Energy Loss Due to Friction in a Pipeline

Abdulla Almuhaizaa

101234

Page | 1
Theory

Theory shows that the relationship governing turbulent flow in pipes may be summarized as the Darcy

Weisbach formula:

4 fL v 2
hf =
2 gd
Where: hf = Energy head loss due to friction

f = Experimentally determined friction factor which varies with Re and pipe roughness

L = Length of pipe

V = Mean velocity of flow in the pipe section

d = Pipe diameter

g = Acceleration due to gravity

In a horizontal pipeline flowing full, the energy head loss between any two sections (1) and (2) is given

by the relationship:

P1−P2
hf =
ρg
Where: hf = Energy loss due to friction

P1 = Pressure at section 1

P2 = Pressure at section 2

g = Acceleration due to gravity

ρ = Density of fluid

Page | 2
For the pipeline that was used during the experiment, the difference in pressure head can be
determined by finding the difference in the fluid levels within the two manometer limbs. Therefore:

h f =h1−h2

To find Reynolds number:

ρvd
Re =
μ
Where: Re = Reynolds number

d = Pipe diameter

ρ = Density of fluid

v = Mean velocity of flow in the pipe section

μ = Dynamic viscosity

Page | 3
Calculations and Results
The third equation was used to determine the energy loss due to friction

h f =h1−h2 =0.966−0.798=0.168

Area

A=π r 2 =π ✕ ( 2 )
0.0136 2
=0.0001453 m2

Velocity

Q 0.000225
v= = =1.548869 m/s
A 0.0001453

Reynolds number
To determine the type of flow, we need to find Reynolds number using the equation below. And the
viscosity of the liquid used (In this case water) was determined by the International Association for
the Properties of Water and Steam (IAPWS) and is μ = 0.0009107 Pa/s

ρvd 1000 ✕1.548869 ✕ 0.0136

Re = = =23130.14694
μ 0.0009107

Page | 4
Pipe 1
Condition: Smooth
Diameter: 0.0136 m
Area: 0.0001453 m2

Q h1 h2 v
Test hf Re
(m3/s) (m) (m) (m/s2)
1 0.000225 0.966 0.798 0.168 1.548869472 23130.14694

2 0.0002 0.91 0.782 0.128 1.376772864 20560.13062

3 0.000153 0.833 0.751 0.082 1.053231241 15728.49992

4 0.0001 0.765 0.724 0.041 0.688386432 10280.06531

Pipe 2
Condition: Smooth
Diameter: 0.017 m
Area: 0.000227 m2

Q h1 h2 v
Test hf Re
(m3/s) (m) (m) (m/s2)

1 0.000262 0.904 0.804 0.1 1.154286369 21547.01689

2 0.000192 0.822 0.762 0.06 0.845889248 15790.18031

3 0.00016 0.785 0.742 0.043 0.704907706 13158.48359

4 0.0001 0.735 0.716 0.019 0.440567317 8224.052246

Page | 5
Pipe 3
Condition: Smooth
Diameter: 0.0262 m
Area: 0.000539 m2

Q h1 h2 v
Test hf Re
(m3/s) (m) (m) (m/s2)

1 0.000246 0.882 0.869 0.013 0.456291778 13127.09408

2 0.000182 0.812 0.805 0.007 0.337581722 9711.915134

3 0.00015 0.778 0.774 0.004 0.278226694 8004.32566

4 0.000123 0.753 0.748 0.005 0.228145889 6563.547041

Pipe 4
Condition: Rough
Diameter: 0.017 m
Area: 0.000227 m2

Q h1 h2 v
Test hf Re
(m3/s) (m) (m) (m/s2)

1 0.00028 0.897 0.696 0.201 1.233588486 23027.34629

2 0.0002 0.782 0.687 0.095 0.881134633 16448.10449

3 0.00016 0.742 0.68 0.062 0.704907706 13158.48359

4 0.0001 0.712 0.69 0.022 0.440567317 8224.052246

Page | 6
Conclusion
We deduce from the data collected that the smaller the diameter the higher the velocity despite the
energy loss due to friction. Pipe 1 and Pipe 3 are of the same condition “Smooth”, yet the velocity of
Pipe 1 with a diameter of 0.0136 m is higher than Pipe 3 with a diameter of 0.0262 m. We can also
deduce that the rougher the condition of the material of the pipe, the higher the energy loss. We can
see that in test 3 of both Pipe 2 and Pipe 4. Although both pipes are of equal diameter of 0.017 m, the
energy loss due to friction is higher.

Page | 7