Home HAZOP study of a fixed bed reactor for MTBE synthesis using a dynamic approach
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

HAZOP study of a fixed bed reactor for MTBE synthesis using a dynamic approach

  • Juraj Labovský EMAIL logo , Zuzana Švandová , Jozef Markoš and L’udovít Jelemenský
Published/Copyright: February 1, 2008
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

A methodology for hazard investigation based on the integration of a mathematical model approach into hazard and operability analysis is presented. This approach is based on mathematical modelling of a process unit where both steady-state analysis, including analysis of the steady states multiplicity and stability, and dynamic simulation are used. The dynamic simulation serves for the investigation of consequences of failures of the main controlled parameters, i.e. inlet temperature, feed temperature and feed composition. This simulation is also very useful for the determination of the influence of failure duration on the reactor behaviour. On the other hand, the steady state simulation can predict the reactor behaviour in a wide range of failure magnitude and determine the parametric zones, where shifting from one steady state to another one may occur. A fixed bed reactor for methyl tertiary-butyl ether synthesis was chosen to identify potential hazard and operational problems of a real process.

[1] Chen, F., Huss, R., Doherty, M. F., & Malone, M. F. (2002). Multiple steady states in reactive distillation: kinetic effects. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 26, 81–93. DOI: 10.1016/S0098-1354(01)00750-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0098-1354(01)00750-510.1016/S0098-1354(01)00750-5Search in Google Scholar

[2] Dimitriadis, V. D., Hackenberg, J., Shah, N., & Pantelides, C. C. (1996). A case study in hybrid process safety verification. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 20, S503–S508. DOI: 10.1016/0098-1354(96)00093-2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0098-1354(96)00093-210.1016/0098-1354(96)00093-2Search in Google Scholar

[3] Eizenberg, S., Shacham, M., & Brauner, N. (2006). Combining HAZOP with dynamic simulation-Applications for safety education. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 19, 754–761. DOI: 10.1016/j.jlp.2006.07.002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2006.07.00210.1016/j.jlp.2006.07.002Search in Google Scholar

[4] Göring, M. H., & Schecker, H. G. (1993). HAZEXPERT-an integrated expert system to support hazard analysis in process plant design. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 17, 429–434. DOI: 10.1016/0098-1354(93)80262-L. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0098-1354(93)80262-L10.1016/0098-1354(93)80262-LSearch in Google Scholar

[5] Graf, H., & Schmidt-Traub, H. (2001). An integrated approach to early process hazard identification of continuous and batch plants with statechart modelling and simulation. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 25, 61–72. DOI:10.1016/S0098-1354(00)00633-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0098-1354(00)00633-510.1016/S0098-1354(00)00633-5Search in Google Scholar

[6] Güttinger, T. E., & Morari, M. (1997). Predicting multiple steady states in distillation: Singularity analysis and reactive systems. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 21, S995–S1000. DOI:10.1016/S0098-1354(97)87632-6. 10.1016/S0098-1354(97)87632-6Search in Google Scholar

[7] Kubíček, M. (1976). Algorithm 502: Dependence of solution of nonlinear systems on a parameter [C5]. ACM Transaction on Mathematical Software, 2, 98–107. DOI: 10.1145/355666.355675. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/355666.35567510.1145/355666.355675Search in Google Scholar

[8] Labovský, J., Jelemenský, Ľ, & Markoš, J. (2006). Safety analysis and risk identification for a tubular reactor using the HAZOP methodology. Chemical Papers, 60, 454–459. DOI: 10.2478/s11696-006-0082-0. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/s11696-006-0082-010.2478/s11696-006-0082-0Search in Google Scholar

[9] Mohl, K.-D., Kienle, A., Gilles, E.-D., Rapmund, P., Sundmacher, K., & Hoffmann, U. (1999). Steady-state multiplicities in reactive distillation columns for the production of fuel ethers MTBE and TAME: theoretical analysis and experimental verification. Chemical Engineering Science, 54, 1029–1043. DOI: 10.1016/S0009-2509(98)00327-3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0009-2509(98)00327-310.1016/S0009-2509(98)00327-3Search in Google Scholar

[10] Molnár, A., Markoš, J., & Jelemenský, Ľ (2005). Some considerations for safety analysis of chemical reactors. Chemical Enginnering Research and Design, 83, 167–176. DOI: 10.1205/cherd.03284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1205/cherd.0328410.1205/cherd.03284Search in Google Scholar

[11] Mushtaq, F., & Chung, P. W. H. (2000). A systematic HAZOP procedure for batch processes, and its application to pipeless plants. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 13, 41–48. DOI: 10.1016/S0950-4230(99)00054-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0950-4230(99)00054-610.1016/S0950-4230(99)00054-6Search in Google Scholar

[12] Parmar, J. C., & Lees, F. P. (1987). The propagation of faults in process plants: Hazard identification. Reliability Engineering, 17, 277–302. DOI:10.1016/0143-8174(87)90093-X. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0143-8174(87)90093-X10.1016/0143-8174(87)90093-XSearch in Google Scholar

[13] Rehfinger, A., & Hoffmann, U. (1990). Kinetics of methyl tertiary butyl ether liquid phase synthesis catalyzed by ion exchange resin. I. Intrinsic rate expression in liquid phase activities. Chemical Engineering Science, 45, 1605–1617. DOI: 10.1016/0009-2509(90)80013-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(90)80013-510.1016/0009-2509(90)80013-5Search in Google Scholar

[14] Schrans, S., de Wolf, S., & Baur, R. (1996). Dynamic simulation of reactive distillation: An MTBE case study. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 20, S1619–S1624. DOI: 10.1016/0098-1354(96)00275-X. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0098-1354(96)00275-X10.1016/0098-1354(96)00275-XSearch in Google Scholar

[15] Shimada, Y., Suzuki, K., & Sayama, H. (1996). Computer-aided operability study. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 20, 905–913. DOI: 10.1016/0098-1354(95)00187-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0098-1354(95)00187-510.1016/0098-1354(95)00187-5Search in Google Scholar

[16] Srinivasan, R., Dimitriadis, V. D., Shah, N., & Venkatasubramanian, V. (1997). Integrating knowledge-based and mathematical programming approaches for process safety verification. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 21, S905–S910. DOI: 10.1016/S0098-1354(97)87617-X. 10.1016/S0098-1354(97)87617-XSearch in Google Scholar

[17] Švandová, Z., Kotora, M., Markoš, J., & Jelemenský, L. (2006). Dynamic behaviour of a CSTR with reactive distillation. Chemical Engineering Journal, 119, 113–120. DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2006.03.032. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2006.03.03210.1016/j.cej.2006.03.032Search in Google Scholar

[18] Švandová, Z., Markoš, J., & Jelemenský, L. (2005a). HAZOP analysis of CSTR with the use of mathematical modelling. Chemical Papers, 59, 464–468. Search in Google Scholar

[19] Švandová, Z., Jelemenský, Ľ, Markoš, J., & Molnár, A. (2005b). Steady states analysis and dynamic simulation as a complement in the HAZOP study of chemical reactors. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 83, 463–471. DOI: 10.1205/psep.04262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1205/psep.0426210.1205/psep.04262Search in Google Scholar

[20] Weatherill, T., & Cameron, I. T. (1989). A prototype expert system for hazard and operability studies. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 13, 1229–1234. DOI: 10.1016/0098-1354(89)87028-0. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0098-1354(89)87028-010.1016/0098-1354(89)87028-0Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2008-2-1
Published in Print: 2008-2-1

© 2008 Institute of Chemistry, Slovak Academy of Sciences

Downloaded on 27.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.2478/s11696-007-0078-4/html
Scroll to top button