December 2021

OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF AUTOMATION

Using Control Valve Installed Gain Calculations

Industrial Autonomy on the Horizon
Extreme OT Data Makeovers
Applying ISA/IEC 62443

Advanced Analytics Improve

Predictive Models

www.isa.org/intech
 A worksheet that calculates control valve
installed gain can be part of any control valve
selection process.

F
By Jon F. Monsen, or many years, the author has used, This article explains how to use control valve in-
PhD, PE and promoted the use of, control valve stalled gain calculations.
installed flow and gain graphs as part Figure 1 is an example of a properly sized valve
of the control valve selection process (references compared to an oversized valve. One valve man-
1–3). For all those years, the author has had the ufacturer suggests the following gain criteria for
benefit of being associated with a valve manu- installed gain within the specified flow range:
facturer with a publicly available control valve- • Gain > 0.5
sizing application that included installed flow • Gain < 3.0
and gain graphing capability. Users who pre- • As constant as possible
ferred other brands of control valves, and thus • As close to 1.0 as possible
those manufacturers’ control valve-sizing applica- • Gain (max) / Gain (min) < 2.0.
tions, were hesitant to learn to use a new applica- Extremely low gains are undesirable, because
tion to take advantage of the graphing capability. a low gain means when the valve moves, the
Recently, the author published an article that flow does not change by much. It might not be
included detailed instructions for constructing a as obvious why high gains are undesirable. An
Microsoft Excel worksheet (www.control-valve- audio amplifier with a high gain may be desir-
application-tools.com) that generates installed able. But control valves are mechanical devices,
flow and gain graphs in conjunction with valve- and parts that move while in contact with each
sizing calculations made with any valve-sizing other tend to stick when not moving. If a valve,
application. This makes it practical for anyone because it tends to stick when not moving, can
to incorporate graphing installed flow and gain only be positioned within 2 percent of the desired
into their valve selection process (reference 4). position and has a gain of 4, the flow can only

28 INTECH DECEMBER 2021 WWW.ISA.ORG

 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

FAST FORWARD
l An Excel worksheet makes it practical to
include the graphing of installed flow and
gain in the valve selection process.
l Extremely low gains are undesirable, because
a low gain means that when the valve
moves, the flow does not change by much.
l Pump selection affects installed gain and
installed flow.

be adjusted within 8 percent steps, which may cess model and the worksheet require the fol-
not be desirable. The reason for limiting the lowing information about the process:
gain change within the required flow range to • The minimum design flow, Qmin
2:1 is so it will be easier to tune the controller • The maximum design flow, Qmax
for stable and fast response throughout the re- • The valve inlet pressure at the minimum
quired flow range. design flow, P1 minQ
To calculate and graph the installed flow and • The valve inlet pressure at the maximum
gain using the reference 4 worksheet, the pro- design flow, P1 maxQ

Installed flow characteristic Installed gain

1.0 4.0
80

550
6” 550
6” 80

0.8 6”
3.0
3” 80
Relative flow, Q

3”
0.6
6” 3”
Gain

2.0
0.4
3” 550

1.0
0.2

0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Relative travel Q/Qmax

Figure 1. Control valve installed flow and installed gain characteristics comparing a properly sized 3-inch valve and an oversized 6-inch
valve in the same system. Emphasis is added to show the portion of the graphs that fall within the user’s specified flow range between
minimum and maximum required flow of 80 to 550 gpm.

WWW.ISA.ORG INTECH DECEMBER 2021 29

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

Control valve sizing: Liquid ating at about 20 percent to 78 percent

open from the minimum design flow to
the maximum design flow. An installed
flow and gain calculation yielded sur-
prising results (figure 3).
The installed flow graph shows the
minimum specified flow intersecting
the installed flow graph at 20 percent
relative travel, and the maximum de-
sign flow intersecting the installed flow
graph just a bit below 80 percent rela-
tive travel, which agrees with the user’s
calculation. What the user’s calculation
Metal seated V-port segment valve did not show is 95 percent of the valve’s
fully open flow is at the maximum de-
sign flow, leaving no safety factor at the
high end.
About 20% to 78% open At about 60 percent travel (relative
Figure 2. User’s calculation of required valve CV at maximum and minimum design flows travel of 0.6), the installed flow graph
and valve manufacturer’s CV table for a 6-inch segment ball valve. starts rounding off to a much shallower
slope. This fact is identified on the in-
stalled gain graph where the installed
Installed relative
Installed Relative flow
Flow vs.vs. relative
Relative travel
Travel Installed gain vs. Q/Qmax gain drops to below 0.5, emphasizing
1.0 4.0
95%
95%
the fact that changes in valve position
3.5
0.8
would have only a small effect on flow
Installed gain
Flowflow

3.0

0.6 2.5
in the system. The gain change from
Relative

2.0
Relative

0.4 1.5
> 4:1
the maximum design flow (Q/Qmax)
1.0
0.2
0.5 < 0.5
and the maximum gain on the graph is
0.0 0.0 greater than 4:1, making it difficult to
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Relative travel
Relative Travel Q/Qmax tune the controller for fast and stable
control. It turned out the problem lies
Installed pressure
Installed Pressure Level level
with the user’s pump choice.
100

90
Reference 4 does not include the
80 ability to graph what is happening to P1
P1
Pressure

70
and P2, and thus the pressure differen-
Pressure

60

50
P2 tial available to the valve. However, the
40 reference 4 worksheet has a tabulation
30
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
of P1 and P2, so constructing a graph
Relative travel
Relative Travel of P1 and P2 versus relative valve travel
was simple. In the installed pressure
Figure 3. Installed characteristics of the valve proposed in figure 2. level graph, as valve relative travel
approaches 0.8 (80 percent valve trav-
• The valve outlet pressure at the mini- pressure changes in the system up- el), the pressure drop available to the
mum design flow, P2 minQ (calculated stream and downstream of the control valve decreases rapidly.
from the user’s input of the valve valve (references 5–6).
pressure drop at the minimum design Reference 4 prompted several inqui- Different pump, different valves
flow, DELTA P minQ) ries as to what applications would be The user found a pump with a slightly
• The valve outlet pressure at the maxi- candidates for installed flow and gain higher and flatter head curve. A new
mum design flow, P2 maxQ (calculated graph analysis. Below are some of the analysis of the upstream system gave
from the user’s input of the valve most common. the revised values of P1 and DELTA P
pressure drop at the maximum design shown in red in figure 4. Putting these
flow, DELTA P maxQ). Surprising results new values of P1 and DELTA P into the
The values of P1 and P2 at the mini- Figure 2 shows a user’s Excel control user’s valve-sizing program and into
mum and maximum design flow need valve-sizing worksheet. The calculated the reference 4 worksheet gives the
to be obtained by an analysis of the CV range appears to show a 6-inch seg- graphs of figure 4. The valve is now op-
frictional pressure losses and static ment ball control valve would be oper- erating between 25 percent and 75 per-

30 INTECH DECEMBER 2021 WWW.ISA.ORG

 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

cent travel. The maximum design flow

Installed relative flow vs. relative travel Installed gain vs. Q/Qmax
is now at slightly less than 80 percent of 1.0 4.0
3.5
the fully open flow, giving ample safety 0.8

Relative flow

Installed gain
3.0
factor at the high end of the range. The 0.6 2.5

installed gain graph is much flatter and 0.4

2.0
1.5
well within the suggested limits. 1.0
0.2
Figure 5 is based on an application 0.5
0.0 0.0
where the system designer recom- 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Relative travel Q/Qmax
mended a 10-inch segment ball valve
after examining the installed flow and Installed pressure level
gain graphs and determining the seg- 100
45
80
25
110

ment valve was a good choice. The With revised pump

100
90
purchasing agent commented that

Pressure
80
a 10-inch high-performance butterfly 70
60
valve would cost approximately one- 50
P2

third less than the segment ball valve. 40

30
The system designer agreed to inves- 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
tigate the applicability of a high-perfor- Relative travel

mance butterfly valve, knowing the two

Figure 4. Installed characteristics of the valve with the revised figure 2 pump pressures
valve styles have quite different inher-
shown in red.
ent flow characteristics. Segment ball
valves tend to have a nearly perfect
Installed relative flow vs. relative travel Inherent flow capacity, C
equal percentage characteristic. High- 1.0
V

performance butterfly valves tend to 3000 Segment ball High-performance BF

0.8
Relative flow

have an inherent flow characteristic

Flow capacity, C V
0.6 2000
between linear and equal percentage.
The upper right graph in figure 5 0.4
1000

compares the inherent flow character- 0.2

istics of the two valves being consid- 0.0 0

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
ered. The installed characteristics are Relative travel Relative travel

linear between the design minimum 10” Segment ball valve

and maximum flows. The installed
Installed relative flow vs. relative travel Installed gain vs. Q/Qmax
gain of each valve meets the suggest- 1.0 4.0

ed gain limits between the minimum 0.8

3.5 Segment ball High-performance BF
Relative flow

3.0
and maximum design flows. The gain
Installed gain

0.6 2.5

of the segment valve is slightly closer 2.0

0.4
to 1.0. The maximum gain change of 1.5

1.0
the butterfly valve is 1.4:1, where the 0.2
0.5

maximum gain change of the segment 0.0

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
valve is 1.6:1. In this system, either Relative travel Q/Qmax
valve would likely control satisfacto- 10” High-performance butterfly valve
rily. In a system with different valve
pressure drop versus flow characteris- Figure 5. Comparison of a segment ball valve and a high-performance butterfly valve in
the same system. The installed gain of both valves is plotted on a single graph.
tics, this might not be the case.

Which pressure drop? The ideal situation is where the person ered, and the one that allows satisfac-
A question arose regarding the pres- selecting the control valve has a say tory controllability while minimizing
sure drop to use when sizing a control in determining what the control valve energy consumption will be selected.
valve. Assuming a system that has al- pressure drop will be, most often by Curves of P1, the pressure just upstream
ready been designed, the sizing pres- specifying the pump that will be used. of the valve, are shown for each of the
sure cannot be arbitrarily assigned, Using an installed gain analysis of vari- three pumps, along with the power re-
but the values of P1 and P2 need to be ous pumps that might be suitable can quired by each at a normal flow rate of
obtained by an analysis of the friction- be helpful. 400 gpm. These curves slope downward
al pressure losses and static pressure To demonstrate how this can be in proportion to the flow squared from
changes in the system both upstream done, three possible pumps for the sys- the 100 gpm pump head (45, 60, and 75
and downstream of the control valve. tem shown in figure 6 will be consid- psig, respectively, for pumps A, B, and

WWW.ISA.ORG INTECH DECEMBER 2021 31

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

Pressure losses 5 15 5
@600 gpm

Pump head
6” Sch 40
drops 5 psi
from 100 gpm 70°F
to 600 gpm 10
Water P1 P2
TC

80 75 P1 (Pump C) 29 hp*
70 65
60 P1 (Pump B) 23 hp*
60
50
65 50 45 P1 (Pump A) 17 hp* 35
35 20 Pressure units: psig
50 40
5
35 30
20 P2 30
=% Inherent 10
10
characteristic
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
* At 400 gpm

Installed GainGain
Installed flow Installed
Installed gain
1.0 40
4.0
5 psi, 17 hp *

600 gpm
100 gpm
3.5
3..5
5 6” valve 35 psi, 29 hp *
0.8 3” valve
)/dh
30
3.0
Relative flow

Fully open flow

(Relative flow = 1.0) )/dh
max
Relative Flow

17 hp*: 644 gpm 6” valve 2.5

2.5
max
0.6
d(Q/Q

23 hp*: 749 gpm 3” valve

29 hp*: 852 gpm 3” valve 20
2.0
d(Q/Q

* At 400 gpm
0.4 1.5
1.5
Gain, Gain,

20 psi, 23 hp *
10
1.0 3” valve
0.2
0.5
0.5
* At 400 gpm
0.0
0
0.0
0 0.1
0.1 0
0.2
.2 0
0.3
..3
3 0
0.4
0..4 0
0.5
.5 00.6
..6
6 0
0.7
..7
7 0
0.8
.8 0
0.9
.9 1 1.1
1.1 1.2
1..2
2
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Q/Qmax
Relative travel
Relative Travel Q/Q max

Figure 6. Control valve installed gain analysis helps balance pumping energy and process controllability.
Segment valve graphic courtesy of Neles

C) to a pressure 10 psi lower due to the difference between P1 and P2) are indi- three cases. What is interesting is the
combined effect of the 5 psi pressure cated in the figure by the arrows at the installed gain graphs.
loss in the upstream piping and the 5 left side of the figure for 100 gpm and at With the 17-hp pump, besides requir-
psi decrease in pump head from 100 the right side of the figure for 600 gpm. ing a more expensive 6-inch valve, the
gain graph looks terrible. The installed
gain is the highest of the three (meaning
a larger flow error for the same valve posi-
The ideal situation is where the person selecting the tion error), it drops to 0.4 as it approach-
control valve has a say in determining what the control es the maximum design flow (the red
vertical line at 1.0 on the Q/Qmax scale),
valve pressure drop will be, most often by specifying the and the variation in gain over the flow
pump that will be used. range is almost 7:1, much greater than
the recommendation of 2:1. This is large
enough that it would be difficult to come
gpm to 600 gpm stated in the figure. The analysis is performed based on up with proportional-integral-derivative
The curve for P2, the pressure at the con- using a segment ball valve. The graph (PID) tuning parameters that would pro-
trol valve outlet, starts with the 10 psig in the lower left of figure 6 shows the vide good and stable control over the en-
static head of the tank at very low flows calculated installed flow characteris- tire required flow range. The gain graphs
and increases in proportion to the flow tics. Keep in mind the installed flow of the 23-hp and 29-hp pumps fall within
squared to 30 psig as the downstream graphs generated by the worksheet of the recommended gain criteria, but the
piping and heat exchanger pressure the reference 4 graph is relative flow, 23-hp pump is the winner, because its
losses increase to their 600 gpm values. so 1.0 is 100 percent of the fully open gain is closer to 1.0, and it also is the more
The control valve pressure drops (the flow, which is different for each of the economical of the two to operate. n

32 INTECH DECEMBER 2021 WWW.ISA.ORG

 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

REFERENCES
Jon F. Monsen, 1. Monsen, Jon, Rules of Thumb, Flow Control, worksheet described in the reference, along
PhD, PE, (jmon- November 2012 pp. 24–26 with an enhanced version, can be found at
[email protected]) www.control-valve-application-tools.com.)
2. Monsen, Jon, An Insider’s Guide to Installed
is a control valve
Gain as a Control Valve Sizing Criterion, Flow 5. Jessee, Peter, Determining Pressure Drop
technology con-
Control, May 2015, pp. 22-25. for Control Valve Sizing, Flow Control, August
sultant for Valin
3. Monsen, Jon, Modern Tools for Sizing 2000, pp. 12-14.
Corp. , the author
of the chapter on Control Valves & Actuators, Processing January 6. Coggan, D. A, ed., “Fundamentals of Industrial
“Computerized Control Valve Sizing” in 2018 pp. 12-14 Control,” Second Edition, Research Triangle Park,
the ISA Practical Guides Book on Control 4. Monsen, Jon, Calculating the Installed NC: Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation
Valves, and the author of the book Con- Flow and Gain of a Control Valve, Process Society (ISA) (now the International Society of
trol Valve Application Technology: Tech- Instrumentation, March 2021, pp. 26–30. (The Automation—ISA), 2004. pp. 278–280.
niques and Considerations for Properly
Selecting the Right Control Valve. With
RESOURCES
his more than 40 years of experience, he
“Choked Flow in Control Valves”
has lectured nationally and internation-
www.automation.com/en-US/Articles/August-2021/Choked-Flow-Control-Valves
ally about control valve application and
sizing, and he hosts a website (www. “Using Flowmeter Diagnostic Data”
control-valve-application-tools.com) www.automation.com/en-US/Articles/February-2021/Using-Flowmeter-Diagnostic-Data
where he offers free information and
“Secure Industrial Control Systems with Configuration Control”
Excel worksheets for those who specify
www.automation.com/en-US/Articles/May-2021/Secure-Industrial-Control-Systems-Configuration
or use control valves.

WWW.ISA.ORG INTECH DECEMBER 2021 33