ENFP300 Matlab Project

Pipe Dreamers

Ted Gladkov
Julian Li
Colleen Whitcomb
Zelda Zhao

December 11, 2020

 2

PART I
GIVENS
Problem Statement:
() *
𝑄"# = 4.45
+
() *
𝑄,- = 1.11 +
() *
𝑄/01 = 3.34 +
𝑃,- = 50𝑝𝑠𝑖𝑔
𝑧"# = 𝑧,- = 15𝑚 = 49.2126𝑓𝑡
𝑧/01 = 0

Figure 1.1 - Pipe schematics and flow directions for all parts

Pipe Diameter [inches] Length [feet]

1 12 3000
2 10 3500
3 6 1000
4 8 1000
5 12 1500
Table 1.1 – Given Pipe Dimensions

Munson, Young, and Okiishi’s Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, Eight Edition:

+/,D+
Density of Water: 𝜌ABC = 1.94 () * (Table 1.5)
/F
Specific Weight of Water: 𝛾ABC = 62.4 () * (Table 1.5)
G G
Bernoulli Equation: 𝑝G + 𝜌𝑉GI + 𝛾𝑧G = 𝑝I + 𝜌𝑉II + 𝛾𝑧I (Equation 3.17)
I I
Continuity Equation: 𝑄 = 𝐴𝑉L (Equation 5.13)
 3

ASSUMPTIONS
The flow is steady, inviscid, incompressible, and along a streamline.

CALCULATIONS
ST*
M Q.QR ∗Q ()
𝑉L"# = PNO = U
ZST B
= 8.159 +
NO WXGY"#∗ [
ZBNO
ST *
M]^ G.GG ∗Q ()
𝑉L,- = P = U
ZST B
= 12.72 +
]^ WXQ"#∗ [
ZBNO
ST*
M c.cQ ∗Q ()
𝑉L/01 = P`ab = U
ZST B
= 38.274 +
`ab WXQ"#∗ [
ZBNO

G I I G
𝑃"# + I 𝜌𝑉"# + 𝛾𝑧"# = 𝑃,- + I 𝜌𝑉,- + 𝛾𝑧,-
𝑧"# = 𝑧,- = 15𝑚 = 49.2126𝑓𝑡
G G
I
𝑃"# = 𝑃,- + I 𝜌𝑉,- − I 𝜌𝑉"#I
G 𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑔𝑠 () I () I G() B
𝑃"# = 50𝑝𝑠𝑖 + I X1.94 𝑓𝑡3
[ gX12.72 + [ − X8.159 + [ h XGQQ"#B [
𝑃"# = 50.64𝑝𝑠𝑖
G
I I G
𝑃/01 + I 𝜌𝑉/01 + 𝛾𝑧/01 = 𝑃,- + I 𝜌𝑉,- + 𝛾𝑧,-
𝑧/01 = 0; 𝑧,- = 15𝑚 = 49.2126𝑓𝑡
I G I G
𝑃/01 = 𝑃,- + I 𝜌𝑉,- + 𝛾𝑧,- − I 𝜌𝑉/01
G 𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑔𝑠 () I () I
𝑃/01 = 50𝑝𝑠𝑖 + kI X1.94 𝑓𝑡3
[ gX12.72 + [ − X38.274 + [ h +
𝑙𝑏 G() B
X62.4 𝑓𝑡3[ (49.2126𝑓𝑡)o XGQQ"#B [
𝑃/01 = 62.55𝑝𝑠𝑖

RESULTS
Using Bernoulli formula, the estimated required pressure at the main inlet is 50.64 psi and
the estimated resulting pressure at the lower hydrant connection is 62.55 psi.

Location Pressure [psi]

𝑃"# 50.64
𝑃/01 62.55
Table 1.2 – Pressure Results (Bernoulli)
 4

PART II
GIVENS
Problem Statement:
Pipe flow direction as shown in Figure 1.1
Pipe dimensions as listed in Table 1.1
𝑃,- = 50𝑝𝑠𝑖𝑔

Munson, Young, and Okiishi’s Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, Eight Edition:

/F∗+
Viscosity of Water: 𝜇AB C@RY˚s = 2.730 ∗ 10tR () B (Table B.1)
+/,D+
Density of Water: 𝜌ABC = 1.94 () *
(Table 1.5)
()
Gravity: 𝑔 = 32.2 +B (Table C.1)
B B
-a]T va]T -NO vNO
Energy Equation: u
+ 2𝑔
+ 𝑧0,) = u
+ 2𝑔 + 𝑧"# + ℎ+ − ℎ/ (Equation 5.84)

Notes from ENFP 300 Fall 2020 Lectures by Fernando Laffan-Montoya, PhD:
zv{
Reynold’s Number: 𝑅𝑒 = (Lecture 20, Nov. 10, 2020)
𝜇
|}GY~ ∗•N
Hazen-Williams Correlation: ℎ/ = € Z.ƒ~B∗{„.ƒ… 𝑄G.|RI D in inches; L in feet (Lecture 24, Dec. 1, 2020)
•‚ N
Coefficient for concrete: 𝐶A‡ = 120 (Lecture 24, Dec. 1, 2020)

ASSUMPTIONS
No minor losses, fully developed, viscous flow.

RESULTS
The MATLAB code used for calculations is in the Appendix. Flow directions unchanged.

Pipe Flow Rate (Q) [ft3/s] Head Loss [inches]

1 3.3470 18.7483
2 0.8975 4.6436
3 1.1030 23.3919
4 1.3395 8.2575
5 2.0005 3.6139
Table 2.1 – Flow Rate and Head Loss Results for Part 2

Location Pressure [psi]

𝑃"# 58 .7745
𝑃/01 58.9889
Table 2.2 – Pressure Results (Part II)
 5

PART III
GIVENS
Upper and lower hydrants’ outflow rates are set equal to each other.
All other givens remain the same as in part II.

ASSUMPTIONS
All assumptions remain the same as in part II

RESULTS
The Matlab code with the necessary adjustments in bold is in the Appendix. Flow direction unchanged.

Pipe Flow Rate (Q) [ft3/s] Head Loss [inches]

1 3.4200 19.5126
2 0.4110 1.0933
3 1.0300 20.6059
4 0.7840 3.0618
5 1.4410 1.9685
Table 3.1 – Flow Rate and Head Loss Results for Part III

Location Pressure [psi]

𝑃"# 62.3953
𝑃/01 70.0205
Table 3.2 – Pressure Results (Part III)
 6

PART IV
In part I the Bernoulli equation is used with the assumptions of a steady, inviscid flow. The
equation does account for the elevation differences between the inlet and outlet, but not the viscous
effects. The minimum inlet pressure needed to provide 50.00 psi at the upper hydrant is calculated
to be 50.64 psi., the resulting lower hydrant outlet pressure is calculated to be 62.55 psi.
In parts II and III with viscous effects taken into account, it becomes apparent that there is
a significant head loss exists in the system. The pressures in parts I and II are calculated for the
same flow rates at the upper and lower hydrants of 1.11 ft /s and 3.34 ft /s respectively. The only
3 3

difference in Part II is the inclusion of losses due to viscous effects. Part III analyses a scenario
where the flow rates at both upper and lower hydrants are set to be equal, with the minimum
pressure at the upper hydrant still being 50 psi.
Table 4.1 summarizes the three cases and lists the inlet pressures needed to provide 50 psi
at the upper hydrant, as well as the resultant pressure at the lower hydrant outlet. It is evident that
when viscous effects are taken into account using the Hazen-Williams approach, a greater pressure
is required at the inlet, and a lower pressure results at the lower hydrant outlet due to the major
losses in the pipes.
It is worth noting that although the results in parts II and III are closer to reality than those
from a more simplistic Bernoulli calculation, they only capture a part of the viscous losses (h ), L major

but ignore the minor ones at pipe junctions, pipe to hydrant diameter changes, etc. Those often can
overpower the major ones.
If we further change the flow rates of the upper and lower hydrants, the inlet pressure at the
pump also has to be adjusted. After the flowrate to the upper hydrant is increased (split evenly with
the lower hydrant), the inlet pressure in part III is higher compared with part II. Varying the
outflow balance requires a change in the inlet pressure. In real life scenarios, a pump for a fire
hydrant system must be able to provide a required water pressure at the outlet(s) with varying flow
rates. When planning for a system, it is important to size an inlet pump using a range of pressures
that it may be required to provide in order to produce the desired outflow/pressure combinations at
the outlets.

Part I Part II Part III

(Bernoulli) (Hazen-Williams) (Hazen-Williams)
𝑃"# 50.64 psi 59.7745 psi 62.3953 psi
𝑃/01 62.55 psi 58.9889 psi 70.0205 psi
Table 4.1 – Comparison of Pressures in three parts
 7

BONUS 1
Pipe New Diameter [inches] Flow Rate (Q) [ft3/s] Head Loss (h) [inches]
1 12 1.7678 5.7487
2 6 0.0766 0.5866
3 11 2.6822 6.3353
4 6 0.5812 7.1404
5 12 2.7588 6.5538
Table B1.1 – Pipe Dimensions, Corresponding Flow Rates and Head Losses

The diameters of pipes 1 and 5 were kept the same, pipe 2 was decreased from 10in to 6in, pipe 3
was increased from 6in to 8in, and pipe 4 was decreased from 8in to 6in. These changes resulted in the flow
rates and head losses shown in the table above.

Location Pressure [psi]

𝑃"# 53.1352
𝑃/01 59.4735
Table B1.2 - Bonus 1 Pressure Results

By adjusting pipe diameters as discussed above, the pressure required at the inlet of the system was
able to be reduced to 53.1352psi from an original 58.7745psi using the given pipe diameters. With this
adjustment, a pressure of 50psi was maintained at the upper hydrant and the resulting pressure at the lower
hydrant is 59.4735psi, which are both greater than or equal to the required pressure of 50psi.

By increasing the diameter of pipe 3, the head loss in this pipe decreased significantly. The increase
in diameter of pipe 3 resulted in a negative flow rate in pipe 2, so the diameter of pipes 2 and 4 was reduced
from 10in and 8in, respectively, to 6in to resolve this. This decrease in the head loss in pipe 3 and the
diameter reductions in pipes 2 and 4 made it possible to achieve a pressure greater than or equal to 50psi at
the upper and lower hydrants with a reduced pressure of 53.1352psi at the inlet.
 8

BONUS 2
Repeating Part II with the assumption that the accumulated deposits on pipes have lowered
C to be 80% of the original (120*.8). This results in flow rates that are the same as in Part 2, but
HW

the head losses have increased considerably, as can be seen in the Table B2.1 below.

Pipe Head Loss [inches]

1 28.3425
2 7.0199
3 35.3625
4 12.4833
5 5.4633
Table B2.1 – Head Loss Results for Reduced CHW

This increase in head losses results in higher pressure required at the inlet to drive same
flow and support the same upper outlet pressure of 50 psi compared to part II.

Location Pressure [psi]

𝑃"# 62.9366
𝑃/01 57.1557
Table B2.2 - Pressure Results for Reduced CHW
 9

Appendix
MATLAB code:
(Adjustments necessary for different parts are listed below the comment lines in bold)
%% PART 2 of project %% inputs / given function F = pipedreamers(Q,k)
D =[12 10 6 8 12]; % diameters of pipes
% for Bonus 1 make next line active instead of line above global k
%D=[12 6 11 6 12]:
L =[3000 3500 1000 1000 1500]; % lengths of pipes
CHW=120; % (for bonus 2) => CHW=120*.8; % equal out flow rates are 2.225
CH=8.52E5/CHW^1.852; %% changes for part 3:
%change F(2)=F(2)=Q(1)-Q(2)-Q(4)-2.225;
% Z1 (inlet) = Z2 (main outlet) =0; Z3(lower outlet) = -15m * 3.28084ft %change F(4)=Q(4)+Q(5)-2.225;
Z=[0 0 -15*3.28084]; rho=1.94; g=32.2; mu=2.73E-5;
%all other inputs are in appropriate british units, mu in lb*s/ft^2 @ 50F F(1)=4.45-Q(1)-Q(3); %A
F(2)=Q(1)-Q(2)-Q(4)-1.11; % B
%% main body F(3)=Q(3)+Q(2)-Q(5); %C
global k F(4)=Q(4)+Q(5)-3.34; %D
F(5)=k(1)*Q(1)^1.852+k(2)*Q(2)^1.852-k(3)*Q(3)^1.852;
k=CH*L./D.^4.87; % K coefficients %loop1
Q0=ones(1,5); %initial guess (array of 1s) F(6)=k(4)*Q(4)^1.852-k(5)*Q(5)^1.852-k(2)*Q(2)^1.852;
Q=fsolve(@pipedreamers,Q0); % resultant flow rates are in array Q (ft^3/s) %loop2
h=k.*Q.^1.852; %head losses in array h (ft) end

V=[4.45*4/(pi*(10/12)^2) 1.11*4/(pi*(4/12)^2) 3.34*4/(pi*(4/12)^2)];

%% for part 3 make next line active instead of line above:
%V=[4.45*4/(pi*(10/12)^2) 2.225*4/(pi*(4/12)^2) 2.225*4/(pi*(4/12)^2)];

%% Pressure calculations:
Pinlet=50+(rho/2*(V(2)^2-V(1)^2)+rho*g*(h(1)))/144
Plowerhydrant=50+(rho/2*(V(2)^2-V(3)^2)+rho*g*(Z(2)-Z(3)-h(4)))/144
PINcheck=Plowerhydrant+(rho/2*(V(3)^2-V(1)^2)+rho*g*(Z(3)-
Z(1)+h(3)+h(5)))/144;
% all pressure results are in PSI
%PINcheck is not necessary, just a confirmation via a different streamline

% these two are just in case they come in handy for narrative
v=4*Q./(pi*(D/12).^2); %velocities in pipes
R=rho*v.*D/(12*mu); % Renold's numbers in each pipe to verify flow all>4000
% v =4.2615 1.6455 5.6176 3.8374 2.5471
%R = 1.0e+05 *
% 3.0283 0.9744 1.9960 1.8180 1.8100