Sequence of control valves, shut-off valves, and elbows
Thread Content
This post was last edited by security on 2011-4-24 08:18. Manual valves at both ends of the control valve: In the traditional design, it is main pipeline---manual valve----narrow section----control valve-----wider section----manual valve----main pipeline. If it becomes main pipeline---narrow section----manual valve----control valve-----manual valve----wider section----main pipeline (is this feasible?), then the two manual valves would be smaller and more cost-effective? ? ?
This depends specifically on the type of control valve, the precision of valve regulation, and the type of material. It is generally not recommended to change it.
This approach is not appropriate; it’s not a matter of saving resources, but rather the fact that it fails to meet the required standards. It is especially unsuitable when strict requirements exist regarding pressure drop in the pipelines
I’m not feeling well; once the pipe narrows, the impact on the check valve increases, and over time it’s prone to breaking
The manual valve encounters too much resistance, so it may not be able to open or close properly, and the flow rate increases as well; this is not acceptable.
The manual valve encounters too much resistance, so it may not be able to open or close properly, and the flow rate increases as well; this is not acceptable.
Throttling at the neck section facilitates control by the control valve.....................
Main pipeline---narrowing section----manual valve----control valve-----manual valve----widening section----main pipeline. In my opinion, after the diameter is reduced, the adjustment degrees of the two manual valves and the control valve are the same; this is not as good as the previous approach where adjustment was done using the larger-diameter pipe first, followed by adjustment via the control valve, which provided a wider range of adjustment possibilities. Moreover, after necking, the impact force of the fluid on the valve when the manual valve is switched increases, which is not conducive to protecting the valve.
In my opinion, although going from a reduced-neck design to a hand valve reduces the size of the valve, the flow rate may not meet the required levels.