Re: Pulsation dampeners
Posted by:
Peter Brow (IP Logged)
Date: July 09, 2003 10:19AM
<HTML>Hi Peter and Rolly,
Thanks for the info and sources. Pipe a size or two larger than the plunger bores would be easy to fit, though I like the idea of flexible hose for a secret reason which bears on possible patent considerations. However, most of the hi-pressure hose I have seen is pretty small in diameter, so it would take several to equal a 3/4" ID flowpath.
My feed pump design is a bit odd. 3/4" bore plunger, double-headed, with 1" stroke. Lots of excess capacity; no running dry on hills for me. Plunger speed is 1/4 engine piston speed, but at the same cyclic rate as the pumps are crosshead-driven. So it is a low-speed, short-stroke pump. The fluid velocities are below limits given by Kent. Poppet check valve flowpaths have the same cross-section at full lift as the plungers -- a no-restriction design. No restriction design required poppet rather than ball valves due to the plunger diameter. I guess the design isn't so Stanley-like after all.
Original plan for plumbing was feedwater line of the same ID as pump plungers (3/4").
$55 for a pulsation damper, that's a cheap and simple solution. Thanks Peter. Then again, do you know of any 3/4" or 1" ID flex hose that can handle 200°F/500 psi working conditions? Microscopic expansion/contraction over several feet length could take out all the pulses with no N2 or gizmos needed. Seems like nearly everything in this design is ending up flexible. Earl's Supply just popped into my head, but I haven't had one of their catalogs in years. I'll see what they have. Dig their wild-colored braided lines & hitech fittings -- pretty trick stuff for a steam car!
On third thought, Rolly, I might end up wanting to hear those pumps working. :)
Peter B.</HTML>