FULLY DEVELOPED FLOW THROUGH 2D PIPE

By Edgar A. Soto Karla V. Montiel Luis Terrazas Jose G. Siqueiros

A Class Project for MECH3354: Fluid Mechanics by Dr. V. Kumar

Abstract In order to study the behavior of a flow under different conditions, we can find several methods available to analyze its behavior such as methodical, theoretical, computation, and experiment. For this project we were asked to examine the behavior of water flow on two different pipes and also we were able to chose an optional problem; the performance of air flow on a rocket nozzle by theoretical and computational analysis. The first pipe studied was a straight pipe, while for a second problem we analyzed two pipes connected in series thanks to a wellrounded section. Computational analysis was displayed by special software to do it; we use Gambit and Fluent 6.3.26. The theoretical analysis was gotten by the knowledge acquired in class and equations from the Essentials of Fluid Mechanics book. At the end of the analysis, we show a comparison of both results. Introduction Our analysis was conducted on two 2-dimensional circular pipe geometries by use of theoretical and actual properties, using equations derived in class and mentioned in the fluid mechanics text. All of our calculations were conducted with Reynoldss numbers smaller than 2300 in order to get a laminar flow. For the first experiments, it was design a straight-pipe of length of 1 meter with an inner diameter of 0.1 meter. In order to maintain laminar flow, an average entrance velocity of 0.01 meters/second was given. The Reynoldss number for this problem was equal to 1000. After the simulation was conducted to verify the pressure differentials, and velocities at various points, comparisons were made against theoretical calculations, as is the main objective of this project. The second experiment assigned consisted of two well-rounded piping sections connected by a well-rounded section. The average velocity for this problem was equal 0.001 meters/second. Both pipes had a length of 1 meter. The first pipe had a diameter of 0.1 meters, while the second one had a diameter of 0.05 meters. The radius used for the well-rounded section was 0.025 meters. It is important to mention that we used the loss coefficient ( ) established in our class book for this section ( . For the third an optional model in Fluent we selected a liquid monopropellant rocket nozzle with: an Area ratio (e= exit area / throat area) of 0.45, totals length=1ft, chamber pressure of 10kPa, well rounded walls, material is titanium, propellant is hydrazine, and expansion ratio of 30. We wanted to analyze the difference in chamber and exiting pressure as well as the increase in velocity. The flow through the nozzle is what causes the trust of the rocket therefore the nozzle being a very important part of the design.

Problem Definition The following equations obtained from Essentials of Fluid Mechanics show the derivation for the pressure loss:

Friction factor for laminar flow is defined as:

Our head loss was calculated from:

Results and Discussion During this project we were introduced to Gambit and Fluent. These two programs are considered to be part of the Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software used to design even real or virtual models in 2D and 3D for engineering analysis. Gambit is software used to create any figure or model expected to be analyzed and also is used to assign each figure a mesh or grid, which is used to analyze the behavior of different fluids inside of those figures. When the straight pipe was designed in Gambit, we used a mesh with an interval size of 0.01 vertically and 0.001 horizontally. The two horizontal lines located in the top and the bottom of

our figure were labeled as walls, while the vertical line located in the left was labeled as mass flow inlet, and finally the vertical line located in the right was labeled as the pressure outlet. Then, this case was exported to Fluent. Using Fluent, we set the boundary conditions and the fluid inside the pipe; in this case we used water. We also were able to obtain the grid size: number of cells = 10000. When we initialized our experiment, 500 iterations were used. Our solution was converged at the 24th iteration. Once we obtained a solution for that problem, we were able to display the contours for the static pressure inside our pipe. The greatest pressure was scals and it was located at the pipes inlet, while the lowest pressure was equal to 0 Pascals and it was recorded at the pipes exit. If we use the values from provided by Fluent, we will obtain a loss of scals. Using the formula for pressure loss obtained from our book, we can obtain the actual pressure loss:

For the second problem we had two straight pipes connected by a well-rounded inlet. When we modeled this figure in Gambit we decided to use a mesh with an interval size of 0.008. The vertical line in the left side was labeled as mass flow inlet, the vertical line in the right side was labeled as pressure outlet, and the other lines were labeled as walls. To initialize this problem, we decided to use 500 iterations, but a solution was converged at the 71th iteration. From the static pressure contours displayed by fluent, we obtained an inlet pressure of and an outlet pressure equal to zero. From this data, the pressure loss calculated by Fluent was . In order to calculate the pressure loss, we decided to select two point the on the first section of the pipe with diameter equals to 0.1m. , from these values we obtained . This result can be compared with the following formulas:

From these results we can observe that there is a big difference between the values given by Fluent and the values obtained with the formula for pressure loss using the given values for each problem. This difference should be related with the mesh used during each experiment. It is important to state that the denser a mesh is, the most accurate values would be obtained. The number of iterations used during this project could be another factor that affected the output values from Fluent. For the third problem we had the rocket nozzle. When we modeled this figure in Gambit we decided to use a mesh with an interval size of 0.009 and also used the pave future for the meshing. The vertical line in the left side was labeled as the pressure inlet, the vertical line in the right side was labeled as pressure outlet, and the other lines were labeled as walls. To initialize this problem, we decided to use 500 iterations, but a solution was converged at the 152th iteration. The program gave us a significant pressure increase as well as a velocity increase from inlet to exit. This correlates to the theoretical performance of an ideal rocket nozzle. Theoretical

values involve far more parameters that were difficult to generate in Fluent there for the modeling showed a basic understanding of how a rocket would work. Conclusion A computational and theoretical model for pipes and an airfoil has been presented. It comprises two sub-models, one for the straight pipe, the second for a well-rounded pipe and a rocket nozzle. The computational model uses Gambit and Fluent software to solve the transport equations for the fluid, in this case water. The theoretical model is based on simplifying assumptions, Bernoulli equation and other equations derived in class and in the book. The computational and theoretical analyses are coupled to get appropriate results and give some conclusions about pressure, velocity, losses and other aspects in each case. Through our analysis, we found that the action of the fluids is to slow down while it is near the wall, so the velocity must be zero at the wall. As a consequence of continuity, the velocity must then increase in the central region. We also concluded that the transition entry length develops a profiles pipe as a parabolic velocity distribution, and it is a function of the Reynolds number. We also found that in the case of the well-rounded pipe, the velocity get almost the same behavior, it would be zero at the walls and increase in the central region of the pipe. Moreover, we found that in both cases, the pressure has a change from de beginning to the end if the pipes. At the beginning, the pressure is high and it decreases thru the end of the pipe.

Fig 1. The mesh created in Gambit is a huge variable to the quality of analysis you will get in Fluent; therefore you must make it as smooth symmetrical and have it flow through out your geometry.

Fig 2. Pressure Profile for a straight pipe with an almost constant pressure loss.

Fig 3. Velocity Profile for a well-rounded pipe showing a rapid change in velocity. We see that the flow into the narrow part of the pipe is fairly smooth due to the well-rounded edges.

Fig 4. We see that there is an increase in pressure; ideally the exiting pressure would be equal to the ambient pressure for optimal expansion.

Fig 5. We see that the highest velocity is located at the throat of the engine (theoretical value of this velocity would be MACH 1), this cause a high increase of velocity at exit (theoretically for an Ideal rocket engine this would be up to supersonic speeds). We see that the nozzle created was over expanded due to the plume that begins to form even before the exit.

References MECH3354 class ANSYS Fluent 12.1 Software Gambit Software Cengel and Cimbala: Fluid Mechanics Fundamentals and Applications, McGrawHill, 2006
Charles D. Brown: Elements of Spacecraft Design1st Edition, AIAA 2002