DK5739 CH4

4
Estimation of Capital
Requirements
A company that manufactures a product has funds invested in land, buildings, and
equipment. Some industries require very large capital investments as reflected in
their assets per employee. These industries have a high degree of large, expensive
equipment and automatic control equipment and are said to be “capital
intensive.” Examples of such industries are crude-oil production, energy,
petroleum refining, chemicals, and pharmaceuticals. Other industries that require
a large amount of labor to manufacture or sell a product are said to be “labor
intensive.” Examples are merchandising, textiles, and food consumer products.
National magazines occasionally publish information listing the assets and the
number of employees so that the capital or labor intensiveness may be determined
[1]. Table 4.1 is a list of assets per employee for selected industrial sectors.
Total capital investment includes funds required to purchase land, design,
purchase, and install equipment and buildings, as well as to bring the facility into
operation [2].
A list of these items includes:
Land
Fixed capital investment
Offsite capital
Allocated capital
Working capital
Other capital items
Interest on borrowed funds prior to startup
Catalyst and chemicals
Patents, licenses, and royalties
TM
Copyright © 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
56 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.1 Assets per Employee
Industry sector Assets/employee
Mining, crude oil production $2,203,000

Energy 1,978,000
Petroleum refining 1,373,000
Motor vehicles and parts 446,000
Chemicals 416,000
Pharmaceuticals 394,000
Forest and paper products 360,000
Semiconductors and electronic components 341,000
Beverages 304,000
Computers and office equipment 304,000
Metals 286,000
Soaps, cosmetics 235,000
Aerospace and defense 216,000
Food consumer products 131,000
Rubber and plastics 131,000
General merchandise 79,000
Textiles 75,000
Source: Compiled from Ref. 1.
Each of the above items will be discussed in detail in this chapter. Not
every item in the list appears in every estimate.
4.1 LAND
Although land is a small part of the total capital investment, it should be included.
Companies will frequently purchase a tract of land for a future plant location and
will allocate a parcel of this land at cost to a project when the project is
authorized. Other companies consider land as a sunk cost and since it is small will
eliminate it from economic evaluation considerations.
Land costs may be obtained by checking with the firm’s real estate
department (if it has one). Local chambers of commerce or real estate agents may
be able to give information on land costs. In the absence of such data, and for
preliminary estimates only, about 3% of the fixed capital investment may be used
to estimate land costs.
4.2 FIXED CAPITAL INVESTMENT

The fixed capital investment for a plant includes the manufacturing equipment,
piping, ductwork, automatic control equipment, structures, insulation, painting,
TM
Estimation of Capital Requirements 57
site preparation, and environmental control equipment, as well as engineering

and contractor’s costs. One may think of it as that part of the total investment
pertinent to the manufacturing of a product; it is “fixed” to the land. It is the
depreciable part of the total capital investment. Land is not a part of the fixed
capital investment and is not depreciable. Numerous techniques are available for
estimating the fixed capital investment and shall be discussed in detail in
following sections.
4.2.1 Capital Cost Estimates

When a firm considers a project to manufacture a product, a capital cost estimate
is prepared. An in-house engineering staff may develop the estimate, if the staff is
large enough, or the estimate may be outsourced to an engineering or consulting
company.
4.2.1.1 Classification of Estimates
There are two broad classes of cost estimates: grass-roots and battery-limits
estimates. The former, also called a green-field estimate, is a descriptive term. It
means the entire facility is estimated starting with site preparation and includes
building and structures, processing equipment, utilities, service facilities, storage
facilities, railroad yards, and docks. A battery-limits estimate is one in which
there is an imaginary boundary drawn around the facility to be estimated. It is
assumed that all raw materials, utilities, services, etc. are available at the
boundary in the proper quantity and with the desired quality to manufacture
the product in question. Only costs within this boundary are estimated—hence
the name battery-limits estimate.
4.2.1.2 Quality of an Estimate
Capital cost estimation is more an art than a science. An estimator must use a
great deal of judgment in the preparation of an estimate. As the estimator gains
experience, the accuracy of the estimate improves.
Estimates may be classified further based upon the quality and the amount
of required information. In an attempt to bring order to the types of estimates, The
American Association of Cost Engineers [3] has proposed the following:
Estimate type Accuracy range
Order of magnitude 2 30 to þ 50%

Budget 2 15 to þ 30%
Definitive 2 5 to þ 15%
Many companies have a fourth type between the budget and the definitive
type called an authorization estimate which has an accuracy range of 2 10% to
TM
58 Chapter 4
þ 20%. Still other companies may have a fifth category called detailed estimate
that has a purported accuracy range of 2 5% to þ 10%. The five-category
breakdown is as follows:
Estimate type Accuracy range
Order of magnitude 2 30% to þ 50%

Study 2 25% to þ 30%
Preliminary 2 20% to þ 25%
Definitive 2 10% to þ 20%
Detailed 2 5% to þ10%
During inflationary periods, there is an overlap in the accuracy range and

therefore the distinction between estimates may be blurred. Figure 4.1 shows the
relationship between the two estimating procedures.
In this text, the five-category estimate shall be used. Nichols [4] in 1951
prepared an estimating guide of information required to prepare capital cost
estimates. A similar guide, Figure 4.2 [5], based upon the Nichol’s chart, will be
FIGURE 4.1 Relationship between two estimating procedures. (From Refs. 2, 3.)
TM
FIGURE 4.2 Information guide for capital cost estimates. (Adapted from Ref. 5.)
TM
60 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.2 Cost of Preparing a Capital Cost Estimate
Type of estimate Cost (% of capital cost)
Order of magnitude 0.01–0.05

Study 0.10–0.20
Preliminary 0.20–0.50
Definitive 0.40–1.50
Detailed 1.00–5.00
Source: Refs. 2, 3.
used in this text. From the guides, it is apparent that the more information
available, the better the accuracy of the estimate.
An estimate might be prepared and used as follows:
To select a business opportunity from alternative proposals
To select a process design from a number of alternatives
To prepare feasibility studies
To appropriate funds for construction
To present and select engineering bids
To facilitate cost control of a project during implementation
Before preparing an estimate, it is advisable to consider carefully the
purpose for which the estimate is to be used. For example, in the early stages of
process development, an order-of-magnitude estimate may suffice for screening
ideas whereas study estimates may be used for preparing preliminary
economics. If the results appear promising, then perhaps a preliminary estimate
with bids on selected major equipment items might be prepared. Preliminary
estimates are often used for economic planning, refining economics, and
perhaps requesting authorization from management to do further engineering. If
the project economics are still promising, a definitive estimate may be prepared
to seek project fund and construction authorization. Ultimately, a definitive or
detailed estimate for plant construction and budget control will be prepared. The
cost of preparing estimates increases according to the type of estimate, as shown
in Table 4.2.
Anyone concerned with the results of estimates should recognize the
degrees of variability inherent in an estimate basis. A widely accuracy range
indicates that there is a strong possibility that there would be a large degree of
uncertainty and an overrun, especially if a preliminary estimate is used for
appropriation of funds. Sometimes this fact is not made clear to management and
no one should risk an appropriation based upon preliminary figures although
there may be pressure to obtain numbers quickly.
TM
4.2.1.3 Equipment Cost Data

The foundation of a fixed capital investment estimate is the equipment cost data.
From these data, through the application of factors or percentages based upon
experience, a fixed capital investment estimate may be prepared. It is essential to
have reliable equipment cost data but the engineer preparing the estimate must
exercise good judgment in the selection and application of the data. There are
many sources of data listed in the literature [6 – 12], but some are old and the latest
data published was in 1990 [12]. There has been no significant cost data published
in the open literature since that date. It is essential for the estimator to know:
. Source of the data
. Basis for the cost data
. Date of the cost data
. Potential errors in the cost data
. Range over which the cost data apply
Most data clearly state the date of the data but should the source be a
textbook, it is advisable that if no date is given, deduct 2 years from the
publication of the text for a base date. One should seek the latest cost data since
the data reflect new technology and improved designs. Old cost data, 10 or more
years old, should be suspect and if no new data are available, the judicious
application of cost indexes may be used as a last resort to update costs. It is true
that some equipment item designs have not changed in 15 – 20 years.
In order to obtain current cost data, one should solicit bids from equipment
vendors. It is essential to impress on the vendor that the information is to be used
for preliminary estimates. One disadvantage of using the vendor source is that
there is a chance of compromising proprietary information.
4.2.1.3.1 Data Presentation. Cost data are stated as purchased, delivered, or
installed costs. Purchased cost is the price of the equipment FOB (free on
board) at the manufacturer’s plant. Delivered cost is the price of the equipment
plus delivery charges to the purchaser’s plant FOB. For estimating purposes,
delivery charges east of the Mississippi River range from 3 to 5% of the
purchased cost and these charges are 7– 10% of the purchased costs on the
West coast.
Some cost data are reported as installed cost. This means the equipment
item, for instance, a centrifugal pump has been purchased, delivered, uncrated,
and placed on a foundation in an operating department but does not include
piping, electrical, insulation costs. Perhaps a more accurate term would be set-in-
place cost.
Equipment cost data are correlated as a function of equipment parameters.
This correlation technique is used whether the costs are purchased, delivered, or
installed equipment costs. Typical capacity parameters are presented in Table 4.3.
TM
62 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.3 Cost-Capacity Parametersa
Equipment Capacity factorsb
Heat exchangers Surface area, number of passes, pitch, type head, pressure
Tanks, receivers Volume, pressure, vertical or horizontal
Pumps Head, capacity, type of pump, motor size
Blowers, fans Flow rate, pressure, motor size
Compressors Capacity, discharge pressure, number of stages, motor size
Towers Height, diameter, internals (plates or packing), operating
pressure
Filters Filter area, pressure, type
Dust collectors Flow rate, pressure, type
Wet scrubbers Flow rate
Cyclone separator Flow rate, type
Cooling towers Capacity, approach temperature
Conveyors Length, type
Dryers Drying area, or volume
Evaporators Heat exchanger area, type
Furnaces Heat transferred, type
Mills Mill capacity, type
Reactors Reactor volume, pressure, type
Source: Ref. 2.
a
Cost data are frequently expressed as a function of equipment factors.
b
Materials of construction is a variable in all the above equipment.
A simple convenient method of presenting cost data is by an equation:

n
S2
C2 ¼ C1 ð4:1Þ
S1
where
C1 ¼ cost for equipment capacity S1
C2 ¼ cost for equipment capacity S2
n ¼ an exponent that varies between 0.30 and 1.20 depending on the type
of equipment
Equation (4.1) is known as the six-tenths or 0.6, rule. This equation permits
the user to obtain a cost for an equipment item of a different size when the cost for
given size is known. For most process equipment, the exponent varies between
0.4 and 0.8 with an average value of about 0.6. When the exponent is unknown,
this value may be used. Typical equipment cost-capacity exponents are found in
Table 4.4. An extensive list of cost-capacity exponents was published by Remer
and Chai in 1990 [6].
Example 4.1 is an example of the application of the 0.6 rule.
TM
TABLE 4.4 Cost-Capacity Exponentsa
Equipment group Average exponent
General equipment 0.68

Heat exchange equipment 0.68
Fluid-moving equipment 0.63
Tanks, vessels, and towers 0.63
Environmental equipment 0.82
Source: Ref. 6.
a
Average cost-capacity exponents for equipment groups are
presented in this table. For a detailed listing of exponents by
specific equipment, see Appendix D.
Example 4.1
Problem Statement:
Recently a cast iron leaf pressure filter with 100 ft2 was purchased for
clarifying an inorganic liquid stream for $15,000. In a similar application, the
company will need a 450 ft2 cast iron leaf pressure filter. The size exponent for this
type filter is 0.6 (see Appendix D). Estimate the purchased price of the 450 ft2 unit.
Solution:

capacity450 0:6
Cost450 ¼ cost100
capacity100

450 0:6
¼ $15; 000 ¼ $15; 000ð2:47Þ ¼ $37; 050
100
Graphical Presentation. Equipment cost data are presented in the literature

by Guthrie [7], Hall et al. [8], Hall et al. [9], Peters and Timmerhaus [10], Garrett
[11], and Page [12] as logarithmic plots of cost as a function of equipment
capacity. Figure 4.3 is a typical example of a cost-capacity plot. Special attention
must be paid to the cost, be it purchased, delivered, or installed.
Although some cost-capacity plots indicate a straight-line relationship,
these lines are not straight. They are slightly curved at both the low-capacity
and high-capacity ends of the plot, and therefore large errors may be produced
at either end of the capacity scale. Actually, the exponent is not a constant in
any given case and the manner in which it varies may not be known. The cost-
capacity plot, Figure 4.4, shows that n could vary from 0.4 to 0.9 over the
desired range. If possible, before using any cost-capacity data, it is advisable to
determine how the data were obtained and correlated. The data accuracy may
TM
64 Chapter 4
FIGURE 4.3 Typical equipment cost-capacity plot. (From Ref. 2.)
be high over a very narrow range of capacity, usually in the middle of the
range. C. A. Miller [13] reported that errors are introduced:
. If one attempts to correlate cost data with one independent variable,
especially when more than one variable is needed to represent the data
. If attempts are made to correlate cost with capacity when pressure and
temperature, materials of construction, and design features vary considerably
. If one line is drawn through smoothed data when more than one line, perhaps
a curve, is needed.
. If technological advances in equipment design take place or no consideration
is given to the “learning curve” in presenting cost correlations
TM
FIGURE 4.4 Variations of n in a cost-capacity plot.
If we assume that for an equipment item, a cost-capacity exponent is 0.6,

doubling the capacity will increase the cost about 50 –60%, not 100%. The
economy of scale is reflected in the exponent. If the exponent is less than 1.0,
there is an economy of scale. As n approaches the value of 1, the economy of
scale disappears. An exponent greater than 1.0 is a negative economy of scale and
multiple equipment units should be used. This is true not only for equipment
items but also for cost data for entire plants.
Algorithm Format. A more convenient way to display cost-capacity data
is by an algorithm. They are readily adaptable in computer cost-estimating
programs. Cost data may be represented by using an equation with equation
modifiers to account for pressure, temperature, materials of construction,
equipment design type, etc. For example, a shell-and-tube heat exchanger cost
developed for ASPEN [14] may be estimated from the following basic
equation:
CE ¼ 1:218 CB F D F MC F P ð4:2Þ
where
CE ¼ exchanger cost
CB ¼ base cost of a carbon steel, floating-heads exchanger, 150 psig design
pressure
FD ¼ design-type cost factor if different from that in CB
FMC ¼ material of construction cost factor
FP ¼ design pressure cost factor
TM
66 Chapter 4
Correlations for base cost, design type factor, material of construction

factor, and design pressure factor can be developed as secondary algorithms:
Base cost:
C B ¼ exp ½8:821 2 0:30863ln ð AÞ þ 0:0681ðln AÞ2 ð4:3Þ
2
where A is the heat transfer area between 150 and 12,000 ft
Design type, FD:
Fixed head exp [2 1.1156 þ 0.0906(ln A)]

Kettle reboiler 1.35
U tube exp [2 0.9816 þ 0.0830(ln A)]
Design pressure range (psig), FP:
100 –300 0.7771 þ 0.04981(ln A)

300 –600 1.0305 þ 0.07140(ln A)
600 –900 1.1400 þ 0.12088(ln A)
Material of construction:
F MC ¼ g1 þ g2 ðln AÞ ð4:4Þ
Material g1 g2
Stainless steel 316 0.8603 0.23296

Nickel 200 1.5092 0.60859
Monel 400 1.2989 0.43377
Inconel 600 1.2040 0.50764
Incoloy 825 1.1854 0.49706
Titanium 1.5420 0.42913
Hastlelloy 0.1549 0.51774
Material
Shell/tube fm
cs/cs 1.0
cs/304L stainless 1.9
cs/316 stainless 2.2
TM
Pressure
Bars fp
,4 1.00
4–6 1.10
6–7 1.25
To bring the cost obtained from the above relationships to the present time
(late 2002), it is necessary to multiply the cost by 1.25. Walas [15] published
algorithms for a variety of equipment that may be found in Appendix C.
4.2.1.4 Equipment Sizing

Before equipment costs can be obtained, it is necessary to calculate equipment
sizes, specify operating temperatures and pressures as well as materials of
construction. To size equipment, one must prepare material and energy balances to
determine the quantities of material processed and the amount of energy
transferred. With the above information, preliminary equipment sizes may be
determined. In this text, it shall be assumed that a preliminary cost of equipment is
to be developed. To assist the reader in the sizing task, heuristics or rules of thumb
may be used for a preliminary estimate. Rules of thumb published by Walas [15]
may be used to size equipment and they are found in Appendix B. Other rules of
thumb may be found in Refs. 16 – 19.
Example 4.2 is an example of how a rule of thumb is used to size an
equipment item for a preliminary estimate.
Example 4.2
Process design of a shell-and-tube heat exchanger
Problem Statement:
An oil at a rate of 490,000 lb/hr is to be heated from 100 to 170 F with
145,000 lb/hr of kerosene at initially at 390 F from another plant unit. The
oil stream enters at 20 psig and the kerosene stream at 25 psig. The physical
properties are:
Oil 0.85 sp. gr.; 3.5 cP at 135 F; 0.49 sp.ht.
Kerosene 0.82 sp.gr.; 0.4 cP; 0.61 sp.ht.
Estimate the cost of an all carbon steel exchanger in late 2002. Assume a counter-
flow 1 – 2 shell-and-tube heat exchanger.
Energy required to heat oil stream ¼ ð490; 000Þð0:49Þð170 2 100 FÞ
¼ 16; 807; 000 Btu=hr
TM
68 Chapter 4

490,000 0:49
Exit kerosene temperature T ¼ 390 2 ð170 2 100 FÞ
145,000 0:61
¼ 200 F
220 2 100 120
LMTD ¼ ¼ ¼ 152:2 F
ln 2:2 0:788
Calculating the F factor for efficiency:
170 2 100
P¼ ¼ 0:241
390 2 100
390 2 200
R¼ ¼ 2:71
170 2 100
F ¼ 0:88
(from Perry [5])
Since the F factor must be greater than 0.75, this exchanger is satisfactory. Then
DT ¼ ðFÞðLMTDÞ ¼ ð0:88Þð152:2Þ ¼ 133:9 F
From Appendix B, a UD of 50 Btu/hr ft2 F is satisfactory.
Q ¼ U D A DT ¼ 16; 807; 000 ¼ ð50ðAÞð133:9Þ
A ¼ 2510 ft2
Use the heat exchanger cost algorithm:

C b ¼ exp ½8:821 2 0:30863ðln AÞ þ 0:0681ðln AÞ2
C b ¼ exp ½8:821 2 0:30863ð7:83Þ þ 0:0681ð61:3Þ ¼ $39; 300
f d ¼ 1:0
f m for cs=cs material ¼ 1:0
f p ¼ 1:00 ðsince this exchanger is operating below 4 barÞ:
Therefore,
C ¼ f d f m f p C b ¼ ð1:0Þð1:0Þð1:0Þð$39,300Þ ¼ $39,300 in 1986
CE Index 1986 ¼ 318

CE Index late 2002 ¼ 398
The cost of this heat exchanger in late 2001 is ($39,300)(398/315) ¼
$49,200.
TM
4.2.1.5 Cost Indexes

Cost data are presented as of a specific date. They are adjusted through the use of
cost indexes that are based upon constant dollars in a base year and actual dollars
in a specified year. The base year selected for each index was a period in which
inflation was flat and the economy stable. Most published cost indexes are about
6 months behind. Projections of cost data into the near future have to take into
account not only inflation rates but also short-term estimates of what an index
might be. Correction for inflation is, at best, an estimate of what the economy
might do. This topic will be discussed later in this chapter. Many cost indexes are
published on a regular basis. Some indexes can be used for estimating equipment
costs while other indexes apply only to labor and materials in specialized fields.
Selected cost indexes are found in Table 4.5.
4.2.1.5.1 Marshall and Swift Cost Index (M&S). The Marshall and Swift
Index, originally known as the Marshall and Stevens Index, was established in the
base year, 1926, with a value of 100. The index is reported as a composite of two
TABLE 4.5 Cost Indexes
Year M&S Index(1)(2)a CE Index(1)(2) Nelson –Farrar Index(1)(3)
Base 1926 ¼ 100 1957–1959 ¼ 100 1946 ¼ 100
1980 675 261 823

1985 813 325 1074
1990 915.1 357.6 1225.7
1991 930.6 361.3 1252.9
1992 943.1 358.2 1277.3
1993 964.2 359.2 1310.8
1994 993.4 368.1 1349.7
1995 1027.5 381.1 1392.1
1996 1039.1 381.7 1418.9
1997 1056.8 386.5 1449.2
1998 1061.9 389.5 1477.6
1999 1068.3 390.6 1497.2
2000 1089.0 394.1 1542.7
2001 1094.3 396.8 1574.2
2002 1104.2 398.1 ——
3Q Sept. June
Sources: (1) Ref. 2. (2) From 1990 on, the M&S and CE indexes are from Chemical
Engineering [20]. (3) The Nelson–Farrar indexes from 1990 on are found in Oil and Gas
Journal [22].
a
Process industry average instead of all-industry average.
TM
70 Chapter 4
major components, namely, a process-industry equipment average and all-

industry equipment average. The process-industry equipment average is based
upon selected process industries. The percentages used for this average are
cement, 2; chemicals, 48; clay products, 2; glass, 3; paint, 5; paper, 10; petroleum
products, 22; and rubber, 8. Related industries such as electric power, mining and
milling, refrigeration, and steam power are also included. The M&S Index tracks
equipment costs and installation labor, thereby reflecting changes in installed
equipment costs. The all-industry average is a simple arithmetic average of
individual indexes for 47 different types of industrial, commercial, and housing
equipment. Included in the Marshall and Swift Index is a correction for changes
in labor productivity. This index is found in each issue of Chemical Engineering,
on the pages entitled Economic Indicators [20].
4.2.1.5.2 Chemical Engineering Index (CE). The Chemical Engineering Index
was established in the early 1960 s using a base period of 1957 –1959 as 100. The
index consists of four major components:
Component Weight factor, %
Equipment, machinery, and supports 61

Construction labor 22
Building materials and labor 7
Engineering and supervision 10
Total 100
The dominant components, equipment, machinery, and supports consist of

the following subcomponents:
Subcomponent Weight factor, %
Heat exchangers and tanks 37

Process machinery 14
Pipe, valves, and fittings 20
Process instruments 7
Pumps and compressors 7
Electrical equipment 5
Structural supports and miscellaneous 10
Total 100
This index is intended for use in escalating process plant construction costs
and is designed to reflect trends in chemical process equipment costs. In
determining the value of the index, prices for the above components were
obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Producer Price Index [21]. The CE
Index is updated monthly and reflects short-term changes in chemical industry
TM
plant costs, although it lags in time by about 3 months. In 1982, a correction was
introduced to reflect changes in labor productivity; in January 2002, it was
revised by updating the components making up the index and in revising the
productivity factor. Like the M&S Index, the CE Index is found in Chemical
Engineering under Economic Indicators [20].
4.2.1.5.3 Nelson –Farrar Indexes (NF). The Nelson – Farrar Indexes were
originally known as the Nelson Refinery Construction Indexes [22]. These
indexes are calculated and published in the first issue each month of the Oil and
Gas Journal with quarterly summaries in January, April, July, and October. The
original indexes were established in 1946 with a value of 100 and are heavily
weighted towards the petroleum and petrochemical industries. The NF Indexes
are based upon the following components:
Pumps, compressors, etc. Heat exchangers

Electrical machinery Miscellaneous equipment, average
Internal combustion engines Materials
Instruments Labor
A more detailed breakdown of each of the above components may be found

in annual index summaries and how the index was determined may be found in
the November 29, 1978 issue of the Oil and Gas Journal. This index does account
for changes in labor productivity.
4.2.1.5.4 Engineering News Record Index (ENR). The Engineering News
Record Index is the oldest cost index. It was established in 1913 with an
arbitrarily set value of 100 and has been adjusted twice as a result of inflation in
1926 and in 1949. The 1913 index today (late 2001) is 6391. The ENR Index is
more suitable for the general construction business than for the CPI. It is based
upon labor craft rates, the cost of lumber, steel and other construction materials
based upon a 46-city average. This index does not account for adjustment in labor
productivity, and, therefore has a tendency to increase more rapidly than other
indexes. The ENR Index may be found weekly in Engineering News Record [23].
4.2.1.5.5 Vatavuk Air Pollution Control Cost Index (VAPCCI). This index is
applicable only to air pollution control equipment. The time base is the first
quarter of 1994 with a value of 100. Air pollution control devices presented are:
Carbon absorbers Mechanical collectors

Catalytic incinerators Refrigeration systems
Electrostatic precipitators Regenerative thermal oxidizers
Fabric filters Thermal incinerators
Flares Wet scrubbers
Gas absorbers
TM
72 Chapter 4
A detailed explanation of the development and use of the VAPCCI may be

found in the Economic Indicators section of Chemical Engineering [20].
4.2.1.5.6 Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The Bureau publishes information
on material and labor indexes for various industries. The best-known and most
useful information is found as the Producer Price Index; see also information in
the Monthly Labor Review [24].
4.2.1.5.7 Mining and Metallurgical Index. This is an index that is specific to
the mining and metallurgical industries. It is found frequently in Cost
Engineering [25].
4.2.1.5.8 EPA – STP Treatment Plant Index. This index is intended for
escalating prices in the primary and secondary waste treatment facilities. The
base period is 1957 – 1959 and the index value is 100. Monthly summaries are
found in the Journal of Water Pollution Control Foundation [26].
4.2.1.5.9 OFJ – Morgan Pipeline Index. As the name of the index implies, it is
specific to the pipeline industry. It is published every 2 months in the Oil and Gas
Journal [22].
4.2.1.5.10 Foreign Indexes. Occasionally, cost indexes for foreign countries,
e.g., Great Britain, Netherlands, France, Germany, and Australia, are published in
Cost Engineering [25]. In using the foreign indexes, one should determine if the
money exchange rate has been taken into account.
4.2.1.5.11 Company Indexes. Companies that have the manpower,
experience, and records should develop their own indexes. These will be more
realistic for a specific site when weighted properly to reflect local equipment and
labor and material costs rather than using a national average.
4.2.1.6 Which Index to Use

The choice of the index to use is based upon the industry in which the person
works. If it is general construction, the ENR Index is the best. An engineer in the
petroleum or petrochemical business might find the NF Index suitable. In the
chemical process industries, either the CE or the M&S are adequate. Although
these latter two indexes have different bases, they give similar results. Some
companies have a preference of one over the other because in their locale
experience has shown that one index is more consistent with company
experience. In this text, the appropriate index will be identified.
One large chemical company located on the Gulf Coast has found that the
M&S Index is more suitable for their operation. The CE Index is more general for
the chemical industry as a whole since it is strongly based upon equipment costs.
For the period from the late 1970s to the late 1980s, the two indexes tracked well
TM
but as equipment prices increased they went their own way. These two indexes
should not be used interchangeably.
4.2.1.7 Use of a Cost Index

A cost index as mentioned earlier is used to project a cost from a base year to
another selected year. The following equation is used:

index at u2
Cost at u2 ¼ cost at u1 ð4:5Þ
index at u1
where
u1 ¼ base year
u2 ¼ selected year
Example 4.3
Problem Statement:
A stainless steel centrifuge cost $85,000 in 1990. What is the cost of that
same centrifuge in 2001? Use the CE Index.
Solution:
CE Index in 1990 ¼ 357:6
CE Index in 2001 ¼ 396:8
CE Index in 2001
Cost in 2001 ¼ cost in 1990
CE Index in 1990

396:8
Cost in 2001 ¼ $85,000
357:6
Cost in 2001 ¼ $94,318
4.2.1.8 Effect of Inflation and Escalation

Projection of costs to some future date is a highly speculative exercise, but it is
necessary to estimate investment costs and operating expenses for developing
profitability estimates and corporate business plans. Inflation refers to the
increase in the price of goods without a corresponding increase in productivity.
This means that there is a tendency for prices in the economy to increase.
Escalation is a more all-inclusive term used to reflect price increases due
not only to inflation but also due to supply– demand factors and engineering
advances. Projected escalation factors are based on past inflation rates and
estimates of where these rates might be in the future.
An effective way is to estimate what the inflation rate might be 1, 2, 3, etc.
years in the future and then adjust the rates later as more reliable data become
TM
74 Chapter 4
available [2]. For example, initially a cost escalated for a 3-year period from the
present might be
C esc ¼ ð1 þ f 0 Þð1 þ f 00 Þð1 þ f 000 ÞðC present Þ ð4:6Þ
where f 0 , f 00 , f 000 ¼ inflation rates expressed as a decimal in 3 years.
These factors must be reviewed periodically to reflect changes in inflation.
This information may be obtained from newspapers, federal economic reports,
and from financial sources such as banks, investment houses, etc.
Example 4.4
Problem Statement:
A drier today costs $221,000. The estimated inflation rates are expected to
be:
First year ¼ 3:5%
Second year ¼ 4:2%
Third year ¼ 4:7%

What is the cost of that drier 3 years hence?
Solution:
C esc ¼ ð1 þ f 0 Þð1 þ f 00 Þð1 þ f 000 ÞðC present Þ
¼ ð1:035Þð1:042Þð1:047Þð$221; 000Þ
¼ $249,500
4.3 ESTIMATION OF FIXED CAPITAL INVESTMENT

Numerous techniques are available for estimating the fixed capital investment.
The methods vary from a simple single factor to a detailed method using a code of
accounts that involves item-by-item costing. The estimating methods presented
in the following sections are some of but not all the methods available. The
methods will be discussed according to the estimate type.
4.3.1 Order-of-Magnitude Estimates

A project scope is essential before preparing an estimate irrespective of the
quality of the estimate. The scope defines the basis for the estimate and
the information required to prepare the estimate. Such information is found in
Figure 4.2. As the project moves from an order-of-magnitude to a detailed
TM
estimate, the scope will increase in detail. At best the accuracy range for these
estimates may vary from 2 30% to þ 50%. As is noted from Figure 4.2, the
minimum information required is a project scope, including location, utilities,
and services, etc., but a preliminary flowsheet with simple material and energy
balances and a general design basis would increase the accuracy of the estimate.
The name of this category of estimates is misleading in that the accuracy is better
than the literal interpretation of the term order of magnitude. These estimates are
used for screening processes, rough business plans, or long-range planning at the
inception of a proposed project.
4.3.1.1 Turnover Ratio

This is a rapid, simple method for estimating the fixed capital investment but is
one of the most inaccurate. The turnover ratio is defined as
annual gross sales

Turnover ratio ðTORÞ ¼ ð4:7Þ
fixed capital investment
The annual gross sales figure is the product of the annual production rate
and the selling price per unit of production. A basic assumption is that all
product made is sold. For a large number of chemical processes operating near
ambient conditions, the turnover ratio is near 1.0. These ratios may vary from
0.2 to 5.0. Values less than 1.0 are for large volume, capital-intensive
industries and those greater than 1.0 are for processes with a small number of
equipment items. Factors affecting the TOR may be temperature, pressure,
materials of construction, the amount of equipment required, plant operating
rate. Inflation affects the ratio because both the numerator and denominator
will vary but not necessarily in the same ratio. A list of turnover ratios is
found in Table 4.6.
Financial analysts use the reciprocal of the turnover ratio, called the capital
ratio, to compare companies in the same line of business. Example 4.5 is an
application of the TOR method.
Example 4.5
Problem Statement:
Estimate the fixed capital investment for a 1500 ton/day ammonia plant
using the turnover ratio. The current gross selling price of ammonia is $150/ton.
The plant will operate at a 95% stream time.
Solution:
annual gross sales
TOR ¼
fixed capital investment
TM
76 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.6 Turnover Ratiosa
Product TOR
Acetic acid 1.70

Acrylonitrile 1.55
Ammonia 0.65
Ammonium sulfate 3.82
Benzaldehyde 1.00
Benzene 8.25
Butadiene 1.68
Butanol 1.10
Carbon tetrachloride 1.00
Ethylene dichloride 0.51
Ethylene glycol 1.10
Ethyl ether 6.05
Methanol 1.00
Methyl chloride 2.95
Methyl isobutyl ketone 2.10
Maleic anhydride 4.82
Nitric acid 3.95
Phthalic anhydride 3.12
Polyethylene 0.40
Polypropylene 0.35
Sodium carbonate 0.39
Styrene 5.21
Sulfuric acid 0.63
Urea 2.36
Vinyl chloride 3.40
Sources: Refs. 2, 11.

annual gross sales; $
a
Turnover ratio ðTORÞ ¼
fixed capital investment; $
From Table 4.6, the TOR for an ammonia plant is 0.65.

Annual gross sales ¼ $150=ton £ 365 £ 0:95 £ 1500 ton=day
¼ $78,000,000
annual gross sales $78,000,000

FCI ¼ ¼ ¼ $120,000,000
0:65 0:65
TM
TABLE 4.7 Fixed Investment per Annual Ton of Capacity
Fixed investment,
Product Capacity M tons/year $/annual ton capacity
Acetaldehyde 50 400
Ammonia 350 120
Butadiene 240 150
Carbon dioxide 550 80
Ethylene oxide 200 700
Ethyl ether 40 170
Maleic anhydride 60 270
Methanol 300 120
Nitric acid 175 50
Phenol 180 275
Phthalic anhydride 185 220
Polyethylene 20 1800
Propylene 25 210
Sulfuric acid 350 90
Vinyl chloride 500 300
4.3.1.2 Fixed Investment per Annual Ton of Capacity

Fixed capital investments may be calculated in an approximate manner using this
method. The data for this method are often in the open literature or from
information that will allow one to calculate this information. Chemical Week or
Hydrocarbon Processing are potential sources. The user must be careful in using
this information because it may be old or may have been obtained from foreign
sources. Salem [27] and Guthrie [7] have reported data from which this ratio may
be calculated.
One should recognize that these data are based on a given process, so
projecting costs must be via that same process and for a similar plant size. Cost
indexes may be used to bring the fixed investment up to date. Table 4.7 is a list of
typical values for the fixed investment per annual ton of capacity. An example of
this method is found in Example 4.6.
Example 4.6
Problem Statement:
Estimate the fixed capital investment of a 75,000 ton/yr maleic anhydride
plant using the data for fixed investment per annual ton capacity in Table 4.7.
TM
78 Chapter 4
Solution:
From Table 4.7 a 60,000 ton/yr plant is $270 investment per annual
ton capacity. Therefore, the fixed capital investment of the plant is
75,000 ton/yr £ $270 per annual ton, or $20,300,000.
Since this method is sensitive to time and the data presented in Table 4.7
was based on 1986 information, cost indexes must be applied to get a 2001 cost.
CE Index for 1986 ¼ 331
CE Index for late 2001 ¼ 396:8
Therefore, the cost in 2001 is estimated to be ($20,300,000)(396.8/331), or
$24,335,000.
4.3.1.3 Seven-Tenths Rule
It has been found that cost-capacity data for process plants may be correlated
using a logarithmic plot similar to the 0.6 rule. Remer and Chai [28] have
compiled exponents for a variety of processes and most are between 0.6 and 0.8.
The use of an average value 0.7 is the name of this method. Table 4.8 and
Appendix E contain appropriate data. The equation is

capacity plant B 0:7
Cost plant B ¼ cost plant A ð4:8Þ
capacity plant A
where cost plant A is the cost of that plant with capacity A and cost plant B is the
cost of that plant at capacity B.
In order to use this method, the estimator must have the fixed capital
investment for another plant using the same process but at a different capacity.
Cost indexes may be used to correct costs for time changes. Example 4.7 is an
application of this method.
Example 4.7
Problem Statement:
A company is considering the manufacture of ethylene oxide as an
intermediate for its polymer division. The process to be used is the direct
oxidation of ethylene. The company built a similar unit in 1997 that had a rated
capacity of 100,000 tons annually for $66,000,000. The projected production of
the new facility is to be 150,000 tons annually. Estimate the fixed capital
investment in late 2001 dollars to produce the required ethylene oxide.
Solution:
CE Index for 1997 ¼ 386:5
CE Index for late 2001 ¼ 396:8
TM
Estimation of Capital Requirements
TABLE 4.8 Seven-Tenths Rule
Compound Process Size range Unit Exponent
Acetaldehyde Ethylene 25–100 1000 tons/yr 0.70

Acetylene Natural gas 4 –37 1000 tons/yr 0.73
Ammonia Natural gas 37–110 1000 tons/yr 0.63
Benzene 0.61
Cyclohexane Benzene, H2 15–365 1000 tons/yr 0.49
Ethanol Ethylene by direct hydration 0.72
Ethylene Refinery gas or hydrocarbons 0.71
Ethylene oxide Direct oxidation of ethylene 0.67
Methanol Natural gas 0.71
Phthalic anhydride Naphthalene or o-xylene 21–365 1000 tons/yr 0.72
Propylene 0.70
Sulfuric acid Contact, sulfur 7 –256 1000 tons/yr 0.63
Urea 20–200 1000 tons/yr 0.70
Vinyl chloride Ethylene, Cl2 or HCl 27–365 1000 tons/yr 0.88

capacity plant B 0:7
Cost plant B ¼ cost plant A
capacity plant A
Source: Ref. 28.
79
TM
80 Chapter 4
Equation (4.8) can be modified to include the cost indexes.

capacity 150 0:67 CEI 2001
Cost150 ð2001Þ ¼ cost100 ð1997Þ
capacity 100 CEI 1997
0:67
150 396:8
Cost150 ð2001Þ ¼ ð$60,000,000Þ
100 386:5
Cost150 ð2001Þ ¼ ð$60,000; 000Þð1:31Þð1:027Þ
¼ $80,722,000; say $80,700,000
4.3.2 Study Estimates

The information needed to prepare a study estimate includes a project scope,
preliminary material and energy balances, preliminary flowsheets, rough sizes of
equipment, rough quantities of utilities, rough sizes of building and structures,
etc. (see Figure 4.2). Study estimates have an accuracy of 2 30% to þ 40%.
4.3.2.1 Lang Method

Lang [29] developed a method for obtaining quick estimates of the capital
investment based upon information gathered on 14 processing plants of various
sizes and types. He recommended that the delivered equipment cost be multiplied
by a factor based upon the type of processing plant to obtain the fixed capital
investment. These factors include process equipment, instrumentation and
automatic control equipment, piping, insulation, electrical, engineering costs,
etc., but do not include a contingency factor. The Lang factor method has a
tendency to produce high results. The factors are found in Table 4.9.
The Lang factor method is illustrated in Example 4.8.
TABLE 4.9 Lang Factors
Type of plant Factor
Solids processing 3.10

Solids – fluid processing 3.63
Fluid processing 4.74
Source: Ref. 29.
TM
Example 4.8
Problem Statement:
A small fluid processing plant is considered for construction adjacent to a
larger operating unit at a large plant site. The present delivered equipment costs
are as follows:
Equipment Delivered cost
Distillation tower $500,000

Trays and internals for tower 435,000
Receivers 320,000
Accumulator drum 175,000
Heat exchangers 620,000
Pumps and motors 215,000
Automatic control equipment 300,000
Miscellaneous equipment 150,000
Estimate the battery-limits fixed capital investment, assuming a 15%

contingency factor.
Solution:
Sum of the delivered equipment cost ¼ $2,715,000
Because this is a fluid processing plant, the Lang factor is 4.74.
Battery – limits fixed capital investment ¼ ð$2,715,000Þð4:74Þð1:15Þ
¼ $14,799,000, or $14,800,000
(All calculations will be rounded to three significant figures.)
4.3.2.2 Hand Method

The Hand method [30] is a refinement of the Lang method for quick estimates.
The method begins with purchased equipment costs, FOB at the factory. Hand
recommended that equipment be grouped by type, such as heat exchangers,
pumps, compressors, with an appropriate factor applied to each type for
installation. Hand determined these multipliers by analyzing several detailed
estimates of plants of the same type. The categories and factors are included in
Table 4.10. The justification for different factors is that not all equipment requires
the same amount of foundations, piping, electrical, insulation, etc. for
installation. For example, the major cost of a compressor installation is in the
first cost of the equipment that is a higher percentage of the installed cost
compared to that of a pump, since it does not require 3 or 4 times the purchased
cost to install the compressor.
TM
82 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.10 Hand Factors
Equipment type Factor
Fractionating columns 4
Pressure vessels 4
Heat exchangers 3.5
Fired heaters 2
Pumps 4
Compressors 2.5
Instruments 4
Miscellaneous equipment 2.5
A process flowsheet is essential, along with sizes of major plant items, to

produce the batter-limits fixed capital investment by this method. The purchased
equipment cost is multiplied by an appropriate factor to obtain the investment
cost. The Hand method does not include a contingency factor, so the user should
apply an appropriate figure. Like the Lang method, accounting for material of
construction differences requires experience. To improve the accuracy of this
method, factors must be derived from recent installations or from detailed
estimates for a given location. Further, this method does not include a
contingency factor that must be applied by the user.
The Hand method has a tendency to produce lower results than the
Lang method. Example 4.9 is an illustration of this method.
Example 4.9
Problem Statement:
Solve Example 4.8 for the battery-limits fixed capital investment using the
Hand method and a 15% contingency.
Solution:
Equipment Delivered costs ($)
Distillation tower and internals 935,000

Receivers 320,000
Automatic control equipment 300,000
TM
Applying the appropriate Hand factor to each of the above items,
Distillation tower $935,000 £ 4.0 ¼ $3,740,000

Receivers* 320,000 £ 2.5 ¼ 800,000
Accumulator drum* 175,000 £ 2.5 ¼ 438,000
Heat exchangers 620,000 £ 3.5 ¼ 2,170,000
Pumps and motors 215,000 £ 4.0 ¼ 860,000
Automatic controls 300,000 £ 4.0 ¼ 1,200,000
Miscellaneous equipment 150,000 £ 2.5 ¼ 375,000
Subtotal ¼ $9,583,000
*Since there was no information to indicate these units were pressure

vessels, they shall be categorized as noted. Had they been pressure
vessels, a factor of 4.0 might be appropriate; then
Receivers ¼ $320,000 £ 4:0
¼ $1,280,000 or $480,000 additional cost
Accumulator drum ¼ $175,000 £ 4:0
¼ $700,000 or $262,000 additional cost
Therefore, $9,583,000 þ $480,000 þ $262,000 ¼ $10,950,000 and

when the contingency is applied, the battery-limits fixed capital
investment is $10,950,000 £ 1.15, $12,184,000, or $12,200,000.
Battery – limits fixed capital investment ¼ $9,583,000 £ 1:15
¼ $11,020,000; or $11,000,000
4.3.2.3 Wroth Method

A more detailed list of equipment installation factors was compiled by Wroth
[31]. The data were obtained from production, construction, accounting, etc.
records. The factors are presented in Table 4.11. They include the cost of site
development piping, electrical installations, painting, foundations, structures,
contractor’s fees, engineering, overhead, and supervision.
The Lang and Hand methods start with delivered equipment costs, but the
Wroth method begins with purchased costs so delivery charges must included.
Wroth suggested that if an equipment item is not found in the list, then “use or
modify a factor for a similar unit.” Although the Wroth method is not as quick as
the Lang or Hand method, the results obtained are more accurate. It does have the
same disadvantages the Lang and Hand methods have with respect to equipment
TM
84 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.11 Wroth Factors
Equipment Factor
Blender 2.0
Blowers and fans (including motor) 2.5
Centrifuge (process) 2.0
Compressors
Centrifugal (motor driven, less motor) 2.0
Centrifugal (steam driven, incl. turbine) 2.0
Reciprocating (steam and gas) 2.3
Reciprocating (motor driven, less motor) 2.3
Ejectors (vacuum units) 2.5
Furnaces (packaged units) 2.0
Heat exchangers 4.8
Instruments 4.1
Motors, electric 3.5
Pumps
Centrifugal, (motor driven, less motor) 7.0
Centrifugal (steam driven, incl. turbine) 6.5
Positive displacement (less motor) 5.0
Reactor (factor as appropriate, equivalent type equipment) —
Refrigeration (packaged units) 2.5
Tanks
Process 4.1
Storage 3.5
Fabricated and field erected 2.0
50,000 þ gal
Towers (columns) 4.0
Source: Ref. 31.
sizes and materials of construction. An example of how to apply this method is

presented in Example 4.10.
Example 4.10
Problem Statement:
Solve Example 4.8 for the battery-limits fixed capital investment using the
Wroth method. Assume that the delivery charges are 5% of the purchased
equipment cost. A 15% contingency factor is to be used.
Solution:
Since the Wroth method begins using purchased equipment costs, the
delivered equipment costs will have to be converted.
TM
Equipment Delivered costs Purchased costs
Distillation tower, internals $935,000 $890,000

Receivers 320,000 305,000
Accumulator drum 175,000 167,000
Heat exchangers 620,000 590,000
Pumps and motors 215,000 205,000
Automatic controls 300,000 286,000
Miscellaneous equipment 150,000 143,000
Applying the Hand factors to each item:
Distillation tower, internals $890,000 £ 4.0 ¼ $3,560,000

Receivers 305,000 £ 3.5 ¼ 1,068,000
Accumulator drum 167,000 £ 3.5 ¼ 585,000
Heat exchangers 590,000 £ 4.8 ¼ 2,832,000
Pumps and motors 205,000 £ 7.7a ¼ 1,579,000
Automatic controls 300,000 £ 4.1 ¼ 1,230,000
Miscellaneous equipment 150,000 £ 4.0b ¼ 600,000
Subtotal ¼ $11,454,000
where
a ¼ average installation value for pumps and motors
b ¼ assumed factor of 4.0
Therefore
Battery – limits fixed capital investment ¼ $11,454,000 £ 1:15
¼ $13,200,000
The results of the three methods are:
Lang $14,800,000
Hand 11,000,000
Wroth 13,200,000
The Lang method, in general, has a tendency to produce high figures.

Whatever figure is reported to management, there should be a statement about the
potential accuracy of these study methods, namely, 2 25% to þ 30%.
TM
86 Chapter 4
4.3.2.4 Brown Method

Brown [32] developed guidelines for the preparation of order-of-magnitude and
study capital cost estimates using a modified modular method. Further, he
modified the Lang and Hand methods for materials of construction,
instrumentation, and plant location. He then compared the results of the
modified Lang and Hand estimates with his method using the module factors of
Garret [11] (see Table 4.12). Brown found that the modified Hand and the module
factor methods gave results within 3.5%, whereas the results of the modified
Lang method were over 30% higher; see the example below.
Brown’s material of construction factor Fm is obtained from a plot of Fm
versus a material cost ratio, namely, alloy cost/carbon steel cost (see Figure 4.5).
For fully instrumented processes Fi a factor of 1.2 is used. If the process is to be
built in the US, the location factor Fp is 1.0. The instrumentation and location
factors are presented in Table 4.13.
An illustration of the application of the Brown method is found in
Example 4.11.
FIGURE 4.5 Brown’s material of construction plot. (From Ref. 32.)
TM
TABLE 4.12 Garrett’s Module Factors
Equipment type (carbon steel, unless noted) Module factor
Agitators: dual-bladed turbines/single-blade propellers 2.0

Agitated tanks 2.5
Blowers, centrifugal 2.5
Centrifuges: solid-bowl, screen-bowl, pusher, stainless steel 2.0
Columns: distillation, absorption, etc.
Horizontal 3.1
Vertical 4.2
Compressors: low, medium, high pressure 2.6
Cooling towers 1.7
Drives/motors
Electric for fans, compressors, pumps 1.5
Electric for other units 2.0
Gasoline 2.0
Turbine: gas and steam 3.5
Dryers
Fluid bed, spray 2.7
Rotary 2.3
Evaporators, single effect-stainless steel
Falling film 2.3
Forced circulation 2.9
Fans 2.2
Filters
Belt, rotary drum and leaf, tilting pan 2.4
Others 2.8
Heat exchangers
Air-cooled 2.2
Double-pipe 1.8
Shell-and-tube 3.2
Pumps
Centrifugal 5.0
Chemical injection 2.8
Reciprocating 3.3
Turbine 1.8
Pressure vessels
Horizontal, spherical 3.1
Vertical 4.2
Vacuum equipment 2.2
Source: Adapted from Ref. 11.
TM
88 Chapter 4
Example 4.11
Problem Statement:
Estimate the fixed capital investment for the following list of
equipment, using the Hand method and the Brown method.
Solution:
Material ratio Purchased

Equipment Description alloy/C steel cost
1. Vacuum dryer 200 ft2 U tube, 304 SS 3.5 $26,000

heater tubes and shell, 150 psig
2. Vacuum dryer 2 ft diameter, 6 ft high, 1.7 1,900
304 SS, full vacuum,
150 psig
3. Vacuum dryer 2 stage, 50 mmHg absolute 2.0 9,900
ejector pressure, 100 lb/hr air flow,
304 SS
4. Vacuum dryer 240 gpm, 130 psi TDH, 2.0 12,800
pump 304 SS
5. Still heater U tube, 450 ft2, 304 SS 3.5 50,700
tubes and shell, 800 psig
6. Fatty acid still 10 ft diameter, 35 ft high, 1.7 55,000
304 SS, heating coil and
internals included
7. Still bottoms 100 gpm, 50 psi, 304 SS 2.0 4,000
pump
8. Overhead U tube, 570 ft2, 304 SS 3.5 54,000
condenser
9. Overhead 2 ft diameter, 4 ft high, 1.7 1,600
surge tank 304 SS, 50 psig
10. Overhead 150 gpm, 120 psig TDH, 2.0 6,000
pump 304 SS
11. Still steam 3 stages, ejector and 2.0 124,300
ejector 15 mmHg abs, 20 lb/hr,
304 SS
Hand method:
Equipment Purchase Hand factor Fm
1. Heat exchanger $26,000 3.5 0.55 $50,200

2. Pressure vessel 1,900 4.0 0.75 5,700
(continued)
TM
TABLE 4.12. Continued
Equipment Purchase Hand factor Fm
3. Steam ejector 17,100 2.5 0.69 17,100

4. Pump 12,800 4.0 0.69 35,300
5. Heat exchanger 50,700 3.5 0.55 97,600
6. Pressure vessel 55,000 4.0 0.75 165,000
7. Pump 4,000 4.0 0.69 11,000
8. Heat exchanger 54,000 3.5 0.55 104,000
9. Pressure vessel 1,600 4.0 0.75 4,800
10. Pump 6,000 4.0 0.69 16,600
11. Steam ejector 124,300 2.5 0.69 214,400
Total $721,700
Fm found in Figure 4.5

Fi, process fully instrumented—1.2
Fp, process in the US—1.0
Capital cost, ($721,700)(1.2)(1.0) ¼ $866,000
Module factor method:
This method used the modular factors of Garret [11] found in Table 4.12.
Capital cost ¼ S(purchased equipment cost £ module factor £ Fm) £ Fi £ Fp.
TABLE 4.13 Brown’s Location Factors

(1993)
Country Factor
Australia 1.60
Belgium 1.26
Canada 1.32
Denmark 1.46
France 1.64
Germany 1.19
Italy 2.15
Japan 0.95
Netherlands 1.04
Spain 2.32
Sweden 1.79
United Kingdom 1.76
Source: Ref. 32.
TM
90 Chapter 4
Equipment Purchase Module factor Fm
1. Heat exchanger $26,100 3.2 0.55 $ 45,900

2. Pressure vessel 1,900 4.2 0.75 6,000
3. Steam ejector 9,900 2.2 0.69 15,200
4. Pump 12,800 5.0 0.69 44,200
5. Heat exchanger 50,700 3.2 0.55 89,200
6. Pressure vessel 55,000 4.2 0.75 173,300
7. Pump 4,000 5.0 0.69 13,800
8. Heat exchanger 54,000 3.2 0.55 95,000
9. Pressure vessel 1,600 4.2 0.75 5,000
10. Pump 6,000 5.0 0.69 20,700
11. Steam ejector 124,300 2.2 0.69 188,700
Total $696,900
Again, Fi and Fp are 1.2 and 1.0, respectively. The capital cost is
($696,900)(1.2)(1.0) ¼ $836,000. The Lang method modified for instrumenta-
tion and materials of construction resulted in a capital cost of $1,126,000, or 32%
higher than the other two methods.
4.3.3 Preliminary Estimates

This quality estimate has many purposes, namely, to screen further processing
methods in the research and development stages, to compare in–house technology
with purchased technology, to uncover those areas of the process where important
design data are missing, and to serve as a basis for an appropriation request.
During a recent literature survey, the author found 25 methods that were
classified as preliminary. The methods were divided roughly into two
categories. One group consists of factored methods in which a series of factors
are applied to items in each method beginning with purchased or delivered
equipment costs. The other group consists of functional units or step-counting
methods. Bridgwater [33] reviewed a number of these methods in considerable
detail. Because of the great number of methods, it will be necessary to limit
those presented here.
The information required to prepare a preliminary estimate is found in
Figure 4.2. A great deal of judgment in using factors or in defining a module
depends upon the information provided and the experience of the estimator. The
accuracy of the various techniques presented in this section will vary from 2 15%
to þ 25%.
4.3.3.1 Chilton Method
Chilton used multiple factors to obtain a battery-limits fixed capital investment.
The method is an extension of previously discussed factored methods. Chilton
TM
TABLE 4.14 Chilton Method
Item Factor % of item
1. Delivered equipment cost 1.0 1

2. Installed equipment cost 1.43 1
(or directly from cost data)
3. Process piping
Type of plant
Solid 0.07– 0.10 2
Solids – fluid 0.10– 0.30 2
Fluid 0.30– 0.60 2
4. Instrumentation
Amount
None 0.03– 0.05 2
Some 0.05– 0.12 2
Extensive 0.12– 0.20 2
5. Buildings and site development
Type of plant
Outdoor 0.10– 0.30 2
Outdoor –indoor 0.20– 0.60 2
Indoor 0.60– 1.00 2
6. Auxiliaries
Extent
Existing 0 2
Minor addition 0– 0.05 2
Major addition 0.05– 0.75 2
New facilities 0.25– 1.00 2
7. Outside lines
Average length
Short 0– 0.05 2
Intermediate 0.05– 0.15 2
Long 0.15– 0.25 2
8. Total physical plant costs
S of items 2–7
9. Engineering and construction
Complexity
Simple 0.20– 0.35 8
Difficult 0.35– 0.60 8
10. Contingencies
Process
Firm 0.10– 0.20 8
Subject to change 0.20– 0.30 8
Speculative 0.30– 0.50 8
(continued )
TM
92 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.14. Continued
Item Factor % of item
11. Size factor

Size of plant
Large commercial unit . $10MM 0–0.05 8
Small commercial unit $0.5MM to $10MM 0.05 –0.15 8
Experimental unit , $0.5MM 0.15–0.35 8
12. Total fixed plant cost (S items 8 –11)
developed this method years ago based upon long experience in chemical process
plants [34]. For many years, this was the only method reported in the open
literature and as a result became popular. The author through various consulting
contacts is acquainted with several companies that have expanded the Chilton
concept for their own in-house needs. The Chilton method is found in Table 4.14
and requires some interpretation to use. Suggestions will be given.
To calculate a fixed capital investment by this method, the user may start
with purchased, delivered, or installed costs. If purchased costs are available,
then a delivery charge must be included resulting in item 1 in Table 4.14. To
obtain the installed equipment cost, a factor of 1.43 is applied to the delivered
equipment cost. Various sources in the literature have noted that installation costs
may vary from 35 to 100% of the delivered equipment costs, with 43% being an
average value. Then individual factors are applied to the installed equipment cost
to obtain process piping, instrumentation, etc. as shown in Table 4.14. Certain
modifications to the original factored method are necessary to update it. Process
piping includes piping, valves, and fittings associated with the process
equipment, including utility lines and lines carrying process materials. For
very high pressure and unusually corrosive or erosive conditions in a fluid
processing plant, the 0.6 factor may approach 1.0. This part of the piping is
confined to the “building” although it may be an open structure. Costs of service
piping not associated with the process, like steam for heating, drinking water,
etc., are included in the building costs. All piping outside the building is classified
as outside lines, including piping supports. When this method was developed,
instrumentation was not as sophisticated as it is today and as such was not a major
part of the fixed capital cost. Today, with data loggers and computer-controlled
processes, those items should be included in the delivered equipment costs
and 0.20– 0.25 used for extensive instrumentation. Even though the “building”
may be an open structure like most refineries and petrochemical plants, the
“building” costs include service facilities such as heating, plumbing, lighting.
TM
In the manufacture of food products, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics, a building

is essential and the factor may be as high as 1.00 times item 2. All piping external
to the building area is classified as “outside” lines and the costs include the piping
supports. Occasionally, outside lines need to be extended to the battery limits of
the proposed plant. Motors, starters, and wiring for process equipment are
included in the installed equipment costs. Electrical services within the building
or structure are part of the building costs. Outside feeder lines are part of the
outside lines. Substations and transformer costs are under auxiliary facilities.
The sum of items 2 –7 is called the “total physical plant”, item 8. The rest of
the items in this method are factors that are applied to item 8. Engineering and
construction are estimated on the basis of a project’s complexity. If it is relatively
simple, then 20 –35% is reasonable. But if the engineering is difficult, first of its
kind, or new to the company, a percentage selected in the difficult range is
appropriate. Contingencies are based upon process information. If the data are
firm and similar to other processes, then 10 –20% of item 8 is satisfactory. If the
process is speculative and subject to change, a higher percentage should be used.
Small process plants seem to have a variety of problems that larger plants don’t.
The “size” factor is included to account for this fact.
Items 8– 11 are summed to give the total battery-limits fixed capital
investment. Example 4.12 is an illustration of how the Chilton method is used to
prepare a preliminary estimate.
Example 4.12
Problem Statement:
A small fluid processing plant is to be built at an existing plant site. The
delivered equipment costs are:
Equipment Delivered costs
Distillation tower $500,000

Trays and internals 435,000
Receivers 320,000
Automatic controls 300,000
The equipment is to be installed in an outdoor structure. The process is

heavily instrumented, and auxiliary services and outside lines are minimal. The
process is well defined and is based upon a similar unit built at another company
TM
94 Chapter 4
location. Estimate the battery-limits fixed capital investment using the Chilton
method.
Solution:
The total delivered equipment cost is $2,715,000.
Item
Item description Factor no. M$
1. Delivered equipment cost 1.0 1 2,715

2. Installed equipment cost 1.47 1 3,991
3. Process piping (high-fluid plant) 0.60 2 2,395
4. Instrumentation (extensive) 0.20 2 798
5. Building and site development 0.20 2 798
(average, outdoor)
6. Auxiliaries (minimal) 0.02 2 80
7. Outdoor lines (minimal) 0.02 2 80
8. Total physical plant costs 8,142
9. Engineering and construction (simple) 0.30 8 2,443
10. Contingencies (firm) 0.15 8 1,221
11. Size factor (. $2 million) 0.02 8 163
12. Total fixed capital investment 11,969
(say $12,000,000)
4.3.3.2 Peters and Timmerhaus Method

This method begins with purchased equipment costs delivered and combines
some of the features of the Lang and Chilton methods [10]. A process is
classified according to whether it is a solid, solid –fluid, or fluid processing plant
like the Lang method, and then 12 factors for direct and indirect costs are
applied is in the Chilton method. The authors state that the method applies to an
existing plant site and therefore have included land. They also include 15% of
the total capital investment for working capital so that the bottom line is the
total capital investment. A word of caution, for depreciation calculations: land
and working capital must be subtracted to give the fixed capital investment
since land and working capital are not depreciable items. The factors are found
in Table 4.15. Example 4.13 is an illustration of this method.
Example 4.13
Problem Statement:
The problem statement is the same as for Example 4.12. Use the Peters and
Timmerhaus method to estimate the battery-limits fixed capital investment.
TM
Solution:
Direct Costs Factor Cost, $M
1. Delivered equipment cost 1.00 $2,715

2. Equipment installation 0.47 1,276
3. Instrumentation and controls 0.18 489
4. Piping (installed) 0.66 1,792
5. Electrical (installed) 0.11 299
6. Building (including services) 0.18 489
7. Yard improvements 0.10 272
8. Service facilities (installed) 0.70 1,901
9. Land (omit)
10. Total direct plant costs 9,283
11. Engineering and supervision 0.33 896
12. Construction expense 0.41 1,113
13. Total direct and indirect plant costs 11,242
14. Contractor’s fee 0.21 570
15. Contingency (10% of item 13) 1,124
16. Total battery-limits fixed capital investment 12,936
(say $12,900,000)
4.3.3.3 Holland Method

Holland et al. [35] proposed a method that combine features of the Lang, Chilton,
and Peters and Timmerhaus methods. In Table 4.16 equipment installation
factors are presented depending upon the type of processing plant beginning with
delivered equipment costs. The reader will note the similarity between the
methods mentioned above.
4.3.3.4 Happel Method
Another method for estimating the fixed capital investment for fluid processing
plants using multiple factors was developed by Happel [36]. The method begins
with delivered equipment costs. Factor ranges for installation labor, insulation,
piping, foundations, buildings, structures, fireproofing, electrical, painting,
overhead, contractor’s fees, and contingencies are applied. As in the Chilton
method, the estimator must exercise some judgment in selecting the appropriate
factors. The details of this method are presented in Table 4.17.
4.3.3.5 Miller Method
Miller [37] analyzed a large number of plants of widely different chemical
production and developed factors for all components, e.g., piping, foundations,
insulation, instrumentation, within the battery limits. All factors were given a
range, minimum, most likely, and maximum values, but in practice selection must
TM
96 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.15 Peters and Timmerhaus Method
Direct costs Solid Solid –fluid Fluid
1. Purchased equipment delivered including 100 100 100

fabricated equipment and process machinery
2. Purchased equipment installation 45 39 47
3. Instrumentation and controls (installed) 9 13 18
4. Piping (installed) 16 31 66
5. Electrical (installed) 10 10 11
6. Building (including services) 25 29 18
7. Yard improvements 13 10 10
8. Service facilities (installed) 40 55 70
9. Land (if purchase is required) 6 6 6
10. Total direct plant costs 264 293 346
Indirect costs
11. Engineering and supervision 33 32 33

12. Construction expenses 39 34 41
13. Total direct and indirect costs 336 359 420
14. Contractor’s fee (about 5% of 17 18 21
the direct and indirect plant costs
15. Contingency (about 10% of 34 36 42
the direct and indirect plant costs)
16. Total fixed capital and land 387 413 483
be based on knowledge of the project as well as experience of the estimator. This

three-point method was the introduction of a three-point uncertainty analysis in the
preparation of a capital cost estimate. In the hands of an experienced estimator and
with reliable equipment costs, an appropriation grade estimate is possible.
4.3.3.6 Miscellaneous Preliminary Methods
4.3.3.6.1 Other Factor Methods. Kharbanda and Stallworthy [38] have noted
that there are many other methods employing factors and various plots to obtain
preliminary estimates with varying degrees of accuracy. Hill [39], Stallworthy
[40], Wilson [41], Allen and Page [42], and Cran [43] developed factored
methods drawing frequently upon techniques previously presented in this section.
Vatavuk [44] presented a factor-type estimating procedure for air pollution
control equipment.
TM
TABLE 4.16 Holland Method
Ctc ¼ f1f2f3Ceq
Ctc ¼ fixed capital cost of plant
Ceq ¼ major process equipment cost, delivered
f1 ¼ 1.45 for solids processing
f1 ¼ 1.39 for mixed solids –fluid processing
f1 ¼ 1.47 for fluid processing
f2 ¼ 1 þ f1 þ f2 þ f3 þ f4 þ f5
f3 ¼ 1 þ f6 þ f7 þ f8
Process piping factor range:
f1 ¼ 0.07 –0.10 for solids processing
f1 ¼ 0.10 –0.30 for solids –fluid processing
f1 ¼ 0.30 –0.60 for fluid processing
Instrumentation factor ranges:
f2 ¼ 0.02 –0.05 for little automatic control
f2 ¼ 0.05 –0.10 for some automatic control
Buildings factor ranges:
f3 ¼ 0.05 –0.20 for outdoor units
f3 ¼ 0.20 –0.60 for mixed indoor outdoor units
f3 ¼ 0.60 –1.00 for indoor units
Facilities factor range:
f4 ¼ 0– 0.05 for minor additions
f4 ¼ 0.05 –25 for major additions
f4 ¼ 0.25 –1.00 for a new site
Outside lines factor ranges:
f5 ¼ 0– 0.05 for existing plant
f5 ¼ 0.05 –0.15 for separated units
f5 ¼ 0.15 –0.25 for scattered units
Engineering and construction factor ranges:
f6 ¼ 0.20 –0.35 for straightforward plants
f6 ¼ 0.35 –0.50 for complex plants
Size factor ranges:
f7 ¼ 0– 0.05 for large plants
f7 ¼ 0.05 –0.15 for small plants
f7 ¼ 0.15 –0.35 for experimental units
Contingency factor ranges:
f8 ¼ 0.10 –0.20 for a firm process
f8 ¼ 0.20 –0.30 for a process subject to change
f8 ¼ 0.30 –.50 for a tentative process
Source: Ref. 35.
TM
98 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.17 Happel Method
Delivered equipment costs Factor IE
Additional direct costs as a fraction of IE

Labor for installing major equipment 0.10 – 0.20
Insulation 0.10– 0.25
Piping (carbon steel) 0.50– 1.00
Foundations 0.03– 0.13
Buildings 0.07
Structures 0.05
Fireproofing 0.06– 0.10
Electrical 0.07– 0.15
Painting and cleanup 0.06– 0.10
fi 1.09– 2.05
Total direct cost (1 þ fi) IE
Indirect costs as a fraction of direct costs
Overhead, contractor’s costs and profit 0.30
Engineering fee 0.13
Contingency 0.13
Total 0.56
fI ¼ 1 þ 0.56
Total cost IF ¼ (1 þ Sfi)fIfE ¼ (3.1– 4.8)IE
Source: Ref. 26.
One must be careful in using any of the factored methods because they
might apply only to certain type of chemical processing plants. Also, it is unwise
to extend the factor methods beyond their intended application.
4.3.3.6.2 Step-Counting Methods. Step counting and a similar method known
as “functional unit method” are discussed in Ref. 38. In these methods, a unit
operation or unit process roughly constitutes a “step” or “functional unit.” For
example, a distillation step might include a fractionating column, condenser(s),
reboiler, pumps, and receivers. These equipment items are regarded as a
functional unit. A fixed capital investment figure is determined for the equipment
in the unit. A process then consists of a number of steps each containing more
than one equipment item. Certain modifiers like materials of construction,
pressure, temperature, etc. are applied to each step.
Zevnik and Buchanan [45] were among the early investigators to recognize
the functional unit approach. Unfortunately, they based their method on limited
historical data and the data are old, but they were the first to introduce correction
factors such as temperature, pressure, process complexity, materials of
TM
construction. Other step-counting methods were introduced by Taylor [46],

Bridgwater [47], Viola [48], and Klumpar et al. [49]. These methods also
incorporate Zevnik and Buchanan’s concept of various modifications.
The most serious disadvantage is in defining a step or functional unit. This
takes practice and experience. If equipment has been inadvertently omitted from
a step, the resulting estimate may be seriously affected. These methods are
reported to yield estimates in the 30 –40% accuracy range.
4.3.3.6.3 Thermodynamic Method. This unique method was introduced by
Tolson and Sommerfeld [50]. The premise is that the relative ease or difficulty
associated with the manufacture of a chemical product is related to the free
energy of the reaction and is reflected in the capital investment. Sommerfeld and
White [51] published information on 55 industrial inorganic and organic
compounds. According to the authors, this method has accuracies between 30 and
40% accuracy. One disadvantage of this method is that it can only be used on
processes in which a chemical reaction takes place and for which thermodynamic
information may be calculated.
4.3.4 Definitive Methods

The methods mentioned in this section can produce accuracies from 2 10% to
þ 20%, depending upon the quality of the data available. Figure 4.2 details the
information available to develop a definitive estimate. A detailed scope is
essential in order to provide product capacity, location, utility and service
requirements, building requirements for process storage, and handling. Process
flowsheets, material and energy balances, site information, piping and
instrumentation diagrams, utility requirements, equipment and instrumentation
and electrical specifications, should be firm. Bids for all equipment and
instrumentation should be on hand.
Two methods are presented in this section in an abbreviated form, but
references are given so the user can find the details of each method.
4.3.4.1 Hirsch and Glazier Method

The authors of this method reported costs of some 42 refining, petrochemical,
and synthetic fuel plants [52]. They developed algorithms and auxiliary plots
consisting of a series of installation factors that permit the user to obtain a
battery-limits fixed capital investment cost with accuracies near the upper limit
of those in the definitive estimate range. The procedure is structured to
begin with purchased equipment cost. The factors and algorithms are found in
Table 4.18.
TM
100 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.18 Hirsch and Glazier Method
I ¼ EA(1 þ FL þ FP þ FM ) þ B þ C
where I ¼ total battery-limits investment, $

A ¼ total purchased equipment cost FOB less incremental cost for
corrosion-resistant alloys, $
B ¼ cost of all equipment estimated on an erected basis, such as
furnaces, tanks, cooling towers, etc., company, erected equipment
C ¼ incremental cost of alloy materials used only for their
corrosion-resisting properties, $
E ¼ indirect factor for contractor’s overhead and profit, engineering,
supervision, and contingencies, $ (normally 1.4).
FL ¼ cost of field labor, FLA is the total field labor costs, less
supervision and excluding the labor charges in item B, $
FM ¼ cost factor of miscellaneous item; FM A includes material cost for
insulation, instruments, foundations, structural steel, buildings,
wiring, painting, and the cost of freight and supervision, $
FP ¼ cost factor for piping materials; FP A is the total cost of piping
materials, including pipe, fitting, valves, hangers, and support, but
excluding insulation and installation charges, $
The FL, FM, and FP factors are not simple ratios but are defined by
equations.

e f
log F L ¼ 0:635 2 0:154 log Ao 2 0:992 þ 0:506
A A

e p
log F P ¼ 20:266 2 0:014 log Ar 2 0:156 þ 0:556
A A

t
F M ¼ 0:344 þ 0:033 log Ao þ 1:194
A
A
where Ao ¼ , expressed in $M
1000
e ¼ total heat exchanger cost, less incremental cost of alloys, $
f ¼ total cost of field-fabricated vessels, less incremental cost of alloy,
$ (vessels larger than 12 ft in diameter are usually field erected)
p ¼ total pump plus driver cost less incremental alloy, $
t ¼ total cost of tower shells less incremental cost of alloy, $
In the reference, there are plots for

e f
logF L ¼ f
A A

e p
logF P ¼ f ;
A A

t
F M ¼ f ðAo Þ;
A
Source: Ref. 52.
TM
4.3.4.2 Guthrie Method

Guthrie [53] developed a method based upon the modular concept using data
from 42 chemical process plants. All major cost elements are grouped into six
modules:
Chemical processing
Solids handling
Site development
Industrial buildings
Offsite facilities
Project indirects
In the chemical processing module, there are 7 primary cost elements and
14 secondary cost elements. These are found in Table 4.19. A module represents
a group of cost elements that have similar characteristics and relationships. The
total module cost then is the sum of the direct material cost M (as purchased
equipment items E and as material for field labor m) and field labor costs L for
each equipment item. These are then gathered to form a total module cost that
accounts for the indirect costs. In order to obtain the total fixed capital
investment, extra costs for adjuncts and auxiliaries are added to the sum of the
total module costs. The Guthrie references [7,53] provide values for equipment
costs and the factors to compute the required installation materials M and the
field labor costs.
As an example, there is a module for shell-and-tube heat exchangers
which includes bare equipment cost-capacity plot, adjustment factors for
design pressure, materials of construction, as well as piping, concrete, steel,
instruments, electrical, painting, material erection, equipment setting, etc.
When these costs are summed, the result is the bare module cost. At this point
in the method, a lumped indirect cost factor may be applied to each of the
equipment modules, and indirect cost factors may be calculated from
an indirect cost module, Table 4.19. The sum of each bare module cost,
indirect costs as well as contingency and contractor’s fees, give the total
module cost.
Because a process consists of a group of equipment items, each being a
module, when all the modules are summed, the fixed capital investment results.
Baasel [54] illustrated the use of the Guthrie method using a polyvinyl chloride
plant. A user could provide up-to-date cost data and use the method successfully
to prepare a definitive cost estimate.
Garrett [11] presented updated (1986) module costs similar to Guthrie’s,
including installation factors, materials of construction, and pressure corrections
for a variety of equipment items.
TM
102 Chapter 4
TABLE 4.19 Guthrie Method
The schedule for the Guthrie method was developed from seven cost elements:
Equipment cost, FOB E
Auxiliary material M
Direct (field) material m M¼Eþm
Direct (field) labor L
Direct M and L costs E þ M þ L ¼ DC
Indirect costs IC
Bare module costs IC þ DC ¼ BMC
Total module costs IF
The direct field material m consists of:

Piping (m ranges from 40 to 125% of E
Concrete or a norm of 62%. Multiply E by 1.40
Steel to 2.25 to get M, the total of all direct
Instrumentation material costs.)
Electrical
Insulation
Paint
The direct field labor L applies to:

Material erection (L ranges from 50 to 70% of E or a
Equipment setting norm of 58%.)
The sum of M þ L comprises the total direct costs. The sum of the values of the
M þ L for all major plant items, and indirect items are applied to account
for these three items:
Freight, insurance, sales tax [Indirect cost ranges from 25 to 45%
Construction overhead of M þ L; multiply M þ L by 1.34 to
Engineering bare module cost.]
The total module cost is obtained by applying the following factors to the bare
module cost:
Contingency (8 –20% of the bare module cost,
or a norm of 15%)
Contractor’s fee (2 –7% of the bare module cost)
If adjuncts or auxiliaries like solids-handling facilities, site development, industrial

buildings, and offsite facilities are required, then the extra investment for them
must be added. Guthrie presented tables listing the details of each of these
latter item in Ref. 7.
Source: Refs. 7, 53.
TM
TABLE 4.20 Richardson System
The Richardson system is presented in seven volumes that cover all the detailed
estimating elements:
Civil engineering work Excavation, backfill, and earthmoving

Concrete Forming, pouring, reinforcing, equipment foundations,
treatment plants, etc.
Structural steel Building, process equipment supports, platforms,
handrails, and ladders
Electrical work Conduit, wire, switchgear for buildings, process
equipment, power distribution, etc.
Mechanical work Piping, instrumentation, plumbing
Process equipment Pressure vessels, tanks, compressors, motors,
freight
Indirect costs Jobsite and home office overhead, supervision,
rental equipment and tools
A detailed fixed capital investment may be prepared from the volumes for the
cost of a process plant. The cost data are updated on an annual basis.
Source: Ref. 55.
4.3.5 Detailed Estimates

The detailed estimating methods are beyond the scope of this book; however, a
brief discussion of each will be presented. Figure 4.2 lists the information
required to prepare this type of estimate. Detailed estimating procedures should
yield an accuracy of 2 5% to 10%.
4.3.5.1 Richardson Rapid Estimating Method

This estimating method was developed by Richardson Engineering Services, Inc.
[55]. The system is presented in seven volumes that cover the detailed estimating
elements found in Table 4.20. The process equipment volume is of interest to
chemical engineers since it contains actual equipment costs from manufacturers
with equipment models identified. But as can be seen, estimates for elements of
construction are found in other volumes. By following the instructions in the
manuals, a detailed estimate can be prepared. Preparing an estimate using this
method takes time and the detail required is considerable. One of the
disadvantages is that some items of equipment are of small to moderate size.
Today the trend is for larger equipment so Richardson’s data may not extend as
far as the user desires, like cooling towers, boilers, and electrical substations.
TM
104 Chapter 4
4.3.5.2 Code of Accounts Method

Companies have a codified system called “code of accounts.” This code is
essentially a listing of all the elements in a detailed estimate so that no pertinent
items have been omitted [56]. A typical code of accounts is found in Table 4.21.
Experienced personnel are required to prepare this quality estimate. Each item in
the code is explained in detail with respect to what is included under the item. The
code is used to note only estimate costs, but later when the plant is being built it is
used to control costs.
4.3.6 Commercial Computerized Estimating Procedures

With the advent of the personal computer, numerous computer estimating
software packages were developed for cost estimation and economic evaluation.
The software programs vary from fairly simple programs to elaborate ones. Also,
there are some companies that will perform computerized capital cost estimates
on a contact basis.
Several of the commercial software packages are CHEMCAD, SUPER-
PRO Designer 4.5 (Intelligen, Inc.), ASPEN, and ICARUS. Although advertising
information of packaged software programs are not intentionally misleading, any
given program may not yield the type estimate the user desires. These programs
are often more expensive than colleges may be able to afford and maintain. On
the other hand, it is very expensive and time consuming to develop a program for
specific use, if a purchased software package can be modified for the user’s needs.
Often companies like those listed above will work with a customer on program
modifications. An elaborate software program may be loaded on a minicomputer
or a large main frame and the program may be accessed via a network for local
users within a company.
There are many reasons for computer cost estimations and economic
evaluations, such as saving time on repetitive calculations and reducing
mathematical errors. Whatever package is used, or if an estimate is prepared by
an outsourced firm, it is wise to spot-check the estimate by selected hand
calculations. The author is aware of several instances in which cost estimates
were prepared by competing engineering firms with wide variations in results.
Just because the estimate was computer generated does not mean that the
software program gave correct or reasonable results. For most cost estimation
tasks discussed in this text, computers are not necessary or not too useful.
4.4 SCOPE AND CONTINGENCY

4.4.1 Scope
The document that defines a project is called the scope.The scope is continually
referred to by cost control and estimating personnel so that the plant constructed
TM
TABLE 4.21 Code of Accounts
Number Direct capital cost accounts
01 Equipment items
02 Instrument items
03 Set and test equipment
04 Set and test instrument
05 Piling
06 Excavation
07 Foundations
08 Structural steel
09 Building items
10 Fire protection
11 Piping
12 Ductwork
13 Wiring
14 Land
15 Sewers and drains
16 Underground
17 Yards and roads
18 Railroads
19 Insulation
20 Painting
21 Fence
Contractor’s Overhead and Fee
22 Temporary facilities
80 Indirect charges (engineering)
81 Construction stores
82 Temporary construction equipment
83 Accounts receivable
84 Contractor’s fee
85 Premium wages
Owner’s Overhead
90 Indirect charges
91 Temporary construction stores
92 Temporary construction equipment
93 Owner’s miscellaneous
94 Relocation and modification expense
Source: Ref. 56.
TM
106 Chapter 4
will correspond to the intent of engineering and management. A scope should

answer the following questions clearly:
. What product is being manufactured?
. How much is being produced?
. What is the quality of the product?
. Where is the product to be produced?
. What is the quality of the estimate?
. What is the basis for the estimate?
. What are the “knowns” and “unknowns” with respect to the project?
Changes during the progress of a project are inevitable but a well-defined
scope planned in advance can help minimize changes.
A scope is defined by words, drawings, and cost figures. If a scope is
properly defined, then the following results may be obtained:
. Clear understanding between those who proposed the scope (engineering) and
those who accepted it (management)
. A document that indicates clearly what is to be provided in terms of
technology, quality, schedule, and cost
. A basis in enough detail to be used in controlling the project and its costs to
permit proper evaluation of any proposed changes
. A device to permit subsequent evaluation of the performance compared to the
intended performance
. Development of a detailed estimate from which to control the final design,
construction, and start-up
4.4.2 Contingency
The word contingency is probably the most misunderstood word associated with
cost estimates whether they are fixed capital, working capital, or operating
expense estimates. A definition is that “contingency is a provision for unforeseen
elements that experience has shown are likely to occur” [57]. There are two types
of contingencies: process and project contingency.
4.4.2.1 Process Contingency

Process contingency was recognized in the 1970 –1980 period when large-scale
pioneer energy projects were considered. It was used to deal with uncertainties in
1. Technical uncertainties in equipment and performance
2. Integration of new and old process steps
3. Scaling up to large scale plant size
4. Accurate definition of certain process parameters, such as
TM
a. Severity of process conditions

b. Number of recycles
c. Process blocks and equipment
d. Multiphase streams
e. Unusual separations
Guidelines for process contingency are poor primarily as a result of the lack
of historical data.
4.4.2.2 Project Contingency
No matter how much time and effort are spent preparing an estimate, there is the
likelihood of errors occurring due to
1. Engineering errors and omissions
2. Cost and labor rate changes
3. Construction of problems
4. Estimating inaccuracies
5. Miscellaneous “unforeseens”
6. Weather-related problems
7. Strikes by fabricator, transportation, and construction personnel
4.4.2.3 What Contingency Values Should Be Used?

For preliminary estimates a 15 –20% project contingency should be applied if the
process information is firm. If not, then a process contingency of 15 – 20% should
also be added. As the quality of the estimate moves to definitive and detailed, the
contingency value may be lowered to 10– 15% and 5 –10%, respectively.
Experience has shown that the smaller the dollar value of the project, the higher
the contingencies should be.
4.5 OFFSITE CAPITAL

The offsite facilities include all structures, equipment, and services that do not
directly enter into the manufacture of a product. These costs are estimated
separately from the fixed capital investment. They are not easy to estimate. Offsite
capital would include the utilities and services of a plant. Among the utilities are:
1. Steam-generating and distribution
2. Electrical-generating and distribution
3. Fuel gas distribution
4. Water-well, city, cooling tower, and pumping stations for water
distribution
5. Refrigeration
TM
108 Chapter 4
6. Plant air
7. Environmental control systems
The service facilities might include
1. Auxiliary buildings
2. Railroad spurs
3. Service roads
4. Warehouse facilities
5. Material storage—raw material as well as finished goods
6. Fire protection systems
7. Security systems
For preliminary estimates, it is suggested that offsite investment be a
percentage of the processing unit’s fixed capital investment. Kharbanda [58] and
Jelen [59] suggested ranges of percentage values. Woods [60 –63] published a
series of articles that may be used to estimate offsite capital. As an
approximation, he recommended the following as a percentage of the FOB
process equipment costs:
1. Small modification of offsites, 1 –5%
2. Restructuring of offsites, 5 – 15%
3. Major expansion of offsites, 15 – 45%
4. Grass roots plants, 45 – 150%
4.6 ALLOCATED CAPITAL

When a company proposes to produce a new product, it is wise to examine various
sources of raw materials and their costs. If the company produces the raw material
at one of its locations, then almost without exception, it is cheaper to use that raw
material rather than buying it on the open market. In such cases, the raw material is
referred to as an intermediate. If it represents a potential sales item, then a
proportion of the intermediate’s fixed capital investment should be allocated to the
new product’s capital investment. The benefit to the new product department is that
the intermediate is charged to the intermediate’s manufacturing expense, in
addition to a transfer price to deliver it to the new product department. The new
department receives a price break for the raw material since it is being bought at
below market price, but with every benefit there is a penalty. In this case, the new
product department must accept a proportion of the intermediate’s fixed capital
investment based upon the amount of raw material to the new department and the
total capacity of the intermediate total capacity.
On paper, the intermediate’s fixed capital investment is reduced by the
allocated amount. The theory is that part of the intermediate’s production cannot
be sold at a profit on the market. Therefore, the intermediate department then
TM
earns a return only on that amount of material produced for sales and should not
be penalized for acting as a raw material producer. This process of allocating
capital is referred to as the proportionate share of existing facilities.
In some companies, the same reasoning is used with respect to utilities and
services facilities capital. Therefore, a new product project shares on a
proportionate-use basis the capital burden of the existing facilities. Sales,
administration, research, and engineering capital is proportioned to the various
production departments using their services in a similar fashion.
The total allocated capital then may consist of contributions from
1. Intermediate chemicals
2. Utilities
3. Services
4. SARE
The total allocated capital is added to other capital items to form the total
capital investment. An illustration of the calculation method is found in Example
4.14.
Example 4.14
Problem Statement:
Ajax Petrochemical is considering the manufacture of 18MM lb/yr of a
specialty chlorinated hydrocarbon. In the process some 4MM lb/yr of chlorine is
required. Ajax has an older caustic-chlorine facility at the same location that has a
rated capacity of 100 tons/day. The book value of the chlorine unit’s capital
investment is $20MM. Calculate the amount of allocated capital to be charged to the
chlorinated hydrocarbon unit if the chlorine is to be transferred from the existing
caustic-chlorine-plant. Assume 330 operating days per year for both plants.
Solution:
Chlorine required ¼ 4,000,000 lb=yr £ ð1 tonÞ=ð2000 lb=yrÞ
¼ 2,000 tons=yr
Yearly capacity of the chlorine plant ¼ 100 tons=day £ 330 days=yr

¼ 33,000 tons=yr
Therefore, the proportion of the chlorine facility capital allocated to the

chlorinated hydrocarbon facility is
33,000 tons=yr
£ $20MM ¼ $1,212,000
2000 tons=yr
TM
110 Chapter 4
In addition, the chlorinated hydrocarbon plant can now receive the chlorine
at manufacturing cost plus a price to transfer the chlorine to the new unit.
As an alternate to this approach, each department must achieve a certain
return on the investment as mandated by management. This is referred to as the
profit-center approach. Departments that have a salable product are required to
show a higher return than utilities, services, and SARE facilities.
4.7 WORKING CAPITAL

Working capital are the “working funds” necessary to conduct a day-to-day
business of the firm. These funds are necessary to pay wages and salaries,
purchase raw materials, supplies, etc. Although the initial input of working
capital funds come from the company’s financial resources, it is regenerated from
the sale of products or services. Working capital is continuously liquidated and
regenerated but is generally not available for another purpose, so it is regarded as
an investment item.
Working capital is a very important aspect of plant operations, especially
for unproven processes and new products. If an adequate amount of working
capital is available, management has the necessary flexibility to cover expenses
in case of delays, strikes, fires, or recessions. Many small firms fail due to an
insufficient amount of working capital to pay the expenses as the new venture
begins to become established.
Several methods are available for estimating an adequate amount of
working capital for a proposed venture. These methods may be classified into two
broad categories:
Percentage methods
Inventory method
4.7.1 Percentage Methods

These methods are adequate for order-of-magnitude, study, and preliminary
methods of estimating. The working capital requirements are based upon either
annual sales or capital investment.
4.7.1.1 Percentage of Capital Investment Methods

The ratio of working capital to total capital investment varies with different
companies and different types of business. If a company manufactures and sells a
product at a uniform yearly rate, then 15– 25% of the total capital investment is
an adequate amount of working capital. Some companies are in a seasonal
business, such as agricultural chemicals. If that is the case, then it would be
TM
advisable to provide 20 –30% of the total capital investment for working capital.
The method is shown in Example 4.15.
Example 4.15
Problem Statement:
A company is considering an investment in an aldehyde facility. The
engineering department has estimated that the battery-limits fixed capital
investment to be $19MM. Land allocated for the project is $500,000 and start-up
expenses to be capitalized are expected to be $900,000. The company normally
uses 15% of the total capital investment for working capital. Determine the
estimated amount of working capital for this project.
Solution:
Land $500,000
Fixed capital investment $19,000,000
Start-up expenses $900,000
Subtotal $20,400,000
Since the working capital is 15% of the total capital investment, the
subtotal above is 85%, providing no other capital items are added.
Therefore,
$20,400,000
Total capital investment ¼ ¼ $24,000,000
0:85
and
Working capital ¼ $24,000,000 2 $20,400,000 ¼ $3,600,000
Checking then
working capital
¼ 15%
total capital investment
or
$3,600,000
£ 100 ¼ 15%
$24,000,000
4.7.1.2 Percentage of Sales Method

The estimate of an adequate amount of working capital for certain specialty
chemicals is frequently based upon a percentage of annual sales. Products that
may fall into this category are fragrances, cosmetics, flavors, perfumes, food
additives, etc. To illustrate this method, let’s consider the manufacture of a
perfume. The essences and long-chained alcohols used in the manufacture of
TM
112 Chapter 4
a perfume are expensive items. The fixed capital investment to produce these
products is rather small compared to the manufacture of a petrochemical. A
perfume producer may have considerable money tied up in raw materials and
finished goods inventory and only a modest amount in fixed capital. Therefore, it
would be reasonable to base the estimate of working capital on a percentage of
sales as reported by one manufacturer [64]. Wessel [65] reported that the
percentage values vary from 15 to 49% with 30 to 35% being a reasonable value.
Annual and 10K reports provide enough information to calculate the percentage
for specialty manufacturers. Example 4.16 is an illustration of this method.
Example 4.16
Problem Statement:
A perfume manufacturer is planning to produce a new product. Annual
sales are expected to be about $15,000,000. Estimate the amount of working
capital required for this product.
Solution:
Since this is a high-cost product due to the raw materials and the fact that
little fixed capital is required, the working capital should be based on a percentage
of annual sales. A mean value of 35% of sales will be used.
Annual sales ¼ $15,000,000
Estimated working capital ¼ ð$15,000,000Þð0:35Þ ¼ $5,250,000
4.7.1.3 Inventory Method

There are several variations on this method mentioned in the literature, but they
all have the common basis of inventory. The reader should note that this method
uses the categories in current assets and current liabilities from a balance sheet
(see Chap. 3) and is consistent with the accounting definition of working capital,
namely, current assets minus current liabilities, see Table 4.22. Example 4.17
demonstrates how this method is applied.
Example 4.17
Problem Statement:
Plastics, Inc. is considering a project to manufacture a specialty product for
the polymer industry. The expected sales are 10,000,000 lb/yr at 65 cents/lb. In
the manufacture of this product, all raw materials are delivered by pipeline from
other operating departments except one, so the only on-site storage is an
inorganic compound. It costs 18 cents/lb and is consumed at a rate of
500,000 lb/month. The total manufacturing expense is estimated to be 30 cents/lb
of product. Goods-in-process amount to about $300,000 because of hold tanks
in the process. The fixed capital investment for this process is $8,000,000 and
TM
TABLE 4.22 Working Capital—Inventory Methoda
Item Factors
Raw materials Two weeks supply depending on availability—use

purchase price.
Goods in process Estimate on an average retention time in tanks.
Convert back to raw materials and charge at purchase
price plus one-half the sum of the direct and indirect
conversion costs.
Finished product Two weeks supply depending on product sales and
charge at selling price.
Supplies and stores 10% of the annual maintenance expense.
Cash One month’s manufacturing expense.
Accounts receivable 5% of annual net sales.
Accounts payable One month’s average accounts payable.
Source: Ref. 2.
a
These are estimating factors for a typical inventory method calculation.
the maintenance is 6% per year of the fixed capital investment. Estimate the
amount of working capital required by the inventory method.
Solution:
Raw materials—2 weeks supply of the inorganic compound
14 days
500,000 lb=month £ ¼ 233,000 lb
30 days
Inventory ¼ 233,000 lb £ $0:18=lb ¼ $42,000
Goods in process ¼ $300,000
Finished product—2 weeks supply of product

2 weeks
10,000,000 lb=yr £ ¼ 385,000 lb
52 weeks
Value of product ¼ 385,000 lb £ $0:65=lb ¼ $250,000
Stores and supplies

Annual maintenance cost ¼ $8,000,000 £ 0:06 ¼ $480,000
10% of the annual maintenance cost ¼ $48,000
TM
114 Chapter 4
Cash—1 month’s manufacturing expenses
1 month
10,000,000 lb=yr £ £ ð$0:30=lbÞ ¼ $250,000
12 months
Accounts receivable—5% of annual net sales
10,000,000 lb=yr £ 0:65=lb £ $0:05 ¼ $325,000
Summary:
Items Working capital
Raw materials $42,000

Goods in process 300,000
Finished product 250,000
Stores and supplies 48,000
Cash 250,000
Accounts receivable 325,000
Estimated working capital $1,215,000
Check the result as a percentage of the total capital investment, assuming

that the fixed capital investment and the working capital are the only two capital
items.
$1,215,000
£ 100 ¼ 13:2%
$8,000,000 þ $1,215,000
This is a reasonable result since other capital like land and start-up
expenses have not been included.
Some companies also take into account the accounts payable. These are
the bills owed by the company and one month’s accounts payable would be an
adequate figure to include.
4.8 START-UP EXPENSES

When a process is brought on stream, there are certain one-time expenses related
to this activity. From a time standpoint, a variable undefined period exists
between the nominal end of construction and the production of quality product in
the quantity required. This period is loosely referred to as start-up. In this period
expenses are incurred for operator and maintenance employee training,
temporary construction, auxiliary services, testing and adjustment of equipment,
piping, and instruments, etc. In general, a part of these items may be carried as
TM
expenses like operating expenses, but the tax laws usually require that a portion
be capitalized.
Baasel [40] suggested that start-up expenses vary between 5 and 20% of the
fixed capital investment while Peters and Timmerhaus [10] recommend 8 – 10%
of the fixed capital. Most authorities agree that seldom does this cost exceed 15%.
One large construction company based start-up cost on 20% of the annual
operating expenses. The best source of information is company files as the data
are often available but need to be compiled.
In the absence of information, one of the two following methods may be
used to estimate start-up expenses.
Single-factor Method. For plants with a fixed capital investment of
$100MM or greater, 6% of the fixed capital investment is a reasonable figure. For
plants in the $10MM to $100MM range, 8% is satisfactory and plants of less than
$10MM the factor may be as high as 10% of the fixed capital investment.
Multiple-factor Method. This method of estimating start-up expenses
consists of three components:
Labor
Commercialization cost
Start-up inefficiency
To calculate the labor component, an assumption used is 2 months training
and 3 months start-up for each operator and maintenance person. Commercia-
lization costs may be estimated as a percentage of the battery-limits direct capital
cost. Included in this item would be temporary construction, adjustment and
testing of equipment and instruments, etc., but not field indirect costs which may
be estimated as 5% of the battery-limits direct cost. Start-up inefficiency takes
into account those operating runs when production cannot be maintained or false
starts. For estimating purposes, 4% of the annual operating expense may be used.
When the three components are summed, the result is an estimate of start-up
expenses.
4.9 OTHER CAPITAL ITEMS

4.9.1 Paid-up Royalties and Licenses
The purchase of technology through paid-up royalties or licenses is considered to
be part of the capital investment. The reasoning is that these are replacements for
process research and development. A paid-up royalty is a one-time charge but
there is another type called a running royalty. This latter item would appear as an
operating expense since it is a recurring charge based upon the amount of product
manufactured by the purchased technology.
TM
116 Chapter 4
4.9.2 Initial Catalyst and Chemical Charge

In processes that require a substantial charge of noble metal catalysts, or in
electrolytic processes, the initial charge of these materials is a large amount of
capital. If these materials have a life of 1 year, then the initial charge is
considered part of the total capital investment.
4.9.3 Interest on Borrowed Funds

If funds required for the purchase of a new facility are obtained by borrowing, for
example, selling bonds or loans, then the interest on these instruments during the
construction period only may be capitalized.
All the items in this section constitute part of the total capital investment.
4.10 SUMMARY
The capital cost estimate is the central core of economic evaluations. The items
essential for the preparation of the total capital investment were discussed. For
any project, not all the items in the total capital investment may be included. The
amount of detail to prepare an estimate of the fixed capital investment depends
upon the type estimate required. Methods for preparing such an estimate used by
practicing engineers were presented. Working capital, allocated capital, and start-
up expenses were estimated by using equations or by assuming a percentage of
the fixed or total capital investment. Recommended guidelines were suggested.
Although definitive and detailed estimating methods were presented, the
details and examples are beyond the scope of this text. The book is intended to
acquaint chemical engineering students with what is involved in preparing from
order of magnitude through preliminary estimates; however, the subject of cost
estimation would not be complete without mention of definitive and detailed
estimating procedures. The chapter concludes with a brief mention of computer
use in cost estimation. Most of the calculations in this chapter can be
accomplished without the use of computers.
REFERENCES
1. Fortune, April 16, 2001:F1 –F73.
2. JR Couper, WH Rader. Applied Finance and Economic Analysis for Scientists and
Engineers. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1986.
3. Cost Engineer’s Notebook. Morgantown WV: American Association of Cost
Engineers, 1995.
4. WT Nichols. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 43(10):2295, 1951.
5. RH Perry, DW Green. Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook. 5th ed. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1973.
TM
6. DS Remer, LH Chai. Chemical Engineering Progress. August, 1990:77 – 82.

7. KM Guthrie. Chemical Engineering. March 24, 1969:114– 156.
8. RS Hall, J Matley, K McNaughton. Chemical Engineering. April 5, 1982:80 – 116.
9. RS Hall, WM Vatavuk, J Matley. Chemical Engineering. November 21,
1988:66– 75.
10. MS Peters, KD Timmerhaus. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers.
4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991.
11. DE Garrett. Chemical Engineering Economics. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold,
1989.
12. JS Page. Conceptual Cost Estimating Manual. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing
Company, 1990.
13. CA Miller. Chemical Engineering Progress. May 1973:77 – 82.
14. ASPEN. Cambridge, MA: Aspentech, 1979.
15. SM Walas. Chemical Engineering. March 16, 1987:75 – 81.
16. CR Branan. Rules of Thumb for Chemical Engineers. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing
Company, 1994.
17. GD Ulrich. A Guide to Chemical Engineering Process Design and Economics.
New York: Wiley, 1984.
18. WJ Kerchinski, LE Turpin. Hydrocarbon Processing. January 1996:129 – 133.
19. DR Woods. Process Design and Engineering Practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PTR
Prentice Hall, 1995.
20. Chemical Engineering Economics Indicators. In Chemical Engineering. New York:
Chemical Week Publishing, February 2002.
21. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor, Washington, 2001.
22. Nelson –Farrar Indexes, Oil and Gas Journal, Tulsa, OK, 2002.
23. Construction Cost Indexes. In Engineering News Record. New York: McGraw-Hill,
every issue.
24. Monthly Labor Review. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Department of Labor, 2001.
25. Cost Engineering. Morgantown, WV: American Association of Cost Engineers.
26. J. Water Pollution Control Foundation.
27. AB Salem. Hydrocarbon Processing. September 1981:199 – 201.
28. DS Remer, LH Chai. Chemical Engineering. April 1990:138 – 175.
29. HJ Lang. Chemical Engineering. September 1947:130 –133; Chemical Engineering.
October 1947:117 –121; Chemical Engineering. June 1948:112– 113.
30. WE Hand. Petroleum Refiner. September 1958:331– 334.
31. WF Wroth. Chemical Engineering. October 17, 1960:204.
32. TR Brown. Hydrocarbon Processing. October 2000:93 – 100.
33. SA Gregory, AV Bridgwater. Institute of Chemical Engineers, Symposium Series
Number 35:3 –14. Institute of Chemical Engineers, London, 1972.
34. CE Chilton. Cost Estimation in the Process Industries. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1960.
35. FA Holland, FA Watson, VK Wilkinson. Chemical Engineering. April 1,
1974:71 – 76.
TM
118 Chapter 4
36. J Happel, DG Jordan. Chemical Process Economics. 2nd ed. New York: Marcel
Dekker, 1975.
37. CA Miller. Chemical Engineering. September 13, 1965:226 – 236.
38. OP Karbanda, EA Stallworthy. Capital Cost Estimation. London: Butterworths,
1988.
39. RD Hill. Petroleum Refiner. August 1956:106 – 110.
40. EA Stallworthy. The Chemical Engineer. June 1970:182 – 189.
41. GT Wilson. British Chemical Engineering and Process Technology. October
1971:931 – 934.
42. DH Allen, RC Page. Chemical Engineering. March 3, 1975:142 – 150.
43. J Cran. Chemical Engineering. April 6, 1981:65 – 79.
44. WM Vatavuk. Chemical Engineering. August 1995:68 –76.
45. FC Zevnik, RL Buchanan. Chemical Engineering Progress. February 1963:70 –77.
46. JH Taylor. Engineering & Process Economics. 2:259– 267, 1997.
47. AV Bridgwater. Cost Engineering. 23(5):293 – 303, October 1981.
48. JL Viola, Jr. Chemical Engineering. April 6, 1981:80 – 86.
49. IV Klumpar, RF Brown, JM Fromme. Process Economics International 7:5 –10,
1988.
50. KW Tolson, JT Sommerfeld. Cost Engineering. August 1990:17 – 21.
51. J Sommerfeld, RH White. Chemical Engineering. May 4, 1970:136 – 138.
52. JH Hirsch, EM Glazier. Chemical Engineering Progress. December 1960:37– 43.
53. KM Guthrie. Process Plant Estimating, Evaluation and Control. Solana Beach, CA:
Craftsman Book Company of America, 1974.
54. WD Baasel. Preliminary Chemical Engineering Plant Design. New York: Elsevier,
1976.
55. Process Plant Estimating Standards. vol. 4. San Marcos, CA: Richardson
Engineering Services, Inc., 2000.
56. Private communication.
57. Technical Assessment Guide. Report Number P-4463. Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power
Research Institute, 1986.
58. OP Kharbanda. Process Plant and Equipment Cost Estimation. Solana Beach, CA:
Craftsman Book Company, 1979.
59. FC Jelen, JH Black. Cost and Optimization Engineering. 2nd ed. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1983.
60. DR Woods. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 57:533– 566, 1979.
64. Private communication.
65. HE Wessel. Chemical Engineering 49(1):168 –171, 200, 1953.
TM
PROBLEMS
4.1 Using the selling prices listed below, estimate the fixed capital investment
using the turnover ratio method for chemical plants manufacturing the following
products:
a. Maleic anhydride $0.33/lb

b. Acetic acid $0.45/lb
c. Methyl isobutyl ketone $0.63/lb
d. Styrene $0.28/lb
e. Salicylic acid $1.00/lb
f. Butadiene $0.70/lb
4.2 The following market prices were obtained from a recent issue of Chemical
Market Reporter:
butyl alcohol, drms., c.l. $0.55/lb

butadiene, tanks $0.70/lb
Estimate the fixed capital investment using the fixed investment per annual
ton of capacity method:
a. A plant to manufacture 100 tons/day of butyl alcohol assuming a 95%
stream time.
b. A plant to produce 200,000 tons/yr of butadiene.
c. How do the results compare with those obtained in Problem 4.1.
Explain any differences. Which result would you report to management
and why?
4.3 You read recently in a trade journal that Cleron, a competitor of your
company in the fertilizer business, plans a $20MM expansion of their existing
urea facilities. The article did not mention how much this expansion would
increase production. Your supervisor asks you to estimate the increase in annual
production assuming that urea is selling for $0.05/lb.
4.4 The purchased price of glass –lined vessels with agitator, baffle, and
thermwell is as follows:
Purchased price,
Capacity, gal FOB factory
500 $55,300
750 60,400
(continued)
TM
120 Chapter 4
Purchased price,
Capacity, gal FOB factory
1000 66,900
1500 76,800
2000 85,300
3000 109,500
4000 123,000
a. Construct a graph of the purchased price as a function of capacity on a

logarithmic plot.
b. Determine whether the six-tenths rule applies.
c. Derive an equation of purchased price as a function of vessel size.
4.5 A 100,000 gal carbon steel storage tank was purchased recently for $75,000
FOB, factory.
a. Estimate the purchased price of a 250,000 gal tank.
b. Estimate the purchased price of a 400,000 gal tank
4.6 Determine the cost of a 150 gpm, 100 ft head, cast iron, centrifugal pump
with motor, coupling, and baseplate, pump using the algorithms in Appendix
C. The CE Index for 1986 is 321 and it presently is 399.
a. What is its installed cost?
b. What is the purchased price of the pump if it were of 316 stainless
steel?
c. What is the size exponent in this capacity range?
4.7 A shell-and-tube heat exchanger of 1000 ft2 surface area fabricated of

carbon steel was purchased in 1995 for $30,000.
a. Estimate the purchased price for a 2500 ft2 exchanger using the six-
tenths exponent.
b. You read in the literature that exchangers of this size had a 0.70 cost
capacity exponent. What is the difference in price compared to that
using an exponent of 0.6?
The 1995 CE Index is 381 and the present one is 399.
4.8 In order to meet an increased demand for high octane gasoline, Peaceful Oil
company is considering the installation of an alkylation unit. The following
equipment items are required for the project:
TM
Item Number required Description
Charge pump 1 þ 1 spare 730 gpm, 100 ft head, high-silicon iron

Product pump 1 þ 1 spare 300 gpm, 50 ft head, high-silicon iron
Alkylators 5 Use storage tank for reactor, each reactor
12 ft diam. by 103 ft long, carbon steel
Agitators 50 Turbine, dual impeller, carbon steel,
100 rpm, 50 HP each
Settlers 5 Use storage tank, 304 stainless steel,
13 ft diam. by 40 ft long
Compressor 1 20,000 SCFM, 5-stage, axial compressor,
carbon steel, 2000 hp
Estimate the fixed capital investment using the following methods:

a. Hand method
b. Brown method
c. Chilton method.
Assume a delivery charge of 7%. The CE Index at present is 399 and that
for the algorithms is 318.
d. Compare the results by these methods and comment on the purported
accuracy of each method. What figure would you report to management
and why?
4.9 A small fluids-processing unit is to be constructed adjacent to a large
operating unit in a multiproduct chemical plant. The current purchased
equipment costs, FOB the vendor’s factory, are:
Number Total purchased

required Equipment price
1 Tower and internals $375,000

2 Accumulators 182,000
3 Receivers 450,000
6 Heat exchangers 726,000
5 Pumps and motors 200,000
— Miscellaneous 160,000
If the delivery charges are 5% of the purchased price, estimate the fixed
capital investment, using the Hand and Wroth methods.
4.10 Acme Petrochemicals is considering the manufacture of an aldehyde in the
amount of 20MM lb/yr. In the manufacturing process, 4MM lb/yr of chlorine is
TM
122 Chapter 4
used, which may be obtained from an onsite plant of 100 tons/day rated capacity.
The fixed capital investment of the chlorine plant is $30MM as carried on the
company’s books. The engineering department estimated that the fixed capital
investment of the proposed aldehyde facility is $12MM in current dollars. Land
for the facility is allocated at $275,000.
The company uses the proportionate share method for allocated capital.
Working capital may be taken as 13% of the total capital investment. The start-up
expenses are expected to be 6% of the aldehyde facility fixed capital investment.
Prepare a statement of the total capital investment for the proposed project.
4.11 The corporate planning committee of Luray Chemicals, Inc. met to
consider plans again for capital expenditures. It was decided that a total capital
investment estimate should be prepared again for the plasticizer, XBC. This
project was considered in 1998 but was shelved due to a downturn in the global
economy. From the equipment list below, prepare the total capital requirements
for a battery-limits plant using both the Chilton and the Peters and Timmerhaus
methods now and for 2 years in the future assuming the inflation rates to be 3.2
and 4.5%.
The following guidelines are to be used:
a. The algorithms in Appendix C are on the basis of a CE Index of 318.
The present CE Index is 399.
b. As the process is a fluids-processing unit, a considerable amount of
piping is required.
c. The company policy is to minimize labor, so extensive instrumentation
is to be used.
d. The plant is to be constructed outdoors with only a modest amount of
capital for auxiliaries and outside lines.
e. The company has built similar plasticizer plants and the engineering is
simple.
f. Working capital is estimated as follows:
1. Raw materials storage (average)
Alcohol—10; 000 gal at $1:10=gal
POCl3 —1000 gal at $0:67=lb
2. Finished goods storage (average)
5000 gal at $3:50=gal
3. Accounts receivable—$125,000
4. Cash—$500,000
5. Stores and supplies—1% of the fixed capital investment
g. Land for this project is allocated at $150,000.
h. Start-up expenses are 8% of the fixed capital investment.
TM
Equipment list
Item no. Item name Description
101 Alcohol storage tank Vertical cylindrical vessel, 15,000 gal,

304 SS
102 Alcohol transfer pump Horizontal centrifugal pump, 50 gpm,
50 ft head, high-silicon iron,
1.5 hp TEFC motor, 1800 rpm
103 POCI3 head tank Vertical cylindrical vessel, 1500 gal,
304 SS
104 Reactor Vertical cylindrical vessel, 2000 gal,
304 SS
105 Agitator Six-bladed turbine, 304 SS, 20 hp
TEFC motor, 1150 rpm
106 Reactor circulating pump Single-stage horizontal centrifugal pump,
100 gpm, 150 ft head, high-silicon iron,
5 hp TEFC motor, 1800 rpm
107 Reactor cooler Shell-and-tube heat exchanger, U-tube,
1000 ft2 304 SS, 100 psig
108 Distillation column 6 ft dia £ 40 ft str. side, 25
sieve trays, 316 SS, 100 psig
109 Reboiler Kettle reboiler, 304 SS, 1500 ft2, 100 psig
110 Bottoms pump 2 required each single stage, horizontal,
centrifugal pump, 50 gpm, 75 ft head,
304 SS, 3 hp TEFC motor, 1800 rpm
111 Bottoms receiver Vertical cylindrical tank, 304 SS 1500 gal,
15 psig
112 Condenser Horizontal shell-and-tube heat exchanger,
U tube, 1200 ft2, 316 SS, 110 psig
113 Accumulator Horizontal cylindrical tank, 1500 gal,
316 SS
114 Recycle pump Horizontal centrifugal pump, 2 stage,
300 gpm, 200 ft head, 316 SS, 30 hp
TEFC motor
115 Product receiver Vertical cylindrical tank, 3000 gal, 316 SS,
15 psig
4.12 You are employed as a process engineer for Western Alumina Company in
their project evaluation section. One of your company’s products, aluminum
hydrate, Al2O3(H2O)3, is used as a base for a number of chemicals.
A major manufacturer, and one of our best customers, has projected a need
for an additional 30,000 tons/yr of hydrate beginning about mid-2004. You may
assume the inflation rate is 3.2% in 2002, 4.0% in 2003, and 4.5% in 2004.
TM
124 Chapter 4
To meet this demand, new equipment will have to installed. You are assigned this
project for evaluation and you collect the following information.
The additional hydrate will be available to the new project from an existing
hold tank. It is the tank as a 50% water slurry (i.e., 50% free water). The specific
gravity of the solids is 2.42. A slurry pump is also available.
The hydrate slurry will be transferred to a dryer feed tank, and then will be
pumped to a spray dryer for removal of 100% of the free water. No chemically
combined water is removed in the drying operation. The dry hydrate will be
removed from the dryer by a pneumatic conveyor to an existing bulk storage tank.
It is proposed to operate the new equipment 24 hr/day but only 5 days/wk.
Details of the required equipment items are.
Dryer feed tank—304 SS, agitated to provide a 3-h retention time at the
design flow rate,
Dryer feed pump—a diaphragm pump
Spray dryer—304 SS, 18 ft diameter
Pneumatic conveyor—304 SS, 100 ft long
Provide the following information for your supervisor:
1. Flowsheet of the proposed additional equipment
2. Material balance
3. Equipment list
4. Fixed investment cost using the Wroth method for the present and for
mid-2004.
Use the rules of thumb in Appendix B and the cost algorithms in Appendix
C. State clearly and justify any assumptions you’ve made in preparing the
estimate.
TM

DK5739 CH4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DK5739 CH4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DK5739 CH4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What equipment is required for the new project?

What equipment is required for the new project?

What is the material balance for the process?

What is the material balance for the process?

4

TABLE 4.1 Assets per Employee

Industry sector Assets/employee

Mining, crude oil production $2,203,000

Source: Compiled from Ref. 1.

4.2 FIXED CAPITAL INVESTMENT

site preparation, and environmental control equipment, as well as engineering

4.2.1 Capital Cost Estimates

Estimate type Accuracy range

Order of magnitude 2 30 to þ 50%

Estimate type Accuracy range

Order of magnitude 2 30% to þ 50%

During inﬂationary periods, there is an overlap in the accuracy range and

TABLE 4.2 Cost of Preparing a Capital Cost Estimate

Type of estimate Cost (% of capital cost)

Order of magnitude 0.01–0.05

4.2.1.3 Equipment Cost Data

TABLE 4.3 Cost-Capacity Parametersa

Equipment Capacity factorsb

A simple convenient method of presenting cost data is by an equation:

TABLE 4.4 Cost-Capacity Exponentsa

Equipment group Average exponent

General equipment 0.68

Graphical Presentation. Equipment cost data are presented in the literature

FIGURE 4.3 Typical equipment cost-capacity plot. (From Ref. 2.)

FIGURE 4.4 Variations of n in a cost-capacity plot.

If we assume that for an equipment item, a cost-capacity exponent is 0.6,

Correlations for base cost, design type factor, material of construction

Fixed head exp [2 1.1156 þ 0.0906(ln A)]

Design pressure range (psig), FP:

100 –300 0.7771 þ 0.04981(ln A)

Stainless steel 316 0.8603 0.23296

4.2.1.4 Equipment Sizing

Use the heat exchanger cost algorithm:

f m for cs=cs material ¼ 1:0

f p ¼ 1:00 ðsince this exchanger is operating below 4 barÞ:

CE Index 1986 ¼ 318

4.2.1.5 Cost Indexes

TABLE 4.5 Cost Indexes

Year M&S Index(1)(2)a CE Index(1)(2) Nelson –Farrar Index(1)(3)

Base 1926 ¼ 100 1957–1959 ¼ 100 1946 ¼ 100

1980 675 261 823

major components, namely, a process-industry equipment average and all-

Component Weight factor, %

Equipment, machinery, and supports 61

The dominant components, equipment, machinery, and supports consist of

Subcomponent Weight factor, %

Heat exchangers and tanks 37

Pumps, compressors, etc. Heat exchangers

A more detailed breakdown of each of the above components may be found

Carbon absorbers Mechanical collectors

A detailed explanation of the development and use of the VAPCCI may be

4.2.1.6 Which Index to Use

4.2.1.7 Use of a Cost Index

4.2.1.8 Effect of Inﬂation and Escalation