Single component study using PVT simulator

Anonymous
timer Asked: Feb 6th, 2019
account_balance_wallet $9.99

Question Description

I uploaded a finished lab report and pictures of tables with my numbers, follow the same format in the lab report and use the numbers that i provided. also, don't use the same words in the lab report. just use it to help you get the idea and understand how to do it.

thank you.

Single component study using PVT simulator
k_.jpg
Single component study using PVT simulator
k.jpg
Single component study using PVT simulator
m.jpg

Unformatted Attachment Preview

West Virginia University LAB 1 SINGLE COMPONENT STUDY USING PVT SIMULATOR Class No. W01 G1, G8, G12, G13 Cover letter: First of all, the goal of the experiment was about measuring the pressure and the volume due to the effect of the temperature for CO2, this single component is defined as a pure component. So, using PVT simulator we were able to use PREOS (PENGROBINSON) equation in order to calculate phase behaviour (book). The pressure could be read when only the valve is open. In this experiment, the students were asked to find the relationship between the volume and the pressure by injecting or withdrawing mercury. The students learnt that the bubble point appears when the volume of CO2 in the gas phase is 0.002cc, and the dew point (book) appears when the volume of CO2 in the liquid phase is 0.002 (book). each student was asked to find the dew and bubble point for the same component in four different temperatures to illustrate how the temperature effects these points. The experiment was done four times so it took about 3 hours to collect data in an excel sheet. Mercury is used to displace fluids it acts as if it were a solid piston when manipulated by the hand pump, so it does not react with CO2. Since mercury could be toxic, this is why the university provided the simulator. The more we inject mercury the more pressure we have inside the cell. The liquid was displayed as brown and the gas was displayed as yellow. I could recover that the pressure-volume of CO2 calculated at temperature of 85 F was 946.08psi and 13.712. after collecting these data in an excel sheet we had to make a line chart that displays the relationship between the pressure and the total volume in each experiment. Theory, concepts and objective of the experiment As the pressure in pure component in the gas phase increased the molecules tend to get close and convert to liquid (book). Therefore, if the pressure decreased the molecule will tend to tear apart and the liquid is changed to vapor. Figure 1 Typical pressure- volume diagram at a constant temperature In this experiment the students do not need to do liquid circulation since this experiment is about a single component not a mixture. A temperature change can occur in a gas as a result of a sudden pressure change over a valve (COMSOL), but this won't happen since we are using PVT simulator. Also, since we are using PVT simulator the tubes won't have any volume so everything transferred through the tubing is measured precisely. Figure 2 Pressure - volume diagram of ethane at different temperature Also, to define the dew point (the point where the last drop of liquid is converted to gas) and the bubble point (the point where the first bubble of gas appears in the liquid) (book). Experimental Procedure: The first thing that was done is to open PVT simulator, a programing screen appeared we wrote: Copy lab1\G1.la1 setup.par Thelab Then the simulator started working at a temperature of 75.2° F (Oven) as illustrated in Figure3. Figure3 an illustration of PVT simulator Then we wanted to open the valves 08 and 09, so we could start injecting/withdrawing mercury and to measure the pressure. To open the valves, press F2 then choose the valve number. Then we need to start withdrawing mercury from the visual cell by using the hand pump. To use the hand pump press F5 then enter the amount to withdraw mercury from the cell, enter the amount with a negative sign to indicate that you're withdrawing (positive sign for injecting). Keep withdrawing, so you could convert all the liquid into gas. The bubble point will appear if the volume in the gas phase (yellow box) is between 0.001cc and 0.002cc. The pressure of carbon dioxide could be defined from the box below the valve 14. Collect the data each time you withdraw mercury in an excel sheet. And the dew point happens when the brown box is between 0.001cc and 0.002cc. After converting all the liquid phase into gas phase withdraw more mercury, so the behavior of the gas phase would be collected. In the excel sheet for a specific temperature make a line graph which basically contains the sum of the volume of the gas and the liquid phases in the x-axis versus the pressure in the y-axis. Then after collecting all the required data you will need to exit the PVT simulator using the escape bottom. And then do the experiment three more times each time you will change the temperature, the different temperatures will be given with respect to G letter. So, you will open the program screen and you will only change the G1 as G with another number. And do the exact same steps three more times and collect the data in the same way and do four different graphs for each different temperature. Figure 4 illustrates withdrawing mercury from the volumetric cell would result as more gas formed. This explains that mercury is incompressible. Figure 4 Vaporization of a pure substance at a constant temperature Results and calculations: The dew and bubble points were a bit tricky to define. However, I defined both of them for each experiment precisely. So, in order to find the total volume, we'll need to sum the volume of the gas and the volume of the liquid after every injection/withdrawing of mercury. The critical point for carbon dioxide is 1071 (book). And the calculated critical from the experiment as show in the graph is approximately 1060. The percentage error is: 𝟏𝟎𝟕𝟏−𝟏𝟎𝟔𝑶 𝟏𝟎𝟕𝟏 *100 = 1.027% G13 VI Vg 10 11 12 13 13.5 13.7 13.71 10.247 8.169 3.322 1.244 0.551 0.101 0.032 0.002 0 0 0 VGH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.002 8.465 16.543 25.39 30.468 32.161 33.261 33.43 33.503 35.505 37.505 39.505 P 0 -1 -1 -1 -0.5 -0.2 -0.01 -5 -3 -7 -3 -1 -0.6 -0.1 -0.043 -5 -2 -2 VL+Vg 2000 1418.2 1134.7 996.63 958.16 946.64 946.08 946.08 946.08 946.08 946.08 946.08 946.08 946.08 946.08 933.75 920.04 905.39 10 11 12 13 13.5 13.7 13.712 18.712 24.712 28.712 31.712 32.712 33.362 33.462 33.505 35.505 37.505 39.505 G12: Vl Vg 10 12 14 13.8 14.1 14.19 14.29 14.39 14.431 13.468 11.54 6.722 1.904 0.94 0.073 0.025 0.006 0.001 0 0 VGH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.002 1.956 5.893 15.711 25.529 27.493 29.26 29.358 29.397 29.407 30.408 35.618 0 -2 -2 -0.2 -0.3 -0.9 -0.1 -0.1 -0.043 -1 -2 -5 -5 -1 -0.9 -0.05 -0.02 -0.005 -1 -3 P VL+Vg 2000 1199.3 1004.9 1013.9 1001 997.68 994.31 991.22 990.01 990.01 990.01 990.01 990.01 990.01 990.01 990.01 990.01 990.01 984.8 933.01 10 12 14 13.8 14.1 14.19 14.29 14.39 14.433 15.424 17.433 22.433 27.433 28.433 29.333 29.383 29.403 29.408 30.408 35.618 G8: VL Vg 10 11 12 13 14 14.2 14.21 14.222 9.838 5.455 1.071 0.194 0.107 0.019 0.006 0.002 0 0 VGH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.001 9.385 18.768 28.152 30.029 30.216 30.404 30.432 30.44 31.442 33.442 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -0.2 -0.01 -0.012 -5 -5 -5 -1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.015 -0.004 -1 -2 P VL+vG 2000 1452.6 1183.4 1050.5 987.21 979.65 979.31 978.88 978.88 978.88 978.88 978.88 978.88 978.88 978.88 978.88 973.43 960.9 G1: VI 10 11 12 13 13.317 7.59 3.008 0.145 0.002 0 0 VG 0 0 0 0 0.002 15.729 28.311 36.174 36.565 38.567 39.567 VHG 0 -1 -1 -1 -0.139 -10 -8 -5 -0.251 -2 -1 P 2000 1382.4 1084.2 940.86 914.1 914.1 914.1 914.1 914.1 901.41 894.67 Tot V(X) 10 11 12 13 13.319 23.319 31.319 36.319 36.567 38.567 39.567 10 11 12 13 14 14.2 14.21 14.223 19.223 24.223 29.223 30.223 30.323 30.423 30.438 30.442 31.442 33.442 Temperature of 75.2 degrees 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Saturation Evolope 1100 Pressure 1050 1000 950 900 850 0 5 10 15 20 25 Volume 30 35 40 45 Analysis and discussion: I noticed the more we withdraw mercury the less pressure we have, also I noticed that between the bubble point and the dew point the pressure remain constant and after the dew point it would decrease. In my perspective, I believe that the simulator gives better results since there are no experimental errors. However, errors could be made through the simulator. The simulator could take less time than the real experimental, because of changing the temperature. Also, the mercury when vapor becomes toxic, so it is safer to use the simulator. I assumed before the experiment that the pressure would decrease while withdrawing mercury and it was correct. Furthermore, I assumed that the pressure would remain constant between the Dew and bubble point. As stated in the theory the tubing system has no volume, so all the volume was transferred. This could be significantly seen while injecting/withdrawing the same values the pattern would be noticed as precise. Moreover, the procedure given was very helpful in order to follow up with the experiment as much as possible. At first the procedure was not very clear to understand, because it seemed like programing. Then after reading what the experiment about I got the idea of the experiment. Based on the experiment the pressure tends to decrease. So, this whole experiment is about to find the dew and bubble points at different temperature. Source of errors could be made through human error such that sometimes I do not write the exact volume injected/withdrawn of mercury. Also, once I clicked F4 while injecting by accident and the valve for servo was closed and it appeared a "BOOM" screen, and I lost track for some of the data for G1. Also, thermodynamic equilibrium instantaneous. Another source of error is joule-Thomson effects are neglected pressure changes take place isothermally, and mercury is incompressible. The last source of error is the tubing system might have volume. Conclusion: The vapor-pressure line is shrinking into a specific point called critical point. And the pressure between the bubble and dew point is constant. References: 1- “Multiphysics Cyclopedia.” COMSOL, www.comsol.com/multiphysics/joulethomson-effect. 2- McCain, William D. The Properties of Petroleum Fluids. PennWell Books, 1990. ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

Robert__F
School: UIUC

Please let me know if there is anything needs to be changed or added. I will be also appreciated that you can let me know if there is any problem or you have not received the work. Please let me know if there is anything needs to be changed or added. I will be also appreciated that you can let me know if there is any problem or you have not received the work Good luck in your study and if you need any further help in your assignments, please let me know Can you please confirm if you have received the work? Once again, thanks for allowing me to help you R MESSAGE TO STUDYPOOL NO OUTLINE IS NEEDED

Report: PVT stimulator.edited

PVT stimulator.edited
by HAL

Gen...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Thanks, good work

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors