55 views

Uploaded by lolofm25

- A New Launder Design Procedure
- Pipe Flow Fricton Factor
- Aniruddha Medhi
- Optimal Design of Piping
- Chapter 4 fluid mechanics
- 68IJMPERDAPR201968
- Pressure Drop Evaluation Along Pipelines
- Pipe Flow-Friction Factor Calculations With Excel
- Gas-Liquid Flow in Slightly Inclined Pipes
- Pipe_flow
- History of the Darcy We is Bach Eq
- Chapter 4 Source Models.pptx
- 06 - Resist Flow Thru Piping Elements
- Friction Loss in Pipe
- Upsc Ese 2016 Ce (II) Answer Key
- fm2
- Packed Bed
- Ecuacion de Weymouth SIngles Pag, 10
- Tr-14 Waterflow Characteristics
- DAK 10703_Exp 5 Head Loss Due to Pipe Friction

You are on page 1of 27

.7-z

Unclassif led

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE

77

Unclassified

2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY

3. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF REPORT

unlimited.

4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

Ga. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

(if appitcable)

USAEWES

CEWES-EE-R

Environmental Laboratory

6c. AnDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code)

PO Box 631

Vicksburg, MS

39180-0631

IBb.

ORGANIZATION

OFFICE SYMBOL

(If applicable)

US Army CERL

PO Box 4005

Champaign,

IL

PROGRAM

PROJECT

TASK

ELEMENT NO.

NNO.

NO.

61820-1305

LWORK UNIT

rc CCESSION NO.

J2. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S)

Final report

FROM

F.

Douglas, Jr.

TO

February 1988

21

S~

VA

22161.

FIELD

GROUP

Springfield,

18. SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse if necesary and identify by block number)

COSATI'CODES

17.

Water mains

C-factors

Pipe cleaning

SUB-GROUP

Carrying capacity

Pipes

Water distribution systems

Pipe networks

Pipe flow

Roughness

'-A method is presented for predicting the Hazen-Williams C-factor for unlined metal

water mains as a function of pipe age.

The method has two steps:

(a) finding the

growth/rate of internal roughness, alpha, for the water main using either historical

C-factor data or water quality data; and (b) using predictive equations for an estimate of

a future C-factor.

.some

319 data points from seven utilities as well as values from the 1920 text entitled

Hydraulic Tables, by G. S.

function of pipl

C-factor vsof a determination

eqtations

The regression

0.87.-.a 95-percent

(r ) age

of have

and for

a coeffici~nt

confidence

interval of-+15

r'UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED

0 SAME AS RPT.

0 DTIC USF.RS

Unclassified

Unclassified

PREFACE

Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (WES),

Order No.

Dr. Ashok Kumar of the CERL was the primary point of contact

The report was written and prepared by Dr.

F. Douglas Shields,

Thomas M. Walski,

Ms.

fulfillment of Reimbursable

ratory (CERL).

Mr.

in

US Army

EL.

The work was accomplished under the direct supervision of Dr.

Schroeder,

Montgomery, Chief,

Assistant Chief,

EED,

COL Dwayne G.

Lee,

and Dr. R. L.

CE,

Shields

John Keeley,

Chief, EL.

John Harrison,

This report should be cited as follows:

Walski, Thomas M., Sharp, Wayne W., and Shields, F. Douglas, Jr.

1988.

"Predicting Internal Roughness in Water Mains," Miscellaneous

Paper EL-88-2, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,

Vicksburg, Miss.

Accesioni For

NTIS

OTIC

CRA&I

TAB

F]

.. . . . . . .

D!!

01:C

'jO

cop

CYS

1OETEO

CONTENTS

PREFACE................. ,............

,.....................................

PART I:

INTRODUCTION ................................................

Estimation of

qu .O .. .o

.3........

o...

I

3

....

.............

PART II:

OF HEAD LOSS

EQUATIONS

FOR C

.........................

Use ofSOLUTION

Hazen-Williams

Equation

for Rough

Flov......................

Use of Darcy-Weisbach Equation for Head Los...........

5

5

6

to..

.. ......

PREDICTING GROWTH OF ROUGHNESS IN PPS...........

..

Formulas Based onWater Quality.......................

Examination of Linear Hyohss...................

10

11

PART III:

PART IV:

Example ro em........*.......

Rate of Change of C aco. .....

.......

.. .. ...

...

.......

S16

PART V:

13

..... . .**...*

.......

REFERENCES.2...............

o***.***..**9

16I

18

19

23

24

PART I:

INTRODUCTION

Background

1. Some measurement of the internal roughness of pipes is an important

parameter entering into virtually all calculations involving the sizing and

analysis of water distribution systems. In water utility practice in tae

United States, the Hazen-Williams C-factor is the most commonly used parameter

to represent the carrying capacity (and internal roughness) of water mains.

2.

In modern cement mortar lined pipes and plastic pipes, the pipe

roughness changes very slowly over the life of a pipe (with the exception of

waters with significant scaling potential or poor removal of aluminum hydroxide flocs). However, there exist many miles of old, bare metal water mains in

which the pipe roughness has changed and continues to change significantly

over time.__

_

_

_

_a

Estimation of C-Factors

mains is critical for pipe sizing calculations, and there are several ways of

obtaining this information.

for pipe roughness.

The first is

As will be shown later in this paper, the only thing

water system.

4. A second method is to determine the internal roughness of existing

mains by calculating the value of pipe roughness that will make a computer

model of the pipe network appear to be calibrated over a wide range of conditions. Some examples of such a procedure are given by Walski (1986) and

These methods essentially give an "effective"

Ormsbee and Wood (1986).

C-factor because many small pipes and minor losses are eliminated when the

distribution system is simplified (skeletonized) to make it more workable.

IMUWIIWWW

5.

A third method is

M MW

MWU

j

UWWW

UVUWWW

" jW%#PWWWU am

6. None of the above methods for determining C-factors,

vide a means for extrapolating pipe roughness into the future.

will review pipe reighness data collected from a wide variety of sources over

many years and provide a theoretically based procedure for predicting future

C-factor values. The procedure will require information on historical

C-factors or water quality.

41

PART II:

7.

applicable to smooth flow (i.e., flow in which roughness elements in the pipe

wall do not penetrate through the laminar bourdary layer).

The equation

becomes somewhat inaccurete for transition flow and even less accurate for

completely rough flow which is usually the case in old unlined water mains.

The equation can be written as:

V - 0.55 C D0.63 S054)

where

V - velocity, ft/sec

C - Hazen-Williams,

C-factor

D - diameter, ft

S - hydraulic gradient, ft/ft

8.

is still

flow because the error in predicting head loss is not significant except for

long pipes with very high velocity.

lems,

9.

C -C

(Vo/V)O0081

0

(2)

vhere

C - C-factor at velocity V

C 0 - measured C-factor at velocity V0

V - velocity at which C-factor measured, L/T

The velocity at which the C-factor is measured can vary widely, but a typical

value of roughly 3 ft/sec (0.9 m/sec) can be used for most calculations.

5I

--

_MM

Equation 2 shows that the error associated with assuming a constant but

typical velocity is minor.

Use of Darcy-Weisbach Equation for Head Loss.

10.

The more theoretically correct equation for head loss is the Darcy-

(3)

Vwhere

2

g - acceleration due to gravity, ft/sec

The friction factor can be calculated based on properties of the flow and the

wall roughness.

Relationship Between Roughness and C-Factor

11.

the initial discussion below will center on pipe roughness (e), which represents the height of equivalent sand grain roughness.

cussed,

(0.9 m/sec)).

12.

head loss and eliminating terms, the C-factor can be related to the DarcyWeisbach friction factcr by

C-

17.25

f 0.54(VD) 0.081

(4)

wide range of flows by the Colebrnok-White transition equation (Colebrook

1939). However, this equation cannot be solved explicitly for f . Since

this paper concerns pipes with significant tuberculation and scale, a simplifled form of the Colebrook-White equation, attributed to von Karman and

6I

I

NZN%'NYKhIM2VM

used.

as given below.

f

where e is

(5)

(All logarithms in this

(6)

height.

13.

e/D .

The exponent,

straight line that most closely approximates Equation 6 over the range of

This line can be given by

C-factors of interest.

(7)

a function of age of pipes and water quality.

14.

roughness,

can be

solved explicitly for friction factor for smooth, transition and rough flow.

The formula of Swamee and Jain is given below

where

0.25

(8)

71

na

VAVaA

.A

t.AnfLrAr6PMW

WUND.%JWWVU%J

VV

~~V~

VVUW%

wqy%,

'W.M V

15.

3 ft/sec (0.9 m/sec) and eliminating the Reynolds number term which is negligible for rough flow, the C-factor can be given by

C-

33.3

The above equation can be simplified by realizing that the log term (even

though it i negative) is always raised to the second power so that the abso-M

lute value of the log can be taken and the exponents can be combined to give

C - 33.3 1 log (e/3.TD)

Equat'ons 6,

1 1.08

(10)

7, 9, and 10 give virtually the same value for C-factor for any

value of pipe roughness greater than 0.001 ft (0.305 mm) and are reasonably

close for values to 0.0001 ft (0.0305 mm).

PART III:

Early Observations

16.

time.

The growth of pipe roughness with time has been observed for some

gested values for C-factor for each diameter pipe for various ages.

They do

not quantitatively describe the effect of water qualIty on pipe roughness.

Nevertheless,

17.

Prandtl (1933),

to the pipe wall roughness and the Reynolds number of the flow.

Colebrook

18.

and data prepared by a Committee of the New England Water Works Association

(1935),

Colebrook and White advanced the hypothesis that pipe roughness grows

roughly linearly with time and that the rate of growth depends most highly on

the pH of the water.

pipe was new.

as

(11)

e + at

0

whereI

e - absolute roughness

height, L

e

time,

19.

detail below.

is a linear function of

is examined in

7, 9, and

This is

-- - - - -- - - -

WInmowmww

owMlnWI

WIWWI

1W.IWInnm

iqr~i

anW

I

WIW

109m

WJIUpa1WnMWI

wrlI

Colebrook-White

C

(12)

Swamne-Ja in

where

(0.27X)

- 33.3 1 log

.C

at)D

+

X - (e

20.

ness, and

cally.

(13)

1.08

The initial

Methods to predict

the roughness growth rate must take into account water quality.

Data on the

Historical Data on Roughness Growth Rate

21.

ranging from 0.000018 ft/yr (0.066 uun/yr) to 0.00017 ft/yr (0.63 im/yr).

Based on data they obtained from the New England Water Works Association

(1935),

(14)

22.

loss of carrying capacity was due much more to the increase in pipe roughness

rather than the decrease in pipe diameter due to the space occupied by the

roughness elements.

23. The roughness growth rates that could be back calculated from the

tables of Williams and Hazen (1920) varied considerably depending on the diameter but generally corresponded to 0.002 ft/yr (0.6 mm/yr).

based on a fairly limited number of observations and they noted, "In general

it may be stated that rather large deviations from the indicated rates of

10

reduction ih carrying capacity are found in individual cases, but that, in the

experience of the authors,

as in the other."

0

accuracy is required.

24.

presented the most thor-

Lamont (1981)

ough compendium of data on pipe roughness and gave the most rational guidance

on the effects of water quality on roughness growth.

growth rate for each trend as given in Table 1. Lamont used the Langelier

Index, which is essentially an indicator of the saturation of the water with

respect to calcium narbonate, to characterize water quality. Numerical values

for growth rate as compared with Langelier Index are shown in Table 1 and can

be predicted by Equation 13 below

a - 10-(4.08+0.38 LI)

where

LI

is

(15)

for LI < 0

for Langmller Indexes less than zero (i.e. corrosive water) and sW)ould not be

Table 1

Roughness Growth Rate for Varying Water Quality

Growt__ rate

_.

Trend

Name

mm/yr

(ft/yr)

Langeliet

Index

Slight attack

0.025

0.0

2Moderate attack

0.076

-1.3

Apprecia;.e attack

0.25

0.00082

-2.6

Severe attack

0.76

0.0025

-3.9

0.000082

0.00025

Index) or waters with other postprecipitation problems.

for growth rate of roughness reported by Lamont is

positive Langelier

The range of values

25.

While it

is

waters with a negative Langelier Index, there is considerably less data available to predict this rate for positive Langelier Index values.

usually do not have a positive Langelier Index, and therefore,

with supersaturated water usually only exist in

describe a city In which 2 in.

found in

8 in.

135 to 100 in

Natural waters

the problems

(203.2 mm) pipes and another in which the C-factor dropped from

15 years due to calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide depo-

sits.

They were able to reproduce this phenomenon in stainless steel pipes in

the laboratory.

26.

Another problem is post precipitation of aluminum hydroxide in distribution systems where the water is

model is

No quantitative

(1982),

Emery (1980)

C-factors dropped from 140 to a range of 109 to 100 over a 10period due to such deposits.

to 23-year

27.

changes in

presented data on

results of over 70 tests for pipes with diameters between 4 and 16 in.

and 406.4 mm).

(101.6

were found to range from 0.0020 to 0.0011 ft/yr (0.61 to 0.34 mm/yr).

28.

Hudson (1966,

1966,

instead of roughness,

data,

it

was still

1973)

However,

terms of C-factor

29.

Table 2.

The above data show that most surface waters tend to be corrosive.

the limestone well water in

12

Table 2

Roughness Growth Rates Calculated from Hudson's Data

Growth Rate

mm/yr

City

(ft/yr)

Atlanta

0.61

0.0020

Fort Worth

0.55

0.0018

and cement mortar lined mains

Denver

0.18

0.0006

Mountain reservoirs

New Orleans

0.16

0.00052

River water

Cincinnati

0.14

River water

Chicago

(south)

0.10

0.00033

St. Paul

0.045

0.00015

Chicago

(north)

0.027

0.0009

San Antonio

0.015

0.00005

Wells in limestone

0.00043

corrosive because it

Unfortunately, data on the pH, calcium, and alkalinity of the waters in the

above table were not available so a quantitative method to predict growth rate

as a function of water quality could not be developed. The higher growth rate

for the Chicago south treatment plant is attributed to postprecipitation of

aluminum hydroxide.

Examination of Linear Hypothesis

30.

available for the pipe sizes and water source of interest, and if water quality has been fairly unchanged over this period of record, then the engineer

13

likely error inherent in

such an approach is

31.

e , is

age.

the hypo-

t .

probably acceptable if

The

available data.

are based on

Some 319 data points from seven utilities plus values from Williams and

Hazen (1920)

were used.

Fi-st, all

C-factors were converted to pipe roughness values (e) using Equation 16.

Then, for each utility, pipe roughness growth rates (a) were determined for

each pipe diameter by linear regression.

The values of

computed with

pipe ages (t)

The

values determined

and the known values of

32.

ani t

to compute

X .

The amount of scatter present in the entire data set, and thus the

log (X)

t

is

e0

as shown in Figure 1.

C versus

dence interval about the regression line is also shown in Figure 1. Predicted

C-factors are within an interval of 15 of observed values with 95-percent

confidence.

This is especially good considering the fact that the data were collected by a

wide variety of investigators for a wide range of conditions. For example,

different investigators use different methods for determining minor head

losses.

33.

Therefore,

Examples of their

use follow.

14

k 111

11

either

'

%**

00

4i

cc Q

05.1

0 do

04.

t2-

*1

*-

S,

VI

PART IV:

Procedure

34.

needs to first

C-factor and pipe age data are available, the engineer

can plot pipe age versus roughness (e).

Roughness (e) can be calculated from

two ways.

First, if

e-D

versus

10-

(C *)(17)

pipe roughness.

(16)

an indication of initial

(18-C) /37.2]

3.7 (D

(io0[

e :

since there is

However,

some error in

C-factor measurements,

and since the predictive equations are not very accurate for roughness

roughness may appear unreasonable

approaching zero, the estimates of initial

in some cases (e.g. negative).

initial

In such cases,

(0.18 mm).

In

any case,

effect on

35.

able error, the engineer must consider why this has occurred.

explanation is

pipes.

The usual

that water quality has changed during the life of some of the

The engineer must then try to determine the aging rate given the cur-

rent water quality since that water quality will influence future changes in

C-factor.

36.

If

expected to change in

the future,

since the Langelier Index is

tior

14.

as given in

16

Equa-

37.

year can be predicted using Equations 12 and 13, knowing the age of the pipe

for that year. This is an acceptable procedure if the precise age of installation of each pipe segment is known. Determining the year laid for each pipe

segment can be a fairly tedious process and is one that is currently not

required in most pipe network models.

An alternative procedure is

to extrapo-

mined from field tests or the value needed to ca?.ibrate a pipe network model

as discussed earlier.

38.

To modify the predictive equations so that the year laid ueed not

be known, it

shown below

t -

TO

(18)

0

where

T - Year of interest (e.g. 1995)

T

It

- year of installation

in some other year,

C = 18.0-

, which

T

a(T-Tl)

+ D

10

37.2 log

1 )/37.2

(18-C

Ilog

0.

27a

(T-

T1 )

(19)

6 /25.7

[r0.c92

C - 33.3

+DD 10-C 1

1.08

I

(20)

where

C1

M C-factor in year

T1 (known)

T - year in which C-factor is predicted

39.

The above equations can be easily incorporated into computer models

of pipe networks so that an engineer can simulate future system behavior.

173

Example Problems

40.

presented below.

available,

The first

known.

Example 1

41.

It is necessary to predict the C-factors in

the first

described in

-1.5.

.c in.

304.8,

(152.4,

12,

24 and

Table 3

Data for

T Example

Pipe

Diameter

(ft)

Year Laid

0.5

1925

68

0.5

1905

64

0.5

1940

72

2.0

1925

91

42.

10-(4.080.38(-1.5)]

18.0 - 37.2

1995 as

- To)]/DJ

ure 2.

1995

from 1995.

C in

shown in

Fig-

18

0N

150

120

(90/,

LL

60

EXAMPLEI

1I

30

Figure 2.

80

60

40

AGE. YR

20

Example 2

43.

In this problem,

the first

transformed as shown in

three columns of Table 4.

Equation 17,

are shown in

Figure 3.

The roughness growth rate was found to be 0.0019 ft/yr (0.58 mm/yr) using linear regression.

C - 33.3

2005:

10_(926 /57_11..0

log [0.0103 + D

1 0 -(CD1

25.7)

111

44.

While pipe roughness increases linearly with time, C-factors initially decrease rapidly and then change more gradually as shown in Figure 2.

19

0.12

0.10

0.08

UI

0.06

0.04

0.0,0.001f9

00

o

0

10

Figure 3.

120

LS

20

t, YR

30

40

50

200

5'

Table 4

Data for Example 2

Diameter

(ft)

C-factor

in 1985

Age in

1985

e

(ft)

C factor

in 2005

2.0

s0

20

0.041

69

1.0

61

35

0.065

54

1.0

55

45

0.095

50

0.5

48

45

0.073

41

0.5

42

50

0.107

37

pip

This explains why results of pipe cleaning jobs, when not accompanied by

cement mortar lining or a change in water quality, are usually short lived as

described by Dutting (1968)

effect, it

time.

To quantify this

dC

d-

-16.1

[o/a)

+ t)]

(2)

The absolute value of the right side of Equation 21 is plotted in Figure 4 for

roughness growth rates,

0.0305 m/yr).

I2

ii21

IS

10

nr8

U-

t.

0

C,

- 0.00? FTYR

Sa

4

2

U.

0

0.0001 FT1YR

10

20

30

40

AGE. YR

Figure 4.

22

50

PART V:

45.

substantiate the claim of Colebrook and White (1937)

The data

46.

that describes the rate of growth of roughness over time and depends on the

quality of the water with respect to corrosion or precipitation.

This param-

eter should be determined based on historical data for the given water system.

If this information is not available,

it

quality.

47.

the C-factor

However,

after a few decades the drop in C-factor with time is very slow.

23j

23

REFERENCES

California

Section

AIIAVol.

Committee,

Water

Maine,"

J. AWWA,

54, No.

1962(Oct).

10,

p. 1293. "Loss of Currying Capacity in

Colebrook, C. F.

1939.

"Turbulent Flow in Pipes with Particular Reference to

the Transition Re-ion between the Smooth and Rough Pipe Laws," J. Inst. Civil

Eng. London, Vol. 11, p. 133.

Colebrook, C. F., and C. M. White.

1937.

"The Reduction of Cerrying Capacity

of Pipes with Age," J. Inst. Civil Eng. London, Vol. 10, V. 99.

Costello, J. J.

Water Treatment,

National Conf Proceedings, p. 1245.

Dutting, R. F.

1968.

"Cleaning and Lining Water Mains in Place," presented

at New England Water Works Association Training School.

Emery, P. M. 1980.

"Some Aspects of the Performance of Cement Mortar Lined

Water Mains," AWA Natl. Conf. Proceedings, p. 249.

Frank, J. A., and Perkins, A. G.

ing," Water and Sewage Works.

1955(Apr).

I(

Hudson, W. D. 1966(Feb).

"Studies of Distribution System Capacity in Seven

Cities," J. AWWA, Vol. 58, No. 2.

Hudson, W. D. 1966(Apr).

"Loss of Water Main Capacity," J. Southeastern Sec.

AWWA, Vol. 30, No. ', p. 44.

Hudson, W. D. 1973(Fcb).

"Computerizing Pipeline Design," ASCE Transportation Engineering Journal, Vol. 99, No. TEl, p. 73.

Lamont, P. A. 1981(May).

"Common Pipe Flow Formulas Compared with the Theory

of Roughness," J. AWWA, Vol. 73, No. 5, p. 274.

Larson, T. E., and Sollo, F. W. 1967(Dec).

"Loss in Water Main Carrying

Capacity," J. AWWA, Vol 59, No. 12, p. 1565.

New England Water Works Association Comittee on Pipeline Friction Coefficients.

Vol 49, p.

1935.

239.

Nikuradse, J.

1932.

"Gesetzmassigkeiten der Turbulenten Stromung in Glatten

Rohren," VDI Forschungsh, Vol. 356.

Ormsbee, L. E., and Wood, D. J. 1986(Apr).

"Explicit Pipe Network Calibration," J. of Water Resources Planning and Management, Vol. 112, No. 2, p. 166.

Prandtl, L.

1933.

"Neuere Ergebnisse der Turbulenxforschung,"

deu. Ing., Vol. 77, p. 105.

Zeit. Ver.

Streeter, V. L.

1971.

Fluid Mechanics, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.

Swamee, P. K., and Jain, A. K. 1976(May).

"Explicit Equations for Pipe-Flow

Problems," ASCE Journal of Hydraulics Division, Vol.

p. 657.

von Karman, T.

1930. "Mechanisehe Ahnlichkeit und Turbulenz," Proc.

3rd International Congress for Applied Mechanics, Stockholm.

Walski, T. M. 1984. Analysis of Water Distribution Systems, Van Nostrand

Reinhold, Inc., New York.

241

~tLIl~,~I~EJLw

uIRRkA

Walski, T. M. 1986(Apr).

Issues," J. of Water Resources Planning and Managemnnt, Vol 112, No. 2,

p.

238.

New York.

1920.

Hydraulic Tables,

I

I

0

0

- A New Launder Design ProcedureUploaded bykategord
- Pipe Flow Fricton FactorUploaded byAbinash Behera
- Aniruddha MedhiUploaded byadarsh_arya_1
- Optimal Design of PipingUploaded byfeki2607
- Chapter 4 fluid mechanicsUploaded byAlimah Azeli
- 68IJMPERDAPR201968Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- Pressure Drop Evaluation Along PipelinesUploaded bykarthikraja21
- Pipe Flow-Friction Factor Calculations With ExcelUploaded byNur Hafizah Kamilah Sapawi
- Gas-Liquid Flow in Slightly Inclined PipesUploaded byBrenda Davis
- Pipe_flowUploaded byHarshana Atapattu
- History of the Darcy We is Bach EqUploaded byjcasafranca
- Chapter 4 Source Models.pptxUploaded byaaa
- 06 - Resist Flow Thru Piping ElementsUploaded byManuel Antunes Luis
- Friction Loss in PipeUploaded bySyahir Hamidon
- Upsc Ese 2016 Ce (II) Answer KeyUploaded bysirfmein
- fm2Uploaded byIbraheem Olugbade
- Packed BedUploaded byManu Chakkingal
- Ecuacion de Weymouth SIngles Pag, 10Uploaded byormandym8
- Tr-14 Waterflow CharacteristicsUploaded byJuan Gonzales
- DAK 10703_Exp 5 Head Loss Due to Pipe FrictionUploaded byMohd Firdaus
- Lab 402222 to SubmitUploaded byvictor
- Momentum TransferUploaded byVishwath Ram
- Intricacies in Gas Pipe DesigningUploaded byarunengg
- ME403 - Lec10.pdfUploaded byahgz96
- fluid flowUploaded byAbdi Rageedi
- My CalculationsUploaded byWaqas Khan Channar
- Fluid Mechanics and Machinery_UnitTest-03_2013_JD (B.E.-3rd Sem)Uploaded byae00505
- 9Uploaded byJerick Hernandez
- Lecture 1525137531Uploaded bynarasimha rao
- dcUploaded byShyam Kant

- k Value of FittingsUploaded byJoydip Misra
- Cv InstructionsUploaded byTheng Ouch
- Jacket Vessels. Overall CoefficientsUploaded bylolofm25
- Jacket and coils of agitated vessels.pdfUploaded bylolofm25
- Process Plant Layout and Piping DesignUploaded by~E~
- An Industrial Design Control Study for VAC Monomer Process.pdfUploaded byPY You
- 1-Heat transfer design methods (McKetta).pdfUploaded bylolofm25
- Frictional Losses for Turbulent FlowUploaded bylolofm25
- jeedyna.pdfUploaded bylolofm25
- Roughness reference.pdfUploaded bylolofm25
- Liquid Line Sizing.xlsUploaded bylolofm25
- Alphabetical List.pdfUploaded bylolofm25
- Piping Workbook PIDesignUploaded byUrsula Moerings
- Pipe Segment-Swage.pdfUploaded bylolofm25
- Product and Process Design Principles - SeiderUploaded byLaura Diaz
- Catalitzadors per a la reacció IPA acetonaUploaded bylolofm25
- c22_c01Uploaded byRobert Fortuny Pons

- Module 23 - Fourier SeriesUploaded byapi-3827096
- 6_16v6i1_1Uploaded byMayur Swamy
- 3U-CSSA Circle GeoUploaded byttong
- Assignment TodayUploaded byharis
- Altivar 312 Solar ATV312HU11M2412Uploaded bylrc24332725
- 04052852Uploaded byBalramParmar
- Gibbs Energy Modeling of Binary and Ternary Molten Nitrate Salt SUploaded byCavanStone
- Resilience of LTE Networks Against Smart.pdfUploaded byNik
- L293D DatasheetUploaded byRahul Grover
- Bathurst & Hatami - Review of numerical modeling of geosynthetic reinforced soil wallsUploaded bylollazzo
- NX Nastran 8 Basic Nonlinear Analysis User's GuideUploaded byMSC Nastran Beginner
- MRRS2011 ProgramUploaded byVladimir Ulansky
- Retaining WallUploaded byAana Sams
- design charts for machine foundationUploaded byroy1zhou
- the cuboctahedronUploaded byapi-282300306
- 2G3G Interoperability (TDD)Uploaded byalqousi_muhieddine
- Stress Strain CurveUploaded byDianaCruz
- Revisiting H-R Rules Using ANNsUploaded byzym1003
- Seal-Jet Norge as - Sealing SolutionsUploaded bydanilovoa
- GSM CharacteristicsUploaded bymuddi24
- tl071aUploaded byFelix Cucchi
- Data Structure and Algorithm List From Jami SirUploaded byS M Shamim শামীম
- saUploaded byanby1
- SVC-commandhelpUploaded bymanas199
- Phase-2 Voided SlabUploaded byKetan Dhameliya
- Gate ServiceUploaded byCowdrey Ilan
- Wolfson 1989Uploaded bym_michael_c
- Transparent heat mirrors based on tungsten oxide–silver multilayer structuresUploaded byjacafy
- cablesUploaded byRahul Sinha
- Week+8+Data+Interpretation+AssignmentUploaded byJoshMatthews