T h e M a n u fa c T u r e r s V o i c e

The impact of SiL on process valve actuating systems

In recent years we have seen even more the need to fulfil the requirements of SiL (Safety integrity Level) in respect of the IEC DIN/EN 61508 how does this impact on process valve actuating systems, especially in hazardous applications? Natural gas has overtaken oil to become a more common domestic and industrial energy source and this brings the problem of delivering the liquid gas (LPG & LNG) to the enduser. Facilities are required for pressure increase (booster stations), pressure decrease to match consumer pressure demand and pressurised underground storage. This means pipelines and ON-OFF and CONTROL process valves. Gas is subject to high pressure and is highly explosive so hazardous to handle with a huge impact on human life and the environment in the case of an accident. Here I put forward some ideas and solutions plus future trends in this field of application. to several minutes for the 90 turning action just to avoid the high speed after the valve combined with a pressure drop which leads in the end to a pressure peak when the line is filled and the media suddenly compressed / jammed. The closing sequence knows 2 different possibilities: 1st possible closing sequence is a normal operating condition for shutting-off the line for maintenance purposes which is absolutely uncritical and needs only a reliable design of the actuating system fail-safe control to match the appropriate & required SiL level possibly electric, hydraulic or pneumatically operated. 2nd possible closing sequence is the abnormal operating condition for shutting-off the line in case of an internal explosion and / or a pipeline burst which releases explosive gas to the environment and creates an explosion there (to view such a disaster have a look on Wikipedia gas pipeline burst) which happens frequently and can never be 100% safe. The major problem is that gas creates an explosive atmosphere very fast and only a small concentration of gas in the air leads to an explosive situation where only 1 spark is enough to blow-up the whole place.

The solutions:
Basically we need to define the closing time of an abnormal operating condition. Recent research by a Swiss based engineering company recommends the closing time for such a process valve shall be not longer than 0.2 sec to avoid impact to the local population resulting in deaths. This gives us an idea what possible actuating systems exist.

1st choice: electrically actuated process valves (see Fig. 1).

So far we have not really had a good opportunity to operate an electrically actuated valve within this time span smaller valves of around 1 possibly in 1 sec if we have direct operated solenoid valves and up to 10 seconds and more for bigger sizes where we have to look at electric part-turn or multi turn actuators.

2nd choice: hydraulically actuated valves (see Fig. 2).

Here the main problem is the evacuation of the oil out of the cylinders to get a fast action circuit. This technology is usually for safety circuits to avoid the so called waterhammer effect by closing a piping system too fast (e.g. water transmission lines of several km length) so this is not an option for this application.

he necessary fast acting process valves range from very small sizes of only up to sizes of 48 and even more. Basically we are looking at butterfly valves and ball valves with a 90 angle turning action generally known as part-turnaction. To avoid hammering inside the piping network there are 2 complete opposite requirements on actuating systems. The opening sequence needs a slow motion and long opening time between 20 sec

Fig. 1

www.valve-world.net

April 2010

T h e M a n u fa c T u r e r s V o i c e

Fig. 2

3rd choice: Pneumatically actuated process valve (see Fig. 3).

These actuators are usually spring operated actuators. Here we face a similar problem as for the hydraulically operated solutions. The evacuation of the trapped air in the cylinder of course not as serious as for the hydraulics and the negative effect is not for small sizes, but the bigger the actuators are

Fig. 3

the more seriously we have to look at it. A 2 ball valve can be operated by a standard pneumatic spring-to-close actuator within 0.5 seconds, whereas a 20 ball valve needs a minimum of around 4 to 5 seconds so even with this technology we are far away from the needs for those pipelines. The next problem for a pneumatic action is the requirement to have a compressor + storage tank + piping for the air supply which is not possible everywhere and, last but not least, affordable. Usually an electric power supply of 415V/ AC, 230V / AC or 24 V/DC is available anywhere. So finally, out of these 3 solutions, we have seen that none of them are really able to run under the required safety parameters to close a valve within 0.2 sec.

Electricity is available almost everywhere. Find a mechanical solution with an independent interface like the ISO 5211 where all actuators can be connected (electric, hydraulic & as well pneumatic) Spring loaded return action where the spring is not trapped in a housing which creates the problem of evacuating air, hydraulic oil and so on..... Electromechanical connection of the spring return unit. It is obvious that we need to have a mechanical solution covering all these needs and there is a solution with patent pending which we will see in the next issue of the Valve World Magazine in detail and I am really looking forward to getting serious replies from readers regarding different applications in the industry. Please give me as much feedback on possible applications as you can!

What is the best choice for the future to solve the requirements and also meet the SiL?
For control purposes in almost all applications is electric power.

Meet Gnter xler

Gnter xler is a freelancer to the Process Industry and has a long history within the valve industry. He graduated in Process Engineering and Mechanical Engineering in Stuttgart, Germany, holds a MBA degree in VWA as well as a controlling degree and is a REFA specialist. For more than 25 years, Gnter has worked for several companies in the valve business. He is also a member of the IWA, ISA and VDI German Engineer. Gnter can be contacted under guenteroexler@aol.com

2 April 2010

www.valve-world.net