1.2K views

Uploaded by carloscartasine

Colebrook White

save

- Modelling and Computation Techniques for Fluid Mechanics Experiments
- Cameron Hydraulic Data.pdf
- Unsolved Problems in Fluid Mechanics
- Colebrook vs Manning
- Surveying- Kavanagh
- Mechanical Engineering Text Listing - 2008[2]
- Virtual Nikuradse
- Colebrook Equation
- Friction Factors for Pipe Flow-MoodyLFpaper1944
- Solve Colebrook White Equation Within Your Worksheet
- Fluid Mechanics Lab Copy
- Crane Technical Paper 410-2009.pdf
- Laws of Flow in Rough Pipes-Nikuradse
- 03_1_COLEBROOKK
- Open Channel Flow
- Fluid mechanics.pdf
- Fluid Mechanics Lab
- Fluid Mechanics
- 7e Chapter 2 SM FinalFrank White Fluid Mechanics 7th Ed. Ch. 2 Solutions
- Advanced fluid mechanics class project
- Fluid Mechanics
- Introduction to Fluid Mechanics
- viscous fluid flow
- Fluid Mechanics - Buoyancy
- Fluid Mechanics
- Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics
- Applied Fluid Mechanics - 03 Pressure Measuremen
- Fluid Mechanics Lecture Notes I
- Fluid Mechanics Lab Manual
- Aerodynamics, Aeronautics and Flight Mechanics McCormick
- Reducing flood
- Risk assessment and hazard mapping
- CivilADS PRO Manual de Usuario
- covermar_final_outcomes_report.pdf
- Martinez_Ramirez_Miguel_Heriberto_44674.pdf
- Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Natural Hazard Science
- Aritmetica-CONAMAT.pdf
- flood-risk-management-web.pdf
- Gu_a_de_USUARIOss.pdf
- Triptico_Cultura Del Agua
- 12_Albornoz Gongora.pdf
- covermar_final_outcomes_report.pdf
- Triptico Huella Hidrica
- LEY DE TRANSITO DE MORELOS
- Optimal Critical Infrastructure Retrofitting Model Evacuation Planning
- CONDICIÓN DE GASTO MÍNIMO PARA MODELAR EL RIEGO POR GRAVEDAD CON PROPIEDADES HIDRODINÁMICAS EQUIVALES DEL SUELO
- 09600030310503352.pdf
- ANÁLISIS DE LA CALIDAD BACTERIOLÓGICA DEL AGUA EN EL DISTRITO DE RIEGO 085, LA BEGOÑA GUANAJUATO
- INSTRUMENTOS TOPOGRÁFICOS DE PRECISIÓN PARA LA NIVELACIÓN EN EL DR 014 RÍO COLORADO B.C.
- Planning for stronger, more resilient floodplains
- Critical review of the evolution of the design storm event concept
- r.inagbi.2014.04.001 (1) (1).pdf
- ANÁLISIS DEL ENTUBAMIENTO DE LA RED DE DISTRIBUCIÓN EN LOS MÓDULOS DE RIEGO
- The Assessment of Damage Caused by Floods in the Brazilian Context
- ANÁLISIS DE LA CALIDAD BACTERIOLÓGICA DEL AGUA EN EL DISTRITO DE RIEGO 023, SAN JUAN DEL RÍO, QUERÉTARO
- file_1_6_Modelizacin matemtica en lecho fijo de fl.pdf
- metodologiasAtlas.pdf
- GIS and Optimisation: Potential Benefits for Emergency Facility Location in Humanitarian Logistics
- COMEII-15027.pdf
- Iber_herramienta de Simulación Numérica

You are on page 1of 29

133

FLOW IN PIPES.

Paper No. 5204.

“ Turbulent Flow in Pipes, with

particular

reference to the

Transition Region between the Smooth and Rough Pipe Laws.”

CYRIL FRANK

COL~BROOK,

Ph.D., B.Sc. (Eng.), Assoc. M. Inst. C.E.

(Ordered by the Council to be published with written.dkcusswn.)l

TABLE O F CONTENTS.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Introduction

.

Theory of turbulent flow inpipes

.

.

.

.

. .

A new theoretical formula for flow in the transition region

.

Relation between Prandtl-von-Karman and exponential formulas.

Analysis of experimental data on smooth pipes

. . . .

Galvanized,cast-, and wrought-ironpipes

.

.

.

.

.

Old pipes .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Discussion and conclusions .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Appendix-Examplesillustratingthe

use of design-Tables .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

PAGE

133

137

139

141

143

145

153

154

.

.

.

155

INTRODUCTION.

The problem offlow in pipes is one which has until recently defied

theoretical analysis, owing to its complexity and the absence of a rational

basis for its solution. An outstanding contribution t o the knowledge of

the subject was made more than half a century ago by Professor OsboTne

Reynolds, who succeeded in finding a unifying principle which considerably

simplified the analysis of his experimental results. His discovery that the

PUd

change from streamline to turbulent flow depended on the value of P

**led later workers to thc corollary that the coefieient X in the well-known
**

hlU2

PUd

**pipe-formula h = -- is afunction of the parameter -, which was
**

2gd

P

named after him the Reynolds number.

His discovery of this criterion led to the formulation of a more general

Correspondencc on this Paper can be accepted until the 15th

w i l l he published in the Institution Journal for October 1939.-sEC.

**May, 1959, and
**

INST.

C.E.

134

COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES.

**“ Principle of Dynamical Similarity,” which determines the conditions
**

for mechanical similarity in the motions in or around geometrically similar

bodies.

Considerations of dynamical similarity may bereplaced by dimensional

reasoning which leads to a grouping of the quantities involved in the

problem into anumber

of non-dimensional parameters;this enables

experimentalresults to be plotted in asystematic manner. Such considerations, however, have definite limitationssince the functional relationship between these groups and their relative importance cannot be determined by dimensional reasoning.

It has been suggested as a result of experiments on lead and other

smooth pipes that the resistance-coefficienth and the Reynolds number R

could be expressed satisfactorily by an exponential ‘formula of the type

h = ARh

By re-arrangement of this equation into the form

**i t is easy to show that for smooth pipes the sum of the indices of U and d
**

must be 3 for all pipe-sizes and velocities. This equation is widely known

and the argument is frequently put forward that the sum of the indices

must equal 3 in any exponential formula designed to fit experimental

results on a few pipes over a limited range of velocities of flow. Although

this relation between the indices is true for smooth pipes, the value of n

itself so depends on the Reynolds number that a single value cf n will only

give approximatelycorrectresults

over alimited range of Reynolds

numbers. When the roughness-factor is introduced the relation no longer

holds : indeed, it will be shown in a later paragraph that, whatever the

roughness, this sum always exceeds 3. F. C. Scobey attempts to justify

by dimensional reasoning 1 his formula for riveted steel pipes in which the

sum of the indices is 3, but his omission, from the argument, of the roughness-factor, which is particularly important in the case of riveted pipes,

seriously affects the value of the formula.

In brief, it may be stated that the principle of dynamical similarity

determines the non-dimensional parameters governing fluid motion, but

fails to determine the functional relationship between them. This has led to

a reconsideration of t,he fundamentals of the problem, and therecent success

of L. Prandtl and von Karman in Germany, and of G. I. Taylor in Great

Brihin, in expressing in mathematical form the mechanism of turbulence,

“ Riveted

Steel and Analogous Pipes.” Bulletin No. 150, Department of

Agriculture, U.S.A., 1930.

and theshear stress at thewall T. the relative roughness.COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW 135 IN PIPES. The smooth. l (p. have now provided a fundamental basis for the analysis of the problem. They developed a formula of the type and showed that thelower limit of integration y1 is a function of the wallparticle size k in the case of rough pipes in which the 00w obeys the square resistance-law. Theroughness Reynolds number P may be expanded into It will be seen that it is the product of three dimensionless numbers. 136) together with the transition curvefor a pipe having a roughness composed of isolated particles. and the Reynolds number. . . Substituting appropriate values of y1 in (1) the following resistance laws are obtained for )) (a) flow in hydraulically smooth pipes : R 4 1 z log-2. . are shown in Fig. since it has the dimensions P of a velocity. . The experiments show that the rough-pipe law is true for values of PV*k t ~ P exceeding 60. linked with the experimental investigations of Nikuradse. Between these values there is a transition from one law to the other. . . rough. the resistancecoefficient. the experiments on which are t I.51 = .in thecase of smooth pipes. (3) (b) flow in rough pipes : The experimental results of Nikuradse show complete agreement with the above laws provided certain limiting conditions are satisfied. and transition laws for Nikuradse's sand roughness in which the grains are of uniform size and closely packed together. . . . (2) . the viscosity p. and is dependent on the density p.'=2/? and is called the " shear force " velocity. whilst for values less than 3 even rough pipes obey the smoothpipe law as the excrescences then cease to contribute to the resistance. . . . .

M. and wrought-iron pipes.351. are shown in Fig. Colebrook and C.136 COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. cast-.1 It is apparentthat with non-uniform roughness the transition zone extends over a range about 10 times as long as that for uniform sand roughness.) . 161 (1937)."Experiments with Fluid-Friction in Roughened Pipes. described in detail elsewhere." Proc. which were determined by an analysis of most of the available reliable data and described later in the Paper. (A). 367. and in the case of new commercial pipe8 in which the roughness is non-uniform the whole working range lies within the transition zone. Roy. 1 for comparison with that for the roughness V . The mean transition curves for galvanized-. F. vol. ness '' V " in this Paper. C. Soc. (See Rough. White. pp.

and at the other extremeto smooth-pipe conditions when the resistance mechanism is entirely molecular. I that this transition-curve merges asymtotically into the smooth. The exact form of the function will depend on the distribution of the roughness-elements and is mathematically indeterminate. the relative roughness. and the Authordesires to place onrecord his indebtednessto Dr. the local grain co-efficient is practically constant over the entire transition range. White for his collaboration in the development of formula (4). and __ d d P V*d’ and hasdefinite limiting values corresponding a t the one extreme to fullyrough-law flow-conditions in which viscous resistance is negligible. the large isolated grains have a shielding effect on the smaller grains which considerably reduces their effectiveness so far as total resistance is concerned. The following general formula is then obtained : which is in exact agreement with theory a t extreme values of __ and P gives results in the transition-zone which approximate very closely to the experimental values. Any attempt to express mathematically the transition-function for uniform sand-roughness is rendered difficult owing to the fact that the turbulent motion in the wake behind the grains is complicated by mutual interference. . but it will be shown in the present Paper that it is possible to obtain a particular transition law which is similar to those obtained experimentally for commercial pipes by simply addingtogether 1 the lower limits of integration y1 which satisfy the rough.in (1) is a function of -. however. and the resistance mechanism is made up of viscous and mechanical forces which are difficult to separate.and smooth-pipe laws. In thecase of non-uniform roughness. In turbulent motion it has been observed that thevelocity-distribution This treatment of the lower limits of integration was suggested by Dr. It willbe seen in Pig.COLERROOK TURBULENT ON 137 FLOW IN PIPES. so that the area of the pipe between the large excrescences may be regarded as behaving as a smooth surface witha coefficient of resistance dependent on the Reynolds number P-. White. Y1 k P In effect. C.and rough-law curves.V*d Since the local Reynolds number on the large P grains is comparatively large even a t fairly low mean velocities. M. . THEORYOF TURBULENT FLOWIN PIPES.

. to be determined in order completely to determine the resistance-law.” by C. Nikuradse. however. (b) the shear-stress T . . Equation (8) may be regarded as a general formula applicable to all types of turbulent flow in pipes.E. the shear stress at the wall. Colebrook and C. &JP 2. M. ahd P (c) the kinematic viscosity of the fluid.and substitutingthis value of y in (6). It has been observed experimentally that providing PV& __ exceeds P about 60 the resistance is proportional t o the square of the velocity (that is. The mean velocity U is numerically equal to the local velocity a t y = 0*113d*.) . the equation becomes d .138 COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. . The hydraulic wall then represents a plane where the disturbances are theoretically as great as the actualones at the wall. deter- * For the proof of this expression.- Since U = 0 when y = y1 the effective hydraulic wall may be regarded as being displaced inwards from the actual wall by an amount yl. the density of the fluid. .(November1937. experimenting with pipes artscially roughened internally by a uniform layer of sand fmed to the walls.vol. and in thiscase dimensional reasoning shows that the shift y1 can only be proportioned to k. . Journal Inst. . F. see “ The Reduction of Carrying Capacity of Pipes with Age. v = - P .. The shift of the effective hydraulic wall y1 has. . r. and p. On integration the equation (5) becomes . 7 (1937-38). . where U denotes the velocity a t a distance y from the wall of the pipe.5 -y- .p. . Re-arranging (7) so as to introduce the resistance-coefficient into the equation. . . . Since y1 depends on the conditions at the wall it must clearly be a function of (U)the roughness of the wall k. the resistance-coefficient is independent of the viscosity of the fluid). .99. may be expressed by the relation av. White. C.

shedding of eddies bythe A NEW THEORETICAL FORMULA ROR FLOW IN THE roughness- TRANSITION REGION. and y1 must. mined a value of L Y1 =g' where k denotes the diameter of the sand grains. whilst in the transition range y1 exceeds both of these extreme values due toa combination of mechanical and viscous mixing at thewalls. The value of y1 may be regarded as having two extremes which satisfy the smooth-law and fully rough-law conditions respectively. the equation becomes .. Y1 = +PV* L ). the resistance is due entirely to molecular or viscous mixing. p.139 UOLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. by dimensional reasoning. . however.is less than P 3 when the roughness particles cease to shed eddies and contribute to the resistance). Other experiments by Nikuradse show that for smooth pipes P y1 =-1 - 10 PV* which on insertion in (8) leads to theresistance-law for smooth pipes exceeds 3. the resistance-law for rough pipes becomes (3) In thecase of smooth pipes (or rough pipes when 'Y*k.CL which is the PV* only combination of 7.. the resistance increases over that When U of a smooth 'pipeduetothe protuberances. Thus. be proportional t o -. .. Putting (9) into non-dimensional form. and p which has the same unit as a length. Inserting this value of y1 in (S).

!l are .respectively. For pipes having non-uniform roughness k may be regarded as being the roughness of a sanded surface giving the same resistance-coefficient as the non-uniformly roughened surface.28 2log= 2log k Thus. The formula for flow in smooth pipes (2) . equation (10) must take the form where a and .113d 3= = log k 33 -2log- 1CL +-.and .113 3% which may be rewritten as 1 ---2log(:+--) dX - k 37d 2.10 p v * -+. (p. butthis P discrepancy against pv k experiment is very small and diminishes with increasing values of 2.and rough-laws asymtoticallyin accordance with experimental observation. 1. CL The curve approaches the smooth. Analytically.d __ 0.51 RdA ' .lO'p17. It will be noticed that the theory indicates aslight increase in resistance over that for P V*k purely rough-law flow at -. ' ' In order to represent (12) graphically it is convenient to separate the independent variable _ -1 ' 3 from the remainder.140 COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. CL 3.!lare numerical constants tobe found by experiment. 136). (13) P This function is shown as a heavy line in Fig.7d 3. 1 l Nikuradse's values for M and . and sub33 10 stituting these numerical values in (11) and inserting the resulting value of y1 in (8) the resistance-law becomes 1 0.60.

is itself a function of the resistancecoeficient.7-may be converted to the exponential type dj.000.08 3. n. 141 is rather inconvenient for practical use since the resistance-coefficient appears on both sides of the equation. suppose it is necessary to develop exponential formulas to cover a .000 to 100.2 1 l. by taking logarithm and differentiating. over a range of Reynolds numbers of from 5. RELATION BETWEEN PRANDTI~VON-KARMAN AND EXPONENTIAL FORMULAS. Thus Formula (17) may be extended into theusual form or It is clear that the exponent.COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. In order to illustrate the argument. so that a single value will only give approximatelycorrect results over a limited range of d/k values. It is of interest to compare the results obtained by the modern rational method of analysis of the problem of fluid-flow with the earlier empirical formulas of the exponential type. The Prandtl-von-Karman rough pipe1 a law -.OOO. This difficulty is overcome by using the formula which is a mathematical approximation to the exact formula (2) but gives numerical results within & $ per cent.

000 so as to give results to within f 24 per cent. The exponent 2. An exponential formula of the type 1 =ARn .51 dX log-n is given by d( :A) .2 log -by taking logarithms and differentiating. . . and .142 COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. and n = 0. A = 2.03. . It will be found by plotting log . . The values of A and n then become dlk dlk = 10 to 200. and n = 0. .000. .against log - 2/h X: that it is necessary to divide up therange into two components of dlk = 10 to 200 and d/k = 200 to 40. range of dlk = 10 to 40.111 = 200 to It is to be noted that thesum of the indices of U and d always exceeds 3 in thecase of rough pipes by 1-74. A = 3. which becomes d(log R ) Thus Equation (20) on extension becomes or where m is given by (19).000. 1 (1 of the correct value. This development of the relationship between rational and exponential formulas shows quite clearly that single values of the exponent. can only give approximately correct results over a limited range of pipe-sixes. may be developed from the Prandtl-von-Karman smooth-pipe law 1 Rdi _ . n.\/ri. . but in this case the sum of the indices of U and d equal8 3 as predicted by dimensional analysis.20 40. Here again it is seen that the exponent m is a function of the resistance-coefficient.25.

All defects were then removed andthe surface rubbed down withcarborundum brick. The concrete used in the construction of the tunnel was deposited against oiled steel forms which resulted in a smooth and even surface. Despite an appreciableexperimental scatterthe test-results are in very satisfactory agreement with theory. ANALYSISOF EXPERIMENTAL DATAON SMOOTH PIPES. at least for all ordinary velocities of flow. Among these may be included good commercial drawn-brass pipes.COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PDES. 852. and the result. although the results for a large number of brass pipes of other diameters tested by them also agree very closely with theory. No.987 degrees. therefore. lead. 2 (p. Bulletin . 143 velocities and exponential formulas are not. Enger on 4-inch. 2@ The correct values.A.s exhibit only slight scatter from the theoretical law. W.S. 145) together with the t’est-results from which they were computed. and concrete-lined pipes which have been deposited against oiled steel forms and carefully rubbed down to remove any imperfections. Of these. l44).was made in the calculations for 2g bends. are especially interesting. The results of an analysis of much of the available experimental data are shown in Figs. The results on sixteen spun concrete-lined pipes and on six spun bitumastic-lined pipes ranging in size from 4inches to 60 inches in diameter are included.a obtained by B. L. “ Concrete Pipes. the biggest of its kind in the world. 6-inch and 8-inch pipes were probably subject to the least experimental error.obtained a t the National Physical Laboratory by Stanton and Pannell in 1915. and are seen to be in close agreement with the Prandtl-von-Karman smooth-pipe law. U. are shown in Table I (p. Scobey. as particular care was taken in its construction and therange of test-velocities was large. centrifugallyspun lined (with bitumen or concrete) cast-iron pipes. 1 F. capable of universal application. The results on the 216-inch diameter Ontario tunnel. Danbury to Herongate main. or tin pipes. an allowance of 2 0 . I n analyzing the test-data1. it was found that an arithmetical error had been h1 1JZ made in calculating the resistance-coefficientsin h = --. which are considerably lower than those given by &obey. the laboratory tests by M. which included one hundred and ninety-two lobster-back bends of radius 3 4 4 and having a total change in direction U2 of 2.” Department of Agriculture. Bryan on the Stour Supply. The data include the experimental results on only one brass pipe of 0-5 inch diameter. I n analyzing the dat. C.. A number of commerical pipes may be regarded as hydraulically smooth. glass.

.144 COLEBROOKONTURBULENTFLOW IN PIPES.

However. The k-values determined for all pipes are shown in Pys. The experimental results for each class of pipe are plotted in Pigs.000 16. -f Footnote (l).00812 0. The problem is complicated by the fact that in practice there are variations of roughness due to non-uniformity in the method of manufacture so that ineach class there is considerable variation both in the size and type of roughness.448 0. Reynolds number.036 3.AND WROUGHT-IRON PIPES. 146 et s q . dA This arrangement gives a sloping straight line for the smooth-law flow and a series of parallel horizontal lines in the square-law region which extends to the right of the dotted line representing the lower limit of rough-law flow. k . 3. l l I 0.108 0.oO0 27. and using the mean Ic-value for each class together with the corresponding mean transitioncurve. X .100. ) with .-as afunction of log X: di P carried out in Pigs. The results may be brought to a single line in the rough-law region by 3. TABLEI. and 7 (pp.550.00798 0. Coemclent of friction. and 8 (pp.700. a number of transition curves have been drawn in Pigs.2oo. andthe transition law for each class.00782 0. and thuslocate the test-results in thetransition-range. 147 el seq. In analyzing the dataon the various types of iron pipes it was necessary mean to determine boththe mean hydraulic-roughness.CAST.as ordinate against log RdX as abscissa.063 5.000 22.000 0.091 in 1.018 2.000 11.p. 4 .7d l P V& This has been plotting 2 log -. 1 5. to determine the transition law and roughness k for each individual pipe-a t. 6.ask which is rendered difficult by the fact that with one or two exceptions the experimental results donot cover a wide enough range and rarely reach square-law. 10 . 152).000feet :per I 4 8 12 16 20 feet.650. the experiments on pipe V t indicate fairly rapid transition to the square-law at the higher values of ' 9 and. thus II with many of the test-results it is possible to extend them with very little error so as toreach square-law and enable the determination of the k values.701 2. 5.00773 040697 GALVANIZED.045 4.397 5.I45 C'OLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. 136. and 7 for direct comparison with the p-. therefore. 3. 1 zGi! 1 I 1 I 1. 9 (p.).990 1. and a mean transition curve drawn in for each class of pipe. It was necessary.

146 COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. .

147 .COLEBROOK “IJRRULENT ON FLOW IN PIPES.

there appears to be sufficient positive evidence to justify the adoption of the given mean transition laws together withthe mean k-values. l? . Referring to Fig. 3 it will be noticed that the resistancecoefficient for the 2-inch pipe becomes constant a t high velocities. so remarks will be confined to a few observations with regard to the most accurate data.148 COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. 5./T EXPERIMENTAL DATAON TAR-COATED CAST-IRON PIPES. being from 0. At the lower values of -the 2-inch and 4-inch pipes diverge P . thus enabling the determination of k and the major portion of the transition curve. The experiments made by F.5 to 21 feet per second. Heywood on new galvanized-iron pipes of 2 inches and 4 inches diameter were carefully conducted and are most valuable. space prohibits a detailed description of all the data available. formula. some having too rapid transition andothers too slow. as therange of velocities waB very wide. It is to be expected that these will enable the prediction of resistancecoefficients in pipes of sizes other thanthose tested and at velocities beyond the normal range with less uncertainty than with any existing empirical Fig. It is seen that although some of the pipes do not agree very closely with the mean curves. With regard to the experimental data itself. test-results.

85 inch in diameter) seems to be an exceptional pipe. 149 in opposite directions from the mean curves.COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. but in thedetermination of the mean value of k for this class the Author has neglected pipe XVIII (0. but it has to be remembered that a slight silt-like deposit had occurred on the inner walls which was entirely sufficient to relieve the roughness." . The remaining data on galvanized pipes was obtained by Saph and Schoder. and the 2-inch pipe is somewhat rougher than the 4-inch.85 inch in diameter) as the experimenters makethe following statement concerning this pipe-" Pipe XVIII (0.

R.” 1 in which the range of velocities was I L \‘X E XPERIMENTAL DATAON WROUGHT-IRON PIPES. and the 61-inch diameter siphon experimented on by Fitzgerald. Freeman.her carefully conducted experiments include those on the Manchester. Ot. Extreme care was exercised in making the experiments which covered a wide range of velocities.5: Journal New England Water Works Aasoc. Practically all of the available data on wrought-iron pipes were obtained by J. The pipes were considered to be fairly representative of ordinary lap-welded wrought-iron pipes used in the U. theSudbury conduit (48 inches in diameter).S. Thirlmere siphons (44 inches indiameter). used in the present analysis on tar-coated cast-iron pipes. Very reliable data.A. Mills a t Lawrence. indicate that their pipes were considerably smoother than those used by Issued by a Committee of the New England Water Works Association in 193.150 COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. 49 (1935). and another carefully made experiment was that on a 6-inch pipe described in the Report on “ Pipe Line Coefficients.. The remaining experiments by J. Jr. vol. Francis and H. was obtained by J. Smith. . 15 to 1. and 12 inches diameter. Freeman and H. 8 inches. B. Massachussetts on pipes of 4 inches..

Y 2 .Fig. 8.

0 0 1 k .! 0-006 0. 50.001 DIAMETER: INCHES. greater than that of uncoated pipes.W6 W - $0034 X 0 002 0. C. Jan.152 COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW TN PIPES. Freeman.004 0 2 4 6 8 DIAMETER: INCHES. Some experiments 1 on asphalted wrought-iron pipes are also 001 0. GALVANIZED-IRON PIPES.” by F..002 0. 0. although Freeman’s results are remarkably consistent among themselves. Pipes Nos. . Bul. but these pipes appear to have a capacity averaging about 5 per cent. WROUGHT-IRON PIPES. 302. Agriculture-Tech. ASPHALTEDCAST-IRON 50 60 70 1 0 I2 14 PIPES 0 004 vi o’w2 2 5: . included. Dept.00I 0 10 20 30 40 DIAMETER: INCHES.006 2 0-004 U r a 0. 304. and 310 in “ The Flow of Water in Riveted Steel and Anagolous Pipes. 0 . Scobey (U. Denoted in Fig. No. 9 of the present Paper by d. 1930).S.

. “The Reduction of Carrying Capacity of Pipes with Age. Where no experimental data is available for calculating the growth-rate 1 C. The diameterof a proposed pipe may be determined from the formula where i denotes the hydraulic gradientandkodenotesthe original roughness size. . . and u may be computed from experimental observation using formula (22). . . . k = 0. k = 0. Q. . . Alternatively.” Journal Inst. . where Q denotes the discharge at theend of T years. Colebroolr and C. . . say 0. Asphalted cast-iron pipes ‘Uncoated cast-iron pipes Wrought-iron pipes .01 inch..005 inch. . . F. .01 inch. 99. k = 0. White. I% = 0. = Co/22/& (where CO is the initial Chezy coefficient) and a is the average rate of growth of roughness. (22) where p = C/22/89and C denotes the final Chezy coefficient. OLD PIPES. The roughness k is readily obtained from k = ko + uT. the appended design-Tables 11-VI may be used to determine Chezy coefficientsand values of A C d m corresponding to various values of k and d.E. M.153 COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. If in any district the growth-ratea is required this may be computed from the results of experimental observations by means of the equation a 3-7a = -(lO*- T 10-0) . (November1937). . The hydraulic resistance of water-mains increases after themains have been in service for some time due togrowths or deposits upon the internal surfaces. . The deterioration of pipes with age has already been discussed a t solne length in a previous Paper 1 so only brief reference to thisproblem will be made here. p. . which may be written as Q $10-0) .0017 inch. . . C. 7 (1937-38). By making various simplifying assumptions it has been possible to develop a formula 1 which gives the relation between the age of a pipe and its carrying capacity. . vol. . denotes the initial discharge. .006 inch. The mean values of k are : Galvanized-iron pipes . p. .

163.p. l (p. such as riveted steel pipes. The scatter of the k-values in Pig. . . and this is not difficult since some reliable experimental data on a few pipes over at least a small range of velocities is usually available. in collaboration with D r . this may be estimated for asphalted cast-iron pipes from the pH value of the water. (24) which gives the growth-rate in inches per year. All formulas in the Paper are non-dimensional throughout and it is possible. C. using t. Such variations are to be expected.I54 COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. By an extensionof the Prandtl-von-Karmanlaws for smooth and rough pipes. and once having reached square-law it remains constant at all higher velocities. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. as shown in Fig. The fact that there are considerable variations in the roughness and transition curves in each class of pipe must not be considered a defect in the method of analysis. . which gives favourable support to this assumption.hc interpolation formula CI 2 l o g a = 3. the theoretical transition curve (12) may be used with verylittle error provided that theroughness can be determined. therefore. . The present analysis of the problem offlow in commercial pipes has been based on the premise that transition from smooth-law to rough-law flow in commercial pipes takes place in a gradual manner. 2 of a previousPaper 1 proves conclusively that in thecase of non-uniformly roughened pipes (which include most commercial pipes). 136). In thecase of built-up pipes. For design purposes a series of transition curves for each class is obviously impracticable.p H . 9 is too great t o be able to ascertain any possible dependence of k on pipe-size. . A l t ~ T h ~ ~ i Z i i i iexperimental ble data is so incomplete and limited in range that fully rough conditions were only reached in a few cases. and in a later Paper it will be shown that thisoccurs in thecase of a certain class of riveted pipe. since manufacturing conditions are not identical in different plants. M. Since the transition curves are somewhat complex and are not. Where it is not possible to determine by experiment the transition curve for any particular type of pipe. five design-Tables (Tables 11-VI) based on these functions are included Footnote ( l ) . to use the results inany system of units. so mean curves corresponding to average conditions have been determined. easy to use.8 . a variation of k with pipe-size would be expected.therefore. so a single value for each class seems justified especially as pipes of all sizes in any particularclass are made by the same process. the resistancecoefficient falls with decreasing rapidity as thevelocity increases. White. a theoretical transition law (12) has been developed by the Author. a collection of data on old mains shown in Pig. .

indirectly inspired the present work. The Paper is accompanied by nine sheetsof drawings and five designTables-from which the Figures in the text and thefollowing Appendixes have been prepared. The dischargeis determinedfrom Q = (AGdiijda and from Table IV the value of A C d G corresponding to a gradient of the order 1 in 6. To find the discharge of a new asphalted cast-iron pipe.710 X 4-63 = 22. ' Examples illustrating the we of t h deaign-Tabks.. To find thc diameter of a new asphalted cast-iron pipe to discharge 10 cuseca with a gradient of 1 in 4 00. 48 inches diameter. 158 in order t o facilitatecalculations on the flow of water. and gradientsinEnglishunits a t atemperature of 55" F.000 is A C d m = 1. The sizeof pipe is determined by the value of . who. Hence Q = 1. London. Problem ( I ) . as calculations involving the Chezy formula are easily and rapidly made by slide-rule. Problem (2).The Chezy coefficient C in U = C 4 2 is given for various pipe-sizes. air and other fluids may be compiled by means of the transition curve determined by the Author.1 cu8ecB. with a gradient of 1 in 6. Similar tables for gas. The work was carried out in the Civil Engineering Department of the Imperial College of Science and Technology.000.COLEBROOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES. APPENDIX. and the Author isindebted tothe generosity of the Clothworkers Company.710. velocities. in supporting another researchof purely academic nature.

To find the diameter of an asphalted cast-iron pipewhich will discharge 36 cusecs 30 years hence witha gradient of 1 in 100 and apH value of 7..zpproximately the given gradient. The required pipe must have a value of and by interpolation in Table VI for a pH value of 7. The actual dischargeof this pipe at thegiven gradient is Q = 208 ..dueofACl/ii. From Table IV it is seen that a 21-inch diameter pipe hacrav. .008 at.2.2 it is seen that a 33-inch diameter pipe has a valueof A C d g = 365 approximately a t this pH value.d-= 10.OOK ON TURBULENT FLOW IN PIPES.4 cusecs Problem (3).156 COLEBR.

45 21.7 27.45 141.5 138 149 150 153.5 149 150 151.0828 0.51 3.5 - 1.078 l 7 0.6 16 152 227 322 437 575 73.5 129.85 13.5 145 146.5 143.5 153 154.3 33.5 167 168 169.5 182 2.5 9.5 39.5 112.4 12.j 166 168 170 170.5 419 141 142..5 139.5 147.05 20 27.5 165.1 31.2 76 121.5 171 172 I73 174 175 3. ACd\/m C ACdm 0.5 141 143 145 146.4 15.6 42.5 112.5 133.8 29.5 139.46 3.08 5.3 57.5 131.6 135.6 19.5 136.8 85.6 20 26.-SMOOTH T 7 D: inrhes.5 07.5 163 164.5 1785 2420 3180 4090 5130 62S0 7620 GRADIENT = -I C 99 107.5 167 168 l69 170 1 1.3 146 148 150 150.3 34.5 134 135.8 40.5 547 -- 1 10.5 156.7 1215 1585 l990 2700 3540 4520 5680 6970 8420 GRADIENT 162 155.37 4.520 7850 u=5 C u=10 U=.5 143 145 146..0 21.05 15.\DIENT= 1 148 150 151.000 ~ -1 0=3 1l 6 2.8 101 103 = U=Z 1 -1- JIOO GRADIENT = I U=1.32 105 106. 7550 9100 6.5 156 157 158.5 133.8 24.141 U 103 ACdG 0474 0.2 20.5 161 114 122 128 131 I 134.5 137 138.1 i5.0713 94 0.5 -l 17.2 30.5 I72 256 362 492 642 823 1030 1350 1720 2160 2920 3830 4910 6I U .09 119 0.46 1.25 8. .53 6.12 13.5 130 131 132.5 1 83 l 48.061 0.5 IN 703 880 1153 1480 1855 2510 3290 4220 5310 6.5 l1 0.4 13.1 35.31 14. - l 5 8.5 148 149 150 151.25 15.5 10.15 10.5 138.5 I36 139.7 39 50 62.45 7.5 165.48 1.1 87.9 -l 124 44 78.3 l 60..5 162 163.2 136.5 130 131.5 154.3 136 203 288 392 515 660 825 1085 l390 1740 2360 3940 4980 6150 7420 1 - 100.4 264 373 507 661 818 I060 l390 >R .5 140 141 142 143.5 I82-.5 152 153.5 8.5 l60 161.55 17.508 1.\DIEXI'= -- l 10 1780 2220 3020 3940 5070 6340 7770 9400 1L GRADIEhT = 100 [TABLE111.5 150 G ~ ~ A QR =D( A C ~ ~ ~ VARIOUS T A T VELOCITIES.000 127.4 12. ACdG C 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 40 44 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 107.5 23.7 51.5 !4.5 0.5 172 173 174.TABLETT.5 147.:i 116 0.1 91 146 217 307 140.87 10.57 U=l PIPES : VALVESOF C l c A4cd/m c 0.5 158 159.5 0.5 145 146.5 158 159.38 2.3 28.5 138 140 141.5 160.5 148.7 15.57 5.5 112 114.5 920 1206 1545 1940 2630 3440 4400 5550 6800 8200 123 126.5 140.5 142.5 333 450 590 757 94.5 108 109.5 114.05 1245 17.5 143.25 6.8 53.5 153 154 154.3 E6.5 135 136.5 129 130 132.545 1'X 1.5 l56 157 158 159.11 2.5 0.2 49.5 139.5 1 55 l57.096F 0.5 110.385 1.5 134.7 40.5 4.1 23.93 119 121 123 125 126 127.585 14ij _105 114 l19 122 l25 127.5 l35 l36 137.<5 161 162 163 164.5 164.92 132.7 ]L11.5 162 I 161.5 160.3 14.5 14.9 176 177 179 180 181.5 161.3 10.5 183.5 153 155 156.5 209 296 402 527 678 848 1115 142.5 165..7 9.5 5.000 =- 465 607 780 975 1280 1630 2050 2780 3630 4660 5830 7150 8650 l 7 3.s GR.19 5.

478 100 3.39 1 U=20 I U=30 I I -I -l-l 76 ‘34.433 97.352 0.5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0.062 0.62 7.638 3.786 ACdK 0.45 9.00136 0.5 75 0.442 0.36 5.5 111 117 11.165 0.289 87.8 22.349 0.m 119 120 121.5 102 103 104 1 lo.546 0.5 4 4.5 0.0491 04668 0.05 2.1362 0.0 38.62 13.01228 0.0102 0.1444 70.14 1.55 10.5 2 2.13 6.408 96 0.5 GRADIENT = U=lO C -1-1 04097 0.25 84 0.0874 0.5 100.457 99 3.5 1 7 34.5 11.55 15.5 0. 114 1 - 1000 117 118.5 5 5.5 99.7 24.382 94.9 30.705 1.5 I 97.5 43.5 GALVAIVIZTD-’IRON PIPES: VALUESOF C m U TABLE111.5 0.2282 I_ H:! 0.306 89 92 0.-- D: inches c 1 1.0086 0.44 3.5 73 78 82 84.5 GRADIENT = 1 .5 95.01 3.50 101 62 -10.0555 0.8 16.5 3 3.163 0.27 86 0.97 5. I82 VARIOUS VELOCITIES.102 0.2 I- GYADTT?\”l’= I 1 .5 1 0.5 20.1 104 0.323 90.-NEW = Cdgi AND Q u=3 I = ( A C d n ) d i AT u=5 U=7 A C G l I -l 73.00546 0.0 103.1965 0.5 93.7 31.0218 04341 0.8 123 38.9 17 23 30.66 0.1772 79 0.31 4.5 94.71 2.339 92 0-353 93 0.6 lGRADIENT= I 64.6 18.267 0.2042 0.5 0.5 0.ooo T -l C -- -0.5 39.

5 146 148 149 GRADTEXT =- 17.5 1.87 7.5 146 147.2 86. sqllnre feert.5 142 143 144.8 89.5 111. .5 l29 130 1Mi 358 470 602 756 993 I270 l605 21 80 2860 I .50 140. 144 214 303 410 540 694 870 1136 14-55 1835 2490 3280 c AC&i 1.5 127 130 132.5 8.ooO AC&i 2.5 139 88.2 17.D: inrhes.9 39.78 111 -~ 117 1.5 134.13 12.5 125.6 49.5 542 G96 870 1140 1460 I835 2190 3290 l 100 [TABLEV.32 2.5 16.0 ACV% C 107.6 31 39. ~ u=m I -__.5 130 131 I32 133.5 112 114 115.5 118 121 163 255 347 458 587 735 967 c c ACl’\/m C ~ U = 30.5 110.5 14.71 4.7 ~ 130 132.4 30.5 2.0 A: U = 1.5 137.90 135 GRADIENT C 99.03 8.1 23.0 IN 181 1240 I560 2120 2780 116.5 118.5 263 ACdK 103 106.5 5. AT T I T V E L~O ~ ~ ~~ E S . TARLX IV-NEW ASPRALTEDCAST-IRONPIPES : VALUESOF C u=1.5 l25 127 128.5 120 121 122 123.80 114.6 49.03 117 119 121 123 124.5 108.8 30 38.2 120..5 149.7 22.3 139 208 294 400 524 672 842 1105 1415 l780 241 5 3180 ~ -- 11.32 107.1 3 12.31 2.T.5 134.5 136.7!1 5.5 l 1 C ACd\/m c c 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 l5 40 44 48 54 60 U = C ~ ~ ~ F AQI =T ( D A C d m ) d .5 142 212 300 407 4x15 F89 860 l130 1440 1820 2470 32.25 136 137.8 X!I.5 141 142 143.5 116.8 48. 3 4 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 u=2.5 144 214 303 138 416 139.5 136.2 23.5 125 126 127.5 139 1 = lo.

6 36.5 2.18 1.5 110 111 113 114.5 u=3 U=2 U=1.04 2.01228 0.3 26.852 2.5 109 112.34 112 111 2.5 103 104. I u=7 1 -I U=IO I c ACdK C u=30 i U=15 c -- -l 0.66 3.000 .85 15.5 50.25 1.144c5 0.5 100.8 !)9.7 26.5 104 04ti:I 106.5 48.7 35.5 112 113.08 6.5 123.41 4.51 3.5 77 85.786 0.4 44.5 91.75 110..0675 0.0 33.1104 0.27 0.7 GRADIENT = 70.5 123.5 113.20 4.47.5 114.5 103 104.5 106.5 121.5 132.065 0.30 1.6 24.3 22.23 1.5 0.5 100 101.53 4.5 l18 119.228 0.0107 0.3 15.5 96 98 99.0094 0.03 11.727 1.5 0.4 j 128.15 7.42 6.218 102.7 28.1 31.82 10.408 0.55 11.75 6.323 0.92 3.433 0.5 119 120 1 - 1.833 ' 109.3 37.TABLE V.5 112 113.2 29. U=0.546 0.677 1.76 2.383 0.5 0.5 108.1772 0.0 83 91.0103 0.267 0.5 105.5 100.289 0.5 1.20 5.4 21.5 130 131 132 94 95.23 121 122.5 131 126.5 dGi : (feet)&.5 7'3 84 87.20 6.175 0.5 123 126 127.0 27.5 17.5 1l 5 116 117 0.778 1. U =0.70 8.5.802 1.5 101.5 134.5 47.306 0.40 12.5 91 94.4 19.5 103 104.5 106 107.60 3.5 90 92.077 0.5 118 120 122 123.7 c 1 c C 1 1.5 12.339 0.10 1.02182 0.5 I07 0.5 113 114.5 2 2.55 120 8.35 3.5 105 109 111.442 0.5 93 94.5 116 117.5 5 5.5 114 I16 118 119.1965 0.0668 0.5 0.012 88.25 0.49 5.5 125 126.19 0.448 0.87 117 118.5 109.83 2.00 113.5 0.25 0.3 43.0341 0.01l l 79.5 103 104.478 0.5 16.5 109.2 41.5 121 122.5 110.072 107.001362 0.72 11.5 108.62 4.64 2.8 40.R 132.197 0.8 GRADIENT = 100 102 104 105.5 116.222 0.5 121 122.00 7.5 I I20 I 3.5 96.5 136 137 138 135 136 GRBDIENT 1 10 =- .5 106 107.5 3 3.5 107 108.5 14.8 20.5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0.8 34.5 97.5 1 GRADIENT = 100 0.421 0.5 128.6 45.-NEW WROUQHT-IRON PWES: VALUESOF C IN U D : inches A: qnarr feet.349 0.5 0.000 2.5 67.5 0.405 0.i 128 129 130.075 97.5 1-09 130.5 3.0054fi 0.2 14.0874 0.0491 0.5 103 105.85 115.87 2.758 1.5 110 114 117 119.353 0.5 4 4.102 0.5 94.5 110 1 10.93 109 2.165 0.5 125 112.457 0.66 0.5 7.9 21.374 0.5 84 87 89.5 U=l = 106.30 10.5 123.5 5.1 Gdz I AD Q u=5 = (ACdm)d/7AT VARIOUS VELOCTRES.65 6. 0.5 0.204 0.78 10.96 5.5 76 80.1332 0.060 0.42 99.5 96 97 98 100 101.

408 0.8 78.1 47.56 1.5 85 86.3 80.912 0.7 75.07 4.2 73.7 56.2 22.383 0.62 1.1 68.9 13.07 8.7 64.5 45.4 29.9 0.98 4.3 62.8 50.5 195 2.7 67.7.5 60 61.3 77.8 39.2 105 14.2 65.30 11.5 60 61.9 83.8 16.21 3.35 7.9 58.46 1.15 3848 k-3.7 71 72.7 98.4 105.9 31.3 80.94 7.5 10F.4 102.349 0.3 67.63 5.7 43.3 20.3 55.8 75.3 52.5 94.8 0.5 510 60 658 61.7 139 191 255 330 418 555 716 907 1245 1660 2130 2700 3350 4070 6.61 2.36 33.8 51.7 774 79 80 0.8 27.5 79.7 31.37 2.5 65.61 4.68 5.3 85 86.34 0.1 13.5 123 176 241 320 413 520 688 885 1120 1530 2030 2600 3290 4060 4930 43.3 74. square fret.2 1532 65.2 90.6 60.7 81.65 6.2 68.9 57.5 94.5 20.3 76.6 64.8 82.79 0.6 0.3 837 62.5 83.2 40.4 19.2 101.1 23.7 98.2 48. In pipes 7.4 112.288 0.442 0. 1 inch k = @ 3 inrh k=0.6 5.9 54.3 51.5 63.74 1.2 2150 97.8 92.785 1.8 69.613 0.1 0.96 3.08 5. There a denotes the growth-rate in inches per year = k" .6 103 104.0 31.90 12.35 9.2 44.3 47.2 50.3 73.4 8.0 139 19s 270 R37 461 580 765 953 1040 1700 2240 2870 3620 4470 5430 60 65.8 89 90.7 62.5 73.50 39.7 31 1.3 110 111.7 66.3 85 86.3 21.35 12.6 41.17 6.6 3'4.3 41.2 89 1.7 92.2 5.63 23.4 81.2 87.22 0.6 40.n75 inch.5 17.7 71.322 0.955 1.5 83.3 76.9 55 5F.28 5.23 7.6 63.4 33.7 89.2 69.8 74.2 48.7 72.8 107 108.7 71.83 0.7 10.457 0.6 43.52 8.5 68.6 92.3 62.5 inch.9 3.2 47.8 95.86 3. 116 39.6 27.7 0.7 68.8 99 100.5 2.2 73.3 25.9 11.6 60 61.57 15.0 148 210 287 379 488 614 810 1040 1310 l 17nn 2360 3020 3820 4710 5710 60 64 67.3 52.433 0.405 3.pH.7 72.1 93.8 50.7 75.1 13.4 8.5 60 62.5 85 87.2 64.l 37.866 0.5 14.0 3.9 30.478 0.5 98.6 73.41 0.8 7.9 63.06 1.3 15.4 6.7 81.11 1.325 0.8 121.7 76.3 76.354 0.707 0.2 72.29 274 0.3 96.81 1.4 79.0873 0.1 65.2 65.5 85 87.85 7.7 43.25 0.12 1.3 69.4 87.8 79.6 96.9 114 115.267 0.13F 0.19 2. Based on 2 1og a = 3.6 2. .3 16.7 71 72.7 21.17 1.5 0.05 1.4 47.76 28.2 14.5 inch.i.5 189 258 341 440 555 733 940 l190 l624 2750 3480 4300 5220 50.2 79.3 54.8 85 88. k=0. ACdk C C -l C C ACl/Z C C C 0.61 8.8 .4 105.76 3.33 35.2 101.1 56.5 83.75 11.7 46.2 104.1 11.0491 0.91 5.7 67.2 45.72 9.2 45.7 38.767 2.7 3.5 27.53 1.5 16.545 0.4 27.4 i 0.73 10.2 56.9 52.7 96.0405' 30 33.8 114 115.54 6.2 60.9 56 58.12 12.54 1.5 417 0.3 10.02 2.94 3.4 77.- 3 4 5 k = 1 4 inch.1 89 90.6 18.7 92.2 60.- D: A: inchcs.5 87.9 107.8 96.7 52.53 4.8 I 1 9.66 0.5 1432 1950 2570 3290 4150 5120 6200 92.92 9.7 75.3 52.8 41.2 494 51.56 0.2 73.7 88 89.0 46.6 72.8 94.\/m C ACd/na G C ACdK 18.3 874 88.3 383 58.06 7.5 0.4 24.7 69.0 8.0inch.5 508 640 843 1080 1360 1860 2450 3 140 3960 48S0 5900 9.7 47.275 1.1 23.6 100.4 57.3 80.5 120.196 0.2 93.1 24.5 103 148 203 271 360 442 587 757 957 1314 1745 2245 2840 3 520 4270 pH* value of vater to give above vaIues of k aftor 30 years' grovt: n cast-.3 51.3 50.7 0.1 65.3 62.227 1.5 26.6 40.0 81.2 7.7 77.55 324 432 562 715 987 1320 1705 21 70 2700 3290 -~ -~ .7 71 72.3 72.8 7R.2 97.2 69.1 lI2'l 5.0 112 160 220 292 378 477 630 813 1030 1410 1870 2400 3040 3760 4570 37.27 33.9 103. k y 0 .6 37.225 1.3 81 82.8 75.0 1.662 0.7 103 104.7 99 low2 101.3 79. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 40 44 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 0.85 69.95 1.3 82.6 35.6 96.3 97.9 60 62.3 90.4 108.5 69.2 74.38 5.1 36.5 14.1 314 33.2 77.7 I 0.3 302 67.8 111.56 12.8 85 86.6 118.6 81.4 101.1 93.7 68.k=n.9 83 84 22.5 62.7 96.5 l152 64.00 4.7 52.2 50.8 79.3 55.6 64.96 4.79 3.3 52.6 92.90 8.8 79.14 3.1 94.69 1.92 8.5 117 I63 217 283 358 477 619 785 1084 1445 1860 2370 2940 3580 48.6 44.75 316 0.3 66.4 37.9 55 56.75 28.5 .7 1975 67 6.9 19.2 70.90 19.45 8.7 100.15 inch k-0.30 11.4 106 107.3 94.51 4.7 67 68.57 6.3 102 154 219 299 89 105.7 75 76.8 * AC.9 54.33 10.62 37.6 16.7 564 58.

- Modelling and Computation Techniques for Fluid Mechanics ExperimentsUploaded byrsnit
- Cameron Hydraulic Data.pdfUploaded byrenigri
- Unsolved Problems in Fluid MechanicsUploaded bySameh Ahmed
- Colebrook vs ManningUploaded byCtSal Harun
- Surveying- KavanaghUploaded byCt Kamariah Md Saat
- Mechanical Engineering Text Listing - 2008[2]Uploaded bysalah51
- Virtual NikuradseUploaded byprashanthreddyh
- Colebrook EquationUploaded byAhmed Awadalla
- Friction Factors for Pipe Flow-MoodyLFpaper1944Uploaded bycarloscartasine
- Solve Colebrook White Equation Within Your WorksheetUploaded byAnilkumar M
- Fluid Mechanics Lab CopyUploaded byRonald Muñez Badic
- Crane Technical Paper 410-2009.pdfUploaded byPasquale Cutri
- Laws of Flow in Rough Pipes-NikuradseUploaded bynurudinsathar
- 03_1_COLEBROOKKUploaded byDante Freidzon
- Open Channel FlowUploaded bykbkwebs
- Fluid mechanics.pdfUploaded bymohapatramugdha99
- Fluid Mechanics LabUploaded byAnindya Chatterjee
- Fluid MechanicsUploaded byDax Shukla
- 7e Chapter 2 SM FinalFrank White Fluid Mechanics 7th Ed. Ch. 2 SolutionsUploaded byÇevik Ahmet
- Advanced fluid mechanics class projectUploaded byfara255
- Fluid MechanicsUploaded byMohammad Hosein Khanesaz
- Introduction to Fluid MechanicsUploaded byGurucharan Prajapati
- viscous fluid flowUploaded byTrym Erik Nielsen
- Fluid Mechanics - BuoyancyUploaded bywiggly18
- Fluid MechanicsUploaded byKittiphong Khunkrua
- Fundamentals of Fluid MechanicsUploaded byvijaynie
- Applied Fluid Mechanics - 03 Pressure MeasuremenUploaded byEmmanuel Ryan
- Fluid Mechanics Lecture Notes IUploaded byMRABSENI
- Fluid Mechanics Lab ManualUploaded byprashanthreddyh
- Aerodynamics, Aeronautics and Flight Mechanics McCormickUploaded byLai Zhangxing

- Reducing floodUploaded bycarloscartasine
- Risk assessment and hazard mappingUploaded bycarloscartasine
- CivilADS PRO Manual de UsuarioUploaded bycarloscartasine
- covermar_final_outcomes_report.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- Martinez_Ramirez_Miguel_Heriberto_44674.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Natural Hazard ScienceUploaded bycarloscartasine
- Aritmetica-CONAMAT.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- flood-risk-management-web.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- Gu_a_de_USUARIOss.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- Triptico_Cultura Del AguaUploaded bycarloscartasine
- 12_Albornoz Gongora.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- covermar_final_outcomes_report.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- Triptico Huella HidricaUploaded bycarloscartasine
- LEY DE TRANSITO DE MORELOSUploaded bycarloscartasine
- Optimal Critical Infrastructure Retrofitting Model Evacuation PlanningUploaded bycarloscartasine
- CONDICIÓN DE GASTO MÍNIMO PARA MODELAR EL RIEGO POR GRAVEDAD CON PROPIEDADES HIDRODINÁMICAS EQUIVALES DEL SUELOUploaded bycarloscartasine
- 09600030310503352.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- ANÁLISIS DE LA CALIDAD BACTERIOLÓGICA DEL AGUA EN EL DISTRITO DE RIEGO 085, LA BEGOÑA GUANAJUATOUploaded bycarloscartasine
- INSTRUMENTOS TOPOGRÁFICOS DE PRECISIÓN PARA LA NIVELACIÓN EN EL DR 014 RÍO COLORADO B.C.Uploaded bycarloscartasine
- Planning for stronger, more resilient floodplainsUploaded bycarloscartasine
- Critical review of the evolution of the design storm event conceptUploaded bycarloscartasine
- r.inagbi.2014.04.001 (1) (1).pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- ANÁLISIS DEL ENTUBAMIENTO DE LA RED DE DISTRIBUCIÓN EN LOS MÓDULOS DE RIEGOUploaded bycarloscartasine
- The Assessment of Damage Caused by Floods in the Brazilian ContextUploaded bycarloscartasine
- ANÁLISIS DE LA CALIDAD BACTERIOLÓGICA DEL AGUA EN EL DISTRITO DE RIEGO 023, SAN JUAN DEL RÍO, QUERÉTAROUploaded bycarloscartasine
- file_1_6_Modelizacin matemtica en lecho fijo de fl.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- metodologiasAtlas.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- GIS and Optimisation: Potential Benefits for Emergency Facility Location in Humanitarian LogisticsUploaded bycarloscartasine
- COMEII-15027.pdfUploaded bycarloscartasine
- Iber_herramienta de Simulación NuméricaUploaded bycarloscartasine