0
Fluid-Structure Interaction

Flowforce in a Safety Relief Valve Under Incompressible, Compressible, and Two-Phase Flow Conditions (PVP-2011-57896)

[+] Author and Article Information
Vasilios Kourakos

e-mail: kourakos@vki.ac.be

Patrick Rambaud

e-mail: rambaud@vki.ac.be

Jean-Marie Buchlin

e-mail: buchlin@vki.ac.be
von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics
Waterloose steenweg 72, B-1640
Sint-Genesius-Rode, Belgium

Saïd Chabane

Centre Technique des Industries Mécaniques
74 route de la Jonelière BP 82617
44326 Nantes Cedex 3, France
e-mail: said.chabane@cetim.fr

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received July 27, 2011; final manuscript received March 29, 2012; published online December 5, 2012. Assoc. Editor: Jong Chull Jo.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 135(1), 011305 (Dec 05, 2012) (11 pages) Paper No: PVT-11-1159; doi: 10.1115/1.4006904 History: Received July 27, 2011; Revised March 29, 2012

The use of relief valves is crucial for the safety of power plants. Indeed, these valves, simple but robust in their design, provide the ultimate protection when all other safety systems are inadequate. This study is focused on valve opening characteristics which can be studied through the determination of flowforces applied on the valve disk. A spring-loaded safety relief valve (SRV) (1½ in. G 3 in.) and its transparent model are tested under static conditions. The spring is removed and the forces, exerted at the valve disk for different inlet pressures and lift positions, are measured in compressible, incompressible, and two-phase flows. Results indicate that even for relatively small qualities (i.e., 5–10%), two-phase mixtures approach compressible flow behavior (especially for the higher lifts) in terms of disk force. Additionally, an inverse flowforce of air and water is noticed above a certain value of valve lift. Numerical simulations with a commercial computation fluid dynamics (CFD) code are performed in a 2D axisymmetric model of the valve for validation purposes. The main motivation of these computations is to obtain the qualitative physical explanation of this phenomenon revealing the displacement of the sonic line which occurs in air flow simulations. Finally, the importance of precise adjustment of the valve ring (in the smallest valve opening) for its optimal use is stressed by quantitative analysis using CFD simulations.

© 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

PED, 1997, “Pressure Equipment Directive-PED. 97/23/EC,” European Commission—Enterprise and Industry.
ISO 4126-1, 2004, Safety Devices for Protection Against Excessive Pressure, International Organization for Standardization.
ISO 4126-10, 2010, Safety Devices for Protection Against Excessive Pressure–Part 10: Sizing of Safety Valves for Gas/Liquid Two-Phase Flow, International Organization for Standardization.
API RP 520, 2000, Sizing, Selection and Installation of Pressure-Relieving Devices in Refineries, Part 1-Sizing and Selection, 7th ed., American Petroleum Institute Recommended Practice 520, Washington, DC.
Leung, J. C., 1996, “Easily Size Relief Devices and Piping for Two-Phase Flow,” Chem. Eng. Prog., 92(12), pp.28–50.
Diener, R., and Schmidt, J., 2004, “Sizing of Throttling Device for Gas/Liquid Two-Phase Flow, Part 1: Safety Valves,” Process Saf. Prog., 23(4), pp.335–344. [CrossRef]
Diener, R., and Schmidt, J., 2005, “Sizing of Throttling Device for Gas/Liquid Two-Phase Flow, Part 2: Control Valves, Orifices, and Nozzles,” Process Saf. Prog., 24(1), pp.29–37. [CrossRef]
Föllmer, B., and Schnettler, A., 2003, “Challenges in Designing API Safety Relief Valves, Valve World, 10, pp.39–43.
Chabane, S., Plumejault, S., Pierrat, D., Couzinet, A., and Bayart, M., 2009, “Vibration and Chattering of Conventional Safety Relief Valve Under Built Up Back Pressure,” 3rd IAHR International Meeting of the WorkGroup on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, Oct.14–16 , Brno, Czech Republic, International Association of Hydro-Environment Engineering and Research, pp.281–294.
Song, X. G., Cui, L., and Park, Y. C., 2010, “Three Dimensional CFD Analysis of a Spring-Loaded Pressure Relief Valve From Opening to Re-Closure,” ASME 2010 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, July18–22 , Bellevue Washington, USA, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Paper No. PVP2010-25024.
Beune, A., 2009, “Analysis of High Pressure Safety Valve,” Ph.D. thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven.
Vallet, C., Ferrari, J., Rit, J.-F., and Dehoux, F., 2010, “Single-Phase CFD Inside a Water Safety Valve,” ASME 2010 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, July18–22 , Bellevue Washington, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Paper No. PVP2010-25619.
Moncalvo, D., Friedel, L., Jörgensen, B., and Höhne, T., 2009, “Sizing of Safety Valves Using Ansys CFX-Flo,” Chem. Eng. Technol., 32(2), pp.247–251. [CrossRef]
Tyco, 2008, Pressure Relief Valve Engineering Handbook, Technical Publication No. TP-V300, Tyco Flow Control, NJ.
Kourakos, V., Chabane, S., Rambaud, P., and Buchlin, J.-M., 2010, “Hydrodynamic Forces, Pressure and Mass Flux in Two-Phase Air-Water Flow Through Transparent Safety Valve Model,” ASME 2010 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, July18–22 , Bellevue Washington, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Paper No. PVP2010-25440.
Corbin, F., Pozzoli, R., and François, P., 2009, Essais de soupapes-Banc eau. Documents Qualité CETIM T-8600-a, Centre Technique des Industries Mécaniques, Techniques des fluides et des écoulements, 74 route de la Jonelière BP 82617, 44326 Nantes Cedex 3.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Detailed view of Nozzle-Valve Disk Components of SRV

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Different types of studies

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Experimental installations for original valve study

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison transparent-original valve

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Visualization in transparent SRV (axisymmetric flow)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Axisymmetric grid of original SRV for CFD computations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

3D flowforce curves

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Total pressure contours for water flow at Pset = 6 bars (0.6 MPa)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Experimental and numerical FP and F/Q2 ratios versus valve opening

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Density contours for air flow at Pset = 6 bars (0.6 MPa). Solid white thick line indicates sonic position.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Relative position of valve seat and adjustment ring/15 (reference), 0, and 20 notches

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Influence of adjustment ring location on disk flowforce for water flow

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Experimental-CFD Flowforce for air and water at Pset = 3 bars (0.3 MPa)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparison of inverse flowforce position for different set pressures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of flowforce for air, water, and two-phase flow at Pset =3 bars (0.3 MPa)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In