You are on page 1of 17

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

CODE AND TITLE OF COURSEWORK Course code: MECH2004: Title: Turbulent Flow in a Circular Cross-section Long Pipe; 1/nth Power Law ERKEL, DANIEL EBF, 3rd YEAR 30/11/2012 30/11/2012 Dr Pavlos Aleiferis

STUDENT NAME: DEGREE AND YEAR: LAB GROUP: DATE OF LAB. SESSION: DATE COURSEWORK DUE FOR SUBMISSION: ACTUAL DATE OF SUBMISSION: LECTURERS NAME:

PERSONAL TUTORS NAME:

DR KEVIN DRAKE

RECEIVED DATE AND INITIALS:

I confirm that this is all my own work (if submitted electronically, submission will be taken as confirmation that this is your own work, and will also act as student signature)

Signed:

Daniel Erkel

Contents
1 Introduction 1.1 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.1 Laminar and Turbulent Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.2 Reynolds Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.3 Power Law and Other Approximations to Turbulent Flow 1.2.4 Friction Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.5 Relative Roughness and Pipe Roughness . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.6 Viscous Sub-Layer in Turbulent Flows . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Methodology and Apparatus Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 9 10 10 12

2 Results 2.1 Initial Recordings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 First Part of the Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Second Part of the Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 Graph Plotted for u against y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2 Finding the Exponent of a Suitable Power Law Expression . . . . . 2.3.3 Plotting Various Graphs to Represent the Velocity Prole . . . . . . / and Comparing to Previous Results, Finding the 2.3.4 Determining u U Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.5 Finding the Friction Factor and the Sub-Layer Thickness . . . . . . 3 Discussion 4 Conclusion 5 Appendices

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reynolds . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mechanics of Fluids and Thermodynamics - Laboratory Report Turbulent Flow in a Circular Cross-section Long Pipe; n1 th Power Law
Daniel Erkel, 3rd year, EBF

Abstract The laboratory experiment presented in the followings aimed at the demonstration of turbulent ows in pipes. By turning on a suction pump connected to a long horizontal pipe, air was drawn to the pipe. Static and dynamic pressures were measure using two types of manometers: an inclined and a Betz manometer. Through a set of calculations it was determined from the recorded data that the ow is turbulent and the pipe is close to, but not exactly hydraulically smooth. Results obtained through various calculations were compared to formulae commonly found in textbooks with good results achieved in each case, demonstrating the validity of these models.

1
1.1

Introduction
Objectives

Liquid is transported in closed conduits or pipes in numerous daily applications, from oil pipes to water pipes. The phenomenon is essential not only in man made but also in natural systems too, as the blood vessels carrying in many animals are pipe ows as well. Hence the understanding of how uids behave being transported in a pipe is crucial in many aspects. Based on Osborne Reynolds fundamental experiments, laminar and turbulent ows are distinguished in pipe ows, terms to be explained later in this report [1]. The experiment discussed in the present report aims at the better understanding of the latter, through observing air owing through a long pipe section. The air being sucked through the pipe using a centrifugal pump attached to the outlet section its static and dynamic pressure were recorded at dierent stations using two types of manometers. From recorded results certain characteristics of the ow were observed and compared to theory.

1.2
1.2.1

Theory
Laminar and Turbulent Flow

Two types of ow were described by Reynolds in his famous dye experiments [1]: laminar and turbulent. Using the velocity of the uid at which they occur to dierentiate between these is not correct, but instead a dimensionless number taking velocity, viscosity, density and dimensional characteristics, the Reynolds number (Re ) should be used. Based on this, laminar ows in a pipe are those that are perceived at lower Re (below 2100-2300) and turbulent ows are those appearing at Re above approximately 4000 (the region between these is usually termed as transitional ) [2]. Dierence is present between the prevalence of viscous forces in laminar ows and greater inertial forces and vibration caused by the turbulence in turbulent ows, all of which are captured by the Reynolds number, introduced later in this section [2]. In most applications, ows tend to be turbulent and their complexity resulting from random uctuation makes accurate mathematical description and modelling dicult. Most eorts, even advanced ones, depend on experimentally obtained data [3] and are valid with certain restrictions or errors. This report presents a few of these comparing them to experimentally acquired results.

1.2.2

Reynolds Number

Earlier it was mentioned that it was Osborne Reynolds (1842-1912) who, through countless experiments tried nding a measure to describe the behaviour of ow in closed conduits and express capture the main characteristics of the uid under certain conditions [1]. Based on his experiments, a nondimensional number named after him, the Reynolds number was dened as (in one of its forms using kinematic viscosity ): u d Re = In another (perhaps more common form) it is given as: Re = vd

This dimensionless number can be translated as a ratio between the following |Intertia force| |Net viscous force| and its value, gives a good description of dierent types of ows relative to each other [3]. The number will be used later in the report. 1.2.3 Power Law and Other Approximations to Turbulent Flow

There are several dierent mathematical models and approximations to describe the velocity of ow within a pipe. Several are used in the report later, the one introduced here is the one appearing in the title of the experiment, the power law. The power law attempts to recreate the velocity prole of ow in a pipe using an exponential relationship derived empirically, which is relatively easy to use: u = U y a
1 n

Where n in the exponential is dependent on the Reynolds number in the following distribution:

Figure 1: Relationship between n and the Reynolds number (from [1]) The power law prole is not valid next to the wall or at the centreline (in the rst case it would give innite velocity gradient, whereas in the second case it should give 0 and this condition is not met), however it well represents the velocity prole at other points as it will be seen later [1]. 1.2.4 Friction Factor

Another term of great importance, relevant in this experiment, is the friction factor. The friction factor, f is a value characterising friction in the pipe, which depends on the relative roughness of the

pipe and determines the losses arising due to friction and is also the ratio of wall stress to dynamic pressure: p a w f= = 1 2 2 L u 2 U p a L 2 Two approximations to the value of friction factor are used in this study, one given by Blasius and one from Lees [3], the former being 0.25 fB = 0.0791Red w = and the latter
0.35 fL = 0.0018 + 0.153Re d

where

These are used in the discussion to evaluate experimental ndings. 1.2.5 Relative Roughness and Pipe Roughness

A non-dimensional term, the relative roughness is dened to account for a parameter, roughness, aecting uid ow and generating losses in pipes. No pipe is perfectly smooth, small it may be, there is always an unevenness of the walls. Roughness is denoted by k here and relative roughness is the ratio of k d [1]. 1.2.6 Viscous Sub-Layer in Turbulent Flows

In turbulent ows there is a region very close to the wall, where the viscous forces and shear are dominant, this realm is termed viscous sub-layer. The velocity given for this region is denoted by u+ or y + and is understood to be between 0 < y + < 5 8. y+ = yU

where U is the shear velocity (equal to (w /)1/2 ) and y is the distance from the wall. Based on this, and on the friction factors denition from before, the thickness of the viscous sub-layer is given as L 5 = d Red 2 f

When k < L , or in other words the roughness is smaller than the viscous sub-layer the ow becomes hydraulically smooth [2].

1.3

Methodology and Apparatus Used

In the experiment air was drawn through a long horizontal pipe (xed at columns in the laboratory) using a suction pump attached to its outlet section. The pipe had 6 holes with manometers attached to measure static pressure (using an inclined manometer) and a 7th with another device, the Betz manometer attached to it. The latter enables the measurement of small changes in dynamic pressure and is connected to a pitot tube probing into the pipe parallel to the ow. Turning a knob the pitot tube can traverse the pipes cross section by turning the knob and thus driving the tube further in. At the start of the experiment ambient pressure (using the inclined manometer) and temperature were measured. This was then followed by starting the suction pump and recording two readings for each of the 6 holes, once the water in the manometer stopped oscillating. In the second part of the experiment, with the pump turned on again, measurements were taken for 29 full turns of the knob moving the pitot tube inside the pipe, with the rst few readings taken at quarter turns. These results are presented in the next section. Illustrations showing the equipment are presented in the appendix.

2
2.1

Results
Initial Recordings

The readings made preceding the main parts of the experiment are presented below Table 1: Initial measurements Initial recordings Ambient Temperature ( C) Ambient Temperature (K ) Ambient pressure (mBar) Ambient pressure (P a) Position of vent sleeve Inclined manometer angle ( ) Initial static pressure (manometer inclined at 45 ) (cmH2 O) Betz manometer zero error (mmH2 O) Air specic gas constan(Jkg 1 K 1 )t Air density (kgm3 ) a (inch) a (mm) 20.5 293.65 1016 101600 closed 45 31.4 0 287 1.205541 1 25.4

2.2

First Part of the Experiment

In the rst part of the experiment, static pressure was recorded for the 6 holes, to which the inclined manometer was connected. These readings are presented below: Table 2: Readings taken in the rst part of the experiment Static pressure on the inclined manometer (cmH2 O) Hole 1 2 3 4 5 6 1st reading 32.2 33.6 34.6 35.4 36.4 37.3 2nd reading 32.2 33.6 34.6 35.4 36.4 37.3 Average value 32.2 33.6 34.6 35.4 36.4 37.3 0.5657 1.5556 2.2627 2.8284 3.5355 4.1719 Static pressure (cmH2 O)

The last column here shows the static pressure converted to a vertical value, with the initial manometer readings for the pump switched o deducted.

2.3

Second Part of the Experiment

Readings taken in the second part of the experiment are presented in tables provided in the Appendix (placed there due to their length). 2.3.1 Graph Plotted for u against y

The rst graph plotted for Table 3 is shown below:

Figure 2: Graph plotted for u against y

From this, the maximum velocity is found to be U = 13.858ms1 occurring at y = 24.99mm. 2.3.2 Finding the Exponent of a Suitable Power Law Expression

Plotting results for y/a and u/U where U is found from the previous part (as U = 13.858ms1 ) on a logarithmic scale, the following results graph is obtained:

Figure 3: Graph plotted for y/a against u/U The trendline tted gives an exponent equal to n, as y = a Thus n = 7.669. 2.3.3 Plotting Various Graphs to Represent the Velocity Prole u U
n

Results from experimental values and others from theoretical formulae are superimposed on the same graph for comparison: The parabolic prole is given as: u =1 U 2.3.4 ay a
2

/ and Comparing to Previous Results, Finding the Reynolds NumDetermining u U ber

Plotting u U against r a

r a r for 0 a 1 gives the following graph, which can then be tted with a trendline to perform an approximate integration and nd the area under the curve

Figure 4: Graphs plotted for y/a against u/U obtained in dierent ways

/ Figure 5: Last graph plotted to obtain u U

The area shown in grey is for which an integration was performed. Using a sixth order polynomial trendline, the curvature of the plot is almost perfectly captured. Integrating this function gives:
1

(7.6269x6 + 19.897x5 19.651x4 + 8.8163x3 1.9867x2 + 1.1655x 0.0031)dx = 0.417901


0 u r As the graph was obtained by plotting values of U multiplied by a , it has to be divided by the mean value of the latter. Since it was integrated between 0 and 1, the mean is 0.5. Dividing the value obtained from the integration by this gives

0.417901 u = = 0.835802 U 0.5 Comparing this to the value obtained from the power law using the expression (from [2]): u 2n2 2 7.6692 = = = 0.8305 U (n + 1)(2n + 1) (7.669 + 1)(2 7.669 + 1) yields a dierence of 0.64%, a very small error, which can result from the fact that in the approximate integration method, limits of 1 and 0 were used instead of the actual limits, which would have been 0.016 an 0.964. The Reynolds number can be obtained using Re = u d

where = 1.511 105 (obtained through simple interpolation using the temperature measured at the start and the table [4]), the diameter of the pipe is (twice the radius) d = 2 25.4 = 50.8mm and the velocity is u = 0.835802 13.9 as obtained previously through the approximate integration. Thus the Reynolds number is: u d 0.835802 13.9 50.8 103 Re = = = 39058.67 1.511 105 Showing that the ow is turbulent. 2.3.5 Finding the Friction Factor and the Sub-Layer Thickness

The friction factor can be found using the pressure gradient, which can in turn be calculated as p = 32.8175 L where p is the pressure dierence between holes 1 and 6 (values from the rst measurement were converted to P a) and L is the distance between hole 1 and 6, equal to L = 10.81 0.03 = 10.78m. Using this and the equation dened previously for the friction factor: f= p a 25.4 103 = 32.8175 = 0.005123 2 L u 1.205540503 (0.835802 13.9)2

Comparing these to values obtained using formulae from Blasius and Lees:
0.25 fB = 0.0791Re = 0.0791 39058.670.25 = 0.00562661 d

and the latter


0.35 fL = 0.0018 + 0.153Re = 0.0018 + 0.153 39058.670.35 = 0.00558086 d

gives an error of 9% and 8% respectively, again very small. Finally, the sub-layer can be calculated as L = d 5 Red 2 5 = 50.8 103 f 39058.67 9 2 = 1.2849 104 m 0.005123

The relative roughness of the pipe can be obtained using a Moodys chart [3], already having the Reynolds number and f . Hence k 0.028 d hence k 0.028 50.8 103 = 1.4224 103 m Therefore as k > L the ow is not smooth hydraulically.

Discussion

The power law gave a good approximation to the velocity prole, with n = 7.668, calculated using the log-graph on Figure 3. As observed on the gure with superimposed graphs (Figure 4, the velocity prole is closer in shape to that obtained using the power law than to that using the parabolic prole, mainly suitable for laminar ow [3], which suggests not only that the power law is a good representation for this ow but also that it is turbulent, as a model used for describing turbulent ow was closer to the experimental results, than the one used for laminar ows. To obtain the mean value of velocity for the ow, an approximate integration was used, integrating the area under the curve on Figure 5, as this was very close (0.64% error) to the mean velocity obtained using the corresponding formula for the power law [2] it was again shown that the ow is turbulent and the power law is a good approximation to its behaviour. Further proof to the ow being turbulent was the found Reynolds number, which was Re = 39058.67, far above the critical value given for pipes (2100-2300) [1]. The two empirical formulae used in comparison with the friction factor calculated from the experimental results showed little dierence (both being less than 10%) with that of Lees slightly closer to the experimental. The best results would be obtained using the Haaland formula [3]. The roughness of the pipe compared to the sub-layer thickness shows that the pipe is very close, but not hydraulically smooth [1]. Errors in the calculations were present due to two main factors: 1. Human errors 2. Instrumental errors Examples of the former included reading the manometers, or turning the control knob traversing the pitot tube attached to the Betz manometer, whereas the latter meant errors resulting from pipe leakages in pipes connecting the manometers. Further error sources are the inherent errors in the accuracy of the manometers or the pipe not having the same cross-section at every part. Small dierences experienced in calculations may result partly from this. With better manometers, and a scaled knob used to traverse the pitot tube (with clear markings for quarter and full turns) could improve the results.

Conclusion

The experiment well demonstrated certain characteristics of turbulent ows in pipe and proved that empirical formulae used to approximate these can be reasonably accurate (at least for a ow with a Reynolds number close to this, e.g. having the same order of magnitude). It was proven that the ow generated in the pipe by the suction pump is denitely turbulent and the pipe is close to, but not exactly hydraulically smooth. The experiment was successful in all aspects, well demonstrating and proving the fundamental theory of turbulent pipe ows, the understanding of which is essential in many engineering applications.

References
[1] B. Munson, D. Young, T. Okiishi, and W. Huebsch, Fundamentals of uid mechanics. Wiley, 2009. 10

[2] R. Fox, A. McDonald, and P. Pritchard, Introduction to uid mechanics. Wiley international edition, Wiley, 2004. [3] B. Massey and J. Smith, Mechanics of Fluids. No. v. 1 in Mechanics of Series, Spon Press, 1998. [4] G. Rogers and Y. Mayhew, Thermodynamic and Transport Properties of Fluids. Wiley, 1995.

List of Figures
1 2 3 4 5 Relationship between n and the Reynolds number (from [1]) . . Graph plotted for u against y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graph plotted for y/a against u/U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphs plotted for y/a against u/U obtained in dierent ways / Last graph plotted to obtain u U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 6 7 8 8

List of Tables
1 2 3 Initial measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Readings taken in the rst part of the experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Second measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6 12

11

Appendices
Table 3: Second measurements No. of turns 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 y (mm) 0.93 1.26 1.59 1.93 2.26 2.60 2.93 3.26 3.60 4.94 6.27 7.61 8.95 10.28 11.62 12.96 14.29 15.63 16.97 18.30 19.64 20.98 22.31 23.65 24.99 26.33 27.66 29.00 30.34 31.67 33.01 34.35 35.68 37.02 38.36 39.69 Betz reading (mmH2 O) 5.2 5.6 5.9 6.2 6.3 6.5 6.7 6.8 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 8.9 9.3 9.6 10.0 10.3 10.6 10.9 11.1 11.3 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8 11.7 11.6 11.6 11.4 11.2 11.0 10.7 10.4 10.1 9.8 9.5 u (ms1 ) 9.199 9.547 9.799 10.045 10.126 10.285 10.442 10.520 10.674 11.048 11.410 11.762 12.035 12.303 12.500 12.757 12.947 13.134 13.319 13.441 13.561 13.681 13.740 13.799 13.858 13.799 13.740 13.740 13.621 13.501 13.380 13.196 13.010 12.821 12.629 12.434

12

13

14

15

16

You might also like