Acknowledgement

It gives me great pleasure and satisfaction to express my

gratitude to my mentor Mr. Tapas Kumar Bag (HOD,
Process Engineering) for overseeing my work, helping me
with my project and for being a continuous source of
motivation during my eight-week internship. Special thanks to
Ms. Divya Pandey (Official HRD) and other HR personnels
for facilitating the project. I would like to thank Mr. K.K.
Tyagi (Process Engineer), Mr. Vikas (Sr. Engineer,
Process Engineering), Mr. Animesh Jha (Engineer,
Process Engineering) and the other IGFL staff members who
helped me in their own different ways and were always
responsive to my queries.




Introduction

Indo-Gulf Fertilizers Ltd. (Jagdishpur) is one of the ten gas based
nitrogenous fertilizer projects, set up by the Government of India. It
uses large quantities of natural gas available from Bombay
High/Bassein Fields. The project was promoted by Pradeshiya
Industrial and Investment Corporation U.P. (PICUP) along with
Gulf Consolidated Company for Services and Industries, a multi-
national company of Bahrain and later on taken over by Aditya
Birla group.

This fertilizer plant was set up in Jagdishpur (Sultanpur) in January
1985. It uses natural gas as its raw material as well as fuel. It is
designed to produce 1350 MT of Ammonia and 2200 MT of urea,
in two streams each of 1100 MT per day. The plant started
commercial production on 1
st
November 1988.


Project Setting

The fertilizer plant of Indo Gulf Fertilizers and Chemical
Corporation Ltd. (IGFCCL) has been set up near Jagdishpur in
District Sultanpur on plots of land developed by the U.P. State
Industrial Development Corporation (UPSIDC) for location of
Industries. UPSIDC acquired an area of 684.4 hectares (1711 acres)
294.4 hectares (736 acres) in Sultanpur District and 390 hectares
(975 acres) in Rae Bareli District along the National Highway No.
56 at a distance of about 78 kms. from Lucknow. The industrial
area has 313 developed plots, out of which 290 plots have come up
in this industrial and other units have come up in this industrial
area. IGFCCL have been allotted an area of 333.332 hectares
(833.33 acres). The plant of IGFCCL its township, demonstration
farm and vocational training center are situated in Sultanpur
district. Title of Indo Gulf Fertilizers and Chemicals Corporation
Ltd. is now changed to Indo Gulf Fertilizers Ltd. (IGFL).

PROJECT SYNOPSIS
Product Urea : 726000 MT/YR
Nutrient output N : 338750 MT/YR
CAPACITY OF MAIN PLANTS
Ammonia : 1x1910 MTPD
Urea : 2x1600 MTPD
PROCESS LICENSE
Process License for Ammonia Plant : Haldor Topsoe, DENMARK
Process License for Urea Plant : Snamprogetti, SpA Milano,
Italy


Technology

The project comprises a single stream Ammonia Plant of 1350
MTPD capacity based on Haldor Topsoe Technology (Denmark)
where natural gas is used as feed and fuel. IGFL has two units Urea
Plant of 1100 MTDP capacity each. Urea plant is based on
Snamprogetti Ammonia Stripping Technology (Italy). Annual
installed capacity of the plant was 7,68,000 MT Urea.

For Steam Generation there are two service boilers, each having a
capacity of generating 100 TPH of high-pressure steam (105
Ata/515C). Power is generated by two units (1 main + 1 stand by)
of Gas turbine of 18 MW each, along with common HRSG to
generate medium pressure steam (39 Ata/395C).

The plant is designed on multiple systems by using
NG/Naphtha/HSD for gas turbine and NG/FO/LSHS/Naphtha for
boilers to overcome any unforeseen shortage of natural gas.













BRIEF PROCESS DESCRIPTION OF AMMONIA PLANT:-


Ammonia Plant Processes

Ammonia is produced from a mixture of hydrogen and nitrogen.
Hydrogen is made available by the processing of natural gas with
steam, whereas Nitrogen from atmospheric air.
During normal operational conditions, the ammonia is sent to Urea
Plant. However, two ammonia storage tanks, of 10,000 & 5000 MT
capacity respectively, are also provided to handle any emergency
situation. Ammonia is stored in these tanks at -33C and
atmospheric pressure. The process flow sheet for ammonia
production is delineated in above Fig.


Ammonia Plant is designed to produce
1350 MTPD of Liquid Ammonia
37073 Nm
3
/hr of Carbon Di Oxide




Main steps for manufacture of Ammonia is -


Desulphurisation
Natural Gas (lean) mainly containing methane (98%) & higher
hydrocarbon has 10-50 ppm of sulphur as Hydrogen Sulphide. In
this process sulphur content is reduced to 0.05 ppm by weight.
Natural Gas at a pressure of 39 kg/cm
2
g & 390
0
C is mixed with
Hydrogen & heated up in Natural Gas Preheaters. After that it
passed to Desulphurisation Reactor containing Ni-Mo catalyst.
Here Sulphur forms Hydrogen Sulphide on reaction with
Hydrogen. Further this Hydrogen Sulphide is absorbed on a bed of
Zinc Oxide Absorber.

Ni-Mo
H
2
+ S H
2
S

H
2
S + ZnO ZnS + H
2
O




Primary Reformer
It consists of a gas fired tubular primary reformer with flue gas heat
recovery section. Natural Gas is reformed with steam to produce a
mixture of Hydrogen, Carbon Monoxide, Carbon Di Oxide &
Methane (11.12%). The desulphurised Natural Gas & Hydrogen
mixture from Zinc Oxide bed at the pressure of 34 kg/cm
2
g is
mixed with excess quantity of superheated steam at a pressure of 37
kg/cm
2
g & 381
0
C. This mixture is preheated with flue gases of
primary reformer furnace at 520
0
C and sent to Primary Reformer.
It consists of tubes packed with Ni catalyst and exit gas temperature
from the tube is 797
0
C.

Natural Gas + Steam Hydrogen + {CO + CO
2
+ CH
4
}




Secondary Reformer
Function of secondary reformer is to reform the primary reformer
exit residual methane & to add nitrogen to the process gas. The exit
gases from the Primary Reformer are mixed with a Stoichiometric
quantity of compressed preheated air at 32 kg/cm
2
g & 550
0
C in
Secondary Reformer through air nozzle. Secondary reformer outlet
gas mixture contains Hydrogen, Carbon Monoxide, Carbon Di
Oxide & Methane (0.3%).






Waste Heat Recovery
High temperature process gas exit Secondary Reformer is cooled
down in waste heat boiler & turn high pressure steam is produced.
Steam produced is utilized ass process steam & as driving force for
major rotary equipment. Secondary Reformer exit gases at 988
0
C
enter the tube side of Waste Heat Boiler having an internal bypass
for temperature control. The process gas temperature at Waste Heat
Boiler exit is maintained at 360
0
C. On shell side of Waste Heat
Boiler high pressure steam is generated at 120 kg/cm
2
g & 324
0
C.

Shift Conversion
Carbon Monoxide is converted to Carbon Di Oxide in two stage
shift conversion bringing down the Carbon Monoxide content from
12.95% to 0.3% in the process gas. This operation is carried out at
two temperature levels,


High Temperature Shift Conversion
The process gas exit Waste Heat Boiler with 12.95 mole%
Carbon Monoxide content enters high temperature shift
converter containing Iron catalyst. Here Carbon Monoxide
reacts with steam to form Carbon Di Oxide & Hydrogen.
Temperature in High Temperature Shift Converter catalyst bed
rises to 427
0
C as the reaction is exothermic in nature. Gas exit
High Temperature Shift Converter contains 3.17 mole%
Carbon Monoxide.

Low Temperature Shift Conversion
The gas exit High Temperature Shift Converter is cooled
down to a temperature of 210
0
C & heat is utilized to produce
steam in High Pressure Waste Heat Boiler. Temperature inlet
is maintained by cooling down the gas in B.F.W. Preheater.
Converter contains Copper- Zinc as catalyst. Here the water
gas shift reaction proceeds further & Carbon Monoxide
content in the gas mixture is brought down to 0.30 mole%.






Carbon Di Oxide Removal

Giammarco Vitrocoke (G.V.) solution is used to absorb Carbon Di
Oxide from the process gas thus reducing Carbon Di Oxide content
from 17.72% to 0.1% in gas mixture. G.V. solution rich in Carbon
Di Oxide is regenerated liberating Carbon Di Oxide which is sent
to Urea plant.

Carbon Di Oxide Absorption

The gas leaving LP boiler at 124 C temp is ccoled down in LP
BFW preheater to 108 C temp. The condensate from the
process gas is separated in the separator. Process gas
containing 17.69 mole% carbon dioxide enters the bottom of
the absorber. Separated condensate is sent to process
condensate stripping section. Major part of the GV soln from
LP regenerator enters in the middle of absorber at 190 C temp.
Rest of the GV soln is cooled down in DMW preheater and
split stream air coolers to a temp of 60 C which enters the
rising process gas. The gas comes out of absorber at 60 C
temp containing 0.09 mole% carbon dioxide and enters
separator OH absorber. Condensate is separated in separator
and process gas from the top of separator and process gas from
the top of separator is sent through heat exchangers to
methanator. GV soln containing carbon dioxide at 116 C temp
is sent to regenerator through hydraulic turbine for carbon
dioxide stripper.




Carbon Di Oxide Stripping


GV soln from absorber enters top of HP regenerator. Major
part of the soln flows down the HP regenerator where as about
20 % of the soln is drawn from draw off Pan of the HP
regenerator and fed to the top of LP regenerator. Heat of
regeneration in regenerator is supplied through:


1. LT shifted gas in reboilers
2. LP steam through ejectors of flash tank
3. LP steam through ejector of LP boiler.
Carbon Dioxide from top of regenerator at 106 C temp is
cooled down in LP BFW pre heater. GV soln in LP
regenerator is flashed to a pressure of 0.29 Kg/cm
2
g. Carbon
dioxide evolved is cooled down in condenser OH LP
regenerator. Condensate from the gas is separated in the
separator and it is sent to the process condensate stripping
section. Carbon dioxide pressure from the separator is boosted
in carbon dioxide booster to a pressure of 1 Kg/cm
2
g and this
stream meets the carbon dioxide from regenerator at down
stream of LP BFW preheater HP regenerator.Combined
stream of carbon dioxide gas from both the regenerators enters
the OH condenser where it is cooled to a temp of 40 C by
cooling water . the condensate is separated in separator OH
regenerator and it is sent to process condensate stripping
section. Product carbon dioxide from the top of the separator
sent to urea plant at 0.88 Kg/cm
2
g. Partially regenerated GV
soln from the regenerator enters the flash tank B-305 at 126 C
temp. From the flash tank the soln flows to LP regenerator F-
303 bottom for further regeneration. GV soln from LP
regenerator is pumped to the absorber through circulation
pumps P-301 A/B/C. Process gas at 164 C temp enters GV
reboilers and is cooled down to 134 C temp by exchanging
heat with GV soln. It is further cooled down to a temp of 125
C in LP boiler. Shifted gas is then sent to absorber through LP
BFW pre heater.

Methanation

Oxides being harmful for synthesis converter catalyst, Carbon
Monoxide & Carbon Di Oxide are converted into Methane in this
step. The exit process gas (Synthesis Gas) contains mainly a
mixture of Hydrogen & Nitrogen in the ratio 3:1. Effluent gas from
absorber at a temperature of 60
0
C is heated to a temperature of 302
0
C in Gas Gas Exchanger is further heated in Trim Heater to
achieve a temperature of 320
0
C of the mixed gas stream at the inlet
of Methanator. The gas enters Methanator where final traces of
Carbon Monoxide & Carbon Di Oxide present in the process gas
are converted to Methane by reacting with Hydrogen in presence of
Ni catalyst. Methanation reaction being exothermic in nature the
gas temperature increases to 343
0
C in the catalyst bed. Gas exit
Methanator is cooled down in Gas-Gas exchanger by exchanging
heat with Methanator inlet process gas to 85
0
C. Synthesis gas
mixture containing 0.8mole% Methane flows to the Synthesis Gas
Compressor at a pressure of 26.0 kg/cm
2
g.


3H
2 +
N
2
2NH
3


Synthesis Gas Compression

Synthesis of Hydrogen & Nitrogen takes place at high pressure,
hence the gas mixture is compressed to 220 kg/cm
2
g in the
synthesis gas Compressor.

Ammonia Synthesis

Conversion of this gas mixture into Ammonia takes place in
TOPSOE 200 radial flow converter.

Refrigeration System

Gas mixture containing Ammonia is cooled down to separate liquid
Ammonia from the gases by providing Ammonia refrigeration.
Separated liquid Ammonia is sent to Urea plant at 12
0
C.













Material and Energy Balance across 02 Section
of Ammonia Plant consisting of:




1- Primary Reformer (H-201)
2- Secondary Reformer (R-203)
3- HT Shift-Convertor (R-204)
4- LT Shift Convertor (R-205)








EFFICIENCY OF CARBON DIOXIDE REMOVAL
SECTION:
Input:
Total Carbon Dioxide from LT shift conveter = 48812.371 Nm
3
/hr
Total Carbon Monoxide from LT shift conveter = 622.237 Nm
3
/hr
Output:
Total Carbon Dioxide absorbed at F-302 = 48608.25 Nm
3
/hr
Efficiency:-
Efficiency = (total CO
2
absorbed/total CO
2
input) x 100
= 99.58%
Therefore, efficiency of absorber is 99.58%.
LOSSES:-
1: As we can see absorber exit gas has 0.09 mole% carbon dioxide and 0.29 mole%
carbon monoxide. As this stream goes to methanation column where CO
2
and CO
are reacted with hydrogen to produce methane as follows:
CO + 3H
2
= CH
4
+ H
2
O + heat
CO
2
+ 4H
2
= CH
4
+ 2H
2
O + heat
Now seeing the above reaction we can derive that due the slip CO
2
and CO
hydrogen gas is being burnt, which is a loss in a plant.
Total hydrogen gas used = 2789.6523 Nm
3
/hr
PRIMARY REFORMER MATERIAL BALANCE CALCULATIONS:

Feed Analysis:
1- Natural Gas
Flow Rate- 50300 Nm3/hr
Composition:
Component Percentage by Volume Volumetric
Flow(NM3/HR)
Methane(CH4) 98.65 49621
Ethane(C2H6) 1.06 533
Propane(C3H8) 0.043 21.6
N2 0.14203 70.42
CO2 0.0967 48.6 215508

2- Process Steam
Flow Rate- 129.11 Tonnes /Hr Or 162802 NM3/Hr
3- Recycled H2
Flow Rate- 2460 NM3/Hr

OVERALL FEED ANALYSIS-
OVERALL FLOW RATE = 223166 NM3/HR

Composition-

Component Percentage by Volume
Methane 23.02
Steam 75.54
Hydrogen 1.14
Rest 0.32

Temperature before Introduction in Primary Reformer = 491C = 764K
Pressure of the combined feed when introduced in Primary Reformer = 36.37 kg/cm2
Atomic Analysis of Reformer Feed
Component Percentage by mole
Carbon 6.85
Hydrogen 71.17
Oxygen 21.96

Steam: Carbon Ratio= 3.28


Analysis of Primary Reformer Exit-

Component Volumetric Flow( NM3/HR) Percentage By Volume
Methane 19181 6.97
Steam 113641 41.34
Carbon-Monoxide 14726 5.35
Carbon-Dioxide 16362 5.95
Hydrogen 110972 40.37

Total Gas flowrate = 274882 NM3/HR
Dry gas flowrate = 161241 nm3/hr
Steam: Dry gas Ratio = 0.704




Analysis of reforming reaction in primary Reformer H-201
Following reactions are taking place in the primary reformer-

CH4 + 2 H2O CO2 + 4 H2 (1)

CO2 + H2 CO + H2O (2)


CH4 reacted in (1) = 30819 NM3/HR
% Conversion of CH4 = 61.6 %
CO formed in Reaction (2) = 14726 NM3/Hr


Fuel Analysis

1- Natural Gas as fuel
Flowrate = 17300 NM3/Hr
Calorific Value: 8163.316 Kcal/Sm3

2- Tail Gas
Flowrate = 6993 NM3/Hr
Calorific Value = 2500 Kcal/SM3


Componenet Percentage By Volume
N2 41.81
Ar 9.97
CH4 34.04
H2 58.96


3- PGR Inlet
Flowrate = 2000 NM3/Hr
Calorific Value = 2500 Kcal/Sm3
Component Percentage By Volume
N2 23.1
Ar 4.03
CH4 12.15
NH3 1.76
H2 58.96



4- Product Gas
Flowrate = 1500 NM3/Hr
Calorific Value = 2400 Kcal/Sm3
Component Percentage By Volume
N2 9.28
Ar .99
CH4 .65
H2 89.08







Net Composition of fuel entering the primary reformer:

Component Volumetric Flow(NM3/Hr) Percentage By Volume
CH4 19606.3 72.5
N2 3511 13
H2 3141.2 11.6
Ar 776.9 2.87
Total 27035.4 100


Total CO2 formed on combustion of fuel gas = 20168 Nm3/Hr
Flow Rate of exit flue gas = 233191 Nm3/Hr
Oxygen Content in flue gas = 3444 Nm3/Hr

Net O2 consumed in combustion of fuel gases = 41768 Nm3/Hr
Total O2 in Combustion Air = 45168 Nm3/Hr
Total N2 in combustion AIR = 166380 Nm3/Hr

Therefore from above calculations :

Total Combustion Air entering the reformer = 215548 Nm3/Hr



ENERGY ANALYSIS OF PRIMARY REFORMER(Radiant Zone):
In the energy analysis done below basic equation of thermodynamics for stream flow is used
i.e-

Net Enthalpy Change of stream = Heat Supplied from outside + Shaft
Work Done on system

Using thermodynamic approach , we know that ENTHALPY IS A STATAE FUNCTION. It depends
only on initial and final stage .

Step-1 Calculation of enthalpy in output and input streams of the primary reformer.

Approach Used is as follows :








REACTION 1
CH4 + 2 H2O CO2 + 4 H2

HEAT OF REACTION = 39.414 kCal/gm-mol
Net heat released in Reaction (1) = 53.466 MKCal



Reaction (2)
CO2 + H2 CO + H2O
Heat of Reaction = 9.846 Kcal/ gm-mol
Net heat released in reaction (2) = 6.25 MKCal
Table for specific heat Capacities :
Component Specific Heat capacity(Cal/gm-mol/K)
CH4 5.34+0.0115T
H2 6.62+0.0008T
Steam 8.22+0.00015T
O2 8.27+0.00027T
N2 6.50+0.001T
CO 6.60+0.0012T
CO2 10.34+0.0027T
Ar 4.97

Reactants
at 497
degree
celsius
Reactants
at 25
degree
celsius
Products
at 25
degree
celsius
Products
at 781
degree
celsius
From the above data enthalpy change for a component undergoing a temperature Change can be
calculated by the following equation:

Change in enthalpy for the reactants going from 770K to 298K =

1- For methane= -11.92 MKCal
2- For Steam= -2.8 MKCal
Change in enthalpy for products going from 298K to 1054K=

1- For methane=5.15 MKCal
2- For steam = 31.45 MKCal
3- For H2 = 26.4 MKCal
4- For CO = 3.63 MKCal
5- For CO2 = 6.97 MKCal




= 118.55 MKCal
Calculation of energy released from fuel gas:

Net energy released from fuel gas = Heat of combustion of fuels Heat consumed by
flue gases to reach 1328k.

Calculation of heat of combustion:
1- Heat of combustion for methane = 191.7 Kcal/gm-mol
2- Heat of Combustion for H2 = 57.76 Kcal/gm-mol
3- Heat of combustion for C2H6 = 339.2 Kcal/gm-mol
4- Heat of combustion for C3H8 = 487.3 Kcal/gm-mol

Net Heat of Combustion = 179.58 MKCal

Heat Consumed in rise in temperature of flue gases =

Heat consumed = 54.9 + 16.2 + 11.43 + 1.31 19.1 - 3.42 0.27 4.52 MkCal
= 56.53 MKCal

NET HEAT RELEASED FROM FLUE GAS TO PRIMARY REFORMER = 179.58-56.53 MKC
NET HEAT TO PRIMARY REFORMER = 123.05 MKcal
Total number of burners = 576
Heat released per burner = 123.05/576 = 20920 Kcal/Hr


Calculation of efficiency of primary reformer radiant zone :

e =




e = 118.55/ 123.05 = 96.34 %













Secondary Reformer Analysis :
Inlet feed to Secondary reformer:
Component Volumetric Flow( NM3/HR) Percentage By Volume
Methane 19181 6.97
Steam 113641 41.34
Carbon-Monoxide 14726 5.35
Carbon-Dioxide 16362 5.95
Hydrogen 110972 40.37

Total Gas flowrate = 274882 NM3/HR
Dry gas flowrate = 161241 nm3/hr
Steam: Dry gas Ratio = 0.704

N2 in the exit of Secondary Reformer = 57388 NM3/Hr
Therefore Process Air entering the secondary reformer = 72643 NM3/Hr
Oxygen content in process air = 15255 Nm3/Hr

Combustion Zone analysis :
Considering higher affinity of combustion for H2 first we will consider combustion of H2 first.
O2 available for combustion = 15255 NM3/HR
H2 combusted = 30510 NM3/Hr
Heat released in combustion = 77.62 MKCal/Hr

Reforming Zone Analysis :

CH4 + 2 H2O CO2 + 4 H2 (1)

CO2 + H2 CO + H2O (2)


CH4 reacted in (1) = 18239 NM3/HR
% Conversion of CH4 = 95 %
CO formed in Reaction (2) = 16810 NM3/Hr








Analysis Of gas leaving secondary Reformer :

Component Flowrate(NM3/Hr) Percentage By Volume
Steam 124835 33.7
H2 136536 36.9
CO 31536 8.5
CO2 17937 369873 4.8
CH4 955.65 0.25
Ar 686.11 0.1
N2 57388 15.5

ENERGY ANALYSIS OF SECONDARY REFORMER :

For calculating the enthalpy balance in the secondary reformer for the reactants and products
we can the process in 4 parts to calculate net enthalpy change.







Entahlpy changes for part-1 :
1- N2 = -2.045 MKCal
2- O2 = -3.01
3- CO2 =- 6.62
4- CO = -3.63
5- H2 = -26.46
6- H2O = -31.49
7- CH4 = -8.37
Total = -81.625 MKCal/hr
Enthalpy changes for part-2 :
1- Heat evolved in combustion of H2 = -77.6 MKCal/Hr
2- Heat consumed in Reaction (1) = 31.65 MKCal/Hr
Primary Reformer exit
at 781 Deg Celcius
+
Process air at 558 Deg
Celcius
Reactants at 25
Deg Celcius
Products at
25 Degree
Celcius
Products at
980 Deg
Celcius
3- Heat consumed in Reaction (2) = 7.28 MKCal/Hr
Total = -38.67 MkCal/hr
Enthalpy changes for part-3:
1- N2 =10.09 MKCal
2- CO2 = 9.38
3- C0 =9.99
4- H2 = 41.58
5- H2O = 43.16
6- CH4 = 0.57
7- Ar = .06
Total = 114.83
-5.465 MKCal/Hr
Therefore heat lost in Secondary reformer = 5.465MKCal/Hr

HT SHIFT CONVERTOR ANALYSIS :
Shift Conversion Reaction :
C0 + H2O CO2 + H2 + heat
Heat of reaction = -9.846 Kcal/mol
CO Reacted = 24003 Nm3/Hr
Percentage Conversion of CO= 76.11 %
Shift convertor exit gas analysis:
Component Volumetric
Flowrate(NM3/Hr)
Percentage by vol
H2 160539 43.4
CH4 941 0.25
CO 7533 2.03
CO2 41944 11.34
N2 57387 15.5
H2O 100829 27.2
Ar 699 0.18
Energy Analysis of shift convertor :
Inlet temperature in shift convertor = 356 deg celcius
Outlet Temperature = 426 deg celcius
Using the same thermodynamic approach as above :
Heat released in reaction =- 10.63 MKCal/hr
Sensible heat of reactants and products :
FOR UNREACTED COMPONENTS :
1- CH4 =.033
2- Ar = .01
3- CO = 0.168
4- CO2 = 0.652
5- N2 = 1.245
6- H2O = 2.58
7- H2 = 2.96
Sensible heat of reacting species = 2.52 MKCal/hr
Net sensible heat = 10.46 MKCal/hr
Heat lost in HT Shift Convertor = Heat released Net Sensible heat
Heat Lost = 0.175 MKCal/hr







LT SHIFT CONVERTOR ANALYSIS :
CO Reacted = 6871 NM3/hr
Percentage Conversion = 91.2%
Heat evolved in Reaction = 2.98 MKCal/Hr
Exit Gas Analysis

Component Volumetric flowrate Percentage
CO2 48812 13.19
Steam 93943 25.39
CO 662 369884 0.17
H2 167435 45.26
N2 57393 15.51
CH4 950 0.256
Ar 689 0.186

Energy Analysis :
Heat released in exothermic reaction = 2.98 MKCal/hr
Sensible heats for rise in temperatures =
1- CO=0.0039
2- CH4=0.0086
3- Ar=0.0028
4- H2O=0.651
5- H2=0.941
6- N2=0.33
7- CO2=0.408
Sensible heats of components undergoing reaction = 0.26 MKCal/hr
Net Sensible Heat = 2.605
Net Heat Lost = Net Heat released Net Sensible heat
Net Heat Lost = 0.375 MKCal/hr
Energy Generated by steam for Compressors :

Steam Requirements :

K-421:
HS:
P=38 Kg/cm2
T= 380 C
Flow rate: 61.94 T / hr
H = 3148 KJ/ Kg
Net Energy Generated = 194987120 KJ/hr

K-451 :
HS:
P= 38 kg/cm2
T= 380 C

Flow rate : 15.68 T/hr
H=3148 KJ/hr
Net Energy Generated = 49360649 KJ/hr



05-Section overall balance
Feed Analysis:
Make up Gas :
Flow Rate- 212000 Nm3/hr or 9464.785 Kmol/hr
Composition:
Component Percentage by mole

Methane(CH4) 1.02
N2 26.30
Ar 0.4
H2 72.28



Product Analysis:
Product H2 :
Flow rate : 11508 Nm3/hr or 513 Kmol/hr
Composition:
Component Percentage by mole
Methane (CH4) 0.31
N2 6.33
Ar 0.67
H2 92.69









Purge Gas :
Flow rate : 1700 Nm3/hr or 75.888 Kmol/hr
Composition:
Component Percentage by mole
Methane (CH4) 13.8
N2 22.08
Ar 4.43
H2 52.89
NH3 6.8


Tail Gas :
Flow rate : 6000 Nm3/hr or 267 Kmol/hr
Composition:
Component Percentage by mole
Methane (CH4) 33.61
N2 44.78
Ar 10.08
H2 11.53

NH3 to Urea plant: 79200 Nm3/hr or 3535 Kmol/hr
NH3 to storage : 3640 Nm3/hr or162.4 Kmol/hr


Elemental Carbon Balance :
Inlet :
9464.785 X 0.0102 = 96.535 Kmol/hr

Outlet :
513 X 0.0031 + 75.88 X 0.138 +267 X 0.3361
= 91.329 Kmol/hr

Carbon Loss =Inlet Outlet
=96.535 91.329
=5.206 Kmol/hr or 62.472 Kg/hr


Elemental Hydrogen Balance :
Inlet :
9464.785 X 2 X 0.0102 + 9464.785 X 0.7228
=6937.687 Kmol/hr




Outlet :
513 X 2 X 0.0031 + 0.9269 X 513 + 75.888 X 2 X 0.138 + 75.888 X 1.5 X0.068
+ 267 X 2 X 0.336 + 267 X 0.1153 + 3535 X 1.5 + 162.4 X 1.5
=6235.042 Kmol/hr


Hydrogen Loss = Inlet Outlet
=6937.687 6235.042
=702.63 Kmol/hr or 15738 Nm3/hr or 1405.276 Kg/hr












Latest Technologies for Enhancing the Capacity and Fuel
Consumption of Ammonia Plant
Proposal 1:

KBR Reforming Exchanger System



KRES is a proprietary heat exchanger-based steam reforming technology consisting of a fired
preheater, an autothermal reformer (ATR) and a reforming exchanger. KRES takes the place
of a conventional primary reformer by feeding excess air, natural gas feed and steam to the
ATR and feed and steam in parallel into the upper end of the robust, shell-and-tube reforming
exchanger. The compact ATR and reforming exchanger in combination with the fired
preheater take up much less plot space than a conventional fired steam methane reformer.

The tubes in the KBR reforming exchanger are open-ended and hang from a single tube sheet
at the inlet cold end to minimize expansion problems. They are packed with a conventional
reforming catalyst, which can be easily loaded through a removable top head. The tubes are
accessible and removable as a bundle for maintenance. This simple, proprietary design has
proven to be extremely reliable and maintenance free in commercial operation since 1994.

Heat to drive the reforming reaction is supplied by the effluent gas from the ATR, which
operates in parallel with the reforming exchanger. To ensure adequate heat to drive the
reaction, the ATR receives excess process air, typically 50 percent more than what is required
for nitrogen balance.
The hot ATR effluent enters the lower shell side of the reforming exchanger where it
combines with reformed gas exiting the reforming tubes. This combined gas stream travels
upward through the baffled shell side of the reforming exchanger providing heat needed for
the endothermic reforming reaction
occurring inside the catalyst-filled reforming tubes. In this way, heat energy that would
otherwise be used to generate possibly unneeded steam in a waste heat boiler downstream
of the reformer is used, instead, to replace fuel as the source of heat to drive the reforming
reaction.






Process Flow Diagram of KRES Scheme:

Revamping a plant for capacity increase using conventional technology has
several limitations as the throughputs increase in various sections of the plant.
Examples are:
The size of the reformer furnaces radiant and convection sections needs to
be increased. Further, the capacity of the flue gas side also needs to be
increased.
Pressure drop through the furnace is increased, which reduces the front-end
pressure, including the syngas machine suction pressure. This would
typically reduce plant energy-efficiency and will make revamping of the
syngas machine more expensive.
Heat duty of the reformed gas waste heat boiler increases, making operation
of this critical equipment more severe. Typically, equipment associated
with the steam system waste heat boiler, steam drum, steam superheater,
boiler feed water pumps, piping may all need modification/change which
is expensive.



KRES technology makes revamping of an ammonia plant more economically
attractive by resolving the above issues as follows:

The reforming exchanger adds up to 25% capacity in the reforming section
as additional feed gas and steam mixture is processed in it by recovering the
high-grade waste heat available exit the secondary reformer. Duties on the
furnace services are either maintained or increased only as far as the existing
coils/tubes can take it. As confirmed during the engineering phase of
several revamp projects, the new small mixed-feed coil for the reforming
exchanger is easily accommodated in the existing furnace system.
As the convection duty of the existing furnace is increased relative to its
radiant duty (post revamp compared to the base case), furnace efficiency is
improved in the revamp case.
As the reforming exchanger handles the additional throughput in parallel to
the existing equipment without significantly increasing flows through the
existing key equipment having relatively high pressure drop, the issue of
front-end pressure drop has a resolution.
The reformed gas waste heat boiler now receives a cooler feed gas at 700 to
850C which makes conditions for this critical equipment less severe.
Where applicable, the concern of potential waste heat boiler tube failure can
be addressed by providing such mild conditions, and hence, such a critical
equipment need not be modified or replaced.
As changes in the steam system flow rates can be minimized, replacement
or modification of the high-pressure steam system (e.g. steam drum, waste
heat boiler, steam superheater, BFW pump and piping) can be avoided or
minimized, which contributes to project viability.






Proposal 2:

KBRs Purifier Ammonia Process :

KBRs Purifier Ammonia Process combines the following proprietary technologies to yield an
extremely
reliable, robust, low-energy plant:
Mild reforming with excess air
KBR Purifier
Magnetite ammonia synthesis in a horizontal converter
With KBRs cryogenic Purifier syngas technology, you receive a lower-cost, more robust processing
route to high-purity synthesis gas in ammonia manufacturing plants. The proprietary, front-end
process technology simultaneously removes impurities (i.e., methane, argon) from synthesis gas by
washing it with excess nitrogen while adjusting the hydrogen to nitrogen (H2/N2) ratio to 3:1.
Benefits of Purifier Ammonia Process

Providing a clean, dry, make-up gas to the synthesis loop and simple and precise H2/N2 ratio control,
Purifier technology offers benefits to the entire operation in several key areas:
Low Energy Consumption
A clean, dry make-up gas reduces the load on the synloop compressor and refrigeration systems,
providing operational cost savings
Mild reforming temperatures are used as methane slip is unimportant, which reduces fuel
consumption and increases tube life
Higher loop conversion is achieved with low inerts
Purifier plants operate at the lowest proven energy consumption; a recent plant achieved an energy
consumption of 6.5 Gcal/MT(ISBL, LHV basis)
Purifier Ammonia Pro
Reduced Capital Costs
No separate purge gas recovery unit is needed because purge gas rejected from the synloop is
passed through the Purifier unit
Very clean make-up gas provided by KBRs Purifier lowers synthesis pressure, catalyst volume and
purge rate, which means that smaller synloop equipment can be used

Flexibility
Achieves greater stability and flexibility of operation, since the reforming section does not need to
be tightly controlled to produce a precise H2/N2 ratio
Maintains production even in the event of catalyst deactivation upstream of the Purifier

Reliability
Low reforming temperatures translate to lower stresses in and longer life of reformer tubes
Numerous Purifier plants have run 3 - 4 years without a maintenance sh

PROPOSAL 3:
Objective: To increase the absorption of CO
2
over absorber F-302, thus increasing
the efficiency of absorber and reducing the hydrogen consumption at methanator
R-311.
To achieve the above objective we should replace MEA( Mono
Ethanol Amine) solution with MDEA( Methyl DiEthanol Amine) solution.
Advantages of MDEA Process:
1: MDEA is more efficient carbon dioxide absorber than MEA solution. Results show
that MDEA solution is able to absorb 99.95 % CO
2
compared to 99.58 % CO
2

absorbed by MEA solution. In return less hydrogen gas consumption and less energy
wastage.
2: Low inerts make-up in synthesis gas due to low CO2 slip. Low CO2 slip with
product gas has further advantages such as less consumption of H2 in methanator,
higher conversion per pass in synthesis converter due to less inerts and reduction in
purge gas from synthesis loop.
3: Utilisation of all the existing equipments i.e. not making any changes in the
system.
4: Lower MDEA make up requirement.
5: MDEA (Methyl diethanol amine) is environment friendly and biodegradable
chemical. MEA solution is a corrosive solution, while MDEA is non-corrosive.
Hence MDEA system does not require any corrosion inhibitor as compared to MEA
solution which uses V
2
O
5
which is carcinogenic in nature.

PROPOSAL 4:
Objective: To reduce the energy consumption in Carbon Dioxide removal section
and make the process more energy efficient.


Existing CO
2
removal section

Modified CO
2
removal section

If the process stream from the top of F-303 is again diverted to F-301 regenerator,
and the residue of B-301 is brought back to the absorber. This modification done
with MDEA solution reduces the energy requirements of the plant by 50 60% of
the current energy consumption.
PROFIT:
By using the above combination of MDEA solution and Two stage removal process
we can optimize the plant for more production. As MDEA solution absorbs 0.37%
more than the existing MEA and GV solution, and preventing the use carcinogenic
corrosion inhibitor V
2
O
5
, therefore cost effective.
Second, by using the Two stage removal process with MDEA solution the removal
process will be optimized for less energy consumption, thus less energy and more
cost effective.





Following proposals are based on KAAP (Kelloggs
Advanced Ammonia Process) Technology based on
some advancement over traditional ammonia process
technology :

Proposal 5:

Gas Heated Reformers
This technologies includes the use of Gas Heated Reformers (GHR), which are
tubular gas-gas exchangers. In the GHR, the secondary reformer outlet gases
supply the reforming heat. Though it is not presently being used widely, GHR
has certain advantages over fired furnaces. Table 1 shows a list of these
advantages. Although GHR results in reduced energy consumption, a
comprehensive energy conservation network should be established to maximize
the benefits of a GHR system.



Table 1: Advantages of Gas Heated Reformers
Fired Furnace Gas Heated Reformers
Large volumes Smaller volumes
Larger surface area and heat loss Reduced surface area and heat loss
Complex instrumentation Simplified instrumentation
High maintenance costs Low maintenance costs
Large convection zone No convection zone
Stack losses No stack losses
High fixed capital costs Low fixed capital costs
Reduced catalyst tube loss from
high temperature and uneven heat
distribution
Longer tube life due to uniform
heat distribution
Increased downtime required for
shut down
Reduced downtime required for
shut down
Well established process Yet to gain wide acceptance


Proposal 6:
Hydrogen Separation
Lechatelier's Principle states that a reaction equilibrium can be shifted
by applying external forces. This offers a means of removing products
from the reaction mixture to increase the conversion per pass. In
reforming, experiments have been performed up to 500
0
C (932
0
F)
and 20 bar (294 psig) using a palladium membrane to remove the
product hydrogen. These experiments have results in a significant
increase in methane conversion as can be seen by the following case
study.
Case Study on the Membrane Separation Process
The separation of hydrogen from the product gas of
the reforming process can result in significant productivity
gains when compared to the current processes being
employed. The base case for this study is a conventional
steam reforming plant based on natural gas operating at
1750 tonnes per day. The operating conditions of the
plant are assumed to be the same as those typically
employed today and the only modification is the
introduction of hydrogen separation. The tests for the
membrane separation have been carried out at 500
0
C
(932
0
F) and 20 bar (294 psig), these conditions will
function as upper limits for the process to be considered
in this study. Membrane units will be considered after
the primary reformer (at 60% hydrogen separation), after
the secondary reformer (at 60% hydrogen separation),
and after the High Temperature Shift (HTS) converters (at
a 50% hydrogen separation)
The following assumptions are made in this case study:
1. The natural gas feed at the primary reformer is the
same for both cases.
2. The primary reformer exit temperature is the same
for both units.
3. The primary reformer operating pressure is the
same for both units.
4. The process air is fed to the secondary reformer at
optimal conditions and any remaining nitrogen that
is required is supplied through an Air Separation
Unit (ASU) and is available at 0.1 kg/cm
2
(1.42 psig)
5. Any extra energy consumption in the ASU is
considered for the revamp case.
6. All of the heat from the process gas from the
primary reformer to the carbon dioxide removal
section is used in a steam network.
7. No changes in the carbon dioxide removal system
are considered.
8. The pressure drop across the front end of the
process is kept constant for both systems, thus the
synthesis gas compressor suction pressure remains
constant.
9. The loop pressure is the same for both processes
and is controlled by changing the purge gas quantity.
10. The existing compressors are capable of
handling any additional loads.
11. No scheme changes are considered in the
synthesis loop.
12. All hydrogen from the membrane separation
unit is available at 9.0 kg/cm
2
(128 psig)
13. The productivity analysis is carried out on the
ammonia plant only (the urea plant is excluded)
14. A complete steam balance is included on both
processes. Changes in the steam balance are
considered for:
Steam generation from the front end of the
processes
Steam generation from the back end of the
processes
Additional steam in the carbon dioxide removal
section caused by a reduction in the heat available
from the process gas
Additional power for the synthesis compressor due
to changes in flow and composition
Additional power in the ammonia refrigeration
compressor
Reduced load on the process air compressor
Additional power for low pressure hydrogen
separated through membranes
Additional power for nitrogen compression
Additional power for the air compressors of the ASU
Small changes in other drives and small equipment

Comparison Between Conventional Reforming and
Reforming with Hydrogen Separation
Production rise from 1750
to 1854 tonnes per day
+6.0% rise in capacity
Process Change Energy Change (Gcal/tonne)
Gain in feed and fuel
including steam
superheater
+0.36
Loss in steam generation
(front end)
0.00
Loss in steam generation
(back end)
-0.02
Loss in additional steam for
carbon dioxide removal
-0.27
Gain in energy in synthesis +0.01
gas compressor
Extra energy in refrigeration
compressor
0.00
Gain in energy in process air
compressor
+0.16
Extra power in hydrogen
compressor
-0.22
Extra power for nitrogen
from ASU
-0.12
Steam savings in primary
reformer
+0.08
Other rotary drives and
equipment
+0.04
Total Gain +0.02
It is evident from these results that the major losses occur
in the carbon dioxide removal section of the plant. These
losses are the result of consuming additional steam and
compression energy for hydrogen separation. With
additional minimization of these losses, additional savings
can result. For a production gain of 6% over the base
case, the energy saving is 0.02 Gcal/tonne (0.08
MBtu/tonne).
This development could yield savings by increasing methane
conversion in reformers and increasing the carbon monoxide
conversion in shift reactors. The energy savings can be as high as 0.50
Gcal/tonne (1.98 MBtu/tonne) depending on the adopted process
configuration. Hydrogen separation technology can also result in
increased ammonia plant capacity as illustrated in the above case
study.
The reduced air requirement (about 80% of conventional plants) in
the secondary reformer is required with a 60% hydrogen removal rate
in the reformer. This will also require an additional source of
nitrogen. Therefore, the technologies in which nitrogen is being
added separately, either from an Air Separation Unit (ASU) or from
any other sources, will become more important in this case.


Proposal 7:
Synthesis Catalyst
After almost 90 years of a monopoly in the ammonia synthesis market, iron
catalyst has not been replaced by a precious metal (ruthenium) based catalyst
used in the KAAP developed by Kellogg. The KAAP catalyst is reported to be
40% more active than iron catalysts.
Research work on low temperature and low pressure catalysts to produce
ammonia at 20-40 kg/cm
2
g and 100
0
C is being performed at Project and
Development India Ltd. (PDIL) according to their in-house magazine. The
catalyst is based on cobalt and ruthenium metals and has exhibited few
encouraging results.