The demonstration of Bernoulli’s Theorem and the determination of discharge coefficient

1 Abstract

This experiment was conducted to demonstrate the Bernoulli’s Theorem and to

determine the discharge coefficient of the venturi meter. First, the Bernoulli’s Theorem
Demonstration unit was set up to the hydraulic bench accordingly. In part 1 of the
experiment, the reading of water level in the manometers tubes for each section with
decreasing water flow rates were taken and tabulated to calculate the ideal flow rate. The
actual flow rates were then plotted against the ideal flow rates calculated and the discharge
coefficient is determined from the gradient of the graph which is 1.0321. In part 2 of the
experiment, similar procedure was carried out to acquire and tabulate the water level in
each section. The data was found to be agreeing with the Bernoulli’s Law and two methods
were found to be suitable for estimating flow velocity which are Bernoulli’s equation and
continuity equation with the former being better estimation in real-world setting.

2 Introduction

In the study of fluid dynamics, Bernoulli’s Law is one of the important theorems as it
relates the pressure, velocity and elevation of a moving fluid which can be gas or liquid, the
compressibility and viscosity which can be interpreted as internal friction of which are
negligible and the flow of which is steady or laminar. In 1739, a Swiss scientist named Daniel
Bernoulli published this principle in his book Hydrodynamica. The Bernoulli’s principle state
that in steady flow of ideal fluids, the gravitational potential energy of elevation, kinetic
energy of flowing fluid and the total mechanical energy of fluid motion would remain
constant (Prager, King & Carlson, 2021).

For fluid flowing horizontally, the gravitational potential energy can be neglected
which implies that a change in fluid pressure is directly associated with the change in fluid
velocity. Therefore, if a fluid is flowing through a horizontal pipe with different cross-
sectional area, then the fluid velocity would decrease with the cross-sectional area and vice-
versa. Therefore, the fluid static pressure at the smallest cross-section would be the lowest
while the highest fluid static pressure would be exerted at the largest cross-section. This can
be represented with

2
P v ¿
+ =h =constant (Eq. 1)
ρg 2 g

in which the P is fluid static pressure at cross section, ρ is the density of fluid, g is the
gravitational acceleration, v is the mean velocity of fluid flow at the cross section and h is
the total stagnation head. Notice that the elevation head of the center at the cross-section
with respect to a datum is not included in the equation, this is because Z would equal to 0 at
horizontal pipe. By applying continuity equation on Bernoulli’s Equation, the flow rate of an
ideal fluid, Qi can be calculated using

[ ( )] [ )]
2 −1 1

Qi= A 2 1−
A2
A1
2
2g(P1−P2
ρg
+ Z 1−Z 2
2
(Eq. 2)

in which A is the cross-sectional area, g is the gravitational acceleration, P is the pressure, ρ

is density if fluid and Z is the elevation (Ahmari & Kabir, 2021). However, in real world, a
discharge coefficient, Cd which is determined through experiment data is introduced to
account for the frictional loss experienced in the actual fluid. In a horizontal apparatus, this
coefficient can be determined with

Qa
C d= (Eq.
Qi
3)

where Qa being the actual fluid flow rate and Qi being the ideal fluid flow rate.

The effect of constricted channels on flow of fluid is also known as the Venturi effect
as it was first discovered by an Italian scientist, G.B Venturi (Britannica, T. Editors of
Encyclopaedia). In this experiment, a venturi meter is used to demonstrate the Bernoulli’s
Law mentioned above. The venturi meter consists of a converging portion, a throat and as
well as a diverging portion which suits the needs of this experiment. Moreover, the
discharge coefficient, Cd would also be determined in this experiment.

3 Objectives
 1) To determine the discharge coefficient of the venturi meter
2) To demonstrate Bernoulli’s Theorem

4 Procedure
4.1 General Star-up Procedures

The acrylic test section was installed to the converging section upstream. The unions
were ensured to be tighten and the total pressure probe was withdrawn fully. The
apparatus was located on the flat top of the bench. A spirit level was attached to baseboard.
The volumetric tank of the hydraulic bench was filled with water until 90% full. The flexible
inlet and outlet tubes were connected. The outlet flow control valve at Bernoulli’s Theorem
Demonstration unit was opened partially. The bench flow control valve, V1 was fully closed
and the pump was then switched on. V1 was gradually opened and the piping was allowed
to fill with water until all air had been expelled from the system. The water flowrate was
further increased until the flow in the pipe was steady and free of trapped bubble. The
discharge valve was closed to reduce the flow to the maximum measurable flow rate. V1
and outlet control valve was adjusted to obtain a flow through the test sections.

4.2 Part 1: Discharge Coefficient Determination

The apparatus were The hypodermic The discharge valve was

started up according to tube was adjusted to the
General Start-up withdrawn from maximum measurable
Procedures the test section flow rate of the venturi

The water flow rate was

The actual flow rate, Qa Step 4 was measured using
was obtained using repeated with volumetric method and
volumetric flow three decreasing the manometers
measurement method flow rates reading in each sections
were recorded
4.3 Part 2: Bernoulli’s Theorem Demonstration

Water flow rate was

The apparatus were
The discharge valve measured using
started up according to
was adjusted to high volumetric method
General Start-up
measurable flow rate after the water level
Procedures
stabilizes.

The hypodermic tube

was slided to cross
Step 3 & 6 were Step 4 was repeated for
section #A and the
repeated with three cross sections of #B, #C,
readings from
decreasing flow rates #D, #E & #F
manometer #H & #A
were recorded.

4.4 General Shut-Down Procedures

V1 was closed to stop the flow of water. Ensure all the water was flushed out. The
pump was then switched off.

5 Results
5.1 Part 1: Discharge Coefficient Determination
Table 1: Data values for part 1

Qa hA hB hC hD hE hF hA – h B Qi QCd
(LPM) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (m) (LPM) (LPM)
14.5 106 96 33 70 78 88 0.010 13.5 13.9
12.7 100 92 41 72 79 86 0.008 12.0 12.4
10.3 93 87 51 74 78 83 0.006 10.4 10.7
8.0 88 84 62 74 79 82 0.004 8.5 8.8

The ideal flow rates in respective sections, Q i can be calculated using (Eq. 2) and by
substituting AB as A2 and AA as A1, equating P = ρgh, and since there are no elevation, Z1-Z2 =
0, (Eq. 2) becomes:

[ ( )] [ )]
2 −1 1

Qi= A B 1−
AB
AA
2
2g(ρgh A −ρg hB
ρg
2
(Eq.

2a)
 2
d
The AB and AA can be further substituted with the formula A = π , while the ρg can be
4
factorised, (Eq. 2a) becomes:

[ ( )]
2 4 −1 1
dB dB 2
Qi=π
4
1−
dA
[ 2 g ( h A −h B ) ] 2 (Eq. 2b)

The values of dA and dB were given as 26 mm and 21.6 mm respectively, hence they need to
be converted into the unit of metre, m whereby 1 m = 1000 mm. The values of h A −h B were
obtained from Table 1:

[ ( )]
4 −1 1
0.02162 0.0216 m3
Qi=π 1−
2
[ 2(9.81) ( 0.01 ) ] 2
=2.243× 10
−4
4 0.0260 s

The values of Qi were calculated for respective Qa. The Qi values calculated were in m3/s,
hence they were converted into the unit of Litre per minute, LPM with the conversion of 1
m3/s = 60000 LPM as shown below:
−4
Qi=2.243 × 10 ×60000 LPM =13.5 LPM

Then, the rest of Qi values were calculated using same approach and were tabulated in
Table 1.

Qa against Qa
16
14
Qa, Actual Flow Rates (LPM)

f(x) = 1.03211636001286 x
12 R² = 0.997645569960648
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Qi, Ideal Flow Rates (LPM)

Figure 1: The relationship between Qa and Qi

The graph of actual flow rates, Qa against ideal flow rates, Qi was plotted using the
values calculated in Table 1.
From the Figure 1, a slope value of 1.0321 were obtained which is equivalent to the
discharge coefficient, Cd. The non-ideal flow rate, Qcd were calculated using (Eq. 3) which
yields a value of 13.9 LPM. The error of flow rate was determined using equation below:
Error ( % )=
| QCd −Q a
Qa |×100 % (Eq.

4)
The error calculated yields a value of 4.14%.
5.2 Part 2: Bernoulli’s Theorem Demonstration
Table 2: Data values for 18 LPM

Cross hi h* ViB Ai x 104 ViC ViB - ViC

Sections (mm) (mm) (m/s) (m2) (m/s) (m/s)
A 210 237 0.7278 5.309 0.5651 0.1627
B 193 235 0.9078 3.664 0.8188 0.0890
C 93 233 1.6573 2.011 1.4918 0.1655
D 159 228 1.1635 3.142 0.9548 0.2087
E 171 226 1.0388 3.801 0.7893 0.2495
F 188 223 0.8287 5.309 0.5651 0.2636

Table 3: Data values for 15.5 LPM

Cross hi h* ViB Ai x 104 ViC ViB - ViC

Sections (mm) (mm) (m/s) (m2) (m/s) (m/s)
A 187 210 0.6718 5.309 0.4866 0.1852
B 176 205 0.7543 3.664 0.7051 0.0492
C 114 203 1.3214 2.011 1.2846 0.0368
D 155 199 0.9291 3.142 0.8222 0.1069
E 164 198 0.8167 3.801 0.6796 0.1371
F 174 197 0.6718 5.309 0.4866 0.1852

Table 4: Data values for 13 LPM

Cross hi h* ViB Ai x 104 ViC ViB - ViC

Sections (mm) (mm) (m/s) (m2) (m/s) (m/s)
A 181 199 0.5943 5.309 0.4081 0.1862
B 173 196 0.6718 3.664 0.5913 0.0805
C 124 193 1.1635 2.011 1.0774 0.0861
D 157 191 0.8167 3.142 0.6896 0.1271
E 165 190 0.7004 3.801 0.5700 0.1304
F 172 189 0.5775 5.309 0.4081 0.1694

The velocities of water in respective sections, ViB was calculated using Bernoulli’s Equation,

V iB = √ 2 × g ×(h −hi )
¿
(Eq. 5)
where g = gravitational acceleration (9.81 m/s 2), h*= total stagnation head (m) and h i =
pressure in respective sections (m). The values of h * and hi from Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4
were converted to m with the conversion of 1 m=1000 mm before substituting into (Eq. 5).
The velocities of water in respective sections, ViC was calculated using continuity equation,
Qa
V iC = (Eq.
Ai
6)

where Qa = actual flow rates (LPM) and Ai = cross-sectional area in respective sections (m2).

6 Discussion
6.1 Part 1: Discharge Coefficient Determination

In Table 1, at actual flow rate of 14.5 LPM, the values of pressure head show a
decreasing pattern from hA to hC while the values of pressure head from h C to hF show an
increasing pattern. The trend is the same across the data obtained in Table 1. This is due to
the converging cross-sectional area from section A to C while cross-sectional area diverges
from section C to F. This tallies with Bernoulli’s Law which states that the pressure would
decrease across a converging cross-sectional area pipe while increase across a diverging
cross-sectional area pipe.

Theoretically, the pressure head value of h A and hF should yield the same value as
they both have the same pipe diameter of 26 mm. However, the values of h A are higher than
hF as shown in Table 1. This is due to the frictional effect on the fluid which would generate
a head loss between the 2 sections.

Likewise, the ideal flow rate, Q i is expected to yield a greater value than the actual
flow rate, Qa. This is because the calculations of Q i were done with the assumption of no
frictional loss across the pipe while Qa is the actual flow rate that is expected to experience
frictional effects. However, the value of Qi and Qa obtained in Table 1 only shows two sets of
data that matches the expectation mentioned. This may due to the parallax error when
taking the reading of the actual flow rate and the pressure head in respective sections.

As for the effects of flow rate on pressure drop between point A and B, it is shown
that the higher the flow rate of water, the higher the pressure drop produced which is
represented by hA-hB. This can be explained through the Darcy-Weisbach equation which
states that pressure drop or head loss is proportional to the flow velocity or flow rate.

From Figure 1, the discharge coefficient, C d is found to be 1.0321. This result is

incorrect as the Cd is expected to be smaller than 1. This is because Q a is expected to be
lower than Qi as mentioned above and Cd is also the Qa divided by Qi according to (Eq. 3).
This error is the subsequent of the parallax error mentioned above during measurement of
actual flow rates.

6.2 Part 2: Bernoulli’s Theorem Demonstration

In Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4, all the h i values are lower than their respective h *
values. These results are true as h * is referring to the total stagnation head while h i is the
pressure head in respective sections which is expected to be lower than total head.
Although theoretically h* should be a constant value for a constant flow rate, however due
to the fluctuation in real world, h * measured is not constant but is relatively similar. As for
the effects of different flow rates on the fluid velocities, it is shown that as the fluid flow
rate decreases, the fluid velocity decreases as well. This trend is same for all sets of data in
Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3 and it is true as it follows the theory of continuity equation.

In Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4, the pressure heads on each respective section have a
similar trend as shown in Table 1 where they decrease from section A to C while increase
from section C to F. On the other hand, both velocities of water in respective section
calculated in Bernoulli equation as well as Continuity equation shows the same trend which
increase from section A to C while decrease from section C to F. This fits the theory of
Bernoulli which states that when cross-sectional area decreases, the velocity would increase
while the pressure head would drop and vice versa.

The difference between the water velocity calculated using Bernoulli equation, V iB
and water velocity calculated using Continuity equation, V iC which is represented by ViB- ViC
has a higher magnitude at section F than section A. This is due the pressure drop experience
by the water from A to F, making the flow velocity having larger value in F. This indicates
that Bernoulli equation take into account of the head loss of the water in the real-world
scenario. Nonetheless, both methods are suitable to estimate the fluid flow rate across
different cross-sectional area region.

7 Conclusion

As seen from the data above, it can be concluded that the experiment fits in with
Bernoulli’s Law, hence the experiment was successful as the Bernoulli theorem was
demonstrated. The experiment shows an increasing trend in flow rate and a decreasing
trend pressure head through converging cross-sectional area and vice versa. The discharge
coefficient of the venturi meter, C d is determined from the graph of Q a against Qi as shown
in Figure 1 which has a value of 1.0321. This value is incorrect as the value of C d should fall
below 1 as the it represents the ratio of actual flow rate to the ideal flow rate where actual
flow rate should be lower than the latter due to the frictional effect it experienced. Lastly,
the Bernoulli’s equation and continuity equation are found to be adequate methods for
estimation of water flow along varying cross-sectional area with Bernoulli’s equation being
more suitable real-world case.
8 References

Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopaedia (2018, July 5). Bernoulli's theorem. Encyclopedia

Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/science/Bernoullis-theorem

Ahmari, H., & Kabir, S. (2021). Experiment #2: Bernoulli’s Theorem Demonstration.
Retrieved from
https://uta.pressbooks.pub/appliedfluidmechanics/chapter/experiment-2/

Prager, J., King, K., & Carlson, D. (2021). Bernoulli's Principle - Lesson. Retrieved from
https://www.teachengineering.org/lessons/view/cub_bernoulli_lesson01

9 Appendix
9.1 Turnitin Report
9.2 Assessment Rubrics