Scribd Logo
Загрузить

Добро пожаловать в Scribd!

  • Flow Coefficients Compare: Manning, Fanning-Moody, & Hazen-Williams

    Загружено:

    Otis Arms
    202 просмотров1 страница
    Here is comparison of relations between the 3 main liquid pressure loss methods. The Moody and Fanning methods give nearly same results. The reliable 'Hazen-Williams' method compares more closely to the Fanning-Blasius method, than to the Moody method. This is demonstrated by a plot of pressure drop differences.

    Авторское право

    © Public Domain

    Доступные форматы

    PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

    Этот документ был вам полезен?

    Это неприемлемый материал?

    Пожаловаться на этот документ
    Here is comparison of relations between the 3 main liquid pressure loss methods. The Moody and Fanning methods give nearly same results. The reliable 'Hazen-Williams' method compares more closely to the Fanning-Blasius method, than to the Moody method. This is demonstrated by a plot of pressure drop differences.

    Авторское право:

    Public Domain
    Скачайте в формате PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    202 просмотров1 страница

    Flow Coefficients Compare: Manning, Fanning-Moody, & Hazen-Williams

    Загружено:

    Otis Arms
    Here is comparison of relations between the 3 main liquid pressure loss methods. The Moody and Fanning methods give nearly same results. The reliable 'Hazen-Williams' method compares more closely to the Fanning-Blasius method, than to the Moody method. This is demonstrated by a plot of pressure drop differences.

    Авторское право:

    Public Domain
    Скачайте в формате PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    из 1

    FLOW COEFICENTS C0MPARE: Manning.Fanning.Hazen-Williams by OP Armstrong P.E.

    2017

    PROBLEM & BACKGROUND


    Three methods are commonly
    used to determine flow pressure
    losses in conduits. They are
    Manning, Hazen-Williams, and
    Fanning a.k.a. Moody Chart.
    Looking at these equations will
    show the similarities and
    differences. A comparison of these
    methods should yield about the
    same friction losses. A small
    dataset based on 1-7fps and R
    10E4-3E6 was used for checking.
    Results are given in chart to right.
    The Manning formula gave closer
    agreement to Moody % than did HW, 8%. The HW formula was developed from over 2000 points in
    of actual works, 1914. HW is a method used by NFPA & other standards agencies. The Manning method
    is widely accepted for both closed and open channel flow. Less error, 1.1%, to HW data is had by fitting
    a Blasius type friction factor to HW p at C of 130, f=0.148/R0.163 & p=fL/D(V2/2g).

    Findings are given below and in above Chart:


    Table of Formula, Symbols, and Variables in Common American Units
    Comment Hazen Williams Manning
    dP: feet fluid/feet of Conduit 10.44(gpm/C)1.85/d4.87 12.75(n*gpm)2/d5.33
    dP Modified Fanning Moody dP=f(gpm)2/d5/32.2 f(gpm)2/d5/32.2
    f , =0.001 ft D= id, feet = d/12 ((-1.8*log((/D/3.7)1.11+6.9/R))-2)/0.976 ((-1.8*log((/D/3.7)1.11+6.9/R))-2)/0.976
    0.0075 0.104 0.187
    Less err when fit f@C=130, n C=82.7d /f or 57.5/f n= 0.049(f0.5d0.167)
    Reynolds Number, =1.31 centStk R=3163*gpm/d/ R=3163*gpm/d/

    The following is a detailed description and analysis of the method.


    f*gpm2/d5/32.2 = 10.44*(gpm/C)1.85/d4.87 by (d/d)0.13 & (gpm/gpm)0.15 to get
    f/32.2=10.44 C1.85 (gpm/d)-0.14 or
    C=23.2/((gpm/d)0.076f0.54) but (gpm/d/v) is Reynolds and f can be expressed in terms a/Rb so call
    this term as
    C, or C=23.2/f0.46 it close to Chezy Cc, Cc=(8g/f)=16.1(1/f)
    When this limited data set is regressed: C=57.5/f0.187 resulted from least squares. The C ranged
    117-133. But an improved fit was with C=82.7d0.0075/f0.104
    The better compliance with this data set was to modify Fanning Friction by a Blasius (f=0.148/R0.163 )
    type friction factor. This complied to within 1% of HW pressure drop at C=130. Note: some
    recommend f=a/Rb & p=fL/D(V2/2g).with a: 0.184, 0.216 & b:0.2, 0.2: Smooth pipes, Commercial
    steel pipes.

    Вам также может понравиться