Preventing air ingress by using a deflector and balcony
The third part of the test was conducted at a low height of fall and with a deflector that broke the water jet before it flowed into the tank. The model test was started at a flow rate of approx. 4 m³/h. The air intake was swirled deeply into the water and largely held back by the deflector. Gas bubbles quickly rose to the surface behind the deflector. Only a few gas bubbles reached the pump's inlet pipe on the right-hand side of the tank.
The flow rate was then increased to approx. 8 m³/h. Here, a large quantity of air bubbles (almost half) were held back by the deflector or rose directly to the surface on the rear of the deflector. In this part of the test, only a few small gas bubbles reached the pump's inlet pipe. When the flow rate was increased to approx. 12 m³/h, the air intake increased and was swirled by the lower end of the deflector. Small and medium-sized air bubbles were transported in the direction of the outlet opening and reached the pump.
For the fourth part of the test, the height of fall was increased. The initial flow rate was approx. 4 m³/h. The air intake was swirled deeply into the water but largely held back by the deflector. Only a very small number of the tiniest of gas bubbles reached the pump. The flow rate was then increased to approx. 8 m³/h. The water jet hit the deflector via the water surface. The water jet was deflected vertically at the deflector and swirled together with the air intake mainly in the left-hand part of the tank. Only very small quantities of small gas bubbles reached the pump's inlet pipe. When the flow rate was increased to approx. 12 m³/h, the water jet was already deflected by the deflector above the water level. The number of smaller air bubbles that reached the pump's inlet pipe increased in this case.
The fifth part of model testing was carried out with a deflector and a balcony, at a low height of fall. The first model test was carried out at a flow rate of approx. 4 m³/h. It showed that the air bubbles were immediately swirled back by the balcony on the left-hand side of the deflector. The air bubbles did not reach the pump's inlet pipe. When the flow rate was increased to approx. 8 m3/h, the result was the same: The larger amount of air intake was also held back by the balcony and remained in the left-hand tank half. This hardly changed even when the flow rate was increased to approx. 12 m³/h, resulting in more air intake. Only a very small amount of air intake reached the pump.
The sixth and last part of model testing was conducted with a deflector and a balcony at a large height of fall. The flow rate in the first part of the model test was approx. 4 m³/h. Here, the air bubbles entered the water deeply but were held back by the deflector and balcony on the left-hand side of the tank. When the flow rate was increased to approx. 8 m³/h, most of the air bubbles were also held back by the balcony and swirled in the left-hand part of the tank. Only very small amounts of smaller air bubbles reached the right-hand side of the tank with the pump's inlet pipe. When the flow rate was increased to approx. 12 m³/h, the swirls became stronger because of the deflected water jet. At this flow rate, too, a large amount of air intake remained mainly on the left-hand side of the tank thanks to the balcony.