Membrane Technology for Natural Gas Processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Membrane Technology for Natural Gas Processing Klaus Ohlrogge; Klaus Ohlrogge GKSS-Forschungszentrum Geesthacht GmbH Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Jan Wind; Jan Wind GKSS-Forschungszentrum Geesthacht GmbH Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Torsten Brinkmann Torsten Brinkmann GKSS-Forschungszentrum Geesthacht GmbH Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, April 2002. Paper Number: SPE-75505-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/75505-MS Published: April 30 2002 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Ohlrogge, Klaus, Wind, Jan, and Torsten Brinkmann. "Membrane Technology for Natural Gas Processing." Paper presented at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, April 2002. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/75505-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE Unconventional Resources Conference / Gas Technology Symposium Search Advanced Search AbstractThe paper deals with the introduction of membrane based separation processes to treat natural gas according to pipeline specifications. Polymeric membranes have been tested in the frame work of a project sponsored by the European Union (Brite EuRam III, Contract No. BRPR-CT 98–0804). The focus of the work was the dehydration of natural gas streams by means of a glassy membrane and hydrocarbon dewpointing by means of an elastomeric membrane. Engineering aspects and experimental results will be discussed as well as the potential for technical applications.IntroductionPolymer membranes are used commercially to separate air, to remove hydrogen from mixtures with nitrogen, carbon monoxide or hydrocarbons, to separate carbon dioxide from natural gas, hydrocarbon vapors from air or process gas streams and to control the water vapor dewpoint of compressed air. Gas membrane separations compete with cryogenics and a variety of adsorption and absorption processes (activated carbon adsorption, pressure swing adsorption, amine treatment etc.).Membrane permeation is a pressure driven process. The partial pressure difference between the feed side and the permeate side has by far the greatest impact on the performance of a membrane separator. This pressure difference directly influences the membrane area required to achieve the desired separation at given feed conditions. Another important process criteria is the ratio of feed pressure over permeate pressure, which has to be established in accordance to the membrane selectivity in order to achieve an efficient separation. In Figure 1 the economic trade offs in membrane process optimization are depicted. It is a direct dependence of product purity: product losses, investment costs and operating costs.The retentate (product) purity can be increased by the installation of more membrane area or the increase of the pressure ratio (feed pressure over permeate pressure).More membrane area or higher pressure increases the stage cut (permeate flow volume over feed flow volume).The feed flow rate impacts the retentate purity. Higher feed flow rates reduce the retentate purity but increases the permeate concentration of the faster permeating compound.The capacity of vacuum pumps or feed compressors are influenced by the recycled permeate or applied permeate pressure.The membrane selectivity determines the achievable product purity. The economic efficiency will decrease if the required product purity will approach 100%. Often hybrid systems are more efficient to produce clean product streams. Membrane separation can be combined for recovery and second purification with condensation, absorption and adsorption. Keywords: membrane module, downstream oil & gas, permeate pressure, hydrocarbon, membrane selectivity, permeation, dewpoint, membrane, gas processing, compound Subjects: Processing Systems and Design, Gas processing This content is only available via PDF. 2002. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".