Patent Grant
9852389
The field of the invention is multiple drum coking systems.
The following background discussion includes information that may be useful in understanding the present invention. It is not an admission that any of the information provided herein is prior art or relevant to the presently claimed invention, or that any publication specifically or implicitly referenced is prior art.
Delayed coking is a well known thermal cracking process used in various refineries that converts a residual feed into solid carbonaceous material (e.g., petroleum coke). The use of multiple drums in coking systems allows the coke drums to operate continuously. Generally, while one drum in a multiple drum system is being filled with a feed stream, another is being stripped, cooled, decoked, pressure checked, or warmed up (See e.g., http://www.coking.com/DECOKTUT.pdf and http://www.coking.com/SeminarUSA/Presentati onPDFs2012/FLUOR_BMilletKirkpatrick_FreshLookAt3DrumCokers_CokingCom_Galv_2012.pdf.).
Coking systems can sometimes be modified by adding a coke drum, replacing a coke drum, or shortening or expanding cycle times (e.g., step cycle (e.g., warm up time, drain time, etc.), drum cycle, system cycle, etc.). As used herein, a “step cycle” or “step cycle time” is the amount of time it takes one drum to complete a step (e.g., warm up, stripping, filling, etc.) in the delayed coking process. A “drum cycle time” or “drum cycle” is the amount of time it takes a single drum to complete all steps in the delayed coking process, from warming up to decoking. A “system cycle” or “system cycle time” is the amount of time it takes for all drums in the delayed coking process to complete a drum cycle. Each of the cycles can be altered (e.g., shortened or expanded). Some examples of modifying coking systems are described in “Fine-tune your delayed coker: obstacles and objectives” by J. D. Elliot (September 2004), found at http://www.fwc.com/publications/tech_papers/files/Fine%20tune%20your%20delayed%20coker.pdf.
While the above cited reference describes some possible modifications to existing coking systems, and some considerations in implementing a modification, it fails to provide either a system for analyzing effects of potential or actual modifications, or operating recommendations based on the analysis. Thus, there is still, a need for improved systems for analyzing an effect of modifying a coking system, and providing recommendations.
The inventive subject matter provides apparatus, systems and methods in which an existing coking system can be improved by estimating an altered life span of an existing drum, and analyzing an effect of modifying the coking system (e.g., adding a drum, modifying an operating parameter, etc.) on the altered life span. Such systems and methods can have many salutary effects, including for example helping to assure that loss of one coke drum (e.g., for repairs, replacement, or even maintenance) will not affect the productivity of remaining coke drums of a system, reducing the likelihood of avoidable repairs and replacement, or increasing the cost effectiveness of coking systems.
As used herein, a “design life span” is an amount of time a drum can operate without repair or replacement under standard operating conditions. An “altered life span” is a life span of a drum as altered from a design life span due to one or more causes. For example, a drum designed to last 20 years under standard operating conditions and parameters without repair or replacement has a design life of 20 years. Where a cycle time (e.g., a step cycle time, a drum cycle time, or a system cycle time) is reduced, the drum would have an altered life span of less than 20 years (e.g., 10 years) absent additional changes. Where a more gradual quench rate is implemented, an altered life span would be greater than 20 years (e.g., 25 years) absent additional changes.
As shown above, it is contemplated that altered life spans can be shorter or longer than a design life span. The cause of deviation from the design life span could be a damage or an improvement caused by a shortened life cycle, operation under damaging conditions, operation under improved conditions (i.e., better than standard operating conditions), an accident, a quench rate, a warm-up rate, or any other deviation from standard operating conditions.
The term “a standard operating condition or parameter” is used very broadly and could include, for example, a predetermined temperature or range thereof, a predetermined operating parameter (e.g., a step cycle time, etc.), a grade or type of feed used, a grade or type of coke produced, or any other predetermined condition or parameter that forms a basis for determining a design life span.
In some aspects of the inventive subject matter, a coking system transmits coke drum data to an analysis engine that analyzes an effect of adding a coke drum to the existing system. The engine can then transmit a recommendation, question, or other result to a user device.
Coke drum data can comprise raw data received by a device of the existing coking system, an estimated altered life span of a drum based at least in part on the raw data, or an estimated time to failure of a drum based at least in part on the raw data. Raw data can comprise any data related to a coke drum received by a sensor. This includes for example, damage (e.g., bulging, cracking, thinning, problematic temperature gradient), a temperature, a pressure, a stress, or any other data related to a coke drum.
An estimation of an altered life span or time to failure can made at any time during a drum life cycle (e.g., prior to operation of the drum, during standard operations, after a detection of a damage, after a change in step cycle time or procedure, etc.), and can be estimated by a sensor, a module communicatively coupled with the sensor, an operator, or an analysis engine.
The estimation of an altered life span can be determined, extracted, or otherwise obtained by a person or a computer program (e.g., an analysis engine, etc.). For example, an analysis engine can receive raw coke drum data and analyze, calculate, or estimate an altered life span locally, or receive raw coke drum data and transmit it to an exterior module that calculates and returns an estimation or analysis. Alternatively, or additionally, the existing coking system can analyze, calculate, or estimate the altered life span locally (e.g., via a module coupled with a sensor of a coke drum) and transmit an estimation to the analysis engine.
This estimation could be used in analyzing a potential effect(s) of adding an additional coke drum to the coking system, changing an operating condition or parameter, or making any other change to the existing system. The analysis preferably concerns the effect of such change on a life span of at least one drum. For example, it is contemplated that information (e.g., temperature reading, stress, strain, etc.) can be gathered for a short period of time (e.g., 1, 2, or even 3 or more weeks), an estimation of an altered life span can be determined, extracted, or otherwise obtained, and operating procedures can be formulated to maximize the life of one or more coke drums in a system based at least in part on the gathered information or estimation. Alternatively or additionally, information can be gathered on an ongoing or periodic basis (e.g., for months, years, etc.), estimation of an altered life span can be determined, extracted, or otherwise obtained, and operating procedures can be formulated or modified based at least in part on the estimation or information gathered.
Based at least in part on this analysis, a recommendation or question related to the coking system can be provided. Examples of recommendations include for example, a modification to an operating parameter, or an addition of a coke drum.
Various objects, features, aspects and advantages of the inventive subject matter will become more apparent from the following detailed description of preferred embodiments, along with the accompanying drawing figures in which like numerals represent like components.
The following discussion provides many example embodiments of the inventive subject matter. Although each embodiment represents a single combination of inventive elements, the inventive subject matter is considered to include all possible combinations of the disclosed elements. Thus if one embodiment comprises elements A, B, and C, and a second embodiment comprises elements B and D, then the inventive subject matter is also considered to include other remaining combinations of A, B, C, or D, even if not explicitly disclosed.
It should be noted that any language directed to a computer should be read to include any suitable combination of computing devices, including servers, interfaces, systems, databases, agents, peers, engines, controllers, or other types of computing devices operating individually or collectively. One should appreciate the computing devices comprise a processor configured to execute software instructions stored on a tangible, non-transitory computer readable storage medium (e.g., hard drive, solid state drive, RAM, flash, ROM, etc.). The software instructions preferably configure the computing device to provide the roles, responsibilities, or other functionality as discussed below with respect to the disclosed apparatus. In especially preferred embodiments, the various servers, systems, databases, or interfaces exchange data using standardized protocols or algorithms, possibly based on HTTP, HTTPS, AES, public-private key exchanges, web service APIs, known financial transaction protocols, or other electronic information exchanging methods. Data exchanges preferably are conducted over a packet-switched network, the Internet, LAN, WAN, VPN, or other type of packet switched network.
An “existing coking system” can refer to any of (1) fully operational coking systems, (2) coking systems where necessary piping, valves and coke drums are coupled to one another but not yet in operation, (3) planned coking systems that have not been assembled, or (4) a coking system where some components (e.g., drums) are in operation, and some are not.
In coking system 100, each drum requires a vapor (e.g., a vapor stream, etc.) of at least one different drum in order to warm up to a threshold temperature so that it can properly be filled with a feed stream.
Second drum 102 and third drum 103 each have a design life of five years and have been operating under standard operating conditions for three years. As such, each drum has two years remaining if operated under standard conditions. First drum 101, recently installed, has a five year design life with all five years remaining if operated under standard conditions. However, due to first drum 101's reliance on a vapor from at least one of the second drum 102 and third drum 103, first drum 101 has an altered life span of two years.
The addition of drum 121 could increase an altered life span of at least first drum 101 to five years (if drum 101 is configured to receive a vapor of 121), assuming no other changes to operating conditions or parameters are made.
It is also contemplated that the addition of a drum to an existing coking system can shorten an altered life span of a coke drum. For example, first drum 101, second drum 102, and third drum 103, could each be operated with an on-line filling cycle time of 6 hours, and an off-line decoking time of 12 hours. Thus, while a first drum 101 is off-line (e.g., being decoked), the two remaining drums can be filled. Once the first drum has been completely decoked, the two remaining drums will be filled and the first drum can begin a new drum cycle. Adding drum 121 to this system could require that the existing step cycles (e.g., shortened quench cycle) of a drum (e.g., first drum 101) are shortened so that each drum operates continuously. The shortened cycle could strain or otherwise damage first drum 101, and thereby reduce an estimated altered life span.
The life span of a drum can be altered many times during the drum's life. Each change to a coking system's operating condition or parameter can potentially alter the life span of a drum significantly. This altering can be a doubling, tripling, quintupling, halving, or any other suitable altering in life span.
Unless the context dictates the contrary, all ranges set forth herein should be interpreted as being inclusive of their endpoints, and open-ended ranges should be interpreted to include commercially practical values. Similarly, all lists of values should be considered as inclusive of intermediate values unless the context indicates the contrary.
Coking system 201 comprises first drum 210 coupled to a sensor 212 and altered life span estimation module 213, second drum 211 having a sensor 214 and module 215, and an operator 216. It is contemplated that sensors 212 and 214 can either compose, or be coupled to coke drums 210 and 211 on a temporary basis (e.g., removable, etc.). For example, a sensor could be coupled with a coke drum and configured to obtain coke drum data (e.g., temperature, stress, strain, etc.) for a temporary period of time. Alternatively, a sensor could be attached to a coke drum and configured to obtain information periodically or continuously for longer periods of times.
Sensors 212 and 214 are configured to receive raw data related to at least one of the coke drums of system 201. This raw data can be directly sent from a sensor to analysis engine 220, or be used by an altered life span estimation module 213 or 215, or operator 216. An altered life span estimation module can comprise software that uses the raw coke drum data to estimate a change in life span relative to a design life span. This can be achieved using a database of standard operating parameters, modified operating parameters, and corresponding altered life spans. Alternatively or additionally, operator 216 can use the raw coke drum data to estimate a change in life span using any suitable method.
Coke drum data 240 comprising raw coke drum data or altered life span data is sent to analysis engine 220, which comprises coke drum data receiving module 221, altered life span analysis module 222, and result generating module 223. If raw coke drum data is received by module 221, analysis engine 220 can calculate or otherwise receive an estimated altered life span via software that uses the raw coke drum data to estimate a change in life span relative to a design life span.
An estimated life span of a coke drum can be significantly altered by the addition of a coke drum to a system. This altering can be beneficial or detrimental to a coke drum or system. The factors that can contribute to altering a life span include, but are not limited to, a damage (e.g., a bulge, a crack, a thinning in a drum wall, a problematic temperature gradient of a portion of a drum wall, etc.), a change in operating parameter, a change in operating conditions, and an altered life span of another coke drum within the system. Any and all available devices for and methods of detecting or measuring a damage is contemplated.
Inherent in a step of “estimating an altered life span” can be estimating a time to failure. Since an altered life span is relative to a known or estimated design life span, the time to failure can also be estimated. For example, where a drum having a design life span is 10 years and an altered life span is 25 years has been in operation for 2 years, the time to failure would be 23 years.
Coke drum data receiving module 221 can send coke drum data to altered life span analysis module 222. Altered life span analysis module 222 can be located locally in analysis engine 220, or distal to and communicatively coupled with analysis engine 220. Altered life span analysis module 222 can be configured to analyze or estimate an effect on an already altered life span based on an addition of a coke drum, a change in operating parameter, or any other change to an existing coking system 201. Similarly to altered life span estimation modules 213 and 215, altered life span analysis module can calculate or estimate an effect of adding a coke drum or modifying an operating parameter using a database storing, among other things, drum data, design life span data, safety data, use data, data related to a type of feed used, an operating parameter (e.g., cycle time reduction), or life span data corresponding to a change in an operating parameter or condition.
Result generating module 223 can use the analysis provided by altered life span analysis module 222 to generate a result item, such as a recommendation or a question. Some examples of result items include a recommendation to add a coke drum in 6 months, a question asking the user which coke drums are directly coupled with one another, a recommendation to alter a processing parameter to reduce a problematic temperature gradient in a skirt attachment, pressure boundary or supporting element during a quenching step, a recommendation to repair a damage, or a recommendation that a quench rate or cycle be reduced.
Once the result generating module 223 has generated a result item, analysis engine 220 transmits the result item data to first user device 230. Contemplated user devices include computers, tablets, speakers, cellular phones, smart phones, or any other suitable device configured to provide an interface to a user.
Where a result item comprises a question, it is contemplated that a user can input text, image, or sound data (e.g., an answer) to a user device communicatively coupled to an analysis engine. This input data can be used by the analysis engine to receive a result item, which can then be transmitted to a user device.
As used herein, the term “receive” is used very broadly to include for example, obtaining data from another source, or extracting or calculating the data locally.
If the addition of one or more coke drums is recommended or beneficial, it is contemplated that a computer can be configured to produce a physically perceivable rendering of the addition, a schedule for procuring components of the additional coke drum, or a schedule for producing equipment that can be used to install the additional coke drum. The coke drum(s) can be installed in accordance with various coupling plans. Thus, the additional coke drum could be coupled to one, two, or even five or more drums, valves, or piping sub-systems.
As used in the description herein and throughout the claims that follow, the meaning of “a,” “an,” and “the” includes plural reference unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Also, as used in the description herein, the meaning of “in” includes “in” and “on” unless the context clearly dictates otherwise.
As used herein, and unless the context dictates otherwise, the term “coupled to” is intended to include both direct coupling (in which two elements that are coupled to each other contact each other) and indirect coupling (in which at least one additional element is located between the two elements). Therefore, the terms “coupled to” and “coupled with” are used synonymously.
Groupings of alternative elements or embodiments of the invention disclosed herein are not to be construed as limitations. Each group member can be referred to and claimed individually or in any combination with other members of the group or other elements found herein. One or more members of a group can be included in, or deleted from, a group for reasons of convenience and/or patentability. When any such inclusion or deletion occurs, the specification is herein deemed to contain the group as modified thus fulfilling the written description of all Markush groups used in the appended claims.
It should be apparent to those skilled in the art that many more modifications besides those already described are possible without departing from the inventive concepts herein. The inventive subject matter, therefore, is not to be restricted except in the scope of the appended claims. Moreover, in interpreting both the specification and the claims, all terms should be interpreted in the broadest possible manner consistent with the context. In particular, the terms “comprises” and “comprising” should be interpreted as referring to elements, components, or steps in a non-exclusive manner, indicating that the referenced elements, components, or steps may be present, or utilized, or combined with other elements, components, or steps that are not expressly referenced. Where the specification claims refers to at least one of something selected from the group consisting of A, B, C . . . and N, the text should be interpreted as requiring only one element from the group, not A plus N, or B plus N, etc.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/666,834 filed on Nov. 1, 2012, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/666,753 filed on Nov. 1, 2012, both of which are incorporated by reference herein in their entireties. All other extrinsic materials discussed herein are incorporated by reference in their entirety. Where a definition or use of a term in an incorporated reference is inconsistent or contrary to the definition of that term provided herein, the definition of that term provided herein applies and the definition of that term in the reference does not apply.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3248321 | Fagan, Jr. | Apr 1966 | A |
| 3344057 | Patrick | Sep 1967 | A |
| 3472761 | Cameron | Oct 1969 | A |
| 3745110 | Allred | Jul 1973 | A |
| 3956101 | Hara et al. | May 1976 | A |
| 4634500 | Elliott et al. | Jan 1987 | A |
| 4853106 | Grove et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
| 4929339 | Elliott, Jr. et al. | May 1990 | A |
| 5024730 | Colvert | Jun 1991 | A |
| 5522428 | Duvall | Jun 1996 | A |
| 5795445 | Boswell et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5827403 | Boswell | Oct 1998 | A |
| 6209390 | LaRue | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6264797 | Schroeder et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6301970 | Biggs | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6343251 | Herron | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6435018 | Murakami et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6490543 | Jaw | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6542853 | Murakami | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6546294 | Kelsey et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6763312 | Judd | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6764592 | Ganji | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6871160 | Jaw | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6907384 | Adachi et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
| 6944572 | Ushiku | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 7143007 | Long et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7206719 | Lindsay et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7328128 | Bonanni et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7457785 | Greitzer | Nov 2008 | B1 |
| 7752144 | Myers, Jr. et al. | Jul 2010 | B1 |
| 7813906 | Shiromaru | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 8255171 | Balestra | Aug 2012 | B2 |
| 9235820 | Antalffy | Jan 2016 | B2 |
| 20020179493 | Etter | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20060032788 | Etter | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060052882 | Kubach et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060122812 | Tinseth | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20080147571 | Greiner et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20090007690 | Hesse | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090127090 | Ganji | May 2009 | A1 |
| 20100153080 | Khan | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100318246 | Bieker | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20130003071 | Mamidipudi et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20140116871 | Antalffy | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140122141 | Antalffy | May 2014 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 1115375 | Jul 2003 | CN |
| 0155163 | Sep 1985 | EP |
| 2014070189 | May 2014 | WO |
| 2015016804 | Feb 2015 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Clark, Rick D. et al., “Coke Drum Life Improvement—A Combined Approach”, CIA Inspection Inc., AIChE 2002, Mar. 10-14, 2002. |
| Elliot, J.D., “Fine-tune your delayed coker: obstacles and objectives”, Hydrocarbon Processing, Sep. 2004, pp. 83-90. |
| Ellis, P.J. et al., Tutorial: Delayed Coking Fundamentals, Great Lakes Carbon Corporation, Port Arthur, TX, presented at AIChE 1998 Spring National Meeting, New Orleans, LA, Mar. 8-12, 1998. |
| Kirkpatrick, Kenneth et al., “A Fresh Look at 3 Drum Cokers”, Fluor, Coking Safety and Reliability Seminar, Moody Gardens, Galveston, TX May 1-4, 2012. |
| OSHA publication, Hazards of Delayed Coker Unit (DCU) Operations, Aug. 2003, pp. 1-8. |
| Sikos, Lazlo et al. “Reliability, availability and maintenance optimisation of heat exchanger networks”, Applied Thermal Engineering, Feb. 2009. |
| Boswell, Richard et al., “Remaining Life Evaluations for Coke Drums” Stress Engineering Services Inc., Apr. 26, 2001. |
| Clark, Rick D. et al., “Coke Drum Life Improvement- A Combined Approach”, CIA Inspection Inc., AIChE 2002, Mar. 10-14, 2002. |
| “Coke Drum Remaining Life—Problem of the Month” Coke Drum Life Barringer1.com, Mar. 1997. |
| Boswell, Richard S. et al., “Remaining Life Evaulations of Coke Drums”, Energy Engineering Conference, Jan. 29, 1997. |
| Mulraney, Don et al., “Coker design achieves cycle times, throughput needs at Kansas refinery”, Oil and Gas Journal, Aug. 3, 2009. |
| Stewart, Colby et al., “Coke Drum Design”. PTQ, Third Quarter, 2006. |
| Pieper, Charles J. et al., “Coke Drum Design-Longer Life Through Innovation”, AIChE 2000, Mar. 5-9, 2000. |
| Ruparel, Shivangi et al., Fitness for service evaluation of bulging in delayed Coke drums, Institute of Technology, Nirma University, Dec. 2011. |
| Allevato, Claudio et al., “Assessing the structural integrity and remaining life of Coke Drums with Acoustic Emissions Testing, Strain Gaging, and Finite Element Analysis”, ETCE'99 Symposium on Plant and Facilities Reliability and Mechanical Integrity, 1999. |
| Barringer, Paul H., “A Life Cycle Cost Summary”, International Conference of Maintenance Societies, ICOMS 2003, May 20-23, 2003. |
| Greitzer, Frank L. et al., “Predicting Remaining Life of Mechanical Systems” Intelligent Ship Symposium IV, Apr. 2-3, 2001. |
| International Application No. PCT/US2012/063076, International Search Report, dated Nov. 13, 2014, 3 pages. |
| International Application No. PCT/US2012/063076, Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, dated Nov. 13, 2014, 5 pages. |
| International Application No. PCT/US2012/063076, International Preliminary Report on Patentability, dated May 7, 2015, 9 pages. |
| International Application No. PCT/US2012/063093, International Search Report, dated Apr. 29, 2013, 3 pages. |
| International Application No. PCT/US2012/063093, Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, dated Apr. 29, 2013, 4 pages. |
| International Application No. PCT/US2012/063093, International Preliminary Report on Patentability, dated May 5, 2015, 5 pages. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/666,834, Office Action, dated Sep. 10, 2014, 19 pages. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/666,834, Final Office Action, dated Feb. 26, 2015, 14 pages. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/666,834, Advisory Action, dated May 4, 2015, 3 pages. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/666,834, Office Action, dated Jun. 22, 2015, 13 pages. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/666,834, Notice of Allowance, dated Sep. 10, 2015, 9 pages. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/666,753, Office Action, dated Aug. 13, 2015, 11 pages. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 13/666,753, Final Office Action, dated Feb. 26, 2016, 12 pages. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20160125340 A1 | May 2016 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 13666834 | Nov 2012 | US |
| Child | 14992882 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 13666753 | Nov 2012 | US |
| Child | 13666834 | US |
