VII.

DATA AND RESULTS

The data gathered from the experiment are shown below in tabulated form from table 1 to table 3.
The first table(table1) presents the data collected from the laminar flow basing from pretreatment of the
flow regime while table 2 presents the data for turbulent flow. The last table(table 3) are the data drawn
upon the set up for different probe distances.

Table 1.

Diameter Probe
Manomet
of diff. Flow manomet
Tube er
Cross- rate(L/ er
no. levels(m
section(m s) level(m
m)
m) m)
1 10 0.0125 158.6 160
2 10.6 0.0125 158.9 160
3 11.3 0.0125 159.3 160
4 12.4 0.0125 159.5 160
5 14.6 0.0125 159.7 160
6 25 0.0125 159.99 160

Table 2.

Diameter Probe
Manomet
of diff. Flow manomet
er
Tube Cross- rate(L/s er
levels(m
no. section(m ) level(mm
m)
m) )
0.18450
1 10 2 5.3 307
0.18450
2 10.6 2 62.5 307
0.18450
3 11.3 2 66.5 307
Table 3. 0.18450
4 12.4 2 122.5 307
Diameter of Area of Manomete Probe
0.18450Flow Probe Fluid
Tube diff. Cross- cross r manomete
5 14.6 2 rate(L/s212.5
distanc 307 velocity
no. section(mm section levels(mm r
0.18450 ) e (mm) (m/s)
) 6 (mm^2) ) level(mm)
25 2 291.6 307
2.274730
1 10 78.54 31 0.18245 58.5 295 8
 2.132416
2 10.6 88.247544 71 0.18245 60.1 303 5
100.28772 2.090645
3 11.3 6 84 0.18245 63 307 8
120.76310 1.883507
4 12.4 4 129 0.18245 67.3 310 4
167.41586 1.290736
5 14.6 4 222 0.18245 75.4 307 2
6 25 490.875 302 0.18245 125 311 0.42

VIII. TREATMENT OF RESULTS

The table below is the result of the treated data of table 1 and table 2 for data and results. The calculation
of Reynolds number is added for the flow regime. Actual Fluid velocity is the average velocity calculated
from the measure flow rate, the time it takes to fill a 1 liter beaker, and the diameter of the different cross
sections. Furthermore, the density and viscosity were calculated from Perry’s Chemical engineers’
Handbook at 25oC. The Fluid velocity calculated from Bernoulli and % difference of the velocities are
added up for further analysis.

Table 4

Diameter Fluid
Manomete Probe Actual
of diff. velocity
Tube Flow r manomete Fluid %
Cross- Nre calculate
no. rate(L/s) levels(mm r velocity difference
section(m d from
) level(mm) (mm/s)
m) bernoulli
1738.646 159.154
1 10 0.0125 158.6 160 7 6 165.6502 4.081355
1640.232
2 10.6 0.0125 158.9 160 7 141.647 146.8332 3.661382
1538.625 124.641
3 11.3 0.0125 159.3 160 4 4 117.1324 6.02446
1402.134 103.508
4 12.4 0.0125 159.5 160 4 4 98.99495 4.3605
1190.853 74.6643
5 14.6 0.0125 159.7 160 9 7 76.68116 2.701139
695.4586 25.4647
6 25 0.0125 159.99 160 7 3 14 45.022
0.18450 25662.70 2349.14
1 10 2 5.3 307 3 7 2431.732 3.51553
0.18450 24210.09 2090.73
2 10.6 2 62.5 307 7 2 2189.109 4.705385
 0.18450 22710.35 1839.72
3 11.3 2 66.5 307 7 7 2171.129 18.01366
0.18450 20695.72 1527.80
4 12.4 2 122.5 307 8 1 1901.631 24.46849
0.18450 17577.19 1102.05
5 14.6 2 212.5 307 4 8 1360.956 23.49218
0.18450 10265.08 375.863
6 25 2 291.6 307 1 5 549.3997 46.16999

The table below represents the treated data of table 3 in data and results and summarizes the different
important points to be considered.

Table 5

Diameter Probe
Area of Manomet
of diff. Flow Probe manomet Fluid
Tube cross er
Cross- rate(L/s distanc er velocity
no. section levels(mm
section(m ) e (mm) level(mm (m/s)
(mm^2) )
m) )
0.1824 2.274730
1 10 78.54 31 5 58.5 295 8
0.1824 2.132416
2 10.6 88.247544 71 5 60.1 303 5
100.28772 0.1824 2.090645
3 11.3 6 84 5 63 307 8
120.76310 0.1824 1.883507
4 12.4 4 129 5 67.3 310 4
167.41586 0.1824 1.290736
5 14.6 4 222 5 75.4 307 2
0.1824
6 25 490.875 302 5 125 311 0.42
 The table below presents the treated data of table 1 for the theoretical head. The computation of
the dynamic head was calculated using the actual velocity. Theoretical head is the sum of the dynamic
and measured static head.

Table 6

Measured Calculated
Actual Theoretical Measured theoretical %
Static Dynamic
Velocity head head Difference
head head
158.6 1.292356464 159.1546 159.8923565 160 0.0673225
158.9 1.02366697 141.647 159.923667 160 0.0477309
0.0578580
159.3 0.792626459 124.6414 160.0926265 160 4
0.0291365
159.5 0.546632085 103.5084 160.0466321 160 6
159.7 0.284426946 74.66437 159.9844269 160 0.0097341
0.0144256
159.99 0.03308431 25.46473 160.0230843 160 1
5.3 281.5556953 2349.147 286.8556953 307 7.0224524
62.5 223.0183824 2090.732 285.5183824 307 7.5237249
66.5 172.6834405 1839.727 239.1834405 307 28.353367
122.5 119.0906069 1527.801 241.5906069 307 27.074477
212.5 61.96590997 1102.058 274.46591 307 11.8536
291.6 7.207825032 375.8635 298.807825 307 2.74162

IX. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

The Bernoulli equation states that,

where points 1 and 2 lie on a streamline, the fluid has constant density, the flow is steady, and there is no
friction. These assumptions made seem severe but although the simplicity of the equation gives the major
importance of giving great insight into the balance between pressure, velocity and elevation.When there is
no elevation the potential energy is zero thus the Bernoulli equation give, respectively,

In table 4 the calculation of the actual velocity was derived from the measured flow rate and the diameter
of cross section specified in the apparatus while the velocity from Bernoulli was derived from the
equation above. In comparison of these velocities taking into account the type of flow, it can be noted that
the flow is more applicable for laminar flow. It is evident in table 4 considering the % difference, that as
the flow rate together with the Reynolds number increases the percent error or difference goes high.
Although taking into account the last reading for the laminar flow which is 159.99mm, it can be noted of
the high difference. This is because of the graduation of the apparatus’s manometer; the reading becomes
harsh and difficult. However it is still able to imply that laminar flow is more applicable for the Bernoulli
equation for the reason that eddies formed in turbulent flow causes the velocity stream to move rapidly
anywhere in the flow system. Turbulent flow will somehow violate the assumption made that fluid must
be of constant density, thus considering the directionless nature of turbulent flow in the presence of
vortices and eddies it cannot assure the consistency of density at different points in the flow system.

Table 5 represents the data for convergence and divergence. Consider the steady, flow of a constant
density fluid in a converging duct, without losses due to friction. The flow therefore satisfies all the
restrictions governing the use of Bernoulli's equation. Upstream and downstream of the contraction makes
the one-dimensional assumption that the velocity is constant over the inlet and outlet areas and parallel.
When streamlines are parallel the pressure is constant across them, except for hydrostatic head differences
if we ignore gravity, then the pressures over the inlet and outlet areas are constant. Along a streamline on
the centreline In the Bernoulli equation and the one-dimensional continuity equation, it is implied that in
theory the velocity of the fluid will increase while the pressure of the fluid and cross section flow area
will decrease. Evident in table 5 that from tube 1 to tube 6 with cross sectional area increasing the fluids
velocity decreases. Convergent flow happens in from tube 6 to 1 for the gradual decrease of the diameter
of cross section together with its area. While divergence is the opposite of convergence, it happens at tube
1 to 6 where there is a gradual increase in cross sectional area.

Bernoulli's equation leads to some interesting conclusions regarding the variation of pressure along a
streamline. Consider a steady flow impinging on a perpendicular plate .There is one streamline that
divides the flow in half: above this streamline all the flow goes over the plate, and below this streamline
all the flow goes under the plate. Along this dividing streamline, the fluid moves towards the plate. Since
the flow cannot pass through the plate, the fluid must come to rest at the point where it meets the plate. In
other words, it ``stagnates.'' The fluid along the dividing, or ``stagnation streamline'' slows down and
eventually comes to rest without deflection at the stagnation point. The stagnation point in this
experiment is at point 7 presenting the probe manometer level. At this point velocity is zero and every
point in a steadily flowing fluid, regardless of the fluid speed at that point, has its own unique static
pressure (p) and dynamic pressure (q). The significance of Bernoulli's principle can now be summarized
as total pressure is constant along a streamline. Evident in table 6, the total pressure represented by the
theoretical head is nearly constant for the laminar flow. If the fluid flow is irrotational, the total pressure
on every streamline is the same and Bernoulli's principle can be summarized as total pressure is constant
everywhere in the fluid flow. It is reasonable to assume that irrotational flow exists in any situation where
a large body of fluid is flowing past a solid body. Examples are aircraft in flight, and ships moving in
open bodies of water. However, it is important to remember that Bernoulli's principle does not apply in
the boundary layer or in fluid flow through long pipes

X. ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

1. Do the computed heads agree with the total head probe? If they differ, what are the reasons?

The computed heads agree with the total head probe in the laminar flow evident in Table 6.
However, there were some deviations from the theoretical head in the turbulent flow. This may be
caused by the formation of eddies in this type of flow. Thus, the density along the streamline
would not be constant. Deviations may also be caused by instrumental error, as leaks can be
observed. Error may also be caused by the difficulty of reading the manometer levels.

2. Comment on the validity of the Bernoulli Equation for the system tested for (a) convergent flow (b)
divergent flow.

(a) For a fluid under convergent flow, Bernoulli’s equation suggests that the velocity increases as
the area is decreased. The result of the experiment confirms this because the velocity is highest at
the point where the cross sectional area of the converging duct is lowest.

(b) For a divergent flow, Bernoulli’s equation suggests that the velocity decreases as the area is
increased. Similar with the convergent flow, the experiment confirms this because the velocity is
lowest at the point where the cross sectional area is highest.

XI. FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

The Bernoulli Equation is governed by the assumptions that the two points under observation lie
on a streamline, the fluid has constant density, the fluid flow is steady and is frictionless. Results show
that there is a significant percentage error for turbulent flow because under this condition, eddies cause
the fluid to move rapidly in the system. Thus, it somehow violates the assumption that the fluid must be
of constant density. We therefore conclude the Bernoulli equation is more applicable for laminar flow.
Using a higher flow rate, a higher deviation from the theoretical velocity was observed. Thus, higher
velocity that caused cross-currents and eddies in the flow system affects fluid properties which resulted
to a decreased validity of the Bernoulli equation.