Optimising steam systems: part I

Simple techniques to reduce the cost of ownership of a refinerys steam

distribution system and condensate return using steam traps and separators
Ian Fleming
Spirax Sarco

www.eptq.com

Potential savings in a refinerys steam distribution system and condensate return

Steam distribution

Measure
Fuel saved, %
Payback period, yr Other benefits
Improved insulation
313
1.1
Steam trap maintenance
1015
0.5
Automatic steam trap monitoring 5
1
Leak repair
35
0.4
Reduced requirement

for major repairs
Flash steam recovery/ Dependent on existing Variable dependent Reduced water
condensate return
use for flash steam
on application
consumption and

water treatment costs
Condensate return alone
10
1.1

Reduced water consumption

and water treatment costs

Table 1



Critical
point
Evaporation
lines



E
4EMPERATURET#

o far 2010 is proving to be

another challenging year for
the refining industry. Not only
is it currently experiencing spare oil
production capacity of over 6
million barrels/day, leading to a
fall in refining margins, but the US
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has confirmed its stance, that
greenhouse gases (GHGs) are a
threat to health and welfare. This
has led to the Mandatory Reporting
of Greenhouse Gases Rule, requiring all US oil and petrochemical
companies, as with all sectors of the
economy, to monitor and report
their GHG emissions. In Europe,
the EU has committed to cutting its
CO2 emissions by 20% by 2020 from
1990 levels.
This article, and part II to be
published at a later date, looks at
ways of optimising the steam
system, to reduce energy costs
(lowering GHG emissions), water
consumption and boiler chemicals.
In addition, ensuring the steam is
of the correct quality, quantity and
pressure when it arrives at its point
of use can improve process
performance.
It is estimated that steam generation accounts for approximately
50% of the total energy consumption in a typical refinery, with
energy costs accounting for more
than 50% of the total operating
expenditure.
The US Department of Energy
estimates that steam generation,
distribution and cogeneration offer
the most cost-effective energy efficiencies in the short term, with
potential energy savings of more
than 12%. Table 1 estimates the
typical savings that can be achieved

Lines of
constant
pressure



Saturated
water line

Dryness fraction lines

Superheated
steam region



Dry saturated
steam line


A







%NTHALPYHK*KG

HF







HFG

Figure 1 Temperature enthalpy diagram

for the steam distribution system

and condensate return of a US
refinery.

Further savings can be achieved

in the powerhouse where steam is
generated. However, this article

PTQ Q2 2010 47

Steam
Condensate
Steam
Slug

Steam

Figure 2 Development of conditions for water hammer

will examine only steam distribution and condensate return.

Before looking at potential
improvements and ways of optimising the steam system, it is worth
understanding the basic properties
and characteristics of steam. These
can be outlined in a temperature
enthalpy diagram (see Figure 1).
When energy is added to water,
the temperature rises until it
reaches the point of evaporation
(point B in Figure 1), which varies
with pressure. The energy required
to reach point B is sensible heat (hf).
Any additional energy will convert
the water to steam at a constant
temperature. At point D, all water
has been completely converted to
steam, which is known as dry saturated steam with a steam quality
(dryness fraction) of 100%.
The energy added between points
B and D is the enthalpy of evaporation (hfg) and is the energy steam
gives out as it condenses back to
water. It is the enthalpy of evaporation that is used in refining.
If further energy is added, the
steams temperature will increase,
creating superheated steam (E).
Superheated steam is used in a
typical powerhouse (at approximately 100 barg and 450C) as part

of the cogeneration or combined

heat and power (CHP) system.
For heating purposes, superheated steam offers very little extra
energy and, in fact, the steam has
to cool to saturated temperature
before the enthalpy of evaporation
can be released. Therefore, using
superheated steam instead of saturated steam at the point of use
actually slows down the heating
process.
For the process to achieve maximum efficiency, steam needs to
arrive at the correct:
Quality: target dryness fraction of
100%
Quantity to allow the process to
meet demand
Pressure, which determines saturated steam temperature and
specific volume, so affecting thermal transfer.
Steam quality is a measure of
dryness fraction. If the dryness fraction is lower than 100% (say, point
C in Figure 1), the available energy/
kg of steam is less. Steam quality
can be improved by ensuring the
mains are well insulated and
condensate is removed effectively
using steam traps and separators.
The quantity of steam required
will depend on the process energy

Flash steam

Flash steam bubble

implodes as steam
condenses

Cool
condensate

Figure 3 Development of conditions for thermal shock

48 PTQ Q2 2010

requirements.
Effective
deliver
relies on correct sizing of the steam
distribution lines and control valves
serving the application. This can
become an issue when processes
are upgraded or additional assets
are added, as it increases the steam
load beyond the steam mains original specification. This results in
increasing velocities within the
steam system, causing higher pressure losses through the distribution
system. If the steam pressure is
lower than the acceptable design
pressure, the process is de-rated, as
the steam is at a lower saturation
temperature, reducing the energy
transfer rate.
Several key areas have the greatest effect on reducing energy costs
and improving efficiency: steam
system insulation, water hammer
and steam trapping.

Steam system insulation

Steam mains and ancillary equipment must be effectively insulated,

in particular valves, strainers and
separators, which have large surface
areas. After any maintenance work
on the steam system, the insulation
must be replaced properly; good
insulation reduces heat losses by up
to 90%.
To put this into context, 1m of an
uninsulated 100mm steam main
operating at 10 barg emits approximately 1.0 kW, which is equivalent
to wasting nearly 16 tonnes of
steam a year. This assumes that the
pipe is dry and there is no wind
chill. Good insulation reduces these
loses to approximately 1.6 tonnes of
steam a year.
But even when insulation standards are good, a certain amount of
steam condenses out during distribution. This needs to be removed
to maintain steam quality and
prevent the possibility of water
hammer.

Water hammer

As steam begins to condense,

condensate forms droplets on the
inside of the walls. These are swept
along in the steam flow, merging
into a film. The condensate then
gravitates towards the bottom of
the pipe, where the film begins to
increase in thickness.

www.eptq.com

Three main types of steam trap

Mechanical
Thermodynamic
Principle of operation:
Principle of operation:
Distinguishes between steam and
Distinguishes between steam and
condensate using difference in density
condensate through variation of flow
between steam and condensate
dynamics between the two fluids

Removes condensate as it forms
Removes condensate as it forms

Thermostatic
Principle of operation:
Uses difference in temperature between
steam and condensate
Condensate has to cool below the steam saturation
temperature before the trap will open, which leads
to backing up of condensate

Table 2

The build-up of droplets of

condensate along a length of steam
pipework can eventually form a
slug of water, which will be carried
at steam velocity (2530 m/s) along
the pipework (see Figure 2). This
slug of water will eventually slam
into bends in the pipework, valves
or separators in its path.
There is a second cause of water
hammer known as thermal shock.
This occurs in two-phase systems,
where water occurs in two states
(water and steam) in the same pipe.
It can also occur in steam mains,
condensate return lines and heat
exchange equipment. Steam bubbles
become trapped within pools of
condensate, which have cooled
sufficiently below saturated temperature and immediately collapse.
Since a kilogram of steam occupies several hundred times the
volume of one kilogram of water,

when the steam collapses condensate is accelerated into the resulting

vacuum. As the void is filled, water
impacts the centre, sending shock
waves in all directions.
Thermal shock can, therefore,
occur where higher temperature
return systems containing flash
steam are discharged into subcooled condensate return lines. The
forces resulting from water hammer
can be immense, causing steam
mains to physically move or, in
worst-case scenarios, rupture.
At best, water hammer increases
maintenance costs and at worst a
ruptured steam main will bring the
plant to a halt, possibly causing
injury to personnel. Water hammer
can be prevented easily through
good engineering practice and by
using steam traps at regular intervals to prevent the build-up of
condensate.

Steam trapping

Some of the most common problems found in a steam system can

be traced back to either the steam
trap application or poor condensate
removal. These issues can normally
be resolved through good engineering practice, selection of the correct
steam trap and a steam trap
management programme.

Types of steam trap

When selecting steam traps, it is

worth remembering that most use
three principles of operation,
summarised in Table 2. Each principle has its strengths and weaknesses,
dependent on the application being
served. Table 3 gives examples of
applications and the preferred type
of trap for the application.
There are some general rules and
guidelines on where to position
steam traps:

Preferred type of trap for various applications

Application
Trap types
Process applications Mechanical
eg, heat exchangers:
Reboilers
Preheaters
Water heaters

Comments
Mechanical steam traps will remove the condensate as it forms, regardless of fluctuating loads,
ensuring maximum steam space and heating surface area within the heat exchanger
Mechanical steam traps also have the greatest capacity, making them ideal for process applications

Distribution lines
Thermodynamic Thermodynamic traps are robust and relatively low cost. TDs remove the condensate as it forms,
eg, steam mains
so eliminating the risk of condensate backing up into the steam line

Thermostatic
Thermostatic traps, by their nature, will back up with condensate, but they are robust and relatively low cost.
Thermostatic traps can be used on distribution mains, providing there is a cooling leg between

the trap and the steam mains
Critical tracing
Thermodynamic Thermodynamic traps are the first choice, as they are compact, robust and low cost. They remove
eg, sulphur lines
condensate as it forms, ensuring the traced product does not solidify

Mechanical

Mechanical traps are also used, but tend to be less compact

Non-critical tracing Thermostatic

eg, instrumentation

Thermostatic traps allow the condensate to sub-cool within the tracer before being discharged. This makes
use of the sensible heat in the condensate and reduces the release of flash steam, particularly important
if the trap is discharging to grade

Table 3

50 PTQ Q2 2010

www.eptq.com

Along the steam main at approximately every 3050m intervals,

using a pocket that is the same
diameter as the steam main up to
100mm. This will ensure all condensate running along the bottom of
the pipe is captured and removed
(see Figure 4)
At all low points on the steam
main and wherever the steam main
rises; at a gantry, for example
Before control valves, in particular valves serving a process. A
separator ensures steam entering
the process is dry, saturated steam,
improving the efficiency of heat
exchange. It also minimises the risk
of erosion of the control valve,
reducing maintenance costs, and
ensures condensate is drained when
the control valve is in the closed
position, preventing the risk of
water hammer. A typical separator
and trap installation protecting a
pressure control valve station is
shown in Figure 5
Before steam isolation valves, to
remove the potential build-up of
condensate when the valve is closed
At the end of each steam main;
this should be fitted with either a
steam trap with good air venting
properties or a separate air vent.
Modern steam trap stations
normally consist of quick-fit connectors, which allow traps to be
isolated and changed in minutes.
This has significantly reduced maintenance costs and the total cost of
ownership of steam traps.

Testing and maintaining steam traps

Modern steam traps are generally reliable and robust, assuming

they have been correctly sized and
selected for the given application.
However, they can fail. A steam
trap has two modes of failure: it can
fail either open or closed/blocked.
If a steam trap fails open, there
are two major consequences:
Steam
wastage, resulting in
higher energy costs/greater emissions, increased consumption of
water and boiler feed chemicals
If
the condensate is being
returned, the condensate line
becomes pressurised, which can
have the effect of de-rating the
capacity of any other steam trap
discharging into the same conden-

www.eptq.com

Steam

Flow

TD trap with
inbuilt strainer

Condensate

Steam trap set

Figure 4 Steam trap arrangement

#ONTROLLER

3TOPVALVE
3AFETY
VALVE
h,OWv
PRESSURESTEAM

h(IGHv
PRESSURESTEAM

3TRAINER
3EPARATOR

0NEUMATIC
CONTROLVALVE

4RAPSET

Figure 5 Typical separator and trap installation

During a steam trap

audit, it is not unusual
to find more than
10% of the steam
trap population
failed open
sate line. This is because the
differential pressure across the
steam trap has been reduced, so
less condensate will pass through a
given sized orifice.
Table 4 shows typical steam
losses from a single 1/2 inch TD
steam trap used on high-pressure

(HP), medium-pressure (MP) and

low-pressure (LP) steam mains
when failed open. Although the
figures are conservative, this clearly
shows the need to ensure steam
traps are checked regularly and
failed traps replaced as soon as
possible. HP traps should be
checked at least every six months,
while MP and LP traps annually.
During a steam trap audit, it is
not unusual to find more than 10%
of the steam trap population failed
open, where a customer has not
implemented a steam trap management scheme. In value terms, this
normally shows potential annual
savings of $100 000s, with a payback
of less than six months. Figure 5
shows examples taken from actual
steam trap audits.

Steam losses from a 1/2 inch TD steam trap

Line pressure

100 barg
20 barg
5 barg

Approx steam loss, t/yr* Approx steam loss, t/yr*

(discharging into condensate line)
(discharging to grade)
460
920
95
190
25
50

* Based on 8700 hours/year

Table 4

PTQ Q2 2010 51

Steam trap audit results from a UK refinery

Failed closed Failed open

15%
or blocked
5%
20%

Not in use

Working correctly
60%

Cost of steam wasted from failed

open traps from a US chemical plant
Unit
Aromatics
Fire water
Flare skid
Light olefins
OSBL PR
Pipe rack
Pyro naphtha
Cyclohexane
Air systems
Annual loss

Steam loss, $
51 111
6975
28 087
323 847
58 667
45 054
21 932
28 811
20 454
584 938

Table 5 Steam trap audits of UK and US refineries

Cold steam traps

Cold steam traps are either failed

closed, blocked or have been
isolated (having failed open).
Although it is harder to achieve a
return on investment by repairing
these traps, the consequences of
ignoring this situation can be much
more costly. Failing to replace or
maintain cold traps can result in:
Corrosion
leading to system
degradation and increased maintenance costs

52 PTQ Q2 2010

Water hammer, with the potential for catastrophic failure of the

steam system a major safety
issue
Freezing,
leading
to
pipe
ruptures
Valve erosion, wire drawing,
vibration and failed valve packing,
where traps have failed upstream
of control valves
Corrosion
and loss of heat
transfer on tracing lines, leading
to higher pumping costs or

solidification of the product being

traced
Blade
erosion, vibration and
drive shaft wear on turbines.

Separators on a steam system

Separators are used to remove

entrained water in the steam
system, to bring the steam quality
to nearly 100%. They consist of
baffle plates, which separate the
water droplets from the steam flow
(see Figure 6).
Separators should be installed in
the following applications:
Upstream
of control valves,
particularly just before a process
where
they:
protect
steam
equipment from erosion caused by
wet steam; ensure the process
receives dry saturated steam, so
improving performance; and drain
the
build-up
of
condensate
upstream of the control valve when
in the closed position
At boiler off-take, to knock out
any carry-over prior to distribution
Downstream of desuperheater
stations, to remove any remaining

www.eptq.com

water that was not absorbed by the

superheated steam
Upstream
of steam turbines,
preventing the risk of damage
through water droplets or water
hammer.

Air and
incondensable
gases vented

Desuperheater stations

Superheated steam is generated in

most plant powerhouses as part of
the cogeneration or CHP process.
The pressures and temperatures
generated are far too high to be
used in most refining and petrochemical processes. Therefore, this
HP superheated steam is let down
to the MP and LP distribution lines,
using turbines or pressure-reducing
stations.
All steam desuperheaters work
on the same principle: injecting
water into the superheated steam,
where it evaporates, absorbing
excess energy and resulting in
steam with approximately 5C of
superheat. This remaining superheat is soon lost as the steam is
distributed to the point of use.
Figure 7 shows a typical desuperheater application on a letdown
station.
The quantity of water required
to desuperheat the steam is controlled by maintaining the steam
temperature downstream of the
desuperheater to between 5C and
10C above the steam saturation
temperature.
If the temperature is too close to

Figure 6 Steam system separator

the saturation curve, there is a risk

that too much water will be injected
into the system, leading to poor
steam quality and all the problems
associated with this. If the temperature is too high, excessive superheat
will remain, affecting the performance of the downstream process.
Although not much can go wrong
with the average desuperheater, it
is worth checking the required set
points for temperature and pressure, and whether the desuperheater
is still correctly sized, particularly if
operating conditions or parameters
have changed.

Conclusion

This article has discussed the

importance of ensuring steam

reaches its point of use at the

correct quality, quantity and
pressure, and has looked at some of
the key areas to consider in reducing maintenance costs and energy
losses; namely the impact poor
steam quality can have on the steam
system and how this can be
improved through:
Ensuring the steam system is
properly insulated
That condensate is promptly
removed from the distribution
system
Using the correct steam trap for a
given application
Putting in place a steam trap
management programme
The use of separators
Checking the installation and
performance
of
desuperheater
stations.
The second part of this review of
steam system optimisation will
consider steam at the point of use
and the importance of returning
condensate back to the powerhouse.
It will also look at examples of why
heat exchangers stall and how this
has been overcome, together with
ways of utilising flash steam within
the plant.

Ian Fleming is Market Development Manager

for Oil and Petrochemicals at Spirax Sarco,
Cheltenham, UK. He has 20 years experience
in steam systems.
Email: ian.fleming@uk.spiraxsarco.com

PCV
controller
PCV

7.5 M

Air

Superheated
HP steam

Desuperheater

1.5 M

TE

PE

PG

Desuperheated
MP/LP steam

3M
Check
valve
TCV
controller

Air

Cooling
water
PG

TVC

PG

Figure 7 Desuperheater application on a letdown station

www.eptq.com

PTQ Q2 2010 53