Entrainment issues in vacuum column

flash zones
For a vacuum tower to operate effectively, the flash zone and the wash section
must work together to provide the best possible feed quality to the sections above
Mark Pilling, Mario Roza and S M Wong Sulzer Chemtech

ne of the recurring questions about as metals and hydrogen-deficient molecules. The

refinery vacuum tower operation is the metals are catalyst poisons for downstream procissue of flash zone entrainment and the esses. The hydrogen-deficient molecules tend to
operation of the wash section. As refiners push form coke and also adversely affect the distilto optimise yields from the vacuum tower, the lates end point and colour.
limits of existing column internals are often
The flow configuration of the bottom of a typiencountered. Although the operation of the cal vacuum column is shown in Figure 1. Above
vacuum tower needs ultimately to be judged as a the flash zone is a relatively short packed bed
whole, this article focuses on the flash zone and called the wash section. The wash section is
wash sections of the column,
since they are critical for highyield operations.
The flash zone serves to transi(6'/DRAW
tion the high-velocity, two-phase
,IQUIDFEEDTO
feed from the transfer line into
WASHBED
the vacuum column in a manner
that separates the liquid and
routes it to the bottom of the
3LOPWAXDRAW
column, while delivering the
vapour uniformly to the upper
sections of the column. The feed
nozzles orientation into the
column can be radial or tangential. The number of nozzles can
vary, depending on column size
&EED
and heater configuration. The
typical feed internal for a vacuum
column is a vapour horn or other
device that uses the feed inertia
to redirect the stream to contact
and remove dispersed liquid
particles. The liquids entrained
in the upward-flowing feed
vapour stream need to be
removed because they contain
disproportionately high amounts
of heavy end contaminants, such Figure 1 Main flows in the bottom of a vacuum column

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000446

PTQ Q1 2010 1

Figure 2 Cyclonic device

as a kind of reflux stream and also

acts to wet the packing to prevent it
from drying out and coking. It also
aids the removal of coalesced liquid
from the packing surface.
Liquid leaving the bottom of the
wash bed is collected in a slop
stream. It consists of coalesced liquid
entrainment from the flash zone, the
heavy condensed com-ponents, and
the heavy portion of the liquid gas oil
feed that made it down through the
packed bed without being vapourised.
Since gas oil is more valuable than
slop, process economics dictate that
the gas oil feed stream to the wash
section be minimised. However, the
stream must be maintained at a sufficient rate so that coking is avoided.
From a column product draw standpoint, as the entrainment rate to the
wash bed increases, the slop draw
should increase by the same amount,
but the contribution of the slop from
the liquid feed to the wash section
will remain essentially constant.

Optimising the flash zone and

wash section design

Figure 3 Velocity profile above cyclonic device

designed to remove heavier components in the

upward-flowing vapour from the flash zone by
coalescing entrained liquid droplets and by
condensing the heavier vapourised components.
The packing provides the surface area that
coalesces the entrained liquid droplets in the
vapour stream. A small liquid gas oil stream is
fed to the top of the wash section, which serves

2 PTQ Q1 2010

When trying to optimise the feed

and wash sections of the vacuum
column, the goal must be clearly
understood. From an operational
standpoint, the true goal is to
provide the best possible vapour
feed to the distillation section above
the wash section. The term best
possible means the lowest possible
amount of entrained liquids as well
as the most uniform vapour distribution. Again, this is measured
above the wash section. However,
since the intermediate conditions
between the flash zone and the wash
section can affect the output of the wash section,
we need to under-stand that region as well.
Therefore, we need to look at the vapour distribution throughout these sec-tions as well as the
corresponding entrainment.
Looking first at vapour distribu-tion leaving
the wash section: this should be fairly straightforward. In order for the wash section to function

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000446

properly with respect to de-entrainment and coking resistance, the

vapour feed to the wash section
must be very well distributed. Since
a packed bed is typically a good
distributor of vapour, the vapour
flow from the top of a properly
working wash bed, by definition,
must be excellent. Therefore, when
discussing vapour distribution, we
need to focus on the region between
the flash zone and the wash section.
Now looking at entrained liquids:
from a practical standpoint, the
flash zone section behaves as a
rough vapour-liquid separator and
the wash section behaves as a
polishing bed, where droplets can be
removed and fractionation takes
place. Generally, it does not matter
how much liquid is removed in the Figure 4 Baffled vapour horn
feed section or the wash section
independently; it matters how the combined feed study, it can be seen that different feed designs
and wash section perform as a unit. To some can have unexpected results with respect to
extent, the de-entrainment effects of the flash vapour
distribution
and
de-entrainment
zone and the wash section are cumulative. In a capabilities.
simplistic approach, if both sections operate at
90% efficiency, the net efficiency will be approxi- CFD study: de-entrainment vs vapour
mately 99%. For example, if 100kg of distribution
entrainment enters the tower, a 90% efficient When studying the performance of various
flash zone will allow 10kg to leave and go to the vacuum tower feed devices, it becomes apparent
wash section, which will capture 90% of that that vapour-liquid separation capabilities
entrainment, allowing 1kg of entrainment to (entrainment removal) and vapour distribution
leave to the tower above.
quality to the wash section do not necessarily go
However, the efficiency of both sections is hand in hand. In other words, a modification
based on droplet particle size. If the flash zone that decreases the entrainment to the wash
or the feed inlet device allow a bigger portion of section does not necessarily help the vapour feed
large-diameter droplets to escape to the wash profile to the wash bed. Often, the opposite can
section, the wash section will be extremely effi- be true. This can be seen with the CFD simulacient in removing those droplets. However, if a tions shown in Figures 2 and 3. Figure 2 shows a
larger percentage of very small droplets leaves pure cyclonic device with a strong rotation that
the flash zone, the wash section will be less effec- optimises de-entrainment. Figure 3 shows the
tive in removing that extra entrainment.
vapour velocity profile leaving this device at an
Nevertheless, it is desirable to minimise the elevation just below the packed bed. As can be
entrainment from the feed section to the wash seen, the feed to the wash section has some
section. However, when this comes at the distinct high-velocity regions. However, from an
expense of poor vapour feed to the wash section, entrainment standpoint, we know from in-house
improved de-entrainment from the feed section testing that a well-designed feed device can have
usually does not result in a better product from very low entrainment rates of less than 1%.1
the wash section. The following CFD study
Figure 4 shows a vapour horn-type feed device
provides a review of an industrial column config- with baffles and a vortex recovery mechanism to
uration with two types of feed devices. From this limit the swirling effect in the bottom of the

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000446

PTQ Q1 2010 3

Figure 5 Velocity profile above baffled vapour horn device








4EMPERATURE#




Vacuum tower example

TBP





SPGR

















column. The CFD results show that

this is not as effective as an initial
de-entrainment device as the pure
cyclone is. When operating at typical
industrial
conditions,
a
well-designed vapour horn feed
device like this can have entrainment levels as low as 2%. This is
still relatively low, but higher than
that of the cyclone. Looking at the
vapour distribution results in
Figure 5, the vapour horn device
clearly provides a more uniform
vapour flow to the wash section
above. It should be noted that the
entrainment rates discussed previously have been measured in
laboratory conditions with column
diameters of 13m. Entrainment
rates from well-designed industrial
columns are typically in the range
35%. So there is some scaling
effect to be seen. However, the
trend of entrain-ment vs vapour
distribution should still hold true,
regardless of scale.



6OLUME










The example below shows the

performance of an industrial
column with a less-than-optimum
wash section design. With this case,
it can be seen that even these older,
less efficient designs can provide
excellent de-entrainment removal.
Wash section















CCR



Ni














6OLUME

Figure 6 Long residue characterisation

4 PTQ Q1 2010










WPPM





Diameter: 10m
Type: double bed
Beds: top 1.4m M125Y, bottom
1.0m MG64Y
Feed inlet: two tangential 1.5m
parallel nozzles, simple galleries
with top and side panel without
baffles, extending about 120
degrees of circumference
Spray nozzle distributor for the
bottom wash bed, Sulzer VEP gravity flow liquid distributor for the
top wash bed
Slop wax externally recycled to
the top of the stripping section.




##2WT



www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000446

Long residue assay

In the following data, the long residue

characteristics
have
been
summarised.
Based on these data, the cut point
of the HVGO is 580C and for LVGO
it is 450C. For this cut point, the
HVGO would have the following
expected contaminant contents:
CCR =
Nickel =
Vanadium =

/6($

7ATER

,6'/

1.45 wt%
0.51 wppm
0.81 wppm

These values are obtained by adding

the contaminant contents of the
different assay cuts between the
LVGO and HVGO cut points. These
data are compared with the results
from the different simulations below.

Simulation

4O(6'/
(6'/

&: 6!0

,2

&:

$E WASH

The analysis was made starting with a

%NTRAINMENT
FROM&:
complete flow sheet simulation with
&: ,)1
furnaces, transfer lines, all exchang$E ENTRAIN
ers, pumps and the vacuum system.
3LOP
36!0
The feed has a full characterisation of
WAX
the blend. In order to be able to estimate the influence of entrainment, it
was subsequently extended to simu3TEAM
late entrainment from the flash zone,
de-entrainment in the wash section
and entrainment to the HVGO
32
draw-off.
The feed zone is simulated as a
flash to the pressure at the feed stage Figure 7 PFD used to simulate entrainment from the flash zone as well
without considering any influence of as de-entrainment by the wash section
the vapour (including water vapour)
coming from the stripping section and assum- ering any cooling effect of passing though the
ing that a part of the liquid feed is entrained wash section. In this manner, the influence of
(stream Entrainment from FZ). The vapour the superheating of the feed compared to the
(FZ-VAP), as well as the separated liquid flash zone temperature is taken into considera(De-entrain), are fed to a stage representing tion with respect to the inherent limitations of
the bottom of the wash section below the slop an equilibrium model used for such mass and
wax draw. The entrained liquid from the flash heat transfer applications.
zone is split into two parts: one part is assumed
A schematic process flow diagram (PFD) of
to be de-entrained in the wash section (De- the unit operations used is shown in Figure 7.
wash); and one part is assumed to pass One theoretical stage is taken for each of the
through the wash section and will end mainly wash zones. On the product side draws, the
in the HVGO (To HVGO). It must be noted HVGO and LVGO flow rates are specified. The
that the liquid entrained to the HVGO is directly slop wax pumparound in the bottom wash bed
fed to the HVGO draw-off stage without consid- is fixed.

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000446

PTQ Q1 2010 5

Feed and flash zone-related streams with contaminant concentration

Stream name
LR
SWAX
Stream description
Long residue
Stream phase
Mixed
Liquid
Total stream
Temperature, C
426
390
Pressure, Mbar
359
34
kg/hr
581 085
31 097
Vapour phase
Rate, kg/hr
115 469
n/a
Density, kg/m3
2.09
n/a
Vapour molecular weight
333
n/a
Liquid phase
Rate, kg/hr
465 616
31 097
Actual density, kg/m3
764
775
Vanadium content, ppm
116
23
Nickel content, ppm
33
8.35
Conradson carbon residue, PCT 9.85
5.55
ASTM D2887 at 760 mm hg (wt), C
IBP
320
462
5%
406
499
10%
438
529
30%
493
570
50%
544
596
70%
609
619
90%
705
649
95%
905
682
EBP
946
715

FZ-LIQ
FZ-VAP
SVAP
SR
Liq. from FZ Vap. from FZ Vap. frm strip. sec. Short residue
Liquid
Vapour
Vapour
Liquid

HVGO

LVGO

Liquid

Liquid

406
36
273 488

406
36
307 597

399
36
58 247

393
44
252 600

333
30
217 560

215
25
110 000

n/a
n/a
n/a

307 597
0.26
412

58247
0.08
132

n/a
n/a
n/a

n/a
n/a
n/a

n/a
n/a
n/a

273 488
830
243
70
20

n/a
n/a
2.05
0.82
1.03

n/a
n/a
6.00
2.38
2.66

252 600
850
265
76
21

217 560
769
0.97
0.53
1.29

110 000
791
0.01
0.01
0.03

502
538
573
626
673
728
820
922
951

236
362
391
439
476
512
558
602
640

413
446
474
517
547
574
607
637
672

558
576
598
643
686
738
831
920
949

400
431
449
483
511
538
571
594
621

314
322
345
384
412
435
458
471
492

Feed: 580 000 kg/hr, V 115 wppm, Ni 35 wppm, CCR 10 wt%. Evaporation: 53%, no entrainment. 6.0 t/hr stripping steam, 3 stripping stages

Table 1

original design have been applied.

What we see is that both the
vapours from the flash zone (FZ),
HVGO yield, kg/hr
217 559
as well as the vapour coming from
Entrainment from FZ 0%
2%
5%
8%
10%
the stripping section, contain a
Entrainment, kg/hr
-
5470
13 674 21 879
27 349
significant amount of contaminants.
V, ppm
0.97
0.98
0.99
1.00
1.01
The stripping vapour has an even
Ni, ppm
0.53
0.53
0.53
0.54
0.54
CCR, wt%
1.29
1.29
1.29
1.29
1.29
higher concentration of V, Ni and
Slops, kg/hr
31 098 36 357 44 261 52 175
57 457
CCR than the feed vapour.
Just to get an idea of the absolute
Feed: 580 000 kg/hr, V 115 wppm, Ni 35 wppm, CCR 10 wt%. Evaporation: 53%,
no entrainment
amounts we are speaking about, in
the vapour phase of the feed, which
Table 2
is 307.4 t/hr, we have: 0.63 kg/hr
V; 0.25 kg/hr Ni; 3187 kg/hr CCR.
Results
On top of that, we have stripping section vapour
Volatility of contaminants
(58.2 t/hr) that contains: 0.35 kg/hr V; 0.14 kg/
The simulation is very helpful to provide an idea hr Ni; 1547 kg/hr CCR. In the HVGO, we have a
of the volatility of the three contaminants, vana- feed of 217.6 t/hr, which contains: 0.21 kg/hr V;
dium (V), nickel (Ni) and Conradson carbon 0.11 kg/hr Ni; 2800 kg/hr CCR. So we are speakresidue (CCR), which have been studied for this ing of very small numbers in large streams.
column.
In Table 1, the contaminants in the vapour Entrainment
and liquid streams going to the wash section For this study, the percentage of entrainment
have been summarised together with some from the flash zone was first varied while keepadditional stream data. The same column ing the de-entrainment factor of the wash zone
configuration and stripping steam rate as in the at 100%. This means that all entrained liquid
Influence of entrainment from the flash zone with perfect
de-entrainment from the wash zone

6 PTQ Q1 2010

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000446

will end up in the slop wax

Influence of de-entrainment from the wash zone with constant entrainment
draw. The results are given
from the flash zone
in Table 2. Analysis shows
that if the wash zone can
Entrainment from FZ
5.0%
cope with the entrained
Entrainment from FZ, kg/hr
13 674
liquid, it does not really
HVGO, kg/hr
218 240
217 830
217 700
217 570
217 559
matter how much entrainDe-entrainment wash zone
95.0%
98.0%
99.0%
99.9%
100.0%
To HVGO, kg/hr
681
271
139
13.5
ment there is from the flash
V, wppm
1.49
1.19
1.09
1.00
1.00
zone. The only negative
Ni, wppm
0.68
0.59
0.56
0.54
0.53
aspect to high entrainment
CCR, wt%
1.33
1.31
1.30
1.29
1.29
Slops, kg/hr
43 451
43 939
44 093
44 249
44 261
from the flash zone is that
more liquid has to be
drawn from the slop wax Table 3
collector. This also means
that if the slop wax is pumped to the top of the liquid at the bottom of the wash section. What
stripping section (where it belongs), some addi- should also be mentioned is that for the cases
tional pump power will be required.
quoted in literature with a higher than expected
It has been stated that higher entrainment dry-out, spray nozzles are used for the
leads to faster than normal coking.2 The main wash oil. The measured dry-out factor is based
reason given is that the superheated entrainment on metered flow of the wash oil fed to the
vapourises the wash oil and leads to a higher distributor, assuming zero entrainment back
than expected dry-out. The main contributor to to the HVGO. This is most probably not correct.
this higher than expected dry-out, however, is The effective wash oil rate was probably much
the superheated feed vapour because there is a lower than metered.3,4 Further study could
much greater amount of vapour than entrained perhaps verify this hypothesis.

Feed and flash zone-related streams with contaminant concentration, reduced stripping section stages
Stream name
LR
SWAX
Stream description
Long residue
Stream phase
Mixed
Liquid
Total stream
Temperature, C
426
391
Pressure, Mbar
359
34
kg/hr
581 085
26 368
Vapour phase
Rate, kg/hr
115 469
n/a
Density, kg/m3
2.09
n/a
Vapour molecular weight
333
n/a
Liquid phase
Rate, kg/hr
465 616
26 368
Actual density, kg/m3
764
776
Vanadium content, ppm
116
26
Nickel content, ppm
33
9.28
Conradson carbon residue, PCT
9.85
5.87
ASTM D2887 at 760 MM hg (wt), C
IBP
320
465
5%
406
502
10%
438
531
30%
493
573
50%
544
600
70%
609
624
90%
705
654
95%
905
687
EBP
946
719

FZ-LIQ
FZ-VAP
SVAP
SR
Liq. from FZ Vap. from FZ Vap. frm Strip. Sec. Short residue
Liquid
Vapour
Vapour
Liquid

HVGO

LVGO

Liquid

Liquid

406
36
273 488

406
36
307 597

399
36
53 519

394
44
252 600

332
30
217 560

214
25
110 000

n/a
n/a
n/a

307 597
0.2
412

53 519
0.08
124

n/a
n/a
n/a

n/a
n/a
n/a

n/a
n/a
n/a

273 487
830
243
70
19.7

n/a
n/a
2.0
0.82
1.04

n/a
n/a
6.4
2.51
2.69

252 600
849
265
76
21.5

217 560
769
1.1
0.57
1.31

110 000
791
0.01
0.01
0.03

502
538
573
626
673
728
820
922
951

236
362
391
439
476
512
558
602
640

412
445
473
516
547
574
608
639
674

551
574
598
642
686
738
831
920
949

400
431
449
483
511
539
572
597
624

314
322
345
384
412
435
458
471
493

Feed: 580 000 kg/hr, V 115 wppm, Ni 35 wppm, CCR 10 wt%, Evaporation: 53%, no entrainment, no entrainment, 6.0 t/hr stripping steam, 2 stripping stages

Table 4

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000446

PTQ Q1 2010 7

Spray nozzle design for top and bottom wash section

Section
l,
F-factor, Nozzles
Type Expected entrainment,

m3/m2/hr Pa1/2
%
Top
2.09
3.76
32 MP437 120
64
Bottom 0.40
3.36
36 MP187 120
93

Table 5

Since the previous case assumed 100% efficiency in the wash section, the next step is to
review the influence of the wash sections efficiency of de-entrainment. In Table 3, the
percentage of de-entrained liquid is varied for a
fixed entrainment of 5% from the FZ.
It is interesting to see that the influence of
entrainment on HVGO is smaller for components with significant volatility (CCR) than for
the vanadium that has the lowest volatility of the
three contaminants. In fact, on the CCR side, the
difference between perfect de-entrainment and
only 95% de-entrainment is probably within
measuring accuracy. For vanadium, the difference will be measurable.
In general, it appears that if we can obtain
99% de-entrainment efficiency in the wash bed,
we can, taking into account the accuracy of the
measurements, probably be sure that we are
within the required HVGO specification as calculated with a rigorous simulation. Sulzers
in-house testing has shown that, depending upon
the average droplet size entering the packed bed,
at least 9899% efficiency is realistic and
attainable.

Varying the number of stripping stages

Another variable that can be reviewed is the
number of stripping stages in the bottom of the
column. In the original simulation, there are
three stripping stages, including the stage were
the liquid is fed. No tray efficiency data are used
to substantiate this. In general, it might be too
optimistic to assume it will attain three stages.
In Table 4, the results of the same simulation, as
summarised in Table 1, are given, with two
rather than three stages.
As expected, with the reduced stage number,
the strip-out vapour (SVAP) is reduced. What is
a bit surprising is that it also shows a higher
contaminant concentration than in the simulation with three stages. This results in reduced
quality (ie, an increased end point of the HVGO)

8 PTQ Q1 2010

and an increased contaminant rate.

If the slop wax rate is not carefully
monitored and analysed to distinguish
between
over-flash
and
de-entrained liquid, this quality
reduction due to lower stripping
section efficiency can easily be
mistaken for entrainment from the
FZ to the HVGO.

Single wash section

The reason this tower was selected for review
was because it used a double wash bed design.
Double wash section designs are rarely, if ever,
used today. One of the reasons, described below,
is the risk of entraining slop wax to the HVGO.
In order to estimate the effect of switching to a
single-bed wash section, two simulations were
made; one simulation just eliminated the bottom
wash section pumparound, while the other simulation added an additional stage (filling the space
created by eliminating the spray nozzle
distributor).
The results with the two-stage, single-wash
section (without entrainment) are identical to
the results with the small slop PA specified by
the process design. With three stages, HVGO
quality improves slightly for the same yield. In
other words, the vanadium content went from
0.97 wppm to 0.86 wppm, and CCR from 1.29
wt% to 1.27 wt%. With one additional stage, the
HVGO yield can be increased by 0.25%. The CCR
is the determining contaminant for the possible
yield increase. Vanadium is less sensitive and is,
at 0.91 wppm, below the original content at this
yield.

Distributor check
Since this column is highly loaded, it is interesting to verify the choice of distributor in the two
wash sections. With the help of the entrainment
estimation program developed by Sulzer, based
on literature data, spray nozzle distributors were
designed for both sections. In the real column,
only the bottom section has a spray nozzle. The
results of this calculation are summarised in
Table 5.
Assuming the Sulzer program gives a good
estimate (at least within 2030%), it is clear that
a spray nozzle distributor is not a very good
choice for this vapour load. Our in-house testing
has actually showne data that indicate that these

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000446

entrainment estimates may actually be conservative.3,4 Based on this, it is possible that the
bottom wash section entrainment might actually
have a more severe effect on the HVGO quality
than the entrainment from the feed in this
column.
The choice of a gravity flow distributor for the
top bed is of high importance, as it assures that
the correct amount of wash oil enters the bed.
With a spray nozzle distributor, this would not
be possible. In fact, the calculation shows that if
more liquid is pumped through the spray nozzle
distributor, less liquid actually goes to the bed
because of the increased pressure drop and associated decrease in drop size. At 120% of design,
74% will be entrained as per the correlations.
Therefore, from a design standpoint, a Sulzer
VEP distributor is the best choice for the top
distributor, which is the most critical for HVGO
quality.

Conclusions
In order for a vacuum tower to operate effectively, the flash zone and the wash section must
work together to provide the best possible feed
quality to the sections above. To properly design
a vacuum column, engineers need to be able to
predict how much entrainment and associated
contaminants will travel from the flash zone to
the slop wax and HVGO draws. These numbers
are based directly on the entrainment removal
efficiency of the flash zone and the wash section.
Sulzers in-house design tools predict entrainment from most well-designed flash zone
internals to be 35%. An inlet device producing
zero entrainment, even if it did exist, would
almost certainly adversely affect the vapour
distribution to the wash bed above. Since it is
imperative that the wash section removes
entrainment at extremely high efficiencies
(>98%) and resists coking, the vapour distribution quality to the wash section must be
excellent. Vapour distribution should not be
sacrificed for the sake of ultra-low entrainment
levels in the flash zone.
A simulation of a commercial vacuum column
with varying entrainment levels shows that near
zero levels are not required in order for the
column to meet HVGO specifications. Even with
a moderate entrainment level, a properly
designed wash section will provide excellent deentrainment levels and, subsequently, excellent

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000446

HVGO quality. In fact, even this particular

column, with severe entrainment of slop wax
between the split wash beds, still made the
HVGO specification in actual operation. Our
studies indicate that, as long as the wash bed is
performing properly, contaminant levels in the
HVGO draw will be well within the desired specifications. The feed and flash zone internals need
to provide both low entrainment levels and highquality distribution to the wash section, but, in
the end, the wash section is the final protection
for the HVGO product draw.
The analyses in this study show that, more or
less independently of the amount of entrainment, it is of great importance to estimate the
capability of the wash section to de-entrain the
liquid carried over. In the past, Sulzer has
already done some investigations on the deentrainment efficiency. From these data and
other sources, the company has developed a
calculation method to predict the performance of
various feed devices and the combined performance of the vacuum tower flash zone and wash
sections to ensure proper operation of each
vacuum tower.
References
1 Wehrli M, Schaeffer P, Marti U, Muggli F, Kooijman H, Mixedphase feeds in mass transfer columns and liquid separation,
IChemE Distillation & Absorption, London, Sept 2006.
2 Golden S W, Shah V B, Kovach III J W, Improved flow sheet
topology for petroleum refinery crude vacuum distillation
simulation, Canadian Chemical Engineering Conference, Calgary,
Alberta, Oct 1994.
3 Pilling M, Bannwart M, Use of gravity flow distributor increases
capacity in refinery vacuum tower wash sections, AIChE Spring
Meeting, Houston, Texas, March 2001.
4 Pilling M, Bannwart M, Campbell C, Operating characteristics of
corrugated grid packing, AIChE AM, Reno, Nevada, Nov 2001.
Mark Pilling is the Manager of Technology for Sulzer
Chemtech USA, where he oversees mass transfer equipment
development and specialises in applications for various
process technologies. He holds various patents on distillation
tray technology and is an active member of Fractionation
Research, Inc, where he serves as Vice-Chair of the Technical
Committee. He is also a technical representative for structured
packing imaging projects at the Separations Research Program
at the University of Texas. He has been a director for the AIChE
Separations Division since 2004. He holds a BS degree in
chemical engineering from the University of Oklahoma.
Email: Mark.Pilling@sulzer.com
Mario Roza is Director of Technology and Business Development
for the business unit Mass Transfer Technology at Sulzer

PTQ Q1 2010 9

Chemtech, Winterthur Switzerland, responsible for R&D, design

tools and operations support, as well as application development
for mass transfer components. He holds a Masters degree in
chemical engineering from the Technical University of Delft, the
Netherlands.
S M Wong is a Mechanical Specialist in the refining applications
and process technology group at Sulzer Chemtech USA. He has
expertise in Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) to assess vapour
distribution quality for refinery columns to identify potential
technical process improvements as well as cost improvements of
materials and manufacturing by optimising equipment design. He
graduated from Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

10 PTQ Q1 2010

Links
More articles from: Sulzer Chemtech USA Inc
More articles from the following category:
Crude Vacuum Units
Mass Transfer & Separation

Revamps, Shutdowns and Turnarounds

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000446