water

Article
Study on the Mathematical Model of Vacuum Breaker
Valve for Large Air Mass Conditions
Xiao-ying Zhang 1 , Cheng-yu Fan 2 , Xiao-dong Yu 2, *, Jian Zhang 1,2 , Jia-wen Lv 2 and Ting-yu Xu 2
1 College of Hydraulic and Civil Engineering, Xinjiang Agricultural University, Urumqi 830052, China
2 College of Water Conservancy and Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
* Correspondence: [email protected]




Received: 19 May 2019; Accepted: 28 June 2019; Published: 30 June 2019


Abstract: The mathematical model of vacuum breaker valve is significant to the protection scheme.
The more accurate the vacuum breaker valve model, the more reliable the calculation results. In this
study, the application conditions of the air valve model are analyzed according to the assumptions
used in the derivation, and the contradictions between these assumptions are proposed. Then,
according to the different working characteristics between the vacuum breaker valve on the siphon
outlet pipe and the air valve, the vacuum breaker valve model is deduced based on the modified
assumptions. In the derivation process, the thermodynamic change of the gas in the vacuum breaker
valve is assumed to follow the isentropic process rather than an isothermal process, and the water
level in the vacuum breaker valve is considered to be changeable. An engineering case is introduced,
and the results calculated according to the vacuum breaker valve model are compared with those
resulting from the air valve model. The results indicate that the vacuum breaker valve model is
suitable for large air mass conditions and can provide a theoretical basis for the numerical simulation
and settings of vacuum breaker valves.

Keywords: vacuum breaker valve; air valve; mathematical model; large air mass condition

1. Introduction
The head loss of the siphon pipe is small, the flow control in the siphon pipe is convenient when
the pumps are powered off, and the water level at the end of the siphon pipe can be lowered [1–3].
Therefore, many large pump systems with low heads and large flow usually have siphon outlet pipes
behind the pumps. To prevent serious negative pressure damage when the pumping station is powered
off, a vacuum breaker valve is usually installed at the top of the siphon pipe for security protection.
As a kind of safety device, the vacuum breaker valve can be both electronically and automatically
controlled. If it is in electronic control mode, it will open immediately as soon as the power failure
happens, while if it is in automatic control mode, it will work as long as the piezometric head in the
pipe at the location of the vacuum breaker valve decreases sharply and becomes smaller than the set
intake pressure [4]. The air sucked into the vacuum breaker valve releases the vacuum, preventing the
pipe from liquid column separation and rejoining.
In recent years, many studies have proposed water hammer protection with vacuum breaker
valves in water supply projects [5–7]. Lee and Leow proposed an improved numerical model and
the calculation method of vacuum breaker valve, using the calculation of the pressure pulsation of
gas-containing fluid in pumping station systems [8]. Numerical experiments showed that air valves
installed at the top of water pipelines under mass flow could be used to reduce the magnitude of the
negative pressure [9–13]. Lingireddy et al. found that if the air was released too quickly, the final air
release through the air vacuum valves would produce a pressure surge. Therefore, the air release
vacuum must be properly designed to avoid excessive pressure surge [14]. Li et al. characterized the

Water 2019, 11, 1358; doi:10.3390/w11071358 www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2019, 11, 1358 2 of 13

dynamics of the vacuum breaker valves and other kinds of valves, the simulation results showed
that the large pressure spikes can be generated in the vacuum breaker valve [15]. Ramezani and
Karney used the basic water hammer theory to semi-analytically explore the effects of friction to the
vacuum breaker valves [16]. Although the research on the influence of vacuum breaker valves on the
secondary transient events were conducted in the experimental studies [5,7,14,15], the rules of the
physical phenomena had not been clearly explained. Cabrera et al. explained how a specific position
of the air vacuum valve affects the transient response of the system [17]. Since the installation position
and air intake mode of the vacuum breaker valve and the air valve were similar, the mathematical
model of the vacuum breaker valve was still calculated with the air valve model in most projects.
Therefore, the research on air valves can provide reference for the development of a vacuum breaker
valve [18–20]. Jönsson raised recommendations for the correct installation position of air valves to
reaerate the pipeline [21]. Zhou et al. investigated various situations of pressure changes occurring
in pipelines with several air pockets without air release valves installed at local high points [22–24].
Considering air valve characteristics, riser dimensions, driving head and allowable working pressure,
methodologies for determining safe filling rates for the pipeline were proposed by Phu D. Tran [25].
Albertson et al. investigated pressure transients during filling for the cases of air vented through an
orifice plate or a large-orifice air valve [26,27]. The situation of filling a pipeline with an orifice plate or
a small-orifice air valve was investigated by several researchers [28–30].
Vacuum breaker valves and air valves are both negative pressure protection devices, whereas
they still have some different features. Firstly, the intake pressures of these two valves are different.
The air inlet pressure of the air valve is 0 m, while the air inlet pressure of the vacuum breaker valve
can be set according to actual engineering needs. Secondly, the valve sizes are different. More air
valves are needed to meet the requirements of water hammer protection due to the diameter of each
single air valve and the amount of the air passing through each valve are both small. In addition,
the amount of the air passing through each valve is usually small. It is difficult for the air valve
discharging out the air that sucked into the pipe as a result of small valve size. So, the air valve is
usually used as an auxiliary water hammer protection device for long-distance pipes. On the contrary,
the size of a vacuum breaker valve can be much larger, so it does not need to install too many vacuum
breaker valves in a project. In most cases there is still less air passing through the vacuum breaker
valve [20,31,32], it is reasonable to use the air valve model for one-dimensional numerical simulation
of vacuum breaker valve. However, as to the large air mass conditions (for example, only one vacuum
breaker valve is set at the top of each siphon pipe, which is of short distance, large flow, and low water
level of the outlet sump), the amount of the air passing through each valve can be much larger. As a
result, the assumptions of the air valve model cannot be satisfied. The air valve model is not suitable
for the simulation of the vacuum breaker valve anymore. Considering the importance of the accuracy
in the numerical model, it directly relates to the reliability of the simulation results for a protection
scheme. It is essential to deduce the vacuum breaker valve model, which is suitable for large air mass
conditions. In this study, the thermodynamic change of the air in the vacuum breaker valve is assumed
to follow the isentropic process, and the water level of the vacuum breaker valve is considered to be
variable. According to these modified assumptions, the vacuum breaker valve model is derived based
on the air valve model. The vacuum breaker valve model can provide a theoretical basis for the water
hammer protection scheme in a large water supply project.

2. Methods

2.1. Problems with the Air Valve Mathematical Model

The schematic diagram of the air valve is shown in Figure 1. The air valve model can be deduced
based on the following four assumptions:
thermodynamic change of the air in the air valve can be assumed to follow the isothermal process,
remaining at the atmospheric temperature. The water level in the air valve can be considered to be
unchangeable and constant with the height of the pipe top at the location of the air valve.
Assumption 4: The location of the air in the air valve is assumed to be fixed at the top of the air
Water
valve, so 11,
2019, the1358
air valve can be considered as a node. 3 of 13

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of an air valve.

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of an air valve.

Assumption 1: The length of the valve hole is so short, so the thermodynamic change in the air
(1) According to Assumption 1 [8,32]:
going in or out of the air valve can be assumed to follow the isentropic process.
If 0.5283 pa < p < pa , then the air will be sucked in with subsonic speed:
Assumption 2 and Assumption 3: The amount of the air sucked into the air valve is small, so the
thermodynamic change of the air in the air valve can be assumed to follow the isothermal process,
  p 1.4286  p 1.7143 
remaining at the atmospheric m =temperature. ρ a  water level−in theair valve
Cin Ain 7 pa The  can be considered to(1)
be
unchangeable and constant with the height of the  pipe
pa top at the p
 a 
location of the air valve.
 
Assumption 4: The location of the air in the air valve is assumed to be fixed at the top of the air
valve,
in which m air
so the is valve can be
the mass flowconsidered a node. through the air valve, kg / s ; Cin is the inflow
aspassing
of the air
coefficient
(1) of the
According gas; Ain is 1the
to Assumption cross-sectional area of the valve hole in the inflow direction, m2 ;
[8,32]:
If 0.5283p
pa is a < p < pa , then
the atmospheric the air Pa
pressure, ρ asucked
will; be is theinatmospheric
with subsonic speed: kg / m3 ; and p is the
density,
pressure of the gas in the air valve, Pa . s !1.4286
p 1.7143 
 ! 
If p ≤ 0.5283 pa , the air will
. be sucked in with  pcritical velocity:
m = Cin Ain 7pa ρa  −  (1)
pa pa
0.6847 pa
. m = Cin Ain (2)
in which m is the mass flow of the air passing through RTair
the
a
valve, kg/s; Cin is the inflow coefficient of
the gas; Ain is the cross-sectional area of the valve hole in the inflow direction, m2 ; pa is the atmospheric
in which Pa;
pressure, m ρis
a isthe
themass flow of density,
atmospheric the air kg/m
passing3 ; and
through thepressure
p is the air valve, kggas
of the / s ; inCthe
in is
airthe inflow
valve, Pa.
If p ≤ 0.5283p
coefficient of the gas; a is the atmospheric pressure, Pa ; R is the gas constant,
a , the pair will be sucked in with critical velocity: J / (kg ⋅ K) , and
Ta is the atmospheric temperature, K .
. 0.6847pa
pa m = C Ain √ (2)
If pa < p < 0.5283 , the air will be dischargedinout with
RTsubsonic
a
speed:
.
7   pa   pa  Cin is the inflow coefficient of
in which m is the mass flow of the air passing through the1.4286 1.7143
air valve, kg/s;
the gas; pa is the atmospheric m =pressure,  gas constant,
−Cout AoutPa;p R is the   · K), and Ta is the atmospheric
−  J/(kg (3)
temperature, K. RT   p   p 
pa
If pa < p < 0.5283 , the air will be discharged out with subsonic speed:
in which m is the mass flow of the air passing through the air valve, kg / s ; Cout is the outflow
2
s
coefficient of the gas; Aout is. the cross-sectional7 area  pa of1.4286  the outflow direction, m ;
pa 1.7143in
 ! the valve!hole 
m = −Cout Aout p  −  (3)
RT  p

p


.
in which m is the mass flow of the air passing through the air valve, kg/s; Cout is the outflow coefficient
of the gas; Aout is the cross-sectional area of the valve hole in the outflow direction, m2 ; p is the pressure
of the gas in the air valve, Pa; Pa and T is the temperature of the gas in the air valve, K.
pa
If p ≥ 0.5283 , the air will be discharged out with critical velocity:

. 0.6847
m = −Cout Aout p √ (4)
RT
Water 2019, 11, 1358 4 of 13

.
in which m is the mass flow of the air passing through the air valve, kg/s; Cout is the outflow coefficient
of the gas; Aout is the cross-sectional area of the valve hole in the outflow direction, m2 ; p is the pressure
of the gas in the air valve, Pa; R is the gas constant, J/(kg · K), and T is the temperature, K.
(2) According to Assumption 3 and Assumption 4, the compatibility equation of the MOC (Method of
Characteristics), the continuity equation, the pressure equation and the equation of state for an ideal
gas [8]:      
Cp CM p−pa

1 1
p V0 + 0.5∆t Q20 − Q10 − Bp + B + Bp + B γ +Z
h  . . i
M M (5)
= m0 + 0.5∆t m0 + m RT
in which p is the pressure of the gas in the air valve, Pa; V0 is the volume of the gas at the beginning of
the time step, m3 ; ∆t is the time step, s; Q10 is the inflow at the beginning of the time step, m3 /s; Q20 is
 m /s; the coefficients CP , BP , CM , and BM = constants;γ
the outflow at the beginning of thetime step, 3
2 2
is the specific gravity of water, kg/ m · s ; Z is constant to be the height of the pipe top at the location
.
of the air valve, m; m0 is the mass of the gas in the air valve at the beginning of the time step, kg; m is
.
the mass flow of the air passing through the air valve, kg/s; and m0 is the mass flow of the air passing
through the air valve at the beginning of the time step, kg/s.
(3) According to Assumption 2, the temperature of the gas in the air valve T in Equations (3)–(5) is equal
.
to the atmospheric temperature Ta . p and m are the only two unknown parameters in Equation (5),
.
and m can be calculated according to Equations (1)–(4), so p can be solved.
As shown in Figure 2, at the beginning of the time step, the mass of the air in the air valve is m1
with Water
the state of p1 , VPEER
2019, 11, x FOR 1 and T1 , while at the end of the time step, the mass of the air in the5 of
REVIEW
air14valve
changes to m1 + ∆m = m2 with the state of p2 , V2 and T2 .

(a) (b)

Figure 2. Processes of air passing through the air valve: (a) Gas sucking in; (b) gas discharging out.
Figure 2. Processes of air passing through the air valve: (a) Gas sucking in; (b) gas discharging out.
According to Assumption 1, the thermodynamic change in the ∆m air going in or out of the air
According to Assumption 1, the thermodynamic change in the Δm air going in or out of the
valve follows the isentropic process. pa > pin should be satisfied if the air can be sucked in the air
air valve follows thepolytropic
isentropic process. pa T> >pinT should be satisfied if the air can be sucked in the
valve, according to the equation, a in , while pa < pout should be satisfied if the air can
air valve, according
be discharged out of theto airthe polytropic
valve, out . That T
Ta < Tequation, is, > T , while pa <ofpout
a theintemperature theshould be satisfied
air sucked if the
in or discharged
out ofairthe
canairbe valve should
discharged outbe different
of the from
air valve, < Tatmospheric
Ta the temperature. However, according to
out . That is, the temperature of the air sucked in or
Assumption 2, as the thermodynamic change in the gas
discharged out of the air valve should be different from the atmospheric in the air valve follows the isothermal
temperature. However,process,
remaining
according as the atmospheric
to Assumption temperature,
2, as T1 = T2change
the thermodynamic = Ta .inSo theTgas
in ,inTthe
2 andair T
valve T2 , which
out ,follows the are
exactisothermal
contradictions. process, remaining as the atmospheric temperature, T1 = T2 = Ta . So Tin ≠ T2 and
In
Toutsummary,
≠ T2 , which there are contradictions between Assumption 1 and Assumption 2 of the air valve
are exact contradictions.
model. Under these assumptions, the state of the air sucked in or discharged out of the air valve is
In summary, there are contradictions between Assumption 1 and Assumption 2 of the air valve
different from that of the air in the air valve. The air pressure p in Equations (1)–(4) should be different
model. Under these assumptions, the state of the air sucked in or discharged out of the air valve is
from different
that in Equation
from that(5). Actually,
of the theair
air in the state of the
valve. Thegas air after isentropic
pressure inhalation(1)–(4)
p in Equations or before discharge
should be
cannot be obtained by the isothermal change in the gas in the air valve; the
different from that in Equation (5). Actually, the state of the gas after isentropic inhalation or before gas requires a process
transition
dischargeof thermodynamic
cannot be obtained changes. Therefore,change
by the isothermal it is assumed
in the gasthat theair
in the intake
valve;and
the exhaust processes
gas requires a
of theprocess
air cannot be completely
transition simulated
of thermodynamic under Therefore,
changes. Assumptions 1 and 2. that
it is assumed The the
simultaneous solutions of
intake and exhaust
theseprocesses
equations of are
the not reasonable.
air cannot be completely simulated under Assumptions 1 and 2. The simultaneous
solutions of these equations are not reasonable.
For the vacuum break valve arranged on the siphon outlet pipe, since the intake air amount is
relatively larger, it is more difficult to achieve sufficient heat exchange between the gas and water,
and Assumption 2 of the air valve is more difficult to achieve. When a large amount of air is taken
into the pipe, the air valve model cannot be applicable to simulate the vacuum breaker valve. It is
necessary to reintroduce the mathematical model of the vacuum break valve to accommodate the
Water 2019, 11, 1358 5 of 13

For the vacuum break valve arranged on the siphon outlet pipe, since the intake air amount is
relatively larger, it is more difficult to achieve sufficient heat exchange between the gas and water,
and Assumption 2 of the air valve is more difficult to achieve. When a large amount of air is taken
into the pipe, the air valve model cannot be applicable to simulate the vacuum breaker valve. It is
necessary to reintroduce the mathematical model of the vacuum break valve to accommodate the large
air mass conditions of the outlet pipe.

2.2. Mathematical Model of the Vacuum Breaker Valve

According to the air valve model assumptions and discussion in the previous section, the air valve
model is only suitable for small air mass conditions, and there are contradictions between Assumption 1
and Assumption 2. To solve the contradictions and make the model fit large air mass conditions,
the vacuum breaker valve model is deduced based on the air valve model according to the following
four modified assumptions:
Assumption 1: The length of the valve hole is so short, so the thermodynamic change in the air
going in or out of the vacuum breaker valve can be assumed to follow the isentropic process.
Assumption 2 and Assumption 3: The amount of the air sucked into the vacuum breaker valve
is large, so the thermodynamic change in the gas in the vacuum breaker valve can be assumed to
follow the isentropic process, and the water level in the vacuum breaker valve can be considered to
be variable.
Assumption 4: The location of the gas in the vacuum breaker valve is assumed to be fixed at the
top of the vacuum breaker valve, so the vacuum breaker valve can be considered as a node.
(1) According to Assumption 1:
Assumption 1 is the same as that of the air valve model, so Equations (1)–(4) can be applied for
the vacuum breaker valve model.
(2) The thermodynamic change in the gas in the vacuum breaker valve is assumed to follow an
isentropic process rather than an isothermal process. According to Assumption 1 and Assumption 2:
For the initial steady state, the vacuum breaker valve is closed, and there is no air in the pipe.
For the end of the first-time step, the mass of the air in the vacuum breaker valve changes to
be ∆m1 . According to the polytropic equation and the equation of state for an ideal gas:

pa V1,a 1.4 = p1,in V1,in 1.4 = p1,2 V1,2 1.4 (6)

pa V1,a p1,in V1,in p1,2 V1,2

= = = ∆m1 R (7)
Ta T1,in T1,2
For the parameters with two subscripts, the first subscript represents the number of the time step,
while the second subscript has the same meaning as before. According to Equation (6) and (7), obviously
if p1,in = p1,2 , V1,in = V1,2 , and T1,in = T1,2 .
For the end of the second time step, on the one hand, the volume of the ∆m1 gas in the vacuum
breaker valve changes to be V2,y . Then:

p1,2 V1,2 1.4 = p2,2 V2,y 1.4 (8)

p1,2 V1,2 p2,2 V2,y

= = ∆m1 R (9)
T1,2 T2,2
By substituting Equation (6) and Equation (7) into Equation (8) and Equation (9):
!1-1/1.4
p2,2
T2,2 = Ta (10)
pa
Water 2019, 11, 1358 6 of 13

On the other hand, for the ∆m2 gas sucked into the pipe during ∆t ∼ 2∆t:

pa V2,a 1.4 = p2,in V2,in 1.4 (11)

pa V2,a p2,in V2,in

= = ∆m2 R (12)
Ta T2,in
By substituting Equation (11) into Equation (12):
!1-1/1.4
p2,in
T2,in = Ta (13)
pa

By comparing Equation (10) and Equation (13), if p2,in = p2,2 , then T2,in = T2,2 .
The same conclusions can be found if there is ∆m2 gas discharged out of the pipe during ∆t ∼ 2∆t.
By substituting the subscript “in” in Equations (11)–(13) with “out”: If p2,out = p2,2 , then T2,out = T2,2 .
In addition, as pa V1,a 1.4 = p2,2 V2,y 1.4 according to Equation (6) and Equation (8) and pa V2,a 1.4 =
p2,in V2,in 1.4 according to Equation (11), if p2,in = p2,2 :
!1.4 !1.4 !1.4 !1.4
pa V2,y V2,in V2,y + V2,in V2,2
= = = = (14)
p2,2 V1,a V2,a V1,a + V2,a V1,a + V2,a

pa V1,a p2,2 V2,y pa V2,a

However, as Ta = T2,2 = ∆m1 R according to Equation (7) and Equation (9) and Ta =
p2,in V2,in
T2,in = ∆m2 R according to Equation (12), if p2,in = p2,2 and T2,in = T2,2 :
 
pa (V1,a + V2,a ) p2,2 V2,y + V2,in p2,2 V2,2
= = = (∆m1 + ∆m2 )R (15)
Ta T2,2 T2,2

For the end of the n-th time step, according to Equation (14) and (15), the state of the gas in the
vacuum breaker valve at the end of the second time step is the same as that of the ∆m1 + ∆m2 gas
directly sucked into the vacuum breaker valve following the isentropic process. Therefore, the gas in
the vacuum breaker valve at the end of the n-th time step can be assumed as follows:
 1.4
 
 
pa  Vn,2 
=   !  (16)
pn,2  Pn 
 Vx,a 
x=1

n
P
pa Vx,a n
x=1 pn,2 Vn,2 X
= = ∆mx R (17)
Ta Tn,2
x=1
n
For the end of the n + 1-th time step, on the one hand, for the ∆mx gas in the vacuum breaker
P
x=1
valve at the end of the n-th time step:
!1-1/1.4
pn+1,2
Tn+1,2 = Ta (18)
pa

On the other hand, for the ∆mn+1 gas sucked into the pipe during n∆t ∼ (n + 1)∆t:
!1-1/1.4
pn+1,in
Tn+1,in = Ta (19)
pa
Water 2019, 11, 1358 7 of 13

By comparing Equation (18) and Equation (19), if pn+1,in = pn+1,2 , then Tn+1,in = Tn+1,2 .
There is no contradiction between the modified Assumption 1 and Assumption 2. The state of the
gas in the vacuum breaker valve at any time is the same as that of the gas with the same mass directly
sucked into the vacuum breaker valve following the isentropic process. According to Equation (18),
the gas temperature in the vacuum breaker valve is as follows:
!1-1/1.4
p
T = Ta (20)
pa

(3) According to Assumption 3 and Assumption 4:

The schematic diagram of the vacuum breaker valve is shown in Figure 3. The compatibility
equation of the MOC, the continuity equation, the pressure equation at the location of the vacuum
breaker valve and the equation of water level change separately are as follows:

C + : H = C P − B P Q1
(21)
C− : H = CM + BM Q2
Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 14
dV
= Q2 − Q1 (22)
dt
1-1/1.4
p − pa 
=Hp − Z (23)
T =γ Ta   (20)
pa 
dV = −AdZ (24)

in which H is the piezometric head at the location of the vacuum breaker valve, m, CP , BP , CM , BM are
(3) According to Assumption 3 and Assumption 4:
constants; Q1 is the inflow of the section;
 Q2 is  the discharge flow of the section; V is the volume of gas,
Thespecific
γ is the schematic diagram
gravity of the
of water, m2 · s2 ;breaker
kg/vacuum valve is shown
p is the pressure in Figure
of the gas 3. valve,
in the air The compatibility
Pa; pa is the
equation of the
atmospheric MOC, Pa;
pressure, theZcontinuity
is constantequation,
to be the the pressure
height of the equation the location
pipe top at the locationof
ofthe
theair
vacuum
valve,
breaker
m; and Avalve
is theand the equationarea
cross-sectional of water
of thelevel
valvechange
hole, m 2.
separately are as follows:

Figure 3. Schematic
Figure 3. Schematic diagram
diagram of
of the
the vacuum
vacuum breaker
breaker valve.
valve.

By substituting Equation (21) into Equation (23):

+
p − pa C : H = CP − BPQ1
= CP- − BP Q1 − Z = CM + BM Q2 − Z (21)
(25)
γ C : H = C +B Q M M 2

According to Equation (22) and Equation (24):

dV
= Q 2 − Q1 (22)
0.5∆t(dQt2 + Q20 − Q1 − Q10 )
Z=− + Z0 (26)
p − pa A
= H −Z (23)
in which Z0 is the water level in the vacuumγbreaker valve at the beginning of the time step, m.

dV = − AdZ (24)
in which H is the piezometric head at the location of the vacuum breaker valve, m , CP, BP, CM, BM
are constants; Q1 is the inflow of the section; Q2 is the discharge flow of the section; V is the
volume of gas, γ is the specific gravity of water, kg / m2 ⋅ s2 ; ( ) p is the pressure of the gas in the
Water 2019, 11, 1358 8 of 13

According to Equation (25) and Equation (26):

 
0.5∆t(BP +BM )
(Q2 − Q1 ) BP BM + A

p−pa 0.5∆t(Q20 −Q10 )
 (27)
= (BP + BM ) γ + Z0 − A − (BP CM + BM CP )

By substituting Equation (22) and Equation (27) into the equation of state for an ideal gas:

0.5∆t(Q20 −Q10 )
    
p−p

  (BP +BM ) γ a +Z0 − A −(BP CM +BM CP ) 
 
pV0 + 0.5∆tQ20 − Q10 +
  
( )
 
0.5∆t B + B 

  BP BM + P
A
M  
 (28)
h  . . i
= m0 + 0.5∆t m0 + m RT

in which p is the pressure of the gas in the air valve, Pa; V0 is the volume of the gas at the beginning of
the time step, m3 ; ∆t is the time step, s; Q10 is the inflow at the beginning of the time step, m3 /s; Q20 is
 m /s; the coefficients CP , BP , CM , and BM = constants;
the outflow at the beginning of the time 3
 step,
2 2
γ is the specific gravity of water, kg/ m · s ; p is the pressure of the gas in the air valve, Pa; pa is the
atmospheric pressure, Pa; A is the cross-sectional area of the valve hole, m2 ; Z0 is the water level in the
vacuum breaker valve at the beginning of the time step, m; Z is constant to be the height of the pipe
top at the location of the air valve, m; m0 is the mass of the gas in the air valve at the beginning of the
. .
time step, kg; m is the mass flow of the air passing through the air valve, kg/s; and m0 is the mass flow
of the air passing through the air valve at the beginning of the time step, kg/s.
For the temperature of the gas in the vacuum breaker valve T in Equation (3), Equation (4) and
.
Equation (28) can be calculated according to Equation (20); furthermore, p and m are the only two
.
unknown parameters in Equation (28). m can be calculated according to Equations (1)–(4), and p can
be calculated.
By comparing Equation (5) and Equation (28), if the air mass sucked into the pipe is small, Z → Z0
and A → ∞ should be satisfied in Equation (28). Then, Equation (28) can be simplified with the same
form as Equation (5). That is, the air valve model can be regarded as a special case of the vacuum
breaker valve model.

3. Results

3.1. Project Description

As shown in Figure 4, the water supply system is mainly composed of the following components:
Suction sump, outlet sump, pump, siphon pipe and vacuum breaker valve. Meanwhile, the parameters
of the water supply system are listed in Table 1. From the table, we can see that the water levels of the
suction sump and outlet sump are 28 m and 38.5 m, respectively. The siphon has a horizontal length of
105 m and a diameter of 2.4 m. The vacuum break valve is placed at the top of the siphon, with a −3-m
intake pressure and 0.3-m diameter. Separately, the vacuum breaker valve is numerically simulated
according to the air valve model as well as the vacuum breaker valve model.

Table 1. System parameters.

Water Level of Suction Sump (m) 28.0 Diameter of Vacuum Breaker Valve (m) 0.3
Water level of outlet sump (m) 38.5 Intake pressure of vacuum breaker valve (m) −3.0
Quantity of pipes 1 Quantity of pumps 1
Elevation of pipe center at outlet sump end (m) 30.0 Elevation of pump (m) 25.0
Elevation of pipe center at top of siphon pipe (m) 37.0 Rated head (m) 12
Horizontal length of pipe (m) 105.0 Rated flow (m3 /s) 10
Pipe diameter (m) 2.4 Rated rotational speed (r/min) 250
Design flow (m3 /s) 10 Rated motor power (kW) 1600
Elevation of vacuum breaker valve (m) 40.0 Flywheel moment (kg·m2 ) 3800
Water 2019, 11, 1358 9 of 13
Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 14

Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 14

Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 14

is used to simulate the intake velocity of the valve, the gas periodically enters and exits the vacuum
break valve with the water hammer pressure fluctuation. The maximum intake and exhaust rates are
is used to simulate the intake velocity of the valve, the gas periodically enters and exits the vacuum
small; the maximum intake rate does not exceed 22.5 m/s, the minimum value is not lower than −22.5
break valve with the water hammer pressure fluctuation. The maximum intake and exhaust rates are
m/s, and the period is short.
small; the maximum intake rate does not exceed 22.5 m/s, the minimum value is not lower than −22.5
According to Equation (28), different air pressure change processes lead to different temperature
m/s, and the period is short.
change processes, as shown in Figure 7. When the air valve model is used to numerically simulate
According to Equation (28), different air pressure change processes lead to different temperature
the gas temperature in the vacuum breaker valve, the thermodynamic change in the gas in the valve
change processes, as shown in Figure 7. When the air valve model is used to numerically simulate
obeys the ideal gas isothermal process, and the ambient temperature is maintained regardless of the
the gas temperature in the vacuum breaker
Figure valve, the thermodynamic change in the gas in the valve
Water
4. Water
temperature change of the valveFigure 4.
gas. Thus, the supply system
valve gas layout. is kept constant at 273 K. When
temperature
obeys the ideal gas isothermal process, and the ambient temperature is maintained regardless of the
the vacuum breaker valve model is used for simulation, the gas temperature in the valve changes
3.2.temperature
Numerical Simulation
change of the of the Airgas.
valve Valve andthe
Thus, Vacuum
valve Breaker Valve
gas temperature is kept constant at 273 K. When
periodically with the gas pressure. The Table 1. System
maximum parameters.is 273.63 K and the minimum is 272.61
temperature
the vacuum breaker valve model is used for simulation, the gas temperature in the valve changes
K,The mathematical
which
WaterisLevel
a small modelFor
change. introduced
this in the
project, previous
since
28.0the gas sections fluctuation
pressure was used toissimulatelarge,the
not Valve the pumping
change
periodically withoftheSuction Sump
gas pressure. (m)
The maximum Diameter
temperature isof Vacuum
273.63 Breaker
K and the minimum (m) 0.3
is 272.61
system
in thewith a siphon
calculated
Water outletsump
temperature pipe. Based
is(m)
also on the
small, and MOC, theinfluence
thus,Intake
the computer ofmodels
of of theisair
temperature valve
negligible. and
Thethe
K, which is alevel
smallofchange.
outlet For this project, since38.5 pressure
the gas pressure vacuum
fluctuation isbreaker valve
not large, (m)
the −3.0
change
abovebreaker
vacuum analysis shows
valve
Quantity that
were the calculation
encoded in the results
FORTRAN are reasonable and
programming
of pipes is also small, and 1thus, the influence consistent
language,
Quantity with
as common
shown in sense.
Figure
of pumps is negligible. The 1 4.
in the calculated temperature of temperature
When simulating
Elevation the
of pipe shows
above analysis vacuum
center atthat
outletbreaker
thesump valve at
end (m)results
calculation the
30.0top of the siphon pipe
are reasonableElevation with
of pump
and consistent the air valve model
(m)common sense.
with and
25.0
the vacuum
Elevation breaker
of pipe centervalve
at topmodel,
of siphonthepipe
calculation
(m) results are as shown
37.0 Ratedinhead
Figures
(m) 5–7. 12
Horizontal length of pipe (m) 105.0 Rated flow (m3/s) 10
Pipe diameter (m) 2.4 Rated rotational speed (r/min) 250
Design flow (m3/s) 10 Rated motor power (kW) 1600
Elevation of vacuum breaker valve (m) 40.0 Flywheel moment (kg·m2) 3800

3.2. Numerical Simulation of the Air Valve and Vacuum Breaker Valve
The mathematical model introduced in the previous sections was used to simulate the pumping
system with a siphon outlet pipe. Based on the MOC, the computer models of the air valve and the
vacuum breaker valve were encoded in the FORTRAN programming language, as shown in Figure
4. When simulating the vacuum breaker valve at the top of the siphon pipe with the air valve model
and the vacuum breaker valve model, the calculation results are as shown in Figures 5–7.
The different relative pressure changes in the air in the pipe are shown in Figure 5. After a water
pumping accident occurs, Figure the vacuum at the
5. Relative top of
pressure the siphon
changes pipe
in the air reaches
in the valve.the set limit, the vacuum
Figure
breaker valve opens, and Figure 5.
the gas Relative
pressure in the valve quickly rises tovalve.
pressure changes in the air in the atmospheric pressure. When
5. Relative pressure changes in the air in the valve.
the air valve model is used to numerically simulate the vacuum breaker valve, the negative pressure
wave is quickly transmitted to the vacuum breaker valve at the valve opening time, causing the
relative pressure of the gas to drop rapidly to −1 m at t = 0.1 s, while at t = 3.6 s, it is reduced to −2.5
m again, then slowly rises, the gas pressure tends to 0 m, and then remains unchanged. As the water
level in the vacuum breaker valve is unchangeable according to the air valve model, the water level
is higher than it should be, leading to a smaller relative pressure. Therefore, the relative pressure of
the gas first decreases and then gradually rises to zero. When the vacuum breaker valve model is
used for the simulation calculation, the relative pressure is suddenly reduced to −2.8 m at the valve
opening time due to the negative pressure wave action, and then quickly rises to 0 m, and when t ≥ 5
s, the gas pressure remains unchanged at 0 m. Since the water level in the vacuum breaker valve is
variable according to the vacuum breaker valve model, the relative pressure of the gas in the valve
after the vacuum breaker valve is opened is approximately maintained at atmospheric pressure.
According to Equations
Figure (1)–(4),
6. Intakedifferent processes
velocity changes of the
in the air pressure
air through lead to different processes
the valve.
of the intake velocity change,
Figureas6. shown in Figure
Intake velocity 6. When
changes in thethe air valve
air through themodel
valve. is used to simulate the
intake velocity
The of the
different vacuum
relative breaker
pressure
Figure
valve,inthe
changes
6. Intake velocity theintake
changesairin velocity
inthe
theairpipe gradually
are shown
through
increases
the valve.in Figurefrom 0, reaching
5. After a water
a maximum
pumping value occurs,
accident of 136.9the m/s at t = 3.6
vacuum s, and
at the top then
of thegradually
siphon pipe decreases.
reaches At thetset
= 26.86
limit,s,the
thevacuum
intake
velocity is less
breaker valve thanand
opens, 0, the
andgas the vacuum
pressure breaker
in the valve begins
valve quickly rises toto vent. As pressure.
atmospheric the waterWhen levelthe
is
unchangeable,
air valve modelthe calculated
is used water level
to numerically is always
simulate greaterbreaker
the vacuum than the actual
valve, the water
negativelevel during
pressure the
wave
intake process;
is quickly therefore,
transmitted thevacuum
to the gas pressure
breaker in valve
the valve
at the is valve
too small,
openingand time,
the intake
causing airthe
velocity is
relative
continuously increased to a larger number before slowly being reduced until gas is discharged. The
intake and exhaust period of the vacuum breaker valve is long. When the vacuum break valve model
Water 2019, 11, 1358 10 of 13

pressure of the gas to drop rapidly to −1 m at t = 0.1 s, while at t = 3.6 s, it is reduced to −2.5 m again,
then slowly rises, the gas pressure tends to 0 m, and then remains unchanged. As the water level in
the vacuum breaker valve is unchangeable according to the air valve model, the water level is higher
than it should be, leading to a smaller relative pressure. Therefore, the relative pressure of the gas
first decreases and then gradually rises to zero. When the vacuum breaker valve model is used for
the simulation calculation, the relative pressure is suddenly reduced to −2.8 m at the valve opening
time due to the negative pressure wave action, and then quickly rises to 0 m, and when t ≥ 5 s, the gas
pressure remains unchanged at 0 m. Since the water level in the vacuum breaker valve is variable
according to the vacuum breaker valve model, the relative pressure of the gas in the valve after the
Water 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 14
vacuum breaker valve is opened is approximately maintained at atmospheric pressure.

Figure 7. Temperature changes in the air in the valve.

Figure 7. Temperature changes in the air in the valve.
According to Equations (1)–(4), different processes of the air pressure lead to different processes of
the4.intake
Discussion.
velocity change, as shown in Figure 6. When the air valve model is used to simulate the
intake velocity
The keyof the vacuum
point of this studybreaker
is tovalve,
derivethe intake velocity
a vacuum breaker gradually
valve model increases from intake
with a large 0, reaching
air
a maximum
condition and value of 136.9
apply it to actual t = 3.6
m/s atwater s, and
supply then gradually
projects. decreases.
In many previous studies, = 26.86
At t the s, the
air valve intake
model
was used
velocity to than
is less numerically
0, and the simulate
vacuum thebreaker
vacuumvalve breaker valve
begins toin actual
vent. Asengineering.
the water levelWhen the vacuum
is unchangeable,
thebreaker
calculatedvalve is applied
water level istoalways
the negative
greater pressure
than the protection of thelevel
actual water general pipe the
during or container,
intake process;the
assumptions of the air valve model are satisfied, due to the small intake and
therefore, the gas pressure in the valve is too small, and the intake air velocity is continuously increasedexhaust air condition. In
fact, when the amount of intake air is large, it is difficult to fully realize
to a larger number before slowly being reduced until gas is discharged. The intake and exhaust period heat exchange between gas
andvacuum
of the water duringbreakerthe valve
flow ofisgas intoWhen
long. and out the ofvacuum
the vacuum breakdestruction
valve model valve,isso it is to
used unreasonable
simulate the
intake velocity of the valve, the gas periodically enters and exits the vacuum break valvethe
to follow the ideal gas isothermal process in the thermodynamic change in the gas in with airthe
valve.
water
At this time, the air valve model cannot be used to simulate a vacuum breaker valve with a large
hammer pressure fluctuation. The maximum intake and exhaust rates are small; the maximum intake
intake air amount. For the air valve model, since the water level is assumed to be constant, the
rate does not exceed 22.5 m/s, the minimum value is not lower than −22.5 m/s, and the period is short.
calculated water level is always higher than the actual water level during the intake process. As a
According to Equation (28), different air pressure change processes lead to different temperature
result, the calculated gas pressure is too small, so there is a second gas pressure drop and recovery
change processes, as shown in Figure 7. When the air valve model is used to numerically simulate
process. The result arises because the air valve model is assumed to be inconsistent with more intake
the gas temperature in the vacuum breaker valve, the thermodynamic change in the gas in the valve
conditions, and it is not a true gas pressure change process in the valve. The calculation results are
obeys thetoideal
likely causegas an isothermal
engineer to process,
misjudgeand that thethe ambient
size of thetemperature
designed vacuumis maintained regardless
breaker valve is too of
thesmall
temperature
and replace change
it with ofathe valve
larger one,gas. Thus,
causing the valve
waste. gas temperature
For a vacuum breaker valveis kept constant
on the siphonat 273 K.
outlet
When the vacuum breaker valve model is used for simulation, the gas temperature
pipe, the air valve model cannot be applied due to the large intake air condition. This study adjusts in the valve changes
periodically with theand
the assumptions gas derives
pressure. theThe maximum
vacuum breaker temperature is 273.63
valve model, makingK and the minimum
it suitable for more is 272.61
intake K,
which is a small
conditions change.
based on the For
airthis project,
valve model. since
It isthe gas pressure
assumed that thefluctuation is not large,
gas temperature in thethe change
valve is no in
thelonger
calculated temperature
atmospheric is also small,
temperature anditthus,
but that followsthe influence of temperature
the isentropic process, and is negligible.
the change The above
in water
analysis shows that the calculation results are reasonable and consistent
level is considered. The proposed vacuum breaker valve model (28) shows that the air valve model with common sense.
can be regarded as a special case under the condition that the vacuum breaker valve model has less
4. Discussion
intake air, and Equation (28) can be simplified to the same form as Equation (5). It can be seen from
the calculation
The key point results thatstudy
of this the vacuum breakeravalve
is to derive vacuum model is closervalve
breaker to themodel
actual situation
with a large of theintake
gas
pressure, intake rate and temperature in the valve.
air condition and apply it to actual water supply projects. In many previous studies, the air valve
5. Conclusions
The vacuum breaker valve model in large air mass conditions is proposed in this paper based
on the air valve model according to the modified assumptions. It is proved that there is no
contradiction among these modified assumptions. In this case study, the vacuum breaker valve is
Water 2019, 11, 1358 11 of 13

model was used to numerically simulate the vacuum breaker valve in actual engineering. When the
vacuum breaker valve is applied to the negative pressure protection of the general pipe or container,
the assumptions of the air valve model are satisfied, due to the small intake and exhaust air condition.
In fact, when the amount of intake air is large, it is difficult to fully realize heat exchange between gas
and water during the flow of gas into and out of the vacuum destruction valve, so it is unreasonable
to follow the ideal gas isothermal process in the thermodynamic change in the gas in the air valve.
At this time, the air valve model cannot be used to simulate a vacuum breaker valve with a large intake
air amount. For the air valve model, since the water level is assumed to be constant, the calculated water
level is always higher than the actual water level during the intake process. As a result, the calculated
gas pressure is too small, so there is a second gas pressure drop and recovery process. The result
arises because the air valve model is assumed to be inconsistent with more intake conditions, and it
is not a true gas pressure change process in the valve. The calculation results are likely to cause an
engineer to misjudge that the size of the designed vacuum breaker valve is too small and replace it
with a larger one, causing waste. For a vacuum breaker valve on the siphon outlet pipe, the air valve
model cannot be applied due to the large intake air condition. This study adjusts the assumptions and
derives the vacuum breaker valve model, making it suitable for more intake conditions based on the air
valve model. It is assumed that the gas temperature in the valve is no longer atmospheric temperature
but that it follows the isentropic process, and the change in water level is considered. The proposed
vacuum breaker valve model (28) shows that the air valve model can be regarded as a special case
under the condition that the vacuum breaker valve model has less intake air, and Equation (28) can be
simplified to the same form as Equation (5). It can be seen from the calculation results that the vacuum
breaker valve model is closer to the actual situation of the gas pressure, intake rate and temperature in
the valve.

5. Conclusions
The vacuum breaker valve model in large air mass conditions is proposed in this paper based on
the air valve model according to the modified assumptions. It is proved that there is no contradiction
among these modified assumptions. In this case study, the vacuum breaker valve is simulated and
analyzed by both the air valve model and the vacuum breaker valve model respectively. The results
indicated that if the vacuum breaker valve model is used for calculation, the relative pressure of the gas
in the valve is almost constant at atmospheric pressure, and the gas temperature and intake velocity
periodically change with minor changes. However, if the air valve model is used, the relative pressure
of the gas in the valve will decrease and then gradually rise to 0 m. The gas temperature remains
constant at an ambient temperature of 273K. The intake velocity continues to increase to a larger value
and then slowly decreases to 0 m/s. According to the discussion, the differences between the relative
pressures, the gas temperatures and intake velocities are the results of different assumptions on the
change in the thermodynamic and the water level. The air valve model is not applicable as the water
level is constant, and higher than the actual water level during the intake process. The calculated
gas pressure then is too small, causing the size of the vacuum breaker valve to be incorrectly judged.
Therefore, compared with the air valve model, the vacuum breaker valve model is more accurate
and suitable in large air mass conditions. Setting an effective and appropriate protective device is a
significant research, because the security of the water supply engineering is very important. We all
hope that in the future, we can make more progress on this work.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.Z. and X.-y.Z.; methodology, X.-y.Z., C.-y.F., and X.-d.Y.; investigation,
C.-y.F., and J.Z.; validation, X.-d.Y.; writing—original draft, X.-y.Z.; and C.-y.F.; writing—review and editing,
X.-d.Y., T.-y.X., and J.-w.L.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2016YFC0401810), the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51879087) and the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (Grant No. 51839008).
Water 2019, 11, 1358 12 of 13

Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC)
for providing partial funding for the project.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to
publish the results.

References
1. Lescovich, J.E. Locating and Sizing Air-Release Valves. J. Am. Water Works Ass. 1972, 64, 457–461. [CrossRef]
2. McPherson, D.L. Air valve sizing and location: A prospective. In Proceedings of the Pipelines Specialty
Conference 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, 15–19 August 2009; pp. 905–919.
3. Coronado-Hernández, O.E.; Fuertes-Miquel, V.S.; Besharat, M.; Ramos, H.M. Experimental and Numerical
Analysis of a Water Emptying Pipeline Using Different Air Valves. Water 2017, 9, 98.
4. Manual of Water Supply Practices—M51: Air-Release, Air-Vacuum, and Combination Air Valves, 1st ed.; American
Water Works Association: Denver, CO, USA, 2001.
5. Bergant, A.; Kruisbrink, A.; Arregui, F. Dynamic behavior of air valves in a large-scale pipeline apparatus.
J. Mech. Eng. 2012, 58, 225–237. [CrossRef]
6. Lucca, Y.F.L.D.; Aquino, G.A.; Filho, J.G.D. Experimental apparatus to test air trap valves. IOP Conf. Ser.
Earth Environ. 2010, 12, 1–8. [CrossRef]
7. Arregui, F.J. Air Valves Dynamic Behavior; ITA, Universitat Polytecnica Valencia: Valencia, Spain, 2012.
8. Lee, T.S.; Leow, L.C. Numerical study on the effects of air valve characteristics on pressure surges during
pump trip in pumping systems with air entrainment. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fl. 1999, 29, 645–655. [CrossRef]
9. Lubbers, C.; Clemens, F. Detection of gas pockets in pressurized waste water mains using dynamic system
response analysis. Water Sci. Tech. 2007, 55, 31–38. [CrossRef]
10. Ramezani, L.; Karney, B.; Malekpour, A. The challenge of air valves: A selective critical literature review.
J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 2015, 141, 04015017. [CrossRef]
11. Bergant, A.; Tijsseling, A.S.; Vitkovsy, J.P.; Covas, D.I.C.; Simpson, A.R.; Lambert, M.F. Parameters affecting
water-hammer wave attenuation, shape and timing-Part 2: Case studies. J. Hydraul. Res. 2008, 46, 382–391.
[CrossRef]
12. De Martino, G.; Fontana, N.; Giugni, M. Transient flow caused by air expulsion through an orifice.
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2008, 134, 1395–1399. [CrossRef]
13. Fontana, N.; Galdiero, E.; Giugni, M. Pressure surges caused by air release in water pipelines. J. Hydraul. Res.
2016, 54, 461–472. [CrossRef]
14. Lingireddy, S.; Wood, D.J.; Zloczower, N. Pressure surges in pipeline systems resulting from air releases.
J. Am. Water Works Ass. 2004, 96, 88–94. [CrossRef]
15. Li, G.; Baggett, C.C.; Rosario, R.A. Air/vacuum valve breakage caused by pressure surges—Analysis and
solution. In Proceedings of the World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2009, Kansas City, MO,
USA, 2009, 17–21 May; pp. 112–121.
16. Ramezani, L.; Karney, B. Water column separation and cavity collapse for pipelines protected with air
vacuum valves: Understanding the essential wave processes. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2017, 143, 04016083. [CrossRef]
17. Cabrera, E.; Fuertes, V.S.; García-Serra, J.; Arregui, F.; Gasc, L.; Palau, V. Reviewing air valves selection.
In Proceedings of the Pumps, Electromechanical Devices and Systems Applied to Urban Water Management,
Valencia, Spain, 22–25 April 2003; pp. 633–640.
18. Miao, D.; Zhang, J.; Chen, S.; Yu, X.D. Water hammer suppression for long distance water supply systems by
combining the air vessel and valve. J. Water Supply: Res. T. 2017, 66, 319–326. [CrossRef]
19. De Aquino, G.A.; De Lucca, Y.D.F.L.; Dalfre Filho, J.G. The importance of experimental tests on air valves for
proper choice in a water supply project. J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 2018, 40, 403. [CrossRef]
20. Bianchi, A.; Mambretti, S.; Pianta, P. Practical formulas for the dimensioning of air valves. J. Hydraul. Eng.
2007, 133, 1177–1180. [CrossRef]
21. JÖNSSON, L. Maximun transients’ pressures in a conduit with check valve and air entrainment.
In Proceedings of the International Conference on the Hydraulics of Pumping Stations, Manchester,
UK, 17–19 September 1985.
Water 2019, 11, 1358 13 of 13

22. Zhou, L.; Liu, D.; Karney, B. Investigation of hydraulic transients of two entrapped air pockets in a water
pipeline. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2013, 139, 949–959. [CrossRef]
23. Zhou, L.; Liu, D.; Karney, B.; Wang, P. Phenomenon of white mist in pipelines rapidly filling with water with
entrapped air pockets. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2013, 139, 1041–1051. [CrossRef]
24. Zhou, L.; Liu, D.; Karney, B.; Zhang, Q. Influence of entrapped air pockets on hydraulic transients in water
pipelines. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2011, 137, 1686–1692. [CrossRef]
25. Tran, P.D. Pressure Transients Caused by Air-Valve Closure while Filling Pipelines. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2016,
143, 04016082.
26. Albertson, M.L.; Andrews, J.S. Transients Caused by Air Release. In Control of Flow in Closed Conduits;
Colorado State Univ.: Fort Collins, CO, USA, 1971; pp. 315–340.
27. Carlos, M.; Arregui, F.J.; Cabrera, E.; Palau, C.V. Understanding air release through air valves. J. Hydraul. Eng.
2011, 137, 461–469. [CrossRef]
28. Zhou, F.; Hicks, F.E.; Steffler, P.M. Observations of air water interaction in a rapidly filling horizontal pipe.
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2002, 128, 635–639. [CrossRef]
29. Zhou, F.; Hicks, F.E.; Steffler, P.M. Transient flow in a rapidly filling horizontal pipe containing trapped air.
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2002, 128, 625–634. [CrossRef]
30. Izquierdo, J.; Fuertes, V.S.; Cabrera, E.; Iglesias, P.L.; Garcia-Serra, J. Pipeline start-up with entrapped air.
J. Hydraul. Res. 1999, 37, 579–590. [CrossRef]
31. Wylie, E.B.; Streeter, V.L.; Suo, L.S. Fluid Transients in Systems; Prentice-Hall, Inc.: Englewood Cliffs, NJ,
USA, 1993.
32. Chaudhry, M.H. Applied Hydraulic Transients; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2014.

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).