Optimizing Chemical Injection for Viscous Polymer in Winter Conditions

  • Thread starter Thread starter spectastic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chemical Injection
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on optimizing chemical injection for viscous polymer during winter conditions, specifically addressing challenges with pumping polymer through a 1.5" line connected to a 10" water header. Participants concluded that installing heat tracing and insulation around the polymer pump is essential to maintain fluidity, as the polymer becomes too viscous in cold temperatures. Additionally, the use of an orifice or control valve to manage pressure and flow was debated, with concerns about potential head loss and its impact on downstream processes. Ultimately, the recommendation is to ensure proper heat tape installation and pump specifications to accommodate viscosity changes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of polymer viscosity and its impact on flow
  • Familiarity with heat tracing and insulation techniques
  • Knowledge of fluid dynamics, particularly pressure loss in piping systems
  • Experience with pump selection and specifications for varying viscosities
NEXT STEPS
  • Research effective heat tracing systems for chemical applications
  • Learn about orifice sizing and its effects on fluid dynamics
  • Investigate pump technologies suitable for high-viscosity fluids
  • Study insulation materials and installation techniques for piping systems
USEFUL FOR

Chemical engineers, facility managers, and maintenance personnel involved in polymer processing and chemical injection systems, particularly in cold weather environments.

spectastic
Messages
38
Reaction score
1
see attached. the main 10" header is water, and the 1/2" chemical injection is polymer feed (not sure how much by volume, we go by pump strokes). problem is during winter, the polymer becomes viscous, and the pump has a hard time pumping the stuff all the way to the header. So we're thinking about putting in a small header that mixes the polymer feed. this 1 1/2" line would run off the supply header pressure from the 10" header. However, because the two 1 1/2" nozzles are so close to each other (like 1 ft), I'm worried that I won't get any flow through the 1 1/2" pipe. I don't want to have to put in a pump if I don't have to.

Untitled.png
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
nevermind. I'll need a pump for pipe "B", otherwise it wouldn't get any flow... too much friction loss.
 
You are right to be worried. After the losses in the 1.5" pipe, the mixed fluid won't have sufficient pressure to break into the flow of the header again (speaking colloquially). You'd need a pump, or alternatively a control valve or PRV that controls the flow in the header so that the pressure regulates with the pressure in the small header. This will alter your header conditions downstream and may negatively effect your process.

Instead, you could consider installing heat tracing and insulation before and after the polymer pump to help maintain the polymer's fluidity.
 
Travis_King said:
You are right to be worried. After the losses in the 1.5" pipe, the mixed fluid won't have sufficient pressure to break into the flow of the header again (speaking colloquially). You'd need a pump, or alternatively a control valve or PRV that controls the flow in the header so that the pressure regulates with the pressure in the small header. This will alter your header conditions downstream and may negatively effect your process.

Instead, you could consider installing heat tracing and insulation before and after the polymer pump to help maintain the polymer's fluidity.

yea that was another idea. I have no experience with heat tracing tape, but now that I think of it, it might be cheaper to both maintain and implement.
 
Put a nozzle in the 10" pipe or merely an orifice to create the flow inducing differential pressure. Move the injection pump.

My facility wrapped heat tape under insulation for critical systems that weren't environmentally enclosed.
 
Doug Huffman said:
Put a nozzle in the 10" pipe or merely an orifice to create the flow inducing differential pressure. Move the injection pump.

My facility wrapped heat tape under insulation for critical systems that weren't environmentally enclosed.

I see what you're saying.. is that something that you've seen work? I'm skeptical because even though it might change the fluid pressure, it will also increase head loss. without the pump, the flow through the 10" pipe is already picking the path of least resistance, which is the 1 ft long 10" orifice, vs the 1.5" 100 ft long pipe... so we're already barely getting any flow through there. putting a flow restriction on that pipe would make it worse
 
He was suggesting that you put an orifice in the 10" pipe, to increase it's pressure loss between the inlet and outlet of the mixing header.

An orifice does the same as a control valve would, it restricts the flow path to increase head loss; except that it isn't variable. Ideally, you'd match the loss over the orifice to the expected flow rate (based on orifice size and header pressure and current demand flow) with the expected flow rate and pressure drop along the 1.5" header. You'd have a bear of a time getting any specific flow rate, but with a couple valves that you can hand-modulate, you could probably get it to work assuming upstream and downstream pressures remain relatively constant.

The problem is that you generally don't want to make unnecessary drops in line pressure, especially on mains. Your downstream users will not be happy about it and if this is an operating facility, you'll have to make sure that all equipment downstream of the orifice will be operating properly (maybe they'd have to be adjusted) with a lower feed pressure and (likely) flow rate. How drastic this would be depends on how much flow you need in that pipe and what the expected head loss there is, if all you need is like 20 gpm, then you could install an orifice that, at your expected mains flow and pressure, would dissipate something like 2 psi.

Whether it's more economical to leave what you've got an install some heat tape and insulation (and have somewhat higher upfront costs plus some additional operating expense in the winter for the electricity) or have lower upfront costs, but have to deal with reduced line pressure and likely line flows (slightly), or do something else; well, that's something you'll have to look into.

**btw, by explaining everything as I am I don't mean to seem like I'm assuming you don't know anything. It's just that I tend to answer questions assuming someone else will look at it later and potentially learn something.
 
Your system is designed to function at a minimum temperature which is why you have problems during the winter. You need to determine the best temp range for service and install heat tracing and insulation. If the range is tight, you need to use an active controlled heat tape. If it is not important, you could use self regulating, but I would not recommend it. Do not use cheap heat tape or you will be replacing it in 2 years. You can also get hot spots which would affect the polymer as well. Usually you need to calculate the heat loss both atmospheric and to the polymer to determine the watts per foot. Make sure the tape is installed on the bottom of the pipe and it is attached directly to it. Also, do the insulation correctly all the way to the connections on the main. I have seen a number of heat tape installation that were useless because of bad insulation.
 
we're going with chase water

with a pump..
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Be sure the pump is spec'd to be able to operate acceptably over all viscosity and density changes due to temperature.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
10K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
8K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K