Design and Control of Gas Lift System due to Well Depletion with Levelized Cost Analysis - Politeknik Negeri Padang
Design and Control of Gas Lift System due to Well Depletion with
Levelized Cost Analysis
# *
Abdul Wahid , Hemi Mauly Kurnianto
#
Sustainable Energy Research Group, Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424,
Indonesia, E-mail: [email protected]
- *
Sustainable Energy Research Group, Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424,
Indonesia, E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract —Gas lift is required to lift the gas on wells that depleted. In the field of X wells located in the offshore area, the necessary gas lift
pressure is 1700 psig to maintain the total gas production by up to 11 MMSCFD, whereas the current well pressure is 650 psig. To raise the necessary gas lift pressure, compressor systems are applied. The objective of this research was to select one of two types of compressors (centrifugal and reciprocating) based on their economics. Proportional-Integral (PI) and Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) controller is applied and tuned by open loop Ziegler-Nichols (ZN) and closed loop Tyreus-Luyben (TL) method. Integral of Squared Error (ISE) controller performance criteria is applied for controller’s performance evaluation. This thesis will also analyze the dynamic design process with levelized cost method. The result is open loop ZN tuning has a smaller ISE up to 99.33% on a centrifugal compressor configuration and 98.65% for reciprocating compressor configuration than TL method. Reciprocating compressor configuration with a PID controller and ZN tuning able to reduce 22.96% of energy, compared with the centrifugal compressor configuration and tuning PI controller TL tuning.
Keywords —Control System, Centrifugal Compressor, Surge, Reciprocating.
I Oil and gas wells generally have high initial pressure and flow rate, then depleted. Therefore, gas lift required to be able to lift the gas in the well properly.
NTRODUCTION I.
X offshore field there has 4 wells; X-24, X-29, X-44 and X-48 with total gas pressure of 1700 psig is required to main- tain total gas production of up to 11 MMSCFD, while the well pressure is 650 psig. The entire gas passing through the com- pressor is 710 ACFM or 47 MMSCFD. Gas is injected con- tinuously into the production conduit at a maximum depth that depends upon the injection-gas pressure and well depth (Walas, 2005).
Fig. 1 Compressor Selection Curve (Branan, 2005) To increase the pressure is required compressor system.
Based on Fig. 1, a centrifugal compressor or reciprocating In this research, the overall system control of gas lift sys- compressor may be selected at this operating condition. Cen- tem will be designed, especially related to the possibility of trifugal compressors are widely used in industrial applications reduced flow rate of compressor suction due to the decrease such as natural gas extraction, cooling, gas processing and gas of gas production from the well. The controllers used are PI transportation (Cortinovis et al., 2015). While reciprocating and PID controllers, because those controls is most widely compressors are typically used to improve for gas compres- used in the industry (Aström et al., 2002). The investment sion with higher pressure ratios but with low flow rates and needs of the gas lift system along with the necessary control usually consist of more than one train. economic will also be analyzed.
Gas compression requires energy and cost, so it is im- The objectives of this research are: portant to operate a gas compressor in a safe and efficient way
1. Obtain the design of the gas lift system in order to to save resources. When operating condition of a gas com- maintain the gas production control variables of exist- pression system very close to the surge line, there is the po- ing wells in X field by comparing the gas lift system tential for a surge. Surge on a dynamic compressor causes the with the configuration of the centrifugal compressor compressor to stop operating for a moment and cause a loud and the reciprocating compressor. rumble followed by a very high vibration. This will cause a 2.
Obtain energy requirements in each compressor con- fatal compressor damage (Li et al., 2015) resulting in eco- figuration and compare them. nomic losses to the gas field management company.
3. Achieve dynamic response economic result from gas lift system design along with its control system with levelized cost method.
Suction
70
11.83
17 Scrubber
Discharge
II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
60
10
20 Scrubber The research was conducted with Unisim software to ana- lyze the operation of centrifugal compressors and reciprocat-
Valve
ing compressor. Stages of research used to analyze gas pro-
CV Valve Controller Valve Type (USGPM)
duction at this well refers based on well development data FEED at field of X. Fig. 2 illustrates the flowchart of method-
VLV-101 FIC-101 107.02 Linear ology for this research.
VLV-102 FIC-102 156.09 Linear
VLV-103 FIC-103 137.17 Linear
VLV-104 FIC-104 164.37 Linear LV-77100 LIC-77100 0.16911 Quick Opening LV-77102 LIC-77102 0.00508 Quick Opening
The sizing of reciprocating compressor configuration equipment is shown on the Table III.
TABLE
III R ECIPROCATING C OMPRESSOR C ONFIGURATION S
IZING Equipment Diameter Length T/T Equipment NLL (%) (Inch) (ft)
Suction
50
8
25 Scrubber
Discharge
36
7
28 Scrubber
Valve CV Valve Valve Controller (USGPM) Type
VLV-101 FIC-101 107.02 Linear
VLV-102 FIC-102 156.09 Linear
Fig. 2 Flow Diagram of Research
VLV-103 FIC-103 137.17 Linear
VLV-104 FIC-104 164.37 Linear Unisim simulation software including Unisim's dynamic
Quick simulation package has become the main tool for the evalua-
LV-77100A/B LIC-77100 0.08456
Opening tion and prediction of steady state and dynamic systems.
Quick The flow basis of simulation is shown in the Table I.
LV-77102A/B LIC-77102 0.00254
Opening
TABLE
I F LOW B ASIS OF S
IMULATION
Control System of centrifugal compressor consists of:
To- 1.
Flow Control on each well.
Well X-12 X-29 X-44 X-48 tal 2.
Level control on suction scrubber and discharge
Associated Gas scrubber . (MMSCFD)
0.05
4.2
2.6
4.9
11.75 3.
The temperature controller comes out after cooler to
Gas Lift 120°F.
(MMSCFD)
9
9
9
9
36 4.
Suction pressure control on the compressor, which serves to maintain suction compressor pressure. The sizing of centrifugal compressor configuration equip- 5.
Anti-surge control on the centrifugal compressor, ment is shown on the Table II. which serves to prevent surge on the compressor.
TABLE
II Reciprocating compressor package will consist of two C C C S ENTRIFUGAL OMPRESSOR ONFIGURATION
IZING
trains each equipped with the following control systems: 1.
Flow Control on each well.
Equipment 2.
Level control on suction scrubber and discharge
Diameter Length T/T scrubber . Equipment NLL (%) (Inch) (ft)
3. Energy output data from the control system evaluation ei-
The temperature controller comes out after cooler to 120°F. ther by Ziegler-Nichols or Tyreus-Luyben tuning methods are 4. analyzed to calculate the economy with Equation 3. Suction pressure controller on the compressor, which serves to keep the suction compressor pressure by con-
(3) = + &
- trolling the compressor speed on both trains.
The control scheme on the PID Controller involves three parameter values of the PID constant to obtain the manipulate In accordance with Equation 3 the component to establish variable (MV) according to Equation 1. the levelized cost is as follows:
1. The price of the total equipment cost will be used as CAPEX initial . ( ) = ( ) = ( ) + ( ) (1)
∫ ( ) + 2.
The total fuel demand comes from the compressor fuel and the cooling cost of the heat exchanger. Where, 3.
Operation and Maintenance Cost is taken 5% from wellhead price
5 USD/MMBTu, which is u(t), controller output
0.25 USD/MMBTu. Kp, proportional gain parameter
Profit is derived from the wellhead price less the annual Ki, integral gain parameter cost from levelized cost method.
Kd, derivative gain parameter
e, error = SP – PV t, time
RESULTS AND
ISCUSSION
III. D τ, integration variable
A train of compressor package is designed in centrifugal compressor configuration, whereas in the reciprocating com- Controller tuning is performed to obtain the optimum value pressor, two train compressors are installed. for the achieved control response by open loop Ziegler-Nich-
In the centrifugal compressor configuration there are 9 con- ols tuning method and closed loop Tyreus-Luyben tuning trolled variables shown in Table IV: method (Marlin, 2000; Luyben, 1996). The evaluation of control system performed by Integral of
TABLE
IV
squared error (ISE) method that can be used independently as C C C C
ONTROLLER OF ENTRIFUGAL OMPRESSOR ONFIGURATION
an indicator of process control performance (Wahid et al,
Control Controlled Manipulated Control Set Point 2015). The calculation of ISE shown in Equation 2. Objective Variable Variable Anti Flow inlet Anti-surge
- Safety
∞ 2 surge compressor valve opening
(2) = ∫ [| ( ) − ( )|]
Smooth X-12 well X-12 valve
9.05 FIC-101 Operation flow opening MMSCFD
Schematic of centrifugal compressor configurations shown
Smooth X-29 well X-29 valve
13.2 FIC-102 Operation flow opening MMSCFD
in Fig. 3. While the reciprocating compressor configuration is
Smooth X-44 well X-44 valve
11.6 shown in Fig. 4. FIC-103 Operation flow opening MMSCFD
Steady control and no oscillations are the main objectives
Smooth X-48 well X-48 valve
13.9 FIC-104
of the process of setting control parameters. The Ziegler-
Operation flow opening MMSCFD
Nichols and Tyreus-Luyben tuning methods is going to be
Suction Suction LIC- Equipment Scrubber Liq- 17%
tested. To observe the influence of type of compressor, con-
Scrubber 77100 Protection uid valve Level
troller and tuning method, 8 cases is simulated:
Level opening 1.
Case 1: Centrifugal compressor configuration with PI
Discharge Discharge
controller and Ziegler-Nichols tuning method.
LIC- Equipment Scrubber Liq- 20% Scrubber
77102 Protection uid valve Level 2.
Case 2: Centrifugal compressor configuration with PI
level opening controller and Tyreus-Luyben tuning method.
Product Manifold Compressor 3. PIC-100 644 psig
Case 3: Centrifugal compressor configuration with
Quality Pressure Speed PID controller and Ziegler-Nichols tuning method.
Temperature TIC-100 Safety Duty Cooler 120°F
4.
after cooler
Case 4: Centrifugal compressor configuration with PID controller and Tyreus-Luyben tuning method.
5. Case 5: Reciprocating compressor configuration with PI controller and Ziegler-Nichols tuning method.
6. Case 6: Reciprocating compressor configuration with PI controller and Tyreus-Luyben tuning method.
7. Case 7: Reciprocating compressor configuration with PID controller and Ziegler-Nichols tuning method.
8. Case 8: Reciprocating compressor configuration with PID controller and Tyreus-Luyben tuning method.
Fig. 3 Simulation of Gas Lift System Control System with Centrifugal Compressor Configuration Fig. 4 Simulation of Gas Lift System Control System with Reciprocating Compressor Configuration In the reciprocating compressor configuration there are 11 controlled variables shown in Table V.
TABLE
The result of reciprocating compressor tuning is shown in Table VIII and Table IX.
It provides sensing, analysis, and control of the physical pro- cess. When a control system is at properly tuned, the process variability is reduced, efficiency is maximized and energy costs are minimized.
In all of the gas lift system configurations Ziegler-Nichols open loop tuning method and Tyreus-Luyben tuning method were applied, the PI and PID parameters are obtained.
Result of centrifugal compressor tuning is shown in Table VI and Table VII.
TABLE
VI O PEN L OOP T UNING P ARAMETER OF C ENTRIFUGAL C OMPRESSOR C ONFIGU- RATION
Controller PI, Ziegler-Nichols PID, Ziegler-Nichols Kc τI Kc τI τD Anti-surge 0.101 0.202 0.135 0.269 0.067 FIC-101 9.317 0.064 12.422 0.039 0.010 FIC-102 6.495 0.064 8.659 0.039 0.010 FIC-103 7.563 0.064 10.083 0.039 0.010 FIC-104 6.364 0.064 8.485 0.039 0.010 TIC-100 0.592 0.400 0.789 0.240 0.060 LIC-77100 165.80 7.013 221.062 4.212 1.053 LIC-770102 308.634 7.026 411.512 4.220 1.055 PIC-100 2.172 0.025 2.896 0.015 0.004 TABLE
VII C LOSED L OOP T UNING P ARAMETER OF C ENTRIFUGAL C OMPRESSOR C ON- FIGURATION
Controller PI, Tyreus-Luyben PID, Tyreus-Luyben Kc τI Kc τI τD Anti-surge 0.0701 0.889 0.102 0.533 0.133 FIC-101 5.041 0.168 4.824 0.139 0.004 FIC-102 3.514 0.168 3.363 0.139 0.004 FIC-103 4.092 0.168 3.916 0.139 0.004 FIC-104 3.444 0.168 3.295 0.139 0.004 TIC-100 0.320 1.050 0.306 0.868 0.025 LIC-77100 89.714 18.428 85.846 15.224 0.434 LIC-770102 167.005 18.463 159.804 15.253 0.434 PIC-100 1.175 0.066 1.125 0.054 0.002
TABLE
Compressor A /B speed 644 psig A.
VIII O PEN L OOP T UNING P ARAMETER OF R ECIPROCATING C OMPRESSOR C ON- FIGURATION
Controller PI, Ziegler-Nichols PID, Ziegler-Nichols Kc τI Kc τI τD FIC-101 14.035 0.039 18.713 0.024 0.006 FIC-102 9.627 0.039 12.836 0.024 0.006 FIC-103 10.832 0.039 14.442 0.024 0.006 FIC-104 9.067 0.039 12.089 0.024 0.006 LIC-77100 A/B 188.546 4.551 251.395 3.244 0.811 LIC-770102 A/B 503.752 5.401 671.669 3.244 0.811 TIC-100 0.501 0.423 0.668 0.254 0.064 TIC-101 0.501 0.423 0.668 0.254 0.064 PIC-100 4.397 0.033 5.863 0.020 0.005 TABLE
IX C LOSED L OOP T UNING P ARAMETER OF R ECIPROCATING C OMPRESSOR C ON- FIGURATION
Controller PI, Tyreus-Luyben PID, Tyreus-Luyben Kc τI Kc τI τD FIC-101 7.594 0.103 7.267 0.085 0.002 FIC-102 5.209 0.103 4.985 0.085 0.002 FIC-103 5.861 0.103 5.608 0.085 0.002 FIC-104 4.906 0.103 4.694 0.085 0.002 LIC-77100 A/B 102.024 11.960 97.625 9.881 0.281 LIC-770102 A/B 272.586 14.192 260.832 11.725 0.334 TIC-100 0.271 1.111 0.260 0.918 0.026 TIC-101 0.271 1.111 0.260 0.918 0.026
Controller Performance
In all cases, a scenario is performed to test the performance of the controller by the following disturbance:
1. At the 10
th
minute, X-12 is shutdown, so the flow rate is reduced by 18.95%.
Tuning Result The control system acts as the nervous system for the plant.
Quality Manifold pressure
V C ONTROLLER OF R ECIPROCATING C OMPRESSOR C ONFIGURATION Control Control Objective Controlled Variable Manipu- lated Varia- ble Set Point FIC-101 Smooth
Suction Scrubber A Liquid valve 25%
Operation X-12 well flow X-12 valve opening
9.05 MMSCFD FIC-102 Smooth Operation
X-29 well flow X-29 valve opening
13.2 MMSCFD FIC-103 Smooth Operation
X-44 well flow X-44 valve opening
11.6 MMSCFD FIC-104 Smooth Operation
X-48 well flow X-48 valve opening
13.9 MMSCFD LIC- 77100A Equipment
Protection Suction Scrub- ber A level
Level LIC- 77101A Equipment
B 120°F PIC-100 Product
Protection Discharge Scrubber A level
Discharge Scrubber A Liquid valve 28% Level
LIC- 77100B Equipment Protection
Suction Scrub- ber B level Suction Scrubber B
Liquid valve 25% Level LIC- 77101B
Equipment Protection Discharge Scrubber B level
Discharge Scrubber B Liquid valve 28% Level
TIC-100 Safety Temperature after cooler A Duty Cooler
A 120°F TIC-101 Safety Temperature after cooler B Duty Cooler
PIC-100 2.380 0.088 2.277 0.072 0.002 B.
th
2. minute, X-29 is shutdown, so that the difficult to distinguish, this is because those streams are con- At the 70 flow rate was reduced to 46.60%. trolled in addition also become disturbance variable. While
th
3. minute, X-44 is shutdown, so that the overshoot can be seen clearly at the X-48 well controller (FIC- At the 130 flow rate is reduced to 70.89%. 104), at the second disturbance overshoot peak is greater be- cause the flow loss is also greater. Level controller of the suc-
From the 4 cases that have been simulated for the centrifu- tion scrubber (LIC-77100) and the level controller on the dis- gal compressor obtained the results shown in Fig. 5. charge scrubber (LIC-77102) shown the smallest overshoot on Ziegler-Nichols tuning method, those configuration reach the steady condition faster. The suction pressure controller (PIC-100) and temperature controller (TIC-100), the smallest overshoot shown in the centrifugal compressor configuration with PID controller and Ziegler-Nichols tuning method.
The 4 cases that have been simulated for the reciprocating compressor obtained the results shown in Fig. 6.
Fig. 5 Comparison of Controller Simulation Results in Gas Lift System with Centrifugal Compressor Configuration
From Fig. 5 the anti-surge position that can handle lower flow is close to the surge line, it can be seen in centrifugal compressor configuration with PID controller and Ziegler- Nichols tuning method. X-12, X-29 and X-44 flow controllers (FIC-101, FIC-102 and FIC-103) show similar results and are
Fuel costs in the gas lift system are focused on providing energy for compressors and providing energy for cooling. At duration of 190 minutes, the simulation of total energy re- quirements is shown in Table X.
TABLE
X E NERGY R EQUIREMENTS O N E ACH G AS L
IFT C ONFIGURATION Compressor Cooling Gas Lift Total Energy Energy Configuration (MBtu) (MBtu) (MBtu)
Centrifugal, PI, 17,381 22,946 40,327
Ziegler-Nichols Centrifugal, PI,
18,224 23,885 42,109 Tyreus-Luyben
Centrifugal, PID, 17,382 22,934 40,316
Ziegler-Nichols Centrifugal, PID,
17,950 23,595 41,545 Tyreus-Luyben
Reciprocating, PI, 13,244 19,204 32,448
Ziegler-Nichols Reciprocating, PI,
13,245 19,375 32,620 Tyreus-Luyben
Reciprocating, PID, 13,247 19,195 32,442
Ziegler-Nichols Reciprocating, PID,
13,245 19,352 32,597 Tyreus-Luyben
Based on Table XII, the smallest energy needs of the gas lift system is reciprocating compressor configuration with a PID controller and Ziegler-Nichols tuning method amounting
Fig. 6. Comparison of Controller Simulation Results in Gas Lift System with Reciprocating Compressor Configuration
to 32,442 MBtu when there are interruptions of wells X-12, From Fig. 6. Flow controllers show similar behavior with X-29 and X-44 respectively. centrifugal compressor configuration. The suction pressure
With maintenance costs equal to 0.25 USD/MMBTu, the controller (PIC-100) is achieve stability fast enough because total cost can be summed from CAPEX cost, fuel cost for manipulated variable that is speed of compressor very influ- compressor, fuel cost for cooling, maintenance cost. The re- ential to the pressure at compressor suction. The level variable sult as shown in Fig. 7. in suction scrubber A (LIC-77100A) in the second the third disturbance, the smallest deviation precisely on the recipro- cating compressor configuration with PI controller and Zieg- ler-Nichols tuning. This is fair because at the level usually the proportional controller is more dominant and the delay time is usually small, so the PI controller is better used here (Se- borg et al., 2004). At LIC-77100B, after the third disorder tends to be unsteady; this is because the reciprocating B com- pressor package has shutted down at the third disturbance. In
discharge scrubber level controller that is LIC-77102A also experience the same with level suction scrubber controller.
As for LIC-77102B on the third interruption compressor B has trip, so the level at discharge scrubber B is reduced dras- tically. At the TIC-100A temperature control controller, the Fig. 7 Dynamic Economic Profit Result with Levelized Cost Method on Each
Gas Lift System
least overshoot deviation of the set point is also shown in re- ciprocating compressor configuration with PID control and Based on Fig. 7 the entire gas lift configuration is econom-
Ziegler-Nichols tuning method. At temperatures its overshoot ically profitable, as evidenced by the absence of negative deviation tends to be high due to high the delay time (Seborg profit values. But the profit of each configuration shows var- et al., 2004). While the TIC-100B tends to fall on the third ying results. With only X-48 wells operating is enough to give disturbance because there is no gas fluid that passes train B. profit to the entire system.
At the first disturbance, the average profit on the centrifu- C.
Economic Analysis
gal compressor actually rises from 3.66 USD/MMBTU to
3.88 USD/MMBTU and the average profit on the reciprocat- In the same system, the PID controller performance has a ing compressor also rises from 3.62 USD/MMBTU to 3.80 smaller ISE than the PI controller. The Ziegler-Nichols tuning USD/MMBTU This is because the production of the X-12 has a smaller ISE up to 99.33% on a centrifugal compressor well is returned more as a gas lift and produced only 0.05 configuration and 98.65% for reciprocating compressor con- MMSCFD, while the decrease in the fuel cost for compressors figuration than Tyreus-Luyben tuning method. and cooling cost far enough, this resulted the profit actually goes up.
As the second disturbance, the profit drops as the amount ONCLUSIONS IV.
C of gas produced decreases significantly compared to the de-
This research has studied the behavior of a dynamic gas lift cline in the fuel cost for compressors and cooling cost. The system with centrifugal compressors and reciprocating com- centrifugal compressor profit position decreased from 3.88 pressors due to well depletion. This research obtained the
USD/MMBTU to 3.54 USD/MMBTU and the average profit value of each ISE of each configuration, control and tuning. on the reciprocating compressor also fell from 3.80
The conclusions of this research are: USD/MMBTU to 3.68 USD/MMBTU.
1. The design of the gas lift system is obtained. The Zieg- At the third disturbance, the profit for reciprocating com- ler-Nichols tuning has a smaller ISE up to 99.33% on pressors drops slightly from 3.68 USD/MMBTU to 3.64 a centrifugal compressor configuration and 98.65% for USD/MMBTU, while the gas lift system with centrifugal reciprocating compressor configuration than Tyreus- compressor configuration drops drastically from 3.62 Luyben tuning method.
USD/MMBTU to 3.12 USD/MMBTU. At the end of simula- 2.
Energy requirements in each compressor configura- tion, precisely the profit of the reciprocating compressor con- tion is obtained. The smallest energy needs of the gas figuration is above the configuration of the centrifugal com- lift system is reciprocating compressor configuration pressor because the reciprocating compressor system has 2 with a PID controller and Ziegler-Nichols tuning compressors, so when the flow is below half of the compres- method amounting to 32,442 MBtu or can reduce by sor capacity, train B on the compressor is trip so that the sys- 22.96% of the gas lift system configuration with a cen- tem becomes more reliable, and Profit on this disorder for re- trifugal compressor with a PI controller and Ziegler- ciprocating compressors to be higher. Nichols tuning method.
3. Dynamic response economic result is achieved. The entire configuration of the gas lift system is economi-
D.
Overall Configuration Evaluation
cally feasible. Gas lift system with reciprocating com- In general the best configuration results should have the pressor configuration with two trains more reliable to smallest error value evaluated by the ISE method and the larg- face the well depletion. Profit response behavior for est profit. controllers with small ISEs are faster up than control-
Controller evaluated by the ISE method because this con- lers with high ISEs. trol criteria provide large deviations, so there is a significant difference between bad control system and good control sys- tem. Profit response calculate from the area of profit response in each configuration shown in Fig.7.
The ISE and its profit response relationship of each gas lift
A CKNOWLEDGMENTS system configuration shown in Table XI.
We express our gratitude to the Universitas Indonesia
TABLE
XI
which has funded this research through the scheme of Hibah
C OMPARISON OF
ISE
V ALUE AND P ROFIT R ESPONSE
V ALUE
Publikasi Internasional Terindeks untuk Tugas Akhir Maha-
Profit siswa (PITTA) No.2068/UN2.R3.1/PPM.00/2017. Response Con- Tun- Total Configuration (USD.Min trol ing
ISE EFERENCES R /
1. K. Aström, P. Albertos, M. Blamke, A. Isidori, M. Schaufelberger and MMBTU) R. Sanz, Control of Complex System. London: Springer, 2002.
Centrifugal PI ZN
67.82
4.97
2. A.S. Bawane, V.K. Bhojwani, M.B. Deshmukh, “Simulator For Per- formance Prediction Of Reciprocating Compressor Considering Vari-
Centrifugal PI TL 883.37
11.37
ous Losses ,” SSRG International Journal of Mechanical Engineering . Maharshtra: India, March 2015.
(SSRG-IJME) volume 2 Issue 3
Centrifugal PID ZN
5.89
4.91
3. B.W. Bequette, Process Control: Modeling, Design, and Simulation,
Centrifugal PID TL 756.40
8.42 New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2003.
4. S. Budinis, and N.F. Thornhill, “Control of Centrifugal Compressors
Reciprocating PI ZN 384.87
2.48
via Model Predictive Control for Enhanced Oil Recovery Applica- 6525.8 tions,” IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-6: 009–014, 2014.
Reciprocating PI TL
3.62 5.
C. Branan, Rules of Thumbs for Chemical Engineers 4th Edition. Ox-
3 ford: Elsevier. Inc, 2005. Reciprocating PID ZN
88.33
2.46
6. L. Brenne, “Prospects for Sub Sea Wet Gas Compression,” Proceed- ings of ASME Turbo Expo 2008: Power for Land, Sea and Air .
5732.3 Reciprocating PID TL
3.50
7
7. J.M. Campbell, Gas Conditioning and Processing 7th Edition, Volume 1: The Basic Principles . Oklahoma: John M. Campbell and Company, 1992.
8. A. Cortinovis, H.J. Ferrau, D. Lewandowski and M. Mercangoz,
“Ex-
perimental Evaluation of MPC-based anti-surge and Process Control for Electric Driven Centrifugal Gas Compressors”. Journal of Process Control 34: 13 –25, 2015.
9. A. Curtis, Natural Gas Compressor Engine Survey for Gas Production and Processing Facilities . Houston: Eastern Research Group, 2006.
10. E.E. Ezer, Perencanaan Injeksi Sumur Gas Lift Langsung Dari Sumur Gas . Yogjakarta: UGM, 2011.
11. H. Tony, Kajian Pada Kompresor Pararel Ketika Salah Satu Kompre- sor Gagal Operasi . Bandung: ITB, 2015.
12. International Gas Union, Whole Sale Gas Price Survey, 2015 Edition.
International Gas Union, 2015.
13. C. Li, S. Xu and Z. Hu, “Experimental Study of Surge and Rotating Stall Occuring in High-Speed Multistage Axial Compressor
,” Proce-
dia Engineering 99: 1548 – 1560, 2015.14. W.L. Luyben, B.D. Tyreus and M.L. Luyben, Plantwide Process Con- trol . New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc, 1995.
15. W.L. Luyben, Tuning Proportional-Integral-Derivative Controllers for Integrator/Dead-time Processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1996, 35:3480- 3483.
16. T. Marlin, Process Control: Designing Processes and Control Systems for Dynamic Performance . United States: McGraw-Hill Higher Edu- cation, 2000.
17. L.T. Narrraway, J.D. Perkins and G.D. Barton, Interaction between Process Design and Process Control . Centre for Process Systems En- gineering, Department of Chemical Engineering and Chemical Tech- nology, Imperial College, University of London, UK, 1991.
18. D.E. Seborg, T.F. Edgar and D.A. Mellichamp, Process Dynamics and Control . USA: John Wiley and Sons, Inc, 2004.
19. M. Sharifzadeh, Integration of process design and control: a review, London: Department of Chemical Engineering, Imperial College Lon- don, 2014.
20. Sulzer, Gas/Liquid Separation Technology, Winterthur, Switzerland: Department of Chemical Engineering, Imperial College London, 2009.
21. A. Wahid and R. Tanuwijaya, “Pemilihan Metode Penyetelan Pengen- dali PI pada Pengendalian Pabrik Regasifikasi LNG Menggunakan Metode Sk or,” Prosiding Seminar Nasional Teknik Kimia UNPAR. Bandung: UNPAR, 2015.
22. Walas and M. Stainley, Chemical Process Equipment – Selection and Design . Burlington: Elsevier. Inc, 2005.
23. R.C. White, “Surge Avoidance for Compressor Systems,” Proceding for the Thirty-Fifth Turbomachinery Symposium , 2006.
24. M. Wilcox and K. Brun, Guideline for Field Testing of Recipro- cating Compressor Performance . Gas Machinery Research Council Southwest Research Institute, 2009.