.DISCUSSION. H. E.

Brandmaier 2
Author provides a long overdue update of Benjamin's design procedure. A similar, as yet unpublished, study by Brandmaier and Knebel [10]3 treats the same problem from a somewhat different viewpoint. The following discussion is based on a comparison of the writer's, author's, and Benjamin's approaches. Referring to Fig. 6, the flow in an umbrella type safety valve/ vent stack system can be described as follows. At high steam pressures the sonic flow at the valve orifice expands to the lower surrounding pressure with a corresponding acceleration to supersonic velocities, forming a free jet. The pressure in the stagnant region surrounding the free jet is determined by the balance between the flow entrained by the free jet and that entering it through the subsonic boundary layer. This appears to be the basis for author's Fig. 4 and corresponding empirical equation for Pi,'. When the free jet boundary intersects the valve wall, an oblique shock is generated to turn the flow parallel to the wall. The subsequent flow then consists of a series of oblique shocks which decelerate the supersonic flow as they intersect with each other and with the boundary layer. If the pipe is sufficiently long, the flow becomes subsonic and then reaccelerates toward sonic flow due to pipe friction. However, if the valve outlet flow is subsonic, the static pressure at the outlet must equal the pressure of the surrounding atmosphere. As this occurs at low steam pressures, the valve outlet flow is expected to be sonic or supersonic with an outlet pressure greater than atmospheric. Flow in the vent stack is similar except that the abrupt area change is open to atmosphere. Thus, depending on the pressure surrounding the free jet relative to atmospheric pressure, there may be either a secondary flow of air into the vent pipe from the surrounding power plant, as in an ejector, no secondary flow, or blowback of a portion of the steam flow into the power plant. If the stack outlet pressure is greater than atmospheric, the flow expands once again forming a free-jet which dissipates by shock interactions and mixing with the atmosphere. The flow in a direct connected system is similar except for the area increase at the valve outlet. If the wall angle of the transition pipe is large, the flow is similar to that at the valve orifice. However, if it is small, the flow will follow the pipe wall and be nearly isentropic as in a steam nozzle and the author's empirical pressure criterion, Fig. 4, will be inapplicable. The purpose of the preceding description is to demonstrate the complexity and multidimensionality of the flow. Thus, the onedimensional analyses used both by the author, Benjamin, and the writer can only approximate reality. A more detailed Method-ofCharacteristics solution, similar to that used in modern ejector analyses [11] for the supersonic parts of the flow, would be required for a significant improvement. Author's momentum criterion, equation (26), with the equal sign, is the conservation of momentum applied between the valve outlet and the section where the free jet fills the vent stack when there is neither a secondary flow nor blowback. It couples the flow in the valve with the flow in the vent stack and must be satisfied for all flow conditions. The writer questions the significance of the > in author's equation (26). If it corresponds to a secondary flow, then the vent stack calculation must at least consider the additional secondary mass flow. Further, the significance of the back-pressure criterion of Fig. 4 is not apparent. For P/, > Pi,' and an umbrella type design, a secondary flow into the vent stack is expected; however, as long as the region between sections 2 and 3' in Fig. 6 is open to atmosphere there will be an inflow if Pf, < P5. Conversely, FREE JET

M<1

PIPE FRICTION

/
Y> M>1

-4
MIXING AND SHOCKS

3'
M<1 SECONDARY ~ FLOW /i FREE JET

f-

p-y M : 2l

1
M=l
Fig. 6 Flow in safety valve/vent system

author's criterion doesn't preclude Pb > Pb in which case backflow will occur. Fig. 7, based on Brandmaier and Knebel's perfect gas analysis [10] shows the interrelation of vent stack area ratio, vent stack length, the ratio of secondary to primary flows and the ratio of stagnation or total pressure to atmospheric pressure at the valve outlet. For sonic valve outflow, the pressure ratio is determined from the constant product of total pressure and flow area necessary to conserve mass in a one-dimensional, adiabatic flow. Above the lower limit, designated A, there is a net entropy increase between sections 2 and 3 in Fig. 6. Above the more restrictive upper limit, designated B, the entropy increases between sections 2 and 3' as well. In the region between A and B, the second law of thermodynamics is violated for this one-dimensional model since entropy decreases between sections 2 and 3'. At area ratios below curve C, the vent stack outflow is sonic; above C, it is subsonic. Curve D represents the maximum vent stack length corresponding to Mach numbers of infinity at 3' and 0.340 at 3 downstream of the shock system. At length to diameter ratios less than about 10-15, the shock system between sections 3 and 3' fills the entire stack and the outflow will be supersonic. The upper three curves in Fig. 7, at varying secondary flows, demonstrate the limiting condition for no blowback. At specified pressure and area ratios, increasing the stack length decreases the secondary flow; blowback occurs if the length increases beyond the zero secondary flow curve. Similarly, at a fixed length there is a minimum area ratio for no backflow as well as a minimum pressure

Burns & Roe Inc., Oradell, N.J. Numbers in brackets designate Additional References at end of discussion.
3

492

OCTOBER 1975

Copyright 1975 by ASME

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 19 Feb 2013 to 198.169.127.201. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

tions in the safety valve vent system as described by Mr. Brandmaier. However, he also recognizes the limitation of the one-dimensional analysis. As Mr. Brandmaier has demonstrated, the one-dimensional analysis can only determine a range of probable and possible solutions. In addition, this range is normally spread so widely that it is almost impossible for plant design engineers to select a reliable solution. For example, according to the one-dimensional analysis conducted by Mr. Brandmaier, the valve outlet flow can be sonic or supersonic. Although he selects sonic velocity in his Fig. 2 for discussion purpose, it is possible to construct as many figures similar to Fig. 2 as required for other mach numbers, such as Mi = 1.1, 1.2, etc. Each of these additional figures can be discussed in the same manner as Fig. 2 to obtain a wide range of all possible area ratios. It is apparent t h a t plant design engineers must clarify many "if s," before they can select a reliable area ratio which can be applied to the actual design with confidence. However, many " i f s " can not be determined by the one-dimensional analysis. Among them, the most important "If" is the valve exit velocity; sonic or supersonic. Generally, the flow passage up to the valve orifice can be considered similar to a convergent nozzle. However, beyond the valve seat the flow changes direction first, and passes through rough contours of the valve and finally through a sharp 90-deg elbow to reach the valve exit. Since the flow must undergo a 90-deg change in direction twice with a constant area duct at the tail end, the author questions whether it can be treated similar to the divergent section of a supersonic nozzle. Unless a higher velocity than sonic can be substantiated, a logical and sound approach is to assume that sonic velocity is the maximum velocity attainable at the valve exit. This paper is intended to give power plant design engineers a guidance in selecting the size of safety valve vent stack, adequately and conservatively with confidence, rather than demonstrating the effects of complexity that can not be solved by the one-dimensional analysis. For this reason, this paper omits those complex effects, such as described by Mr. Brandmaier, and takes a straightforward conservative approach from the beginning, mainly because the author recognizes the limitation of the one-dimensional analysis. On the other hand, this paper attempts to cover all possible situations which may occur in the actual design, by including both umbrella and direct connected types, and by discussing both choking and nonchoking conditions. Concerning the secondary flow mentioned by Mr. Brandmaier, the author does not consider the determination of an exact inflow is essential to vent stack sizing. In fact, safety valve vent systems need to achieve two objectives: one is to pass a full safety valve capacity without restriction, and the other is to prevent steam blowback for the umbrella type system. In this regard, plant design engineers' concerns are limited to the blow-back but not the inflow. The selection of a vent stack size to achieve neither blow-back nor inflow is next to impossible in the actual design. This is due to the fact that the vent stack size must be chosen from the nominal pipe sizes available on the market, and if blow-back has to be avoided, an inflow, whatever small it may be, must be allowed due to the stepwise selection of pipes. Regarding the significance of the "greater" sign, equations (26) and (28) are based on the primary flow with a set condition of Pb = PB for the umbrella type system. If the selected stack size results in the "greater" sign in equation (26), an inflow exists, and probably actual Pb is slightly lower than P5. However, as emphasized before, the quantity of inflow is not of concern. The design criterion is to avoid blow-back, but not to limit the inflow. In addition to the entropy and momentum criteria, the backpressure criterion expressed by equation (29) is applicable to the case where a choking condition exists at the valve exit. If a nonchoking condition exists at the valve exit, the back-pressure criterion does not apply. According to the multidimensional analysis, the back pressure is a function of area ratio and static pressure at the valve exit. It can not be set arbitrarily, such as Pb = P& for the

0 Fig. 7

2 FL/D3

Perfect gas design curves: K = 1.3, M 2 = 1.0

ratio to satisfy the second law of thermodynamics throughout the flow. Using Fig. 7 and author's entropy criterion to solve example A in Appendix B gives the same answer as author obtained. Author's major contribution is his inclusion of real gas effects in the perfect gas critical flow equations. In their study, Brandmaier and Knebel considered two one-dimensional approaches to the flow of saturated steam, as improvements over the simple perfect gas equations: the first was an adaptation of the two-phase, equilibrium flow of a condensing vapor, with perfect gas properties, containing liquid droplets [12] and the second was a generalization that uses a readily available steam table subroutine in a computer program, similar to the programs developed for rocket engine anal-' ysis [13]. It was concluded that although limited to one-dimensional, equilibrium flow the second approach was better. Perhaps author would comment on his choice of method relative to the foregoing alternatives?

Additional References
10 Brandmaier, H. E., and Knebel, M. E., "Steam Flow Through Safety Valve Vent Pipes," submitted to the Journal of Fluids Engineering, Nov. 1974. 11 Chow, W. L., and Addy, A. L., "Interaction Between Primary and Secondary Streams of Supersonic Ejector Systems and Their Performance Characteristics," American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Journal, Vol. 2 No. 4., Apr. 1964, pp. 686-695. 12 Wegener, P. P., and Mack, L. M., "Condensation in Supersonic and Hypersonic Wind Tunnels," Advances in Applied Mechanics, H. L. Dryden, and Th. von Karman, eds., Academic Press, New York, Vol. 5,1958, pp. 307-447. 13 Brandmaier, H.E., and Harnet, J. J., "The "The Computation of High Temperature Engine Performance," Kinetics, Equilibria and Performance of High Temperature Systems, G. S. Bahn, and E. E. Zukoski, eds., Butterworths, Washington, 1960, pp. 171-180.

Author's Closure
The author would like to express his appreciation to Mr. Brandmaier for valuable comments and discussions. His comments, as well as the author's approach to this subject, are further clarified in the following. . The author fully appreciates the complexity of the fluid condi-

Journal of Engineering for Power

OCTOBER 1975

493

Downloaded 19 Feb 2013 to 198.169.127.201. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

umbrella type system, as indicated in General Requirements under Design Criteria. The significance of the back-pressure criterion is that there is a possibility of steam blow-back, if an area ratio determined from the entropy and momentum criteria should yield a greater back-pressure, P'b, than the desired back-pressure Pb- In this case, the area ratio should be further increased to satisfy equation (29), even if it is not necessary to meet the other two criteria. Since the desired back-pressure Pb is equal to P5 for the umbrella type system, equation (29) shows P5 > P'b, and thereby precluding P'b > PsMr. Brandmaier comments that the back-pressure criterion (empirical pressure criterion) is applicable to the direct connected system with a large area ratio, but inapplicable to the system with a small area ratio. However, without knowing how small is the small area ratio to which this criterion becomes inapplicable, the author applies it for any area ratio for conservatism. The author applied the equilibrium approach to saturated or slightly unsaturated steam. Based on the assumption which limits the valve exit velocity to sonic, the enthalpy of steam in the vent system is never lower than that at the valve orifice as shown in the author's Fig. 2. With this enthalpy and a much lower pressure than that at the valve orifice, the quality of steam at the valve exit is ex-

pected to be quite high, and in many cases even superheated. Although saturated steam is in a metastable condition from the valve inlet to the valve exit, the effects of supersaturation may retard the formation of droplets. Since safety valve up to the orifice are similar to convergent nozzles and usually short, if supersaturation occurs, there is little likelihood of recovery within the nozzle because of the short time available for equilibrium to be established. After the valve orifice, the steam velocity reduces, according to the author's assumption, to subsonic that condensation' may not be significant. However, if supersonic flows must be allowed in the analysis, such as conducted by Mr. Brandmaier, the effects of droplet formations might be significant, because, in convergentdivergent nozzles, there is a possibility that equilibrium might be reached before the steam passes out of the nozzle. Mr. Brandmaier states that the use of his method to solve Example A in Appendix B yields the same answer as the author's. This is no surprise for the reasons that both his method and the author's were based on the one-dimensional analysis, and that he specifically chose the author's conservative approach of assuming a choking condition at the valve exit for comparison. If he had chosen a supersonic velocity instead of sonic, the solution might have been completely different.

494

OCTOBER 1975

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 19 Feb 2013 to 198.169.127.201. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm