Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 17

4.

FLUID FRICTION IN PIPES

4.1.

OBJECTIVE

4.1.1. To determine the relationship between head loss due to fluid friction and
velocity for flow of water through smooth bore pipes.
4.1.2. To confirm the head loss predicted by pipe friction equation associated
with flow of water through a smooth bore pipe.

4.2.

INTRODUCTION

The flow of fluid in a pipe is accompanied by the loss of energies as a result of


the interaction between the fluid and the viscous stresses on the wall of the
pipe. The energy loss may be in the form of pressure loss in the system due to
friction, pipe bend or connections etc. This experiment will focus on the
energy losses due to friction in the pipe, the relationship between head loss
(loss in pressure), friction factor, flow rate and Reynolds number for both
laminar and turbulent flow in a smooth pipe will also be investigated.

4.3.

EQUIPMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS

Unit Assembly
The test circuits are mounted on Formica laminated backboard strengthened
by a deep frame and carried on tubular stands. There are six pipes arranged
to provide facilities for testing the following:
i. Smooth bore pipes of various diameters (6mm, 10mm and 17mm)
ii. An artificially roughened pipe
iii. A 90o bend
iv. A 90o elbow
v. A 45o elbow
vi. A 45o Y
vii. A 90o T
viii. A sudden enlargement
ix. A sudden contraction
x. A gate valve
xi. A globe valve
xii. An in-line strainer
xiii. A venturi made of Perspex
xiv. An orifice meter made of Perspex
xv. Pitot Static Tube
Note: Hydraulic bench in included

4.4.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

4.4.1. Open and close the appropriate valves to obtain flow of water through
the required test sections. The test sections are as follows:

18.0 mm Smooth Bore Pipe

13.5 mm Smooth Bore Pipe

10.3 mm Smooth Bore Pipe


4.4.2. Measure the flow rates.
4.4.3. Measure head loss.
4.4.4. Repeat the testing with different flow rate.

4.5.
RESULTS
4.6.
4.6.1. Test section 1 : 18.0 mm Smooth Bore Pipe

4.7.
Vol
u
m
e
,
V

4.8.
Ti

4.9.
Fl

(
l
i
t
r
e
)

4.10.
Pipe
d
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
,
d
(
m
)

4.12.
Hea
d

4.11.
Velo
c
i
t
y
,
u

l
o
s
s
,

(
m
/
s
)
4Q
d2

H
(
m
m
H
g
)

4.13.
He
a
d
l
o
s
s
,

4.14.
Lo

4.15.
Lo

(
m
H
2

O
)
0.0126 H

4.16.
0.6
0

4.25.
0.5
4

4.17. 4.18.
6
1

4.26.
4.27.
6
9

4.34.
0.4
8

4.35.
4.36.
6
8

4.43.
0.4
2

4.44. 4.45.
6
7

4.19.
0.01
8
0

4.20.
392
9
7
.
5
4.29.
353
6
7
.
8
4.38.
314
3
8
.
0
4.47.
275
0
8

4.21.
20.
6
8
6

4.22.
0.2
6
0
6

4.30.
20.
6
8
6

4.31.
0.2
6
0
6

4.39.
15.
5
1
5

4.40.
0.1
9
5
5

4.48.
10.
3
4

4.49.
0.1
3
0

4.23.
4.

4.24.
-

4.32.
4.

4.33.
-

4.41.
4.

4.42.
-

4.50.
4.

4.51.
-

4.52.
0.3
6

.
3
4.56.
235
7
8
.
5

4.53.
4.54.
6
6

4.57.
15.
5
1
5

4.58.
0.1
9
5
5

4.59.
4.

4.60.
-

4.61.
4.62. Test section 2 : 13.5 mm Smooth Bore Pipe

4.63.
Volu
m
e
,
V
(l
it
r
e
)

4.72.
0.60

4.81.
0.54

4.90.
0.48

4.64.
Ti

4.73.
60

4.82.
60

4.91.
60

4.65.
Flo

4.74.
10

4.66.
Pipe
di
a
m
et
er
,
d
(
m
)
4.75.
0.013
5

4.67.
Veloci
ty
,
u
(
m
/s
)
4Q
d2

4.76.
6986
2.
3

4.83.
9

4.85.
6287
6.
0

4.92.
8

4.94.
5588
9.
8

4.99.
0.42

4.100. 4.101.
60
7

4.108.

4.109. 4.110.

4.103.
4890
3.
6
4.112.

4.68.
Head
lo
s
s,
H
(
m
m
H
g
)
4.77.
118.
9
4
4
4.86.
124.
1
1
6
4.95.
129.
2
8
7
4.104.
51.7
1
5
4.113.

4.69.
Head
l
o
s
s
,
h
(
m
H

4.70.
Lo

O
)
0.0126 H
4.78.
1.49
8
7
4.87.
1.56
3
9
4.96.
1.62
9
0
4.105.
0.65
1
6
4.114.

4.79.
4.8

4
0

4.88.
4.7

4
0

4.97.
4.7

4
0

4.106.
4.6

4.115.

0.36

60

4191
7.
4

51.7
1
5

0.65
1
6

4.6

4.117.
4.118.

4.119.
Volu
m
e
,
V
(l
it
r
e
)

4.128.
0.60

4.137.
0.54

Test section 3 : 10.3 mm Smooth Bore Pipe

4.122.
Pipe
di
a
4.121.
m
4.120. Flo
et
Ti
er
,
d
(
m
)

4.123.
Veloci
ty
,
u
(
m
/s
)

4.131.
0.010
4.129. 4.130.
3
60
10

4.132.
1200
1
5.
0
4.141.
1080
1
3.
5

4.138. 4.139.
60
9

4Q
d2

4.147. 4.148.
60
8

4.150.
9601
2.
0

4.155.
0.42

4.156. 4.157.
60
7

4.159.
8401
0.
5

4.164.
0.36

4.165. 4.166.
60
6

4.146.
0.48

4.168.
7200
9.
0

4.124.
Head
lo
s
s,
H
(
m
m
H
g
)

4.133.
325.
8
0
4
4.142.
305.
1
1
8
4.151.
263.
7
4
7
4.160.
201.
6
8
8
4.169.
149.
7
4

4.125.
Hea
d
l
o
s
s
,
h
(
m
H

4.126.
Lo

O
)
0.0126 H
4.134.
4.10
5
1
4.143.
3.84
4
5
4.152.
3.32
3
2
4.161.
2.54
1
3
4.170.
1.88
9
7

4.135.
5.0

4
0

4.144.
5.0

4
0

4.153.
4.9

4
0

4.162.
4.9

4
0

4.171.
4.8

4
0

0
4.174.
4.175.
4.176.

4.173.
If the measure flow rate, Q is
V 103
Q=
T
then the is

V =QT 10

4.176.1.
Graph of head loss, h versus velocity, u for each size of pipe.
4.177.
4.178. Graph 1 : Graph of h versus u for 0.0180 m diameter size of pipe
4.179.

h vs u (0.0180 m )
0.3
0.25

f(x) = 0x + 0
R = 0.57

0.2
Axis Title

h vs u (0.0180 m )

0.15

Linear (h vs u (0.0180 m ))

0.1
0.05
0
20000

30000

40000

50000

Axis Title

4.180.
4.181. Graph 2 : Graph of h versus u for 0.0135 m diameter size of pipe
4.182.

h vs u (0.0135)
1.8
1.6
1.4

f(x) = 0x - 0.89
R = 0.67

1.2
1
Axis Title

h vs u (0.0135)

0.8

Linear (h vs u (0.0135))

0.6
0.4
0.2
0
40000

50000

60000

Axis Title

70000

80000

4.183.
4.184.
4.185.
4.186.
4.187.
4.188.
4.189. Graph 3 : Graph of h versus u for 0.0103 m diameter size of pipe
4.190.

h vs u (0.0103)
4.5
4
3.5

f(x) = 0x - 1.45
R = 0.97

3
2.5
Axis Title

h vs u (0.0103)

Linear (h vs u (0.0103))

1.5
1
0.5
0
60000 80000 100000 120000 140000
Axis Title

4.191.
4.191.1.
Graph of log h versus log u for each diameter size of pipe.
4.192.
4.193.

Graph 4 : Graph of log h versus log u for 0.0180 m diameter size of pipe

4.194.

log h vs log u (0.0180 m)


0
-0.14.35 4.4 4.45 4.5 4.55 4.6 4.65
-0.2
-0.3
Axis Title

-0.4

log h vs log u (0.0180 m)

-0.5

Linear (log h vs log u


(0.0180 m))

-0.6
-0.7
-0.8

f(x) = 0.96x - 4.99


R = 0.46

-0.9
-1
Axis Title

4.195.
4.196.
4.197.
4.198.
4.199.

Graph 5 : Graph of log h versus log u for 0.0135 m diameter size of pipe

4.200.

log h vs log u (0.0135m)


0.25
0.2
0.15

f(x) = 2.06x - 9.72


R = 0.74

0.1
log h vs log u (0.0135m)

0.05
Axis Title

0
-0.054.6 4.65 4.7 4.75 4.8 4.85 4.9

Linear (log h vs log u


(0.0135m))

-0.1
-0.15
-0.2
-0.25
Axis Title

4.201.
4.202.

Graph 6 : Graph of log h versus log u for 0.0103 m diameter size of pipe

4.203.

log h versus log u (0.0103m)


0.7
0.6
0.5

f(x) = 1.57x - 7.35


R = 0.97
log h versus log u
(0.0103m)

0.4
Axis Title

Linear (log h versus log u


(0.0103m))

0.3
0.2
0.1
0
4.8 4.85 4.9 4.95
Axis Title

4.204.

5.05 5.1

4.204.1.
The value of Reynolds number at the start and finish of the
transition phase.
4.204.2.

ud

= molecular viscosity = 1.15 x 10-3 Ns/m2 at 15C

4.204.3.
4.204.4.

Re =

= density = 999 kg/m3 at 15oC

4.204.5.
4.204.6.

For 0.0180 m diameter size of pipe


R e 1=

4.204.7.

4.204.8.

R e 2=

( 999 )( 39297.5 ) ( 0.0180 )


1.15 103

( 999 )( 23578.5 )( 0.0180 )


1.15 103

4.204.9.

Re1 = 6.145(108)

4.204.10.

Re2 = 3.687(108)

4.204.11.
4.204.12.

For 0.0135 m diameter size of pipe

4.204.13.

R e 1=

( 999 )( 69862.3 )( 0.0135 )


1.15 103

4.204.14.

R e 2=

( 999 )( 41917.4 ) ( 0.0135 )


1.15 103

4.204.15.

Re1 = 8.193(108)

4.204.16.

Re2 = 4.196(108)

4.204.17.
4.204.18.

For 0.0103 m diameter size of pipe

4.204.19.

R e 1=

( 999 )( 120015 ) ( 0.0103 )


3
1.15 10

4.204.20.

R e 2=

( 999 )( 72009 ) ( 0.0103 )


3
1.15 10

4.204.21.

Re1 = 10.738(108)

4.204.22.
4.204.23.

Re2 = 64.430(107)

4.205. DISCUSSION
4.206.
From this experiment, some values of friction factor for two pipes
were determined. Considering the results obtained for the laminar, turbulent
and transition regions of flow, it could be observed clearly that there was
some deviation in the values which were obtained for the experimental and
theoretical values for the friction factor especially for the small diameter
pipe.
4.207.
From the table 1, the friction factor has a percentage error
of +_0.5% for the laminar flow in the 0.0180 m diameter pipe. This error may
have resulted from poor pressure difference readings in the scale which may
have compounded the overall error. Between the laminar and transition
(Transition) zones, the variation in temperature may have contributed to
some of the discrepancies in these results. This is because, the change in
temperature can affect the viscosity, density and other parameters used in
the calculation. The variation may have been from changes in the
temperature of the surrounding which was not taken into consideration.
4.208.
Another source of error in the experiment could be the
presence of bubbles in the pipes during the time of the experiment. The air
bubbles may have interrupted the fluid flow rate during the initial readings.
Similarly, poor readings from the manometer scales may have affected the
accuracy of the results.
4.209.
The results obtained as shown on the table and the graph of
Reynolds number versus friction factor shows that the pipe flow in the 0.0180
m, 0.0135 m, 0.0103 m diameter pipe behaves similarly as predicted by
Hagen Poiseuilles equation for laminar flow,(f =64/Re). The agreement in
these values could be that experimental errors were minimal in this region,
thus, the laminar flow region was more consistent the overall trend observed
in the experiment.
4.210.
However, the prediction of the region of the transition was a
bit more complex for analysis given that there were no empherical methods
or equation to compare their behaviour with in order to interpret the trend.
4.211.
Furthermore, the value of the friction factor for the turbulent
flow in the large diameter pipe was not much accurate when compared with
standard models such as the Moody chart and the Blasius equation (f =
0.316/Re0.25 ). The probable cause of these discrepancies could be as a
result of poor readings of pressure drop in the manometer which influenced
most of the calculated parameters.
4.212.
The effect of this variation may have had a serious impact
on the calculation of the friction factor at this point owing to the relationship
of the flow rate, the friction factor and the Reynolds number in a given flow. It
was observed that as the flow rate and the Reynolds number increases

respectively for each test for the turbulent flow in a smooth pipe, there was a
corresponding decrease in the friction factor.
4.213.
For the lowest flow rate, the probable measurement error could be
error in pressure readings which may have affected the important
calculations.
4.214.

4.215. CONCLUSION
4.216.
The aim of this experiment was to determine the head loss
(pressure difference), the flow rate, friction factor and some associated
parameters relating to the Reynolds number. The head loss and the friction
factor was determined through a 0.0180 m, 0.0135 m, 0.0103 m cylindrical
pipes and compared with equations for friction factor, f = 64/Re and f =
0.316/Re for laminar and turbulent flow respectively.
4.217.
Though the experiment fulfilled most of the above
relationships, no actual model was developed for determining the behaviour
of fluid in the transition region. Furthermore, the direct variation of the
Reynolds number and the flow rate was shown to vary inversely with the
friction factor as the flow develops from one region to the other.
4.218.
Finally, some errors limited the overall results obtained in
the experiment. To improve the reliability of subsequent experiments,
conducting the experiment in a controlled environment should be considered
in order to minimise the effects of variation of temperature or viscosity in the
fluid system. Similarly, the manometer should be marked in such a way that
readings may be taken more accurately.

4.219. APPENDIX

4.220.

4.221.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi