Minimising Butadiene Level in Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) via Non-Stirred Blending with Numerical Approach


  • Mohd Sapiee Amin Faculty of Chemical and Energy Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
  • Norazana Ibrahim Faculty of Chemical and Energy Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
  • Zainal Zakaria Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Jalan UMS, 88400 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia



CFD, LPG, off-specification, on-specification, jet mixing, homogeneous blending time


LPG has variable commercial grades due to its varying LPG composition will yield different properties. Because their properties depend on the composition, the LPG quality will differ based on the source of its production extracted either from refinery streams or natural gas. The composition of propane and butane, which are the two major components in LPG composition, play an important role in reflecting the properties of LPG, as the mixtures influence the boiling points and also meet product specification requirements. Butadiene is also present in LPG, albeit in trace amounts. Although butadiene is a minor component, it must be kept minimised of the total weight fraction due to regulatory limits. Butadiene is a hazardous chemical that, when inhaled, can cause cancer and genetic defects. LPG used for commercial purposes that contain of any carcinogenic substance such as butadiene must also be classified as carcinogenic. The LPG plant operator is facing the problem that imported LPG composition from outside sources contain levels of butadiene that exceed the regulatory limit of 0.5% of weight fraction. LPG composition, containing butadiene levels that exceed 0.5% of weight fraction is considered as off-specification, while butadiene levels less than 0.5% of weight fraction are considered as on-specification the LPG products. To reduce the levels of butadiene that exceed 0.5% of the weight fraction in off-specification LPG products, the blending of on-specification LPG products with off-specification was introduced and provided the most economical method inside the plant. The jet mixing approach was selected to predict the homogeneous blending time for each different off-specification LPG composition because it is the best approximation for natural mixing behaviour. Four empirical mixing time correlations of jet mixing were applied for the prediction of homogeneous blending time; the correlations were derived by Lane and Rice (1982), Maruyama, Ban and Mizushina (1982), Grenville and Tilton (1997) and Hiby and Modigell (1978). The homogeneous blending time predicted by these four mixing time correlations decreased as the quantity of on-specification LPG required increased, which is in good agreement with both simulation results of 95% and 99% mixing. Therefore, due to the development of individual jet mixer correlation, these four mixing time correlation results in different homogeneous blending times was going through the different measurement techniques and monitoring methods in jet mixed tanks.


A. Vinayagamoorthy and C. Sankar. (2012). Service quality of domestic LPG: An empirical study. 1(1), 11-26.

M. Momtaz, N. Tasnim, and M. A. A. S. Choudhury. (2021). A Review of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) as an alternative fuel option and its market scenario in Bangladesh.December 2019.

J. Jonatan. (2012). Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) storage design. Universiti Malaysia Pahang.

F. Shahrier, I. J. Eva, M. Afrin, C. S. Alam, and A. R. M. H. Rashid. (2020). Literature review on LCA of LPG as a transportation and cooking fuel. Proc. Int. Conf. Ind. Mech. Eng. Oper. Manag.

Z. Zainal, A. Mustafa, and M. Hanapi. (2006). Heat and mass transfer studies in liquefied petroleum gas storage operations. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

K. Hughes, M. E. Meek, M. Walker, and R. Beauchamp. (2001). Concise international chemical assessment document 30: 1,3-Butadiene: Human health aspects. IPCS Concise Int. Chem. Assess. Doc., 30, 1-73.

Safety Data Sheet. (2013). NGC Energy Liquefied Petroleum Gas, Kuala Lumpur.

A. G. C. Lane and P. Rice. (1982). Comparative assessment of the performance of the three designs for liquid, 1978, 650-653,

J. Tisa, J. Lepika, and J. Nedumaan. (2019). Domestic robot for LPG and AC gas leakage detection. Int. J. Comput. Appl., 178(28), 1-3. Doi: 10.5120/ijca2019919090.

P. Poonam, G. Ritik, S. Tiwari, and A. Sharma. (2019). IOT based air pollution monitoring system using esp8266-12 with google firebase. Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol., 04(10). Doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1362/1/012072.

American Chemistry Council’s Olefins Panel Butadiene Product Stewardship Task Group. (200). Product Stewardship guidance manual: Butadiene. [Online]. Available:

K. L. Wasewar. (2006). A design of jet mixed tank. Chem. Biochem. Eng. Q., 20(1), 31-46.

S. Phapatarinan, E. Bumrungthaichaichan, and S. Wattananusorn. (2018). A suitable k-epsilon model for CFD simulation of pump-around jet mixing tank with moderate jet reynolds number. MATEC Web Conf., 192, 1–5. Doi: 10.1051/matecconf/201819203010.

E. Bumrungthaichaichan. (2016). A review on numerical consideration for computational fluid dynamics modeling of jet mixing tanks. Korean J. Chem. Eng., 33(11), 3050-3068. Doi: 10.1007/s11814-016-0236-x.

P. W. Coldrey. (1978). IChemE Course. Univ. Bradford, Engl.

R. K. Grenville and J. N. Tilton. (2018). A new theory improves the correlation of blend time data from turbulent jet mixed vessels. January 1996.

J. W. Hiby and M. Modigell. (1978). 6th CHISA Congress. Prague.

A. Parvareh, M. Rahimi, M. Yarmohammadi, and A. A. Alsairafi. (2009). Experimental and CFD study on the effect of jet position on reactant dispersion performance. Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf., 36(10), 1096-1102. Doi: 10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2009.08.007.

S. Y. Lee. (2013). Mixing Study for JT-71 / 72 Tanks. November.

R. A. Leishear, S. Y. Lee, M. D. Fowley, M. R. Poirier, and T. J. Steeper. (2012). Comparison of experiments to computational fluid dynamics models for mixing using dual opposing jets in tanks with and without internal obstructions. J. Fluids Eng. Trans. ASME, 134(11). Doi: 10.1115/1.4007536.

I. R. Muhammad and J. P. Kizito. (2012). Mixing time determination of steady and pulse jet mixers. ASME Early Career Technical Journal, 11, 219-250.

V. V Ranade. (1996). Towards better mixing protocols by designing spatially periodic flows: The case of a jet mixer. Chem. Eng. Sci., 51(11), 2637-2642.

A. W. Nienow, M. F. Edwards, and N. Harnby. (1997). Mixing in the Process Industries. Butterworth-Heinemann.

M. Simon and C. Fonade. (1993). Experimental study of mixing performances using steady and unsteady jets,” Can. J. Chem. Eng., 71(4), 507-513. Doi:

R. K. Grenville and J. N. Tilton. (1996). “A new theory improves the correlation of blend time data from turbulent jet mixed vessels. Chem. Eng. Res. & Des., 74(3), 390-396.

H. D. Zughbi and M. A. Rakib. (2002). Investigations of mixing in a fluid Jet agitated tank. Chem. Eng. Commun., 189(8), 1038-1056. Doi: 10.1080/00986440213878.

H. D. Zughbi and M. A. Rakib. (2004). Mixing in a fluid jet agitated tank: Effects of jet angle and elevation and number of jets. Chem. Eng. Sci., 59(4), 829-842. Doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2003.09.044.

N. Okita and Y. Oyama. (1963). Mixing characteristics in jet mixing. Chem. Eng., 27, 252-260. Doi: 10.1252/kakoronbunshu1953.27.252.

T. Maruyama, Y. Ban, and T. Mizushina. (1982). Jet mixing of fluids in tanks. J. Chem. Eng. Japan, 15(5), 342-348. Doi: 10.1252/jcej.15.342.