James A.

Davis
University of Arkansas,
Fayetteville, AR 72701

Mike Stewart
University of North Dakota,
Fargo, ND 58105

Predicting Globe Control Valve

PerformancePart I: CFD
Modeling
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) tools are evaluated for use in industrial design
applications by predicting primary control valve performance characteristics. The performance parameter of primary interest to the manufacturer is the flow coefficient, C v .
Valves having relative valve capacity factors between 2.5 and 13 were modeled. The
control valve C v was experimentally measured and numerically predicted. Both equal
percentage and linear characteristic valves were represented in the study. The numerical
(simulation) study presented in Part 1 showed that the valve C v and the inherent valve
characteristic could be accurately predicted using axisymmetric flow models over most of
the plug travel. In addition, the study demonstrates the usefulness of simplified CFD
analysis for relatively complex 3-D flows. DOI: 10.1115/1.1490108

Introduction

Control valves are used throughout the chemical process industry for controlling volumetric flow rates. One of the most common
types of control valves is the single seat globe valve. It consists of
three main components: body, trim, and actuator. The body of the
valve houses the trim, which is made up of the plug and seat, and
the actuator positions the plug. Efforts of this work were focused
on the design of the trim. The trim of the control valve is responsible for the inherent valve flow characteristics. Different flow
conditions require different shapes of the plug and seat to achieve
optimum flow control. Past design strategies have relied heavily
on experimental and to a lesser extent analytical techniques to
design the trim. More recently, designers of fluid handling equipment have begun using Computational Fluid Dynamics CFD for
product development and optimization. In this work control valve
design tools were developed which utilize the technology of CFD.
In particular, simplified analyses are used that would be more
useful for smaller companies having fewer R & D resources.
This paper is one in a two part series. In the first paper the CFD
results are primarily used to calculate control valve performance
characteristics. The second paper focuses on details of the flow
field such as pressure at a discrete point and jet behavior. In addition, the second paper uses flow visualization techniques for
verification.
1.1 Literature Review. Despite the control valves relative
importance in a control loop, little work has been published on
control valve design. In an attempt to generalize losses through
valves, the Crane Companys Technical Paper 410 1 presents
many analytical expressions that can be used to calculate flow and
pressure relations. However, most of this information applies to
valves that are fully opened and not used for flow control. Other
work has been published on butterfly valves e.g., Takeyoshi et al.
2 developed an analytical method to predict flow characteristics
based on the hub geometry and percent opening in a butterfly
valve. Other work on butterfly valves includes Huang and Kim 3
who initially numerically modeled a butterfly valve as two dimensional and later modeled it in three dimensions. Calculating the
loss coefficient from the converged flow field and comparing this
coefficient to representative values verified their model.
Hydraulic valves differ from process control valves in applicaContributed by the Fluids Engineering Division for publication in the JOURNAL
OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received by the Fluids Engineering Division
June 1, 2001; revised manuscript received April 3, 2002. Associate Editor: B. Schiavello.

772 Vol. 124, SEPTEMBER 2002

tion and design. Hydraulic valves are typically used for controlling pressures and therefore, are of the quick opening type of
characteristics. Quick opening valves utilize plugs shaped in the
form of a truncated cone with relatively large clearances between
the plug and the seat. Or sometimes these valves utilize a disc for
a poppet plug. Process control valves on the other hand are used
for precise control of the fluid flowrate and are of the linear or
equal percentage characteristic. These type valves usually have
small clearances between the plug and the seat. Despite these
differences, many of the flow phenomena in the hydraulic valve
such as recirculation and jet separation and reattachment also occur in the process control valve. Therefore, it is instructive to
review the literature in this area.
The experimental work of hydraulic valves extends back over
many years. Johnston and Edge 4 studied forces on the valve
plug as well as the pressure-flow characteristics for several different plug and seat arrangements. Schrenk 5 published work on
the pressure-flow characteristics of poppet and disk valves. Stone
6 studied the characteristics of poppet valves with sharp-edged
seats, small openings, and low Reynolds number. McCloy and
McGuigan 7 studied the effects of the downstream chamber size
in a two-dimensional model of a poppet. Oki and Kawakami 8
studied disk valves by issuing water jets into air.
Some researchers have attempted to analytically predict flow
through poppet valves. Von Mises 9 predicted the contraction
coefficient for flow through an orifice using potential flow. Fluid
forces on the plug are often estimated using simple concepts of
fluid momentum change through the valve 10. Duggins 11
used potential flow to analyze the flow through a valve. These
simplified techniques are often valuable for determining order of
magnitude type calculations, but for high accuracy predictions,
they can yield misleading results.
Recently CFD has been combined with experimental work to
analyze hydraulic valves. Vaughan, Johnston, and Edge 12 modeled the valve reported experimentally by Johnston and Edge 4.
They found that the overall flow patterns and other parameters
were predicted well for flows not dependent on jet separation and
reattachment. Lee and Wellford 13 modeled a spring-loaded
poppet valve with a valve body similar to a globe style valve in a
two dimensional Cartesian coordinates system. His results showed
how a jet may impinge on the roof of the valve body and cause a
large-scale recirculation region in the pipe downstream of the
valve.

Copyright 2002 by ASME

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Fig. 3 Axisymmetric view of plug and seat region rotated 90

degrees

simply the number of gallons per minute of water that can flow
through the valve with a pressure drop of one pound per square
inch. However, in System International units this definition would
not apply. Despite the somewhat ambiguous meaning of Cv, it has
proven to be an acceptable indication of valve capacity. In the SI
system the units of C v are m3/hr/kPa0.5.

Fig. 1 Inherent valve characteristics

1.2 Objectives. The objectives of this work were to develop

control valve design tools using CFD, and to verify these tools
using experimental methods.

Theory

This section is divided into two parts. The first part discusses
control valves from an application point of view and the second
part discusses the turbulence model used in the study.
2.1 Control Valves. Two important control valve parameters are the overall flow coefficient C v and the relative valve
capacity factor C d . In general the calculation methods for C v are
a function of the valve Reynolds number, Rev . Another important
concept in control valve application is characterization.

Rev. Equation 1 is applicable to fully turbulent flow fields

for which valve parameters become independent of the Reynolds
number. However, due to its complex geometry, globe style control valves have no obvious characteristic dimension or velocity.
Therefore, a valve Reynolds number (Rev) is usually acceptable
as a suitable parameter for predicting the point of transition to
turbulence. Stiles 15 initially proposed the idea of using the
diameter of a circular orifice with the same C v as the control
valve. This data was then correlated by an experimentally determined factor that corrected the dimension to an effective diameter.
Using this concept the ISA 14 recommends
Rev

76,000F d q
v F L1/2C 1/2
v

F L2 C 2v
0.00214 D

1/4

(2)

C v . The flow coefficient C v is a measure of the valve capacity. It is given by the ISA standard S75.01 14 for incompressible,
fully turbulent, noncavitating, and nonflashing flow as
C v 11.6q

Gf
P

(1)

The C v is a dimensional quantity that has evolved through industry usage. In the English Engineering System of units the C v is
Table 1 Valve description
Valve
Valve A
Valve B
Valve C

Description

Rated C v

2.54 cm 1 in. nom. NPT,

Seat radius 0.471 cm
2.54 cm 1 in. nom. NPT,
Seat radius 1.03 cm
2.54 cm 1 in. nom. NPT,
Seat radius 1.346 cm

2.5

Fig. 2 Different regions of a control valve

Journal of Fluids Engineering

4
13

Fig. 4 Grid for valve A, 50 percent open seat-plug region

SEPTEMBER 2002, Vol. 124 773

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Fig. 5 Streamlines for valves A, B, and C partial opening: 30 percent, 50 percent, 70 percent

where F d is a value that accounts for the effect of the valve geometry and F L is a value that relates the overall pressure drop
across the valve to the pressure drop at the vena contracta in the
plug and seat area. Driskel 16 points out that for single seat
globe style control valves fully turbulence occurs in regions of
flow where Rev104 .

searchers have developed many turbulence models. The model

used in this study was the two equation K- model with the standard parameters 17. Other turbulence models RNG were used
but the effect on predictions was small 18.

C d . The relative valve capacity factor is a measure of the

valve capacity relative to its nominal pipe size. It is given by

This project was divided into a numerical study and an experimental study. In the numerical study, three commercial globe
valves were modeled using a CFD code developed by FLUENT,
Inc. Then an experimental study was undertaken to verify these
models. A description of the valves is given in Table 1. As seen in
this table, all valves were 2.54 cm globe style control valves with
rated C v s C v at 100 percent open ranging from 2.5 to 13. In
globe style control valves, the widely varied range in rated C v is
accomplished by varying the size of the seat and plug, which is
seen in Fig. 2. In addition, both linear and equal percentage trims
were included in the study. Some of the details of the numerical
study and the experimental study are discussed next.

C d

Cv
0.0394D 2

(3)

and has units of m3/hr/kPa0.5/mm2. Analogous to the C v , the

C d is a quantity that has evolved through industry usage. Values
of C d do not normally exceed 11.
Valve Characteristic. The valve characteristic is a plot of the
C v versus percent opening of the valve. The plot is indicative of
how the flow rate will change with a change in percent opening of
the valve. The percent opening of the valve is a measure of how
far the plug is stroked relative to its maximum stroke length.
Characterization is used in control applications to better linearize
the control loop. The two most commonly used characteristics are
the linear, where flow rate increases linearly with valve plug
travel, and equal percentage, where flow rate increases exponentially with valve plug travel. Both of these characteristics are
shown in Fig. 1. Linear characteristics are used in applications
where the majority of the system pressure drop occurs at the valve
and equal percentage characteristics are used where the pressure
drop across the valve could vary significantly.
2.2 Turbulence Model. Turbulence modeling is used to
predict the Reynolds stresses in the governing equations. Re774 Vol. 124, SEPTEMBER 2002

Procedure

3.1 Numerical Study. In the numerical study, valves A, B,

and C were modeled axisymmetrically. Each valve was modeled
with the plug positioned at different percent openings. These percent openings were in increments of ten percent and ranged from
10 to 100 percent open. The converged pressure and flow fields
were used with Eq. 1 to calculate the valve C v .
Geometry. A cross section of a single seat globe valve is
shown in Fig. 2. From this figure three regions can be identified.
The first region is a three-dimensional inlet region. The second
one is a two dimensional axisymmetric plug and seat region. And
the third one is a three-dimensional exit region. In this study the
three dimensional valve was modeled as an axisymmetric valve.
Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

The plug and seat region was essentially axiymmetric and was
well represented. The three-dimensional entrance and exit region
was approximated using axisymmetric geometries. Upstream of
the seat, the inlet pipe length divided by the valve radius (L/R)
was 10, and downstream of the seat, the outlet pipe length divided
by the valve radius was 6. In addition, symmetry was exploited at
the centerline by only modeling half of the valve. The simplified
axisymmetric model for valve A is shown in Fig. 3.
Grid. The grid used in the numerical study was a structured
grid with body fitted coordinates BFC. After an initial investigation for grid independence, a grid size of 40 by 25 was used. The
nodes of the grid were clustered in the plug and seat regions since
this was the area of largest flow gradients. In addition, an effort
was made to reduce grid distortion. The effect of grid distortion is
documented in previous research 19. Figure 4a shows an extensive view of the grid and Fig. 4b shows an expanded view of
the grid.
Boundary Conditions. Symmetry boundary conditions were
used at the centerline. All solid boundaries were represented using
no slip velocity conditions and log wall turbulence conditions.
Inlet conditions were represented by uniform velocity sufficient to
provide the required large Rev flow. Turbulence intensity was set
to 10 percent at the inlet. Test cases were run with 20 percent inlet
conditions but no significant change in the predictions was observed. Outlet boundary conditions were set as uniform pressure.
The pipe radius was used as the inlet length scale.

Fig. 6 Plug retracting from seat for valves A, B, and C

Numerical Accuracy. All conservation equations are discretized in FLUENT using a finite volume formulation with second order spatial accuracy. In areas having large flow velocities
and cell sizes, a proportional upwinding scheme is used having
first order spatial accuracy whenever full upwinding is required.

Fig. 7 Pressure contours for valves A, B, and C partial opening: 30 percent, 50 percent, 70 percent

Journal of Fluids Engineering

SEPTEMBER 2002, Vol. 124 775

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

The effect of the reduced accuracy with upwinding would be evident during the grid resolution studies. Since there was no effect
of grid refinement seen, the upwinding did not appear to affect the
solutions. Continuity is satisfied using a SIMPLE semi implicit
pressure linked equations algorithm. Normalized residuals were
used for the convergence criteria, which was set at three orders of
magnitude.
3.2 Experimental Study. The experimental study was undertaken to obtain an experimentally determined C v for comparison to the numerically determined C v . Details are found in Part 2
of the paper describing this research 20. In Part 1 of the paper,
some of the experimental results will be used to compare with the
numerical predictions.

Results

The results of the numerical and experimental study are shown

in Fig. 59. Figures 58 show the modeled streamlines and pressure contours, and Fig. 9 shows the inherent valve characteristics.
4.1 Streamlines. Figure 5 displays the numerically modeled
streamlines for valves A, B, and C. Each valve is shown at openings of 30, 50, and 70 percent. In each case the flow initially
accelerates through the plug and seat region, and then issues
downstream in the form of a wall jet while remaining attached to
the plug. In addition, a large recirculation region develops on the
downstream side of the seat. As the valve percent open increases,
the plug begins to retract beyond the plane of the seat as shown in
Fig. 6 where valve A is shown at 80 and 100 percent open, valve
B is shown at 90 and 100 percent open, and valve C is shown at
80 and 100 percent open. When this occurs the flow separates
from the plug forming a second recirculation region between the
jet and the plug. Then the flow either reattaches to the plug at
some point downstream Figs. 6a and 6b or it issues as a free
jet until impinging on the surface of the valve body, Figs. 6e
and 6f.
4.2 Pressure Contours. Figure 7 displays the numerically
modeled pressure contours for valves A, B, and C. Each valve is
shown at openings of 30, 50, and 70 percent. In each case the
pressure decreases in the downstream direction with the largest
pressure gradients occurring in the plug and seat region. Most of
the contours are radial relative to the centerline which implies
that the pressure field is primarily one dimensional with the axial
plug and stem direction. No significant pressure changes are
observed upstream of the seat and only minor changes are observed downstream of the seat. Minor pressure changes downstream of the seat imply little to no pressure recovery. This is both
expected and desirable in a control valve.
Figure 8 shows the modeled pressure contours with the plug
positioned at higher percent openings. As the plug starts to retract
beyond the plane of the seat, the contours become twodimensional and the gradients are less confined to the gap between
the plug and seat. In addition, this phenomenon becomes more
pronounced as the valve size rated C v increases.
4.3 Inherent Valve Characteristics. Figure 9 displays the
inherent valve characteristics for valves A, B, and C. In this figure
the manufacturers published values are plotted along with the
numerical and experimental results. Over bars are used to represent the uncertainty in the experimental results. Details of this
figure as well as the experimental uncertainty are discussed in
more detail below.
Valve A. The experimental results in Fig. 9a show that valve
A has a predominantly linear characteristic from 10 to 70 percent
opening, and the numerical results show this trend from 10 to 80
percent opening. Both show a change in the characteristic type at
higher percent openings. From 10 to 50 percent opening the numerical model over predicts the C v . At higher percent openings
70 to 100 percent open the numerical model under predicts the
776 Vol. 124, SEPTEMBER 2002

Fig. 8 Plug retracting from seat for valves A, B, and C pressure contours

C v . The experimental uncertainty for valve A changed with valve

percent opening. When calculated as a percent of the measured
C v , the experimental uncertainty ranged from a minimum value
of 2.14 percent error to a maximum value of 3.59 percent error.
The minimum experimental error occurred at a valve opening of
10 percent, and the maximum experimental error occurred at a
valve percent opening of 90 percent.
Valve B. The experimental results in Fig. 9b show that valve
B has an equal percentage characteristic. At the lower percent
openings there is good agreement between the numerical and
the experimental results. However, at approximately 90 percent
opening the difference in the numerical values and the experimental values start to increase significantly. The experimental uncertainty for valve B changed with valve percent opening. When
calculated as a percent of the measured C v , the experimental
uncertainty ranged from a minimum value of 1.09 percent error to
a maximum value of 8.47 percent error. The minimum experimental error occurred at a valve opening of 10 percent, and the maximum experimental error occurred at a valve percent opening of
100 percent.
Valve C. The experimental results in Fig. 9c show that valve
C has an equal percentage characteristic. At the lower percent
openings 10 to 60 percent the numerical and experimental results have good agreement with the numerical model predicting a
slightly higher value for the C v . From 70 to 100 percent open the
difference between the numerical and experimental values start to
increase significantly. The experimental uncertainty for valve C
changed with valve percent opening. When calculated as a percent
of the measured C v , the experimental uncertainty ranged from a
minimum value of 2.09 percent error to a maximum value of
Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Conclusions

Three commercial globe style control valves were modeled

axisymmetrically using CFD. The valves modeled included both
linear and equal percentage trims and included C d ranges of 2.5
to 13.
From the results three conclusions were drawn. The first was
that the simplified axisymmetric numerical model qualitatively
predicted the inherent valve characteristic for globe style control
valves. The second conclusion was that the axisymmetric numerical model quantitatively predicted the valve C v over a large range
of percent openings. The final conclusion was that after the plug
retracted beyond the plane of the seat, the accuracy in predicting
the C v decreased significantly, but that this occurred only at the
highest values of percent openings.

Nomenclature
Cd
Cv
D
Fd
FL
Gf
P
q
Rev
v

relative valve capacity factor m3/hr/kPa0.5/mm2

valve flow coefficient m3/hr/kPa0.5
internal diameter of pipe mm
valve style modifier dimensionless
pressure recovery factor dimensionless
liquid specific gravity dimensionless
Pressure drop kPa
volumetric flow rate m3/hr
valve Reynolds number dimensionless
kinematic viscosity centistokes

References

Fig. 9 Inherent valve characteristics for valves A, B, and C

11.96 percent error. The minimum experimental error occurred at

a valve opening of 10 percent, and the maximum experimental
error occurred at a valve percent opening of 100 percent.
General Trends. From these results two general observations
are made regarding the inherent characteristic and the valve C v .
The first is that the numerically predicted inherent valve characteristic in all the valves qualitatively matches the experimentally
determined inherent valve characteristic. The second observation
is that the quantitative values of the experimentally determined C v
are in close agreement with the modeled values at the lower percent openings. However, at the higher percent openings, the discrepancy between the numerical and experimental values starts to
increase. The discrepancy at higher percent openings is possibly
explained by considering the plug position relative to the seat,
which was previously shown, in Figs. 6 and 8. As the plug starts
to retract beyond the plane of the seat, the flow field could possibly change from an axisymmetric flow field to a threedimensional one. If this transition occurs, then the axisymmetric
numerical model would naturally be in error at these percent
openings.
Journal of Fluids Engineering

1 Crane Co., 1988, Flow of Fluids, Technical paper 410, 24th Printing.
2 Kimura, Takeyoshi et al., 1986, Hydrodynamic Characteristics of a Butterfly
Valve, Instrument Society of America Transactions, 241, pp. 53 61.
3 Huang, C., and Kim, R. H., 1996, Three-Dimensional Analysis of Partially
Open Butterfly Valve Flows, ASME J. Fluids Eng., 118, pp. 562568.
4 Johnston, D. N., and Edge, K. A., 1991, Experimental Investigation of Flow
and Force Characteristics of Hydraulic Poppet and Disc Valves, Proc. Inst.
Mech. Eng., 205, pp. 161171.
5 Schrenk, E., 1957, Disc Valves, Flow Patterns, Resistance, and Loading,
BHRA Publications, T547.
6 Stone, J. A., 1960, Discharge Coefficients and Steady State Flow Forces for
Hydraulic Poppet Valves, Trans. ASME, 144.
7 McCloy, D., and McGuigan, R. H., 1964, Some Static and Dynamic Characteristics of Poppet Valves, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 179.
8 Oki, I., and Kawakami, K., 1961, Characteristics of flat seated valves with
broader seat face experimental research on disc valves, 8th report, Bull.
JSME, 4, p. 279.
9 Von Mises, R., 1917, The Calculation of Flow Coefficient for Nozzle and
Orifice, VDA, 61, pp. 21,22,23.
10 McCloy, D., and Martin, H. R., 1980, Control of Fluid Power-Analysis and
Design, Wiley, New York.
11 Duggins, R. K., 1973, Further Studies of Flow in a Flapper Valve, Third
International Symposium on Fluid Power, Turin, pp. B225.
12 Vaughan, N. D., Johnston, D. N., and Edge, K. A., 1992, Numerical Simulation of Fluid Flow in Poppet Valves, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 206, pp. 119
127.
13 Lee, J. J., and Wellford, L. C., 1997, Transient Fluid-Structure Interaction in
a Control Valve, ASME J. Fluids Eng., 119, pp. 354 359.
14 Control Valve Sizing Equations, ISA-S75.01-1997, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina: Instrument Society of America.
15 Stiles, G. F., 1964, Liquid Viscosity Effects on Control Valve Sizing, Proc.
Ann. Symp. on Instrumentation for the Process Industries, pp. 52 61.
16 Driskell, Les, 1983, Control Valve Selection and Sizing, Instrument Society of
America, Research Triangle Park, N.C., pp. 177180.
17 FLUENT, 1995, Users Guide, Fluent Incorporated, Centerra Resource
Park, 10 Cavendish Court, Lebanon, NH 03766.
18 Davis, J. A., and Stewart, M., 1998, Geometry Effects when using CFD
Analysis as a Design Tool to Predict Control Valve Performance, Nineteenth
Southeastern Conference on Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Deerfield
Beach, FL, pp. 38 45.
19 Davis, J. A., and Stewart, M., 1998, Effects of Grid Distortion on Predictions
of Control Valves and Detection Methods, Proceedings of the Fifth NRC/
ASME Symposium on Valve and Pump Testing, Vol. 2, pp. 1C 43.
20 Davis, J. A., and Stewart, M., 2002, Predicting Globe Control Valve
Performance-Part II: Experimental Validation, ASME J. Fluids Eng., 124, pp.
778 783.

SEPTEMBER 2002, Vol. 124 777

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 05/20/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms