Swinburne University of Technology

School of Engineering

MEE20003 Fluid Mechanics 1

Semester 1 , 2019

Lab Sheet: Impact of a jet

Name: Shehan Fernando

Student ID: 7664613
Date performed experiment: 28/03/2019
Lab supervisor: Gayan , Email: gweerakkodydayarathn@swin.edu.au, 0413327043

1
1. Description of Apparatus

Fig 1 shows the arrangement, in which water supplied from the Hydraulic Bench is fed to a vertical
pipe terminating in a tapered nozzle. This produces a jet of water which impinges on a vane, in the
form of a flat plate or a hemispherical cup. The nozzle and vane are contained within a transparent
cylinder, and at the base of the cylinder there is an outlet from which the flow is directed to the
measuring tank of the bench. As indicated in Fig 1, the vane is supported by a lever which carries
a jockey weight, and which is restrained by a light spring. The lever may be set to a balanced
position (as indicated by a tally supported from it) by placing the jockey weight at its zero position,
and then adjusting the knurled nut above the spring. Any force generated by impact of the jet on
the vane may now be measured by moving the jockey weight along the lever until the tally shows
that it has been restored to its original balanced position.

2
 Fig.1 Arrangement of apparatus for measuring the forces from the impact of a jet

2. Experimental procedure

The apparatus is first leveled and the lever brought to the balanced position (as indicated by the
tally), with the jockey weight at its zero setting. Note the weight of the jockey, and the following
dimensions: diameter of the nozzle, height of the vane above the tip of the nozzle when the lever
is balanced, and distance from the pivot of the lever to the center of the vane. Water is then admitted
through the bench supply valve, and the flow rate increased to the maximum. The force on the
vane displaces the lever, which is then restored to its balanced position by sliding the jockey weight
along the lever. The volume flow rate is established by collection of water over a timed interval.
To do so, use a stopwatch to establish the time t required for raising the level in the volumetric
tank of the apparatus from 20 to 30 liters. Further observations are then made at a number of
reducing flow rates. About eight readings should suffice. The best way to set the conditions for
reduced flow rate is to place the jockey weight exactly at the desired position, and then to adjust
the flow control valve to bring the lever to the balanced position. The condition of balance is
thereby found without touching the lever, which is much easier than finding the point of balance
by sliding the jockey weight. Moreover, the range of settings of the jockey position may be divided
neatly into equal steps. The experiment should be run twice, first with the flat plate and then with
the hemispherical cup. The volume flow rate is calculated as

Diameter of nozzle, D (mm) 10

Cross sectional area of nozzle, A (m2) 0.000079
Height of vane about nozzle tip, s (mm) 30
Distance from centre of vane to pivot of lever, L (mm) 150
Mass of jockey weight, M (kg) 0.5
Weight of jockey weight, W (N) 0.00491
Gravity Acceleration, g (m/s2) 9.81
Density of Water, ρ (kg/m3) 998

3
Results:

Table 1. Data recording table for results using the flat plate vane

Volume (L) Time (s) x (mm) Q (m3/s)

1 10 12.97 220 0.00077
2 10 13.47 190 0.00074
3 10 15.19 160 0.00066
4 10 16.15 130 0.00062
5 10 18.59 100 0.00054
6 10 22.34 70 0.00045
7 10 27.37 40 0.00037
8 10 49.87 10 0.00020

Table 2. Data recording table for results using the hemispherical cup vane.

Volume (L) Time (s) x (mm) Q (m3/s)

1 10 15.46 220 0.00065
2 10 18.07 190 0.00055
3 10 20.04 160 0.00050
4 10 22.25 130 0.00045
5 10 25.47 100 0.00039
6 10 29.57 70 0.00034
7 10 36.94 40 0.00027
8 10 72.47 10 0.00014

4
Table 3. Calculation recording table for calculations using the flat plate vane

Q (m3/s) Fj-v(y,meas) 𝒎̇ Vin(y) Fj-v(y)

1 0.00077 7.194 0.769468 9.817 15.1074
2 0.00074 6.213 0.740906 9.452 14.00666
3 0.00066 5.232 0.657011 8.382 11.01423
4 0.00062 4.251 0.617957 7.884 9.743715
5 0.00054 3.27 0.536848 6.849 7.353784
6 0.00045 2.289 0.446732 5.699 5.092175
7 0.00037 1.308 0.364633 4.652 3.392501
8 0.00020 0.327 0.20012 2.553 1.021859

Table 4. Calculation recording table for calculations using the hemispherical cup vane

Q (m3/s) Fj-v(y,meas) 𝒎̇ Vin(y) Fj-v(y)

1 0.00065 7.194 0.645537 8.236 10.63287
2 0.00055 6.213 0.552297 7.046 7.783113
3 0.00050 5.232 0.498004 6.353 6.328113
4 0.00045 4.251 0.448539 5.722 5.133453
5 0.00039 3.27 0.391834 4.999 3.917525
6 0.00034 2.289 0.337504 4.306 2.906478
7 0.00027 1.308 0.270168 3.447 1.862412
8 0.00014 0.327 0.137712 1.757 0.483897

5
Discussion

1.

Theoritical & Measured force vs. Flow rate

Flat Plate Vane
16
Xyz Measured points
14
12 Xyz Theoretical points
10
8
6
4
2
0
0.00000 0.00010 0.00020 0.00030 0.00040 0.00050 0.00060 0.00070 0.00080 0.00090

Theoritical & Measured force vs. Flow rate

Hemispherical cup vane
12 Xyz Measured points

10 Xyz Theoretical points

0
0.00000 0.00010 0.00020 0.00030 0.00040 0.00050 0.00060 0.00070

6
2. This is a function, if a vertical line test is conducted and the vertical line intersects once then it is a
function, as a result Ratio of Measured/ Theoretical is a function of flowrate

Ratio of Measured/ Theoretical vs. Flow rate

0.6
Ratio of Measured/ Theoretical

0.5

0.4
Ratio of
0.3 Measured/
Theoretical
0.2
vs. Flow rate
0.1

0
0.00000 0.00010 0.00020 0.00030 0.00040 0.00050 0.00060 0.00070 0.00080 0.00090
Flow rate

Ratio of Measured/ Theoretical vs. Flow rate

0.9
Ratio of Measured/ Theoretical

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4 Ratio of
0.3 Measured/
Theoretical
0.2 vs. Flow rate
0.1
0
0.00000 0.00010 0.00020 0.00030 0.00040 0.00050 0.00060 0.00070
Flow rate

3. By observing the results, it is evident that there is discrepancy between the calculated values
and the measured values, given that comparing the flat plate to hemispherical cup, the
hemispherical cup performed the best, confirming the experiment hypothesis, where the
energy is conserved, the little variation on the values is due to frictional coefficient that may
be present in the material being used as well as error was introduced due to viscosity effects,
in order to reduce this errors when calculating the thermotical values perhaps we should
incorporate a friction factor even add a reduction factor to counter the human and
mechanical error that was present in the experimental values, because currently the
experimental data is being compared to a experiment that would have been done in a
perfect world.

7
8