to simulate reactor hydraulic conditions/67531/metadc... · to simulate reactor hydraulic...
TRANSCRIPT
ANL-79-7
nJ % -
21
t,1 STER
DEVELOPMENT OF A MK-H LOOP
TO SIMULATE REACTOR HYDRAULIC CONDITIONS
by
R. J. Page and L. E. Robinson
APPLIED TECHNOLOGY
Any further distribution by any holder of this document or of the data thereinto third parties representing foreign interests, foreign governments, foreigncompanies and foreign subsidiaries or foreign divisions of U. S. companies shouldbe coordinated with the Director, Division of Reactor Research and Technology,U. S. Department of Energy.
UbMC-AUA -USOE
ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY, ARGONNE, ILLINOIS
Prepared for the U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract W-31-109-Eng-38
"IT )
ANL-79-7
_ . ... r
i
:
,_
i
t
f
r
i
ii
._...,
j+,
..:(,;
.
Distribution Category:
LMFu3R Safety (UC-79p)
ANL-79-7
ARG.ONNE NATIONAL LAI:OR ATOrY9700 South Cass Ave'mArgonn , Illino i s b( 39
1.EVEIOPMENT F A MK-Il FALO()P
10 SUvIULA'E PEACTOk H1YD[AU LIC CONI)ITIONS
b)y
4. J. 'Page and T. E: Robinson
Reactor Analysiis and Safety Division
it _ . .. .. N t 11, -.- _-- -- ,--* .:--*-' -l e ~ "+... ' 5 '!lf: l r ~..l? r, " , I
January 1979
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT........................................ .7
I. INTRODUCTION................................. . 7
II. LOOP HYDRAULICS CHARACTERISTICS .. . . . . .. .. .. . . .. 9
A. Loop Pressure Drop . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . 9
1. Loop-body Pressure Drop.. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . .. .. 92. Pin-bundle Pressure Drop . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 9
B. Two-pump System Performance Characteristics . ... . .. . . 11
C. Sharp-edged-orifice Calibration Tests . . . . . . ....-.-..... . 12
III. SIZING OF FLOW-RESTRICTING ORIFICE.......-. ...-...... 13
A. Overall Loop Pressure Drop....... .................. 13
B. Calculation of Required Orifice Pressure Drop . . . . .. .. . . 14
C. Design of Flow-restricting Orifice . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . 14
IV. SUMMARY OF H6 HYDRAULIC DESIGN PARAMETERS . . .. ... 15
V. H6 LOOP HYDRAULIC CHECKOUT.. .. ........ .... . ... 16
A. As-manufactured Size of Fluted Tube, and Loop PressureD rop....................................... 16
B. Orifice Checkout during Flowmeter Calibration Tests...... ... 16
VI. RESULTS FROM H6 FLOWMETER CALIBRATION TEST ...... 18
A. Description of Flowmeters................. ........ 18
B. Results and Observations. .. .. . . .. . . . ....... 18
VII. HYDRAULIC PERFORMANCE AT TREAT .... A........... 20
A. Postdesign Hydraulic Changes ............. ........ 20
B. TREAT Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 21
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
APPENDIXES
A. Calibration of Fluted-tube Flow Area and HydraulicDiam eter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231. Discussion................... ..... .... . .. .. .. ... .. .... 232. FORTRAN IV Program Listing for Computation of Pin-
bundle Flow Area and Hydraulic Diameter.. .. . . . . . . .. 25
B. ALIP Performance Characteristics..........................26
C. Orifice Calibration Results.. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .30
D. Sample Calculation of Overall Loop Pressure Drop. . .. . . .. 31
E. Flowmetcr Calibration Data. . . . . . . . . .... .. . . .. . . .. 32
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.............. ........................... 33
REFERENCES...................................... 33
5
LIST OF FIGURES
No. Title
1. Mk-IIC Loop with Dual ALIP's. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Loop-body Pressure Drop...............................
3. Cross Section of H6 Fuel Bundle .........................
4. Friction Factors for H6 Test Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5. Dual ALIP Performance and Pressure vs Flow Map for
H6 Loop and Test Train . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6. Comparison of Measured and Predicted Flow Rates for a
Given Pump Current . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7. Lower Electromagnetic Flowmeter Calibration at 400 CSodium, Showing Input Current per Pump. . .. . . .. . ... . . . .
8. Comparison of Upper Electromagnetic Flowmeter OutputUsing Different Calibration Flow Tubes.
9. H6 Test-section Pressure Drop: Pin-bundle Losses plusInlet and Exit Losses...... ..................... . .
A.l. Pin-bundle Segment for Calculation of Flow Area and
Hydraulic Diameters........... ................-.-......-- ..
ALIP No. 1 Performance:
ALIP No. 2 Performance:
Dual ALIP Performance:
ALIP No. 1 Performance:
ALIP No. 2 Performance:
Dual ALIP Performance:
ALIP No. 1 Performance:
ALIP No. 2 Performance:
Dual ALIP Performance:
Opposed ALIP Characteri
Opposed ALIP Characteri
315 C Sodium . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .
315 C Sodium . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. .
315 C Sodium . ... . . .. .... ... .
400 C Sodium..................
400*C Sodium.................
400 C Sodium .. .. . ... .. .. ... .
480'C Sodium.................
480 C Sodium............ .. . .
480'C Sodium................ .
stics: 3150C Sodium . . . . .....
stics: 400 C Sodium..............0
Opposed ALIP Characteristics: 480 C Sodium.......... . . .
Orifice Calibration Data................................
Page
8
9
10
11
14
17
17
. . .".0 .0. . . . . . 20
22
23
26
26
26
26
27
27
27
28
28
28
29
29
30
B.1.
B.2.
B.3.
B.4.
B.5.
B.6.
B.7.
B.8.
B.9.
B.10.
B.11.
B.12.
C.l1.
6
LIST OF FIGURES
No. Title Page
E.1. Flowmeter Calibration: 315 C Sodium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
E.2. Flowmeter Calibration: 4000C Sodium............ ........... 32
E.3. Flowmeter Calibration: 400 C Sodium; Old Flow Tube... ... . 32
E.4. Flowmeter Calibration: 4800C Sodium............ . .. .. .. 32
TABLE
No. Title Page
I. Results of Pretest Flowmeter Checkout . ......... .. 21
7
DEVELOPMENT OF A MK-II LOOPTO SIMULATE REACTOR HYDRAULIC CONDITIONS
by
R. J. Page and L. E. Robinson
ABSTRACT
The Mk-IIC Integral Loop was modified to provide an
in-pile experimental apparatus that would simulate the subas-sembly coolant flow rate and inlet pressure head of the FastTest Reactor (FTR). There were two main design changes.
First, the safety dump tanks were removed from the Mk-IIC
loop and replaced by a second annular linear induction pump(ALIP). Second, a flow-restricting orifice was sized so that the
hydraulic requirements of prototypical test-section coolantve-locity (670 cm/s) and pressure head (0.74 MPa) would beachieved. In support of this effort, out-of-pile experiments
were conducted to determine the frictional pressure drop acrossa seven-pin fuel bundle; determine the pumping characteristics
of the dual ALIP system; determine the calibration character-
istics of several sharp-edged orifices; and improve the test-section outlet flowmeter sensitivity. The resulting redesigned
loop was used for the in-pile TREAT transient over-powerTest H6, which investigated fuel sweepout and coolability fol-
lowing fuel-pin failure under hydraulic conditions typical of theFTR. The procedure reported here will help in the design ofadvanced TREAT vehicles such as the Mk-III loop.
As an offshoot of the main problem, the flowmeters'
sensitivities obtained by calibration at ANL-East were foundnot to change appreciably at TREAT. This indicates that there
is no need to rely solely on the lower electromagnetic flow-meter as the only calibrated flowmeter when the loop is at
TREAT.
I. INTRODUCTION
In order to achieve TREAT in-pile experimental hydraulic conditionssimilar to those in an FTR subassembly, and to run experiments on preirradi-ated fuel, the existing Mk-IIC loop' design would have to be modified to increaseits pumping capability. In the version of the loop used for previous seven-pinTREAT tests, maximum coolant velocity was about 370 cm/s and the maximumzero-flow pressure head was about 0.24 MPa. It was decided to use two annular
8
linear induction pumps (ALIP's) instead of the single ALIP used previously,making room on the loop by removing the safety dump tanks. Together with
a significant change in the design of the pumps, it was felt that this con-
figuration would achieve the required hydraulic conditions. A sketch of the
loop is shown in Fig. 1.
,. _
i'
.
I'
r
Secondary,Can
PressureTransducerPort
ALIP
TREATCore
FlowmeterMount
Orifice
Burst DiscHousing(Blanked Off)
FlowmeterMount
TestSectionRegion
Max PinLength
1549 mm
Typ. FuelLength
343 mm
.ALIP
Pressure TransducerPort
Flowmeter Mount
ALIP
t
HodoscopeSlot
Fig. 1
Mk-IIC Loop with Dual ALIP's.ANL Neg. No. 900-78-759 Rev. 1.
Subsequently, TREAT TOP Test H6 was proposed to investigate post-pin-failure fuel motion under hydraulic conditions typical of the Fast Test Reactor(FTR). The fuel bundle consisted of seven irradiated PNL-10 pins containedwithin a fluted tube. From a hydraulic standpoint, it was required that thesodium coolant velocity through the fluted tube be 670 cm/s and that themaximum pressure head be 0.74 MPa. In FTR, this pressure drop is sustainedmainly across the shield, orifice, and flow-straightener assembly (0.40 MPa),across the pin bundle itself (0.25 MPa), and across the inlet nozzle (0.06 MPa).
The hydraulic design of the loop required the following:
1. Knowledge of the total pressure drop around the loop, as a functionof test-section coolant velocity.
9
2. Knowledge of the pumping capability of the two-pump system.
3. Subsequent design of a suitable flow-restricting orifice, if
necessary.
II. LOOP HYDRAULICS CHARACTERISTICS
A. Loop Pressure Drop
The pressure drop around the loop was considered to be composed of
the pressure drop in the loop body (due to friction, bends, and area changes)
and of the pressure drop across the pin bundle. The pressure drop across aflow-restricting orifice was not considered at this time since the final objective
was to calculate the orifice pressure-drop requirement, if any.
1. Loop-body Pressure Drop
The loop-body pressure drop was calculated as a function of
coolant volumetric flow rate,and was composed of losses due to friction, pipe
bends, and area change (including entry to and exit from the test section).The result is shown in Fig. 2. The pressure drop applies to that part of the
loop between the lower-pump outlet and the upper-pump inlet, excluding the
fuel-pin bundle.
0.10
o 0.06
00.06 -- Fig. 2
0.04 Loop-body Pressure. Drop.cc
0.02 ANL Neg. No. 900-79-25.
0 0 1000 2000
FLOWRATE, cc/s
2. Pin-bundle Pressure Drop
The frictional pressure drop across the fuel-pin bundle could havebeen estimated quite accurately by using the Blasius smooth-tube frictionfactor:
0.316 (1)
Re0 .2 5
in conjunction with
LpV2aP = f-- --- h 2 ,
where
Re = pVDh/p = flow Reynolds number,
L = length of fluted tube,
Dh = hydraulic diameter of fuel pin bundle,
and
V = test-section coolant velocity.
However, other work (Refs. 2 and 3, for example) indicated that
Eq. 1 could lead to considerable underprediction of the bundle pressure drop.Therefore, an experiment was conducted
PUMP to directly measure f for the type offuel-pin bundle to be used in H6, which
ADIABATIC HOLDERPNL--1is shown in Fig. 3.
5 4
PNL-10-3 R PNL-10-38
INNERLINER PNL-10-61
PNL-10-64 PNL-10-70
SPACER WIRE 2 I.D. FLAT
PNL-10-9 KEG SLOT
HODOSCOPESLOT
Fig. 3. Cross Section of H6 Fuel Bundle.AN L Neg. No. 900-79-17.
The experimental facility wasthe E BR -II water loop. Seven dummypins, 0.58 cm in diameter and 154.9 cmlong, with 0. 10 - cm -dia helically wr appecspacer wire of 30.5-cm pitch, were con-
tained within a fluted tube which allowedabout 0.023-cm clearance between thepins. This assembly was positionedvertically and run over a range ofReynolds numbers of 5000-70,000. Theflow area within the fluted tube, and thepin-bundle hydraulic diameter, werecalculated according to the methodgiven in Appendix A.
The measured pressure drop,AP, was corrected for inlet and exit losses, and the friction factor was cal-culated from Eq. 2. The results, shown in Fig. 4, indicated that the measuredfriction factor was only slightly (~ 5%) above the Blasius relationship and wellbelow those measured in Ref. 1. The data were fit well by the expression
0.331f = (3)
Re0.2s
which was used to obtain the fuel bundle pressure drop for the H6 test.
10
(2)
11
0.10
-- ---- BLASIUS FRICTION FACTOR, f: 0.316Re 2
Q08REHME - 7 PINS, WIRE WRAP IA. : 5 mm,
PIN DIAMETER = 12 mm, PITCH = 300 mm0c
R 0.06 38 "C PRESENT RESULTS -7 PINS, WIRE WRAP66 "C DIA.=1.0 mm, PIN DIAMETER= 5.8 mm,77"C PITCH= 305 mm
004 -%
0.02
E8 E7 H6
0 ' I ' I0 10000 20000 60000 80000
REYNOLDS NO.
Fig. 4. Friction Factors for H6 Test Section. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-27.
B. Two-pump System Performance Characteristics
Before the hydraulic design of the loop could be completed, thecapability of the pumping system had to be known. Therefore, a series
of tests was proposed that would yield data concerning the performance of bothsingle and double ALIP configurations over a wide range of flow rates andcoolant temperatures. In addition to the conventional forward-flow pumpsystem characteristics, it was planned to observe the characteristics of anALIP subjected to an over-riding reverse flow. This was a situation that hadbeen seen in TREAT Mk-II loop tests when post-pin-failure flow reversaloccurred.
The test was conducted in a Mk-IIC loop modified to accept an orifice
flowmeter and a throttle valve. This last was controlled from the top of theloop and seated at the bottom of the test-section region. A test section assuch was not used.
The general test procedure was to set a certain B-phase input current
to one or both of the pumps with the throttle valve wide open and to make
measurements of temperature, flow rate, and pressure drop. The flow wasthen throttled at constant pump current and flcw temperature, in a series ofsteps until the throttle valve was fully closed. Characteristics obtained in this
fashion were obtained for both pumps, individually and in tandem, over a rangeof flow rates, B-phase input currents, and coolant temperatures.
The procedure for obtaining reverse flow characteristics was to set acertain B-phase input current on the upper pump and then to increase thecurrent to the lower pump (the input leads of which had been reversed so thatit pumped "backwards") in a series of steps, taking pressure-drop and flow-rate data at each step. This procedure was followed over a range of inputcurrents to the upper pump, and over a range of coolant temperatures.
12
The test results are shown in Appendix B.
C. Sharp-edged-orifice Calibration Tests
The pressure-drop/flow- rate characteristics in sodium of several
sharp-edged orifices were required as part of the hydraulic design of the
1-6 loop. Orifices were used as (a) a flowmeter in the ALIP characteristics
test, (b) a loop flow limiter, and (c) a flowmeter in the calibration of the loop
magnetic flowmeters. In case (a), the maximum pressure-drop characteristic
(measured at "D- D" taps) was required. In cases (b)and (c), the overall, or
recovery, pressure drop was measured.
The orifices were calibrated in the EBR--II water loop, and the results
made applicable to sodium flow by use of the orifice equation
Q = CAo LAP, (4)
where
Ao = orifice area,
p = fluid density,
AP = orifice pressure drop,
and
C = orifice coefficient, a function of Reynolds number and ratio of
orifice to pipe area.
Then, for a given orifice,
a CNa WQ _P (5)Na CW Ap/p/W\ PNay
where the subscripts Na and W refer to sodium and water, respectively.
Further, if the Reynolds number in sodium is made equal to that for
which a certain Q and AP were measured in water, or if the sodium Reynoldsnumber is greater than a certain value above which the orifice coefficient
ceases to depend on the Reynolds number, then Eq. 5 reduces to
QNa P (WNa (6)
13
In other words,
7P7P = constant for a given orifice size and pipe diameter.
Thus, the orifice calibration characteristic in water, together with a
measured pressure drop in sodium, gives the sodium flow rate at the sodium
temperature implied by the density value.
Since the pressure recovery from the vena contracta to a region remote
from the orifice is a function of orifice-to-pApe-diameter ratio then, for agiven orifice, Eq. 6 is valid for both maximum and recovered pressure drops.
Orifice characteristics are given in Appendix C. In each case, the
upstream pipe diameter was 1.905 cm.
III. SIZING OF FLOW-RESTRICTING O(IFICE
Sufficient information could be obtained from the data acquisition
described in Sec. II to decide whether a flow-restrictor orifice was necessaryand, if so, to determine its size. The procedure was:
1. Determine the loop pressure drop, including that of the fuel bundle,
as a function of test-section coolant velocity.
2 From the pump characteristics, for a two-pump system determinethe input current necessary to give the required no-flow pressure head of
0.74 MPa (107 lbf/in. 2 ).
3. Determine the additional pressure drop required in the loop so that
the input current requirement determined in step 2 would produce a test-section coolant velocity of 670 cm/s (22 ft/s).
4. From the orifice calibration data, determine the orifice size that
would produce this additional pressure drop at the design conditions.
A. Overall Loop Pressure Drop
The pin-bundle pressure drop depended to a certain extent on the flowarea, which in turn depended on the manufactured dimensions of the flutedtube. Since this manufactured dimension was not known, calculations weredone assuming (a) a "tight" pin bundle, i.e., no clearance between the pins and(b) a pin bundle with 0.025-cm clearance between the pins. These geometriescoincided with the upper and lower manufacturing tolerances on the flutedtube.
14
Pressure-drop calculations were done, for a range of test-section
coolant velocities, using Eq. 2, i.e.,
P L pV
Dh 2
with the friction factor f obtained from the experimentally determined
express ion
0.331
RC0 .Zs
The pin-bundle flow area and hydraulic diameter for both possible
extremes of fluted-tube dimensions were obtained through the method covered
in Appendix A. The flow area also converted pin-bundle coolant velocity to
loop volumetric flow rate, from which the pressure drop in the remainder of
the loop could be determined, i.e., from Fig. 2.
0 500 1000 E500FLOWRATE, cc/s
Fig. 5. Dual ALIP Performance and PrFlow Map for 1-16 Loop and Te5ANL Neg. No. 900-79-22.
B. Calculation of Required Orifice
URRENT/PUMP Pressure Drop
From Fig. 5 it could be seen
that, for 400'C sodium, a B-phase
input current of about 32 A to each
pump would produce the requiredno-flow head of 0.74 MPa. However,
- if this pump current were used in aloop without a flow-restricting orifice,the test-section coolant velocity would
be about 900 cm/s (from Fig. 5).
2000 2500 Therefore, to restrict the test-sectioncoolant velocity to 670 cm/s, anadditional loop pressure drop of
'essure vss Train. 0. 31 MPa was required, for both the
tight pin bundle and the bundle with
0.025-cm clearance. That is, the
flow-restricting orifice had to be designed so that it provided a pressuredrop of 0.31 MPa at a flow rate between 890 and 1110 cm3/s, depending onthe manufactured size of the fluted tube.
C. Design of Flow-restricting Orifice
It was assumed that the tube would be manufactured to the nominaldimensions and that there would therefore be 0.013-cm clearance between the
- NOMINAL 'B' PH ASE CL
~~ aomps
35
25
ly COOLANT VELOC'T
- 640549
457
S366
1.0
0.8
0
0.6
cr.
04"-
01
0.21
v
15
pins. Calculations similar to those outlined in Appendix D indicated that, for
a coolant velocity past the pins of 670 cm/s, the total loop pressure drop would
be 0.27 MPa at 997 cm3 /s. The flow-restricting orifice had to be such that it
would provide a pressure drop of 0.31 MPa at a flow rate of 997 cm/s. Cross-
plotting the orifice calibration data of Appendix C showed that a 0.81-cm-.dia
orifice would meet this requirement, based on an upstream pipe diameter
of 1.91 cm. It was also noted that, should the fluted tube be manufactured toits lower tolerance, i.e., providing no clearance between the fuel pins (otherthan the spacer wires), then, for the required flow rate of 890 cm 3/s, thisorifice would produce a pressure drop of 0.24 MPa and the total loop pressure
drop would be 0.54 MPa. The necessary pump current would be about 28 A,and the corresponding no-flow pressure head would be about 0.66 MPa. On
the other hand, should the fluted tube be manufactured to its upper tolerance,the total loop pressure drop would be 0.66 MPa, the necessary pump currentwould be about 38 A (per pump), and the no-flow pressure head would beabout 0.85 MPa.
Thus, although having to base the size of the flow- restricting orificeon an assumed fluted-tube dimension was not an ideal situation, it could be
shown that Test 116 could be run at the required coolant velocity for any size
of fluted tube within the specified manufacturing tolerances.
IV. SUMMARY OF H6 HYDRAULIC DESIGN PARAMETERS
Based on the H6 test requirements and the considerations outlined inthe previous sections, the following design parameters were obtained:
Test-section coolant velocity = 670 cm/s (22 ft/s)
Initial coolant temperature = 400*C (750F)
Coolant flow rate = 997 cm3/s (15.8 gpm)
No-flow pressure head = 0.74 MPa (107 lbf/in.Z)
Diameter of flow-restricting orifice = 0.81 cm (0.32 in.)
Ratio of flow-restricting orifice to pipe diameter = 0. 182
Pressure drop across fuel bundle = 0.27 MPa (39 lbf/in.2 )
Pressure drop around loop body = 0.02 MPa (3 lb/in.2 )
Total pressure drop at design point = 0.60 MPa (84 lbf/in.Z)
Input ALIP B-phase current = 32 A/pump
16
V. 1H6 LOOP HYDRAULIC CHECKOUT
A. As-manufactured Size of Fluted Tube, and Loop Pressure Drop
The area of the manufactured fluted tube was measured in two ways:
(a) by recording the volume of alcohol necessary to fill the tube, and dividing
this by the measured length of the tube, and (b) by measuring the outside tube
diameter at several locations, and calculating from this, using the method shown
in Appendix A, the cross-sectional area. The flow area was then calculated by
subtracting from the tube area the cross-sectional area of the seven fuel pins
(including spacer wires). Method (a) gave a flow area of 1.55cmZ, and method (b)
gave 1.50 cmz. The 1.55-cmz measurement was assumed to be correct
since it was arrived at through a more direct method. The corresponding
clearance between the pins was 0.018 cm, and the hydraulic diameter was0.274 cm.
The coolant flow rate necessary to give a velocity of 670 cm/s past
the fuel pins was 1039 cm'/s. Calculations similar to those in Appendix D
showed that the overall loop pressure drop at this flow rate would be 0.61 MPa.
The necessary pump B-phase current would then be about 33 A per pump, and
the no-flow pressure head would be about 0.78 MPa.
B. Orifice Checkout during Flowmeter Calibration Tests
The 1-16 loop was instrumented with four magnetic flowmeters: three
of the electromagnetic type and one permanent-magnet type. These were cal-
ibrated in place, against a sharp-edged orifice located in a circular flow tube
of 1.91-cm diameter, which itself was located in the test-section region of the
loop. (This flow tube and the orifice were removed from the loop after the
calibration tests.) The orifice used for the calibration was 0.884 cm in diam-
eter. Its characteristic is shown in Appendix C for 400C sodium. The pres-
sure drop across the orifice was measured by transducers at the inlet to and
exit from the test-section region. The measurement w-, themiefore of the
recovered pressure drop with an additional drop due to friction losses along
the flow tube. The static head loss due to the vertical flow of liquid was ac-
counted for by zeroing both transducers at zero flow. The measured pressuredrop could then be converted to a sodium flow rate that was associated with a
certain millivolt reading from each magnetic flowmeter. The calibration was
done over a range of sodium temperatures (315-480*C), and the flow rate was
varied by changing the input current to the pumps.
Apart from calibrating the flowmeters, this process allowed for an
assessment of the design of the flow-restricting orifice. This was done by
calculating the total loop pressure drop, for a given flow rate, with the flow
tube and calibration orifice in place. This pressure drop included contribu-
tions from the loop body, the flow-restricting orifice, the calibration orifice,and the flow-tube frictional head loss. Then, from Fig. 5, the necessary
17
(theoretical) pump current could be found. This could then be compared with
the relationship between measured pump current and flow rate. This compar-
ison is shown in Fig. 6, which indicates that, in general, a somewhat higher
pump current was required to produce a given flow rate than had been calcu-
lated. The difference, however, was quite small and, in fact, decreased as
the flow rate approached the design point.
500 1000
Fig. G
Comparison of Measured and PredictedFlow Rates for a Given Pump Current.
A NL Neg. No. 900-79-21.
1500FLQWRATE ,c/s
In addition, since the pressure drop across the calibration orifice was
close to that across the H6 fuel-pin bundle (0.250 MPa, compared with0.233 MPa at the design flow rate of 1039 cm 3/s), an estimate could be madeof the pump current that would be required for the actual Test H6 in TREAT.Figure 7 shows a typical flowmeter calibration plot for 400 C sodium. A
cross-plot of this indicated that pump input currents of about 36 A per pumpwould be required, as opposed to the 33 A originally estimated from the de-sign calculations. It was concluded that the H6 hydraulic design wassatisfactory.
Fig. 7
Lower Electromagnetic Flowmeter Calibrationat 400 C Sodium, Showing Input Current perPump. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-20.
E
I-
0
A
-FLOWRATEcc/s
1000 1500500
40
30
20
10
E
0
z
/
MEASURED
CALCULATED
- -
Ud0
CURRENT/ PUMP = 38.5 amps
30.7
21.0
10.3
r 1 - 1 -
21
u
i
18
VI. RESULTS FROM H6 FLOWMETER CALIBRATION TEST
A. Description of Flowmeters
Each of the four magnetic flowmeters was calibrated against a
0.884-cm-dia orifice contained in a 1.91-cm-dia flow tube. The table belowgives details concerning each flowmeter and its location.
No. of Turns
Type on Coil Location
Permanent magnet - Lower bend
Electromagnet 1080 Between pumpsElectromagnet 1080 Test-section inlet
Electromagnet 2070 Test-section outlet
The electromagnet at the test-section outlet was of a new design in
that the number of turns on the coil had been doubled in order to increase the
sensitivity of the flowmeter. Bench tests on such a magnet indicated that sat-
isfactory performance could be expected.
The removal of the dump tanks from the Mk-IIC loop used for Test H6
allowed for placement of a flowmeter on the spool piece connecting the two
pumps. Space considerations made the design of this flowmeter somewhatdifferent from conventional Mk-II loop flowmeters, but the casual number of
coil turns (1080) was used.
The other two flowmeters were of types used in previous Mk-Il loop
tests.
B. Results and Observations
The flowmeters were calibrated at three nominal values of sodium
temperature: 315, 400, and 480*C. Temperature, pressure, and flowmeter
data were taken at several values of pump-input B-phase current, up to a
maximum of about 40 A per pump. The flowmeter data were plotted against
measured flow rate (Appendix E gives the complete results), and a calibration
constant was obtained from the slope of each line. A more detailed study,
which considered the sensitivity at each data point, revealed a small, but con-sistent, effect of sodium temperature on the calibration "constant." The tablebelow details the sensitivity of each flowmeter as a function of temperature.
19
Temperature, Sensitivity,Type Location C pV/(cm3 / s)
Permanent magnet Lower bend 400 3.17
480 3.01
Electromagnet Between pumps 400 1.60
480 1.54
Electromagnet Test-section inlet 400 1.57
480 1.49
Electromagnet Test-section outlet 400 1.06
480 1.06
Thus, for each flowmeter except the one at the test-section outlet,
there was a drop in sensitivity of about 4% as the sodium temperature in-creased from 400 to 480 C. Why the upper flowmeter should be immune to
temperature change when the others were not is not clear at this time. How-ever, that it was so seems to be verified by the results of the TREAT H6 in-pile test, 4 which showed that the permanent-magnet flowmeter, the between-
pumps electromagnet, and the test-section-inlet electromagnet all evidenceddownward drift in output signal as the sodium temperature increased, while
the upper-flowmeter signal remained steady.
The zero-flow output of the flowmeters, which has caused some con-
cern in recent experiments, was, typically, only about 3% of the output at thedesign flow rate. The zero-flow output was not, therefore, a major source ofuncertainty in the computation of the flowmeter sensitivity although it was takeninto account.
A further observation concerns the question of whether the upper flow-
meter can be calibrated against the flow-tube orifice, as the other flowmetersare, and retain its calibration at TREAT, or whether, as is current practice,
the upper flowmeter must be calibrated at TREAT against the lower flowmeter.The problem arose because the geometry of the orifice flow tube in the vicinityof the upper flowmeter differs somewhat from that of the actual test train, andbecause the effect of the fuel-pin bundle and thermocouple support structurejust upstream of the flowmeter location was unknown. This matter was partiallyinvestigated by using a second orifice flow tube, with similar geometry to theactual test train and with the upstream thermocouple support structure, andcomparing the results with those obtained using the old flow tube. The results,shown in Fig. 8, indicate that the upper-flowmeter calibration was unchanged,and that it could therefore be calibrated directly against the orifice.
20
0 OLD FLOW TUBE0 NEW FLOW TUBE
11.0-- C&0 A Fig. 8
Comparison of Upper Electromagnetic Flow-
meter Output Using Different Calibration
X Flow Tubes. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-19.
0.5
00 500 1000
FLOWRATE,cc/s
VII. HYDRAULIC PERFORMANCE AT TREAT
A. Postdesign Hydraulic Changes
Conditions for TREAT Test H6 differed somewhat from those used todefine the design point. First, the initial coolant temperature was increasedfrom 400 to 470 C, and second the initial coolant flow velocity was decreasedfrom 670 to 610 cm/s (945 cm 3/s). Both changes were made to ensure fuel-pinfailure during the test.
The first design change, i.e., increasing coolant temperature to 470*C,
could have made it difficult to meet the design flow rate of 670 cm/s. Calcu-lated pressure drop for these conditions was 0.59 MPa, and the dual ALIPperformance characteristic for 480*C sodium (see Fig. B.9) indicated that a
pump input current of 40 A per pump would be needed. However, reducingthe flow-rate requirement also reduced the calculated total pressure drop to
about 0.50 MPa, which could be achieved with input currents of about 32 A perpump. Taking into account the experience gained during the flowmeter cali-
bration runs, the pump current so estimated was probably some 10% low.Therefore, one would expect to meet the new hydraulic conditions, in TREAT,
with pump currents of about 35 A per pump.
21
B. TREAT Data
During the H6 loop checkout runs at TREAT, it was found that, as was
to be expected, the flowmeters' calibration constants had changed somewhat.There is no means of independently measuring the loop flow rate at TREAT.
However, ideally, at a certain flow rate, all the flowmeters should give thesame result when their output, in millivolts, is converted to flow rate by theirindividual calibration factors. Pretest checkout runs indicated that, in fact,
the measured flow rates varied by about 6% about the average measured value.Table I shows results obtained from one such run. The pump current repre-
sents the total current to both pumps. Whereas, in Sec. A above, pump cur-rents of 35 A per pump, i.e., 70 A total, were predicted for the required flowrate, in fact a total pump amperage of 71 A was needed. This was a very
satisfactory (although probably somewhat fortuitous) result.
TABLE I. Results of Pretest Flowmeter Checkout
Flow Rates, cm 3/s
Pump Permanent Upper Lower Between-pumpsCurrent Magnet Flowmeter Flowmeter Flowmeter Average
0 0 0 0 0 020 334 370 364 401 38040 677 656 639 721 67360 885 867 840 949 88566 918 898 868 982 91771 948 928 894 1008 945
It might be expected that the checkout of the flowmeter(s) at TREATwould indicate that the calibration for the permanent magnet and the upperflowmeter had changed considerably from their original values. This is dueto (a) the suspected temperature dependency of the permanent magnet, and(b) the effect of the fuel-pin bundle on the flow characteristics, and hence onthe output of the upper flowmeter. However, as can be seen, neither calibrationappears to have changed much. It therefore seems that both these flowmeters
could be used at TREAT as calibrated instruments, using the sensitivities de-termined earlier at ANL-East. Given the uncertain lifetime of the lower elec-tromagnet, this would be a significant improvement in operating capability.
It was stated previously that there were no means, at TREAT, of inde-pendently measuring the loop flow rate. This is true if good accuracy is re-
quired. However, during the H6 pretest checkout, an attempt was made toestimate the flow rate by measuring the pressure drop across the fuel-pin
bundle. Since the range of the test-section inlet and outlet pressure transduc-ers was 0-17 MPa, while the maximum pressure to be measured was onlyabout 0.2 MPa, this procedure could not be described as accurate. The ten-dency for the transducers to drift also hindered the calculation.
22
The results are given in the table below.
Temperature,oC
455450
Total Average FlowmeterPump current, A Flow Rates, cmn/s
080
0973
LowerPressure
Transducer
mV MPa
0.083 0.09750.286 0.3359
UpperPressure
Transducer
mV MPa
0.061 0.06160.051 0.0516
The pressure drop is then computed to be 0.2485 MPa. Referring to
Fig. 9, which gives the test-section pressure drop (including pin-bundle inlet
and exit losses) as a function of coolant temperature and test-section velocity,
this measured pressure drop corresponds to a flow rate of 1062 cm3/s, i.e.,about 9% higher than the average flowmeter reading.
60
50 0.35
400 427 455 483 TEMP. C
750 800 850 900 TEMP.*F- 0.30c'J.-
0.25
O0-0.20 2
0.15
0.10
0.05
0
Fig. 9
H6 Test-section Pressure Drop: Pin-bundle Losses plus Inlet and ExitLosses. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-32.
One may conclude that, although this method of measuring loop flowrate is rough, it can nevertheless be used as a check on the magnetic flowmeterreading and, in a pinch, be used to recalibrate the flowmeters should they, forsome reason, appear to have suffered a severe loss in sensitivity.
40
~-
30
20
24 732
22 -SODIUM VEL. 671
-ft/s
18 549
SODIUM VEL.15 457 cm/s
1 g305
5 152
101
0
23
APPENDIX A
Calculation of Fluted-tube Flow Area and Hydraulic Diameter*
1. Discussion
Figure A.1 shows a 30* "slice" from the cross section of a seven-pin
fuel bundle contained in a fluted tube. This "slice" is further divided into three
parts. The area and wetted perimeter of each of these parts are required for
test-bundle pressure-drop calculations. They are also required as input to
the COBRA-II thermal-hydraulics code.
do/2
HMO
K SPACER WIRE
8 o F
CENTRAL PERIPERAL
2
edo/2 -S do r - S+
Note: AC = R1 and angle AMF equals 90.
d0 = diameter of central and peripheral pins;
dl= diameter of spacer wire on central pin;
d2 = diameter of spacer wire on pCripheralpin;
R1 = inner radius of fluted tube;R2 = outer radius of fluted tube and distance
from center of flute to center of cluster;S = spacing between central pin and periph-
eral pin, and between periphCral pinand wall.
Fig. A.1. Pin-bundle Segment for Calculation of Flow Area and
Hydraulic Diameters. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-24.
The calculations in this appendix allow for variation in pin diameterand wire-wrap diameter. In addition, the central-pin wire wrap may have adifferent value from that of the peripheral pin. The space between the pins isalso variable, allowing for the existence of variable clearance. This last isimportant since, depending on the manufactured size of the fluted tube, the flowarea could be increased by nearly 25% over that for the nominal "tight" fuelbundle.
It was assumed in the calculations that the space between the adjacentpins is the same as that between the peripheral pin and the wall of the flutedtube, and between the peripheral pin and the fluted part of the tube wall. Asa consequence of this assumption, in Fig. A.1, e = 30 and K = 600.
The area and wetted perimeter of each segment can be calculated fromthe following expressions:
Al 1 42T3 S Z 1 dl Z 2 dZAo 4
*Based on work by Dr. A. E. Wright (ANL).
A2
and
A3
A0
Al 1 (d 1\2
7 i+=)sin (*
+ S sin/
Ao = d4
+2n,/
6 -o
and Ai = area of segment i,
= arc cos[ 1 - - 30*,
and
6 = 300 -
P1 _- - 1 +
P0 4
- -1+Po 4\
5 + 7(S/d0 )arc cos 3 S '
3+2dJ
2 d2\3 ,
2 di\, o
P3 _ 1 3- -6Po Z n \2
S+d2 ++ +
,;J
where
Po = nd and Pi = perimeter of segment i.
Then the total flow area of the fuel bundle is
A = 12Ao( A+
24
where
and
A3
-r +
I dl- d
25
the total wetted perimeter is
P = 12P0---+---+---,P0='0 f'
and the pin-bundle hydraulic diameter is
Dh = 4A
For convenience, a program listing of the above computation is included below.
2. FORTRAN IV Program Listing for Computation of Pin-bundle Flow Areaand Hydraulic Diameter
IRITE(6,1012)WRITE(6,1010)READ( 5,1001 )XaH=XNNN=0
1 READ(5,1001)D0.D1,D2,SR 1=S/D0R2=D1/00R3=02/D0A0=(3.14159*D0*D0)/4.B1=((2.*1.732)*(1.+R1)**2)/3.14159B2=1.+((R2*R2)/3. )+((2.*R3*R3)/3.)A1=(B1-B2)*.25*A0P0=3.14159*D0P1=( 1.+(R2/3. )+(2.*R3/3. ))*.25*P0X1=(3.*D0/2. )+(2.*S)X2=00+S)*(3.**.5)A2=A1+(R2*R2*A0/12.)P2=(P0/4. )+(PO*R3)/6.ALF=ACOS(((5.*00)+(7.*S))/(((3.*DO)+(4.*S))*(3.**.5)))
DEL=(3.14159/6. )-ALFSALF=SIN( ALF)BET=ASIN(2.*X1*SALF/00)-(3.14159/6. )E0=D0+SS1=D0*E0*SIN(BET)/4.SDEL=SINI DELCDEL=COS(DEL)S2=X1*E0*SDEL/2.S3=(00*D0*BET/8. )+(00*00*3.14159/24.)S4=X1*X1*DEL/2.S5=3.14159*02*02/24.A3=S1-S2-S3+S4-S5A=(A1+A2+A3)*12.P3=((((2.*DEL*X1/D0)+(3.14159/3. )+BET)/(2.*3.14159))+R3/6.)*PO
DH=(4.*(A1+A2+A3))/(P1+P2+P3)ALF=ALF*180./3.14159BET=BET*180./3.14159DEL=DEL*180./3.14159HRITE(6,1013)ALFBET,DELNRITE(6,1011)DO.01,012,S,A1,A2,A3,P1,P2,P3,DH,ANN=M+1IF(NN.EQ.N)GO TO 260 TO 1
1001 FORHAT(7F10.5)1010 FORMAT(15X'00',8X'01',8X'02'.8X'S',9X'A1',8X'A2',8X'A3',8X'P1',
18X'P2',8X'P3',8X'DH',6X'ATOT',//)1011 FORMAT(IlOX,12F10.5///)1012 FORNAT(35X'ZONE AREAS FOR SEVEN PIN CLUSTERS WITH FLUTED TUBE'//)1013 FORMAT(15X'ALF=',F5.2,5X'BET=',F5.2,5X'DEL=',F5.2/)
2 RETURNEND
APPENDIX B
ALIP Performance Characteristics
The performance characteristics of both ALIP's, separately and intandem, were obtained at sodium temperatures of 315, 400, and 480 C. Thesecharacteristics are shown in Figs. B.1-B.9.
0.6
0.5 40 amps 'B' PHASE CURRENT
L.4 - 36
C-
0.2
15
0.1
5
0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 250FLOWRATE, cc/s
Fig. B.1. A LIP No. 1 Performance: 315 CSodium. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-31.
1.0
0.8
CL 0.
N
0.4
0.2
0I- 500 1000 1500
FLOWRATEcc /s2000 2500
40 amps 'B' PHASE CURRENT
0.4 36
o O
a-
0. -
- C 25
00 500 1000 1500 20
FLOWRATE , cc/s00
'Fig. B.2. ALIP No. 2 Performance: 315 CSodium. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-23.
06
0.540 amps 'B' PHASE CURRENT
0 04 36
0.3 _ 25C-.
0.2 --
15
0.1-
50( -- - -1 1 1
0 500 1000 1500 2000 25(
FLOWRATE, cc/s
00
Fig. B.3. Dual ALIP Performance: 315 C Sodium.ANL Neg. No. 900-79-9.
Fig. B.4. ALIP No. 1 Performance: 400 CSodium. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-18.
40 amps 'B' PHASE CURRENT
36
5
I-S
5 t
T
--
DO
r
04 40 Omps ' PHASE CURRENT
36
S0~3
0 O
01
0 500 1000 1500 20CFLOW RATE,cc/s
Fig. B.6
Dual ALIP Performance:400 C Sodium. ANL Neg.
No. 900-79-29.
40 amps 8' PHASE CURRENT
0 36
a- 2
0.2
0.1 -
00 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
FLOWRATE,cc/s
Fig. B.. ALIP No. 1 Performance:480 C Sodium. ANL Neg.
No. 900-79-30.
Fig. B.5
A LIP No. 2 Performance:400 C Sodium. ANL Neg.
No. 900-79-33.
1.0
0.8 40 amps B' PHASE CURRENT
36206
2504
150.2
00 500 1000 1500 2000 25C
FLOWRATE, cc/s
0-
U)
Wn
0.4
0.3 40 amps 'B' PHASE CURRENT
36
0.225
0.1 15
00 500 1000 1500 2000 250
FLOWRATE, cc/s
Fig. B.8. ALIP No. 2 Performance:480 C Sodium. ANL Neg.
No. 900-79-28.
27
D0
00
00
1.0
0.8
40 amps 'B' PHASE CURRENT0.6 36
w04 -25 -
- -
0.2
0 500 1000 1500 2000 25FLOWRATEcc/s
Fig. B.9
Dual ALIP Performance:480 C Sodium. ANL Neg.No. 900-79-16.
00
In addition, the reverse-flow characteristics of ALIP No. I were ob-
tained by operating ALIP No. 1 at a certain constant-input current and increas-
ing the input current in steps to ALIP No. 2, which was operating in reverse.
These characteristics, also obtained at sodium temperatures of 315, 400, and
480*C, are shown in Figs. B.10-B.12.
0.
En
.
.6ri
.5
Fig. 13.10
Opposed ALIP Characteristics: 315 CSodium. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-12. .3
15 2
.I
5
i
40 amps '8' PHASETO NO. I ALIP
36
25
I I I
2000 3000-3000 -2000 -1000 0 1000FLOWRATE, cc/s
0- a 5 - 'Rbw a I
0d.
.r
.5
IS
.2
I .I
.31
40 amps 'B' PHASETO NO. I ALIP
36
25
0-
-3000 -2000 -1000 0 1000FLOWRATE, cc/s
Fig. B.11
Opposed A LIP Characteristics: 400 C
Sodium. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-11.
I - I
2000 3000
0
C-
.5
Fig. B.12
Opposed ALIP Characteristics: 480 CSodium. ANL Neg. No. 900-79-10.
o .3
.3
- 40 amps 'B' PHASETO NO. I ALIP
36
25
I 1
2000 3000-3000 -2000 -1000 0 1000FLOWRATE. cc/s
29
I
h
w-
s
061
30
APPENDIX C
Orifice Calibration Results
The calibration data are presented in Fig. C.1 in terms of the orifice
characteristic Q/./ii 7P, where Q is in m3 /s, DP is in MPa, and p is in kg/rn 3 .Data for both the recovered pressure drop and the maximum pressure dropare given.
"4'
0.21
0.10 -
1q 0.0 8 -
0.06~
0.04
0.02
f i 1II
0 0.1 0.2 0.3ORIFICE-TO- PIPE
0.4AREA
0.5RATIO
0.6
Fig. C.1
Orifice Calibration Data.ANL Neg. No. 900-79-15.
0.7
I I 1
UNITS -- 0 ~m3saP~ MPoP ̂ ,Kg/m 3 A
RECOVERED--PRESSURE DROP 0
MAXIMUMg PRESSURE DROP
.
F
I I II
V.v
31
APPENDIX D
Sample Calculation of Overall Loop Pressure Drop
Assume test-section coolant velocity = 21 ft/s
Assume coolant temperature = 750*F (399C).
From AREAS (Appendix A), we get:
Flow area = 0.206 in.2 (0.523 cm?) 5f for tight fuelHydraulic diameter = 0.093 in. (0.236 cm) bundle, 0.00-in. clearance
Flow area = 0.257 in.2 (0.653 cm) rfor bundle withHydraulic diameter = 0.114 in. (0.290 cm) 0.010-in. (0.0254-cm)
clearance
Flow rate (0.00 clearance) = 0.030 ft3 /s (8.5 x 104 m3/s)= 13.5 gpm (8.5 x 10"4 m3/s)
Flow rate (0.01 clearance) = 0.0375 ft3 /s (1.06 x 10"3 m 3/s)= 16.8 gpm (1.06 x 10~3 m3/s)
Coolant density = 53.5 lb/ft3 (857 kg/m3 )Coolant viscosity = 0.67 lb/h.ft (2.77 x 10-4 Pa-s)
Reynolds No. (0.00 clearance) = 46784Reynolds No. (0.01 clearance) = 57349
Friction factor (0.00 clearance) = 0.023Friction factor (0.01 clearance) = 0.021
Test-section pressure drop:
AP(000)= 002361 53.5(21)2 11P(0.00) = 0.02360.093 64.4 14 = 38.4 lbf/in.2 (265 kPa)
AP(0.01) = 28.6 lbf/in. 2 (197 kPa)
Loop-body pressure drop:
AP(0.00) = 2.3 lbf/in.2 (16 kPa)
AP(0.01) = 3.5 lb/in.2 (24 kPa)
Overall loop pressure drop:
AP(0.00) = 40.7 lbf/in.A (281 kPa)
AP(0.01) = 32.1 lbf/in. 2 (221 kPa)
32
APPENDIX E
Flowmeter Calibration Data
Figures E.1-E.4 present the flowmeter calibration data over a rangeof sodium temperature. Except for Fig. E.3, all the data were taken using
the new orifice flow tube, i.e., where the actual test-train geometry was du-plicated in the region of the upper flowmeter.
5
4
E
ac3
La.
"IU.L
0 500 1000FLOWRATE, cc/s
Fig. E.1. Flowmetcr Calibration: 315*C Sodium.ANL Neg. No. 900-79-14.
O LOWER e/m FLOWMETERO UPPER e/m FLOWMETERA BETWEEN PUMPS e/m FLOWMETERO PERMANENT MAGNET FLOWMETER
0 500FLOWRATEcc/s
1000
4
F-
0
coacWH0
-J
3
2
no
0 500FLOWRATE, cc/s
1000
Fig. E.2. Flowmeter Calibration: 400 C Sodium.ANL Neg. No. 900-79-13 Rev.
4
E
1-3
0
-J
0l
;000500FLOWRATE, cc/s
Fig. E.3. Flowmeter Calibration: 400 C So-
dium; Old Flow Tube. ANL Neg.No. 900-79-26.
Fig. E.4. Flowmeter Calibration:480 C Sodium
O LOWER elm FLOWMETERO UPPER elm FLOWMETERA BETWEEN PUMPS e/m FLOWMETERO PERMANENT MAGNET FLOWMETER
- -
O LOWER e/m FLOWMETERG UPPER elm FLOWMETER
- BETWEEN PUMPS e/m FLOWMETERo PERMANENT MAGNET FLOWMETER
5
4
E
1-
0
'3
-J4.
O LOWER e/m FLOWMETER0 UPPER e/m FLOWMETERA BETWEEN PUMPS e/m FLOWMETERo PERMANENT MAGNET FLOWMETER
-I
r
nor
0
33
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to acknowledge the assistance of Warren T. Becker,who took and organized the data from the pump-characteristics test presentedin Appendix B; of John S. Harmon and Vernon R. Fletcher, who took the datafor the pin-bundle friction factor test and the orifice-calibration test; ofEdward W. Johanson, who instrumented the apparatus for the pump-characteristics test; of Kenneth J. Schmidt, who was the H6 test engineer; ofCharles August, James E. Emerson, Eugene R. Maslowicz, andJoseph P. Burghardt, who contributed to the outfitting and running of the ex-perimental apparatus.
REFERENCES
1. L. E. Robinson, R. T. Purviance, and K. J. Schmidt, The Mark II IntegralSodium TREAT Loop, ANL-7692 (Nov 1971).
2. K. Rehme, The Measurement of Friction Factors for Axial Flow Through RodBundles with Different Spacers, Performed on the INR Test Rig, EURFNR-142P(Nov 1965).
3. V. I. Subbotin et al., Hydraulic Resistance to the Flow of a Liquid alonga Bundle of Rods, Atomnaya Energiya 9(4), 308-310 (Oct 1960).
4. R. J. Page et al., TREAT TOP Test H6--Preliminary Results, Trans. Am. Nucl.Soc. 28, 481-482 (June 1978).
34
Distribution for AN L- 79- 7
Internal:
J. A. KygerL. BurrisD. W. CisselS. A. DavisB. R. T. FrostD. C. Rardin
R. J. Teunis
C. E. TillR. S. Zeno
H. 0. Monson
R. Avery
J. F. Marchaterre
A. J. Goldman-1. K. Fauske
I. Bornstein
B. A. Korelc (3)T. C. ChawlaD. RoseL. Baker
P. A. Lottes
R. H. Sevy
W. C. Lipinski
D. H. ChoL. W. DeitrichA. E. KlickmanA. B. RothmanC. E. Dickerman
J. B. HeinemanS. H. FistedisD. R. FergusonR. A. NolandJ. P. BurelbachT. H. Bauer
N. J. Carson
R. C. Doerner
P. A. FroehleH. HummelKalimullahR. K. Lo0. McNaryC. Mueller
R. G. PalmL. W. Person
L. E. Robinson (5)
K. J. SchmidtL. A. SemenzaR. H. SevyR. SimmsJ. P. TylkaA. E. WrightH. U. WiderR. J. RobertsonR. D. WrightR. J. Page (l9)R. E. HenryB. W. SpencerD. H. LennoxD. R. Pedersen
J. H. TessierW. A. MurphyE. W. JohansonL. J. HarrisonA. B. KrisciunasANL Contract FileANL Libraries (5)TIS Files (6)
External
DOE-TIC, for distribution per IJC-79p (251)Manager, Chicago Operations Office
Chief, Office of Patent Counsel, CH
Director, DOE-RRT (2)Director, Reactor Programs Div., CHDirector, CH-INELK. Davidson, CHPresident, Argonne Universities AssociationReactor Analysis and Safety Division Review Committee:
S. Baron, Burns and Roe, Inc.
J. R. Dietrich, Combustion Engineering, Inc.
W. Kerr, U. MichiganM. Levenson, Electric Power Research Inst.
S. Levy, S. Levy, Inc.
D. Okrent, U. California, Los Angeles
N. C. Rasmussen, Massachusetts Inst. Technology