Calculation of pressure variation due to fluid discharge

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of orifice size for a pipeline to achieve a controlled pressure reduction of 0.5 bar per minute during fluid discharge. Participants explore methodologies for estimating orifice dimensions based on various parameters, including pipeline dimensions, fluid properties, and pressure conditions. The conversation includes technical aspects related to fluid dynamics and pressure changes in both short and long pipelines.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks to create an Excel template for calculating orifice size based on specific input data related to a steel pipeline filled with seawater.
  • Another participant requests a diagram to clarify the setup of the pipeline and orifice plate.
  • Assumptions regarding pipe expansion under pressure and the volumetric expansion of water during depressurization are questioned, with a focus on how these factors influence calculations.
  • A participant presents equations related to fluid density and mass flow rate through the orifice, noting the assumption of uniform pressure in shorter pipelines.
  • Concerns are raised about the influence of speed of sound time delay in long pipelines, suggesting that it complicates the analysis.
  • One participant proposes using known volumes and pressures to simplify calculations for orifice size, while acknowledging the complexity introduced by long pipelines.
  • Another participant shares results from calculations using steam tables, highlighting the potential for high delta-P across the orifice and suggesting alternatives like multiple orifices or a drag valve.
  • It is noted that the derived equations may not apply to long pipelines due to the presence of traveling pressure waves.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the assumptions and methodologies for calculating orifice size, with no consensus reached on the best approach or the impact of certain factors, particularly in the context of long pipelines.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on assumptions regarding fluid behavior under pressure changes, the complexity of pressure wave dynamics in long pipelines, and the need for further clarification on the impact of speed of sound delays.

  • #31
JBA said:
I can accept the initial step decline and depressurization wave upon the opening of of the of the pipe discharge to due an instantaneous flow change from the opening of the venting valve; but, I have doubts about there being following successive similar stepwise pressure declines. I have been involved in many liquid flow and blowdown tests for measuring and certifying the performance of both modulating and snap open relief valves using highly sensitive pressure transducers and at no time have I observed on any test indications of pressure stepdown type discontinuities recorded or by visual and audible observation of discharge flow rates that would be inherent with any discontinuous pressure drop(s) during the blowdown periods.
This is a very valid point. The model I described above is, of course, highly idealized, and there are many kinds of physical mechanisms unaccounted for which can sooth the response. One obvious example is viscous dissipation. Even in gas shock waves, viscous dissipation is an important contributor.

Still, at short times (up to a few minutes), I would expect the idealized model to do a pretty good job near the orifice. However, after that, when the reflected wave returns, I would say a subsequent step change would be either extremely modulated or entirely unlikely.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #32
Thank You all for help, especially Chestermiller.

If no one else has anything to add, I consider this topic closed.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
11K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K