Mansoura Engineering Journal

Volume 39 Issue 3 Article 11

7-13-2020

A Comparison Study between 3-D CFD and Experimental Data of

Butterfly Valve Coefficients.
Mohammed Said
GUPCO - Gulf of Suez Petroleum Co., 270 Palestine St. 4th Sector, New Maadi, Maadi, Cairo, Egypt,
[email protected]

Hossam AbdelMeguid
Mechanical Power Engineering Department., Faculty of Engineering., El-Mansoura University., El-Mansoura
35516., Egypt., [email protected]

Lotfy Hassan Rabie Sakr

Mechanical Power Engineering Department., Faculty of Engineering., El-Mansoura University., Mansoura.,
Egypt., [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://mej.researchcommons.org/home

Recommended Citation
Said, Mohammed; AbdelMeguid, Hossam; and Hassan Rabie Sakr, Lotfy (2020) "A Comparison Study
between 3-D CFD and Experimental Data of Butterfly Valve Coefficients.," Mansoura Engineering Journal:
Vol. 39 : Iss. 3 , Article 11.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.21608/bfemu.2020.102725

This Original Study is brought to you for free and open access by Mansoura Engineering Journal. It has been
accepted for inclusion in Mansoura Engineering Journal by an authorized editor of Mansoura Engineering Journal.
For more information, please contact [email protected].
M: 01 Mansoura Engineering Journal, (MEJ), Vol. 39, Issue 3, September 2014

A Comparison Study between 3-D CFD and

Experimental Data of Butterfly Valve Coefficients
‫دراسة مقارنة بين الحسابات العددية ثالثية األبعاد والعملية لمعامالت‬
‫صمام الفراشة‬
Mohammed M. Saida,1, Hossam S.S. AbdelMeguidb,2, and Lotfy H. Rabieb,3
a
GUPCO - Gulf of Suez Petroleum Co., 270 Palestine St. 4th Sector, New
Maadi, Maadi, Cairo, Egypt.
b
Mechanical Power Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Mansoura
University, El-Mansoura 35516, Egypt
1
Email: [email protected], Tel.: +201092647247
2
Email: [email protected], Tel.: +201066464712
3
Email: [email protected], Tel.: +201000076754
‫ملخص‬
.‫لقد أصبح استخدام الحسابات العددية في إختبار صمامات التحكم من األمور المهمة في التطبيقات الصناعية‬
‫ ولقد إزدادت‬.‫ واحدا من البرامج المستخدمة في الحلول الرقمية للعديد من المشكالت الهندسية‬Fluent6.3 ‫ويعتبر برنامج‬
‫ وقبل الشروع في الحسابات تم عمل‬.‫الحاجة لمعرفة خصائص السريان حول صمام الفراشة إلستخداماته الصناعية الواسعة‬
‫ بوصة ثالثى األبعاد كما تم إختبار‬2 ‫ لصمام فراشة‬Gambit2.4 ‫إختبار التأكدية للبناء الرقمي والذي تم إنشائه ببرنامج‬
‫ بعد فحص‬.‫ لتوزيع السرعة خالل األنابيب‬7 ‫توزيع سرعة المائع عدديا ووجد أن توزيع السرعة تتفق مع قانون األس‬
‫ األولى عند سرعات مختلفة للمائع واألخرى‬:‫ وبطريقتين مختلفتين‬ᴼ01 ‫ إلى‬ᴼ01 ‫معامل فقد الضغط عدديا عند الزوايا من‬
‫عند سرعة ثابتة وجد أن المفاقيد الهيدروليكية ال تعتمد على السرعة ولكنها تعتمد على التغير في فتحة الصمام في عالقة‬
‫ كما تم حساب معامل سريان الصمام ومقارنته ببيانات المصنع فوجد تقاربا كبيرا بينهما‬.]0[ ‫أسية وهذا يتفق مع ما نشر في‬
‫ كما تم حساب معامل العزم للصمام ووجد أن أقصى معامل عزم هيدروليكي عند زواية‬.ᴼ01‫ و‬ᴼ01 ‫مع حيود عند الزاويتين‬
‫ كما تتعاظم المفاقيد‬ᴼ71 ‫ كما تم إثبات أن قوى العزم الهيدروليكية تتعاظم عند‬.]٢[ ‫ وهذا يتفق مع ما نشر في‬ᴼ71
.ᴼ71 ‫ وعند زوايا أكبرمن‬ᴼ01 ‫ وهذا الذى يفسر قيود تشغيل الصمام عند زوايا أقل من‬ᴼ01 ‫الهيدروليكية للفتحات أقل من‬
ᴼ
71 ‫وأخيرا رغم ما يتطلبه قرص الصمام من تعديل للتغلب على اإلضطرابات الحادثه لسريان المائع خالله عند الزوايا من‬
‫ لذلك يمكن استخدام الحسابات‬.‫ إال أنه ال يحتاج ألية تعديالت من ناحية متطلبات العزم الهيدروليكي عند أية زاوية‬ᴼ01 ‫إلى‬
‫ وفي المستقبل نأمل في دراسة تأثير ظاهرة التكهف على‬.‫الرقمية بنجاح للوصول ألفضل متطلبات التصميم لصمام الفراشة‬
.‫معامالت األداء لهذا الصمام‬

1. Abstract
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) enables scientists and engineers to perform ‘numerical
experiments’ (i.e., computer simulations) in a ‘virtual flow laboratory’. Numerical simulation permits valve
manufacture to determine valve sizing coefficients and to solve problems involving valves fluid flow. Valve
designer via CFD could identify and eliminate valve flow problems before starting the manufacturing step. This
technique is less costly alternative to determine the flow coefficients based on CFD calculations. Butterfly valves
are versatile components widely used in hydraulic systems as shutoff and throttling valves. In this study, a
comprehensive 3D simulation study for 2" (50 DN STC model) butterfly valve is conducted to establish a trusted
and a calibrated numerical solution model after comparing with experimental data. The goal of this study is to
verify and validate CFD code to obtain reasonable results for control valve coefficients calculation. The steady
and incompressible Navier-Stokes equations are solved numerically to predict the flow behavior and compute
the pressure loss, flow, and torque coefficients.

Keywords: CFD, control valve, butterfly valve, valve coefficients.

Received: 2 July, 2014 - Revised: 11 August, 2014 - Accepted: 24 September, 2014

Mohammed M. Said, Hossam S. S. AbdelMeguid and Lotfy H Rabie M: 00

2. Introduction which is widely used in industry application

to regulate the fluid flow in pipelines.
CFD validation weight increases Studies on flow behavior inside these
with time. Researchers use numerical valves endeavor to optimize the valve
techniques to solve problems involving design and selection. Jeon et al. [4] studied
fluid flow, heat and mass transfer, chemical the performance of butterfly valve disk, and
reactions, and related complex phenomena. the flow characteristics using CFD. The
Most of the commercial CFD solvers are results showed that the flow pattern
based on the finite volume method in which associated with a double disk is more
the continuous flow domain is replaced by a complex compared to a single disk type due
discrete one using grid points. Fluent 6.3 is to formation of recirculating eddies, at the
one of these CFD solvers including several rear of valve disk. Moreover, the results
models to solve incompressible, steady and showed that valves hydrodynamic behavior
turbulent flow at these grid points. and their dynamic torque coefficients were
Using CFD in control valves design affected by the shape of the disk geometry.
to predict the fluid flow and pressure Vakili-Tahami et al. [5] studied numerically
distribution is attractive to industry since it 1000 mm diameter butterfly valve using
is less costly than valve experimental tests. Cosmos FloWorks software. The results
Butterfly valve and its actuator should be revealed that the valve disk surface
mutually compatible to withstand the torque roughness has an insignificant effect on the
that is applied during its service of disk opening torque. Thanigavelmurugan et
operation. On that basis, to select the al. [6] employed CFD analysis to design the
economical actuator for a control valve, the tortuous path and to study the flow field and
foremost effective factor is the torque performance of high pressure turbine
required to operate the valve [3]. bypass valve. The results showed that the
Butterfly control valves are sized valve performance is satisfactory with the
according to the valve coefficients at operating conditions. Leutwyler and Dalton
different disk angles (α). Misconception in [7] utilized Fluent 6.0 to predict the
sizing butterfly valves can destroy the flow pressure profile on the butterfly valve disk
continuity and change the physical at angles 30°, 45°, and 60°. The numerical
performance. In many cases, it results in results depicted that for certain disk angles,
undesirable effects such as intensive noise significant fluctuations in the torque are
and vibration which can limit the life present and cause severe vibrations to the
expectancy of the valve. Therefore, it is piping system. Shirazi et al. [8] concluded
very important to know in which conditions the ball valve 3-order polynomial equation
the butterfly valves exhibit high for the relation between the ball valve
performance, i.e., minimum pressure drop pressure loss coefficient and valve disk
and large flow coefficient. angle using CFD analysis. Sonawane et al.
CFD provides local information of [9] studied the flow pattern of the globe
all the variables as, pressure and velocity valve using 3-D CFD simulations. The
around the control valve disk. In many numerical results were used to estimate the
instances, the determination of control valve flow coefficients at different flow
valve coefficients: pressure drop, flow, rates and constant pressure drop across the
cavitation, and torque coefficients, as a valve. The results closely matched with the
function of valve disk angle is essential to laboratory testing data. Wang et al. [10]
compare valve performances for specific studied the fluid flow properties in a large
application. On that basis, these coefficients butterfly valve using fluid structure
are the basic step to optimize the selection interaction (FSI) to determine whether it
among different manufactures. Butterfly can work safely or not. The results of FSI
valve is a type of flow control device, suggested that large butterfly valve should
M: 21 Mansoura Engineering Journal, (MEJ), Vol. 39, Issue 3, September 2014

not be fixed at a low opening angle, and (fully-opened position) is also presented in
also the improvement of butterfly valve this study.
design is conducted in their study. Price
[11] examined the effect of the pipeline 3. Butterfly valve performance
length and valve closure time on the
transient dynamic torque that was applied to coefficients
butterfly valves. The results showed that The principal use of valve
there is a noticeably large increase in performance coefficients is to aid in the
dynamic torque when the valve is being selection of appreciated valve size for
closed with long pipelines and short closure specific application. All the pertinent sizing
times. Morita et al. [12] examined in details factors must be known at different valve
the unsteady phenomena of steam valve in disk angles (α). Butterfly valve performance
mid-opening position to understand the coefficients include pressure loss, flow, and
flow characteristics using CFD because the hydrodynamic torque coefficients. Whereas
flow around the valve had a complex 3-D these values can usually be obtained
structure. The results confirmed that the experimentally, it is sometimes not possible
CFD validity, as the unsteady phenomena to identify these coefficients
that were observed and the unsteady region, experimentally. Another method wherein
amplitude and frequency agree well with butterfly valve performance coefficients can
those of experiment. Prema et al. [13] be obtained is by using CFD.
studied the design optimization using CFD
for butterfly disk. The result showed that 3.1 Pressure loss coefficient
the flow coefficient increases by 56.8 % The pressure loss coefficient, k, is a
after redesigning the stem by the optimized dimensionless value commonly used to
design. The valve manufactures present predict the minor head loss due to the
their products with the valve coefficients presence of valve in fluid flow field. It is
which are the major target in the case of essential to obtain the valve pressure loss
good sizing and selection process. Chern coefficient as a function of valve disk angle
and Wang [14] investigated numerically (α). Two different methods are used
and experimentally the fluid flow which numerically to investigate the relation
was controlled by a full-port 1/4 turn valve between the pressure loss coefficient and
with a V-port. It was observed that, the the disk angle:
smaller the angle of a V-port, the more the  Fixed inlet velocity of 1.9 m/s and free
pressure loss. discharge (atmospheric outlet pressure).
The present research aims to study  Varying inlet velocity (i.e., varying
numerically the pressure loss, torque and Reynolds number) and fixed discharge
flow coefficients of butterfly valve at pressure (0.69 barg) as listed in Table 1.
different disk angles (α) for different The pressure loss coefficient, k, can be
operating conditions. To establish a CFD calculated by:
model for the butterfly valve with the
connected pipeline, Gambit 2.4 is employed
to the 3D flow domain and generate the
mesh. Numerical results are obtained by Reynolds number =
using Fluent 6.3 with applying the k-ε
where
turbulence model to solve the RANS
continuity and momentum equations. The : Difference between inlet and outlet
pressure loss, torque and flow coefficients pressures (N/m²)
are calculated. The fluid flow field Density (kg/m³)
represented by velocity and pressure (m/s)
distributions for disk angles (α) 30° to 90°
d: Pipeline diameter (m)
 Mohammed M. Said, Hossam S. S. AbdelMeguid and Lotfy H Rabie M: 00

: Kinematic viscosity ( )
Table 1 Reynolds number values with different
3.3 Dynamic torque coefficient
angles.
α (°) 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 The torque of butterfly valves is the
U (m/s) 3.8 6.8 11.1 12.8 17.7 25.0 27.5 turning force needed to rotate the valve disk
Re x 104 1.4 2.6 4.2 4.8 6.7 9.4 10.4 or hold it in a certain position [15]. Torque
3.2 Flow coefficient coefficient, , is a dimensionless value
,which depends on the valve disk shape,
The flow coefficient, Cv, is the disk opening angle, valve type and the
volume (in US gallons) of water at 60° F offset of valve stem with disk.
that flow per minute through a valve with a The dynamic torque coefficient is
pressure drop of 1 psi and can be calculated determined by involving the hydrodynamic
by: torque, as given by:

where
where Dynamic torque (N.m)
Flow rate (US gallons per minute) ∆P: Difference between inlet and outlet
Pressure drop across the valve (2d pressures (N/m²)
and 6d) before and after the valve disk D: Diameter of the valve disk (m)
respectively (psi)
: Torque coefficient
Specific gravity of fluid ( for water = 1) Dynamic torque is a function of the
Flow coefficient diameter to the third power; therefore, it
The valve flow coefficient that becomes increasingly more significant as
compatible with SI units is , which does valve diameters increase. The resulting
not have a wide acceptance by the technical force vector components in Cartesian
community. is measured according coordinate for all grid nodes are summed
ISA standard for testing control valves. In after multiplied by the corresponding arms
this standard the upstream pressure to calculate the hydrodynamic torque.
measured from a pipe tap 2d before the The obtained numerical results of
valve and the downstream pressure from a torque coefficient at different disk angles
pipe tap 6d after the valve. Eq. (2) ignores are compared with the results of Henderson
the pressure drop between these taps and et al. [2].
the valve. Therefore, for maximum
accuracy, should be superseded by
(is the pressure drop across the valve
4. CFD model
and close to the disk), as will be explained This section presents the valve and
later. The numerically computed flow connected pipes dimensions and geometry,
coefficients, as shown in Fig. 10 are governing equations, boundary conditions
compared with the manufacture flow and the CFD solving model.
coefficients that are listed in Table 2.
4.1 Physical model description
Table 2 Manufacture Cv values for 50DN STC Stonetown butterfly valve, STC
model butterfly valve at different disk angles (α).
type, DN 50, class #150 is shown in Fig. 1.
Size 2" (50 mm)
The disk diameter (D) is 49 mm with
thickness 3.175 mm. The disk geometry is a
α (°) 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
circular plate connected with two
Cv 8 9 18 28 55 72 110 135 semicircular hubs 12.7 mm radius. The
hubs are aligned parallel to the valve stem
M: 21 Mansoura Engineering Journal, (MEJ), Vol. 39, Issue 3, September 2014

upstream and downstream the valve disk.

The flow volume consists of the valve disk
inserted in the pipe with 2d length upstream
the valve and 6d downstream the valve.
These dimensions are shown schematically
in Fig. 2, this layout choice complies with 0
[13, 14, 16].
where are the
velocity vectors in the three perpendicular
Cartesian coordinates . is the
strain–rate tensor given by:

One approach was used to solve

Navier-Stokes equations includes focusing
on the effects of turbulence on mean flow
properties by using what is called
Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes
(RANS). The RANS is represented by:

(7)
where
Fig. 1 STC butterfly valve
and : The time-averaged value of the
velocity vectors in the two perpendicular
Cartesian coordinates .
and : The fluctuating velocity is in
two perpendicular Cartesian coordinates
.

: Reynolds stresses term.

In order to compute the turbulent flows with

Eq. (7), it is necessary to develop the
turbulence model to predict the Reynolds
stresses. One of the most common
turbulence models is the k-ε model which is
used to solve the RANS equations to predict
Fig. 2 STC butterfly valve volume flow domain turbulent flows for 3D butterfly valve. The
drawn by Gambit 2.4 (This drawing is not to standard k-ε turbulence model is selected
scale). from different models in Fluent 6.3 due to
4.2 Mathematical model its accuracy, free from the complex and
non-linear damping functions that are
The governing equations are the required for the other models. Huang and
Navier-Stokes and continuity equations. Kim [17] utilized Fluent to simulate
The equations for steady state, turbulent flows in a butterfly valve, in
incompressible Newtonian fluid are which the k-ε model was employed for
described by Eqs. (4), (5), and (6). turbulence consideration. The model is a
Mohammed M. Said, Hossam S. S. AbdelMeguid and Lotfy H Rabie M: 01

transport equation for the kinetic energy (k) then solved numerically over each
and its dissipation rate (ε) as described by elemental discrete volume.
Eqs. (8) and (9).
Changes of k (kinetic energy)

Changes of ε (dissipation rate)

ε ε ε
ε ε

ε
ε

where
Fig. 3 Mesh for valve disk angle of 40°.

ε 4.4 Boundary conditions

(10) A large source of uncertainty in CFD
The constants values are [18]: modeling can result from poor
representation of boundary conditions,
=0.09, ε =1.44, ε =1.92, =1, ε =1.3 particularly, the inlet [7]. It is very
important to specify the proper boundary
conditions in order to have a well-defined
4.3 Mesh generation problem.
Basically, there are three main stages In 3D, boundaries are surfaces that
in CFD methodology which are typically completely surround and define a region.
followed in this study. These stages are The defined boundary conditions of the
:Pre-processing, Solving and Post- outlet pressure, the inlet velocity, ,
processing. The studied flow volume and ε for the disk surfaces and the pipe
including the valve disk and the connected walls are varnished in Table 3. At solid
pipes is meshed via Gambit 2.4. The boundaries, the no-slip condition is applied
generated mesh has been repeated for for all disk angles.
different mesh types and sizes, the best
Table 3 Fluent 6.3 fixed entries and boundary
efficient mesh method for converging conditions data
solution is executed using unstructured
(tetrahedral) and T-grid type. The final Variables Value
meshes are generated for seven different Inlet velocity 1.9 m/s
disk angles from 30° to 90° with Outlet pressure 0 barg
incremental step of 10°. An illustration of Turbulence intensity (I) 4%
the geometry and mesh are shown in Figs. 2 0
and 3 with locally re-fined numerical grid ε 0
of high density ranges from 0.8x106 to Density 998.2 kg/m³
1.2x106 elements. The model previously Viscosity 1.13x m²/s
described is implemented directly into Hydraulic diameter 0.049 m
Fluent 6.3. Partial differential equations are Reynolds no. 8.2x
discretized into a system of algebraic
equations and these algebraic equations are
M: 21 Mansoura Engineering Journal, (MEJ), Vol. 39, Issue 3, September 2014

Table 4 Mesh independence test for disk angle of 60 o

5. Results and discussion
The target from the numerical
Mesh dependence test (60°) Inlet

Error
simulation is to compute the fluid flow Time

(%)
No. pressure
No. of cells No. of faces No. of (Hour)
properties to obtain valve performance nodes
(psig)
curves for valve disk angles from α=30° to 1 275,034
581,397 62,066 0.814
- 4
90° with incremental step of 10°. The 2 8 6
533,055 1,111,892 112,717 0.753
calculated valve coefficients are analyzed in
this section. Furthermore, constructing 3 2 8
1,188,539 2,476,541 249,793 0.737
validity and accuracy degree of numerical 4 0.1 10
1,774,814 3,703,369 375,994 0.737
results are also discussed. HP G62 PC
laptop with Intel processor core (i5) CPU M The flow coefficient, Cv, is calculated
460 @ 2.53GHz and memory of 3 GB from the numerical results of different mesh
RAM is used to perform the simulations. resolutions. As depicted in Fig. 4, the value
Despite there are differences between the of Cv for trials 3 and 4 are
meshes of the executed cases for each disk indistinguishable.
angle, the mean run time is about 8 hours.
65
5.1 Results validation and accuracy
Mesh independence test
Simulated engineering cases via CFD, 64
Flow coefficient (Cv)

Trial 3
especially complex cases, are prone to Trial 4
errors from different sides. The most arising 63 Trial 2
challenging side is the meshing phase.
Mesh resolution has a strong influence on 62
the quality of the numerical results and
computational time required. Sometimes, it
takes a lot of time efforts and engineering 61
skills to obtain the validated solution. Mesh Trial 1
independence test is performed for 3-D 60
butterfly valve at 60° disk angle. The 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
No. of cells 6
repetition of the calculation using Fluent 6.3 x 10
with a higher mesh resolution until a good Fig. 4 Cv variation with mesh density
degree of accurate results is achieved. The
converging criteria is established when the Velocity profile
numerical solutions obtained for the inlet The numerical results of the
pressure on different grids agrees to within dimensionless velocity profile for fully-
a level of tolerance of 0.001. The number of opened valve (α = 90o) are shown in Fig. 5.
mesh elements is increased gradually with This result is used to identify the turbulent
avoiding skewed elements and aspect ratio exponent n in Eq. (11) which is derived for
violation till defining the number of the turbulent flow model [18].
elements where the solution is independent
on the mesh density. As illustrated in Table =
4, and after performing four trials, the Where
number of grid points is increased, the error : Maximum centerline velocity (m/s)
in the numerical solution decreases. The R: Pipeline radius (m)
result obtained for cell resolution around r: Distance from the centerline (m)
1.188x106 is adopted in the present study.
A mesh of higher density is generated close
to and around the valve disk.
Mohammed M. Said, Hossam S. S. AbdelMeguid and Lotfy H Rabie M: 07

escalate while diminish gradually with

1 larger disk angles.
Dimensionless velocity (U/Um )

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Position (r/R)

Fig. 5 Velocity profile for fully-opened position. Fig. 6.a Side view for pressure profiles from angle
30° to 90°.
The value of n increases with In the current numerical study, the
increasing Reynolds number. The typical outlet pressure boundary condition is set at
value of n ranges from 6 to 10 for turbulent atmospheric condition (free discharging
flows. Henderson et al. [2] determined n case), which enhancing the existing of valve
from CFD analysis for a butterfly valve cavitation. The cavitation flow condition
used in Hydro-electric power scheme as zones are formed horizontally downstream
10.5 and 11.4, but the value of n equal to 7 the valve disk at angles 30° and 40° and
generally approximates many flows in diagonally behind the valve at angle 50°,
practice. This value is giving rise to the while they dominate vertically around the
term one-seventh power-law velocity valve disk at angles 80° and 90°. These
profile. In this study, the average value of n zones are represented by dashed arrow lines
is obtained from numerical results of the are shown schematically in Fig. 6.a. The
velocity at outlet zone. The value of n is downstream length of 6d is enough length
found to be 8.6, which agrees with fully- to cover fully turbulent region for disk
developed turbulent flow. angle ranges from 30° to 60°. However, this
is not yield for disk angle ranges from 70°
5.2 Total pressure to 90°, which are represented by arrow lines
Figure 6.a illustrates the numerical a, b, and c in Fig. 6.a. This observation
results of the total pressure ratio (normal concords with what was published by ISA.
In cavitation circumstances, the
pressure relative to maximum pressure) for downstream pressure of the control valve
the side view visualization of the flow field with a v d greater than 20 may not be
around the valve disk and along the pipe fully recovered at the distance of 6d [16].
line for different disk angles. For disk
angles smaller than 70o (α < 70o), there are 0.5

high pressure drops across the valve disk.

Vena contracta tracking line
Total pressure, [psig]

Whereas, for larger angles (α > 70o), a 0

relatively small pressure drop is observed.

-0.5
The pressure drop at disk angle of 80° and  = 30o
90° is hardly distinguished. Therefore, the  = 40
o

-1  = 50o
operation of butterfly valve is restricted to  = 60o
disk angle of 80°. For the disk angles 30°  = 70
o

-1.5
and 40°, the degree and extent of the 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9
Position after the disk [d]
formulated eddy zones behind the disk
Fig. 6.b Pressure recovery curves 2d after the
valve disk for angles 30° to 70°.
M: 21 Mansoura Engineering Journal, (MEJ), Vol. 39, Issue 3, September 2014

In Fig. 6.b, the pressure recovery a complete symmetry is found at disk

from the valve centerline extended to 2d angles of 80° and 90°. A moving and
downstream the valve disk and along the growing separation zone behind the valve
pipe mid-line for disk angle ranges from as going from disk angle 30° has
30° to 70°. It can be noticed that the disappeared at disk angles 80° and 90°. This
pressure decreases as the fluid passes is depicted by the diagonal dashed line
through the valve Vena contracta and then extended downstream the valve disk. The
the pressure is partially recovered as the zone flows away from the disk wall instead
fluid enters the downstream pipe area. As of flowing along the wall and is presented
depicted in Fig. 6.b, the point of lowest by points a, b, c, d, and e. Turbulence
pressure (i.e., Vena contracta) lies behind kinetic energy from valve centerline to 2d
the valve disk and moves far away the valve after the valve disk for 30° to 70° angles is
disk with increasing the valve disk angle. depicted in Fig. 7.b. Turbulence kinetic
Furthermore, after 1d distance downstream energy diminishes gradually from 30°
the valve disk centerline, the pressure toward large disk angle 70°, but between
gradient along the perpendicular axis to the angles 40° and 50° there is a distinct rapid
valve stem has a constant value, i.e., overshot value. This observation suggests
p that, for flow free of turbulence, the
c .
x butterfly valve throttling below 40° is not
5.3 Velocity magnitude recommended. This result concords with
the finding of Ibrahim et al. [19]. They
The butterfly valve is a quarter turn
concluded that, the flow turbulence is more
type which specifies a high recovery valve.
significant at valve angle of 35° and its
The flow passing the valve at certain disk
intensity increases with small disk angles.
angle is divided between convergence-
In Fig. 7.b, turbulence peaks occur
divergence pass at one disk side and to
near the disk wall between (2.5d and 2.6d)
divergence-convergence pass in the other
from pipe inlet behind the valve disk, and
side. On that basis, the un-symmetry flow
the peak value is shifted away in flow
condition occurs around the valve disk as
direction for large disk angles.
indicated in Fig. 7.a by dashed arrows at
angle 50°, where is the normal
m 1.4
]

maximum velocity relative to the maximum

2
Turbulence kinetic energy, [m 2 /s

velocity. 1.2

1
o
 = 30
0.8  = 40o
o
 = 50
0.6
 = 60o
0.4  = 70o

0.2

0
2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9
Position after the disk [d]
Fig. 7.b Turbulence kinetic energy curves 2d after
the valve disk for different disk angles

Fig. 7.a Top view for velocity profiles for 5.4 Turbulence intensity
different disk angles. The results presented in Fig. 8 show
The extensive un-symmetry occurs at that, the degree of turbulence depends on
disk angles lower than 70o (α ≤ 70o), while the valve disk angle, where is the
m
Mohammed M. Said, Hossam S. S. AbdelMeguid and Lotfy H Rabie M: 00

turbulence intensity relative to the

maximum turbulence intensity. At small Constant velocity, K1
disk angles ranging from 30º to 50º, there is 40

Pressure loss coefficient (K)

Variable velocity, K2
an escalated turbulence associated with the Sandalci et al. [1]
valve disk, and is enveloped by dash lines. 30
While the turbulence decreases at large disk
angles ranging from 70º to 90º, and is 20
illustrated by dashed arrows.

10

0
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Disk angle ( )

Fig. 9 The effect of the disk angle on the pressure

loss coefficient.

From the numerical results of constant flow

velocity method, a relation between
pressure loss coefficient and disk angle
(α) is given by:
3
Fig. 8 Side view for turbulence intensity from 0 α 0 99
angle 30° to 90°.
The growing up turbulence areas at The numerical results of variable flow
large disk angles is due to existence of disk velocity gives a relation between pressure
hub. However, the distinct limiting disk loss coefficient and disk angle (α) as:
angle is 60º which is not subjected to any 0 α 3
0 99
turbulence. Therefore, the disk geometry
design may need adaptation to reduce the Sandalci et al. [1] concluded that the
turbulence and to avoid flow disturbance pressure loss coefficient is independent of
that is affected by hub existence. Reynolds number and its variation with the
opening angle is given by:
5.5 Pressure loss coefficient 07 0 α
and
The two criteria described in section 3.1 are which is very close to the obtained results
used to investigate the relation between the as depicted in Fig. 9.
pressure loss coefficient and the disk angle.
5.6 Flow coefficient
The results are illustrated in Fig. 9, and are
compared with the published results in The numerically computed ISA
Sandalci et al. [1]. The results show that pressure drop, , is the pressure
there is no distinguishing between the two difference between 2d and 6d upstream and
scenarios and also with Sandalci et al. [1]. downstream the valve, respectively.
The error is too small between exponential However, the net pressure drop, , is
Eqs. (12-14). The pressure loss coefficient often specified at upstream and downstream
only depends on the valve geometry. the valve faces, when sizing and selecting
Although increasing Reynolds number with the control valve. Instead of in Eq.
large valve opening, the pressure loss (2), Rahmeyer and Driskell [20] derived Eq.
coefficient tends to decrease, so the (15) for p for high recovery valves
variation of the disk angle position has the (Cv/d² > 20) [21].
major effect on the pressure loss coefficient,
which agrees with Sandalci et al. [1].
M: 12 Mansoura Engineering Journal, (MEJ), Vol. 39, Issue 3, September 2014

v v Song and Park [23] found that CFX

0 00 9 f simulation agreed with the experimental
d d
data very well. However, at some positions,
especially at the valve opening angle lower
than 20°, it didn’t agree well. his may be
v v calculated from PNET due to the disadvantage of the k-ε
v : Cv calculated from turbulence model of its own. Furthermore,
f Pipeline friction factor it is suggested to use another turbulence
d Diameter of the disk in (inches) model which is good at treatment of near-
Specific gravity of fluid ( for water = 1) wall such as the k-ω model and shear stress
The difference between and transport (SST) turbulence model.
can be as large as 50% for low and
high recovery valves [20]. Small 5.7 Torque coefficient
differences in computing the flow
coefficient, Cv, and pressure drop can The valve actuators are chosen to match
produce significant difference in valve the valve closing/opening torques. Torque
sizing, actuator requirements, and valve coefficient is specific for each valve type
cavitation coefficients [22]. Flow and geometry. Some valve manufacture
coefficient values computed numerically by tabulated these values with valve disk angle
using , and Eq. (15) are for each valve type. It is difficult for
compared in Fig. 10. The results show that, manufacture to determine the exact point
the relative error between v and vManf for maximum torque and select the right
has a value of about 50% at 30°, and valve actuator to operate the valve
decreases with increasing the disk angle till automatically. The numerical results of
reaches 9% at disk angle 90°. There is not torque coefficient is depicted in Fig. 11, and
enough information about the manufacture compared with Henderson el. al. [2]. These
valve test benches, and the related standard results reveal that the maximum value of
that was applied. Therefore, the the torque occurs at disk angle of 70o. The
manufacture always should be contacted to flow at this position is complex and tends to
verify the valve data. The relative error change over from heavily imbalance to
between numerically calculated v and balanced phase.
v ahm [20] increases with disk angle.
0.2
CFD Present study
140 Exp. Henderson et. al. [2]
ISA CFD Henderson et. al. [2]
Torque coefficient (Ct)

Net 0.15
120
Rahmeyer and Driskell [20]
Flow coefficient (Cv)

100 Manufacture
0.1
80

60 0.05

40
0
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Disk angle ( )
0 Fig. 11 Valve torque coefficient at different disk
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Disk angle ( ) angles.

Fig. 10 Valve flow coefficient at different disk In this study, only torque due to flow
angles. (i.e., hydrodynamic) is considered. As
discussed in section 5.3 and illustrated in
Fig. 7.a for the velocity profile, more
Mohammed M. Said, Hossam S. S. AbdelMeguid and Lotfy H Rabie M: 20

stagnant flow regime is found behind the References

valve which forms non-uniform pressure
[1] M. Sandalci, E. Mançuhan, E. Alpman,
distribution and consequently , increases
K. Küçükada, Effect of the Flow Conditions
the torque required to open the valve disk
and Valve Size on Butterfly Valve
further. When these results are compared
Performance, Journal of Thermal Science
with the published data OF different authors
and Technology, 30(2) (2010) 103-112.
[2] and manufactures, it was found that the
maximum value of the torque occurs at disk [2] A. Henderson, J. Sargison, G. Walker, J.
angle ranges from 70° to 80° for the Haynes, A Numerical Prediction of the
butterfly valve. The torque value decreases Hydrodynamic Torque acting on a Safety
in the range of 80° to 90° position of the Butterfly Valve in a Hydro-electric Power
disk because the force distribution on the Scheme, WSEAS Transactions on Fluid
valve surface is balanced itself [24]. From Mechanics, 3(3) (2008) 218-223.
the comparison between the values of [3] LLC, Control Valve Handbook, Fisher
torque coefficient, , with other valve Control International, 2005.
disk styles yields that the disk geometry [4] S.Y. Jeon, J.Y. Yoon, M.S. Shin, Flow
shape doesn’t need any modification to Characteristics and Performance Evaluation
reduce the dynamic torque, as the torque of Butterfly Valves using Numerical
coefficient in these valve styles are less than Analysis, 25th IAHR Symposium on
other valves. Hydraulic Machinery and Systems, IOP
Conference Series: Earth and
6. Conclusions Environmental Science, 12(1) (2010)
012099.
The present study shows that the use
of CFD tool, such as Fluent 6.3 software, [5] F. Vakili-Tahami, M. Zehsaz, M.
gives good results when analyzing the flow Mohammadpour, A. Vakili-Tahami,
characteristics of butterfly valve. The model Analysis of the Hydrodynamic Torque
yields a good agreement between the Effects on Large Size Butterfly Valves and
experimental data and industrial literatures Comparing Results with AWWA C504
for the pressure loss, flow, and hydraulic Standard Recommendations, Journal of
torque coefficients. The results show a Mechanical Science and Technology, 26(9)
formulated relation between the valve disk (2012) 2799-2806.
angle and these coefficients. CFD [6] K. Thanigavelmurugan, N.V.
succeeded to predict the flow coefficient; Mahalakshmi, S.M. Das, D. Venkatesh,
however, care must be paid at small angles, Performance Improvement of a Control
as the model needs more improvement in Valve using Computational Fluid
itself when applied in the region of high Dynamics, Proceedings of the National
turbulence. Moreover, the results depict that Conference on Trends and Advances in
turbulence is small at large angles, and a Mechanical Engineering, YMCA
significant overshoot occurs between disk University of Science & Technology,
angles 40° and 50°. Furthermore, the valve Faridabad, Haryana, India, 2012 , 106-113.
Vena contracta moves along diagonal line [7] Z. Leutwyler, C. Dalton, A CFD Study
far away the valve disk with increasing the to Analyze the Aerodynamic Torque, Lift,
valve disk angle. The disk hub needs and Drag Forces for a Butterfly Valve in the
adaption to reduce flow turbulence, in spite Mid-Stroke Position, ASME 2004 Heat
of the design is adopted by torque Transfer/Fluids Engineering Summer
requirement. Therefore, CFD used in valve Conference, Charlotte, North Carolina,
coefficients calculation introduces a good USA, 2004, Paper HT-FED04-56016.
tool to suggest the need or no need for [8] N.T. Shirazi, G.R. Azizyan, G.H.
additional valve modifications. Akbari, CFD Analysis of the Ball Valve
M: 11 Mansoura Engineering Journal, (MEJ), Vol. 39, Issue 3, September 2014

Performance in Presence of Cavitation, Life [17] C. Huang, R.H. Kim, Three-

Science Journal, 9(4) (2012) 1460-1467. Dimensional Analysis of Partially Open
[9] V.J. Sonawane, T.J. Rane, A.D. Monde, Butterfly Valve Flows, Journal of Fluids
R.V. Vajarinkar, P.C. Gawade, Design and Engineering, 118(3) (1996) 562-568.
Analysis of Globe Valve as Control Valve [18] D.F. Young, B.R. Munson, T.H.
Using CFD Software, Second National Okiishi, A Brief Introduction to Fluid
Conference on Recent Developments in Mechanics, Wiley, 2004.
Mechanical Engineering, M.E.Society's [19] G. Ibrahim, Z. Al-Otaibi, H.M.
College of Engineering, Wadia College Ahmed, An Investigation of Butterfly Valve
Campus, Pune, India, 2013 , pp. 63-71. Flow Characteristics Using Numerical
[10] L. Wang, X. Song, Y. Park, The Technique, Journal of Advanced Science
Improvement of Large Butterfly Valve by and Engineering Research, 3(2) (2013) 151-
Using Numerical Analysis Method, 166.
Proceedings of the 6th WSEAS [20] W. Rahmeyer, L. Driskell, Control
International Conference on Fluid Valve Flow Coefficients, Journal of
Mechanics (FLUIDS'09), Vouliagmeni, Transportation Engineering, 111(4) (1985)
Athens, Greece, 2009, 75-79. 358-364.
[11] T.N. Price, Transient Effects on [21] J.W. Hutchison, ISA Handbook of
Dynamic Torque for Butterfly Valves, Control Valves, 2 ed., Instrument Society of
M.Sc.thesis, Utah State University, Logan, America, Pittsburgh, USA, 1976.
Utah ,USA, 2013. [22] ISA, ISA Standards, Recommended
[12] R. Morita, F. Inada, M. Mori, K. Practice and Technical Reports, Control
Tezuka, Y. Tsujimoto, CFD Calculation Valves, ISA, USA, 1999.
and Experiments of Unsteady Flow on [23] X.G. Song, Y.C. Park, Numerical
Control Valve, ASME 2004 Heat Analysis of Butterfly Valve-Prediction of
Transfer/Fluids Engineering Summer Flow Coefficient and Hydrodynamic
Conference, Charlotte, North Carolina, Torque Coefficient, Proceedings of the
USA, 2004, Paper HT-FED04-56017.
World Congress on Engineering and
[13] B. Prema, S. Bhojani, N. Computer Science, WCECS 2007, San
Gopalakrishnan, Design Optimization of Francisco, USA, 2007.
Butterfly Valve using CFD,Proceedings of [24] W. Chaiworapuek, The Engineering
the 37th National & 4th International Investigation of the Water Flow past the
Conference on Fluid Mechanics and Fluid Butterfly Valve, Institut National des
Power, IIT Madras, Chennai, India, 2010, Sciences Appliquées de Lyon, France,
Paper, FMFP10-FP-15. 2007.
[14] M.-J. Chern, C.-C. Wang, Control of
Volumetric Flow-Rate of Ball Valve Using
V-Port, Journal of Fluids Engineering,
126(3) (2004) 471-481.
[15] AWWA, Butterfly Valves: Torque,
Head Loss, and Cavitation Analysis,
Manual of Water Supply Practices - M49,
American Water Works Association, 2012.
[16] ANSI/ISA, Flow of Fluids through
Valves, Fittings, and Pipe, CRANE (Ed.)
Control Valve Capacity Test Procedures:
Ansi/Isa-S75.02-1996, ISA, 1996.