Summary / Abstract

For this experiment, the objectives are to measure the discharge and to investigate the
characterictic of a venturi. The results of this experiment are tabulated in table 1, 2, 3, and
4.From the results, the comparison between ideal flow rate and experimental flow rate
can be make. As the conclusion, the behaviour of venturi meter is opposite with the flow
rate value, where it will go to lower point when the flow rate is increasing.

Statement of Purpose

There are two objectives that must be fulfilled in this experiment. The first one is to
measure the discharge. Second, to investigate the characteristic of a venturi meter. The
experiment was demonstrated with different value of flow rate as the way to make the
objectives fulfilled.

Data, Observation and Results

Table 1: Ideal Pressure Distribution

Piezometer Dia. Of cross Distance from d2/dn (a2/a1)2 (a2/a1)2-(a2/an)2
tube No (n) section (dn) the inlet (xn)
A(1) 26.00 -54.00 0.6154 0.1435 0
B 23.20 -34.00 0.6897 0.1435 -0.0829
C 18.40 -22.00 0.8696 0.1435 -0.0600
D(2) 16.00 -8.00 1.000 0.1435 -0.8565
E 16.80 7.00 0.9529 0.1435 -0.6815
F 18.47 22.00 0.8663 0.1435 -0.4200
G 20.16 37.00 0.7937 0.1435 -0.2534
H 21.84 52.00 0.7326 0.1435 -0.1447
J 23.53 67.00 0.6800 0.1435 -0.0704
K 25.24 82.00 0.6347 0.1435 -0.0188
L 26.00 102.00 0.6154 0.1435 0
Tube Q=0.00022563 m3/s (u2)2/2g=0.0607m Q=0.00016 m /s (u2) /2g=0.049m
3 2

No. hn hn – h1 hn – h1 hn hn – h1 hn – h1
(m) (u2)2/2g (u2)2/2g
A (1) 66 0 0 66 0 0
B 56 -0.010 -0.1647 58 -0.008 -0.1633
C 48 -0.018 -0.2965 50 -0.016 -0.3265
D (2) 14 -0.052 -0.8567 24 -0.042 -0.8571
E 18 -0.048 -0.7908 28 -0.038 -0.7755
F 32 -0.034 -0.5601 40 -0.026 -0.5306
G 38 -0.028 -0.4613 46 -0.020 -0.4082
H 44 -0.022 -0.3624 50 -0.016 -0.3265
J 50 -0.016 -0.2636 52 -0.014 -0.2857
K 54 -0.012 -0.1977 54 -0.012 -0.2449
L 56 -0.010 -0.1647 56 -0.010 -0.2041
Table 2 : Measured Pressure Distribution

Table 3 : Water Level of piezometer tubes A(1) and D(2)

Qty t h1 h2 Q h1– h2 (h1– h2)1/2 C*
(L) (sec) (mm) (mm) (m /s)
3
(m) (m1/2)
5 120.88 70 66 0.0414 0.004 0.0632 0.6795
5 77.47 68 62 0.0645 0.006 0.0775 0.8657
5 57.47 66 56 0.0870 0.010 0.1000 0.9039
5 49.19 64 50 0.1016 0.014 0.1183 0.8925
5 35.59 64 34 0.1405 0.030 0.1732 0.8427
5 31.12 64 28 0.1607 0.036 0.1897 0.8798
5 26.87 64 18 0.1861 0.046 0.2145 0.9014

Ideal Q (m3/s) Experimental Q (m3/s) Percentage error (%)

0.0609 0.0414 32.0197
0.0746 0.0645 13.5389
0.0962 0.0870 9.5634
0.1139 0.1016 10.7989
0.1667 0.1405 15.7169
0.1826 0.1607 11.9934
0.2064 0.1861 9.8353
Table 4 : Percentage error for flow rate

SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
Table 1:
Piezometer tube diameter, d1
Piezometertube diameter, d2
Cross sectional area of tube A, a1
Cross sectional area of tube D, a2
Cross sectional area of tube C, an
= 26 x 10-3 m
= 16 x 10-3 m
= π(26 x 10-3 m)²/4
= 5.31 x 10 –4 m²
= π(16 x 10-3 m)²/4
= 2.011 x 10-4 m²
= π(18.40 x 10-3 m)²/4
= 2.66 x 10-4 m²

d2/dn = d2/dc = 16 x 10-3/18.4 x 10-3

= 0.8696
(a2/an)² = (a2/a1)² = [ (2.011 x 10-4) / (5.31 x 10-4) ]²
= 0.1435
 (a2/a1)² - (a2/an)² = (a2/a1)² - (a2/ac)²
= [ (2.011 x 10-4/5.31 x 10-4)²] – [ (2.011 x 10-4 /
2.67 x 10-4)²]
= - 0.4200
Table 2:
Volume collected, V = 5 litres
= 0.005 m³
Discharge rate, Q = a2 √ 2g (h1 – h2) / 1 – (a1 / a2)2
= 0.000225 m³/s
Velocity at D, u2 = √ 2g (h1 – h2) / 1 – (a1 / a2)2
= √ 2(9.81) (0.066 – 0.014) / 1- (0.1435)
= 1.0914 m/s
(u2)² / 2g = (1.0914)² / 19.62
= 0.0607 m
At tube C, (hn-h1) = 0.048 - 0.066
= - 0.018 m

At tube C (hn-h1)/(u2)²/2g = - 0.018 / 0.0607

= - 0.2965
Table 3:
Discharge rate, Q = volume / time
= 0.005 m³ / 120.88 s
= 0.000414 m³/s
(h1-h2)1/2 = (0.004)1/2
= 0.0632 m1/2
Coefficient of meter, C = Q / [a2 √ 2g (h1 – h2) / 1 – (a1 / a2)2 ]
= 0.0414/{2.011 x 10-4 √ [(19.62) (0.004) / 1 –
(0.1435)]}
= 0.6795
Table 4:
Experimental rate, Q = 0.0870m³/s
Ideal rate, Q ideal = a2 √ 2g (h1 – h2) / 1 – (a1 / a2)2
= 2.011 x 10-4 m² x [√ {(19.62) x
(0.010)} / (1- (0.1435)]
= 0.0962 m³/s
Percentage error, %error = ( Q ideal – Q / Q ideal ) x 100%
= (0.0962 m³/s - 0.0870m³/s)
x 100%
0.0962 m³/s
= 9.5634%
Analysis and Discussion

Firstly, there are certain problems that we have to face during the experiment
especially during the manometer tube reading. Since the flow rate are not stable the
reading from tubes varies with the flow rate. Besides of that, one of the manometer tube,
which is tube B is not functioning. The value of the tube B has to be determined using
interpolation between tube A and tube C. From table 1, it is observed that the value for
(a2/a1)² - (a2/an)² starts with 0 and then it goes up until the position D is achieved and then
it goes down to the initial condition.
From table 2, by implementing the Bernoulli’s theory which states that pressure
varies inversely to the velocity of air. This means that when velocity is high, pressure
drops. It can be seen from table 2, that the height of the manometer tube at position D is
low compared to at position A. This is because, as the diameter of the tube decrease, the
velocity increase as it went through it.
The values of C from the calculation is within the range of 0.6795 to 0.9039. We
concluded from this unusual phenomena, that an error has occurred during the
experiment.
From the graph C vs. flow rate, it can be observer that when the flow rate
increases, the coefficient, C increases. This is because, if we observed from table 3, the
value of Q increases during the experiment. Which means that coefficient, C is
proportional to the discharge rate, Q.
From table 4, it is observed that for the last 5 readings of the discharge rate, the
ideal discharge rate, Q ideal is bigger than the value for the experiment discharge rate, Q.
This is to be expected, since the ideal discharge rate represents the best discharge rate that
can be obtained from an experiment. From table 4, the first two readings shows, the ideal
discharge rate to be less than the experimental discharge rate. We conclude this behaviors
as an error. The experiment value cannot be greater than the ideal value because the
experiment value are influenced by certain factors that could make the readings
mistakenly read. Some of the factors are such as the level of the water in the manometer
tube is not stable, there are air bubbles that are trap in the tube and the result are not very
precise. Moreover, there are also resistive forces and the friction between the flowing
fluid and the pipe.
Conclusion

After the experiment, referring to the Bernoulli’s principle that, the velocity of a
fluid varies inversely to its pressure. From graph 1 from 1 and table 2, the result of the
velocity varies with the cross sectional area of the pipe. It can be seen that the velocity at
the inlet and outlet is low due to the larger cross sectional area compare at the neck of the
pipe which is small in cross sectional area.
From graph 2 and table 3, the value of C is proportional to the value Q which is
also depends on the characteristic of the venture meter, the velocity and also the pressure.
The values of C from the calculation is within the range of 0.6795 to 0.9039. We
concluded from this unusual phenomena, that an error has occurred during the
experiment.
Finally, it can be concluded that the result of the percentage difference almost
related to personal and technical problems. The value of ideal discharge rate should be
greater than the experiment discharge rate.