Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Short communication
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Paper deals with the model for economic optimization of pipe diameter for complete turbulence. The
Received 3 October 2011 proposed new model for economic optimization of pipe diameter is based on simple economic balance
Received in revised form 24 October 2011 approach. The model covers the region of complete turbulence (so called rough pipe flow). Final result
Accepted 30 October 2011
estimates somewhat different pipe diameter values than the widely cited Genereaux equation for smooth
pipe flow.
Keywords:
© 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Pipeline
Optimal diameter
Complete turbulence
0378-7788/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.10.054
336 S.B. Genić et al. / Energy and Buildings 45 (2012) 335–338
Ycen (1 + J)L G3
Ce = 8 (15)
2 ED5 2
by letting Re→ ∞, so the general form of friction factor can be writ-
where Y (h/year), is the plant attainment (annual operating hours or
ten as
hours of operation per year); cen (USD/(W h)), is the cost of pumping
ε m energy.
= MRrm = M (6)
D After involving (6) in (15), for region of complete turbulence
operational cost can be expressed as
2. Pipe optimization model based on economic criteria for
8MYcen (1 + J)L m G3
complete turbulence Ce = ε (16)
2 ED5+m 2
Total pipe cost consists of two parameters: capital cost and oper- Total annual pipe cost is
ational cost. The most economic pipe diameter will be the one
which gives the lowest annual cost. C = Cc + Ce (17)
Pipe purchase cost can be expressed by
and, since C depends only on D, the optimum economic pipe diam-
Pc = XDx L (7) eter can be found by
where L (m) is the pipe length and X and x are the parameters that dC
=0 (18)
depend on the type of pipe material and pipe wall thickness (pipe dD
schedule).
i.e.
Annual capital cost (Cc , EUR/year) of pipeline is calculated using
dCc dCe
Cc = XDx L(1 + F)(a + b) (8) =− (19)
dD dD
where F is the factor that includes the cost of valves, fittings and After solving (19) for D, minimum cost (or economically opti-
erection; a is amortization or capital charge (annual); b presents mized) pipe diameter is
the maintenance costs (annual).
8(5 + m)M (1 + J)Ycen G3
In this paper the cost of pump (or compressor) is considered as 5+m+x
Drpf = εm 2 (20)
independent of D. 2 XxE(1 + F)(a + b)
S.B. Genić et al. / Energy and Buildings 45 (2012) 335–338 337
Table 1
Absolute roughness of pipes (uncertainty is given in brackets) [4,6,7].
1/(5+1.472+0.25)
Material – condition ε (mm) [(8(5 + 0.25)0.11/2 )ε0.25 ]
Table 3
Different values for optimal pipe diameter obtained for flow in rough and smooth pipes.
Drpf (mm) vrpf (m/s) Dspf (mm) vspf (m/s) Drpf (mm) vrpf (m/s) Dspf (mm) vspf (m/s)
1 41 0.76 38 0.88 0.01 39 7.02 40 6.50
2 56 0.82 52 0.94 0.02 53 7.57 55 6.97
5 84 0.91 79 1.03 0.05 80 8.36 83 7.64
10 114 0.98 107 1.11 0.1 109 9.01 114 8.18
20 155 1.05 147 1.19 0.2 148 9.71 156 8.77
50 234 1.16 221 1.30 0.5 222 10.72 235 9.61
100 319 1.25 302 1.39 1.0 303 11.55 321 10.30
200 434 1.35 413 1.49 2.0 413 12.45 438 11.04
500 653 1.49 624 1.64 5.0 621 13.74 662 12.10
1000 890 1.61 852 1.75 10.0 846 14.81 904 12.97
cen = 0.0716 USD/(kW h). Using these values and J = 0.5, for carbon The optimum pipe diameter for given flow rate is the result of an
steel pipes, characteristic members in Eqs. (20) and (21) are economic balance between capital and energy costs. In this paper
(1 + J)Ycen
1/(5+1.472+0.25) the new model was developed for the optimization of pipe diam-
= 0.476 eter in case of complete turbulence. It was shown that there is the
XxE(1 + F)(a + b) difference between well known and widely cited Genereaux equa-
and tion (21) for flow in smooth pipes and newly developed equation
(1 + J)Ycen
1/(5+1.472−0.16) (20) for complete turbulence.
= 0.454
XxE(1 + F)(a + b) Acknowledgement
After involving these values in (23) and (24) the optimal pipe
diameter for flow in rough pipes is We thank the Ministry of Science and Technological Develop-
0.446 −0.298 0.446 0.148
ment of Serbia for partial support of this study through the Project
Drpf = 0.32G = 0.32V (25) of Energy Efficiency.
while for flow in smooth pipes optimal diameter is
References
Dspf = 0.34G0.450 −0.317 = 0.34V 0.450 0.133 (26)
[1] R.P. Genereaux, Fluid-flow design methods, Industrial and Engineering Chem-
Eqs. (25) and (26) slightly differ one from another, and for the istry 29 (1937) 385–388.
flow of cold water and ambient air calculated values of pipe diam- [2] B.R. Sarchet, A.P. Colburn, Economic pipe size in the transportation of vis-
eters for rough pipes Drpf and smooth pipes Dspf are presented in cous and nonviscous fluids, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 32 (1940)
1249–1252.
Table 3, as well as corresponding velocities vrpf and vspf . [3] M.S. Peters, K.D. Timmerhaus, Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engi-
neer, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991.
4. Conclusions [4] S.M. Walas, Chemical Process Equipment – Selection and Design, Butterworth-
Heinemann, Boston, 1990.
[5] C.F. Colebrook, Turbulent flow in pipes with particular reference to the transi-
Major part in HVAC, oil and gas industry, chemical plant, etc. is tion region between the smooth and rough pipe laws, Journal of the Institution
always connected with the fluid transportation. Since the pipeline of Civil Engineers 11 (4) (1939) 133–156.
[6] F.M. White, Fluid Mechanics, McGraw-Hill, Boston, 1999.
cost can be significantly higher than 20% of plants investment cost [7] D.W. Green, R.H. Perry, Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook, McGraw-Hill,
the choice of pipe diameter (i.e. fluid velocity) is of the great impor- New York, 2008.
tance. [8] L.F. Moody, Friction factors for pipe flow, Transactions of the ASME 66 (8) (1944)
671–684.
Nowadays piping design involves the usage of software pack-
[9] B.L. Shifrinson, New method for district water system optimization, Heat and
ages that enable relatively quick estimation of capital piping costs, Power 2 (1937) 4–9.
without accounting its operating costs. This is the reason that [10] A.D. Altshul, P.G. Kiselev, Hydraulics and Aerodynamics, Stroisdat Publishing
engineers still prefer to use simple equations for economically opti- House, Moscow USSR, 1975.
[11] A.A. Durand, M.J. de Villafranca Casas, A.S.G. Cornejo, D.J. Carranza, F.J.P. Román,
mized pipe costs (so-called rules-of-thumb) that can provide more R.G.S. Suárez, J.S. Espinoza, L.F. Villalobos, V. de la Parra, Updating the rules for
accurate solution and speed up hand calculations. pipe sizing, Chemical Engineering 116 (1) (2010) 48–50.