Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Group I
Sessouh Akowanou
Jason Fields
Joe Mitchell
Shea Robinson
February 24 2010
Summary
The aim of this experiment is to measure the system curve of a 54.8 ft long
and 0.085 ft diameter system of pipework. It is also desired to establish a
calibration curve. The study has been done on liquid water at room
temperature. The system curve indicates how much energy is lost in the
system in function of the flow rate .In order to determine it two approaches
are used in this experiment. One method is realized by measuring physicals
properties of the system such as pipe length, pipe diameter flow velocity
etc... The other one is derived from conservation of mechanical energy. The
pipe roughness builds up on the surface of the duct within time and can
lower the overall performance of the system. This parameter has been
estimated then reevaluated throughout our work in order to reduce the
difference between estimated head loss and measured one. We generate a
calibration curve so one can calibrate the measured flow rate to the
predicted one and hence predict the head loss. After plotting measured and
predict system curve, both curves underlie each others. In consequence the
model and actual measure fit well in this experiment. Finally we will
determined the head loss of the system at regime that has not been
measured during the experiment.
Pa and Pb are the pressure at point “a” and point “b” or as an example
between inlet and outlet. Pressure at inlet can be determined from pressure
transmitter PT03 and the pressure at the outlet is supposed to be
atmospheric pressure (14.7 psi). “η” is the pump efficiency; however no
shaft works (Wp) is done on the fluid so the term ηWp is set equal to zero.
The elevation height between inlet and outlet ΔZ is about 5.5 ft. Initial
velocity (Va) can be assumed to be equal to zero and final velocity is
measured by gravimetric flow rate. Alpha is a correction factor for kinetic
energy and its value is estimated to be 1.05 however, for simplifying our
analysis we will consider it equal to 1. The data needed to apply eq 4.74 are
available in table 1.
Having those data, we can estimate the head loss (hf) of the system. Head
loss can be understood as the part of energy that gets irreversibly lost due to
friction and changes in momentum of the fluid streamline.
In this equation f is the friction factor, D is the pipe diameter and ε is pipe
roughness. This equation is valid only for turbulent flow which corresponds to
the regime we having in this experiment. Another way to determine the
friction factor is by using the Moody chart and it is suitable for Reynolds
number ranging between 103 to 108. Now that we can determine the friction
factor, we can calculate the major loss. Minor losses are due to fittings and
are also taken in account when total head loss is determined. Fittings disturb
streamline and create eddies. The fittings attached to our system are listed
in table 1.
The Total head loss is the sum of major and minor loss. The governing
equation used to calculate head loss has been obtained from Unit Operation
of chemical engineering (McCabe and Smith):
In table 2 we summarize the data that we collected and processed from the
laboratory to generate the system curve of our system of pipe work.
Stand Standa
Head ard rd
Mean Volume Flow Loss Deviat Head Loss Deviat
Rate (ft^3/sec) (ft) ion (ft) theory ion
Flow
1 0.50 1.104 0.010 1.106806 0.001
Flow
2 0.802 2.678 0.044 2.671129 0.009
Flow
3 1.48 8.461 0.018 8.469375 0.007
Flow
4 0.397438 0.657 0.001 0.657411 0.000
From table 2, measured and theoretical system curves are plot for the
system of pipework studied during our experiment in figure 1.
A calibration curve is added to the work so we can calibrate the flow rate
measured by gravimetric measurement to the one measured by the orifice
plate. To do so, volumetric flow rate calculated from the orifice plate is plot
as a function of gravimetric flow rate. We obtained the following plot
Another source of deviation might arises from the fact that after collecting
the data during the experiment, the recorded values obtained from pressure
transmitter 3 and 5 (PT03 and PT05) have been corrupted and automatically
rounded by the software to the nearest 1/1000. This might affect the
accuracy of the measured data. According to the results it looks that the
predicted values get close to the measured one at higher regime and the
reverse phenomenon at lowest regime. Overall, theory and observations
meet in this experiment. However no value have been taken out of the range
studied, so we don’t know if the general trend obtained for the studied range
will be kept out of the range studied. Thus we recommend collecting more
data principally out of the range studied (0.3 ft3/min to 1.3 ft3/min) if time is
available.
hl is the head loss in ft and V is the volumetric flow rate in ft3/s. According to
eq 1, the expected head loss at 50 GPM (6.68 ft3/min) is to be 163.33 ft. To
compensate the head loss one can add a pump which will compensate the
calculated head loss (163.33 ft) to the system. When we calibrate the
volumetric flow rate we obtained a head loss of 123.33 ft. By comparing both
values it is better to choose a pump that will compensate 163.33 ft of head
loss. In case that the work done by the pump is higher than what is needed
one can still adjust the pump to deliver more head to the system. As we
mentioned above it will be wise to obtained more value at different range of
volumetric flow rate so one can know the general trend of the system curve
at a wider range.
References lists: