1

Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Utah State University, Logan

Utah, 84322-8200.
2
Manager of Corporate Engineering, VALTEK International, Springville Utah, 84633.
1
CALIBRATION AND VERIFICATION OF CAVITATION
TESTING FACILITIES USING AN ORIFICE
by William Rahmeyer
1
and Fred Cain
2
ABSTRACT
NOMENCLATURE
The following symbols were used in this paper:
Cv Flow Coefficient (gallons-in/min-lb
1/2
)
Cv/d
2
Flow Coefficient (gallons/in-min-lb
1/2
), independent of line size
d Inside pipe diameter at valve or orifice (inches)
F
L
Pressure Recovery Factor
G
f
Specific gravity of the fluid (dimensionless)
K
c
Incipient choking cavitation parameter
(dimensionless)
P
1
Upstream pressure of the valve/orifice (psia)
P
2
Downstream pressure of the valve/orifice
(psia)
P
V
Vapor pressure of the liquid (psia)
!P Pressure drop across valve/orifice (psi)
q Volumetric flowrate (gpm)
" Cavitation parameter for valve/orifice (dimensionless)
"
CHOKED
Design limit of choking cavitation
"
CONSTANT
Design limit of constant/critical cavitation
"
INCIPIENT
Design limit of incipient cavitation
"
MV
Design limit of maximum vibration
2
INTRODUCTION
Testing valves for cavitation is a specialized procedure that often produces questionable
results because of the inexperience and lack of quality control by the testing laboratory. The
proposed draft of "Considerations for Evaluating Control Valve Cavitation" (1) is just one of the
current documents (2,3,4,5) that provides information on how to test a valve for cavitation.
However, accurate testing still requires training and experience of laboratory personnel,
specialized instrumentation, quality control on measurements as well as the fluid properties, and
verification of the test procedures and methods.
One of the simplest components to study and produce cavitation is the orifice. It has
been studied in detail by a number of researchers (6,7,8) and in 1975 Ball and Stripling first
published values for the cavitation limits and flow coefficient of an orifice plate. It is proposed
that a simple orifice can be used as a calibration device (Cavitator) that can provide the
necessary training and quality control for a laboratory. As part of this study, a calibration orifice
and attached pipe spools were fabricated and then tested at seven different laboratories. The
laboratories were independent of each other, with their own testing personnel and
instrumentation. The purpose of the repetitive testing was to show the accuracy of the calibrator
and verify that the methodology and device could be used for quality control. The test results
were also compared to the 1975 test results (6) of a similar orifice.
APPLICATION
The applications of the calibration orifice include the following uses:
1. Provide laboratory qualification of abilities and instrumentation to test valves for
cavitation;
2. Verify accuracy of instrumentation to measure flow rate, pressure differential, and
acceleration;
3. Demonstrate the cavitation limits and levels of noise and vibration associated
with cavitation;
4. Provide training and experience of laboratory personnel;
3
Fi gur e 1 Cal i br at i on Shar p- edged Or i f i ce
CALIBRATION ORIFICE (CALIBRATOR)
The flow component or calibration orifice is a simple sharp-edged, concentric orifice
plate(1,7,8). The orifice (Figure 1) that was fabricated for this study was stainless steel orifice
with a 1.534 inch throat/opening. The orifice was installed in standard schedule steel pipe with a
inside diameter of 3.068 inches. The beta or diameter ratio of the orifice was then 0.5.
Pressure taps were located upstream of the orifice at a distance of 6.14 inches or 2 pipe
diameters, and were located 30.68 inches (10 pipe diameters) downstream of the orifice. The
pressure taps were located on the sides of the test piping so that any air bubbles or debris would
not be trapped. The overall line size of the calibration orifice is not important providing size
scale effects are considered (1,3). Calibration orifices in almost any pipe size can be used if
there is sufficient flow capacity and the beta ratio of the orifice is 0.5. The thickness of the plate
is greater than typical orifice plates in order to remain rigid under the severe vibration of
cavitating flow. The dimensions of the orifice that are critical are the beta ratio of 0.5 and the
location of pressure taps at 2 diameters and at 10 diameters.
It is very important to note that the calibration orifice and any cavitation testing should
only be performed with liquids that have no undissolved air bubbles entrained in the flow. Air is
often entrained in the flow from a bad seal or gasket in other flow components such as upstream
control valves or from the water supply such as the return piping in a pump sump.
4
INSTRUMENTATION AND TEST MEASUREMENTS
The instrumentation required for the calibration tests are: an accurate flowmeter, an
accurate differential pressure gage or a manometer, and an accelerometer and vibration meter. It
should be possible to obtain at least a 1% accuracy of flow and pressure differential. The
accelerometer and vibration meter (1) should be capable of measuring vibrations in the 5 to 50
kHz range and with enough sensitivity to distinguish between cavitation and flow
noise(turbulence). However, the frequency range is restricted by the natural frequency of the
accelerometer or its mounting method. Generally, the smaller piezoelectric accelerometers that
are rigidly mounted the best high-frequency limit.
Other accelerometer mounting are acceptable if frequencies of the harmonic range are
filtered out. As a rule-of-thumb, the smaller the flow geometry, the higher the frequencies that
need to be measured. Valves in the 2-inch to 4-inch size range provide good data in the 5 kHz
range. Smaller valves and multiple stage valves with small flow passages may require
instrumentation for measurements in the 15 to 20 kHz range. The location of the accelerometer
is arbitrary as long as a strong enough signal can be achieved. The accelerometer for this study
was placed magnetically at different locations on the orifice flange and at different locations on
the downstream piping. It is preferable to place the accelerometer as close to the valve or orifice
as possible.
The test data should include: flow rate q; upstream pressure P
1;
pressure differential !P;
vibration or acceleration; and the general observation of the magnitude of the cavitation
intensity (ie. none, mild, moderate, or heavy). Fluid temperature and barometric pressure should
also be measured. They are needed to determine the vapor pressure P
V
of the fluid. The
geometry and dimensions of the orifice, piping, and pressure tap locations should be noted.

5
(1)
FLOW COEFFICIENT
The flow coefficient or pressure loss coefficient is used to relate the pressure loss of a
valve or orifice to the discharge of the valve/orifice. The most widely used flow coefficient is
C
V
(9) of equation 1, where q is in gpm, !P is the pressure drop in psi, and Sg is the specific
gravity of the fluid.
The definition of C
V
is per Instrument Society of America S75.02 testing specifications
for control valves (9). The main consideration in determining C
V
is that the pressure drop !P is
measured from static wall taps upstream and downstream of the test valve and in locations of
fully developed, uniform pipe flow.
The flow coefficient is experimentally determined for three to five test runs that are made
at different flow rates and pressure drops. The test runs are made at high Reynolds numbers and
turbulent flows such that the flow coefficient should remain constant. Runs made at levels of
heavy cavitation are avoided because of the effect of cavitation on C
V
. The flow coefficient is
then calculated from the average of the test runs.
It must be noted that C
v
is not dimensionless, and has the English units of gallons inch
per minute per lb
1/2
. The flow rate, q, is in gallons per minute, and the pressure drop of !P=P
1
-P
2
is in psi for water at standard conditions. The majority of published flow coefficients and
cavitation data for control valves use the form of C
v.
A major disadvantage to the use of C
v
is
that C
v
is not independent of valve size or orifice line size. Therefore, in this paper the
parameter of C
v
/d
2
is substituted for C
v
, because C
v
/d
2
is independent of line size.
CAVITATION
Cavitation is a liquid phenomena based on the formation and collapse of vapor cavities in
the fluid passing through a valve or orifice. The vapor cavities begin to grow in low pressure
regions such as areas of separation and collapse downstream of the low pressure regions.
Cavitation can produce the effects of noise, vibration, and erosion or damage to a valve and
downstream piping.

Cavitation parameter
The cavitation parameter or index is a dimensionless ratio used to relate the conditions
which inhibit cavitation to the conditions which cause cavitation. Equation 2 is the form of the
parameter used for this paper. The cavitation parameter can be used to predict the pressure drop
6
(2)
or discharge at which a control valve or orifice will begin to experience a given level of
cavitation. If the " calculated for the actual operating pressures of a valve or orifice is less than
the value of " for a cavitation limit, the valve or orifice will experience a level of cavitation more
severe than that associated with the limit.
The intensity of cavitation increases with the decrease in " until intensity reaches a
maximum level between the cavitation levels of constant and choked. The intensity then
decreases due to the cavitation vapor cloud or collapse events moving downstream away from
the accelerometer. The intensity of cavitation appears to be less at choked cavitation because the
collapsing cavitation bubbles are well downstream of the accelerometer.

Incipient Cavitation
Incipient cavitation is defined as the flow conditions at which cavitation is first
noticeable. Usually incipient cavitation can be described as very intermittent popping sounds.
Incipient cavitation can be detected aurally or electronically with hydrophones and
accelerometers (10).
The flow conditions for incipient cavitation are for a given upstream pressure, valve
opening, and pressure drop. The flow is usually set at a large " value, greater than 20, where
there are no effects of cavitation. The testing procedure is to then increase the flow rate or
pressure drop in small increments for a constant upstream pressure and valve opening or orifice
size until cavitation can first be detected. Incipient " is then calculated for the flow conditions at
which cavitation began.
Figure 2 shows the results of the calibration tests of the calibration orifice performed at
Utah State University. Incipient cavitation occurred at about a SIGMA (") of 2.7. At " values
greater than 2.7, there was no cavitation and only flow noise. It is important to note, the
magnitude of vibration readings is not as important as the " value at the inception points.
Different instrumentation can produce repeatable " values for incipient and constant cavitation
while measuring significantly different magnitudes of vibration.
Constant Cavitation
Constant or Critical cavitation is another level or limit of cavitation. It can also be
mathematically represented by the cavitation parameter of Equation 2. Generally, critical
cavitation is about 80% of the value of the cavitation parameter for incipient cavitation.
Constant or critical cavitation occurs at a light to moderate level of cavitation. It can be
experimentally determined (11) by the use of accelerometers and vibration meters as the set of
conditions at which the cavitation suddenly becomes constant and increases at a slower rate with
7
Fi gur e 2 Vi br at i on ver sus Si gma f or USU Or i f i ce Test s
increased pressure drop than for the incipient cavitation. Constant cavitation is a good design
limit for the operation of most valves/orifices, because the cavitation effects of noise and
vibration are still light and not objectionable. The noise level associated with critical cavitation
is usually less than 80 decibels (A-scale). For valves and orifices, there is no cavitation damage
associated with critical cavitation. Figure 2 shows constant cavitation occurring at a " of about
2.3
Maximum Vibration
The limit of maximum cavitation vibration represents the conditions in which the
maximum levels of cavitation noise and vibration are produced (12). Figure 2 shows the limit
occurring at a " of 1.4. Maximum vibration should no be used as a design limit because extreme
levels of cavitation damage often occur between the limit of maximum vibration and the limit of
constant cavitation. The inherent value of "
MV
is questionable as a limit or cavitation level since
8
(3)
(4)
it greatly varies with pressure, type of valve, valve opening, the type of downstream piping, and
with the location of the accelerometer.
Choked Cavitation
The maximum liquid flow through a control valve is limited by the phenomena of
choking cavitation. Choking cavitation (11,12) occurs when the local pressure inside a control
valve decreases to the vapor pressure of the liquid, and the contracted flow through the valve
flashes to vapor. At choking cavitation, the maximum flow for a given geometry and upstream
pressure (regardless of downstream pressure) is reached.
There has been a great amount of confusion about the use of the limit of choking
cavitation. The limit of choking cavitation is a maximum flow limit and should not be used as an
operating limit unless the valve and downstream piping are specifically engineered to withstand
this most severe condition.. A control valve that is operating with choking cavitation can
experience maximum structural stresses as well as severe effects of cavitation damage, noise,
and vibration. The design limit of choking cavitation should be used to predict maximum
discharge that a valve can experience and to predict the pressure drops and actuator forces
associated with the maximum discharge. Manuals and publications by ISA (13) and EPRI (2)
continue to incorrectly represent choking cavitation as an operating limit for control valves. The
K
C
parameter used by ISA and EPRI is actually the limit of incipient choking at which cavitation
vapor begins to choke the flow , and is not the operating limit at which a valve begins to cavitate.
The choking cavitation limit represented by "
CHOKED
can be related to the Pressure
Recovery Factor F
L
by Equation 3. F
L
is a form of the choking cavitation parameter (Equation 4)
that is used by most valve manufactures and valve design procedures (1,9). For cold water, the
value for "
CHOKED
can be related to
The pressure recovery factor, F
L,
can also be thought of as the ratio of the theoretical
discharge (at P
2
=P
V
) to the actual discharge (at P
2
=P
V
) through a valve for a given upstream
pressure and geometric shape. For a given upstream pressure and valve opening, the pressure
recovery factor calculates the maximum possible flow that can pass through the valve for a given
upstream pressure. F
L
is dimensionless and independent of valve or line size. It varies with
9
valve opening or orifice size (beta), and usually decreases as the valve opening or orifice beta
increases.
In liquid flows, the flow conditions corresponding to the limits of the pressure recovery
factor are those of choking and flashing cavitation. Pressures inside or downstream of the valve
are at vapor pressure, and any further decrease in downstream pressure of the valve will not
increase the flow through the valve. It is not recommended to operate most control valves or
orifices under the conditions of choking cavitation. A valve that is experiencing choking
cavitation is operating at the most severe level of cavitation and the downstream piping may be
experiencing large pockets of unstable vapor.
The ISA 75.02 standard (14) on capacity testing procedures explains the method used to
test for the pressure recovery factor F
L
. It is also possible to determine F
L
from the flow
conditions (q and P
1
)associated with choked flow and when the downstream pressure P
2
is at
vapor pressure.
Pressure and Size Scale Effects
The cavitation parameter was derived with the assumption that size of the system and that
the fluid properties other than vapor pressure would have little effect on the parameter (15).
Comparisons of field installations and limited testing of valves with different fluids has shown
the cavitation parameter is not affected by the other fluid properties such as viscosity, density,
surface tension, etc. The temperature of the fluid is accounted for by the use of the vapor
pressure in the cavitation parameter. However, tests show that, for control valves, the cavitation
parameter is affected by line size and pressure.
These size and pressure scale effects for valves can be significant for the limits of
incipient, constant, and maximum vibration. Orifices do not have pressure effects for incipient
and constant cavitation. A size scale factor must be used to correct data from orifices of
different sizes. Both valves and orifices do not have scale effects for choking cavitation. The
advantage of using an orifice for calibration is that the upstream pressure does not have to be
controlled or maintained at any set value.
Another effect on cavitation and the cavitation parameter is the presence of undissolved
gas bubbles in the fluid. Large amounts of undissolved gas will cause the formation of vapor
pockets (cavitation) to be suppressed, and will lessen the effects and intensity of cavitation. It is
important that undissolved gas bubbles be removed from the test flows when any cavitation
limits or levels are evaluated and tested. Test setups that utilize flow supply from some types of
re-circulating and blow-down systems, can introduce undissolved gas and significantly under
predict cavitation.

10
TEST LABORATORIES
Seven different laboratories contributed test results for the calibration orifice and piping
spools of this study. The flow supply systems varied from single source (constant pressure
reservoirs) to blow down (pressurized air-water tanks) to re-circulating systems (pumps and
pump sumps). The laboratories tested with different pressures, piping setups, and temperatures.
The laboratories were also located in states with different elevations and barometric pressures.
RESULTS
Table 1 summarizes the test results of the calibration orifice tests. Initially, two of the
test labs were not successful in determining cavitation levels. It was found that one of the labs
was introducing undissolved air in the return flow into its pump sumps, and another lab was
introducing undissolved air into the flow from a bad gasket on a control valve. After the
undissolved air was eliminated, the correct cavitation levels and limits were achieved. A third
lab was able to produce correct cavitation values but the C
V
values were significantly different.
After checking and re-calibrating the labs flowmeters, the correct C
V
values were produced.
The original 1975 orifice tests from Ball and Stripling (6) found C
V
/d
2
= 5.5;
"
I
= 2.7; "
C
= 2.3; and F
L
= 0.9. The test results in Table 1 show that the seven laboratories were
able to determine an average flow coefficient of C
V
/d
2
= 5.52 and with a maximum data scatter
of 1.5%. The average cavitation limits were determined to be "
I
= 2.66; "
C
= 2.33; and F
L
=
0.86 and had a maximum data scatter of 2.5%. The maximum vibration limit had a poor
correlation with an average value of "
MV
= 1.40 and a maximum data scatter of 15.5%.
11
Table 1 Test Data for ISA Cavitator
LAB
P1
psig
Pv
psig
Cv/d
2
"
I
"
C
"
MV
F
L
A 90 -11.1 5.43 2.62 2.3 1.55 0.85
B 100 -12.2 5.51 2.68 2.37 1.38 0.86
B 50 -12.2 5.51 2.68 2.37 1.5 0.86
C 200 -13 5.55 2.7 1.13 0.88
D 164 5.47 2.61 2.4 0.86
E 214 -13.7 5.59 2.7 2.3 1.37 0.85
E 114 5.59 2.6 2.3 1.47 0.85
F 300 5.56 2.65 2.27 1.42 0.85
G 114 -14.1 5.47 2.74 2.35 0.86
avg
5.52 2.66 2.33 1.40 0.86
max 5.59 2.74 2.40 1.55 0.88
min 5.43 2.60 2.27 1.13 0.85
max dev 1.4% 2.8% 2.9% 10.5% 2.3%
min dev -1.7% -2.4% -2.7% -19.5% -1.1%
REFERENCES
1. ISA-dRP75.23, Considerations for Evaluating Control Valve Cavitation, Draft
Recommended Practice, Instrument Society of America, Research Triangle Park, NC.
1994.
2. EPRI, Guideline for the Application and Use of Valves in Power Plant Systems, EPRI-
NP-6516, prepared by Stone and Webster, August 1990.
3. NRC Publication NUREG/CR-6031, Cavitation Guide for Control Valves, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 1993.
4. Rahmeyer, W.J., "Cavitation Testing of Control Valves", Advances in Instrumentation,
Vol. 38, ISA, Research Triangle Park, NC., 1983.
12
5. Rahmeyer, W.J., "The Critical Flow Limit and Pressure Recovery Factor for Flow
Control", Jr. of Instrumentation and Control, INTECH, November, 1986.
6. Numachi, F., Yamabe, M., and Oba, R. (1960). "Cavitation Effect on the Discharge
Coefficient of the Sharp-Edged Orifice Plate'" Journal of Basic Engineering, ASME,
pp. 1-11.
7. Ball, J.W., Tullis, J.P., and Stripling, T.E. (1975). "Predicting Cavitation In Sudden
Enlargements," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. HY7, pp. 857-870.

8. Rahmeyer, W.J., "Energy Dissipation and Limiting Discharge with Orifices", ASCE
Pipeline Division Journal, November 1987.
9. ANSI/ISA S75.01-1985, Flow Equations for Sizing Control Valves, Instrument Society
of America, Research Triangle Park, NC. 1985.
10. Rahmeyer, W.J., "Test Procedures for Determining Cavitation Limits in Control Valves",
Journal of the American Water Works Association, November 1986.
11. Rahmeyer, W.J., "Prediction of Flashing, Choking, and Constant Cavitation in Control
Valves", Proceedings of the ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping Conference, ASME, New
Orleans, LA, June 1992.
12. Tullis, J.P., "Choking and Supercavitating Valves", Jr. of Hydraulics, ASCE, Dec. 1971,
pp 1931-1945.
13. Hutchison, J.W., Handbook of Control Valves, 2nd Edition, Instrument Society of
America, Research Triangle Park, NC., 1976.
14. ANSI/ISA S75.02-1988, "Control Valve Capacity Test Procedures", Instrument Society
of America, Research Triangle Park, NC. 1988.
15. Tullis, J.P., 1973, "Cavitation Scale Effects for Valves", Journal of the Hydraulics
Division, ASCE, Vol. 99, No. HY7, P. 1109, 1973.