Sizing of Throttling Device for

Gas/Liquid Two-Phase Flow

Part 2: Control Valves, Orices,
and Nozzles
Ralf Dienera and Jurgen Schmidtb
a
BASF AG, Inorganic Chemicals Europe, Ludwigshafen, Germany
b
BASF AG, Safety Engineering, Ludwigshafen, Germany; juergen.schmidt@onlinehome.de (for correspondence)
Published online 19 January 2005 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/prs.10035
The calculation of the mass ow rate through throttling devices is difcult when handling two-phase ow,
especially when boiling liquids ow into these ttings.
Control valves and orices are typically oversized in
industry and the control range of those valves often
does not t the control requirements. In this paper the
HNE-DS method is proposed for the sizing of control
valves, orices, and nozzles in two-phase ow. It extends the -method, originally developed by Leung, by
adding a boiling delay coefcient to include the degree
of thermodynamic nonequilibrium at the start of the
nucleation of small vapor mass fractions upstream of
the tting. The additional introduction of a slip correction factor, to take account of hydrodynamic nonequilibrium (slip), also makes it possible to calculate reliably the ow rate through control valves and orices in
both ashing and nonashing ow.
In Part 2 the HNE-DS method for short nozzles,
orices, and control valves is considered. Part 1 describes the sizing of safety valves using the same
method. Additionally, the derivation of the HNE-DS
model is given there in detail. The predictive accuracy
of the HNE-DS model has been checked with reference
to more than 1300 sets of experimental data. 2005
American Institute of Chemical Engineers Process Saf
Prog 24: 29 37, 2005
INTRODUCTION

The sizing of control valves, orices, and nozzles for

the ow of gases, noncondensing vapor and nonvaporizing liquids is described in the standards ISO 5167 and
2005 American Institute of Chemical Engineers

Process Safety Progress (Vol.24, No.1)

IEC 60534 [1, 2]. The current standards are sufciently

accurate for the sizing of these devices for single-phase
ow, although they do not contain reliable recommendations for two-phase mixtures composed of vapor and
liquid. At present there is no appropriate standard either nationally or internationally.
In the chemical and petrochemical industries and
also in power plants and offshore facilities, however,
such a standard is frequently needed. In these plants
liquids are often pumped from tanks or pipeline networks into parts of the plants having relatively low
pressures. Under this circumstance the feed rate is
controlled by means of a control valve (see Figure 1). A
safety valve must as a general rule be installed to
protect the plant against overpressure, for instance in
the event that the outlets have become blocked or have
been inadvertently closed. The size of this safety device
is based on the maximum feed rate through the control
valvethe control valve is part of the safety concept.
This complicates any replacement of the control valve.
Therefore, the ow rate is in practice usually limited by
an additional orice, which is tted downstream from
the control valve. The control valve is then no longer
relevant to safety and it can be replaced by any other
valve without having an effect on the safety concept.
Overall, the design engineer is confronted with the task
of estimating the ow rate through the control valve or
orice as accurately as possible to determine the size of
the safety valve on the low-pressure equipment (Figure
1). The sizing task is divided into two steps:
1. Sizing a relief valve for two-phase ow (Part 1, see
Literature Cited [19])
March 2005

29

Figure 1. Typical layout of production vessel fed by a

control valve with a safety valve on top to avoid an
inadmissible vessel overpressure. The size of the
safety valve is determined by the maximum feed
through the control valve.

2. Sizing a control valve or orice for two-phase ow

(Part 2)
Both steps are based on the same method: the HNE-DS
(homogeneous nonequilibrium method developed by
the authors Diener and Schmidt). This is an extended
-method, originally developed by Leung. In this article the HNE-DS method is described for sizing control
valves, orices, and nozzles.
LITERATURE REVIEW

A few methods are described in the literature for

two-phase ow with sufcient accuracy for the determination of the mass ow rate through throttling devices. These computational methods, however, are
very resource intensive. The calculation requires precise knowledge of the internal geometry of the tting,
such as the contour of a throttle cone in a control valve,
not usually given by the manufacturer. In addition,
physical properties data such as densities, viscosities,
enthalpies, and entropies of the vapor and liquid
phases as a function of pressure and temperature over
a broad parametric range are needed. In many cases
these are not available or they must be determined by
means of costly measurement procedures.
Apart from these complex methods there are also
sizing methods, which are easier to use and in line with
actual practice in the chemical and petrochemical industries, but these exhibit certain limits in application.
Most of the control valves are sized by means of the IEC
60534-2-1 standard [2]. Any limitation in mass ow
capacity attributed to cavitation or ashing of a distinctly subcooled liquid is taken into account by empirically developed correction factors. If two-phase
mixtures or boiling liquids are to be considered in the
inlet of the valve, the standard is not applicable. As a
consequence, in practice the ow coefcients for single-phase gas and single-phase liquid are added with
the mass ow rate of each phase as a weighting factor.
This so-called addition model is a frozen ow consideration where no momentum, heat, or mass transfer is
30

March 2005

taken into consideration. In general, this method may

lead to highly underestimated or distinctly overestimated mass ow rates. Sheldon and Shuder [3] have
recommended a variable correction factor to obtain
less uncertain results. Nevertheless, in the case of boiling liquids or mixtures of ashing liquids and vapors
the results are still unsatisfactory. Diener [4] developed
a more sophisticated physical model including hydrodynamic and thermodynamic nonequilibrium ow. Iteration procedures and a numerical integration of the
equations are necessary for calculating the mass ow
rate. Additionally, pressure- and temperature-dependent property data are needed (density, enthalpy, and
entropy), which in practice are often not available.
The most common method for calculating the mass
ow rate in the case of a gas/liquid two-phase ow for
technical purposes is the -method, originally developed by Leung [5, 6]. It is based on the homogeneous
ow model in which gas and liquid ow at the same
velocity and are uniformly distributed over the ow
cross section. Both phases are in hydrodynamic equilibrium and the phase boundary is (theoretically) of
innite size. Under real conditions, however, these
assumptions are true only for the limiting case in spray
or wet vapor ow having just a few drops of liquid in
the vapor. Nevertheless, the model is used for the
lower vapor content range and in ow without a phase
transition, such as a mixture of air and water. It still
provides acceptable results for the practitioner even in
the median range of vapor contents. The reason for this
is the acceleration in the valve that mixes phases thoroughly and as a result they are largely homogeneously
distributed.
UNCERTAINTIES OF THE -METHOD

In two-phase ow the real mass ow rate can be

determined only by experiments, for example measurements made at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, in the department of Prof. Dr. L. Friedel,
and by SAMSON AG (Frankfurt, Germany). There, the
mass ow rate was measured when mixtures of steam
and boiling water were passed through control valves.
The test valves used had nominal diameters of 25, 50,
and 80 mm and had different types of valve cones
(V-port cone, parabolic cone, and perforated cone).
The test setups and the measuring methods and technology employed are described by Diener [4]. In Figure
2 the mass ow rates calculated by the -method of
Leung (homogeneous equilibrium model) are plotted
against the measured mass ow rates. If these data sets
were in agreement with each other all points would lie
on the diagonal. The deviations, however, are far removed from the diagonal line and are distributed asymmetrically about the 100% error limit. The maximum
deviation between measured and calculated values is
500%; that is, the true ow rate through the control
valve is about six times larger than the calculated rate.
A downstream safety valve, sized using these calculated ow rates through the control valve, would be far
too small and the calculated relief cross section would
likewise be about six times smaller than the cross
section needed. The method is, therefore, unsuitable
Process Safety Progress (Vol.24, No.1)

Figure 2. Accuracy of reproduction of control valve

mass ow rates by the -method of Leung for vapor/

liquid ow with low vapor content.

for sizing calculations for inlet ow conditions involving boiling liquids with only low vapor contents.
RECOMMENDATION FOR AN EXTENDED METHOD (HNE-DS)

Mass Flux through an Ideal Nozzle

To take the boiling delay into account the HNE-DS
method was developed. It extends the -method by an
equation for the boiling delay coefcient. All equations
needed for the application of the HNE-DS method are
given in Tables 1 and 2. The basic idea for this model
was outlined in 1998 [7].
In general, the mass ow rate through nozzles, control valves, and orices may be calculated by
CV/orif corrACV/orifm
M
id with corr CV/orifS

(1)

where ACV/orif is the valve seat/orice area of the tting,

m
id is the mass ux through an adiabatic, ideal formed
nozzle in case of frictionless ow, CV/orif is the ow
coefcient, is the slip correction factor, and S is a
safety factor. The ow coefcient for nozzles equals the
so-called velocity coefcient with values of 0.95 to 1.
In Table 1, the calculation procedure for the mass
ow rate through an ideal nozzle m
id is summarized:
the required variables of state and physical property
data are specied for the (maximum permissible) stagnation condition pin, Tin in front of the tting, such as
in an upstream vessel or pipe network. In the case of a
very large pressure drop in front of a control valve or
orice it may be necessary to determine an imaginary
stagnation condition at the inletthat is, an isentropic
ash calculation from the static inlet conditions to a
ctitious total condition is made. The compressibility
factor (Eq. 4) and the critical pressure ratio crit (Eq.
5) are then determined for a homogeneous ow in
thermodynamic equilibrium (N 1). Based on this rst
estimate the boiling delay factor N is calculated using
Eq. 6b with sufcient accuracy so that the compressibility factor may be corrected taking account of the
boiling delay. By analogy with the method of Henry
and Fauske [8] a value for the exponent a 3/5 is
Process Safety Progress (Vol.24, No.1)

recommended for throttling devices where the accelerational pressure drop dominates the frictional pressure drop, that is, in typical short nozzles, orices, and
control valves. If the area ratio of the nozzle or orice
tends to 1 (small ow contraction), the boiling delay
exponent decreases. Therefore, the exponent a becomes 2/5 for safety valves and for long nozzles and
diffusors a value of a 0 is recommended (also see the
Appendix in the companion article, Part 1).
In principle, the HNE-DS method can also be applied to venturies. In the absence of detailed experimental data with low-quality two-phase ow, the exponent a cannot precisely be specied. From a
theoretical perspective, the value will be expected to
be 2/5 or less.
With the aid of the compressibility factor , including the boiling delay coefcient N, the critical pressure
ratio crit can now be determined more accurately. By
comparing this with the actual pressure ratio in operation 0 (Eq. 2), the ow condition in the narrowest ow
cross section (critical or subcritical pressure ratio) can
be determined (Eq. 7). The corresponding pressure
ratio crit (critical ow) or 0 (subcritical ow) is then
used to calculate the expansion coefcient (Eq. 8).
With this coefcient the mass ux in the narrowest ow
cross section of a (adiabatic) throttling device in a
frictionless ow m
id is obtained (Eq. 9).
The equation for the compressibility factor N contains no additional physical properties and iterations
are unnecessary. In contrast with the distinctly more
complex nonequilibrium model of Henry and Fauske
[8] the mass ux is dened as a continuous function of
the vapor mass ow quality and there is no need for
derivatives of property data functions (cf. Figure 3). In
this gure the mass ow densities calculated by both
methods for the ow of steam and water through an
ideal nozzle are plotted as a function of the stagnation
vapor mass ow qualities at inlet pressures of 10, 1, and
0.1 MPa (100, 10, and 1 bar). The calculated results are
almost identical. Equally high accuracy is also obtained
using the refrigerant R12 (cf. Figure 4) whose physical
properties are very different from those of water. The
enthalpy of vaporization for R12 is smaller by more
than a factor of 10 and its heat capacity is lower by a
factor of 4. Nevertheless, the results of both computational methods are in good agreement, at least in the
region of low vapor mass ow qualities up to about
10%. Although the new HNE-DS method is considerably simpler to apply, the predictive accuracy is similar
to that from the more complicated method of Henry
and Fauske.
Flow Rate through Control Valves and Orices
To determine the mass ow rate through a control
valve or orice, the ow correction factor corr has to
be specied. It represents the ratio of the true mass
ow rate through the throttling device in comparison to
a frictionless ow through an adiabatic ideal nozzle.
Table 2 is a compilation of the equations for determining the mass ow rate through throttling devices
with high acceleration of the uid, such as control
valves and orices, on the basis of the (ideal) mass ux
calculated using the relationships in Table 1. The disMarch 2005

31

Table 1. Determination of mass ux for frictionless ow through an adiabatic throttling device (such as nozzle,
orice, control valve, safety valve).

pin, Tin, pout, hv,in, cpl,in, vg,in, vl,in, xin

pout p0
pcrit
pVC

crit

0
pin pin
pin
pin
vin xinvg,in (1 xin)vl,in

State variables and property data

Pressure ratios
Homogeneous specic volume
of mixture
Compressibility factor
(equilibrium condition, N 1)

Critical pressure ratio

(equilibrium condition, N 1)
N1 2
N1 2
Compressibility factor
(nonequilibrium condition,
N 1)

(3)
(4)
(5)

(6a)
(6b)

(7)

0 crit f crit
0 crit f 0

ln

Mass ux for isentropic

frictionless ow

m
id

1
11

1
1 1

orif,l

2p in
vin

(10)

This loss coefcient can be recalculated into a discharge coefcient for pure liquid ow. The compressibility dependency of the discharge coefcient is recalculated from experiments of Perry [10] performed with
pure gas ow. A trigonometric function with the pressure ratio between outlet pressure and inlet stagnation
pressure describes the wide range of experimental valMarch 2005

(8)

charge coefcient for control valves CV is determined

by the value of Kvs (Eq. 11a). The determination of the
discharge coefcient for orices, that is, the so-called
contraction coefcientthe area ratio of the vena contracta and the inlet pipeis based on the discharge
coefcients for the ow of pure vapor and pure liquid.
Idelchik [9] has recommended the following pressure
loss coefcient for sharp-edged orices in fully developed turbulent ow (Re 104):

32

crit 0.55 0.217 ln 0.046 (ln )2 0.004 (ln )3

2
crit
(2 2)(1 crit)2 22ln(crit) 22(1 crit) 0

subcritical

dpipe
dVC

xinvg,in cpl,inTinpin vg,in vl,in 2

N
vin
vin
hv,in
vg,in vl,in
1 a
N xin cpl,inTinpin
ln
2
crit
hv,in
a 3/5 orices, control valves, short nozzles
a 2/5 safety valves (see Part 2), control valve (high lift)
a0
long nozzles, orice with large area ratios

Critical pressure ratio

2
2
Expansion coefcient
critical

pipe

xinvg,in cpl,inTinpin vg,in vl,in 2

vin
vin
hv,in
crit 0.55 0.217 ln N1 0.046 (ln N1)2 0.004
(ln N1)3
crit2 N12 2 N1 1 crit2 2 N12 crit
2 N12 1 crit 0
N1

(2)

(9)

ues quite well (Eq. 13). Results of Eq. 13 are almost as

accurate as calculated values based on the more complex model of Benedict [11] for contraction coefcients.
The discharge coefcients have been validated with
experimental values of BASF for inlet pressures up to
300 bar.
The discharge coefcient for two-phase ow (Eq.
15) is specied similar to the procedure specied in
Schmidt and Westphal [12, 13], that is, weighting the
discharge coefcients for vapor and liquid ow by the
mean void fraction in the narrowest ow cross section
(Eq. 14). It is not recommended to weight it by the void
fraction at inlet stagnation condition because that may
lead to a signicant error. For example, at the expansion of boiling water from a tank at a pressure of 10 bar
into the atmosphere, the steam content at inlet stagnation condition (tank) is zero, whereas the steam content at the narrowest ow cross section is greater than
90 Vol %.
In addition to boiling delay the difference in velocity
Process Safety Progress (Vol.24, No.1)

Table 2. Determination of discharge capacity through control valves and orices.

Data from Table 1

Geometric data

Control Valve
m
id
Kvs

Discharge
coefcient

ref 1000 kg/m3,

ACV Kvs

Orice
vl,in, vin, , m
id, crit, 0
dorif (orice diameter), dpipe
1
orif,l
2
d orif
1 0.707 1 2
d pipe

ref
11a
2pref

(11b)

5 3
c orif,l
8 8
c orif,l c orif,l

cosout
orif,g
2
2
0 crit f crit
0 crit f 0
vl,in
Vg
1

Vg Vl
1
vin 1 1

2
Aorif d orif
orif,g 1 orif,l
4

(12)
(13)
(14)

Slip correction
(two-phase
multiplier, [14])

v in

ve,in

v in
vg,in
1 xin
vl,in
vl,in

1/6

1 1 xin

vg,in
vl,in

5/6

1/2

(15)
(16)

out,S1 (CV/orif ACV/orif) m

Mass ow rate
M
id
S safety factor (recommended values 11.3)
out M
CV/orif,S1S M
CV/orif,S11.3
Mass ow rate to
M
be discharged

(17)
(18)

Figure 3. Comparison of the Henry/Fauske model with the HNE-DS method for steam/water ow.

between the gaseous and liquid phases (slip)the socalled hydrodynamic nonequilibriumshould also be
taken into consideration (see the derivation in Appendix A). For this purpose Simpson et al. [14] species the
two-phase multiplier, which is based on the effective
specic volume by Lottes [15]. The multiplier has been
validated with a large volume of measured data for
ow through orices and valves.
Although, in comparison with thermodynamic nonequilibrium, the effect of hydrodynamic nonequilibrium is relatively moderate, it can nevertheless give rise
Process Safety Progress (Vol.24, No.1)

to deviations of about 30 50% in mass ow rates. This

would lead to a mass ow rate larger than that calculated without taking the nonequilibrium into consideration and is thus not conservative. As an example, the
measured discharge capacities through control valves
presented in Figure 2 were recalculated using the
HNE-DS model with and without taking the slip correction coefcient into account (see Figures 5 and 6).
Even in the case of no slip correction, the deviations
between measured and calculated values are distinctly
smaller than those calculated with the original -methMarch 2005

33

Figure 4. Comparison of the Henry/Fauske model, the HNE-DS, and the original method for R12

vapor/liquid ow.

Figure 5. Accuracy of reproduction of control valve

mass ow rates by means of the HNE-DS method

without slip correction in vapor/liquid ow having
low vapor content.

od: the mean logarithmic deviation is just 32%, whereas

the variance of the logarithmic deviation is now only
38% (denition of statistic numbers; see Appendix C).
This is much better by comparison with the values of
126 and 138%, respectively, obtained when the original -method is used. However, deviations of up to
100% are still possible. When the slip correction
factor is applied, the accuracy of reproduction is
again signicantly lowered (see Figure 6). The deviations are distributed almost symmetrically about the
diagonal. The mean logarithmic deviation is 5%
(that is, the mass ow rate is slightly high). Thus, on
average, the calculation approach yields slightly conservative results. At 17% the variance of the logarithmic deviation is relatively low. With a few exceptions
the deviations are less than 30%. To allow for a
34

March 2005

Figure 6. Accuracy of reproduction of control valve

mass ow rates by means of the HNE-DS method
with slip correction for steam/water ow having low
vapor content.

conservative estimate, a safety margin of 30% (factor

of S 1.3) is proposed for the determination of the
maximum mass ow rate. In Figure 7 steam/water
orice data from Friedrich [16] are presented. Again,
the accuracy of reproduction of the new HNE-DS
method is excellent.
In contrast to the data of ashing steam/water ow,
Figure 8 shows the comparison of calculated and measured data for the ow of nonashing air and water.
The mean logarithmic deviation is only 21% for all of
the 723 data points. Figure 8 underlines the quality of
the slip correction factor because the boiling delay
factor does not come into play.
Process Safety Progress (Vol.24, No.1)

Figure 7. Comparison of mass ow rate through orices according to HNE-DS and measured by Friedrich [16].

sets of steam/water experimental data and more than

700 measurements with air/water. Additionally, the
HNE-DS model was proven for the ow through throttling devices with the refrigerant R12, CO2 /CO2 vapor,
and N2 /N2 vapor. In any case, the HNE-DS model
provides excellent results, even at very low mass ow
qualities at the inlet of the throttling device.
NOMENCLATURE

Figure 8. Accuracy of reproduction of control valve

mass ow rates by means of the HNE-DS method

with slip correction for air/water ow having low
vapor content.

SUMMARY

The -method, originally developed by Leung, is

extended by a boiling delay coefcient to take account
of the delayed boiling of a liquid (thermodynamic nonequilibrium) in a depressurizing ow process. The extension led to the new HNE-DS method, which is just as
easy to use as that developed by Leung, and requires
physical properties only at the stagnation condition.
Resource-intensive equations of state and derivations
of physical property functions are not needed; nor, as
a rule, are iterations necessary. Only in the case of low
compressibility factors ( 2) is it advisable to determine the critical pressure ratio by means of the implicit
equation.
The advantage of the HNE-DS model is that it can be
applied equally to several throttling devices, such as
control valves, orices, nozzles, and safety valves (Part
1). The overall reproducibility of the HNE-DS model
has been checked with reference to more than 1300

Process Safety Progress (Vol.24, No.1)

orif orice discharge coefcient for twophase ow

CV control valve discharge coefcient
for two-phase ow
CV/orif discharge coefcient for a valve or an
orice for two-phase ow (control
valve V CV; orice V orice)
ACV/orif seat area of the control valve (ACV/orif
ACV) or orice (ACV/orif Aorif)
a boiling delay exponent (see Table 1)
cpl,in specic heat capacity of the liquid at
stagnation state
dorif orice diameter
dpipe pipe diameter
void fraction in the narrowest ow
cross section of the throttling device
slip correction factor
corr ow correction factor
pressure ratio (ratio of real pressure
in the narrowest ow cross section
and the inlet stagnation pressure)
0 back pressure ratio at the outlet of
the control valve or orice (ratio of
back pressure and the inlet stagnation pressure)
crit critical pressure ratio (ratio of critical
pressure in the narrowest ow cross
section and the inlet stagnation pressure)
hv,in latent heat of vaporization at stagnation state
KVS liquid discharge factor for fully
opened control valve
March 2005

35

 expansion factor or outow function

m
id mass ux through an adiabatic fric id /ACV/orif)
tionless nozzle (m
crit M
V/orif mass ow rate through a control
M
valve or orice, which has to be discharged from the pressurized system
N boiling delay factor
pin stagnation or inlet stagnation pressure (see Figure 1)
pout back pressure at the outlet of the
control valve or orice (the pressure
that exists at the outlet of a throttling
device)
pcrit critical pressure at choking conditions
pVC pressure in the narrowest ow cross
section (uid-dynamic pressure occurring in the narrowest ow cross
section of the throttling device)
pref reference pressure difference (0.1
MPa)
ref reference density (1000 kg/m3)
Sabs variance of the absolute deviations
Sln variance of the logarithmic deviations
S safety factor (recommended value
11.3)
Tin inlet stagnation temperature (see Figure 1)
vg,in specic gas volume at inlet stagnation state
vin mixture-specic volume at inlet stagnation state
vl,in specic liquid volume at inlet stagnation state
compressibility factor
xin inlet stagnation mass ow quality,
that is, the ratio of the gas mass ow
rate to the total mass ow rate of a
two-phase mixture at stagnation state
X ln mean logarithmic deviation
Xi,abs absolute deviation between experimental and calculated value
Xi,ln logarithmic deviation between experimental and calculated value
Yi,calc calculated value, e.g., mass ow rate
Yi,exp experimental value, e.g., mass ow
rate
APPENDIX A: DEFINITION OF THE SLIP FACTOR

The ideal mass ow rate of a frictionless homogeneous ow through an adiabatic nozzle is dened by
the HNE-DS model as
m
id

2p in
vin

(A1)

whereby is the expansion coefcient of the uid.

Considering the slip between gas and liquid phase
the velocity ratio of the averaged gas and liquid velocitieswould lead to an increased mass ow rate because of the increase in density of the ow:
36

March 2005

m
id,slip

m
id

v in
fm
id,slip m
id with
ve,in

v in
ve,in

(A2)

The slip-corrected specic volume may be developed

by a momentum balance (so-called momentum-specic volume) including the slip factor K according to
[14]

v e,in xinvg,in K 1 xinvl,in xin

K

vg,in
vl,in

1 xin
K

(A3)

5/6

Rearranging Eq. A3 leads to a momentum specic volume model based on the specic volume of both
phases at inlet stagnation condition.

v e,in vl,in 1 xin

1 xin

vg,in
vl,in

vg,in
vl,in

1/6

(A4)

5/6

APPENDIX B: APPLICATION LIMITS OF THE MODEL

The application range of the HNE-DS method is

exactly the same as that for the original -method [5, 6].
Special emphasis should be given to the following
assumptions:
Validity of the ClausiusClapeyron equation. It is

proven for single-component vapor/liquid systems, but also usable for multicomponent vapor/
liquid systems, if the difference of the boiling
point from each component is less the 100 C.
Vapor phase behaves as an ideal gas. This holds,
if the stagnation pressure is less than or equal to
half of the thermodynamic critical pressure of the
component (pred p/pc 0.5) and the temperature is less or equal to 0.9 times the critical
temperature (Tred T/Tc 0.9). Otherwise, a real
gas coefcient has to be introduced into the
method.
In general, the HNE-DS method is applicable to every
throttling device in industrial processes. The design
engineer needs to assume the contraction rate within
the throttling device and the relaxation time for heat
transfer between both phases. In short throttling devices, with large depressurization, an exponent a of 3/5
is recommended as a rst estimate, whereas in lesspronounced nonequilibrium ows a lower value for
the exponent is recommended.
APPENDIX C: DEFINITION OF STATISTIC NUMBERS

The average predictive accuracy of the models is

based on the values obtained for the variance of the
logarithmic deviations between the experimental and
calculated values (Table C1). Moreover, the mean logarithmic deviation characterizing the average under- or
overprediction of the experimental values is depicted
for the sake of completeness. The advantages of using
Process Safety Progress (Vol.24, No.1)

Table C1. Denition of statistical numbers used to characterize the average predictive accuracy of the models.

Statistical Number

Denition

Variance of logarithmic deviations

Sln exp

Variance of absolute deviations

Sabs

Mean logarithmic deviation

X ln exp

these parameters are already discussed by Govan [17],

Friedel [18], and Diener [4] and showed in the past to
allow for a balanced description of the merits of each
correlation.
LITERATURE CITED

1. ISO 5167, Measurement of uid ow by means of

pressure differential devices inserted in circular
cross-section conduits running full, Beuth Verlag,
Berlin, 2003.
2. DIN EN 60534-2-1, Stellventile fur die ProzessregelungTeil 2-1: Durchusskapazitat; Bemessungsgleichungen fur Fluide unter Einbaubedingungen
(IEC 60534-2-1:1998); Ausgabe 2000 03.
3. Sheldon, C.W. and Schuder, C.B., Sizing control
valves for liquid gas mixtures, Instruments and
Control Systems, 38 (1965).
4. Diener, R., Berechnung und Messung der Massendurchsatzcharakteristik von Stellventilen bei
Zweiphasenstromung (Calculation and measurement of the mass ow rate characteristics of control
valves in two-phase ow), Fortschr.-Ber. Series 7,
No. 388, 2000.
5. Leung, J.C., A generalized correlation for one-component homogeneous equilibrium ashing choked
ow, AIChE Journal, 32 (1986), 17431746.
6. Leung, J.C., Similarity between ashing and non-ashing two-phase ows, AIChE Journal 36 (1990), 797800.
7. Diener, R. and Schmidt, J., Extended -method
applicable for low inlet mass ow qualities, 13th
Mtg. ISO/TC185/WG1, Ludwigshafen, Germany,
June 15, 1998.
8. Henry, R.E. and Fauske, H.K., The two-phase critical ow of one-component mixtures in nozzles,
orices, and short tubes, Journal of Heat Transfer,
93 (1971), 179 187.
9. Idelchik, I.E., Handbook of hydraulic resistance,
3rd ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1994.
10. Perry, J.A., Critical ow through sharp-edged orices, Transactions of ASME, 71 (1949), 757764.

Process Safety Progress (Vol.24, No.1)

n
2
i1
X i,ln
1
nf1

n
2
i1
X i,abs
nf1

1
n

Xi,ln ln

Xi,abs Yi,exp Yi,calc

i1

Yi,exp
Yi,calc

Xi,ln 1

Xi,ln ln

Yi,exp
Yi,calc

11. Benedict, R.P., Fundamentals of pipe ow, Wiley,

New York, 1980.
12. Schmidt, J. and Westphal, F., Praxisbezogenes
Vorgehen bei der Auslegung von Sicherheitsventilen und deren Abblaseleitungen fur die Durchstromung mit Dampf/Flussigkeits-Gemischen
Teil 1 (Practical procedure for the sizing of safety
valves and their relief lines for the ow of vapor/
liquid mixturesPart 1), Chemie Ingenieur Technik, 69 (1997), No. 6.
13. Schmidt, J. and Westphal, F., Praxisbezogenes
Vorgehen bei der Auslegung von Sicherheitsventilen und deren Abblaseleitungen fur die Durchstromung mit Dampf/Flussigkeits-Gemischen
Teil 2 (Practical procedure for the sizing of safety
valves and their relief lines for the ow of vapor/
liquid mixturesPart 2), Chemie Ingenieur Technik, 69 (1997), No. 8.
14. Simpson, H.C., Rooney, D.H., and Grattan, E., Two
phase ow through gate valves and orice plates,
Int Conf on the Physical Modelling of Multi-Phase
Flow, Coventry, UK, April 19 20, 1983.
15. Lottes, P., Expansion losses in two-phase ow,
Nuclear Science and Engineering 9 (1961), 26 31.
16. Friedrich, H., Durchu durch einstuge Dusen bei
verschiedenen thermodynamischen Zustanden, Energie 10 (1960), 411 419.
17. Govan, A.H., A note on statistical methods for comparing measured and calculated values, HTFS
RS767-1 (1988), 315323.
18. Friedel, L., Kriterien fur die Beurteilung der Vorhersagegenauigkeit von halbempirischen Berechnungsmodellen (Criteria for the evaluation of the
predictive accuracy of halfempirical models), Chemie Ingenieur Technik, 53 (1981), No. 1.
19. Diener, R., and Schmidt J. Sizing of throttling
device for gas/liquid two-phase ow Part 1:
safety valves, Process Safety Progress, 23 (2004)
335344.

March 2005

37