Alhuda CIBE - Introduction to islamic banking by Mazher Ali Bokhari
COOP training-Bokhari
-
Upload
assad-bokhari -
Category
Documents
-
view
13 -
download
2
Transcript of COOP training-Bokhari
COOP TRAINING AT SAMREF REFINERYBY: ASSAD BOKHARI
OUTLINE of This Presentation• SAMREF Refinery
• My unit area A1 processes
• Case studies
• Experiences
2
SAMREF Refinery
• Started operating in 1984 by the joint venture of Petromin &
Mobil Oil Corporation (PEMREF)
• Saudi Aramco took Petromin shares in 1993 (SAMREF)
• Initial design processed 250,000 BPD of Arabian Light Crude Oil
• Nowadays, design reached around 400,000 BPD capacity
3
SAMREF Products Percentages
25%
30%15%
18%
10% 2%
Premium GasolineDiesel OilJet FuelMarine Fuel OilRegular GasolineSulfur
4
5
SAMREF Departments• Technical Department (Process, Project, Design, Training)
• Operation Department ( Control, Shelters)
• Maintenance Department ( Inspection, Maintenance)
• Finance and Accounting Department ( Management, Human- -Resource, Security)
6
Safety
7
Area A1 units
8
9
Area A1 units
10
SAMREF Departments:
11
12
13
Case Studies
14
Case study 1: CDU & VDU Yields
• Objective:– Learn PI tag system integration with Excel – Calculate yield using actual live data (10 years range)
15
Crude Distillation Unit Stream flow (m3/day) Tag No. from PI system
Input CDU Feed 11FNQX001.
Output
Naphtha 11FN091.
Kero 11FN092. + 32FN658.
LGO 11FN093.
HGO 11FI094.
CDU Bottom (Resid) 12FN003.
Calculations
16
17
18
Conclusion
• Flowrates were balanced most of the ten years (input = output)
• Kerosene flow reading (32FN658.) had very low readings until 2013.
The reason according to Eng. Abdulaziz was CHD unit was too small
and was improved in Jan 2013
• Some turnarounds and shut down periods were noticed in the figures
(yield % = around zero)
• Shut down in April 2016 (last bottom peak) in VDU while I was a trainee
19
Case Study 2: Fouling Rate for Heat Exchanger
• Objective:– Find actual and theoretical heat transfer coefficients – Calculate fouling rate to predict when the unit needs cleaning
Q = m x Cp x ∆T
Q = U x A x LMTD
Fouling rate = U Theoretical – U Actual
20
Calculation
21
Tube-Light
Arabian Crude
Density ρ 778.5 Kg/m3
Specific Heat(Cp) 2.395 KJ/(Kg.C°)Surface Area 240.74 m2
Thermal Cond. (k) 0.1135 w/m.C°Viscosity (µ) 1.4 mPa.sVelocity U 3.5 m/s
outside diameter 254 mmThickness. 2.74 mm
inside diameter 251.26 mm
22100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300
0.000
100.000
200.000
300.000
400.000
500.000
600.000
700.000
800.000
f(x) = 2.68798738779346 x − 80.2096421796557R² = 0.993484330039097
Actual Heat Transfer Coefficient U (W/m2.C°) (23/Apr to 11/June) in 2010
Actual ULinear (Actual U)
Feed Flowrate (kg/s)
U (K
W/m
2.C°
)
This equation is used to find U theoretical
23
12/Dec/15
31/Jan/16
21/Mar/16
10/May/16
29/Jun/16
18/Aug/160.000
100.000
200.000
300.000
400.000
500.000
600.000
700.000
800.000
Actual & Theoretical Heat Transfer Coefficients U , During 2016
Actual U
Theoritical U
U (K
W/m
2.C°
)
2412/Dec/1531/Jan/16
21/Mar/1610/May/16
29/Jun/1618/Aug/16
0.000
50.000
100.000
150.000
200.000
250.000
Fouling Rate, During 2016 Fo
ulin
g Fa
ctor
(W/m
2.C°
)
2528/May/05 10/Oct/06 22/Feb/08 6/Jul/09 18/Nov/10 1/Apr/12 14/Aug/13 27/Dec/140.000
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
70.000
80.000
90.000
100.000
f(x) = 0.0145078424488091 x − 556.328983407271R² = 0.398261734135305
Fouling Rate for 11-E-01Fo
ulin
g ra
te
This is the after cleaning period used to get the the-oretical U
Conclusion• Difference between Theoretical and actual U was noticeable, so
not very efficient is not optimum
• Fouling rate figure during 2016 shows non stability, there are several reasons for this and they need to be checked
• Some optimization techniques were suggested to improve the efficiency of these heat equipment. Also to decrease the load on some suboptimal equipment.
26
Case Study 3: Pump Efficiency Evaluation
• Objective:
– Understand how pumps cavitates and malfunction
– Evaluate efficiency, hydraulic power, total head, net positive
suction head required and absolute
– Suggest methods to improve the NPSHa
27
Calculation
28
= Efficiency
29
First, we start by reconstructing the pump data sheet figures
Calculated
Capacity (M3/hr) Total head (Meter) Hydraulic power BHP (Kw) Efficiency %
0 782.8 0.0 371.70.0
63.5 763.7 122.8 404.730.2
142 754.7 271.3 495.454.6
257.6 712.6 464.7 637.872.7
351 621.6 552.3 723.376.2
387.8 582.8 572.1 747.676.3
463.1 456.8 535.5 777.368.7
Capacity (M3/hr) NPSHr
65 3.1
145 3.3
260 4
350 5.5
380 6.4
30
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 5000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
68.7
777.3
456.8
f(x) = − 0.000594004527376216 x² + 1.23088290586817 x + 350.296317790586f(x) = − 0.0019589730695301 x² + 0.254666674138162 x + 769.207500226148R² = 0.991003261169777
G-150-01C Pump Performance Curve
Total head (Meter)Polynomial (Total head (Meter))BHP (Kw)Polynomial (BHP (Kw))Efficiency %
Capacity (m3/hr)
Tota
l Hea
d (H
ead)
, BHP
(KW
)
Effici
ency
%
Actual pump data sheet used
31
Pump is in area B2150 – Boilers No access to P&ID’s was granted to me.
32
Calculation
PI Tag Numbers 98fic021 98fic041 98fic061 98fi703 - -
Weekly dataFlowrate Boiler 1
(tonne/h)
Flowrate Boiler 2
(tonne/h)
Flowrate Boiler 3
(tonne/h)
Flow Users's
(tonne/h)
Total flowrate
(tonne/h)
Actual Capacity (m3/h)
17-Jan-16 133.02 128.65 121.68 207.82 591.18 318.87
24-Jan-16 138.08 131.19 128.32 213.68 611.27 329.70
31-Jan-16 143.02 137.78 134.46 219.24 634.50 342.23
7-Feb-16 127.22 131.79 108.99 191.70 559.69 301.88
14-Feb-16 136.66 135.02 124.04 184.55 580.28 312.99
21-Feb-16 139.96 138.53 129.44 243.90 651.82 351.58
28-Feb-16 135.55 131.49 124.96 250.65 642.64 346.62
6-Mar-16 134.99 139.26 133.71 218.92 626.87 338.12
13-Mar-16 137.90 141.33 125.51 239.84 644.58 347.67
20-Mar-16 139.68 134.87 125.08 251.15 650.78 351.01
27-Mar-16 143.46 137.69 128.65 242.33 652.13 351.74
*Using the same
total head
equation
Shaft power (kW) (obtained
from driver's calculations)
716
98pi003. 98PI008.
Pressure in (brag)
Pressure out (brag)
Total Head
hydraulic Power at current capacity
Actual Efficiency
%NPSHA NPSHr
2.52 67.28 647.57 562.33 78.59 24.85 5.31
2.54 65.03 624.86 561.05 78.41 25.20 5.51
2.92 63.90 609.80 568.34 79.43 31.33 5.76
2.63 62.73 601.07 494.15 69.06 26.52 5.00
2.52 68.37 658.45 561.24 78.44 24.85 5.20
2.56 64.70 621.36 594.93 83.15 25.44 5.96
2.45 65.20 627.54 592.38 82.79 23.59 5.85
2.56 66.26 637.01 586.56 81.98 25.38 5.68
2.60 65.36 627.61 594.23 83.05 26.10 5.87
2.48 64.92 624.34 596.82 83.41 24.17 5.95
2.40 64.81 624.12 597.84 83.56 22.82 5.96
Discussion
• NPSHa was noticed to be a critical aspect of a pump efficiency
• NPSHr is usually uncontrollable, because it is designed by company
that built it
• Allowing higher level in the supply tank will reduce chance of
pump cavitation
• Frictional loss could be decreased by reducing valves, strains, and
length of the piping 33
Experiences Acquired
34
• 2 Weeks of rich preparatory induction program (full day class)
– Chemical Engineering for 1 week
– Mechanical Engineering for 2 days
– Electrical Engineering for 2 days
– Control & Instrumentation for 1 day
35
VDU overflash Coke formation
36
• First meeting of engineer and managers
Flare Reduction Project
37
SL# Equipment Tag System Line Size Type Equipment Details Area Unit Flare
Header P&ID Ref
Pipe VENT FM 31-K-03B 31-K-03 2" VENT MAKE UP GAS TO CHD LINE B1 HRU CFP C0EF-031B1-009
1 66-PSV-004 66-D-13 3" PSV Hydrogen make up from CCR B1 MDU CFP C0EF-066B1-011
2 66-PSV-177 66-D-13 8" PSV Hydrogen back up from HRU B1 MDU CFP C0EF-066B1-011
3 66-PSV-015 66-M-01A 6" PSV FCC Gasoline Feed from USGP B1 MDU CFP C0EF-066B1-012
4 66-PSV-016 66-M-01B 6" PSV FCC Gasoline Feed from USGP B1 MDU CFP C0EF-066B1-012
5 66-PSV-021B 66-D-01 6" PSV Hydrogen make-up from 66-D-13 B1 MDU CFP C0EF-066B1-013
6 66-PSV-020/030 66-D-01 16" PSV Relief from 66-D-01 B1 MDU CFP C0EF-066B1-013
7 66-PSV-034 66-E-01 12" PSV Relief from 66-E-01 B1 MDU CFP C0EF-066B1-014
8 66-PSV-044 66-E-03 10" PSV Relief from 66-E-03 B1 MDU CFP C0EF-066B1-015
9 DEPR. FM 66-E-03 66-E-03 2" Drain From 66-E03 Depressurization line B1 MDU CFP C0EF-066B1-015
10 FM 66-D-02B 66-D-02B 10" Drain Draning line B1 MDU CFP C0EF-066B1-016
38
VDU Shut Down
• Objective:– Replace two rusty heat exchanger bundles– install new steam motive nozzles– Test the new heat exchanger bundles (Hydro test)
39
40
Thank you for listening
41
Questions
42