Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Name:
Student ID:
Group Number:
Date performed experiment:
Lab supervisor:
OBJECTIVE
1. To determine the reaction force produced by the impact of jet of water on to
variety type of target vanes.
2. To experimentally determine the force required to keep a target at a datum level
while it is subjected to the impact of water jet.
3. The experimentally measured force is compare with the theoretical calculated
force
APPARATUS REQUIRED
Weight Carrier
Pointer
Brass Weights
Weight Platform
Interchangeable
Target Vane
Interchangeable
Nozzle
2.0
SUMMARY OF THEORY
2.1 General Analysis
When a jet of water flowing with a steady velocity strikes a solid surface,
the water is deflected to flow along the surface. Unlike the impact of solid
bodies, there is no rebound and unless the flow is highly turbulent, there
will be no splashing. If friction is neglected by assuming an inviscid fluid
and it is also assumed that there are no losses due to shocks then the
magnitude of the water velocity is unchanged, the pressure exerted by the
water on the solid surface will everywhere be at right angles to the surface.
Newtons second law of motion states that a mass that is accelerated
required a force that is equal to the product of the mass and acceleration.
In fluid mechanics, whenever fluid are forced to go through a restriction or
change direction. The analogy to Newtons second law in fluid mechanics
is known as the momentum equation.
FX
Vi
Vi
Impact Velocity, Vi
Vi cos
Vi
Height, h
Vi sin
Vi
Exit Velocity, Vn
But M
Force
Mass Acceleration
Mass Flow Rate Change in Velocity
- FX
M V
M (VX,out - VX,in )
- FX
M Vi cos - Vi
FX
M Vi 1 - cos
= Q
therefore
Q V i (1 cos )
.
F
.
Q Vi
1 cos
Effect of Height
The jet velocity can be calculated from the measured flow rate and
the nozzle exit area.
.
Q
Vn
A
However, as the nozzle is below the target, the impact velocity will
be less than the nozzle velocity due to interchanges between
potential energy and kinetic energy.
Z n 2 g Z i
2g
P
i 0
And
Z n Zi h
Therefore,
Vi 2 Vn2 2 gh
c)
d)
Experimentally,
.
F Q Vi 1 - cos
3.0
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
3.1 General Start-up Procedures
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
3.2
Objective:
1. To determine the reaction force produced by the impact of a jet of
water on to various target vanes.
2. To experimentally determine the force required to keep a target at a
datum level while it is subjected to the impact of a water jet.
3. To compare the experimentally measured force with the theoretically
calculated force
Procedures:
1. The weight carrier is positioned on the weight platform. The spring
tension adjuster is adjusted to a distance of 20 mm between the nozzle
and the target, then record this value as h. The pointer is to be moved
so that it is aligned to the weight platform that is floating in mid
position.
2. The pump is started and the water flow is established by steadily
opening the bench regulating valve until it is fully open.
3. The vane will now be deflected by the impact of the jet. Weights are
added onto the weight carrier until the weight platform is again
floating in mid position.
4. The flow rate is measured and the result is recorded on the test sheet,
together with the corresponding value of weight on the tray. The form
of the deflected jet is observed and its shape is noted.
5. The weight on the weight carrier is reduced in steps and balance of
weight platform is maintained by regulating the flow rate in about
eight or ten even steps, each time recording the value of flow rate and
weight on the weight carrier.
6. The control valve is closed and the pump is switched off.
7. The experiment is repeated with different target vanes and nozzles.
Results and analysis:
1. The results are recorded on the result sheets.
2. The flow rate and the nozzle exit velocity are calculated. The nozzle
velocity for the height of the target is corrected above the nozzle to
obtain the impact velocity.
3. The experimental force and the theoretical force are calculated, then to
compare.
Discussion:
Flow Rate
(LPM)
12.8
14.8
18.3
Flow Rate,
Q (m /s)
2.13 x10 4
2.47 x10 4
3.05 x 10 4
Flow Rate,
Q (m /s)
Exit
Velocity,
Vn (m/s)
h,
(mm)
Impact
Velocity, Vi
(m/s)
Experimental
Force, F(N)
Theoretical
Force,
Fn(N)
Error
(%)
2.13 x10 4
2.47 x10 4
3.05 x 10 4
10.85
12.58
15.53
25
25
25
10.83
12.56
15.51
1.15
0.98
1.47
1.96
17.23
5.44
20.92
1.55
2.37
Vn 2 2 gh
10.83m / s
10
QVi (1 cos )
1000 x 2.13 x10 4 x10.83 x (0.5)
1.15 N
0.92 1.15
x100%
0.98
= 17.23%
11
Impact
Velocity Vi
Experimental
Force, F (N)
9.333
1.71
Theoretical ERROR
Force, Fn (%)
(N)
1.472
16.2
x 11.036
25
11.025
2.39
1.962
21.8
x 11.88
25
11.87
2.73
2.45
11.6
12
Vn 2 2 gh
(11.036) 2 ( 2 x9.81x0.025)
11.025m / s
1.962 2.39
x100%
1.962
= 21.8%
13
Impact
Velocity Vi
Experimental
Force, F (N)
7.11
8.74
9.51
9.50
25
14
ERROR
(%)
1.71
2.39
Theoretical
Force, Fn
(N)
1.4715
2.45
2.73
3.55
20.63
35.29
22.5
Vn 2 2 gh
8.74m / s
2.45 3.001
x100%
2.45
= 22.5%
Table for 30 Plate Target
15
Weight
(g)
100
150
200
Volume
(L)
12.5
13.0
16.1
Time (s)
T2
60
60
60
T1
60
60
60
T3
60
60
60
Average
Time (s )
60
60
60
Flow Rate,
Q (m /s)
Exit
Velocity,
Vn (m/s)
h,
(mm)
Impact
Velocity, Vi
(m/s)
Experimental
Force, F(N)
Theoretical
Force,
Fn(N)
2.0830 x10 4
2.1667 x 10 4
2.6830 x10 4
10.6090
11.0347
13.6670
25
25
25
10.5870
11.0125
13.6490
1.10263
0.981
1.4715
1.9620
1.19304
1.83101
Error
(%)
12.40
18.92
6.68
= ( 60 + 60 + 60 ) / 3
= 60 s
Flow Rate, Q (m/s) = V / t
= ( 12.5l x 0.001 m/l ) / 23s
= 2.083 x 10 4 m/s
Nozzle Diameter: 5 x 10 m
Area, A = D / 4
= ( 5 x 10 ) / 4
=1.9635 x 10 5 m
Exit Velocity, Vn (m/s) = Q / A
= ( 2.083 x 10 4 m/s ) / 1.9635 x 10 5 m
= 10.609 m/s
Impact Velocity, Vi (m/s)
Vn 2 2 gh
10.587 m / s
0.981 1.10263
x100%
0.981
= 12.40%
4.0
O BSERVATIONS
AND
D ISCUSSION
When the graphs of Theoretical Force vs Experimental Force were plotted all the
vanes except the hemispherical one gave a gradient very close to 1. The
hemisphere gave a gradient of 1.92
17
120 Conical
Flat Plate
Hemisphere
30 Plate
5.0
Most of the experimental errors above are below 25% which although are not
within the usually range of about 10-15 percent are not totally unacceptable.
It was also observed that the experimental force was at all instances higher than
the theoretically required force.
18
For orifices having a sharp edge, A, has been found to be approximately 62% of
the orifice area (pg 117, Kundu) Therefore the area used for the calculations can
be one reason for the discrepancies.
Although assumed as uniform throughout the jet during calculation, the velocity
of the water in the jet is not. To account for this a Momentum-Flux correlation
factor(Beta) has to be used where
The elasticity of spring acted on the weight platform is one of the main cause to
the errors occurred in the experiment when weight is been added. To obtain a
theoretical force, a suitable formulae is:
f = mg kx
where k is the constant of elasticity and x is the length of the spring.
The experimental results and the theoretically calculated values are similar within
experimental error and proves the law of conservation of momentum.
R EFERENCES
19