ALBA Synchrotron Light Source

Solving thermal instabilities

in the SR (Part 2, 3)

Juan José Manotas Mazario

In collaboration with Marcos Quispe

January 09th , 2019

V3
Contents
1. Starting data for calculating the new valve size.
2. Checking current aspiration pressure with closed bypass.
3. Valve sizing.
3.1 Samson valve sizing overview.
3.2 Cases and flow scenarios.
4. Designing a new valve DN200 Kvs = 630.
4.1 KvsA – Calculation a linear characteristic response Inlet A (ST4).
4.2 KvsB – Calculation a linear characteristic response Inlet B (Acc).
5. Designing a new valve DN200 - Kv calculations.
5.1 Calculation of KvA scenario 283 and 330 [m3/h] at 1,82[bar].
5.2 Calculation of KvB scenario 283 and 330 [m3/h] at 1,82[bar].
6. Circuit boundary conditions DN200.
7. Parametric studies and Goals optimizations.
8. Scenario 1: 283 m3/h Closed bypass – Flow balance.
8.1 Pressure.
8.2 Temperature.
8.3 Data list.
9. Scenario 2: 330 m3/h Closed bypass – Flow balance.
9.1 Pressure.
9.2 Temperature.
9.3 Data list.
10. Rangeability 283 [m3/h].
11. Rangeability 330 [m3/h].
12. Conclusions.
13. Final specifications. Page 2
14. Next steps.
1. Starting data for calculating the new valve size.
Maximum number of beamlines (M.Pont):

8 BLs (current) + LOREA + NOTOS + XAIRA + FAXTOR + 12 BLs (in the future).

Therefore, we would say increasing

 from 283 [m3/h] (current)
 to 3 [m3/h] x 15 BLs = 45 [m3/h] that make a total around of 330 [m3/h].

The new valve must be capable of handling between two flow scenarios with the less drop
pressure:
 283 [m3/h] until 330 [m3/h].

Page 3
2. Checking current aspiration pressure with closed
bypass.
Test performed on August 8th, 2018, with closed bypass, (no data available from archiving storage controls
in this date).
ST4 side
Comparison between simulated and
current data:
Test consisted in close manually bypass Acc side
valve and measure pressure gauges in 2
scenarios:
1.Move 3WV shutter to open 100%
Accelerator side open (ST4 side closed).
2.Move 3WV shutter to open 100% ST4 side
open (Acc side closed). Pressure
discrepancy ≈
The result is around of max -0,05 bar of -0,05 bar
pressure discrepancy.

Off P08A On P08B On P08C

Simulated aspiration
0,64 bar 0,62 bar 0,64 bar
pressure:

1.Actual aspiration pressure Off P08A

3WV open 100% Acc side:

2.Actual aspiration pressure

Off P08A
3WV open 100% ST4 side:
Page 4
2. Checking current aspiration pressure with closed
bypass.
In detail, part of this discrepancy is due to not considering gravity in the analysis type, so the pressure due to the
suction head has not been considered either. This value is:

Considering gravity

When considering the gravity the final discrepancy

would be of a minor order:

Lower value + gravity (not consider initially) =

0,62lover simulated value in 2 + 0,28suction head in 2 = 0,90 bar

The pressure simulated discrepancy is:

0,85actual aspiration pressure – 0,90 simulated = - 0,05 bar

Page 5
3. Valve sizing.
3.1 Samson valve sizing overview.
Using SAMSON valve sizing to obtain first approximation of an adequate size to the flow to perform the
simulation of the valve size.
We use SAMSON valve sizing, because we need a reference to be able to design the valve that allows us to
test it in our simulated circuit in order to calculated the final pressure drop in pumps aspiration with two
scenarios 283 [m3/h] and 330 [m3/h].

SAMSON valve sizing Overview of the programs elements

Page 6
3. Valve sizing.
3.2 Cases and flow scenarios
Using SAMSON valve sizing to obtain first approximation of an adequate size to perform the simulation of the
valve, using points in the graph (cases) in order to calculate different work points.
Scenario 283m3/h: case1 ∆p= 1bar, Scenario 330m3/h: case1 ∆p= 1bar,
case2 ∆p= 0,5bar case2 ∆p= 0,5bar, case3 ∆p= 0,38bar

Linear characteristic Linear characteristic

In both scenarios using 283 m3/h or 330 m3/h Samson valve sizing calculated a DN200 with a Kvs = 630, linear
characteristic.
Page 7
4. Designing a new valve DN200 KVs630.
4.1 KvsA - Calculation a linear characteristic response Inlet A (ST4).
A valve is designed that fits the valve previously considered in the valve sizing software, to be able to later
calculate the pressure drop in the pump suction. Inlet pump pressure drop is a critical value.
Calculation of KvsA The next graph calculated shows the difference between valve
characteristic theorical Kvs630 versus designed Kvs630 in
KvsA side of 3WV.

Valve design: Close linear response has been achieved to

calculate the scenarios and cases.

KvsSamson / KvsA discrepancy

Page 8
4. Designing a new valve DN200 KVs630.
4.2 KvsB - Calculation a linear characteristic response Inlet B (Acc).
A valve is designed that fits the valve previously considered in the valve sizing software, to be able to later
calculate the pressure drop in the pump suction. Inlet pump pressure drop is a critical value.
Calculation of KvsB The next graph calculated shows the difference between valve
characteristic theorical Kvs630 versus designed Kvs630 in
KvsB side of 3WV.

Valve design: Close linear response has been achieved to

calculate the scenarios and cases

KvsSamson / KvsB discrepancy

Page 9
5. Designing a new valve DN200 - Kv calculations.
5.1 Calculation of KvA scenario 283 and 330 [m3/h] at 1,82[bar]
The goal is to find the Kv corresponding to each point of the different cases in both flow scenarios. these points
must be similar to calculated by valve sizing application, that means the behavior will be the same.
Calculation of KvA - Scenario 283 [m3/h]

The KvA calculated with flow = 283[m3/h], from the

designed valve are similar to the Kv calculated by
SAMSON, so the design of the valve is validated.

Are Similar

Low discrepancy
Calculation of KvA - Scenario 330 [m3/h]
The KvA calculated with flow = 330[m3/h], from the
designed valve are similar to the Kv calculated by
SAMSON, so the design of the valve is validated.

Are Similar
Low discrepancy
Page 10
5. Designing a new valve DN200 - Kv calculations.
5.2 Calculation of KvB scenario 283 and 330 [m3/h] at 1,82[bar]
The goal is to find the Kv corresponding to each point of the different cases in both flow scenarios. these points
must be similar to calculated by valve sizing application, that means the behavior will be the same.
Calculation of KvB - Scenario 283 [m3/h]

The KvB calculated with flow = 283[m3/h], from the

designed valve are similar to the Kv calculated by
SAMSON, so the design of the valve is validated.

Are Similar

Low discrepancy
Calculation of KvB - Scenario 330 [m3/h]

The KvB calculated with flow = 330[m3/h], from the

designed valve are similar to the Kv calculated by
SAMSON, so the design of the valve is validated.

Low discrepancy Are Similar Page 11

6. Circuit boundary conditions.
Open and
Close Closed
butterfly butterfly
Valve Valve scenario
scenarios

3-way valve 3-way valve

DN 150 DN 200

P08A P08A
P08B P08B

P08C
P08C

- Real Wall Roughness chosen = 0,1 mm = 100 micra The DN200 valve is placed inside the
- Real Flow 1: 283,57 m3/h = 0,07876 m3/sg / 2 = 0,0393833 m3/sg circuit and tested in two scenarios:
(P08+P08)
- Max Flow 2: 330 m3/h = 0,0916 m3/sg / 2 = 0,0458333 m3/sg Scenario 1: 283 [m3/h] Closed bypass
(P08+P08) Scenario 2: 330 [m3/h] Closed bypass
- Real Pressure:
- Inlet ST4 pressure = 1,78223 bar = 178223 Pa
- Inlet accelerator pressure = 1,82198 bar = 182198 Pa

Page 12
7. Parametric studies and Goals optimizations.
Parametrics studies with closed bypass:

1. Goal optimization (283 m3/h): search shutter (3Wv) position to reach

T = 23±0,2ºC.
2. Goal optimization (330 m3/h): search shutter (3Wv) position to reach
T = 23±0,2ºC.
3. What if Analysis Rangeability (330 m3/h), move shutter along the
stroke (0% to 100%) to determine the main values, valve and circuit.
4. What if Analysis Rangeability (283 m3/h), move shutter along the
stroke (0% to 100%) to determine the main values, valve and circuit.

TT302 Position
Pressure Probes

Page 13
8. Scenario 1: 283[m3/h] Closed bypass – Flow Balance.

108,5 m3/h
38,3 %

174,5 m3/h
61,7 %

QT = QByp + QST4+QAccSR

P08A
P08B
P08C

Page 14
8.1. Scenario 1: 283[m3/h] Closed bypass – Pressure.

Future KvQ=283 = 481

∆p =
0,36 bar

∆p =
0,32 bar

Off P08A On P08B On P08C

Off P08A On P08B On P08C

- Pa 143537 Pa 146659 Pa
Page 15
8.2. Scenario 1: 283[m3/h] Closed bypass – Temperature.

TT 302 =
296,17 [K]

Off P08A On P08B On P08C

OUT - ºC OUT 23,13 ºC OUT 23,03 ºC

Page 16
8.3. Scenario 1: 283[m3/h] Closed bypass – Data list.
Data list:
Data Simulated 283 m3/h
A cross check of Kv is made in Samson
software, introducing the pressure drop
(0,36[bar]) to obtain the Kv calculated by
the Samson valve sizing for a valve of
size DN200 with a Kvs of 630 and
compare both, simulated Kv481 versus
calculated Kv471. This means that the
simulation is in accordance with the
calculation made by the manufacturer.
The inlet pump pressure will be P08C =
1,46 [bar], P08B = 1,43 [bar].

Comparison of the results with Samson valve sizing

0,36bar

Page 17
9. Scenario 2: 330[m3/h] Closed bypass – Flow Balance.

126,0 m3/h
38,2 %

204,1 m3/h
61,8 %

QT = QByp + QST4+QAccSR

P08A
P08B
P08C

Page 18
9.1. Scenario 2: 330[m3/h] Closed bypass – Pressure.

Future KvQ=330 = 475

∆p =
0,48 bar

∆p =
0,52 bar

Off P08A On P08B On P08C

- Pa 129908 Pa 134497 Pa
Page 19
9.2. Scenario 2: 330[m3/h] Closed bypass – Temperature.

TT 302 =
296,19 [K]

Off P08A On P08B On P08C

OUT - ºC OUT 23,12 ºC OUT 23,05 ºC

Page 20
9.3. Scenario 2: 330[m3/h] Closed bypass – Data list.
Data Simulated 330 m3/h Data list:

A cross check of Kv is made in Samson

software, introducing the pressure drop
(0,48[bar]) to obtain the Kv calculated by
the Samson valve sizing for a valve of
size DN200 with a Kvs of 630 and
compare both, simulated Kv475 versus
calculated Kv 476. This means that the
simulation is in accordance with the
calculation made by the manufacturer.
The inlet pump pressure will be P08C =
1,34 [bar], P08B = 1,29 [bar].

Comparison of the results with Samson valve sizing

0,48bar

Page 21
10. Valve Rangeability 283[m3/h].
Working point:

The manufacturers of valves in general

advise not to work in the 20% of stroke
by both sides. The graph shows this
aspect by not graphing both ends of the
valve work.

In this case the working point is in

50,63% of stroke, with a Kv of 481 with a
pressure drop of 0,355 ≈ 0,36

Page 22
11. Valve Rangeability 330[m3/h].
Working point:

The manufacturers of valves in general

advise not to work in the 20% of stroke
by both sides. The graph shows this
aspect by not graphing both ends of the
valve work.

In this case the working point is in

48,80% of stroke, with a Kv of 475 with a
pressure drop of 0,48

Page 23
12. Conclusions.

Flow rate 283 - 330 [m3/h] (Closed bypass).

1. The current values of pressure in the aspiration have a discrepancy of less than - 0.05bar compared to those
calculated in the initial design (Part I). The order of magnitude simulated is aligned with operation data.

2. A valve design with a linear characteristic has been drawing and compared with SAMSON valve sizing, with the
conclusion has a low discrepancy 5,5% (worse case) between calculated (samson software) vs design. This means
that the designed valve is the adequate one to performed the study.

3. The simulated Kv, with a close linear response, are very similar to than future one DN200, less than 0,84%
discrepancy (worse case), it means that the behavior will be similar to the future valve with nominal KVs 630.

Page 24
12. Conclusions.

4. DN150 – Kv262 is a current valve: we move from a scenario in which the pressure is not higher than 0.7 bar in
case of closed bypass.
Toward two scenarios with an average expected pressure of 1.4 bar in the case of 283 [m3/h] with DN200 – Kv 471
and 1.3 bar in the case of 330 [m3/h] with DN200 – Kv 476 (closed bypass).
Conclusion: In this both cases the pressure increase in the pump inlet moves away from the cavitation zone
(≈0,32bar NPSH). The simulated valve size works away from the cavitation zone with closed bypass.

Page 25
12. Conclusions.

5. Temperature range is adequate to achieved the value of 23ºC±0,2ºC, with a comfortable relative position shutter
around 50,63% and 48.80% of stroke in each case.

Data Simulated 283 m3/h Data Simulated 330 m3/h

OUT 23,13 ºC OUT 23,03 ºC OUT 23,12 ºC OUT 23,05 ºC

Page 26
12. Conclusions.

6. A cross check was made in order to confirm with samson software if the values of pressure drop are similar
between the calculated and simulated.

The values are very similar that means the confidence in the simulated values for the DN200 size valve.

7.We can expect a behavior like the following:

Data Simulated 283 m3/h Data Simulated 330 m3/h

Page 27
13. Final specifications.

Finally the technical specifications for the purchase of the valve should be the following according to the study
performed:
• Size: DN200
• Nominal Kv: 630
• Kv for the work point, with 0,36 bar of pressure drop at 283 [m3/h]: 481
• Kv for the work point, with 0,48 bar of pressure drop at 330 [m3/h]: 475
• Rated working speed for water: between 2.5 (Flow 283m3/h) – 3.0 (Flow 330m3/h) [m/s]

Page 28
14. Next steps.

The study is already finished, and final steps are:

1. Part 4: Search for offers to buy the valve, including:

 Modification of the circuit, (pipes), to fit new requirements.
 Installation Project (Cost and Schedule).

2. Part 5: Pumping capacity study.

Page 29
ALBA Synchrotron Light Source

Thank you.