Nuclear Engineering and Design 72 (1982) 321-327 321

North-Holland Publishing Company

VAPOR FLOW RATING OF VALVES USING SMALL PRESSURE RESERVOIRS

D.W. SALLET *
Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Institute of Nuclear Reactor Components, Karlsruhe, Fed. Rep. Germany

Received 16 June 1982

A new method for the determination of valve coefficients for choked vapor flow is presented. The procedure is based on the
non-steady equations governing isentropic critical flow of gases from finite sized pressure vessels, and can be extended to
subcritical vapor flow. This method has two advantages. A relatively small pressure vessel, i.e., a time dependent upstream
reservoir, takes the place of a large continuous flow loop, and only the pressure decay in the vessel need be accurately
measured, instead of mass flow rates and stagnation conditions.

1. Introduction the steam generator and flow loop necessary to achieve

The A S M E Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code de-
termines the steam flow rating of a safety or pressure
relief valve as
W=CWN, (1)
where C is the valve coefficient and W N is the theoreti-
cal steam flow rate calculated with Napier's rule, namely
Wr~ = 51.45 Ap I b m / h , (2a)
W~ = 1.457 X 10 -3 Ap k g / s . (2b)
The Code certified discharge is 90% of this theoretical
value. In eq. (2) A is the minimum cross sectional area
available to flow inside the fully open valve, and p is the
pressure at the valve inlet. The units of A are in 2 and m 2
and of p are psia and Pa in eqs. (2a) and (2b) respec-
tively.
The valve coefficient C must be determined experi-
mentally either for every valve or for a specific valve
design. In the latter case, three valves each of three
different representative or scale models must be tested.
The A S M E Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code prescribes
the precise individual test procedures and the permissi-
ble data scatter for safety valve certification testing.
Determination of the valve coefficient C can become
expensive and difficult when large valves are tested at
high steam pressures; expensive because of the size of
* Professor, on sabbatical leave from the Dept. of Mechanical
Engineering, The University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
steady state tests and difficult because of the need to
measure the steam flow rate accurately. Extreme scaling
down of the valve can lead to a significant error in the
determination of the valve coefficient and should there-
fore be avoided.
This paper describes a new method for determining
valve coefficients for choked steam or vapor flow. The
method is based on the non-steady blow-down of steam
or vapor from a pressure vessel and can be extended to
non-choked steam or vapor flow. Gas dynamic theory
can provide the vessel pressue as a function of time with
certain test variables held constant during any particu-
lar test run, namely, initial vessel pressure, initial vessel
temperature, vessel volume and minimum flow area of
the valve. The gas constant for steam, the specific heat
ratio and the compressibility factor are also constant,
with slight variations possible for the latter two parame-
ters, to improve the accuracy of the method by match-
ing reference tests with nozzles of known nozzle coeffi-
cient. With the proposed method, the valve coefficient
can be determined for steam or vapor flow over a given
pressure range by monitoring the pressure decrease in
the steam supply vessel as a function of time.
2. Napier's equation
The theory upon which the proposed new method of
determining valve coefficients is based assumes that the
steam or vapor flow can be calculated with reasonable
accuracy using the equation of state

0029-5493/82/0000-0000/$0.275 © 1982 N o r t h - H o l l a n d
322 D. W. Sallet / Vaporflow rating of valves'

p~ : Z R T , (3) rh -- 2.954 X l 0 2 A , p o / ( Z T o ) l z kg/s, (9b)

where
R : 1545.34 f t - l b f / ( l b m o l ° R ) / M ,
R = 8.31441 N m / ( m o l K ) / M .
It is therefore of interest to compare the steady steam
mass flow rate as predicted by the currently accepted
method (Napier's equation) with the steady steam flow
rate using isentropic flow equations and the equation of
state given by eq. (3).
For choked flow, i.e. as long as
p*/po <--. ~ , (5)
where p* is the static pressure at the critical section of
the valve and P0 is the isentropic stagnation pressure;
the mass flow rate through the critical flow area A* is
rhst = A*poKI/ ( ZRTo ) 1/2
where
2 )(k+l)/(k
as follows from elementary gas dynamics, see for ins-
tance Shapiro [1]. Eq. (6) can now be rewritten specifi-
cally for saturated steam. The specific heat ratio k = 1.13
yields Kj = 0.635. Setting
R s t e a m -~- 85.793 f t - l b f / l b m ° R =0.46152 k J / k g K,
where the units of A* are in 2 and m 2, of P0 are psia and
(4a) Pa, of To are °R and K for eqs. (9a) and (9b), respec-
tively. The theoretical mass flow rates predicted by eq.
(48) (9) (perfect gas and isentropic flow theory) can now be
compared to the results from Napier's formula, eq. (2),
for several different pressures. The compressibility fac-
tor Z in eq. (9) is calculated using eqs. (3) and (4) with
values of v and T from the steam tables (saturated
vapor) at the chosen pressure. The values in the second
column of table 1 were generated in this manner. The
last column in this table, ~b/exp/WN, was reported by
Thompson and Buxton [2] and shows that between 400
and 1600 psia (2.76 and 11.03 MPa) Napier's equation
correctly predicts the steam flow rates within 1%, but
that at higher pressures, say 1900 to 2100 psia (13.10 to
14.49 MPa) Napier's rule underpredicts the mass flow
rate by 4 to 7%. The underprediction of actual mass
(6) flow rates calculated with Napier's equation exceeds
10% at pressures near 2500 psia (17.24 MPa).
T h e mexp/Fh column of table 1 represents a compari-
son between the experimental flow rates and the theo-
retical mass flow rate calculated with eq. (9). It can be
seen that eq. (9) is comparable to Napier's equation in
the region of interest. The use of eq. (9) for the predict-
ion of saturated steam flow rates is therefore justified.
3. Non-steady choked flow equations
(8)

yields Described in this section are the non-steady mass

flow rates and stagnation conditions which occur when
rn : 1398.98 A*po/( ZTo )1/2 I b m / h , (9a) steam flows from a high pressure reservoir to a low

Table 1
A comparison of mass flow rate predictions

p Z m~p/m r/~exp/ W N
pressure compressibility factor exp. flow rate/theor, flow rate exp. flow rate/Napier eqn.

500 psia 0.841 1.016-1.027 1.00-0.99

3.45 MPa (400-600 psia)
1000 psia 0.745 0.996 0.99
6.89 MPa (900-1100 psia)
1500 psia 0.659 0.980 1.00-1.01
10.34 MPa ( 1400-1600 psia)
2000 psia 0.576 0.961-0.989 1.04-1.07
13.79 MPa (1900-2100 psia)
2500 psia 0.486 0.965 1.12
17.24 MPa (extrapolated)
 D. 144 Sallet / Vaporflow rating of valves
pressure reservoir. The high pressure reservoir is a pres-
sure vessel of a given, finite volume and is not recharged
during the blow-down process.
The pressures in the pressure vessel and the receiver
vessel (i.e., the low pressure reservoir) are assumed to be
such that choked flow exists [see eq. (5)]. In addition it
is assumed that the thermodynamic changes in the
pressure vessel and in the flow process from the re-
servoir to the choked flow cross section are isentropic.
As shown by Sallet et al. [3], the non-steady mass flow
rate from the pressure vessel and the decreasing steam
pressure, temperature and density in the vessel can be
theoretically derived as functions of time and are given
by the explicit formulas
rh ( t ) : rhst [ F ( t ) ] ( k + l)/(k- l),
po(t):poi[F(t)] 2k/<k 1)
To(t)= Toi[ F(t)] 2,
and
Po( t ) : P0i [ F( t )] 2/~k- '),
where
F(t) = 1/[(A*K3Toli/2)t/V+ 1],
= - - ,
and where nhst is given by eq. (6). The mass of vapor at
any time in the pressure vessel and the time at which
critical flow will cease are given by
M(t)=Moi[F(t)]2/~k l),
and
tc = V ( K 4 - 1)/[A*K3Tgi/2],
where
For dry or wet saturated steam, the specific heat
ratio is approximately k = 1.13 and eq. (14) becomes
F(t) = I/[N(ZToi)'/2A*t/V+ 1],
where N = 2.17 if customary engineering units are used
and N = 0.886 where SI units are used.
For superheated steam, the specific heat ratio is
approximately k = 1.33 and the constant N in eq. (19)
323
becomes N = 5.83 for engineering units and 2.38 for SI
units.
In eqs. (14) and (19) the variable t is the time (in
seconds) which has elapsed since the start of the blow-
down.
4. Non-steady blow-down for vapor flow rating of valves
The non-steady equations given above can be used
for vapor flow rating tests of valves as explained here.
The basic idea is to compare the time it takes for the
pressure in a steam filled vessel to drop to a given value
when flow takes place through a calibrated ASME
nozzle with the time it takes the pressure to drop the
(lO) same amount when flow takes place through the valve
to be calibrated.
(11) Eqs. (11) and (14) can be solved explicitly for the
blow-down interval t. Using the notation of eq. (19), the
(12) expression for t is
t = [ ( P] ° ( t )-) (]-k)/2k
- 1 V (20)
(13) P0i NA* ( Z Toi ) i/2'
where the values to be used for N depend upon the
initial stagnation conditions and are given above.
(14) The vapor flow rating of the valve is carried out in
the following three step method:
(15) Step I: Determination of effective compressibility factor Z
and the effective specific heat ratio k
The available pressure vessel is filled with saturated
or superheated steam to the desired initial pressure P0i
and temperature T0i. The steam in the vessel is partially
vented to the atmosphere through a calibrated ASME
(16) nozzle which has effective critical area A*. This effective
area should be approximately equal to the theoretical
critical area (given by the valve geometry) of the valve
(17) to be rated. The initial pressures and temperatures
should roughly correspond to the pressures at which the
valve is expected to operate. The effective compressibil-
ity factor Z and the effective specific heat ratio k are
found by comparing the actual time needed to achieve a
suitable series of pressure ratios po(t)/Pol when the flow
takes place through the calibrated ASME nozzle with
the time predicted by eq. (20). In other words, the
effective compressibility factor Z and the effective
(19) specific heat ratio k are experimentally determined by
monitoring the pressure decay in the pressure vessel
during a given time period when the venting takes place
through a nozzle of known effective flow area A*. The
initial values for k should be 1.13 for saturated steam
and k = 1.33 for superheated steam. The k values should
 324 D. ~ Sallet / Vaporflo~* rating of valves
only be changed when further i m p r o v e m e n t by chang-
ing Z is not possible. The m a x i m u m variation of k
should not exceed -+0.03.
Step 2." Valve test
The pressure vessel is recharged to the initial condi-
tions on Step 1. The vessel is then vented to the atmo-
sphere through the valve and the pressure decay po(t) is
accurately measured as a function of time. In particular
the time t is recorded which was needed for the pressure
ratio po(t)/po~ to reach a selected value.
Step 3: Calculation of valve coefficient
The valve coefficient is C = A * / A , where A is the
m i n i m u m cross section in the valve which is available to
the fluid passing through the valve. Area A is readily
calculated from the blue-prints of the valve. A* is
calculated from eq. (20) by substituting t and po(t)/Poi
(the selected pressure ratio from Step 2) as found ex-
perimentally from the valve test of Step 2. The effective
compressibility factor Z and the effective heat capacity
ratio k were determined in Step 1.
5. Discussion
The proposed m e t h o d of vapor rating valves has two
prime advantages over current steady-state test: a large
v a p o r generation capability is not necessary, a n d mass
flow rates do not have to be measured. The proposed
m e t h o d is only of value if the vapor rating is possible to
an acceptable degree of accuracy. This accuracy de-
p e n d s upon the relative sizes of the available pressure
vessel and the valve to be tested, a n d on the accuracy
with which the vessel pressure po(t) can be monitored.
This can best be d e m o n s t r a t e d by a n example.
Let a pressure vessel have a volume V of 1300 ft 3
(36.8 m 3) a n d let P0i = 1500 psia (10.34 MPa), which for
Table 2
Predicted blow-down, k = 1.13 and Z = 0.66, saturated steam at 1500 psi (10.34 MPa). V = 1300 ft 3 (36.8 m3 ). A - - 0 . 6 in2 (3.87 × 10 4
m 2)
Po/Poi Time t in seconds for:
A* = A =0.6 A* = 0.90A
1.000 0.0 0.0
0.900 33.1 36.8
0.800 70.4 78.3
0.700 113.0 125.6
0.600 162.6 180.7
0.500 221.8 246.5
saturated steam means that T0i = 5 9 6 ° F - - 1056°R (842
K). Further, let the valve throat area A be 0.6 in 2
( 3 . 8 7 × 10 4 m2), k = 1.13 and Z = 0 . 6 6 . It is instruc-
tive to compare the depressurization times for A* --A
with those for A* = 0.9A and for A* = 0.92A. This will
indicate if the time differences which may be measured
to an accuracy of 0.01 s are large enough to determine
the valve coefficient to an accuracy of -+0.01. T a b l e 2
also indicates the mass flow ratios r h / r h i and the vessel
t e m p e r a t u r e ratio To/Tol; the initial mass flow rate rn i is
13.25 l b m / s (6.01 k g / s ) .
Table 2 shows, for instance, that the vessel is depres-
surized to P0 = 0.7 P0i = 1050 psia (7.24 M P a ) in 113.0 s.
A valve coefficient of C - - 0 . 9 0 would be indicated by
a n increase in depressurization time of 125.6-- 1 1 3 . 0 -
12.6 s, while a valve coefficient of C = 0 . 9 2 would be
indicated by an increase of 1 2 2 . 9 - 113.0 = 9.9 s. It can
be seen that the suggested accuracy is easily surpassed
for this particular vessel and valve size since quick
opening valves can start the blow-down within +0.01 s
a n d time m e a s u r e m e n t s can be taken even more accu-
rately without u n d u e experimental complexity. Interpo-
lation of the pressure data shows that a 10 psia (68.9
kPa) error in pressure m e a s u r e m e n t would show up as
an 0.3 s time error, also well below a final accuracy of
the valve coefficient of ±0.01.
The influence of vessel volume V and of effective
valve area A* on the depressurization time t is given by
eq. (20); t is directly proportional to V and inversely
proportional to A*.
The effect of variation in compressibility factor Z is
shown in tables 3 and 4 and the effect of variations of
the specific heat ratio k is shown in tables 5 and 6. The
initial mass flow rates for tables 3, 4, 5 a n d 6 are 13.90
l b m / s (6.31 k g / s ) , 12.69 l b m / s (5.76 k g / s ) , 13.12 l b m / s
(5.96 k g / s ) and 13.38 l b m / s (6.07 k g / s ) , respectively.
A* = 0.92A vh/rh, To/To~
0.0 1.000 1.000
36.0 0.905 0.988
76.6 0.810 0.975
122.9 0.715 0.960
176.8 0.618 0.943
241.1 0.520 0.923
 D. W. Sallet / Vaporflow rating of valves 325

Table 3
Predicted blow-down, k = 1.13 and Z =0.60. Other parameters as for table 2.

Po/Poi Time t in seconds for:

A* = A =0.6 A* =0.90A A* = 0.92A ,~/,~ T0/To,

1.000 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.000 1.000

0.900 34.8 38.6 37.8 0.905 0.988
0.800 73.9 82.1 80.3 0.810 0.975
0.700 118.6 131.7 128.9 0.715 0.960
0.600 170.5 189.5 185.4 0.618 0.943
0.500 232.6 258.5 252.9 0.520 0.923

Table 4
Predicted blow-down, k = 1.13 and Z =0.72. Other parameters as for table 2

Po/Poi Time t in seconds for:

A* = A =0.6 A* = 0.90A A* =0.92A m / ,~ ~ ro / To~

1.000 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.000 1.000

0.900 31.7 35.3 34.5 0.905 0.988
0.800 67.4 74.9 73.3 0.810 0.975
0.700 108.2 120.2 117.6 0.715 0.960
0.600 155.7 173.0 169.2 0.618 0.943
0.500 212.4 236.0 230.8 0.520 0.923

Table 5
Predicted blow-down, k = 1.10 and Z =0.66. Other parameters as for table 2

Po/Poi Time t in seconds for:

A* = A =0.6 A* =0.90A A* = 0.92A ~11~1 i To lIToi

1.000 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.000 1.000

0.900 34.4 38.2 37.4 0.904 0.990
0.800 73.0 81.1 79.3 0.808 0.980
0.700 117.0 130.0 127.2 0.711 0.968
0.600 168.2 186.9 182.8 0.614 0.955
0.500 229.2 254.6 249. I 0.516 0.939

Recent safety valve tests performed by the author s e p a r a t i o n a n d s h o c k l o c a t i o n s in t h e valve. In f u t u r e

s h o w e d t h a t valve c o e f f i c i e n t s for c h o k e d v a p o r flow
w e r e i n f l u e n c e d b y t h e receiver p r e s s u r e . D e p e n d e n c y
u p o n receiver p r e s s u r e w a s p r e v i o u s l y a c c o u n t e d for
o n l y in s u b c r i t i c a l flow. T h i s d o w n - s t r e a m effect o n
c h o k e d m a s s flow r a t e s is at first s o m e w h a t s u r p r i s i n g
b u t is e x p l a i n e d b y t h e effect t h e receiver p r e s s u r e h a s
o n t h e critical a r e a in t h e v a l v e t h r o u g h i n f l u e n c i n g
v a l v e r a t i n g t e s t s t h i s d o w n - s t r e a m o r receiver p r e s s u r e
effect s h o u l d b e n o t e d . T h e n o n - s t e a d y m e t h o d o f v a p o r
r a t i n g d i s c u s s e d in this p a p e r a v e r a g e s t h e effect o f t h e
receiver p r e s s u r e , to a c e r t a i n degree, d e p e n d i n g u p o n
t h e p r e s s u r e d r o p r a t i o w h i c h is s e l e c t e d f o r t h e i n d i v i d -
u a l test.
326 D. ~ Sallet / Vapor flow rating of valves

Table 6
Predicted blow-down, k = 1.16 and Z : 0.66. Other parameters as for table 2

Po/Poi Time t in seconds for:

A* = A : 0 . 6 A* : 0.90A A* -- 0.92 A

1.000 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.000 1.000

0.900 32.0 35.6 34.8 0.907 0.986
0.800 68.1 75.6 74.0 0.812 0.970
0.700 109.3 121.4 118.8 0.717 0.952
0.600 157.4 174.9 171.1 0.622 0.932
0.500 214.9 238.8 233.6 0.524 0.909

6. Conclusion T temperature
U specific volume
This paper develops a new m e t h o d to determine the V total volume
flow coefficients for valves, orifices and other sudden Z compressibility factor
flow restrictions, for choked vapor flow. The m e t h o d is p density
valid for all gases and vapors a n d can be extended to
subcritical vapor flow. A comparison between the steam Superscripts
flow equation currently used (Napier's equation) and
the theoretical a p p r o a c h used in the d e v e l o p m e n t of the
refers to quantities at critical section
new valve rating m e t h o d shows that the latter predicts
when choked flow exists
measured steam flow rates as well over a comparable
vessel pressure range. The theoretical a p p r o a c h used for
the non-steady flow analysis is therefore valid. It is Subscripts
suggested that an extensive experimental program be
carried out to test the accuracy a n d the practicality of N refers to Napier's equations
the suggested valve rating method. 0 refers to isentropic stagnation condi-
tions
0i refers to initial stagnation conditions
Nomenclature rec refers to receiver vessel
st refers to steady state
A area (cross sectional flow area)
C valve coefficient
c~ c o n s t a n t pressure specific heat Acknowledgement
Cv c o n s t a n t volume specific heat
F(t) defined in text This work was supported by the D e p a r t m e n t of
k specific heat ratio: k = C p / C v Transportation, contract D O T - F R 64181. The author
gl, K3, K4 defined in text would like to express his gratitude to Professor U.
rh, W mass flow rate Muller, Director of the Institute for Nuclear Reactor
M mass, molecular weight C o m p o n e n t s , where this research was performed.
P pressure
R gas constant: ratio of universal gas con-
stant to molecular weight of gas
N defined in text References
t time
tc time d u r a t i o n from start of blow-down [1] A.H. Shapiro, The Dynamics and Thermodynamics of
to the instant at which choked flow Compressible Fluid Flow, Vol. 1 (The Ronald Press Co.,
ceases New York, 1953) p. 85.
 D. IV. Sallet / Vaporflow rating of valves 327

[2] L. Thompson and O.E. Buxton, Maximum isentropic flow flow of fluids from pressure vessels, Dynamics of Fluid-
of dry saturated steam through pressure relief valves, J. Structure Systems in the Energy Industry, Eds., M.K. Au-
Press. Vess. Techn. 101 (1979) 113-117. Yang, S.J. Brown, (ASME, PVP-39, New York, 1979, pp.
[3] D.W. Sallet, M.E. Palmer and S.R. Rod, The non-steady 213-228).