You are on page 1of 86

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers

Licensed by Information Handling Services


ASME P T C * L 9 * 2 3 8 0 W 0759670 0052304 L W

Guidance Manual
PART 23
II INSTRUMENTS

AND
for Model Testing
-
I APPARATUS
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23 1980

THEAMERICANSOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS


UnitedEngineeringCenter
345 East 47th Street New York,
N.Y. 10017

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
I

ASME P T C * L 7 - 2 3 8 0
~ m 0757b70 0052305 3 m

No part of this document may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic


retrieval systemor otherwise, without the prior written permission of the
publisher.

Date of Issuance: April 15,1980

Copyright 01980
THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS
All Rights Reserved
Printed in U.S.A.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME PTC*KL9*23 B O M 0757670 0 0 5 2 3 0 6 5 M

FOREWORD

In 1971 the PTC Supervisory Committee, then called the PTC Standing Committee, recognized
that the high cost of prototypetesting had resulted in increased interest in the use of models to
confirm or extend performance data. The Supervisory Committee suggested that a group of
specialists in severalareas of Model Testing undertake to study the larger aspects and implica-
tions of Model Testing.The result of this suggestion was the formation in March 1972of
PTC 37 on Model Testing. The Committee was later designated PTC 19.23.
This Committee was charged with the responsibility of surveying the varied fields of PTC
activity in which the techniques, opportunities for, and the limitations of, Model Testing may
be useful. The initial concept was to develop a Performance Test Code. After further delibera-
tions, it wasagreed, with the permission of the PTC Supervisory Committee, based upon the
complexities of the subject matter and the uniqueness of its application, to prepare an Instru-
mentsandApparatus Supplement on Code Applications of Model Experiments,(Guidance
Manual for Model Testing). This document was submitted onvariousoccasions to the PTC
Supervisory Committee and interested parties for review and comment. Comments received as a
result of this review were duly noted and many of them were incorporated in the document.
This I & A Supplement represents the first effort to prepare a manual on the techniques and
methods of Model Testing and it is intended that it would eventually be utilized by all the
Performance TestCode Committees.
This I L? A Supplement was approved by the PTC Supervisory Committee on May 1O, 1979,
and was approved by ANSI as an American National Standard on January 14,1980.

iii
x- \

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
This documentis dedicated toProfessor J. H. Potter,
Bond Professor o f Stevens Institute of Technology,
who was instrumental in the development o f this
report.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * 1 7 * 2 3 8 0 m 0759b70 0052308 7 m

NO. 19.23
PERSONNEL OF PERFORMANCE TEST CODE COMMITTEE

ON MODEL TESTING

C. A. Meyer, Chairman
Professor J. H. Potter, Past Chairman*

Brown, D. H., Environmental Systems Engineer, General Electric Company, P. o. BOX 43-5-345,
Schenectady, New York 12301
Burton, C. L., Section Manager, R & PD Kreisinger Development Lab., Steam Generator Develop-
ment & Testing, Combustion Engineering, Incorporated, 1000 Prospect Hill Road,
Windsor, Connecticut 06095 (Deceased)
Fisher, R. K., Supervisor, Hydraulic Labs., Allis-Chalmers, York Plant, Hydro-Turbine Division,
P. O. Box 712, York, Pennsylvania 17405
Karassik, I., Consulting Engineer, 476 Walton Road, Maplewood, New Jersey 07040
Langhaar, H. L., Professor, Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, University of Illinois, Urbana,
Illinois61 801 (Retired)
Meyer, C.A.,Professor, Engineering Center, WidenerCollege,Chester,Pennsylvania 19013.
Neale, L. C., Professor,Charles T. Main, Incorporated, Southeast Tower, Prudential Center,
Boston, Massachusetts 02199
*Potter, J. H., Professor, Departmentof Mechanical Engineering, Stevens lnstituteof Technology,
Castle Point Station, Hoboken, New Jersey 07030 (Deceased)
Rolsma, B., SeniorEngineer,Design Thermodynamics, Medium Steam TurbineDepartment
(E & M), Building 264 G2,General Electric Company, 1100 WesternAvenue, Lynn,
Massachusetts O191O
Yorgiadis, S., Partner,Sheppard T. Powell Associates, 31 Light Street, Baltimore, Maryland
2 1 202

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * 1 9 * 2 3

Personnel of Performance Test Codes SupervisoryCommittee

J.H. Fernandes, Chairman


C. B.Scharp, Vice Chairman

D. W. Anack A. S. Grimes S. W. Lovejoy


R. P. Benedict K. G. Grothues W. G. McLean
K. C. Cotton R. J orgensen J. W. Murdock
W. A. Crandall E. L. Knoedler L. C. Neale
R. C. Dannettel W. C. Krutzsch, J r. R. J. Peyton
J. S. Davis C. A. Larson W. A. Pollock
V. FI Estcourt A. Lechner J. F. Sebald
W. L. Garvin P. Leung J. C. Westcott
F. H. Light

vi

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
CONTENTS

SECTION 1 PAGE
O General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
0.1 Objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
0.2 Intended Use of This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
0.3 Definition of a Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
0.4 General Philosophy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1 Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3 Dimensionless Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4 Similitude (Similarity) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.1 Geometric Similarity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2 Dynamic Similarity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5 Some Modeling ExamplesUsingDimensionlessNumbers .......... 4
5.1 The Pendulum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5.2 A Vibration Dynamic Damper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.3 Incompressible Flow Turbine Blade Cascade Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.4 Compressible Flow Turbine Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.5 Flow Induced Turbulence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.5.1 Flow Over a Flat Plate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.5.2 Pipe Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.5.3 Flow Past a Sphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.5.4 Flow in PipeBends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.5.5 Flow Through Regions of Rapid Expansion/Contraction . . . . . . 9
5 .G Characteristic Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.7 Additional Considcrations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
G Referred Quantities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7 References for Section 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

SECTION 2
Index of Example Problems
Example
1 Oversized Turbine Stage Flow Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2 Pump lntakcVortex Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3 Hydraulic Turbine Tcsts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4 Butterfly Valvc Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5 Electrostatic Precipitator. Gas
Distribution
Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . .: . 30
G Flow in Furnaces
and
Ducts.
Smokeand Water Table Tests . . . . . . . . . 42
Cooling
7 Tower. Flow Recirculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
8 Compressor for the Tullahoma Windtunnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Large 47
9 River Model Heating Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
10 Model Testing of LargeFans ............................ 54

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 3 PAGE
Theoretical Background
1 Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
2 Dimensional
Analysis ................................. 56
3 Referred QuantitiesSpecific
and Speed ...................... 57
4 SimilarityModel
Laws
and .............................. 58
5 Examples ......................................... 60
5.1 Efficiency of a Centrifugal Pump . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
5.2 ..................
Film-Type Condensation in a Vertical Pipe 60
5.3 Analysis of a Time Dependent Radiative Model . . . . . .
Dimensional 61
6 The
Similarity Laws o f Reynolds and Froude .................. 62
7 Derivation of Model
Laws from Basic Physical Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Appendix -The Land Chart of Dimensionless Numbers ........................ 65

viii
,...". =_
---======.
COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Licensed by Information Handling Services
-
- ASME PTC*K17*23 80 9 0 7 5 7 6 7 00 0 5 2 3 3 2 O 9

AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

ASME Performance Test Codes


Supplement on
Instruments and Apparatus
Part 23

GUIDANCE MANUAL FOR MODEL TESTING

SECTION 1

O GENERAL It is important torecognize that model testing is a very


broad and complex field with its own specialties, and that
0.1 Objective working engineers cannot expect to do effective work on
To prepare a compendium of techniques and methods the basis of a single document. What has been assembled,
for model testing. This general procedure is to serve as a then, is a review of the basic theory coupled with some
guide for thedesign and application of models by those illustrative examples. It is hoped that the user will be stim-
concerned with the extension or supplementation of proto- ulated to further study and professional growth. Particular
type tests of equipment and apparatus coming under the care has been taken to indicate the limitations and pitfalls
aegis of the ASME Performance Test Codes Committee. of model testing.
Wherethereare test codes in existence covering specific
equipment, the guiding principles, instruments and
0.3 Definition of a Model
methods of measurement from suchcodesshallbeused
withonly such modifications as becomenecessary by A model is a device, machine, structure or system which
virtue of the fact that a model is being tested instead of a can be used to predict the behavior of an actual and similar
prototype. Where models of components, systems, etc. are device,machine, structure orsystem which is called the
involved, and no test codes covering these are in existence, prototype. A physical model may besmaller than, the same
guiding principles and methods of measurementmay be size as, or larger than the prototype. Initially, the Commit-
requested from this Committee (PTC 19.23). tee will consider only physical models for those prototypes
covered by the Performance Test CodesCommittee,
0.2 Intended Use of This Document
Although PTC 19.23 has been
Concerned with the
0.4 General Philosophy
preparation of a guidance manual, it is appropriate to ask
what background should be required of theuser. It has P. model, when built before the prototype, is an engi-
been tacitly assumed that the practitioner should have neering design toolthat may overcomeeconomic or
some prior knowledge of model theory, such as might be practical limitations of prototype testing. It could permit
obtained in an Upperclass college coursein fluidmechanics imposing operational conditions thatmay not be attainable
of heat transfer. Certainly he should have been introduced in the testing of a prototype. It may also be used
to indicate
to the concepts of dimensional homogeneity and dynamic potential remedial changes to a prototype which is not
similarity. performing as predicted ordesired.Whereverpossible,

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 1 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

relationships betweenthe performance of model and proto- canbeused as a designguideorused to determine the
type should be determined, or confirmed experimentally. remedial action that might be required if the equipmentis
Models shall be physically similar to the prototype and notperformingasexpected. The ability to interpret model-
must experience the same physical phenomenaas theproto- ing results is strongly dependent on an understanding of
type, as detailed subsequently in this document. Analogs dimensional analysissuchas developed in the next section.
are not included in Performance Test Code modeling at A treatment o f the theoretical background of model
this time. Of most immediate importance to the engineer testing isgiven in Section 3. Examples il!ustrating modeling
is the ability to use a model of a prototype to predict the applications are given in Section 2. The remaining sections
performance of equipment covered by Performance Test are devoted to definition and application.
Codessuch as centrifugal pumps, fans,
compressors,
hydraulic turbines and steam turbines.
Certain systems being considereddo not lend themselves
1 DIMENSIONS
to complete system modeling, (such as steamgenerators,
steam and gas turbines and steam condensing equipment). Certain fundamental entities are identified as dimen-
Others such as hydraulic turbinesandpumps arefrequently sions. Some common dimensions are cited below:
modeled to determine and even prove prototype perform- (M) mass
ance,Where complete system modeling is not effective, (L) length
various approaches are available such as the selective model- ( T ) time
ing of components and an interpretive ability to relate the (e) temperature
component modelresults. With this approach, modeling (a) electric charge

TABLE 1

Quantity U.S. Customary Units S.I. (Metric Units) Conversion Factor (*)

Length inch meter 2.54E-O2


foot meter 3.048 E-O1

Area square inch square meter 6.451 600 E-O4


square foot square meter 9.290 304 E-O2

Volume cubic inch cubic meter 1.638706 E-O5


CU bicfoot cubic meter 2.831 685 E-O2

Vel oc
ty footlmin meterlsec 5.08E-O3
footlsec meterlsec 3.048 E-O1

Mass pound mass kilogram 4.535 924 E-O1

Acceleration f t per sec2 meter per sec2 3.048 E-O1

Force pound force newton 4.448 222 E+OO

Torque (pound force) (ft) newton-meter 1.355 818 E+OO

Pressure (stress) (Ibflsq in) pascal 6.894757E+03


(I bflsq ft) pascal 4.788026E+01

Energy, work BTU ( I T) joule 1.O55 056 E+03

Power horsepower watt 7.456 999 E+02

(*) Note: Conversion factors are expressed as a number greater than one but less than ten, followed by E (for exponent) and a
sign showing whether the decimal should be moved to the l e f t (-) or to the right (+), and the power o f ten to which
the change i s made.
As an example, the conversion factor from inches to meters is 2.54 E-02, or inches multiplied by 0.0254 is meters.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * L 7 - 2 3 B O M 0 7 5 9 b 7 0 00523L4 4 m
ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 1

Furthermore, many useful quantities may be expressed TABLE 2


in terms of the above dimensions and may be considered
as dimensions themselves. Some examples o f these derived Name Symbol Definition
dimensions are:
(1 / T ) frequency Reynolds number NRe L Vpl1.1or L V/u
(F) force, M L / T ~ Froude number NFr V/@ or V2/gL
(E) energy, M L ~ / T ~ Euler number PIP
NEU
(P) power, ML 2 / T 3
Mach number
lp) pressure, or stress, M L / T L
~ NM0 V/a
Prandtl number NPr cp I.1lk
( V ) velocity, LIT
.(A) acceleration, L / T ~ Nusselt number NNu hLlk-
(P) density, M / L ~ Weber number %V e LP
(1.1) absolute viscosity, MILT
Where:
It can be demonstrated (1) that the selection of afunda-
mental set of dimensions is arbitrary, e.g., MLT, FLT, L = An arbitrarily chosen dimension used to measure
FMLT are in common use. the relative size of a model or prototype. The d-
ameter of a pipe or the chord of an airfoil cross
section are examples (often called a characteristic
2 UNITS length).
Dimensions must be assigned magnitudes according to V = velocity
a consistent system of units. The Council of the ASME has a = sonic velocity
gone on record as favoring the introduction of the S.I. p = density
(Metric) Units, aware of the fact that the changeover may 1.1 = dynamic viscosity
require a protracted time to achieve. See Reference 9 for u = kinematic viscosity
an extensive coverage of S.I. (Metric) units. g = acceleration o f gravity
Some commonly used quantities are listed in Table 1, p = pressure
citing U.S. Customary and S.I. (Metric) Units with appro- A = An arbitrarily chosenarea*used to measure the
priate conversion factors. size of a model or prototype, often in place of L 2
k = thermal conductivity
cp = specific heat a t constant pressure
3 DIMENSIONLESS GROUPS h = film coefficient of heat transfer
Certain groupings of dimensions yield dimensionless u = surface tension
numbers. These are found to be useful tools in many areas *For airfoils it is the custom to use the chord length of the airfoil
of engineering science, especially in fluidflow, heat trans- as the reference (characteristic) lengthin the Reynolds number and
fer and masstransfer. Some of the better known dimension- to use the plan area of the wing in the lift and drag (force) co-
efficients. For non-lifting bodies, such as rivets or steps orspheres,
less groups are cited below. More than 150 such groups are the frontal area is used in the drag coefficient.
identified in the Appendix.
The use of dimensionalanalysisanddjmensionless
groupings(numbers) can greatly simplify a problem and
the modeling of a problem. For example, in studying the
Force coefficient = (&) = a function of

force ( F )* on a body in a moving fluid, one would expect (dimensionlessforce) = a function of


the force to depend on the fluid velocity ( V ) and density (dimensionlessviscosity)
( P ) and viscosity (u) and on the size ( L ) or area (A ) if the
body. The test results can now be plotted as a single curve on
There are five (5)variables, which would require nine a singlecurve sheet. The 2 in the force coefficienthas been
(9) curve sheets to plot the data, if we tested three values arbitrarily added since (P V2/2)= q i s the well known
of each variable. velocity pressure.
Using dimensional analysis, we find that there are only
two real (dimensionless) variables: 4 SIMILITUDE
(SIMILARITY)

The previous list of dimensionlessnumberspresents


*The force may be any force suchas the lift or the drag of an air- historically useful engineeringconcepts. Before these con-
foil or the fluid shear on a surface. cepts areused in modeling, considerations of similitude

3
"
COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 1 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

must be considered. Among these are geometric, kinematic N N =~ Convectiveheattransfer/Conductiveheat


anddynamic similitude. In the case of fluid mechanics transfer
consideration of specific similitude vary from one model- The above dynamic dimensionless numbers should not
ing problem to another. Geometric and kinematic simili- be consideredto be exclusive in themselves. There arecases
tude must be considered before dynamic similitude such where experimental data is correlated better by ratios o f
aSNRe, NF,. can be applied. dimensionless numbers such as:
N K (Knudsen
~ no.) = N R /NMo
~ (5)
4.1 Geometric similarity requires that the model (larger,
equalto, or smallerthanthe prototype) must be a geo-
Nst (Stanton no.) = NNu/Np, (61
metrically accurate reproduction of the prototype. That is Npe (Peclet no.) = NRe Npr (7 1
(4<Z)prototype =K(x,Y,z)model tvherex, <z . .(I) The classical case in heat transfer is
are the coordinates andK is the size scale factor.
The surface finish and clearances to be used in fabricat- N N =~C N R ~Nprb
' ~ (7)
ing the modelare derivedfrom an evaluation of their effects
where a, b, and C areexperiment,allyderivedempirical
on the phenomenon being evaluated.
constants. Even in this case, thedata is correlated only
Under certain conditions, such as in modeling of rivers, within a band o f k 15 percent and i s also dependent on
it may be desirable to create a distorted geometric model, whether the fluid is being heatedor cooled.
.e., one in which the vertical and horizontal scale factors
This poor correlation is evidently due to the fact that
are not equal. Scaling down the length of a river to fit into
turbulence levels and velocity distributions have not been
the laboratory, will lead to very small depths in the model,
the same in the different tests. Subsequent sections of this
unless the model is distorted.
presentation will cite examples of the typical application
Kinematic similarity requires that the motion of the
and interpretation of dimensionlessnumbers.Section 2
fluid, in the system being studied, is the same in both the
will provide examplesof the application o f these techniques
model and prototype. For this to be true, then the velocity
t o realproblems,taken from current industrial practice.
ratios

zI'
= constant (2) 5 SOME MODELING EXAMPLES USING DIMEN-
vx, YI z SIONLESS NUMBERS
must exist. Also, the accelerationratios Much time, effort and expense may be saved through a
knowledgeable application of modeling using similitude
anddimensionlessnumbers.Someselectedexamplesare
presented here to point outthe advantages o f using dimen-
sional
analysis,
especially for the
testing of models.
must exist.
5.1 The
Pendulum
4.2 Dynamic similariv requires that the forces actingon
the corresponding masses between the prototype and the The simple pendulum affords an excellent example for
model, demonstratingthe principles o f modeltesting. A dimen-
sionalanalysisshows that the period ( t ) of a pendulum
z - constant multiplied by the square root of the ratio of the accelera-
" Y
tion of gravity (9)divided by i t s length is a function o f the
amplitude (O) o f i t s swing and is independent of i t s mass
must be related. The Reynolds number NRe , or the Froude
number areexamples fromfluid mechanics. (m).
The idea of dynamic similitud; is derived from the con-
sideration that the dimensionlessnumbersare typically
(t m) function o f (e)
= (8)
ratios of transport functions and/or other specific proper-
ties of the system being modeled.Typically (1 O) Any one of the pendulums shown in Fig. 1 (a) could be
N R =~ Inertia forces/Viscous forces used as a test model for any of the others, for the analysis
N F ~= Inertia forces/Gravityforces o f this system shows:
= Pressure forces/lnertia forces
N1ve = Inertia forces/Surface tension forces
N M =~ Local velocity/Acoustical velocity

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME PTC*19*23 B O 0 7 5 7 b 7 0 0052336 B

ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1 980 SECTION 1

To test such a damper in a rotating rig would havebeen


difficult and costly, as there were no instruments available
to measure the vibration during rotation. The model test
technique shown in Fig. 1 (b), consisted of a cylindrical
rod located in acylindrical hole of slightly larger diameter.
The rod, acted upon by centrifugal force, performed as a
pendulum. The damper was tested in a stationary arrange-

PERIOD t
o FIG. 1 (a)
ment, at one g instead o f 9000 g, a t ten times the size,
and a t a period 300 times as long, as would be the case in
the rotating prototype. However, the value of t c w a s
the same in model and prototype.

5.3 Incompressible Flow Turbine Blade Cascade Study

c. F. Modeling can lead to substantial savings in the aerody-


namic testing of turbomachinery, especiallywhen the
effects of Mach number aresmall.Whensuch items as
viscosity and fluid density are the same, the power of this
type of machinery varies as the product of the velocity
cubed (V), times the square of the size ( L ) . Then:
300 t
Power (P) a Flow X Kinetic energy ( V 2 / 2 g )0:VA X V 2
a V3L2 (10)
and the Reynolds number varies as the. product of the
velocity ( V )and the size ( L ) .

NRe 0: VL P a Nie/(L (1 1)
Thus the power for the same Reynolds number varies
inversely with the size ( L ) .(See Fig. 2.)
Hence, a turbine oracascade ten times larger,with 1/1O
PROTOTYPE
the velocity, will require 1/10 the air power to test it pro-
vided, the Reynolds numbers are the same, Large low speed
MODEL
turbines or large low velocity cascades, require less air or
steam power, can be constructed more accurately, and are
affected less by the presence of instrument probes. The
above reasoningcan be applied to all fluid compressors,
FIG. 1 (b) pumps and turbines.

5.4 Compressible Flow TurbineStudy


For small amplitudes (e), all pendulums, short or long, If the effects of Mach number are important, and the
fast or slow, will give the same value ( 2 n ) for the dimen- prototype Reynolds number is large enough to cause the
sionless period. This is only true, however, if the damping flow to be turbulent, or the flow i s turbulent for other
effect of the air and support is negligibly small. When air reasons, one could reduce the Reynolds number by reduc-
damping is to be taken into consideration, a dimensionless ing the model size while maintaining the prototype Mach
number must be introduced which will include a measure number and still achieve flow similarity. With this model
o f theviscosityof theair. Reynolds number the power varies as the square of the model size. A half
could be used. size model (turbine or compressor Fig. 3) will haveone
quarter of the prototype power and twice the rotational
5.2 A Vibration Dynamic Damper speed. This approach causes difficulties of manufacturing
half size blades, surface finish and instrument size.
The modeling principle abovewas applied in a device An alternative to the above method .is to reduce the
for the testing of a vibration damper for turbine blades. pressure level while maintaining full size. This reduces the

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 1 ANSIlASME PTC 19.23-1980

I " /
/

a cxv
Pa c2 v3

N d -

PalooC2x - v3
1 O00
=
c2 y 3
-
10
FIG. 2

v =1 must be exactly similar to the prototype. If however, the


flow is laminar, the effects o f roughness have been found
v =1 t o beverysmall, as for example in boundary layer or in
pipe flows. If the flow is turbulent, one can either:
(1) Match the roughness of the model and the proto-
type.
or
(2) Induce turbulent flow on the model at the calcu-
lated transition point by means of artificial rough-
ness such as nails or airfoils(as is done when testing
v =1 v =1 model boats).
(JJ = 2 W =1 or
P = 114 P= 1 (3) Make use of the fact that roughness, smaller than a
FIG. 3 certain amount, have no effect on the flow and the
model is considered aerodynamically smooth. This
roughness is smallerthan the thickness of the
Reynoldsnumber,maintainsthe Mach number, and re- laminarsublayerwhich is underthe turbulent
duces the mass flow and power required, in proportion to boundarylayer. The Reynoldsnumber, based on
the pressure. This method avoids the complications and the roughness size, must be less than 100.
tooling needed to manufacture a scale model. The modeling of twophase flows as occurs when moist
The aboveexamples indicate the latitude that is avail- steam flows through turbines or piping is difficult to ac-
ablewhendesigning models while maintaining predeter- complish. In a turbine the unsteady shedding of droplets
mined dimensionless numbers. off theupstream bladesand the centrifuging of the
No mention of surface roughness has been made in Sec- moisture off the rotating blades cvidently requires a rotat-
tions 5.3 and 5.4. In general, the roughness of thc model ing test to obtain similarity betwecn model andprototype.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
~ ~~~~

ASME PTCmI7.23 80 m 0757670 0052328 I

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980 SECTION 1

In the case of piping where liquid collects in horizontal devcloped pipeflow.Typically, the Moody[] diagram,
runs, additional dimensionalnumbers based on liquid Fig. 6, relates the friction factor f to N R and~ the relative
density, gravity, surfacetensionand viscosity must be roughness /D, where E is the median height of the source
introduced. of roughnesson the inside diameter of the pipe D. The
Moody diagram is only applicable for flow conditions at
5.5 Flow Induced Turbulence least 20 diameters downstream from the pipe inlet or from
a turbulence inducingdevice.This permits the full hydraulic
The general characterization of flow turbulence by the development of the boundary layer as noted in Fig. 4.

-
Reynolds number

DV
N R ~=,-
u -D
+
canbe misleading. The following are several examples of 1 +
how the Reynolds number criteria is used to describe or
evaluate various phenomena.
5.5.1 Flow Over a Flat Plate
The development of a flow field over a f l a t plate is il-
lustrated by Fig. 4121*. Here, a flat plate with a sharp FIG. 5
leading edge is located parallel to the fluidvelocityvectors.
Theviscous effects first form a laminar boundary layer
where the viscous drag is a function of stress on the plate 5.5.3 Flow Past a Sphere
7 = FIA (dvldy).
The analysis andexperimental data onthe sphere afford
further insights into the proper interpretation of dimen-
sionless numbers. The plot ofdrag coefficient of a sphere,
Fig. 7, has a characteristic cusp a t a Reynolds number of
about 3 X 10. The location of this cusp has been found
to depend on the surface roughness of the sphere and also
on thefree stream turbulence, both of which influence the
LAMINAR
BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY
LAYER TRANSITION
LAYER
- flowseparation point and therefore the drag of the sphere.
Without this empirical knowledge one might assume the
drag coefficient is a function of the Reynolds and Mach
numbers and ignore the effects of surfaceroughnessand
FIG. 4 turbulence. Therefore, turbulence andsurfaceroughness
must be considered also to get model to full scale corrcla-
When the velocity gradient (dvldy) exceeds the shear tion.
stress capability of the fluid, the flow becomes turbulent. 5.5.4 Flow in Pipe Benas
The momentum transfer of V, into V*, Fig. 5i31, again
adds to theviscousdrag of thesystem. Theresults are The preceding discussion of turbulence was based only
characterized by the relationship: on the viscous properties and the resultant boundary layer
of the fluid stream. Other turbulence-producingagents are
N R =~x VPlF (14) encountered in real fluid flow systems. Figure 8 indicates
where x is the distance downstream from the leading edge the creation of secondary flow systems when a fluid tra-
of the flat plate. Hence, there is a dimension x, where fully verses a pipe bendl 4 l . Here the centrifugal forces due to
devcloped turbulent boundary layer flow is established. turning create a pressure gradient of (P,- p2)ld. The
The boundary layer thickness is shown in Fig. 4 as S. lower momentum boundary layer on the wall of the pipe
permits the pressure gradient to initiate a secondary flow
5.5.2 Pipe Flow onthe wall from p l to p z . This secondary flow adds to
Historically, the Reynolds number turbulence concept the pressure drop of the system by increasing the velocity
ha:been useful in calculating the pressure drop of fully gradient a t the pipe wall. Additional fluid energy is con-
verted to heat by the viscous dissipation of the free stream
*Numbers in brackets idcnlifyrcfcrenccs in Item 7 of Section I . turbulence of the vortices.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 1 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980

&
Ln
O
Ln 7 0
.
s g
m
9 9
* 8 8
O 0
I

II

I
I-
O
I Ln0
r0
O 0
m

O
5 88
O 0

1
2

o Wz
cc
o

I:u LLLL

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * l 1 7 - 2 3 80 m 0759670 0 0 5 2 3 2 0 T m
ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 1

OQ

10-3 10-2 1o' 1 10 1o2 103 104 105 1o6


UD
R=-
V
FIG. 7

Here, it is seen that suddenchanges in pipe flow area


create pressure drop coefficients equivalentto Some 10 to
1O0 pipe diameter lengths based on the Moody friction
factor. In explanation, it canbeshown that the pressure
drop is principally due to momentum interchange caused
by mixing and hence is independent of Reynolds number.

5.6 Characteristic Length


Reynolds number, N R ~ =T, is used to correlate dif-
ferent types of flow. In the case of a flat plate, x is the
distance downstreamfrom firstcontact of the fluid on the
surface. In the case of a perforated platex can be the hole
diameter. Theseare different, but arbitrary selections of
the characteristic length x to be used as a measure of the
size of the device. The user of the Reynolds Number con-
FIG. 8 cept is cautioned to make surethat the characteKistic length
( x ) i s known and consistent throughout a given work and
5.5.5 Flow Through Regions of Rapid Expansion/Con- among authors.
traction
5.7 Additional Considerations
Changes in cross-sectional area may also create turbu-
lence which will be reflected in pressure drop, as shown in Because turbulence can be produced by many means, a
Fig. 9. system of turbulence quantification other than Reynolds

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 1 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980

1 .I

1 .o

0.9

0.8
k
r"
z 0.7
uU
U
0.6
o
W
o
2
0.5
2
v)
W
U: 0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

o
o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2

D1 I D 2

FIG. 9

number is needed. Figure shows the mean stream hance ease of measurement, provided that the critical
velocity, U, with the Root Mean Squared turbulent compo- physical effects are reproduced. An additional benefit is
nentsof velocity ii, V, and F. A statistical analysis of these the succinct presentation of experimental resultsand
flow elements is then used to quantify turbulence in terms designdatawhenexpressed in terms of t h e significant
of intensity, frequency, and scale. dimensionless groups. For example, to test three (3) values
Based on this analysis, one should expect that the effi- each of five (5) independent variables, requires 243 tests
ciency of a major item of equipment, such as a turbine or and requires 27 curvesheets to plot the results. Whereas
a kinetic compressor, is not fully dependent on Reynolds the five variables can bereduced to two (2) nondimensional
or Mach number alone, but alsoon theupstream turbulence variables which will require only nine tests and the results
which is not homogeneous, but consists, in the case of can be plotted on one curve sheet.
turbomachinery, o f a succession of hub and tip lifting
vortices interspersed with blade trailing edge wakes.
These application examplesdiscussed in this section
illustrate that the criteriaare notsize, larger or smaller, nor
6 REFERRED QUANTITIES
speed,fasterorslower, but rather the proportion among Referred quantities have been devised to avoid some of
significant physical entities that are expressible as dimen- the inconveniences associated with dimensionless numbers
sionlessnumbers. Model testing can save expenseoren- but at the expense of a loss of generality.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * L 7 - 2 3 B O m 0757670 0 0 5 2 3 2 2 3

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980 SECTION 1

"U"

" O

ROLL
J

VORTEX

INTENSITY = / U
FREQUENCY = n
SCALE = L

FIG. 10 CLASSIFICATION OF TURBULENT FLOW

Consider a compressor, for which unit inlet total pressure ( P t , ), corrected for inlet sonic
W = mass flow,Ibm per sec velocity (atl).
at, = inlet sonic velocity, ft per sec This dimensionlessnumber is converted to a referred
A = cross-sectional area, s q in. quantity by first ignoring the reference size (A ) and refer-
P t , = total inlet pressure,psi ring the flow to standard sea level inlet pressure (Po) and
g = Acceleration of gravity, ft per sec2 tempcraturc ( T o )conditions, assuming the sonic velocity
to vary as fl
A dimensionless mass flow rate may be computed from

In a specific example, equation (17 ) is evaluated


Dimensionless Flow Referred Flow (18)
Waf, - 100(lbm/scc) X 1100(ft/sec)
=0.40
4x144 (in.')X 14.7(Ibf/in.')x32.17(ft/s~c~)
Thus the referred quantity adjusts the flow to standard
The magnitude 0.40 is the dimensionless mass flow rate. inlet conditions but notforcompressor size. Other referred
It is the mass flow rate (W/g) slugs per unit area ( A ) , per quantities are dcvcloped in Tablc 3, Section 3.

11

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
~

ASME P T C x 1 9 . 2 3 A O W 0759670 0 0 5 2 3 2 3 5 m
.~

SECTION 1 ANSIlASME PTC 19.23-1980

REFERENCES FOR SECTION 1 [T] Turbomachinery Design Described


by Similarity
Considerations, G. F. Wislicenus, NASA Publication
] Friction Factors for PipeFlow, L. F. Moody, Tr. SP-304, 1974, PP. 7-39.
ASME, v.66, 1944, pg. 671. [8] Theory of Turbomachines, G. T. Csanady,
] Elements of Fluid Mechanics,J J. K. Vennard, McGraW-Hill, New York, 1964.
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1940, pg. 116. [9] ASME Orientation and Guide for Use of Metric
[3] Ibid. pg. 118. Units, 7th Edition, 1976.
[4] Technical Paper No. 41 O, CraneCompany. [IO]Fluid Mechanicsand Its Application, J.W. Mur-
[S] Average Velocity in a Duct,ASTM-D-3154, 1974; dock, P.E., Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston 1976, pg.
Part 26, Appendix, pg. 655. 204.
[6] Centrifugal Pumps & Blowers, A. H. Church, John [II] Model Tests of Two Types o f Vibration Damper,
Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1944, pg. 64. C. A. Meyer, H. B. Saldin, trans. ASME A59,1942.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
In this section a group of real problems are solved,
either in whole or in part, by model testing.

INDEX OF EXAMPLE PROBLEMS

Example Title
-
1 Oversized Turbine Stage Flow Model
2 Pump Intake Vortex Studies
3 Hydraulic Turbine Tests
4 Butterfly Valve Tests
5 Electrostatic Precipitator,Gas Flow Distribution
6 Flowin Furnaces and Ducts, Smokeand Water Table Tests
7 Cooling Tower, Flow Recirculation
8 Large Compressor.for the Tullahoma Windtunnel
9 River Model Heating Studies
10 Model Testing of Large Fans

Figures are designated as follows: For instance, Ex.5-2 represents Ex-


ample 5, Figure 2.

EXAMPLE 1 -OVERSIZED TURBINE TAGE FLOW MODEL

Certain aerodynamic effects in turbine stage flow defy forces in the rotating bucket.
rigorous analysis ortheoretical appraisal. Their proper (4) Intra-stage three-dimensional effects due to radial
understandingrequires amodel where the physical phenom- aerodynamic forces induced by the warpednozzlesand
enacanbe directly observed and measured. The aerody- buckets.
namic effects which appeared to be themajor probable Studies in several of these areas were carried out, but it
sources of losses in efficiency, and for which no clearunder- soon became apparent that economy of effortrequired the
standing exists, were: identification of the sources of the most significantlosses,
(1) The timevaryingnatureof theflowin turbinestages so that work could then stress these most promisingareas.
caused by the interaction between the stationary nozzles Consideration of the problemareas indicated that it would
and the moving buckets. beverydesirable to expand both the physical and time
(2)Effects due to the interaction of the nozzle end scales involved. Such scaling would permit rather detailed
vortex with bucket end wall flow. investigations of boundary layer and main-flow behavior
(3) Radial forces on the nozzle and bucket boundry using simple, well-proven instruments, and, with the time-
layers due to radial pressure gradients and thecentrifugal scale expansion, would also permit relatively easy visual

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
.- .
~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~~~ ~~ . ~ ~~~

SECTION 2

and photographic studies of all aspects of the flow. Such a TABLE 1-1
time andsize expansion would also entail a low enough Dimensions of Test Stage
speed to permit an observer to ride on the rotating wheel
of a test facility, and thus directly study the relative flow Diameter (pitch
49
line) ft-4 in.
through the moving buckets. Radial height of buckets
53% in.

Nozzle partitions
Establishment o f Design Parameters
Number 50
Obviously, it would be difficult to operate a large-scale width
Axial /8 48-1 in.
visualizer with anyappreciable pressure drop across the Pitch 37.1 5 in.
stage. Fortunately, the turbine stages beinginvestigated Exit area 166.4 ft2
have a pressure ratio across the buckets so near to unity
Buckets
that no serious distortion o f the flow picture is introduced
Number 95
by testingunder incompressible-flow conditions. The
in. 25 width Axial
factors governing the designof the model were:
in. 19.6 Pitch
(1) Maintenance o f the correct ratio between the flow
velocity and the wheel speed.
Overall Structure
(2) Operation at the same Reynoldsnumber as the
prototype stages to permit direct comparison o f results. Height 45 fb4 in.
(3) Consideration o f size and speeds such that observers Diameter 72 ft
could obtain useful results without undue discomfort, Radome 90 ft diameter X
Preliminary experiments with large airfoil mockups in- 55 ft high
dicated that the air velocity relative to the bucket should
be no higher than 10 ft/sec for visual studies with smoke. Operating Conditions for Visualization
This figure, plus the necessity of maintaining the proper
velocity ratios,establishedthedesign bucket tangential flow Air 174,000 cfm
speed o f 11 ft/sec and theflow velocity at the nozzle throat4.3 speedWheel rpm
o f about 20 ft/sec. (1 1 fps at pitch line)
Toobtain thesevelocities at the same Reynolds Number Stage
pressure drop
0.09 in. H 2 0
as exists on the actual turbine, t h e model stage is 25 times Nozzle-passing frequency
the size of the prototype. Table 1-1 shows the operating (moving observer)
3.6/sec
conditions and some pertinent dimensions of the facility.
The axis of the model turbine stage is vertical with air
flow downwardthroughthestationarynozzlesandthen
ment of flow-smoothing screenswasdeveloped using a
downward through theturbine buckets. Example1-1shows
1/50th sizescale model with water as the fluid anddye
the buckets and an observer riding on the ring shaped car
tracers.
(like a merry-go-round) that rotateson a circular track.
Because of the low velocities and pressure differentials
at whichthemodeloperates, it would havebeenvery
Observing Flow Behavior
d i f f i h t to eliminate all troublesome air infiltration and The moving buckets in Ex. 1-1 are bounded by trans-
thermalconvective effects if the structure were directly parent plastic end plates. Penetrationsof the plastic permit
exposed to the weather. Accordingly, it was enclosed in a the moving observer to insertmeasurementprobesand
90-ft-diameter air-supportedfabricradomewhich com- smoke probes.
pletely eliminates wind effects and provides weather An excellentpictureof flowconditions in the boundary
protection. layer is obtained by wiping the bucket surface with a swab
Due to the low air flow velocity the power generated soaked in a mixture of titanium tetrachloride andanhy-
in the model turbine stage is insignificant. An electric drousalcohol. During the few seconds required for the
motor drive of the ring thatbears the moving buckets and liquid filmtoevaporate, adensesmoke is liberated directly
the moving observer synchronizes the pitchline velocity to into the boundary layer. For exploratory studies, the ob-
the air flow velocity. server uses a long-handledapplicator to apply the chemicals
The air flow is induced by a 14-ft-diameter propeller- to any region of interest. Since the moist swag smokes
type fan. It wasnecessary to suppress the general whirl continuously it is a convenient probe for investigatingflow
and many smaller disturbances leaving the fan. An arrange- in the main streamalso.When more detailed studiesare

14
7!
\
;

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSI/ASME 19.23-1980 2 SECTION

EX, 1-1 MOVING BUCKETS AND OBSERVER ON GENERAL ELECTRIC 25/1 SCALE TURBINE STAGE

O==O F. V. T . BUCKET PRESSURE TESTS WlVo = 0.59


THEORETICAL
1.4

0.2

O
O 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

SURFACE DISTANCE FROM LEADING EDGE, %

EX. 1-2 COMPARISON OF THEORETICAL AND MEASURED PRESSURE


DISTRIBUTIONS ON ROTATING BUCKET

15

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

needed, smoke may be liberated from fixed probes, rakes, The correspondence between the measured and calcu-
or ports in the surfaces. lated pressures is quite good, with the principal differences
The smoke generated on the bucket surface is rapidly occurring near the trailing edge-ofthe bucket. These differ-
diffused into the turbulent boundary layer by the turbulent ences are believed to be mainly -due to the accumulated
eddies, and thus tends to outline the extent o f the bound- three-dimensional flow effects near the dischargeside of
ary layer thickness at t h i s point. In.motion pictures of t h i s the bucket,andalso to boundarylayer growthon the
regiontaken a t high framing rates, the presence of indi- bucket surface.
vidual eddies in the boundary layer can be detected, The Much interesting flow visualization data hasbeen ob-
smoke generated outboard along the trailing edge is seen tained using this facility. Motion pictures havebeenused
to pass smoothly into the bucket wake with no backward for this documentation. Complex flows near the surfaces
flow along the bucket surface, thus indicating that there is are observed with definite secondary flow effects. Cyclical
noflow separation from t h e convex bucket surface, patterns at the frequency of nozzlepassingare readily
The facility is welladapted for detailed quantitive observed.
measurements of the various flow parameters,andsuch
work is being carried out. Example 1-2 illustrates one type Conclusion
of result which has been obtained. In this case, the pressure
distribution on the bucket surface wasmeasured, and in The understanding of turbine stage efficiency started
the graph the time average pressures at one radial position with steady-flowconcepts of simple pitch-line vector
are compared to the values calculated for that section as P diagrams and hasadvanced to sophisticated concepts for
two-dimensional cascade. The quantity plotted is the pres- accounting for radial equilibrium and radial velocity com-
sure coefficient ponents of the turbine.flow. Further efficiency refinements
are dependent on specific understanding of loss mechan-
- Po - P
isms. Thelarge-scale turbine stage modelprovides the
cp -P T
means for the direct observation o f non-steady flows and
where:
other fine flow details by observers riding withthe moving
po = total pressure buckets.
p l = static pressure at the discharge
p = local static pressure on the bucket surface ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This pressurecoefficientvariesas the square o f the local This article was


based entirely onASME Paper 65
velocity, being zero a t the stagnation point and unity at WA/PWR-2 by J. J.
E. Fowler and J. Parry,A Facility
the downstream condition. For Flow Visualization in aLarge-Scale Turbine Stage.

EXAMPLE 2 -PUMP INTAKE VORTEX STUDIES

The mostserious problem encountered in suction in- output. Conversely, if t h e rotation o f the water is in the
takes is that of a persistent and large-scale vortex at the same direction as the pumprotation, the pump output
pump suction. The design specific speedo f a wet-pit pump will decrease with a reduction in power,andmay not
is dependent upon straight-through flow into the suction satisfy the anticipated conditions. The formation o f a
bell, and if this pattern is disturbed the capacity and head large-scale vortex is usuallyassociated with an intake
at maximum efficiency will be affected. If the water a t the design that causes a change in direction of the flow before
suction rotates in a direction opposed to that of the pump it enters the pump suction.
rotation, the pump will increase with a proportional in- It has been learned from field experience and through
crease in power required to produce this condition. Since model studies, that if the change in direction of the water
the pump head is dependent upon the sum o f the angular is not too severe, a baffle placed between the suction-bell
momentum at the suction and that produced by the im- rim and the back wall in line with the incoming flow, as
peller, it is apparent that a negative angular momentum o f shown in Ex. 2-1, will assuresatisfactory operation. The
the flow at the suction, as a result o f counter-rotation baffle should beplaced as close to the suction bell as
produced by the intake structure, will increase the pump possible and extend to the surface of the water in an open

16

-7
COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1 980 SECTION 2

1-1/2 D MIN

/////////
A B
"
"-
11111,

1-1/2D
MIN
1-1/2 D MIN

EX. 2-1 TYPICALPUMP INSTALLATION AND INTAKE DESIGN

Y /

r
EX. 2-2

EX. 2-2a

17

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

channelor to the roof of the tunnel in a closedsystem. the sacrifice in pump performance warrants the additional
In a multiple-unit installation of identical pumps a construction cost.
number of the pumps may operate satisfactorily, but the The most effective method for the study of these prob-
remaining units mayoverpump or underpump in anap- lems is by model tests of the intake structure where con-
parently haphazard fashion. Upon investigation, however, trolled conditions can be maintained and alterations made
it will be evident that becauseof the location o f thevarious at little cost.Model studies,however,are not infallible,
units the suction conditions are not duplicated and over- and considerable skill and judgment must be exercised in
pumping and underpumping occursdepending upon the their design, operation, and interpretation of results. Such
magnitude and direction of the swirls. It is thus apparent models have been designed, built, and tested andthe results
that identical pumps cannot be considered as duplicates when applied to the prototype have provedeffective. A
unless the suction-flow conditions to each are also dupli- model of the complete intake structure, from the inlet to
cated. the pump suction, is seldom necessary and the usual prac-
Largerand morecomplexinstallations involving a tice is to model that portion where the most severe condi-
number of pumps generally operatea t higher tunnel veloc- tions occur and to select as large a scale as is practicable.
ities. Shown in Ex. 2-2 is a typical installation o f this type Models of intake structuresfall into two general classifi-
in which the pumps are placed in individual wells out of cations,models of open-channelintakesandmodels of
the mainstream flow. Toillustrate, if each o f the six pumps closed conduits or tunnel intakes. The surface conditions
shown has a design capacity of 25,000 gpm, thetunnel in an open channel follow Froude's law which states that
flow at the first well is 150,000 gpm at tunnel velocity of the surfacedisturbancecan bedescribed by Froude's
6 fps. The velocity head represented by this velocity tends number. It is further recognized that to produce compa-
to maintain straight flow through the tunnel and the flow rable conditions in two geometrically similar structures o f
into the wells will be proportional to the difference in the differentsize, Froude's numbermust be held constant. Now
pressure in the tunnel and the level in the well. The level if L, i s a linear dimension o f the model and L is the cor-
in the well is determined by the drawdown of the pump respondinglineardimension of the prototype, the scale
and will increase until a sufficient differential exists to factor is Lm/L. Further the Froude number o f the model
divert the required capacity into the well. The reduction is
in level, however, will manifest itself to the detriment of - Vm
the pump in at least three forms: Frm - G
(a) Thesuctionheadavailable a t the impeller is re- and of the prototype is
duced, and if less than that required by the pump, cavita-
tion will occur.
Fr =
v "
-
(b) That portion o f the flow which is diverted into the
well still retains a component of its forward velocity and
G
produces a severe swirl that cannot be controlled effectively and it follows that withconstant Froude number
by baffling.
(c) The reduction in level will increase the total pump- vm= V d ?
ing head by increasing the static head between t h e suction
anddischarge levels. This is an example o f uncontrolled Modeling o f the pump suction to-maintain geometric
flow a t high velocities andcan beimproved only by provid- similarity requires that the suction bells and the flow pat-
ing a means to utilize a portion ofthe energy of the tunnel tern in the model and the prototype be similar. The ratio
flowand guiding the flowevenly to the impeller. The usual of the model and the prototype velocities, however, need
practice is to provide a scoop or contractingelbow located not be related to the scale factor t o maintain geometric
in such a manner that as much flow is diverted as required similarity.
by each pump and yet does not restrict the flow to the It would appear that a model designed for constant
downstream units. Froude number, .e.,
Formed suctions have proved to be very effective with
high-velocity flows and, when it is realized that a flow of vm=.v/+
150,000 gpm a t a velocity o f 6 fps represents 21 hp, it is
apparent that every effort should be made to utilize this
*If the water depth ( h ) is used in place of ( L ) , the wave velocity
power with a minimum of loss. The formed intake struc- (V,) = f i andthe Froudenumber is the ratio of velocity
ture,however, will increase thecost of the installation Fr = (V/V,). The Froude number i s unity when the head is 2/3
materially and theengineer must decidewhether or not the initial head.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME PTCmL7.23 B O 0757670 0052330 2

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980 SECTION 2

RECIRCULATION MAKE UP
FROM
- .TUNNEL
-._.- .- WATER

S'PHoN No* '7 WELL 7


I

GAGE

ORIFICE
% I
I
I
I
I
METER 7 I I/i """" "-
"-

MANOMETER
IJ
f- SUCTION SCOOP

/ -r"-
I
EE

EX. 2-3 MODEL SUCTION TUNNEL

19

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
" C I - .

. .
ASME P T C * l 1 7 . 2 3 8 0 W 0757b70 0052331 4 9
~~~

SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

will satisfy the model relations for both the surface flow TABLE 2-1 PROTOTYPE AND MODEL DATA
conditions and thepump suction. This assumption is reason-
able if the model scale is not toosmall and the prototype Prototype Model
velocities sufficiently high.
Tunnel cross section 8 ft X 15 ft 6 in. X 11% in.
As the model scale decreases, the model flow velocities
Well opening 8 ft X 8% ft 6 in. X 6-3/8 in.
become very low as compared to the prototype and the re-
Well size 9% ft X 8% ft 7% in. X 6-3/8 in.
sults areunreliable. Satisfactory results have been obtained,
Pump capacity-each 34500 gpm 135 gpm
however, if themodel is designed with t h e same flow
Suction-bell diameter 44 in. 2% in.
velocities as in the prototype. With velocities higher than
Scoop inlet 2 ft x 4 ft 1% in. X 3 in.
required for a constant Froudenumbertheeddiesand
Static head on tunnel 15 in. 3% ft
turbulence in the model will be more severe than in the
prototype and it is reasonable to assume that if these ad-
verse flow conditions can be corrected in the model, the siphon flows with tunnelvelocitiesequal only to those
same measures will be effective when applied to the proto- caused by the siphon flow. This plots, as shown in Ex. 2-4,
type. with the suction-bell inlet, and in Ex. 2-5 with the suction
A 1/16-scale model was used to study the effectiveness scoop inlet. Usingthesecurves as a calibration for each,
o f suctionscoops in an installation with varying tunnel any deviation in capacity a t constant siphon heads will
velocities. The model was built with the same velocities as indicate the effectiveness of the suction design.
in the prototype. To attain the desired velocities past the Examination of Ex. 2-4 with the bell suction shows a
first well, a true model would have included additional marked decrease in capacity for pumps Nos. 1 and 2 up to
pumps, but modeling of the first two wells only was con- about 3% fps tunnel velocity, and then with a further in-
sidered sufficient to obtain the essential information. The crease in tunnel velocity, the curves approximately parallel
modelconsisted of a crib which served as areservoir to the calibration curve up to the velocities of 9 to 10 fps
maintain a constant static head on the tunnel comparable whenthedeviationbegins to increase. Throughout the
to the actual river level. The No. 1 well was placed a suffi- range of velocities tested, with the exception o f the low
cient distance from the junction o f the tunnel and the crib tunnel velocities,there is little difference in performance
so that the inlet conditions into the tunnel would not between the Nos. 1 and 2 pumps.
affect thereadings at the first well.Thedesiredtunnel Example 2-6 shows the loss in capacity plotted on a
velocities were obtained by an auxiliary pump which took percentagebasisagainsttunnel velocity. The singlecurve
i t s suction from the end of the tunnel and recirculated the shown is anaverage o f the loss in capacity o f the Nos. 1
water back to the crib. By throttling the discharge o f this and 2 pumps. It must be remembered in the application of
pump it was thuspossible to vary the tunnelvelocities these curves to the prototype that the percentage loss in
overawiderange. It is veryconvenient in this type of capacityreflects losses into thewell only, and gives no
model to use siphons with modeled inlets to duplicate the indication of the magnitude or direction of the swirl in the
pumps. well and its effect upon the pump performance.
Example 2-3 shows the modeled scoop in place in t h e Visualexamination during these tests revealedsevere
No. 1 wellandthe orifice meter in the down leg of the swirling in both wellseventhough a baffle had been in-
siphon to measure theflow rates. The siphon headrequired stalled between the suction bell and the back of the well.
to producethe flow rate through the suction bell and Rcadings of thedrawdown in each well weretakenand
siphon system. The flow removed by the siphons was re- the f e e t drawdown is plotted against tunnel velocity in
placed by make-up waterin the crib to maintain a constant Ex. 2-7. The curve applics for both the Nos. 1 and 2 wells
level throughout the tests. Table2-1 gives the pertinent as very little difference was noted betweenthe two. The
specifications of the prototype andthecorresponding velocity head in the tunnel also is plotted on t h e same scale
model values. and the diffcrcnce between the velocity head andthe draw-
To obtain acomparison of therelative mcrits of the down represents the head loss incurred with a 90-deg turn
suction bell and the scoop suction, the change in capacity of the watcr into the well. I t can bc seen from this curve
andsiphonhead with each suction dcsign a t a constant that a drawdown bf 1% ft a t a tunnel vclocity of 7.8 fps,
valve setting of thesiphon was obtained. It is apparent that which would bc of the same order of magnitude in the
the greatertheturbulenceandlosses into thewell,the prototype, would be quite scrious with a low-head pump
lower will be the capacity of thesiphonand t h e greater as it would incrcascthe pumping headanddecreasethe
will be the required siphon head. It follows that all losses available submergcncc by the same amount.
in thesiphonsthcmselvcs must be isolatedand this was In contrast of thew curves is that in Ex. 2-5 where the
done by plotting the static levels in the wells against the same test was run with the suction scoop in place. It will

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
,
- ASNE P T~.
~~~ C * L 7 * 2 3 80 M 0757670 0 0 5 2 3 3 2 6
~~

. .

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

6.0

5.6

5.2
c
d
4
$ 4.8
O
-
2
v)

4.4

4 .O

3 .c
110
GALLONS PER MINUTE

EX. 2-4 SIPHON LOSS WITH BELL SUCTION

2
130 110 120 140
GALLONS PER MINUTE

EX.2-5 SIPHON LOSS WITH SCOOP SUCTION

21

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
. .-

SECTIOfi 2 ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980

20

15

10

I I I I
I
TUNNEL VELOCITY, fps
I
I
I
I I
I I
I 1 I I

I
5 0 7 8 9 10 11 12

m
m
s

l I 1 I I I I I I I I l

EX. 2 6 COMPARISON O F LOSSES WITH SCOOP SUCTION AND BEL.L SUCTIN

22

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSllASME PTC 19,23-1980 SECTION 2

O 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
TUNNEL VELOCITY, fps
EX. 2-7 DRAWDOWNAND HEAD-LOSS CURVES

be' noted that there is a gain in capacity as the tunnel tunnel construction to reduce velocities, if the suction bell
velocity is increased with an appreciable spread between is to be used, as against the cost of the scoop construction
the Nos. 1 and 2 pumps. which will operate satisfactorily with the high tunnel
Example 2-6 shows this increase as a percentage rise in velocities.
capacity plotted against tunnelvelocity. It is apparent Evidently the tests show that the source of vortices is
from these curves that much is to be gained by the use of the moment of momentum of the flow at inlet to the
the suction scoop which utilizes a portion of the impact pump. Any flow whose moment is about the center of the
velocity of the tunnel flow over the suction-bell design pump must resultin avortex of equal momentum. Adesign
and, with performance data of t h i s nature, the problem similar to Ex, 2-2a should fulfill this requirement.
then resolves itself into the cost study of the increase in

EXAMPLE 3 - H Y D R A U L I C T U R B I N E T E S T S

Model testing of hydraulic turbines is a well established for development and improvement of existing designs and
method for design research and development. The results for contract acceptance.
of model testing are used to predict and/or verify the per- For accurate prediction of performance of a prototype
formance of prototype units.[l] All the major rnanufac- turbine based upon a model, complete homology is neces-
turers of hydraulic turbines have their own laboratories for sary. This includes modeling of the inlet casingand the
model performance and cavitation tests. In these labora- draft tube discharge. The model must be carefully built
tories the turbine efficiency, power, flow and cavitation with fine attention to the degree of dimensional accuracy
characteristics are determined. The model testing is done between the model and prototype. When good correlation

23

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSllASME PTC 19.23;1980

110

.1O0
x

W
z , .
m
U
3
I-
80
I
MODEL TEST INCLUDING
REYNOLDS NUMBER CORRECTION

70
200 16080 120 240 280
360 320 400

TURBINE OUTPUT, 1000 hp

EX. 3-1

1O0

90

x
&2
W
E
L
.!
80
u1
W
zm
U
3

70

60
40 60 80 1O0 120 140 160 180

TURBINE OUTPUT, 1000 hp

EX.3-2

24

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * L 9 - 2 3 B O
~~ ~ ~~
m 0757b70 005233b 3 m
ANSl/ASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

between model dimensions and prototype dimensions are, tion and actual prototype measurements. The power levels
obtained accurate predictions of prototype performance are satisfactorilypredicted from the model tests. The
based upon model results i s possible. However, these pre- efficiency levels obtained on the model are lower than the
dictions must take into account the effect of Reynolds efficiencies measured on the prototype, but when the ef-
number in scaling from model toprototype size. The fect of Reynolds number is taken into account the model
Reynolds number effects are taken into account by ap- efficiency is increased and a better estimate of prototype
plying a correction to the model results based on formulas efficiencies is obtained.
derived by Moody, Hutton, and others.[2] Furthermore, In addition to determining thesteadystate performance
tests on models must bedone in a Reynolds number of the prototype, model testing is used to obtain the hy-
regime where the flow can be considered super critical.* draulic characteristicsof the turbomachine when operating
Tests on models which are too smalloraretested with in a transientcondition.The data is obtained on the model
flow velocities that are lowor where the possibilityof sub- in a quasi-static manner and then is used to predict tran-
critical Reynolds number exists yield results which are sient prototype performance'througti the use of computer
erroneous. Each manufacturer has evolved generalized di- modeling. Furthermore, pressures,stresses, and vibration
mensions for his modelswhich yield test results which can aremeasured on models to beable to undeistand how
be satisfactorily scaled to prototype size. Models are con- designcanbe built which will have smooth operating
structed to be as small as possible in physical size to characteristics.
minimizethe cost of the testing while still beinglarge
enough to be in t\he super critical flow regime.
REFERENCES
Examples 3-1 and 3-2 illustrate the correlation between
tests doneon prototype turbines and the expected per- [l] Symposium on Laboratory Testing of Hydraulic
formance derived from model test results. In both cases Turbine Models in Relation to Field Performance
good correlation is obtained between model based predic- -Transaction of the ASME for October 1958.
[2] InternationalElectrotechnical Commission - Pub-
*Critical, as usedhere, refers to the critical Reynolds number
where the flow changes from laminar t o turbulent, rather than lication 193 International Code for Model Accept-
from subsonic to supersonic as used elsewhere. ance Tests of Hydraulic Turbines.

EXAMPLE 4 -BUTTERFLY VALVE TESTS

The design of butterflyvalves, for example in cross-over 01 =The angle setting of the valve
pipes in low pressure steam turbines, requires a knowledge shaft, from the open position,
of the flow and the torque on the valve shaft as a function which is alreadydimensionless.
of the valve shaft angular position and the pressure drop
across the valve. In case of emergency, the valve must be
The dependent variables are:
closed quickly to prevent the turbine from running away.
The size of the operating piston and its supply pressure K = A p / ( pV 2 / 2 ) =The totalpressure drop across the
will, of course,depend on the inertia andaerodynamic valve,measured in terms of the
torque of the valve and the required closing time and the velocity pressureahead of the
flow through the valve during closing. valve, taken as a standard dimen-
sion itself to replace either M, L,
Dimensional Analysis or t.
The independent variables are:
CD = (Flow/ldeal flow)=The discharge coefficient, which
(Ap/pl) =The pressure drop across the is the flow measured using an
valve,measured in terms of the ASME Standard Nozzle, given as
inlet pressure (DI) which is used a fraction of an ideal flow which
as a standard dimension to re- is used.as a standard dimension
place M, f., or t . itself to replace M, L or t.

25

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSllASME PTC 19.23--1980

THE CALCULATION OF THELOSS COEFFICIENT ( K I USING THE THRUST FACILITY

Operation
(1) An arbitrary thrust is selected by placing a weight on the scale
which opposes the nozzle thrust and holds nozzle against a stop
toward the left.
( 2 ) A blower, supplyingair a t "O" is increased in speed until it
develops sufficient pressure and nozzle thrust t o l i f t the nozzle
off its stop, toward the right where it hits another stop. The
greater the loss of the specimen, the greater the supply pressure
must be to l i f t the selected weight.
(3) The difference between the total pressure required t o l i f t the
weight when the specimen is in the nozzle and when the nozzle
is empty i s used t o calculate the incremental loss coefficient.

--. "

P t o - P t z = K pzeV;/2 (definition of the loss coefficient)


P t z = pSz + p2 V: 12 (definition of the total pressure Pt,
Adding

P to =Psz + ( 1 + K ) p , V 2 2 / 2 - p S Z + ( 1 + K ) ( F / 2 A )
' P S z r + (1 +K,I p z V , 2 / 2 " P S Z f + ( 1 + K , ) ( F m )
Pt" r

Subtracting, Holding (F/A) Constant


(Pt, -PSz) - (Ptor -PSzf)
= (K X,.)
(F/2A)

nr

EX. 4-1

T = (T/AA p D ) = Thctorque cocfficicnt (= dimen- - ( a p / p ) / ( a v / v ) , a mcasurc of comprcssibility, canbe


sionlesstorque) is thetorque,uscd in place of Mach numbcr.
mcasured in tcrms of thc product
of.valvc arca, prcssurc drop and
diametcr;taken as a dimension Tests
itsclf in place o f M , L or t.
The aboveanalysisassumes incomprcssiblc lurbulcnt Testswcrc run usingthc facilily shownon Ex. 4-1,
flow since the valve is downstrcam of turning vanc clbows which consists ol: a nozde N which is connected to a circu-
and othcr valves and has a small prcssurc drop across it at lar prcssurc balancing platc ( P ) . When high prcssurc fluid
full flow. If this wcrcnotthccasc wc wouldhavctoincludc is supplied at (O), thc n o d e and its prcssurcbalancing
theReynoldsnumbcr(dimcnsionlcssviscosity)andthc platc arc forced to thc right, duc to thc n o z h thrust-. A
Mach number ( V / g ) in the indcpcndcnt variable list above. lever systcm and ;I dead weight scale arc arranged to hold
Forreasonably low Machnumbers, the quantity (y) = the nozzle against I Sc1 of stops toward thc left.

26

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

0.1o

0.09

0.08

0.07

0.06

-
z
-
W

o
U
U 0.05
W
O
V
W
3
U
U
O
t- 0.04

h
c,
-.
II
Q
4
a 0.03
\
h
L

0.02

0.01
1oo 200 30' 40' 50' 60' 700
VALVE ANGLE-DEGREES FROM OPEN

O 0.2 0.4 O .6 0.8 1 .o 1.2 1.4


PRESSURE DROP ( Ap / p l ) PERCENT c-)

EX. 4-3 TOKQUE O F BUTTERFLY VALVE FOR VARIOUS ANGLES AND PRESSURE DROPS

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSIlASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

1 .o a a - a l * I m
l
NOZZLE WITHOUT VALVE

8
0.9

0.8

-u 0.7

LI
LI
W
8
W
0.6
a
1u
2
Cl
n

0 0.4
-I
Q
W
Cl
S
\
3
If 0.3
04

0.2

0.1

o
100 200 30' 40' 50' 60
VALVE ANGLE-DEGREES FROMOPEN +
I I I I I I I I
O .2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 .o 1.2 1.4
PRESSURE DROP ( 40 / P , ) PERCENT 6
. __ . -
EX. 4-4 DISCHARGE COEFFICIENT FOR VARIOUS ANGLES AND PRESSURE DROPS

29

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
~~

SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

The nozzle and i t s balancingplateare hungfrom flexible Test Results


shims attached to the air supply drum. A tare reading of
The loss coefficients of the tunnel alone and with the
the thrust is found by blocking off the nozzle and supply-
valve insGIled, for different anglesettingsand with and
ing the air a t high pressureat (O).A t 1O0 psi one can move
without the bar stop are shown in Ex. 4-2.
the nozzle and its balancing plate with a light push of the
The tested torque coefficients are shown in Ex. 4-2 for
finger.
various angle settings and pressure drops ( A p l p ~ A
) . cross
The analysis, shown in Ex. 4-1,tests how much.supply
plot shows t h e variation of torque for one percent pressure
pressure is required to lift a given weight on the scale and
drop.
move the nozzleoff its stops. Tests of the nozzle alone and
The discharge coefficient i s shown in Ex. 4-4. The flow
also with the valve installed give the incremental loss of
was measured using the standard nozzle which is built into
the valve. No traversing is required,unless you want to
the thrust facility and measures only the flow which gen-
know the details of the flow. The drag of a human hair
erates thrust and does not include the leakage around the
can be measured by placing it across the end of the nozzle.
nozzle and its pressure balancing-plate,
A similar system was used to measure the torque of the
valve. A dead weight on a lever arm was arranged to hold
REFERENCE
the shaft against a stop. The air supply was increased until
the valve was able to lift the weight. A light circuit was C.. A. Meyer, R. D. Swope - Widener.College Report
used to indicate when the weight was lifted. TR 75-3,April 7, 1975.

, EXAMPLE 5 - ELECTROSTATICPRECIPITATOR, GAS FLOW DISTRIBUTION

Thissectiondescribessome model and field gas flow receiving 9 percent more flow than the south but, more
studies of the inlet and outlet flues of an electrostatic importantly, the inboard leg of each fan received moreflow
precipitator installation. This precipitator was designed to than the outboard legs.
produce 99.6 percent (.0041oss) dust collection efficiency. Finally, dust samples weretaken a t the inlet to each I.D.
The actual measured collection efficiency was measured at fan tocheck for system performance and it was found that
98.8 percent (.O12loss) to 99.1 percent (.O09 loss). The 88 percent of the total dust going up the stack, asmeasured
reduced performance was attributed to poor gas flow as it a t each fan inlet, occurred at Sample Port No. 1 as noted
passed through the precipitator. in Ex. 5-3.
Example 5-1 is a side elevation of the precipitator com- Based on these results and supplemental visual off-line
plex. Gas leaves two Ljungstrom airpreheatersand is inspections, it was obvious that gas flow problems in this
divided between the two precipitators of the double deck unit were a major contributing factor to i t s deteriorated
installation. During initialoperation, flue gas flow traverse performance. It was concluded that a three-dimensional
were conducted to determine the gross division of gasbe- air model study would have to be conducted to evaluate
tweenthe twoprecipitators. Detailed velocity traverses the various options available to remedythe situation. It
were also conducted in the vertical outlet flue leaving the was also decided that a complete field velocity traverse of
upper precipitator and a t the inlets to the I.D. fans. The the inlet to both the upper and lower precipitators should
gas volume flow passing through the lower precipitator was be conducted. This information would then beused to
determined by subtracting the measured gas flow leaving check the as built model fesults to ensureanaccurate
the upper precipitator from the measured gas flow en tering presentation of the problem.
the. induced draft fan inlets. Thesetestsshowed that ap- The field tests were performed using cold air at approx-
proximately 54.6 percent of the gaswas going through the imately 60 percent of design velocity. This provided a
lower precipitator. Basedon t h i s result, the ,perfo;ated Reynoldsnumber approximately equal to that which
plate shown in Ex. 5-1 was installed to distribute more gas would be seen under actual full load operation. Example
to the upper precipitator. 5-4 presents an example of a typical field velocity profile
The velocity traverses conducted a t the inlet to the I.D. in the lower precipitator. Once these velocity profiles had
fans also revealed alateral imbalance of gas flow across the been obtained across the width of the precipitators they
precipitators. Example 5-2 shows the north I.D. fan was were reduced to numerical form. These velocity data

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

EX, 5-1 SIDE ELEVATION OF ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR

31

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSIlASME PTC 19.23-1 980

F LOW

.c
I

I I

L 310,230 ACFM @ 255 deg F 1


407,660 ACFM @ 271 deg F

EX. 5-2 GAS FLOW IMBALANCE -OUTLET FLUESAND I.D, FANS

32

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASflE P T C * l 1 9 * 2 3 8 0
~ ~~~ 0759670 0052344 2 m
ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

EX. 5-3 SIDE ELEVATION OF I.D. FANS

33

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980

-
FL
OPE MG
-SUPPORT
STRUT

GAS FLOW

- PERFORATED
PLATE

1 L

T COLLECTING ELECTRODE

EX. 5-4 TYPICAL MEASURED VELOCITY PROFILE, AS INSTALLED


LOWER PRECIPITATOR INLET

34

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
I ASM PTC*K17.23 B O m 0 7 5 7 b 7 0 005231.lb h m
ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

UPPER
PRECIPITATOR

F LOW

LOWER
PRECIPITATOR

1 1 0.5
0.3
I 1 1I.5
1 1 0.17 1 01.9 1.1I I 1.3

EX. 5-5 AVERAGE INLET VELOCITY SIDE ELEVATION PROFILES, AS INSTALLED

35

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

DISCHARGE
UPPER
PRECIPITATOR

VAVG 7
LOWER

h
PRECIPITATOR -- -t DISCHARGE

VAVG = 1.48 MISEC


L'DESIGN 1.74 MISEC

1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1
0.7
0.5 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7
1.O
V'VAVG

EX. 5-6 AVERAGE OUTLET VELOCITY SIDE ELEVATION PROFILES, AS INSTALLED

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980 SECTION 2

20
i- l I I I I
18

16

14

ae
ui
5o 12
a
U
3
o
10
U
O

5
E3 8
2
E
6

O
0.2 O .4 0.6 0.8 1 .o 1.2 1.4 1.6 1 .S 2.0 2.2
NON-DIMENSIONAL NORMAL COMPONENTS, V / VAVG

EX. 5-7 HISTOGRAM ANALYSIS OF UPPER PRECIPITATOR INLET


VELOCITY MEASUREMENTS

37

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980

20

B -f 25%
ACTUAL DATA = 35%
18
IGCl REQUIREMENT = 85%

16

14
3
u G- f 40%
V ACTUAL DATA = 50%
2
W 12 IGCI'REQUIREMENTS = 100%
U
U
3
V
V
O
u 10
O
G
2
W
3 8
2U RMS
U

0.4 0.6 0.8 1 .o 1.2 1 :4 1.6 1.8 2.2 2.0

NON-DIMENSIONAL NORMAL COMPONENTS, V / VAVG

EX. 5-8 HISTOGRAM ANALYSIS O F LOWER PRECIPITATOR INLET


VELOCITY MEASUREMENTS

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

EX. 5-9 MODEL STUDY OF THE PRECIPITATOR INSTALLATION

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION2 ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980

MODEL
CORRECTED

VERTICAL
GAS FLOW
DISTRIBUTION

LOWER PRECIPITATOR

OUTLET

0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

.V/VAVG

EX, 5-10 VERTICAL GA FLOW DISTRIBUTION EX. 5-11 VERTICAL GAS FLOW DISTRIBUTION
LOWER PRECIPITATOR INLET LOWER PRECIPITATOR OUTLET

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

points were then numerically averaged to establish an nelswere installed in vertical orientation which formed
average vertical and horizontalvelocity profile for each contnuous vertical slots that would not plugfromthe
precipitator, Example 5-5 illustrates a simplified side residual fly ash leaving the precipitator. This satisfactorily
elevation view of the upper and lower precipitators show- decoupled the I.D. fans from the precipitator. The vertical
ing the average vertical inlet velocity profile for each as slots were lined up with the centerline of the precipitator
obtained from the field tests. Approximately 58 percent ducts. The net free area required was found to be 15 per-
of the gas was found to be passing through the upper pre- cent open.
cipitator with the remainder passing through the lower. The net resultofthe above changes, .e., the installation
Example 5-6 demonstrates the dramatic effect that the of the inlet ladder vanes and the installation of a 15 per-
outlet flue has on the velocity profile leaving the lower cent open picket fence at the lower precipitator outlet
precipitator. This pointed out a condition that had to be produced a flow-distribution slightly biased to the lower
corrected if re-entrainment and hopper sweepage in the precipitator. The resultant corrected flow patterns for the
lower precipitator were to be eliminated. lower precipitator was shown in Ex. 5-1O for the inlet and
Examples 5-7 and 5-8 detail the statistical distribution Ex. 5-11 for the outlet. The gross improvement is noted
of the data points taken in the upper and lower precipita- whenthesefiguresare compared to Ex. 5-5 and 5-6.
tors and also compare these results with the recommended Further analysis ofthe corrected model study data
criteria of the IGCl (Industrial Gascleaning Institute).The produced the following results:
vertical bars of these histograms represent the percentage
of the data points occurring a t each velocity range. The
actual velocity valueshavebeen normalized, that is, they Lower Precipitator
have been divided by the average velocity following stand- Inlet: 10.6% RMS Deviation
ard practice. Outlet: 12.0% RMS Deviation
As can beseen, neither precipitator met the IGCl re-
quirements with the upper precipitator being approxi- Upper Precipitator
mately two times better than the lowerprecipitator. lt Inlet: 11 .l%RMS Deviation
was then decided to proceed with the construction of a Outlet: 9.2%RMS Deviation
1/I6 scale model study to produce the necessary corrective
devices and optimize the flow fields of the two precipi-
tators. The model was made and is shown in Ex, 5-9. The
internals of this model reproduced the details of Ex. 5-1. Because of these favorable results, the full sized flues
Velocity traverses in the model effectively matched the were modified inaccordance with the model recommenda-
data-of Ex. 5-5 through 5-8 within normal experimental tions. Once the modifications were completedawalk-
accuracy,Theseresults confirmed that the model could through inspection was performed with the fans running.
reproduce the problems and then beused to arrive at No high velocity jets or hopper sweepage could be found.
design solutions. Due tosystem load requirements and the confidence*levels
It was decided that ladder vanes would beused to established with the model study results, field follow-up
replace the inlet radius vanes. Ladder vanes are a series of velocity traverses were not performed.
flat surfaces that are oriented perpendicular t o the direc- The unit was permitted-tooperate for atleast one month
tion ofthe duct inlet gas flow. The positioning of the inlet before performance testing. Three tests were then run. All
flue ladder vanes was optimized in the model study. three tests produced equal to or better than required dust
The model study also indicated that the floor of the collection efficiencies. The customer agreed to accept the
lower precipitator inlet flue would be subject to potential installation as having made i t s contractual guarantee.
fly ash dropout. It was, therefore, recommendedthat a dust It is recommended that gas flow distribution be studied
blower be installed in this area to keep the flue clean. , before an installation is built.-The cost of a model study,
A major problem that still remained was the correction during the designstages of a system, is significantly less
of the lower precipitator outlet gas flow distribution. The expensive than finding and correcting the problems in the
lower precipitator outlet of the model was still experienc- field. It hasbeen experienced that correcting an existing
ing both verticaland lateral gas flow problems. It was con- installation can cause roughly ten to fifteen times the cost
cluded that this was the result of the close coupling of the of performinga designstage model study. It hasbeen
lower precipitator to theI.D. fans. shown, through the study reported here, that model studies
A pressure drop device was placed at the lower precipi- and full-size installations produce results which correlate
tator outlet to provide for a decoupling between the I.D. well within the range of experime.ntal error. The important
fans and the precipitator. Standard structural shaped chan- factors in producing a reliable model study are complete

41

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
I

SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980

and
accurate reproduction o f .systemgeometry
being ABSTRACTED FROM
studied, and the propermodeling o f the system flow fields
and pressuregradients entering andleaving t h e model. C. L. Burton and D. A. Smith Precipitator Gas flow
Most o f thetime, this last requirement is easilysatisfied Distribution, page 191, EPA-650/2-75-016Symposium
by including major system components(heat exchangers, on ElectrostaticPrecipitators for the Control of Fine Par-
fans, etc.) ahead o f and following the
model. ticulates and G E TIS-4257.

EXAMPLE 6 - FLOW IN FURNACES A N D DUCTS, SMOKE A N D WATER


TABLE TESTS

The substantial increase in physical siz e o f commercial general, the most effective use of heat transfer surface is
furnaces and auxiliary equipment, together with increasing accomplished within uniform flow distribution ofthe heat
emphasis on high. availability and minimum cost o f opera- transfer fluids.
tion, puts a distinct premium on effective equipment It has been found that there is no single best modeling
design. Simple extrapolation o f previous designs often is technique to use as a guide for obtaining uniform flowdis-
not enough, since tolerable flowmaldistributions of earlier tribution in thegas passages o f a boiler, Rather, it has been
designsmaybecome intolerable from the standpoint o f found that utilization o f a variety of modeling and test
heat transfer, pressure loss, corrosion, wear, material selec- techniques often leads to the quickest and most accurate
tion, or overallperformance.Properlyapplied cold flow solution o f gas flow distribution problems. Two-dimen-
models are a useful tool for identifying all the major pit- sionalsmoke table models,two-dimensionalwatertable
fallsand many of the minor pitfallswhich should be avoided models, three-dimensional water models, and three-dimen-
in duct and furnace gas flow design. One o f the principal sional air models canbe adapted to virtually any significant
areas o f interest has been the simulation or representation flow distribution problem in furnaces or ductwork, despite
of the flow of t h e products o f combustion in boiler furnaces the isothermal natureof each of these modeling techniques.
and gaspassages so that t h e engineer can select and locate None of the methods result in so-called true models, but
heat transfer surfaces in the most effectivemanner. In we can call them adequate models for lack o f a better term.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
. ASME PTCxL7.23 B O
~ ~

0757670 Cl052354 5

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

All that i s necessary for successful utilization of each of air heater in which the draft loss is ten or more times
the methods is recognition o f the similarity criteria which greater than the loss of the ductwork ahead o f it. The air
need to be maintained for each method. heater in this case tends to improve flow distribution due
One additional factor, which hasbeen found to be of t o the flow resistance.When modelingtheductwork,a
importance in flow model work, is visual impact. Several screen or perforated plate is used to simulate the air heater
earlier authors havestressed this point. It is agreed that resistance in the system, and approximates the effect of
visualobservationand photographic records are vital to the complicated airheater section.
the success in using the flow modeling technique. Smoke The basic smoke table apparatus consists of asupport
table modeling provides a quick methodof making avisual arrangement for two parallel sheets of glass plate, a smoke
assessment of the aerodynamic characteristicsof fluid flow generator, and a fan used to induce the air flow through
systems. This technique, shown in Ex. 6-1, lends itself to the model. The model i s mounted between the parallel
rapid screening o f a series of proposeddesignfeatures. sheets of glass. Smoke is introduced through a series of
Themodels are simple,inexpensive,easily set up,and jets a t the model inlet, and a flow of air induced by these
readily modified. Modeling is limited to two-dimensional jets. When the inlet velocity of the induced airand the
flowstudies. This technique provides pertinent information smoke are equal, streamers o f smoke are carried through
as to areas in which further study,using more refined the model tracing out the flow pattern. Flow velocities in
models, should be carried out. In many cases, smoke table the model areas under study are maintained in the laminar
tests, in themselves,are sufficient lo provide a suitable flow range. Reynolds number range isapproximately 1000.
answer as to the effectiveness of a design. Qualitative data Theuse of laminar flow in this type of model produces
i s obtained from smokemodels,Records of model flow conservativeresults. Turbulent flow separation noted in
characteristicsmay be made by tracing the flow streamlines three-dimensional air modelshas correlated directly with
on the glass top of the table, makingfreehand sketches of the laminar flow separation observed in the smoke table.
flow patterns, and by taking still photographs or movies Besides producing conservative observitions, the laminar
of the operating model. Relative values may be arrived a t flow enhances visualization. If the flow velocities are in-
by scaling the size of the indicated eddies, stagnant areas, creased to the turbulent range, the smokestreamersdis-
or the portion of a flow channel that is being effectively sipate in theairmakinginterpretation of results more
used. difficult.
Exact geometrical similarity with the prototype i s used These models are quite effective for demonstration pur-
in the smoke table slice models. ln some instances, a com- poses.Areaswhere flow separation from the boundaries
ponent upstream or downstream of the model i s not scale occur may be readily seen. Stagnant. areas and eddies are
modeled. An example of this would be a regenerative type apparent to the observer. Flow disturbances maybe traced

EX. 6-2 SMOKE TABLE-ECONOMIZER TO AIR HEATER - A S MODIFIED IN MODEL

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECT1ON 2 ANSllASME PTC 19.,23-1980

EX. 6-3 WATER TABLE - TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODEL

EX. 6-4 WATER TABLE - REPEAT OF EX. 6-1

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
-
3 ASME P T C #.l ~ 9 " 2 3 B O
. ~ ~~ ~ ~~~
0757b70 0 0 5 2 3 5 6 9

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION'2

to their source and their magnitude assessed. The investi- The same study of Ex. 6-1 and 6-2 was repeated in a
gator can readilyillustratethe flow streamlines,trace two-dimensional water table to illustrate the effectiveness
effects of flow separation,and point out good and bad of this technique. The water table shown in Ex. 6-3 is a
design features. The fluid motion can be clearly seen, and portable device and can betransported to various facilities
judged without resorting to vectors, contours, orother to provide flow solution5 to local problems. Example 6 4
conventional graphical methods of presenting flow infor- is a report of the flue geometry o f Ex. 6-1. It is obvious
mation. A series of models can be demonstrated quickly from Ex. 6-4 that the photographic record of the water
to show a sequence in devtlopmentofan acceptabledesign. table is superior to the smoke table. However, subsur.face
A typical before and after sequence is shown in Ex. 6-1 details are not readily discernible in the water table. Again,
and 6-2, which illustrates the boundary flow separation it takes engineering judgment to select the best technque
which can occur and the correction that canbemade in for a particular problem.
the flue gas ductivork between the economizerand the I.

air heater of a large boiler. Moviesand still pictures of ABSTRACTED FROM


smoke models have been quite effective in demonstrating
the characteristicsof a system to engineeringdesign person- R. C, Patterson, R. F. Abrahamse'n, "Flow Modeling of
nel who do not have the opportunity to view the models Furnaces and Ducts," ASME, Journal o f Engineering for
a t first hand. Power, October 1962, page 345.

EXAMPLE 7 -COOLING TOWER, FLOW RECIRCULATION

The Problem influencing recirculation. Because of the complexity of


the recirculation phenomenon, thequantitative significance
Cooling tower recirculationis defined as the proportion of these factors were evaluated by model studieswhere
of the air enteringthe tower that originatedfrom the warm, variablessuch as wind speed, direction, ambientandoperat-
saturatedexhaust air leaving it. This raises the inlet air ing temperatures and tower configuration could be easily
wet bulb temperature above ambient and reduces the over- controlled and measured.
all tower performance that might-otherwise be expected.
In power plant operation, the resultant high cold water Discussions
temperature means higher condenser temperatures and in-
creased turbine back pressure. The net effect is a loss in In model testing, it i s necssary t o maintain geometric,
plant generating output and efficiency. An adequate recir- kinematic and whereapplicable, dynamic similitude.
culation allowance must be included in the selection of Geometric similitude was satisfied by keeping linear di-
the cooling tower design inlet wet bulb if power plant per- mensions proportional to those of an actual tower. To
formance is to be assured under adverse atmospheric satisfy kinematic 'similitude,velocity components for
conditions. tower exhaust air, incoming air,and atmospheric wind
were proportioned to actual operating conditions.
Two non-dimensional terms -must be considered in
What Was Done
satisfying dynamic similitude in model tests of this kind.
A cooling tower model was constructed of 3/16 inch They are the Reynolds number and a densimetric Froude
mahogany to a scale of 1 inch equals IO feet or 1 :120. number. The Reynolds number is the ratio of the inertia
Theoverall length for the maximum 16 cell model con- forces to theviscous forces acting on the fluid. For stream-
figuration was 57.6 inches which corresponds to an actual lined bodies, the flow field and pressure distributions are
tower length of 576 feet. Each model cell represents a established by geometry and boundary layer effectswhich
cooling tower cell 36 feet long. The model and associated are directly related to viscous and dynamic forces. For
equipment were built so that a tower configurationrepre- streamline flow dynamic similitude will be identical for
senting 4,8,12 or 16cellscouldbe tested. This corresponds model and prototype only if the Reynolds numbers are
to a range of tower lengths from 144 to 576 feet. identical. However, in flow over blunt bodies,pressure
Fundamental aerodynamic theory and related experi- distribution and flow patterns occur as a result of flow
mental observations were used to identifythemajor factors separation induced by discontinuities in geometry which

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

are essentiallyindependent o f viscous forces.Previous For a cooling tower, however, the NFrf is on t h e order of
studiesconcur that identical Reynoldsnumbers are not 25, and the model is about 3100, both far in excess of the
necessary to assure dynamic similitude for blunt structure critical value. This implies that the plume momentum forces
flow as long as the Reynolds number is above 11,000. The far outweigh the buoyant and gravitational forces in deter-
minimum Reynolds numberwas 13,200 for t h e wind speed mining the plume path near t h e model. Thus, NFr' scaling
and model size tested. It was thusconcluded thatgeometric or modeling of the buoyant forces, is not necessary in t h e
shape alone controlled the airflow pattern and the pressure presentmodel test to assureaccurate near-fieldplume
profiles and that the flow fields of the model did represent simulation.
those o f a full size tower. Hence, for the model size, velocities, and operating
A densimetric Froude number NF/, is pertinent when temperatures chosen, it is only necessary to satisfy gea-
it is desired to model the behavior of a hot exhaust plume metric and kinematic similitude to simulate full sizepres-
entering a colder air stream. It is defined as: sure profiles, flow fields and plume behavior.

Conclusions

Recirculation occurs primarily because of theatmos-


or phericwinds blowing overandaround a cooling tower.
These winds influence theexhaust plume behavior and
cause low pressure zones on the leeward side o f the tower.
These phenomena cause a portion o f the exhaust air to be
Where; recirculated back into the tower, thus raising the inlet air
wet bulb aboveambient. The major factors influencing the
N F ~= ~densimetric Froude number, or ratio o f inertial magnitude of recirculation are:
force to buoyancy force (1) Tower orientation relative to the wind.
N F ~ = Froudenumber,or ratio of inertial force to (2) Wind speed,
gravity force (3) Tower length.
V = velocity through
thestack (4) Exhaust plume behavior and temperature.
Theresults o f the model tests conducted to simulate
L = configuration referencelength(diameter of the actual tower behavior indicate, in general:
stack in this case) (1) For wind, parallel to the tower axis, recirculation is
The ratioT , - is used as an approximation of the density at a minimum, averaging 1% percent. It is fairly constant
for all lengths and wind velocities.
ratio, LC!? For all other wind directions:
P1

The magnitudeof the densimetric Froude numbermust (2) As tower length increases, recirculation increases.
be considered because of the influence of buoyant forces (3) As wind velocity increases, recirculation increases.
on the near field flow behavior of the warm exhaust air (4) As wind direction approaches 90 deg to the tower
from the cooling tower. The greater the density (tempera- axis, recirculation increases.However, recirculation tends
ture) differencebetweenthe plume andtheoutsideair, to diminish for orientations of 67% deg and 90 deg when
the more influence the buoyant force has on the plume winds exceed 8 mph.
path, and thelower the NFr' number. Conversely, NFr' scal- The model test is believed to accurately simulate actual
ing becomes unimportantat very largevalues. The"critical" tower behavior since the model plume behavior is consis-
NFnumber has been determined to be approximately 0.8. tent with actualobserved cooling tower plume behavior
and magnitudes of recirculation determined by the model
*This is the square of the Froude number used in Example 2. test correlate generally with field t c s t experiencc.

46

7
P
COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1 980 SECTION 2

EXAMPLE 8 -LARGE COMPRESSOR FOR THE TULLAHOMA WINDTUNNEL

Definition of the Problem the model. Due to the low speed, the pressure developed
by the compressor was, of course, low and the proper in-
The problem was one of predicting the performanceof
cidence to the latterblade rows was obtained by adjusting
a huge 216,000 horsepower, 30 foot diameter, 600 rpm
(distorting) the rotor and stator bladeheightsandangle
axial flow compressor to beused in the transonic leg of
settings. The test results for different rotor bladeangles
the windtunnel a the Arnold Engineering Development
are shown on Ex. 8-3. .
Center (AEDC) at Tullahoma, Tennessee.
This three stage compressor (Ex. 8-1) wasan addition
Y"
~~~~~~~ -~
The second(moreexpensive)model-$as
-S& -
~

""

a li1 6 i
~.

Z"-~
~ -
high speed (9600 rpm) model tested at full scale Mach
to four other compressors used in series-parallel combina-
number (Ex. 8-4).
tion inthe main leg of the windtunnel.

What Was Done Limitation of the Method


Model testing was the means available to obtain the re- The low speed distorted model, of course, would be ex-
quired performance data prior to design and manufacturing pected to give a lower pressure rise and lower efficiency
of the compressor. Two models were tested. The first, was due to. the lower Mach and Reynolds numbers of the test.
a 1/18 siz low speed (2500 rpm), 1O0 horsepower model, The high speed 1/16 size undistorted model matched the
Ex. 8-2. For similarity of Mach number (tip speed), a 1/18 full size Mach numberbut had 1/16th thefull size Reynolds
site model should be tested a t 18 x 600 = 10,800 rpm in- number. It therefore would be expected to give a poorer
stead of 2500 rpm as limited by the mechanical design of performance than the full size compressor.

EX. 8-1 ONE OF FOURSECTIONS OF THE 400,000 HP TULLAHOMA WINDTUNNEL COMPRESSOR.


THIS COMPRESSOR WAS DEVELOPED USING 118 AND 1/16 SCALED MODELS.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SEC 9.23 -1 980

EX. 8-2 1/18 SIZE LOW PEED MODEL (100 HP) (74.6 kW)

1O0

80

60

40

20

O
O 2 4 6 8 19 12 14 16

F LOW CFM x 10-3

EX. 8-3

48

t
COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

EX, 8-4 1/16SIZE MODEL F ONE SECTION OF THE TULLAHOMA COMPRESSOR


(216,000 HP) (161,194 kW)

49

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 2 ANSIlASME PTC 19.23-1980

1.60

1.50

I
0 1.40
x
o
kK
W 1.30
K
3 (=J 1.000
8
Lu
cc
R.
1.210
1.20 . 0 1.429 -
A 1.503

1.605
1.10 -
t = l00deg F
t0

1 .o0
200 180 160 1140 120

INLET VOLUME FLOW, oc,x IO-^ cfs


EX. 8:s COMPARISON OF THE PREDICTED AND MEASURED PERFORMANC CHARACTERISTICS
OF THE COMPRESSOR

Results of the performance of the compressoras follows:


A comparison of the test results o f the low speed model TEST
SCALE
FULL
DESIGN
and the full scale compressor is shown on Ex. 8-5[11. The
model test predicted stall line matches closely thefull scale Pressure ratio 1.385 1.07-1.385-1S95
tests. The different blade angle setting curves are steeper Flow cfm200,000 247000195000*128000
for the prototype than for the model, due to its higher Efficiency 0.85 0.90
speed. Stall pressure ratio 1.585 1S90
The tested efficiency of the low speed model was 87 per-
cent,the tested efficiency of t h e high speed model was REFERENCE
86 percent and the tested efficiency of the prototypewas Estabrooksand J. R. Milillo, AEDC TR-57-15,
[ I ] B. B.
90 percent. Oct. 1957.

Conclusions
The use of an inexpensive low speed model and later a *The flow at design point pressure ratio was 2.5 percent low but
more expensive high speed model enabled the prediction could be adjusted by changing the blade settings.

50 -.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * L 7 - 2 3 80 m 0759b70 0052362 4 m

ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 2

EXAMPLE 9 -RIVER MODEL HEATING STUDIES

It i s generally accepted that river modeling includes The model was designed as a distorted model having a
studies with physical models of any free surface flow horizontal ratio of 1/465 and a vertical ratio of 1/60 in
through a body of water contained and encompassed by a order to avoid viscosity problems associated with small
geometrically modeled configuration such as a reservoir, models and correspondingsmall depth of water.The result-
harbor, ocean, estuary or river. The purposes are numerous ing scale ratios are listed in Table 9-1 below:
and include definition of flow patterns, density currents,
forces on structures, bed movement, erosion of shoreline TABLE 9-1
and mixing characteristics. Horizontal distance /465 1
In considering problems in the river model context, the Vertical distance /60 1
advantages include the capabilities usually associated with Area (vertical) /27,900 1
models such as facility of change or modification,
oc accessi- Vel ty 1/7-75
bility, control of test conditions and ability to reproduce Time 1/60
unusual natural phenomena. In additionsynoptic data, Flow rate 1/216,225
improved precision, and accuracy of readings are possible. K (heat transfer coeff.) 1I1
The scaling laws or relationships arebased on Froude Temperature 1/I
scaling since dynamic similitude for free surface flows in-
volve the ratio of gravitational forces and the dynamic or The lower 11 miles of the York River Estuary, starting
inertia forces. It should be pointed out that for certain from the Chesapeake Bay were modeled in concrete with
model studies involving density effects (thermal problem pertinent structures fabricated from steel, plastics and
or esturine problem), the densimetric Froude number is wood. In addition the additional 22 miles of estuary were
applied. This means simply modifying the acceleration of reproduced as a labyrinth inorder to fully model the tidal-
gravity (9) by the ratio of density difference and the fluid wedge (Ex. 9-1). An automated inflowcontrol and a water
density. level gate were both programmed to produce the tidal flow
Aparticular example could be the Yorktown Steam effects while a small pump and electric immersion heaters
Power Station o f the VirginiaElectric Power Company modeled the plant intake flow and heated outflow.
and the proposed addition of an 845 MW unit. The State Instrumentation comprised 240 copper constantan
of Virginia had imposed strict limits on the allowed tem- thermocouples linked to a computer in order to provide
perature rise in the area of the plant discharge. A model simultaneoustemperatures printed
by
the
computer
study a t the Alden Research Laboratory of Worcester center on a planview o f the modeled area.
Polytechnic Institute was commissioned to aid in develop- On the basis of the studies,an underwater multiport
ing and documenting a system to disperse the effluent and diffuser was developedand installed as the heated water
satisfy the state requirements. Since the plant site is in the outfall. The resulting surface temperature rises through
York River estuary, tidal conditions were involved, reverse the condenserswas 2F or less. (Ex. 9-2). Subsequent field
flow, salt water intrusion and navigation as well as aquatic tests of the installed manifold have confirmed the results
biology. indicated by the model.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ESTUARY EXTENSION MAIN MODEL BUILDING
.-- .-,

Licensed by Information Handling Services


FLOW

SUMP

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


-CHANNEL

CONTROL

I-iwLe T Ll-itlzR
EXTENSION

EX. 9-1 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF YORKTOWN ESTUARY MODEL


AVERAGE CONDITIONS

TEST ,4&,6JL71
SECTION B-B DlSCHARGE SCHEME: 30 ANGLE
AM6,ENT RIVERTEMPERATURE: 78.2F
TlDAL RANGE: 2.6 FT
FRESH WATER RUNOFF: Ocfn
DEPTH AT
DRY BULB AIR TEMPERATURE: 6OSF
LOW WATER RELATIVE HUMIDITY: 91%
SECTION C-C EQUILIBRIUM BOXTEMPERATURE: 76.2OF

\ 36 ft :\.

Licensed by Information Handling Services


0 20 40 60 ft
VERTICAL @aSZm zn
0 1000 3000 ft *
. I.\ . \ kIRIZONTAL m -. I-C

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


zl
.
l-u
W
_----.- CP
0

MAP SCALE

$ STAGE VERSUS TIME INTAKE RISE LB


HW 1.0 DEGF AVERAGED PLANT CONDITIONS
MW
FLOW PLANT RISE
LW UNIT (cfs) (OFI
o 2 4 6 8 IO 12
TIME-HOURS 1 275 16.7
ARROW INDICATES TIME OF DATA 2 275 16.7
3 1670 10.1

EX.9-2 TEMPERATURE RISE ABOVE RIVER AMBIENTSURFACES/PROFlLES


ASME P T C * L 7 * 2 3 80 W 0757670 00523b5 T
~~ ~ ~~~~

SECTION 2 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

EXAMPLE 10 - MODEL TESTINGOF LARGE FANS

Definition -- -IT nD
Mach number
a
Model testing of largefans would be conducted only
when it is not possible to test the full-sizfd fan other than If the model scale factor, model speed, and model fluid
in i t s field installation. Theobjective o f themodel test properties were properly selected so that all o f the five
would be to obtain preliminary performance information dimensionless parameters were thesame for the- model and
with the model fan tested in a scale model of the proto- the prototype, then the prototype performance could be
type installation. accurately predicted from the measured model perform-
Some fans required by industry today are very large in ance. However, it is usually not possible to do this without
sizeand require large amounts o f power to operate. Ex- an elaborate and expensive model test rig thatwould permit
amples of applications of large fans are largewind tunnels, the useof differentfluids and possiblythe use o f operating
mechanical draft cooling towers, mine and tunnel ventila- pressures and temperatures different from ambient condi-
tion fans, etc. Some of these fans may beas large as 60 feet tions.
in diameter and require thousands o f horsepower to oper- The applications mentioned above areprimarily air fans.
ate. The manufacturer of these large fans probably would If a 1/I O size model were operated with the same air con-
not have the facilities required to test such fans because of ditions, the following model operating conditions would
its size and power requirements. occur if Mach number were held constant:
(1) The speed ( n )would be increased 10 times.
Method of Modeling Large Fans
(2) The flow rate (Q) would be decreased 1O0 times.
Dimensionless Performance Parameters
(3) The head rise ( H ) would remain the same.
The performance o f a family of fans is described by the (4) The power ( P ) would decrease 1O0 times.
volume flow rate (Q), thedevelopedhead (H), andthe (5) The Reynolds number would be reduced 10 times.
input shaft power ( P ) or efficiency. The performance is
The change in Reynolds number would be a deviation
also afunction ofthe speed (n),a characteristic dimension
( D ) , the fluid density ( P ) , the viscosity ( P ) and the speed from exact similarity that would cause the prototype per-
formance results, scaled from the modeltest results to be in
o f sound (u). These eightvariables with three primary
dimensions (mass, length, time) can be combined into five error. The error would generally be in the conservative direc-
dimensionless groupsthatcompletely describe the perform- tion by predicting lower generated head and larger power
ance of a family o f geometrically similar fans by using the because of increasedlosses in themodel fan bladesand
Buckingham Pi Theorem.* attachedducts due to reduced model Reynoldsnumber.
The combination of five dimensionless groups that has A different set of assumptions for size scale, model fluid
proved to be the most meaningful for fans is the following: properties and what group o f variables should be held con-
stant will lead to differentconclusions and differentsources
Flow coefficient - Q o f error between predicted prototype resultsandactual
-3 field results.

Head
rise coefficient z gH Model Testing
The choice o f model parameters would be governed by
-
- P the testing facilities available for flow rate and power as
Power coefficient
pn3D well as the desire to obtain conservative model results. The
previous discussion assumes that all aspects o f t h e fan and
- np nD
-- duct geometry are scaled including clearances, blade thick-
Reynolds number
P nesses, roughness and blade shapes. The effect o f any vari-
ation from geometric similarity must be considered along
*The Pi Theorem states that a functional relation involving Q di- with any non-similarity between the model and prototype
mensional variables, whose dimensions can be expressed in terms dimensionless ratios whenevaluatingthemodelresults.
of N fundamental units (like M, L and T ) , can be reduced t o a
relation involving only ( Q - N )dimensionless variables. Example: The model fan should be tested according t o the Per-
(5 quantities - 3 units) = 2 dimensionless variables. formance Test Code for Fans.

54

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME PTC*L7.23 80 W 0757b70 0 0 5 2 3 b b L W

SECTION 3

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1 DIMENSIONS Dimensions were devised by the French mathematician


J. Fourier (1768-1830) as a means for clarifying units of
Scientific reasoning is basedon concepts of various measurement. For example, the velocity of a particle that
entities, such as force, mass, length, time, acceleration, moves on the x-axis is v =dx/dt. Since dx is an increment
velocity, temperature, specific heat, electric charge, electric of length and d t is an increment of time,-the dimension of
current, etc. All these things possess a common character- velocity is (L/T) or ( L T). Similarly,. since acceleration
istic, called magnitude. The magnitudesof an entity are an i s represented by a derivative dv/dt, t h e dimension of ac-
ordered set; for instance, one force is larger than another celeration is ( L I T 2 )or ( L T - 2 ) . These dimensions show
or one temperature is lower than another. Because of thatvelocitiesmay be expressed in feet per second (ft/sec),
natural order, the magnitudes of an entity may be placed miles per hour (mi/hr), metersper second(mlsec), etc.,
in one-to-one correspondence with the real numbers (or a and that accelerations may be expressed in feet per second
subset of them); that is, each magnitude corresponds to a squared (ft/sec2), miles per hour squared (mi/hrZ), etc.
number, andeach num ber correspondsto a magnitude. The The dimensions of a given entity are not fixed but depend
larger the magnitude the larger the number that represents upon the arbitrary fundamental units chosen to measure it.
it. A system of measurement is a specific method for estab- For example, the dimensions of velocity can be (length/
lishing such a correspondence. The way in which a system time), (acceleration x time), (volumeltime x area).
of measurement is set up depends, to a large extent, on Since force and acceleration have the respective dimen-
conventions. The customary procedure is to designate a sions ( F )and ( LT), Newtons equation when written in
fewentities as fundamental, and to assign arbitrary the form, F = m ( a ) shows that masshas the dimension
units of measurement of the magnitudes of these entities. ( M ) = ( F T 2 f.-) in the gravitational system. Conversely,
For example, length is regarded as a fundamental entity, in the absolute system, force hasthe dimension ( F ) =
and an arbitrary unit of length is specified; e.g., the inch, (M L T-2).
the meter, or the wavelength of a particular kind oflight. It may happen that certain distinct physical quantities
The unit oflength customarily determines theunitsof area have the same dimension. For example, work and torque
and volume. However, this condition is not essential. For each have the dimension ( F L ) .This situation results from
example, the inch might bedesignatedas theunit oflength, the choice of the fundamental entities; it should be re-
and the unit of volume might be taken as the v&%me of garded as a coincidence rather than an inconsistency. It
somc object that is prescrvcd in a bureau of standards. Then may be noted that work is a scalarand torque a vector
length and volume wouldboth be fundamental entities, quantity.
but this convention would lead to cumbersome formulas The dimension of an arbitrary variable Q i s denated by
in gcomctry. [QI. If Q is dimensionless,this fact may be denoted by
According to one widely used convention, deccptively [@]= [MO- 1.- P-0- ao]. As a number raised to the
called the absolute system, the fundamental entities are zero power is unity, this relationship is denoted conven-
mass, length, time, tcmperature and electric charge. Fre- tionaiiy by [S] = [ I ] . The dimension of an integral y d x is
qucntly, in engineering practice, force is r6garded as a IV1 1x1 or I V X I
fundamental entity rather than mass; thisconvention Dimensionsmay bc regardedas a device for determining
characterizes the so-called gravitational system.The how the numerical valuc of a quantity changes when the
fundamental entities of the absolute system are designated fundamental units of measurement are subjcctcd to pre-
by the symbols ( M ) , (f.),( T ) ,(e), (Q). Thesc symbols are *Thc fundamcntal units might bc kilograms,mctcrsandseconds,
cal led dimensions. or, altcrnativcly pounds, inchcs, and minutcs.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 3 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

scribed changes. This is the only characteristic of dimen- cosity, acceleration of gravity, speed of sound, and surface
sions havingsignificancein the developmentof dimensional tension, respectively.
analysis. Innumerabledimensionless products can beformed from
For example, since 1 ft = 0.3048m and 1 min = 60 sec, the variables F, L, V, p, p, g, a, u. However, it is shown in
an acceleration of 1000 ft/min2 is transformed to the dimensionalanalysis that anydimensionless product of
metric system as follows: thesevariables is of the form (NRe)" NE^)', ( N F ~ ) ' ~
~ . , al, a2, a3, a4, as are constant
( N M ~ ) ' ~ ( N w ~in) 'which
exponents. On the other hand, the products (NRe), NE^),
(NF,.),( N M ~and
) (Nwe)are independent of each other, in
the sense that no one of these products is identically a
1
1000 X 0.3048 X = 0.0847 product of powers of the others. Examplesof other dimen-
60
sionless products that can be formed from the given
The method illustrated by this example is perfectly variablesare V3p/pgand p F / p 2 . However,theseare not
general. new products, as they areexpressible in terms of t h e
preceding ones as follows:
2 DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS
Fourier observed that the lawsof nature are independent
of man-made systemsof measurement. Therefore,the equa-
tions that represent natural phenomena should be inde-
pendent of the units assigned to the fundamental entities;
for example, theyshould be the same for the metric system In general, a set of dimensionless productsof given vari-
as for the Englishsystem. If an equation possesses this ables is said to be complete, if each product in the set is
property, it is said to be dimensionally homogeneous. For independent of the others, and every other dimensionless
example, a continuity equation V = Q/A is equally valid in product of the variables is a product of powers of dimen-
all systems of measurement. Many empirical equations are sionless products in the set. Accordingly, (NRe, NE^, NF~,
not dimensionally homogeneous;hence they are applicable NM', Nwe) is a complete set of dimensionless products of
only for particularsystems of measurement. the variables (F, L, V, P, p, g,a, u). Dimensional analysis
Theconcept of dimensional homogeneity leads to a provides routine methods for composing complete sets of
general theory, called dimensional analysis. It may be re- dimensionless products of any given variables.*
garded as the algebraic theory of equations that are invari- The most significant property of a dimensionless prod-
ant under arbitrary transformations of the size of the uct is that i t s numericalvalue does not dependonthe
fundamental units of measurement. One conclusion from units of the fundamental entities. For example, the critical
dimensional analysis is that an equation of the type value of Reynolds number for flow in a pipe is stated to
x = a + b t c + .... is dimensionally homogeneous if, and be about 2000, without regard for the system of measure-
..
only if, the variablesx, a, b, c, ,, all have the same dimen- ment.
sion. This theorem is useful for checking algebraic deriva- Conversely, if an equation is dimensionally homogene-
tions. If a derived equation contains a sum or difference ous, it can be reduced to a relationship among a complete
of two terms that have different dimensions, a mistake has set of dimensionless products.
been made. This theorem, which is generally attributed to E. Buck-
Dimensionalanalysis is concerned primarily with di- ingham, is the foundation of dimensional analysis.
mendonless products. Certain dimensionless products arise The result of a dimensional analysis of a problem is a
so frequently that they have received special names.A few reduction of the number of variables in t h e problem, since
of them are: the number of dimensionless products in a complete set is
generally less than the number of initial variables. For ex-
Reynolds
number N R =~ VLp/p = VL/u (11 ample, the eight variables ( F , L, V, P, p, g, a, u ) provide
number
Euler orF/pV2L2
p/pV2 (2) only five independent dimensionless products (NRe,
Froude
number NF-r = V / a o r V2/gL (31 N F ~NM',
, NWe). In general, if there arc n initial variables,
Mach number NM,= V/a (4) there are n-r dimensionless products in a complete set,
number
Weber Nw, = V 2 p L/u (5) *Notice (according to Meyer) that the f i v e dimensionless numbers
given above are simply the viscosity, force, gravity, sonic velocity
in which F, P, L, V, p, p, g, a, u denote force, pressure, andsurfacctension,mcasurcd in terms of L, V and p taken as
length, velocity, mass density, dynamic coefficient of vis- fundamental units themselves, to replace M, L and T.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME PTCmL9.23 80 W 0759b70 0052368 5 W

ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 3

where r is a positive number. Formerly, it was thought Where:


that r is equal to the number of fundamental entities in- a = acoustic velocity
volved, but this is not invariably true. Van Driest [9i stated g = 32.2 ft/sec2
the rule that r is equal to the maximum number o f i n * M D = size
variables that will not form a dimensionless product. This A =area
rule canbe proved rigorously. For instance, from the set Q = heatingvalue, energy/unitmass
of variables ( F ; L, V, p, P, g, a, u ) , we can choose three of
6 =PlPo
the variables (e.g., V, L, p ) that will not forma dimension-
8 = TITo
less product. However, any four of the variables will form
a dimensional product. Consequently, r = 3. Van Driests a
rule is awkward to apply if there are many variables. A
00
more convenient rule thatis derived in dimensional analysis
is based on matrix algebra.
It is noteworthy that r generally depends on the set of The referred quantity:
fundamental entities that is chosen. Occasionally, r may be (1) hasbeen arrived at by assuming that the acoustic
increased by augmentingthesetof fundamental entities. In velocity varies as the square root of the temperature. This
particular, if there is not appreciable conversionof energy is not too serious as we generally neglect the effect of the
from work to heat or vice versa, as often happens in heat variation of the ratio of specific heats y and gas constant
transfer processes, heat may be regarded as a fundamental R . This could be partially corrected by redefining0 as the
thermal entity, in addition to temperature, and the factor ratio of acoustic velocities.
representing the mechanical equivalent of heat is not in- (2) has dimension, for instance, the referred flow can
volved. Examples may be cited in which this circumstance be measured in pounds mass per second, whereas the value
enhances the information that is gained by dimensional of the dimensionless flow does not give one an idea of the
analysis. machine size.
(3) does not involve the question of which dimension
wasused as the characteristic size in thedimensionless
3 REFERREDQUANTITIESAND SPECIFIC SPEED quantity, which i s the case, for instance,whenoneuses
the Reynolds number.
(a) Referred Quantities (4) is somewhat less general than the dimensionless
It is sometimes advantageous to replace dimensionless number as the size factor has been eliminated.
numbers by referred quantities in certain types of turbo- (5) represents the value of the particular variable while
machinery. When analyzing the performance data for jet under standard pressure andtemperature conditions.
engines[141 referred quantities have considerable conven- Referred quantities are often used to record the per-
ience. Examining one frame size at a time it is possible to formance of compressors, blowers and gas turbines under
eliminate the size factor, and with it the inconvenience of standard sea level atmospheric conditions.
defining a characteristic length.
Refer all pressures ( P ) andtemperatures ( T ) to the (b) Specific Speed
static sea level values ( p o )and ( T o ) ,then:* In testing a turbine, compressor or pump of any fixed
geometry, one can choose arbitrarily, as independent vari-
TABLE 3 REFERRED QUANTITIES ables, the rotational frequency or speed ( n ) and the pres-
sure drop (or rise). Selecting values of these two independ-
Quantity Dimensionless Referred Units ent variables completely determines the performance of
Number Quantity
the fixed geometry device. That is, the volumetric (or mass)
Air Fow w u wua/pAg wufi/j Ibm/sec or flow and power (or efficiency) are set. Any other desired
kg/sec quantity such as the maximum efficiency orbending stress
Rotational n rpm or rps or or end thrust will depend on thesetwo variables (rotational
frequency and pressure drop, or head ( H ) ) .
n/- nD/a
frequency** hertz
Onecan non-dimensionalize these two independent
Anyforce ( F ) FIpA F/& Ibf or newtons variables in terms of size (such as D = diameter) and a fluid
Fuel flow wf rvfQ/pAa w f / S fllbmlsec or property (such as a = acoustic velocity). Table 4 shows
kglsec typical non-dimensionalformsof the independentvariables
*See PTC 2 and other codes as applicable. speedandpressureheadandalso of the dependent vari-
**Formerly called rotational speed. ables volumetric flow, powerand bending stress.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
I
ASME PTC*KL7-23 B O m 0757670 0052367 7 m i

SECTION 3 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

TABLE4 TURBOMACHINERY DIMENSIONLESS*VARlABLES Another stress form could be obtained by specifying H

Speed E =
a
1 and u, to obtain (gHp/u)as a design number. ""

Balje[17] has defined aspecific diameter(D5)=(DH'/4/Q%)

Head =
a2
1 Independent Variables by eliminating the fluid property ( u ) and the speed ( n ) . It
is .interestingto note that:

()! ):(
Volumetric flow =a -(Q/aD2); mass f l o w =
=
n, Ds =?
T C
where = velocity ratio
r = (W/paD') De-
Someobservations, with regard to specific speed (n,),
Fluid power (rH ) ' = (pQgH/pa3D ') =
pend-
ent
may be of interest.
( P ha3D '); pf = PQsH
- Vari-
Consider as design possibilities:
Stress =S = u/pgD ables
Pump efficiency ~p =P# = QgH/P, (1) Driving through a gear of ratio ( r )
(2) Dividing the head among ( z ) stages
For a given turbomachine: (3) Dividing the flow through ( f ) parallel turbines
a = a function of (E, H ) and ( N R e ) , (y) (Npr)
(pump inlets), (compressors), then the
speed formula becomes more generally
specific

P = a function of (E, P ) and ( N R ~(y)


) , (Npr)
S = a function of (E, P ) and ( N R ~('Y)
) , (Npr)
qp = a function of (E, H) and (NRe), (y) (Np,.)

where P, is shaft power and u is stress and Npr is Prandtl


Number. If one specifies the two independent dimension- Thus, the concept of specific speed can be extended to
cases which involve changes in speed due to gearing, num-
less variables, speed and head A together with one other
ber of stagesand multiple flow turbines. The designer of
dependentvariable say the volumetric flow Q; onecan
eliminate the size (D) and fluid property (a) from the three steam turbines for power generation usually has a choice
dimensionlessvariablesand obtain a newdimensionless of 1800 or 3600 rpm***, number of stages, and multiflow
variable, the specific speed. low pressure turbines.

Summarizing
The specific speed is a number, which is calculated using
Thus, the specific speedcanbe imagined as a dimen- the design requirements of speed, flow rate, and head. The
sionlessvariable involving only the design conditions n, numerical value of the specific speed is an indication of
Q and H, after eliminating the size and fluid property.** the type of pump (or turbine) best suited to the given de-
For some turbomachines, specificspeedcould beexpressed sign requirements. For example, Figs. l l and 12 show[l6]
in terms of shaft power( P 5 )rather than volumetric flow Q. the variation of efficiency and the type of pump impeller
selected by expert designers to satisfy the design require-
mentsexpressed in terms of t h e singlevariablespecific
speed.

Other specific speeds may be obtained by eliminating


4 SIMILARITY AND MODEL LAWS
the size (D) and fluid property ( u ) from any three design
condition variables, For example, rather than specifying For experimental studies,referenceframes must be
n, Q and H if we prefer to specify n, Q and bending stress established.Rectangular coordinates (x,y,z) maybe set
(u), we obtain (n/Q) ( ~ / p gas) a~ design number. up on the reference frameof the prototype, and rectangular
coordinates ( X ' , y', z') on thereferenceframe of the
*Ignoring variations in the fluid properties, such as viscosity, com-
pressibility, and thermal conductivity, which are covered later by model. Usually thegeometric relation between correspond-
introducing Reynoldsnumber,-/(isentropicexponent) and Prandtl ing points of the model and the prototype is represented
number, respectively. by simple proportions betweenthecoordinates; that is,
**ln past American practice[15] the specific speed of pumps has x' = x K,, y' = y Ky, z' = z K,, where (K,, Ky, K,) are
usually been calculated using n in rpm, Q in gpm, H in ft and ig-
noringg. This gives a dimensional number having mixed units. ***For 60 hertz generators.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * L 7 - 2 3 80 M 0 7 5 4 6 7 0 0052370 3 W

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980 SECTION 3

1O0

90

80
x
2Z
W 70
52
U.
U.
W
60

50

40
500 1O00 2000 3000 4000 10,000 15,000
rpm diFE
SPECIFIC SPEED =
H.3l4
FIG. 11 CENTRIFUGAL AND AXIAL FLOW PUMPS

PROPELLERFLOW MIXED FRANCIS RADIAL

FIG. 12 PUMP EFFICIENCY VERSUS SPECIFIC SPEED


AND PUMP SIZE

positive constants called similarity ratios or scale factors. dx'/dt', . ...


where dots indicate that similar relationships
If Kx = Ky = K, = K L ; the model is geometrically similar apply for v; and v i . The corresponding particle of the
to the prototype, that is, the prototype is a uniform en- prototype undergoes the displacement dx, dy, dz in time
largement or contraction of the model with magnification dt; hence, its velocity is v, = dx/dt . . . .,
and dt' = K d t .
factor I / K L . If the factors K,, Ky, KI are not all equal, Consequently, Kv, = K,/Kt, .. .. Thus, the velocity scale
the model is said to be distorted. A model of a moving a factors are determined by the similarity ratiosK,, Ky, K,,
system is meaningful only if a time scale factor Kt is also K t . Likewise, the second derivatives provide the accelera-
established, so that corresponding times for the model and tion scale factors, Ka, = Kx/Kt2, . . .. If the model is
the prototype are determined by = t Kt. A moving model geometrically similar to the prototype, there is a single
is said to be kinematically similar to the prototype if the velocity factor, Kv = KL/Kt, and a single acceleration scale
factors K,, Ky, K,, Kt exist. When ideal kinematic similar- factor, Ka = K L / K ; .
ity exists, all ancillary effects must be scaled by these same Two systems are said to be dynamically similar if they
factors, such as approach conditions, turbulence levels, etc. are kinematically similar, and, in addition, corresponding
If a particle of the model experiences the infinitesimal parts of the two systemshave aconstant mass ratio,
displacement dx', dy', dz' in time dt', i t s velocity is v,' = Km = m'/m. Fordynamically similar systems, Newton's

59

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * 3 7 * 2 3 8 0
~
m 0 7 5 7 6 7 00 0 5 2 3 7 3 5 m
SECTION 3 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980

law, F, = m', ..
. , yields the force scale factors, K F =~ Consequently, by Buckingham's theorem,
Km Kux, , , , or K F =~ Km K,/K; If the model is geomet-
rically similar to the prototype, there is a single force scale
factor, KF= KmKL/K:= KpKf/Kz where Kp is the scale
factor for mass density.
in which @ denotesan unknown function. Equation (1 2)
The scale factors for a model and its prototype are said
signifies that, if two pumps of the same designbut different
to express the model law. In cases of geometrical similarity,
sizes operate at the same values of (Q/nD3)and (n D 2 / v ) ,
model lawsmay be derived by dimensional analysis. In
each has the same efficiency. This conclusion holds even
general, dimensional analysis reduces a relationship of the
though different*fluids are beingpumped by the two
formy = f ( x l ,x2, ....,
x,) to t h e form R = @(RI, , ... ,n P ) , machines. Reynolds number (n D2/v)represents the effect
in which (R,nl, ...., nP) are a complete set of dimension-
of viscosity.
less products of (y,xl, ....
, x,). If the independent di- If viscosity effects areneglected, an analysis like the
mensionless variables nl, n2,, ...., rP are adjusted to have
preceding oneshows that the shaft power P is given by
the samevalue for a mbdel as for the prototype, the
an equation of the form
dependent dimensionless variable obviously has the same
value for the model and prototype. The two systemsare
then said to be completely similar. If theseare fluid
systems,then they will have geometrically similar flow
patterns. Consequently, if pumps of t h e same design but different
sizes operate a t the same value of (Q/nD3),(which implies
5 EXAMPLES the same efficiency), their shaft powers varydirectly as the
5.1 Efficiency of a Centrifugal Pump density of the fluid, as thecube of their rotationalfrequen-
A part of the shaft power of a pump is spent in over- cies and as the fifth power of the impeller diameter. An
coming friction of the packing, but this is disregarded in alternative statement is: Foragiven tipspeed (u3 " n 3 D 3 )
this discussion. For purposes of dimensional analysis, a the power varies as pD2 which is proportional to the mass
centrifugal pump, or any other machine, is conveniently flow. Similarly, it may be shown that their delivered heads
specified by a characteristic length (e.g., the diameter D ( h ) vary as the squares of their rotational frequencies and
of the impeller), and the ratio of all other lengths to the as the squares of t h e impeller diameters (h u2 -(nD)')).
N

characteristic length. These length ratios fix the shape of 5.2 Film-Type Condensation- in a Vertical Pipe
"

the machine. Vapor at the-saturation temperature O flows through a


If there is no cavitation and if the liquid is a Newtonian smooth vertical pipe with a wall temperature 0 -AO. The
fluid, the efficiency 1) 6f a centrifugal pump depends on condensate forms a film on the wall that is an insulating
'the design of the pump, t h e diameter D of the impeller, layer. Consequently, the rate of condensation is influenced
the volumetric rate of discharge Q, the mass density p of by the coefficient of thermal conductivity k of the con-
the liquid, the kinematic viscosity v of the liquid, and the densate. The rate of condensation is determined directly
rotational frequency n of the shaft. More concisely, by the average surface film heat-transfer coefficient,h, as
the heat that is extracted from the vapor per unit time is
= f@,
Q, n, P, v, shape) (1 1) h A A O , where A is the area of the wall of the pipe.
where, as usual, thesymbol fdenotes a correspondence
Themaingeometricalvariable is thethickness of the
film of condensate. This depends on the rate of condensa-
from the independent variables to the dependent variable.
tion and the nature of the flow ofthe condensate. Therate
The word "shape" could bereplacedby numerous ratios
of lengths, L LJD, ....
Since p = pv, the dynamic vis-
of condensation depends on the enthalpy of vaporization
hf,, of the fluid. Since the volume rather than the mass of
cosity coefficient p could be introduced instead of v, inas-
condensate is significant, hf, should be expressed as
much as p is included among the independent variables.
enthalpy per unit volume of condensate. This is repre-
The delivered head does not appear in equation (1 1) be-
sented by X = (hf,/vf).
cause it is a dependent variable; .e., it also is determined
The flow of condensate from thewall is influenced
by the variables (D, Q, n, p, v, shape).
mainly by viscosity p and the specific weightpg. Since the
A complete set of dimensionless products of the preced-
laminar flow of the condensate is presumed, inertial forces
ing variables is
are neglected, and the mass density of the condensatecon-
sequently entersonly inthe productpg. Since the thickness
*Incompressible.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
a ASME P T C * L 7 - 2 3 B O m 0757b70 0052372 7

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980 SECTION 3

of the film is not constant along the pipe, the length L of 5.3 Dimensional Analysis of a Time Dependent Radia-
the pipe affects the coefficient of heat transfer. The diam- tive Model
eter of the pipe does not affect the thickness of the film
(and consequently it does not affect h), if it is large com- The intensity of external radiation incident upon the
pared to the thickness of the film. Thevelocity of the vapor surface of a wall from one side only is denoted b y q (e.g.,
in the pipe influences the thickness of the film to some Btu per second incident upon a square foot of the surface;
extent, but this effect is small if the velocity is not large. Fig. 13). The dimension of q is ( H L-2T-1)where ( H ) de-
If the interaction between the flow of vapor and the flow noted heat. The initial condition is specified to be 0 (x, O)
of condensate is neglected, the density of the vapor is ir- by 8 0 = constant. The heat conduction within the wall is
relevant. Since the process under consideration involves no governed by the differential equation.
appreciable conversion of energy from work to heat, the
mechanical equivalent of heat is not involved.
On the basis of the preceding discussion, we infer that
there is a relationshipof the form
in which u = k/C, with k being the coefficient of thermal
el k, pJ gJ P ) o (14) conductivity and C the volumetric specific heat (heat to
raise a unit volume one degree). The wall absorbs heat a t
in which fdenotes an undetermined function. The estab-
the rate al q, where al is the coefficient of absorption of
lishment of an undetermined relationship, such as equa-
the surface x = O. Also, the wall reradiates heat a t the rate
tion (14), is always the first step in dimensional analysis.
e1u04 where el is the emissivity, u is the Boltzmann con-
The identification o f the significant variables, and the ex-
clusion of the inconsequential ones, is the hardest part of stant, and d l is the absolute temperature at surface x = O.
dimensional analysis. It usually requires a good insight into Accordingly, the boundary condition a t x = O is
the phenomenon under consideration. Heat ( H ) may be
taken as a fifth dimension; the other four being F, L, T al q - e l a o 4 = - k - aaet x = O
ax (17)
and O . The dimensions of the variablesare then ( h ) =
(L -2 7- e -I ( e ) = (e), ( L ) = (h) = (H
(k) = (H L T" 8 - l ) , (pg) = (FL - 3 ) J (p)=(FT L -').
Sevenvariablesare involved, and five dimensions. Con- -L-
sequently, two dimensionless products may be expected
to form a complete set, This may be confirmed by Van
Driest's rule, or by verifying that th rank of the dimen-
sional matrix is 5. Onestandarddimensionless product, 02
N N =~ (h L/k), called Nusselt's number, may be seen im-
mediately. Another dimensionless product thatis obviously
independent of N N can ~ be found by inspection. Follow-
ing the custom of denoting dimensionless products by pi,
k AO
we write it as pl =
-s. The result of the dimensional
PSXL
analysis is, according to Buckingham's theorem,

where Q denotes an undetermined function.


Although the function Q is unknown, equation (1 5) is
much more amenable to experimental plotting than equa-
tion (14). On the basisof acompletemathematical analysis
of the problem, Nusselt arrived a t the equation, N N ~=
0.943 (al)?
It is noteworthy that, in this example, an advantage is X
gained by taking ( H ) as an independent dimension. If, on
the basis of the mechanicalequivalentof heat, we had writ-
ten ( H ) = (F L ) , three independent dimensionLessproducts
would have been obtained instead of two. FIG, 13

61

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
SECTION 3 ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980

Since the surfacex = L is not subjected to incident radia- too low for the model to operate a t equal temperature and
tion, the boundary condition a t the surface is the model consequently does not reradiate as much heat
ae
e2 a d 4 = - k - a t x = L
as it should.
ax This example illustrates the danger in a naive approach
to dimensional analysis, in which the significant variables
With the initial condition, equations (16 ) , (17) and (1 8)
are not carefully identified.
present a purely mathematical problem, provided that e l ,
Failure to recognize that el and e2 occur only in the
e2 ,al areconstants.The problem is quite difficult, because
ratios k/el and k / e 2 , and substitutingk, e l , e2 separately
of the nonlinear O 4 appearing in the boundary conditions.
in the dimensional analysis, would have resulted in the
Even though the mathematical problem is difficult, the
dimensionless product qL/kOo. As KO = 1, this yields
equations serve to identify the significant variables. Con-
K4 = I/KL, whichindicates that a smallmodelshould
sequently, dimensional analysis can be applied. Evidently,
receivemuchhigher radiationintensity than the proto-
the solution is of the form, type. Actually, the radiation intensity imposed by Kq =
e = f ( e 0 , x , t , ~ , ~ , u , q , k / ~ l , k / e 2 , ~ 1 / ~ l ) , 1/KL might be disastrous for a small model. As the preced-
ing dimensional analysis shows, the dimensionless product
since equations (1 7) and (1 8) may be divided through by qL/KOo really does notarise; rather, the product elqL/k60
el and e2, respectively. Dimensional analysis of this rela- occurs. It can be obtained by multiplyingthe twoproducts
tionship yields q/ue: and u 0; Lel/k which occur in equation (19).
The product L2/at in equation (19) yields K r = Kr_.
This signifies that the time required to bring a body of
given shape up to a given temperature varies as the surface
It is known that a = e if equilibrium prevails (12). area of the body - not as the volume of the body.
Usually t h e condition is satisfactory for gray bodies, even In all of the aboveexamples - systematic, boundary
for non-equilibriumconditions. Consequently, the ratio and material properties have all been suitably defined or
allel is practically unity. Equation (19) yields the model assumed. However, there are problems wherephysical or
law for radiative heat transfer. thermodynamic properties are incompletely defined. At-
Although a wall was considered, equation (19) applies tempts to model plows,road scrapers and other earth
for a body of any given shape. If the model is made of the moving machines have had only marginal successbecause
same material as the prototype, K d = 1 and Kk = 1. Also, the properties of soils are obscure. Also, models of highly
since u is a basic physical Boltzmann constant, KO= 1. If loaded mechanical structures, where the material is subject
the model and the prototype operate a t the same tempera- to creep, will tend to be inconclusive because the creep
ture, KO = l . Then the product o 0, Lel//? in equation (19) phenomenon is still being studied and i s as yet ill-defined.
yields K, = I/KL, and the product g/u 0, yields K, = 1. To some extent, the same problem arises in the modeling
These conclusions signify that a small model of a radia- o f steamwater flow systems operating under transient
tive system should have greater surface emissivity than the conditions, Here the properties of steam are documented
prototype, and the intensity of incident radiation should for conditions of thermodynamic equilibrium. The
be the same as for the prototype. Unfortunately, the con- enthalpy of superheatedwater* and subcooIedsteam*
dition K, = I/KL cannot be realized in most cases, since cannot be characterized for analysis using the usual
surfacefinishes for providing the required emissivity are mechanical measurements.Because of the limited under-
unavailable. In fact, fora smallmodelthe condition standing of all of the prerequisite information similar to
K, = 1 /KL may require that e > 1, and this is impossible. thosedescribedabove, the user of model studies is cau-
Consequently,models of radiative systemsare not very tioned that engineeringjudgment will be required to inter-
satisfactory. Commenting on t h i s situation, Chaoand pret and correlate the results of a model study in terms of
Wedekind[ 3 1 state: When the model and the prototype the prototype system. This judgment is only gained through
are made of the same materials, the model operatesat tem- practice and experience.
peratures higher than those of the prototype. The smaller
the scaled model, the higher the temperatures will be. One 6 THESIMILARITY LAWS OF REYNOLDS AND
thus encountersall the adverse effects inherently associated FROUDE
with such operation: namely,dimensional instability and
warpage, changes in surface and bu1k properties, deteriora- If two flow systems are geometrically and dynamically
tion ofsurface paints,variations in jointconductances, etc. similar, there is a length scale factor K L , a time scale factor
These conditions occur because the emissivity of the sur- *Thesephenomenacanbedemonstrated in thelaboratoryunder
face of the model being equal to that of the prototype is carefully controlled steady-state conditions.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * L 9 * 2 3 80 m 0759670 0052374 0

ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1 980 SECTION 3

K T , and a mass scale factor Km. The scale factor Kp for We suppose however, thatgeometric similarity is preserved,
mass density isdetermined by Km = Kp K f . By the defini- except for minordetails. Then if L is a length of the proto-
tions of velocity and acceleration, K v = KL/KT and Ku = type car and L is the corresponding length in the model,
KL/KF. Equivalence of Reynolds number yields Kp = LIL = KL isaconstant, irrespectiveof the particularlength
K,KVKL. Consequently, Newtons equation for viscous that is measured. The mass m of the prototype is propor-
shearing stress, r = pd Vfdy, yields KT = KpKV/KL =Kp K;, tional to pL3, where p is the mass density of the material.
Therefore, KFf = KTKt = K p K g Kini ,which Ff denotes The factor of proportionalitydepends on the design of the
the external frictional force onany part ofthe fluid. car. Hence, Km = KpKf where Km =mlm and Kp = p/p.
The inertial. force F;; on any part of the fluid is the Gravity has a significant effect upon the behavior of the
negative time rate of change of its momentum, hence, parts in a derailment. Consequently, the equation W = mg
KF;.= Km K v~KT. is essential. Hence, Kw = Km Kg. Since g is generally un-
alterable, Kg = 1 and K v = Km. True modeling requires
that there be a single force scale factor KF, and,since
weight is a force,
3
K F = Km = Kp KL (22)
where the prime denotes the model. When the present approach to model analysis is used,
This conclusion may be stated as follows: one must be careful to introduce only relevant laws, and
ln geometrically and dynamically similar systems, the t o include all laws that are relevant. For example, if weight
ratios o f inertial force to frictional force are identical for were negligible, W = mg should not have been used. New-
corresponding masses of fluidif the Reynolds numberso f tons law, F = ma, certainly would enter into any rational
the two flows are equal. This principle is known as Rey- analysis of the motions of the parts of a derailed train.
nolds law of similarity. * By asimilar anabsis, Froudes law Consequently, KF = Km KO,With equation (22), this yields
of similarity is obtained. Ku = 1; .e., corresponding parts of the model and the pro-
Namely: totype experience the same accelerations. As, by definition,
ln geometrically and dynamically similar systems, the a = d2x/dt2, Ku = KJKF, where KT is the time scale
ratios o f inertial force to weight are identical for corre- factor. Hence,
sponding masses o f fluid if the Froude numbers o f the
two flows are equal.
KT= fi (23)
(It is implied above that geometrical and dynamic For example, if KL = 1/25, KT = I/5; .e., the whole
similarity leads to similarity in streamline pattern.) process or any particular movement (e.g., a gyration of a
car) occurs in only one-fifth the time in which it occurs in
the prototype. Consequently, high speed photography
7 DERIVATIONOFMODEL LAWS FROM
BASIC
might beneeded to get all the details of the behavior of
PHYSICAL LAWS
the model.
Dimensional analysis is only one of several methods that Since velocity i s defined by V = dxfdt, K V = KL/KT.
can be used to derive model laws. A widely used method Therefore by
equation (23), K v = For example, if
rests on underlying physical laws which may be expressed KL = 1/25, the model should run at only one-fifth the
in algebraic form or as differential equations. speed of the prototype.
As an example, the modeling of a derailmentof a train Motions of the cars andthe wheels in a derailment might
is considered. Theobjective is to obtain realistic motion pic- be studied with a model of differentmaterialthan the
tures of the tumblingand slidingof thecars in aderailment. prototype. Then Kp f l . If Kp = 1, equation (22) yields
Separation of the wheel trucks might also be observed in K F = Kz. The relationships KF =Kiand K v = K a r e
the pictures. Simulation of mangling and rupture of the known as Froudes law in hydrodynamics; in fact, with a
cars requires consideration of properties of the material. slight change of wording, the preceding argument applies
For a model study of a derailment, the carsneedbe for a ship model instead of a train.
only crude reproductions of the prototype, although mass
distributions must be proportioned so that centers of grav- Bibliography
ity are preserved andmoments of inertia are scaledproperly.
[I 1A Modern Approach to Dimensions,Parry Moon,
*This assumes, of course, thatviscousforcesareimportant. A t large
Jour. Franklin lnst., Dec,, 1969.
Reynolds numbers the friction loss coefficient is independent of [2] Dimensional Analysis, P. Bridgman,Yale Univer-
viscosity and Reynolds number. sity Press, 2nd ed., 1931.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME PTC*KL7*23 80 m 0 7 5 7 6 7 00 0 5 2 3 7 5 2 m
SECTION 3 ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

On Physically Similar Systems: Illustrations o f the [ 1I ] Centrifugal Pumps, Turbines,andPropellers,


Use of DimensionalEquations, E. Buckingham, W. Spannhake,Technology Press, M I T Press, Cam-
Mys. Rev., vol. IV, p. 345, 1914. bridge, Mass., 1934.
Thermodynamics, Fluid Flow, and Heat Transmis- [ 121 Radiative Transfer, H. C. Hottel and A. F. Sarofim,
sion, H. W. Croft, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1938. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967.
Dimensionless Groups, J .P. Catchpole andG. Ful- I Similarity Criteria for Thermal Modeling o f Space-
ford, Ind. andEngrg.Chem., vol. 58, no. 3, Mar., craft, B. Chao and G. Wedekind, Jour, o f Spacecrafr
1966. and Rockets, vol. 2, no. 2, Mar. 1965.
HandbookoftheEngineeringSciences,vol. 1, Jet Propulsion Engines, Princeton University Press,
J. H. Potter, D. Van Nostrand, Princeton, N.J., 1967. p. 99, 1959.
Dimensional Analysis, Special Issue, Jour. Franklin Dissimilarity Laws in Centrifugal Pumps and BIow-
lnst., Dec., 1971. ers, A. J. Stepanoff and H. A. S. Hahl, Jour. of
Dimensional Analysis andTheory of Models, H. L. Engrg. for Power, Oct. 1961.
Langhaar, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1951. 1 Centrifugal and Axial Flow Pumps, A. F. Stepan-
On DimensionalAnalysisandthePresentation of off, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, p. 67,
Data inFluidFlow Problems, E. R. van Driest, 1957.
lour. A w l . Mech., vol. 13, no. 1, p. A-34, Mar. 1946. [ 171 A Study on Design Criteria and Matching of Turbo-
[IO] *Heat Transmission, W . H. McAdams, 3rd ed., machines, O. E. Balje, /our. of Engrg. for Power,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1954. pp. 83-114, Jan. 1962.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
APPENDIX
The Land Chart of Dimensionless Numbers
by Permission of Alliance Electric Co.
( L :I 1
ACCELERATION AEROELASTIC ALFVEN ARCHIMEDES

"_2E g13Ap,p2
pV?

sliffness flow speed buoyant force


aerodynamic force Alfven wave speed viscousforce

ARRHENIUS BAGNOLD BANSEN BINGHAM


fr 34ppY?
-___ h,&
___ "

RT 4dIJp,g Qmc /.kv


activalion energy drag on _parlicle heat radiated yield stress
- _
polenltal energy particle weigh1 heat capacily viscous stress

BIOT HEAT. XFER BIOT MASS XFER BODENSTEIN


ov

heal Xfer lo fluid mass Xfer rate a l interface inertia force bulk mass Xfer
heat Xfer within body mass Xfer rale a l interior of wall viscous force diffusive mass Xfer

BOLTZMANN BOND BOUGUER BOUSSl N ESQ


P129 V
ut (2grh)l"

"
bulk heat Xwrl gravity force inertia force
radiative heat Xport surf. lens. force gravity lorce

BRINKMAN BUBBLENUSSELT BUBBLE BUOYANCY


REYNOLDS
I2WAT
PXV
heal from viscous dissipation buoyanf force
heal Xport by molec. conduction v i w u s force

CAPILLARITY-1 CAPILLARITY-2 CAPILLARITY- CAPILLARY


BUOYANCY

"
viscous
- - force-,
""

surf. lens. force

CARNOT CAVITATION CENTRIFUGE CLAUSIUS


_.___.
P - PC. 2(P
'
-P4 ""
V'lp
Pd pv2 h,.AT
pressure margin
dynamic pressure

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C x l r 7 . 2 3 B O M 0757b70 0 0 5 2 3 7 7 b
~~
M

APPENDIX ANSllASME PTC 19.23-1980

(Co-Fe)
CONDENSATION-1 CONDENSATION-2 CRISPATION CROCCO

'
veioity
max. velocitv

DAMK~HLER'S DAMK~HLER'S DAMK~HLER'S DAMK~HLR'S


FIRST SECOND THIRD FOURTH
UI UP
"
:-
tt
"
QUI QUIZ
-
veo tr Deo CPPVT hcT

reaction or relaxation rate reaction rate hsat liberated


flow rate diffusion rate heat conducted

DARCY DEAN DEBY E DERYAGIN


2gHd
v21 "
v
r, rP
film thickness
( E I E S ) (diameter) capillary length
Debye length
vel. head &$i
orobe radius

DULONG EKMAN ELASTICITY-1 ELASTICITY-2


V2
cbTr
(&y'*
elastic force
kinetic energy vismus force inertia force
thermal energy coriolis force
see note 1

ELASTICITY-3 ELECTRIC ELECTROVISCOUS ELLIS


REYNOLDS
e,,V
q,bl

ELSASSER EULER EVAPORATION-1 EVAPORATION-2


V?
"-P "_ PS
. "
Fi
&J-, pV' ' pV*P x Y

pcessure force
inertia force

EVAPORATION- EXPLOSION FANNING FEDEROV


ELASTICITY
Pb -
27
az
- PV2
x,.
shear stress
dynamic pressure

Note 1 - r, is the solution to: T + t,i = -!+A

66

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * L 9 ; 2 3 8 0 0759670 0052378 8 m
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980 APPENDIX

FLI EGN ER F 1 0W FOURI ER H EAT FOURIERMASS


XFER XFER
Qm(CpT)'" -
Qv

A(P.~+P~*) wdi

FROUDE FRUEH GOUCHER


v2 v d3P2
:-
"

a PZ

inertia force gravity force Eravity force


gravity force viscous force sur. tens. force
~~~

GRA ET2 GRASHOF GRAVITY GUKHMAN


Qmcp -W p r
hl PVr

fluid thermal capacity (inertia force) (buoyant force) gravity force


(viscous force)z
-
conductive heat Xfer filtration force

HALL HARTMANN HEAT XFER H EDSTROM-1


d r BG"21
plr:
"_ QI.- uypl'
pvv P,,'

magnetic force
viscous force
~ ~~

HERSEY HODGSON J-FACTOR H EAT J-FACTOR MASS


XFER XFER
FI, xf4P
__-
PVI.II. Q v ~ a
LlM!?(+)2'3

" "_
load force
viscous force
"
time constant
pulsation period

JACOB JAKO-B JOULE KARMAN-1


2pc,AT PAP@
_" AV

POH,'
c,AT P*!
joule heating energy
magnetic field energy

~~

KIRPICH EV HEAT KIRPICH EV "ASS KlRPlTCH EFF KNUDSEN


XFER XFER
L 1 . 2 8 ~ ~ 1 ~ ~
Qd
hdT
"
MA (59 'I3 I ' apl
Dm~Rrn
molec. mean free path
characteristlc body length
sxternal heat Xfer intensity external mass Xfer intensity
internal heat Xfer intensity internal mass Xfer intensity

67
d \.

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
APPENDIX ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980

( Ko-Pe

LAGRANGE-1
KOSSOVICH LAGRANGE-2 LEVERET"
X"R,
CAT^
API
-
PV
P
PPWSE2
( y%
heat to evaporate moisture pressure force char. dim. of interface curvature
heat to raise body temp. viscous force char. dim. of pores

LUNDQUIST LYKOUDIS MACH


GH,lptF2 V
-
pl'' a

inertia force
elastic force

MAGNETIC-
DYNAMIC
I MAGNETIC FORCE MAGNETIC
INTERACTION
MAGN ETlC
PRAN DTL
p,2Hm2GI
GVB'I PV
"" -
pv2
magnetic force
dynamic force
magnetic pressure
dynamic pressure

MAGN ETlC MA.GNETlC MARANGONI MASS RATIO


PR ESSUR E REYNOLDS
6T
-~~ 22 mt,
Wu,,H,,,?
"
.
GVIpo 6T 61 PDt PI3
pv: see note 2
motion induced mag. field mass of immersed body
applied mag. field mass of surrounding fluid
magnetic pressure
._
dynamic pressure

McADAMS MERKE1 MORTON

put3

mass of HtO Xferred


(unit of humidity dl".)
mass of dry gas

NUSSELT HEAT NUSSELTMASS NUSSELT FILM OCVIRK


XFER XFER THICKNESS
Qd
hgATw
-."mel
Dmol '
Twl
pVDm01
(9) ll3 o r
bearingload
viscous force
total heat Xfer mass diffusivity
conductive heat Xfer molec. diffusivity

OHNESORGE I PARTICLE
I
P ECL ET H EAT
XFER
P ECL ET MASS
XFER
"
PC,,VI
-
IV "

h,. D
viscous force
surf. tens. force I heat
- convection
-. . - .. "

heat conduction
bu_lk mass X f e l
diffusme mass Xfer

68

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1 980 APPENDIX

(Pi-St)

POISEUILLE POISSON POMERANTSEV


-
d2 6p
"
QL~*
"

pv 61 hBT

pressure force lateral Contraction


viscous force longitudinal extension
see note 2

POROUSFLOW POSNOV POWER PRANDTL H EAT


vu1
XFER
asAT P
R, CPP
"

h,
viscous pressure
"

capillary pressure momentum ditfusivity


thermal dinusivity

PRANDTLMASS PRANDTL VEL. PREDVADITLEV RADIATION


XFER RATIO PRESSURE
6T
"
I*
- P V(+) lI2
61 DtTi ~8BT'
PD medium temp. change rate
3Q
inertia farce 111 body temp. change rate
momenlum diffusivity radiation pressure
m a s dilfusivily (wall shear force) see note 2 gas pressure

RAYLEIGH REGI ER REYNOLDS RICHARDSON


cpp2gl~@AT slap
Ph PV2
gravity inertia force buoyant force
ihermal diflusivily viscous force turbulent farce

ROSSBY RUSSELL SACHS SCHILLER


v
- V, V,
2wl VI<-&-)

inertia force
coriolir force inerlia force
buoyancy force see note 2
~_____ ~ ~ _ _

SLOSH T I M E SOMMERFELD SPECIFIC H EAT SPECIFIC SPEED


RATIO.
"W(QV)"*
_
(gHetY1'

viscous farce
load force
spec, heat at const. pressure
""

spec. heat at canst. volume

SQUEEZE STO K ES

6T
hCAK---
61

1I
heaI-Xferred lo fluid viscous force
heatxported by fluid gravityforce
-___
heat radiated
heat conducted see note 2
."
. ..- .
Note 2 - 6 y h x itdicates a gradient or rate f change coefficient between variables y and x .

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
APPENDIX ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

(St-We)

STROUHAL STRUCTURAL SURATMAN SURFACE


M ERlT VISCOSITY
IWv
__ "
PlPt
VT
"
yw I P?
E
!!bration speed
Xlation speed
_"
weight
stiffness

TAYLOR THOMA THOMSON TOMS


w%4p2 Pin-Pv tv QH
-

PZ Pout-Pi" I pV3l

fuel weight
centrifugal farce
"
viscous force
-
pressure margin above cavitation
pressure rise i n pump
"

ai; d:aR

TRUNCATION TWO-PHASE FLOW TWO-PHASE VISCOELASTIC


POROUSFLOW
Pa PdbV
__ "

P ail

shear stress viscous force elastic force


normal stress surf. tens. force viscous pressure viscous force
gravitypressure

WEBER WEISSENBERG
pv21
- (fz -ta) V
Ut 4
viscous force see note 3
surf. tens. farce

Note 3 - tz and t3 are solutions to: T + t , i = -PZ ( A + t3I \ )

70

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ASME P T C * L 9 - 2 3 8 0 U 0 7 5 9 6 7 0 0 0 5 2 3 8 2 T

ANSIlASME PTC 19.23-1980 APP ENDlX

NOMENCLATURE
a sonic speed (I /t) m, mass transfer rate or mass transfer coefficient (I/t)
pressure wave velocity (I It) particle mass (m)
2
A C
area (12)
cooling surface area per unit volume (1-1)
mP
mw
M
wing mass per unit length (m/I)
mass transfer per unit area per unit time (m/Pt)
As conducting area (P) M e mass of moisture evaporated per unit area per unit
Ar radiating area (P) time (m /Pt)
b carrier mobility, speed /voltage gradient (Qt/m) M" momemtum flux ( P p )
B magnetic induction (m /Qt) n number of nucleation centers per unit area (1-2)
C specific heat (12/PT) ne number of electrons per unit volume (1-3)
Co concentration (m /P) N natural vertical frequency of fluid element about i t s
CP specific heat at constant pressure ( P p T ) equilibrium altitude
in a density-stratified at-
cv specific heat at constant volume (P/t2T) mosphere (t-1)
cd ratio of dust mass to bed volume (m/13) P pressure (m/lt2)
CL slope of wing lift curve (dimensionless) Pa average static pressure (m /W)
d pipe or tube diameter (I) PC capillary pressure (m /W)
db bubble or droplet diameter (I) Pd dynamic pressure (m /W)
di impeller diameter (I) Pin total pressure at pump inlet (m /W)
jet diameter (I) Po atmosphere pressure (m /W)
di total pressure at pump outlet (m /W)
mean particle diameter (I) Pout
dm ..
particle diameter (I) PS local static pressure or pressure drop (m /W)
dP fluid vapor pressure (m/lt2)
D
D*
mass diffusivity (P/t)
axial mass diffusivity (P/t) 2P P pressure drop (m /W)
power input t o agitator (mP/t3)
Di mass diff usivity at interface (l*/t)
D
. , _._ mass diffusivity of moisture in body (P/t) . 9 charge (4)
Dmol.". molecular diffusivity(P/t) qe electron charge (9)
Dt thermal diff usivity (P/t) 9s space charge density (q/l3)
permittivity (Q2t2/ml3) Q liberated heat per unit mass (P/t2)
OP
permittivity of free space (QW/ml3) Of heat flux per unit area per unit time (m/t3)
OPS
es surface emissivity (dimensionless) Q 11 heat flow per unit time or heat flow rate (mP/tn)
QL heat liberated per unit volume per unit time (m/lt3)
E modulus of elasticity (m/ltZ) Qm mass flow rate (m It)
Eb fluid bulk modulus (m/lt2) Qv volume flow rate (13 It)
Eg torsion modulus of elasticity (m /It*) Qw fuel weight flow per unit time (ml /V)
Es shear modulus of elasticity (m /W)
Et tension modulus of elasticity (m /W) r radius from explosive to reference point (I)
rb . blast wave radius (I)
f frequency of formation (t-1) rB bearing radius (I)
fP pulsation frequency (t-1) rc bend radius of curvature (I)
FR bearing load per unit area (m/lt2) r hydraulic radius, ratio ofwetted cross sectional
Fb bearing load (ml/tz) area to perimeter (I)
Fi force on immersed body (ml/t2) PP probe radius (I)
FL bearing load /length (m/t2) rs shaft radius (I)
Fr resistance force on immersed body (ml/tz) rt tank radius (I)
g gravitational acceleration (I 112) rw wire radius (I)
G electrical conductivity (Q2t /ml,) R gas constant (P/t2T)
hc thermal conductioncoefficient or thermal conduc- Rc fractional difference in moisture content of bodies
tivity (ml /tZT) (dimensionless)
hs thermal conductivity of gas (ml /t3T) R", fractional change in moisture content of
body
hr radiant heat transfer coefficient (m(t3T) (dimensionless)
ht heat transfer coefficient (m/taT) S ratio of particle area to volume (1-1)
H head loss (I) t time (t)
Hm magnetizing force (Q/It) tf ratio of average free path t o average velocity (t)
H, static head (I) tr reaction or relaxation time (t)
Hst head produced per stage (I) tt translation time (t)
I porosity, ratio of void t o solid volume (dimensionless) tl time constant (t)
k permeability (P) t:! time constant (t)
kH horizontal permeability (P) t3 time constant (t)
kL longitudinal permeability (P) T temperature (T)
K wing half-chord (I) TC sink temperature (T)
Tg ambient gas temperature (T)
I characteristic length or dimension (I) TH source temperature (T)
lb bearing length (I) Ti initial temperature of body (T)
k
b
reactor length (I)
mean free path of molecules (I)
Debye length (I)
TI
Tm
bulk liquid temperature (T)
wet bulb temperature at moist surface (T)
Tsnt saturation temperature (T)
Lr mean radiation path length (I) Tt total stagnation temperature (T)
mb mass of body (m) AT temperature differential (T)

71

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
- "

ASME PTCmL7.23 80 m 0759670 0052383 L M


APP EN DIX ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

NOMENCLATURE (Cont'd)

body temperature change (T) film thickness (I)


temperature difference across liquid film (T) fluid.layer thickness (I)
temperature range of interest (T) unloaded film thickness (I)
surface temperature minus saturationtempera- wall thickness (I)
ture (T) heat of condensation (P/t2)
AT, temperature difference between wall and gas heat of vaporization perunit mass or heat ofevapora-
stream (T) tion (P/t2)
U reaction rate (m /Pt) absolute viscosity (m /It)
V velocity or flow speed (I/t) permeability of free space (mI/q2)
Vb bearing surface speed (I It) magnetic permeability (ml /q2)
Vf terminal free fall particle velocity (I/t) absolute viscosity in plastic state (m /It)
, , ,V maximum gas velocity when expanded to zero surface viscosity (m It)
temperature (I /t) zero shear viscosity (m /It)
v, reference velocity (I It) kinematic viscosity (Pit)
mass density (m /P)
VT translational speed (I It)
V
, wind speed (I It) mass density of air (m /P)
AV velocity difference (I/t) mass density of particle cloud (m /P)
mass density of dust (m /P)
W clearance width (I) mass density of liquid (m 113)
W weight (ml/t2) particle mass density (m /13)
X volume (13) vapor mass density (m /P)
Xt total volume (13) mass density difference (m /P)
vertical coordinate (I) mass density difference between fluids (m/P)
yv
Z
height of obstacle (I)
liquid depth (I)
mass density
difference
fluid (m /P)
between
objects
and

shear strain rate (t-1) interfacial tension (m /t2)


P"
h
(T-1)
temperature coefficient of volumetric expansion
coefficient of bulk expansion (T-1)
surface tension (m /t2)
stress at elastic yield (m /W)
thermal gradient (T-1)
Y specific heat ratio (dimensionless) shear or friction stress (m/lt2)
YW weight density (m /12t2) fluid shear stress at surface (m /W)
rf specific gravity of fluid (dimensionless) wall shear stress (m /W)
rp specific gravity of particles (dimensionless)
activation energy ( P p )
shearstresswhen = pz/2 (m/W)
air drag coefficient of particle (dimensionless)
explosive energy (rnP/tz) ratio of radial clearance to diameter (dimensionless)
rate of deformation (I It) angular velocity or rotational speed (t-1)
Boltzmann constant (rnlz/tzT) first torsional natural frequency of wing (t-1)
Stefan-Boltzmann constant (m /t3T4) rotational speed of agitator (t-1)
Stefan-Boltzmann constant (m /lt2T4) cyclotron frequency (t-1)
contact angle (dimensionless) vibrational frequency (t-1)
clearance between cylinders (I) indicates time derivative (t-1)

72

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980 APPENDIX

VARIABLES WHOSE RATIOS FORM NONDIMENSIONAL NUMBERS

DlFFUSlVlTY Kirpichev Heat Transfer


Lewis Kossovich
Nusselt Mass Transfer Lewis
Peclet Mass Transfer Nusselt Heat Transfer
Prandtl Heat Transfer Peclet Heat Transfer
Prandtl Mass Transfer Prandtl Heat Transfer
Rayleigh Rayleigh
ENERGIES Specific Heat Ratio
Arrhenius Stanton
Dulong Stefan
Joule LENGTHS
FORCES Debye
Aeroelastic Deryagin
Archimedes Knudsen
Bagnold Leverett
Blake "

Poisson
Bond MAGNETICFIELDS
Bouscinesq Magnetic Reynolds
Buoyancy MASS ANDMOMENTUM
Capillarity 1 Biot Mass Transfer
Capillary Bodenstein
Centrifuge Kirpichev Mass Transfer
Ekman Lewis
Elasticity-1 Mass Ratio
Euler Merke1
Froude Nusselt Mass Transfer
Galileo Peclet Mass Transfer
Goucher Prandtl Heat Transfer
Grashof Prandtl Mass Transfer
Gravity Structural Merit
Hartman PRESSURE
Hersey Cavitation
Hooke Fanning
Lagrange-1 Magnetic-Dynamic
Mach Magnetic Pressure
Magnetic Force Pipeline
Ocvirk Porous Flow
Ohnesorge Radiation Pressure
Poiseuille Thoma
Power Two-Phase Porous Flow
Prandtl velocity ratio RATES
Rayleigh Damkahler's First
Reynolds Damkohler's Second
Richardson Predvaditlev
Rossby STIFFNESS
Russell Aeroelastic
Sommerfeld Structural Merit
Stokes STRESS
Structural Merit Bingham
Taylor Fanning
Toms Truncation
Two-Phase Flow TEMPERATURE
Viscoelastic Carnot
Weber Gukhman
HEAT AND SPECIFIC HEAT TI M E
Bansen Damkhler's First
Biot Heat Transfer Hodgson
Boltzmann VELOCITY
Brinkman Alfven
Carnot Cowling
Damkhler's Third Crocco
Damkhler's Fourth Mach
Graetz Strouhal

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
APPENDIX ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

DUPLICATE NONDIMENSIONAL NUMBERS

Cauchy = (Mach)* Leroux E Cavitatlon


Colburn Prandtl
Mass Transfer Magnetic Mach = Alfven
Cowing = l/Alfven Newton = Euler
Damkhlers fifth = Reynolds Plasticity = Bingham
Eckert = Dulong Reech = l/Froude
Eotvos = Bond Sarrau = Mach
Hedstrom 2 = Bingham Schmidt = Prandtl Mass Transfer
Hooke = (Mach)* Semenov = l/Lewis
Jeffrey E l/Stokes Sherwood = Nusselt Mass Transfer
Karman 2 = Alfven Smoluckowski E l/Knudsen
Laval = Crocco Thring = Boltzmann

74
---
!

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
. ASNE PTC*L9*23 8 0 0759670 005238b 7

ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980 APPENDIX

PHENOMENA IN WHICH NONDIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS ARE APPLICABLE

AEROELASTICITY COMPRESSIBLEFLOW Gukhman


Aeroelastic Acceleration Jacob
Frueh Crocco Kirpichev Mass Transfer
Mass Ratio Dulong Kossovich
Regier Fliegner Merkel
Strouhal Knudsen EXPLOSIONS
BEARINGSANDLUBRICATION Mach Explosion
Hersey Radiation Pressure Sachs
Ocvirk Specific Heat Ratio FANS, PUMPS, AND
Reynolds CONDENSATION TURBINES
Sommerfeld Condensation 1 Cavitation
squeeze Condensation 2 Flow
BOILINGAND BUBBLES McAdams Lagrange 2
Bubble Nusselt CONDUCTION Power
Bubble Revnlds Brinkman Saecific Saeed
Jakob Clausius Thoma
Morton Damkhlers Fourth FLUIDANDMATERIAL
BUOYANCY Graetz PROPERTY
Archimedes Nusselt HeatTransfer Capillarity 2
Buoyancy Peclet Heat Transfer Elasticity 2
Caplllarity-Buoyancy Stefan Elasticity 3
Richardson CONVECTION Lewis
Russell Buoyancy Poisson
CAPILLARY FLOW Crispation Prandtl Mass Transfer
Blake Grashof Specific Heat Ratio
Bond Marangoni FLUIDIZATION
Capillarity 1 Momentum Archimedes
Capillarity 2 Nusselt Heat Transfer Blake
Capillarity-Buoyancy Peclet Heat Transfer Federov
Capillary Prandtl Heat Transfer GRAVITY
Deryagln Rayleigh Bond
Gravity Stanton Boussinesq
Kirpichev Mass Transfer Surface Viscosity Froude
Kossovich CURVED FLOW Galileo
Leverett Centrifuge Goucher
Ohnesorge Dean Gravity
Porous Flow Ekman Rayleigh
Posnov Rossbv Russell
Two-Phase Flow Tayloi Stokes
Two-Phase Porous Flow DIFFUSION Two-Phase Porous Flow
Weber Damkhlers Second HEAT TRANSFER
CAPILLARY JETS Fourier Mass Transfer Bansen
Bingham J Factor Mass Transfer Biot Heat Transfer
Elasticity 1 Kirpichev MassTransfer Boltzmann
Ellis Lewis Bouguer
Hedstrom 1 Nusselt Mass Transfer Brinkman
Ohnesorge Peclet Mass Transfer Carnot
Weissenberg Prandtl Mass Transfer Condensation 1
CAVITATION Rayleigh Condensation 2
Cavitation ENERGY Damkdhlers Third
Thoma Arrhenius Damkhlers Fourth
CENTRIFUGAL FORCE Dulona Evaporation 1
Centrlfuge Exploiion Evaporation 2
Ekman
.. .. ENTRAINMENT Evaporation-Elasticity
Lanranne 2 Archimedes Fourier Heat Transfer
Taylor - Bagnold Graetz
CHEMICAL REACTIONS Blake Grashof
Arrhenius Bubble Nusselt Heat Transfer
Damkghlers First Bubble Reynolds J Factor Heat Transfer
Damkghlers Second Buoyancy Jacob
Damkdhlers Third Froude Jakob
Damkhlers Fourth Particle Joule
COATINGSANDFILMS EVAPORATION Kirpichev Heat Transfer
Deryagin Evaporation .1 Kossovich-
Goucher Evaporation 2 Lewis
Nusselt Film Thickness Evaporation-Elasticity Merkel

75

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
- __ 7
ASME P T C * l 7 * 2 3 8 0
~~
m 0757670 0052387 7 W

APPENDIX ANSI/ASME PTC 19.23-1980

PHENOMENA IN WHICH NONDIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS.ARE APPLICABLE(Contd)

Nusselt Heat Transfer PIPE FLOW Poisson


Peclet Heat Transfer Darcy Truncation
Pomerantsev Fanning STRUCTURES
Prandtl HeatTransfer Karman 1 Structural Merit
Predvaditlev Pipeline SURFACE TENSION
Rayleigh PLASTICAND Bond
Stanton NON-NEWTONIAN FLOW Capillarity 1
Stefan Bingham Capillarity 2
IMMERSED BODIES Elastocity 1 Capillarity-Buoyancy
Bagnold Ellis Capillary
Biot Heat Transfer Hedstrom 1 Centrifuge
Bond Truncation Goucher
Cavitation Viscoelastic Marangoni
Crocco POROUS BODIES Ohnesorge
Euler Blake Two-Phase Flow
Fliegner Bond Weber
Kirpitcheff Capillarity 1 TIME
Knudsen Catlillaritv 2 Damkhlers First
Mach Capillary Hodgson
Mass Ratio Gravity Slosh Time
Morton Kirpichev Mass Transfer Thomson
Predvoditlev Kossovich TWO MEDIUMFLOW
Reynolds Leverett Archimedes
Schiller Porous Flow Bagnold
Stokes Posnov Blake
Suratman Two-Phase Flow Capillarity 1
Toms Two-Phase Porous Flow Capillarity-Buoyancy
IONIZED GASES Weber Capillary
Debye PRESSURE Gravity
MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS Cavitation Leverett
Alfven Darcy Russell
Ekman Euler Two-Phase Flow
Electric Reynolds Fanning Two-Phase Porous Flow
Elsasser Lagrange VELOCITY
Hall Magnetic-D3namic Alfven
Hartmann Magnetic-Pressure Crocco
Joule Pipeline Damkhlers First
Lundquist Poiseulle Strouhal
Lykoudis Thoma Thomson
Magnetic-Dynamics PULSATING FLOW VISCOELASTICS
Magnetic Force Hodgson Bingham
Magnetic Interaction Pipeline Elasticity 1
Magnetic Prandtl Strouhal Ellis .
Magnetic Pressure Taylor Hedstrom 1
Magnetic Reynolds RADIATION Richardson
MASS AND MOMENTUM Bansen Truncation
TRANSFER Boltzmann Viscoelastic
Biot Mass Transfer Bouguer Weissenberg
Bodenstein RadiationPressure VISCOUS FLOW .
Damkhlers Second Stefan Brinkman
Fourier Mass Transfer SLOSH AND SURFACE -WAVES Darcy
J Factor Mass Transfer Bond Fanning
Kirpichev Mass Transfer Bossinesq Frueh
Lewis Centrifuge Hodgson
Merke1 Froude Karman 1
Nusselt Mass Transfer Galileo Lagrange 1
Peclet Mass Transfer Ohnesorge Pipeline
Prandtl Mass Transfer Russell Poiseuille
PARTICLE FLOW Slosh Time Prandtl Velocity Ratio
Bagnold Weber Reynolds
Bouguer STRESS Stokes
Electroviscous Bingham Taylor
Particle Fanning Truncation

COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers


Licensed by Information Handling Services
-
......... "A"-: "L " . - L k " - L - " < G ~ * .

INSTRUMENTS
SUPPLEMENTS ON INSTRUMENTSAND APPARATUS
AND NOW AVAILABLE

APPARATUS PTC 19.2 PressureMeasurement ........................ (1 964)


PTC 19.3 Temperature Measurement. ..................... (1974)
PTC 19.5 Measurement of Quantity of Materials:
.......................

k
19.5.1, Weighing Scales. (1964)
PTC 19.6 ............
Electrical Measurements in Power Circuits. (1955)
PTC 19.7 Measurement of Shaft Horsepower................. (1961)
- -~ .- _=_._I_'._"
~.
PTC 19.8 Measurement of Indicated Power.................. (1 970)
. . . . .
. . . " . " "~~

PTC 19.1O Flue and Exhaust Gas Analysis ................... (1968)


PTC 19.1 1 Water and Steam in the Power Cycle (Purity and
Quality, Leak Detection and Measurement) ........... (1970)
PTC 19.12 Measurement of Time ........................ (1958)
PTC 19.1 3 Measurement of Rotary Speed................... (1961 1
PTC 19.14 Linear Measurements. ........................ (1958)
These supplementary documents . ,..,..,.
PTC 19.16 DensityDeterminations of Solids andLiquids. I (1965) 2
..............
PTC 19.1 7 Determination of Viscosity of Liquids, (1965)
give descriptions of, and PTC 19.20 Smoke-Density Determinations. .................. (1971)

directions for, the use and


PTC 19.23 Guidance Manual for Model Testing ................ (1 980)

calibration of measuring devices


likely to be required.

A specially designed binder


for holding these pamphlets i s available.

A complete list of ASME publicofions


w i l l be furnished upon request,

C 00047
COPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Licensed by Information Handling Services