Engineering Practice

A Shortcut to Optimize Pipe Diameters by

Economic Criteria
This methodology can be used not only for laminar flow, but also for
the complete turbulent flow region
Srbislav B. Genic. Branislav M. simplicity of the method and illustrate to prevent negative external im­
Jaci movie the impact of changes in economic pacts on the transportation system
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, parameters on the optimal diameter and action taken in order to protect
University of Belgrade of pipelines. Moreover, a sensitiv­ the environment from possible fail­
ity analysis was done to show that ures of the transport system
n recent decades, the impact of the optimization model provides the • Economic optimization of trans­
energy costs on the transport solution in an acceptable range, es­ port systems in order to reduce
of fluids has led to a significant pecially for the conceptual phase of the overall costs
reduction in fluid velocity and projects, as well as for basic design. Aforementioned elements of de­
an increase in the diameter of the sign are usually done after design of
pipeline. In this article, an improved Background the basic equipment needed for the
shortcut methodology is presented Engineers that work in the chemi­ process. Some of the listed param­
for estimating the optimal diameter cal process industries (CPI) in fields eters will be analyzed in more detail.
of pipelines. Besides the laminar flowsuch as process engineering, oil- The most important elements re­
regime, the algorithm can be applied,and-gas engineering, heating, ven­ lating to the pipeline transport of fluid
for the first time, to the complete tur­tilation and air conditioning (HVAC), are as follows:
bulent flow region. Several examplesthermal and hydroelectric power and• Transportation capacity that
are presented that demonstrate the related disciplines, quite often per­ should meet the technical and
form calculations for pipeline-system other requirements of all consum­
NOMENCLATURE transportation of fluids. Fluids flow ers that are supplied with fluids
A Parameter, see Equation (14)
through plant equipment including • Selection of appropriate pumps
a Amortization parmeter, S/yr)
8 Parameter, see Equation (15)
reactors, separators, heat exchang­ and other machines needed for the
b Maintenance costs, $/yr ers, boilers, tanks, radiators and transport of fluids in order to achieve
Cc. Annual capital cost. $/yr other devices that are connected by the necessary pressure head
Ce Annual operational cost of pipeline, $/ pipes or channels. In this article, we • Choice of materials for the pipeline
(Wh) will consider only continuous steady- or channel and pumping devices
cCost of electric energy, $/(W-h) state transport of fluids. taking into account the impact
D Pipe inner diameter, m In order to ensure adequate trans­ of fluid on materials and possible
u Optimal pipe inner diameter, m port of fluids through the plant, en­ degradation of the material due to
F Overall efficiency of pump, compressor gineer have to select, determine or erosion, corrosion and cavitation
or fan
define the following: • Possible accumulation of liquids or
F Parameter for cost of fittings, valves, erec-
tion
• The route of the pipelines solids in the pipeline
G Mass flowrate of fluid, kg/s
• The type and size of each pipe (di­• Occurrence of vibration and noise
J Ratio of minor pressure losses and fric­ ameter, length and wall thickness) • Transport safety that can be tanta­
tion pressure drop • The types and sizes of necessary fit­mount to mechanical calculations,
L Pipe length, m tings, valves and other accessories tests before and during the com­
P Pumping power, W • The types of flowmeters missioning and implementation of
Pc Pipeline purchase cost, $ • The types and basic parameters protecting measures against ex­
Ap Pressure drop, Pa of pumps, compressors, blowers ternal impacts, as well as actions
Apir Friction pressure drop, Pa or fans to protect the environment from
Ap,„i Minor pressure losses. Pa • The types of materials for all ele­ possible failures of the pipeline
Re Reynolds number
ments of the transport system transport system
R, relative pipe roughness
V Volumetric flowrate. m3/s (pipes, ducts, fittings, electrical • Economic optimization of the pipe­
X Parameter that depends on pipe material machinery, valves and so on) line transport system, which is done
x Parameter that depends on pipe thick­ • The type and size of pipeline sup­ in order to reduce transport costs
ness ports and compensating elements Economic criteria is, in most cases,
Y Plant attainment, h/yr • Transportation safety measures, crucial for the design of plants, so
n Fluid viscosity, Pa s which can be reduced to stress cal­ the optimum size of the series of
l> Fluid density, kg/m3 culations, testing before and duringunits that the plant consists of pro­
4 Friction factor the commissioning, implementa­ vides the lowest life-cycle cost of any
v Average fluid velocity, m/s tion of protective measures in orderproject. The cost of piping typically
4a CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHEMENGONLINE.COM DECEMBER 2018
represents up to 35% of plant capitalWhere: plies only to incompressible isother­
cost [7], Fluid pumping cost is also F = a factor that includes the cost of mal flow. In engineering practice, this
an important part of plant operation valves, fittings and erection equation can be accepted for the
cost. According to the U.S. Dept, of a = amortization or capital charge compressible flow if the total pres­
Energy (DOE), 16% of a typical facil­(annual) sure drop is less than 10% of the
ity's electricity costs are involved withb = maintenance costs (annual) initial pressure (8).
pumping of fluids [2). It is therefore The power required for fluid pump­ The annual operational cost of the
useful to design the piping system ing (P, W) is given by Equation (3): pipeline (Ce, $/yr) is:
as close as possible to the optimal _ \r&p G-bp
value, in order to minimize the sum of I■ PE (3) lC
-e =Y
1 ■c■P 1 (9)
the capital and operating expenses.
Mathematically rigorous meth­ Where: which yields:
ods for selecting pipe diameters are V, = volumetric flowrate of fluid, m3/s Yc G3
time-consuming because they in­ p = fluid density, kg/m3 ce = 8- 7T2(1+/H-1.
: Vi

-£D5 Pz
(10)
volve detailed (iterative) procedures Ap = pressure drop, Pa
to determine the minimum capital E = overall efficiency of the pump, Where:
and operating costs. Simple equa­ compressor or ventilator Y = the plant attainment (annual op­
tions, like the one proposed in this G = mass flowrate of fluid, kg/s erating hours or hours of operation
article, can provide reasonably ac­ per year), h/yr
curate estimates of optimal pipe di­ C = V p (4) cen = cost of pumping energy, $/W h
ameters in the initial stages of a plant Total annual pipe cost is:
design, which are a good starting Energy loss in the pipeline includes
point for a more rigorous procedure. fluid friction loss, but also potential C = Cc + Ce (11)
The first pipe economic optimiza­ and kinetic energy losses. This model
tion model was published in 1937 forexcludes the latter two losses since and, since C depends only on D, the
turbulent flow in hydraulically smooththe pumping height is always a fixedoptimum economic pipe diameter
pipes [3) and three years later the value and fluid density is consideredcan be found by:
model was broadened for laminar to be constant. This means that the dC
flow [4\. These models are widely pressure drop can be calculated as — [ID
=0 (12)
cited in literature and they even be­ the sum of the friction pressure drop
came classic university lectures [5]. (Ap/j., Pa) and minor pressure losses After differentiation of capital,
Recently, a new model was published (Apm/, Pa): Equation (2), and operational costs,
for hydraulically rough pipes [6]. Equation (10), the general form of
This article contains new and sim­ Ap = Apfr + A pm, (5) the solution for Equation (12) is:
ple models for economic pipe siz­
ing for laminar, turbulent and tran­ Weisbach [7] proposed in 1845 I) opt —
sitional flow. the equation that is still in use for
pressure drop calculations:
Pipe optimization model s+XyjA B-tf-p-V3)
- L pv2 LG2
Pipeline cost consists of two param­ . —
8.
(13)
eters: capital cost and operational ^Pfr ~ % ' d ' 2 „2 ' $ ' p-Ds
cost. The most economic pipe diam­ LpV 2
Parameter A consists of values that
eter will be the one which gives the 7r2 ' ^ ' D5 (6) must be presupposed for every sin­
lowest annual cost. gle pipeline:
Pipe purchase cost (Pc) can be ex­Where: y-ce„-(i+j)
pressed as Equation (1): ^ = friction factor coefficient A= (14)
x-XE(l+F)(a+b)
v, = average fluid velocity, m/s
Pc = X ■ Dx • L (D Minor pressure losses can be es­ and parameter B shows the influ­
timated either as head losses or by ence of pipe diameter on the friction
Where: using equivalent lengths. In further factor:
D = pipe inner dia. (I.D.), m analysis, the minor pressure losses D d£
L = pipe length, m will simply be taken into account as: f AD )
(15)
X = a parameter that depends on the
type of pipe material hPml = / ' Ap/r (7) In order to obtain the useful short­
x = a parameter that depends on the cut formula for estimation of DopJ,
pipe-wall thickness (pipe schedule) where J is the ratio of minor pressurethe derivative d£/dD has to be de­
The annual capital cost (Cc, $/ losses and friction pressure drop. termined for laminar, critical and tur­
yr) of a pipeline is calculated using Pressure drop then becomes: bulent flow. The pipe friction factor,
Equation (2): 8r LG2 in general, depends on the Reynolds
Ap
Cc = X ■ Dx ■ L ■ (1 + F) • (a + b) n2 ' C1 p-D5 (8) number (Re):
w-D-p 4 V p 4C
(2) Strictly speaking, Equation (8) ap Re = rt nDp n-D-ri (16)

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHEMENGONLINE.COM DECEMBER 2018 49

 and relative pipe roughness: TABLE 1. PRICES OF ELECTRICITY AND CARBON-STEEL PIPES
Parameter Value Parameter Value
c.n. S/(kWh) 0.08 F 6.5
*>■ = § (17)
x 1.5 a + b 0.2
8,760
The friction factor for all cases of X 330Y,h/yr
E
flow regimes in pipes can be calcu­ J
0.5 0.6

lated using [9]: TABLE 2. CALCULATIONS ACCORDING TO THE “RULES OF THUMB” AND PROPOSED MODE
Literature M. IM New model
?=-
’ Re
for Re <2,000 (18a) Recommended O, mm 285 279 289 341
v, m/s 2.742 2.871 2.658 1.915
Re 1,077,000 1,102,000 1,061,000 900,000
{ = 0.032 4- 0.000052 Rr 0-00351 0.00359 0.00345 0.00293
0.0269 0.0270 0.0267 0.0255
(Re - 2,000) • (R®-8 + 0.089)
Aflft, Pa/m 422 477 389 164
for Re = 2,000-4,000 (18b) (18b) CfJL. S/(yr m) 75.3 72.8 77.1 98.6
CJL S/(yr m) 103.5 116.8 95.3 40.1
7.35—1,200-ftjt1.25 OL, S/(yrm) 178.8 189.6 172.4 138.7

{ 1.8 • log
Re

&nr
Economic flowrate or velocity is 0.000576 Pa-s. We adopted the
Optimal pipe diameter equations canabsolute roughness e = 1 mm as a
+ be rewritten in order to estimate the guess value for the end of pipeline
most economic flowrate or velocity life cycle of 10 years.
for Re = 4,000-35.5 10
i:.
(18c) for a given pipe diameter. From Equa­ Solution. Using the methodology
tion (13), the optimal mass flowrate is: proposed above yields an optimal
Pipe relative roughness, accord­ pipe diameter of Dopt = 341 mm, the
ing to open literature data, is in the 3 Ds+x-p2 corresponding velocity is v = 1.915
range Rr = 0 to 0.0333. “opt — A B( (21) m/s and pressure drop is Ap/L = 164
For laminar flow, the explicit so­ Pa/m. This corresponds to the total
lution is B = 3.24, and for other the optimal volumetric flowrate is: pipe cost of C/L =138.7 $/(yr-m).
flow regimes, the mean value of B Rules of thumb from various litera­
should be estimated after integra­ 3 Ds+X ture sources give the results presented
tion. For critical flow, the following V opt (22) in Table 2. The value calculated by
yjABfp
applies: Equation (13) gives the velocity that is
■0.0333 ,-4,000
and the optimal fluid velocity is significantly lower than the ones from
J->2,000 B-dRedRr the cited recommendations. The con­
mean (0.0333—0)(4,000—2,000) 4 3 Dtl+X sequential total pipeline cost is about
!
r.opt ~ TT A-Bf-p (23) 30% greater than the one calculated
= 3.86 (19) by hereby proposed model. This fact
Algorithm for solving equations is in good agreement with the conclu­
and for turbulent flow (after setting ofEquation (13) provides an implicit sion from Ref. 10 about the influence
the upper limit of the integral to Re =calculation procedure, since the pipeof energy cost on pipe diameter in re­
108, which is a value that is of impor­diameter has to be known in order tocent decades.
tance to engineering practice): obtain the friction factor or vice versa.
Solving of Equation (21), (22) or (23)Example 2
,0.0333 ,10s also demands the iterative procedureFor the next example, consider the
B-dRe-dfir
Hmean
Jp -12,000 since £■ is a function of fluid velocity.flow of bitumen through a carbon-
(0.0333 —1)-(108—4,000) The easiest way for solving the listedsteel pipeline with D = 82.5 mm, with
equations is to make the assumptionvolumetric flowrate of V = 20 m3/h.
= 4.34 (20) of a fluid velocity or friction factor andAt 150°C, the density of bitumen is p
then apply an iterative procedure. In = 959 kg/m3 and the viscosity is -q =
Our estimation for variables that case of turbulent flow, no more than 0.407 Pa-s. What is the optimal pipe
should be known for calculation of three iterations are needed. For lami­diameter and what savings can be
A are presented in Table 1, and the nar flow, no more than five iterationsobtained after replacing the existing
final value is A = 0.00236. are needed. pipeline with the optimal one if the
After applying A in Equation (13), length of pipeline is L = 1,000 m?
one can get (A-B)1/5+* = 0.47 for Example 1 Solution. According to Equation
laminar flow and (A B)1/5+x = 0.49 The authors were recently asked (13), the optimal pipe diameter is
for other flow regimes. Therefore, a to estimate the optimal diameter Dopt =110 mm (v = 0.585 m/s, Re =
value of (AB)1/5+* = 0.48 is adopted of carbon-steel pipeline for liquid 152, £ = 0.422) and pressure drop is
for all flow regimes in all of the sub­ methanol at ambient temperature. Ap = 9.44 bars.
sequent calculations. Methanol flowrate was 500 ton/h, its For further analysis, we have used
density is 794 kg/m3 and viscosity the standard steel pipe DN100 (O.D.
50 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHEMENGONLINE.COM DECEMBER 2018
TABLE 3. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF TABLE 4. PIPEUNE DIAMETER FOR 3. Genereaux, R. P.. Fluid-Flow Design Methods, Ind Eng.
Chem.. vol. 29. pc. 385-388,1937,
PARAMETERS EXAMPLE 1 AFTER SENSITIVITY
4. Sarchet, 6 R.and Colburn, A. R, Economic Pipe Size In
Parameter Range of Variation ANALYSIS
The Transportation Of Viscous And Nonviscous Fluids, Ind.
Production rate ±20% Parameter Dopi• mm Eng. Chem.. vol. 32, pp. 1,249-1,252,1940.
Fuel/energy cost -50% to ±100% G= 160-240 l/h 309-370 6. Sinnott, R. K„ 'Chemical Engineering Design,' Butter-
Capital investment -20% to +50% 310-341 worfh-Heinemann, 1996.
e = 0.05-1 mm
= 114.3 mm, I.D. = 107.1 mm). a + 6=01-0.2 341-382 6. Genic. &. Jaomovic, B. Genic. V.. Economic Optimiza­
tion ol Rpe Diameter for Complete Turbulence. Energy
Using Equations (2) and (10), capital E= 0.6-0.85 327-341
and Buildings, vol- 45, pp. 335-338,2012.
cost is Cc = 17,350 $/yr, operational ■/= 0-2 320-382
7.Wersbach. J.. 'Lehrbucb der Ingenieur- und Maschinen-
costs are Ce = $6,820/yr, so the total cen = 0.04-0.16 S/(kWh) 307-382
Mechanik,' Braunschwieg. 1845.
cost is C = $24,170/yr. For D = 82.5 A = 0.8-1.5 Of basic A 300-402 8. Peters, M. S. Timmethaus K. D„ ‘PlantDesign and Eco
mm, the pipeline total cost is C = Mean value 316-371 nomics for Chemical Engineer,' McGraw Hill, New York,
$31,090/yr. This means that, after • G should be in the range 0.8 to 1.2 N.Y.,1991.
replacement, each year the savings of basic G 9. Gertie’, &. JatSmovid. B. 'Reconsideration of the Fric­
tion Factor Data and Equations for Smooth, Rough, and
will be $6,920, and the investment • cen should be in the range 0.5 to 2 Transition Pipe Flow' presented at 1st International Con­
will be paid off after 4.5 yr. of basic c, ference on Computational Methods and Appfcadons in
On the other hand, recommended • A should be in the range 0.8 to 1.5 Engineering, Timisoara, Romania, May 2018.
velocities and pressure drops from of basic A Reconsideration of the Friction Factor Data and Equations
for Smooth, Rough and Transition Pipe Flow, Lecture hetd
the literature are: 0.6-1.0 m/s in Furthermore, for the shortcut in Engineering Chamber ot Serbia. Belgrade. April 2016.
Ref. 14, 0.9-1.2 m/s and 450 Pa/m model presented here, we should 10. Durand. A A., and others Updating the Rules For Pipe
in Ref. 13, 0.2-1 m/s in Ref. 15, include the following: Sizing, Chem. Eng., vol. 116. no. 1. pp. 48-50.2010.
0.9-1.5 m/s in Ref. 16 for viscous • The factor of minor losses in the 11. Adams J. N„ Quickly Estimate Pipe Song with 'Jack’s
oils and pipelines with nominal di­ range J = 0 to 2 Cube,' Chem. Eng. Progress, vol. 93. no. 12. pp. 55-
ameter DN80-DN250. It is obvious • Pump efficiency from E = 0.6 up 59,1997.
that these recommendations are not to E = 0.85 12. 'Piping Engineering.' Tube Turns Inc, Louisville 1986.
covering the region of laminar flow, • a + b in the range 0.1-0.20 13. Waias. S M., ‘Chemical Rrooess Equipment - Selection an
and one can make a serious mistake• Rr should be taken into account for Design,' Butterworfi-Heriemann, Boston. Mass, 1990
by following them. new, as well as for old pipes — for14. Coker, A, K., 'Ludwig's Applied Process Design for
Chemkal and Petrochemical Plants', Fourth Edition: Vol­
carbon steel pipes s = 0.05-1 mm ume 1, Elsevier Inc, 2007.
Sensitivity analysis Let’s reconsider Example 1. After 15. tolov, K. F. Romankov. P. G, Noskov. A. A., 'Chemi­
The economic analysis consists of consideration of the sensitivity analy­ cal Technology Processes and Equipment: Examples and
the following two parts: sis, we get the pipe diameters listed Tasks,' Leningrad, Nedra Publ., 1987.
1. The investment and cash flows
in Table 4. 16. Oatta. A., 'Process Engineering And Design Using Visual
are first calculated using the most In this case, the mean value of the Basic'CRC Press, 2008.
probable values of the various pipeline diameter is in the range Dopt17. Genid, S., JarSmovi, R, Mitic', S, Kolendic', P., 'Eco­
nomic Analysis for Process Engineering' (in Serbian),
factors (this establishes the base = 316-371 mm, which is a variation Association ot Mechanical and Electrical Engineers and
case for analysis). of less than ±10% of the pipe diam­ Technicians of Serbia, Belgrade. 2014.
2. Various parameters in the cost eter of Dopl = 341 mm obtained in
model are then varied, assuming Example f. Followingthe data from Authors
a range of error for each factor Table 4, for this example, one can —1 Srbislav Genic is full professor of
in turn, in order to provide how conclude that the variation of pipe beat transfer operations and
equipment, mass transfer opera-
sensitive the cash flows and eco­ diameter is not significant due to the j lions and equipment and Eco-
nomic criteria are to errors in the (very strong) exponent 5 + x = 6.5 in A nomic analysis in process engi-
forecast figures. Equation (13). i neering at the Dept, of Process
In other words, the basic eco­ " Engineering of the Faculty of Me-
k chanical Engineering of the Uni-
nomic analysis of a project is based Concluding remarks ■ versity of Belgrade (Kraljice Marije
on the best estimates that can be The simple optimization model of " 16. 11120 Belgrade 35; Phone:
made at the moment of design of pipe diameter presented here is suit­+381-11-3302-200: Email: sgenic@mas.bg.ac.rs).
His research interests include heat and mass transfer
the system, and a sensitivity analysisable for both laminar and turbulent processes and equipment. He holds 8.Sc., M.Sc., and
is a way of examining the effects of flow. The sensitivity analysis shows Ph D. degrees in mechanical engineering from the Uni­
uncertainties in the forecasts on the that the optimization model can pro­ versity ot Belgrade. He is a court expert and registered
viability of a project. vide the solution in an acceptable Professional Engineer in Serbia.
The purpose of a sensitivity analy­ range that is especially suitable for Branislav Jariimovic is retired
sis is to identify those parameters the conceptual phase of projects, as 0. full professor of Heat transfer op­
erations and equipment and Mass
that have a significant impact on well as for the basic design. ■ transfer operations and equip­
project viability over the expected Edited by Gerald Ondrey ment at the Dept.of Process Engi­
neering of the Faculty of Mechani­
range of variation of the parameter. cal Engineering of the University of
Ranges of variation of typical param­References Belgrade. He is a registered Pro­

adopted from Ref. 17.

ill
eters are given in Table 3, which is 1. Capps, R. W.. Select the Optimum Pipe Size — Simple
Equations can Quickly Optimize Pipe Diameters, Chem.
fessional Engineer in Serbia and
holds B.Sc., M.Sc., and Ph.D. de­
grees in mechanical engineering at University of Bel­
Data from Table 3 suggest the fol­ Eng., vol. 105, rxx 7., pp. 165-166,1995. grade. He has over 35 years experience in the field of
lowing variation of parameters: 2. 'Improving Pumping System Performance: Aseparation
Soi/ce- processes (especially distillation) and heat
book for Industry.' Hydraulic Institute (TP. 2006.
exchangers design.
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHEMENGONLINE.COM DECEMBER 2018 51