Research article
Vol 15 No 1 (2021): Volume 15, Number 1, 2021
Perbandingan performa refrigeran propana dan amonia pada siklus refrigerasi Dew Point Control Unit (DPCU)
Program Studi Teknik Kimia, Fakultas Teknologi Industri, Institut Teknologi Bandung Jalan Ganesha No. 10, Bandung, Jawa Barat, Indonesia 40132
Program Studi Teknik Kimia, Fakultas Teknologi Industri, Institut Teknologi Bandung Jalan Ganesha No. 10, Bandung, Jawa Barat, Indonesia 40132
Departemen Teknik Kimia, Fakultas Teknik Kampus Baru, Universitas Indonesia Jalan Fuad Hasan, Depok, Jawa Barat 16424
Abstract
Natural gas, that has been processed and met certain specifications, is sent to consumers through pipeline. Gas condensation within the pipeline should be avoided because it has negative impacts. Hydrocarbon dew point is a measure of the easiness of gas condensation. To meet the hydrocarbon dew point, heavy hydrocarbon should be extracted in dew point control unit (DPCU). The extraction is done by gas cooling in gas chiller followed by separating the liquid formed in low temperature separator (LTS). The gas chiller functions as an evaporator in the DPCU refrigeration cycle. Propane is a common refrigerant in the DPCU. In addition, ammonia is also a potential refrigerant due to its normal boiling point being close to the hydrocarbon dew point. Refrigeration cycle performance depends on evaporator temperature, condensor temperature, and the inherent pressure-enthalpy (PH) characteristic of the selected refrigerant. This study aimed to compare the performance from ammonia and propane against the change of evaporator and condenser temperature. This study was a dry research using Aspen Hysys V11.0 simulation software (academic license). The refrigeration cycle was a simple cycle with fixed variables in the form of evaporator load, saturated liquid at outlet condenser, and saturated vapour at outlet evaporator. This study indicated that at the same evaporator load, evaporator temperature, and condenser temperature, ammonia refrigeration cycle was better than the propane because coefficient of performance (COP) of ammonia was higher than propane. This study also modeled COP changes of propane and ammonia as mathematical equation. Quantitatively, it appeared that COP of propane was more sensitive than ammonia against both evaporator and condenser temperature changes.
References
Aftab, A., Unar, I. N., Mahar, H., Almani, S. M., Hussain, S., dan Siddique, M., 2016, Modeling of refrigeration based hydrocarbon dew point control plant, Sci.Int., 28(4), 3603–3608.
Al Shehhi, A., Varghese, M. J., Rao, L., dan Walke, S., 2019, Process simulation and optimization of natural gas dehydration process using aspen hysys, Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng., 8 (9), 644–649.
Chebbi, R., Qasim, M., Darwish, N. A., dan Ashraf, M. T., 2013, Optimization and cost-oriented comparison of ammonia- and propane-compression refrigeration for the recovery of natural gas liquids, Energy Technol., 1 (10), 573–580.
Eckhoff, R. K., Ngo, M., dan Olsen, W., 2010, On the minimum ignition energy (MIE) for propane/air, J. Hazard. Mater., 175 (1–3), 293–297.
El Mawgoud, H.A., Elshiekh, T.M. dan Khalil, S.A., 2015, Process simulation for revamping of a dehydration gas plant, Egypt. J. Pet., 24 (4), 475–482.
Elhady, A. A. A., 2005, Operating experiences of DEG and MEG for hydrate and dewpoint control in gas production offshore mediterranean, 2005 Int. Pet. Technol. Conf. Proc., 123–128.
Elyas, R. dan Li, Z. H., 2017, Modeling of a Dew Point Control Unit With UniSim Design, di: Foo, D. C., Chemmangattuvalappil, N., Ng, D. K. S., Elyas, R., Chen, C., Elms, R. D., Lee, H., Chien, I., Chong, S., dam Chong, C. H., Chemical Engineering Process Simulation, Elsevier Inc, pp. 119-135.
Hidayat, M., Hartanto, D. T., Azis, M. M., dan Sutijan, S., 2020, Studi Penambahan Etilena Glikol dalam Menghambat Pembentukan Metana Hidrat pada Proses Pemurnian Gas Alam, J. Rekayasa Proses, 14 (2), 198.
Horbaniuc, B.D., 2004, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning, 5, 261–289.
Kobayashi, H., Hayakawa, A., Somarathne, K. D. K. A., dan Okafor, E. C., 2019, Science and technology of ammonia combustion, Proc. Combust. Inst., Elsevier Inc., 37 (1), 109–133.
Lim, W., Choi, K., dan Moon, I., 2013, Current status and perspectives of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) plant design, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 6 Maret.
Makogon, Y. F., 2010, Natural gas hydrates - A promising source of energy, J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng., Elsevier B.V, 2 (1), 49–59.
Mokhatab, S., Mak, J. Y., Valappil, J. V., dan Wood, D.A., 2014, Handbook of Liquefied Natural Gas, First Edit., Gulf Professional Publishing.
Mokhatab, S., Northrop, S., dan Mitariten, M., 2017, Controlling the Hydrocarbon Dew Point of Pipeline Gas, Digit. Refin., 1–9.
Nasir, Q., Suleman, H., dan Elsheikh, Y. A., 2020, A review on the role and impact of various additives as promoters/ inhibitors for gas hydrate formation, J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng., 76, No. 103211, https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jngse.2020.103211
Nawaz, K., Raza, M. A., dan Abdelaziz, O., 2018, Ammonia and propane as natural refrigerants for heat pump applications, Refrig. Sci. Technol., 2018-June (c), 604–611.
Shoaib, A. M., Bhran, A. A., Awad, M. E., El-Sayed, N.A., dan Fathy, T., 2018, Optimum operating conditions for improving natural gas dew point and condensate throughput, J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng., 49, 324–330.
Smith, J. M., Ness, H. C. V., Abott, M. M., dan Swihart, M. T., 2017, Introduction to chemical engineering thermodynamics, 8th edition, McGraw-Hill Education, New York.
Smith, R., 2005, Chemical Process Design and Integration, Wiley.
Verkamp, F. J., Hardin, M. C., dan Williams, J. R., 1967, Ammonia combustion properties and performance in gas-turbine burners, Symp. Combust., 11 (1), 985–992.
