1. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa1 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Ultra-light carbon fiber structures: first test campaign Enrico DA RIVA (EN-CV-PJ) Manuel GOMEZ MARZOA (EN-CV-PJ) 18 th July 2012

2. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa2 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Outline  Thermal tests done over the structure already tested by the Bari team. Pipe OD [mm]1.5 Pipe thickness [mm]0.035 Pipe ID [mm]1.43 CF strip thickness t cs [mm]0.07 CF tangential coverage β [deg]270 Pitch p+w [mm]7.5 Fiber width w [mm]1.5 Separation central line fibers p [mm]6 Angle fibers with pipe axis α [deg]23

3. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa3 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Setup description

4. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa4 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Setup procedure 1.Assemble the circuit 2.Connect the sensors to the Data Acquisition System through ELMB cards  Existing channel configuration used: no need to recalibrate ELMB 3.Build up the PVSS panel 4.Connect the circuit bypassing prototype: flush water  Check the reading of the sensors 5.Connect prototype and flush water 6.Start measurements  Heater emissivity: ε=0.86 (for thermo camera)  Insulation placed over the PTs and connectors

5. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa5 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Results  Six cases done, corresponding to the experiments done in Bari  An absolute power equal to 11.7 W applied to heater (see Bari presentation):  R heater = 27.2 Ω  P = I 2 R; I= (11.7/27.2) 0.5 = 0.65 A  V = I R = 0.65*27.2 = 17.7 V  From case number 3 onwards, insulation was put over the aluminum connectors and the PTs at the piping  Temperature of the heater remains stable even when increasing the flow rate Nm [kg h -1 ] P [W] T in [ o C]T out [ o C]T1 [ o C]T2 [ o C]T3 [ o C]T4 [ o C]p in [bar]p out [bar]ΔP [bar] 1 7.611.715.316.2129.4229.23129.00427.6552.742.470.27 2 8.12411.715.141629.08329.03128.67327.3722.762.470.29 3 8.22411.714.815.7829.52928.827.52.722.410.31 4 11.4111.714.6616.4428.427.927.827.12.982.410.57 5 13.711.714.515.22827.427.226.73.232.420.81 6 15.811.714.6215.127.927.3427.1326.73.472.41.07

6. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa6 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Results – Thermal pictures Inlet/outlet Hotspot outside the stave cooling area 7.60 lpm 8.12 lpm 8.22 lpm 11.41 lpm 13.70 lpm 15.8 lpm Silicon

7. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa7 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Results – Thermal pictures (Bari)

8. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa8 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Results – Thermal pictures 8.22 lpm Silicon  Hotspots on the heater: PointsTemperature [°C] a34.17 b31.53 c31.38 d e30.78 f30.03 g h29.88  Hottest point is at the heater end, outside the cooled area (silicon)  Heater is supposed to be cooled there by the water at the pipe turn and the stave by thermal conduction along the heater. Inlet/outlet

9. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa9 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Results – Thermal pictures 8.22 lpm Silicon  Temperature along three lines at the stave: Inlet/outlet T line 1 T line 2 T line 3

10. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa10 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Results  The first test (@7.6 lpm) can be neglected, the results do not follow the trend of the rest.  Noticeable decrease of silicon maximum temperature when transition to turbulent flow happens (~ 12 lpm).

11. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa11 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Results ΔT wall-water m [l/h] V [m/s] Re Δp exp [bar] Δp duct [bar] HTC (lam) HTC (Gniel)LAMTURB 7.60 1.3116490.27 0.12 164635963.21.45 8.12 1.4017620.29 0.12 164641623.21.25 8.22 1.4217840.31 0.13 164642683.21.22 11.41 1.9724750.57 0.17 164674653.20.70 13.70 2.3629720.81 0.45 164695943.20.54 15.80 2.7334271.05 0.56 1646114623.20.45  Difference in pressure drop with the expected theoretical values is due to the connectors, piping, etc. These losses can be considered as k*1/2*ρ*v 2, where k is a constant dependent on the setting and can be calculated.  ΔT wall-water: establishes the margin of improvement by using a better cooling system for this setup: HTC wall-fluid [W m -2 K -1 ]T max Silicon [ o C] 164643.02 500039.25 1000038.22

12. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa12 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Outcome 1.Experiences can be run fast and reliably. 2.Uncertainty: big  Sensors (PTs, NTCs, p sensors, flow meter).  Thermo camera: -/+4 o C below 100 o C  Systematic: depends on the setup (assembly of sensors, NTCs over heater).  Thermo camera shooting point: not fixed this time (reflections can appear).  Results qualitatively significant 3.Standardized setup necessary:  Stave support for quick replacement.  Tripod for thermo camera.  NTCs glued to the heater to enhance local contact. 4.Evaporative cooling system little improves thermal performance, but could ensure better T distribution. 5.Water tests can be repeated using the same absolute power as in the Bari experiences (13.7 W corresponding to 0.71 A current)

13. E. Da Riva/M. Gomez Marzoa13 WG4 Meeting - 18th July 2012 Ultra-light carbon fiber structures: first test campaign Enrico DA RIVA (EN-CV-PJ) Manuel GOMEZ MARZOA (EN-CV-PJ) 18 th July 2012