Gas throughput, compression, cooling and dehydration: an integrated teaching case

PetroSmart Academy | Synthetic teaching case | Version 1.0, 25 October 2026. This is a reproducible educational model, not a field development approval or an independently certified design.

Purpose and model boundary

Connect gas accounting, compressor power, cooling duty, water removal and energy cost without mixing standard and actual volumes. Use a deliberately ideal gas with Z = 1, molecular weight 18.83 kg/kmol and constant k = 1.3. These assumptions are not a validated model of a real natural-gas composition. Prerequisites are absolute pressure, ideal-gas relations, compressor efficiency and heat balances.

1. Define the standard-volume basis

Throughput is 1,000,000 standard m³/day at 15 °C and 1.01325 bar absolute, dry-gas basis. It enters the compressor at 50 bar absolute and 30 °C; discharge pressure is 80 bar absolute. The corresponding mass flow is 9.217 kg/s and inlet actual volume flow is 0.2468 m³/s. Standard m³/day must not be inserted as the inlet actual volumetric rate.

2. Calculate compression under declared ideal-gas assumptions

Take isentropic efficiency 78% and mechanical efficiency 98%. Temperature ratio for the isentropic reference is (80/50)^[(k − 1)/k]. The ideal-gas heat capacity used consistently in this exercise is cp = kR/[(k − 1)MW] = 1.9134 kJ/(kg·K). Actual outlet temperature = Tin + (Tout,is − Tin)/ηis = 74.53 °C.

Power transferred to the gas is 785.26 kW; shaft power is 801.29 kW. No motor rating, surge margin or compressor stage count is established. For real design, replace constant properties with a suitable equation of state and validate the selected compressor map and driver basis.

3. Close the aftercooler energy balance

Cool the gas to 35 °C using cooling water with a 10 K temperature rise and cp = 4.18 kJ/(kg·K). The ideal sensible cooler duty is 0.6971 MW, requiring 16.677 kg/s water. Gas-side heat removed equals water-side heat gained in the script. No condensation is predicted by the ideal-gas model; if condensation occurs in a real gas, add phase enthalpies and size separation equipment from the actual liquid load.

4. Reconcile the dehydration water load

Independently assume inlet and target outlet water contents of 700 and 100 mg per dry standard m³ on the same basis as the gas rate. Removal load = 1,000,000 × (700 − 100)/1,000,000 = 600 kg/day. This is a water mass balance only. It neither sizes a glycol contactor nor proves a dew-point specification. A vendor/model assessment must define glycol strength, circulation, regeneration, losses and the contractual water/dew-point requirement.

5. Keep flow assurance and safety separate from arithmetic

No actual gas composition or hydrate equilibrium envelope is supplied. The compressor discharge temperature does not establish hydrate safety throughout the downstream system or during shutdown. Obtain composition-specific hydrate and dew-point predictions, transient pressure-temperature profiles and liquid holdup information. Protective functions and relief cases require their own hazard assessment; this case supplies no trip settings, relief settings or plug-removal instructions.

6. Energy cost and model limits

At 90% availability, shaft-energy equivalent is 6,317.3 MWh/year. At a hypothetical $100/MWh, the corresponding energy cost is $631,734/year. Motor efficiency and auxiliary loads are excluded; add them before estimating purchased electrical energy. Prices are assumptions, not current tariffs.

Reproduce the idealized case with calculations.py. Inspect every assumption in outputs.json. A field case additionally requires a verified EOS, fluid assay, pressure losses, compressor performance data, actual utility conditions, gas specifications and independent engineering review.