The Experimental Study on Effects of Height and Hold up on performance of Vertical Gas-Liquid Separator using Amin Contactor Tower
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X20836Abstract
In present research, first the treatment of flow in designed vertical gas-liquid separator and Amin contactor tower at refinery in order to reduce of liquid percent was simulated. In order to simulation was used three dimension model with finite volume method numerically. Then separator and contactor tower has been modeled three dimensional and for droplet tracking in continuous phase has been used discrete phase model (DPM) with turbulence RNG k-Ɛ model. Also the gambit software is used for three dimension designs and fluent is used for solution governing equations of flow field. After simulation, the governing model of separator and contactor tower, fluid flow, the effect of growing of liquid droplet, droplet settling length (disengagement time) was studied. After analysis and compare behavior of flow in separator and tower, the results of simulation compared with experimental results at sweetening unit in Sarkhoun and Qeshm gas treating company that has 95% compatibility. The simulation results has shown that TOTAL method has more compatibility with relation to other methods so that one of effective parameters in improvement of separation process is growing of liquid droplets and separation factor depend on that, also more disengagement time causes increase hold up time and finally growing of liquid droplets. Additionally according to younger's comment gas-liquid separators can applied in horizontal or vertical status so that he founded if L/D be 1.7 to 3.6, the separators should be used vertically also Branan has proved that if L/D > 5, a horizontal separator should be used. The results of research are shown that in special conditions with L/D>6.5 can apply vertical separator. Finally experimental data has shown that the settling length can be 36 ft (11m) that separation works well and according to Schiman this length should be 0.75D or a minimum 12in (0.305 m) whereas Gerunda recommends a length equal to the diameter or a minimum of 3 ft (0.914 m) that present result is new recommendation.Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
