sarahr:
I’ve pumped and compressed a lot of CO2 (I mean a LOT!) in my 45 years as an engineer. My first comment is: Once again, here we go totally confusing and mistreating a really simple, interesting, and practical thread by failing to note the basic data. Are you proposing to apply a reciprocating compressor or a centrifugal compressor? Let’s get this straight up front and avoid a lot of confusion. Both David and JC are assuming a recip (and a very specific and highly fast one, may I add) but you haven’t stated that. I’ll assume you are interested in using a recip as well. Another issue that makes for confusing this thread even more so is that of gas compression and transport as compared with super critical fluid (SCF) compression and transport.
I would not normally use an Ariel reciprocating machine on this application. I’m very familiar with the Ariel since its development and entry into the oil patch field in the early 1980’s. It was a machine specifically designed and made for natural gas applications on a competitive basis. It was not designed as an industrial gas machine. There are BIG differences between compressors for industrial gases and those for natural gas. A lot of the differences are in valve design, piston speeds, and service life. I am not against using an Ariel, but I want to make sure that everyone understands what I mean about the basic scope of design for a reciprocating machine so that a lot of hearts aren’t broken up when expectations are not realized. The Ariel machine is a good machine for what it is intended to do and for the field it is intended to compete in. It was not a custom-designed machine for industrial gases and custom process conditions – however, I could be educated if that has recently changed and they are now designing their machines for industrial gas applications.
Nevertheless, the optimum CO2 compression ratio I’ve used is 3.5 to 4.0 for 2 and 3-stage machines. The CO2 compressors I’m referring to at this point are all GASEOUS compressors. This is a big difference from SCF “compressors” (or pump?). You fail to make mention of the very important basic design point that you are proposing to enter into and continue to “compress” through the Critical Point of CO2 ( 87.8 oF and 1,071 psia). You are not going to get very far with compressor manufacturers without clearly explaining this intent in your scope of work. As a chemical engineer, I presume that you are aware of the importance of this point. Beyond the Critical Point, as we both know, the fluid starts to behave in a totally different manner from that of a gas (or a liquid). It may resemble a gas – but as David would correctly say: “It ain’t!” Special procedures and design must be used to successfully carry out the passage of the fluid from the Critical Point to the 4,000psig and 140 F that you are proposing – which puts the CO2 right smack in the middle of a first-class SCF status.
You may be able to pump liquid CO2 that you produce at 1,200 psig and 70 oF. You would use a 2 or 3-stage recip for this purpose and follow up with a cooler-condenser on the discharge. Once you store this high pressure liquid CO2, you can employ a pump to transport the fluid up to the desired target conditions. Or, as you are inferring, you may also use a special “compressor” design to raise the SCF to a higher pressure. But special mechanical and process design must be incorporated to ensure proper and safe operation of a reciprocating machine while carrying out this very unique unit operation. Piston lubrication and proper valve action are certainly items that have to be carefully looked at – especially since a SCF like CO2 will most like dissolve any liquid lubricant. And this would not be considered a conventional gas compressor at this point.
Like David, I don’t know what the reason is for your concern on the interstage temperatures. On gaseous machines my concern has always been the avoidance of coking or solidifying lubricating oil with temperatures in excess of 300 oF. That’s why my optimum compression ratio for CO2 gas recips is 3.5 – 4.0. At these compression ratios I normally get around 250 oF discharge temperatures and this has proved to be very satisfactory for continuous service of up to 11 months.
I don’t understand what you mean by a “need to determine how many compressors are required to increase the pressure”. You don’t need a multiplicity of compressors to raise the pressure. You need more compression stages which conforms with the title of this thread.
I hope these comments serve to add some help to your cause and clear up a few points.