Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 11 (1998) 391395

Critical mass ow rate in accordance with the omega-method of DIERS and the Homogeneous Equilibrium Model
T. Lenzing a, L. Friedel
a

a,*

, M. Alhusein

b,1

Department of Fluid Mechanics, Technische Universita t Hamburg, Eisendorfer Strasse 38, 21073 Hamburg, Germany b Mutah University, Al Karak, Jordan

Abstract A correlation frequently used in practice for the design of the relief cross-section next to the Homogeneous Equilibrium Model is the so-called -method. For the determination of the -parameter a denition was originally reported by J.C. Leung in 1986. A new expression was proposed by the same author in 1995. Predictions of the critical mass ow rate using both the new and the old -parameter formulations as well as the Homogeneous Equilibrium Model are compared for some typical substances. Results demonstrate that the deviations as a rule are acceptable for practical use, if the proposed range of application and recommended property data calculation are respected. 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: -method; Homogeneous Equilibrium Model; Critical mass ow; Two-phase ow

Nomenclature cp G* h n p s T x* x0 Subscripts V/G L G hom crit 0 Specic heat at constant pressure Mass ow rate Specic enthalpy Exponent of the state change Pressure Specic entropy Temperature Specic volume Flow mass vapour/gas quality Stagnation mass vapour/gas rate Isentropic exponent Vapour Liquid Gas Homogeneous Fluid dynamic critical condition Stagnation condition

1. Introduction Proper calculation of the critical mass ow rate plays a signicant role in the uid dynamic design for twophase ow duty, e.g. of safety relief systems. Overestimation may result in a serious accident by undersizing the safety valve that would not be able to reduce the pressure in the protected installation. On the other hand, underestimation of the critical mass ow rate may lead to overload in the outlet installation. The classical Homogeneous Equilibrium Model (HEM) was recently chosen by the DIERS for emergency relief sizing design (Fisher, 1991; Huff, 1985; Leung, 1992). Although this is considered by experts to be a conservative method with respect to the calculation of the required relief area, evaluation of the HEM involves a lengthy (iterative) procedure and requires detailed thermodynamic property tabulation (Leung & Nazario, 1990). A generalised correlation for onecomponent homogeneous equilibrium ashing choked ow was published by J.C. Leung in 1986 (Leung, 1986) for simplifying this procedure. It has come to be known as the omega method since an -parameter rst proposed by Epstein et al. (1983), comprising dimensionless physical property groups, was introduced to characterise a wide range of uid conditions. As only stagnation

* Corresponding author. Tel.: + 49-40-77183052; Fax: + 49-4077182573. 1 Alexander von Humboldt Fellow.

09504230/98/$see front matter 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 9 5 0 - 4 2 3 0 ( 9 8 ) 0 0 0 2 2 - 9

392

T. Lenzing et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 11 (1998) 391395

properties are required, this method can be used in most engineering calculations, especially those where extensive property data are not readily available. In 1995, a slightly modied form of the -parameter was proposed by Leung (1995), which has the attribute of bringing out key parameters in connection with the compressible nature of a two-phase ow system. The denition of the -parameter was originally based on the assumption of an isothermal state change of the two-phase mixture (Leung, 1986). With this, deviations appear with respect to the critical mass ow rate as opposed to the normally isentropic gas or vapour state change, as a limiting case of the two-phase ow, of up to 20%. In the modied correlation this limit value is more adequately included. So, the question arises of how far this correction affects the critical mass ow rate predictions in the complete range of the two-phase ow. To answer this question, the predictions in accordance with both the old and the new -parameter formulations, as well as the HEM, were compared for some typical substances and different operational conditions. The most essential calculation equations are presented. 2. Critical mass ow rate models The critical mass ow rate formulations according to both the HEM and the -method are presented only briey. However, these equations and the way they are arrived at can be found elsewhere (Leung, 1986, 1995; VDI-Wa rmeatlas, 1994). In the HEM the ideal case of a frictionless, adiabatic ow, and the immediate delay free establishment of saturation values for density and temperature during the (fast) relief are assumed. Furthermore, the two phases ow with the same average velocity. The mass ow rate is dened as G* = 2(h(p0) h(p))/hom(p) with h(p) = x*hV/G(p) + (1 x*)hL(p) and

the stagnation mass quality x0 is determined as: x0 = MV/G MV/G + ML

The critical mass ow rate is obtained by numerically searching for the maximum value as a function of the (static) nozzle exit pressure: starting at the stagnation pressure the exit pressure is lowered in discrete steps until the critical ow rate is obtained. As an explicit approximate solution for the HEM the -method contains a polytropic instead of an isentropic state change of the two-phase mixture. The critical mass ow rate results from the quotient of sound velocity a2ph and specic volume of the homogeneous mixture hom at the so-called uid dynamic critical pressure G*crit = 2ph/hom = 2p0/hom(p0)( ln(pcrit/p0) + (1 )(pcrit/p0 1))/ ((p0/pcrit 1) + 1) where the critical pressure can be calculated from (pcrit/p0)2 + (2 2)(1 pcrit/p0)2 + 22 ln(pcrit/p0) + 22(1 pcrit/p0) = 0 To solve iteratively for the determination of the uid dynamic critical pressure, the equation can be replaced through for the range from 1 to 100 pcrit = p0(0.55 + 0.217 ln() 0.046(ln())2 + 0.004(ln())3) The -parameter characterises the initial compressibility of the mixture and the increase due to the phase transition. It contains the mean void fraction in the stagnation state as well as the Jakob number (Epstein et al., 1983) and has the following denition for the old expression:

1986 = x0V(p0)/hom(p0) + cpLT(p0)p0/hom(p0)

hom(p) = (x*V/G(p) + (1 x*)L(p)

Here h is the specic enthalpy, s is the specic entropy, L, V/G and hom are the specic volumes of liquid, vapour or gas and the homogeneous mixture, respectively, p0 is the stagnation pressure and x* is the mass ow vapour/gas quality. For an isentropic state change the quality is x* = x0(sV/G(p0) sL(p0)) + sL(p0)) sL(pcrit) sV/G(pcrit) sL(pcrit)

V(p0) L(p0) hV(p0) hL(p0)

and for the modied correlation is

1995 = x0V(p0)/hom(p0) 1
+ cpLT(p0)p0/hom(p0)

2p0(V(p0) L(p0)) hV(p0) hL(p0)

V(p0) L(p0) hV(p0) hL(p0)

T. Lenzing et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 11 (1998) 391395

393

Here T denotes the temperature and cpL is the liquid specic heat. The expressions can be reduced for two-phase mixtures with a negligibly small evaporation to

1986 = x0G(p0)/hom(p0) 1995 = x0/G(p0)/hom(p0)

For the calculation of the critical mass ow rates at a thermodynamic critical pressure or temperature ratio of more than 0.5 and 0.9, respectively, the liquid specic heat, which is not usually known in this range sufciently exactly, is replaced by the term hL/Tp0 (Leung, 1986), in which J.C. Leung (personal communication, 1996) recommends a temperature difference of 2 K. An advantage of the -method, besides the possibility of the explicit calculation of the critical mass ow rate, is the low number of required uid properties. Only at the set pressure of the safety device are the temperature and pressure as well as the specic volumes and enthalpies needed. However, this simplication has an adverse effect on the calculation of the specic volume (Simpson, 1995). For example, for an air/water mixture at a pressure of 50 bar (absolute) and temperature of 25C, the specic volume differs by around 27% and in the case of a butane gas/liquid mixture at a pressure of 30 bar (absolute) the difference is about 14% of the correct uid property. These inaccuracies lead to considerable deviations in the calculated values of the critical mass ow rate compared with the values calculated by the HEM. The determination of the liquid enthalpy temperature gradient also causes difculties in practice, because the uid properties of the sub-cooled liquid are needed, which are only known for a few substances, as a rule. In the following, the predictions of the critical mass ow rates according to the HEM and both correlations of the -method are compared for selected two-phase mixtures and operating states.

Fig. 1. Critical mass ow rate according to J.C. Leungs original and modied model and the homogeneous equilibrium model as a function of stagnation quality for water at a thermodynamic critical pressure ratio of 0.09.

with the old -parameter the lower boundary is given. However, deviations between the predictions of the calculation methods should, for technical reasons, be negligible, especially as the preference for the models selection is based on a convention. At a pressure of 100 bar (absolute), which equals a thermodynamic critical pressure ratio of 0.45, the term hL/Tp0 is used instead of the specic heat. This is because the relative temperature ratio of 0.9 as a limit is about to be exceeded. This is also contrary to the recommendation that the critical mass ow rate is applied by using the specic heat (Leung, 1986). Here, this still does not lead to deviations and the trends of the predictions are almost identical as shown in Fig. 2. The differences between the two mass ow rates predicted by the -method are based on the denition of the parameter in both old and new correlations. As opposed to the critical mass ow rates calculated with the HEM the deviations are approximately 6% and 3%, respectively. Once

3. Predictions of the critical mass ow rates The calculations were made at rst for a steam/water mixture at three thermodynamic critical conditions of pressure and temperature. In Fig. 1 the critical mass ow rate is plotted against the stagnation mass quality at a relative pressure ratio of 0.09. All curves show a similar course, starting from the largest mass ow rate at liquid ow, decreasing strongly with increasing stagnation mass quality and approaching asymptotically the lower value at steam ow, which is, however, only reached by the HEM. The latter represents the upper limitation about the complete range of the two-phase ow, whereas

Fig. 2. Critical mass ow rate according to J.C. Leungs original and modied model and the homogeneous equilibrium model as a function of stagnation quality for water at a thermodynamic critical pressure ratio of 0.45.

394

T. Lenzing et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 11 (1998) 391395

more, with the HEM one can get the highest results whereas the lowest are obtained by the old -method. Also, as demonstrated in Fig. 3, this order continues near the thermodynamic critical condition at a pressure ratio of 0.9 (a pressure of water of 200 bar absolute). Again, the HEM represents the upper limit. With the old and new -parameter, using three values of temperature difference (1, 2 and 5 K) clearly lower results are obtained. The deviations are directly proportional to the size of the temperature difference. The lower this is, the smaller the discrepancies between the calculated critical mass ow rates in accordance with the -method and the HEM. The lowest results for the critical mass ow rate are calculated using the liquid specic heat (contrary to the recommendation given in Leung, 1986). They are up to 50% lower than those in accordance with the HEM. The deviations which result from the new expression of the polytropic exponent are once more against this by only about 6%. On the basis of the uid properties of the refrigerant R12 the fundamental course of the curves is the same as before (Figs. 4 and 5). However, at a thermodynamic critical pressure ratio of 0.9 the differences increase between the calculations with increasing stagnation mass quality, in which for the case of a vapour ow the predictions in accordance with the -method are up to 22% too small (Fig. 6). The HEM represents an upper limit once more. The deviations between the predictions of the critical mass ow rates, using the specic heat, are lower here as in the case of steam/water mixture. Nevertheless, in principle, Leungs instruction to use the enthalpy gradient with respect to temperature, as an alternative the term hL/Tp0 is sound. Calculations for a chlorine vapour/liquid mixture at a thermodynamic critical pressure ratio of 0.9 conrm the observations for water and the refrigerant R12 in terms of the trend of the curves; however, the relative differ-

Fig. 4. Critical mass ow rate according to J.C. Leungs original and modied model and the homogeneous equilibrium model as a function of stagnation quality for refrigerant R12 at a thermodynamic critical pressure ratio of 0.09.

Fig. 5. Critical mass ow rate according to J.C. Leungs original and modied model and the homogeneous equilibrium model as a function of stagnation quality for refrigerant R12 at a thermodynamic critical pressure ratio of 0.45.

Fig. 3. Critical mass ow rate according to J.C. Leungs original and modied model and the homogeneous equilibrium model as a function of stagnation quality for water at a thermodynamic critical pressure ratio of 0.9.

Fig. 6. Critical mass ow rate according to J.C. Leungs original and modied model and the homogeneous equilibrium model as a function of stagnation quality for refrigerant R12 at a thermodynamic critical pressure ratio of 0.9.

T. Lenzing et al. / Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 11 (1998) 391395

395

poses. However, it is surprising, that the predictions in accordance with the -method lie insignicantly over those obtained with the HEM.

4. Conclusions In general, it is valid to say that the use of either the old or the new -parameter correlation could result in deviations between each other in the calculation of critical mass ow rates. These should be negligible in practice, as a rule, if faults of up to 10% are tolerable. For the uids considered, the contrary use of the specic heat near the thermodynamic critical state shows, in contrast to the predictions in accordance with the homogeneous equilibrium model, deviations of up to 50% with increasing pressure. With correct use of the temperature gradient on the liquid enthalpy curve at constant pressure the size of the differences calculated for the critical mass ow rates depends on the temperature difference. The value recommended by J.C. Leung of 2 K leads in individual cases to deviations of up to 25% as opposed to the predictions of the homogeneous equilibrium model. Leung (1996) Personal communication not cited in text.

Fig. 7. Critical mass ow rate according to J.C. Leungs original and modied model and the homogeneous equilibrium model as a function of stagnation quality for chlorine at a thermodynamic critical pressure ratio of 0.9.

References
Epstein, M., Henry, R. E., Midvidy, W., & Pauls, R. (1983). Onedimensional modeling of two-phase jet expansion and impingement. Second International Topical Meeting on ThermalHydraulics Nuclear Reactors, St. Barbara. Fisher, H. G. (1991). An overview of emergency relief system design practice. Plant/Operations Progress, 10(1), 1. Huff, J. E. (1985). Multiphase ashing ow in pressure relief systems. Plant/Operations Progress, 4, 191. Leung, J. C. (1986). A generalized correlation for one-component homogeneous equilibrium ashing choked ow. AIChE J., 32(10), 17431746. Leung, J. C. (1992). Size safety relief valves for ashing liquids. Chem. Eng. Progress, 88(2), 70. Leung, J. C. (1995). The Omega method for discharge rate evaluation. Runaway Reactions and Pressure Relief Design. Int. Symp., Boston. Leung, J. C. (1996). Personal communication, September 11th. Leung, J. C., & Nazario, F. N. (1990). Two-phase ashing ow methods and comparisons. J. Loss Prevention Process Industries, 3(2), 253. Simpson, L. L. (1995). Navigating the two-phase maze. Runaway Reactions and Pressure Relief Design. Int. Symp., Boston. VDI-Wa rmeatlas (1994). Berechnungsbla tter fu rmeu r den Wa bergang, Abschn. Lgcl/2: Kritische Massenstromdichte, Du sseldorf.

Fig. 8. Critical mass ow rate according to J.C. Leungs original and modied model as a function of stagnation quality and pressures for an air/water mixture.

ences are lower (Fig. 7). In general, for single-component two-phase ows, a better adjustment of the predictions is carried out with the modied -parameter than one in accordance with the HEM. Comparing the predictions for the case of an air/water mixture it can be recognized that unlike the previous results in the range of small to nearly medium mean stagnation mass qualities, the results obtained lie closer to those of the HEM when the old -parameter method is used compared with the new denition (Fig. 8). The differences between the curves corresponding to the old and the new expressions become larger with increasing pressure; however, they are negligible for technical pur-