Tall Vessels PDF
Tall Vessels PDF
Tall Vessels PDF
Module # 6
DESIGN OF TALL VESSELS: INTRODUCTION, AXIAL STRESS
DUE TO DEAD LOADS, AXIAL STRESSES DUE TO PRESSURS,
LONGITUDINAL BENDING STRESSES DUE TO DYNAMIC LOADS,
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS OF DISTILLATION (TALL) AND
ABSORPTION COLUMN (TOWER)
1. INTRODUCTION
2. STRESSES IN THE SHELL (TALL VERTICAL VESSEL)
3. AXIAL AND CIRCUMFERENTIAL PRESSURE STRESSES
3.1 Tensile stresses resulting from internal pressure
4. COMPRESSIVE STRESS CAUSED BY DEAD LOADS
5. THE AXIAL STRESSES (TENSILE AND COMPRESSIVE) DUE TO WIND
LOADS ON SELF SUPPORTING TALL VERTICLE VESSEL
6. THE STRESS RESULTING FROM SEISMIC LOADS
7.
STRESS
DUE
TO
ECCENTRICITY
OF
LOADS
(TENSILE
OR
COMPRESSIVE)
8. ESTIMATION OF HEIGHT OF THE TALL VESSEL (X)
9. COLUMN INTERNALS
9.1 Design and construction features of plate and trays
9.1.1 Loading conditions of trays and plates
9.1.2 Deflection and stresses
Page 1 of 29
Page 2 of 29
induced due to bending moment caused by wind load acting on the vessel and its
attachments; ii) stress induced due to eccentric and irregular load distributions from
piping, platforms etc. iii) stress induced due to torque about longitudinal axis resulting
from offset piping and wind loads and iv) stress resulting from seismic forces. Apart from
that, always there are some residual stresses resulting due to methods of fabrication used
like cold forming, bending, cutting, welding etc.
3. AXIAL
STRESSES
AND
CIRCUMFERENTIAL
PRESSURE
Page 3 of 29
And
(p
d2)/4
Therefore
f
stress
P/a
p d 2 / 4
pd
=
= induced stress, pounds per square inch
t d
4t
or
pd
4f
(6.1)
Page 4 of 29
Circumferential stresses: Fig (6.2b) shows the circumferential force acting on the thin
cylinder under internal pressure. The following analysis may be developed, if one
considers the circumferential stresses are induced by the internal pressure only.
P
stress =
or
P
pdl pd
a
2tl
2t
pd
2f
(6.2)
Equation 6.1 and 6.2 indicates that for a specific allowable stress, fixed diameter and
given pressure, the thickness required to restrain the pressure for the condition of eq.
(6.2) is double than that of the equation (6.1). Therefore, the thickness as determined by
equation (6.2) is controlling and is the commonly used thin walled equation referred to in
the various codes for vessels. The above equation makes no allowances for corrosion and
does not recognize the fact that welded seams or joints may cause weakness. Experience
has shown that an allowance may be made for such weakness by introducing a joint
efficiency factor j in the equations and this factor is always less than unity and is
specified for a given type of welded construction in the various codes. The thickness of
metal, c, allowed for any anticipated corrosion is then added to the calculated required
Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD
Page 5 of 29
thickness, and the final thickness value rounded off to the nearest nominal plate size of
equal or greater thickness.
Equation (6.1) and (6.2) rewritten based on the foregoing discussion as
Where,
pd
+c
4f j
(6.3)
pd
+c
2f j
(6.4)
Wshell =
2
o
Di2 s X
(6.5)
Page 6 of 29
And
(6.6)
f d wt shell
/4 (Do2 -Di2 ) X s
=
Xs
/4(Do2 -Di2 )
(6.7)
f d wt ins =
(D t)ins X
Dm t s
(6.8)
Therefore,
f d wt ins =
ins t ins X
(6.9)
ts
Stress induced due to liquid retained in column. It will be depend upon internal e.g. in
tray column, total number of plates, hold up over each tray, liquid held up in the down
comer etc. will give the total liquid contents of the column.
f d liquid =
liquid
Dm t s
(6.10)
Page 7 of 29
f dattachments =
attachments
Dm t s
(6.11)
The total dead load stress, ftotal, acting along the longitudinal axis of the shell is then the
sum of the above dead weight stresses.
ftotal = fdead wt shell + fdead wt ins + fdead wt liq + fdead wt attach.
(6.12)
Page 8 of 29
Pw = CD Vw2 A
(6.13)
Where,
CD = drag coefficient
= density of air
Vw = wind velocity
A = projected area normal to the direction of wind
If wind velocity is known approximate wind pressure can be computed from the
following simplified relationship.
Pw = 0.05 Vw2
(6.14)
Page 9 of 29
h1 > 20m
Therefore, the bending stress due to wind load in the axial direction
fw
4 Mw
t (Di + t) Di
(6.15)
Page 10 of 29
Where,
fw - longitudinal stress due to wind moment
Mw - bending moment due to wind load
Di inner diameter of shell
t corroded shell thickness
Page 11 of 29
The load may, therefore be considered as acting at a distance 2/3 from the bottom of the
vessel.
Load, F = Sc W
(6.16)
Where, W = weight of the vessel
Sc = seismic coefficient
Seismic coefficient depends on the intensity and period of vibrations. For example if the
vibration lasts for more than one second seismic coefficient value varies from minimum,
moderate to maximum Sc = 0.02, 0.04, and 0.08 respectively.
Stress induced due to bending moment up to height X from the top of the column is given
by:
Sc W X 2 (3 H - X)
MsX =
(6.17)
3
H2
Where X = H, maximum bending moment is at the base of column
Msb= 2/3 Sc W H
(6.18)
The resulting bending stress due to seismic bending moment is given by:
4 MsX
fsb =
(6.19)
D2 t
0
Page 12 of 29
The maximum bending moment is located at the base of the vessel (X = H). Thus
substituting H for X in Eq. (6.17)
Sc W H 2 (3 H - H)
(6.20)
f = 4
sb
3
H 2 Do2 t
2 Sc W H
(6.21)
sb
3 R2 t
The possibility of the wind load and seismic load acting simultaneously over the column
is rare. So both the loads are computed separately and whichever is more severe is used
to calculate the maximum resultant stress.
Maximum tensile stress at the bottom of the skirt
ftensile = (fwb or fsb) - fdb
Maximum compressive stress on the skirt
fcompressive = (fwb or fsb) + fdb,
here, fdb - dead load stress
Taking into account the complexity of the final equation for maximum stresses, it is
customary to assume a suitable thickness t of the skirt and check for the maximum
stresses, which should be less than the permissible stress value of the material.
f
M e (e)
( /4) Do2 (t s c)
OF
LOADS
(6.22)
Page 13 of 29
Stress due to wind load at distance 'X' + Longitudinal stress due to internal pressure -
attachments
Dm t s
attachments
Dm t s
b 2 4ac
(6.23)
2a
Once the value of X is estimated, it is described to adjust the plate thickness, t, for the
top portion of the column, so that the height of portion X will be multiple of the plate
width used. The plate thickness which is originally selected is satisfactory up to a
considerable height. Trays below the distance X of the column must have an increased
thickness. If the above condition does not satisfy then calculation of the axial stress with
an increase in the thickness according to equation (6.5, 6.23) are repeated, and this
repetitive steps in calculation helps to estimate subsequent height ranges to corresponds
with increase thickness. The procedure is repeated till the entire height of the vessel is
covered.
from which
X =
-b
(X )
Page 14 of 29
(X )
= f t max
- f t all J 0
9. COLUMN INTERNALS
9.1 Design and construction features of plate and trays
Plate or trays can be constructed either as one piece trays or as sectional trays. Several
factors control the design and construction features of plates or trays. These factors
includes 1) down coming liquid impact, liquid weight, load on the tray due to dead
weight; 2) expansion due to rise in temperature; 3) fabrication and installation ease; 4)
support type; 5) material of construction and safety.
One piece tray may be made of material such as cast iron, copper or steel including the
risers and down comers, with a thickness of 2 to 6 mm depending on the diameter and the
material. The sectional tray is made from section in the form of floor plates cut form
sheets, which are laid on the supporting beams and peripheral ring. A clearance is
provided between adjacent sections and clamping devices are used for fixing.
The cast iron tray is able to withstand compressive forces created due to thermal
expansion within reasonable limits and their diameters are also limited to small sizes.
Whereas the one piece shaped tray made of ductile material is comparatively thin and has
a limited ability to absorb forces due to thermal expansion. Therefore, in order to prevent
the distortion of the tray floor, provision of packing seal between the edge of the tray and
column wall help to relieve these problem. On the other hand one of the main advantages
of the sectional tray is its ability to cope with thermal expansion. The individual sections
of the tray are placed on the supporting structures, an asbestos jointing material inserted
between the section and the support member. Each section is finally held by frictional
clamping devices. Sectional trays are also necessary when these are to be taken inside
through the limited size of column man holes in parts and assembled inside.
Page 15 of 29
considered. The design is based not on the permissible deflection but on the permissible
stresses.
3 (m2 -1)
4
.
P
.
R
L
16 E m2t 3
(6.25)
PL .R 4
(6.26)
16 E t 3
Where, E modulus of elasticity
t thickness of the plate
PL loads a to c causing deflection per unit area of the plate
R radius of the plate
Equation 6.26, need to be modified in view of the actual construction for each type of
tray. Because the tray is perforated and not solid sheet, as in the case of dual flow,
turbogrid or sieve tray. While in case of bubble cap tray, the holes are reinforced by
risers. The load may not be as uniformly distributed as it is assumed and fixing of the tray
at the edge may be only partial and may not be complete. The above equation can be
modified by taking the value of constant in the above equation as 1/2 instead of 1/6.
During cleaning and assembly operations a uniformly distributed load of tray and down
comers may produce a stress in the tray which is estimated by:
Then,
3P.R 2
(6.27)
4 t2
p - uniformly distributed load per unit area
R, t radius and thickness of tray
f1
Where,
Page 16 of 29
Whereas the stress induced due to concentrated load of maintenance personnel and tools
will be given by:
3w
R
f2
1.33log 1 (6.28)
2
2 t
x
Where, w - concentrated load at the centre of the tray
R, t radius and thickness of tray
x - any intermediate radius, when the load is present
In equations 6.27 and 6.28, the value of Poissons ratio is taken as 0.33. From the above
calculation it can be observed that the tray supported merely on a peripheral ring has to
be handled with a minimum loading during actual operation and maintenance. Its
application is limited to small diameter vessels.
b) Tray supported on a truss
The size of each beam of the truss is determined by the span and the load shared by the
beam. The load on the tray will be shared by the beams in proportion to the area of the
tray supported by it. The deflection of the beam has to be limited and is given by
5 W l3
(6.29)
=
384 EI
Where, W load carried by the beam including its own weight
l beam
E- modulus of elasticity
I moment of inertia
The stress is given by
Wl
(6.30)
f =
8 Z1
for uniformly distributed load and concentrated load is given by 6.24
Wl
(6.31)
f =
4 Z2
Where, Z section modulus of beam
Page 17 of 29
Solution:
Design pressure = 4 1.2 = 4.8 Kg/cm2
Thickness of shell -
PD0
4.8 2.5103
=
+ c = 9.5mm + 2mm = 11.5mm
2 f J + P 27800.8 + 4.8
Assuming standard plate thickness -10 mm.
If assuming elliptical head with major to minor axis ratio - 2:1
Weight of elliptical head =
3
3
( D0 Di )
6
=
3
3
(2.52 - 2.50 )7600 = 1504 kg
6
Page 18 of 29
PD
4.8 2.5
kg
375 2
4(t c) 4(10 2)
cm
2.
kg
cm
7500x 2
ts
0.008
m
Fd attach
1504 (157.38x)
23936 (2504.78x)
(2.5)(0.008)
x 1
1 2x 1
0.6
weight of liquid on the trays is calculated on the basis of water & 0.05 m water depth.
Weight of tray
.D 2x 1 .(2.5) 2 2x 1 4.908 2x 1
4
4
Page 19 of 29
Fd liq tray
245 2x 1 245.428 2x 1
kg
3906.1 2x 1 3
D.t
2.5 0.008
m
Total stress due to dead weight = 7600x + 7500x + 23936 + 2504.78x + 7812.2x
3906.1 = 25416.98x + 20029.9
Stress due to wind load , wind load acting over the vessel
PW = k1 k2 (P1)Deff
= 0.7 110 Deff
Deff = Diameter of insulation + Diameter of overhead line
= (2.7 + 0.5) = 3.2 m.
PW = 0.7 (110) 3.2 = 246.4 x kg
Bending moment induced and calculated upto height x from top.
MW = 246.4 x. x/2 kg.m
MW = 123.2 x2 kg.m
Stress induced due to bending moment FW
MW
123.2x 2
3137.26x 2
( / 4).D 2 .t ( ).(2.5)2 .0.008
4
Page 20 of 29
x=
- 8.10
8.10
4 2623.99
2
- 8.10 102.75
2
x = 47.32m
or
-55.42m
47.32 > 42 m
Page 21 of 29
1 2.5 10 3
9.61mm
2 130 1
Basically base of the column needs to be much thicker to with stand the wind load and
dead weights load.
For trial purpose divide the column is to five sections. We can consider the increasing
thickness by 2 mm per section. Try 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 mm.
-
t = 14 mm
Page 22 of 29
(2.5) 2 4.9m 2
4
1 2.5 10
fh
69.44 N / mm2
2 18
3
1258 103
Dead weight of stress f w
8.83N / mm2
(2500 18)18
Page 23 of 29
Fb
6147072 10 3 2500
18 69.06 N / mm 2
11
1.128 10 2
18
141.95 N / mm2
2536
The maximum compressive stress will occur when the vessel is not under pressure
= 8.83 + 69.06 = 77.83 N/mm2
The value 77.83 is well below the critical buckling stress. Therefore design is
satisfactory.
Page 24 of 29
Example 3: Determine the shell thickness for a tall vessel of following specification. As
a generation guide it is to be noted that for each 5.6 m height, shell thickness can be
increased by 1.2mm. This general guide is required to determine the number of shell
courses.
Max wind speed expected (for height up to 20 m) = 150 km/h
Shell outside diameter = 2.5 m
Shell length tangent to tangent = 18.0 m
Skirt height = 3.8 m
Operating temperature = 310oC
Operating pressure = 0.6 MN/m
Design temperature = 330oC
Design pressure = 0.9 MN/mm2
Corrosion allowance = 2.5 mm.
Tray spacing = 0.7 m
Top designing space = 1.0 m
Bottom separating space = 2.5 m
Weir height = 80 mm
Down comer clearance = 30 mm
Weight of each head = 7.5 KN
Tray loading (excluding liquid) = 1.0 KN/m2 of tray area
Tray support rings = 50mm x 50mm x 10mm angles
Insulation = 70 mm asbestos
Weld joint efficiency factor = 0.85
Page 25 of 29
Solution:
Thickness of shell required for internal pressure:
ts
PD0
0.9 2.5
C
0.003 0.016 m 16 mm
2 fJ P
2 98.1 0.85 0.9
PD
0.9 2.5
51.1MN / m2
4t
4 0.011
0.0358. X MN/m2
t
0.011
0.75 3
Liquid wt on the trays are calculated on the basis of water and 0.070 m depth.
WL
4X 1
6
( D) 2 0.075 9810
10 MN
4
3
FL
WL
75 9.81 10 6 4 X 1
4X 1
2
0.0267
MN / m
Dt
2.5 0.011 3
3
Page 26 of 29
weight of trays =
4X 1
3
( D) 2 1 9810
10 MN
4
3
4 X 1
Hence, Wa = wt of attachments = 7.5 103 3.65 104 4.90 103
MN
3
fa
Wa
4X 1
0.086 4.22 10 3 X 0.056
0.00792 X 0.0671
Dt
3
4 X 1
f d 0.077 X 0.0358 X 0.0267
. 0.0792 X 0.0671 0.2276 X 0.0581
3
f bm =
4 Mw
106
2
D t
4 749 x 2
=
106
2
2.5 0.011
= 0.0138 X2 MN/m2
Resultant tangential stress: ftensile = fa fd + fbm
= 51.13 0.792X 0.0671 +0.0138 X2
=0.0138X2 0.792 X + 51.0629
ftensile max = 98.1 0.85 = 83.0 MN/m2
0.0138X2 0.792X 31.93 = 0
Page 27 of 29
0.792
0.792
4 0.0138 31.93
2 0.0138
0.792 1.5458
X=
2 0.0138
X = 84 >> 18 m
fcompressive maximum = 0.125 E (t/Do) = 0.125 2 105(0.011/2.5)
= 110 MN/m2
fcompressive stress = fd + fbm - fa = 0.0138 X2 + 0.792 X + 0.0671 51.13
110= 0.0138X2+ 0.792X 51.06
0.0138X2 + 0.792X 161.06 = 0
0.792
0.792
0.792 3.085
2 0.0138
-0.792+3.085
X=
20.0138
4 0.0138 161.03
2 0.0138
X=
X = 83
or
-0.792-3.085
20.0138
or
-140.47
X = 83 >> 16 m
If reinforcement of shell by tray support rings are also considered, X value will further
increase.
If we consider longitudinal stress alone it is observed that hoop stress controlling the
design and a uniform thickness of 16 mm is sufficient throughout the shell length.
Page 28 of 29
References:
Geankoplis, C.J., 1993, Transport Processes and Unit Operations, 3 rd Edition, PrenticeHall International, Inc., New Jersey.
Dawande, S.D., 1999. Process Design of Equipments, First Edition, Central Techno
Publications, Nagpur, India.
Dutta, B. K., 2010, Principles of Mass Transfer and Separation Processes, PHI Learning
Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, India.
McCabe, W.L., Smith, J. C., Harriott, P., 1987, Unit Operations of Chemical
Engineering, Fourth Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Singapore.
Sinnott, R. K., 2005, Coulson & Richardsons Chemical Engineering Series, Chemical
Engineering Design, Fourth Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann An Imprint of Elsevier,
Oxoford.
Mahajani, V V., Umarji, S.B., 2009, Process Equipment Design, Fourth Edition,
Mcmillan Publishers India Ltd., India.
Perry, R. H., Green, D. W., Maloney, J. O., 1997, Perrys Chemical Engineers
Handbook, Seventh Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Company, USA.
Ludwig, E. E., 1999, Applied Process Design for Chemical and Petrochemical, Third
Edition, Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, TX.
Speight, J. G., 2002, Chemical and Process Handbook, McGraw-Hill Book Company,
USA.
Walas, S. M., 1990, Chemical Process Equipment Selection and Design, ButterworthHeinemann, a division of Reed Publishing, USA.
Heldman, D.R. and Lund, D.B. 1992. Handbook of Food Engineering. Marcel Dekker
Inc. 475-480.
Cheremisinoff, N. P., 2000, Handbook of Chemical Processing Equipment, ButterworthHeinemann Publications, USA.
Page 29 of 29