In the name of ALLAH

Natural Gas Processing

Fractionation and
Absorption
Seyed Hossein Mazloumi

Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

Chemical Engineering Department
REFERENCE: ENGINEERING DATA BOOK, Gas Processors Suppliers Association,
Twelfth Edition-FPS 2004
Fractionation is a unit operation utilized to separate mixtures into individual products.
Fractionation involves separating components by relative volatility (α).

The difficulty of a separation is directly related to the relative volatility of the components
and the required purity of the product streams.

Virtually all gas processing plants producing natural gas liquids require at least one
fractionator to produce a liquid product which will meet sales specifications.

Heat is introduced to the reboiler to produce stripping vapors. The vapor rises
through the column contacting the descending liquid. The vapor leaving the top of
the column enters the condenser where heat is removed by some type of cooling
medium. Liquid is returned to the column as reflux to limit the loss of heavy
components overhead.

Internals such as trays or packing promote the contact between the liquid and
vapor streams in the column.
Vapor entering a separation stage will
be cooled which results in some
condensation of heavier components.

The liquid phase will be heated which

results in some vaporization of the
lighter components. Thus, the heavier
components are concentrated in the
liquid phase and eventually become
the bottom product. The vapor phase
is continually enriched in the light
components which will make up the
overhead product.

The vapor leaving the top of the

column may be totally or partially
condensed.
All calculations are performed using theoretical
(equilibrium) stages. A fractionation column
may be considered as a series of equilibrium
flashes with two feeds and two product streams
(Fig. 19-3). The vapor enters the flash from the
stage below at a higher temperature and the
liquid stream enters from the stage above at a
lower temperature. Heat and mass transfer
occur in this stage such that the exiting streams
are a bubble point liquid and dew point vapor
at the same temperature and pressure. The
compositions of these phases are related by the
equilibrium relationship of yi = Kixi (See Section
25). This relationship, along with heat and
material balance considerations, is the basis for
all fractionator design.
Types of Fractionators

The number and type of fractionators required depend on

the number of products to be made and the feed composition.
Typical NGL products from a fractionation process include:
• Demethanized Product (C2+)
• Deethanized Product (C3+)
• Ethane/Propane mixtures (EP)
• Commercial Propane
• Propane/Butane mixture (LPG)
• Butane(s)
• Butane/Gasoline mixtures
• Natural Gasoline
• Mixtures with a vapor pressure specification
See Section 1 for definitions and Section 2 of GPSA for product
specifications.
Product Specifications
A material balance around the column is the first step in fractionation calculations. In order
to perform this balance, assumption of the product stream compositions must be made.

There are three ways of specifying a desired product from a fractionator:

• A percentage recovery of a component in the overhead or bottom stream.
• A composition of one component in either product.
• A specific physical property, such as vapor pressure, for either product.
The recovery and composition specifications can be used directly in the material balance.

However, property specifications specifications are used indirectly. For instance if vapor
pressure is a desired specification of a product, a material balance is performed
with an assumed component split. The calculated vapor pressure of the resulting stream is
then compared with the desired value and the material balance redone until reasonable
agreement is reached.
In a multicomponent mixture, there are typically two components which are the "keys" to
the separation.

The light key component is defined as the lightest component in the bottom
product in a significant amount.

The heavy key component is the heaviest component in the overhead product in a
significant amount.

For hand calculations, it is normally assumed for material balance purposes that all
components lighter than the light key are produced overhead and all components heavier
than the heavy key are produced with the bottom product.

By definition, the key components will be distributed between the product streams.
Example 19-1 — For the given feed stream, estimate the product
stream compositions for 98% propane recovered in the overhead product
with a maximum iso-butane content of the overhead stream of 1%.

Solution Steps
For Propane (light key):
Moles in overhead = (0.98) 162.8 = 159.5
Moles in bottoms = 162.8 – 159.5 = 3.3

For Ethane:
Moles in overhead = 2.4 (100% to overhead)
Since the iso-butane (the heavy key) is 1% of the overhead stream, the sum of
propane and ethane must be 99% (all n-C4 and C5+ are in the bottoms). Thus:
In actual operation, the lighter than light key components and heavier than heavy key
components will not be perfectly separated. For estimation purposes and hand
calculations, perfect non-key separation is a useful simplifying assumption.
Key Parameters

Two important considerations which affect the size and cost of a fractionation
column are degree of separation and component volatility.
The degree of separation or product purity has a direct impact on the size of
the column and the required utilities.

Higher purity will require more trays, more reflux, larger diameter, and/or a reduced
product quantity. One quantitative measure of the difficulty of a separation is the
separation factor, SF, defined as:

Typically, for most fractionation problems this factor ranges from around 500 to 2000.
However, for sharp separations, it can be in the 10,000 range. The number of trays will
be roughly proportional to the log of the separation factor for a given system.
The volatility of the components is usually expressed as relative volatility, α.

This quantity is computed as the ratio of the equilibrium K-values of two components at a
given temperature and pressure.

For fractionation calculations the α of the key components is important. Therefore:

This is a measure of the ease of separation. The larger α is, the easier is the separation.

If volatility varies widely, the approach of Winn is suggested, in which a modified

volatility is used:

where the exponent b is obtained from K-value plots over the range of interest.
The minimum stage calculation is:
Before any design calculations can be made on a fractionation problem, a tower operating
pressure must be determined.

One of the primary considerations for operating pressure is the cooling medium available
for the reflux condenser.

The overhead product will be at bubble point conditions for a liquid product or at dew
point conditions for a vapor product.

The bubble point (or dew point) pressure is fixed by a desired component separation and
the temperature of the cooling medium.

The cooling media typically used are air, water, and refrigerant.

Air cooling is normally the least expensive cooling method.

Practical exchanger design limits the process to a 20°F approach to the ambient summer
temperature. This translates to a process temperature of 115 to 125°F in most locations.

With cooling water, process temperatures of 95 to 105°F are possible.

Below about 95°F, mechanical refrigeration must be used to achieve the desired
condensing temperature.

This is the most expensive cooling method from both a capital and operating cost
standpoint.

Generally, it is desirable to operate at as low a pressure as possible to maximize the

relative volatility between the key components of the separation.

However, if reducing the pressure requires a change to a more expensive cooling

method, this is usually not a desirable choice.

In some cases, the overhead from the column must be compressed to sales or another
process unit. In this case a higher operating pressure may be desired to reduce
compression horsepower.
The selection of a partial or total condenser is fixed by the disposition of the
overhead product.

A total condenser is used for a liquid product and a partial condenser for a vapor
product.

However, a liquid product can be produced as a vapor and subsequently cooled

and/or compressed to produce a liquid product. There may be cases where this
downstream liquefaction is economically attractive.

In most cases, the fractionation system for a partial condenser will be cheaper and
will have to be balanced against the cost of additional downstream equipment.

Before a reliable economic comparison can be made, the column design must be
made for each type condenser for a number of reflux ratios and operating pressures.
Reflux Ratio and Number of Stages

The primary parameters are the number of stages and the reflux ratio.

Reflux ratio may be defined in several ways. For most calculations, reflux ratio is
defined as the ratio of the molar rate of reflux liquid divided by the molar rate of
net overhead product.

The reboiler duty is a direct function of the reflux ratio as the fractionating column
must maintain an overall heat and material balance for a given separation.

A fractionation column can only produce a desired separation between the limits
of minimum reflux and minimum stages.

Fig. 19-6 illustrates the relationship between reflux ratio and number of stages for
a given separation.

At minimum reflux an infinite number of stages is required.

At total reflux a minimum number of stages is required.

Neither of these situations represents actual operation but are the extreme limits
of possible design configurations.
Minimum Stages
In order to begin a detailed design, estimates of minimum reflux ratio and minimum trays
should be generated from simple methods using a binary key component analysis.

The minimum stages can be calculated for most multicomponentm systems by the Fenske
equation

Sm in this equation includes a partial reboiler and a partial condenser if these items are
used.

The αavg is the column average relative volatility of the key components in the
separation. Various averaging techniques have been proposed such as square root
averaging of the α at the top and bottom of the column. The most common approach
is to use an arithmetic average:
Minimum Reflux Ratio
The Underwood method is the most widely used of the methods for calculating
minimum reflux ratio. Underwood assumed constant relative volatility and constant
molal overflow in the development of this method. The first step is to evaluate
θ by trial and error:

q = moles of saturated liquid in the feed per mole of feed

Once θ is determined, the minimum reflux ratio is:

D = distillate (overhead)
L0 = liquid reflux rate, moles/unit time
R = reflux ratio, moles of reflux divided by moles of net overhead product
V1 = vapor rate leaving top tray, moles/unit time (Lo + D = V1 )
Number of Stages

The number of theoretical stages required for a given separation at a reflux ratio
between minimum and total reflux can be determined from empirical relationships.

Erbar and Maddox made an extensive investigation of tray-by-tray fractionator

calculations and developed the correlation in Fig. 19-7.

This correlation relates the ratio of minimum stages to theoretical stages to the
minimum reflux ratio, Rm, and the operating reflux ratio, R (where R = Lo/D).

Fig. 19-7 can be used to determine an operating reflux for a given number of stages by
entering the figure at the value of Sm/S, moving up to the line representing the value of
Rm/(Rm + 1) and reading a value of R/(R + 1). The optimum operating reflux ratio has
been found to be near the minimum reflux ratio. Values of 1.2 to 1.3 times the minimum
are common. Thus for a given R, a value of S can be determined from Fig. 19-7.
This correlation is generated on the basis of bubble point feed. If the feed is between
the bubble point and dew point then the operating reflux should be corrected. Erbar
and Maddox proposed the following relationship to adjust the vapor rate from the
top tray for non-bubble point feed:

The reflux rate can then be adjusted by material balance since:

Lo = V1 − D
Computation Method

In order to determine the design parameters for a fractionation problem, the following
method is recommended:

1. Establish feed composition, flow rate, temperature, and pressure.

2. Make product splits for the column and establish condenser temperature and column
pressure. From column pressure, calculate the reboiler temperature.

3. Calculate minimum number of theoretical stages from the Fenske equation (Eq 19-3).

4. Calculate minimum reflux rate from the Underwood equations (Eq 19-7 and 19-8).

5. Obtain theoretical stages/operating reflux relation from Fig. 19-7.

6. Adjust actual reflux for feed vaporization if necessary (Eq 19-9, 19-10).
Example 19-2
For the given feed stream, 291,000 gal./day (bubble point feed).
Desire: 98% C3 in the overhead (relative to the feed)
1% iC4 in the overhead
Air cooling (120°F Condensing Temperature)

Find the:
• Minimum trays required
• Minimum reflux ratio
• Actual trays at 1.3 times the minimum reflux ratio
Estimate Product Splits from Material Balance:

Get tower pressure at 120°F (bubble point calculation). Using K-values from Section
25:
Estimate the bottom temperature using K-values at 280 psia (bubble point calculation)
assuming negligible pressure drop:

Determine the minimum number of trays (Eq 19-3):

Correct for change in relative volatility by using Eq 19-6:

Thus correcting for changing α did not affect the minimum tray calculation in this
example.
Find the minimum reflux, Rm (Eq 19-7, 8):
TRAYED COLUMNS

Internals
Various types of trays are used in fractionation columns.
Fig. 19-9 shows the vapor flow through bubble cap trays, sieve trays, and valve trays.

Due to the riser in the bubble cap, it is the only tray which can be designed to prevent
liquid from "weeping" through the vapor passage.

Sieve or valve trays control weeping by vapor velocity.

The bubble cap tray has the highest turndown ratio, with designs of 8:1 to 10:1 ratio
being common. Bubble cap trays are almost always used in glycol dehydration columns.

Valve and sieve trays are popular due to the lower cost and increased capacity over
bubble cap trays for a given tower diameter.

The sieve or perforated tray is the simplest construction of the three general types and
thus is the least expensive option.The sieve tray is simply a plate with holes for vapor
passage.

Although the sieve tray generally has higher capacity, its main disadvantage is that sieve
trays will be susceptible to "weeping" or "dumping" of the liquid through the holes at
low vapor rates and its turndown capacity is limited.
Trayed columns generally provide satisfactory operation over a wide range of vapor and
liquid loadings. Fig. 19-11 shows operating characteristics for a representative system.
The vapor and liquid rates can vary independently over a broad range and the column will
operate satisfactorily.

At low vapor rates unsatisfactory tray dynamics may be characterized by vapor pulsation,
dumping of liquid, or uneven distribution.

At high vapor rates, the tower will eventually flood as liquid is backed-up in the downcomers.

At low liquid rates, poor vapor-liquid contact can result.

High liquid rates can cause flooding and dumping as the liquid capacity of the downcomers
is exceeded.

In order to handle higher liquid rates, more downcomer area is required. This is often
achieved by using multiple pass trays.

Multipass trays increase liquid handling capacity for a given diameter due to reductions in
the flow path length and weir crest.

Fig. 19-12 shows various configurations beyond a one pass tray where the liquid phase is
split into two to four flow paths to increase liquid handling capacity.
Sizing
"C" Factor Method
Many design methods for sizing trayed fractionators have been used. A simple method
called the Souders and Brown equation involves using a Stokes’ Law type formula:

Note that ρL and ρv are at flowing temperature and pressure.

The value of C can be found from Fig. 19-13 based on tray spacing and liquid surface
tension. The column diameter is:

Vmax = volumetric vapor flow rate, ft3/hr

This method was originally developed for bubble cap trays and gives a conservative
diameter, especially for other types of trays.
Nomo graph Method —
Manufacturers of valve trays have developed design methods for their trays. Design
procedures are made available for preliminary studies. One such procedure starts with the
nomograph in Fig. 19-14. This is a simple relationship of liquid rate (GPM) and a quantity
Vload defined as:

CFS = vapor flow rate, ft3/sec

Detailed Method —
Fig. 19-14 is an approximation only and does not take into account foaming which is a
major consideration in many systems. In order to compensate for foaming, a System
Factor is used to adjust the vapor and liquid capacities (Fig. 19-15).
The downcomer velocity VD dsg∗ is found from Fig. 19-16.
VDdsg∗ is corrected by the System Factor:

The other factor required for this design method is the vapor capacity factor CAF.
Detailed Method —
The other factor required for this design method is the vapor capacity factor CAF.

CAFo is read from Fig. 19-17. In order to compute the column cross sectional area,
three quantities are needed. The flow path length, FPL:

DT (tower diameter), and NP are found from Fig. 19-14. The active area, AAM:

FF, the flooding factor commonly used is 0.82 for most systems. The downcomer area,
ADM:

If ADM is less than 11% of AAM, use 11% of AAM or double ADM, whichever is smaller.
The tower cross sectional area is then:

or

The larger of these two values is used. Then:

Example 19-3 — Determine the diameter of a depropanizer
with the following data:
vapor rate: 70418 ft3/hr
vapor density: 3.0 lb/ft3
liquid rate: 1190 gpm
liquid density: 28.8 lb/ft3
liquid surface tension: 3.3 dyne/cm
tray spacing: 24"
Tray Efficiency

All column design work is performed using theoretical trays. An actual tray will not achieve
equilibrium due to limitations of vapor-liquid contact time. In an actual column, more trays
are required to obtain the desired separation. This determination is usually accomplished
by the use of an overall tray efficiency defined as:

O’Connell correlated the tray efficiencies of fractionators and absorbers. For fractionators,
this correlation considered thirty-eight systems of which 27 are hydrocarbon fractionators.
The correlation, shown in Fig. 19-18, relates overall tray efficiency to relative volatility
computed at average column conditions and the feed viscosity at average column
conditions.
Example 19-4 — Evaluate the tray efficiency for the system in Example 19-2.
Average column temperature = 185°F
Feed viscosity @ 185°F = 0.076 cp
Average α = 1.854
Solution Steps
(α)(μ) = 0.141
From Fig. 19-18, ε ≅ 80%
The system in Example 19-2 required 21 theoretical stages including the reboiler. The
total actual trays is:
21 − 1 ≅ 25 trays
0.80
Typical operating pressures, tray counts, reflux ratio, and tray efficiencies for various
gas processing systems are shown in Fig. 19-19. These are not design values; rather
guidelines for typical values in previous applications. The actual selection depends on
many factors such as feed composition, energy cost, and capital cost.
PACKED COLUMNS

Traditionally the majority of fractionation columns in gas processing plants were equipped
with trays. However an option to trayed columns is to use packing.

With packed columns, contact between the vapor and liquid phases is achieved
throughout the column rather than at specific levels.

There are some types of packed columns:

• Random packing wherein discrete pieces of packing are dumped in a random manner
into a column shell. These packings are of a variety of designs. Each design has particular
surface area, pressure drop and efficiency characteristics.
Examples of various packing types are shown in Fig. 19-21.

• Structured packing where a specific geometric configuration is achieved. These types

of packing can either be the knitted-type mesh packing or sectionalized beds made of
corrugated sheets (Fig. 19-24).
Structured packing have found application in low
liquid loading applications which are below 20
gpm/ft2. Structured packing has performed very
well in extremely low liquid loading applications
such as glycol dehydration (See Section 20).
The high surface tension in glycol dehydrators also
helps the structured packing to perform well.
Above 20 gpm/ft2, random packings are more
advantageous. Structured packings have
been tried in fractionators with little success.
Numerous case of structured packing failures have
been experienced in high pressure and/or high-
liquid rate services. Structured packings
generally have lower pressure drop per theoretical
stage then random packings. This can be important
in low pressure applications but not for high
pressure NGL fractionators.
Column Sizing
The Eckert generalized pressure drop correlation (GPDC) is often used for sizing randomly
packed columns.

Fig. 19-26, which is a modified correlation, can be used to predict pressure drop for a
given loading and column diameter.

Alternatively, for a given pressure drop the diameter can be determined.

Most packed columns are designed for pressure drop of between 0.20 and 0.60 inches of
water per foot of packed depth with 1.0 inches of water being the maximum.

The packing factors for various packings are shown in Fig. 19-25.

Broadly speaking,
packings smaller than 1 inch size are intended for towers one foot or smaller in diameter,
packings 1 inch or 1-1⁄2 inch in size for towers over one foot to three feet in diameters,
and 2 or 3 inch packings are used for towers three or more feet in diameter.

This results from tradeoffs of capacity and efficiency.

The designer should select the proper size of packing, and therefore the proper packing
factor for calculations.
The GPDC has limitations in describing the performance of packings. Efforts to improve the
correlation for specific packing geometries have led to the development and publication of
charts for each packing which strive to correlate packing performance information with the
same abscissa and ordinate as the GPDC chart. Kister published a series of 96 charts for a
wide variety of packings.
Example 19-5 — Determine the packed column diameter for example 19-3 using 2" plastic
Pall rings.
Given: μ = 0.076 cp
ΔP = 0.5 in. water/ft of packing

Solution Steps
In order to determine the height of a packed column bed, the height of a theoretical
plate, HETP, is required.

HETP times the number of theoretical stages gives the height of the packing.

Generally HETPs range from 12 to 36 in. but can be as high as 60 in.

Packed columns have found wide usage in cryogenic plant demethanizers.

Typical HETP’s for demethanizers are 36 inches for the upper section and 30 inches for
the lower section.
The prediction of the HETP from theory or empirical relations is a complex subject.

Recent research by Fractionation Research Inc. has underscored the sensitivity of HETP
with a number of variables. HETP is a function of flow rates and properties of the system
as well as the specific geometric and mechanical factors.

In order to determine packing requirements, a packing manufacturer should be

consulted.

Fig. 19-27 provides some example HETPs for hydrocarbon systems in the gas processing
industry.
HETP’s are also a function of the packing size. In general, the smaller packings have lower
HETP values.

Fig. 19-28 shows an example trend of packing HETP’s for one type of packing.
Packed Column Internals

A critical consideration in packed columns is the control of the vapor and liquid phases.

Fig. 19-29 shows a cross section of a packed tower with various internals. Each section of
packing is supported by a support plate or grid whose function is to carry the weight of
the bed with minimum pressure drop.

Hold-down grids are used at the top to prevent lifting of the bed by the vapor phase.

Liquid distribution is a critical consideration in packed columns.

Poor liquid distribution causes dramatic loss of efficiency.

Various designs have been used to distribute liquid feeds and to collect and redistribute
the liquid at various points in the tower.

Generally the liquid should be redistributed every 20 ft of packing height or every 10

column diameters, whichever is smaller.
Dumped Packing Versus Trays

Packed columns have been used extensively in the chemical industry for many years.
Packings are selected instead of trays for several reasons:

• Pressure drop—Packed towers usually yield a lower pressure drop per theoretical
stage. This can be important for low pressure operations. At the elevated pressures
encountered in natural gas processing, column pressure drop is usually not a major
issue.

• High liquid loading—for high liquid-to-vapor ratio systems, a packed column will
have more capacity for a given diameter. Some fractionation applications are
characterized by low liquid/vapor ratios and packing has less of an advantage for
these designs.

• Corrosion—for corrosive systems, packing can be fabricated from ceramics or

plastics. Trays may have to be fabricated from expensive alloy materials.
Packed columns also have several disadvantages which must be taken into account in a
fractionation design:

• Turndown—Packed columns usually have limited turndown capabilities. Whereas trays

can be operated as low as 10-15% of full load, packings are limited to about a
50% turndown.

• Liquid distribution—In trayed columns, the liquid phase is forced to flow across a tray
surface. With gas bubbling through the liquid, contact is assured. In packed towers, the
liquid and vapor are free to seek their own flow paths, and channeling can occur. It is
critical that the liquid phase be properly distributed at the top of the column and be
redistributed at 20 foot intervals or every 10 column diameters, whichever is smaller.

• Plugging—Packed towers will be more susceptible to plugging from dirt and other
foreign materials.

• Packing Height—The HETP for a packed column is an uncertain matter. Often they must
be determined by testing or field applications. HETP’s can vary from a few
inches to several feet.
Absorption
Absorption is one of the oldest unit operations used in the gas processing industry.

Rich gas enters the bottom of the absorber and flows upward contacting the
countercurrent lean oil stream.

The lean oil preferentially absorbs the heavier components from the gas and is then
termed "rich oil".

The rich oil is sent to a stripper (or still) where the absorbed components are removed by
heating and/or stripping with steam.

The lean oil is recycled to the absorber to complete the process loop.

For a given gas, the fraction of each component in the gas that is absorbed by the oil
is a function of the equilibrium phase relationship of the components and lean oil,
the relative flow rates, and the contact stages.

The phase relation is a function of pressure, temperature, and the composition of the
lean oil. Nomenclature for an absorber is shown in Fig. 19-50.
As components are absorbed, the temperature of the gas and oil phases will increase
due to heat of absorption.

The heat released is proportional to the amount of gas absorbed.

In many cases, side coolers are used on the absorber to limit the temperature rise and
aid in absorption.

Lean oil will have a molecular weight in the 100 to 200 range. For ambient temperature
absorbers, a heavy lean oil of 180 to 200 molecular weight will normally be used.

For refrigerated absorbers, a lighter lean oil of 120 to 140 molecular weight is used. A
lower molecular weight lean oil will contain more moles per gallon resulting in a lower
circulation rate. However, lower molecular weight lean oil will have higher vaporization
losses.
The stripping column is operated at low pressure and high temperatures.

In older plants, steam is injected into the bottom of the column to strip the NGL
components. The steam lowers the partial pressure of the light hydrocarbons which is
equivalent to lowering the effective operating pressure.
Refrigerated lean oil plants normally use direct fired heaters to vaporize a portion of the
rich oil in the stripper (still) to provide the necessary stripping vapor.
ABSORBER CALCULATIONS

Absorber and stripper calculations, like fractionation column calculations, can be

accomplished with tray-by-tray computer models. However, hand calculations can be
performed to estimate the absorption of components in a lean oil absorber.

The stripping operation is essentially the reverse of absorption and can be handled in a
similar fashion.

Many attempts have been made to define an "average" absorption factor method to short-
cut the time consuming rigorous calculation procedures.

The sole restriction of such a method is how well the average factor, as it is defined, will
represent the absorption that actually occurs.

One of the simplest definitions of an average absorption factor was by Kremser

and Brown. They defined it as:

Using an average absorption factor, the extraction of any component from a rich gas can
be described by:

Fig. 19-48 provides a graphical solution of Eq 19-30.

Fig. 19-48 provides a graphical solution of Eq 19-30.
Example 19-7 — Oil absorption is to be used to recover 75 percent of the propane from
100 moles of the rich gas stream shown below. The absorber is to have six theoretical
plates. What oil circulation rate is to be used if the average temperature and pressure of
the absorber are 104°F and 1,000 psig? The entering lean oil is assumed to be completely
stripped or denuded of rich gas components. What will be the composition of the residue
gas leaving the absorber?

Solution Steps
Using the equilibrium ratio charts (Section 25), obtain the K-value
for each component at 104°F and 1,000 psig.
From Fig. 19-51 at Ea = 0.75, A = 0.80
Using Eq. 19-29:
Lo = (0.8) (0.37) (100) = 29.6 moles/hr (based on 100 moles of gas)

Using Eq 19-28, the oil rate calculated and the component K-

values determine the absorption factor "A" for the remaining
components.

For example, for methane:

Using the absorption-factor values read values of Ea for each component (Fig. 19-51).
Solve Eq. 19-30 for each component to determine the moles of components in the
residue gas, Y1.
For example, for methane:

Note: For this example, Yo = 0 since entering lean oil is assumed completely stripped
of rich gas components. This assumption will not be true for all cases.
Calculate the moles of each component in the rich oil. For example, for methane:
The use of an average absorption factor, as defined in Eq. 19-28, ignores the change in
gas volume from inlet to outlet.

Also, the assumptions of average temperature and K-values can cause significant errors
in the preceding calculation method.

Fig. 19-51 can also be used to determine the trays required for a given lean oil rate or to
calculate recoveries with a given oil rate and tray count.

Fig. 19-51 shows that oil rate declines with increasing number of trays and that beyond
about eight theoretical trays little increase in efficiency is achieved.

Since higher oil rates require more energy for heating, cooling, and pumping, the optimum
design is usually one that uses the minimum possible oil rate with a reasonable size
absorber.

The lowest molecular weight lean oil should be used. This will be fixed by oil vapor
pressure and absorber operating temperature.

Most problems in absorber operation center around oil quality and rates. Proper stripping
of the oil is necessary to minimize lean oil losses to the gas and to maximize absorption
capacity.
STRIPPER CALCULATIONS

In a calculation sense, a stripper is simply an upside-down absorber. For hand calculations,

a stripping factor is defined as

Fig. 19-51 can be used to perform stripper calculations in a similar manner to absorber
calculations.
 High-Capacity Trays

Standard tray Hanging downcomer tray