Public Courses In-House Courses Operator Training

How to Estimate Compressor Efficiency?

In the November 2011 tip of the month (TOTM) we presented the compressor calculations of a case study.
Tweet
We compared the rigorous method results with the values from the shortcut methods. The rigorous method
was based on an equation of state like the Soave-Redlich-Kwong (SRK) for calculating the required
enthalpies and entropies. The enthalpies and entropies are used to determine the power requirement and Search for:
the discharge temperatures. The results indicated that the accuracy of the shortcut method is sensitive to
the value of ideal gas state heat capacity ratio, k. Search
From a calculation viewpoint alone, the power calculation is particularly sensitive to the specification of mass
flow rate, suction temperature and pressure, and discharge temperature and pressure. A compressor is English TOTM Home
going to operate under varying values of the variables affecting its performance. Thus the most difficult part
of a compressor calculation is specification of a reasonable range for each variable and not the calculation itself. Spanish TOTM Home
Reference [1] emphasizes that using a single value for each variable is not the correct way to evaluate a compression
system.
Archives
Normally, the thermodynamic calculations are performed for an ideal (reversible) process. The results of a reversible
process are then adapted to the real world through the use of a thermodynamic efficiency. In the compression process
there are three ideal processes that can be visualized: 1) an isothermal process (PV1=C1), 2) an isentropic process March 2019
(PVk=C2) and 3) a polytropic process (PVn=C3). Any one of these processes can be used suitably as a basis for February 2019
evaluating compression power requirements by either hand or computer calculation. The isothermal process, however, is
seldom used as a basis because the normal industrial compression process is not even approximately carried out at January 2019
constant temperature.
December 2018
Note that Dresser Rand is doing quite a lot of work with “Near constant temperature” compression especially for CO2
November 2018
compression from vent stacks. For detail refere to:
October 2018
http://www.nist.gov/pml/high_megawatt/upload/6_1-Approved-Moore.pdf
September 2018
In this TOTM, we will demonstrate how to determine the efficiency of a compressor from measured flow rate, composition,
suction and discharge temperatures and pressures. A rigorous calculation based on an equation of state and a shortcut August 2018
method are considered and the results are compared.
July 2018
Compress Efficiency June 2018
Compressor efciencies vary with compressor type, size, and throughput. They can only be determined (afterward) by a May 2018
compressor test, although compressor manufacturers can usually provide good estimates. For planning purposes,
reference [2] suggests the following values for the overall efciencies: April 2018
Table 1. Overall Compressor Efficiencies [2] March 2018
February 2018
Compressor Type Efficiency, η January 2018
December 2017
Centrifugal 0.70 – 0.85
November 2017
High Speed Reciprocating0.72 – 0.85 October 2017
September 2017
Low Speed Reciprocating 0.75 – 0.90
August 2017
Rotary Screw 0.65 – 0.75 July 2017
June 2017
Reference [2] indicates that these overall efciencies include gas friction within the compressor, the mechanical losses
(bearings, seals, gear-box, etc.), and gear-box losses. The mechanical efciency varies with compressor size and type,
May 2017
but 95% is a useful planning number. When calculating the compressor head and discharge temperature the efciency April 2017
used will be isentropic or polytropic (isentropic efciency is sometimes called adiabatic efciency). Adding 3-4 % efciency
(mechanical losses) to the overall efciencies in Table 1 will generally give a good estimate of the thermodynamic March 2017
efciency [2].
February 2017
To evaluate the performance of an existing compressor, the objective is to calculate the compressor efficiency (η) and
power requirement.
January 2017

Known and measured properties are:

December 2016
November 2016
a. Standard condition gas volume flow rate (qS) or gas mass rate ()
October 2016
b. Gas composition (zi)
September 2016
c. Suction pressure (P1) and temperature (T1)
August 2016
d. Discharge pressure (P2) and temperature (T2) July 2016
Estimating Efficiency – Rigorous Method June 2016
The heart of any commercial process flow simulation software is an equation of state. Due to their simplicity and relative May 2016
accuracy, a cubic EOS such as Soave Redlich-Kwong (SRK) [3] or Peng-Robinson [4] is used. These equations are used
April 2016
to calculate Vapor-Liquid-Equilibria (VLE), enthalpy (h), and entropy (s). With proper binary interaction coefficients, the
process simulation results of these two equations are practically the same. Therefore, only the SRK is used in this work. March 2016
The isentropic efficiency is defined by February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
Where:
 ηIsen = Isentropic efficiency June 2015
h1 = Suction enthalpy calculated at P1, T1, and composition (zi) May 2015
h2 = Discharge enthalpy calculated at P2, T2, and composition (zi) April 2015
h2Isen = Isentropic discharge enthalpy at P2 (or T2), S2Isen =S1, and composition (zi) March 2015
February 2015
= Mass flow rate
January 2015
The computation compressor efficiency or power involves two steps December 2014
1. Determination of the ideal or isentropic (reversible and adiabatic) enthalpy change (h2Isen-h1) of the compression November 2014
process.
October 2014
2. Determination of the actual enthalpy change (h2-h1).
September 2014
The step-by-step calculation based on an EOS: August 2014
a. Assume steady state, i.e. July 2014
b. Assume the feed composition remain unchanged June 2014
c. Calculate suction enthalpy h1=f(P1, T1, and zi) and entropy s1=f(P1, T1, and zi) by EOS May 2014
d. Assume isentropic process and set s2Isen = f (P2, T2Isen, zi) = s1 = f (P1, T1, zi). April 2014
March 2014
e. Calculate the ideal enthalpy (h2Isen) at discharge condition for known zi, T2 (or P2) and s2Isen.
February 2014
f. Calculate the actual enthalpy (h2) at discharge condition for known zi, T2 and P2.
January 2014
g. Calculate isentropic efficiency by Equation 1: µIsen = (h2Isen – h1)/(h2 – h1)
December 2013
November 2013
h. Calculate power by Equation 2:
October 2013
Estimating Efficiency – Shortcut Method
September 2013
The isentropic path exponent (k) or ideal gas heat capacity ratio (k=CP/CV) can be calculated by the correlation presented August 2013
in the May 2013 TOTM:
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
Where:
April 2013
T = Temperature, K (°R)
March 2013
= Gas relative density; ratio of gas molecular weight to air molecular weight February 2013
A = 0.000272 (0.000151) January 2013
The actual discharge temperature based on an isentropic path can be estimated by December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
Solving for the isentropic efficiency, April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
Similarly, the actual discharge temperature based on a polytropic path can be estimated by October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
Solving the above equation for the polytropic path coefficient (n): May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
Similarly, the actual discharge temperature based on a polytropic path can be estimated (ηPoly) by:
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
 June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
The isentropic head is calculated by
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
Similarly, the polytropic head is calculated by August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
For an isentropic (reversible and adiabatic) process the power is calculated by February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
Or for a polytropic process the power is calculated by August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
Alternatively: February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
Where:
September 2007
Head = Compressor head, m (ft) August 2007
Power = Compressor power, kW (HP) July 2007
R = Universal gas constant, 848 kg-m/(kmol-K) or (1545 ft-lbf/(lbmol-°R)) June 2007
PS = Standard condition pressure, kPa (psia) May 2007
P1 = Suction pressure, kPa (psia)
April 2007
March 2007
P2 = Discharge pressure, kPa (psia)
February 2007
TS = Standard condition temperature, K (°R)
January 2007
T1 = Suction temperature, K (°R) December 2006
T2 = Discharge temperature, K (°R) November 2006
qS = Gas volumetric rate at the standard condition, Sm3/d (scf/day)
October 2006
September 2006
Za = Average gas compressibility factor = (Z1+Z2)/2
August 2006
Z1 = Gas compressibility factor at the suction condition
July 2006
Z2 = Gas compressibility factor at the discharge condition
June 2006
MW = Gas molecular weight May 2006
The power calculation should be made per stage of compression and then summed for all stages connected to a single April 2006
driver.
March 2006
The step-by-step calculation for shortcut method
February 2006
a. Calculate the isentropic exponent (k) by Equation 3 using the average temperature defined by T = (T1+3T2)/4. January 2006
This form of average temperature was defined to obtain better match between the rigorous and shortcut method
results. December 2005
b. Calculate the isentropic efficiency (ηIsen) by Equation 5. November 2005
c. Calculate the polytropic coefficient (n) by Equation 7. October 2005
September 2005
d. Calculate the polytropic efficiency (ηPoly) by Equation 8.
August 2005
e. Calculate the isentropic and polytropic heads by Equations 9 and 10, respectively.
July 2005
 f. Calculate the required power per stage by either Equation 11 or 12. June 2005
Case Study
Complete Archives
A natural gas mixture is compressed using a three-stage centrifugal compressor. The process flow diagram is shown in
Figure 1. For each stage, the measured pressure, and temperature are presented in Table 1. The measured feed Free Subscription
composition, flowrates, and calculated molecular weight and relative density are presented in Table 2.

Topics

Gas Processing
Mechanical
Pipeline
Process Facilities
Process Safety
Refining
Reliability Engineering
Supply Chain
Management
Figure 1. Process flow diagram for a 3-stage compression Uncategorized
Table 1. Measured temperature and pressure for the three stages of compression Water and Corrosion

Meta

Register
Log in
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
WordPress.org

Table 2. Gas analysis and flow rate for the three stages of compression

* Calculated

Results and Discussions

The process flow diagram shown in Figure 1 was simulated by ProMax software [5] to perform the rigorous calculations
using the SRK EOS. The program calculated polytropic and isentropic efficiencies, heads, and compression power. The
program also calculated the isentropic path exponent (k), and polytropic path exponent (n). These calculated results are
presented in Table 2 for all three stages under SRK headingings. The calculations performed by ProMax are very similar
to the step-by-step of a through h described in the rigorous section. Table 2 also presents the shortcut caculation results
for the corresponding values under the shortcut heading. The shortcut calculations are based on the step-by-step of a
through f described in the shortcut method section. The error percent between the rigrous method and the shortcut
methods for each stage are presented in Table 2, too. Table 2 indicates that excellent agreements are obtained for stages
1 and 2. However, larger deviations are obseved for the isetropic and polytropic exponents of stage 3 due to high pressure
operation which deviated too far from ideal gas state conditions.

Table 3. Summary of the rigorous and shortcut calculated results

Conclusions

Table 2 indicates that there are good agreements between the shortcut and the rigorous results. The differences between
the rigorous and shortcut method results for facilities calculations and planning purposes are negligible. For stage 3, due
to high-pressure operation and deviating too far from the ideal gas state condition, a larger error is observed for the
isentropic exponent (k).

The calculated isentropic exponent (k) in the ProMax [5] is not the ideal gas state heat capacity (CP/CV) ratio. It is the
value of the isentropic exponent that is required to yield an isentropic path from inlet to outlet. Its value is calculated as an
integration of that path. Thus it is somewhat of an “average” value representing the true isentropic path. For ideal gases,
the value would be equal (CP/CV) ratio.

This error in ‘k’ also illustrates the importance of specifying which correlation is to be used when ordering a performance
test (ie, refer to ASME PTC-10 for additional details), so that client and vendor are on the same agreement moving
forwards with regard to molecular weight (MW) and k for the test fluid. For further detail refer to reference [6] and August
and September 2010 TOTMs [7, 8].

It may also be worth noting that when trending ‘n’ and the polytropic efficiency to evaluate machine condition, the relative
accuracy of measurement instrument/equipment (temperature and pressure transducers) and mapping of compressor
performance to the original performance curve (actual gas volume flow rate vs speed), introduces many potential
erroneous sources into this daily evaluation.

Note that the accuracy of the shortcut methods is dependent on the values of k and n. The definition of average
temperature in the shortcut method was adjusted to obtain a better match between the isentropic path exponent (k)
calculated by rigorous method.

To learn more about similar cases and how to minimize operational problems, we suggest attending our G4 (Gas
Conditioning and Processing), PF4 (Oil Production and Processing Facilities), ME46 (Compressor Systems–
Mechanical Design and Specifications) and ME44 (Fundamentals of Pump and Compressors Systems), courses.

PetroSkills offers consulting expertise on this subject and many others. For more information about these services, visit
our website at http://petroskills.com/consulting, or email us at consulting@PetroSkills.com.

Dr. Mahmood Moshfeghian

Reference:

1. Maddox, R. N. and L. L. Lilly, “Gas conditioning and processing, Volume 3: Advanced Techniques and Applications,”
John M. Campbell and Company, 2nd Ed., Norman, Oklahoma, USA, 1990.

2. Campbell, J.M., Gas Conditioning and Processing, Volume 2: The Equipment Modules, 9th Edition, 2nd Printing, Editors
Hubbard, R. and Snow–McGregor, K., Campbell Petroleum Series, Norman, Oklahoma, 2014.

3. Soave, G., Chem. Eng. Sci., Vol. 27, pp. 1197-1203, 1972.

4. Peng, D. Y., and Robinson, D. B., Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam., Vol. 15, p. 59, 1976.

5. ProMax 3.2, Bryan Research and Engineering, Inc, Bryan, Texas, 2014.

6. ASME PTC-10, “Performance test Code on Compressors and Exhausters”, 1997.

7. Honeywell, J. “Important Aspects of Centrifugal Compressor Testing-Part 1”, Tip of the Month, August 2010

8. Honeywell, J. “Important Aspects of Centrifugal Compressor Testing-Part 2”, Tip of the Month, September 2010

Tweet Did you enjoy this post? Do you have a question?

Leave us a Comment below!

Want to read more articles like this?

Subscribe to our RSS Feed or visit the Tip of the Month Archives
for past articles.

Posted on July 1, 2015 at 12:00 am

23 comments

Categories: Gas Processing, Mechanical, Pipeline, Process Facilities

Recieve new post updates: Entries (RSS)

Recieve follow up comments updates: RSS 2.0

Written by Dr. Mahmood Moshfeghian

DR. MAHMOOD MOSHFEGHIAN is a Senior Technical Advisor and Senior Instructor. He is the author of most Tips of the
Month and develops technical software for PetroSkills. He has 40 years teaching experience in universities as well as for
oil and gas industries. Dr. Moshfeghian joined JMC in 1990 as a part time consultant and then as full time
instructor/consultant in 2005. Moshfeghian was Professor of Chemical Engineering at Shiraz University. Dr. Moshfeghian
is a senior member of AIChE and has published more than 125 technical papers on thermodynamic properties and
Process Engineering. Dr. Moshfeghian has presented invited papers in international conferences. He is a member of the
Editorial Board for the International Journal of Oil, Gas, and Coal Technology and a member of the GPSA Technical
Committee Group F. He holds B.S. (74), M.S. (75) and and PhD (78) degrees in Chemical Engineering, all from Oklahoma
State University.

View all posts by: Dr. Mahmood Moshfeghian

« Previous post

Next Post »

23 responses to “How to Estimate Compressor Efficiency?”

1. Paul says:
August 31, 2015 at 7:11 am

thanks for the article,

I would also mention that rigorous methods (based on interpolated values such as ASME PTC-10 or numerical
integration pin->pout such as Huntington etc.) consider non-contant values for properties from pin->pout,
these variations may originate large errors (see the example provided in Huntington’s paper),
finally, a procedure can also consider phase equilibria, I know Prode Properties (see
http://www.prode.com/docs/pppman.pdf) which includes both Huntington and a proprietary method for solving a
polytropic stage with phase equilibria,
when there is a change of phase it is difficult to evaluate and adopt a value for efficiency in different conditions…

2. Francis says:
December 28, 2015 at 9:30 am

Please may I know the equation seven. I cannot find the formula for calculating the polytropic path exponent(n).
Please can u write the formula for calculating polytropic path exponent

Laurent says:
February 25, 2016 at 8:37 am

There is an obvious mistake in (7) when you inverse (6).

Dr. Mahmood Moshfeghian says:

February 27, 2016 at 9:54 am

Laurent:
You are correct, both temperature and pressure ratios should have been ln(T2/T1) and ln(P2/P1).
Thanks.

3. Daniel says:
April 22, 2016 at 3:51 am

Hello, used these equations with preos… did not work, gave me an efficiency of 4000…

4. Ray Fang says:

April 25, 2016 at 9:32 pm

Contact us to learn about CAE350

CAE350 compressor analyzing system is a low cost portable system to test the capacity,power efficiency and unit
air consumption of the compressor

Contact with fangliang@comatemeter.com to know more

5. Panos says:
June 17, 2016 at 4:19 pm

Here is the link of a new article, which describes the rigorous calculation of the polytropic efficiency based on
thermodynamics of real gases. A comparison with data shown on this website (!) can also be found, under:

http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/tjj.ahead-of-print/tjj-2016-0029/tjj-2016-0029.xml?format=INT

Arif says:
November 2, 2016 at 12:55 pm

Panos, the link does not work

Arif says:
November 2, 2016 at 12:56 pm

Panos, nothing works as the link

6. Norman Day says:

September 7, 2016 at 3:21 pm

Please calculate or estimate overall efficiency of the following

AIR
5.4 bore
6.5 stroke
1800-2400 RPM
mechanical valves
from a Caterpillar 3406 Diesel engine

7. Norman Day says:

September 7, 2016 at 3:25 pm

Please calculate or estimate overall efficiency of;

AIR
BORE 5.4 INCHES
STROKE 6.5 INCHES
1800-2400 RPM
Mechanical valves
Caterpillar 3406 Diesel Engine
is 85% practical?

8. TRILOK SINGH says:

February 19, 2017 at 5:22 am
 How to calculated throughput efficiency of a gas compressor?

9. TRILOK SINGH says:

February 19, 2017 at 5:23 am

How to calculate throughput efficiency of a gas compressor?

10. Rodney A. Olsen says:

April 21, 2017 at 5:15 am

Compressor efficiency is very important factor for any business. Thanks for sharing this detailed calculations.

http://www.zahroofvalves.com

11. Faisal says:

May 1, 2017 at 5:55 am

I built an air compressor with a quick return mechanism and a bike pump. So obviously it is a single stage
compressor. But for the calculation of efficiency should I follow these equations? If I want to neglect the
temperature change(too low) which equations should I follow?

M. Azarakhshi says:
July 1, 2017 at 8:30 am

dear Faisal, you want to neglect temperature change?

in other words you mean fixed temp., => isohermal? or P.v = const.

12. Greg Janse van Vuuren says:

May 17, 2017 at 1:32 pm

These “Tip of the month” pages are really insightful.

Would these equation work for an oil injected twin rotary screw compressor?

13. prathima says:

July 4, 2017 at 3:48 am

when I try to calculate the polytropic exponent with the T1 = 40.6, T2 = 129.4, P1 = 793.1, P2 = 2275.9 the n =
1.808666. but in the table the value is n = 1.3097. Please clarify me why i am getting wrong.

14. Ankit says:

August 17, 2017 at 2:27 am

I tried using the same formulas for calculating the compressor efficiency but results are good in one case but in
other cases error is more than 20 %.

Efficiency was calculated for high pressure compressor with suction pressure 60 kg/cm2.

Please suggest the reason for varying answers.

15. nurse says:

September 5, 2017 at 8:23 am

I ⅼove уour blⲟg.. very nice colors & theme.

Did you design this weЬsite yourself оr did yоu hire someone t᧐ do it
for you? Plz reply as I’m looking to create my own blog and would like
to find out wһere u got this from. kսdos

16. M.Haris says:

December 1, 2017 at 11:59 pm

can anyone please help that how to calculate the efficiency of rotary screw air compressor..????

17. Martin says:

June 14, 2018 at 3:40 pm

Hi, The A in case of air, what is the value?

Dr. Mahmood Moshfeghian says:

June 18, 2018 at 9:38 am

The correlation of heat capacity ratio (Eq 3) is valid for light hydrocarbon mixtures. It is not valid for air. Air
heat capacity ratio is about 1.4 in the range of -40 deg F to 200 deg F.

Training Helpful Links Company Information

Public Courses Request Information Contact Us
In-House Courses Consulting Services About Us
Operator Training Tip of the Month Job Postings
Online Course Previews Campbell Forums Testimonials
HGPA Educational Sessions Conversion Tool Download Catalog (PDF)
Course Schedule John M. Campbell & Co. Books Request Catalog
Oil and Gas Training GCAP Software Instructor Bios
Facilities Engineering Training GCAP Mobile FAQ
Liquefied Natural Gas Training Continuing Education Credits Links
Petroleum Engineering Courses Follow us on Twitter Kindle Disclaimer

© John M. Campbell & Co.

1215 Crossroads Blvd.

Suite 230
Norman, OK. 73072