Letter from Clifford K. Beck to Dean J. H. Lampe

%FBcosts060952; ]> Letter from Clifford K. Beck to Dean J. H. Lampe Machine readable transcription Beck, Clifford K. Creation of machine-readable version: Russell S. Koonts Creation of digital images: Russell S. Koonts Conversion to TEI.2-conformant markup: Russell S. Koonts ca. 18 kilobytes NCSU Libraries Raleigh, NC Modern English, FBcosts060952

Available from: NC State University Archives

Publicly-accessible

URL: http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/archives/etext/engineering/reactor/

22 January, 2001

Nuclear Reactor Digitization Project

Illustrations have been included from the print version. Scanned by Russell Koonts with Photoshop 5.0 software. Letter from Clifford K. Beck to Dean J. H. Lampe Clifford K. Beck

3 pp. Manuscript copy consulted UA 3.8

Prepared for the North Carolina State University Science and Technology Electronic Text Center

The lineation of the manuscript has been maintained and all end-of-line hyphens have been preserved.

Keywords in the header are a local Science and Technology Electronic Text Center scheme to aid in establishing analytical groupings.

Library of Congress Subject Headings June 9, 1952 English LCSH manuscript 24-bit color: 400 dpi Letter from Clifford K. Beck to Dean J. H. Lampe Typescript 3 pp. June 9, 1952 FBcosts060952

North Carolina State College of Agriculture and Engineering of the University of North Carolina Raleigh PHYSICS DEPARTMENT June 9, 1952 Dean J. H. Lampe 228 Riddick Campus Copy for Mr. J. G. Vann Re: - Additional funds for Reactor Construction JHL. Dear Dean Lampe:

In March, 1950, (as published in a N. C. State Collage Bulletin of August, 1950, and in Nucleonics, December, 1950,), estimated that construc- tion of the Nuclear Reactor cost $150,000, including $30,000 for al- terations the Bureau Mines Building, in which it was then expected that the reactor would be housed. In late 1950, it was established that a new reactor building would be constructed, and our estimates of the cost of constructing the reactor were lowered to $120,000, since alteration of the Bureau of Mines Building would not be involved.

During 1951 and thus far in 1952, three things have transpired which have caused the actual cost of the reactor construction project to be higher than it should have been:

1. Costs of equipment materials have increased from 5 to 50%par- ticularly electronic equipment.

2. Design of the reactor building, the extended haggling over building plans and revision of building plans (when the first bids were excessive), and in general the inexperience of the architect and of the Physics Staff in the problems of building construction, consumed a great deal of time, energy, and money, and delayed the project by at least a year.

3. The delay in the project has greatly extended the efforts of the staff, made the efforts less efficient, extended the overhead costs of keep- ing the project going, and much of the staff efforts have been involved with the building rather than with the reactor.

On the other hand, have been able to reduce costs through one favor- able accomplishment. Through arrangement with the Atomic Energy Commission, about $9,000 was saved on the costs of graphite and lead, and almost as much was saved through special arrangements with the Brown Instrument Company, and the Nuclear Instrument Chemical Corporation.

At the present time, as matters have now developed, we believe that the reactor can be brought completely into operating condition for a total of $125,000.

Dean J. H. Lampe - 2 - June 9, 1952

This figure will include all material and labor costs on the reactor itself and on the auxiliary systems required in operating it; will include such items on the reactor building as has, for one reason or another, been forced into the reactor account--design, construction, and installation of the water windows, minor excavating charges, design and construction of a sample hood, etc.; and will also include other miscellaneous items related to reactor operation, but not directly required therein--a campus radiation monitoring system, personnel monitors for persons engaged in the reactor operation, etc.

You will recall that $90,000 (now $91,800) was allocated to the reactor construction account in late 1950. In the conversation in Mr. Vann's a office relative to this project when the allocation on was made, Mr. Vann, Mr. Carmichael, Dean Lampe, and Clifford Beck being present, it was pointed out by the letter that the estimated amount required was $120,000, but it was agreed that the $90,000 then available would be used as far as it would go, and cnsideration would be given later to the problem of added funds, if any were needed,

We have now committed about $85,000 of the $90,000, and the matter of the extra $35,000 needed to complete this job must be faced.

It is our intention to accomplish a major part of the job yet remaining on the reactor during the summer period immediately ahead, when the Physics Staff is relatively free of teaching responsibilities.

The effort and labor effort proposed for the summer are shown below. Of the regular staff, it is anticipated that one-third of the first six weeks (two-thirds to be devoted to teaching), and all of the subsequent five weeks will be devoted to reactor construction. The other men will spend about eleven weeks, full tine, on the reactor components (at $.75 to $1.50 per hour).

1/3 of 1st 6 weeks2nd 5 weeks Menius A.C.$300$600H.A.Lamonds Electronic$660 Murray, R. L.$300$600R.H. Clark and$660 Underwood, N. N.$300$600F.P. Turvey Instruments$525 Waltner, A. W.$2500 Lancaster, F. W.$300$600D.Pendergraft,Shop(15 wks. to Sept. 1)$950 Brown, E.J.$150$450 $4,450L. Robinson, Drafting(Part-time)$300 Meyers (Laborer)$500 $3,595

Insofar as we have been able to estimate at the present stage of develop- ment, the following materials, supplies, and equipment, together with estimated

Dean J. H. Lampe - 2 - June 9, 1952

labor costs of construction, necessary alteration, and installation, yet remain to be purchased on the reactor:

1.Boron "Curtain" across thermal column$1,200 $1,200 2.Further work on reactor fuel container5001,700 3.Further work on recombiner2501,950 4.Flowmeter on recombiner4002,350 5.Pressure meter on recombiner6002,950 6.Pressure meter on reactor1,0003,050 7.(6) Aluminum liners for ports 3" x 10' x 3/32" wall1003,150 8.(6) Aluminum liners for ports 1" x 10' x 3/32" wall1003,250 9.Thermocouples1003,350 10.Water cooler for cooling coils2503,600 11.Pure lead window for the column2,0005,600 12.Pump for cooling water circulation2005,800 13.Further work on water windows1,5007,300 14.Control console1,0008,300 15.Logarithmic amplifier, rate meter with trip circuits, and interlocks 4,50011,800 16.Additional components on instrumentation (stack, sewer monitors, gamma raychannel) 6,00017,000 17.Boron chamber1,00018,000 18.Boron cadmium paraffin, and other special items2,00020,000 19.Motor on gas disposal20020,200 20.Gas disposal tanks and valves45020,650 21.Liquid level indicator30020,950 22.Sampling device17521,125 23.Personnel monitors, films and foils30021,425 24.Rod position indicators-slide wire trams35021,775 25.Cables, valves, meters shop supplies, tubing minor equipment,miscellaneous items 50026,775Total partsequipment,etc., yetto purchase.

In this estimate, we have allowed very little margin for unanticipated equipment requirements, for extended labor costs, sould excessive difficulties in installation or "proving" be encounter, etc. The estimate is conserva- tive, but I am rather confident, as matters now appear, that we can bring the reactor to the point where O.O.R. funds can apply with the schedule outlined above

I will appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your con- venience.

Sincerely yours, Clifford K. Beck CKB:mm