UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, JAMAICA

Thermal Fluid Science laboratory 1 exercise report

Title of Experiment: Laminar and Tubular flow

Experiment #: 7
Due Date: November 30, 2019
Name of Lecturer: Shanroy Dennis
Student name: Landel Smith
Id number: 1607757
Date Given: October 22, 2019
Table of Contents Page
NOMENCLATURE ....................................................................................................................... 1
OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND ............................................................................................ 1
Background ................................................................................................................................. 1
APPARATUS ............................................................................................................................. 3
PROCEDURE AND OBSERVATION .......................................................................................... 4
CALCULATIONS AND RESULTS .............................................................................................. 5
Sample Calculations .................................................................................................................... 8
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSION .................................................................. 11
Conclusion..................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................... 13
 NOMENCLATURE
Qty:- Quantity, m^3
h1 :- First differential head, mm
h2 :- Second differential head, mm
hf :- Sum of first and second differential head (h1 + h2)
Ɵ : Temperature, °C
A : Area, m^2
V: Velocity, m/s
f : Friction factor

𝑅𝑒 : Reynolds number
D : Diameter, m
G: Gravity, 9.784 m/s^2
I: Hydraulic gradient

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND

The objective of this experiment was to investigate the friction-loss for laminar and turbulent
flow of water through a straight pipe with smooth walls.

Background
The objective of this experiment was to investigate the friction-loss for laminar and turbulent
flow of water through a straight pipe with smooth walls.

Laminar flow is the resistance to flow in a liquid and it can characterized by its viscosity and it is
found to flow smooth. In the case of a moving plate in a liquid it is found that there is a layer
which moves with the plate the liquid tends to move in layers with a higher speed. Turbulent
flow however undergoes irregular fluctuations, the speed of the fluid at a point is continuously
undergoing changes in both magnitude and direction.

Moody’s chart is used to work out pressure drop and flow rate through pipes. It is a graph in non-
dimensional form that relates the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor, Reynolds number and relative
roughness for fully developed flow in a circular pipe.

Page | 1
An example of Moody’s chart:

Reynolds number is named after Osborne Reynolds who popularized its use in 1883 after it was
created by George Gabriel Stokes in 1851,it is a dimensionless quantity that is used to help
predict similar flow patterns in different fluid flow situations for flow in a pipe or tube Reynold’s
number can be with the use of the formula:

Laminar flow: Re < 2000

Transitional flow: 2000 < Re < 4000

Turbulent flow: Re > 4000

Page | 2
 APPARATUS
TechQuipment Hydraulics bench (H1) with constant head tank

TecQuipment Pipe Friction Apparatus (H7)

Measuring cylinder (1/2 or 1 litre)

Stopwatch

Thermometer

Figure 1: pipe friction apparatus (H7)

The Pipe Friction Apparatus is shown in figure 1 above. Water from a constant head tank is led
through a flexible hose to the bell-mouthed entrance of a straight tube along which the friction
loss would be measured. Piezometer tappings are made at a upstream section from the pipe
entrance and a downstream section at the pipes outlet. The tappings are connected to an inverted

Page | 3
U-tube water manometer or to a U-tube containing water and mercury. The water manometer
would be used for laminar flows and the water-mercury manometer used for turbulent flows.

PROCEDURE AND OBSERVATION

The Pipe Friction Apparatus was mounted on the Hydraulics bench, ensuring it was leveled. The
bench supply hose was connected to the constant head tank, and the tank to the test pipe inlet via
the flexible hoses. The tank overflow hose was placed in the drain leading to the sump tank. The
bench supply valve was checked if closed and the pump was turned on. The bench supply valve
was opened until there was just a steady flow of water down the overflow hose. The tap at the
downstream piezometer connection was opened. The needle valve was partially opened to allow
water to flow through the system and the piezometer connection tube was tapped to encourage
the trapped air to be escaped. The needle valve was the closed. When all the air had been cleared
from the tubes both limbs of the manometer was at the same level. The level in the manometer
was adjusted to near zero (mid scale) by releasing air from the valve at the top of the manometer.

The needle valve was the fully opened to obtain a differential head (h1 +h2) of more than
400mm. the flow rate was measured by means of volumetric measuring cylinder and stopwatch.(
the outlet end of the plastic tube was endured to be below the pipe, and it was never immersed in
the discharged water.) The needle valve was closed in stages to provide readings at a series of
reducing differential heads down to a minimum of about 20mm. at least 12 sets of reading was
taken with 6 having a differential head below 100mm. the temperature of the water was recorded
on few occasions. These readings covered laminar region and the turbulent flow.

To obtain a wider range of values in turbulent flow it was necessary to use water directly from
the bench supply and differential heads with the water-mercury was measured. The bench supply
hose was directly connected to the test pipe inlet, securing the joints firmly with hose clip. The
water manometer was isolated by closing the tap at the downstream piezometer connection. The
bench supply valve was checked if closed and the pump was switched on. The bench supply
valve was fully open and the needle valve slightly, so that there was a moderate flow of water
from the pipe exit. The bleed valve at the top of the mercury U-tube was opened to flush air from
the connecting tubes. There was a continuous water link from the piezometer connections up to
the surface of the mercury columns in the U-tube. The bleed valve and the needle valve were
closed. Both limbs of the mercury were checked if leveled.

The needle valve was opened fully, to give the maximum available flow rate. The differential
head and flow rate was recorded. The flow rate was gradually reduced by closing the needle
valve in stages, to give 10 sets of readings, with the minimum differential head on the
manometer being about 20mm. The water temperature was recorded on few occasions.

Page | 4
 CALCULATIONS AND RESULTS
Table 1: Lanminar Flow

h1 h2 V
Qty Qty Q(m3/ Log Log Log Log
t/s (m (m θ (m/s I f Re
(ml) (m3) s) V I f RE
m) m) )
26 - - -
0.00 4.9342 6. 0.69 0.76 0.02 2708 3.43
30 174 226 .1 0.15 0.11 1.63
003 1E-06 08 7908 3359 3001 .92 2796
1 62 727 826
26 - - -
0.00 6.8273 4. 0.96 0.65 0.01 3748 3.57
34 152 190 .1 0.01 0.18 1.98
0034 1E-06 98 5673 2672 0272 .246 3828
1 517 531 836
26 - - -
0.00 6.9506 4. 0.98 0.56 0.00 3815 3.58
31 134 162 .1 0.00 0.24 2.06
0031 7E-06 46 3122 4885 8577 .974 1605
1 739 804 665
26 - - -
0.00 5.6761 5. 0.80 0.51 0.01 3116 3.49
34 122 146 .1 0.09 0.29 1.93
0034 3E-06 99 2847 145 1645 .238 3631
1 537 12 385
26 - - -
0.00 6.9288 5. 0.98 0.43 0.00 3803 3.58
37 106 124 .1 0.00 0.35 2.17
0037 4E-06 34 0034 8931 6707 .987 0239
1 876 76 348
26 - - -
0.00 6.4981 5. 0.91 0.40 0.00 3567 3.55
36 98 112 .1 0.03 0.39 2.15
0036 9E-06 54 9122 0763 6962 .56 2371
1 663 711 725
26 - - -
0.00 4.3193 7. 0.61 0.19 0.00 2371 3.37
33 52 48 .1 0.21 0.71 2.12
0033 7E-06 64 0944 084 7504 .369 4999
1 4 933 473
26 - - -
0.00 3.9568 8. 0.55 0.16 0.00 2172 3.33
33 47 37 .1 0.25 0.79 2.12
0033 3E-06 34 9665 0305 7511 .333 6926
1 207 505 43
26 - - -
0.00 3.3543 9. 0.47 0.11 0.00 1841 3.26
32 39 23 .1 0.32 0.92 2.11
0032 E-06 54 4441 8321 7714 .536 518
1 382 694 27
20 26 - - -
0.00 1.4313 0.20 0.07 0.02 785. 2.89
30 .9 30 10 .1 0.69 1.11 1.56
003 E-06 2447 6336 7335 7936 5309
6 1 369 727 328
29 26 - - -
0.00 1.0671 0.15 0.05 0.03 585. 2.76
31 .0 26 4 .1 0.82 1.24 1.43
0031 3E-06 0937 7252 6881 8603 7794
5 1 12 221 319

Page | 5
Table 2: Turbulent Flow

h1 h2 V
Qty Qty Q(m3/ Log Log Log Log
t/s (m (m θ (m/s I f Re
(ml) (m3) s) V I f RE
m) m) )
26 - -
0.00 3.5393 1. 5.00 0.69 0.74 0.00 1943 4.28
63 172 218 .1 0.12 3.36
0063 3E-05 78 6119 9501 4275 0436 1.18 8499
1 827 066
26 - -
0.00 2.7495 5. 3.88 0.58 0.64 0.00 1509 4.17
157 152 188 .1 0.18 3.20
0157 6E-05 71 9055 9844 8855 063 5.31 8842
1 785 093
26 - -
0.00 2.4224 6. 3.42 0.53 0.54 0.00 1329 4.12
164 130 156 .1 0.26 3.16
0164 5E-05 77 6382 4836 5802 0682 9.45 3834
1 297 603
26 - -
0.00 2.2510 7. 3.18 0.50 0.45 0.00 1235 4.09
165 110 128 .1 0.34 3.18
0165 2E-05 33 3908 2961 4198 0658 8.29 1959
1 275 207
26 - -
0.00 2.0347 8. 2.87 0.45 0.38 0.00 1117 4.04
164 98 104 .1 0.41 3.16
0164 4E-05 06 7991 9089 5496 0683 0.88 8087
1 398 555
26 - -
0.00 1.6683 9. 2.35 0.37 0.26 0.00 9159 3.96
162 68 70 .1 0.57 3.15
0162 8E-05 71 9806 2876 3359 0694 .554 1874
1 945 86
11 26 - -
0.00 1.3748 1.94 0.28 0.21 0.00 7548 3.87
161 .7 52 61 .1 0.66 3.07
0161 9E-05 4686 885 5649 0837 .272 7848
1 1 625 734
16 26 - -
0.00 9.8340 1.39 0.14 0.10 0.00 5398 3.73
160 .2 32 22 .1 0.98 3.10
016 5E-06 0955 3313 3053 0782 .971 2311
7 1 694 696
26 - -
0.00 2.9963 5. 4.23 0.62 0.67 0.00 1645 4.21
163 140 216 .1 0.16 3.25
0163 2E-05 44 8081 7169 9389 0555 0.05 6167
1 788 561
20 26 - - -
0.00 5.3562 0.75 0.03 0.00 2940 3.46
112 .9 20 0 .1 0.12 1.41 3.01
0112 9E-06 7608 8168 0976 .644 8443
1 1 056 83 058

Page | 6
Graph 1: Hydraulic Gradient vs Flow Velocity

12

10

8
Hydraulic Gradient, I

Laminar Flow Laminar Flow

6
y = 0.6479x - 0.075
R² = 0.6119 Turbulent Flow
4 Linear (Laminar Flow)

Turbulent Flow Linear (Turbulent Flow)

2 y = 0.1861x - 0.1334
R² = 0.9777

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

-2
Flow Velocity, V

Graph 2: log f vs log i

Page | 7
 0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
-0.2

-0.4
Laminar Flow
y = 1.2734x - 0.2778-0.6
Laminar Flow
log i

-0.8 Turbulent Flow

Turbulent Flow
Linear (Laminar Flow)
-1 y = 1.6549x - 1.1936
Linear (Turbulent Flow)
-1.2

-1.4

-1.6
log f

Graph 3: log Re vs log f

5
4
3
2
1
0
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
log f

Laminar Flow
-2
-3 Turbulent Flow
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
log Re

Sample Calculations
laminar flow

Qty = 30ml = 0.00003m3

t = 6.03s

Page | 8
 𝑄𝑡𝑦
Flow rate, 𝑄= 𝑡

0.00003
𝑄= = 4.93421 × 10−6 𝑚3 /𝑠
6.03

Given;

Bore of test pipe, D = 3.0mm/.003m

𝐴 = 𝜋𝑟 2
𝐴 = 𝜋(1.5 𝑥 10−3 )2
𝐴 = 7.07 x 10−6
𝑄
Mean velocity,𝑉 = 𝐴

4.93421 × 10−6
𝑉= 7.07 𝑥 10−6

𝑉 = 0.697908

𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑉 = −0.1562

Given;

ℎ1 = 0.174𝑚
ℎ2 = 0.226m

ℎ𝑓 (ℎ1 +ℎ2 )
Hydraulic gradient, 𝑖 = =
𝐿 𝐿

(0.174+ 0.226)
𝑖= = 0.7634
0.524

𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑖 = −0.1173

Finding friction factor, f;

4𝑓𝑣 2
𝑖=
𝐷2𝑔
𝐷2𝑔𝑖
𝐹𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 , 𝑓 = 4𝑉 2

Page | 9
 .003 𝑥 2 𝑥 9.784 𝑥 0.7634
𝑓= 4 𝑥 0.69792

𝑓 = .0103

𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑓 = −1.9872

Finding Reynolds number, Re

𝑉𝐷
𝑅𝑒 = 𝑣

0.6979 𝑥 .003
𝑅𝑒 = 7.7290 𝑥 10−7

𝑅𝑒 = 2709.92

𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑅𝑒 = 3.433

16 16
𝑓= = =
𝑅𝑒 3.433

Vcritical from graph 1 = 0.8ms-1

𝑉𝐷
𝑅𝑒 @ 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑐𝑎𝑙 =
𝑣
0.8 × 0.003
𝑅𝑒 @ 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑐𝑎𝑙 =
7.7290 × 10−7

𝑅𝑒 @ 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑐𝑎𝑙 = 3105.19

= 3.10519 × 103

𝑖
Experimental, = 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 0.6479𝑚−1 𝑠
𝑉

𝑖 32𝜈𝑉 32𝜈
Theoretical, = 𝐷2 𝑔
=
𝑉 𝐷2 𝑔
𝑉
𝑖 32 (7.7290 𝑥 10−7 )
= = 0.2809 m-1s
𝑉 0.0032 × 9.784

For graph of LogI vs LogV;

Gradient of Laminar flow = 1.2734

Page | 10
Gradient of Turbulent flow = 1.6549

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Laminar flow involves layers of fluid flowing over each other at different speeds with virtually
no mixing between layers. Its flow velocity profile in circular pipes is parabolic in shape, with a
maximum flow in the center of the pipe and a minimum flow at the pipe walls. The average flow
velocity is normally approximately one half of the maximum velocity. In turbulent flow is
characterized by the irregular movement of particles of the fluid. The flow velocity profile for
turbulent flow is fairly flat across the center section of a pipe and drops rapidly extremely close
to the walls. The average flow velocity is approximately equal to the velocity at the center of the
pipe. Viscosity is the fluid property that measures the resistance of the fluid to deforming due to
a shear force. For most fluids, temperature and viscosity are inversely proportional.

Observing the results obtained in Table 1, it is noted that as the rate of flow of water decreases
through the test pipe, the frictional head loss also decreases. This obeys the law that states that
the frictional head loss (hf), is directly proportional to the mean flow velocity (V) of the water
when under laminar flow.

On the other hand, when observing the results obtained in Table 2, it is noted that for the water
within similar values of h1 and h2, the frictional head loss is much greater for turbulent flow and
thus, agrees with the law for turbulent flow.

It was noted that for turbulent flow, the mean flow velocity is much greater than that of the
laminar flow. Based on the observations made from both tables, it is noted that for similar h1
values the friction factor is much less for turbulent flow than that of the laminar flow. It was also
observed that as the flow velocity decreases, the hydraulic gradient also decreases. The
hydraulic gradient (i) for the turbulent flow was observed to be significantly higher than that of
the laminar flow within similar h1 parameters.

Analyzing Graph 1, it was observed that as the laminar flow transitions into a turbulent flow, the
slope of the graph became steeper for i plotted against V. The transition of the fluid from
laminar to turbulent flow was marked on Graph 1and observed to be the point of intersection.
The mean flow velocity at this point was observed to be 0.8 m/s; this value was used to calculate
the Reynolds number (Re).

Thus, it can be concluded that Poiseuille’s equation was not verified within the limits of the
experiment, since, the transitional Re value didn’t fall between 2000≤Re≤4000. The Re value was
calculated to be 5479.

Analyzing Graph 2, for the laminar flow section, a gradient of 1.2734 was observed, while, for
the turbulent flow a gradient of 1.6549 was observed. The gradient of laminar flow was

Page | 11
expected to be in this range as the value of the laminar flow section should possess a gradient in
the region of 1.1.

Lastly, another graph was plotted of log f vs. log Re for the readings and compared with
theoretical equations. However, the gradients of these slope varied from the graphical
representation of the experimental data that was plotted, as both lines didn’t agree with the
plotted points on the graph.

The disparity in the result between the experimental and theoretical values can be attributed to
the possible source of errors which could have occurred during the experiment.

Sources of Errors

✓ The variations in room temperature occurring and also heat transfer from the pump to the
water.

✓ At the top of the manometer there was a leak allowing air pressure to affect the pressure
obtained when attempting to read the heights on the manometer.

✓ The smoothness of the pipe was also an inconsistent factor contributing to friction loss
variation.

✓ Heights h1 and h2 were also left up to estimation as the meniscus was not resting on an
incremental reading on the tube at all times.

Page | 12
 REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY
Çengel. Y. A, Cimbala. J. M, Turner. R. H. (2017) FUNDAMENTALS OF THERMAL-FLUID
SCIENCES, FIFTH EDITION. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education

Page | 13
 RAW DATA SHEET

Scan Dec 1,
2019.pdf

Page | 14