Compression 1 2013

2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

Compression
Split Technical Seminar
September 26, 2013
Tom Birney,
Director of Business Development
OVERVIEW
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
COMPRESSOR TYPES
Rolling Lobe (Roots)
Reciprocating
Single Screw
Axial
Liquid Ring
Screw
Vane
Radial
Positive Displacement Dynamic
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

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
ELECTRIC DRIVER
Two types of gas turbines
Industrial
steam turbine technology
in-situ repair
Aero-derivative
replace - dont repair
COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE
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
TURBINE DRIVER
Complex start-up/stop sequencing
Complex controls required for fuel scheduling and emissions
controls
Many critical monitoring points for gas turbine
Complicated surge control
GAS TURBINE CONTROLS
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 ENGINE DRIVER
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 DRIVERS
Turbine Engine
Available HP >30,000 >10,000
Temp. 22C 37.8C
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
RECIPROCATING ENGINE VS. GAS TURBINES DRIVERS
CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSORS
WHY Centrifugal?

Mature Technology Since 1940s
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
Flow:

Minimum flow is approx. 3 m3/min (100 acfm) into any impeller.
As flow decreases toward this limit efficiency falls off dramatically.

CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSOR APPLICATION LIMITATIONS
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 -75C handled using higher cost materials of
sufficient ductility. Special seals required. Upper limit set by shaft
seals.

Temps. of 195C are common & can be increased to 230C 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 -30C with standard material and -40C with special alloys.
Maximum limit is normally 175C and preferably below 150C.
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:

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

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
Solar Titan 130
SEPARABLE / CENTRIFUGAL COMPARISON
OPERATING COSTS:

Fuel:
Cost of fuel is the single largest operating cost.

Reciprocating uses 23% less fuel than the Gas Turbine.

Reciprocating Turbine
Site Rating 8.44 Mj/Kwh 10.09 Mj/Kwh
Total 43736 Mj/hr 57109 Mj/jr
EFFICIENCY COMPARISON
Turbine / Centrifugal Engine / Reciprocating
Driver Heat Rate
Btu / (hp-hr)

8239 6400 29%
Compressor
Hp / MMSCFD
26.5 24.7 +7%
Decreasing Driver
Speed
Increased Fuel Rate No Change or Decrease
Total Difference
+36%
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
MAINTENANCE COMPARISON
Centrifugal Compressor:
minimal with high quality gas
Gas Turbine
major overhaul 32000 hr
Estimated Cost $6.4/MWh
AVAILABILITY
100%
Downtime) d Unschedule from Losses Production (Actual
Production Actual
y Reliabilit
100%
scheduled) Losses d Unschedule Losses Production (Actual
Production Actual
ty Availabili


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%
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
F
l
o
w

(
M
M
S
C
F
D
)
Jan Mar May July Sept Nov
During Engineering / Design:
Flow
MMSCFD
Suction Pressure
PSIA
Discharge Pressure
PSIA
305 550 900
300 564 900
290 590 900
280 615 900
250 678 900
225 722 900
Reciprocating
Centrifugal
Percent Flow
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
C
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n

R
a
t
i
o
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
ACTUAL Operating Conditions:
Reciprocating
Centrifugal
Percent Flow
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
C
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n

R
a
t
i
o

1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
Design vs Actual:
Percent Flow
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
C
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n

R
a
t
i
o
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2 Reciprocating
Units
Reciprocating
1 Reciprocating Unit
Centrifugal
Design vs Actual:
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
gas turbine driven
centrifugal compressor
gas engine driven reciprocating
compressor
operating
pressure
not flexible, has very limited pressure
ratio
very flexible, can be designed to
cover broad range of pressures
flow capacity
typical 100%-60% with variable guide
vanes Large Capacity
typically 100% - 50% with clearance
control
100%-0% with recycle 100%-0% with recycle
gas gravity
pressure ratio is sensitive to the gas
gravity
pressure ratio is not affected by the
gas gravity
modification
not practical to modify for changing
gas conditions
can be modified for # stages and
changing gas types and flows
cannot readily change pressure ratio
can be designed as 1 stage / 2
stage or 2 stage/3 stage, etc
size, weight small and compact larger and heavier than centrifugal
available in large powers but similarly
sized standby needed if the service is
critical
Above about 4700 hp would require
multiple units but costs and
flexibility are improved
gas turbine driven centrifugal
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
for field gases
tolerant of field gases
reliability typically 99 - 99.8% typically 95-98.5%
needs sophisticated controls and
instrumentation
off the shelf control and
instrumentation
maintenance
requires special shop repair and
skilled technicians
common tools and oil-field
mechanics
usually requires special synthetic
lubricants
Uses locally available engine
crankcase lubricants
requires special tools and
assembly fixtures
common tools and assembly
techniques
parts low usage, high cost predictable usage, low cost
special parts, expensive insurance
spares
common parts, no insurance spares
gas turbine driven centrifugal
compressor
compressor
failure modes can be unexpected and catastrophic
usually with early symptoms and
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
unbalance and vibration are nil
unbalanced forces and moments
are low
typically 4 - 8 weeks typically a few days to a week
portability
usually not portable since the
compressor is designed for a
specific set of conditions and gas
below about 2,000 hp can operate
without foundation
site rating
turbines lose power generally above
500 ft
turbocharged gas engines
maintain power up to about 5,000
ft
RECIPROCATING / CENTRIFUGAL COMPARISON
Compressor Type Separable Centrifugal

kw/m
3
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
Compare a natural gas engine driven separable compressor to a gas turbine
driven centrifugal compressor.
1 = best
2 = not quite as good
3 = worst
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

Compression 1 2013

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

Compression 1 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

2012 Valerus. Confidential and proprietary. All rights reserved.

You might also like