J
ELaag9 .,2 3
I `'TE 'AL LETTE R
NORTH AMMAN AVIATON INC.
TO H . V . Wright
AD DRESS 096-213
(ON . Dept ., o- a,
Rocketdyne, SanSu
Location)
Q1
V
FL11-4..4690
DATE
FROM
J . D . Dunn
ADORM 096-21 1
Rocketdyne, SanSu
&
PHONE
SUBJECT
20 October 1964
5107
Optimum Anti-Vortex Baffle Configuration and Lowest Usag e
Level Allowable for YT3-2 and VTS-3 After Dip Tube Remova l
References : (1) IL J-2E-4-1023, dated 14 October 1964, to E . G . Spencer,
from H . W . Wright , Subjeet : Yortexing Difficulties,
Test Stands VTS-2 and VTS-3, Bowl Area .
(2) IL J2-EB-4-232 , dated 13 October 1964, to H . Weiss,
from E . E . Erickson, Subject : Safe Fuel Tank Low Level
Cut-Off After Dip Tube Removal, VTS-2 and VTS-3 .
lZ'1',RIBUTI ON
24
V . Nichol
S. Cal l
R . Roberts
19. Erickson
A . Kern
V . Watson
2 . #iarmon
' . Wiegan d
096-200
L Rutmacher
a. Weis s
6 ',1 t
11.. Fento n
1. Spence r
1,e FL1 I
In reply to your request for the optimum anti-vortex baffle
configuration and the lowest usage level allowable, the
fallowing information is forwarded :
Determination of the optimum anti-vortex baffle configuration
for VTS-2 and VTS-3 would require extensive experimental
investigation and the shortage of time does not permit testing .
To expedite a solution to the problem, a survey of available
literature on anti-vortex devices was conducted and outlide
help was sought from Douglas Aircraft . Mr. R . Overman of
Douglas Aircraft stated that analysis of their anti-vortex
devices was heavily dependent upon emperical data and did
not believe that any of their anti-vortex devices were
directly applicable to the VTS-2 and VTS-3 problem .
Approximately two years ago, scale model tests were conducted
at PFL on various anti-vortex devices . Of the devic tested,
the most effective was the largest horizonal circular flat
plate consistant with allowable flow area and pressure drop
that can be mounted in a vessel .
Based on PFL tests and other information avialable, the antivortex baffle configuration presented in Figure 2 is recommended
for the VTS-2 modification. Although less efficient tha n
the configuration presented in Figure 2, the configuration
presented in Figure 3 is recommended for VTS-3 modification
because the dip tube has already been removed up to the
vessels bulkhead .
FORM 131-R-I NEW 1-63
I
LI I I
BNA00583967
HDMSpO1756505
IL TO :
FBs
SUBJECT :
4
Optimum Anti ..Yortex Baffle Configuration
and . Lowest Usage Level Allowable for VTS-2
and VTS.*3 After Dip Tube Removal
?L11-4-46 b
20 Cctober 194
Page 2
Based on SSFL' s experience , it was concluded that a realistic
incipient vortexing liquid level Jis 3 feet above the anti-vortex
baffle for the configuration presented in Figure 2, (and 4 feet
above the anti-vortex baffle for the configuration in Figure 3 .
When taking into consideration the ten second run time mentione d
in Reference 2, and possible variations in liquid saturation pressures
(saturation pressures from 15 psia to 45 psia), the lowest usag e
of the tunne would be approximately 30 inches,
with Mr . J . Boyd, D/210 .
but should be checke d
For less conventional anti-vortex baffle configurations such as
the one shown in Figure 1 (this configuration was suggested by
E . Erickson, D/213 in Reference (2)), testing would be required
before a safe low cut-off point can be established .
D. Dunn
Test Systems Uni t
Analysis and Equipdent Sectio n
JDD .ji
IBNA00583968
I I LII
I
I
HDMSpO1756506
477-ACA.' ? 4
-c> 74
FG //- 4~ ~a
RC?CKll-
PREPARED BY :
PAGE NO . '
A DIVISION CC NC-RTLJ nMER CLN 6 aT .QA.
1SC// M.9T/C OF p,eo/ 2S~D AN T%- vae7FX
BAIIC- LE s
CHECKED BY :
©C7
/2
.N C
OF
REPORT NO .
/9441
DATE:
MODEL NO .
/5GIk TR/C V/Flit/
4F /'A?h l/D.PTEX E4FFLE
PE'OP©5 EL7 /rV .P£FE.~ENG E . (A)
rI /J.eE4. . ~1/GC',sS 7-4'. rLa4T
GU/DE` A /i~fi9Ai 5iWEV 7'
2 ------>- i
FLAAT (,U/lE-
Alc z s FD.2
f'LGb4r GU/06
/GU?E c' . C/C Y1LA~ FLAT
!PLATE A.NTJ-,/OR7 X BAFFLE
R CO~Yi L7fND D / d ' l/TS
F/61/KC'E 3? C/A?CUL ASP FLAT
PLATL' ANT/-V/QIeTEX SArFGE
A-Z-tf:,0ZKA69E,VD 27 FOR !/' 7S - ,3
LII I
BNA00583969
HDMSp01756507