Flashing liquid expanders for

cryogenic industries
Presented to Petrotech 2010
2nd November 2010, New Delhi, India

Roger Dambach
Simon Hautdidier
Please visit www.cryostar.com

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Flashing liquid expander (FLE) a new

concept for LNG base load
FLE expansion of LNG (PR from 5 to 45)
FLE expansion of cooling fluid (PR from 3 to 15)

What is flashing?
Flashing occurs due to a rapid expansion of the
liquid below the saturated liquid line
Nucleation reduces metastability
LNG often contains a fraction of Nitrogen
Multi-component fluid will enhance nucleation
Gas inclusions in the liquid act as nuclei for gas
flashing

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Flashing liquid expander (FLE) not a new concept for ASU

First unit installed in UK in 1985
50 units sold for installation in ASU
Operate with liquid N2 and liquid air
Design pressure 90 bar(g)
Design temperature -196C

3 units with flashing at discharge

Liquid

Location

Power
(kW)

Air

Braddock,
Pennsylvania,
USA

95

Air

Izdemir,
Turkey

65

N2

Claymont,
Delaware, USA

85

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Typical liquid expander installation in a ASU

JT valve

Process
isolation
valve
Quick
closing
valve

Twophase
flow

N2 purge outlet

Liquid
turbine
installed
at grade

Pressure
control
valve

Process
isolation
valve

A height
difference
of 20 40
meters is
common

Drain to
low
pressure

N2 purge inlet

Confidential Information. This document is the property of Cryostar. It is not permitted to copy it, relate its contents to other persons, or to misuse it in any other way

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

No reason to be
reluctant!
FLE not a critical
equipment
Always installed
in parallel to a
Joule Thompson
valve (JTV)
Plant efficiency
benefits are
enormous
Oil & gas
turboexpanders
already
operating inside
the dome

NG
treatment
expander
Flashing
liquid
expander

API 617
expander

Ethylene
expander

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

3 different FLE technologies under the loop

API 617
expander

Liquid
inlet

Liquid
inlet

Liquid
inlet

Flashing
outlet

Flashing
outlet

Flashing
outlet

Multi stage
radial inflow
FLE

Impulse
wheel
FLE

Single stage
radial inflow
FLE

Rh > 0.5

Rh = 0

Rh = 0.5
6

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Work contribution of flashed gas in the liquid

The notion of head no longer valid for FLE
Ideal work contribution of flashed gas :
Enthalphy h

hG = his g H L

hactual

hisentropic

wG =

hG
his

3
s
s

wG = 1

p stage

liquid his

with

liquid =

Entropy s

in _ liq + out _ liq

2
7

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Ratio of potential work by the flashed gas over isenthalpic work in a FLE
100.0%
Flashing in mass (LNG lean)
90.0%
Work contribution of flashed gas (LNG lean)
Flashing in mass (LNG rich)

80.0%

Work contribution of flashed gas (LNG rich)

70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%

Isentropic expansion
from 60 bar(a) to 1.25 bar(a)

10.0%
0.0%

-160

-150

-140

-130

-120

-110

-100

-90

-80

Turbine inlet temperature (C)

AIChE national meeting Flashing Liquid Expanders

Outlet density as a function of h_isentropic

Outlet density (kg/m3)

1000
Ethylene Plants I

Ethylene Plants II

Gas treatement Plants

Liquid Expanders for LNG

Liquid Expanders for IG

100

10

1
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Isentropic enthalpy difference across a single stage (kJ/kg)

9

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Applying a FLE to the ConocoPhillips Optimized Cascade

Process assumptions for high and intermediate stage (acc to Qualls et al, 2004)

High stage

Intermediate stage

Pressure at inlet (bara)

40

15

Temperature at inlet (C)

-95

-115

Pressure at outlet (bara)

15

3 different mass flows

Massflow (kg/s)

47.6 (~ 1.5 mtpa)

115.4 (~ 3.6 mtpa)

164.9 (~ 5.2 mtpa)

2 different LNG compositions

LNG type

N2

C1

C2

C3

LNG lean

0.5 mol%

98 mol%

1.5 mol%

0 mol%

LNG rich

0.5 mol%

91.5 mol%

6 mol%

2 mol%
10

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

HP and IP stage in the Mollier diagram for Lean LNG

Methane
refrigeration
system
according to
Qualls et al
(2004)

HP stage

IP stage
~20% mass
flashing at
discharge

11

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

The impact of process conditions on the work contribution of the flashed gas
10

80%
Flashing in mass at turbine discharge (in %)

70%

Work contribution of flashed gas (in %)

Volume ratio (inlet flange to outlet flange)

60%
7

Isentropic efficiency = 80%

50%

6
5

40%

30%

3
20%
2
10%

0%

0
High Pressure
Rich LNG

High Pressure
Lean LNG

Interm. Pressure
Rich LNG

Interm. Pressure
Lean LNG

12

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Multistage FLE technology not retained

Liquid
inlet

Flashing in multistage radial inflow turbine is

not recommended
Gas and liquid may disengage when entering
the downstream blade row
High local Mach numbers due to flashing will
have detrimental effects on the efficiency
especially at off-design conditions
High local Mach numbers may lead to
unpredictable flow phenomena in the
serpentine passage

Axial exducer for end flashing maximum

work contribution of the gas estimated at 20%

Flashing
outlet

13

AIChE national meeting Flashing Liquid Expanders

Flashing in a single stage liquid expander

Flashing needs to be done in a single

blade row to avoid flow complications due
to leading edge separation of the
downstream blade row
Swearingen and Schulz (1976) predicted
that a radial inflow turbine is the best
expander type for FLE applications

Liquid
inlet
Approximate inception
of flashing in a
single stage FLE
based on conditions
in Table 3

Flashing
outlet

14

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Optimum wheel diameter for HP stage (Lean LNG)

Design with gearbox & conventional generator OR high speed generator & VFD
500
450

Wheel diameter in mm

400

Single stage
radial inflow FLE

Utip = 95 115 m/s

350
300

Impulse wheel
FLE

250

Utip = 65 80 m/s

200
150
Wheel tip diameter (single stage FLE for high stage)

100

Outer wheel diameter (impulse wheel FLE for high stage)

50
0
1

1.5 mtpa

3.6 mtpa

5.2 mtpa

Massflow across the turbine

15

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Comparison of relative velocities at rotor stage inlet

100
Relative velocity at wheel inlet (single stage FLE)

90

Relative velocity at mid span (impulse wheel FLE)

Relative velocity (m/s)

80
70

60

Impulse wheel
FLE

W
U

50
40
30

C
W

Single stage
radial inflow FLE

20
U

10
0
High Pressure
Rich LNG

High Pressure
Lean LNG

Interm. Pressure
Rich LNG

Interm. Pressure
Lean LNG
16

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Cold power extracted from the process fluid for Lean LNG

Single stage
radial inflow
FLE

Impulse wheel
FLE

17

Reliable criteria for the selection of FLE

Summary of results
Both single stage and impulse wheel FLE are valid turbine concepts for LNG
Multi stage FLE technology excluded work contribution of flashed gas too high
Upper limit of max work contribution of flashed gas estimated to be 20%
Impulse wheel FLE design yields 3 times higher relative velocities at wheel inlet
Impulse wheel must be titanium, single stage FLE can be aluminium
Risk of phase separation at leading edge
Seperated liquid will migrate to the ps of the impulse blade high friction losses
Risk of phase separation in the downstream piping (froth or annular flow)
Single stage FLE will extract more work from the fluid

Conclusion
Single stage radial inflow FLE is the best performing and most qualified FLE
technology currently available to the LNG industry

18