DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL & STURCTURAL ENGINEERING

Hydraulics Laboratory Experiment: Pipe Friction

Objective:
To investigate the friction loss in a pipeline flow and the relationship between the friction factor f and
Reynolds number Re.

Apparatus:

𝑃1 , 𝑃2 , 𝑃3 𝑃𝑖𝑒𝑧𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠; 𝐴 𝑡𝑜 𝐵 = 10.34𝑚 ; 𝐿 = 11.34𝑚

𝑃1 𝑡𝑜 𝐵(excluding elbows, e1 & e2 ) = 8.44m; 𝑑 = 50.8𝑚𝑚

The apparatus consists of a horizontal galvanized steel pipe, with two 90∘standard elbows (e1 & e2), through
which water is fed from a reservoir. The water head can be measured by vertical open tubes fitted at four
locations along the pipeline (P1, P2, P3 & B). Further downstream of the pipe is a flow control valve and an
electromagnetic flow- meter.
Reading of flow-rate Q can be obtained by the equation:
5
𝑄= (𝑥 − 4)
16
where Q the flowrate is in litres/sec, and x is the electro-meter reading in mA.
Theory:
The headloss hf in a pipeline flow may be expressed by the Darcy-Weisbach equation

𝑓𝐿𝑉 2
ℎ𝑓 =
2𝑔𝑑
where
d diameter of pipe
f friction factor
g acceleration due to gravity
L length of pipe
V average velocity of flow in pipe
f, the friction factor depends upon the condition of the flow (laminar, transition or turbulent), Reynolds
number and relative roughness.
𝑉𝑑
𝑅𝑒 =
𝜈
For laminar flow, with Reynolds number Re less than 2000,
64
𝑓 =
𝑅𝑒
where ν is water kinematic viscosity in m2/sec
For Re > 4000, we have the transition zone followed by the turbulent flow regime; and the extent of these
regimes depend on the condition of the pipeline.
For smooth pipe-flow:
1 2.51
= −2 log ( )
√𝑓 Re √𝑓

For rough pipe-flow:

1 𝜀
= −2 log ( )
√𝑓 3.7𝑑

For the entire turbulent range:

1 𝜀 2.51
= −2 log ( + )
√𝑓 3.7𝑑 Re √𝑓

where ε is the average size of roughness of the pipe-wall, 𝜀/𝑑 is the relative roughness.

The above relationships, which give the friction factor f only implicitly, are presented graphically by the Moody
diagram.
For Re > 4000 in the test, the following relationship may be assumed:
Energy gradient:
ℎ𝑓
𝑖= = 𝑎𝑉 𝑏
𝐿
Friction factor:

𝑓 = 𝑐(𝑅𝑒 )𝑑

Procedure:
Adjust discharge into reservoir to allow for some overflow over the side weir, thus ensuring an approximately
constant level in the reservoir in the course of the experiment. Fully open the control valve at the outlet end
of the pipe to give the maximum flowrate.
When the flow becomes steady, measure the water levels in the reservoir h 1 and in the open tube h2. Also
record the flowrate as indicated by the flow-meter reading.
A series of readings of h1, h2 and Q are obtained by adjusting the control valve such that each reduction in the
flow is approximately the same.
Also record the readings of the open pipes before and after the elbows.
Results and calculations:
ε 0.15
Theoretical value: R e ≈ 81000; = (@𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡 𝑧𝑜𝑛𝑒) → 𝑓 ≈ 0.0277
d 50.8

From A to B
ℎ𝑓 𝑉𝑑
𝑓= ; 𝑅𝑒 = ; 𝜀 = 0.15𝑚𝑚
𝐿 𝑉2 𝜈
( ) (2𝑔)
𝑑
h1 h2 hf hf/L log(hf/L) Q(m3 Q(m3/s) V log V Re log f log f
(m) (m) (m) /hr) (m/s) Re
2.575 1.100 1.475 0.1301 -0.89 14.00 0.00389 1.92 0.283 96985 4.99 0.0352 -1.45
2.575 1.200 1.375 0.1213 -0.92 13.46 0.00374 1.84 0.266 93244 4.97 0.0355 -1.45
2.575 1.300 1.275 0.1124 -0.95 12.98 0.00361 1.78 0.250 89919 4.95 0.0354 -1.45
2.575 1.400 1.175 0.1036 -0.98 12.44 0.00346 1.70 0.232 86178 4.94 0.0355 -1.45
2.575 1.500 1.075 0.0948 -1.02 11.91 0.00331 1.63 0.213 82507 4.92 0.0355 -1.45
2.575 1.600 0.975 0.0860 -1.07 11.35 0.00315 1.56 0.192 78627 4.90 0.0354 -1.45
2.575 1.700 0.875 0.0772 -1.11 10.76 0.00299 1.47 0.169 74540 4.87 0.0354 -1.45
2.575 1.800 0.775 0.0683 -1.17 10.11 0.00281 1.39 0.142 70037 4.85 0.0355 -1.45
2.575 1.900 0.675 0.0595 -1.23 9.455 0.00263 1.30 0.113 65500 4.82 0.0353 -1.45
2.575 2.000 0.575 0.0507 -1.29 8.715 0.00242 1.19 0.077 60373 4.78 0.0354 -1.45
Energy gradient:
ℎ𝑓
𝑖= = 𝑎𝑉 𝑏
𝐿
ℎ𝑓
log = log 𝑎 + 𝑏 log 𝑉
𝐿

log V vs log(hf/L)
-0.8
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
-0.9
y = 1.9993x - 1.4492
-1
log(hf/L)

-1.1

-1.2

-1.3

-1.4
log V

𝑦 = 1.9993𝑥 − 1.4492
𝑎 = 10−1.4492 = 0.03555; 𝑏 = 1.9993
ℎ𝑓
= 0.03555𝑉 2
𝐿
While the value of “a” depends on shape and size of pipe, pipe roughness and flow condition.
The range of “b” is 1.75 (Laminar flow) to 2 (Completely turbulent flow).
In the experiment, the measured value of “b” = 1.9993, which is a completely turbulent flow.

1 𝜀 2.51
Theoretical value of 𝑓 𝑎𝑛𝑑 log 𝑓 from Moody diagram or = −2 log (3.7𝑑 + )
√𝑓 Re √𝑓

Re log Re f (Theoretical) log f

96985 4.99 0.0274 -1.56
93244 4.97 0.0275 -1.56
89919 4.95 0.0275 -1.56
86178 4.94 0.0276 -1.56
82507 4.92 0.0276 -1.56
78627 4.90 0.0277 -1.56
74540 4.87 0.0278 -1.56
70037 4.85 0.0279 -1.55
65500 4.82 0.0280 -1.55
60373 4.78 0.0281 -1.55
Friction factor:

𝑓 = 𝑐(𝑅𝑒 )𝑑
log 𝑓 = log 𝑐 + 𝑑 log 𝑅𝑒

log Re vs log f
-1.4
-1.42 4.75 4.8 4.85 4.9 4.95 5

-1.44
-1.46
y = -0.0007x - 1.4474 Experimental
-1.48
log f

Theorical
-1.5
Linear (Experimental)
-1.52
Linear (Theorical)
-1.54
-1.56
-1.58 y = -0.0555x - 1.2854
log Re

𝑦 = −0.0007𝑥 − 1.4474
𝑐 = 10− 1.4474 = 0.0357; 𝑑 = −0.0007
𝑓 = 0.0357(𝑅𝑒 )−0.0007
The value of “c” in completely turbulent flow depends on relative roughness only.
The range of “d” is -1 (Laminar flow) to 0 (Completely turbulent flow).
In the experiment, the obtained value of “d” =-0.0007, closed to 0. Therefore, it is a completely turbulent flow.

The average value of experimental f is 0.0354 while the theoretical average value of f is 0.0277. The
experimental calculated is included the minor loss in the elbows.
𝑣 2 𝑓𝐿
∆ℎ𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = ℎ𝑓 + Σℎ𝑚 = ( + ΣK)
2𝑔 𝑑

The following part is to find out the pipe friction in a straight section and the resistance coefficient for an
elbow.
Pipe friction factor
From P1 to P2
P1 (m) P2 (m) hf (m) hf/L V (m/s) Re f
2.090 1.720 0.370 0.0835 1.92 96985 0.0226
2.120 1.785 0.335 0.0756 1.84 93244 0.0221
2.150 1.840 0.310 0.0700 1.78 89919 0.0220
2.190 1.900 0.290 0.0655 1.70 86178 0.0224
2.230 1.960 0.270 0.0609 1.63 82507 0.0228
2.260 2.020 0.240 0.0542 1.56 78627 0.0223
2.290 2.075 0.215 0.0485 1.47 74540 0.0222
2.330 2.135 0.195 0.0440 1.39 70037 0.0229
2.360 2.195 0.165 0.0372 1.30 65500 0.0221
2.395 2.255 0.140 0.0316 1.19 60373 0.0221
1 𝜀 2.51
The average experimental value of f is 0.0224. By = −2 log (3.7𝑑 + ) , we can find 𝜀 = 0.0463 𝑚𝑚.
√𝑓 Re √𝑓

This indicates the pipe quality is better than expected.

From P2 to P3
𝑣 2 𝑓𝐿
∆ℎ𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = ℎ𝑓 + Σℎ𝑚 = ( + ΣK)
2𝑔 𝑑
P2 (m) P3 (m) ∆htotal (m) hf (1.58) (m) hm of 2 elbows (m) V (m/s) K of each elbow
0.370 0.084 0.286 0.091 0.196 1.92 0.522
0.335 0.076 0.259 0.085 0.174 1.84 0.503
0.310 0.070 0.240 0.079 0.161 1.78 0.498
0.290 0.065 0.225 0.072 0.153 1.70 0.515
0.270 0.061 0.209 0.064 0.145 1.63 0.532
0.240 0.054 0.186 0.059 0.127 1.56 0.515
0.215 0.049 0.166 0.053 0.113 1.47 0.511
0.195 0.044 0.151 0.046 0.105 1.39 0.538
0.165 0.037 0.128 0.040 0.088 1.30 0.512
0.140 0.032 0.108 0.034 0.075 1.19 0.514
The average experimental value of Loss Coefficient K of an elbow is 0.516.
The theoretical Head loss coefficient KL for Long sweep elbow is 0.6.
The experimental value and the predicted value is similar.
Conclusions and discussions:
There are possible errors in the experiment and ways to minimise such errors
The water level at each piezometer is unstable during the experiment. It is hard to obtain exact values. This
cause errors in measured headloss. To minimize the error, the experiment can be repeat to obtain more sets
of data and then take the average of values of water height of three piezometers. The errors in headloss will
be minimized.
There may be impurities on the inner surface of the pipe. The impurities would increase the pipe friction.
Then, the recorded heads may be inaccurate. To minimize this error, the pipe can be clean thoroughly before
the test to obtain more accurate results.