Proceedings of ASME FEDSM'01

2001 ASME Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting

New Orleans, Louisiana, May 29- June 1, 2001

FEDSM2001-18090

1 Copyright © 2001 by ASME

RECIPROCATING PUMP ACCELERATION HEAD

Stephen D. Able
Principal Engineer
IR Fluid Products
Bryan, Ohio

2 Copyright © 2001 by ASME

ABSTRACT system stiffness and damping
The acceleration head as well as Laplace and
term in the net positive Inverse Laplace transforms
suction head available of the resulting differential
equation (NPSHa) for equation. The inverse
reciprocating pumps is an Laplace transform is an
approximation that is algebraic equation that can
intended to prevent be evaluated directly. This
cavitation. The intent of this expression is compared to
paper is to further explain actual test data of an air
the acceleration head operated diaphragm pump.
phenomena, provide a Keywords: NPSH, suction
dynamic calculation of a performance, acceleration
very simple system for head, cavitation
educational purposes, and to
recommend a better way to INTRODUCTION
deal with the acceleration The acceleration head
head phenomena. term, Pacc, in the Net
Acceleration head deals Positive Suction Head
with the pulsations that are equation is an approximation
caused by the pump as its that is intended to prevent
internal valves shift and cavitation in the suction of a
interact with the system. reciprocating pump. The
The acceleration head pump causes pulsations as its
calculation currently in use internal valves shift and
is a steady-state calculation interact with the system. It is
that is not representative of quite easy for the engineer to
the actual unsteady perform the calculation, but
pressures and flow rates is not representative of the
involved. Acceleration actual physics involved. This
head may be viewed as a paper provides a model of the
forced vibration that is acceleration head
dependent on the pump and phenomena, a dynamic
its entire suction system. calculation of a very simple
The transient pulsation can system, and recommends a
be detrimental, particularly better way to deal with the
to high-energy pumps where acceleration head
cavitation damage can be phenomena.
significant. In low energy
pumps, however, it may be NPSHa and NPSHr are
of such little consequence terms that have historically
that it may be ignored. The been used by industry to
stiffness of the piping and match the suction
entrained gas in the liquid performance of a pump to a
can have a significant effect field application. Industry
on the amplitude, frequency standards have been
and damping of the established to provide
transient. A measurement of consistency in nomenclature,
the energy produced by the testing and calculations [1].
pump has been proposed For practical reasons, net
and is termed the Power positive suction head
Density Index (PDI), which required (NPSHr) is
can provide some guidance determined at the pump
for the user as the extent factory using a specific test
and type of analysis needed system. Water is normally
to predict the effect of this used as the test fluid. At a
transient. This paper given rate of flow, the NPSHr
provides expressions for of a pump is determined
when there is degradation in
pump performance as the
suction head available to the
pump is gradually lowered.
The performance degradation
of a reciprocating pump is
normally a loss in the
volumetric efficiency of three
percent (i.e.: at a constant
speed the rate of flow drops
by three percent). Abnormal
noise or vibration can also
determine the NPSHr at a
given operating condition.
The user normally
computes NPSHa. It is
comprised of the absolute
pressure (or head) on the
surface of the liquid in the
supply tank minus inlet
piping losses, minus the
static height of the pump
above the surface of the
liquid and minus the vapor
pressure of the liquid. The
specific gravity of the fluid is
accounted for by the equation
involved.
Acceleration head is a
static head calculation that is
subtracted from the NPSHa
when using a reciprocating
pump. Pacc is based on a
number of pump and system
characteristics (APPENDIX
I). The formula for
acceleration head is derived
from force equals mass times
acceleration for the liquid in
the suction system [2]. The
intent of this calculation is to
prevent any cavitation during
the suction stroke of a
reciprocating pump. In
higher energy pumps this
effect can be damaging to the
pump and certainly should
not be discounted. However,
damage due to acceleration
head is less likely to occur in
low energy pumps. For
example, a user could be led
to believe that a low energy
pump (on the order of a few
horsepower) could not pump
water though a suction pipe
3 Copyright © 2001 by ASME
that was twenty five feet long,
when it is known that this is
commonly done [3]. It has
been proposed [3] that a
power density index (PDI) be
used to determine the level of
sophistication needed to
determine the acceleration
head effect. The PDI allows
the user to match the level of
need for suction control and
analysis based on the pump
being evaluated.
Recommendations range from
no concern (low PDI pumps)
to a computer prediction
model for high PDI pumps.
This paper provides an
approach to the pump and the
suction system as a damped,
forced vibration model. The
resulting differential equation
is transformed using the
Laplace transform in order to
find the inverse Laplace
transform. The inverse
Laplace transform is an
algebraic equation that can be
evaluated directly. This
expression is compared to
actual test data of an air
operated diaphragm pump.
NOMENCLATURE
A = area
C1 = coefficient used in
acceleration head equation
co = speed of sound
CPM = cycles per minute
CS = control surface
CV = control volume
D = damping coefficient
Dc = critical damping
dpipe = diameter of the pipe
dtvlv = valve closing time
Ep = modulus of elasticity of
the pipe material
Fcv= force on the control
volume
Fdamp = damping force
Hs = height of the pump
suction above the tank level.
k = stiffness
L = length
Kf = relative compressibility
factor
m = mass
Pacc = pressure due to
acceleration head
PDI = power density index
(horsepower/(number of
pistons times piston
diameter^2))
Pf = pressure loss due to
inlet piping friction
po = suction pressure
Ps = pressure on surface of
liquid
Pv = vapor pressure of the
liquid
P(t) = time varying liquid
pressure at pump suction
Sg = specific gravity of the
liquid.
t = time
T = temperature
tp = thickness of the pipe
wall
v = velocity (dx/dt)
V = fluid steady state
velocity
Vol = volume
vstrk = average stroke
velocity
vgr = ratio gas/liquid
volume
x = displacement
 = isothermal bulk
modulus
eff = effective bulk
modulus
is = isostatic bulk modulus
effpipe = effective bulk
modulus of the fluid
considering the piping
stiffness
F = change in force
P = change in pressure
Vol = change in volume
x= change in displacement
 = density
water = density of water
 = time constant
Acceleration head
physics
Acceleration head may
be viewed as a forced
vibration that is dependent
on the pump and its entire
suction system. In
situations where costs are
high and pump-system
interaction problems are a
major concern, a good
computer prediction model
should be used [3] & [4]. To
get an idea of what is
involved in the physics, a low
energy pump (a 2-inch NPT
air operated diaphragm
pump) was tested with
various lengths of suction
line (Figure 2 and 3,
APPENDIX II). The
resulting pressure
measurement at the suction
of the pump indicated that
the acceleration head was
actually a transient with an
increase in pressure initially,
followed by oscillations that
decayed in time after the
pump had changed stroke
direction (Figures 4 though
6). The phenomena may be
viewed as a forced vibration
with the forcing function
being a step function. In a
pump with two fluid
chambers, flow is
momentarily stopped as one
suction valve closes. This
occurs because the other
suction valve does not open
instantaneously. The mass of
the fluid in the suction
system along with the
stiffness and damping of the
fluid and the piping system
can be used in the vibration
model.
Forced vibration in the
suction piping
Due to the need for
empirical data concerning
both the pump and system,
the following approach
should not be used for
general predictive purposes.
However, it is insightful
because the solution
(equation (14)) demonstrates
the physics involved. The
equation for forced, damped
vibration [5] is given by:
Bulk Modulus and Speed of
2 Sound
d d
m x D x k x = forcing function (1)
d t2 dt
In order to derive an
expression for the spring rate
and damping of the suction
system, a property that relates
fluid compressibility with
pressure is needed. The bulk
modulus relates the change in
density with a change in
pressure (APPENDIX III).
The bulk modulus is an
expression for the
compressibility of the fluid.
The speed of sound through
the fluid is related to the
square root of the bulk
modulus divided by its density
[6]. Other factors can affect
the bulk modulus and speed of
sound through the fluid,
including compressibility of
the pipeline and entrained
gas. The bulk modulus may
also be expressed in terms of
volume and pressure in a
system with uniform
properties as:
P
 = Vol  (2)
Vol
It has been reported that
the speed of sound in water
with entrained air can actually
be much less than the speed of
sound in air [4]. The effective
bulk modulus can be less than
the isostatic bulk modulus by
several orders of magnitude,
depending on the amount of
entrained gas (APPENDX
III).
Stiffness
Piping stiffness
contributes to a reduced
effective bulk modulus and
speed of sound, but not to a
great extent in this example
(Appendix IV). The stiffness
due to the compressibility of
the fluid is:
4 Copyright © 2001 by ASME
 D However,
  d ( po ) P(t) cannot drop
( P A )  A po   s 
2 t
F
k = = =
Pulse(t) =  
below saturation pressure.
x Vol Vol Constant  e
Laplace( p ) =   limit
Vol  This dt
is imposed in the
A (7) 2 D s prediction.
A
2 
s    
(3) An expression for the
 Vol   2
 Vol Pulse Constant and
 The
pressure, with the d(po)/dt in equation (14) can
Damping displacment (x) eliminated, (12)
be estimated by using a
is found using equation (2) as control volume analysis of the
Viscous damping results follows: The inverse Laplace
transform is an algebraic inlet piping systems and using
in a force that opposes fluid dVol d Vol dxexpression:
d Vol some empirical data.
motion. Critical damping in = p  = p 
Consider the forces on a
spring, mass and dashpot dt dt  dt dt A 
control volume due to fluid
system [5] is given by: flow [8]: 1 4    A 2   D2
2 2 Vol Vol sin  t
d d
x = p x = p 1 D 2 ( Vol   ) Control
k 2 d t2 A  A 
Invlaplace(p)  
= po D exp   t 
Dc = 2 m = 2 A    d t 2 ( Vol   ) Surface
4    A   D(in)
m 2 2
(8)
(4)
Substitute into (6) and
1 4   A   D 
dx 2 2
Fdamp = D  = D v + po  exp
1 D  
t cos  t
dt elimnate the minus signs: 2 ( Vol   ) 2 ( Vol   )
Flow
(5)
Vol  d 2  A 
2
1  4    A   D  Control Volume
d Vol Vol 2 2
  Vol  p D p  p =0 sin t
The damping A d t2 dt A Vol Ad ( po )
 exp 1  D  t  2 ( Vol   ) Suction Pipe,
coefficient (D) affects both + 2    Vol  (entire length)
amplitude and resonant (9) dt 2 ( Vol   )
frequencies. For our  
4Figure
2
 A  1:DSuction
2

example, the damping (13) system control volume

coefficient term is The resulting equation is
established from test The complete solution is Assume the velocity of
simplified by dividing by the the fluid changes during valve
observation. The damping constants: found by adding the free and
ratio, D/Dc should be forced responses in the time closure from its steady state
between .05 and .5 if several 2 value (V) to zero in a linear
  Adomain:
2
d D d  manner. Also, assume that the
pulses are observed and then p p + p =0
decay. dt 2   Vol d t  2 control volume
 
1 4  A  D 
2  is stationary
2
 Vol sin t of
Free and forced and the density of the fluid
(10) 1 D 2 ( Vol  )
response may be added by P( t ) = po  D  exp  the
t  liquid is constant. Then
the principle of 2 ( Vol   ) the momentum eqution
becomes:4    A   D
2 2
superposition for linear In order to solve this
systems [10], p.117. The equation, it may be written as . .
d  
equation governing the free a Laplace transform [7, 9]. Fcv =2  V   d Vol   V 
1  4    A   dtDCV
2 CS
response is:  s 2 Laplace( p)  s  po  dpo   + D po  exp 1 D   
  ( s  Laplace( p )  po t )cos t
 dt   Vol   2 ( Vol   ) 2 ( Vol   )
= d 2
d
2
d Fcv   Vol V    V  A
m x D x k x = 0  A  2 d t
d t2 dt + Laplace( p )    =0 (15)
1 4   A   D 
2 2
2
(6)    Vol  sin  t
(11) d ( po ) 1 D The 2 pressure ( Vol  resulting
)
+ 2    Vol   exp  t 
The response associated dt 2 ( Vol  from
) stopping all flow in time
4    AThe
2 2
dtvlv is Fcv/A.  Pressure
D
with a valve closing rapidly, resulting from flow stoppage
t
may be modeled as a pulse. is equal to the value of the

The pulse response is + Pulse Constant  e Pulse Constant. dV/dt is
deteremined by the (14) estimated to be the steady
following expression and is state flow velocity divided by
developed in Ref [10], the valve closure timing. The
p.234-235:

5 Copyright © 2001 by ASME

Pulse Constant equals the lengths of suction piping 80 80
Pump Inlet Pressureintended
vs. Time to prevent
initial pressure at time zero were studied (0.5,4 and 7.6 cavitation of a
when suction valves are meters). The volume of reciprocating pump, due

Pressure (psig)
60

Pressure (psig)
closed. water used in the mass term Prediction i to stroke changeover
Vol d included the water in the dynamics. NPSHa is
Pulse Constant =   V2 Test 40
V as
j

tank well as in the suction normally reduced by the

A d t piping. 20 value calculated for Pacc.
(16) 2. The pump causes
0
3 INCH PIPE
0
0 0.2 0.4 pulsations
0.6 as its internal
0.8 1
The value of d(po)/dt is SUPPLY TANK 0 tp  ta valves shift and interact
i j 1
likewise estimated as the 1.8 m x 0.9 m x 1.1 m DEEP
Prediction Time
Time (sec)
(sec) with the system.
Pulse Constant divided by Test Acceleration head may be
the valve closure timing. viewed as a forced
Figure 4: Two-inch air vibration that is a pump
The time constant, , is operated diaphragm pump, and system interaction.
a function of system and 0.5-m suction line length 3. This transient pulsation
fluid variables, but is INLET Pump Inlet Pressure can vs. Time be detrimental,
3 INCH HOSE,
assumed to be a function of 2 m LONG
PRESSURE
TRANDUCER
80 80
particularly to high-
valve closure timing only energy pumps where

Pressure ( psig)
2 INCH SUCTION LINE

and is approximated by: 60

Pressure (psig)
Prediction i
cavitation damage can be
dtvlv (17) significant. In low
= Test 40j

3 energy pumps, however,

In summary, by using Figure 2: Test 20 it may be of such little
some simplifying Stand with Open Tank 0
consequence, that it may
assumptions and empirical
0
0 0.2 0.4 be0.6ignored. 0.8 1

data (i.e.: valve closure

0 4.tp  ta The stiffness of the piping
Time (sec)
i j 1

timing), equation (14) Prediction Time (sec) and entrained gas in the
Test
provides a reasonable liquid can have a
Figure 5: Two-inch air significant effect on the
prediction for the test
operated diaphragm pump, amplitude, frequency and
example provided as
4-m suction line length damping of the transient.
described in the next
section. The predicted 5. A measurement of the
response and the measured energy produced by the
pressure response are in Pump Inlet Pressure pump has been proposed
vs. Time
80 80
reasonable agreement [3], termed the Power
(Figures 4 through 6). Density Index (PDI),
However, the assumptions,
60 which can provide some
Pressure (psig)

Pressure (psig)

Predictioni
estimates of valve timing guidance for the user as
and the time constant,
Test j 40 the extent and type of
would require further analysis needed to predict
analysis before extending
20 the effect of this transient.
this prediction for other 0
6. A more extensive analysis
pumps or pump types. The
0
0 0.2 0.4 is 0.6indicated,0.8 when the 1
tpi  tavalves cycle before the
key issue is that the physics 0
TimeTime (sec)
j
(sec)
1

involved with acceleration Prediction

pressure transient decays
Figure 3: Air Operated Test or when there is a more
head are dynamic in nature Diaphragm Pump
and can be viewed as a complex inlet system.
Figure 6: Two-inch air
forced vibration. operated diaphragm pump,
This pump is a double 7.6-m suction line length ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Test example: Two-inch acting Air reciprocating pump
Operated Diaphragm Pump with diaphragms operating in The author would like to
CONCLUSIONS
two liquid chambers. Each thank Dr. Pawan Singh for his
In a test run to liquid chamber has a ball guidance in the past and to IR
1. A static calculation of Fluid Products.
determine the effect of valve at the inlet and a ball acceleration head, Pacc,
varying line lengths, a two- valve at the outlet. Manifolds has historically been
inch air operated diaphragm join the inlets (bottom) and APPENDIX I
used as an Net Positive Suction Head
pump was installed in a loop outlets (top). approximation that is
with an open tank. Three (NPSH)

6 Copyright © 2001 by ASME

 the total head that the pump The bulk modulus is given
NPSHa requires to operate properly
without a reduction in
 =    
9
dp 3 10
Net positive suction pressure-flow performance by: 
head available (NPSHa) is (due to cavitation), excessive  d  T
vibration or noise. Effective 9
the total suction head Entrained gas reduces Bulk
2 10
available from the system at the bulk modulus by the Modulus
the pump suction NPSHa must always be folowing relationship: (Pa)
connection, minus the vapor greater than NPSHr. 1  vgr 1 10
9

pressure of the liquid at the eff =  

pumping temperature. If APPENDIX II is vgr
1
the pressures and Two inch air operated po 0
0 0.001 0.002
temperatures are provided at diaphragm pump example
is = isostatic bulk Ratio of gas to water (vg
some distance from the
suction of the pump, Suction Line diameter: modulus (for water is =
frictional head losses must 0.0508 m (2 inches) approximately 2.2x10^9 Atmospheric Pre
be calculated and subtracted. Suction line lengths: 0.5,4 Pa (300,000 psi ). 7 Atmospheres
For a reciprocating pump, and 7.6 m (1.5,13 and 25
Acceleration Head (Pacc) is feet) The following graphs APPENDIX IV
normally subtracted from Effective bulk modulus: 31.6 indicate their dependence on Piping Stiffness (Ref [4]
NPSHa, as if it were a MPa (4000 psi) the gas contained in the fluid section C)
steady flow head loss. The Damping ratio (D/Dc): 0.4 and the fluid pressure. For
purpose of this paper is to (The effective bulk modulus the test case presented The bulk modulus is
show that acceleration head and damping ratio were herein, an entrained gas ratio reduced by the elasticity of the
is a dynamic pressure selected in a reasonable range of about 0.3% was used. pipe and may be calculated
response and is a pump and and set to fit the test data.)
from the following:
system interaction.
The following values 1
1500 eff =
NPSHa = (Ps - Pv - Pf - were computed for the dpipe  
example presented above. 1
Pacc) / (water Sg)– Hs Speed tp Ep
The parameter varied in the 1000
three tests was the inlet pipe of
Acceleration head provided Sound For the test case presented
length.
by industry standards for a (m/s) herein, the bulk modulus was
500
double acting pump (Ref [1] Length of Stiffness,k Damping,D Natural Initial reduced by a few percent due
and [2]): Pipe -2 -1 Frequency,fc Pressure to piping elasticity.
(kg/s ) (kg/s )
(m) (Hz) (Pa)
C1 0
Pacc = L V 2  CPM   0.5 1.04·10 4 269 31 0
3.4·10 5 0.001 REFERENCES
0.002 0.003 0.004
Kf 4.0 6.28·10 3 269 19 4.2·105
For the example provided 1. “Hydraulic
Ratio of gas to water (vgr) Institute
7.6 4.45·10 3 269 13 5·10 5
above: Atmospheric Pressure Standards,” 1994,
Kf = relative compressibility 7 Atmospheres ANSI/HI, Hydraulic
factor = 1 Institute, Parsippany,
V = average flow velocity = Sections 6.1-6.5 and 7.1-
k 7.5.
3.5 m/s Where: fc =
C1 = coefficient =.628 m 2. Miller, J. E., 1995, The
APPENDIX III Reciprocating Pump
L Pacc Theory, Design, and Use,
(m) (kPa) Bulk Modulus and Speed of
Sound (Ref [4] Appendix C) nd
2 . Edition, Krieger
0.5 15.9 Publishing Company,
4.0 137.7 The bulk modulus and Malabar, p.41-42.
speed of sound vary 3. Singh, P.J., & Able, S.D.,
7.6 264.9 significantly depending on 1996, "Determination of
air content and pressure. NPSHr for reciprocating
NPSHr
Positive Displacement-
pumps: A New Approach",
Net positive suction Proceedings of the
head required (NPSHr) is Thirteenth International

7 Copyright © 2001 by ASME

 Pump Symposium,
Turbomachinery
Laboratory, Texas A&M
University, College
Station, Appendix 1.
4. Singh, P.J., & Madavan,
N.K., 1987, "Complete
Analysis and Simulation
of Reciprocating Pumps
Including System
Piping", Proceedings of
the Fourth International
Pump Symposium,
Turbomachinery
Laboratory, Texas A&M
University, College
Station, Appendix A.
5. Vierck, R.K.,
1979,Vibration Analysis,
2nd Ed., Harper & Row,
New York, p.59-63.
6. White, F. M., 1991,
nd
Viscous Fluid Flow, 2
Edition, McGraw-Hill,
Inc., New York, p.44.
7. Irwin, J. D., 1996, Basic
Engineering Circuit
Analysis, 5th Ed.,
Prentice Hall, Upper
Saddle River, Sec. 17.2.
8. Fox, R.W. & McDonald,
A.T., 1992, Introduction
to Fluid Mechanics, 4th
ed. John Wiley & Sons,
New York, Section 4.4-
4.5.
9. Wylie, C.R., Jr., 1966,
Advance Engineering
Mathematics, 3rd
Edition, McGraw-Hill,
New York, Section 7.6.
10.Palm, W. J., 1986,
Controls Systems
Engineering, John Wiley
& Sons, New York,
p.117, 234-235.

8 Copyright © 2001 by ASME