Experiment No.

1:

DETERMINATION OF FRICTION LOSSES

ChE 34 A

Group 1:
200631921 Kismet Patrick T. Ong
200930115 Mariza S. Silagan*
201110174 Reymond F. Tayone

Date Performed: November 11, 2014

Submitted to:
Engr. Edwin Richard Ortiz
ChE 34 Instructor

Submitted on:
November 18, 2014
Abstract

Friction losses incurred by a fluid as it flows along a pipeline may be caused by skin friction
losses at the pipe walls and/or losses due additional turbulence from fluid mixing at valves and
fittings. The objective of the experiment was to (a) determine the friction losses across pipe
fittings in a piping network and to (b) plot the fanning friction factor, ƒ, versus the Reynold’s
Number for the flow of fluid in a straight pipe. Four piping systems were inspected and were
measured of the volumetric flowrates at different valve openings. The frictional losses were
calculated for each piping and a relation was constructed in a plot of the friction factor against
Reynold’s number.

Introduction

Some factors are involved upon changes on the dynamic mechanism of fluids. A necessary
factor to account is the effect of friction losses on the behavior of fluids. The length, material
used, diameter, and type of fittings are some of the components that account to the frictional
losses. Therefore, there is a necessity to quantify the so-called losses upon usage of different
piping. The researchers were able to perform a three-trial experiment on each of the 3 different
pipelines involving different fittings and length. Volumetric flowrates were determined manually
through collection of certain amount of water, liters, at a specific time, in seconds. Quantifying
frictional losses is an evident essential also for energy balances.

Theoretical Background

In turbulent flow, the friction factor depends on the Reynold’s number. However, it is not
possible to predict theoretically the Fanning friction factor, f for turbulent flow as was done for
laminar flow. This Fanning friction factor needs to be determined experimentally.

Theoretically, in solving for Friction losses, F, this equation must be used:

Lv 2
F 4f (Eq. 1, Geankoplis, 2003)
2D
 However, Fanning friction factor, f, is based on the graph for “Friction factors for fluid
inside pipes”

Figure 1.1 Friction Factors for fluids inside the pipe (Geankoplis, 2003)

For region with a Reynold’s number below 2100, the line is the same as f = 16/Nre. For
Reynold’s number above 4000 for turbulent flow, the lowest line in Figure 1.1 represents the
friction-factor line for smooth pipes and tube, such as glass tubes and drawn copper and brass
tube. The other lines for higher friction factor, represents lines for different relative roughness
factor, ϵ/D where D is the inside diameter of the pipe and ϵ is the roughness parameter. The most
common pipe, commercial steel, has a roughness of ϵ = 4.6 x 10-5 m.

Also, if the pressure difference is available on a specific fluid flow, the friction factor, f,
could be calculated as:

 2 g F  D 
f   c 2   (Eqn 2)
 v  L 

Where: f = friction factor

D= pipe diameter
V = fluid velocity
F = friction loss (∆P / ρ)
L = equivalent length of fittings, expansions, contractions and straight pipes

Since there are two unknowns, a solver is required.

Procedure

Turn-on the three pumps

Measure the Inside Diameter of

Pipe using Vernier Caliper

Measure the Length of the Pipe

using Meter Stick

Open (one-fourth) the Valve of the

First Piping

Read Pressure at Pressure Gauge

Collect Volume of Water in 2

seconds

Open (one-eighth) the Valve of the

First Piping

Read Pressure at Pressure Gauge

Collect Volume of Water in 2

seconds

Repeat for the second, third and

fourth Pipings

The three pumps were turned on and waited until there was a steady state condition achieved.
The inner diameter of the pipe was measured using a vernier caliper. On the other hand, the
length of the pipe was measured using a meter stick. Measurements were recorded in SI units.
The flow of water was controlled by the gate valve. Thus, the valves were opened to one-fourth
and one-eight opening; then the volume of water in liters were collected at the span of two
seconds. The procedure was repeated through the second (with two valves), third (with elbows)
and fourth piping (with expansion and contraction).

Results

The results for the First Piping is tabulated as shown.

Fluid
Ave. Ave. Vol ΔP Length ΣF
Velocity f Nre
Time (s) (L) (kg/cm2) (m) (m2/s2)
(m/s)
1/4 81.130093 0.0191768
2.125 1.735 0.8 1.37 43128
open 07 38
5.76
1/8 212.96649 0.0587594
2.255 1.315 2.1 0.98 30803
open 43 33

Table 1. Calculated friction loss, friction factor and Reynold’s number for the first piping.

For the Second Piping

Fluid
Ave. Ave. Vol ΔP Length
Velocity ΣF f Nre
Time (s) (L) (kg/cm2) (m)
(m/s)
1/4 96.341985 0.016850
2.1 1.995 0.95 1.60 50182
open 52 822
5.76
1/8 167.33081 0.019511
1.95 1.66 1.65 1.43 44967
open 7 674

Table 2. Calculated friction loss, friction factor and Reynold’s number for the second piping.
For the Third Piping

Fluid
Ave. Ave. ΔP Length
Velocity ΣF f Nre
Time (s) Vol (L) (kg/cm2) (m)
(m/s)
1/4 0.008830
1.985 1.76 0.55 1.49 55.77693899 46835
open 949
7.32
1/8 0.013543
2.25 1.715 1.05 1.28 106.4832472 40263
open 008

Table 3. Calculated friction loss, friction factor and Reynold’s number for the third piping.

For the Fourth Piping

Ave. Fluid
Ave. ΔP Length
Time Velocity ΣF f Nre
Vol (L) (kg/cm2) (m)
(s) (m/s)
1/4 0.019701
2.13 1.92 1 1.52 5.76 101.4126163 47615
open 598

1/8 0.013233
1.94 1.78 1.3 1.54 131.8364012 48466
open 184

Table 4. Calculated friction loss, friction factor and Reynold’s number for the fourth piping.

Discussion of Results

The main objective of this study is to determine the friction losses across the different
network of pipes and to plot the friction factor vs. the reynold’s number of the fluid flow in the
straight pipe. Water is used as working fluid throughout the experiment. As water flows from an
initial point to the final point of a flow in a network of pipes, there is a pressure loss develop as
fluid flows continuously because pressure loss is due to the skin friction and form friction. Skin
friction is due to the material’s roughness and form friction is due to the valves, contraction,
expansion and fittings. Roughness of a material, valves, fittings, contraction and expansion can
develop obstruction as water flows. Hence, a greater pressure of the pump is required to continue
the flow towards the end point of the flow to overcome the friction. In this equation:
fv 2
F (Eqn 3)
2g
Where, F is the Friction Loss
f is the friction factor
v is the velocity of the fluid
g is the gravitational acceleration constant

F can be expressed as:

P
F (Eqn 4)


Where ∆P is the pressure loss developed by the fluid

ρ is the density of the fluid

The data obtained of friction losses and friction factor is consistent to the description that
was describe above. Fluid flow was measured in a 4 different network of pipes. This pipe
contains different kinds of valves and fittings. Valves are adjusted in different runs. Clearly as
stated the theory above, pressure loss is increased as valves adjusted from wide open to nearly
closed. Some network of pipes contains fittings. Comparing the data obtained of the pipe
containing fittings to the straight pipe, greater pressure loss in a pipe with fittings than in a
straight pipe. It supported the theory above that pressure loss is increased when more fittings is
installed in a pipe system because of the obstruction developed as fluid flow in the fittings. In
another system of pipe an expansion and contraction of the pipe was used. A high pressure loss is
obtained between the contraction and expansion was obtained. This high pressure loss is due to
the obstruction of the flow in the contraction.

When the plot of friction factor vs. Reynold’s number was obtained for the first pipe
(straight line), the relationship of the two mentioned above is inverse. That is, consistent in the
literature. However, this kind of graph cannot be possible because in the turbulent region, as
increasing the Reynold’s number, the friction factor must become almost constant. Some errors
were noted from the experiment proper in relation to the obtained graph. Errors were present in
the pressure reading of the pressure gauges. The instrument cannot give approximate readings
because the pressure gauge needle is unstable. Power output of the pump is also insufficient – the
power output should be increased in order to give approximate reading in the pressure gauge.
Another source of error is: since pressure gauge cannot give approximate readings, only 1/4 and
1/8 openings of the valve were used to raise the pressure reading in the pressure gauge. Therefore,
limited number of runs were used yielding a great amount of error.
Conclusions

1. The friction losses in a piping system is contributed by the skin friction of the fluid to the
walls of the pipe, friction due to valves and fittings, and friction from expansion/contraction
of the pipe. Thus, the longer the pipe, the greater the friction loss, and the more valves and
fitting would also result to a greater friction loss.
2. The plot of the friction factor against the Reynold’s number for the straight pipe (first piping)
constructed was not sufficient because only 2 points were projected, that of the 1/4th and
1/8th valve openings. Hence, this result is not reliable to use for other types of flow (e.g.flow
in fully opened and half open valve).

Recommendations

3. The piping systems may be redesigned, taking into consideration the changes in size and
types of equipment to be used.
4. The pressure gauges, thermometer, Vernier caliper and other measuring apparatuses to be
used must be well-calibrated to ensure accurate data.
5. The valves and fittings used in the piping systems must be known and specific constants
must be readily available to provide ease in the calculation process.

References

[1] Geankoplis, C.J. Principles of Transport Processes and Separation Processes. 4th Ed. Pearson
Education, Inc. 2003.

[2] Welty,J.R. Fundamentals of Momentum, Heat, and Mass Transfer. 5th Ed. John Wiley and
Sons, Inc. 2007.

Nomenclature

D - diameter of pipe, m
ƒ - Fanning friction factor, dimensionless
v - fluid velocity, m/s
F - friction loss, m2/s2
L - length of pipe, m
ϵ - relative roughness, m
Appendix

A.1 Raw Data

Diameter of pipe = 2.75 cm

Temperature = 26˚C

First Piping Third Piping

Time (s) Volume (L) Time (s) Volume (L)
2.09 1.7 2.11 1.73
1/4 open 1/4 open
2.16 1.77 1.86 1.79
2.31 1.34 2.2 1.63
1/8 open 1/8 open
2.2 1.29 2.3 1.8

Second Piping Fourth Piping

Time (s) Volume (L) Time (s) Volume (L)
2.35 2.01 1.95 1.84
1/4 open 1/4 open
1.85 1.98 2.31 2
1.88 1.55 1.99 1.67
1/8 open 1/8 open
2.02 1.77 1.89 1.89

A.2 Sample Calculations

D 2  (0.0275) 2
A   0.00593959m 2
4 4

Q (1.735 / 2) / 1000
v   1.37 m / s
A 0.000593959

P 0.8 * 98066
F   81.1301m 2 / s 2
 996.8

FD 81.1301* 0.0275
f    0.0192
2v 2 L 2(1.37) 2 * 5.76