Hi Rick
I was involved with a similar installation to what you describe last year.
It was on a smaller scale, however, and didnt have a CO2 scrubber on the
back end. Also we used catalytic oxidisers as the fume strength was at times
too weak to support combustion. My involvement was to kick the project into
shape; part of which involved bludgeoning the engineers into producing
coherent P&IDs.
Obviously I cant give you a copy, but I can tell you that there is nothing
of importance which would not arise from scrutinising the process flowsheets
and conducting a series of proper HAZOPS ( not the panicky safety-only
variety).
Suggest you contact a burner/oxidizer vendor and a CO2 absorption scrubber
vendor. Im sure they will give you enough info to enable you to connect the
dots. Dont forget to look at the services (e.g. absorbent may be quicklime)
as you may need some additional conditioning plant.
Unlike Chris, I dont find your question objectionable.
To deal with Chris' points
1 I'm not doing your work for free - just helping point you in the right
direction.
2 No property has been stolen; no encouragement to steal was inferred.
3 It is not possible to comment on incompetence as Rick has not stated his
objective.
4 No proprietary information has been issued.
Cheers
Steve
>From: Christopher Wright <chrisw@skypoint.com>
>Reply-To: <a href="/group/PipingDesign/post?postID=eaQZnwmIVai6AdMtxd6ZtFDh5IbLUGunmkTQECN3eJ7lO4xRhTimyxv6fYDcQCgVnGRbQveCXOKqXZotcOKV5aWaymrCpA">PipingDesign@yahoogroups.com</a>
>To: <a href="/group/PipingDesign/post?postID=eaQZnwmIVai6AdMtxd6ZtFDh5IbLUGunmkTQECN3eJ7lO4xRhTimyxv6fYDcQCgVnGRbQveCXOKqXZotcOKV5aWaymrCpA">PipingDesign@yahoogroups.com</a>
>Subject: Re: [PipingDesign] Amount of piping
>Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 10:49:30 -0500
>
>
>On Apr 4, 2007, at 10:15 AM, RICK wrote:
>
> > Could you help me? I need a typical P&ID for a gas treatment
> > facility. I am talking of a facility composed of a burner and a
> > scrubber to treat petroleum vapor with a flow rate of 45000Nm3/hr
> > and convert it to nitrogen.
>
>I shouldn't need to say this, but you're asking someone else to
>1. Do your work for you for free.
>2. Steal property of his own firm or that of a client
>3. Aid or abet incompetence
>4. Possibly act against his own employer's interest
>
>All of these are either illegal or unethical, not to mention rather
>stupid--because you imagine you'd be able to get away with presenting
>someone else's work as your own.
>
>Don't do this again if you want to remain on the list. Last warning
>
>Christopher Wright P.E. |"They couldn't hit an elephant at
>chrisw@skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen.
>.......................................| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania
>1864)
><a href="http://www.skypoint.com/~chrisw/">http://www.skypoint.com/~chrisw/</a>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 04 2008 - 11:40:50 EST