ORNL-TM-0079.txt

 

 

. ---{{OAK RIDGE NATIONAI. I.ABORATORY
TR . operated by
__;__;umou CARBIDE conpounon
for the |
u s ATOMIC ENERGY comwssaou |

  

ORNL TM 79

 

 

 

 

 

--ii!i:;_iuo-'ncs

 

   

L _This document cuntums mformqtmn of a preluminary nature ond was prepcred S
~ primarily for internal use at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, It is. subiect : :
to revision or correction and therefore does not represent a final report, The -~
- information is not ‘to -be abstracted, reprinted or otherwise given public dis- =
semination ‘without the approval - cf the ORNL pctent branch, Legai and Enfor- S
~ mation Conh'ol Deparfment. ST T ST

 

  

 

MASTER'

NNl
- LTI

o

e ermemr e i v e e

e AR5 58 s e - o Rt

 
 

 

 

 

 

~LEGAL NOTICE

- This report was preparsd as on account of Gonmmcm sponsored work., Neither the Unlnd Sfchs,'- :

nor the Commission, nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission:

"A. Makes any warranty or representation, expressed or implied, with respsct to the uccuracy,

completeness, or usefulness of the lnformatwn contained Iin this report, or that the use of
any information, apparatus, mefhod or proctss disclosed in !hus report may not infnnge
privately owned rights; or - - - :

B. Assumes any liabilities with nspccf lo the use of, or for dcmcgos resulting from the use of
any information, apporatus, method, or process disclosed in this report.

As used in the above, “person acting on behalf of the Commission® includes any employes or
contractor of the Commission, or employss of such contractor, fo the extent that such employee

or contractor of the Commission, or omplono of such contractor prepares, disseminates, or

provides access to, any informuiion pursvaat to Ms .mploymem or contract with the Commiuion,

or his nmpioymcnt with such contractor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

ORNL-TM-T9

Copy Lo.

Contract No. W-T405-eng-26

. Reactor Division

 

WATER TEST DEVELOPMENT OF THE FUEL PUMP FOR THE MSRE

el MG 1 bt

P. G. Smith

| DATE ISSUED
. - | MAR 2 7 1862

OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY
Oak Ridge, Tennessee

i : operated by

j | UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION

! _ - for the

U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

 

 

 
 

ot

’\ *

»

 

iii

'CONTENTS

List of Figures
Abstract . ¢« v v v 4 4 4 e e e e e e e

Introduction . .+ « ¢ ¢ o v v 4« 4 e s . .
Experimental Apparatus . . . . . .+ . . . .
Pmp » e . r - ” . » - » - & - . -

Test LOOP « + « ¢ s o ¢ o ¢ & o & s » &
Carbon Dioxide Stripping Devices . . .
Instrumentation . . . . « + . ¢ o 4 . . ...
Description of Tests .+ « « « « « « « + &
Head-Flow-Power-Speed Performance
Carbon Dioxide Stripping Tests . . .
Pump Tank Liquid and Gas Behavior . .

Fountain Flow . . . . . « « « « .

Stripper Flow . . « « . « « &

Gas Bubble Behavior in the Pump Tank
Priming . « « « ¢ « ¢« « ¢« o o o
Coastdown Characteristics . . . . .

Test Results . . . ¢« « ¢« « « « « « + &

Head-Flow-Power-Speed Performance .
Carbon Dioxide Stripping Effectiveness
Pump Tank Liquid and Gas Behavior
Fountain Flow . . . . . « . .
Stripper Flow . . + « + « ¢ ¢ ¢ o &
Gas Bubble Behavior in the Pump Tank
Priming . . . . . . .

Coastdown Characteristices . . . . .

Conclusions . « « ¢ o & o o o« s 2 o s o o
Acknowledgments . . . « + « + o o . . 0 .
REferenc eS - o & . . . - * - *« 8 - * » . *

Vblumer .

Page No.

vii

O OO N

12
12
12
1k
1k
1k
1k
14
15
15
15
19
22
22
27
27
29
31
31
32
32

 
 

 

 

Appendix . . « &
Nomenclature
Table I . .
Table II . .
Teble III

*

*

*

Computations for:
Table I « ...

Table IT

Table III . .

iv

‘Page No.

, "
35
36
37
.38

N
b

0

. O
 

FPig. No.

O O~ O o= D

o
O

11,
12.

130

1k,
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.

LIST OF FIGURES

Captions

Cross Section of Pump

Discharge Connection to Loop .« « « .+

Photo of Test LOOP « ¢ v « o v o o o o o s o+ o
Stripper Configuration 1 . . . . . « « « « « «+ « &
Stripper Configuration 2 . . + « « « « « « + &« « &
Stripper Configuration 5 . .« + « « ¢ « ¢« v o o o &
Venturi Calibration . « . « « « v ¢ ¢ ¢« v ¢« + & + &
Motor Calibration « ¢« « v ¢ « v « ¢ o o o + o o o o
Hydraulic Performance, 13-in. Impeller . . . . .
Hydraulic Performance, l1ll-in. Impeller . . . . . .
Prerotation Baffle .« « « « « + o o « o o o &

Head, Input Power, and Speed Versus Flow, 1ll-in.
Impeller * * . - . & . » . . v * » . - - * * - .

Hydraulic Performance, 1l-in. Impeller, Efficiency
Contours Superimposed . « ¢ o ¢« « o « ¢« o ¢ o o «

Relative Effectiveness Versus Sweep Gas Flow
Half-Life Versus Stripping Flow . . « . « « + &
Relative Effectiveness Versus Jet Velocity

Cross Section of Upper Labyrinth . .

Fountain Flow Versus Speed, 1ll-in. Impeller .

Pump Inlet X-Section « « ¢« ¢ ¢« ¢ ¢ ¢ 4 v o o ¢ &« o

Page No.

O 1 WV W

10
11
13
16
17
18

20

21
23
24
25
26
28
30

 

 
 

 

, O

€)
vii

ABSTRACT

A vertical centrifugal sump-type pump utilizing commercially
available impeller and volute deslgns was selected to circulate the
fuel salt in the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE). Tests were
conducted in water to determine the adequacy of the pump design, to
assist design of the prototype fuel pump, and to investigate the
effectiveness of xenon removal with high velocity liquid Jjets con-
tacting sweep gas in the pump tank. Hydraulic head characteristics
were within +1 to -3 ft of manufacturers data for a given constant
speed. Adequate and necessary provisions were devised to control
the liquid and gas bubble behavior in the pump tank. The results of
priming and coastdown tests are reported. During the gas removal
tésts, the fuel, xenon, and helium in the MSRE were simulated with
distilled water, carbon dioxide, and air, respectively. The best
configuration removed carbon dioxide from water at approximately 99%

of the ideal removal rate when the stripping flow was 65 gpm and the

 

 

 

sweep gas flow rate was 4 scfm.,

 

 
 

 

 

 

“

 

 

[,
»

 

WATER TEST DEVELOPMENT OF THE FUEL PUMP FOR THE MSRE

P. G. Smith
INTRODUCTION

The Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) is to be a'low-pressure,
‘high-temperature, graphite moderated circulatifig fuel nuclear reactor
using fissile and fertile materials dissolved in molten fluoride salts
and is designed for a heat generation rate of 10 Mw'(l, 2, and 3). Its
goals include proving'the'safe and reliable operation of this nuclear
reactor'concept and demonstrating the maintainability of molten salt
machinery. The investigation reported herein is concerned with the pump
‘required to circulate the fuel salt in the MSRE.

A centrifugal sump-type pump consisting of a rotary element and
pump tank was selected for this application. The rotary element in-
cludes the vertical shaft and underhung impeller, the shaft bearings,
and the means for lubricating and cooling the bearings. The pump tank
includes the volute (casing), suction and discharge nozzles, other
nozzles for accommodating inert ges purge, fuel sampling and enrichment,
liquid level sensing devices, a flange for mounting the rotary element,
and various liquid bypass flows for degassing and.rémpving Xxenon poison
from the circulating'fuel salt. The device used for removal of xenon
will be referred to as a "stripper”. Much of the design of the fuel
_pump was‘derived from the past experienée.with similér pumps for
elévated temperaturé'service which were developed during the Aircraft
' Nuclear Propulsion Program at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (4, 5,

' an@ié)‘- l'_ | | ' : ‘ )
The initial phase of development and testing of the fuel pump was

conducted with water to aSceitain_the capability of the pump to meet the
hydraulic requirements of the fuel circuit and to remove from the circu-
-lating-fuel the xenon whichlwiil-bé generated by the fisslioning process.
Data were taken on the headéfiow-power-speed performance of the pump for
twb impeller outside diametérs; 13_and 11 inches. Various baffles were

devised to control splash, spray, and gas bubbles caused by the operation

 

 
 

 

of the bypass flows in the pump tank. The ability -of the pump to prime
was determined at various liquid levels of interest. The coastdown
characteristics of the pump were measured from various speeds and\flows.
Attempts were made to measure indirectly the effectiveness with which
xenon poison might be removedufrdm the circulating fuel using high
velocity liquid jJets in contact with gas in the pump tank. During this
particular test the fuel and xenon were simulated, respéctively, with
distilled water and carbon dioxide; this gas is much more soluble in
water than xenon is in molten salts of interest and. in addition provides
for convenient measurement of solubility.

Pertinent information from these water tests were incorporated. in
the desigfi of the prototype fuel pump and will be subjected to elevated
temperature testing at MSRE design conditions.

EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS

The experimental apparatus includes the pump, the test loop, and
the stripper configurations. A description of each follows:

Pump

The pump is shown in Fig. 1 and includes a centrifugal impeller and
volute with the impeller supported at the lower end of a vertical shaft,
. grease~lubricated bearings for supporting the.éhaft, bearing housing,
pump tank bowl, and volute support. The pump tank bowl was fabricated
of plexiglas to-permit visual observation of the behavior of the liquid
and the gas bubbles. Labyrinth-type seals were utilized on the impeller
inlet shroud and on the impeller support shroud. The Impeller suppoft
shroud labyrinth seal was supported on the 1mpeller'cover'plgte,which
wvas sealed to the volute by an elastomeric O-ring. The volute discharge
vas connected to the pump tank discharge nozzle through a flexibly

. mounted bridge tube. The connection arrangement is shown in Fig. 2.

Test Bnqp
The test loop is shown in Fig. 3, which consists of the pump, piping,
venturl flowmeter, throttle valve (globe type), stripper flow circuits

-

O,

o

€}

)
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LOWER LABYRINTH

 

 

|~ ————— %t PREROTATION BAFFLE

 

 

 

 

Fig. 1. Cross

Section of Pump,

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL-LR-DWG 60816
MOTOR
i
i |
BEARING HOUSING
GREASE LUBRICATED SHAFT
BEARINGS
jam| =
= N
VOLUTE SUPPORT
"SLINGER 5;‘&;?‘3 FOUNTAIN| | B
IMPELLER FLow\
' STRIPPER
PUMP UPPER : h BAFFLE
‘ : CONFIGURATI
- TANK LABYRINTH GURATION §
| - Pt LIQUID LEVEL
—FOUNTAIN J
- FLOW— ) =
_ . | =
. BAFFLE

 
 

 

O.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UNCLASSIFIED ’
ORNL-LR-DWG 60817
o . ‘ ; O
NY ANANTS ANNT MY
b ‘ \7
1. !
Y

PUMP TANK
DISCHARGE NOZZLE —

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
 

BRIDGE TUBE—

 

 

 

 

 

T

 

 

Fig. 2. Discharge Connection to Loop.

, ©

¢
 

 

 

 

RN

 

3. Photo of Test Loop.

UNCLASSIFIED
PHOTO 36279

 

 
 

 

 

(not shown), and a cooler. The pump was driven with a 60 hp d.c.
variable speed motor. The vei'tical inlet pipe to the pump was fabri-
cated of plexigla.s to permit visual observation of the inlet flow.con-
ditions. A bundle of l-in. diameter thin-wall tubes, 6-in. long, was
‘added to the lower end of this pipe to reduce rotation of the water
column. The cooler was installed in parallel with the main loop throttle
velve. A pert of the main loop flow.was bypessed through the cooler to
control the system temperature. The bypass flow was controlled by &
-throttle velve located in the bypass flow circuit. Stripper configu-
ration flow was supplied through & tep located. just dovnstreem of the
pump tenk discherge nozzle. The stripper flow as well as the flow from
the impeller upper labyrinth pa,ssed’, through the pump tenk and re-entered
the system at the impeller ‘inlet. Throttle velves were used to control
_the stripper flow. Following the initial tests an orifice was added to
the nearly vertical section of the loop between the discharge and the
venturi flow meter to decrease the pressure drop through the maip throttle

valve.

Carbon Dioxide Stripping Devices

Tests were conducted wherein a portion of the pizmp_discha:rge flow
was introduced into the gas volume of the pump tank t_hrough high velocity
Jets (strippers). A number of configurations were investigated, starting
with a single stream and progressing to configurations vwhich gave in-
creasingly more fresh liquid-gas interface.- |

The strippers tested .and identified in Table I (Appendix) are
described as follows (:I.n each test two strippers were used):

1. Configuration 1 is shown in Fig. 4. The flow discharged from
one side of the can through 1/L-in. holes. For this test the holes were
submerged belofi the liquid surface in the pump tank.

2. Configuration 2 is shown in Fig. 5. The lower end of the entry
tube was éfl.bsed. and the beaker was packed with Inconel wool. The strip;
pifig_"flow,entered the pump 'tank gas space in tangential direction as a
spray. One beaker contai_ned.Bh spray holes, 1/8-111. .in diameter, and
the.-other contained 30 spray holes , 1/b-in. in diameter.

"

O.

b
 

”

 

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL-LR-DWG &608ie

ase I/J \\

PUMP TANK
LIQUID LEVEL

  

= | ST

 

 

 

 

 

SIXTY Y,—in. HOLES —
o
i
!
I
1 3in1Ps ? 5 in. 6% in.
GRAVITY
™
\ J
- .
- 5in.

 

 

Fig. 4. Stripper Configuration 1.

 
 

' B
; ¥
| UNCLASSIFIED

ORNL-LR-DWG 60819

 

 

L

PUMP TANK
LIQUID LEVEL

 

PACKED WITH INCONEL WOOL DRAIN HOLES

 

Fig. 5. Stripper Configuration 2.

 

'

 

 

   

131

 
 

 

.in rpm.

3. Configuration 3 was the same as No..2, except for the size of

spray holes, and the number of holes. Each stripper contalned 162
spray holes, 1/16-in. in diameter, with the beaker suspended such that

the spray was circumferential.
L. Configuration 4 was the same as No. 3, except the number of

holes was reduced by a factor of two and the spray was directed radially

‘invards towsrd the pump shaft.

5. Configuration 5 was a toroid constructed of pipe as shown in
Fig. 6, and located in the pump tank as shown in Fig. 1. Each stripper

contained two rows of 80 holes each, 1/16-in. in diameter.,

INSTRUMENTATION

Insttumentation was provided to measure venturi pressure drop,
discharge pressure, pump shaft speed, water temperature, motor input
power, fountain flow, stripper flow, pH value of the water, and pump
tank liquid level. _ ;

Three diffefent methods were used in measuring the vetturi pressure
drop: mercury manometer, difference between individual pressures measured
at the inlet and.throat,.and,by¢differential pressure transmitter. Cali-
bration of the venturi was provided by the vendor, and it 1s shown in
Fig. T. Individual pressures at the inlet and throat were indicated on
Bourdon tube gages, 0-30 psi range, 1/8 psi subdivision, and 1/4% ac-

curacy. The differential pressure~transm1tter was read out on a dif-

ferential gage, 0-50 psi range, 1/2 psi subdivision, 1/4% accuracy. The
flow is estimated to be accurate within + 3%.

The discharge pressure'was measured on a Bourdon tube gage, 0-100 psi

range, 1/2 psi subdivision, and 1/4% accuracy.

The'pump shaft speed was measured by use of a 60-tooth gear mounted
on the shaft, a magnetic pickup, and a counter which indicated directly

The water temperature was ‘méasured with audialétype thermometer,

0 to 240 F range, 2F subdivision.

Motor input power data was. dbtained by two methods pover recorder,
0 to 40 kw range, 0.8 kw subdivision and power analyzer which indicated

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10

 

Fig. 6.

 

 

 

Stripper Configuration 5.

O.

. O
AP, DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE (cm Hg)

 

 

11

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL-LR~-DWG 60820

/

 

120

/.

100 - /
#
80 : /

 

 

 

 

 

: /
€0 ',.I
40 /.4 /

20 " <

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 200 400 600 800 {000 {200 1400 1600 4800 2000 2200
@, FLOW (gal /min)

Fig. 7. Venturi Calibration.

 
 

12

~current and voltage. The povwer measurements were in error during most
of the testing with the 13-in-o.d. impeller which preceded tests with
the 11-in. impeller. During'this.period,_investigations were conducted
~to: locate and correct the source of error. Satisfactory power measure-
ments were obtained with the 11-in. impeller. The motor calibration
curve is shown in Fig. 8. |

>The-fountain flow was measuréd by directing the flow through 90°
V-notch weirs and measuring the height of the flow column.

| The stripper'flow wes measured by use of rotameters.

The pH vaelue of the water was indicated with & Beckmen pH meter,
Model H-2, renge O to. 1k pH with an accuracy of 0.03 pE.

The pump. tank liquid level weas indicated with & scale marked off in
O.d=in. divisions. Zero level corfesponded.withlthercenter line of the

volute.
DESCRIPTION OF TESTS

'Hbad-Flow-Power—Speed Performance

Hydraulic perfbrmance data vere cobtained over a wide range of
,oPerating conditions with 1mpellers of 11- and 13-in.. outside diameter.
Two methods of operation were used: speed was varied (700 to 1300 rpm)
‘at constant system resistance for several values of resistance with the

13~in. 1mpellef, and system resistance was varied at constant speed for

several values of speed (700 to 1300 rpm) with the 1l-in. impeller. Data
were obtained for computing head, flow, brake.horsepower, and efficiency.

Carbon Dioxide Stripping Tests

- A number of tests were>performed with both impeller diameters to
ascertain the change in effectiveness of 002 removal caused by various
stripper configurations, flow rates, jet velocities, and sweep gas flow
rates, Carbon dioxide in dry-ice form was added to the circulating dis-
tilled water in the system until saturation .was achieved,,after.vhich
time the stripper flow was started. Readings of pH of the water were
taken versus time to determine the time required to reduce the CO2 con-
centration by a factor of two. A total of 37 tests were performed.

O

T,

O
 

INPUT (kw)

60

50

40

30

20

10

13

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL-LR-DWG 60821

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

850 rpm 7
1160 rpm ‘
2400 rpm
60-hp dc G.E.MOTOR
SERIAL NO. 7287063
y
10 20 30 40 50 60 70

QUTPUT {hp)

Fig. 8. Motor Calibration.

 
 

1h

An expression was derived to. give the theoreticel time required to
.reduce the CO2 concentration by one half. Comparison of the'theoretical
and experimental data is reported as relatlve effectiveness of the

stripper.

Pump Tank Liguid end Ges Behavior

Fountain Flow

Considerable testing was performed to . observe the flow of weter fram
the impeller upper labyrinth (flOW‘up the shaft and return to the system
‘through the pump. tank volnme) and to. develope adequate control of the re-
turn of this flow into -the pump tank 11quid keeping the splatter of water
“end ges bubble formation to & minimum (see Fig. 1).

Clearances were varied. between the shaft and the. impeller wpper
labyrinth and the impeller upper shroud. and seal plate. The corres-
ponding fountain flows were measured.

Strigger’Flow

The flow through the various stripper configurations was measured
and- baffling was developed to control splatter and ges bubble formation.

\

Gas Bubble Behavior in the Pump Tank Volume

Throughout all of the testing the formation and behavior of gas
bubbles were observed in the pump tank volume. Baffling was devised to
prevent entry of gas bubbles into the pump inlet from the pump tank

volume.
Priming

The priming characteristics of the pump were checked at various
static liquid. levels -in the pump tank. The abillty of,the.pump-to hold
prime -as the liquid level in the pump tank ‘was being lowered was in-
vestigated. Data were obtained bf»head—flowhspeed perfbrmence‘and of

O.

O
 

 

15

change in starting level for various starting levels as the pump. was

accelerated from zero to design speed.
Coastdown Characteristics

A number of coastdown tests were made from various pump operating
conditions. The power supply to the pump drive motor was interrupted
vhile the pump was operating at specific speed and flow conditions, and
the time required to reach reduced system flow and pump speed was de-

‘termined.
TEST RESULTS
Head-Flow-Power-Speed Performance

Hydraulic performance data were obtained over a wide range of head
and flow conditions at several speeds for the 8 in. x 6 in. volute, using
impellers of 13- and 1ll-in. outside diameter. These tests with the 13-in.
diameter impeller were conducted without a baffle in the pump inlet. The
13-in. impeller performance is presented in Fig. 9, which is.a plot of
head versus flow at various speed?. The flow 1s total flow consisting
of system flow, fountain flow, ané stripper flow. The corresponding
dats are tabulated in Table IT (Appendix). Allis-Chalmers data are also
shown for comparigcon. The heads obtained are increasingly lower than
.Ailis—Chalmers data with decreasing flow at constant speed.

The performance obtained with the 1l-in. diameter impeller is pre-
sented in Fig.'lo,_whidh.is a plot of head versus flow at various speeds.
The flow is total fldwficonsisting of system flow, fountain flow, and
stripper flow. The correspbnding;data_are.tabulated in Table IIT (Ap-
pendix). Data for'thrée différent inlet configurations are shown: in
two configurations a prerotatioh\baffle was located at the inlet to the
impeller; and the other configuration had none. The baffle consisted of
two,plates:arrangednin.a.crbés as shown in Fig. 11; it had the effect of
increasing the head at the lower range of flows on a constant speed line.
There was essentially no difference in the results obtained with the two

 
 

 

g

H,HEAD {ft)
o
o

30

16

 

 

 

 

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL~LR-DWG 60822
1300 rpms;
i-.\
r
"50 FPM = "-“—--"—-q / ..‘-L /)
'-.,‘-.\ e \ -~
A
H50~g

 

%S

.
\

 

Z

(.

J
_/
N

 

 

/)

 

 

/.,
T
'/
A

/
/

 

 

]

/ -
4
4;// :;/<:>,/
700~
17 7 "~~~ CONSTANT RESISTANCE

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

 

 

=== ALLIS-CHALMERS DATA
== ——=— ORNL. DATA WITHOUT INLET BAFFLE

L

 

ALLIS CHALMERS MFG. CO. IMPELLER AND VOLUTE.
SIZE 8x6; TYPE E; IMPELLER P-482,13~in.

CD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o 200 400 €00 800 1000 {200

1400

@, FLOW (gal/min)

1600

180C 2000 2200 2400

Fig. 9. Hydraulic Performance, 13-in. Impeller.

O.

£

. O
 

 

17

UNCLASSIFIED

ORNL-LR-DWG 60823

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

88 . . . T T .
ALLIS CHALMERS MFG. CO. IMPELLER-VOLUTE
SIZE 8x6; TYPE E; IMPELLER P-482, 11-in. 0D
80 ——ALLIS CHALMERS DATA —_
ORNL DATA
© WITHOUT INLET BAFFLE 4-19-6!
72 ® WITH INLET BAFFLE (4-in. LONG) 4-20-61 _ |
——a] e & WITH INLET BAFFLE (2'2-in. LONG) 6-19-6!
&.\
64 \K\\
\t...‘\
T A ] 1300 rpm
E N \__{\\ \4
— ha
[~
w _ R S
. 40 SaN.,
T }\ 150
1.&\
32 _a__-.--.‘_!“- [ .,
N ey
X B6O
-.——--_._‘_" N%
v Jep— \
18 o
p= 700
8
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 {600 180C

@, FLOW (qgal /min)

-Fig. 10. Hydraulic- ‘Performance , 11-in, Impeller.

2000

 
 

 

 

18

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL-LR-DWG 60824

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l‘/
-
\\\ "'4
-
\- - -
- ’l
~ ‘I

FLOW

Fig. 11. Prerotation Baffle.

. O

-Gy

O.
 

- -

19

sizes of baffles. Curves of head and pump input power versus flow at
various speeds are shown in Fig. 12. The input power change versus
flow for constant speed operation is slight.

The prerotation baffle was not fully tested with the 13-in. im-
peller. Were such a baffle used with the 13-in. impeller, performance
would be more nearly coincident with the published Allis-Chalmers data.

From the power data obtalned with the 1l-in. diameter impeller,

efficiency contours were computed which are shown in Fig. 13, super-

“imposed on a plot of head-flow-speed data.

Carbon Dioxide Stripping Effectiveness

In the stripping tests, data were obtained to determine the time
required to reduce the CO2 concentration by one half (half-life). The
change in pH value of the distilled water was measured over a range from
4 to 6 versus time. Fdr plotting purposes the pH values were converted
to the logarithm of the molarity of CO2 to determine the half-life.

Theoretical half-1ife (t = 0.69 V/QS) was computed for each test
and compared with the experimental half-life to give relative effective-
ness.

The results of the carbon dioxide stripping tests are presented in
Teble I (Appendix). Related in the table are data pertaining to the
stripper configurations, by-pass flows, liquid level in the pump tank,
sweep gas flow rate, system volume, jet velocity, experimental half-life,
ideal half-life, and relative effectiveness. |

The first six tests fiefe-preliminary; the flow was simply bypassed
through the pump tank without passing through strippers. These tests
were performed to provide a base from which to proceed with strippers.
Values of relative effectiveness ranged from 10 to LO percent.

Tests7.through.16'were'éoncerned mainly with varying the stripper
configuration. _Other‘variéblesfimay_be noted in the data shown in the
table . Values of effectiveness ranged from 15 to 68 percent.

~ From the results of tests through No. 16, configuration 5 (Fig. 6)
was_derived and used fbr'thé'reméinder of the tests, 17 through 39.

 
 

 

 

20

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL~LR-DWG 60825

o
Q

1300 rpm —

n
o

PUMP INPUT POWER (hp)
S

o

 

-
n

 

64

 

56

 

 

48 , \\ ‘c\

40 L

 

 

M, HEAD (1)

32 o

Tl

 

 

24
86‘0

 

 

 

 

 

 

16 |— 50 gal/min STRIPPER FLOW AT 1200 gal /min,
48.5 ft, 1150 rpm; 7.5 gal/min FOUNTAIN FLOW

4-in. IMPELLER, 8 x 6 IMPELLER-VOLUTE
8 — 2% -in. PREROTATION BAFFLE

]

c 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
@, FLOW (gal /min)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fig. 12. Head, Input Power, and Speed Versus Flow, 1l-in. Im-
peller. ‘

O
 

b

72

64
56
48

40

H,, HEAD (ft)

32

24

16

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL-LR-DWG 60826

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

70 |
~_ 75
/ )'\
— ~<80
£ | e
< 87.5
~ / / o g
s / ~ 89.5
EFFICIENCY TSa No
CONTOURS ~ ~ _87.5
..‘\ \.
~ TN.85
\‘.\ g &
~ Aoo
\'\ rpm
/) 7
// N150
™ -
/ > \‘\86 /
70 -—-..“4‘-/ / .\\\
75 e~ | ~
80 <
S g7+ ™ 860
o *~_V
, er.s‘gf-
8 700
FROM DATA WITH 4-in. LONG PREROTATION BAFFLE
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

@, FLOW {gol /min)

Fig. 13. Hydraulic Performance, ll-in. Impeller, Efficlency
Contours Superimposed.

 
22

In tests 17 through 24, the flow and jJet velocity were varied simul-

taneously at a constant sweep gas flow rate. The relative effectiveness

varied. from 27 to 99 percent.
In tests 10, 13,.1k4,.17, 18, and 25 through 29, sweep gas flow rate

,was-varied,with-thé other varisbles held constant, and two stripper con-

figurations were used. The relative effectiveness variedrf;om»47 to

T2 percent. These data are plotted in Fig. 14, Relative Effectiveness

VersuSVSweep Gas Flow, for two configurations.

In tests 30, 32, 33, 35, and 39, the stripping‘flow”uas varied with
the other varisbles held constant. The relative effectiveness varied
from 7O to 90 percent. The'results from these tests are shown in Fig. 15,
Half-Life (defined on page 18) Versus Stripping Fléw. Experimental and

theoretical curves are shown.

In tests 30, 31, 34, and 36, the jet velocity was varied with the
other variables held constent. The relative effectiveness varied from

27 t0.90 percent. The results are shown in Fig. 16, Relative Effective~

ness Versus Jet Velocity.

Configuration -5 was selected for the MSRE fuel pump, and was .in-
corporated in the design of the prototype fuel pump. Tests 37 and 38
yielded effectiveness values of 52 and 55 percent, respectively. These
tests were performed at the following conditions, reasonably attainable
in the MSRE: stripping flow rate of 65 gpm, and sweep gas flow rates . of
0.05 and 0.07 scfm, respectively. |

Pump Tank Liquid,and Gas Behavior

Fountain Flow

|

Observations of the fountaein flow from the impeller upper labyrinth
(Fig. 17) revealed the need to control it; the slinger impeller was

causing an undesirable spray. This spray was contained and controlled

-by use of a cover enclosing the labyrinth and slinger impeller, and
‘having drain ports located at its lower end. |

Approximate measurements of the fountain flow were made using weirs

located in the windows carrying the flow from the fountain into. the pump

0.

. O
 

h

L

23

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL~-LR-DWG 60827
100
I I |
(smuppsa CONFIGURATION 5
3 80 |[—
= 17
& TEST NUMBER ~* 13 3
W _ et
g 60 — 28 / / P _4__-—-—"____—-"'"
u{é .CT:' _——_—\ STRIPPER CONFIGURATION 3
| i
w \10
4 40 o6
5
-
W
t. 20 JET VELOCITY CONSTANT
STRIPPING FLOW CONSTANT
. ]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

¢, SWEEP GAS FLOW (ft*/min)

Fig. l4. Relative Effectiveness Versus Sweep Gas Flow.

 
 

 

t, HALF -LIFE (min}

{6

-
N

o
®

°
b

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

24
UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL-LR-DWG 60828
T 1 {
]
e 35
N 33 o
EXPERIMENTAL /\ 39
THEORETICAL P
| JET VELOCITY CONSTANT
SWEEP GAS FLOW RATE CONSTANT
STRIPPING CONFIGURATION CONSTANT
0 10 20 30 40 80 60 70 80

STRIPPING FLOW (gal/min)

Fig. 15, Half-Life Versus Stripping Flow.

0.
 

b

100

€, RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS (%)

80

60

40

20

Fig.

25

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL-LR-DWG 60829

 

s

30
o

L~

 

9
18 35

 

 

 

 

 

 

\TEST NUMBER

 

 

STRIPPING CONFIGURATION CONSTANT
SWEEP GAS FLOW RATE CONSTANT
STRIPPING FLOW CONSTANT

 

 

 

 

 

|

 

 

 

 

16'

5 10 15 20 25
v, JET VELOCITY (ft/sec)

30

35

40

Relative Effectiveness Versus Jet Velocity.

 
26

SLINGER IMPELLER

CLEARANCE "A"—

LABYRINTH

TOP EDGE e

OFf IMPELLER

 

CLEARANCE “C"

UNCLASSIFIED

ORNL-LR-DWG 60830

SHAFT

-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

L

Npid/

 

CLEARANCE "8"

T -

Fig. 17. Cross Section of Upper Labyrinth.

O.

o
 

27

tank. Values of fountaln flow for several labyrfnth clearances are as
follows:
13-in. Diameter Impeller, 1450 gpm, 1030 rpm, 50 ft Head

,Configura&ion
Number Clearance "A" Clearance "B", Clearance '"C", Flow, gpm
1l 0.015 0.015 0.090 T.5 - 10
2 0.015 0.0k0 0.090 10 - 12
3 0.015 0.0%0 0.250 10 - 12
b 0.015 0.060 0.250 15 - 17.5

Configuration 4 was used with the 1l1-in. diameter impeller and the
fountaln flow was measured at various speeds along a constant resistance
line defined by 1300 gpm and 45 ft. The fountain flow versus speed is
shown in Fig. 18. Configuration 4 was adopted for use on the prototype
MSRE fuel pump. '

The direction of the fountain flow was observed over the range of
conditions from which_head-flow-speed.data.were_dbtained with both the
1l-in. and 13<in. impellers. The flow of liquid was found always to be
outward from the shaft annulus into the pump tank, which is the desired

direction.

Stripper Flow

Considerable splatter of liquid resulted from impingement of this
flow onto the volute and volute support. Control of this splatter was
obtained through use of baffles installed on the stripper and on the

volute sufirort.‘

Gas Bubble Behavior in the Pump Tank Volume

Entrance of the fountain and stripper flows into the pump tank liquid
caused gas bubble formation in the liquid. Control was obtained through
use of a baffle installed on the voluté which deflects bubbles radially

 

¥ | L |
Each configuration was basically the same. Only the clearances

were different.

 
 

20 |

28

UNCLASSIFIED
ORNL-LR-DWG €083

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

| @
{1-in.-dia IMPELLER
1300 - gal/min LOOP FLOW
8 45-ft HEAD o/
€
E |
S 6 /
2 /
S
T A /.
Z /
<{
E o4
oD
o
w
12 ./
/
10
800 500 1000 100 1200 1300
SHAFT SHAFT {rpm)
Fig. 18. Fountain Flow Versus Speed, 1l-in. Impeller.

O

O
 

. "

Y

89

outwards in the tank and by forcing these two flows to enter the
* impeller inlet at the lowest elevation in the tank as shown in Fig. 19,

which may be compared to Fig. 1.

Priming

Priming tests were conducted with the 13-in. impeller in wvhich the
pump was accelerated from zero to 1030 rpm in approximatelyf30 seconds,
notinghthe-change in pump tank liquid level and observing attainment of
normal pump head and flow performance. The following operating levels
were noted for the listed starting levels:

* *
Static Liquid Level Operating Liquid Level
(in.) (in.)
13-in. impeller

+2 +1.2
+1.5 : +0.6
+1 -0.9
+0.5 -2.1

11-in. impeller

+2 +]
+1 -1.5
0 would not prime

Norma.l. hydraulic performance was achieved at the end of pump accele-
ration for all runs except the 0.5-in. starting level with the 13-in.

-impelier and.fihe-zero level with the 1l-in..impeller. The 13-in. . impeller

required an additional minute for priming at the 0.5-in. level and the
11-in. impeller would not prime at the zero level. These data should not

be used for reactor system computations unless differences in volumes of

system trapped gas are accounted for.

 

- Reference level 1s center”line of the volute. + 1s above center

line.

 
 

 

 

 

 

  

30

 

   
 

sssssssssssss
RRRRRRRRRRRRRR

 

 

 

 

4/
FFFFFF 22 N\
: W <\\\\\3\
'
I\ -

 

Fig. 19. Pump Inlet X-Section.

 

 

O

O
 

 

"

30

Other priming-tegts were performed;by lowering of the liquid level
in the pump tank slowly with the pump running. A test was performed with
the 13-in. diameter impeller operating at 1450 gpm, 50 ft head, and
starting liquid level at .l 1/2-in. above center line of the volute. In-
gassing began at approximately L l/a-in. below the center line of the
volute. At 5 1/2 in. below the center line of the volute, the system
flow dropped to 700 gpm, and 6 l/2rin.-below the center line of the
volute, the flow reduced to zero.

A test was performed with the ll-in. impeller operating at 1250 gpm,
45 ft and starting liquid level at 1 1/2 in. above the center line of the
volute. Ingassing began at approximately 3 in. below the center line of
the volute. Vigorous ingassing and loss of head and flow began at 3 1/2 in.

‘below the volute center line.

Coastdown Characteristics

Coastdown tests were performed on the drive motor and pump with the
13-in. impeller to determine the time required for the unit to stop after
opening the drive motor circuit from the electric supply. Tests were

performed on the same flow resistance line for operating speeds of 1150,

11030, and 860 rpm at flow rates of 1630, 1450, and 1210 gpm, respectively.

Coastdown times to zero speed ranged from 10.1 to 10.k sec., and for flow

reduction to 540 gpm, the times ranged from 1.5 to 2.0 sec.
CONCLUSIONS

From the experimental hydraulic characteristics, the total head was
found to deviate framwreportéd data.by'+1 to -3 ft. It was found necessary
to insert a prerotation baffle in the inlet to,improve,the,head.at reduced
flows. ) o
| BasédAon the water;tést‘reSults, a 1l.5-in. diameter impeller will
be required to meet the rgaétcr design head and flow (48.5 £t and 1200 gpm).
This dimension will be more precisely determined during the prototype fuel
pump tests.

 
 

 

32

Fountain flow was observed over the whole range of operation and
~found to be outward from the upper -lebyrinth into the pump tank, which
1is the desired direction. Gas bubbles crested by the fountain and
stripping flows were removed in the pump tank with assistance from the
various baffles.

With regard to priming, the pump would prime (full head and flow)
.1nstqntaneouély with speed at statlic levels of 1 in. or more above the
center "line of. the volute. ' |

Gas stripping was accomplished in the pump tank vith a relative
effectiveness of up to 99 percent. Sweep gas flow rate, stripping flow,
and Jet veloclty were found to have quite pronounced effects on the |
stripping rate of & given stripper configuration. It was concluded that
the zenon removal rate will be primarily dependent on the fraction of
fuel processed rather than on improved stripper configurations.

The hydraulic characteristice were found to be adequate for the
anticipated requirements of the fuel circuilt of the MSRE. The required
control of liquid and gas behavior in the pump tank was accomplished by
the use of baffles.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The following specific contributions are acknowledged which comprise
the main talents required to complete the investigations: L. V. Wilson,
design; F. F. Bla.nkehship, devised .stripping--tests; .R. F. Apple, .chem.ical
aspects of stripping tests, and J. M. Cdburn, test operation, data taking,

end computations.

REFERENCES

1. R. B. Briggs, MSRP Quar. Prog. Rep. for Period August 1, 1960
to February 28, 1961, ORNL-3122, June 20, 1961.
2. R. B. Briggs, MSRP Prog. Rep. for Period March 1 to August 31,
11961, ORNL-3215, January 12, 1962. ’
3. S. E. Beall, W. L. Breazeale, B. W. Kinyon, Molten-Salt Reactor
Experiment Preliminary Hezards Report, ORNL-CF 61-2-46, February 28, 1961.

O,

. O
 

’)

¥

%)

iy

33

4, A. G. Grindell, W. F. Boudreau, H. W. Savage, "Development of
Centrifugal Pumps for Operation with Liquid Metals and Molten Salts at
1100-1500 F", Nuclear Science and Engineering, Vol. 7, No. 1, 1960,
pp 83-91. |

5. H. W. Savage, Components of the Fused-Salt and Sodium Circuits
of the Aircraft Reactor Experiment, ORNL-2348, Feb. 15, 1958.

6. A. G. Grindell, "Correlation of Cavitation Inception Data for
a Centrifugal Pump Operating in Water and in Sodium-Potassium Alloy (Nak)",
ASME Trans., Series D, Dec. 1960, pp 821-828.

 
 

 

 

 
 

' o

O.

. O
 

"

»)

w)

Nomenclature
Table I
Table II
Table III

Computations

35

APPENDIX

 
 

 

 
 

 

37

NOMENCLATURE

Half-life, min.

System volume, gal.

Stripping flow, gal/mifi.

CO2 concentration, pH reading

Sweep gas flow rate, ft3/min.
Relative effectiveness, dimensionless
Total flow, gal/min.

Total head, ft.

Jet velocity, ft/sec.

 

 
 

38

Table I. CO, Stripping Tests of MSRE Primary Pump Circulating H,0

Impeller Diameter: 13 in. for tests 1 through 24
Impeller Diameter: 11 in. for tests 25 through 39
System Water Flow: 1450 gpm

Head: 50 ft

Water Temperature: 65 F

 

 

 

 

 

18 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 12 13 14 15
Stripper Configuration By-Pass Flow (gpm) | . Half-Life, t (min)
- Sweep Cas : ‘ Total
Liquid Jet Systen Relative
Test Diamg¢ter ‘ b (Air) Direction of By-Pass
No. . Number mg; Level . Flow Stripper Flow Veloclity Volume Flow o Effectiveness
No. of . Stripper Fountain  (in.) (ft/sec) (gal) Experimental® Theoretical (%)
Holés  {cfm) (gpm)
Holes (inl]) L
1 35 8 4.0 0 Submerged 96 42 15.0 1.57 10.5
2 35 8 4.0 0 " 926 42 16.0 1.57 9.8
3 18 15 4.0 0 " 96 32 12.0 2.06 17.2
4 18 15 4.0 0.1 " 9% . 32 8.0 2.06 24.2
5 35 15 4.0 0.1 : 96 50 10.0 1.34 13.4
6 : 0 15 4.0 0.1 96 15 11.0 4,45 40,5
7 1 60 1/4 26 15 2.5 0.1 " 4.6 91 41 10.0 1.55 15.5
9 2 84} 1; 43} 35 15 1.5 0.1 Circumferential 8.9 } 88 50 3.0 1,22 40.6
30 1/4 6.2 :
10 3 324 1/16 35 15 1.5 0.1 " 18.5 88 50 2.6 1,22 46,9
12 3 324 1/16 35 15 3.8 . 0.1 n 18.5 96 50 3.2 1.32 41,7
13 3 324 1/16 35 15 1.5 8.6 " 18.5 88 50 1.8 1.22 67.7
14 3 324 1/16 35 15 1.5 4.3 " 18.5 88 50 2.2 1.22 55.4
15 5 324 1/16 0 15 1.5 0.1 " 0 88 15 6.8 4,06 59,7
16 4 162 1/16 35 15 1.5 0.1 Radially in- 37.0 88 50 2.0 1.22 61.0
: ward
17 5 320 1/fl6 35 15 1.5 4,3 " 18.5 88 50 1.7 1.22 72.8
18 5 320 1/16 35 15 1.5 4.3 " 18.5 88 50 1.7 1.22 71.8
19 5 200 1/16 50 15 1.5 4.3 " 46.2 88 65 1.0 0.9 98.9
20 5 200 = 1/1e 50 15 1.5 | 4.3 " 46.2 88 65 0.9 0.94 99,0
21 5 320 1/16 70 15 . 1.5 4.3 " 40, 88 85 0.9 0,72 80.8
22 5 320 l/%G 70 15 1.5 " 4.3 " 40.5 88 85 0.9 0.72 82.7
23 5 215 1/16 44 15 1.5 4,3 " 37.8 88 59 1.1 1.03 96.8
24 5 215 1/16 44 15 1.5 4,3 " 37.8 88 59 1.0 1.03 98,0
25 5 320 1/16 35 15 1.5 0 " 18.5 88 50 2.5 1,22 48.8
26 5 320 1/16 35 15 1.5 0 " 18.5 88 50 2.6 1.22 46,9
27 5 320 1/16 35 15 1.5 0,05 " 18.5 88 50 2.5 1.22 48,8
28 5 320 1/16 35 15 1.5 0.07 " 18.5 88 50 2.4 1,22 50.8
29 5 320 1/16 35 15 1.5 1.0 " 18.5 88 50 2.3 1.22 53.0
30 5 160 1/16 35 15 1.5 4,3 " 37.0 - 88 50 1.4 1.22 89.6
31 5 200 1/16 35 15 1.5 4.3 " 29.6 88 50 1.5 1.22 83.6
32 5 200 1/16 4d 15 1.5 4.3 " 37.0 88 59 1.4 1,04 73.8
33 5 228 1/16 50 15 1.5 4,3 " 37.0 88 65 1.2 0.94 78,3
34 5 240 1/16 35 15 1.5 4.3 n 27.0 88 50 1.6 1.22 76.3
35 5 274 1/16 60 15 1.5 4.3 " 37.0 88 75 1.2 0.81 70.2
36 5 280 1/16 35 15 1.5 4.3 " 23,1 88 50 1.7 1.22 71.7
34 5 290 1/16 50 15 1.5 0.05 " 28.8 88 65 1.8 0.9 52,2
3gd 5 290 1/16 50 15 1.5 0,07 " 28.8 88 65 1.7 0.94 55,3
39 5 300 1/16 62 15 1.5 4.3 " 34.8 88 77 1.1 0.79 72.2

 

 

83ee appendix for compytations relative to indicated columns.
bZI‘..c.e\rel referred to cenfierline of volute.

®Data from R. G. Apple] Reactor Chemistry Division.
d5ystem flow, 1200 gpm{ head, 48.5 ft.

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E
39 |
}
Table'II. Head-Flow-Speed-Power Data for 134in. Impeller on MSRE Primary Pump Circulating %20
18 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11{ 12 13 % 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Motor Input Motor Input Discharge | .
" Power Recorder Power Analyzer Pressure Ventur% Stripper Flow . |
| Fountain Total Cnonge in
Speed f Ap Gage . low Fl ow Velocity  Total Head
(xrpm) - ‘ Inlet Throat Aqaé pFlofi Circuit 1 Circuit 2 (&pm) ( erpm) Hea? (£t)
Readi kw o kw i f ' ; = 5
eacre v.ooow psle " T (peig) (psie) (psfi) _ —_ (
| el gpm %  gpm % gpm
700 1.30 5.2 11.0 24.4 8.0 4.2 3.3' 3.2 80 74 13.0 74 13.0 9 875 0.98 25. 38
860  2.45 9.8 16.2 37.4  11.6 6.1 5.5 5.2 1032 88 1l4.4 88 1.4 12 1073 1.47 38. 87
1030 4.25  17.0 23,1 53.3 16.4 8.4 8. 7.4 1248 100 17.5 100  17.5 15 1298 2.15 55.45
1150 5.95 = 23.8 28.5 65.4  20.0 10,2 9, 9.3 1375 100 17.5 100  17.5 17 1427 2.61 68.01
1300 8.65 34,6 36.1 83.4  25.5 13.0 12,5 12,2 1550 100 17.5 100  17.5 20 1605 3.35 86.75
700 1.40 5.6 9.2 2.2 8.2 2.4 5.j 5.5 1070 - 68 11.9 68  11.9 9 1103 1.58 22.78
860 2.65 10.6 13.6 31.4  12.0 3.1 8.9 8.5 1315 84  14.7 84  14.7 12 1356 2.35 33.75
1030 - 4.65 18.6 19.4 44.8  16.9 4o 2 12.4 12.3 1620 100 17.5 100 17.5 15 1670 3.56 48. 36
1150 6. 60 26.4 23.9 55.2  20.6 5.0 15,6  15.4 1745 100 17.5 100 17.5 17 1797 3.93 59.13
1300 9.50 38.0 30.2 69.6  22.9 9.0 18.9  15.4 1930 100 17.5 100 17.5 |20 1985 3.74 73,34
700 1.50 6.0 8 T 6.1 7.9 18.2 | 7.3 1185 45 15.7 45  15.7 9 1225 1.92 20.17
860 2.70 10.8 108 106 11.4 11.7 27.0 ‘1 11.0 1450 56 19.5 56  19.5 12 1501 2.88 29. 88
1030 . 4.75 19.0 . 130 150 19.5 16.7 38.6 | 15.5 1735 70  24.5 70 24.5 15 . 1799 4,15 42,75
1150 6.70 26.8 145 187 27.1  20.7 47.8 i 19.5 1950 76 26,6 76  26.6 17 2021 5.22 53.02
1300 = 9.90 39,6 164 245  40.2 26.5 62.2 | 25.0 2270 86 30.0 86  30.0 20 2340 5,81 68.01
700 1.30 5.2 10.3 23.8 6.5 2.0 4.4 4o2 955 69 12.0 69  12.0 9 088 1.25 25,05
860 = 2,55 10.2 15,2 35.2 9.4 2.6 6.8 6.5 1145 85 14.9 85 14.9 12 1187 1.81 37.01
1030 4. 40 17.6 21.6 49.9  13.1 3.4 9.8 9.5 1380 100 17.5 100 17.5 15 1430 2.59 52.49
1150 6.10 24,4 26.6 61.4  16.1 4.0 12.1 11.8 1535 100 17.5 100 17.5 |17 1578 3.23 64. 63
1300 9.00 36.0 34,0 78.5 20.4 4.8  15.6 1710 100 17.5 100 17.5 20 1765 4.00 82.50
700 1.25 5.0 11.3  26.1 6.8 3.8 3.0 2.7 760 72 12.6 72 12.6 9 794, 0.81 26.91
860 2.35 9.4 16.8 38.8 9.9 5.1 4.3 e 2 960 90 15.9 90 15.9 12 1004 1,29 40.09
1030  4.00 16.0 23.6  54.5 13.8 7.1 6. 6.1 1135 100 17.5 100 17.5 15 1185 1.79 56, 29
1150 5.70 23.5 29.4 68,2 17.0 8,8 8.2 7.6 1265 100 17.5 100 17.5 17 1317 2.22 70,42
1300 8.60 34,4 37,3 86,2 21.2 11.0 10.2  10.0 1412 100 17.5 100 17.5 20 1467 2.75 88.95
700 1.40 5.6 82 68 5.6 9.6 22.2 5.1 | 5.3 1010 48 16.8 48  16.8 9 1052 1.42 23.62
860 2.60 10.4 105 101  10.6 14.4 33.3 7.4 7.8 1225 69  24.1 69 24.1 12 1285 2.11 35.41
1037 = 4.61 18.4 130 143 18.6 20.8 48.1 10.2 11.1 1460 70 24.5 70 24.5 15 1524 2.97 - 51.07
1154 6.40 26.4 146 176 25.7 25.5 58.9 12.5 13.7 1625 80 28.0 80 28.0 17 1698 3.68 62.58
1300 9.40 37.6 164 228  37.4 32.4 74.9 15.6 17.5 1875 92  32.2 92  32.2 20 1959 4,92 79, 82

 

aSee appendix for computations relative to indicated columns.

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

| : . ' 40
{ Table III. Head-Flow-Speed-Power Data for 1lyin. Impeller on MSRE Primary Pump Circulating Hy0
18 2 3 4 5 6 7 g 9 10 112 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Motor Input = Motor Input " Discharge |
Power Recorder Power Analyzer Pressure Venturi Strippppg Flow . Change in ‘
. : Fountain Total Total Pump Power Water
Speed ‘ Velocity Efficiency
‘ : -} - Flow Flow Head Input Horsepower
(o) | o weie g AP moy _ Ctrouits {%) (em)  (eow)  Fo (r0)  (wD) (p) (B
: eading kw v amp ; pelg (cm Hg) (gpm) . _ .gpg ,
“ 1 2 3 4
; Prerotation Baffle: Not Used
1300 3.90 15.6 156 100  ‘15.6 24,6 56,8 15.8 770 56 58 59 59 41.0 20.0 831 0.88 57.68 18.3 12.10 66.1
4,50 18.0 156 116 18.1 23.9 55.2 32.5 1100 55 56 57 58 39.9 20.0 1160 1.73 56.93 21l.7 16.67 76.8
4, 80 19.2 156 125 @ 19.5 22.8 52.7 49.3 1350 53 - 56 53 57 39.0 20.0 1409 2.54 55.24 23.5 19.65 83.6
5.00 20.0 156 129 ; 20.1 21.4 49.4 = 60.8 1500 51 53 54 55 37.8 20.0 1558 3.10 52.50 24.4 20.65 84.6
5.10 20.4 156 132 1 20.6 19.1 44.1 76.2 1690 48 51 51 52 35,7 20.0 1746 3.90 48,05 25.1 21.20 84.5
5.30 21.2 156 138 21L.5 16.8 38.8 93.2 1880 45 46 47 48  32.5 20.0 1932 477 43.57 26.3 21.28 80.9
1150 2.60 10.4 144 77 1l.1 19.5 45.0 12.8 700 46 51 52 52 35.2 17.4 753 0.73 45,73 13.2 8.70 65.9
3.15 12.6 144 89 12.8 18.6 43,0 29.2 1045 45 50 51 51 34.8 17.4 1097 1.55 4t 55 15.5 12.35 79.7
3.40 13.6 144 9 '13.8 1l6.7 38.6 48.7 1340 42 47 4@ “48 32,7 17.4 1390 2.47 41.07 16.5 14,28 86.5
3.55 4.2 144 100  14.4  1l4.4 33,2 64.7 1550 39 43 44 45 30,3 17.4 1598 3.26 36.51 17.2 14.74 85.7
3.60 4.4 144 103 - 14.8 13.3 30.8 73.0 1650 37 41 42 42 28,7 17.4 1696 3.68 34.48 17.7 14.78 83.5
860 1.20 4.8 102 48 3‘ 4.9 11.0 25.3 10.1 630 33 37 3B 38 25.5 12.0 667 0.57 25,87 5.5 4,37 79.5
1.30 5.2 102 56 ' 5.7 10.5 24.2 -19.4 850 32 36 38 37 25,5 12.0 887 1.01 25.26 6.7 5.67 84.6
1.40 5.6 102 58 « 5.9 9.6 22.2 27.1 1005 31 35 3% 35 24,1 12.0 1641 1.38 23.58 7.0 6.19 88.5
1.50 6.0 102 6l | 6.2 8.5 19.6 35.2 1145 28 32 33 33 22.5 12.0 1179 1.78 21l.42 7.3 6.39 87.5
1.55 7.2 102 62 : 6.3 7.7 17.8 41.6 1240 27 30 31 31 21..3 12.0 1273 2,07 19.87 7. 6.39 86.4
700 .65 2.6 80 34_; 2.7 7.4 17.1 6.7 500 26 30 30 30 20.3 8.9 529 0.36 17.46 2.8 2.34 84.2
.75 3.0 80 39 § 3.1 7.1 16,4 12.3 690 25 29 30 29 19.8 8.9 719 0.66 17.06 3.6 3.10 . 84,7
.80 3.2 80 42 | 3.4 6.8 15,7 17.1 800 2 28 29 28 19.1 ‘8.9 g28 0.88 16.58 3.8 3.47 91.9
.80 3.2 80 43 ' 3.4 6.2 14.3 21l.3 890 23 26 2 27 18.0 8.9 917 1.08 15.40 4.0 3.57 89.2
.85 3.4 80 45 3.6 5.3 12.2 28.2 1025 20 24 5 25 1l6.5 8.9 1050 1.42 13,67 4.3 3.64 84.7
E Prerotation Baffle: 2 1/2 in. Long
860 1.20 4,8 101 51 ; 5.2 13.5 31.2 2.9 250 57 60 5y 57 40.4 12.0 302 0.12 31.32 5.9 2.40 40.1
1.25 5.00 101 53 5.4 13,0 30.1 6.8 500 55 59 5 56 39,5 12.0 551 0.38 30.48 6.0 4y 24 70.7
1.30 5.2 101 56 5.7 12.0 27.7 12.5 690 53 55 $ 54 38.0 12.0 740 0,70 28.40 6.5 5.31 81.8
1.35 5.4 101 57 . 5.8 11.0 25.4 17.2 800 50 54 53 51 36.4 12.0 848 0.92 26,32 6.6 5.64 85.5
1.40 5.6 101 58 | 5.9 10.2 23.6 21.4 890 48 53 50 49 35.0 12.0 937 1.12 24.72 6.7 5.85 87.2
1.40 5.6 101 59 ¢ 6.0 9.4 21.7 26.4 990 45 50 48 47 33,3 12.0 1035 1,37 23.07 7.0 6.20 88.
1.45 5.8 101 6l ! 6.2 8.0 18.5 35.5 1145 4l 47 45 44 31.0 12.0 1188 1.81 20,29 7.1 6.10 85.8
1.45 5.8 101 62 - 6.3 7.3 16.9 41,0 1230 38 _45 4b 42 29.0 12.0 2171 2.06 18.92 7.2 6.07 84.3
1150 3.25 13.0 142 92 13.1 24,2 55.5 5.2 430 779 7Y 76 55.0 17.4 502 0.32 55.78 15.6 6.70 42.9
3,20 12.8 142 89 12.6 23,0 53.2 11.8 645 T4 77 75 75 54.6 17.4 770 0.76 53.96 15.2 10,48 68.9
3.25 13.0 141 91 12.9 21.0 48.5 22.3 910 68 74 70 71 50.0 17.4 977 1.22 49,72 15.4 12.26 - 79.7
3.30 13.2 141 95 1 13.5 19.5 45.1 31.3 1080 65 73 6] 68 47.5 17.4 1145 1.68 46.78 16.3 13,52 83.0
3.40 13,6 141 97 13.8 17.4 40.2 42.8 1255 61 68 63 64 45.0 17.4 1317 2.21 42.41 1l6.4 14.28 87.1
3.40 13.6 141 29 14,1 15.8 36.5 53.0 1400 57 66 6 61 43.0 17.4 1460 2.73 39.23 16.8 14.48 86.2
3.50 4.0 141 101 14,4  14.0 32.4 66.6 1575 54 62 58 56 40.5 17.4 1643 3.46 35.81 17.1 . 14.88 87.0
3.60 ld.4 141 103 14.6 13.0 30.0 73.5 1655 50 59 55 55 38.5 17.4 1711 3.75 33.75 17.5 14.57 83.3

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

;.
41
Table ITI. . (continued)
j ,
1?22 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13° 14 15 16 17 18 19| 20 21 22
; 5
Motor Input Motor Input Discharge ‘
Power Recorder Power Analy:zer Pressure Venturi Strippiég Flow Change in '
i Fountain Total Totdl  Pump Power Water
Speed : Fl Velocity | Efficiency
_ . ow Flow Head Input Horsepower
(xpm) ' ap oy Chrontts () (gm)  (gow) P2 () (wp) (p) (#)
Reading Yew v amp kw psig f% * gpm (ft) -
(em Hg)  (gpm) |
. 1 2 3 ? 4
: »
Prerotation Baffle: 2 1/2 in. Long
1300 4. 80 19.2 159 122 19.4 30.6 70.4 6.2 480 83 88 85[ 8 59.5 20.0 599 0.40 70.715 23.4 9.98 42.6
4.65 - 18.6 159 116 18.4 29.3 ¢67.4 14.3 740 g8 77 83; 82 57.0 20.0 817 0.85 68. 20 22.7 14.10 62.2
4,60 18,4 159 115 18.3 27.8 64.2 22.8 915 77T 82 79 80 56.0 20.0 291 1.26 65.46 22.5 16.38 72.8
4,70 18.8 159 121 19.2 24.7 57.1 39.0 1200 73 78 75{ 76  53.0 20.0 1273 .07 59.17 23.3 19.00 8l.5
4.80 19.2 159 @ 124 19.7 22,5 52.0 50.8 1370 70 75 70 77 50.0 20.0 1440 2.61 54.?1 24,0 19.88 82.8
4,90 19.6 158 126 20.7 20.7 47.8 63.0 1530 65 72 65 68 47.0 20.0 1597 3.26 51.11 24,5 20.62 84.2
5.00 20.0 158 129 20.5 18.3 42.3 80.0 1730 62 70 63? 65 45.5 20.0 1795 4,12 46,42 25.1 21.10 84.0
5.10 20.4 158 132 21.0 16.3 37.6 93.0 1880 58 €0 6OL 60 43.0 20.0 1943 4,82 - 43.47 25.5 21,32 82.0
| Prerotation Baffle: 4 in. Long
1300 4,25 ‘17.0‘ l62 104 16.8 30.2 69,8 11.0 655 67 65 66 64 46,0 20.0 721 0.67 70.47 20.0 12.83 64,1
4.40 17.6 162 107 17.4 28.2 65.2 20.2 870 65 63 63, 61 44.1 20.0 934 1.12 66. 32 21.5 15.64 72.2
465 18.6 162 115 18.6 25.0 57.8 38.0 1185 58 59 59. 58 41.0 20.0 1246 1.98 59.18 22.5 18.83 83.7
4,85 19.4 162 121 19.6 21.8 50.4 57.6 1460 55 55 55{ 54  48.3 20.0 1562 3.12 53.32 23.6 21,12 89.5
5.00 20,0 161 125 20.2 18.9 43.6 79.6 1725 5L 52 53, 50 36.0 20.0 1781 4,06 47,71 24.5 21.45 87.5
5.15 20.6 160 128 20.8 16.7 38.6 9.5 1895 47 48 47, 46 32.9 20.0 1974 4,98 43,48 25.3 21.70 85.8
1150 2.95 11.8 138 86 11.9 23.2 53.6 11.1 655 56 57 56§ 55 39.2 17.4 711 0.65 54,25 13.0 9.75 75.0
3.10 12.4 138 91 12.6 20.7 47.8 23.9 940 53 53 53/ 52 36.8 17.4 994 1.27 49,07 15.0 12.32 82.1
3.30 . 13.2 138 98¢ 13.6 17.8 41.1 41,3 1235 48 50 49, 48 34,2 17.4 1287 2.12 43,22 16.5 14.5 85.2
3.40 13.6 138 101L. 14.0 15.9 36.7 56.2 1445 44 45 46} 44 31l.4 17.4 1494 2.85 39.35 16.7 14,93 89. 4
3.50 4.0 138 103 14.2 4.2 32.8 67.0 1580 43 44 43 42 30.0 17.4 1627 3.35 36.15 17.0 14.86 87.5
3.55 14.2 138 104 14.4  13.1  30.3 73.6 1660 40 42 41 41 28.7 17.4 1706 3.72 34,02 17.3 14.67 84.9
860 1.20 4.8 107 48 5.1 13.5 3l1l.2 6.0 470 43 43 42 41 29,7 12.0 512 0.33 31,53 6.0 4.08 68.0
1.320 5.2 107 52 5,6 11.8 27.2 13,4 710 40 40 40 38  27.7 12.0 750 0.72 27.97 6.5 5.30 8l.5
1.40 5.6 107 55 5.9 10,2 23.6 21.6 895 36 37 36 36 25.7 12.0 933 1.05 24.65 6.9 5.81 84.2
1.40 5.6 107 57 6.1 9.0 21.0 29.8 1050 34 35 341 33  23.8 12.0 1086 1.51 22,31 7.2 6.19 86.0
1.50 6.0 107 59 6.3 7.7 17.8 40.7 1225 31 32 31 30 21.7 12.0 1259 2.02 19. 42 74 6.31 85.3
700 .65 2.60 78 36 2.8 9.2 21,2 3.1 260 34 34 34 33 23.7 8.9 293 0.12 21.37 3.0 2.22 74.0
.70 2.80 178 39 3.0 8.0 18.5 8.6 580 32 32 32° 31 22.2 8.9 611 0.48 18. %4 3.5 2.92 83.5
.75 3.00 78 43 3.4 6.9 15.9 14.9 750 22 29 29, 28 20.8 8.9 780 0.87 16,72 3.7 3.29 88.9
. 80 3.20 78 by 3.4 6.2 14.3 19.5 855 27 28 27 26 18,9 8.9 883 1.00 15.33 3.8 3.42 20.0
. 80 3.20 78 45 3.5 5.2 12.0 26.3 990 24 25 24f 24 17.3 8.9 1016 1.32 13,32 4,0 3.42 85.5
|
aSee appendix for computations relative to indicated columns. |
1

 

 
 

 

42

 

v

COMPUTATIONS
Table I. |

Col. (10), Jet Velocity, ft/sec.

Q = VJ.Aj vy o= 98 v Where v is Vglocity through hole.

A y = 62 A A is area of hole
Vj is Velocity of jet
Q = .98 v (.624) = .61 VA Aj 1s area of jet
v = -2
6L A
35 822 % 1hh %%2
Test 17, v = 5

| 61 (321 holes)-fi (%g) in.2 x 7.5 ff%-x 60 Ef%

18.5 ft/sec.

Col. (12), Total By-Pass Flow, gpm

Col. (10) = Col. (5) + Col. (6)

Col. (13), Experimental Half-Life, min.

Col. (13), Data obtained from Reactor Chemistry Division

Col. (14), Ideal Half-Life, min.

-Qst/V
C=Cle
-Q_t/V
0.5 = e
‘In 0.5 = -Qst/V
0.69k = Q_t/v
t = 0.694% V/Q

Cc = CO2 Concentration, pH reading
Qs = Stripping Flow, gpm.
t = Half-Life Time, min.
V = System Volume, gal.

0

P

 

 
 

i

43

Test 17, t = 9-‘62—3(9@ = 1.22 min.

Col. (15), Relative Effectiveness, %

col. (15) .g‘;i_%}
Table II.

Col. (3), Motor Input'Power, Kw
Col. (3) = L [Col. (2)]

Col. (6), Motor Input Power, Kw

[col. ()] [col. (5)]

Col. (6) = 1000

 

Col. (8), Discharge Head, ft.

Col. (8) = Col. (7) lb; x %bs& = col. {7) (2.31)

in
£t

Col. (11), Venturi Pressure Drop, psi

Col. (11) = Col. (9) — Col. (10)
Col. (13), Venturi Flow, gpm

Col. (13) obtained from Fig. 7, using Col. (11) or (12)
Col. (15) and (17), Stripper Flow, gpm .

ols (15) and (17) [CEJ:_ST' (1;))03.:1:1 (16)] v17.5

Col. (18), Fountain Flow, gpm
Col. (18) dbfained'from Fig. 18
Col. (19), Total Flow, gpm

Col. (19) = col. (13) + Col. (15) + Col. (17) + Col. (18)

 
 

 

b

Col. (20), Change in Velocity Head, ft. o

Col. (20) = 1.28Ax_1o'6 Q° Where @ = Total Flow, gpm.

128 5 16°6 o2 R (Q/A,d)a’ (f=1/-"~‘.s)2

 

1
a, %

1= ) -

£

 

_ 266" [a1 _ 1
2(32.2)n° -Qaéh E;:;‘

B
@
H
0

_f
i

discharge diameter

suction diameter

o7
i

&
t

0.505 ft.

0.666 ft.

ol
il

Q ,='ft3/sec.

16 8’;’
(7.5x60)° [_ 1 1 .
o(32.2)52 (.505)%  (.666)"

Lo -

1.28 x 1070 Q@  Where Q = gpm.

Col. (20)

!
.

Col. (21), Total Head, ft.
Col. (21) = Col. (8) + Col. (20)
Table IIT.
Col. (3), Motor Input Power, Kwv.

Col. (3) = 4 [cor. (2)]

. O
 

 

45

Col. (6), Motor Input Power, Kw.

[co1r. (4)] [co1. (5)]

Col. (6) = 1566

 

Col. (8), Discharge Head, ft.

Col. (8) = col. (7) (2.31)
Col. (10), Venturi Flow, gpm.

001.7(10) is obtained from Fig. 7 using Col. (9)
Col. (15), Stripping Flow, gpm.

Col. (15) = [°°1'_(l1) + Col. (12) + Col. (13) + Col. (14)

100 ]. 7.5
Col. (16), Founfiain Flow, gfim.

Col. (16) is obtained from Fig. 18.
Col. (17), Total Flow, gpm.

Col. (17) = Col. (10) + Col. (15) + Col. (16).
Col. (18), Change in Velocity Head, ft.

Col. (18), Same as Col. (20), Table II.
Col. (19), Total Head, ft.

Col. (19) = Col. (8) + col. (18).
Col. (20), Pump Power Input, hp.

col. (20)_bbtained..from Fig. 8, using Col. (6).
| Col. (21), Water Horsepower, hp.

col. (21) = %3%6' ~ Qis in gpm.

' H is in ft.

Col. (22), Efficiency, % -

Col. (22) .= {ggi:} = ] 100

 
 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 
 

10.
11.
12,
13.
1k.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
20,
23,

5h-

A

INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION

MSRP Director's Office 24, A. M. Perry

R. F. Apple .25« M. W. Rosenthal

S. E. Beall 26, H. W. Savage

M. Bender 27 A. W. Savolainen

E. S. Bettis 28. D. Scott

F. F. Blankencship 29. M. J. Skinner

At 'I.lro BOCh ? 30‘350 P- G_'o &nith

W. F. Boudreau 36. I. Spiewak

R. B. Briggs 37T« Je« A. Swartout

J« M. Coburn 38. A. Taboada

G. T. Colwell 39. J. R. Tallackson

A. P. Fraas 40. D. B. Trauger

C. H. Gabbard 41. R. S. Valachovic

‘W. R. Grimes b2, J. H. Westsik

A. G. Grindell 43, L. V. Wilson

M. I. Lundin Ly, C. E. Winters

R. N. ILyon 45.46. Central Research Library

H. G. MacPherson 47-49. ORNL — Y-12 Technical Library,
W. D. Manly Document Reference Section
W. B. McDonald 50-52. Laboratory Records Department
A. J. Miller 53. Laboratory Records, ORNL R.C.
R. L. Moore

J«. C. Moyers

EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION

68. Division of Technical Information Extension
69. Research and Development Division, ORO

70-71. Reactor Division, ORO