2nd IAHR International Meeting of the Workgroup

on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems

in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems
Timisoara, Romania
October 24 - 26, 2007

Scientific Bulletin of the

Politehnica University of Timisoara
Transactions on Mechanics
Tom 52(66), Fascicola 6, 2007

ON CAVITATION AND CAVITATIONAL DAMAGE

AT BUTTERFLY VALVES
Gheorghe BRAN *

Florentina D. BUNEA

University Politehnica of Bucharest, Romania

INCDIE ICPE-CA Bucharest, Romania

Gabriela I. OPRINA
INCDIE ICPE-CA Bucharest, Romania

*Corresponding author: Splaiul Independentei 313, 060032 Bucharest, Romania

Tel.: +40214029486, fax +40214029865, E-mail baran_gheorghe@yahoo.co.uk
ABSTRACT
The diagram of a butterfly valve D100 operating
in cavitation is assigned; six evolution stages of
cavitation are identified; choking flow rates were
determinate. The diagram can be utilized to determine the operating conditions in different stages of
cavitation evolution. The cavitational damages are
identified downstream, on the inferior half of the
pipeline, in the shape of some macro-rugosities.
KEYWORDS
Cavitational coefficient, butterfly valves, stage of
cavitations development
1. INTRODUCTION
The problem of cavitation apparition and evolution in pipes, fittings (bent pipes, valves, et al.), in
flow rate metering devices (diaphragms, Venturi tubes)
is present in literature after 1960, when experimental installations with this destination are beginning
to be made [1]. Ulterior (1978), the study of cavitation at butterfly valves constitute the subject of PhD
thesis.
In older treatises [2], the mentioned problem is
not approached; the new ones [1] add in chapters
regarding this subject. Also, new research centers
are appearing in this domain [3].
The cavitation problem at valves consist in determining the upstream flow rates and pressures,
corresponding to certain development stages and in
the case of admitted existence, the cavitation at valves
is or not a cavitation generator, downstream or on all
the circuit. Preliminarily we have to define more or
least exact, the cavitation studies.

The solution proposed by Tullis [4] filled in with

the authors experience and with the method chose
for the evaluation of cavitation stages is adopted in
this paper [5], [6].
In the cavitation evolution we propose the following stages of cavitation development, acoustically
characterized:
1. NON (N) stage,
2. INCIPIENT (I) stage characterized by specific
noises (snaps) quasi random, hardly determinable
with the ear,
3. LIGHT (L) stage, low intensity, continuous noises,
undeterminable at distance,
4. MODERATE (M) stage, continuous noises, determinable at distance,
5. HEAVY (H) stage, acute, continuous noises, determinable in all the laboratory,
6. VERY HEAVY (VH) stage, very acute, continuous
noises, with different intensities,
7. SUPERCAVITATION (S) stage, difficult to sonorous evaluate/differentiate from the VH stage, in
which at the rise of the pressure drop on the valve,
the flow rate remains constant (choking flow).
The cavitation coefficients are associated to each
stage 2-7. The purpose of this paper is to analyze these
coefficients and to experimentally rise the flow rate
Q (m3/h), pressure drop on the valve p (bar) diagram
in all the 7 stages mentioned, in order to pick the
admissible working domain.
2. THE CAVITATION COEFFICIENTS AT VALVES
For evaluating the quality of the valves, the flow
rate coefficients Kv, the hydraulic resistance coefficients or those of cavitation are utilized. The first
two are defined by the relations:

Proceedings of the 2nd IAHR International Meeting of the Workgroup on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems

42

Q = Kv

p
,
r

2p
v02

(1)

the installation cavitation coefficient

inst =

with Q [m /h] the liquid flow rate, p [bar], the net

pressure drop on the valve, v0 the average upstream
velocity, the liquid density, r the relative density
comparing to water (if the working liquid is water,
then r = 1). The coefficient is dimensionless. In
Anglo-Saxon units, with Q in USGPM and p in
PSI, the flow rate coefficient is Cv.
If Kv1> Kv2, valve 1 is hydrodynamic superior and
similar if 1 < 2. The determination of the values Kv
and is made in stalls/installations especially created and in conformity with certain regulations (for
example [7]).
For cavitation are used many coefficients presented
below.
2.1. The cavitation coefficient , defined by
Thoma

p0 pv (t )
,
v02 / 2

(2)

if p0i and/or v0i are the values at which the cavitation

appears, then is the incipient cavitation coefficient i.
If i is obtained by reducing the pressure p0, the results
have a great dispersion and in order to avoid the hysterezis phenomena, a developed cavitation study is
realized and p0 is diminished to the value of pd when
the cavitation disappears and his value is now d [1].
2.2. The cavitation coefficient of a solid in a
liquid current (I. Anton)
The method generally establish in [1] for a butterfly valve is applied. Considering the Bernoulli
relation in permanent movement between the points
M0 and M (fig. 1), it obtains:

p0

v02
p
v2
+ z0 = M + M + zM + hp .

2g
2g

(3)

Defining the reserve coefficient at cavitation, rez

rez =

pmin pv
,
v02 / 2

p0 pv
v02 / 2

(5)

and the valve cavitation coefficient, in the hypothesis that pM = pmin and vM = vmax

c =

2
h
vmax
z z0
1 + M2
+ 2 p ,
2
v0
v0 / 2 g v0 / 2 g

(6)

From the relations (4), (5) and (6) we obtain

rez = inst c .

(7)

So, from relation (7) results the following stages [1]:

rez > 0, inst > c , non - cavitation;
rez = 0,

inst = c , incipient cavitation;

rez < 0,

inst < c , developed cavitation

(industrial);
rez  0,

inst  c , super - cavitation.

Relation (7) has a theoretic base and differentiates ins from c, which at constant temperature depends on Froude number, Fr, by

z M z0 2
= , on
v02 2 g Fr

Reynolds number, Re and on the relative roughness

k/D by hp, of distance LMM0

c = f ( Fr, Re, k / D, L )

(8)

In the case of butterfly valve (fig. 1) determines

that between the cavitation coefficients associated
with the section from M, M and the section from
M1, M1 exists the relation

rezM < rezM 1

(9)

respectively the cavitation begins in section M. Between

the c and Kv coefficients, respectively exist a natural dependence: the valves with big Kv, respectively
small are, at the same flow rate, less exposed to
cavitation.

(4)

Figure 1. The defining scheme for the cavitation coefficient

Proceedings of the 2nd IAHR International Meeting of the Workgroup on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems

2.3. The cavitation coefficients with the upstream and downstream parameters
The following cavitation coefficients (numbers)
[1, 8] are proposed for valves:

Kf =

p pv
p
p
(10)
; K d = am
; Km =
pav pv
pav pv
pam pv

43

and the parameter Zy is given in tables for different

diameters and types of valves. For butterfly valve
D100, at = 0, Zy = 0.06 and at = 40, Zy = 0.33.
It can be seen that XF = Kf and the maximum admissible drop on the valve is obtained for non cavitation

p X F ( pam pv ) ,

(17)

In order to correlate the hydrodynamic qualities

evaluated by with cavitation numbers, the relations
(1) (5) are used and with pav = pam p it obtains

respectively p 0, 06 ( pam pv ) at = 0 and

p pv pam pv inst
1

, (11)
; Kf =
= am
=
=
2
Kf
inst
p
v0 / 2

cerning the flow rate results indirectly from the Kv

coefficients:

Kd =

Km =

1
= inst ,
1 K f rez

Kf
1 K f

inst

(12)

(13)

can be expressed, for example, in function of Kf. Also

Kd Km = 1. Concurrently, in relations (10), the flow
rate intervenes implicitly by p. At inst = ct. and
superior hydraulic valves (small ), the Kf and Km
coefficients have small values, at lest for the incipient cavitation and they rise at developed stages if is
changing. The experimental research accomplished
before and partially presented here ( 2.4) show that
the Kv and values at = ct. are not modifying practically at stages (I) (H). So, it results that Kf and Km
are not modifying with the development of cavitation
and can be fruitful at determining of stages (I) or (L).
Referring to Kd, the last two terms from relation (6)
are considered negligible comparing to the others; this
hypothesis is admissible, at lest in the case of small
valves (D 100 mm) and in the following case

2
vmax
1 , (14)
v02

Relation (14) suggest the approximation of c with a

resistance coefficient e and Kd becomes

Kd =

inst
inst
=
.
rez inst e

(15)

At the development of cavitation e is modifying

(increases) so that, theoretically, Kd should augment.
2.4. The cavitation coefficients given by
manufacturers
A small number of manufacturers give in prospects
information concerning cavitation [8]. The condition
for operating without cavitation is

XF Zy;

XF =

p
pam pv

(16)

p 0.45 ( pam pv ) at = 40. Information con-

Q = Kv

Q
p ; p =

Kv

and from relation (16)

2

Q
1
< Zy .

K v pam pv
It obtains

Q K v Z y ( pam pv ) K v Z y pam . (18)

From the prospect, for D100, = 40, Kv = 65,
Zy = 0.45 and at the working pressure pam = 1 bar
results Q = 61.66 m3/h, value closed to the value
determined in the laboratory in conditions of incipient
cavitation (4.2).
3. THE EXPERIMENTAL STAND
The experimental stand is a hydrodynamic tunnel
type with closed circuit (fig. 2).
The water flow rate is measured with a diaphragm,
connected at a differential manometer with mercury
MD. The net pressure drop on the valve is determined
with relation

p = pm pl = g (m ) H m 0.4gH l ,
The linear pressure drop is measured distinctly
on a length L = 2.5(l1 + l2) in order to obtain a value
Hl great enough. The manometers have the class of
accuracy 0.6.
4. OBTAINED RESULTS
4.1. The flow rate coefficient the hydraulic
resistance coefficient
The measurements have been accomplished in
conformity with the regulations [7]. In table 1 are
presented the values of Kv and in function of ,
determined in the laboratory, in the absence of cavitation and at values of the flow rates as great as possible.

Proceedings of the 2nd IAHR International Meeting of the Workgroup on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems

44

Figure 2. Stand sketch

4.2. The diagram for running in cavitation

Table 1. Kv and values in function of and Q

degree
0
10
20
30
40

Q
m3/h
111.33
110.82
109.28
66.24
53.15

p
bar
0.0074
0.0163
0.073
0.083
0.154

Kv
m3/h
1294.18
868.01
404.46
229.92
135.60

0.113
0.251
1.155
3.567
10.160

The obtained values are same greater then those

given by manufacturers [9].

Based on the studies presented in 1, the diagram

in figure 3 was built-up. It is useful in designing as well
as in exploitation. So, for flow rates of 7080 m3/h,
the cavitation is in the stage (M) at = 40, etc.
The relative dispersion of the results is explained
by the inevitable human error. In table 2 are given
the values of the flow rates that have been experimentally determined for different stages.
The values Kv and are not modifying at stages
(I) (VH).

0.6
H

delta p [bar]

0.5

V
H

0.4

0.3

0.2
0.1
I

VH S

0
20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

Q [cm/h]
teta=30

teta=40

Figure 3. The running in cavitation diagram for a butterfly valve D100, Pn6

Proceedings of the 2nd IAHR International Meeting of the Workgroup on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems

45

Table 2. The water flow rates at the development of cavitation and = 40

Cavitation
stage
I
L
M
H
VH
S

Q [m3/h]
58.2
66.36
71.27
80.57
87.29
99.39

58.8
65.24
72.46
76.99
87.2
93.54

55.7
62.79
69.19
83.24
91.09
94.64

4.3. Cavitational damages

After ca. 2000 hours of discontinuous running, in
stages (H) and (VH) cavitational damages have been
detected on the downstream pipe, on the inferior
half; the damages are in the form of some protuberances of different sizes (0.5 2 mm).

Medium

51.57
64.12

63.17

84
90.47
94.44

81.62
90.38
96.51

96.51

56.07
64.33
70.97
81.28
89.28
95.84

There were no erosions on the valve flap. This

situation can be explained considering the flow scheme
in figure 5. The contracted sections (geometrical) Sc
and Sc1 are equal, as well as the minimum ones, Scm
and Scm1. The implosion of the bubbles is producing
downstream of Sc and the flow spectra encourage the
implosion next to the solid wall, in the case of Scm1.

Figure 4. Cavitational damages downstream the valve

Figure 5. The scheme of the flow on the butterfly valve

CONCLUSIONS
1. The cavitation coefficients defined with the upstream and downstream parameters (11), as well
as those given by the manufacturers (16) are useful

for determining only the incipient cavitation in depending of the essential parameter in that installation (pam, respectively pav). On the other part, the
relation (11) has a theoretic base and defines three
stages of cavitation development,

46

Proceedings of the 2nd IAHR International Meeting of the Workgroup on Cavitation and Dynamic Problems in Hydraulic Machinery and Systems

2. Defining and identifying the 7 stages of evolution,

the diagram for running in cavitation for a butterfly valve Dn 100, Pn 6, at opening angles = 30
and = 40 was determined in the laboratory.
This give to user the possibility of choosing the
running conditions,
3. Cavitational damage has been observed downstream
of the valve and is explicated by the flow scheme
in figure 4.
NOMENCLATURE
Cv flow rate coefficient (with Q in USGPM and p
in PSI)
D (m) pipeline diameter
Fr (-) Froude number
Hl (mH2O) level difference at the manometer with
water
Hm (mHg) level difference at the manometer with
mercury
Kd cavitation coefficient defined with the upstream
and downstream parameters
Kf cavitation coefficient defined with the upstream
parameters
Km cavitation coefficient defined with the downstream parameters
Kv flow rate coefficient
L (m) the length on which the linear pressure drop is
measured
LMM0 (m) the distance between the points M0 and M
Q (m3/h) flow rate
Re (-) Reynolds number
XF cavitation parameter [9]
Zy cavitation coefficient [9]
g (m/s2) gravity
hp (m) the pressure losses between the points M0 and M
k (m) roughness
p0 (Pa) absolute pressure upstream the valve, in the
point M0
p0i (Pa) the pressure at which the cavitation appears
pam (Pa) the pressure upstream the valve
pav (Pa) the pressure downstream the valve
pd (Pa) the pressure at which the cavitation disappears
pM (Pa) pressure in the point M
pmin (Pa) the minimum pressure on the valve
pv (Pa) vaporization pressure at temperature t
t () temperature
v0 (m/s) average velocity upstream the valve, in the
point M0

v0i (m/s) the velocity at which the cavitation appears

vM (m/s) velocity in the point M
vmax (m/s) the maximum velocity on the valve
z0 (m) height of the point M0
zM (m) height of the point M
p (bar) pressure drop on the valve
pl (bar) the linear pressure drop on the l1 and l2 lengths
(fig. 2)
pm (bar) the pressure drop read on the manometer
with mercury
() butterfly valve opening angle
(-) coefficient of the local pressure drop
e (-) equivalent coefficient of the local pressure drop
r (-) relative density comparing to water
(-) Thomas cavitation coefficient
c (-) cavitation coefficient of the valve
d (-) cavitation coefficient at the pressure pd
i (-) incipient cavitation coefficient
inst (-) cavitation coefficient of the installation
rez (-) the reserve coefficient at cavitation
rezM (-) the reserve coefficient at cavitation in the
point M
rezM1 (-) the reserve coefficient at cavitation in the
point M1
REFERENCES
[1] Anton I., 1985, Cavitaia, Vol.II, Editura Academiei,
Bucureti
[2] Knapp, H., Daily, J., Hamitt, F., 1970, Cavitation Mc. Graw Hill, New York.
[3] Koivula T., 2000, On cavitation in fluid power, Proc.
Of 1st FPNI-PhD Symp., p. 371-382, Hamburg.
[4] Tullis P., 1978, Choking and Supercavitation Valves
ASCE, Journal of Hydraulics Division, p. 19311945.
[5] Bran Gh., Ianculescu C., 1995, The Function Diagram for Cavitation of Valves, Conferina Internaional Sisteme Hidropneumatice de Acionare vol. 1,
p. 73-83, Timioara.
[6] Bran Gh., 2001, Cavitaie i eroziune cavitaional,
Editura Tehnic, Bucuresti.
[7] CEI/IEC 60534-2-1 Industrial process control valves,
part 2.1, Flow capacity Sizing equations for fluid flow
under installed condition.
[8] *** Application of butterfly valves for free discharge,
minimum pressure drop and for chocking cavitation,
AWWA 2002.
[9] *** EBROARMATUREN Product Programme
ERHARD VALVES (prospect)