基于乙二醇的天然气脱水装置的设计修改和比较分析

C.O Wosu, J.G Akpa, A. A. Wordu, E. Ehirim, E.M Ezeh
{"title":"基于乙二醇的天然气脱水装置的设计修改和比较分析","authors":"C.O Wosu, J.G Akpa, A. A. Wordu, E. Ehirim, E.M Ezeh","doi":"10.1002/appl.202300093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Natural gas production from reservoirs is often associated with water, which poses numerous challenges, such as methane hydrate formation, sludge, corrosion, and flow assurance issues in gas processing plants and sales gas transmission pipelines. To effectively remove water from natural gas, there is a need to design, compare, and modify dehydration plants. This study investigated the performance difference between a conventional Triethylene Glycol (TEG)‐based dehydration system with a cooler at the TEG inlet to the contactor, and a newly proposed TEG‐based dehydration system with a heat exchanger replacing the cooler at the TEG inlet with the contactor. The advanced process simulation software Aspen HYSYS was used to design and compare two dehydration system configurations. The modified design configuration exhibited better performance in terms of energy conservation and water‐removal capability. The material balance of molar flow, mass flow, and volume flow of dry gas produced in the absorber/contactor column showed a higher volume of dry gas produced in the modified system configuration, indicating that it is a better design. The modified design configuration also produced dry gas within the recommended temperature range for underground storage and transmission. There was a significant difference in the percentage difference of 64% between the conventional and modified designs in terms of energy consumption, whereas the percentage differences of 0% and 0.6% showed non‐significant and significant differences between the two plant design configurations. Both plant design configurations showed a significant reduction (from 0.005 mol% to 0.0002 mol%) in the water composition of natural gas after the simulation.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.","PeriodicalId":100109,"journal":{"name":"Applied Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Design Modification and Comparative Analysis of Glycol‐Based Natural Gas Dehydration Plant\",\"authors\":\"C.O Wosu, J.G Akpa, A. A. Wordu, E. Ehirim, E.M Ezeh\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/appl.202300093\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Natural gas production from reservoirs is often associated with water, which poses numerous challenges, such as methane hydrate formation, sludge, corrosion, and flow assurance issues in gas processing plants and sales gas transmission pipelines. To effectively remove water from natural gas, there is a need to design, compare, and modify dehydration plants. This study investigated the performance difference between a conventional Triethylene Glycol (TEG)‐based dehydration system with a cooler at the TEG inlet to the contactor, and a newly proposed TEG‐based dehydration system with a heat exchanger replacing the cooler at the TEG inlet with the contactor. The advanced process simulation software Aspen HYSYS was used to design and compare two dehydration system configurations. The modified design configuration exhibited better performance in terms of energy conservation and water‐removal capability. The material balance of molar flow, mass flow, and volume flow of dry gas produced in the absorber/contactor column showed a higher volume of dry gas produced in the modified system configuration, indicating that it is a better design. The modified design configuration also produced dry gas within the recommended temperature range for underground storage and transmission. There was a significant difference in the percentage difference of 64% between the conventional and modified designs in terms of energy consumption, whereas the percentage differences of 0% and 0.6% showed non‐significant and significant differences between the two plant design configurations. Both plant design configurations showed a significant reduction (from 0.005 mol% to 0.0002 mol%) in the water composition of natural gas after the simulation.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":100109,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"0\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/appl.202300093\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Research","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/appl.202300093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从储层中生产天然气通常会伴生水,这带来了许多挑战,如甲烷水合物的形成、污泥、腐蚀以及天然气加工厂和销售天然气输送管道中的流量保证问题。为了有效去除天然气中的水分,需要对脱水设备进行设计、比较和改造。本研究调查了基于三乙二醇 (TEG) 的传统脱水系统与基于 TEG 的新脱水系统之间的性能差异,前者在 TEG 与接触器的入口处安装了冷却器,而后者则在 TEG 与接触器的入口处安装了热交换器以取代冷却器。先进的工艺模拟软件 Aspen HYSYS 用于设计和比较两种脱水系统配置。改进后的设计配置在节能和脱水能力方面表现出更好的性能。吸收器/接触器塔中产生的干气的摩尔流量、质量流量和体积流量的物料平衡显示,改进后的系统配置产生的干气体积更大,表明它是一种更好的设计。修改后的设计配置产生的干气也符合地下储存和输送的建议温度范围。在能耗方面,传统设计和改进设计的百分比差异为 64%,差异显著,而两种工厂设计配置的百分比差异分别为 0% 和 0.6%,差异不显著,差异显著。两种工厂设计配置在模拟后都显示天然气的水成分显著降低(从 0.005 mol% 降至 0.0002 mol%)。本文受版权保护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Design Modification and Comparative Analysis of Glycol‐Based Natural Gas Dehydration Plant
Natural gas production from reservoirs is often associated with water, which poses numerous challenges, such as methane hydrate formation, sludge, corrosion, and flow assurance issues in gas processing plants and sales gas transmission pipelines. To effectively remove water from natural gas, there is a need to design, compare, and modify dehydration plants. This study investigated the performance difference between a conventional Triethylene Glycol (TEG)‐based dehydration system with a cooler at the TEG inlet to the contactor, and a newly proposed TEG‐based dehydration system with a heat exchanger replacing the cooler at the TEG inlet with the contactor. The advanced process simulation software Aspen HYSYS was used to design and compare two dehydration system configurations. The modified design configuration exhibited better performance in terms of energy conservation and water‐removal capability. The material balance of molar flow, mass flow, and volume flow of dry gas produced in the absorber/contactor column showed a higher volume of dry gas produced in the modified system configuration, indicating that it is a better design. The modified design configuration also produced dry gas within the recommended temperature range for underground storage and transmission. There was a significant difference in the percentage difference of 64% between the conventional and modified designs in terms of energy consumption, whereas the percentage differences of 0% and 0.6% showed non‐significant and significant differences between the two plant design configurations. Both plant design configurations showed a significant reduction (from 0.005 mol% to 0.0002 mol%) in the water composition of natural gas after the simulation.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信