You are on page 1of 7



Author: Constantin Pruteanu
Student no. 3126004
Submitted: 29 April 2014

1 . Procedure The water flow was adjusted to the maximum possible reading ensuring that the flowrate does not reach a point where the menisci in the manometers cannot be seen. mitre bend. area enlargement and area reduction as sketched in the Figure 1. EXPERIMENTAL 1. for a number of bends and fittings and to compare them with the values from other reference sources.48 mm Enlargement pipe diameter = 26. 900 elbow. stopwatch and bike pump. The readings for water pressure were taken for each of these components at different flowrates and the volume of water collected in a certain period of time was measured. Sketch of enlargement and contraction in the pipe system. 2. water collection basin and rubber ball. long radius bend.AIMS The aim of this study was to measure K. short radius bend. Data Pipe Diameter = 19. The pipe system consists of following components : water inlet.2 mm Figure1. Apparatus The apparatus consisted of a Hydraulic bench with a pipe and fittings system connected to a water source. 3. the dimensionless loss coefficient.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The energy loss in a pipe network with bends and fittings has two components: major loss due to shear stress between the water and the pipe surface (major loss) and minor loss. and z2 are the elevations relative to a datum (m). 2 . The pressure values (P1 and P2) can be determined from the manometers readings where: (3) h is the height of the water in the manometer tube (mm). g is the gravitational constant (m/s2) and V is the fluid velocity (m/s). The expression used to determine the head losses is: (1) where H is the water column high (mm). The application of Bernoulli equation for both sections of pipe from Figure 1. A1 and A2 are the area of pipe system. ρ is water density (kg/m3). respective the area of enlargement section (mm2) . V1 and V2 refer to liquid velocity at these points in the pipe system (m/s). Rearranging equation (2) for head losses gives: (4) Using the conservation of mass equation: (5) where Q is the water flow. energy loss caused by sudden changes in either direction or velocity as stated by Strothman (2006). z1. Each style of pipe fitting and pipe bend has an individual value of K which can be determined only experimentally. gives: (2) Where p1 and p2 refer to liquid pressure between two sections of flow (mm of water column). K is the dimensionless loss coefficient. g in gravitational constant (m/s2).

01 0.The head loss equation can be written as: (6) where the difference in elevation z1 and z2 between section 1 and 2 can be considered negligible for this experiment. 0.00 0. Raw data collected in experiment are presented in Appendix A.04 Enlargement Contraction 0.09 0. The experiment was conducted under time restrictions and there was not enough time to have few checks readings before the start of experiment. Determined values ΔH and V2/2g.05 Long Bend 0.05 0. It can be observed that the slopes for the determined values of pressure and V2/2g are passing through origin and they have almost similar trend.06 0. 3 . and example calculations for pressure difference and velocity are given in Appendix B.02 0.04 0.08 0.07 Mitre 0.07 Figure2.10 0.06 Elbow Short Bend 0.01 0.03 V2/2g 0.03 0.02 0.00 0. Figure 2 shows the experimentally determined values of the pressure difference between the two points of the pipe system and the velocity squared over double gravitational constant.

26 with an average of 1. It was conducted very early in the morning and the water temperature could be below 20°C which will increase the viscosity that could explain our calculated results. A detailed variation of water density with temperature is presented in Appendix E.80 which are very different comparing with other calculated results 1. Results were found to compare favourably with other published values for few section of pipe system. For the mitre section the calculated results are between 1. The average uncertainty for the calculated results is ±0. internal roughness.52 and 2. In the enlargement and contraction sections the average calculated results are close to each other but out of range of other calculated results. Due to the difference between the thermal expansion coefficients of the pipes material and the enclosed water a systematic measurement deviation is caused if the temperature of the water varies during experiment.Observing the lines on the graph above it can be concluded that the differences in pressure for long bend and enlargement sections are very similar and the contraction section is the closest to the V 2/2g line.25 are similar with other published results 0. Comparing the calculated results for loss coefficient K in different sections of pipe system with similar results it can concluded that the calculated values are only for few sections similar to other results. These results raise few questions regarding the experiment undertaken.50 and in long bend section the calculated values for K 0. For elbow section only one of the calculated values 1. It would be recommended for a future K head loss coefficient measurement experiment to have prepared a spreadsheet with preloaded formulas in order to determine K values during experiment and to compare them with similar results.06 is close to other similar results. 1. In case of significant difference it will be considered the parameters of fittings: radius.25 (Appendix C). thus. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMANDATIONS An experiment for determining the K head loss coefficient in a pipe system was undertaken. For this experiment it can be outlined few sources of errors: the shear stress within the liquid layers and the pipe system which will affect the energy balance of fluid Gomez-Osorio et al. distance.62 is the closest one to the other results 0.20. Results were presented in terms of calculated K coefficients using the difference of pressure between two points of the pipe system and the volume of water collected in a certain time. For short bend the calculated values 0. 0. Rainer and Baade (2012) have found that the variation of water temperature implies a change in water density. 0.24.00. (2013). 4 .08 as presented in Appendix D. Apart of this there are few missing details about our pipe system.40. this effect has to be taken into account for analysing the measurement uncertainty of a flow. Another factor which affected our results is the fact that we ignored the difference in elevation between the sections of fitting elements. the roughness internal surface in the pipes could affect the calculated results as well as the size proportions (R/D) for elbows.

NOMENCLATURE g Gravitational constant (9.81) m/s2 h Elevation of water m pA Water column pressure at point A mm pB Water column pressure at point B mm t Time s zA Elevation relative to a datum of point A m zB Elevation relative to a datum of point B m A Area of pipes cross-section m2 D Distance mm H Elevation of water m K Loss coefficient - V Volume m3 R Radius for elbow mm ρ Liquid density kg/m3 5 .

pp 197-201. 2006.. 6 . Rainer. pp 40-53.J. E. vol. “A formulation for the flow rate of a fluid passing through an orifice plate from the First Law of Thermodynamics”. 23.A. Baade. “Water density determination in high-accuracy flowmeter calibration – Measurement uncertainties and practical aspects”.knovel. H. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation Journal. “ISA Handbook of Measurement Equations and Tables (2nd Edition)”.REFERENCES Gomez-Osorio. J. 25. 2012.. M.... vol. et al. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation Journal. ISA Online version available at: http://app. 2013.