VALVE MAGAZINE Fall 2023

on valve position feedback and an energy supply system. For simple hydraulic actuator systems or those utilizing non-com pressive fluids, synchronization of target position setpoints is typically achieved using limit switches or position transduc ers. Once the valve reaches the desired position, the system reduces the flow rate to slow down the actuator’s stroke time. Similar operational configurations can also be designed for pneumatic systems or those using compressive fluids. Calcu lations for the time required to alter the pipeline fluid are determined by transit analysis of the piping system. Another common technique for mitigating the poten tially damaging effects of water hammer centers around the deliberate reduction of the velocity of fluid travel within the pipeline. This velocity, in turn, is linked to the pipe’s nominal diameter. The crux of the matter lies in understanding this relationship: as the diameter of the pipe increases, it inher ently provides a more expansive cross-sectional area through which the fluid can flow. Consequently, to maintain a con sistent flow rate, the fluid has to move at a lower velocity within the larger-diameter pipe. Conversely, when a smaller diameter pipe is used, the fluid must surge through it at a higher velocity to maintain the same volumetric flow rate. The more swiftly the fluid is moving, the greater its kinetic energy, and the more pronounced the pressure surge result ing from abrupt changes. Considering this, pipe diameter emerges as a pivotal design consideration. While it might be tempting to opt for smaller pipes that meet the minimum flow velocity require ments on paper, this approach often leads to elevated flow velocities in practice. These elevated velocities escalate the vulnerability to water hammer during valve operations or other flow disruptions. A proactive strategy involves choosing pipes with larger diameters than the minimum specified by flow calculations. By opting for larger pipes, the flow velocity is naturally attenuated for the same flow rate. This reduction in velocity acts as a buffer, facilitating more gradual adjustments in flow and pressure and reducing the likelihood of pressure spikes and the associated potential to inflict harm on the system. In summary, the proper design of pipeline valve actua tion systems is essential to prevent or mitigate the effects of water hammer in piping systems. Valves, designed to alter flow direction, impact the momentum of the fluid within the pipe. Depending on the application, valves may need to effect these changes quickly, but rapid changes can lead to increased pressure. Introducing a variable-speed system for valve operation, coupled with fluid transit analysis and consideration of future flow increments when sizing a piping system, can provide a viable solution to the issues posed by water hammer in the operation of pipeline valves. VM M aria A guirre is a certified professional mechanical engineer with a master’s degree in mechanical engineering and a master’s degree in environmental engineering. She is the director of business and product development for Cowan Dynamics and is a member of Valve’s editorial advisory board.

tum demands a significant amount of energy. Consequently, in large pipes, this phenomenon can result in catastrophic damage, ranging from vibrations and noise to complete pipe collapse. Various methods exist to prevent or mitigate water ham mer, all hinging on the idea of averting abrupt changes in fluid movement or safely dissipating the wave’s energy with out harming the system. Valves play a pivotal role in this phenomenon, as they are engineered to alter fluid direction. Ensuring the proper operation of valves within the system is fundamental to designing an effective piping system. SO, HOW CAN VALVES BE OPERATED TO REDUCE OR PREVENT WATER HAMMER? One effective approach involves prolonging the time during which changes in fluid movement occur. In pipes, the valve’s closing time can be extended, allowing for energy dissipa tion due to pressure loss. As a valve closes, its flow capacity decreases, which is determined by the relationship between the pressure differential across the valve and the flow rate passing through it. The higher the percentage of closure, the lower the capacity and the higher the differential pressure for a given flow rate. The pressure spike generated by clos ing a valve correlates with the time it takes to close it. An instantaneous valve closure yields the maximum pressure spike. While it may seem that closing the valve extremely

slowly could entirely eliminate water hammer, this isn’t a practical solution in all cases or for certain applications. In many isolation or shut-off valve applications, it’s essential for the valve to operate as swiftly as possible. This is necessary not only to promptly halt the flow, but also because on/off valves should not remain partially open for extend ed periods, as this could lead to damage to the closing membrane, seats, and other components due to erosion. This challenge can be addressed by implementing a dual or variable-speed system to operate the valve. Such a system enables the operator to close the valve, say, 80% of the way at high speed and then gradually reduce it in the remaining 20% to maximize energy dissipation in the shortest time. This approach also significantly reduces the valve’s flow capacity in a short duration, allowing for efficient flow blockage while accounting for the necessary pressure loss to mitigate or prevent water hammer. The actuator’s operational con trols manage this system, relying

FALL 2023 VALVE MAGAZINE

29