See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/267501224

Investigation on Flow Characteristics and Stability of Control Valves for Steam

Turbines

Conference Paper · January 2008

DOI: 10.1115/GT2008-51016

CITATIONS READS

6 136

6 authors, including:

Liu Guanwei Zhenping Feng

Xi'an Jiaotong University Xi'an Jiaotong University
11 PUBLICATIONS   51 CITATIONS    318 PUBLICATIONS   1,403 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

film cooling View project

Vibration, aerodynamic noise and flow characteristics of steam turbine valve View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Liu Guanwei on 10 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2008:
Power for Land, Sea and Air
June 9-13, 2008, Berlin, Germany

GT2008-51016

INVESTIGATION ON FLOW CHARACTERISTICS AND STABILITY OF CONTROL VALVES

FOR STEAM TURBINES

Guanwei LIU, Shunsen WANG, Hui GUO, Jingru MAO, Zhenping FENG and Xiaowei XIANG
Institute of Turbomachinery, Xi’an Jiaotong University
Xi’an, Shaanxi 710049, P.R. China
Tel: +86-29-82667808, Fax: +86-29-82668704, E-mail: lgw1999@sohu.com

ABSTRACT Cp specific heat, J/K

Through-flow capability and flow stability of some steam
turbine control valves were studied by experimental Dm seat diameter, m
investigation and numerical simulation. Based on the analysis G actual mass flow, kg/s
of thermodynamic process in control valve, the relationship of
Gc theoretical mass flow, kg/s
flow coefficient, area ratio of valve outlet section to seat
diameter section, pressure ratio and total pressure loss 0
h1 inlet stagnation enthalpy, J
coefficient was deduced, and the expression of polytropic
exponent was obtained. The relative deviations between h2 outlet enthalpy, J
formula results and experimental results are within 3%. Both hf lift of valve disc, m
expressions can be used for design and optimization to
n polytropic exponent
determine control valve parameters quantitatively. The results
of 3D numerical simulation indicate that the topological P10 inlet total pressure, Pa
structure of flow fields in all control valves is similar. The P2 outlet static pressure, Pa
results of valve stability show that the airflow force acted on
the valve disc depends on the vortex strength of flow around P20 outlet total pressure, Pa
valve stem bush and valve disc, the asymmetric transonic T 0
inlet total temperature, K
1
impinging jet under the valve disc and the diffusing action. The
0
valve operates steadily when the inlet and outlet Mach number v1 specific volume at the state of P10 and T10 , m3/kg
are less than 0.15. As the unload degree is about 85%, stem 0 0
vibrates at the operating conditions that pressure ratio is less
v1 ' specific volume at the state of P2 and T1 , m3/kg
than 0.8 and opening ratio is from 10% to 18%. A multihole v 2 outlet specific volume, m3/kg
annular orifice can make flow steady at all operating X p − p Peak-to-Peak value of signal
conditions.
Keywords: control valve, through-flow capability; stability; X rms root-mean-square value of signal
experimental investigation; numerical simulation
ε ratio of outlet static pressure to inlet total pressure
NOMENCLATURE ε' ratio of outlet static pressure to outlet total pressure

A2 outlet area, m2 ε cr critical pressure ratio

Am area of seat diameter section, m2

κ adiabatic exponent
η total pressure loss coefficient
B characteristic coefficient as the pressure ratio is ε
B' characteristic coefficient as the pressure ratio is ε' ξc flow coefficient
C2 outlet flow velocity, m/s

1 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

INTRODUCTION
In order to improve the efficiency of steam turbine, the
initial steam parameters and unit capacity are higher and
higher. However, these factors make the working environment
of steam turbine control valve worse and worse. Therefore,
much attention has been paid to the reliability, economic
performance and noise of control valve [1-4].
The flow in control valve has a complex 3D structure so
the total pressure loss is difficult to be calculated by theoretical
formula. At present, conducting experiment is still a main
method to obtain the performance of control valve. To explain
the mechanism of flow instability, much work has to be done
both in experimental and numerical aspects. Fortunately, with
the development of CFD techniques, numerical simulation
becomes an effective way to get flow details and understand
the complex 3D flow structure in the control valve, and it can
be complementary to the experimental investigation.
There are three common flow processes for various
valves: flow around valve stem bush and valve disc,
asymmetric high velocity impinging jet flow, and diffusion
flow. It is impossible to eliminate all the unsteady flow by only
optimizing the configuration of valve. In fact, there are two key
points for design and optimization of the control valve. One is
to keep the high flow efficiency under the normal operating
condition of steam turbine. The other is trying to keep the valve
Fig.1 Schematic diagram of control valve test system
TEST SYSTEM
Figure 1 shows the test system of the control valve
designed according to the similarity theory. The modeling scale
is 3.6. The compressed air is created by three compressors and
the flux was measured by an orifice. Then it enters a silencer to
far away from the unsteady operating. Certainly, the
performance of lifting force must be considered.
The systematical measurement results indicate that control
valve operates steadily when the Mach numbers at valve inlet
and outlet sections are less than 0.15. Stem vibration is aroused
at the operating conditions when the pressure ratio is from 0.8
to 0.4. Not only the valve geometry, but also its inlet and outlet
section areas can affect obviously the through-flow capability
and flow stability. When a multihole annular orifice is put in
the valve chest, the stability of valve is improved because the
flow pattern is optimized.
Based on the theory of structural dynamics, the analysis of
experiment results shows that the stem axial vibration is
induced by the alternative back flow which is caused by
transonic impinging jet flow and the fluctuation of asymmetry
transonic or supersonic flow in annular passage, and the lateral
force changed with back flow can break the stem. When unload
degree (the ratio of unload room diameter to the seat diameter)
is high (for example 100%), the stem vibration is usually
happened as the opening ratio is less than 8%. There are two
reasons: one is the supersonic jet flow in small annular passage,
the other is the small damping of valve stem system. In this
condition, reducing the unload degree or increasing the
damping can make control valve operate more steadily.
算机
eliminate upstream flow fluctuation, goes through the test valve
and discharges through a downstream pipe. The flux and inlet
pressure are controlled by a bypass valve to obtain the desired
pressure ratio across the test valve. The geometry and measuring
points of two control valves (called valve 1 and valve 2) are
2 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
shown in Fig.2 and Fig.3. The pressure and temperature of the The experimental conditions are: pressure ratio (the ratio of
valve inlet and outlet are measured at section 1 and 2. As the 0
outlet static pressure P2 to the inlet total pressure P1 ) is from
flux through the test valve has been measured before, the
velocity and total pressure at the inlet and outlet section can be 0.2 to 0.98 and opening ratio (the lift of valve disc h f over the
calculated. Then the pressure ratio and total pressure loss are seat diameter Dm ) is from 0 to 27.7%. The unload degree (the
obtained exactly. Four pressure holes (3, 4, 5 and 6) are set on
the valve seat to measure the pressure fluctuation and a ratio of unload room diameter to the seat diameter) of valve 1 is
displacement transducer (7) is used to measure the stem 81.8%.
vibration. The sampling rate of dynamic parameters is 5000
samples/s. In addition, the unloading property, static pressure of FORMULA DERIVATION AND VALIDATION
valve chest and lifting force are measured to find the The analysis of experimental results indicates that the
relationship between the downward load and upward fluctuating thermodynamic process in control valve can be regarded as a
force, so that the dynamic instability of stem system can be all polytropic expansion process, which is composed of throttling
considered. That is to say, both the unloading property and the process and isentropic expansion process. First, in the throttle
excitation of unsteady flow have an effect on the valve stability. process, the state parameter changes from P10 and T10 (inlet
The load acting on valve moving part determines the stem 0 0
vibration. total temperature) to P2 (outlet total pressure) and T1 . This
process includes the whole loss of valve and has no contribution
to the variation of flow velocity. Then, in the isentropic
expansion process, the pressure and temperature are P20 and
T10 at the beginning and P2 in the end. The pressure drop in
this process is all used to accelerate fluid. Based on the above
analysis, the relationship of flow coefficient, area ratio of valve
outlet to seat diameter section, pressure ratio and total pressure
loss coefficient was deduced and the expression of polytropic
exponent was obtained.
The flow coefficient ξ c is defined as:
G
ξc = (1)
Gc
where Gc is the theoretical mass flow and G is the actual mass
flow of control valve at a same pressure ratio. The theoretical
Fig.2 Geometry and measuring points of valve 1 mass flow G c is given by:
κ +1
P10 2 κ −1
Gc = Am B κ ( ) (2)
v10 κ + 1
π
where Am = Dm2 is the area of seat diameter section, κ is
4
the adiabatic exponent, v10 is the specific volume at the state of
P10 and T10 , B is a characteristic coefficient:
ε − ε cr 2
B = 1− ( ) (3)
1 − ε cr
P2
where ε= and ε cr is the critical pressure ratio.
P10
When ε < ε cr , B = 1 .
Based on the isentropic expansion process, the actual mass
Fig.3 Geometry and measuring points of valve 2 flow G can be obtained by:

3 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

 κ +1 the relationship. Figure 4 shows the formula results and
P20 2 κ −1
G = A2 B' κ ( ) (4) experimental results of valve 1 with a flow blocking plate under
v1 ' κ + 1 the valve disc at different pressure ratios (0.98, 0.75 and 0.5)
and opening ratios (from 0 to 21.7%). As shown in Fig.4, the
where v1 ' is the specific volume at the state of P20 and T10 , formula results are close to the experimental results and the
P2 relative deviations are within 3%.
B' is the characteristic coefficient when ε ' = . It can be The derived equation shows the influence of pressure ratio,
P20 area ratio of valve outlet to seat diameter section and total
calculated by Eq.(3) by replacing the ε with ε ' . pressure loss coefficient on flow coefficient quantitatively. For
With reference to Eq.(2) and Eq.(4), Eq.(1) can be reduced example, the flow coefficient is in direct proportion to the area
to: ratio of valve outlet to seat diameter section. Valve geometry
and total pressure loss coefficient are related with flow
A2 B'
ξc = (1 − η ) (5) coefficient in the formula, so that it can be used for valve design
Am B and optimization to determine valve parameters.
P10 − P20
where η = is the total pressure loss coefficient.
P10
Furthermore, it can be deduced by the definitions of ε ' and η
ε
as ε '= . Then Eq.(5) can be written as:
1 −η
when ε > ε cr :

A2 (1 − η − ε )[(1 − η )(1 − 2ε cr ) + ε ]
ξc = (6)
Am (1 − ε )(1 − 2ε cr + ε )
when ε < ε cr :
A2 ε − ε cr + ηε cr 2
ξc = (1 − η ) 2 − ( ) (7)
Am 1 − ε cr Fig.4 Flow coefficient variation with opening ratio
The expression of polytropic exponent n can be obtained
by the same way:
κ ln ε
n= (8)
ln ε + (κ − 1) ln(1 − η )
When ε and η are given, the polytropic exponent n can be
calculated by Eq.(8), and the function P (v ) = P2 (v2 ) can
0 0 n n
1 1
be used to get fluid state parameter at the valve outlet. Then the
valve outlet flow velocity can be calculated by the equation:
C 2 = 2(h10 − h2 ) , the actual mass flow can be derived. If
the specific heat of fluid is constant in the process, the formula
C 2 = 2C p (T10 − T2 ) can also be used, but the equation

2n 0 0 P
n −1 Fig.5 Flow coefficient variation with total pressure loss
C2 = P1 v1 [1 − ( 20 ) n
] is unacceptable. The coefficient
n −1 P1
relationship between other flow coefficient and pressure loss For a control valve, such as valve 1 with the flow blocking
coefficient which have different definition can also be derived. plate, the variation of flow coefficient with total pressure loss
coefficient at a same pressure ratio can be calculated by Eq.(6)
The ε and η acquired at all test conditions are used to
or Eq.(7). The results are shown in Fig.5. When the opening
evaluated the flow coefficients by Eq.(6) or Eq.(7). The results ratio is less than 16.6%, the total pressure loss coefficient
are compared with the experimental flow coefficients to justify decreases as the opening ratio increases, and it leads to the

4 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

increase in flow coefficient. Otherwise, when the opening ratio boundary conditions. The flow around the control valve has a
is more than 16.6%, the total pressure loss coefficient and flow complex 3D structure, so the valve is divided into five parts
coefficient are invariable while the opening ratio keeps during grid generation. The part, such as annular passage, where
increasing. For the operating condition at which the pressure the flow has a large velocity gradient, is meshed by refined
ratio is more than 0.9, the total pressure loss coefficient has a structured grids, others are meshed by unstructured grids. The
little change as the opening ratio increases, and the flow total mesh number is approximately 1,000,000 points. To ensure
coefficient changes with the opening ratio. the mesh independence, the mesh number of some working
conditions is increased to 2.65 times and the CFD results show
TOPOLOGICAL STRUCTURE OF FLOW FIELD that the flow coefficients only change 0.03%. The relative errors
SIMILARITY AND FLOW INSTABILITY of the flow coefficient between CFD results and experimental
results are within 5%.
Topological Structure of Flow Field Similarity Since flow in control valve is complex three dimensional,
For a side-entry steam turbine control valve, the valve the three processes of valve internal flow can’t be made visible
internal flow can be divided into three processes. in one figure. To show the similarity of topological structure of
The first process is the flow around valve stem bush and flow field distinctly, the CFD results of the three processes are
the valve disc. Though there is not enough room in valve chest displayed respectively.
to form vortex, the boundary layer separation still exists. The
shear strength is in direct proportion to velocity gradient that it
forms alternate back flow behind the valve stem bush and the
valve disc.
The second process is the high speed impinging jet which
is like the flow of high speed jet impacting a wall. There are two
ways for the incoming flow to go into the annular passage with
a converging-diverging configuration. One is fluid enters the
annular passage directly, which happens at the side faced the
valve inlet. The other is fluid goes into the annular passage as
flowing around the valve stem bush and valve disc, which leads
to the asymmetric and rotational flow in the annular passage and
makes flow unsteady. Then the asymmetric distribution fluid
jets from the annular passage forms impinging jet under the
valve disc and results in upward back flow which strikes the Fig.6 Computational mesh of valve 1 ( h f / Dm = 16.6% )
valve disc.
The last process is the flow from the valve seat expanding
section to valve outlet. It is usually a diffusion flow. The
diffusion action is decided by the valve geometry and has much
influence on flow stability.
The 3D numerical simulation of some control valves
confirms that the three processes mentioned above exist in all
control valves, so the topological structure of the flow field is
similar. The numerical simulation results of two control valves
will be shown next.

Numerical Simulation Method and Results

CFD calculations of flow in the valve 1 and a high pressure
control valve (called valve 2) of a 600MW super-critical steam
turbine are conducted with the SIMPLE method. The 3D
compressible NS equations discretized by the second-order
difference scheme are solved. The CFD results of using
different turbulent models show that the flow coefficient
computed by using k-ε model is closest approach to the
experimental result, therefore the standard k-ε model and wall
function method are used in turbulent flow calculations. Figure
6 shows the computational mesh of valve 1 at X-Y symmetry
section. The valve shape is the same as the experiment and the
test parameters at valve inlet and outlet sections are used as
Fig.7 Streamline diagram of valve 1 at inlet center X-Z section
h f / Dm = 16.6% , ε = 0.7
The streamline diagrams of valve chest at the X-Z section
of valve 1 and valve 2 inlet centers are shown in Fig.7 and
Fig.8. It can be seen that in the valve chest, some of the
incoming flow goes into the annular passage directly at the side
opposite to the valve inlet, others enters the annular passage as
flowing around the valve stem bush and valve disc. The
circumferential motion in valve chest induces the asymmetric
flow in annular passage. With the increase of fluid flux, the

5 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

valve inlet velocity goes up. The flow separation becomes
stronger and makes flow unstable. This phenomenon is like the
flow around a cylinder which produces asymmetric vortex and
leads to unsteady flow. Though there is not enough room in the
valve chest to form completely circumferential motion, the
boundary layer separation still can form alternate back flow
behind the valve stem bush and the valve disc.
Fig.8 Streamline diagram of valve 2 at inlet center X-Z section
h f / Dm = 24% , ε = 0.75
Fig.9 Velocity vector diagram of valve 1 at X-Y section (Z=0)
h f / Dm = 16.6% , ε = 0.7
Fig.10 Velocity vector diagram of valve 1 at X-Y section (Z=0)
h f / Dm = 24% , ε = 0.75
The velocity vector diagrams of annular passage and the
region under the valve disc at the X-Y symmetry section of
valve 1 and valve 2 are shown in Fig.9 and Fig.10. After
acceleration, the asymmetric distribution fluid jets from the
annular passage and collides with each other under the valve
disc. As a result, the flow will attach the valve seat in one side
and will form vortex and upward back flow under the valve disc
in the other side. This flow process is similar to high speed
impinging jet, and the upward back flow can be regarded as
wall jet. During the impinging jet, the flow noise and pressure
pulsation produced by the feedback resonance between nozzle
and impact wall are much higher than that produced by the free
jet, impact jet and wall jet. It is considered that when a free
shear flow impacts solid boundary, it creates a perturbation
wave. As the perturbation wave feeds back to free shear layer, it
grows and becomes unsteady. Then a feedback loop is formed
and leads to flow noise and pressure pulsation [5-9]. On the other
hand, the alternate back flow formed by the circumferential
motion in valve chest will change the position, velocity and
direction of the upward back flow. Then the vertical force and
the side thrust that act on the disc will vary alternately. When
the vertical force is bigger than the system damping, the stem
becomes unstable and begins to vibrate. The interaction between
the disc and flow makes the problem become more complex.
At a small opening ratio, the inlet velocity is small. The
circumferential motion becomes weak and the impinging jet
happens at the Y-Z central cross-section. When the opening ratio
is greater than 8%, the impinge jet switches to the X-Y
symmetry section, the vortex strength of circumferential motion
increases with the incoming flow velocity and the flow becomes
more unstable.
Fig.11 Velocity vector diagram of valve 1 at X-Y section (Z=0)
h f / Dm = 16.6% , ε = 0.7
After the high speed impinging jet, the fluid flows from
valve seat expanding section to valve outlet. Figures 11 and 12
show the velocity vector diagrams from the valve seat
expanding section to the valve outlet at the X-Y symmetry
section of valve 1 and valve 2. As mentioned before, the flow in
this section is usually a diffusion flow, and the valve geometry
has great influence on it. For a well designed valve, the
6 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
diffusion flow should make valve outlet velocity less than
90m/s, whatever conditions the valve operates under. The
experience of thermal power plants operation indicates that
control valve will vibrate if it doesn’t be well designed and thus
make the outlet velocity being too high. The operating
conditions of Fig.11 and Fig.12 are unsteady conditions. It can
be seen that the outlet velocity is about 140m/s. Therefore, the
valve geometry from the valve seat expanding section to valve
outlet has great influence on the flow stability.
Fig.12 Velocity vector diagram of valve 1 at X-Y section (Z=0)
h f / Dm = 24% , ε = 0.75
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OF FLOW INSTABILITY
Stability Test and Signal Processing
The experiment of some control valves has been conducted
at different operating conditions to investigate the flow stability,
and this paper only shows the results of valve 1. The flow at the
annular passage outlet section can express the character of the
unsteady flow, so the pressure fluctuation at this position (3, 4, 5
and 6, as shown in Fig.2) was measured on the valve seat by
dynamic pressure transducer (XTE-190 by Kulite Co.). And a
displacement transducer was used to measure the stem vibration
at measuring point 7. The sampling rate of all dynamic
parameters is 5000 samples/s. Since point 5 is near the side
where the alternate back flow forms, the amplitude of pressure
fluctuation at this point is biggest and its value is used to
analyze the flow instability.
At unstable operating condition, the experimental results
show that the vibration and pressure fluctuation signals are
random. The signal processing and analysis theory indicates that
a random signal can only be analyzed by power spectrum
estimation, and FFT analysis can’t be used directly. The Bartlett
method is used to process all signals obtained. To reduce the
variance, the signals are resampled and the Hanning window is
used. Frequency resolution, sample length and sample group are
chosen by the comparison of signal processing results. In this
paper, the sample length of signal processing is 256 and 512,
and the number of sample group is 10. The Peak-to-Peak value
X p − p of a random signal is calculated by:
X p − p = 2 2 X rms (9)
where X rms is the root-mean-square value of signal whose
mean value has been subtracted.
Influence of the Intake Condition on Flow Instability
The experimental results of valve 1 original geometry are
set as comparative basis. The results show that the flow
becomes unsteady and the stem begins to vibrate when the
opening ration is more than 11.5% and the pressure ratio is less
than 0.8. For example, when the opening ratio is 16.6% and the
pressure ratio is 0.7, the time history and RMS spectrum of
pressure pulsation at point 5 are shown in Fig.13 and Fig.14.
The Peak-to-Peak value of pressure pulsation is 8.6kPa. Two
high peaks at 4.3Hz and 1.17Hz can be seen in Fig.14, and
some small peaks exist with the frequency below 20Hz. The
reason is that the inlet and outlet areas of valve 1 original
geometry are too small. When the flow flux is rather large, the
inlet velocity becomes too high. It results in strong alternate
back flow behind the valve stem bush and the valve disc which
leads to the asymmetric and rotational flow in annular passage
and makes flow unsteady. Furthermore, the outlet area is the
same as the inlet and the pantograph ratio (the area ratio of
valve outlet to seat throat) is 0.977. That means the flow from
the valve seat expanding section to valve outlet is not a
diffusion flow and the fluid is more difficult to flow out.
Therefore, the pressure under the valve disc increases, the
strength of impinging jet is reduced slowly and the pressure
pulsation becomes high. To sum up, for the valve 1 original
geometry, the circumferential motion and the asymmetric
transonic impinging jet are strong, so it has a wide range of
unsteady operating conditions.
According to the above analysis, the inlet diameter of valve
1 is increased by 30% to improve flow stability. The
experimental results indicate that the enlarged valve inlet not
only increases the through-flow, but also decreases the range of
unsteady operating conditions, as it reduces the inlet speed and
makes flow more symmetric. The flow coefficient increases
about 10% at the full open state and the valve doesn’t vibrate as
the opening ratio is from 11.5% to 16.6%. Figures 15 and 16
show the time history and RMS spectrum of pressure pulsation
at point 5 after the inlet diameter is increased. At the operating
condition, the opening ratio is 16.6% and the pressure ratio is
0.7. The Peak-to-Peak value of pressure pulsation is 5.33kPa.
Compared with the original valve 1, the pressure pulsation
decreases 38% and the flow coefficient increase 6.5%. When
the opening ratio is from 16.6% to 19.1%, the flow stability is
also increased. Only when the opening ratio is 21.7%, the flow
rate increases so much that the stem vibrates as the pressure
ratio is less than 0.9. However, this operating condition doesn’t
exist in the real operation.
7 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

Fig.13 Time history of pressure fluctuation (point 5)
original valve 1, h f / Dm = 16.6% , ε = 0.7
Fig.14 RMS Spectrum of pressure history (point 5)
original valve 1, h f / Dm = 16.6% , ε = 0.7
Fig.15 Time history of pressure fluctuation (point 5)
valve 1 with enlarged inlet, h f / Dm = 16.6% , ε = 0.7
Fig.16 RMS Spectrum of pressure history (point 5)
valve 1 with enlarged inlet, h f / Dm = 16.6% , ε = 0.7
Influence of Diffusion Action on Flow Instability
To study the influence of diffusion action on flow
instability, the outlet diameter is increased by 27% to improve
the diffusion action after the amplification of inlet diameter. The
increase of diffusion action reduces the asymmetry of high
speed impinging jet and enlarges the range of steady flow
farther. The stem doesn’t vibrate as the opening ratio is less than
20%. Figure 17(a) and 17(b) show the RMS spectrums of stem
vibration at unstable operating condition with the opening ratio
of 21.7% and the pressure ratio of 0.8. As shown in Fig.17, both
highest peaks are about 1.5Hz and their values are near equals,
but the frequency range of large vibration RMS value in
Fig.17(a) is wider than that of Fig.17(b). That means the flow in
the inlet and outlet enlarged valve is more stable.
On the other hand, the increase of diffusion action
improves the through-flow capability further. Compared with
the inlet enlarged valve, the flow coefficient increases about
15% at the full open state and the pressure pulsation is near
equals when the pressure ratio is more than 0.9. When the
pressure ratio is less than 0.8, the pressure pulsation of the inlet
and outlet enlarged valve is about 25% higher than the inlet
enlarged valve. However, it is more stable than the inlet
enlarged valve because the flow field in it is more symmetry.
These results show that the stem vibration depends on not only
the value of pressure pulsation but also the flow field symmetry
in the valve. It is determined by the stem system damping and
the fluctuating force that the asymmetric flow acts on the disc.
(a) Valve 1 with enlarged inlet
(b) Valve 1 with enlarged inlet and outlet
Fig.17 RMS Spectrum of valve stem vibration
h f / Dm = 21.7% , ε = 0.8
8 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

Fig.18 Time history of pressure fluctuation (point 5)
valve 1 with multihole annular orifice,
h f / Dm = 16.6% , ε = 0.7
Fig.19 RMS Spectrum of pressure history (point 5)
valve 1 with multihole annular orifice,
h f / Dm = 16.6% , ε = 0.7
Since the unsteady operating conditions of the inlet and
outlet enlarged valve don’t exist in the real operation, a
conclusion can be drawn that the enlarged inlet and outlet
diameter can improve the through-flow capability and make the
flow steady. Compared with the original valve 1, the flow
coefficient increases 27% at the full open state and the flow is
stable at all real operating conditions.
Prevention of Instability Caused by Circumferential
Motion and Asymmetric Flow
As mentioned before, the inlet and outlet size have great
influence on valve working performance. If the valve inlet and
outlet are well designed, it can improve the through-flow
capability and stability. The experimental results show that
under the real operating condition, the stem doesn’t vibrate as
the inlet and outlet Mach number is less than 0.15. In practical
application, the valve inlet and outlet size are limited and can’t
fit the request at all time. At that time, the stability of control
valve should be assured on the other way.
To reduce the flow asymmetry and instability, a multihole
annular orifice is set into the chest of original valve 1. The
multihole annular orifice is a cylinder. There are no holes on its
side opposite to the valve inlet for about 90 degree and 114
holes with 9mm diameter are uniformly distributed on the rest
part. The experimental results show that the control valve is
stable in all operating conditions. The reason is that the
multihole annular orifice improves the flow pattern and
symmetry before the annular passage and prevents the alternate
back flow. Therefore, it depresses the excitation source of flow
unsteady and can make the flow steady. Figures 18 and 19 show
the time history and RMS spectrum of pressure pulsation at
point 5 for the valve with multihole annular orifice at the
operating condition with the opening ratio being 16.6% and the
pressure ratio 0.7. The Peak-to-Peak value of pressure pulsation
is 4.1kPa. Compared with the original valve 1, the pressure
pulsation decreases about 60% and its distribution on the four
points (3, 4, 5 and 6, as shown in Fig.2) is more symmetry, so
the flow becomes more stable. After the multihole annular
orifice is installed, the flow coefficient increases by 2% at the
full open state, and it reduces about 6% when the opening ratio
is less than 12%, because the pressure loss caused by the
multihole annular orifice has more important place in the total
pressure loss at these operating conditions.
Investigation on Stem Vibration Induced by Alternate
Upward Back Flow under Valve Disc
To prove the opinion that the upward back flow formed by
the high speed impinging jet under the valve disc results in stem
vibration, a component (called flow blocking plate) is set under
the disc of the original valve 1 to prevent the act of upward back
flow. The results indicate that the stem is steady at all operating
conditions, so the upward back flow is the efficient cause that
leads to stem vibration.
Relation between Flow Excitation and Stem Vibration
The experimental results show that the stem vibration is
forced vibration which is excited by the pressure pulsation.
However, high pressure pulsation under the valve disc doesn’t
mean the stem will certainly vibrate. The stem vibration is
related to the fluctuating force due to pressure pulsation and the
damping characteristic of the stem system. Figures 20 and 21
show the time history and RMS spectrum of pressure pulsation
at point 5 as the opening ratio is 7.6% and the pressure ratio is
0.4. The Peak-to-Peak value of pressure pulsation is 8.1kPa. The
comparison between Fig.20 and Fig.13 indicate that the pressure
pulsation at both operating conditions is close to each other, but
the stem doesn’t vibrate at the operating condition of Fig.20.
The unload degree of the valve 1 is 81.8%. At small opening
ratio and pressure ratio, the downward loading on the valve disc
is high and it increases the stem system damping. Then the stem
becomes more stable. For the control valve whose unload
degree is 100%, the stem system damping is so small that the
stem will vibrate when the opening ratio is less than 8% and the
pressure ratio is less than 0.8. Therefore, the reduction of unload
degree can increase the stem system damping and the valve
stability, if the lifting force is under permission.
Based on the theory of structural dynamics, the dynamic
force analysis of stem vibration indicates that the stem vibration
is determined by the interaction between the stem system
damping and the force that the transonic jet acts on the valve
9 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
disc. When the airflow force is larger than the stem system
damping, the stem begins to vibrate.
The lower unload degree can avoid the strong stem
vibration which is caused by the coactions of shock wave and
unsteady flow, so the unload degree should be at least 85% and
100% unload degree is not advised to be used, especially for the
big seat diameter valve.
Fig.20 Time history of pressure fluctuation (point 5)
original valve 1, h f / Dm = 7.6% , ε = 0.4
Fig.21 RMS Spectrum of pressure history (point 5)
original valve 1, h f / Dm = 7.6% , ε = 0.4
CONCLUSIONS
Through-flow capability and flow stability of some steam
turbine control valves are investigated by experimental and
numerical methods. The following are the conclusions drawn.
1. The relationship of flow coefficient, area ratio of valve
outlet to seat diameter section, pressure ratio and total
pressure loss coefficient is deduced and the expression of
polytropic exponent is obtained. The relative deviations
between the formula results and experimental results are
within 3%. In the formula, valve geometry and total
pressure loss coefficient are related with the flow
coefficient. Therefore, it can be used for valve design and
optimization to determine valve parameters.
2. The topological structure of flow field in all control valves
is similar. The flow stability depends on the vortex strength
of the circumferential motion in valve chest, the
asymmetric transonic impinging jet flow under the valve
disc and the diffusing action.
View publication stats
3. The enlarged inlet and outlet area can improve the through-
flow capability and flow stability of control valve. Under
the real operating condition, control valve operates steadily
when the inlet and outlet Mach number is less than 0.15.
4. Stem vibration is concerned with flow field symmetry in
control valve. It depends on the interaction between stem
system damping and fluctuating force that the asymmetric
flow acts on the disc, and the value of pressure pulsation
can not determine it alone. When fluctuating force is larger
than stem system damping, the stem begins to vibrate.
5. The results of control valves indicate that when the unload
degree is about 85%, stem is easy to vibrate at the operating
conditions that pressure ratio is less than 0.8 and opening
ratio is form 10% to 18%, but the valve stability is usually
good as the opening ratio is less than 10%. The stability of
the control valve with 100% unload degree is unreliable.
REFERENCES
[1] Mao, J. R., et al., 2002, “The Experimental Study of Flow
Characteristics within Control Valve for Steam Turbine,” J.
of Engineering Thermophysics, 23(6), pp. 687-690.
[2] Morita, R., et al., 2007, “CFD Simulations and
Experiments of Flow Fluctuations Around a Steam Control
Valve,” Journal of Fluids Engineering, Transactions of the
ASME, 129(1), pp. 48-54.
[3] Zhang, D. Engeda, A., 2003, “Venturi Valves for Steam
Turbines and Improved Design Considerations,” Proc.
IMechE, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy, 217(2), pp.
219-230.
[4] Zhang, D. et al., 2004, “Experimental Study of Steam
Turbine Control Valves,” Proc. IMechE, Part C: Journal of
Mechanical Engineering Science, 218(5), pp. 493-508.
[5] Jiang, P., et al., 2007, “Large Eddy Simulation of
Rectangular Jets on the Effects of Various Inlet
Disturbance Frequencies,” Chinese Journal of
Computational Mechanics, 24(1), pp. 7-13.
[6] Xiong, F., et al., 2004, “PIV Investigation of Impinging
Jet,” Experiments and Measurements in Fluid Mechanics,
18(3), pp. 68-72.
[7] Yao, Z. H., et al., 2003, “Study on Flow Characteristics and
Noise Mechanics of Impinging Jet with High Speed,”
Experiments and Measurements in Fluid Mechanics, 17(2),
pp. 84-87.
[8] He. F., Hao, P. F., Zhang. X. W., 2003, “Instability of
Screech Switch for Underexpanded Free Jet,” ACTA
ACUSTICA, 28(2), pp. 182-186.
[9] He, F., Yang, J. L., Shen, M. Y., 2002, “Supersonic Jet with
Interaction between Shock and Shear Layers,” ACTA
PHYSICA SINICA, 51(9), pp. 1918-1922.
10 Copyright © 2008 by ASME