Final Report for Chevron

Vapor Recovery Unit Project

Submitted to:
Wesley Brubaker, Project Engineer
Chevron
Houston, Texas

Prepared by:
Leslie Esparza
Krisha Mehta
Sean Swearingen, Team Leader

Mechanical Engineering Design Projects Program

The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas
Fall 2009

Final Report for Chevron

Vapor Recovery Unit Project
Submitted to:
Wesley Brubaker, Project Engineer
Chevron
Houston, Texas

Prepared by:
Leslie Esparza
Krisha Mehta
Sean Swearingen, Team Leader

Mechanical Engineering Design Projects Program

The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas
Fall 2009

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Over the course of semester we received much guidance and technical advice from both the
engineers at Chevron and the faculty at the University of Texas at Austin. We would like to
extend our thanks to those who helped make our project possible and call attention to their
contributions.

First, we would like to thank Wesley Brubaker, Chris Kurr, and Zachary Schneider at
Chevron for sponsoring our senior design project and giving us the key information and
counseling necessary to execute our project.

We would also like to think Dr. Crawford for heading the UT-SDP program which gives us
and our classmates the opportunity to work on real world projects with major companies, such as
Chevron.

Dr. Kiehne, our Mechanical Engineering faculty advisor, provided us with valuable feedback
on our project. Dr. Bommer, from UTs Petroleum Engineering department, was also kind
enough to review our vapor recovery unit design and give us insight into critical problems that
occur in the field during oil and gas production. Dr. Krueger, our graphics advisor, reviewed our
reports helped us to improve their professionalism.

John Montgomery, our teaching assistant, played a central role in our projects
development and provided us with advice and coaching throughout the semester.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments................................................................................................................ i
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... iii
List of Figures ......................................................................................................................v
List of Tables .................................................................................................................... vii
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... ix
1 INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................1
2 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................1
2.1 Chevron ................................................................................................................... 1
2.2 Project Overview .....................................................................................................2
2.3 Standard Vapor Recovery Unit ...............................................................................5
3 PROBLEM STATEMENT ..............................................................................................6
4 REQUIREMENTS AND CONSTRAINTS ....................................................................6
4.1 Requirements ...........................................................................................................6
4.2 Constraints ..............................................................................................................8
5 SUBFUNCTION DEFINITION ......................................................................................9
5.1 Function Structure and Morphological Matrix .......................................................9
5.2 Patent Search .........................................................................................................11
6 DESIGN EMBODIMENT AND ANALYSIS ............................................................. 12
6.1 VRU Design Overview ........................................................................................ 12
6.1.1 Determining Gas Compression Stages Required ................................... 13
6.1.1.1 Tank 1 Gas Compressions Feasibility Calculation ................... 14
6.1.1.2 Combined Gas Flow Compression Feasibility Calculation ...... 16
6.1.2 Interstage Cooling ................................................................................. 17
6.1.3 Water and Gas Phase Separation ............................................................ 17
6.1.4 Equipment Drivers ................................................................................. 18
6.1.5 Valve Systems ........................................................................................ 18
6.2 MATLAB Model ................................................................................................. 19
6.3 Individual Component Design ............................................................................. 20
6.3.1 Compressors ........................................................................................... 20
6.3.1.1 Compressor Selection Justification ........................................... 21
6.3.1.2 Design Calculations .................................................................. 24
6.3.2 Gas Coolers ............................................................................................ 24
6.3.2.1 Cooler Selection Justification ................................................... 25
6.3.2.2 Air-Cooled Heat Exchanger Design ......................................... 25
6.3.3 Gas-Liquid Separators ............................................................................ 28
6.3.3.1 Separator Selection Justification ............................................... 29
6.3.3.2 Vertical Separator Design ......................................................... 30
6.3.4 Water Disposal System .......................................................................... 31
6.3.5 Drivers .................................................................................................... 34
6.3.5.1 Compressor Drivers .................................................................. 34
6.3.5.2 Cooler Drivers ........................................................................... 34
6.4 MATLAB Results and Sensitivities..................................................................... 34
6.4.1 Separator and Cooler Results ................................................................. 36
6.4.2 Compressor Results and Sensitivities..................................................... 37

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED

6.5 Bill of Materials ................................................................................................... 39
6.6 Solid Skid Model ................................................................................................. 40
7 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 43
7.1 Annual Sales Loss ................................................................................................ 43
7.2 Investment Costs .................................................................................................. 44
7.3 Payback and Return on Investment...................................................................... 45
7.4 Net Present Value ................................................................................................ 47
8 COST ESTIMATE....................................................................................................... 49
9 FUTURE WORK AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 49
10 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 50
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 51
APPENDIX A:
DESIGN FEASIBILITY CALCULATIONS ............................... A-1
APPENDIX B:
DETAILED VRU DESIGN FLOW DIAGRAM ......................... B-1
APPENDIX C:
MATLAB FLOW CHARTS......................................................... C-1
APPENDIX D
MATLAB CODE .......................................................................... D-1
APPENDIX E:
COOLER SAMPLE CALCULATIONS ...................................... E-1
APPENDIX F:
VERTICAL SEPARATOR SAMPLE CALCULATIONS .......... F-1
APPENDIX G:
GANTT CHART .......................................................................... G-1

iv

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Figure 10.
Figure 11.
Figure 12.
Figure 13.
Figure 14.
Figure 15.
Figure 16.
Figure B.1.
Figure C.1.
Figure C.2.
Figure C.3.
Figure C.4.
Figure G.1.

Production Platform Flow Diagram. ...............................................................4

Standard Vapor Recovery Unit Schematic. ....................................................5
VRU Function Structure .............................................................................. 10
Air Cooled Exchanger with Wind Shields ................................................... 11
VRU Design Flow Process Diagram ........................................................... 13
Single Stage Compressions from Tank 1 ..................................................... 14
Two Stage Compressions from Tank 1 ........................................................ 15
Combined Gas Flow Compression .............................................................. 16
Compressor Chart ........................................................................................ 21
Compressor Selection Chart ........................................................................ 22
Component Layout of Air Coolers .............................................................. 26
Vertical and Horizontal Two Phase Separator Schematic ........................... 29
Vertical Scrubber Design Dimensions ......................................................... 31
Two Dimensional Skid Layout .................................................................... 41
Three Dimensional Skid Layout .................................................................. 42
Value of Recovered Gas vs. Natural Gas Spot Price ................................... 46
Detailed VRU Process Flow Diagram .......................................................B-1
Main VRU MATLAB Program Flowchart ................................................C-1
Vertical Separator MATLAB Function Flowchart ....................................C-2
Cooler MATLAB Function Flowchart .......................................................C-3
Heat Capacity Calculator MATLAB Function Flowchart .........................C-4
Gantt Chart ................................................................................................ G-1

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
Table 8.
Table 9.
Table 10.
Table 11.
Table 12.
Table 13.

Specification Sheet: Function Requirements. ................................................7

Specification Sheet: Constraints.....................................................................9
Thermodynamic Property Table. ..................................................................13
Compression stage flow rate and discharge pressures ............................... 22
Compressor Selection Decision Matrix ...................................................... 23
Condensate Water Piping Results .............................................................. 33
Sensitivity Cases......................................................................................... 35
Separator Design Outputs ........................................................................... 36
Cooler Design Outputs ............................................................................... 37
Compressor Design Outputs ....................................................................... 38
Bill of Materials.......................................................................................... 40
Past and Predicted Natural Gas Spot Prices ............................................... 43
VRU Costs .................................................................................................. 44

vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Vapor Recovery Unit project focuses on one of Chevrons oil and gas
production platforms in the Gulf of Mexico continental shelf. Our teams objective is to
configure a Vapor Recovery Unit (VRU) for this platform that will increase two lowpressure gas flows to a sufficient pressure and re-route the gas to enter the sales stream.
This system will compress gas coming from both an existing bulk surge tank on the
platform as well as a new tank that has not yet been installed. Chevron wants to maintain
compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations to minimize gas losses
and increase profits. To reduce hazardous emissions on the platform, an efficient and
economical system is needed to capture hydrocarbon vapors which are currently being
flared or burnt off into the atmosphere. Further detail on our projects background and
design requirements can be seen in the Background, Problem Statement, and
Requirements and Constraints sections of the report.
Overall VRU and detailed individual component designs have been developed
through research and analysis. Our final VRU design recommendation incorporates the
following key components: gas compression and cooling, water and gas separation,
piping systems for condensate water removal, equipment drivers, and key valve systems.
Reciprocating compressors, powered by natural gas engines, are used for gas
compression. Hot gas at the compressor outlet is cooled using air-cooled heat exchangers,
which are powered by electric motors. Vertical liquid-vapor separators use gravity to
separate condensate water from dry gas after cooling, where the water is piped from the
scrubbers to a water collection point. The key valve systems include valves for the
compressor inlet and discharge, control valves for the scrubber, and a three way valve to
combine gas flows. Because of the significantly low gas pressures, multiple compression
stages are needed considering individual and combined gas streams. As a result, three
sets of compressors, coolers, and scrubbers are modeled in our overall VRU design.
Thermodynamic feasibility calculations and justifications are presented to support
our findings and component selections. A MATLAB computer model of our system
provides design simulation and verification using engineering analysis. Equipment sizing
and power specifications from the model, along with a compiled bill of materials, are
used to create a solid skid model of our design layout for visualization. A full discussion
of these topics concerning our overall VRU design and its key components can be seen in
the Design Embodiment and Analysis section of the report.
An important aspect of the proposed design solution is our financial analysis,
addressing annual sales loss, investment costs, payback, ROI, and net present value. The
Financial Analysis section in the report provides further detail on these topics. Based on
average values, considering the short payback period of 4 months, high return on
investment of 243%, and positive annual revenue of $4 million, our analysis shows
implementing our final design solution is financially sound and would be a favorable
investment for Chevron.

ix

INTRODUCTION

The Vapor Recovery Unit project focuses on one of Chevrons oil and gas
production platforms in the Gulf of Mexico continental shelf. Our teams objective is to
configure a Vapor Recovery Unit (VRU) for this platform that will increase two lowpressure gas flows to a sufficient pressure to enter the sales gas stream. In addition to
conveying our understanding of the project background and problem, we will describe
and justify our decisions made when generating ideas for design. Our primary focus will
be on outlining the design analysis, embodiment, and results for our final design model
and individual component designs. Our team will discuss the financial analysis associated
with our project solution, as well as provide recommendations for further solution
improvements and future studies for the project. Also included in this report is a project
Gantt Chart outlining our project time schedule, and a specification sheet detailing the
project-specific design requirements and constraints for implementing a VRU system.

BACKGROUND

2.1

Chevron
Our sponsor, Chevron, is a major oil and gas company that has over 62,000

employees and operates in over 100 countries.

It is one of six super major oil

companies that are involved in all aspects of upstream and downstream activities,
including the exploration, production, refining, distributing, and marketing of
hydrocarbons as finished oil and gas products. In addition to producing oil and gas,

Chevron is also involved with power production and is the worlds leader in producing
geothermal energy. Chevron also has mining and chemical production divisions and
invests in researching renewable fuels. Outside of oil and gas production, Chevron is
well known for its fuel additive Techron, which acts as a detergent and prevents engine
build-up [1].
Chevron is one of the largest producers of oil and natural gas on the Gulf of
Mexico shelf. In addition to being the largest lease holder on the outer continental shelf,
Chevron owns 313 major structures in the Gulf of Mexico and in 2008 maintained an
average daily net production of 76,000 barrels of crude oil, 439 million cubic feet of
natural gas and 10,000 barrels of natural gas liquids. Working with engineers in Houston,
TX and Covington, LA, our team will be focusing on one of Chevrons oil and gas
production platforms in the Gulf of Mexico continental shelf [2].
2.2

Project Overview
Our project involves increasing the reliability and efficiency of gas production,

presenting a unique set of cost drivers and environmental concerns due to its offshore
location. Offshore equipment reliability is a high priority because loss of production and
equipment replacement present financial liabilities for Chevron. Environmental factors
are also of concern and Chevron wants to reduce its carbon emissions on this platform by
recovering excess low pressure gas and adding it to the sales gas stream rather than
burning it off, also known as flaring. Gas flaring and venting are highly regulated in the
Gulf of Mexico by the Minerals Management Service (MMS).

Our team will focus on one of Chevrons offshore production platforms in the
Gulf of Mexico, where oil and gas are produced and processed from underground
deposits. A general flow diagram of this platform, as seen in Figure 1 on the following
page, gives a basic overview of how oil, water, and gas are separated from the well
streams. The gas and liquids flow from the well head through high, medium, and low
pressure separators. The liquids, consisting of oil and water, eventually exit the low
pressure separator and enter the oil dehydration unit. At this stage the water is sent for
treatment to be dumped back into the ocean, while the dry oil is pumped to shore. The
excess gas needs to be compressed to be sent to shore and must go through the inlet of the
sales compressor. The high and medium pressure gas flows are at sufficient pressures to
enter the second and first stages of the sales gas compressor, respectively. Currently, the
excess low pressure gas must flow from the low pressure separator to a bulk surge tank,
where the gas is then flared to the atmosphere rather than going through a Vapor
Recovery Unit (VRU). This VRU would allow for excess low pressure gas to achieve a
sufficient pressure to enter the first stage of the sales compressor, recovering some of the
gas.

Liquid Flows
Gas Flows
Alternate LP Gas Flow

Sales
Compressor
1st

stg

High
Pressure
Separator

1000 psig

Medium
Pressure
Separator

Low
Pressure
Separator

200 psig
Well Stream

Clean H2O
Dry Oil

35 psig
Oil
Dehydration

2nd
stg

Bulk
Surge
Tank

VRU

Flare to
Atmosphere

Figure 1. Production Platform Flow Diagram.

Our projects focal point will be designing and analyzing a VRU system to add to
the production platform. Currently, all of the excess low pressure gas is being vented to
the atmosphere since there is no VRU installed on the platform. Additionally, due to
other production platforms in the area being damaged from a hurricane, a larger volume
of production will be brought to our platform to compensate for the incurred losses.
Bringing more oil and gas to the platform places greater emphasis on maximizing
productivity, efficiency, and the sales compressors capabilities, while increasing the
demand for other separating equipment. At the same time, environmental and cost factors
need to be considered. Thus, adding a vapor recovery system to feed into the compressor
will address these issues by capturing low pressure gas and compressing it to add to the
sales gas stream rather than venting/flaring. Flaring less of the low pressure gas and
4

incorporating it into the sales stream will recover vapors and boost sales while
maintaining compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
2.3

Standard Vapor Recovery Unit

A standard VRU includes three key components including a suction scrubber, a

compressor, and a liquid transfer pump (with its associated drivers). Figure 2 below
depicts a standard single stage VRU attached to a crude oil storage tank. Initially,
hydrocarbon vapors are drawn out of the storage tank under low pressure and sent to a
suction scrubber which separates excess water from the gas. The condensed water is then
sent back to the storage tank via the liquid transfer pump while the gas in the suction
scrubber flows through a compressor. From the compressor, the vapors are metered and
transported to either the sales gas line or back to the production facility to drive other
equipment. The control pilot that separates the stock tank from the suction scrubber
prevents the formation of a vacuum in the top of the stock tank by shutting off the
compressor and allowing back flow into the tank [3].

Figure 2. Standard Vapor Recovery Unit Schematic [4].

5

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Our team will research various Vapor Recovery Unit (VRU) equipment to develop
design recommendations and select the optimal configuration for incorporating a VRU
system on the platform while meeting key design criteria. This VRU will need to
compress excess low pressure gas coming from both an existing bulk surge tank as well
as a new tank that has not yet been installed. This gas must be brought up to a sufficient
pressure in order to enter the inlet of the sales gas compressor.

REQUIREMENTS AND CONSTRAINTS

4.1

Requirements
The first page of the specification sheet shown in Table 1 outlines the functional

requirements that we will use to gauge the success of our design.

The first functional requirement listed is to reduce carbon emissions.

This

environmental factor, which is one of the key drivers for installing the VRU, will be
achieved by taking low pressure gas that that would normally be burned off or flared
and increasing its pressure so that it can be added to the sales gas stream and sold or
rerouted back to the platform for use on-site.
Another significant requirement for this project is to bring the low pressure gas
from the new bulk surge tank and add it to the gas from the existing bulk surge tank.
This is done to recover the low pressure gas from a damaged facility by integrating it
with a functional facility.
6

Other key requirements for the VRU include making it easy to install and
minimizing its size and weight due to the limited space available on the platform. It is
also important to ensure that the design operates within safe temperature and pressure
limits. This will ultimately prevent the need for costly repairs and extend the useful life
of the gas processing equipment that makes up the VRU. The VRU design must also be
judged on its financial merits and should provide a cost-benefit to Chevron in addition to
complying with environmental regulations.

Table 1. Specification Sheet: Function Requirements.

4.2

Constraints
The second page of the specification sheet, Table 2, details the five categories of

constraints associated with our VRU design: pressures, temperatures, flow rates,
equipment sizes, and gas properties. The specifications for some pressures, temperatures,
and flow rates were determined by first locating where the VRU would be integrated with
the existing equipment, and then looking up the relevant information from our facilitys
process and instrumentation diagrams (P&ID). The rest of the pressures, temperatures,
and flow rates were found by asking our sponsor what could generally be expected from
the additional low pressure gas that would be brought in from the damaged facility. The
limitations on equipment size and placement can be found by looking at the equipment
location diagrams for our platform. The gas properties found in the specification sheet
were determined by reviewing the results of a gas sample analysis test and will be
assumed constant for all further models and analysis.

Table 2. Specification Sheet: Constraints.

SUBFUNCTION DEFINITION

5.1

Function Structure and Morphological Matrix

By linking the various energy, material, and signal inputs from the black box to

key functional requirements, we were able to develop a function structure as shown in

Figure 3. Some lessons learned from the function structure were based on available
resources and cycles. We learned that gravity could be used as a key energy source for
facilitating liquid and gas separation in the VRU. Also, the process of separating,
compressing and cooling gas is iterative and will most likely require multiple stages. We

also learned that the process of transferring condensed water and compressing gas
pressure may require a driver. Due to the flow process, if one of the components fail, the
entire process will need to be shut down until the component is repaired.

Figure 3. Function Structure of VRU.

A morphological matrix was created to review all possible ways to achieve the
desired subfunctions from the function structure. We used the morphological matrix as a
tool to discover new technologies and determine which components we could
recommend for future VRU configurations. We were also able to use the matrix to select
which components we would like in our final VRU design.

10

5.2

Patent Search
Throughout the design process our team has performed a patent search to generate

ideas for selection and design of VRU components and alternative vapor recovery
systems. The following section is a description of two patents that we found to be the
most relevant for the systems we considered in our project design.
The first patent, Air Cooled Exchanger, describes an improved air-cooled heat
exchanger with shields attached to each tube bank to deflect wind entering the exchanger
without affecting cooling air flow on the tube exterior [5]. This proposed system seen in
Figure 4, which has shields comprised of a wind deflecting front wall and triangular side
walls, would be advantageous for improving control of exchanger operations in difficult
weather with high wind velocities. This invention is significant for the project because
certain design aspects were adopted for modeling the inter-stage gas coolers in our VRU
system. It also provided insight into reflecting adverse atmospheric conditions in our
design sensitivity analysis, which is especially relevant considering our projects offshore
location.

Figure 4. Air Cooled Exchanger with Wind Shields [5].

11

The second patent, Eductor System and Method for Vapor Recovery, outlines a
system for recovering discharged vapors from hydrocarbon processing systems to prevent
or minimize harmful emissions [6]. This design uses venturi eductor technology to
combine a high-pressure motive fluid with low-pressure vapors to discharge gas at an
intermediate pressure and inject it into existing process equipment. Considering our
projects objective of economically capturing hydrocarbon emissions, while maintaining
Chevrons compliance with environmental regulations, this non-mechanical alternative
vapor recovery system is relevant for our projects gas production and processing
application. However, due to the lack of a high-pressure gas source on the offshore
facility, we have only utilized this idea for future project recommendations.

6 DESIGN EMBODIMENT AND ANALYSIS

6.1

VRU Design Overview

After reviewing our function structure, standard vapor recovery unit designs, and

input from our sponsor we created the VRU layout shown in Figure 5.

The

thermodynamic properties associated with states 1-9 can be found in Table 3. The
following sections will outline the process that led us to this design.

12

Figure 5. VRU Design Flow Process Diagram.

Table 3. Thermodynamic Property Table.

6.1.1 Determining Gas Compression Stages Required

The first step toward creating a vapor recovery unit is to become familiar with the
process of natural gas compression. The Handbook of Natural Gas Transmission and
Processing (HNGTP) provides much information on the subject and served as our source
for determining the number of compression stages required for the gas flows from each of
our two stock tanks. In particular, the handbook recommends keeping the compression
13

ratio for each stage of compression less than 4. This prevents the gas from reaching
critical temperatures in excess of 300 oF which will damage compressors [7]. To create
our design we performed design feasibility calculations for both the 5-45 psig gas
compression from stock tank 1 and the 45-90 psig gas compression for the combined
3MMSCFD flow stream.
6.1.1.1 Tank 1 Gas Compression Feasibility Calculation
Figure 6 details the thermodynamic constraints associated with gas compression
from tank 1.

Figure 6. Single Stage Compression from Tank 1.

Assuming negligible changes in potential and kinetic energy and adiabatic compression,
the first law of thermodynamics reduces to [7]:

If we assume constant specific heat for the gas, the isentropic outlet temperature can be
found by the relation [7]:

14

Where (P2/P1) is the compression ratio, K is the gas heat capacity ratio, and T2s is the
isentropic compressor outlet temperature.

Once the isentropic temperature at the

compressor outlet has been determined the actual outlet temperature can be found from
the relation [7]:

Where c is the isentropic compressor efficiency which we have assumed to be 83% for a
reciprocating compressor [8]. As expected, the outlet temperature for the compressor
was in excess of 300oF. With this in mind we decided to add a second compression stage
and an interstage cooler to the design as seen in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Two Stage Compression from Tank 1.

To minimize the compression ratios across the compressors we decided to make

each of the compression ratios three, resulting in an intermediate pressure of 15 Psig.

15

From the Handbook of Natural Gas Transmission, we found a rule of thumb relation that
said that interstage air cooling could result in output cooler temperatures of 25oF above
ambient temperature. Assuming Steady State Steady Flow isentropic compression and
negligible pressure drop across the cooler, we followed a similar procedure to the single
stage compression and determined the intermediate temperature T3 as well as T5. This
procedure resulted in compressor operating temperatures safely below the critical
temperature of 300oF.

The detailed calculations for both single and two stage

compression feasibility can be found in Appendix A.

6.1.1.2 Combined Gas Flow Compression Feasibility Calculation
Figure 8 details the thermodynamic constraints associated with the combined gas
flow from tank 2 and tank 1.

Figure 8. Combined Gas Flow Compression.

Performing the same calculation as the single stage compression from tank 1 we
found that the compressor operating temperature was safely below the critical
temperature of 300oF. This makes it clear that only one compression stage is required for
the combined 3MMSCFD gas flow from 45Psig to 90Psig. The feasibility calculations
for this section can also be found in Appendix A.

16

6.1.2 Interstage Cooling

The interstage coolers CLR 1-3 on Figure 5 are included in the design for the
purpose of both lowering the potentially damaging high temperatures associated with gas
compression and minimizing the horsepower requirements for the compressors. As we
have mentioned before, gas flows over the critical temperature of 300oF can damage
equipment especially by degrading lubricants used in compressors [7].

Minimizing

compressor power requirements is another important consideration in our design and

interstage cooling decreases the temperature of the gas entering the compressor which in
turn decreases the power required to run the compressor [7].
6.1.3 Water and Gas Phase Separation
Since water is an incompressible fluid, large quantities of water vapor in a natural
gas flow stream can have catastrophic effects on gas compressors. To extract water from
natural gas, two phase gravity separators (also called scrubbers) are often used in gas
processing and our design includes one before every compression stage. Initially, our
design also included scrubbers after each stock tank, but we were informed by our
sponsor that they were not required because the stock tanks included mist extractors that
removed excess water.

Since condensate water is produced by each of the three

scrubbers in our design it is necessary to transport the excess water to a holding tank to
be cleaned and disposed of. On the bottom deck of the production facility where the VRU
will be installed, there is a holding vessel called a sump tank where excess water
produced at the facility can be stored. Since the VRU will be installed on the top deck of
the facility, condensate water will be piped from the scrubbers to the sump tank using
17

gravity and internal scrubber pressure as a driving force. It is important to note that we
have assumed that changes in pressure, temperature and volumetric gas flow rates across
the scrubbers will be negligible.
6.1.4 Equipment Drivers
Compressors and coolers are the only two pieces of equipment in the VRU that
require an outside power source. As a requirement from our sponsors, the compressors in
the VRU will be powered with natural gas drivers. These natural gas drivers typically
come in the form of internal combustion engines and will provide power to all three of
our compressors. The cooling systems typically have a low horsepower requirement and
will be powered electrically from the production facility.
6.1.5 Valve Systems
To set limits on the scope of our design we have decided not to design the valves
in the VRU in detail but to simply show the placement of key valve systems in a detailed
VRU design flow diagram found in Appendix B. There are three key valve systems
found on the VRU design in Appendix B including compressor valves, scrubber valves
and a three way valve. In order to control fluctuating gas flows and prevent damage, each
compressor in the VRU is equipped with an inlet valve and discharge valve, labeled CIV
and CDV respectively. In addition to controlling gas flows through the use of a pressure
control valve (PCV), scrubbers must also be able to control the condensate liquid flow to
the sump tank. This will be achieved through the use of a liquid control valve or LCV.
A three way valve between state 7 and 8 on the VRU flow process diagram will be used

18

to combine the gas flows from stock tank 1 and 2 so that they may enter the final
compression stage.
6.2

MATLAB Model
A critical aspect of our engineering analysis for the project was to apply

principles of thermodynamics, heat transfer, fluid mechanics, and gas separation to verify
our proposed VRU configuration. As a result, we have created a computer model to
simulate our developed VRU design using MATLAB. From this model, we automated
our final design and obtained significant outputs by running simulations with varying key
parameters. It also allowed us to examine and evaluate each individual component design
in greater detail and adjust assumptions made as necessary. This feature facilitated the
troubleshooting process for our design since each key component is modeled as a
separate entity that can be modified individually.
These computer simulations provided us with a collection of valuable data for our
design: temperatures at all key states including compressor outlet temperatures;
compressor and cooler brake horsepower to determine overall power required to drive the
system; scrubber and cooler sizing specifications; and effects of deviating ambient
temperatures, and flow rates. Some of this data, particularly the power requirements and
dimensions, were important factors in sizing our VRU system for the platform and
determining capital expenditure cost estimates for our financial analysis.
The inter-stage coolers and vertical separators in our VRU configuration are
modeled as separate sub-functions that are called in from the main MATLAB function,
where the overall VRU program incorporates the isentropic compression analysis of the
three compressors to reflect different compression stages in our design. The MATLAB
19

flow chart for the main function can be seen in Appendix C.1, while the separator and
cooler flow charts are in Appendices C.2 and C.3, respectively. Another function was
created to calculate the specific heat capacity of the gas at variable temperatures, using
both the specific heat polynomial expression and, assuming the gas is treated as an ideal
gas mixture, mass composition for the individual gas components. This function, whose
MATLAB flow chart can be seen in Appendix C.4, proved to be extremely beneficial in
easing the automation process of our model algorithms. The MATLAB code for these
four functions can be seen in Appendices D.1-D.4.
The key input variables for our program included the temperatures, pressures, and
flow rates of the gas streams from both stock tanks, as well as the specific gravity and
molecular weight of the gas. To verify the feasibility and output values of our model, we
produced sample calculations for the compressors, coolers, and scrubbers, and provided
justifications for assumptions made in our analysis; these calculations can be seen in
Appendix A and Appendices E-F. Each of these components will be discussed in further
detail in the next section of this report.
6.3

Individual Component Design

6.3.1 Compressors
Compression is the central element in VRU design and successful compressor
selection is vital to a VRUs operation. Figure 9 divides natural gas compressors into
three distinct groups: positive displacement, dynamic, and thermal type compressors.
Though ejectors have been used in onshore gas pressure boosting, they require a high

20

pressure motive gas flow that is not available at our offshore site and will not be
considered in our compressor selection.

Figure 9. Compressor Chart [8].

6.3.1.1 Compressor Selection Justification
The Gas Processors Suppliers Association Engineering Data Handbook is a
valuable resource for compressor selection and provides many useful charts and tables
that compare various gas compressor types across wide volumetric flow rate and pressure
regimes. Figure 10 compares reciprocating, rotary, centrifugal, and axial compressors
based on their ability to handle various input flow rates and discharge pressures.
When the flow rates and discharge pressures for each of the three compression
stages are plotted on Figure 10 below, it becomes apparent that reciprocating, rotary, and
centrifugal compressors are all acceptable choices. For offshore gas processing however
rotary compressors are rarely used so we will further limit our compressor selection to
only reciprocating and centrifugal compressors [8].

21

Figure 10. Compressor Selection Chart [8].

Table 4. Compression Stage Flow Rate and Discharge Pressures.

Though reciprocating and centrifugal compressors are both capable of increasing

the pressure of natural gas, they operate under different mechanical principles which give
rise to different operating characteristics. Reciprocating compressors, which consist of a
piston that compresses gas in a fixed volume cylinder, tend to have lower capital costs
22

and power costs than centrifugal compressors while maintaining higher adiabatic
efficiencies [8].

Centrifugal compressors, which use radial impeller movement to

increase the pressure of a gas stream, require less maintenance than reciprocating
compressors (due to having fewer moving parts) and have lower installation costs [8].
The benefits of each compressor type are summarized in Table 5 below. Since adiabatic
efficiency and maintenance are both key concerns in compressor selection, there is no
clear choice based on the aforementioned criteria. After running our MATLAB model
for each type of compressor we found that the brake horse power (horse power adjusted
for mechanical losses) requirements for the compressors were similar (within 5%), which
also prevented us from using power requirements as a deciding criteria. Our final
decision to use reciprocating compressors came after finding that using centrifugal
compressors led to higher interstage temperatures, resulting from their lower adiabatic
efficiencies. Since larger coolers are needed to offset the damaging high interstage
temperatures and production floor space is limited, we found reciprocating compressors
to be the preferred choice.
Table 5. Compressor Selection Decision Matrix.

23

6.3.1.2 Design Calculations

Brake horsepower (BHP) is the primary parameter for compressor design. The
formula for calculating BHP can easily be adjusted to model reciprocating or centrifugal
compressors, and is given below [7]:

Where Zavg is the average compressibility factor; QG,SC is the standard volumetric
flow rate of gas (MMSCFD). T is the compressor suction temperature (R). P2 and P1 are
the discharge and suction temperatures (Psia).

E is the parasitic efficiency (for

reciprocating: 0.72-0.82, for centrifugal: 0.99), and is the compression efficiency (1 for
reciprocating, 0.8-0.87 for centrifugal units) [7].
6.3.2 Gas Coolers
Gas coolers are typically used as intercoolers for multiple compression stages or
for compressor suction and discharge [9]. Gas cooling is a significant aspect of our VRU
design by helping prevent equipment damage and lower compressor power requirements.
These coolers cause minor pressure losses of the gas depending on the design [7].
However, for our design this pressure drop is considered negligible and gas cooling is
assumed to be done at constant pressure. Based on our research, calculations, and
selected cooler size, this critical assumption can safely be made and has been approved
by our Chevron sponsors and faculty advisor, Dr. Thomas Kiehne.

24

6.3.2.1 Cooler Selection Justification

The two primary types of cooling media used for gas cooling are air and water,
where air cooling is achieved by air-cooled heat exchangers and water cooling is
typically done using water-cooled heat exchangers or cooling towers. Since water has
more favorable thermal properties than air, water coolers have a higher cooling capacity
and require less heat-transfer surface area [8]. However, because water coolers require an
adequate supply of cooling water, they have significantly higher operation and
maintenance costs due to water pumping, treatment, and disposal [10]. Other concerns
associated with water coolers include equipment corrosion and limited water availability,
while air coolers require less frequent cleaning and have unlimited air quantities available
with no preparation costs [11]. Although seasonal variations in ambient temperature can
make temperature control difficult, air has become the more viable and economical heat
transfer media for achieving industrial cooling requirements [8].
Overall, air-cooled heat exchangers are viewed as more cost-effective than water
coolers over the systems projected lifespan, especially with their well-established and
reliable design [8]. Considering our projects low design pressures, temperatures, and
flow rates, as well as other factors including offshore location, cost sensitivity, and strict
environmental regulations in the Gulf of Mexico, air-cooled heat exchangers are the ideal
choice for modeling our cooler designs.
6.3.2.2 Air-Cooled Heat Exchanger Design
The fundamental principle behind air-cooled heat exchangers (ACHEs) involves
transferring heat from the gas to a cooling ambient airstream via finned tubes, where air
movement is achieved by mechanical fans [11]. ACHEs consist of the following basic
25

components: tube bundle, axial fan, fan drive assembly, and supporting structure [8]. Hot
gas flows through tubes in the tube bundle, the heat-transfer device for the cooler, where
fins are applied to increase heat-transfer effectiveness by providing an extended surface
on the air side [12]. We used the most typical fan configuration for our design, known as
forced-draft, where the fan below forces air up across the tube exterior; a basic layout of
this configuration can be seen in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Basic Component Layout of Air Coolers [9].

To optimally model our three cooler designs, we assumed standard values in

terms of tube geometry and tube bundle layout. These assumptions include fin length and
spacing, tube pitch and diameter, and the number of tube passes and rows [12]. To keep
the designs conservative we used a minimum ratio of 0.40 for fan coverage, which
measures air distribution across the tube bundle face [8]. Using the ACHE design
procedure outlined in the GPSA Engineering Data Book, we determined the key sizing
and power requirements to model the coolers. These parameters, along with our cooler
results, will be discussed in detail further along in the report. The key principles

26

underlying ACHE thermal design involve basic heat transfer analysis, where heat and
material balances are performed for the air and gas sides of the exchanger.
The heat dissipated by the gas (Qgas), absorbed by the air (Qair), and transferred from gas
to air (Q) are all equal [9]:
Qgas = Qair = Q
which can also be expressed as [9]:
mgas Cpgas Tgas = mair Cpair Tair = U A F (LMTD)
where m is the mass flow rate, Cp is the specific heat capacity, T is the temperature
change, U is the overall heat-transfer coefficient, A is the heat transfer area, F is the
LMTD correction factor, and LMTD is the log mean temperature difference that acts as
the driving force of heat transfer.
Using the relationship above, we calculated the total extended surface heat
transfer area and converted this value to a bundle face area depending on the tube
geometry and bundle layout. These parameters also allowed us to calculate the air mass
flow rate and velocity. The minimum fan area and fan diameter were calculated using the
bundle face area and fan coverage ratio. To determine the total pressure loss across the
fan, we summed the calculated dynamic fan and air static pressure drops. Finally, the fan
driver brake horsepower was estimated using average fan and speed reducer efficiencies,
total fan pressure drop, and the actual volumetric flow rate of air at the fan inlet [8].
Sample calculations and key assumptions detailing this cooler design methodology are
outlined in Appendix E.
27

6.3.3

Gas-Liquid Separators
Liquid-vapor separators are one of the most common types of process equipment.

As discussed in the VRU design section of the paper, water vapor extraction is crucial for
prolonging compressor life and preventing equipment damage. Though there are three
main types of gravity phase separators (horizontal, vertical and spherical) we will be
limiting our discussion to horizontal and vertical scrubbers because spherical separators
are only used for high pressure service which does not apply to our project constraints
[8]. For both horizontal and vertical scrubbers, gas-liquid separation is accomplished in
three stages. Primary separation, section A in Figure 12, occurs when incoming gas hits
the inlet diverter plate causing large water droplets to coalesce and fall into section D
from gravitational forces.

In section B, secondary separation takes place as gravity

causes the smaller water droplets in the gas flow to fall through the disengagement area
into section D. Finally, the smallest droplets of water are collected by the mist extractor
in section C before the gas exits the separator [13].

28

Figure 12. Vertical and Horizontal Two Phase Separator Schematic [8].

6.3.3.1 Separator Selection Justification

Though vertical and horizontal separators achieve gas-liquid separation in the
same manner, they have inherent advantages and disadvantages from one another that
make them ideal for different situations. For example, vertical separators are ideal for
offshore applications because they require less production floor space than horizontal
separators. It is also easier to clean vertical separators and control their fluid levels [7].
Horizontal separators, on the other hand, are ideal for applications where large volumes
of gas and surging are key concerns [7]. Since floor space on the production facility is
severely limited and we do not require a separator that can handle large throughputs and
surging volumes, we have decided to implement vertical separators in our design.

29

6.3.3.2 Vertical Separator Design

When designing a two phase separator, the key dimensions required include the
inner vessel diameter and seam-to-seam height. Other important dimensions include the
liquid level height and vessel wall thickness. After reviewing numerous sources on
separator design, we found a paper by Svrcek that takes multiple industry standard
separator sizing methods and streamlines the process into a simple step by step
methodology. A brief outline of the steps required to size a two phase separator will be
covered here while the detailed sample calculations can be found in Appendix F.
The first key dimension that must be calculated is the vessel diameter and it is found by
the relation [13]:

where QV is the volumetric flow rate of gas in ft3/sec and UV is the vertical terminal vapor
velocity of a single water droplet falling through the disengagement area of the separator
in ft/sec. Once the vessel inner diameter has been found, the seam to seam height of the
separator HT in Figure 13 must be determined, where HT is simply the sum of the heights
HD, HLIN, HS, HH, HLLL and 1.5 ft. The lower liquid level height (HLLL), distance between
inlet nozzle and liquid level (HLIN ), and distance between inlet nozzle and mist extractor
HD are easily determined from pressure dependent sizing charts given in the paper by
Svrcek. Other heights that deal with the liquid level in the separator such as HS and HH,
require more detailed calculations and are outlined in Appendix F.

30

Figure 13. Vertical Scrubber Design Dimensions [13].

6.3.4

Water Disposal System

To transport the condensed water coming out of the water separators and exiting

the VRU system, we found the most viable and economical choice for our project would
be to model a piping system that disposes the water into a sump tank, which is a mass
tank vessel at atmospheric pressure that contains collected water from other equipment on
the facility.
Since water flow from our three scrubber designs is substantially low, we
eliminated the need for liquid transfer pumps and their associated drivers in our system,
simplifying our overall VRU design. Instead, this piping system uses the pressure
difference from gravity to push the liquids out of the scrubbers and into the sump tank,
31

which is currently located on the bottom deck level of the platform. According to
Chevron, our VRU system will be installed above the tank, allowing us to utilize this
height difference and use gravity as the key driving force of this piping system.
Our analysis for determining the required pipe sizing for each scrubbers water
flow in our design was based on applying Bernoullis principle, assuming an
incompressible and non-viscous water flow. Standard pipe sizes vary from to 2 in
diameter with increments, as per Chevron. We have also accounted for pressure losses
in the pipe due to friction, which depends on the average water velocity, pipe length and
diameter, and a friction factor obtained from the Moody diagram. The friction factor is
based on pipe roughness and the Reynolds number for determining turbulent or laminar
flow [9]. To account for losses from expected bends and valves in the piping, Chevron
has provided us with an equivalent pipe length of 300 ft from each scrubber to the sump
tank for our calculations.
Using Bernoullis equation to combine the fluid energy in terms of elevation (h),
velocity (v), and pressure (P) between the scrubber and sump tank, the total energy can
be expressed as [9]:
P1 + v1 + gh1 = P2 + v2 + gh2 + Ploss
The pressure loss, using the DArcy-Weisbach Equation, is expressed as [9]:
Ploss = (f Leq /D)( vavg)
where f is the friction factor, Leq is the equivalent pipe length, D is the pipe diameter, and
vavg is the average water velocity in the pipe. For the height difference between the
32

scrubbers and sump tank, we assumed the VRU would be installed two deck levels above
the tank based on our systems skid dimensions and the equipment location diagram of
the platform. Provided that the pipe inlet at the sump tank is located 6 from the bottom
as per Chevron, and using the known height of 18 per deck level, we calculated the
elevation difference to be 355. Using these equations and assumptions, along with the
pressures and calculated water velocities for each scrubber, we created an Excel
spreadsheet to determine the average water velocity in the pipe for each scrubber design
at different standard pipe diameters. These results are summarized in Table 6.
Table 6. Condensate Water Piping Results.

The feasibility analysis of our piping system was based on ensuring that the water
velocity in the pipes remained between 5 to 15 ft/s to avoid pipe damage. According to
Chevron, high water flows cause pipe erosion, while low velocities cause pipe corrosion.
Using our data in Table 6, we were able to select the feasible pipe diameter for each
scrubber depending on which average pipe velocity fell within this velocity range. As a
result, both scrubbers 1 and 2 require diameter piping, while scrubber 3 requires a 1
pipe diameter for water condensate removal.

33

6.3.5

Drivers
In order to power our compressors and air coolers, we need to look at what types

of drivers are applicable for our designs.

6.3.5.1 Compressor Drivers
Gas compressors are typically driven by electric motors, gas engines, or gas
turbines. While electric motors must rely on the availability of electric power, both gas
engines and gas turbines can use pipeline gas as fuel. Since an abundant supply of natural
gas fuel already exists on the production facility, we have only considered engines fueled
by natural gas to drive the compressors in our VRU design. We have also discussed this
decision with our sponsors at Chevron and have received their approval.
6.3.5.2 Cooler Drivers
Fan drivers for air-cooled heat exchangers are typically electric motors, steam
turbines, hydraulic motors, or gas engines. After further research and analysis, our team
decided that an electric motor would be the ideal driver selection for our air coolers, as
this is commonly used and would be most appropriate for our coolers considering the
relatively low amount of brake horsepower required to drive the cooler fans. Electricity
would power these motors using the extra capacity from the generator on the facility. We
have also verified this selection with Chevron, and other types of drivers for our cooler
designs will not be considered.
6.4

MATLAB Results and Sensitivities

Using our methodology for detailed design and the MATLAB model, we obtained

key parameters to determine power and sizing requirements for each of the compressors,
34

scrubbers, and coolers in our VRU design. To run the overall MATLAB VRU program at
average conditions, we used the pressures, temperatures, and flow rates listed earlier in
the report in Table 3. These base conditions consist of an ambient air temperature of 80oF
at average gas flow rates.
From a practical standpoint, certain aspects associated with our design change on
a daily basis. To simulate these variations, we used our MATLAB program to run
multiple cases with varying parameters to reflect realistic conditions and analyze the
effects on key model outputs. Performing this sensitivity analysis allowed us to refine our
model and adjust assumptions made based on our designs feasibility in extreme
conditions. Two key fluctuations are modeled in our VRU design: ambient air
temperatures and gas flow rates. A summary of these sensitivity cases can be seen in
Table 7, and these cases will discussed in further detail in the compressor results section
of the report. We have considered sensitivity effects solely on the three compressors in
our model because altering these conditions only had a significant impact on the
compressor output values. The results presented for the scrubber and cooler designs were
obtained at average conditions using the values for case 2, or the base case, as seen in
Table 7.
Table 7. Sensitivity Cases.

35

6.4.1

Separator and Cooler Results

From the MATLAB output, we populated an Excel spreadsheet for the scrubbers

containing the inner separator diameters (Dvd) and seam to seam lengths (Lss) in feet.
These values can be seen in Table 8. Since vendors only make separators with diameters
and lengths in 6-inch increments, the dimensions were converted to inches and then
rounded up to the next multiple of six inches. The slenderness ratio (Lss / Dvd) for each
separator was then calculated based on the rounded dimensions; these values can also be
seen in Table 8. Typical slenderness ratios for two-phase separators fall in the range of 3
to 5, and all three of our separators meet these criteria [8].
Table 8. Separator Design Outputs.

We obtained the necessary outputs from the model to determine the horsepower
and size requirements for our three cooler designs, providing data for the cost analysis
and skid model. These values, as seen in Table 10, include the fan driver brake
horsepower, total extended surface heat-transfer area of tubes (Ax), tube bundle face area
(Fa) which represents the heat-transfer surface available to airflow, and fan blade
diameter (Dfan) rounded up to the next available fan size. The total power required to

36

drive our entire VRU system was determined using the cooler and compressor brake
horsepower values.
Table 9. Cooler Design Outputs.

6.4.2

Compressor Results and Sensitivities

To simulate hot and cold day (daytime vs. nighttime) conditions, we used ambient

air temperature to model three cases: minimum (cold), average, and maximum (hot)
temperatures. After simulating these cases, also referred to as cases 1-3 in Table 7, our
results showed that both the outlet temperature and brake horsepower for compressors 2
and 3 increased with ambient temperature, as seen in the compressor outputs for cases 13 of Table 10. When compared to our base case conditions, the outlet temperature and
brake horsepower changed by an average 11% and 4%, respectively. The outlet
temperature is a critical aspect of our design as it determines compression feasibility. For
the hot conditions (case 3), we observed that the outlet temperature for compressor 2 was
slightly above the critical temperature of 300oF, illustrating that our design may not be
feasible for extremely hot weather without making key changes. To minimize these
compressor outlet temperatures for extreme conditions, many future modifications can be
made to our design: add more air cooling, use or add water cooling, increase number of
37

compression stages, change compressor type, increase compressor efficiency, and/or resize the existing compressors.
Surging effects were also considered, as the gas flow rates coming from both
stock tanks are constantly fluctuating, especially with the presence of excess liquids or
pipeline pressure changes. To model these deviations in flow, the given gas flow rates
were used as averages, while 30% of these values provided the maximum and minimum
flow rates; these conditions are indicated as cases 2, 4, and 5 in Table 7. According to our
design results, the brake horsepower for all three compressors significantly increased
with gas throughput, as seen in Table 10. Compressor power changed by an average 30%
when compared to our base case values, which stresses the importance of accounting for
extreme conditions in our design. Compressor brake horsepower is a key design output
because it not only determines minimum sizing and power requirements for the
compressor designs, but also affects compressor selection, equipment cost analysis, VRU
skid layout for the platform, and the total power required to run our system.

Table 10. Compressor Design Outputs.

38

6.5

Bill of Materials
Before creating a skid layout of our proposed design, we had to list all

components with their dimensions in a Bill of Materials (BOM) as shown in Table 11.
Dimensions were determined using product catalogs from vendors, MATLAB models,
and calculations described above [14,15]. The BOM was also needed to determine part of
the financial costs concerning capital expenses, where costs for the specific components
were obtained using values from 2003 [16]. We doubled the cost values to account for the
recent increase in raw materials and labor rate costs. The total equipment cost was
estimated to be approximately $750,000, which was also used for further financial
analysis. The BOM provides a layout of the type and quantity of individual components
needed for the VRU system as well as their estimated costs.

39

Table 11. Bill of Materials.

6.6

Solid Skid Model

The VRU system will need to be placed on a skid, which represents a base

platform that will be able to withstand the weight of components placed on top. The VRU
components will be placed on a skid, transported, and finally be placed on the production
platform offshore. To fit on the production platform, we had to focus on reducing the skid
size as much as possible. From the BOM, we were able to lay out a two-dimensional
sketch of the VRU on the skid. Figure 14 shows the two-dimensional sketch from the top
view.

40

Key
Scrubbers
Coolers

29 ft.

Compressors

Cooler 2

Cooler 1

Cooler 3
12 ft.

S1

Com 1&2

S2

Com 3

S3
3 MMSCFD

2 MMSCFD

1 MMSCFD

5 psig

90 psig

45 psig

Figure 14. Two Dimensional Skid Layout.

Looking at this skid layout above, we can see the overall relative dimensions as
well as the streams entering and exiting the VRU. The process starts with the 2MMSCFD
flow running first through the two-stage compressor to increase the pressure from 5psig
to 15psig, cooler 1, scrubber (S1), and returning to the same two-stage compressor
(Com1&2) to be recompressed from 15psig to 45psig.

Since the first compressor

(Com1&2) is a two-stage compressor, it is able to simultaneously compress two flows at

one time. From there, it passes through cooler 2, scrubber (S2), and then enters the
second compressor (Com3). The 1 MMSCFD stream is added into the stream to be
compressed from 45psig to 90psig in the second compressor (Com3). Finally the
combined stream of 3 MMCFD is cooled, separated (S3), and rerouted to the sales
compressor.

41

The final dimensions for the skid will be 29 ft. long and 12 ft. wide with a
maximum height of 10 ft due to scrubber 3s height. The components are spaced 2 ft.
apart from each other and 6 in. from the edges of the skid to allow access for piping and
maintenance.
Figure 15 is a three-dimensional model of our proposed design following the
same layout, from left to right, as the two-dimensional model in Figure 14. As seen in
Figure 15, the two stage reciprocating compressor on the left is much larger in
comparison to the single stage reciprocating compressor because it will have to
recompress two streams. The heat exchangers shown in the back are the largest pieces of
equipment in our final design while the vertical scrubbers are the tallest.

Figure 15. Three Dimensional Skid Layout.

42

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

7.1

Annual Sales Loss

Now that we have covered the key aspects of sizing components, we shift our

focus to financial costs. Currently the gas stream of 45psi (1 MMSCFD) is being burnt
off into the atmosphere, so we calculated the value of the gas that was being lost. To do
this, we needed a cost estimate of how much the natural gas is worth in todays market,
also known as spot price. Since the spot price of natural gas changes every day, we chose
to look at the spot trends over the last year, published on online markets, as well as future
price predictions from natural gas price traders and the Energy Information
Administration. These prices per million British thermal units (MMBtu) for November
11th can be seen in Table 12.
Table 12. Past and Predicted Natural Gas Spot Prices [17,18,19].

To estimate the value of natural gas being lost in a given day, we took the Henry
Hub spot price on the day of November 11, 2009, since this is the closest value to
present day, which was $4.18 per million British thermal units [18]. To calculate the sales
amount that is lost due to flaring, we had to account for the natural gas heating value
which is 1,028 Btu/SCF. Using the equation below we are able to compute the value of
the original 1 MMSCFD stream being burnt off:
43

Annual Sales Loss = Flowrate (Q)* Heating Value (HV)* Spot Price* Days in a year
Annual Sales Loss = 1 MMSCF/day * 1,028 Btu/SCF* $4.18/MMBtu * 365 days/year
From our calculations, the annual sales loss from the 1 MMSCFD stream alone is
approximately $1,568,400 a year. Instead of earning this profit amount, Chevron is
currently burning off the 1 MMSCFD gas stream.
7.2

Investment Costs
Capital, installation, and operations and maintenance (O&M) costs are related to

the design flow capacity of the stream. We determined the costs for a VRU system for
the 3MMSCFD flow capacity leaving the VRU. Due to Chevrons request we were not
able to contact vendors for specific prices on equipment; therefore, we derived our
financial values from extrapolating capital, installation, and O&M costs available from
EPAs Natural Gas Star Program [20]. Capital costs were also compared to values of the
specific equipment costs [16]. Table 13 lists the capital, installation, and O&M costs
derived.
Table 13. VRU Costs [3].

44

Since the above values were obtained in 2004, we doubled the cost estimate to
take into account recent increases in labor rates, installation costs, deck differences, cost
of raw materials, and equipment costs. Therefore, the cost estimates we focused on for
our design were based on the 6000 MSCFD design capacity, rather than the 3000
MSCFD, to have a more conservative and accurate representation of todays prices.
Design capacity is the maximum fluid flow the VRU will experience while
running. As fluid capacity increases, the investment cost also increases. Capital costs
include the cost of the equipment: compressors, separators, and coolers. Installation costs
include the cost of a crew to install the system and any extra equipment needed to
transport the skid onto the platform. In the above example, installation cost is calculated
as 75% of the capital cost [20]. Operation and maintenance costs incorporate the cost of
the crew to maintain the VRU, as well as the operating cost to keep the VRU in working
order. The investment cost is the sum of the capital and installation cost. As seen in
Table 13, the investment cost for our project is approximately $1.3 million. Equipment
cost was the major factor in contributing to the investment cost and unavoidable since it
relies on the capacity flow.
7.3

Payback and Return on Investment

To continue our financial analysis, we calculated the value of recovered gas, the

payback period, and the return on investment after the installation of the VRU. The value
of recovered gas is the annual value that Chevron may potentially earn by selling off the
natural gas recovered by the VRU. The price range of the recovered gas was based on a
low and high range from past and future natural gas spot prices from Table 12. To
45

calculate the value of recovered gas, we used the same annual sales loss equation as
stated previously.
Figure 16 graphs the predicted value of recovered gas at 75% runtime versus the
natural gas spot price. A 75% runtime was chosen to take into account the annual
downtime from maintenance on the VRU equipment [21]. The value of recovered gas for
our range of $4.18/MMBtu to $6.50/MMBtu (highlighted in Figure 16) varied from $3.5
million to $5.5 million. In comparison to the initial investment cost of $1.3 million, the
profit exceeds the initial cost by double to triple the cost.

$25,000,000

Value of Recovered Gas and

Net Present Value

Dollar Amount

$20,000,000
$15,000,000

Value of
Recovered
Gas at 75%
NPV 5yrs

$10,000,000
$5,000,000
$0
$0.00

$2.00

$4.00

$6.00

$8.00

$10.00

Natural Gas Spot Price

Figure 16. Value of Recovered Gas and Net Present Value vs. Natural Gas Spot Price.
Now that we know the investment cost and the value of recovered gas, we were
able to calculate payback and return on investment. The payback period tells us how
long it will take for incoming cash flow to equal the amount invested on implementing
46

the VRU system. The payback period was calculated by dividing the initial capital and
installation costs by the annual value of the recovered gas. For our low and high range
for natural gas spot prices, we calculated payback to be from about 3 months to less than
5 months. This is a considerably short payback and favors the installation of our VRU on
the platform.
The return on investment differs from the payback period because it determines
how much profit is gained in comparison to the initial investment.

The return on

investment (ROI) was calculated using the equation:

ROI = (Value of Recovered Initial Investment)/Initial Investment.
For the low and high range spot prices, return on investment varied from 168% to 317%.
This is a very high return on investment and if natural gas prices continue to climb, so
will Chevrons return on investment. Fast payback and high return on investment makes
installing the VRU on the platform a favorable option for Chevron.
7.4

Net Present Value

Since Chevron would still like to implement the VRU for environmental reasons

even if implementing the VRU on the platform does not add much financial contributions
we chose a small discount rate (i) of 10%. The discount rate is the minimum percentage
price a company would like to be returned by an investment. By using the 10% discount
rate, we calculated the net present value (NPV) of the project for five years.

47

To calculate NPV, we used the equation:

NPV = AVRG *(PVIFA,n) CC IC O&MC*(PVIFAi,n)
NPV = Net present value
AVRG = Annual value of recovered gas
PVIFA = Present value of an annuity
n = Number of years

i = Discount rate
CC = Capital cost
O&MC = Operation and maintenance cost

The present value of an annuity was obtained from economic tables [22] and based on the
discount rate of 10% for a five year span.
Again, we took a range considering the changes in natural gas prices. Figure 16
also depicts the linear increase in net present value in relation to the natural gas price.
For our low/high range, net present value ranged from $11.3 million to $18.8 million.
Since net present value is greater than zero, this project can be deemed a good investment
because the company would not be losing any money; in fact, they can still make $11 to
$18 million dollars more than the 10% return desired.
Almost as important, is the annual revenue Chevron can expect to see after
installing the VRU system, also known as annuity. Taking the net present value, we
back-calculated to obtain the annual revenue. By knowing the interest rate and the
number of years, we determined the annuity of the present value using the conversion
factor (1/PVIFA). The equation used the equation:
Annuity = Net Present Value * (1/PVIFA).
After calculation, for the low and high gas spot prices, the annuity ranged from $3
million to $5 million. After incorporating the VRU system on the platform, Chevron can
expect positive annual revenue from the recovered natural gas.
48

Considering the short payback, high return on investment, and positive values of
net present value and annuity, the financial analysis proves to benefit Chevron financially
and would be a great investment if the VRU is implemented. If natural gas prices
continue to increase, Chevron will be able to obtain more revenue in the years to come.

COST ESTIMATE

No costs were associated with our project. A prototype was not required for our
project, eliminating material costs. The MATLAB and SolidWorks software we used
were available free of charge at the university. Due to resources through the universitys
libraries, we also did not need to buy technical papers.

FUTURE WORK AND RECOMMENDATIONS

For future purposes, implementing liquid transfer pumps after each scrubber may
be a critical addition to the proposed VRU system to account for surging and the presence
of excess liquids in the gas when restarting the VRU. This will help prevent damage to
the compressors and decrease downtime when gravity is not sufficient to drain all the
liquids to the sump tank. If there is access to a high pressure gas source on the platform,
an alternative for vapor recovery could be to use venturi jet ejector technology, which
takes a high pressure gas flow and combines it with the low pressure vapors to create an
intermediate pressure flow which can then enter the sales compressor or other processing
equipment. Currently, venturi jet ejectors have only been implemented onshore, but may

49

be used offshore in the future. In addition, venturi jet ejectors have no mechanical
moving parts resulting in significantly lower maintenance costs [23].

10

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our team has developed overall VRU and detailed individual
component designs through research and utilization of applicable design tools, along with
supporting feasibility calculations and justifications for our selections. A critical
component of our engineering analysis included creating a MATLAB computer model to
simulate and verify our VRU design, applying principles of thermodynamics, heat
transfer, fluid mechanics, and gas separation. A three-dimensional solid model was also
created to provide detailed visualization of our VRU design components and overall
layout. This VRU system will recover hydrocarbon vapors and re-route the gas to sales
on one of Chevrons offshore production platform in the Gulf of Mexico, minimizing gas
losses and increasing profits while complying with environmental regulations.
Considering the short payback period, high return on investment, and annual revenue of
about $4 million associated with the proposed VRU design, our analysis shows this final
design solution is financially sound and would be a favorable investment for
implementing in the project. We have also provided Chevron with recommendations for
future work in terms of further improvement of the final solution and potential
investments in new and existing technologies.

50

REFERENCES

1.

Our Businesses. (n.d.). Retrieved September 3, 2009, from Chevron:

http://www.chevron.com/about/ourbusiness/

2.

Chevron. (2009). Gulf of Mexico Business Unit Fact Sheet. Houston: Chevron
North American Exploration and Production.

3.

Natural GasSTAR Program. (n.d.). Retrieved September 10, 2009, from

http://www.epa.gov/gasstar/documents/workshops/houston-2005/instal_v.pdf

4.

Evans, N. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.vaporrecoveryunits.net/

5.

Rothenbucher, R. K. (1976). U.S. Patent No. 3,939,906. Washington, DC: U.S.

Patent and Trademark Office.

6.

Goodyear, M. A. (2002). U.S. Patent No. 6,418,957. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office.

7.

Mokhatab, S., Poe, W., & Speight, J. (2006). Handbook of Natural Gas
Transmission and Processing. Burlington: Gulf Publishing

8.

Gas Processors Suppliers Association. (1994). Engineering Data Bok. Tulsa: Gas
Processors Association.

9.

Mohitpour, M., Golshan, H., & Murray, A. (2003). Pipeline Design &
Construction: A Practical Approach. New York: American Society of Mechanical
Engineers.

10.

Hewitt, G. (1998). Heat Exchanger Design Handbook. New York: Begell House
Inc.

11.

Kroger, D. G. (2004). Air-Cooled Heat Exchangers and Cooling Towers.

PennWell Books.

12.

Kuppan, T. (2000). Heat Exchanger Design Handbook. New York: Marcel

Dekker Publishing .

13.

Svrcek, W., & Monnery, W. (1993). Design Two-Phase Separators Within the
Right Limits. Chemical Engineering Progress , 53-60.

14.

Ariel Corporation. (n.d.). Ariel JGM, JGP, JGN, JCQ Compressors [Brochure].
Retrieved from http://www.arielcorp.com/uploadedFiles/Products/JGMPNQ.pdf

51

15.

Air-X-Changers. (n.d.). AXC Model H [Brochure]. Retrieved from

http://www.airx.com/Uploads/All/Air-X-Changers/Publications/
AXC_ModelH_11-06.pdf

16.

Process Equipment Cost Estimates. (2003, October 15). Retrieved from

http://www.matche.com/EquipCost/index.htm

17.

Oilnergy. (n.d.). NYMEX Henry Hub Natural Gas Price. Retrieved November 19,
2009, from http://www.oilnergy.com/1gnymex.htm

18.

Bloomberg. (n.d.). Energy Prices. Retrieved November 11, 2009, from

http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/commodities/energyprices.html

19.

CME Group. (2009, November 19). Natural Gas Henry Hub Futures. Retrieved
November 19, 2009, from http://www.cmegroup.com/trading/energy/naturalgas/natural-gas.html

20.

EPA's Natural Gas STAR Program, Shell, GCEAG, API, & Rice University.
(2004, June 8). Installing Vapor Recovery Units to Reduce Methane Losses
[PowerPoint slides].

21.

Quincy Compressor. (n.d.). Cost of Ownership: The Definitive Guide [Brochure].

22.

National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (Ed.). (2008).

Fundamentals of Engineering Supplied-Reference Handbook (8th ed.). Author.

23.

Goodyear, M. A., Graham, A. L., Stoner, J. B., Boyer, B. B., Zeringue, L. P., &
Society of Petroleum Engineers International. (2003, March). Vapor Recovery of
Natural Gas Using Non-Mechanical Technology (SPE No. 80599). Society of
Petroleum Engineers Inc.

24.

Schmidt, P., Baker, D., Ezekoye, O., & Howell, J. (2006). Thermodynamics: An
Integrated Learning System. Hoboken: Wiley.

25.

Kline, P. E., Fahlgren, C. E., & Kitchen, M. R. (1971). U.S. Patent No. 3,565,164.
Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

26.

Artemov, L. N., & Bakanov, A. F. (1977). U.S. Patent No. 4,002,444.

Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

27.

Longardner, R. L. (1990). U.S. Patent No. 4,936,109. Washington, DC: U.S.

Patent and Trademark Office.

28.

Raseley, L. J., Collier, S. J., & McCarty, H. G. (1980). U.S. Patent No. 4,214,883.
Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
52

29.

Hewitt, P. J. (1991). U.S. Patent No. 5,006,138. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office.

30.

Grimmer, J. E., & Ketcham, E. T. (2004). U.S. Patent No. 6,695,591.

Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

31.

Brown, R. (2005). Compressors: Selection and Sizing. Boston: Gulf Publishing.

53

APPENDIX A: DESIGN FEASIBILITY CALCULATIONS

545 psig: Stock Tank 1 Single Stage Gas Compression

Figure 6. Single Stage Compression from Tank 1.

o Assumptions
Steady State Steady Flow
No change in KE, PE
Adiabatic
Isentropic Compression
Constant ratio of specific heats (K)
K=1.27, evaluated at T1 using specific heat calculator MATLAB
function
Compressors are reciprocating with adiabatic efficiencies of
= .83 [31]
st
o 1 Law of Thermodynamics reduces to:
,13 = 3 1
o For Isentropic compression the inlet temperature and adiabatic outlet
temperature are related by:

3 = 1

3
1

1 + 1 = 849.40 = 390

o The actual compressor outlet temperature is found by the following

relation:
3 =

3 1
+ 1 = 908.68 = 448.68

o Operating temperature T3>300oF, so cooling phase and multiple

compression stages are required for 5 45spig pressure increase
545 psig: Stock Tank 1 Two Stage Gas Compression with interstage cooling

A-1

Figure 7. Two Stage Compression from Tank 1.

o Set each compression ratio per stage = 3 = 5 = 3 to evenly distribute

1

compression load
o Assumptions:
Steady State Steady Flow
No change in KE, PE
Adiabatic
Isentropic Compression
Constant K=1.27, evaluated at T1 using specific heat calculator
MATLAB function
Compressors are reciprocating with adiabatic efficiencies of
= .83
Pressure change across cooler is negligible
Tambient=80oF

o 13: Following same isentropic compression analysis as for single stage

compression

3 = 1

3 =

3
1

1 + 1 = 707.33 = 247.33

3 1
+ 1 = 737.51 = 277.51

o 34: Cooler rule of thumb

For air cooling assume discharge temperature of 25oF above
ambient dry bulb temperature [8]
4 = + 25 = 105
A-2

o 45: Following same isentropic compression analysis as with single stage

compression

5 = 1

5 =

5
4

1 + 4 = 713.65 = 253.65

5 4
+ 4 = 744.10 = 284.10

o Since both T3 and T5 are safely below 300oF, 2 stage compression with
intercooling will boost the gas pressure without damaging the equipment
o Now we will check the feasibility of single stage compression for the
combined 45 psig gas flow stream
4590 psig: combined Gas flow Stream

Figure 8. Combined Gas Flow Compression.

o Same assumptions as Stock Tank 1 Single Stage Gas Compression

8 = 7

8 =

8
7

1 + 7 = 648.91 = 188.91

8 7
+ 7 = 667.12 = 207.12

o The operating temperature T8<300oF, so the compression can be achieved

in one stage without cooling
Based on these feasibility calculations, we must have two compression stages for
the 2MMSCFD gas flow from stock tank 1 and only one compression stage for
the combined 3MMSCFD gas flow.

A-3

APPENDIX B: DETAILED VRU PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM

Figure B-1. Detailed VRU Process Flow Diagram.

B-1

APPENDIX C.1: MAIN VRU MATLAB PROGRAM FLOWCHART

Inputs: Comp 1-3

Efficiencies, Q 1&2
Tambient

Calculate T3-T9

Calculate COM
BHPs

Print Out Results

Calculate CLR BHPs

and Dimensions

Calculate SCR
Dimensions

Outputs: T1-9,
BHPs: COM & CLR,
Dimensions: CLR
and SCR

Figure C-1. Main VRU MATLAB Program Flowchart.

C-1

APPENDIX C.2: VERTICAL SEPARATOR MATLAB FUNCTION

FLOWCHART

Function
Inputs: P, T,
Qgas

Calculate SCR
inner vessel
diameter (Dvd)

Calculate SCR
Lss

Calculate SCR
Nozzle
Diameter (Dn)

Output array
with Dvd, Dn,
Lss
Figure C-2. Vertical Separator MATLAB Function Flowchart.

C-2

APPENDIX C.3: COOLER MATLAB FUNCTION FLOWCHART

Inputs: Comp 1-3

Outlet T's & P's,
Q 1&2, Tambient

Calculate Total
Extended Surface
Area

Calculate Tube
Bundle Face Area

Outputs: Extended
Surface & Bundle
Face A's, Fan D, Fan
Driver BHP

Calculate Fan Driver

BHP

Calculate Fan
Diameter

Send Outputs to
Main VRU Function

Figure C-3. Cooler MATLAB Function Flowchart.

C-3

APPENDIX C.4: SPECIFIC HEAT CAPACITY CALCULATOR MATLAB

FUNCTION FLOWCHART

Inputs:
Temperature, Gas
Properties &
Composition

Calculate Cp's for

Individual Gas
Components

Calculate Overall
Gas Cp

Convert Molar
Fractions to Mass
Fractions

Send Cp to Main
VRU & Cooler
Functions
Figure C-4. Specific Heat Capacity Calculator MATLAB Function Flowchart.

C-4

APPENDIX D.1: MATLAB CODE: MAIN VRU PROGRAM

% Variable Inputs
SG=.625;%input('Enter the Specific gravity of your natural gas ');
T1F=100;%input('Enter the natural gas temperature of the stock tanks in Deg F');
T2F=T1F;
T1R=T1F+460;%Rankine
T2R=T1R;
EffComp1=.835;
EffComp2=.835;
EffComp3=.79;
Tinf=80;%input('Enter the ambient air Temperature in Deg F');
E=.785;%input('Enter parasitic efficiency for compressors (.785 for low speed recip, .99
for centrifugal):');
CompEff=1;%input('Enter Compression efficiency for compressors (1 for low speed
recip, .835 for centrifugal):');
%Constants
P1=5; %[Psig]
P2=45; %[Psig]
P3=15; %[Psig]
P4=15; %[Psig]
P5=45; %[Psig]
P6=45; %[Psig]
P7=45; %[Psig]
P8=90; %[Psig]
P9=90; %[Psig]
Q1=1.4; %[MMSCFD]
Q3=Q1;
Q4=Q1;
Q5=Q1;
Q6=Q1;
Q2=0.7; %[MMSCFD]
Q7=Q1+Q2; %[MMSCFD]
Q8=Q7;
Q9=Q7;
Rbar=1.9858; %[btu/lbm*R]
MW=18.06;
%Calculate K (Specific heat ratio)
%K=CPcalc(T1F)/(CPcalc(T1F)-Rbar/MW);
K=1.3-0.31*(SG-0.55); %Campbell relation (1992)
%1-3: Compressor 1
%Find T3S
T3SR=T1R*(((P3/P1)^((K-1)/K))-1)+T1R;
%Find T3
D-1

T3R=((T3SR-T1R)/EffComp1)+T1R;
T3F=T3R-460;
%3-4: Cooler 1: Rule of thumb- discharge pressure @ cooler exit is ~25Deg F
%above ambient temp
T4F=25+Tinf;
T4R=T4F+460
%4-5: Compressor 2
T5SR=T4R*(((P5/P4)^((K-1)/K))-1)+T4R;
T5R=((T5SR-T4R)/EffComp2)+T4R;
T5F=T5R-460; %[Deg F]
%5-6: Cooler 2
T6F=25+Tinf;
T6R=T6F+460;
%6-7: Combine Gas Streams
cp6=CPcalc(T6F); %[Btu/lbm-degR]
cp2=CPcalc(T2F);
cp7=CPcalc((T6F+T2F)/2); %Evaluated at average of inlet temperatures
mdot6=(Q6*10^6*MW)/(379*24*3600);%Mass flowrate from stock tank 1 [lbm/sec]
mdot2=(Q2*10^6*MW)/(379*24*3600);%Mass flowrate from stock tank 2 [lbm/sec]
mdot7=(Q7*10^6*MW)/(379*24*3600);%Mass flowrate of combined gas streams
[lbm/sec]
T7R=((mdot6*cp6*T6R)+(mdot2*cp2*T2R))/(mdot7*cp7);
T7F=T7R-460; %[Deg F]
%7-8: Compressor 3
T8SR=T7R*(((P8/P7)^((K-1)/K))-1)+T7R;
T8R=((T8SR-T7R)/EffComp3)+T7R;
T8F=T8R-460; %[Deg F]
%8-9: Cooler 3
T9F=25+Tinf;
T9R=T9F+460;
%Outputs
T1F
T2F
T3F
T4F
T5F
T6F
T7F
D-2

T8F
T9F
% BHP for Compressors
KRatio=(K/(K-1));
BhpComp1=0.0854*((Q1*T1R)/(E*CompEff))*KRatio*(((P3/P1)^(1/KRatio))-1)
%[hp]
BhpComp2=0.0854*((Q4*T4R)/(E*CompEff))*KRatio*(((P5/P4)^(1/KRatio))-1)
%[hp]
BhpComp3=0.0854*((Q7*T7R)/(E*CompEff))*KRatio*(((P8/P7)^(1/KRatio))-1)
%[hp]
%Scrubber Designs
%Scrubber 1 Design
A1=VertSepFunction(T4F,P4,Q4)
%Scrubber 2 Design
A2=VertSepFunction(T6F,P6,Q6)
%Scrubber 3 Design
A3=VertSepFunction(T9F,P9,Q9)
%Cooler Designs
%Cooler 1 Design
B1=CoolerFunction(T3F,Tinf,P3,Q3)
%Cooler 2 Design
B2=CoolerFunction(T5F,Tinf,P5,Q5)
%Cooler 3 Design
B3=CoolerFunction(T8F,Tinf,P8,Q8)

D-3

APPENDIX D.2: MATLAB CODE: VERTICAL SEPARATOR FUNCTION

function A = VertSepFunction (TF,Pg,Qsc)
%User Input
%TF=input('Enter the temperature of natural gas entering separator in Deg F: ');
TR=TF+460; %Temp in Rankine
%Pg=input('Enter the Pressure of natural gas entering separator in Psig: ');
Pa=Pg+14.7; %Atmospheric Pressure [Psia]
%Qsc=input('Enter the Volumetric Flow Rate of natural gas entering separator in
MMSCFD: ');
%Constants
R=10.73; %Universal Gas constant
MW=18.064; % Molecular weight of Natural Gas
RhoL=62.4; % Density Natural Gas [lb/ft^3]
Th=5; %Hold up time [Min]
Ts=3; %Surge time [Min]
%Calculate Gas Density at Given Temp and Pressure
RhoV=(Pa*MW)/(R*TR); %lb/ft^3
%Calculate Separation Constant K
Kprime=0.35-0.01*((Pg-100)/100);
K=Kprime*0.75; %Includes correction factor for suction scrubbers
%Step 1: Calculate Vertical Terminal Vapor velocity
Ut=K*((RhoL-RhoV)/(RhoV))^.5; %ft/s
Uv=0.75*Ut; %ft/s
%Step 2: Calculate Vapor and Liquid Volumetric Flow Rates
mdot=(Qsc*10^6*MW)/(379*24*3600);%Mass flowrate of gas converted from
Volumetric Flowrate [lb/sec]
Qv=mdot/RhoV; %volumetric flowrate of gas [ft^3/s]
Qlprime=mdot/RhoL; %volumetric flowrate of liquid water [ft^3/s]
%Step 3: Calculate Vessel ID
Dvdprime=((4*Qv)/(pi()*Uv))^.5; %[ft]
Dvd=Dvdprime+(6/12);%Vessel Diameter with 6" added for mist extractor [ft]
%Step 4: Convert Liquid Flow Rate to ft^3/min
Ql=Qlprime*60; %[ft^3/min]
%Step 5: Calculate hold up volume
Vh=Th*Ql; %ft^3
%Step 6: Calculate Surge Volume
Vs=Ts*Ql; %Ft^3
D-4

%Step 7: Find HLLL

%From chart Svrcek (1993)
HLLL=15/12; %[ft]
%Step 8: Calculate HH
HH=((Vh)/((pi()/4)*(Dvd^2))); %[ft]
%Step 9: Calculate HS
HS=((Vs)/((pi()/4)*(Dvd^2))); %[ft]
%Step 10 Calculate dn and HLIN
Qm=Qlprime+Qv;%[ft^3/s]
lambda=Qlprime/(Qlprime+Qv);
Rhom=(RhoL*lambda)+(RhoV*(1-lambda)); %[lb/ft^3]
dn=((4*Qm)/((pi()*60)/(Rhom^.5)))^.5; %[ft]
HLIN=1+dn; %[ft]
%Step 11 Calculate HD
HD=2+(.5*dn);%[ft]
%Step 12 Calulate Mist extractor Extra Height
HME=1.5; %[ft]
%Step 13 Calculate HT
HT=HLLL+HH+HS+HLIN+HD+HME;%[ft]
% %Outputs
% disp('The diameter of the separator in feet is:')
% Dvd
%
% disp('The diameter of the input nozzle in feet is:')
% dn
%
% disp('The height of the separator in feet is')
% HT
A=[Dvd,dn,HT];

D-5

APPENDIX D.3: MATLAB CODE: COOLER FUNCTION

function B = CoolerFunction (TinF,Tinf,Pg,Qsc)
%User Input
%TinF=input('Enter the natural gas temperature entering cooler in Deg F: ');
TinR=TinF+460; %Temp in Rankine
%Tinf=input('Enter the ambient air temperature in Deg F: ');
%Pg=input('Enter the natural gas pressure entering cooler in Psig: ');
%Qsc=input('Enter the Volumetric Flow Rate of natural gas entering cooler in
MMSCFD: ');
%Constants
EffFan=.70;
EffSpeedReducer=.92;
MW=18.064; %Molecular weight of natural gas
N=3; %Number of rows of tubes
L=6; %Tube length in ft
F=1; %Mean Temperature Difference correction factor for 3 tube passes
APSF=80.4; %Total Available External Area/Bundle Face Area for 3 rows of tubes
cpAIR=0.24; %[Btu/lbm-degR]
FCmin=0.40; %Minimum Fan Coverage ratio
RhoDryAir=0.0749; %Density of Dry Air at 70degF, 14.7psia [lb/ft^3]
%Determine Overall Heat Transfer Coefficients for Air Coolers based on extended
surfaces values from GPSA table for hydrocarbon vapors
if (Pg == 15)
Ux=1.39;
elseif (Pg == 45)
Ux=1.57;
elseif (Pg == 90)
Ux=1.87;
else
Ux=1.61;
end
%Cooler outlet temp: Rule of thumb- discharge temp @ cooler exit is ~25Deg F above
ambient temp
ToutF=25+Tinf;

D-6

ToutR=ToutF+460; %Rankine temp

%Approximate air temperature rise in Deg F
TavgF=(TinF+ToutF)/2;
TavgR=460+TavgF; %Rankine temp
TinAIR=Tinf; % deg F
DeltaTa=((Ux+1)/10)*(TavgF-Tinf);
ToutAIR=DeltaTa+TinAIR; % deg F
%Calculate Log & Corrected Mean Temperature Differences
LMTD=((TinF-ToutAIR)-(ToutF-TinAIR))/log((TinF-ToutAIR)/(ToutF-TinAIR)); %deg
F
CMTD=F*LMTD; %deg F
%Calculate outside extended surface heat transfer area
%Determine specific heat constant of gas mixture
cpgas=CPcalc(TavgF); %[Btu/lbm-degR]
%Calculate mass flowrate of gas
mdot=(Qsc*10^6*MW)/(379*24*3600);%Mass flowrate of gas converted from
Volumetric Flowrate [lbm/sec]
%Calculate heat transfer rate (Qdot)
Qdot=mdot*cpgas*(TinF-ToutF)*3600; %[BTU/hr]
Ax=Qdot/(Ux*CMTD); %[ft^2]
%Convert heat transfer area to bundle face area
Fa=Ax/APSF; %[ft^2]
UnitWidth=Fa/L; %[ft]
%Calculate air mass flow rate & air face mass velocity
mdotAIR=Qdot/(cpAIR*DeltaTa); %[lbm/hr]
Ga=mdotAIR/Fa; %[lb/ft^2-hr]
%Calculate minimum fan area & fan diameter
FAPF=FCmin*Fa;
df=ceil(sqrt(4*FAPF/pi));
%Calculate fan total pressure & cooling air rate
%Determine density ratio at average air temperature
TavgAIR=(TinAIR+ToutAIR)/2;
Dr1=-0.002*TavgAIR+1.14; %using linear relationship for air-density ratios for
temperature range 40degF-120degF

D-7

%Determine pressure drop factor from air face mass velocity

Fp=7e-5*Ga-0.065; %using linear relationship for air static-pressure drop
%Calculate air static pressure drop
DeltaPs=Fp*N/Dr1; %[in H2O]
%Determine density ratio at fan inlet air temperature
Dr2=-0.002*TinAIR+1.14;
%Calculate actual air volumetric flow rate at fan inlet
ACFM=mdotAIR/(RhoDryAir*60*Dr2); %[ft^3/min]
%Calculate fan dynamic pressure drop
DeltaPd=(ACFM/((pi*df^2)/4))^2*(Dr2/4005^2); %[in H2O]
PF=DeltaPs+DeltaPd; %Total Fan Pressure [in H2O]
%Calculate fan brake horsepower
bhp=(ACFM*PF)/(6356*EffFan); %[hp]
Actualbhp=bhp/EffSpeedReducer; %[hp] actual fan motor bhp
%Outputs
%disp('The fan driver brake horsepower is: ')
%Actualbhp
%disp('The extended surface area in square feet is: ')
%Ax
%disp('The fan diameter in feet is: ')
%df
%disp('The bundle face area in square feet is: ')
%Fa
B=[Actualbhp,Ax,df,Fa];

D-8

APPENDIX D.4: MATLAB CODE: SPECIFIC HEAT CALCULATOR

FUNCTION
function B= CPcalc(TF)
format short g
%User Input
%TR=610.316;
TR=TF+460;
%Constants
M=18.064;
% Coefficient matrix contains the Cp polynomial constants a,b,c and d
% From First Row to last the gases are: Methane, Ethance, CO2,Propane,
% Isobutane, n butane, isopentane,npentane,hexanes+
CeoffMatrix=[4.75,.6666e-2,.09352e-5,-.451e-9; 1.648,2.291e-2,-.4722e-5,.2984e9;5.316,7.94e-3,-2.58E-06,3.06E-10;-0.966,4.04E-02,-1.16E-05,1.30E-09;-1.89,5.52E02,-1.70E-05,2.04E-09;0.945,4.93E-02,-1.35E-05,1.43E-09;1.618,6.03E-02,-1.66E05,1.73E-09;1.618,6.03E-02,-1.66E-05,1.73E-09;1.657,7.33E-02,-2.11E-05,2.36E-09];
%Calculate Cp bar using polynomial expression from Schmidt Thermo Text book
%page 369
CPbar=[CeoffMatrix(1,1)+(CeoffMatrix(1,2)*TR)+CeoffMatrix(1,3)*(TR^2)+CeoffMatr
ix(1,4)*(TR^3);CeoffMatrix(2,1)+(CeoffMatrix(2,2)*TR)+CeoffMatrix(2,3)*(TR^2)+Ce
offMatrix(2,4)*(TR^3);
CeoffMatrix(3,1)+(CeoffMatrix(3,2)*TR)+CeoffMatrix(3,3)*(TR^2)+CeoffMatrix(3,4)*
(TR^3);
CeoffMatrix(4,1)+(CeoffMatrix(4,2)*TR)+CeoffMatrix(4,3)*(TR^2)+CeoffMatrix(4,4)*
(TR^3);
CeoffMatrix(5,1)+(CeoffMatrix(5,2)*TR)+CeoffMatrix(5,3)*(TR^2)+CeoffMatrix(5,4)*
(TR^3);
CeoffMatrix(6,1)+(CeoffMatrix(6,2)*TR)+CeoffMatrix(6,3)*(TR^2)+CeoffMatrix(6,4)*
(TR^3); CeoffMatrix(7,1)+(CeoffMatrix(7,2)*TR)+CeoffMatrix(7,3)*(TR^2)+CeoffMat
rix(7,4)*(TR^3);
CeoffMatrix(8,1)+(CeoffMatrix(8,2)*TR)+CeoffMatrix(8,3)*(TR^2)+CeoffMatrix(8,4)*
(TR^3);
CeoffMatrix(9,1)+(CeoffMatrix(9,2)*TR)+CeoffMatrix(9,3)*(TR^2)+CeoffMatrix(9,4)*
(TR^3)];
%Cpis by dividing cpbars by their molecular weights
CPi=[CPbar(1)/16.043;CPbar(2)/30.07;CPbar(3)/44.01;CPbar(4)/44.094;CPbar(5)/58.124
;CPbar(6)/58.124;CPbar(7)/72.151;CPbar(8)/72.151;CPbar(9)/86.178;(2.5*1.98586)/28.0
13];
Mi=[16.043;30.07;44.01;44.094;58.124;58.124;72.151;72.151;86.178;28.013];%Molecul
ar Weights of gasses [Btu/lbmol*R]
yi=[92.407;3.352;4.79e-1;1.45;4.12e-1;5.18e-1;2.16e-1;1.84e-1;4e-1;5.84e-1];%Molar
composition of each gas
xi=(yi.*Mi)*(1/(100*M))
D-9

Cpix=CPi.*xi;
SumCpix=sum(Cpix);
B=SumCpix;

D-10

APPENDIX E: COOLER SIZING AND POWER SAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Givens

P=15 psig
T1=280.33oF (Compressor 1 outlet temperature)
T2= T + 25 oF = 105oF (Rule of thumb for cooler outlet temperature)

T=80 oF
MWNatural Gas= 18.064

Cpair=0.24

Cpgas=0.5534

dry air =0.0749 3

Qsc=2MMSCFD
F=LMTD Correction Factor=1
FCmin=Minimum Fan Coverage=0.40

Average efficiencies: = 0.70,

1 +2
2

= 192.67

= 80.4

= 0.92

Assumptions

Fan Configuration: Forced-draft, horizontal, 1 fan

Ideal gas mixture with constant specific heats
Negligible gas pressure drop across cooler
N=3 rows of tubes
Number of tube passes = 3
Tube pitch & diameter
o Triangular pitch ~ 2
o 1 outside diameter
Fin length & spacing
o 5/8 high fins
o 10 fins/in spacing

Procedure

Step 1 : Determine overall heat transfer coefficient for extended surfaces

Extrapolate from GPSA Table:

E-1

50 15
100 50
=
1.6
1.9 1.6
= 1.39

Step 2: Approximate air temperature rise

=

+ 1

10

= 29.93 = ,
, = 106.93

Step 3: Calculate log & corrected mean temperature differences

1 , (2 )

ln 1 ,
2

= = 76.62

Step 4: Calculate outside extended surface heat-transfer area

, =

106

= 1.103
379 24 3600

= , 1 2

3600 = 3.8528 105

=
=

= 3627.57 2

Step 5: Convert heat transfer area to bundle face area

=

= 45.12 2

E-2

Step 6: Calculate air mass flow rate & air face mass velocity
= ,
, =
=

= 1192.03 2

Step 7: Calculate minimum fan area & fan diameter

=
= ( ) =

= 53784.21

2 = 18.05 2
4

= 4.79 5 ( )

Step 8: Determine air static pressure drop

From GPSA Air-Density Ratio Chart:
,1 = @ , = 0.96
,2 = @ = 0.98
From GPSA Air Static-Pressure Drop Chart: = @ = 0.03
=

Step 9: Calculate actual air volumetric flow rate at fan inlet

=

= 0.094 2
,1

,
1
3
= 12212.25
( ) (,2 ) 60

Step 10: Calculate fan dynamic pressure drop

=

E-3

=
2

4
2

2
=

,2

2
40052
4

,2
= 0.0236 2
40052

( 40052 = @ 70)

Step 11: Calculate total fan pressure drop

= + = 0.1176 2

Step 12: Calculate fan driver brake horsepower

()
=
= 0.341
6356
( 6356 = )
=

E-4

= 0.371

APPENDIX F: VERTICAL SEPARATOR SAMPLE CALCULATIONS

Givens

P=15 psig= 29.7 psia

T=105oF=565 R
Z~1
MWNatural Gas= 18.064

Rbar=10.73

L= water=62.4 3

Qsc=2MMSCFD

Figure 13. Vertical Scrubber Design Dimensions [13].

Procedure

Step 1 : Calculate Vertical Terminal Vapor Velocity

= 0.75 = 5.329

F-1

1
2

= 7.105

From GPSA:
100
= 0.342
100
= 0 .075 = 0.256

=
= 0.088 3

= .35 0.01

Step 2: Calculate Vapor and Liquid Volumetric Flow Rates

=

106

= 1.103
379 24 3600

3
=
= 12.534

3
=
= 0.018

Step 3: Calculate Vessel Inner Diameter

=

4
= 1.731

For a mist eliminator add 3-6 to DVD to accommodate support ring and round
up to the next 6:
= + 6" = 2.23 ~ 2.5

Step 4: Convert Liquid Volumetric Flow Rate Units

=

3 60
3
= 0.018
= 1.08

Step 5: Select Holdup Time and Calculate Holdup Volume

= 5 min ()
= = 5.4 3

F-2

Step 6: Select Surge time and Calculate surge Volume

= 3 min ()
= = 3.24 3

Step 7: Find HLLL From Chart

o For Inner Diameter <= 4 ft and Pressure < 300 psia HLLL= 15
Step 8: Calculate HH

=
= 1.383
2

Step 9: Calculate HS

=
= 0.830
2

Step 10: Calculate HLin

= 12 + 0.5 = 21.55 "
= =

= + = 12.552
=

= 0.001434
+

= + 1 = 0.177

= 9.55 "

60

Step 11: Calculate HD

= 24 + 0.5 = 28.775

F-3

Step 12: Allow 6in for mist eliminator and 1 ft between mist eliminator and top
seam
= 0.5 + 1 = 1.5

Step 13: Calculate HT

= + + + + +
= 8.44 ~ 8.5 ( 6")

F-4

G-1