstream hydrocracking catalysts. They also ensure and SR VGO into diesel (Fig. 11). This solution is based on
hydrodesulfurization (HDS) and aromatic saturation reactions.4 an optimized management of the high-pressure pure hydrogen
Amorphus hydrocracking catalysts (HDK series) offer high network feeding the two hydrocracking units and including the
cracking activity and excellent selectivity, while being very active amine section. The developed solution can reduce CAPEX, while
for removing the ultimate organic nitrogen compounds. These guaranteeing flexibility and independent operation. The VGO
catalysts orient selectivity toward middle distillates, and create and VR hydrocracking units are both equipped with a separa-
84
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
 REFINING DEVELOPMENTS

tion and fractionation section, thus maxi- TABLE 5. Hydroconversion of and will reduce low-sulfur fuel oil (LSFO)
mizing diesel production. This is owing to heavy DAO with ebullated-bed production to 7%.
the full recovery of VGO coming from the hydrocracking process
VR hydrocracking unit (no loss in the fuel- Hydrocracking DAO. Using DAO
oil cut), the absence of ammonia and light Feed C5 DAO streams from the SDA unit can increase
technology
hydrocarbons, and no asphaltene carry- product output. Blended with VGO, C3
over from the ebullated-bed hydrocracking Yields vs. DAO Feed, vol% to C5–DAOs can be processed using modi-
unit to the integrated hydrocracking/ Naphtha 10.3 fied MHC and integrated hydrocracking/
hydrotreating unit. Middle distillate (kerosine + diesel) 49.6 hydrotreating technologies with adapted
VGO 40.7 operating conditions. In case the heavier
East European case study. The ebul- Vacuum residue – C5–DAO contains high metal traces (often
lated-bed/hydrocracking integrated con- H consumption vs. DAO feed, wt% 3.03
above 50 ppm) and a the CCR exceeds 10
figuration was chosen by an East European 2 wt%, the ebullated-bed hydroconversion unit
refiner. The objective is to obtain a 70% VR Yield of asphalt vs. VR feed, wt% 33.5
is more adapted to produce light products.
conversion so as to maximize Euro V diesel Middle distillate properties The DAO ebullated-bed hydroconversion
production and to produce a heavy fuel oil Sp. gr. 0.865 unit is the equivalent of the VR ebullated-bed
with less than 1% sulfur. Sulfur, ppm < 300 hydrocracker unit.
The ebullated-bed hydrocracking unit Cetane number 45 DAO ebullated-bed hydrocracking
will process 43,000 bpd of VR with a sulfur VGO properties requires online catalyst replacement and is
content of 2.9%, plus nickel and vanadium designed for both heavy VGO and DAO
Sp. gr. 0.910
metal traces of approximately 350 ppm. The conversion. The typical investment is
integrated hydrocracking/hydrotreating unit Sulfur, wt% < 0.20 approximately $4,500 to $5,500 per barrel
is designed to treat 36,000 bpd of a blend Hydrogen, wt% 12.5 of feedstock.
of SR VGO and VGO produced within the CCR, wt% < 0.5 The process uses one or several ebullated-
ebullated-bed hydrocracking unit. Nickel + vanadium, ppm < 0.1 bed reactors in series with an upward fluid
Fig. 12 also shows the benefit of upgrad- flow (Fig. 13). A circulation pump maintains
ing HCO produced by the existing FCC unit. The investment the catalyst in optimum mix and suspension, with a constant low
will allow the refinery to increase its Euro V diesel and middle pressure drop. The bed is backward-mixed in terms of both catalyst
distillates production, which represents 52% of the crude oil, movement and reactor liquid composition. Continuous move-

NOW WITH
EXPANDED COVERAGE AND ANALYSIS
THE 2010 HPI MARKET DATA BOOK
Available Early December 2010.
Proof only. Copyrighted material.
May not be reproduced without permission.
Order your copy today and be among
the first to see this year’s report.
Redesigned and with more vital information, graphs and illustrations HPI MARKETDATA
than ever before, the 2010 HPI Market Data Book is the most extensive
overview of the industry available, including:
WWW.HYDROCARBONPROCESSING.COM
2010
• A 2010 forecast of capital, maintenance and operating expenditures
by refining, petrochemicals and LNG/gas processing industries
• A 3-year history of new and total HPI construction project activity.
• Economic, Environmental and Industry trends and developments
driving spending in the upcoming year
• Plus! A bonus CD including over 10 years of trends on construction
activity and spending, courtesy of Construction Boxscore Database,
and updated worldwide.
A must-have planning tool, the HPI Market Data Book is loaded with
actionable insight into the Hydrocarbon Processing Industry in 2010.

DON’T MISS OUT! Order your copy

of the full-version today!
Call us at +1 (713) 520-4426 | Visit www.GulfPub.com For a FREE Synopsis of the 2010
Pre-orders are available. Marketing Data Book, visit www.
hydrocarbonprocessing.com/
hpimarketdatabook

Select 163 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009
I 85
REFINING DEVELOPMENTS

ment of the catalyst grains and the DAO to lighter products,

an isothermal temperature profile VR DAO such as gasoline, diesel and
(100) (89) Ebullated-bed Products (74)
inside the reactor mitigate cata- SDA at 75% VGO, with only a slight increase
hydrocracker at
DAO lift
lyst bed plugging as compared 85% conversion in asphalt yield (Fig. 14).
to a fixed bed. Higher reactor Asphalt (26)
temperatures can be maintained Overall conversion on Case study: Combining
in a moving bed system than in Unconverted DAO (15) Ural feed: 74% residual ebullated-bed
the fixed type, with the former hydrocracking and SDA.
achieving a higher conversion of FIG. 14 SDA plus residual ebullated-bed hydrocracking recycle Table 5 provides performance
feedstock to light fractions. Con- scheme. details of C 5 -DAO derived
version levels over 80% can be from Arabian Heavy crude pro-
achieved by balancing operating cessed through an ebullated-bed
temperature, residence time and catalyst replacement rates, and hydrocracker. The net conversion levels of 80% can be achieved
hydrodesulfurization (HDS) levels of 90% to 98% are obtained. from a single-stage, once-through ebullated-bed hydrocracker.
Controlling conversion and the HDS activity level in the reac- However, unconverted DAO, using VR product, would not be
tor is obtained by continuous catalyst renewal from the top of the highly upgraded, and could only be used as low-grade-sulfur
reactor, and a discharge unit at the bottom. Adding small daily fuel oil. A more attractive option is to recycle the low asphaltene
quantities of catalyst to the ebullated-bed reactor is a key feature content VR product to the SDA unit along with fresh VR feed.
that promotes constant product quality. Unlike a fixed-bed system, This will lead to a slight increase in asphalt production from
the unit’s operating period is not a function of catalyst activity or 30% to 33.5%.
pressure drop across the bed; rather, it is is determined by inspec- The major benefit of the recycling scheme is the total elimi-
tion and turnaround schedules set at between 24 and 36 months. nation of heavy DAO and VR through conversion into higher
Catalysts with high mechanical properties have been developed value products, as shown in Table 5. The small volume of avail-
to minimize fines production; achieve high HDS activity, metals able naphtha is a good reformer feedstock. Although the middle
removal and retention capacity; and ensure selective conversion distillate (50 vol% yield) has an acceptable cetane level, further
of DAO into diesel-boiling fractions. treatment in an integrated hydrotreater is required to obtain a
During the processing of C4 and C5–DAO, one option is to ULSD cut. With its low-sulfur content and a good hydrogen level,
recycle unconverted VR fractions blended with fresh VR in the the VGO can be sent to the FCC or VGO hydrocracker to further
SDA unit. This scheme succeeds in the near full conversion of increase middle distillate production.

H y d r o c a r b o n P r o c e s s i n g . c o m

WEBCAST
Now Available On-Demand
Heinz Bloch—Maintenance and Reliability Trends in the Refining, Petrochemical,
Gas Processing and LNG industries
Watch as Hydrocarbon Processing’s Reliability/Equipment Editor Heinz Bloch is interviewed by Editor Les Kane, in his first webcast
on maintenance and reliability trends in the refining, petrochemical, gas processing and LNG industries.
In these tough days of narrow refining margins, refiners have to do more with less and create greater efficiency with a smaller pool
of capital expenditures. This is not impossible, but it is challenging. Heinz Bloch addresses these issues head on in this timely and
informative webcast. Heinz advises participants on his belief system for effective reliability engineering, pulling no punches as he
describes his view that adding value requires effort and doing the right thing is very seldom the easy thing.
Heinz, as an editor for Hydrocarbon Processing for 10 years, has built a dedicated following worldwide in his area of responsibility.
He holds six U.S. patents and has authored over 460 technical papers and 17 books on machinery. He was an Exxon Chemical
Co. machinery specialist and held positions worldwide before retiring after 24 years with Exxon. He has a deep personal and
technical understanding in the area of maintenance and reliability and current trends.
To view this exciting, one-of-a-kind event for the HPI, visit www.hydrocarbonprocessing.com/blochwebcast0909 to register for the
on-demand webcast that was held on September 10, 2009.
For questions about future Hydrocarbon Processing Webcasts, contact Bill.Wageneck@Gulfpub.com.

Sponsored by |

Select 168 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

 REFINING DEVELOPMENTS

Squeezing more from the bottom of the barrel. Dif-

ferent process alternatives are available for hydrocracking of VGOs,
HCGOs and DAOs, wherein the options are a function of the
demand for specific finished products and CAPEX constraints;
1. Mild hydrocracking with an integrated finishing
hydrotreater can upgrade VGO-based feedstocks, enabling pro-
duction of low-sulfur FCC feed while producing additional ULSD
and constraining low-sulfur gasoline output.
2. The high-conversion fixed-bed hydrocracker produces near
full conversion of VGO-based feedstocks to top-quality middle
distillate products.
3. Integrated with a residue hydrocracker, the high-conversion
fixed-bed hydrocracker can maximize ULSD throughput and
reduce the refinery’s fuel oil output.
4. Ebullated-bed technology is adaptable for deep conversion
of refractory feedstocks such as C5-DAO-containing feeds. Adding
a SDA unit ensures nearly full conversion of the DAO into lighter
products with only a marginal increase in asphalt yield. HP
Frederic Morel is product line manager for VGO and resid
conversion. Mr. Morel is working at Axens in technology depart-
ment as a product line manager for VGO and resid conversion. He
was formerly manager of Axens Hydroprocessing and Conversion
Technical Services. He has 30 years of experience in oil refining,
having worked previously with IFP Lyon Development Center as a research engineer,
as a project leader of distillates and residues hydroprocessing and as development
department manager. Mr. Morel holds a degree in chemical engineering from Ecole
Supérieure de Chimie Industrielle de Lyon and a graduate degree from Institut
d’Administration des Entreprises.
Jérôme Bonnardot is deputy product line manager for VGO
hydroconversion. Dr. Bonnardot joined IFP in 1994 as research
engineer at its Lyons Development Center. He moved to Axens
in 2001 where he began as a process design engineer in the field
of distillates hydroprocessing and hydroconversion, and technical
manager for hydrocracking technology, before attaining his current position. Dr. Bon-
nardot is a graduate of the Ecole Supérieure de Chimie Industrielle de Lyon (ESCIL).
He holds an MS degree in chemistry from the University of Notre Dame (USA) and
received his PhD from the Université de Lyon (France).

LITERATURE CITED
1 Sarrazin, P., J. Bonnardot, C. Guéret, F. Morel and S. Wambergue, “Direct
Production of Euro-IV Diesel at 10 ppm Sulfur via HyC-10™ Process,”
ERTC, Prague, Nov. 15–17, 2004.
2 Fernandez, M., J. Bonnardot, F. Morel and P. Sarrazin, “Advantageously
Integrating a High Conversion Hydrocracker with Petrochemicals,” ERTC,
London, Nov. 17–19, 2003.
3 Benazzi, E., L. Leite, N. Marchal-George, H. Toulhoat and P. Raybaud,
“New Insights into Parameters Controlling the Selectivity in Hydrocracking
Reactions,” Journal of Catalysis, Vol. 217, No. 2, pp. 376-387, July 25,
2003.
4 Axens website—www.axens.net
Eric Benazzi is Axens’ marketing director. He has over 21
years experience in catalysis applied to fuels and petrochemicals.
Dr. Benazzi joined Axens in 2004 as strategic marketing manager
in charge of market analysis, business planning and acquisition
evaluation. He started his professional career as a research engi-
neer at IFP, where he worked in the field of catalysis, specializing in zeolites and in
hydrocracking processes. Later, he moved to the economic department, where he
was responsible for investment profitability studies for refining and petrochemicals
projects. Dr. Benazzi holds a PhD in chemistry from the University of Paris, and he
graduated as a chemical engineering from the ENCSP.

Media Relations
Gulf Publishing Company

Training Series The Road to

PREPARING FOR CRISIS COMMUNICATIONS Environmental Compliance
ng, and
Preparation is everything,
tions
this newest media relations The Yaws Handbook of
y
video spells out exactly Properties for Environmental
what you need to know w and Green Engineering
and how to be prepared d Carl L. Yaws
ven in a
for media contacts—even
325 pages l Hardcover
crisis situation. Pub date: October 2008
d most
This is the clearest and ISBN: 978-1-933762-15-9
straightforward media relations $175.00 US*
e today.
training video available
This four-part program with media
reference guides show how to
successfully deal with the media
during: Plant Incidents,, Chemical
ncies.
Spills, Pipeline Emergencies. Environmental
Management Systems
Part 1: Eye to Eye Handbook for Refineries
Part 2: The Uninvited Guest
uest Nicholas P. Cheremisinoff
Part 3: The Crisis Interview
iew
Part 4: Handling the Media
dia During 326 pages l Hardcover
Pub date: March 2006
ncies
Pipeline Emergencies ISBN: 978-0-9766511-38-0
Price: $1,295 $175.00 US*
(Order # BE30 – Series VHS)

www.GPCBooks.com
Phone: +1 713-529-4301 l Fax: +1 713-520-4433
+1 (713) 520-4426 | +1 (800) 231-6275
Videos@GulfPub.com | www.GPCVideo.com *Applicable tax, shipping and handling apply

Select 169 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS Select 170 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

BOXSCORE DATA BASE
ONLINE
www.ConstructionBoxscore.com

NEW PROJECTS BEING ADDED AT A RATE OF 40 PER WEEK!

2009
Construction activity in the global hydrocarbon processing industry is increasing at rates
not seen in 25 years. Since September 2007, there has been an average of 40 projects per
week added to the Boxscore Data Base which now totals over 5,300 projects in various
stages from planning, engineering and construction. Subscribe today and start receiving
these projects every week in an e-mail plus the additional enhancements listed below:
• Export searches to Excel
• Access to www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com
• Posted press releases of project announcements
• 2009 HPI Market Data Book
• Process Handbooks online: Refining, Petrochemical, Gas Processing, Advanced Control
• Improved user interface

Contact: Lee Nichols l Phone: +1 (713) 525-4626 l E-mail: Lee.Nichols@GulfPub.com

 ENGINEERING CASE HISTORIES

Case 53: Electrical faults can cause

shaft and gear failures
This technique allows transient torques in geared units to be determined
T. SOFRONAS, Consulting Engineer, Houston, Texas

W
hen power disturbances occur such as grid switching or
short circuits, motors or generators can experience a sud-
den speed variation due to unloading and loading.1
This event can cause a “braking inertia effect” on the machine
system that can cause cracks in shaft keyways, coupling bolts or
gear teeth. These may eventually become a fatigue failure due to
normal loading. The model used here is for quick troubleshooting
purposes on simple systems when a circuit is opened and quickly
reclosed. It does not consider the electrical torsional vibration
frequency torque.
This analytical model is general enough for geared-motor–
compressor or generator–turbine units that experience such a
speed change. Knowing the magnitude of increase in the shaft
torque allows stress calculations to be made.
Fig. 1 is a two-mass torsional system with J1 being the motor
that experienced the speed variation over time t and J2 is the
compressor. C is the shaft stiffness between the masses. This is the
simplified geared system2 described in Fig. 2. The coupling bolts
had sheared and this required five times the mean torque.2 This
model explains where the extra torque came from.
In the analytical model J1 is not involved since no matter what
size J1 is it has already resulted in the recorded speed change over
a given time. All that needs to be done is to apply the twist to the
shaft end at J1 and then by angular impulse and momentum equa-
tions solve for the twist at J2 . The torque in the shaft is simply the
difference in these twists times the shaft stiffness.
The resulting equation and an example of its use is:
Tshaft = (
rpmt C /60)[1
C / (C + 2 J 2 /t 2 )]
$52 = C $51/(C + 2J2/t 2)
51 51 52
In Fig. 1 the motor speed change was Δrpm = 60 and occurred
in 0.05 seconds. The corrected shaft stiffness is C = 9.4 x 106
in.-lb / rad and the corrected J2 is 755 lb-in.-sec2. What is the
torque increase in the shaft over the calculated mean shaft torque
of Tmean = 14,850 in.-lbs?
Tshaft = 89,200 in.-lb
Tshaft /Tmean ≈ 6.0
A torque six times mean explains why the coupling bolts
sheared. The cause was that a time-delay relay was wired incor-
rectly and the motor reaccelerated too soon after tripout.
For troubleshooting, the author has found a Δrpm of 3% of the
rpm in 0.05 seconds to be reasonable when no other data were avail-
able. In the several machines the author has investigated values of
over six times mean torque resulted in some shaft or gear damage. It
would be a good time to recommend a consultant who specializes
in torsional vibration to be utilized. HP
LITERATURE CITED
1 Nailen, R.L., “Avoiding Switching Transient Damage in Motor Circuits,”
Consulting-Specifying Engineer, March 1987, Cahners Publishing Company.
2 Sofronas, A., Analytical Troubleshooting of Process Machinery and Pressure
Vessels: Including Real-World Case Studies, (p. 44, 128 ), ISBN: 0-471-73211-
7, John Wiley & Sons.
Dr. Tony Sofronas, P.E., was worldwide lead mechanical
engineer for ExxonMobil before his retirement. The case studies are
from companies the writer has consulted for. Information on his
books, seminars and consulting are available at the Website http://
www.mechanicalengineeringhelp.com.
Getting system to J1 rpm: C2 rpm = C2 (rpm2 /rpm )2
J3
J4 rpm = J4 (rpm2 /rpm )2
C1 J5 rpm = J5 (rpm2 /rpm )2
rpm J1

C2
Case where C2 >> C1 J5 rpm2

Tshaft J4
J1 J2
C C = C1 C2rpm / (C1 + C2rpm )
J1 J2
$51 = P $rpm t/60 Tshaft

Motor Compressor J2 = J3 + J4 rpm + J5 rpm

FIG. 1 Two-mass system analyzed. FIG. 2 Geared system reduced to Fig. 1 system.

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I 89
HPI MARKETPLACE HPI MAND
PROCESS EQUIPMENT ARKETPLACE
MATERIALS
Wedge-Wire Screen Manufacturer: HAZY GASOLINE
filtration screens, resin traps, strainer
baskets, hub and header laterals, media PROBLEMS DUE TO
retention nozzels, and custom filtration
products manufactured with stainless
steel and special alloys.
CAUSTIC EMULSIONS?
Contact: Jan or Steve Caustic Hydrocarbon
Mixer
18102 E. Hardy Rd., Houston, TX 77073
Ph: (281) 233-0214; Fax: (281) 233-0487 AMISTCO Solution
Toll free: (800) 577-5068
www.alloyscreenworks.com Oil

Water

Hydrocarbon AMISTCO Coalescer

Select 201 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

Caustic/H2O
SURPLUS GAS PROCESSING/REFINING EQUIPMENT
NGL/LPG PLANTS: 10 – 600 MMCFD REMOVE EMULSIONS with an
AMINE PLANTS: 60 – 5,000 GPM IFT as LOW as 5 DYNE/CM
SULFUR PLANTS: 10 – 1,200 TPD
FRACTIONATION: 1,000 – 15,000 BPD Select 204 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS • Mix reblending cost
HELIUM RECOVERY: 75 & 80 MMCFD • Minimize shipping delays
NITROGEN REJECTION: 25 – 80 MMCFD
ALSO OTHER REFINING UNITS • Protect Downstream Catalyst Integrity
We offer engineered surplus equipment solutions.
Bexar Energy Holdings, Inc.
7!"!3(3%,,32%.43 Idle product is bad for business. Amistco
Phone 210 342-7106 "/),%23$)%3%,'%.%2!4/23 Emulsionsep™ liquid/liquid coalescers
Fax 210 223-0018 remove mercaptan sulfur rich caustic carry
www.bexarenergy.com over from Gasoline, LPG Jet Fuel, and
Email: info@bexarenergy.com 
-/Ê  ,
9Ê- ,6

hydrocarbon feedstocks faster and more
Select 202 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
nää‡Çä{‡ÓääÓ effectively than traditional separation methods.
Let our coalescer specialist review your
application. Or view our full line of mist
ÜÜÜ°Ü>L>Å«œÜiÀ°Vœ“ eliminators and other separation products
@ www.amistco.com

8\Ê n{LJx{£‡£ÓǙ
Ê n{LJx{£‡xÈää

23147 Hwy. 6 Alvin, TX 77511

Ph:(281) 331-5956 Fax:(281) 585-1780
Select 205 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS www.amistco.com
Select 206 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

SEEK REFINERY FOR ALLOCATION

1 Million Bbls/Mo, Bashra Light Crude Oil, 33.9 gravity; 2.08% Sulfur
Please respond to: billkalil@juno.com
Select 203 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Select 207 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

WORLD’S LARGEST INVENTORY OF LPG STORAGE TANKS

ASME Fabrication & Alteration ASME Tank Sales
Separator Tanks 10,000 to 120,000 gallons
Slug Catchers Propane Butane
Knock Out Drums Ammonia Nitrogen
CO2 & O2 LNG
Any Size - Any Quantity
USED & RECONDITIONED
®
“ENERGY PRODUCTS & SERVICES WORLDWIDE” BUY - SELL - DISMANTLE PROCESS EQUIPMENT

Total Energy www.totalenergy.com 1.800.682.0181

Select 208 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
90
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
 SOFTWARE AND INSTRUMENTATION HPI MARKETPLACE
CA
Co PE-O
mp PE
lian N
t!

HTRI Xchanger Suite® – an integrated, easy-to-use suite of tools that

delivers accurate design calculations for
• shell-and-tube heat exchangers • fired heaters
• jacketed-pipe heat exchangers • air coolers
• hairpin heat exchangers • economizers
• plate-and-frame heat exchangers • tube layouts
• spiral plate heat exchangers • vibration analysis
Interfaces with many process simulator and physical property
packages either directly or via CAPE-OPEN.
Select 209 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Heat Transfer Research, Inc. HTRI@HTRI.net
150 Venture Drive www.HTRI.net
College Station, Texas 77845, USA
Select 212 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS

>COST EFFECTIVE Flexware®
LO W N O X S C R S Y S T E M S

Turbomachinery Engineers
No Fan or Control Upgrades

Generate Emission Credits  Compressor Training
Qualify for Energy Rebates
Bearings & Seals,
>PROVEN PERFORMANCE Bo L Performance Analysis,
ile ow
N
6 0 + S u c c e s s f u l I n s t a l l a t i o n s & r s, H O x Vibration, Rotordynamics,
Tu
r b e at e Troubleshooting,
Select 210 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS 1 0 0 % C o m p l i a n c e Te s t R e s u l t s i n e rs
s! , & Problem Resolution
Reliable Low NOx Operation

> E F F I C I E N T O P E R AT I O N S • Maximize Plant Production &

Reliability
EconoStak Economizers for • Optimize Your Condition Based
Fuel & Energy Efficiency Equipment Reliability Program
• Confirm OEM Performance
Minimal Operator Intervention Guarantee
• Optimize Equipment Utilization
Select 211 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
FREE PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
SOFTWARE

TECHNICAL SERVICES Doha Bangkok

Call 1-800-227-1966 Kuala Lumpur
0IPE3TRESS www.nationwideboiler.com St Croix
0ROCESS3IMULATION
0ELLETIZING$IE$ESIGN 
(EAT4RANSFER!NALYSIS TM www.flexwareinc.com
&INITE%LEMENT!NALYSIS
#OMPUTATIONAL&LUID$YNAMICS
6ESSEL%XCHANGER-ACHINE$ESIGN
CataStak
Ultra Low NOx Solutions
sales@flexwareinc.com
1-724-527-3911
2OTOR$YNAMICS3TRUCTURAL$YNAMICS
Select 214 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS Select 215 at
3PECIALISTSINDESIGNFAILURE www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
ANALYSISANDTROUBLESHOOTINGOF (OUSTON4EXAS
STATICANDROTATINGEQUIPMENT
4ELss
WWWKNIGHTHAWKCOM &AXss
Select 213 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

HYDROCARBON PROCESSING NOVEMBER 2009

I 91
 Statement of Ownership,
Management and Circulation
(Required by 39 U.S.C.).
1. Title of publication: HYDROCARBON PRO-
CESSING
2. Publication number: ISSN 0018-8190.
3. Date of filing: October 1, 2009
4. Frequency of issue: Monthly.
5. Number of issues published annually: 12
6. Annual subscription price: $140.00.
7. Complete mailing address of known office of
publication: Gulf Publishing Company, P. O. Box
2608 (2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1020, 77046),
Houston, Harris County, Texas 77252-2608.
8. Complete mailing address of the headquar-
ters or general business offices of the publish-
ers: Gulf Publishing Company, P. O. Box 2608 (2
Greenway Plaza, Suite 1020, 77046), Houston,
Texas 77252-2608 , Contact person: Suzanne
McGehee; Telephone (713) 529-4301.
9. Names and complete addresses of publisher,
editor and managing editor: Publisher—Bill
Wageneck, 2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1020, Hous-
ton, Texas 77046; Editor—Les A. Kane, 2 Green-
way Plaza, Suite 1020, Houston, Texas 77046;
Director-Production—Sheryl Stone, 2 Greenway
Plaza, Suite 1020, Houston, Texas 77046.
10. Owner: Euromoney Institutional Investor
PLC, Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London
EC4V 5E4, United Kingdom
11. Known bondholders, mortgagees and other
security holders owning or holding 1 percent or
more of total amount of bonds, mortgages or
other securities: Euromoney Institutional Inves-
Bill Wageneck, Publisher
2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1020
Houston, Texas, 77046 USA
P.O. Box 2608
Houston, Texas 77252-2608 USA
Phone: +1 (713) 529-4301, Fax: +1 (713) 520-4433
E-mail: Bill.Wageneck@GulfPub.com
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com
SALES OFFICES—NORTH AMERICA
AK, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS,
KY, MI, MN, MS, MT, ND, NE, NM, NV, OR, SD, TN,
TX, UT, WA, WI, WY, WESTERN CANADA
Laura Kane
2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1020, Houston, Texas, 77046
Phone: +1 (713) 520-4449, Fax: +1 (713) 520-4459
E-mail: Laura.Kane@GulfPub.com
IL, LA, MO, OK, TX
Josh Mayer
5930 Royal Lane, Suite 201, Dallas, TX 75230
Phone: +1 (972) 816-6745, Fax: +1 (972) 767-4442
E-mail: Josh.Mayer@GulfPub.com
CT, DC, DE, MA, MD, ME, NC, NH, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI,
SC, VA, VT, WV, EASTERN CANADA
Merrie Lynch
20 Park Plaza, Suite 517, Boston, MA 02116
Phone: +1 (617) 357-8190, Fax: +1 (617) 357-8194
Mobile: +1 (617) 594-4943
E-mail: Merrie.Lynch@GulfPub.com
DATA PRODUCTS AND CLASSIFIED SALES
Lee Nichols
Phone: +1 (713) 525-4626, Fax: +1 (713) 525-4631
E-mail: Lee.Nichols@GulfPub.com
92
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
tor PLC, Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London
EC4V 5E4, United Kingdom
12. Tax Status has not changed
13. Publication title: Hydrocarbon Processing
14. Issue date for circulation data below: Sep-
tember 2009
15. Extent and nature of circulation-Average
number of copies each issue during preced-
ing 12 months. (A) Total number of copies (net
press run)-31,800; (B) Legitimate paid and/or
requested distribution; (1) Outside County Paid/
Requested Mail Subscriptons stated on PS Form
3541-13,036. (2) In-County Paid/Requested
Mail Subscriptions stated on PS Form 3541.)-0-
; (3) Sales through dealers and carriers, street
vendors, and counter sales, and other paid or
requested distribution outside USPS-17,023.
(4) Requested Copies distributed by Other mail
classes through the USPS - 74; (C) Total paid and/
or requested circulation (sum of 15B1,2,3 and
4)-30,133; (D) Nonrequested distribution (by
mail and outside the Mail). (1) Outside County
nonrequested Copies Stated on PS Form 3541
-0-; (2) In-County Nonrequested copies Stated
on PS Form 3541 -0-; (3) Nonrequested copies
distributed Through the USPS by Other Classes
of Mail -0-; (4) Nonrequested Copies Distributed
Outside the Mail - 881; (E) Total Nonrequested
Distribution (sum of 15d) - 881; (F) Total distri-
bution (sum of 15C and E)-31,014; (G) Copies
not distributed -786; (H) Total (sum 15F and
G)-31,800; (I) Percent paid and/or requested cir-
culation (15C/15G x 100)-97.15%. Actual num-
ber of copies of single issue published nearest
to filing date: (A) Total number of copies (net
SALES OFFICES—EUROPE
FRANCE, GREECE, NORTH AFRICA, MIDDLE EAST,
SPAIN, PORTUGAL, SOUTHERN BELGIUM,
LUXEMBOURG, SWITZERLAND, GERMANY,
AUSTRIA, TURKEY
Catherine Watkins
30 rue Paul Vaillant Couturier
78114 Magny-les-Hameaux, France
Tél.: +33 (0)1 30 47 92 51, Fax: +33 (0)1 30 47 92 40
E-mail: Watkins@GulfPub.com
ITALY, EASTERN EUROPE
Fabio Potestá
Mediapoint & Communications SRL
Corte Lambruschini - Corso Buenos Aires, 8
5° Piano - Interno 7
16129 Genova - Italy
Phone: +39 (010) 570-4948, Fax: +39 (010) 553-0088
E-mail: Fabio.Potesta@GulfPub.com
RUSSIA/FSU
Lilia Fedotova
Anik International & Co. Ltd.
10/2 Build. 1,B. Kharitonyevskii Lane
103062 Moscow, Russia
Phone: +7 (495) 628-10-333
E-mail: Lilia.Fedotova@GulfPub.com
UNITED KINGDOM/SCANDINAVIA, NORTHERN
BELGIUM, THE NETHERLANDS
Peter Gilmore
57 Keyes House
Dolphin Square
London SW1V 3NA
United Kingdom
Phone: +44 (0) 20 7834 5559, Fax: +44 (0) 20 7834 0600
E-mail: Peter.Gilmore@GulfPub.com
press run)-30,100; (B) Legitimate Paid and/or
requested distribution; (1) Outside County Paid/
Requested mail Subscriptions stated on Form
3541 (include advertiser’s proof and exchange
copies)-12,552. (2) In-County Paid/Requested
mail Subscriptions stated on PS Form 3541-0;
(3) Sales through dealers and carriers, street
vendors, and counter sales, and other paid or
requested distribution outside USPS-15,776.
(4) Requested copies distributed by other mail
classes through the USPS- 55(C) Total paid and/
or requested circulation (sum of 15B1,2,3 and
4)-28,383; (D) Nonrequested distribution (by
mail and Outside the mail); (1) Outside County
Nonrequested copies stated on PS Form 3541
-0-; (2) In-County Nonrequested copies distrib-
uted as stated on PS Form 3541 -0-; (3) Non-
requested copies distributed Through the USPS
by Other Classes of mail -0-; (4) Nonrequested
Copies Distributed Outside the Mail - 815; (E)
Total Nonrequested distribution (sum of 15d)
-815; (F) Total distribution (sum of 15C and E)-
29,198; (G) Copies not distributed- 902; (H) Total
(sum15F and G)-30,100; (J) Percent paid and/or
requested circulation (15C/F x 100)-97.20%.
16. This statement of ownership will be printed
in the November 2009 issue of this publication.
Publication required.
17. Signature and Title of Editor, Publisher, Busi-
ness Manager, Or Owner
I certify that the statements made by me above
are correct and complete.
/s/ John T. Royall, President & Chief Executive
Officer
SALES OFFICES—OTHER AREAS
AUSTRALIA – Perth
Brian Arnold
Phone: +61 (8) 9332-9839, Fax: +61 (8) 9313-6442
E-mail: Australia@GulfPub.com
BRAZIL – São Paulo
Alfred Bilyk
Brazmedia Rua General Jardim, 633 Cj 61 01223 011
São Paulo SP, Brazil
Phone: +55 (11) 3237-3269
Fax: +55 (11) 3237-3269
E-mail: Brazil@GulfPub.com
JAPAN – Tokyo
Yoshinori Ikeda
Pacific Business Inc.
Phone: +81 (3) 3661-6138, Fax: +81 (3) 3661-6139
E-mail: Japan@GulfPub.com
INDONESIA, MALAYSIA, SINGAPORE, THAILAND
Peggy Thay
Publicitas Major Media (S) Pte Ltd
Phone: +65 6836-2272, Fax: +65 6297-7302
E-mail: Singapore@GulfPub.com
KOREA – Seoul
Joong Hyon Kwon & JES MEDIA, INC>
Phone: +82 (2) 481-3411, FAX: +82 (2) 481-3414
E-mail: Korea@GulfPub.com
PAKISTAN – Karachi
S. E. Ahmed
Intermedia Communications
Karachi-74700, Pakistan
Phone: +92 (21) 663-4795, Fax: +92 (21) 663-4795
REPRINTS
Phone: +1 (713) 525-4633
E-mail: EditorialReprints@GulfPub.com
FREE Product and Service Information — NOVEMBER 2009
HOW TO USE THE INDEX: The FIRST NUMBER after the company name is the page on which an This information must be pro-
advertisement appears. The SECOND NUMBER, appearing in parentheses, after the company name, vided to process your request:
is the READER SERVICE NUMBER. There are several ways readers can obtain information: PRIMARY DIVISION OF INDUSTRY
1. The quickest way to request information from an advertiser or about an editorial item is to go to www. (check one only):
HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS. If you follow the instructions on the screen your request will be forwarded for A 䊐-Refining Company
immediate action. B 䊐-Petrochemical Co.
C 䊐-Gas Processing Co.
2. Go online to the advertiser's Website listed below. F 䊐-Equipment Manufacturer
G 䊐-Supply Company
3. Circle the Reader Service Number below and fax this page to +1 (416) 620-9790. Include your name, company, complete
H 䊐-Service Company
address, phone number, fax number and e-mail address, and check the box on the right for your division of industry
J 䊐-Chemical Co.
and job title.
P 䊐-Engrg./Construction Co.
Name ________________________________________________________ Company ________________________________________________________ JOB FUNCTION
Address ______________________________________________________ City/State/Zip ____________________________________________________ (check one only):
B 䊐-Company Official, Manager
Country ______________________________________________________ Phone No. _______________________________________________________
E 䊐-Engineer or Consultant
FAX No. ______________________________________________________ e-mail ___________________________________________________________ F 䊐-Supt. or Asst.
G 䊐-Foreman or Asst.
This Advertisers’ Index and procedure for securing additional information is provided as a service to Hydrocarbon Processing I 䊐-Chemist
advertisers and a convenience to our readers. Gulf Publishing Co. is not responsible for omissions or errors. J 䊐-Purchasing Agt.

ADVERTISERS in this issue of HYDROCARBON PROCESSING

Company Page RS# Company Page RS# Company Page RS#
Website Website Website

ABV Energy SpA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 (153)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-153
ARC's Collaborative Mfg . . . . . . . . .40 (105)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-105
Axens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96
www.info.hotims.com/27224-53
Babbitt Steam Specialty Co. . . . . . . .65 (161)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-161
Baldor Electric Company . . . . . . . . .72
www.info.hotims.com/27224-77
Belco Technologies Corp . . . . . . . . .63
www.info.hotims.com/27224-64
BJ Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47
www.info.hotims.com/27224-52
Black & Veatch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
www.info.hotims.com/27224-56
Borsig GmbH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77 (164)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-164
Buchen-ICS GmbH. . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 (155)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-155
Burckhardt Compression Ag . . . . . .31
www.info.hotims.com/27224-55
Chas. S. Lewis & Co., Inc. . . . . . . . . .78
www.info.hotims.com/27224-67
Criterion Catalyst & Technologies. . .12
www.info.hotims.com/27224-60
Cudd Energy Services . . . . . . . . . . .48 (159)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-159
Curtiss Wright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
www.info.hotims.com/27224-74
Dresser-Rand. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39 (156)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-156
Farris Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
www.info.hotims.com/27224-74
Feeney Wireless . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
www.info.hotims.com/27224-73
Finder Pompe SpA . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 (154)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-154
Flexitallic LP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 (93) MBI Global . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 (99)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-93 www.info.hotims.com/27224-99
Gas Technology Products LLC. . . . . .14 (59) Merichem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 (86)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-59
www.info.hotims.com/27224-86
(53) Gulf Publishing Company
Newton's . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 (166)
Boxscore Online . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88
www.info.hotims.com/27224-166
Circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66
Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83 (165) Onis, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 (160)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-165 www.info.hotims.com/27224-160
(77)
GPC Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87 (170) Pittsburgh Corning Corporation . . . .55 (76)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-170 www.info.hotims.com/27224-76
(64)
HPI Market Data Book . . . . . . . . . .85 (163) Rentech Boiler System . . . . . . . . . . . .2 (58)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-163 www.info.hotims.com/27224-58
(52) On-Demand Webcast . . . . . . . . . .86 (168)
Roth Pump Company. . . . . . . . . . . .71 (162)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-168
www.info.hotims.com/27224-162
(56) Video . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87 (169)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-169 Samson GmbH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 (151)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-151
Haldor Topsoe A/S . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 (69)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-69 Siemens Ag . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 (81)
HPI Marketplace . . . . . . . . . . . . 90-91 www.info.hotims.com/27224-81
Hytorc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 (91) SKF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75 (54)
(55) www.info.hotims.com/27224-91 www.info.hotims.com/27224-54
Inpro/Seal Company . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 (78) Spectro Analytical Instruments . . . . .42 (157)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-78
(67) www.info.hotims.com/27224-157
KBC Advanced Technologies Inc . . . .18 (82)
Spraying Systems Co . . . . . . . . . . . .68 (62)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-82
(60) www.info.hotims.com/27224-62
KTI Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 (97)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-97 Swagelok Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 (65)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-65
KTI Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 (96)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-96 T.D. Williamson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95 (66)
(74)
Lectrus Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 (71) www.info.hotims.com/27224-66
www.info.hotims.com/27224-71 Thomassen Compressison System . .23 (106)
Linde Process Plants . . . . . . . . . . . .28 (79) www.info.hotims.com/27224-106
www.info.hotims.com/27224-79
UOP LLC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34
(74) M3 Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 (158)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-158
URS Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 (108)
(73) www.info.hotims.com/27224-108
Maxon Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 (152)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-152 Veolia Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
MBI Leasing LLC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 (100) Weir Minerals France . . . . . . . . . . . .76 (167)
www.info.hotims.com/27224-100 www.info.hotims.com/27224-167

For information about subscribing to HYDROCARBON PROCESSING, please visit www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com 93

 HPIN WATER MANAGEMENT
LORAINE A. HUCHLER, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR
Huchler@martechsystems.com
Are your decisions based on obtained data?
Let’s talk about how operators and engineers make decisions
over utility water systems. Take this short quiz; give your plant one
point for each “true” answer and zero for each “false” answer:
T F
1. __ __ The plant log sheets show specification limits.
2. __ __ Operators or central lab are responsible for validat-
ing accuracy of non-conforming test results.
3. __ __ All data are logged into an electronic database.
4. __ __ The operator or central lab chemist enter data into
the database and validate accuracy of data.
5. __ __ All electronic data are stored on a server and acces-
sible to all plant personnel.
6. __ __ Critical data are automatically tabulated into trend
graphs in the centralized database.
7. __ __ The plant engineers have identified key performance
indices (KPIs) and key operating indices (KOIs).
8. __ __ The plant engineers tabulate compliance statistics
for KOI and KPI data.
9. __ __ The operations and tech-service personnel are
trained to modify trend graphs and to conduct
statistical analyses on the data.
10. __ __ Operations and tech-service regularly review and use
data to troubleshoot and to optimize operations.
__ __
Total
Measuring up. A perfect score (10) means that your plant
personnel are tracking the health of your utility water systems and
making data-based decisions about changes and corrective actions.
Plants with less than a perfect score should ponder whether they
are relying on experience, judgment or just plain “guessing” to
determine the proper corrective action instead of analyzing data.
Date validation. Specification limits are analogous to speed
limits. Without written limits on the log sheets, it’s impossible for
operators to have confidence that the process is in control. Most
plants require an operator or central lab chemist to analyze a grab
sample. However, most plants don’t have a procedure to confirm the
accuracy of the analysis. Analyzing the accuracy of data is important
when testing results fail to conform to the specification limits, e.g.,
validate by exception. Many strategies can be used to validate analyti-
cal test results. Here is an example for this very complex subject.
First, it is reasonable to assume that the individual test results
will follow a normal distribution. Second, the process engineer must
specify the repeatability limit. Repeatability is a metric for test results
when the same operator or chemist uses the same method on identi-
cal samples in the same laboratory using the same equipment in a
short interval of time. The repeatability limit is the maximum dif-
ference between two test results. Process engineers establish a repeat-
ability limit as “95%.” For a single pair of test results, there is a 95%
94
I NOVEMBER 2009 HYDROCARBON PROCESSING
probability that the difference between the two results will be less
than 1.96 ! 2 ! (␴2)1/2 (see Eq. 1). In a normal distribution, 95%
of all data is within 1.96 standard deviations (␴r) of the mean.
Repeatability limit = 1.96 2
r2 (1)
Data storage. In refineries and chemical plants, process units
have electronic data storage in a location easily accessible to all
plant personnel. But, surprisingly, many plants have not yet con-
verted to the same system for data management of utility water
systems. Collecting data from individual paper log sheets is so
time consuming that most engineers choose not to invest the time
and effort in creating the historical trend charts.
Engineers who master the software tools (data trending, statis-
tical analyses) can take advantage of the carefully-gathered-and-
validated data in the centralized database. Some plants create default
trend graphs to simplify the user’s review; however, training opera-
tions and tech service personnel to modify trend graphs and con-
duct statistical analyses on the data is the key to making data-based
decisions for troubleshooting and optimizing operations. Training
operations and tech-service personnel to modify trend graphs and
conduct statistical analyses on the data is the key to making data-
based decisions for troubleshooting and optimizing operations.
Indices and specifications. Constructing KOI and KPI
trends is a simple way for organizations to manage process improve-
ment. Plant personnel are responsible for identifying operating (KOI)
and performance (KPI) parameters that are necessary to maintain
reliable waterside operation. In cooling water systems, a KPI may
be a maximum limit for admiralty corrosion rates as measured by
corrosion coupons, while a KOI may be a minimum limit and/or a
maximum limit for cooling water conductivity.
Plant personnel must establish specification limits for each
KOI and KPI parameter based on industry standards, treatment
program application guidelines and/or experience. Establishing a
minimum acceptable compliance to the specification limits and
tabulating compliance allows engineers and managers to focus on
the “vital few” systems that require improvement. These bench-
marks also provide clear targets for operator performance.
Summary. Data and sound analysis of that data provide the
foundation for all improvement processes. Plant personnel must
make a clear commitment to making decisions based on verifiable
data, not assumptions and guesswork. HP
The author is president of MarTech Systems, Inc., an engineering consulting
firm that provides technical services to optimize energy and water-related systems
including steam, cooling and wastewater in refineries and petrochemical plants.
She holds a BS degree in chemical engineering and is a licensed professional engi-
neer. She can be reached at: huchler@martechsystems.com.
 Ready to pump up performance and profits? TDW process industry
solutions deliver a variety of maintenance and repair capabilities for
refining, petrochemical, plant piping and industrial applications - all
designed to fuel system performance and profitability.

Give us a call or visit www.tdwhpi.com.

And put our solutions to work for you.

NORTH & SOUTH AMERICA: 918-447-5000 | EUROPE/AFRICA/MIDDLE EAST: 32-67-28-36-11

ASIA/PACIFIC: 65-6364-8520 | OFFSHORE SERVICES: 832-448-7200

®Registered trademarks of T.D. Williamson, Inc. in the United States and in foreign countries. TM Trademarks of T.D. Williamson, Inc. in the United States and in foreign countries.
Select 66 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Simplify
sulfur recovery
and cut your costs
Low-temperature tail-gas hydrogenation catalysts
that deliver superior and cleaner performance from simplified operations, and significantly
lower CO2 emissions. Axens’ TG catalysts can work with steam reheating technologies to reduce
energy consumption. Operating costs and investments are also reduced. It’s a winner every time.

Single source ISO 9001 technology and service provider

www.axens.net
Beijing +86 10 85 27 57 53 Houston +1 713 840 11 33
Moscow +7 495 933 65 73 Paris +33 1 47 14 25 14 Tokyo +81 335 854 985
Select 53 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS