1 / 35

S. Austin, J. Williams, S. Smith and G. D. Wesson

Prediction of the Separation Efficiency of a 10 Mm Hydrocyclone Using Light Liquid Phase Particles. S. Austin, J. Williams, S. Smith and G. D. Wesson. Department of Chemical Engineering FAMU-FSU College of Engineering Tallahassee, FL 32310. Presented at:

oren
Download Presentation

S. Austin, J. Williams, S. Smith and G. D. Wesson

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Prediction of the Separation Efficiency of a 10 Mm Hydrocyclone Using Light Liquid Phase Particles S. Austin, J. Williams, S. Smith and G. D. Wesson Department of Chemical Engineering FAMU-FSU College of Engineering Tallahassee, FL 32310 Presented at: 8th Annual International Petroleum and Environmental Conference Houston, TX November 6-9, 2001

  2. Presentation Outline • Motivation • Hydrocyclone principles • Particle separation theory • Hydrocyclone performance measurements • Separation experiments • Results • Conclusions and future work • Acknowledgements

  3. Motivation • Oil production requires water treatment. • Required offshore constraint < 30 ppm of oil in water to environment • Interest in down-hole separation

  4. Hydrocyclone Operation Principles • Tangential feed entry • Creation of core vortex • High local accelerations • Complex internal flows • No moving parts

  5. Liquid Particle -Fluid Interaction • Liquid particles remain spherical • Particle diameter < 50 microns • Rep <0.1 , i.e. creeping flow • Incompressible fluids

  6. Liquid Particle -Fluid Interaction Stokes’ law

  7. Terminal velocity Separation is a function of: Density difference Particle size Continuous phase viscosity Cyclone diameter Local accelerations in 10mm cyclone may approach 10,000 g Particle Motion

  8. Measuring the Performance • Many ways to measure hydrocyclone performance • Due to different applications • “Traditional” separation measurement: QOCOfO(l) QFCF fF(l) QUCU fU(l)

  9. Separation Efficiency • Efficiency based on total fraction of concentration reduction or: • Equivalent to “traditional” efficiency measurement

  10. Separation Theory • Grade underflow purity coefficient-separation efficiency for each particle size • Integrating over sizes yields overall separation efficiency

  11. Grade Efficiency Curve • Continuous function of particles sizes • Hydrocyclone performance is size dependent and GEC varies with particles size • Graphically represented as curve that is usually ‘S’ shaped • “Overall” separation efficiency is a result of the integration of the product of the GPC and the feed distribution

  12. Grade Efficiency Curve Wesson & Petty 1994

  13. Separation Experiments

  14. Flow Diagram

  15. 10mm Hydrocyclone 2.5 mm 2.5 mm 80 mm 10 mm 1 mm

  16. Experimental Flow Loop hydrocyclone Stirrer Sample Cylinders tank pump

  17. Flow Predictions • Feed pressure varied from 60 - 160 psig • Flow rates determined using stopwatch • Linear regression Qf = f(Po, Pu)

  18. Flow Predictions

  19. Flow Rate Predictions

  20. Determine optimum conditions which will give the best separation efficiency Compare concentration separation efficiency with traditional way of determining efficiency. Experiment

  21. Solid-Liquid Separation Experiments

  22. Soda Lime Borosilicate Glass glass bubbles and water : r = 0.1 g/cm3 c = 1 cp (Cannon-Fenske viscometer) lmean = 30 mm Model Dispersion

  23. Results Conc vs. oil droplet sizes at 60 psi pressure drop

  24. Results Conc vs. oil droplet sizes at 60 psi pressure drop

  25. Results Grade Purity Function vs. Diameter – 4.85 lpm

  26. Results Overall efficiency vs. Feed flow rate

  27. Conclusions • Glass bubbles-water separation • Best overall efficiency for feed distribution occurs 4.8 lpm feed flow rate (DP=200 psi) • L50 = 10 mm

  28. Liquid-Liquid Separation Experiments

  29. Vegetable oil dispersion in water: r = 0.1 g/cm3 (pycnometer) d = 50 cp (Cannon-Fenske viscometer) c = 1 cp (Cannon-Fenske viscometer)   30 dynes/cm (Pendant drop method) Model Dispersion

  30. Results Conc vs. oil droplet sizes at 60 psi DP

  31. Results Conc. vs oil droplet sizes at 160 DP

  32. Concentration G-curves Grade Purity Coefficient vs. Oil droplet diameter at various flow rates L/min best GPC-curve “Drop Breakup”

  33. Results The best “overall” efficiency?

  34. Conclusions • Oil-Water separation • Best overall efficiency for feed distribution occurs 3.0 lpm feed flow rate (DP=60 psi) • Best GPC curve occurs at 3.7 lpm feed flow rate (DP=100 psi)

  35. Continued Work • Investigate drop breakup • Investigate source of ‘fish hook” • Investigate use of back pressure to eliminate the air from the core vortex

More Related