A Case Study: Best Practices for Pulsation Bottle Design to Reduce Horsepower Losses
To save upfront packaging costs, some companies design pulsation bottles with inadequate bottle and choke tube diameters as well as high loss choke tube inlets. Not only does this result in excessive pressure and horsepower losses, but it can also insufficiently damp pulsations. This necessitates the use of orifices and/or secondary pulsation bottles to lower pulsations in the piping system to acceptable levels, which in turn creates additional pressure and horsepower losses. While these methods can decrease initial installation costs, the long-term horsepower costs can be unacceptably high and prevent a station from reaching expected flow capacity. This paper will discuss best practices and preliminary calculation results used to design a pulsation bottle to allow an end user to determine whether the pulsation control system designed for a reciprocating compressor is likely to create future problems. A case study of an inadequately designed pulsation control system that would have prevented the station from reaching expected flow rates due to excessive horsepower losses will be presented.