Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
A NHYD ROU S
HYD ROG EN FLU ORID E
FROM FLU ORSP A R
A CL A N | C A TA L A N | GO JO C R UZ | T AM B UL I | VI LL A R A N | Y USI
EXECU TIVE SU M MA RY
P R ODU CTI ON OF A NH Y DR OUS H YD R OGEN FL UOR ID E
FR O M FL UOR SP A R
Constraint Nature Solution
Availability of Raw Materials Manufacturability Approaching alternative
suppliers
Market Proximity Economic Establishment of
Warehouses
Collection of email
addresses
Loyalty Programs
Waste Generation Environmental (Solid) Availing of a DENR-
accredited agency to treat
and dispose solid waste.
(Liquid) Treatment of waste
as per DAO 35.
(Gaseous) Continues
treatment by series of
scrubbers.
High Temperature Health and Safety Insulation, regular
Equipment / Noise maintenance and personnel
training.
Exposure limits as per
OSHA
TRA D E-OFF A NA LYSIS
P R ODU CTI ON OF A NH Y DR OUS H YD R OGEN FL UOR ID E
FR O M FL UOR SP A R
To Recover or to Dispose CaSO4 By-
product?
Two scenarios are analyzed; first is the recovery and market of calcium
sulfate and the other is the disposal of the said by-product.
The study aims to compare the total amount of cost for each scenario with
considerations such as environmental and economic in terms of production
cost factors and ultimately arrive with the best choice for the company.
COMPARISON
RECOVERY
Total Cost when Recovered CONCLUSION:
Based from the total cost of each
of the option, disposal of calcium
Total Sales per Year sulfate has lower cost compared
with the recovery of calcium
sulfate. Therefore, disposal of
calcium sulfate is proven to be
more practical than the recovery
Profit of calcium sulfate.
DISPOSAL
Total Cost of Disposal
INSTRU M ENTATION &
P ROCESS CONTROL
P R ODU CTI ON OF A NH Y DR OUS H YD R OGEN FL UOR ID E
FR O M FL UOR SP A R
# Meaning
L Level
W Weight
F Flow
P Pressure
T Temperature
PROCESS
EQUIPMENT
CONTROL SCHEMES
FLUORSPAR GRINDING MILL
CLASSIFIER
FLOTATION CELLS
THICKENER
ROTARY DRUM FILTER
ROTARY DRYER
ROTARY KILN
ACID SCRUBBER
WATER SCRUBBER
VAPORIZER
FLASH TANK
COOLER
STORAGE
EQUIPMENT
CONTROL SCHEMES
WATER STORAGE TANK
SULFURIC ACID STORAGE TANK
OLEIC ACID STORAGE TANK
SODA ASH SILO
SODIUM BISULFITE STORAGE TANK
FLUORSPAR SILO
OLEUM STORAGE TANK
P U MP S,
COM P RESSORS, A ND
P IP E SIZING WITH
CONVEYORS
P R ODU CTI ON OF A NH Y DR OUS H YD R OGEN FL UOR ID E
FR O M FL UOR SP A R
FLUORSPAR SILO TO
BALL MILL
Type: Screw Conveyor
Design Requirement:
Conveyor
Speed
Data:
Volumetric fl ow From CEMC, the material code
rate of fluorspar is 100D36
*100 = Density
*D = Lumpy
*3 = Average flowability
*6 = Moderate abrasive
capacity, conveyor size and speed
Note: A standard pitch
screw conveyor will
be used
Where;
L=total length
of conveyor,ft
N=operating
speed,rpm
Fd=conveyor
diameter HP
Horsepower
factor
Requirement Friction Fb=hanger
HP bearing HP
factor
Material HP
Where;
C=capacity require,(ft^3)/hr-10.428
D=density of material as conveyed,lb/(ft^3 ) -1794
L=total length of conveyor,ft -55.77
Fm=material factor -2.0
Ff=flighting modification HP factor -1.0
Fp=Paddle HP factor -1.29
Total HP
BALL MILL TO CLASSIFIER
Type: Screw Conveyor
Design Requirements:
Conveyor Speed
Motor horsepower
Material Specification
Density ( 198.52
MATERIAL CODE :
from screw conveyor capacities table the degree of through loading for fluorspar is
30%. for conveying products horizontally or up slight inclines, use a standard pitch.
FOR A CUT FLIGHT STANDARD PITCH WITH CONVEYOR LOADING
OF 30%
THE COMPUTED SPEED OF CONVEYOR SHOULD NOT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED SPEED.
THUS, 51.39 RPM MAY BE ACCEPTED SINCE IT IS BELOW THE MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED SPEED.
CALCULATION OF MOTOR HORSE POWER
FRICTION HP:
WHERE;
FA C TOR
TOTAL HP:
WHERE;
IN THIS CASE,
IF IS THEN
IF IS THEN
USING SCREW CONVEYOR DRIVE WHICH IS SPECIALLY DESIGNED FOR SCREW CONVEYOR, E = 0 . 8 8
CLASSIFIER TO FLOTATION CELL
Data:
Volumetric fl ow
rate
Setting the fl uid
velocity to 1 m/s
Din = 0.035052 m
Fluid friction factor
Velocity
CALCULATION OF POTENTIAL
ENERGY
OVERALL MECHANICAL ENERGY
BALANCES
Volumetric fl ow
rate
Setting the fl uid
velocity to 0.5 m/s
Din 0.0068326 m
Fluid
Velocity
friction factor
CALCULATION OF POTENTIAL
ENERGY
OVERALL MECHANICAL ENERGY
BALANCES
157.29
MATERIAL CODE:
FROM SCREW CONVEYOR CAPACITIES TABLE THE DEGREE OF THROUGH LOADING FOR SODA ASH IS 30%. FOR CONVEYING
PRODUCTS HORIZONTALLY OR UP SLIGHT INCLINES, USE A STANDARD PITCH.
For a capacity of 0.07 and 30%B through loading, a screw diameter of 6 inches should be used.
MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED SPEED = 6 0 R P M
THE COMPUTED SPEED OF CONVEYOR SHOULD NOT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED
SPEED.
CALCULATION OF MOTOR HORSE POWER
FRICTION HP:
MATERIAL HP:
Total HP:
Where;
IN THIS CASE,
IF IS THEN
IF IS THEN
USING SCREW CONVEYOR DRIVE WHICH IS SPECIALLY DESIGNED FOR SCREW CONVEYOR, E =
0.88
THICKENER TO ROTARY
FILTER
Data:
Volumetric fl ow
rate
Setting the fl uid
velocity to 1 m/s
Din = 0.02664 m
Fluid
Velocity
friction factor
CALCULATION OF POTENTIAL
ENERGY
OVERALL MECHANICAL ENERGY
BALANCES
175.27
MATERIAL CODE:
FROM CEMC, THE MATERIAL CODE OF FLUORSPAR IS AND FOR SILICON DIOXIDE IS 7 5 A 2 7
FROM SCREW CONVEYOR CAPACITIES TABLE THE DEGREE OF THROUGH LOADING IS 45%. FOR
CONVEYING PRODUCTS HORIZONTALLY OR UP SLIGHT INCLINES, USE A STANDARD PITCH.
FOR A CAPACITY OF 9.36 AND 45% THROUGH LOADING, A SCREW DIAMETER OF 6 . 0 I N C H E S SHOULD
BE USED.
MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED SPEED = 1 6 5 R P M
THE COMPUTED SPEED OF CONVEYOR SHOULD NOT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED SPEED.
THUS, 4.25 RPM MAY BE ACCEPTED SINCE IT IS BELOW THE MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED SPEED.
TOTAL HP:
WHERE;
IF IS THEN
IF IS THEN
USING SCREW CONVEYOR DRIVE WHICH IS SPECIALLY DESIGNED FOR SCREW CONVEYOR, E =
0.88
ROTARY KILN TO ACID
SCRUBBER
Data:
Volumetric fl ow
rate
Setting the velocity
to 15 m/s
nRe = 109,381.99
SUCTION LINE
Line Loss
Static Pressure
SUCTION PRESSURE
DISCHARGE LINE
Line Loss
Static Pressure Dynamic Loss
DISCHARGE PRESSURE
ACID SCRUBBER TO
VAPORIZER
Data:
Volumetric fl ow
rate
Setting the fl uid
velocity to 1m/s
Din = 0.0157988 m
Fluid
Velocity
friction factor
nRe = 3,308.5115
Turbulent flow
Friction Loss Due To
Friction Losses Due
Pipe Line
To Valves And Fittings
L = 57.93
m
Setting the throat
FRICTION LOSSES DUE TO METERING DEVICE
diameter to 20% of
pipe diameter
FRICTION LOSSES DUE TO METERING DEVICE
VENTURI METER IS TO BE USED
Y = 0.10
Friction Loss Due To
Friction Loss Due To
Sudden Enlargement
Sudden Contraction
TOTAL FRICTIONAL CALCULATION OF
LOSSES KINETIC ENERGY
CALCULATION OF POTENTIAL
ENERGY
OVERALL MECHANICAL ENERGY
BALANCES
Volumetric fl ow
rate
Setting the velocity
to 15 m/s
nRe = 114,125.62
SUCTION LINE
Line Loss
Static Pressure
SUCTION PRESSURE
DISCHARGE LINE
Line Loss
Static Pressure Dynamic Loss
DISCHARGE PRESSURE
COMPRESSOR Power
Requirement
Assume 80%
effi ciency
compressor (from
Plant Design and
Economics for ChE)
INSULATION
*Q=75,221.1167 W
*Fiber glass is the
recommended insulating
material
*k = 0.036 W/mK
*ri = 0.0641m
SULFURIC ACID TANK TO ROTARY KILN
Mass flow 583.56
rate 0.1621
0.1621
Density 1840
Viscosity
Density 0.019
1840
Viscosity 0.019
Calculating the inside diameter of pipe with the assumed velocity of 1 m/s from the table:
Table 5.4 (Towler & Sinnott, 2007)
TABLE 10-22: PROPERTIES OF STEEL PIPE (PERRY & GREEN, 2008)
Nominal Pipe
Size
Schedule 40S
number
Inside 0.824 0.0209 m
Diameter in
Outside 1.050 0.0267m
Diameter in
Since Reynolds number obtained is lower than 2,100 therefore the fluid flow is laminar (Geankoplis, 1995)
Total 0.75
Substituting the values at the overall mechanical energy balance
on pumping system with
TO CALCULATE POTENTIAL ENERGY:
Viscosity 0.048
Viscosity
0.000637
% ROI
15.00
2021 199,150,698.4 1,063,787,918. 18.72
10.00
3 46
2022 282,339,379.5 1,170,166,710. 24.13 5.00
5 30 0.00
2023 306,919,582.9 1,521,216,723. 20.18 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028
8 39 Year
2024 361,535,131.9 1,673,338,395. 21.61 Return of Investment on Asset
5 73
2025 420,539,700.7 1,840,672,235. 22.85
0 30
2026 518,923,729.1 2,208,806,682. 23.49
8 36
2027 591,614,240.0 2,871,448,687. 20.60
BREAK EVEN ANALYSIS
Calculates the break-even point based on fixed costs, variable costs per unit of sales and revenue per unit of sales
2018 180,021,680.52
2019 254,937,321.98
2020 537,656,482.03
2021 1,280,710,593.55
2022 2,830,680,175.65
As raw material
supplier for the
main industrial
As an
sectors employer
As an emerging member of the Chemical
Industry Sector