Abstract
The compressibility factor (zfactor) of gases is a thermodynamic property used to account for the deviation of real gas behavior from that of an ideal gas. Correlations based on the equation of state are often implicit, because they require iteration and are computationally expensive. A number of explicit correlations have been derived to enhance simplicity; however, no single explicit correlation has been developed for the full range of pseudoreduced temperatures \(\left( {1.05 \le T_{pr} \le 3} \right)\) and pseudoreduced pressures \(\left( {0.2 \le P_{pr} \le 15} \right)\), which represents a significant research gap. This work presents a new zfactor correlation that can be expressed in linear form. On the basis of Hall and Yarborough’s implicit correlation, we developed the new correlation from 5346 experimental data points extracted from 5940 data points published in the SPE natural gas reservoir engineering textbook and created a linear zfactor chart for a full range of pseudoreduced temperatures \((1.15 \le T_{pr} \le 3)\) and pseudoreduced pressures \((0.2 \le P_{pr} \le 15)\).
Introduction
The compressibility factor (zfactor) of gases is used to correct the volume of gas estimated from the ideal gas equation to the actual value. It is required in all calculations involving natural gases.
The zfactor is the ratio of the volume occupied by a given amount of a gas to the volume occupied by the same amount of an ideal gas:
Substituting for \(V_{\text{ideal}}\) in the ideal gas equation
For generalization, the zfactor is expressed as a function of pseudoreduced temperature and pressure (Trube 1957; Dranchuk et al. 1971; Aboukassem and Dranchuk 1975; Sutton 1985; Heidaryan et al. 2010).
Dranchuk et al. (1971) defined pseudoreduced temperature and pressure as the ratio of temperature and pressure to the pseudocritical temperature and pressure of natural gas, respectively:
The pseudocritical properties of gas are the molar abundance (mole fraction weighted) mean of the critical properties of the constituents of the natural gas:
As a function of specific gravity (air = 1.0), Sutton (1985) provides
A plot of 5346 data points covering a full range of pseudoreduced temperatures \((1.15 \le T_{pr} \le 3)\) and pseudoreduced pressures \((0.2 \le P_{pr} \le 15)\) is shown in Fig. 1
Implicit zfactor correlations
The three most popular correlations for calculating the zfactor are implicit. The three correlations, described in the following subsections, are well known for their accuracies, almost unit correlation of regression coefficients and low maximum errors.
Hall and Yarborough’s correlation (Trube 1957)
Hall and Yarborough’s correlation is a modification of the hard sphere Carnahan–Starling equation of state, with constants developed through regression, and 1500 data points extracted from Standing and Katz’s original zfactor chart, as shown in Fig. 2.
where y is the root of the following equation:
Dranchuk and AbouKassem’s correlation (Aboukassem and Dranchuk 1975)
This is an elevenconstant modification of the Benedict–Webb–Rubin equation of state. The constants were calculated using a regression method, with 1500 data points extracted from standing and Katz’s chart.
where y is the root of the following equation:
Dranchuk, Purvis and Robinson’s Correlation (Dranchuk et al. 1971)
This is a further modification of the earlier obtained DAK correlation. The DPR has eight constants and requires less computational workload to obtain the zfactor.
where y is the root of the following equation:
These correlations are effective; however, they do not converge (or converge on wrong pseudoreduced density values) when the temperature of the systems is close to the critical temperature. In addition, they are computationally expensive. It is these limitations that necessitated the development of the current explicit correlations.
Explicit correlations
Explicit correlations do not require an iterative procedure. Therefore, they do not have the problem of convergence as opposed to implicit correlations. One of the best explicit correlations for evaluation of the zfactor was given by Beggs and Brills (1973). More recent ones are Heidaryan et al. (2010), Azizi et al. (2010) and Sanjari and Lay (2012) correlations. A short description of some of the explicit correlations is presented in the following subsections.
Brill and Beggs’ compressibility factor (1973)
where
Heidaryan, Moghdasi and Rahimi’s Correlation
Heidaryan et al. (2010) developed a new explicit piecewise correlation using regression analysis of the zfactor experimental value for reduced pseudopressure of fewer and >3 (Table 1). The correlation has a total of 22 constants, with a discontinuity at \(P_{pr} = 3\) (Fig. 2) and correlation regression coefficient of 0.99,963.
For some petroleum engineering applications, it is often necessary to compute the derivative of zfactor with respect to pressure or temperature. A function that is discontinuous at a certain point is not differentiable at that point (O’Neil 2012). Therefore, the explicit correlation developed by Heidaryan et al. (2010) cannot be used to evaluate the derivative of the zfactor with respect to the pseudoreduced pressure at \(P_{pr} = 3\) (Fig. 3).
Azizi, Behbahani and Isazadeh’s Correlation
Azizi et al. (2010) presented an explicit correlation with 20 constants for a reduced temperature range of \(1.1 \le T_{pr} \le 2\) and reduced pressure range of \(0.2 \le P_{pr} \le 11\). The correlation used 3038 data points within the given ranges.
where
Sanjari and Nemati’s Correlation
Using 5844 data points, Sanjari and Lay (2012) developed an explicit correlation for the zfactor. This correlation, as with Heidaryan et al. (2010) correlation, has different constants for the values of \(P_{pr}\) below and above 3, but a total of 16 constants (Table 2). The procedure for calculating the zfactor is as follows:
This correlation, however, is less efficient when compared with that of Heidaryan et al. (2010). Its regression correlation coefficient is 0.8757 and its error rate at a certain point can be as high as 90 per cent. For instance, the actual value of z from the experiment for a \(P_{pr}\) of 15 and a \(T_{pr}\) of 1.05 is 1.753, but this correlation gives a value of 3.3024. Therefore, the actual maximum error for this correlation is 104.3206 %.
To resolve the limitations in the application of the existing explicit correlations, a single correlation that is continuous over the entire range of pseudoreduced pressure is required.
New explicit zfactor correlation
A new explicit zfactor is developed as a multistage correlation based on Hall and Yarborough’s implicit correlation. The implicit correlation was rearranged to return a value of y using an approximate value of z. The yvalues on the right side of the expression were replaced by \(\left( {A_{1} P_{pr} /z} \right)\). Nonlinear regression was performed using the derived model. The resulting correlation for reduced density is given in Eq. 15, while Eq. 14 provides an extra iteration to bring the results closer to those obtained by Hall and Yarborough. The constants for these two equations are shown in
Table 3. The zfactor chart shown in Fig. 4 was generated from this new correlation:
where
Linearized zfactor isotherms
Given that the reduced temperature and pressure fall within \(1.15 \le T_{pr} \le 3\) and \(6 \le P_{pr} \le 15\), the first nine constants can be used to predict z with a correlation regression coefficient of 0.99899. For this range of pseudoreduced properties, the simplified singlestage correlation of the zfactor is given by
A plot of Eq. 16 is shown in Fig. 5.
A careful analysis of Eq. 16 shows that it can be rewritten in the following form:
The values of M are chosen to be a function of reduced temperature and a regression analysis performed to extend the applicability of Eq. 17 to cover the ranges \(1.15 \le T_{pr} \le 3\) and \(0.2 \le P_{pr} \le 15\). For this range of values of reduced temperature and pressure, M is given by
It should be noted that B and C maintain the same definition as in Eq. 16. Hence, a graph of \(zC\) against \(P_{pr}^{2} \left( {1  \frac{B}{{C^{2} }}} \right)\) gives straight lines passing through the point \(\left( {P_{pr}^{2} \left( {1  \frac{B}{{C^{2} }}} \right) = 0, zC = 1} \right)\) with slopes M. A plot of the straight line form of the zfactor is shown in Fig. 6.
Results and discussion
Figure 7 shows the cross plot of the zfactor from the new correlation against the measured values. The cross plots show that the plotted points fall on the unit slope line through the origin, which implies that the new correlation reproduces the measured values to a considerable degree of accuracy.
Table 4 shows the statistical detail of the constants of the new correlation. The narrowness of the 95 per cent confidence interval is in agreement with the nearzero Pvalues. This implies that the probability that these values could have been developed by chance is negligible, which signifies that the new correlation is reliable (Wolberg 2006).
As shown in Table 5, within the range of pseudoreduced temperatures \((1.15 \le T_{pr} \le 3)\) and pseudoreduced pressures \((0.2 \le P_{pr} \le 15)\), Eq. 14 outperforms Heidaryan et al.’s (2010) correlation in terms of correlation regression coefficient, average percentage error and root mean square of error, with the exception of maximum percentage error. Most importantly, the new correlation is continuous over the entire pseudopressure range. Therefore, it would allow for computation of the derivatives of the zfactor over the whole range \((0.2 \le P_{pr} \le 15)\), which is not possible with other explicit correlations.
An application of the new correlation shown in Eq. 17 produces a good correlation of regression of 0.9999 between \(z_{\exp } C\) and \(1 + MP_{pr}^{2} \left( {1  \frac{B}{{C^{2} }}} \right)\). The maximum relative error is the same as that in Eq. 14. This maximum error is shown in Fig. 8 to occur at \(P_{pr} = 2\) and \(T_{pr} = 1.15\).
Plots of the zfactors generated using the three most recent explicit correlations (Sanjari and Lay 2012; Heidaryan et al. 2010; Azizi et al. 2010) were compared with those generated using Eqs. 14 and 16 (Fig. 9). While Sanjari and Lay (2012) and Azizi et al. (2010) show marked deviations from the unit line, Heidaryan et al. (2010) and Eqs. 14 and 16 fall on the unit line. This shows that the correlations of Heidaryan et al. (2010) and Eqs. 14 and 16 (and by extension Eq. 17) are better at predicting the values of the zfactor than those of Sanjari and Lay (2012) and Azizi et al. (2010). Since these functions have no point of discontinuity, they can be used in applications where the derivative of the zfactor with respect to its independent variables is required.
Example calculations
With Figs. 1 and 5, evaluate and compare the compressibility factor of a 0.7 gravity gas at 2000 psig and 150 °F.
From Sutton’s (1985) correlation,
Solution 1
From Fig. 10, \(z = 0.83\)
Solution 2
From Fig. 11,
The problem can also be solved using Eq. 14 directly:
where
Therefore,
Conclusions
A simple accurate correlation for evaluating the zfactor that can be linearized has been developed. This correlation performs excellently in the ranges \(1.15 \le T_{pr} \le 3\) and \(0.2 \le P_{pr} \le 15\). It is simple and singlevalued. A noteworthy advancement is that the new correlation is continuous over the full range of pseudoreduced pressures \((0.2 \le P_{pr} \le 15)\). This will widen its applicability to include cases such as the evaluation of natural gas compressibility, in which the derivative of the compressibility factor with respect to the pseudoreduced pressure is required. For the range outside the coverage of this correlation, implicit correlations can be applied; however, this new explicit correlation can be used to provide an initial guess to speed up the iteration process.
Abbreviations
 P :

Pressure (psi)
 \(P_{pc}\) :

Pseudocritical pressure
 \(P_{pr}\) :

Pseudoreduced pressure
 T :

Temperature (R)
 \(T_{pc}\) :

Pseudocritical temperature (R)
 \(T_{pr}\) :

Pseudoreduced temperature
 \(P_{pc}\) :

Pseudocritical pressure (psi)
 \(P_{pr}\) :

Pseudoreduced pressure
 \(v\) :

Initial guess for iteration process
 Y :

Pseudoreduced density
 zfactor:

Compressibility factor
References
Azizi N, Behbahani R, Isazadeh MA(2010) An efficient correlation for calculating compressibility factor of natural gases. J Nat Gas Chem 19:642–645. doi:10.1016/S10039953(09)600815
Aboukassem JH, Dranchuk PM (1975) Calculation of z factors for natural gases using equations of state. J Can Pet Technol. doi:10.2118/750303
Beggs DHU, Brill JPU (1973) A study of twophase flow in inclined pipes. J Pet Technol 25:607–617
Dranchuk RA, Purvis DB, Robinson PM (1971) Generalized compressibility factor tables. J Can Pet Technol 10:22–29
Heidaryan E, Salarabadi A, Moghadasi J (2010) A novel correlation approach for prediction of natural gas compressibility factor. J Nat Gas Chem 19:189–192. doi:10.1016/S10039953(09)600505
O’Neil PV (2012) Advanced engineering mathematics, 7th edn. Cengage Laerning, Stamford
Sanjari E, Lay EN (2012) An accurate empirical correlation for predicting natural gas compressibility factors. J Nat Gas Chem 21:184–188. doi:10.1016/S10039953(11)603526
Sutton RP (1985) Compressibility factor for highmolecularweight reservoir gases. In: 60th annual technical conference and exhibition of society of petroleum engineers
Trube A (1957) Compressibility of natural gases. J Pet Technol. doi:10.2118/697G
Wolberg J (2006) Data analysis using the method of least squares: extracting the most information from experiments, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin
Author information
Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Kareem, L.A., Iwalewa, T.M. & AlMarhoun, M. New explicit correlation for the compressibility factor of natural gas: linearized zfactor isotherms. J Petrol Explor Prod Technol 6, 481–492 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s1320201502093
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
Keywords
 Zfactor
 Explicit correlation
 Reduced temperature
 Reduced pressure
 Natural gas