fouling phenomena in multi stage flash (msf) distillers
TRANSCRIPT
FOULING PHENOMENA IN MULTI STAGE FLASH (MSF) DISTILLERS1
Mohammad Abdul-Kareem Al-Sofi
Research & Development Center, Saline Water Conversion Corporation
P.O.Box # 8328, Al-Jubail 31951, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
ABSTRACT Fouling in Multi Stage Flash (MSF) distillers has been occupying researchers for many
years. A lot of work has been done and more is yet to come in order to fully understand
the role of various components and their interaction including the effectiveness of scale
control techniques.
In this paper an attempt is made based primarily upon visual and reported observations
of fouling in various parts along the flow path of brine solutions in MSF distillers. This
analysis is aimed at proposing certain sequence of scale forming reaction steps and to
suggest certain experiments that could verify the validity of the proposed reaction
mechanism. The proposed reaction steps are shown in alphabetic order to denote the
sequence that could prevail inside heat transfer tubes of recovery and heat input (brine
heater) sections and water boxes and thereafter in flash chambers including demister
pads of MSF distillers. To predict the fate of various species and pH values one must
identify reaction steps. Starting with reaction (A), which is initiated as a result of
solution heating. The next three steps will proceed, thus reaction (D) is considered as
the last step inside Distiller heat exchanger tubes. Then reaction (E) will occur
dominantly after the release of pressure in flash chambers where carbon dioxide
Evolution can take place. These five steps (A to E) plus the overall balance (F) are
shown below:
3 HCO3- + 3 H2O ⇔ 3 CO3
2- + 3 H2OH+ (A)
CO32- + Ca2+ → CaCO3 ↓ (B)
2 CO32- + 2 H2O ⇔ 2 HCO3
- + 2 OH- (C)
1 Presented at the European Conference on Desalination and the Environment, Las Palmas, Gran Canaria, Spain, 9–12 November 1999: Proc., Vol 3, pp. 61-76.
2103
2 OH- + Mg2+ → Mg (OH)2 ↓ (D)
3 HCO3- + 3 H2OH+ → 6 H2O + 3 CO2 ↑ (E)
4HCO3- + Ca2++Mg2+ → CaCO3↓ + Mg(OH)2 ↓ + 3CO2 ↑ + H2O (F)
The common practice is that: pH values are measured of solutions drawn out of heat
exchanger tubes of recovery section or brine heater. This leads to the evolution of
carbon dioxide. In view of the above, variation in pH values, which could support the
above mechanism, were never addressed. Certain experiments should, therefore, be
devised where pH values of recirculating brine inside heat exchanger tubes could be
measured on-line while still under pressure. It would then be probable (especially if
particular species detection electrodes are installed) to measure variation in pH values
due to hydronium ion generation in reaction (A) and its consumption in reaction (E).
Meanwhile, the presence of hydroxyl ions will be short lived primarily due to Mg(OH)2
precipitation through reaction (D) which will consume hydroxyl ions that are generated
in reaction step (C).
The above proposed steps (A to D) support CaCO3 precipitation ahead of Mg(OH)2.
The abundance of magnesium ions and the extreme low solubility of magnesium
hydroxide will rapidly then lead to its formation. However, scale precipitation inside
tubes are not only from initial scale formation under pressure inside the tubes but also
due to nucleates recirculation from flash chambers back into heat gain exchanger tubes
because of brine recycling. Recent analysis of variation in coloration of water boxes
came as a strong support to this hypothesis. Reaction steps suggested by other workers
will be shown for the sake of comparison. It is worth to note that the end results of
various reaction mechanisms are almost the same in the cited ones also the same to the
proposed overall reaction (F) as shown in this abstract.
Key Words
Multistage Flash (MSF) distillers, Heat input section: brine heater (BH), Heat recovery and rejection sections, Single and multi pass heat exchanger (HE) bundles, HE inlet and outlet tube sheets, Heat transfer tubes, Vapor space, flash chambers, demister pads, Scale and sludge forming species and their reaction mechanisms, Scale control chemicals, alkaline scale of CaCO3 & Mg (OH)2 & Sponge rubber ball on-line mechanical cleaning system.
2104
1. INTRODUCTION Evaluation of scale control methodology and optimization thereof plus the review of
plant and heat exchanger tube inspection reports [1&2] have led to comprehension of
the proposed mechanism. Some recent analysis and review of published works
particularly those of Professor Ahmad Medhat Shams El-Din, (and his coworker Rizk)
[3 & 4] had stimulative effects to inquisitively look into the commonly and currently
stipulated reaction mechanisms, more specifically the sequence of events, i.e., reaction
hierarchy or steps. Over the years there were instances when scale was predominantly
reported in certain sections of MSF distillers where no one would expect any scale.
There were also cases, yet seldom, that such predominance were of an over riding
nature in those sections where no heavy scaling could be expected, even more, or in the
absence from places where scale is believed and typically observed to be the heaviest
[2]. Such deviations, unevenness and/or abnormalities require some logical
explanation.
This paper will primarily address reaction mechanisms especially the step-wise reaction
sequence and most specifically how and at which stage the carbon dioxide release
would be coming into effect [5]. The work of professor Shams El-Din and his coworker
particularly their postulation of scale nucleus circulation back into heat gain exchanger
tubes [4] is to be given the rightly deserved recognition. This paper will also discuss
antiscalant effectiveness and causes of its deterioration [6]. In addition the paper will
go into operational aspects as well, with very brief reference to design causes of scale
and sludge formation. Some emphasis is also placed upon the on-line mechanical
cleaning of heat exchanger tubes by sponge rubber balls. Ball cleaning requirements
and terminologies are addressed in some detail.
It is worth noting that there is a wealth of experience on MSF distillation in general and
scale control in particular in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states [1 - 5 & 7 – 11]
and the world at large [6, 12 & 13]. This paper is primarily based on local knowledge
and experiences. Also worth of noting that (primarily local) experiences have led to
antiscalant dose rate reductions as shown in Figure 1 [1, 2, 6 & 8].
2105
2. DISCUSSION In this part of the paper seven headings (subsections) will appear. First section is under
the heading of literature review. Under the second heading an effort is made into giving
as clear a picture as possible of certain unique field reports. This will be followed by
description of graphical presentation of these cases. The fourth, subsection will offer
what is felt to represent the situations and conditions typically occurring inside various
parts of an MSF distiller. The fifth subsection is devoted to ball cleaning. Under the
sixth heading deviations are discussed. Variation off the normal operating conditions
that could lead to abnormalities are further elaborated on in the closing subsection of
this discussion under the heading of causes and mechanisms. It is worth stressing that
one of the primary objectives of this paper is to offer a logical sequence of events and
an overall view.
It is also to be noted that acidic species are referred to in this paper as hydronium
(H2OH+) and not as (H+). Because the older notation of (H+) had created some
confusion in the true sense of the word. Due to the non-existence of a free moving
proton in acidic media. With the above in mind, reaction steps in chronological order
(A to E ) plus their overall balance (F) are presented as follows :
3 HCO3
- + 3 H2O ⇔ 3 CO32- + 3 H2OH+ (A)
CO32- + Ca2+ → CaCO3 ↓ (B)
2 CO32- + 2 H2O ⇔ 2 HCO-
3 + 2 OH- (C)
2 OH- + Mg2+ → Mg (OH)2 ↓ (D)
3 HCO3- + 3 H2OH+ → 6 H2O + 3 CO2 ↑ (E)
4HCO3- + Ca2++Mg2+ → CaCO3↓ + Mg(OH)2 ↓ + 3CO2 ↑ + H2O (F)
1.1 Literature Review
Alkaline scale formation in seawater distillation begets from the decomposition
hydrolysis of seawater bicarbonate ion as process temperature is increased. The mostly
observed scales that occur in multistage flash (MSF) distillers are found to be either Ca
2106
CO3 or Mg (OH) 2. The two are commonly referred to as alkaline scale. The reference
notation is a result of their laboratory formation dependence on solution alkalinity.
Currently there are couple of methods of controlling alkaline scale formation in MSF
especially where they would become an obstacle to continuous (problem free, i.e.,
smooth) operation. The areas where scale and sludge formation take place are: a - heat
transfer tubes and most specifically those of the brine heater, b - demister pads, c - water
boxes and tube sheets, d – flash chamber brine gates and orifices and e - (most remotely
to occur) their ingress into the vapor space [1-4]. Common control methods are through
bicarbonate depletion where it reacts with inorganic strong acids, e.g., sulfuric or
hydrochloric, which is dosed into the seawater make-up to MSF distillers. Alternatively,
alkaline scale formation is controlled by organic polymeric additives [14 & 15].
On the other hand, the formation of Non-Alkaline scale (mainly CaSO4) in MSF
distillers are controlled in almost all commercial plants by maintaining top brine
temperature (TBT) below 122 oC in order to limit its formation. Although causes and
products of alkaline scale and/or sludge are quite known, the mechanism of their
formation (according to A. Mubarak [16]) “has been a subject of a long persisting
ambiguities. Langlier and more recently Shams El Den (same as Din) et al spoke of
carbonate formation directly from bicarbonates which, in their view, will hydrolyze to
produce hydroxyl groups causing the precipitation”. The suggested mechanisms by
Shams El Din & Rizk are based on a “primary bimolecular reaction occurring at
moderate temperatures”. This reaction was cited to be:
2 HCO- 3 = CO2-
3 + CO2 + H2O (G) This will lead to the precipitation of CaCO3 as its solubility limits are exceeded. As
temperature is increased further carbonate ions hydrolyze by the following reaction:
CO2-
3 + H2O = 2OH- + CO2 (H)
They also suggested a unimolecular decomposition of bicarbonate along with its
neutralization by the following reactions (in an alphabetic respective order – though
they suggest parallel reactions):
HCO-
3 = CO2 + O H- (I)
HCO-3 + OH- = CO2-
3 + H2O (J)
2107
They had, therefore, suggested subsequent precipitation of Ca CO3 and (in a time lag
order behind) Mg(OH)2. In their view, the appearance of either one scale at lower
temperature stage(s) of MSF distiller by one mechanism or the other could be attributed
to circulation with the brine recycle [4].
Mubarak [16] also cited Dooly and Glatter also Harais and coworkers (in the same order of publications) who suggested the following order of reactions: HCO-
3 = OH- + CO2 (K) Mg++ + 2 O H- = Mg (OH)2 (L) HCO-
3 + OH- = CO2-3 + H2O (M)
Ca++ + CO2-
3 = Ca CO3 (N) According to Mubarak [16]: “It is clear that the ambiguity revolves around the
underlying kinetics and since the consequences to adopting either concept would, no
doubt, have a great impact on the operational as well as maintenance philosophy of
desalination plants, the need for a kinetic study that will hopefully contribute to the
understanding of such a complex system is therefore readily apparent. Likewise, since
the inhibiting action of antiscalant materials (namely, Belgard of Ciba Geigy ”-
misspelled Ciba which should have ended with an {a} rather than with an {e},
moreover Ciba Geigy long before 1997 had sold its antiscalant chemical business to
Food Manufacturing Company (FMC) which sold this year to Great Lakes, both of
USA – “and POC of Degussa)” – there is quite a long list of suppliers which Mubarak
have ignored unfairly. Mubarak continues to say that they describe their products
“under the term {Threshold Effect} has never been quantified, so to speak”. He
suggests, “a study addressing the intrinsic role of these materials in desalination
processes seemed very much in order”. Almost all earlier works in understanding of
scale and/or sludge formation, hence their control were conducted under laboratory
atmospheric or even sub atmospheric (including nitrogen purging) pressures [14 & 16].
It is worth at the end of this literature review to cite that a number of works were
published on non-conventional approaches in MSF scale prevention techniques. In these
somewhat new techniques the scale forming ions are removed ahead of exposing
seawater to heating in heat recovery section and then the brine heater of MSF distillers.
These works have taken two directions the earlier, which was proposed and tested
2108
during the late seventies and the eighties, was an extension to the conventional
depletion approach where by inorganic acids are used to deplete ions causing alkaline
scale. The process is then followed by ion exchange for sulfate reduction (by
approximately 50%: for example from 2900 Mediterranean water ionic content down to
1400 parts per million), hence for the Mediterranean water, the reduction of CaSO4
contents (even after concentration) to below its saturation [17]. Very recently (1998-99)
Saline Water Conversion Corporation represented by Research and Development Center
in Al-Jubail, Saudi Arabia published the bulk of its results on membrane seawater
softening by the use of commercially available brackish water softening Nanofiltration.
Nanofiltration permeate (NFP) was used as a substitute make-up water to an MSF pilot
plant distiller. NFP replaces acidified or antiscalant treated seawater [18-21]. It is
expected that this new approach will not become dominant before the end of the next
decade (2010 onwards). In view of which a better understanding of situations (as they
are today) is still much needed (see quotation from Mubarak [16] shown earlier under
this heading).
1.2 Field Observations
Certain abnormalities in sludge and scale presence in various parts of MSF distillers
were reported in the past. Heavy or uneven depositions were reported to occur inside
heat exchanger tubes from lower end to mid-section up to high temperature parts in heat
recovery stages. There were also cases when inlet sides of brine heater tubes were
fouled to a higher degree than outlet tube ends [1 & 2]. Moreover, there are references
to alkaline scale inverse temperature dependence solubility. (It is worth stressing that
the so-called inverse behavior resulting from the rate of generation of anions (as shown
by reactions A & C) rather than the temperature dependence of alkaline scale solubility
[12 & 13]).
In addition to the above, uneven sludge depositions were reported especially in water
boxes and on the face of tube sheets. Such uneven presence were either restricted to
certain areas of the water box and the tube sheet or very heavy in some specific stages
along the flow path of recirculating brine from cold to hot end of the recovery section or
across the brine heater. Uneven depositions of somewhat similar pattern were also
reported to take place inside water boxes and on inlet tube sheets and those of heat
recovery or rejection section inlets in particular. There were also cases when heavier
2109
depositions reported in lower temperature flash chambers and more specifically carry
over of scale into their demister pads [2].
1.3 Graphical Presentation In this subsection graphical presentation of reported configurations, behaviors and
observations will be specified. Figure 2 shows MSF distiller flow patterns [1 & 11].
Figure 3 shows the trend of temperature and concentration gradients in various
sections of a typical MSF distiller as the one shown in Figure 2b. Figure 4
represents the trend of commonly accepted deposition of sludge and/or scale along the
flow path of recirculating brine inside heat exchanger tubes of heat recovery and heat
input (brine heater) sections of MSF distillers as well as deposition in flash chambers
(including demister pads) of successive stages along the flow path of flashing brine
from hot to cold end of MSF distillers. Figure 5 is a group of graphical presentation
based on a correlation developed by a ball supplier for percent distribution as they are
influenced by variation in ball to tube ratios. Based on (Figure 5 a to c) (Table 1) was
prepared to summarize level of cleaning effectiveness.
In Figure 6a abnormalities in deposition in various parts of heat recovery and brine
heater tubes are shown. Then abnormalities in deposition in flash chambers including
demister pads are shown in Figure 6b.
Figures 7a, b & c show, respectively, some of the reported situations of (a) uneven
sludge build-up (b) heavy build up in water boxes and as (of detrimental effect) shown
on tube sheets and last (c) blockage of inlet tube sheet of MSF distillers, heat recovery
section. 1.4 Typical Deposition As shown in Figure 4 the commonly accepted trends of deposition should
progressively be in direct relation with temperature rise. This norm as was stated earlier
should not be misinterpreted as an inverse solubility relation but must be properly
identified as being due to the temperature dependence of bicarbonate and carbonate
hydrolysis as shown in reaction steps A through D. Deposition inside water boxes or
flash chambers including demister pads are to be related to antiscalant hydrolysis or the
rise in concentration (Total Dissolved Solids: TDS, usually in parts per million: ppm)
2110
through successive stages. This is found to be acceptable and thus can be viewed as one
of the contributing factors to deviations off commonly accepted norms. Increased
concentration is a result of distillate production by evaporation off flashing brine
solution in a step-wise.
1.5 Ball Cleaning as Scale Control Technique The most ingenious aspect of scale control could be the on-line mechanical scale and
sludge removal technique. This technique utilizes sponge rubber balls which are
slightly of larger diameter than the tube internal. They are pushed through heat transfer
tubes under the influence of solution pressure. For some heat exchanger tube bundles
these balls go through all the passes of a single exchanger bundle such as the ones in
most power plant condensers, for which this technique was initially invented. As
thermal desalination started to flourish specially by multistage flash (MSF) process, this
technique was introduced into the process. Its applicability and success was primarily
due to the close resemblance between multi pass power plant condenser and MSF heat
rejection or recovery sections as well as the mostly single pass heat input tube bundles
of MSF brine heaters (BHs). This technique came to MSF process at the peak of its
development while most of the operating units were employing polyphosphate as
antiscalant. In such time the success of ball cleaning was due to the heavy sludge
forming characteristic of the polyphosphate. Ball cleaning was extremely beneficial to
brine heater tubes and quite useful for heat recovery section tubes and of certain benefits
to heat rejection section tubes.
From 1980 onwards the majority of MSF installed (new) plants were equipped with
such systems for on-line mechanical tube cleaning. The system was also introduced to a
number of older plants as retrofits. Almost all newer installations contain either a
combined or separable cleaning loops for heat input (BH) and recovery sections. It is
evident from the above that ball cleaning started to take an appreciable role in scale and
more specifically sludge build up control inside heat transfer tubes of MSF distillers. It
is also evident that the system started to appear during the last couple of decades out of
3.5 decades of MSF since its inception. The reason for highlighting the age difference is
to prepare the reader for some misconceptions, which have surrounded this on-line
mechanical tube cleaning technique.
2111
One of these misconceptions is the thought that rubber balls are so orderly in their
movement. That is to say, when a group of successive bundles (for example) of 3000
tubes each are charged with 3000 balls, could each ball go through one of the 3000
tubes? Such a naive orderly flow of balls is still one of the misconceptions that occupies
the minds of some of the users. In such case, the user would be naively expecting that
these 3000 balls would march (in a militarily ordered fashion) into the 3000 tubes of
each successive bundle. In fact, ball system designers and manufacturers have come up
with correlations that do not look at the matter in this naive way. Such correlations
predict ball to tube probability distribution for a given number ratios of balls to tubes
similar to the ones shown in Figure 5a to c. Manufacturers would, therefore, suggest
to keep the number ratio of balls to tubes around 0.3 ± 0.1, i.e. 20 to 40% of tubes. This
aspect (of ball to tube ratio) is stressed upon because it has been established that missing
even a large number of tubes in any one cycle is (by far) of lower negative impact on
cleaning than the presence of more than one ball in any particular tube per any one cycle
of ball cleaning. The argument is further supported by stating that the missed tubes in
any one-ball cycle (again in a probabilistic view) would be cleaned in one of the
successive cycles. While multiple balls presence in one tube would cause appreciable
drop in velocity through that particular tube thus causing scaling due to low velocity,
see reference [2]. Moreover, subsequent i.e., following, balls are in fact going through a
tube, which is supposedly had just been cleaned by the front ball. The orderly march of
balls towards tubes is the most dangerous misconception. Another aspect of ball
cleaning belonging to the category of misconceptions needs to be clarified and thus
abolished. This second misconception is related to a parameter which most probably
has been blindly copied out of single pass power plant condensers, where the issue of
balls to tube ratio and distribution are of by far lower impact than they are in multi pass
MSF recovery and brine heater tube bundles as a flow loop. This is mainly due to the
fact that repeated exists and entries of balls into such bundles could aggravate the
situation (on a probability basis). To illustrate this misrepresentative parameter, (which
is referred to as balls per tube-day or even in some mathematically incorrect term as:
balls per tube per day) the following tabulation is shown.
This tabulation highlights the fact that balls per tube-day (b/t-d) are not only a
meaningless parameter but also a quite misleading one. The reader may convince
himself further by developing additional similar tabulations using Figure 5 for the
2112
presence of more than one ball per tube which would propagate its negative impact as
the number of balls per cycle is increased.
1.6 Alkalinity Based on classical perception of scale formation, it is customary to measure overall
change in alkalinity as loss in total alkalinity (LTA). Where in distillation processes
particularly in MSF chemical monitoring and LTA are used as a scaling indication.
This practice is found to be valid yet it is to be highlighted that such indication is not to
be understood as a confirmation of scale formation. Since loss of alkalinity is due to
successive reaction steps. That is to say reactions (G) & (H) will lead to a drop of
approximately 20% of converted bicarbonate ions to carbonate. The second step in
LTA reduction is due to precipitation of calcium carbonate. Then the third step is the
conversion of carbonate to hydroxide, which would have no measurable effect on
alkalinity, i.e., no measurable LTA. Fourth step is the formation of magnesium
hydroxide. This fourth step would be responsible for measurable LTA.
On the other hand, the proposed alternative mechanism shown in reaction (A) through
(E) would cause changes in alkalinity in a slightly different stepwise fashion. The only
difference is in the magnitude of change associated with carbonate and hydroxide
formation steps, in the proposed mechanism. From this it could be seen that the overall
effects will not be any different whether embracing the conventional or the proposed
(alternative) approach.
Chemical analysis results especially those taken at extremely low antiscalant dose rate,
while operating MSF pilot unit; are shown in Table 2.
Positive LTA across the tubes suggests scale formation yet there is no change in either
calcium or magnesium concentration. This clearly demonstrates that even though the
LTA across MSF pilot unit tubes are of +11 there is no loss of calcium or magnesium
shown in Table 2, i.e., no scale is formed. This may be due to either the proposed
step-wise alkalinity change of the earlier proposed concept of weathering at the time of
sampling from brine heater outlet due to pressure release.
2114
Sulfate results shown in Table 2 were used to calculate the alkalinity of brine blow
down. The alkalinity of brine blow down by calculation found to be 147 ppm while the
measured value is only 138. Thus LTA by difference (147-138) should equal + 9.
Sulfate results were also used to establish that there was no depletion of calcium and
magnesium in flash chambers. Thus, the step-wise alkalinity change is further
supported by calculated calcium and magnesium expected concentration in blow down
when compared with the measured value of its concentration. Yet the magnesium loss
of 20 ppm seems surprising! It could, therefore, be attributed to analytical errors as LTA
change dose not support the loss of 20 ppm of magnesium. Conversely, it could be said
that magnesium dioxide is formed even in the absence of CaCO3 formation. The zero
change in this unique concentration confirms that no scale is formed in flash chambers
It is, therefore, suggested that scale formation is not to be directly related to positive
LTA. That is to say:
“Positive LTA is not to be taken as a confirmation of scale formation but as An indication of increased scale formation potential”. 1.7 Deviations Figures 6 through 8 show trends of deviations off the normally reported situations. In
Figure 6a deposition of scale at various parts of recovery tubes as well as the inlet tube
ends of the brine heater are shown. These deviations can be due to some variation, most
probably; of approximately less than one (to few) hour(s) duration in make-up, brine
recycle or antiscalant dosage flow. Should there be starvation of make-up or antiscalant
then concentration of scale forming species or their potential will rise, thus their
chelation threshold limits are surpassed. In such events scaling will take place very
rapidly. And depending on where the threshold limits are exceeded (depending on
concentration and/or mixing effects), then scaling will occur at that location at a given
temperature regardless of how hot the brine is. Potential for further scaling down
stream of the said location would be very low even when solution temperature or the
TDS is increased. That is to say, should scaling in some specific location along the flow
path predominate then a marked reduction in the concentration of scale forming species
will characterize the brine solution thereafter along its flow path inside heat gain tubes
or through rising TDS flashing brine. Lower flash chambers and demister pads fouling
as shown in Figure 6b could be attributed to the above phenomenon. Nevertheless,
2114
there are other reasons, which could have enhancing influence along the flashing brine
stream. These are (i) the effect of rising concentration due to distillate production in
successive stages, i.e., thus increasing the TDS until it would reach the brine blow down
level, (ii) operation with abnormal flashing brine level(s) in such stage(s) and (iii)
excessive splashing that would be occurring in that (those) particular stage(s) regardless
of how low (or high) its (their) temperature(s) (or TDS, respectively) might be. Figure 7 shows abnormalities, which are mostly related to design but could also be
due to mal-operation. Uneven flow regime in water boxes could lead to deposition of
mainly sludge in a patch wise fashion on inlet tube sheets as those shown in Figure 7a.
On the other hand, heavy silt content and possibly hydrolysis of certain brands of
antiscalants could lead to heavy deposition in water boxes or on tube sheets as shown in
Figure 7b. Heavy sludge could digress into the tubes. This could be enhanced by
nucleation in water boxes or even as a result of brine recycling. The later could be the
most probable cause of fouling inside tubes of low temperature stages of heat recovery
section as well as at or close to tube inlets of brine heater. Such fouling would also be
enhanced by variation in flow i.e., starvation, hence differential concentration which
was mentioned earlier. Scale and/or sludge may also form within the tubes where it
could deposit. Furthermore, it could travel through tubes then appear on outlet tube
sheets.
It is worth to draw attentions to the similarity in nature as well as causes of blockage of
heat recovery and heat rejection inlet tube sheets as shown in Figures 7c & 8,
respectively. In spite of their similarities there are couple of differences which are also
worthwhile to highlight. The nature of re-circulation can lead to inclusion of (i) lose
debris, e.g., scale and corrosion products; also (ii) sponge ball unwise application,
which could characterize recovery section inlet tube sheet fouling. These aspects are
believed to be the primary causes that could lead to recovery section tube mouth
blockage. On the other hand, the blockage of heat rejection inlet tube sheet as shown in
Figure 8 is mainly due to poor filtration and/or active seawater feed giving rise to the
growth of barnacles as a result of improper disinfection.
2115
1.8 Causes and Mechanisms The proposed reaction steps (A through E) can very well support the common
understanding of CaCO3 precipitation ahead of Mg(OH)2. On the other hand, the
proposed steps especially (A through D) would not preclude precipitation of Mg (OH)2
right after the precipitation of calcium carbonate due to magnesium hardness. This is
further enhanced by the suggested starvation, i.e., reduction in seawater make-up flow
or antiscalant dosing. It can be explained by the traditional concepts of inhibition by
nucleus chelation of scale and crystal distortion. Moreover, some recent observations
and chemical analysis came as strong supports to the suggested higher temperature zone
precipitation of Mg(OH)2.
Alternatively, it is proposed that there is higher affinity of antiscalant active sites
towards higher valency ions such as di- (or higher) valent cations of calcium,
magnesium or even ferric, ferrous and cupric ions. The higher affinity is suggested in
comparison to monovalent cations such as those of sodium (and anions of chloride,
hydroxide or bicarbonate). It is also worth noting that this affinity is controlled by the
sizes and shapes of scaling ionic species hence their attachment at active sites on the
molecular chain of polymer additive [22-23]. Above approach can thus support the
scale nucleation (as a step) on the parameter of antiscalant by attraction of scaling
species to sites where oppositely charged species are already in place. This could be the
way by which antiscalant effectiveness is reduced yet there are other reasons for the
antiscalant effectiveness deterioration. It is commonly accepted that antiscalant
especially phosphorous-based brands undergo hydrolysis [1 & 10]. In addition, there is
yet a third way by which antiscalant activity deterioration could occur. This third mean
of deterioration is postulated on the suggested higher affinity, which can be applied to
highly polarized species and charged corrosion products, e.g., silt and ferric ions,
respectively. Such mechanism is still a proposed concept.
Furthermore, heavy sludge was also reported in flash chambers with detrimental effect
on demister pad performance. On the other hand, it was established that certain brands
of antiscalant lead to higher sludge formation than other brands especially in turbid
seawaters. This can be related to the third cause of antiscalant deterioration discussed in
the previous paragraph. In such cases there are situations when sludge (if left in the
2116
system) could solidify. It is worth to mention that sludge solidification into scale takes
place predominantly in low flow zones especially on outlet tube sheets [1 & 2].
Flow path blockage either as shown in Figure 7c or Figure 8 of inlet tube sheets of
heat recovery and rejection section, respectively. This is primarily caused by lose
derbies that are carried through by the solution, e.g., broken pieces of shells, scales,
corrosion products or even somewhat foreign matters like sea weeds or wood (and
sometimes peculiar things such as plastic bags and nylon robs), particularly on the inlet
tube sheet to heat rejection section. It is to be said that sponge balls could turn devilish
hence further escalate such blockage (see Figure 7c), especially on the inlet tube sheet
to heat recovery section. They could have an over toning effect in the case of uneven
distribution of flow or due to the presence of more than one ball in a particular tube
leading to blockage under heavily slugged situations as shown in Figure 7a. Also
blockages by balls similar to that shown in Figure 7c [2]. As was discussed earlier,
misinformed users could turn ball cleaning into a heavy liability on heat transfer
through recovery section and brine heater tubes of MSF distillers. Reference is made to
Figure 5 and Table 1.
2. CONCLUSION
Scale and sludge formation have negative impacts on heat transfer, pressure drops, as
well as flow starvation and above all deterioration of distillate product water yield and
quality. Such formation can by no means be stopped or totally eliminated. Even though,
safe prolonged operation can be achieved by bringing deposition of sludge and scale
under control [9]. For such control to be effective deposition mechanisms, causes and
passivation techniques are to be clearly understood. This understanding would be the
primary initial step in any full sludge and scale deposition control program.
The proposed mechanism suggests that the formation of low temperature (instead of the
so called) alkaline scale inside heat gain exchanger tubes of heat recovery section and
the brine heater could proceed without the need for carbon dioxide generation step to
take place. By this, one can explain scaling inside heat gain tubes even where the re-
circulating brine is under pressure and the CO2 generation step is self-limiting in the
absence of gaseous CO2 release off the re-circulating brine solution. Should the
2117
proposed mechanism is proven to be correct then the so-called alkaline scales are to be
renamed as suggested above.
Furthermore, sludge formation is primarily due to (i) salt growth around antiscalant
molecular chain, (ii) hydrolysis of antiscalant molecular chains and (iii) silt and
corrosion product polarized species accumulation on the molecular chain of antiscalant
material. All these types of build-ups on antiscalant molecular chains would render the
additive less effective. It is, therefore, important to monitor Residual Antiscalant
Potential (RAP) [1]. Taking into consideration that the suggested mechanism and the
deliberated upon causes will lower production cost through reduced use of
consumables, e.g., antiscalants, cleaning balls and acids; plus better prolonged operation
thus shorter down time hence minimized production losses and longer plant productive
life. Moreover, improper approach to ball cleaning may also give rise to sludge and/or
scale deposition inside heat transfer tubes, which would also add to the above negative
impacts.
One of the primary observations, which this analysis would put forward, is that the
carbon dioxide evolution step (E) could have very little effect on scale formation inside
heat exchanger tubes. This proposition is put forward in order to give way to explain
scale formation even if CO2 gas is not released where its reaction is suppressed due to
its concentration. Reaction steps suggested in this paper differ from other proposed
mechanisms in the sense that scale formation inside heat exchanger tubes can proceed in
an Acidic media (see reaction step A) without the need for CO2 generation step to be
occurring. That is to say, the sequence is predominantly ending with step (D) before
any appreciable CO2 is released off the flashing brine, i.e., in flash chambers; where
carbon dioxide generation hence Evolution is controlled by reaction step (E). In order
to verify the validity of the proposed mechanism some well thought-out experiments are
to be conducted. The most detrimental checks on this validity verification are felt to be
by the results of pH measurements and detection hence the fate of various species.
The commonly introduced concept referring to: “Positive LTA as scaling yard stick” is
to be replaced with “positive LTA is not a confirmation sign of scale formation but it
is only an indication of increased scale formation potential”.
2118
3. RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1. Process Control
Based on this review certain process parameters are to be placed under scrutiny, hence
closely monitored and controlled within clearly specified ranges. These parameters are
outlined hereafter.
3.1.1 Top Brine Temperature (TBT)
Reference is to be made to the range given in Figure 1 of 90 to 115 ºC.
3.1.2 Antiscalant Dose Rate
Again reference is made to Figure 1. In this respect, it is recommended that the
proposed optimum dose rates are to be targets that could be reached through careful
investigation at each site based on seawater and plant design specifics. It is also
recommended to maintain a sufficiently healthy safety margin of antiscalant (above
minimum requirements), i.e., to apply an optimum rather than the minimum required
dose rate. In order to coupe up with variations in conditions of the plant and the
environment, some of the due most crucial changes, which deserve close attention, are:
1. Antiscalant preparation and dosing system malfunction
2. Make-up flow rate
3. Brine recycle flow rate hence brine tube velocity
4. Malfunction in ball cleaning system
5. Sea roughness hence seawater turbidity
6. Steam de-superheating, flow and temperature hence the TBT
3.1.3 Residual antiscalant potential (RAP)
RAP has not become a common controlling parameter because it would require
elaborate and tedious chemical analysis, yet it is felt to be quite detrimental. Its
adaptation as a monitoring control parameter is strongly recommended.
2119
3.1.4 Ball Cleaning Philosophy
It is strongly recommended to upgrade the understanding of ball cleaning aspects.
Misconceptions, e.g., highball to tube ratios, and ball per tube per day are to be
abolished.
3.2 Future Work
As a result of this analysis a number of tests are recommended. These tests are to be
aimed at verifying the proposed reaction steps (and their sequence). The proposed tests
can be divided into three categories as shown below.
3.2.1 Laboratory testing
1. Bench top tests to verify the validity of the proposed mechanism by
detection of various species and more importantly pH value
measurements.
2. Pressurized plug flow device is to be designed with proper selective ion
electrode detection and pH value measurements to study reaction
constants, temperatures, pressures and time dependence; in order to
verify the proposed mechanism at various ionic species and antiscalant
concentrations.
3.2.2 Pilot plant testing
1. Some tests (to verify points raised in 2a 2 above) are to be devised on a
pilot plant MSF distiller. In Figure 2a locations of additional
instrumentation are identified by crosses.
2120
3.2.3 Commercial plant testing
1. The third phase of the work is to be carried out on some commercial
MSF distillers. They are to be equipped with essential components to
carry out tests of similar nature to those proposed in a pilot plant (in 2b1
above). Figure 2b shows monitoring locations for the proposed tests as
marked (again) by crosses.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author acknowledges the support as well as the fruitful discussion with Dr. Dalvi
and Dr. Osman, heads of Chemistry and Thermal Departments, respectively, at SWCC
Research and Development Center (RDC), Al-Jubail, Saudi Arabia. Also the assistance
provided by Messrs Mustafa M. Ghulam, Khalid Bamardoof, Rafique Mubarak
Imambakhsh and Syed Mohammed Iqbal.
2121
Table 1. Ball per (day-tube) as a misrepresentative parameter
Case No. of tubes No. of balls
per cycle No. of cycles/day
Balls per (tube-day)
Single ball per tube-day*
Effective cleaning
A 3000 3000 1 1 37% Poor B 3000 1500 2 1 50% Good C 3000 750 4 1 54% Very good
• See Figure 5 as effective cleaning is a cumulative value. With a 10% reduction factor to take care of probable overlaps in multi cycle operation.
Table 2. Pilot Plant Chemical Analytical Results Parameter Unit Seawater
to HRJS Brine recycle To HRCS
Brine Recycle Ex. BH
Brine blow down
pH Unit 8.2 8.40 8.30 8.44 Conductivity µS/cm 58000 67800 67500 72000 M.Alkalinity mg/l* 128 137 126 138 Sulfate mg/l 3200 3795 3795 4015 TDS mg/l 44000 58260 57780 62820 Total Hardness mg/l 6700 9600 9600 10200 Calcium mg/l 490 621 621 641 Magnesium mg/l 1420 1958 1958 2079 *mg/l ≅ ppm, in the case of alkalinity it is measured as CaCO3
2122
Figure 1. Originally Proposed Versus Optimized Antiscalant Dose Rate
DISTILLATE
DISTILLATE PUMPS
SEA WATER SUPPLY
REJECT SEA WATER TO DRAIN / NF
MAKEUPFROM RO
HEAT RECOVERY STAGES
BRINE RECIRCULATION PUMP
MAKEUP PUMP
HEAT REJECT STAGES
BLOWDOWN
LIC
LIC
TIC
DEAERATOR
FLASHTANK
TO EJECTOR SYSTEM
CONDENSATE
LIC
LIC
DECARBONATOR
BLOWER
FIC
ANTIFOAM
ANTI -SCALANT
SODIUMBISULFITE
ACID
STEAMSUPPLY
CONDENSATETO FLASH TANK
EJECTOR CONDENSER
Figure 2(a). Schematic Diagram of MSF Pilot Plant
REDUCTION IN ANTISCALANT DOSE RATES(Before & After Optimization Program)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120
TOP BRINE TEMPERATURE (TBT), O C
AN
TIS
CA
LAN
T D
OS
E R
ATE
, ppm
Dose Rates Recommended in 1981
Dose Rates as Optimized in 1986
Dose Rates as Optimized in 1996
Dose Rates as Proposed Optimum
2123
Figure 2(b). Schematic Diagram of Al-Jubail MSF Plant Phase II
SEA WATER
X X X X
SEA WATER REJECT DISCHARGE
BRINE HEATER
ANTISCALANT TANK
SODIUM SULFITE
ACID TANK ANTIFOAM TANK
CONDENSATE PUMP HEAT RECOVERY STAGES
DEAERATOR
H/P STEAM
L/P STEAM
BRINE BLOWDOWN PUMP
BRINE RECYCLE PUMP MAKEUP
TEMPERING PUMP
EJECTOR CONDENSER SYSTEM
CONDENSATE
PRODUCT WATER
FBT FBC
RBC
SWC
BH HRC HRJ
RBT
SWT
FBT - Flashing Brine Temperature RBT - Recyc le Brine Temperature FBC - Flashing Brine Concentration RBC - Recycle Brine Concentration SWC - Sea Water Concentration
SWT - Sea Water Temperature
Temp. Conc.
Figure 3. Temperature & concentration gradients in MSF Distillers
2124
Figure 4, TYPICAL TREND OF DEPOSITION IN MSF DISTILLERS
DE
PO
SIT
ION
TF
FC-DPF
BH HRC HRJ
TF - Tube Fouling
FC-DPF - Flash Chamber & Demister Pad Fouling
Figure 4. Typical trend of deposition in MSF distillers
2125
a) 100% Balls to Tubes
b) 50% Balls to Tubes
c) 25% Balls to Tubes
32.1
37
18
9
3
0.9
% Dist.
51
27.5
15
5
1
0.5
% Dist.
66.4
20
10
2
0.6
0.1
% Dist.
Figure 5. Ball Distribution Probabilities with different Percent of Balls to Tubes (in any one cycle)
2126
Figure 6 A. Deviations off normal deposition tendency in heat exchangers Tubes of MSF distillers
Figures 6b. Deviations off normal deposition tendency in demister pads of MSF distillers.
2127
Figure 7A. Uneven Slugging Figure 7B. Heavy Slugging
Figure 7C. Blockage of Heat Recovery Figure 8. Blockage of Heat Recovery Section Inlet Tube Sheet Section Inlet Tube Sheet
2128
REFERENCES
1. Al-Sofi, M.AK., Al-Hussain M. A. and Al-Zahrani S. G., (1987), Additive Scale Control Optimization and Operation Modes, Desalination, 66, 11-32.
2. Al-Sofi, M. AK., Khalaf, S. and Al-Omran, A. A., (1989), Practical Experience in Scale Control, Desalination, 73, 313-325.
3. Shams El-Din, A. M. and Rizk, A. M., (1988), on the thermal stability of the HCO3
- and CO32- ions in aqueous solutions, Desalination, 69, 241-249.
4. Shams El-Din, A. M. and Rizk, A. M., (1994), Brine and scale chemistry in MSF distillers, Desalination, 99, 73-111.
5. Nada N., (1986), Operating Experience of MSF units, Topics in Desalination, SWCC.
6. Finan, M. A., Smith, S., Evans, C. K., Muir, J. W. H., (1989), Belgard - 15 years’ Experience in Scale Control, Desalination, 73, 341.
7. Al-Sofi, M.AK., Hamed, O.A. and Mustafa, G.M., (1997), Evaluation of a modified polyphosphonate as an additive in Multistage Flash distillers, 2nd O&M Acquired Experiences in SWCC, Al-Jubail, Saudi Arabia.
8. Al-Gobaisi, D. M. K., (1994), A quarter century of seawater desalination by large multistage flash plants in Abu Dhabi, Desalination, 99, 483-509.
9. Al-Sofi, M.AK., Al-Hussain, M. A. Al-Omran, A. A. and Farran, K. M., (1993), A full decade of operating experience in Al-Khobar Phase II MSF plants, 6th IDA World Congress, Yokohama, Japan.
10. Al-Sofi, M. AK., El-Sayed, E. F., Imam, M., Mustafa G. M., Hamada, T., Haseba, S. and Goto T., (1995), Heat Transfer Measurement as a Criterion for Performance Evaluation of Scale Inhibition in MSF plants, 7th IDA World Congress, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 3, 191.
11. Al-Sofi, M.AK., Hamada T., Tanaka Y. and Al-Sulami S. A., (1994), Laboratory testing of antiscalant threshold effectiveness, 2nd WSTA Gulf Water Conference, Manama, Bahrain, 2, 66-76.
12. Hodgkiss, T. (1980), A short course on desalination technology, chapter 19, King Abdul Aziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, p. 200.
13. Harris, A., (1983), Desalination technology, developments and practice, chapter 2, Applied science publishers, London and New York, 31-9 (Edited by: Andrew Porteous).
14. Shams El-Din, A.M. and Rizk, A.M., (1989), The problem of Alkaline scale formation from a study on Arabian gulf water, Desalination, 71, 313-324.
15. Shams El-Din, A.M. and Rizk, A.M., (1988), A 700-Day Experiment with Belgerd EV – 2000 as anti-scale agent in MSF distillers, Desalination, 69, 147 – 160.
16. Mubarak, A., (1997), A kinetic model for scale formation in MSF desalination plants effect of antiscalants, Third WSTA Gulf Water Conference, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman, 2, 409 – 423.
2129
17. Maio, A. De., Zannoni, R., Ronzoni, A., Boari, G., Siberti, L. and Santoni, (1983), Desalination of seawater make-up to MSF, Desalination, 45, 197.
18. Hassan, A.M., Al-Sofi, M.AK., Al-Amodi, A.S., Jamaluddin, A.T.M., Dalvi, A.G.I., Kither, N.M., Mustafa, G., Al-Tissan, I.A.R., (1998), A two part article, in Desalination and Water Reuse Quarterly, in May-June & September – October issues, Vol. 8/1&2, 54-59 & 35-45.
19. Hassan, A.M., Al-Sofi, M.AK., Al-Amoudi, A.S., Jamaluddin, A.T.M., Farooque, A.M., Rowaili, A., Dalvi, A.G.I., Kither, N.M., Mustafa, G.M., and Al-Tissan, I.A.R., (1998), A new approach to membrane and thermal seawater desalination processes using nanofiltration membranes (part 1), Desalination, 118, 35 – 51.
20. Hassan, A.M., Al-Sofi, M.AK., Al-Amoudi, A.S., Jamaluddin, A.T.M., Farooque, A.M., Rowaili, A., Dalvi, A.G.I., Kither, N.M., Mustafa, G.M., and Al-Tissan, I.A.R., (1999), A new approach to membrane and thermal desalination processes using nanofiltration membranes (part 2), 4th WSTA Gulf Water Conference Proceedings, Vol. 2, Manama, Bahrain.
21. Al-Sofi, M.AK., Hassan, A.M., Mustafa, G.M., Dalvi, A.G.I., Kither, N.M. (1998), Nanofiltration as a means of achieving higher TBT of ≥ 120 °C in MSF, Desalination, 118, 123 – 129.
22. Dalvi, AG. I., Kither, M.N.M., AL-Sulami, S.A., Sahul, K. and Al-Rasheed, R.A., (1999), Effect of some chemical constituents in recycle brine on the performance of scale control additives, SWCC – RDC Report No. TR 3803 / APP 95001.
23. Dalvi, AG. I., Kither, M.N.M., Al-Sulami, S.A., Sahul, K. and Al-Rasheed, (1999), Effect of various forms of Iron in recycle brine on the performance of scale control additives in MSF Desalination plant, WSTA 4th Gulf Water Conference, Bahrain, Vol. 2,. 663-677.
2130