Article
Email Email Print Print
Clip Clip & File

Business & Economics :: Cost Engineering

November 1, 2009

De-emphasize Capital Costs For Pipe Size Selection

Focus more on mass flowrates, fluid densities and operating hours for real savings

Rajiv Narang, Subodh Sarin, Anu Anna George Fluor Corp.

Price volatility in industrial piping commodities, such as carbon steel, can complicate the selection of optimal pipe diameters at the start of a project. But while constantly changing capital costs will certainly affect optimal pipe diameter, plants can realize significant cost savings by focusing more on fluid densities, mass flowrates and hours of operation when selecting pipe sizes, and worrying less about varying commodities prices....

This information is only available to Gold members.

Forgot your user ID or password?
Click here to have it sent to you.

Not a member yet?

UPGRADE now to full archive accces and you will receive:

  • A discount on full delegate pass to ChemInnovations.

  • Free pass to ChemInnovations show floor.

  • Discounts on store items and and webinars.


 

 

 

Comments (2) for De-emphasize Capital Costs For Pipe Size Selection
1.
I read the article "De-emphasize Capital Costs For Pipe Size Selection" from the November 2009 edition. I followed the calculations in the article using an excel spreadsheet and I couldn't duplicate the results shown. The paper references Edgar, F.T., and Himmelblau, D.M. "Optimization of Chemical Processes," 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, N.Y., 2001 (which I do not have a copy of) as the source of the following equation (equation 1). D(opt) = 0.9*[C0 + (C1*nu*gc)]^0.164 * m^0.459 x mu^0.033 * rho^-0.328. The graphs in figures 1 and 2 do not correspond to this equation (as I expect they should). I found that reversing the sign of the "0.164" exponent to "-0.164" yields the expected results. Respectfully, am I missing something or is there a typo in equation 1?
Posted by Jeff Lundberg on Wednesday, March 10, 2010 @ 06:18 PM
2.
In the original printing of this article, the addition signs in the following equations should have been division symbols: equations (1), (2A) and (2B). The version here is corrected
Posted by Editor on Wednesday, May 12, 2010 @ 07:33 PM

Add a Comment

Name:
Email:
Comments:

Please enter the letters or numbers you see in the image. (refresh)
 
 

More Cost Engineering

Related Stories

LinkedIn Groups

Our LinkedIn group is now over 33,000 members strong!

  1. Join other CPI professionals from all over the globe and share best practices, expertise, concerns and more.
  2. Provide feedback to Chemical Engineering Editors


Current members represent Worley Parsons, DuPont, SABIC, Fluor, Air Products, LyondellBasell, Nalco, Dow Chemical, Dow Corning, BASF, Jacobs Engineering, ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron and more.

Join Now



We also offer the following subgroup for more targeted discussions:

Tools
Search the Buyers' Guide

Plant Cost Index

Facts at Your Fingertips (archive)

Ask the Experts

Back Issues
X
To access this area, please log in or create an account.
Username:
Password:
Forgot your password?
Request it now.
Processing...
Live chat by BoldChat