Fluids Handling

Simplified Analysis of
Water Hammer
Alejandro Anaya Durand Use this graphical method to quickly
Mauricio Marquez Lucero
Maria del Carmen Rojas Ocampo
and reliably determine the main data —
Carlos David Ramos Vilchis wave celerity, critical time, maximum
Gonzalez Vargas Maria de Lourdes
National Autonomous University of Mexico
head developed in the maximum
pressure time and the minimum head
developed in the critical time —
produced by water hammer.

W
ater hammer is generally defined as a pressure ty, ft/s; and g is the gravitational acceleration constant, ft/s2.
surge or wave caused by the kinetic energy of a The volumetric flow is given as:
fluid in motion when it is forced to stop or
change direction suddenly, such as in the slow or abrupt Q = vA (2)
startup or shutdown of a pump system. It can also occur
because of other operating conditions, such as turbine fail- where A is the flow area, ft2. A can be defined as:
ure, pipe breakage or electric power interruption to the
pump’s motor. A = πDi2/4 (3)
Today, informatics methods are commonly used to per-
form complex water hammer calculations. However, the where Di is the internal diameter of the pipe, in. Substituting
lack of information about certain physical flow properties, Eqs. 2 and 3 into Eq. 1 and solving for a, yields:
as well as the intricacy in handling complicated equations 2 2
make this phenomena analysis difficult. The objective of ⎛ g π ⎞ ⎛ hw maxε ⎞ ⎛ Di ⎞
a=⎜ (4 )
this paper is to provide a practical and simplified method- ⎝ 4 ⎟⎠ ⎜⎝ Q ⎟⎠ ⎜⎝ ε ⎟⎠
ology to calculate four main phenomenon parameters of where ε is the pipe thickness, in.
water hammer: Eq. 4 can then be rewritten as:
• velocity of the pressure wave or celerity 1
2
• phenomena critical time ⎛ ⎞
• maximum head developed in the maximum pressure time ⎜ 1 ⎟
a=⎜ ⎟ (5 )
• minimum head developed in the critical time. ⎜ ⎛ ρ ⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎛ D ⎞ ⎛ C1 ⎞ ⎞ ⎟
⎜⎝ ⎜⎝ g ⎟⎠ ⎜⎝ K + ⎜⎝ ε ⎟⎠ ⎜⎝ E ⎟⎠ ⎟⎠ ⎟⎠
Equations and basic considerations
One of the most basic equations for the maximum pres- where ρ is the density, lb/ft3; K is the liquid compressibility
sure gradient calculation is Joukowsky’s equation: volume factor, lb/in2; C1 is Poisson’s ratio; and E is the
maximum yield stress, lb/in2. These equations were used to
hw max = (a)(v)/g (1) generate Figures 1–3.
When the valve that stops the fluid flow is closed in a time
where: hw max is the maximum fluid elevation head to water slower than the critical time (this reduces the effect of water
hammer, ft; a is the wave celerity, ft/s; v is the flow veloci- hammer), the Allievi equation is used:

40 www.aiche.org/cep December 2006 CEP

 ho 2
∆h =
2
(
C ± C (4 + C2 )
0.5
) the right side to determine the quotient value tc/L. The
(6 )
value of hw maxε2/Q is determined by observing the value
LV of the vertical curve at which D/ε and the density in
C= (7) °API meets. With the knowledge of the value of hw
gh0t c
max
ε2/Q, the maximum pressure with instant valve closing
4Q time can be obtained. This value should be added to the
v= (8 )
π Di2 system’s pressure to determine the system overpressure.
The maximum and the minimum head, with different
where: C is a valve constant; h0 is the head pump, ft; L is valves closing can be calculated using Figure 4, which
the length, ft; V is the velocity, ft; and tc is the time to close plots the pump head against the maximum pump head to
the valve. Substituting Eqs. 7 and 8 into Eq. 6 results in: water hammer. It also shows a family of curves with dif-
ferent LQ/D2tc values. Knowing the values
⎛ ⎛ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎛ 4 ⎞ ⎛ LQ ⎞ ⎞ 2 ⎞ for the pump head and LQ/D2tc, the maxi-
⎜⎜⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ 2 ⎟⎟ ± ⎟ mum and minimum pressure that the system
h ⎝ gπ ⎠ ⎝ Di t c ⎠ ⎠
ho ⎜ ⎝ ⎝ o ⎠ ⎟
∆h = ⎜ 2 0.5
⎟ (9 ) can handle can be determined by drawing a
2 ⎜ ⎛ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎛ 4 ⎞ ⎛ LQ ⎞ ⎞ ⎛ ⎛ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎛ 4 ⎞ ⎛ LQ ⎞ ⎞ ⎞ ⎟ horizontal line from the point that the pump
⎜⎜⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ 2 ⎟⎟ ⎜4 + ⎜⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ 2 ⎟⎟ ⎟ ⎟ head and LQ/D2tc intersects.
⎜⎝ ⎝ ⎝ ho ⎠ ⎝ gπ ⎠ ⎝ Di t c ⎠ ⎠ ⎜⎝ ⎝ ⎝ ho ⎠ ⎝ gπ ⎠ ⎝ Di t c ⎠ ⎠ ⎟⎠ ⎟⎠

Methodology
The simplified graphic
methodology is based on
the simple nomograms
developed for pipeline
transportation of hydrocar-
bons (piping API-5L-X52
of carbonated steel).
Figures 1–3 plot the wave
celerity on the y-axis and
the diameter divided by the
Nomenclature
a = wave celerity, ft/s L = length, ft
A = flow area, ft2 Q = volumetric flow, ft3/s
C = valve constant as defined by the Allievi Eq. t = close time valve, s c
C = Poisson’s ratio 1
v = flow velocity, ft/s
D = internal diameter, in. i
V = velocity, ft/s
E = maximum yield stress, lb/in2 X = value of the quotient obtained in Figure 4
g = gravitational acceleration constant, ft/s2
h = pump head, ft o
Greek Letters
h = fluid elevation head to water hammer, ft µ = pipe thickness, in.
w

K = liquid compressibility volume factor, lb/in.2 ρ = density, lb/ft3

pipe thickness in the x-axis
for commercial LPG, crude
-4
oil and water, respectively. 2,800.0 7.1x10

Also plotted in Figures 1–3 90 °API -4

2,700.0 7.4x10
are the different values of 80 °API Valve Close Time (tc) / Length (L), s/ft
density in degrees (°API) 2,600.0 70 °API 7.7x10 -4

and the quotient value,

Wave Celerity (a), ft/s

60 °API
hw maxε2/Q. Using Figures 1, 2,500.0 8.0x10 -4

50 °API
2 or 3, the maximum head
-4
at the instant the valve clos- 2,400.0 40 °API 8.3x10

es or the pump stops can be

0.80

30 °API -4
2,300.0 8.7x10
calculated. 20 °API
Given the values of D/ε
10

-4
2,200.0 9.5x10
0.70

10 °API
0.60

0.50

= 0.
0.40

0.30

0.25

and the density in °API, the

0.20

0.15

/Q

wave celerity, hw maxε2/Q -4

hw ε 2

2,100.0 9.1x10
and tc/L can be determined.
-3
2,000.0 1.0x10
This is done by drawing a
10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0
horizontal line from the
Diameter (D) / Thickness (ε)
intersection to the left side
of the figure to determine

Figure 1. Wave celerity vs. D/ε vs. valve close time for commercial liquefied propane gas (LPG; volume
the wave celerity, and to factor = 67,000 lb/in.2) in carbon steel pipe.

CEP December 2006 www.aiche.org/cep 41

Fluids Handling

Sample calculation
4,100.0 A 12-in. pipe used to 4.9x10-4
transport hydrocarbons
0.80

10
0.70

-4
0.60
4,000.0 5.0x10
0.50

= 0.
0.40
(commercial LPG with a

0.30

0.25

Valve Close Time (tc) / Length (L), s/ft

-4

0.20

/Q
3,900.0 90 °API 5.1x10
density of 51.4 lb/ft3) with

0.15

hw ε 2
3,800.0 80 °API 5.3x10 -4
40°API has a length of 12
Wave Celerity (a), ft/s

70 °API km and a flow of 25,000 -4

3,700.0 5.4x10

3,600.0
60 °API
5.6x10
bbl/d. The pipe is con- -4

50 °API structed from carbonated -4

3,500.0 5.7x10
40 °API steel API-5L-X-52 and has
-4
3,400.0 5.9x10 a constant thickness of
30 °API
3,300.0 6.1x10 0.406 in. The pump’s dis- -4

20 °API charge pressure is 400 -4

3,200.0 6.3x10
10 °API lb/in.2 and the valve section -4
3,100.0 6.5x10
closing time is 60 s.
-4
3,000.0 6.7x10 Calculate the: maximum
10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
pressure; maximum pres-
Diameter (D) / Thickness (ε) sure critical time; maxi-
mum pressure with a valve

Figure 2. Wave celerity vs. D/ε vs. valve close time for crude oil (volume factor = 150,000 lb/in. ) in2 closing time of 30 s; and
carbon steel pipe. overpressure.
Calculate the maxi-
mum pressure. First,
determine D/ε. Start by
5,700.0 3.51x10 calculating the internal -4

diameter:
0.10

-4
5,600.0 3.57x10
0.80
0.70

0.60

/Q =

5,500.0 3.64x10-4
0.50

D = 12 in. – ((2)(0.406 in.))

0.40

hw ε 2

5,400.0 3.70x10-4
0.30

= 11.18 in. = 0.93 ft

0.25

-4
5,300.0 3.77x10
0.20

Valve Close Time (tc) / Length (L), s/ft

5,200.0 3.85x10-4
90 °API Therefore:
5,100.0 3.92x10-4
80 °API
Wave Celerity (a), ft/s

5,000.0 4.00x10-4 D/ε = (11.18 in.)/(0.406 in.)

70 °API
4,900.0 4.08x10-4 = 27.53
4,800.0 60 °API 4.17x10-4

4,700.0 50 °API 4.26x10-4 The maximum system

4,600.0 4.35x10-4 pressure is:
40 °API
4,500.0 4.44x10-4
30 °API System pressure =
4,400.0 4.55x10-4
20 °API
(400 lb/in.2)(144)/(51.4 lb/ft3)
4,300.0 4.65x10-4
= 1,120.6 ft
4,200.0 10 °API 4.76x10-4

4,100.0 4.88x10-4 Calculate the maxi-

4,000.0 5.00x10-4 mum pressure critical
3,900.0 5.13x10-4 time. Using Figure 1, start-
12.0 17.0 22.0 27.0 32.0 37.0 ing at D/ε = 27.53, draw a
Diameter (D) / Thickness (ε) vertical line until it inter-
cepts the 40°API line. At
this intersection, the fol-

Figure 3. Wave celerity vs. D/ε vs. valve close time for water (volume factor = 300,000 lb/in.2) in lowing information is
carbon steel pipe. obtained:

42 www.aiche.org/cep December 2006 CEP

 Fluid Elevation Head, ft
a = 2.389 ft/s
hw max ε2/Q = 0.124 100 1,100 2,100 3,100 4,100 5,100

tc/L = 0.00083 s/ft LQ/Di2Tc(max) = 10,000

300
8,000
Maximum Elevation Head to Water Hammer, ft
Solve for hw max, given Q =
25,000 bbl/d = 1.78 ft3/s and 200 6,000
ρ = 51.4 lb/ft3 = 0.029 lb/in.3:
Pressure
4,000

100
hw max = XQ/ε2 = 2,000
0.124(1.78ft3/s)/(0.406 in./
12 in./ft)2 = 192.8 ft 0
2,000
Subpressure

The maximum over-

-100 4,000
pressure is:
6,000
1,120.6 ft + 192.8 ft = -200
8,000
1,313.4 ft
Calculate the maximum -300
10,000
pressure critical time:

Figure 4. Maximum fluid elevation head to water hammer.
tc= (tc/L)L =
(0.00083 s/ft)(39,370 ft) =
32.6 s ALEJANDRO ANAYA DURAND is professor of chemical engineering at the
National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM; Parque España 15B
Colonia Condesa, México D.F. C.P. 06140, México; Phone and fax:
Calculate the maximum pressure with a valve closing 52110385; E-mail: aanayadurand@hotmail.com). He has 40 years of
time of 30 s. experience as an educator, teaching subjects such as heat transfer,
fluid flow and project engineering. After 30 years of holding top-level
positions in project engineering, Durand retired from the Instituto
LQ/Di2tc = (39,370 ft)(1.78 ft3/s) / (0.93 ft)2 (30 s) = Mexicano del Petroleo in 1998. He is also a consultant of several
2,700.8 ft2 engineering companies. Durand is a Fellow of AIChE and holds an M.S.
in chemical engineering from UNAM. He has published more than 200
technical articles in local and international magazines, related to
Calculate the overpressure and subpressure. Knowing chemical engineering and education.
the maximum pump head value system, as well as LQ/Di2tc,
MAURICIO MARQUEZ LUCERO Is project manager for the Delta Project and
the overpressure can be determined by using Figure 4. The
Development Co. (Sur 73 No 311 bis 1 Colonia Sinatel, Del Iztapalapa,
overpressure is 108.8 ft. Therefore, the total system’s over- México D.F., C.P. 09470; Phone: 56721237; Fax: 55392883; E-mail:
pressure is 1,120.6 ft + 108.8 ft = 1,229.4 ft. Similarly, mao_marquez@hotmail.com). He is a member of the Instituto Mexicano
de Ingenieros Químicos. Lucero has published several technical articles
using Figure 4, the subpressure is 104.5 ft. Thus, the total
in local and international magazines, in chemical engineering.
system’s subpressure is 1,120.6 ft – 104.5 ft = 1,016.0 ft.
MARIA DEL CARMEN ROJAS OCAMPO is a chemical engineering student at
CEP
the National University Autonomous of Mexico (Sur 73 No 311 bis 1
Colonia Sinatel, Del Iztapalapa, México D.F., C.P. 09470; Phone:
56721237; Fax: 55392883; E-mail: maricarmen_rojasoc@hotmail.com).
Literature Cited She has published several technical articles on local and international
magazines, in chemical engineering.
1. Perry, J. H., “Chemical Engineers Handbook,” Mc Graw Hill, CARLOS DAVID RAMOS VILCHIS is a chemical engineering student at the
4th edition, pp. 6–44. National University Autonomous of Mexico (Cerrada Canal Nacional #6
2. UNAM, “Selection and Operation of Pump System,” National col. Tejomulco Nativitas C.P. 16510 Delegacion Xochimilco Mexico. D.F.;
Autonomous University of Mexico (March 1983). Phone: 21578360; E-mail: hetlos@excite.com). Presently, he
3. American Society of Civil Engineers, “Pipe Line Design for collaborates in a company dedicated to training groups for work in the
Water and Wastewater,” Pipeline Committee on Pipeline Planning chemical industry (pilot plant).
(1975).
4. Douglas, J. F., “Solution of Problems in Fluid Mechanics,” GONZALEZ VARGAS MARIA DE LOURDES is a chemical engineering
Pitman Paperbacks, pp. 109–117 (1967). student at the National University Autonomous of Mexico (México
5. Potter, M. C. and D. C. Wiggert, “Mechanics of Fluids,” Tacuba 1523 edificio Managua departamento 505 colonia Argentina
Prentice Hall, 2nd edition, p. 18 (1997). Poniente C.P.: 11230 Delegación Miguel Hidalgo México, D.F.; Phone:
55761849; Fax: 55761855).

CEP December 2006 www.aiche.org/cep 43