Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2012

GT2012
June 11-15, 2012, Copenhagen, Denmark

GT2012-70072
DYNAMIC PIPELINE SYSTEM SIMULATION OF MULTI-STAGE COMPRESSOR
TRAINS
Augusto Garcia-Hernandez
Southwest Research Institute
San Antonio, Texas, USA
Phone: 210-522-5693
Email: agarciahernandez@swri.org

Theodore Sean Tavares

Southwest Research Institute
San Antonio, Texas, USA
Phone: 210-522-6544
Email: t.tavares@swri.org

ABSTRACT
An oil and gas company was facing process and
mechanical related problems on the multiple-stage compressor
trains at two important booster installations. The frequency of
these problems has increased lately, and this has led to frequent
trips and shut downs. These interruptions affect the operation of
the plant leading to a loss in production and consequences of
lost revenue for the company. The two platforms each contain
one compressor train comprising a four-stage compressor with
a gas turbine driver. Each train is fitted with an integrated
turbine compressor control panel.
Thus, a detailed dynamic pipeline system simulation of the
subject compressor trains was performed in order to provide a
series of recommendations that would improve the safe
operation and increase the reliability of the compression
systems. The analysis included a review of the existing
compression systems including all the equipment and hardware
related with the compression anti-surge system. In addition, a
site visit was performed to review and understand the existing
anti-sure control system at each facility. A detailed dynamic
model of the multi-stage compression system was built for each
train. These models included compressor performance maps,
gas compositions for each stage and train, piping yard, recycle,
isolation, check and blowdown valves, scrubbers, separators,
and coolers.
Several simulation cases were conducted for both the
platform systems. These cases evaluated the effect of the delay
and travel times of the existing anti-surge valves, delay the
coast down action, failure of the non-return valves (NRVs),
action of a blowdown valve on the emergency shutdown (ESD)
sequences, recycle valve bypasses, check valve arrays, and
process upset conditions. In addition, parametric studies were
conducted for each of the most important parameters of the
system to quantify their effect of any possible modification.

Melissa Wilcox
Southwest Research Institute
San Antonio, Texas, USA
Phone: 210-522-6046
Email: melissa.wilcox@swri.org

The results of this analysis provide recommendations to

solve some of the existing issues while understanding more of
the dynamics of the system. It was found that any propose
recommendation or change in the sequence or timing of one
stage will affect the surrounding stages since they are not only
connected through the piping as they are driven by the same gas
turbine shaft. Therefore, a very comprehensive analysis was
conducted for each train to provide recommendations that
would be feasible for implementation while reducing the
constant risk of mechanical failure and surge events. Thus,
results of the analysis and some of the recommendations
obtained are presented in this paper.
INTRODUCTION
Multi-stage compressors are being used very frequently
due to their high performance characteristics. Currently, a vast
variety of applications are present in the industry for these
machines. In many cases, the different stages are located in one
solid body structure, while in other applications the multiple
stages are separated in various bodies or barrels. Another key
feature of the multi-stage units is the driver and connection
used to power them which can vary from gas turbines to
internal combustion engines to electric motors. Moreover, the
flexibility to have one driver that can power all the stages
provides some critical space-power-cost advantages. In any
system, inter-stage cooling is required to improve the process
efficiency and maintain the operating condition within
acceptable limits; thus, this typically is accomplished with
inline or back-to-back coolers.
For the case presented in this paper, a four-stage
centrifugal compressor train barrel type is driven by a gas
turbine; thus, all the stages are connected through a common
shaft. Mechanical couplings are installed between the GT driver
and the multi-stage compressor. Each stage has its own
dedicated anti-surge loop and cooling system. The trains are fed
with gas from different production fields and the design flow

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

and compression ratios are different for each stage. Moreover,

some stages are fed through more than one stream at a time.
The compressor trains have low pressure (LP), medium
pressure (MP) and high pressure (HP) stages and each one of
them includes a suction scrubber, cooler, recycle loop, and
blowdown line. In addition, each train is fitted with an
integrated turbine compressor control panel.
Those two compressor trains are used to boost the pressure
of natural gas coming from off-shore production fields to an onland processing facility. Thus, they are key components of the
production process; moreover, any unexpected shutdown or
failure can originate upset conditions that will affect the
production process and the performance of the producing wells.
In the past, those units have presented different types of
mechanical and control failures. Therefore, a detailed analysis
of the system was required to mitigate the process and control
issues. Thus, the two multi-stage compressor trains were
dynamically analyzed to determine if their anti-surge logic and
controls were operating properly. In addition, it was very
critical to understand and deeply evaluate the interaction of the
different stages with their surrounding stages and components,
since minor changes in one stage will affect the transient
behavior of the neighboring stages.
The analysis of each compression train presented in this
paper was carried out using commercially available pipeline/
process simulation software [1] coupled with detailed models
for the system components tailored for the particular
application by the authors.
The techniques used in this work are based upon a large
body of previous work devoted to understanding and modeling
the complex dynamic interaction between compressor
equipment and associated piping. The state of the art in this
area is well represented in various publications [2, 3, 4]. These
references also cite an extensive body of work containing both
the conceptual ideas upon which these techniques are based,
their numerical implementation, and their experimental
validation using both laboratory and field data. Two of the
earlier underlying works include that of Wylie et al. [5]
involving use of the method of characteristics in numerical
calculations of transient flow in pipelines and that of Sparks [6]
describing transient behavior of centrifugal compressors
coupled to piping systems.
The focus of the current study was to identify changes to
piping and valves that would avoid damaging surge events
during emergency shutdown (ESD) events. Therefore, the
criterion was to keep the operating point of the compressor
away from the surge line at least until speed had bled off to
where surge energy would be low enough to avoid equipment
damage. For this reason, there was no need to model the
compressor at flows below the defined surge line.
Configurations for which the surge line was reached during
ESD, even in a transient manner, were rejected as valid design
candidates.

NOMENCLATURE
Non-return valve
Emergency shutdown
Low pressure
Medium pressure
High pressure
Gas turbine
Surge Control Line
Boost Line
Actual inlet flow (am3/hr)
Surge flow (m3/hr)
Compressor speed (rpm)
Surge flow at operating head
Compressor head
Flow coefficient
Power (kW)
Inertia (kg-m2)
Speed (rpm)
Time (s)
Compressor Torque (N-m)
Surge Margin
Operating Point
Turndown
Anti-Surge Valve

NRV
ESD
LP
MP
HP
GT
SCL
BL

H
Cv
P
J
N
t
T
SM
OP
TD
ASV

COMPUTATIONAL MODEL AND METHODOLOGY

The quantitative analysis of each compression train is
based on fluid simulation utilizing pipeline/process simulation
software. The software used is able to accurately model rapid
trips of centrifugal compressors. Moreover, this software has
been validated against real data and it has been used to model
very complex and large oil/gas systems. The Benedict-WebbRubin-Starling (BWRS) equation of state was used for the fluid
properties calculations considering the actual gases
compositions that feed the system. Two separate computational
models were built for the compression systems. Those models
accounted for the operation of recycle valves, their actuators,
vent valves, compressor coast down speed, and control system
responses, while including the effects of upstream and
downstream piping, scrubbers, after-coolers, series compressors
(multiple stages), and other features of the compressor
installation.
The computational model solves non-linear systems of
differential equations at each time step using the method of
characteristics [1]. Transient analysis consists of a linearized
solution of partial differential equations. In addition, an
optimum time step for the computations is automatically
determined by the software without sacrificing accuracy [1].
For the transient cases simulated in this study, the maximum
time step taken was one millisecond. This value was found to
be more than sufficient to accurately capture all the transient
behavior of the system.
The process of creating a system model consists of
reviewing available data for the system, creating a functional
process block diagram, developing a system model in the

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

pipeline software, running the simulation based on given initial

and boundary operating conditions, validating the model, and
post-processing and interpreting the results of the
computations. These computational models allow for the
evaluation and comparison of various conditions for a given
system, and also for the variation of characteristics of system
components such as valve responses and compressor operating
conditions. Thus, parametric studies of the main control
variable and elements such as anti-surge valve opening, signal
delays, and ESD sequences were conducted to determine in
which direction the possible system changes should be going
and how they will affect the entire train and compression
system [7, 8]. Figure 1 presents a typical diagram of the
compression trains and its main components.
MULTISTAGE CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSOR TRAIN
Anti-Surge Valve

Out Flow

Discharge
Header

Cooler

Suction
Header

Check
Valve
Scrubber

Gas Turbine
Driver

Flare

Low Pressure
Stage (LP)

Low Pressure
Stage (LP)

Medium Pressure
Stage (MP)

High Pressure
Stage (HP)

simulation of normal and off-design operating conditions. The

following boundary conditions were utilized; a flow boundary
condition was taken at the suction header while a pressure
boundary condition was considered at the discharge header. The
inlet flow boundary is adjusted by the flow control valves
located in the inlet multiphase separators that are part of the
upstream process. In addition, inlet and outlet flow boundary
conditions were incorporated, including different separators,
inputs, and outputs. All flow resistance elements were
considered to ensure the modeled system impedance was as
accurate as possible. The model for each compressor was
validated against steady-state data provided. To validate the
pipeline models of each compressor, steady-state flows,
temperatures, and pressures collected from each compressor, a
specified configuration was compared to that same
configuration replicated in the simulation. For the validation to
be complete, several different operating points needed to be
evaluated and data collected for each unique operating
condition. A baseline operating condition was used to tune the
hydraulic model and to account for losses, which are not
accounted for directly in the model. The simulation was run at
other operating points and compared to the reference data. This
analysis provides quantitative results as to the predictive
capability of the developed models.

Figure 1. Multi-stage Compressor Train Diagram

A large amount of detailed data was required in order to

develop an accurate and complete model of the centrifugal
compressors and their controls. The complete piping system
with lengths, diameters, and all branches or connections were
defined and input into the model builder. Details such as
volumes, lengths, and heat transfer surface areas were provided
for coolers, heaters, scrubbers, or filters. The rotational inertia
of the compressor trains and their drivers, along with the torque
characteristics of the drivers were needed so the rate of coast
down or start up could be simulated. In this case, the train
inertia was back calculated using a coast down data provided
from unit trip events. Thus, the rate of deceleration is
determined by the inertia of the train J (referenced to
compressor speed (N) for geared trains), any residual power
generated by the gas turbine (PGT,resid), the friction losses in
the system, and the power absorption of the compressor [3].

P Pcompr Pfrict PGT, resid T N J N

dN
(1)
dt

Solving Eq. 1 for steady-state power and speed at the

initial operating point and assuming a constant Q/N Eq. 1 yields
the following expression for the speed decay:
3

N (t )

J No
2
J N o Po t

(2)

Table 1. Comparison between the Model Predictions and the

Provided Data

STAGEILPPoint#2
PARAMETERS/COMPRESSOR
STONER Relative
STAGE
Reported
Calculated Difference
ValuesLP
Values
(%)
InletConditions
Pressure(bara)
Temperature(C)
MolecularWeight(kg/kmol)
SpecificGravity()
Compressibility(Z1)
InletActualVolume(m3/h)
StandardFlow(SCMH)
Density(kg/m3)
MassFlowRate(kg/s)

1.02
42.78
45.21
1.561
0.985
5381
5025.4
1.782
2.66

1.02
42.78
45.21
1.561
0.985
5466
5004.0
1.778
2.70

0.000
0.000
0.000
0.008
0.000
1.572
0.426
0.245
1.323

4.453
112.7
0.967

4.453
110.587
0.967

0.000
1.875
0.000

92.8
72.7
10739.1
344.3

0.045
0.411
0.000
1.662

AverageRelativeDifferenceAllParameters(%)

0.562

DischargeConditions
Pressure(bara)
Temperature(C)
Compressibility(Z2)

ReportedCompressorOperatingConditions
PolytropicHead(KJ/Kg)
PolytropicEfficiency(%)
Speed(RPM)
Power(Kw)

92.8
73
10739.1
338.7

The normal and upset condition pressures, temperatures,

flows, and gas compositions were included. A complete
compressor map was prepared and input to the model for the

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

The computed percentage differences between the supplied

data and quantities computed by the models are seen to be quite
small and serve to confirm the accuracy with which the system
behavior was modeled. The differences between the developed
model and the data are between 0.9% and 1.8% for both
systems. For each point, a relative difference was calculated for
each parameter provided, as shown in Table 1, while the total
uncertainty of an operating point was defined as the average
summation of all the parameters uncertainty, Eq. 3. Thus, the
model uncertainty was computed as the average of multiple
operating points uncertainties. An example of the comparison
between the model and the data is presented in Table 1. This
process was repeated for at least five different operating points
at steady-state conditions, to determine the average total
difference or computational uncertainty for each model.
n

U flow U pressure Uhead Uspeed Utemp ........Un

Up
1

sequences and coast down speed of the compressor. The values

of control parameters such as Surge Control Line (SCL) and
Boost Line (BL) were based on the existing compressor
configuration.
The different analyses were classified based on parametric
studies carried out for different variables such as ASV opening
time, signal delay time, and flow coefficients. The general
concept is to identify areas where small changes in the existing
system could drive the compressor to a safer operation while
avoiding surge events. For each simulation, run control
parameters (such as Surge Margin (SM, Eq. 4), Operating Point
(OP, Eq. 5), and Turndown (TD, Eq. 6) were monitored and
used to quantify the benefits of the evaluated changes.

(3)

DYNAMIC SIMULATION ANALYSIS

Simulations of the compressor were focused on various
operational conditions identified to be of interest for the
performance improvement study. Transient sequences were
initiated from design, minimum, and other normal flow
conditions, since they represented the most critical scenarios for
a compressor shutdown. Unit emergency shutdown (ESD)
sequences were simulated to determine if the units go through
surge and also how stable they were while they were
undergoing coast down. In addition, anti-surge control logic
function and parameters were programmed into the model
logic. Thus, typical process upset conditions such as sudden
loss of a separator or flow and pressure changes were
simulated. A very critical situation occurs when centrifugal
compressors go through surge, which is the flow reversal within
the compressor that originates high fluctuating loads and
vibrations that could damage the compressor [9, 10, and 11]. So
the main objective of the simulations is to find out how the
compressors behave during critical upset conditions such as
ESD. In addition, it is very important to verify that the
compressors surge margins during normal operation are
sufficient to avoid any surge phenomenon. However, if the
surge margin reaches a stipulated value of 10%, it is expected
that the anti-surge control opens the recycle valve; thus, the
flow through the compressor increases and the pressure ratio
decreases.
Several emergency shutdown simulations were completed
on the model of the multi-stage compressor and piping systems.
These were simulated at the provided operating conditions. The
same starting operating conditions were used for all
simulations. The simulations investigated the sensitivity of
various parameters in the surge control systems, such as recycle
valve opening times, recycle valve sizes, delay of opening of
recycle valves, and the effects of the opening time of the
blowdown valve. Thus, the anti-surge system control
parameters were built into the simulation as well as the ESD

(4)

(5)

(6)

Different levels of ESD events were simulated for both of

the compressor train systems since different valves delay times
(to begin opening and closing) existed for the various types of
ESDs. The main differences between the ESD sequences were
in the delay to open a specific recycle valve in the entire train
and the depressurization of a particular stage or all stages. In
addition, four other variations in the ESD sequence were
considered in order to find solutions to the surging of the
compression system during an ESD event: 1) Varying the valve
delays and opening times, 2) delaying the coast down of the
compressors, 3) adding an additional line and valve on the
second and third stage recycle lines (referred to as hot bypass),
and 4) combining the coast down delay and hot bypass on the
second stage.
CASE RESULTS
Since it was very critical to evaluate, understand, and
quantify the existing systems issues and their effect on the
process, a series of simulation analyses were conducted first for
the existing configuration. In addition, it was vital to
understand how the different stages and their diverse
components were acting as a whole system, since any minor
change in operation of one stage anti-surge valve (such as
opening time, or relocation of the check valve) would affect the
behavior of the entire train. The system dynamics was very
sensitive to changes; for example a minor modification of
approximately 5% in the flow coefficient of the third stage
(MP) anti-surge valve would cause the fourth stage (HP) to
surge during an ESD. Similarly, increasing the flow coefficient
of the anti-surge valve would allow more flow through its
recycle line during the initial few milliseconds of opening,
which would cause a sudden decrease in the suction flow of the

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

SurgeMarginforeachCompressorStageduringESDEvent
60

50

SurgeMargin(%)

last stage (HP) until the actuation of the check valve; thus, the
rate of head change versus flow (dH/dQ) of the HP stage would
decrease drastically making the compressor move much faster
toward the surge line. In addition, any change in the impedance
of the system will affect the initial reaction of any stage, since
the pressure waves that originate when the machine is
shutdown travel in the system based on its impedance. Thus,
the systems impedance can affect the initial dH/dQ behavior of
the compressor until the system flow resistance starts
dominating the movement of the gas flow [2, 12].

40

30

20

Existing System
An ESD event was simulated for the existing configuration
in which the compressor started to shutdown (speed ramped
down) at 0 seconds. The valves opened and closed according to
their specified timing. The anti-surge valve opening events are
shown in Figure 2. The surging of the compressor occurs within
the first 1 to 2 seconds after shutdown, and the blow down and
isolation valves do not start to actuate until after this time.
Thus, it was found that the first few milliseconds were very
decisive for the existing anti-surge configuration.
AntiSurgeValvesOpeningversusTimeduringanESD
110
100
90

ValveOpening(%)

80
70
60
50

SM_S1:VAL
SM_S2:VAL
SM_S3:VAL
SM_S4:VAL

10

0
0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1.25

1.5

1.75

2.25

2.5

2.75

3.25

3.5

Time(s)

Figure 3. Surge Margin Values during an ESD Event for the

Existing Configuration

Figure 3 shows the surge margin of the four stages of the

compressor during the ESD. In this figure, it is clear that both
the second and third stages surged. The ESD is shown to have
little effect on the operating point of the first stage. This is most
likely due to two factors: 1) the recycle valve of the first stage
was already opened to a fraction of 31% at the beginning of the
ESD event, and 2) the first stage recycle valve is the first valve
that opens during an ESD event and has the quickest opening
time. All of these factors reduce the effect of the compressor
shutdown on the surging of the first stage. The first stage had a
minimum surge margin of 18.4% during the transient
simulation, which is considered acceptable.

40
30
20

ASVStage1
ASVStage2
ASVStage3
ASVStage4

10
0
0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1.25

1.5

1.75

2.25

2.5

2.75

3.25

3.5

Time(s)

Figure 2. Anti-Surge Valves Opening during an ESD Event for the

Existing Configuration

The second and third compressor stages experienced a

surge event during the simulated ESD for the existing antisurge configuration. Those two stages presented the slowest
opening time and the longest signal delay. Thus, they did not
have sufficient flow to recover from the rapid speed reduction
that originated during the ESD. Moreover, as soon as the fourth
stage started drawing more flow it affected the dH/dQ behavior
of the second and third stages, since the dQ component
decreased rapidly. Thus, the compressors move to the surge
condition quickly.
Contrary to the other stages, the flow and head in the
second and third stages reduced rapidly bringing the
compressors to a surge condition. It was observed that the antisurge valves of both units were not able to divert sufficient flow
to the suction of the compressor stage during the transient.
Moreover, the second stage valve has the slowest travel time
and the third stage valve has the longest delay time. Thus, those
conditions affect the behavior of the system, since the high
pressure energy is maintained in the discharge of both units for
a longer period of time during the coast-down of the unit.
Therefore, the lack of enough flow in the suction side and the
high energy present at the discharge (head) during the transient
event cause a harsh surge condition in both compressor stages,
which are not acceptable even for a small period of time.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

During a simulated rapid shutdown, the speed of the

compressor, the head across the compressor, and the flow
through the compressor decreased. If the surge line is crossed at
a relatively low head, the surge or flow upset at the compressor
will be mild and the surge control will be considered
successful. On the other hand, if the surge line is crossed at a
relatively high head, then the surge or fluid driven forces acting
on the compressor will be significant, and the surge avoidance
will not be considered satisfactory.
Therefore, the current anti-surge design was not sufficient
to protect the compressor train when it experienced an ESD
event from a normal operating condition. Thus, a new system
design was required.
Parametric Study and Modification of ESD Logic
In order to propose feasible solutions or modifications of
the anti-surge system, several variables and scenarios were
analyzed. The first step in the analysis was to conduct a
parametric study of the opening and delay times of the antisurge valves, delay of the gas turbine fuel cut-off signal, and
timing of the blowdown valves. Figure 4 shows typical
parametric study results. In this case, the second stage antisurge valve opening time was varied up to 200% (3 seconds)
from its current value and then various ESD simulations were
conducted. The results of this parametric study indicated that a
slower stroke second stage valve, combined with a coast down
delay of 100 milliseconds, would reduce the surge margin of
the second stage by almost 50% during ESD, while slightly
increasing the surge margin of the third and first stages by
approximately 2% and 1%, respectively.

opening times on the second and third stages to avoid surge; all
stages avoided surge with the proposed timing. The surge
avoidance on the second and third stages was marginal. A
second modification in the anti-surge logic introduced a coastdown delay of the compressor unit; thus, all stages avoided
surge when the compressor shutdown was delayed by
1.15 seconds. The surge avoidance on the second stage was
marginal. Another option evaluated was to implement hot
bypasses in some of the stages. In this option, the original valve
timing was used and additional recycle valves were added in
parallel to the recycle valves on the second and third stages
(referred to as hot bypass valves). Several cases were presented
where surge was avoided. However, in the majority of these
cases the surge avoidance was considered marginal. One case
was presented where the surge margin was considered
acceptable. This included the use of a 6 and 3-inch quick
opening valve on the second and third stages, respectively.
A final option blended two of the previously evaluated
options in one; a compressor coast-down delay and hot bypass.
This sequence took advantage of both the coast down delay and
a hot bypass valve on the second stage. Surge was avoided with
a coast down delay of 0.5 seconds and a second stage hot
bypass valve with a flow coefficient (Cv) equivalent to a 4-inch
valve. The surge with this delay and valve was considered
marginal. The surge avoidance was found to be better with a
coast down delay of 0.75 seconds and a second stage hot
bypass valve of 4-inch as presented in Figure 5. Typical inlet
and outlet temperature and pressure conditions used as the
initial steady-state for the transient events are presented in
Table 1 of the appendix section.
SurgeMarginforeachCompressorStageduringESDEventwith
theCoastDownDelayandHotBypass

SecondStageAntiSurgeValveOpeningTimeParametricStudy
CompressorShutdownDelayof100Milliseconds
60

22.5
50

20.0
17.5

SurgeMargin(%)

Minimum SurgeMarginReachedduringanESD(%)

25.0

15.0
12.5
10.0

40

30

20

7.5
5.0
2.5
0.0
1.50

SM_S1:VAL
SM_S2:VAL
SM_S3:VAL
SM_S4:VAL

10

LPS1
LPS2
MPS3
HPS4

0
0

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

0.5

3.25

1.5

2.5

3.5

Time(s)

2ndStageAntiSurgeValveOpening Time(s)

Figure 5. Coastdown Delay and Hot Bypass Option Results

Figure 4. Parametric Study for the Second Stage Anti-Surge Valve

Opening Time including a Coastdown delay of 100 Milliseconds

Results from the different parametric studies indicated the

most critical scenarios to be analyzed for the entire train, as
well as the best direction for any proposed change or
modification. Therefore, modified sequences and alternatives
were simulated and analyzed for the compressor trains. The
first modified sequence involved changing valve delay and

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Blowdown and Check Valves Effect

CompressorTrain2nd StageMapwithDifferentSequences
90

Several simulations were completed in order to determine

the effect of the main blowdown valve opening time on the
surge margin of the compressor stages. The first alternate case
was used to determine the effect of a short valve delay on the
surge margins of each compressor stage. The second alternate
case investigated the effects of a short valve opening time on
the surging of the compressor stages. In all cases simulated, the
ESD sequence with a 0.75 second coast down delay and
inclusion of a hot bypass valve on the second stage was used.

80

PolytropicHead(kJ/kg)

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
4000

ExistingESDSequence
ModifiedValveTiming
CoastdownDelay
HotBypass
Coastdown+HotBypass
6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

22000

InletFlow(am3/hr)

Figure 6. 2nd Stage Compressor Map with Decel Paths for

Different Sequences

Figure 6 and Figure 7 show each of the five sequences

discussed above on the compressor maps for the second and
third stages. Based on the results of these studies, it is
recommended that either the hot bypass sequence (use of 6 and
3-inch quick opening valves with 1.2 and 1.5 seconds on
second and third stages, respectively) or a combination of a
coast down delay and hot bypass on the second stage
compressor be implemented. In addition, it was observed that
the implementation of the hot bypass will affect the neighbor
stages, since it will produce a quick drop of the discharge
pressure of one stage as well as the suction pressure of the
following stage as observed in Figure 6 where the coast down
delay and the hot bypass combined effect is in the middle. In
this case, the hot bypass option of the 2nd stage is diminishing
the positive effect of the coast down delay.
CompressorTrain3rd StageMapwithDifferentSequences
140

PolytropicHead(kJ/kg)

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
2000

ExistingESDSequence
ModifiedValveTiming
CoastdownDelay
HotBypass
Coastdown+HotBypass
3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

11000

InletFlow(am3/hr)

Figure 7. 3rd Stage Compressor Map with Decel Paths for Different
Sequences

The results of these simulations indicate that the first and

second stages were not affected by the change of timing on the
main blowdown valve. This was expected since the valve is
located on the blow down line at the suction of the fourth stage
compressor. The third stage was slightly affected by the delay
opening time of the valve. When the valve had a 0.5 second
delay, the surge characteristics of the third stage compressor
slightly improved. The minimum surge margin point increased
to 17.2% from 15.4%. The third stage was not affected by the
short opening time of the valve simulated in the second case.
The minimum operating point on the fourth stage slightly
decreased when the main blowdown valve opened with a 0.5
second delay. However, the decrease experienced (4.3%) was
not considered significant since the fourth stage has an
adequate surge margin. The fourth stage was not affected by the
short opening time of the valve as simulated in the second case.
Additional scenarios were also analyzed for critical process
upset conditions and failure of check and isolation valves. The
existing anti-surge system responded well to mild process
upsets, such as lower suction pressure; however, for critical
upset conditions, such as a sudden drop of the inlet flow due to
a loss of a process separator, its response was very marginal
due to the slow response of the second and third stages recycle
valves. Thus, this confirmed again that the anti-surge logic or
sequence for those stages should be adjusted to provide
sufficient protection for the entire train.
The main objective of the check valves in the gas system is
to stop reverse flow through the compressor stages. A high
amount of energy is accumulated in the discharge of each
compressor in form of pressure volume relationships [13].
Thus, if this energy is not controlled or diverged in the
appropriate manner, it will affect the behavior of the
compressor during an ESD or process control situation.
Moreover, when an ESD sequence is activated the flow
distribution within the system is very critical, since the gas will
try to move to a lower energy condition, meaning the suction
side of the compressor when the ASV opens. Thus, in order to
avoid an excessive amount of flow from an upcoming stage,
non-return valves are used to check the mass transfer between
the stages. Therefore, the flow recirculation remains local and
is sufficient to reduce the energy level in each stage to a safe
condition.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

A faster reduction of the head through the compressor will

cause the inter-stage check valves to close, isolating each stage
from the surrounding stages. Moreover, an inter-stage flow
distribution takes place when the compressor is shutdown or
unloaded, affecting the amount of flow that is available for
recirculation within stages, since one stage could be taking part
of the flow that is required by the other stage to avoid a surge
condition. Therefore, the appropriate closure of the check
valves is vital in an ESD event to avoid a surge condition.
SurgeMarginforeachCompressorStageduringaFailureofthe
InterstageCheckValves
60
SM_S1:VAL
SM_S2:VAL

through parametric studies of the main variables and

components of the anti-surge system and its logic. In addition,
the case study results illustrated typical steps that should be
performed to properly analyze a multi-stage compressor train.
It was found that traditional solutions and changes from a
single compression stage can be extrapolated to multi-stage
systems. However, special considerations and analysis should
be conducted to determine the correct level of application for
those changes. Thus, typical rules of thumb or quick fixes
should not be applied, since they could increase the risk of
unintentionally introducing adverse system behavior due to the
complex nature of the multi-stage compression system.

SM_S3:VAL
50

SM_S4:VAL

SurgeMargin(%)

40

30

20

10

0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

6.5

Time (s)
Time(sec)

Figure 8. Surge Margin during an ESD with a Failure of the

Interstage Check Valves.

Thus, a failure of the check valves during an ESD event

with a 0.75 second coast down delay and second stage hot
bypass valve sequence was simulated to determine how this
would affect the protection of the entire train system. Figure 8
shows the surge margin of the compressor stages with time.
During the simulation three compressor stages surged: second,
third, and fourth. The second and third stages surged first. In all
other simulations discussed above, the fourth stage has
maintained a very high surge margin and has not surged. In the
simulation with all check valves remaining open, the fourth
stage compressor surged after approximately 6.5 seconds. The
first stage of the compressor did not surge, but the surge margin
was affected by the check valves staying open. The minimum
surge margin for the first stage was 13.4%. This minimum
surge margin is 5.75% below the minimum surge margin in the
case where all check valves were operating correctly.
Therefore, it was proved that the action and placement of the
check valves play a critical role in the anti-surge control system
and help to prevent critical conditions during an ESD.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A dynamic pipeline system simulation of a multi-stage
compressor train is a complex task that should include both
very detailed system data and a good analysis methodology.
The dynamics of the multi-stage system is affected by the
interaction of each stage and its components, since they are
critically linked and related. This paper presented and
summarized a methodology for analyzing a multi-stage system

Parametric studies of the main components and their

interaction with the system should include installation of hot
bypasses; placement or relocation of the check valves; antisurge valve timing (stroke rate); different type and size of
recycle valves; and shutdown delays.
The dynamic interaction between the stages and their antisurge loop can be modified by properly adjusting the anti-surge
logic and sequences. Moreover, the initial dH/dQ (pressure
wave) behavior of each compressor stage is affected by the
changes made in the entire train. The system dynamics is very
sensitive to changes. In addition, any change in the impedance
of the system will affect the initial reaction of the pressure
waves originated when the machine is shutdown.
The case study presented a methodology to dynamically
analyze multi-stage compressor trains and to determine if their
anti-surge logic and controls operate properly. In addition, it is
very critical to understand and thoroughly evaluate the
interaction of the different stages with their surrounding stages
and components since minor changes in one stage will affect
the transient behavior of the neighboring stages.
REFERENCES
[1] Advantica, Inc. Stoner Pipeline Simulation (SPS)
Reference Manual and Software
[2] Botros, K. K., Single Versus Dual Recycle System
Dynamics of High Pressure Ratio, Low Intertia Centrifugal
Compressor Stations, ASME Journal of Engineering for
Gas Turbines and Power, 133, 122402, 2011.
[3] Brun, K., and Kurz, R., Analysis of the Effects of
Pulsations on the Operational Stability of Centrifugal
Compressors in Mixed Reciprocating and Centrifugal
Compressor Stations, ASME Journal of Engineering for
Gas Turbines and Power, 132, 072402, 2010.
[4] Morini, M., Pinelli, M., and Venturini, M., Development
of a One-Dimensional Modular Dynamic Model for the
Simulation of Surge in Compression Systems, ASME
Journal of Turbomachinery, 129, pp. 437-447, 2007.
[5] Wylie, E.B., Stoner, M.A., and Streeter, V.L., Network
System Transient Calculations by Implicit Methods,
Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, 1971, pp. 356362.
[6] Sparks, C.R., On the Transient Interaction of Centrifugal

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Compressors and Their Piping Systems, ASME Paper 83GT-236, 1983.

[7] Brun, K., Nored, M., 2007, Application Guideline for
Centrifugal Compressor Surge Control Systems, Gas
Machinery Research Council.
[8] McKee, R., Garcia, A., 2007, Simulation of Centrifugal
Compressor Trips for Surge Avoidance System Design,
Pipeline Simulation Interest Group, Calgary, Canada.
[9] Moore, J. J., Kurz, R., Garcia, A., and Brun, K., 2009,
Experimental Evaluation of the Transient Behavior of a
Compressor Station during Emergency Shutdowns,
ASME GT2009-59064, Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo
2009: Power for Land, Sea, and Air.
[10] White, R. C., Kurz, R., 2006, Surge Avoidance in
Compressor Systems, Turbomachinery Symposium,
Houston, TX.
[11] Kurz, R., White, R.C., 2004, Surge Avoidance in Gas
Compression Systems, ASME Turbo Vol. 126 No. 4.
[12] Botros, K. K., Single vs. Dual Recycle System
Requirement in the Design of High Pressure Ratio, Low
Inertia Centrifugal Compressor Stations, Proceedings of
ASME Turbo Expo 2011: Turbine Technical Conference &
Exposition.
[13] Botros, K. K., Selection Criteria of Spring Stiffness of
Nozzle Type Check Valves for Compressor Station
Applications, Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2011:
Turbine Technical Conference & Exposition.

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

ANNEX A MULTI-STAGE COMPRESSOR TRAIN DIAGRAM

MULTISTAGE CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSOR TRAIN

Anti-Surge Valve

Out Flow

Discharge
Header

Cooler

Suction
Header

Check
Valve
Scrubber

Flare

Low Pressure
Stage (LP)

Gas Turbine
Driver

Low Pressure
Stage (LP)

High Pressure
Stage (HP)

Medium Pressure
Stage (MP)

TABLE 1. COMPARISON BETWEEN DATA AND COMPUTATIONAL MODEL

STAGEIILPPoint#1
STAGEIILPPoint#2
STAGEILPPoint#2
STAGEIIIMPPoint#1
STAGEIIIMPPoint#2
STAGEIVHPPoint#1
STAGEIVHPPoint#2
PARAMETERS/COMPRESSOR
STONER Relative
STONER Relative
STONER Relative Reported STONER Relative Reported STONER Relative Reported STONER Relative Reported STONER Relative
STAGE
Reported
Reported
Reported
Calculated Difference
Calculated Difference
Calculated Difference Values Calculated Difference Values Calculated Difference Values Calculated Difference Values Calculated Difference
ValuesLP
ValuesLP
ValuesLP
(%)
Values
(%)
Values
(%)
Values
(%)
MP
Values
(%)
MP
Values
(%)
HP
Values
(%)
HP
Values
InletConditions
Pressure(bara)
Temperature(C)
MolecularWeight(kg/kmol)
SpecificGravity()
Compressibility(Z1)
InletActualVolume(m3/h)
InletActualVolume(ft3/min)
StandardFlow(SCMH)
StandardFlow(MMSCFD)
Density(kg/m3)
Density(lbm/ft3)
MassFlowRate(kg/s)

1.02

1.02

0.000

4.164

4.164

0.000

4.263

4.263

0.000

9.85

9.85

0.000

9.93

9.93

0.000

32.25

32.25

0.000

31.88

31.88

0.000

42.78

42.78

0.000

39.87

39.87

0.000

29.89

29.89

0.000

39.93

39.93

0.000

29.94

29.94

0.000

39.93

39.93

0.000

29.94

29.94

0.000

45.21

45.21

0.000

30.73

30.73

0.000

29.24

29.24

0.000

30.39

30.39

0.000

28.95

28.95

0.000

28.11

28.11

0.000

26.91

26.91

0.000

1.561

1.561

0.008

1.061

1.061

0.000

1.010

1.010

0.000

1.049

1.048

0.116

1.000

0.999

0.050

0.971

0.970

0.052

0.929

0.929

0.008

0.985

0.985

0.000

0.975

0.975

0.000

0.975

0.985

1.026

0.943

0.943

0.000

0.944

0.944

0.000

0.84

0.84

0.000

0.841

0.841

0.000

5381

5466

1.572

16241

16281

0.245

15647

15907

1.659

9588

9560

0.292

9328

9443

1.229

2105

2076

1.368

1981

2004

1.181

3167

3217

1.572

9559

9583

0.245

9209

9362

1.659

5643

5627

0.292

5490

5558

1.229

1239

1222

1.368

1166

1180

1.181

5025.4

5004.0

0.426

63136.9

62680.0

0.724

64324.8

64875.0

0.855

91145.2

89860.0

1.410

92242.5

92570.0

0.355

73550.2

71430.0

2.883

70594.7

70590.0

0.007

4.259

4.241

0.426

53.512

53.125

0.724

54.519

54.985

0.855

77.250

76.161

1.410

78.180

78.458

0.355

62.338

60.541

2.883

59.833

59.829

0.007

1.782

1.778

0.245

5.043

5.026

0.337

5.074

5.065

0.184

12.195

12.130

0.535

12.085

12.049

0.297

41.462

41.034

1.031

40.481

40.191

0.717

0.111

0.111

0.245

0.315

0.314

0.337

0.317

0.316

0.184

0.761

0.757

0.535

0.754

0.752

0.297

2.588

2.562

1.031

2.527

2.509

0.717

2.66

2.70

1.323

22.75

22.73

0.092

22.05

22.38

1.472

32.48

32.21

0.825

31.31

31.60

0.928

24.24

23.67

2.385

22.28

22.38

0.456

0.007

DischargeConditions
4.453

4.453

0.000

10.39

10.39

0.000

10.41

10.41

0.000

32.55

32.548

0.006

32.15

32.15

0.000

102.5

102.499

0.001

102

101.993

Temperature(C)

112.7

110.587

1.875

94.4

96.261

1.971

85

83.253

2.055

122.8

125.549

2.239

113.2

110.657

2.246

146.7

150.28

2.440

139.1

136.36

1.970

Compressibility(Z2)

0.967

0.967

0.000

0.965

0.964

0.104

0.966

0.966

0.000

0.92

0.92

0.000

0.923

0.923

0.000

0.871

0.871

0.000

0.877

0.877

0.000

92.8

92.8

0.045

81.6

81.9

0.357

81.4

81.6

0.185

107.7

108.1

0.401

108.2

108.5

0.252

105.6

107.8

2.095

108.7

110.6

1.728

73

72.7

0.411

83.1

83.2

0.120

83

83

0.000

74.7

74.4

0.402

75.3

74.9

0.531

58

58.2

0.345

58.5

58.7

0.342

10739.1

10739.1

0.000

10802.3

10802.3

0.000

10739.1

10739.1

0.000

10802.3

10802.0

0.003

10739.0

10739.0

0.000

10802.3

10802.0

0.003

10739.1

10739.0

0.001

338.7

344.3

1.662

2234.0

2236.7

0.118

2163.0

2199.1

1.672

4682.9

4824.5

3.025

4499.5

4717.0

4.834

4414.0

4518.0

2.356

4136.0

4343.0

5.005

AverageRelativeDifferenceAllParameters(%)

0.562

Pressure(bara)

ReportedCompressorOperatingConditions
PolytropicHead(KJ/Kg)
PolytropicEfficiency(%)
Speed(RPM)
Power(Kw)

0.281

0.594

0.690

0.801

10

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

1.130

0.861

Copyright 2012 by ASME