Subido por salem.jaque.manriquez1in

Como presentar un informe

Anuncio
Professional Development
Elements of Calculation Style
James Anthony,
Lockwood Greene
Style helps readers to understand,
and calculations to succeed.
T
he elements of style in calculations are the choices in composition that strengthen collaboration between writers and
readers by helping them meet
one another’s needs. The overriding need of both writers and readers is to not
have to keep track of too much new, unfamiliar
material at one time (1).
Elements of style include separate sections for
assumptions, data, calculations and summaries.
Each section can be prepared and read with a minimum of in-depth thought, yet each section moves
the solution forward and serves as a resource for
use with the later sections.
Elements of style at the formula level, which
are even more helpful, include conventional symbols, reminders of variable definitions, reference
names and pages, reminders of values of dependent variables, and equations that are visible, as
shown in Figure 1. These elements let writers and
readers understand and check formulas with a
minimum of cognitive strain.
Elements of style in calculations are elaborated
below and illustrated with a sample calculation on
pages 52–53.
1. Use calculation software
Use software that displays the working formulas. The equations are the working parts of the
calculation. A calculation is easier to use if its
functions can be readily inferred by looking at
50
www.cepmagazine.org
November 2001
CEP
the features visible to the user. Calculation software packages, such as Mathcad and CalculationCenter, display a calculation’s working formulas
and results together, and print them for convenient writing and reading (3, 4). Spreadsheets
typically don’t display formulas, so only simple
operations like totaling the numbers in a column
can be readily inferred by looking at a spreadsheet. (Spreadsheets can be made to display formulas and results together through the use of
named ranges (5) and user-defined functions, as
shown in Figure 2). Programming languages,
such as Visual Basic and FORTRAN, display and
print the working formulas and results separate
from each other, and often use coded syntax
(when referencing data objects, for example),
making calculations in these languages difficult
to read and document.
Use software that calculates units as well as
numbers. Calculation software like Mathcad and
CalculationCenter makes it possible to include dimensional units in values and formulas and have
the software perform unit conversions automatically, bypassing an otherwise major source of errors.
2. Set up for easy viewing
Make calculations read from top to bottom. Use
the approach that experts use when solving easy
problems — work forward from the known data to
determine the unknown values that are needed (6).
Enter data before calculations, and summarize inputs before summarizing results. In the same man-
■ Figure 1.
Formula blocks
help readers to
understand and
check formulas (2).
ner, provide reference materials before referring to them.
Place the table of contents before the actual contents, list
references before they are used, and list variable names before they are mentioned.
Use font, font size, and font style changes to help readers. Font changes can help readers distinguish equations
from text. Font size changes can improve readability of
equations. Both changes are performed automatically by
the calculation software used to prepare Figure 1 and the
sample calculation. A font style change to bold face for the
headings can help readers rapidly scan through a calculation, as shown in the sample calculation.
Use graphic lines mostly to convey information. When
graphic lines are used sparingly, the lines that are used
stand out better (7). Horizontal lines can be used as blanks
for user-supplied data. Vertical lines can be used as revision
bars. Blank space can serve the same function that graphics
lines are often used for in forms, providing separation between unrelated items of information and helping readers
read horizontally across rows of information in tables.
Include equipment number and page number at the
right on each page. Sets of calculations arranged by major
equipment number including letter prefix can be leafed
through easily to locate calculations that are of interest to
the reader.
Make formulas readable without comments. Help readers be able to review formulas independent of the explanatory comments. Place formulas on separate lines from
comments. Center formulas on the page, or indent them.
Provide punctuation and text to allow the
resulting material to be read straight
through more easily than the formulas
alone could be read.
3. Provide supporting information
Write clear sentences. Start by writing
what you would say aloud. Then remove
excessive words. Rearrange phrases to improve clarity or eliminate ambiguity. Add
words wherever this will help readers understand without having to concentrate as
hard and without having to reread (8).
Reread the work yourself later and edit it
again, repeating these steps.
List the contents. Simple, descriptive
headings provide enough useful help to
readers to avoid the need for paragraphs of
explanatory text.
State the objective. Readers expect to
find the most important information at the
start, and if not there, then at the end.
They spend more time reading the information at the start. When the key theme is
identified up front, readers understand the
subsequent material better as they proceed
The effective interfacial areas per unit volume in the first and second stage vessels, a1 and a2, are calculated from the gas holdups
εG1 and εG2 and the Sauter-mean bubble diameters or bubble volume-to-surface ratios dvs1 and dvs2 (Perry’s pages 5-69 and 5-43):
εG1 = 0.194676 and εG2 = 0.196213
dvs1 = 0.284573 in and dvs2 = 0.284552 in. 12 in = 1 ft.
6ε
6ε
a 1 : = G1 and a 2 : = G2 :
d vs1
d vs2
2
2
a 1 = 49.255 ft and a 2 = 49.648 ft .
3
3
ft
ft
through it, and they proceed through it more quickly.
Sketch the system. Sketches with text help people understand problems more thoroughly and help people move
further toward solutions (9). The more useful diagrams
show spatial relationships, show key data at a glance, and
place information near the associated objects so that symbolic labels are not needed (10). When solving a problem
that requires the use of formulas to interpret physical information, experts tend to insert an intermediate step redescribing the problem qualitatively (11). Sketches can
capture some of an expert’s understanding of the problem
by emphasizing key considerations while leaving out secondary details. Unfortunately, people who have less trouble proceeding with a problem tend to draw fewer sketches. As a result, they miss out on opportunities to help
novices develop the skill of going beyond the literal features clearly evident in problem statements to infer additional relationships that are important for constructing effective solutions, which is the skill that novices are usually most lacking (6).
State the approach, noting the key methods used. Name
the key method or methods used, and describe how they
■ Figure 2. Current spreadsheets, such as Microsoft Excel, can display formulas and results together.
CEP
November 2001
www.cepmagazine.org
51
S
A
M
P
L
E
Objectives
Approach
References
Symbols
Assumptions
page
1
1
1
1
1
Constants and Conversions
Hardware Data
Property Data
Operating Data
1
1
2
2
Calculations
Results
2
2
Objective
Estimate minimum recommended slurry velocities vs. pipe diameter.
Approach
Apply the Durand equation for the minimum transport velocity as recommended in Perry’s and Heywood, adding a
reasonable margin to the velocity as recommended in Heywood.
References
Data Sheet
General Info
Heywood
P & ID
Perry’s
World Minerals, “Harborlite 2000 Technical Data Sheet,” World Minerals, Lompoc, CA, 2000 (enclosed)
World Minerals, “Perlite General Information,” World Minerals, Lompoc, CA, 2000 (enclosed)
Heywood, N.I., “Stop Your Slurries from Stirring Up Trouble,” Chemical Engineering Progress,
pp. 21-41, September 1999 (enclosed)
WRC, “Filter Aid Storage/Delivery P&ID,” Dwg. No. PR-001, Rev. A, Confidential Client, 2000
(in project master file)
Green, Don W., editor, “Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook - 7th Ed.,” McGraw-Hill, New York,
pages 6-30, 6-31, 10-72, and 10-73, 1997 (enclosed)
Symbols
Cs
maximum volume fraction solids
-
D
pipe diameters
in
d
particle diameter
mm
FL
Durand factor for minimum suspension velocity
-
g
gravitational acceleration
s
ratio of solid density to liquid density
ft
sec 2
-
sgL
specific gravity of liquid
-
sgs
specific gravity of solid
V
minimum recommended slurry velocities
VM2
minimum transport velocities
Ws
maximum weight fraction solids
ρL
density of liquid
ρs
density of solid
ft
sec
ft
sec
lb
3
ft
lb
3
ft
Assumptions
Assume pipe is Schedule 40S.
Constants and Conversions
The gravitational acceleration g is:
g = 32.174
ft .
sec 2
Hardware Data
Consider several pipe diameters D (Perry’s pages 10-72 and 10-73)
1.610
D: = 2.067 in.
3.068
52
www.cepmagazine.org
November 2001
CEP
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
Property Data
The specific gravity of the liquid, sgL, is (P&ID):
sgL := 1.0.
The specific gravity sgs and particle size d of the solid are (Data Sheet):
sgs := 2.3. d := 0.0431 mm.
Operating Data
The maximum weight fraction solids, Ws, is (General Info page 19):
Ws := 10%.
Calculations
The maximum volume fraction solids, Cs, follows from the maximum weight solids fraction Ws and the specific
gravities of the liquid and solid, sgL and sgs:
Ws = 10%, sgL = 1.0, and sgs = 2.3.
Ws
sgs
Cs: =
Ws 100% – Ws
+
sgs
sgL
Cs = 4.6%.
Since 100% = 1, Cs = 0.046.
The Durand factor FL can be read from a chart given the particle size d and the maximum volume fraction solid, Cs
(Perry’s page 6-31 Figure 6-33):
For d = 0.043 mm and Cs = 0.05, FL := 0.6.
The densities of the liquid and solid, ρL and ρs, follow from specific gravities sgL and sgs, within engineering accuracy:
sgL = 1.0 and sgs = 2.3.
ρL := sgL ⋅ 62.45 lb3 ; ρL = 62.45 lb3 . ρs := sgs ⋅ 62.45 lb3 ; ρs := 143.63 lb3 .
ft
ft
ft
ft
s, the ratio of solid density ρs to liquid density ρL, is:
ρs = 143.63 lb3 . ρL = 62.45 lb3 .
ft
ft
ρL
s := ρ ; s = 2.3.
S
The minimum transport velocities VM2 as a function of the Durand factor FL, gravitational acceleration g, pipe
diameters, D, and ratio of liquid density to solid density, s (Perry’s ):
FL = 0.6.
g = 32.174
ft .
sec 2
s = 2.3.
2.0
1.610
ft .
For D = 2.067 in, given that 12 in = 1 ft and VM2 := FL ⋅ [2 ⋅ g ⋅ D ⋅ (s–1)]0.5, V M2 = 2.3 sec
2.8
3.068
The minimum slurry velocities V can be calculated given the minimum transport velocities VM2 vs. the pipe diameters
D (Heywood page 28):
2.5
1.610
For D = 2.067 in, V := 125% ⋅ VM2 ; V = 2.8 ft .
sec
3.5
3.068
Results
Minimum slurry velocities V vs. pipe diameters D are:
1.610
For D = 2.067
3.068
2.5
in, V = 2.8 ft .
sec
3.5
CEP
November 2001 www.cepmagazine.org
53
Professional Development
were located and chosen. Avoid describing the details of
the calculation in text form, since the actual formulas will
be displayed later when they are used and will be nearly
self-explanatory, while text descriptions of the formulas
would take extra effort and extra skill to write and would
be less clear and less helpful.
Name, list and enclose references. Identify convenient,
clear references for each formula used and data value entered. Name each reference using a short descriptive name
such as the lead author’s name. Give titles and page
ranges. Provide readers copies of references, so that they
can find out things for themselves right away, while they
are most interested.
Use conventional symbols. Match the conventional notation in the area of interest for ready recognition. Use the
same main symbol for all variables of a given type, and use
subscripts to differentiate the family members from one
another. Greek letters and subscripts can be typed directly
into a calculation when calculation software like Mathcad
or CalculationCenter is used.
List complete symbols, including subscripts, and provide complete descriptions and standard units. Descriptions that include subscripts can eliminate guesswork.
Standard units provide added descriptions of the symbols.
Promote alternative methods. Describe alternative approaches and possible outcomes. Present the alternatives
as positive possibilities, so they will be considered more
likely and will therefore more effectively counterbalance
the base case that is being presented positively. Considering alternatives reduces overconfidence. This promotes
progress on problems (12), improves decision-making,
and may improve self-checking by writers and errorchecking by readers.
4. Include text comments and equation-style
comments with the working formulas
Provide comments that supplement formulas but do not
describe them. The working formulas do the actual calculation. Writers and readers need to be helped to review
the formulas carefully, and need to not be lulled into a
false sense of security by comments that seem to tell a
complete story, and as a result, encourage them to skip
over the equations (13).
Repeat the description of each symbol each time it is
used in a formula. Provide the description and repeat the
symbol, including any subscript.
List a source for each formula. Identify a convenient
source that states the formula clearly. List the source’s
short, descriptive name from the reference list, and identify
the page or pages where the formula is defined. Include the
formula number from the source, where helpful.
Repeat the value of each symbol used in standard units
each time it is used. Help people learn the relative magnitudes of terms and check the values of input data and intermediate results at every opportunity they have to do so.
54
www.cepmagazine.org
November 2001
CEP
Provide conversion factors each time they are used.
Conversion factors often help reassure readers of the reasonableness of calculations and occasionally help writers
find mistakes. When calculation software is used, it takes
little effort to call up predefined conversion factors.
Check function definitions by calculating known values.
Check function definitions for temperature-dependent
properties, for instance, by evaluating the equations at temperatures where the property values are known.
Show a formula’s comments together with the formula
on the same page. Add a page break before an assembled
formula block if needed to keep the block together on a single page. Self-contained formula definitions and evaluations
that can be seen together at a glance are easier to review.
5. Provide assumptions, inputs and calculations
Note assumptions. Assumptions can include notes on
how the mathematical models that are used oversimplify
the behavior that they describe. They can also include
notes on how the experimental approach underlying a
method differs from the particulars of the process that is
being analyzed. The assumptions that can be the most difficult to recognize are the underlying beliefs shared by previous workers, the writer, and the readers when they all are
from the same era and have similar backgrounds. Explaining assumptions early, especially assumptions about factors
that cannot be changed by the writer or the readers, produces more realistic assessments about the reliability of results. Reducing overconfidence improves checking, which
improves accuracy.
Enter any assumed data values. Assumptions can also include reasonable guesses of data values that are not known
for certain. Provide an equation block for each assumed data
value, as shown in the sample calculation. Repeat the description and the symbol, including any subscripts. Display
the value in standard units for reasonability checking.
Enter the hardware data. Provide an equation block for
each hardware data value. Repeat the description and the
symbol, including any subscripts. Repeat the source’s
name from the references and note the applicable page or
pages. Enter the data in the dimensional units that were
used in the source. Provide any conversion factors used, in
units that are as familiar as possible. Display the data in
standard units for reasonability checking.
Enter the property data. Provide an equation block for
each property data value. Repeat the description and the
symbol including any subscripts, the source of the data,
the data in the units used in the source, any conversion
factors, and the data in standard units. If a property is a
function of variables such as temperature, pressure or
composition, enter the property as a function that can be
evaluated later based on the values of the variables at that
point in the calculation.
Enter the operating data. Provide an equation block for
each operating data value. Provide the description and the
symbol including any subscripts, the source of the data, the
data in the units used in the source, any conversion factors,
and the data in standard units.
Enter the calculation formulas. Provide a formula
block, like that in Figure 1, for each calculation formula.
Provide text descriptions of the dependent variables and
the independent variables, and provide a reference source
for the formula. Then provide the values of the independent variables in standard units, any conversion factors, the
formula, and the results.
6. Provide summary information
Repeat key assumptions. An assumption may be crucial,
and well worth highlighting again by including it in the
summary information at the end of a calculation.
Summarize the key input parameter values. Summarizing key input parameters near the end of calculations highlights them for the writer as well as for the reader. Also,
sometimes it is convenient to set up a file containing a single case and then change input parameters and save separate files for new cases. In such situations, it is critical to
Literature Cited
1. Miller, G. A., “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two:
Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information,” The Psychological Review, 63 (2), pp. 81–97 (1956).
2. Anthony, J., “Chloroform Plan,” available via http://www.cepmagazine.org (2001).
3. Phillips, J. E., and J. D. Decicco, “Choose the Right Mathematical
Software,” Chem. Eng. Prog., 95 (7), pp. 69-74 (July 1999).
4. Sandler, S. I., “Spreadsheets for Thermodynamics Instruction: Another Point of View,” Chem. Eng. Edu., 31 (1), pp. 18-20 (Winter
1997).
5. Lira, Carl T., “Advanced Spreadsheet Features for Chemical Engineering Calculations,” submitted to Chem. Eng. Edu.,
http://www.egr.msu.edu/~lira/spreadsheets.pdf (2000).
6. Chi, M. T. H., et al., “Expertise in Problem Solving,” in Sternberg,
R. J., “Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence,” Vol. 1,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 7-75;
see pp. 18, 19, 35, and 71 (1982).
7. Tufte, E. R., “The Visual Display of Quantitative Information,”
Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT, p. 96 (1983).
8. Cook, C. K., “Line by Line: How to Improve Your Own Writing,”
Houghton Mifflin, Boston (1985).
9. Mayer, R. E., “Models for Understanding,” Review of Educational
Research, 59 (1), pp. 43-64 (1989).
10. Larkin, J. H., and H. A. Simon, “Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth
Ten Thousand Words,” Cognitive Science, 11 (1), pp. 65-99 (1987).
11. Larkin, J. H., “Processing Information for Effective Problem Solving,” Engineering Education, 70 (3), pp. 285-288 (December 1979).
12. Platt, J. R., “Strong Inference,” Science, 146 (3642), pp. 347-353
(1964).
13. Kernighan, D. W., and P. J. Plauger, “The Elements of Programming Style,” 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 141-152 (1978).
14. Allwood, C. M., “Error Detection Processes in Statistical Problem Solving,” Cognitive Science, 8 (4), pp. 413-437; see pp. 419 and 431 (1984).
point out the values of the changed parameters to distinguish the cases from one another.
Summarize the results. Conclude by returning to the big
picture and recalling key intermediate results and final results
for the benefit of casual readers and careful readers alike.
7. Get calculations checked
Seek checking, whether by experts or by interested colleagues. Unless people get very detailed feedback on
their performance, they tend to be overconfident in their
own abilities. They do not perform nearly enough selfchecks on material they believe is correct (14). As a result, errors of omission are almost never identified and
corrected by the person who made them. With checking, a
fresh viewpoint enters the situation, and errors of omission can be corrected.
Calculations will get easier
The calculation approach shown here easily scales up to
handle tougher problems. An example of a more difficult
calculation is available at www.cepmagazine.org (2).
This approach produces accurate results, is easy to read,
and is easy to reuse. It is particularly helpful when experimental data on a process are unavailable, data cannot be
obtained cheaply and quickly, and readily available calculation methods do not cover the process in question.
This list of uses barely hints at the broader roles that
could quickly develop for approaches like this. Affordable
calculation software already provides the capability to
embed subprograms and the capability to define graphical
symbols that have smart interconnections. Soon, such software could provide the capability to embed subprograms in
smart symbols. Libraries of thermodynamic property calculation routines and unit operations could emerge easily
from environments of friendly competition and sharing, in
academic settings and in industry. It could ultimately be
possible to simply connect components from reliable
sources and produce accurate and reliable process simulations and other calculations.
Even wider impacts are imaginable. Calculation approaches developed for process applications could easily
be adapted to other uses in science and in education.
Much can get easier when collaboration is improved by
CEP
style in calculations.
JAMES ANTHONY is a process engineer with Lockwood Greene, St. Louis,
MO (Phone: (314) 919-3208; Fax: (314) 919-3201; E-mail:
[email protected]). He has process design experience with chemical,
pharmaceutical, and beverage applications, which have included the
manufacture of iodine products, abrasives, inorganic salts, alkyds,
polyesters, polyurethanes, synthetic pharmaceuticals, soy sauce, and
tea. He also has aerospace design experience developing jet engine air
inlets, piston-propeller systems, sensors, adhesive-bonded structures
and molded plastic parts. He has a BS in chemical engineering from the
Univ. of Missouri – Rolla and an MS in mechanical engineering from
Washington Univ. He is a registered professional engineer.
CEP
November 2001 www.cepmagazine.org
55
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 1 of 37
Prep, Check, Appr: J Anthony, _________, _________
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Chloroform Effluent Plan
page
Objective
Approach
References
Symbols
Assumptions
1
1
2
3
6
Conversions and Constants
Hardware Data
Property Data
Operating Data
7
8
8
13
Steam Flows
Interfacial Areas
Mass Transfer Coefficients
Stripping and Dilution
14
19
27
29
Key Parameters Summary
Results Summary
34
35
Objective
Model the lime press effluent chloroform concentration after raffinate stripping, reslurrying using
stripper effluent, and reslurrying using four chloroform-free streams.
S team
FO
Lim e P ress S olids
FO
1. S trip Liquor
R affinate
2.
3.
4.
5.
1st S tage
Lim e Liquor
W ater
W ater
W ater
2nd S tage
Approach
Calculate restriction orifice flows using Benedict's general equation as suggested on Perry's page
10-16. Calculate sparger mass transfer per Perry's page 5-69, using bubble diameters calculated as
referenced on Perry's page 14-71 and interfacial areas calculated as referenced on Treybal page 144.
Calculate dilution using available data.
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 2 of 37
References
Akita
Akita, K., and F. Yoshida, "Gas Holdup and Volumetric Mass Transfer Coefficient
in Bubble Columns", Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Process Design and
Development, 12(1), pp. 76-80, 1973 (enclosed)
Baseline
Anthony, J., "Confidential Client Lime Press Chloroform Effluent Baseline", [
Chloroform Baseline].mcd, Lockwood Greene, St. Louis, MO, 2000 (enclosed)
Benedict
Benedict, R. P., "Loss Coefficients for Fluid Meters", Journal of Fluids
Engineering, 99(1), pp. 245-248, 1977 (enclosed)
Calderbank
Calderbank, P. H., and M. B. Moo-Young, "The Continuous Phase Heat and
Mass-Transfer Properties of Dispersions", Chemical Engineering Science, 16, pp.
39-54, 1961 (enclosed);
Calderbank, P. H., in Uhl, V. and J. Grey, Editors, "Mixing", Volume 2, Chapter 6,
Academic Press, New York, 1967 (source of small bubble-size mass transfer
correlation listed in Perry's page 5-69, per Perry's page 5-8 reference 109, Kirwan
1987) (not enclosed; not available at Washington University until 9/18 or later)
Cussler
Cussler, E. L., "Diffusion, Mass Transfer in Fluid Systems", page 251, Cambridge
University Press, 1984 (enclosed)
DIPPR
Daubert, T. E., R. P. Danner, H. M. Sibul, and C. C. Stebbins, "Physical and
Thermodynamic Properties of Pure Chemicals: Data Compilation", chloroform's
fixed properties, vapor pressure, and surface tension; water's fixed properties,
vapor pressure, ideal gas heat capacity, second virial coefficient, vapor viscosity,
and surface tension, Taylor & Francis, Bristol, PA, extant 1994 (enclosed)
Geankoplis
Geankoplis, C. J., "Transport Processes and Unit Operations", 3rd Ed., pp.
450-453, PTR Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1993 (enclosed)
Godbole
Godbole, S. P., and Y. T. Shah, "Design and Operation of Bubble Column
Reactors", in Cheremisinoff, N. P., "Encyclopedia of Fluid Mechanics" Vol. 3, pp.
1216-1239, Gulf Publishing, Houston, TX, 1986 (enclosed)
Grace
Grace, H. P., and C. E. Lapple, "Discharge Coefficients of Small-Diameter Orifices
and Flow Nozzles", Transactions of the ASME, 73, pp. 639-647, 1951 (enclosed)
JH
Anthony, J., Notes from phone call, 6/22/00 (enclosed)
Hwang
Hwang, Y.-L., J. D. Olson, and G. E. Keller II, "Steam Stripping for Removal of
Organic Pollutants from Water. 2. Vapor-Liquid Equilibrium Data", Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Research, 31, pp. 1759-1768, 1992 (enclosed)
Kumar
Kumar, A., T. E. Degaleesan, G. S. Laddha, and H. E. Hoelscher, "Bubble Swarm
Characteristics in Bubble Columns", The Canadian Journal of Chemical
Engineering, 54, pp. 503-508, December 1976 (enclosed)
Manual
SS, Confidential Company, "Confidential Client Raffinate Stripping System
Project A-7819 Operating Manual", Sparging Hole Requirements, Confidential
Client, 11/11/99 (enclosed)
Mathcad Help
Mathsoft, Mathcad 2000 Solve Block help, Mathsoft, Cambridge, MA, 2000;
Mathsoft, Resource Center: Polynomial Regression, Mathsoft, Cambridge, MA,
2000 (enclosed)
P&ID
SS, Confidential Company, "Raffinate Stripper P&ID", Dwg. 0000-102-001, Rev. 8,
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 3 of 37
y
Confidential Client, 11-8-99 (enclosed)
g
Perry's
Green, Don W., editor, "Perry's Chemical Engineers' Handbook", 7th Ed., pages
1-18, 1-19, 2-355, 4-7, 5-7, 5-8, 5-56, 5-69, 6-49, 6-50, 10-4, 10-14, 10-16, 10-72,
10-140, 14-70, 14-71, and 14-74, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1997 (enclosed)
Pfaudler
Pfaudler, "30 Gal. (20 I.D. x 24 3/4 Dp.) POWCT VR-30 Gl. Stl. "P" Tank", Dwg.
CE279-0863-65, Pfaudler, Rochester, NY, 11/27/79;
Pfaudler, "50 Gal. (24" I.D. x 28 3/4" Dp.) JOWCT Glasteel Vacuum Receiver",
Dwg. CE279-0860, Pfaudler, Rochester, NY, 12/3/79;
Pfaudler, "Chemstor/Storage Tank", Pfaudler, Rochester, NY, 4/97 (enclosed)
Pipe Spec
SS, Confidential Company, "Raffinate Stripper Piping Material Specifications",
Dwg. 0007-702-004, Rev. 0, Confidential Client, 5/28/99 (enclosed)
PQ Data
SS, Confidential Company, "Chloroform Concentration in Raffinate Stripper",
Confidential Client, 11/01/00 (enclosed)
PQ Report
Keeler, R., "Amendment to Process Qualification Protocol of the Raffinate
Stripper", Confidential Client, 1/5/00 (enclosed)
SS
Anthony, J., Notes from meeting, 7/26/00 (enclosed)
Treybal
Treybal, R. E., "Mass-Transfer Operations", 3rd Ed., pp. 143-144 and 211-217,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980 (enclosed)
Wilkinson
Wilkinson, P. M., and L. L. van Dierendonck, "A Theoretical Model for the
Influence of Gas Properties and Pressure on Single-Bubble Formation at an
Orifice", Chemical Engineering Science, 49(9), pp. 1429-1438, 1994 (enclosed)
Wright
Wright, D. A., S. I. Sandler, and D. DeVoll, "Infinite Dilution Activity Coefficients
and Solubilities of Halogenated Hydrocarbons in Water at Ambient
Temperatures", Environmental Science and Technology, 26(9), pp. 1828-1831,
1992 (enclosed)
Yaws
Yaws, C. L., "Handbook of Transport Property Data", pp. 141-145, Gulf Publishing,
Houston, TX, 1995 (enclosed)
Symbols
A1 and A2
cross-sectional areas of first and second stage vessels
a1 and a2
effective interfacial area per unit volume of vessels
ft
2
ft
ft
2
3
2
aT1 and aT2
total hole areas of first and second stage spargers
ft
Bw
second virial coefficient of water vapor
ft
lbmole
CPgw
ideal gas heat capacity of water vapor
joule
kgmole⋅ K
D1 and D2
diameters of first and second stage restriction orifices
in
Dc0w
diffusivity of chloroform in infinite dilution in water
Dv1 and Dv2
dN1 and dN2
diameters of stripper first and second stage vessels
ft
sec
in
hole diameters of first and second stage spargers
in
3
2
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 4 of 37
inertial_force
, of first and second stage vessels
gravity_force
Frgc1 and Frgc2 Froude numbers for transition to foaming flow
Fr1 and Fr2
Froude numbers,
lbmole
GM1 and GM2
gas-phase molar fluxes based on vessel cross-sectional areas
Gr1 and Gr2
Grashof numbers of first and second stage vessels
-
ID1 and ID2
piping inside diameters of restriction orifices
in
K1 and K2
loss coefficients of first and second stage restriction orifices
-
Kc1 and Kc2
vapor-liquid equilibrium ratios of chloroform at infinite dilution
-
hr⋅ ft
2
in water in the first and second stage vessels
KL1 and KL2
overall liquid-phase mass-transfer coefficients in vessels
kL1 and kL2
individual liquid-phase mass-transfer coefficients in vessels
kw
heat capacity ratio of water vapor
LM1 and LM2
liquid-phase molar fluxes based on vessel cross-sectional areas
ft
hr
ft
hr
lbmole
hr⋅ ft
Lover1 and Lover2
level of clear liquid at overflow of first and second stage vessels
%
lb
lbmole
Mw and Mc
molecular weight of water and of chloroform
NA1 and NA2
molar fluxes based on interfacial areas in vessels
n1 and n2
hole counts of first and second stage spargers
-
P0
absolute pressure upstream of the restriction orifices
psi
Pv
absolute pressure in first and second stage vessels
psi
Pvc
vapor pressure of chloroform
psi
Pvw
vapor pressure of water
psi
qr
volumetric flow of raffinate
Rg
universal gas constant
r
rc1 and rc2
pressure ratios of the orifices
critical pressure ratios of restriction orifices
lbmole
hr⋅ ft
-
Sc1 and Sc2
inertial_force
, of spargers
viscous_force
Schmidt numbers of first and second stage vessels
-
Sh1 and Sh2
Sherwood numbers of first and second stage vessels
-
T
T0
absolute temperature
absolute temperature upstream of the restriction orifices
K
K
TF
magnitude of the temperature in degrees F
-
Tref
absolute temperature reference value
K
NOT CHECKED
2
gal
min
joule
mole⋅ K
-
ReN1 and ReN2 Reynolds numbers,
Chloroform Plan.mcd
2
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 5 of 37
Tv1 and Tv2
absolute temperatures in first and second stage vessels
K
uN1 and uN2
superficial velocities based on hole areas of spargers
ft
sec
V1 and V2
velocities in first and second stage restriction orifices
ft
sec
rated capacities of first and second stage vessels
gal
Vcap1 and Vcap2
Voper1 and Voper2
operating volumes of first and second stage vessels
W1 and W2
mass flows in first and second stage restriction orifices
WT
total mass flow of steam
wcr
weight fraction chloroform in raffinate
gal
lb
hr
lb
hr
-
wcs
weight fraction chloroform in stripped liquid
-
wcs_adj
weight fraction chloroform in stripped liquid, adjusted
-
Weg1 and Weg2 Weber numbers,
-
x1v1 and y1v1
inertial_force
, of spargers
surface_tension_force
liquid and vapor mole fractions chloroform
-
x2v1 and y2v1
at bottom - position 1 - of first stage vessel
liquid and vapor mole fractions chloroform
-
x1v2 and y1v2
at top - position 2 - of first stage vessel
liquid and vapor mole fractions chloroform
-
x2v2 and y2v2
at bottom - position 1 - of second stage vessel
liquid and vapor mole fractions chloroform
-
β 1 and β 2
at top - position 2 - of second stage vessel
diameter ratios of first and second stage restriction orifices
-
ε G1 and ε G2
gas holdups in first and second stage vessels
-
γc
activity coefficient of chloroform at infinite dilution in water
-
µ lw
liquid viscosity of water
cP
µ vw
vapor viscosity of water
lb
ft⋅ sec
ρ0
vapor density upstream of the restriction orifices
ρ lw
ρv
liquid density of water
vapor density in first and second stage vessels
lb
3
ft
lb
3
ft
lb
ft
σw
Chloroform Plan.mcd
surface tension of water
NOT CHECKED
3
newton
m
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 6 of 37
Assumptions
The levels of clear liquid at overflow of the first and second stage vessels, Lover1 and Lover2 , are
taken to be (initial design, 100% : SS):
Lover1 := 60% and Lover2 := 60% .
Vessel appurtenances - sparger pipes, level elements, etc. - are neglected in calculating vessel
cross-sectional areas.
The flows upstream of the restriction orifices are taken to be saturated vapor.
The absolute pressures downstream of the restriction orifices are taken to equal those of the first
and second stage vessels. For critical flow through thick-plate orifices, the flow increases only about 2% as
the pressure ratio is decreased to well below the critical pressure ratio (Grace pages 645 and 640).
The weight fraction chloroform in the raffinate, wcr , is taken to be (PQ Data from 7/7/99):
3926
6
wcr :=
10
+
3581
6
10
3
+
3760
6
10
: wcr = 3756
1
6
.
10
The absolute pressures and temperatures in the first and second stage spargers are taken to be
those of the vessels, not those of the restriction orifices. Bubbles reach pressure equilibrium with the vessel
before they disengage from the sparger, which is reasonable since the flow through the sparger orifices is
subsonic. Bubbles reach thermal equilibrium with the vessel before they disengage from the sparger, which
is reasonable given the experimental observation that the gas-phase mass transfer resistance is negligible
(Perry's page 5-69 Table 5-25 Condition Z).
The absolute pressures and temperatures in the first and second stage vessels, Pv , Tv1 , and Tv2 ,
are taken to be the following values at all points in the vessels, neglecting the small liquid heads at the
sparger holes and the small pressure drops in the vapor discharge piping and condenser (PQ Data from
10/5/99):
Pv := 14.696psi .
Tv1 := 

91 + 92 + 91 + 91 + 94
+ 273.15 K and Tv2 := ( 100 + 273.15)K :
5

Tv1 = 364.95 K and Tv2 = 373.15 K .
The vapor densities and vapor viscosities in the first and second stage vessels are taken to be
those of water at the conditions in the second stage vessel. The liquid densities and surface tensions in the
first and second stage vessels are taken to be those of water at the conditions in the vessels. Changes in
properties due to chloroform and tar present are neglected.
The volumetric flow of raffinate, qr , is taken to be (PQ Data from 9/17/99):
4.7
qr :=
Chloroform Plan.mcd
gal
gal
+ 3.67
min
min
gal
; qr = 4.185
.
2
min
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 7 of 37
The bubble diameter correlation (Kumar) is for spargers mounted horizontally, while the spargers
are mounted vertically, which may increase bubble coalescence, reducing interfacial area and mass
transfer.
The gas holdup correlation (Akita) and mass transfer correlation (Perry's page 5-69, Calderbank) is
for bubbles uniformly distributed throughout the cross-section of the vessel. The spargers, on the other
hand, are vertical pipes with holes every 90 degrees around (Manual), and the spargers are mounted on
off-center nozzles. The nonuniform bubble distributions may reduce mass transfer.
Conversions and Constants
The centipoise cP is defined as follows:
cP := 10
−2
⋅ poise .
The millinewton mN is defined as follows:
mN := 10
−3
⋅ newton .
The amount of substance kgmole is defined as follows:
kg = 1000 gm , so kgmole := 1000mole .
The amount of substance lbmole is defined as follows:
lb = 453.592370 gm , so lbmole := 453.592370mole .
The reference temperature, Tref , where the temperature-dependent property values listed in the
DIPPR fixed properties list are calculated, is:
Tref := 298.15K .
The magnitude of the temperature in degrees F, TF , as a function of the absolute temperature T is
(Perry's page 1-19):
T
⋅ 1.8 − 459.69 .
K
Tref = 298.15 K : TF ( Tref ) = 76.980 .
TF ( T) :=
The universal gas constant Rg is (Perry's page 1-19):
3
Rg := 8.3144
Chloroform Plan.mcd
joule
psi⋅ ft
. Alternatively, Rg = 10.73
.
mole⋅ K
lbmole⋅ R
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 8 of 37
Hardware Data
The restriction orifice diameters of the first and second stages, D1 and D2 , are (Baseline: JH):
16
19
⋅ in and D2 :=
⋅ in :
64
64
D1 = 0.250 in and D2 = 0.297 in .
D1 :=
The pipe inside diameters of the first and second stage restriction orifices, ID1 and ID2 , are (P&ID,
Pipe Spec, Perry's page 10-72):
ID1 := 1.049in and ID2 := ID1 .
The sparger hole diameters of the first and second stages, dN1 and dN2 , and hole counts n1 and
n2 are (Baseline: Manual Sparging Hole Requirements):
dN1 :=
11
13
in and dN2 :=
in . 12in = 1 ft .
64
64
n1 := 16 + 4 + 2 and n2 := n1 .
The vessel diameters of the first and second stages, Dv1 and Dv2 , are (Pfaudler):
Dv1 := 20in and Dv2 := 24in .
The rated capacities of the first and second stage vessels, Vcap1 and Vcap2 , are (Pfaudler
Chemstor/Storage Tank):
Vcap1 := 32gal and Vcap2 := 52gal .
These equal the straight side capacity plus the bottom head capacity, based on a check using the standard
formula for the capacity of an ellipsoidal head with a given height, using data for a Pfaudler VR-50 (Perry's
page 10-140 and Pfaudler).
Property Data
The molecular weight of water, Mw , is (DIPPR):
Mw := 18.015
Chloroform Plan.mcd
kg
gm
lb
; Mw = 18.015
; Mw = 18.015
.
kgmole
mole
lbmole
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 9 of 37
The liquid density of water, ρ lw , as a function of the absolute temperature T is defined by the liquid
molar density as a function of the absolute temperature and the molecular weight of water Mw (DIPPR):
ρ lw ( T) :=  ( 273.16⋅ K ≤ T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 333.15⋅ K) ⋅
5.4590
0.0810
...
 


1 + 1 − 

  647.13 
0.3054

4.9669
 + ( 333.15⋅ K < T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 403.15⋅ K) ⋅
0.18740

  T 
K

1 + 1 − 
647.13 

0.27788  

4.3910
 + ( 403.15⋅ K < T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 647.13⋅ K) ⋅
0.25340
  T 

K
1 + 1 − 

647.13 
0.24870  

T
K
 ⋅ kgmole ⋅ M ; M = 18.015 kg .
w
w

3
kgmole
 m


...








Tref = 298.15 K :
ρ lw ( Tref )
Mw
ρ lw ( Tref ) = 995.122
kg
3
= 55.239
kgmole
3
.
m
. 1kg = 2.204623 lb . 1ft = 0.304800 m .
m
ρ lw ( Tref ) = 62.123
lb
ft
3
.
The vapor pressure of water, Pvw , as a function of the absolute temperature T is (DIPPR):

Pvw ( T) := ( 273.16⋅ K ≤ T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 647.13⋅ K) ⋅ exp  73.649 +
−7258.2
T
T
+ −7.3037⋅ ln   ...  ⋅ Pa .
 K

K
2.0000

T
 + 4.1653⋅ 10− 6⋅  

 K
Tref = 298.15 K :
Pvw ( Tref ) = 3170 Pa . 1Pa = 0.000145038 psi .
Pvw ( Tref ) = 0.4598 psi .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED




LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 10 of 37
The ideal gas heat capacity of water, CPgw , as a function of the absolute temperature T is (DIPPR):
CPgw ( T) := ( 100.00K ≤ T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 2273.1K) ⋅  3.3363⋅ 10 ...
4

2610.5



T

 K

4
 
 + 2.6790⋅ 10 ⋅

2610.5 


 sinh  T 


   


  K 

2
1169.0





T

 K


 
 + 8896.0⋅

1169.0  

cosh 

 

T  



 


  K  
 ⋅ joule .

kgmole⋅ K
2
 
 
 
 ...
 
 
 







Tref = 298.15 K :
CPgw ( Tref ) = 33578
joule
kgmole⋅ K
joule
. 1
= 0.000238851
kgmole⋅ K
BTU
.
CPgw ( Tref ) = 8.020
lbmole⋅ R
Mw = 18.015
CPgw ( Tref )
Mw
lb
lbmole
= 0.445193
BTU
lbmole⋅ R
.
.
BTU
lb⋅ R
.
The heat capacity ratio of water vapor, kw , as a function of the ideal gas heat capacity of water
vapor Cpw ( T) and the universal gas constant Rg is (Perry's page 4-7):
kw ( T) :=
CPgw ( T)
CPgw ( T) − Rg
.
Tref = 298.15 K :
CPgw ( Tref ) = 33578
joule
. Rg = 8314
kgmole⋅ K
kw ( Tref ) = 1.329106 .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
joule
kgmole⋅ K
.
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 11 of 37
The second virial coefficient of water vapor, Bw , as a function of the absolute temperature T is
(DIPPR):

Bw ( T) := ( 273.15⋅ K ≤ T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 2273.1⋅ K) ⋅  0.0222 +
−26.38
7
+
−1.675⋅ 10
T
3

T
K
 

 K

19
21
 + −3.894⋅ 10 + 3.133⋅ 10
8
9

T
T

 
 

 K
 K

3
m
.
 kgmole
...  ⋅






Tref = 298.15 K :
Bw ( Tref ) = −1.1536
3
m
kgmole
. 1m = 3.280840 ft . 1lbmole = 0.453592 kgmole .
Bw ( Tref ) = −18.479
3
ft
.
lbmole
The liquid viscosity of water, µ lw , as a function of the absolute temperature T is (DIPPR):
µ lw ( T) := ( 273.16⋅ K ≤ T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 646.15⋅ K) ⋅ exp  −52.843 +
3703.6
T
T
+ 5.8660⋅ ln   ...  ⋅ Pa⋅ sec .
 K

K
10.000

T
 + −5.8790⋅ 10− 29⋅  

 K
Tref = 298.15 K :
µ lw ( Tref ) = 0.0009 Pa⋅ sec . 1Pa⋅ sec = 999.978174 cP .
µ lw ( Tref ) = 0.912511 cP .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED




LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 12 of 37
The vapor viscosity of water, µ vw , as a function of the absolute temperature T is (DIPPR):
6.1839⋅ 10
−7
µ vw ( T) := ( 273.16K ≤ T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 1073.2K) ⋅
847.23
1+
T
T
⋅  
 K
0.6778
4
+
−7.3930⋅ 10
K
T
 
 K
⋅ Pa⋅ sec .
2
Tref = 298.15 K :
µ vw ( Tref ) = 9.7696 × 10
−6
Pa⋅ sec . 1Pa⋅ sec = 0.671969
µ vw ( Tref ) = 6.564835 × 10
−6
lb
.
ft sec
lb
.
ft sec
The surface tension of water, σ w , as a function of the absolute temperature T is (DIPPR):
T




K
σ w ( T) := ( 273.16⋅ K ≤ T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 647.13⋅ K) ⋅ 0.1855⋅  1 −

647.13 

T
 T 
 K
  K 
2.7170+ − 3.5540⋅   + 2.0470⋅    
647.13
 647.13 
⋅
Tref = 298.15 K :
σ w ( Tref ) = 0.072825
newton
m
. 1newton = 1000 mN .
σ w ( Tref ) = 72.825
σ w ( Tref ) = 0.072825
newton
m
mN
m
.
. 1newton = 0.224814 lbf . 1ft = 0.304800 m .
σ w ( Tref ) = 0.004990185
lbf
.
ft
The molecular weight of chloroform, Mc , is (DIPPR):
Mc := 119.38
Chloroform Plan.mcd
kg
kgmole
; Mc = 119.38
gm
mole
; Mc = 119.38
NOT CHECKED
2
lb
lbmole
.
newton
.
m
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 13 of 37
The vapor pressure of chloroform, Pvc , as a function of the absolute temperature T is (DIPPR):
Pvc ( T) := ( 207.15⋅ K ≤ T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 536.40⋅ K) ⋅ exp  146.43 +
−7792.3
T
+ −20.614⋅ ln   ...  ⋅ Pa .
T
 K

 

 K
1.0000

T
 
+
0.0246
⋅
 


 K





Tref = 298.15 K :
Pvc ( Tref ) = 26337 Pa . 1Pa = 0.000145038 psi .
Pvc ( Tref ) = 3.8199 psi .
The diffusivity of chloroform in infinite dilution in water, Dc0w , as a function of the absolute
temperature T is (Yaws):
− 1.4389+
Dc0w ( T) := ( 274⋅ K ≤ T) ⋅ ( T ≤ 394⋅ K) ⋅ 10
− 1051.706
T
 K
 
Dc0w [ ( 25 + 273.15)K] = 1.08 × 10
−5
Dc0w [ ( 100 + 273.15)K] = 5.53 × 10
2
cm
⋅
sec
. 2.54cm = 1 in .
2
cm
.
sec
−5
2
cm
.
sec
The activity coefficient of chloroform at infinite dilution in water, γ c , as a function of the absolute
temperature T is (Wright, Mathcad Polynomial Regression):

 20.0 + 273.15   818    20.0 + 273.15   818  
γ c ( T) := interp regress  35.0 + 273.15  ,  847  , 2 ,  35.0 + 273.15  K ,  847  , T ;

 50.0 + 273.15   862    50.0 + 273.15   862  


 
  
 
 
γ c [ ( 20.0 + 273.15)K] = 818 .
γ c [ ( 35.0 + 273.15)K] = 847 .
γ c [ ( 50.0 + 273.15)K] = 862 .
γ c [ ( 100.0 + 273.15)K] = 811 .
Operating Data
The absolute pressure upstream of the orifices, P0 , is (P&ID):
P0 := 30psi + 14.7psi : P0 = 44.7 psi .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 14 of 37
Steam Flows
The pressure ratio of the restriction orifices, r , depends on the absolute pressure upstream P0 and
the absolute pressure downstream Pv :
P0 = 44.7 psi . Pv = 14.7 psi .
Pv
r :=
P0
: r = 0.328770 .
The diameter ratios of the first and second stage restriction orifices, β 1 and β 2 , are calculated from
the orifice diameters D1 and D2 and the orifice pipe inside diameters ID1 and ID2 (Perry's page 10-4):
β 1 :=
D1
ID1
and β 2 :=
D2
ID2
:
β 1 = 0.238322 and β 2 = 0.283008 .
The absolute temperature upstream of the restriction orifices, T0 , is calculated iteratively from the
absolute pressure upstream P0 using the water vapor pressure as a function of the absolute temperature,
Pvw ( T) (Mathcad Help for Solve Block):
Start with T0 := Tref . Tref = 298.15 K , so T0 = 298.15 K .
Given P0 = Pvw ( T0 ) , calculate T0 := Find ( T0 ) :
T0 = 407.67 K . [ TF ( T0 ) = 274.11 .]
The critical pressure ratios of the first and second stage restriction orifices, rc1 and rc2 , are
calculated iteratively from the heat capacity ratio of the water vapor at the upstream absolute temperature,
kw ( T0 ) , and the diameter ratios of the orifices β 1 and β 2 (Perry's page 10-14):
T0 = 407.67 K . [ TF ( T0 ) = 274.11 .] kw ( T0 ) = 1.319786 .
β 1 = 0.238322 and β 2 = 0.283008 .
Start with rc1 := 1 and rc2 := 1 .
1 − kw( T0)
Given ( rc1)
kw( T0)
1 − kw( T0)
(rc2)
kw( T0)
 kw ( T0) − 1 
+

2
2
 ⋅ ( β 1) ⋅ ( rc1)

4
kw( T0)
=
2
2
kw ( T0 ) + 1
kw( T0)
 kw ( T0) − 1 
4
,
=
+
 ⋅ ( β 2) ⋅ ( rc2)
2
2


 rc1 
calculate   := Find ( rc1 , rc2) :
 rc2 
rc1 = 0.542571 and rc2 = 0.542962 .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
kw ( T 0 ) + 1
NOT CHECKED
and
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 15 of 37
The restriction orifices are in critical flow if their pressure ratios r are smaller than their critical
pressure ratios rc1 and rc2 (Perry's page 10-14):
r = 0.329 . rc1 = 0.543 and rc2 = 0.543 .
flow1 := if ( r ≤ rc1 , "critical" , "not critical" ) and flow2 := if ( r ≤ rc2 , "critical" , "not critical" ) :
flow1 = "critical"
and flow2 = "critical" .
The loss coefficients of the first and second stage restriction orifices, K1 and K2 , can be estimated
from the orifice diameter ratios β 1 and β 2 alone (Benedict page 247 equation 22):
3
(
K1 := 1 − β 1
)
2 2
+
(
)
(
1
2
⋅ 1 − β 1 + 1.41⋅ 1 − β 1
2
)
2 2
3
(
and K2 := 1 − β 2
)
2 2
+
(
)
(
)
1
2
2 2
:
⋅ 1 − β 2 + 1.41⋅ 1 − β 2
2
K1 = 2.653 and K2 = 2.550 .
The vapor density upstream of the restriction orifices, ρ 0 , is calculated iteratively from the absolute
pressure upstream P0 , universal gas constant Rg , molecular weight of water vapor Mw , absolute
temperature upstream T0 , and second virial coefficient of water upstream Bw ( T0 ) (Perry's page 2-355):
P0 = 44.7 psi . Mw = 18.015
Rg = 10.73
psi⋅ ft
3
lbmole⋅ R
.
. K = 1.8 R . T0 = 407.67 K . [ TF ( T0 ) = 274.11 .] Bw ( T0 ) = −5.297421
Start with ρ 0 := 0.1
lb
ft
Given that
P0
ρ0
Mw
⋅ Rg⋅ T0
= 1 + B w ( T0 ) ⋅
ρ0
Mw
ρ 0 = 0.105532
3
.
( )
, calculate ρ 0 := Find ρ 0 :
lb
ft
Chloroform Plan.mcd
lb
lbmole
3
.
NOT CHECKED
ft
3
lbmole
.
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 16 of 37
The velocities in the first and second stage restriction orifices, V1 and V2 , are calculated from the
absolute pressure upstream P0 , the critical pressure ratios of the orifices rc1 and rc2 , the loss coefficients
of the orifices K1 and K2 , and the vapor density upstream ρ 0 (Benedict page 245 equation 1):
P0 = 44.7
lbf
2
in
. rc1 = 0.542571 and rc2 = 0.542962 .
ft
1⋅ lbf = 32.174 lb⋅
2
2
. 144in = 1 ft
2
.
sec
lb
.
K1 = 2.652828 and K2 = 2.550223 . ρ 0 = 0.105532
3
ft
V1 :=
2
(P0 − rc1⋅ P0)⋅ K ⋅ ρ
1
V1 = 822.655
and V2 :=
2
(P0 − rc2⋅ P0)⋅ K ⋅ ρ
2
0
:
0
ft
ft
and V2 = 838.683
.
sec
sec
The mass flows in the first and second stage restriction orifices, W1 and W2 , and the total mass
flow of steam WT are calculated from the vapor density upstream ρ 0 , the pipe diameters D1 and D2 , and
the velocities in the orifices V1 and V2 (Benedict page 245 equation 3):
ρ 0 = 0.105532
lb
ft
3
. π = 3.141593 . D1 = 0.25 in . V1 = 822.655
D2 = 0.296875 in . V2 = 838.683
ft
sec
ft
sec
.
2
2
 D1 
 D2 
 ⋅ V1 and W2 := ρ 0⋅ π ⋅   ⋅ V2 :
 2 
 2 
W1 := ρ 0 ⋅ π ⋅ 
W1 = 106.540
lb
hr
and W2 = 153.165
WT := W1 + W2 : WT = 260
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
lb
hr
.
lb
hr
.
2
2
. 144in = 1 ft .
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 17 of 37
The vapor density at the vessels, ρ v , is calculated iteratively from the absolute pressure at the
spargers Pv , the universal gas constant Rg , the molecular weight of water vapor Mw , the absolute
temperature of the second stage vessel Tv2 (as noted in the assumptions), and the second virial coefficient
of water Bw ( Tv2) (Perry's page 2-355):
Pv = 14.696 psi . Mw = 18.015
Rg = 10.73
psi⋅ ft
3
lbmole⋅ R
lb
.
lbmole
. K = 1.8 R . Tv1 = 364.95 K . [ TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .] Bw ( Tv2) = −7.242413
Start with ρ v := 0.1
lb
ft
Given that
Pv
ρv
Mw
= 1 + Bw ( Tv2) ⋅
⋅ Rg⋅ Tv2
ρv
Mw
ρ v = 0.037288
lb
ft
3
3
3
ft
.
lbmole
.
( )
, calculate ρ v := Find ρ v :
.
The cross-sectional areas of the first and second stage vessels, A1 and A2 are calculated from the
vessel diameters Dv1 and Dv2 (neglecting vessel appurtenances as noted in the assumptions):
π = 3.141593 . Dv1 = 20 in and Dv2 = 24 in . 12in = 1 ft .
2
2
 Dv1 
 Dv2 
 and A2 := π ⋅ 
 :
 2 
 2 
A1 := π ⋅ 
2
2
A1 = 2.182 ft and A2 = 3.142 ft .
The superficial velocities in the first and second stage vessels, UG1 and UG2 , are calculated from
the mass flows W1 and W2 , vapor density ρ v , and vessel cross-sectional areas A1 and A2 :
lb
lb
and W2 = 153.165 . 3600sec = 1 hr .
hr
hr
lb
2
2
. A1 = 2.182 ft and A2 = 3.142 ft .
ρ v = 0.037288
3
ft
W1
W2
and UG2 :=
:
UG1 :=
ρ v⋅ A1
ρ v⋅ A2
W1 = 106.540
UG1 = 0.363794
ft
sec
and UG2 = 0.363195
UG1 = 0.110884
Chloroform Plan.mcd
m
sec
ft
sec
. 1ft = 0.304800 m .
and UG2 = 0.110702
NOT CHECKED
m
sec
.
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 18 of 37
The vessel velocity regimes indicated by the vessel superficial velocities UG1 and UG2 are (Perry's
page 14-74):
UG1 = 0.36
ft
ft
and UG2 = 0.36
.
sec
sec
ft
, "Quiescent" , ""  and
sec


ft
Vessel_Gas_Velocity2 := if  UG2 ≤ 0.15
, "Quiescent" , ""  ;
sec


ft
ft 





Vessel_Gas_Velocity1 := if  0.15
< UG1 ⋅  UG1 < 0.20⋅
 , "Quiescent or Turbulent" , Vessel_Gas_Velocity1 a
sec
sec




Vessel_Gas_Velocity1 := if  UG1 ≤ 0.15
ft
ft 

< UG2 ⋅  UG2 < 0.20⋅
 , "Quiescent or Turbulent" , Vessel_Gas_Velocity2
sec
sec 



ft
Vessel_Gas_Velocity1 := if  0.20⋅
≤ UG1 , "Turbulent" , Vessel_Gas_Velocity1  and
sec


ft
Vessel_Gas_Velocity2 := if  0.20⋅
≤ UG2 , "Turbulent" , Vessel_Gas_Velocity2  :
sec


and
Vessel_Gas_Velocity1 = "Turbulent"
Vessel_Gas_Velocity2 = "Turbulent" .
Vessel_Gas_Velocity2 := if  0.15
Vessel_Quiescence_vs_Max1 :=
UG1
0.15
Vessel_Quiescence_vs_Max2 :=
ft
sec
UG2
0.15
. 1 = 100 % .
ft
. 1 = 100 % :
sec
Vessel_Quiescence_vs_Max1 = 243 % and
Vessel_Quiescence_vs_Max2 = 242 % .
Vessel_Turbulence_vs_Min1 :=
UG1
0.20
Vessel_Turbulence_vs_Min2 :=
ft
sec
UG2
0.20
. 1 = 100 % .
ft
. 1 = 100 % :
sec
Vessel_Turbulence_vs_Min1 = 182 % and
Vessel_Turbulence_vs_Min2 = 182 % .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 19 of 37
Interfacial Areas
The total hole areas of the first and second stage spargers, aT1 and aT2 , are calculated from the
hole diameters dN1 and dN2 and hole counts n1 and n2 :
dN1 = 0.171875 in and dN2 = 0.203125 in . 12in = 1 ft . n1 = 22 and n2 = 22 .
2
2
 dN1 
 dN2 
aT1 := π ⋅ 
 ⋅ n1 and aT2 := π ⋅ 
 ⋅ n2 :
 2 
 2 
2
2
aT1 = 0.003545 ft and aT2 = 0.004951 ft .
The superficial gas velocities based on total hole area of the first and second stage spargers, uN1
and uN2 , are calculated from the mass flows W1 and W2 , gas density ρ v , and total hole areas aT1 and aT2 :
W1 = 106.54
ρ v = 0.037288
lb
ft
3
lb
hr
and W2 = 153.165
hr
. 3600sec = 1 hr .
2
2
. aT1 = 0.003545 ft and aT2 = 0.004951 ft .
uN1 :=
W1
ρ v⋅ aT1
uN1 = 223.907
Chloroform Plan.mcd
lb
ft
sec
and uN2 :=
W2
ρ v⋅ aT2
:
and uN2 = 230.469
NOT CHECKED
ft
sec
.
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 20 of 37
The sparger hole superficial velocities uN1 and uN2 (for open-end pipe, perforated plate, or ring- or
cross-style perforated-pipe spargers in quiescent vessels) are considered (Perry's page 14-74):
uN1 = 224
ft
and
sec
ft
.
sec
Vessel_Gas_Velocity1 = "Turbulent"
uN2 = 230
and
Vessel_Gas_Velocity2 = "Turbulent" .
Sparger_Velocity1 := if  uN1 ≤ 250

ft
, "Not Excessive" , ""  and
sec

Sparger_Velocity2 := if  uN2 ≤ 250
Sparger_Velocity1 := if  250


ft
< uN1 ⋅  uN1 < 300⋅
ft
, "Not Excessive" , ""  ;
sec

ft 

 , "Possibly Excessive" , Sparger_Velocity1 and
sec 


ft 

Sparger_Velocity2 := if  250
< uN2 ⋅  uN2 < 300⋅
 , "Possibly Excessive" , Sparger_Velocity2 ;
sec
sec 



ft
Sparger_Velocity1 := if  300⋅
≤ uN1 , "Excessive" , Sparger_Velocity1  and
sec


ft

Sparger_Velocity2 := if  300⋅
≤ uN2 , "Excessive" , Sparger_Velocity2  :
sec


sec
ft
Sparger_Velocity1 = "Not Excessive"
and Sparger_Velocity2 = "Not Excessive" .
uN1
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Max_Okay1 :=
250
ft
sec
uN2
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Max_Okay2 :=
250
. 1 = 100 % .
ft
. 1 = 100 % :
sec
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Max_Okay1 = 90 % and
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Max_Okay2 = 92 % .
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Min_Excessive1 :=
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Min_Excessive2 :=
uN1
ft
300
sec
uN2
. 1 = 100 % .
. 1 = 100 % :
ft
300
sec
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Min_Excessive1 = 75 % and
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Min_Excessive2 = 77 % .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 21 of 37
inertial_force
(Perry's page 6-50), for the gas flows at the holes in the first
viscous_force
and second stage spargers, ReN1 and ReN2 , are calculated from the hole diameters dN1 and dN2 , hole
The Reynolds numbers,
superficial gas velocities uN1 and uN2 , vapor density ρ v , and vapor viscosity of water at the absolute
temperature in the second stage vessel (as noted in the assumptions) µ vw ( Tv2) (Kumar page 508
Nomenclature section):
ft
ft
lb
and uN2 = 230.469
. ρ v = 0.037288
.
3
sec
sec
ft
12in = 1 ft .
− 6 lb
.
Tv2 = 373.15 K . [ TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .] µ vw ( Tv2) = 8.397656 × 10
ft sec
dN1 = 0.171875 in and dN2 = 0.203125 in . uN1 = 223.907
ReN1 :=
dN1⋅ uN1⋅ ρ v
µ vw ( Tv2)
and ReN2 :=
dN2⋅ uN2⋅ ρ v
µ vw ( Tv2)
;
ReN1 = 14240 and ReN2 = 17322 .
The sparger flow regimes indicated by the sparger hole Reynolds numbers ReN1 and ReN2 are
(Perry's pages 14-70 and 14-71):
ReN1 = 14240 and
ReN2 = 17322 .
Sparger_Re_Regime1 := if ( ReN1 < 200 , "Single-Bubble" , "" ) and
Sparger_Re_Regime2 := if ( ReN2 < 200 , "Single-Bubble" , "" ) ;
Sparger_Re_Regime1 := if ( 200 ≤ ReN1) ⋅ ( ReN1 ≤ 2100) , "Intermediate" , Sparger_Re_Regime1 and
Sparger_Re_Regime2 := if ( 200 ≤ ReN2) ⋅ ( ReN2 ≤ 2100) , "Intermediate" , Sparger_Re_Regime2 ;
Sparger_Re_Regime1 := if ( 2100 < ReN1 , "Possibly Jet" , Sparger_Re_Regime1 ) and
Sparger_Re_Regime2 := if ( 2100 < ReN2 , "Possibly Jet" , Sparger_Re_Regime2 ) :
Sparger_Re_Regime1 = "Possibly Jet"
and
Sparger_Re_Regime2 = "Possibly Jet" .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 22 of 37
The Weber numbers,
inertial_force
(Perry's page 6-50), for the gas flows at the holes in the
surface_tension_force
first and second stage spargers, Weg1 and Weg2 , are calculated from the vapor density ρ v , the hole
diameters dN1 and dN2 , the hole superficial gas velocities uN1 and uN2 , and the surface tensions of water
at the absolute temperatures in the vessels (as noted in the assumptions) σ w ( Tv1) and σ w ( Tv2) (Perry's
page 14-71):
ρ v = 0.037288
lb
ft
3
. dN1 = 0.171875 in and dN2 = 0.203125 in . uN1 = 223.907
ft
ft
and uN2 = 230.469
.
sec
sec
Tv1 = 364.95 K . [ TF ( Tv1) = 197.22 .] σ w ( Tv1) = 0.004098
lbf
lbft
. 1lbf = 32.174
.
2
ft
sec
Tv2 = 373.15 K . [ TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .] σ w ( Tv2) = 0.003989
lbf
Weg1 :=
ρ v⋅ dN1⋅ uN1
σ w ( Tv1)
2
and Weg2 :=
ft
. 1lbf = 32.174
ρ v⋅ dN2⋅ uN2
lbft
sec
2
.
2
σ w ( Tv2)
:
Weg1 = 203.062 and Weg2 = 261.198 .
The sparger flow jet regimes indicated by the sparger hole Weber numbers Weg1 and Weg2 are
(Perry's pages 14-70 and 14-71, and Wilkinson page 1433):
Weg1 = 203.062 and
Weg2 = 261.198 .
Sparger_We_Regime1 := if ( Weg1 > 2 , "Jet" , "Not Jet" ) and
Sparger_We_Regime2 := if ( Weg2 > 2 , "Jet" , "Not Jet" ) :
Sparger_We_Regime1 = "Jet"
and
Sparger_We_Regime2 = "Jet" .
Sparger_We_vs_Jet_Flow_We1 :=
Sparger_We_vs_Jet_Flow_We2 :=
Weg1
2
Weg2
2
. 1 = 100 % .
. 1 = 100 % :
Sparger_We_vs_Jet_Flow_We1 = 10153 % and
Sparger_We_vs_Jet_Flow_We2 = 13060 % .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 23 of 37
The Sauter-mean bubble diameters or bubble volume-to-surface ratios of the first and second
stage spargers, dvs1 and dvs2 , are calculated from the Reynolds numbers for the gas flows at the holes
ReN1 and ReN2 , the hole diameters dN1 and dN2 , the surface tensions and liquid densities of water at the
absolute temperatures in the vessels σ w ( Tv1) , σ w ( Tv2) , ρ lw ( Tv1) , and ρ lw ( Tv2) (as noted in the
assumptions), the vapor density in the spargers ρ v , and the gravitational acceleration g (Kumar page 504
equations 4 to 6):
ReN1 = 14240 and ReN2 = 17322 .
dN1 = 0.171875 in and dN2 = 0.203125 in . 12in = 1 ft .
Tv1 = 364.95 K and Tv2 = 373.15 K . [ TF ( Tv1) = 197.22 and TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .]
lbf
lbf
lbft
and σ w ( Tv2) = 0.003989
. 1lbf = 32.174
.
2
ft
ft
sec
lb
lb
lb
ft
and ρ lw ( Tv2) = 59.793
. ρ v = 0.037288
. g = 32.174
.
ρ lw ( Tv1) = 60.155
3
3
3
2
ft
ft
ft
sec
σ w ( Tv1) = 0.004098
Define interpolation functions f1 ( ReN1) and f2 ( ReN2) .
(
0.425
log 0.32⋅ 2100
f1 ( ReN1) := 10
(

0.425
log 0.32⋅ 2100
f2 ( ReN2) := 10
0.425
− 0.4
) +  log( 100⋅ 4000 ) − log( 0.32⋅ 2100 )  ⋅ ( log( ReN1) − log( 2100) )

log( 4000) − log( 2100)
) +  log( 100⋅ 4000 ) − log( 0.32⋅ 2100
− 0.4

0.425
log( 4000) − log( 2100)
)  ⋅

0.425
= 8.262 .
− 0.4
= 3.624 .
f1 ( 2100) = 8.262 ; 0.32⋅ 2100
f1 ( 4000) = 3.624 ; 100⋅ 4000
and
( log( ReN2) − log( 2100) )
:
f1 ( 3000) = 5.236 .
1
4
 σ w ( Tv1) ⋅ dN12 


. 1ft = 12 in .
dvs1 := ( 1 < ReN1) ⋅ ( ReN1 ≤ 10) ⋅ 1.56⋅ ReN1
...
⋅

  ( ρ lw ( Tv1) − ρ v) ⋅ g 
0.425

...  
 + ( 10 < ReN1) ⋅ ( ReN1 ≤ 2100) ⋅ 0.32⋅ ReN1
 + ( 2100 < ReN1) ⋅ ( ReN1 < 4000) ⋅ f1 ( ReN1) ...


− 0.4 
 + ( 4000 ≤ ReN1) ⋅ ( ReN1 < 70000) ⋅ 100⋅ ReN1

0.058
1
4
 σ w ( Tv2) ⋅ dN22 
⋅ 
. 1ft = 12 in :
dvs2 :=  ( 1 < ReN2) ⋅ ( ReN2 ≤ 10) ⋅ 1.56⋅ ReN2
...

  ( ρ lw ( Tv2) − ρ v) ⋅ g 
0.425


... 
 + ( 10 < ReN2) ⋅ ( ReN2 ≤ 2100) ⋅ 0.32⋅ ReN2
 + ( 2100 < ReN2) ⋅ ( ReN2 < 4000) ⋅ f1 ( ReN2) ...


− 0.4 
 + ( 4000 ≤ ReN2) ⋅ ( ReN2 < 70000) ⋅ 100⋅ ReN2

0.058
dvs1 = 0.285 in and dvs2 = 0.285 in ;
dvs1
dN1
Chloroform Plan.mcd
= 166 % and
dvs2
dN2
= 140 % .
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 24 of 37
inertial_force
(Perry's page 6-49), in the first and second stage vessels, Fr1
gravity_force
and Fr2 , are calculated from the superficial velocities UG1 and UG2 , gravitational acceleration g , and
The Froude numbers,
vessel diameters Dv1 and Dv2 (Godbole pages 1235-1236):
UG1 = 0.363794
g = 32.174
ft
sec
2
ft
ft
. UG2 = 0.363195
.
sec
sec
. Dv1 = 20 in . Dv2 = 24 in . 12in = 1 ft .
Fr1 :=
UG1
g⋅ Dv1
. Fr2 :=
UG2
g⋅ Dv2
.
Fr1 = 0.049680 . Fr2 = 0.045276 .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 25 of 37
The gas holdups in the first and second stage vessels, ε G1 and ε G2 , are calculated iteratively from
the gravitational acceleration g , the vessel diameters Dv1 and Dv2 , the liquid densities, surface tensions,
and liquid viscosities of water at the absolute temperatures in the vessels (as noted in the assumptions)
ρ lw ( Tv1) , ρ lw ( Tv2) , σ w ( Tv1) , σ w ( Tv2) , µ lw ( Tv1) and µ lw ( Tv2) , and the superficial velocities UG1 and
UG2 (Akita page 78 equation 11):
Tv1 = 364.95 K and Tv2 = 373.15 K . [ TF ( Tv1) = 197.22 and TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .]
g = 32.174
ft
lb
lb
. Dv1 = 20 in and Dv2 = 24 in . 12in = 1 ft . ρ lw ( Tv1) = 60.155
and ρ lw ( Tv2) = 59.793
.
3
3
sec
ft
ft
2
lbf
lbft
− 3 lbf
and σ w ( Tv2) = 3.989 × 10
. 1lbf = 32.174
.
2
ft
ft
sec
− 6 lb
− 6 lb
and µ lw ( Tv2) = 187.815 × 10
.
µ lw ( Tv1) = 206.177 × 10
ft sec
ft sec
σ w ( Tv1) = 4.098 × 10
−3
UG1 = 0.363794
ft
sec
and UG2 = 0.363195
ft
sec
.
Start with ε G1 := 10% and ε G2 := 10% .
Given that
ε G1
(1 − ε G1)4
ε G2
(1 − ε G2)4
1
1
8
12
 g⋅ Dv12⋅ ρ lw ( Tv1)   g⋅ Dv13   UG1  1.0
= 0.20⋅
⋅
 ⋅
 and
2

 
σ
T
⋅
g
D
(
)
v1
w
v1



 µ lw ( Tv1) 



 
  ρ lw ( Tv1)  
= 0.20⋅
1
1
8
12
 g⋅ Dv2 ⋅ ρ lw ( Tv2)   g⋅ Dv23   UG2  1.0
⋅
 ⋅
 ,
2

 
σ w ( Tv2)


 µ lw ( Tv2)    g⋅ Dv2 

 
  ρ lw ( Tv2)  
 ε G1 
calculate 
:= Find ( ε G1 , ε G2) :
 ε G2 


2
ε G1 = 19.468 % and ε G2 = 19.621 % .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 26 of 37
inertial_force
(Perry's page 6-49), for transition to
gravity_force
The critical values of the Froude number,
foaming flow in the first and second stage vessels, Frgc1 and Frgc2 , are calculated from the gas holdups ε G1
and ε G2 , and the vessel foaming flow conditions are determined by comparing the calculated critical values
of the Froude number to the actual values Fr1 and Fr2 (Godbole page 1221):
ε G1 = 0.195 and ε G2 = 0.196 .
Frgc1 :=
0.25⋅ ε G1
2
3
and Frgc2 :=
(1 − ε G1) 2
Frgc1 = 0.013110
0.25⋅ ε G2
2
3
.
(1 − ε G2) 2
and Frgc2 = 0.013356 .
Fr1 = 0.049680 . Frgc1 = 0.013110 . Fr2 = 0.045276 . Frgc2 = 0.013356 .
Vessel_Fr_No1 := if ( Fr1 < Frgc1 , "Foaming Flow" , "Not Foaming Flow" ) and
Vessel_Fr_No2 := if ( Fr2 < Frgc2 , "Foaming Flow" , "Not Foaming Flow" ) :
Vessel_Fr_No1 = "Not Foaming Flow"
and
Vessel_Fr_No1 = "Not Foaming Flow" .
Vessel_Fr_vs_Min_Nonfoaming1 :=
Vessel_Fr_vs_Min_Nonfoaming2 :=
Fr1
Frgc1
Fr2
Frgc2
. 1 = 100 % .
. 1 = 100 % :
Vessel_Fr_vs_Min_Nonfoaming1 = 379 % and
Vessel_Fr_vs_Min_Nonfoaming2 = 339 % .
The effective interfacial areas per unit volume in the first and second stage vessels, a1 and a2 , are
calculated from the gas holdups ε G1 and ε G2 and the Sauter-mean bubble diameters or bubble
volume-to-surface ratios dvs1 and dvs2 (Perry's pages 5-69 and 5-43):
ε G1 = 0.194676 and ε G2 = 0.196213 .
dvs1 = 0.284573 in and dvs2 = 0.284552 in . 12in = 1 ft .
a1 :=
6⋅ ε G1
dvs1
a1 = 49.255
ft
ft
Chloroform Plan.mcd
6⋅ ε G2
and a2
:=
and a2
= 49.648
2
3
:
dvs2
NOT CHECKED
ft
ft
2
3
.
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 27 of 37
Mass Transfer Coefficients
The Grashof numbers for the first and second stage vessels, Gr1 and Gr2 , are calculated from the
Sauter-mean bubble diameters or bubble volume-to-surface ratios dvs1 and dvs2 , the liquid densities and
liquid viscosities of water at the absolute temperatures in the vessels (as noted in the assumptions) ρ lw ( Tv1)
, ρ lw ( Tv2) , µ lw ( Tv1) , and µ lw ( Tv2) , the vapor density ρ v , and the gravitational acceleration g (Calderbank
page 53):
Tv1 = 364.95 K and Tv2 = 373.15 K . [ TF ( Tv1) = 197.22 and TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .]
lb
lb
ft
. ρ v = 0.037288
. g = 32.174
.
dvs1 = 0.284573 in . 12in = 1 ft . ρ lw ( Tv1) = 60.155
3
3
2
ft
ft
sec
lb
dvs2 = 0.284552 in . ρ lw ( Tv2) = 59.793
3
ft
ft sec
(
)
dvs1 ⋅ ρ lw ( Tv1) ⋅ ρ lw ( Tv1) − ρ v ⋅ g
3
Gr1 :=
lb
µ lw ( Tv1) = 0.000206177
µ lw ( Tv1)
2
Gr1 = 36.503 × 10
6
and µ lw ( Tv2) = 0.000187815
.
(
)
dvs2 ⋅ ρ lw ( Tv2) ⋅ ρ lw ( Tv2) − ρ v ⋅ g
3
and Gr2 :=
lb
ft sec
µ lw ( Tv2)
and Gr2 = 43.452 × 10
6
2
:
.
The Schmidt numbers for the first and second stage vessels, Sc1 and Sc2 , are calculated from the
liquid viscosities and liquid densities of water at the absolute temperatures in the vessels (as noted in the
assumptions) µ lw ( Tv1) , µ lw ( Tv2) , ρ lw ( Tv1) , and ρ lw ( Tv2) , and the diffusivities of chloroform at infinite
dilution in water at the absolute temperatures in the vessels Dc0w ( Tv1) and Dc0w ( Tv2) (Calderbank page 53):
Tv1 = 364.95 K and Tv2 = 373.15 K . [ TF ( Tv1) = 197.22 and TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .]
µ lw ( Tv1) = 0.000206177
ρ lw ( Tv1) = 60.155
lb
ft
3
lb
lb
and µ lw ( Tv2) = 0.000187815
.
ft sec
ft sec
and ρ lw ( Tv2) = 59.793
lb
ft
3
. Dc0w ( Tv1) = 51.439 × 10
Dc0w ( Tv2) = 59.514 × 10
Sc1 :=
µ lw ( Tv1)
ρ lw ( Tv1) ⋅ Dc0w ( Tv1)
and Sc2 :=
−9
2
ft
.
sec
µ lw ( Tv2)
ρ lw ( Tv2) ⋅ Dc0w ( Tv2)
Sc1 = 66.632 and Sc2 = 52.780 .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
:
−9
2
ft
and
sec
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 28 of 37
The Sherwood numbers for the first and second stage vessels, Sh1 and Sh2 , are calculated from
the Grashof numbers Gr1 and Gr2 , Schmidt numbers Sc1 and Sc2 , and Sauter-mean bubble diameters or
bubble volume-to-surface ratios dvs1 and dvs2 (Perry's page 5-69):
Gr1 = 36.503 × 10
6
and Gr2 = 43.452 × 10
Sc1 = 66.632 and Sc2 = 52.780 .
6
.
dvs1 = 0.284573 in and dvs2 = 0.284552 in . 1in = 2.54 cm , so
dvs1 = 0.722814 cm and dvs2 = 0.722762 cm .
1
1
Sh1 := ( dvs1 < 0.25cm) ⋅ 2 + 0.31⋅ Gr1 ⋅ Sc1
3
1
1
+ ( 0.25cm ≤ dvs1) ⋅ 0.42⋅ Gr1 ⋅ Sc1
3
3
1
1
... and Sh2 := ( dvs2 < 0.25cm) ⋅ 2 + 0.31⋅ Gr2 ⋅ Sc2
3
1
+ ( 0.25cm ≤ dvs2) ⋅ 0.42⋅ Gr2 ⋅ Sc2
2
3
3
... :
1
2
Sh1 = 1554.180 and Sh2 = 1481.527 .
The individual liquid-phase mass-transfer coefficients in the first and second stage vessels, kL1
and kL2 , are calculated from the Sherwood numbers Sh1 and Sh2 , the diffusivities of chloroform at infinite
dilution in water at the absolute temperatures in the vessels Dc0w ( Tv1) and Dc0w ( Tv2) , and the
Sauter-mean bubble diameters or bubble volume-to-surface ratios dvs1 and dvs2 (Calderbank page 53):
Tv1 = 364.95 K and Tv2 = 373.15 K . [ TF ( Tv1) = 197.22 and TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .]
Sh1 = 1554.180 . Dc0w ( Tv1) = 51.439 × 10
−9
Sh2 = 1481.527 . Dc0w ( Tv2) = 59.514 × 10
−9
ft
2
sec
ft
. 1hr = 3600 sec .
2
. 1hr = 3600 sec .
sec
dvs1 = 0.284573 in and dvs2 = 0.284552 in . 12in = 1 ft .
kL1 :=
Sh1 ⋅ Dc0w ( Tv1)
dvs1
kL1 = 12.136
and kL2 :=
Sh2 ⋅ Dc0w ( Tv2)
dvs2
:
ft
ft
and kL2 = 13.386 .
hr
hr
The overall liquid-phase mass-transfer coefficients KL1 and KL2 are taken to equal the individual
liquid-phase mass-transfer coefficients kL1 and kL2 since the resistance is entirely in the liquid phase for
most gas-liquid mass transfer (Perry's page 5-69 Table 5-25 Condition Z, and page 5-56 equation 5-257):
ft
ft
and kL2 = 13.386 .
hr
hr
KL1 := kL1 and KL2 := kL2 :
kL1 = 12.136
KL1 = 12.136
Chloroform Plan.mcd
ft
ft
and KL2 = 13.386 .
hr
hr
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 29 of 37
Stripping and Dilution
The operating volumes of the first and second stage vessels, Voper1 and Voper2 , are calculated
from the rated capacities Vcap1 and Vcap2 , the levels of clear liquid at overflow Lover1 and Lover2 , and the
gas holdups ε G1 and ε G2 (Akita page 76 equation 1):
Vcap1 = 32 gal and Vcap2 = 52 gal .
Lover1 = 60 % and Lover2 = 60 % .
ε G1 = 19.468 % and ε G2 = 19.621 % .
100% = 1 .
Voper1 := Vcap1⋅
Lover1
100% − ε G1
and Voper2 := Vcap2⋅
Lover2
100% − ε G2
:
Voper1 = 23.841 gal and Voper2 = 38.816 gal .
The liquid-phase molar flux in the first stage vessel, LM1 , is calculated from the volumetric flow of
raffinate, qr , the liquid density of water as a function of the absolute temperature in the vessel (neglecting
the chloroform present, as noted in the assumptions) ρ lw ( Tv1) , the weight fraction chloroform in the
raffinate wcr , the molecular weights of water and chloroform Mw and Mc , and the cross-sectional area of
the vessel A1 (Cussler page 251):
Tv1 = 364.95 K . [ TF ( Tv1) = 197.22 .]
qr = 4.185
gal
min
lb
3
. 1gal = 0.133681 ft . 1hr = 60 min . ρ lw ( Tv1) = 60.155
.
3
ft
wcr = 0.003756 .
Mw = 18.015
lb
lbmole
and Mc = 119.38
100lbwcr
LM1 := qr⋅ ρ lw ( Tv1) ⋅
Chloroform Plan.mcd
Mc
+
lb
lbmole
. A1 = 2.182 ft
2
100lb⋅ ( 1 − wcr)
Mw
100lb
NOT CHECKED
⋅
1
lbmole
: LM1 = 51.213
.
2
A1
hr⋅ ft
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 30 of 37
The liquid mole fraction chloroform at the top of the first stage vessel, x2v1 , is calculated from the
weight fraction chloroform in the raffinate wcr and the molecular weights of water and chloroform Mw and
Mc :
Basis: 100lb of raffinate.
wcr = 0.003756 .
Mw = 18.015
x2v1 :=
lb
lb
. Mc = 119.38
.
lbmole
lbmole
 100lb⋅ wcr 


 Mc 
100lbwcr
Mc
+
100lb⋅ ( 1 − wcr)
: x2v1 = 0.000569 .
Mw
The gas-phase molar fluxes in the first and second stage vessels, GM1 and GM2 , are calculated
from the restriction orifice mass flows W1 and W2 , the molecular weight of water Mw , and the vessel
cross-sectional areas A1 and A2 (Cussler page 251):
W1 = 106.540
Mw = 18.015
GM1 :=
GM1 = 2.711
lb
Mw⋅ A1
lbmole
hr⋅ ft
2
hr
.
2
lbmole
W1
lb
. A1 = 2.182 ft .
and GM2 :=
W2
Mw⋅ A2
and GM2 = 2.706
:
lbmole
hr⋅ ft
2
.
The vapor-liquid equilibrium ratios of chloroform at infinite dilution in water in the first and second
stage vessels, Kc1 and Kc2 , are calculated from the vapor pressures of chloroform and the activity
coefficients of chloroform at infinite dilution in water, both evaluated at the absolute temperatures in the
vessels, Pvc ( Tv1) , Pvc ( Tv2) , γ c ( Tv1) , and γ c ( Tv2) , and from the total pressure in the vessels Pv (Hwang
page 1759 equation 1):
Tv1 = 364.95 K and Tv2 = 373.15 K . [ TF ( Tv1) = 197.22 and TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .]
Pvc ( Tv1) = 36.595 psi and Pvc ( Tv2) = 45.276 psi . γ c ( Tv1) = 829.935 and γ c ( Tv2) = 810.889 .
Pv = 14.696 psi .
Kc1 :=
Pvc ( Tv1) ⋅ γ c ( Tv1)
Chloroform Plan.mcd
Pv
and Kc2 :=
Pvc ( Tv2) ⋅ γ c ( Tv2)
Pv
NOT CHECKED
: Kc1 = 2067 and Kc2 = 2498 .
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 31 of 37
The remaining concentrations, molar fluxes based on interfacial areas, and molar fluxes based on
vessel cross-sectional areas, x1v1 , y2v1 , NA1 , x1v2 , x2v2 , y2v2 , NA2 , and LM2 , are calculated iteratively
from the interfacial areas per unit volume a1 and a2 , operating volumes Voper1 and Voper2 , liquid-phase
molar flux based on cross-sectional area of the first stage vessel LM1 , gas-phase molar fluxes based on
cross-sectional areas GM1 and GM2 , overall liquid-phase mass transfer coefficients KL1 and KL2 , liquid
densities of water at the vessel absolute temperatures (as noted in the assumptions) ρ lw ( Tv1) and ρ lw ( Tv2)
, molecular weight of water Mw , and vapor-liquid equilibrium ratios of chloroform at infinite dilution in water in
the vessels Kc1 and Kc2 (Geankoplis page 451 Example 7.4-1):
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 32 of 37
x2v 1
y2v1
x2v 2
y2v2
x1v 1
y1v1
x1v 2
y1v2
Tv1 = 364.95 K and Tv2 = 373.15 K . [ TF ( Tv1) = 197.22 and TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .]
a1 = 49.255
GM1 = 2.711
ft
2
3
. Voper1 = 23.841 gal . LM1 = 51.213
ft
lbmole
hr⋅ ft
2
. KL1 = 12.136
a2 = 49.648
ft
ft
ft
hr
lbmole
hr⋅ ft
. A1 = 2.182 ft
2
2
. Voper2 = 38.816 gal . A2 = 3.142 ft . GM2 = 2.706
KL2 = 13.386
ft
hr
x2v1 = 0.000569 .
lb
lb
. ρ lw ( Tv1) = 60.155
. Mw = 18.015
. Kc1 = 2067 .
3
lbmole
ft
2
3
2
. ρ lw ( Tv2) = 59.793
lb
ft
3
lbmole
hr⋅ ft
2
.
. Kc2 = 2498
Note:
y1v1 := 0 . y1v2 := 0 .
Let:
x1v1 := 0 . y2v1 := 0 . NA1 := 0⋅
x1v2 := 0 . x2v2 := 0 . y2v2 := 0 . NA2 := 0
lbmole
2
hr⋅ ft
lbmole
hr⋅ ft
2
.
. LM2 := LM1 .
Given
NA1⋅ a1 ⋅ Voper1 = LM1⋅ A1 ⋅ ( x2v1 − x1v1) and NA2⋅ a2 ⋅ Voper2 = LM2⋅ A2 ⋅ ( x2v2 − x1v2) .
NA1⋅ a1 ⋅ Voper1 = GM1⋅ A1 ⋅ ( y2v1 − y1v1) and NA2⋅ a2 ⋅ Voper2 = GM2⋅ A2 ⋅ ( y2v2 − y1v2) .
NA1 = KL1⋅ ρ lw ( Tv1) ⋅
y2v1 
y2v2 
1 
1 
⋅  x1v1 −
 and NA2 = KL2⋅ ρ lw ( Tv2) ⋅ ⋅  x1v2 −
.
Mw 
Kc1 
Mw 
Kc2 
LM2⋅ A2 = LM1⋅ A1 − NA1⋅ a1 ⋅ Voper1 . x1v1 = x2v2 .
Calculate:
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 33 of 37
 x 1v1 


 y 2v1 
 N A1 


 x 1v2 

 := Find ( x 1v1 , y 2v1 , N A1 , x 1v2 , x 2v2 , y 2v2 , N A2 , L M2) :
 x 2v2 
 y 2v2 


 N A2 


 L M2 
x1v1 = 14.788 × 10
−6
. y2v1 = 10.462 × 10
x1v2 = 218.741 × 10
−9
−3
. x2v2 = 14.788 × 10
NA2 = 6.315 × 10
−6
lbmole
hr⋅ ft
2
. NA1 = 394.136 × 10
−6
−6
lbmole
. y2v2 = 191.357 × 10
. LM2 = 35.545
lbmole
hr⋅ ft
2
hr⋅ ft
−6
2
.
.
.
The weight fraction chloroform in the stripped liquid, wcs , is calculated from the mole fraction
chloroform in the stripped liquid x1v2 and the molecular weights of water and chloroform Mw and Mc :
Basis: 100lbmole of stripped liquid.
x1v2 = 218.741 × 10
Mw = 18.015
wcs :=
lb
lbmole
−9
.
. Mc = 119.38
100lbmole⋅ x1v2⋅ Mc
lb
lbmole
100lbmole⋅ x1v2⋅ Mc + 100lbmole⋅ ( 1 − x1v2) ⋅ Mw
.
: wcs = 1.450 × 10
−6
.
The weight fraction chloroform in the stripped liquid, adjusted based on Process Qualification data,
wcs_adj , is calculated from the weight fraction chloroform in the stripped liquid wcs based on PQ data
(Baseline calculation wcs , PQ Data from 10/5/99):
wcs = 1.450 × 10
−6
.
 125 + 125 + 115 + 115 + 70 


5
−6

: w
.
wcs_adj := wcs⋅
cs_adj = 17.730 × 10
8.993
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 34 of 37
The weight fraction chloroform in the final rinsate, wcf , is calculated from the adjusted weight
fraction chloroform in the stripped liquid wcs_adj based on PQ data (PQ Report):
wcs_adj = 17.730 × 10
wcf := wcs_adj⋅
−6
 0.19 + 0.22 + 0.08 


3


 ( 125 + 125 + 115) + ( 115 + 70 + 75) + ( 50 + 85 + 100) 


9


: wcf = 30.306 × 10
−9
.
Key Parameters Summary
The levels of clear liquid at overflow of the first and second stage vessels, Lover1 and Lover2 , are
taken to be:
Lover1 = 60 % and Lover2 = 60 % .
The volumetric flow of raffinate qr is taken to be:
qr = 4.185
gal
min
.
The absolute pressure upstream of the orifices, P0 , is:
P0 = 44.7 psi .
The absolute pressures and temperatures in the vessels, Pv , Tv1 , and Tv2 , are:
Pv = 14.7 psi .
Tv1 = 364.95 K and Tv2 = 373.15 K . [ TF ( Tv1) = 197.22 and TF ( Tv2) = 211.98 .]
The restriction orifice diameters of the first and second stages, D1 and D2 , are:
D1 = 0.250 in and D2 = 0.297 in .
The sparger total hole areas, aT1 and aT2 , are:
dN1 = 0.172 in and dN2 = 0.203 in .
n1 = 22 and n2 = 22 .
2
2
aT1 = 0.003545 ft and aT2 = 0.004951 ft .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 35 of 37
Results Summary
The mass flows in the first and second stage restriction orifices, W1 and W2 , and the total mass
flow of steam WT are:
W1 = 106.540
lb
lb
lb
and W2 = 153.165 . WT = 260 .
hr
hr
hr
The superficial velocities in the first and second stage vessels, UG1 and UG2 , are:
ft
ft
and UG2 = 0.363195
.
sec
sec
m
m
and UG2 = 0.110702
.
UG1 = 0.110884
sec
sec
UG1 = 0.363794
The vessel flow regimes indicated by the vessel superficial velocities
Wi
 Dvi 
2
are (Perry's
ρ 4⋅ π ⋅ 

 2 
page 14-74):
Vessel_Gas_Velocity1 = "Turbulent"
and
Vessel_Gas_Velocity2 = "Turbulent" .
Vessel_Quiescence_vs_Max1 = 243 % and
Vessel_Quiescence_vs_Max2 = 242 % .
Vessel_Turbulence_vs_Min1 = 182 % and
Vessel_Turbulence_vs_Min2 = 182 % .
The sparger hole superficial velocities
Wi
ρ 0 ⋅ aTi
(for open-end pipe, perforated plate, or ring- or
cross-style perforated-pipe spargers in quiescent vessels) are considered (Perry's page 14-74:
Sparger_Velocity1 = "Not Excessive"
and
Sparger_Velocity2 = "Not Excessive" .
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Max_Okay1 = 90 % and
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Max_Okay2 = 92 % .
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Min_Excessive1 = 75 % and
Sparger_Velocity_vs_Min_Excessive2 = 77 % .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 36 of 37
The sparger flow regimes indicated by the sparger hole Reynolds numbers
dNi⋅ uNi⋅ ρ 4
are (Perry's
µ vw ( T0 )
pages 14-70 and 14-71):
Sparger_Re_Regime1 = "Possibly Jet"
and
Sparger_Re_Regime2 = "Possibly Jet" .
2
The sparger flow jet regimes indicated by the sparger hole Weber numbers
ρ g⋅ dNi⋅ uNi
σ w ( Ts)
are
(Perry's pages 14-70 and 14-71, and Wilkinson page 1433):
Sparger_We_Regime1 = "Jet"
and
Sparger_We_Regime2 = "Jet" .
Sparger_We_vs_Jet_Flow_We1 = 10153 % and
Sparger_We_vs_Jet_Flow_We2 = 13060 % .
The Sauter-mean bubble diameters or bubble volume-to-surface ratios of the first and second
dvs1
dvs2
stage spargers, dvs1 and dvs2 , and the ratios of the bubble diameters to the hole diameters,
and
,
dN1
dN2
are:
dvs1 = 0.285 in and dvs2 = 0.285 in .
dvs1
dN1
= 166 % and
dvs2
dN2
= 140 % .
The gas volumetric holdups in the first and second stage vessels, ε G1 and ε G2 , are:
ε G1 = 19.5 % and ε G2 = 19.6 % .
The vessel foaming flow conditions indicated by the Froude numbers
6-47, and Godbole page 1221):
Vessel_Fr_No1 = "Not Foaming Flow"
and
Vessel_Fr_No1 = "Not Foaming Flow" .
Vessel_Fr_vs_Min_Nonfoaming1 = 379 % and
Vessel_Fr_vs_Min_Nonfoaming2 = 339 % .
Chloroform Plan.mcd
NOT CHECKED
UGi
g⋅ Dvi
are (Perry's page
LOCKWOOD GREENE
Confidential Client
Job, Item: A7947 010704.01, CHCl3 Plan
Date, Page: 7/22/2001, 37 of 37
The weight fraction chloroform in the stripped liquid, wcs , is:
wcs = 1.450 × 10
−6
.
The weight fraction chloroform in the stripped liquid, adjusted based on Process Qualification data,
wcs_adj , is:
wcs_adj = 17.730 × 10
−6
The weight fraction chloroform in the final rinsate, wcf , is:
wcf = 30.306 × 10
Chloroform Plan.mcd
−9
NOT CHECKED
.
.
Descargar