You are on page 1of 18

# FACULTY OF PETROLEUM AND RENEWABLE ENERGY

ENGINEERING

## UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

FLUID MECHANICS LABORATORY
TITLE OF EXPERIMENT
JET IMPACT (E3)
Name

## Bong Woei Shen (A13KP0021)

Kumaresan a/l Sinathurai (A13KP0038)
Ahmed Gamal Mahmoud Moteir (A12KE4016)

Group / Section

2/Section 11

Supervisor

## Associate Professor Issham bin Ismail

Date of Experiment

3 March 2014

Date of Submission

9 March 2014

## Marks obtained (%)

TECHNICIANS:
1. EN. MAHMOOD RASIDON
2. PN. ZAIMARHAMAH ZAINUDDIN

1.0

Objective

The objective of this experiment is to measure the force exerted by a fluid jet impinging upon
a flat plate or a hemispherical surface and to compare the results with the theoretical values.

2.0

Introduction

Water jet from a small opening, with a high velocity, when exerted on a surface of plate
will produce force that gives power to move a system. The principle of jet impact is the
basis for the understanding of liquid flow in turbines. This principle is used in designing
impulse turbines. In these turbines part of the fluid energy is transformed into kinetic energy
in a nozzle ( or a set of nozzles) which issues a jet of fluid at high speed. The jet strikes the
moving blades, mounted on the turbine wheel, producing the force required to drive it.
3.0

Theory

A jet of fluid when impinging upon a flat or a curved surface generates a force due to change
of momentum of the fluid according to Newtons second law of motion. For example, when
water of a velocity is forced out from a jet nozzle with diameter d on a plate, the rate of
change of momentum produced and its magnitude is the same with the force exerted on
the surface of the plate to support the water jet.

## Force = Rate of momentum change of water jet

= (mass of fluid/time) x change of velocity
The force (F) generated by a jet of water as it strikes depends on the shape of the plate
surface, e.g. flat plate or a curved (hemispherical) surface.
Diagrams 1-2 show a jet of fluid issuing from a nozzle of diameter d,
and moving vertically upward with velocity v and strikes a stationary
surface. The jet is deflected by the vane through an angle and the fluid leaves the vane
with velocity v
The force generated is

Fth m v v'

av v v cos

(1)

av 2 av 2 cos

where,
Fth
a

v
v

## = Theoretical force exerted on the plate (Newton)

= Cross-sectional area of nozzle (m2)
= Density of water (kg/m3)
Angle of water flow after impact on the plate surface
= Velocity of water jet before impact on the plate surface
= Velocity of water jet after impact on the plate surface

Water jet
Nozzle d

## Diagram 1- Flat Surface

Water jet
Nozzle d
Diagram 2 Hemispherical Surface

Fth av 2

(2)

## For hemispherical plate (diagram 2), = 180o, therefore cos = -1, So

Fth av v v
2 av 2

(3)

4.0

Apparatus

The apparatus consists of an upward discharging jet surrounded by a clear Plexiglas tube
provided with levelling screws. The plate located directly over the jet is mounted on a
stainless steel spindle, which passes through the top plate of the apparatus. A weight pan
is mounted on the upper end of this spindle Water is supplied from the lab faucet (supply
valve) to the inlet of the apparatus via a hose. Water flowing through the nozzle strikes
the flat plate and deflects from the flat plate and falls to the base of the clear Plexiglas
tube where it exit and drain in the sink.

JET IMPACT

Weight Mass
Plate Apparatus
Spring Coils

Standard Indicator
Jet Impact Plate

Control Valve

## Water Volume Scale

Pump Switch
Water Tank Valve

5.0

Experimental Procedure
Notice:The weight cannot be reentered to make up the total required weight

1. Be sure the flat or hemispherical plates are fixed. (please be careful, do not turn it too
tight since it would be difficult to open)
2. 700g was the standard weight for each plate apparatus. Weights were put on the
spring plat. Standard weight for both plates must be similar.
3. Standard indicator was adjusted to be level with the position of the plate containing
the weight as standard mark. (zero velocity of water, V = 0)
4. The water control valve was sure to be closed (clockwise). Both switches of the pump
were turn on and water control valve was opened slowly (anticlockwise) until
maximum.
5. The plate with standard weight height will increase above standard mark. More
weights were added until it returns to the standard mark. The total maximum weight
for the first reading of the load is taken.
6. The valve of the water tank is closed (clockwise). Time started to be taken as the
volumes at 2 liter until it reached 7 liter. 5 liter of water was accumulated.
7. The total weight load was reduced; the plate will rise above the standard mark. The
flow of water jet was reduced slowly (clockwise) until the plate apparatus returns to
the standard mark level. Step 6 was repeated.
8. Step 7 and 6 was repeated for next readings until the last total weight load is the same
with the standard weight load
9. Control valve was closed (clockwise) and the pumps were switched off after the
experiment was finished. The equipments were cleaned and dry.

6.0

Water density,

= 1000 kg/m3

Q

m3
m liter 1

2
3

s s m 10 liter

where
V

x d 2 ... m 2
4

m

2

x d mm x
3
4
10 mm

## Hence, the force measured is

Fmea

RESULTS
Flat plate
Standard Weight

weight (gram)
x 9.81 m/s
1000 gram/kg
gram x 9.81 x 10 3 Newton

= 700 (g)

Maximum Weight

= 1300 (g)

Weight
(Gram)

Actual
Weight
(Gram)

Fmea
(Newton)

Time
(Second)

Q
(L/S)

V
(m/s)

Fth
(Newton)

1300
1200

600
500

5.89
4.90

14.38
16.16

0.348
0.309

17.67
15.74

6.13
4.86

1.247

0.770

1.197

0.690

12.07
0.82

1100

400

3.92

18.71

0.267

13.60

3.63

1.134

0.593

7.99

1000

300

2.94

21.31

0.235

11.97

2.81

1.078

0.468

4.63

900

200

1.96

28.10

0.178

9.12

1.63

0.960

0.292

20.25

800

100

0.98

42.78

0.117

5.96

0.70

0.775

-0.009

40.00

700

Log Fmea

Percentage of relative
error

Log V

Log Fmea

Percentage of relative
error

Hemispherical plate
Standard Weight
= 700 (g)
Time
(Second)

Q
(L/S)

Maximum Weight
V
(m/s)

Fth
(Newton)

Fmea Fth
x100
Fth

= 1700 (g)

Weight
(Gram)

Actual
Weight
(Gram)

Fmea
(Newton)

1700

1000

9.81

13.38

0.374

19.05

14.25

1.280

0.992

31.16

1600

900

8.83

14.3

0.350

17.83

12.48

1.251

0.946

29.25

1500

800

7.85

15.36

0.326

16.60

10.82

1.220

0.895

27.45

1400

700

6.87

16.66

0.300

15.28

9.17

1.184

0.837

25.08

1300

600

5.89

17.56

0.285

14.51

8.27

1.162

0.770

28.78

1200

500

4.91

19.47

0.257

13.09

6.73

1.117

0.691

27.04

1100

400

3.92

21.75

0.230

11.71

5.38

1.069

0.593

27.14

1000

300

2.943

23.15

0.216

11.00

4.75

1.041

0.469

38.04

900

200

1.962

25.70

0.195

9.93

3.87

0.997

0.293

49.30

800

100

0.981

28.63

0.175

8.91

3.12

0.950

-0.008

68.56

700

Log V

Fmea Fth
x100
Fth

## (2) Actual Weight = Load Weight Standard Weight

7.0
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Calculation for each data for both flat and hemisphere plate is same. Then
we take the calculation for first data of each plate as example.
For Flat Plate,
Actual weight =

Fmeasured =

1400 g - 800 g

600 g

=

5.886 N

Flow rate, Q

Velocity, v

Ftheory

Log V
Log Fmeasured

5 L/14.13 s

0.35386 L/s

(Q/1000)/A

=
=

18.02179 m/s
AV2

=
=

6.3771 N

log (18.02179)

1.256

log (5.886)

0.770

## Percentage of relative error, % = (Fmea Fth) / Fth x 100%

= (5.886 6.3771) / 6.3771 x 100%
= 7.70%

## For Hemisphere Plate,

Actual weight =
Maximum weight (g) Standard weight (g)

Fmeasured =

1700 g - 800 g

900 g

=

8.829 N

Flow rate, Q

Velocity, V

Ftheory

5L / 15.90s

0.31447 L/s

(Q/1000)/A

=
=

16.01559 m/s
2AV2

10.0727 N

log (16.01559)

1.205

log (8.829)

0.946

m/s)2
Log V
Log Fmeasured

## Percentage of relative error, % = (Fmea Fth) / Fth x 100%

= (8.829 10.0727) / 10.0727 x 100%
= 12.35%

10

11

12

A.Estimate the slope of the graph for each plate and compare with the theoretical
value as shown in eq. 1 and eq. 2, respectively. Comment on the difference.
The slope of the graph 1 for flat plate is a linear graph. By logging both side of
the theoretical equation for flat plate we are able to get:

Log

Log

av2

Log av2

2Log v + A

(1)

(2) ,

## Where A is constant, A= Log + Log a

While the slope of graph 2 for hemispherical plate is also a linear graph. By
logging both side of the theoretical equation for hemispherical plate we are able to
get:

Log

Log

2av2

Log 2av2

2Log v + B

(1)

. (2)

## Where B is constant, B= Log 2 + Log + Log a

(The same goes to

.)

The slope of Fmea on flat plate is 2.2718 while its Fth is 1.9977. The differences
of slope is only 0.2741, and slightly deviated from the theoretical value but still result can
be considered acceptable. The difference might be caused by the height between the
nozzle and the vane due to the change of vanes as all vanes do not have equal heights. As
for hemispherical plate, the Fmea slope is 2.2989 while its Fth 1.9976. The difference is
also 0.301 thus3 can be considered acceptable. The difference might be cause by error
such as bubbles present in the water can be a reason to get inaccurate readings as well.
13

A.

Estimate the y-intercept ratio of hemispherical to flat plate and compare with the
theoretical ratio, as deduced from eq. 1 and eq. 2. Comment on the difference.
Y- Intercept ratio of hemispherical plate to flat plate
Ratio = -1.8142/-2.029 = 0.8236 (Fmean)
Ratio= -1.4037/1.7044 = 0.8236 (Ftheory)
The ratio of y-intercept of hemispherical to flat plate for (

) is 0.8236

## : 1 while the ratio of y-intercept of hemispherical to flat plate for(

is

0.8236 : 1. Both values for gradient and y-intercept for both graphs are
identical, thus the result obtained is near to the theoretical value. So,
the data that we calculated and recorded can be considered
acceptable. The differences might be due to errors when taking the
measurement and might be due to systematic errors while handling
experiment apparatus.
B. Comparing the force exerted on the hemispherical vane with the one on the flat
plate, which one is greater? Why?
Comparison of force on both plates
Force exerted on both hemispherical plates and the flat plate was totally different.
Force exerted on hemispherical plate greater than flat plate because it lies on the
behaviour of water jet when it strikes the flat surface. It forms a radial sheet which
impinges on the inner wall of the surrounding cylinder, and then divides, some of the
water flowing down the cylinder wall and the rest flowing upwards. Although visibility is
impaired by the spray which is generated, it does seem that some water falls on to the top
side of the vane. This would have the effect of producing a small momentum force in the
downwards direction, so reducing the net upwards force on the vane.

14

1) Comparing the percentage of relative error for the two plates as function of
jet velocity. Comment on the analysis. Can one deduce sources of error due to
the shape of the plates? Explain your reason. State other possible sources of
error.
Comparison of the percentage of relative error for the two plates
Based on our data, the percentage of relative error for both plates different,
that is 7.70% for flat plate and 12.35% for hemispherical plate. The percentage of
error ranged from around 0.52% to around 31%. If we have less percentage
relative error, so it means jet velocity is more constant. Some of the percentages
of error are large due to several errors made during the experiment.
The shape of the plate can be as sources of error, because the equation
using the angle where the impact of the velocity from water to the surface of the
plate, so if the plate is not in perfect shape , in case got incomplete sphere , the
angle will be different which will get a different force. Then possible source of
error could be is spring coil. The shape of coil must be in a standard position
which is straight. If not, the velocity that applied by the water is not accurate.
i.

## Briefly discuss factors contributing to errors or inaccuracy in experimental

data and propose recommendation to improve the results.
15

While conducting the experiment several errors may have been made which
affected accuracy of our data. Firstly, parallax error occurred when we were taking the
reading of 5 L water in the water tank and when we were synchronizing the height of
weight with standard height. Secondly, the control valve may not be open to maximum.
Thirdly, the time reading for increasing of 5 L water may not be accurate. The contact
angle between water and the plates also may not be the same as stated in experimental
procedure. The spring that was used to balance the weights may not be able to be
compressed to its full potential

There are some precautionary steps that we must follow in order to obtain data
with high degree of accuracy.First of all,make sure that all the apparatus is in good
condition and do some repetition in the experiment so that the reading will accurate and
precise.Secondly, always remember to open the control valve to its maximum so steady
flow rate of water can be achieved. Next, tally the standard height carefully so that the
weight height and the standard height is equal. Parallax error can be avoided via placing
our eye position perpendicular to the meniscus of water.Furthermore,the surfaces of
plates also should be examined before carrying the experiment to eliminate possibilities
of defect surfaces.The control valve should be handled carefully and slowly to avoid
disturbance in the water flow rate. The person who taking the time reading should
remained focus and alert while taking the time do that better data can be obtained.

8.0

CONCLUSIONS
From our experiment, we found that the force produced by the jet is directly
proportional to the square of the velocity of water for both flat plate and the
hemisphere,
F 2V
The force produced by the hemisphere plate is greater than the flat plate that is
approximately two-fold. This happen due to the structure of hemisphere plate that
16

curve, resulting fountain out of the water jet nozzles experienced rate of change of
momentum is higher compared to flat plate structures.

Surface area nozzle jet large flow rates will slow the water. This will reduce water
flow velocity and lower the rate of change of momentum flow. With this, the
power produced will also be less. From question 5, the relationship with the
power nozzle diameter can be described as follows:
Fth

9.0

REFERENCES

## by Yunus A. Cengel and John M.

Cimbala
Fundamental of Fluid Mechanics
Bruce R. Munson, Donald F.
Young, Theodore H. Okiishi

10.0

APPENDICES
Data table for graph of Log Fmea vs

Hemispherical plate
Log V
Log Fmea
1.205
0.946
1.183
0.895
1.142
0.837
1.115
0.77
1.091
0.691
1.045
0.594
1.009
0.469
0.917
0.293
0.782
-0.008

by

Log

17

18