J. Hong, C. Baukal, M. Bastianen, J.

Bellovich and K. Leary, John Zink

Company, LLC, USA, present innovative
steam assisted flare technology.

lares are devices used to safely and efficiently dispose of operational or

emergency relief of flammable gases and liquids1. They are somewhat
unique compared to other common combustion devices such as burners
because of the very wide range of flowrates and compositions that they often
handle. This makes the design very challenging as flares often have to be
capable of safely handling gas flows from as low as several hundred pounds
per hour or less (purge rate) up to as much as a million or more pounds
per hour. This means a flare must have a very wide turndown range, where
turndown is the ratio of the highest to lowest flowrates of waste streams that
can be safely handled.
There have traditionally
been six important performance
parameters of interest for
most flares2. The first is the
hydraulic capacity, which is
the maximum gas flowrate that
can flow through the flare at
a given pressure for a given
gas molecular weight and gas
temperature. While the gases
are safely combusted, smoke
is often generated. Since this
is the maximum design flow
that could occur during an
emergency, the primary focus is safely disposing of the gases and not on how
much smoke is generated.
The second parameter is the smokeless capacity. This is the maximum
flow of waste gases that can be sent to the flare without producing significant
levels of smoke. It is usually lower than the hydraulic capacity. A flare is typically
designed so that the smokeless capacity is at least as much as the maximum
waste gas flowrate expected during normal daily operation.
The third performance parameter of interest is the thermal radiation
generated by the flare as a function of the waste gas flowrate and composition3.
The radiation levels at specific points of interest are typically limited to avoid
injuring personnel and damaging equipment. The height of the flare is then
determined by how tall the stack needs to be so that the radiation levels at
specified locations are maintained at or below desired levels.
The fourth parameter of interest in flares is noise. Excessive noise can injure
personnel, damage equipment, and property both inside and outside of the
plant.
The fifth parameter is utility consumption rates at various waste flowrates,
typically measured in terms of steam to hydrocarbon mass ratio for steam
assisted flares and horsepower required per unit hydrocarbon mass flowrate
for air assisted flares. This parameter reflects how efficient a flare design is
in utilising the momentum of the steam in a steam assisted flare, or the air
supplied by the blower in an air assisted flare.
The sixth parameter is the minimum purge gas flowrate required. The purge
gas is supplied for two purposes: to prevent air ingression into the stack, which

New steam assisted

flare technology

www.hydrocarbonengineering.com

Reprinted from July2007 HydrocarbonEngineering

has received considerable

attention recently is pollutant
emissions from flares4.
There are various types
of flares, depending on the
specific application. If the
waste gases are at a relatively
low pressure, then some type
of assist media is often used
to entrain air into the flame
to increase the smokeless
Figure 1. Effectiveness of steam in smoke suppression: (left) without steam, (right) with steam.
waste gas flowrate. The two
most common assist media
are steam and air. In the
case of air assisted flares, one or more blowers supply
a portion of the combustion air to the flare. Air assisted
flares are commonly used where steam is limited, such
as in locations where water is limited (e.g. the desert). For
steam assisted flares, steam is used to entrain a portion
of the combustion air to the flare. For either type of assist
medium, most of the combustion air comes from the
ambient air surrounding the flare flame.

Conventional steam assisted

flares

Figure 2. Schematic of an internal tube type steam assisted flare.

Figure 3. An internal tube type steam assisted flare.

could produce an explosive mixture leading to severe
stack damage; and to prevent internal burning in the fuel
plenum that could lead to flare tip failure. The purge rate
required to prevent stack damage is typically lower than
the purge rate required to prevent internal burning. In order
to prevent internal burning in a steam assisted flare, centre
steam is often used. An additional (seventh) parameter that

Reprinted from HydrocarbonEngineering

July2007

By far the most popular type of assisted flare is steam

assisted, which is the type discussed here. Figure 1
shows the effectiveness of steam assist for increasing the
smokeless capacity of a flare. There are many types of
steam assisted flares that are available. One common high
efficiency design uses a bundle of tubes inside the flare
stack where the waste gas flows outside the tubes and a
steam/air mixture flows inside the tubes. A typical design
is shown in Figure 2. There is no premixing inside the flare,
so the combustion air and flammable waste products mix
at the exit of the flare tip. The tip of a typical steam flare is
shown in Figure 3. There are usually three different steam
supply lines for this type of flare: to the tubes inside the
flare; to the upper rim at the top of the flare tip; and inside
the waste gas plenum of the flare tip (often referred to as
centre steam). For optimum performance, each of these
lines is independently controlled. The steam supply to the
tubes inside the tip is used to entrain combustion air into
the interior of the flame to increase the smokeless capacity.
The steam supply to the upper rim of the tip minimises
wind effects and helps entrain combustion air into the
flare flame. The centre steam supply is primarily to prevent
internal burning that can occur during very low waste gas
flowrates where air can migrate inside the flare gas plenum
due to buoyancy, cross wind and capping.
One potential limitation of conventional steam assisted
flares is related to what can happen if the steam supplies
are not in the correct proportions. If the steam flare is
not operated properly, a detrimental phenomenon called
capping can occur, if too much steam is supplied to the
upper steam ring and too little is supplied to the lower
steam ring. This is shown schematically in Figure 4. The
upper steam flows upward and inward toward the centre.
The collision above the flare tip creates a zone with a
relatively high pressure, acting as a fluidic dome or a cap
over the flare tip that can force some of the flame down
inside the waste gas plenum, causing internal burning.
Depending on the severity, flames can actually be pushed
all the way back through the steam air tubes, resulting in

www.hydrocarbonengineering.com

flame engulfment of the flare tip. Prolonged capping can

damage the flare due to the internal burning and flame
engulfment. Figure 5 shows a photo of a capped flare.
Centre steam is often used to prevent internal burning
at purge rate flows by increasing the volume flowrate
and therefore the velocity through the tip to prevent air
infiltration. This is less expensive than simply increasing
the purge flowrate of a purchased gas such as natural gas.
However, the centre steam flow still represents a significant
cost. Using centre steam in freezing weather conditions
can sometimes cause the steam to condense and freeze,
plugging up the flare tip. In cold weather conditions, it is
common to turn off the centre steam and increase the
purge gas flowrate, which typically increases the operating
costs of the flare.

New steam assisted flare

development
A development project was initiated to address some of
the limitations of conventional steam assisted flares. An
important objective of designing a new steam assisted flare
was to reduce the amount of steam required to achieve
smokeless combustion of a given waste flowrate. This can
be quantified as the ratio of the mass of steam needed per
unit mass of flare gas (S/HC ratio), at a flare gas flowrate
where smoke is just beginning to be produced (sometimes
referred to as the incipient smoking rate). Reducing steam
consumption directly reduces utility costs. If the plant is
steam limited, reducing the steam flow to the flare system
can also free up steam for other uses in the plant.
An extensive development programme, utilising
computational fluid dynamic (CFD) modelling5, cold flow
modelling and large scale combustion testing6, led to a new
flare design called the Steamizer XP (patent pending). A
drawing of one version of the XP is shown in Figure 6. The
XP consists of multiple modules connected to a common
waste gas supply header. An important innovation with this
design is that the steam/air tubes are straight, instead of
having a bend as in the conventional steam assisted flare
design. This dramatically reduces the flow frictional losses.
The increased flow efficiency optimises air entrainment for
a given steam flowrate.
Extensive computer modelling was done to investigate
various aspects of the new flare design. CFD, including
the effects of flame radiation, was used to study the heat
load effects caused by high or low waste gas flows during
high and low winds. Extensive thermal stress modelling
was also done to study the effects of flame radiation and
very high wind loading on the stresses created in the flare
tip. A fatigue assessment was included based on the
ASME VIII Section II code. The stress analyses showed
that the design is very robust under the conditions
modelled.
Another important design feature of the XP design
is the shape of the nozzle outlet, whose purposes are to
efficiently mix the air with the flare gas and to minimise/
prevent internal burning. A proprietary geometry and flame
stabiliser configuration was developed with the help of CFD
modelling5.
Testing of various module configurations was
conducted in a full scale air entrainment test rig with
accurate measurement of both steam and entrained air
flows (Figure 7). Bent tubes as used in the conventional
design were compared against straight tubes in the

www.hydrocarbonengineering.com

Figure 4. Schematic of capping (green represents fuel gas, blue

represents steam, and red represents flame).

Figure 5. A capped steam assisted flare.

XP design. Extensive combustion testing was also
performed in John Zinks state of the art flare test facility6.
The smokeless capacity, steam consumption rate,
thermal radiation output and other characteristics were
experimentally determined.

Moderated shear mixing

The new XP flare design has some important benefits

compared to conventional steam assisted flare designs. The
design of the outlet nozzle is critical to the performance of
the XP flare. One of the reasons for the special shape is to
enhance the mixing of the air and the waste gas. Figure 8

Reprinted from July2007 HydrocarbonEngineering

termed moderated. Furthermore, the optimal moderated

design minimises pressure losses for the given waste gas
flows.
The improved mixing of the air and waste gas increases
the smokeless capacity for a given set of conditions
compared to the conventional design. Alternatively, a flare
requiring less steam could be used for a given smokeless
capacity, compared to the conventional design.
The new nozzle design with moderated shear mixing
eliminates the centre steam and upper steam required on
the conventional design. This dramatically reduces the
steam requirements and capping caused by excessive
upper steam flow.

Secondary air entrainment

Figure 6. The XP flare (patent pending).

Figure 7. Cold flow air entrainment testing.

Figure 8. Examples of mixing: (left) low shear, (middle) high shear,

(right) moderated shear.
shows some simple schematic diagrams of different types
of mixing. The left diagram shows that mixing is low and
shear force is minimal when there are two parallel fluid
streams of approximately the same velocities. The middle
diagram shows that mixing is greatly increased where one
stream is perpendicular to the other. In that case, the shear
between the two streams is very high, which enhances
mixing. The right diagram shows moderated mixing where
there is some shear between the fluids, but not as much as
when they are perpendicular.
The XP flare uses moderated shear mixing to improve
mixing compared to the conventional steam assisted flare
design. The converging nozzle causes the waste stream to
intersect the steam/air stream at a slight angle. Extensive
modelling and testing have shown that the angle is critical,
otherwise capping can occur, which is why the mixing is

Reprinted from HydrocarbonEngineering

July2007

Another important design feature is dividing the outlet

area into multiple nozzles to improve mixing between the
secondary air and the flare gas stream around and along
the flame. In the conventional design, the flare gases in the
centre of the flare primarily mix only with the air that has
been entrained into and through the steam/air tubes. Since
this is only a relatively small fraction of the total air needed
to completely combust the waste gases, air from around
the flame must be entrained to make up the balance of
the requirement. Although the air from around the flame is
termed secondary air and the air entrained into the steam/
air tube is termed primary air, the secondary air actually
accounts for the majority of the air required to completely
combust the waste gas. In the conventional design,
secondary air cannot get to the interior of the flame. The
multiple individual nozzles in the XP allow secondary air to
go between the nozzles into the centre of the flare before
all the individual flames merge into a continuous ring of
flame with a hollow centre. Secondary air is entrained into
the hollow centre to further suppress smoke formation. The
tubes in the XP design are optimally spaced to minimise
the overall size of the tip, without adversely affecting the
secondary air entrainment capability. If the tubes are too
closely spaced, then air flow to the inner portion of the tip
would be restricted, thus reducing the smokeless capacity
of the flare.
Improving the secondary air entrainment around the
flare effectively either increases the smokeless capacity for
a given steam flowrate, or reduces the steam flowrate for
a given smokeless capacity, compared to the conventional
steam assisted flare design.

Improved eductor efficiency

Another important feature of the XP flare is the reduced

pressure losses or hydraulic resistance in the air/steam
passage compared to the conventional design, which
uses bent tubes. Extensive tests in this study showed that
the more angled the steam/air tubes, the less efficient
the steam is for entraining air and mixing it with the
waste gases. The less smooth the turn (e.g., mitered vs.
contoured elbows), the less the air entrainment for a given
steam flowrate. Also, the closer the bend is to the steam/
air tube inlet, the lower the air entrainment. The XP flare
eliminates the bends in the steam/air tubes which makes
the steam much more efficient at entraining air and mixing
entrained air with the waste gases. Again, this means
increased smokeless capacity for a given tip design and
steam flowrate, or alternatively, less steam flow required for
a given smokeless capacity.

www.hydrocarbonengineering.com

Conclusion
The newly developed Steamizer XP flare reduces or
eliminates the potential limitations of conventional
steam assisted flares. Extensive CFD modelling, cold
flow testing and full scale combustion testing were
used in the development programme. The XP utilises
straight steam/air tubes, proprietary nozzles and multiple
individual modules to produce moderated shear mixing,
increased secondary air entrainment and improved
eductor efficiency. These features provide many benefits,
including significantly reduced steam requirements (>30%
reduction), two of the three steam supply lines eliminated,
simplified controls, longer tip life, and reduced installation
and operating costs. This innovative new technology will
improve flare operations while simultaneously reducing
costs.

References
1.
2.
3.
4.

5.
6.

REED, R., Flaring and Disposal, Chapter 2 in Furnace Operations,

Gulf Publishing, Houston, 1973.
SCHWARTZ, R., WHITE, J. and BUSSMAN, W., Flares, Chapter 20
in the John Zink Combustion Handbook, edited by C. Baukal, CRC
Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2001.
HONG, J., WHITE, J. and BAUKAL, C., Accurately predict radiation
from flare stacks, Hydrocarbon Processing, Vol. 85, No. 6, pp. 79
- 81, 2006.
LEVY, R., RANDEL, L., HEALY, M. and WEAVER, D., Reducing
Emissions from Plant Flares, Proceedings of the Air & Waste
Management Assoc. Conf. & Exhibition, New Orleans, LA, June
2006, Paper #61.
BAUKAL, C., GERSHTEIN, V. and LI, X. (eds.), Computational
Fluid Dynamics in Industrial Combustion, CRC Press, Boca Raton,
FL, 2001.
HONG, J., BAUKAL, C., SCHWARTZ, R., and FLEIFIL, M.,
Industrial-Scale Flare Testing, Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol.
102, No. 5, pp. 47 - 54, 2006.

www.hydrocarbonengineering.com

Figure 9. Air entrainment around XP modules.

Reprinted from July2007 HydrocarbonEngineering