MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017)
DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
Trends in Supersonic Separator design
development
Rami Ali Altam 1, Tamiru Alemu Lemma 1,* , and Shiferaw Regassa Jufar 1
1Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, 32610 Seri Iskandar, Perak Darul Ridzuan, Malaysia.
Abstract. Supersonic separator is a new technology with applications in
hydrocarbon dew pointing and gas dehydration which can be used to
condensate and separate water and heavy hydrocarbons from natural gas.
Many researchers have studied the design, performance and efficiency,
economic viability, and industrial applications of these separators.
The purpose of this paper is to succinctly review recent progress in the
design and application of supersonic separators and their limitations. This
review has found that while several aspects of this study are well studied,
considerable gaps within the published literature still exists in the areas such
as turndown flexibility which is a critical requirement to cater for variation
of mass flow and since almost all the available designs have a fixed
geometry and therefore cannot be considered suitable for variable mass flow
rate, which is a common situation in actual site. Hence, the focus needs to
be more on designing a flexible geometry that can maintain a high separation
efficiency regardless of inlet conditions and mass flow variations. This
review is focusing only on the design and application of the supersonic
separators without going through the experimental facilities, industrial
platform, pilot plants as well as theoretical, analytical, and numerical
modelling.
1 Introduction
The presence of CO2 in a natural gas mixture has a negative effect. As such, (i) it reduces
heating value of the natural gas, (ii) it causes corrosion of the pipes and hence corrosion-
resistant materials have to be used which leads to a costly facility, (iii) high CO2 production
requires separation process and huge storage facilities. However, the high capital cost for the
Acid Gas Removal System (AGRS) considered being the major factor obstructing the
monetization of a high CO2 gas field. Therefore, several technologies and processes have
been used and evaluated by the industry which have the potential to remove CO 2 from the
natural gas. Each of these methods has its landscape of performance, energy requirement and
system footprint [1], namely; amine and membrane which however were economically
impossible. Besides, these technologies were technically non-viable as CO2 proportion gets
higher [2]. Extensive studies then introduced a new technology called ‘vortex tube’. This
technology has been developed on the pressure difference principle. This principle is
employed to a nozzle pressure that has hot and cold ends, these ends create a differential
______________________________________
1
Corresponding author: [Link]@[Link]
© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License 4.0 ([Link]
MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
pressure state, which is used in the supersonic flow. The role of supersonic flow is to create
a low-temperature area inside the nozzle. This process can separate CO 2, sulfur and other
impurities from the natural gas that consist of heavier hydrocarbons. The credit for this goes
to a physical principle called ‘centrifugal force’ which is caused by the swirling flow [3].
The supersonic separation unit consists of (i) Casing, (ii) swirling device, (iii) supersonic
nozzle, (iv) liquid extraction and (v) diffuser. As shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Current supersonic separator UTP patent design.
One of the supersonic separation advantages is that it is more efficient in extracting
dissolved impurities in natural gas. Moreover, supersonic separation unit has no rotating
parts. Hence it needs less compression power which simplifies its scheme, footprint, and
maintenance. Also, supersonic separation unit is cost-efficient due to its small and compact
design, it also requires less operating cost.
There are several technologies by which CO2 can be separated. Two technologies are
considered the most recent and efficient CO2 separation devices; namely, the 3S supersonic
separator and the second one is the Twister separator. A detailed review of the literature is
presented in the sections that follow.
2 Geometry of nozzle
The Laval Nozzle is a tube of an hourglass shape that is pinched in the middle. It uses the
principle of the Joule-Thompson effect where expanding the pressurized gas to low pressure
at constant enthalpy results in transforming the potential energy (temperature and pressure)
into kinetic energy (velocity) that eventually leads to accelerating the gas to a supersonic
speed [4]. The Laval Nozzle is composed of three sections: expander, cyclone separator, and
compressor as in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Scheme of supersonic swirling separator(Twister-I) [4].
1. The expander (convergent section)
The expander (subsonic zone) is located at the inlet section. Where the swirling generator
located in the expander is composed of several blades tangent to the nozzle. The gas flow
2
MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
passes through these blades leading the gas flow to accelerate and enter the nozzle with the
tangential velocity of a particular value. The pressure and temperature are decreasing due to
the supersonic speed of the wet gas in the expander. Where the drop of the temperature results
in condensation of the water vapors existing in the gas[5, 6].
2. The Cyclone Separator (throat section)
After the expansion, in the cyclone separator (critical zone) where the already formed
droplets are being separated to the walls due to the centrifugal force that can reach values up
to 500000g causing the cyclonic separation [5]. The droplets separated on the walls are then
forming a thin film which is moving in the direction of the flow.
3. The Compressor (divergent section)
The Laval Nozzle ends with the compressor (supersonic zone). A separation channel is
located in the compressor to separate the thin water film on the walls from the dry gas stream.
Compressor part leads to the diffuser in order to recover the initial pressure of the gas where
a shock wave is produced. The shock wave is generated by changing the velocity from
supersonic to sonic speed. From here, the gas is slowed down in the diffuser that results in
recovering about (65-80%) of the initial pressure [7].
In the Laval nozzle, the inlet diameter must be greater than √5 of the throat diameter, in
order to obtain the sonic speed at the throat [8]. On the other hand, the throat diameter should
be equal to or smaller than the convergent length based on Wen et al. [5, 9-14] calculations
where the Foelsch’s analytical calculation [15] was used to compute the dimensions of the
convergent section of the Laval nozzle in order to obtain the sound speed in the throat area
and generate the stable supersonic flows. The recommended geometry is governed by:
D Dcr 1 x
3
x
1 2 for X m ሺͳሻ
D1 Dcr Xm L L
3
D Dcr 1 x x
D D 1 X 2 1 L for X m
1 cr m L
For converging-diverging nozzle, the optimum design proposed by Betting [16] dictates
that 50 ≤ L2 (D2 – Dcr) ≤ 220. Many of the designs use straighteners in the substantially
gaseous region. However, the decision on the geometry and location of this component is
still not clear.
3 Twister BV
Prast et al. [17] who was associated with Twister BV, studied the nucleation and growth of
droplets in a 2D supersonic Laval nozzle. Twister separator which is based on air drying
device was originally developed by Stork Product Engineering BV in 1989 [18]. Twister BV
company is a joint venture between the Beacon Group and Shell launched in the year 2000
for developing the first generation of supersonic separators, trademarked Twister [19]. This
model used a deflecting blade in the supersonic section of the nozzle to generate the swirl
required for condensed particles separation and is now referred to as Twister-I as illustrated
in Fig. 2. However, Twister design is reported to have a temperature drop as low as (-40C)
with a corresponding pressure drop of up to 30%. But then, a significant portion of the gas
leaves with the mist, forcing the design to have a secondary separator called degassing vessel.
Erosion of the wing or deltoid plate paneled to the inside wall downstream to the throat is a
further drawback that is making the swirl action prone to extinction in a short period of time.
The residence time for the droplets is also short rendering the separation performance very
low. Therefore, the design of the nozzle was optimized by including a central body and an
annular nozzle configuration [20]. The swirl generation was also moved upstream, in the
subsonic part of the nozzle inlet (Twister-II) as showed in Fig. 3.
3
MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
Fig. 3. Scheme of supersonic swirling separator (Twister-II) [21].
The improved design is being used by PETRONAS and Sarawak Shell Berhad (SSB).
Nevertheless, inability to handle variable mass flow rates and high-pressure loss (30%) are
issues yet to be resolved.
4 3S supersonic separator
3S separator is supersonic separator designed by TransLang Technologies Limited which is
an engineering services company. The 3S supersonic separator is a hybrid of the two Twister
devices. This device has a swirl generator in the subsonic entrance to the nozzle and has no
central body as in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. 3-S separation [21].
3S Separator uses the fundamental principle of adiabatic expansion through a Laval
nozzle. Additionally, however, a swirler is included to increase the centrifugal force in the
separation zone. A de-swirler or directing vanes at the outlet is another feature that makes it
different from other designs. As reported, a temperature drop of up to (-70C) is possible
with a corresponding pressure ratio of about 2.5 and Mach numbers in the range of 1.5 to 2.
Because of the low temperature, the potential use of 3S extends to LNG applications, CO 2
extraction, and ethane recovery and the cryogenic temperature for natural gas is within the
capacity limit of the separator. 3S is patented in many countries including US, Canada, and
Netherlands. Additionally, the 3S separator was capable of dew pointing lean gases where
Joule Thompson systems were ineffective. Some of these accomplishments were published
in an article in the Oil and Gas Journal [22]. However, it seems at this point that there have
been no further contributions from this group to the technology available from Twister.
5 Garrett design [23]
The separator is featured by supersonic expansion of a multi-component gas in a planar bend.
The bend is shaped to have converging and diverging sections with an intervening minimum
throat area. The condensed fluid is collected through a permeable wall as shown in Fig. 5.
4
MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
Fig. 5. Supersonic flow separator by Garrett [23].
The design is unique in the sense that it is equipped with (i) a mechanism to adjust size
of the flow region and fully control the starting of supersonic flow and also the location of
shockwave for maximum separation efficiency, and (ii) a permeable wall with electrostatic
field to enhance particle ejection and droplet coalescence. One drawback of this design,
however, is that the separation performance depends on the radius of curvature of the duct,
which in turn is affected by the presence of unwanted shockwaves.
6 Keisuke design [24]
Designed to separate two or more gaseous mixtures, it has a converging-diverging nozzle
with a swirler at the inlet, and two vacuum pumps connected to the exits. The oblique shock
in the expansion zone is reported to have used for vaporizing the condensate back to the
gaseous state. As documented by other authors, however, the design is featured by high-
pressure drop due to the long axial distance. It also needs sufficient energy to sustain strong
swirl throughout the separation zone.
7 Van Holten design [25]
Unlike Garret Design, the separator by Val Holten has a cylindrical shape that converges to
a nozzle and diverges into a swirl nozzle. The gas that enters to the separator at subsonic
speed first flows through a converging section and then expands to supersonic speed in the
diverging section of the separator. Plate-like elements attached to the inside wall and
protruding radially into the flow imparts a swirl to the supersonic flow. The lean gas at
supersonic speed is discharged through a centrally arranged pipe. Condensate reach mixture,
on the other hand, leaves the separation zone through a diverging section where a suction fan
is installed to draw out the fluid. This design suffers from erosion of the deltoid plates and
the energy it needs to run the fan. Furthermore, there is no mechanism to deal with variable
mass flow rate. According to the discussion in Betting et al. [16], Van Holten’s separator has
low efficiency due to the presence of shock waves in the first and second outlets. Which in
5
MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
other words is that substantial amount of the condensed gas leaves through the secondary
outlet.
8 Borissov design [26]
Two version of Borissov designs have been reported. The first design called SUSTOR-I
entails a plug or central body and inlet manifold where the swirl is initiated using guide vanes,
as described in Fig. 6 (a). Some of the features are: (i) temperature drop up to (-73C), (ii)
tangential inlet and tangential exit, (iii) reduced pressure drop for an equivalent temperature
reduction, (iv) liquid droplets attached to the sidewalls by centrifugal action are removed
through slits, (v) dry gas that is spirally expanding in the separator leaves the vortex chamber
through a tangential outlet. The second design called SUSTOR-II involves a chamber
consists of two disc-like parts (marked by the A-A and B-B cross-sections in Fig. 6 (b)) and
the converging-diverging nozzle located in between. SUSTOR-II advantage is that the
tangential exit is thought to have mitigated the high-pressure loss in SUSTOR-I.
Nevertheless, the cast geometry is relatively complex.
(a) (b)
Fig. 6. Schematics of the (a) SUSTOR-I and (b) SUSTOR-II Separators [26].
9 Wen et al. design [27]
Wen and his colleagues have worked on the analysis and modelling of the supersonic
separators over the last few years. This design has a cylindrical casing starting from inlet
flange all the way to the expanding pipe. Akin to Twister-II and SUSTOR-I, it also has a
central body and swirl generating blades. However, the shape of the central body is different,
and the longitudinal cross-section has ellipsoid shape at the inlet while the rest of the edges
are straight lines. The presence of a swirler at the inlet and resistive vortex vanes at the central
outlet also making the design similar to 3S separator. In terms of structure, is reported simple.
However, the claim that it runs stably and has high efficiency is hard to verify for, and there
is limited information on its performance and working range. Additionally, the design is
fixed geometry and therefore cannot be considered suitable for variable mass flow rate, which
is a common situation in actual site.
6
MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
10 Beijing university of technology [28]
A supersonic separator test apparatus with a throat diameter of 10 mm was built with stainless
steel. The separator has no central body, in which a swirl generator was located downstream
of the nozzle and in the supersonic flow region. The device also has a total of seven
thermocouple probes along the nozzle, humidity and temperature sensors, pressure gauges,
flow meters at the inlet and dry gas outlet of the separator, and also an extra pressure gauge
at the wet outlet.
Fig. 7. Tangential inlet openings that generate the swirl [29].
As showed in Fig. 7, the flow is introduced as a tangential flow by passing through the
two symmetrical inlet openings in which the swirl generator was relocated upstream to the
subsonic section and also the blade system to generate swirl is not needed [29]. The
dimensions of the two openings can be adjusted in order to increase or decrease the inlet
velocity. However, changing the size of the inlet openings had no effect on the flow rate.
Another factor to consider in this design was the strong gradients in tangential velocity near
the axis of the nozzle.
11 Discussion
Table 1 shows the comparisons between the available designs of the supersonic separators.
In terms of the main features, it is clear that almost all the separators contain a swirler
generator installed except for Garrett design. On the other hand, Twister, SUSTOR-I and
Wen et al. designs have a central body inside the Laval nozzle in order to increase the
separation performance. Another main feature is the temperature drop which found to be the
lowest of (-70oC) in the 3S separator and (-73oC) in the SUSTOR separator. Garrett separator
has a unique design with electrostatic field to enhance the separation and adjustable flow
region that might be able to handle the flow rate variations. SUSTOR separator can also be
scaled down for any rate of the gas flow. Regarding the limitation, almost all the designs
suffer from the high-pressure losses and the turndown flexibility problem. SUSTOR-II
considered being the latest and best design available recently. SUSTOR-II was able to
minimize the pressure losses and solve the turndown flexibility. However, the cast geometry
is relatively complex.
7
MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
Table 1. Comparison between the available supersonic separators designs.
Design Main features Limitations
Deflecting blade to generate the
swirl.
Inability to handle variable mass
Central body in order to increase
TWISTER BV [7] flow rates and high-pressure loss
the separation performance.
up to 30%.
A temperature drops as low as (-
40°C).
Hybrid of the two Twister
devices.
A swirler is included. Fixed geometry that lacks the
3S Supersonic
A de-swirler or directing vanes ability to handle the variable
Separator [22]
at the outlet. mass flow rates.
Temperature drop of up to (-
70°C).
Featured with a planar bend
contains the converging and
diverging sections with an
intervening minimum throat The separation performance
area. depends on the radius of
Garrett Design
curvature of the duct, which in
[23] A permeable wall to collect the
turn is affected by the presence
condensed fluid.
of unwanted shock waves.
Adjustable flow region.
Electrostatic field to enhance the
separation.
The design is featured by high-
A converging-diverging nozzle pressure drop due to the long
Keisuke Design with a swirler at the inlet and two axial distance.
[24] vacuum pumps connected to the It needs sufficient energy to
exits. sustain strong swirl throughout
the separation zone.
A cylindrical shape that
converges to a nozzle and
diverges into a swirl nozzle.
The design suffers from erosion
Plate-like elements attached to
of the deltoid plates and the
the inside wall and protruding
energy it needs to run the fan.
radially into the flow imparts a
Van Holten Design There is no mechanism to deal
swirl to the supersonic flow.
[25] with variable mass flow rate.
The gas at supersonic speed is
Has low efficiency due to the
discharged through a centrally
presence of shock waves in the
arranged pipe.
first and second outlets.
A suction fan is installed in the
diverging section to draw out the
fluid.
SUSTOR-I entails a plug or
central body and inlet manifold
where the swirl is initiated using
guide vanes.
SUSTOR-I&II The cast geometry is relatively
A temperature drops up to (-
[26] complex.
73°C).
Reduced pressure drop for an
equivalent temperature
reduction.
8
MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
The liquid is removed through
slits.
Dry gas leaves through a
tangential outlet.
The tangential exit in SUSTOR-
II is thought to have mitigated
the high-pressure loss in the
SUSTOR-I design.
Can be scaled down for any rate
of the gas flow.
The claim that it runs stably and
A cylindrical casing is starting has high efficiency is hard to
from inlet flange all the way to verify for, and there is limited
Wen et al. Design the expanding pipe. information on its performance
[27] A central body and swirl and working range.
generating blades. Fixed geometry which is unable
Simple structure. to handle variable mass flow
rates.
No central body.
Swirl generator located
downstream of the nozzle. Changing the size of the inlet
Contains total of seven openings had no effect on the
Design by Beijing thermocouple probes along the flow rate.
University of nozzle. Strong gradients in tangential
Technology [28] Tangential flow by passing velocity near the axis of the
through two symmetrical inlet nozzle due to the lack of the
openings that can be adjusted to central body.
increase or decrease the inlet
velocity.
12 Conclusion
The application of supersonic separators in natural gas treatment has been studied
and practiced for over two decades now. Several aspects of the technology including
physical design, sensitivity to flow conditions, and various design features such as
swirl generation and diffuser properties have been studied using analytical,
numerical, and experimental techniques.
Using the conventional method of separation, it is impossible to initiate condensation
at pressures higher than 100atm. Besides, the condensation process might not be
amenable to full control over a wider operating region. Therefore, it is necessary to
rely on a separator that partly or entirely uses supersonic flow.
Turndown flexibility is a critical requirement to cater for variation of mass flow rate.
The reported designs fail to have this feature.
Swirl generation device is also an important part of the design of these separators,
and further research can potentially increase the knowledge base to improve the swirl
generation effectiveness significantly.
Many of the designs discussed above use straighteners in the substantially gaseous
region. However, the decision on the geometry and location of this component is still
not clear.
The research on mechanical gas separators for the last few decades had studied the
sizing of the supersonic zone, design of the swirler, design of the separation section,
prediction of the gas property, condensation enhancement, and CFD simulation.
9
MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
This paper reviewed the available supersonic separator designs and limitations in a
very simple way, as well as making a brief comparison between them in terms of the
main features and limitations.
Abbreviation
AGRS Acid Gas Removal System
C Celsius
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
LNG Liquefied natural gas
SSB Sarawak Shell Berhad
Symbols
D1 Inlet diameter
Dcr Throat diameter
D Convergent diameter
D2 Outlet diameter
L Length of the convergent nozzle
L2 Length of the diverging nozzle
Xm Convergent curve relative coordinate
x Distance from the inlet to arbitrary cross section
The authors would like to acknowledge Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS (UTP) financial assistance
under Graduate Assistance (GA) Scheme.
References
1 M. S. Onn, A. A. Seman, Z. Kassim, and M. A. Esa, "CO 2 Separation from Natural
Gas Through Hydrate Formation," (2014).
2 R. A. Samawe, K. Rostani, A. Mohd Jalil, M. Esa, and N. Othman, "Concept
Proofing of upersonic Nozzle Separator for CO2 Separation from Natural Gas using
a Flow Loop," (2014).
3 S. Kong, J. Liu, L. Zhao, P. Cai, and Y. Huang, "Study of CO 2 Separation
Characteristic in Supersonic High-Pressure Vortex Tube," in Materials for
Renewable Energy & Environment (ICMREE), 2011 International Conference on,
(2011), pp. 936-940.
4 T. González, M. Netušil, and P. Ditl, "Raw Gas Dehydration on Supersonic Swirling
Separator," Czasopismo Tech. Mech. J., vol. 109, (2012).
5 C. Wen, X. Cao, J. Zhang, and L. Wu, "Three-dimensional Numerical Simulation
of the Supersonic Swirling Separator," in The Twentieth International Offshore and
Polar Engineering Conference, (2010).
6 C. Wen, X. Cao, Y. Yang, and J. Zhang, "Effects of Swirls on Natural Gas Flow in
Supersonic Separators," in The Twenty-first International Offshore and Polar
Engineering Conference, (2011).
7 F. T. Okimoto and J. M. Brouwer, "Supersonic Gas Conditioning," vol. 223 (2002).
8 H. C. Man, J. Duan, and T. M. Yue, "Design and Characteristic Analysis of
Supersonic Nozzles for High Gas Pressure Laser Cutting," J. Mater. Process.
Technol., vol. 63, pp. 217-222, (1997).
10
MATEC Web of Conferences 131, 03006 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/201713103006
UTP-UMP SES 2017
9 C. Wen, X. Cao, and Y. Yang, "Swirling Flow of Natural Gas in Supersonic
Separators," Chem. Eng. Process., vol. 50, pp. 644-649, (2011).
10 C. Wen, X. Cao, Y. Yang, and Y. Feng, "Prediction of Mass Flow Rate in
Supersonic Natural Gas Processing," Oil Gas Sci. Technol.- Rev. IFP. J., vol. 70,
pp. 1101-1109, (2013).
11 C. Wen, X. Cao, Y. Yang, and J. Zhang, "Supersonic Swirling Characteristics of
Natural Gas in Convergent-Divergent Nozzles," Pet. Sci. J., vol. 8, pp. 114-119,
(2011).
12 C. Wen, Y. Feng, X. Cao, Y. Yang, and P. Witt, "Effects of Operating Parameters
on Flow Characteristics of Natural Gas in Supersonic Separators," in Offshore
Technology Conference, (2013).
13 C. Wen, Y. Feng, P. Witt, X. Cao, and Y. Yang, "CFD Simulation of Supersonic
Swirling Separation of Natural Gas Using a Delta Wing," in Proceedings of the
Ninth International Conference on CFD in the Minerals and Process Industries,
(2012).
14 Y. Yang, C. Wen, S. Wang, Y. Feng, and P. Witt, "The Swirling Flow Structure in
Supersonic Separators for Natural Gas Dehydration," RSC ADV J., vol. 4, pp.
52967-52972, (2014).
15 K. Foelsch, "The Analytical Design of an Axially Symmetric Laval Nozzle for a
Parallel and Uniform Jet," J. Aeronaut. Sci., (2012).
16 M. Betting, T. V. Holten, and J. M. H. M. V. Veen, "Supersonic Separator Apparatus
and Method," US Patent US 20020194988A1, (2002).
17 B. Prast, R. A. van Dam, J. F. H. Willems, and M. E. H. van Dongen, "Formation
of Nano-Sized Water Droplets in a Supersonic Expansion Flow," J. Aerosol Sci, vol.
27, pp. S147-S148, (1996).
18 P. Schinkelshoek and H. Epsom, "Supersonic Gas Conditioning-Low Pressure Drop
Twister for NGL Recovery," (2006).
19 F. T. Okimoto, S. Sibani, and M. Lander, "Twister Supersonic Gas Conditioning
Process," (2002).
20 B. Prast, P. Schinkelshoek, B. Lammers, and M. Betting, "CFD for Supersonic Gas
Processing," in NEL Multiphase Separation and Multiphase Pumping Technologies
Conference, (2005), pp. 53-58.
21 M. Haghighi, K. A. Hawboldt, and M. A. Abdi, "Supersonic Gas Separators:
Review of Latest Developments," J NAT GAS SCI ENG, vol. 27, pp. 109-121,
(2015).
22 V. Alfyorov, L. Bagirov, L. Dmitriev, V. Feygin, S. Imayev, and J. R. Lacey,
"Supersonic Nozzle Efficiently Separates Natural Gas Components," Oil Gas J.,
vol. 103, pp. 53-58, (2005).
23 R. L. Garrett, "Supersonic Flow Seprator," US Patent 3559373, (1971).
24 S. Keisuk, "Separation of Gaseous Mixtures," Japan Patent JPH0217-921A, (1990).
25 V. Holten, "Method and Device for Separating a Gas from a Gas Mixture," (1992).
26 A. Borissov, G. Mirzoev, and V. Shtern, "Supersonic Swirling Separator 2
(Sustor2)," ed: Google Patents, (2014).
27 C. Wen, Y. Yang, and W. Jiang, "Supersonic Expansion Refrigeration and Cyclone
Separation Device for Natural Gas," (2012).
28 L. Hengwei, L. Zhonggliang, F. Yongxun, G. Keyu, and Y. Tingmin, "Characteristic
of a Supersonic Swirling Dehydration System of Natural Gas," Chin. J. Chem. Eng.,
vol. 13, pp. 9-12, (2005).
29 Z. Liu, J. Ding, W. Jiang, J. Zhang, and Y. Feng, "Numerical Simulation of Highly-
Swirling Supersonic Flow Inside a Laval Nozzle," PROG COMPUT FLUID DY,
vol. 8, pp. 536-540, (2008).
11
