Capacity increase of existing

ammonia plants
KLAUS NOELKER
ThyssenKrupp Industrial Solutions AG
Dortmund, Germany

Two case studies are presented for a capacity increase of an existing ammonia plant.
Case 1 describes an actually completed revamp of a plant in Russia. It not only describes
the technology applied but also the different working steps from study to execution It confirms
the rule of thumb that an upgrade up to about 10 to 15 percent can usually be realized with
moderate modifications by utilizing the overdesign being present in some process units.
Encouraged by the success of the project and by the fact that there exist many more
similar plants, Case 2 investigates the technical and economic feasibility of an alternative
concept for capacity increase by 30 percent of the same plant. It shows how limitations in the
two most critical plant units can be overcome: Reforming capacity is increased by adding an
autothermal reformer (ATR), while capacity is added to the ammonia synthesis by
ThyssenKrupp’s patented Dual Pressure Process. One of the advantages of this concept is
the fact that by installation of parallel equipment with few tie-ins only, the shutdown time for
implementation is very short and so is the lost profit.

PLANT REVAMPS
Targets of a Revamp
The most frequent targets of a revamp or retrofit of a chemical plant are:
• increase of production capacity,
• reduction of operating cost, for example by reduction of the energy consumption.
This also applies to the case studies for the ammonia plant revamps presented here.
However, other goals and motivations of such a project can be:
• environmental improvement, e.g. by reduction of emissions in order to comply with new laws and
standards,
• increase of reliability, for example by improvements in technology or material of construction,

- 193 -
 K. Noelker

• improvement of ease of operation, for example by change of control system.

Requirements on a Revamp
A capacity increase shall always use the existing margins and overdesign to get the maximum possible
additional product with the lowest effort necessary. This target inherently asks for finding and removing the
bottlenecks of the plant.
Typically, for a revamp the investment per ton of product is less than for a newly built plant because
existing spare capacity is used as much as possible and only the bottlenecks must be worked on.
It is very important to utilize a well proven and reliable technical concept. Another important requirement is
that this concept allows for a very short downtime for its implementation because every day of downtime
for installation comes at the high price of production loss. Such a concept is presented in this paper.
THE PLANT PRIOR TO THE REVAMP
Kuibyshev Azot is a joint stock company and operates a number of plants in Togliatti near the city of
Samara in Russia. Kuibyshev Azot produces ammonia, nitric acid, ammonium nitrate, urea and other
chemicals and fertilizers. The ammonia plant discussed in this paper is a 1,600 tons per day plant of GIAP
design. It has initially been commissioned in 1977 with a nameplate capacity of 1,360 tons per day.
The plant is a standard GIAP design of the 1970s. What makes the project and the two case studies
presented here particularly interesting is the fact that several dozen of this pant type exist in Russia and
other states of the former Soviet Union. Its process is fairly conventional, with the main features:
• top-fired primary reformer with internal riser pipes,
• bayonet-type HP steam boiler downstream of the secondary reformer,
• CO shift with one vessel for HT and two parallel vessels for LT shift,
• MEA CO2 removal system,
• methanation,
• synthesis gas compression by steam-turbine driven centrifugal compressor,
• synthesis loop with one ammonia converter.
Fig. 1 shows a block diagram of the plant.

Fig. 1: Block Diagram of the existing ammonia plant at Kuibyshev Azot before revamp

In an earlier revamp, the following modifications have already been made:

• change from MEA to activated MDEA as CO2 removal solvent,

194 Nitrogen + Syngas 2015 International Conference & Exhibition (Istanbul 23-26 February 2015)
 Capacity increase of existing ammonia plants

• replacement of the ammonia converter cartridge by a new one with axial/radial flow pattern.
REVAMP CASE 1: SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED REVAMP
Technical Aspects
The purpose of the revamp was to increase the production rate to 1,800 tons per day under summer
conditions, which means by 12.5% above the current and by about 32% above the original nameplate
capacity. Improved energy efficiency by better heat recovery was desired but not the main intention.
The major revamp measures done in the individual units are as follows:
• replacement of a fired heater used for feed preheating and integration of a new feed preheat coil
into the reformer flue gas duct,
• addition of a blower to the suction side of the process air compressor,
• lowering the steam-to-carbon ratio,
• increasing the feed / steam inlet temperature,
• implementation of a synthesis gas drying unit in order to move the feed point for the fresh syngas
to directly upstream of the ammonia converter,
• addition of a second ammonia converter with two radial catalyst beds to the synthesis loop,
located in parallel to the existing converter, as shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2: Synthesis unit of the plant at Kuibyshev Azot after revamp to 1,800 tons per day (Case 1). Red:
Additions in revamp

The last two items relate to the changes in the synthesis loop: In the original configuration, the syngas is
compressed by four make-up stages and one recycle stage, installed in a two-casing compressor driven by
an extraction / condensing steam turbine.
One means to increase the ammonia production is to shift the feed point of the make-up gas to the
synthesis to a place closely upstream of the converter, thus reducing the ammonia concentration at the
first catalyst bed, which increases the driving force for the synthesis reaction. In order to do so, water
needs to be removed from the syngas upstream. Therefore, a drying unit is installed. This unit consists of
an ammonia injection to the syngas, a gas / gas heat exchanger and a separator vessel. By injection of
liquid ammonia the gas cools down whereas water condenses and mixes with the liquid fraction of the
ammonia which is then separated (see red box in Fig. 2).

Nitrogen + Syngas 2015 International Conference & Exhibition (Istanbul 23-26 February 2015) 195
 K. Noelker

The existing ammonia synthesis reactor is not the original equipment but it had already been revamped in
the past to a design with axial / radial flow in the catalyst beds. For more ammonia production, more
catalyst volume is needed. In order to keep the synthesis loop pressure drop low, the new synthesis
reactor is not installed in series as a booster converter but is placed in parallel to the existing one. The new
reactor is a two-bed converter with radial catalyst beds and two internal heat exchangers. For a more
detailed presentation of the revamp measures refer to [1].
Phase Concept for Revamps
One of the differences between a capacity increase and a new-build- project is the fact that at the start of a
revamp project its targets usually are not yet completely defined. Before the ideas are turning into
hardware in the field, the project passes through several phases, each aiming at more precisely defining
the target figures. In each phase also the cost estimate gets more precise and therefore the owner gets
more solid ground to judge on the project’s economics.
The phase approach for revamp projects suggested by ThyssenKrupp Industrial solutions (TKIS, formerly
known as Uhde) consists of the following four phases. For more details refer to Table 1.
Table 1: Phase concept for revamps
Phase Contents Main documents resp. results
1 – Study • Discussion on plant status • Process description
• Collection of operating data • Process flow diagrams with heat and material balance
• Identification of bottlenecks • Cost estimate, typical accuracy +/–30%
• Involvement of vendors for critical • Time schedule for implementation
equipment
• Evaluation of options for improvement
2 – Basic • Preparation of basic engineering by the • Final process flow diagrams with heat and material
Engineering contractor for the preferred option from balance
the study • Specifications for new and modified equipment
• Other engineering documents such as plot plan
• Update of cost estimate
• Detailed time schedule for implementation
3 – Detail • Preparation of detail engineering by the • Detail engineering documents such as piping isometrics,
Engineering contractor order specifications and other
• Equipment order and fabrication
4 – Erection • All activities on site • Construction
and Start-up • Dismantling of equipment no longer in use
• Commissioning
• Operation up to performance test run

• Phase 1 – Study: It starts with data collection and ends with preparation of a revamp study.
Important for its success is the involvement of the owner because his staff knows the plants and
its problems best.
• Phase 2 – Basic Engineering: If the study from phase 1 looks economically feasible, the contractor
prepares the basic engineering including a more accurate cost estimate for the preferred technical
option.
• Phase 3 – Detail Engineering: The contractor prepares the technical documents for installation of
the revamp. Equipment is being ordered and fabrication starts. In order to speed up the project, it
is possible to start with activities of phase 3 while phase 2 is not yet finished, for example by
ordering long delivery equipment items during basic engineering already.
• Phase 4 – Erection and Start-up: This includes all activities on site up to the performance test run.
There is also an overlap between phases 3 and 4 because construction can start while
engineering and fabrication is still ongoing.

196 Nitrogen + Syngas 2015 International Conference & Exhibition (Istanbul 23-26 February 2015)
 Capacity increase of existing ammonia plants

Revamp Implementation
The phase concept was applied to this project. TKIS (at that time Uhde) carried out study and basic
engineering. Detail engineering and procurement was shared between Kuibyshev Azot and TKIS.
Kuibyshev Azot’s technical know-how and experience allowed them to complete a large part of the revamp
on their own. TKIS provided engineering and supply for the proprietary items like the ammonia converter.
In October 2010 the converter was successfully started up with assistance by TKIS and catalyst vendor
Johnson Matthey.
REVAMP CASE 2: ALTERNATIVE REVAMP CONCEPT
Process Concept
In the following, an alternative revamp concept is presented which allows for an even higher capacity
increase. This concept attacks the main bottlenecks of the plant which are the primary reformer and the
ammonia synthesis.
Basis is the same existing plant in Russia. Target is an expansion by 30% over its current capacity of
1,600 tons per day to 2,080 tons per day. Several concepts for its enlargement have been studied and
compared in [2].
Reforming
The most critical and cost intensive part of the synthesis gas generation is the reforming section. The most
promising concept from point of CAPEX and OPEX (see below) is the installation of an autothermal
Reformer (ATR) in parallel to existing reforming section.
Fig. 3 shows the block flow diagram of this process concept. The ATR is operated by oxygen-enriched air
in order not to exceed a reasonable amount of nitrogen in the process gas. The autothermal reformer is a
brick-lined vessel in which the two inlet streams of feed / steam mixture and oxygen are brought to
reaction. The principle design is shown in Fig. 4. Like a secondary reformer, it consists of two zones: First,
of a reaction zone (or combustion zone) at the top, at the inlet of the two streams; and of a second zone
which is the catalyst volume in the bottom.

Fig. 3: Block diagram of the revamp concept (Case 2). New items in dashed / blue.

Nitrogen + Syngas 2015 International Conference & Exhibition (Istanbul 23-26 February 2015) 197
 K. Noelker

Fig. 4: Principle sketch of the autothermal reformer.

The existing reforming section remains essentially unchanged. Since the additional reforming is done
entirely through autothermal reforming, the CO2 content in the process gas is higher than before the
revamp, having a slight impact on the duty of the CO2 removal unit.
Other Front End Units
As the CO shift reactors are sufficiently sized in the reference plant, they can be left unchanged, tolerating
a slightly higher CO content. Alternatively, a parallel HT shift vessel can be installed, helping to keep
pressure drop under control and to achieve a lower CO concentration which is favourable.
The methanation reactor does not need to be changed.
CO2 Removal
As there are many different processes available for CO2 removal, there are also many different options for
a capacity increase.
In the plant of Kuibyshev Azot, the CO2 removal unit had been revamped to activated MDEA earlier.
However, there are other plants of the same type operating with different CO2 removal processes.
Therefore, there are different options for changes in their CO2 removal units.
Options for capacity increase include:
• Change of packing material in the absorber, allowing for higher gas and liquid loads
• Installation of an additional flash step in the desorption section of the solvent cycle for improving
the solvent regeneration
• Change of the activator in UOP BenfieldTM solution to a more effective one
• Complete change of solvent type (e.g. from potassium carbonate to amine-based), involving also
significant modifications at equipment
Typically, the absorber is the bottleneck. Changes in the desorption section are easier to implement as
they involve low-pressure equipment. If needed, additional regeneration heat can be provided by low
pressure stream.
Syngas Compression and Ammonia Synthesis
Upgrading all items in the synthesis loop would be a task which would involve many modifications at the
existing high-pressure piping and equipment. This would cause a high amount of modifications which
would have to be executed in a small area in the very short time interval while the plant is not in operation.
Therefore, any solution is highly welcome which allows installing the new synthesis equipment while the
plant is in operation, and which requires connecting only a few tie-in points during a plant shutdown.

198 Nitrogen + Syngas 2015 International Conference & Exhibition (Istanbul 23-26 February 2015)
 Capacity increase of existing ammonia plants

Such a solution is the Uhde Dual-Pressure Ammonia Synthesis. It consists of a once-through (OT)
ammonia synthesis which is added to the plant on an intermediate pressure level upstream of the
synthesis loop as shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 5: Flow diagram of the once-through synthesis (dashed / blue items), added to the existing synthesis
and synthesis gas compressor (brown) as per the revamp Case 2.

For the 30% capacity expansion the synthesis gas compressor is not able to cope with the significantly
larger flowrate. Hence, an auxiliary compressor parallel to the first and second stage of it has been
selected (not shown in Fig. 5), essentially taking the additional gas up to the intermediate pressure level.
At this pressure level of around 100 bar, the dried synthesis is then passed through the OT synthesis. This
process unit comprises of a gas / gas heat exchanger to heat up the gas to converter inlet temperature, the
actual OT synthesis converter, a steam generator / boiler feed water preheater and a cooling train. The
latter consists of a water cooler and a series of chillers, lowering the process gas temperature to a level for
separation of most of the generated ammonia by condensation.
Subsequently, the remaining process gas is passed on to the third stage of the synthesis gas compressor
for further compression up to the pressure level of the existing ammonia synthesis loop. Since the amount
of ammonia produced and separated in the OT synthesis corresponds to approx. the capacity added by
the revamp, flow rate and composition of the gas fed to the synthesis loop is about the same as in the
original plant.
The Uhde Dual-Pressure Ammonia Process has been successfully installed already for a revamp in a plant
in Slovakia [3], for two new plants in operation [4] (being the two largest single-train ammonia plants in the
world), and for two more plants currently under construction.
Economical Evaluation
Operating Cost (OPEX)
For the operating cost evaluation, the following streams entering the plant are accounted for by their cost
data:
• Feed and fuel gas are represented by their lower heating value (LHV) resp. gas price.
• MP steam is represented by the fuel LHV required for its production in a boiler.
• The imported electrical energy is expressed as the fuel LHV required for generating it via a steam
cycle with an overall efficiency of 30 %, that means 1 kWhel = 12000 kJNG (LHV).
It is justified to consider only energy cost for an OPEX comparison because other contributions like
personnel or maintenance cost are fairly equal for different concepts.

Nitrogen + Syngas 2015 International Conference & Exhibition (Istanbul 23-26 February 2015) 199
 K. Noelker

Of course, the air separation unit with its motor-driven compressor is considered as a new process unit
and for the sake of a fair evaluation it is included in the figures for OPEX and CAPEX (see following
section). This is an important point for ATR concepts. Sometimes in literature oxygen is treated as a utility
stream which is readily available, but usually this is not the case. Therefore the air separation unit (or any
other oxygen supply) must not be forgotten in the cost evaluation.
The specific energy consumption is with 36.91 GJ per ton of ammonia (8.81 Gcal/t) quite high compared to
that of a newly built plant, but there is a slight improvement compared to the original condition, and the
focus of this study is on capacity increase – same as for the actually executed revamp described in the
previous section.
There are many options left to reduce energy consumption. The energy consumption is mostly determined
by the efficiency of the steam system (generation by waste heat and consumption by steam turbines) and
by the efficiency of the reformer. Any improvement found can be applied to the concept presented here as
well as to others. Therefore, for sake of simplicity they are not made a part of this investigation.
Capital Cost (CAPEX)
The capital cost for the revamp is estimated by first estimating the cost of the main equipment (new or
modified as shown in Table 2) and then accounting for other implementation costs by the factor method.
That means, other contributions (piping, instrumentation, electrical, civil, engineering, procurement,
erection and commissioning) are estimated by applying a certain factor, known from experience, to the
equipment cost.

Table 2: Main equipment items in revamp: new, modified, or unchanged.

Equipment item Status
New parallel process air compressor new
Air separation unit new
Steam reformer furnace box expansion –
Replacement of reformer combustion air fan –
Replacement of reformer flue gas fan –
Replacement / modification of secondary reformer –
New autothermal reformer new
New fired heater for process gas preheating new
Process air preheating coil –
Combustion air preheating coil –
Feed / steam preheating coil –
Natural gas preheating coil modified
Waste heat boiler with steam drum new
CO2 absorber new
New once-through ammonia synthesis new
New parallel synthesis gas compressor new

In addition, cost of lost production due to downtime for implementation is added to CAPEX. This is an
important part of the real cost of a capacity expansion. The erection time for the revamp extends over
several months. During this time, the existing plant can continue its operation, but a complete shutdown is
needed only to install the final tie-ins and for commissioning of the new sections.
There are other process options which at first glance may seem more obvious than the revamp concept
presented here, such as:
• for the front end: replacement of the secondary reformer, or increase of the primary reformer size;
• for the back end: installation of a booster ammonia converter plus waste heat recovery and
replacement of equipment in the synthesis loop.

200 Nitrogen + Syngas 2015 International Conference & Exhibition (Istanbul 23-26 February 2015)
 Capacity increase of existing ammonia plants

However, when comparing the presented concept to these ideas, one finds that it offers huge advantages
with respect to final implementation. The parallel ATR and the OT synthesis allow more pre-fabrication and
less interference with the existing plant during construction. They have fewer tie-ins, and only at locations
with relatively low piping design temperatures and moderate pressures. In particular, there are no or only
minor modifications in the synthesis loop. This makes work, especially welding, easier and faster. For the
sake of a fair comparison, the lost profit by extended downtime of the other revamp options must be
considered in the cost evaluation.
For the case study presented here, four weeks of additional downtime caused by an unfavourable concept
translate to an increase of the revamp cost by 15.7 million USD (12.1 million Euro), assuming an ammonia
sales price of 400 USD/t (308 Euro/t)and energy cost of 4.0 USD/MMBTU (12.21 Euro/Gcal).
SUMMARY
In Russia and other countries of the former Soviet Union, several old GIAP ammonia plants of the same
type exist. One of them was successfully revamped jointly by Kuibyshev Azot and ThyssenKrupp Industrial
Solutions to 1,800 tons per day, as described here under Case 1.
This project was occasion to investigate an alternative and higher capacity increase (by 30 percent) of the
same plant, which is applicable to the other plants of this type as well. Its main features are the installation
of an autothermal reformer in parallel to the primary reformer, and a once-through synthesis upstream of
the existing one. This allows leaving critical parts of the plant untouched, especially the reformer and the
synthesis loop. Its economic feasibility has been compared with more conventional concepts.
An important lesson learnt from this study is the following: When comparing concepts for a revamp, not
only their CAPEX and OPEX have to be evaluated. It is a great advantage if new plant sections can be
installed in parallel to existing equipment while the plant is in operation, as per Case 2 presented above.
Therefore it is also important to get a realistic estimation of the downtime needed for the revamp
installation, and to convert the loss of profit for this time into cost which is added to the CAPEX. The fact
that one week additional downtime with the other concepts can be equivalent to additional costs of several
million Euro makes the presented concept even more favourable.
References
[1] D. Lippmann: Successful Execution of Ammonia Plant Revamps in Eastern Europe and Russia, Nitrogen + Syngas
International Conference, Moscow, 2008
[2] K. Noelker: Ammonia Plant Capacity Increase by Autothermal Reforming and Dual Pressure Synthesis, Safety in
Ammonia Plants and Related Facilities Symposium, AIChE, Chicago, 2012
[3] F. Kessler et al., First application of Uhde’s dual pressure ammonia process for revamping of the Duslo ammonia
plant, Nitrogen + Syngas International Conference 2006, Vienna (2006)
[4] K. Noelker: Commissioning Experience of the World’s Largest Ammonia Plant, ACHEMA International Conference
2009, Frankfurt a.M. (2009)

Nitrogen + Syngas 2015 International Conference & Exhibition (Istanbul 23-26 February 2015) 201
 K. Noelker

202 Nitrogen + Syngas 2015 International Conference & Exhibition (Istanbul 23-26 February 2015)