You are on page 1of 8

Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2518e2525

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Design and analysis of liquefaction process for offshore associated gas resources
Q.Y. Li, Y.L. Ju*
Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Institute of Refrigeration and Cryogenics, Shanghai 200240, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Liquefaction is the key section on floating platform. Some experts and designers selected mixed
Received 13 August 2009 refrigerant process for floating platform, while some recommended expander cycle. However, few of
Accepted 4 July 2010 them compared the two types of processes systemically before making a choice. In this paper, the
Available online 27 July 2010
liquefaction processes of propane pre-cooled mixed refrigerant cycle (C3/MRC), mixed refrigerant cycle
(MRC) and nitrogen expander cycle (N2 expander) for the special offshore associated gases in South China
Keywords:
Sea have been designed and studied. These processes have been analyzed and compared systematically
Offshore associated gas resources
considering the main factors including the performance parameters, economic performance, layout,
Liquefaction process
Design and analysis
sensitivity to motion, suitability to different gas resources, safety and operability, accounting for the
features of the floating production, storage and offloading unit for liquefied natural gas (LNG-FPSO) in
marine environment. The results indicated that N2 expander has higher energy consumption and poorer
economic performance, while it has much more advantages than C3/MRC and MRC for offshore appli-
cation because it is simpler and more compact and thus requiring less deck area, less sensitive to LNG-
FPSO motion, has better suitability for other gas resources, has higher safety and is easier to operate.
Therefore, N2 expander is the most suitable offshore liquefaction process. In addition, the exergy analysis
is conducted for N2 expander and the results indicate that the compression equipments and after coolers,
expanders and LNG heat exchangers are the main contribution to the total exergy losses. The measures to
decrease the losses for these equipments are then discussed.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction facilities present several unique design challenges including the


effect of sea motion on equipment performance, space limitations
Natural gas is a type of important energy [1] and it has multiple and increased safety concerns due to a more compact layout and
uses [2,3]. In recent years, the recovery and utilization of offshore limited space, different from that of the onshore project. A floating
associated gases have been becoming more and more important process must be simple, compact, and offer high inherent process
[4]. Most of the marginal gas fields, with short lifetimes, are in safety. It must also consider the additional constraints placed on
medium and small size [5] and, therefore, it is not advisable to the system in the marine environment such as high degree of
exploit these gas fields adopting fixed platform or building gas modularity, ease of operation, low equipment count, quick start-
transfer pipeline [6,7]. The exploitation of marginal gas fields has up/stop, and high flexibility to the natural gases of different
become reality with the improvement of advanced offshore tech- components.
nologies. As a new developing technique of offshore gas fields, LNG- Some experts selected mixed refrigerant process for offshore
FPSO [8] has received great attention because of its advantages of associated gas liquefaction, while some recommended expander
lower investment, shorter building period and being easer to move cycle. However, before making selection, few of them compared the
and repeated used. two kinds of processes systematically. In this paper, the liquefaction
Liquefaction is the important part for offshore gas production. processes of C3/MRC [10], MRC [11] and N2 expander [12] have been
There are mainly three kinds of liquefaction processes: cascade studied and designed according to the offshore associated gas
refrigeration cycle [9], mixed refrigerant liquefaction cycle and resources in South China Sea. These processes have been analyzed
expander cycle. However, the floating liquefaction process and and compared systematically considering the main factors
according to the special marine environment. The results show that
although the N2 expander has the higher power consumption and
poorer economic performance compared to the other two lique-
faction processes, it is a more suitable liquefaction process for LNG-
* Corresponding author. Tel./fax: þ86 21 34206532.
FPSO, taking everything into consideration.
E-mail address: yju@sjtu.edu.cn (Y.L. Ju).

1359-4311/$ e see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2010.07.001
Q.Y. Li, Y.L. Ju / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2518e2525 2519

Nomenclature MRC Mixed refrigerant cycle


N2 expander Nitrogen expander cycle
ai Constant related to gas p Pressure, Pa
aj Constant related to gas R Molar gas constant, 8.314 J/(mol. K)
aa Constant related to gas T Temperature, K
b Constant related to gas V Valves
bi Constant related to gas Vm Mole volume, m3/mol
C&A Compression equipments and after coolers Z Compression factor
C3/MRC Propane pre-cooled mixed refrigerant cycle zi Mole fraction for the component of i
Ex Expanders zj Mole fraction for the component of j
H-E LNG heat exchangers ai Constant related to gas
kij Binary interaction coefficient aj Constant related to gas
LNG-FPSO Floating production, storage and offloading unit for
liquefied natural gas

2. Liquefaction processes The N2 expander is expressed in Fig. 3. The refrigerant of this


process is a single component, nitrogen, which is always in the
The liquefaction processes of C3/MRC, MRC and N2 expander gaseous phase. In order to cool the nitrogen refrigerant to the
have been designed according to the conditions of the offshore temperature below that of LNG product [13], the N2 expander uses
associated gas resources in South China Sea. The pressure of the gas both self-cooling (within the LNG heat exchangers) and turboex-
resources is 13 MPa and the temperature is 50  C. Figs. 1, 2 and 3 panders. The booster/turboexpanders are also adopted in this
show the flow diagram of C3/MRC, MRC and N2 expander, process. To reduce power consumption, the power extracted from
respectively. the turboexpanders is recovered by the boosters and used to
As shown in Fig. 1, the high-pressure natural gases are first compress the refrigerant. The high-pressure natural gases are first
expanded to a lower pressure, with concomitant temperature drop, expanded to a lower pressure and then cooled by the LNG heat
via a turboexpander and then they are cooled by a series of LNG exchangers. The final temperature of the LNG product stream is
heat exchangers of H-E1, H-E2, H-E3 and H-E4. The series of heat attained by throttling the chilled natural gases exiting from the LNG
exchangers cool the natural gases to a temperature sufficiently low heat exchangers to storage pressure. This process is adaptable to
and then they are liquefied when throttled to the storage pressure. different feed natural gases because the refrigerant of it is a single
The low-pressure mixed refrigerants are first compressed and then component.
pre-cooled by a simple propane cycle. The mixed refrigerants
provide cooling for the natural gases in the LNG heat exchangers.
The booster/turboexpander is employed in this scheme, and the 3. Phase equilibrium equations
work recovered from the turboexpander is employed to drive the
booster. The MRC process shown in Fig. 2 is similar to that of The HYSYS [14] software is selected as the process simulator in
the C3/MRC. The only difference is that the propane cycle is removed this paper. In the HYSYS software, the PR (PengeRobinson) [15]
in the MRC process. As for the two processes, the component equation is often used to calculate the phase equilibrium of the
proportion of mixed refrigerants should be changed with the feed mixed refrigerants and natural gases. The PR equation is given as
natural gases in order to minimize the power consumption. follows

Fig. 1. C3/MRC process.


2520 Q.Y. Li, Y.L. Ju / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2518e2525

Fig. 2. MRC process.

RT aa The PR equation can also be expressed in the form of


p ¼  2 (1)
Vm  b Vm þ 2bVm  b2 compression factor:
   
where
Z 3  ð1  BÞZ 2 þ A  3B2  2B Z  AB  B2  B3 ¼ 0 (5)
X
b ¼ zi bi (2) where
XX
aa ¼ zi zj ðaaÞij (3) Z ¼ pV=ðRTÞ (6)

 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi A ¼ aap=ðRTÞ2 (7)


ðaaÞij ¼ 1  kij ai ai aj aj (4)

Fig. 3. N2 expander process.


Q.Y. Li, Y.L. Ju / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2518e2525 2521

B ¼ bp=RT (8) Table 2


Mole fraction of components for mixed refrigerants.

Components CH4 C2H6 C3H8 iC4H10 iC5H12 N2


4. Analysis and comparison of liquefaction processes Mole fraction 0.24 0.44 0.07 0.02 0.12 0.11

4.1. Performance parameters


in these figures, each of the layouts consists of two deck levels, the
The natural gases used in the simulation are the associated
lower deck and the upper deck. The plot areas of the equipments of
natural gases from South China Sea. After pretreatment, the natural
C3/MRC, MRC and N2 expander are 203.6 m2, 189.8 m2 and 125.4 m2
gases are at a pressure of 12.75 Mpa and a temperature of 50  C. The
respectively. The plot areas of C3/MRC and MRC are larger than that
flow rate of the natural gases is assumed as 375 kmol/h. To compare
of N2 expander by 62.3% and 51.3%. It is evident that the plot area of
the above three processes, we keep the same storage conditions,
N2 expander is the smallest. Now we can draw a conclusion that the
including the same storage pressure and storage temperature, and
plot area for N2 expander is much smaller than the other two
the output of LNG. The adiabatic efficiencies of the compressors,
processes. Therefore, the N2 expander is the most simplest and
turboexpanders and boosters in these liquefaction processes are all
compact process.
set at 80%. The mole fraction of the components for the natural
gases is shown in Table 1. Table 2 gives the fraction of components
for mixed refrigerants adopted in the simulation. 4.4. Sensibility to motion
The main performance parameters of the three kinds of
liquefaction processes are shown in Table 3. We can see clearly LNG-FPSO is often operated under irregular motion due to high-
that the power consumption of the N2 expander is the highest, intensity waves. Therefore, the employed liquefaction process
which is higher than that of C3/MRC and MRC by 68% and 52%, should be insensitive to the motion of the floating platform. In the
respectively. The load of water-cooling of the N2 expander is also N2 expander process, the refrigerant is single component nitrogen
the largest. which is always in the gaseous phase, the impact of LNG-FPSO
motion on the thermal performance of the heater exchangers is
4.2. Economic performance negligible [19]. In another word, LNG-FPSO motion has almost no
effect on the performance of N2 expander process. However, the
The economic performance has been compared and analyzed for platform motion will cause the fluid of liquid phase or gas/liquid
these three liquefaction processes [16,17]. The equipments of these two-phase maldistribution in equipments and pipelines, which will
processes mainly contain compressors, booster/turboexpanders, impact the performance of heat transfer. The simulation results
cold boxes, auxiliary equipments, refrigerant matching equipments revealed that the refrigerants in gaseous phase are only in the stage
and so on. The estimated capital costs for the equipments of C3/MRC, of compression and the outlet of separators in the process of
MRC and N2 expander are 17 million RMB, 16.3 million RMB and 14.1 C3/MRC. As shown in Fig. 1, the refrigerants are in gaseous phase
million RMB, respectively. The operating costs, mainly including only at the pipe segments of 18, 19, 20, 24, 28, 40 and 41, while in
electricity charges, equipment maintenance charges, refrigerant liquid phase or gas/liquid two-phase at all the other pipe segments.
costs and staff salaries, for C3/MRC, MRC and N2 expander are 3.4 The process of MRC, as shown in Fig. 2, is similar to that of C3/MRC,
million RMB/a, 3.6 million RMB/a and 4 million RMB/a, respectively the refrigerants are all in liquid phase or gas/liquid two-phase in
[18]. We can see that the capital costs of the equipments in N2 the whole refrigeration cycle except for the pipe segments of 16, 17,
expander are lower than that of C3/MRC and MRC, while the oper- 18, 19, 20, 21, 23 and 31. Therefore, LNG-FPSO motion impacts the
ating costs of the N2 expander are the highest. We assume that the performance of the whole liquefaction processes of C3/MRC and
equipment lifetimes for the three kinds of liquefaction processes are MRC. Obviously, N2 expander is less sensitive to the LNG-FPSO
10 years, the depreciation expenses of the equipments each year in motion than the other two liquefaction processes.
the processes of C3/MRC, MRC and N2 expander are 1.7 million RMB,
1.63 million RMB, and 1.41 million RMB, respectively. The total costs, 4.5. Suitability to gas resources
the sum of operating costs and depreciation expenses, for the
liquefaction processes of C3/MRC, MRC and N2 expander are 5.1 Once the gas resources are exhausted in the current gas field,
million RMB/a, 5.23 million RMB/a and 5.41 million RMB/a, LNG-FPSO may be transferred to other fields for the exploitation of
respectively. We can draw a conclusion that the economic perfor- different gases. Therefore, the liquefaction process employed for
mance of N2 expander is poorer than that of the other two lique- LNG-FPSO should be tolerant of reasonable feed gas changes. The
faction processes. suitability of the three kinds of liquefaction processes has been
analyzed with the associated natural gases from another gas field.
4.3. Overall layouts The pressure and temperature of the feed gases are 5 MPa and
48  C, respectively. The mole fraction of the components of the
The overall layouts have been designed for the three kinds of natural gases is shown in Table 4. According to the simulation
liquefaction processes, as shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 4aec show the layouts results, with the purpose of minimizing the energy consumption,
of C3/MRC, MRC and N2 expander, respectively. Fire/blast walls are no changes need to be done in N2 expander except regulating the
included around the cold boxes and refrigeration storage tanks for parameters of the process due to its single component refrigerant
protection of the process facilities against a fire/explosion. As shown nitrogen. However, the proportion of the components for the mixed

Table 1
Mole fraction of components for natural gases.

Components CH4 C2H6 C3H8 iC4H10 nC4H10 iC5H12 nC5H12 nC6H14 nC7H16 N2
Mole fraction 0.909 0.042 0.016 0.004 0.004 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.009 0.011
2522 Q.Y. Li, Y.L. Ju / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2518e2525

Table 3 Table 4
Main performance parameters of the processes. Mole fraction of components for natural gases.

Flow rate Power per Load of Liquefaction Components CH4 C2H6 C3H8 iC4H10 nC4H10 iC5H12 N2
of natural unit LNG water-cooling rate Mole fraction 0.758 0.153 0.061 0.009 0.005 0.003 0.011
gases (kmol/h) (kWh/Nm3) (kW)
C3/MRC 375 0.238 3258 0.884
MRC 375 0.263 3464 0.884
N2 expander 375 0.4 4481 0.884 performance than C3/MRC and MRC, but it claims more advantages
over the other two liquefaction processes for offshore application.
N2 expander is more compact and thus require less plot area, less
refrigerants in the processes of C3/MRC and MRC must be matched sensitive to LNG-FPSO motion, has better suitability to different gas
repeatedly in order to gain the minimum energy consumption and resources and has higher safety and operability. In conclusion, N2
this is a heavy work. Table 5 is the mole fraction of the components expander process is the most suitable offshore liquefaction process.
for the mixed refrigerants in the two processes with the minimum
energy consumption. It can be seen that N2 expander has better 6. Exergy analysis
suitability for different gas resources than the other two processes.
As compared and analyzed above, N2 expander is a more ideal
4.6. Safety process for offshore applications. The main equipments employed
in this liquefaction process are compressors and after coolers,
Safety is one of the important factors for selecting offshore booster/turboexpanders, LNG heat exchangers and throttle valves,
liquefaction process. The refrigerants of N2 expander are nitrogen which all involve irreversible operations. In this section, the exergy
while that of C3/MRC and MRC are the mixtures of most hydro- losses of these equipments are analyzed and compared. Measures
carbons and a small amount of nitrogen. It is well known that of reducing the losses of these equipments are also discussed.
nitrogen is non-flammable gas but hydrocarbon is flammable and is
possible to explode in air once the concentration of it is within the 6.1. Exergy
explosion limit (the concentration range of flammable gas in air).
Table 6 shows the explosion limits of the hydrocarbons contained Exergy [20] is the maximum amount of useful energy that can
in the mixed refrigerants of C3/MRC and MRC. From Table 6 we can be extracted from a process stream when it is brought to equilib-
see that a low hydrocarbon concentration can be within the rium with its surroundings in a hypothetical reversible process. For
explosion limits and it will cause to explode in air once meeting fire flow sheet unit operations at steady state conditions, the kinetic
source. The nitrogen refrigerant in N2 expander avoids the and potential energy effects are often neglected. The exergy of
requirement of storing hydrocarbon refrigerant and thus improves a stream is, therefore, expressed as
the security of this process. The refrigerants in the processes of
C3/MRC and MRC need the storage of the hydrocarbons of CH4,
E ¼ ðH  H0 Þ  T0 ðS  S0 Þ (9)
C2H6, C3H8, iC4H10 and iC5H12. These hydrocarbons have the where H0, S0 are enthalpy and entropy in the equilibrium condition,
possibility to explode in air once leaking from the storage vessels normally considered as the ambient condition, while H, S are
and this increases the potential safety hazards of the processes. It is enthalpy and entropy in the specified stream conditions.
evident that the safety of N2 expander is higher than that of C3/MRC As mentioned above, all of the main equipments adopted in the
and MRC. liquefaction process involve irreversible operations. The exergy
losses of these equipments can be calculated based on the exergy
4.7. Operability balance between input and output streams.

The offshore liquefaction process should be at ease to operate. 6.1.1. Compression equipment
The refrigerant of N2 expander process is the single gaseous A compressor and three booster/turboexpanders are applied in
nitrogen and no refrigerant match problem. The operation and the liquefaction process. The boosters and the compressor are all
maintenance of this process is quite simple. The mixed refrigerants compression equipments. The exergy balance between the input
in C3/MRC and MRC processes must be matched exactly in the and output streams for the compression equipment can be
process of operation, while the proportion of each component expressed as
contained in the refrigerants is difficult to control and thus leading
the two processes more difficult to operate and maintain than N2 Ein þ Wc ¼ Eout þ II (10)
expander. In addition, N2 expander process has quicker start-up/
and exergy loss is given by
stop than the other two liquefaction processes. Therefore, N2
expander process has higher operability than that of C3/MRC and II ¼ Ein  Eout þ Wc (11)
MRC.
where Ein and Eout are the inlet and outlet exergy of compression
5. Offshore liquefaction process equipment, respectively. Wc is the power input to the compression
equipment and II is the exergy loss.
Energy consumption is not the most important factor for
selecting offshore liquefaction process. The liquefaction process 6.1.2. Expander
employed on LNG-FPSO should meet the requirements associated The expanders are important devices. The exergy balance
with operating in marine environment which include meeting between the input and output streams for the expander is
constraints of space, accounting for LNG-FPSO motion, and suit- expressed as
ability for different gas resources, safety and operability. Through
Ein ¼ Eout þ Wc þ II (12)
comparison and analysis above, it is demonstrated that N2
expander has higher energy consumption and poorer economic therefore, the exergy loss of the expander can be expressed as
Q.Y. Li, Y.L. Ju / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2518e2525 2523

Lower deck plan view Upper deck plan view


1, Cold box; 2, N2 storage tank; 3, Methane storage tank; 4, Isobutane storage tank; 5, Isopentane storage tank; 6, Propane storage
tank; 7, Ethane storage tank; 8, Compressors; 9, Lube oil console for compressors; 10, Refrigerant make up equipments; 11,
Booster/ turboexpander; 12, Lube oil console for booster/ turboexpander; 13, Fuel gas heater; 14, Fuel gas filter, 15, Refrigerant
coolers.

Lower deck plan view Upper deck plan view


1, Cold box; 2, N2 storage tank; 3, Propane storage tank; 4, Isobutane storage tank; 5, Isopentane storage tank; 6, Methane storage
tank; 7, Ethane storage tank; 8, Compressors; 9, Lube oil console for compressors; 10, Refrigerant make up equipments; 11,
Booster/ turboexpander; 12, Lube oil console for booster/ turboexpander; 13, Fuel gas heater; 14, Fuel gas filter; 15, Refrigerant
coolers.

Lower deck plan view Upper deck plan view


1, Cold box; 2, N2 storage tank; 3, Booster/ turboexpanders; 4, Lube oil console for booster/ turboexpanders; 5,Refrigerant make up
equipments; 6, Compressor; 7, Lube oil console for compressor; 8, Fuel gas heater; 9, Fuel gas filter; 10, Refrigerant coolers.

Fig. 4. Overall layouts for the three processes. a. Overall layouts for C3/MRC. b. Overall layouts for MRC. c. Overall layouts for N2 expander.

Table 5 Table 6
Mole fraction of components for mixed refrigerants. The flammable limits of the hydrocarbons at ambient conditions.

Components CH4 C2H6 C3H8 iC4H10 iC5H12 N2 Components CH4 C2H6 C3H8 iC4H10 iC5H12
Mole fraction 0.28 0.40 0.08 0.06 0.14 0.04 Flammable limits 5%e15% 3%e16% 2.1%e9.5% 1.9%e8.4% 1.4%e8.3%
2524 Q.Y. Li, Y.L. Ju / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2518e2525

II ¼ Ein  Eout  Wc (13)


where Ein and Eout are the inlet and outlet exergy of the expander,
respectively. Wc is the output power of the expander and IIis the
exergy loss.

6.1.3. Heat exchanger


Several streams enter and exit the LNG heat exchanger. The
exergy balance between the input and output streams is given by
X X
Ein ¼ Eout þ II (14)

and the exergy loss of the LNG heat exchanger is expressed as


X X
II ¼ Ein  Eout (15)
P P
where Ein and Eout are the sum of exergy for input and outlet
streams. II is the exergy loss of LNG heat exchanger.

6.1.4. Valve
The throttle valve is essentially isenthalpic device. The heat
transfer with the surroundings is neglected. The exergy balance
between the input and output streams for the valve is expressed as

Ein ¼ Eout þ II (16)


and the exergy loss can be expressed as

II ¼ Ein  Eout ¼ ðHin  Hout Þ  T0 ðSin  Sout Þ (17)


here Hin equals to Hout, so II can also be expressed as

II ¼ T0 ðSout  Sin Þ (18)

6.1.5. Cooler
The after coolers are applied in this liquefaction process. The
nitrogen is cooled with water in the coolers. The exergy balance
between the input and output streams for the after cooler is
expressed as

En;in þ Ew;in ¼ En;out þ Ew;out þ II (19)

therefore, the exergy loss of the water cooler is expressed as


   
II ¼ En;in þ Ew;in  En;out þ Ew;out (20)

1400

1200
Fig. 6. Hot and cold composite curves for LNG heat exchangers. a. Hot and cold
Exerfy loss(KW)

1000 composite curves for H-E1. b. Hot and cold composite curves for H-E2. c. Hot and cold
composite curves for H-E3.
800

600 where En,in and Ew,in are the input exergy of nitrogen and of cooling
water, respectively. En,out and Ew,out are the output exergy of
400 nitrogen and of cooling water.
200
6.2. Analysis and discussion
0
C&A Ex H-E V The exergy losses of these equipments are calculated according
Equipment to the exergy equilibrium equations. The results are shown in Fig. 5.
The C&A represents the compression equipments, including the
Fig. 5. Exergy losses of N2 expander process. compressor and the boosters, and the associated after coolers.
Q.Y. Li, Y.L. Ju / Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 2518e2525 2525

While Ex, H-E and V represent the expanders, LNG heat exchangers factors containing performance parameters, economic perfor-
and valves, respectively. We can see from Fig. 5 that a large amount mance, layouts on LNG-FPSO, sensibility to motion, suitability to
of the exergy losses, about 58.7% of the total losses, come from the different gas resources, safety and operability, accounting for the
compression equipments and the associated after coolers. The special marine environment. The results indicated that N2
other two important equipments with irreversible operations are expander is the most suitable process for offshore application
the turboexpanders and the LNG heat exchangers. They contribute because it claims much more advantages over the other two
28.2% and 9.5% of the total exergy losses to the liquefaction process, processes. The exergy analysis is also conducted to the N2 expander.
respectively. The exergy loss of throttle valves is the least. The results revealed that the compression equipments and after
It is evident that reducing the losses in the compression coolers, expansion devices and LNG heat exchangers are the main
equipments and the associated after coolers would produce the equipments contributing to the total exergy losses. The measures to
greatest effect in decreasing the total losses of this liquefaction reduce these exergy losses are also discussed.
process. The main measures to decrease the loss of the compressor
consist of adopting multi-stage compression and associated after
cooling, selecting reasonable inlet parameters and compression Acknowledgements
ratio for the compressor. With multi-stage compression, the outlet
temperature of the compressors is decreased and thus the This work was supported by the National High-Tech Research and
temperature difference of heat transfer in the after coolers is Development Program of China (863 Program) (No.2006AA09Z317)
smaller. The exergy losses of the after coolers are decreased because and the Program for Distinguished Young Scholars of the Ministry of
of the reduced temperature difference of heat transfer. Education (No. NCET-07-0544).
The booster/turboexpander consists of a turboexpander and
a booster. The turboexpander is the expansion device while the
References
booster is the compression equipment. The power extracted from
the turboexpander is recovered and employed to drive the booster. [1] P. Regulagadda, I. Dincer, G.F. Naterer, Exergy analysis of a thermal power
However, the turboexpander and the booster both are the equip- plant with measured boiler and turbine losses, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (8e9)
(2010) 970e976.
ments involving exergy losses. Therefore, reducing the losses of
[2] B. Adouane, W. de Jong, J.P. van Buijtenen, G. Witteveen, Fuel-NOx emissions
them is very important. Selecting reasonable inlet pressure and reduction during the combustion of LCV gas in an air staged Winnox-TUD
expansion ratio are the effective ways to decrease the exergy loss of combustor, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (8e9) (2010) 1034e1038.
the turboexpander. Furthermore, reducing the friction loss and [3] A.K. Sen, G. Litak, B.-F. Yao, G.-X. Li, Analysis of pressure fluctuations in
a natural gas engine under lean burn conditions, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (6e7)
leakage loss of the expander can also decrease the exergy loss. As (2010) 776e779.
for the booster, selecting reasonable inlet parameters is the [4] G.S. Fraser, J. Ellis, The Canada-Newfoundland Atlantic Accord Implementation
important method to reduce its loss. Act: transparency of the environmental management of the offshore oil and
gas industry, Mar. Policy. 33 (2) (2009) 312e316.
Composite curve [12] is often employed to analyze the multi- [5] J.J. Li, The building technology of LNG tank, Welding Technol. 35 (4) (2006)
flow heat exchanger. All of the heat flows in the multi-flow heat 54e56.
exchanger are expressed by hot composite curve while all of the [6] A. Barletta, E. Zanchini, S. Lazzari, A. Terenzi, Numerical study of heat transfer
from an offshore buried pipeline under steady-periodic thermal boundary
cold flows are expressed by the cold composite curve. The exergy conditions, Appl. Therm. Eng. 28 (10) (2008) 1168e1176.
loss of the multi-flow heat exchanger is reflected by the tempera- [7] H. Najibi, R. Rezaei, J. Javanmardi, K.H. Nasrifar, M. Moshfeghian, Economic
ture difference between the hot and cold composite curves. The evaluation of natural gas transportation from Iran’s South-Pars gas field to
market, Appl. Therm. Eng. 29 (10) (2009) 2009e2015.
exergy losses will increase with the raising of the temperature [8] A.L. Tonkovich, K. Jarosch, R. Arora, L. Silva, S. Perry, J. McDaniel, F. Daly, B. Litt,
difference between the hot and cold composite curves. In this Methanol production FPSO plant concept using multiple microchannel unit
paper, the LNG heat exchanger is multi-flow heat exchanger. operations, Chem. Eng. J. 135S (2008) S2eS8.
[9] J.B. Jensen, S. Skogestad, Optimal operation of a mixed fluid cascade LNG plant,
Therefore, the exergy loss of it can be analyzed with composite
Comp. Aid. Chem. Eng. 21 (2006) 1569e1574.
curve. The hot and cold composite curves for the LNG heat [10] Y.M. Shi, M.Z. Yang, X.S. Lu, Optimization analysis of the procedure of lique-
exchangers are expressed in Fig. 6. Fig. 6aec show the composite fying natural gas by propane pre-cooled mixed refrigerant cycle, Natur. Gas
curves for the exchangers of H-E1, H-E2 and H-E3, respectively. We Ind. 21 (2) (2001) 107e109.
[11] K. Wang, F.Y. Xu, H.Y. Li, Dynamic performance simulation of plate-fin heat
can see that the temperature difference between the hot and cold exchangers in small scale MRC-LNG plant, Cryogenics 3 (2007) 44e49.
composite curves of H-E1 is very small. However, the temperature [12] C.W. Remeljej, A.F.A. Hoadley, An exergy analysis of small-scale liquefied
differences of H-E2 and H-E3 are very larger than that of H-E1. It natural gas (LNG) liquefaction processes, Energy 31 (12) (2006) 2005e2019.
[13] T. Lu, K.S. Wang, Analysis and optimization of a cascading power cycle with
indicates that the exergy losses of H-E2 and H-E3 are larger than liquefied natural gas (LNG) cold energy recovery, Appl. Therm. Eng. 29 (8e9)
that of H-E1. Therefore, higher degree of optimization can be (2009) 1478e1484.
available with H-E2 and H-E3. The measures to decrease the exergy [14] W.S. Cao, X.S. Lu, W.S. Lin, A.Z. Gu, Parameter comparison of two small-scale
natural gas liquefaction processes in skid-mounted packages, Appl. Therm.
losses of the LNG heat exchangers mainly include increasing heat Eng. 26 (8e9) (2006) 898e904.
transfer area and recovering cold energy. [15] A.Z. Gu, X.S. Lu, R.S. Wang, Liquefied Natural Gas Technology. China Machine
Press, Beijing, 2003.
[16] Y.X. Fu, H.Z. Li, G.B. Guo, The economic analysis of the coal bed methane
7. Conclusions liquefaction equipments, Low Temp. Spec. Gas. 22 (4) (2004) 10e13.
[17] D.Z. Zheng, A complex criterion for evaluating economy of LNG unit schemes,
Few of the designers systemically compared the two types of Cryogenics 5 (1996) 31e35.
[18] Q.S. Yin, Economic analysis compared between mixed-refrigerant cycle and
liquefaction process of mixed refrigerant process and expander
N2 expander, Natur. Gas Ind. 28 (2) (2008) 148e150.
cycle before their selection for offshore gas production. In this [19] M.J. Roberts, J.C. Bronfenbrenner, D.R. Graham, W.A. Kennington, Process
paper, three kinds of liquefaction processes, C3/MRC, MRC and N2 design solutions for offshore liquefaction, In: 24th International Conference
expander, have been designed and studied according to the asso- and Exhibition on Liquefied Natural Gas, Abu Dhabi, UAE, May 2009,
pp. 25e28.
ciated natural gas resources in South China Sea. The processes were [20] Q.S. Fu, Method of Thermodynamic Analysis to Energy System. Xi’an Jiao Tong
analyzed and compared systematically considering the main University Press, Xi’an, 2005.

You might also like