HIGH-EFFICIENCY

DESIGN WITH CUSTOM

BACK-END WASTE
HEAT RECOVERY.

HIGH-PERFORMANCE
EMISSION CONTROLS –
FOR THE LOWEST LEVELS
OF CO AND NOX AS
LOW AS 2PPM.

COMPLETE SYSTEMS
CUSTOM DESIGNED
FOR THE MOST
STRINGENT CUSTOMER
SPECIFICATIONS.

RENTECH BOILERS.
AS TOUGH AS TEXAS.
PRODUCTS SOLUTIONS
Heat Recovery Steam Generators Refining and Petrochemical
Waste Heat Boilers Power Generation
Fired Packaged Watertube Boilers Manufacturing & Institutional
Specialty Boilers Food Processing
CHP
WWW.RENTECHBOILERS.COM

Select 53 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com

CLEAN FUELS
Convert LCO to gasoline
with a high RON

Upgrading residual fuels

to produce high-value products

PROCESS OPTIMIZATION
Desalting operations
for opportunity crudes

PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Flexibility in demolition of a refinery—
A site exit with many winners

VIEWPOINT
Digitalization is key to increasing
the process industry’s productivity
 HIGH-EFFICIENCY
DESIGN WITH CUSTOM
BACK-END WASTE
HEAT RECOVERY.

HIGH-PERFORMANCE
EMISSION CONTROLS –
FOR THE LOWEST LEVELS
OF CO AND NOX AS
LOW AS 2PPM.

COMPLETE SYSTEMS
CUSTOM DESIGNED
FOR THE MOST
STRINGENT CUSTOMER
SPECIFICATIONS.

RENTECH BOILERS.
AS TOUGH AS TEXAS.
PRODUCTS SOLUTIONS
Heat Recovery Steam Generators Refining and Petrochemical
Waste Heat Boilers Power Generation
Fired Packaged Watertube Boilers Manufacturing & Institutional
Specialty Boilers Food Processing
CHP
WWW.RENTECHBOILERS.COM
Select 53 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 MARCH 2018 | Volume 97 Number 3
HydrocarbonProcessing.com

30

23

SPECIAL FOCUS: CLEAN FUELS DEPARTMENTS

31 Convert LCO to gasoline with a high RON 4 Industry Perspectives
J. Gong, A. Mao, J. Long, J. Zhang, X. Chang and J. Tang 8 Business Trends
35 Composite ionic liquid alkylation technology 15 Industry Metrics
gives high product yield and selectivity
Z. Liu, R. Zhang, X. Meng, H. Liu, C. Xu, X. Zhang and W. Chung 17 Global Project Data

39 Upgrading the bottom of the barrel 85 Innovations

R. Elshout, J. Bailey, L. Brown and P. Nick 87 Marketplace

ENVIRONMENT AND SAFETY 88 Advertiser Index

47 Combating normalization of deviance within your organization 89 Events

J. Caudill 90 People

PROJECT MANAGEMENT COLUMNS

51 Demolition of a refinery—a site exit with many winners
K. Noé
7 Editorial Comment
The future of refining—
sulfur need not apply
PROCESS OPTIMIZATION
57 Dynamic simulation of integrated syngas, O2 and steam networks 19 Reliability
Consider stainless steel tubing
for a gasification complex—Part 2
for mechanical seal connections
V. Dadhich, N. Karvekar, T. Mathew, G. Bhattad, M. Saxena and P. Kodolikar
21 Automation Strategies
61 Flexibility in desalting operations for opportunity crudes Top technology trends
I. Mejias, Y. Liu, J. Boul and T. Collins in automation for 2018
65 Cost-effective revamp of CO2 removal systems 23 Refining
V. Arora Russia plans ramp-up in refinery
expansion, construction
FLUID FLOW AND ROTATING EQUIPMENT
25 Viewpoint
71 Preventing wire wooling journal bearing failure Digitalization is key to increasing
K. Brashler the process industry’s productivity
75 Simulation model of a vacuum heater transfer line 27 Digital
R. H. Williams Operational excellence index—Part 2:
The digital transformation
TERMINALS AND STORAGE
80 Keep a floating roof on an even keel
P. Skogberg
83 Prevent buckling of tanks with external rafters
J. Tharakan

Cover Image: Marathon Petroleum is executing the $1.5 B–$2 B South Texas Asset Repositioning (STAR)
program, which will unify its 459-Mbpd Galveston Bay refinery and 86-Mbpd refinery at Texas City, Tex. (shown).
The project, due to be completed in 2021, will form the fully integrated 585-Mbpd Galveston Bay-Texas City
refining complex. The STAR project will enable the two refineries to achieve the US EPA’s updated Tier 3
gasoline sulfur standards. Photo courtesy of Marathon Petroleum Corp.

www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com
P. O. Box 2608
Houston, Texas 77252-2608, USA
Phone: +1 (713) 529-4301
Fax: +1 (713) 520-4433
HPEditorial@HydrocarbonProcessing.com

PUBLISHER Catherine Watkins

Industry Perspectives EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER

Secondary unit construction
surges in the near term
Although the refining industry is expected to add more than 7
MMbpd of new distillation capacity by the early 2020s, the glob-
al refining industry will witness a boost in secondary processing
capacity, as well. This processing capacity will be added through
the construction of greenfield refineries, as well as through plant
upgrades and additions. The additional capacity will provide
these facilities with complex units to produce high-value, low-
sulfur and ultra-low-sulfur fuels. More secondary processing
units are needed to meet new fuel quality regulations that are be-
ing enacted by dozens of countries around the world.
According to OPEC’s World Oil Outlook 2017, more than 11
MMbpd of secondary processing unit capacity will begin opera-
tion by 2022 (FIG. 1). The majority of new secondary unit capaci-
ty—approximately 6.6 MMbpd—will be for new desulfurization
capacity. Conversion and octane-boosting capacity additions
will amount to 3.2 MMbpd and 1.7 MMbpd, respectively.
The Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions will be the lead-
ers in new desulfurization capacity. Both regions are building
and/or upgrading existing refining capacity to meet low-sulfur
regulations and produce transportation fuels that adhere to Euro
4, Euro 5 ad Euro 6 standards. The ability to create high-value
products allows these regions to compete for market share in es-
tablished and developing fuel markets.
From 2017–2022, OPEC forecast that additional conversion
capacity will be led by new hydrocracking capacity. A breakdown
of new conversion capacity includes more than 1.3 MMbpd of
hydrocracking capacity, more than 1 MMbpd of coking/vis-
breaking capacity and approximately 800 Mbpd of fluid catalytic
cracking (FCC) and residual FCC capacity. Similar to new de-
sulfurization capacity, the majority of new conversion capacity
will be located in Asia and the Middle East. However, Russia and
the Caspian region will see more than 400 Mbpd of new conver-
sion capacity begin operations by the early 2020s. The additional
Russian capacity stems from the country’s $55-B modernization
program, which is focused on upgrading and conversion capacity,
as opposed to distillation capacity.
1.6
Conversion
1.4 Desulfurization
Octane units
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Catherine.Watkins@GulfPub.com
Lee Nichols
Lee.Nichols@GulfPub.com
EDITORIAL
Executive Editor Adrienne Blume
Managing Editor
Digital Editor
Mike Rhodes
Stephanie Cano
Technical Editor
Reliability/Equipment Editor
Bob Andrew
Heinz P. Bloch
Contributing Editor Alissa Leeton
Contributing Editor ARC Advisory Group
Contributing Editor Anthony Sofronas
MAGAZINE PRODUCTION / +1 (713) 525-4633
Vice President, Production Sheryl Stone
Manager, Advertising Production Cheryl Willis
Assistant Manager, Advertising Production Krista Norman
Manager, Editorial Production Angela Bathe Dietrich
Assistant Manager, Editorial Production Lindsey Craun
Artist/Illustrator David Weeks
Graphic Designer Andreina Keller
ADVERTISING SALES
See Sales Offices, page 87.
CIRCULATION / +1 (713) 520-4498 / Circulation@GulfPub.com
Manager, Circulation Suzanne McGehee
SUBSCRIPTIONS
Subscription price (includes both print and digital versions): One year $399,
two years $679, three years $897. Airmail rate outside North America $175 addi-
tional a year. Single copies $35, prepaid.
Hydrocarbon Processing’s Full Data Access subscription plan is priced at $1,695.
This plan provides full access to all information and data Hydrocarbon Processing
has to offer. It includes a print or digital version of the magazine, as well as full
access to all posted articles (current and archived), process handbooks, the
HPI Market Data book, Construction Boxscore Database project updates and more.
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.
DISTRIBUTION OF ARTICLES
Published articles are available for distribution in a PDF format or as professionally
printed handouts. Contact Foster Printing at Mossberg & Co. for a price quote and
details about how you can customize with company logo and contact information.
For more information, contact Jill Kaletha with Foster Printing at
Mossberg & Co. at +1 (800) 428-3340 x 149 or jkaletha@mossbergco.com.
Hydrocarbon Processing (ISSN 0018-8190) is published monthly by Gulf Publishing
Company, 2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1020, Houston, Texas 77046. Periodicals post-
age paid at Houston, Texas, and at additional mailing office. POSTMASTER: Send
address changes to Hydrocarbon Processing, P.O. Box 2608, Houston, Texas 77252.
Copyright © 2018 by Gulf Publishing Company. 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.
President/CEO John Royall
CFO Alan Millis
Vice President Andy McDowell
Vice President Ron Higgins
Vice President, Finance and Operations Pamela Harvey
Vice President, Production Sheryl Stone

FIG. 1. Forecast of secondary processing capacity from existing Publication Agreement Number 40034765 Printed in USA
projects by year, 2017–2022. Source: OPEC World Oil Outlook 2017. Other Gulf Publishing Company titles include: Gas ProcessingTM, Petroleum Economist ©,
World Oil ®, Pipeline & Gas Journal and Underground Construction.

4 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 IS WHO WE ARE
Ariel’s expert technical
service workforce is what
makes us the number one
authority in natural
gas compression.

Select 65 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 Shell Global Solutions

TECHNOLOGY AND CATALYST

SOLUTIONS FOR COST-EFFECTIVE
RESIDUE UPGRADING
■ Increase crude flexibility
■ Upgrade the bottom of the barrel
■ Identify no regret, value-adding investments
■ Sustain refinery competitiveness

To identify the most promising response

options for your facility, let’s talk.

SRU/GAS PROCESSING
ATMOSPHERIC ROSE® SDA HYDROTREATER CANSOLV/CO2
DISTILLATION CAPTURE

EMISSIONS MANAGEMENT
OPPORTUNITY
REVAMP SCOT ULTRA or CANSOLV SO2
MARGIN INTEGRATION OPPORTUNITY OPPORTUNITY Increase sulphur recovery efficiency
OPPORTUNITY SDA + DAO hydrocracking Reactor internals
Crude flexibility A low capital cost option for and catalysts
Increase margin by $1/bbl residue conversion Increase bottoms
conversion

INTEGRATION
INTEGRATION REVAMP OPPORTUNITY
INTEGRATION RETROFIT OPPORTUNITY OPPORTUNITY OPPORTUNITY SDA + residue
OPPORTUNITY Residue upgrading catalysts SDA + visbreaker Hydrocracker gasification
Deep-flash VDU Raise conversion levels, A low capital cost option Increase feed and A low capital cost option
Increase VGO lift process heavier feeds for residue conversion product flexibility for residue conversion

PRODUCT TANKS

CRUDE TANKS VACUUM DISTILLATION

RESIDUE VISBREAKER HYDROCRACKER RESIDUE GASIFICATION
HYDROCONVERSION

ROSE is a trademark of KBR Inc.

Select 54 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

228891_Advert_SGS_Criterion_148x210mm.indd 1 15/01/2018 13:33

 Editorial
Comment
The future of refining—sulfur need not apply
According to multiple industry re-
ports, crude oil consumption will con-
tinue to increase over the short term.
The majority of this growth will be for
the production of transportation fuels,
while a sizable portion will be for the
production of petrochemicals. Nearly all
of the oil demand growth will come from
emerging economies.
With the increase in demand for re-
fined fuels, additional consumption
equates to higher emissions rates. To
combat these effects, dozens of countries
around the world are increasing pressure
on refiners to reduce the amount of sulfur
in transportation fuels, primarily in die-
sel and gasoline. Some of the major poli-
cies governing the mandatory decrease in
emissions and the allowable amount of
sulfur in fuels include Tier 3 fuel regula-
tions in the US, National 5 and Beijing 6
in China, Bharat Stage 6 in India, Euro
5 and Euro 6 and clean fuel production
projects in the Middle East, as well as
higher ethanol/biofuel blending rates
in several countries and the adoption of
electric, hybrid-electric and natural gas-
powered vehicles.
Low-sulfur rules have also moved
into the global shipping sector with the
enactment of the IMO’s Global Sulfur
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Africa Asia-Pacific Canada/Europe/US
FIG. 1. Desulfurization capacity additions by 2022, by region (MMbpd). Source: OPEC World Oil
Outlook 2017.
LEE NICHOLS, EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER
Lee.Nichols@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Cap regulation. This new regulation,
which will be enacted in 2020, will affect
more than 50,000 ships worldwide, and
has spawned a wave of questions on how
refiners and shipowners will react to new
low-sulfur fuels for marine shipping.
However, the move to reduce sulfur in
refined products is not new to the down-
stream processing industry. Over the past
several decades, Hydrocarbon Processing
has followed the technologies surround-
ing the reduction of sulfur in refined fu-
els and the development of clean fuels
around the world.
With the addition of new legislation
restricting the amount of sulfur in trans-
portation fuels, refiners will continue to
invest billions of dollars to adhere to new
fuel quality regulations.
Some of the most intense investment
will be seen in the increase of desulfuriza-
tion capacity. Approximately 6.6 MMbpd
of new desulfurization capacity will be
added by the early 2020s (FIG. 1). The
majority of this capacity will be in non-
OECD countries in the Asia-Pacific and
Middle East regions.
Clean fuels production is the way of the
future, and refiners will either have to get
onboard or risk a future where their low-
grade products are virtually unsellable.
Russia/Caspian Latin America Middle East
INSIDE THIS ISSUE
8 Business Trends. Business
executives and project managers
are grappling with challenging business
environments and a 20-yr legacy
of failing megaprojects. Approximately
$12 B/yr is wasted in capital execution
inefficiencies, lost output and disputes.
The conventional “medicine” applied
over decades is not working. A change
is required to empower project
professionals to lead the preparation
of well-designed contract “spines” that
underpin business governance and
project management discipline.
30 Special Focus.
In response to new emissions
regulations, refiners are implementing
operational and processing changes
to produce low-sulfur and ultra-low-
sulfur fuels. This month’s Special Focus
investigates the opportunities available
to cost-effectively produce clean
transportation fuels and products while
adhering to existing and impending
environmental regulations.
47 Environment
and Safety.
Normalization of deviance (NoD) is a
long-term phenomenon in which a lower
standard of safety is accepted, until that
lower standard becomes the “norm.”
This work outlines the “Seven Deadly
Sins” of NoD and discusses the potential
solutions to combat subpar operations.
57 Process Optimization.
The conclusion of a joint study
on the capital-intensive gasification
unit at Reliance Industries’ 1.24-MMbpd
Jamnagar refinery in India. A dynamic
simulation network model
of syngas, oxygen, hydrogen and
steam headers has been developed
for the complex. The study was carried
out with more than 75 identified
process upset scenarios. The resulting
recommendations were implemented
before the startup of the facility.
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 7
 | Business Trends
Approximately $12 B/yr is wasted in capital execution
inefficiencies, lost output and disputes. Business executives
and project managers are grappling with challenging business
environments and a 20-yr legacy of failing megaprojects. The
conventional “medicine” applied over decades is not working.
This month’s Business Trends details the many contract forms
available in the construction of megaprojects, as well as the
changes in business culture that are needed to get the job done.

Photo: The 400-Mbpd Saudi Aramco Total Refining and Petrochemical Co.
(SATORP) refinery is a modern-day example of a downstream megaproject.
According to SATORP, building the multibillion-dollar facility involved the
engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning (EPCC) of 13
lump-sum turnkey EPCC contracts and the operation of 45 process units,
utilities and offsites. The complex is one of the most advanced facilities
in operation. Photo courtesy of SATORP.
B. CROSSLEY, Energy Contract Solutions Pte. Ltd., Singapore;
and G. MCLEOD, Chevron, Bahrain

Business Trends

Rejuvenating the contract “spine”

of megaprojects—Part 1
Business executives and project managers are grappling with
challenging business environments and a 20-yr legacy of failing
megaprojects. The “medicine” applied over decades is not work-
ing. Two respected consulting firms recently reported on project
failure causes and made valid observations. However, they misdi-
agnosed symptoms of failure as root causes. This article is based
on understanding what it takes to build megaprojects. It diagno-
ses the root cause of problems—business culture. A change is re-
quired to empower project professionals to lead the preparation
of well-designed contract “spines” that underpin business gover-
nance and project management discipline. Contract “preventive
medicine” will cure the reported symptoms, improving project
outcomes and, in turn, setting in motion a flywheel of sustain-
able positive momentum. Enlightened members of management
circles are ready for a change and looking for solutions.
Contracts are not working as the spine of projects. There FIG. 1. Empowering project professionals to build the contract “spine”
is an old saying: “The best place for contracts is in the bottom of governance and project management.
drawer.” Some projects work that way, until a dispute arises.
Then, the contract is retrieved and interrogated for favorable ment review procedures, etc. These contract headings should
interpretations. Contracts are misused and misunderstood in reflect the project manager’s required body of knowledge
numerous ways, including: (BOK) published by the Project Management Institute and the
• They are thought to have no relevance to the execution Association of Project Management. Clearly, the place for con-
team business of building the project. In the medical tracts is not in the bottom drawer.
field, this would be referred to as “unnecessary medicine.”
• Viewed as a narrow function of minimizing liability. Why has it gone wrong? What can be done? The General
This is an important governance function since liabilities Counsel at GE Aviation recently lamented, “For the most part,
can be substantial. However, it is required only after the the contracts used in business are long, poorly structured and
project has gone wrong (i.e., crisis medicine). full of unnecessary and incomprehensible language.”1 Contracts
• Some clients believe that if engineering, procurement focus too much on who to blame and too little on how to get the
and construction (EPC) lump-sum contract terms are in job done. Contracts have lost the project management spine;
place, “if the project fails, the contractor is responsible… and the aspects of governance, including risk management, are
we will not pay more for the contract.” In reality, mere often misunderstood. Lawyers are experts in liability—most
legal words will not protect clients from project failure are not trained in building projects. They are not accountable
(i.e., delusional medicine). for project outcomes; these are usually the responsibility of
project managers.
Preventive medicine. A contract’s purpose is preventive medi- After changes in the business culture, project management
cine. Well-designed contracts are the primary tools underpin- can restore ownership of well-designed contracts as a principal
ning project governance—high-level assurance that a project will stakeholder in project outcomes. Project management can also
meet its objectives. This includes allocation of sufficient time and empower project professionals, which leads to the rejuvenation
resources, commercially advisable risks and liabilities, and con- of contracts, while taking good legal advice in context (FIG. 1).
trol measures in place. Poor governance in “toxic contracts” has Fortunately, practical and relatively inexpensive solutions are
caused bankruptcies (e.g., Carillion 2018, Shaw Group 2012). within reach (FIG. 2).
Underpinning project management discipline, the contract
form determines the project relationship and organization. The Project overruns are sinking business cases. A 2016 in-
contract’s contents determine the scope, time, quality, docu- dustry report highlighted concerns with construction sector
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 9
 Business Trends
productivity and project overruns. The report explained that
industry must confront internal challenges, and that productiv-
ity improvements in construction have been meager over the
past 50 yr in most countries.2 For example, construction labor
productivity in the US has fallen over the last 50 yr, and lags
approximately 72% behind other industry sectors that have in-
novated and applied a learning culture.2
Two industry reports on megaproject outcome data show
that cost overruns are rampant. One report collected data on
60 oil and gas and mining megaprojects. The data showed that
projects with an average of 80% cost overruns and 20-mos de-
lays appeared in 98% of the cases.3 Another report gathered data
on 100 megaprojects in the power industry.4 Cost overruns of
35% occurred in 57% of the cases. Megaprojects that were de-
layed more than 25 mos occurred in 64% of the cases.
The lowest of reported overrun percentages equate to ap-
proximately $29 B in annual capital cost. This cost is based on
a forecast of $144 B in capital spending in 2018 in the refining,
petrochemical and gas processing/LNG industries.5 Based on
an analysis of past project closeout data, the authors have split
the $29 B in annual capital cost into three overrun cost catego-
ries (FIG. 3):
1. Additional work: This section represents 10% of the
total cost overruns of $29 B. This category equates to
“nice-to-have changes,” due to enhanced functionality or
FIG. 2. Economic and practical “preventive medicine.”
FIG. 3. Global cost overruns of $29 B split into three cost categories.
10 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
operating preference (e.g., a plant layout change
preferred by the operator).
2. Underestimation: This category—representing 50%
of the total overrun cost—includes “must-have” changes
due to incomplete design or execution requirements
(e.g., inaccurate sizing of client-supplied vendor
equipment requiring layout and routing changes).
Although underestimating is not a total waste, late
changes cause inefficiency and impacts the business case.
3. Execution inefficiency: This represents 40% of the
overall overrun cost. Execution inefficiency is an
absolute waste due to interruptions to planned work
practices and delays (e.g., if the client team is not ready
for the execution phase, then it causes approval delays).
In addition to capital cost overruns, business cases are sunk
deeper by project delays and cost disputes. Additionally, repu-
tational risk will drive lenders to increase risk premiums or
decline financing. Costs caused by unavoidable risks, such as a
change in the law, are generally negligible.
Lost production due to startup delays—averaging 20 mos
on the lowest report—is the single most damaging factor. Pro-
duction losses can be astronomical. Therefore, contracts have
a mutual waiver of consequential loss and limit a contractor’s
delay liability to cap liquidated damages—normally 10% of the
contract price. No contractor’s governance process would allow
uncapped exposure to production loss.
Disputes occur on every failed project, particularly on EPC
lump-sum fixed price (LSFP) contracts. In one corner, the con-
tractor faces liquidated damages and cost overruns, reported to
average 35% vs. typical pre-tax margins of around 5%. In the
other corner, the client maintains that fixed price means fixed.
Does this sound familiar? A thriving construction dispute busi-
ness employs multitudes of claim consultants and consumes
more than 50% of construction legal hours. In the authors’ ex-
perience, disputes cost approximately 1% of the project’s capital
(approximately $1.4 B annually), and can climb as high as 5% if
a dispute reaches arbitration.
Legal words will not protect clients from the consequences
of project failure. Some clients believe that with an EPC lump-
sum contract in place, the burden lies with the contractor. If the
project fails, the client is not required to pay more than what is
expressed in the contract. In reality, the clients have the most to
lose. In extreme cases, contractor bankruptcy from unrealistic
contract commitments leaves the client with no recourse.
The $12 B of annual capital cost inefficiency, lost output and
disputes is an absolute waste due to megaproject development
and execution issues. The interests of both clients and contractors
are to apply preventive medicine to the causes of cost overruns.
The Cobb Paradox. The methods that have been tried over
many years, including better project management and complex
EPC lump-sum contracts, are not working. In 1995, Martin Cobb,
a Canadian government IT specialist, advised the Canadian Trea-
sury on the failure of projects. From this discussion, the Cobb
Paradox was developed, which states: “We know why projects fail;
we know how to prevent their failure—so why do they still fail?”
Increasing the scale, complexity and one-off nature of mega-
projects are not the root causes of cost overruns. At first glance,
megaprojects may seem overwhelming. They include numerous
 Business Trends

companies, hundreds of engineers, thousands of documents and

tens of thousands of workers. However, with experience and un-
derstanding, it can be seen that megaprojects are built in the same
way, time after time. For example, the majority of labor hours and
schedule-critical paths always involve piping, which is standard
technology. Megaprojects are not destined to fail; they are simply
large and complex, and require a disciplined grip to understand
and avoid the causes for failure.5
According to two industry consulting firms,3,4 the causes of
project cost overruns include:
• Unachievable cost and/or time commitments
• Incomplete design and/or definition of project execution
conditions, requirements and restraints
• An execution team that is unprepared and inadequately
skilled, along with a project that is not set up with
appropriate procedures, tools and/or digital infrastructure
• An inadequate contract, commercial structure and/or
poor supply chain integration
• Inappropriate risk allocation and management.
These causes are internal to project organizations, so they
can be prevented. Project failure is rarely caused by uncontrol-
lable external events—a few exceptions are projects lost to cata-
strophic events, such as war.
These reported causes are symptoms of failure, not root
causes. These are valid observations of shortcomings. However,
based on an understanding of what it takes to build megaproj- High Performance Disc Coupling
ects, the following analysis supported by front-line examples
shows that project professionals already know all of the reported • Scalloped profile disc pack optimized for
shortcomings. In addition, they know that established preven- high speed compressor applications
tive medicine should have been applied. • Cost reduced, economical solution for
Example 1: Unachievable estimates. Examples of un- today’s turbomachinery market
achievable estimates include the unsuccessful attempt by the
project teams to compress schedules and cut costs, which results • Fully compliant to API-671/ISO10441
in rework, additional costs and delays. One example is contract- • Disc material – 300 series stainless,
ing the construction of a nuclear power plant on a 5-yr schedule Inconel option
vs. the historical, fastest construction timeline of 7 yr. Realistic • Coated or uncoated discs
schedules start with past project reference durations, followed • Phosphate coating standard on components
by probabilistic analysis of an integrated schedule based on ac-
• Shrouded fasteners for reduced windage
curate front-end engineering and design (FEED) quantities and
realistic field productivity. • Optional fail-safe designs
Example 2: Incomplete design. Changes in the field re-
quire cutting and the rewelding of piping and steelwork, which www.Ameridrives.com
dramatically decreases labor productivity. Subcontracted labor www.BibbyTurboflex.com
hours can overrun by 150% due to field changes and other ex-
ecution inefficiencies. A complete design starts with FEED with
approximately 10% accuracy from the cost and schedule esti- Visit us at the Asia Turbomachinery
mate, followed by a realistic timetable and resources to provide a & Pump Symposium, Booth 133
“right the first-time” detailed engineering design. March 13-15, 2018 in Singapore
Example 3: Lacking execution preservation measures.
These measures include equipment and material corrosion,
along with rework and startup delays. One project required
opening and resurfacing 5,000 installed flanges. Preservation
measures start with a clear specification and bid pricing, fol-
lowed by mobilizing the appropriate resources to execute the
clearly understood commitments.

Culture change. The real root cause of failure is business cul-

ture. Cultural challenges, particularly on the client side, that
inhibit the preparation of well-designed contracts include the
Select 151 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
11
 Business Trends
pursuit of short-term savings on project development person-
nel; a reluctance to face realistic cost and schedule estimates; a
lack of commitment to the project as “temporary but core” busi-
ness, instead seeing it only as a step to achieving an ultimate busi-
ness case; delegating contract ownership to lawyers who are not
trained in building projects; fear of a change to simple contracts
and the use of more appropriate contract forms; and pre-contract
“gaming behaviors” undermining collaborative relationships that
should start out with a well-designed bid submission, followed
by business-like clarification, negotiation and aligned objectives.
When faced with lower margins and a shortened time to mar-
ket, and when contracting implications are rarely explained (let
alone understood), these cultural behaviors seem rational. After
the drivers, challenges and available solutions are clearly under-
stood, it is time for a culture change.
Enlightened members of management are ready for a culture
change. The business culture required for successful projects is
long-term, smart, strategic-thinking, collaborative, innovative,
tough-minded, honest and down-to-earth. The culture should
be tough but fair, which is more efficient in the long-term. For ex-
FIG. 4. Change empowers project professionals to prepare contract
spines and set in motion a positive flywheel.
FIG. 5. PCS through project Phases 1–4.
12 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
ample, unduly using market leverage to impose undesirable con-
tracting arrangements leads to higher dispute costs. It incubates
the single-minded objective of preparing a robust business case at
the outset—if necessary, killing off unfeasible projects. It remains
relentlessly committed to achieving all project success criteria. It
understands what must happen, why and when, and drills down
to the fundamentals including well-designed contracts, and sets
in motion a flywheel of sustainable positive momentum (FIG. 4).
Improved contract preparation management requires prac-
tical techniques and tools. Established, but under-used, tech-
niques are usually poorly described in contracting manuals. The
following provides a summary of the essentials with an empha-
sis on project management.7
Project contracting strategy (PCS). A PCS is the key to le-
veraging long-term value from any business opportunity. After
the strategic business case is defined in Phase 1, the first PCS
step in Phase 2 is deciding the appropriate strategies for con-
tracting Phase 3 companies for FEED and specifying the tech-
nical requirements of the execution phase (FIG. 5). The right
Phase 3 contracts will establish stable project foundations. The
quality of the FEED documents will directly affect the quality
of the EPC bids.6
The PCS for the entire project should be developed in Phase
3 and progressively optimized. PCS defines what is proposed
in each work package, who will deliver the work while creating
synergies of available skillsets and existing contract relation-
ships, and how to motivate performance while managing risks
and opportunities.
Contract development schedule (CDS). The CDS encom-
passes the entire project, and is used to execute the PCS within
the final business case timeline. Built-in tensions exist in a CDS
to prepare contracts, bid, negotiate and award, as well as short
time-to-market requirements. Short-term planning is a frequent
cause of long-term overrun.
Individual contracting plans (ICPs). ICPs develop the de-
tailed tactical plans to contract each work package within the
frameworks set by the PCS and CDS.
Contract development team (CDT). To develop the PCS,
the core team must be formed no later than Phase 2 of the proj-
ect. A full-strength team is needed in Phase 3 to prepare contract
documents for bid packages. The CDT leadership is comprised
of the project manager as the principal stakeholder in a well-de-
signed contract; a contract manager as the specialist in contract
strategy and content; engineering and construction managers
as specialists in technical requirements, where most overrun
causes originate; a project controls manager as the specialist in
timelines; and a legal advisor and a business manager as special-
ists in terms and conditions and commercial requirements, re-
spectively. Having CDT personnel follow through into contract
negotiations and worksite execution delivers benefits of build-
ing an expert, committed and collaborative project team.
Improved contract forms. Some senior professionals have
said, “We tend to exaggerate the importance of the contracting
approach…contracting is a second-order concern.” The ratio-
 Business Trends

nale given for this statement is that a robust business case, stake- One example of meeting all five criteria is repeat projects.
holder alignment and a complete design are first-order concerns. In these cases, the undoubted benefits of LSFP can be realized
These aspects of the project are undoubtedly very important. (i.e., certainty of outcome, single point of responsibility, mini-
However, the best-fit contract form is crucial to underpin execu- mal client team cost).
tion. The wrong form will undermine the established criteria. LSFP is the predominant form of contracts on megaprojects,
Four different contract forms define four attributes of a busi- even though it is often unrealistic to meet all qualifying criteria.
ness agreement: performance obligations, payment principles, This is especially true when trying to achieve the required defi-
first-order risk allocation and working relationships (FIG. 6). nition of design and execution conditions. Due to the lack of
The traditional unit rate contract includes all client engi- awareness of qualifying criteria, LSFP contracts are often used
neering and decision-making. It includes payment by actual inappropriately, which leads to major overruns. Fortunately,
work quantities on bill of quantities (BQ ) rates, or by labor several alternatives to LSFP are available.
and equipment hours on a schedule of rates. In this process, the
client takes most of the risk, except for BQ productivity risk, Alternatives to EPC LSFP. Some alternatives to LSFP con-
which is used mainly for subcontracts. tracts include:
In the EPC contract, the contractor performs everything • EPCM: This contract is used on 25% of projects with
necessary and takes most of the risks under defined execution a lower design definition and higher risk. Experience
conditions in a LSFP contract. The contractor has the right and shows that with a smart design of the cost-plus formula,
the responsibility to manage the work process to achieve the the contractor’s cost, time and HSE motivations can be
contracted end states. The client maintains a hands-free rela- aligned with the client. However, data shows that 78% of
tionship, with non-intrusive oversight. EPC contracts are used these projects have major overruns, which indicates the
on more than 50% of megaprojects globally. difficulty in designing an effective formula and use on
In an EPC management (EPCM) or EPC reimbursable higher-risk cases.
(EPCR) contract, the contractor performs the management • Early contractor involvement (ECI): In this contract,
of works as the client’s agent, or in an EPCR role. In both the the client employs one or more contractors to develop
EPCM and EPCR contract structures, payment is calculated us-
ing the cost-plus formula. The client takes most of the risks, and
can maintain an active relationship. These types of contracts are
used on approximately 25% of megaprojects.
Integrated project development (IPD) collaborative/rela-
tive contracting defines the relationships for parties to work to-
gether to achieve mutual objectives. Both parties share the risk
and opportunity for saving target price underrun.
In ideal risk allocation cases, the parties allocate a contin-
gency, mitigation or insurance plan against every project risk
(e.g., a change in the law or ground conditions). Risk transfer is
not for free. First-order risk allocation is achieved by selecting
the form of contract. Specific second-order risk allocation is a
special topic that means to optimize the contract allocation to
achieve the lowest long-term cost. This generally means assign-
FIG. 6. Four different contract forms (high-level and multiple variants).
ing every risk to the natural owner who is best able to manage
and mitigate it, or to take the benefit and save contingency if
risk does not occur.
EPC LSFP contracts should be limited to projects that
achieve all of the following LSFP-qualifying criteria before the
EPC award:
1. Clearly defined project scope. This includes
approximately 10% of the FEED design. At a minimum,
the contract should define unambiguous basic
engineering inputs (e.g., certified P&ID, HAZOP, etc.)
and end states (output guarantees).
2. Clear and stable execution conditions, requirements
and restraints (FIG. 7).
3. Project risks are identified and commercially prudent.
4. The client wants a hands-free relationship by
not intruding on the contractor’s right to manage
project works.
5. Qualified LSFP providers are interested in the market.
6. The bid time is available and sufficient for stable
FIG. 7. Contract structure and pinnacle activities.
and competitive pricing.
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 13
 Business Trends
the design and execution plan that will act as the basis
for second-stage execution. Efficiencies result from
leveraging execution expertise in value engineering and
advanced work planning in the project-shaping stage.
• Mixed engineering and procurement reimbursable
(EPR) and EPCLS: This type of contract is used on
12% of projects, with only 8% registering major overruns.
Efficiencies result from a reimbursable work scope
definition. During the EPR contract, the client’s risk is
managed by “open-book” procurement, with engineering
equaling only 10% of the project’s cost. Second-stage
EPCLS construction contractors bid on the project’s
scope, which is clearly defined in the EPR phase.
International model contracts (FIG. 6) offer efficiency-pro-
moting advantages over many specifically drafted contracts,
including a more balanced second-order risk allocation, usable
plain language, and a smaller chance of ambiguity following
fine-tuning; and they are available off-the-shelf.
Improved contract content. A rising trend within business
and segments of the legal community is toward simpler, usable
contracts with accessible language. For example, at the end of
a GE Aviation 3-yr program to consolidate contracts, drive out
complexity and write in plain language, the General Counsel re-
ported that plain language has saved the company’s digital ser-
vices business significant amounts of time and money.1
The business opportunity at the front end is to save time-to-
market and unnecessary costs due to contracts that needlessly
drag down negotiations. On the back end, reducing disputes
caused by ambiguity in over-complex and hard-to-understand
documents is ideal, while maintaining governance safeguards
and protecting company interests. Well-designed contracts sat-
isfy two criteria:
1. For matters where there is certainty, they must
offer unambiguous instruction
2. For matters that deal with uncertainty, they must
offer clear guidance on how it will be handled.
Contracts should be structured so that users know where to
find relevant information. An effective technique is to mirror the
main project activity breakdowns and workflow so that it is logi-
cal for project personnel.
The contract’s language should be concise so that users do not
become lost or distracted. There are good business reasons to
systematically consolidate, but companies seldom do. The results
are unmanaged jungles of requirements. Important data is ob-
scured by irrelevant data. A series of mid-project workshops are
required to determine what is important and what to leave out.
The first step in many organizations is consolidation, espe-
cially of technical requirements. Reducing complexity requires
an organization-wide change of management. For example,
some experienced engineering practitioners recommend more
international standards and fewer custom client standards.
They support business drivers to improve efficiency and reduce
costs without compromising quality. Other important factors
include the appropriate latitude for specialists to innovate and
provide better value, and the appropriate detail for the contract
form that is selected.
Contracts should clearly summarize the results of front-end
loading (FEL). Execution conditions and requirements are nor-
14 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
mally the sections most in need of improvement. Requirements
should be expressed in simple and actionable terms. Project
management-orientated texts are available to help the CDT
achieve all of these objectives.7
Simple does not mean incomplete or lazy; it means the op-
posite. The continued use of unfamiliar terminology and un-
managed jungles of requirements is lazy. Ambiguity and inef-
ficiencies are a greater business risk than the chance of omitting
a minor detail that might lead to minor consequences. Well-
designed contracts are comprehensive, yet they make complex
situations easy to understand and implement.
Takeaways. The estimated $12 B in annual capital execution
inefficiencies, lost output and disputes is an absolute waste. Con-
tracts focus too much on who to blame and too little on how to
get the job done. The following recommended practical improve-
ment steps are neither difficult nor expensive to implement:
1. The client organizations need to buy in as the primary
drivers in their supply chain. They can do this by
analyzing the causes of existing or potential overruns.
After consultation, the organization can design the
appropriate improvements.
2. Improvements must be implemented with stakeholders,
including, as applicable:
a. Core personnel and capabilities: Establish or
train company centers of competence in line with
present trends and techniques. Replenishing the
competencies that have been lost over the past
decades is a top priority for many clients.
b. Contract form: Familiarize project management
with available options and implement smart,
best-fit forms that are applicable to specific
project circumstances.
c. Contract content: Overdue housekeeping is
required to clear out unnecessary complexity
and consolidate concise standard documents.
Prepare usable plain-language contracts with
a focus on the technical requirements.
Part 2. The next installment will focus on contracting trends
and new strategies for collaborative contracting.
NOTES
The views, information and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of
the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy or position
of any third party, including an author’s employer.
LITERATURE CITED
Complete literature cited available online at HydrocarbonProcessing.com.
BEN CROSSLEY is the Founder of Energy Contract Solutions
Pte. Ltd. in Singapore. Mr. Crossley specializes in contracts and
procurement, and provides front-line advice to clients and EPC
contractors on downstream oil and gas and power generation
megaprojects. Mr. Crossley facilitates regular training on project
development and EPC contract management.
GAVIN MCLEOD is a Commissioning and Systems Completion
Specialist for Chevron Inc. He is presently on assignment with
The Bahrain Petroleum Co. (BAPCO) in Bahrain. Mr. McLeod’s
expertise and special interests include hydroprocessing
technology, project implementation efficiencies, team
development and organizational dynamics.
MIKE RHODES, MANAGING EDITOR
Mike.Rhodes@HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Industry Metrics

US refining margins showed slight gains on the top of the barrel as a Global refining margins, 2017–2018*
result of cold weather-related refinery outages, rebounding slightly from 18
the previous month. European product markets lost some ground, with 16 WTI, US Gulf
weakening recorded at the bottom of the barrel, primarily due to supply- 14 Brent, Rotterdam

Margins, US$/bbl
12 Oman, Singapore
side pressure. Except for the middle-distillates complex, Asia losses were
recorded all across the barrel due to slower seasonal demand. 10
8
An expanded version of Industry Metrics can be found 6
online at HydrocarbonProcessing.com. 4

Jan.-17

Feb.-17

Mar.-17

April-17

May-17

June-17

July-17

Aug.-17

Sept.-17

Oct.-17

Nov.-17

Dec.-17

Jan..-18
US gas production (Bcfd) and prices (US$/Mcf)
100 7 Global refining utilization rates, 2017–2018*
6 100
80
5 US Japan
Gas prices, US$/Mcf

EU 16 Singapore
Production, Bcfd

95
Utilization rates, %
60 4
40 3 90
Monthly
Monthlyprice
price(Henry
(HenryHub)
Hub) 2
20 12-month
12-monthprice
priceavg.
avg. 85
Production
Production 1
0 0 80
N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J
Jan.-17

Feb.-17

Mar.-17

April-17

May-17

June-17

July-17

Aug.-17

Sept.-17

Oct.-17

Nov.-17

Dec.-17

Jan.-18
2015 2016 2017 2018
Production equals US marketed production, wet gas. Source: EIA.

Selected world oil prices, US$/bbl US Gulf cracking spread vs. WTI, 2017–2018*
80 50
40 Prem. gasoline Diesel
W. Texas Inter.
Cracking spread, US$/bbl

70 Jet/kero Fuel oil

Brent Blend 30
Oil prices, US$/bbl

60 Dubai Fateh
Source: DOE 20
50
10
40
0
30
-10
20
Jan.-17

Feb.-17

Mar.-17

April-17

May-17

June-17

July-17

Aug.-17

Sept.-17

Oct.-17

Nov.-17

Dec.-17

Jan.-18

Feb.-18
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J
2016 2017 2018

World liquid fuel supply and demand, MMbpd Rotterdam cracking spread vs. Brent, 2017–2018*
104 6 30
Stock change and balance
Stock change and balance, MMbpd

102 5
Cracking spread, US$/bbl
Supply and demand, MMbpd

World supply
100 4 15
World demand
98 3
96 2 Prem. gasoline Gasoil
0 Jet/kero Fuel oil
94 1
92 0
90 -1 -15
88 -2
Jan.-17

Feb.-17

Mar.-17

April-17

May-17

June-17

July-17

Aug.-17

Sept.-17

Oct.-17

Nov.-17

Dec.-17

Jan.-18

Feb.-18

2013-Q1 2014-Q1 2015-Q1 2016-Q1 2017-Q1 2018-Q1 2019-Q1

Source: EIA Short-Term Energy Outlook, February 2018
Singapore cracking spread vs. Oman, 2017–2018*
Brent dated vs. sour grades
20
(Urals and Dubai) spread, 2017–2018*
Cracking spread, US$/bbl

6 10
Dubai
Light sweet/medium sour
crude spread, US$/bbl

4 Urals Prem. gasoline Gasoil

0 Jet/kero Fuel oil
2
-10
0
Jan.-17

Feb.-17

Mar.-17

April-17

May-17

June-17

July-17

Aug.-17

Sept.-17

Oct.-17

Nov.-17

Dec.-17

Jan.-18

Feb.-18

-2
Jan.-17

Feb.-17

Mar.-17

April-17

May-17
June-17

July-17

Aug.-17

Sept.-17

Oct.-17

Nov.-17

Dec.-17

Jan.-18

Feb.-18

* Material published permission of the OPEC Secretariat; copyright 2018;

all rights reserved; OPEC Monthly Oil Market Report, February 2018.

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 15

Select 99 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
LEE NICHOLS, EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER
Lee.Nichols@HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Global Project Data

According to Hydrocarbon Processing’s 2018 Market Data Book,
total capital expenditures (CAPEX) are expected to reach $144 B
in 2018. Approximately $46 B of the total CAPEX will be within the
global refining sector. Nearly 57% of refining investments will be in
the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions. These two regions account
for nearly 70% of active refining projects globally. The majority of
these projects are being built to satisfy domestic and/or regional
demand, and will produce transportation fuels that meet low-sulfur
and ultra-low-sulfur fuel regulations. This construction includes new
greenfield facilities and expansions to existing plants.

$2 B

Canada
$4 B

$7 B Europe
$10 B
US
$16 B
$4 B
Middle East
Africa
$3 B

Latin America Asia-Pacific

Forecast of total capital expenditures

in 2018 by region, billions $

32
29 29 30 30 6% Africa
25 25 24 9% US
20 20 21
17
26% Middle East
12 12 31% Asia-Pacific
11

3% Canada
14% Europe
Dec.- Jan.- Feb.- Mar.- April- May- June- July- Aug.- Sept.- Oct.- Nov.- Dec.- Jan.- Feb.-
11% Latin America
16 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 18 18

Boxscore new project announcements, Market share analysis of active

December 2016–present refining projects by region

Detailed and up-to-date information for active construction projects in the refining,
gas processing and petrochemical industries across the globe | ConstructionBoxscore.com

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 17

 ™

INNOVATING CAUSTIC TREATING TECHNOLOGY

®
Introducing FFC Plus™, the next generation of FIBER FILM Contactor technology. Merichem Company’s advanced FIBER FILM

technology with an integrated coalescer and treater pushes the boundaries of extractive technologies. With this latest

innovation, hydrocarbon treating rates can be increased by up to 150% through increased mercaptan extraction efficiency.

The integrated coalescing and treating device offers a simple installation, reduced chemical use, and reduced service and

maintenance complexity.

FFC Plus truly is mercaptan treating made better.

Select 84 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

www.merichem.com
 HEINZ P. BLOCH, RELIABILITY/EQUIPMENT EDITOR
Reliability Heinz.Bloch@HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Consider stainless steel tubing

for mechanical seal connections
If, in days past, you have questioned why hard piping was
used for mechanical seal flush lines and seal support configu-
rations in process pumps, you are certainly not alone. Chances
are that this hard pipe requirement carries over from the days
when pumps were packed with rope, horse hair, cotton and
other materials.
More recently, however, American Petroleum Institute
Standard 682 (API 682) began to endorse the use of tubing for
some seal piping plans. Regrettably, tradition-bound purchas-
ers still opt for hard pipe; we are asking them to reconsider.
API 682 (4th edition) now specifies seal support system
connections almost interchangeably. The Fluid Sealing Asso-
ciation’s Technical Director, Henri Azibert, graciously gave us
an update on this topic, and agreed to pass our strong pref-
erence for tubing along to the API Task Force. Mr. Azibert
pointed out that the API 682 (4th edition) text now offers
considerable leeway:

“Seal auxiliary systems shall include tubing, piping,

isolating valves, control valves, relief valves, temperature
gauges and thermowells, pressure gauges, sight flow
indicators, orifices, barrier/buffer fluid reservoirs, and
all related vents and drains, as shown in Annex G (8.2.2).”

The latest standard then notes, “Tubing shall be fabricated

by bending and the use of compression fittings (8.2.12).”
The mechanical seal data sheet gives users the option of
tubing or piping for connections to the seal.
Moreover, in some sections, the default selection is tubing
rather than piping. This is also the case in section 8.2.8, which
reads, “Unless otherwise specified, lines connecting the bar-
rier/buffer fluid system to the mechanical seal shall be tubing
in accordance with 8.1.7, Table 4.”
For API Plans 52, 53, 54 and 55, the default is tubing due
to its lower friction losses, particularly since radii can be used
instead of elbows. Finally, Annex F gives information on both
tubing and piping friction losses.
A seal manufacturer’s experienced input. With change
and innovation on our mind, we enlisted the thoughts of an-
other seal expert. We asked AESSEAL’s Richard Smith how he
would attempt to steer pump users in the right direction. He
answered by elaborating on an effective, multi-step approach.
When trying to persuade a user-purchaser to adopt tubing,
Mr. Smith first separates the risk pump groups by piping plan.
He then points out that tubing is universally accepted on instru-
ments because the fluid is normally a non-hazardous gas, which
FIG. 1. Stainless steel tubing on mechanical seal. Photo courtesy of
Swagelock Corp.
should be a sufficiently convincing observation. Many AES-
SEAL user-purchasers have switched to tubing and no longer
require hard pipe for non-hazardous liquids.
Getting into detail, Mr. Smith reminded us that API Flush
Plans 72 and 74 normally use pressurized nitrogen as a fluid.
It is, therefore, non-hazardous; alarms are activated only in the
event of failure. Plans 53 and 54 generally use fluids that are haz-
ardous and will activate alarms in the event of failure. Plans 52,
75 and 76 are connected to flare, regardless of alarm setup and
alarm status.
In all other flush plans, there will be contact with the
process fluid—but stainless steel is available for use here, as
well. Stainless steel tubing is extensively used in the critically
important hydraulic lines of various aircraft, motor vehicles
and marine equipment. We find hydraulics in mining and
construction equipment, and throughout different indus-
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 19
 Reliability
tries. These industries stress safety and reliability, which are
of equally great importance to engineers in the hydrocarbon
processing industry (HPI).
Standards need updates and improvement. Consider
now as the right time to more widely use tubing for mechani-
cal seals and their support systems. A compelling case can be
made for users to seek closer cooperation with prominent and
knowledgeable manufacturers of hydraulic tubing and fittings.
The combined competences of reliability professionals in the
HPI and innovative manufacturers of sealing products will un-
doubtedly cause mechanical seal lines to gravitate more toward
hydraulic tubing, which will benefit all parties.
Invoking relevant API standards is commendable, but un-
derstanding the limitations of these standards is equally impor-
tant. As we consult these standards, we should always keep in
mind that API clauses cover minimum requirements and repre-
sent general guidelines—not regulatory requirements or laws.
Look for a decades-old disclaimer right under the top cover
of any API standard. It likely states that if the user-purchaser
knows a better way of accomplishing safe operation and en-
hanced reliability, then the vendor-manufacturer is encouraged
to offer an upgrade that exceeds minimum requirements.1
Having spent many years with a best-of-class corporation, I
recall how our engineers made frequent use of this paraphrased
disclaimer. My colleagues and I made it a habit to communicate
our rationale to plant management. We followed up by placing
Select 152 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
20MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
explanatory notes in the company’s technical files to not only
fend off bureaucrats and detractors, but also so that future gen-
erations could understand our well-researched decisions.
We were aware that by the time certain standards commit-
tees got moving with their updates, revisions and legal reviews,
reliability-focused organizations had already moved forward.
As the thinking went, if some products were good enough for
critical aerospace use, then they would prove highly advan-
tageous for HPI plants in almost every case. High-pressure
stainless steel tubing and double-braided metal hose will rank
high among these better-than-before products (FIG. 1); please
consider using them.
LITERATURE CITED
1
Bloch, H. P., Petrochemical Machinery Insights, Elsevier Publishing, Oxford, UK and
Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1st Ed., 2016.
HEINZ P. BLOCH splits his time between Houston,
Texas and Westminster, Colorado. His professional
career commenced in 1962 and included long-term
assignments as Exxon Chemical’s Regional
Machinery Specialist for the US. He has authored
or coauthored more than 700 publications, among
them 20 comprehensive books on practical
machinery management, failure analysis, failure
avoidance, pumps, compressors, steam turbines,
oil mist lubrication and practical lubrication
for industry. Mr. Bloch holds BS and MS degrees
(cum laude) in mechanical engineering. He is an ASME Life Fellow and
was awarded lifetime registration as a Professional Engineer in New Jersey.
 Automation
Strategies
Top technology trends in automation for 2018
The last several years have seen sig-
nificant advances in, and acceptance of,
new automation technologies. This rate
of change and subsequent adoption will
continue to ramp up in the coming year.
Many of the recent advances include in-
dustrializing popular consumer technol-
ogies, which helps accelerate the ongoing
convergence of information technology
(IT) and operational technology (OT)
to support digital transformation.
In 2018, there will be an acceleration
of this IT/OT convergence, particularly
as it relates to the acceptance and prolif-
eration of Industrial Internet of Things
(IIoT)-enabled solutions, cybersecu-
rity, edge computing, augmented reality
(AR), artificial intelligence (AI), analyt-
ics, digital twins and progress on the
open process automation (OPA) front.
Five key technology trends that are
expected to have a major impact on both
process and discrete automation in 2018
are discussed here.
Intelligence at the edge. As more
data-intensive computing workloads are
pushed to the network edge, real-time
remote management and a simplified
edge infrastructure are crucial for suc-
cess. Operational issues, such as man-
aging asset performance to improve
production while reducing unplanned
downtime, will drive end users to deploy
edge computing.
Companies that take advantage of
self-managed, edge computing infra-
structures will be able to unlock addi-
tional data stranded inside machines and
processes. They will also be able to more
quickly identify production inefficien-
cies; compare product quality against
manufacturing conditions; and better
pinpoint potential safety, production or
environmental issues.
Remote management will enable on-
site operators to connect in real time with
offsite experts to more quickly resolve,
or even to avoid, downtime events. This
C. RESNICK
ARC Advisory Group, Dedham, Massachusetts
will help free operations personnel and
IT staff to perform their respective roles,
thereby utilizing their specific expertise
to the best advantage.
Advances in industrial cybersecu-
rity management. Additional advances
in industrial cybersecurity management
solutions will be deployed to address
the unique requirements of industrial
automation equipment, applications and
plants—particularly as these relate to the
stringent constraints on system updates
and network communications. These ad-
vances will incorporate commercial-type
IT cybersecurity management solutions,
but in a manner that limits negative im-
pacts on control system operation.
More importantly, these new industri-
al cybersecurity management solutions
will extend this functionality to include
unique, non-PC-based industrial assets
and control system protocols. These so-
lutions will also recognize and manage
industry-specific cybersecurity regula-
tions, such as NERC CIP (North Ameri-
can Electric Reliability Corp. critical
infrastructure protection), and leverage
new integrated strategies that combine
IT, OT and IIoT security efforts, thereby
maximizing the use of all corporate cy-
bersecurity resources.
Open process automation vision
gains traction. The OPA vision will
gain additional traction, with the Open
Process Automation Forum adding new
end user and supplier members.
Initiated by ExxonMobil and man-
aged by The Open Group, this initiative
aims to build a proof-of-concept pro-
totype and establish standards for, and
ultimately build, commercial OPA sys-
tems. These systems will be designed to
minimize vendor-specific technologies
and increase overall return on system
investment, while maintaining stringent
safety and security. These goals would
be achieved by specifying highly distrib-
uted, modular, extensible systems reliant
on standards-based architecture for in-
teroperable components, with intrinsic
cybersecurity.
The objective is to eventually replace
large-CAPEX automation retrofit pro-
grams with smaller OPEX programs that
require less analysis, engineering and
planning. Updates to these new, open
systems will be managed as a mainte-
nance activity. These new systems will
consist of smaller, more modular and
more easily distributed components.
They will better empower technical
personnel, reducing the level of training
required and facilitating additional ben-
efits through collaboration.
Merging of virtual and physical
worlds. New technologies are accelerat-
ing the merger of the virtual and physi-
cal worlds, enabling the creation of new
business models. Manufacturers are in-
troducing new business models under
which they sell digital services along with
products. Examples include digital twins,
which are a virtual replication of an as-
designed, as-built and as-maintained
physical product. Manufacturers aug-
ment the digital twin service with real-
time condition monitoring and predictive
analytics. Customers use the equipment
and products, as well as maintenance and
operational optimization services, based
on predictive and prescriptive analytics.
AR technologies are used to connect
virtual design to physical equipment for
operator training and visualization, and
for machine maintenance. With help
from the IIoT, the cloud, big data and
operational analytics, AI-based machine
learning (ML) solutions can be used to
make operational changes without the
need for programming.
Distributed analytics. IIoT-enabled
distributed analytics will further extend
data processing and computing close to
or at the data source, typically through
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 21
 Automation Strategies

intelligent, two-way communication
devices, such as sensors, controllers and
gateways. In many instances, the data for
distributed analytics comes from IIoT-
connected devices located at the edge of
the operational network.
These devices can be located near,
or are embedded in, a wide variety of
edge machines and equipment, such as
robots, fleet vehicles and distributed
microgrids. The analytics can be em-
bedded within distributed devices or
created in a cloud environment and then
sent to the edge for execution. From an
operational perspective, security, pri-
vacy, data-related cost and regulatory
constraints are often the reasons cited
for keeping the analytics local.
Distributed analytics can help support
revenue generation from new methods of
serving existing customers and encourag-
ing ways to reach new ones. These meth-
ods include asset optimization through
improved, proactive and highly automat-
ed management of infrastructure and re-
sources; higher satisfaction and retention
by engaging customers with high-value
products and services where and when
they need them; and improved operation-
al flexibility and responsiveness through
better and faster data-driven decisions.
Recommendations. Successful digi-
tal transformation will be a prerequisite
for industrial organizations to compete
effectively and maximize business per-
formance. When looking for a place to
start the digital transformation process,
asset performance management (includ-
ing avoiding unscheduled downtime) is a
good place to focus.
End users and original equipment

TURNKEY RENTAL
manufacturers (OEMs) alike should em-
brace, rather than resist, digital transfor-
mation. While the increasing convergence
of OT and IT serves as an enabler, this

FILTRATION
digital transformation must still embrace
legacy assets, as plants will not “rip and re-
place” old (but otherwise well-function-
ing) equipment without financial cause.
Legacy assets must remain a part of, and
TIME IS MONEY be integrated into, the solutions for digital
transformation wherever possible.
Succeeding here will require an open
mind for emerging technologies, ap-
Imagine solving throughput and process proaches and business models. It will also
issues within days or even before they arise. require close collaboration between OT
With a turnkey rental fleet of skidded filtration and IT groups at the respective operations
& separation systems in stock, Pentair offers and enterprise levels, as well as collabora-
you the ability to solve your most critical tion among technology suppliers and in-
issues fast. dustrial and governmental consortiums.
While not all technologies, solutions
The equipment is available for a wide range and approaches will be right for all com-
of applications within refineries, gas plants, panies, it is important to understand what
chemical plants, and upstream for produced is going on, what is available today, what is
water management. likely to be available tomorrow and what
peer organizations are doing to determine
where to best focus limited human and fi-
Check for availability today!
nancial resources.

CRAIG RESNICK is
the Vice President of
Consulting for ARC
Advisory Group in
Dedham, Massachusetts,
a position he has held
for more than 18 yr.
He earned a BSEE degree
in electrical engineering
from Northeastern
OIL &788-1000
(936) GAS SEPARATIONS University in Boston,
www.pentairseparations.com Massachusetts, and
an MBA degree from the D’Amore-McKim School
of Business at Northeastern University.
Select 153 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
22

Refining
Russia plans ramp-up in refinery
expansion, construction
Russian fuel producers aim to ensure
regular supplies of oil products to both
the domestic market and foreign im-
porters in the coming years by building
new refineries and modernizing existing
plants across the country.
New refinery capacities are slated to
be built in Moscow, the Far East and the
Volga regions. These areas are strategi-
cally important in terms of geographical
location and hydrocarbon reserves.
Primorye refinery project revival.
One project will involve the construc-
tion of a new, large-scale refinery in the
Partizansky district of Primorsky Krai in
the Far East. The project will be jointly
implemented by Russian state-owned
oil producer Rosneft and China’s Chem-
China. Construction was scheduled to
begin in December 2017.
Initial plans for the building of the
Primorye refinery, near the Nakhodka
seaport, were approved by the Council
of Ministers of the USSR in the mid-
1970s. Construction work was originally
supposed to start in 1975; however, due
to the consequences of the global oil cri-
sis of 1973, the project was suspended.
The plan to revive the refinery was
proposed by former Rosneft President
Sergei Bogdanchikov in January 2007.
Implementation of the project began re-
cently, after an agreement was signed be-
tween China National Chemical Corp.
(ChemChina) and Rosneft, following a
visit by Russian President Vladimir Pu-
tin to China in September 2015.
The project will be implemented by
Eastern Petrochemical Co., a JV estab-
lished by ChemChina and Rosneft that
will act as the managing company for
the project. To date, the Eastern Petro-
chemical project has passed all required
environmental evaluations. The total
investment in the new refinery is esti-
mated at RUB 800 B (US$13.79 B). It
E. GERDEN
Contributing Writer
FIG. 1. The Moscow refinery is one of Russia’s oldest refineries.
will produce gasoline, kerosine, diesel
and marine fuel, as well as polyethylene,
polypropylene and benzene.
The plant will comprise three pro-
duction lines. The first two lines are
expected to be commissioned by 2022.
The design capacity is 30 metric MMtpy.
The refinery’s proximity to the Asia-Pa-
cific region, and its access to the seaport
of Nakhodka, will give it prime access to
consumer markets.
Upgrades to Moscow refinery. In ad-
dition to the Far East region, new refin-
ing capacities will be established in the
European part of Russia and, in particu-
lar, the Moscow region. The Moscow
area is the most economically developed
in the country and the largest consumer
of oil products.
Gazprom Neft, the oil arm of Russian
natural gas producer Gazprom, plans
to invest approximately RUB 120 B
(US$2 B) in the construction of a new
complex for deep oil refining at its Mos-
cow refinery (FIG. 1), which is one of
Russia’s oldest refineries. Construction
work will start in 2018 and is expected to
conclude by 2022.
The 12-metric-MMtpy complex will
include units for delayed coking and
hydrocracking, among others. The pro-
cessing depth of the complex will be
96%, with an output of light oil products
of 85%. The refinery will provide 40% of
the Moscow region’s fuel supplies.
Since 2013, the plant has been pro-
ducing gasoline and Euro 5 diesel fuel.
In 2016, it produced 2.6 metric MMt of
gasoline, 2.1 metric MMt of diesel fuel,
704 metric Mt of kerosine and 976 met-
ric Mt of bitumen. The new investments
are expected to allow for significant in-
creases to these volumes.
Volga refinery optimization. Refining
capacities will also be significantly ex-
panded in the Volga region of Russia. As
part of these plans, Russian oil producer
LUKOIL plans to invest $1 B in upgrades
to its Nizhegorodnefteorgsintez refinery,
which is located in the Nizhny Novgorod
region (FIG. 2). Work on the expansion is
expected to begin in 2018.
The complex will include the con-
struction of a delayed coking unit, a dis-
tillate hydrotreating unit, a gas fraction-
ation unit, and hydrogen (H2 ) and sulfur
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 23
 Refining
GLOBAL
FIG. 2. LUKOIL’s Nizhegorodnefteorgsintez refinery, located in the Nizhny Novgorod region,
will be expanded this year.
CERTIFICATION
production facilities. The new complex
Electric actuators for all types will have the capacity to process up to
2.1 metric MMtpy of feedstock, enabling
of industrial valves an increase in the production of light oil
Reliable and long-term service. products of more than 10%.
AUMA offers a comprehensive After modernization, the refining
portfolio. depth of the complex will increase from
■ Customized solutions thanks 77% to 94%. This will allow LUKOIL to
to the modular scheme
increase the share of high-margin light oil
products in its total output, and reduce the
■ Corrosion protection with
share of low-margin petroleum products.
offshore certification Increased production of light oil prod-
■ Temperatures down to –76 °F ucts is essential for Russian refineries
■ Integration into all to remain competitive under the most
conventional distributed drastic scenario of the tax changes to be
implemented in Russia in 2018. The tax
control systems
maneuver includes a sharp decrease in
■ Worldwide certifications and the export duty on crude oil and light oil
vendor approvals products, and an increase in the mineral
■ Service worldwide extraction tax.
The depth question. In recent years,
Find out more on our Russia has faced overproduction of
automation solutions low-quality oil products, which could
www.auma.com negatively impact the country’s refining
Phone: +1 724-743-2862
industry in the future. Russia produces
mailbox@auma-usa.com
approximately 87 metric MMtpy of low-
quality oil products, of which only 26
metric MMtpy–27 metric MMtpy are
consumed within the country. Domes-
tic demand continues to decline due to
tightening environmental standards for
bunker fuel.
Select 154 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
06.02.2018 10:47:43
Russia’s refinery depth is expected to
reach 81.4% this year and as high as 85%
by 2020; however, the government wants
to significantly increase this percentage.
At present, Russian refineries produce an
average of 65% gasoline and diesel fuel,
and 35% fuel oil and bitumen, per metric
t of oil. The government wants produc-
tion of light oil products to reach 80%.
Many Russian refiners do not see an
economic incentive to further increase
their oil refining depth. The fuels they
produce already meet domestic speci-
fications, and upgrading to boost fuel
quality for exports, or to produce more
fuel for domestic use, would require sig-
nificant investment.
Nonetheless, the government plans
to present new measures to stimulate
growth in oil refining depth. One such
measure may involve the refund of an ex-
cise tax to refineries that provide guaran-
tees of future investment in raising their
refining depth.
EUGENE GERDEN is an
international contributing
writer specializing in the
global oil refining and
gas industry. He has been
published in a number
of prominent industry
publications.

Viewpoint
Digitalization is key to increasing
the process industry’s productivity
PERTTU TUOMAALA has 20 years of experience
of digitalization of process industries. He holds
MSc in Electrical Engineering, Strategy and
International Business from Helsinki University of
Technology and as part of the degree, he spent
a year at University of Toledo. Mr. Tuomaala
has wide international experience and he has
been working in several executive positions in
the automation industry as well as been leading
international sales teams.
Consumers are continuously look-
ing for healthier, safer and more envi-
ronmentally sustainable products. The
process industry must respond to these
demands, which call for a consider-
able change in how fuels and chemicals
are refined and processed. Engineering
companies need to be able to provide
solutions that help customers respond to
these requirements.
The process industry is going through
a vast transformation—a paradigm shift
in the true potential of production capac-
PERTTU TUOMAALA, HEAD OF NAPCON BUSINESS UNIT
Neste Engineering Solutions, Porvoo, Finland
ity will reshape the industry within the
next 5 yr. Without question, the shift will
have an impact, either directly or indi-
rectly, on all companies involved with the
process industry.
Attributing the production capac-
ity of a plant to its physical factors is an
outdated way of thinking and prevents
us from perceiving the true potential of a
production plant. The traditional meth-
ods of improving productivity through
CAPEX and OPEX projects are no lon-
ger sufficient. The future approach to
these improvements lies in a different
solution: software.
Significant improvements to the pro-
duction capacity of an existing plant are
achieved through data-utilizing software.
Many plants have uncovered the poten-
tial to generate profit through a more
comprehensive use of data. It is the task
of engineering companies to discover
ways to maximize the value of this data
and make it profitable for our customers.
At Neste Engineering Solutions, we
took a revolutionary approach to these
changes. Beyond being an engineering
contractor, we grew ourselves into a data
refiner specializing in information man-
agement. In other words, we refine our
customers’ data to discover their plant’s
hidden potential and utilize that data to
generate profit for them.
The spearhead of this unconventional
thinking is a proprietary software called
NAPCON. This software is a fusion of
in-depth process know-how and highly
sophisticated automation solutions that
replace manual adjustments.
Our expertise and experience of
customer cases are well demonstrated
by our work with various companies
in the process industry. Examples in-
clude Bahrain Lube Base Oil Co., a JV
between the Bahrain Petroleum Co.
(Bapco) and Neste Oyj, the world’s
largest producer of renewable diesel;
and Valio, the largest producer of dairy
products in Finland.
Valio is an excellent example of how
data refining with an innovative software
can generate significant results without
notable hardware investments or an in-
creased demand of resources. Valio gained
a 10% productivity increase and a decrease
in undesired product variability by utiliz-
ing proprietary production software. By
using an enhanced production software
tool, Valio was able to witness an increase
in production and a quicker payback.
These types of software help compa-
nies understand their production pro-
cesses, make decisions in light of valid
data, improve results without major CA-
PEX or OPEX, and train staff. These ben-
efits help to improve environmental sus-
tainability and a company’s bottom line.
I believe in the digitalization of the
process industry. In my vision, 2018 will
be the year when digitalization will ad-
vance significantly in oil refineries. The
price of oil is rising, and refineries must
make investments into the safety and se-
curity of their plants. Making these assets
more efficient with software is an easy
and cost-effective method.
The Industrial Internet of Things
(IIoT), artificial intelligence and gamifi-
cation are offering new possibilities for
oil refineries, as well. We have begun to
bring gamification into process industry
training, and have been developing oper-
ator training games for more than 10 yr.
In September 2017, we launched the first
next-generation training game to make
operator training even more interactive
and engaging.
There is no room for mistakes in the
process industry, and guaranteeing well-
trained operators is important risk man-
agement. Several research studies support
the fact that gamified training increases
skill-based-knowledge assessments, fac-
tual-knowledge and retention rates.
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 25
 Get accurate flare
gas heat values fast,
with the FlarePro™ Mass Spectrometer

With impending EPA rule changes for flare gas stack combustion, you’ll need to measure
heat value at the stack quickly, accurately, and often. AMETEK Dycor®’s FlarePro mass
spectrometer has the speed and specificity for the task, calculating make-up gas quantities
10X faster than chromatographs. It can speciate and quantify alkanes and alkenes up to
C7 and convert ASTM calculations of concentration to yield flare gas BTU values, even with
wildly changing flare gas streams. Features include:

• 24” footprint (general or C1, D2 areas) • Low maintenance

• 16-valve inlet system
• 1 to 100 amu mass range
Learn more at www.ametekpi.com.
Select 67 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
• Modbus/OPC communications
• Environmentally controlled to
accommodate a wide range
of temperatures

© 2018 by AMETEK Inc. All rights reserved.

 S. LEHMANN
Digital Petrotechnics, Aberdeen, UK

Operational excellence index—Part 2:

The digital transformation
Without a doubt, digitalization is the engine fueling the
growing adoption of operational excellence (OE) in hazard-
ous industries. As Part 1 of Petrotechnics’ OE index (OEI)
survey—featured in the November 2017 issue of Hydrocarbon
Processing—revealed, technology is at the heart of a rapidly
accelerating effort to deliver unparalleled transparency, effi-
ciency and intelligence into operational decision making.
Part 2 of the OEI survey provides a window into applica-
tions, attitudes and benefits, capturing the insights of oil, gas
and petrochemical industry professionals. The experiences of
the respondents reflect a firm belief in digitalization to enable
and transform an organization’s OE frameworks.
Having realized the initial benefits, early adopters are lead-
ing a nascent, yet inevitable, march toward the next stage of
digitalization. However, the rapid pace of innovation may
pose some barriers to widespread adoption that will challenge
senior leaders to foster organizational cultures that embrace
the strategic value of digital transformation.
Workplace culture is ranked as the single biggest barrier to
advancing OE.
Beyond these concerns, newer applications—predictive
analytics, machine learning and others—have the potential
to disrupt long-standing models of operation. Naturally,
this breeds a sense of uncertainty among individuals rang-
ing from job security to fears of “Big Brother” monitoring
through mobile device GPS location tagging, which only in-
creases resistance.
In reality, digitalization is meant to enhance, not replace,
the human element of decision-making. The smart combina-
tion of human and sensor-derived inputs provides everyone

Full steam ahead. The momentum towards OE adoption in

hazardous industries is building, and digitalization is playing
a vital role. More than 73% of companies surveyed noted that
digitalization is helping to accelerate their ability to deliver
sustainable OE.
Many companies have made great strides integrating dis-
persed operational data, business processes and workforce
roles to create the foundations of an enterprise-wide OE
framework. Having achieved new levels of transparency and
oversight, companies are looking to digitalization to manage
OE in a proactive, strategic manner. According to survey re-
spondents, enhanced key performance indicators (KPIs) and
metrics (51%), and improved prioritization and planning
(49%) are the two areas where digitalization is creating the
biggest impact within organizations (FIG. 1).

A need to dispel concerns. Viewing digitalization as a sil-

ver bullet is a mistake. It is dangerous to point analytics at dis-
parate data and apply machine learning with the expectation
that actionable insight will be the result. As the nature and use
of technology accelerates, obstacles to progress arise.
The rate of digitalization in hazardous industries has some
observers worried whether people can keep pace. According
to respondents, steep learning curves (19%) and data over-
loads (18%) are the top challenges that digitalization poses
for operators. When you add the potential for disengaged
workforces (14%), 51% of respondents recognize challeng- FIG. 1. Digitalization is driving OE, according to survey respondents.
Source: Petrotechnics.
es to embracing digitalization. This comes as no surprise.
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 27
 Digital
with the right information at the right time to make better,
more informed operational decisions.
Data is a prime example. The reality is that we have too
much data and not enough context and insight. Deliver-
ing meaningful and actionable insights requires us to unlock
meaningful relationships between previously disparate data
sources. Analytics are only as good as the inputted data. A
“common currency,” such as risk, that connects data to opera-
tional reality is fundamental. In this way, organizations can un-
derstand what is happening, when it is happening, and where
it is happening on the asset. This allows data to be transformed
into meaningful and actionable insight, and allows operators
to forecast, with great accuracy, when equipment will require
maintenance. This intelligence enables informed decisions
and elevates operational performance, safety and efficiency.
Part 1 of the 2017 OEI revealed a large gap between organi-
zations whose senior leaders champion OE and those that do
not. For digitalization to become embedded in organizations,
senior leaders must lead from the front and effectively com-
municate the benefits across the business. More importantly,
they must be proactive in demonstrating how digitalization is
part of a wider strategy to ultimately enhance the way indi-
viduals and teams operate.
Foundations first, then evolving strategies. Given that
companies are in different stages of digital OE adoption, it is
no surprise that the majority of organizations rank the use of
more mature point applications, such as enterprise asset man-
agement (84%), asset performance management (69%) and
operational risk software (61%), at the top of the list of tech-
nologies they use or plan to use. The emphasis on these tech-
nologies signifies that many organizations are in the infancy of
establishing their OE foundation.
Simultaneously, early OE adopters are ramping up their use
of more cutting-edge technologies to build on their initial suc-
cesses. Deriving insight from data is a key focus, with 65% of
respondents either deploying or planning to deploy predictive
analytics. The use of mobile workforce applications (35%)
and smart sensors (37%) are expected to increase, as real-time
visibility and frontline productivity remain high on the list of
operational priorities.
Cutting-edge digital technologies, such as the Industrial
Internet of Things (IIoT) platforms (53%), artificial intelli-
gence (AI) (39%) and machine learning (49%) are not just
on the OE horizon, but are already seeing modest adoption.
According to respondents, the usage of IIoT platforms and AI
will increase nearly three times (280%), with machine learn-
ing (200%) close behind. The future of digitalization lies in
creating even deeper levels of intelligence to enable a more
predictive and prescriptive approach to operational decision-
making, which is at the heart of OE.
Aspirations become outcomes. Digitalization is delivering
on its promise to bring OE to life. According to respondents,
technology is having the greatest and anticipated impact on
areas that are at the heart of a strong OE framework.
More than 83% of organizations agree that digitalization is
enabling a single, shared view of operational reality. By bring-
ing together disparate data and creating an integrated view of
28 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
all operational activities and risk, companies realize greater
levels of transparency, efficiency and performance.
Likewise, 81% highlight real-time visibility of asset risk as a
significant benefit of digitalization. The connection between
risk control systems and frontline operations is enabling pro-
active risk management, loss prevention and enhanced safety.
Companies are also feeling the benefits of digitalization
around strategic management and the deployment of opera-
tional resources. As previously noted, prioritization, planning
and the establishment of more impactful metrics are areas
where technology is having the greatest impact on OE.
The shift from real-time to predictive management of OE
reveals the areas where the future potential of digitalization
is greatest. Organizations anticipate a 209% growth rate in
the use of advanced analytics to better understand where and
how to improve operational processes. Additionally, respon-
dents expect a vast uptick in the use of digital twin technol-
ogy (222%) to create virtual replicas of their operations to run
more-detailed operations simulations to improve maintenance
strategies and uptime, and reduce risk.
A clear direction, but there is work to do. Debates over
the merit of OE and digitalization have been far surpassed by
the progress made across hazardous industries. With more
companies creating the foundations for OE and early movers
already plotting future advancement, OE has grown firm roots.
The question of digital OE adoption is not “if,” but “when.”
For each organization, the answer lies in its ability to embrace
technology as an enabler of a more collaborative operational
culture. Digitalization must be used to close the loop between
functions to make better, more-informed, collaborative deci-
sions. Convergence and consolidation allow a whole organiza-
tion to be understood as an end-to-end business process, with
the OE focus on the entire process rather than siloed functions.
With strong leadership, silos can be broken down and op-
erational models can evolve.
As the impacts and business benefits continue to stack up,
the momentum towards widespread OE adoption only increas-
es. The only choice left for companies in hazardous industries
is whether they are willing to pay the price to wait any longer.
Industry representation. The OEI survey was conducted
between August 2017 and October 2017, collecting responses
from a broad representation of functions, demographics and
industries across the oil, gas and petrochemicals sectors.
SCOTT LEHMANN is responsible for product
segmentation and delivering market driven
products and solutions for Petrotechnics.
Mr. Lehmann joined Petrotechnics in 2010 and
has more than 20 yr of senior management
experience in enterprise software. Before he
joined Petrotechnics, he co-founded a VC-backed
enterprise storage software startup; was the
EMEA Security Products Marketing Manager
at Microsoft and the Director of EMEA Channel
at security software vendor Sybari Software
(acquired by Microsoft). Mr. Lehmann is focused
on empowering organizations to achieve operational excellence through
digital transformation, the IIoT and IT-OT convergence. He is regularly published
in top tier industry and technology publications. Mr. Lehmann has a BA degree
from Tufts University and an MA degree from Georgetown University.
Get more from your operation.
Linde delivers cost effective solutions to improve
efficiencies and recoveries. We supply and service
a full range of technologies, including PSA, steam
methane reforming, amine treatment, furnaces/
heaters, sulfur recovery, off-gas hydrogen and liquids
recovery, hydrotreating, emissions abatement and
more.
Learn more!
www.leamericas.com/refining
Linde Engineering North America Inc.
sales@leamericas.com
Select 76 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Some of the services we provide:
→ Efficiency improvements
→ Feasibility, debottlenecking and process studies
→ Furnace and heater re-lifes
→ Fitness for service inspections
→ Revamps, retrofits, upgrades and expansions
→ Engineering, procurement and fabrication
→ Overall project execution and commissioning
→ Spare parts
→ Training
→ Outage planning and optimization services
 | Special Focus
CLEAN FUELS
As the world continues to welcome more vehicles on its roads, and as emerging
economies invest in civil, industrial and energy projects, global demand for fuels
is forecast to increase through the end of the decade. More vehicles on the road
equates to higher emissions and, in turn, more airborne pollutants. To combat
these effects, legislation mandating decreased emissions and lower levels of
airborne pollutants is coming into effect.

In response, refiners are implementing operational and processing changes to

reduce sulfur levels in transportation fuels. Refiners are investing billions of
dollars to increase environmental and sustainability performance, as well as to
adhere to new fuel quality regulations. This month’s Special Focus investigates
the opportunities available to cost-effectively produce clean transportation fuels
and products while adhering to existing and impending environmental regulations.

Photo: View of Valero’s 90-Mbpd Ardmore refinery in Ardmore, Oklahoma. The facility has been
modernized several times to increase crude processing flexibility and to boost the production
of clean-fuels. Photo courtesy of Valero.
 Special Focus Clean Fuels
J. GONG, A. MAO, J. LONG, J. ZHANG, X. CHANG
and J. TANG, Sinopec Research Institute of Petroleum
Processing, Beijing, China

Convert LCO to gasoline with a high RON

Due to the growing popularity of fami- operation, mono-aromatics crack readily thenes will be converted to monocyclic
ly automobiles in China, the country’s do- into alkylbenzene, which is a typical gaso- naphthenes with a lower RON in FCC.
mestic oil market is experiencing a rise in line component with a higher RON. By By controlling the operating param-
gasoline consumption and a reduction in contrast, the deep hydrogenation of di-ar- eters of LCO hydrotreating, the selective
diesel consumption in recent years. Light omatics into bicyclic naphthenes is unde- formation of mono-aromatics is guaran-
cycle oil (LCO) is an important byprod- sirable in LCO hydrotreating, since naph- teed, together with low hydrogen (H)
uct of fluidized catalytic cracking (FCC).
With the increasing severity of FCC oper-
ations, LCO with a higher aromatic con- TABLE 1. Hydrocarbons contained in LCO
tent and lower cetane number is no longer Samples GZ SJZ1 SJZ2 GQ YS2
appropriate as a blending component for Paraffins 9.6 12.32 6.3 17.07 17.6
clean diesel, even after being hydrogenat-
ed. To meet the urgent requirements for Naphthenes 8.83 5.16 2.4 10.62 10.2
gasoline consumption and diesel quality, Mono- 6 3.73 1.8 7.97 8.2
a new FCC technology a has been devel- Bi- 2.13 1.08 0.5 2.05 1.5
oped. It has been confirmed that this FCC Tri- 0.7 0.35 0.1 0.6 0.5
technology is capable of converting inferi-
or LCO into gasoline with a high research Aromatics 81.57 82.52 91.3 72.31 72.2
octane number (RON). Alkyl benzene 11.02 11.04 15.1 9.01 16.4
Indane or tetralin 13.99 11.43 8.8 8.58 11.1
Reaction chemistry. As the data in
Indene 3.47 3.36 4.2 2.68 4.3
TABLE 1 shows, LCO consists mainly of
aromatics, particularly di-aromatics. It Naphthalenes 26.83 29.92 38 27.46 23.5
is presently impossible to directly con- Acenaphthene 11.68 10.68 8.4 10.45 6.9
vert di-aromatics into mono-aromatics Acenaphthylene 3.64 3.53 9 3.85 5.5
in conventional FCC operations. UOP
Tri-ring aromatics 4.93 5.79 7.8 5.39 4.5
once tried to develop a J-cracking process
to convert hydrogenated LCO (HLCO)
years ago, but the conversion of LCO FCC R1
was unsatisfactory.1 Ashland Oil Inc.2 and Hydrogen
ExxonMobil3,4,5 have both designed dif- transfer R2
ferent processes to produce high-octane Hydrotreating R1 CH3 CH3 CH3
gasoline with the combination of LCO Ring opening ideal CH3
hydrotreating and FCC. R2 H3C H3C
The new FCC technology—its reac-
Hydrogenation
tion mechanism is schematically shown ideal
R1
in FIG. 1—was recently developed to pro-
duce gasoline from LCO containing high
R2
aromatic content.
This FCC technology is an integration Hydrogenation
R1 CH3 CH3
of the hydrotreating of LCO into HLCO non-ideal CH3
and the FCC processing of HLCO. Di-aro- R2 H3C
matics enriched in LCO are hydrogenated
moderately into mono-aromatics with a
FIG. 1. Reaction mechanism involved in FCC technologya processing.
tetralin structure. In the following FCC
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 31
 Clean Fuels

FCCU FCCU

High RON gasoline/BTX Heavy oil High RON gasoline

Hydrogenated Hydrogenated
unit unit
LCO LCO
Extraneous LCOs
Hydrogenated LCO Hydrogenated LCO
Hydrogen Hydrogen

Hydrogenated LCO Hydrogenated LCO

FIG. 2A. Flowsheet of FCC technology in Mode 1. FIG. 2B. Flowsheet of FCC technology in Mode 2.

TABLE 2. Performance of commercialized and an olefin content of

FCC technology in Mode 1
Items Data in Mode 1
Feedstock (HLCO)
Density (20°C), g/cm3
IBP-FBP, °C 199.6–359
Refractive index, 20°C
Sulfur, μg/g
Hydrogen (H), %
Nitrogen, μg/g
Polycyclic aromatics, %
Mono-aromatics, %
Operating conditions
Riser outlet temperature, °C
Reactor pressure (G), MPa
Ratio of catalyst to oil
Product distribution, m%
Dry gas
LPG
Gasoline
LCO
Slurry
Coke
Loss
Sum
Gasoline properties
Olefin content, vol%
Aromatics content, vol%
RON
consumption. With the further optimi-
zation of the FCC processing of HLCO,
the ring open rather than H2 transfer of
mono-aromatics with tetralin structure
occurs preferentially to produce alkyl-
benzene with a higher octane number.
Operation modes. Up to now, the new
FCC technology can be operated in
32 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
approximately 5 vol%
• Gasoline produced in Mode 2
shows an olefin content that is
Heavy oil reduced by 4%–5% and an RON
0.8921 conversion zone
that is increased by 0.5–1 units.
1.5052 COMMERCIAL APPLICATIONS
10 The FCC technology has been suc-
11.3 FCC feedstock Hydrogenated LCO cessfully commercialized in both Modes
conversion zone 1 and 2 at Sinopec’s Shijiazhuang re-
0.52 Hydrogenated Regenerated catalyst
LCO finery. In 2013, the FCC technology in
11.2 Mode 1 was realized by the integration
44.7 of the No. 2 FCCU and a typical diesel
hydrogenation unit operated at the H2
FIG. 3. Structure of the FCC riser of the partial pressure of 6.4 MPa. After the re-
500 new FCC technology in Mode 2.
vamp of an HLCO conversion zone in
0.21
the riser of the No. 1 FCCU, the conver-
4.8 Mode 1 (FIG. 2A) or Mode 2 (FIG. 2B). In sion of LCO to gasoline was achieved by
Mode 1, LCO from an FCC unit (FCCU) the FCC technology in Mode 2 in 2014.
1.14 and extraneous LCO are processed in a
15.45 hydrotreating unit. The produced HLCO FCC technology in Mode 1. The op-
48.18
then returns to the original FCCU as the erating conditions and the performance
sole feedstock. In Mode 2, both heavy oil of the commercialized FCC technology
29.15
and HLCO serve as feedstock. To process in Mode 1 are listed in TABLE 2. When
1.22 HLCO and heavy oil separately in a single HLCO with a density of 0.89 g/cm3, H
4.5 riser, an additional conversion zone at the content of 11.3% and total aromatic con-
0.36 lower section of the FCCU riser is intro- tent of 55.9% is used as the feedstock for
100
duced. The schematic structure shown in the FCCU, a gasoline yield of 48.18% can
FIG. 3 identifies two conversion zones of be obtained at the HLCO conversion of
the FCCU riser in Mode 2: the upper sec- 70.85%. The content of olefins in gasoline
5.9 tion for heavy oil cracking, and the lower produced is only 5.9 vol%, while that of
40.2 section for HLCO cracking. aromatics is 40.2 vol%. Furthermore, the
94.8 RON of gasoline may reach up to 94.8.
Technical features. The new FCC
technology is characterized by the follow- FCC technology in Mode 2. The oper-
ing technical features: ating conditions and the performance of
• Once-through conversion the commercialized FCC technology in
of HLCO up to 70% Mode 2—HLCO with a density of 0.91
• Gasoline selectivity up to g/cm3, H content of 10.95% and a total
almost 80% aromatic content of 76.8% was used as
• H2 consumption of about 2%–2.5% one of the FCCU feedstocks—are listed
• Gasoline produced in Mode 1 in TABLE 3. Compared with the traditional
indicates an RON over 94 FCC operation, the gasoline yield is in-
HONORING
August 30, 2018
Houstonian Hotel | Houston, Texas
HydrocarbonProcessing.com/Awards

INNOVATION IN THE
DOWNSTREA M

Nominations Close April 12th

The editors of Hydrocarbon Processing are thrilled to
announce the 2nd annual Hydrocarbon Processing Awards.

The awards program will honor the downstream energy

segment’s leading innovations, as well as outstanding
personal contributions to the industry.

Winners will be announced at a black-tie awards

ceremony and dinner to be held August 30, 2018,
at the Houstonian Hotel in Houston, Texas.

2018 Award Categories include:

PROJECT OR TECHNOLOGY
• Best Automation Technology
• Best Catalyst Technology
• Best “Digitalization”
• Best Flow Control Technology
• Best Gas Processing Technology
• Best HSE in a Project
• Best Instrument Technology
• Best Modeling Technology
• Best Petrochemical Technology
• Best Refining Technology

OUR PEOPLE AWARDS

• Lifetime Achievement
• Most Promising Engineer

To RSVP or Sponsor this Exciting Event:

Contact your Hydrocarbon Processing representative or
Melissa Smith, Events Director, at +1 (713) 520-4475 or
Melissa.Smith@GulfPub.com.

VISIT HY DROCARBONPROCESSI NG.CO M/AWARDS FO R MORE INFO RMATION

 Clean Fuels

creased from 42.95% to 59.03%, and the by 18.11 vol%. At the same time, the gaso- Economic benefits. At the time of
LCO yield is reduced from 21.25% to line RON is increased by 0.6 units. In the publication, 18 of the new FCC technol-
0.94%. Additionally, the content of ole- HLCO conversion zone, the selectivity of ogy applications are in use in China, and
fins in the produced gasoline is reduced gasoline can be as high as 78.83% at the more units are under modification or
by 20.2 vol%, and aromatics are increased apparent conversion of HLCO of 70.2%. construction. According to the statistical
data from the available FCC technology
units, the average H2 consumption in hy-
TABLE 3. Performance of traditional FCC and commercialized FCC technology in Mode 2
drotreating units is only 2%–2.5%, since
Items Data of traditional FCC Data of new FCC technology in Mode 2 a moderate LCO hydrogenation condi-
Feedstock (Heavy oil) tion is vital to the reaction mechanism
involved in the FCC technology. For
Density (20°C), g/cm3 0.9278 0.9278
the new FCC technology in Mode 1, the
Conradson carbon, % 3.63 3.59 once-through conversion of HLCO and
Sulfur, μg/g 11,200 9,750 the yield of gasoline are approximately
70% and 48.5%, respectively.
Hydrogen, % 12.28 12.3
For the FCC technology in Mode 2,
Nitrogen, μg/g 1,900 2100 in the HLCO conversion zone, the once-
Saturates, % 58.6 53.8 through apparent conversion of HLCO
and the selectivity of gasoline are ap-
Aromatics, % 32 34.1
proximately 68% and 75%, respectively.
Gum, % 8.8 11.5 In the meantime, the olefins content in
Asphaltene, % 0.6 0.6 the produced gasoline is reduced by ap-
Recycled HLCO
proximately 20 vol%, and the aromatics
content is increased by about 15%. Also,
Density (20°C), g/cm3 0.9121 the RON of gasoline is increased by 0.5–
IBP-FBP, °C 156.8–338.2 1 units. Based on a comprehensive evalu-
Refractive index (20°C) 1.5125
ation of product slates, product quality,
energy consumption and H2 consump-
Sulfur, μg/g 115.12 tion, the incremental profit margin of the
H, % 10.95 FCC technology in Mode 2 is $23.55/t
Nitrogen, μg/g 2.4 of recycled LCO.
Polycyclic aromatics, % 13
Follow-up development. Efforts are
Mono-aromatics, % 63.8 now focused on further reducing the H2
Operating conditions consumption of the new FCC technol-
ogy. Additionally, the maximization of
Heavy oil rate, t/h 86.68 86.54
BTX production from the FCC technol-
Recycling ratio of LCO 0.24 ogy is under development. It was found
Riser outlet temperature, °C 505 505 that the light fraction of LCO contains a
high percentage of mono-aromatics with
Reactor pressure (G), MPa 0.127 0.13
long alkyl branches. In FCC processing,
Product distribution, m% these aromatics can be converted to mo-
Dry gas 3.46 4.35 no-aromatics with short alkyl branches,
LPG 18.32 20.85
resulting in an increased octane number
of gasoline higher than 100. In the next
Gasoline 42.95 59.03 generation of FCC technology that is
LCO 21.25 0.94 now being commercialized, LCO will be
Slurry 4.73 4.61 separated into light and heavy fractions
first. The light fraction is fed directly back
Coke 8.79 9.73
to the FCCU without hydrotreating,
Loss 0.49 0.48 while the heavy fraction is subjected suc-
Sum 100 100 cessively to hydrogenation and FCC.
Gasoline properties NOTE
Density, (20°C), g/cm3 0.7276 0.7382 a
Sinopec’s LCO to Aromatics and Gasoline (LTAG)
technology
Olefin content, vol% 20.3 16.2
LITERATURE CITED
Aromatics content, vol% 24.3 28.7
Complete literature cited available online at
RON 92.6 93.2 HydrocarbonProcessing.com.

34 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 Special Focus Clean Fuels
Z. LIU, R. ZHANG, X. MENG, H. LIU and C. XU,
China University of Petroleum, Beijing, China;
X. ZHANG, Beijing Zhongshi Aojie Petroleum
Technology Co. Ltd., Beijing, China; and W. CHUNG,
Well Resources Inc., Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Composite ionic liquid alkylation technology

gives high product yield and selectivity
Global sentiment has been mov-
ing toward a call to develop innovative
technologies that address environmental
preservation and limit the use of hazard-
ous materials. For example, in 2016, the
South Coast Air Quality Management
District of California published a tech-
nology study that noted that advantages
in emerging alkylation technologies lie
in their ability to mitigate “…safety con-
cerns related to volatile acid vapor clouds
and acid transportation.”1 Also, China’s
Environmental Protection Ministry has
imposed heavy penalties on alkylation
operators with inadequate safe practices
relating to spent sulfuric acid treatment.2
This article discusses the commercial
results of a new composite ionic liquid
(CIL) alkylation technology3 that is not
only capable of producing desired prod-
ucts with higher alkylate yield and selec-
tivity over traditional methods, but that
also utilizes an environmentally friendly
and non-hazardous catalyst.
Alkylation technologies. Alkylation is
a common refinery process that is used to
produce valuable, high-octane gasoline
constituents, such as trimethylpentanes
(TMPs). Alkylation offers an attractive
return on investment for manufacturers,
and alkylate production is near all-time
highs.4 The long-term demand for alkyl-
ate has been growing, driven by macro
factors, such as the adoption of high-
compression engines in vehicles and low
vapor pressure requirements.4
In China, the demand for alkylate has
grown considerably. China has trans-
formed from an agricultural/industrial
society into a modern consumer market.
Over the past 3 yr, an average of 2 MM
new vehicles per month have been sold
in China.
To combat its environmental emis-
sions problem, China has fast-tracked
implementation of its clean transporta-
tion fuels program: Euro 6 fuels in major
first-tier cities and Euro 5 fuels in the rest
of the country. This policy has a tremen-
dous impact on refinery operations.
Traditionally, due to the paraffinic
nature of domestic feedstock, fluid cata-
lytic cracking (FCC) has been the refinery
“workhorse” in China to produce gasoline
and diesel. However, FCC-derived gaso-
line does not meet regulatory octane num-
ber specifications and requires the use of
additives to boost its octane number.
Also, China has been importing lique-
fied natural gas (LNG), which contains a
substantial amount of butane. Butane can
be isomerized into iso-butane, which is
an alkylation feedstock. As a result, many
alkylation plants have been constructed
in China over the past 5 yr.
Conventional alkylation processes
utilize sulfuric acid and anhydrous hy-
drofluoric acid as catalysts, but both of
these chemicals pose serious safety and
environmental concerns when handled
in significant quantities.
California’s proposed ban of hydro-
fluoric (HF) acid as an alkylation cata-
lyst has forced some refiners to rethink
their processes. While advancements
have been made in HF acid to sulfuric
acid alkylation conversion technolo-
gies,5 these solutions do not completely
address the underlying safety and envi-
ronmental concerns.
The use of solid acids has been ex-
plored as a less hazardous alternative to
traditional alkylation catalysts.6 However,
rapid deactivation and difficulty in regen-
erating spent catalyst remain obstacles.7
Non-hazardous ionic liquid catalysts,
such as acidic chloroaluminate, are also an
option. While conventional ionic liquids
can overcome obstacles associated with
solid acid catalysts, they exhibit low yield
and selectivity in producing desirable al-
kylate products.3
CIL catalysts have been developed to
increase yield and selectivity toward valu-
able alkylate products. FIG. 1 compares
the alkylate composition obtained from
bench-scale alkylation experiments us-
ing a conventional acidic chloroaluminate
ionic liquid catalyst and the CIL catalyst.
The inserts in FIG. 1 show gas chromatog-
raphy mass spectra of alkylates. The al-
kylate C5–C7, C8, and C9+ compositions
derived from the conventional acidic
chloroaluminate ionic liquid catalyst were
35.7%, 46.5% and 17.8%, respectively,
whereas CIL catalyst produced alkylate
with compositions of 3.2%, 95.8% and
1%, respectively. The comparison reveals
that CIL catalyst has higher selectiv-
ity and reactivity for desirable alkylation
products, namely TMPs.
The science behind CIL and the devel-
opment of CIL catalyzed alkylation have
been published in peer-reviewed journals
and as patents, respectively.
CIL catalyzed iso-butane alkylation.a
After 8 mos of extensive bench-scale lab-
oratory testing, the CIL catalyzed alkyla-
tion process was subjected to a continu-
ous, 4-l/hr alkylate gasoline production
pilot run for 60 d.3 In 2005, PetroChina
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 35
 Clean Fuels

100 conducted the field commercial demon-

stration of CIL catalyzed alkylation by
90
retrofitting an existing, 65-metric Mtpy
80 sulfuric acid alkylation unit.3,8 A green-
field, 100-metric-Mtpy CIL catalyzed al-
70 kylation facility (FIG. 2) was constructed
60
at the Shandong Deyang Chemical Plant
in China. It experienced a smooth start-
Yield, %

50 up in August 2013.9,10,11 The butane feed

used in this facility was a refinery off-
40
gas consisting of iso-butane and a small
30 amount of n-butane purchased from
nearby refineries.
20 CIL catalyzed iso-butane alkylation
Chloroaluminate IL
10 Composite IL is a non-hazardous and environmentally
friendly process. It has a built-in catalyst
0 regeneration system and can selectively
C5–C7 C8 C9+
produce high-value alkylate products,
FIG. 1. Alkylate compositions derived from acid chloroaluminate ionic liquid catalyst thereby overcoming the issues associated
and CIL catalysts. with both solid acids and non-composite
ionic liquid catalysts.
FIG. 3 shows the process flow dia-
gram of the commercial CIL catalyzed
iso-butane alkylation unit. In this con-
figuration, plant-derived iso-butane is
first hydrotreated to remove impurities.
In the reactor, the feed is mixed with a
circulating homogenous CIL catalyst,
and alkylate is formed. Reactor contents
are then sent to a settler, where gravity
separation is used to differentiate alkylate
and light ends from the heavier catalyst.
The alkylate and light ends are sent to a
fractionator, which further separates the
components and recycles unconverted
iso-butane.
Catalyst from the first settler is sent
FIG. 2. Commercial 100-metric-Mtpy CIL alkylation plant.
through a series of additional settlers
and extractors, where spent catalyst fines
and other solids are ultimately removed.
The balance of catalyst from the extrac-
tor is combined with hydrocarbon and
n-butane
Settler chloride in the catalyst regeneration unit
Hydrotreater Chloride + hydrocarbon prior to being fed back into the reactor.
CIL alkylation Fractionator
reactor a Commercial process performance.
Butane feed Alkylate The following data shows a snapshot of
Settler
2015 commercial operation, obtained
Chloride + hydrocarbon Catalyst
during the initial cycle of the first green-
regeneration field, 100-metric Mtpy CIL catalyzed iso-
butane alkylation unit.
FIG. 4 shows the monthly volume of
butane feed and alkylate produced in the
Extractor
commercial CIL catalyzed alkylation unit
throughout 2015. Iso-butane conversion
exceeded 90% throughout the run. The
Spent catalyst and solids data shows that the monthly capacity of
the alkylation unit fluctuated over a wide
FIG. 3. Process flow diagram of the CIL alkylation process.
range (10%–90% design capacity), due to
36MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 Clean Fuels

the availability of butane feedstock in the 10,000

spot market. The data also showed that 9,000
Feed
Alkylate
the CIL reactor system is highly flexible
to varying feed capacities. On an average 8,000
annual basis, the alkylation unit operated

Butane feed and alkylate production, t

7,000
at 40% of its design processing capacity.
FIG. 5 shows the research octane num- 6,000
ber (RON) of CIL-derived alkylate, sam- 5,000
pled daily over a 1-yr period in which the
target alkylate RON was set to 95. The 4,000
data showed that the alkylate RON was 3,000
relatively constant and often exceeded
the set specifications, indicating stable 2,000
operation. The results showed that the 1,000
processing capacity variation had no im-
0
pact on the alkylate RON. January February March April May June July August September October November December
On the 250th day, the process operat-
ing conditions were adjusted for produc- FIG. 4. Monthly butane feed and alkylate produced.
ing alkylate RON exceeding 98. While
the CIL alkylation process can be used to 100
reliably produce high-RON alkylates, the
99
desired alkylate RON should be depen-
dent on economics. 98
FIG. 6 shows the chloride content of
97
CIL-derived alkylate, sampled daily over
Research octane number (RON)

a 1-yr period in which the alkylate chlo- 96

ride content was set at 5 ppm. The data
95
showed that the majority of the alkylate
chloride content was below 2 ppm. Alkyl- 94
ate chloride content is dependent on the
93
volume of chloride introduced into the
catalyst regeneration unit. 92
FIG. 7 shows the CIL reactor inlet and
outlet temperatures over a 2-wk period, 91
recorded at 8-hr intervals. The tempera- 90
ture profiles were relatively constant, 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Days
indicating stable process operation. The
CIL catalyzed iso-butane alkylation re- FIG. 5. CIL-derived alkylate RON.
actions are mildly exothermic and are
carried out at ambient temperatures and 10
moderate pressures.
Energy consumption monitored over 9
a 1-yr period for the CIL catalyzed alkyla- 8
tion process varied from 130 kg EO/t to
CIL alkylate chloride content, ppm

160 kg EO/t alkylate produced, which is 7

comparable to the sulfuric acid catalyzed
6
alkylation process.
TABLE 1 shows the composition of 5
heavy matter (byproduct) that was re-
moved, along with the spent catalyst 4
at the extractor. The amount of heavy 3
matter produced was relatively small.
It was discharged from the system once 2
every few days during commercial op- 1
eration. The byproduct is chemically
benign and non-hazardous. It can be 0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
easily disposed of and poses no envi- Days
ronmental threat. Nevertheless, devel-
FIG. 6. CIL-derived alkylate chloride content.
opment work is underway to explore
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 37
 Clean Fuels
30
Temperature, °C
20
10
Reactor outlet temperature
Reactor inlet temperature
Secondary inlet temperature
0 RUI ZHANG is an Associate Professor of chemical
05-02 05-03 05-04
FIG. 7. CIL alkylation reactor temperatures.
TABLE 1. Composition of CIL alkylation
byproduct
Dry basis
NaCl
Al(OH)3
Cu(OH)2
Mineral oil
SiO2
Na2SO4
Mg, Ca, Fe
the feasibility of recovering base metals
from the byproduct.
The CIL catalyzed iso-butane alkyla-
tion unit was shut down for a turnaround
in May 2016 after 33 mos of continuous
operation. The unit was subjected to 2
wk of rigorous and thorough inspection.
No indications of corrosion or wear
were observed.
Recent developments. Ten new CIL
catalyzed iso-butane alkylation units,
ranging from 50 metric Mtpy–400 met-
ric Mtpy of alkylate production, have
been licensed to major state-owned re-
fineries in China. Construction of four
300-metric-Mtpy units are underway at
Sinopec’s refineries at Jiujiang and An-
qing, and at PetroChina’s refineries at
Germu and Harbin, which will be started
up in 2018.12
Unlike the first CIL alkylation unit at
Deyang Chemical, most of the butane
feed used in the units at the state-owned
refineries will come from the plants’ re-
finery offgas. The processing capacities
of these units will be relatively constant
and close to design capacities.
38 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
05-05 05-06 05-07 05-08 05-09 05-10 05-11 05-12 05-13
Date
NOTE
a
The proprietary composite ionic liquid catalyzed iso-
butane alkylation technology is commonly referred
to as CILA, or Ionikylation.
60%–75% ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
10%–15% Exploratory and strategic research grants were
obtained from the National Natural Science Foundation
5%–10% of China (Grant Nos. 21425626, 21036008,
0.1%–0.5% 20976194 and 20206018) and Shell Global Solutions
International BV. China State Council granted the
Trace National Invention Award for Composite Ionic Liquid
Catalyzed Iso-butane Alkylation Technology.
Trace
Trace LITERATURE CITED
1
Zhang, S., L. Wilkinson, L. Ogunde, R. Todd, C.
Steves and S. Haydel, “Alkylation technology study
final report—South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD),” Norton Engineering, 2016.
2
China Financial News, “Environmental crackdown on
spent sulfuric acid from alkylate producers,” online:
http://www.195315.com/qihuo/201610/309298.
html
3
Liu, Z., R. Zhang, C. Xu and R. Xia, “Ionic liquid
alkylation process produces high-quality gasoline,”
Oil & Gas Journal, Vol. 104, 2006.
4
Pawloski, J., “Refining: Alkylation—What’s a refiner
to do?” Hydrocarbon Processing, November 2017.
5
Nunez, J. and S. Presley, “HF alkylation conver-
sion is finally within reach—Part 1,” Hydrocarbon
Processing, September 2017.
6
Corma, A. and A. Martinez, “Catalysts and pro-
cesses for isoparaffin-olefin alkylation,” Catal. Rev.,
Vol. 35, No. 4, 1993.
7
Weitkamp, J., and Y. Traa, “Isobutane/butene alkyla-
tion on solid catalysts,” Catal. Today, Vol. 49, No. 2,
1999.
8
“PetroChina’s Ionikylation process based on ionic
liquid,” online: http://www.ionicliquid.org/en/
application/2014-04-24/40.html
9
Zhang, R., Z. Liu, X. Meng, H. Liu and C. Xu,
“Evaluation of 100 kt/a composite ionic liquid alkyl-
ation (CILA) plant,” 4th Asia-Pacific Conference on
Ionic Liquids and Green Processes 2014, Sydney,
Australia, September 28–October 1, 2014.
10
Liu, Z., “Commercial ionic liquid alkylation technol-
ogy,” 2nd China Alkylate Technologies and Market
Conference 2016, Xian, China, September 20–21,
2016.
11
Gan, P. and S. Tang, “Research progress in ionic
liquids catalyzed iso-butane/butene alkylation,”
Chinese J. Chem. Eng., Vol. 24, 2016.
12
AsiaChem, “Status of commercial ionic liquid
alkylation plants in China,” 3rd China Alkylate
Technologies and Market Conference 2017, Yantai,
China, July 26–27, 2017.
ZHICHANG LIU is a Professor of chemical engineering
and the Dean of human resources at the China
University of Petroleum in Beijing. He is also a Deputy
Director of the China State Key Laboratory of Heavy
Oil Processing. His research interests include clean
fuels production and petroleum processing. Dr. Liu is
a co-inventor of Ionikylation technology and the head
of the ionic liquid research group. He holds a PhD in
chemical engineering from the Shanxi Institute of
Coal Chemistry at the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
engineering at the China University of Petroleum
in Beijing. His research interests include petroleum
processing and clean fuels production. Dr. Zhang
is a co-inventor of Ionikylation technology and is
responsible for the experimental test program.
He holds a PhD in chemical engineering from the
China University of Petroleum.
XIANGHAI MENG is a Professor of chemical
engineering at the China University of Petroleum
in Beijing. His research interests include petroleum
processing and clean fuels production. Dr. Meng
is a co-inventor of Ionikylation technology and is
responsible for reactions and process modeling.
He holds a PhD in chemical engineering from the
China University of Petroleum in Beijing.
HAIYAN LIU is an Associate Professor of chemical
engineering at the China University of Petroleum
in Beijing. Her research interests include catalysis,
catalytic materials, clean fuels production and
petroleum processing. Dr. Liu is a co-inventor
of Ionikylation technology and is responsible
for the composite ionic liquid catalyst formulation.
She holds a PhD in chemical engineering from the
China University of Petroleum.
CHUNMING XU is a Professor at China University of
Petroleum in Beijing. He is also a Deputy Advisory
chair at the China State Key Laboratory of Heavy Oil
Processing. He was formerly a Vice President at the
China University of Petroleum and a visiting scholar
at the Syncrude Research Center in Edmonton,
Alberta, Canada. His research interests include heavy
oil chemistry and processing technology, and clean
fuels production. Dr. Xu is a co-inventor of Ionikylation
technology and initiated the development work.
He holds BSc and MS degrees, as well as a PhD,
all in chemical engineering from the China
University of Petroleum.
XIAOMING ZHANG is a Technical Manager at Beijing
Zhongshi Aojie Petroleum Technology Co. Ltd. He has
20 yr of refinery experience and specializes in plant
optimization and process licensing. Mr. Zhang
is responsible for the commercial production of
various additives used in petroleum applications.
He holds a BE degree in chemical engineering from
the China University of Petroleum in East China.
WARREN CHUNG is the President of Well Resources
Inc. He specializes in assessing the commercial
readiness of novel technologies, project development
and process licensing. Mr. Chung developed best
practice protocols for the Ionikylation technology.
He holds a BS degree in chemical and biomedical
engineering from the University of Alberta in Canada.
He is also a registered professional engineer in Alberta.
 Special Focus
Upgrading the bottom of the barrel
In the past few decades, new tech-
nologies, including both carbon rejec-
tion methods and catalytic conversion
methods, have emerged. Often, a com-
bination of these two technologies has
proven to be the best approach to up-
grading operations. A combination of
carbon rejection and the addition of
hydrogen (H2 ) can be used to upgrade
residuum fuels to make the low-sulfur
gasoline and ultra-low-diesel (ULSD)
fuels required by environmental regu-
lations. Upgrading residual fuels uses
either carbon rejection or H2 addition,
or a combination of the two. Traditional
carbon rejection technologies include
delayed coking, visbreaking, fluid cok-
ing, solvent deasphalting and residual
fluid catalytic cracking (RFCC). The
key to optimizing refinery margins is
often the technology that is used to up-
grade the bottom of the barrel. With the
advent of new catalysts, other upgrading
technologies have remained the same.
Relatively new heavy oil upgrading pro-
cesses, along with improvements to ex-
isting technologies, are being used to
help increase refining margins.
Some alternatives to carbon rejection
are H2 addition technologies, which in-
clude ebullated bed hydrocracking and-
fixed-bed hydrotreating/hydrocracking,
among others.
Residuum properties. The proper-
ties of the vacuum residuum in the feed
are a key factor in determining which
technologies will work best. These key
properties include Conradson Carbon
(Concarbon) residue, heavy metals such
as nickel (Ni) and vanadium (V) that
poison catalysts, the asphaltene content,
sulfur and organic nitrogen. These key
properties determine which technolo-
Clean Fuels
R. ELSHOUT, Energy Systems Engineering, Pasadena,
California; J. BAILEY, Consultant, Lake Oswego, Oregon;
L. BROWN, Consultant, Orange County, California;
and P. NICK, Consultant, Yorba Linda, California
gies are feasible and which secondary
upgrading technologies can be used to
upgrade the feed into marketable fuels.
The composition of residuums varies
as follows:
• Carbon: 83%–87%
• H2 : 10%–14%
• Nitrogen: 0.1%–2%
• Oxygen: 0.1%– 1.5%
• Sulfur: 0.5%–6%
• Heavy metals (e.g., Ni and V)
under 10 ppmw.
The market for both the products
produced and the byproducts, such as
coke, low-BTU fuel gas, low-sulfur fuel
oils, paving or roofing asphalt, etc., is a
strong determining factor in the evalua-
tions. The market pays more for higher
conversion process technologies. How-
ever, with the right set of economics, the
incremental values of the products can
provide sufficient economic incentives.
Several options of carbon rejection
and H2 addition processes are evaluated
here, as well as various combinations of
these two basic process types. Process
schematics, operating conditions, yields,
catalyst and chemicals, and economics
are presented.
Primary residuum upgrading tech-
nologies. The feed for these processes
is vacuum residuum from the vacuum
unit. It is assumed that a vacuum unit is
employed to minimize the quantity of re-
siduum to be upgraded. A light-vacuum
gasoil (VGO), a heavy-VGO and a vacu-
um residuum are produced. The vacuum
residuum is fed to one of the primary up-
grading units.
Following the primary upgrader, a
secondary upgrader that usually co-
produces other low-value streams like
VGOs will be required. Hydrocracking
and FCC are the most commonly used
secondary upgrading processes.
The semi-refined products are upgrad-
ed into environmentally friendly fuels us-
ing conventional technologies and well-
known refinery processes that are used for
processing the crude. These processes are
shared between the conventional section
of the refinery and the residual upgrading
units to provide economy of scale.
Using block flow diagram simulators
is useful for evaluating the cases. These
programs contain databases of the feed-
stocks and models of the individual units,
and simulate refined products blending
into finished fuels, along with providing
utility requirements.
CARBON REJECTION
TECHNOLOGIES
Delayed coking. This technology is
the most common residuum upgrading
process used in a refinery. The delayed
coker is the garbage can of the refinery.
It is a brute force thermal process simi-
lar to visbreaking. Residuum is heated to
approximately 482°C–510°C (900°F–
950°F) and enters the main coker frac-
tionator. The bottoms product from this
fractionator then enters a coking drum
to undergo the coking reactions. At least
two coking drums continuously operate
in a cyclic, batch-wise fashion. While the
coking reactions are taking place in one
drum, the other drum is having the solid
coke product removed. Once the coke
drum is emptied, the operating modes
switch. As the flowrate of a delayed coker
is increased, the number of coke drums is
also increased to enhance the efficiency
of the process.
Within the coke drum, a combina-
tion of temperature and time thermally
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 39
 Clean Fuels
decomposes the residuum feed into a
broad mixture of materials from gases to
naphtha, light and heavy gasoils. These
drum products are then fed back to the
main fractionator, which separates the
products into gas, gasoline, light-coker
gasoil and heavy-coker gasoil in a con-
tinuous fashion, and recycles the bot-
tom resid product back to the coking
drum(s). The coke left behind in the
drum is removed by using high-pressure
water. This process is referred to as “de-
coking” the drum. Coke exiting the bot-
tom of the drum usually goes through
a crusher car to pulverize it into ½-in
chunks, which fall into a sluice and are
carried to the dewatering area as water
slurry. A schematic of the delayed coking
process is shown in FIG. 1.
The solid coke product is sometimes
calcined to remove volatile hydrocarbons
before being transported to market. Envi-
ronmental regulations prohibit the direct
combustion of coke unless the combus-
tion includes process facilities to recover
hydrogen sulfur oxides and other pollut-
ants. These facilities are included in the
design of the continuous fluid coking
process. One advantage of this process
over the batch-wise delayed coking pro-
cess is the recovery of energy from com-
busting some of the coke product.
FIG. 1. A schematic of the delayed coking process.
40 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Some delayed cokers process special
composition feeds (i.e., highly aromatic),
and can produce a more valuable, metal-
lurgical grade of coke that is used to make
anodes for the production of aluminum
and other chemical products. The prop-
erties of the feedstock determine the ap-
plicability.
Typically, the gas produced is treated
to remove hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and
other impurities, then sent into the refin-
ery fuel gas system. The coker naphtha is
sent to the hydrotreater and catalytic re-
former, either by itself or with other simi-
lar naphthas. The light gasoil (e.g., kero-
sine/diesel boiling range) can go to the
hydrocracker for secondary upgrading.
Typically, the heavy-coker gasoil goes to
the FCCU for secondary upgrading.
The economics of a delayed coker de-
pend on the sale price of the coke and the
cost of transporting it to market. Coke
is typically 20 wt% of the feed, and coke
purchasers generally only pay the trans-
portation cost to their facility.
Visbreaking. This technology is very
old, and has become useful only in areas
where heavy fuel oils are used for power
generation and fuel for ships. It is still
used in some European countries to pro-
duce heavy fuel oil for boilers. Like the
delayed coker, the visbreaker uses time
and temperature to partially decompose
the feed and reduce the viscosity. The pri-
mary difference between coking and vis-
breaking is that coking produces a solid
bottoms product and recovers essentially
all of the oil product. Visbreaking leaves a
significant amount of oil in the bottoms
product. For this reason, coking achieves
profitable oil recoveries in the range of
55%–65%, whereas the less expensive
visbreaking process achieves recoveries
of approximately 25%–35%.
The coke deposits on the visbreaker’s
heater tube walls and in the soaker drum
must be periodically removed. This makes
visbreaking a semi-continuous process,
meaning that several parallel units are re-
quired with one in decoking mode.
The visbreaker produces small
amounts of naphtha and gasoil prod-
ucts, as well. The offgas must be amine
treated for H2S removal before entering
the refinery fuel system. One potential
application for visbreaking would be pro-
ducing a pumpable oil from the tar sands
(bitumen) upgrading process. Most tar
sands deposits are located near the Arc-
tic Circle. Transporting a syncrude com-
posed of products of a crude, vacuum
and visbreaker unit into a less viscous
and transportable material has economic
potential. Additional diluents may be re-
quired for this approach, as asphaltene
compounds typically settle out from the
bitumen in piping in cold climates.
Fluid coking and resid upgrading.
Far fewer fluid cokers are in service than
delayed cokers. A northern California re-
finery recently switched from fluid cok-
ing to delayed coking since fluid coke
is less valuable, and a more difficult by-
product to handle, than delayed coke.
The proprietary resid upgrading tech-
nologya utilizes a coke gasifier to turn
the fluid coke that is not recycled back
to the process into low-Btu gas (about
250 Btu), which cannot be economically
mixed with the refinery fuel gas system.
Typically, boilers or other dedicated
heaters must be designed to use this very
lean gas. Part of the resid upgrading op-
eration includes the removal of H2S and
sulfur oxides (SOx ).
Another option for the gasification
product is to further convert it into syn-
gas [one part carbon monoxide (CO)
and two parts H2 ]. Syngas is the starting
 Clean Fuels

feed for many petrochemical plant op-
erations, such as an H2 plant.
The common part of the delayed
coker or resid upgrading technology is
the reactor-coking vessel. The fluid coke
recirculates back to the reactor, making
more coke by reacting with the feed.
Some of the coke is combusted to supply
heat for the coking reactions.
Solvent deasphalting (SDA)/demet-
allization. As previously mentioned,
the residuum contains catalyst deacti-
vators, which poisons catalysts in the
downstream units. These contaminants
include heavy metals such as Ni, V, as-
phaltenes and other catalyst poisons.
Light hydrocarbons, such as propane
and butane, are used as preferential
solvents to separate the feed into the
following semi-refined products using
supercritical operating conditions: deas-
phalted oil (DAO), a resin and an asphal-
tene stream, which contains most of the
contaminants. The DAO is very heavy
but easy to crack, and can flow to the
hydrocracker for upgrading. Typically,
the resins are sent to an FCCU. The as-
phaltenes can be used as heavy fuel oil or
made into roofing or paving asphalt.
RFCC process. This process is similar
to conventional FCC, primarily with
enhanced regeneration capacity. The
feedstock is limited to an upper, maxi-
mum level of metals, which will poison
the catalyst. The Concarbon number
and asphaltene content determine the
special requirements of the regenerator
section. These carbon-rich compounds
form coke on the catalyst, which must be
removed during regeneration (burning
with air), generating heat. Most of the
heat generated is transferred by fluidiza-
tion back to the fluidized reactor, where
it is utilized. Steam generation coils can
recover some of this heat, as well.
Due to the higher-than-normal heavy
metals, the catalyst must be replaced
to keep the equilibrium metals con-
tent within a tolerable level. The atmo-
spheric residuum of light crudes, such as
West Texas Intermediate (WTI), can be
fed to an RFCCU. A simplified process
flow diagram of an RFCCU is shown
in FIG. 2.b In this scheme, the reactor
and regenerator are configured side-by-
side. The RFCCU is similar to a gasoil
FCCU except that the regenerator must
be designed to remove the higher heat
loads resulting from the increased coke
formation. Typically, steam coils or an-
other type of steam generation system
are used to remove heat.
The previously mentioned tech-
nologies are the most commonly used
upgrading processes in the refining in-
dustry. In areas where it is environmen-
tally permitted, vacuum residuum can
be manufactured directly in the vacuum
unit into No. 6 fuel oil for use in boilers
and in marine fuel, as well as into pav-
ing asphalt. The asphalt can be further
processed into roofing asphalt in an air
blower, or cut back with solvent for cus-
tom road applications.
The semi-refined products from these
upgrading technologies must be further
processed to make marketable products.
FCC and hydrocracking are used indi-
vidually or in combination. The products

LIVE WEBCAST: Tuesday, March 27, 2018

10 a.m. CDT / 3 p.m. UTC
SPEAKER

Lei Lei Liu

Associate Process Engineer
Fluor Corporation
Reduce Time and Cost by Accelerating Process Design:
A Customer’s Perspective
Do you want to improve employee efficiency and productivity? Equip your engineers
with the best tools to effectively execute their process designs. Fluor, knowing the
importance of getting the most from their employees and their technology, tasked
Lei Lei Liu with modeling an intricate cooling water system in a new process simulator.
In just weeks, with no previous training, she had built the model.

SPEAKER The idea behind this new tool, SimCentral Simulation Platform, is to replace multiple
Livia Wiley point solutions; allowing for seamless transitions between calculation modes. EPCs and
Senior Marketing Manager operating companies alike can reduce time and cost by accelerating process simulation
Schneider Electric Software and design. In this webinar, Lei Lei Liu, will share how to maximize the benefits by using
one simulation tool to do rigorous steady-state, hydraulics, and dynamic modeling
quickly and efficiently in SimCentral Simulation Platform.

Register For Free: HydrocarbonProcessing.com/Webcasts

MODERATOR

Mike Rhodes
Managing Editor
Hydrocarbon Processing Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 41
 Clean Fuels
produced from the secondary residual
upgrading processes are then integrated
into the refinery upgrading process units
used for the lighter crude/vacuum unit
semi-refined products.
H2 ADDITION TECHNOLOGY
Unlike carbon rejection technology,
H2 addition uses catalyst, high pressure
and an H2 -rich atmosphere to break
down large molecules into smaller ones,
and hydrogenate them. Liquefied petro-
leum gas (LPG) is in the C3–C4 range,
gasoline is in the C5–C9 range, kerosine
FIG. 2. A schematic of the RFCC process.b
Guard reactor
H2O makeup
Heater
Feed
Filter
FIG. 3. A schematic of a fixed-bed hydroprocessing unit.
42 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
is in the C9–C15 range, and diesel is in the
C15–C20 range. All of these saleable prod-
ucts are blended to the required prod-
uct specifications for new, low-sulfur
gasoline,1 and new ULSD.2 The kerosine
range material is used primarily for jet
fuel and has less stringent environmen-
tal requirements. The key properties are
flash point, freeze point and smoke point.
Flash point is controlled by the front-end
components; freeze point is controlled
by the back-end components, and smoke
point is controlled by the aromatics con-
tent and back-end components.
H2 recycle
Main reactors Lean amine
H2S
absorber
Rich amine
Product
fractionator
HT sep. LT sep.
In H2 addition processes, H2 saturates
the ends where carbon-to-carbon bonds
are broken by hydrocracking reactions.
H2 also converts sulfur to H2 S, organic
nitrogen to ammonia (NH3), and satu-
rates most olefins and some naphthenes
and aromatic compounds. Most of the
processes use fixed-bed reactors loaded
with different catalysts to perform the
required functions. Typically, multiple
beds are required to limit increases in exo-
thermic temperature caused by quench
H2 injection. Licensors provide their own
proprietary catalysts or have catalyst man-
ufacturers produce catalyst to their speci-
fications. Some catalysts are generic and
available from multiple catalyst vendors.
The design of the reactor must have
sufficient wall thickness to withstand the
high pressures. Typically, the base metal
is a low-alloy cobalt/molybdenum (Co/
Mo) or Ni/Mo carbon steel with suffi-
cient amounts of Mo, Co or Ni to resist
high-temperature corrosive attack. The
base wall is then overlaid with austen-
itic stainless steel using a special welding
procedure to ensure that the overlay does
not disband. Since these heavy-wall alloy
reactors require considerable time to fab-
ricate, long lead times are required in the
construction schedule.
Most hydroprocessing technologies
use recycled H2 to provide sufficient par-
tial pressure for the reactions, while sup-
pressing coking reactions. Makeup H2 is
added as required to replace the H2 con-
sumed by the reactions.
As previously mentioned, both NH3
and H2 S are produced from side reactions.
To prevent the deposition (sublimation)
of ammonium bisulfide (NH4HS) and
chloride crystals in the downstream equip-
ment, a water wash is included at tempera-
Fuel gas tures where these reactions are predicted
and naphtha to occur. It is recommended that this
injection system be designed to ensure
that the wash water is adequately and uni-
formly distributed to keep these potential
Distillate
solid deposits dissolved in the wash water.
Ultimately, this spent wash water is recov-
Desulfurized
heavy oil ered in one of the separators and is sent
to a sour water stripper. For each mole of
NH3 in the reactor effluent, a mole of H2 S
combines with NH3 to produce a mole of
NH4HS. The unreacted H2 S is partially
absorbed in the spent wash water.
Fixed-bed hydroprocessing unit. A
process schematic of a typical fixed-bed
 Clean Fuels

hydroprocessing unit is shown in FIG. 3.
These units use downflow, fixed-bed re-
actors to perform hydrotreating and mi-
nor hydrocracking. These units are typi-
cally a once-through process. The overall
conversion can be up to 60%, with sulfur
removal up to 90%. Depending on the
concentration of heavy metals and Con-
carbon, the catalyst life can last up to 1 yr
before a changeout is required. A com-
mon design of this process is the cat feed
hydrotreating unit. These units can op-
erate at up to 2,500 psig and at tempera-
tures up to (371°C) 700°F. This process
usually uses at least four reactors with
different catalyst, such as desulfurization
catalyst, organic nitrogen removal cata-
lyst, saturation catalyst and crackability
improvement catalyst.
The main fractionator removes the
lighter products, including LPG, gasoline,
jet fuel and diesel. The higher-boiling
components flow to the FCCU. Due to
new regulations for low-sulfur gasoline and
ULSD, additional processing is required to
provide a low-sulfur blendstock that can
be blended with other fuel blendstocks.
Ebullated bed technology. In this
technology, an ebullated bed consisting
of recycled H2 , feed and catalyst is circu-
lated through a reactor. Pumps are used
to increase reactor circulation through
a center internal. An example of this
technology is shown in FIG. 4.c Catalyst
is continuously added through catalyst-
addition ports that are connected to the
reactor. The catalyst is continuously
withdrawn to provide for a fresh makeup
catalyst, as well as to maintain catalyst
activity. Flash drums are used to separate
vapors from cooled effluent and to feed
the fractionation tower.
Comparison of technologies. A com-
parison of the various carbon rejection
and H2 addition technologies is shown in
TABLE 1; however, the table only discusses
the relative merits of these technologies.
These upgrading processes must then be
integrated into the overall refinery. The
three areas that are most affected and
require debottlenecking include the sul-
fur recover units (SRUs), H2 production
units and utilities (steam, fuel gas, electric
power, cooling water circulation, etc.).
Ultimately, the final upgrading of the
semi-refined products into fuels is re-
quired, which includes cat reforming,
isomerization, fuel blending, hydrocrack-
ing and FCC. In the US, heavy fuel oils
have nearly disappeared; however, some
areas of Eastern Europe still produce fuel
Makeup H2
compressor
Catalyst
addition
H2 heater
Feed
withdrawal
Oil heater
FIG. 4. A schematic of a proprietary ebullated-bed process technology.c
oils, such as bunker or No. 6 fuel oil, for
power plants and fuel for ships.
FULY INTEGRATED
UPGRADING REFINERY
A block flow diagram of a fully inte-
grated refinery is shown in FIG. 5. The vac-
uum unit produces light vacuum gasoil
and heavy-vacuum gasoil feedstocks for
the hydrocracker and FCCU, respectively.
The delayed coker upgrades the vacuum
bottoms to produce light-coker gasoil and
heavy-coker gasoil for the hydrocracker
and FCCU. These units ultimately feed
the final upgrading units to produce low-
sulfur gasoline, jet fuel and ULSD.
Economic evaluation. Simple, before-
tax payout is the means for screening
Reactors HP separator HP separator
high-temperature medium-temperature
Recycle HP separator
compressor low-temperature Purge
Offgas
H2-rich gas
Catalyst
Low-pressure
separator
Products

TABLE 1. Comparison of upgrading technologies

High crude Conversion to Commercial Exposure to fuel oil
Affordability flexibility transport fuels track record or niche market
Delayed coking Good Good Good Good No, petcoke market is liquid
Flexicokinga
Neutral Good Good Neutral No, power
SDA + DAO hydrocracking Excellent Neutral Good Good Yes, asphalt to fuel oil/bitumen
Ebullated-bed residue Neutral Neutral Good Good Yes, unconverted material
hydrocracking to fuel oil
Ebullated-bed residue Disadvantaged Good Excellent Disadvantaged Yes, bleed
hydrocracking + SDA
Gasification Disadvantaged Good Disadvantaged Good No
Slurry-phase residue Disadvantaged Good Excellent Disadvantaged Yes, bleed
hydrocracking

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 43

 Clean Fuels

Fuel gas Refinery fuel products that are produced by the hydro-
Amine treating
processing processes. Carbon rejection
Claus sulfur Sulfur
technologies generally decrease the vol-
Other gases LPG plant
Gas processing Merox treaters ume of valuable products, since carbon
Gas Butanes H2S from sour rejection reduces the net volume of the
Gas H2 Gas H2 water stripper final products.
Light
naphtha Isomerization Isomerate A detailed comparison of upgrading
Hydrotreater technologies is summarized in TABLE 2.
plant
Gas H2 Gas H2 A complete evaluation is needed to com-
Heavy naphtha Catalytic Reformate pare the various technologies. The nec-
Atmospheric distillation

Hydrotreater reformer essary steps to select the best upgrading

Jet fuel Jet fuel and/ technology include:
kerosine Gas H2
Crude oil or kerosine
Merox treaters • Developing yields of the individual

Gasoline blending pool

Gas H2 Hydrocracked gasoline process technologies in-house,
Hydrocracker or by using a licensor.
Diesel oil Diesel oil Diesel oil
Hydrotreater • Combining the upgrading
Gas
technologies into the existing
I-butane
Atmospheric Heavy vacuum Alkylation
Alkylate refinery using a block flow
gasoil gasoil Butenes pentanes diagram simulator.
Gas Gas H2
Evacuated
Gas H2 • Determining the debottlenecking
Atmospheric bottoms

non condensibles Naphtha FCC gasoline requirements of the existing units.

Hydrotreater
Light FCC feed • Determining the incremental
FCC

vacuum hydrotreater modifications to offsite units,

gasoil FCC gasoil Fuel oil
Gas which can often be more than
distillation

50% of the onsite units.

Vacuum

Heavy vacuum Coker naphtha (after

gasoil hydrotreating and reforming) • Determining the operating costs,
including utilities, catalyst
Delayed coker

H2S to sulfur plant

Coker gasoil and chemicals, maintenance,
Vacuum residuum Sour waters operations and labor.
• Evaluating whether these
steam stripper
Sour water

Asphalt
blowing
Asphalt Petroleum coke modifications can be performed
Air Steam during various phases.
• Finished products are shown in blue CO2 Stripped water • Carrying out evaluations that
• Sour waters are derived from various distillation tower H2
reflux drums in the refinery Natural gas can usually be completed on
• The “other gases” entering the gas processing unit Steam Hydrogen several levels, including front-
include all the gas streams from the various process units synthesis
end loading (FEL)-0 (block
FIG. 5. A block flow diagram of a fully integrated refinery. flow diagrams and using cost vs.
capacity curves for economics);
FEL-1, which requires enough
various processing technologies early in upgrading of the products rather than process engineering to obtain
the comparison stage of technology se- the final products, which are a blend equipment pricing and conduct
lection. Incremental revenues are divided of existing and new operations. These a factor estimate; and takeoff
into the incremental capital cost to deter- revenues are based on in-house price grade-type estimates using cost
mine the number of years to payout for values of the upgraded streams. When estimating software.
each option. To determine the payout the streams leave the project perimeter, • Conducting blending calculations,
of a processing unit, subtract the unit’s the economics can be greatly simpli- sulfur balances and H2 balances
feed costs from the net product revenues fied. Using inter-refinery costs for feeds to discover the effect on the
to determine the net product revenues. and products allows the evaluation to be support units and utilities.
Then, the incremental cost of utilities, made on a net upgrade basis and not on • Ranking the various options and
labor, catalyst and maintenance are sub- the whole refinery. determining which technologies
tracted to determine net revenues. best meet the refinery’s capital
Conducting the evaluation in this Takeaways. Bottom-of-the-barrel up- cost money available.
manner avoids getting into the econom- grading costs can run in the billions of
ics of the existing units. If the streams dollars. Past evaluations have shown REFERENCES
entering the new project perimeter are that the higher cost of the H2 addition 1
Elshout, R. V. and C. S. Bains, “USA motor fuels sul-
considered as feedstocks, and the semi- technologies, when combined with car- fur levels: Moving up a tier—Part 1:Gasoline sulfur,”
Hydrocarbon Engineering, 2005.
refined products leaving the “new proj- bon rejection technologies, can show 2
Elshout, R. V. and C. S. Bains, “Moving Up a
ect” area are considered products, then robust payouts. This is primarily due to Tier—Part 2:Ultra-low sulfur diesel,“ Hydrocarbon
the economics can be determined on the the increased volumes of more valuable Engineering, 2005.

44 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 Clean Fuels

TABLE 2. A detailed summary comparing multiple upgrading technologies

General product Feed/product
Process Type Catalyst produced treating requirement Conversion Features
Delayed coking Semi-batch No Light gas, naphtha, Demetallization of 54.76% • Low capital cost and feed
thermal light gasoil, the feed, product flexibility
cracking heavy gasoil treatment by • Represents 33% of installed
hydrodesulfurization upgrading plants in the world
(HDS), olefin/
• Creates industrial coke
aromatic saturation
as a byproduct
Fluid coking Continuous No Light gas, naphtha, Demetallization of 54.76% • Low capital cost and
thermal light gasoil, the feed, product feed flexibility
cracking heavy gasoil treatment by HDS, • Represents 33% of installed
olefin/aromatic upgrading plants in the world
saturation
• Creates industrial coke
as a byproduct
SDA Solvent No DAO No 35.75% • Complete asphaltenic
separation
Visbreaker Mild thermal No Light gas, naphtha, No 4%–30% • Represents 26% of installed
cracking gasoil upgrading plants in the world
• Creates fuel oil as a byproduct
Hydrovisbreaker Mild thermal No Light gas, naphtha, No 44%–74% • Lower coke formation
cracking gasoil • More stable products than
the conventional visbreaker
• Creates fuel oil as a byproduct
High-conversion Thermal No Light gas, gasoline, Product treatment 30%–60% • Relative simplicity
soaker cracking cracking middle distillates by HDS • Low-H2 consumption
(HSC)
Heavy-oil Catalytic Regenerable Light gas, gasoline, Demetallization of the – –
cat cracking cracking light- and heavy- feed, product treatment
cycle oil by HDS, olefin/aromatic
saturation
RFCC Catalytic Regenerable Light gas, diesel, Hydrotreating of 63%–95% • Represents 24% of installed
cracking gasoline, fuel oil the feed, olefin/ upgrading plants in the world
aromatic saturation • Creates olefins as a byproduct
• Capable to 12 ppm
metal-tolerable catalyst and
7% Concarbon tolerable
H-oil Catalytic in Regenerable Light gas, naphtha, Amine treating – • High-pressure process
the presence kerosine, diesel, of the product
of H2 vacuum gasoil, fuel oil
Ebullated-bed Catalytic in Regenerable Light gas, naphtha, Amine treating – • Light-pressure process
technologyc the presence kerosine, diesel, of the product
of H2 vacuum gasoil, fuel oil
Heavy-residue Catalytic in Regenerable Light gas, naphtha, Amine treating 95% • Low capital cost and feed
hydroconversion the presence kerosine, diesel of the product flexibility
of H2 • Complete elimination
of heavy metals
• Low-pressure process
• Catalyst recovery of more
than 95%

NOTES
a
Flexicoking is a proprietary resid upgrading
technology from ExxonMobil.
b
Refers to Honeywell UOP’s RFCC process.
c
Refers to CB&I’s LC-Fining technology.
RAY ELSHOUT has 30 yr of process and project
engineering experience with Fluor, Jacobs and Unocal.
He is a consultant with Energy Systems Engineering, and
his primary experience is in process design, including
retrofits, revamps and expansions. Mr. Elshout holds
BS and MS degrees from the University of Michigan.
JOHN BAILEY graduated from the University of
Alberta with a BS degree in chemical engineering.
He worked for Fluor in their research and
development department, developing the company’s
solvent process and gas treating applications.
He then worked for Worley Parsons as a supervising
process engineer specializing in gas treating
and petroleum refining.
LYNN BROWN has 40 yr of operations and
design experience in refining, petrochemicals,
gas processing and production at Worley Parsons,
Unocal, Jacobs and Fluor. Her primary expertise
is in operations, instrumentation reliability, and
design and revamp of crude units, desulfurizers
and distillation systems.
PETER NICK has 30 yr of simulation and
process design experience at refineries and
petrochemical plants. His primary expertise is in
process simulation and modeling of refinery
process units, with positions at Unocal, Phillips 66,
Fluor and Worley Parsons. He is also the author
of several publications in process design methods.

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 45

See What’s Next in Get ready to achieve more from challenging
feeds. Join us at AFPM or contact Honeywell

Hydroprocessing UOP for details.

Learn more at www.uop.com.

Select 71 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

© 2018 Honeywell International. All rights reserved.


Combating normalization of deviance
within your organization
NASA’s 1986 Space Shuttle Chal-
lenger disaster investigation brought the
term “normalization of deviance” into
the spotlight. What is normalization of
deviance (NoD)? The formal definition
is a long-term phenomenon in which a
lower standard of safety is accepted until
that lower standard becomes accepted as
the norm. Another way to look at it is ac-
cepting small incremental deviations that
seem harmless at the time they occur, but
their cumulative effects result in a signifi-
cant negative outcome.
To improve our resistance to falling
victim to this dangerous impediment, we
must be mindful of seven major devia-
tions of NoD, which we hardheartedly call
the “Seven Deadly Sins,” which are not to
be confused with the Seven Deadly Sins of
religious origin. However, one thing that
they all have in common is that they are all
rooted deeply in human behavior.
Together, my colleague and I represent
a combined experience of more than 50
yr in the manufacturing and heavy in-
dustrial construction industries. We have
conducted or reviewed thousands of in-
vestigations. With some effort, we were
able to distinguish numerous human
performance shortfalls and narrow them
down to the top seven categories we see
most often. Those categories, in no sig-
nificant order, are:
• Uniformity in message
• Hazard awareness
• Operating limits
• Improvisation
• Casual compliance
• Tribal knowledge
• Transparency.
The following will provide some defi-
nition around these “Seven Deadly Sins”
Environment
and Safety
J. CAUDILL, Contributing Writer,
Houston, Texas
and some suggested solutions to identify
and combat them.
“Blame the process, not the worker,” is
a noble endeavor. Overzealous supervisors
and managers often unknowingly practice
NoD following an incident when the ac-
tions of individuals become the focus of
attention. If it were only that easy to just
blame someone, then surely that will fix the
problem. In fact, blame is institutionalized
in many organizations and is disguised as
leading with a firm hand or by the person-
ality and training of the individuals chosen
to supervise others. What is meant by lead-
ing with a firm hand? A supervisor lead-
ing with a “firm hand” can be recognized
by a “take charge” attitude. Their initial
response to news of an incident is usually,
“I’m going to get to the bottom of this!”
This counterfeit leadership style, in which
management is confused with leadership, is
well-defined in several publications. Lead-
ing by authoritative control rather than by
influence defines this management type.
Management style has a lot to do with cul-
tural buy-in in the work place.
Uniformity in message. Controlling the
message from the bottom of a company to
the top and back down again is a daunt-
ing challenge. This is a huge part of every
company’s war on culture in combating
NoD. Many companies spend a great
deal of time on training and programs
designed to make safety, particularly pro-
cess safety, everyone’s business. This mes-
sage is made ineffective by any manager
that demonstrates a cavalier attitude, the
impact of which shows up in the bottom
line. The intention of this message can
be undermined by a single manager who
hinders the progress of a positive culture,
contributing to NoD. Furthermore, it sub-
jugates the idea of leading by example by
saying one thing and doing another. An
example of this is holding the workforce
to higher standards than management is
willing (or able) to demonstrate.
Potential solutions. When conduct-
ing investigation interviews, ask frontline
workers and field supervisors cultural
questions around uniformity in message.
Try to determine if they understand the
company’s personnel and process safety
objectives that have been conveyed by top
management. This goes beyond adher-
ence to policy. Look for disconnects be-
tween the message that is being conveyed
between frontline supervisors and their
field hands, frontline supervision and
contractors, and contractor supervision
to contractor field hands.
Companies and plant management
must be culturally mature enough to un-
derstand the value in making additional
inquiries. The goal is not to call out a man-
ager, but rather to simply provide valuable
feedback to the manager to allow them to
begin the process of professional mentor-
ing when occasions arise. This also keeps
top management in the loop to determine
if they have the same message penetrating
through every level of the organization.
Over time, a history will emerge that can
be woven into investigation reports that
tactfully point to disconnects between the
safety goals of top management and execu-
tion and understanding at the field level.
Other potential avenues include con-
ducting anonymous cultural surveys
through a third-party vendor. One of the
pitfalls many companies find in their au-
dit programs is the ability to determine
cultural issues. We audit for compliance
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 47
 Environment and Safety
against a standard or practice, and build-
ing some cultural questions into these au-
dits is another avenue to pursue. Another
worthwhile endeavor is to determine if a
company demonstrates the qualities of a
“failure-restrictive” or “failure-permissive”
organization.1 This assessment can equip
you to take positive steps to correct any de-
ficiencies before a major accident occurs.
Hazard awareness. Does your work-
force maintain a sense of vulnerability2
and have tools in place to assess hazards?
This is a double-edged sword, since haz-
ard awareness must contain recognition
of both personnel safety and process safe-
ty hazards. This NoD is entwined with
“uniformity in message,” as well as several
other NoDs. The message must be that
all process and personnel safety hazards
will be assessed before beginning work. A
lack of this sense of vulnerability can have
catastrophic effects on an organization,
which cannot afford to ignore having a ro-
bust hazard awareness program. Compli-
ance indicators can be gained through the
investigation process by asking appropri-
ate questions during interviews.
Potential solutions. Training the
workforce, at every level, to recognize
and understand both personnel and pro-
cess safety hazards is imperative. Further-
more, providing empowerment to stop
unsafe acts is essential for a successful
program. This includes providing robust
systems for reporting and analyzing near
misses and lower-level incidents. Every
worker should be able to recite, without
hesitation, a methodology for identifying
and mitigating hazards for every task per-
formed. This includes both in-house and
contractor resources and their field man-
agement. Several companies offer training
that can help prevent a cavalier manager,
supervisor, foreman or employee from
hindering the process. Compliance indi-
cators can again be gained through the in-
vestigation process by asking appropriate
questions during interviews.
Three key concepts for this program
to be successful are engaging, exciting and
empowering your workforce. Referring
back to “uniformity in message,” everyone
should be on the same page when assess-
ing hazards, and using the same tools.
Operating limits. Does your organiza-
tion have process controls in place that
protect it from reaching not-to-exceed
48 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
alarms, relief activations, emergency shut-
downs and safety instrumented system
activations? Furthermore, when limits
are exceeded, are they thoroughly inves-
tigated and resolved? Setting limits that
place the process at the very edge of ac-
tivating alarms and reliefs leaves minimal
response times with no wiggle room for
operations to ensure an appropriate, pro-
tective response. This supports NoD.
Potential solutions. One solution is
to track low-level process safety events,
such as demands on safety systems and
safe operating limits. Personnel should
utilize these indicators in deep dive in-
vestigations where multiple incidents
are grouped and examined for patterns
in procedural, mechanical, maintenance,
operational, instrumentation and hu-
man performance deviations. Personnel
should review alarms regularly with the
operations and technical services groups,
with board operators to understand
causes and make adjustments to limits
and procedures to ensure that an exceed-
ance is not accepted as routine.
Some of the common responses to
look for during interviews with front line
operations are:
• “That happens every time we
start up.”
• “It’s no big deal.”
• “We just ignore it.”
• “That indicator malfunctions,
so we don’t trust it.”
• “We don’t know what that alarm
is for, so we just acknowledge it
and move on like we always have.”
Improvisation. Does your workforce
practice have the right person, with the
right training, at the right location, with
the right tools and the right work package
and authorization to proceed? A boister-
ous workforce is flirting with a potentially
high consequence event without realizing
it. Maintaining a sense of vulnerability
and avoiding shortcuts must become in-
stinctive, and has to be practiced at all lev-
els of the organization. Look for impro-
visation with tools, shortcuts, skipping
steps, etc. Improper work packages, tools
or directions provided to begin work are
never a valid excuse to improvise with an
unauthorized substitution.
Potential solutions. During the in-
vestigation process, look for potential
deviations with tools, work direction and
training. Modifying or creating makeshift
tools, modifying lifting and rigging, ig-
noring work packages, working outside
the scope, and beginning work without
authorization or management of change
in place are all areas of potential recom-
mendations. Having robust field audits on
work as it is performed, encouraging the
reporting of all incidents and near misses,
inspecting tools, having a robust behav-
ior-based safety program lead, and having
the support of the hourly workforce are
all areas to consider. In addition, analyz-
ing near-miss and low-consequence inves-
tigations through deep dive assessments
can provide additional corrective actions
in combatting improvisation.
Casual compliance. Does your work-
force comply with policies and follow
procedures all the time, or only when
they know they are being watched? Do
you have systems in place to audit for
compliance? Do you audit completed
procedures looking for steps out of se-
quence, incorrect language or set points,
and deviations? Do you always check for
adherence to policies and procedures dur-
ing the investigation process?
Potential solutions. An inaccurate or
incorrect procedure should be marked,
reviewed by the right people and resolved
immediately. The procedure must then
be updated for future acceptable use.
Having robust investigations, deep dive
assessments, audits and procedure review
committees will provide a greater chance
of avoiding casual compliance. Utilize
these areas to seek out NoD and correct
it. Finding issues during an audit is pro-
active and can prevent an incident from
occurring, but writing recommendations
for causal factors in an investigation is re-
active and places you in the caboose of the
NoD train. Your objective is to get in front
of the hazard before an incident investiga-
tion is necessary.
Tribal knowledge. Do certain people
have the skills to make things work when
others cannot seem to get it right, even
when carefully following procedures?
This NoD can be detected when certain
statements are expressed during an inter-
view following an incident. Examples of
these statements include:
• “Frank is the only one that can
get that pump primed. We had
to call in Sam because we couldn’t
get the unit started.”
 Environment and Safety

• “Hank is the only one that heater
loves. It trips when anyone else
tries to operate it.”
Potential solutions. During the inves-
tigation process, look for expressions of
tribal knowledge. Opportunities to capture
and document what a particular person
does differently can be both tribal knowl-
edge and deviation from a prescribed pro-
cedure. In either case, job shadowing and
capturing how a particular person does
something that “no one else can do” are
low hanging fruit to be cultivated. A pro-
cedure or guidance should be prescriptive
enough that it is repeatable by everyone
on the unit. However, the style by which
certain individuals are able to successfully
operate temperamental processes must be
safe and in no way depends on improvisa-
tion that defeats a system’s design basis.
Transparency. Does your organization
share lessons from investigations with the
workforce, or are these protected under a
“need to know basis” to avoid any poten-
tially embarrassing or legal situation? Shar-
ing results from audits and lessons learned
with all levels of the workforce improves
everyone’s attitude. Remember, it is good
to learn from your mistakes, but less pain-
ful to learn from the mistakes of others.
Potential solutions. Creating lessons
learned and sharing incident investiga-
tions, audit findings and resolutions allow
everyone to learn together. Company per-
sonnel should have open discussions dur-
ing safety and tool box meetings and use
these opportunities to demonstrate uni-
formity in message. These are opportuni-
ties to reinforce what best practices look
like, and to combat multiple NoDs.
This work has shared a few NoDs that
might be observed in your own organiza-
tion. Since each site is different and oper-
ates at a different level of cultural maturity,
they are not meant to be all-inclusive and
may or may not represent your most prev-
alent NoD groups. Therefore, look inside
your organization to establish your most
prevalent NoD groups. The references cit-
ied in this article can help you identify and
build your own programs. Successful im-
plementation of any NoD improvement
plan requires having management and the
workforce onboard. Your audit and inves-
tigation processes will provide the data
you need to identify and demonstrate im-
provement in reducing NoD in your own
organization.
LITERATURE CITED
1
Bloch, K., Rethinking Bhopal, A Definitive Guide to
Investigating, Preventing, and Learning from Industrial
Disasters, Elsevier Books, 2016.
2
Walter, R., CCPS-AICHE, Recognizing and
Responding to Normalization of Deviance, Wiley
Books, 2018.
JEFF CAUDILL is a Process Safety
Supervisor in the downstream oil
and gas industry. He has more than
26 yr of combined experience in
maintenance, design engineering,
process safety, construction and
technical roles. He specializes in
industrial incident investigation and failure analysis.
Mr. Caudill has had success with published articles in
professional magazines and has contributed to books
in the field of process safety. He participates with
AFPM, API, ASCE and AIChE to promote process
safety related issues within the chemical and refining
manufacturing industries. He graduated with honors
from Morehead State University with a BS degree in
industrial technology. He earned a second BS degree
in 1994 in civil engineering, with an emphasis in
environmental design, from the University of Kentucky.

AMERICAS
September 25–26, 2018 | Houston, Texas | HPIRPC.com/Americas

Hydrocarbon Processing’s International Refining and Petrochemical Submit Abstracts

Conference will return to Houston in September 2018. This two-day
conference will explore the challenges, opportunities and latest For more information, contact:
technological developments in the HPI. Hortensia “Tish” Barroso,
In addition to networking with colleagues from across the Americas, Business Development Manager,
delegates will hear from executives and engineers from leading refining Hortensia.Barroso@GulfPub.com
and petrochemical companies.
ORGANIZED BY:
Sponsorship opportunities are available!

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 49

 REAL-TIME LNG DATA
Any project. Any time. Any place.
The Energy Web Atlas is a comprehensive dataset covering the global LNG market.
Updated in real time, the web-based platform enables users to access
worldwide facility and project data.

Real-time Data Comprehensive Functionality

The platform’s mapping, search and query tools allow users Built for ease of use, the Energy Web Atlas facilitates
to interrogate real-time facility and project data and find the access to the most relevant data available, with various
information needed for major decisions. Data points include: functionalities including:

• Owner/Operator • LNG shipping/vessel • Custom annotation, • Data exports

information reporting and graphing
• Project status • Production quality maps,
• Shareholder data • Interactive data filtering PDF exports
• Project storage and
capacity • Process method • Layer/attribute access • Interactive charts/statistics
and modification

Additional Maps/Data Questions and More Info

A geospatial dataset covering US gas processing plants AMERICAS: Brian Holsinger, +1 (713) 520-4407
is also available. or Brian.Holsinger@EnergyWebAtlas.com

REST OF WORLD: Alastair Noakes, +44 (0) 203 409 2244

or Alastair.Noakes@EnergyWebAtlas.com

D I S C O V E R M O R E AT E N E R G Y W E B AT L A S . C O M
 Project
Management
K. NOÉ, Arcadis, Stuttgart, Germany

Demolition of a refinery—
a site exit with many winners
The demolition of a refinery site is a streamlining process that it viewed as es- to solve with these policies is the overly
complex, large-scale project. Its success sential for its economic survival, thereby high usage of areas to create new settle-
essentially depends on utilizing the cre- securing its position in a highly competi- ment and traffic spaces—the present rate
ation of value potential of the plants and tive market. However, with the decom- is 69 hectares/d (170 acres/d). The fed-
buildings to be demolished, and of the missioning of the Ingolstadt refinery site, eral government’s goal is to reduce this
site, which then becomes available once Bayernoil did not leave behind a brown- figure to 30 hectares/d (74 acres/d) by
again. Supported by a design and con- field. Immediately after the refinery’s de- 2020. Cities and municipalities, in par-
sultancy company, Bayernoil succeeded commissioning, the immense project of ticular, have a great interest in actively
in decommissioning and demolishing its demolition and remediation was begun. assisting with the marketing of decom-
108-hectare (267-acre) refinery site in With this project, Bayernoil fulfilled its missioned production sites to satisfy an
Ingolstadt, Germany, (FIG. 1) without suf- environmental responsibilities. increasing demand for properties for resi-
fering financial or image losses. dential and commercial construction.
Eco-political boundary conditions. For refinery operator Bayernoil, this
A difficult market environment for The federal government in Germany con- was an important aspect of the economic
refineries. For some time, oil refineries tinues to pursue ambitious environmen- feasibility of the demolition and the sub-
in Germany, as well as in other European tal policies. One of the ongoing environ- sequent remediation. The development
countries, have been undergoing struc- mental challenges the government wants scenario that was developed in 2005, 3 yr
tural changes. These changes are due not
only to volatile oil prices and fluctuating
refinery margins, but also to energy pol-
icy discussions regarding the reduction
of carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emissions, with
the long-term goals of exclusively using
renewable energies and abandoning the
use of fossil fuels.
As early as the mid-2000s, these de-
velopments prompted Bayernoil to carry
out its own market research, which pre-
dicted a change in Germany regarding
the requested range of products. Based
on this research, it was forecast that as
early as 2008, it would no longer be eco-
nomically efficient for Bayernoil to con-
tinue the operation of its three refinery
sites in Neustadt, Vohburg and Ingol-
stadt in their existing technical configu-
rations. It was decided to gradually fo-
cus production on the sites in Neustadt
and Vohburg and to decommission the
Ingolstadt site. Like other European
oil companies, Bayernoil implemented
FIG. 1. The Ingolstadt refinery site prior to demolition and remediation. (Photo: Dietmar Strauss)
these strategic measures as part of a
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 51
 Project Management

before the beginning of the decommis-
sioning, envisaged a gradual remediation
and the development of building land
on the 108-hectare (267-acre) site. The
profits from the sale of one area were to
be used for the remediation and building
land development of the site’s next sec-
tion. This made it possible to execute the
demolition at virtually no cost. The size
and traffic connections of the site, which
is located at the southeast edge of the city,
offer an ideal location for different con-
struction projects. For example, when
the city of Ingolstadt urgently needed a
new soccer stadium, a new owner was
quickly found for the first subplot of 20
hectares (49 acres).
Site development and marketing.
In the course of the decommissioning
process and in cooperation with the de-
sign and consultancy company, which
has the required expertise in demolition,
contaminated site investigations and re-
mediation, property development and
marketing, Bayernoil examined different
options for the development and mar-
keting of the former refinery site. How
and when Bayernoil should engage in
the investment in the demolition, reme-
diation and development processes were
evaluated. All legal and technical require-
ments had to be met while striving for an
efficient design of the site exit process.
At the same time, the future owners had
to be provided with flexible uses of the
site. The conversion of the former refin-
ery site, shown in FIG. 2, was performed
in three phases:
1. During the first phase in 2008–
2010, a sports park with a new
stadium for the aspiring Ingolstadt
soccer club was built. Because
the soccer club needed a stadium
suitable for the German premier
league, the Bundesliga, by 2010,
the project was under extreme
time pressure. Within a period of
only 1.5 yr, a large subplot had to
be made ready for development.
In 2008, the demolition of the
existing plants and tanks had
already begun, as well as the
remediation of the 20-hectare
(49-acre) Subplot 1 that was
intended for the construction of
the stadium. During the following
2 yr, work continued on Subplot
2, which was also intended for the
sports park. A right to build on
these areas existed at the time of
marketing. Bayernoil demolished
the site and also performed the
remediation in accordance with
a quickly developed remediation
plan. Bayernoil remained
responsible for the supervision
of groundwater monitoring, parts
of which were to be performed
for an extended time, and also
assumed liability under public
law for the contaminated land.
2. During the second phase,
different scenarios were presented
and discussed regarding the
next subplots, ranging from
renaturation to industrial
area expansion. An urban
development ideas competition
called “EUROPAN” was
initiated by Bayernoil and
the city of Ingolstadt in 2011.
The 51 submitted ideas provided
interesting options for the use
and design of the areas that were
becoming available. The winning
design was used as a basis for
further planning. Between 2011
and 2013, the 9-hectare (22-acre)
Subplot 4 was remediated
and developed into a commercial
area that was then sold to
local companies.
3. The third phase was the largest
part of the development. Subareas
3 and 5, with a combined size
of approximately 75 hectares
(185 acres), were transferred to
a development company that was
planning the construction of an
innovation campus. The site was
sold without an existing right
to build. In coordination with
the competent authorities, the
development company prepared
a legally binding land use plan,
as well as a specially tailored
remediation plan. The company
also performed all required
remediation and underground
demolition measures.

In-depth contaminant investigation.

An essential prerequisite required for ne-
gotiations with potential buyers and for
the submission of applications for the
necessary permits to the competent en-
vironmental and building authorities was
knowing which contaminants were pres-
ent in the soil and groundwater, and how
to remediate these contaminations. In
2007, during ongoing refinery operations,
the design and consultancy company be-
gan investigating the contaminants and
the subsequent extensive environmen-
tal assessments. These works were per-
formed in conjunction with the property
FIG. 2. The site plan of the refinery site with Subplots 1 and 2, the sports park; Subplots 3 and 5, development. As a first step, the consul-
the innovation campus; and Subplot 4, the commercial area.
tancy company primarily investigated the
52 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com

substances and materials that were used
and to what extent, in what processes and
physical states, and in which plants.
Included in the assessment were re-
finery-typical contaminants; auxiliaries
used during refinery operations, such as
catalysts and additives; byproducts of re-
finery processes, such as disulfides; and
herbicides that were used in the areas of
pipeline routes. Proactively included in
the investigations were per- and poly-
fluorinated surfactants that are contained
in special fire extinguishing foams, and
which are increasingly debated as envi-
ronmentally relevant. Known soil con-
taminations and their remediation sta-
tus were also considered. Based on the
results of the research, a classification
of different subareas in accordance with
their contamination and risk potential
was performed to plan and prepare tech-
nical investigation measures.
Systematic soil and groundwater in-
vestigations. The contaminant investi-
gation was followed by both exploratory
and detailed investigations that were per-
formed in 2007 and 2008 in three rounds.
Due to the close proximity of the refinery
to the Danube River, the focus of the in-
vestigations was on the soil-groundwater
exposure pathway. Based on previous
use, an examination grid was developed.
The grid density varied depending on
the contamination and risk potential of
the contaminants. The measurement of
the contaminant load in the groundwater
was performed along transects (vertical
planes at a right angle to the direction of
propagation of the contaminants). In ad-
dition to traditional methods, new and
innovative investigative measures were
also applied, including:
• 750 reconnaissance boreholes
were drilled onsite, 120 with an
expansion for oil-phase examination
• Extraction and analysis of several
thousand soil samples
• Construction of approximately
80 groundwater monitoring wells
• Extraction of 500 groundwater
samples in several sampling rounds
• Approximately 10 chemical
and hydraulic pumping tests
were performed
• Extraction of groundwater samples
at different depths
• Characterization of redox zones;
quantification of the microbial
contaminant decomposition based
on isotope analyses
• Investigations based on direct push
technologies for oil phase detection
(laser inducted fluorescence)
• Analysis of oil types based on gas
chromatography (GC) and mass
spectrometry (MS) screening.
The 3,000 extracted soil and ground-
water samples were analyzed in a labora-
tory for refinery-typical contaminants,
such as petroleum-derived hydrocar-
bons and highly volatile aromatic hy-
drocarbons. Analyses of many different
inorganic and organic substances were
also randomly performed. Indications
of additional substances were also in-
cluded in the investigation, e.g., in areas
where tetrachloroethene or lead tetra-
ethyl had been used. About 20% of the
approximately 800 small boreholes were
converted into temporary monitoring
points to determine whether any floating
oil phase existed.
Efficient soil and groundwater con-
tamination. Based on these extensive
environmental investigations, 50 con-
taminated areas were identified and suit-
able remediation measures were then
selected. Many areas showed increased
concentrations of petroleum-derived hy-
drocarbons in the soil. However, due to
their low solubility, these caused little to
no groundwater contamination. The in-
vestigations also showed an efficient mi-
crobial degradation of the hydrocarbons
in the groundwater. In large areas, moni-
tored natural attenuation—an efficient
approach where organic contaminants
are naturally degraded and continuously
monitored—could be applied. With the
soil-groundwater exposure pathway and
for the protection of the groundwater,
action was required in only 16 areas. In
nine additional areas, groundwater moni-
toring activities were required.
In coordination with authorities, re-
mediation concepts were developed for
identified areas. Remediation targeted
the creation of legal certainty for both
Bayernoil and subsequent users at op-
timized financial expenditure and or-
ganizational effort. After different tests
performed by the consultancy company,
excavation, disposal and soil vapor ex-
traction proved to be the most efficient
remediation measures for the unsaturat-
ed soil zone (soil-groundwater exposure
Project Management
path). In most areas, the pump-and-treat
method was preferred for the saturated
soil zone. When this method is applied,
groundwater is pumped up, treated on-
site and then discharged back into the
soil zone. In areas where mobilizing oil
phase was detected, a more complex pro-
cedure was required. The unsaturated
soil zone had to be removed and dis-
posed of. The oil phase on the exposed
groundwater surface was skimmed off
and also disposed of.
In Subareas 1, 2 and 4 (FIG. 2), where
the sports park—including the soccer
stadium and a commercial park—were
to be built, excavation and disposal were
applied to remove identified contami-
nations with hydrocarbons. As desired
by the buyers, the areas were thereby
quickly ready for new development. In
accordance with the remediation plan,
the soil contaminations in the saturated
soil zone were remediated by applying
the pump-and-treat method. Following
the remediation, groundwater monitor-
ing was installed to gauge the success of
the remediation.
In Subareas 3 and 5 (FIG. 2), the extrac-
tion of soil vapor was applied for reme-
diation in the unsaturated soil zone. The
pump-and-treat method was also used in
the saturated soil zone to reduce the de-
termined contaminations with mobilizing
hydrocarbons. As agreed with the pur-
chasing company, which wanted to inde-
pendently perform the remediation of the
contaminations depending on the subse-
quent use, these areas were handed over by
Bayernoil in a partially remediated state.
Carefully prepared dismantling. The
dismantling of the existing buildings and
plants was the final step in completing
this mega-site exit project, and it was per-
formed simultaneously with the property
development and the soil and ground-
water remediation. A significant portion
of the plant was contaminated with sub-
stances from refinery operations, so the
dismantling had to be executed so that no
present or future hazards could arise. Eco-
nomically, it was very important to prede-
termine the value of the plant components
to be dismantled, and to prepare their
marketing to yield proceeds to finance
the remediation measures. The extensive
stock-taking of the plants and installations
to be demolished (FIG. 3), which was sup-
ported by applying geo-radar from the air
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 53
 Project Management
to enable quantifications as precise as pos-
sible, showed the following results:
• Approximately 3,500 individual
installations at different levels
of height and in complex
configurations, partly on
concrete foundations and
supported by steel beam structures
• Sixty floating and/or roofed-over
tanks (FIG. 4) with capacities of
1,000 m3–115,000 m³, partially
FIG. 3. An aerial photograph of the Ingolstadt refinery before decommissioning.
(Photo: Arcadis/Horst Schalles)
FIG. 4. Creation of value source: The storage tanks that occupied three quarters
of the refinery site yielded proceeds, as they were sold as high-quality scrap steel.
(Photo: Arcadis/Horst Schalles)
54 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
constructed with double walls,
including tank screed, tank buffer
and ring walls
• About 140 km of above-ground
pipelines with different pipe
diameters and wall thicknesses,
shown in FIG. 5, as well as 20 km
of underground pipelines,
including the respective shaft
systems, drainage installations
and shoring elements
• 17 km of tracks
• Two 120-m high chimney stacks
• Two cooling towers
• One gas flare.
To conduct an inventory, the consul-
tancy company staff used Bayernoil data
banks and archives, viewed plans, draw-
ings and reports on buildings, refinery
plants and media, and also prepared
and evaluated these documents. This
research was supplemented by employee
interviews, site visits and inspections of
the buildings and plants, enabling the
detection of critical dismantling areas.
The thorough research also improved
the risk assessment of the works to be
performed during the dismantling pro-
cess. For example, separate points of
contamination were identified to pre-
vent the spreading of contaminants dur-
ing the dismantling process.
Organized dismantling. The disman-
tling (FIG. 6) was conducted in defined
segments while considering existing plant
locations, pipeline bridge routes and op-
erating roads. To ensure a high standard
of occupational health and safety, only
three segments were worked on simul-
taneously. In areas where hazardous sub-
stances such as asbestos, artificial mineral
fibers, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
and polychlorinated biphenyls had been
identified, contaminant-specific decon-
tamination measures were performed
prior to the actual dismantling.
Initially, the tracks and heavy fuel oil
tanks were dismantled. The dismantling
works were then gradually extended to
the entire tank farm, the contractor stor-
age facilities, the processing plants and
the wastewater treatment plant. The bal-
last contaminated with herbicides that
required removal during the dismantling
of the 17 km of railway tracks was divided
into two fractions by using sieves. The
disposal costs could thereby be reduced,
as only the fine-grained ballast was con-
taminated with the herbicide glyphosate.
Before the dismantling, the residual
contents of the oil tanks were removed.
The oil tanks were then cut open in slices,
dismantled with the help of cable excava-
tors, further dismantled on the ground
and then transported out for recycling.
The dismantling of apparatuses, pipelines
and supporting structures consisting of
steel beams and columns was executed in
sections by applying suitable cold separa-
 Project Management

tion procedures, as almost no aerosols ac- initiative to sell a complete plant to one molished concrete directly onsite. The
crue during these cutting processes. investor fell through at the last minute disposal costs for this demolition materi-
Apparatuses and pipelines had to be at the onset of the banking crisis. How- al were saved when it was used for ground
emptied and cleaned before their disman- ever, this critical phase of the project was levelling purposes during the construc-
tling, and any potential existing hydrocar- overcome. The plants were dismantled in tion of the soccer stadium.
bon-containing soiling and contamina- a proven way, materials were separated
tions had to be removed on areas of the and cleaned, and steel was sold as scrap, Important factors for success. For
process field permitted for these purpos- generating corresponding proceeds. Cost both Bayernoil and the consultancy
es, or a washing area on the refinery site advantages were also created by enabling company, which was charged with the
that was approved for this purpose. the reuse of more than 10,000 m³ of de- dismantling, remediation and property
Those apparatuses or pipelines in
contact with water-polluting substances
during their operation were inspected by
experts of the Technischer Überwachun-
gsverein (TÜV)—German businesses
that provide inspection and product cer-
tification services—and refinery officials
regarding their state of cleaning. The
water used for cleaning was discharged
via a special wastewater system for oil-
containing substances into the wastewa-
ter treatment plant. Heat-resistant brick-
work of apparatuses, kilns and flue gas
ducts with a buildup of coke, sulfur and
catalyst dust were disposed of separately.
The remaining mineral building struc-
tures were demolished. The demolition
of the two chimney stacks of the refinery,
which were visible from afar, attracted
much public and media attention. Sev-
eral thousand interested citizens and ap-
proximately 1,000 invited guests watched
the demolition of the chimneys (FIG. 7),
which were accurately demolished by us-
ing 55 kg of explosives. FIG. 5. 140 km of above-ground and 20 km of underground pipelines—among these were
fire extinguishing pipes made of asbestos cement—including the respective shaft systems.
(Photo: Arcadis)
Optimized creation of value. A re-
mediation and dismantling of this scale
costs a significant amount of money.
Apart from the proceeds from property
development, the creation of value by
processing and recycling residual build-
ing materials, machinery and plants was
an indispensable liquidity contribution
to execute the decommissioning and dis-
mantling of the refinery plants at virtu-
ally no cost. A total of 45,000 t (metric
tons) of steel scrap comprised the largest
asset of the dismantling material capi-
talization. Steel used in the oil industry
is very high-quality, and therefore in
high demand as a secondary raw mate-
rial. Because of the highly volatile price
movements for steel scrap on the world
market, the correct timing of the sale was
absolutely crucial for the profitability of
the entire conversion project.
Not everything envisaged during the
FIG. 6. Heavy equipment for the demolition of the refinery plants. (Photo: Dietmar Strauss)
value creation plans came to pass. The
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 55
 Project Management
development, the dismantling and revi-
talization of the refinery site was consid-
ered a successful project. Within a period
of only 8 yr after the decommissioning,
the entire site could be sold. Bayernoil
was able to almost finance decommis-
sioning, dismantling, remediation and
building preparation measures from the
proceeds of the sale. A decisive factor
was that this highly complex conversion
project was finalized with such positive
results by allowing sufficient time for
planning. Bayernoil began to think about
reasonable future uses of the site 3 yr be-
FIG. 7. Two 120-m high chimney stacks were demolished and removed. (Photo: Dietmar Strauss)
FIG. 8. An aerial photograph of the refinery site after the building land development
and with the new soccer stadium. (Photo: Arcadis/Horst Schalles)
56 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
fore the decommissioning of the refin-
ery. Using the expertise of experienced
employees, this provided sufficient time
to gather all of the necessary information
and to investigate the site in detail.
Utilizing third-party expertise from
the beginning was also a major advan-
tage. At a very early stage of the project,
the consultancy company was able to
apply an integrative approach to analyze
and assess the value potential creation
and investment risks of the revitalization
of the refinery site. Throughout the pro-
cess, Bayernoil maintained a clear view
of the expected proceeds and controlled
the required investments.
As part of this proactive project man-
agement, risks were minimized and the
creation of value was optimized. Short
decision-making paths were decisive for
a steady project course. The consultan-
cy company directly coordinated deci-
sions regarding the remediation strategy
and the development and marketing of
the property with Bayernoil manage-
ment and the shareholders. High trans-
parency and proactive public relations
work contributed to the success of the
project. Above all, the early and close
contact with the city of Ingolstadt and
the competent and administrative au-
thorities resulted in broad acceptance
and trusting cooperation.
Takeaways. With this conversion proj-
ect, Bayernoil fulfilled its entrepreneurial
responsibility in many ways:
• Ecologically, by remediating
developed and built-upon areas
and preparing them for reuse
• Socially, by upgrading
a municipal area
• Economically, by creating
optimum value.
Bayernoil can now concentrate on the
operation of its two remaining refiner-
ies in the region. The city of Ingolstadt
has received much needed space for
trade, industry, sports and nature with-
out encroaching on existing natural areas
(FIG. 8), and a large industrial company
received important, urgently needed ar-
eas for expansion. Bayernoil ended one
industrial era in the region, but created
optimum space for new and interesting
developments.
DR. KARL NOÉ is Director Environment Europe
Central for Arcadis, and has 30 yr of experience in
environmental and industrial project management.
He has managed and performed large scale
remediation and demolition projects at more than
50 industrial sites. Sitework has included design and
management of soil and groundwater remediation,
deactivation, decommissioning, decontamination and
demolition of buildings and industrial plants, as well
as negotiations with the authorities for reasonable
remediation technique and targets. Projects were
performed for industrial facilities in the metal
processing, automotive and chemical/pharmaceutical
industries, as well as for oil refineries and power plants.
Dr. Noé is a member of the Chamber of Engineers
of the state of Baden-Württemberg, the Association
of German Geologists (BDG), the Engineering
Technology Association for Contaminated Sites
(ITVA), and is the Chairman of the Contaminated
Site Forum Baden-Württemberg.

Dynamic simulation of integrated syngas, O2 and
steam networks for a gasification complex—Part 2
Reliance Industries Ltd. (RIL) operates the world’s largest
refinery complex, with a combined crude processing capacity
of 1.24 MMbpd that is split between two refineries: a Domes-
tic Tariff Area (DTA) refinery and a Special Economic Zone
(SEZ) refinery in Jamnagar, India.
RIL is constructing a gasification project in Jamnagar to pro-
duce syngas, to supply feeds for hydrogen (H2 ) production, for
power and steam, and for synthetic natural gas (SNG) for process
heaters. Gasification generates syngas from petcoke, to satisfy
the Jamnagar refinery complex’s energy demand, on a competi-
tive and cost-effective basis, compared to LNG imports. The gas-
ification complex consists of various process plants and units: air
separation unit (ASU), gasification,a CO shift, low-temperature
heat recovery (LHTR), acid gas recovery (AGR), pressure swing
adsorption (PSA) and SNG, all licensed by different companies.
Dynamic simulation helps in verifying control strategies
and testing before plant commissioning and startup, as well as
in understanding plant dynamics for identified upset scenarios.
As this complex will be integrated into the existing refineries,
it is imperative to study the dynamics of the complete plant to
ensure continuous product supply.
Part 1 of this article discussed a gasification complex over-
view and dynamic simulation base mod-
el building, as well as the gasifier trip up- ASUs
set scenarios and their effect on priority
H2 product and other interactions in an
integrated environment. The continu-
ation of that article here will focus on
O2 backup
the remaining identified upset scenarios
(such as ASU and superheater trip), and
their effects on the interactions among
syngas, oxygen (O2 ) and steam networks
in an integrated DTA and SEZ gasifica- Liquid O2
tion complex.
ASU trip. In the base case, a certain
FIG. 12. O2 header configuration from ASUs to gasifiers.
number of gasifiers were running in the
Process
Optimization
V. DADHICH, N. KARVEKAR and T. MATHEW,
Reliance Technology Group, Reliance Industries Ltd.,
Mumbai, Maharashtra, India; and G. BHATTAD,
M. SAXENA and P. KODOLIKAR, Advanced
Solutions, Honeywell Automation India Ltd.,
Pune, Maharashtra, India
DTA and in the SEZ. The O2 to these gasifiers was supplied
from multiple ASUs.
The high-pressure (HP) gaseous O2 from multiple ASUs in
the DTA was supplied to one common header, which is also
connected with the SEZ. In the case of an ASU trip, a backup
O2 system vaporizes the liquid O2 from the storage tank and
supplies the HP O2 to the common header. The configuration
is shown in FIG. 12.
In the case of an ASU trip, the O2 supply is reduced. To
avoid gasifier capacity reduction or one or more gasifier trips,
the backup O2 is activated by an ASU trip signal, as well as by
low header pressure.
With one DTA ASU trip, the cause and effect matrix sends a
signal to start the DTA O2 backup system. However, no signal
for the SEZ backup system is in place. In case the DTA backup
system does not come online, the SEZ backup system will start
only on low pressure, or 90% of steady-state pressure, as per the
licensor design. To determine the pressure at which the SEZ
backup should start (in the event that the DTA backup system
does not start), a dynamic scenario was created in which the
SEZ backup system was triggered at 95%, 97% and 100% of the
steady-state pressure.
HP O2
Vent to atmosphere
LPS
PC FC
HP O2 header To multiple
gasifiers
PV O2 FV
Condensate
To/from SEZ Slurry pump
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 57
 Process Optimization

From the scenario results (FIG. 13), it was observed that the drum in the gasifier area [high-temperature heat recovery
lower the header pressure when the backup was started, the lower (HTHR)] increases, consequently venting the steam through a
the suction pressure available for the O2 flow control valve (FCV) control valve. In the case of a single superheater trip in the SEZ,
on the gasifier side. With the reduced suction pressure, the O2 the remaining superheaters in the SEZ ramp up to their maxi-
FCV opening increases to control the flow of O2 to the gasifier. mum capacity of 115%, as shown in FIG. 15. This also helps to
With 95% pressure, it was observed that the valve was fully open reduce the saturated HHP steam loss on the gasifier end.
for a certain time, which implies that the FCV could not control During normal operation, the import of HHP steam from
the O2 flow to the gasifier during that period. Even at 97% pres- the CPP of the existing refinery is continuous. Since the steam
sure, the valve opening was approximately 88%. At 100% pres- is reduced (due to the trip) to the HHP steam header in the gas-
sure, the maximum valve opening was approximately 80%. ification area, the HHP steam header pressure reduces and, sub-
Based on these scenario results, it was suggested to start the sequently, import from the CPP increases. The pipeline coming
SEZ backup system when any of the DTA ASUs tripped and the from the CPP is designed for a certain maximum flow. In the
corresponding DTA backup system failed to start. This would scenario, it was observed that, with a single superheater trip, the
prevent the O2 header pressure from falling to a low value and, import steam from the CPP exceeded the maximum permissible
consequently, avoid the full opening of the O2 control valve to limit (FIG. 16). This led to a decision to reduce the steam demand
the gasifier during an ASU trip. from some of the internal users on the superheater trip. After
deliberation, it was decided to stop the IP steam users on the su-
HHP steam superheater trip. In the base case, a certain num- perheater trip. This IP steam is used to improve the efficiency of
ber of gasifiers are running in the DTA and in the SEZ. High-high- the process and is not essential. Here, IP steam was letting down
pressure (HHP) steam is produced in the gasifiers. The HHP from the HHP steam in a backpressure turbine (BPT). With the
steam from the DTA gasifiers is combined and routed to multiple IP steam cut (and subsequent respite in the HHP steam header)
steam superheaters. The same process occurs on the SEZ side. on the superheater trip, it was observed that the HHP steam im-
The superheated steam is then sent to the common HHP steam port from the CPP was within the maximum permissible limit.
header, which is utilized for further processing. The common From the scenario results, it was suggested to ramp the other
HHP steam header also receives steam from heat recovery steam superheaters to their maximum capacity, and to trip the IP steam
generators (HRSGs), located in the captive power plant (CPP) users to limit the HHP steam import on one superheater trip.
area of the refinery. The configuration is shown in FIG. 14.
In the case of a single superheater trip, the HHP steam to Emergency shutdown valve malfunction closure. In the
the HHP steam header reduces, while the pressure in the steam base case, a certain number of gasifiers are running in the DTA
and in the SEZ. The total flow from the gasifiers is divided into
100
CO shift and LTHR. Emergency shutdown valves (XVs) are
95 provided at the inlet of the LTHR unit and CO shift to isolate
90 the units in the fire and pipe leak case.
85 Each gasifier has a dedicated pressure-controlled flare valve.
80 In the scenario of LTHR inlet XV malfunction closure, the gas-
Opening, %

75
ifier syngas header pressure began increasing rapidly, and the
flare pressure controller started flaring the syngas to control the
70
pressure (set at 2 kg/cm2 above the normal operating pressure).
65 However, the controller takes time to flare the syngas, and the
60 Gasifier O2 valve OP at 95% Pr header pressure increased to the gasifier design pressure (7 kg/
Gasifier O2 valve OP at 97% Pr
55 Gasifier O2 valve OP at 100% Pr cm2 higher than the normal operating pressure).
50 To avoid reaching the design pressure of the gasifier during
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1,080 1,200 such a scenario, it was recommended to provide a pre-set, open-
Time, sec
140
FIG. 13. Backup O2 valve opening.
130
120
From CPP 110
DTA refinery 100
DTA gasification 90
Saturated HHP steam Superheater HHP steam 80
Flow, %

(from gasifiers) (to steam users) 70

60
50
Multiple superheaters
DTA 40
SEZ 30 Superheater 1 flow
Saturated HHP steam Superheater HHP steam 20 Other superheaters flow
(from gasifiers) (to steam users) 10
0
0 150 300 450 600 750 900 1,050 1,200 1,350 1,500
Multiple superheaters Time, sec

FIG. 14. Steam superheater configuration. FIG. 15. Steam superheater flow after trip.

58 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com

to-flare PV at 50% on an XV closure as a feed-forward signal.
This enables the syngas to start flaring quickly, keeping the gas-
ifier away from the design pressure.
Additional scenarios. Other than the major scenarios dis-
cussed here, a mitigation philosophy was finalized for major
producer trips to ensure that end-users are not affected and that
the operability and reliability of the complex are not compro-
mised. For example, during a gasifier trip, un-shift clean syngas
to HRSGs and GTs reduces, which calls for the changeover of a
few HRSGs and GTs from syngas to other fuels with predefined
ramp rates. This study confirmed that sufficient time is avail-
able, due to long pipeline holdup from the gasifier to the GTs/
HRSGs, for the sequential HRSGs and GTs fuel changeover
before syngas header pressure falls to the cut-off limit, below
which syngas is unacceptable to HRSGs and GTs. Similarly, one
or more mitigation actions were finalized for most of the sce-
narios to achieve the desired products dynamics.
Project execution. Considering the importance of dynamic
simulation and its results, some basic guidelines and carefully
planned execution play important roles for the study to be
meaningfully conducted and interpreted. Key points and appli-
cations that were learned during the study project include:
• The scope of the project should be defined clearly,
with a proper understanding of the simulation
boundaries and their impact on the study.
• All assumptions should be listed, and their effects on
the results should be explained. Attempts should be
made to reduce the assumptions with a better modeling
approach so that a better result can be achieved,
with a lower impact on the schedule.
• Plant data should be accurate, with minimum revisions.
A revision control and data freeze can provide
comparable results.
• A small team of engineers and a standard modeling
approach can help provide a consistent model with
fewer variations.
• A number of review meetings with different experienced
persons present a different view of potential results.
Takeaway and future work. The gasification complex con-
sists of different process plants, and since it is integrated into an
existing refinery, it is difficult to assess the process conditions
without conducting a detailed dynamic analysis. A dedicated
and high-fidelity network dynamic simulation model was built
for syngas, steam, O2 and H2 systems for the integrated DTA
and the SEZ facility. The simulation model used actual engi-
neering data, such as system volumes, equipment geometry,
and control and instrumentation inputs. Since gasifiers are
maintenance-intensive equipment, three different base cases
were developed, and 75 different upset scenarios were tested.
The major outcomes of this study are:
• Detailed verification of engineering design, and the
validation of complex control schemes.
• Increased understanding of the behavior of the
gasification complex during transient conditions
caused by identified upsets.
• Recommended design modifications for the addition
Process Optimization
300
250
200
150
100
50 HHP steam flow from CPP, with trip
Flow, %
HHP steam flow from CPP, max limit
0
HHP steam flow from CPP, with trip and IPS cut
-50 HHP steam flow from SEZ to DTA, with trip
-100 HHP steam flow from SEZ to DTA, with trip and IPS cut
-150
-200
-250
-300
0 150 300 450 600 750 900 1,050 1,200 1,350 1,500
Time, sec
FIG. 16. HHP steam flow before and after the IP steam cut.
of small-sized bypass control valves.
• Suggested software modifications of various logics
and controls, such as changing the differential pressure
measurement tapping, evaluating the preload value
for the O2 vent pressure controller and the gasifier vent
pressure controller, and activating the backup O2.
• A finalized mitigation philosophy for all producer/
consumer trips to ensure that end users are not affected.
Most importantly, this study has given confidence to man-
agement in assessing the effect of the gasification complex on
refinery operations, and vice versa.
A fixed number of identified scenarios were studied on a lim-
ited number of base cases. The model developed can be further
used to create new base cases. A base case can be prepared with a
single gasifier running, which will help during the commissioning
of the first gasifier. New base cases can be derived with an addi-
tional number of gasifiers coming online, enabling greater under-
standing of the product flow distribution as each gasifier comes
online. Critical trip testing can be performed on these newly de-
veloped base cases to understand the dynamics inside the gasifi-
cation complex, as well as its impact on the existing refinery.
End of series. Part 1 of this article appeared in the February
issue of Hydrocarbon Processing.
NOTES
a
Technology provided by CB&I.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge Shirish Choudhary, a former Process
Control Lead at RIL, who was instrumental in conceptualizing and providing his
valuable guidance during the implementation of this work.
VIKAS DADHICH worked with Reliance Industries Ltd., India, as a Process Engineer
for 7 yr on a gasification project, from conceptualization to commissioning.
NITIN KARVEKAR is Vice President of the Centre of Excellence (COE)
Gasification group at Reliance Industries Ltd., India.
THOMAS MATHEW is President of the Centre of Excellence for the PTA
and gasification groups at Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai, India.
GIRISH BHATTAD is Team Leader with Honeywell Pune, India.
MOHIT SAXENA is Engineering Manager of Honeywell’s operator training
simulation department.
PRASAD KODOLIKAR is Project Manager with Honeywell Pune, India.
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 59
 REGISTRATION NOW OPEN

APRIL 22-26

AIChE® invites you to be a part of the 2018 AIChE Spring Meeting &
14th Global Congress on Process Safety. Focused on applications
of technology in core and emerging process areas, the AIChE Spring
Meeting covers a wide range of subjects relevant to the current needs
of industry. The Global Congress on Process Safety is the largest
global gathering of chemical process safety professionals, sharing
practical and technological advances.
TOPICAL CONFERENCES
• 4th Big Data Analytics
• 6th International Conference on Upstream Engineering & Flow Assurance
• 18th Topical Conference on Gas Utilization
• 21st Topical Conference on Refinery Processing
• 30th Ethylene Producers’ Conference
• Distillation Symposium
WHO SHOULD ATTEND?
• Emerging Technologies in Clean Energy
• Applied Researchers • Industry 4.0 Topical Conference
• Consultants • Innovative & Smart Manufacturing
• Early-Career Engineers • Process Intensification
• Executives • Sustainable Engineering Conference
• License Developers
• Managers 14TH GLOBAL CONGRESS ON PROCESS SAFETY FEATURES
• Plant/Production Engineers • 20th Process Plant Safety Symposium (PPSS)
• Process Engineers • 33rd Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS)
• Project Engineers International Conference
• Regulators • 52nd Annual Loss Prevention Symposium (LPS)
• Young Professionals • 7th Process Safety Management Mentoring (PSMM) Forum
• Leadership Development
ADDITIONAL PROGRAMMING FROM: • Perspectives on Process Safety from Around the World
• Computing & Systems
Technology Division
• Chemical Engineering & the
FOR BEST RATES,
Law Forum
• Environmental Division
REGISTER BY MARCH 12
• Fuels & Petrochemicals Division
• Management Division FOLLOW US: #AIChESPRING | #GCPS
• Process Development Division
• Young Professionals Committee
© 2017 AIChE 2212_17 • 12.17

To register or for more information, please visit aiche.org/spring or aiche.org/gcps

 Process
Optimization
I. MEJIAS, Y. LIU, J. BOUL and T. COLLINS,
Forum Process Technologies, Houston, Texas

Flexibility in desalting operations

for opportunity crudes
Typically, opportunity crudes require more rigorous desalt- The direct-distribution desalting mode is typically used to
ing to yield high-quality products due to high levels of naph- process medium to heavy feedstock or for any emulsion-sensi-
thenic acids, basic sediment and water (BS&W) and filterable tive crude high in solids, such as opportunity crudes. The crude
solids, among others. These crudes differ greatly in quality, as is introduced horizontally between the electrode grids (FIG. 1).
does the quality of the desalted crude from such feeds. The Improved laminar flow provides an enhanced water droplet en-
benefits from low-priced feedstock are balanced against capital vironment for emulsion-sensitive crudes. The dual horizontal
investments for desalting units and higher operating costs. The flow distribution provides quick, complete coalescence, thereby
key is ensuring that the desalting process has the operational ensuring larger and faster settling droplets. The high-level dis-
flexibility to process these types of crudes. tribution between the grids allows for two- to three-times the
The impact from emulsion sensitive crudes is prevalent; up- volume of water/oil emulsion, compared to other vertical flow
sets from the desalter elevate downstream corrosion. Cold liq- desalters. Furthermore, the distribution improves the control of
uid carryover to downstream units and corrosion, among many the interface (rag) emulsion and minimizes oil carryunder for
others, are examples of issues caused by water and water-soluble improved effluent water quality.
salts in crude oil. High oil content in the desalter effluent wa- FIG. 2 shows data for six units operating in the direct-distri-
ter can cause environmental constraints. Opportunity crudes, bution desalting mode for heavy feeds and opportunity crudes.
with emulsions that are difficult to resolve, can also consume
significantly higher amounts of demulsifier and create high grid
voltage fluctuations. Subsequent fluctuations in voltage and
higher power consumption may lead to electromechanical fail-
ures, further reducing run time between maintenance periods.
This leads to poor desalting and low-power efficiencies that in-
evitably result in higher operating costs. How can a refiner take
advantage of opportunity crudes? An improved desalter design
can mitigate these impacts.
The dynamic design of a desalter/dehydrator to process dif-
ferent types of crudes can significantly reduce the carryover of
inorganic contaminants and lead to economic savings in refin-
ery operations. If the desalter can process or water concentra-
tion fluctuations in the crude feedstock, desalting would reduce FIG. 1. Direct-distribution desalting mode for heavy feeds and
operating costs significantly. These fluctuations would not in- opportunity crudes.
hibit the electrostatic coalescence process within the treater.
100 55
Desalting opportunity crudes. To offer flexibility in electro- 95 98% 99.2% 99.0% 99.3% 50
90 95% 45
static separation, refiners need a technology-based solution to 40
Efficiency, %

85
API gravity

address higher chemical and energy consumption to improve 80 37

35
36 30
the quality of opportunity crudes and reduce operating costs. 75 30 25
Refiners need a technology option to process different crude 70 27 Desalting efficiency 20
23
slates, a unique design that incorporates two different types of 65 API gravity 15
distribution systems into the same vessel to provide a dynamic 60 10
A B C D E
design. As the properties of the crude change, the two distribu- Customer
tion systems in one vessel offer a significant advantage to pro-
FIG. 2. Operating desalting units in direct-distribution mode.
cess a wide variety of crudes.
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 61
 Fluid Flow and Rotating Equipment
These units have been installed in the US, Canada, Australia
and Egypt. The data shows desalting efficiencies obtained with
different crude charge rates and API gravities. All units achieved
above 95% desalting efficiency. The heaviest feed, with 23 API
gravity crude, presented a 98% desalting efficiency. All of the
units continue to exceed the salt specifications to date.
Desalting light- and high-water content feeds. The low-
velocity desalting mode is typically used for lighter crudes.
This operation is typical in applications where water content
in the feed may be very high, or during tank switches. The
crude is introduced below the electrodes to create the maxi-
mum oil residence time for improved dehydration (FIG. 3).
The low-intensity electric field is then used to treat the bulk
emulsion and interface, whereas the high-intensity electric
field (between the electrodes) is used for removal of the final
traces of water and smaller droplets that remain. FIG. 4 shows
data for four units operating in this mode that were installed in
the US, Canada and Brazil. The data shows desalting efficien-
cies obtained with different crude charge rates and API gravi-
ties. All units achieved above 95% desalting efficiency. Even
the heaviest feed, with 20 API gravity crude, presented a 99%
desalting efficiency. Higher dehydration efficiencies for heavi-
er crudes are seen with a crude distribution between the grids
(FIG. 5) for a 27 API crude. All of the units continue to exceed
salt specifications to date.
Reaching desalter steady state. When processing op-
portunity crudes, which may be highly conductive and/or
refinery slops and tank bottoms, the desalter transformer may
reach near its overloading state. However, the output voltage
can be automatically changed to minimize the current draw.
FIG. 3. Low-velocity desalting mode for light crudes or feeds
with high water content.
100
99% 99%
90 95%
29
80
Efficiency, %
25
70 20
60
Desalting efficiency
50 API gravity
40
A B C Sample, no.
Customer
FIG. 4. Operating desalting units in low-velocity mode.
62 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
A desalter/dehydrator controller, which is a bolt-on type, pre-
programmed, power electronics device, provides the optimum
voltage gradient/electrical field inside the desalter vessel to
help resolve stable emulsions and mitigate issues caused by
water excursions in the dehydrator/desalter feed. To show the
improved operational performance with a desalter/dehydrator
controller, the following case study is presented.
A four-train, two-stage desalting system operating in direct-
distribution mode was installed in the Middle East to process
a 27 API gravity crude. The crude inlet salt content was 460
parts per millions (ppm), and the BS&W was up to 2.5 vol%.
After the operation of the unit was stabilized, samples of the
undesalted and desalted oil were collected. The samples were
then analyzed for BS&W and salt content with ASTM standard
methods. The results confirmed that the direct distribution
mode achieved an average of 80% dehydration efficiency and
92% desalting efficiency over a period of 3 mos, exceeding the
specifications established for this unit (FIG. 5).
The desalter/dehydrator controller has the ability to alter
the voltage gradient based on dynamic feedback from the treat-
er. The desalter/dehydrator controller can be programmed
with parameters on the timing and how power is delivered to
each grid within the vessel based on emulsion, API gravity,
flowrate, etc. This technology mates up to the primary of any
existing standard transformer, with only a few minor modifi-
cations. It can be bypassed, returning the desalter to its pre-
controlled state via a no load selector switch.
The four-train, two-stage desalter system operating in di-
rect-distribution mode was analyzed before and after the in-
stallation of the desalter/dehydrator controller with the same
operating parameters (FIG. 5). Before the controller installa-
tion, the overall average desalting efficiency was 90%. After
the installation of the controller, the desalting efficiency in-
creased to 94%. It is important to note that after the control-
ler installation, the desalting efficiency was stabilized, even
though the system experienced fluctuations in the incoming
BS&W content. Thus, the controller optimized the operation
performance, ultimately stabilized the desalting efficiency and
increased the dehydration efficiency of the system.
Because the controller provides real-time monitoring and
control adjustability without system shutdown, it proves to
be an excellent tool for additional flexibility when operating
opportunity crudes or feeds where the physicochemical prop-
erties may change. Therefore, two different crude distribution
designs, selectable in operation with a voltage controller, can
110
35 100
Desalting efficiency, %
30 90
25 80
API gravity
20 70
15 60 Controller
in operation Desalting efficiency
10 50
5 40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 24 25 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
0
FIG. 5. Operating data of a desalter treating a 27 API gravity crude
in direct-distribution mode with controller.
 Fluid Flow and Rotating Equipment

improve the efficiency of production and refining operations,

while reducing OPEX.

Gaining flexibility with redundant electrode configu-

ration. The electrode and transactor design enhances the de-
salting/dehydration process for opportunity crudes, as well.
The independently energized electrode grid design provides
flexibility to handle upsets that can come with heavy or emul-
sion-sensitive crudes and facilitates long run cycles for main-
tenance (FIG. 6). Independently energized grid layers provide
a redundant configuration and allow for continuous desalt- FIG. 6. Redundant electrode configuration.
ing, even upon loss of a grid due to the loss of level control
or other upsets. Transactor connection and phasing allow for
little to no loss in performance due to the loss of an energized
electrode. This design facilitates chemical reduction, since the Enhanced mixing technologyb
Traditional
lower electrode provides a low-intensity electric field for con-
tinuous resolution of rag emulsion, thereby enhancing the ease
of interface control. Multiple transactor secondary voltage lev-
els provide the flexibility to optimize performance at varying
operating conditions. In high-conductivity environments, such
as with very conductive crudes, lower voltages provide longer Probability
service life for electrical components.

The heart of desalting opportunity crudes: Efficient mix-

ing. The quality of mixing imparted to the oil and water prior to
reaching the desalter vessel is key to maximize the desalting and
dehydration efficiencies when processing opportunity crudes. It
is desirable to disperse the fresh process water in the crude as
thoroughly as possible without forming an emulsion that is dif-
ficult or impossible to break due to its high stability. This may
be a challenge with opportunity crudes that may already contain
emulsions that are difficult to resolve. If the size distribution of
the water droplets in the crude feed is not relatively constant, the
water droplet coalescence is lower, thus the desalting and dehy-
dration efficiencies suffer. Because of this, an inline modulated,
multiphase mixing technology is key to improving the droplet
size distribution for enhanced desalting, reducing operating
costs while increasing plant operations efficiency (FIG. 7).
The mixing device should be designed to exert a homoge-
neous shear force, orientation-free, to the process flows running
through. The mixing element should generate moderate, yet
efficient, turbulent flow conditions to facilitate the mixing pro-
cess with low pressure drop (up to 5 psi), and to accommodate
water content fluctuations in opportunity crudes. Traditional
inline mixing technologies, such as mixing valves, yield high
pressure drop (≥ 25 psi) combined with non-homogeneous
shear forces, and may lead to undesired stable emulsions and
low desalting efficiency. For example, a specific inline mixing
device utilizes the main process flow momentum to create tur-
bulent eddies inside the internal mixing element to enhance the
mixing process with evenly sized droplets.b
The operating data presented here demonstrates the abil-
ity of a desalter/dehydrator controller, several units operating
Droplet size
FIG. 7. An example of an inline mixing device and traditional droplet
size distributions.
NOTES
a
Refers to Forum Process Technologies’ Edge II technology.
b
Refers to Forum Process Technologies’ ForuMIX inline mixing device.
DR. ISIS MEJIAS is a Process and Busines Development Manager
at FPT. Dr. Mejias has more than 10 yr of experience in
technology development for water treatment and in process
design for the petrochemical industry, including modeling,
experimental studies and complex data analysis of adsorption
and desalting technologies for water and crude oil treatment.
DR. YI LIU is a Senior Process Engineer at FPT. She has more
than 12 yr of experience in process engineering related to oil
and gas and petrochemical industries. She specializes in
process design and analysis, engineering calculations,
simulation and optimization, and onsite technical support
and troubleshooting.
JONATHAN BOUL is the Product Manager for Forum’s oil
treating technologies. A former nuclear submariner, he began
his career in the electrostatic field with Petreco in the early
2000s. He continued his work there until joining Forum upon its
acquisition of Howe-Baker.

under direct distribution and low-velocity modes, and a spe-

cific mixing device to provide flexibility for processing different
crude slates, from light to heavy feeds, particularly opportunity
crudes. These technologies ultimately result in operational flex-
ibility and a dynamic design, which improves the crude-water
separation process.
TOM COLLINS is the Vice President of FPT. With more than
37 yr of experience in desalting, he focuses on technical sales,
process review, desalter design, troubleshooting, training,
optimization and business development. Mr. Collins began
his career at Petreco in 1980 servicing desalters worldwide,
and has spent his entire career in the desalting field.

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 63

 www.ConstructionBoxscore.com Logon for a
FREE ONLINE
DEMO!

E F O R T H E G LO B A L R E F IN IN G,
MARKET INTELLIGENC S IN G /L N G IN D U ST R IES
RO C H E M ICA L A N D G AS P R O C ES
P E T

Hydrocarbon Processing’s Construction Boxscore Database,

the most reliable source to track active construction projects in the refining, petrochemical, gas processing,
LNG and solids industries throughout the world, now reaches further and is more powerful than ever before!

• Project details on thousands of active projects and global

construction contracts, including contact information for
key personnel

• Advanced search that filters the listings by project type,

scope, region, investment and more

• Daily updates for new and newly updated projects

• The weekly Boxscore Update e-newsletter with new

listings and trends analysis

For more information, contact:

J’Nette Davis-Nichols at Jnette.Davis-Nichols@GulfPub.com,
or +1 (713) 520-4426.

Cost-effective revamp of CO2 removal systems
The cost-effective revamp experiences of carbon dioxide
(CO2 ) removal systems in three different ammonia plants, and
the resulting attractive payback of just a few months are detailed
here. One of the plants uses a methyldiethanolamine/pipera-
zine (MDEA/PZ) system, and the other two use Benfield sys-
tems. Similar approaches can be used in acid gas removal sys-
tems in various petrochemical plants and refineries.
Ammonia Plant 1 with the MDEA-based CO2 removal sys-
tem was earlier revamped from its original nameplate capacity
of 600 tpd to approximately 1.1 Mtpd (thousands of tons per
day), using the original MEA-trayed absorber and stripping col-
umns replaced with packing and new internals. The plant ex-
perienced excessive CO2 slip (up to 3,000 ppmv) at increased
rates, resulting in reduced plant efficiency. A review of the
complete CO2 removal system was conducted, along with field
measurements to identify the key bottlenecks. Following this,
several cost-effective and practical options were identified to re-
duce CO2 slippage to a target value of less than 300 ppmv at the
present capacity, along with its maximum capacity of 1,170 tpd
and future capacity of 1,250 tpd.
A combination of new efficient packing and new distribu-
tors, along with an increase in circulation, were insufficient to
meet this target due to mass transfer limitations. To support
the performance targets, the absorber column was closely re-
viewed to increase the packing height with nominal modifica-
tions with different configurations. The studied options were
jointly reviewed with the customer’s operations, engineering
and construction groups to select the most suitable practical
option to meet the target performance with a 27% increase in
the packing height. The selected option is now in the imple-
mentation phase and the hardware has already been ordered.
A similar issue of high CO2 slip and corrosion in a two-
stage MDEA/PZ system in another ammonia plant is now be-
ing studied.
The other two ammonia plants, Plant 2 and Plant 3, each
maintained 2 Mtpd of capacity using Benfield ACT-1 CO2 re-
moval systems operated at 108% of nameplate capacity. Both
plants consistently experienced significant carryover from the
absorber, resulting in pressure-drop buildup across the down-
stream methanator feed-effluent exchanger. Based on plant his-
torical data, the system segment pressure drop increased from
20 psi to 30 psi in about 3 mos, resulting in a gradual increase
in front-end pressure and a gradual reduction in ammonia pro-
duction and efficiency. This forced operators to briefly shut
Process
Optimization
V. ARORA, Kinetics Process Improvements Inc.,
Houston, Texas
down the plant every three mos to clean the exchanger, and
also resulted in an additional loss of ammonia production of
nearly 10 hr, reducing plant reliability. This problem continued
despite new liquid distributors and demisters.
Following this, an independent process technology consult-
ing and engineering company was engaged to study and review
the potential deficiencies, and to recommend cost-effective im-
provements to minimize or eliminate the carryover in the Ben-
field systems of both plants.
Following the review of all studied options with recommend-
ed modifications, the consulting and engineering company was
advised to further carry out the engineering and supply of all
necessary hardware for both plants. The hardware was success-
fully installed in 2009 in both ammonia plants, which saw better
than expected performance without any loss of ammonia pro-
duction or plant shutdown until the next turnaround in 2013.
AMMONIA PLANT 1
MDEA-based CO2 removal system. The existing single-
stage MDEA CO2 removal system scheme is shown in FIG. 1.
This conversion of an old MEA-based system was implemented
as a part of the overall ammonia plant capacity revamp from the
CO2 product
Treated syngas
Stripper
Water
Absorber
Raw syngas
LC
FIG. 1. MDEA/PZ CO2 removal scheme.
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 65
 Process Optimization

original nameplate capacity of 600 tpd to 1,100 tpd. The origi- • Reconciliation of the operating data
nal absorber and stripper columns were used with trays replaced • Simulation of the existing scheme to match the
with packings and other internals. The present operating capac- reconciled operating data
ity is 1,140 tpd–1,170 tpd, depending on the seasonal variation. • Evaluation of potential bottlenecks at present
This plant was well stretched to its design limits and beyond. operating conditions:
A holistic review of the reference CO2 removal system was o Mass transfer limits of the existing packing type
conducted to identify all potential bottlenecks that might have and height
been contributing to a shortfall in performance. To support o Adequacy/limitations of the liquid distributor
this, the following steps were taken: o Adequacy/limitations of the feed vapor distributor
• Gamma scan of the columns to determine any o Hydraulic adequacy/limitations of the solvent
maldistribution circulation loop
• Representative operating data corresponding to o Solvent and activator concentration for optimal
maximum operating capacity performance.
FIGS. 2, 3, 4 and 5 represent the base operating performance
at 1,140 tpd, as modeled and reconciled with the actual oper-
ating performance. A gamma scan of the absorber indicated
the liquid density variation profile in FIG. 2, with a variation
of 8–15 units indicating maldistribution. The absorber oper-
ated at 85% flood, while the stripper had sufficient hydraulic
capacity, as shown in FIG. 5. The absorber temperature profile
in FIG. 3 seems reasonable, while CO2 concentration profiles in
FIG. 4 indicate 2,600 ppmv of CO2 slip.

Potential causes of high CO2 slip. Based on the initial eval-

uation, the absorber column indicated the major limitations re-
sulting in performance shortfall. The potential causes identified
in the absorber system were:
• Liquid maldistribution determined through gamma scan
• An undersized liquid distributor in the absorber,
leading to maldistribution
• High momentum through the vapor distributor
FIG. 2. Absorber liquid density profile. in the absorber, leading to maldistribution
• Mass transfer limitations due to short packing height
1 and incorrect loading
2 • Hydraulics and mass transfer limitations of the
3 existing packing.
4
5
6 0
7
8
9
10
11
Packing height, ft (top down)

12
13 5
Packing height, ft (top down)

14
15
16
17
18
19
20 10
21
22
23
24
25
26 15
27
0
2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
12,500
15,000
17,500
20,000
22,500
25,000
27,500
30,000
32,500
35,000
37,500
40,000

28
100 115 130 145 160 175
Temperature, °F CO2 concentration, ppmv

FIG. 3. Absorber temperature profile. FIG. 4. Absorber vapor CO2 concentration profile.

66 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 Process Optimization

The stripper column did not indicate any hydraulic or mass redistributors—were also reviewed. Based on the detailed eval-
transfer limitations, or any performance issues. uation and modeled performance, it was decided to pursue only
one deeper bed for the most value, as discussed here.
Options to reduce CO2 slip. In the next step, several options
were evaluated, and relevant inputs were gathered from vendors. Incremental packing height and practical constraints.
The following options were further simulated and reviewed for The existing packing height was determined to be a limiting
improved performance, including cost-benefit analysis:
• New efficient packing configurations with improved mass 0
transfer and hydraulics
• An increase in packing height, as noted later
for different options 5
• New liquid distributor
• New feed vapor distributor
• An increase in circulation rate
10
• Optimized solution concentration.

Packing height, ft (top down)

New liquid distributor. The existing trough-type, V-notch
15
liquid distributors were inadequate and considered less efficient
for the service conditions. They were replaced with new, effi-
cient, orifice-deck distributors that were rated with sufficient
20
design margin over the new service conditions for both present
and future operating cases. Most importantly, the new distribu-
tors were designed for installation and removal through the
25
existing 17-in. manways to facilitate correct loading of packing.
The existing feed vapor distributor was also found to be in-
adequate, with a much higher momentum than recommended
30
and insufficient coverage of the cross section. It was replaced
with a T-type lateral distributor that was rated with sufficient Stripper
Absorber
design margin over the new service conditions for both present
35
and future operating cases. Most importantly, the new distribu- 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
tors were designed for installation and removal through the ex- Flood, %
isting 17-in. manways.
FIG. 5. Flood %—absorber and stripper.
Increase in circulation and hydraulics adequacy. In-
creasing the solvent circulation rate was reviewed, along with 0
a complete hydraulics evaluation of the lean circuit and the
lean MDEA pumps, with a clear premise NOT to replace any
of the existing pumps or their drivers. Interestingly, a marginal 5
increase in circulation rate was possible by replacing the existing
impellers with the maximum possible size within the maximum
10
design rating of the existing drivers. Further, the impact of the
higher circulation rate was also evaluated for both absorber and
stripper columns with the new packing type and size, and differ- 15
Packing height, ft (top down)

ent bed configurations, as covered under the new packing.

Efficient packing and configurations. To improve the limi- 20

tations of both mass transfer and hydraulics in the absorber, new
packings from two reputed suppliers were evaluated with exten- 25
sive in-house modeling for their quantitative impact on perfor-
mance. The improved hydraulics with the newly selected pack-
ing with increased packing height (127% of the existing packing 30
height) are shown in FIG. 6 and compared with the hydraulics of
the existing packing for both base and future capacities (1,140 35
Base capacity with existing packing
tpd and 1,250 tpd, respectively). The hydraulic capacity of the ab- Base capacity with new packing
sorber indicates a substantial improvement with the new packing. Future capacity with new packing
The latest and most efficient proven packings from two sup- 40
55 65 75 85
pliers were reviewed and modeled to evaluate their impacts on Flood, %
CO2 slip and hydraulics. A combination of split-bed configura-
FIG. 6. Flood %—absorber, new and old packing.
tions with two different packing sizes—with and without liquid
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 67
 Process Optimization

factor to achieve the target CO2 slip, despite the changes with
the packing, the vapor-liquid distributors and the optimized
High CO2 slippage is a common problem
experienced in ammonia plants and other acid
gas removal systems in petrochemical plants
and refineries, particularly when plant capacities
are stretched by common limiting factors.
solution concentration. Several options to maximize the pack-
ing bed height were closely investigated (TABLE 1) with all prac-
tical constraints for this old column.
Based on a thorough review of all options with the custom-
er’s operations, construction and engineering teams, as well as
the facility’s inspection history, it was decided to pursue the
third maximum height option, with some hot work within the
absorber column.
CO2 slip with new-generation packing and distributors for the base and future capacities are estimates to be less than
(with base and modified packing heights)
2,000
Existing packing height
Modified height—127% of existing
1,500
CO2 slip, ppmv
Estimated performance improvements. The new perfor-
mance of the CO2 removal was estimated using the new packing,
new vapor and liquid distributors, and an optimized
solution concentration. The performance with the
new internals/packing with optimized solvent was
further compared for two capacity cases (base and
future) using the modified packing height (127% of
the existing packing height) in the existing absorber
to provide the most value for the lowest cost.
The additional packing height provides a signifi-
cant reduction in CO2 slip, achieving well below 300
ppmv for the base capacity and below 500 ppmv for
the future capacity, as shown in FIG. 7.
Reducing CO2 slip benefits ammonia plant efficiency with
a proportionate increase in ammonia production for the same
amount of feed gas used with high CO2 slip. Incremental am-
monia production with the improved performance of the CO2
removal system for the base and future operating capacities are
estimated and shown in FIG. 8.
Economics. Based on the modifications being carried out and
the expected performance improvements, the payback periods
8 mos and 4 mos, respectively (FIG. 9). The basis of this estimate
is the incremental ammonia production relative to the base am-
monia production, corresponding to high CO2 slip for the two
capacity cases using the median netback on ammonia.

Another MDEA-based, two-stage CO2 removal system is un-

1,000 der review for high CO2 slip and corrosion related issues (FIG. 10).

500 TABLE 1. Options to maximize the packing bed height

Packing Bed Tower
0 Option height CO2 slip target configuration modifications
1,140 1,250
Plant capacity, tpd Base 100% Well below target Single-bed Wall clips
FIG. 7. Performance estimate with modifications. 1 112% Below target Single-bed Wall clips
2 123% Closer to target Split-bed Wall clips,
complex
60
1,140 tpd supporting
Incremental ammonia, tpd

1,250 tpd
3 127% Meets target Single-bed Wall clips
40 and ring

20 Treated syngas Flash/fuel gas CO2 product

0 Water
100 200 300 400 500
CO2 slip, ppmv LP flash

FIG. 8. Incremental ammonia production with reduced CO2 slip. Stripper

Absorber PC

8
1,140 tpd
1,250 tpd
Simple payback, mos

Raw syngas

4 LC

0
100 200 300 400 500
CO2 slip, ppmv

FIG. 9. Payback estimate of modifications. FIG. 10. MDEA/PZ scheme, two-stage.

68 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 Process Optimization

AMMONIA PLANTS 2 AND 3 with inefficient vapor-liquid separation.

The existing Benfield process scheme for CO2 removal in
Ammonia Plant 2 and Plant 3 is shown in FIG. 11. Each ammonia
plant operated at approximately 108% of nameplate capacity of
2,000 tpd and consistently experienced a significant carryover
from the absorber, resulting in pressure-drop buildup across
the downstream methanator feed/effluent exchanger. Based
on plant historical data, the system segment pressure drop in-
creased from 20 psi to 30 psi in about three mos, resulting in a
gradual reduction in ammonia production and plant efficiency.
This situation forced operators to briefly shut down the plant
every three mos to clean up the exchanger, which also resulted
in additional loss of ammonia production for nearly 10 hr, fur-
ther reducing plant reliability. This problem continued despite
a replacement with new liquid distributors and demisters in
both absorbers and syngas knockout (KO) drums. Following
this equipment replacement, the consulting and engineering
company was engaged to study and review the potential de-
ficiencies, and to recommend suitable cost-effective improve-
ments to minimize or eliminate the carryover.
The following potential causes of carryover were identified:
• There was a significant fraction of smaller droplets
(< 10 microns) in the carryover. Recently replaced
separation devices were considered inadequate to
efficiently capture the smaller droplets below 10 microns.
• Insufficient vapor disengagement space in absorbers
and syngas KO drums was leading to channeling
• Makeup water quality with the carryover of any
undissolved solids was eventually deposited in the
downstream methanator feed/effluent exchangers.
• Excessive foaming could potentially result in carryover.
• Lower velocities with carryover, coupled with higher
localized temperature in the downstream methanator
feed/effluent exchanger could promote fouling rates.
Findings and recommendations. Based on the adequacy
check and further analysis of the absorber overhead system, the
following recommendations were made:
Treated syngas to methanator feed/effluent exchanger CO2
Syngas LP steam
KO drum
Eductor flash system
Stripper
Semi-lean
Feed pump
Absorber
Lean pump
FIG. 11. Benfield process schematic for ammonia Plants 2 and 3.

Now Available!

HPI MARKET ORDER TODAY!

DATA 2018 Call +1 (713) 520-4426 or
visit GulfPub.com/MDB2018

Make Smarter Decisions and Plan Ahead.

HPI Market Data 2018 is the hydrocarbon processing industry’s most
trusted forecast of capital, maintenance and operating expenditures for the
petrochemical, refining and natural gas/LNG industries.

HPI Market Data 2018 features:

• Global spending in the refining, petrochemical • More than 35 tables and 70 figures,
and gas processing sectors including information and data collected
from governments and private organizations
• Forecast on global capital, maintenance and
operating spending in the HPI • Editorial analysis of worldwide economic,
social and political trends driving HPI activity
• Short-term and long-term implications of
across all sectors.
today’s low crude oil prices
• An exploration of changing markets and
demand within the global HPI, with discussion
of emerging markets

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 69

 Process Optimization

• The vapor-liquid disengagement space in the syngas
KO drum was found to be inadequate. This was
considered to be a significant cause of uneven flow
distribution and channeling, resulting in poor separation
efficiency and potential carryover. It was recommended to
replace the existing slotted pipe feed distributor with an
even flow distributor to overcome this limitation (FIG. 12).
• The recently replaced new demister pads in the
absorbers and syngas KO drums of both plants were
also found to be inadequate to efficiently capture the
smaller liquid droplets, potentially resulting in carryover.
It was recommended to replace the pads with a new
design using a combination of co-knit polymer with
metal, as shown in FIG. 13.
• Syngas velocities in the shell side of the feed/effluent
exchangers caused concern initially, but no modification
was warranted, as the intent was to simply minimize
or eliminate the carryover as opposed to pushing the
carryover through higher exchanger velocities into the
downstream catalyst beds. Therefore, no change in the
downstream exchanger was recommended.
• A Phase 2 recommendation was made for an in-situ
spray system for the syngas KO drums, in the event
that the above recommended modifications fail
to yield the expected performance.

Modifications and performance improvements. Based

on these findings and recommendations, the following modifi-
cations were engineered and supplied for both plants:
• Special co-knit polymer demisters for absorbers and
syngas KO drums for both ammonia plants
• Even flow distributors were engineered to be supported
within the existing vessels without any hot work on
the vessel shells.
FIG. 14 charts an ∆P trend of more than 450 d of performance
before and after the modifications, and clearly indicates a fairly
steady pressure drop. No plant shutdown or any loss of am-
monia production was experienced for the next 4 yr before the
FIG. 12. Even flow distributor. turnaround for this lingering carryover problem in both ammo-
nia plants. The simple modifications were successful and were
carried out within a day. Further, the Phase 2 recommendation
to include the spray system was not required during this period.
The modifications implemented were simple, and were en-
gineered and supplied within a month by the consulting and
engineering company. They were installed quickly within a day
shift by the customer. Based on the reclaim of the lost produc-
tion following the modifications, the real payout was less than
three mos.

Key learnings. High CO2 slippage is a common problem expe-

rienced in ammonia plants and other acid gas removal systems
in petrochemical plants and refineries, particularly when plant
capacities are stretched by common limiting factors, including:
• Limiting mass transfer due to inadequate vapor/liquid
distribution, inefficient packing, and packing height or
stage limitations
FIG. 13. Special demister with co-knit polymer.
• Heat transfer limits (cooling, reboiling)
• Insufficient circulation due to limiting pump capacities
35 • Less than optimal solution concentration.
30 Before modifications VK ARORA is Director of process and operations at
Pressure drop, psi

Kinetics Process Improvements Inc. He previously worked

25
for SABIC, KBR and CB&I-Lummus as Technology Director
After modifications
20 of the refining group and Technology Manager of
petrochemicals. He spearheaded the KPI team that developed
15 and implemented a world-scale propylene derivatives complex
in Saudi Arabia for the production of acrylic acid, oxo-alcohols
10 and acrylic esters. He holds two patents relating to ammonia process
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 improvements and a nitrogen oxide (NOx ) reactor system for ethylene furnaces.
Elapsed time, days
He has directed several successful revamps in ammonia and methanol plants,
and is a licensed professional engineer in Texas. Mr. Arora earned a chemical
FIG. 14. ∆P trend, before and after the modifications.
engineering degree from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi in India.

70 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 Fluid Flow and
Rotating Equipment
K. BRASHLER, Saudi Aramco,
Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

Preventing wire wooling journal bearing failure

This work details the operation of a 21,000-HP, five-stage areas of the shaft. PMI results showed that both shaft journal
barrel pump utilized for seawater injection service. This pump areas comprise a super duplex stainless steel,a which indicated
is driven by a gas turbine and has a hydraulic rating of 12 Mgal/ that no sleeve or coating was present at the shaft journal loca-
min at 5,775 ft total dynamic head (TDH). FIG. 1 shows the tions. All areas of the shaft showed duplex, except for the probe
cross-sectional drawing of the pump.
The pump was in operation for approximately 1 yr before
experiencing a non-drive end (NDE) radial bearing resistance
temperature detector (RTD) alarm, and a subsequent increase
in radial vibration amplitude. The NDE journal bearing was in-
spected in the field and was found to have significant damage to
both the bearing and the shaft journal area.

Bearing and shaft inspection. Upon inspection, the NDE

journal bearing damage showed severe scoring, high temperature
and subsequent melted babbitt areas. FIG. 2 shows the bottom half
of the NDE journal bearing. A build-up of material, referred to as
a “black scab,” at the edge of the sleeve bearing was observed.
FIG. 3 shows the NDE shaft journal area, which shows severe
grooving damage. The shaft experienced severe deep grooving at
one end of the NDE bearing journal, which corresponds to the
buildup of material (black scab) at the edge of the sleeve bearing. FIG. 2. Damage to the bottom half of the NDE journal bearing.
FIG. 4 shows the black scab area at the edge of the NDE sleeve
bearing, indicating significant heat generation. This is consistent
with the deep grooving that was experienced at the edge of the
shaft journal area.
A positive material identification (PMI) analysis was per-
formed on the shaft to identify the material at several shaft areas,
including the shaft journal areas, to identify whether a sleeve or
coating may have failed. PMI testing was performed at both the
NDE and drive-end (DE) journals, the probe track and other

FIG. 1. Cross-sectional drawing of the seawater injection pump. FIG. 3. Grooving damage of the NDE shaft journal area.

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 71

 Fluid Flow and Rotating Equipment
track areas, which are comprised of a chromium-molybdenum
alloy steel (i.e., AISI 4140) (FIG. 5). This indicated that a sleeve
or coating failure was not a cause for the bearing failure.
Due to the severe radial grooving of the shaft, and the deter-
mination that a shaft sleeve or coating failure was not a contrib-
uting factor, the possibility of a wire wooling failure mechanism
was investigated. The damage that was observed was consistent
with a wire wooling failure mechanism. The DE bearing jour-
nal also showed evidence of slight radial grooving, most likely
from foreign particles rolling through the bearing clearance.
FIG. 6 shows the DE shaft journal area, which also showed signs
of radial grooving that could, given time, potentially lead to the
same outcome of the NDE.
Lubrication analysis. This pump utilizes an external forced
feed lubrication system. A recent lube oil sample was taken prior
to the failure, and showed an Appearance value of 1.2, which is
an indication of possible particulate in the lube oil. The retention
sample was also checked and found to contain visible particles,
which reflects the oil analysis report and the Appearance value of
1.2. Visible particles indicate a particle size of at least 40 microns.
A particle count test was not performed due to the sensitivity of
the particle counter instrument to large particles.
FIG. 4. Black scab and heat generation buildup on the edge
of the NDE sleeve bearing.
FIG. 5. PMI results of the shaft analysis.
72 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
The presence of grooving to the shaft journal area, a clarity
value of 1.2 and visual particulates in the lube oil sample were all
indications of particulate in the lube oil.
Wire wooling failure mechanism. Wire wooling occurs
when a relatively large particle enters the bearing-to-journal an-
nulus/clearance and becomes embedded in the bearing babbitt
material. Due to the heat generation, the particle reacts with the
shaft material to form a hard deposit (chromium carbide), also
known as a black scab. The hard deposit causes severe damage
to the shaft mating surface by acting like a cutting tool. The ma-
chining that takes place propagates to a point where the shaft
and bearing become inoperable. Shaft journals, sometimes re-
ferred to as “runners” made of high chromium material (1.3%
or greater), such as stainless steels, are more sensitive to wire
wooling damage than those made of mild- or low-chromium
steel. Four key elements are required for wire wooling to occur:
1. Introduction of foreign particulate into the bearing
clearance
2. Surface speeds of 20 m/sec (65.6 ft/sec) or greater,
which generates the required heat generation
due to the particle rub
3. Shaft journals or runners with more than 1.3%
chromium content
4. Hydrocarbon environment, in this case lube oil,
which is the elemental source of carbides.
The sequence of events leading to failure are:
• Introduction of foreign particle into the bearing clearance
• The generation of frictional heat due to the particle
rub at high shaft journal surface speeds
• Conversion of chromium to hard chromium carbide
in the shaft steel in the presence of hydrocarbon lube oil
• Embedding of chromium carbide in the stationary
component (i.e., bearing babbitt) acting as a cutting tool.
TABLE 1. Chemical composition of the super duplex
stainless steela
Cr Ni Mo C W Cu
24%–26% 6%–8% 3%–4% 0.03% max. 0.5%–1% 0.5%–1%
N Mn Si P S Fe
0.2%–0.3% 1% max. 1% max. 0.03% max. 0.01% max. Balance
FIG. 6. Grooving damage was observed on the DE shaft bearing journal.
Are you taking full advantage of Hydrocarbon Processing?

Gain instant premium access to

HydrocarbonProcessing.com
HYDROCARBON PROCESSING

DECEMBE R 2017 | HydrocarbonProcessin

g.com
DECEMBER 2017

PLANT DESIGN, Subscriber

PLANT DESIGN, ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION

ENGINEERING AND
CONSTRUCTION
Construction—The cornerstone
of a successful project
Only Benefits
Incorporate assurance into
an operational readiness program A subscription includes twelve
PROCESS OPTIMIZATION
Maximizing energy efficiency
monthly issues in print or digital
in paraxylene production
format and premium access to
TOP PROJECT AWARDS
Reader-chosen winners of the top
construction project awards of 2017
HydrocarbonProcessing.com,
where you will find:
• All the latest issues and
Process Handbooks
• HP’s extensive archive containing
more than 16 years of back issues
• Receive each upcoming issue of
Hydrocarbon Processing in your
choice of print or digital format
• HPI Market Data 2018
• Daily e-newsletters
Published since 1922, Hydrocarbon
Processing provides operational and
technical information to improve
plant reliability, profitability, safety
and end-product quality.

Subscribe Today!
Log on to HydrocarbonProcessing.com or call +1 (713) 520-4426.
 Fluid Flow and Rotating Equipment

In the case of the pump that failed, the four key elements
were satisfied for the failure to occur:
1. Evidence of particles in the lube oil basis visual inspection
of the retention lube oil sample were observed, there was
an Appearance value of 1.2, and radial grooving evidence
was observed at the DE bearing journal area.
2. A high-shaft journal surface speed of 32.9 m/sec
supplied heat generation potential from a particle rub.
3. High shaft steel chromium content existed. The shaft
journal areas comprise a super duplex stainless steel.a
TABLE 1 shows the material specification for the super
duplex, which contains 24%–26% chromium content.
FIG. 7. Damage of a pump shaft journal and sleeve bearing wire
PumpAd_3_5x4_625_f.qxp_Layout
wooling failure. 1 10/24/17 3:04 PM Page 2
4. The lube oil environment was the source of
elemental carbides.
The observed bearing failure was very consistent with a wire
wooling failure. FIG. 7 shows damage to the pump shaft journal,
along with the sleeve bearing wire wooling failure from an in-
dustry case study. The shaft journal and sleeve bearing damage
are very similar to the case study presented, which shows the ra-
dial grooving/machining of the shaft journal area and the hard
deposits in the bearing babbitt.
Takeaways. The observed failure was consistent with damage
resulting from a wire wooling failure mechanism, based on the
radial grooving/machining observed on the NDE shaft jour-
nal, and the hard deposits embedded in the bearing babbitt.
Evidence of particles in the lube oil were observed based on
the visible particles in the lube oil retention sample, an Appear-
ance value of 1.2 in the lube oil analysis report, and slight radial
grooving shown on the DE bearing journal. The pump design
shaft journal surface speeds were 32.9 m/sec, which significant-
ly exceeds the required rub speed of 20 m/sec for sufficient heat
generation required to develop the chromium carbides in the
presence of a hydrocarbon lube oil environment.
To avoid this situation, the author recommends that:
• Lube oil system cleanliness control should be evaluated
for improvement to ensure particles are not introduced
into the lube oil system. The entire lube oil system
should be inspected for areas of possible intrusion,
such as oil tank seals, bearing housing breathers,
storage containers, etc.
• A high level of cleanliness should be maintained during

Run Dry and maintenance activities, such as bearing assembly

and inspections, to avoid contamination. Standard

Keep on Running recommendations or best practices to control lube oil

contamination include utilizing a desiccant breather
and conducting periodic inspections of the breather to
ensure proper performance; using a filter cart (no more
than 5 microns in size) to filter new lube oil before filling
the lube oil system (new oils are not always clean);
avoiding contaminate ingression through seals to control
contamination with in-service lube oil; and ensuring
proper lube oil storage and handling practices to avoid
contaminate ingression.
• Future repairs of shaft journals should incorporate
a surface coating, such as hard chrome plating or a
Pumps fitted with chrome carbine coating. The shaft can also be sleeved
with a mild- or low-chromium material, such as 4140.
GRAPHALLOY® wear This will eliminate the high chromium content of the
parts survive upsets. runner and prevent the wire wooling failure mechanism.
• Personnel should revise the present shaft design for the
• Self-lubricating subject pumps to include the above modifications to
• Non-galling the shaft journal for future shaft orders/replacements.
• Won’t swell This will provide added protection from wire wooling
• Corrosion resistant failures if particle contamination occurs.
• Dimensionally stable
• Improved efficiencies NOTES
• -400˚F to 1000˚F (-240˚C to 535˚C) GRAPHITE METALLIZING
CORPORATION
a
Refers to Zeron 100 duplex stainless steel.
Yonkers, NY USA
P2 KEITH BRASHLER has 27 yr of rotating equipment experience in refining, pipeline,
power generation, pulp and paper, and nuclear facilities. His expertise focuses
+1.914.968.8400
Yonkers, NY USA • www.GRAPHALLOY.com on field pump and system troubleshooting.

Select 156 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

74 
 Fluid Flow and
Rotating Equipment
R. H. WILLIAMS, C&I Engineering,
Louisville, Kentucky

Simulation model of a vacuum heater transfer line

The vacuum tower is a critical part of many crude distilla- uct conditions (e.g., asphalt viscosity and gasoil asphaltene
tion units, and the vacuum heater transfer line is a critical part content) are controlled by flash zone temperature and pressure.
of vacuum tower operation. The vacuum tower’s vacuum heat- The vacuum charge heater and vacuum tower can be modeled
er, heater transfer line and flash zone operate in concert with as a heater feeding directly to a column, if the model will only be
one another, so they must be designed as an integrated whole used for unit monitoring or for modifications in the upper sec-
rather than as individual pieces. In a grassroots design, it is im- tions of the tower. However, if the purpose of the model is fo-
portant to minimize the distance between the vacuum charge cused around the transfer line, flash zone and wash oil sections
heater and vacuum tower to shorten the length of the vacuum of the vacuum tower, a more complex approach is required.
heater transfer line. However, in a revamp of an existing unit, Previous work has shown that the liquid and vapor portions
this distance and the transfer line pipe routing are already in of the vacuum tower charge stream are likely not at equilibrium
place, so the new design must deal with constraints imposed by as they exit the transfer line.1 Modeling the exit of the transfer
the existing layout. line and flash zone of the vacuum tower must account for the
The feed portion of a vacuum tower is a very complex, nature of this non-equilibrium stream in specifying flash zone
non-ideal system. Obtaining a complete picture of the high- conditions, designing the wash oil section, and designing the
temperature, extremely low-pressure, high-velocity, two-phase inlet separation device.
feed stream to use in design work requires two steps using two A process flow diagram (PFD) of the vacuum unit is shown
distinct modeling methods. Step 1 addresses the impact of the in FIG. 1. The existing vacuum tower had a vacuum diesel draw, a
transfer line on the lower portion of the vacuum tower, and will heavy vacuum gasoil (HVGO) draw, a wash oil draw and a bot-
provide design information for heater duty, the inlet separation toms asphalt product. In this tower, a wash oil draw is required
device, wash zone internals and stripping section internals. to meet asphalt viscosity and penetration specifications while
Step 2 covers transfer line and heater hydraulics, and will pro- maintaining HVGO quality that is adequate for a hydrocracker.
vide the sizing basis for the transfer line and heater tubes. The The vacuum tower modifications included the replacement of
output of these two steps will allow the
entire system, from the heater through Vacuum tower offgas
the lower section of the vacuum tower, to
be designed as an integrated unit.
Vacuum diesel
A recent crude/vacuum unit revamp pumparound
project successfully applied this two-
step process with commercially available Vacuum
diesel
simulation tools and calculation meth- Heavy vacuum product
gasoil pumparound LC
ods to predict transfer line performance
and propose modifications to meet proj-
ect objectives. Heavy vacuum
gasoil product
The objectives of the revamp were to Vacuum tower
LC
increase the refinery’s crude slate flexibil-
ity, specifically toward running heavier Atmospheric
opportunity crudes, as well as provide a tower bottoms Flash zone LC Wash oil product
18 in. 24 in. 30 in. 36 in.
14% increase in crude rate (38.5 Mbpd– Vacuum tower
44 Mbpd), while continuing to produce charge pump Vacuum
paving-grade asphalt. charge heater Asphalt quench LC
Asphalt product
Step 1: Transfer line and lower por-
tion of vacuum tower. Vacuum tower
FIG. 1. PFD of the vacuum tower and heater.
operation, product cut points and prod-
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 75
 Fluid Flow and Rotating Equipment

6
lic information about the transfer line
HVGO wash itself. Therefore, the non-equilibrium
to wash model is not useful in determining trans-
Flash oil section:
Modeled fer line diameter, pressure drop or ve-
Transfer line vapor 7 as internal locities. For that design information, the
stream from
HVGO draw tray project created a hydraulic model within
the simulation to evaluate the pipe rout-
ing and line diameters necessary to meet
Flash the required flash zone conditions. One
caveat to the hydraulic model is that the
two-phase flow correlations will assume
Wash oil fractionation section that the vapor and liquid are in equilib-
ATM tower Wash oil product rium. From the non-equilibrium discus-
bottoms sion above, this assumption is invalid
Entrainment

Flash along the entire length of the transfer

Cracked gas
production line; however, the two-phase correla-
Flash zone tions include a correction for liquid slip,
Flash
where appropriate. While the exact com-
positions of the vapor and liquid stream
Splitter
Transfer line liquid may not be rigorously accurate in the hy-
Asphalt product draulic calculations, the pressure drops
and velocities derived are adequate for
use in design.
It is important to differentiate be-
FIG. 2. Simulation model block flow diagram of the lower portion of the vacuum tower.
tween the following two terms as they
relate to this study:
some trayed sections with packing, the addition of new pack- • Sonic velocity is the speed of sound in the vapor phase.
ing in the vacuum diesel pumparound section, the replacement The velocity of the vapor portion of the stream cannot
of a wash oil grid with a packed section, and the replacement of exceed sonic velocity without pressure drop becoming
the wash oil recycle with an HVGO recycle. prohibitive—sonic flow velocity is considered an
To model the modified system, the project used flash and absolute constraint. Typically, vapor flows will be
splitter unit operations, as shown in FIG. 2. The first flash is set designed to be 50%–80% of sonic to provide some
at a pressure between the heater outlet and the flash zone pres- design margin. Calculations of sonic flow are well
sure, and allows the model to behave in a manner consistent known and readily available. For this revamp project,
with the theory that vapor and liquid in the transfer line are sonic velocity of the vapor phase in the transfer line
not truly in equilibrium. Liquid from this flash is split into a ranged between 420 ft/sec. and 480 ft/sec.
fraction that represents entrainment going up to the wash oil • Critical (or choked) velocity is the maximum
section and a fraction that proceeds into the flash zone, where attainable velocity for two-phase flow, taking both
it is flashed at flash zone pressure. phases into account. Significant theoretical and
The wash oil section of the vacuum tower is represented by experimental work has been completed in developing
two flashes external to the vacuum tower and one tray within correlations for two-phase critical velocity. The methods
the vacuum tower. The combination of the flashes and tray rep- available have sufficient uncertainty, and two-phase flow
resents between two and three theoretical stages of separation. hydraulics are complex enough that multiple locations
HVGO wash oil to the wash oil section of the tower is modeled along the transfer line are frequently calculated at critical
as an internal stream from the HVGO draw tray. In actuality, velocity in deep-cut vacuum units.2 For the transfer line
the HVGO tray is a total draw tray, and the hot recycle to the in this revamp project, critical velocity was calculated to
wash oil section is pumped back before any heat exchange. be approximately 200 ft/sec. total stream velocity.
The non-equilibrium simulation model was used to provide The correlation used by the simulator for critical
vapor and liquid tray loadings to the internals vendor for pack- (choked) flow is based on the work of Henry and
ing, distributor and vapor horn design. Streams entering the Fauske,3 and is presented in Eq. 1:
various unit operations at the boundaries of the “flash zone”
−1
and the “wash oil fractionation section” were used to represent ⎛ G2 ⎞ dv g ⎛ 1+ 2x ( k −1) + kvl 2 ⎞
theoretical tray loadings. − ⎜⎝ k ⎟⎠ = (1+ x ( k −1)) x dp +(v g ⎜ ( x −1) + k (1− 2x ) ⎟
⎝ ⎠
(1)
⎛ v g ⎞ dk
+ k (1+ x ( k – 2 ) − x ( k −1)) + x (1− x )⎜ kvl − ⎟
Step 2: Transfer line hydraulics. While the non-equilibri- dx 2 dvl
um model from Step 1 is required to capture the behavior of dp dp ⎝ k ⎠ dp
the vacuum tower charge through the transfer line (thus pro-
viding heater duty and the sizing basis for the vacuum tower where:
and its internals), this methodology does not provide hydrau- k = slip ratio = Vg /Vl
76 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
 Fluid Flow and Rotating Equipment

x = quality (gas mass fraction) of the model, the heater inlet tubes, heater tubes and heater
vg /vl = specific volumes of the gas and liquid (1/density). outlet tubes were modeled as separate pipe segments. Heater
Design of the transfer line balances capital investment firing was modeled as a duty applied to the heater tubes. The
against hydraulic constraints. As part of that balance, two heater duty was set to match the required duty determined by
or three sections of the transfer line are frequently allowed the Step 1 vacuum tower model to meet project specifications.
to reach critical velocity. Operating at critical velocity is un- For this project, the hydraulic model was created in a
desirable, as it can lead to liquid entrainment and high pres- simulation program with the ability to reverse-calculate pipe
sure drop. However, experimentation in the hydraulic model segments. Reverse-calculating pipe hydraulics allowed the
shows that elimination of critical velocity in one location (by project to specify the known flash zone pressure and tempera-
increasing line size) introduces critical velocity in another sec- ture, and easily determine conditions backward through the
tion, so it is difficult to completely eliminate in a revamp. This transfer line sections to the heater. For a simulator that cannot
phenomenon, combined with the large line sizes required to calculate bi-directionally, adjust blocks can be used to force re-
mitigate critical velocity at very low pressures, pushes design- verse calculation. Reverse calculation of the transfer line is re-
ers to accept critical velocity at a few locations. Critical veloc- quired for this iteration because the vacuum tower flash zone
ity in the heater tubes should be avoided, but critical velocity is where the target pressure/temperature condition is located.
in the outlet tubes just prior to connection into the transfer The heater outlet and transfer line hydraulics must be de-
line is not uncommon. Critical velocity is also often accepted signed to meet these flash zone conditions. Attempting to iter-
at the tower inlet, the largest section of the transfer line. ate line size and routing calculations forward from the heater
For the hydraulic model of the transfer line, piping should
be broken into separate segments, so no single segment’s
pressure drop represents greater than 10% of the inlet pres-
sure of that segment. In addition, fittings (elbows, expand-
ers, etc.) should be represented with a separate segment. 3D
model printouts of the existing transfer line, the originally
proposed transfer line (developed in an early design phase
without rigorous hydraulics) and the final design transfer
line for this revamp project are illustrated in FIGS. 3A, 3B and
3C, respectively. The pipe segments chosen for the model are
illustrated in FIG. 4. A piping equivalent length for the pipe
or fitting, as determined in literature,4 was used as the line
length for the segment.
A simplified heater hydraulic model was included to evalu-
ate velocities and pressure drops through the heater tubes.
This simplified model does not replace a full heater evalua-
tion, but can reasonably evaluate hydraulics. For this portion

FIG. 3B. 3D model printout of the initial vacuum tower transfer line
routing proposal.

FIG. 3A. 3D model printout of the original vacuum tower transfer line FIG. 3C. 3D model printout of the chosen vacuum tower transfer line
routing. routing.

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 77

 Fluid Flow and Rotating Equipment

FIG. 4. Hydraulic model line segments in the transfer line simulation.

460 240

410 Calculated velocity 220

Approximate critical velocity
200
360
Fluid velocity, ft/sec.

180
Fluid velocity, ft/sec.

310
160
260
140
210
120
160 100
Calculated velocity
110 80 Approximate critical velocity

60 60
Line segment Line segment

FIG. 5A. Velocity profile of the initial vacuum tower transfer line FIG. 5C. Velocity profile for the chosen vacuum tower transfer
routing proposal. line routing.

240 Once the model was set up, the iterative process of defin-
Calculated velocity ing transfer line sizes and routing began. The first iteration
220
Approximate critical velocity was based on the originally proposed transfer line size and ar-
200 rangement with the design flowrate and crude slate. FIG. 5A
shows the results of this iteration, including a comparison of
Fluid velocity, ft/sec.

180
160
140
120
100
80
60
Line segment
FIG. 5B. Velocity profile of the optimum transfer line routing for process.
becomes a frustrating process because the transfer line exit,
typically along with several other sections of the transfer line,
are at critical velocity. As such, a very small change in pressure
at the inlet of the transfer line can cause the calculations to
fail due to critical or sonic velocity. Reverse calculation simpli-
fies the iterative process by making the highest-velocity zone a
“known” point, rather than a calculated point.
78 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
the calculated velocity to the critical velocity for each seg-
ment. For these line sizes, the transfer line outlet is above
sonic velocity, and six sections of the transfer line, along with
the heater tubes, are at or above critical velocity. This result
confirms that the originally proposed transfer line design is
inadequate to meet project requirements.
To eliminate the sonic velocity condition and improve
the near-critical velocity conditions in the transfer line, pipe
diameters were adjusted and optimized, beginning with the
last section of piping (at the vacuum tower inlet), target-
ing vapor velocity in all sections of the transfer line to be
well below 80% of sonic velocity while allowing the critical
(choked) flow calculation to be rarely violated. Attempting
to eliminate all critical velocity sections in the transfer line
reduced line pressure drop to the point that critical veloc-
ity existed in the heater tubes. Since a major revamp goal
was to maximize flexibility and rate within the capacity of
the existing heaters and tower shells, increasing heater tube
size was unacceptable. To avoid heater modifications, the
 Fluid Flow and Rotating Equipment

project targeted operating at or close to critical velocity in
the transfer line, where possible, followed by step changes
in line size when velocity increased above critical velocity. A
greenfield design would have had the option of minimizing
pressure drop in the transfer line (ideal), and then designing
the heater to avoid critical velocity at that lower pressure. For
this revamp, the heater, tower and distance between the two
were fixed constraints.
After multiple iterations, the project proposed a feasible
solution by stepping the transfer line size up in the smallest
increments possible with commercially available pipe sizes.
The results of this case are shown in FIG. 5B, including a com-
parison of the calculated velocity to critical velocity. From a
process standpoint, this case represented the optimum solu-
tion available with the existing heater and line routing be-
tween the heater and vacuum tower. However, this case had
constructability and cost concerns related to the large num-
ber of welds and the cost of purchasing relatively short sec-
tions of large, high-alloy, unusually sized piping.
The project team suggested limiting pipe sizes to more
standard 24-in., 30-in. and 36-in. nominal diameters. Results
from the final iteration, using these more readily available
pipe sizes, are listed in FIG. 5C, including a comparison of the
calculated velocity to critical velocity. This option has four
sections of the transfer line calculated at critical flow, avoids
critical flow in the heater and was chosen as a reasonable bal-
ance between velocities and anticipated installed costs.
Takeaways. The crude and vacuum unit revamp, including
the transfer line and vacuum tower, was completed in 1Q
2017. Actual heater outlet temperatures, flash zone pres-
sure and temperature, and product specifications match very
closely with design values. The unit started up on a crude
slate similar to the pre-revamp slate, and has shifted to the
planned heavier crude slate. The crude charge rate has been
between 45 Mbpd and 45.5 Mbpd, above the project target of
44 Mbpd. With all crude slates and rates that have run since
startup, the unit has met asphalt property specifications, pro-
duced high-quality gasoils and been within the operating
range of all new equipment. These results show that design-
ing the vacuum tower transfer line and flash zone using this
two-step methodology will provide a successful project with
an appropriate level of conservatism at a reasonable cost.
LITERATURE CITED
1
Barletta, T. and S. Golden, “Deep-cut vacuum unit design,” PTQ , 4Q 2005.
2
Ha, H., M. Reisdorf and A. Harji, “Stepwise simulation of vacuum transfer line
hydraulics,” eptq Revamps, 2009.
3
Henry-Fauske, Aspentech HYSYS documentation, HYSYS Version 10.
4
Crane’s Technical Paper 410, “Flow of fluids through valves, fittings and pipe,”
Crane Co., 1988.
RUSSELL WILLIAMS is a Senior Process Engineer with C&I
Engineering, and has 30 yr of refining technical service and
refining/chemical plant design experience. He received his
BS degree in chemical engineering from the University of
Tennessee in 1987, and is a licensed PE in Kentucky.

SCHEDULE OF EVENTS:
This conference is designed for
I N T E R N AT I O N A L A B O V E G R O U N D S T O R A G E TA N K WELCOME RECEPTION FREE TRADE or other
engineers, managers
CONFERENCE & TRADE SHOW March 26, 2018
individuals SHOWwith
involved ENTRYoperations,
March 27-28, 2018
March 27-29, 2018 | Orlando, Florida 11TH ANNUALconstruction,
GOLF environmental
compliance,
TOURNAMENT spill prevention and
AST CONFERENCE
This conference is designed for engineers, managers or response or management activities
March 26, 2018 March 27-29, 2018
other individuals involved with operations, construction,
International Aboveground Storage Tank Conference & Trade Show associated with aboveground
environmental compliance, spill prevention and response COCKTAIL MIXER
April 18-20, 2017 | Orlando, storage tanks.
or management activities Florida
associated March 27, 2018
This conference is designed with
for aboveground storageortanks.
engineers, managers other individuals
NISTM
involved with operations, construction, environmental compliance,
spill prevention and response or management activities associated FOR ADVERTISING, SPONSORSHIPS,
with aboveground storage tanks. ANDSPEAKER OPPORTUNITIES,
CALL 800.827.3515 OR 011.813.600.4024

NISTM
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR STORAGE TANK MANAGEMENT

To Register, Call or Visit the Website:

800.827.3515 | www.NISTM.org
International 011.813.600.4024

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 201879

 Terminals
and Storage
P. SKOGBERG, Emerson Automation Solutions,
Houston, Texas
Keep a floating roof on an even keel
Users of large liquid hydrocarbon storage tanks at refiner-
ies and terminals must solve a variety of problems and make
trade-offs related to vapor emissions and general structural in-
tegrity for these massive containers. Rigid tanks have a fixed
roof, which helps support the sides, and it must hold up under
rain and possibly snow accumulation. Moreover, vapors with-
in the headspace must be controlled and contained to comply
with environmental regulations, and to maintain a safe work-
ing environment.
Given these structural challenges, it is no surprise that more
than half of the larger storage tanks around the world have
done away with a rigid roof in favor of a floating roof. This ap-
proach has two main advantages:
• It has effectively no headspace, so there is minimal
interior vapor accumulation
FIG. 1. A malfunctioning roof drain is a common problem that can
lead to severe consequences if too much liquid accumulates.
80 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
• While the sides of the tank must still contain the liquid,
they no longer need to support the roof, and the roof no
longer needs to support itself since the entire surface is
resting on the liquid.
Designs vary, but most floating roofs use pontoons distrib-
uted around the interior surface to provide uniform support
across the entire area. As the tank is filled and emptied, the roof
simply follows the liquid movement, taking advantage of the
natural leveling of the contents. Seals around the edge contain
hydrocarbon vapors and prevent infiltration of rainwater, while
still permitting free movement up and down. Such is the case
when the storage system is working properly; unfortunately,
there can be problems.
The free movement of something as large as a floating roof,
while maintaining an effective seal around the entire perimeter,
poses a variety of challenges. One of the major drawbacks of a
floating roof is the need to remove rainwater and perhaps snow
(FIG. 1). Since the roof sits within the sides of the tank, water
must be removed via a complex system of moving drainpipes,
or be pumped over the side.
If the drainage system becomes clogged and if water or snow
accumulate, the additional weight can cause an imbalance with
one area becoming too heavy, resulting in the roof sloping. The
worst outcome is a jammed roof that is no longer able to move,
and that becomes bent or distorted as product is pumped into
or out of the tank. This type of failure can also lead to loss of
seal, release of vapors and water entering the tank. Correcting
such a situation is a major undertaking and can remove the
tank from service for a considerable period of time.
Avoiding movement problems. A tilting, leaking or sticking
roof affects the performance of the tank, potentially leading to
costly structural damage and major environmental and safety
risks. It is vitally important that any problems be detected as
soon as possible so that action can be taken to correct issues
before they lead to a serious incident.
Traditionally, the solution is to send operators over the side
of the tank and down to the surface, via moving ladders, to carry
out visual inspections (FIG. 2), but tank farm operators seek to
minimize this practice for safety reasons. Just as manual tank
gauging is being replaced with automated level measurement,
operators increasingly favor a continuous, automated roof mon-
itoring solution. This type of solution offers greater efficiency
and reliability, while keeping personnel out of harm’s way.
 Terminals and Storage

Potential problems with floating roofs. The rim seals or the liquid level changing but the roof not moving—then au-
around the perimeter of the roof are designed to tolerate some tomatic systems will issue an instant, actionable alert.
misalignment, but these seals work best when the roof is level, Automated solutions offer an improved means of maintain-
making it perpendicular to the tank sides all the way around. ing the integrity of the roof, helping operators adhere to the
However, as mentioned, if the roof cannot drain and water or recognized industry standard API 650, which establishes mini-
snow accumulate on the surface, it adds to the overall weight. If mum requirements for storage tank design and inspection.
an imbalance is present, any liquid on the surface will gather at Automating what was previously a manual task can also
the low side, making the weight distribution unbalanced. help companies meet local health and safety regulations. For
Rim seals can become too tight in some segments and re- example, in some locations, it is mandatory to monitor the
strict movement. They can become too loose in other areas, al- roofs of tanks larger than 60 m (180 ft) in diameter. A compa-
lowing infiltration of water and release of hydrocarbon vapors. ny’s own personnel and process safety policies, as well as its en-
These problems can be caused by imbalances, but also by dam- vironmental policies, may require a high degree of monitoring,
age, incorrect installation or inadequate maintenance. while at the same time restricting the potential to accomplish
Taken altogether, numerous factors are able to cause roof this task by using human inspectors.
problems:
• Inadequate surface water drainage Using an automated solution. An automated monitoring
• Punctured pontoons solution requires level instruments to be installed at multiple
• Sticking (too tight) seals
• Leaking (too loose) seals
• Deformation of the sides.
If some segment of the roof is truly stuck, a problem can
develop quickly during an active filling or emptying cycle. The
attending operator must determine whether or not the roof
is moving correctly; this requires multiple sets of marks or
some other means to determine if roof movement is consistent
around the circumference.
An accurate and reliable mechanism is required to monitor
movement with a high degree of accuracy at multiple points.
With such a mechanism, operators can respond quickly to stop
the flow of liquids into the tank before the sides are damaged or
the entire roof begins to distort.

Automating the measurement. Given the potential com-

plications of roof issues, it is not surprising to see many op-
erators working to reduce the need for visual inspections, and
adopting an automated solution using a system of intelligent
level instruments to monitor the status of their floating roof FIG. 3. Three non-contacting radars measure the position of the
tanks. These instruments provide the advantage of continuous floating roof, using reflectors placed on the deck.
surveillance and real-time verification, along with operational
and safety improvements. If any deviation from normal opera-
tion occurs—such as increased or decreased buoyancy, tilting

FIG. 2. Manual inspections and personnel entering the roof area FIG. 4. Three wireless guided wave radars measure the distance
are risky and costly operations. between the floating deck and the liquid surface.

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 81

 Terminals and Storage
FIG. 5. A scalable, fully automated solution to remotely monitor floating
roof tanks can avoid problems and maintain closer track of inventory.
points. These can be placed on top of the tank or on the float-
ing roof itself.
The first option (FIG. 3) uses devices placed on top of the
tank—typically three non-contacting radars mounted at 120°
from each other, looking down at the roof. A reflector plate
placed on the roof serves as a target to enable accurate measure-
ments that are unaffected by water accumulations or any pro-
truding objects on the roof surface.
Using this approach, roof position can be measured to accu-
racy within a few millimeters. The presence of roof tilt can be
tracked by comparing the level value from the three radars. This
solution tracks how well the roof is floating by comparing the
roof readings against an automatic tank gauge, which measures
the liquid level through a still pipe.
The measurements from the three non-contacting radars are
transmitted via wired or wireless communication to the control
room, where a console operator can monitor the status of the
roof by using tank monitoring software. This solution enables
automatic alarms to be generated should any issues arise.
For example, if the amount of roof movement does not corre-
spond to the change in volume, then an alarm can sound. A tank
monitoring system can also warn of roof tilt, changes in buoy-
ancy, roof sticking and other issues. Other safety functions are
available, such as an overfill prevention alarm.
This non-contact approach has several key benefits:
• It is highly accurate and reliable
• It is suitable for any size of tank, and can be retrofitted
to existing tank gauging systems
• Its functionality as overfill protection is a further benefit,
along with the provision of a redundant level measurement.
The second option positions the measurement devices on
the floating roof (FIG. 4), using battery-powered wireless guided
wave radars (GWRs). The transmitters are installed in existing
nozzles, with rigid probes penetrating through the roof and into
the liquid below. The use of wireless transmitters enables instal-
lation without the need for flexible wiring.
82 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
A wireless repeater mounted at the top of the tank ensures
that when the roof is at a low point, the radars can still trans-
mit uninterrupted data back to the control room, despite the
devices being well below the upper edge of the tank shell. When
three radars are deployed, they are typically installed 120° apart.
Potential roof tilt is tracked by comparing the immersion lev-
els of the probes into the liquid product. Using this solution,
alarms can be generated for issues with tilting, buoyancy, and
roof sticking or sinking.
One major advantage of the rooftop configuration is its ease
of installation, configuration and communication. Installation
can be done in a few hours and with the tank in operation. Con-
figuration of the GWRs can be performed remotely and wire-
lessly on a user-friendly configuration screen, and the roof tilt
data is made available in the software in the control room.
The drawback of this approach is its inability to measure the
overall height of the roof. It can determine the position of the
roof relative to the liquid inside, which helps it determine po-
sition and alignment problems, but the three GWR transmit-
ters cannot determine liquid height. This function is left to a
fourth level instrument, the primary radar level gauge reading
the liquid level through a still pipe and providing volume mea-
surement for inventory purposes. The three GWR readings are
monitored in the software, along with the primary radar level
gauge, which allows for connection to the control system.
Additional functional capabilities. As an additional advan-
tage, other sensors can be integrated into an automated solu-
tion to minimize business-critical risks from a floating roof
malfunction. The use of wireless communication makes such
expansion easy and cost effective.
A typical example is monitoring the roof water drain, using
a wireless level switch. The frequency monitoring functional-
ity of wireless vibrating fork switches can quickly identify if the
liquid present in the water drain on the tank roof is water or oil.
If the switch detects water, it could indicate that the drain is
blocked or closed. On the other hand, if it finds hydrocarbons,
either the drainpipe or the roof is leaking. The ability to make
this distinction provides major benefits in terms of health and
safety, while preventing product loss and contamination.
An automated monitoring solution provides operators with
constant surveillance and real-time verification that a float-
ing roof is operating normally (FIG. 5). It also issues automatic
alarms in case of any incident or deviation from normal op-
eration, such as increased or decreased buoyancy, tilting of the
roof, or the liquid level changing but the roof not moving.
Obtaining an early warning of this kind enables tank farm op-
erators to take appropriate corrective action before the situation
worsens and leads to a serious incident. An automated solution
helps meet environmental, health and safety requirements and
provides significant risk reduction compared to manual inspec-
tions—all for a relatively low investment.
PER SKOGBERG is Product Manager at Emerson Automation
Solutions. He is based in Gothenburg, Sweden, and joined
Emerson in 2014. Mr. Skogberg has expertise in radar level
measurement and tank gauging systems for bulk liquid
storage. He holds a BS degree in industrial engineering
and management, and an MS degree in management and
economics of innovation, both from the Chalmers University
of Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden.

Prevent buckling of tanks with external rafters
Most cone roof tanks are designed
with roof-supporting structures inside the
tank. If the vapor space of the tank is cor-
rosive, then the roof structure will corrode,
causing tank integrity issues. Coatings for
corrosion mitigation are ineffective for
internal roof rafters because the coating is
prone to peeling due to flexing of the roof
plates that rest on the rafters. For this rea-
son, tanks with corrosive vapor space are
sometimes designed with external rafters.
In such designs, the bottom flange of the
rafters is welded to the roof plates.
Tanks with external rafters. Since
these tanks are not common, the Ameri-
can Petroleum Institute’s tank design code
API 650 is not written with this type of
construction in mind. API 650 Appendix
F provides the compression area require-
ment for the roof-to-shell junction. The
roof plates in a tank with internal rafters
are not welded to the rafter, and the roof
will bulge out under internal pressure,
which causes hoop compression at the
shell-to-roof joint. This does not oc-
cur when the rafters are above the roof,
and will provide rigidity along the rafter,
thereby restricting the bulging of the roof
under internal pressure. API 650 Appen-
dix F would overestimate the compression
area requirement for a tank with external
rafters because such a design has an inher-
ent rigidity against hoop compression.
For aboveground steel tanks, it is im-
portant that the tank meets the frangi-
bility criteria. In a frangible design, the
weakest joint is between the shell and
the roof plates. This joint will give way in
the event of overpressure inside the tank,
thereby preventing the failure of other
joints, particularly those within the liquid
space of the tank.
The roofs of tanks with external raf-
ters are stiffened by the rafter. Such a
Terminals
and Storage
J. THARAKAN, Suncor Energy Inc., Calgary, Canada
design will have a stronger roof-to-shell
joint than a tank with an internal rafter,
with everything else remaining the same.
Therefore, it will be very difficult to meet
the frangibility criteria for tanks with ex-
ternal rafters.
Lateral buckling of beams. Beams are
subjected to bending moments under
both dead load and live loads. A bending
moment (BM) is resisted by the flanges
of a steel beam. The bottom flange of a
horizontal beam is under tension, and
the top flange is under compression.
When the rafter is below the roof, the
compression flange is in contact with
the roof plates, whereas the compression
flange for an external rafter does not con-
tact the roof plates.
When loaded incrementally, a beam
with a long span will first deflect down-
ward. When the load exceeds a specific
value, it will tilt sideways (refer to the
sideways movement “U” in FIG. 1) due to
the instability of the compression flange,
and it will rotate about the longitudinal
axis. As the beam deflects laterally, the ap-
plied moment exerts a torque about the
deflected longitudinal axis, which causes
the beam to twist. The BM—i.e., where
a beam fails by lateral buckling when
subjected to a uniform end moment—is
called its elastic critical moment, or Mcr.
The buckling resistance is dependent
on a geometrical parameter known as
the slenderness ratio. For a simply sup-
ported beam, this parameter is equal to
the unbraced length of the beam, L, di-
vided by the radius of gyration, K. Tank
rafters should be inspected for lateral
buckling. A simple guideline is that the
slenderness ratio should be less than 200
to safeguard against buckling under com-
pressive loads. The slenderness ratio of a
beam is (L/Kxx) in the longitudinal di-
rection and (L/Kyy) in the lateral direc-
tion. Unequal beams are more slender in
the lateral direction—i.e., (L/Kyy) > (L/
Kxx)—and may require lateral bracing
to prevent buckling.
Case study: Rafter buckling on lime
softener tank. The external rafters of a
warm lime softener (WLS) in a plant suf-
fered lateral buckling of the compression
flange, as shown in FIG. 2. The WLS was
an atmospheric pressure cone roof tank
with stationary and rotating internals.
The buckling of the rafter does not
appear severe in FIG. 2, but it caused col-
lateral damage to both the center ring and
the shell of the tank. This tank rafter had
a slenderness ratio of less than 200 in the
longitudinal direction, but the slender-
ness ratio in the lateral direction was 450.
The lateral buckling resistance of the
rafters under live load was examined
using rules in structural codes, which
showed that at least one lateral bracing
was required to prevent lateral buckling of
the rafters. Given the original, unbraced
length of the rafter, elastic buckling would
z
x
u
y
φ
FIG. 1. Due to the instability of the
compression flange, a beam will tilt sideways
and rotate about the longitudinal axis when
loading exceeds a specific value.
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 83
 Terminals and Storage

be expected to occur in the beam. “Elastic
buckling” means that buckling could re-
sult at stresses less than the elastic limit;
therefore, the beam cannot realize its full
flexural strength.
The method for lateral buckling cal-
culations in structural codes involves two
essential steps:
1. Finding the elastic critical moment
(Mcr) for lateral torsional buckling
considerations. The Mcr is
FIG. 2. Lateral buckling of the compression
flange on the external rafters of a WLS.
calculated using geometric factors
that include the unbraced length
(L), the lateral moment of inertia
and the lateral slenderness ratio.
2. Comparing the BM under
applicable loading to the Mcr. If
the Mcr > BM, then the design can
be approved; otherwise, L must be
reduced by adding lateral brace(s).
As per API 650, the rafters must be
evaluated for lateral buckling for the dead
load. API 650 further states that the fric-
tion between the roof plates and the raf-
ters provides lateral bracing for a live load
case. The assumption here is that the raf-
ters are below the roof plates, which is not
true for tanks with external rafters.
Closing the knowledge gap to pre-
vent design errors. The plant under
study has other tanks with external raf-
ters. Most of these tanks also have un-
braced rafters, which were determined to
be vulnerable to lateral buckling since L/
Kyy was between 400 and 500. It was also
discovered that more than one designer
contributed to these errors.
API 650 defaults to structural codes
for structural design. Ideally, cautionary
statements would alert the designer to
distinctions between external and inter-
nal rafter designs. Since more than one
designer made an error in providing lat-
eral bracing, the author views this as a
knowledge gap.
Supplementary information on rafter
designs should be captured in the own-
er’s specifications and standards. Where
frangibility is important, finite element
analysis may be required to examine this
criterion for tanks with external rafters.
JOHN THARAKAN is a Static
Equipment SME at Suncor
Energy Inc.’s Enterprise Technical
Department. He has a post-
graduate degree in mechanical
engineering design and more than
30 yr of experience in the oil
industry. Mr. Tharakan renders consulting services
to various business units of Suncor on complex
problems involving static equipment and piping.
He also leads a Suncor-wide static equipment
and piping excellence network that develops
best practices and proactively drives mechanical
integrity. He previously worked for Kuwait Oil Co.
in Kuwait and for Kochi Refineries in India.

WE STAND TOGETHER
From our 20,000+ students taught annually by our knowledgeable instructors to our dedicated members who
develop and peer review our programs, NACE Career Development understands the challenges you face in
building a career in today’s world.

Entrust your career development to NACE, the premium provider of corrosion training programs, and join an
elite group of professionals who stand together in protecting people, assets, and the environment from the
adverse effects of corrosion.

Developed by Industry,
Globally Recognized.

84 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
BOB ANDREW, TECHNICAL EDITOR
Bob.Andrew@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Liquid laser detection of parallel system just for storing and serv- New liquid
difficult-to-measure liquid ingSelect vibration data.
2 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Hawk Measurement Systems has an-
nounced a new OptioLaser S300 that can
be used for the detection of all types of liq-
uids, regardless of their dielectric proper-
ties (FIG. 1). This laser can accurately and
reliably measure highly reflective liquids,
clear liquids and turbulence liquids. Due
to its narrow beam divergence, the Op-
tioLaser can be used to measure through
grates, narrow passages and flat walls. Key
advantages and benefits include:
• Easily measures difficult liquids
such as slurries, oils, agitated
liquids and clear water
• Operates without the need
of any calibration
• Unaffected by background noise
and vapor pressure
• Handles low-dielectric substances
and acoustically absorbing materials.
Select 1 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Single module
for condition monitoring
and machinery protection
Brüel & Kjær Vibro enhanced its ca-
pabilities with the acquisition of SET-
POINT technology from Metrix Instru-
ment Co. (FIG. 2). SETPOINT gained
considerable industry recognition for its
innovation by introducing a single mod-
ule type that can perform more than 50
of the most common condition monitor-
ing and machinery protection functions.
This operation dramatically reduces the
requirements for spare parts and cost of
ownership. Using intuitive configuration
software, the module can be programmed
in the field directly by customers.
SETPOINT’s online condition-mon-
itoring software utilizes the powerful
OSISoft PI historian as the repository
for all data rather than requiring the pur-
chase of a stand-alone system strictly for
vibration data. This allows existing PI
customers to utilize their investment in
the PI system rather than purchasing a
Innovations
fluoroelastomer product
formulations
Lightweight, portable Pelseal Technologies LLC developed
23 new product formulations in 2017
device ensures flowmeters to meet their customer needs, includ-
perform to specification ing those in petrochemical maintenance.
KROHNE Inc. offers the OPTI- The company created formulations to
CHECK flowmeter verification tool, refine the physical properties of its exist-
providing in-situ verification for mass ing products for better VOC, higher sol-
and other flowmeters (FIG. 3). The OP- ids content, process viscosity or adhesion
TICHECK enables operators to perform properties.
preventive maintenance and responsive Among the new products is Pelseal
service to ensure that installed flowme- A1104 is the AFLAS fluoroelastomer
ters are performing to specification. caulk. Pelseal A1104 is designed to resist
When the OPTICHECK tool is con- alkalis, amines and other high pH chemi-
nected in-line onsite, it gathers measur- cals. It also has excellent oil and fuel resis-
ing data to ensure that the flowmeter is tance and can withstand a broad tempera-
performing within 1% of factory calibra- ture range beyond 400°F (205°C).
tion, with a confidence level of 95%. The The formulation features the unique
baseline for comparison can be historic properties of a fluoroelastomer: ex-
repair data from the factory or onsite test treme chemical resistance, flexibility,
results after performing a full verification. high abrasion resistance and broad tem-
The lightweight, portable OPTI- perature range capability. Pelseal prod-
CHECK is capable of verification of the ucts also bond to a broad range of sub-
range of OPTIMASS Coriolis mass me-
ters, OPTISONIC ultrasonic flowmeters
and OPTIFLUX, TIDALFLUX and WA-
TERFLUX electromagnetic meters. The
equipment provides both a hard copy ver-
ification report for every flowmeter, and
digital storage of verification data in the
internal database of the industrial tablet.
Select 3 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
FIG. 2. Module for condition monitoring
and machinery protection.
FIG. 1. Laser measurement of reflective, FIG. 3. Portable device ensures that
clear and turbulent liquids. flowmeters perform to specification.
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 85
 Innovations
strates, including most metals, concrete,
glass, ceramics, other elastomers and
some plastics. In addition to Viton and
AFLAS-based fluoroelastomer presen-
tations, Pelseal also offers a number of
Dyneon-based formulations.
In the petrochemical industry, Pel-
seal products are typically used for the
repair of secondary containment expan-
sion joints and concrete cracks; coating
metal surfaces that are exposed to cor-
rosive vapors and liquids; and sealing
pipe penetrations.
Select 4 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Thicker zinc primer
offers more protection
in fewer coats
Carbozinc 608 HB is the first 5 mil–10
mil zinc primer on the market. More prim-
er means more protection. The zinc-rich
primer is highly surface tolerant, quick to
cure and has excellent film build proper-
ties, yielding a high zinc loading per ft3.
When coupled with a micaceous iron
oxide, MIO, flake-reinforced epoxy phe-
nalkamine binder, the resultant film is
an extremely durable and effective cor-
FIG. 4. Schematic of a variety of conditions
causing imbalance.
FIG. 5. Highly-sensitive oil spill detector
strategically mounted to detect spills.
86 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
rosion resistant coating. Due to these
unique combinations of properties, it
can (in one coat) replace a zinc + (ep-
oxy) intermediate coating of a standard
3-coat (zinc/epoxy/urethane) system.
While the primary target market for
Carbozinc 608 HB is the marine market,
it has many more potential uses in other
industrial markets on storage tanks, pip-
ing, equipment, structural steel, etc. The
fast recoat properties (and 2-coat system
approach) will be attractive to fabrica-
tion shops and original equipment man-
ufacturers (OEMs). It saves application
time and labor cost without sacrificing
performance, and eliminates the need
for an epoxy intermediate coat by pro-
viding a two-coat system that provides
excellent performance.
Select 5 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Automatic diagnostic
tool checks the health
of rotating machines Should a floating roof
Accurex is the patent-pending auto-
tank drain valve be left
matic diagnosis software built into the open or closed?
Fixturlaser Smart Machine Checker
(SMC) (FIG. 4). The software’s intel-
ligence is based on a Bayesian network
developed by the engineers at ACOEM,
the parent company of Fixturlaser and
VibrAlign. Accurex is the product of more
than 30 yr of vibration analysis innova-
tion by ACOEM.
The SMC includes several built-in
tools to help provide the most accurate
and comprehensive report possible on a
machine’s health:
• A laser pyrometer to check the
bearing temperature
• A stroboscope to pinpoint the exact
revolutions per minute (RPM)
• A camera to document sensor
placement or machine defects.
Select 6 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Real-time oil detection
and alert for oil spills
The Slick Sleuth (FIG. 5) line of oil
spill detectors is used in a wide variety
of industrial and environmental applica-
tions for remotely detecting oil spills in
real time. Should an oil spill or leak oc-
cur, Slick Sleuth provides instant detec-
tion and notification, enabling users to
contain accidental oil spills and avert
costly environmental damages, cleanup/
mitigation expenses, fines, regulatory
penalties and public relations night-
mares. The highly sensitive sensor de-
tects small (micron-level) amounts of
oil on calm water, moving water surfaces
(outfalls, streams, harbors, offshore), as
well as on solid/dry surfaces.
The system consists of one or more
sensor stations, strategically placed for
greatest realization of cost-benefit and
strategic risk mitigation, and for the earli-
est-possible detection in/around vulner-
able operations and environmentally sen-
sitive areas. Sensitivity is user adjustable
for use in clean water “zero tolerance”
locations (high-sensitivity applications),
as well as for industrial sites where the
presence of some oil might be expected,
but early warning is still needed for cata-
strophic spill events (e.g., event or anom-
aly detection applications).
Select 7 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
Does your operation dictate that the
tank roof drain valve be left open? In cas-
es of slight or torrential rains, all rainwater
immediately drains from the roof through
and out of the tank. However, if the inter-
nal roof drain line fails, the stored prod-
uct drains through the failed line onto the
ground, causing hazardous material dis-
charge into the tank dike.
Does your operation dictate that the
tank roof drain valve be left closed? In
light or heavy rain conditions, it is essen-
tial that an operator immediately respond
by manually opening the roof drain line.
If excessive rainwater is allowed to accu-
mulate on the roof, loss of buoyancy may
occur, resulting in the sinking of the roof,
damage to the tank wall and release of
stored product into the environment.
Both scenarios can expose operators
to potential contamination, permit viola-
tions, media attention, tank failures and
extended downtime. EnviroEye’s Float-
ing Roof Drain Guard System includes
a Slick Sleuth hydrocarbon sensor that
can be sent to a desired level of sensitiv-
ity. The sensor can detect the presence
of hydrocarbons, signal the valve to close
and prevent the release of the storage tank
contents. The system can be programmed
to deploy a customized alert.
Select 8 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
 MARKETPLACE / L.Kane@GulfPub.com / +1 (713) 412-2389

Acid Resistant
Epoxy Why should you
filter your water?
EP21ARHT Epoxy Adhesive

∙ Low viscosity
∙ Serviceable from -60°F to +400°F
Scale formation reduces the
∙ Electrically insulative
heat transfer rate and
increases the water pressure
drop through the heat
exchanger and pipes. In fact,
one study has shown that
.002" fouling will increase
pumping needs by 20%.

Hackensack, NJ 07601 USA

+1.201.343.8983 • main@masterbond.com
www.masterbond.com

Select 201 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS 2672 S. La Cienega Bl vd, Los Angeles, C A 90034 USA
(800) 336-1942 (310) 839-2828 www.t ekleen.com inf o@t ekleen.com
Visit HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Select 202 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

RUSSIA/FSU INDONESIA, MALAYSIA, SINGAPORE,

Lilia Fedotova THAILAND
Anik International & Co. Ltd. Peggy Thay
Phone: +7 (495) 628-10-333 Publicitas Singapore Pte Ltd
Catherine Watkins, Publisher E-mail: Lilia.Fedotova@GulfPub.com Phone: +65 6836-2272
Phone: +1 (713) 520-4421 E-mail: Singapore@GulfPub.com
TURKEY, WESTERN EUROPE
E-mail: Catherine.Watkins@GulfPub.com JAPAN
www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com Hamilton Pearman
Phone: +33 608 310 575 Yoshinori Ikeda
SALES OFFICES—NORTH AMERICA Hamilton.Pearman@GulfPub.com Pacific Business Inc.
Phone: +81 (3) 3661-6138
EASTERN UNITED STATES, EASTERN CANADA UNITED KINGDOM/SCANDINAVIA E-mail: Japan@GulfPub.com
Merrie Lynch Patrick Djuma
Phone: +1 (617) 357-8190 Phone: +44 20 3409 2243 KOREA
Mobile: +1 (617) 594-4943 E-mail: Patrick.Djuma@GulfPub.com YB Jeon
E-mail: Merrie.Lynch@GulfPub.com Storm Associates Inc.
SALES OFFICES—OTHER AREAS Phone: +82 (2) 755-3774
GULF COAST, SOUTH TEXAS E-mail: Korea@GulfPub.com
Catherine Watkins AFRICA, MIDDLE EAST
Phone: +1 (713) 520-4421 Tanya Mbaluli MEXICO, CENTRAL AMERICA,
E-mail: Catherine.Watkins@GulfPub.com Twiga Media Partner SOUTH AMERICA
Phone: +254 722 376 972 Marco Antonio Monteiro
MIDWEST, NORTH TEXAS Email: Mbaluli@GulfPub.com Mobile: +55 21 99616-4347
Josh Mayer E-mail: Brazil@GulfPub.com
CHINA—HONG KONG
Phone: +1 (972) 816-6745
E-mail: Josh.Mayer@GulfPub.com Iris Yuen CLASSIFIED SALES
Phone: +86 13802701367 (China) Laura Kane
WESTERN UNITED STATES, Phone: +852 69185500 (Hong Kong)
Phone: +1 (713) 412-2389
WESTERN CANADA E-mail: Iris.Yuen@GulfPub.com
E-mail: L.Kane@GulfPub.com
Rick Ayer INDIA
Phone: +1 (949) 366-9089 DATA PRODUCTS
Manav Kanwar
E-mail: Rick.Ayer@GulfPub.com
Phone: +91-22-2837 7070/71/72 J’Nette Davis-Nichols
Mobile: +91-98673 67374 Phone: +1 (713) 520-4426
SALES OFFICES—EUROPE E-mail: Jnette.Davis-Nichols@GulfPub.com
E-mail: India@GulfPub.com
ITALY, EASTERN EUROPE
REPRINTS
Fabio Potestá
Mediapoint & Communications SRL Jill Kaletha, Foster Printing at Mossberg & Co.
Phone: +39 (010) 570-4948 Phone: +1 (800) 428-3340 x 149
E-mail: Fabio.Potesta@GulfPub.com E-mail: JKaletha@Mossbergco.com

Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 201887

ADVERTISER INDEX  /  HydrocarbonProcessing.com
The first number after the company name is the page on which an advertisement appears. The second number is the Reader Service Number. There are two ways readers can obtain product and service information:
go to www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS, follow the instructions on the screen, and your request will be forwarded for immediate action, or go online to the advertiser's website listed below.

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

Website Website Website

Altra Industrial Motion...........................11 (151)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-151
AIChE ..................................................60
AMETEK Process Instruments .................26 (67)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-67
Ariel Corporation....................................5 (65)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-65
AUMA Riester Gmbh & Co., KG ...............24 (154)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-154
Axens ..................................................92 (51)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-51
Criterion Catalyst & Technologies, L.P. ......6 (54)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-54
Gulf Publishing Company
Construction Boxscore Database .........64
Data—EWA LNG.................................50
Events—HP Awards ........................... 33
Events—IRPC Americas .....................49
Events—IRPC Europe ......................... 91
Events—POC .....................................88
HP Circulation ................................... 73
HP Webcast—Schneider Electric.......... 41
HPI Market Data 2018 .........................69
Marketplace ......................................87
Merichem Company.............................. 18 (84)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-84
NACE International ...............................84
Neste Jacobs Oy ...................................20 (152)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-155
NISTM ..................................................79
Paharpur Cooling Towers, Ltd. ............... 16 (99)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-99
Pentair Filtration & Process ................... 22 (153)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-153
Rentech Boiler System ............................2 (53)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-53

Graphite Metallizing Corporation ........... 74 (156) Linde Engineering North America ..........29 (76) UOP LLC ...............................................46 (71)
www.info.hotims.com/70512-156 www.info.hotims.com/70512-76 www.info.hotims.com/70512-71

This Index and procedure for securing additional information is provided as a service to Hydrocarbon Processing advertisers and a convenience to our readers. Gulf Publishing Company is not responsible for omissions or errors.

Explore the Challenges and

Opportunities Facing Industry Leaders
at Pipeline Opportunities Conference April 3, 2018 | Westin Galleria | Houston, Texas

Pipeline & Gas Journal and Gulf Publishing are pleased to announce Join us for panel discussions providing industry
the upcoming 14th annual Pipeline Opportunities Conference on insight on topics such as:
April 3 at the Westin Galleria in Houston, TX. The meeting has
become the premier event for the pipeline industry and is co-spon- • Key issues facing the oil and gas industry,
sored by the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA), including economic, political and environmental
the Association of Oil Pipe Lines, and the Maguire Energy Institute at aspects
SMU’s Cox Business School. The one-day conference is focused on
new construction opportunities in North America as well as expert • Political and legislative developments in the
analyses of the numerous factors driving the industry forward. nation’s capital that will affect the industry
Keynote Address presented by: • Challenges and opportunities facing industry
John Davies, CEO of Davies Public Affairs executives and their contractors John Davies

PRESENTED BY: SPONSORED BY:

HYDRO-TEST INCORPORATED



To sponsor contact Karen Francis at +(713) 520-4450 | View the agenda and register at pipelineopportunities.com

88 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
ALISSA LEETON, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR
Alissa.Leeton@GulfPub.com
MARCH
CERAWeek, March 5–9,
Hilton Americas–Houston,
Houston, Texas
P: +1 800-447-2273
ceraweek.com
AFPM Annual Meeting,
March 11–13, New Orleans Hilton,
New Orleans, Louisiana
(See box for contact information)
Asia Turbomachinery & Pump
Symposium, March 13–15,
Suntec Singapore Convention
& Exhibition Centre, Singapore
P: +1 979-845-7417
info@turbo-lab.tamu.edu
atps.tamu.edu
Middle East Sulphur CRU,
March 18–21, Jumeriah at Etihad
Towers, Abu Dhabi, UAE
P: +44 0-207-903-2444
conferences@crugroup.com
events.crugroup.com
Easyfairs, Stoc Expo Europe,
March 20–22, Ahoy Rotterdam,
Rotterdam, The Netherlands
P: +44 0-203-196-4400
margaret@tankstoragemag.com
www.easyfairs.com
Eastern Mediterranean
Gas Conference (EMGC),
March 21–22, Gulf Publishing
Company Events,
Hilton Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
EMGasConference.com
(See box for contact information)
AFPM International
Petrochemical Conference (IPC),
March 25–27, Grand Hyatt
San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas
(See box for contact information)
China International Petroleum
& Petrochemical Technology &
Equipment (CIPPE), March 27–29,
New China International
Exhibition Center, Beijing, China
P: +86 10-5823-6555
www.cippe.com.cn/en/
International Aboveground
Storage Tank Conference
& Trade Show, March 27–29,
Rosen Shingle Creek Hotel,
Orlando, Florida
P: +1 800-827-3515
mail@nistm.org
nistm.org
APRIL
Pipeline Opportunities
Conference, April 3,
Gulf Publishing Company Events,
Omni Galleria, Houston, Texas
P: 713-520-4450
kfrancis@uctonline.com
pipeline-opportunities.com
GPA Midstream, April 15–19,
JW Marriott Austin, Austin, Texas
gpamidstreamconvention.org
NACE Corrosion Conference
& Expo, April 15–19,
Phoenix Convention Center,
Phoenix, Arizona
P: +1 800-797-6223
nacecorrosion.org
API Spring Refining and
Equipment Standards Meeting,
April 16–19, Sheraton Seattle
Hotel, Seattle, Washington
P: +1 202-682-8195
registrar@api.org
www.api.org
Easyfairs, Stoc Expo Middle East
Africa, April 17–18, Dubai World
Trade Centre, Dubai, UAE
P: +44 0-203-196-4381
duly@stocexpo.com
www.easyfairs.com
MCAA Industry Forum,
April 22–24, The Woodlands
Resort and Conference Center,
The Woodlands, Texas
P: +1 757-258-3100
mcaa@TheMCAA.org
themcaa.org
AIChE Spring Meeting,
April 22–26, Orlando World
Center Marriott, Orlando, Florida
P: +1 800-242-4363
www.aiche.org
STRATCO Alkylation
Best Practices Workshop,
April 23–26, Omni Amelia
Island Plantation Resort,
Amelia Island, Florida
www.dupontbpw.com
MAY 2018
AFPM Reliability and
Maintenance, May 22–25,
Convention Center,
San Antonio, Texas
(see box for contact information)
JUNE
LNG International Congress,
June 4–5, Mercure Hotels MOA,
Berlin, Germany
lng@bgs-group.eu
www.lngcongress.com
IRPC Europe, June 5–6,
Gulf Publishing Company Events,
Milan Marriott Hotel, Milan, Italy
HPIRPC.com/Europe
(See box for contact information)
(ILTA) International
Operating Conference
& Trade Show, June 11–13,
George R. Brown Convention
Center, Houston, Texas
P: 703-875-2011
www.ilta.org/AOCTS
ACHEMA, June 11–15, Messe
Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
P: +49 69-756-4100
www.achema.de
East Africa Oil & Gas
Summit (EAOGS), June 14–15,
The Intercontinental Hotel,
Nairobi, Kenya
P: +1 254-600-0823
wmwiti@eastafricanchamber.org
eaogs.com
World Gas Conference,
June 25–29, Walter E.
Washington Convention
Center, Washington, D.C.
P: +44 20-7978-0775
www.wgc2018.com
Pump Summit Americas,
June 26–27, George R. Brown
Convention Center,
Houston, Texas
P: +1 416-361-7030
d.morgan@kci-world.com
www.pumpsummitamericas.com
AUGUST
ONS, Aug. 27–30,
Stavanger, Norway
P: +47 932-56-125
angelo@ons.no
www.ons.no
HP Awards, Aug. 30,
Gulf Publishing Company Events,
Houston, Texas
HydrocarbonProcessing.com/
Awards
(See box for contact information)
Hydrocarbon Processing | MARCH 2018 89
Events
SEPTEMBER
Gastech Conference
& Exhibition, Sept. 17–20,
Fira Gran Via, Barcelona, Spain
P: +44 0-203-615-5914
info@gastechevent.com
www.gastechevent.com
IRPC Americas, Sept. 25–26,
Gulf Publishing Company Events,
Houston, Texas
HPIRPC.com/Americas
(See box for contact information)
International Pipeline Expo,
Sept. 25–27, Telus Convention
Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
P: +1 888-799-2545
jessyzhao@dmgevents.com
internationalpipelineexposition.com
OCTOBER
AFPM Operations &
Process Technology Summit,
Oct. 1–3, Atlanta Marriott
Marquis, Atlanta, Georgia
(See box for contact information)
GasPro Americas, Oct. 25,
Gulf Publishing Events,
Houston, Texas
GasProcessingConference.com
(see box for contact information)
NOVEMBER 2018
Sulphur CRU, Nov. 5–8,
Gothia Towers,
Gothenburg, Sweden
P: +44 0-20-7903-2444
conferences@crugroup.com
www.events.crugroup.com
Hydrocarbon Processing/
Gulf Publishing Company
Events
P: +1 713-520-4475
Melissa.Smith@GulfPub.com
EnergyEvents@GulfPub.com
American Fuel &
Petrochemical
Manufacturers (AFPM)
P: +1 202-457-0480
info@afpm.org
www.afpm.org
Easyfairs
P: +44 0-208-843-8800
uk@easyfairs.com
www.easyfairs.com
MIKE RHODES, MANAGING EDITOR
Mike.Rhodes@HydrocarbonProcessing.com
Metso’s board of directors
has appointed CFO
Eeva Sipilä as Metso’s
interim President and
CEO, succeeding Nico
Delvaux. At the time
of publication, the search
for a new President and
CEO is under way.
Pipetech has bolstered
its team with senior
appointments, naming
Gavin Booth as Sales
Manager for the UK and
Holland, and Thomas
Karlsen as Sales Manager
of Scandinavia. Based
in Aberdeen, Mr. Booth
will be responsible
for driving key accounts
for the business. He
has held several senior
positions within the
energy industry, including
hire division Deputy
Manager at ACE Winches
and Key Account Manager
at ATR Group. Joining
Pipetech’s Stavanger
team, Mr. Karlsen brings
a wealth of oil and gas
experience, most recently
in the role of Sales
Engineer at Quickflange,
and he will be responsible
for the company’s growth
in Norway, Denmark
and Sweden.
Harry Quarls has retired
from his positions as
Executive Chairman
and as a Director of
Penn Virginia Corp. The
company also expanded
its board of directors from
five to seven members,
and has appointed David
Geenberg and Michael
Hanna as new independent
board members.
90 MARCH 2018 | HydrocarbonProcessing.com
DNV GL—Oil & Gas has
appointed Ben Oudman
as Regional Manager
for Continental Europe,
Eurasia, the Middle East,
India and Africa. He joins
the Executive Leadership
Team for DNV GL’s Oil
& Gas business area,
leading a 500-strong
team of experts serving
a diverse range of oil and
gas clients. Mr. Oudman
joined DNV GL in 2013 and
has previously held senior
positions in Phillips and
Kiwa Technology. He was
Country Manager for DNV
GL’s Oil & Gas operations
in The Netherlands. He
succeeds Liv Hovem, who
has taken the role of CEO
in DNV GL Oil & Gas.
Marathon Petroleum Corp.
has named Brian K. Partee,
Director of business
development, as VP of
business development, and
Rick Linhardt, Director of
tax, to VP of tax. Mr. Partee
joined MPC in 1995 as an
accountant in Marathon
Pipe Line, progressing
through increasingly
responsible positions
before being named VP of
business development and
franchise at Speedway. He
served as MPC’s manager
of crude oil logistics and
analysis beginning in 2014.
Mr. Linhardt joined MPC
in 2013 as Manager of tax
compliance, and has 30 yr
of tax experience in public
accounting and the oil and
gas industry, including an
assignment as the head of
the tax department at RRI
Energy Inc., where he was
instrumental in its merger
with NRG Energy.
Galtway Industries
LLC, a channel partner
of manufacturers that
specialize in developing
and implementing supply
chain solutions for top-
tier original equipment
manufacturers (OEMS),
has promoted Greg Gilbert
to VP of sales.
REXA has appointed Geoff
Hynes as its new President
and CEO. He has spent his
entire career with REXA
in varying roles, including
factory assembly, Direct
and Regional Sales,
Aftermarket Manager,
International Sales
Manager and Director of
Sales. Mr. Hynes’ transition
into President and CEO
created the following
restructure within the
organization: Robert Sass,
the previous customer
service Manager, has
been appointed Director
of customer support;
and Michael Murphy,
the previous Marketing
Manager, has been named
as Director of sales and
marketing. Nicholas
Lalos has transitioned to
Marketing Manager.
The board of directors
of Exxon Mobil Corp. has
appointed Peter Clarke as
President of ExxonMobil
Gas & Power Marketing
Co. and elected him as
a VP of the corporation.
Mr. Clarke is now the
VP of international gas,
ExxonMobil Gas & Power
Marketing Co., and lead
country manager for
ExxonMobil businesses
in the UK.
Neste Corp.’s board of
directors has appointed
Peter Vanacker as
President and CEO. Matti
Lievonen, who has served
as Neste Corp.’s President
and CEO since 2008, will
act as the President and
CEO of Neste until his
retirement at the end of
the 2018. Mr. Vanacker
is now the CEO and
Managing Director of
CABB Group GmbH. Prior
to CABB, Mr. Vanacker
held various executive
positions at Bayer, where
he was responsible for
the global polyurethanes
business and many
significant investment
projects.
Matthew K. Schatzman
will succeed Kathleen
M. Eisbrenner as CEO
of NextDecade Corp.
Mr. Schatzman formerly
served as President of
the LNG producer. Ms.
Eisbrenner, who founded
NextDecade in 2010, will
remain Chairman. Mr.
Schatzman has 30 yr of
experience in the industry,
and previously served as
Executive VP of global
energy marketing and
shipping, and as a member
of the group executive
committee at BG Group.
Exxon Mobil Corp.
has elected Steven A.
Kandarian, the Chairman,
President and CEO of
MetLife Inc., to its board
of directors. Mr. Kandarian
became President and
CEO of MetLife in May 2011,
and was elected Chairman
of the board in 2012.
People
Jim Gross has been
named President and CEO
at Trachte LLC. Mr. Gross
joins Trachte from Johnson
Controls Inc., where he
was VP of global product
management. Prior to
his global position with
Johnson Controls, he was
with Brady Corp.
The National Association
of Manufacturers (NAM)
has made three new
hires to its government
relations and policy team,
including the addition of
Jordan Stoick as VP of
government relations.
He comes to NAM from
the US Department of
the Treasury, where he
was Senior Advisor to the
Assistant Secretary for
legislative affairs. Patrick
Hedren joins NAM as VP of
labor, legal and regulatory
policy. He previously
served as Senior Counsel
for regulatory advocacy.
Laura Berkey-Ames joins
the NAM as Director of
energy and resources
policy. She previously
held roles as Senior
Manager of government
relations for the American
Fuel and Petrochemical
Manufacturers (AFPM).
CycloPure Inc. has hired
Dr. Jason Spruell as its
new VP of commercial
development. Dr. Spruell
will lead CycloPure’s
efforts to commercialize
its high-affinity
cyclodextrin polymers
(HACPs) for use in the
water treatment, industrial
separation and textile
application markets.
 Register
Today

Main and Host Sponsor:

EUROPE
5–7 JUNE, 2018 | MILAN MARRIOTT HOTEL, MILAN ITALY | HPIRPC.COM/EUROPE

Exploring Downstream Innovation

Join industry leaders and speakers at this high-level technical forum showcasing
best practices in the industry and the latest technological advancements in the global
petrochemical and refining sector.

Keynote Speakers include: Session Topics include:

• Process/Plant Optimization
KEYNOTE KEYNOTE
Global Supply/Demand and Eni’s perspective on the • Maintenance and Reliability
Refining Trends refining system
• Meeting IMO Regulations
Alan Gelder Giacomo Rispoli
Vice President, Refining, Chemicals & Oil Executive Vice President, • Process Controls and Automation
Markets, EMEARC, Wood Mackenzie Portfolio Management, Eni
• Refining and Petrochemical
KEYNOTE KEYNOTE
Integrations
Adoption of electric cars/ The Diesel Dilemma • Sulfur Removal Technologies
trucks, how fast and where?
• Bottom of the Barrel
Cuneyt Kazokoglu Stephan Marcos Jones
Head of Oil Demand Forecasting and Director-General, UK Petroleum
Long-term Service, Facts Global Energy Industry Association (UKPIA)
• Energy Efficiency
• Clean Fuels Production/Fuels
KEYNOTE KEYNOTE of the Future
Petrochemicals: Chemical economics in times of
How macroeconomic factor’s volatile feedstock prices • Revamps, Retrofits and Upgrades
shape the industry
• Emerging Technologies
Dorothee Arns Dr. Duncan Seddon
Executive Director, Petrochemicals and President and CEO, Duncan Seddon • Digitalization of Refining and
Plastics, European Chemical Industry and Associates Pty, Limited Petrochemical Operations
Council (CEFIC)

Sponsorship opportunities available! Lanyard sponsor Hotel Card Key Sponsor

Contact your Hydrocarbon Processing representative or
Hortensia “Tish” Barroso, Business Development Manager,
at Hortensia.Barroso@GulfPub.com
Select 51 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS