Patent Grant
10226717
The present invention relates to the treatment of oil sands bitumen froth and more precisely to a process and unit for recovering solvent from solvent diluted tailings using spray configurations for distribution of the solvent diluted tailings into a flash vessel.
Oil sands extraction processes primarily use hot water mixed with oil sands ore to produce a slurry from which is removed a froth fraction containing bitumen. The bitumen froth, which contains bitumen, water and fine mineral solids, is further processed by adding a diluent solvent to facilitate separation of the bitumen from the other components.
In froth treatment operations, the bitumen froth is mixed with diluent and the diluted froth is supplied to separation vessels to separate an overflow diluted bitumen stream from an underflow solvent diluted tailings stream.
Froth treatment operations thus produce by-products including solvent diluted tailings. The cost and environmental impact preclude directly discharging solvent diluted tailings to tailings ponds. The diluted tailings are thus treated in a tailings solvent recovery unit.
Various tailings solvent recovery units have been proposed and each has its own set of drawbacks and challenges. Many possible recovery schemes are disclosed in the literature. In one process, froth treatment tailings from the froth treatment plant are introduced into a flash vessel with internal shed decks maintained at sub-atmospheric pressures. Steam is introduced below the internals and the major portion of the diluent vaporizes together with water. The flashed vapours are removed and cooled to condense diluent and water which separate by gravity settling. Non-condensed vent gases are withdrawn from the condenser to maintain the sub-atmospheric pressure. The flashed solvent depleted tailings are pumped from the flash vessel to tailings disposal.
Some challenges encountered by known tailings solvent recovery processes result in lower solvent recovery levels than would be desirable. For some processes, the lower recovery is attributable to premature flashing at the feed inlet inducing feed to bypass the shed decks and negating any addition of steam below the shed decks. Other processes which operate the flash vessel at near atmospheric pressures which may permit feed distribution over the shed decks and may increase the steam addition to maintain vessel temperature to about 100° C. can increase naphtha diluent recovery.
Another diluent recovery process investigation flashes feed to a flash temperature such that the enthalpy of vaporized flash components matches enthalpy released from the flash liquid and the flash temperature governs vapour pressures of vaporizing components. Given the relative volatility of diluent hydrocarbons, there may be an expected direct relationship between feed temperature, flash temperature and diluent recovery. However, the investigation identified increased feed temperatures for the same feed flow did not proportionately translate to increased diluent recovery due to increased vaporization of water. Stable operation for the flash column in terms of flash temperature and pressure was found marginally below the boiling point of water for the operating pressure and with small increases in feed enthalpy resulting in upsets as the water essentially boils.
Process upsets affect the flash column in at least two ways. Firstly, boiling on shed decks results in damage to the extent that frequently the shed decks fail structurally. Secondly, the vapour velocity in the column increases by an order of magnitude exceeding design guidelines, such a set out in “Design Two-Phase Separators within the Right Limits” W. Svrcek, et al. Chemical Engineering Progress October 1993, to limit entraining solids and bitumen into the overhead system.
In the overhead of the tailings solvent flash column, bitumen acts a binder for the solids to adhere on surfaces in the overhead system. The adherence of solids to components of the overhead system restricts vapour flow to the downstream equipments unit operations such as condensers and separators. The adherence of solids on condenser heat transfer surfaces reduce cooling and condensing of vapours which increases the non-condensed gases to be vented. Directionally, both effects of solids adhering on surfaces in the overhead system increase column pressure which reduces feed flashing resulting in actual diluent recoveries. The contribution of increased steam to improve diluent recoveries due the reduced partial pressure created by the superheated steam can often be largely offset by the increased water vapour reporting an overhead system restricted by the adherence of solids. Over the operating cycle, the deposit of solids causes column performance to deteriorate which can only be regained by shutting down the column and associated systems for repair and cleaning.
As mentioned above, some known processes use flash vessels with internal shed decks to provide a large surface area to facilitate flashing or stripping of diluent from froth treatment tailings. The flash conditions are near the boiling point of water and both feed flow and feed temperature variations occur. For flash columns depending on internal shed decks there are a number of challenges and drawbacks. For instance, high feed flows increase liquid loading on column internals which directionally increases the time required for diluent to separate. In addition, low feed flows can cause short circuiting in the column when feed does not adequately cover internals and permits depositions of froth treatment tailings mineral and bitumen/asphaltenes on internal surfaces. The depositions provide sites to increase corrosion of the shed decks. Furthermore, high feed temperatures which boil the water on the internals with resultant vibrations and shock can lead to structural failure of the shed decks, which can be seen observing shed deck pieces in the bottom of the column. In general, these challenges reflect feed conditions as supplied from the froth treatment plant to the tailings solvent treatment unit.
Other known or proposed units have columns substantially free of internals with an agitated liquid pool with residence time to allow residual solvent to evaporate while limiting foaming. The column generally has an inlet device that finely disperses the feed. Other known or proposed technologies describe specific manifold assemblies for injecting feed in a tailings solvent recovery vessel that may have small openings through which the feed is injected.
In other known units, such as described in US patent application published under No. 2010/0282642 (Kan et al.), a column is provided such that it is substantially free of internals using nozzles with diameters of about 0.5 mm with a precise pressure drop range producing substantially solvent depleted hydrocarbon drops which reduce in size to a precise range after a fall to the bottom of the vessel over a precise time interval. The inlet feed nozzles may be orientated up or down and the column may also have steam nozzles to inject steam counter-currently with respect to the falling droplets. This proposed system may have a number of challenges and drawbacks. For instance, feed to tailings solvent recovery columns can contain some “tram” materials. This tram material may include prehistoric wood and coal which are contained in the bitumen froth and during froth solvent diluent addition the tram material follows the froth treatment tailings stream. Due to screening or grinding limitations, such tram material may be in the range of 10 to 15 mm and thus can cause plugging, clogging or altered flow through nozzles of 0.5 mm. In addition, due to variable feed conditions, controlling the unit for the precise pressure drops, droplet size distribution and evolution over precise drop times may be difficult. Furthermore, feed injection systems and demisting systems are themselves internal to the flash vessel and thus bitumen/asphaltenes can adhere also to their surfaces leading to maintenance and cleaning issues.
There is thus a need for a technology that overcomes at least some of the challenges and drawbacks of what is known in the field.
The present invention responds to the above need by providing a tailings solvent recovery unit (TSRU) for recovering a solvent from solvent diluted tailings with inlet spray system configurations.
In one embodiment, there is provided a tailings solvent recovery unit (TSRU) for recovering a solvent from a solvent diluted tailings, the TSRU comprising:
In one optional aspect, the multiple nozzles are retractable out of the flashing chamber.
In another optional aspect, each of the nozzles is independently retractable out of the flashing chamber.
In another optional aspect, each of the nozzles is operable in an on/off mode to regulate the flash-atomization of the solvent diluted tailings into the flashing chamber.
In another optional aspect, each of the nozzles comprises an upstream section converging toward a throat and a downstream section diverging from the throat.
In another optional aspect, each throat is sized to have an internal cross-sectional diameter between about 20 mm and about 65 mm.
In another optional aspect, each of the nozzles is sized to have a minimum internal cross-sectional diameter above about 20 mm.
In another optional aspect, the flash vessel is a stripping vessel and the separation apparatus further comprises a stripping fluid inlet for supplying stripping fluid into the stripping vessel below the inlet spray system.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises a distributor comprising an inlet for receiving the solvent diluted tailings, multiple outlets for releasing separate feed streams of the solvent diluted tailings; and multiple feed conduits in respective fluid communication with the multiple outlets of the distributor for respectively providing the separate feed streams to the multiple nozzles.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises isolation valves respectively associated with the multiple feed conduits.
In another optional aspect, the isolation valves are have quick-closing functionality with closing speeds between about 5 mm/s and about 15 mm/s.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises flow sensors respectively associated with the multiple feed conduits.
In another optional aspect, each of the flow sensors is coupled to a the isolations valves and configured to close a corresponding one of the isolation valves in response to a step change flow increase of the feed stream of the solvent diluted tailings.
The invention also provides a tailings solvent recovery unit (TSRU) for recovering a solvent from solvent diluted tailings, the TSRU comprising:
In one optional aspect, the nozzle comprises an upstream section converging toward a throat and a downstream section diverging from the throat.
In another optional aspect, the throat is sized to have an internal cross-sectional diameter facilitating the choked flow.
In another optional aspect, the throat is further sized such that the cross-sectional diameter allows passage of tram materials contained in the solvent diluted tailings.
In another optional aspect, the throat is sized to have an internal cross-sectional diameter between about 20 mm and about 65 mm.
In another optional aspect, the TSRU also includes a tailings supply pump and wherein the flash vessel and the tailings supply pump are configured to regulate pressurization of the solvent diluted tailings supplied through the inlet spray system.
In another optional aspect, the flash vessel is a stripping vessel and the separation apparatus further comprises a stripping fluid inlet for supplying stripping fluid into the stripping vessel below the inlet spray system.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system comprises a plurality of the nozzles.
In another optional aspect, each of the nozzles is independently retractable out of the flashing chamber.
In another optional aspect, each of the nozzles is operable in an on/off mode to regulate flow of the solvent diluted tailings into the flashing chamber.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises: a distributor comprising an inlet for receiving the solvent diluted tailings, multiple outlets for releasing separate feed streams of the solvent diluted tailings; and multiple feed conduits in respective fluid communication with the multiple outlets of the distributor for respectively providing the separate feed streams to the nozzles.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises isolation valves respectively associated with the multiple feed conduits.
In another optional aspect, the isolation valves are have quick-closing functionality with closing speeds between about 5 mm/s and about 15 mm/s.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises flow sensors respectively associated with the multiple feed conduits.
In another optional aspect, each of the flow sensors is coupled to a the isolations valves and configured to close a corresponding one of the isolation valves in response to a step change flow increase of the feed stream of the solvent diluted tailings.
The invention also provides a tailings solvent recovery unit (TSRU) for recovering a solvent from a solvent diluted tailings, the TSRU comprising:
In an optional aspect, each of the nozzles comprises an upstream section converging toward a throat and a downstream section diverging from the throat.
In another optional aspect, each throat is sized to have an internal cross-sectional diameter allowing choked flow.
In another optional aspect, each throat is sized to have an internal cross-sectional diameter between about 20 mm and about 65 mm.
In another optional aspect, the TSRU includes a tailings supply pump and wherein the flash vessel and the tailings supply pump are configured to regulate pressurization of the solvent diluted tailings supplied through the inlet spray system.
In another optional aspect, each of the nozzles is independently retractable.
In another optional aspect, the flash vessel is a stripping vessel and the separation apparatus further comprises a stripping fluid inlet for supplying stripping fluid into the stripping vessel below the inlet spray system.
In another optional aspect, the TSRU includes a controller for controlling the on/off mode of the nozzles so as to maintain constant fluid pressurization.
In another optional aspect, the TSRU includes a controller for controlling the on/off mode of the nozzles so as to maintain choked flow.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises: a distributor comprising an inlet for receiving the solvent diluted tailings, multiple outlets for releasing separate feed streams of the solvent diluted tailings; and multiple feed conduits in respective fluid communication with the multiple outlets of the distributor for respectively providing the separate feed streams to the nozzles.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises isolation valves respectively associated with the multiple feed conduits.
In another optional aspect, the isolation valves are have quick-closing functionality with closing speeds between about 5 mm/s and about 15 mm/s.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises flow sensors respectively associated with the multiple feed conduits.
In another optional aspect, each of the flow sensors is coupled to a the isolations valves and configured to close a corresponding one of the isolation valves in response to a step change flow increase of the feed stream of the solvent diluted tailings.
In another optional aspect, the nozzles are distributed around a periphery of the side walls of the flash vessel.
In another optional aspect, the nozzles are regularly spaced around the periphery.
In another optional aspect, the TSRU includes a common service platform configured around the flash vessel and being proximate to the nozzles and wherein the nozzles are sufficiently spaced around the periphery to permit servicing nozzles from the common service platforms.
The invention also provides a tailings solvent recovery unit (TSRU) for recovering a solvent from a solvent diluted tailings, the TSRU comprising:
In one optional aspect, the distributor comprises: a bottom wall having the inlet provided therein; a top wall in opposed relation to the bottom wall; and lateral side walls extending between the top wall and the bottom wall defining a distributor chamber and having the multiple outlets provided in the lateral side walls.
In another optional aspect, the distributor is sized to have a height between the inlet and the top wall that is between about 2 and about 5 times a diameter of the inlet.
In another optional aspect, the distributor is sized to have a diameter of the distributor chamber at least the greater of two times the diameter of the inlet nozzle or with a circumference of at least equal to two times the diameter of the outlet nozzle times the number of outlet nozzles.
In another optional aspect, the outlets are distributed around a periphery of the lateral side walls of the distributor.
In another optional aspect, the outlets are regularly spaced around the periphery.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises isolation valves respectively associated with the multiple feed conduits.
In another optional aspect, the isolation valves are have quick-closing functionality with closing speeds between about 5 mm/s and about 15 mm/s.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system further comprises flow sensors respectively associated with the multiple feed conduits.
In another optional aspect, each of the flow sensors is coupled to a the isolations valves and configured to close a corresponding one of the isolation valves in response to a step change flow increase of the feed stream of the solvent diluted tailings.
In another optional aspect, the multiple feed conduits are sized and configured to provide substantially equivalent hydraulic losses from the respective outlets of the distributor to the respective nozzles.
In another optional aspect, at least one of the feed conduits comprise a pressure loss regulation device.
In another optional aspect, the inlet and the outlets of the distributor are sized and configured to avoid settling of minerals contained in the solvent diluted tailings.
In another optional aspect, the TSRU also has a heat exchanger for heating the solvent diluted tailings upstream of the distributor.
In another optional aspect, the flashing chamber is relatively free of internals.
In another optional aspect, the flashing chamber is free of shed decks.
In another optional aspect, the flash vessel is configured and operated at a temperature between about 70° C. and about 110° C.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system is configured and operated to a have a pressure drop there-through between about 150 kPa and about 1000 kPa.
In another optional aspect, the inlet spray system is configured and operated to a have a pressure drop there-through up to about 700 kPa.
The invention also provides a tailings solvent recovery process for recovering a solvent from a solvent diluted tailings, the process comprising:
The invention also provides a tailings solvent recovery process for recovering a solvent from a solvent diluted tailings, the process comprising:
The invention also provides a tailings solvent recovery process for recovering a solvent from a solvent diluted tailings, the process comprising:
The invention also provides a tailings recovery process for recovering a solvent from a solvent diluted tailings, the process comprising:
The processes described above and herein may also be used in conjunction with the TSRUs as described above and herein.
In an optional aspect, the flash vessel has an inert gas inlet for injecting insert gas into the flashing chamber.
In an optional aspect, any one of the TSRUs as described above is a naphtha solvent recovery unit for recovering naphthenic solvent from naphtha diluted tailings.
In another optional aspect, any one of the TSRUs as described above is a paraffinic solvent recovery unit for recovering paraffinic solvent from paraffin diluted tailings.
Embodiments of the distribution system and the related tailings solvent recovery process according to the present invention are represented in the following Figs.
While the invention will be described in conjunction with example embodiments, it will be understood that it is not intended to limit the scope of the invention to these embodiments. On the contrary, it is intended to cover all alternatives, modifications and equivalents as may be included as defined by the appended claims.
The present invention provides a tailings solvent recovery unit (TSRU) and a related process for recovering a solvent from solvent diluted tailings.
Referring to
In order to favour stripping of the solvent diluted tailings (4), tailings inlets (16) located in the upper section of the stripping section (12) permit spray systems (30) to flash-atomize solvent diluted tailings (4) into droplets. In one aspect, under the flash-atomizing process, the solvent diluted tailings (4), initially at equilibrium, becomes superheated and the excess heat converts to latent heat of evaporation that vaporizes volatile components such as solvent.
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
The nozzle feed distributor as illustrated in
The diameter (df) of the distributor is preferably provided to be at least about 2D, where D is the diameter of the inlet (Y1) or the number of spray systems (X3) times at least 2DS where DS is the diameter of spray system conduit (X4), which is illustrated in
Referring to
The diameters of both inlet (Y1: D) and outlets (X2: DS) for the nozzle feed distributor (X1) depend on settling characteristics of solvent diluted tailings (4) as a mineral containing slurry. The mineral fractions, particularly the sand fraction which are generally considered as particles above 44 μm, settle in piping systems if the velocity is below a critical value. This critical velocity depends on particle size distribution, particle density and fluid properties. The critical velocity sets the minimum flow rate for slurry pipelines. To provide operational flexibility, the slurry pipeline velocities are specified for a higher velocity to permit operational turndown for routine flow variations. However, erosion by sand increases rapidly with velocity. Due the risk of erosion and the attendant risks associated with solvent leaks from piping failures, the specified maximum velocity may limit the turndown availability of the system to less than required by the TSRU in normal operation and may require diluting the solvent tailings (4) or recycling of an internal stream (such as a stripping column bottoms recirculation stream back into the feed line which is shown in dotted line in
In one aspect, the nozzle feed distributor (X1) may be constructed to resist certain erosion conditions. The nozzle feed distributor (X1) is subjected to the turbulence and slurry characteristics of solvent diluted tailings (4) which may result in significant erosion potential. To extend the life expectancy, a nozzle feed distributor (X1) may be lined (Y3) with abrasion resistant such as chrome carbide or tungsten carbide overlays. To facilitate applying the lining (Y3), the top and/or bottom of nozzle feed distributor (X1) maybe flanged to permit access. The nozzle feed distributor (X1) may be configured with two or more operable units in parallel to facilitate balancing system hydraulics and/or maintenance and replacement while reducing process downtime. Where two or more nozzle feed distributors are installed, the feed to may be split by accepted methods for splitting slurry streams from a common train of froth separation vessels or more than one train of froth separation vessels either dedicated to a specific nozzle feed distributor or provided with interconnecting crossover connections.
Referring to
Referring to
The isolation valve (X5) permits the flow of solvent diluted tailings (4) to the specific spray nozzle system (X3) and is operable in fully open or fully closed mode. Due to the inherit risk of a nozzle head (32) failing and resulting in upsetting the distribution of solvent diluted tailings to other spray systems by the flashing of volatile components the isolation valve is preferably an automated quick-closing valve specified with closing speeds in the range of 5 to 15 mm/s.
Referring to
Another function of the isolation valve (X5) may be to open or close flow to spray nozzle systems (28) to maintain the system pressure at the nozzle feed distributor within the operating envelop. Generally, the opening and closing sequence for the isolation valve (X5) may be designed, controlled or programmed to minimize the risk of two or more spray systems failing at the same time by selectively controlling the operating times for each spray system. Another aspect associated with fast acting valves is the potential to induce pressure surges into the feed supply system and, while each valve may involve a limited fraction of the solvent diluted tailings feed, a prudent approach includes reviewing and monitoring the system to determine whether any surge mitigation measures are desired or required.
Still referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
The flash-atomization process is a sequential progression of homogeneous and/or heterogeneous nucleation, bubble growth, breakup through bubble disruption and droplet evaporation and occurs when the surrounding liquid conditions suddenly change and drop below liquid saturation conditions resulting in a superheated liquid. The surplus heat quickly cools by latent heat of vaporization the liquid towards the equilibrium temperature.
Referring to
A second parameter ΔPR is the pressure difference between the superheated liquid TS and saturated bulk vapour TSat. ΔPR represents the generalized driving force for the phase transition and plays a dominate role in boiling. Boiling is considered induced by nucleation and literature such as R. Duan et al.'s “Numerical Analyses of Flashing Jet Structure and Droplet Size Characteristics”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, Vol. 43, No. 3, p. 285-294, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “Duan et al.”), identifies four different boiling modes: homogenous boiling where nucleation occurs uniformly within liquid having a high degree of superheat, wall boiling where nucleation occurs on the nozzle wall, particle boiling where nucleation occurs on suspended particles or gases, and surface boiling where nucleation occurs exclusively on surfaces of jets. As
A third parameter ΔTSub=TF−TS is defined as the degree of sub cooling where TF is the temperature of the liquid at the nozzle feed pressure PF and TS is the liquid saturation temperature at equilibrium pressure PSat. The degree of sub cooling of the liquid determines whether or not a liquid-vapour region occurs within the nozzle.
Referring to
Referring to
TSRU feed to the nozzle (70) can contain tramp material from the oil sand or upstream operations. While screening or grinding processes can generally minimize particle dimensions in two dimensions, the minimum diameter DT of the nozzle throat (66) needs to pass these particles or the particles plug the nozzle (70). Generally, the minimum diameter DT is at least 3 times the dimension of particles passing through installed upstream screens or grinding equipment. This dimension together with the flow rates provides an initial starting basis for specifying nozzle inlet (64) and throat (66) conditions.
In one embodiment, specifying nozzles (70) for a flash atomizing process employs analogous principles to specifying pressure relief valves for liquid service when venting both liquid and vapour phases from chemical reactors under runaway conditions. The safety considerations for these liquid relief valves have resulted in establishing applicable methods for safe but not overly conservative design of emergency relief systems suitable for the discharge of two-phase fluid flow. One manual “Emergency Relief System Design Using DIERS Technology”, H. Fisher, et al. American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1992, provides detailed and comprehensive guidelines and recommendations on methods available for specifying relief valves for two-phase vapour-liquid flow. TSRU feed is a complex fluid and as such the specification for the nozzle (70) involves successive iterations. Firstly, the flow path for the nozzle (70) is considered in at least 3 sections: nozzle entrance effects included on
In addition to the nozzle flow capacity described herein-above, cavitation within the nozzle and/or the spray assembly (X3) can also adversely affect nozzle capacity. A paper entitled “Effects of Cavitation in a Nozzle on liquid Jet atomization” A. Su et al., International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer; Vol. 50, p. 3575-3582, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as “Su et al.”) identifies types of cavitation that may occur within a nozzle and correlates dimensionless cavitation number to Reynolds number. The relationship may identify flow conditions within the nozzle and/or the spray assembly (X3) prone to cavitation which adversely affects equipment component life which may by computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modelling assess strategies to minimize this failure mechanism due to flow transitions created by valves, elbows, flanges and other pipe fittings.
Velocity of the liquid flowing through the nozzle (70), which may range from 7 to 15 m/s, and cavitation that occurs over the nozzle (70) life cycle, give rise to a sever erosion environment. Consequently, it is preferred that the nozzles be fabricated from abrasion resistant materials such as chrome carbide, tungsten carbide or speciality ceramics.
In one preferred embodiment of the present invention, the function of the nozzle (70) is to produce an atomizing jet. In the discharge cone (68) of the nozzle, the rapid drop in pressure superheats the jet stream. By nucleated boiling, the superheated jet as illustrated in
Still referring to
Referring now to
The vapour velocity which includes optional sparge steam or inert gas (18) above the elevation of the nozzles (32) together with design guidelines such as set out in “Design Two-Phase Separators within the Right Limits”, W. Svrcek et al., Chemical Engineering Progress October 1993, may be used to determine elevation difference (HV) above the nozzles (32) to limit entraining solids and bitumen into the overhead system.
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
In another optional aspect, each nozzle (32) is independently operable in an on/off mode to partially or completely stop or disrupt the solvent diluted tailings feed in order to regulate the flow in response to variable feed properties or adjust the pressure and pressure drop across the inlet spray system. The inlet spray system may also comprise spare nozzles usable in case of the clogging of operating nozzles.
Referring to
In one embodiment, the inlet spray system distributes the feed in the flash vessel without depending on vessel internals to provide the surface area for stripping diluent from solvent diluted tailings. In another aspect, the inlet spray system can be installed with retractable nozzles and with suitable sparing can extend run times. In yet another aspect, the inlet spray system and any and all configurations described herein may also be applied to recovering other types of solvents, such as alkanes from alkane diluted tailings derived from a corresponding froth treatment operation. In another aspect, the inlet spray system, while identified and illustrated for a single stage flash column, can apply to columns in series operation. In another aspect, embodiments of the inlet spray system provide technical advantages including the following. If the feed system does not have a recycle system to maintain constant feed flow to the column, then individual spray nozzle systems could operate in an on/off mode to regulate flash conditions. The spray system can aid in minimizing vessel internals which increases the reliability of the TSRU system. In addition, nozzles with retractable mechanisms permit redundancy with on-line maintenance. Furthermore, the flow nozzles are preferably specified for a throat diameter in the range of 20 to 65 mm to minimize plugging risk from tram material. In addition, the high flow capacity reduces the number of nozzles required. Also, high flash separation of solvent from small droplets of feed precludes the need for additional retention time in the lower liquid pool.
In one embodiment, the selection and placement of spray nozzles are performed to balance passing the maximum sized particle which could plug the nozzle with producing small droplets which generate a large surface area for effective mass transfer to vaporize solvent. Placement of the inlet spray system and sizing of the vessel are such that the droplets have adequate time prior to contacting the pool for the mass transfer to occur.
The inlet spray system may have nozzles structured and configured to provide certain spray characteristics. Referring to
In another embodiment, the process is operated to maintain adequate pressure to the nozzle to prevent two-phase flow for improved nozzle performance and longevity.
In another aspect, optional heating of the feed permits more consistent feed to the nozzle.
In yet another embodiment, the solvent diluted tailings (also called “froth treatment tailings”) are fed to the stripping column at a specific pressure and temperature for the given specific spray nozzle system. The temperature may be provided by heat exchangers or direct steam injection heaters specifically specified for reliable operation with the solids in froth treatment tailings. The sprays distribute tailings as drops across the diameter of the stripping column.
In another embodiment, the steam or inert gas injected near the bottom of the column aids stripping diluent from the droplets as vapours rises in the column to the overhead systems for diluent recovery. Stripped tailings are collected in the bottom of the column. The column tailings pump maintains the level of stripped tailings in the column to provide adequate suction conditions for the pump.
In another embodiment, in the case that the selected nozzles produce droplets that are sufficiently small so as to be prone to entrainment into the overhead system due to stripping vessel conditions such as pressure, temperature and stripping steam injection rates, it may be advantageous to remove the entrained particles using various systems such as filters or scrubbers which would limit adverse impacts of particulates on the overhead system.
It is noted that the inlet spray system and the nozzles used therewith may be used to retrofit existing TSRUs. However, in the case that a given spray or nozzle system is not suitable for retrofitting into existing columns, for instance due to column height not permitting adequate time for diluent mass transfer to vapour phase, the spray system may be adapted for the given column. In some cases, feed pumps may benefit from replacement or upgrading to match pressure requirements for the selected nozzles.
In another embodiment, when large particles and tram material are present in the feed, there may be digester devices, which may be referred to as “muffin munchers”, in order to digest and reduce the size of such particles below the minimum nozzle diameter. Such digesting devices may be cyclones or centrifuges or a combination thereof.
In another aspect, the solvent recovered from the TSRU of the present invention can be reused in the corresponding froth treatment operation.
Finally, it should be understood that the preset invention should not be limited to the aspects and embodiments disclosed and illustrated herein.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2738700 | Apr 2011 | CA | national |
| Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/CA2012/050213 | 4/4/2012 | WO | 00 | 10/21/2013 |
| Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| WO2012/145840 | 11/1/2012 | WO | A |
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 181668 | Gregg et al. | Aug 1876 | A |
| 654965 | Franke | Jul 1900 | A |
| 1085135 | Kelly, Jr. | Jan 1914 | A |
| 1147356 | Allen | Jul 1915 | A |
| 1159044 | Kelly, Jr. | Nov 1915 | A |
| 1201558 | Cobb | Oct 1916 | A |
| 1254562 | Allen | Jan 1918 | A |
| 1261671 | Zachert | Apr 1918 | A |
| 1494375 | Reilly | May 1924 | A |
| 1754119 | Pink | Apr 1930 | A |
| 1777535 | Walcott Stratford | Oct 1930 | A |
| 2010008 | Bray | Aug 1935 | A |
| 2047989 | William | Jul 1936 | A |
| 2091078 | McKittrick et al. | Aug 1937 | A |
| 2111717 | Young | Mar 1938 | A |
| 2188013 | Pilat et al. | Jan 1940 | A |
| 2240008 | Atwell | Apr 1941 | A |
| 2410483 | Dons et al. | Nov 1946 | A |
| 2853426 | Peet | Sep 1958 | A |
| 2868714 | Gilmore | Jan 1959 | A |
| 3081823 | Constantikes | Mar 1963 | A |
| 3220193 | Sttohmeyer | Nov 1965 | A |
| 3271293 | Clark | Sep 1966 | A |
| 3278415 | Doberenz et al. | Oct 1966 | A |
| 3291569 | Joseph Rossi | Dec 1966 | A |
| 3575842 | Simpson | Apr 1971 | A |
| 3705491 | Foster-Pegg | Dec 1972 | A |
| 3779902 | Mitchell et al. | Dec 1973 | A |
| 3808120 | Smith | Apr 1974 | A |
| 3901791 | Baillie | Aug 1975 | A |
| 3929625 | Lucas | Dec 1975 | A |
| 3954414 | Samson, Jr. et al. | May 1976 | A |
| 3957655 | Barefoot | May 1976 | A |
| 4013542 | Gudelis et al. | Mar 1977 | A |
| 4035282 | Stuchberry et al. | Jul 1977 | A |
| 4115241 | Harrison et al. | Sep 1978 | A |
| 4116809 | Kizior | Sep 1978 | A |
| 4120775 | Murray et al. | Oct 1978 | A |
| 4140620 | Paulett | Feb 1979 | A |
| 4209422 | Zimmerman et al. | Jun 1980 | A |
| 4210820 | Wittig | Jul 1980 | A |
| 4230467 | Buchwald | Oct 1980 | A |
| 4251627 | Calamur | Feb 1981 | A |
| 4284242 | Randell | Aug 1981 | A |
| 4314974 | Libby et al. | Feb 1982 | A |
| 4315815 | Gearhart | Feb 1982 | A |
| 4321147 | McCoy et al. | Mar 1982 | A |
| 4324652 | Hack | Apr 1982 | A |
| 4342657 | Blair | Aug 1982 | A |
| 4346560 | Rapier | Aug 1982 | A |
| 4395330 | Auboir et al. | Jul 1983 | A |
| 4410417 | Miller et al. | Oct 1983 | A |
| 4425227 | Smith | Jan 1984 | A |
| 4461696 | Bock et al. | Jul 1984 | A |
| 4470899 | Miller et al. | Sep 1984 | A |
| 4495057 | Amirijafari et al. | Jan 1985 | A |
| 4514305 | Filby | Apr 1985 | A |
| 4518479 | Schweigharett et al. | May 1985 | A |
| 4532024 | Haschke et al. | Jul 1985 | A |
| 4539093 | Friedman et al. | Sep 1985 | A |
| 4545892 | Cymbalisty et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
| 4572781 | Krasuk et al. | Feb 1986 | A |
| 4584087 | Peck | Apr 1986 | A |
| 4609455 | Weimer et al. | Sep 1986 | A |
| 4634520 | Angelov et al. | Jan 1987 | A |
| 4640767 | Zajic et al. | Feb 1987 | A |
| 4644974 | Zingg | Feb 1987 | A |
| 4648964 | Leto et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
| 4678558 | Belluteau et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
| 4722782 | Graham et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
| 4726759 | Wegener | Feb 1988 | A |
| 4781819 | Chirinos et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
| 4802975 | Mehlberg | Feb 1989 | A |
| 4822481 | Taylor | Apr 1989 | A |
| 4828688 | Corti et al. | May 1989 | A |
| 4859317 | Shelfantook et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
| 4888108 | Farnand | Dec 1989 | A |
| 4906355 | Lechnick et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
| 4929341 | Thirumalachar et al. | May 1990 | A |
| 4931072 | Striedieck | Jun 1990 | A |
| 4950363 | Silvey | Aug 1990 | A |
| 4966685 | Hall et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
| 4968413 | Datta et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
| 5022983 | Myers et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
| 5039227 | Leung et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
| 5133837 | Elmore | Jul 1992 | A |
| 5143598 | Graham et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5186820 | Schultz et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
| 5223148 | Tipman et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
| 5236577 | Tipman | Aug 1993 | A |
| 5264118 | Cymerman et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5282984 | Ashrawi | Feb 1994 | A |
| 5298167 | Arnold | Mar 1994 | A |
| 5443046 | White | Aug 1995 | A |
| 5558768 | Ikura et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5645714 | Strand et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5690811 | Davis et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5817398 | Hollander | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5871634 | Wiehe et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5876592 | Tipman et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5879540 | Zinke et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5914010 | Hood et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5937817 | Schanz et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5948241 | Owen | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5954277 | Maciejewski et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5968349 | Duyvesteyn et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5985138 | Humphreys | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5988198 | Neiman et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5997723 | Wiehe et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6004455 | Rendall | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6007708 | Allcock et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6007709 | Duyvesteyn et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6019888 | Mishra et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6036748 | Wallace et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6076753 | Maciejewski et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6110359 | Davis et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6120678 | Stephenson et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6159442 | Thumm et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6214213 | Tipman et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6355159 | Myers et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6358403 | Brown et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6361025 | Cincotta et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6391190 | Spence et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6482250 | Williams et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6497813 | Ackerson et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
| 6523573 | Robison et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
| 6566410 | Zaki et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6746599 | Cymerman et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6800116 | Stevens et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 7152851 | Cincotta | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7237574 | Chipman | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7357857 | Hart et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7569137 | Hyndman | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7690445 | Perez-Cordova | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7749378 | Iqbal et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7820031 | D'Alessandro et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7909989 | Duyvesteyn et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
| 7934549 | Cimolai | May 2011 | B2 |
| 8133316 | Poncelet et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8141636 | Speirs et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8147682 | Lahaie et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8157003 | Hackett et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8197676 | Kan | Jun 2012 | B2 |
| 8252107 | Esmaeili et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 8261831 | Lockhart et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8262865 | Sharma et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8312928 | Lockhart et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
| 8343337 | Moffett et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8354020 | Sharma et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8357291 | Sury et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8382976 | Moran et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
| 8394180 | Diaz et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
| 8449764 | Chakrabarty et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
| 8454821 | Chakrabarty et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8455405 | Chakrabarty | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8550258 | Bara et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8585892 | Lourenco et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
| 8741107 | Kan | Jun 2014 | B2 |
| 20010020649 | Miquel et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
| 20020043579 | Scheybeler | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20030089636 | Marchionna et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20040074845 | Hagino et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040256325 | Frankiewicz | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050150816 | Gaston | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050150844 | Hyndman et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20060065869 | Chipman et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060138055 | Garner et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060196812 | Beetge et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20070125719 | Yarbrough | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070180741 | Bjornson et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070284283 | Duyvesteyn | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080000810 | Garner et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080185350 | Remesat et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080210602 | Duyvesteyn | Sep 2008 | A1 |
| 20090134059 | Myers et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20090200210 | Hommema | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090200688 | Cincotta | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090294328 | Iqbal | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090321322 | Sharma | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20090321324 | Sharma | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20100006474 | Gaston et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100076236 | Van Heuzen et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
| 20100078306 | Alhazmy | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100089800 | MacDonald et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100096297 | Stevens et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100126395 | Gauthier | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100126906 | Sury | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20100133149 | O'Connor et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100147516 | Betzer-Zilevitch | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100155293 | Verstraete et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100155304 | Ding et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100206772 | Keppers | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100243534 | Ng et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100258477 | Kukkonen et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
| 20100258478 | Moran et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
| 20100264068 | Ikebe et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
| 20100276341 | Speirs et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100276983 | Dunn et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100282642 | Kan | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100298173 | Smith et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20100320133 | Page et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20110005750 | Boerseth et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110011769 | Sutton et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110061610 | Speirs et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110062090 | Bara | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110089013 | Sakurai et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110100931 | Lake et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110127197 | Blackbourn et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110146164 | Haney et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110174683 | Cui et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110219680 | Wilkomirsky Fuica | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110233115 | Moran et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110265558 | Feimer et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20110284428 | Adeyinka et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20120000830 | Monaghan et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120000831 | Moran et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
| 20120029259 | McFarlane et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120043178 | Kan | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120074044 | McFarlane | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120074045 | Stauffer et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120145604 | Wen | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120175315 | Revington et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
| 20120217187 | Sharma et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120288419 | Esmaeili et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20130043165 | Revington et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
| 20130081298 | Bugg et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
| 20130140249 | Sury et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
| 20130168294 | Chakrabarty et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130313886 | Van Der Merwe et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
| 20130345485 | Duerr et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140001101 | Van Der Merwe et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140011147 | Van Der Merwe | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140048450 | Van Der Merwe et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140076785 | Penner et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| 20140083911 | Van Der Merwe et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 918091 | Jan 1973 | CA |
| 918588 | Jan 1973 | CA |
| 1027501 | Mar 1978 | CA |
| 1055868 | Jun 1979 | CA |
| 1059052 | Jul 1979 | CA |
| 1072474 | Feb 1980 | CA |
| 1081641 | Jul 1980 | CA |
| 1111782 | Nov 1981 | CA |
| 1165712 | Apr 1984 | CA |
| 1237689 | Jun 1988 | CA |
| 1245990 | Dec 1988 | CA |
| 1247550 | Dec 1988 | CA |
| 1249414 | Jan 1989 | CA |
| 1263331 | Nov 1989 | CA |
| 1267860 | Apr 1990 | CA |
| 1272975 | Aug 1990 | CA |
| 2012305 | Sep 1990 | CA |
| 2029795 | May 1991 | CA |
| 1291957 | Nov 1991 | CA |
| 1293465 | Dec 1991 | CA |
| 2021185 | Jan 1992 | CA |
| 2053016 | May 1992 | CA |
| 2053086 | Apr 1993 | CA |
| 2055213 | May 1993 | CA |
| 2075108 | Jan 1994 | CA |
| 2098656 | Dec 1994 | CA |
| 2123076 | Nov 1995 | CA |
| 2165865 | Jun 1997 | CA |
| 2174801 | Oct 1997 | CA |
| 2188264 | Apr 1998 | CA |
| 2191517 | May 1998 | CA |
| 2200899 | Sep 1998 | CA |
| 2232929 | Sep 1998 | CA |
| 2149737 | Mar 1999 | CA |
| 2217300 | Mar 1999 | CA |
| 2254048 | May 1999 | CA |
| 2195604 | Nov 1999 | CA |
| 2350907 | May 2000 | CA |
| 2272045 | Nov 2000 | CA |
| 2304972 | Oct 2001 | CA |
| 2350001 | Dec 2002 | CA |
| 2353109 | Jan 2003 | CA |
| 2387257 | Nov 2003 | CA |
| 2527058 | Mar 2004 | CA |
| 2425840 | Oct 2004 | CA |
| 2454942 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2455011 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2726122 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2750837 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2750845 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2750934 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2750936 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2750939 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2750995 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2751587 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2751773 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2799354 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2799400 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2799739 | Jul 2005 | CA |
| 2520943 | Apr 2006 | CA |
| 2490734 | Jun 2006 | CA |
| 2502329 | Sep 2006 | CA |
| 2521248 | Mar 2007 | CA |
| 2524110 | Apr 2007 | CA |
| 2526336 | May 2007 | CA |
| 2567185 | Apr 2008 | CA |
| 2610122 | May 2008 | CA |
| 2610124 | May 2008 | CA |
| 2573633 | Jul 2008 | CA |
| 2673961 | Jul 2008 | CA |
| 2582059 | Sep 2008 | CA |
| 2588043 | Nov 2008 | CA |
| 2606312 | Apr 2009 | CA |
| 2610052 | May 2009 | CA |
| 2616036 | Jun 2009 | CA |
| 2654611 | Aug 2009 | CA |
| 2630392 | Nov 2009 | CA |
| 2669059 | Dec 2009 | CA |
| 2638120 | Jan 2010 | CA |
| 2673981 | Jan 2010 | CA |
| 2673982 | Jan 2010 | CA |
| 2641294 | Apr 2010 | CA |
| 2655852 | Apr 2010 | CA |
| 2683374 | Apr 2010 | CA |
| 2643893 | May 2010 | CA |
| 2647855 | Jul 2010 | CA |
| 2649928 | Jul 2010 | CA |
| 2652355 | Aug 2010 | CA |
| 2653032 | Aug 2010 | CA |
| 2653058 | Aug 2010 | CA |
| 2689684 | Aug 2010 | CA |
| 2657360 | Sep 2010 | CA |
| 2657801 | Oct 2010 | CA |
| 2661579 | Oct 2010 | CA |
| 2711136 | Oct 2010 | CA |
| 2666025 | Nov 2010 | CA |
| 2708416 | Dec 2010 | CA |
| 2674246 | Jan 2011 | CA |
| 2708048 | Jan 2011 | CA |
| 2678818 | Mar 2011 | CA |
| 2701317 | Mar 2011 | CA |
| 2717406 | Apr 2011 | CA |
| 2729457 | Jul 2011 | CA |
| 2733862 | Jul 2011 | CA |
| 2705055 | Nov 2011 | CA |
| 2768852 | Nov 2011 | CA |
| 2748477 | Mar 2012 | CA |
| 2752558 | Mar 2012 | CA |
| 2730467 | Aug 2012 | CA |
| 2735311 | Sep 2012 | CA |
| 2737410 | Oct 2012 | CA |
| 2740935 | Nov 2012 | CA |
| 1187300 | Jul 1998 | CN |
| 0059106 | Sep 1982 | EP |
| 587798 | May 1947 | GB |
| 2044796 | Oct 1980 | GB |
| 2145730 | Apr 1985 | GB |
| S56150407 | Nov 1981 | JP |
| S57200402 | Dec 1982 | JP |
| S6285415 | May 1987 | JP |
| 2065455 | Aug 1996 | RU |
| 2078095 | Apr 1997 | RU |
| 2096438 | Nov 1997 | RU |
| 2007102819 | Sep 2007 | WO |
| 2009111871 | Sep 2009 | WO |
| 2010088388 | Aug 2010 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| A John Brooks Website, Spraying pumping filtering, Automated Retractable Nozzle System, FluidHandlingSolutions.com. |
| Schaschke, Carl. (2014). Dictionary of Chemical Engineering. Oxford University Press. p. 67. Online version available at: http://app.knovel.com/hotlink/toc/id:kpDCE00021/dictionary-chemical-engineering/dictionary-chemical-engineering. |
| Ashgriz, Nasser (Editor), “Handbook of Atomization and Sprays”, 2011, Springer, p. 246-250. |
| “Saturated and Subcooled Liquids” Engineers Edge, LLC, www.engineersedge.com, available online at: https://www.engineersedge.com/thermodynamics/saturated_subcooled_liquids.htnn. |
| International Search Report in corresponding PCT/CA2012/050213 dated May 14, 2012. |
| Written Opinion in corresponding PCT/CA2012/050213 dated May 14, 2012. |
| Andrews et al. “Great Canadian Oil Sands Experience in Commercial Processing of Athabasca Tar Sands” American Chemical Society San Francisco Meeting Apr. 2-5, 1968, p. F5-F18. |
| Mitchell et al. “The solubility of asphaltenes in hydrocarbon solvents” Fuel, 1973, N. 02, vol. 52, p. 149-152. |
| Kemp, “Pinch Analysis and Process Integration, A User Guide on Process Integration for the Efficient Use of Energy”, Second edition, Elsevier 2007. |
| Svreck et al “Successfully Specify Three-Phase Separators” Chemical Engineering Progress, Sep. 1994, p. 29-40. |
| Svreck et al. “Design Two-Phase Separators within the Right Limits” Chemical Engineering Progress, Oct. 1993, p. 53-60. |
| Fu et al.“New technique for determination of diffusivities of volatile hydrocarbons in semi-solid bitumen”, Fuel, 1979, vol. 58, August, pp. 557-560. |
| Kamoun et al.“High Speed Shadowgraphy Investigations of Superheated Liquid Jet Atomization”, ILASS—Americas 22nd Annual Conference on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems, Cincinnati Ohio, May 2010. |
| Duan et al.'s “Numerical Analyses of Flashing Jet Structure and Droplet Size Characteristics” Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 2006, vol. 43, No. 3, p. 285-294. |
| Sou et al., “Effects of Cavitation in a Nozzle on liquid Jet atomization” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer; vol. 50, p. 3575-3582, 2007. |
| Ransom et al., “The relaps choke flow model and application to a large scale flow test”, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Heat Transfer Division, 1980, Saratoga, New York. |
| Power,“Froth Treatment: Past, Present &Future” Oil Sand Symposium, University of Alberta, May 3-5, 2004. |
| Rahmani, “Shear-Induced Growth of Asphaltene Aggregates” Oil Sand Symposium, University of Alberta, May 4, 2004. |
| Paul et al. “Handbook of Industrial Mixing: Science and Practice” Wiley Interscience 2004, p. 391-477. |
| Blevins “Applied fluid dynamics handbook”, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company 1984, p. 80-83. |
| Wu et al., “Experimental study on steam plume and temperature distribution for sonic jet” J. Phys.: Conf.Ser. 147 2009, 012079. |
| Yeon et al., “An Experimental Investigation of Direct Condensation of Steam Jet in Subcooled Water” Journal of Korean Nuclear Society vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 45-57, Feb. 1997 E. |
| Long et al., “Structure of water/solids/asphaltenes aggregates and effect of mixing temperature on settling rate in solvent-diluted bitumen” Fuel 2004, vol. 83, p. 823-832. |
| Rahimi et al., “Partial Upgrading of Athabasca Bitumen Froth by Asphaltene Removal”, Unitar International Conference on Heavy Crude and Tar Sands, No. 1998.074, p. 1-8. |
| Hoehenberger, “Water Treatment, Cycle Chemistry, Boiler Operation and Related Problems/Failures on Steam Generator Systems > 30 bar”, TÜV SÜD Industry Services, 2006, p. 1-14. |
| Schroyer, “Understand the Basics of Steam Injection Heating”, Chemical Engineering Progress, Hydro-Thermal Corporation, May 1997, p. 1-4. |
| Prosonix, “Psx Steam Jet Diffuser . . . Technology That Makes a Difference”, PSX Jet Diffuser Feb. 9, 2011. |
| Prosonix, “ProSonix Technical Bulletin”, TB-4 Liquid & Steam Pressure Relationship. |
| Prosonix, “PSX Technical Bulletin”, TB-7 Internally Modulated Steam Control 0210. |
| Prosonix, “Sparging Efficiency vs. Direct Steam Injection”, TB-6 Sparging Efficiency & Performance Dec. 10, 2010. |
| Siemens, “Pictures of the Future”, Spring 2006, Power Plants—Siemens Global Website, http://www.siemens.com/innovation/en/publikationen/publications_pof/pof_spring_2006/infrastructures_articles/power_plants.htm. |
| George, “Mining for Oil”, Scientific American, Mar. 1998, p. 84-85. |
| Speight, “Deasphalting and Dewaxing Processes”, The Chemistry and Technology of Petroleum, Fourth Edition, Chapter 19, CRC Press 2006. |
| Jeribi et al., “Adsorption Kinetics of Asphaltenes at Liquid Interfaces”, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, vol. 256, Issue 2, Dec. 15, 2002, pp. 268-272. |
| Branan, “Pocket Guide to Chemical Engineering” Elsevier Science & Technology Books, Nov. 1999. |
| Perry, “Perry's Chemical Engineers' Handbook” (7th Ed.), 1997. |
| Clarke et al., “Asphaltenes precipitation from Cold Lake and Athabasca bitumens”, Petroleum Science and Technology, 1998, 16:3-4, p. 287-305. |
| Al-Atar, “Effect of Oil Compatibility and Resins/Asphaltenes Ratio on Heat Exchanger Fouling of Mixtures Containing Heavy Oil”, Master Degree Thesis report, The University of British Columbia, Feb. 2000. |
| Gearhart, “ROSE® process offers energy savings for solvent extraction”, Proceedings from the Fifth Industrial Energy Technology Conference vol. II, Houston, TX, Apr. 17-20, 1983, p. 823-835. |
| Clarke et al., “Asphaltene precipitation: detection using heat transfer analysis, and inhibition using chemical additives” Fuel, vol. 76, Issue 7, May 1997, p. 607-614. |
| Shell Canada Limited, Application for Approval of the Jackpine Mine-Phase 1, ERCB application No. 1271285, May 2002. |
| Imperial Oil Ressources Ventures Limited, Application for the Imperial Oil Resources Ventures Limited (Imperial Oil) and ExxonMobil Canada Properties (ExxonMobil Canada) Kearl Oil Sands Project—Mine Development (Kearl Project), ERCB Application No. 1408771, Jul. 12, 2005. |
| Shell Canada Limited, Application for the Approval of Muskeg River Mine Project, ERCB Application No. 970588, Dec. 19, 1997. |
| Beckman Coulter, Particle Size and Size Distribution Analysis, Coulter Counter.com, pp. 1-3. |
| Outokumpu Technology, Slurry particle size analyzer, PSI 200 TM, 2006, pp. 1-8. |
| Johnson, Particle size distribution in clays, Clays and Clay Minerals, pp. 89-91. |
| Buckley et al., Solubility of the Least-Soluble Asphaltenes, Asphaltenes, Heavy Oils, and Petroleomics, Springer, 2007, Chapter 16, pp. 401-437. |
| Gerson et al., The Relation of Surfactant Properties to the Extraction of Bitumen from Athabasca Tar Sand by a Solvent-Aqueous-Surfactant Process, Chemistry for Energy, American Chemical Society, 1979, Chapter 6, pp. 66-79. |
| Nour et al., Characterization and Demulsification of Water-in-crude Oil Emulsions, Journal of Applied Sciences, vol. 7, issue 10, 2007, pp. 1437-1441. |
| Malcolmson et al., In-Line Particle Size Measurements for Cement and Other Abrasive Process Environments, for Presentation at the IEEE/PCA 40th Cement Industry Technical Conference, 1998, pp. 1-13. |
| Bui et al., “Modelling of Viscous Resuspension Using a One-Field Description of Multiphase Flows”, Third International Conference on CFD in the Minerals and Process Industries, 2003 pp. 265-268. |
| Dispersion Technology, Inc., “Model DT-1201 . . . Acoustic and electro-acoustic spectrometer”, Particle size and zeta potential measurement. |
| Csiro Minerals, UltraPS—Ultrasonic Particle Size Analyser, www.minerals.csiro.au. |
| Wedd, “Determination of Particle Size Distributions Using Laser Diffraction”, Educ.Reso. for Part. Techn. 032Q-Wedd, pp. 1-4. |
| Rahmani et al., “Settling Properties of of Asphaltene Aggregates”, Abstract, Energy Fuels, 2005, 19 (3), pp. 1099-1108. |
| Rahmani et al., “Fractal structure of asphaltene aggregates”, Abstract, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, vol. 285, Issue 2, May 15, 2005, pp. 599-608. |
| Liang et al., “Experimental and Analytical Study of Direct Contact Condensation of Steam in Water” Nucl. Eng. Des., 147, Issue 3, Apr. 1994, pp. 425-435. |
| Peramanu et al., “Flow loop apparatus to study the effect of solvent, temperature and additives on asphaltene precipitation” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, vol. 23, Issue 2, Aug. 1999, pp. 133-143. |
| Fisher et al. “Emergency Relief System Design Using DIERS Technology”, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1992. |
| Choked Flow in Control Valves in Liquid Applications, Engineered Software, Inc., from http://kb.eng-software.com/display/ESKB/Choked+Flow+in+Control+Valves+in+Liquid+Applications (2017). |
| Fluid Flow Basics of Throttling Valves, Cashco, from http://www.controlglobal.com/assets/Media/MediaManager/RefBook_Cashco_Fluid.pdf (1999). |
| Karami, et al. “Effect of Flashing on Choking,” Handbook of Atomization and Sprays, Theory and Applications, pp. 246-250 (2011). |
| Leung, et al. “A Generalized Correlation for Flashing Choked Flow of Initially Subcooled Liquid,” AIChE Journal, 34(4):688-691 (1988). |
| Liquid Flow in Control Valves—Choked flow, Cavitation and Flashing, from http://www.valln.com/resources/blog/liquid-flow-control-valves-choked-flow-cavitation-and-flashing (2017). |
| Simpson, “Navigating the Two-Phase Maze,” Proceedings of the International Symposium on Runaway Reactions and Pressure Relief Design, Boston, MA, Aug. 2-4, AIChE/DIERS, New York, pp. 394-417 (1995). |
| Tran, “Applications of Three-Phase Flashing Flow in Design and Study Alumina Digestion Flash Trains,” Proceedings of the 7th International Alumina Quality Workshop, 26-31 (2005). |
| William L. Luyben, “Heat-Exchanger Bypass Control”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2011, 50, 965-973. |
| Dutta-B, “Principles of Mass Transfer and Separation Processes”, p. 344, 2009. |
| Imran Ali, “Process Heating by Direct Steam Injection”, Pharmaceutical Guide; Dec. 2010. |
| Choung, J. et al., “Effect of Temperature on the Stability of Froth Formed in the Recycle Process Water of Oil Sands Extraction”, The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, vol. 82, Aug. 2004, pp. 801-806. |
| Wiwchar, K. et al., “col. flotation in an oilsand application”, Proceedings 36th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mineral Processors, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, Jan. 20-22, 2004. |
| Cleyle, P. et al., “col. Flotation Testing at Suncor Energy Inc.”, Oilsand 2006 Conference, CD, University of Alberta, Feb. 22-24, 2006. |
| Finch, J. et al. “Column Flotation”, 1st ed. Pergamon Press, 1990, pp. 1-7, 75-79, 82-89, 148-149, 152-159. |
| Baczek, “Paste Thickening Design Evolving to Higher Capacities and Efficiencies”, International Minimizing Supplement to Paste Tailing Management, Mar. 2007. 16 pages. |
| Versteeg et al., “An Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics: the Finite Volume Method”, 2nd Edition, Pearson Prentice Hall, First published 1995 and 2nd Edition published 2007, pp. 9, 33-77, 88-97, 78-87, 98-114, 115, 131-133, 156-164, 186-196, 256-264. |
| Ferziger et al., “Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics”, 3rd Edition, Springer, 2002, pp. 142-151, 188-206, 226-245, 265-307, 324-328. |
| Hobbs, D.M., “Optimization of a static mixer using dynamical systems techniques”, published 1998, Elsevier Science, Chemical Engineering, vol. 53, No. 18, pp. 3199-3213. |
| Godard, et al., “A Review of Suncor Energy's Millennium Extraction Process”, Proceedings 36th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mineral Processors, pp. 141-152 (2004). |
| Mankowski et al., “Syncrude's Low Energy Extraction Process: Commercial Implementation”, Proceedings 31st Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mineral Processors, pp. 154-181 (1999). |
| “Choked Flow of Gases”, O'Keefe Controls Co., pp. 38, 16-18 (2000). |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20140048408 A1 | Feb 2014 | US |
