pg.

1


Fluid Mechanics 230
Laboratory 2:
Flow Through Pipes Experiment Report

I hereby declare that the report submitted are entirely my own work and have not been copied
from any other student or past year reports.


Name : Wong Yee Jing
Student ID : 7E1b9107 / 15880909
Course : Bachelor of Chemical Engineering
Date Performed : 23 May, 2014 (2-4pm, Friday)
Date Due : 6 June, 2014
Date Submitted : 6 June, 2014
Lecturer : Dr. Sharul Sham Bin Dol

pg. 2


Contents
1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 Theory .............................................................................................................................................. 6
2.0 Experimental Procedure ................................................................................................................ 11
2.1 Apparatus used .............................................................................................................................. 11
2.2 Procedure ....................................................................................................................................... 12
3.0 Results ............................................................................................................................................ 13
4.0 Analysis and Discussion .................................................................................................................. 16
4.1 Piezometer head ............................................................................................................................ 16
4.2 Development length ...................................................................................................................... 17
4.3 Friction Factor ................................................................................................................................ 19
4.4 Velocity Profile ............................................................................................................................... 21
4.5 Discharge calculation method ....................................................................................................... 24
4.6 Assessment of Error ....................................................................................................................... 25
5.0 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 25
6.0 References ..................................................................................................................................... 26
7.0 Appendices ..................................................................................................................................... 27



pg. 3

List of Tables
Table 1: Properties of fluid and pipe of the experiment -------------------------------------------13
Table 2: Discharge and average velocity-------------------------------------------------------------13
Table 3: Traverse of Test 1 and Test 2----------------------------------------------------------------13
Table 4: Traverse of Test 3 and Test 4----------------------------------------------------------------13
Table 5: Manometer Reading and Calculated Piezometer Head at Various Positions in Pipe
for Test 1, Test 2 and Test 3----------------------------------------------------------------------------14
Table 6: Manometer Reading and Calculated Piezometer Head at Various Positions in Pipe
for Test 4, Test 5 and Test 6----------------------------------------------------------------------------15
Table 7: Average velocity, Reynolds Number, flow type and development length for
Test 1, 2 and 3--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17
Table 8: Development length in terms of D----------------------------------------------------------18
Table 9: Static head, head loss and friction factors for test 1 to 4---------------------------------19
Table 10: Experimental and theoretical friction factor and Reynolds number------------------19
Table 11: H for test 1 to 4----------------------------------------------------------------------------21
Table 12: Radius and velocity of each radius point for test 1 to 4--------------------------------21














pg. 4

List of Figures
Figure 1(a) Experiment to illustrate type of flow and; (b) Typical dye streaks-------------------6
Figure 2(a): Laminar flow; (b): Transitional flow; (c): Turbulent ---------------------------------7
Figure 3: Velocity profile and boundary layers in pipes (Dr Andrew Sleigh 2009) -------------8
Figure 4: Laboratory equipment of flow through pipes --------------------------------------------11
Figure 5: Graph plotted of Piezometric Head Versus Piezometric Position---------------------16
Figure 6: Inviscid core and boundary layer of entrance length (Entrance length 2005) -------18
Figure 7: Moody chart ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------20
Figure 8: Graph of radius versus velocity profile ---------------------------------------------------22
Figure 9: Graph of H (m) against velocity profile(m/s) ------------------------------------------22







pg. 5

1.0 Introduction

The design of this experiment is to explore the study of flow in pipes. Types of flow
in pipes are classified into three types which are laminar, transitional and turbulent flow.
Transitional regime between laminar and turbulent flow will be identified as well in the
experiment. Pressure gradient along the pipe was measured and the pipes fraction factor also
was assessed for different flow rates. Furthermore, velocity profile in the cross section of the
pipe was determined as well in the experiment.
The aim of this experiment was to identify typical laminar, transitional, and turbulent
values of Reynolds Number for flow in a pipe with a circular cross-section. Moreover,
application of friction concept in pipe flow was studied in the experiment. To acquire the
developed flow friction factor for a range of different flows is another objective of the
experiment. Lastly, the velocity profile in both laminar and turbulent flows in a pipe with a
circular cross-section was investigated and compared.


pg. 6

1.1 Theory

Laminar, Transitional or Turbulent flow
The flow in pipes can be either be laminar or turbulent flow. Types of flow can be
determined by Reynolds Number. A British scientist and mathematician who called Osborne
Reynolds was the first to discover the difference between two classifications of flow by using
a simple apparatus as shown in Figure 1(a) below.

Figure 1(a) Experiment to illustrate type of flow and; (b)Typical dye streaks
(Viscous flow in pipes 2014)
If water flows through a pipe of diameter D with a mean velocity V, the following
characteristics of fluid can be observed by injecting a dye as shown in Figure 1(a). When the
flow rate is small enough, the dye streak-line will remain as well. As defined line flows along
with a larger intermediate flow rate, the dye streak-line will fluctuate in time and space.
While for the flow rate is large enough, the dye streak-line changes to become blurred and
spreads across the pipe with random pattern. The three characteristics are known as laminar,
transitional and turbulent flow as illustrated in Figure 1(b).
For laminar flow, it has regular, smooth and systematic flow pattern (refer Figure
2(a)). Low velocity, no intermixing of fluid particles in adjacent layers and high viscosity are
the characteristics of laminar flow. For transitional flow, it displays characteristics of both
turbulent and laminar flow. The laminar flow is near the edge of fluid, while the centre of
fluid is taken by turbulent flow. Transitional flow also is hard to measure same as turbulent
flow. Whereas for turbulent flow, it is irregular and unsteady type of flow.

pg. 7

So, it does have high velocity and low viscosity. The pattern flow for three different types of
flow is illustrated in Figure 2(a), (b) and (c) below.

Figure 2 (a): Laminar flow Figure 2 (b): Transitional flow Figure2(c):Turbulent flow
(Types of flow 2014) (Types of flow 2014) (Types of flow 2014)

Reynolds Number
Reynolds number, Re is a dimensionless parameter which denotes the ratio of the inertia to
viscous effects in the flow. The formula of Reynolds number is shown as follows.

Equation 1
where = density of fluid ;

= average velocity in pipe;

D= diameter of pipe;
= dynamic viscosity of fluid;
= kinematic viscosity of fluid

The actual transition from laminar to turbulent flow may take place at various
Reynolds number, depending on how much the flow disturbance caused by vibrations in the
pipe and roughness of the entrance region. Generally, flow in a circular cross section is
laminar if the Reynolds number is less than approximately 2100. The flow in a round pipe is
turbulent if the Reynolds number is larger than approximately 4000. For Reynolds number
between these two limits, it is transitional flow which can switch between laminar and
turbulent flow.

Velocity profile, boundary layers, entrance length and fully-developed flow
The types of flow either is laminar or turbulent flow also can depends on the shape of
the velocity profile in pipe. Velocity profile of laminar flow is parabolic which is parallel to

pg. 8

boundary while velocity profile of turbulent flow is known as fuller as chaotic fluctuations
observed. If only the parabolic of laminar flow is found in pipe, the first part of the boundary
layer growth diagram is used as shown in the top diagram of the below Figure 3. If turbulent
(or transitional), both the laminar and turbulent (transitional) regions of the boundary layer
growth diagram are used as shown in bottom diagram of below Figure 3. When boundary
layer has reached the centre of the pipe, the flow is said to be fully-developed. Entry length
which means the length of pipe before fully-developed flow is reached is different for the two
types of flow. The entrance length is quite short for the low Reynolds number whereas for
high Reynolds number, the length is equal to many pipe diameters before the end of entrance
region is reached.

Figure 3: Velocity profile and boundary layers in pipes (Dr Andrew Sleigh 2009)
In this experiment, the velocity profile can be determined from experimental data by
using the Equation 2 shown as below.
Equation 2
where is the difference between TP1 and TP2, converted into head of oil.



pg. 9


Head loss in a developed flow
Head loss due to wall shear in a developed flow has a relationship with friction factor as
shown by Darcy-Weisbach equation below. Darcy formula is mainly used to calculate
pressure loss in a pipe due to turbulent flow. Shear stress in a flow is dependent on the flow
either is laminar or turbulent. Pressure drop for turbulent flow is dependent on roughness of
surface due to the fact that a thin viscous layer is formed near to pipe surface in turbulent
flow that causes energy loss. In the case of laminar flow, Poiseuilles Equation is used as it
determines the pressure drop of a constant viscosity fluid exhibiting laminar flow through a
pipe also shown as below. Pressure drop in laminar flow is vice-versa since roughness effects
of wall are negligible non-existence of viscous layer.

Equation 3

Equation 4

where

=head loss due to friction;

f = friction factor;
L= Pipe length (distance between two piezometer points);
D= Internal diameter pipe;

= Average flow velocity;

g = gravitational acceleration;
=dynamic viscosity;
= density

In this experiment, head loss,

can be calculated by using Bernoullis equation as shown as

formula below.

Equation 5
The Bernoullis Equation can be defined in term of head as shown below.
Static head first term

pg. 10

Dynamic head second term
Hydrostatic head third term which represents pressure change due to elevation
Stagnation head total pressure
Since

, the head loss can be determined.

Friction factor and Moody chart
Friction factor or flow coefficient is depends on parameters of pipe and velocity of fluid flow
but it can be determined accurately within some regimes. It may be evaluated for given
conditions by using numerous empirical or theoretical relations, or it also can be obtained
based on published chart by referring to Moody chart or diagram. The Darcy friction factor
for laminar flow (Re<2100) is given as formula below.

Equation 6
For friction factor in turbulent flow in smooth pipes, Balsius equation is used as it is the
simplest equation to compute Darcy friction factor. The Balsius correlation is accurate within
5% for smooth pipes at Reynolds number less than 100000 (Head Loss Due To Friction In
Circular Pipe 2014). Balsius equation for turbulent flow is given as formula below.

Equation 7
Moody chart is a graph of the friction factor f against Reynolds numbers for various values of

, where k is a measure of the wall roughness and d is the pipe diameter. For high

values or
high Reynolds number, appropriate

and Reynolds number on chart should be used. If the

pipe roughness

is less than 0.01, Balsius equation is used.

pg. 11

2.0 Experimental Procedure
2.1 Apparatus used


Figure 4: Laboratory equipment of flow through pipes
The fluid that used in this experiment which was oil was circulated in the circuit of
the apparatus by using gear pump as shown in Figure 4. Oil was drained from the reservoir
and transported by way of the lower horizontal pipe. Then, the oil moved from this chamber
through a parabolic bell mouth into a brass pipe of 19mm bore and overall length 4.4m, with
18 pizeometric tappings along its length.
The pipe was discharged to the atmosphere so that the difference on types of flow can
be observed. Typicall, lower discharge will generate a laminar flow. A flow disturber was
inserted at the upstream end of the pipe at lower flow rates to produce a turbulent flow for
lower where its Reynolds number is approximately 5000.
A pitot tube (TP1-Channel 19) that can be traversed across the flow in the pipe was
situated at the downstream end of the pipe adjacent to a static tapping (TP2-Channel 17). The
recorded readings can be used to determine the flow speed.





pg. 12

2.2 Procedure

Test 1-3: Turbulent and Laminar Flow Conditions
The control valve was checked to be shut and the flow disturber was fully retracted.
The pump was started and control valve was opened slowly until a minimum flow rate of
18L/min was reached. The reading of discharge and all manometer readings were recorded.
The readings of pitot tube (TP1) and static tube (TP2) for different locations along the cross
section of the pipe were recorded. Steps 3 and 4 were repeated with the increased flow rates
that give 26L/min and 30L/min respectively.
Test 4: Transitional Flow Condition
The flow disturber was retracted. The flow rate was increased until the flow condition
was transitional flow. All manometer readings (1-19) were recorded and the discharge was
measured. The readings of pitot tube (TP1) and static tube (TP2) for different locations along
the cross section of the pipe were recorded.
Test 5-6: With and without flow disturber
The flow rate was adjusted to 18 L/min and the condition was checked for laminar
flow. All the manometer readings were recorded. Flow disturber was inserted without
changing the flow rate. All the manometer readings were recorded again and the discharge
was measured as well.
After the experiment was fully carried out, the control valve was closed and pump was
checked to be stopped.




pg. 13

3.0 Results

Properties of fluid (oil) and pipe:
Density of oil, (Kg/m
3
) 841
Kinematic viscosity of oil, (m
2
/s) 7.7x10
-6
@20
Diameter of pipe, (m) 0.019
Roughness of pipe wall,

(m) 0.0015
Table 3: Properties of fluid and pipe of the experiment

Discharge:
Test No. Discharge (L/min) Discharge (m
3
/s)
Average Velocity
(m/s)
Test 1 18 3.00 x10
-4
1.058
Test 2 26 4.33 x10
-4
1.527
Test 3 30 5.00 x10
-4
1.764
Test 4 22 3.67 x10
-4
1.295
Test 5 & 6 18 3.00 x10
-4
1.058
Table 4: Discharge and average velocity
*Please refer to Appendix I for calculations of discharge and average velocity.

Traverse results:
Rod reading
(mm)
Distance from
wall (mm)
Test 1
Pressure (bar)
Test 2
Pressure (bar)
TP1 TP2 TP1 TP2
16.5 1.0 0.033 0.027 0.047 0.034
14.5 3.0 0.039 0.027 0.050 0.034
12.5 5.0 0.043 0.026 0.052 0.032
10.5 7.0 0.044 0.026 0.054 0.032
9.0 8.5 0.043 0.025 0.052 0.032
8.0 9.5 0.041 0.025 0.052 0.032
Table 3: Traverse of Test 1 and Test 2
Rod reading
(mm)
Distance from
wall (mm)
Test 3
Pressure (bar)
Test 4
Pressure (bar)
TP1 TP2 TP1 TP2
16.5 1.0 0.052 0.036 0.039 0.027
14.5 3.0 0.055 0.036 0.048 0.027
12.5 5.0 0.057 0.035 0.050 0.026
10.5 7.0 0.058 0.034 0.052 0.026
9.0 8.5 0.058 0.034 0.050 0.025
8.0 9.5 0.057 0.034 0.049 0.025
Table 4: Traverse of Test 3 and Test 4


pg. 14

Piezometer Head:
Manometer
No
Position (m)
Test 1 Test 2 Test 3
P (bar) H (m) P (bar) H (m) P (bar) H (m)
1 0.160 0.058 0.7030 0.102 1.236 0.128 1.551
2 0.300 0.056 0.6788 0.100 1.212 0.124 1.503
3 0.450 0.045 0.5454 0.089 1.079 0.113 1.370
4 0.600 0.052 0.6303 0.095 1.151 0.121 1.467
5 0.750 0.049 0.5939 0.091 1.103 0.115 1.394
6 0.900 0.046 0.5576 0.088 1.067 0.116 1.406
7 1.050 0.041 0.4970 0.083 1.006 0.108 1.309
8 1.200 0.045 0.5454 0.086 1.042 0.109 1.321
9 1.350 0.043 0.5212 0.082 0.9939 0.104 1.261
10 1.500 0.042 0.5091 0.083 1.006 0.102 1.236
11 1.800 0.040 0.4848 0.075 0.9091 0.095 1.151
12 2.100 0.038 0.4606 0.073 0.8848 0.087 1.055
13 2.400 0.034 0.4121 0.067 0.8121 0.079 0.9576
14 2.750 0.033 0.4000 0.058 0.7030 0.069 0.8363
15 3.160 0.030 0.3636 0.051 0.6182 0.058 0.7030
16 3.610 0.028 0.3394 0.043 0.5212 0.045 0.5454
17 3.930 0.025 0.3030 0.032 0.3879 0.034 0.4121
18 4.195 0.023 0.2788 0.027 0.3273 0.029 0.3515
19 3.950 0.022 0.2667 0.047 0.5697 0.052 0.6303
Table 5: Manometer Reading and Calculated Piezometer Head at Various Positions in Pipe
for Test 1, Test 2 and Test 3


pg. 15

Manometer
No
Position (m)
Test 4
Test 5
Without flow
disturber
Test 6
With flow disturber
P (bar) H (m) P (bar) H (m) P (bar) H (m)
1 0.160 0.061 0.7394 0.058 0.7030 0.059 0.7151
2 0.300 0.058 0.7030 0.056 0.6788 0.058 0.7030
3 0.450 0.047 0.5697 0.045 0.5454 0.048 0.5818
4 0.600 0.055 0.6667 0.052 0.6303 0.056 0.6788
5 0.750 0.051 0.6182 0.049 0.5939 0.052 0.6303
6 0.900 0.052 0.6303 0.046 0.5576 0.052 0.6303
7 1.050 0.045 0.5454 0.041 0.4970 0.047 0.5697
8 1.200 0.048 0.5818 0.045 0.5454 0.050 0.6060
9 1.350 0.046 0.5576 0.043 0.5212 0.048 0.5818
10 1.500 0.045 0.5454 0.042 0.5091 0.047 0.5697
11 1.800 0.043 0.5212 0.040 0.4848 0.045 0.5454
12 2.100 0.041 0.4970 0.038 0.4606 0.043 0.5212
13 2.400 0.038 0.4606 0.034 0.4121 0.037 0.4485
14 2.750 0.036 0.4364 0.033 0.4000 0.036 0.4364
15 3.160 0.032 0.3879 0.030 0.3636 0.033 0.3999
16 3.610 0.030 0.3636 0.028 0.3394 0.029 0.3515
17 3.930 0.024 0.2909 0.025 0.3030 0.024 0.2909
18 4.195 0.023 0.2788 0.023 0.2788 0.023 0.2788
19 3.950 0.037 0.4485 0.022 0.2667 0.031 0.3757
Table 6: Manometer Reading and Calculated Piezometer Head at Various Positions in Pipe
for Test 4, Test 5 and Test 6



pg. 16

4.0 Analysis and Discussion
4.1 Piezometer head

Figure 5: Graph plotted of Piezometric Head Versus Piezometric Position
Based on Figure 5, it is a negative gradient graph for all the tests which indicates that
pizezometric head is inversely proportional to piezometric position. When piezometric head
decreases, piezometric position increases. The pressure drop is caused by the friction which
also known as shear stress happens between the wall and fluid. This is based on the concept
of conservation of energy which tells that energy losses in the pipe can cause pressure drop
occurred across the pipe. The friction occurred due to the viscous effects of fluid. Shear stress
is related with pressure drop as can be shown by analytical expression as shown below
(Laminar and Turbulent flows in pipes 2014).

This analysis is valid for both laminar and turbulent flows. The total shear stress for both
laminar and turbulent flows is different. The apparent shear stress for turbulent flows are
much greater than laminar flows. This is due to the eddy viscosity which is not a simple
property fluid and varies from one point to another point or from one flow to another
condition. Compared to others, Test 3 has the highest pressure gradient with the highest
average velocity due to resulted higher shear stress. Test 1 has the lowest pressure gradient
and lowest average velocity due to lower shear stress experienced. Between Test 5 and Test 6,
Test 6 does have a higher pressure gradient as with the presence of flow disturber that helps
in the development of turbulent flow in laminar flow. The flow is disturbed and hence the
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
P
i
e
z
o
m
e
t
r
i
c

H
e
a
d

(
m
)

Piezometric Position (m)
Graph of Piezometric Head (m) Versus
Piezometric Position (m)
Test 1
Test 2
Test 3
Test 4
Test 5
Test 6

pg. 17

fluctuations increase. As a result, pressure gradient and average velocity increase due to
increased shear stress.
4.2 Development length
The length required to achieve a fully-developed flow is known as development
length. To calculate development length for laminar and turbulent flows, the equations are
shown respectively.

Equation 8

Equation 9
Reynolds number and development length are determined and tabulated as shown in table
below.
Test
Average
Velocity(m/s)
Reynolds
Number
Type of Flow Development Length (m)
1 1.058 2610.65
Laminar
(Transitional)
2.877
2 1.527 3767.92
Turbulent
(Transitional)
0.3298
3 1.764 4352.73 Turbulent 0.3378
Table 7: Average velocity, Reynolds Number, flow type and
development length for Test 1, 2 and 3.

Reynolds Number can be calculated by using Equation 1 for each test.
Test 1: Test 2: Test 3:

= 2610.65 = 3767.92 = 4352.73
Development length is determined from Equation 8 and 9 for each test.
Test 1 (laminar): Test 2 (turbulent): Test 3 (turbulent):

= 2.877m = 0.3298m = 0.3378m

pg. 18


Table 8: Development length in terms of D
As seen from Table 7, when the Reynolds number is low (laminar flow), the development
length is much higher than of a high Reynolds number (turbulent flow). Other than that, it
shown that laminar flow for test 1 and 2 while test 3 is determined as turbulent flow. Besides,
the transitional regimes between laminar and turbulent and Reynolds number is the only
parameter that affects the entrance length is shown in Table 7 in this experiment. The
velocity of fluid in the stream at a point can be regarded as time average of fluid velocity
which also is defined as mean velocity or average velocity. When the average velocity
increases, the Reynolds number also increases. From Table 8, the development length of test
1 is approximately ten times longer than development length for test 2 and 3 which are
shorter compared test 1. This is due to viscous effects are dominant within the boundary layer
in laminar flow. The viscous effects are negligible inviscid core. The thickness is growing
when moving down the downstream as it is dynamic phemomenon. From Figure 6, it is seen
that the boundary layer from the walls grows to such an extent they all merge on the
centreline of pipe. The flow is all viscous after inviscid core terminates and it said to be fully
developed. Thus, the length required for a fully-developed flow of laminar flow is longer than
turbulent flow.

Figure 6: Inviscid core and boundary layer of entrance length (Entrance length 2005)
Test 1 Test 2 Test 3

151.42D


17.36D

17.78D

pg. 19



4.3 Friction Factor
Friction factor can be calculated by using Darcy-Weisbach equation while head loss is
determined from Bernoullis equation. The friction factors, f for each test (test 1 to 4) is
calculated and tabulated as table shown below.
Table 9: Static head, head loss and friction factors for test 1 to 4
Calculated friction factors will be compared with the plotted values in Moody chart as shown
in Figure 7. By determining the friction factor, the Reynolds number can be estimated from
Moody chart as well. Below shows a table with the comparison made between theoretical
Reynolds number and experimental Reynolds number.
Test no
Experimental
friction factor
Reynolds from
Moody chart
Theoretical
Reynolds number
Theoretical
friction factor
Test 1 0.0353 ~2000 2610.65 0.032
Test 2 0.0360 ~5200 3767.92 0.0372
Test 3 0.0362 ~5200 4352.73 0.0372
Test 4 0.0264 ~2500 3195.45 -
Table 10: Experimental and theoretical friction factor and Reynolds number
The theoretical friction factor also is calculated to compare with the experimental factor. The
calculated theoretical factor is shown in Table 10 and details calculations of theoretical
friction factor can be referred to Appendix III.
From Table 10, there is huge difference is observed between the theoretical and experimental
Reynolds number. This may due to one of the reasons which is some of the flows are
transitional flow where the Reynolds number cannot be determined from Moody chart.
Experimental error like fluctuation due to occurrence of bubbles in flow speed also influence
the experimental friction factor to be different with theoretical friction factor. Another reason
is minor loses is negligible in the experiment, thus difference in head loss values may lead to
difference in experimental friction factor. Instrument error due to inconsistency of values
displayed by the machine when taking the readings of the static head also may lead to the
Test
no.
Static Head, H (m) Head
Loss,

(m)
Friction factor,
Channel 1, H
1
Channel 17, H
2
Test 1 0.7030 0.3030 0.4 0.0353
Test 2 1.236 0.3879 0.8481 0.0360
Test 3 1.551 0.4121 1.139 0.0362
Test 4 0.7394 0.2909 0.4485 0.0264

pg. 20

difference of the results. There is slightly different between the experimental and theoretical
friction factors as resulted from previous Reynolds number data.


Figure 7: Moody chart (Dr Hong Wei 2006)


pg. 21

4.4 Velocity Profile
Velocity profile from experimental data can be calculated using formula,
The linear relationship is well described shown by the formula itself. When the
dynamic head of the fluid increases, the velocity increases also. The calculated velocity
profile and dynamic head fluid from experimental data are tabulated as shown in Table 11
and 12 respectively
Distance from
wall (mm)
H (m)
Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4
1.0 0.07273 0.1576 0.1939 0.1455
3.0 0.1455 0.1939 0.2303 0.2545
5.0 0.2182 0.2424 0.2667 0.2909
7.0 0.2182 0.2667 0.2909 0.3151
8.5 0.2182 0.2424 0.2909 0.3030
9.5 0.1939 0.2424 0.2788 0.2909
Table 11: H for test 1 to 4

Radius, r (m)
Velocity (m/s)
Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4
0.0085 1.195 1.758 1.950 1.690
0.0065 1.690 1.950 2.126 2.235
0.0045 2.069 2.181 2.288 2.389
0.0025 2.069 2.288 2.389 2.486
0.0010 2.069 2.181 2.389 2.438
0.0000 1.950 2.181 2.339 2.389
Table 12: Radius and velocity of each radius point for test 1 to 4

Note: Details calculations for calculated values shown in Table 11 and 12 can be referred to
Appendix IV.

pg. 22


Figure 8: Graph of radius versus velocity profile



Figure 9: Graph of H (m) against velocity profile(m/s)


-0.01
-0.008
-0.006
-0.004
-0.002
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
R
a
d
i
u
s

(
m
)

Velocity (m/s)
Graph of Radius(m) Versus Velocity Profile(m/s)
Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

H
(
m
)

Velocity(m/s)
H(m) Against Velocity Profile(m/s)
Test 1
Test 2
Test 3
Test 4

pg. 23

The data from Table 11 and 12 is used to plot the distance from centre against
velocity profile graph as shown in Figure 8. Negative distances from centre are plotted where
the values of velocity profile are similar to the positive distances from centre. The velocity
profile shown in Figure 8 for test 1 is a parabolic shape which indicates that it is laminar flow.
Although the shape is not a fully-developed of parabolic shape, it is considered as laminar
flow due to low Reynolds number by judging Reynolds number obtained from Moody Chart.
The non-fully developed parabolic shape may due to the fluctuations happen in flow speed of
fluid as some turbulent effects spotted.
For test 2 and 3, by determining from Reynolds number obtained from Moody chart,
they are considered to be turbulent flow event though the turbulent flow velocity profile
shape characteristics is more clearly can be seen from test 2 than test 3. For test 4, it is in
transitional flow due to a bit irregular shape characteristics is shown. From the Reynolds
number which obtained from Moody chart, it is proved that it has to be transitional flow as its
Reynolds number falls in between the range of transitional flow.
Figure 9 shows that the linear relationship between the dynamic head of fluid and
velocity of fluid. When the velocity increases, the dynamic head of fluid also increases. An
almost linear straight line is plotted due to the very slightly difference between them. All
points lie in a straight line due to the numerous repeated constant numbers can be found as
shown in both tables whether based on distances either from walls or centres. This lead to the
mostly parabolic shape characteristics is clearly to be seen in some tests as the flow speed is
quite uniform and less steady effects are found. This may affect how to determine the type of
flow based on velocity profile shape and needed be compared with Reynolds number
obtained from Moody chart.








pg. 24

4.5 Discharge calculation method

Discharge is the product of the average velocity and cross sectional area. Cross
sectional area of the pipe can be determined depends on the geometric formula. Average
velocity can be determined by using the velocity profile of the fluid. The velocity increases
towards the centre of a tube under the conditions of laminar flow in a viscous fluid. Hence,
the average velocity for laminar flow can be calculated by divide the maximum velocity of
the fluid which located at the centreline of the pipe. However, for transitional flow and
turbulent flow, the maximum velocity of the fluid is hard to be identified. Another way to
find the average velocity is to total up the all velocities recorded at different radius and then
divided it with the number of velocity recorded. To reduce the error to find out the average
velocity, it is suggested to increase the number of velocity recorded to increase the accuracy
of result. Below shows the formulas can be used to calculate the discharge by using velocity
profile.
Average Velocity

Discharge

pg. 25

4.6 Assessment of Error

There are several errors in this experiment. The first error is instrument error. The
pressure values that recorded are taken from a machine that displays the values in digital way.
The unstable values that shown by the machine during taking the readings is greatly affected
the accuracy of result as it gives difficulties to take a correct reading. Other than that, the
pressure value shown by the meter takes few minutes before the values come to stable, this
may due to the fluctuations occurred in flow speed of fluid as bubbles present. Moreover,
while waiting the value to become stable and consistent, this may cause the minor loses
energy in the pipe that which are not considered in this experiment. Parallax error when
measuring the discharge due to fluctuations occurred that causes values keep changing is
another error. Parallax error also occurs when adjusting the rod readings also can lead to
inaccuracy of the result. Diameter is considered consistent throughout experiment. The
inconsistent of diameter can affect the pressure drop and will affect the friction factor as well.
The friction factor varying with Reynolds number in this experiment is limited since it is only
to determine the laminar and turbulent flow and not valid for transitional flow.

5.0 Conclusion

All the Reynolds number is determined of each test for flow in a pipe with a circular
cross-section. The Reynolds number falls lower than 2100 is considered as laminar flow
while more than 4000 is considered as turbulent flow and between the range of these flows is
known as transitional flow which can be in either laminar or turbulent flow. The friction
factor concept in pipe flow was studied and investigated in this experiment. The fully-
developed flow friction factor was obtained to determine the Reynolds number from Moody
chart which also is used to determine type flow of each test was identified as well but it is
only valid for laminar and turbulent flow. The velocity profile was measured and compared
in both laminar and turbulent flows. The parabolic shape velocity profile is considered as
laminar flow while a more irregular shape velocity profile is considered as turbulent flow.



pg. 26

6.0 References

Dr. HongWei Wu, 2006. Lecture 6: Viscous Flow in Pipe.
http://moodle.curtin.edu.my/pluginfile.php/14134/mod_folder/content/0/FM_230_Chap
6.pdf?forcedownload=1.

Entrance Length. 2005. Aerospace, Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering.
http://wwwmdp.eng.cam.ac.uk/web/library/enginfo/aerothermal_dvd_only/aero/fprop
s/pipeflow/node9.html.

Head Loss Due To Friction In Circular Pipe. 2014. Accessed May 26,
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC
4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heacademy.ac.uk%2Fassets%2Fdocuments%2
Fsubjects%2Fengineering%2Fcase-study-teaching-material-headloss-
friction.doc&ei=bUGRU97SMI_h8AX7moLICA&usg=AFQjCNH27RPZe2mqrDJ9
CeJ46KD1c7vEVQ.
Laminar and Turbulent flows in pipes. 2014. Accessed May 27,
http://www.cs.cdu.edu.au/homepages/jmitroy/eng247/sect09.pdf.

Sleigh, Dr Andrew. 2009. Unit 4: Boundary Effects.
http://www.efm.leeds.ac.uk/CIVE/FluidsLevel1/Unit04/T2.html.

Types of flow. 2014. Alicat Scientific, Inc. Accessed May 25,
http://www.alicat.com/technical-information/flow-principles/.

Viscous Flow In Pipes. 2014. Accessed May 25,
http://civil.emu.edu.tr/old_website/data/civl332/chap3%20_revised.pdf.













pg. 27

7.0 Appendices

Appendix I
Table 2
Discharge (Test 1):
The volumetric flow rate of 18L/min can be converted into SI unit

Same method is applied on Test 2, Test 3, Test 4 and also for Test 5&6 respectively.
Average velocity (Test 1):
Average velocity can be determined from volumetric flow rate equation.

Same method is applied on Test 2, Test 3, Test 4 and also for Test 5&6 respectively.
Table 5 and 6
Piezometer head (Test 1):
Pressure, P in unit bar which obtained from experiment is converted into head form in unit m.
For Manometer No 1 where P is 0.058bar, head form is calculated as below.

This step is repeated for all manometers (manometer no. 1 to 19) and all tests (test 1 to 6).
The calculated results are tabulated and recorded in Table 5 and 6.



pg. 28

Appendix II
Table 9
Head loss,

is calculated using Bernoullis equation.

Each test (test 1to 4 )is calculated using same method and the answer obtained is substituted
to the Darcy-Weisbach equation to determine the friction factors, f for each test.
After that, substitute

, L= 3.93-0.16=3.77 ,

=1.058, D=0.019m, g=9.81(constant) and

friction factor of test 1 is obtained as shown below.

=0.4 (

)
= 0.035m
All the results are tabulated in Table 9.









pg. 29

Appendix III
Table 10
Theoretical friction factor is calculated as shown below.
For laminar flow,

For turbulent flow,

(Blasius formula)
For Test 1,
Test 1 is laminar flow,

= 0.032
Test 2 is turbulent,
= 0.316 (Re)
-0.25

= 0.316 (5200)
-0.25

= 0.0372
For Test 3,
Test 3 is turbulent,
= 0.316 (Re)
-0.25

= 0.316 (5200)
-0.25

= 0.0372
All the results are tabulated in Table 10.



pg. 30

Appendix IV
The velocity for different distance from the wall or center is calculated using formula,
while the dynamic head, is actually the different between TP1 and TP2 in
head form shown in Table 3 and 4.
Table 11
Calculation for test 1 with the distance 1.0 mm from wall is as shown below:

Same method is applied in each test 1 until 4 to determine the dynamic head in each test.
Table 12
For first set distance from wall, 0.001m,
To obtain the radius of the pipe,

= 0.0085m
Same method is applied for another five sets of distance from wall, 0.003m, 0.005m, 0.007m,
0.0085m and 0.0095m.
Velocity profile
For test 1,


= 1.195 m/s
Same method is applied for the test 2 to 4.