Professional Documents
Culture Documents
regulated valve. The transient, compressible and turbulent flow [6] have investigated turbulent flow structure inside a Pressure
structures inside the valve are simulated using ANSYS FLUENT
Regulating and Shut-Off Valve using ANSYS FLUENT. In
coupled with a special UDF. Here, valve inlet pressure is varied in a
stepwise manner. For every value of inlet pressure, transient analysis this work, both 2-D and 3-D simulations were performed with
leads to a quasi-static flow through the valve. Spool forces are a conclusion that 2-D model could predict the flow
calculated based on different pressures at inlet. From this information coefficients satisfactorily. Song et al. [7] have reported 2D
of spool forces, pressure characteristic of the passive control circuit dynamic simulation of a pressure relief valve using CFD.
has been derived.
I. INTRODUCTION
International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 7(5) 2013 936 scholar.waset.org/1307-6892/9500
World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering
Vol:7, No:5, 2013
3/ 2
⎛T ⎞ T O+ S
μ = μ o ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
⎝ To ⎠ T +S Fig. 3 Flow domain showing two different zones of fluid
International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 7(5) 2013 937 scholar.waset.org/1307-6892/9500
World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering
Vol:7, No:5, 2013
14
13
12
11
Opening(mm)
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110
Inlet Pressure(Psig)
Fig. 5 FLOWCHART for special UDF
Fig. 6 Spool opening plotted against valve inlet pressure
International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 7(5) 2013 938 scholar.waset.org/1307-6892/9500
World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering
Vol:7, No:5, 2013
Fig. 7 shows the variation of mass flow rate in kg/s with the 46
change in inlet pressure. There is no significant change in
Pilot Pressure(Psig)
44
42
mass flow rate. This is justified as two things happen 40
simultaneously. Resistance in flow path increases as spool 38
36
opening reduces which would try to decrease mass flow rate. 34
But again the increase in inlet pressure results in nullifying the 32
30
above fact.
In Fig. 8 flow forces acting on spool surfaces are plotted 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110
against the inlet pressure. The negative sign indicates that the
force is acting in negative x direction, i.e. axially from right to Inlet Pressure(Psig)
left direction (refer to Fig. 1). It is observed that absolute force
increases with increase in inlet pressure. This owes to the fact Fig. 9 Pressure characteristic of passive control circuit
that spool opening creates an orifice and the spool area left
side of that orifice is less than that at the right side of the VII. CONCLUSION
orifice (refer to Fig. 1). So, a counter force is required to keep Control circuit pressure characteristic has been determined
the spool at desired location. This force comes from pilot by solving compressible, turbulent flow through pressure
International Science Index, Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineering Vol:7, No:5, 2013 waset.org/Publication/9500
chamber air. Pilot pressure is the outlet pressure of a passive regulated valve. A special UDF has been developed to couple
control circuit. Fig. 9 shows the pilot pressure variation with with ANSYS FLEUNT primarily to modify structured mesh
change in inlet pressure. of the flow domain dynamically with change in valve inlet
pressure. The simulation provides valuable insight into the
0.150000
control circuit behaviour which is crucial for designers.
Attempt to simulate using fully three-dimensional geometry is
underway.
Inlet mass flow rate(kg/s)
0.140000
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
0.130000
We thank Prof. Gautam Biswas, Director, Central
0.120000
Mechanical Engineering Research Institute, Durgapur, for
permission to publish the work. We are also thankful to Dr.
Amitava Dasgupta for providing valuable advice on the
0.110000
functional aspect of the valve.
0.100000
REFERENCES
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100105110
[1] Leutwyler Z, Dalton C. A computational study of torque and force due
to compressible flow on a butterfly valve disk in mid-stroke position. J
Inlet Pressure(Psig) Fluid engineering 2006; 128:1074-84..
[2] Amirante R, Del Vescove G, Lippolis A. Flow forces analysis of open
Fig. 7 Variation of mass flow rate through valve with change in inlet center hydraulic directional control valve sliding spool. Energy
Conversion and Management 2006; 47:114-31.
pressure
[3] Amirante R, Del Vescove G, Lippolis A. Evaluation of the flow forces
on an open centre directional control valve by means of a computational
‐500.0
fluid dynamic analysis. Energy Conversion and Management 2006;
47:1748-60.
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 [4] Amirante R, Moscatelli PG, Catalano LA. Evaluation of the flow forces
‐550.0 on a direct (single stage) proportional valve by means of a computational
fluid dynamic analysis. Energy Conversion and Management 2007;
‐600.0
48:942-53.
Spool force(N)
[5] Chern MJ, Wang CC, Ma CH. Performance test and flow visualization
of a ball valve. Experimental thermal and fluid sciences 2007; 31:505-
‐650.0 12.
[6] Chattopadhyay H., Kundu A., Saha B. K, Gangopadhyay T.. Analysis of
‐700.0
Flow Structure inside a Spool Type Pressure Regulating Valve. Energy
Conversion and Management 2012; 53:196-204.
[7] Song XG, Jung JH, Lee HS, Kim DK, Park YC, 2-D dynamic simulation
‐750.0 of a pressure relief valve by CFD, Proc. 9th WSEAS Int. Conf. on
Applied Computer and Applied Computational Science, Hangzhou,
‐800.0
China, April 11-13, 2010.
[8] www.ansys.com.
[9] Shih TH, Liou WW, Shabbir A, Yang Z, Zhu J. A new k- ε eddy-
Inlet Pressure(Psig) viscosity model for high Reynolds number turbulent flows -model
development and validation. Computers Fluids 1995; 24:227-38.
Fig. 8 Variable flow forces on spool surfaces as inlet pressure varies
International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 7(5) 2013 939 scholar.waset.org/1307-6892/9500