Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pi Control Valves Vs HP Control Valves
Pi Control Valves Vs HP Control Valves
November, 2006
130
closest circuits
costs and balancing costs of each option were
estimated.
110 The eight balancing options studied were:
furthest circuit
19
“Over-pressurized” means that the pressure differential across the control valve is greater than its rated differential pressure due to its
proximity to the pump(s) (see Figure 1). Control valves that are over-pressurized will require a greater percentage of the valve stoke for
balancing the circuit, thereby reducing the valve stroke available for control.
20 Taylor (2002) states this as a disadvantage in his ASHRAE Journal article. If the control valve is properly sized with or without the
balancing valve the branch pressure drop will be the same at design flow.
21 Ibid.
22 Ibid.
Siemens Industry, Inc. Page 5 of 26
Document No. 149-990
Balancing Option Advantages Disadvantages
7 Undersized control valves No balancing labor Limited effectiveness and applicability due to
Coils may be added/subtracted without limited available control valve sizes (Cv)
rebalance High design and analysis cost to determine
Reduced cost of smaller control valves correct control valve sizing
Reduced over-pressurization of control valves Coils may be starved if variable-speed drives
close to pumps where control valves have are used without P reset
been undersized Slightly higher pump energy depending on
Improved valve authority which could improve flow variations and pump controls
controllability where control valves have been
undersized
8 Pressure-independent No balancing labor Added cost of strainer and pressure-
control valves Coils may be added/subtracted without independent control valve
rebalance Cost of labor to clean strainer at startup
No over-pressurization of control valves close Higher pump head and energy due to strainer
to pump and pressure-independent control valve
Perfect valve authority which will improve Valves have custom flow rates and must be
controllability, making valve selection easier. installed in correct location
Valves can clog or springs can fail over time
ASHRAE Journal, October 2002. © American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., www.ashrae.org.
Designing Self-Balancing Hydronic sensible cooling transfer of about 85%, and a drop in
flow to 20% of design will still result in about a 50%
Systems sensible cooling transfer at the coil. These curves
represents the fundamental reason why most
A self-balancing hydronic system is one that does systems do not need to be mechanically balanced—
not need to be mechanically balanced to maintain substantial flow reduction must take place before
adequate flow through the coil for all load conditions. heat transfer ability is affected to any extent. The
Bell & Gossett 23 states that the great majority of balance problem occurs when flow rates through the
hydronic systems are free from balance problems. coils have been reduced to the point where minor
Why is this so? Most hydronic systems operate flow variations result in significant heat transfer
without the need for mechanical balance because changes, as shown by the “steep” part of the curve
adequate waterflow is maintained through the coil. in Figure 2.
Inadequate flow through the coil results in the
common balancing problem—the inability to meet If it can be agreed that a coil flow volume that will
the heating or cooling demand at high loads. result in at least 90% of the design heat transfer of
the coil will meet the heating or cooling load, Bell &
Gossett 24 has developed design procedures that will
Coil Heat Transfer Characteristic eliminate all waterflow balance problems. We will
Curves call the coil flow rate that results in at least 90% of
the design heat transfer of the coil the critical flow
Why is adequate flow through the coil maintained in rate. HVAC distribution system designers should
most circumstances? Figure 2 shows a typical employ the following procedures to ensure that coil
characteristic curve of the heat transfer versus flow flow rates remain above the critical flow rate for all
for a hot water coil. Note that a decrease in load variations.
waterflow rate to 50% of design decreases the heat
transfer ability of the coil only about 10%, and that
flow must be reduced all the way down to 10%
before the coil will exhibit a 50% drop in heat
transfer ability. For a cooling coil, the characteristic
cooling transfer curve as shown in Figure 3 is not
quite as steeply sloped and there are sensible and
latent heat components to the characteristic curve.
The more gradual curvature is due to the lower
design water T’s for cooling coils. Nevertheless, for
a cooling coil, 50% design flow will result in a
23 24
Op. Cit., Carlson. 1965. Ibid.
Page 6 of 26 Siemens Industry, Inc.
Document No. 149-990
100
Transfer of Heat as a Function of
90 Supply Temperature and
80 Temperature Differential
PERCENT OF DESIGN HEAT TRANFER
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
PERCENT OF DESIGN FLOW RATE
Table 2. Percent of Design Flow to Provide 90%
Figure 2. Coil Heat Transfer vs. Flow for 200F of Design Heating Load.
Inlet Water Temperature with a 20F T. 25
100
Hot Water Supply Temperature, F
90
TOTAL HEAT
Design 140 180 220 260 300 340
80 T, F
SENSIBLE HEAT
TOTAL HEAT TRANSFER, %
100
70
90 Percent of Design Flow
60 80
50 70
60
40
50 40 76 68.9 63.7 58 52.5 47.6
30 40 50
LATENT, %
LATENT HEAT
20
30 40 60 ___ 74.7 70.5 66.5 62.3 58.4
30
20
20
10 10
10
80 ___ ___ 76.5 71.5 67.6 63.5
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 100 ___ ___ 78 73.4 70.7 68
DESIGN FLOW, %
Courtesy: Bell & Gossett.
TEMPERATURE RISE, %
25
20
15
10
VF0305R1
5
0 20 40 60 80 100
DESIGN FLOW, %
25
Pg. 37.6, 2003 ASHRAE Handbook–HVAC Applications. ©
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, Inc., www.ashrae.org.
26
Pg. 37.7, 2003 ASHRAE Handbook–HVAC Applications. ©
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, Inc., www.ashrae.org.
Siemens Industry, Inc. Page 7 of 26
Document No. 149-990
Table 3. Percent of Design Flow to Provide 90% Circuit No. 1
of Design Cooling Load. Design flow at
low circuit
Chilled Water Supply Temperature, F differential
pressure
Design 40 45 50 Supply
T, F flow
8 64 68.4 74/3
Circuit No. 2
10 69 73 78.5 Design flow at
high circuit
73 77 82.1
VF0306R1
12 differential
pressure
14 76 79.8 84.8
Figure 4. Two Water Circuits Piped in Parallel.
16 78.7 82.3 87.2
Courtesy: Bell & Gossett.
Figure 5 plots the ratio of the design flow rates
against the ratio of the pressure drops for the two
circuits shown in Figure 4. Note in Figure 5 that the
Designing Coils to be Self-Balancing 90% curve levels off at about 0.75 on the vertical
axis. This shows that at least 90% of design flow will
Since all coils in a distribution system are piped in
occur in the high pressure-drop circuit, as long as
parallel, the general circuit balancing problem can
the design pressure drop of the low pressure-drop
be described by considering the arrangement shown
circuit is at least 75% of that for the high pressure-
in Figure 4, where one of the two parallel circuits has
drop design. Since from Figure 2 or Figure 3, for a
been designed for a higher pressure drop than the
flow of 90% or more of design, one can safely
other. Since the pressure drop across the headers
assume that the coil heat transfer rate will be
joining the two parallel circuits must be the same,
adequate to satisfy the heating or cooling load, one
the problem is that the flow in the lower pressure
can conclude that if the design pressure-drops for
drop circuit will be greater than design flow, and the
the various parallel circuits can be kept within 25%
flow in the higher pressure drop circuit will be less
of one another, flow distribution problems will be
than design flow. We will show that deviations in the
kept to a minimum. Since design pressure drops are
flow rates of each circuit are dependent on the ratio
determined by the coils, piping, and valves the
of design pressure drops of one circuit to the other
distribution system design engineer selects for the
and the ratio of design flow rates.
sub-circuits in the system, the design engineer can
essentially make the distribution system self-
balancing. In fact, Avery (1990) states, “if the control
valves are sized properly and the actuators are large
enough to position the valve plugs properly, the
27
system is self-balancing.”
27
Op. Cit., Avery et. al. 1990.
Page 8 of 26 Siemens Industry, Inc.
Document No. 149-990
1.0
o f design flo
w through linear relationship with the stem travel, as shown in
0.9
95 %
high PD cir
cuit Figure 7. 28
Avery (1993) 29 states that a direct-return variable-
0.8
90% flow hydronic system must be designed to be self-
0.7 balancing, and that for this system to be self-
high PD circuit
low PD circuit
0.4 70%
versus stem travel as possible will advance this goal.
0.3
Figure 8 shows the distortion of an equal percentage
control valve characteristic versus control valve
0.2 authority. A control valve authority of 1.0, as shown
in Figure 8, most closely matches the ideal equal
0.1
percentage characteristic curve shown in Figure 6.
100
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0
0
Combined Valve and Coil Characteristic 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10
Curves PERCENT OF VALVE STEM TRAVEL
90% 90%
HEAT OUTPUT
HEAT OUTPUT
FLOW
50% 50% 50%
10% 10%
VF0309R1
Figure 7. Coil Characteristic Curve Combined with Valve Characteristic Curve Produces a
Theoretically Linear Heat Output with Stem Travel.
Control Valve Authority the wide open valve with a one psi pressure drop
across it. 33
The designer should select a high control valve The Pressure drop across the system is determined
authority to ensure the least distorted flow by totaling the pressure drop path from the pump
characteristic. discharge through the supply main, branch supply,
coil, branch return, and return main to the pump
The control valve authority is defined
differently by different sources. suction.
Hegberg (1998) 32 defines authority as: ASHRAE 34 defines valve authority as the ratio of the
control valve pressure drop when it is controlling to
Pressure drop across control valve (2) its pressure drop when it is wide open.
Pv Valve Authority
Pressure drop across system Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. defines control
valve authority as the ratio of the pressure drop
Where Pressure drop across control valve is across the wide open valve to the branch circuit
determined from the equation: pressure drop when the valve is fully closed.
The distortion of an equal percentage control valve
GPM (3) characteristic versus control valve authority is shown
p in Figure 8. A control valve authority of 1.0, as
Cv shown in Figure 8, most closely matches the ideal
Where: equal percentage characteristic curve shown in
Figure 6.
GPM = coil design flow in gallons per minute.
p = pressure drop across the valve at design
flow in psi.
Cv = control valve flow coefficient. The valve Cv is
defined as the flow in gallons per minute through
33
Pg. 42.9, 2004 ASHRAE Handbook–HVAC Systems and
Equipment. © American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., www.ashrae.org.
32 34
Hegberg, Richard A. 1998. “Application of control valves and Pg. 42.8, 2004 ASHRAE Handbook–HVAC Systems and
balancing valves in a variable-flow hydronic system”. ASHRAE Equipment. © American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Transactions, Vol. 104, Part 1. Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., www.ashrae.org.
Page 10 of 26 Siemens Industry, Inc.
Document No. 149-990
100
Relationship Between Valve
90
Authority, Valve Stroke Needed for
80
Control, Pressure Rise, and
70 Pressure Drop Ratio
FLOW RATE, PERCENT
1
0.
60
The valve authority simply relates the valve pressure
=
A
50
0.
2 5 drop at nominal design flow, V100, defined as ΔpV100,
0.
5 divided by the branch circuit pressure drop ΔpVR.
40
0
Figure 9 shows the relationship between the coil
1.
30 pressure drop, ΔpMV, the valve pressure drop at
nominal design flow, ΔpV100, and the circuit pressure
20
drop, ΔpVR. If the pressure drop across the valve and
10 coil are the same, the valve authority of 0.5 results
and the valve has its full stroke available for control.
VF0310R1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 For example, in Figure 10, if the branch circuit
VALVE LIFT, PERCENT pressure drop ΔpVR = 200 kPa (29.1 psi) and the
valve pressure drop at design flow ΔpV100 = 50 kPa
Figure 8. Distortion of Equal Percentage Valve (7.3 psi), the valve authority, Pv = 0.25, and 82% of
Characteristic with Valve Authority. 35 the valve stroke is available for control The valve
authority PV could also be called Pressure Drop
Ratio (PDR). In the literature, Avery (1993) 36 refers
to the Pressure Rise Ratio (PRR), which is identical
to the inverse of the Pressure Drop Ratio or valve
authority PV.
35 36
Ibid. Op. Cit., Avery. 1993.
Siemens Industry, Inc. Page 11 of 26
Document No. 149-990
Figure 9. Pressure Loss in a Typical Branch of a Variable Flow System.
The valve constantly changes to adjust flow to the branch depending on the actual load in the building.
Figure 11 shows the relationship of the valve flow Cv Typically, since a great number of operating hours
as a function of the stroke of the control valve. This are spent at low-load conditions, it is important that
is the typical control valve characteristics for an the valve has the rangeability as possible.
equal percentage control valve of Siemens. If the The two-way coil modulating valve will always
stroke Y is plotted against the valve authority Pv it control better if the balancing valve is not used and
can be shown how much of the stroke Y is required the pressure drop across the control valve is
to achieve nominal flow and how much stroke is increased by the drop that would be allocated to the
available for control of the load of the coil. balancing valve. The control valve will then be
smaller and the rangeability and close-off will be
greater (Avery 1993). 40
Pressure Rise Ratio
The pressure rise ratio of a hydronic system is the The minimum controllable load is defined by the
ratio of the design pump head to the valve pressure rangeability and the valve authority (Petitjean
drop at design flow, with the valve wide open (Avery 1994). 41 The minimum controllable load can be
1993). In a properly controlled variable-flow hydronic estimated by the following relationship.
system, there can only be one valve fully open for
any given system load. 100 (5)
Qmin
When the two-way modulating control valve is Rangeability Pv
seating and unseating, the entire branch pressure
drop is across this valve. Therefore, in variable-flow Where:
hydronic systems the balancing is done by the last
segment of the plug lift (Avery 1993). 38 This Qmin is the minimum percentage controllable load.
segment is not usable to modulate the flow of water
to the coil under design operating conditions. It is
Pv is the valve authority.
desirable to minimize this loss in lift so that more of A high rangeability results in a good control
the valve stroke can be used for flow modulation. performance at low load conditions. As shown in
This can be accomplished by minimizing the Equation (5), the influence of the valve authority on
pressure drops in the mains and all components in the minimum controllable load is minor, since Qmin
the branch circuits, except the control valve. As a varies as the reciprocal of the square root of Pv.
rough rule-of-thumb that appears to be derived from
Avery’s experience, Avery (1993) recommends that Figure 11 shows the relationship between valve
the circuit be designed so that only the last 20% of rangeability, installed valve rangeability, and
the plug lift or less is used to balance the system. minimum controllable flow. The valve rangeability is
based on the actual maximum flow, which is derived
from the calculated Cv of the valve, whereas the
39
Turndown is another valve term closely related to rangeability.
Turndown is the ratio of maximum usable flow to the minimum
controllable flow of a valve. Turndown refers to the
valve/actuator combination, whereas rangeability refers to the
valve only. It is desirable to have as high an installed turndown
37
The “critical coil” is the coil that will typically drive the flow ratio as possible because this indicates that the valve is sized
requirements of the distribution pumps. The critical coil is properly for any flow demand in the circuit.
40
usually the coil farthest from the distribution pumps in a direct- Op. Cit., Avery et. al. 1990.
return distribution piping system. 41
Petitjean, Robert, 1994. “Total Hydronic Balancing”, pp.152-
38
Ibid. 155, Printed 1994 by Responstryck, Boras, Sweden.
Siemens Industry, Inc. Page 13 of 26
Document No. 149-990
installed valve rangeability is based on the installed The recommended basic sizing rule is to take half of
maximum flow, which is based on the Cv of the valve the design pressure drop across the branch at
actually installed in the system. It is important to design flow and use this value to size the valve. For
distinguish between these two definitions of example, if the branch pressure drop is 30 psi, the
rangeability because the Cv of the valve actually valve is sized with 15 psi. The sizing takes this
installed is often rounded down from the calculated pressure loss and calculates the required Cv value
(ideal) valve Cv because valves are manufactured with the required nominal GPM flow V100 as shown in
only in discrete sizes. Figure 12.
The ASHRAE 2004 Systems and Equipment
Handbook recommends that the control valve
pressure drop should be at least 25% to 50% of the
system loop pressure drop, which is equal to the
pressure drop across the pump discharge flange,
supply main, supply riser (if applicable), coil, control
valve, balancing valve (if used), and return main to
the pump suction flange) 44 . Valve pressure drops
more than this enhance controllability, but at the
expense of pump energy consumption.
Design specifications for variable-flow hydronic
systems must stress the importance of the valve
actuator and the need for high quality valve bodies
to withstand the additional dynamic forces and static
pressures that are prevalent in these systems.
All valves, in particular the globe-type control valve
commonly used in the hydronic circuit for heating
and cooling coils, has four pressure ratings: (1) the
valve body static pressure rating, generally 250 psig
Figure 11. Valve Rangeability and Installed Valve (1724 kPa); (2) a close-off rating based on the
Rangeability Defined According to Valve closing force of the actuator; (3) valve rangeability
Manufacturers. (pressure-rise ratio); and (4) a valve dynamic
pressure rating, which is defined as the maximum
differential pressure that the wetted parts will
Control Valve Sizing withstand. This last rating is often inappropriately
Traditional control valve sizing practice is to select ignored when selecting valves for variable-flow
45
the valve from the control valve manufacturer’s systems.
technical data sheets based upon the required Cv,
the estimated valve pressure drop, and an actuator
size capable of closing the valve against the
maximum differential pressure expected across it
(Hegberg 1998). 42 It is important to note that the Cv
rating varies by valve manufacturer.
Avery (1993) 43 recommends that this valve should
be selected so that the pressure drop across the
valve is at least half the pressure drop in the coil
branch. This basic sizing rule will assure sufficient
valve authority in each branch circuit, eliminate
underflow at low load operation, and assure
sufficient valve controllability. Figure 12 shows this
basic sizing rule.
44
See pages 42.8 – 42.9
42
Op. Cit., Hegberg. 1998. 45
Avery, Gil. 2000. “Selecting valves and piping coils”. ASHRAE
43
Op. Cit., Avery. 1993. Journal, 42(4), pp. 23–26.
Page 14 of 26 Siemens Industry, Inc.
Document No. 149-990
The basic rule for sizing the
valve is to
pVR
pV100
2
Figure 12. Basic Valve Sizing Rule.
In Figure 12 V100 is the full-load flow. ΔpV100 is the Required Parameters for Better Valve Sizing
pressure drop across the control valve at full-load
flow, and ΔpVR is the pressure drop across the Coil design pressure loss
branch circuit. Total system pressure drop at design flow
If the total system pressure drop at design flow
Required and Optional Information is unknown, use the design pump head
Needed for Optimal Versus Adequate If the valve authority is less than 0.25, then the Cv of
Control Valve Sizing the valve should be reduced by one (valve) size.
Siemens Building Technologies has created a valve This information can easily be obtained from the coil
sizing tool that only requires the following and pump schedule blueprints for the job, or from
parameters to size a high-performance, two-way the pump manufacturer.
control valve according to “Good, Better, Best”
accuracy: Required Parameters for Best Valve Sizing
Branch circuit design flow.
Required Parameters for Good Valve Sizing
Branch circuit pressure loss for each branch
Design pump flow circuit.
Total system pressure drop at design flow This information can be obtained from the coil and
pump schedule blueprints for the job, plus
If the total system pressure drop at design flow information on pipe size and length of pipe to each
is unknown, use the design pump head branch circuit. The branch circuit pressure loss for
This information can easily be obtained from the each branch circuit that is required for best valve
pump manufacturer. This information will provide the sizing can also be estimated using a model of
least accurate valve sizing, but it can be shown that branch pressure loss similar to the pressure gradient
the control valve will still have sufficient stroke diagram illustrated in Figure 13.
(nearly 80%) available for control.
Figure 13 shows the pressure gradient model used effective pressure loss ΔpV100 and the valve authority
in Siemens valve sizing tool to estimate branch Pv.
circuit pressure loss for a typical variable flow
The required branch pressure loss information is
hydronic system. The table in Figure 13 shows the
taken from the pipe sizing calculations. The branch
calculated Cv,calc and the selected Cv of the control
pressure loss can be estimated when the critical coil
valve. The table beneath the layouts also shows the
Page 16 of 26 Siemens Industry, Inc.
Document No. 149-990
pressure loss and the system pressure loss, which wetted parts are designed for” (Avery 1993). 47 This
the system is designed for, are known. A linear last rating is often inappropriately ignored when
estimation for each branch can be made. selecting valves for variable-flow hydronic systems.
In certain valve manufacturer’s literature, this may
For example, if the critical coil has a pressure drop
be referred to as the water modulating differential
of 45 kPa (6.55 psi) and the system pressure loss is
pressure, the maximum allowable throttling
225 kPa (32.6 psi), the following assumptions allow
differential pressure, or the maximum recommended
simple sizing.
differential pressure for modulating service. Avery
The table beneath the layouts in Figure 13 shows (1993) recommends that the valve dynamic pressure
the sizing assumptions. The sizing rule is to take half rating for any valve on a variable-flow hydronic
of the pressure drop across the branches to size the system should be at least 1.5 times the design pump
valve. The result is to always obtain a valve authority head. It is easy to understand that the valve closest
Pv > 0.25 and with an equal percentage valve to the pump must withstand a differential pressure
characteristics it is assured to attain more than 82% across it equal to the design pump head when this
of the stroke for control. valve closes when system flow demand is at design.
The 50% safety factor should provide enough
The best valve size is achieved with this sizing reserve rating to handle the higher pressure
approach. However, if less information is available, a differentials when the pump is operated at full speed
valve can be sized with less information. However, it
or is accidentally deadheaded, though this factor is
must have a valve authority Pv > 0.25 to assure redundant as the valve manufacturer has chosen the
good control performance with a high performance valve wetted surface materials, including the
control valve. manufacturer’s own safety factor.
Other Valve Parameters Needed Pump cut-off head, shown in Figure 14, can occur
across any valve during emergency conditions;
for Proper Control Valve Selection therefore, all coil valves in the system must be
selected for this differential. 48 On large installations,
it may be necessary to use industrial valves to meet
Valve Body Static Rating this high performance because of the higher pump
Commercial HVAC valve bodies are generally rated heads required for the longer pipe runs on these
at 250 psig, which is adequate for most installations systems.
(Avery 1993). 46 On variable-flow hydronic systems, Pump
however, the valve bodies must withstand not only Cut-Off
Head
the static hydronic head, plus the imposed Pump
expansion tank pressure, but also the full-speed Head
pump head when the valve is closed. This also
applies to all pipes and fittings in each variable-flow Pump Design
hydronic system circuit. Head and Flow
Pump
Curve
Valve Close-off Rating at
The valve close-off rating is the highest pressure 100%
Speed
differential the control valve will close off against to a Control
Curve
high performance leakage. For example, if the sub-
VF0312R1
49
Ibid.
Page 18 of 26 Siemens Industry, Inc.
Document No. 149-990
DP
Valve and Actuator Capability
20h
When the distribution system T is low, the
T
differential pressures across control valves close to
Chiller #1
10h
Coil the pump(s) are higher than what has been
10h
designed for. This is due to a higher chilled water
4h
4h
T
supply temperature; therefore, more flow is needed
Coil
Chiller #2 18h 10h
to satisfy a given load, creating the higher differential
4h pressures across terminals close to the pump(s).
4h
T
Coil
This is illustrated in the pressure gradient diagram of
26h Figure 16. Improperly-sized control valve actuators
20h
20h
Chiller #3 10h
may lack the strength to close off the valve
4h
4h
T
4h
T load on that circuit drops to zero, or even to
sufficiently close for low loads. In these cases, the
P-1 P-2 P-3 P- 4
Coil
42h 10h
control valves may begin to operate like two-position
4h
4h
T
Pump
Chiller (on/off) valves.
Valve
Control A B Coil
Panel 50h 10h 200
60h
180
VFD
P-5 160
Low 6°
System Pressure (ft)
140
Flow
VF0313R1
Sensor Low 8°
120
20 ft drop
Note: h = head (feet of water)
Design 12° across
100 coils and
control
Figure 15. Design Dynamic Pressure Ratings for valves
80
Control Valves.
60
expansion tank pressure
Valve Actuator Sizing 40
Distance
Due to the widely variable pressure differentials Courtesy: Flow Control Industries Inc.
across hydronic branches, it is recommended (Avery
1993) 50 that large valve actuators be installed that Figure 16. Pressure Gradient Along Water
can close tightly and can precisely position the valve Distribution System at Design Load Through
plugs. Actuators should be sized to close against at Range of T Performance.
least 1.5 times the design pump head. This will
ensure good valve plug positioning, and for High-Performance Control
pneumatic valves, minimize any spring range shift
caused by high differential pressure across the Valves and Actuators
valve. 51 A high-performance valve and actuator combination
must have the following characteristics:
52 53
See product brochure 153-277P10 Rev. 4 (05/02), or visit the This is generally the case when the supply air temperature
Web site: www.sbt.siemens.com/hvp/components. controls the coil valve on a VAV air handling unit.
Page 20 of 26 Siemens Industry, Inc.
Document No. 149-990
designs. 54 The main impediment to wider use of as the Cv is changed by rotating the valve stem
these valves has been their initial cost. However, manually or with electronic or pneumatic actuation.
since 2003, at least one pressure-independent valve The second valve is the differential pressure section.
manufacturer has been promoting the idea that The spring and piston in this section function to
these valves can also maximize the plant and maintain a constant differential pressure (P1 through
distribution system supply/return water T, and that P2) across the control surface using only the internal
this will lead to substantial reduction in boiler or fluid pressure in the valve. Therefore, flow is
chiller, pump, and air handler fan power unaffected by pressure changes (P1 through P3)
consumption over the course of a heating or cooling across the valve. When a pressure-independent
season. The valve manufacturer claims the plant valve is installed in a circuit that experiences a high
and distribution equipment power savings from the differential pressure across the valve, only a small
use of pressure-independent control valves, will part of the differential pressure exists across the
more than offset their higher initial cost. Does a control surface; the remaining pressure is absorbed
pressure-independent control valve offer an inherent by pressure regulating part of the valve.
advantage in attaining the highest possible water T
in a hydronic circuit if all of the other factors that As load varies on a chilled water system, the
differential pressure across any given coil control
affect T are eliminated?
valve changes continuously. Pressure-independent
From testing that has been conducted, one of the control valves maintain relatively constant differential
conclusions is that if a high-performance, pressure- pressure across the control surface within the valve
dependent control valve is sized and installed so that the flow rate remains steady until a change in
properly, it can actually attain a higher T load for that zone (coil) signals the valve actuator to
performance compared to that for a pressure- move. Dynamic pressure fluctuations are absorbed
independent control valve. Another conclusion is by the diaphragm and spring arrangement as shown
that for the vast majority of applications, control in Figure 17. Pressure-independent control valves
valves are not sized perfectly due to the finite automatically balance the system regardless of the
number of valve selections available from the amount or location of the system load because the
manufacturer, and less than optimal T performance pressure regulating part of the valve absorbs any
is attained. However, if the valve control logic of a excess pressure across the valve. As long as the
high-performance control valve is enhanced to differential pressures across the pressure-
control for maximum coil water T within a set independent valve are within their specified range,
tolerance of the discharge air temperature setpoint, high-load zones being near or far from the pump(s)
a high-performance control valve can at least attain does not affect the flow rate through the valve.
the same T as that for a pressure-independent Figure 18 shows the pressure-independent valve
control valve. The water T performance between pressure-flow characteristics. The typical operating
these two types of valves will be examined in a range of the valve is in the flat (vertical) part of the
separate Technology Report that will be published in characteristic curves. Note that because the
the future. pressure-independent valve has different pressure-
flow characteristics compared to a high-
Theory of Operation performance, pressure-dependent valve, in general
a larger valve size must be selected for the
Figure 17 shows a comparison between a high- pressure-independent valve compared to a
performance control valve and a pressure- pressure-dependent valve for the same design
independent control valve. Note that a pressure- (operating) point.
independent control valve is really two valves in
series–the upstream valve is the control valve, while
the downstream valve functions as a pressure-
regulating valve. The first valve is the Cv section.
This section changes the flow rate through the valve
54
Currently, there are three major manufacturer’s of pressure-
independent control valves: (1) Flow Control Industries, Inc.
who introduced their “Delta P” valve in 1992, (2) Belimo, who
introduced their “PICCV” valve in 2003, and (3) Griswold, who
introduced their “PIC” valve in 2003.
Siemens Industry, Inc. Page 21 of 26
Document No. 149-990
CONTROL SHAFT
ROTATES TO MODULATE FLOW
SPRINGS
PISTON
FLOW P1 P1 P3 FLOW
FLOW
P2 FLOW
CONTROL SURFACES
SEAL
VF0317R1
Valve on Right Courtesy: Flow Control Industries, Inc. and Pumping Solutions, LLC
20 Infinitely
Cv = 25
20. 00
Variable
Flow
Setting 3" Valve
Cv = 40
15 Pressure-regulating 15. 00
valve pressure drop
pmin = 10 psi
Equivalent (20 psid)
pressure-
10 dependent 10. 00
2" valve
pW = 7 psi 5. 00
5
(5 psid) -
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
50 100 150 Flow (gpm)