The use of Aspen Simulation tools and the integration of process simulation, heat exchanger and costing applications while providing conceptual design packages at Sasol Technology to the Sasol group of companies are important to the progress of Sasol's design gate processes.

Several case studies will be presented to demonstrate the benefits of dynamic simulation as a tool for solving operational and design issues. Here dynamic simulation using HYSYS is used not only as a validation tool but it provides powerful insight into problem areas which will otherwise be missed. Some of the examples that will be discussed are • Typically rotating machinery vendor decides the design torque requirements for compressor drives. It is extremely beneficial for the project if process engineers investigate torque and horsepower sufficiency during compressor start-up at off-design, settle out and high discharge pressure conditions. This can significantly reduce downtimes and start-up bottlenecks. • Validation of compressor settle-out pressure against steady state or manual calculations. • Design and adequacy checks of compressor quench system. Quench is used during transient conditions like compressor start-up and process upsets when the compressor goes to recycle. • At startup feed conditions were significantly different from design conditions leading to inadequacy of existing equipment. Dynamic simulation was used to identify the inadequacies and to solve with minimal hardware changes.

In this presentation we will review the newest features in Aspen Plus and related products, with demonstrations to show the most important features.

Since our adoption of Aspen Economic Evaluation, DuPont has used this software successfully for estimating and preliminary engineering design throughout the Front End Loading (FEL) process. From early order-of-magnitude estimates through authorization estimates, DuPont has used Aspen Economic Evaluation as our tool of choice for all estimates, including minor plant maintenance and major capital projects. This talk will focus on our use of the tool suite across the FEL process.

Sasol, a South African company also listed on the NYSE, is best known for its coal conversion experience. Its core Fischer Tropsch technology is proven on a commercial scale for the conversion of natural gas to liquid products (GTL). To support the frequent evaluation of GTL opportunities of different capacities, product slates and locations, an effort was made to create a standard GTL plant estimating model in ACCE. A multi-disciplinary engineering team, including cost estimators, made use of detail design information with some “Approved for Construction” quality material take-offs to build the model comprising some 800 tag items. Indexing, calibration and the treatment of proprietary technology units were key aspects of model development. The model resulted in several benefits including training by exposing inexperienced engineers to detail level engineering not regularly encountered in an owner company.

This demo will highlight the Economic Evaluation tools from the Conceptual Design of a process through FEED and into the EPC phase of a project.

Since 2010, Pemex DCIDP (Project Development and Engineering Corporate Department) was merged with Pemex DCO (Operation Corporate Department) to create a single project department for all Pemex divisions. As a result of this merger, this new department developed a cost estimating process for Pemex Projects. This paper describes this Cost Estimation Process as a daily activity. How Pemex develop, prepare, analyze projects for budgetary estimates, prepare investment analysis and review bids presented by different external contractors. This paper also explains the methodology for Pemex projects cost estimation, factors that influence the cost estimation and how the different cost estimation tools, such as Aspen Economic Evaluation, are used.

Case 1: Am I doing the right thing? If I evaluate a project with Aspen Economic Evaluator, am I sure that the final estimated investment cost will correctly fit with my reference cost scenario? In order to get a good ACCE estimation I must well know my project context and, thus, check and, in case, change the ACCE cost parameters. Is the best thing to compare the results of ACCE with the detailed analytical investment cost estimation (+/-10%) made by engineering dept or to expenditures really done during project execution? Case 2: Less equipment but bigger, how do the project costs compare? Often we need to compare two or more plant configurations that give the same product and, almost always, the target is the lowest investment cost. If the alternatives are really close to each other, the comparison of investment costs could be really misleading if the cost estimation isn’t done with high accuracy. With traditional method (budgetary offers request, analytical cost estimation of every specialty - electrical, piping, automation etc., man-hours estimation etc.) we need a long time and effort; with ACCE, in a very short time we can get the cost estimation of the alternatives with good accuracy and do the best choice.

In every project, key parameters affect the quality and accuracy of an estimate. This presentation will define the key parameters which drive the estimate quantities and resulting costs. We will review how AspenTech tools use these parameters to drive the development of project estimating quantities. Harvey will present examples of how definition of project, area and component specifications impact output quantities.

An old Nitric Acid plant was being relocated from USA to Indonesia. The client wanted to validate the existing plant capacity, predict plant performance at the new location, determine operating or equipment changes needed to achieve business objectives of throughput, quality & NOx emission levels. A carefully calibrated simulation study helped answer these questions and increased the confidence in making capital investment decision. Several key performance parameters were optimized along with some new equipment recommendations to achieve the rated capacity in Indonesia.

Steam reforming of natural gas or naphtha is a major source of hydrogen for refiners. Traditionally naphtha is used as a feedstock for producing hydrogen in most of the refineries. Increasing hydrogen demand for meeting stringent environmental norms and higher production cost is forcing refiners to look for avenues of cost reduction. As availability of natural gas has increased over the years refiners are switching over to a natural gas based steam reforming process. When switching existing hydrogen plants to these feedstocks the pressure drop limitations have to be understood realistically for optimal plant performance. A simulation model has been developed for the performance prediction of existing naphtha based Steam Reforming Unit for feedstocks such as natural gas and LPG. The reformer model evaluates the performance parameters related to switching from naphtha to natural gas or LPG. Sensitivity studies have been performed with respect to key parameters such as reactor temperature and pressure, S/C ratio. Key features of the model include pressure drop predictions with changing feedstocks, heat recovery, steam generation, etc. Hydrogen unit performance improvement options such as optimizing S/C ratio (incremental hydrogen 2 t/d woth approximately 3 million US $/year), offgas utilization (incremental hydrogen 3-4 t/d) and methanol addition in shift reactor (increase in hydrogen plant capacity by 25%) have been explored. Steady state model presented in this study enables simulation of hydrogen plant performance under various operating conditions thus aiding in improving and monitoring plant performance continuously.

To meet the challenge of a more competitive ethylene market, it was required to take in account new methodologies like integrated design between ethylene plant and other process for energy efficiency improvements. The integrated model based on energy reduction lets us see opportunities for significant and innovative energy reduction. As a result, opportunities to achieve about 5% specific energy saving were identified and adapted. This presentation will cover the sustained value features of Aspen Plus, Shell & Tube Exchanger and Energy Analyzer in aspenONE Engineering suite. The initial approach was to develop a baseline for current operation which can be used as a common basis for energy improvement aspects of the study. This involved building a plant model tuned ideally to current high load operating data. Following modeling and analysis of this common base case for individual energy saving projects were developed.

Cryogenic Unit N° 1 at Ciudad Pemex’s Gas Processing Plant was working at an efficiency of 76.72% for C2+, well below its originally designed capability of 81.94%. Once the Aspen Plus simulation model was updated to reflect the plant’s current operating conditions, it showed low efficiency in a heat transfer unit, which was adjusted according to results of a new simulation model. The overall results were an improvement in production of 815 thousand barrels per day, representing an annual profit of USD 7.6 million.

Genesis Oil and Gas Pty Ltd a created an innovative solution to a complex problem enabling accurate Heat and Mass Balances to be delivered in a vastly reduced timescale. This scope of work had not been executed before within Genesis. The key technological advancement demonstrated was the integration of multiple Pipesim flowline models; some single branch, some network, within an overall HYSYS model of the facilities. The solution meant that production of new mass balances could be achieved within 3 days where previously the process had taken 1 to 2 months to complete. The client’s project comprises of a number of well sites that are produced via Dry Tree Units (DTUs). On the DTUs, liquid and gas is separated before transmission via separate liquid and gas pipelines to a central processing platform where gas processing takes place before fluids are exported via 310 km pipelines to an onshore LNG plant. As production rates change then so do flowline back pressures which affects the liquid / gas separation at the DTUs. With 8 flowlines and 3 DTU separators this represents a complex problem when generating Heat and Mass Balances. Genesis produced a novel solution by integrating Pipesim models into the overall HYSYS model to allow accurate heat and mass balances to be generated in a fraction of the time previously achievable. The resulting integrated model is a powerful, accurate and quick method of generating new mass balance tables based on latest design data. Going forward this process is likely to be repeated several times over the lifetime of the project. Each time this happens the customer will be able to benefit from the large reduction in man hours and schedule that this solution has enabled. Genesis has demonstrated the best use of latest AspenTech technologies in generating value for their customers.

This presentation is on improving the performance of propane-propylene splitters in an Olefins Plant. Simulation models using Aspen Plus were built for these distillation columns. Thermodynamic models were validated with process data to evaluate and to predict system behavior to help guide corrective actions and/or to define operations. Optimum feed tray location were determined in both splitters. Process design studies to revamp the splitters showed that using the second propane-propylene splitter as a depropanizer and the first one in its original service as a propane-propylene splitter would improve performance. No indication of flooding or weeping of trays was observed, and propane recovery was close to 100%.

The acrylonitrile plant at RIL (39000 MTA capacity) consists of quench, absorption, stripping, simple, extractive and vacuum distillation and a network of heat and material integration. The process chemistry produces several by-products besides acrylonitrile, aceonitrile and hydrogen cyanide (HCN) and a huge quantity of water. The component system is highly non-ideal forming azeotropes and high affinity mixtures with water having a tendency to polymerize and create serious environmental issues. In order to improve safety, environmental performance, process optimization and cost reduction, Aspen Plus was used to develop a steady state simulation model of the total plant. The model is used for developing various processing schemes whose benefits are being realized continuously. This includes environmental protection schemes such as 50% reduction in HCN emissions and 75% reduction in effluent color, process optimization for 15% improvement in acetonitrile concentration, and for analyzing heat and mass balance at higher (125%) load operation. Other schemes are being studied and the findings are encouraging in terms of optimum plant performance. These include reduction in flare losses (worth INR 1 million/ annum), 30% effluent COD reduction, and reduction in hydrogen cyanide inventory. The capability of Aspen Plus for simulation of large flow sheets with complex unit operations and highly non-ideal systems helped us in developing a plant model that is being utilized for process optimization, environmental protection, plant safe operation, and energy optimization.

SK Innovation has plans to construct plants using a new polyethylene solution process which has been developed with SK’s proprietary technology. A simulation model of new commercial PE solution process has been developed using Aspen Polymers. The model considers the important issues of single site catalyst kinetics, polymer properties, solvent separation and stripping. The model also contains thermodynamic parameters that accurately predict polymer production rate, molecular weight, polydispersity index, and comonomer composition. The process has been optimized, in particular with respect to conditions for solvent separation and stripping, and energy consumption. In this presentation we will review the project, how these models were developed, and we optimized the new PE commercial process.

This paper presents the development of a mathematical formulation for modeling tier pricing associated with different product flows in AspenPlus. The formulation along with the standard EOTIER model is able to cross tier boundaries for monotonically increasing/decreasing objective function, and find the resulting correct optimum solution.

This real time optimization (RTO) application is comprehensive, including all the ammonia plant process-side equipment as well as the fuel and flue gas side heat recovery, and steam system units. Furthermore, sufficient detail of the urea plant, which is consuming the ammonia plant’s product ammonia and carbon dioxide, in included to account for the highly coupled steam systems of the ammonia and urea plants. High fidelity models are used, especially for the reactors (primary and secondary steam reformers, high temperature water gas shift, low temperature water gas shift, methanation, and ammonia synthesis), as well as for the carbon dioxide removal system. The CO2 removal system is an MDEA (methyl diethanolamine) based system, and the model includes the electrolyte and chemisorption reactions in the MDEA absorber and solution regenerators. The RTO application also performs an ongoing equipment and process monitoring function. The RTO system is closely coupled with a plant-wide multivariable advanced process control system. The application has been in closed-loop operation for several months and is performing robustly, with a service factor of almost 100 % since January 2011. The application was developed jointly by AspenTech, PLAPIQUI, and PROFERTIL staff.

Aspen Online Deployment enables the use of process models in plant operations for a wide range of real-time process monitoring, soft sensor, and operator advisory applications. A demo of AOD and the vision for his product will be presented.

In this paper a review of process selection and configuration of the LPG recovery unit and the impact of exchanger design are presented. Two typical configurations of the gas plant for LPG recovery using the Turboexpander (TE) based process, where differential pressure across the turbo-expander provides the driving force for the recovery, are simulated using HYSYS. One of the process configuration is selected for the heat exchanger design case study based on the higher LPG recoveries achieved. The impact of exchanger type and approach temperature on the process and the LPG recovery is then examined. The following options are evaluated using the Aspen HTFS Shell & tube and PlateFin module. • Shell and tube exchanger with 10 deg C approach temperatures • Shell and tube exchangers with low approach temperatures of 5 deg C • Multistream brazed aluminium exchangers with lower approach temperatures of 3 deg C Finally, an economic estimate of the savings achieved using the Multistream brazed aluminium exchangers design vis a vis the shell and tube exchangers is presented.

Plate Fin has a depth of capability to design and rate plate-fin heat exchangers. Most of the user requirements for design and simulation, both standalone and with HYSYS process simulator are effectively addressed by the program. However, at times, for specialist needs additional functionality would be useful. PlateFin’s link to Excel provides the extensibility to meet many of these specialist needs. This presentation reviews some applications where linking Plate Fin to Excel provides good value. Examples include • calculating isothermal flow test performance, • filling in custom equipment data sheets and • calculating equipment cost. The background of isothermal flow tests at Chart is as follows. In the days of salt bath brazing and reversing heat exchangers an isothermal flow test measured and confirmed whether a heat exchanger had sufficiently removed the salts to meet the important low pressure drop requirements of reversing service. Today, even though cores are vacuum brazed and no salts are used, some customers pay for an additional flow test to confirm pressure drop expectations. Basic data like temperature, barometric pressure and pressure drop are measured and the results are compared with calculated values. The Excel extensions allow to automate the process of comparing experimental data directly with the PlateFin predictions.

This demonstation will show the new inetrface between HYSYS and Aspen Plate Fin Exchanger, released with aspenONE V7.3. The case will show how users can easilty benefit from the rigor of PlateFin within a crogenic process to optimize the overall design or operation.

In this session we will discuss the current drivers that influence and create the challenges of estimating mega projects in the Middle East. We will briefly examine the current driving forces of the principle elements causing the challenges and how ACCE can help mitigate the risks. The elements that will be discussed are: 1) The availability of high value (lower cost) engineering centers; 2) Competing markets resulting in lower material pricing; 3) Competing markets resulting in lower field labor cost; 4) The current economy and the resulting “supply/demands” in the Middle East market.

In today's global engineering and manufacturing environment, there is a good possibility that the company you work for, or perform work for, will one day do business in China. In the engineering world, performing work in China is not unlike other locations, requiring knowledge of the business climate and "rules of engagement". There are conditions to doing business that are uniquely Chinese. This presentation will attempt to identify these unique conditions and the impact to project estimates performed for projects in China. Doing projects in China, that require a Chinese venture partner, will necessitate a good understanding of the Chinese feasibility and project approval processes. These are mandatory steps when getting projects approved in China. Recognizing the potential pitfalls and opportunities is imperative to project success. The use of local codes and specifications, locally procured materials, labor practices, governmental policies and practices will be addressed. Navigating these while using typical "Western" style estimating methods will be a challenge, but not insurmountable. As in preparing estimates for any project, in any location around the world, preparation and knowledge of "in country" practices, policies and cost is imperative to successful projects.

Do we still have the right balance between estimate accuracy and the details we believe we need have as basis? Do we still have the right balance between the cost for doing an estimate and the purpose it serves? This presentation will cover an ongoing, unstoppable trend in the industry, which demands estimates to be based on more details than ever before, yet at the same time it is very questionalble if all those details created by engineering and/or parametric estimating models are of influence on the estimate accuracy.

This presentation is on the design and analysis of topside facilities using process simulation software such as Aspen HYSYS and Aspen Flare System Analyzer (and Excel). Effective engineering design is dependent on timing, cost, and accuracy. It can be the difference in delivering first oil on time and on budget versus being bogged down in delays and costly reworks. One of the best leading indicators (historically) for project delivery is in its start up and execution at the beginning. Use of tools that provide more detail, better definition, and quicker results can make the difference between success and failure. This paper presents the software tools that we use in the different phases of a project, and how we use them to enhance the end result. A walkthrough of how the Process Simulation PFD is setup for input into the custom Excel macros, how the macros work, and how to the use these programs in designing and estimating equipment.

Aspen HYSYS® and Aspen Plus® viscosity estimates were compared to measured data from 700 samples which were primarily of whole crudes, pipeline blends, fractions, resids, and refinery products. Both Aspen HYSYS® and Aspen Plus® were found to under-predict the viscosity of extra-heavy crudes and residues (? 10° API), particularly at lower temperatures. An extension of the Moharam viscosity prediction method was developed which more accurately predicts these heavy oil viscosities. The average error in predicted viscosity is on the order of 25%, a significant improvement over the methods currently available in Aspen HYSYS® and Aspen Plus®. This new correlation is recommended as an alternative to the cumbersome task of adding viscosity curves as part of the assay data input, to improve viscosity predictions for heavy oil fractions and residues.

Aspen HYSYS V7.3 has significant new capabilities and functionality that will benefit both the refining and oil & gas production user communities. Many of these new capabilities will be presented in “deep-dive” demos planned for other tracks during the Conference. In this presentation, an overview of the new capabilities will be given.

Refinery profitability is determined using refinery-wide models in planning and scheduling. The planning and scheduling models need simplified but accurate models for the performance of the crude distillation and conversion units. Engineering models condition plant data into simplified forms used in planning and scheduling. This presentation will provide a brief tutorial on these workflows.

Taiyo Oil completed their integrated ad advance planning & scheduling system in 2009. Since we shifted to produce more petrochemical feedstock, aromatics and propylene, we adopted component base modeling, and established proper PIMS model updated system using operation data. In their system, the reconsolidated field operation data was used for update model of the scheduler regularly, and used for PIMS base data updates. Also, they introduced refining process simulation, Refsys, for reforming and RFCC units to get more accurate yield estimation for operation changes. The process models are updated using operation data periodically, and PIMS model is updated accordingly. To establish this component basis accurate planning and scheduling system, they have better selection of the crude for aromatics feedstock with more margins. After implementation of this system, more than multi-million dollars benefits were observed.

The usage of hydrocracking and other process models to update the refinery Linear Planning model (LP) requires collaboration from many sources to enable site acceptance. Cooperation from the operations, technical, and planning teams are crucial to develop the process models and robust LP sub-models to insure safe and reliable operations. MIT have developed tools that can quantify uncertainties in plant data and model predictions, and help illucidate statistically significant performance differences between the operating plant, LP representation of the plant and the actual hydrocracking process model. These uncertainty tools have guided us to reconcile differences between daily operating data with that of the hydrocracking process model. As we reconcile these differences, the tuning targets are corrected within the tolerance allowed to improve the tuning capability of the hydrocracking model. The hydrocracking model allows us to simulate conditions outside normal refinery operation ranges but still within the design operating envelope. The uncertainties between the LP sub-model and the hydrocracking process model are identified over the entire unit design operating envelope so that their differences can be reconciled. The plant information is used to validate both models over the actual operating ranges. Many key process hydrocracking modeling gaps are also identified which are fed back into the hydrocracking model development plan.

In the past the worlds of process simulation experts and that of heat exchanger designers had little in common. Now the demands of efficiently executing process engineering business is driving these worlds together.  This has an impact on the abilities and skills required of the different engineering disciplines who collaborate in the delivery of process designs. The influence of the interface provided in aspenONE on the basic design workflow is demonstrated and an ideal workflow is presented. EVONIK’s progress in approaching the ideal workflow is presented.

Aspen Plus and Aspen Shell & tube were used to simulate a vertical thermosiphon with boiling on shell side. We detail the approach taken to rigorously model a system consisting of a number of elements: kettle, vapor separator, downcomers, risers, and other geometric elements. Aspen Simulation Workbook was used to allow easy control of the simulation, even for people not familiar with the details of the simulation. This approach enabled accurate calculation of the vapor flowrate and the circulation loop flowrate. This simulation helped to increase the circulation loop flowrate by only changing specifc geometric elements. It helped Rhodia avoid having to change the full equipment, resulting in savings of the order of three million US Dollars.

Thermosyphon reboilers must be designed for stable operation with a steady recirculating flowrate. An effective engineering guideline to ensure stability is that a minimum of 33% of the available pressure drop is used up by friction in the inlet pipework. However it is often very difficult to achieve this target, and the designer must rely on the predictions of the Aspen Shell&Tube Exchanger instability model. Two-phase dynamic instability is a complex phenomenon that ideally requires a numerical solution of partial time-dependent differential equations. This approach is impractical in the context of heat exchanger design software, and Aspen Shell&Tube implements a simplified model that is more approriate to engineering calculations. The presentation covers three aspects of instability in thermosyphon reboilers: • Brief introduction to the type and causes of instability • Description of recent research work to assess and validate the instability model in Aspen Shell&Tube • Practical demonstration of using Aspen Shell&Tube to reduce the risk of instability.

This presentation will discuss how to effectively use the Code of Accounts and Indexing functions within Aspen Capitol Cost Estimator. It will discuss potential complications and how to handle these issues.

Our team was tasked with improving estimate accuracy, flexibility, and providing transparency within the company and for our clients. Our solution was to utilize Aspen Capital Cost Estimator along with internal resources to achieve this. In addition to using project-specific documents, historical data, and computer models we involve our Civil, Structural, I&E, and Construction groups throughout the process to ensure all aspects of the estimate are covered. During review with the client prior to proposal submission, the tool provides a great amount of support data for both component and area requirements that have had preliminary design internally. The benefit at this stage is the flexibility of changing and adding on-the-fly with instant results that produce buy-in and approval by our client. It is with their confidence in this process that we have received increased cooperation and latitude in our proposals.

The latest developments to support efficient capital project estimation will be highlighted in this session. The use of the new Templates and new equipment models will be demonstrated.

A case study is presented regarding optimization of capital cost for an NGL facility revamp. Three separate processing units of a single NGL facility are modeled in individual Aspen Plus simulations. There are multiple cases for each unit: base case, economic base case and future design case. These cases are linked in a single instance of Aspen Simulation Workbook for study of feed conditions, product uplift, and particular unit constraints. Plant historian data is also used to validate model input and results. Aspen Plus is used to rate existing equipment and hydraulics in each of the three processing units. This enables analysis of suitability of existing equipment and reduction of new capital equipment based on the rating cases. Optimization of product value is accomplished using Aspen Plus and Aspen Simulation Workbook. The allowable ethane slip for maximum profit is determined while minimizing additional new, high-cost capital equipment including exchangers, process analyzers and high-head pumps. Aspen In-Plant Cost Estimator is used by Process Engineering to rapidly develop and verify input to Aspen Capital Cost Estimator for customer estimate development. The results include reduction of capital equipment count (replacement, new or modification) by 62% during FEL-2; increase of potential product uplift resulting in 3-year payback; reduction of project total installed cost by 38%; and minimization of turnaround outage duration and cost.

The Dow Chemical Company has long seen the advantage integrating Process Simulation with cost estimation to optimize flowsheets during process development. To that end, Dow presented a paper at the 2007 Aspen User Conference on an internally developed tool that automated data transfer and equipment sizing to allow faster, more reliable hand-offs to our cost estimation function. With the V7.3 release of Aspen Process Economic Analyzer (APEA), Dow is ready to transition from its internal tool to AspenTech's product. This presentation will highlight key functionality improvements in APEA that led to that decision as well as outline plans for our transition from that internal tool to APEA.

In this presentation we will review and demonstrate the integrated workflow between AspenTech’s process simulators (Aspen Plus and Aspen HYSYS) and Aspen Process Economic Analyzer. We will focus especially on improvements made in V7.3 to enable custom sizing and evaluation through the introduction of economic analysis templates.

This presentation describes how to utilize Aspen HYSYS optimizer and Aspen EDR to improve electricity output and to reduce the cost in the renewable engineering field. First, the process model in HYSYS is setup based on the best engineering practice. Second, HYSYS optimizer is utilized to maximize the electricity output, subject to some constraints, such as shell and tube exchanger pinch. Third, EDR is used to size the most cost effective exchangers based on the optimized process model in step two. Now the electricity output and the actual exchanger geometries and the cost are known. Finally HYSYS optimizer and EDR are utilized to rate the whole cycle and find the most optimum operating point to generate the maximum electricity output. If desired, further tuning of the exchanger size and case studies can be done to find the best compromise between the performance and the cost.

Fouling of heat exchanger surfaces reduces the rate of heat transfer in heat recovery systems requiring more energy to be consumed from primary sources. In refinery applications this means that more fuel must be burned in the furnaces, increasing the cost of production and the increasing emissions of CO2. If the furnace is bottlenecked (at practical operating limits) then the operator will be forced ro reduce feed throughput with a major impact on profitability. Heat recovery from pump-around streams is present on most key refinery units including atmospheric and vacuum crude distillation, FCCs, delayed cokers, hydrotreaters etc. and the world-wide cost can be estimated at 10sB$/year. In the UK for example it has been estimated at $450M - $750M/year. Management of fouling in crude systems hinges on decisions around on-line and off-line cleaning and essential to these are effective monitoring of exchanger fouling. In this presentation, we describe a framework in which Aspen HYSYS Petroleum Refining can be used in conjunction with Aspen Shell & Tube Heat Exchanger and Aspen Simulation Workbook to monitor the preheat train heat exchanger performance and establish which exchangers can be cleaned to give most impact on overall performance.

Presentation will introduce the Process Optimization Through Equipment Design Sessions. It will set the general context for the two days. Key recent developments and progress in Equipment Design & Rating within AspenTech will be outlined

We present and demonstrate an integrated model for a UOP Continuous Catalyst Regeneration (CCR) reforming process handling a feed capacity of 1.7 million tons/yr (34,100 BPD) in the Asia Pacific. We discuss key strategies and workflows to deal with inadequate plant data, missing information and calibration steps required for CatReform model in Aspen HYSYS/Refining. The integrated model includes rigorous tray-by-tray downstream fractionation models. We validate the model predictions for over four months (using only a single initial calibration) to within 2-3% error. We study several new operating scenarios (changing WAIT, WHSV, etc.) using the calibrated model. Use of the resulting model to predict a new operating scenario shows significant economic benefit.

Aspen HYSYS and Aspen HYSYS Petroleum Refining provides new features that have been designed to make the workflow of updating your refinery Planning (Aspen PIMS) and Scheduling (Aspen Petroleum Refinery Scheduler) models easier and simple. A demo of these new features and workflow will be given.

WorleyParsons will present the drivers, objectives and benefits to project execution using integrated tools sets like aspenONE Engineering Suite and others.

Presenting the history of why DuPont has begun to use Aspen Basic Engineering (ABE) as the preferred front end loading (FEL) tool. We further discuss what has worked well for us, the areas we are working to configure the tool for our use and the areas we are working with Aspen Tech to imporve the tool.

Shaw Energy & Chemicals have achieved continued success with Aspen Basic Engineering. This presentation will build on past reports of progress and describe the benefits that they have achieved from ABE in three areas: Integrating multiple disciplines in different locations, streamlining the delivery of licensed technologies, and promoting agility and flexibility in staffing projects to spread resource loading and expedite project initiation.

The Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy and a consortium of industry sponsors, has developed the necessary tools to evaluate the cost of carbon dioxide (CO2) capture from full-scale power plants. A pilot-scale combustor is used in conjunction with a CO2 capture absorber/stripper system to evaluate the performance of baseline and novel solvents. An Aspen Plus-based process model has been developed with data from EERC pilot-scale facilities that evaluates the CO2 capture process from coal combustion to amine scrubbing with solvent recycle. Aspen Plus is used to determine CO2 baseline capture rates from coal-derived flue gas using monoethanolamine (MEA). Then advanced solvents are modeled in Aspen Plus using pilot-scale performance data. The key data needed to model the advanced solvents include regeneration energy and liquid-to-gas ratio. Aspen Process Economic Analyzer (APEA) is then used to evaluate the cost of technologies for CO2 capture for a 500-MW power plant. This presentation describes studies that have been performed for baseline MEA and advanced solvents, and the results have been compared to the cost of oxy-fired combustion.

This presentation is on Kuwait Oil Company's experience in using Aspen HYSYS simulations for conceptual studies. Various cases were simulated in Aspen HYSYS 2006.5 and Heat and Material Balance sheets were developed for early evaluation of equipment sizing (for example, diameter and tangential lengths) and costing. This simulation profile helped to overcome the project cycle times to successfully achieve project gates as early as possible to proceed for further approvals. In a similar manner, the Aspen HYSYS TEG (Glycol) Package was utilized to evaluate the Gas Dehydration and Glycol regeneration package performance and compared with design limitations. Similar models were also developed for sales gas specification of 10 lb/MMSCF with existing operating conditions. This work showed that utilizing Aspen HYSYS helps to reduce project life cycle time by providing clear technical solutions at the conceptual study level and helps to close the project gate system quickly. This helped optimization of cycle time to repeat the project review periods.

Appraisal studies for new oil and gas separation facilities are undertaken very frequently. The goal is to determine if under current and projected market conditions, the development of a field is economically attractive. The time required to build a model with a process simulator used to be too long, so simpler assumptions were used. The new AspenTech Conceptual Design Builder streamlines the building of these models and makes this a viable option for appraisal studies. Aspen HYSYS models can now be auto generated very quickly. With the integrated economics tools - Aspen Process Economic Analyzer - a quick estimate can be made of capital cost, operating cost and dry weight of equipment.

Upon detection of unconstrained, dangerous process vapors, the desire is to safely vent to reduce the internal pressure in the processing equipment as quickly as possible. In order to design the disposal equipment, the expected vent stream flow rate, composition, temperature, and pressure is needed. Aspen Plus Dynamics™ (APD) provides the means to address this problem. The plant was divided into four areas with a separate model for each. Four independent pressure-driven APD process models were than used to determine the process performance with the existing proposed design. These were then used to determine where the process performance is OK, where control changes would meet needs, where process equipment changes would meet needs, and where desired performance would not be met without a change in the laws of physics.

Petrobras’ gas distribution points are skid-mounted units. These include a filtering module, a heating module, a regulator module and a measuring system for custody transfer. While it is necessary to decrease the gas delivery pressure to the consumer, it results in a temperature reduction (Joule-Thomson expansion). This natural temperature dropping effect can lead to harmful consequences in operations such as gas condensation, hydrate formation, as well as condensation of air humidity, with ice formation. Therefore, a heating module was installed to raise the temperature of the gas before pressure drop occurs due to gas expansion inside the control valves. The outlet temperature of the gas in the city gate exit is monitored by a "override" control system which analyzes the temperature in the immediate exit of the heater (restriction variable)  and the final temperature of the gas to be delivered to the distributor (primary variable). There are two sequences of regulatory valves in parallel to achieve the desired pressure at this point, which then ensures the correct delivery pressure, followed by a flow measurement at the end of each branch. Aspen HYSYS Dynamics® was used to evaluate the control system and all of the equipment, size the heater and the valves, considering flow coefficients. The model was also used to test units and valves from different suppliers and helped to improve and simplify the design.

The Atmosphere Distillation Tower (A-Tower)’s Optimization is one of the oldest optimization problem. However, it is not easy to find a successfully running A-Tower Optimization System in refineries. This is SKenergy’s operational excellence which optimizes A-Tower using AspenTech’s powerful engineering and manufacturing suite aspenONE's EDR (Exchanger Design and Rating) tools integrated with Aspen HYSYS and with DMCplus. SKenergy’s 10-years-old idea “how to rigorously simulate A-tower’s overhead pressure and optimize A-Tower’s optimizing variables” has been tried with aspenONE V7 where HYSYS can use embedded EDR and column rating with an overhead dummy cooler and adjust its duty using the HYSYS adjust function. By successful rigorous modeling of A-Tower pressure, this more accurate model provides greater practical solutions and optimized results. This approach to excellence also avoids the use of a fixed A-tower pressure-based model which in the past would provide directionally incorrect optimization guidance for variables.

Air-Liquide have very long history of staying at the forefront of technology innovation of cryogenic industry. This presentation describes how our company has harnessed the Aspen HTFS Research Network information to continue that long tradition in the specific area of heat transfer equipment design and simulation. The presentation refers to the following specific examples where we have benefited from the use of Research Network information. · A novel facility for measuring fin performance data · Interpretation of some of the measured flow pattern data from a cryogenic therrmosyphon rig · Development of a novel compact reboiler In addition to this some other examples of use of Research Network to solve some challenging problems in design and simulation of heat exchanger are discussed.

Plate Fin Heat Exchangers (PFHE) are widely used in cryogenic processes. Due to their high specific heating area and their perfect counter flow high thermal effectiveness can be achieved, allowing temperature differences down to 1K. Good fluid distribution is very important where high thermal effectiveness is required, and maldistribution may lead to under performance and mechanical problems. The presentation addresses the following main topics. • Short introduction to causes and consequences of maldistribution (with reference to research network papers, e.g. Plate Fin Heat Exchanger guide, HTFS Handbook Sheets) • The reliability and the accuracy of pressure drop methods determine the feasibility to simulate maldistribution (with reference to research network papers, e.g. Research Reports) • Using HTFS heat exchanger simulation programs such as PlateFin for the forecasting and trouble shooting of maldistribution problems In conclusion the presentation will demonstrate how the insight gained using the Aspen HTFS Research Network material and the programs such as PlateFin, is valuable in addressing two-phase maldistribution problems associated with plate-fin heat exchangers.

The presentation will outline AspenTech's HTFS Research Network and frame the context of customer presentations in this session. The latest heat transfer research from AspenTech's in-house program will be reviewed with important new developments in understanding and modeling detailed.

This presentation compares C&I Engineering’s current workflow and data management to the new system instituted by AspenTech Basic Engineering (ABE). Implementing ABE will improve project efficiency and quality. C&I’s current data management system is subject to inefficiencies and inaccuracies including: repeated entry of data between systems utilized within the project team, minimal communication or synchronization between project tools, lack of standard datasheets and calculation sheets, and ineffective communication of project changes between team members. Poor data management can create quality problems such as increased costs, inaccurate designs, and delayed schedules. To mitigate these issues, C&I is implementing ABE, which will manage process information consistently throughout the engineering lifecycle, improve design quality, ensure as-built accuracy and ability to recycle operating information for future designs. C&I will execute the project in stages over three years. ABE will contain management of data from initial entry through multi-engineering discipline end use.

The quantity and variety of deliverable documents that Bechtel Process Engineers are expected to create for any project, from Design Package to FEED to EPC, provides a robust challenge to produce high quality, consistent documents in a timely manner. Bechtel Process Engineering has chosen to evaluate Aspen Basic Engineering (ABE) for implementation at this time, in order to help achieve quality and consistency goals for Process Engineering documents. ABE is also plug-in compatible with Intergraph SmartPlant Foundation which will support better collaboration with other engineering disciplines. Bechtel has chosen a phased approached to the evaluation of ABE with the expectation of implementing ABE in our standard work process. This paper discusses the driving factors for a new approach to the Process Engineering work process, the results of Phase 1 of this process, and our expectations for future Phases of development and implementation.

This presentation will profile the application of Aspen Basic Engineering within the DuPont Clean Fuel Technologies business. The presentation highlights how DuPont Clean Fuel Technologies has accelarted project execution using Aspen Basic Engineering. Specifically discussed topics are: -Before-and-after basic engineering workflows -Project schedule and engineering cost reductions -Reduction in translation time and cost.

The Dow Chemical Company maintains its own Pure Component Database that have many components not in the Aspen PureXX Databanks. The NIST databank has now been added to Aspen and the PureXX Databanks continue to add components. In the early versions of APED it was not easy to migrate the Dow names to the Aspen names if a component that was added already existed in the Dow Database. However, with the APED V7.3 the error checking provided and the functionality of the component find feature in Aspen Plus has made migration much easier.

In 2009 Evonik Degussa started to test the feasibility of the APED concept. Based on an in-house VBA-Tool, a workflow for an automized parameter import from existing simulations was established. Our goal is to provide and maintain individual databanks for different Business Lines within Evonik Degussa. Our achievements and further expectations shall be presented.

Chemical engineers have lost an intuitive understanding of physical properties and process behavior as computers and software have become more powerful. Interestingly, key solutions to the problem may be enabled by software advances, namely the easy availability of comprehensive property databases and advances in graphics and visualization.

A method to size PRVs and orifices was developed to account for complex two-phase flow conditions. Programmed in Excel and using the advanced thermodynamic algorithms and routines from Aspen HYSYS through automation, it provides a fast, simple and accurate way to analyze cases where complex conditions may appear, such as supercritical fluids or multiphase flows. The spreadsheet / HYSYS application simulates the PRV as an isentropic evolution through an expander, adjusting the expander outlet pressure automatically to determine the maximum mass velocity – the specific work of the expander representing the variation of kinetic energy produced in the nozzle. It has been successfully used in several projects, including Camisea Second Expansion, for applications such as PRV sizing, gas or liquid flow through an orifice, or even loss of containment calculations. Thanks to its ease of use, it has become unnecessary to make the rigorous calculations manually – which would consume up to ten times more time – make gross estimations, or even resort to a subcontractor.

The improvements in computer processing capability have enabled wonderful accomplishments in engineering design practices. The process design engineer can rapidly determine the impact of changes on the base process design case using steady state process modelling tools, which now can be used for multiple scenario analysis. The C&I engineer is then called on to ensure that the safety design meets all of the SIL requirements as determined in Hazops. During plant construction and commissioning, a whole host of operability problems usually become evident. Changes are made to the original design to ensure that the control scheme provides a steady and operable plant, which is normally costly involving minor mods, MOC procedures and unplanned downtime. Why, with all of these good technologies at our disposal are we continuing to repeat the same mistakes? The main contributor is due to the disconnect between process design and control design. AspenTech provide an engineering design suite which seamlessly provides ways to integrate these two disciplines in a dynamic virtual plant environment. The power of dynamic process models are underutilised and the capability of them undervalued in the design phase. Optimal control structures and logic can be determined/tested before commissioning. Control and operability robustness can also be tested in FEED, providing significant cost reductions during commissioning and implementation. For existing plants, the tool is also ideal for testing APC/ARC designs and can provide initial models for DMC solutions. A few examples of how this has been used here in Sasolburg and Secunda will be presented, showing both how powerful these tools can be, and the need to view process control as an integral part of design.

Not only is the Aspen PlateFin interface different from MUSE but it also provides a new calculation structure, removing limitations inherent in the MUSE methods and providing a basis for a more extensive range of calculations. This presentation reviews cases where the PlateFin results are superior to MUSE. Examples include: • Hardway Serrated Fin • Redistribution • Move Distributor Location

Aspen EDR Program has an Excel utility which can be used to link the input and output variables. It makes it easy to initialise and run these programs, view the results in Excel and integrate our in-house design and cost estimation tools. Jord has developed an integrated design and cost estimation program in which process and property data are first retrieved from a HYSYS simulation. They are then passed to the in-house design program which evaluates the various design options, and selects five best economical designs within the pool of all the feasible designs. These designs are then transferred to the AirCooled Program for further evaluation. Once a design is finalised, the program then calculates the cost, selects a fan, and generates a datasheet and a proposal. With this program, we are able to deal with customer enquiries in a much shorter time. It has helped us manage the workflow better, reduce overhead costs and achieve greater efficiency using existing resources.

Air cooled heat exchangers are widely used in cooling processes where heat recovery is impractical and cooling water is uneconomic. The integration of Aspen Air Cooled Exchanger with HYSYS and Aspen Plus allows the process impact of operational changes, such as control measures or ambient air temperature variation, to be properly modeled within comprehensive simulations. This presentation and demonstration will expand on these themes.

Lurgi is developing an application that implements modular design concept in Basic Engineering within ABE environment. With this application, it will be possible to configure Basic Engineering deliverables as per project specification in appreciable lesser time frame, along with simple and standard streamlined workflow.

The presentation starts with a short introduction into the concepts of ISO 15926. The structure of the single parts is described with regard to the historical background. it is demonstrated how the ISO lives today. We will outline our intention to put some efforts in understanding this data model. A short summary of our first transcription of our data model into the ISO model will be given.

Today’s capital projects in the Process Industry are executed in a very challenging environment of increasing competition, reduced margin and more aggressive schedules. Andy will outline the key challenges and introduce the remaining presentations for this session, as examples of solutions to the challenges. He will also review and demonstrate the key forthcoming features in aspenONE that focus on optimizing workflows for capital projects and addressing the needs of ever-bigger projects.

Pfizer has significantly improved access to Aspen Properties for conceptual process design. A combination of custom-designed spreadsheet applications for unit operation design and installation of AspenTech server applications provides a wide array of users immediate access to important property data. Distillation and Extraction Predictive Tools, designed for Aspen Properties via Excel, have found wide acceptance among project teams for accelerated process development. Aspen Web Properties and Mobile Properties provide seamless access to information that propels innovation and collaboration to new levels.

Cargill Process Optimizers has developed a set of steady state and dynamic models in Aspen Custom Modeler that can by used as templates for the analyzing the yield, water and energy balance of breweries. These models can support the optimization of operational performance through changes in process operation and design.

The pharmaceutical industry is slowly moving from traditional batch processing towards the use of continuous processing for API manufacturing. This has opened up more opportunities for modeling using traditional steady state and dynamic modeling tools and technologies. This presentation will cover some examples of modeling and associated challenges to support development of continuous processes in pharmaceutical API manufacturing.

The BP Upstream System Optimisation programme (a Fieldofthefuture® technology) is working to integrate domain models for all or part of an asset, to add business value through improved operability and production. Examples of business problems which could then be addressed include: • Integration of reservoir with models of the wells and gathering network to optimise waterflood • Optimisation of gas lift where the facility is gas constrained • Subsurface flow network integrated with facilities model for NGL optimisation In all these examples, there is a significant business benefit that can be achieved through the use of an integrated model. Current commercially available solutions for integrated models require the use of an "integration" environment, which are all designed to integrate any number of different modelling tools. The model can then be used for many purposes, including life of field modelling. However, there are a number of issues which impact on their ease-of-use, such as: • The user has to be familiar with the integration environment as well as the base models • Information or physical recycles can only be solved as an optimisation • Bespoke mappings are often required between different fluid representations These can be overcome in some circumstances by a tighter low level integration between the domain modelling tools. CO-LaN (the CAPE-OPEN standards body) has recently commissioned the development of a CAPE-OPEN wrapper for GAP (from Petroleum Experts) to demonstrate this. GAP can now be used as a "source" unit operation in any CAPE-OPEN compliant modelling environment, including HYSYS. The wrapper also includes a built-in capability to map from a black oil model of the fluid to a compositional representation. This paper will demonstrate the potential business benefits of integrating GAP with HYSYS and the ease-of-use of the CAPE-OPEN interface, using a case-study from the BP Upstream asset, Clair, in the North Sea Region. Fieldofthefuture® is a trademark of BP p.l.c

The flare systems of processing plants in the oil and gas industry are constantly under examination; e.g. when new plants are built and connected to an existing flare header, when existing plants are extended, or when new regulations have to be applied to an existing system. Often, dynamic analysis of the flare system or the flare gas sources can relieve an apparently bottlenecked flare system. In recent articles the benefits of analysing the transient behaviour of flare gas sources during an emergency situation or a normal blow-down have been examined. This paper now extends the scope of the dynamic simulation from the flare gas sources to include the flare header in order to account for the transient behaviour inside the header and describes the different phenomena that are to be taken into account when doing so. This approach has been recently applied to analyse and improve the blow-down strategy for an existing Gas Utilisation Plant of Wintershall in Libya and the results of that project are discussed as an example of the potential of the dynamic approach.

Overpressure protection of the inlet arrangement with basis in conventional solutions according to API Std521/ISO23251 is discussed with focus on challenging situations imposed by long subsea tie-backs to an oil & gas production facility. Dimensioning cases to consider according to the international standards mentioned are (i) inadvertent opening of inlet block valves with production choke fully open and (ii) “choke collapse”. A method of utilizing integrated dynamic multiphase (“OLGA”) and process simulations (“HYSYS”) to design such a system is demonstrated. Based on the experience of using an integrated dynamic multiphase/process solution, several benefits have been observed compared to other methods, such as a pure static approach as well as stand-alone multiphase simulations. The improved model and the improved understanding of these scenarios, contributes to more realistic design cases which reduce the need for over-conservative assumptions. This may again lead to avoiding platform modifications driven by unnecessary conservative arguments.

Vibration in shell and tube heat exchangers is a serious operational issue. Unresolved vibrations can lead to unstable operations, loss of production, equipment damage and ultimately catastrophic failure leading to loss of containment. The Aspen EDR program not only designs and rates shell and tube exchangers, it analyzes and provides insight to potential mechanical problems, such as vibration, which gives the user the opportunity to address this problem prior to fabrication. This report will focus on one aspect of vibration, Fluid Elastic Instability. We will discuss what fluid elastic instability is and what options are available to us within the EDR program to resolve the problem. We will also work through an example which demonstrates the use of the EDR program to detect fluid elastic instability and incorporate design changes to resolve this one aspect of vibration.

Recent trends towards higher water cuts and heavier oils have both contributed to increased uncertainty in the prediction of the effective viscosity of oil-water flows. A particular problem arises near the Inversion point, where the nature of the flow changes from oil-contnuous with dispersed droplets of water to water-continuous with dispersed oil droplets. The problem is that the effective viscosity near the inversion point can be very much higher than the oil viscosity, and the implications of underestimating the effective viscosity in thermal design of a heat exchanger could be severe. High viscosity implies both increased pressure drop which will restrict operational throughput and reduced heat transfer. Aspen Shell&Tube V7.3 provides new methods to both improve predictions and provide the user with options that may be appropriate to different systems. The presentation describes the new methods available in Shell&Tube V7.3 for the prediction of the effective viscosity of liquid-liquid systems. Case studies with light and heavy oils will be used to show how Shell&Tube can be used to optimise design and avoid under-performance.

This demonstartion will focus on the design of multi-shell series-parallel trains of exchangers. It showcases a new V7.3 capability which extends the advanced design optimization of Aspen Shell & Tube Exchanger. The case will focus on crude pre-heat but have wide relevance to chemical, refining and oil and gas production.

Methodologies for adjusting thermodynamic properties using Aspen Plus have been applied to different Braskem’s process units over the years. This paper presents how rigorous selection of thermodynamic models and parameters adjust for simulation of such petrochemical plants could lead to significant benefits: revamp accurate project, production increasing, operating costs reduction, effluents and emissions decreasing, energy optimization, operational problems troubleshooting, increase the value of different products, and real time optimization implementation. This methodology was applied to an isoprene revamp project, making possible to develop a model using Braskem’s technology. The plant capacity was increased in 40%, by applying streams recovery and waste reduction. Another example is the simulation of BTX extraction unit using Sulfolane, which allowed comparison of different technologies and implementation of process and operational improvements, i.e. significant enhance in operational periods and energy consumption reduction, around US$ 2 million/year, taking the units to the first energy consumption quartile in the benchmarking analyses. The same methodology is being replicated to another unit, with a potential gain of energy consumption and capacity increase of about US$ 4 million. Recently, the design optimization of a feed preparation unit to produce a rich olefinic C9 stream was also possible, allowing the recovery of 3 ton/hr of a product that is burned as fuel and will be converted to automotive gasoline, with potential benefits equivalent to US$ 5 million/year.

CO2 capture and sequestration (CCS) can be of importance for the further reduction of greenhouse gasses from large point emission sources such as power plants. Post combustion capture (PCC) is considered as one of the prime technologies for the reduction of CO2 emissions. PCC is based on the reactive absorption of CO2 into an aqueous solution and the subsequent thermal regeneration of this absorption liquid. There is a strong emphasis on the reduction of energy consumption for the thermal regeneration next to further improving the environmental burden of PCC (eg solvent emission to the environment, solvent degradation). TNO, contract research organization in the Netherlands, is working on the above mentioned topics using Aspen plus as modeling tool. We have developed amino acid salt systems for the absorption of CO2. Amino acid salt systems have a great advantage compared to traditional amine based absorption systems. In the presentation, we will demonstrate a new process concept based on amino acid salt systems. This concept is based on using Le Chatelier principle for enhancing CO2 absorption. This principle states that equilibrium can be shifted by removing one of the constituents in the reaction. Laboratorium experiments confirm the potential of the newly developed concept. Using ASPEN plus this process concept was further evaluated. Based on the amino acid salt potassium taurate, it was found that a significant energy reduction is possible. At TNO we are now further developing this process.

In this demonstration we will show the newest improvements in Aspen Plus which give you on-demand access to over three million sets of experimental phase equilibrium and mixture data from the US National Institute of Standards SOURCE database. This feature saves days or even weeks of effort required to collect the data you need to fit, validate, and verify the accuracy of your models. The NIST database is also evergreen, with quarterly updates.

In this paper the way we use the Aspen Shell and Tube program, at Radiant Engineers, is illustrated. Two examples are considered for this purpose. In the first example, the objective is to reduce the moisture content of compressed air stream using the cooling tower and chilled water flows. It is demonstrated that optimum solution to this problem is a set of three shell and tube heat exchangers with the same shell diameter, working as aftercooler, chiller and heat recovery unit. We designed the after cooler first and then the shell side outlet temperature from the after cooler was used as the tube side inlet temperature for the design of the heat recovery unit. Finally the tube side outlet temperature from the heat recovery unit was used as the shell side inlet temperature for the chiller. In another example design optimization of an oil cooler is presented. Various steps starting from initial design to fine tuning of that design in rating mode, where various warning messages concerning pressure drops, the crossflow fraction being less than a desired value etc are addressed. Also a detailed flow induced vibration analysis produced by the Shell and Tube program is examined.

This paper presents simulation of two box type heaters and selection of metallurgy for the convection section tubes based on the predicted temperature of flue gas leaving the heater, using the dry run operation. The convection sections of two box type heaters were designed for steam recovery and the metallurgy selected was carbon steel. It was decided to design the convection section for dry run operation so that flexibility of plant operation can be improved. The fired heaters were simulated using Aspen HTFS Fired Heater module, for generating the operational data for both the heaters. The radiant section exit flue gas temperatures were simulated for various operating conditions and the maximum flue gas temperature at the inlet of convection section was finalized .The tube metal temperature was calculated based on the maximum flue gas temperature for dry run operation and the tube metallurgy was selected. For one of the heaters suitable metallurgy for convection section of tube was not possible. Hence, the steam flowrate required to maintain the tube metal temperature below the design temperature was calculated, and necessary controls and interlocks were implemented to ensure that steam flowrate. The draft profile and casing temperatures were calculated based on high flue gas temperatures leaving stack during dry run operation. A scheme for necessary modification was finalized and implemented to replace the convection section tubes with better tube metallurgy which was suitable for dry run operation.

This demonstation will show the new inetrface between Aspen HYSYS and Aspen Fired Heater, released with aspenONE V7.3. The case will show how the rigor of Fired heater can help in optimizing or trouble-shooting crude distillation heater operations.

In response to higher global demand for gasoil and gasoline and environmental regulations, refineries are incorporating new hydrotreating units into their existing facilities. Most of the project attention focuses on these new units while utilities and other services are evaluated later in the project cycle. Verification of the existing refinery flare systems is often a key issue. In this paper we outline the approach used successfully in three recent hydrotreater projects, and enumerate the typical bottlenecks encountered in the rating and analysis of existing flare systems and how simulation can help resolve them. Examples will cover the use of different models to estimate relief loads, evaluate dispersion of contaminants, and calculate the future radiation intensity of the revamped designs.

As an owner and operator of many industrial gases facilities, Air Products supplies hydrogen in various regions from a pipeline, linking one or more of its production plants to many tonnage customers. Meeting multiple customers’ pressure and flow specifications from a single pipeline system is a balancing act which requires optimizing plant operations to meet the demand. By determining optimum inlet pressures, from various plants to the pipeline, operating-cost savings can be achieved while meeting contract terms. Aspen Plus can be effectively utilized to simulate a Hydrogen Pipeline system as explained in this presentation. Pipe model accurately calculates the outlet pressure based on pipe characteristics. Pipeline tees are effectively simulated using FSplit and Mixer models. Using optimization capabilities in Aspen Plus, inlet and outlet pressures can be calculated for known inlet and outlet flow rates. Results from the Aspen Plus simulation were compared with an off-the-shelf pipe network modeling program and matched very well.

For V7.3, Aspen Flare System Analyzer (formerly known as Flarenet) has been modernized with a new Graphical User Interface, many new “ease-of-use” features, and a new underlying architecture and hydraulics capabilities that will enable the support of dynamic flare system models in the future. The vision for Aspen Flare System Analyzer and a demo of the new V7.3 User Interface will be presented.