Comparison of Natural Gas Hydrocarbon Dewpointing Control Methods | ||||
| Journal of Advanced Engineering Trends | ||||
| Public Titles, Volume 40, Issue 2, April 2021, Page 99-116 PDF (980.76 K) | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/jaet.2020.31288.1020 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Abdelaziz Ahmed Noaman  1; Ebrahiem Ebrahiem2
| ||||
| 1Chemical engineering department, faculty of engineering, Minia university | ||||
| 2chemical engineering department, faculty of engineering , Minia University | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Natural gas dew point is a very important quality parameter. It is specified in predetermined mandatory specifications for the producers through transmission and distribution companies to market. Several problems in gas transmission lines may be caused by the hydrocarbon liquid dropout. These include increase in pressure drop, line capacity reduction, and equipment problems (e.g. compressor damage). Avoiding liquid dropout, the operating current specifications of gas transmission lines require to be operated above the dew point of hydrocarbon (DPH) or cricondentherm hydrocarbon dew point (CHDP). This paper compares the different methods for natural gas hydrocarbon dew-pointing that are widely applied in industry and choose the best method for a gas project to achieve the required hydrocarbon dew point of the export gas. These methods are Joule-Thomson expansion (J-T), turbo expansion, mechanical refrigeration, Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA) and thermally Regenerated Adsorption (TSA). The comparison was made to choose the best applicable method needed for a gas project to achieve the required export gas specifications. It was found that the mechanical refrigeration method is preferred due to its numerous advantages. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Hydrocarbon dew point; Joule-Thomson expansion; turbo expander; PSA; TSA | ||||
|
Supplementary Files
|
||||
|
Statistics Article View: 263 PDF Download: 1,781 |
||||
