화학공학소재연구정보센터
홈 로그인 로그아웃 연락처 사이트맵
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol.33, No.3, 764-774, March, 2016
DOI10.1007/s11814-015-0219-3  Export Citation
Case study of surge avoidance design for centrifugal compressor systems during emergency shut-down (ESD)
Se-jin Pak, Ju Woung Yoon, Seojin Kim, Felicia Salim, Jaihyo Lee1, and In-Won Kim†
  • Department of Chemical Engineering, Konkuk University, 120, Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 05029, Korea
  • 1Department of Mechanical Engineering, Konkuk University, 120, Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 05029, Korea
E-mail:
Compression systems with centrifugal compressors are widely used in gas involving processes. Surge protection system design is crucial in avoiding any damage in abnormal circumstances such as emergency shutdown (ESD), start-up, coast-down operation, and normal shutdown. We analyzed four cases of existing centrifugal compressor systems, three CO2 compression systems and one off-gas compression system, to study the surge protection availability during ESD. All compression systems were working well at normal operating condition, but some systems could not avoid surge during ESD. To check the surge cases, the surge criteria flowchart was suggested and surge analysis through dynamic simulation was done using a commercial process simulator. To avoid a surge during ESD, a sensitivity analysis was done while considering the following process parameters: pre-stroke time, anti-surge valve (ASV) type, capacity, and stroke time. We optimized ASV design using response surface method with two selected parameters from the sensitivity study, ASV capacity and stroke time. Finally, the installation of the hot gas recycle system was analyzed to avoid surge occurrence.
Keywords:Compression System;Compressor Surge;Emergency Shutdown (ESD);Surge Protection;Dynamic Simulation
  1. Gas Machinery Research Council and Southwest Research Institute, Application guideline for centrifugal compressor surge control systems (2008).
  2. Gravdahl JT, Egeland O, Vatland SO, Automatica, 38(11), 1881 (2002)
  3. Patel V, Feng J, Dasgupta S, Ramdoss P, Wu J, Proceedings of the 36th Turbomachinery Symposium, 95 (2007).
  4. Dunkle N, Narayanan K, Validating anti-surge control systems, PTQ (2003).
  5. Bohagen B, Gravdahl JT, Automatica, 44(4), 1135 (2008)
  6. Kurz R, White RC, Pipeline Simulation Interest Group, PSIG 0913 (2009).
  7. Galindo J, Serrano JR, Guardiola C, Cervello C, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., 30, 449 (2006)
  8. Aramco S, Engineering standards-Centrifugal compressors, Compressors, Gears and Steam Turbines Standards Committee (2012).
  9. Tauveron N, Nucl. Eng. Des., 238, 2925 (2007)
  10. Mahgerefteh H, Saha P, Economou IG, Process Saf. Environ. Protect., 75(4), 201 (1997)
  11. Botros KK, Richards DJ, The 11th Symposium on Industrial Applications of Gas Turbines, Canada Gas Association (1995).
  12. Botros KK, Ganesan ST, Proceedings of the 37th Turbomachinery Symposium (2008).
  13. McKee RJ, Garcia-Hernandez A, Pipeline Simulation Interest Group, PSIG 0707 (2007).
  14. Botros KK, Jungowski WM, Richards DJ, J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 118, 641 (1996)
  15. Brateck W, Botros K, Pipeline Gas J., 240 (2013)
  16. Morini M, Pinelli M, Venturini M, Appl. Energy, 86(11), 2466 (2009)
  17. Mongomery DC, Runger GC, Hubele NF, Engineering Statistics (5th Ed.), Wiley (2012).
  18. Su H, Wang X, Kim YG, Kim SB, Seo YG, Kim JS, Kim CJ, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 31(11), 2070 (2014)
  19. Daoud W, Ebadi T, Fahimifar A, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 32(6), 1119 (2015)