Abstract:

Head loss is a major factor that should be taken into consideration when it comes to
flow speed. Two types of head loss can be present, the first being major head losses
which involve losses in a straight pipe because of its surface roughness and length,
the second being minor head losses due to other factors such as fittings, junctions,
elbows, throttles, and so. The importance of viscous effects allows us to seamlessly
slot in the existing head losses into the famous Bernoulli equation when it comes to
steady incompressible pipe flow. The main purpose of this experiment was to
measure the minor and major losses and consequently obtain an understanding of
their dependence on the flow speed.

Introduction:
On Friday the 8th of May, at around 15:40, our group, composed of 5 members,
conducted the 3rd scheduled experiment regarding our Fluid Mechanics course with
the assistance of the incredibly helpful Miss. The experiment primarily involved
acquiring the major and minor head losses within three differently oriented pipes.
The first, an expanding pipe, and the second, a contracting one, provided us with
minor head losses while the major head loss was obtained from the third straightly
formed pipe. Friction, as regards to major losses, and sudden pipe area alterations,
concerning minor losses, are very vital issues that affect the flow inside pipes and
the main target of our experiment was to observe to what degree and how such
factors affect the flow, specifically the speed of flow. Reynolds number relies heavily
on the viscous effects and is also directly related to the friction factor in laminar
pipe flows whereas in turbulent flows, the roughness of the pipe significantly comes
into play. For minor head losses, irreversibility in the flow field is brought about from
the discontinuous expansions and contractions pushing us to obtain the loss
coefficient from the extended Bernoulli equation and the mass conservation
principles. One can now have an idea about the extreme importance of head loss in
pipes and its relation to flow speed, in fact, the magnitude of both types of losses
are found to be proportional to the velocity head.

Theory and Methodology:

This section will consist of the experimental setup, the procedure, and the relevant
equations for the experiment.

The experimental setup:

The following figure (Figure 1) depicts the experimental setup used, with every
component labeled as shown.

Figure 1: Test section and Hydraulic bench.

Calibration is a somewhat time consuming yet necessary first step when handling
such equipment. It is achieved by allowing a certain volume of water to flow through
the system for some time until no air bubbles can be seen anywhere in the system.
After opening the auxiliary valve and checking that the water was allowed to flow to
the tank pump, the stop-cock of the pipe in question was adjusted in a parallel
direction to it, with all the other perpendicular to their respective pipes in order to
allow flow solely into the pipe being observed. The pump was then turned on and
with the assistance of our lab instructor, we connected the two pressure gauge
cords to the specified sections that we wanted to measure. With the pressure
gauges closed from the atmosphere at the top, we set the volumetric flow rate in
the rotameter to an initial value of 1300 l/h and noted down the upstream and
downstream pressures. This procedure was repeated five times, with the volumetric
flow rate decreased 100 l/h after each measurement.

The following equation (Reynolds Equation), which is the ratio of flow inertia to the
viscous effects, was used to determine Reynolds number and therefore allowing us
to specify the flow as laminar or turbulent.

VD

Where,
Re: Reynolds number
: Density of water at 25C
: Viscosity of water at 25C
V: Average water velocity
D: Diameter of pipe

The loss coefficient for minor losses can be determined by the following equation.
2
d 22
K=( 2 1)
d1

Where d2 > d1
Consequently allowing us to obtain hminor from

hminor = K i (

V2
)
2g

Where,
g: gravitational acceleration
Ki: loss coefficient for ith component within pipe system

The laminar flow friction factor (Re<2100) for major losses can be determined by
the following equation.

f=

64

Meanwhile for turbulent flow (Re >2100) one can use either the Moody diagram
which relates the friction factor with the roughness (/D) or the following Blasius
equation for smooth pipes (2100<Re<10 5).

f Blasius =

0.3164
4

Consequently allowing us to obtain hmajor from

hmajor =

fl V 2
2 Dg

Where,
L= length of the pipe

t can be determined by the following equation.

Where,

: flow rate
The velocity is determined by the equation of continuity where
A1V1=A2V2=Q
Where,
Q: Flow rate
A: Area
V: Velocity

Calculations:
Major Loss:
Q= 1300 l/h = 3.6 x 10

-4

m3/s

hmajor = 73.6 mm h2o 55.4 mm h2o = 18.2 mm h2o = 0.0182 m h2o

V=Q/A =

3.6 x 104

2
(0.017 )
4

= 1.59 m/s

VD

hmajor =

= 27030 which means that the flow is turbulent

( f ) ( l ) (V 2)
2 ( g ) ( D)

0.3164
f theory = 4
27030

so f = 0.003

= 0.025

Following the same procedure we can obtain the following tables,

Column
1
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
t
0.077
0.083
0.091
0.1
0.11
A
100
100
100
100
100
h
(major)
0.018
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.010
(m)
2
1
2
5
5
Table 1 Values of t, A, and hmajor
V
(m/s)
Re
f

1.59
1.45
1.35
1.22
1.1
27030 24650 22950 20740 18700
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
2
3
5
6
Table 2 Values of Re, f

f vs Re
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
0

Figure 2 - Graph of f vs Re

|actualcalculated
|
actual

ERROR=
f
theory
Error

X 100%

0.025
0.026
0.025 2
0.026 3
0.027
87.20
86.50
87.70
88%
%
87%
%
%
Table 3 Values of f theory and the error

Major Losses:
Contraction:
Q = 3.6 x 10-4 m3/s
hminor = 78.6 60.8 = 0.0178 m h2o
V=Q/A
Re = (VD)/
We basically follow the same procedure to obtain the following table

Table 4 All the necessary values regarding head loss

Figure 3 Moodys Chart

Results and Discussion:

7

After plotting the graph of the obtained values of the friction coefficient vs Reynolds
number and comparing it to the give Moody diagram, we can observe that the curve
somewhat behaves in the same way but with noticeable inaccuracies due to the
rather hefty error calculated. Pipe roughness in laminar flow is of no or little
importance because of the fact that the flow stratified and basically covers the
roughness allowing it to behave as if flowing on a smooth surface. Meanwhile, pipe
roughness is of high significance when it comes to turbulent flow where at high
Reynold numbers the laminar sublayer no longer covers the roughness and
therefore should be taken into account. Reynolds number and major head loss are
related in a way in which they are both somehow proportional to the velocity,
making a relation worthy of note between the two. The friction coefficient will with
no doubt change if a different fluid is used since it is directly related to Reynolds
number, which itself is linked to the viscosity and the density of the fluid itself. If
flow rate were to be doubled, the velocity will also double in turn quadrupling the
head loss coefficients. The results obtained above clearly show the relation between
head loss, the velocity and Reynolds number.

Conclusion:
In this experiment, the major and minor head losses in three differently shaped
pipes were determined, the first being a pipe with a sudden expansion of its
diameter, the second being one with a sudden contraction, and the last one from
which we obtained the major head loss was a straight pipe. Major head loss
concerned the loss coefficient which involved loss due to friction and the length of
the pipe while the minor head losses concerned losses due to discontinuous
expansion or contraction. After finding the head losses at 5 different flow rates, we
were then allowed to calculate all the related loss coefficients and Reynolds
number, allowing us to plot a graph of f vs Re and compare our values to the
theoretical ones, giving us valuable experience for future practices.

References:

(n.d.).

Retrieved
May
15,
http://www.convertunits.com/from/mmH2O/to/pascal

2015,

from

Appendix A:
Left mm
Right mm
Q
h2o
h2o
(l/h)
55.5
62
1300
59.2
64.7
1200
61.3
66.4
1100
63.8
68
1000
66.1
69.4
900
Table 5 Measurements from the lab for expansion

Left mm
Right mm
Q
h2o
h2o
(l/h)
78.6
60.8
1300
79.6
64.3
1200
80.5
67.6
1100
81.1
70
1000
81.5
72.2
900
Table 6 - Measurements from the lab for contraction

Left mm
Right mm
Q
h2o
h2o
(l/h)
73.6
55.4
1300
75.1
59
1200
76.2
62
1100
77
64.5
1000
78
67.5
900
Table 7 Measurements from the lab for major loss

10