ES341 Lab 3

Impact of Jets

Prepared By:
Yan Trindade (ytrindadelisboagome@alaska.edu)




Lab Partners:
Alex Slaymaker (arslaymaker@alaska.edu)
Ruth Luna do Nascimento (rlunadonascimentogo@alaska.edu)




Prepared Due Date
10/19/2014 10/21/2014






INTRODUCTION

Based on Newtons second law, the momentum equation for a given fluid says that the
sum of external forces in a control volume is equal to the rate of change of momentum. It can be
clarified by the following equation.
F = V (equation 1)
F = Q (V
in
V
out
) (equation 2)
Where; F: the force exerted by the jet on the plate; : the mass density of water; mass
flow rate; Q: volumetric flow rate; V: the change in velocity just after and before impact.
Its important to learn more about the force caused by a free jet. The principle given in
the previous equation can be applied in the design of turbines to enhance the efficiency and the
output power, and in the design of cars - to reduce the friction force, for example. Thus, the
objective of this experiment is to compare the force acting in different vanes (flat vane and
hemispherical vane), and understand how the momentum changes this force. It`s also an
objective to compare the experimental results to the theoretical values.
Analyzing the geometry of the two types of vane, it can be noticed that the force in the
hemispherical vane is twice greater than the force in the flat vane. It is explained by the
approximation V
out
= V
in
*cos ; where is the change in direction of the flow. In the flat vane
the angle is 90, and in the hemispherical vane the angle is 180. Rearranging the equation 2, F is
now given by:
For the flat vane: F = Q Vin (equation 3)
For the hemispherical vane: F =2 Q Vin (equation 4)
The limitations for this experiment are: errors in parallax, inconstant flow rate,
uncontrolled changes of the humidity and temperature in the lab.

EQUIPMENT and SETUP

Flat Vane Experiment:
Gravimetric Hydraulic Bench
Model: H1D Tecquipment Ltd.
Serial Number: S5014/2

Control Volume
Model: H8 Tecquipment Ltd.
Serial Number: 399

Hemispherical Vane Experiment:
Gravimetric Hydraulic Bench
Model: H1 Tecquipment Ltd.
Serial Number: TQ090648-03

Control Volume
Model: H8 Tecquipment Ltd.
Serial Number: 440
2 X 2.0 kg weights












Figure 1 Experiment Setup, Gravimetric Hydraulic Bench and control volume. The hemispherical vane
is on the right side, on the top. The flat vane is on the right side, in the bottom.


PROCEDURE

1. Set the jockey at the zero position. If the rule is note leveled, adjust the screw on top of
the system to equilibrate it.
2. Turn on the hydraulic bench, and regulate the valve for a slow flow rate.
3. Move the jockey to make the system reach the equilibrium, record the distance where the
jockey is into observations.
4. Fill out the tables with three times elapsed for each flow rate.
5. Calculate each flow rate by using the average elapsed time and volume of water in the
bench.
6. Increase the flow rate and do the steps 3, 4 and 5. Do these steps for a total of 5 trials.
7. Repeat the steps before for a different kind of vane inside the control volume.


RESULTS

Definitions:
m
L
= mass of load on load arm (kg)
r
arm
= ratio of arm lengths
V
w
= volume of water (m
3
)
Q
0
= flow rate of water (m
3
/s)
t = time elapsed (s)

= average time elapsed

= mass flow rate (kg/s)
D = nozzle diameter (m)
A = area of the jet (m
2
)
U
1
= velocity of water at the top of the
nozzle (m/s)
S = the distance from the vane to the
nozzle (m)
U
0
= velocity of water at the vane (m/s)
J = force due to flow of water (N)
L = vane center from pivot (m)
g = acceleration of gravity (m/s
2
)
m
j
= mass of jockey (kg)
Y = position of jockey (m)
F
e
= experimental value of the force
acting on the vane (N)
F
t
= theoretical value of the force acting
on the vane (N).
m
w
= mass of water in the water arm

water
= Density of water
Formulas:
m
w
= (m
L
)(r
arm
)
V
w
= m
w
/
H2O

Q
0
= V
w
/

= m
w
/

U
1
= Q
0
/A
U
0
=

J = ( )*(U
0
)
F
e
= (m
j
g Y)/L
F
t
= J (for flat vane)
F
t
= 2J (for hemispherical vane)

Observations:
m
L
= 2.0 kg
r
arm
= 3
m
j
= 0.6 kg
D = 0.010 m
A = 78.54 x 10
-6
m
2

L = 0.150 m
S = 0.035 m

In table 1, its shown the observed values for position of jockey and time elapsed. Its
organized for flat vane and hemispherical vane trials. In table 2, its shown the calculated values
for average time elapsed, mass flow rate, volumetric flow rate, velocity of water at the top of the
nozzle, velocity of water at the vane, force due to flow of water, experimental value of the force
acting on the vane, and theoretical value of the force acting on the vane, respectively. In table 3,
there are calculated values for error in the flat vane and in the hemispherical vane.
Table 1
Flat Vane Hemispherical Vane
Trial Y (m) t (s) Trial Y (m) t (s)
1 0.060 15.09 14.41 13.97 1 0.055 19.47 19.94 17.97
2 0.063 14.56 14.18 14.35 2 0.070 17.46 18.03 16.40
3 0.078 14.00 12.81 12.88 3 0.075 18.19 16.75 16.25
4 0.081 12.62 12.07 12.37 4 0.086 16.38 15.44 15.79
5 0.097 11.53 11.37 10.75 5 0.095 14.47 14.25 14.57
Results:
Table 2
Flat Vane
Trial t
m
(s) (kg/s) Q
0
(m
3
/s) U
1
(m/s) U
0
(m/s) J (N) F
e
(N) F
t
(N)
1 14.49 0.414 0.000414 5.272 5.207 2.156 2.354 2.156
2 14.36 0.418 0.000418 5.319 5.254 2.195 2.472 2.195
3 13.23 0.454 0.000454 5.774 5.715 2.592 3.061 2.592
4 12.35 0.486 0.000486 6.184 6.128 2.977 3.178 2.977
5 11.22 0.535 0.000535 6.811 6.760 3.616 3.806 3.616
Hemispherical Vane
Trial t
m
(s) (kg/s) Q
0
(m
3
/s) U
1
(m/s) U
0
(m/s) J (N) F
e
(N) F
t
(N)
1 19.13 0.314 0.000314 3.994 3.907 1.226 2.158 2.451
2 17.30 0.347 0.000347 4.417 4.338 1.505 2.747 3.010
3 17.06 0.352 0.000352 4.477 4.400 1.547 2.943 3.094
4 15.87 0.378 0.000378 4.814 4.742 1.793 3.375 3.586
5 14.43 0.416 0.000416 5.294 5.229 2.174 3.728 4.348

Table 3
Flat Vane Error (%) Hemispherical Vane Error (%)
9.20 11.96
12.64 8.74
18.10 4.89
6.78 5.88
5.26 14.27
Average Error (%) Average Error (%)
10.40 9.15





DISCUSSION

Based on the results and the figures 2 and 3 below, it can be inferred that the
experimental and the theoretical results didnt match exactly. However, the table 3 shows that the
average error for the flat vane was 10.40%, and the average error for the hemispherical vane was
9.15%. Moreover, according to the figures 3 and 4, the slope of the tendency lines, when
compared to the slopes of the theoretical lines, show a satisfactory result.
From table 2, it can be noticed that as the volumetric flow rate increased, the force in the
vane increased for both flat vane and hemispherical vane. Furthermore, the force in the flat vane
was half of it in the hemispherical vane. This was previously discussed in the introduction
section.
The discrepancy between the experimental and theoretical values for force in the vanes
can be due to some factors. Such as, head loss due to friction during the measurements
inconstant flow rate, errors in taking the read, errors in taking the time elapsed.
Figure 2
y = 0.947x + 0.4108
R = 0.9625
y = 1.647x + 0.2744
R = 0.951
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
F
e

(
N
)

J (N)
F
e
vs. J
Flat Vane
Hemispherical Vane
Linear (Flat Vane)
Linear (Hemispherical Vane)










Figure 3

Questions:
1. How well does F
t
compare to F
e
?
Answer: As showed in the table 3, the average error for the flat vane was 10.40% and the
average error for the hemispherical vane was 9.15%. According to the figures 3 and 4, the slope
of the tendency lines, when compared to the slopes of the theoretical lines, show a satisfactory
result. However, there are some points far away from the tendency lines. Some mistakes when
taking the time elapsed time could happen.

2. Is there a difference in the force measured on the two vanes for a given value of discharge?
Why?
y = x
R = 1
y = 2x
R = 1
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
F
t

(
N
)

J (N)
F
t
vs. J
Flat Vane
Hemispherical Vane
Linear (Flat Vane)
Linear (Hemispherical Vane)
Answer: Yes, there is. For the same discharge but with different vanes, the momentum going
out of the vane will be different. The force in the hemispherical vane will be 2 times greater than
the force in the flat vane. Its better explained in the introduction section.

3. Is the velocity at the nozzle outlet the same as the velocity striking the vane? Explain.
Answer: No, it is not. The velocity at nozzle is given by the equation U
1
= Q
0
/A, and the
velocity striking the vane is given by U
0
=

. The velocity at the vane will be fewer

than the velocity at the nozzle. The velocity reduction is due to the change in height; the
gravitational potential energy will increase with the height and will reduce the kinetic energy.

4. What is the pressure distribution across the jet of water (across the diameter)? Describe your
answer with a sketch.
Answer: The pressure reduces as it approaches the nozzle, once the pressure outside the
nozzle is the atmospheric pressure. The maximum pressure is at the center of the tube, and at the
surface of the tube the pressure is the minimum.








5. What is the velocity distribution across the jet of water (across the diameter)? Describe your
answer with a sketch.
Answer: The maximum velocity is at the center of the tube, and the minimum velocity is at
the surface of the tube. Moreover, as the water approaches the nozzle, the velocity increases.
This is the reason why the nozzle was used.







CONCLUSION

This experiment was well succeeded. The relation between flow rate and exerted force
was noticed. As the volumetric flow rate increased, the force in the vane increased for both flat
vane and hemispherical vane.
It was observed also that the force in the hemispherical vane was twice greater than the
force in the flat vane. It was due to the geometry of the vane. The hemispherical vane had a
greater rate of change on momentum in the control volume (in the x axis) comparing to the flat
vane.
Comparing the experimental and theoretical values for the force in the vane, the results
are satisfactory. The slopes in the tendency lines of both experimental and theoretical forces
were predicted. The largest errors was 18.10%, however the average error in the experiment was
around 10%.
REFERENCES

Munson, Young, and Okiishi. Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, Fifth Edition. Hoboken: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.