You are on page 1of 5


The aim of the practical is to determine the pressure drop in pipes having
different roughness values and the velocity of the fluid in rough and smooth pipes with
different inner diameters.

 Hydraulic bench.
 Stop watch
 Centrifugal pump
This unit is designed to study the behavior of closed flow. It makes it possible to
study pressure drops in pipes as well as in different hydraulic accessories.

Figure 01: AFT/AFTB/AFTC/AFTP unit

Two type of flow may exist in a pipe.
1. Laminar flow regime at low velocities where hf α v
2. Turbulent flow regime at higher velocities where hf α vn
hf = head loss due to friction
v = Average velocity of the fluid [m/s]
For a circular pipe flowing in full, the head loss due to the friction may be
calculated from the formula (1), called as Darcy Weisbach equation. This
low is used to calculated the friction coefficient. It is determined by :
hf = f.(L).(v2) -------------------(1)
(D) (2g)
hf = h1 - h2 -------------------(2)
h1 = Height of the water column at the beginning of the pipe [m]
h2 = Height of the water column at the end of the pipe [m]
f = Friction coefficient [dimensionless]
L = Length of the pipe [m]
D = Inner diameter of the pipe [m]
g = Acceleration due to gravity [m/s2]
The velocity of the flow can be written as follows:
V = Q = 4Q -----------------(3)

Where :
A = Area of the cross section [m2]
V = Average velocity of the fluid [m/s]
D = Inner diameter of the pipe [m]
Moody chart is used to obtain the friction factor. It represent the friction factor f a
function of the Reynold’s number and the relative roughness.
Relative roughness = Absolute roughness/diameter of the pipe.
Reynolds number, Re, is defined as
Re = ρvD ------------------ (4)
ρ = The fluid density [kg/m3]
v = Average velocity of the fluid [m/s]
D = The pipe diameter [m]
μ = The dynamic viscosity [kg/m.s]
The kinematic viscosity v and dynamic viscosity μ can be related by means of the
following expression:
Re = vD
 Hydraulic bench was connected to the AFT/AFTB/AFTC/AFTP.
 The “mushroom button” was activated of the hydraulic bench with the
V1,V2,V3,V4,V5,V6,V7 and the regulation valve number 23 was closed.
 The unit and the switch were connected on the pump
 The V1 valve was opened and wait until all the air from the pipe was expelled.
 The pressure taps of the corresponding manometer was connected to the inlet and
outlet of pipe number 2. The manometric cube was chosen when there are water
column difference lower than 800mm.
 Readings were taken of different flow rates. Altering the regulation valve number
 Flow rates were measured by volumetric tank. For small flow rates use measuring
cylinder. Head losses between the tapping were measured by the manometer.
 Readings were obtained on all four smooth pipes.

In the trial 1 for pipe with diameter 0.017 m

t = 60 s D = 0.017 m Q = 0.28 m3/s

𝑉 =
4 × 0.28
𝑉 =
𝜋 × 0.0172
𝑉 = 1.233 𝑚/𝑠

𝑅𝑒 =
1000 × 1.233 × 0.017
𝑅𝑒 =
8.9 × 10−4
𝑅𝑒 = 23553

From Moody chart;

𝑓 = 0.0328
𝐿 𝑣2
ℎ𝑓 = 𝑓 ( ) ( )
𝐷 2𝑔
1 1.2332
ℎ𝑓 = 0.0328 ( )( )
0.017 2 × 9.81
ℎ𝑓 (𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 ) = 0.149 𝑚
After calculations were done we compare the head losses which were
obtained from experimental and calculated. Almost all measured head losses are greater
than corresponding calculated head loss. But in smooth low diameter experiment results
show confliction on above results because it has higher calculated values especially at
higher flow rates. That shows at the higher flow rates measured pressure drops has a
certain limit in low diameter pipes.
The sources of errors were mainly due to human error, and equipment
limitations. The time measured using the stopwatch might be wrong due to reaction of
human when using the stop watch. A time lag or excess time could have easily been
introduced into the time recorded. The volume of water collected might be more due to
human reaction time in removing the measuring cylinder away from the pipe. Other than
that parallax error could have occurred when taking reading of the manometer and the
volume of water in the measuring cylinder. Equipment limitations cannot be neglected
because it would have caused significant errors to the results obtained. One of the possible
errors was that minor losses in the pipe due to pipe fittings were assumed to be negligible.
However, in reality, these minor losses will be significant. As a result, errors were
introduced into our calculations which would affect the results of the experiment. Other
than that, air bubbles were seen to develop inside the pipe. This could have resulted in
fluctuations of the liquid level in the manometer. The value taken might have varied from
the actual value. Furthermore, the temperature measured might also be inaccurate, and
could have given rise to wrong estimations for the values of density and viscosity of water.
We can observe linear connection between fiction factor and Reynolds
number in the laminar region and also less relative roughness. At high Reynolds number
friction factor converges to a value even though less relative roughness. So the constant
relative roughness lines have curve shape.

[1]"Pipe Head Loss - Head Loss - Pipes - Fluid Mechanics - Engineering Reference with
Worked Examples",, 2019. [Online]. Available:
head-loss.php. [Accessed: 06- Jul- 2019].