0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

387 Ansichten12 SeitenAug 20, 2010

© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

387 Ansichten12 SeitenAttribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 12

DOI 10.1007/s10010-006-0043-3

ORIGINALARBEITEN · ORIGINALS

for initially sub-cooled gas/liquid two-phase flow –

The HNE-DS method

J. Schmidt

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Abstract Current standards for sizing nozzles, venturis, ori- von Gasen und Flüssigkeiten. Gemeinsam ist den Modellen

fices, control and safety valves are based on different flow in den Regelwerken die Kombination aus einer idealisier-

models, flow coefficients and nomenclature. They are gener- ten Düsenströmung und einem Korrekturfaktor (z.B. dem

ally valid only for single-phase gas and liquid flow. Common Ausflusskoeffizienten), um die Nicht-Idealitäten der dreidi-

to all is the concept of one-dimensional nozzle flow in combi- mensionalen realen Strömung zu korrigieren. Die neue HNE-

nation with a correction factor (e.g. the discharge coefficient) DS Methode, ein Düsen-Strömungsmodell mit Gasen und

to correct for non-idealities of the three-dimensional flow. Flüssigkeiten im partiellen Ungleichgewicht, erlaubt es, die

With the proposed partial non-equilibrium HNE-DS method bestehenden Auslegungsempfehlungen in den verschiedenen

an attempt is made to standardize all sizing procedures by Regelwerken zu vereinheitlichen und gleichzeitig auf Zwei-

an appropriate nozzle flow model and to enlarge the appli- phasenströmungen zu erweitern. Die HNE-DS Methode, die

cation range of the standards to two-phase flow. The HNE- zunächst für siedende und nicht-verdampfende Zweiphasen-

DS method, which was first developed for saturated and non- strömungen entwickelt worden ist, wird erweitert für an-

flashing two-phase flow, is extended for initially sub-cooled fangs unterkühlte Flüssigkeiten im Eintritt der Armaturen.

liquids entering the throttling device. To account for non- Ungleichgewichtseffekte, beispielsweise die Überhitzung

equilibrium effects, i.e. superheated liquid due to rapid de- der Flüssigkeit bei schnellem Druckabfall, werden mit ei-

pressurisation, the non-equilibrium coefficient used in the nem erweiterten Ungleichgewichtsfaktor im HNE-DS Mo-

HNE-DS method is adapted to those inlet flow conditions. dell berücksichtigt. Der Vergleich mit experimentellen Daten

A comparison with experimental data demonstrates the good zeigt die gute Genauigkeit des Modells.

accuracy of the model.

List of symbols

Auslegung von Düsen, Venturis, Blenden, Stell- Variable Unit Definition

und Sicherheitsventilen für eingangs unterkühlte a – exponent of the non-equilibrium

Gas-Flüssigkeits-Strömungen nach der HNE-DS coefficient N

Methode A m2 cross-sectional area of the nozzle throat

(seat aera of valve)

Zusammenfassung Die derzeitigen Regelwerke zur Ausle- C – flow coefficient

gung von Düsen, Venturies, Blenden, Stell- und Sicherheits- Ccrit – flow coefficient at critical pressure

ventilen basieren auf verschiedenen Strömungsmodellen, ratio in the nozzle throat

Durchflusskoeffizienten und sind mit verschiedenen Nomen- cpi,0 J/(kg K) specific liquid heat capacity at inlet

klaturen beschrieben. Sie gelten nur für Einphasenströmung conditions

d m nozzle throat diameter

J. Schmidt (u)

d0 m nozzle inlet diameter

BASF AG, GCT/S-L511,

Ludwigshafen, Germany K d,2 ph – derated two-phase flow valve

e-mail: juergen.schmidt@onlinehome.de discharge coefficient

13

48 Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58

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 49

In the following, the HNE-DS method is derived and cross-sectional average for a homogeneous two-phase flow

extended for initially sub-cooled liquids at the inlet of throt- under thermodynamic equilibrium condition is [5, pp. 58ff],

tling devices.

vg vl

v∗ = ẋ · + (1 − ẋ) · , (3)

v0 v0

2 HNE-DS method

from where an equation of state v∗ (η) for the profile along

the nozzle may be determined by integration of the deriva-

The basic idea of the HNE-DS method is to consider a throt-

tive,

tling device as a frictionless, adiabatic nozzle. The fluid

is assumed to be a quasi single-phase, i.e. a homogeneous dv∗ d ẋ dvg dvl

mixture of gas and liquid in equilibrium, with two-phase v0 = vg − vl · + ẋ · + (1 − ẋ) · (4)

dη dη dη dη

properties. Correction of the simplified model are defined

for non-idealities like boiling delay and slip between gas The liquid may be considered as almost incompressible,

and liquid phase, which may be characteristic for certain the gas as following the ideal gas law and the boiling line

throttling devices. Those non-idealities are induced, e.g., by of the gas/liquid mixture may be prescribed by the Clau-

a contraction and redirection of the flow and due to fric- sius Clapeyrons law. Heat of vaporization and liquid spe-

tion and wall heat exchange. The more precise the nozzle cific volume are constant and the temperature of the gas

flow model accounts for non-equilibrium effects and real is taken equal to that of the liquid (spontaneous heat ex-

properties of the fluids, the fewer dependencies have to be change). What remains is the information about the change

taken into consideration for a discharge coefficient. In any of mass flow quality along the pressure curve in the nozzle,

case, the discharge coefficient must be experimentally de- i.e. the interfacial heat and mass transfer. Any heat transfer

termined, at least at certain, representative flow conditions. limitation due to steep pressure gradients within the noz-

A precise nozzle flow model is critical in order to extrapo- zle will result into a thermodynamic non-equilibrium – or

late the flow coefficient of a throttling device from labora- boiling delay – of the flow. Henry and Fauske [10] iden-

tory test conditions to flow conditions typically encountered tified the boiling delay as a deviation of the mass flow

in industry. quality from equilibrium conditions at a certain pressure

The one-dimensional momentum balance for the flow drop

through a frictionless, adiabatic nozzle with no gravity ef-

fects encountered is, d ẋ d ẋ eq

= ·N. (5)

dη dη

η ∗

− v dη

η v

The proposed dependency of the boiling delay factor N on

p ∗ d

C= ; η= ; v = ; β= . (1)

0

the mass flow quality is linear at low qualities and constant

∗

(v )2 − β 4 p0 v0 d0 for mass flow qualities larger than 0.14. In contrast, Diener

and Schmidt [11, 12] suggested a (continuous) power-law

The nomenclature of ISO/DIS 4126-10 is identically applied function for the boiling delay factor. The basis of their func-

in the present paper. tion is the mass flow quality in the narrowest cross section

Herein, η is the ratio of the pressure in the nozzle throat p of the nozzle ẋ eq – the nozzle throat – if both the vapor and

and the inlet p0 (symbols without subscripts refer to the noz- liquid phase are in thermal equilibrium:

zle throat while the subscript ,,0“ stands for the inlet of the

nozzle), v∗ is the specific volume ratio and β the diameter a

N = ẋ eq ; a ∈ 0 . . . ∞ ; ẋ eq ∈ 0 . . . 1 ; ⇒ N ∈ 0 . . . 1 .

ratio. The flow coefficient C is, by definition, the normalized

(6)

mass flow rate Q m through the nozzle,

The exponent “a” depends on the relaxation time for the

Qm π 2

C= ; A= d . (2) two-phase flow in the nozzle up to its narrowest cross sec-

A · 2 · vp0 4

0 tion. In a very short nozzle, the momentum and heat ex-

change between both phases is poor and, hence, the boiling

Equation 1 is valid for single phase gas and liquid flow as delay reaches its maximum (a →∝; N → 0). The flow is al-

well as for two-phase mixtures. The gas/liquid two-phase most frozen. If vapor and liquid would have time to reach its

flow is treated as quasi single-phase flow with a specific vol- equilibrium state, i.e. in a very long nozzle, almost no boil-

ume of a mixture. Any information about interfacial heat ing delay will occur (a → 0; N → 1). As a general rule, the

and mass transfer between the phases is included in the di- larger the inlet mass flow quality is, the less pronounced is

mensionless specific volume of the flow v∗ . Its time and the boiling delay effect, Fig. 1.

13

50 Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58

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 Equations 15 and 17 are good approximations for two-phase

rate through the nozzle for given inlet conditions, flow with saturated mixtures (ηs = 1). In case of sub-cooled

liquids the results are poor, because the critical pressure

dC

= 0 ⇒ max[C(η); η ∈ ηb , 1] , (14) ratio is highly overestimated. There is a strong dependence

dη of the flow coefficient on the nozzle length and the degree of

and is determined most accurately by integration of Eq. 12 sub-cooling as can be seen from the well known experimen-

or using Eq. 13 and a subsequent maximum search, Eq. 14. tal data of Sozzi and Sutherland [22], Fig. 4. Additionally,

At its maximum, either the back pressure or the critical pres- the low sub-cooled region is limited to very high satura-

sure is reached in the nozzle throat. Typical solutions of tion pressure ratios η S , typically in the range of 0.9 to 1, i.e.

Eq. 14 for C are presented in Fig. 3 for a constant value of to very small sub-cooling temperatures, Fig. 5. At low in-

the exponent a. A sub-cooling of η S = 1 represents an ini- let pressures even 1 K makes the difference between the low

tially saturated liquid and a value of η S = 0.5 gives typical sub-cooled region (flashing within the nozzle) and the high

results for initially high sub-cooled liquids, see Eq. 10. sub-cooled region (flashing in the nozzle throat).

13

52 Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58

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

Fig. 4 Uncertainty of HEM model compared to experiments from relaxation time to exchange heat and mass between both

Sozzi and Sutherland [22] for initially sub-cooled steam/water flow phases and depends on the geometry of the throttling de-

through nozzles of different length

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)

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

Fig. 5 Sub-cooling of liquid at nozzle entrance versus nozzle inlet two-phase gas/liquid flow by comparison with limited ex-

pressure for experiments given in the open literature 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

Most of the literature data are measured in the high sub-

two-phase flow.

cooling region and the flow rates calculated based on the

In an initially sub-cooled two-phase flow the flashing de-

HEM assumption are significant too low. As a consequence

lay or non-equilibrium coefficient N depends on the degree

of the small region of low sub-cooling, the thermodynamic

of sub-cooling. This is shown by the comparison in Fig. 6

equilibrium model of Eq. 15 instead of Eq. 14 is most of-

of the flow coefficient for homogeneous equilibrium flow

ten applied in industry in case of initially sub-cooled liquids.

Ccrit,HEM , Eq. 14, and experimentally determined flow co-

Overall, the HEM model can not be recommended for ini-

efficients Cexp , Eq. 2. The lower the degree of sub-cooling

tially sub-cooled two-phase flow.

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

5 Non-equilibrium coefficient N

HEM model. This is equally true for nozzles and for safety

valves.

In the literature there are at least two general methods to

The exponent a in Eq. 18 for sub-cooled two-phase flow

account for the thermal non-equilibrium in flashing flows:

(ẋ 0 ≡ 0) was determined by a regression analysis of lit-

one method is based on the growth of a single bubble fol-

erature data measured using nozzles and safety valves as

lowing a certain pressure drop [23]. Due to the lack of any

follows

data, the total number of nuclei in a liquid has to be defined

empirically and the models are highly sensitive to this pa- 7.5

rameter. Therefore, these types of models can not be applied a= lpipe

· (η S )−0.6 . (19)

for industrial purposes. The second type of model is based d0 + 7.5

13

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

nozzle throat diameter behind the nozzle throat1 . For noz-

zles without a pipe tail, Eq. 20, reduces to

a = (η S )−0.6 . (20)

η0 = 1; η ≥ ηcrit ) Eqs. 13, 8, 9 reduces to the HNE-DS model

already proposed by Diener and Schmidt [11, 12].

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- with a mean logarithmic deviation of 78%. Even the model

namic equilibrium conditions for simplicity. of Darby [35] tends, in general, to underestimate the ex-

vl,0 perimental data. The reason could be that the model has

ε = 1− , (22)

only been fitted to a certain nozzle used by Sozzi and

v0 · ω · 1η − 1 + 1

Sutherland.

The HNE-DS model gives excellent agreement with the An overall comparison of the HNE-DS model with more

measured valve data even for initially sub-cooled two-phase than 4000 data including the data with saturated two-phase

flow as shown in Fig. 9. The mean logarithmic deviation flow and non-flashing flow is given in [36].

– see definition Table 3 – is only 16%. The HEM model The HNE-DS model can equally applied to control

recommended by API 520 and ISO 23521 is less accu- valves, orifices and other throttling devices. For initially

rate. The experiments are highly under-estimated, Fig. 10, 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

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

7 Conclusion

– or more general – non-equilibrium coefficient including

the exponent a will be a good estimate. Nevertheless, fur- The HNE-DS model is based on the assumption of homoge-

ther validation with data using these fittings being carried neous equilibrium flow which is corrected for thermal and

out and will be presented elsewhere. mechanical non-equilibrium effects (see [12] for discussion

13

56 Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58

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

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

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 Forsch Ingenieurwes (2007) 71: 47–58

14. Schmidt J, Friedel L, Westpahl F, Wilday J, Gruden M, van der 26. Boivin JY (1979) Two-phase critical flow in long nozzles. Nucl

Geld C (2001) Sizing of Safety Valves for Two Phase Gas/Liquid Technol 46

Mixtures. 10th Int. Symposium on Loss Prevention and Safety 27. Lee DH, Swinnerton D (1983) Critical flow of subcooled water at

Promotion in the Process Industrie, Stockholm, 19–21 June 2001 very high pressure relevant to an ATWS. Safety and Engineering

15. ISO/DIS-4126-10 (2006) Safety devices for protection against ex- Science Division

cessive pressure – sizing of safety valves and connected inlet and 28. Simoneau RJ, Hendricks RC (1984) Two phase flow of cryogenic

outlet lines for gas/liquid two-phase flow. DIN Deutsches Institute fluids in converging-diverging nozzles. NASA Technical Paper

für Normung e.V., Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin 29. Veneau T (1995) Etude expérimentale et modélisation de la

16. Diener R, Kiesbauer J, Schmidt J (2005) Improved valve sizing

décompression d’un réservoir de stockage de propane. Thèse de

for multiphase flow – HNE-DS method based on an expansion

doctorat – Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble

factor similar to gaseous media to account for changes in mixture

30. Seynhaeve (2006) private communication

density. Hydrocarb Process 84(3):59–64

17. ISO 5167 2/3 (2000) Measurement of fluid flow by means of 31. Boccardi G, Bubbico R, Celata GP, Mazzarotta B (2005) Two-

pressure differential devices inserted in circular cross-section phase flow through pressure safety valves. Experimental investi-

conduits running full. DIN Deutsches Institute für Normung e.V., gation and model prediction. Chem Eng Sci 60:5284–5293

Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin 32. Bolle L, Downar-Zapolski P, Franco J, Seynhaeve JM (1995)

18. EN-ISO 9300 (2003) Measurement of gas flow by means of crit- Flashing water flow through a safety valve. J Loss Prev Proc

ical venturi nozzles. DIN Deutsches Institute für Normung e.V., 8(2):111–126

Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin 33. Sallet DW (1984) Thermal hydraulics of valves for nuclear appli-

19. Woodward JL (1995) An amended method for calculation omega cations. Nucl Sci Eng 88:220–244

for a homogeneous equilibrium model of prediting discharge 34. Lenzing T (2001) Theoretische und Experimentelle Untersuchun-

rates. J Loss Prev Proc 8(5):253–259 gen zu dem über Vollhubsicherheitsventile abführbaren Massen-

20. Leung JC (1994) Flashing flow discharge of initially sub-cooled strom bei Einphasen- und Zweiphasenströmung, Fortschritt-

liquid in pipes. J Fluid Eng 116:643–645 Berichte VDI Reihe 3 Nr. 718 VDI Verlag

21. Leung JC (1988) A Generalized Correlation for Flashing Choked

35. Darby R (2004) On two-phase frozen and flashing flows in safety

Flow of Initially Sub-cooled Liquid. AIChE J 34(4):688–691

relief valves – recommended calculation method and the proper

22. Sozzi GL, Sutherland WA (1975) Critical flows of saturated and

use of the discharge coefficient. J Loss Prev Proc 17:255–259

subcritical water at high pressure. General Electric, San Jose, CA,

NEDO-13418, July 1975 36. Schmidt J (2006) Sizing of Safety Valves, Control Valves, Ori-

23. Plesset MS, Zwick SA (1954) The groth of vapour bubble in fices and Nozzles – HNE-DS model applied for two-phase crit-

superheated liquids. J Appl Phys 25(4):493–500 ical flow with saturated and initially subcooled liquid. European

24. Abuaf N, Jones OC, Wu BJC (1983) Critical flow in Nozzles with DIERS User Group meeting, London, UK, April 2006

sub-cooled inlet conditions. J Heat Transf 105:379–383 37. Kim SW, No HC (2001) Subcooled water critical pressure and

25. Alamgir M, Lienhard JH (1981) Correlation of pressure under- critical flow rate in safety valve. Int J Heat Mass Transf 44:

shoot during hot-water depressurisation. Trans ASME 103:52–55 4567–4577

13