Title

Author













Group No.
Date

Table of Contents

Contents
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................................. ii
List of Figures ....................................................................................................................................................................... iv
List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................................................... v
1. Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 2
3. Methodology .................................................................................................................................................................. 3
3.1 Governing equations .......................................................................................................................................... 3
3.1.1

Continuity Equation: ............................................................................................................................. 3

3.1.2

Energy equation: .................................................................................................................................... 3

3.2 Underlying assumptions ................................................................................................................................... 4

4. Experimental Procedure ........................................................................................................................................... 5
4.1 Material: ................................................................................................................................................................... 5
4.2 Procedure ................................................................................................................................................................ 5
5. Data Collected ................................................................................................................................................................ 7
5.1 Straight Pipe trials ............................................................................................................................................... 7
5.2 Contraction ............................................................................................................................................................. 7
5.3 Bend ........................................................................................................................................................................... 8
6. Calculation and Results ............................................................................................................................................. 9
6.1 Friction Factor results: ...................................................................................................................................... 9
6.2 Kc results: ................................................................................................................................................................ 9
6.3 Kb Results: ............................................................................................................................................................ 10
7. Discussion and Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 11
7.1 General Errors ..................................................................................................................................................... 11
7.2 Friction Factor .................................................................................................................................................... 11
7.3 Contraction loss coefficient ........................................................................................................................... 11
7.4 Bend Loss Coefficient ....................................................................................................................................... 12
8. Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................................. 12
Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................................. 13

ii


References ............................................................................................................................................................................ 14
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................................... 15

iii

List of Figures
Figure 1 Measuring time needed to fill 10 L of water in the tank .................................................................. 5
Figure 2 Placing the sensors on the end points of the segment under study ............................................ 6
Figure 3 Reading pressure head values from the software .............................................................................. 6
Figure 4 Technician fixing pressure censors ......................................................................................................... 12

iv

List of Tables
Table 1 Data collected from straight pipe trials ..................................................................................................... 7
Table 2 Data collected from contraction trials ....................................................................................................... 7
Table 3 Data collected from 90 degree bend trials ............................................................................................... 8
Table 4 Calculations of Reynolds number, friction factors and percentage error ................................. 9
Table 5 Calculation of Kc and the percentage error ............................................................................................. 9
Table 6 Calculations of Kb and percentage error ................................................................................................ 10
Table 7 Kc values for contraction of different angles ........................................................................................ 15
Table 8 K values for threaded pipe fittings ............................................................................................................ 15
Table 9 Ks values for pipes made of different materials .................................................................................. 15
Table 10 Moody Diagram ............................................................................................................................................... 16

1. Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to show the results of calculating experimental values of
friction factors and loss coefficients of a contraction and a 90 degree threaded bend.

Our experiment involved 3 phases and 3 trials per phase:
1) Friction factor of a straight pipe
2) Kc value of the contraction
3) Kb value of a 90 degree threaded bend

The experiment resulted in large errors in determining the different factors relative to
the theoretical ones.

The friction factor found had an average error of 42.45% relative to the theoretical
friction factor. Also, the Kc value, having the largest error in calculation, had an average
error of 672% relative to the theoretical Kc. Finally, the Kb value had an average error of
35 % from the theoretical Kb.

The errors calculated were a result of several factors including:
1) Malfunction and inaccuracy of the pressure head sensors
2) Assuming of Ks instead of determining the actual value
3) Not measuring again the flow after the transition from one segment to another

2. Introduction
In hydraulic engineering practice, it is necessary to estimate the head loss incurred by
a fluid as it flows along a pipeline. For example, it may be desired to predict the rate of
flow along a proposed pipe connecting two reservoirs at different levels. Or it may be
necessary to calculate what additional head would be required to double the rate of flow
along an existing pipeline. Thus its necessary to calculate the head losses for the above
calculations to be accurate.
Usually, head loss is incurred by fluid mixing which occurs at fittings such as bends or
valves, and by frictional resistance at the pipe wall. Major losses are due to bends,
contraction-expansion and valves. Friction losses are between fluid and contact surface.
Where there are numerous fittings and the pipe is short, the major part of the head loss
will be due to the local mixing near the fittings. For a long pipeline, on the other hand,
skin friction at the pipe wall near will predominate. In the experiment described below,
we investigate the losses due to frictional resistance in a straight pipe with rough walls,
fluid mixing in a bend and a contraction.

3. Methodology
3.1 Governing equations
In this experiment two main equations were used: Continuity and energy equations.
3.1.1 Continuity Equation:
The continuity equation states that the net rate of mass inflow to a control volume is
equal to the rate of increase in mass within fixed boundaries.
Therefore, 1 * A1*V1=2 * A2*V2 Since the fluid is incompressible then 1 =2 therefore
A1*V1=A2*V2 Then Q1=Q2
Where:
= density (Kg/m3)
V: velocity (m/s)
A= area in m2
Q= flow rate (m3/s)
3.1.2 Energy equation:
!!

!!

!
!
! ! + ! + 1 !!
+ = !! + ! + 2 !!
+

Where:

! : Elevation Head (m)

: Pressure Head (m)

!!
!!

: Velocity head (m)

HM: Head of the machine (m). There is an absence of pumps or turbines HM =0

! Summation of all major and minor losses

Assuming turbulent flow (as will be determined from Re in the experiment) 1=2=1

!!

Lets define the hydraulic head as = ! + + !!

The equation becomes: H! = H! +
!!

Head Losses: ! = ! !! +

h!
!!

!!

Where:

: Friction loss coefficient

: Length of the pipe (m)

: Diameter of the pipe (m)

!!
!!

: velocity head (in m)

: minor loss coefficient for each fitting

Friction Coefficient =

!.!"
!"#

Reynolds Number: =

!"
!

!"
!.!"
!
!.!! !"!.!

Where:

: Kinematic Viscosity =10-6 m2/s at 20C

Ks= relative roughness (in m).

D= diameter of pipe (in m).

3.2 Underlying assumptions

There are 3 main assumptions in this experiment:
!

!!

1) For the bend and contraction, the head loss ! !! is neglected because L is
small
2) = 1
3) Assume Ks= 0.3mm

4. Experimental Procedure
4.1 Material:

Hydraulic Bench with adjustable flow

Pipes of different sizes and fittings equipped with valves including:

o 1 m straight pipe
o A contraction with an angle of 60o
o A threaded 90o bend

PC interface connected to two sensors

Stop watch

Measuring tape

4.2 Procedure
a) Use a measuring tape to measure the straight pipe length
b) Record the necessary dimensions of the segments under study.
c) Open the valve for the rough pipe
d) Turn on the pump and adjust initial flow
e) Using a stopwatch, record the time needed to fill 10 Liters in the tank as done in
figure 1.

Figure 1 Measuring time needed to fill 10 L of water in the tank

f) Place the sensors at the start and end points of the segment under study as done
in figure 2.

Figure 2 Placing the sensors on the end points of the segment under
study

g) Reset the computer program and record the values for the pressure heads as
done in figure 3.

Figure 3 Reading pressure head values from the software

h) Open the valve of the contraction then close that of the rough pipe to avoid
damaging the equipment.
i) Repeat steps e to g after changing the flow

j) Open the valve of the pipe line including the bend then close that of the
contraction
k) Repeat the steps e to g after changing the flow
l) Open the valve of the straight pipe and close that of the bend.
m) Repeat the procedure for a total of 3 different flow rates.

5. Data Collected
5.1 Straight Pipe trials
Trials

Flow Calculated

hu (cm)

hd (cm)

(m3/s)
1

4.33E-04

106

70

6.60E-04

217

151

7.71E-04

271

190

Length (cm)

Diameter (mm)

100

17

Table 1 Data collected from straight pipe trials

5.2 Contraction
Trials

Flow Calculated

hu (cm)

hd (cm)

(m3/s)
1

4.33E-04

65

59

6.60E-04

128

116

7.71E-04

155

141

Diameter 1 (mm)

Diameter 2(mm)

40

25

Table 2 Data collected from contraction trials

5.3 Bend
Trials

Flow Calculated

hu (cm)

hd (cm)

(m3/s)
1

4.33E-04

78

70

6.60E-04

158

143

7.71E-04

193

175

Diameter 1 (mm)

(cm)

17

Table 3 Data collected from 90 degree bend trials

6. Calculation and Results

6.1 Friction Factor results:
Trial

V(m/s)

1.9056

2
3

Re

fexperimental

ftheoretical

Error (%)

32395

0.03306

0.04817

31.37

2.9080

49437

0.02603

0.04761

45.32

3.3968

57746

0.02341

0.04746

50.67

Table 4 Calculations of Reynolds number, friction factors and percentage error

Sample Calculation based on trial 1:

1) Velocity : =

!
!

!.!!!"!!
!

!.!" !

= 1.9056
!

2) Experimental friction factor: =

3) Reynolds number: =

!!
!

4) Theoretical friction factor: =

5)

!experimental!!theoretical
!theoretical

!!" !!!!! !"!!

! ! !

!.!"#$!.!"#
!"!!

!!.!"#!.!" !"#!!" !"!!

!.!"#$! !

= 0.03306

= 32395

0.25

log 3.7
+ 5.74
0.9

100 =

0.25
0.3
log 3.717
+ 5.74 0.9
26678.4

!.!"#$%!!.!""!#
!.!"#$%

100 = 31.37%

6.2 Kc results:
Trial

Vu(m/s)

Vd(m/s)

Kcexperimental

Kctheoretical

Error (%)

0.3442

0.8811

0.6688

0.06

1014.7

0.5253

1.3448

0.4547

0.06

657.8

0.6136

1.5707

0.2660

0.06

343.3

Table 5 Calculation of Kc and the percentage error


Sample Calculation based on trial 1:
1) Velocities:

a. V1 = =

b. V1 = =
2)

!!
!

2
2

!!

!
+ !!
=

2
2 2

!!
!

!!
!!!
!!

!!!

!!.!!!"!!
!(!"!"!! )!

!!.!!!"!!

= 0.3442 s
m

= 0.8811 s

!(!"!"!! )!

!!

!
+ !!
+

2
2
9.81
0.34422
0.88112
2
2
d
=2
65

10
+

59

10
+
2
2
2 9.81
2 9.81
0.88112

= 0.6688

3) =

!"experimental!!"theoretical
!"theoretical

100 = 1014.7%

6.3 Kb Results:
Trial

V(m/s)

Kbexperimental

Kbtheoretical

Error(%)

1.906

0.8101

0.9

9.999

2.908

0.5104

0.9

43.29

3.397

0.4251

0.9

52.77

Table 6 Calculations of Kb and percentage error

Sample Calculation based on trial 1:

!

1) Kbexperimental: ! ! + 1 =
Kb =

!!(!! !!! ! !)

2) =

!!

!!
!

!!

+ 2 + 2!

!!.!" !"!!"!! !"!!

!.!"#!

!"experimental!!"theoretical
!"theoretical

= 0.8101

100 =

!.!"#"!!.!
!.!

100 = 9.999 %

10

7. Discussion and Analysis

The flow, in this lab, could be measured in two different ways. The first one is obtained
from the software on the computer while the second one can be measured manually.
The ones obtained by the software were disregarded.
Its notable that there were some large errors in the determination of f, Kc and Kb.
7.1 General Errors
General errors include:

Inaccurate measurement of the flow rate manually ( pressing stop watch +- 1-2 s
from the actual time needed to fill 10 L)

Precision of measuring the pipe length is to the nearest mm.

7.2 Friction Factor

An average error of 42.45% is a rather noticeable one (The average error was calculated
by referring to the table comparing the experimental and textbook f). This error might
be due to the fact that we assumed a roughness of 0.3 mm whereas it could have been a
different value.
7.3 Contraction loss coefficient
An average error of 672% is alarming and implies the occurrence of major errors. These
errors could be due to several factors including:

Neglecting the frictional loss f along the contraction pipe

Malfunctioning of the sensors in calculating the pressure heads as seen in figure

4 where the technician fixes them after they start dripping water.

The valve of the pipe including the contraction might be causing increased flow
of fluid than the valve of the straight pipe. Thus, the actual value of Q is greater
than the one calculated initially for the first pipe. Doing the calculation for 1
percent increase in Q leads to an error of 964.9% for first run. Therefore, the
difference in error is 49.8 %.

11

Figure 4 Technician fixing pressure censors

7.4 Bend Loss Coefficient

An average error of 35.35% is noticeable but its more acceptable than the errors faced
in contraction and friction loss trials. This error could be due to the following factors:

Neglecting the frictional losses along the length of the bend.

Also the flow might be varied in the transition to the new pipe containing the
bend.

8. Conclusions
The calculated friction and loss coefficients for the pipe, bend and contraction had large
errors relative to the theoretical ones exceeding 10-14 percent. Therefore, there is a
need to question the quality of the sensors being used to measure the pressure heads
especially when it comes to the contraction section.

The errors calculated were partially a result of several factors: malfunction and
inaccuracy of the pressure head sensors, assuming of Ks instead of determining the
actual value, and not measuring again the flow after the transition from one segment to
another.

12

Acknowledgments
Special thanks for Mr.Rabih our lab assistant for explaining thoroughly the procedure of
the experiment.
Special thanks for Dr. Basha for explaining the continuity and energy equations in class,
and explaining their usage in this experiment.

13

References
Basha, H. (2013). Hydraulics & Laboratory. Beirut, Lebanon.

14

Appendix

Table 7 Kc values for contraction of different angles

Table 8 K values for threaded pipe fittings

Table 9 Ks values for pipes made of different materials

15

Table 10 Moody Diagram

16