You are on page 1of 19

MECH 2600

FLUID MECHANICS

 

LABORATORY ASSSIGNMENT:

EXPERIMENT ONE: FORCE ON A SUBMERGED BODY

Aim:

The main aim of this experiment was to find the magnitude of the force F subjected to the vertical

surface of the float and also to calculate the point on the vertical surface at which the force acts in

relation to the liquid’s surface.

Apparatus:

MECH 2600 FLUID MECHANICS LABORATORY ASSSIGNMENT: EXPERIMENT ONE: FORCE ON A SUBMERGED BODY Aim: The main

Method:

For this experiment, the apparatus was set up in the manner shown above with a float and counterweight suspended on a pivot. The tank was filled up until the water line reached the top of the vertical surface of the float. At this point, due to force of the water on the vertical wall of the float, the system tilted around the pivot and the counterweight dropped. The next step was to take some measurements of the apparatus. This included the area, A, of the vertical surface of the float (bd), the depth of the centre of area (y) (d/2), the distance of the bar to which the float was connected to the water’s surface (q) and the distance from the pivot to the position where further weight will be added. After this, weights were added to the end of the bar on the same side of the pivot as the float in increments of 0.05kg until the float and counterweight began to even out and balance on the pivot when smaller weights were then added. When the float and counterweight were balanced in equilibrium over the pivot, no more weights were added. A record of the added weight was then taken.

Results:

  • (a) Calculate the magnitude of the force F acting on the vertical surface. b = 0.075m Thus:

d = 0.1m

A = 7.5 x 10 -3 m 2 y = 50 x 10 -3 m ρ = 1000kgm -3 g = 9.81N

q = 0.1m

(

)

(

(

)

)

  • (b) Using the apparatus provided, experimentally determine y’.

(

)

(

)

(Ignore minus sign for distances)

  • (c) Calculate the theoretical value of y’ and compare to (b).

As shown above, the theoretical value of y’ is 0.0667m whereas the experimentally determined value of y’ is 0.0832m.The percentage error for this is 19.8%.

Analysis:

Firstly, I was asked to find the force acting on the vertical surface which caused the float to move upwards in rotation to the pivot. This happened because the forces from the water on the curved surface of the float act directly in line with the pivot and thus has no affect on the movement of the float. Therefore only the force on the vertical surface is the only influential force and needed to be found. To find y’ the equation, ( ), was used by the method of pivots and moments. The values of mg are the weights added to the float’s bar; the x value is simply the distance from the pivot to the weights; F was calculated in part (a) and q is the distance from the pivot to the water’s surface. By rearranging the equation to make y’ the subject, we can work out its experimental value. The possible reasons for the percentage difference between the experimentally determined value for y’ and the theoretical value include “parallax error”, which concerns the user taking readings of the water level, and specifically the level of meniscus in terms of eye level, accurately and precisely; and also random error, which is the inaccurate yet unavoidable error caused by the

apparatus available. For example, the rulers were only accurate to 1mm which leaves a margin of +- 0.5mm for error when measuring distances.

Conclusion:

I think that the aim set out for this experiment was achieved and the further calculations made

therefore proved that bearing in mind the percentage differences although they were small, the measurements were accurate enough to prove that the theory is relevant.

EXPERIMENT TWO: CONSERVATION OF MASS AND ENERGY

Aim:

The aim of this experiment was to use strategically positioned manometers along a tapered venturi shaped nozzle which opens up again to calculate the velocity and mass flow rate of the liquid at certain points in the tube.

Apparatus:

The apparatus consists of a wide tube containing water that runs into a tapered venturi nozzle in a

smaller diameter tube then back to a wide tube again. At certain intervals along this tube are much smaller vertical single limb manometer tubes that are required to measure the pressure at those points. Alongside these manometer tubes are measuring lines marked by numbers to record height of the water levels in them.

Theory: Mass flow rate: ̇ Conservation of mass: ̇ 1 = ̇ 2 ρ u 1
Theory:
Mass flow rate:
̇
Conservation of mass:
̇ 1 =
̇
2
ρ u 1 A 1 = ρ u 2 A 2
Conservation of Energy (Bernoulli’s Equation):
p 1 +
ρ u 1 2 = p 2 +
ρ u 2 2
Pitot Tube: Measures total pressure = p + ρ u 2

Method:

From the apparatus shown above, water was pumped through the tubes at an unknown speed. The cross sectional areas of the tubes were then recorded. Using these values and Bernoulli’s Equation, ̇

velocities at points 1 and 2 were calculated. Then the mass flow rate at the throat

was calculated

firstly using the equation for the conservation of mass and then by measurement (for example time for 10litres to flow through). Finally, the velocity at the throat of the venturi nozzle, u 2 , was

Results:

  • a) Determine the velocities at positions 1 and 2 by using Bernoulli’s Equation.

Bernoulli’s Equation:

p 1 +

ρ u 1 2 = p 2 +

ρ u 2 2

p 1 p 2 =

ρ u 2 2

ρ u 1 2

[p 1 p 2 = ρ g Δh]

[Δh

h 1 h 5 ]

Conservation of mass:

ρ u 1 A 1 = ρ u 2 A 2

 

A 1,2 = π(d/2) 2

u 1 = u 2 A 2 / A 1

where, d 1 = 25mm and d 2 = 10mm

A 1 = 4.9 x 10 -4 m 2 A 2 = 7.85 x 10 -5 m 2

 
 

h 1 (mm)

h 5 (mm)

Difference

 

240

110

130

Δh = 0.132m

Δh = 0.132m 250 110 140
 

250

110

140

   

245

120

125

 

395

Δh = 131.67mm

 

ρ g Δh

ρ u 2 2

ρ (u 2 A 2 / A 1 ) 2

 
 

1000 x 9.81 x 0.132 =

x 1000 x u 2 2

x 1000 x (u 2 x 7.85x10 -5 / 4.9x10 -4 ) 2

1294.92 = u 2 2 x (487.17) u 2 2 = 2.658

u 2 =

1.63m/s

u 1 = (u 2 A 2 / A 1 )

u 1 =

0.26m/s

  • b) Calculate the mass flow rate

̇ of the flow at the throat. ̇

ρ u 2 A 2 =

Use equation for the Conservation of Mass:

1000 x 1.63 x (7.85x10 -5 ) = ̇ = 0.128kgs -1

̇

From this calculation one has to question the accuracy of Bernoulli’s Equation at this point. Any

errors in calculating the velocity previously will be carried forwards and possibly exponentially increasing the errors further on. The assumptions made include that the flow is ideal, incompressible and ideal.

  • c) Determine the mass flow rate,

̇ , by measurement (1000litres = 1m 3 ).

Flow rate:

This is the time it took for 10 litres of water to flow through the apparatus.

Flow rate = 17.84s This was measured using a small marked tube which filled up according to how much water was being pumped through the apparatus. The time for the water to pass between 0 and 10 litres was measured and this came to 17.84s.

10 litres ÷ 1000 = 0.01m 3 0.01m 3 over 17.84 seconds = 5.61x10 -4 m 3 /s ̇ = 0.561kg/s

This value for mass flow rate by measurement is very different to that of the theoretical result. By percentage difference, it is a 338.3% difference. This is most likely as a result of systematic and random error in reading the measurements accurately and the manual use of the stopwatch to time it. Also, at some points when the plug was put in the tank to allow the over flow of water fill up the measuring tube that told us how many litres were flowing, the water level would initially fluctuate and jump up and down making it difficult to differentiate when it actually passed 0litres and the user could start timing on the stopwatch. It was also very difficult to read off the monometer the exact location of the meniscus as it moved up and down the tube quickly. Not only this but there were two meniscus readings to take at the same time, meaning that two users were needed to read them and this could result in inconsistent readings between them.

  • d) Determine the velocity at the throat, u 2 , using the pitot tube. Δh

 

p 1 p 2 =

ρ u 2 2

p – p = ρ u 2 dynamic pressure

dynamic pressure

[p 1 p 2 = ρ g Δh]

 

[Δh

h 8 h 5 ]

   

h 1 (mm)

 

h 5 (mm)

Difference

m

m 290 120 170
   

290

 

120

170

     

285

 

120

165

   

290

 

120

170

 

505

Δh = 168.3mm

1000 x 9.81 x 0.168 = 500 x u 2 2

u 2 =

 
 

u 2 = 1.816ms -1

Having compared the two values calculated for the velocity u 2 , the percentage difference shows to be 10.8% difference between them. Therefore, since these values are relatively close together having been found by different means the application of the conservation of mass and the conservation of energy and the use of the pitot tube it is safe to say that both techniques are accurate and reliable.

  • e) Explain what happens when you move the pitot tube beyond point 2 towards the exit?

Towards the exit of the tube it starts to open up and widen. This causes turbulence and eddies in the water. An eddy is a swirling of fluid and a reverse current is created as the tube opens up. In terms of

the conservation of energy, the average velocity stays the same, yet turbulence causes the waste and dissipation of energy within the system. Pressure will also decrease.

Conclusion:

As it was set out to achieve, the velocity and mass flow rate of the liquid through the tapered venturi tube was calculated and compared when different methods and techniques were adopted giving a reliable value for the velocity of the liquid yet due to the huge difference in mass flow rate between the different methods of calculation, it is difficult to state an accurate mass flow rate value from these results.

EXPERIMENT 3: CONSERVATION OF MOMENTUM

Aim:

The aim is to vary the flow rate of water out of a known diameter jet nozzle onto targets of various

shapes and use the application of momentum equation to compare which shape target produces the maximum force exerted on the plate.

Apparatus:

The experiment is set up in the manner shown below which a nozzle for shooting a jet of water at a

target plate flat or curved in our case connected to a spring weight pan for measuring the force of the water.

EXPERIMENT 3: CONSERVATION OF MOMENTUM Aim: The aim is to vary the flow rate of water

Method:

This experiment consisted generally of measuring the impact of jets of water and their subsequent deflection on targets of various shapes. A vertical jet of water was aimed at a target. The vertical force exerted on the target by the water was measured by placing weights on the pan until the force of the jet matched the downward weight. This was done by zeroing the weights pan to be in line with the level gauge with no water jet and no weights. Then once weights were added, the force of the jet was increased until the pan lined up with the level gauge. To measure the flow rate of water from the nozzle, the time for 5litres of water to flow out was recorded. Since the force on the plate was countered by the weight on the pan, this equation was used:

Looking at Newton’s 3 rd Law, the force applied to the fluid is equal to the rate of change of momentum in the vertical direction:

̇u 2 -

̇u 1 = ρQ(u 2 u 1 )

Where u 1 and u 2 are the velocities before and after impact, ρ is the water density (1000kgm -3 ) and Q is the volumetric flow rate.

By the use of Newton’s 2 nd Law, the equation for the force exerted on the plate is given by:

Results:

̇u 1 -

̇u 2 = ρQ (u 2 u 1 )

= ρQ (u 1 u 1 cosθ)

= ρQ (1 cosθ)

And Q = Au 1

(

)

  • a) For a particular target, plot the force on the plate on the y-axis and the quantity on the x-axis. Measure the gradient of this and compare it to the theoretical value (1-cosθ) for your particular target at θ = 90° and θ = 180°.

Force on plate F = mg A = π x r 2

By the use of Newton’s 2 Law, the equation for the force exerted on the plate

A = 5.0265x10 -5 m 2

 

Flat Plate - 90°

Force mg (g)

Flow rate (litres/s)

 

0.49

0.17

0.575

0.98

0.23

1.052

1.47

0.29

1.673

1.96

0.34

2.2998

2.45

0.39

3.026

2.94

0.4

3.183

Flat Plate - 90 o 3.5 3 y = 0.8694x 2.5 2 Force on Plate (g)
Flat Plate - 90 o
3.5
3
y = 0.8694x
2.5
2
Force on Plate (g)
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
ρQ²/A

This first set of data corresponds to the flat plate where the water was turned 90 o . The force on the plate was equal to mass x gravity as previously stated and for each force, a flow rate was calculated

for the water jet in litres/s. Lastly, the quantity was found using the equation as stated in the

question where ρ = 1000kg/m 3 and the area being 5.0265x10 -5 m 2 . Using this data, the above graph was plotted and the gradient was measured to give 0.8694. Comparison between this and the theoretical as follows:

Calculated gradient value = 0.8694

For θ = 90 o ,

Theoretical gradient = (1 cosθ) = (1 cos90) = 1

Compare:

1 0.8694 = 0.1306

This slight error difference will be due to systematic and random error that cannot be avoided. Common examples of systematic errors include faulty calibration of measuring instruments, poorly maintained instruments or faulty reading of instruments by the user. This last type is commonly known as “parallax error” which is the user reads the instrument at an angle resulting in reading data that is consistently high or consistently low. To correct this error, the measurement method or technique must be refined. Random errors affect the precision of the measurements. Measurements subject to random error differ from one another due to unpredictable variations in the readings and measurement process. The precision of measurements can be increased if number of readings in increased also. An example of this in this particular experiment is when starting and stopping the stopwatch there needs to be some degree of a quick reaction and the human being can only react at a certain speed leaving some margin for error. This will cause a variation in readings and some margin for error.

Curved Plate:

 

Curved Plate - 180°

Force mg (g)

Flow rate (litres/s)

 

0.49

0.125

0.311

0.98

0.17

0.575

1.47

0.19

0.718

1.96

0.24

1.146

2.45

0.26

1.345

2.94

0.29

1.673

Curved plate 3.5 3 y = 1.7819x 2.5 2 Force on Plate (g) 1.5 1 0.5
Curved plate
3.5
3
y = 1.7819x
2.5
2
Force on Plate (g)
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
ρQ²/A

This second set of data relates to the curved plate through which the water was turned 180 o . These values were calculated in the same way as previously finding the flow rate, force on the plate and quantity for the curved plate apparatus. As a result, the above graph was plotted and from this, the gradient was found. The comparison of the two gradients is as follows:

Calculated gradient value = 1.7819

For θ = 180 o ,

Theoretical gradient = (1 cosθ) = (1 cos180) = 2

Compare:

2 1.7819 = 0.2181

As you can see there is also some percentage error between the measured gradient and the theoretical gradient again due to systematic and random error. This includes parallax error in

reading the water level in the thin volume meter tube and also the user’s reactions at starting and

stopping the stopwatch which could results in some readings showing higher than normal and some showing lower than normal.

  • b) Determine which angle of θ gives the maximum force exerted on the plate.

The plate of angle 180 o gives the maximum force exerted on the plate because the gradient calculated from the measurements and the graph is higher than that of the plate of angle 90 o . Since the gradient is higher and the curve on the graph is steeper for the curved plate than the flat plate, the force exerted is higher at a specific value of the quantity.

Conclusion:

As a result of the data collected for this experiment and the calculations made using it, I feel that the

aim set out was achieved and the target of certain shape that gave the maximum force exerted on the plate was found.

EXPERIMENT FOUR: DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS

4a) In Drop Tubes

Aim:

The aim of this experiment was to measure the total drag on a set of spheres that varied in diameter

and density and to investigate how this drag varies when the spheres flow through fluids of different viscosities.

Apparatus:

Glass tubes in excess of 1meter high containing water, glycerine and oil (XHVI 8.2).

A selection of spheres of differing diameters and densities thus made from different

materials including steel, glass, nylon and ptfe (polytetrafluoroethylene). Stopwatch

Measuring callipers

Method:

The very first task for this experiment was to measure the diameters of each sized sphere for each material since although they appeared the same size there were slight variances in their diameters. Having found the diameters, the volumes, areas and frontal areas were then calculated. The practical part to the experiment consisted of dropping the spheres individually into a tube of fluid water, glycerine or XHVI 8.2 then starting a stopwatch once it passes a marked point and stopping the time when it passes the second mark which indicated a whole meter. The top marker was a small distance beneath the surface of the liquid to allow the sphere to reach terminal velocity whilst it travelled between the two markers. By measuring the time it took to travels 1 meter, the terminal velocity could be calculated simply using speed = distance/time. After recording all the dropping times, the theoretical part to the experiment began. This comprises of finding the drag force and the Reynolds number for each case. Finally, the coefficient of drag had to be calculated using our measurements of drag force, terminal velocity and frontal area.

When the spheres are falling at terminal velocity:

D F = drag force B = buoyancy mg = weight x gravity

Coefficient of Drag:

D F B
D F
B

mg

Reynolds number:

Buoyancy:

=

A = Frontal area (πr 2 ) u = Terminal velocity

d = diameter μ = dynamic viscosity

V = volume of sphere g = 9.81N

Densities Steel = 7800kg/m 3 Glass = 2530kg/m 3 Nylon = 1140kg/m 3 PTFE = 2160 g/m 3 Air = 1.225kg/m 3

Results:

Water = 1000kg/m 3 Glycerine = 1262kg/m 3 XHVI 8.2 = 829kg/m 3

Using the above equations details about the spheres were obtained and are stated below:

TYPES OF SPHERE

DIAMETER

AREAS

VOLUMES

FRONTAL

MASS

mg

S (m)

(m²)

(m³)

AREA (m²)

(kg)

STEEL

Large

 

5.07E-04

  • 0.0127 1.27E-04

1.07E-06

 

8.36E-03

8.20E-02

Medium

 

2.84E-04

  • 0.0095 7.09E-05

4.49E-07

 

3.50E-03

3.44E-02

Small

0.00634

1.26E-04

1.33E-07

3.16E-05

1.04E-03

1.02E-02

NYLON

Large

0.0127

5.07E-04

1.07E-06

1.27E-04

1.22E-03

1.20E-02

Medium

 

2.88E-04

  • 0.00957 7.19E-05

4.59E-07

 

5.23E-04

5.13E-03

Small

 

1.26E-04

  • 0.00634 3.16E-05

1.33E-07

 

1.52E-04

1.49E-03

GLASS

Large

 

5.04E-04

  • 0.01266 1.26E-04

1.06E-06

 

2.69E-03

2.64E-02

Medium

0.0054

9.16E-05

4.55E-07

2.29E-05

1.15E-03

1.13E-02

Small

 

1.26E-04

  • 0.00633 3.15E-05

1.33E-07

 

3.36E-04

3.30E-03

PTFE

Large

 

5.05E-04

  • 0.01268 1.26E-04

1.07E-06

 

2.30E-03

2.26E-02

Medium

 

2.84E-04

  • 0.00951 7.10E-05

4.50E-07

 

9.72E-04

9.54E-03

Small

 

1.23E-04

  • 0.00625 3.07E-05

1.28E-07

 

2.76E-04

2.71E-03

The times taken for the spheres to drop through the 1 meter marks on the tubes of different fluid are recorded below:

TYPES OF SPHERE

TIMES (s) TO TRAVEL 1M

WATER

GLYCERIN

HVI 8.2

STEEL

Large

0.62

2.91

0.65

 

Medium

0.68

 
  • 3.6 0.9

 

Small

0.82

 
  • 8.9 1.5

NYLON

Large

4.68

FLOATS

7.79

 

Medium

5.31

FLOATS

11.28

 

Small

7.36

FLOATS

19.34

GLASS

Large

1.8

13.72

2.12

 

Medium

2.09

22.19

2.88

 

Small

-

-

-

PTFE

Large

1.5

19.12

2.59

 

Medium

2.2

30.31

3.63

 

Small

1.8

62.63

5.69

(All the nylon balls floated on the surface of the glycerine and wouldn’t sink)

(There were insufficient supplies of the small glass spheres therefore no data was recorded) Using the data on drop times previously, the terminal velocity can be found by simply dividing 1 by the time taken. This is taken from the equation speed = distance/time and with the distance being 1meter over which the sphere was timed, this is the distance.

TYPES OF SPHERE

 

TERMINAL VELOCITY

STEEL

Large

 
  • 1.61 1.54

0.344

 
 

Medium

 

0.278

  • 1.47 1.11

 
 

Small

 
  • 1.22 0.667

0.112

 

NYLON

Large

 
  • 0.214 0

0.128

 

Medium

 
  • 0.188 0

0.0887

 

Small

 
  • 0.136 0

0.0517

GLASS

Large

 
  • 0.556 0.0729

0.472

 

Medium

 
  • 0.478 0.0451

0.347

 

Small

0

0

0

PTFE

Large

 
  • 0.667 0.0523

0.386

 

Medium

 
  • 0.455 0.0329

0.275

 

Small

 
  • 0.556 0.176

0.016

 

In converging all this data and further values of density of fluid and dynamic viscosities, values for drag force, buoyancy, Reynolds number and coefficient of drag were calculated and plotted on a graph of C D against R e .

TYPES OF SPHERE

BOUYANCY

DRAG FORCE

 

Water

Glycerine

HVI 8.2

Water

Glycerine

HVI 8.2

STEEL

Large

1.05E-02

1.33E-02

8.72E-03

7.15E-02

6.88E-02

7.33E-02

 

Medium

4.40E-03

5.56E-03

3.65E-03

3.00E-02

2.88E-02

3.07E-02

 

Small

1.30E-03

1.65E-03

1.08E-03

8.87E-03

8.53E-03

9.10E-03

NYLON

Large

1.05E-02

1.33E-02

8.72E-03

1.47E-03

-1.28E-03

3.27E-03

 

Medium

4.50E-03

5.68E-03

3.73E-03

6.30E-04

-5.49E-04

1.40E-03

 

Small

1.30E-03

1.65E-03

1.08E-03

1.83E-04

-1.59E-04

4.06E-04

GLASS

Large

1.04E-02

1.31E-02

8.64E-03

1.59E-02

1.32E-02

1.77E-02

 

Medium

4.46E-03

5.63E-03

3.70E-03

6.83E-03

5.66E-03

7.59E-03

 

Small

1.30E-03

1.65E-03

1.08E-03

2.00E-03

1.65E-03

2.22E-03

PTFE

Large

1.05E-02

1.32E-02

8.68E-03

1.21E-02

9.40E-03

1.39E-02

 

Medium

4.41E-03

5.57E-03

3.66E-03

5.12E-03

3.96E-03

5.88E-03

 

Small

1.26E-03

1.58E-03

1.04E-03

1.46E-03

1.13E-03

1.67E-03

From those two sets of data in drag force and buoyancy, the coefficients of drag and Reynolds number for each size sphere was calculated and shown below:

TYPES OF SPHERE

COEFFICIENTS OF DRAG

REYNOLDS NUMBER

Water

Glycerine

HVI 8.2

Water

Glycerine

HVI 8.2

STEEL

Large

4.34E-01

7.28E+00

5.90E-01

  • 21449.08 4.590

 

177.60

 

Medium

3.91E-01

8.34E+00

8.47E-01

  • 14628.89 2.775

 

95.95

 

Small

3.78E-01

3.39E+01

1.56E+00

  • 8096.029 0.749

 

38.42

NYLON

Large

5.09E-01

0

3.78E+00

  • 2841.545 0

 

14.82

 

Medium

4.94E-01

0

5.98E+00

  • 1887.183 0

 

7.71

 

Small

6.27E-01

0

1.16E+01

  • 902.0032 0

 

2.98

GLASS

Large

8.21E-01

3.13E+01

1.53E+00

  • 7364.747 0.970

 

54.28

 

Medium

2.61E+00

1.93E+02

6.63E+00

  • 2705.479 0.256

 

17.04

 

Small

-

-

-

-

-

-

PTFE

Large

4.33E-01

4.31E+01

1.79E+00

  • 8851.658 0.697

 

44.50

 

Medium

6.98E-01

8.13E+01

2.63E+00

  • 4526.416 0.330

 

23.81

 

Small

3.08E-01

2.28E+02

4.26E+00

  • 3635.835 0.105

 

9.98

To find the values of Reynolds number, the dynamic viscosity needed to be known for each fluid as shown in the equation:

Reynolds number:

,

where μ is the dynamic viscosity.

Water = 9.55x10 -4 Ns/m 2 Glycerine = 1.2Ns/m 2 XHVI 8.2 = 9.12x10 -2 Ns/m 2

By bringing together the data above, a graph was plotted showing the Coefficient of Drag on the y- axis and the Reynolds numbers on the x-axis. The data for water, glycerine and XHVI 8.2 were all put on the same graph to show the trend between them as the size and density are varied giving varying results for the coefficient of drag and Reynolds numbers. Graph shown on next page.

Graph Analysis:

From the graph, it is apparent that the further away from the y-axis, the more turbulent the fluid becomes. For example, that would explain why the plots for water are more scattered rather than in a neat line because the spheres moved quickly through the water making it difficult to record an accurate time. The closer the plots are to the y-axis mean that the fluid is more viscous and therefore less turbulent. The Stokes law shows that C D = 24/R e only for very viscous fluids, such as XHVI 8.2 which very nearly fits this relationship. For other fluids like water that has high Reynolds numbers, this relationship does not apply.

4b) In the Wind Tunnel

Aim:

The aim is to measure the drag on a number of different spheres in a range of different flow

conditions in order to investigate the effects that pressure has on the total drag with increasing Reynolds numbers and therefore decreasing and less significant viscous effects.

Apparatus:

The body under test is mounted in a small wind tunnel on the ‘sting’ of a drag force balance.

Four different sphere/objects were used in this investigation:

  • 1. Large Sphere polystyrene of diameter 0.07m

  • 2. Small Sphere polystyrene of diameter 0.03m

  • 3. Ellipsoid (large egg) polystyrene of diameter 0.044m

  • 4. Small egg polystyrene of diameter 0.04m

Air was passed through the wind tunnel around the body seated on the sting and pressure values were taken at the opening of the wind tunnel and a second one right underneath the body.

Method:

Firstly, the drag created on the sting alone was found for air speeds of maximum, minimum and one between which was subtracted from each value of drag for the bodies later on. Then the bodies were added one by one to the wind tunnel and placed on the sting and a drag value was calculated for each. To find the air speed u∞, in the tunnel for each wind speed, the upstream pitot pressure

tapping (p o = p∞ + body were used. Equations used:

) and the static pressure (p∞) in the working section below the

Coefficient of Drag:

Reynolds number:

Results:

Firstly, the drag on the sting in open, closed and half positions was found:

 

Drag on sting

 

open

closed

half

Mass(kg)

0.012

0.027

0.019

static

     

pressure(Pa)

150

440

340

total pressure(Pa)

50

70

80

specific drag

     

force(N)

0.11772

0.26487

0.18639

Using this, the following data was calculated for the different spheres at varied wind speeds:

   
 

small

   

Closed Door tunnel

big ball

ball

big egg

small egg

static pressure(Pa)

470

450

440

430

total pressure(Pa)

90

95

90

80

mass measured(kg)

0.162

0.057

0.07

0.046

total drag force(N)

1.58922

0.55917

0.6867

0.45126

specific drag force(N)

1.32435

0.55917

0.42183

0.18639

upstream velocity of air(m/s)

24.58543

24.583

24.58179

24.58057

drag coefficient

0.455734

0.769684

0.24483

0.346892

Reynolds number

1.64E+05

8.19E+04

1.26E+05

7.05E+04

 
   

small

   

open door tunnel

big ball

ball

big egg

small egg

static pressure(Pa)

160

160

160

170

total pressure(Pa)

30

30

30

40

mass measured(kg)

0.066

0.022

0.032

0.017

total drag force(N)

0.64746

0.21582

0.31392

0.16677

specific drag force(N)

0.52974

0.0981

0.1962

0.04905

upstream velocity of air(m/s)

12.76182

12.76182

12.76182

12.76245

drag coefficient

0.674486

0.499619

0.421335

0.337763

Reynolds number

8.53E+04

4.27E+04

6.57E+04

3.67E+04

   

small

 

small

half open door

big ball

ball

big egg

egg

static pressure(Pa)

310

300

320

280

total pressure(Pa)

50

70

50

50

mass measured(kg)

0.116

0.039

0.064

0.034

total drag force(N)

1.13796

0.38259

0.62784

0.33354

specific drag force(N)

0.95157

0.1962

0.44145

0.14715

upstream velocity of air(m/s)

20.59305

20.59203

20.59406

20.59

drag coefficient

0.465991

0.384322

0.364617

0.38988

       

1.07E-

Reynolds number

1.38E+05

1.24E-05

1.91E-05

05

To find the density of air, certain values such as kinematic and dynamic viscosities had to be found and also the density of atmosphere and then RT which is R = 287Jkg -1 K -1 x T = 288K:

     

density

 

kinematic viscosity of air

dynamic viscosity

(atm)

RT

big ball

1.50E-05

1.84E-05

101662.992

82656

small

       

ball

1.50E-05

1.84E-05

101662.992

82656

big egg

1.50E-05

1.84E-05

101662.992

82656

small

       

egg

1.50E-05

1.84E-05

101662.992

82656

Therefore, the density of air was found using these equations:

ρ(abs) = ρ(atm) = ρ(static) ρ(atm) = ρ(merc) x g x h ρ(air) = ρ(abs) / RT

thus:

(ρ(merc) = 13600kg/m 3 , h = 0.762m)

Closed

Open

Half

 

density of

     

density

p(abs)

air

p(abs)

density of air

p(abs)

of air

101193

1.224267

 
  • 101502.992 101353

    • 1.228017228 1.226202

   

101213

1.224509

 
  • 101502.992 101363

    • 1.228017228 1.226323

   

101223

1.22463

 
  • 101502.992 101343

    • 1.228017228 1.226081

   

101233

1.224751

 
  • 101492.992 101383

    • 1.227896245 1.226565

   

The graphs are as follows:

Graph analysis:

My results show a strong correlation similar to that of the graph shown in the lab report notes. It represents that for high Reynolds numbers, the coefficient of drag is very low meaning that the viscosity of the fluid is very low and turbulence is very likely to occur. In this case of the wind tunnel we were dealing with air flow which causes a lot of turbulence when passing non aerodynamic surfaces or bodies.

Discussion:

Judging by my graph of all the Reynolds number vs all the coefficients of drag, they seem to compare well with the graph provided in the notes showing and steady negative correlation with increasing Reynolds numbers and then plateau slightly before another steep drop in the coefficient of drag which in my graph is represented by the wind tunnel results that appear to be a random scatter of plots. This will probably be due to inaccuracies with in the apparatus and in taking measurements too.

The Navier-Stokes law does apply to my results but only for the low Reynolds values where they are close to the y-axis and the viscosity is high.