Performance Evaluation of a Centrifugal Compressor Operating under Wet Gas Conditions

This paper presents the results of performance testing of a single-stage centrifugal compressor operating under wet gas conditions. The test was performed at an oil and gas operator’s test facility and was executed at full-load and full-pressure conditions using a mixture of hydrocarbon gas and hydrocarbon condensate. The effect of liquid was investigated by changing the gas-volume fraction between 1.0 and 0.97, which covers the range encountered by the operator during regular gas/condensate field production in the North Sea. Other parameters that were evaluated include the 111 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF A CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSOR OPERATING UNDER WET GAS CONDITIONS by Lars Brenne Staff Engineer Tor Bjørge Staff Engineer Statoil ASA Trondheim, Norway José L. Gilarranz Senior Aero/Thermodynamics Engineer Jay M. Koch Staff Engineer, Aero/Thermodynamics and Harry Miller Product Manager, Marketing Dresser-Rand Company Olean, New York compressor test speed, the suction pressure, and two different liquid injection patterns. During the tests, the machine flowrate was varied from near surge to choke conditions; hence, the evaluation covered the entire operating range of the machine. Although the test was primarily intended to evaluate the effects of the wet gas on the thermodynamic performance of the machine, the mechanical performance was also investigated by measuring the machine vibration levels and noise signature during the baseline dry gas tests as well as during the tests with liquid injection. INTRODUCTION Centrifugal compressor packages utilized for upstream gas processing often must operate under wet gas conditions in which the fluid handled by the compression package contains a mixture of liquid and gaseous phases. Typically, the liquid components of the mixture are separated from the gas stream before they enter the compressor by the use of scrubbers and separators located upstream of the compressor inlet. These devices are very large and heavy, requiring a large “footprint” (amount of floor space) as compared to the gas compression package. A compressor with the ability to directly handle wet gas without the need for separation equipment is very attractive from an economic standpoint, as it would drastically reduce the size, weight, and cost of the gas compression package. For the case of future subsea compression systems, this capability is even more attractive because of the high costs of deploying a compressor train and all of its associated equipment under water. Wet gas compression (WGC) technology represents new opportunities for enhanced, cost-effective production from existing and future gas/condensate fields. Many oil and gas operators face future challenges in tail-end production, unmanned operation, and improved recovery from topside and subsea wells. This emphasizes the need to develop more robust compression systems, which can be designed for remote operation in unmanned topside installations, or could be designed for subsea operation for reinjection and/or transport boosting. The use of this technology for subsea boosting represents a new and exciting application for rotating equipment, which will allow new gas/condensate field production opportunities as well as enhanced recovery of existing gas/condensate fields and cost-effective production from marginal gas fields. As mentioned above, these wet gas compression systems could be based on the use of a liquid tolerant dry gas compressor, which could boost a coarsely separated (via a scrubber) well-stream, however, an even more attractive solution would be the development of compression systems that can boost the well-stream directly. Many research projects and product qualification programs are currently underway to develop such a system either by modifying existing multiphase pump technology or by the adaptation of currently available gas compression technologies (Scott, 2004). Regardless of the choice of concept, the compressor solution should be able to tolerate liquid ingestion for an extended time without failure. For the case of subsea applications, the high cost associated with the retrieval of the compressor from the sea floor accentuates the importance of a reliable design. The work presented herein served as an initial test to verify the multiphase boosting capabilities of a centrifugal compressor as well as to provide an oil and gas operator with data to compare the performance of this technology with other available wet gas compression concepts. It is important to state that the test compressor used for this investigation was not originally designed for wet gas boosting, nonetheless it provided an economically viable test bed for centrifugal compressor technology. DESCRIPTION OF TEST VEHICLE The test vehicle used for this work was a barrel-type, singlestage compressor, manufactured by the coauthors’ company. Said compressor was equipped with a high-head impeller, with a diameter of 0.384 m (1.26 ft), and a design flow coefficient of 0.02380. The compressor was originally designed to handle an inlet flow of 4332 Kg/min [2167 Am3/hr (76,526.88 ft3/hr)] of dry hydrocarbon gas (molecular weight of 18.49), with an inlet pressure of 130.2 bar (1888.4 psi)and a discharge pressure of 161.8 bar (2346.7 psi). Figure 1 shows a cross-section of the test compressor; the inlet and discharge nozzles are located at a 45 degree angle with respect to the top dead center of the machine. The original design of this machine, which dates to 1986, was not intended for wet gas service, and hence the internal geometry was not optimal. Nevertheless, in order to increase the reliability of the machine, the original rotor design was modified to accommodate an electron-beam welded and vacuum furnace brazed impeller with a shrink fit to the shaft. The rest of the machine remained the same (i.e., casing and stationary components). This compressor was equipped with a vaneless diffuser configuration. Figure 1. Cross-Section of the Test Compressor. The compressor was driven by a 2.8 MW synchronous electric motor, through a speed increasing gearbox, with a gear ratio of 6.607. A variable speed drive permitted the operation of the compressor within its speed range of 6000 to 13,000 rpm. The test compressor is utilized in the coauthor’s closed loop test facility, and was equipped to simulate the conditions expected for a centrifugal compressor operating under wet gas conditions. Figure 2 shows a schematic diagram of the test loop that was used for the evaluations. The major components of the test loop included a scrubber, the test compressor, a pump, a cooler, and a liquid injection module (mixer). The scrubber, here called guard separator, was used to separate the dry gas (saturated hydrocarbon mixture) from the liquid (hydrocarbon condensate) in order to permit accurate measurement of the massflow of each stream (liquid and gas). The liquid stream was measured with a Coriolis flowmeter while the gas stream was measured with a calibrated orifice plate. Figure 2. Schematic Diagram of the Wet Gas Test Loop. PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRTY-FOURTH TURBOMACHINERY SYMPOSIUM • 2005 112 Variable Speed Electric Motor (MW) Gas Flow 2 Phase Flow Condensate