ATENEO DE DAVAO UNIVERSITY

School of Engineering and Architecture

Civil Engineering Department
E. Jacinto Street, 8016 Davao City

HYDRAULICS LABORATORY - CE 3254

PIPE NETWORKS
Laboratory Activity No. 11

Engr. Angelito A. Saluague, CE, MEP

Professor

Soriano, Reymart Cesar O.

Subaldo, Ariel D.
Tan, Mary Janzen L.
Torreon, Eliezah Mae A.
Valente, Fe Lourence D.
Ybañez, Shaina Kate C.
Students

March 7, 2022
 CE 411 (HYDRAULICS LAB -11)
I. TITLE: PIPE NETWORKS
II. OBJECTIVES:
1. To apply Hardy Cross’ approximate method and principles in order to balance the pipe
network.
2. To determine the division of flow in a given pipe network provided by the instructor.

III. MATERIALS NEEDED:

Pipe network provided by the instructor, calculator, laptop computer

IV. THEORY:
In supplying water to a city, complicated pipe systems are inevitable. There is a need to design the pipes.
Part of the design process is the estimation of the flow rates as well as the head losses inherent in the
system.
Professor Hardy Cross (1930) developed an approximate method in analyzing pipe networks that may be
carried out to a certain degree of accuracy by successive iterations.
Before, discussing the method, two important principles apply. First, that in a junction, the inflow rates
are equal to the outflow rates and second, the sum of the head losses around a closed loop must be zero.
For the second principle, we can write,
Σ hf =0 around a closed loop.

Σ ( k Q )=0→ Eqn .1
m

The actual discharge in each pipe is not yet known. It is imperative therefore to assume the discharge
which is reasonable enough based on the pipe properties given. Of course, principle 2 must also be
enforced to see to it that there is mass balance (principle 1). If the assumed flow is Q a and the error in the
assumed flow for that loop is ΔQ, then Eqn. 1 can be rewritten into Eqn 1.1 below.
Σ¿
Because ΔQ is expected to be small, successive terms in the binomial expansion of Eqn 1.1 would
become negligible for the quantity ΔQ has an exponent greater than or equal to 2. Therefore, only the first
two terms are considered and Eq.1.1 becomes
Σ¿
Σ¿

−Σ [ k Qma ]
Δ Q= → Eq .2
m [ Σk Q a ]
m−1
The pipe friction formulas are:

hf =
( 0.0826
D
fL
5 )Q ; by Darcy−Weisbac h
2

( )
10.29 n2 L 2 '
hf = 16
Q ; by Mannin g s
D 3

hf =
( 10.2967 L
4.870 1.852
D C1
1.852
)
Q ; by Hazen−Williams

Thus, m=2 for both the Darcy-Weisbach and the Manning’s formulas and m=1.852 for Hazen-Williams.
The constant k for the respective formulas are enclosed with parentheses.
Depending on the degree of accuracy, it is acceptable that all these errors in discharge in a loop must be
less than 1% of the total inflow. When this condition is satisfied, the approximate actual discharges in
each pipe can be finalized as the preceding estimated/assumed/corrected discharge of each pipe plus the
correction/s.
If a particular pipe is common to two loops, then the discharge of that pipe must be corrected
correspondingly from the computed errors of the loop; add the error if the direction of this error and the
flow direction are the same; subtract the error from the assumed discharge if the direction of flow is
opposite to the assumed direction of the error.

V. SEQUENCE OF OPERATIONS:
1. Gather all group mates to discuss strategies, role assignment and responsibility, and solution process of
the problem.

2. All calculations should be done using hand-held calculators. A third member must be assigned to check
manual calculations using the computer (Microsoft Excel).

3. The calculations of the discharge error in a loop must be repeated and the discharge corrected until all
errors are within 1% of the inflow rate.

4. Discuss the results among the group and ask everyone if the results make sense.
5. Submit the calculated results with drawings of the pipe network and the final discharge in each pipe
clearly labeled.
VI. DATA AND CALCULATIONS:
ASSUMPTION IN FLOW RATE (m^3/s)
Calculations

Pipe L (m) D (m) k= Qa (m3/s) KQa0.852 KQa1.852

10.67( L)
4.87 1.852
D C1

AB 2500 0.80 13.10379 0.400 6.002775 2.401110

BC 2000 0.60 42.55382 0.235 12.390487 2.911765

AC 1500 0.75 10.76584 0.525 6.217615 3.264248

BE 1600 0.50 82.72585 0.115 13.102549 1.506793

DE 2000 0.60 42.55382 0.290 14.821825 4.298329

CD 1600 0.60 34.04306 0.290 11.857460 3.438663

AF 3800 0.80 19.91776 0.275 6.630587 1.823411

FG 1500 0.60 31.91537 0.275 10.624568 2.921756

BG 1800 0.50 93.06658 0.180 21.591655 3.886498

GH 1600 0.50 82.72585 0.095 11.134270 1.057756

EH 1800 0.60 38.29844 0.405 17.730981 7.181047

Pipe
Qa1 (m3/s) KQa10.825 KQa11.825

AB 0.464 6.815066 3.163898

BC 0.187 10.176627 1.898181

AC 0.442 5.371531 2.375181

BE 0.118 13.348830 1.569037

DE 0.256 13.312552 3.403433

CD 0.256 10.650042 2.722746

AF 0.294 7.010205 2.057985

FG 0.294 11.232852 3.297627

BG 0.193 22.936919 4.432170

GH 0.127 14.239912 1.805662

EH 0.373 16.537600 6.171784

Pipe
Qa2 (m3/s) KQa20.825 KQa21.825

AB 0.466 6.834848 3.183896

BC 0.183 10.016243 1.833755

AC 0.415 5.093005 2.115592

BE 0.136 15.084346 2.046543

DE 0.225 11.958929 2.695812

CD 0.225 9.567144 2.156650

AF 0.319 7.519861 2.397148

FG 0.319 12.049503 3.841087

BG 0.180 21.604792 3.891640

GH 0.139 15.389858 2.137715

EH 0.361 16.079608 5.806280

Pipe
Qa3 (m3/s) KQa30.825 KQa31.825

AB 0.478 6.988265 3.341293

BC 0.202 10.891530 2.200035

AC 0.394 4.865288 1.915358

BE 0.131 14.632441 1.915609

DE 0.216 11.519642 2.485190

CD 0.216 9.215713 1.988152

AF 0.328 7.708722 2.529946

FG 0.328 12.352125 4.053877

BG 0.185 22.117604 4.095231

GH 0.153 16.743385 2.567594

EH 0.347 15.529899 5.383443

Pipe
Qa4 (m3/s) KQa40.825 KQa41.825

AB 0.487 7.100337 3.458868

BC 0.216 11.540639 2.495047

AC 0.375 4.671110 1.753074

BE 0.130 14.556043 1.893935

DE 0.212 11.329420 2.396850

CD 0.212 9.063536 1.917480

AF 0.338 7.887734 2.665262

FG 0.338 12.651785 4.270701

BG 0.181 21.670290 3.917331

GH 0.158 17.205280 2.724058

 EH 0.342 15.339723 5.241171

1.852
∑(kQa )
ΔQ = - 0.852
1.852[∑ kQ a ]

ΔQ1 0.0828205

ΔQ2 0.0185699

ΔQ3 0.0343441

ΔQ4 0.0318029

ΔQ1’ 0.026788

ΔQ2’ 0.025206

ΔQ3’ 0.030233

ΔQ4’ 0.012101

ΔQ1’’ 0.0217134

ΔQ2’’ 0.0094171

ΔQ3’’ 0.0096875

ΔQ4’’ 0.0144456

ΔQ1’’’ 0.0183768

ΔQ2’’’ 0.0093645

ΔQ3’’’ 0.0041752

ΔQ4’’’ 0.0049771

ΔQ1’’’’ 0.0182808

ΔQ2’’’’ 0.0048199

ΔQ3’’’’ -0.0008670
 ΔQ4’’’’ 0.0038764

Using Excel:
VII. REMARKS, HINTS, and PRECAUTIONS:
The following are the possible sources of errors in the activity:
1. Personal errors. Be sure that everybody knows the problem. Each should participate in the calculation
procedure for this also prepares you not only in the evaluation exam but in your future works as a civil
engineer. Thus, there is no excuse when one commits a mistake because either he or she does not know
the problem, or if he/she knows, a big mistake in the calculation happens.

VIII. CONCLUSION
In this laboratory activity, we assumed the discharge in this experiment. The diameters of the pipe
and the length of the pipe are two parameters that influence the increase and decline in values. Flow rates
will be higher if the diameter and length of the pipe have an enormous value. We can elucidate this
assertion with the help of the accompanying figure. At A, the 1200 liters per second were dispersed
through pipes with larger diameters than the others. The 500 liters per second also went via the smaller
pipes at node H.
Manning's friction coefficient, which is 0.012 for all pipes, was used to demonstrate the Hardy
Cross technique. Finally, the procedures employed for municipal and city water systems are shown in this
experiment. More iteration does not guarantee that the material balance of liquid passing through the
complicated network will be satisfied.