Pipelines

September 26, 2013
Compression
Split – Technical Seminar
Tom Birney,
Director of Business Development
© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.
OVERVIEW
©
© 2012
2012 Valerus.
Valerus. Confidential
Confidential and
and proprietary.
proprietary. All
All rights
rights reserved.
reserved.
OUTLINE
1. Selection Of A Reciprocating Or Centrifugal Compressor

a. Parameters
b. Drivers
c. Centrifugal Compressors
d. Reciprocating Compressors
d. Recip. vs. Centrifugal Comparison
- Examples
e. Conclusion

OUTLINE
2. High/Medium Speed Vs. Slow Speed

Comparison of API 11P (ISO-13631): High/medium speed
compressors and API 618 slow speed compressors
3. Sizing, Selection and Applications
4. Packaging Considerations

COMPRESSION
1. Selection of a Reciprocating or Centrifugal Compressor
©
© 2012
2012 Valerus.
Valerus. Confidential
Confidential and
and proprietary.
proprietary. All
All rights
rights reserved.
reserved.
COMPRESSOR TYPES
Positive Displacement Dynamic

Reciprocating
Radial
Screw
Vane
Rolling Lobe (Roots)

Axial
Liquid Ring
Single Screw
HISTORY

DEFINE THE QUESTION
• Plant or Site Parameters
• Project Parameters
• Process Parameters
• Machinery Parameters

PLANT OR SITE PARAMETERS
• Onshore / Offshore
• Elevation/Barometric Pressure
• Ambient Temperature - design/range
• Fuel Available - type, pressure, cost
• Soil/Foundation conditions
• Enclosure Required - open, partial, full
• Manpower/Staffing Plans
• Utilities - water, power, air
• Environment - noise, air, effluents

PROJECT PARAMETERS
• Anticipated life
• Required start up date & equipment deliveries
• Economic evaluation criteria

PROCESS PARAMETERS
• Gas analysis
• Suction pressure - design/range
• Discharge pressure - design/range
• Suction temperature - design/range
• Flow rate - design/range
• Extra process heat requirement
• Operating flexibility required
• Operating reliability required

MACHINERY PARAMETERS
• Initial cost
• Transportation/installation cost & time
• Compressor efficiency - kw/m3
• Specific fuel consumption over range
• Power avail/power required match
• Actual emissions/emissions allowed
• Operation & maintenance cost
• Flexibility to handle range of conditions

ELECTRIC OR GAS DRIVER
• Fuel gas availability & quality
• Electricity availability
• Speed control
• Fuel gas vs electric cost
• Maintenance vs initial cost
• Emissions
• Lead time

ELECTRIC DRIVER
• Fuel gas availability & quality – Not Required
• Electricity availability - Required
• Speed control – Additional VFD and Torsional Analysis
• Fuel gas vs electric cost – varies
• Maintenance vs initial cost – Maintenance Low / (high failure cost)

Initial cost comparable
• Emissions - None
• Lead time – Long, built to order

COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE
• Two types of gas turbines

– Industrial
• steam turbine technology
• in-situ repair
– Aero-derivative
• replace - don’t repair

TURBINE DRIVER
• Fuel gas availability & quality –Required / high quality
• Electricity availability - No
• Speed control – Usually ran at constant speed
• Maintenance vs initial cost – Maintenance Low / (high failure cost)

Higher Initial cost
• Emissions - High
• Lead time – Long

GAS TURBINE CONTROLS
• Complex start-up/stop sequencing

• Complex controls required for fuel scheduling and emissions
controls
• Many critical monitoring points for gas turbine
• Complicated surge control

RECIPROCATING ENGINE DRIVER
• Fuel gas availability & quality –Required / low quality
• Electricity availability - No
• Speed control – Included
• Maintenance vs initial cost – Maintenance medium / Low Initial cost
• Emissions - medium
• Lead time – short

RECIPROCATING DRIVERS
• Industry did not have a large industrial gas engine until 1995.
– Caterpillar G3616 in 1995 (4500 HP)
– Caterpillar G16CM34 in 2001 (7670 HP)
– Waukesha 16V-AT27 in 2000 (4500 HP)
– Wartsila 18V34SG in 1997 (8000 HP)
– Wartsila 20V34SG in 1998 (10600 HP)

RECIPROCATING ENGINE VS. GAS TURBINES DRIVERS
Turbine Engine
Available HP >30,000 >10,000
Temp. 22°C 37.8°C
Altitude Sea Level 1500m
Intake Loss None allowed 1500mm WC
Exhaust Loss None allowed 300mm WC

Degradation Allow up to 10% 0%
Weight / Footprint Low High

CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSORS
WHY Centrifugal?
• Mature Technology – Since 1940’s

• Handles large capacities
• High Horsepower
• Small footprint
• 99% Availability
• Minimal Maintenance

CENTRIFUGAL CHARACTERISTICS
• Dynamic compressor
Achieves pressure increase by controlling gas velocities
• Narrow operating range
Precise matching to design point
• Minimal degree of capacity control\
• Large Volumetric flow rates

CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSOR APPLICATION LIMITATIONS
Flow:
Minimum flow is approx. 3 m3/min (100 acfm) into any impeller.

As flow decreases toward this limit efficiency falls off dramatically.

Pressure:
• Lower limit, none with proper seals.
• Upper limit, high discharge pressure not itself a limiting factor, just
thicker components. This may reduce number of stages possible.
• Most applications are below 350 bar.
• Higher suction pressure are more difficult to seal. Most applications
below 200 bar.

Temperature:
• Low temps. down to -75°C handled using higher cost materials of

sufficient ductility. Special seals required. Upper limit set by shaft
seals.
• Temps. of 195°C are common & can be increased to 230°C with

cool buffer gas.

Compression Ratio or Head:
• Determines the number of stages required.

For dynamic compressors this is a function of pressure ratio, MW,
temperature, compressibility and ratio of specific heats.
Due to rotor stability 10 impellers is normal max. At 4,600 m kg/kg
polytropic head per impeller this limits methane to 7.92 ratios in one
casing and propane to 200 ratios. Correct MW is critical to proper
selection.

Horsepower:
• Applications less than 750 kw (~1000 hp) usually have some other
limiting factor such as low flow or poor efficiency.
• Upper limits are typically set by available drivers.
• Centrifugal compressors can handle high powers.

Rotative Speed:
• With dynamic compressors higher speed results in improved

performance. Work per stage and flow increases with speed.
Mechanical considerations limit tip speeds to 335 m/sec for open
impellers and 425 m/sec for closed impellers.

Efficiency:
• Polytropic efficiency per stage of 85% is normal for quantity constant

of 100 to 300 and declines to 70% as quantity constant drops to 35.
Quantity Constant = ICFM X 1000 X 1728

RPM X IMP. DIA. (in)

RECIPROCATING COMPRESSORS
WHY Reciprocating?
• Large, operating range / flow / pressure / variations in gas

• +95% Availability
• Portability
• Ease of Start – Stop
• Re-Application
• Cost

RECIPROCATING CHARACTERISTICS
• Positive Displacement compressor

Achieves pressure by reducing the volume
• Wide operating range
• Infinite capacity control
• Efficiency improves with decreasing flow

RECIPROCATING COMPRESSOR APPLICATION LIMITATIONS
Flow:
• No minimum flow. Maximum flow limited by piston displacement of

available cylinders.

Pressure:
• No minimum limit, can attain high vacuums. Maximum pressures

can be ultra high for special processes. Separable applications are
normally limited to 415 bar (6000 psi), at reduced rotative speeds.

Temperature:
Minimum limit is -30°C with standard material and -40°C with special alloys.
Maximum limit is normally 175°C and preferably below 150°C.

Compression Ratio:
• Normally limited by one of following;

Max. discharge temp.
Allowable rod load
Low cylinder volumetric efficiency
• Practical limits on natural gas are 4 - 5 on first stage and 3.5 - 4.5 on
succeeding stages.

Horsepower:
• Limited by frame ratings or driver ratings. Reciprocating (aka Separable)

frames of 7500kw and gas engines of 6100 kw (8000 Bhp) are available.

Rotative Speed:
• Smaller compressors operate at speeds up to 1800 rpm with larger units in

the 750 - 1200 rpm range. Speed is normally determined by available driver
speed.

SEPARABLE / CENTRIFUGAL COMPARISION
Comparing the most abundant combination in the upstream gas field.
• Reciprocating Compressor
driven by a Gas Engine : Separable
• Radial Compressor
driven by a Gas Turbine : Centrifugal

Coverage:

Separable vs. Centrifugal Coverage:

POWER COMPARISON:
Point Separable Centrifugal
1 5182kW 5660kW
2 5138kW 6129kW
3 4016kW 4685kW
2
1

POWER COMPARISON:
Point Separable Centrifugal
1 5182kW 5660kW
2 5138kW 6129kW
3 4016kW 4685kW
DRIVER RATINGS:
Derate
Temperature 37C 18%

Altitude 260m 4%
GT intake losses 100mm 0.7%
GT exhaust losses 100mm
• Gas Turbine Derate: 22% + 10% degradation

• Gas Engine Derate: 0%
SEPARABLE / CENTRIFUGAL COMPARISON
POWER COMPARISION:
Required Driver Rating (from Point 1): Solar Titan 130
• Gas Engine rating required:

5182 kw
• ISO Gas Turbine rating required:

5660 ÷0.68 = 8323 kw
• Turbine rating needs to be 60%

more than gas engine rating to
meet design flows

SEPARABLE / CENTRIFUGAL COMPARISON
OPERATING COSTS:
Fuel:
• Cost of fuel is the single largest operating cost.
Reciprocating Turbine
Site Rating 8.44 Mj/Kwh 10.09 Mj/Kwh
Total 43736 Mj/hr 57109 Mj/jr
• Reciprocating uses 23% less fuel than the Gas Turbine.

EFFICIENCY COMPARISON
Turbine / Centrifugal Engine / Reciprocating
Driver Heat Rate 8239 6400 29%

Btu / (hp-hr)
Compressor 26.5 24.7 +7%

Hp / MMSCFD
Decreasing Driver Increased Fuel Rate No Change or Decrease
Speed
Total Difference +36%

MAINTENANCE COMPARISON
Reciprocating Compressor:
– piston rings and wear bands 16000 hr
– valve overhaul 8000 hr
– packings 16000 hr
– complete 70000 hr
• Engine
– spark plugs 2000 hr
– top end 30000 hr
– complete 60000 hr
• Estimated cost $7.2/MWh
Centrifugal Compressor:
– minimal with high quality gas
• Gas Turbine
– major overhaul 32000 hr
• Estimated Cost $6.4/MWh
AVAILABILITY
Actual Production
Reliabilit y   100%
(Actual Production  Losses from Unschedule d Downtime)
Actual Production
Availabili ty   100%
(Actual Production  Losses Unschedule d  Losses scheduled)

AVAILABILITY
• Reciprocating
Rental fleet operators guarantee 97 - 99% availability for
separable units
• Rotating
99% expected for gas turbine / centrifugal

PIPELINE APPLICATION EXAMPLE
ASSUMPTIONS
• 7500 Bhp installed

• Heat rates (btu / (hp-hr))
– CAT 3616TA: 6810
– Wartsila 34SG: 6400
– Solar Taurus: 8239
• Fuel Cost: $2.5 / MM btu
• Interest rate: 10%
• Project life: 18 years

SOLAR CAT Wartsilla

Installed Cost $6,091,000 $5,642,000 $5,834,000
O&M ($/hp) 25 40 45
Yearly O&M ($) $200,000 $320,000 $360,000
Yearly Fuel ($) $1,160,000 $841,000 $909,000
NPV - O&M ($) $1,640,000 $2,624,000 $2,952,000

NPV - Fuel ($) $9,511,000 $6,896,000 $7,454,000
Life Cycle Cost ($) $17,242,000 $15,162,000 $16,240,000
% Difference 14% 0% 7%

During Engineering / Design:
350
300
250
Flow (MMSCFD)
200
150
100
50
0
Jan Mar May July Sept Nov

Flow Suction Pressure Discharge Pressure

MMSCFD PSIA PSIA
305 550 900
300 564 900
290 590 900
280 615 900
250 678 900
225 722 900

2.5
2.4
2.3
Reciprocating
2.2
2.1
Compression Ratio
2.0
1.9
1.8 Centrifugal
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Percent Flow

ACTUAL Operating Conditions:

Design vs Actual:
2.5
2.4
2.3
Reciprocating
2.2
2.1
Compression Ratio
2.0
1.9
1.8 Centrifugal
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Percent Flow

Design vs Actual:
2.5
2 Reciprocating
2.4 Units Reciprocating
2.3
2.2
1 Reciprocating Unit
2.1
Compression Ratio
2.0
1.9
Centrifugal
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Percent Flow

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
gas turbine driven gas engine driven reciprocating

centrifugal compressor compressor
operating not flexible, has very limited pressure very flexible, can be designed to
pressure ratio cover broad range of pressures
typical 100%-60% with variable guide typically 100% - 50% with clearance
flow capacity
vanes Large Capacity control
100%-0% with recycle 100%-0% with recycle
pressure ratio is sensitive to the gas pressure ratio is not affected by the
gas gravity
gravity gas gravity
not practical to modify for changing can be modified for # stages and
modification
gas conditions changing gas types and flows
can be designed as 1 stage / 2
cannot readily change pressure ratio
stage or 2 stage/3 stage, etc
size, weight small and compact larger and heavier than centrifugal
available in large powers but similarly Above about 4700 hp would require
sized standby needed if the service is multiple units but costs and
critical flexibility are improved

gas turbine driven centrifugal gas engine driven reciprocating

compressor compressor
cost usually higher capital cost usually lower capital cost
fuel consumption 3 - 4 times higher than gas engine as low as 6800 - 8000 btu/bhp/hr
usually requires fuel conditioning
tolerant of field gases
for field gases
reliability typically 99 - 99.8% typically 95-98.5%
needs sophisticated controls and off the shelf control and
instrumentation instrumentation
requires special shop repair and common tools and oil-field
maintenance
skilled technicians mechanics
usually requires special synthetic Uses locally available engine
lubricants crankcase lubricants
requires special tools and common tools and assembly
assembly fixtures techniques
parts low usage, high cost predictable usage, low cost
special parts, expensive insurance
common parts, no insurance spares
spares

gas turbine driven centrifugal gas engine driven reciprocating

compressor compressor
usually with early symptoms and
failure modes can be unexpected and catastrophic
limited to replaceable components
delivery Can be very long 9 - 18 months Can be very short 14 - 36 weeks
installation small footprint and close centerlines larger footprint
unbalanced forces and moments
unbalance and vibration are nil
are low
typically 4 - 8 weeks typically a few days to a week
usually not portable since the
below about 2,000 hp can operate
portability compressor is designed for a
without foundation
specific set of conditions and gas
turbocharged gas engines
turbines lose power generally above
site rating maintain power up to about 5,000
500 ft
ft

RECIPROCATING / CENTRIFUGAL COMPARISON
Compare a natural gas engine driven separable compressor to a gas turbine

driven centrifugal compressor.
1 = best
2 = not quite as good
3 = worst
Compressor Type Separable Centrifugal

kw/m3 1 3
Installed cost 1 2
Lead time 1 3
Fuel consumption 1 2
Waste heat avail. 3 1
Availability 2 1
O & M cost 2 1
Low emissions 2 2
Operating flexibility 1 3

CONCLUSIONS
• Best compressor choice depends on:
– Plant or site parameters
– Project parameters
– Process parameters
– Machinery parameters

CONCLUSIONS
Gas Turbine driven Centrifugal compressors are best when:
• Large horsepower is required
• Waste heat is required
• Limited range of process conditions
• Minimal foundation is required
• Light weight is desired
• Low fuel gas cost
• Long lead time is possible

CONCLUSIONS
Separable compressors are best when:
• High fuel cost
• No waste heat required
• Minimum initial cost required
• 6000 kw or less increments required
• Medium project life is required
• Relocation or conversion may be required
• Minimum shipping/construction schedule
• Maximum operating flexibility

Pipelines

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Pipelines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

September 26, 2013

1. Selection Of A Reciprocating Or Centrifugal Compressor

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

2. High/Medium Speed Vs. Slow Speed

3. Sizing, Selection and Applications

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

Positive Displacement Dynamic

Rolling Lobe (Roots)

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Plant or Site Parameters

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Ambient Temperature - design/range

• Fuel Available - type, pressure, cost

• Enclosure Required - open, partial, full

• Utilities - water, power, air

• Environment - noise, air, effluents

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Required start up date & equipment deliveries

• Economic evaluation criteria

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Suction pressure - design/range

• Discharge pressure - design/range

• Suction temperature - design/range

• Flow rate - design/range

• Extra process heat requirement

• Operating flexibility required

• Operating reliability required

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Transportation/installation cost & time

• Compressor efficiency - kw/m3

• Specific fuel consumption over range

• Power avail/power required match

• Actual emissions/emissions allowed

• Operation & maintenance cost

• Flexibility to handle range of conditions

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Fuel gas availability & quality

• Fuel gas vs electric cost

• Maintenance vs initial cost

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Fuel gas availability & quality – Not Required

• Electricity availability - Required

• Speed control – Additional VFD and Torsional Analysis

• Fuel gas vs electric cost – varies

• Maintenance vs initial cost – Maintenance Low / (high failure cost)

• Lead time – Long, built to order

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Two types of gas turbines

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Fuel gas availability & quality –Required / high quality

• Speed control – Usually ran at constant speed

• Fuel gas vs electric cost – varies

• Maintenance vs initial cost – Maintenance Low / (high failure cost)

• Lead time – Long

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Complex start-up/stop sequencing

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

• Fuel gas availability & quality –Required / low quality

• Speed control – Included

• Fuel gas vs electric cost – varies

• Maintenance vs initial cost – Maintenance medium / Low Initial cost

• Lead time – short

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

© 2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.