GENERALIZED WATER HAMMER ALGORITHM

FOR PIPING SYSTEMS WITH UNSTEADY

FRICTION
by
Jaime Surez Acua
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
In
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO
MAYAGEZ CAMPUS
2005
Approved by:
________________________________
Nellore S. Venkataraman, PhD
Member, Graduate Committee

__________________
Date

________________________________
Vikram Raj Pandya, PhD
Member, Graduate Committee

__________________
Date

________________________________
Walter Silva Araya, PhD
President, Graduate Committee

__________________
Date

________________________________
Andres Calderon, PhD
Representative of Graduate Studies

__________________
Date

________________________________
Paul Sundaram, PhD
Chairperson of the Department

__________________
Date

ABSTRACT

Unsteady flow in pipe networks is usually analyzed by means of one-dimensional

models, in which the energy dissipation is computed assuming the friction factor
dependent on the local and instantaneous Reynolds Number (quasi-steady model). This
model underestimates the friction forces and overestimates the persistence of oscillations
following the first one. Unsteady friction has great importance in pipe networks because
the maximum oscillation may occur after the first one.
Silva-Araya and Chaudhry developed (1993) a model to simulate unsteady friction in
transient flow which was tested in simple pipe valve systems only. The model
approximates the velocity profiles during the transient flow and computes the actual
energy dissipation. The ratio of the energy dissipation at any instant and the energy
dissipation obtained by the quasi-steady approximation is defined as the Energy
Dissipation Factor. This is a time-varying, non-dimensional parameter that is
incorporated in the friction term of the transient flow governing equations.
The objective of this study is to extend Silva-Araya and Chaudhrys unsteady friction
model for water hammer analysis to series and branching pipe systems. The conduits at
these systems may have different diameters, wall thickness, wall material, and/or friction
factors.
For the computation of the initial steady state conditions a subroutine that solves the
network flow equations using the Hardy Cross linear analysis is used. The subroutine
allows for the input of minor losses, use of either the Darcy-Weisbach or Hazen-Willians
pipe frictional loss. Either SI or English units are permissible.
ii

To create a user friendly Windows interface, the extended application was

developed using VBA (Visual Basic for Applications) in Excel for general program
applications.

The model was tested for three cases: single, series and branching piping systems.
The computed pressures are compared with the experimental data obtained for Silva
Araya (1993) for a single piping system case. For a series and a branching piping system
the computed results obtained by using unsteady friction are compared with the data
obtained by using steady friction model.

iii

RESUMEN

El flujo no permanente en redes de tuberas se analiza generalmente por medio de

modelos unidimensionales, en que la disipacin de energa se calcula asumiendo el factor
de friccin dependiente del Nmero de Reynolds local e instantneo (modelo cuasipermanente). Este modelo subestima las fuerzas de la friccin y sobreestima la
persistencia de las oscilaciones que siguen a la primera. La friccin en flujo nopermanente tiene gran importancia en redes de tuberas, porque la oscilacin mxima
puede ocurrir despus de la primera.

Silva-Araya y Chaudhry desarrollaron (1993) un modelo para simular la friccin no

permanente en flujo transitorio, el cual se prob solamente en sistemas de tubo sencillo
vlvula. El modelo aproxima los perfiles de velocidad durante flujo transitorio y calcula
la disipacin de energa verdadera. La relacin

entre la disipacin de energa en

cualquier instante y la disipacin de energa obtenida por la aproximacin cuasipermanente se define como el Factor de Disipacin de Energa. Este es un parmetro nodimensional que varia en el tiempo que se incorpora en el trmino de la friccin de flujo
transitorio que gobierna las ecuaciones.

El objetivo de este estudio es extender a sistemas de tuberas en serie y ramificadas,

el modelo de friccin no permanente de Silva-Araya y Chaudhry para el anlisis de Golpe
iv

de Ariete. Las tuberas en estos sistemas pueden tener diferentes dimetros, espesor de
pared, material de pared, y/o factores de friccin.

Para el cmputo del estado permanente inicial se utiliza una subrutina que resuelve
las ecuaciones de flujo de la red, usando el anlisis lineal de Hardy Cross. La subrutina
tiene en cuenta las prdidas menores de entrada, el uso de las perdidas por friccin en
tuberas de Darcy-Weisbach o la de Hazen-Willians. Son permisibles tanto el sistema
internacional como las unidades inglesas.

Para crear una comunicacin amigable con Windows, la aplicacin extendida se

desarroll utilizando VBA (Visual Basic for Applications) en Excel para las aplicaciones
generales del programa.

El modelo fue probado para tres casos: sistemas de tubera sencillos, en serie y
ramificados. Las presiones computadas se comparan con los datos experimentales
obtenidos para Silva Araya (1993) para el caso de sistemas de tubera sencillos. Para
sistemas de tubera en serie y ramificados los resultados calculados, obtenidos utilizando
friccin en flujo no-permanente se comparan con los datos obtenidos utilizando el
modelo de friccin permanente.

To my mother Amanda and my wife Lilibeth.

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I want to express a sincere acknowledgement to my advisor, Dr. Walter Silva for his
motivation, time, and support during my research.

I wish to thank the Department of Mechanical Engineering at University of Puerto

Rico, Mayagez Campus for giving me the opportunity to carry out my master studies.

I wish to express my gratitude also to the Department of General Engineering at

University of Puerto Rico, Mayagez Campus for the financial assistance.

I would like to thank my mother and my wife, for their support, inspiration and love.

vii

Table of Contents
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................II
RESUMEN ................................................................................................................................................. IV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................................VII
TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................................................ VIII
TABLELIST ................................................................................................................................................X
FIGURELIST ............................................................................................................................................ XI
1

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................2
1.1
1.2
1.3

GOVERNINGEQUATIONS...........................................................................................................9
2.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.4.1
2.4.2

CLOSED CONDUIT TRANSIENT FLOW GOVERNING EQUATIONS ....................................................9

Continuity Equation.................................................................................................................9
Momentum Equation ...............................................................................................................9
ENERGYDISSIPATIONFUNCTION..............................................................................................11
MOMENTUMEQUATIONFORAXISYMMETRICPIPEFLOW .......................................................14
METHODOFCHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................................15
Characteristics Equations .....................................................................................................16
Boundary Conditions.............................................................................................................23

SYSTEMSPECIFICATION ...........................................................................................................37
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4

MOTIVATION .................................................................................................................................3
LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................................3
SUMMARY OF FOLLOWING CHAPTERS ..........................................................................................8

SCHEMATICDIAGRAM...............................................................................................................37
NUMBERINGOFNODES .............................................................................................................38
NODETYPES...............................................................................................................................40
NUMBERINGOFCONDUITS .......................................................................................................41

METHODOLOGY ...........................................................................................................................42
4.1
COMPUTATIONOFTHEINITIALSTEADYSTATECONDITIONS ...................................................42
4.1.1
Generalized Network Equations............................................................................................43
4.1.2
Linearization of System Energy Equations............................................................................49
4.1.3
Hardy Cross Method .............................................................................................................50
4.2
GENERATIONOFTHECOMPUTATIONALGRID ..........................................................................53
4.3
TURBULENCEMODELING ...........................................................................................................55
4.3.1
Turbulence Model for the Inner Region ................................................................................57
4.3.2
Outer Region Model and Blending Relation..........................................................................58

viii

4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.7.1
4.7.2
5

VERIFICATION...............................................................................................................................69
5.1
5.2
5.3

INITIALVELOCITYPROFILE ........................................................................................................61
COMPUTATIONOFTHEPRESSUREGRADIENT ...........................................................................63
SHEARSTRESSDISTRIBUTION .....................................................................................................64
COMPUTATIONOFTHEVELOCITYPROFILE ...............................................................................65
Predictor Step........................................................................................................................66
Corrector Step .......................................................................................................................67

SINGLEPIPINGSYSTEM ..............................................................................................................69
SERIESPIPINGSYSTEM ...............................................................................................................82
BRANCHINGPIPINGSYSTEM .....................................................................................................89

CONCLUSIONS ..............................................................................................................................94

APPENDIXA.VALUESOFTVS.TAUFORDIFFERENTTYPESOFVALVES........................99
APPENDIX A1. BUTTERFLY VALVES...................................................................................................99
APPENDIX A2. CIRCULAR VALVES....................................................................................................101
APPENDIX A3. BIPLANES VALVES.....................................................................................................103

ix

TableList
Tables
Table 3-1.
Table 5-1.
Table 5-2.
Table 5-3.
Table 5-4.
Table 5-5.
Table 5-6.
Table 5-7.

Page
Node Types..................................................................................................... 41
Parameters for Single Piping System. ............................................................ 71
Node type for Single Piping System. ............................................................. 71
Node type for Series Piping System............................................................... 83
Parameters for Series Piping System.............................................................. 83
Characteristics of the Pipes for Series Piping System.................................... 83
Node type for Branching Piping System. ....................................................... 90
Characteristics of the Pipes for Branching Piping System............................. 90

FigureList

Figures

Page

Figure 2-1. Coordinate System. ........................................................................................ 14

Figure 2-2. Characteristic Lines in x-t Plane. ................................................................... 19
Figure 2-3. Single Pipeline. .............................................................................................. 19
Figure 2-4. Regions of Validity for a Single Pipeline. ..................................................... 20
Figure 2-5. Constant-level Upstream Reservoir. .............................................................. 25
Figure 2-6. Constant-level Downstream Reservoir. ......................................................... 28
Figure 2-7. Dead End........................................................................................................ 29
Figure 2-8. Valve at Downstream End. ............................................................................ 31
Figure 2-9. Series Junction. .............................................................................................. 33
Figure 2-10. Branching Junction....................................................................................... 35
Figure 2-11. Intermediate Valve ....................................................................................... 35
Figure 3-1. Notation.......................................................................................................... 37
Figure 3-2. Schematic Diagram of a Series System. ........................................................ 38
Figure 3-3. Schematic Diagram of a Branching System................................................... 40
Figure 4-1. Representative piping network: (a) assumed flow directions and numbering
scheme: (b) designated interior loops; (c) path between two fixed-grade nodes.
(From [14])................................................................................................................ 44
Figure 4-2. Two piping networks: (a) tree watering system: P = 17, L = 0, j = 8, F = 10;
(b) water distribution system: P = 17, L = 4, J = 12, F = 2. (From Wood, 1981.).... 48
Figure 4-3. Non-uniform grid. .......................................................................................... 53
Figure 4-4. Regions of a Boundary Layer ........................................................................ 56
Figure 4-5. Eddy Viscosity Distribution........................................................................... 60
Figure 5-1. Schematic of Experimental Setup (Silva Araya, 1993) ................................. 70
Figure 5-2. Characteristic Curve for Valve in Single Piping System. .............................. 71
Figure 5-3. Pressure Head Histories for a Single Piping System Using Steady Friction. 73
Figure 5-4. Pressure Head Histories for a Single Piping System Using Unsteady Friction.
................................................................................................................................... 76
Figure 5-5. Velocity Profile in transient Flow at the Middle of the Pipe ......................... 78
Figure 5-6. Energy Dissipation Factor in Transient Turbulent Flow................................ 81
Figure 5-7. Schematic of Series Piping System................................................................ 82
Figure 5-8. Characteristic Curve for Valve in Series Piping System. .............................. 84
Figure 5-9. Geometrically Expanding Grid Spacing for Series Piping System................ 85
Figure 5-10. Eddy Viscosity distribution for Series Piping System. ................................ 85
Figure 5-11. Initial Velocity Profile for Series Piping System......................................... 86
Figure 5-12. Pressure Head Histories for a Series Piping System Using Steady and
Unsteady Friction...................................................................................................... 87
xi

Figure 5-13. Schematic of Branching Piping System....................................................... 89

Figure 5-14. Eddy Viscosity distribution for Branching Piping System. ......................... 91
Figure 5-15. Initial Velocity Profile for Branching Piping System. ................................. 91
Figure 5-16. Pressure Head Histories for a Branching Piping System Using Steady and
Unsteady Friction...................................................................................................... 92

xii

1 INTRODUCTION
If sudden velocity and pressures variations are caused in a pipe system, for example
when pumps are shut off or valves are closed, a pressure wave develops which is
transmitted in the pipe at a certain velocity that is determined by fluid properties and the
pipe wall material. This phenomenon, called water hammer, can cause pipe and fittings
rupture. The intermediate stage flow, when the flow conditions are changed from one
steady state condition to another steady state, is called transient state flow or transient
flow; water hammer is a transient condition caused by sudden changes in flow velocity or
pressure.

Generally friction losses in the simulation of transient pipe flow are estimated by
using formulae derived for steady state flow conditions, this is known as the quasi-steady
approximation. The head loss during transient flow is equal to the head loss obtained for
steady uniform flow with an average velocity equal to the instantaneous transient velocity.
Although this approximation is enough to calculate the maximum pressures in the
absence of vapor cavitations or column separation, this is not accurate for the prediction
of the time history of pressure oscillations and the attenuation of pressure waves. An
accurate calculation of the damping effect due to unsteady friction losses is important for
long time simulations and for systems having multiple operations.

1.1 Motivation
Water hammer analysis tools of the past have been noted for being difficult to use and
requiring extensive specialized knowledge. As a result, this critical aspect of piping
system design and operation has often been overlooked. Recently, pressure oscillations
caused serious damage in the important pipe conduction called the North Coast Super
aqueduct of Puerto Rico.

The present research extended Silva-Araya and Chaudhrys (1997) unsteady friction
model to series and branching pipe systems. The extended application was developed
using a Windows interface with VBA in Excel for general program applications. The
original research was tested in simple pipe valve systems only.

Piping systems engineers typically are not specialists in water hammer modeling.
With this work and fundamental knowledge they would be equipped with the proper tools
to design and analyze for water hammer transients in liquid systems.

1.2 Literature Review

Several researchers have proposed analytical and numerical approaches to model
energy losses in unsteady pipe flows. Historically, the most common method of
representing frictional resistance in unsteady flows has been the use of Darcy-Weisbach
steady-flow equation based on the mean velocity, considering that the shear stress at the

wall is the same in steady-state flow condition than in transient condition. These models
fail to correctly predict the transient pressure head field beyond the first wave cycle.

Ohmi et al. (1980) studied the flow behavior in turbulent oscillatory flow and found
that the shear stress depends on the ratio of frequency of oscillation and the timeaveraged Reynolds number throw each cycle. When this ratio is small, the pressure
gradient and the wall shear stress are in phase with the mean velocity and the quasisteady approximation is applicable. As this ratio increases, the mean velocity delays from
the shear stress and the pressure gradient. Then the friction factor is different from its
values in quasi-steady conditions.

Experimental studies by Ramaprian and Tu (1979) showed that the turbulent structure
in oscillatory flow is different from that in equilibrium conditions, thereby increasing the
time-mean shear stress and the friction losses. Therefore, the energy dissipation in
oscillatory flow is greater than that computed by the quasi-steady approximation.

Vardy and Hwang (1991) adopted a five-region turbulence model to compute the
eddy viscosity distribution using empirical relations. In each region a different expression
was used to compute the eddy viscosity. This turbulence model is used to solve the
transient governing equations including axial and radial velocity components. The
equations are transformed by the method of characteristics and solved simultaneously.

The equations must be solved at every time step at every cross section to obtain the
pressure head and the axial velocity. It was reported that this model is very time
consuming.

Giuseppe Pezzinga (1999) developed a quasi-two dimensional model for

axisymmetry unsteady-flow analysis in a pipe system. Taking into account the velocity
profile in the cross section, he used a two layer turbulence model, which divides the flow
into a viscous sub-layer and a turbulent sublayer, based on the mixing length hypothesis
in the turbulent zone and on Newtons law in the viscous sublayer.

Eichinger and Lein (1992) developed a numerical model to compute an unsteady

friction factor with the help of the turbulence model, developed by Nagano and Hishida
(1987), to compute the eddy viscosity and solve the transient pipe flow governing
equations.

Silva-Araya and Chaudhry (1993) developed an energy dissipation model for the
computation of laminar and turbulent unsteady friction losses and obtained instantaneous
velocity profiles to compute the Reynolds stresses in transient pipe flow. The energy
dissipation factor incorporated in the momentum equation is defined as the ratio of the
energy dissipated in transient flow to the energy dissipated according to the steady-state
approximation. This is a non-dimensional, time-varying parameter that modifies the

friction term in the transient flow governing equations. For transient turbulent pipe flow a
mixing length eddy viscosity turbulence model proposed by Granville (1989) was chosen
for the inner region of the boundary layer and a constant eddy viscosity model proposed
by Kita et al., (1980) was used for the outer region.

Peralta Cooper (2001) replaced the mixing length model in Silva-Araya and
Chaudhrys model by the two-equation k - turbulence model proposed by Wilcox
(1988a, 1993b). The results were very similar to those obtained by using Granvilles
mixing length model. As a general conclusion, for most transient conditions, the use of
simple turbulence models provides similar results to two-equation models. The use of
steady-state turbulence models for unsteady flow is supported by physical measurements
of pressure oscillation. However, unsteady turbulence models are still an area where
research must be done.

Arangoitia Valdivia (2001) developed a mathematical model for the calculation of

water hammer considering the energy dissipation. He studied the water hammer produced
by the instantaneous closure of a valve, located at the end of a pipe line connected to a
constant head reservoir. The model consists of linearizing the equations of transient flow,
to establish an equation similar to the corresponding to an oscillatory mechanical system
and to use this equation as a boundary condition, in the method of characteristics.

Zhao and Ghidaoui (2004) formulated, applied, and analyzed first and second order
explicit finite volume Godunov-type schemes for water hammer problems. The finite
volume formulation ensures that both schemes conserve mass and momentum and
produce physically realizable shock fronts. The implementation of boundary conditions,
such as, valves, pipe junctions, and reservoirs, within the Godunov approach is similar to
that of the method of characteristics approach. The schemes were applied to a system
consisting of a reservoir, a pipe, and a valve and to a system consisting of a reservoir, two
pipes in series, and a valve.

Trikha (1975) developed a procedure for simulating frequency-dependent friction in

transient laminar liquid flow by the method of characteristics. The procedure consists of
determining an approximate expression for frequency-dependent friction such that the use
of this expression requires much less computer storage than the use of the exact
expression proposed by Zielke (1967).

Schohl (1993) used a new approximation to the weighting function in Zilekes (1967)
equation in an improved implementation of Trikhas (1975) method for including
frequency dependent friction in transient laminar flow calculations. The new, five-term
approximation was fitted to the weighting function using a nonlinear least squares
approach.

Vardy and Brown (2004) presented a method for evaluating wall shear stress from
known flow histories in unsteady pipe flows. The method builds on previous work by
Trikha, but has two important differences. One of these enables the method to be uses
with much larger integration time steps than are acceptable with Trikhas method. The
other, a general procedure for determining approximations to weighting functions,
enables it to be used at indefinitely small times. The method is applicable to both laminar
and turbulent flows.

Most of unsteady flow models with unsteady friction have been tested in simple pipe
systems, typically a valve-reservoir system. Recently, some attempts have been done to
apply then in pipe networks. The present work has extended the application of a quasibidimensional model to branching and series systems.

1.3 Summary of Following Chapters

We first develop the necessary background theory in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 describes
the governing equations of the phenomenon. Chapter 3 explains how to describe the
system you are analyzing, how many components the system has, and of what type and
size they are. Chapter 4 describes the procedure followed to obtain the energy dissipation
factor as an integrated part of the transient analysis. Chapter 5 shows the verification of
the generalized algorithm, with the results obtained by using the unsteady friction model
for piping systems. Conclusions are presented in Chapter 6.
8

2 GOVERNINGEQUATIONS
2.1 Closed Conduit Transient Flow Governing Equations
The dynamic equations in transients-state flow in closed conduits are the equations
for the conservation of mass and the momentum equation. These equations are a set of
hyperbolic partial differential equations. Using the Reynolds Transport Theorem and
assuming one-dimensional flow and elastic conduit with slightly compressible fluid,
which stretch or contracts with respect to time; these equations become (Chaudhry, 1987)

2.1.1 Continuity Equation

p
p
+ V
+ a
t
x

V
= 0
x

2.1

Where: p = pressure intensity, V = mean flow velocity, a = wave speed, = fluid

density, t = time, x = coordinate axis along conduit length.

2.1.2 Momentum Equation

fV V
V
V
1 p
+V
+
+ g sin +
=0
t
x
x
2D

2.2

Where: g = acceleration due to gravity, = pipe angle with respect to the horizontal,

D = pipe diameter, f = Darcy-Weisbach friction factor.

In most engineering applications, the convective acceleration terms, ( Vp / x ) and

( VV / x ), are very small compared to the others terms and may be neglected. Therefore
by dropping these terms Equation 2.1 becomes:

p
+ a
t

V
x

= 0

2.3

fV V
V
1 p
+
+
x
t
2D

= 0

2.4

Equation 2.2 becomes:

Expressing pressures in the pipeline in terms of the piezometric head, above a

specified datum as, and using the discharge, Q = VA, instead of the flow velocity and
considering the energy dissipation factor in the equation of momentum. Equation 2.3
becomes:

H
t

a 2
gA

Q
x

10

= 0

2.5

Equation 2.4 is modified as:

fQ Q
Q
H
+ gA
+ ef
=0
t
x
2 DA

2.6

Where: Q = flow discharge, ef = energy dissipation factor, A = pipe cross sectional

area, H = piezometric head. f = Darcy- weisbach friction factor.

ef is a non-dimensional and time dependent parameter to compute the variation of the

friction losses in space and time. This parameter is set equal to one if the quasi-steady
approach in transient pipe flow is used. The term in the energy equation that involves the
viscous and turbulent stresses is commonly called the dissipation function. A procedure
to compute the energy dissipation factor is described in the following paragraphs.

2.2 EnergyDissipationFunction
For boundary layer planar or axisymmetric flow, the expression to compute the
energy dissipation function, denoted by , is given by (White, 1991):

u u

u 'v '

r r

2.7

Where: u = axial velocity of the fluid particle along the conduit length, r = radial

11

coordinate measured from the pipe centerline, u/r = velocity gradient in the radial
direction, = dynamic viscosity of the fluid, = fluid density, u ' v ' = Reynolds
stresses. Equation 2.7 accounts the total shears stresses, viscous and turbulent stresses
and represents the energy dissipation per unit volume and per unit time.

Integration of Equation 2.7 across the conduit area from the wall to the pipe
centerline and multiplying by two can be estimated the dissipation integral. This result
accounts for the rate of energy dissipation per unit length in the conduit area.

Therefore:

= 2

R
0

rdr

2.8

Where DI = dissipation integral. The dissipation of energy in transient flow can be

computed by integration the dissipation function across a pipe section. Evaluating
Equation 2.8 during an interval of time gives:

t2 R

E t = 2 rdrdt

2.9

t1 0

Silva Araya (1993) demonstrated that for steady-state the energy dissipation is given
by:

12

Is

fV 3
A
2g

2.10

Where DLs = steady state dissipation integral, f = Darcy- weisbach friction factor,
V = mean velocity, = fluid density, A = pipe flow cross sectional area.

If Equation 2.10 is considered by an interval of time it becomes:

fV 3
A (t 2 t 1 )
2D

2.11

Equation 2.9 can be used to compute the unsteady energy dissipation integral if the
velocity profile at any time during the computation and the Reynolds stresses are known.

Division of Equation 2.9 by Equation 2.11 gives the ratio, called the energy
dissipation factor, as defined by Silva Araya and Chaudhry (1997), of the energy
dissipated during the transient flow to that in the steady flow.

Et
Es

2.12

The energy dissipation factor is a function time-varying velocity gradient and the
Reynolds stresses for turbulent flow. To solve Equation 2.12 requires a procedure to
compute the instantaneous velocity distribution in transient flow condition and also a

13

turbulence model. The next section describes the procedure implemented to find the
velocity distribution during the transient flow.

2.3 MomentumEquationforAxisymmetricPipeFlow
The velocity distribution in transient flow process for an axisymmetric
incompressible pipe flow is given by (White, 1991):

u
u
u
1 p
+ ux
+ ur
=
+
t
x
r
x

2u
1 u

+
2
r
r
r

2.13

Where = kinematics viscosity of the fluid. The coordinate directions are defined in
Figure 2-1.

Figure 2-1. Coordinate System.

14

Thus after time averaging the axisymmetric equation of motion, the following
assumptions were considered:
1. Incompressible flow and constant viscosity
2. The convective terms are not considered
3. The second order spatial derivative term 2 u / x 2 is not considered.
4. The velocities in the radial direction can be neglected

With these assumptions the momentum equation becomes, see appendix A.

2u 1 u
u 'v '
u
1 p

+
=
+
+
2
t
r
x
r r
r

2.14

Where u = time averaged velocity in the axial direction, u ' v ' = Reynolds stress.
Equation 2.14 is the equation to compute the velocity distribution in turbulent transient
pipe flow.

2.4 MethodofCharacteristics
The equations describing the transient-state flow in closed conduits are quasi-linear,
hyperbolic, partial differential equations. A closed-form solution of these equations is not
available. However, by neglecting or linearizing the nonlinear term, various graphical and
analytical methods have been developed.
15

The method of characteristics has become quite popular and is extensively used. For
the solution of one-dimensional, hydraulic transient problems (especially if the wave
speed is constant), this method has proven to be superior to other methods in several
aspects, such as correct simulation of steep wave fronts, illustration of wave propagation,
ease of programming, and efficiency of computations.

2.4.1 Characteristics Equations

Let us rewrite the momentum and continuity equations (Eqs. 2.5 and 2.6) as:

L1 =

H
Q
+ gA
+ RQ Q = 0
t
x

= a

Q
+ gA
x

H
t

2.15

= 0

2.16

In which R = f/(2DA). Let us consider a linear combination of Eqs. 2.15 and 2.16:

L = L1 +L2
Or

Q
+ a

Q
H
+ gA
x
t

16

1 H
+ RQ
x

= 0

2.17

If H = H(x,t) and Q = Q(x,t), then the total derivative

dQ
dt

Q
Q
+
t
x

dH
dt

H
t

dx
dt

2.18

and

H
x

dx
dt

2.19

By defining the unknown multiplier as:

dx
dt

= a

2.20

i.e.,

1
a

2.21

And by using Equations. 2.18 and 2.19, Equation 2.17 can be written as

dQ
gA dH
+
+ RQ Q = 0
dt
a dx

2.22

If

dx
=a
dt
17

2.23

and

dQ
gA dH

+ RQ Q = 0
dt
a dx

2.24

If

dx
= a
dt

2.25

Note that Equation 2.22 is valid if Equation 2.23 is satisfied and that Equation 2.24 is
valid if Equation 2.25 is satisfied.

In the x t plane, Equations 2.23 and 2.25 represent two straight lines having slopes
1/a. These are called characteristic lines. Mathematically, these lines divide the x t
plane in two regions, which may be dominated by two different kinds of solution, i.e., the
solution may be discontinuous along these lines. Physically, they represent the path
traversed by a disturbance. For example, a disturbance at point A (Figure 2-2) at time to
would reach point P after time t.

18

dt

Figure 2-2. Characteristic Lines in x-t Plane.

Considering a single pipeline (Figure 2-3) Equations 2.22 and 2.24 are valid along the
pipe length (i.e., for 0 < x < L) and special boundary conditions are required at the ends
(i.e., at x = 0 and at x = L) (Figure 2-4).

Figure 2-3. Single Pipeline.

19

dt

Figure 2-4. Regions of Validity for a Single Pipeline.

Referring to Figure 2-2, knowing the values of Q and H at points A and B, their
values at point P can be determinates by solving Equations 2.22 and 2.24 as follows:

By multiplying the left-hand side of Equation 2.22 by dt and integrating, we obtain:

dQ +

gA
a

dH + R dQ Q dt = 0
A

2.26

The first two integral forms of Equation 2.26 are easily evaluated; however, the third
term is not, representing the friction losses, because the variation of Q with respect to t is
not explicitly known. By using a first-order approximation, the integral of the third term
is evaluated as:
20

R dQ Q dt RQ A Q A ( t p t A ) = RQ A Q A t
A

2.27

In other words, we are saying that for the evaluation of this term, Q remains constant
form point A to point P. Hence, Equation 2.26 becomes:

QP QA +

gA
( H P H A ) + R tQ A Q A = 0
a

2.28

Note that Equation 2.28 is exact except for the approximation of the friction term.
This first-order approximation usually yields satisfactory results for typical engineering
applications.

By proceeding similarly, we may write Equation 2.24 as:

QP QB

gA
( H P H B ) + R tQ B Q B = 0
a

2.29

By combining the known variables together, we may write Equation 2.28 as:

QP = CP CaH P

21

2.30

And Equation 2.29 as:

QP = Cn Ca H P

2.31

CP = QA +

gA
H A R tQ A Q A
a

2.32

Cn = QB

gA
H B R tQ B Q B
a

2.33

And

Ca =

gA
a

2.34

Note that Equation 2.30 is valid along the positive characteristic line AP and Equation
2.31 along the negative characteristic line BP (Figure 2-2). The value of the constants CP
and Cn are known for each time step, and the constant Ca depends upon the conduit
properties. We will refer to Equation 2.30 as the positive characteristic equation and
Equation 2.31 as the negative characteristic equation. In Equations 2.30 and 2.31, we
have two unknowns, namely, HP and QP. The values of these unknowns can be
determined by simultaneously solving these equations.

22

2.4.2 Boundary Conditions

Special boundary conditions are required to determine the transient-state head and
discharge at the boundaries. These are developed by solving Equations 2.22 or 2.24, or
both, simultaneously with the conditions imposed by the boundary. These conditions are
in terms of special relationships that define, at the boundary, the discharge, the head, or a
relation between them. Equation 2.22 is used for the downstream boundaries and
Equation 2.24 for the upstream boundaries.

We shall designate the upstream and downstream ends with reference to the initialflow direction even though the flow may reverse during the transient state. A section at
the upstream end of a conduit shall be numbered section 1 and the one at the downstream
end as section n + 1, assuming the conduit is divided in n reaches. To specify variables at
different sections, we shall use two subscripts: The first subscript designates the conduit
number, and the second indicates the section number. For example, Qi,j represents flow at
the jth section of the ith conduit. For variables that have the same value at all sections of
a conduit, only one subscript will be used. For example, Cai refers to constant Ca
(Equation 2.34) for the ith conduit. Although CP and Cn may have different values at
different sections of a conduit, only one subscript will be used with them to indicate the
conduit number.

23

2.4.2.1 Constant-Level Upstream Reservoir

In this case, it is assumed that the water level in the reservoir remains constant during
the transient-state conditions.

Let the entrance losses be given by the equation:

he =

kQ P2i ,1

2.35

2 gA i2

In which k is the coefficient of entrance loss. Then, referring to Figure 2-5, we obtain:

H Pi ,1 = H res (1 + k )

Q P2i ,1
2 gA i2

In which Hres = height of the reservoir water surface above the datum.

24

2.36

Figure 2-5. Constant-level Upstream Reservoir.

To develop the boundary condition, we have to solve this equation simultaneously
with the negative characteristic equation (Equation 2.31). Elimination of HPi,1 from
Equations 2.31 and 2.36 and simplification of the resulting equation yield:

k 1Q P2i ,1 + Q Pi ,1 ( C ni + C a i H res ) = 0

2.37

In which:

k1 =

C a i (1 + k )
2 gA i2

2.38

By solving Equation 2.37 and neglecting the negative sign with the radical term, we
obtain:
25

Q Pi ,1 =

1+

1 + 4 k 1 ( C n1 + C a1 H res )
2 k1

2.39

If the entrance losses as well as the velocity head are negligible, then:

H Pi ,1 = H res

2.40

In which Hres = height of the reservoir water surface above the datum. Equation 2.31
for the upstream end thus becomes:

Q Pi ,1 = C ni + C a i H res

2.41

2.4.2.2 Constant-Level Downstream Reservoir

If the head losses at the entrance to the reservoir are:

he =

kQ P2i , n +1
2 gA i2

2.42

Then referring to Figure 2-6:

H Pi , n +1 = H res (1 k )
26

Q P2i , n +1
2 gA i2

2.43

Elimination of Hpi,n+1 from Equations 2.43 and 2.30 yields:

k 2 Q P2i , n +1 Q Pi , n +1 + C pi C a i H res = 0

2.44

In which:

k2 =

C a i (1 k )
2 gA i2

2.45

By solving equation 2.44 and neglecting the positive sing with the radical term:

Q Pi , n +1 =

1 1 4 k 2 ( C p1 C a1 H res )
2k2

2.46

If the exit loss and the velocity head are negligible, then:

H Pi , n +1 = H res

2.47

Hence it follows from Equation 2.30 that:

Q Pi , n +1 = C p i C a i H res

27

2.48

Figure 2-6. Constant-level Downstream Reservoir.

2.4.2.3 Dead End at Downstream End

At the dead end (Figure 2-7), QPi,n+1 = 0. Hence, from the positive characteristic
equation (Equation 2.30), it follows that:

H Pi , n +1 =

28

C pi
C ai

2.49

Figure 2-7. Dead End.

2.4.2.4 Valve at Downstream

Steady-state flow through a valve can be written as:

Q oi , n +1 = ( C d Av ) o

2 gH

oi , n +1

2.50

In which subscript o indicates steady-state conditions, Cd = coefficient of discharge,

Hoi,n+1 = head upstream of the valve, and Av = area of the valve opening.

If we assume that the transient-state flow through a valve may be described by an

equation similar to the steady-flow equation, then:

Q Pi , n + 1 = ( C d A v ) 2 gH
29

Pi , n + 1

2.51

Dividing Equation 2.51 by Equation 2.50, taking square of both sides and defining the
relative valve opening = (CdAv)/(CdAv)o, we obtain:

2
Pi , n + 1

(Q
=

oi , n +1

H oi , n +1

H Pi , n +1

2.52

Substitution for Hp from the positive characteristic equation (Equation 2.30) into
Equation 2.52 yields:

Q P2i , n + 1 + C v Q Pi , n + 1 C p i C v = 0

2.53

In which Cv = (Qoi,n+1)2/(CaHoi,n+1). Solving for Qpi,n+1 and neglecting the negative

sign with the radical term:

Q Pi , n +1 = 0 . 5 C v +

C v2 + 4 C p i C v

2.54

Now Hpi,n+1 may be determined from Equation 2.30.

To compute the transient-state conditions for an opening or closing valve, versus t

curves (Figure 2-8b and c) may be specified either in a tabular form or by an algebraic
expression. Note that = 1 corresponds to a valve opening at which the flow through the
valve is Qoi,n+1 under a head of Hoi,n+1. Values of t versus for different types of valves
30

are given in Appendix A.

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 2-8. Valve at Downstream End.

31

2.4.2.5 Orifice at Lower End

For an orifice, the opening remains constant. Therefore, the above equations may be
used with = 1.

2.4.2.6 Series Junction

A series junction is a junction of two conduits having different diameters, wall

thicknesses, wall materials, and/or friction factors. If the difference in the velocity heads
at sections (I, n+1) and (i+1, 1) (Figure 2-9) and the head losses at the junction are
neglected, then it follows from the energy equation that:

H Pi , n +1 = H Pi +1 ,1

2.55

The positive and negative characteristic equations for sections (I, n+1) and (i+1, 1)
are:

Q Pi , n +1 = C p i C a i H Pi , n +1

2.56

Q Pi +1 ,1 = C n i +1 C a i +1 H Pi +1 ,1

2.57

The continuity equation at the junction is:

Q Pi , n +1 = Q Pi +1 ,1
32

2.58

It follows from Equations 2.55 through 2.55 that:

H Pi , n +1 =

C p i C ni +1
C a i + C a i +1

2.59

Now Hpi+1, 1, Qpi, n+1, and Qpi+1, 1 can be determined from Equations 2.55 through
2.57.

Figure 2-9. Series Junction.

2.4.2.7 Branching Junction

For the branching junction shown in Figure 2-10, the following equations can be
written:

1. Continuity equation:

Q Pi , n +1 = Q Pi +1 ,1 + Q Pi + 2 ,1
33

2.60

2. Characteristic equations:

Q Pi , n +1 = C p i C a i H Pi , n +1

2.61

Q Pi +1 ,1 = C ni +1 + C a i +1 H Pi +1 ,1

2.62

Q Pi + 2 ,1 = C n i + 2 + C a i + 2 H Pi + 2 ,1

2.63

3. Equation for total head:

If the head losses at the junction are neglected and it is assumed that the velocity
heads in all conduits are equal, then it follows from the energy equation that:

H Pi , n +1 = H Pi +1 ,1 = H Pi + 2 ,1

2.64

Simultaneous solution of Equations 2.60 through 2.64 yields:

H Pi , n +1 =

C p i C ni +1 C ni + 2
C a i + C a i +1 + C a i + 2

2.65

Now Hpi+1, 1 and Hpi+2, 1 can be determined from Equation 2.64; Qpi, n+1, Qpi+1, 1, and
Qpi+2, 1 can be determined from Equations 2.61 through 2.63.

34

Figure 2-10. Branching Junction.

2.4.2.8 Intermediate Valve

Figure 2-11 illustrates a valve positioned at the junction of two pipes that may have
different diameters, wall thicknesses, wall materials, and/or friction factors.

Figure 2-11. Intermediate Valve

35

The positive and negative characteristic equations for sections (I, n+1) and (i+1, 1)
are given for Eqs. 2.56 and 2.57 respectively. The continuity equation at the junction is
given for Eq. 2.58.

It follows from Eqs. 2.56 through 2.58 that

p i +1 ,1

C pi C ai H

p i , n +1

C ni +1

C a i +1

2.66

from Equation 2.30

pi , n +1

C p i Q p i , n +1
C ai

2.67

And Qpi,n+1 is computed for Eq. 2.54 for a valve at downstream. Values of t versus
for different types of valves are given in Appendix A.

36

3 SYSTEMSPECIFICATION
This chapter describes how to specify the pipe system in the computer program.

3.1 SchematicDiagram
Figure 3.1 shows a system configuration. Liquid-conveying structures, such as pipes,
conduits or tunnels are conduits and the storage facilities, devices or appurtenances, such
as reservoirs, tanks, valves or pipe junctions are the boundaries. The conduit cross
sections at the boundaries will be called nodes.

A square is used for a node and a circle for a conduit. The node number is written
inside the square and the conduit number inside the circle. The type of each node will be
indicated by a numeral written inside a triangle (see Fig. 3-1). Each node type is
explained in this chapter.

Figure 3-1. Notation.

37

3.2 NumberingofNodes
To identify the nodes in the system, they are numbered in a sequence starting at the
upstream end and, number the upstream node as one. Then, proceeding in the
downstream direction, the other nodes are numbered 2, 3, and so on. Fig. 3-2 illustrates
this procedure. The junction of two conduits is a node called a series junction. The
conduits joining at a series junction may have different diameters, wall thickness, wall
material, and/or friction factors. In a branching piping system having a tree-like structure
(Fig. 3-3), designate one pipeline as the main line, and the remaining pipelines as the
branch lines. The branch lines may have sub-branches and the sub-branches may be
further branched out.

Figure 3-2. Schematic Diagram of a Series System.

38

Nodes on the main line are numbered like a series system, i.e., we start at the
upstream end and then proceed in the downstream direction. The nodes on each branch
line are then numbered one branch at a time. The numbering on the branch line starts at
the upstream end of the branch and then proceeds in the initial-steady-state-flow
direction. No particular sequence has to be followed to number the branches, i.e., you
decide which branch you want to number as branch no. 1, 2, 3, and so on.

Fig. 3-3 illustrates this numbering procedure for a branching system. We have
arbitrarily called one line as the main line and the remaining lines as branch lines. We
number the upstream node of the main line as 1 and number the remaining nodes on this
line proceeding in the downstream direction. The last node on the main line is 8. Then,
we select one of the branch lines as number 1 and number the nodes on this line as 9 to
11. Of the remaining two branch lines, we call one of them as branch number 2 and
number the nodes on this line as 12 to 14. Branch number 3 provides inflow to the main
line as compared to the other two lines in which flow is from the main line. We number
the upstream node on this line as 15 and the remaining two nodes on this line as 16 and
17.

39

Figure 3-3. Schematic Diagram of a Branching System.

3.3 NodeTypes
Assign numbers to designate the type of a node. For example, an upstream reservoir
is node type 1, downstream reservoir as node type 2, and so on. Table 3-1 lists various
types of nodes and numbers to designate their type. Write in a triangle the number
designating the type of a node, i.e., the number in the triangle refers to the type of the
node, and the number in the square represents the number of the node.

40

Node Type
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Node
Upstream Reservoir
Downstream Reservoir
Series Junction
Branching Junction
Dead End
Downstream Valve
Orifice at Lower End
Intermediate Valve

Table 3-1. Node Types

3.4 NumberingofConduits
Different nodes are connected by conduits, and number these conduits to distinguish
them from another. It is not necessary to follow any particular sequence in numbering the
conduits as long as each conduit in the system in numbered once and the numbering of
the conduits starts at one. For example, the conduit between nodes 1 and 2 may be
numbered 1, 3, or any other number as long as it is not greater than the local number of
conduits in the system. The numbering of conduits should start at 1 and then continue
consecutively to the total number of conduits in the system. It does not matter if conduit
number 1 is located at the downstream end of the system, conduit no. 2 is located ate the
upstream end of the system, and conduit no. 3 is located as some intermediate location.

41

4 METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the procedure followed to obtain the energy dissipation factor
as an integrated part of the transient analysis in piping systems. The methodology
includes the application of the Hardy Cross method for the computation of the initial
steady state conditions and the use of a technique to generate the computational grid
without having an excessive number of grid points. The turbulence model is described
and details on the computation of the initial steady state velocity profile. The
approximation of the time dependent pressure gradient and the numerical scheme to solve
the axisymmetric momentum equation are also included.

4.1 Computationoftheinitialsteadystateconditions
For the computation of the initial steady state conditions a subroutine that solves the
network flow equations using the Hardy Cross linear analysis (adapted from [14]) is used.
The subroutine allows for the input of minor losses, use of either the Darcy-Weisbach or
Hazen-Willians pipe frictional loss, and the provision of rated power for pumps. Either SI
or English units are permissible.

It is necessary to know the flow direction in each pipe element at all times because
the required head summations depend on that flow direction. This process is handled by
42

initially designating an assumed flow direction in each pipe element. As the calculations
proceed, the direction of the flow rate is positive if it is in the initial assumed direction
and negative if it reverses direction. Input geometric data require signs based on the
initial assumed flow directions. The subroutine requires input data specifying assigned
pipe numbers for the paths of pipe sections making up primary loops and pipe sections
between fixed-grade nodes. The pipe numbers are input with a positive sign if the
assumed flow direction is in the path direction and with a negative sign if it is opposite.

4.1.1 Generalized Network Equations

Networks of piping such as those shown in Figures 4.1 and 4.2 can be represented by
the following equations.

1. Continuity at the jth interior node:

( )

Q j Qe = 0

4.1

In which the subscript j refers to the pipes connected to a node, and Qe is the
external demand. The algebraic plus or minus sign convention pertains to the
assumed flow direction. Use the positive sign for flow into the junction, and the
negative sign for the flow out of the junction.
43

Figure 4-1. Representative piping network: (a) assumed flow directions and
numbering scheme: (b) designated interior loops; (c) path between two fixedgrade nodes. (From [14])

2. Energy balance around an interior loop:

( ) W
i

=0

4.2

In which the subscript i pertains to the pipes that make up the loop. There will be
44

a relation for each of the loops. Here it is assumed that there are not pumps
located in the interior of the network. The plus sign is uses if the flow in the
element is positive in the clockwise sense; otherwise, the minus sign is employed.

3. Energy balance along a unique path or pseudo loop connecting two fixed-grade
nodes:

( ) [W
i

(H

p i

+ H = 0

4.3

Where: H is the difference in magnitude of the two fixed-grade nodes in the path
ordered in a clockwise fashion across the imaginary pipe in the pseudo loop. The term
(Hp)i is the head across a pump that could exist in the ith pipe element. If F is the
number of fixed-grade nodes, there will be (F 1) unique path equations. The plus and
minus signs in Eq. 4.3 follow the same argument given for Eq. 4.2.

Let P be the number of pipe elements in the network, J the number of interior nodes,
and L the number of interior loops. Then the following relation will hold if the network is
property defined:
P=J+L+F1

In Fig. 4.1, J = 4, L = 2, F = 2, so that P = 4 + 2 + 2 1 = 7.

An additional necessary formulation is the relation between discharge and loss in

45

each pipe; it is:

W = RQ

k
2 gA

Q2

4.4

In which R is the resistance coefficient, given by:

R =

8 fL
g 2 D 5

4.5

x = 2 for Darcy-Weisbach pipe frictional loss or x = 1.85 for Hazen-Willians pipe

frictional loss, and

K are

the minor loss components associated with each pipe

element.

If the minor losses can be defined in terms of an equivalent length, Eq. 4.4 can be
replaced by:

W = RQ x

4.6

In which the modified pipe resistance coefficient R is given by

R =

8 f [L + (L e )]
g 2 D 5

46

4.7

Where: Le is the equivalent length.

An approximate pump head-discharge representation is given by the polynomial:

(Q ) = a o

+ a 1Q + a 2 Q 2

4.8

The coefficients ao, a1, and a2 are assumed known; typically, they can be found by
substituting three known data points from a specified pump curve and solving the three
resulting equations simultaneously. In place of defining the pump head-discharge curve,
an alternative means of including a pump in a line is to specify the useful power the
.

pump puts into the system. The useful, or actual, power W f is assumed to be constant
and allows Hp to be represented in the manner:
.

(Q ) =

Wf

4.9

This equation is particularly useful when the specific operating characteristics of a

pump are unknown.

47

Figure 4-2. Two piping networks: (a) tree watering system: P = 17, L = 0, j =
8, F = 10; (b) water distribution system: P = 17, L = 4, J = 12, F = 2. (From
Wood, 1981.)
48

4.1.2 Linearization of System Energy Equations

Equation 4.3 is a general relation that can be applied to any path or closed loop in a
network. If it is applied to a closed loop, H is set equal to zero, and if no pump exists in
the path or loop, (Hp)i is equal to zero.

Define the function (Q) to contain the nonlinear terms W(Q) and HP(Q) in the form:

(Q ) = W (Q ) H P (Q ) = RQ x H P (Q )

4.10

Equation 4.8 can be expanded in a Taylor series as:

d
(Q ) = (Q o ) +
dQ

d 2
(Q Q o ) + 2
dQ
Qo

(Q Q o )2

+ ...

4.11

Qo

In which Qo is an estimate of Q. To approximate (Q) accurately, Qo should be

chosen so that the difference (Q - Qo) is numerically small. Retaining the first two terms
on the right-hand side of Eq. 4.11, and using Eq. 4.10, yields:

(Q ) RQ ox H P (Q o ) + x RQ ox 1

dH P
dQ

(Q Q o )
Qo

Note that the approximation to (Q) is now linear with respect to Q.

49

4.12

The parameter G is introduced as:

G = x RQ ox 1

dH P
dQ

4.13
Qo

Substituting Eq. 4.13 into Eq. 4.12 gives:

(Q ) = R Q ox H P (Q o ) + (Q Q o )G
= W o H Po + (Q Q o )G

4.14

In which Wo = W(Qo) and Hpo = Hp(Qo). Finally, Eq. 4.14 is substituted into Eq. 4.3 to
produce the linearized loop or path energy equation:

( ) [(W ) (H ) + [Q
i

o i

po

(Q o )i ]G i + H = 0

4.15

4.1.3 Hardy Cross Method

The Hardy Cross method of analysis is a simplified version of the iterative linear
analysis. In Eq. 4.15, let (Qo)I be the estimates of discharge from the previous iteration,
and let Qi be the new estimates of the discharge. Define a flow adjustment Q for each

50

loop to be:

Q = Q i (Q o )i

4.16

The adjustment is applied independently to all pipes in a given loop. Hence Eq. 4.15
can be written as

( ) [(W ) (H )
i

po

+ Q G i + H = 0

4.17

Solving for Q, one has:

Q =

( )[(W ) (H ) ] H
G
o i

po

4.18

For a closed loop in which no pumps or fixed-grade nodes are present, Eq. 4.18
reduces simply to the form:

Q =

( )(W )
G

o i

4.19

The hardy Cross iterative solution is outlined in the following steps:

1. Assume an initial estimate of the flow distribution in the network that satisfies
continuity, Eq. 4.1. The closer the initial estimates are to the correct values, the
51

fewer will be the iterations required for convergence. One guideline to use is that
in a pipe element as R increases, Q decreases.

2. For each loop or path, evaluate Q with Eq. 4.18 or 4.19. The numerators should
approach zero as the loops or paths become balanced.

3. Update the flows in each pipe in all loops and paths, that is, from Eq. 4.16

Q i = (Q o )i +
The term

4.20

Q is used, since a given pipe may belong to more than one loop;

hence the correction will be the sum of corrections from all loops to which the
pipe is common.

4. Repeat steps 2 and 3 until a desired accuracy is attained. One possible criterion to
use is

Q i (Q o )i

Qi

In which is an arbitrarily small number. Typically, 0.001< <0.005.

52

4.21

4.2 Generationofthecomputationalgrid
The skin friction in turbulent flow is greater than in laminar flow; therefore, the
velocity gradient is greater at the wall. To assure a good resolution of the velocity
gradient close to the wall it is very important to have small grid steps in this region. A
geometrically expanding grid spacing proposed by Cebeci and Smith (1974) was used in
this study. Figure 4.1 shows a typical grid. This was the same grid adopted by SilvaAraya and Chaudhry (1997) to compute the velocity distribution during the transient
flow.

Pipe Center Line

r=R

r=0
Pipe Wall
Figure 4-3. Non-uniform grid.
53

This technique is a geometric progression, in the radial direction, which have the
property that the ratio of lengths of any two adjacent intervals is a constant; that is:

h j = Kh j 1

4.22

Where h j 1 the size of the jth -1 interval is, h j is the size of the jth interval, K is the
ratio of two successive intervals. The distance to the position in the radial direction is
given by the following formula:

j = h1 ( K j 1) /(K 1)

j = 1, 2, ...,J

4.23

Where: h1 the length of the first cell and K is equal to the ratio of two successive
steps. The total number of points J was calculated by the following formula:

J =

ln [1 + ln( K 1)( R / h1 ) ]
ln K

4.24

Where: k = ratio of two successive steps, R = pipe radius, h1 = length of the first
interval. The implementation of this grid generation technique was based in knowing the
length of the first interval, the pipe radius and the number of grid points (N).

The constant expansion rate was computed using Newtons iteration method, which
54

starts with an initial guess; the convergence is quadratic. Then the grid growth in the
radial direction until the grid points is equal to the pipe radius. In order to compare the
model results, it is important to have a similar grid; therefore this grid was similar to the
grid used by Silva-Araya and Chaudhry (1997).

4.3 Turbulencemodeling
The turbulent boundary layer can be considered as composed of an inner and outer
region. The inner region characteristics are strongly dependent on the conditions near the
wall and are affected by the pressure gradient and the shear stress distribution. This
region is subdivided into a very thin region near the wall, called the viscous sublayer,
where, where the flow is dominated by viscous effects. Farther from the wall the
turbulent stresses become more important. The transition between the viscous sublayer
and the fully turbulent region is called the buffer layer. Beyond this transition the
turbulent stresses dominate the flow and the average velocity profile can be estimated
using a logarithmic equation. In pipe flows the inner region includes most of the pipe
cross section. Figure 4.4 shows the regions of a turbulent boundary layer.

55

25
Viscous
Sublayer

20

Buffer
Region

Logarithmic
Region

15
u

Outer
Region

10
5
0
0.1

10

100

1000

10000

Figure 4-4. Regions of a Boundary Layer

As a general expression for the Reynolds stresses, Prandtl proposed the mixing length
theory (1925). According to this theory, the Reynolds shear stress is calculated as:

(u ' v ' ) = l 2

u u
r r

4.25

Where: l is the mixing length. The bar symbol on the velocity was dropped in the
previous equation.

The Reynolds stresses can also be modeled by using the eddy viscosity concept

56

introduced by Boussinesq (1877). The basic assumption is that the turbulent stresses are
proportional to the velocity gradient. The same assumption is made in the mixing length
model. The coefficient of proportionality, , was called eddy viscosity and is defined as

u
( u ' v ' ) =

4.26

The close relation between the mixing length and the eddy viscosity concepts allows
converting mixing length into eddy viscosity in many cases. A mixing-length model was
used for the inner region of the boundary layer. An eddy viscosity model was selected for
the outer region. The mixing-length values are converted into eddy viscosity to make
both models compatible.

4.3.1 Turbulence Model for the Inner Region

The following mixing length model, proposed by Granville (1989), and normalized
by using the wall variables, is used for the inner region of the boundary layer.

l + = ky

(1 e

y + / 1+

4.27

Where l + = u l / v , y + = u y / v , + = / w , 1+ = mixing length damping parameter

57

(for flows with zero pressure gradient), u = friction velocity given by u = w / ,

w = wall shear stress, l = mixing length, v = kinematics viscosity, k von Karmans

constant and y = radial distance measured form the wall.

Granville (1990) derived the relation between the mixing length model (Eq. 4.27) and
the eddy viscosity as

+ =

( )

1
+ 2
1 + 2l
2

4.28

Where + = / v is the ratio of the eddy viscosity and the kinematics viscosity.

4.3.2 Outer Region Model and Blending Relation

For the outer region the eddy viscosity is computed using a model proposed by Kita
et al. (1980). This is a constant eddy viscosity values across the outer region given by

+
out
= CcR +

Where Cc is slightly dependent on the Reynolds number.

58

4.29

For the range 1 X 104 < Re < 2 X 106 the value of Cc is given by (Silva Araya and
Chaudhry, 1993).

C c = 0 . 4095 0 . 1390 log (Re ) + 0 . 0137 log (Re )

4.30

If Re < 1 X 104 then Cc = 0.07, if Re > 2 X 106 then Cc = 0.075.

According to the criterion given by Kita et al (1980). the outer region starts when the
following condition if fulfilled

+
lim

0 . 154 Re +
=
k

1 +

Cc
0 . 077

4.31

Where Re+ = u+R / v and R is the pipe radius.

A smoother transition between the inner and outer eddy viscosities can be achieved
by using a blending relation. This merging is accomplished by an exponential function
given by:

+
+ = out
e b (y

+
y out

59

4.32

Where the exponent b is computed as

b=

+
Ln out
/ c+
+
y out
y c+

4.33

The value of c+ is linearly interpolated between the beginning of the falling limb of
the eddy viscosity distribution and out . y c+ is the value of y+ corresponding to c+ . Also
+
+
is linearly interpolated between y lim
and R+ = uR/v. The corresponding value of
y out
+
is out
. Figure 4.5 shows a typical eddy viscosity distribution with the inner, transition and

outer regions.
Transition

Outer
Region

Inner Region

Figure 4-5. Eddy Viscosity Distribution.

60

4.4 Initialvelocityprofile
For laminar flow the velocity profile is computed using the following expression
(White, 1991)
u =

1 p

R
4 x

r2

4.34

Where R = pipe internal radius, p / x = pressure gradient, = dynamic viscosity.

No eddy viscosity computation is required.

For turbulent flow, the initial mean velocity distribution can be written in the form:

u+ = f (y+)

4.35

Where f(y+) is the profile across the pipe, including the sublayer, buffer, logarithmic
and outer regions.

If the shear stress, +, and the eddy viscosity distribution, +, are known, the velocity
profile can be obtained by the following equation (Silva Araya and Chaudhry, 1993).

u+ =

y+

1+

61

dy

4.36

Where u+ = 0 at y+ = 0. For a fully develop steady-state flow, the shear stress +,

varies linearly across the pipe section from 0 at the wall to 1 at the pipe centerline.

The gradients of the velocity profile are computed by using a forward-time, centralspaced explicit scheme modified for a geometrically expanded grid. The partial
derivatives can be approximated as (Hoffman, 1989)

+ 2 1 u i 2 u i 1
u
u
i +1
r
( + 1 ) r

4.37

Where = ri 1 / ri is the ratio of two successive grid spaces and r = ri 1 ri .

In the previous expressions the subscript i refer to the i-th position inside the pipe
cross section. A second-order backward approximation is used for the gradient at the wall

u
r

2 u N 2 (1 + )2 u N 1

(1 + ) (r N 1 r N 2 )

4.38

Where N is the number of grid lines (the grid line at the wall is number N).

Prior to the initiation of the transient flow, the dissipation integral is computed
substituting the derivatives of the initial flow profile into Equation 2.8. The integrated

62

value is compared with the initial steady-state value given by Equation 2.10.

4.5 Computationofthepressuregradient
The computation of the pressure gradient needed in the Equation 3.14 is time
dependent and must be estimated from the local conditions. Given an approximation of
the velocity profile, for example the velocity profile at the previous time step, the
pressure gradient can be estimated from the momentum equation, expressed in a compact
form (Silva Araya and Chaudhry, 1997) as:

r p
u

= r
r
t
r
x

4.39

Where: t = + , = kinematics viscosity, = eddy viscosity. Multiplying

Equation 3.50 by 2 and integrating with respect to r and expressing it in a compact
form yields:

2
Q
1 p
=

tA
R
x

63

r r=R

4.40

where Q / t can be approximated by the change in discharge from the previous

time step. Adjustments in the value of the pressure gradient may be required if the flow is
reduced drastically; but Equation 3.51 is a good initial approximation (Silva Araya and
Chaudhry, 1997).

4.6 Shearstressdistribution
Equation 2.14 can also be expressed in terms of the shear stress as:

u
p
1 (r
=
+
r r
t
x

4.41

Where is the shear stress at a distance r from the pipe centerline.

Multiplying Equation 4.32 by r and integrating with respect to r, we obtain:

u
rdr
t

r 2 p
+ r
2 x

4.42

Dividing by the shear stress at the wall, the following non-dimensional for results:

64

r w

r p
u
rdr +
2 w x
t

4.43

The time derivative is approximated as:

u
u
ut
t+t
t
tMOC

4.44

Where tMOC is the time step chosen to solve the characteristic equations.

For steady state flow this expression reduces to:

R p
2 x

4.45

Equation 4.34 is used to update the shear stress distribution after every time step.

4.7 Computationofthevelocityprofile
This research adopted the procedure to compute the axisymmetric momentum
equation for the velocity profile across the unequally spaced grid, developed by Silva
Araya and Chaudhry, (1997). This procedure is reference as the McCormack scheme
predictor-corrector where is second order accurate in space and time scheme (Anderson
et al., 1984). In the predictor a step forward finite-differences approach is used for the
65

spatial derivatives, and a backward finite differences is used in the corrector step. This
sequence was alternated during the computations from one time step to the next; as
reported by these researchers. Therefore:

4.7.1 Predictor Step

The approximations for the partial derivatives in this step are:
u * u in
u
= i
t
t

4.46

un un
u
= i +1 + i
r
r

4.47

2 ( u in+ 1 ( + 1) u in + u in 1 )
2u
=
r 2
( + 1)( r ) 2

4.48

Where: r + = ri +1 ri , r = ri ri 1 and = ri +1 / ri . The superscript n refers to

the time level, the subscript i refers to the grid point, and the asterisk indicates a predicted
value.

Thus, the momentum equation is solved for u i* (Silva Araya and Chaudhry, 1997) as
n +1

1 p
d u in+ 1 u in

u = u +
t +
+
t

dr
r+
r
x
u in+ 1 ( + 1 ) u in + u i 1
+ 2 t
( + 1 )( r ) 2
*
i

n
i

66

4.49

4.7.2 Corrector Step

The predicted values are used in a backward finite-difference approximation for the
first spatial derivative and are also used for the second spatial derivative. The
approximations are
u * * u in
u
= i
t
t

4.50

u * u i* 1
u
= i
r
r

4.51

2 ( u i*+ 1 ( + 1 ) u i* + u i* 1 )
u 2
=
r 2
( + 1 )( r ) 2

4.52

Where (**) indicates a corrected value. Therefore, the corrected velocity is:
n +1

*
*
1 p
d u i u i 1
t + +
t
u = u +

dr r +
r
x
u * ( + 1) u i* + u i*1
+ 2 t i +1
( + 1)( r ) 2
**
i

n
i

4.53

Finally, the velocity for the next time step is given by:

u in +1 =

u i** u i*
2

The derivative of the eddy viscosity is obtained (Silva Araya, 1993) as:

67

4.54

 + ( 2 + 1) i 2 i 1
d
= i +1
dr
( + 1)( ri 1 ri )

4.55

The velocity distribution is computed at every section of the pipe. At the end of the,
method of characteristic (MOC) and for every time step the velocity profile is integrated
across the pipe section to compute the flow discharge. If the integrated discharge differs
from the one predicted by the MOC, the pressure gradient is slightly adjusted to satisfy
the continuity equation. The adjustment is done until both discharges differ by less than
5%.

68

5 VERIFICATION
This chapter presents the results obtained by using the unsteady friction model for
piping systems. The generalized algorithm was analyzed for three cases: single, series
and branching piping systems. The computed pressures are compared with the
experimental data obtained for Silva Araya (1993) for a single piping system case. For a
series and a branching piping system the computed results obtained by using unsteady
friction are compared with the data obtained by using steady friction model.

5.1 SinglePipingSystem
The experimental data obtained by Silva Araya (1993) was used for the verification
of the generalized algorithm in a single piping system. The experimental apparatus used
is shown in Figure 5.1. The system was built at the Albrook Hydraulics Laboratory at
Washington State University.

The arrangement consists of a constant-head tank open to the atmosphere connected

by a horizontal pipe to a motorized butterfly valve located 32 m downstream of the tank.
A pump supplies water from the sump to the tank. At the valve, the water discharges into
another open tank and returns to the pump. Four pressure transducers were used to record
the pressure fluctuations for the valve closure in each section. These were located at X =
69

L / 4, X = L / 2, X = 3L / 4 and X = L from the reservoir.

Figure 5-1. Schematic of Experimental Setup (Silva Araya, 1993)

The pipe material is commercial steel with an internal diameter of 0.101 m and a wall
thickness of 0.00635 m. The initial steady-state discharge was 0.0165 m3/s. This
corresponds to an average velocity of 20.02 m/s and an initial Reynolds number of 2.06
X 105. The relative roughness for this simulation was 0.001. Other parameters are listed
in Table 5.1. Table 5.2 shows the different types of nodes present in this system.

The transient conditions for this case were produced by a gradual closure of the
downstream valve. The valve closed completely in 1.085 sec. The curve of the effective
valve opening versus time curve used in the simulation is given in Figure 5.2

70

Parameter
Initial Discharge
Upstream Tank Head
Entrance Loss Coefficient
Friction Factor
Initial Valve Position
Wave Speed
Density
Dynamic Viscosity

Value
0.0165 m3/s
2.65 m
1.44
0.0223
0 = 0.62
1125 m/s
999.1 Kg/m3
1.06 X 10-3 m2/s

Table 5-1. Parameters for Single Piping System.

Node Number
Node Type
1
(1) Upstream Reservoir
2
(6) Downstream Valve
Table 5-2. Node type for Single Piping System.

Effective Valve Opening

1
0.9

Effective Opening, TAU

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

Time (s)

Figure 5-2. Characteristic Curve for Valve in Single Piping System.

71

Figures 5.3 (a) to 5.3 (d) compare the measured pressures with the computed results
obtained by using steady friction. The maximum pressure is predicted accurately without
the unsteady friction model. The oscillations damp much more rapidly than the predicted
values. The shift in the frequency of the oscillations is due to the reduction of the wave
speed caused by the low pressures after the valve closure.

72

H Vs T (Valve)

Experimental Data
Steady Friction

60
50

Pressure Head (m)

40
30
20
10
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

(10)
(20)

Time (s)

(a) At the Valve

H Vs T (x = 3L/4)

Experimental Data
Steady Friction

60
50

Pressure Head (m)

40
30
20
10
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

(10)
(20)

Time (s)

(b) At x = 3L / 4
Figure 5-3. Pressure Head Histories for a Single Piping System Using Steady
Friction.
73

H Vs T (x = L/2)

Experimental Data
Steady Friction

60
50

Pressure Head (m)

40
30
20
10
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

(10)
(20)

Time (s)

(c) At x = L / 2
H Vs T (x = L/4)

Experimental Data
Steady Friction

60

Pressure Head (m)

50

40

30

20

10

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

(10)

Time (s)

(d) At x = L / 4
Figure 5-3. Pressure Head Histories for a Single Piping System Using Steady
Friction (Cont.)
74

Figures 5.4 (a) to 5.4 (d) compare the measured pressure heads with the pressure
heads obtained by the unsteady friction model. The maximum and the minimum
pressures as well as the damping rate are predicted accurately at the four locations along
the pipe.
The effect of the passage of a strong pressure wave created during a transient flow
condition in the velocity profiles is observed in Figure. 5.5.

Figure 5.5 (a) correspond to the initial steady-state velocity profile. Figure 5.5 (b)
through 5.5 (d) present several instantaneous velocities profiles. Figure 5.5 (e) shows that
during transient flow, the average velocity across the section could be almost zero;
however, local velocities could be significant. Figure 5.8 (f) presents a profile during a
complete flow reversal (negative velocities).

The energy dissipation factor as a function of time for different points of the pipe is
shown in figure 5.6.

75

H Vs T (Valve)

Experimental Data
Unsteady Friction

60

50

Pressure Head (m)

40

30

20

10

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

(10)

(20)

Time (s)

(a) At the Valve

H Vs T (x = 3L/4)

Experimental Data
Unsteady Friction

60
50

Pressure Head (m)

40
30
20
10
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

(10)
(20)

Time (s)

(b) At x = 3L / 4
Figure 5-4. Pressure Head Histories for a Single Piping System Using
Unsteady Friction.
76

H Vs T (x = L/2)

Experimental Data
Unsteady Friction

60

Pressure Head (m)

50

40

30

20

10

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

(10)

Time (s)

(c) At the x = L / 2
H Vs T (x = L/4)

Experimental Data
Unsteady Friction

60

Pressure Head (m)

50

40

30

20

10

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

(10)

Time (s)

(d) At x = L / 4
Figure 5-4. Pressure Head Histories for a Single Piping System Using
Unsteady Friction (Cont.)
77

Velocity Profile (t = 0s)

Distance from Centerline (m)

0.06

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

Velocity (m/s)

(a) At t = 0 s

Velocity Profile (t = 1s)

Distance from Centerline (m)

0.06

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

Velocity (m/s)

(b) At t = 1 s
Figure 5-5. Velocity Profile in transient Flow at the Middle of the Pipe
78

Velocity Profile (t = 1.5s)

0.06

Distance from Centerline (m)

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
-0.04

-0.02

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

Velocity (m/s)

(c) At t = 1.5 s

Velocity Profile (t = 1.56)

0.06

Distance from Centerline (m)

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
-0.04

-0.02

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

Velocity (m/s)

(d) At t = 1.56 s
Figure 5-5. Velocity Profile in transient Flow at the Middle of the Pipe (Cont.)
79

Velocity Profile (t = 1.625s)

0.06

Distance from Centerline (m)

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
-0.05

-0.04

-0.03

-0.02

-0.01

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

Velocity (m/s)

(e) At t = 1.625 s

Velocity Profile (t = 2s)

0.06

Distance from Centerline (m)

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
-0.08

-0.07

-0.06

-0.05

-0.04

-0.03

-0.02

-0.01

Velocity (m/s)

(f) At t = 1.75 s
Figure 5-5. Velocity Profile in transient Flow at the Middle of the Pipe (Cont.)
80

Energy Dissipation Factor Vs Time (x = L / 2)

9000

Energy Dissipation Factor (ef)

8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Time (s)

(a) At x = L / 2
Energy Dissipation Factor Vs Time (x = L / 4)
4500

Energy Dissipation Factor (ef)

4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Time (s)

(a) At x = L / 4
Figure 5-6. Energy Dissipation Factor in Transient Turbulent Flow
81

5.2 SeriesPipingSystem
A case study presented by Chaudhry M. Hanif, (1987) in his book Applied
Hydraulics Transients was used to apply the generalized algorithm in a series piping
system

Transient conditions in the piping system shown in Figure 5.7 were determined using
steady and unsteady friction. The arrangement consists of a constant-head tank open to
the atmosphere connected by two horizontal pipes located in series to a valve located
1000 m downstream of the tank. The conduits at these systems have different diameters,
wall material, and friction factors. Table 5.3 shows the different types of nodes present in
this system.

Reservoir

Valve

Qo
2
1
3
1

Figure 5-7. Schematic of Series Piping System

82

3
6

Node Number
Node Type
1
(1) Upstream Reservoir
2
(3) Series Junction
3
(6) Downstream Valve
Table 5-3. Node type for Series Piping System.
The initial steady-state discharge was 1 m3/s. This corresponds to an average velocity
of 2.26 m/s and an initial Reynolds number of 1.69 X 106 for pipe number 1 and an
average velocity of 3.53 m/s and an initial Reynolds number of 2.12 X 106 for pipe
number 2. Other parameters are listed in Table 5.4 and characteristics of the pipes are
listed in Table 5.5.
Parameter
Initial Discharge
Upstream Tank Head
Number of Pipes
Valve Operation Time
Initial Valve Position
Final Valve Position
Density
Dynamic Viscosity

Value
1 m3/s
67.7 m
2
6s
0 = 1
f = 0
1000 Kg/m3
1.06 X 10-3 m2/s

Table 5-4. Parameters for Series Piping System.

Parameter
Pipe Number 1 Pipe Number 2
Initial Discharge
1 m3/s
1 m3/s
Diameter
0.75 m
0.6 m
Length
550 m
450 m
Wave speed
1100 m/s
900 m/s
Friction Factor
0.010
0.012
Table 5-5. Characteristics of the Pipes for Series Piping System.
83

Transient conditions were caused by closing the valve according to the t curve
shown in Figure 5.8. Seven points on this curve were stored in the computer, and the
values at the intermediate times were parabolically interpolated.

Effective Valve Opening

1
0.9

Effective Opening, TAU

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0

Time (s)

Figure 5-8. Characteristic Curve for Valve in Series Piping System.

Figure 5.9 shows the geometrically expanding grid spacing used for each pipe. Small
grid steps were used near the wall to assure a good resolution of the velocity gradient.
Figure 5.10 shows the initial eddy viscosity distribution in each pipe, and Figure 5.11
shows the initial velocity profiles.

84

DISTANCE FROM CENTER LINE

Wall

0.4
0.35

Wall
0.3

ETA

0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1

PIPE1
PIPE2

0.05
0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

80

70

GRID LINE NUMBER

Figure 5-9. Geometrically Expanding Grid Spacing for Series Piping System.
Eddy Viscosity Distribution
4500
PIPE1
PIPE2

4000
3500
3000

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

Y+

Figure 5-10. Eddy Viscosity distribution for Series Piping System.

85

Initial Velocity Profiles

0.4
PIPE1
PIPE2

Distance from Centerline (m)

0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

Velocity (m/s)

Figure 5-11. Initial Velocity Profile for Series Piping System.

Figures 5.12 (a) to 5.12 (d) compare the computed results obtained by using steady
and unsteady friction. The maximum pressure is predicted similarly by both models.
However the oscillations damp much more rapidly using unsteady friction than the results
obtained using steady friction.

86

H Vs T (Valve)

Steady Friction
Unsteady Friction

180
160

Pressure Head (m)

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0

10

15

20

25

30

Time (s)

(a) At the Valve.

H Vs T (Middle Pipe 2)

Steady Friction
Unsteady Friction

180
160

Pressure Head (m)

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0

10

15

20

25

30

Time (s)

(b) At the middle of Pipe Number 2.

Figure 5-12. Pressure Head Histories for a Series Piping System Using Steady
and Unsteady Friction.
87

H Vs T (Junction)

Steady Friction
Unsteady Friction

180
160

Pressure Head (m)

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0

10

15

20

25

30

Time (s)

(c) At the Junction.

H Vs T (Middle Pipe 1)

Steady Friction
Unsteady Friction

180
160

Pressure Head (m)

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0

10

15

20

25

30

Time (s)

(d) At the Middle of Pipe Number 1.

Figure 5-12. Pressure Head Histories for a Series Piping System Using Steady
and Unsteady Friction (Cont.).
88

5.3 BranchingPipingSystem
The researcher modified the previous system to convert it into a branching system.
The modification, shown in Figure 5.13, consists of adding a new pipe exactly at the
junction of the previous case study, and thus to convert a series piping system in a
branching piping system. The boundary condition downstream of the new pipe is a node
type 2 (downstream reservoir) as it is indicated in Table 3.1.

The other boundary

conditions continue is the same of the previous case.

Reservoir
3

Reservoir

2
Valve
1
1

2
3
4
6

Figure 5-13. Schematic of Branching Piping System

Table 5.6 shows the different types of nodes presents in this system.

89

Node Number
1
2
3
4

Node Type
(1) Upstream Reservoir
(4) Branching Junction
(6) Downstream Valve
(2) Downstream Reservoir

Table 5-6. Node type for Branching Piping System.

The diameter, length, wave speed and friction factor for pipes number 1 and 2 are the
same listed in Table 5.5. Characteristics for pipe number 3 are listed in Table 5.7.

Parameter
Pipe Number 3
Diameter
0.6 m
Length
1100 m
Wave speed
1100 m/s
Friction Factor
0.012
Table 5-7. Characteristics of the Pipes for Branching Piping System.
Transient conditions were caused by closing the valve at the end of pipe number 2
according to the t curve shown in Figure 5.8.

Figure 5.14 shows the initial eddy viscosity distribution in each pipe, and Figure 5.15
shows the initial velocity profile. Figures 5.16 (a) to 5.16 (d) compare the computed
results obtained by using steady and unsteady friction.

90

Eddy Viscosity Distribution

4500
PIPE1
PIPE2
PIPE3

4000
3500
3000

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

Y+

Figure 5-14. Eddy Viscosity distribution for Branching Piping System.

Initial Velocity Profile

0.4
PIPE1
PIPE2
PIPE3

Distance from Centerline (m)

0.35
0.3

0.25
0.2

0.15
0.1

0.05
0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

Velocity (m/s)

Figure 5-15. Initial Velocity Profile for Branching Piping System.

91

3.5

H Vs T (Valve)

Steady Friction
Unsteady Friction

110
100
90

Pressure Head (m)

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0

10

15

20

25

30

Time (s)

(a) At the Valve

H Vs T (Junction)

Steady Friction
Unsteady Friction

110
100

Pressure Head (m)

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

10

15

20

25

30

Time (s)

(a) At the Junction

Figure 5-16. Pressure Head Histories for a Branching Piping System Using
Steady and Unsteady Friction.
92

H Vs T (Middle Pipe No 1)

Steady Friction
Unsteady Friction

110
100

Head Pressure (m)

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0

10

15

20

25

30

Time (s)

(c) At the Middle of Pipe Number 1

H Vs T (Middle Pipe No 2)

Steady Friction
Unsteady Friction

110
100

Head Pressure(m)

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0

10

15

20

25

30

Time (s)

(c) At the Middle of Pipe Number 2

Figure 5-16. Pressure Head Histories for a Branching Piping System Using
Steady and Unsteady Friction (Cont.).
93

6 CONCLUSIONS
1. A computer algorithm to extend Silva and Chaudhry unsteady friction model for
water hammer oscillations in piping systems to series and branching pipe systems
was developed. The conduits may have different diameters, wall thickness, wall
material, and/or friction factors.

2. Boundary conditions for upstream and downstream reservoir, series and

branching junction, dead end, downstream and intermediate valve, and orifice at
lower end are included.

3. The generalized water hammer algorithm was developed using Visual Basic for
Applications in Excel, creating a user friendly windows interface. The program
is an excellent tool to design and analyze fluid transients in liquid systems and no
compilers or interpreters are required because VBA is part of the Excel and MS
Office suite.

4. Commercial programs for transient analysis generally are very costly. This
investigation developed an economic form to analyze this phenomenon, since no
installation of additional programs, is necessary as long as you have installed
Microsoft Excel in your computer.
94

REFERENCES
[1] Arangoitia Valdivia, Vctor, (2001). Disipacin de Energa en Flujo Transitorio
en Conductos Cerrados, M. Sc. Dissertation, University of Puerto Rico,
Mayagez Campus.
[2] Cebeci, T., Smith, A.M. 1974. Analysis of Turbulent Boundary Layers,
Academic Press, New york.
[3] Chaudhry M. Hanif, (1987). Applied Hydraulics Transients, Vann Nostrand
Reinhold Company, New York.
[4] Eichinger, P. and Lein G., (1992). The Influence Of Friction Unsteady Pipe
Flow, Unsteady Flow and transients, Betless and Watts. Balkema, Rotterdam.
[5] Hoffman, K.A. 1989. Computational Fluid Dynamics for Engineers, Texas:
Engineering Education System.
[6] Granville, P.S. 1990. A Near-Wall Eddy Viscosity Formula for Turbulent
Boundary Layers in Pressure Gradients Suitable for Momentum, Heat or Mass
Transfer, Journal of Fluids Engineering ASME. 112: 240 243.
[7] Granville, P.S. 1989. A modified Van Driest Formula for the Mixing Length of
Turbulent Boundary Layers in Pressure Gradients, Journal of Fluids Engineering
ASME. 111: 94 97.
[8] Huddleston, D. Alarcon, V. and Chen, W. (2004). Water Distribution Network
Analysis Using Excel. J. Hydr. Eng., Vol. 130, (10), 1033 1035.
95

[9] Larock Bruce E., Jeppson, Roland W. and Watters, Gary S. (2000). Hydraulics
of Pipelines Systems, CRC, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
[10] Libby, Paul A. (1996). Introduction to Turbulence. Washington, D. C. Taylor
& Francis.
[11] Ohmi, M. Iguchi, M. and Hinami H., (1980). Flow Pattern and Frictional
Losses in Pulsating Pipe Flow. Part 1. Effect of Pulsating Frequency on the
Turbulent Flow Pattern, Bulletin of the JSME 23, No. 186, 2013 2020.
[12] Peralta Cooper, Eddy, (2001). k- Two-equation turbulence model in the
Computation of the Energy Dissipation in Transient Flow, M. Sc. Dissertation,
University of Puerto Rico, Mayagez Campus.
[13] Pezzinga, G. (1999). Quasi-2D Model for Unsteady Flow in Pipe Networks. J.
Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., Vol. 125 (7), 676 - 685.
[14] Potter, Merle C. and Wiggert, David C. (1997). Mechanics of Fluids, Second
Edition, Prentive Hall, Inc. USA.
[15] Ramaprian, B.R. and Tu, S.W. (1979). Experiments on Transitional Oscillatory
Pipe Flow, Report No. 221, Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research, August 1979,
115 p.
[16] Roberson, Jhon A. and Crowe Clayton T. (1997). Engineering Fluid
Mechanics, Sixth Edition, John Wiley & Sons. Inc. USA.

96

[17] Schetz, Joseph A. (1993). Boundary Layer Analysis, Prentice Hall,

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, USA.
[18] Shames, Irving H. (1992). Mechanics of Fluids, 3rd ed., New York, Mc Graw
Hill Co.
[19] Silva-Araya, W. (1993). Energy Dissipation in Transient Flow, Ph.D.
Dissertation, Washington State University, Washington.
[20] Silva-Araya, Walter, and Chaudhry, M. Hanif, (1997). Computation of Energy
Dissipation in Transient Flow, J. Hydr. Eng., Vol. 123, (2), 108 - 115.
[21] Silva-Araya, Walter, and Chaudhry, M. Hanif, (2001). Unsteady friction in
Rough Pipes, J. Hydr. Eng., Vol. 127, (7), 607 - 618.
[22] Streeter, Wylie, Bedford (1998). Fluid Mechanics. Ninth edition, USA, WCB/
Mc Graw Hill Co.
[23] Schlichting, H. (1979). Boundary Layer Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York.
[24] Schohl, G. A. (1993). Improved approximation method for simulating
frequency-dependent friction in transient laminar flow. J. Fluids Eng., Vol.
115, 420 424.
[25] Swaffield J. A. and Boldy A. P. (1993). Pressure Surge in Pipe and Duct
Systems, Avebury Technical, England.

97

[26] Trikha, A. K. (1975). An efficient method for simulating frequency-dependent

friction in liquid flow J. Fluids Eng., Vol 97(1), 97 105.
[27] Vardy, A. E., and Brown, J. M. B. (2004). Efficient Approximation of
Unsteady Friction Weighting Functions, J. Hydr. Eng., November 2004, 1097
1107.

[28] Vardy, A.E. and Hwang, K. (1991). A Characteristics Model of Transient

Friction, Journal of Hydraulics Research 29, No. 5: 669-684.
[29] White, F.M. (1991). Viscous Fluid Flow, 2nd ed., New York, Mc Graw Hill
Co.

[30] Wood, Don J., Lingireddy, Srinivasa and Boulos Paul F. (2005). Pressure
Wave Analysis of Transient Flow in Pipe Distribution Systems, MWH Soft,
Pasadena California, USA.
[31] Zhao, M. And Ghidaoui. M. (2004). Godunov-Type Solutions for Water
Hammer Flows. J. Hydr. Eng., Vol. 130, (4), 341 348.

98

APPENDIX A. VALUES OF T VS. TAU FOR DIFFERENT

TYPESOFVALVES

APPENDIX A1. BUTTERFLY VALVES

t/tc Opening t/tc Close
1.00
0.00
0.94
0.06
0.89
0.11
0.83
0.17
0.78
0.22
0.72
0.28
0.67
0.32
0.61
0.39
0.56
0.44
0.50
0.50
0.44
0.56
0.39
0.61
0.32
0.67
0.28
0.72
0.22
0.78
0.17
0.83
0.11
0.89
0.06
0.94
0.00
1.00

0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90

TAU
1.00
0.95
0.87
0.75
0.62
0.49
0.39
0.30
0.23
0.17
0.125
0.1
0.07
0.055
0.036
0.021
0.01
0.005
0.000

Table B- 1. t/tc Vs. TAU values for Butterfly valves.

99

BUTTERFLY VALVES
1
0.9
0.8
0.7

TAU

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

t/tc

(a)

(b)
Figure B- 1. (a) t/tc Vs. TAU for Butterfly valves, (b) valve scheme.
100

APPENDIX A2. CIRCULAR VALVES

t/tc Close t/tc Opening (Z/D)100 TAU
1.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.95
0.05
5
0.05
0.90
0.10
10
0.10
0.85
0.15
15
0.15
0.80
0.20
20
0.20
0.75
0.25
25
0.25
0.70
0.30
30
0.30
0.65
0.35
35
0.35
0.60
0.40
40
0.40
0.55
0.45
45
0.45
0.50
0.50
50
0.50
0.45
0.55
55
0.55
0.40
0.60
60
0.60
0.35
0.65
65
0.65
0.30
0.70
70
0.70
0.25
0.75
75
0.75
0.20
0.80
80
0.80
0.15
0.85
85
0.85
0.10
0.90
90
0.90
0.05
0.95
05
0.95
0.00
1.00
100
1.00
Table B- 2. t/tc Vs. TAU values for Circular valves.

101

Circular Valves
1
0.9
0.8
0.7

TAU

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

t/tc

(a)

(b)
Figure B- 2. (a) t/tc Vs. TAU Circular valves, (b) valve scheme.
102

APPENDIX A3. BIPLANES VALVES

t/tc Close t/tc Opening
1.00
0.00
0.94
0.06
0.89
0.11
0.83
0.17
0.78
0.22
0.72
0.28
0.67
0.32
0.61
0.39
0.56
0.44
0.50
0.50
0.44
0.56
0.39
0.61
0.32
0.67
0.28
0.72
0.22
0.78
0.17
0.83
0.11
0.89
0.06
0.94
0.00
1.00

0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90

TAU
1.00
0.68
0.51
0.37
0.29
0.22
0.19
0.15
0.125
0.098
0.078
0.062
0.048
0.038
0.029
0.022
0.016
0.011
0.000

Table B- 3. t/tc Vs. TAU values for Biplane valves.

103

Biplane Valves
1
0.9
0.8
0.7

TAU

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

t/tc

(b)

Figure B- 3. (a) t/tc Vs. TAU for Biplane valves, (b) valve scheme.

104