Valve Closure Member Pressure Differential Biasing

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing flow control arrangements in the resource recovery industry, such as the XP MCV configuration, rely on costly springs that occupy valuable space, necessitating a cost-saving and space-efficient solution for maintaining the closure of the sleeve against fluid flow.

Innovation Solution

A valve arrangement with a housing and closure member that utilizes a smaller flow area bore to create lower pressure, combined with an angled opening to convey fluid pressure and generate a pressure differential, reducing the need for a large spring to bias the closure member into a closed position.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If a spring is used to hold the sleeve closed against fluid flow, then the closure member can be maintained in a closed position, but the spring is costly and occupies valuable space

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveclosure member positioningVSAvoidspring space occupation
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSVolume of stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the spring from the system entirely, replacing it with a pressure differential mechanism. The closure member is biased closed by the pressure difference created between the upstream side (higher pressure) and downstream side (lower pressure through the restricted bore), eliminating the need for a mechanical spring component.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent uses fluid pressure forces to achieve the closure biasing function. A restricted bore creates a pressure differential that generates a force on the closure member, using pneumatic/hydraulic principles instead of mechanical spring forces.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #29Pneumatics and hydraulics

2Productivity

If a spring is used to bias the closure member closed, then flow control is achieved, but the spring is costly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveflow control capabilityVSAvoidmanufacturing cost
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The expensive spring component is removed from the design. The flow control function is achieved through the pressure differential mechanism created by the restricted bore, which is simpler and less costly to manufacture than a precision spring assembly.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces an expensive, precision-manufactured spring with simpler, cheaper components - specifically the restricted bore geometry and pressure differential system - that achieve the same flow control function at lower manufacturing cost.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #27Cheap short-living objects (Disposable)

3Force

If a larger spring is used to counteract fluid drag forces, then the closure member remains closed, but the spring occupies more space and costs more

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebiasing forceVSAvoidspring volume
Core Design Contradiction:
ForceVSVolume of stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses fluid pressure forces generated by the pressure differential across the restricted bore to provide the biasing force. This hydraulic/pneumatic force generation is more space-efficient than mechanical springs, as the force is generated by the fluid system itself rather than a separate mechanical component.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #29Pneumatics and hydraulics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the operating parameters of the fluid system - specifically creating a pressure differential through restricted flow - to generate the necessary biasing force. This approach allows force generation without the volume constraints of mechanical springs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This configuration allows for a smaller, lighter, and less costly spring to maintain the closure member in a closed position, preventing fluid drag and enabling efficient flow control without the need for expensive and space-consuming springs.

Implementation Method 1

the bore being of a smaller flow area than an adjoining flow area to produce a lower pressure in flowing fluid therein than pressure in fluid flowing in the adjoining flow area

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectPressure differential: Pressure Gradient

Implementation Method 2

the bore being of a smaller flow area than an adjoining flow area to produce a lower pressure in flowing fluid therein

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectBernoulli effect: Bernoulli Effect

Data Source

PatentUS10502023B2Valve arrangement, system and method
Publication Date: 2019.12.10 BAKER HUGHES CO
  • US10502023B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A valve arrangement including a housing having a port, a closure member defining a bore, the bore being of a smaller flow area than an adjoining flow area to produce a lower pressure in flowing fluid therein than pressure in fluid flowing in the adjoining flow area, the closure member being disposed within the housing and movable between a closed position and an open position, a volume defined between the closure member and the housing, an opening in the closure member extending from the volume to the bore of the closure member to convey fluid pressure generated in the bore of the closure member to the volume thereby creating a lower pressure in the volume thereby biasing the closure member into a closed position.