Experiment No.

1
Pipe Surge
Abstract
The objective of the work undertaken consisted of an experiment of pipe surge. This is caused by
a reduction in the flow rate within a pipe. There are dissipations in potential energy in the case of
the surge shaft. The surge shaft is used as a way to avoiding the pressure surges that accompany
with the water hammer effect, which allows the fluid up a shaft near the valve, thus absorbing
the pressure on the valve and also pipe exerted by the liquid when it flows with large speed. The
aim of this experiment was to compare the results with the theory. So in this experiment, we
were assigned to measure the surge height (amplitude) and oscillations period experimentally
and then to compare with theoretical results. Theoretical value of time period is less as compared
to experimental values in each surge level. All these experimental values were not similar
slightly due to human error in reading out the time, friction losses in the system which cause to
differ the values experimentally.
Key words: Reduction in flow rate, potential energy, pressure, human error, friction losses

Aims/Objectives
To compare the measured surge height and oscillation period with the theoretical
predictions

Introduction
Surge is a useful technique to changes the speed or velocity in the pipeline resulting in increase
or decrease in the pressure. It depends on either velocity of fluid is increased or decreased
suddenly. Its operation can cause the failure in the system if it is not designed across its
limitations. While Surge towers also called surge tanks are essential parts of the hydropower
with high head and they protect the system of low pressure from internally high pressure. This
tank is also used to minimize the hazards to the system created by the two factors change in
pressure and water hammer in the closed pipes. This happens due to the different reasons or
problems occurring in the system which are not highly required like when we open or close the
path of water and this cause acceleration and deceleration of water respectively. Also we can say
that it happens when velocity of water rapidly change by other source in the system. Water
hammer phenomena comes in use when the power system just abrupt rejection in load due to
which mass of water in that system will get decelerated. The surge towers are used to decrease
gradually waves of high pressure and then resisting their creation in the low pressure system
also. Surge tanks can be used to decrease the distance between free water surface and inlet of the
turbine. It helps in reducing the intensity of waves produced by water hammers and also
reduction of load for turbine water level will increase upto the main level in the reservoir. But in
case of increment in turbine load, our chamber will be a reservoir which actually enables the
turbine to increase the load. Use of surge technique demands various conditions where it could
be designed.

Apparatus
Apparatus used in this experiment is:
Hydraulic Bench, MTFM-12, Suitable PC and VDAS Hardware (CIM)

Description of Apparatus:
MTFM-12 setup for this experiment contains different component like surge tower with
graduated scale, surge valve across the measuring tank, surge pipe from the header tank (with
valve, float, level indicator and inlet pipe from the supply) and power supply to run all the setup.
Also one personal computer is necessary connected to the VDAS-B (Computer Interface
Module). This PC will display all the results through this hardware setup when the experiment is
being run.
Figure 1: Set up for Pipe Surge
Hydraulic Bench are used for the measurement of water discharges to the other setup which is
actually less than that of theoretical. Header tank is connected to 4 types of pipes (surge,
overflow, water hammer and inlet pipe). Inside this tank, there are valve from the Inlet pipe, float
and level indicator. All the pipes are clipped by pipe clips in the mid of these pipes from header
tank to surge tower. Surge tower connected to CH1 transducer is situated in the path of surge
flow pipe. In this region there is surge valve which controls the flow of the fluid. This transducer
will change the physical signal into an electrical signal. Fluid supply to the header tank is
basically given by Hydraulic Bench through an inlet valve and this fluid returns to Hydraulic
Bench through the path of surge pipe after an experiment.

Figure 2: Plan view of apparatus

Methodology
All the setup of the experiment is shown in figure 1. First we closed both surge and flow control
valve shown in setup 2 of the experiment. Then we opened the supply of water from the
hydraulic bench through inlet pipe and reservoir is filled upto 620 mm. Both surge tower and
reservoir showed the same readings. Using hardware setup, we opened pipe surge experiment
after selecting the H405 layout. The value on the channel of VDAS was similar as on the scale of
surge tower. We allowed the small water flow through surge pipe by opening surge valve again
to the Hydraulic Bench. We kept adjusting the valve until scale reading is 550 mm lower than
reservoir level. Again we allow the flow to stabilize the level at same readings. Volume flow
rate leaving surge pipe was measured by Hydraulic Bench. We displayed the values of volume
flow rate and both levels on the VDAS channel for finding the velocity and head loss. VDAS
gave oscillations by shutting the surge supply down quickly. We waited until the oscillations
dropped to zero within in a minute and level became same as in the reservoir. The cursors in the
VDAS are used to measure time period and surge height. We entered these values into these
values into VDAS and it gave us the head loss called the surge amplitude. We repeated the
experiment for further four times against different lower level of the surge tower. At the end we
turned off the supply of water and opened all the valves/drains.

Theory
Amplitude, time period and frequency can be found by using these given formulas;

As
R= Eq. 1
Ap

LR
T =2 π
√ g
Eq. 2

1 g
f=
2π √ LR
Eq. 3

L
Amplitude=V
√ Rg
Eq. 4

Where R is area ratio, V is flow velocity.

Data, Results and Graphs
Head loss and Volume Flow Rate
This graph shows the nonlinear behavior between head loss and volume flow rate or you can say
for very limited time, there is linear behavior. It is obvious from the graph that head loss
increases as volume flow rate increases.

Figure 3: Head loss vs. Volume Flow Rate

Theoretical and Experimental Time Period

Time period can be found by using this formula with value of length and area’s ratio

LR
T =2 π
√ g
Putting all the values of L, R and g; we get

3× 4.45
T =2 π
√ 9.81
T =7.329 s
But the experimental value of time period for different surge level of water is not similar to the
theoretical value and those values are greater than the theoretical value in each surge level. It is
because of the friction losses and human error while taking the readings especially.

Amplitude and Volume Flow Rate

This graph shows different behavior for the experimental and theoretical amplitude with volume
flow rate. It is obvious that theoretical amplitude shows linear relationship with volume flow
while experimental amplitude shows nonlinear relationship with volume flow rate. Also we can
observe that experimental values of amplitude are less than that of theoretical values.

Figure 4: Amplitude vs. Volume Flow Rate

Pressure Surges Impact and Control
Pressure Surges place stress on the piping system and its materials and all the joints and can be
reason for the physical movement that system. We should make such design that at least can
controls and maintain this pressure on the piping system and hence reducing the physical
movement.

Conclusions
During the experiment and theoretical calculations, we observed some changes in the values of
surge height, amplitude and pressure rise. They are not similar to each other because of the
uncertainty of the system and human error also. As man is always not perfect in his doings due to
occurrence of slight discrepancies in the system designed. But the error can be made less by
repeating the experiment again. Therefore if the experiment is going to be repeated to get better
accuracy for the result may be extra dependable and trustful to apply. We observed two changes
in the experiment which are, theoretical time period is less than experimental time period and
experimental amplitude is less than theoretical amplitude both having different behavior with
volume flow rate.

References
1. https://www.omega.co.uk/techref/waterhammer.html
2. https://www.ukessays.com/essays/biology/the-pipe-surge-and-water-hammer-
experiment-biology-essay.php
3. https://www.advanceengineeringlab.com/pipe-surge-and-water-hammer-apparatus-
2537299.html
4. https://www.fluidmechanics.co.uk/surge-analysis/
5. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00221686.2017.1289267?src=recsys
6. https://www.dft-valves.com/blog/consequences-solutions-water-hammer/

Bibliography
1. Miroslav Marence and others published Book review: Hydraulics in Civil
and Environmental Engineering, 5th edition 
2. Hydraulics in Civil and Environmental Engineering: Andrew Chadwick, John Morfett,
Martin Borthwick
3. Douglas JF, Gasiorek JM and Swaffield JA, Fluid Mechanics, 4th ed, Prentice Hall,
2001. (ISBN 0582414768)
4. Massey, B, Mechanics of Fluids, 8th ed, Taylor & Francis, 2006 (ISBN 0-415-36206)
Experiment No. 2
Water Hammer
Abstract
In the experiment, we studied the impact of water hammer on the piping system. In fact water
hammer is a damage of the system which is due to some improper use of piping components. We
observed that when we open or close the fluid path very instantly then there are increase in speed
and also pressure rise which can cause for the failure of the system overall. Then we learnt how
to control and reduce these failure in the piping system by using the resting tool which can hold
the quick closing valve. We must understand the situations when these cause occurs and how to
tackle with that problem or failure of the system. On the other hand we also find the values of
acoustic velocity, pressure rise and amplitude and then compared them with theoretical values.
These experimental values were not similar slightly due to human error in reading out the time,
friction losses in the system which cause to differ the values experimentally. We almost observed
16 to 18 % changes in the values.
Key words: Piping system, acoustic velocity, pressure rise, human error, friction losses

Aims/Objectives
 To compare the experimental/measured amplitude of pressure with theoretical predictions
 To calculate the speed of the pressure surge along the pipe.

Introduction
In the piping system, when we change speed or velocity of the fluid flowing through the pipe
suddenly then pressure waves are produced. We observe water hammer in the situation where
there is a risk of quick stop or start of the fluid flow means change in the direction. Very sudden
opening or closing of control valves and when pump is stopped rapidly can produce water
hammer ultimately. It depends on time that whether it is short or not. If it is very less in the sense
to make rapid change then the chances of water hammer will also increase. It is also depends on
the size of the valves and pipes. Small size and less time for opening and closing of valves can
cause water hammer more than the case of large size and time for opening and closing of the
valves. Physical properties of the fluid also responsible for the cause of water hammer. It means
higher dense fluids can create this effect heavily than the low dense fluid where it means the
compressibility is less. These produced waves can be of pressure which is even five times greater
than the working pressure. This pressure value can exceed the speed of sound three to four times
which can burst the working pump or pipeline. It also can fracture the fittings of the pipe. So we
must have to understand the conditions or situations when these waves are produced and then
how to control or reduce these pressure waves in the piping system.

Apparatus
Apparatus or equipment used for this experiment is;
MTFM-12, Suitable PC and VDAS Hardware (CIM)

Description of Apparatus
MTFM-12 setup for this experiment contains different component like water hammer pipe, quick
closing and water hammer control valve across the water measuring tank, the header tank (with
valve, float, level indicator and inlet pipe from the supply) and power supply to run all the setup.
Also one personal computer is necessary connected to the VDAS-B (Computer Interface
Module). This PC will display all the results through this hardware setup when the experiment is
being run.

Figure 5: Set up for Water Hammer

Methodology
All the setup and equipment is shown in figure below. We closed both the valve surge and water
hammer (flow control) valve. We started the pump running and opened the supply or inlet valve
to fill up the reservoir upto the maximum level. Then we inserted the resting tool which kept the
quick closing valve for the specific time we required. Air is bleed by using the quick closing
valve and retightening from the system. Bleed air from the system using the quick-closing valve
and retighten. Inlet valve is fully opened for the maximum flow. Hydraulic Bench used to
measure the value of flow rate from returning pipe. With device toolbar button, we clicked on the
Initiate Communications and entered the value of Volume Flow rate. We remove the resting tool
by holding the closing valve. We pressed down the plunger on the top of that valve. VDAS just
captured the path of wave from each pressure transducers. The cursors used to measure the
value of time taken and then put into VDAS hardware. This hardware calculated wave velocity,
value of the flow velocity and then theoretical pressure amplitude for water is calculated at given
density. We repeated the experiment once more with taking the readings this time also. At the
end we turned off the supply of water and opened all the valves/drains.

Theory
As we know that water hammer is produced when the pressure waves pass through the pipe. In
the figure below, “a” is acoustic velocity which is generated by the quick closing of the fluid
flow. V is undisturbed velocity and it is set to rest before the pressure waves. We will illustrate
this phenomena through the figure below;

Figure 6: Pressure rise and Acoustic velocity display

In the figure, flow is moving toward wave with speed V+a and moving away from the wave with
“a” velocity, so there will also be change in pressure which is given as:
 δp
δp Eq. 1
ρ

Mass continuity becomes,

ṁ=ρA ( V + a˙)=( ρ+ δ p ) Aa Eq. 2

δp V
=
ρ a
Using the formula;
Theoretical pressure rise = 14.67 bar
As acoustic velocity is more greater than normal flow velocity,

ṁ=ρAa
Momentum equation becomes.

{ ρ−¿ Eq. 3

δ p A=mV
˙ Eq. 4

Subtracting the equation;

aV
δ p=ρaV ∨dh=
K
And acoustic velocity can be found from the formula given below;

K
a=
√ ρ
Eq. 5

K for water is 2.15 ×109 N/m2 and density of water is 1000 kg/m3.
 2.15 ×10 9 = 1470 ms-1
a=
√ 1000
1 1 D
= +
K ' K tE
Where K ' is effective modulus, t is thickness and E is modulus of elasticity.
Also we can say that;
∆ P=ρaV

OR
aV
∆ h= Eq. 6
K

Where K is the bulk modulus.

Given Data
Table 1: Given data for water hammer

Sr. No Item Property Details/Value

1 Water Hammer Pipe Material Hard-drawn Brass
Young’s Modulus (E) 103 x 109 N.m-2
Inner Diameter (D) 22.2mm
Wall Thickness (t) 1.6mm
Cross section Area (A) 0.387 x 10-3m2
Approx. distance between 1.5m
transducers
2 Surge Supply Pipe Length between reservoir and surge 3m
tower (L)
Inner diameter 21.1mm
Cross sectional Area (Ap) 0.3497 x 10-3m2
3 Surge Tower Inner Diameter 44.5mm
Cross sectional Area (As) 1.5553 x 10-3m2

Results Analysis
When we calculate the theoretical values of the acoustic value using the bulk modulus and
density values for water as a fluid, the theoretical formula gives 1470 m/s -1 while after
performing the experiment we got its value equal to 1209.1 meters per second. It is obvious that
experimental value of acoustic velocity is less than that of theoretical value by the difference of
200+ meters per second. We can observe that there is almost 17.75% decrease in the
experimental value as compared to theoretical value. On the other hand, theoretical pressure is
14.67 bar while experimental pressure rise is 17.56 bar. But in this case we can observe that there
is theoretical value is less than experimental value of pressure rise by 16.46%. It is due to
different reasons. It happens when there is human error and friction losses during the experiment
while theoretically we ignore the friction losses.
Water hammer can cause critical damage to pipelines, pipe joints gaskets, and all different
additives of the machine-like drift meters and the pressure gauges. On the contact to the surface,
these strain spikes can without difficulty exceed 5 to 10 times almost the working pressure of
that piping system, while placing a superb amount of stress at the system.

Conclusions
During the experiment and theoretical calculations, we observed some changes in the values of
acoustic velocity and pressure rise. They are not similar to each other because of the uncertainty
of the system and human error also. As man is always not perfect in his doings due to occurrence
of slight discrepancies. But the error can be made less by repeating the task again. Therefore if
the experiment is going to be repeated to get better accuracy for the result may be extra
dependable and trustful to apply.

References
7. https://www.omega.co.uk/techref/waterhammer.html
8. https://www.ukessays.com/essays/biology/the-pipe-surge-and-water-hammer-
experiment-biology-essay.php
9. https://www.advanceengineeringlab.com/pipe-surge-and-water-hammer-apparatus-
2537299.html
10. https://www.fluidmechanics.co.uk/surge-analysis/
11. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00221686.2017.1289267?src=recsys
12. https://www.dft-valves.com/blog/consequences-solutions-water-hammer/

Bibliography
5. Miroslav Marence and others published Book review: Hydraulics in Civil
and Environmental Engineering, 5th edition 
6. Hydraulics in Civil and Environmental Engineering: Andrew Chadwick, John Morfett,
Martin Borthwick
7. Douglas JF, Gasiorek JM and Swaffield JA, Fluid Mechanics, 4th ed, Prentice Hall,
2001. (ISBN 0582414768)
8. Massey, B, Mechanics of Fluids, 8th ed, Taylor & Francis, 2006 (ISBN 0-415-36206)