The effect of chip-shaped particles on pump performance characteristics
by Ken L Page
A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF Science in Civil Engineering
Montana State University
© Copyright by Ken L Page (1966)
Abstract:
This is a preliminary study of the effects of chip-shaped solids on the performance characteristics of
low-head centrifugal pumps. An Allis-Ohalmers 4 x 4 x 9 1/2 LC Pump with two interchangeable
impellers, an NSW closed impeller and an NSX open-faced impeller, a Fairbanks-Morse 3-inch model
5422 pump, and a 5-inch Hazelton CTL pump were used in the study.
The pumps were tested at speeds corresponding to those given on the characteristic performance curves
furnished by the manufacturers.
The flow rates for each pump were varied from no flow to 600 gallons per minute, Performance tests
were run on each pump at each test speed for clear water, for a 10 per cent volumetric concentration of
water and chips, and also for a 20 per cent concentration. The three resulting performance curves for
each pump speed were plotted and compared to ascertain the effects of the solids on the head, brake
horsepower, end efficiehcy of the pump. This study shows that the increase in concentration of a
water-chip mixture has the following effects on the characteristic performance of a centrifugal pump?
a) The head developed by the pump at a given discharge increased a small amount with the open
impeller and decreased slightly with the closed impeller.
b) The power input required by the pump at a given discharge increased significantly for both impeller
types.
c) The pump efficiency at a given discharge decreased an appreciable amount for both types of
impellers. THE EFFECT OF CHIP-SHAPED PARTICLES
ON
PUMP
PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS
by
KEN L PAGE
A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
Civil Engineering
Approved:
Head, Major Department
Chairman, Examining Committee
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Bozeman, Montana
December, 1966
ill
IOKNGWLBDGMEUT
This study was part of a project investigating the hydraulics of
transporting wood chips in pipe lines.
This program is conducted as a
part of the cooperative aid agreement between the Forest Engineering
Research Branch of the Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station,
TL So Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, and the Civil Engineer­
ing and Engineering Mechanics Department of Montana State University.
The pumps used in this study were obtained on loan from the
following companiesi
Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Oomppny, Norwood, Ohio.
Barrett-Uaentjens Company, Hazelton', Pennsylvania.
Fairbanks-Morse and Company, Kansas City, Kansas.
The author wishes to express his gratitude to Dr. William A. Hunt,
who provided technical guidance on this project.
Appreciation is ex­
tended to Mr. Ronald E. Schmidt, Research Hydraulic Engineer for the ■
U. S. Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station,
for his advice and efforts in seeing this project to completion.
Thanks are extended to Mr. Ronald Carlson, Mr. Dick Herbert, and
Mr. Spence Hockstein, along with others who worked on the project, for
their ideas and efforts in helping to complete this study.
Appreci­
ation is also extended to the entire Civil Engineering and Engineering
Mechanics staff at Montana State University for the use of the Labora­
tory facilities and for their encouragement throughout the period of
this study.
iv
The author gives thanks to the staff of the Electronics Research
Laboratory for the use of the various electronic measuring devices
developed and employed on the project.
Thanks is also given to the
staff of the Computing Center for their efforts expended on this project.
(/
Finally, extreme gratitude is expressed to Jeaneen J. Page, the
author's wife* for her help in typing and correcting this thesis and
for her continual encouragement to see the project through to
completion.
TABLE OF GONTEETS
Page
List
of T a b l e s .....................................
List
of F i g u r e s ................
Abstract
vii
viii
..........................................
x
List of Symbols .............................. .................. . . . . xi
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
Introduction .....................
I
Review of Flows of Mixtures and P u m p i n g ................
3
A.
Rheology of Mixtures
B.
Pumping of Mixtures . . . . . . . .
0.
Objectives of the S t u d y ........ ...........................8
Development of Hypothesis
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
...................
.................
...........
.
3
...
6
. . . . .
9
Experimental A p p a r a t u s ......... ............................. . 1 4
A=
The Plastic Chips . . . . . . . . .
..........
. . . . . .
14
B.
The Overall Test Facilities .............................. . 1 4
O0
Pumps Used.in the Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D.
The Measuring Devices
17
......... ...................... 19
1.
Flow and Concentration Measurements
2.
Pump Head Measurements . . . . . . . . .
3.
Shaft Input Torque M e a s u r e m e n t s ........ ............ 22
4.
Auxiliary I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n ....................... .. . 24
Experimental Methods
. . . . . . . . .
..........
19
.20
............................... 27
A.
The Head Produced by the P u m p ............................. 27
B.
The Brake Horsepower
0.
The Pump Efficiency .............................. ..
.................................. .. . 3©
30
vi
Page
VI.
D.
Goncentration of Solids . .
E.
Betermination of the Npmber of Observations Needed
Test Procedures
A.
....................... ..
......................................
Preliminary Procedures
. . . .
313,1
. . . . . 32
................................ .. . 33
B. • Data Collection ................................ ............ 33
VII.
VIII.
IX.
Presentation of Results
Discussion of Results
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusions and Recommendations
........
. 37
..........
.47
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
57
Appendix A - Development of Computer Program . . . . . . . . . .
63
Appendix B - Input and Output Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
70
Appendix G - Ptunp Performance Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
88
Appendix D - Statistical Analysis of the Number of Observations
97
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Bage
Table
I
II
III
17
7
B-I
B-II
I-III
B-17
B-7
B-7I
G-I
G-II
Computed Results of Allas-Ghalmers U S X lump Performance
Characteristics - 1160 RPM . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 38
Computed Results of Allis-Ohalmers NSX Pump Performance
Characteristics - 1400 RPM . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 39
Raw Input Data for Allis-Chalmers NSX Pump at 1160 RPM
. . . 43
Computed Results of Allis-Ghalmers 4 x 4 x
LO NSX.
Pump at 1160 RPM .............................. ..
. . 4&
Analysis of Computed Results for Allis-Ohalmers Type
NSX Pump - 1160 RPM - 610 GPM . . . . . . . . . . .
. .
Observed Bata for Allis-Ohalirters A % 4 % 9a NSX Ptnnp
at *1I 60 RPM t > 0 e o 6 » e o * e 6 * * o 0 » « « a «
. . 72-77
Computed Results for Allis-Ohalmers 4 x 4 x 9s" NSX
Pump at 1160 RPM ............................
. . 78
Observed Data for Allis-Ohalmers 4 % 4 x 9& NSX Pump
at 1400 RPM o * „ * * * .
» 0 **, , * * * , > 0 0 0 0
. . 79-84
Computed Results for Allis-Chalmers 4 x 4 x 9ir NSX.
Pump at 1400 RPM . . . . . . . . . . .
.............
. . 85
Computed Results for Allis-Chalmers 4 x 4 x 9& NSX
Pump at 860 RPM ................................ ..
48
.
Computed Results for Allis-Ghalmers 4 % 4 x 9g NSX
Pump at 1600 RPM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 87
Computed Results for Fairbanks-Morse 3-inch Pump
at 1200 RPM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 89
Computed Results for Hazelton 5-inch OTL Pump at
1000 RPM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1
Laminar Flow Diagrams
2
General Layout of Laboratory Apparatus . . . . . . . . . . .
3
Allis-Ghalmers 4 % 4 % Sg" LG Pump with NSX Impeller
4
Allis-Ghalmers Pump with Close-up of NSX Impeller
5
Magnetic Flow Meter
6
Details of Air Bleeding Connection on Manometer
7
.
Modified Gate Valve
5
16
. „ .18
. . . . .
18
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
. . . . . .
21
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
S
Torque Meter . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
Torque Meter .................
..........
. . . . .
23
„23
10
Instruments Used for Torque and Pump Speed Measurements
11
Control Panel
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
25
Ila
Regulating Switches on Console . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26
12
Schematic of Piping Relative to Equation 5.3 ............... 29
13
Test Pump Performance Curve for Allis-Ghalmers
4 x 4 x 9ir LC NSX at 1160 RPM . . . . . . . . . . . . .
40
Test Pump Performance Curve for Allis-Ohalmers
4 x 4 x 9i LC NSX at I400 RPM . . . . . . . . . . . . .
41
Dimensionless Curves for Efficiency Loss for
AlliS-Ghalmers Pump with NSX Impeller . . . . . . . . .
51
Dimensionless Curve for Efficiency Loss at ,
10% Concentration for All Pumps Tested
52
14
15
16
17
18
'
Dimensionless Curve for Efficiency Loss at
20% Concentration for all Pumps Tested
„ „■ 25
. . . . . . . .
53
Dimensionless Brake Horsepower Increase Curve
at 10% Concentration - All Pumps . . . . . . . . . . .
54
ix
Figure
19
20
Page
Test Pump Performance Ourve for Fairbariks-Morse
3-inch Pump at 1200 RPM ........................
90
Test Pump Performance Curve for Hazelton 5-inch
GTL Pump at 1000 RPM ............... ..
93
21
Test Pump Performance Curve for Allis-Ghalmers
HSX Pump at 860 RPM . . . * ........................... 94
22
Test Pump Performance Curve for Allis-Ghalmers
NSX Pump at 1600 RPM ............... .................. 95
23
Allis-Chalmers Pump Performance Curve
. . . . . . . . . . .
96
XABST1AGT
This is a preliminary study of the effects of chip-shaped solid,s
on the performance characteristics' of low-head centrifugal pumps. An
Allis-Ohalmers 4 x 4 x ^ LC Pump with two interchangeable impellers,
an NSW closed impeller and an NSX open-faced impeller, a FairbanksHorse 3-inch model 5422 pump, and a 5-inch Hazelton GTL pump were used
in the study.
The pumps were, tested at speeds corresponding to those given on
the characteristic performance curves furnished by the manufacturers.
The flow rates for each pump were varied from no flow to 600 gallons
per minute,
Performance tests were run on each pump at each test speed for
clear water, for a 10 per cent volumetric concentration of water and
chips, and also for a 20 per cent concentration. The three resulting
performance curves for each pump speed were plotted and compared to
ascertain the effects of the solids on the head, brake horsepower, end
effieiehcy of the pump. This study shows that the increase in concen­
tration of a water-chip mixture has the following effects on the charac­
teristic performance of a centrifugal pump?
■ a) The head developed by the pump at a given discharge increased
a small amount with the open impeller and decreased slightly with the
closed impeller.
b) The power input required by the pump at a given discharge in­
creased significantly for both impeller types.
c) The pump efficiency at a given discharge decreased an appreci­
able amount for both types of impellers.
xi
LIST OF SYMBOLS
A
=
Gross-sectional area of pipe in square feet
b
=s
Width of the impeller in feet
BHP
=
Brake horsepower
G
—
Volumetric concentration of chips in water-chip mixture
ofs
—
Cubic feet per second
d
=
Diameter of pipe in inches
D
=
Diameter of pipe in feet
=■
Disc friction losses
=
Direct current
d-c
dv/dr =
Change in velocity in the radial direction
e
-
Pump efficiency in per cent
BP
“
fps
=
Feet per second
Acceleration of gravity, 32,2 feet per second
g
gpm
Head produced by the pump in feet of fluid flowing
=
Gallons per minute
Specific gravity of the chips
Specific gravity of mercury
Specific gravity of the mixture
Specific gravity of water
Head developed by the pump
Hydraulic losses
Head loss in feet of fluid flowing
.
■
h"
Theoretical head produced by the pump 1
hp
Horsepower
xii
mv
p .
=
Leakage losses
=
Mechanical losses
=
=
Millivolt output
Pressure in pounds!per square foot
Q
=
ZLow of fluid in cubic feet per
QM
=
Zlow meter chart reading for the water-chip mixture in gpm
=
second
Discharge flow rate at the best efficiency point
QS
.•»
Flow rate of the solids into
QW
=
Zlow meter chart reading for the clear water
r
=
Radius of the impeller in feet
RPM
=»
Revolutions per minute
T
=
Input torque in inch-pounds
V
=
the system
Water horsepower
T
Manometer deflection in inches
2
=
gpm
Velocity of water in the pipe in feet per second
WHP ■ =
=
in
Elevation above a datum in feet,
Subscripts:
Greek letters:
d
=
Discharge side of the pump
s
=
Suction side of the'pump
(3 =
Blade angle is degrees.
y
-
Unit weight of water, 62,4 pounds per cubic foot
A
-
Amount of change in any quantity
Mi -
Absolute viscosity of a fluid ■
hT =
A constant, 3.1416
zT =
Unit shearing stress of a fluid
Cd =
Rotational speed of the pump in radians per second
CHAPTER I
HTRODITOTION
The interest in hydraulie transportation of solids in pipe lines
has increased in scope and volume during the last 10 years to the extent
that several major companies throughout the country are now engaged in
research in this line
.Qfj;
The operating experiences of several experi­
mental slurry pipe lines have been very encouraging to the scope of the
above mentioned research
2Tj „
Reduction in transportation costs is the main advantage advocated
by proponents of the hydraulic transport of solids Q f j »
feasibility study
Qfj completed
An economic
at Montana State University in March
1960 showed that this method of transporting wood chips competes favor­
ably with other methods of transportation,
As a result of this feasi­
bility study an experimental program was initiated at Montana State
.University investigating the hydraulics of transporting wood chips in
pipe lines.
This study of the effects of chip-shaped particles on pump perform­
ance characteristics is part of the above mentioned experimental program.
The program is conducted as part of a cooperative aid agreement between
the Forest Engineering Research Branch of the Intermountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station9 U, S, Forest Service and the Qivil Engineering
and Engineering Mechanics Department of Montana State University,
Previous studies performed at Montana State University, under the
above cooperative agreements have dealt with the effects of chip-shaped
particles on axi-symmetric pipe expansion losses* the specific gravity
-
2-
of saturated wood chips and the effects of chips on the head loss caused
hy a standard gate valve.
Results of these studies are available from
the Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station of the U. S» Forest
Service and the Civil Engineering Department of Montana State University„
This particular phase of the project deals with the effects o f -h.
fluid mixture containing rectangular-shaped chips on the performance
characteristics of low-head centrifugal pumps designed to handle sewage
.and trash.
wood chipso
Plastic chips were used in the tests to simulate saturated
The tests were performed at Montana State University in the
Civil Engineering Section of Ryon Laboratory*
This study was undertaken to acquire knowledge about'- the changes
in pump performance characteristics while pumping rectangular-shaped,
chip-type solids.
This will help to determine the power requirements
for wood chip pumping projects as well as the type of pump most suitable
for pumping water^chip mixtures.
CHAPTER TI
REVIEW OF FLOWS OF MIXTURES AND PUMPING
Ab investigation of the problems of the performance characteristics
of pumps caused by water-chip mixtures requires an understanding of flow
characteristics of mixtures and pumping problems associated with them.
This section covers the flow characteristics of fluids and mixtures,
termed rheology, and reviews the progress being made in pumping of
solid-liquid mixtures.
A.
Rheology of Mixtures.
The branch of science dealing with the mechanics of flow of sub­
stances, including solid-liquid mixtures, is called rheology.
rheology of solid-liquid mixtures is extremely complex.
The
This complexity
arises from the fact that a solid does not mix homogeneously with a
fluid, but retains its own shape and identity.
The solid is simply
transported by the fluid while conserving its own state and form, except
in the case where the solids are very small and are in continuous sus­
pension, as in a colloidal, solution.
When the solid particles are extremely small and the concentration
high, the mixture displays a property similar to the viscosity of true
liquids and the term "apparent viscosity" is attached to this phenomena
to differentiate it from the viscosity as defined for Newtonian fluids.
The absolute viscosity of a fluid (yuQ is defined as the ratio of the
unit shearing stress (T -) to the rate of change of velocity in respect
to the pipe radius (dv/dr) herein referred to as the rate of shear strain.
When the shearing stress is linearly proportional to the rate of shear
strain, the fluid is s^id to he Newtonian.
Likewise when the relation
between the shearing stress and the rate of shear strain is non-linear
the fluid is termed non-Newtonian.
■None of the current fluid mechanics textbooks give a discussion of
non-Newtonian fluid flow.
Such discussions are generally omitted or
treated in a manner similar to that of Daugherty and Pranzini Q Q .
"Although there are certain non-Newtonian fluids in which the shear
stress varies with the rate of shear, these are not generally of engi­
neering importance„"
Those engaged in hydraulic transport of solids
research agree that non-Newtonian fluids are of "engineering importance".
Stepanoff [so] suggests that a stage has been reached where there should
' be as many rheograms (flow diagrams) as there are non-Newtonian fluids,
very much the same as there are tables and charts of physical properties
of Newtonian fluids and solid substances.
Stepanoff
also points
out that in rheology "slip” (sudden change of velocity near the pipe
wall) and "plug flow" are termed as "anomalies" and are omitted from
consideration.
However these are part of the main characteristics of
the rheology of solid-liquid mixtures.
A characteristic distinction between solids and liquids is the
manner in which each can resist shearing stresses.
A further distinc­
tion among various kinds of fluids can be noted by reference to Fig. I.
As was stated previously, a Newtonian fluid is one for which the shear­
ing stress in linearly proportional to the rate of shear strain and can
be represented by a straight line in Fig. I .
determined by the viscosity of the fluid.
The slope of the line is
An ideal fluid, with no
-5viscosity is represented by the horizontal axis.
A fluid which resists
flow until it sustains a certain amount of stress can be shown in Fig. I
by a straight line intersecting the vertical axis at the shear stress at
which initial motion occurs.
These fluids are generally termed Bingham
plastics and once flow has started they behave much the same as a Newton­
ian fluid.
A vast group of non-Newtonian fluids fall between the Newton­
ian fluids and the Bingham plastics.
These are termed psuedo-plastics
and they follow what is commonly referred to as the Oswald de Waele
model.
Bingham plastic
Psuedo-plastic
Newtonian fluid
Ideal fluid
Rate of shear (-dv/dr)
Figure I —
Laminar Flow Diagrams
The rheological properties of a mixture composed of water and wood
chips have not yet been established.
Ostwald de Waele fluid
Pulp stock is accepted as an
Stepanoff [~2(0 states that most of the
solid-liquid mixtures encountered in the hydraulic transportation of
solids have exhibited Bingham properties.
It could not be determined
from his discussion whether they behaved as a Bingham plastic or as a
psuedo-plastio, becoming asymptotic to the Bingham plastic line as the
concentration increased.
It is the opinion of the author that a mixture
of wood chips and water will behave much the same as pulp stock with
psuedo-plastio properties.
As the concentration is increased to 25-30
per cent plug flow will develop and the mixture should exhibit Bingham
plastic properties.
The above discussion points out the complexity of the rheology of
fluid-solid mixtures and the small amount of information available
pertaining to the non-Newtonian fluids.
The non-Newtonian flow characteristics of a water-chip mixture
creates two questions regarding the performance characteristics of a
pump.
1) To what extent does the mixture of water and chips affect
the pump performance characteristics?
or detrimental?
2) Are the effects advantageous
A review of the available literature shows that very
little has been done in this area to date.
Be
Pumping of Mixtures.
The mechanics of flow of Newtonian fluids through closed Impellers
has been studied and analyzed quite extensively [ 2, 4, 7, 11, 12,
15,
'isj ,
Research has been done on how the blade angle of the impeller affects the
-7flow characteristics
The effects of the variation in casing size
and pump speed upon pump characteristics have been studied and plotted
for various pumps |j2, I£] a
However, the field of centrifugal, closed-
impeller, pump design still relies quite heavily on empirical formulae
and plots of various parameters derived from past experiments,
Strictly
mathematical formulae have been developed for this type of design but
they are limited to ideal (non-viscous) fluids
Research.in the field of pumping solids in a liquid medium has been
limited
Several large companies in the United States and Canada
they are either not at liberty to, or are unwilling to, publish their
results.
Very little printed information is available pertaining to the -
flow of solid-liquid mixtures and the effects of these mixtures on pumps.
Results of previous investigations pertaining to the pumping of
clay slurries, using a centrifugal dredge pump with a 4-inch line, have
been presented by Herbich and VaUentine [ 7 ]«
The conclusions presented
regarding pump characteristics are as follows:
I)
The head developed at a given capacity
decreased as the concentration of the solid
material in suspension increased.
2)
The required power input at a given capacityincreased as the concentration of the solid
material in suspension increased.
3)
The efficiency at a given capacity decreased as the
concentration of the solid .material in suspension increased.
—3—
Similar results included in Herbich and Vallentine'g report |_7j,
were noted for a centrifugal pump handling sand-water mixtures.
The literature research conducted as part of this study failed to
locate any mathematical development of the mechanics of flow through
open-faced impellers.
0.
Objectives of the Study.
This study was undertaken to acquire knowledge about the changes
in pump performance characteristics while pumping rectangular-shaped s
chip-type solids in a water medium.
Results of this study should be
useful in the design or selection of pumps handling solids.
These
results will also be useful in predicting power requirements for pump­
ing solidss particularly those pumps used in the hydraulic transportation
of wood chips.
CHAPTER III
DEVELOPMENT OF HYPOTHESIS
Ptmip performance oharaeteristic curves are described by the parame­
ters Q, H, T 5 and e.
horsepower
The total head developed by the pump (H), the brake
[b HP = T CO /(550 x 12) where T is the shaft input torque in
inch-pounds and CO is the rotational speed in radians per second], and
the pump efficiency (e) are plotted as ordinates on the same sheet with
the discharge capacity (Q) as the abscissa Q), I9].
Any change in one of the first three parameters will affect the
pump efficiency, since:
e = (Q x K x H x 12)/(T x O))
'
(3.1)
where S' is the unit weight of the fluid being pumped.
The deliberate variation of discharge (Q) and pump speed (6)) under
controlled conditions will produce a set of characteristic pump curves
for a given pump (Fig. 23 of Appendix 0).
The efficiency of centrifugal pumps with open or closed impellers
depends upon a number of loss factors.
These are generally classified
into four groups.
a)
Hydraulic losses, Hj_:
In this group are included the skin
friction losses due to the motion of the fluid relative to the impeller
and the casing, the shock losses at the impeller entrance and at the
discharge into the volute, and the energy dissipated in turbulence
generated in these regions.
The hydraulic losses ar'e related' to the
radial component of the fluid velocity in the pump.
-10—
b)
Leakage Iessesp L^s
These are associated with the wearing
rings3 seals, and bushings in the pump.
The leakage is a part of the
fluid that recirculates inside the pump4
c)
Disc friction losses, D^:
This loss uses mechanical energy
without reducing the head or the flow rate.
It is related to the tan­
gential component of the velocity of the fluid in the pump.
In the case
of the closed impeller it represents the energy absorbed by the pumping
action of the fluid between the impeller shrouds and the easing walls.
d)
Mechanical losses,
These are concerned with the mechanical
friction loss in the stuffing box and the bearings.
The exact calculation of the above losses cannot be made with
exact mathematical expressions due to the complex patterns of flow in
the fluid passages, the superimposition of vortex motion on the throughflow characteristics, the difference in surface roughness, and the machin­
ing tolerances of the internal parts of the pump.
However, mathematical
formulae have been developed for each of the above losses and are listed
by Kovats (jT] .
They are developed for specific pumps under ideal con­
ditions and although they give results accurate to ± one or two per cent
they were not considered general enough to include herein.
The head (H) developed by the pump is usually measured in feet of
the mixture flowing and is determined by test results.
The theoretical
head is determined by considering the following equation:
(r| - r?)(A)2 + Q eD [dot Bo ~ G®i>
2m
bg
Sf-1JJ
(3.2)
where r is the radius of the impeller in feet, g is the acceleration of
gravity, p is the blade angle in degrees, and b is the width of the
—1 J—
impeller in feet„
The subscripts I and 2 refer to the inner and outer
radii of the impeller respectively.
The theoretical head (h") is reduced
by the hydraulic losses (H^) to the net head.
The brake horsepower (BHP) of the pump is the input energy required
t© drive the pump and is dependent upon the rotational speed of the pump
(.60) and the torque transmitted to the pump impeller.
The shaft input
torque is proportional to the quantity of fluid flowing through the pump,
the torsional frictional resistance of the fluid within the pump passages,
and £he change in angular momemtum of the fluid.
Wlien the discharge flow rate (Q) and the rotational speed
of
the
pump (GD) are held constant for a particular pump and a water-chip mix­
ture is put into the system, the question arises; llWhat happens to the
head, torque, and efficiency"?
As was discussed in Chapter'll the
rheology of solid-liquid mixtures is extremely complex, compounding the
problem of developing a theory relating changes in pump performance
characteristics to changes in concentration of the water-chip mixture.
The discussion which follows answers the above question.
With the discharge flow rate (Q) and the rotational pump speed (W )
held constant as chips are introduced, this leaves the head (H) and the
torque (T) free to change, thereby effecting a change in the pump ef­
ficiency (e)(Eq0 3,1), assuming the specific gravity of the chips is
equal to that of the liquid medium.
Stepanoff
points out that a homogeneous, mixture will’have the
same pipe friction loss when measured in feet of the mixture as a clear
liquid, assuming a psuedo-viseosity of the mixture equal to that of the
-
Iiquid0
12 -
Under these conditions the head produced while pumping a mixture
should be the same as the head produced when pumping clear liquid reduced
only by the amount of additional hydraulic loss caused by the solid parti-
On the assumption that the viscosity of a water-chip mixture is
different from .clear water and follows the model outlined in Ohapter II,
that of a psuedo-plastic, the following deductions can be made,
a)
The quantity of chips in the water will change the flow charac­
teristics of the water-chip mixture.
The viscosity of the mixture will
be greater,( F i g d ) resulting in a greater apparent shearing stress through­
out the mixture,
The shear stress at the boundaries will increase, there­
by causing a greater torsional frictiohal resistance of the fluid and an
increase in applied torque,
b)
The pump head will be reduced due to the additional friction
loss caused by the chips in the pump passages and the resulting pump ef­
ficiency will decrease,
©)
A comparison to "a” and riU te above can be noted by reference to
Fig, BF-4© in the Hydraulic Institute- Standards [19],
With a closed
impeller at a given capacity for a constant pump speed handling a fluid
having a viscosity greater than water, the following will results
1)
The head produced will be lower than that produced
for clear water,
2)
The power input required will be greater than for
clear water.
-13”
3)
The resulting pump effieieney will he less than
for clear water=
The literature research failed to produce any available information
about the throughflow characteristics of the open-faced impeller.
It is assumed that the resulting effects on the performance charac­
teristics for an open-faced impeller will be similar to those of the
closed impeller described above =
T h e r e f o r e t h e hypothesis is stated as follows.
’’Chip-shaped par­
ticles will have a detrimental effect upon the performance character­
istics of a centrifugal pump."
CHAPTER IV
EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS
The experimental test apparatus used in this study will be described
in four parts:
chipsI
2)
"I) the plastic chips used to simulate saturated wood,
the overall test facilities 5
3)
the pumps used in the test;
and 4) the measuring devices used to obtain the data consisting of flow
and concentration measurements, pump head measurements, the input torque
measurements to the pump shaft, and the pump speed measurements,
Ae
,The Plastic Chips,
To preserve the characteristics of large quantities of solids
exhibiting flat plate flow characteristics, the chips which were used
were scaled down from the prototype chip size.
Red plastic chips
3/8 x 1/2 x 0o08 inches were used to simulate saturated wood chips in
this study.
The average specific gravity of the chips as furnished hy
the manufacturer is 1.002,
Sclimidt jjb] did an extensive study of the effects of pressure and
time on the specific gravity, moisture content and volume of wood chips,
The chips used in Schmidt1s study approximated those found in actual
wood chip operations and varied in size from 1/8 x 1/2 x 1/2 inches to
1/2 x I x 2 inches,
Schmidt also brought out the fact that a system
handling a water-chip mixture would he less likely to plug if the
specific gravity of the chips was at or slightly less than unity.
B.
The Overall Test Facilities,
In order to obtain and maintain a specific, volumetric concentration
of chips in the system during a test run, and then to be able to vary
-15™
the concentration, it was necessary to have separate feed systems for
both the plastic chips and the clear water.
The volumetric flow rates
of chips and clear water required for each given concentration were
discharged separately into a' mixing tank, then drawn into the system
by the pump under a positive suction head.
The clear water was pumped from the sump in the Civil Engineering
Laboratory, through the laboratory system into a 3-inch line which fed
into the mixing tank#
The desired rate of inflow was maintained by a
3-inch gate valve installed downstream from a flow meter as shown in
Fig, 2.
The plastic chips were fed by gravity from the chip storage bin
onto an 13-inch wide conveyor belt, then elevated as shown in Fig# 2
and dumped into the mixing tank#
The desired quantity of chips feeding
onto the belt and dumping into the mix tank was controlled by a vertical
gate on the chip storage bin*
The water and chip mixture, after being pumped through the system,
was discharged ,into an elevated rotating drum#
of qr-inch wire mesh over a steel framework,
The drum was constructed
As shown in Fig# 2 the mesh
allowed the water to separate from the chips and drop into the water bin,
thereby returning to the main sump.
The chips continued down the inclined
drum and returned to the chip storage bin#
A detailed report by Schmidt [j?] on the design and construction of
test facilities for wood chip pipe line research contains a summary of
the design, construction, and initial operational problems of the test
-
17 -
facilities described above, used in making the tests herein to obtain
the data necessary to test the hypothesis,
Ge
Pumps Used in the Tests,
The pumps used in this study for pumping the water-chip mixture
through the test pipeline loop were standard low head centrifugal sewage
and trash pumps obtained on loan from interested manufacturers.
Follow­
ing is a list of the pumps that were supplied and tested,
1)
Allis-Qhalmers Mfg. Co,, JSorwood, Ohio; a 4 x 4 x
L U pump
with two interchangeable impellers, the NSX and the NSW models.
The NSX
is an open-faced impeller specifically designed for handling fibrous or
pulpy mixture So
The NSW is a closed impeller.
The pump with the NSX
impeller installed is shown in Figs, 3 and 4»
2)
Barrett-Haentjens Company, Hazelton, Pennsylvania; a $-inch
Hazelton GTL pump with a closed impeller,
3)
Fairbahks-Morse and Company, Kansas City, Kansas; a 3-inch model
5422 pump with a 9-3/4 T38I closed impeller.
Each of the pumps were capable of handling relatively large solids
so there.was no danger of lodging the chips in the pumps.
The manu­
facturers claim that the Allis-Chalmers pump with the NSX impeller will
handle 3^-ineh spheres and the Fairbanks-Morse pump will pass 2-inch
spheres,
A universal mounting frame described in Schmidt's report [j?] made
it possible to interchange the pumps in the test system quite easily.
The pumps were all driven by a 15 hp 220-volt d-c motor.
used is described in detail in Schmidt's report
17J,
The motor
—18-
Figure 4 —
Allis-Chalmers Pump with Close-up of NSX Impeller
-19D.
The Measuring Devices.
I.
Flow and concentration measurements.
Two magnetic, continuous recording, flow meters manufactured by
Foxboro Corporation were installed to measure the flow rates of the
clear water entering the mix tank and the water-chip mixture flowing
through the pump.
Fig. 5 shows the flow meters used and a detailed
description of the operation of the flow meters and recorders can be
found in Bulletin 1737, Foxboro Company
Figure 5 —
[V].
Magnetic Flow Meter
The basic principle of the magnetic flow meter is that the voltage
induced by a conductive fluid flowing through a magnetic field is pro­
portional to the velocity of the fluid.
The induced voltage generated
by the conductive fluid is transmitted to one of the dynalog recorders
shown on the control panel of Fig. 11.
~20“
A greater voltage is induced as the fluid moves faster through the
magnetic field| thus a direct, linear measurement of the fluid flow is
obtained.
checked.
The two flow meters were carefully calibrated and periodically
The flow rates for the clear water inflow to the mix tank and
the water-chip mixture are read directly from the dynalog recorder charts
in gallons per minute (gpm),
Oomeentration measurements were obtained by taking the difference
between the two flow chart readings, the one for clear water and the
other for the water-chip mixture, as outlined in Chapter
2,
Y0
Pump head measurements,
Tlie pump head measuring apparatus consisted of a 100-inch mercury
U-tube manometer connected with
inch copper tubing to the pressure
taps in the suction and discharge lines.
The upstream pressure tap
was located approximately one-half pipe diameter upstream from the in­
take flange of the pump.
The downstream "pressure tap was located between
10 and 11 pipe diameters downstream from the discharge flange of the
pump.
Each pressure tap consisted of four holes drilled on 90-degree
centers around the pipe and inter-connected with brass tees and 3/16inch copper tubing.
The location and construction of the pressure taps
comply with the Hydraulic Institute Standards [/>, 19] „
The manometer has a
4—inch
copper tubing connection to the city
water line for ease in bleeding the air from the lines.
shown in Fig,
6,
The valve, as
could be turned on while the system was in operation
and any air in the manometer would be forced out into the piping system,
where it would not affect the manometer reading.
-21-
— 50
Water
To suction
pressure tap
Valve
To city s=
water line
Figure 6 —
Details of Air Bleeding Connection on Manometer
Figure 7 -- Modified Gate Valve
-
22 -
The TJ-tube manometer, shorn in Figs. 6 and 12, read the pressure
differential across the pump in inches of deflection o f 'a water-mercury
manometer.
This reading was then converted to feet of water.
Three modified gate valves constructed of 3/8-inch plastic, similar
to the one shown in Fig. 7, were installed in the test line, and used
to vary the system head loss permitting a wide range of flow rates and
pumping heads for a given pump speed„
3.
Shaft input torque measurements.
The torque meter which was developed for this study is shown in
Figs. 8 and 9.
It incorporates an aluminum alloy 2024-T4 shaft 0.775
inches in diameter and 6-inches long.
Two serrated aluminum disks
10-inches in diameter are mounted on the shaft.
disk contains
60
The periphery of each
equally spaced notches 0.25 inches wide.
A back-up
disk 9.558 inches in diameter makes the disk openings approximately
square.
The disks when rotating pass between a small light source and
a photoelectric diode, interrupting the light beam, thus producing two
interrupted light patterns.
The electronic circuitry, contained in an insulated sheet metal
box (for temperature stability) converts each light pattern into a
d-c voltage pulse.
Angular displacement of one disk relative to the
other disk produces a phase shift in the pulse patterns.
Electronic
sensing of the pulse shift produces a constant d-c output which is
proportional to the phase shift of the pulse patterns; thus propor­
tional to the angular displacement of the disks relative to each other.
F igu re 9
F igure 8
Torque Meter
Torque Meter
”24.—
The angular displacement of the disks measures the shaft twist which is
a measure of the input torque supplied to the pump.
The torque meter, consisting of shaft, disks, and circuitry, was
calibrated under known loads so that the d-c millivolt output could-be
converted to inch-pounds of torque, . Two additional shafts besides the
one described above were constructed for the torque meter so the shafts
could be interchanged.
These shafts were also calibrated and each shaft
was assigned a shaft number for use in later computations.
The top instrument shown in Fig, 10 is a digital voltmeter which
reads the torque output in millivolts.
The millivolt output in then
converted to inch-pounds of torque by using the calibration formula:
Torque = (Millivolt Reading x 1,18815) - 9-0
4«
(4,1)
Auxiliary Instrumentation,
The electronic circuit which produced the shaft torque output
voltage is also wired so that the pulse frequency measured from the
right hand disk shown in Figs, 8 and 9 is a direct reading of the
shaft rotational speed.
Because the disk has 60 teeth, the pulse count
in cycles per second is exactly the speed in revolutions per minute.
The electronic instrument used to obtain the pump rotational
speed measurement is a crystal-based counter, which gives a direct
readout in revolutions per minute (rpm), shown below the digital volt­
meter in Fig, 10.
2
-25-
Figure 10
Instruments Used for Torque and Pump Speed Measurements
Figure 11 —
Control Panel
-26-
Figure Ila —
Regulating switches on Console
The control panel operated by the console operator, shown in
Figs. 11 and 11a, consists of regulating switches, flow meter charts,
a manometer for checking the level of water in the mix tank, and a
rheostat for maintaining a constant pump speed by control of the
15
hp d-c motor.
The 3-inch gate valve, mentioned in Section B of this chapter, for
control of the clear water inflow, was within easy reach of the console
operator.
The regulating switches shown in Fig. Ila control the conveyor
belt, the rotating drum, the two flow meter charts, and the 15 hp d-c
motor.
GHAPTER V
EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
This portion of the test program of the wood chip pipe line project
was conducted on the test facilities installed in the Oiwil Engineering,
Laboratory for previous studies.
The test facilities which were origi­
nally designed to handle 400 gallons per minute (gpm) were modified so
that the system would handle from 700 to 800 gpm in order to test the
pumps throughout their entire operating range.
The flow meters which
originally had a maximum reading capacity of 400 gpm, were adjusted to
read half scale so that at a reading of
400
gpm, 800 gpm was moving
through the system.
To test the hypothesis that a mixture of water and chip™shaped
solids have a detrimental effect on the performance characteristics of
a centrifugal pump, the following experimental parameters were needed
for a given capacity:
I ) the head produced by the pump;
horsepower delivered to the pump;
2) the brake
3) the resulting pump efficiency;
and 4) a determination of the concentration of chips in the mixture.
To arrive at these parameters it was necessary to measure the suction
and discharge pressures of the pump, the pump rotational speed, the
input torque to the pump shaft, and the flow rates of the clear water
and the mixture.
The parameters were then computed as follows and a
determination was made of the number of observations needed.
Ae
The Head Produced by the Pump.
The head produced by the pump is determined from the energy equation:
Bp + Ps/r + v^/zg + Zg = pa/y + v^/2g + z^ + h^
.
(5.1)
—23—
where
represents the energy or head developed by the pump measured
In feet of fluid flowing, p is the pressure of the fluid within the
pipe, V is the velocity of the fluid flowing, g represents the acceler­
ation of gravity, and Z is the elevation of the point above a datum.
The subscripts s and d refer to the suction and discharge sides of
the pump respectively.
Assuming the headless (h^) is negligible, E q . (5.1) reduces to:
Bp = (Pd - Ps)/^ + (^d - ^ ) / 2 g + (Zj - Zg)
(5.2)
The differential pressure head, (p^ - ps)/y, between the suction and
discharge pressure taps can be obtained by writing a manometer equation,
for the U-tube manometer of Fig. 12, between the two sections.
The pres­
sure taps were located and constructed in accordance with the Hydraulic
Institute Standards [s, 19] .
Fig. 12 shows a schematic of the pump and
piping relative to the manometer equation.
Ps " Ys* + YGm* - (Y - Yd)* = Pd
Ps -
(Ys
- Yd)* + Y(Gm - I)* = Pd
Note from Fig. 12:
(Yg - Yd ) = (Zd - Zg)
(Pd - Ps)/^ = Y (Gm - I) - (Zd - Zg )
(5.3)
where Y represents the deflection of the water-mercury manometer with
the subscripts as defined above, Gm is the specific gravity of mercury,
and & equals the unit weight of water.
into Eq. (5.2)
Ep =
Then by substituting E q . (5.3)
the head produced by the pump is given
Y(Gm - I) - (Zd - Zg) + (Vjj - V^)/2g
Ep = Y (Gm - I) + (?§ - V^)/2g
by:
+ (Zd - Zs )
(5.4)
where Y is obtained by measuring the total deflection of the manometer
-30and V is obtained by dividing tbe flow in the pipe (Q) by the arosesectional area of the pipe (A).
B„
The Brake Horsepower.
The brake horsepower (BHP) of the pump represents the actual horse­
power delivered to the pump by the motor Qfje
The brake horsepower is
delivered to the pump by means of the shaft coupling the motor to the
pump, thereby developing a torque in the shaft.
The shaft torque (T)
in inch-pounds was measured by the use of the torque meter described in
Chapter IV and the brake horsepower was computed by the following
equation:
BHP = (T X HPM X 2 nr))/(550 x 12'x
G0
6©)
(5.5)
The Pump Efficiency.
The pump efficiency in per cent is determined by taking the ratio
of .the horsepower output to the horsepower input multiplied by 100«
The
input horsepower is equal to. the brake horsepower (BHP) and the output
horsepower is equal to the water horsepower (WHP).
The water horsepower
is computed by the.following equation:
WHP = (Ep z Q z * z G*G)/550
(5.6)
where Q is the flow rate of the mixture in cubic feet per second, Gwe is
the specific gravity of the mixture and is computed as follows:
Gwo = (I - 0)0* + (0 z Go)
where G is the volumetric concentration of the chips, Gw is the specific
gravity of water, and Gc is the specific gravity of the chips.
The overall pump efficiency (e) in per cent, is then computed by:
e = WIP/BHP x 10©
(5.7)
—31 D„
Concentration of Solids.
The concentration of the chip-shaped solids flowing through the
pump was determined using the following procedure.
The inflow of clear
water to the mix tank (QW) and the outflow of the water-chip mixture
from the mix tank through the pump (QM) were measured simultaneously
while the level of the mix tank was held constant (Fig, 2),
Each flow
rate (QM and QW) was measured by the use of the flow meters described
in Chapter IV,
The level of the mix tank was held constant by increasing
or decreasing the inflow of chips.
When the above conditions were met
the inflow of solids (QS) could be determined:
QS = QM - Q W .
The volumetric concentration o f ■the solids in the system (C)?
expressed as a percentage of the total volume of the mixture, can
then be determined by the equation:
C = QS/QM x 100 = (QM - QW)/QM
E,
x
100
(5.8)
Determination of the Number of Observations Needed.
The Allis-Ohalmers pump was initially operated at speeds of 1150
and 1400 rpm and the data for four observations at each flow rate were
recorded.
The recorded data was punched on IBM cards and processed using
the IBM 1620 digital computer as outlined in Appendix A.
The results
were analyzed statistically to determine how many observations would be
needed to have the individually computed pump efficiency points fall
within ± 0,2 of a per cent of their mean value at a given flow rate.
A 95 per cent confidence interval was selected for the analysis.
analysis, included as Appendix D indicated that seven observations
would give the desired degree of reliability.
The
CHAPTER
Tl
TEST PROCEDURES
The pumps were tested at speeds corresponding to those for which
the pump companies had furnished performance-characteristic curves.
At
each speed tests were made at 50 gallons per minute (gpm),- flow rate inter­
vals beginning at the higher limit (limited by- the capacity of the system),
and working down to the lower limit (limited by the system plugging),
At
each-flow rate tests were made at 0, 10, and 20 per cent volumetric
concentration of chips.
The three modified gate valves installed in the test line were
regulated to vary the system headless making it possible to pump at
the different flow rates throughout- the operating range of the pump
while maintaining a constant speed.
The system was capable of handling up to 650 'gpm.
Plow rates in
excess of 650 gpm allowed an excessive amount of water to be carried
into the chip storage bin, thereby affecting the chip concentration,
When headless in the system would allow flows in excess of 650 gpm at
a given pump speed, one or more of the valves were partially closed to
maintain the upper pumping limit at 650 gpm.
The lower flow rate limit was reached when the .system started to
plug.
Previous tests revealed that when the gate valves were 70 to 80
per cent closed, and the concentration of chips was 10 per cent or
higher, the chips moving along the bottom of the pipe piled up in front
■of the valve and caused the system to plug.
After the lower limit was
attained, the tests were continued at 50 gpm intervals at aero per cent
-33concentration to shut-off head.
The experimental testing program was divided into two sections
consisting of the preliminary procedures and the data collection routine
which are discussed in the following sections0
A„
Preliminary Procedures.
Before beginning a test run the pump was run at a constant speed
for 20 to 30 minutes to allow the electrical components of the torque
meter to reach thermal equilibrium*
The pump was then disconnected
from the torque meter shaft and the torque meter output was adjusted to
sero under no load conditions with the motor rotating at the test speed.
The pump was then connected and a series of readings were obtained with
clear water at go gpm flow rate intervals.
These readings, similar to
those obtained for each test, consisted of the pump speed (rpm), shaft
input torque, manometer deflection, and the flow rates*
They were re­
corded and compared with the zero per cent concentration test runs
during the data collecting process.
Completion of the preliminary procedures entailed disconnecting the
pump from the torque meter and rechecking the no load torque output read­
ing.
If the reading had shifted more than one per cent of the total
range the torque meter was checked and the preliminary procedures were
repeated*
When no appreciable change was noted the pump was reconnected
to the torque meter and testing was begun*
B*
Data Collection.
Seven data observations at 15— second intervals for each concentra­
tion at each given flow rate were obtained.
As an example of the
-34“
procedureg the 600 gpm flow rate at
1160
rpm will he used*
The pump was started and the speed of rotation was set at or near
1160 rpm at the same time the valves in the line were closed just enough
to allow 600 gpm to he pumped.
When the flow rate of the mixture (QM)
and the flow rate of the clear water (QW) readings were both set at 608'
gpm and the pump was rotating at 1160 rpm, the console operator would
signal the start of a series of test readings.
The readings were re­
corded by the notekeeper directly on Fortran data sheets, for subsequent
key-punching in the following order:
The pump speed in revolutions per minute,
The torque output reading in millivolts.
The left', manometer deflection in inches.
The right, manometer deflection in inches.
The flow rate of the mixture in gallons per minute,
The flow rate of the clear water in gallons per minute»
The above six readings required the services of four observers to
insure simultaneous readings.
The six measurements were read simulta­
neously and the seven observations were spaced at 15-second intervals.
The group of seven data readings were preceded by run identification
information giving the number of observations, the nominal concentration,
the nominal flow rate of the mixture, the shaft number, the run number,
and the initial torque reading.
After seven observations were made, the console operator brought
the chip concentration np to 10 per cent.
The flow of chips was in­
creased while the flow of clear water into the mix tank was decreased
-
to 540 gpm„
35 -
Tffhen the flow of chips into the mix tank was regulated so
that the level of the mix tank was constant, the console operator signaled
the start of another series of observations.
After seven observations
as described previously were obtained, the above process was repeated
with the clear water inflow being decreased to 480 gpm, while the flow
of chips was increased to maintain the level of the mix tank constant.'
This gave a 20 per cent concentration and when everything was relatively
steady the final seven measurements of the 600 gpm'run were taken.
The discharge flow rate (QM) was held constant at 600 gpm through­
out the run and the pump speed was held as nearly constant as possible
at 1160 rpm.
Any adjustments necessary to keep the flow rate at 600 gpm
were made by opening or closing one}of the gate valves in the line.
Any
adjustments necessary to keep the pump speed constant were made by
adjusting the rheostat on the control panel.
Performance tests were run on each pump and the results checked
before the pump was removed from the system and replaced by another.
The Allis-Ohalmers 4 x 4 x
was tested first.
LO pump with the MSX open-faced impeller
The NSW closed impeller was installed in the pump
and performance tests run on it after completion of the NSX open-faced
impeller tests.
The pumps were then changed and the Fairbanks-Morse
pump was run through the testing procedure, followed by the Haaelton
5-inch OTL pump.
Performance tests were completed on three pumps during the course
of this study, with the results being analysed and compared.
Ghalmers pump had two different impeller models.
The Allis-
All of the test results
—36are on file in the Civil Engineering Department of Montana State Universi­
ty.
The Allis-Chalmers pump with the USX impeller is used for the main
discussion in this thesis.
Supporting data and results from the other
pumps tested are shown in three of the graphs in Chapter VIII, which show
the relationship existing between changes in chip concentration and corre­
sponding changes in pump performance characteristics.
QHAPTER VII
PRESENTATION OF RESULTS
The computed results of the experimental tests made with the AllisChalmers pump with the NSX open-faced impeller are used in this portion
of the discussion.
to the 1160 and
The presentation of results in this chapter is limited
14-00 ppm
pump speeds.
The results of pump performance tests are best described by plotting
efficiency, pump head, and brake horsepower versus discharge.
of the computed results for the above pump at 1160 and
speeds is given in Tables I and II.
1400
A summary
rpm pump
These computed results consist of
the actual volumetric concentration of chips in- the mixture, the flow
rate of the mixture in gpm at a given pump speed, the pump efficiency at
a given flow rate, the head produced by the pump, and the input horse­
power required.
Tables I and II contain the data used in constructing
the pump performance curves of Figs. 13 and 14.
Figs, 13 and 14 contain the pump performance characteristic data
for pump speeds 1160 and I400 rpm with head, efficiency, and brake
horsepower plotted versus discharge in gpm.
Similar figures for the
860 and 1600 rpm pump speeds are included in Appendix G along with a
pump performance characteristic curve furnished by the manufacturer
for the Allis-Ghalmers 4 % 4 %
LG pump with the NSX impeller*
Figs. 13 and 14 graphically illustrate the results of this portion of
the hydraulic transport of wood chips project.
The calculated results used to construct the curves of Figs* 13;
and 14 are obtained from a digital computer program.
The computer
-38-
TABLE I
COMPUTED RESULTS OF ALLIS-CHALMERS NSX PUMP PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS
NOMINAL PUMP SPEED 1160 RPM
Concentration
0*0
FLow-gpm
Efficiency
Head
BHP
598
598
604
53.1
51*9
49.9
38.96
39.42
39.73
11.07
11*48
12.16
52.7
51.8
50.2
40.04
40.32
19.8
550
551
547
10.56
10.84
11.25
0.0
10.0
20.2
501
500
501
52.6
51.1
49.5
41.00
41.32
41.75
0.0
452
450
452
51.6
50.1
48.7
42.22
0.0
10.0
20.0
398
399
50.4
49.1
47.5
42.22
42.62
43.00
8.47
8.74
9.19
0.0
351
349
350
48.7
47.7
42.83
43.03
43.39
7.80
7.96
8.35
299
42.88
298
48.1
47.4
45.5
43.51
43.65
6.74
6.91
7.24
20.0
250
250
250
43.1
41.9
40.0
43.57
43.78
43.85
6.38
6.61
6.94
0.0
10.2
201
200
19.1
198
38.8
37.6
35.3
44.10
44.29
44.29
5.77
5.97
6.27
0.0
149
34.6
44.63
4.85
0.0
104
27.5
45.02
4.29
0.0
O
0.3
48.33
3.34
9.6
20.4
0.0
10.0
9.9
20.6
9.7
19.5
0.0
10.0
20.2
0.0
10.4
402
298
46.0
40.81
41.87
42.51
9.87
10.22
10.70
9.25
9.59
9.98
-39TABLE II
COMPUTED RESULTS OF ALLIS-CHALMERS NSX PUMP PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS
NOMINAL PUMP SPEED I400 RPM
Concentration
-0.1
9.3
19.7
Flow-gpm
Head
601
600
53.8
53.2
51 .6
61.35
19.9
550
552
547
52.9
51.9
50.2
61.96
62.20
0.0
10.0
20.0
496
499
501
51.9
50.9
49.4
0.0
19.8
453
453
452
49.0
47.2
0.0
10.1
20.0
402
48.2
404
398
0.1
10.2
598
Efficiency
60.42
61.11
61.51
62.18
62.61
BHP
16.97
17.45
18.01
16.17
16.66
17.11
62.94
15.01
15.51
16.15
62.91
63.03
63.30
14.13
14.73
15.31
46.8
45.2
63.23
63.74
63.94
13.35
13.89
14.21
20.0
349
349
351
45.1
44.9
43.2
63.63
63.93
64.05
12.16
12.56
13.15
0.3
9.0
19.8
299
297
295
43.9
42.4
39.9
64.26
11.06
64.42
64.OI
11.43
11.96
0.2
10.2
19.2
251
251
249
39.5
37.9
37.8
64.13
64.52
66.04
10.29
0.0
199
203
35.9
11.7
20.0
200
33.7
65.08
66.60
66.46
9.16
9.49
9.97
0.0
148
29.7
65.48
8.27
0.0
101
22.8
66.04
7.38
0.0
I
0.2
70.55
6.01
10.5
0.0
9.5
51.0
36.1
10.86
10.99
10
-
o 0 % CONC
a i0 % COA/C
a 20 % /i
"Discharge in GPM
Figure 13 —
Test Pump Performance Curve
for Allis-Chalmers 4 x 4 x 9 -f LC NSX at ll60 RPM
Brake Horsepower
a 20 -
Brake Horsepower
W 20
° 0 % COfVC
A /0 %
«
Q 20 %
I.
D isch arge in GPM
F ig u re l 4 - - T est Pump Performance Curve
fo r A llis-C h a lm ers 4 x 4 x
DC NSX a t 1400 RPM
—1)2.—
program takes the raw data and performs the following operations and
computations for each run, not necessarily in the following order.
a) ; Gbmputes the average value-of the pump speed (rpm).
b)
Computes the average values of the flow rates into
(QW) and out of (QM) the mix tank.
c)
j Subtracts the initial torque reading from each
individual reading, then computes the average value of
the shaft input torque.
d)
J Lists the nominal concentration for the run and
computes the actual volumetric chip concentration of the
mixture for each individual run as outlined in Chapter 17,
then computes the average chip concentration value.
e)
) Computes the head in feet of water as outlined
in Chapter V.
f)
Computes the water horsepower (WHP) and the brake
horsepower (BHP) by the formulae In Chapter V.
g)
Computes the pump efficiency.
h)
Adjusts the flow rate (QM), the pump head, and the
brake horsepower, whose raw data have been computed at the
operating speed, to the desired nominal speed, according to
the laws of similarity for hydraulic machinery.
The output data resulting from the computations listed above for
the Allis-Ohalmers pump is included in Appendix B as Tables B-II, B-117,
B-17, and B-VI.
The tables are comprised of the computed results for
each test run and contain the nominal and actual chip concentration,
—43—
the pump speed, the flow rate of the mixture, the head developed by the
pump, the shaft input torque, the water horsepower, the brake horsepower,
the pump efficiency, and finally the flow rate, the pump head, and the
brake horsepower adjusted to the nominal pump speed.
were reduced from Tables B-II and B-IV.
Tables I and II
Similar tables are included in
Appendix G for the Hazelton and Fairbanks-Morse pumps along with the
resulting performance curves.
As an illustration of the computations made by the computer in
arriving at the results, consider the raw data tabulated in Table III
for the Allis-Chalmers pump run at 1160 rpm delivering 600 gpm at 10
per cent concentration of chips.
TABLE III
RAW INPUT DATA FOR ALLIS-CHALMERS NSX PUMP AT 1160 RPM
Number of
Observations
10
7
Pump
Speed
1162
1161
1161
1162
1162
1161
1161
Nominal
Concentration
Nominal
Flow Rate
600
Shaft
Number
Run
Number
0
3
Left
Manometer
Right
Manometer
Flow Rate
of Mixture
526
528
19.0
19.0
529
531
530
534
532
18.9
19.0
18.9
18.9
18.9
18.9
18.9
18.8
18.9
18.8
18.8
18.8
300
299
300
Input
Torque
300
300
300
300
Initial
Torque
-4
Flow Rate of
Clear Water
271
271
271
271
271
271
271
-44The program first adjusts the recorded flow rates to the actual
quantity flowing by doubling each recorded flow rate.
Actual flow rate (QA) = Recorded flow rate x 2
Example:
(7.1)
QA = 300 x 2 = 600 g m
The input torque millivolt (mv) readings are then adjusted by
subtracting
the initial torque reading from each observed torque reading.
Torque in mv = Torque reading - Initial torque reading
Example:
(7.2)
Torque in mv = 526 - (-4) = 530 mv
The torque output in millivolts is then converted to inch-pounds by
E q . (4.1).
Torque (inch-lbs) = (530 x 1.18815) - 9.0 = 620.7 in-lbs
The velocities of the mixture at the suction and discharge sections
of the pump are computed as follows.
V = Q/A where V is the velocity of the fluid in feet per
second (fps), Q is the rate of flow in cubic feet per second (cfs),
and A is the cross-sectional area of the pipe in square feet.
Then Q = Plow in gallons per minute (gpm) x 0.002228 cfs/gpm
A = /TTD2A
where D is the pipe diameter in feet.
A = /tt<J2/(144 in2/ft 2 x 4) = hTd2/ 576
where d is the diameter
of the pipe in inches.
Then V = QA x 0.002228 x 576 / (/rrx d2 )
Example:
(7.3)
V = 600 x 0.002228 x 576 /(3.1416 x 42 ) = 15.3 fps
The head is then computed by utilizing Eq. (5.4).
Example:
E d = (19.0 + 18.9)03.55 - 1)/12 + (15.3 2 - 15.32 )
64.4
Ep = 37.9 x 12.55/12 = 39.63 feet
-45“
The water horsepower is computed as outlined in Chapter V by the
use of E q . (5.6), the BHP is computed by using E q . (5.5), and the pump
efficiency is arrived at by the use of E q . (5.7).
Examples:
WHP = 39.63 x I.34 x 62.4 / 550 = 6.01 hp
BHP = 620.7 x 1162 x 2 Of/ 550 x 12 x 60 = 11.44 hp
e =
6.01
/
11.44
x
100
=
52.5
per cent
The flow rate, the pump head, and the brake horsepower are then
adjusted to the nominal speed according to the laws of similarity for
hydraulic machinery.
Q at 1l60 rpm = QA x (II6O/II 62)
(7.4)
Head at 1160 rpm = Ep x (1160/1162 )2
(7.5)
BHP at 1160 rpm = BHP x (1160/1162)3
(7.6)
Examples:
Q at 1160 = 600 x .997 = 598 gpm
Head at 1160 = 39.63 x (.997)2 = 39.50 feet
BHP at 1160 = 11.44 % (.997)3 =
11.38
hp
Each of the above computations is performed on the data read in for
each observation, as listed in Table III. The results are then summed
up as illustrated in Table IV and the totals are divided by the number
of observations giving the average results for each of the computed re­
sults as shown in Table IV.
The actual concentration of chips in the mixture is then computed
by the use of E q . (5.8).
Example:
Concentration = (599-- 542) / 599 = 9.6 per cent
-46TABLE IV
COMPUTED RESULTS OF ALLIS-CHALMERS 4 x 4 x ^
Rpm
Gpm
Head
1162
600
1161
598
1161
1162
1162
1161
1161
600
600
600
600
600
39.63
39.63
39.42
39.63
39.42
39.42
39.42
Tot. 3130
4193
A v e . 1161
599
LC NSX PUMP AT 1160 RPM
Gpm
1160
Head
1160
BHP
1160
11.56
51.8
51.5
51.7
598
597
599
598
598
599
599
39.50
39.56
39.36
39.50
39.29
39.36
39.36
11.38
11.44
11.47
11.49
11.47
11.57
11.53
Torque
WHP
BHP
e
620.7
6.01
623.0
624.2
626.6
5.99
5.98
11.44
11.47
11.50
11.55
11.53
52.5
52.2
6.01
52.0
52.0
627.3
5.98
5.98
5.98
276.57
4377.9
41.93
80.65
363.7
4183
275.93
80.35
39.51
625.4
5.99
11.52
51.9
598
39.42
11.48
625.4
630.2
Nominal Concentration = 1 0 per cent
Actual Concentration =
9.6
per cent
11.60
ohapter
HII
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The test results, presented in the proceeding chapter, were analyzed
to determine the effects of the chips on the pump performance' character­
istics.
The curves of Fig. 13 or 14 in Ohapter VII show that a mixture
of chips and water does affetjt the performance of a pump.
noted in Tables I and II,
The analysis of the effects is summarized in
Table V for the Allis-Ohalmers .NSX pump speed of 1160 rpm.
an extension of Table I.
This is also
This table is
It includes the concentration of the mixture,
the flow rate, the ratio of the flow at any point to the flow rate at
the best efficiency point (QZQr ), the pump efficiency (e), the change in
efficiency (A e ), the per cent change in efficiency (P-e), the pump head
(H), the change in head (AH), the per cent change in head (P-H), the
brake horsepower (BHP), the change in brake horsepower (A h p ) , and the
per cent change in brake horsepower (P-hp). ' The change in efficiency,
head and brake horsepower (A e , AH, and Ahp) are computed by the
following equations:
A e = (e @
10%
or 20% concentration) -
(e @ 0% cone.)
(8,1)
A H = (H @ 10% or 20% concentration) -
(H @ 0% cone,)
(8,2)
A h p = (BH? @ 10% or 20% cone,) - (BHP
@ 0% cone,)
(8,3)
The per cent change in efficiency, head, and brake horsepower
(P-e, P-H, and P-hp) are computed by taking the following ratios:
P-e = A e / (e @ 0 % concentration) x 100
(8.4)
P-H = A H /(H @ 0% concentration) x 100
(8.5)
P-hp = A h p /(BHP @ 0% concentration) x 100
(8.6) .
—43TABLE V
ANALYSIS OF COMPUTED RESULTS FOR ALLIS-CHALMERS TYPE NSX PUMP
PUMP SPEED 1160 RPM
P-e
Gone
gptn
Q/Qr
e
Ae
0.0
598
598
98.0
0.0
604
53.1
51.9
49.9
0.0
98.0
99.0
- 1.2
-3.2
-2.2
- 6.0
19.8
550
551
547
90.2
90.3
89.1
52.7
51.8
50.2
-0.9
-2.5
0.0
10.0
20.0
501
500
501
82.1
82.0
82.1
52.6
51.1
49.5
0.0
452
450
452
74.0
73.7
74.0
0.0 398 65.2
10.0 399 65.4
20.0 402 65.8
9.6
20.4
0.0
10.0
9.9
20.6
0.0
40.32
0.0
0.0
-1.5
-3.1
- 2.8
-5.8
41.00
41.32
41.75
50.4
49.1
47.5
0.0
0.0
42.44
0.00 0.0
-1.3
-2.9
-2.5
-5.7
42.62
0.18
0.56
19.1
198
0.0
0.0
41.0 40.0
- 1.2
-3.1
-2.7
-7.1
33.0
32.8
32.5
0.0
0.0
- 1.2
-3.5
-3.0
-9.0
38.8
37.6
35.3
0.41
1.09
10.56
10.84
11.25
9.25
9.59
9.98
0.64
43.1
41.9
11.07
11.48
12.16
10.70
42.51
- 1 .4
-5.4
Ahp
1.5
48.7
-0.7
- 2.6
0.0 201
10.2 200
0.75
0.00 0.0
0.35 0.8
43.00
BHP
P-hp
0.00 0.0
3.7
9.8
0.00 0.0
0.28 2.6
0.69
6.5
0.00 0.0 9.87 0.00 0.0
0.32 0.7 10.22 0.35 3.5
41.87
0.0
250
1.9
42.22
0.0
20.0
0.00 0.0
0.6
0.28
0.77
0.0
48.1
47.4
45.5
41.0
1.9
-2.9
-5.6
0.0 299 49.0
10.0 298 48.8
20.2 298 48.8
10.4
0.77
0.0
-5.5
41.0
0.00 0.0
0.46 1.1
-1.5
-2.9
-2.7
250
P-H
50.1
0.0
- 2.0
250
40.81
AH
51.6
0.0
- 1.0
0.0
38.96
39.42
39.73
0.0 40.01
48.7
47.7
46.O
351
349
350
Head
-1.7
-4.7
57.5
57.2
57.3
0.0
9.7
19.5
RATED FLOW 610 GPM
1.5
0.4
1.3
42.83
43.03
43.39
0.00 0.0
0.20 0.4
42.88
43.51
43.65
0.00 0.0
0.63 1.4
0.56
1.3
8.47
8.74
9.19
7.80
7.96
8.35
0.83
8.4
0.00 0.0
0.34
0.73
3.6
7.8
0.00 0.0
0.27
0.72
3.1
8.5
0.00 0.0
2.0
0.16
0.55
7.0
0.00 0.0
1.7
6.74
6.91
7.24
43.57
43.78
43.85
0.00 0.0
0.21 0.4
0.28 0.6
6.38
6.61
6.94
0.00 0.0
44.10
44.29
44.29
0.00 0.0
0.19
0.19
5.77
5.97
6.27
0.00 0.0
0.20 3.4
0.50 8.6
0.77
0.4
0.4
0.17
0.50
0.23
0.56
2.5
7.4
3.6
8.7
-49The analysis of the effects of chip-shaped particles on the perfor­
mance of a pump, (sample-Table V) discloses the following effects on the
pump head, BHP, and efficiency related to the Allis-Ohalmers USX pump.
This analysis includes all four pump speeds at flow rates extending from
200
to
600
1)
gpm»
The head produced by the pump at a given flow rate increased
as the chip concentration was increased from
0
to
10
then
20
per cent.
The per cent increase (P-H defined above) varied from 0.1 per cent to
1.4
per cent for the
per cent to
1,9
10
per cent concentration of chips and from
per cent for the
20
0.4
per cent concentration of chips.
Reference to Table V shows that the variation of the head produced while
pumping chips compared to the clear water head, is greater at the higher
flow rates.
2) The BHP versus discharge relationship shows a definite increase
when chips are added to the mixture for a
10
per cent chip concentration.
Gonsidering all test speeds on the Allis-Ghalmers pump, the per cent in­
crease (P-hp defined above) ranged in value up to 5 per cent with the
average value of about
tration.
per cent increase for the
10-per
cent concen­
The 20 per cent concentration exhibited an even greater increase
going as high as
about an
3.3
8
10
per cent increase with most of the values showing
per cent increase.
The variation appeared to be independent
of the flow rate.
3)
The pump efficiency when plotted versus discharge (Figs, 13 and
14) shows an appreciable decrease with an increase concentration of chips
as compared to clear water.
The per cent decrease in pump efficiency
-“■•fjQ—
(P-e defined by equation 8,4) had quite a wide range as can be noted
from Fig, 15 and Table V 0
per cent decrease for the
It varied from 1,1 per cent decrease to 4*0
10
per cent chip concentration and from
9,1 per cent decrease for the 20 per cent chip concentration,
15
4*0
to
As Fig,
illustrates the decrease in pump efficiency has a tendency to decrease
as Q approaches Qr ,
Fig, 15 portrays the dimensionless curves which were developed as
a result of this study.
These curves and those on Figs. 16, 17, and 18,
indicating an approximate fit of the plotted points, can be used to pre­
dict pump performance characteristics while pumping a water-chip mixture,
Fig, 15 shows the results for the three Allis-Ohalmers pump speeds
860, 1160, and 1400 rpm with per cent decrease in pump efficiency; Eq,
(8,4)f plotted versus Q/Qr , where Q is the discharge at any point and
Qr is the discharge at the best efficiency point for the given pump
speed.
Although the points are quite scattered they do lie in two dis­
tinct groups,, one associated with each per cent of solids concentration.
Each group shows that the per cent decrease in efficiency tends to de­
crease as Q approaches Qr ,
An equation for the straight line portion of the dimensionless
curves is as follows:
p-e = K -
0.02
(8,7)
x (QZQr );
where (P-e) is the per cent change in pump efficiency as described
previously, QZQr is the discharge ratio described above, and K is a
constant depending upon the concentration.
For a 10 per cent concentra­
tion of chips K = 3,9 and for a 20 per cent concentration K = 7,4-
----- o
860
A 1160
----- ----- o 1400
20% C
DIMENSIONLESS
CURVES
10%
D isch arge R a tio
Q/Q,
F ig u re 15 - - D im en sio n less Curves fo r E f f ic ie n c y Loss
fo r A llis-C h a lm ers Pump w ith NSX Im p e lle r
C
A
A llis-C h a lm ers 860 rpm
A llis-C h a lm ers l l 6 0 rpm
o A llis-C h a lm e r s 1400 rpm
▼ H azelton 8 50 rpm
♦ H azelton l l 6 0 rpm
• Fairbanks-M orse 1000 rpm
A
"
" 1200
"
■
"
" 1400
"
o
*
"
"
1600
D isch arge R a tio %/Q
F igu re l6 - - D im en sio n less Curve fo r E f f ic ie n c y Loss
a t 10% C on cen tration fo r a l l Pumps T ested
"
1
vn
OJ
I
A A llis-C h a lm e r s 860 rpm
□
ft
!T
ll6 0 ft
O
tt
I!
i4oo
n
▼ H azelton 850 rpm
#
!T
l l 6 0 ft
• Fairbanks-M orse 1000 rpm
Jk
M
n
1200 I !
■
"
Tl
1400 t t
4
Tl
Tl
1 6 0 0
Tl
D isch arge R a tio Q/Q,.
F igu re I? - - D im en sio n less Curve fo r E f f ic ie n c y Loss
a t 20% C on cen tration fo r a l l Pumps T ested
A • A llis-C h a lm e r s 860 rpm
D
"
"
l l 60 rpm
0
"
"
l4 0 0 rpm
▼ H azelton 85O rpm
♦
"
l l 60 rpm
• Fairbanks-M orse 1000 rpm
A
"
"
1200 rpm
■
"
"
1400 rpm
*
"
"
1600 rpm
A llis-C h a lm e r s
Open-Faced Im p e lle r
C losed Im p ellers
D isch arge R a tio Q/Q,
F igu re l 8 - - D im en sio n less Brake Horsepower In c r e a se
Curve a t 10% C on cen tration - A ll Pumps
-
55-
Figs»,16 and 17 show the decrease in efficiency plotted versus Q/Qr
10
for all pumps tested for
and
20
per cent concentration respectively,
Considering all the points the dimensionless curve reaches a minimum
point at Q/Qr = 90 per cent then rises slightly.
curve for both
10
and
20
The dimensionless
percent of solids concentration have the same
general shape,
A curve was not developed for the head versus discharge relation­
ship since the change in head while pumping chips was less than one foot.
The per cent change in head (Eq. 8.5) was less than two per cent and a
majority of the values were around one per cent.
The change in head
( A H ) for the Allis-Ghalmers open-faced impeller was an increase, whereas
the A H for the closed impellers was a decrease.
Fig. 18 shows the difference in power requirements for the openfaced and closed impellers.
(Eq.
8.6)
The per cent increase in horsepower required
is greater for the open-faced impellers and remains relatively
constant throughout, whereas the per cent increase in power required for
the closed impellers tends to decrease as Q approaches Qr , then increases
slightly.
The results discussed in (2) and (3) above regarding the brake horse­
power and efficiency agree with the results of investigations mentioned
in Chapter II presented by Herbieh and Vallentine [Y].
The increase in
power required and the 'decreasesinefficiency agree with the hypothesis
stated in Chapter III.
The results discussed in (1) above for the open-
faced impeller do not agree with the ‘hypothesis stated in Chapter III or
with Herbich and Vallentine 1s
[V]
investigations.
The results of the
-56cloged impeller tests are in agreement with the hypothesis and the
results of previous investigations.
CHAPTER IX
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the results of this investigation of the effects of chip™
shaped particles on pump performance ,characteristics, the following con­
clusions are drawn, with the pump speed being held constant:
a)
The head developed at a given capacity, with the Allis-Ohalmers
open-faced impeller, increased from 0.5 to 0.9 foot with an increase in
volumetric chip concentration.
The head obtained with the closed im­
pellers decreased under the same conditions from 0.6 foot to I .8 feet.
b)
The power input'required at a given capacity increased with an
increased concentration of chips for both types of impellers.
The in­
crease in power required was much greater for the open-faced impeller,
requiring as much as 1.1 additional horsepower (hp) at 20 per cent con­
centration whereas the Hazelton required up to 0=4 additional hp and the
Fairbanks-Morse up to 0.25 additional hp.
c)
The pump efficiency at a given capacity decreased as the con­
centration of chips increased for both types of impellers at all pump
speeds.
The decrease ranged from I to 2.5'per cent for the 10 per cent
concentration of chips and from 3 to 6 per cent for the 20 per cent
concentration,
As Q approached Qr the effects as described above were more con­
sistent between pumps and the fluctuations were much less.
Figs. 16 and
17 illustrate this point.
Based on a consideration of the efficiency and brake horsepower, it
is concluded that -chip-shaped solids mixed with water have a detrimental
effect on the performance characteristics of a pomp.
The dimensionless
curves presented for predicting efficiency losses and increased power
requirements while pumping chip-shaped solids.may be refined by con­
ducting further tests on these and other pumps.
The following recommendations are a result of this study.
Improve­
ments should be made in the mechanical measuring devices and the labor­
atory apparatus to improve future data gathering, such as:
1)
Use a bank of manometers connected in series containing a fluid
with a specific gravity lighter than that of mercury.
Couple this with
photogrammetrie data recording for greater accuracy in reading the head
developed by the pump.
2)
Develop a more sensitive torque meter with a greater degree of
reliability.
3)
Arrive at a method of measuring the fluid and mixture flows
more accurately.
Probable areas of additional research which may help to expand the
field of knowledge being acquired relative to the transportation of wood
chips in hydraulic pipe lines are:
a,)
Gheek the efficiency decrease while pumping chips which are
50 per cent larger than those used in this study.
b)
Repeat part "a" using chips i- as large as those used in this
study.
c.J
Check the changes in pump performance characteristics while
pumping chips with a specific gravity significantly greater than unity.
-
d)
59 -
Repeat part "c" using chips with a specific gravity somewhat
lower than unity,
e)
Expand the system so that tests can be made at flow rates which
are at and above the best efficiency point.
This would help to determine
if the efficiency decrease tapers off or remains relatively constant
throughout the range of pump operation.
f)
Build a transparent face plate for the pump in order to observe
and study the flow patterns in the pump that result when the chips are
introduced into the system.
It is recommended that each of the above studies be performed at a
constant pump speed with various flow rates and concentrations.
REFERENCES
1„
Bird, Richard B . , Stewart, W. E. ahd Lightfoot, E„ N . , Transport
Phenomena. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1960*
2.
Ohurch, Austin H„, Centrifugal Pumps and Blowers* Wiley and Sons,
New York and London, 1944.
3«
Daugherty, Robert Li and Eransini, Joseph B., Fluid Mechanics with
Engineering Applications, McGraw Hill, New York, 1965.
4.
Defeld, Raymond, A Practical Treatise on Single and Multi-Stage
Centrifugal Pumps, Chapman and Hall, L o n d o n , 1930.
5.
Elliot, D. R., nChiplines - Closer Than We Think", Pulp and Paper,
p 27, August 10, 1964.
6»
Handbook, Hydraulic Handbook, Fairbanks-Morse and Company, Chicago,
Illinois, p 194, 1965.
70
Herbich, John B e and Vallentine, H e R e, Effect of Impeller Design
Changes on Characteristics of a Model Dredge Pump. Lehigh
University report No. 33 for U e S e Army Engineers, Sept0 1961.
8e
Hunt, William A., An Economic Analysis of Transporting Low Value
Forest Products Continuously in Hydraulic Pipelines. Unpub­
lished final report .at Montana State University, Civil Engi­
neering Department, March 1965.
9.
Instructions, Installation, Operation, Maintainance - Bulletin 1737 Dynalog Magnetic Flow Meter, The Foxboro Co., Foxboro,
Massachusetts, I964.
10o
Jerome, G. R e, Statistical Inference I , Edwards Brothers, Inc.,
Ann"Arbor, Michigan, I965.
11.
Kovats, Andre, Design and Performance of Centrifugal and Axial
Flow Pumps and Compressors. MacMillan Goe, New York, 1964.
120
Loewenstein, Louis G. and Crissley, Clarence P., Centrifugal Pumps Their Design and Construction. D e Van Nostrand Co., New York,
1911.
13.
Maurer, Gerould W e,•"Pipelining Can Transport Your Bulk Solids",
Material Handling Engineering, pp 56- 60, March '1966.
14»
Nardi, J e, "Pumping Solids Through a Pipeline", Mining Engineering,
pp 904-908, September 1959.
-6115«
Rousejl Hunter, Engineering Hydraullos , Proceedings of the Fourth
Hydraulic Conference,- Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research,
Wiley and Sons, New York and London, 1950.
16.
Shhmidt, Ronald 1«, An. Investigation of the Effects of Pressure and
Time on the Specific Gravity.■Moisture .Content and.Volume of
Wood Chins in a Water Slurry. Unpublished Easter's Thesis,
*
G„ E e Pept., Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, June
196g.
17.
Schmidt, Ronald E., Design and Construction of Test Facilities for
Wood-Chip Pipeline Research. Unpublished Research Report for
Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Bozeman,
Montana, 1966.
18.
Spannhake, .Wilhelm, Centrifugal .Pumps. Turbines, and Propellers,
Technology Press, MIT, Cambridge, 1934«
19.
Standards, Hydraulic Institute Standards. Hydraulic Institute,
Hew York, 1965.
20.
Stepanoff, A. J e, "Pumping Solid-Liquid Mixtures", Mechanical
Engineering, pp 29-35, September I964.
21.
The Transportation .of Solids in-Steel Pipelines, Colorado School
of Mines Research Foundation - A summary of existing pipe
line data.
—62—
APPEWBIGES
IPPBHiDIX A
DEVELOPMENT OF COMPUTER PROGRAM
The program which was developed for the IBM 1620 digital computer
and u$ed to process the data for this project was written in Fortran II
language.
Equations (5.4)? (5.5)# (5.6), (5.7) and (5,8) were adapted
to Fortran II language and used in the program along with equations
(4.1), (7,1), (7.2), (7,3), (7.4), (7.5), and '(7.6) which were also
adapted to Fortran II language to complete the program.
The input data was recorded directly on Fortran data sheets and key­
punched for immediate analysis.
The output data was printed and also
punched so that additional copies could be made.
The numbers in parenthesis in the following discussion refer to
statement numbers in the program.
The program reads the constants consisting of the specific gravities
of water, mercury, and chips, and the inlet and outlet pipe diameters,
(20) and the pump identification (21) first.
out a complete pump run.
These remain fixed through­
The pump' rotational speed is read in next (22)
and the output headings are printed and punched.
The input data consist­
ing of the observed readings is read (23,24) in two parts.
The first
statement (23) picks up the number of observations recorded, the nominal
concentration, the nominal flow rate, the shaft number, a run number, and
initial no-load torque reading.
The observed data readings corresponding
to the number of observations read previously are then read as a series
(24).
The data readings contain the measured and recorded pump speed,
shaft input torque, left and right manometer deflection readings, and the
*-64.“
flow rates of the mixture outflow and clear water inflow.
Computations
are then completed with a printed output for each observation.
The
results of the observations in a series are averaged and the average
output for a run is printed and punched.
The program was set up this
way so that the results from each observation could be checked for
deviation from the average,
When the computations for a series of observations are completed,
the program cycles back to read either another series of observations
or else a new pump speed depending on the run number.
When all obser­
vations at all speeds are completed, a blank card or else a negative
speed card is read in to either start the program over using a different
pump and corresponding data or end it.
The following notations are used in the programs
SGW = Specific gravity of water.
SGG = Specific gravity of the chips.
SGM = Specific gravity of mercury.
PDI = The pipe diameter in inches of the suction pipe.
PDO = The pipe diameter in inches for the discharge pipe.
PIDEWI = The pump name and identification.
WOBS = The number of observations in a series.
WRPM = The pump speed at which the run is to be made.
WGONG = The nominal concentration for the run.
NGPM = The nominal flow rate at which a run is to be made.
WSHFT = The shaft number.
WR = The run number, either 0 or I .
—65—
The following variables with subscripts (J) have more than
one value„
EPM = Recorded speed in revolutions per minute.
TE = The torque reading which is read in in millivolts.
YL = The left manometer reading in inches of deflection.
IR = The right manometer reading in inches of deflection.
QM = The flow of the mixture in gallons per minute.
QW = The flow of clear water in gallons per minute.
T = The adjusted torque reading.
WI
=? Velocity of flow in the suction pipe in feet per second.
WO
= Velocity of flow in the discharge pipe in feet per second.
EP = (Equation 5.4) The pump head in feet.
0 = Volumetric concentration (equation 5.8).
WHP = Water horsepower (equation'5.6).
TOR = Torque computation in inch-pounds.
BHP = Brake horsepower (equation 5.5).
EFF = The pump efficiency (equation 5.7).
Z = Value used to change the pump speed to a decimal number.
ZZ z= Ratio of the nominal speed to the actual speed'of the run.
Q := The flow in gallons per minute adjusted to the nominal speed.
H z= The pump head in feet adjusted to the nominal pump speed,
ABHP == The brake horsepower adjusted to the nbminal pump speed.
OBS =: The number of observations changed to a decimal number.
■66—
The prefix llSUn attached to the variables indicates the process of
summation, wherein the variables are summed up for averaging, e.g„, SURPH
is the sum of 1}he various pump speed (rpm) readings.
The suffix tlA n attached to the variables indicates the average
value for the series of observations, e„g., RPMA is the average value
of the pump speed (rpm) readings for a given run and is obtained by
dividing the sum of the rpm readings by the number of observations.
Provisions were made in the program for the use of three different
shafts for the torque meter, each with a different calibration constant
to provide greater accuracy in reading the torque in the shaft.
This
is noted in statements 37 through 39 in the program and is discussed
in Chapter 17.
The computer program used to process the data is listed on the
next three pages of this appendix.
—6 7 —
PUMP PERFORMANCE PROGRAM - K L PAGE 1 2 - 1 - 6 6 - COMPUTES PUMP
HEAD, BRAKE HORSEPOWER, AND EF F I CI ENCY.
REVI SED AND MODI FI ED - 3 - 3 0 - 6 6
DI MENSI ON P I D E N T f 1 0 ) , R P M f 1 0 ) , T R f 1 0 ) , Y L f 1 0 ) , Y R f 1 0 ) , QMf 1 0)
DI MENSI ON QWf 1 0 ) , Tl 1 0 ) , Q A f 1 0 ) , Q B f 1 0 ) , E P f 10) , TORf 1 0 ) , WHP f 10)
DI MENSI ON B H P f 1 0 ) , E F F f 1 0 ) , Q f 1 0 ) , Hf 1 0 ) , A B H P f 10)
1 FORMATt 5 F 7 . 3)
2 FORMAT{ I 2 , I 3 , 2 ( 3 X » I 5 ) , I 5 , F 8 . 0 i
3 FORMAT(6X,2F8.0,2F7.2 , 2F6.0)
4 FORMAT(IOAA)
5 FORMAT( 1 6 )
10 FORMAT < / 2 2 X , 1 0 A 4 )
11 FORMAT( Z / 3 2 X , I OHPUMP S P E E D , 1 6 , 4H RPM I
12 FORMAT( 9X, 7HN0M ACT , 9 X, 8 HQ
T E S T , 9 X , 4 H P U MP , I 3 X , 14HQ
HEAD
13 FORMAT( 9X, 47HC0N CON
RPM GPM HEAD TORQ
HP
BHP EFF
1216)
14 FORMAT ( I X )
15 FORMAT ( I H l )
16 FORMAT ( 2H *)
17 FORMAT( / 3 4 X, 1 6 HC0 MP UTED R E S U L T S / )
18 F O R M A T ( 9 X , I 3 , F 5 . 1 , F 6 . 0 , F 5 . 0 , F 6 . 2 , F 6 . 1 , 2 F 6 . 2 , F 5 . 1 , F 5 . 0 , 2 F 6 . 2 )
19 F O R M A T ( 1 7 X , F 6 . 0 , F 5 . 0 , F 6 . 2 , F 6 . 1 , 2 F 6 . 2 , F 5 . 1 , F 5 . 0 , 2 F 6 . 2 )
20 READ I , SGW, SGC, SGM, PD I ,
21 READ 4 , PI DENT
22 READ 5 ,NRPM
2 2 1 I F (NRPM) 5 5 , 2 0 , 2 2 2
2 2 2 PRI NT 15
PUNCH 16
PRI NT 1 0 , PIDENT
PUNCH 1 0 , PIDENT
PRI NT 1 1 , NRPM
PUNCH 1 1 ,NRPM
PRI NT 17
PUNCH 17
PRI NT 12
PUNCH 12
PRI NT I 3 »NRP M, NRP M, NRPM
PUNCH 1 3 , NRPMf NRPM, NRPM
23 READ 2 , NOBS, NCONC, NGPM, NSHFT, NR, TR I
GPM = NGPM
IF (NCONC) 2 3 2 , 2 3 1 , 2 3 2
2 3 1 PRI NT 14
PUNCH 14
2 3 2 DO 2 9 J = I , NOBS
2 4 READ 3 , RPMf J ) , T R ( J ) , Y L ( J ) , Y R ( J ) , Q M ( J ) , QW( J)
2 7 Q A ( J ) = QM( J ) * 2 . 0
Q B ( J ) = QW( J ) * 2 . 0
2 9 T ( J ) = T R ( J ) - TRI
DO 80 J = I , NOBS
BHP )
15,
~68“
VWI-QAjJ) * 0 . 002228 * 5 7 6 . 0 / ( 3 . 1 4 1 6 * PDI**2.0)
VWO=QAI J ) * 0 . 0 0 2 2 2 8 * 5 7 6 . 0 / ( 3 . 1 4 1 6 * P D O * * 2 . 0 )
3 6 E P ( J ) = ( Y H J ) + Y R ( J ) ) * ( SGM- I . ) / 12 . + ( VWO**2 . O-VW I * * 2 . 0 ) / 6 4 . 4
C=(QAiJ) - Q B ( J ) ! / Q A ( J )
WHP( J I = E P ( J ) * Q A( J ) * 0 . 0 0 2 2 2 8 * 6 2 . 4 * ( ( 1 . 0 - C ) *SGW + C * S G C ) / 5 5 0 . 0
3 6 5 I F ( NSHFT - 2) 3 7 , 3 8 , 3 9
37 T C R ( J ) = T ( J ) * 0 . 4 2 6 - 1 5 . 0
GO TO 40
38 T O R ( J ) = T ( J ) * 1 . 1 3 2 0 4 - 9 3 . 0
GO TO 40
39 T O R ( J ) = T ( J ) * 1 . 1 8 8 1 5 - 9 . 0
40 BHP(J)=TOR(J) * RPM( J) / 6 3 0 2 5 . 3 5
EFF(J)=WHP(J)/BHP(J) * 100.0
Z=NRPM
ZZ=ZZRPM( J )
Q ( J i = Q A ( J ) *ZZ
H (J) = EP (J) * ZZ**2.0
ABHP(J)=BHP(J) * ZZ**3 . O
80 PRI NT 1 9 , R P M ( J ) , Q A ( J ) , E P ( J ) , T O R ( J ) , W H P ( J ) , B H P ( J ) , E F F ( J ) , Q ( J ) , H ( J ) ,
I ABHP( J )
SURPM=O. OO
SUQA = 0 . 0 0
SUQB = 0 . 0 0
SUEP = 0 . 0 0
SUTOR=O. OO
SUWHP=O. OO
SUBHP=O. OO
SUEFF=O. OO
SUQ = 0 . 0 0
SUH = 0 . 0 0
SUABHP=O. 0 0
DO 91 J = I , NOBS
SU RPM=SURPM+RPM CJ I
SUQA =SUQA + QA( J )
SUQB =SUQB + Q B ( J )
SUEP =SUEP + E P ( J )
SUTOR=SUTOR+TOR( J )
SUWHP=SUWHP+WHP{J )
SUBHP=SUBHP+BHP( J I
S UE F F = S UE F F + E F F ( J )
SUQ =SUQ + Q ( J )
SUH =SUH + H ( J )
91 SUABHP=SUABHP+ABHP( J )
9 5 OBS = NOBS
RPMA = SURPM/ OBS
QAA = SUQA/ OBS
QBA = SUQB/ OBS
EPA = SUEP/ QBS
TORA = SUTORZGBS
-69WHPA = SUWHP/OBS
BHPA = SUBHP/ OBS
EFFA = S U E F F / 0 8 S
AQ = SUQ/ OBS
AH = SUH/ OBS
ABHPA=SUABHP/ OBS
CONC = ( QAA - QBA) /QAA * 1 0 0 . 0
PRI NT 1 8 , NCONC, CONC » RPMA »QAA »EPA »I ORA, WHPA *BHPA » E F F A, AQ, AH, ABHPA
PUNCH 1 8 , NCONC, CONC, RPMA, QAA, EP A, TORA, WHPA, BHPA, EF F A, AQ, AH, ABHPA
PRI NT 14
IF (NR) 5 5 , 2 3 , 2 2
55 CALL EXI T
END
APPENDIX B
INPDT AND OUTPDT DATA
The observed input data which was key-punched directly from the
Fortran data sheets is included herein for the Allis-Ohalmers pump with
the NSX open impeller, for the 1160 and I400 rpm runs.
The computed
results for these two runs is also included, as well as the 860 and
1600 rpm runs.
A list of the column headings is included for explana­
tory purposes.
All of the observed data which was collected during the
course of this study is on file in the Civil Engineering Department at
Montana State University.
The computed results for the other pumps
that were tested in addition to the Allis-Ohalmers pump are also on
file in the Civil Engineering Department.
. INPUT DATA
NQ|5 GON = The nominal concentration of the mixture.
NOM GPM = The nominal flow in gpm at which the run is made,
SHAFT NBR = The number of the torque shaft which was used,
INIT TORQ = The initial torque reading after zeroing.
RPM = The pump speed at which the reading was taken.
GPM MIX = The flow of the water-chip mixture in gpm/2,
GPM WATER = The flow of the clear water in gpm/2,
LT MAN = The left manometer reading in inches of deflection.
RT MAN = The right manometer reading in inches of deflection.
.TORQ = The torque reading in millivolts.
OUTPUT DATA
NOM OON = The same as for the input data.
-71AOT OON = The actual computed volumetric concentration of the mix.
KPM = The average pump speed for the test run.
Q GEM =S The average flow of the mixture for the test run.
TEST HEAB = The average head produced by the pump in feet.
TORQUE = The average torque input to the pump in inch-pounds.
EUMP HE =J The output horsepower or water horsepower.
BHP = The input or brake horsepower,
EFF = The overall efficiency of the pump.
The last three columns consist of the flow in gallons per minute,
the pump head in feet, and the brake horsepower adjusted to the nominal
pump speed.
-72TABLE B-I
ALLIS-CHALMERS
PUMP
4
X 4
SPEED
X 9 - 1 / 2 - IN T Y P E
1160
OBSERVED
NOM
CON
20
SHAFT
NBR
600
3
6 00
600
550
10
550
3
3
3
3
INIT
TORQ
RPM
RPM
DATA
GPM
MIX
GPM
WATER
LT
MAN
RT
MAN
TORQ
—4•
1164.
1163.
1164.
1163.
1165.
300.
300.
300.
300.
300.
300.
300.
300.
300.
300.
18.80
18.80
18.80
18.80
18.80
18.70
18.70
18.70
18.70
18.70
in
10
NOM
GPM
NSX
1162.
1161.
1161.
1162.
1162.
1161.
1161.
300.
299.
300.
300.
300.
300.
300.
271.
271.
271.
271.
271 .
271.
271.
19.00
19.00
18.90
19.00
18.90
18.90
18.90
18.90
18.90
18.80
18.90
18.80
18.80
18.80
526.
528.
529.
531.
530.
534.
532.
1156.
1155.
1156.
1156.
1156.
1156.
1158.
300.
300.
300.
302 .
302.
302.
302.
240.
239.
240.
240.
239.
239.
239.
18.90
19.00
18.90
18.90
18.90
18.90
18.90
18.80
18.90
18.80
18.80
18.80
18.80
18.90
554.
556.
554.
556.
555.
557.
560.
1157.
1157.
1156.
1157.
1157.
1156.
1157.
274.
275.
275.
274.
274.
274.
275.
275.
275.
274.
274.
274.
274.
274.
19.10
19.10
19.00
19.10
19.10
19.10
19.10
19.00
19.00
18.90
19.00
19.00
19.00
19.00
487.
488.
485.
487.
484.
485.
486.
1156.
1156.
1154.
275.
275.
275.
247.
247.
247.
19.20
19.10
19.10
19.10
19.00
19.00
498.
495.
493.
513.
512.
515.
512.
-4 •
—4 •
-2.
- 2.
—‘73“
TABLE ti-1 (C O N T I N U E D )
20
5 50
5 00
10
20
500
50 0
450
3
3
3
3
3
1154.
1154.
1153.
1154.
274.
274.
274.
275.
247.
247.
247.
247.
19.10
19.20
19.20
19.10
19.00
19.10
19.10
19.00
497.
496.
49 9 .
500.
1162.
1164.
1164.
1162.
1164.
1164.
1165.
275.
274.
275.
275.
274.
275.
275.
221 .
221.
22C .
220.
220.
220.
220.
19.70
19.70
19.70
19.70
19.60
19.70
19.70
19.60
19.60
19.60
19.60
19.50
19.60
19.60
523.
522.
521 .
528.
521.
523.
526.
1160.
1160.
1161.
1161.
1161.
1162 .
251.
250.
2 51 .
2 51 .
2 51 .
2 51 .
251
251
2 51
25 1
251
251
19.70
19.70
19.70
19.70
19.70
19.60
19.60
19.60
19.60
19.60
19.60
19.50
458.
460.
4 61.
458.
463.
458.
1159.
1158.
1159.
1158.
1159.
1159.
1158.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
19.70
19.70
19.80
19.80
19.80
19.80
19.70
19.60
19.60
19.70
19. 70
19.70
19.70
19.60
474.
473.
475.
476.
474.
472.
475.
1156.
1156.
1158.
1157.
1156.
1157.
1157.
249.
250.
250.
251.
250.
2 51 .
2 51 .
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
19.90
19.90
19.90
19.90
19.90
19.90
19.90
19.80
19.80
19.80
19.80
19.80
19.80
19.80
494.
495.
496.
493.
494.
498.
491 .
1155.
1155.
1156.
1154.
1154.
1 1 5 5.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
19.90
19.90
19.90
19.90
19.90
19.80
19.80
19.80
19.80
19.80
19.80
19.70
428.
429.
42 6«
427.
428.
426.
- 2.
0.
.
.
.
.
.
.
0.
0.
0.
-74—
TABLE B-I
IO
20
450
450
400
10
20
400
400
(CONTINUED)
1154.
225.
225.
19.90
19.80
426.
1151.
1151.
1153.
1152.
1152.
1152.
1152.
225.
224.
224.
223.
224.
224.
223.
202.
202.
202.
202.
201.
201 .
2 01 .
20.00
19.90
20.00
20.00
20.00
19.90
19.90
19.90
19.80
19.90
19.90
19.90
19.80
19.80
440.
440.
444.
442.
437.
438.
439.
1162.
1161.
1161.
1161.
1161.
1161.
1161.
226.
227.
227.
226.
227.
227.
227.
180.
180.
180.
180.
180.
180.
180.
20.40
20.50
20.40
20.40
20.40
20.40
20.40
20.30
20.40
20.30
20.30
20.30
20.30
20.30
467.
463.
462.
465.
465.
468.
464.
1159.
1161.
I 160.
1161.
1159.
1160.
1160.
200.
200.
200.
199.
199.
199.
199.
200.
200.
200.
199.
199.
199.
199.
20.40
20.30
20.30
20.40
20.30
20.30
20.25
20.30
20.20
20.30
20.30
20.20
20.20
20.35
395.
396.
395.
395.
397.
395.
394.
1158.
1158.
1157.
1157.
1158.
1155.
1156.
200.
199.
199.
199.
199.
199.
199.
180.
179.
179.
179.
179.
179.
179.
20.40
20.35
20.30
20.40
20.30
20.35
20.40
20.20
20.15
20.20
20.20
20.15
20.20
20.20
406.
408.
407.
403.
404.
405.
406 .
1154.
1154.
1155.
1154.
1153.
1154.
1154.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
160.
160.
160.
160.
160.
160.
160.
20.40
20.35
20.45
20. 35
20.50
20.45
20.40
20.30
20.20
20.30
20.25
20.35
20.30
20.25
42 3.
42 2 .
422.
424.
42 3.
424.
428.
3
3
3
3
3
0.
0.
0.
0.
-75TABLE
20
350
3 50
300
10
20
300
300
3
3
3
3
3
0.
1155.
1155.
1155.
1154.
1154.
1154.
1154.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
20.30
20.35
20.40
20.35
20.30
20.30
20.30
20.20
20.25
20.30
20.20
20.20
20.20
20.30
360
360
3 65
360
360
360
3 62
1161.
1161 .
1161.
1161.
1161.
1161 .
1161.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
176.
175.
158.
158.
158.
158.
158.
158.
158.
20.60
2 0.70
20.65
20.70
20.60
20.70
20.70
20.50
20.60
20.55
20.60
20.50
20.60
20.55
374
3 72
375
370
372
372
3 73
1158.
1157.
1158.
1156.
1158.
1157.
1157.
175.
175.
I 75.
175.
175.
175.
175.
141 .
141 .
140.
140.
141 .
141.
141 .
20.70
20.80
20.75
20.70
20.75
20.70
20.50
20.60
20.55
20.50
20.75
20.50
20.55
387
390
388
389
388
385
388
1162.
1163.
1162.
1163.
1163.
1162.
1164.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
20.80
20.60
20.70
20.60
20.60
20.90
20.70
20.50
20.50
20.60
20.60
20.60
20.40
20.30
310
312
309
308
311
308
308
1166.
1167.
1166.
1167.
1166.
1166.
1166.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
135.
135.
135.
135.
135.
135.
135.
21.10
21.10
21.10
21.10
21.20
21.00
21.10
20.80
21.00
20.90
21.00
20.90
21.00
21.10
3 18
3 20
3 19
3 18
319
322
3 20
1167.
150.
120.
21.40
21.00
3 32
0.
0.
VJI
10
3
(CONTINUED)
IXJ
O
350
B-I
-8 .
-8.
-8 .
— 7 6~
TABLE B-I
250
10
20
250
250
200
10
200
3
3
3
3
3
(CONTINUED)
1166.
1168.
1169.
1169.
1169.
1169.
150.
150.
151 .
150.
151 .
151 .
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
21.30
21.40
21.20
21.20
21.20
21.30
21.10
20.90
21.10
21.20
21.00
21.00
333.
338.
336.
336.
337.
337.
1158.
1159.
1157.
1159.
1159.
1158.
1159.
12 5.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
21.00
20.80
20.90
21.00
20.90
20.80
20.90
20.60
20.80
20.60
20.70
20.60
20.70
20.60
289.
288.
293 .
292.
29 2 .
291 .
290.
1157.
1157.
1157.
1158.
1158.
1159.
1159.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
112.
112.
112.
112.
112.
112.
112.
20.90
20.80
21,00
21.00
21.00
21.20
21.00
20.80
20.80
20.80
20.90
20.60
20.50
20.70
302.
299.
301 .
300.
302.
300.
303.
1157.
1157.
1157.
1157.
1157.
1156.
1156.
126.
125.
124.
125.
125.
12 5.
126.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
21.00
21.00
21.00
21.00
21.00
20.90
21.00
20.70
20.60
20.70
20.70
20.80
20.70
20.80
317.
312 .
314.
314.
316.
318.
316.
1165.
1163.
1164.
1165.
1164.
1164.
1165.
101 .
101 .
101 .
101 .
101 .
101 .
101.
101
101
101
101
101
101
101
21.30
21.40
21.30
21.30
21.30
21.30
21.40
21.20
21. 10
21.20
21.20
21.10
21.20
21.10
269.
265.
266.
269.
262 .
264.
264.
1162.
1162.
1163.
101 .
102 .
102.
21.50
21.30
21.40
21.20
21.10
21.20
275.
274.
273.
-8.
-8.
- 8.
- 8.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- 8.
91 .
91.
91.
-77TABLE
20
200
150
10 0
3
3
3
8-1
(CONTINUED)
1163.
1164.
1163.
1164 .
100.
100.
100.
100.
90.
90.
90.
90.
21.50
21.50
21.40
21.50
21.20
21.10
21.00
21.10
276.
275.
273.
274.
1160.
1160.
1160.
1161.
98.
100.
100.
99.
80.
81.
80.
80.
21.20
21.30
21.20
21.30
21.00
21.00
21.10
21.00
284.
286.
290.
287.
1167.
1168.
1167.
1166.
1167.
1167.
1167.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
21.50
21.60
21.70
21.60
21.70
21.70
21.70
21.50
21.60
21.70
21.40
21.60
21.60
21.50
226.
227.
1159.
1160.
1159.
1160.
1159.
1158.
1159.
52 .
52.
52 .
52.
52.
52.
52 .
52.
52.
52.
52.
52.
52.
52 .
21.60
21.50
21.50
21.50
21.60
21.60
21.60
21.30
21.40
21.30
21.50
21.50
21.40
21.60
196.
197.
198.
195.
194.
193.
197.
1160.
1166.
1167.
1167.
1168.
1168.
1168.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
23.50
2 3.50
2 3.50
23.20
2 3.40
2 3.40
23.70
23.40
23.40
23.30
23.20
23.20
23.30
23.00
150.
154«
158.
154.
152.
155.
157.
-8 .
- 8.
222 .
224.
222 .
226.
223.
-8.
— 7 8~
TABLE B-I I
ALLIS
CHALMERS
PUMP
4
X 4
SPEED
COMPUTED
NOM
CON
ACT
CON
RPM
X. 9 - 1 / 2 - I N
1160
TYPE
NSX
RPM
RESULTS
Q
GPM
TEST
HEAD
TORQ
PUMP
HP
BHP
Q
1160
EFF
HEAD
1160
BHP
1160
1163.
1161.
1156.
600.
599.
602.
39.21
39.51
39.47
605.5
625.4
656.3
5.94
5.99
6.01
11.18
11.52
12.04
53.1
51.9
49.9
598.
598.
604.
38.96
39.42
39.73
11.07
11.48
12.16
10
20
.0
10.0
19.8
1156.
1154.
1163.
548.
549.
549.
39.81
39.93
41.07
570.8
583.7
615.2
5.52
5.54
5.70
10.47
10.69
11.35
52.7
51.6
50.2
550. 4 0 .04
551 . 4 0 .32
547. 40.81
10.56
10.84
11.25
10
20
.0
10.0
20.0
1160.
1158.
1156.
501 . 4 1 . 0 6
500. 4 1 . 2 2
500. 4 1 . 5 1
537. I
554.3
578.4
5.20
5.21
5.25
9.89
10.19
10.61
52.6
51.1
49.5
501.
500.
501.
41.00
41.32
41.75
9.87
10.22
10.70
10
20
.0
9.9
20.6
1154. 450.
1151. 447.
1161 . 4 5 3 .
41.48
41.63
42.59
498.5
513.7
543.3
4.71
4.71
4.88
9.13
9.39
10.00
51.6
50.1
48.7
452.
450.
452.
41.87
42.22
42.51
9.25
9.59
9.98
10
20
.0
10.0
20.0
1160.
1157.
1154.
398.
398.
400.
42.44
42.40
42.55
460.6
472.8
494.4
4.27
4.26
4.30
8.47 50.4
8.68 49.1
9 .0 5 4 7 . 5
398.
399.
402.
42.44
42.62
43.00
8.47
8.74
9. 19
10
20
.0
9.7
19.5
1 1 5 4 . 350.
1161 . 3 5 0 .
1157. 350.
42.42
43.11
43.19
419.9
433.6
451.8
3.75
3.81
3.82
7.69
7.98
8.29
47.7
46.0
351 . 42.83
349. 43.03
350. 43.39
7.80
7.96
8.35
10
20
.0
10.0
20.2
1162.
1166.
1168.
300.
300.
300.
43.08
43.98
44.26
368.1
380.0
399.2
3.26
3.33
3.36
6.79
7.03
7.39
48.1
47.4
45.5
299.
298.
298.
42.88
43.51
43.65
6.74
6.91
7.24
.0
10
20
10.4
20.0
1158.
1157.
1156.
250.
250.
250.
43.46
43.62
43.61
345.9
358. I
375.1
2.74
2.75
2.76
6.35
6.57
6.88
43.1
41.9
40.0
250.
250.
250.
43.57
43.78
43.85
6.38
6.61
6.94
10
20
.0 1 1 6 4 .
10.2 1163.
19. I 1 1 6 0 .
202.
201.
198.
44.43
44.52
44.21
316.0
326.3
341.2
2.26
2.26
2.21
5.83
6.02
6.28
38.8
37.6
35.3
201.
200.
198.
44.10
44.29
44.19
5.77
5.97
6.27
1167.
1159.
1166.
150.
104.
I.
45.17
44.95
48.85
266.9
233.0
183.8
1.71
1.18
.01
4.94
4.28
3.40
34.6
27.5
.3
149.
104.
44.63
45.02
48.33
4.85
4.29
3.34
.0
.0
.0
Is*-
.0
9.6
20.4
CO
10
20
0.
-79TABLE B-III
A L L IS - C H A L M E R S
PUMP
4
X 4
SPEED
X 9-1/2-IN
1400
OBSERVED
NOM SHAFT
GPM NBR
600
10
20
600
600
10
550
3
3
3
3
RPM
DATA
LT
MAN
RT
MAN
TORQ
300.
301 .
300.
300.
300.
300.
300.
29.10
29.10
29.00
29.00
29.00
29.00
29.00
28.90
28.90
28.90
28.90
28.90
28.90
28.90
663.
6 64.
659.
660 .
659.
658.
661 .
299.
298.
299.
298.
299.
299.
299.
271.
271.
271.
2 70.
271 .
271.
271.
28.90
28.90
28.90
28.80
28.80
28.80
28.80
28.80
28.80
28.80
28.60
28.70
28.70
28.70
668 •
666 .
670.
666 •
665.
66 7.
668.
1396.
1396.
1395.
1393.
1395.
1396.
1395.
300.
300.
299.
299.
298.
299.
299.
240.
240.
240.
240.
240.
240.
240.
29.20
29.20
29.20
29.20
29.20
29.30
29.30
29.00
29.00
29.00
29.00
29.10
29.10
696.
694.
693.
691.
696.
692.
693.
1398.
1400.
1399.
1398.
1401.
1399.
1399.
275.
275.
275.
275.
275.
275.
276.
275.
275.
275.
275.
275.
275.
274.
29.40
29.50
29.40
29.40
29.50
29.50
29.50
29.20
29.40
29.30
29.20
29.30
29.30
29.30
626.
625.
628.
627.
630.
628.
629.
1394.
276.
247.
29.50
29.30
644.
RPM
GPM
MI X
1405.
1403.
1401.
1402.
1401.
1400.
1401 .
300.
300.
300.
300.
300.
298.
299.
1391 .
1389.
1390.
1390.
1388.
1389.
1390.
GPM
WATER
8.
8.
8.
O
O
550
3
INIT
TORQ
NSX
O'
rsj
NOM
CON
TYPE
8.
8.
- 80™
TABLE B--III
20
5 50
500
10
20
500
500
450
3
(CONTINUED)
1392.
1393.
1394.
1394.
1395.
1395.
276.
275.
274.
275.
276.
275.
247.
247.
247.
247.
247.
247.
29.50
29.40
29.50
29.50
29.40
2 9.50
29.30
29.20
29.30
29.30
29.20
29.20
640 .
640 .
6 43 .
640.
645.
639.
1405.
1408.
1407.
1407.
1407.
1405.
1405.
276.
275.
275.
275.
275.
274.
274.
220.
220.
220.
220.
220.
220.
220.
30.10
30.10
30.10
30.10
30.10
30.10
30.10
30.00
29.90
29.90
29.90
29.90
29.90
29.90
673.
672.
668 .
1409.
1410.
1410.
1411.
1409.
1409.
1410.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
250.
30.20
30.20
30.20
30.20
30.20
30.30
30.30
30.10
30. 10
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.10
30.10
592.
595.
5 92 .
596.
598.
587.
586.
1404.
1402 .
1403.
1405.
1402.
1403.
1403.
250.
249.
250.
250.
250.
2 51 .
251.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
225.
30.10
30.20
30.20
30.20
30.20
30.20
30.10
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
29.90
29.90
608.
603.
607.
608.
604.
607.
606.
1397.
1395.
1397.
1396.
1396.
1396.
1397.
250.
252.
252.
250.
250.
248.
250.
2 00.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.10
30.00
30.10
30.00
29.80
29.80
29.90
29.90
29.80
29.90
29.80
620.
6 21 .
623.
627.
622.
627.
630.
1395.
1397.
1396.
226.
226.
226.
226.
226.
226.
30. 10
30.00
30.00
29.80
29.80
29.80
546.
548.
547.
8.
3
668 •
670.
66 7.
672.
8.
3
3
3
8.
8.
8.
-81TABLE B-III
10
20
450
450
400
10
20
400
400
3
3
3
3
3
(CONTINUED)
1396.
1397.
1397.
1396.
226.
226.
226.
226.
226.
226.
226.
226.
30.00
30.10
30.00
30.00
29.80
29.90
29.80
29.80
550.
549.
548.
549.
1393.
1394.
1395.
1393.
1394.
1395.
1395.
225.
225.
226.
225.
226.
226.
227.
202.
202.
202 .
202.
202 .
202.
202.
30.00
30.10
30.00
30.30
30.00
30.10
30.00
29.70
29.80
29.80
29.70
29.70
29.80
29.70
568.
567.
569.
572.
569.
569.
570.
1393.
1392.
1390.
1391.
1392.
1392.
1392.
225.
225.
225.
225.
224.
224.
225.
180.
180.
180.
180.
180.
180.
180.
30.00
30.00
30.10
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
29.80
29.80
29.80
29.80
29.80
29.80
29.80
588.
587.
589.
591.
589.
590.
590.
1388.
1389.
1390.
1390.
1389.
1390.
1390.
200.
200.
200.
200.
199.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
2 9.80
29.80
2 9.90
29.90
30.00
30.00
30.00
29.60
29.60
29.60
29.60
29.70
29.70
29.70
512.
514.
516.
513.
516.
513.
514.
1388.
1385.
1386.
1387.
1387.
1388.
1387.
200.
202.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
180.
180.
180.
180.
180.
180.
180.
30.00
30.10
30.10
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
29.70
29.80
29.80
29.80
29.80
29.80
29.80
530.
532.
531.
529.
534.
534.
536.
1407.
1407.
1407.
1407.
1406.
200.
200.
200.
200.
200.
160.
160.
160.
160.
160.
31
31
31
31
31
30.80
30.70
30.80
30.80
30.70
558.
558.
557.
562.
560.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
— 82 “
TABLE B--I I I !CONTINUED)
350
10
20
350
3 50
300
10
300
3
3
3
3
3
1407.
1407.
200.
200.
160.
160.
31.00
31.00
30.70
30.70
559.
561 .
1405.
1404.
1403.
1403.
1403.
1404.
1403.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
30.70
30.70
30.70
30.70
30.70
30.70
30.70
30.50
30.50
30.40
30.40
30.40
30.50
30.50
478.
477.
477.
478.
480.
4 82 .
479.
1400.
1401 .
1400.
1398.
1400.
1398.
1399.
175.
175.
175.
175.
174.
174.
175.
158.
158.
158.
158.
158.
158.
158.
30.70
30.70
30.70
30.60
30.70
30.60
30.70
30.50
30.50
30.40
30.30
30.40
30.40
30.40
495.
492 .
491.
486.
4 93 .
490.
493.
1393.
1394.
1393.
1395.
1394.
13 96.
1393.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
175.
174.
140.
140.
140.
139.
140.
140.
140.
30.50
30.50
30.50
30.50
30.50
30.60
30.50
30.20
30.20
30.20
30.20
30.20
30.30
30.20
512.
508.
514.
510.
509.
507.
507.
1408.
1408.
1407.
1409.
1407.
1407.
1408.
150.
150.
152 .
151 .
150.
150.
151.
150.
150.
150.
150.
150.
I 50.
150.
31.10
31.10
31.10
31.10
31.10
31.20
31.10
31.00
31.00
31.00
31.00
31.00
31.10
31.00
445.
447.
448.
446.
446.
442.
444.
1405.
1405.
1408.
1406.
1406.
1408.
1407.
150.
150.
149.
150.
150.
148.
150.
136.
136.
136.
136.
136.
136.
136.
31.10
31.30
31.20
31.20
31.20
31.20
31.20
30.90
31.00
31.00
30.90
31.00
31.00
31.00
460.
457.
459.
461 .
4 60 •
458.
456.
8.
8.
8.
14.
14.
— 83TABLE B-III
20
300
250
10
20
250
250
200
3
3
3
3
3
!CONTINUED)
14.
14 15.
1414.
1414.
1414.
1413.
1412.
1412.
150.
150.
149.
148.
150.
148.
148.
120.
120.
118.
118.
120.
120.
120.
31.40
31.40
31.50
31.40
31.40
31.30
31.40
31.00
31.00
31.10
31.00
31.00
30.90
30.90
482
483
483
486
4 82
483
486
1397.
1396.
1398.
1396.
1395.
1397.
1397.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
126.
126.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
30.90
30.60
30.80
30.60
30.70
30.70
30.70
30.50
30.40
30.30
30.10
30.20
30.30
30.40
408
408
4 11
407
408
4 13
412
1392.
13 94.
1392 .
1393.
1393.
1392.
1393.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
125.
112.
112.
113.
112.
112.
112.
112.
30.60
30.90
30.80
30.80
30.70
30.60
30.80
30.40
30.30
30.20
30.40
30.20
30.30
30.40
425
426
428
426
427
426
428
1391.
1392.
1392.
1391.
1392.
1392.
1393.
125.
124.
124.
123.
123.
124.
124.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
31.50
31.50
31.60
31.40
31.50
31.40
31.50
31.00
30.90
30.90
30.90
30.80
31.00
31.00
410.
407.
414.
419.
418.
413.
412.
1400.
1401.
1400.
1402.
1400.
1400.
1400.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
31.30
31.60
31.50
31.40
31.30
31.20
31.30
30.80
30.90
31.00
30.90
31.00
30.80
30.90
370.
371.
367.
374.
367.
368.
365.
14.
14.
—6 .
14.
-84TABLE B-III
10
2 00
200
150
100
■
6
(CONTINUED)
•
1401 .
1402.
1401 .
1401 .
1401 .
1401 .
1402.
102.
102.
102.
102.
102 .
102 .
102.
90.
90.
90.
90.
90.
90.
90.
32.30
32.30
32.20
32.30
32.30
32.30
32.20
31.50
31.60
31.50
31.60
31.50
31.50
31.50
3 62
3 63
3 64
361
3 63
360
361
1397.
1397.
1398.
1399.
1399.
1399.
1398.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
100.
80.
80.
80.
80.
60.
80.
80.
32.00
32.00
32.00
32.00
32.00
32.10
32.10
31.40
31.40
31.30
31.40
31.30
31.40
31.30
380
378
375
378
377
382
380
1408.
1408.
1411.
1410.
1414.
1413.
1412.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75 .
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
75.
31.90
32.00
32.00
32.20
32.20
32.00
32.00
31.40
31.30
31.80
31.60
31.90
31.80
31.00
3 39
336
340
33 9
342
3 43
340
1392 .
1381 .
1386.
1387.
1384.
1384.
1385.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
50.
31.00
31.00
31.00
31.00
31.10
31.00
31.20
30.70
30.70
30.80
30.80
30.90
30.80
31.00
297
290
293
297
299
300
294
I•
I.
33.50
33.40
33.20
33.00
33.00
33.40
33.30
33.50
33.20
33.30
33.50
33.30
33.10
33.20
254
247
248
246
238
242
251
■6 .
14,
14.
14.
1398.
1393.
1387.
1384.
1392.
1390.
1390.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
I.
— 85"
TABLE B-IV
ALLIS CH ALM ER S
4 X 4 X 9-1/2-IN TYPE NSX
PUMP SPEED
1400 RPM
CO MPUTED RESULTS
Q
1400
HEAD
1400
BHP
1400
Q
GPM
TEST
HEAD
TORQ
PUMP
HP
BHP
10
20
-.1 1 4 0 1 .
9.3 1389.
19. 7 1 3 9 5 .
599.
597.
598.
60.58
60.21
60.92
766.3
774. I
805.5
9.17
9.09
9.21
17.04
17.06
17.83
53.8
53.2
51.6
598. 60.42
601 . 61.11
600. 61.35
16.97
17.45
18.01
10
20
. I 1399.
10.2 1393.
19.9 1406.
550.
550.
549.
61.43
61.42
62.76
727.1
743.7
777.5
8.54
8.54
8. 72
16.14
16.44
17.34
52.9
51.9
50.2
550.
552.
547.
61.51
61.96
62.20
16.17
16.66
17.11
10
20
.0
10.0
20.0
1409.
1403.
1396.
500.
500.
500.
63.04
62.89
62.61
685.2
701.6
723.2
7.96
7.95
7.92
15.32
15.62
16.02
51.9
50.9
49.4
496. 62.18
499. 62.61
501 . 62.94
15.01
15.51
16.15
10
20
.0
10.5
19.8
1396.
1394.
1391.
452.
451.
449.
62.58
62.51
62.55
632.7
657.7
681.4
7.15
7.13
7.10
14. 0 1
14.54
15.04
51.0
49.0
47.2
453.
453.
452.
62.91
63.03
63.30
14.13
14.73
15.31
10
20
.0 1 3 8 9 .
10. I 1 3 8 6 .
20.0 1406.
399.
400.
400.
62.28
62.55
64.57
592.2
613.9
646.0
6.29
6.33
6. 53
13.05
13.50
14.42
48.2
46.8
45.2
402.
404.
398.
63.23
63.74
63.94
13.35
13.89
14.21
10
20
.0
9.5
20.0
1403.
1399.
1394.
350.
349.
349.
63.96
63.88
63.51
550.2
565.3
586.9
5.65
5.64
5.61
12.25
12.55
12.98
46.1
44.9
43.2
349.
349.
351.
63.63
63.93
64.05
12.16
12.56
13.15
10
20
.3
9.0
19.8
1407.
1406.
1413.
301.
299.
298.
64.97
65.02
65.24
503.6
519.3
548.9
4.94
4.91
4.91
11.24
11.59
12 . 3 1
43.9
42.4
39.9
299.
297.
295.
64.26
64.42
64.01
11.06
11.43
11.96
10
20
.2
10.2
19.2
1396. 250.
1392 . 250.
1391 . 2 4 7 .
63.82
63.85
65.27
460.9
481.1
489.1
4.04
4.0 3
4.08
10 . 2 1
10.63
10.80
39.5
37.9
37.8
251.
251.
249.
64.13
64.52
66.04
10.29
10.80
10.99
10
20
.0
11.7
20.0
1400.
1401.
1398.
200.
204.
200.
65.12
66.72
66.29
412.6
428.2
447.9
3.29
3.44
3.3 5
9.16
9.52
9.93
35.9
36.1
33.7
199.
203.
200.
65.08
66.60
66.46
9.16
9.49
9.97
.0
.0
.0
1410.
1385.
1390.
150.
100.
I.
66.50
64.69
69.60
378.1
325.7
267.3
2.52
1.63
.01
8.46
7.16
5.89
29.7
22.8
.2
148.
101.
I.
65.48
66.04
70.55
8.27
7.38
6.01
NOM
CON
ACT
CON
RPM
EFF
"86TABLE B-V
ALLIS CH ALM ER S 4 X 4 X 9-1/2-IN
PUMP SPEED
TYPE NSX
860 RPM
COMPUT ED RESULTS
NOM
CON
A CT
CON
RPM
Q
GPM
TEST
HEAD
TORQ
PUMP
HP
BHP
EFF
Q
860
HEAD
8 60
BHP
860
10
20
.0
10.0
20.0
856.
861.
866.
400.
400.
400.
21.64
22.05
22.44
296.9
311.2
329.3
2.18
2.23
2.27
4.03
4.25
4.52
54.2
52.4
50.1
401.
399.
397.
21.81
21.97
22.13
4.08
4.23
4.43
10
20
.0
6.8
20.0
858.
864.
858.
350.
350.
350.
22.28
22.75
22.55
2 72.8
286.5
299.0
1.97
2.01
1.99
3.71
3.93
4.07
53.0
51.2
48.9
350.
348.
350.
22.39
22.52
22.61
3.74
3.86
4.09
10
20
.0
9.3
20.0
858.
865.
861.
300.
300.
300.
22.89
23.21
23.04
246.7
256.8
265.1
1.73
1.76
1.74
3.36
3.52
3.62
51.6
49.9
48.2
300.
298.
299.
22.95
22.91
22.99
3.37
3.45
3.60
10
20
.0
10.4
20.0
854.
863.
858.
250.
250.
250.
22.92
23.41
23.25
216.7
226.2
235.7
1.44
1.47
1.47
2.93
3.09
3.21
49.2
47.7
45.7
251.
249.
250.
23.21
23.23
23.32
2.99
3.06
3.22
10
20
.0
10.0
20.0
862.
861.
857.
200.
200.
200.
23.58
23.58
23.24
190.9
197.7
208.1
1.19
1.19
1.17
2.61
2.70
2.83
45.6
44.1
41.5
199.
199.
200.
23.46
23.51
23.39
2.59
2.69
2.85
.0
857.
150.
23.72
165.0
. 89
2.24
40.0
150.
23.85
2.26
.0
865.
100.
24.98
142.1
.63
1.95
32.3
99.
24.68
1.91
.0
654.
50.
24.96
113.0
.31
1.53
20.5
5 0.
25.30
1.56
.0
859.
2.
26.43
94.9
.01
1.29
1.0
2.
26.46
1.29
-87TABLE B -V I
ALLIS CH ALM ER S 4 X 4 X 9-1/2-IN TYPE NSX
PUMP SPEED
1600 RPM
COMPUTED RESULTS
NOM
CON
ACT
CON
RPM
Q
GPM
TEST
HEAD
TORQ
PUMP
HP
BHP
397.
400.
81.99
82.35
672.7
708.9
8.22
8.33
17.04
17.94
48.2
46.4
EFF
Q
1600
HEAD
1600
BHP
1600
397.
401.
82.35
82.82
17.15
18.09
10
.0
10.2
10
.0
9.6
1602 . 298.
1587. 299.
84.39
82.38
577.3
604.9
6.35
6.22
14.68
15.23
43.3
40.8
297.
301.
84.10
83.68
14.60
15.60
.0
1602 . 252.
85. 18
523.8
5.42
13.31
40.7
251.
84.94
13.26
.0
1611 . 2 0 0 .
87.66
476.9
4.43
12.19
36.3
198.
86.42
11.93
.0
1596.
152.
86. 75
424.6
3.33
10.75
30.9
152.
87.10
10.82
.0
1606.
100.
89.02
3 80.4
2.25
9.69
23.2
99.
88.36
9.58
.0
1589.
2.
91.14
281.2
. 04
7.09
.6
2.
92.38
7.23
1596.
1595.
APPENDIX C
PHMP PERFORMANCE DATA
The computed results for performance tests run on the FairbanksMorse pump at 1200 rpm and the Hazelton 5-inch GTL at 100 rpm appear
in this section.
These results are in the form of calculated numerical
results (Tables G-I and G-II) and pump performance curves (Figs. 19 and
20), . The column headings notations for the tables are the same as in
Appendix B 6
V
-89TABLE C-I
FAIRBANKS MORSE
3-IN 5422 9-3/4
PUMP SPEED
IMP T3BI
1200 RPM
COMPUTED RESULTS
NOM
CON
ACT
CON
RPM
Q
GPM
TEST
HEAD
TORQ
PUMP
HP
BHP
EFF
400.
400.
400.
Q
1200
HEAD
1200
BHP
1200
10
20
.0
10.0
20.0
1196.
1195.
1209.
26.51
26. 14
25.88
205.4
208.1
215.5
2.68
2.64
2.61
3.90
3.94
4.13
68.7
66.9
63.2
401 . 26.65
401 . 26.35
396. 2 5 . 4 6
3.93
3.99
4.03
10
20
.0
9.7
20.2
1201 . 350. 3 0 . 6 9
1197. 350. 3 0 . 1 7
1 1 9 6 . 351 . 2 9 . 1 2
198.6
200.1
202.1
2.71
2.66
2.58
3.78
3.80
3.83
71.7
70.2
67.3
349. 30.64
350. 30.2 8
3 51 . 2 9 . 2 8
3.77
3.82
3.87
10
20
.0
9.3
20.0
1198. 300.
1197. 300.
1201 . 3 0 0 .
34.30
33.70
32.96
186.4
190.0
192.0
2.60
2.55
2.50
3.54
3.61
3.66
73.3
70.8
68.3
300.
300.
299.
34.41
33.84
32.90
3.56
3.63
3.64
10
20
.0
10.4
20.0
1200.
1199.
1197.
250.
250.
250.
37.54
37.04
36.2 6
171.5
173.3
177.2
2.37
2.34
2.29
3.26
3.29
3.36
72.5
70.9
68.0
249.
250.
250.
3 7.49
37.07
36.43
3.26
3.30
3.39
10
.0
10.0
1199.
1198.
200.
200.
39.68
39.37
151.6
151.9
2.00
1.99
2.88
2.88
69.4
68.9
200.
200.
39.72
39.50
2.89
2.90
.0
1 2 0 2 . 100.
43.4 5
109.8
1.09
2.09
52.4
9 9.
43.30
2.08
.0
1192.
49.54
76.8
.10
1.45
6.8
8 . 50.17
1.48
8.
QfJo Cone.
IQfJo Cone,
ZQfJ0 Cone.
E f f ic i e n c y in Per cen t
°
A
o
D isch arge in GPM
F ig u re 19 — T est Pump Performance Curve fo r
Fairbanks-M orse 3 - inch Pump a t 1200 RPM
—91—
TABLE C-I I
HA ZEL !O N
5-INCH CTL
PUMP SPEED
IOOO
PUMP
RPM
CO MPUTED RESULTS
NOM
CON
ACT
CON
RPM
BHP
1000
TORQ
BHP
652. 4 2 . 9 0
65 2 . 4 2 . 0 4
650. 4 0 . 9 7
691.7
693.1
704. I
7.07
6.93
6.73
11.00
10.99
11.16
64.2
63.0
60.3
650. 42.69
652 . 4 2 .04
650. 41.02
10.92
10.99
11.18
TEST
HEAD
EFF
Q
1000
HEAD
1000
PUMP
HP
Q
GPM
10
20
.0
10.4
20.3
1002.
1000.
999.
10
20
.0
10.6
53.0
1002 . 600.
998. 604.
996. 602.
47.18
45.64
44.34
662.7
665.8
672.7
7.15
6.96
6. 76
10.53
10.54
10.63
67.9
66.1
63.5
598. 4 6 . 9 9
605. 45.82
604 . 44.66
10.47
10.60
10.75
10
20
.0
10.1
20.3
1 0 0 0 . 550.
1 0 0 1 . 550.
1000. 553.
47.73
46.93
47.27
644.7
649.7
659.2
6.63
6.52
6.61
10.23
10.31
10.46
64.8
63.2
63.1
549.
549.
552.
47.67
46.84
47.19
10.21
10.28
10.44
10
20
.0
10.0
20.1
997.
1001.
999.
500.
500.
496.
51.03
50.76
50.17
603.6
625.2
637.3
6.45
6.41
6.30
9.55
9.93
10.10
67.5
64.6
62.3
501.
499.
496.
51.32
50.66
50.21
9.63
9.90
10.12
10
20
.0
10.2
20.0
1002.
1001.
997.
452.
450.
452.
53.69
52.94
51.78
586.7
597.6
606.2
6.13
6.02
5.93
9.33
9.49
9.59
65.7
63.4
61.7
451.
449.
453.
53.45
52.81
52.01
9.26
9.46
9.66
10
20
.0
10.0
20.1
999. 400.
997. 400.
1000 . 396.
55.09
54.15
54. 19
554.6
564.4
581.5
5.57
5.47
5.43
8.79
8.93
9.23
63.3
61.2
58.9
400.
400.
396.
55.18
54.39
54.15
8.81
8.99
9.21
10
20
.0
9.9
19.8
1003 . 350.
1002. 350.
998. 348.
57.03
56.26
55.03
527.3
542.5
557.0
5.04
4.99
4.84
8.39
8.63
8.82
60.0
57.8
54.9
348.
349.
348.
56.60
55.95
55.16
8.30
8.56
8.85
10
20
.0
10.0
19.7
1003.
1000.
997.
300.
301.
297.
57.87
56.97
56.34
491.4
502.6
515.2
4.38
4.33
4.23
7.82
7.97
8.15
56.0
54.3
51.9
298. 57.46
301 . 56.90
298. 56.68
7.74
7.96
8.22
10
20
.0
10.6
19.8
1000.
998.
999.
250.
252.
248.
58.65
57.52
57.52
464.8
477.1
498.1
3.70
3.67
3.61
7.37
7.55
7.90
50.2
48.6
45.7
250.
253.
248.
58.65
57.72
57.54
7.37
7.59
7.90
-92TABLE C-I I (CONTINUED)
.3
9.4
996.
995.
2 01 . 5 9 . 1 5
198. 5 8 . 4 2
427.5
436.7
3.00
2.93
6.77
6.89
44.4
42.5
201.
199.
59.36
58.98
6.80
6.99
.0
997.
150.
59.59
399.9
2.26
6.33
35.7
150.
59.85
6.37
.0
1001 .
9 9.
60.97
369.0
1.52
5.86
26.0
99.
60.77
5.83
.0
1002 .
4 6.
63.87
347.2
. 77
5.52
14.0
47.
63.62
5.48
.0
1002.
I.
69.12
3 3 3.9
.01
5.31
.3
0.
68.77
5.27
-
93
-
JaMOdasJOH a^BJH
o
o o o
<]
□
D isch arge in GPM
O
q.uao jad ut XouaTOTjja pra q.aaj ut p'ean
F igu re 20 — T est Pump Perform ance Curve
fo r H azelton 5 - in ch CTL a t 1000 RPM
-
o
A
a
94
-
CfJ0 Cone.
10$ Cone,
20$ Cone.
Brake Horsepower
A ll p o in ts were w ith in
1$ o f each o th er —.
10 -
D isch arge in GPM
F igu re 21 — T est Pump Performance Curve
fo r A llis-C h a lm e r s NSX a t 860 RPM
-
-
90
20
15
o
A
Qfj0 Cone.
10$ Cone.
10
5
D isch arge in GPM
F igu re 22 - - T est Pump Performance Curve
fo r A llis-C h a lm e r s NSX a t 1600 RPM
Brake Horsepower
—
95
-
96
-
CURVE E -7301
VAE. RPM
,C
TYPE NSX
MAX. DIA.
MIN. DIA.
F 7 - M 2 FRAME
T o ta l Head in F eet
- E f f ic i e n c y Curves
100 - U. S. G a llo n s per Minute
F igu re 23
A llis-C h a lm e r s Pump Perform ance Curve
APPENDIX D
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS
The details of the statistical analysis (mentioned in Chapter V)
used to insure enough observations at each point so that the values
would lie within + 0.2 per cent of the real value are presented in
this section.
A 95 per cent confidence interval was selected and the
analysis was based on a "t" distribution wherin x - u
i— —I s || n
distribution with n - I degrees of freedom [loj.
follows the "t"
Therefore the probability P equals:
P —
L
Then
<u < x
+
f*
<X/2 =
Io c a j
fn,’
S
= I - oc =
.95
0.025, since o< = 0.05
x + s t i025,n-1
frT
-S
% 0 25,
= u = 0.4
the
selected
limit
Then 2 |^l_t .025,n-fJ = 0.4
or
4 _ t .025,n-1
(n
Then
= 0.2
f T = 0_t.o25,n-1
Two initial runs at 1150 and 1400 rpm were made and data collected
from four observations at each flowrate.
The computed results for the
two runs were analyzed for an estimate of the standard deviation to use
for a determination of "n".
Engineering Department.
The data referred to is on file in the Civil
Values for s =
negligible value up to 0.26.
, / (x - 3t)2
varied from a
A value of s = 0.22 was selected as an
-98estimate of the standard deviation.
Reference was then made to a table
of "t" values plQ~] and using s = 0.22/ a value of n = 7 was arrived at
by trial and error.
V5"= £ _
t.025,n-1
where t #02^ 6 = 2.447
0.2
Then '
■\FT= 2.65
^
2.66 = (0.22/0.2) (2.447)
As computed results were printed out for each observation and the
average for a series of observations, the confidence interval was check­
ed periodically.
The testing was completed using seven observations and
most of the values which were checked fit within the limits which were
selected.
- All of the data used for this analysis is on file in the Civil
Engineering Department of Montana State University.
N379
Pl1O
cop. 2
Page, K. L.
The effect of chip-shaped
NAM t A^p Afeowitaii
r\i >■ ; > v : ( (gj -uSX)
Ib I?— b t
IilN 2 4
fig
2 W E E K S USE
% % /VT
XT- 7 U
H rnERURHARY.
m m u e m A R
INTERL'
-3
A.6
wrrem.^'
/V ^
3 7
riv a
<=op. 2
r