# Design of Pyrolysis Plant for Waste Methyl Ethyl Ketone from the Polarizer Manufacturing Process
## 3 Results and Discussion
### Model of Lab-Scale System
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Model** & **Thermal Cracking Unit** & **Cyclone-Heat Exchanger Unit** \\ \hline
**Software** & **SOLIDWORKS Flow Simulation** & **SOLIDWORKS Flow Simulation** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Mesh} & Total cells: 1,416,169 & Total cells: 3,341,314 \\  & Fluid cells: 628,680 & Fluid cells: 2,171,307 \\  & Solid cells: 787,489 & Solid cells: 1,170,007 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Boundary Conditions} & Gas Inlet: 36 g/min @ 298 K & Gas Inlet: 36 g/min @ 1173 K \\  & Real Wall: 1173 K & Water Inlet: 30 LPM @ 298 K \\  & Outlet: 1 bar @ 298 K & Outlet: 1 bar @ 298 K \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Materials} & Fluid: Syn-gas & Fluid: Methane\&H\({}_{2}\)O \\ \cline{2-3}  & Solid: Steel Stainless & Solid: Steel Stainless \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Result} & Heating Cylinder: & Tube Side: \\  & Average Heat Transfer Coefficient: 2.868 W/m\({}^{2}\)/K & Average Heat Transfer Coefficient: 529.6 W/m\({}^{2}\)/K \\  & Average Tube Wall Temperature: 1173 K & Average Tube Wall Temperature: 294.5 K \\  & Average Heat Flux: 2522.88 W/m\({}^{2}\) & Average Heat Flux: -626.3 W/m\({}^{2}\) \\  & Spiral Deflector: & Shell Side: \\  & Average Heat Transfer Coefficient: 4.79 W/m\({}^{2}\)/K & Average Heat Transfer Coefficient: 493.5 W/m\({}^{2}\)/K \\  & Average Tube Wall Temperature: 1105 K & Average Tube Wall Temperature: 294.0 K \\  & Average Heat Flux: 2344 W/m\({}^{2}\) & Average Heat Flux: 488.3 W/m\({}^{2}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: The calculation of the experimental machine. of approximately 15 m/s, particles are effectively captured, as depicted in Figure 6b. The gas temperature, initially ranging from 500 to 600 \({}^{\circ}\)C, is progressively reduced until reaching around 30-40 \({}^{\circ}\)C. This level of cooling is satisfactory for subsequent analysis and provides valuable insights for simulating operational conditions in future large-scale production plants. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline
**NO** & **ASPEN EDR Input/Result** & **Unit** & **Value** \\ \hline
1 & Mass flow rate & kg/s & HotSide: 0.0036; ColdSide: 0.1657 \\
2 & Inlet temperature & \({}^{\circ}\)C & HotSide: 870; ColdSide: 25 \\
3 & Heat exchanged & kW & 8.7 \\
4 & Allowable pressure drop & bar & HotSide: 0.11; ColdSide: 0.2 \\
5 & Fouiling resistance & m\({}^{2}\)\(\cdot\)K/W & HotSide: 0.00035; ColdSide: 0.00035 \\
6 & TEMA type & – & B-E m * \\
7 & Tube OD/Pitch/Pattern & mm & 20.7/29.5/30 Triangular-Unbaffled \\
8 & Shell ID/OD & mm & 203.2/208.92 \\
9 & Tube length & mm & 1000 \\
10 & Number of tubes/Tube passes & – & 37/1 \\
11 & Actual/Required area ratio & – & 0.95 \\
12 & Film coefficient & W/m\({}^{2}\)/K & Overall fouled: 16.7 \\  & & & Overall clean: 16.9 \\ \hline \end{tabular}  
* B: Bonnet bolted or integral with tube sheet; E: One pass shell; M: Bonnet.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Parameter and result of the experimental heat exchanger by EDR. Figure 5: The results of the calculation for (**a**) gas temperature and (**b**) gas velocity in the lab-scale reactor.