GESP-FAC-EP-008-ConocoPhilips-Separator Sizing Guideline

Engineering Standards and Procedures
UNCONTROLLED UNLESS VIEWED FROM THE GESP INTRANET LIVE SITE
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Process Engineering Design Procedures

Chapter 14 – Section 1 –Separator Sizing Guideline
Recommended Document Retention: ADM220 Administrative, Policy and Procedures; Policy, Directives and Procedures.
Rev Document Technical Reviewed Approved
Date Description
No. Owner Authority By By
T.K.Szeto / P.R.
1 T.K.Szeto S.S.Huang R. Tocher 18-Sep-2015 Issued for Use
Hahn / M.S.Choi
Chapter 14 – Sec. 1 – Separator Sizing Guideline
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Revision 1 Page 2 of 70
Chap 14 – Sec1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 5

2.0 SCOPE ................................................................................................................................................ 5
3.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 5
4.0 DEFINITIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 6
5.0 NOMENCLATURE .............................................................................................................................. 7
6.0 FACTORS AFFECTING SEPARATION ............................................................................................. 9
7.0 SECTIONS OF A SEPARATOR ....................................................................................................... 10
7.1 Primary Separation Section ..................................................................................................... 11
7.2 Secondary Separation Section ................................................................................................ 11
7.3 Mist Extraction Section ............................................................................................................ 11
7.4 Liquid Accumulation Section ................................................................................................... 12
8.0 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................ 12
8.1 Configuration ........................................................................................................................... 12
Table 1: Typical Vessel Orientation by Service................................................................................. 12
8.1.1 Horizontal vs Vertical ............................................................................................................... 13
8.2 Separator L/D Ratio ................................................................................................................. 13
Table 2: Economical Vessel Sizing Aspect Ratios ............................................................................ 14
8.3 Flow Regime in Inlet Piping ..................................................................................................... 14
8.4 Feed Pipe Configuration .......................................................................................................... 14
8.5 Liquid Retention Time .............................................................................................................. 14
Table 3: Typical Liquid Retention Times by Service ......................................................................... 15
8.6 Surge Times ............................................................................................................................ 16
Table 4A: Typical Surge Times by Service ....................................................................................... 17
Table 4B: Design Factor for Suspected Intermittent Flow ................................................................ 18
8.7 Operator Control/Intervention Times ....................................................................................... 18
Table 5: Typical Operator Control/Intervention Time ........................................................................ 18
8.8 Vapor Space ............................................................................................................................ 19
9.0 DESIGNING FOR 2-PHASE (VAPOR-LIQUID) SEPARATION ....................................................... 19
9.1 Separators without Mist Eliminators ........................................................................................ 19
9.1.1 Stokes’ Law ............................................................................................................................. 21
9.1.2 Intermediate Law ..................................................................................................................... 21
9.1.3 Newton’s Law .......................................................................................................................... 22
9.2 Vertical Separators .................................................................................................................. 22
9.2.1 Horizontal Separators .............................................................................................................. 23
9.3 Drums with Mist Eliminators .................................................................................................... 23
This document may not be used or reproduced without the permission of ConocoPhillips.
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
9.3.1 Vertical Separators .................................................................................................................. 24

Table 6: Vertical Separator K Factors ............................................................................................... 24
Table 7: Typical Support Ring Requirement ..................................................................................... 25
9.3.2 Horizontal Separators .............................................................................................................. 26
Table 8: Horizontal Separator K Factors ........................................................................................... 26
10.0 DESIGNING FOR 3-PHASE (VAPOR-LIQUID-LIQUID) SEPARATION .......................................... 28
10.1 Horizontal Separators .............................................................................................................. 29
10.1.1 Draw-off Boots..................................................................................................................... 29
10.1.2 Separator with an Internal Baffle ......................................................................................... 30
10.1.3 Separator with a “Bucket and Weir” .................................................................................... 30
10.2 Vertical Separators .................................................................................................................. 31
11.0 SEPARATOR NOZZLES................................................................................................................... 31
11.1 Process Nozzles ...................................................................................................................... 31
11.1.1 Inlet Nozzle .......................................................................................................................... 31
11.1.2 Gas Outlet ........................................................................................................................... 32
11.1.3 Liquid Outlet(s) .................................................................................................................... 32
11.2 Auxiliary Nozzles ..................................................................................................................... 32
Table 9: Auxiliary Nozzle Sizes by Vessel Volume ........................................................................... 32
11.3 Process-Control/Instrumentation Connections ........................................................................ 33
Table 10: Instrumentation Connection Sizes .................................................................................... 33
11.4 Relief Devices .......................................................................................................................... 34
11.5 Manhole(s) ............................................................................................................................... 34
Table 11: Manhole Location and Size Summary .............................................................................. 34
11.6 Nozzle Locations ..................................................................................................................... 35
12.0 SEPARATOR INTERNALS ............................................................................................................... 35
12.1 Inlet Nozzle Device .................................................................................................................. 35
Table 12: Inlet Device Requirement Criteria ..................................................................................... 36
12.2 Mist Eliminators/Extractors ...................................................................................................... 37
12.2.1 Mesh Pad ............................................................................................................................ 38
Table 13: Common Mesh Pad Specifications ................................................................................... 38
12.2.2 Vane Type ........................................................................................................................... 39
12.2.3 Filter Coalescing Mist Extractors ......................................................................................... 39
12.2.4 Centrifugal Mist Extractors .................................................................................................. 39
12.3 Vortex Breakers ....................................................................................................................... 40
12.4 Wave Breakers ........................................................................................................................ 40
12.5 Overflow Dams (Bucket & Weir) .............................................................................................. 40
12.6 Coalescer Pads ....................................................................................................................... 40
12.7 Stilling Wells ............................................................................................................................ 40
12.8 Defoaming Plates .................................................................................................................... 41
12.9 Sand Jets and Drains .............................................................................................................. 41
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
13.0 POTENTIAL OPERATIONAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................... 41

13.1 Foamy Crude ........................................................................................................................... 41
13.2 Paraffin .................................................................................................................................... 42
13.3 Sand ........................................................................................................................................ 42
13.4 Carryover and Blowby ............................................................................................................. 42
13.5 Liquid Slugs ............................................................................................................................. 43
14.0 OTHER DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................. 43
14.1 Standard Heads ....................................................................................................................... 43
14.2 Vessel Dimensions .................................................................................................................. 43
14.3 Skirts and Legs ........................................................................................................................ 43
14.4 Materials Selection .................................................................................................................. 43
Table 14: Corrosion Allowance ......................................................................................................... 44
14.5 Vessel Weight .......................................................................................................................... 44
15.0 SEPARATOR SIZING PROCEDURE ............................................................................................... 45
15.1 Collecting the Required Process Inputs .................................................................................. 45
Table 15: Required Process Inputs ................................................................................................... 45
15.2 Identifying the Intended Process Function(s) .......................................................................... 46
15.3 Selecting the Design Case(s) for Sizing the Separator ........................................................... 46
15.4 Selecting the Separator Configuration/Orientation .................................................................. 46
15.5 Sizing the Separator ................................................................................................................ 47
16.0 PROCESS DATA SHEET SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS ...................................................... 48
17.0 SPECIFYING PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS ........................................................................ 49
18.0 PROCESS DATA SHEET EXAMPLE ............................................................................................... 49
19.0 SEPARATOR SIZING EXAMPLES ................................................................................................... 50
APPENDIX 1 - FIGURES .................................................................................................................. 62
Figure 1 – Drag Coefficient ............................................................................................................... 63
Figure 2 – Typical Separator Configurations for 2-Phase and 3-Phase Separation ......................... 64
Figure 3 – Typical Inlet Devices ........................................................................................................ 65
Figure 4 – 2-Phase Horizontal Separator with Demister Pad ........................................................... 66
Figure 5 – 2-Phase Vertical Separator with/without Mesh Pad ......................................................... 67
Figure 6 – 2-Phase Vertical Separator with Vane Pack .................................................................... 68
Figure 7 – 3-Phase Horizontal Separator with Vane Pack ................................................................ 69
Figure 8 – 3-Phase Separator with Mesh Pad and Boot................................................................... 69
APPENDIX 2 – USEFUL GEOMETRIC FORMULAS ....................................................................... 70
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this section is to provide general guidance on the design, sizing, and evaluation of
conventional separators including their internals.
A separator is a pressure vessel designed to accomplish one or more of the following process
functions:
 Separate vapor and liquid phases by gravity settling
 Separate two liquid phases by gravity settling
 Provide liquid surge volume
Some of the other common names used in reference to a separator include scrubber, knockout
drum, accumulator, and receiver. This variation in naming convention is used to provide a
specific description of the process function associated with the separator vessel. Appropriate
design criteria need to be applied when sizing a separator to ensure that the vessel performs the
intended process function(s). Inadequately sized separators can often bottleneck and limit the
processing capabilities of an entire facility.
2.0 SCOPE
This guideline covers conventional gravity settling separators and their internals for surface
application on ConocoPhillips upstream onshore and offshore facilities. The premise of this
guideline is intended to couple good engineering judgment with design criteria and considerations
required for conventional separators to adequately perform the necessary process function(s) on
new grassroots construction and revamp projects. These process guidelines for sizing
conventional gravity settling separators may not address every application and/or service
encountered, including the developing area of subsea separation.
3.0 REFERENCES
No. Standard Document Title
1 GESP-VSL-EP-001 Pressure Vessels – Design and Fabrication

2 GESP-FAC-EP-008 Process Engineering Design Procedures:
Ch. 13-Sect. 1: Design Pressure and Temperature Philosophy
Ch. 13-Sect. 2: Hydraulic Calculations and Line Sizing
Guidelines
Ch. 14-Sect. 3: Molecular Sieve Gas Dehydration Specification
and Calculations
3 GPSA Gas Processors Suppliers Association Engineering Data Book:
Section 7: Separators and Filters.
4 API American Petroleum Institute:
RP-12J: Oil and Gas Separators
RP-14E: Recommended Practice for Design and Installation of
Offshore Production Platform Piping Systems
Std-521:Pressure Relieving and Depressuring Systems
5 NORSOK NORSOK Standard
P-002: Process Design Systems
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
4.0 DEFINITIONS
The following definitions are used throughout this guideline:
Company The term “Company” shall mean ConocoPhillips or any entity
represented by ConocoPhillips.
Contractor Firm or business that agrees to furnish materials or perform
specified services at a specified price and/or rate to the Company.
Dead Oil Oil without dissolved gas, e.g., stabilized oil in an atmospheric
storage tank.
Filter Separator Vessel used for solid and liquid removal in low liquid loading
applications.
Floating Production Units that are supported by a hull or supporting structure that float
Systems (FPS) in water. FPS are often used for the production of hydrocarbons
recovered from below the seabed and can come in a variety of
different shapes, sizes, and designs. The four basic platform
options are FPSO, TLP, SPARs, and semisubmersibles.
Foam Is a mixture of gas dispersed in a liquid and having a density less
than the liquid but greater than the gas.
Free Water Vessel used to separate free water from a flowing stream of gas,
Knockout (FWKO) oil and water.
Heat and Material A tabulated list that defines composition, flow rates and properties
Balance (H&MB) of streams entering and leaving the unit that allows for a complete
energy and mass balance.
Immiscible A term used to refer to fluids that are incapable of mixing or
achieving homogeneity.
Inspector A ConocoPhillips appointed engineer or inspector.
Knockout Drum A type of separator for total liquid removal (combined hydrocarbon
and water) from a gas stream.
Operator ConocoPhillips Company or a designated affiliate assigned with
the operation and maintenance of equipment.
Operator It is the available time between the level at which an alarm is
Intervention Time initiated and the level where the trip command is triggered.
Operator must take action within this time to prevent shutdown.
Also referred to as the operator intervention time used to set the
distance between the HLL to HLSD and/or the LLL to LLSD.
Owner’s Engineer A ConocoPhillips appointed engineer.
Philosophy Guiding principles based upon qualitative characterization,

experience, policy, and company culture.
Process Simulation A representation of the physical facility usually based on first-
Model principle thermodynamic equations to gain insight into the
operation of those systems. They are commonly built on
commercial software with pre-programmed blocks to represent
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
unit operations.
Retention Time Expressed in minutes, it is defined as the time corresponding to
liquid volume that a vessel can retain based on the incoming fluid
rate so that required the liquid phase(s) reach phase equilibrium at
the specific separator operating temperature and pressure.
Commonly referred to as the holdup time used to set the distance
between LLL and NLL.
Scrubber A type of separator designed for flow streams with high gas to
liquids ratios. Term commonly used in reference to vessels in
conjunction with gas treaters, dehydrators, or compressors for
protection against entrained liquids.
Separator Vessel used to remove oil and/or water from the gas components.
A separator may be a two-phase (vapor-liquid) or three-phase
(vapor-liquid-liquid) separator.
Shall Denotes a minimum requirement in order to conform to the
specification.
Slug Catcher Separator able to absorb and hold large liquid volumes.
Surge Time Expressed in minutes, it is the duration that the vessel can
accommodate additional feed flow with premised liquid content. It
is used to set the distance between NLL and HLL.
Test Separator 3-phase separator used for well testing by measuring the
production rates of oil, gas and water for an individual well.
Unsaturated Oil Contains dissolved gas but not at saturation conditions.
5.0 NOMENCLATURE
The following nomenclature are used throughout the guideline:
2
A Area, ft
AG Cross sectional area of a horizontal separator occupied by the gas

2
phase, ft
AH Cross sectional area of a horizontal separator occupied by the
2
liquid phase, ft
AL Cross sectional area of a vertical separator occupied by the liquid
2
phase, ft
2
AP Particle or droplet cross sectional area, ft
BFD Block Flow Diagram
BOD Basis of Design

CA Corrosion Allowance, in
C Empirical constant for erosional velocity (use C = 100 for
continuous service and C = 125 for intermittent service)
CD Drag coefficient of particle, dimensionless
d Nozzle inner diameter (for inlet or gas outlet nozzles), in
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
D Vessel internal diameter, in or ft
DP Droplet diameter, ft
DCS Distributed Control Systems
FS Safety factor
FPSO Floating Production Storage and Offloading

2
g Acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 ft/s
3
GLR Gas to liquid ratio, standard ft /bbl
HL Liquid height of a horizontal or vertical separator, in or ft
h Vertical traveling distance of the entrained liquid droplet, in or ft
HLL High Liquid Level (alarm)
HLSD High Liquid Level Shut Down, HLSD (also referred to as HHLL)
H&MB Heat & Material Balance
K Empirical or experience factor for separator sizing, ft/s
L Length of vessel from tan to tan or seam to seam, ft
LB Horizontal length of a 3-phase horizontal separator required for

the continuous phase compartment usually behind the internal
baffle, ft. Typically the greater of 5 ft or 0.5D.
LRT Effective separation length of horizontal separator required to
satisfy liquid retention time requirement for vapor-liquid and/or
liquid-liquid separation, ft
LLL Low Liquid Level (alarm)
LLSD Low Liquid Level Shut Down (also referred to as LLLL)
mP Mass of particle or droplet, lb
MW Molecular Weight, lb/lbmol
NLL Normal Liquid Level
P Operating pressure, psig
PDesign Design pressure, psig
PFD Process Flow Diagram
P&ID Piping & Instrumentation Diagram
PLC Programmable Logic Controller

3
QG Volumetric gas flow rate, ft /s
3
QHL Volumetric heavy liquid flow rate, ft /s
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
3
QLL Volumetric light liquid flow rate, ft /s
3
R Gas constant, 10.73 (psia-ft )/(lbmol-˚R)
r Radius of vessel or D/2, in or ft
RT Retention time, min
Re Reynolds number, dimensionless
SGG Specific gravity of gas phase at standard conditions (air = 1)
SGL Specific gravity of liquid phase at standard conditions (water = 1;

use average gravity for hydrocarbon-water mixtures)
T Temperature, ˚R
t Time, min
tHead Vessel wall thickness, in
tShell Vessel head wall thickness, in.
TLP Tension Leg Platform
Ua Maximum allowable vapor velocity, ft/s
Ue Erosional velocity, ft/s
UG Design vapor velocity, ft/s
Ut Terminal or crucial gas velocity necessary for particles of size DP

to drop or settle out of the gas phase, ft/s
3
V Volume, ft
3
VG Volume of the gas phase, ft
3
VL Volume of the liquid phase, ft
Z Compressibility factor, dimensionless
µc Viscosity of continuous phase, cP
3
ρG Gas phase density, lb/ft
3
ρL Liquid phase density, lb/ft
3
ρM Mixture phase density, lb/ft
3
ρC Continuous liquid phase density, lb/ft
3
ρD Dispersed liquid phase density, lb/ft
6.0 FACTORS AFFECTING SEPARATION

The following factors can affect the separation of a fluid stream when designing, sizing, and
evaluating the operation of a separator:
 Anticipated inlet and outlet stream flow rates with full composition entering and leaving the
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
separator (including all minimum pump flow and recycles) at minimum, average, and peak
production
 Operating pressures
 Operating temperatures
 Vapor properties at operating conditions (e.g., density, viscosity, MW, compressibility)
 Liquid properties for each liquid phase at operating conditions (e.g., density, viscosity, MW,
surface tension)
 Retention time requirement for each liquid phase, if applicable
 Degree of separation required, or process performance requirements (i.e., oil-in-water
specification, water-in-oil specification, liquid carryover in gas outlet)
 Particle size distribution
 Water cut over time
 Surging/Slugging tendencies and requirements
 Foaming tendencies
 Presence of impurities (e.g., paraffin, sand, scale, etc.)
 Corrosive tendencies (e.g., from water, O2, CO2, H2S, chlorides, hydrogen, etc.)
These various factors serve as the required process inputs to size a separator designed to
perform its intended process function(s).
7.0 SECTIONS OF A SEPARATOR
The major sections required for the mechanical separation of gas, liquids, and solids (where
applicable) are:
 Primary separation section
 Secondary separation section
 Liquid accumulation section
 Mist extraction section
Each of these sections is essential to the separator adequately performing the intended process
functions. However, separation of the phases can only occur if the incoming fluid phases are
immiscible and have different densities at a specific operating temperature and pressure.
Each of these sections are covered in more detail to follow.
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
7.1 Primary Separation Section

The primary separation section removes the bulk of the entrained liquid in the inlet stream feeding
the separator. This section refers to the inlet device (feed deflector or momentum breaker) used
to both change the direction of the incoming fluid flow and absorb the fluid momentum. The
presence of an inlet device will generally help disengage the large liquid droplets (1000+ µm)
entrained in the gas phase by impaction. However, an inlet device is not always required, as
discussed in Section 12.1 Inlet Nozzle Device.
7.2 Secondary Separation Section
After the primary separation section, this section is sized so that liquid droplets (250+ µm)
naturally fall out of the gas phase due to the force of gravity. The separation efficiency of this
section depends on the gas and liquid properties, particle size, and degree of gas turbulence
coming out of the primary separation section. A secondary function of the gas gravity settling
section is to allow the gas trajectory to naturally straighten and improve the distribution ahead of
the mist extraction section. The vapor space requires sufficient clearance above the gas-liquid
interface to prevent the entrained liquid droplets from overloading the mist extraction device.
Refer to Section 8.8 for additional discussion on vapor space.
7.3 Mist Extraction Section
Prior to exiting the separator, the mist extraction section is the last mechanical means to
disengage any remaining entrained liquid droplets from the gas phase. Common mist extraction
devices, including mesh pads and vane packs, provide the surface area for the entrained liquid
droplets to impinge and collect into larger sized droplets and, eventually, fall to the liquid
accumulation section. The mist extraction section, when equipped with a mist extractor, can be
designed to reduce the liquid carryover in the outlet gas to liquid droplets < 15 µm in size, which
equates to a performance specification of less than 0.1 gallon of carryover liquid per MMSCF.
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Liquid carryover tolerance in the gas outlet will depend on sensitivity of the downstream process
or equipment to liquid content entrained in the gas phase.
7.4 Liquid Accumulation Section
The bulk liquid is collected in the liquid accumulation section, also known as the liquid gravity
separation section. The liquid accumulation section provides liquid retention time for the gas
droplets entrained in the liquid phase to break out of solution, as well as provides adequate
capacity to accommodate intermittent liquid surges. For three-phase separation, additional
retention time may be required to allow the light-liquid droplets to disengage from the heavy-liquid
phase and the heavy-liquid droplets to settle from the light-liquid phase. See Section 8.5 for
additional details.
8.0 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
8.1 Configuration
Separators come in various shapes and configurations, but there are three conventional types of
separator configurations: horizontal, vertical, and spherical. See Figure 2 for typical two- and
three-phase separator configurations.
In general, horizontal separators are preferred when separation of significant quantities of liquid
from gas is involved. Horizontal separators are often used when separating a stream containing
more than one liquid phase, due to increased liquid retention time and shorter travel distances for
droplets to reach an interface.
Vertical separators are preferred when liquid quantities are small, or plot space is a major
concern.
Although, spherical separators are a class of vertical separators, spherical separators are
theoretically designed to encompass the best characteristics of both the horizontal and vertical
separator. However, due to fabrication/operational difficulties, and limited liquid-surge capability,
spherical separators are seldom used. For this reason, no further discussion of spherical
separators is included in this guideline.
The table below summarizes typical orientations for some general applications.
Table 1: Typical Vessel Orientation by Service

Service Typical Orientation
Amine Knockout Drum Vertical
Compressor Suction/Discharge Vertical
Scrubbers
Feed Surge Drum Horizontal
Flare Knockout Drums Horizontal
Fuel Gas Scrubber Vertical
Free Water Knockout Drum Horizontal
Heat Exchanger Heads/Surge Drum Vertical
Production Separator Horizontal
Reflux Accumulator Horizontal
Refrigeration Receivers Horizontal
Tower Feed Separator Horizontal
Tower Feed Surge Drum Vertical
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
8.1.1 Horizontal vs Vertical

Horizontal separators are normally more efficient at handling large volumes of gas than vertical
separators. In the gas gravity-settling section of the vessel, the liquid droplets fall perpendicular
to the gas flow, and, thus, are more easily settled out of the gas-continuous phase. Since the
interface area is larger in a horizontal separator than a vertical separator, it is easier for the gas
bubbles to come out of solution, as the liquid approaches equilibrium, to reach the vapor space.
Thus, from a pure gas-liquid separation viewpoint, horizontal separators would be preferred.
However, horizontal separators do have several drawbacks, which could lead to a preference for
a vertical separator in certain situations.
From a general solids handling perspective, the liquid dump of a vertical separator can be placed
at the center of the bottom head, so that, solids will not accumulate in the separator and continue
to the next vessel in the process. As an alternative, a drain could be placed at this bottom head
location so that solids could be disposed of periodically, while liquid leaves the vessel at a slightly
higher elevation.
Although horizontal separators are not as effective as vertical separators in removing solids,
horizontal separators offer greater solid handling capabilities compared to a vertical separator,
which may have less volume capacity to collect solids and may be prone to plug liquid outlets
without periodic disposal. Thus, horizontal production separators equipped with sand jets are
common configurations. Since the solids will have an angle of repose of 45° to 60°, several
drains along the length of the horizontal vessel are often necessary, and must be spaced at very
close intervals to reduce solid accumulation in the separator. Attempts to lengthen distance
between drains by providing sand jets in the vicinity of each drain to fluidize solids have been only
marginally successful in field operations and may result in more frequent periodic disposal of
solids. Sand jets are covered in more detail in Section 12.9.
Horizontal vessels require more plan area to perform the same separation as vertical vessels.
While this may not be of importance at an onshore location, it could be very important offshore. If
several separators are used, however, this disadvantage may be overcome by stacking one
horizontal separator on top of another.
For a given change in liquid surface elevation, a horizontal separator offers a larger increase in
liquid volume compared to a vertical separator sized for the same incoming fluid flow rate. This
additional liquid volume in a horizontal separator allows additional operator intervention time to
react and to respond to surges, which could create internal propagating waves that could result in
prematurely activating high level sensors. To avoid potential operating concerns associated with
surges in flow, careful consideration should be exercised for all separator designs to ensure that
level devices are set at the proper elevations to handle potential operating concerns associated
with surges in flow.
Overall, horizontal vessels are most economical for normal oil-gas separation, particularly where
there may be problems with emulsions, foam, or high gas-oil ratios (GOR). Although vertical
vessels may be effectively used in low-GOR applications with plot space limitations, they are also
used in some very high-GOR applications. One such high-GOR application is the use of a vertical
scrubber to remove fluid mists from the gas to protect downstream equipment sensitive to liquid
carryover in the gas outlet (e.g., compressor suction scrubber).
8.2 Separator L/D Ratio
The sizing goal is a separator design that satisfies the process requirements economically. The
length to diameter (L/D) ratio for typical separators is ideally 3.0 or lower, except for high
operating pressure (400+ psig) separators where L/D ratios of 4.0 to 6.0 are more common as
depicted in the table to follow.
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Table 2: Economical Vessel Sizing Aspect Ratios
L/D Ratio Operating Pressure
barg psig
1.5 to 3.0 ≤ 20 ≤ 290
3.0 to 4.0 20 < P ≤ 40 290 < P <580
4.0 to 6.0 > 40 > 580
A higher L/D ratio is typically chosen if the size is governed by liquid-liquid separation criteria.
High-pressure separators with higher L/D ratios generally result in less wall thickness and a less
expensive vessel.
8.3 Flow Regime in Inlet Piping
Different flow regimes may be present in the inlet piping of a separator. These flow regimes are
dependent on the relative amounts of gas and liquid in the inlet piping, as discussed in Reference
2 (Hydraulic Calculations and Line Sizing Guidelines). In general, an increase in gas velocity
correlates with an increase in liquid entrainment in the gas phase and a decrease in liquid droplet
sizes, both of which will negatively affect separation.
8.4 Feed Pipe Configuration
The feed pipe configuration directly upstream of any separator is important to the performance,
but is often overlooked. The presence of flow changes (e.g., elbows, fittings) or flow pattern
disruptions (e.g., expansion/contractions) immediately upstream of a separator can upset any
well-established, stabilized flow state into the separator. A general rule of thumb is to provide at
least 10 diameters of straight pipe immediately upstream of the inlet nozzle without elbows,
valves, or expansions/contractions.
8.5 Liquid Retention Time
The liquid retention time is in reference to the liquid volume required for the liquid phase(s) to
reach phase equilibrium at the specific separator operating temperature and pressure. Liquid
retention time is defined as the average time liquid is retained in the vessel at NLL and is, thus,
the volume of the liquid storage in the vessel divided by the inlet liquid flow rate. The retention
volume is normally based on a change in the liquid level from LLL to NLL. In general, the volume
of vessel heads is not included as part of the liquid retention volume, even though some vendors
and contractors may take credit for the head volume as part of the retention time in an effort to
reduce the overall size of the vessel.
For most applications, retention times of between three to five minutes have been found to be
sufficient. However, retention times can also be severely affected by inlet and outlet
configurations, which in turn can reduce the actual residence times necessary to achieve the
separation performance requirements. Where foaming liquids or emulsions are present, retention
times up to four times this amount may be required. In the event that long retention times may
not be sufficient to separate tight emulsions and very fine solids, alternate treatment may be
required in these instances (i.e., centrifuge or electrostatic treatment), see Section 12.0.
The table below provides typical liquid retention times for common two-phase and three-phase
separators:
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Table 3: Typical Liquid Retention Times by Service
Liquid Retention Time (LLL to NLL) 2-Phase 3-Phase
Minutes Minutes
Gas Production Service
Inlet Separation
Production Separator 2.0 3.0

nd
2 Stage Separator 2.0 3.0
Amine Gas Treating
Contactor Inlet Separator 2.0 n/a
Clean Gas Separator 2.0 n/a
Amine Stripper Reflux Drum 10.0 n/a
Rich Amine Flash Drum n/a 20.0
Molecular Sieve Dehydration
Drier Inlet Separator 2.0 n/a
Mol Sieve Regeneration Gas n/a 3.0

Separator
Glycol Dehydration
Contactor Inlet Scrubber 2.0 n/a
Dry Gas Scrubber 2.0 n/a
Rich Glycol Flash Drum n/a 30.0
NGL Recovery Process
Expander Inlet Separator 5.0 n/a
Low Temperature Separator 5.0 n/a
Fractionator Reflux Drum 10.0 n/a
Compressors (Gas & Refrigeration)
Suction Scrubbers 1.0 n/a
Flare Knockout Drum 30.0 n/a
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Oil Production Service
Production Separators
> 35˚ API 1.0 3.0 – 5.0
25˚ to 35˚ API (> 120 ˚F) 2.0 6.0
25˚ to 35˚ API (80 to 120 ˚F) 3.0 8.0
25˚ to 35˚ API (< 80 ˚F) 4.0 10.0
15˚ to 25˚ API (> 150 ˚F) 4.0 15.0
15˚ to 25˚ API (120 to 150 ˚F) 5.0 20.0
15˚ to 25˚ API (80 to 120 ˚F) 6.0 25.0
< 15˚ API (> 180 ˚F) 8.0+ 30.0+
< 15˚ API (< 180 ˚F) 10.0+ 45.0+
As indicated in the table above, sufficient retention time, in two-phase separation, is necessary for
efficient separation of the gas droplets to break out of solution. For three-phase separation, the
design approach to the liquid accumulation section is to allow equal retention times for the light-
liquid phase (oil) and the heavy-liquid phase (water) to remain in contact with each other. This
settling time approach allows for the light-liquid phase to adequate disengage itself from the
heavy-liquid phase, and the heavy-liquid phase to adequately drop out from the light-liquid phase.
8.6 Surge Times
Surge time is the time required for instruments and operators to respond to load changes and
inlet fluid fluctuations (e.g., intermittent slug flows). Adequate surge volumes give instruments
and operators sufficient time to respond to process changes and maintain smooth operations.
Surge time is the liquid surge volume divided by the design liquid flow rate and is usually
expressed in minutes. The surge volume is based on a change in the liquid level from NLL to
HLL.
Liquid flow surges are accommodated by allowing the liquid level in the separator to rise and fall
while holding the liquid outflow relatively constant. This requires level controllers that are tuned to
allow the level to move up and down within the alarm set points. To smooth out gas flow rate
surges, it is necessary to let the separator pressure rise and fall while holding the gas outflow
relatively constant. If the swings in gas/liquid flow are large, as in cases where the fluids are
received from a long, large diameter multi-phase pipeline, a dedicated slug catcher may be
needed to attenuate the flow variations.
The general guidelines for typical liquid surge times are summarized in Table 4A below based on
common services.
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Table 4A: Typical Surge Times by Service

NLL to HLL
Surge Times
Minutes
1
Feed Surge Drum (Feed from Other Unit Control
Room)
Separators
Knockout Drum
- Compressor Suction Scrubber 1.0 - 2.0
- Fuel Gas Scrubber 1.0 - 2.0
- Amine Scrubber 2.0 - 3.0
Feed to Another Drum or Tower 1.0 - 2.0
Reflux Drum 2.0 - 3.0
2
Overhead Receivers 2.0 - 3.0
Water Draw-Off Boots 1.0 - 3.0
3
Rich Amine Flash Drums 2.0 - 3.0
Note(s)
1.) More time may be required for liquid-liquid separation.
2.) Based on total overhead liquid (reflux + product).
3.) Surge requirements for these drums are set mainly for degassing and hydrocarbon liquid
skimming.
The following additional generic guides should be considered when determining surge times.
a. Knockout drums are provided to remove substantial amounts of liquid that are present on an
intermittent basis. This is frequently the case for compressor suction scrubbers and fuel gas
scrubbers. One approach is to have the surge volume equal to the volume of a slug of liquid that
could accumulate in the feed pipe based on an arbitrary length of 25 to 50 feet.
b. In some cases, a surge volume for receiving-liquid drained from the related equipment and piping
during startup, shutdown and maintenance period may be required.
c. For a closed loop expansion drum, the surge volume should be determined by the liquid volume
changes due to expansion and contraction between maximum operating and minimum ambient
temperatures.
d. Multi-phase transient simulations can be a good source for the quantity and rate of a surge when
a vessel is connected to a pipeline. This data may increase the surge timing from those listed
above.
In the absence of quantifiable surging tendencies and/or requirements, a design factor relative to
the anticipated normal flow rate may be used to preliminarily size the separator to account for
suspected surging service. Table 4B below provides generic design factor multipliers that may be
applied as surge allowance:
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Table 4B: Design Factor for Suspected Intermittent Flow
Suspected Surge Services Design

Factor
(% of Normal
Flow Rate)
Offshore Separator Handling Primary Production from:
- Own Platform 20%
- Another Platform or remote well in less than 150 feet 30%
of Water
- Another Platform or remote well in greater than 150 40%
feet of Water
Offshore Separator Handling Gas Lifted Production from:
- Own platform 40%
- Another platform or remote well 50%
Onshore Separator Handling Primary Production from
- Flat or Rolling Country 20%
- Hilly Country 30%
General Feed from Other In-Facility Equipment 15%
8.7 Operator Control/Intervention Times
Depending on the service of the separator, additional operator control and/or intervention time to
respond to an alarm condition to prevent a serious upset or shutdown may be necessary. The
operator must take action within this time to prevent a shutdown, which is typically 1 to 2 minutes
for operator intervention in the control room and around 5 minutes for action outside the control
room. This intervention time is used to set the distance between HLL to HLSD and/or LLL to
LLSD, but no less than 6 inches in height as depicted in Figures 5 and 6.
Separators ahead of compressors, for example, often have a high-level shutdown (HLSD) device
that will be activated if the operator does not take corrective action when a HLL is signaled by an
alarm. If the separator feeds a tower, for example, it is usually advisable to provide additional
time below LLL for operator response to prevent serious hydraulic upsets within the tower.
Although the preceding examples are illustrative and not exhaustive, the table below provides a
general summary of typical operator control/intervention times required to protect downstream
equipment and/or units:
Table 5: Typical Operator Control/Intervention Time

HLL to HLSD LLL to LLSD
Operator Control/Intervention Times
Minutes Minutes
Feed Surge Drum
- Feed from Other Unit (Same Control Room) 1.0 - 2.0 1.0 - 2.0
- Feed from Other Unit (Other Control Room) 5.0 5.0
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Separators
Knockout Drum
- Compressor Suction Scrubber 2.0 - 4.0 Note 1
- Fuel Gas Scrubber 1.0 - 2.0 Note 1
Feed to Another Drum or Tower Note 1 3.0
Reflux Drum Note 1 5.0
Overhead Receivers 2.0 - 3.0 2.0
Rich Amine Flash Drums 2.0
Note(s)
1.) Careful consideration is necessary to ensure the level devices are set at the proper elevations to
handle case specific design upset conditions.
8.8 Vapor Space
In a horizontal vessel, the vapor space refers to the vertical height above the highest liquid level
anticipated in the vessel. The vapor space is sized based on the allowable vapor velocity, which
will be covered in Sections 9.3.2 and 10.1, and the height should be at least 20% of the vessel
diameter, as depicted in Figures 4, 7, and 8.
For vertical vessels, the vapor space is the space between the centerline of the inlet nozzle and
the bottom of the mist eliminator. The height of this space should be equal to 50% of the vessel
diameter (up to 6 feet), or 125% of the inlet nozzle diameter plus 12 inches or 36 inches,
whichever is greater. The distance between the inlet nozzle centerline and the maximum liquid
level should be equal to 125% of the inlet nozzle diameter plus 12 inches. Liquid level in the
vertical vessel should never be allowed to rise above the bottom of the inlet nozzle. See Figures
5 and 6 for additional guidelines for dimensional requirements.
9.0 DESIGNING FOR 2-PHASE (VAPOR-LIQUID) SEPARATION
Separators without mist eliminators are designed using fundamental rules for the terminal velocity
of liquid droplets of a specified size settling under the influence of gravity. Separators with mist
eliminators are sized using empirical equations for the allowable vapor velocity through the mesh
pad. Applications of these methods for vertical and horizontal separators are discussed in the
following sections.
Mist eliminators are used for two reasons. First, mist eliminators minimize liquid entrained in the
gas leaving the separator. The most notable examples are compressor suction scrubbers.
Second, mist eliminators reduce the separator size when it is governed by vapor-liquid criteria.
For instance, the allowable vapor velocity in a vertical separator can be increased significantly by
using a mist eliminator. If neither reason applies, or if the service is a known fouling service, then
the separator can be designed without a mist eliminator. For black oil and dirty gas applications,
vane packs are recommended over wire mesh pads to avoid potential plugging issues.
Although the focus in this section is on vapor-liquid separation, criteria for liquid-liquid separation
and liquid surge may also have to be satisfied. In fact, these additional criteria may govern the
size of the separator, orientation, L/D ratio, and whether or not a mist eliminator is used. See
Section 10 for additional details on designing for liquid-liquid separation.
9.1 Separators without Mist Eliminators
To use the following criteria for sizing drums without mist eliminators, the terminal settling velocity
of a liquid particle of a specified size must be calculated, as show below in Equation 1:
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
2 𝑔 𝑚𝑃 (𝜌𝐿 − 𝜌𝐺 )
𝑈𝑡 = √ [1]
𝜌𝐿 𝜌𝐺 𝐴𝑃 𝐶𝐷
For a spherical liquid droplet of diameter DP,

𝜋 3
𝑚𝑃 = 𝐷 𝜌
6 𝑃 𝐿
𝜋
𝐴𝑃 = 𝐷𝑃2
4
Equation 1 can be further simplified.
4 𝑔 𝐷𝑃 (𝜌𝐿 − 𝜌𝐺 )
𝑈𝑡 = √ [2]
3 𝜌𝐺 𝐶𝐷
Given that the liquid droplet diameter and drag coefficient are rarely known, Equation 2 can be
reduced to the Souders-Brown Equation where an experience separation factor K is simplified to
encompass both unknowns. The Souders-Brown Equation is depicted below as Equation 3 (for
vertical separators) and Equation 4 as a function of length L (for horizontal separators).
𝜌𝐿 − 𝜌𝐺 [3] (Vertical
𝑈𝑡 = 𝐾 √
𝜌𝐺 Separators)
𝜌𝐿 − 𝜌𝐺 𝐿 0.56 [4] (Horizontal

𝑈𝑡 = 𝐾 √ ( )
𝜌𝐺 10 Separators)
Where:
4 𝑔 𝐷𝑃
𝐾= √ [5]
3𝐶𝐷
As shown above, the K value is a function of both the particle size and drag coefficient. Although
not readily known, the K value can be expressed as follows for various liquid droplet sizes.
For 150 µ droplets:
0.145
𝐾= [6]
√𝐶𝐷

0.206
𝐾= [7]
√𝐶𝐷
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
0.291
𝐾= [8]
√𝐶𝐷
For a spherical particle, the drag coefficient is a function of the Reynolds Number of the vapor
phase as defined below:
1488 𝐷𝑃 𝑈𝑡 𝜌𝐺
𝑅𝑒 = [9]
𝜇𝐺
The relationship between CD and Re cannot be expressed explicitly. When CD is plotted against
2
CD(Re) (as shown in Figure 1), the value of CD can be determined without knowing the velocity.
The value of CD can be calculated directly by using the following equation:
(0.95 × 108 )𝜌𝐺 𝐷𝑃3 (𝜌𝐿 − 𝜌𝐺 )

𝐶𝐷 (𝑅𝑒)2 = [10]
𝜇𝐺2
CD can then be read from the graph in Figure 1.

Although Stokes and Newton developed simplified “laws” that apply to the upper and lower
extremes of Figure 1, respectively, neither law is suitable for designing vapor-liquid separators to
remove particles having diameters in the range of 150-600 µ.
Although the terminal velocity calculated by Equation 1 is used to size both vertical and horizontal
separators, the separators are designed by different methods, which reflect the differences in
their vapor flow pattern.
An alternative method of calculating the terminal velocity is explained through the following
approach.
The following settling laws: Stoke’s Law, Intermediate Law, and Newton’s Law, can be used
based upon the calculated Reynolds Number. These laws were each developed from Equation
1.
9.1.1 Stokes’ Law
When the Reynolds number is between 0.0001 and 2, the relationship between the drag
coefficient and Re can be expressed as the following equation:
24
𝐶𝐷 = [11]
𝑅𝑒
Stokes’ Law, as expressed below in Equation 12, can be used to calculate the settling/rising
terminal velocity. This equation should only be used for situations involving high viscosity fluids
for small droplet sizes (3 microns to 100 microns).
1488 𝑔 𝐷𝑃2 (𝜌𝐿 − 𝜌𝐺 )

𝑈𝑡 = [12]
18 𝜇𝐺
9.1.2 Intermediate Law
If the Reynolds number falls between 2 and 500, the following equation should be used if the drag
coefficient needs to be calculated.
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
18.5
𝐶𝐷 = [13]
𝑅𝑒 0.6
The Intermediate Law should be used to calculate the settling terminal velocity and works well
with both gas-liquid and liquid-liquid droplet settling.
3.49 𝑔0.71 𝐷𝑃1.14 (𝜌𝐿 − 𝜌𝐺 )0.71

𝑈𝑡 = [14]
𝜌𝐺0.29 𝜇𝐺0.43
9.1.3 Newton’s Law
If the Reynolds number falls between 500 and 200,000, Newton’s equation can be applied.
𝑔 𝐷𝑃 (𝜌𝐿 − 𝜌𝐺 )
𝑈𝑡 = 1.74√ [15]
𝜌𝐺
Newton’s method is effective for separation of particles above 600 microns to 100,000 microns.
For all Reynolds numbers in this region, the drag coefficient is equal to 0.44.
𝐶𝐷 = 0.44 [16]
9.2 Vertical Separators
Vertical separators without mist eliminators are sized so that the upward vapor velocity does not
exceed the terminal velocity of a liquid particle of a specified size. Theoretically, the particle size
to be removed should be determined by entrainment tolerance and mass distribution of particles
by size. Since the particle distribution data usually is not available, the following criteria, obtained
from industrial experience, are normally used for particle size selection.
The typical size of liquid particles to be removed is 150 microns and larger (equivalent to K = 0.08
to 0.14) for most process separators, both vertical and horizontal. Smaller particle diameters
should be used if entrainment must be minimized, and there is a concern that a mesh pad would
not be suitable because of severe fouling.
Larger particle sizes may be used for separators where the downstream component can tolerate
more entrainment. For example, a particle diameter up to 300 microns (equivalent to K = 0.18 to
0.26) can be used for steam condensate flash drums. For flare knockout drums, particle sizes of
300-600 microns (typically 500 microns) are normally used in industry.
Unless different criteria are required to be met, the above particle sizes are recommended as the
basis for vapor-liquid separation in drums without mist eliminators.
The minimum separator diameter is one that gives a design vapor velocity (UG) that is equal to or
less than the maximum allowable velocity (Ua), which is the same as the terminal velocity (Ut)
unless a safety factor (FS) is applied.
𝑈𝐺 ≤ 𝑈𝑎 ∝ 𝑓(𝐹𝑠 , 𝑈𝑡 ) [17]
The minimum diameter of the separator (Dmin) can then be calculated using the following
equation:
4 𝐴𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝐷𝑚𝑖𝑛 = √ [18]
𝜋
Where Amin is the minimum circular cross sectional area of the separator, and can be calculated
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
from the gas flow rate, QG, and the minimum allowable velocity, Ua, as follows:
𝑄𝐺
𝐴𝑚𝑖𝑛 = [19]
𝑈𝑎
For most separator services, a safety factor is not required and the maximum allowable velocity is
the terminal velocity. However, for services with a moderate- to high-foaming tendency, a safety
factor of 0.7 to 0.8 should be used. Such foaming services include glycol and amine solutions.
The separator diameter selected may be larger than the minimum calculated since the separator
size may be governed by the liquid volume requirement for surges. See Figure 5 for other
guidelines that apply to vertical separators without mist eliminators. The calculated diameter
should be rounded up in accordance with Section 14.2 and with an economical L/D ratio as
specified in Section 8.2.
9.2.1 Horizontal Separators
In horizontal separators, vapor flows horizontally while the liquid droplets settle vertically, as
depicted in Section 7.0. When the time for vapor to flow from inlet to the outlet is equal to or
greater than the time for the liquid droplets to travel from the top of the separator to the interface,
the entrained liquid drops can be separated from the vapor phase. As a result, Ua is defined
differently from the vertical vessels, which includes a horizontal traveling distance of the entrained
liquid droplet. The following equation must be satisfied to achieve the desired vapor-liquid
separation.
𝑈𝐺 ≤ 𝑈𝑎 ∝ 𝑓(𝐹𝑆 , 𝑈𝑡 , 𝐿) [20]
Use the same particle sizes and safety factors recommended for vertical separators to calculate
the terminal velocity and the maximum allowable vapor velocity for horizontal separators.
For the effective separation length, L, use the distance between the inlet nozzle and the vapor
outlet nozzle and not the tangent-tangent length. Use the maximum liquid level to calculate the
settling height for the liquid droplet and the allowable vapor velocity in the horizontal direction. At
the HLL, the ratio of Va to h is the smallest, thus, if the droplet can settle out at these conditions, it
can settle out at any other conditions.
The same separation performance can be achieved with different L/D ratios, so use one that
satisfies all of the process functions performed by the drum and is in the economical range as
previously mentioned. L/D ratios toward the upper end of the economical range are preferred for
high-pressure services and drums whose functions include liquid-liquid separation. The diameter
calculated through Equation 4 should be rounded up to the next standard size in accordance with
Section 14.2.
See Figure 4 for additional guidelines for horizontal vapor-liquid separator design.
9.3 Drums with Mist Eliminators
Mist eliminators are used not only to reduce the size of drums but also to minimize entrainment.
An existing separator without a mist eliminator may be equipped with one if a higher percentage
of entrainment removal is required. High separation efficiency is due to separators utilizing
various removal methods (coalescing, gravity settling, impingement, and scrubbing), all working
together and supplementing each other. Although there are various types of mist eliminators, the
criteria in these guidelines is based mainly on conventional wire mesh pads, the type specified
most often for process separators.
Vertical separators with mist eliminators are sized so that the upward vapor velocity is less than
the allowable velocity for the mist eliminator. Horizontal drums with mesh pads are designed by
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
using a combination of methods.

9.3.1 Vertical Separators
When a vertical separator is equipped with a mesh pad or a vane pack, the maximum allowable
vapor velocity can be expressed by the following equation:
𝜌𝐿 − 𝜌𝐺
𝑈𝑎 = 𝐹𝑠 𝐾 √ [21]
𝜌𝐺
The following range of K values can be used for general sizing purposes based on experience:
Table 6: Vertical Separator K Factors
K Factor (ft/s) Vertical Vessel
w/ Wire w/ Vane
Mesh Pack
Inlet Separation
Production Separator 0.35 0.55

nd
2 Stage Separator 0.35 0.55
Amine Gas Treating
Contactor Inlet Separator 0.35 Note 3
Clean Gas Separator 0.16 Note 3
Amine Stripper Reflux Drum 0.30 Note 3
Rich Amine Flash Drum 0.25 Note 3
Drier Inlet Separator 0.16 Note 3
Mol Sieve Regeneration Gas

0.16 Note 3
Separator
Inlet Filter/Coalescer Note 4 Note 4
Glycol Dehydration
Contactor Inlet Scrubber 0.35 Note 3
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Dry Gas Scrubber 0.16 Note 3
Rich Glycol Flash Drum 0.25 Note 3
Expander Inlet Separator 0.12 Note 3
Low Temperature Separator 0.12 Note 3
Fractionator Reflux Drum 0.30 Note 3
Compressors (Gas & Refrigeration)
Suction Scrubbers 0.35 0.60
Flare Knockout Drum Note 1 Note 1
> 35˚ API Note 2 0.50
25˚ to 35˚ API Note 2 0.50
< 15˚ API Note 2 0.50
Note(s)
1.) Flare Knockout Drums do not generally have demisting devices to avoid potential plugging
issues.
2.) Use of wire mesh pad is not generally recommended due to plugging potential and/or entrained
liquid is highly viscous.
3.) Use of vane pack is not generally used for service.
4.) Refer to Molecular Sieve Gas Dehydration Specification and Calculations, GESP-FAC-EP-008,
Chapter 14, Section 3, for sizing basis.
For systems having foaming tendencies, such as glycol and amine solutions, a safety factor of
0.7 to 0.8 should be used with the above equation. Safety factors are typically not required for
most other services, unless specifically identified based on experiences for similar service.
When designing a separator with a mesh pad, consider the lost area associated with the pad
support ring. The pad support ring is typically 2 to 3 inches wide as depicted in the table below.
Table 7: Typical Support Ring Requirement
Vessel ID Ring Width Ring

Thickness
ft in in
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
< 4.0 2.0 1/4
4.0 to 9.0 2.5 1/4
9.0 to 14.0 3.0 3/8
> 14.0 3.5 3/8
If the separator diameter is governed by liquid surge volume requirements, the separator
diameter selected may be significantly larger than the minimum calculated for the mesh pad. A
full size mesh pad may be used, as long as the velocity at turndown is not less than about 30% of
the maximum allowable based on a safety factor of 1. Otherwise, a reduced mesh size pad, or
commonly referred to as a partial mesh pad, should be used. Performance suffers when the
velocity drops too low in the mesh pad.
See Figures 5 and 6 for other guidelines that apply to vertical drums with mist eliminators.
9.3.2 Horizontal Separators

The method used to design a horizontal separator with a mist eliminator at the outlet end includes
features of the method used for one without a demister pad or a vane pack. The maximum
allowable vapor velocity can be expressed by the following modified Souders-Brown Equation:
𝜌𝐿 − 𝜌𝐺 𝐿 0.56
𝑈𝑎 = 𝐹𝑠 𝐾 √ ( ) [22]
𝜌𝐺 10
The following range of K values can be used for general sizing purposes based on experience:
Table 8: Horizontal Separator K Factors

K Factor (ft/s) Horizontal Vessel
Horizontal K w/ Wire w/ Vane

Mesh Pack
Inlet Separation
0.50 0.35 0.55
Production Separator
nd 0.50 0.35 0.55
2 Stage Separator
Amine Gas Treating

0.50 0.35 Note 3
Contactor Feed Separator
0.25 0.18 Note 3
Clean Gas Separator
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
0.40 0.35 Note 3

Amine Stripper Reflux Drum
0.35 0.30 Note 3
Rich Amine Flash Drum

0.25 0.18 Note 3
Drier Inlet Separator
0.50 0.35 Note 3
Mol Sieve Regeneration Gas
Separator
Note 4 Note 4 Note 4
Inlet Filter/Coalescer
Glycol Dehydration
0.50 0.35 Note 3
Contactor Inlet Scrubber
0.25 0.18 Note 3
Dry Gas Scrubber
0.35 0.30 Note 3
Rich Glycol Flash Drum

0.25 0.28 Note 3
Expander Feed Separator
0.25 0.28 Note 3
Low Temperature Separator
0.40 0.35 Note 3
Fractionators Reflux Drum
Compressors (Gas &

Refrigeration)
0.50 0.35 0.60
Suction Scrubbers
0.28 Note 1 Note 1
Flare Knockout Drum
0.50 Note 2 0.50
> 35˚ API
0.50 Note 2 0.50
25˚ to 35˚ API
0.50 Note 2 0.50
< 15˚ API
Note(s)
1.) Flare Knockout Drums do not generally have demisting devices to avoid potential plugging
issues. K value based on API 521 recommendation and 500 micron liquid droplet removal.
2.) Use of wire mesh pad is not generally recommended due to plugging potential and/or entrained
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
liquid is highly viscous.

3.) Use of vane pack is not generally used for service.
4.) Refer to Molecular Sieve Gas Dehydration Specification and Calculations, GESP-FAC-EP-008,
Chapter 14, Section 3, for sizing basis.
Use the above equation to size the separator so that the liquid particles settle out before they
reach the mist eliminator. The effective length for settling is the distance between the inlet nozzle
and the front edge of the mesh pad or vane pack, and not the distance between the inlet nozzle
and the vapor outlet nozzle. Since there is a mist eliminator at the outlet, the particle size
removed by gravity can be as large as 300 microns, which is twice as large as that typically used
for drums without mist eliminators.
See Figures 7and 8 for additional guidance.
10.0 DESIGNING FOR 3-PHASE (VAPOR-LIQUID-LIQUID) SEPARATION
The basic principles for gravity settling discussed in the previous section for vapor-liquid
separation, also apply to liquid-liquid separation. Usually, the conditions for liquid-liquid
separation are such that Stokes Law applies. The relationship between the drag coefficient and
the Reynolds Number is expressed in Equation 11.
Equation 23 is obtained by substituting the density and viscosities of both the dispersed and
continuous liquid phases into Equation 9.
1488 𝑔 𝐷𝑃2 (𝜌𝐷 − 𝜌𝐶 )

𝑈𝑡 = [23]
18𝜇𝐶
The flow of the rising light-liquid droplets in the heavy-liquid phase, and the settling of heavy-
liquid droplets in the light-liquid phase can be calculated, when the liquid densities and the
continuous phase liquid viscosity are available. Otherwise, settling rates are a function of the
density difference between the light and heavy liquids, the diameter of the liquid droplets of the
dispersed phase, and the viscosity of the fluid medium. In Equation 24, the continuous phase can
be either the heavier or the lighter liquid. The following criteria may be of help if it is uncertain
which liquid phase is continuous and which is dispersed.
𝑄𝐿𝐿 𝜌𝐿𝐿 𝜇𝐻𝐿 0.3
𝐴=( )∗( ) [24]
𝑄𝐻𝐿 𝜌𝐻𝐿 𝜇𝐿𝐿
A< Light liquid phase always dispersed

0.3
0.3 ≤ A Light liquid phase probably dispersed

< 0.5
0.5 ≤ A Phase inversion is probable

< 2.0
2.0 ≤ A Heavy liquid phase probably dispersed

≤ 3.3
A> Heavy liquid phase always dispersed

3.3
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
If the criteria above do not give a clear indication of which phase is dispersed and which is
continuous, check the separation for each case and use the worst one to size the separator.
Limit the design settling velocity to 10 inches per minute, even if a higher rate is calculated. This
limitation accounts for disturbances and other hindered settling effects that are present in all
settling drums. In some cases, the design-settling rate is based on operating experience.
One of the key design parameters for separators is liquid retention time. In liquid-liquid
separation, the retention time for each phase is selected to achieve relatively clean products.
Generally, the longer the retention time, the cleaner (less impurities) each liquid phase will be.
See Section 8.5 regarding typical retention time requirements.
Gravity separation can only be used for separating free liquid droplets. Stable emulsions should
be treated by adding emulsion breaking chemicals, heating the fluid to higher temperatures,
adjusting the pH and/or using electrostatic coalescers to help the separation.
10.1 Horizontal Separators
The horizontal vapor-liquid-liquid separator design depends on the heavy-liquid phase. This
phase can be withdrawn either directly from the shell of the separator, or through an external boot
on the shell. When the volume of the heavy-liquid phase is large enough to obtain an adequate
and maintainable interface level no boot is necessary. The light-liquid phase can then be
withdrawn either from behind a baffle, through a standpipe, or from a bucket.
Most liquid-liquid separators are horizontal. In a horizontal separator, the retention time of the
continuous phase must not be less than the settling time of the droplets. The maximum allowable
velocity that satisfies this requirement is expressed by the following equation:
𝜌𝐷 − 𝜌𝐶 𝐿 0.56
𝑈𝑎 = 𝐹𝑠 𝐾 √ ( ) [25]
𝜌𝐶 10
In 3-phase separation, the overall length of the horizontal vessel should be greater than the
minimum length of the horizontal vessel required to satisfy liquid retention time requirement for
liquid-liquid separation, known as LRT. Because there is very little separation that will occur near
the inlet nozzle, LRT is typically no less than one separator diameter of clearance between the
inlet nozzle and the heavy-liquid phase outlet nozzle (or to the draw-off boot) to minimize the
agitation potential from the momentum breaker, especially in the absence of a coalescing pad or
wave breaking mechanism.
An L/D ratio between 3 and 5 is usually selected for this application. See Figure 7 and 8 for
additional guidelines for horizontal liquid-liquid separator design.
In a long separator, even though the retention time may be high, the horizontal liquid velocity may
also be high, which would result in less than ideal phase separation. In such a case, it may be
advantageous to recommend splitting the flow equally to two parallel drums, which are shorter in
length, so that the liquid velocity effect does not negate the longer retention time.
For horizontal separators three basic designs are commonly used: a separator with a boot, a
separator with an internal baffle, and a separator with an internal bucket and weir.
10.1.1 Draw-off Boots
Horizontal separators are often equipped with boots when the volume of heavy liquid is small
compared to the volume of light liquid. Generally, a boot is typically specified if the ratio of the
liquid volumetric flow rates of the heavy and light phases is smaller than 0.2. In all other cases, a
separator with an internal baffle or bucket and weir design is used for proper liquid/liquid
separation.
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Size the boot diameter (using Eq. 13 with heavy liquid as the continuous phase) so that the heavy
liquid draw-off velocity does not exceed about 80% of the rising velocity of the light liquid. For
hydrocarbon-water separations, use the typical liquid retention times from Table 3 to allow the
water phase to disengage from the hydrocarbon phase and the hydrocarbon phase to disengage
from the water phase.
The boot diameter should be less than 1/2 the drum diameter because of drum design
constraints. If the interface level is in the boot and the heavy phase is removed on level control,
the length of the boot, measured from the bottom of the drum to the tangent line of the boot,
should be at least 38 inch to allow for a 14 inch displacer type level transmitter and a level gauge
to cover the transmitter range. See Figure 8 for additional guidelines for boot design.
The draw-off boot can be a separate vessel or made from piping components and must be
located below the separator. This option may be more economical than installing a boot attached
to the main vessel. The location of the draw-off boot relative to the inlet nozzle should be
considered due to the agitation effects from the inlet device that may influence the rate of natural
gravity separation.
The distance between the centerline of the boot and the tangent line on the outlet end of the
vessel must allow for a saddle support, a light phase outlet nozzle, and nozzle reinforcing pads (if
required). The distance should not be specified; however, the typical constraints on the separator
design should be noted. For a saddle support 9-inch wide and reinforced nozzles, the minimum
distance is approximately the sum of the boot diameter plus the outlet nozzle diameter plus 18
inch.
10.1.2 Separator with an Internal Baffle
The most common type of three-phase separator employs a simple horizontal drum with an
internal weir (or baffle). The weir holds back the heavy-liquid phase (water), while allowing the
light-liquid phase (oil) to overflow the weir. The water is removed from the upstream side of the
weir, while the oil is removed from the downstream side of the weir. In many cases, particularly if
surging flow is an issue, it is recommended that the weir not be designed as an overflow weir, but
rather as a baffle.
With a baffle design, the oil phase is at a continuous level across the entire length of the
separator, somewhere above the height of the baffle as in Figure 7. This design allows any liquid
surges to be absorbed by the entire length of the vessel, rather than just the volume downstream
of a weir.
Typically, the weir is placed at a point corresponding to 15% of the tangent-tangent length of the
drum. This results in 85% of the drum being available for separation. The height of the weir is
commonly set no lower than 50% of the internal diameter of the drum.
10.1.3 Separator with a “Bucket and Weir”
An alternate common three-phase horizontal separator is a design with an internal “bucket and
weir”, as depicted in Figure 2. As the name suggests, this design uses an internal bucket to skim
the light-liquid phase (oil), while holding back the heavy-liquid phase (water). The oil level in the
bucket is controlled by a level controller that operates the oil dump valve. The water flows under
the oil bucket and then over a water weir, where the water level is controlled by a level controller
that operates the water dump valve. The “bucket and weir” design eliminates the need for an oil-
water interface level controller.
Typically, a “bucket and weir” design is recommended in applications where the light- and heavy-
liquid phase interface levels that may be difficult to distinguish. Such an example would be in
heavy oil applications (small liquid-liquid density differences), or in services where large amounts
of emulsion and/or paraffin content are anticipated. Conversely, a separator with an internal
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
baffle may be recommended for applications where an interface control design has a distinct
advantage of being easily adjustable. Such applications include services where there is a large
liquid-liquid density difference and/or where handling of unexpected changes in oil or water
specific gravity or flow rates is necessary.
With the “bucket and weir” design, the back of the oil bucket is always higher than the front to
prevent the oil from overflowing into/out of the water compartment. The water weir is typically
lower than the oil weir, at the front of the oil bucket, to allow sufficient oil retention time. This
difference in height of the oil and water weirs controls the thickness of the oil layer as it floats on
top of the water layer, due to specific gravity differences. Inadequate sizing of the water weir
height could result in oil carryover with the water outlet or water carryover with the oil outlet.
Normally, the oil and/or the water weirs are made adjustable such that the changes in the oil-
water specific gravities or flow rates can be accommodated.
10.2 Vertical Separators
Vertical separators are seldom used in three-phase separation services. and are more common
in downstream applications. A subject matter expert should be consulted if a three-phase vertical
separator application is required.
11.0 SEPARATOR NOZZLES
11.1 Process Nozzles
It is necessary to specify the preliminary size of all process nozzles. The elevation and
orientation of critical process nozzles that affect the performance should also be shown on the
process data sheet. Typical design considerations are:
 Inlet and outlet nozzles on a horizontal separator should be located as far apart as possible.
 The liquid hydrocarbon outlet nozzle should be located downstream of the water draw-off
boot and have an internal projection above the bottom of the horizontal drum.
 Flare knockout drums often have two gas outlet nozzles at opposite ends of the vessel to
reduce vessel-internal gas velocities.
 Vortex breakers are often installed on liquid outlet nozzles, especially if there are downstream
pumps.
Process nozzles are generally no smaller than the connected piping size. Refer to Reference 2
for additional details on Hydraulic Calculations and Line Sizing Guidelines.
11.1.1 Inlet Nozzle
The minimum size of an inlet nozzle shall be sized such that the fluid velocity is no more than
75% of the erosional velocity as calculated in accordance with API RP-14E providing the
pressure drop requirement is not a concern.
𝐶
𝑉𝑒 = [26]
√𝜌𝑀
Where:
Ve Fluid Erosional Velocity, ft/s
C Empirical Constant (100 for Continuous

Service)
3
ρM Gas/Liquid Mixture Density at T, P, lb/ft
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
12409 𝑆𝐺𝐿 𝑃 + 2.7 𝐺𝐿𝑅 𝑆𝐺𝐺 𝑃

𝜌𝑀 =
198.7𝑃 + 𝐺𝐿𝑅 𝑇 𝑍
P Operating Pressure, psia
T Operating Temperature, ˚R
SGG Gas Specific Gravity at STP
SGL Liquid Specific Gravity at STP
Z Gas Compressibility
GLR Gas to Liquid Ratio, scf/bbl
When preliminarily sizing the inlet nozzle,

 maintain a minimum of velocity of 10 ft/s to avoid and/or minimize the effects of severe
slugging

2
limit the inlet momentum (ρmv ) to less than1000 lb/ft-s2 unless an inlet device is used (refer
to Section12.1 for additional details)
11.1.2 Gas Outlet
Size single-phase gas lines for typical flow velocity of 35 ft/s, but not to exceed the maximum
velocities as indicated in Reference 2 Hydraulic Calculations and Line Sizing Guidelines. In
addition to confirming pressure drop requirements, the velocity of a compressible fluid in vapor
lines should be sized to not exceed 200 ft/s.
11.1.3 Liquid Outlet(s)
Size single phase liquid lines on the basis of flow velocity typically in the range of 2-5 ft/s, but not
to exceed maximum velocities as indicated in Reference 2 Hydraulic Calculations and Line Sizing
Guidelines. For liquid outlets feeding pump suction piping systems, verify that pressure drop
requirements are not a concern and the available net positive suction head (NPSHA) at the pump
inlet exceeds the pump net positive suction head required (NPSHR).
11.2 Auxiliary Nozzles
Use the following table for sizing steam-out, vent, and drain nozzles in the absence of project
specification.
Table 9: Auxiliary Nozzle Sizes by Vessel Volume
Vessel Volume Steam-out Vent Drain
ft3 In In in
≤ 50 1½ 1 1/2 1½
> 50 to 600 2 2 2
> 600 to 5000 2 2 3
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
> 5000 to 3 3 4
10000
> 10000 and 3 4 4

greater
11.3 Process-Control/Instrumentation Connections

The degree of process-control instrumentation that is provided on a pressure vessel will vary
widely with the service and should align with the operating philosophy. Typically, pressure
vessels should be equipped with a local pressure gauge (for local indication), a pressure
transmitter (for pressure control, alarms, and trips); a temperature gauge (for local indication),
level gauges (for local indication), and level transmitters (for level control, alarms, and trips). If the
vessel only uses pneumatic controls, it may be equipped with local pressure gauge, pneumatic
pressure controller, temperature gauge, level gauges, and pneumatic level controllers. If the
vessel needs to control or closely monitor the temperature, it would also be equipped with a
temperature transmitter.
The initial issue of a separator process data sheet should show all the instrument connections
required. Indicated below are suggested instrumentation connection sizes. An instrumentation
specialist will determine the final instrument type and sizes based on the process information
provided and market available instruments.
Table 10: Instrumentation Connection Sizes
Instrumentation Size
Level Gauge 2”
1
Level Switch
Level Bridle 3”
Level Control (Displacer) 2”

2
Level Control (dP cell, tubing type) 2”
Level Control (dP cell, diaphragm 3” or 4”

3
type)
5
Level Control (GWR) 2”
Temperature Tap 2”
Pressure Tap 2”
Note(s)
1.) Not recommended or preferred due to potential failure to function when required. Current
designs use level transmitters, which provide a continuous active signal with a 2” nozzle
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
size.
2.) Standard tubing type dP cells are used in clean services where plugging of tubing by
process fluid is not a concern.
3.) Diaphragm sealed capillary type dP cells are used in dirty services or waxy conditions.
The service temperature is usually limited to 450˚F (maximum). Temperatures above
450˚F may require special designs. Ambient temperature considerations may apply.
4.) For vertical and horizontal drums, the preferred instrumentation connection location is the
shell, not the head. Care should be exercised with bottom connections as they may be
subject to plugging or water traps and freezing.
5.) Consult instrumentation specialists for recommended guided wave radar services and
corresponding connection size.
In many cases, warning alarms will be required for important process vessels to indicate an out-
of-the-normal situation to the operator. Warning alarms are usually associated with the process
controllers and are generated internal to the DCS or PLC, and do not require separate vessel
connections.
On critical process vessels where their abnormal conditions could escalate into a hazardous
event should also be equipped with safety shutdown trips and alarms. Normally, shutdown
actions should be initiated from independent transmitters or controllers, which are separate from
those used for process control. These transmitters or controllers would require their own
instrument connections in addition to the connections needed for the process control. Examples
of shutdown alarms might include a high-high level shutdown on the suction scrubber of a
compressor (preventing significant amounts of liquid from entering the compressor) or a low-low
level shutdown on a vessel feeding a pump (preventing the pump from ingesting vapor).
11.4 Relief Devices
All vessels must be reviewed for overpressure requirements. With exception of a flare knockout
drum, a relief valve will generally protect most pressure vessels, although not necessarily
equipped with a relief valve. Locating the relief device on a separate nozzle or on the overhead
vapor line is acceptable, as long as the device cannot be isolated from the vessel. Choosing one
location versus the other depends on the amount of piping involved, access to the platform
locations, vessel isolation philosophy and risk of leakage.
If a vessel is equipped with a mesh pad or other internal mist eliminator, the PSV must protect the
inlet side (upstream side) of the vessel. In cases where the PSV must relieve both liquid and gas,
it is sometimes advantageous to put the PSV on the inlet line to the vessel. Caution should be
used in this case because of potential slugs of liquid entering the relief header.
11.5 Manhole(s)
The location and size of manholes in general shall be as follows:
Table 11: Manhole Location and Size Summary

Manhole Location
▪ One manhole shall be provided on the side of vertical drum for inner
Vertical
inspection when the drum diameter is over 900 mm.
Separator
▪ Smaller drums with less than 900 mm diameter may have one flanged top
and no manhole because the top flange can be easily opened for interior
inspection. In the absence of a flanged top, handholes are recommended for
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
interior inspection.
▪ Horizontal drums with less than 15,000 mm in length are equipped with one
Horizontal
standard manhole on the head. (Some projects and clients have a different
Separator
length standard for two manholes.)
▪ Horizontal drum length greater than 15,000 mm may have two manholes.
The preferable placement is one on each head. If there is an inlet nozzle
pointing towards one head with an impingement baffle, that manhole could be
on the side of the drum. The engineer should ensure that the placement of
each manhole makes sense, especially with respect to inspection and
installation/removal of internal components.
Manhole Size
Separator I.D. (mm) Manhole Size (in.)
≥ 2000 24
1000 to 1999 20
900 to 999 18 or smaller depending on internal components installation and/or removal
requirements
< 900 Flanged head and no manhole
▪ Top for vertical separator
▪ End for horizontal separator
Boots on Horizontal Optional handhole if boot height ≤ 1000 mm (40”)
Separators 8” handhole if boot height > 1000 mm (40”)
Manholes should be smaller than one-half of the vessel inside diameter. In addition to the
diameter related manhole sizes shown in the above table, there may be internal components that
require at least one manhole to be larger in size. Verify that the minimum required manhole sizes
are adequate for the installation and removal of internal components.
11.6 Nozzle Locations
Feed streams should be combined as much as possible outside the separator so that they enter
the vessel through one nozzle, e.g., pump minimum flow recycles and compressor scrubber liquid
recycles should be combined with the main inlet stream if possible.
For a horizontal separator, inlet and outlet nozzles are best located on the top and bottom of the
shell. Generally, the gas outlet nozzles are located at the opposite end from the inlet nozzles.
For a vertical separator, the inlet nozzle is best located on the shell side. For more than one inlet
nozzle, the inlet nozzle centerlines should be arranged on the vertical separator with the all vapor
feed nozzles even with or above the two-phase feed nozzles. All predominantly liquid feed
nozzles should be located below the feeds containing all vapor feed nozzles and 2-phase feed
nozzles. Gas and liquid outlet nozzles are best located respectively at the top and the bottom
heads of the vertical vessel.
12.0 SEPARATOR INTERNALS
All separator internals that perform a process function should be specified. Typical internals are
discussed in the following sections.
12.1 Inlet Nozzle Device

Inlet nozzle devices are among the most important internals. They are necessary to change the
direction of flow (diverter), break the momentum of the incoming fluid, and provide the primary
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
mechanical means for physical separation by impaction. Use of an inlet nozzle device will
provide disengagement of the large liquid droplets (1000μ +) entrained in the gas phase.
The type of inlet device needed will depend on the service, but a few generalizations can be
made:
 A good inlet device will not require a high pressure drop: high pressure drops tend to
generate mists, foams, and emulsions
 A good inlet device absorbs some of the momentum of the incoming fluid
 A good inlet device will direct the incoming fluids away from any level control or alarm
devices, so as to minimize false readings
There are many types of inlet diverters that are used to divert and break the momentum of
incoming fluids. Figure 3 shows an array of some of the commonly used inlet diverters including
spherical dishes, baffle hoods, flat plates, and angle irons.
The rapid change of the fluid velocity due to impaction with an inlet nozzle device allows for the
disengagement of the liquids from the gas due to kinetic energy differences. At the same
velocity, the higher density liquid possesses more kinetic energy, and, thus, does not change
direction or velocity as easily as the gas. Therefore, the gas tends to flow around the diverter
while the liquid strikes the diverter and then falls to the bottom of the vessel. The design of the
deflector baffle, the most common type of inlet device, is governed principally by the structural
support required to resist the impact-momentum load. The advantage of using devices such as a
half sphere is that they may help in distributing flow of liquid more evenly over the cross-sectional
area of the separator.
In contrast to the deflector baffle designs, a second commonly used inlet device utilizes cyclones
that use centrifugal force to disengage the oil and gas. This inlet can have a cyclonic chimney, or
may use a tangential fluid path around the walls. These devices are proprietary, but the
advantage of a cyclone is that it can be designed to efficiently separate the liquid while minimizing
the possibility of foaming or emulsifying problems. The disadvantage is that their design is rate
sensitive. At low velocities they will not work properly. Thus, they are not normally
recommended for production operations where rates are not expected to be steady.
The table below shows the inlet fluid momentum limit for various inlet devices.
Table 12: Inlet Device Requirement Criteria

2
Inlet Device Type ρmV (MAX),
2
lb/ft-s
No Inlet Device 1000
Diverter Plate / Dished 1500

Head
Half-Pipe / Piped 2000/2500

Distributor
Vane-Type 4000*
Cyclonic 5000*
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
*Vendor specific; requires vendor specification.
12.2 Mist Eliminators/Extractors

Mist eliminators normally are capable of removing over 99% of the entrained liquid. The size of
separators equipped with mist eliminators can be reduced due to higher allowable vapor velocity.
Mist elimination internals should be considered for both horizontal and vertical vessels. There are
four generic types of mist elimination internals that will be discussed herein: the mesh pad, the
vane type, the filter coalescing type, and the centrifugal type. It should be noted that all varieties
of mist eliminating internals have an "operating window": they will only operate properly when the
gas velocity is within a given range (minimum and maximum), and when the amount of entrained
mist is not too great. These issues should be discussed with the vendors prior to purchasing any
vessel.
Wire mesh pads are made of finely woven mats of stainless steel wire wrapped into a tightly
packed cylinder. The liquid droplets impinge on the matted wires and coalesce. Ensuring the
proper velocity range of gas can have a large impact on the effectiveness of wire mesh. If the
velocity is low, the vapor just drifts through the mesh pad without the droplets impinging and
coalescing. On the other hand, if the velocity is too high, the gas can strip the liquid droplets from
the wire mesh and carry the droplets out the gas outlet.
Vane packs are comprised of several stacked stainless steel corrugated plates that range in pack
thickness from 9 to 15 inches. Typically, the corrugated plated spacing ranges from half an inch
to 3 inches and has a varying number of bends depending on the service for the mist laden gas to
flow. The corrugations provide surface contact areas for the liquid droplets to collide, overcome
its surface tension, and coalesce into larger liquid drops. Subsequently, the liquid droplets will
accumulate at the low point in the vane pack, allowing gravity to overcome the adhesive wetting
forces and drain the liquids to the accumulation section.
Filter coalescing elements are comprised of very small diameter fibers, typically less than 0.02
mm, used to capture liquid droplets less than 3 microns in diameter. These densely packed
fibers operate in a similar mechanism to wire mesh pads, but are limited in liquid handling
capacity (due to gravity drainage limitation) and require 2 to 5 psi of pressure drop available.
Centrifugal type mist extractors range in variety due to the proprietary and vendor specific
designs. Typical cyclone demisters come in either horizontal or vertical tubes arranged in square
pitched bundles. Each cyclone tube contains a fixed axial spiral element that imparts axial
rotation on the inlet fluid. These fixed axial spiral elements change the inlet momentum of the
fluid such that the liquid phase, which has the greater inertia, film the wall of the cyclone tubes.
Small perforations along the cyclone tubes allow the liquid film to exit the tubes and fall to a
collection deck, where the liquid is drained back to the liquid accumulation section of the
separator.
The selection of a type of mist extractor involves a typical cost benefit analysis. Wire mesh pads
are the cheapest, but mesh pads are the most susceptible to plugging with paraffins, gas
hydrates, etc. With age, mesh pads also tend to deteriorate and release wires and/or chunks of
the pad to the gas stream. This can be extremely damaging to downstream equipment, such as
compressors. Vane units, on the other hand, are more expensive. Typically, vane units are less
susceptible to plugging and deterioration than mesh pads. The selection of a type of mist
extractor is affected by the fluid characteristics, the system requirements, and the cost.
In general, the use of different mist extractors in series (e.g., mesh pad followed by vane pack,
mesh pad followed by cyclone bundle) has been used to improve droplet removal performance in
various applications. The advantage of coupling the devices is based on the use of the initial
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
mist-extractor, as it becomes oversaturated, to coalesce the incoming liquid droplets into

substantially larger liquid droplets for the secondary device to more effectively remove.
12.2.1 Mesh Pad
The most common type of mist eliminator is the mesh pad. These typically consist of a stainless
steel wire mesh about 6" thick. The theory is that the liquid droplets in the vapor stream will strike
one of the wires in the mesh pad and coalesce with other liquid droplets. The advantages of
mesh pads are that they are relatively inexpensive, can be obtained in a variety of materials, are
easy to replace, and have a low pressure drop. The disadvantages are the mesh pads are
sometimes not held in place very well, they tend to plug if the stream contains any solid particles,
and the liquid droplets need to flow countercurrent to the bulk vapor stream (re-entrainment is
possible).It is strongly recommended that mesh pads not be used in black oil applications
because of the potential for plugging.
Woven wire mesh is the preferred type of mist eliminator for the following circumstances:
 Vapor is not laden with solids that would plug the mesh.
 Entrained liquid is not highly viscous.
The following table summarizes common mesh pads:
Table 13: Common Mesh Pad Specifications
Mesh Mesh Pad Typical Application

Density Thickness
lb/ft3 in.
12 6 Heavy Duty / High

Efficiency
9 6 General Purpose
5 6 Viscous / Dirty Service

(Not Including Black Oil
Service)
Mesh pad density, thickness and style should be specified on the vessel process data sheet
along with the mesh pad area or other dimensional data.
A mesh pad can perform effectively over a wide range of flow rates and operating conditions.
Acceptable separation efficiency generally can be obtained over the range of 30% to 110% of the
calculated maximum allowable velocity. Under normal conditions, the coalesced liquid
accumulates in a 1 inch to 2 inch deep layer at the bottom of the mesh pad. If the velocity is too
high, the liquid level may reach the top of the mesh pad and re-entrainment occurs. On the other
hand, if the velocity is too low, a liquid layer may not be held in the mesh pad and the droplets
can only be removed by impinging on the wires without the help of coalescing and scrubbing. In
this case, the separation efficiency may become very low.
The pressure drop across a mesh pad depends on liquid holdup in the mesh, vapor velocity,
vapor density and mesh density. The pressure drop is normally low (less than 1 inch of water)
and is considered negligible for most applications (except for vacuum services). The total
pressure drop is the sum of the pressure drop across the dry mesh and the additional pressure
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
drop contributed by the liquid loading within the mesh.

Since mesh pads are made of thin wires, they should be fabricated from 316 stainless steel or
other corrosion resistant materials. The grid should also be made of a corrosion resistant
material.
Two mesh pads of different densities may be sandwiched together to improve the performance
and reduce the drum diameter. In addition, some vendors offer high efficiency mist eliminators for
special applications.
12.2.2 Vane Type
Another type of mist elimination internal is the vane type internal, commonly called a tortuous
path vane (TP Vane). This type consists of several parallel, metal plates, stacked side-by-side in
a vertical alignment. The mist laden vapor passes through the vane in a horizontal direction. The
liquid droplets tend to strike the walls of the vane, because their heavier density does not allow
them to change directions as readily as the vapor. Once the liquid droplet strikes the wall, it
tends to coalesce with other droplets and run down the wall of the vane. The droplets are
collected at the bottom of the vane pack, and flow through a drain pipe (dip leg) down below the
low liquid level in the bottom of the separator. The advantages of TP vanes are that they are
highly effective in removing small mist particles (15+ µ), do not plug as readily as mesh pads, are
available in a variety of materials, are relatively inexpensive, and the liquid droplets flow
crosswise to the vapor flow (re-entrainment is less likely). Vane packs are, therefore,
recommended for black oil and dirty service applications. The disadvantages are a slight
increase in pressure drop versus a mesh pad, a smaller operating window, a slight increase in
required vessel height, and somewhat more difficult in repair/replacement. When a vane pack is
not coupled with a mesh pad, the typical pressure drop across the vane pack is less than 15 mm
of water.
Vane-type mist extractors force the gas flow to be laminar between parallel plates, which contain
directional changes. Vane-type extractors are sized by their manufacturers to assure both
laminar flow and a certain minimum pressure drop.
A detailed internal study performed at Ekofisk indicated that the separation effectiveness of a
vane pack starts to deteriorate from 10 to 40 barg and become largely ineffective at operating
pressures above 40 barg. Careful consideration of vane-type mist eliminators selection should be
exercised when operating pressures encroach 40 barg, especially when performance credit is
taken for liquid droplet removal from the use of vane pack.
12.2.3 Filter Coalescing Mist Extractors
Filter coalescing elements are a third type of mist elimination internal. This type includes actual
filter elements to aid in liquid removal from the gas stream. While this type of mist elimination
internal is normally the most effective in reducing liquid droplets down to less than 3 microns, it is
also the most expensive and requires the most maintenance due to filter element replacement at
regular intervals. These filter elements typically require replacement when the media pores
become blocked, and the pressure drop has exceeded the vendor prescribed element change-out
differential pressure, typically 10-15 psi. Due to the proprietary nature of these vendor specific
devices, no further discussion of filter coalescing mist extractors is included in this guideline.
12.2.4 Centrifugal Mist Extractors
Some separators have centrifugal mist extractors (also commonly referred to as cyclones), which
cause the liquid droplets to separate by centrifugal force. These can be more efficient than either
wire mesh or vanes and are the least susceptible to plugging. However, they are not widely used
in production operations because their removal efficiencies are sensitive to small changes in flow.
In addition, they require relatively larger pressure drops to create the centrifugal force. Due to the
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
proprietary nature of these vendor specific devices, no further discussion of centrifugal mist
extractors is included in this guideline.
12.3 Vortex Breakers
Vortex breakers should be installed on most liquid outlets. They are required in all liquid lines
feeding pumps, in liquid-liquid separation, and in situations where gas flowing out the liquid outlet
would be particularly unsuitable. Refer to GESP-VSL-EP-001, Pressure Vessels – Design and
Fabrication, for additional details. Vortex breakers are indicated on the process data sheets.
It is normally a good idea to include a simple vortex breaker to keep a vortex from developing
when the liquid control valve is open. A vortex could suck gas out from the vapor space and re-
entrain it in the liquid outlet. Use of vortex breakers should be reconsidered when solids are
present due to possible plugging problems.
There are two main types of vortex breakers: cross type and grating type. In general, a grating
type is used for nozzles larger than 4” NPS. Although vane type plate packs do not constitute as
either of the two main types of vortex breakers, they are occasionally employed on the liquid
outlet at the bottom of a separator or tower bottoms compartments for services where vapor
entrainment cannot be tolerated. Both the cross type and grating type vortex breakers are larger
than the nozzle itself and are typically twice the size of the liquid outlet nozzle.
12.4 Wave Breakers
In large horizontal vessels, wave breakers may be used to limit wave propagation in the vessel.
The waves may result from surges of liquid entering the vessel. The wave breakers consist of
perforated baffle plates perpendicular to the flow. In general, the sizing basis of the wave breaker
should be validated to insure that the perforations are adequately size to prevent any additional
turbulence/mixing within the vessel. On floating production facilities, such as FPSOs or TLP and
SPARs, where internal waves may be set up in the separator by the motion of the substructure,
wave breakers may also be required parallel to the flow direction. The wave actions in the vessel
must be minimized so level controls, level shutdown devices, and weirs perform properly.
The need for wave breakers should be specified on the vessel data sheet. Structured packing has
been used in these services with varying degrees of success.
12.5 Overflow Dams (Bucket & Weir)
Consider using an overflow dam (weir) when hydrocarbons may have to be skimmed from an
aqueous solution such as oil in wastewater skimmers or hydrocarbon liquid in amine flash drums.
12.6 Coalescer Pads
Coalescer pads are used when it is critical that a good separation be made between the two
liquid phases. Usually, the coalescer is regarded as "insurance" and no credit is taken for it. A
common application is a hydrocarbon-water separation where the hydrocarbon is middle distillate
or heavier material.
Normally coalescer pads are made of wire mesh. If a coalescer pad is required, the mesh density
and thickness should be specified on the process data sheet. Typically, the pad thickness is 12
inch minimum. Limit the velocity through the pad to 3 ft/min maximum at normal liquid level.
Coalescer pads, like mist eliminators, are susceptible to plugging. Consult with vendors for each
specific application.
12.7 Stilling Wells
In some services, it is preferable to install the level instruments internal to the drum. This is often
the case when the liquid will solidify if cooled. Internal level instruments should be equipped with
stilling wells or mechanical protectors to prevent damage to the instrument, or poor
measurement, due to movement. The stilling well is a slotted pipe, which protects the float from
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
currents, waves, etc., which could cause it to sense an incorrect level. Even where wave
breakers are not needed, it may be beneficial to install a stilling well around any internal floats for
level control.
12.8 Defoaming Plates
Foam at the interface may occur when gas bubbles are liberated from the liquid. Foam can be
reduced with the addition of chemicals at the inlet: however, a more effective solution is to force
the foam to pass through a series of inclined, closely spaced parallel plates or tubes. These
defoaming plates aid in collapsing the foam into the liquid phase.
12.9 Sand Jets and Drains
A jet water system is very useful in a horizontal pressure vessel in services where solids are
present. A jet water system allows the vessel to be internally cleaned while remaining on line.
Typically, produced water is pumped to the vessel through spray nozzles, located along the
bottom of the vessel. The water spray stirs up the sediment in the bottom of the vessel, which is
then drained through nozzles along the length of the shell. Extensive research has been
conducted on the proper flowrates, pressures, spray patterns and angles of incident for these
spray nozzles, but the detail is beyond the scope of this standard.
In horizontal separators, one concern is the accumulation of sand and solids at the bottom of the
vessel. Excessive accumulation of these solids can upset the separator operations. Generally,
the solids settle to the bottom and become well packed.
To remove the solids, sand drains are opened in a controlled manner, and then high-pressure
fluid, usually produced water, is pumped through jets to agitate the solids and flush them down
the drains. The sand jets are normally designed with a 20 ft/s jet-tip velocity and aimed in such a
manner to give good coverage of the vessel bottom.
To prevent the settled sand from clogging the sand drains, sand pans or sand troughs are used to
cover the outlets. These are inverted troughs with slotted side.
To properly remove the sand without upsetting the separation process in the vessel, separate
units consisting of a sand drain and its associated jets must be installed at intervals not
exceeding 1.5 m (5 ft). It is not possible to stir the bottom of a long horizontal vessel with a single
sand jet header.
13.0 POTENTIAL OPERATIONAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
13.1 Foamy Crude
The major causes of foam are impurities, other than water, in the crude oil that are impractical to
remove before the stream reaches the separator. Foam presents no problem within a separator if
the internal design assures adequate time or sufficient coalescing surface for the foam to "break."
Foaming in a separating vessel is a threefold problem. Mechanical control of liquid level is
aggravated because any control device must deal with essentially three phases instead of two.
Foam has a large volume-to-weight ratio: therefore, it can occupy a large amount of the vessel
space, otherwise used for liquid collection or gravity settling. In an uncontrolled foam bank, it
becomes impossible to remove separated gas or degassed oil from the vessel without entraining
some of the foamy material in either the liquid or gas outlets.
Oil foaming tendency is not possible to predict ahead of time without laboratory tests. Service
companies can run laboratory tests on oil samples to qualitatively determine an oil's foaming
tendency. Although there is no standard method for measuring the amount of foam produced or
the difficulty in breaking the foam, foaming should be expected where CO2 is present in even
small amounts (one percent to two percent). The amount of foam is dependent on the pressure
drop to which the inlet liquid is subjected, as well as the characteristics of the liquid at separator
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
conditions.
In some cases, the effect of temperature may be quite spectacular. Changing the temperature at
which a foamy oil is separated has two opposite effects on the foam. The first effect is to change
the oil viscosity. That is, an increase in temperature will decrease the oil viscosity, making it
easier for the gas to escape from the oil and less likely to establish a stable foam. The second
effect is to change the gas-oil equilibrium: a temperature increase will increase the amount of gas
which evolves from the oil resulting in more foam production.
It is difficult to predict the effects of temperature on foaming tendencies, but some general trends
can be identified. For heavy oils with a low GOR, an increase in temperature will typically
decrease foaming tendencies. Similarly, for light oils with a high GOR, temperature increases
typically decrease foaming tendencies. However, for light oils with a low GOR, a temperature
increase may increase foaming tendencies. Oils in this last category are typically rich in mid-
range components, which will evolve to the gas phase when the temperature increases.
Therefore, increasing the temperature significantly increases the gas evolution, and, thus, the
foaming tendencies.
Foam-depressant chemicals are available that often will do a good job in increasing the capacity
of a given separator. However, in sizing a separator to handle a particular crude, the use of an
effective depressant should not be assumed because characteristics of the crude and of the foam
may change during the life of the field. In addition, the cost of foam-depressants for high-rate
production may be prohibitive. Sufficient capacity should be provided in the separator to handle
the anticipated production without use of a foam depressant.
13.2 Paraffin
Separator operation can be adversely affected by an accumulation of paraffin. Coalescing plates
in the liquid section and mesh-pad mist extractors in the gas section are particularly prone to
plugging by accumulations of paraffin. Where it is determined that paraffin is an actual or potential
problem, use of vane-type or centrifugal mist extractors should be considered. Manways,
handholes and nozzles should be provided to allow steam, solvent or other types of cleaning of
the separator internals. Paraffin accumulation often occurs in external level bridles and
transmitters. Heat tracing and insulation of these external devices may help.
13.3 Sand
Sand can be very troublesome in separators by causing cutout of valve trim, plugging of
separator internals and accumulation in the bottom of the separator. Special hard trim can
minimize effects of sand on the valves. Accumulations of sand can be alleviated by the use of
sand jets and drains in horizontal separators, and cone bottoms in vertical separators.
Plugging of the separator internals is a problem that must be considered in the design of the
separator. A design that will promote good separation and have a minimum of traps for sand
accumulation may be difficult to attain, since the design that provides the best mechanism for
separating the gas, oil, and water phases probably will also provide areas for sand accumulation.
13.4 Carryover and Blowby
Carryover and blowby are two common operating problems. Carryover occurs when free liquid
escapes with the gas phase. It can be an indication of high liquid level, damage to vessel
internals, foam, plugged liquid outlets, or exceeding the design rate of the vessel.
Blowby occurs when free gas escapes with the liquid phase, and it can be an indication of
vortexing or level control failure. This is a particularly dangerous problem. If there is a level
control failure and the level dump valve is open, the gas flow entering the vessel will exit the liquid
line and will have to be handled by the next vessel in the process. Unless that vessel is designed
for the gas blowby condition, it can be overpressured.
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
13.5 Liquid Slugs

Two/three-phase flow lines and pipelines tend to accumulate liquids in low spots in the lines.
When the level of liquid in these low spots rises high enough to block the gas flow, then the gas
will push the liquid along the line as a slug. Depending on the flow rates, flow properties, length
and diameter of the flow line, and the elevation change involved, these liquid slugs may contain
large liquid volumes.
Situations in which liquid slugs may occur should be identified prior to the design of a separator.
The normal operating level and the high-level shutdown on the vessel must be spaced far enough
apart to accommodate the anticipated slug volume. If sufficient vessel volume is not provided,
then the liquid slugs will trip the high-level shutdown.
When liquid slugs are anticipated, slug volume for design purposes must be established. Then
the separator may be sized for liquid flow-rate capacity using the normal operating level. The
location of the high-level alarm set point may be established to provide the slug volume between
the normal level and the high level. The separator size must then be checked to ensure that
sufficient gas capacity is provided, even when the liquid is at the high-level alarm set point. This
check of gas capacity is particularly important for horizontal separators, because, as the liquid
level rises, the gas capacity is decreased. For vertical separators, sizing is easier, as sufficient
height for the slug volume may be added to the vessel tangent-to-tangent length.
Often the potential size of the slug is so great that it is beneficial to install a large pipe volume
upstream of the separator. The geometry of these pipes is such that they operate normally empty
of liquid, but fill with liquid when the slug enters the system. This is the most common type of
slug catcher used when multiphase pipelines are routinely pigged.
14.0 OTHER DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
14.1 Standard Heads
Most separators have 2:1 elliptical heads. For small vertical separators, 30-inch diameter or less,
a flanged top head is sometimes used, because it also serves as the access opening. For
extremely large, high-pressure separators, hemispherical heads may be considered.
14.2 Vessel Dimensions
The actual dimensions of vessels can be specified in several ways. The length can be specified
as seam-to-seam (S-S) or tangent-to-tangent (T-T). The T-T method of specifying the length
dimension is generally adopted to coincide with mechanical drawings developed during detail
engineering.
Separator diameters can be specified on the basis of either Inside Diameter (ID) or Outside
Diameter (OD). Most often separators are specified using ID. Generally, separators with
diameters 24 inch and larger are sized in increments of 6 inch and expressed as ID. Separators
and boots with diameters 24 inch and smaller are usually fabricated from pipe, and their sizes are
expressed as the OD of standard pipe.
14.3 Skirts and Legs
Skirts are normally used for supporting vertical separators and providing pump NPSH
requirements. Legs are generally used only for small chemical injection pots and blowdown
drums, and seldom used for main process separators.
14.4 Materials Selection
A detailed discussion of materials is beyond the scope of this standard, however, proper
assessment of hydrogen, hydrogen sulfide, amine, caustic, salts, etc., must be made. Normally
the materials group should be consulted and the Process Licensor, if contracted, should review
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
the materials diagram.

The corrosion allowance selected for the vessel will depend on the fluids being handled, the
operating conditions, the expected life, and the materials of construction. For non-removable
internals, specify twice the normal corrosion allowance. The table below provides preliminary
guidance on corrosion allowance.
Table 14: Corrosion Allowance
Material of Construction Minimum Corrosion Allowance (in)
Carbon Steel 0.125
Low and Intermediate Alloy Steels 0.125
Stainless Steel or Duplex 0.00
Clad and Weld Overlayed Carbon 0.00

Steel/Low/Intermediate Alloy Steel
The information in the table above is presented only for preliminary weight estimates and cost
estimating purposes and is not intended for use in performing detailed pressure vessel
mechanical design. A Materials subject matter expert should be consulted.
14.5 Vessel Weight
The weight of a vessel may be estimated from the vessel diameter, tangent-to-tangent length,
and design pressure. Vessel design pressure must be greater than the vessel operating
pressure, which was used to size the vessel, and must be in accordance with Reference 2
(Design Pressure and Temperature Philosophy).
The wall thickness required for a cylindrical shell pressure vessel may be calculated using the
following from the ASME Code. This information is presented for cost estimating purposes only
and is not intended for use in performing detailed pressure vessel mechanical design.
𝑃𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝐷
𝑡𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙 = + 𝐶𝐴 [27]
2𝑆𝐸 − 1.2𝑃𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛
Where:
tShell Vessel Shell Wall Thickness, in
PDesign Design Pressure, psig
D Shell Diameter, in.
CA Corrosion Allowance, in.
S Steel Allowance Stress, psi (17,500 or 20,000

for CS)
E Weld Joint Efficiency
The thickness calculated in the above equation should be rounded up to the next larger standard
size (next 1/8 in for customary units). For carbon steel vessels, the most common material used
is SA-516-70, which has an allowable stress of 17,500 psi. Commonly, the joint efficiency is one
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
(1), and the corrosion allowance is 3 mm (1/8 in).

The thickness of 2-to-1 elliptical heads may be calculated using the following:
𝑃𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝐷
𝑡𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑑 = + 𝐶𝐴 [28]
2𝑆𝐸 − 0.2𝑃𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛
The vessel weight (W) may be estimated with the following equation using the surface areas for
3
the shell (AShell) and the head (AHead) with the density of carbon steel (489 lb/ft ):
𝑊 = 𝜌𝑀𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
∙ (𝑡𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝐴𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙
[29]
+ 2 𝑡𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝐴𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑑 ) ∙ 1.15
Where:
AShell πDL
=
2
AHead 1.09D
=
D Shell Diameter, ft
L Length of the
Vessel, ft
Bare vessel weights calculated using above equation should be used only as preliminary
estimate. Note that a 15 percent margin has been included with the estimate to account for
nozzles and/or internals. Since the actual vessel weight is dependent on the specifics of the
design, weight estimates should be re-evaluated using fabrication drawings when available.
15.0 SEPARATOR SIZING PROCEDURE
This section covers the general steps to sizing, designing, and evaluating a conventional gravity
settling separator.
15.1 Collecting the Required Process Inputs
The required process inputs to size, design, and evaluate a separator to perform its intended
process function(s) were specified in Section 6.0. These process inputs may be obtained from a
variety of supporting project documents, references, and/or resources.
Table 15: Required Process Inputs
Required Process Input(s) Project Document (s) / Reference(s) /

Resource(s)
 Inlet/Outlet Stream Flow  Basis of Design (BOD)

Rates with Full  Process Description
Compositions
 Block Flow Diagram (BFD)
 Operating Conditions
 Process Flow Diagram (PFD)
 Vapor Properties at
 Heat & Material Diagram (H&MB)
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Operating Conditions  Piping & Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID)

 Liquid Properties (for Each 
1
Process Simulation Model (Hysys,
Phase) at Operating PROMAX, AspenPlus, PRO/II)
Conditions  Reservoir Fluid Data
1
 Retention Time  Past Project Experiences or Go-by for

Requirements Designs with Similar Service/Application
 Process Performance  Laboratory Data
Requirements
 Surging Tendency and
Requirements
 Foaming Tendencies
 Presence of Impurities
 Corrosive Tendencies
Note(s)
1.) When available, a process simulation model (Hysys, AspenPlus, PRO/II) will provide the
necessary inlet and outlet stream property/data that may be used for separator sizing. In the
absence of such a process simulation model, reservoir fluid data will provide the minimum
process property/data requirements to size a separator.
2.) Note that this table is illustrative of common resources and not an extensive list of the actual
resources available.
15.2 Identifying the Intended Process Function(s)
Based on the information that is available, determine the intended process function(s) of the
separator. In addition to the naming convention of the separator, a Block Flow Diagram (BFD) or
a Process Flow Diagram (PFD) will indicate the number of phases separated by the separator.
The degree of phase separation required of the separator can be confirmed using the Heat &
Material Balance (H&MB) and/or the Basis of Design (BOD) if one of the outlet stream(s) has a
product performance specification.
15.3 Selecting the Design Case(s) for Sizing the Separator
Evaluate the various processing scenarios to be encountered by the separator. The overall size
of the separator is designed to accommodate each of the various processing scenarios
anticipated or projected for its design life. As such, a separator will typically have various rating
cases (i.e., start-up, minimum, average, peak production) to envelope the processing
requirements for maximum production of gas, oil, and/or water. In all likelihood, the size of the
separator may not be controlled by a single design case that encompasses the maximum
production of gas, oil, and/or water. A comparison of the various rating cases should be
performed based on a volumetric flow basis so that any variations in phase densities influenced
by the operating conditions can be taken into account.
15.4 Selecting the Separator Configuration/Orientation
Preliminarily, select a separator configuration/orientation based on phase separation
requirements – vertical or horizontal. Refer to Figure 2 and Sections 8.1 and 8.2 for additional
guidance. Find a go-by to use for a similar service/application as a starting point, or consult a
Separation subject matter expert. If sufficient information is available, a comparison of the fluid
composition and operating conditions will provide insight into some of the additional separator
sizing considerations to account for at least as a point of reference. Some of these
considerations include facility plot plan restrictions including footprint/weight, budgetary
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
limitations, project/production schedule, and availability. Review the potential operation design
considerations in Section 13, and assess the requirement for specific separator internals that
perform a process function, as mentioned in Section 12.
15.5 Sizing the Separator
With a preliminary separator configuration/orientation, locate the following for ease of reference
during the sizing process:
Table to identify an economical L/D ratio to target based on operating

2 pressure
Table to identify the liquid retention time by service

3
Table to find the appropriate K-value by service when calculating the

6 or 8 terminal settling vapor velocity
Once located, proceed with the following general steps to sizing a separator based on orientation:
For vertical separators:
1. Using maximum gas production found in Section 15.3, calculate the terminal vapor velocity
using Equation 3 and the appropriate K-value from Table 6 based on the allowable liquid
carryover in the gas outlet.
2. Evaluate the need to include a safety factor based on service and/or on experiences.
3. Using the terminal vapor velocity from Step 1, calculate the maximum allowable vapor
velocity based on Equation 21.
4. Determine the corresponding vessel cross sectional area for vapor flow as well as the vessel
diameter with Equation 18. If a full size mesh pad is used to minimize entrainment, factor in
any lost area associated with the support ring.
5. Estimate the cylindrical height (NLL-LLL) to satisfy the liquid retention time requirement (from
Table 3) by using the cross sectional area from Step 4 and the maximum liquid production
found in Section 15.3. Provide a minimum of 12” vertical height for NLL-LLL. If the vertical
liquid height is greater than 48-inches, the vertical vessel dimensions may be dictated by the
liquid processing capability. For such a scenario, consider re-evaluating the vessel
orientation with the use of a horizontal separator.
6. Use Equation 26 to determine the minimum size of the inlet nozzle. This will factor into the
overall height of the vertical vessel. Adjust this minimum inlet nozzle size to correspond with
inlet device in accordance with Table 12.
7. Referring to Figures 5 and 6, continue to estimate the remaining individual component
heights of the vertical vessel.
8. Determine the tangent-to-tangent (T-T) and calculate the length to diameter (L/D) ratio.
9. Evaluate the L/D ratio and whether follow-up iterations need to be run to achieve an
economical vessel size in accordance with Table 2. Perform a study of the vessel L/D ratio
relative to the estimated vessel weight relative as described in Section 14.5.
10. Make a scale drawing of the vessel and internals to visualize potential issues including
interferences, personnel accessibility/maintainability, and layout.
For horizontal separator:
1. Using maximum gas production found in Section 15.3, calculate the terminal vapor velocity
using Equation 4 and the appropriate horizontal K-value from Table 8 based on the
allowable liquid carryover in the gas outlet. Initially, provide an estimate of the overall
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
length of the horizontal vessel to facilitate the variable input requirements for Equation 4.
2. Evaluate the need to include a safety factor based on service and/or on experiences.
3. Using the terminal vapor velocity from Step 1, calculate the maximum allowable vapor
velocity based on Equation 25.
4. Determine the corresponding vessel cross sectional area for vapor flow, also known as the
vapor space, with Equation 19.
5. Using the vessel cross sectional area for vapor flow from Step 4 and the maximum liquid
production found in Section 15.3, determine the vessel cross sectional area for liquid flow
by initially assuming that the horizontal vessel is 50% liquid full. Estimate the vertical
height (NLL-LLL) to satisfy the liquid retention time requirement (from Table 3. If this
vertical liquid height is less than 12-inches, the length of the horizontal vessel used as the
initial sizing basis iteration may need to be reduced. In some cases, the horizontal vessel
sizing basis may be dictated by the vapor processing capability where a vertical separator
may be more suitable. If the vertical liquid height is greater than 48-inches, consider
revising the initial overall horizontal vessel length to increase the length retention time
section required for separation.
6. Based on the liquid retention time requirement, assess the intermittent surging tendency
requirements anticipated throughout the design life of the separator. Case by case
scenarios will require engineering judgment and experience as to whether the surge
allowance is adequate, as previously discussed in Section 8.6.
7. Referring to Figures 4, 7, and 6, continue to estimate the remaining individual component
heights of the horizontal vessel including dimensioning requirements for internal baffle,
external draw-off boot and “bucket and weir” designs.
8. Determine the tangent-to-tangent (T-T) and calculate the length to diameter (L/D) ratio.
9. Evaluate the L/D ratio and whether follow-up iterations need to be run to achieve an
economical vessel size in accordance with Table 2. Perform a study of the vessel L/D ratio
relative to the estimated vessel weight relative as described in Section 14.5.
10. Make a scale drawing of the vessel and internals to visualize potential issues including
interferences, personnel accessibility/maintainability, and layout.
16.0 PROCESS DATA SHEET SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
The following process information is needed by a vessel vendor and should always be supplied
on a process data sheet as a minimum:
 Operating pressure (minimum and maximum)
 Operating temperature (minimum and maximum)
 Liquid properties for each liquid phase at operating conditions (density, viscosity)
 Vapor properties at operating conditions (MW, viscosity)
 Liquid rate(s)
 Vapor rate
 Separator orientation
 Separator dimensions
 Maximum liquid level heights
 Design temperature (minimum and maximum)
 Design pressure (minimum and maximum)
 Corrosive impurities (Water, O2, CO2, H2S, Chlorides, Hydrogen)
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
 Materials of construction
 Corrosion allowance
 Complete nozzle schedule (size, number, locations, etc.)
 Performance specifications
 Minimum liquid retention times
 Internal requirements
 Process insulation requirements
 Notes describing any special design requirements
17.0 SPECIFYING PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS
One way to specify a separator is to specify all the necessary separator parameters including
separator internal diameter, tangent to tangent length, and internal dimensions. An alternative
method is to specify the process functional performance requirements of the separator and let the
vendor size the separator. For example, the process specifications may be made for the vapor
and liquid rates and properties, and require the liquid carryover in the gas outlet stream be less
than 0.1 gallon per MMSCF, the oil-in-water to be less than 1000 ppmv and the water-in-oil to be
less than 2 vol. %.
From the viewpoint of a vendor, the primary means to minimize the cost of a separator is to make
the overall dimensions smaller (.i.e., reduce the amount of material requirements). A vendor will
often reduce the size of the separator coupled with “high performance, proprietary internals”, for
which the vendor will provide performance guarantees that satisfy the process performance
specification. This price advantage may come at the expense of the operator by pushing the outer
performance limits of the separator, which may not have been previously proven operationally.
By setting both a performance based specification and specifying a minimum acceptable
separator size, an engineer can more easily compare the separator size and internals from the
various vendor bidders.
Typical performance specifications for a separator may include the following:
 For a compressor suction scrubber, less than 0.1 gallon of carryover liquid per MMSCF, with
a separator no smaller than X feet in diameter, and able to safely handle a liquid slug of 30
gallons without shutdown.
 For a horizontal, three phase separator, less than 1.0 gallon of carryover liquid per MMSCF,
less than 1% by weight of water in the oil phase, and less than 1000 parts per million (ppm)
of oil in the water phase.
 For a flare knock out separator, removal of all liquid particles greater than 300 µm with no
vapor phase internals allowed and a liquid retention time of 2 minutes at the maximum liquid
relief rate.
18.0 PROCESS DATA SHEET EXAMPLE (SEE ATTACHMENT)
Typical Process
Datasheet for Separator
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
19.0 SEPARATOR SIZING EXAMPLES
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
APPENDIX 1 - FIGURES
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Figure 1 – Drag Coefficient
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Figure 2 – Typical Separator Configurations for 2-Phase and 3-Phase Separation
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Figure 3 – Typical Inlet Devices
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Figure 4 – 2-Phase Horizontal Separator with Demister Pad
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Figure 5 – 2-Phase Vertical Separator with/without Mesh Pad
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Figure 6 – 2-Phase Vertical Separator with Vane Pack
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Figure 7 – 3-Phase Horizontal Separator with Vane Pack
GESP-FAC-EP-008
Chap 14 – Sec1
Figure 8 – 3-Phase Separator with Mesh Pad and Boot

APPENDIX 2 – USEFUL GEOMETRIC FORMULAS

GESP-FAC-EP-008-ConocoPhilips-Separator Sizing Guideline

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GESP-FAC-EP-008-ConocoPhilips-Separator Sizing Guideline

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GESP-FAC-EP-008-ConocoPhilips-Separator Sizing Guideline

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering Standards and Procedures

UNCONTROLLED UNLESS VIEWED FROM THE GESP INTRANET LIVE SITE

Process Engineering Design Procedures

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 5

9.3.1 Vertical Separators .................................................................................................................. 24

13.0 POTENTIAL OPERATIONAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................... 41

No. Standard Document Title

1 GESP-VSL-EP-001 Pressure Vessels – Design and Fabrication

Philosophy Guiding principles based upon qualitative characterization,

AG Cross sectional area of a horizontal separator occupied by the gas

BFD Block Flow Diagram

BOD Basis of Design

d Nozzle inner diameter (for inlet or gas outlet nozzles), in

D Vessel internal diameter, in or ft

DCS Distributed Control Systems

FPSO Floating Production Storage and Offloading

HL Liquid height of a horizontal or vertical separator, in or ft

h Vertical traveling distance of the entrained liquid droplet, in or ft

HLL High Liquid Level (alarm)

H&MB Heat & Material Balance

K Empirical or experience factor for separator sizing, ft/s

L Length of vessel from tan to tan or seam to seam, ft

LB Horizontal length of a 3-phase horizontal separator required for

LLSD Low Liquid Level Shut Down (also referred to as LLLL)

mP Mass of particle or droplet, lb

MW Molecular Weight, lb/lbmol

NLL Normal Liquid Level

P Operating pressure, psig

PDesign Design pressure, psig

PFD Process Flow Diagram

P&ID Piping & Instrumentation Diagram

PLC Programmable Logic Controller

r Radius of vessel or D/2, in or ft

RT Retention time, min

Re Reynolds number, dimensionless

SGG Specific gravity of gas phase at standard conditions (air = 1)

SGL Specific gravity of liquid phase at standard conditions (water = 1;

tHead Vessel wall thickness, in

tShell Vessel head wall thickness, in.

TLP Tension Leg Platform

Ua Maximum allowable vapor velocity, ft/s

Ue Erosional velocity, ft/s

UG Design vapor velocity, ft/s

Ut Terminal or crucial gas velocity necessary for particles of size DP

6.0 FACTORS AFFECTING SEPARATION

7.1 Primary Separation Section

Table 1: Typical Vessel Orientation by Service

8.1.1 Horizontal vs Vertical

Table 2: Economical Vessel Sizing Aspect Ratios

L/D Ratio Operating Pressure

1.5 to 3.0 ≤ 20 ≤ 290

3.0 to 4.0 20 < P ≤ 40 290 < P <580

4.0 to 6.0 > 40 > 580

Table 3: Typical Liquid Retention Times by Service

Liquid Retention Time (LLL to NLL) 2-Phase 3-Phase

Gas Production Service

Production Separator 2.0 3.0

Amine Gas Treating

Contactor Inlet Separator 2.0 n/a