Sawsan311
Chemical
- Jun 21, 2019
- 303
Dear All
Going through API 537 section A.2.3 It discusses that steam assisted pipe flares are sensitive to high inerts as they reduce the LHV of the flare gas and hence reduce the combustion efficiency
I presume from this that higher inert content would mandate higher steam requirements to be able to achieve the smokeless performance in light of the low combustion efficiency
However looking at API 521 table 14 discussed in section 5.7.3.2.2 , the numerical figures provided for typical steam to hydrocarbon ratio requires calculating the mass fraction of hydrocarbons in the flare mixture multiplied by the API for each hydrocarbon type. If we have more inerts, Wi for the individual hydrocarbon gas would reduce indicating eventually less required steam to flare gas ratio, Therefore, what is the impact of the inert gas on the steam requirement, would it increase the requirement or decrease as it dilutes the saturated and unsaturated hydrocarbons as per the equation in table 14.
Appreciate your views.
Regards,
Going through API 537 section A.2.3 It discusses that steam assisted pipe flares are sensitive to high inerts as they reduce the LHV of the flare gas and hence reduce the combustion efficiency
I presume from this that higher inert content would mandate higher steam requirements to be able to achieve the smokeless performance in light of the low combustion efficiency
However looking at API 521 table 14 discussed in section 5.7.3.2.2 , the numerical figures provided for typical steam to hydrocarbon ratio requires calculating the mass fraction of hydrocarbons in the flare mixture multiplied by the API for each hydrocarbon type. If we have more inerts, Wi for the individual hydrocarbon gas would reduce indicating eventually less required steam to flare gas ratio, Therefore, what is the impact of the inert gas on the steam requirement, would it increase the requirement or decrease as it dilutes the saturated and unsaturated hydrocarbons as per the equation in table 14.
Appreciate your views.
Regards,
