Chemical Forums: A Socratic Model of Chemical Education
November 20, 2009, 12:08:14 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
Forum Rules: Read This Before Posting
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  



Google Sponsors


Content
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: When to use butterfly valve?  (Read 228 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
coalball
Very New Member
*

Mole Snacks: +0/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


View Profile
« on: November 02, 2009, 01:19:12 AM »

Dear all,

I'm working on a Water Injection Package for offshore platform (I'm in an oil and gas engineering design firm) and all of the isolation valves in that package are butterfly valve. Exactly what are the conditions that requires to use butterfly valve instead of the normal ball valve?

Thanks and regards.
Logged

eugenedakin
Oilfield Consulting Chemist
Moderator
Full Member
*****

Mole Snacks: +85/-2
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 570

My desk agrees with the law of entropy


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 03, 2009, 04:11:36 PM »

Hello coalball,

Good question! The answer I am giving will be generic, as there are always exceptions to the rule. Here are some general rule-of-thumbs. Any valve will work in any application....for a certain period of time  Wink Every valve has its own limits.

Ball Valves:
1) limited to pressure on the plastic seats.
2) typically used for higher pressure applications
3) more expensive to construct
4) Is larger for the same pipe size
5) unrestricted flow when open

Butterfly Valves:
1) take less space than ball valves
2) form a tight closing seal
3) a rubber seated butterfly valve requires high torque to remove the vane from the seat
4) have lower pressure limits
5) typically used as control valves
6) less expensive

I hope this helps.

Best wishes,

Eugene
Logged

There are 10 kinds of people in this world: Those who understand binary, and those that do not.

DrCMS
Full Member
****

Mole Snacks: +72/-46
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 534


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 04, 2009, 12:32:24 AM »

I'd add that butterfly valve are more likely to fail than ball valves and when they fail they'll fail open.
Logged
typhoon2028
Full Member
****

Mole Snacks: +8/-5
Offline Offline

Posts: 136


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 04, 2009, 01:46:02 AM »

I would avoid using ball valves where the valve is being used to control flow rate.

My experience says ball valves are most effective as on/off valve.
Logged
Duane
Very New Member
*

Mole Snacks: +0/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2009, 04:31:46 PM »

I'd agree with most of what eugendakin said, with the exception of their use as control valves, if by control he means modulating flow.  This is sometimes done, but it is definitely not an appropriate use of butterfly valves.  The flow characteristic for a butterfly valve is such that typically the valve would need to close 50% or more before seeing any significant reduction in flow.  This implies that for most modulating control situations, the valve will only be operating at 20-35% open or so.  This, by the way, is also mostly true of full-port or standard-port (uncharacterized) ball valves.  However, a number of the ball valve manufacturers will install inserts into their ball valves to provide characterization to their flow profiles, and that can be tuned for specific flow applications.  To my knowledge, this is not possible with butterfly valves.

That's not to say that a butterfly can't be used in special control circumstances, only that you should be aware of the limitations.

If by control he means on/off actuation, this is a very common and appropriate use of either butterfly valves or uncharacterized ball valves.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP
Mitch Andre Garcia's Chemical Forums 2003-Present.

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.064 seconds with 20 queries.