A large part of the discussion about the flow meter ignores a bigger problem. Whether the meter could possibly have correct measurements at that flow rate is irrelevant. The numbers are fake! 36000 kg/day even when the plant is not running.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 11:29 AM a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote: > Bob, > > If the flow meter was mounted at the bottom outlet of the water tank, that > presumably is outside and therefore a couple of feet lower than the plant, > it would always be full > > > On 8/8/2016 10:06 AM, Bob Higgins wrote: > > Jed, > > Do you know the orientation of the flow meter? It is only possible to > have a pipe half full if the flow meter is mounted horizontally (a mistake > for use of this type of flow meter). That problem could have been totally > eliminated if the flow meter were oriented vertically. > > An observation (agreeing with yours) is that turbine type flow > measurements are really measurements of the flow speed of the medium > (water). The flow meter presumes a full pipe in calculation of the > volumetric flow rate. The turbine blade is meant to turn with the smallest > possible friction so as to create as to minimize flow resistance. If the > flow meter was mounted horizontally, and the pipe was half full, the > turbine would turn at the speed of the water (same as if it were full) - > since a full pipe was presumed in the indication of rate, it would be in > error by the volumetric difference between the pipe full volume and the > pipe partly filled volume. > > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 7:51 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I wrote: >> >> >>> Look at Exhibit 5, and also look at what Rossi told Lewan. The >>> temperature is just over 100°C and the flow rate is 36,000 kg per day. The >>> pressure is 0 bar. It is the same every day, including days when the >>> reactor was shut down, according to Exhibit 5. >>> >>> If you assume there was actually some pressure, then there was only hot >>> water, not steam, where the temperature went from 60°C to 100°C. Assume >>> there was 20 kW of input power. That's 20,000 J/s = 4,780 cal. . . . >>> >> >> Let me revise this using the numbers from Exhibit 5. Exhibit 5 shows the >> water reservoir was 68.7°C and the fluid was 102.8°C, a temperature >> difference of 34.1°C. >> >> As described in Exhibit 5, the pressure of 0.0 bar is unlikely because it >> would mean the reactor room is in a vacuum. "Given the foregoing, this >> would require that the pressure on the JMP side of the building was >> significantly below atmospheric (vacuum) and that the steam would flow at >> extraordinary velocity." >> >> Let me assume the pressure was a little higher than 1 atm. That means the >> fluid was pressurized and it was probably not steam. It was probably hot >> water. Assume it was hot water and the temperature increased by 34.1°C. >> Input power was 20,000 J/s = 4,780 cal. Divide by 34.1°C gives a flow rate >> of 140 g/s. That's 8.41 kg/minute or 12,111 kg/day. The flow meter >> indicated 36,000 kg/day, so I estimate it was wrong by a factor of ~3. >> >> As I said, that is not a surprising error, given that the pipe was half >> full and it was the wrong kind of flow meter. >> >> - Jed >> >> > >
