Ball valve technology
The resurrection of the double-seated non-contact ball valve
Once considered too complex and costly to succeed, a pioneering valve design has been brought back to life through modern manufacturing innovation. This article traces its journey from early promise and dormancy to its rebirth as a highperformance, production-ready solution.
By Ingolf Holmslet
Introducing the newly reimagined wedging ball valve, now named the KT Valve— where“ K” stands for Klyde and“ T” for Téchne. During the 90s, I patented the original doubleseated non-contact ball valve. While the concept was sound, the machining technology at the time was insufficient to manufacture it effectively. The valve, known as the“ e-ball”, was extremely complex to manufacture and priced beyond what most of the market was willing to pay. Despite this, approximately 200 e-ball valves were installed in the Norwegian sector, primarily in harsh environments where conventional valves failed prematurely. However, due to production challenges and high costs, the market response was lukewarm. Production ceased, and by 2013, the e-ball valve was discontinued and effectively went into hibernation.
A decade later: Rebirth through innovation
After ten years in obscurity, Téchne and I revived the valve. Téchne, a high-precision machining company based in Erba, Italy, operates 35 CNC machines and is a respected sub-supplier in the valve industry. Following a thorough evaluation and redesign, supported by multiple Finite Element Analyses( FEA), the non-contact ball valve was reborn as the KT Valve,( figure 1). Thanks to Téchne’ s advanced CNC capabilities, we achieved extremely tight tolerances and complex geometries that were previously unattainable. We began with a 4” Class 600 valve and agreed on several key production parameters:
• Manufacture components for six valves.
• Use metal-to-metal seat / ball contact( TCC) with leak rate A.
• Eliminate lapping for part adjustment and seat / ball contact.
• Assemble valves using randomly selected parts.
Figure 1
Rigorous testing and results
The valve underwent extensive testing:
• 500 operations with 100 bar differential pressure( DP) during opening.
• Closing force matched 100 % of the design specification( gear ratio 1:16, 80 Nm input = 1280 Nm on the stem).
• Torque measurements recorded for each closure.
• Water testing for every closure; nitrogen testing every 10 closures.
After 500 operations, the valve remained leak-free. Upon disassembly, all components were intact, with no damage or cracking in the TCC surfaces. To further validate the design, we swapped the outlet and inlet seats and reassembled the valve. It continued to seal perfectly. After 900 operations, we increased the closing torque to 120 Nm( 1920 Nm on the stem)— 40 Nm above the design spec— simulating a stressed operation scenario. Even then, the valve held firm. Finally, we replaced just one seat with a new one to test interchangeability. The valve still sealed flawlessly. We no longer have a prototype— we have a fully functional, production-ready valve.
Figure 2
36 Valve World February 2026 www. valve-world. net