# Srbislav Genić

Associate Professor University of Belgrade Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

Ivan Arandjelović
Associate Professor University of Belgrade Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

A Review o !"#li\$it A##ro"imations o %olebrook&s !'uation
The most common explicit correlations for estimation of the friction factor in rough and smooth pipes are reviewed in this paper. Comparison of any friction factor equation with the Colebrook’s equation was expressed trough the mean relative error, the maximal positive error, the maximal negative error, correlation ratio and standard deviation. The statistical comparison of different equations was also carried out using the “ odel selection criterion! and “"kaike #nformation Criterion!. #t was found that the equation of \$igrang and %ylvester provides the most accurate value of friction factor, and that &aaland’s equation is most suitable for hand calculations. Keywords: Colebrook’s equation, friction factor, approximations, fluid mechanics, turbulent flow.

Petar Kolendić
Research Assistant University of Belgrade Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

Marko Jarić
Research Assistant University of Belgrade Innovation Center of Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

Nikola Budimir
Research Assistant University of Belgrade Innovation Center of Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

Vojislav Genić
Head of Public Health Care and Mobility Sie ens I! Solutions and Services" Belgrade

() IN*R+,-%*I+N

The determination of a single-phase friction factor of pipe is essential to a variety of industrial applications, such as single-phase flow systems, two-phase flow systems and supercritical flow systems. Typically, the method of choice for computing friction factor is the Colebrook’s equation. This equation is a combination of Prandtl-von arman-!ikuradse smooth-pipe equation

that became widely accepted design formula for turbulent friction in the range of 'e " #\$\$\$ % &\$' and ε " \$ % \$.\$(. )ue to its demonstrated applicability, the Colebrook’s equation *+, has become the acceptable standard for calculation of the friction factor in turbulent regimes. -t should be noted that .ouse /+0 was the first to confirm Colebrook’s equation *+, by his own measurements. 1quation *+, was plotted in &2## by 3oody /#0 into what is now called the oody chart for pipe friction *this chart is probably the most famous and useful figure in engineering fluid mechanics,. The implicit form of *+, disables the quick estimation of friction factor in hand calculations. 5or this reason, a number of appro6imate e6plicit counterparts have been proposed in the last 7\$ years and a most recent and very good overview of these equations is given in /(-80. The basic idea of these efforts is to introduce more parameters in equation, in order to obtain as good results as possible, or more precisely as close prediction as possible of a Colebrook’s equation. These e6plicate equations were compared with Colebrook’s equation as shown in :ection +.
.) !/P0I%I* !1-A*I+NS 2+R %A0%-0A*I+N +2 *3! 2RI%*I+N 2A%*+R IN *-RB-0!N* 20+4

&

= 4 log 'e f

(

)−

*&,

\$.\$' f and rough-pipe equation & f = &.&# − 4 log ( ε ) *4,

where 'e is the .eynolds number and ε is the relative pipe roughness. 1quations *&, and *4, are known as P ! equations /&0. 9sing these equations and his own data gathered on commercial pipes, Colebrook /40 formed the following equation that covers the whole turbulent flow region & = −4 log ⎛ 4.(& +

ε ⎞

*+,

The most widely used e6plicit appro6imations for the

⎜ ⎟ 'e f +.8 ⎝ ⎠ .eceived= <pril 4\$&&, <ccepted= 3ay 4\$&& Correspondence to= 3arko >aric -nnovation Center of 5aculty of 3echanical 1ngineering, ral?ice 3ari?e &7, &&&4\$ @elgrade +(, f

Colebrook’s equation postulated since &2#8 are synthesi;ed in Table &, in the order of publication. <dditionally, this table contains the range of validity for :erbia 1-mail= m?aricAmas.bg.ac.rs

78-8& 56 . <ll rights reserved over only a limited range of the 'e and ε values encountered in practice. @elgrade.each appro6imation cited as defined in the original paper. +2. 3ost of these appro6imations are typically valid B 5aculty of 3echanical 1ngineering. 531 Transactions *4\$&&.

224# ⎛ (.&& ⎜ +ε ⎟ ⎝ 'e ⎠ \$. >ain *&287.\$&' then f = " and if " < \$.( D &\$' /4\$0 ε " \$ % \$. >ain *&287. *&8. /&+0 *&\$.2+#( ⋅ log ⎜⎜ +⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎝ 8.\$4 ⎛ (. f = ⎡−4 log ⎛⎜4. f = \$.&+# ⎡ ⎛ ε 8 ⎞⎤ f = ⎢ −4 log⎜ + \$.=(( 2M! *ransa\$tions .< No .2 ⎤ ⎪⎫ f = ⎨ −&. Chen *&282.Hyo. *&(. <uthors *year.&'e ) ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ 'e −4 !ot specified /80 @rkiJ *4\$&&.82 ⎟⎠ ⎝ 4\$'.\$\$\$\$& % \$.*able () Various a##ro"imations o t7e %olebrook&s e'uation 1q.\$( 'e " #\$\$\$ % &\$' ε " \$ % \$. ⎛ 7' ⎞ " = \$.\$\$4' + \$. .'4 ⎞ ⎤ ⎡ f = ⎢ −4 log⎜ + \$. /&20 *&7. /&80 *&#.&'β + ε ⎟⎞⎤ ⎢ +. ⎧ (.\$484 ⎛ ε #.\$( 'e " (\$\$\$ % &\$' ε " \$.\$\$(( ⎢ & + ⎜ 4\$\$\$\$ε + ⎟ ⎢ ⎜ 'e ⎟ ⎠ ⎣ ⎝ ⎛ 7' ⎞ f = \$.++47 ⎞ \$. 58 9 V+0) :. 3anadilli *&228.\$( /&70 *&+.ef.\$\$\$\$# % \$.&'e &. ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ /'0 *(. 3oody *&2#8.\$\$\$\$\$& % \$.\$( 'e " #\$\$\$ % # D &\$' 'e " #\$\$\$ % # D &\$' ε " \$ % \$. :ylvester *&2'4.8& ⎠ ⎦ ⎣ ⎛ ⎞ &. Figrang.\$( .2 ⎟ ⎥ ⎝ +.8 'e ⎠ ⎦ ⎣ 'e " (\$\$\$ % &\$8 ε " \$.&+(ε + ⎟⎥ 'e ⎠⎦ ⎝ ⎣ −4 /&(0 *&4. <ltshul *&2(4.&'e &.'2'& ⎟ ⎥ ⎬ 'e ⎣ +. Ion.\$&' then f = \$. /&&0 *'.ound *&2'\$. *&'.\$# !ot specified −4 /20 *7.8\$7( ⎩ ⎝ ⎠⎦ ⎪ ⎭ /&#0 *&&.(+ε + \$.\$#(4 ⎛ ε f = ⎨−4 log ⎡ − log + ⎜ ⎟⎥ ⎢ ⎜ 4.74ε \$.\$( −4 /4&0 5ang *4\$&&. *#. 4&. &.8 'e 'e +.&'e⎠ 'e .&& ⎜ +ε ⎟ ⎝ 'e ⎠ -f " ≥ \$.'&7 ln ⎜ )⎟ ⎝ ln (& + &. f = ⎢−4 log ⎜ &\$−\$.'4(8 'e\$.omeo.8\$ 'e ⎣ −4 \$.'48 'e ⎢ +.4( /&'0 Tsal *&2'2.'4 + 'e ⎠ ⎝ ⎞ ⎞⎤ ⎫ ⎪ ⎟ ⎟⎥ ⎬ ⎟ ⎟⎥ ⎪ ⎠ ⎠⎦ ⎭ −4 'e " +\$\$\$ % &.\$4 ⎛ ε &+ ⎞ ⎤ ⎫ ⎡ ε f = ⎨−4 log ⎢ − log ⎜ ε − log ⎜ + ⎞ ⎟ ⎟⎥ ⎪ ⎬ +.## 'e−&.' log⎛ ⎜ \$. β = ln ⎡ ε ⎞⎤ ⎛ .7&+ ⎢ln ⎜ \$.\$8&4 'e 'e ⎣ ⎝ ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎠⎦ −4 'e " +\$\$\$ % &\$' ε " \$ % \$. .&& ⎧ ⎡⎛ ε ⎞ ⎪ 7. Gaaland *&2'+.\$( −4 /&40 −4 *2.(78 f = ⎨−4 log ⎢ − log ⎜ − ⋅ 'e +.8\$7( ⎪⎩ ⎛ ⎛ ε ⎞ \$.\$( 'e " #\$\$\$ % &\$' ε " \$ % \$. !ot specified 'e " #\$\$\$ % ( D &\$8 ε " \$.44( + ''ε \$.2 ⎟⎥ ⎝ +.&\$\$8 f = &.8 'e ⎠⎦ ⎣ −4 /&\$0 *8.2 ⎠ ⎦ ⎣ ⎛ ε (.ange 'e " #\$\$\$ % ( D &\$' ε " \$ % \$.< .8# ⎞ ⎡ ⎤ f = ⎢ −4 log ⎜ + \$. Churchill *&28+.8 'e ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠ ⎦ ⎪⎭ ⎣ ⎩ &.on *4\$\$4. ⎧ ⎡ ε ⎪ (.'( " ⎛ ε 2( 27. 7\$.4( ⎞ ⎤ ⎡ ⎛ f = ⎢&.' log ⎢ ⎜ ⎟ + ⎥ ⎬ ⎢⎣⎝+. Eood *&277.#+#+β + ⎟⎥ ⎝ +.\$2#ε \$.42& ⎡ ⎛ &.4( &C + ⎤ . :wamee.(4( (7. num.\$\$\$\$\$& % \$.4+#ε − &.2'+ − ⎟⎥ 'e ⎠ ⎦ ⎝ +.'(\$7 ⎞⎤ ⎪ (.8& ⎠⎥ ⎝ 'e ⎛ ⎞ ⎣ ⎦ &. 1quation ⎡ ⎛ &\$7 ⎞ f = \$. β = ln !ot specified /80 @rkiJ *4\$&&.&\$2' ⎫ −4 ⎧ ε (.&&\$( + &. ⎡ 7.\$\$\$\$# % \$.'&7 ln ⎜ ln (& + &.&# − 4 log ⎜ ε + ⎟⎥ ⎝ 'e\$.( ⎞ ⎤ f = ⎢ −&. *&2.8⎠ 'e ⎥⎦ ⎭⎪ ⎪⎩ −4 'e " #\$\$\$ % &\$' ε " \$.\$& .\$( 'e " #\$\$\$ % &\$' ε " \$.

i − f pred..84 % % % 4(.i − f pred. num.&4# max'e% /O0 % &4.\$\$&4& % +.##& +.av ) -t should be noted that similar analysis covering the observed range *'e " #\$\$\$ % &\$' and ε " \$ % \$.'7# % +.\$\$#\$# \$.7 (\$\$ D &\$%7 22227\$ ( D &\$%7 ⎛ f C.i was calculated numerically within the range of error L %' &\$ . The statistical comparison of different equations was also carried out using the M3odel selection criterionN * %C.(+4 % 4.&4+ max'e) /O0 &(. *&(. ε " \$ % \$. where fC. -- 'e " #\$\$\$ % &\$ &\$\$\$ &\$\$\$ &\$\$\$\$ &\$\$ &\$\$ &\$\$\$\$ ε " \$ % \$.4& \$.8(( % 7.\$( and a net will be formed using 7 linear scale with &\$ nods.+# &\$. with a much lesser number of points *about (\$\$ points in /4\$0.. .842 % \$. *&7.++ "#C D &\$%7 +.av = i =& n n .&&' \$.''4 % +. *able .\$7'7 2\$.(+\$ *+ # + 8 ( ( ( ' # 8 ( # 7 && ' 2 2 *C ( # && ' ' ' &# 8 &7 ' ( &\$ 4\$ && &7 &7 2M! *ransa\$tions V+0) :. *&'.\$'&( \$.\$72 \$. standard deviation ⎛ f C.i ) ∑ ( fC.i by the individual appro6imate equation.+4# \$ % \$. 8#\$ points in the recent one /80.8& % % 4(. • Calculate friction factor value fC.(&8 &7.i − f pred. *&8.i i =& *4\$..&7 \$.+\$ \$.\$((\$ \$.\$\$\$7&4 \$.+8# \$. *&4.+&( \$.\$88 \$. *&2.47 22.\$( 4 *able :) Statisti\$al #arameters or observed e'uations 1q.#4 +.&7 % +4.i calculated with the Colebrook’s equation *fC.i ⎞ f C. presented in Table 4.\$#\$7 \$. *2.7(( % 4. and M<kaike -nformation CriterionN *"#C.+\$( % 7.\$( 'e " #\$\$\$ % &\$' o the ma6imal negative error max'( − = ma6 ⎛ f pred.+&7 2#. --- Θ = & − i =& n i =& ∑ ( fC.++ \$. • Calculate the following parameters= o the mean relative error mean'( = o ∆av *4#.:) S*A*IS*I%A0 %+MPARIS+N +2 *3! !1-A*I+NS o ∆av.\$'8 % #.744 % 4.2( % % 4(.i ⎠ = i =& ⎝ n n 4 The statistical comparison of any friction factor equation with the Colebrook’s equation can be done by the following procedure= • )ivide the range of possible 'e and ε using appropriate pitch into n nodes. *4+.744 % 7. *&+. *'.\$\$7&( \$. *&&.++( \$. *#.+2+ #.4\$8 &7.i − f pred.i ⎞ ∑⎜ f ⎟ C .&#7 % \$.7'( \$.82\$ \$.&'& \$.'7# &. -n this paper. &\$\$\$\$ points in /(0 and /440.44 +\$.#4\$ 48. *4(.+(' % \$.'+ &\$\$ \$ \$. *8.'(7 Θ /O0 '#. mean'e /O0 8.#2+ #.i − f C.\$( 'e " #\$\$\$ % &\$' ⎜ ⎝ o Θ.+8 \$.#( \$.4#& % \$.24 % +\$.(2\$ % +. we will use the range of 'e " #\$\$\$ % &\$' and ε " \$ % \$.(&# 8.2\$ #7. *(.\$+4# \$.=(( 9 5.&&# &.i 4 ε " \$ % \$. & n f C. *7.< .+&# % 4.i n∑ f C.\$787 2\$.i f C. &\$\$\$ points in /4&0.444 &8.i − fC. • Calculate the friction factor fpred.ange !ods ' Kinear step 22227 (\$ D &\$%7 2222.i = ma6 ⎜ ⎜ f C.7#8 \$.\$\$ % 44.++ % % % +\$.44\$ \$.\$#\$ % &.4#( \$.i ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ *4&.\$#27 % &.'(8 % &#.< No .&'( % +. correlation ratio n ⎠ ⎟ *44. *&#.'(+ &'. Three ways were used to produce the number of nods.4'\$ %C % 42.av is the average value of fC for complete set of nods ∑ fC.#2& % &.\$7'\$ \$.) *7ree wa>s or ormin? t7e net wit7 (= nods 5 the ma6imal positive error max'( + .\$(.8\$' \$.27 % 4(.(&& % 7.+8 % 4(. *&\$.\$'&' \$.\$4 &\$\$ &\$\$ &\$\$ &\$\$ \$ &\$\$ &\$\$ +\$.47 &\$\$ &\$\$ &\$\$ &\$\$ &\$\$ ∆av /O0 '.872 % #.22 \$.4&4 % +.

-t is interesting to compare. <ccording to this criterion. two equations can be recommended= • equation *&4. ⎥⎦ *48. /40 Colebrook. They have almost the same standard ∆av and Θ. &2++.i ) • where *+ is the number of parameters in proposed equation. because it has much lesser *+ and *C compared to *&7. famous Colebrook’s equation is still the best equation that provides a link between the friction factor. % *&2.. -ts only disadvantage is the implicit form of equation. >. with Rur analysis shows that both equations do not predict friction factor well. <fter the statistical analysis given in this paper. should be given the advantage. and many authors reported their e6plicit appro6imations.eynolds number and relative roughness..i − fC. 5or this criterion.The %C and "#C attempt to represent the Minformation contentN of a given set of parameter estimates by relating the coefficient of determination to the *+ *or equivalently. 1quation *&&. is the best one according to most important criterions ∆av and Θ.mungsgeset-e in rauhen 'ohren.= %tr.'+ O is highly unacceptable.i − f pred. where *C is the number of mathematical calculations in a given equation. . because we want to ma6imi. is 48. that were required to obtain the fit..5. and ma6imal relative errors are quite low.e information content of the model. the number of degrees of freedom. % *7. equation shows even worse parameters= ma6imal error #7. is the worst one among the cited equations. as well as other statistical parameters. 1quation *&\$. and *&#. is given in Table +. %C criterion is given in the form ⎡ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎥ i =& <lthough *C is small. ⎥ n ⎢∑ ( fC. @) %+N%0-SI+N %C = ln ∑ ( fC. The "#C as defined above is dependent on the magnitude of the data points as well as the number of observations. *&\$. <lshul’s. :tatistical comparison of equations *#.i ⎢ ⎣ i =& equation *&+.7 O of those obtained by Colebrook’s equation. in hand calculations. The citation from /440 is interesting= M5riction factors obtained from the <ltshulTsal equation are within &. of <ltshul’s equation is cited in one of the most significant engineering handbooks /440. should be avoided in engineering practice. the most appropriate model will be that with the largest %C. Q)--Qerlag. and *&7. and Tsal’s correction *&#. which is more convenient for hand calculation.av ) ⎥ 4 *+ i =& n n ⎤ ⎥ <s stated by many engineers and scientists. <lthough it is published 4' years ago. that have to be done in order to obtain the result. this criterion places a burden on the model with more parameters not only to have a better coefficient of determination. 1quation *&4. with Colebrook’s equation *+.+\$ O. with different numbers of parameters..N /&0 !ikuradse. it provides very fine statistical parameters and needs only *C " ' mathematical operations. of Figrang and :ylvester /&70 provides the most accurate value of friction factor using &7 calculations to obtain the resultP − *47. . the most appropriate model is the one with the smallest values of the "#C. <nother interesting equation is *&+.= Turbulent flow in pipes. but quantifies how much better it must be for the model to be deemed more appropriate. 1quations *#. The only shortcoming of the *&4.i − f pred. Ehen comparing two models *equation. "#C is defined by the following e6pression ⎡ n "#C = n ln ⎢ ∑ f C. The numbers from Table + speak for themselves. *&&. these equations cannot be recommended for engineering practice. @erlin. R!2!R!N%!S ( ) 4⎤ ⎥ + 4 *+ . 3a6imal relative error of *&#. is the number of calculations *mathematical operations. C. for e6ample. <ltshul’s equation *(. standard deviation is about &' O. of Gaaland /&80 provides reasonably good statistical parameters but needs only ' calculations.

pp. &. . >ournal of the -nstitution of Civil 1ngineers. Vua. Paper 48. 9:<. &&. ). 4\$\$2. !o. +7. 2M! *ransa\$tions 6= 9 V+0) :.&2#+. 72. Transactions of the <:31. Qol./+0 /#0 /(0 /70 particular reference to the transition region between the smooth and rough pipe laws. &&. 4\$&&. +#-#'.= 5riction factors for pipe flow. #\$. /&\$0 Eood. 3oody. /20 WXYZ[X\.].= <n appro6imate formula for pipe friction factors.eview of e6plicit appro6imations to the Colebrook relation for flow friction. U= Computer-based analysis of e6plicit appro6imations to the implicit Colebrook-Ehite equation in turbulent flow friction factor calculation. !o. V.= <n e6plicit friction factor relationship. W. 4447. 7. !o. /'0 3oody. &4. '28-2\$4. Kowa City.\$7. and Fhou. Qol.= . &277.>. &\$\$(-&\$\$7. /80 @rkiJ. pp.ouse. K.= !ew correlations of single-phase friction factor for turbulent pipe flow and evaluation of e6isting single-phase friction factor correlations. S.= 1valuation of boundary roughness.< . 77. '..< No . F. &2#8. G. K. Civil 1ngineering. 7\$-7&. pp. #. Transactions of the <:31. pp. Qol. >ournal of Petroleum :cience and 1ngineering. 88. Qol. 4#&.= ^_`_Zabbcd eHfg[Xc `HhfHYijXabid Yf[_HhfHjHkHj. pp. <dvances in 1ngineering :oftware. +.5. ). STldTrTm. &ydraulics Conference. 78&7'#. !o.=(( . &2+2. &2##. !uclear 1ngineering and )esign. in= nd +roceedings of the . !o. &&'+-&&2\$.5. Qol. 4\$&&. !o. &2(4. 5ang. &++-&(7. pp. likfcjXima`nia `YfHiYaX 04_MJaric | Mechanical Engineering | Applied And Interdisciplinary Physics

YjH. pp. Qol. Qol. !o.

number of mathematical calculations number of parameters .. <-Ch1 >ournal. :. !o.= :imple and e6plicit formulas for the friction factor in turbulent pipe flow.= 16plicit appro6imations to the solution of Colebrook’s friction factor equation. Geating. pp./&&0 Churchill. Qol.< No . `fakxar Hk`Y[hcxc i nHfaXcuiHbHr HkbH`c. |cjakabHg cbcXivHg [`YcbHj}abH qa kc `[ Hk`Y[hcxc qakbcmiba nHq[ `[ hfakXHziXi ~irfcbr i •iXja`Yaf bcqgcxc [ HkbH`[ bc yHX_f[nHj[ faXcuiq[.).= <ccurate e6plicit equation for friction factor. 4'. /4&0 Uoudar. pp. . !o. 4\$\$'. <.efrigerating and <ir-conditioning 1ngineers.eynolds number Greek symbols β ∆ Θ av C pred nondimensional parameter standard deviation correlation ratio Subscripts average Colebrook predicted ПРЕГЛЕД ЕКСПЛИЦИТНИХ АПРОКСИМАЦИЈА КОЛБРУКОВЕ ЈЕДНАЧИНЕ ЗА КОЕФИЦИЈЕНТ ТРЕЊА Србисла Г!"и#\$ И а" Ара"%!л& и#\$ П!'ар К&л!"(и#\$ Мар)& Јари#\$ Ни)&ла Б*(и+ир\$ В&. Chemical 1ngineering. 4\$\$&. and >ain. ('. >. +72-+8#. Gidrocarbon Processing. !o. !o. Transactions of the <:31. +\$-#(.исла Г!"и# p fck[ qa kcY hfarXak bcqmaZsa nHfiZsabit an`hXiuiYbit qakbcmibc vc Hkfawijcxa nHaeiuiqabYc Yfaxc [ rXcYnig i tfchcjig uajigc. . ).1. !. !o.eplace implicit equations with signomial functions. pp. !. /&#0 Chen.= -mproved e6plicit equations for estimation of the friction factor in rough and smooth pipes. Qol. !o.. &\$#. 4.//0 "%&'"( &andbook1 2undamentals. &42-&+4. Qol. N+M!N%0A*-R! ε f n *C *+ 'e relative pipe roughness friction factor number of nodes *points.. 78#-788. >ournal of the Gydraulics )ivision. Qol. &2'\$. Qol. and :ylvester. '. <merican :ociety of Geating . gcn`igcXba barcYijba rfaZna. ^`ig bcjakabit nfiYafiq[gc.G. . +8(-+87. /&20 3anadilli. Qol. +. Qol. Qol. C.>. '8. /&40 >ain. >. 4\$\$4. hHfawaxe qakbcmibc qa ivjfZabH i nHfiZsaxag {3odel selection criterionM *3:C. pp. &228.E.. (.= Comparison of the iterative appro6imations of the Colebrook-Ehite equation.oyo. 427-428. pp. ^k`Y[hcxa bcjakabit qakbcmibc Hk yHX_f[nHja qakbcmiba ivfczabH qa hfanH `fakxa faXcYijba rfaZna. 82-'+. -ndustrial and 1ngineering Chemistry 5undamentals. !o. <.= . The Canadian >ournal of Chemical 1ngineering. &. <. Piping and <ir Conditioning. Chemical 1ngineering >ournal. P.= <n e6plicit equation for friction factor in pipe. pp. pp. +. pp.omeo. '7. /&80 Gaaland. &'.= 16plicit equations for pipe-flow problems. C. i {<kaike -nformation CriterionM *<-C. pp.on. <tlanta. . /4\$0 .= <ltshul-Tsal friction factor equation. :. &44-&4+. U. and 3on.T. >ournal of 5luids 1ngineering. &2'+. &2.< . '2-2\$. /440 . '. !o..ound.= <n e6plicit appro6imation for the friction factor % . 7(8-77#. /&'0 Tsal. Qol. /&+0 :wamee. !o. and :onnad.5. !o. pp. &28+.=(( 9 6( .eynolds number relation for rough and smooth pipes. /&70 Figrang. &2'4. +. <-Ch1 >ournal. '. . U. /&(0 . 1. 2M! *ransa\$tions V+0) :. gcn`igcXba hHviYijba rfaZna. Qol. !o. &282. >ournal of the Gydraulics )ivision. &\$(. &287.= 1mpirical e6pressions for the shear stress in turbulent flow in commercial pipe. &\$4. &\$4. (&#-(&(. pp. &. c kc qa €cXcbkHjc qakbcmibc bcqhHrHkbiqc vc ibzaxaf`n[ [hHYfa_[. &287. (. &2'2.