ENGR3345_Group3_Lab6_Closed_Conduit_FLow

.docx

School

Kennesaw State University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

3345

Subject

Civil Engineering

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

10

Uploaded by Aj2b1321

Report
2 Department of Civil Engineering Lab 6: Closed Conduit Flow Fluid Mechanics Laboratory Section 1 Prepared by: Dorsey, Fahim – Results McManus, Harrison – Introduction & Full Report Review Moreno, Jesus – Conclusion Partain, Ethan – Discussion Rosenberg, Austin – Executive Summary, Materials and Methods, & Template Design ENGR 3345 – Fluid Mechanics Laboratory David S. Ancalle, P.E November 15 th , 2023
2 Table of Contents: Cover Page ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 0 Table of Contents …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………………………….……. 2 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….. 2-3 Materials & Methods ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 3-4 Results ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………….. 5-6 Discussion ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 7-9 Conclusion ……………….…………………………………………………………………………………………..….. 10 References …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..….. 11 Appendix …….…………..…………………………………………………………………………………………..….. 12
2 Executive Summary The main goals of this experiment were to view major and minor losses experimentally, investigate the relationship between pressure drops and energy losses, and calculate friction factors and loss coefficients. The energy equation was the start for the analysis of losses in a closed conduit system. Three different tests were to be carried out, that included divided flow with parallel pipes, minimal loss with a half-open ball valve in a smooth pipe, and friction loss in a rough pipe. The findings showed patterns in friction factors in relation to Reynolds numbers, which made it possible to compare the findings with well-known formulas like the Swamee-Jain equation. The split flow experiment used a trial- and-error approach to reduce head loss, and the ball valve's estimated minor loss coefficient was compared with published values. Introduction The Materials and Methods Equipment and Materials: The experimental setup involved the use of AFTC (Advanced Fluids Training and Calibration) software, a pump actuator (AB-1 button), a hydraulic network with manometer tubes, and a variety of pipes and valves. The tests were designed to find friction losses in a rough pipe, minor losses with a half-open ball valve in a smooth pipe, and split flow in parallel pipes. Specific instruments included manometer tubes for pressure measurements, a ball valve for controlling flow, and various pipes of different diameters and lengths.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
2 Experimental Procedure: 1. Friction Loss (Rough Pipe with No Minor Losses): The experiment began with the start of the pump actuator through the AFTC software. For each flow rate, the length of the pipe across two manometer tubes was measured, and the diameter of the pipe was recorded. Pressure head differences were recorded for at least eight readings, and data was collected. 2. Minor Loss (Smooth Pipe with a Ball Valve Half Open): In this test, the length and diameter of the pipe were measured, and a ball valve was opened halfway. The pressure head differences were recorded for four different flow rates. 3. Split Flow (Smooth Pipe with Split Flow): This test used the measurement of minor loss components such as elbows, tees, and valves. The lengths and diameters of the pipes in the upper and lower sections were measured. A ball valve was opened halfway, and pressure head differences were recorded for four flow rates. Theoretical calculations involved a trial-and-error method to minimize head losses. These procedures were conducted while considering a roughness height (ε) of 0.175 mm for calculations. The data collected was used to find friction factors, Reynolds numbers, and minor loss coefficients, and plots were created to analyze trends and compare with equations.
2 Results
2
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
2 Discussion The friction factor demonstrates a roughly linear decreasing trend when plotted against increasing Reynolds numbers, indicating that friction generally decreases as the velocity of the flow increases (assuming constant pipe diameter).  However, a closer look at the graph shows that while the overall trend is linear decreasing, there is actually a slight exponential decrease from the start of the line to about Re = 60000, after which there is a slight increase in the friction factor followed by a steeper decrease.  As seen in Figure 3 (below), when plotted against the Reynolds number, the friction factor curve according to the Swamee-Jain equation closely matches the experimental data curve in Figure 1. Therefore, the experimental data curve for this lab can be verified with the Swamee-Jain equation.  The calculated k value for minor loss caused by the half-closed ball valve is 2.02, compared with 5 for a ball valve 1/3 closed.  The theoretical head loss for the upper loop is __, and the theoretical head loss for the lower loop is __, compared to 2.416m calculated head loss for both the upper and lower loops. 
2 Conclusion The Swamee-Jain equation is used to solve directly for the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor full-flowing circular pipe. The Swamee-Jain equation is a quick method to find the turbulent flow friction factors. The moody diagram is a graphical interpretation where Reynolds numbers are on the x-axis, relative roughness is showing as curved lines and friction factor values are on the lefts side of the y-axis. Although the moody diagram is more accurate it is more time consuming.   The minor loss coefficient calculated in the second part can’t be used for any type of value. The minor loss is used to account for energy loss in a system of pipes.   The best method for calculating flow distribution in pipe networks is the hardy cross method. The hardy cross metho is an iterative method for determining the flow in the pipe network system. 
2 References: [1] R. C. Hibbeler, Fluid Mechanics . NY, NY: Pearson, 2018.    
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
2 Appendix No charts or graphics were referenced in this report.