EXPERIMENT 2: FLOW THROUGH ORIFICE

RESULTS

Diameter of Orifice, do = 0.013 m

d 2
Area of Orifice, Ao =
4

= 1.327 x 10 4 m 2
dc = Diameter of jet
Ac = Area of jet
Cc = Coefficient of contraction

Table 1: Data recorded and the calculations of flow rate, Q.

Stopwatch reading Volumetric tank Coefficient of
contraction,
No. reading Q = V/t d j dc
A
(mm) Cc c
(x 10 4 ) Ao
Initial End Time Initial End Volume ( m3 / s )
(s) (s) (s) (s) (s) (s)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
1 0 23.00 23.00 0 0.005 0.005 2.17 11.87 0.834
2 0 29.13 29.13 0 0.005 0.005 1.72 11.09 0.728
3 0 28.03 28.03 0 0.005 0.005 1.78 9.87 0.576
4 0 38.10 38.10 0 0.005 0.005 1.31 9.61 0.546
5 0 42.28 42.28 0 0.005 0.005 1.18 9.21 0.502
6 0 47.00 47.00 0 0.005 0.005 1.06 11.07 0.725
7 0 48.94 48.94 0 0.005 0.005 1.02 10.09 0.602
8 0 43.00 43.00 0 0.005 0.005 1.16 10.00 0.592

Average Cc = 0.638
 Table 2: Data recorded and the estimation of Cv.
Head of tank Head of pitot tube Coefficient of
velocity,
No. Ho Ho Hc Hc
Hc
Cv
(m) ( m1 / 2 ) (m) ( m1 / 2 ) Ho

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

1 0.370 0.608 0.368 0.607 0.998
2 0.353 0.594 0.351 0.592 0.997
3 0.279 0.528 0.277 0.526 0.996
4 0.245 0.495 0.244 0.494 0.998
5 0.296 0.443 0.195 0.442 0.998
6 0.172 0.415 0.171 0.414 0.998
7 0.143 0.378 0.142 0.377 0.997
8 0.111 0.333 0.111 0.333 1.000

Average value of Cv = 0.998

 Table 3: Calculation of Cd, Cc and Cv for orifice.
No. Q Ho Qo Ao 2 gH o Cd
Q
Cc
Cd
(x 10 4 ) Qo Cv
(x 10 4 ) 1/ 2 Cv
(m )
3
(m /s ) ( m3 / s )

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

1 2.17 0.608 0.998 3.575 0.607 0.608
2 1.72 0.594 0.997 3.492 0.493 0.494
3 1.78 0.528 0.996 3.105 0.573 0.575
4 1.31 0.495 0.998 2.909 0.450 0.451
5 1.18 0.443 0.998 2.602 0.433 0.454
6 1.06 0.415 0.998 2.438 0.435 0.436
7 1.02 0.378 0.997 2.223 0.459 0.460
8 1.16 0.333 1.000 1.958 0.592 0.592
Average 1.425 0.474 0.998 2.788 0.508 0.509

Average Value of Cv = 0.998

Average Value of Cd = 0.508
Average Value of Cc = 0.509
CALCULATION & OBSERVATION

Diameter of orifice, do = 0.013m

(d o ) 2 (0.013) 2
Area of orifice, Ao
4 4

= 1.327 x 10 4 m 2

TABLE 1
Taking No. 1 as an example for calculation:

Volume of water = 5 L = 5.0 10 3 m 3

Time taken = 23.00s
V
Flow rate, Q
t

5103 m3

23s

= 2.17 x 10 4 m 3 / s

Diameter of jet, dc = 11.87mm

= 0.01187 m

(d c ) 2
Area of jet, Ac
4

(0.01187) 2

4

= 1.107 x 10 4 m 2

Ac
Coefficient of contraction, Cc
Ao

1.107 10 4

1.327 10 4
= 0.834
The above steps are repeated from no.1 to no.8.
Table 2

Taking No. 1 as an example for calculation:

Head of tank, Ho = 0.370 m

Head of pitot tube, Hc = 0.368 m

Ho = 0.370 Hc = 0.368

= 0.608 = 0.607

Hc
Coefficient of velocity, Cv
Ho

0.607

0.608

= 0.998

The above steps are repeated from no.1 to no. 8.

Average value of Cv

0.998 0.997 0.996 0.998 0.998 0.998 0.997 1.000

8
0.998

Table 3

Taking No. 1 as an example for calculation:

Q1 2.17 104

Ho = 0.370

= 0.608 m1 / 2

Cv = 0.998
Qo Ao 2 gH o

(1.327 10 4 ) 29.810.608

= 3.575 x 10 4 m 3 / s

Q
Cd
Qo

2.17 10 4

3.57510 4

= 0.607

Cd
Cc
Cv

0.607

0.998

= 0.608

The above steps are repeated from no.1 to no.8.

Average value of Cd

0.607 0.493 0.573 0.45 0.433 0.435 0.459 0.592 0.509

8
0.508

Average value of Cc

0.608 0.494 0.575 0.451 0.454 0.436 0.46 0.592

8
0.509
 Graph of Q against Ho (1/2)
0.00023

0.00021

0.00019

0.00017
Flow Rate, Q (m3/s)

0.00015

0.00013

0.00011

0.00009 y = 0.0004x - 3E-05

0.00007

0.00005
0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65
Ho (1/2), (m1/2)

Graph 1: Graph of Q against Ho(1/2)

1
From graph of Q versus H o 2 , the flow rate through the orifice is stated as:

Q K Ho
1
where K Cd A 2 g = gradient of graph of Q versus H o 2

K
Cd
A 2g
0.0004

(1.327 10 4 ) 2 X 9.81
0.681
DISCUSSION

This experiments purpose is to determine the coefficient of contraction (Cc),

coefficient of discharge(Cd) and coefficient of velocity (Cv) for the orifice. The
coefficient of contraction is the ratio of cross-section of the vena contracta to the cross
section of the orifice. The coefficient of discharge is the ratio of the actual discharge
to the discharge at the ideal velocity without the reduction of area, while the
coefficient of velocity is the ratio of actual velocity to the ideal velocity. Table below
shows the values obtained from the experiment and the comparison of the results with
the values from manual of apparatus.

Average Values From

Percentage
Coefficient Experimental Manual of
Difference (%)
Values Apparatus

Cc (From Table 1) 0.638 0.650 1.85

Cv (From Table 2) 0.998 0.996 0.20

Cd (From Table 3) 0.508 0.630 19.37

Cc (From Table 3) 0.509 0.650 21.69

Cd (From Graph 1) 0.681 0.630 8.10

Table 4: Coefficient of Cc, Cd and Cv for the orifice.

The experiment shows that 2 values of the coefficient of contraction, Cc are

calculated by using different equation which is the ratio of cross section of vena
contracta to the cross section of orifice (Table 1) and ratio of coefficient of discharge
to coefficient of velocity (Table 3). The results obtained for Cc from Table 1 is 0.638
while from Table 3 is 0.509 and having a percentage difference of 1.85% and 21.69%
respectively when compared with values from manual of apparatus. The coefficient of
velocity, Cv obtained in the experiment is 0.998 while compared to the data from
manual of apparatus of 0.996, the percentage difference is 0.20%. This means that the
results obtained is close and agreed with the theoretical value. On the other hand,
coefficient of discharge (Cd) also obtained by two methods which are by calculating
the ratio of the actual discharge to the discharged at ideal velocity without reduction
of area (Table 3) and from graph of Q versus H1/2 (Graph 1). Both values obtained are
very close to each other which are 0.508 for the former method and 0.681 for the
latter method. At the meantime, both values have a percentage difference to the value
from manual of apparatus (0.630) of 19.37 and 8.10%.
 The overall values of the coefficients obtained from the experiment are lower
than that from the manual of apparatus. Between them, the coefficient of discharge
and coefficient of contraction are much lower than expected and showed high
percentage difference. This may because of some errors occurred when carrying out
the experiment, for example the errors when obtaining the diameter of the jet. It is
difficult to determine the diameter of jet accurately using the knife blade as parallax
errors might occurred and the position of blade might move during adjusting. Besides,
human errors might also occur when taking the reading of the time as the time to stop
the stopwatch differs from one to another as each person has different reaction time.
The orifice flow meter apparatus might also have some discrepancies and not well
calibrated as the water head of tank and pitot tube decreased sharply although the
valve was closed slightly and sometimes the situation vice versa. The energy loss
during the experiment might also affect the readings obtained to be lower than
expected.

Further discussions on the suggestions for improving the apparatus:

To increase the accuracy of the result, an electronic device should be introduced
in measuring the diameter of the water jet. As we are only using the blade to touch the
both side of water, the result is not that accurate as there are some deviation on the
actual diameter of water since the touching is not standard. A laser or infrared ray can
be used to replace the blade as it can measure the diameter of water jet in a higher
accuracy.
Besides that, a digital reading device is suggested to be installed in apparatus so
that the reading taken will be more accurate and human errors can be reduce as we
realized that the volume of water is not increase or decrease in constant rate when we
adjusted the valve. It is very difficult for the observer to take the reading of the
volume and the volume indicator will fluctuate and increase with a sudden increment.
It will affect the accuracy of the reading taken.
A better controlling valve should also replace to ensure consistent change of
the flow when adjusting the valve. The orifice flow meter apparatus should also place
on another levelled place to avoid the disturbance on the water level due to vibration
caused by the pump and increase its accuracy.
Precautions
There are few types of errors happened during this experiment and there are some
precautionary steps that are taken throughout the experiment to ensure the results
obtained are accurate and precise.

Parallax errors:
The eyes might not be horizontal when taking the reading.
The reading must be taken at least three times to take the average reading.
Make sure the eye level is always perpendicular when taking the reading of
the dial gauge and the scale of apparatus.

Human reflex errors:

The stopwatch might not be pressed accurately and exactly when the
reading of the water tank reached 0 litre or 5 litres. This is due to slower
human reflexes as our eyes and fingers do not work simultaneously
without any time difference.
Person who is in charge the stopwatch should focus to the reading when
the water tank reached 0 litre and 5 litres.

To improve the accuracy and consistency of the apparatus, we suggest:

Installation of digital electronic device should be installed at the discharged

pipe to measure the flow rate of the water in order to obtain a more accurate
flow of water. This can eliminate many human errors and hence, increase the
accuracy of the result.
Always do a check-up or maintenance within a certain period to make sure the
apparatus is well-functioned at all time.
Minimising the disturbance on the orifice due to vibration or shaking will
definitely increase the accuracy as the water level tends to fluctuate when the
orifice is shaken
CONCLUSION

From the experiment, the objective is to determine the value of Cv, Cd, and Cc of
orifice where Cv is the coefficient of velocity, Cd is the coefficient of discharge and Cc
is the coefficient of contraction is achieved.

Average
Coefficient Experimental
Values

Cc (From Table 1) 0.638

Cv (From Table 2) 0.998

Cd (From Table 3) 0.508

Cc (From Table 3) 0.509

Cd (From Graph 1) 0.681

Table 5: Average value of CV, Cd and CC for orifice.

The value of Cv, Cd and Cc as shown in the table above were determined from the
average eight sets of data. Since both of Cc and Cd values are close to theoretical
range 0.5-0.6, the results are acceptable. And Cv is near closed to 1.000 the value is
also acceptable. Therefore, the objectives of this experiment is achieved.