Tony,Phil has pointed out that sizing header for choked flow is not an issue and he has done it for many projects. I would believe Phil's statement is TRUE. I have used SONIC flare tip for numbers of project. The tip is just PIPE. Nothing more than that. It has been designed to create SONIC flow. I believe the design has serious consideration on FIV, AIV, dynaimic stress analysis, noise, welding type, procedures, etc. I have not seen one failed.
However, i personally have not designed choke flow in header before and dare to this now with the limited experience that i have . Reason being there are many binding conditions behind success. We have to ensure the pipe design passing all criterias (FIV, AIV, Dynamic stress), noise (certainly the noise is tremendous and acoustic insulation is required in some part of header) welding is 100% good, 100% X-ray passed, etc. Human factor, working environment, stringent QA requirement, etc have to be taken into account. That's one of the main reason most of the COMPANY e.g.SHELL, DOW, EXXONMOBIL, etc limit it to MACH no of 0.5-0.8. Those all these factors has caused me take a conservative approach (of course always expensive).
QUOTE
I think it's not so easy as choosing the next one or two larger pipes sizes. Because you might cause the choked flow in upstream pipes. The problom isn't solved but displaced. Do you have some experience in such case?
Phil's statement is reference to TAIL pipe. Those increase by one or two size bigger will definitely get system away from MACH NO criteria.
You are also certainly right on the second part of the statement. Choked flow occured at MAIN HEADER (or SUBHEADER), increase the CHOKED header size will result lower pressure drop on the line and back pressure to the upstream subheader and tail pipes. The may end-up more upstream pipes/headers experience choke flow. you have to do the same for the usptream untill all pipe not experience choke flow. This could results an EXPENSIVE design as Phil mentioned in earlier post.
JoeWong