Danlap
Mechanical
- Sep 17, 2013
- 309
Dear respected valve practitioner,
I have only dealt with a dozen of these kind of (thousands turns) valves, and I am still wondering what was the initial reason for designing valve or gearbox with such “slow” linear movement.
Even after being refurbished, a 42”-150# Gate valve (for geothermal application years back) still required almost 1 hr to fully open/close it from fully close/open position. And that was even with the help hand-drilled gun with socket drive. 3 handwheel rotation for 1 mm linier movement.
Picture below is 24”-600# gate valve for Methanation process though. And claimed to be required approximately 3 hours to fully close/open the valve, if the valve is moving.
Having young operator with less patience and same (but getting older) valve with less reliability, thus the production team lead or asset owner getting more and more frustrated and wandering whether this kind of valve is still suitable for faster pace production.
Question:
- What was the reason / design basis?
Was it DeltaP and torque required to break open the valve? Was the gearbox with bigger Mechanical Advantage (MA) ratio in the 80’s so big, therefore not preferred weight-wise? Is it the spindle diameter? Etc.
- If I change the gearbox with bigger MA ratio, what would be the consideration factor?
Thank you in advance for the constructive reply.
Kind regards,
MR
All valves will last for years, except the ones that were poorly manufactured; are still wrongly operated and or were wrongly selected
I have only dealt with a dozen of these kind of (thousands turns) valves, and I am still wondering what was the initial reason for designing valve or gearbox with such “slow” linear movement.
Even after being refurbished, a 42”-150# Gate valve (for geothermal application years back) still required almost 1 hr to fully open/close it from fully close/open position. And that was even with the help hand-drilled gun with socket drive. 3 handwheel rotation for 1 mm linier movement.
Picture below is 24”-600# gate valve for Methanation process though. And claimed to be required approximately 3 hours to fully close/open the valve, if the valve is moving.
Having young operator with less patience and same (but getting older) valve with less reliability, thus the production team lead or asset owner getting more and more frustrated and wandering whether this kind of valve is still suitable for faster pace production.
Question:
- What was the reason / design basis?
Was it DeltaP and torque required to break open the valve? Was the gearbox with bigger Mechanical Advantage (MA) ratio in the 80’s so big, therefore not preferred weight-wise? Is it the spindle diameter? Etc.
- If I change the gearbox with bigger MA ratio, what would be the consideration factor?
Thank you in advance for the constructive reply.
Kind regards,
MR
All valves will last for years, except the ones that were poorly manufactured; are still wrongly operated and or were wrongly selected