Experimental and Analytical Investigations on Liquid Impact Erosion

Thiruvengadam, A.; Rudy, S. L.; Gunasekaran, M.

doi:10.1520/stp26873s

Cited by 27 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there is no experimental evidence supporting this idea. The erosional velocity calculated from this equation seems to be very conservative as compared to the experimental data from literature [3,4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…The API RP 14E erosional velocity, V e (in ft/s) can be determined from the following equation, 1 where c is the empirical constant and ρ m is the gas/liquid mixture density in lb/ft 3 . In this equation c = 100 for continuous service and c = 125 for intermittent service for solid-free fluids.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is obvious that some of the experimental results provided in Table 1 are significantly different. For example, Thiruvengadam [3] used a jet stream and paddle wheel experiment and determined that the threshold velocity for SS-316 is 46 m/s (150 ft/s), but Hattori used a liquid jet and determined a threshold velocity for SS-304 of 120 m/s (393 ft/s).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Calculation of Erosional Velocity Due to Liquid Droplets with Application to Oil and Gas Industry Production

Arabnejad

Shirazi

McLaury

et al. 2013

SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The American Petroleum Institute Recommended Practice 14E (API RP 14E) describes a method for calculating an "erosional" velocity, a threshold velocity at which it is presumably safe to operate. The origin of this guideline appears to remain a mystery, but some authors and operators assume that the basis for API RP 14E is erosion due to liquid droplet impacts. However, there is no experimental evidence supporting this idea. In this work, a method has been developed to calculate erosion resulting from liquid impact for pipeline materials that are used in oil and gas industry applications. Material loss data has been collected for several oil field materials such as stainless and carbon steels, chromium alloys, inconel and duplex utilizing specimens that were mounted on a rotating flywheel and impacting liquid jets. The data and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) G73 guideline are combined to develop a method for calculating erosion resulting from liquid droplets impacting the surface of the pipe materials under specific flow conditions. The results from this model have been compared to data provided in the literature for both liquid jets and droplets impacting specimens utilizing different materials, droplet sizes or jet diameters and velocities. Although the model was developed based on data at relatively low velocity conditions, the results agree well with data for a variety of flow speeds and conditions. Furthermore, the model for liquid impact erosion is used to predict threshold velocities for specific flow conditions for elbow geometry to avoid erosion-corrosion due to liquid impacts. Moreover, the results of this model are compared for several different flow conditions with API RP 14E. It is shown that the trend of the erosional velocity calculated by the API guideline does not correlate with the erosional velocity calculated by the present method that is based on the liquid droplet erosion model.The model presented in this work will be improved as more data and information becomes available. An example is provided in which Computational Fluid Dynamics simulations are being used for different droplet and impinging jet diameters to improve the performance of the model.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Calculation of Erosional Velocity Due to Liquid Droplets with Application to Oil and Gas Industry Production

Arabnejad

Shirazi

McLaury

et al. 2013

SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The procedure for each test was as follows: 1 The system was activated with water discharging onto a scrap aluminum block. Desired theoretical jet velocity V was established by adjusting the pressure regulator to provide water pressure P of 34.5 MN/m 2 (5000 psi), 51.7 MN/m 2 (7500 psi), or 68.9 MN/m 2 (10,000 psi).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Erosion and its Effect on a Water-Cooled Turbine

Freedman

1978

Volume 1B: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Erosion tests were run to obtain data for designing a water-cooled gas turbine collection shroud. All tests utilized a coherent stream of water ejected from a static nozzle against stationary small block specimens. Twenty-one tests were run with aluminum specimens and 16 more tests with other materials. The impact velocity was varied from 165 to 270 m/s (540 to 890 fps). The impact angle was varied from 10 to 90 deg. The mass loss rate results generally show four erosion regions, which are consistent with the literature. A correlation between regions two and four was found. Aluminum specimen erosion rate was found to be unexpectedly high with impact angles of 10 deg and moderate-to-high impact velocity. No report of previous liquid erosion work at impact angles less than 30 deg was found; since it is expected that water-cooled gas turbines will operate at impact angles of about 15 deg, erosion in this low impact angle region should be studied. If the correlation between erosion regions two and four can be quantized, then very short-time tests could be used to predict long-term erosion at minimal cost.

show abstract

“…Such a concept in erosion behavior of some materials could be called as erosion limit [23]. It means that there is a threshold velocity below which the applied shock pressure cannot cause material loss within a certain time limit.…”

Section: Water Droplet Erosion Damagementioning

confidence: 99%