Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58
DOI 10.1007/s10010-006-0043-3
ORIGINALARBEITEN · ORIGINALS
Sizing of nozzles, venturis, orifices, control and safety valves
for initially sub-cooled gas/liquid two-phase flow –
The HNE-DS method
J. Schmidt
Received: 20 November 2006 / Published online: 12 January 2007
© Springer-Verlag 2007
Abstract Current standards for sizing nozzles, venturis, ori-
fices, control and safety valves are based on different flow
models, flow coefficients and nomenclature. They are gener-
ally valid only for single-phase gas and liquid flow. Common
to all is the concept of one-dimensional nozzle flow in combi-
nation with a correction factor (e.g. the discharge coefficient)
to correct for non-idealities of the three-dimensional flow.
With the proposed partial non-equilibrium HNE-DS method
an attempt is made to standardize all sizing procedures by
an appropriate nozzle flow model and to enlarge the appli-
cation range of the standards to two-phase flow. The HNE-
DS method, which was first developed for saturated and non-
flashing two-phase flow, is extended for initially sub-cooled
liquids entering the throttling device. To account for non-
equilibrium effects, i.e. superheated liquid due to rapid de-
pressurisation, the non-equilibrium coefficient used in the
HNE-DS method is adapted to those inlet flow conditions.
A comparison with experimental data demonstrates the good
accuracy of the model.
Auslegung von Düsen, Venturis, Blenden, Stell-
und Sicherheitsventilen für eingangs unterkühlte
Gas-Flüssigkeits-Strömungen nach der HNE-DS
Methode
Zusammenfassung Die derzeitigen Regelwerke zur Ausle-
gung von Düsen, Venturies, Blenden, Stell- und Sicherheits-
ventilen basieren auf verschiedenen Strömungsmodellen,
Durchflusskoeffizienten und sind mit verschiedenen Nomen-
klaturen beschrieben. Sie gelten nur für Einphasenströmung
J. Schmidt (u)
BASF AG, GCT/S-L511,
Ludwigshafen, Germany
e-mail: juergen.schmidt@onlinehome.de
von Gasen und Flüssigkeiten. Gemeinsam ist den Modellen
in den Regelwerken die Kombination aus einer idealisier-
ten Düsenströmung und einem Korrekturfaktor (z.B. dem
Ausflusskoeffizienten), um die Nicht-Idealitäten der dreidi-
mensionalen realen Strömung zu korrigieren. Die neue HNE-
DS Methode, ein Düsen-Strömungsmodell mit Gasen und
Flüssigkeiten im partiellen Ungleichgewicht, erlaubt es, die
bestehenden Auslegungsempfehlungen in den verschiedenen
Regelwerken zu vereinheitlichen und gleichzeitig auf Zwei-
phasenströmungen zu erweitern. Die HNE-DS Methode, die
zunächst für siedende und nicht-verdampfende Zweiphasen-
strömungen entwickelt worden ist, wird erweitert für an-
fangs unterkühlte Flüssigkeiten im Eintritt der Armaturen.
Ungleichgewichtseffekte, beispielsweise die Überhitzung
der Flüssigkeit bei schnellem Druckabfall, werden mit ei-
nem erweiterten Ungleichgewichtsfaktor im HNE-DS Mo-
dell berücksichtigt. Der Vergleich mit experimentellen Daten
zeigt die gute Genauigkeit des Modells.
List of symbols
Variable Unit Definition
a – exponent of the non-equilibrium
coefficient N
A m2 cross-sectional area of the nozzle throat
(seat aera of valve)
C – flow coefficient
Ccrit – flow coefficient at critical pressure
ratio in the nozzle throat
cpi,0 J/(kg K) specific liquid heat capacity at inlet
conditions
d m nozzle throat diameter
d0 m nozzle inlet diameter
K d,2 ph – derated two-phase flow valve
discharge coefficient
13
48 Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58

K d,g – certified (derated) valve discharge 1 Introduction

coefficient for single-phase
gas/vapor flow Two-phase mass flow rates through throttling devices are
K d,l – certified (derated) valve discharge generally calculated based on simplified geometries. Most
coefficient for single-phase liquid often a nozzle is considered. The result is then corrected by
flow an experimentally determined factor, i.e. a friction or dis-
lPipe m length of piping behind the nozzle charge coefficient, to account for any deviation in the flow
throat with an diameter equal to the due to the real geometry – an orifice, a venturi or valve. Cur-
nozzle throat diameter rently the only standards which exist are for the sizing of
ṁ kg/(m2 s) mass flux safety valves given in API 520 [1] and ISO 23521 [2]. These
N – non-equilibrium coefficient are based on the world wide accepted ω-method developed
p Pa pressure in the nozzle throat by J.C. Leung, [3, 4], and recommended by the DIERS In-
p0 Pa nozzle inlet pressure stitute [5]. Several classical sizing text books also make
ps (T0 ) Pa saturation pressure at inlet reference to it [6, 7]. One of the major advantages of this
temperature method is its use of known or easily measurable property
pb Pa back pressure data at inlet stagnation condition of the safety valve.
pc Pa thermodynamic critical pressure The use of the ω-method for saturated two-phase flow
Qm kg/s mass flow rate through the nozzle generally leads to conservative sizing results, because ho-
T0 K nozzle inlet temperature mogeneous equilibrium flow through the safety valve is
Tc K thermodynamic critical temperature assumed. However, if an initially sub-cooled or a boiling
v m /kg
3
specific volume in the nozzle throat liquid with a low mass flow quality has to be considered
v0 m3 /kg specific volume in the nozzle inlet at the inlet of a safety valve, it is well known, that the
v∗ m3 /kg dimensionless specific volume method provides an in-acceptable over-estimation of the re-
ẋ 0 – mass flow quality in the nozzle inlet quired size [e.g. 8,9]. As an alternative, the Henry/Fauske
ẋ eq – mass flow quality in the nozzle throat model [10] which is based on a more accurate fit to ex-
under thermodynamic equilibrium perimental data can be applied in such situations to cal-
conditions culate the mass flow rate. Henry and Fauske also pro-
∆ẋ eq – change of mass flow quality between posed a boiling delay factor to account for the thermal
nozzle inlet and throat under non-equilibrium of the fluid and get excellent results when
thermodynamic equilibrium compared with the flow through nozzles. Unfortunately, the
conditions model of Henry/Fauske is based on physical property data
ε – void fraction in the nozzle throat which are only rarely available in industry and additionally
β – diameter ratio it is more complicate to use than the ω-method.
η – pressure ratio To overcome the conservatism of the ω-method for low
ηb – ratio of back pressure to the inlet quality inlet flow, both the ω-method and the Henry/Fauske
pressure model are combined into the HNE-DS method (Homoge-
ηcrit – critical pressure ratio neous Non-Equilibrium Method of the authors Diener and
ηS – ratio of the saturation pressure Schmidt) to account for thermodynamic non-equilibrium ef-
corresponding to the nozzle inlet fects [11, 12]. Mechanical non-equilibrium effects are ac-
temperature (measure of liquid counted for by means of a slip model. In this way, the
subcooling) to the inlet pressure previous work of J.C. Leung and Henry and Fauske is rec-
κ – Isentropic coefficient ognized and engineers in practice may continue to use their
λinsul W/(m2 K) heat transfer coefficient of the traditional methods, like API 520.
insulation In addition to the sizing of safety valves, a generaliza-
ω – compressibility coefficient tion of the HNE-DS method is proposed for sizing nozzles,
ω(N) – compressibility coefficient depending venturis, orifices, control valves and other throttling devices.
on the non-equilibrium coefficient N The HNE-DS method is part of the standard ISO/DIS 4126-
ωeq – compressibility coefficient for 10 for safety valves [15] (the standard was accepted in 2006
a homogeneous fluid under as a draft international standard, a preliminary standard has
thermodynamic conditions, been published in [13, 14]) and is proposed for inclusion
ω (N = 1) in IEC 60534 (control valves) [16]. Additionally, it is rec-
∆h v,0 J/kg latent heat of vaporization at inlet ommended to extend ISO 5167 [17] and ISO 9300 [18]
condition (nozzles, orifices, venturis) for two-phase flow.

13
Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58
In the following, the HNE-DS method is derived and
extended for initially sub-cooled liquids at the inlet of throt-
tling devices.
2 HNE-DS method
The basic idea of the HNE-DS method is to consider a throt-
tling device as a frictionless, adiabatic nozzle. The fluid
is assumed to be a quasi single-phase, i.e. a homogeneous
mixture of gas and liquid in equilibrium, with two-phase
properties. Correction of the simplified model are defined
for non-idealities like boiling delay and slip between gas
and liquid phase, which may be characteristic for certain
throttling devices. Those non-idealities are induced, e.g., by
a contraction and redirection of the flow and due to fric-
tion and wall heat exchange. The more precise the nozzle
flow model accounts for non-equilibrium effects and real
properties of the fluids, the fewer dependencies have to be
taken into consideration for a discharge coefficient. In any
case, the discharge coefficient must be experimentally de-
termined, at least at certain, representative flow conditions.
A precise nozzle flow model is critical in order to extrapo-
late the flow coefficient of a throttling device from labora-
tory test conditions to flow conditions typically encountered
in industry.
The one-dimensional momentum balance for the flow
through a frictionless, adiabatic nozzle with no gravity ef-
fects encountered is,

dη

 η ∗
 − v dη
 η v
 p ∗ d
C= ; η= ; v = ; β= . (1)
0
∗
(v )2 − β 4 p0 v0 d0
The nomenclature of ISO/DIS 4126-10 is identically applied
in the present paper.
Herein, η is the ratio of the pressure in the nozzle throat p
and the inlet p0 (symbols without subscripts refer to the noz-
zle throat while the subscript ,,0“ stands for the inlet of the
nozzle), v∗ is the specific volume ratio and β the diameter
ratio. The flow coefficient C is, by definition, the normalized
mass flow rate Q m through the nozzle,
Qm π 2
C=  ; A= d . (2)
A · 2 · vp0 4
0 tion. In a very short nozzle, the momentum and heat ex-
Equation 1 is valid for single phase gas and liquid flow as
well as for two-phase mixtures. The gas/liquid two-phase
flow is treated as quasi single-phase flow with a specific vol-
ume of a mixture. Any information about interfacial heat
and mass transfer between the phases is included in the di-
mensionless specific volume of the flow v∗ . Its time and
49
cross-sectional average for a homogeneous two-phase flow
under thermodynamic equilibrium condition is [5, pp. 58ff],
vg vl
v∗ = ẋ · + (1 − ẋ) · , (3)
v0 v0
from where an equation of state v∗ (η) for the profile along
the nozzle may be determined by integration of the deriva-
tive,
dv∗   d ẋ dvg dvl
v0 = vg − vl · + ẋ · + (1 − ẋ) · (4)
dη dη dη dη
The liquid may be considered as almost incompressible,
the gas as following the ideal gas law and the boiling line
of the gas/liquid mixture may be prescribed by the Clau-
sius Clapeyrons law. Heat of vaporization and liquid spe-
cific volume are constant and the temperature of the gas
is taken equal to that of the liquid (spontaneous heat ex-
change). What remains is the information about the change
of mass flow quality along the pressure curve in the nozzle,
i.e. the interfacial heat and mass transfer. Any heat transfer
limitation due to steep pressure gradients within the noz-
zle will result into a thermodynamic non-equilibrium – or
boiling delay – of the flow. Henry and Fauske [10] iden-
tified the boiling delay as a deviation of the mass flow
quality from equilibrium conditions at a certain pressure
drop
d ẋ d ẋ eq
= ·N. (5)
dη
The proposed dependency of the boiling delay factor N on
the mass flow quality is linear at low qualities and constant
for mass flow qualities larger than 0.14. In contrast, Diener
and Schmidt [11, 12] suggested a (continuous) power-law
function for the boiling delay factor. The basis of their func-
tion is the mass flow quality in the narrowest cross section
of the nozzle ẋ eq – the nozzle throat – if both the vapor and
liquid phase are in thermal equilibrium:
 a
N = ẋ eq ; a ∈ 0 . . . ∞ ; ẋ eq ∈ 0 . . . 1 ; ⇒ N ∈ 0 . . . 1 .
(6)
The exponent “a” depends on the relaxation time for the
two-phase flow in the nozzle up to its narrowest cross sec-
change between both phases is poor and, hence, the boiling
delay reaches its maximum (a →∝; N → 0). The flow is al-
most frozen. If vapor and liquid would have time to reach its
equilibrium state, i.e. in a very long nozzle, almost no boil-
ing delay will occur (a → 0; N → 1). As a general rule, the
larger the inlet mass flow quality is, the less pronounced is
the boiling delay effect, Fig. 1.
13
50 Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58

3 Initially sub-cooled liquid flow

If a sub-cooled liquid enters a nozzle three distinct void pro-

files may develop up to the nozzle throat, Fig. 2: (I) pure
liquid flow throughout the nozzle or (II) just flashing in
the nozzle throat (highly sub-cooled two-phase flow) and
(III) flashing prior to nozzle throat (low sub-cooled two-
phase flow). Let pb be the back pressure downstream of the
nozzle throat, then the flow coefficient for pure liquid flow
yields (profile I)


1 − ηb pb
Cl = ; ηb = . (10)
Fig. 1 Mass flux calculated with the HEM and the Frozen Flow 1 − β4 p0
model versus inlet mass flow quality for a nozzle investigated by
Sozzi/Sutherland [22]
Flashing of the liquid in the nozzle throat will cause a local
choke. A first estimate for the throat pressure is the satura-
Following the derivation of the original ω-method [3] tion pressure of the liquid at inlet temperature p S (T0 ), the
and taking the boiling delay coefficient N into consideration flow coefficient becomes (profile II)
yields an equation of state for a two-phase flow including
thermal non-equilibrium effects, 
1 − ηS p S (T0 )

 C= ; ηS = . (11)
1 1 1 − β4 p0
∗
v = ω(N) − −1, (7)
η η0
Only if gas and liquid phase are homogeneously mixed
where the compressibility coefficient is defined by, and in thermodynamic equilibrium can the flow coefficient,
Eq. 11, be reached. Superheating of the liquid phase typ-
 ically causes larger mass flow rates. This effect can be
1 ẋ 0 · vg0 c pl0 · T0 · p0 · η0 vg0 − vl0 2
ω(N) = + · · N , (8) accounted for by a flashing delay – or more general –
κ v0 v0 ∆h v0



a non-equilibrium coefficient N as already proposed for the
vg0 − vl0 η0 HNE-DS model in saturated two-phase flow. According to
N = ẋ 0 + c pl0 · T0 · p0 · η0 · · ln . (9)
∆h v0
2 η Leung [20] the integral in Eq. 1 should be separated into
a flow region for liquid flow up to η S (s. Eq. 11) and into
The factor 1/κ in the left term on the right hand side was in- a two-phase region starting at η0 = η S until the nozzle throat
troduced to account for an isentropic rather than an isother- to yield a generally valid flow coefficient for single-phase
mal change of state in single phase gas flow compared to gas and liquid flow as well as for homogeneous two-phase
a two-phase gas liquid flow. The compressibility coefficient
ω(N) leads to the original ω-parameter, when vapor and li-
quid phase are in thermal equilibrium (N = 1; ω(N = 1) = Fig. 2 Void profiles in
initially sub-cooled
ωeq ). If there is no mass and heat transfer between vapor two-phase flow through
and liquid at all (frozen flow) or in a non-flashing gas/liquid a nozzle
flow, the second term on the right hand side of Eq. 8 would
vanish (N = 0).
Due to simplified assumptions, such as constant heat of
vaporization, Eq. 7 results in large unacceptable uncertain-
ties close to the thermodynamic critical point of a fluid.
Hence, it should only be used, if the reduced inlet pres-
sure or temperature of the fluid do not exceed values of
p0 / pc ≤ 0.5 or T0 /Tc ≤ 0.9, respectively. Additionally, for
multi-component fluids the largest boiling temperature dif-
ference of two compounds should be less than 100 ◦ C. In
any other case, a more precise equation of state should be
considered [7, 19].

13
Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58 51

gas/liquid mixtures,



 η
 (1 − η S ) − v∗ (ω(N)) · dη
 p S (T0 )
 ηS
C= ; ηS = . (12)
(v∗ (ω(N)))2 − β 4 p0
The pressure ratio η, i.e. the pressure in the nozzle throat to
the inlet pressure, which is used in Eq. 7 to define v∗ and in
Eq. 9 to calculate N, equal the back pressure ratio η = ηb
in case of sub-critical flow and the critical pressure ratio
η = ηcrit , if the flow in the nozzle throat is choked. The crit-
ical pressure ratio ηcrit is defined as the ratio where the flow
coefficient C(η), (s. Eqs. 12, 7–9), reaches its maximum
value. Fig. 3 Flow coefficient according to the HNE-DS model as a function
of pressure ratio for certain degree of initially sub-cooled liquids
For a plenum inlet flow (β = 0) and a non-equilibrium
coefficient N independent of the pressure ratio η, Eq. 12
would lead to an analytical solution for the flow coefficient An analytical solution of Eq. 14 may be performed for
C= a plenum flow (β = 0) of a homogenous mixed fluid in ther-
     modynamic equilibrium as proposed by Leung [20]
(1 − η S ) + ω(N) · η S · ln ηηS − (ω(N) − 1) (η S − η)
  Ccrit,HEM =
. 
ω(N) ηηS − 1 + 1    
(1 − η S ) + ωeq · η S · ln ηηS − (ωeq − 1)(η S − η)
(13)   (15)
Overall, Eqs. 12, 7–9 (integral solution) or Eqs. 13, 8, 9 ωeq ηηS − 1 + 1
(analytical solution) are applicable for all flow conditions
Herein, ωeq is the compressibility coefficient for N = 1
typically encountered in industry.
(see Eqs. 8 and 9, ω(N = 1) = ωeq ). In Eq. 15 is η = ηcrit
if ηcrit ≤ η S (low sub-cooling), otherwise η = η S (high sub-
Flow characteristic
cooling) leading to
Single phase liquid ẋ0 = 0; v∗ = 1; η0 = 1; η = ηb
Single phase gas ẋ0 = 1; v∗ = vg /vg,0 ; 
η0 = 1; η ≥ ηcrit & η ≥ ηb
Ccrit,HEM = 1 − η S . (16)
Initially sub-cooled ẋ0 = 0; η0 = η S ; η ≥ ηcrit & η ≥ ηb
two-phase flow The critical pressure ratio ηcrit at the critical flow coefficient
Saturated ẋ0 ≥ 0; η0 = 1; η ≥ ηcrit & η ≥ ηb was derived by applying Eq. 14 yielding a transcendental
two-phase flow equation
Non-flashing ẋ = ẋ0 = const;
two-phase flow η0 = 1; η ≥ ηcrit & η ≥ ηb ; N ≡ 1 ω2eq − 2ωeq + 1
0= η2crit − 2(ωeq − 1)ηcrit
2ωeq η S


ηcrit 3
4 Critical mass flow rate + ωeq ln + ωeq η S − 1 . (17)
ηS 2

The critical mass flow rate is defined as the maximum flow
rate through the nozzle for given inlet conditions,
dC
= 0 ⇒ max[C(η); η ∈ ηb , 1] ,
dη
and is determined most accurately by integration of Eq. 12
or using Eq. 13 and a subsequent maximum search, Eq. 14.
At its maximum, either the back pressure or the critical pres-
sure is reached in the nozzle throat. Typical solutions of
Eq. 14 for C are presented in Fig. 3 for a constant value of
the exponent a. A sub-cooling of η S = 1 represents an ini-
tially saturated liquid and a value of η S = 0.5 gives typical
results for initially high sub-cooled liquids, see Eq. 10.
Equations 15 and 17 are good approximations for two-phase
flow with saturated mixtures (ηs = 1). In case of sub-cooled
liquids the results are poor, because the critical pressure
(14) ratio is highly overestimated. There is a strong dependence
of the flow coefficient on the nozzle length and the degree of
sub-cooling as can be seen from the well known experimen-
tal data of Sozzi and Sutherland [22], Fig. 4. Additionally,
the low sub-cooled region is limited to very high satura-
tion pressure ratios η S , typically in the range of 0.9 to 1, i.e.
to very small sub-cooling temperatures, Fig. 5. At low in-
let pressures even 1 K makes the difference between the low
sub-cooled region (flashing within the nozzle) and the high
sub-cooled region (flashing in the nozzle throat).

13
52
Fig. 4 Uncertainty of HEM model compared to experiments from
Sozzi and Sutherland [22] for initially sub-cooled steam/water flow
through nozzles of different length
Fig. 5 Sub-cooling of liquid at nozzle entrance versus nozzle inlet
pressure for experiments given in the open literature
Most of the literature data are measured in the high sub-
cooling region and the flow rates calculated based on the
HEM assumption are significant too low. As a consequence
of the small region of low sub-cooling, the thermodynamic
equilibrium model of Eq. 15 instead of Eq. 14 is most of-
ten applied in industry in case of initially sub-cooled liquids.
Overall, the HEM model can not be recommended for ini-
tially sub-cooled two-phase flow.
5 Non-equilibrium coefficient N
In the literature there are at least two general methods to
account for the thermal non-equilibrium in flashing flows:
one method is based on the growth of a single bubble fol-
lowing a certain pressure drop [23]. Due to the lack of any
data, the total number of nuclei in a liquid has to be defined
empirically and the models are highly sensitive to this pa-
rameter. Therefore, these types of models can not be applied
for industrial purposes. The second type of model is based
13
Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58
on rapid depressurization experiments due to pipe ruptures
investigated for the nuclear industry [24, 25]. Within mil-
liseconds the pressure falls locally very much below the sat-
uration pressure, and is followed by a vapor explosion. The
depressurization gradient within those experiments is much
larger than in typical throttling devices. Hence, this theory
is also not applicable for calculating the non-equilibrium
effects. Overall, there is no physical method available to ac-
count for the thermal non-equilibrium effects which occur in
nozzles, venturis, orifices or valves.
In the HNE-DS method an alternative approach is pro-
posed, based on a semi-empirical non-equilibrium coeffi-
cient N. Physically, the coefficient N is a measure of the
relaxation time to exchange heat and mass between both
phases and depends on the geometry of the throttling de-
vice as well as on the distribution of gas and liquid phase.
It therefore represents both the degree of super-saturation in
the sub-cooled liquid region and boiling delay in saturated
two-phase flow,
 a
N = ẋ 0 + ∆ẋ eq,nozzle ; N ∈ 0 . . . 1 . (18)
The exponent “a” is derived from experimental nozzle flow
data. The correlation with experimental measurements is
an ongoing process, depending on the data available in the
literature.
Diener and Schmidt [11, 12] proposed a value of a = 2/5
for safety valves and a = 3/5 for control valves for saturated
two-phase gas/liquid flow by comparison with limited ex-
perimental data from valves. Good agreement for inlet mass
flow qualities larger than 0.05 has been shown. Due to the
lack of more detailed data, no recommendations have been
given for lower mass flow qualities or initially sub-cooled
two-phase flow.
In an initially sub-cooled two-phase flow the flashing de-
lay or non-equilibrium coefficient N depends on the degree
of sub-cooling. This is shown by the comparison in Fig. 6
of the flow coefficient for homogeneous equilibrium flow
Ccrit,HEM , Eq. 14, and experimentally determined flow co-
efficients Cexp , Eq. 2. The lower the degree of sub-cooling
is (η S → 1), the larger is the deviation from HEM. Ex-
perimentally determined values of the flow coefficient are
up to 5 times larger, than calculated values based on the
HEM model. This is equally true for nozzles and for safety
valves.
The exponent a in Eq. 18 for sub-cooled two-phase flow
(ẋ 0 ≡ 0) was determined by a regression analysis of lit-
erature data measured using nozzles and safety valves as
follows
7.5
a= lpipe
· (η S )−0.6 . (19)
d0 + 7.5
Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58 53

Fig. 6 Ratio of flow coefficient according to HEM and from measure- Fig. 7 Comparison of flow coefficients measured by Lee [27] and
ments on nozzles and safety valves versus sub-cooling calculated with the HNE-DS model extended for initially sub-cooled
liquids

Herein, lpipe is the length of pipe with a diameter equal to the

nozzle throat diameter behind the nozzle throat1 . For noz-
zles without a pipe tail, Eq. 20, reduces to

a = (η S )−0.6 . (20)

In case of a saturated gas/liquid two-phase flow (ẋ 0 ≥ 0;

η0 = 1; η ≥ ηcrit ) Eqs. 13, 8, 9 reduces to the HNE-DS model
already proposed by Diener and Schmidt [11, 12].

6 Validation of the extended HNE-DS model

Literature data from nozzles, Table 1 [22, 26–29], have been

used for the comparison of the HNE-DS model extended to
initially sub-cooled liquids with experimental results. There Fig. 8 Mass flow rate according to the extended HNE-DS method
is no unambiguous tendency concerning the nozzle diameter and experimentally determined for initially sub-cooled tow-phase flow
through nozzles
and length. Additionally, even very small deviations of mass
flow quality result in large deviations of the mass flow rate at
low sub-cooling. Physically, any gas dissolved in the liquid
perimental data the HNE-DS model is in good agreement
phase or absorbed on the wall surface of the nozzle may act
with the measurements. Of course, it is still possible to fur-
as a nucleation source. Hence, the experimental data often
ther improve the correlation, but that would lead to a more
has a high degree of uncertainty.
complex function of the exponent a in the model, beside the
The HNE-DS model extended to initially sub-cooled
fact, that there are not detailed data available about the influ-
liquids by means of the non-equilibrium coefficient N
ence of the different parameters.
leads to fairly good results in comparison to experimen-
Beside the nozzle data, roughly 2000 measurements
tal data. Figure 7 shows the overall tendency depending
from safety valves, Table 2 [30–33], have also been com-
on the degree of sub-cooling compared to the data of
pared with the HNE-DS model. As proposed by Diener and
Lee [27]. Especially at low sub-cooling the model is by
Schmidt [11], the valve discharge coefficient for two-phase
far better than the HEM model. A frozen flow assump-
flow K d,2 ph was based on the discharge coefficients for gas
tion (no vaporization) would give highly overestimated
flow K d,g and liquid flow K d,l , in general given by the valve
results.
manufacturer,
Figure 8 shows the comparison of the HNE-DS model
with the ∼ 1500 investigated nozzle data with sub-cooled
K d,2 ph = ε · K d,g + (1 − ε) · K d,l . (21)
liquids at the inlet. Considering the uncertainty of the ex-
1 Nozzles with pipes of up to 500 mm length have been considered in where ε is the void fraction in the narrowest flow cross
this study section. Diener and Schmidt [11, 12] proposed to use the

13
54 Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58

Table 1 Experimental data from nozzles and venturis with initially sub-cooled two-phase depicted from literature
Literature Nozzle Throat diameter Inlet length Outlet length Inlet pressure Inlet temperature fluid
Source Type [mm] [mm] [mm] [bar] [◦ C]
Sozzi, Sutherland No 1 12.7 44.5 114 54–69 220–285 demineralized
1975 [22] Venuri outlet conus water
No 2 12.7 44.5 0
Rounded Nozzle 12.7
with Tail Pipe 38.1
63.5
190.5
317.5
508
635
1778
No 4 12.7 – 4.7
Sharped edged nozzle 195.2
322
520.7
639
No 5 19 44.5 –
Rounded Nozzle
No 6 54 732 380
Venturi outlet conus
No 6 76.2 696 380
Venturi outlet conus
No 7 28 63.5 165
Venturi outlet conus
Boivin 1979 [26] Nozzle with tail pipe 12 50 450 20–90 200–300 water
30 130 1600
50 130 1700
Veneau 1992 [29] Nozzle with tail pipe 2 2 1.2 280–300 60–120 propane
5 6 3
Lee, Swinnerton Nozzle Sharped 1.8 – 1.8 140–300 200–430 water
1983 [27] Edged Inlet
Nozzle rounded Inlet 1.8 1.3 5.3
Nozzle rounded Inlet 2.5 1.3 7.6
(outlet guide)
Nozzle rounded Inlet 2.5 1.3 7.6
Nozzle rounded Inlet 2.8 1.3 8.4
Simoneau, Hendricks Venturi outlet conus 3.555 74 237 6–140 −244–12 nitrogen
1984 [28] methane
2 D nozzle Höhe: 1.09 205 106
Breite: 10.1
Venturi outlet conus 2.934 7.8 54
Venturi outlet conus 3.555 237 74
Düse 2 6.4 k.A. k.A.
Düse 3 4 k.A. k.A.

critical pressure ratio η = ηcrit in Eq. 22 under thermody-
namic equilibrium conditions for simplicity.
vl,0
ε = 1−    , (22)
v0 · ω · 1η − 1 + 1
The HNE-DS model gives excellent agreement with the
measured valve data even for initially sub-cooled two-phase
flow as shown in Fig. 9. The mean logarithmic deviation
– see definition Table 3 – is only 16%. The HEM model
recommended by API 520 and ISO 23521 is less accu-
rate. The experiments are highly under-estimated, Fig. 10,
with a mean logarithmic deviation of 78%. Even the model
of Darby [35] tends, in general, to underestimate the ex-
perimental data. The reason could be that the model has
only been fitted to a certain nozzle used by Sozzi and
Sutherland.
An overall comparison of the HNE-DS model with more
than 4000 data including the data with saturated two-phase
flow and non-flashing flow is given in [36].
The HNE-DS model can equally applied to control
valves, orifices and other throttling devices. For initially
sub-cooled liquids the here presented flashing delay factor

13
Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58 55

Table 2 Experimental data from Literature Valve Type Seat Diameter Inlet length Outlet length
safety valves with initially Source [mm] [mm] [mm]
sub-cooled two-phase depicted
Boccardi 2005 [31] Leser 10 – –
from literature
K d,l = 0.85
K d,g = 0.68
Bolle/Seynhaeve Crosby 1D2 10.25 104.85 88
1995 [32] JLT-JOS-15-A
K d,l = 0.91
K d,g = 0.96
Modell 10.4 k.A. k.A.
K d,l = 0.91
K d,g = 0.96
Lenzing 2001 [34] Leser 25 k.A. k.A.
K d,l = 0.77
K d,g = 0.54
Sallet 1984 [33] Kunkle k.A. k.A. k.A.
K d,l = 0.962
K d,g = 0.726
Universität Louvain Leser 28 105 100
1997 [30] K dl = 0.699
K dg = 0.521
Bopp & Reuther 20 105 95
K d,l = 0.780
K d,g = 0.660

Table 3 Definition of statistical Statistical Number Deviation Definition

numbers used to characterize the 
n 2
i=1 X i,abs
average predictive accuracy of variance of absolute deviations X i,abs = Ci,exp − Ci,calc Sabs = n− f −1
models (subscript “exp” denotes 
n 2
experimental values and “calc” Ci,exp −Ci,calc i=1 X i,rel
variance of relative deviations X i,rel = Ci,exp Srel = n− f −1
the calculated data)   
n 2
C i=1 X i,ln
variance of logarithmic deviations X i,ln = ln Ci,calc
i,exp
Sln = exp n− f −1 −1

Fig. 9 Mass flow rate according to the extended HNE-DS method Fig. 10 Flow coefficient according to the extended HEM model for
and experimentally determined for initially sub-cooled tow-phase flow initially sub-cooled tow-phase flow through safety valves
through safety valves

– or more general – non-equilibrium coefficient including
the exponent a will be a good estimate. Nevertheless, fur-
ther validation with data using these fittings being carried
out and will be presented elsewhere.
7 Conclusion
The HNE-DS model is based on the assumption of homoge-
neous equilibrium flow which is corrected for thermal and
mechanical non-equilibrium effects (see [12] for discussion

13
56 Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58

of the mechanical equilibrium). It combines the advantages Input data:

of both, the well accepted homogeneous equilibrium model p0 := 10 bar sizing pressure (inlet pressure)
proposed by Leung and the non-equilibrium model of Henry pb := 1 bar back pressure
and Fauske. Beside the boiling delay and the phase slip Q m := 25 000 kg/h mass flow rate to be discharged
in saturated two-phase flow the HNE-DS model has been according to ISO 4126-10
extended to two-phase gas/liquid flow with initially sub- x 0 := 0 inlet mass flow quality
cooled liquids. For that, the flashing delay coefficient N,
Temperature determined by reaction calorimetry and
already defined to account for boiling delay, has been ex-
property data of the reactor inventory at inlet condition
tended to take the superheat of an initially sub-cooled liquid
into account. This is defined as a function of the degree of T0 := 453.05 K temperature in the pressurized
sub-cooling. The geometric effect on this coefficient was system at sizing conditions
found to be of minor importances as previously also re- psat (T0 ) := 9.5 bar pressure at saturation condition
ported by Kim et al. [37]. c pl0 := 4650 J/kg K specific heat capacity (liquid phase)
The extended model has been validated with more than ∆h v0 := 1 826 000 J/kg latent heat of vaporization
3500 experimental data performed with nozzles and safety vl0 := 0.001193 m3 /kg specific volume liquid phase
valves with sub-cooled liquid at the inlet. Taking the uncer- vg0 := 0.1984 m3 /kg specific volume gas phase
tainty of the measurements into account, the agreement with v0 := x 0 · vg0 + (1 − x 0) · vl0
the HNE-DS is more than sufficient. Applying the extended specific volume of reactor inventory
HNE-DS method for sizing nozzles and safety valves will v0 = 1.193 × 10−3 m3 /kg
limit the enormous over-estimation of HEM models which
Certified derated discharge coefficients of the safety
are currently recommended for example by API 520 and
valve (given by valve manufacturer)
ISO 23521, at low degree of sub-cooling. The size of the
throttling device will be reduced by a factor of up to 5. Nev- K dg := 0.77 certified derated discharge coefficient for
ertheless, the models given in API 520 and ISO 23521 are single-phase gas/vapor flow
just the boundary values of the HNE-DS model for N = 1. K dl := 0.5 certified derated valve discharge coefficient
The HNE-DS method included in the draft international for single-phase liquid flow
standard ISO/DIS 4126-10 for sizing safety valves for
flashing liquids has been proposed for IEC 60534 (control Calculation of the dischargeable mass flux
valves) and ISO 5167 and ISO 9300 (nozzles, venturis and through a safety valve
orifices). It would be a major advantage for sizing engineers (two-phase gas-liquid mixture)
if the same method and an identical nomenclature were used
psat (T0 )
for all throttling devices. ηs := p0 ηs = 0.95 ratio of the saturation pressure
A further simplification of the proposed HNE-DS method to sizing pressure
pb
might be possible, if the search for the maximum flow co- ηb := p0
ηb = 0.1 ratio of back pressure to the
efficient at critical pressure ratio could be substituted by sizing pressure
an empirical relation (see Fig. 3). Additional investigations
are recommended to combine the proposed exponents of
Maximum search for maximum flow coefficient
the non-equilibrium coefficient for certain throttling devices
and critical pressure ratio
into a single correlation for all throttling devices.
(Definition of vector parameters)
The non-equilibrium effect recommended in the HNE-
DS method was determined by means of a regression an- Steps := 100 Number of calculation steps
1−ηb
alysis of experimental data from various authors in the lit- Interval := Steps−1 Step size of pressure ratio
erature. A more academic solution, where the exponent a is j := 0, 1 . . . (Steps − 1) Index parameter running from
based on physical principles like depressurization rate and 0 number of steps defined
bubble growth models would further improve the method. η j := 1 − Interval· j Pressure ratio at each step

 η−0.6
s
vg0 −vl0
Appendix Nj := x 0 + c pl0 · p0 · ηs · T0 · ∆h 2 ln ηηs
v0 j

Non-equilibrium coefficient at
Example calculation (MathCad Version 12)
each step
 
x0 ·vg0 vg0 −vl0 2
Sizing of a safety valve ωj := 1x · v0
+ c pl0 ·Tv0 · p0 ·ηs ∆h
· Nj
0 v0
Example: Venting of a 10 m3 reactor (TEMPERED SYS- Compressibility coefficient at
TEM) each step

13
Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58 57

Fig. 11 Flow coefficient versus

pressure ratio

 
 
(1−ηs )+ ω j ·ηs ·ln ηηs −(ω j −1)(ηs −η j ) d SV := π4 A SV d SV = 28.9 mm
j
C j :=

minimum required diameter of the safety valve
ηs
ω j η −1 +1
j

Flow coefficient at each step

References
Ccrit := max(C) Ccrit = 0.465
Maximum of flow coefficient 1. API 520 (2000) Sizing, selction, and installation of pressure-
max := j ← 0   relieving devices in refineries, Part I sizing and selection, 7th
while C j  ≤ Ccrit · 0.9999
Edition. American Petroleum Institute, January 2000
2. ISO 23521 (2006) Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas
j ← j +1 industries – Pressure-relieving and depressuring systems. DIN
j Deutsches Institute für Normung e.V., Beuth Verlag GmbH,
Step where maximum flow Berlin
3. Leung JC (1986) A generalized correlation for one-component
coefficient occurs homogeneous equilibrium flashing choked flow. AIChE J 32(10):
ηcrit := ηmax ηcrit = 0.691 critical pressure ratio 1743–1746
4. Leung JC (1990) Similarity between flashing and non-flashing
Flow coefficient versus pressure ratio (see Fig. 11) two-phase flows. AIChE J 36(5):797–800
5. Fischer HG, Forrest JS, Grossel SS, Huff JE, Muller AR,
Critical pressure ratio exceeds back pressure ratio Noronha JA, Shaw DA, Tilley BJ (1992) Emergency Re-
Data at critical pressure ratio are taken to calculate the flow lief System Design Using DIERS Technology, DIERS Project
coefficient Manual
6. Etchells J, Wilday J (1998) Workbook for chemical reactor relief
η := ηmax η = 0.691 pressure ratio system sizing. HSE Contract Research Report 136
N := Nmax N = 0.034 boiling delay factor 7. CCPS of AIChE (1998) Guidlines for pressure relief and effluent
handling systems. AIChE, New York
ω := ωmax ω = 0.666 compressibility coefficient
8. Bolle L, Downar-Zapolski P, Franco J, Seynhaeve JM (1995)
C := Cmax C = 0.465 flow coefficient Flashing water flow through a safety valve. J Loss Prev Proc
8(2):111–126
Estimation of the two-phase discharge coefficient of the 9. Celata GP, Guidi G (1996) Problems about the sizing of two-
safety valve phase flow safety valves. Heat Technol 14(1):67–95
10. Henry R, Fauske H (1971) The two-phase critical flow of one-
 := 1 −  vl0    = 0.2
v0 ω ηηs +1 component mixtures in nozzles, orifices, and short tubes. J Heat
Transf 93(5):179–187
void fraction in the throat area of the valve 11. Diener R, Schmidt J (2004) Sizing of throttling devices for gas
K d2 ph := K dg ·  + (1 − ) · K dl K d2 ph = 0.554 liquid two-phase flow, Part 1: safety valves. Process Saf Prog
derated two-phase discharge coefficient of the safety valve 23(4):335–344
 12. Diener R, Schmidt J (2005) Sizing of throttling devices for gas
m SV := K d2 ph · C 2vp00 m SV = 1.055 × 104 kg/m2s liquid two-phase flow, Part 2: control valves, orifices and nozzles.
dischargeable mass flux through the safety valve Process Saf Prog 24(1):29–37
13. Diener R, Schmidt J (1998) Extended ω-method applicable for
A SV = mQ m A SV = 6.581 × 10−4 m2 low inlet mass flow qualities. 13th Mtg ISO/TC185/WG1, Lud-
SV
minimum required cross sectional area of the safety valve wigshafen, Germany, 15–16 June 1998

13
58
14. Schmidt J, Friedel L, Westpahl F, Wilday J, Gruden M, van der
Geld C (2001) Sizing of Safety Valves for Two Phase Gas/Liquid
Mixtures. 10th Int. Symposium on Loss Prevention and Safety
Promotion in the Process Industrie, Stockholm, 19–21 June 2001
15. ISO/DIS-4126-10 (2006) Safety devices for protection against ex-
cessive pressure – sizing of safety valves and connected inlet and
outlet lines for gas/liquid two-phase flow. DIN Deutsches Institute
für Normung e.V., Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin
16. Diener R, Kiesbauer J, Schmidt J (2005) Improved valve sizing
for multiphase flow – HNE-DS method based on an expansion
factor similar to gaseous media to account for changes in mixture
density. Hydrocarb Process 84(3):59–64
17. ISO 5167 2/3 (2000) Measurement of fluid flow by means of
pressure differential devices inserted in circular cross-section
conduits running full. DIN Deutsches Institute für Normung e.V.,
Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin
18. EN-ISO 9300 (2003) Measurement of gas flow by means of crit-
ical venturi nozzles. DIN Deutsches Institute für Normung e.V.,
Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin
19. Woodward JL (1995) An amended method for calculation omega
for a homogeneous equilibrium model of prediting discharge
rates. J Loss Prev Proc 8(5):253–259
20. Leung JC (1994) Flashing flow discharge of initially sub-cooled
liquid in pipes. J Fluid Eng 116:643–645
21. Leung JC (1988) A Generalized Correlation for Flashing Choked
Flow of Initially Sub-cooled Liquid. AIChE J 34(4):688–691
22. Sozzi GL, Sutherland WA (1975) Critical flows of saturated and
subcritical water at high pressure. General Electric, San Jose, CA,
NEDO-13418, July 1975
23. Plesset MS, Zwick SA (1954) The groth of vapour bubble in
superheated liquids. J Appl Phys 25(4):493–500
24. Abuaf N, Jones OC, Wu BJC (1983) Critical flow in Nozzles with
sub-cooled inlet conditions. J Heat Transf 105:379–383
25. Alamgir M, Lienhard JH (1981) Correlation of pressure under-
shoot during hot-water depressurisation. Trans ASME 103:52–55
13
Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58
26. Boivin JY (1979) Two-phase critical flow in long nozzles. Nucl
Technol 46
27. Lee DH, Swinnerton D (1983) Critical flow of subcooled water at
very high pressure relevant to an ATWS. Safety and Engineering
Science Division
28. Simoneau RJ, Hendricks RC (1984) Two phase flow of cryogenic
fluids in converging-diverging nozzles. NASA Technical Paper
29. Veneau T (1995) Etude expérimentale et modélisation de la
décompression d’un réservoir de stockage de propane. Thèse de
doctorat – Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble
30. Seynhaeve (2006) private communication
31. Boccardi G, Bubbico R, Celata GP, Mazzarotta B (2005) Two-
phase flow through pressure safety valves. Experimental investi-
gation and model prediction. Chem Eng Sci 60:5284–5293
32. Bolle L, Downar-Zapolski P, Franco J, Seynhaeve JM (1995)
Flashing water flow through a safety valve. J Loss Prev Proc
8(2):111–126
33. Sallet DW (1984) Thermal hydraulics of valves for nuclear appli-
cations. Nucl Sci Eng 88:220–244
34. Lenzing T (2001) Theoretische und Experimentelle Untersuchun-
gen zu dem über Vollhubsicherheitsventile abführbaren Massen-
strom bei Einphasen- und Zweiphasenströmung, Fortschritt-
Berichte VDI Reihe 3 Nr. 718 VDI Verlag
35. Darby R (2004) On two-phase frozen and flashing flows in safety
relief valves – recommended calculation method and the proper
use of the discharge coefficient. J Loss Prev Proc 17:255–259
36. Schmidt J (2006) Sizing of Safety Valves, Control Valves, Ori-
fices and Nozzles – HNE-DS model applied for two-phase crit-
ical flow with saturated and initially subcooled liquid. European
DIERS User Group meeting, London, UK, April 2006
37. Kim SW, No HC (2001) Subcooled water critical pressure and
critical flow rate in safety valve. Int J Heat Mass Transf 44:
4567–4577