See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/275581908

EXERGY ANALYSIS OF AN LNG BOG RE-LIQUEFACTION PLANT

Conference Paper · January 2011

CITATIONS READS

2 264

1 author:

Boumedienne M. Beladjine
Université des Sciences et de la Technologie d'Oran Mohamed Boudiaf
13 PUBLICATIONS   17 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Recirculation des gaz d'échappement View project

bunkering LNG to ship's across med sea View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Boumedienne M. Beladjine on 28 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ID: 277

EXERGY ANALYSIS OF AN LNG BOG RE-LIQUEFACTION PLANT

BELADJINE M.B.(*), OUADHA A. (*), BENABDESSELAM Y. (**), ADJLOUT L. (*)

*Laboratoire d’Energie et Propulsion Navale, Faculté de Génie Mécanique, Université des Sciences et de la
Technologie d’Oran Mohamed BOUDIAF, B.P. 1505 Oran El M’naouar, 31000 Oran, Algérie
bbeladjine@yahoo.fr, ouadha@univ-usto.dz, adjloutl@yahoo.fr
**HYPROC Shipping Company, Zhun USTO, B.P. 7200 Es-Seddikia, 31025 Oran, Algérie
ybenabdesselam@hyproc.com

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to perform a rigorous and detailed exergy analysis of an LNG BOG re-
liquefaction plant using nitrogen as the Claude cycle working fluid. Thermodynamic properties of the
refrigerant are calculated using a set of equations of state developed on the basis of available data. Virial
equation of state has been used to calculate thermodynamic properties of nitrogen and the energy and exergy
analysis of the Claude cycle have been adopted to calculate the thermodynamic performances. Simulation
results show the influence of operating conditions on the exergy losses and the exergy efficiency of the
system.

Key words: Re-liquefaction; BOG; LNG; Exergy Analysis

NOMENCLATURE

COP Coefficient of Performance η Efficiency (%)

Ex Exergy (kW) λ Ration of the BOG mass to the total high-
ex Specific exergy (kJ/kg) pressure nitrogen mass
h Specific enthalpy (kJ/kg) ρ Density (kg/m3)
m Mass flow rate (kg/s) θ Inverse of the reduced temperature
p Pressure (MPa) ω Reduced density
Q Heat load (kW) Subscripts
T Temperature (K) BOG Boil-Off Gas
v Specific volume (m3/kg) comp Compressor
xexp Ratio of the expanded mass through evap Evaporation / Evaporator
the expander to the total high- ex Exergetic
pressure nitrogen mass exp Expander
w Compressor work (kJ/kg) HX Heat exchanger
W Power consumed by the compressor o Outlet
(kW) r Reduced
Z Coefficient of compressibility spec specific
Subscripts t Total
ΔEx Exergy loss (kW) th Throttling valve
Δex Specific exergy loss (kJ/kg) 0 Dead state

1. INTRODUCTION

Natural gas is considered as a clean source of energy compared to the others commercial sources of energy.
This quality conjugated to its large reserves and cost effectiveness has an impact on the growth of natural gas
market. The efficient and effective transportation of natural gas from producing countries to consumption
ones can be achieved using pipelines in which natural gas is transported from producing sites to the enduser.
However, the long distances separing consumption countries to producing ones make this solution
uneconomical and technically difficult to ensure. Natural gas can be easily transported if it is changed to its
liquid form in liquefaction plants in the producing country. The liquefaction process reduces the volume of
natural gas by a factor of 600 allowing it to be shipped by sea. The liquefied natural gas (LNG) is typically
transported at a temperature very close the boiling point under the atmospheric pressure in insulated tanks on
board LNG carriers. Hence, ships are the most efficient and economical means of gas transport which is the
central module within the global supply chain. Due to inevitable heat inleak during the trip, an amount of
0.15% of the cargo vaporizes every day, involving the increase of pressure in the tank. In order to maintain
this pressure close to the atmospheric pressure, the vapor generated, commonly known as boil-off gas
(BOG), has been for a long time recovered as a fuel burned in boilers to produce steam for ship’s propulsion
plant and the rest is vented to the atmosphere, which explain that until very recently most LNG carriers used
dual-fuel steam turbines for their propulsion.
LNG shipping industry has been for a long time a large user of low-quality, cheap heavy oils that have
largely been phased out of onshore applications. This affects port cities as well as the general environment
through emissions that are spread across large areas. In order to meet the coming stricter International
Maritime Organisation (IMO) greenhouse gas emission requirements, the LNG shipping industry needs to
reduce emissions du to its fuel consumption, which is a significant burden on air quality in coastal regions.
Under IMO requirements, new limitations for ships engine emissions will be setted. This will concern both
fuels and engines. As environmental issues are becoming increasingly important in shipbuilding, recent
technology developments in building LNG vessels intend to replace the steam turbine propulsion plant by
others alternative solutions. These solutions not only respect environment but allow moving away from the
less efficient and costly steam turbine technology. In that aspect, new propulsion systems which are based on
new generation of Diesel engines, the tank pressure is maintained close to atmospheric pressure by re-
liquefying the BOG in a special system and return the LNG produced back to the cargo tank. The LNG boil-
off gases re-liquefaction system provide an increase in cargo deliveries using an appropriate propulsion
system and offering better fuel economy (Chang et al., 2008).
The solution involving a re-liquefaction system requires relatively high capital investment. Therefore efforts
should be directed to the study and the analysis of the BOG re-liquefaction system in order to compare the
propulsion option choice to the others options. Despite the importance and the development of these types of
systems, few studies on LNG BOG exist in the literature. The existing studies have been focused on the
analysis of LNG BOG re-liquefaction plants based on the first law of thermodynamic. Chin (2006) has
performed a cycle analysis in order to find the optimum design point of the LNG Boil-off gas re-liquefaction
system. Thermodynamic analysis has revealed the system could be defined by three state variables. Thus the
system performance could be described by the three cold endpoint temperatures of the three-pass heat
exchanger. This enabled us to investigate the cycle performance in terms of the heat exchanger parameters.
To get access to the cycle states of higher system performances, larger heat exchangers were found
necessary. Also the thermal pinch in cryogenic heat exchangers was found to act as a limiting factor to the
system performance. Moon et al. (2007) have used numerical methods to analyze Claude and Kaptiza
refrigeration cycles. It was found that Kaptiza refrigeration cycle is more efficient in plant operability and
cost for the LNG BOG re-liquefaction plant than the Claude cycle. The effect of outlet temperature of BOG
condenser for the nitrogen cycle, the ratio of expanded mass flow rate through turbo-expander to the total
mass flow rate on the system efficiency of selected LNG boil-off re-liquefaction cycle has also delineated.
The results indicate that there exist unique optimum values for the ratio of expanded mass flow rate through
the turboexpander to the total mass flow rate. Pil et al. (2008) have given an introduction to reliability
assessment of reliquefaction systems for boil-off gas on LNG carriers with focus on redundancy optimization
and maintenance strategies. The reliability modeling is based on a time-dependent Markov approach. Four
different system options have been studied, with varying degree of redundancy. Failures in the reliquefaction
system may require flaring of the BOG, and the associated cost has been compared with the cost of
introducing redundancy added to maintenance cost onboard. A model for maintenance optimization has been
developed and applied on a main unit of the reliquefaction system. The input data have been collected from
the best available data sources and adjusted by expert judgment. Anderson et al. (2009) have discussed the
details of the design, qualification and development activities, and operating modes of the reliquefaction
systems for the first Q-Flex and Q-Max LNG carriers to enable the use of slow-speed Diesel engines to
achieve higher efficiency and lower emissions than conventional LNG carriers. An object-oriented dynamic
simulation which facilitates the design of the plant and control system for the thermal process has been
presented by Shin and Lee (2009). A reliquefaction process based on the reverse Brayton cycle has been
designed, and its static thermodynamic states at the design BOG load have been presented. Dynamic
simulations have been conducted for all operating modes. It was found that the expander exit temperature is
the key process variable for control and that the process control works successfully when three actuators are
activated in three different BOG load regimes. The study also shows that control of the separator pressure to
keep the vapor fraction at the throttle valve exit as low as possible is an efficient method for purging nitrogen
from BOG. Dimopoulos and Frangopoulos (2010) have developed a detailed dynamic boil-off model which
accounts for the variation of BOG mass flow, composition and thermodynamic properties during voyage.
The model employs coupled non-linear vapor-liquid phase equilibrium thermodynamic equations and
differential conservation equations describing the evolution of LNG quantity and composition with time.
Various solution and time discretization schemes have been tested to assess the solution accuracy and
stability. The model has been used to investigate the variation of the LNG and BOG quantity, composition
and thermodynamic properties during typical voyage profiles of a case study LNG vessel. Variations of the
thermodynamic properties and the quantity of BOG in the range of 6 to 10% during voyage have been found,
having a significant impact in operation modes and fuel consumption of the energy system. Results have
been also compared with the traditional approaches used in the marine technical practice.
As mentioned above, most of studies cited have been focused on the analysis LNG BOG re-liquefaction
plants based on the first law of thermodynamic. However, a more rigorous study must consider both the first
and second laws of thermodynamic. This can be conducted using the concept of exergy analysis. While
several studies have been reserved to the application of exergy analysis to numerous systems for different
applications (Szargut et al., 1988; Moran and Sciubba, 1994; Kotas, 1995; Dincer and Cingel, 2001;
Kanoglu, 2002; Ouadha et al., 2005; Corrado et al., 2006), the application of the exergy concept to re-
liquefaction plants has attracted less attention. A thermoeconomic optimization of the LNG-BOG
liquefaction system has been performed by Sayyaadi and Babaelahi (2010). A thermoeconomic model based
on energy and exergy analyses and an economic model according to the total revenue requirement have been
developed. Minimizing of the unit cost of the refrigeration effect as a product of BOG re-liquefaction plant
has been performed using the genetic algorithm. Results of thermoeconomic optimization have been
compared with corresponding features of the base case system. Finally, sensitivity of the total cost of the
system product with respect to the variation of some operating parameters has been studied. In a second
study, Sayyaadi and Babaelahi (2010) have performed an exergetic efficiency optimization for cryogenic
refrigeration cycle for re-liquefaction of LNG boil-off gas is performed. Thermodynamic modeling has been
performed based on the energy and exergy analyses. Objective problem has been developed based on
maximization of the plant exergetic efficiency and selected decision variables and constraints. The results of
exergetic efficiency optimization have been also compared with the corresponding results of the base case
system obtained in the previous study. Finally, effects of some operating parameters on the exergetic
efficiency have been discussed by sensitivity analysis.
Regarding the use of re-liquefaction system onboard LNG carriers, the Claude cycle has been the centre of
attention of much research developed in recent years. The aim of this study is to perform a rigorous and
detailed exergy analysis of an LNG BOG re-liquefaction plant using nitrogen as the Claude cycle working
fluid. Accordingly to the second law of thermodynamics, entropy is inevitably generated in every process
where energy or matter is dispersed. The analysis based on the combination of both the first and second laws
of thermodynamics is called exergy analysis. Thermodynamic properties of the refrigerant are calculated
using a set of equations of state developed on the basis of available data. The reliability of these equations is
checked by comparison with published data. Virial equation of state has been used to calculate
thermodynamic properties of nitrogen and the energy and exergy analyses of the Claude cycle have been
adopted to calculate the thermodynamic performances. Simulation results show the influence of operating
conditions on the exergy losses and the exergy efficiency of the system.

2. NITROGEN THERMODYNAMIC PROPERTIES

Thermodynamic properties of the working fluid are a key factor to evaluate the system performance and
design. The model adopted, in the present study, is based on four basic equations:
- an equation of state for the gas phase,
- a correlation for the saturated vapour pressure,
- a correlation for the saturated liquid density,
- an equation of the specific heat capacity at constant pressure in the ideal gas state.
 3. THERMODYNAMIC MODELLING

To improve the performance of the cycle, it is necessary to conduct the thermodynamic analysis and carry
out the distribution of exergy losses so that rational improvement can be made. LNG is a mixture of gases,
methane being the main component. Almost no heavy hydrocarbons are present in the BOG since their
boiling point temperatures are much higher than the LNG temperature. The evaluation of a tank’s BOG is
usually done considering LNG as methane (Miana et al., 2010).

3.1 Systems description

LNG BOG Re-liquefaction plants such as those used on board LNG carriers liquefy LNG BOG using basic
thermodynamic principals of a nitrogen compression-expansion cycle (Claude cycle) by extracting heat from
the boil-off gas. BOG is removed from the cargo tanks by means of a two stage centrifugal compressor. The
BOG is cooled and condensed to LNG in three heat exchangers.
Typical LNG BOG re-liquefaction system and its corresponding temperature-entropy diagram are shown in
Figure 1. Discharge pressure from BOG compressor is 4.5 bars and the BOG is cooled and condensed to
LNG at this pressure in a 3-stream plate-fin cryogenic heat exchanger (cold box). The system uses a nitrogen
refrigerant Claude cycle. The nitrogen at 14 bars is compressed to 58 bars in three-stage compressor with
water inter-cooling. The gas is led to the “warm” part of the cold box (HX1) it is pre-cooled (-110 C) and
expanded through a rotary expander from about 58 bars pressure to 14 bars. By this expansion the
temperature of the nitrogen falls, by Joule-Thomson effect, to –160 C. The cold nitrogen is lead to the cold
box (HX2) where it cools the boil-off gas which has been compressed to about 4.5 bars in the low duty
compressor. The condensed boil-off gas is lead to a liquid receiver where the LNG is collected and the non-
condensable gases, mainly nitrogen, are vented in a separator vessel. The vented gases are either returned to
the vapour main or directed to the gas combustion unit for incineration. Venting to the atmosphere is
normally not permitted since the contents of methane gas in the vented gas are 20-25% at 4.5 bars of
pressure in the liquid receiver. From the separator, the LNG is returned to the cargo tanks by the differential
pressure in the system.

1
8
Temperature (K)

pH

pB

2
1-xexp xexp
7

3 9

6
5
4

Entropy (kJ/kg K)

Figure 1. LNG BOG re-liquefaction scheme and cycle.

3.2 Energy balance

The analysis has been carried out considering the following assumptions:
- all processes are considered in equilibrium state with negligible kinetic and potential energies,
- absence of chemical reactions,
- heat and pressure losses in the pipes are neglected,
- the LNG BOG is assumed as 100% methane.
The steady-flow energy balance applied successively to HX1, HX2, HX3 and the mixer yields to the
following equations:
⎧h1 − h2 + h7 − h8 = 0
⎪
⎪⎪(1 − xexp ) ( h2 − h3 ) + h6 − h7 + λ ( hBOG1 − hBOG 2 ) = 0
⎨ (1)
⎪(1 − xexp ) ( h3 − h5 ) + λ ( hBOG 2 − hBOG 3 ) = 0
⎪
⎪⎩(1 − xexp ) h5 + xexp h9 − h6 = 0
Where λ is the ration of the BOG mass to the total high-pressure nitrogen mass and xexp is the ratio of the
expanded mass through the expander to the total high-pressure nitrogen mass. For the expander, the adiabatic
efficiency is defined by:
h2 − h9
ηexp = (2)
h2 − h9i
The cooling of the hot streams by the cold ones within HX2 can be ensured if the following constraints were
imposed on the terminal temperatures of HX2:
⎧T6 ≤ T3
⎪
⎨T6 ≤ TBOG 2 (3)
⎪T ≤ T
⎩ 7 BOG1

Since T8 is fixed to a temperature 5°C lower than T1 as shown in Table 1, the inequality T7≤T2 is satisfied by
itself and thus need not to be implemented. Also note that there is no inequality in the relationship between
T3 and TBOG,2, and between T2 and TBOG,1. Since the saturation temperature of the nitrogen at 14 bars is -
164°C, the system operation avoiding the liquid droplet formation at the expander outlet can be reflected by
T9 ≥ −160°C (4)
Where a safety margin of -164°C was considered.

Table 1. Operating conditions of the system.

BOG pressure, pBOG , bar 3
BOG Temperature, TBOG1 , °C -57.8
BOG Temperature, TBOG 3 , °C -160
N2 High pressure, pH , bar 58
N2 Low pressure, pL , bar 14
N2 Temperature, T1 , °C 40
N2 Temperature, T5 , °C -146.4
N2 Temperature, T8 , °C 35
Expander efficiency, ηexp 0.85
Compressor efficiency, ηcomp 0.75

3.3 Exergy balance

Many researchers (Szargut et al., 1988; Moran and Sciubba, 1994; Kotas, 1995; Cornelissen, 1997; Dincer
and Cingel, 2001) propose that the thermodynamic performance of a process is best evaluated with exergy
analysis. The exergy of a system is defined as the maximum shaft work that could be done by components of
the system and a specified environment reference that is assumed to be infinite, in equilibrium, and
ultimately to enclose all other systems. Typically, the environment is specified by stating its temperature,
pressure and chemical composition (Dincer and Cingel, 2001). Exergy is consumed during real processes,
and conserved during ideal processes. The exergy consumption during a process is proportional to the
entropy created due to process irreversibilities.
The exergy balance of an open steady system, as shown in Figure 2, is presented. The exergy balance is
stated around a control volume delimited by specific boundaries. The exergy flow to the control volume is
always greater than that from the control volume. The difference between the two gives the exergy loss. The
system can include a whole machine or only parts of it, such as compressor, condenser, etc… Generally, the
streams are the mechanical or electric power ( Wi ), the exergy of the fluids flows ( m i exi ) at the entry and
( m o exo ) at the exit, or the exergy of heat ( Ex
 ) .
Q i

Figure 2. Flows of exergy through the limits of a control volume.

The exergy destruction within a particular component can be determined from an exergy balance on that
component. Whether for non-reacting or reacting systems, the unsteady exergy balance on a lumped-
parameter basis for a well-defined control volume (Figure 2) is given by:

∑ ( Ex ) + ∑W + ∑ ( m ⋅ ex ) + ∑ ( m ⋅ ex )
in out

Q i i j j
= ΔEx (5)
i i j =1 j =1

Where the first term is the exergy of heat q, the second is the work, the third the sum of incoming exergy
flows while the last term corresponds to the outgoing exergy flows. The right-hand side is the exergy loss
due to irreversibilities in the process considered.
Generally, there is one mass flow rate ( m  = m i = m o ). Moreover, if there is one term of mechanical or
electric power ( W ) and one term of heat flow (Q), the equation (5) can be reduced, using the equation:
2
⎛ T ⎞
⎝∫
ExQ = ⎜1 − 0
T ⎟ dQ
⎠
(6)
1
to:
2
⎛ T ⎞
Δex = w + ∫ ⎜1 − 0 ⎟ dq + ex1 − ex2 (7)
1⎝
T ⎠
Generally, the specific exergy at a given state is calculated using the following formula:
ex = ex ph + exk + ex p + exch (8)

Where exph, exk, exp and exch denote the physical, kinetic, potential and chemical exergy, respectively.
In this study, kinetic, potential and chemical exergies are neglected. Therefore, the specific exergy of a given
state corresponds to its physical exergy. The latter is expressed by the following equation:
ex = ex ph = ( h − h0 ) − T0 ( s − s0 ) (9)

Where h is the specific enthalpy, s the specific entropy and the subscript 0 corresponds to the environment
state defined as T0 = 25°C and p0 = 0.101325 MPa.
For each component, the energy and exergy balances combined to the definition of exergy give specific
exergy losses in each component of the system by the following equations:
⎧Δexcomp = ( h1 − h8 ) (1 − 1 ηcomp ) + ( s8 − s1 ) (T8 ηcomp − T0 )
⎪
⎪Δexexp = T0 xexp ( s9 − s2 )
⎪
⎪⎪ΔexHX 1 = T0 ⎡⎣( s2 − s1 ) + ( s8 − s7 ) ⎤⎦
⎨ (10)
⎪ΔexHX 2 = T0 ⎡⎣(1 − xdét )( s3 − s2 ) + ( s7 − s6 ) + λ ( sBOG 2 − sBOG1 ) ⎤⎦
⎪
⎪Δexth = T0 (1 − xexp ) ( s4 − s3 )
⎪
ΔexHX 3 = T0 ⎡⎣(1 − xexp ) ( s5 − s4 ) + λ ( sBOG 3 − sBOG 2 ) ⎤⎦
⎩⎪
The total exergy loss in the system is the sum of individual losses of each component:
Δext = Δexcomp + Δexexp + ΔexHX 1 + ΔexHX 2 + Δexth + ΔexHX 3 (11)

The exergy efficiency can be calculated by the following expression:

Δext
ηex = 1 − (12)
wcomp − wexp

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A computer program has been written on the basis of the thermodynamic properties model, the energy
balance equations and the exergy losses expressions using the operating conditions summarised in Table 7.
Since the five equations, (1) and (2), involve the eight cycle variables, T2, T3, T6, T7, T9, TBOG,2, λ and xexp, the
cycle state is defined by three cycle variables. Their domains are bounded by the inequality relations of (3)
and (4). In this study, the cycle state will be mainly described by the three exit temperatures of HX2, T3, T6
and TBOG,2.
Figure 3 shows the combined effect of the temperature difference T3-T6 and TBOG2 temperature on the rate of
nitrogen expanded in the expander xexp. Generally, xexp decreases with increasing the temperature difference
T3-T6. This decrease is more pronounced for high temperatures TBOG2. For example, for TBOG2 equal to -135
°C, xexp drops from 0.4 to 0096 when T3-T6 passes from 0 to 10°C while it is quasi-constant for a TBOG2
temperature equal to -145 °C. The decrease of the amount of nitrogen flowing through the expander is
mainly due to the increase in temperature at its exit.

1.0

0.8

0.6
xexp

0.4

0.2
TBOG2 = -135°C
= -140°C
= -145°C
0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10
T3-T6 (°C)

Figure 3. Effect of the heat exchanger HX2 temperature difference T3-T6 and TBOG2 on the amount of
nitrogen flowing through the expander.
Figure 4 illustrates the effect of the temperature difference T3-T6 and temperature TBOG2 on the specific work
produced by the expander. Its magnitude can be evaluated using the following expression:
wexp = xexp ( h2 − h9 ) (13)

Increasing the temperature difference T3-T6 in the heat exchanger HX2 decreases the specific work produced
by the expander. This is explained by the combined decrease in xexp and the expander exit temperature. The
increase of the TBOG2 temperature enhances this decrease as shown in Figure 4.
60

50

40
wexp (kJ/kg N2)

30

20

10 TBOG2 = -135°C
= -140°C
= -145°C
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
T3-T6 (°C)
Figure 4. Effect of the heat exchanger HX2 temperature difference T3-T6 and TBOG2 on the specific work
produced by the expander.

The performance indicator of re-liquefaction cycles is the liquefaction specific work defined by:
wcomp − wexp
wspec = (14)
λ
Where wcomp and wexp represent the specific work supplied to the compressors and the specific work produced
by the expander, respectively.
The application of the energy balance of nitrogen flowing between states 1 and 8 requires:
wexp − λ ( hBOG1 − hBOG 3 ) = h1 − h8 (15)

By substitution equation (15) into equation (14), the final liquefaction specific work is obtained:
wcomp − ( h1 − h8 )
wspec = − ( hBOG1 − hBOG 3 ) (16)
λ
The effect of the temperature difference T3-T6 and TBOG2 on the liquefaction specific work is shown on the
Figure 5. Increasing the temperature difference involves a significant increase in the specific work for a
temperature TBOG2 equal to -135 ° C. However, for TBOG2 equal to -140 and -145 ° C, the temperature
difference has negligible effect on the liquefaction specific work. Moreover, it is noted that the increase of
TBOG2 improves significantly the liquefaction specific work.
As for conventional refrigeration systems, the commonly used first law criterion for judging the quality of a
re-liquefaction system is the coefficient of performance defined as:
qL
COP = (17)
wcomp − wexp
 18000
TBOG2 = -135°C
= -140°C
15000 = -145°C

12000

wspec (kJ/kg N2) 9000

6000

3000

0
0 2 4 6 8 10
T3-T6 (°C)
Figure 5. Effect of the heat exchanger HX2 temperature difference T3-T6 and TBOG2 on the cycle specific
liquefaction work.

Where qLis the quantity of heat extracted to LNG BOG during its liquefaction which can be assessed using
the following formula:
qL = h5 − h4 (18)
The COP is plotted against T3-T6 and TBOG2 in Figure 6. The COP decreases quasi-linearly with increasing the
difference T3-T6. This decrease is mainly due to the decrease of work produced by the expander. The
decrease of temperature TBOG2 improves significantly the COP as shown in Figure 6.
1.0
TBOG2 = -135°C
0.9
= -140°C
0.8 = -145°C

0.7

0.6

0.5
COP

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10

T3-T6 (°C)
Figure 6. Effect of the heat exchanger HX2 temperature difference T3-T6 and TBOG2 on the cycle
coefficient of performance.

The ratio of the BOG mass to the total mass of nitrogen compressed vapour, λ, is shown in Figure 7. For
TBOG2 equal to -140 and -145 °C, λ is quasi-constant. For TBOG2 equal to -135°C, λ decreases with increasing
the temperature difference (T3-T6). Similarly here, this decrease is attributed to the decrease of xexp.
This section is dedicated to the exergy analysis of the BOG re-liquefaction system by determining the exergy
losses in each component of this system and the total exergy losses. In addition, exergy analysis allows to
define an efficiency which is more suited to the concept of refrigeration cycle performance compared to the
coefficient of performance.

0.09
TBOG2 = -135°C
0.08 = -140°C
= -145°C
0.07

0.06
λ (kg BOG/kg N2)

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10
T3-T6 (°C)

Figure 7. Effect of the heat exchanger HX2 temperature difference T3-T6 and the TBOG2 on the BOG rate
λ.

Figure 8 shows the effect of the temperature difference T3-T6 on the exergy losses in each component of the
cycle. The largest exergy losses occur in the compressor and the throttling valve and the expander while it is
minimal and quasi-constant in the three heat exchangers HX1, HX2 and HX3. Exergy losses in the
compressor are constant while those produced in the throttling valve increases with increasing temperature
difference T3-T6. While the exergy losses in the expander decrease slightly with increasing T3-T6.
50

TBOG2 = -145°C
40

Compressor
Turboexpander
30 HX1
Δex (kJ/kg N2))

HX2
Throttling valve
HX3
20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10
T3-T6 (°C)
Figure 8. Effect of the heat exchanger HX2 temperature difference T3-T6 on the individual exergy losses
of the system.

The variation of total exergy losses versus the temperature difference T3-T6 and TBOG2 temperature is shown
in Figure 9. The first finding is that exergy performance does not follow those derived from the energy
method. In fact, total losses are produced at a maximum temperature TBOG2 equal to -145°C whereas at this
temperature the COP takes maximum values. At this temperature, the total exergy loss decreases slightly
with increasing the temperature difference T3-T6. For TBOG2 temperatures of -140 and -135°C, the increase of
T3-T6 involves an increase in total losses.

150

125
Δext (kJ/kg N2)

100

75

TBOG2 = -135°C
= -140°C
= -145°C
50
0 2 4 6 8 10
T3-T6 (°C)
Figure 9. Effect of the heat exchanger HX2 temperature difference T3-T6 on the total exergy losses.

For all the cases previously studied, compressor and expander isentropic efficiencies have been considered
constants. Tables 2 and 3 show the effect of the variation of compressor and expander isentropic efficiencies
on the system performance. It is clear that increasing efficiencies improves the performance of the cycle in
terms of coefficient of performance and exergetic efficiency. For example, the jump from 0.7 to 0.85 in ηcomp
involves an increase of 22% in the COP and ηex. However, the transition from 0.7 to 0.85 in ηexp causes an
increase of 63.34% ηex and only about 1.5% in COP.

Table 2. Effect of the compressor efficiency on the cycle performance.

ηcomp wspec (kJ/kg N2) COP Δext (kJ/kg N2) ηex
0.70 2701.111 0.612 110.323 0.258
0.75 2476.136 0.667 97.945 0.281
0.80 2279.284 0.725 87.115 0.305
0.85 2105.590 0.785 77.558 0.331

Table 3. Effect of the expander efficiency on the cycle performance.

ηcomp wspec (kJ/kg N2) COP Δext (kJ/kg N2) ηex
0.70 2667789 0.657 124.235 0.103
0.75 2555.375 0.663 116.058 0.154
0.80 2487.972 0.667 107.353 0.213
0.85 2476.136 0.667 97.945 0.281

5. CONCLUSIONS

A detailed exergy analysis of an LNG BOG re-liquefaction plant using nitrogen as the Claude cycle working
fluid has been investigated. Thermodynamic properties of the refrigerant have been calculated using a set of
equations of state developed on the basis of available data. The reliability of these equations is checked by
comparison with published data. Virial equation of state has been used to calculate thermodynamic
properties of nitrogen and the energy and exergy analyses of the Claude cycle have been adopted to calculate
the thermodynamic performances. The later have been calculated considering the three exit temperatures of
HX2, T3, T6 and TBOG,2.
 Results show that the large amount of exergy losses is dissipated in the compressor and the expander.
Furthermore, exergy performances do not follow those derived from the energy method. In fact, total losses
are produced at a maximum temperature TBOG2 equal to -145°C whereas at this temperature the COP takes
maximum values. At this temperature, the total exergy loss decreases slightly with increasing the
temperature difference T3-T6. For TBOG2 temperatures of -140 and -135°C, the increase of T3-T6 involves an
increase in total losses.
Accordingly, exergy analysis is a more effective approach for on board LNG BOG re-liquefaction plants
because it takes into account all losses occurring in the system. This allows designers to identify less
efficient components in order to improve them.

REFERENCES

Anderson T. N., Ehrhardt M. E., Foglesong R. E., Bolton T., Jones D., Richardson A., 2009, Shipboard
reliquefaction for large LNG carriers, Proceedings of the 1st Annual Gas Processing Symposium, 10-
12 January, Doha, Qatar.
Chang D., Rhee T., Nam K., Lee S., Kwak B., Ha J., 2008, Economic evaluation of propulsion systems for
LNG Carriers: A comparative life cycle cost approach, GasTech 2008, March 10 to 13, Bangkok,
Thailand.
Chin Y.W., 2006, Cycle Analysis on LNG Boil-off Gas re-liquefaction plant, J. Korean Institute Appl.
Superconductivity Cryogenics, 8: 34-38.
Cornelissen, R.L., 1997, Thermodynamics and sustainable development-The use of exergy analysis and the
reduction of irreversibility, PhD Thesis, The Netherlands University of Twenty, 150 p.
Corrado A., Fiorini P., Sciubba E., 2006, Environmental assessment and extended exergy analysis of a “zero
CO2 emission”, high-efficiency steam power plant, Energy, 31: 3186-3198.
Dimopoulos G. G., Frangopoulos C. A., 2010, A Dynamic model for liquefied natural gas evaporation
during marine transportation, Int. J. Thermodynamics, 11: 123-131.
Dincer, I., Cengel, Y. A., 2001, Energy, entropy and exergy concepts and their roles in thermal engineering,
Entropy, 3: 116-149
Kanoglu, M., 2002, Exergy analysis of multistage cascade refrigeration cycle used for natural gas
liquefaction, Int. J. Energy Research, 26: 763-774.
Kotas, T.J., 1995, The Exergy method of thermal plant analysis, Malabar, FL: Krieger Publish Company.
Miana M., Del Hoyo R., Rodrigal Varez V., Ramon Valdes J., Llorens R., 2010, Calculation models for
prediction of liquefied natural gas (LNG) ageing during ship transportation, Applied Energy, 87: 1687-
1700.
Moon J. W., Lee Y. P., Jin Y. W., Hong E. S., Chang H. M., 2007, Cryogenic refrigeration cycle for re-
liquefaction of LNG boil-off gas, International Cryocooler Conference, Boulder : 629-635.
Moran, M. J., Sciubba, E., 1994, Exergy analysis: Principles and practice, ASME J. Eng. for Gas Turbines
and Power, 116: 285-290
Ouadha, A., En-Nacer, M., Adjlout, L., Imine, O., 2005, Exergy Analysis of Two-Stage refrigeration Cycle
Using Two Natural Substitutes of HCFC22, Int. J. Exergy, 2: 14-30.
Pil C.K., Rausand M., Vatn J., 2008, Reliability assessment of reliquefaction systems on LNG carriers,
Reliability Engineering & System safety, 93: 1345-1353.
Sayyaadi H., Babaelahi M., 2010, Thermoeconomic optimization of a cryogenic refrigeration cycle for re-
liquefaction of the LNG boil-off gas, Int. J. Refrig., 33: 1197-1207.
Sayyaadi H., Babaelahi M., 2010, Exergetic optimization of a refrigeration cycle for re-liquefaction of LNG
boil-off gas, Int. J. Thermodynamics, 13: 127-133.
Shin Y., Lee Y. P., 2009, Design of a boil-off natural gas reliquefaction control system for LNG carriers,
Applied Energy, 86: 37-44.
Szargut, J., Morris D.R., Steward F.R., 1988, Exergy analysis of thermal, chemical and metallurgical
processes, Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, New York.

View publication stats