Glycol dehydration is the most common dehydration process used to meet pipeline sales specifications and field requirements (gas lift, fuel, etc.). Triethylene glycol (TEG) is the most common glycol used in these absorption systems. In this Tip of The Month (TOTM), the effect of stripping gas rate on the regenerated lean TEG concentration for several operation conditions will be studied.

Chapter 18 of “Gas Conditioning and Processing” [1] presents the process flow diagram and the basics of glycol units. A key parameter in sizing the TEG dehydration unit is the water dew point temperature of dry gas leaving the contactor tower. Once the dry gas water dew point temperature and contactor pressure are specified, water content charts similar to Figure 1 in reference [2] can be used to estimate the water content of lean sweet dry gas. The required lean TEG concentration is thermodynamically related to the dry gas water content which influences the operating (OPEX) and capital (CAPEX) costs. The lower the dry gas water content required, the higher the lean TEG concentration must be. This parameter sets the lean TEG concentration entering the top of the contactor and the required number of trays (or height of packing) in the contactor tower.

The rich TEG solution is normally regenerated at low pressure and high temperature. Maximum concentrations achievable in an atmospheric regenerator operating at a decomposition temperature of 206°C (404°F) is 98.7 weight percent. The corresponding dry gas water dew point temperature for this lean TEG weight percent and contactor temperature of 38°C (100°F) is -8°C  (18°F).

If the lean glycol concentration required at the absorber to meet the dew point specification is higher than the above maximum concentrations, then some method of further increasing the glycol concentration at the regenerator must be incorporated in the unit. Virtually all of these methods involve lowering the partial pressure of water in the glycol solution either by pulling a vacuum on the regenerator or by introducing stripping gas into the regenerator.

A typical stripping gas system is shown in Figure 1 [1]. Any inert gas, or a portion of the gas being dehydrated, or the exhaust from a gas-powered glycol pump (if used), is suitable. The quantity of gas required is small. The stripping gas may be introduced directly into the reboiler or into a packed “stripping column” between the reboiler and surge tank. In theory, adding gas to a packed unit between the reboiler and surge tank is superior and will result in lower stripping gas rates. If introduced directly to the reboiler, it is common to use a distributor pipe along the bottom of the reboiler. Other stripping gas alternatives can be found in reference [1].

Most regenerators will contain more than 1 equilibrium stage, particularly if a stripping column is installed between the reboiler and surge tank. Stripping gas rates seldom exceed 75 std m3/std m3 TEG [10 scf/sgal] unless lean TEG concentrations in excess of 99.99 weight percent are required. If these concentrations are required, an alternate design such as DRIZO® or a mole sieve adsorption system should also be considered [1].

In this Tip of The Month (TOTM) we study the required stripping gas rate as a function of the lean TEG weight percent, reboiler temperature, number of theoretical trays in the stripping section (NS) and number of theoretical trays in the still (regenerator) column (NR). By performing rigorous computer simulation of TEG regeneration, we have prepared charts for quick determination of stripping gas rates needed for facilities type calculations.

Figure 1. Typical TEG regeneration column with stripping gas [1]

Computer Simulation Results:

In order to study the impact of stripping gas rate on the lean TEG weight percent, we simulated the TEG regeneration process diagram shown in Figure 1. To undertake this study, we used ProMax [3] software with its Soave-Redlich-Kwong (SRK) [4] equation of state (EOS). The corresponding process flow diagram for computer simulation is presented in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Process flow diagram showing sample results using ProMax [3]

Figure 2 also shows sample calculation results for a case study. As shown in Figure 2, the rich TEG solution contained 97.5 weight percent TEG entering the still column at 150°C (302°F) and 104 kPaa (15.1 Psia). The reboiler temperature was set at 204°C (400°F) and boil-up ratio of 0.1 (molar bases).  Two theoretical trays in the still column (NR = 2) and two theoretical trays (NS = 2) in the gas striping section were specified. The striping gas enters the bottom of the gas stripping section at 150°C (302°F) and 125 kPaa (18.1 Psia). For the stripping gas (methane was used) rate of 5 std m3/h (175.6 scf/hr), the regenerated lean solution contains 99.65 weight percent TEG and  the ratio of stripping gas to lean TEG liquid volume rates is 5.76 std m3 of gas/std m3 of lean TEG solution (0.77 scf/sgal). If stripping gas was spurged directly into the reboiler (NS = 0, no gas stripping section), and everything else remaining the same, the  regenerated solution contains 99.2 weight percent TEG and  the ratio of stripping gas to lean TEG liquid volume rates is 5.73 std m3 of gas/std m3 of lean TEG solution (0.76 scf/sgal). For the above cases, we increased the number of theoretical trays in the still column from 2 to 3 (NR = 3) and the lean TEG concentration remained almost the same. We also varied the concentration of rich TEG solution from 90 to 98 weight percent, but no appreciable change in the lean TEG concentration was observed for the same stripping gas rate.

Using similar set up, several simulations were performed for a range of stripping gas rates, for NR=3, NS=0, 1, and two were performed at reboiler temperatures of 204, 193, and 182°C (400, 380, and 360°F). The results of these simulation runs are presented in Figures 3 to 5. All of these diagrams are replotted in Figure 6.

Fig 3. Effect of lean TEG weight %, reboiler temperature and number of ideal trays in stripping column

Fig 4. Effect of lean TEG weight %, reboiler temperature and number of ideal trays in stripping column

Fig 5. Effect of lean TEG weight %, reboiler temperature and number of ideal trays in stripping column

Conclusions:

In this TOTM, the effect of stripping gas rate on the regenerated lean TEG concentration for several operation conditions was studied. A series of charts for quick determination of the required stripping gas rate to achieve a desired level of lean TEG concentration was prepared and presented in Figures 3 through 6. These charts are based on the rigorous calculations performed by computer simulations and can be used for facilities type calculations for evaluation and trouble shooting of an operating TEG dehydration unit. In addition, the following observations were made:

  1. The required stripping gas is independent of rich TEG concentration (for 90 to 98 TEG weight percent)
  2. As the number of theoretical trays in the stripping column (NS) increased from 0 to 2, the required striping gas rate decreased.
  3. Increasing the number of theoretical trays in the still column (NR) from 2 to 3 has no appreciable effect on the stripping gas requirement.
  4. Increasing the reboiler temperature from 182 to 204 ˚C (360 to 400 ˚F), decreases the required stripping gas rate.

Fig 6. Effect of lean TEG weight %, reboiler temperature and number of ideal trays in stripping column

To learn more, we suggest attending our G40 (Process/Facility Fundamentals), G4 (Gas Conditioning and Processing), G5 (Gas Conditioning and Processing-Special), and PF81 (CO2 Surface Facilities), PF4 (Oil Production and Processing Facilities) courses.

John M. Campbell Consulting (JMCC) offers consulting expertise on this subject and many others. For more information about the services JMCC provides, visit our website at www.jmcampbellconsulting.com, or email us at consulting@jmcampbell.com.

By: Dr. Mahmood Moshfeghian

References:

  1. Campbell, J. M., “Gas Conditioning and Processing”, Vol. 2, The Equipment Module, 8th Ed., Second Printing, J. M. Campbell and Company, Norman, Oklahoma, 2002.
  2. Campbell, J. M., “Gas Conditioning and Processing”, Vol. 1, The Basic Principles, 8th Ed., Second Printing, J. M. Campbell and Company, Norman, Oklahoma, 2002.
  3. ProMax 3.2, Bryan Research and Engineering, Inc., Bryan, Texas, 2012.
  4. Soave, G., Chem. Eng. Sci. Vol. 27, No. 6, p. 1197, 1972.
Did you enjoy this post? Do you have a question?
Leave us a Comment below!

Want to read more articles like this?
Subscribe to our RSS Feed or visit the Tip of the Month Archives for past articles.