VÁLVULA DE ALIVIO

© All Rights Reserved

15 views

VÁLVULA DE ALIVIO

© All Rights Reserved

- VBA_Training_Document.pdf
- [K-101X] Eng'g Spec for Instrumentation for Package Equipment_Rev.4.pdf
- ASME_PTC_19.5-2004_toc(1)
- Pressure Safety Valve Analysis
- Catalog 2004
- Unsteady Flow
- Btech Construction Management Assignments Ist Year
- Bernoulli_Equation
- 7766X_04e[1]
- NRT1214
- Cfd Present
- Heyebook
- During the Previous Spring Semester To
- FMM INT-II
- Timouchev Wind Turbine2005
- ork e bb
- Safety Relief Valve General Information Copy
- HVAC Flow Measurement
- 08ye1186
- Bernoulli Equation in a Flume Lab Report

You are on page 1of 3

Feature Report

Engineering

Practice

Relief Valve Sizing

The approach described here is easier to use,

and provides more-accurate results,

compared to leading valve-sizing methodologies

Mark Siegal

Consulting Engineer

tell you that there is one

method available for sizing

relief valves that applies

to virtually every situation, including two-phase flow and supercritical

fluids? And what if they told you that

method is more accurate and easier

to use than traditional methods or

formulas? As it turns out, both of

these statements are true. The approach described here the Direct

Integration Method involves numerical integration of the isentropic

nozzle equation [1].

From as early as 2005, the method

of choice for determining the flow

through a relief valve has been the Direct Integration Method [2]. API 520

has also sanctioned this method due

to its general applicability to any situation where the fluid is homogeneous

[1]. However, because this method is

perceived to be difficult or time consuming, many engineers continue to

opt for older, simplified methods, even

though such methods can produce lessaccurate results. For instance, without

careful analysis, using the traditional

gas-phase equation near a fluids

critical point can yield an undersized

valve [3].

Fortunately, thanks to the widespread availability of process simulators and spreadsheet software, nu-

Silvan Larson

and William Freivald

Valdes Engineering Company

merical integration of the isentropic

nozzle equation is now easier, faster,

and more accurate than other methods for determining the mass flux

through a relief valve. This article discusses the use of process simulators

to simplify the numerical integration

method, and describes the advantages

of numerical integration over other

methods that may be used to calculate

the required relief valve area.

Calculation methods

Equation. The calculation of the theoretical mass flux for homogeneous

fluids through a relief valve is generally accepted to be modeled based on

the isentropic converging nozzle. The

isentropic nozzle equation is developed from the Bernoulli equation by

assuming that the flow is adiabatic

and frictionless [4].

(1)

valve is calculated using Equation (2).

(2)

spreadsheet programs and simulators,

the once-cumbersome Direct

Integration Method is easier than

ever to use to size relief valves

pressure range encountered in the

nozzle. To solve the integral analytically, an equation of state needs to be

available for the fluid at constant entropy. However, for many fluids, such

an equation is not available for density

as a function of pressure. To overcome

this limitation, various simplifying assumptions were traditionally made to

allow the integral to be solved analytically, rather than by performing a numerical integration.

For instance, for non-flashing liquids, the density is assumed to be constant, and the integral is easily solved.

The traditional vapor-sizing equation

is obtained by assuming the vapor

is an ideal gas with a constant heat

capacity [5]. However, the assumptions required by these methods may

introduce large errors under some

conditions. In contrast, the Direct Integration Method has been shown to

produce more-accurate results.

Direct Integration Method. The

Direct Integration Method uses a numerical method to evaluate the integral in the isentropic nozzle equation

[2]. API 520 proposes the use of the

Trapezoidal Rule, shown below, to calculate the integral:

Nomenclature1

G0 Mass flux,

lb/h in.2

Density, lb/ft3

P0 Relieving

pressure, psi

Pn Nozzle exit

pressure, psi

A Orifice area, in.2

W Relieving mass rate,

lb/h

Kd Discharge coefficient,

unitless

Pi Pressure at stage i, psi

i Density at stage

i, lb/ft3

(3)

process simulator to generate data

points for the fluid density at various

pressures, utilizing an isentropic flash

routine over a pressure range from the

relieving pressure to the exit pressure.

The simulation data are used to determine the theoretical mass flux at each

point.

Using Equation (3), the maximum

mass flux is determined by calculating the mass flux over incrementally

larger pressure ranges, beginning at

the relieving pressure, and observing

where a maximum flux is reached. If

the maximum occurs at the relief-valve

exit pressure (built-up backpressure),

then the flow is not choked. Generally

accurate results can be obtained with

pressure increments as large as 1 psi,

but smaller step sizes can be specified

if desired [2]. Once the mass flux is

determined, the required relief valve

orifice area* can be determined from

Equation (2).

The value of the discharge coefficient,

Kd, depends on the phase of the fluid

and varies by the manufacturer of the

relief valve. The discharge coefficient

corrects for the difference between the

theoretical flow and the actual flow

through the nozzle. This value is determined empirically for liquid and vapor

and reported by vendors for each make

and model of relief valve. If vendor

data are not available, an initial guess

of 0.975 for gases, or 0.65 for liquids

can be used [1].

For two-phase flow, the liquid-discharge coefficient should be used if

flow in the valve is not choked and the

maximum mass flux will occur at the

relief-valve exit pressure. If the flow is

choked, then the gas-discharge coefficient should be used and the maximum

* While relief valves are designed with a nozzle,

the area at the end of the nozzle is commonly

referred to as the orifice area.

above the relief-valve exit pressure.

This is called the choked pressure [6]

Implementation

Direct Integration Method using a

spreadsheet program (such as Microsoft Excel 2010) and a process simulator (such as AspenTech HYSYS 7.2) [7].

Users can automate the process to the

point where all they would need to do is

simply hit a button in the spreadsheet

program and the numerical integration

will be performed on an existing stream

in the simulator using a VBA (Visual

Basic for Applications) program.

First, the spreadsheet is set up to

accept the pressure and density data

for the numerical integration points.

The inlet and outlet pressure points,

pressure step size, and name of relief

stream in the simulator are placed

into specific cells in the spreadsheet,

which are referenced in the VBA code.

The VBA code instructs the simulator

to create a new, ideal expander process block and associated streams in

the simulator. The code then iterates

across the pressure range and modifies the pressure of the expander product stream and automatically exports

the pressure and density data to the

Excel spreadsheet.

For each data point in the spreadsheet, the summand, cumulative sum,

and mass flux are calculated using

Equation (3) with typical spreadsheet

formulas. When a maximum mass flux

is reached, the spreadsheet uses this

maximum flux value to calculate an

orifice size, given the relieving mass

rate and coefficients. Alternatively,

the data can be collected using the

databook feature in the simulator

and copied into the spreadsheet using

a simple copy-and-paste operation.

non-flashing liquid methods are relatively easy to calculate and the result-

conditions well away from the critical

pressure. However, two-phase models

are more difficult to implement. Existing two-phase flow models approximate the pressure-density relationship of the fluid in order to calculate

the integral in Equation (3).

One of the simplest models, the

Omega Method, assumes a linear

pressure-density relationship, with

the omega parameter () representing the slope of the pressure-density

curve. An analytical solution to the

isentropic nozzle equation was developed using the omega parameter to

solve the integral [8].

The TPHEM Method uses three

pressure-density points to define coefficients for an empirical equation

of state model [9]. The empirical

equation is then used to evaluate the

integral numerically. Pressure-density data for these models are often

provided by a process simulator. If

a simulator is available, then it

is much simpler to use the Direct

Integration Method.

The Direct Integration Method is

fundamentally different from the

other methods described here because

it does not generate an explicit equation-of-state model to relate pressure

and density. Instead, pressure and

density data are generated using the

full thermodynamic models available

in the selected process simulator, and

these data are then used to solve the

integral numerically. Since there is

no reliance on a curve-fit pressuredensity model, the Direct Integration

Method is more exact and reliable,

assuming the simulators thermodynamic model is accurate. Specifically,

there is no chance for inaccuracies

associated with the fluid equation of

state model propagating through the

rest of the calculations resulting in

inaccurate mass flux estimations and

ultimately an inappropriate reliefvalve area [8, 9, 10].

Note that the Direct Integration

Method assumes that the two-phase

fluid is homogeneous, and that the

fluid is in mechanical and thermodynamic phase equilibrium. The homogeneous assumption is valid for most

two-phase reliefs due to high velocity

in the nozzle, which promotes mixing

Engineering Practice

Closing remarks

[2]. The thermodynamic equilibrium

assumption is valid for nozzles with

a length longer than 10 cm [4]. Most

standard relief valves have a nozzle

that is slightly longer than this [11].

by the same constraints as many

other models or methods. Using this

approach, the same method can be

used whether the flow is choked or not

choked, flashing or not flashing, single

or two-phase, close or far from the

critical point, subcooled or supercritical. The only assumptions required

for the Direct Integration Method are

that flow through the relief valve is

isentropic, homogeneous, and in thermodynamic and mechanical equilibrium, although it is possible to adjust

the method to account for mechanical

non-equilibrium or slip [6].

Although most other methods give

unsatisfactory results near the thermodynamic critical point, the Direct Integration Method continues to function

properly [12]. Additionally, many other

concerns that come up when using

relief-valve model equations, such as

determining the heat capacity ratio or

isentropic expansion coefficients, are

no longer relevant since they are inherent to the simulator itself [3].

Downsides to this Method. The Direct Integration Method can produce

References

1. American Petroleum Inst., Sizing, Selection,

and Installation of Pressure-Relieving Devices in Refineries, ANSI/API RP 520, 8th

Ed., Part 1: Sizing and Selection, Washington, D.C., Dec. 2008.

2. Darby, R., Size safety-relief valves for any

conditions, Chem. Eng., pp. 42-50, Sept.

2005.

3. Kim, J.S., H J. Dunsheath and N.R. Singh,

Proper relief-valve sizing requires equation

mastery, Hydrocarbon Proc., pp. 7780, Dec.

2011.

4. Huff, J., Flow through emergency relief devices and reaction forces, J. Loss Prev. Process Ind., Vol. 3, pp. 4349, 1990.

5. Bird, R.B., and others, Transport Phenomena, pp. 481, John Wiley, New York, 1960.

6. Darby, R., On two-phase frozen and flashing

flows in safety relief valves: Recommended

calculation method and the proper use of the

discharge coefficient, J. Loss Prev. Process

Ind., Vol. 17, pp. 255259, 2004.

Method is not only easy to use, but

provides more accurate results when

sizing pressure relief valves, since this

approach does not rely on a potentially

sensitive equation of state model

to under-prediction of the mass flux

and selection of an oversized valve.

This appears to be an issue only when

the fluid is in two-phase frozen flow

(no flashing), or the relief valve has

a short nozzle and there is flashing

flow [2].

This potential limitation can be

compensated for in both situations by

applying a slip factor. However, at this

time, there is insufficient literature

available to provide accurate guidance

on the value of a slip factor. The accuracy of the calculation is also limited

by the accuracy of the physical property data in the simulator.

7. AspenTech, Aspen HYSYS Customization

Guide, Version 7.2, July 2010.

8. Leung, J.C., The Omega Method for Discharge Rate Evaluation, in International

Symposium on Runaway Reactions and

Pressure Relief Design, G.A. Melhem and

H.G. Fisher, Eds., pp. 367393, AIChE., New

York, N.Y., 1995.

9. Center for Chemical Process Safety, Guidelines for Pressure Relief and Effluent Handling Systems, AIChE, New York, N.Y., 1998.

10. Diener, R., and J. Schmidt, Sizing of throttling device for gas/liquid two-phase flow,

Part 1: Safety valves, Process Safety Prog.,

Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 335344, 2004.

11. Fisher, H.G., and others, Emergency Relief

System Design Using DIERS Technology

The Design Institute for Emergency Relief

Systems (DIERS) Project Manual, pp. 91,

Wiley-AIChE, 1992.

12. Schmidt, J., and S. Egan, Case studies of

sizing pressure relief valves for two-phase

flow, Chem. Eng. Technol., Vol. 32, No. 2, pp.

263272, 2009.

from a simulator and to calculate the

summation over a range of pressures

is extremely easy and straightforward. One simply needs to simulate

the relieving stream and perform

a flash operation at each pressure

and capture the required data. Not

only is the Numerical Integration

Method much simpler than the alternatives for two-phase flow, but it

is also more accurate, since it does

not rely on a potentially sensitive

equation-of-state model. There is no

need for a model because physical

property data are generated for each

data point directly from simulation.

In addition, the Numerical Integration Method can be used for singlephase flow and choked or not-choked

conditions. This versatility and ease

of calculation makes Numerical Integration the obvious choice for any

relief valve calculation where physical property data are available in a

process simulator.

n

Edited by Suzanne Shelley

Authors

Mark Siegal (Email: msiegal2

@gmail.com), was, until recently, a process engineer at

Valdes Engineering Company

where he was responsible for

process design, process modeling, and emergency relief

system design. He holds a

B.S.Ch.E. from the University

of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Silvan Larson is a principal

process engineer at Valdes

Engineering Company (100

W 22nd St., Suite 185, Lombard, IL 60148; Phone: 630792-1886; Email: slarson@

valdeseng.com),where he is

responsible for process design

and emergency-relief-system

design. He has more than 30

years of experience in manufacturing and process design

engineering in the chemicals and petroleum refining industries. He holds a B.S.Ch.E. from University of WisconsinMadison and is a registered

professional engineer in Ill.

William A. Freivald is the

manager of process engineering at Valdes Engineering

Company (Phone: 630-7921886; Email: wfreivald@

valdeseng.com). He has more

than 17 years of international

process design experience in

specialty chemicals, gas processing and refining. He holds

a B.S.Ch.E. from Northwestern University and is a registered professional engineer in Illinois.

- VBA_Training_Document.pdfUploaded byJack Desouza
- [K-101X] Eng'g Spec for Instrumentation for Package Equipment_Rev.4.pdfUploaded bymihir_jha2
- ASME_PTC_19.5-2004_toc(1)Uploaded byVamsi Yashoda
- Pressure Safety Valve AnalysisUploaded bysid
- Btech Construction Management Assignments Ist YearUploaded bybasheerkk
- Unsteady FlowUploaded byGangaram Sapkota
- Bernoulli_EquationUploaded byJosh Sam
- 7766X_04e[1]Uploaded byEnrico Gambini
- Catalog 2004Uploaded bydocrafi
- NRT1214Uploaded bysafar2007
- Cfd PresentUploaded byVel Murugan
- HeyebookUploaded bygerte_yuew
- During the Previous Spring Semester ToUploaded bygerte_yuew
- FMM INT-IIUploaded bytagoreboopathy
- Timouchev Wind Turbine2005Uploaded bySanthosh Lingappa
- ork e bbUploaded byNelson Ribeiro
- Safety Relief Valve General Information CopyUploaded byShridharBadami
- HVAC Flow MeasurementUploaded byDustin White
- 08ye1186Uploaded bylumostar
- Bernoulli Equation in a Flume Lab ReportUploaded byMan
- Tongchana_Turnitin1.pdfUploaded byJ'Gree Sakpisuttiwanit
- Steam Loss Calculations_Rev 0Uploaded byAnonymous A4NHI5
- Lab Manual FlowmeterUploaded bymhd badhrul bin bahar
- Urbanowicz PMRes 2017 3Uploaded byrlane1975
- lecture chemical engineeringUploaded byAasia Farrukh
- MEPC.107(49)Uploaded byTimmyJuri
- Flow of Liquids and Viscosity Solved Examples _ AskIITiansUploaded bythiripura sundari
- Bubble ModelingUploaded bymekwonu
- Beverloo 1961Uploaded byKATHERYN ESTUPIÑAN
- Excel VBAUploaded bySoumitra Chakraborty

- Three Phase Separator - Inlet DevicesUploaded byashsurya2008
- Cadworx_P&ID_Online.pdfUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- CADWorx_2016_Quick_Start_Lesson_Guide_R2.pdfUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- P&ID-1.PDFUploaded byprateek_bhoir
- Heat ExchangerUploaded byAudrey Patrick Kalla
- Thesis GayathriUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- WORK+TOGETHER+WITH+AVEVA+E3D+AND+PDMSUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- OLGA ExercisesUploaded byginozky
- Three Phase Separators - Times DefinitionUploaded byPragathees Waran
- Perform Overpressure Protection Analysis in Aspen HYSYS Final Presentation-MENAUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- Perform_Overpressure_Protection_Analysis_Webinar.pdfUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- PSV Webinar FinalUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- CEP Article Sep2002_Fire Depressurization and ReliefUploaded bymaxsed
- SmartPlant Grids Users GuideUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- PV Elite Tips and TricksUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- 8.5 - Introduction to Gas-solid Fluidized Bed ReactorsUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- FISCHER TROPSCHUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- FISCHER TROPSCHUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- GTL Presentation April18Uploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- FISCHER TROPSCHUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- Catalogo FlangesUploaded byMadirley Pimenta
- TempUploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- Numerical Methods Chemical EngineeringUploaded byseamonkees_r_coming
- STUDY ON MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF COIR FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER MATRIX COMPOSITESUploaded byAshokan Keloth
- 5893Uploaded byHoracio Rodriguez
- Three Phase Separator - Gas InternalsUploaded bySyed Mujtaba Ali Bukhari
- Ethanol April 2014Uploaded byHoracio Rodriguez

- nernst_eqnUploaded bySrirevathi Balapattabi
- What is an MRI scanUploaded byzafira_nabila
- 12th.docxUploaded byAnujKumarVerma
- fluid mechenicsUploaded byRajesh Chandel
- Basics of Motion Control1Uploaded byrator10
- H2IL Co-simulation of Cooperative Robots Based on ADAMS, MATLABUploaded byemanuelg902
- Cyclotron Elec.Uploaded byJefrey Shajan
- chapter 5 Lecture 17 21-12-2011.pdfUploaded byVimal Chand
- Prologue the Card CatalogueUploaded bydidaedem
- NeutrinoUploaded byBalaji Logan
- Electric Motor_ Generator.pdfUploaded byGus Edi
- Aero Simulation of Quasi Static Crushing of Fabric 11Uploaded byHasrizam86
- Software Linearization of an RTD SensorUploaded bygrbavithra
- BE_BSc_Plan_3711_MTRN_2013Uploaded byniqqa123456
- Linear and Nonlinear Analysis of a Cantilever Beam using Marc MentatUploaded byKrysia Baker
- F Edexcel Mechanics-1 6677 Solomen PapersUploaded byKaushal
- Project MpUploaded bymheshwar009
- CFD Modelling and Analysis of an Opposed Piston Internal CombustiUploaded bykanta118
- uv-visUploaded byohorey
- j. Basic. AdegunUploaded bylekenson
- Horizontal directional DrillingUploaded byoconnorr81
- Computational Method for the Design of Wind Turbine Blades 2008 International Journal of Hydrogen EnergyUploaded byMaurício Soares
- Classificacoes Publicadas Engenharias IV 2014Uploaded byTed
- Degrees of FreedomUploaded byAllen Marsh
- GATE-Chemical-Engineering-2003.pdfUploaded byVenkatesh Ch
- ABTcompiled-rayarpalayamUploaded bySathiyaseelan Subramani
- 14821 (1)Uploaded bySergio A. Rdz. F.
- Numerical Methods Review SheetUploaded byAnonymous Q4wQhJIqtG
- Non Destructive TestUploaded byMaharNadirAli
- Magnetics-Ferrite-Catalog-2017.pdfUploaded byEdgar Mamani

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.