Urban Water Journal, 2014

Vol. 11, No. 5, 414–425, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1573062X.2013.768682

TECHNICAL NOTE
Head losses and friction factors of steady turbulent flows in plastic pipes
A. Freire Diogo* and Fábia A. Vilela
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Coimbra, Pólo II, Coimbra, Portugal
(Received 3 February 2012; final version received 17 January 2013)

Many hydraulic engineering applications, which were once limited to the use of traditional materials, are progressively
executed using prefabricated plastic pipes, particularly in the case of larger diameters. There is relatively little information
specifically on the laws of flow resistance in plastic tubes, or that has been obtained directly for these materials. In this work,
head losses and friction factors were determined experimentally in turbulent steady water flows established in conduits made
of different plastics. Several pressure pipes, governed by gravity and forced, with nominal diameters until 110 mm, were
used with Reynolds numbers ranging from 4E3 to approximately 6E5. Pairs of values, friction factor vs. Reynolds number,
were computed and plotted using logarithmic scales. The layout of the points seems to be generally well represented by the
Colebrook-White equation, for each relative roughness. Important absolute roughness variations for the different pipes were
found by trend analysis. Blasius and Scimemi empirical formulas for smooth pipes were also plotted and also showed a
satisfactory agreement with the experimental data, for Re up to 1E5 and a little less than 1E6, respectively.
Keywords: head losses in plastic pipes; steady flow in pressure conduits; friction factor; turbulent flow; flow resistance

Introduction according to the Darcy-Weisbach equation, by

Proposed in the far year of 1939 on a semi-empirical
basis, with some interesting approximations around the
influence and representation of the roughness distribution
in commercial pipes, and with a large amount of
experimental data obtained particularly in the following
decades (Colebrook 1939, Quintela 1962, 1973, Lamont
1954, 1969, 1981), the well-known Colebrook-
White equation is presented in nearly all current text
books of fluid mechanics and hydraulics (e.g. Novais-
Barbosa 1986, Franzini and Finnemore 1997, Quintela
2000, among many others). Particularly referenced for the
transition turbulent regime, it has been generally accepted
in the scientific and academic community, as well as in
engineering practice, as one of the most powerful tools for
determining the friction factor and continuous head loss
throughout the domain of all incompressible uniform
turbulent flows in pressure commercial circular conduits.
In its dimensionless form, the equation may be described
as:
 
1 k 2:51
pffiffiffi ¼ 22log þ p ffiffi
ffi ð1Þ
f 3:7D Re f
in which f represents the friction factor, expressed,
2gDJ
f ¼ ð2Þ
U2
where g is the gravitational acceleration, D is the internal
pipe diameter, U is the mean flow velocity in the
cross section, and J is the head loss per unit length, or
energy gradient; Re is the Reynolds number, defined by
Re ¼ UD/n, where n is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid;
and k is the equivalent absolute roughness. Roughness k
depends on the pipe internal surface and needs to be
determined experimentally, normally in the complete
turbulence, fully rough pipe flow region, where the viscous
sublayer is negligible and f is independent of the Reynolds
number. The shear stress at the wall (drag force per unit
surface), t0, is directly related to J and f by t0 ¼ rg (D/4) J
and t0/(rU2) ¼ f/8, where (D/4) is the hydraulic radius,
Rh, for the circular section flowing full, and r is the density
(mass per unit volume) of the fluid.
The formula interrelates the three dimensionless
parameters that interact in these flows, f, Re and k/D,
known as relative roughness, and it may be decomposed
into the Karman-Prandtl formulas for smooth-pipes, if
k/D ¼ 0, and rough-pipes, with uniform roughness, when
the influence of Re decreases (1/Re ! 0) (Franzini and
Finnemore 1997, Quintela 2000).

*Corresponding author. Email: afdiogo@dec.uc.pt

q 2014 Taylor & Francis
 Urban Water Journal
For smooth pipes, which is generally the case of
plastic pipes conveying water, the rigorous experimental
determination of k (which is close to zero) is difficult and
very probably needs to be accomplished by trend
analysis, given that fully rough pipe regimes may only
occur for extraordinarily large Re numbers that are not
easily established in the laboratory , and are not easily
obtained in the majority of practical applications. Values
of 0.002 mm to 0.004 mm (Lencastre 1996) or larger
(Novais-Barbosa 1986) are often reported for polyethy-
lene and PVC pipes and used in the engineering practice,
but the influence of manufacturing processes or the age of
the material is rarely considered.
Several researchers reported that the observed friction
factors and the corresponding head losses in water flows
conveyed by plastic pipes are sometimes lower (generally
only slightly) than those obtained by considering the null
roughness in the Colebrook-White equation. This was
reported by Levin (1972), for extremely smooth plastic
internal coatings of a 20 m long force main conduit,
with an internal diameter of about 210 mm, and with
respect to large Re numbers, by Bagarello et al. (1995)
who conducted tests in small low-density polyethylene
pipes, 100 m long and nominal diameters of 16, 20 and
25 mm, by Cardoso et al. (2008) for low density
polyethylene pipes with 15 m length and small internal
diameters of 12.9, 16.1, 17.4, and 19.7 mm, and,
according to Bernouth and Wilson (1989), by Norum
(1984) and Urbina (1976), for small polyethylene pipes
with internal diameters between 8.9 mm and 21 mm, as
well as by Paraqueima (1977), with PVC and
polyethylene pipes of 17.6 mm and of 15.5 mm internal
diameters, respectively.
A friction law that would give noticeably lower
values does not seem possible, according to the
theoretical basis of the method as well as to the known
turbulence model of Prandtl, associated with the widely
disseminated Nikuradse experiments (Nikuradse
1932,1933) and the corresponding Karman-Prandtl
equations (Prandtl 1942) and the numerous measurements
that were mostly carried out in the second part of the last
century with respect to the velocity profiles and the
experimental constants obtained with (or for) the
equations (see, for instance, Novais-Barbosa 1986, Long
et al. 1993 and McKeon et al. 2005). Based on some
previously available experimental records for plastics
pipes, Lamont (1970) recommends the use of the
Karman-Prantl equation for fully smooth pipes or any
exponential formula that approximates this curve, and
recognizes that additional experiments are required
particularly for large PVC pipes due to a possible
waviness of the internal surface that may occur (or not)
sometimes with this material, producing an equivalent
roughness. However, recent decades have seen a rapid
development of the plastics industry and manufacturing
415
processes, with new plastic materials and prefabricated
pipes being produced and low friction values are reported
specifically for these pipes.
Plastic pipes, particularly those made of PVC or
polyethylene, were initially used mostly in the hydraulic
engineering applications for small diameters, mainly
because the larger sizes were much more expensive. As the
plastic industry developed, however, prices tended to fall.
Larger diameters that had been usually made of concrete
or other materials are now being increasingly made of
plastic, in many practical applications, thanks to more
competitive prices.
An experimental research study of steady full-bore
water flows in plastic pipes was conducted, based on
experimental data obtained in the Laboratory of
Hydraulics, Water Resources and Environment of
Coimbra University. Several experiments were performed
in the context of a Master’s thesis completed in 2009
(Vilela 2009). This paper reports, interprets and discusses
the results of this research.
Analysis and empirical methods
The Colebrook-White formula is explicit for U, or k, but
implicit for J, or D, and a numerical iterative method is
required to determine the roots of the corresponding
equation. The successive approximations method pro-
posed in Quintela (2000), for instance, is intuitive and has
a rapid convergence. The lack of explicitness of the
formula for J (or f) was perhaps the major drawback in the
early years of its application and this was overcome with
the arrival of digital calculators and microcomputers in
the 1970s and 80s. The Moody diagram (Moody 1944)
with f vs. Re plotted in logarithmic scales and k/D
as a parameter became widespread; it allows the
visualization of the three types of turbulent flow for
commercial pipes (smooth-pipe flow, transitionally rough,
and fully rough) and the corresponding direct calculation
of f (and J). Several explicit approximations were also
proposed, of which Moody (1947) and Haaland (1983),
among others, are examples frequently cited. A review of
several alternatives, including those mentioned above, is
given in Romeu et al. (2002), and Yildirim (2009).
Another approach, prior to the Prandtl’s school,
indicated the use of empirical resistance laws that can
be associated to different degrees of scientific support.
It is known that by using dimensional analysis,
particularly the Vaschy-Buckingham theorem, it may
be proved that f depends exclusively on Re for laminar
and turbulent smooth-pipe flow (i.e. the flow through
pipes that are practically smooth or that have some
roughness comprised in the viscous sublayer, and then
with the same behavior, according to the Nikuradse and
Colebrook results). The empirical Blasius equation
proposed in 1913, which is normally considered as a
416 A.F. Diogo and F.A. Vilela
good approximation for the smooth-pipe regime up to
Re ¼ 105, considers
f ¼ 0:3164Re 20:25
Assuming a generic form
f ¼ aReb
as proposed in Bernouth and Wilson (1989), where a
and b are constants, and substituting the expressions for
f and Re
U ¼ ð2gv b =aÞ1=ðbþ2Þ D ð12bÞ=ðbþ2Þ J 1=ðbþ2Þ
Based mostly on the experiments conducted with 30 m
long PVC pipes, with internal diameters of 15.6 mm and
26.2 mm, and 30 m long polyethylene pipe of 14.4 mm
internal diameter, at the end of the 1980s, Bernouth
and Wilson (1989), and Bernouth (1990) analyzed and
evaluated the constants a and b in Equation (4) and
confirmed generically the coefficients presented in the
Blasius equation, for Re less than 105.
Scimemi (1964) recalls empirical laws for several
materials, of generic type U ¼ K0Rah Jb. They are
equivalent to the expression:
U ¼ KDa Jb
which resembles partially Equation (5) and is widely used
in common calculations for uniform turbulent regimes.
K (or K0), a and b are coefficients assumed as constants
for each pipe material, and are determined experimen-
tally, normally for water at ambient temperature. The
coefficients for old and new fibrocement pipes (the
smoothest frequently mentioned material) are discussed
in Scimemi (1951) and reported to be a ¼ 0.68,
b ¼ 0.56, and K ¼ 61.5, or K ¼ 64.3. This last value
was experimentally obtained by Scimemi for new pipes
25 years earlier and was later thought to be perhaps
slightly overestimated. Based on the similitude laws and
the data measured in the polyethylene pipes described by
Bagarello et al. (1995), and on the measurements of
Butera el al. (1993), using a 150 mm Plexiglas pipe, Ferro
(1997) proposed an approach for the flow resistance law,
expressed by:
Re* ¼ 0:1676Re0:8925
p slope, in the logarithmic f vs. Re plot (2 0.214 instead of
where Re* is defined by Re* ¼ (t0/r) D/n (or Re* ¼
p
(gDJ/4)(1/2) D/n) and is equivalent to Re* ¼ Re (f/8),
which, for a temperature T close to 208 Celsius,
approximately matches the coefficients of the Scimemi
equation for fibrocement (with K ¼ 64.3).
Also frequently considered in uniform turbulent flow of
ð3Þ water in pressure conduits, for a wide range of materials,
normally at ambient temperature, (Novais-Barbosa 1986,
Quintela 2000)are the empirical formulas of Hazen-
Williams established in 1902,
ð4Þ
U ¼ 0:849CRh0:63 J 0:54 ð8Þ
and Manning proposed in 1891 (sometimes designated as
Gauckler-Manning-Strickler formula, 1867 –1891 – 1923):
ð5Þ
U ¼ KsRh2=3 J 1=2 ð9Þ
where C and Ks are constants that depend on the pipe
material. These formulas must not be used for plastic pipes
carrying clean water in pipe flow, regardless which values
of coefficients are assumed. Certainly, they may also be
written in the form U ¼ K Da Jb, which may be rearranged
and expressed for f and Re as:
2g
f ¼ D 32ðaþ1Þ=b Re 1=b22 ð10Þ
K 1=b v ð221=bÞ
When plotting f vs. Re in logarithmic scales, these
two equations are represented as parallel straight lines,
ð6Þ one for each constant diameter, since the exponent of D,
(3 2 (a þ 1)/ b), is not null (Quintela 1973, 2000). In the
Manning formula, the straight lines are horizontal, since
the exponent of Re, (1/b 2 2), is null, a characteristic of
a fully rough flow that is difficult to reach in normal
conditions in plastic pipes, unless the Re numbers are
extraordinarily large. For the Hazen-Williams equation,
the slope of the parallel straight lines is relatively low
(1/b 2 2 ¼ 2 0.148) and not suitable for the prevailing
smooth pipes, even in the transition region between
turbulent regimes (see, for instance, Travis and Mays
2007). Liou (1998) considers the Colebrook-White
equation conceptually sound and so he advises that the
use of the Hazen-Williams equation should be avoided,
even for materials for which many empirical values of
C exist.
On the other hand, the Scimemi formula for
fibrocement is represented in the f vs. Re plot as a straight
line for all diameters (Lamont 1969, 1970), since the
exponent of D, 3 2 (a þ 1)/ b, is null (Quintela, 1973,
2000). The formula is then similar in its form and layout to
ð7Þ the Blasius equation, with a slightly lower exponent, or
2 0.25) and a lower base coefficient (0.223, for K ¼ 64.3,
g ¼ 9.8 m/s2, and n ¼ 1.01E-6m2/s, corresponding to a
 Urban Water Journal 417

standard water temperature of 20 degrees Celsius): (see for instance the data and formulae presented in
Lamont 1954).
f ¼ 0:223Re 20:214 ð11Þ

The constants a and b can also be obtained from the
coefficients in Equation (5).
According to the shape of the Colebrook-White
equation curves, for each fixed k/D, represented in the
Moody Diagram, the slope of the curves for smooth-pipes
and (Novais-Barbosa 1986, Quintela 2000) regimes is not
constant with Re (as for a straight line), and the plastic
pipes do not behave as hydraulically smooth for all Re
numbers, since their roughness in not null. As for the other
materials, in these regimes the slope of the lines decreases
as Re increases, to various degree, depending on the
turbulent region that has been reached, which shows a
decreasing influence of Re. Any approximation of the
resistance law that is represented by a straight line must
then be limited between fixed boundaries of Re numbers
Experiments performed
Three experimental installations with four types of plastic
pipes and several diameters were used in the Laboratory
of Hydraulics, Water Resources and Environment
(LHRHA) of the Department of Civil Engineering of
Coimbra University, and are schematically represented in
Figures 1 to 3. The tests were performed using: (i) two
old PVC pipes, with internal diameters 17.35 mm and
21.75 mm (old LHRHA equipment Armfield Fluid
Friction Apparatus Model C6 – Armfield undated), over
a straight length of 2 m; (ii) a high-density polyethylene
pipe, with an internal diameter of 53.6 mm (nominal
63 mm), over a straight length of 6.5 m; (iii) a low-
density polyethylene pipe, of 94.5 mm (nominal 110 mm)
diameter, 32.35 m long, over a line of 20.35 m; and, (iv) a

Figure 1. Schema of the pipes tested, circuits and equipment used in the first experimental setup (drawn based on the Armfield sheet for
the equipment Fluid Friction Apparatus Model C6 – Armfield undated).

Figure 2. Schematic circuit and used equipment for the testing of the 63 mm HDPE pipe.
418 A.F. Diogo and F.A. Vilela
Figure 3. Schematic circuit and used equipment for the testing
of the 35 mm and 110 mm pipes (First stage of an experimental
inverted siphon setup – adapted from Diogo and Oliveira 2013).
flexible transparent PVC plastic pipe, commercially
known as “crystal pipe”, of 35 mm internal diameter
and 21.5 m long, over a line of 10.65 m. The flow in the
last two pipes was governed by gravity, starting in a feed
chamber with a free surface and with an outlet in the
bottom, and ending in a free discharge, and in the other
pipes tested, flow was governed by pumping.
A hydrodynamic entrance with a negligible head loss
was used for the 35 mm and 110 mm pipes. The tested
lengths of the gravity conduits were the down leg of an
inverted siphon, with a maximum depression a little
above 3 m (adjustable, normally between 3 and 4 m),
clean water flow and large radius curves (Figure 3). The
measurements were taken in the spring and in the
summer. The water temperature varied between 18 and
29 degrees Celsius. It was assumed that the water
kinematic viscosity (in m2/s) varied with T (in oC)
according to the Poiseuille empirical formula (Marques
and Sousa 2009):
1:78E 2 6
v¼ ð12Þ
1 þ 0:0337T þ 0:000221T 2
with coefficients of viscosity close to the equation given
in Scimemi (1964). The tests consisted of measuring the
water flow, Q, and the continuous head loss, DH, in each
established steady flow for the selected length, L, of each
conduit, with J ¼ DH/L.
The head losses were measured using static pressure
taps connected to differential manometers or piezometers.
The taps in the 63 mm HDPE tube were located far enough
from any appurtenance or equipment to avoid interfer-
ences with the measurements of static pressures. For the
(continuous) gravity pipes, piezometer levels were
measured at different control sections, including the
upstream feed chamber, and at distances of 3.70 and 20.35
m for the 110 mm pipe, and 10.65 m for the 35 mm pipe.
Although possible, the consideration of more piezometers
was not essential for the required/estimated accuracy. No
relevant minor losses were expected to exist or were
detected over the tested lengths of the pipes.
The flow was measured by different methods, which
were sometimes complementary, in order to identify
and eliminate, or reduce, any failures of the devices
used. In the installation with the old PVC pipes, a
volumetric process (Armfield undated, 1980) was used
with two existing graduated tanks of known capacity.
In the HDPE 63 mm pipe installation, a Venturi meter
and an ultrasonic device were used together. For the
gravity LDPE 110 mm and 35 mm plastic pipes, two
triangular weirs of different capacities were placed in
the discharge line, calibrated or confirmed by volu-
metric measurements of flow, and employed alterna-
tively (Vilela 2009).
Great accuracy was required, and many experiments
were repeated several times to avoid or minimize any
errors. It was estimated that any relative errors in the
variables did not generally exceed 5%. Since, for fixed Js, f
varies with the power 2 2 of the velocity or flow, and, for
a given Q and J, f varies with the 5th power of the
diameter, emphasis was given to the diameter precision
and accuracy of the flow measurement, in particular.
The nominal diameters of (commercial) plastic pipes
are frequently the external diameters and sometimes the
precise internal diameters may not be readily known with a
high degree of accuracy. In addition, the internal diameter
and the section shape of a plastic pipe may not always be
constant along its longitudinal axis, may change due to the
fluid-pipe interaction, and due to multiple external factors,
such as static or dynamic loads, or temperature
fluctuations, and these aspects may severely affect the
friction factor and the energy line.
The internal diameters of the 110 mm LDPE, the
63 mm HDPE, and the flexible PVC tube were thoroughly
measured and confirmed by measuring the mass or volume
of water needed to fill a known length of the pipe.
The mean velocity in cross section (through the
continuity equation for a steady flow of an incompres-
sible fluid) U ¼ Q/(pD2/4), the friction factor, f, and
the Reynolds number, Re, were computed for each
test and the corresponding points drawn in a f vs. Re
plot with logarithmic scales. Due to the limitations of
the equipment available, Re larger than about 6E5,
corresponding to transitionally rough regimes, could not
be attained.
The tolerances or maximum errors in D, Q, J, and n, for
each tested pipe, as well as the propagated errors in f and
Re, were evaluated separately and are shown in Table 1.
The tolerances were estimated according to the apparatus,
the type of material and the size of pipe, and the
measurement process and equipment. Relative values of
^ 0.29% to ^ 2.30% were estimated for D, ^ 3.0% to
^ 4.0%, for Q, ^ 1.0% to ^ 2.5%, for J, and ^ 2.2% to
^ 2.5%, for n. Since f ¼ (p2 g/8) D5 J / Q2 and Re ¼ (4/p)
Table 1. Estimated average tolerances and f and Re propagated maximum experimental deviations.

J relative tolerance
Pipe Internal D relative tolerance Q relative tolerance and f maximum n relative tolerance f and Re maximum
diameter and and f and Re maximum and f and Re maximum propagated and Re maximum accumulated
Maximum propagated deviations propagated deviations deviation propagated deviation deviations
tolerance (mm)
DD/D Df/f DRe/Re DQ/Q Df/f DRe/Re DJ/J Df/f Dn/n DRe/Re Df/f DRe/Re
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
PVC 17.35 ^ 0.25 ^1.44 þ 7.4 þ 1.46 ^ 3.0 þ6.3 ^3.0 ^1.0 ^1.0 ^ 2.2 þ 2.2 þ15.3 þ 6.9
2 7.0 2 1.42 25.7 2 2.2 213.2 2 6.4
PVC 21.75 ^ 0.50 ^2.30 þ 12.0 þ 2.35 ^ 4.0 þ8.5 ^4.0 ^1.0 ^1.0 ^ 2.2 þ 2.2 þ22.8 þ 8.8
2 11.0 2 2.25 27.5 2 2.2 218.5 2 8.2
Crystal PVC 35 ^ 0.10 ^0.29 þ 1.4 þ 0.29 ^ 3.0 þ6.3 ^3.0 ^2.0 ^2.0 ^ 2.5 þ 2.6 þ10.0 þ 5.9
Urban Water Journal

2 1.4 2 0.28 25.7 2 2.4 28.9 2 5.6

HDPE 53.6 ^ 0.20 ^0.37 þ 1.9 þ 0.37 ^ 3.0 þ6.3 ^3.0 ^1.5 ^1.5 ^ 2.5 þ 2.6 þ9.9 þ 6.0
2 1.9 2 0.37 25.7 2 2.4 28.9 2 5.7
LDPE 94.5 ^ 0.60 ^0.63 þ 3.2 þ 0.64 ^ 3.5 þ7.4 ^3.5 ^2.5 ^2.5 ^ 2.3 þ 2.4 þ13.6 þ 6.6
2 3.1 2 0.63 26.6 2 2.2 211.8 2 6.3
419
420 A.F. Diogo and F.A. Vilela

Q / (n D), the propagated relative errors in f (Df/f) and Re and

(DRe/Re), either non-cumulative or cumulative, may be        
described exactly by the expressions: DRe DD DQ Dv
¼2 þ 2 ð16Þ
Re D Q v
       
Df DD 5 DQ 22 DJ 1 where DD/D, DQ/Q, DJ/J, and Dn/n represent the relative
¼ 1þ £ 1þ £ 1þ 21
f D Q J errors in D, Q, J, and n, respectively (that are assumed to
ð13Þ be relatively small).
Although unlikely in general (an exception may be
and perhaps established for the 63 mm HDPE pipe), owing to
the considerable number of repetitions normally per-
        formed in the tests, sometimes using additional meters,
DRe DD 21 DQ 1 Dv 21 the maximum cumulative errors obtained by the error
¼ 1þ £ 1þ £ 1þ 21
Re D Q v propagation analysis, for the worst cases, were about 5.6%
ð14Þ to 8.8% for Re and 8.9% to 22.8% for f.

or approximately (as it is generally accepted in the error

Results, analysis and discussion
propagation analysis, i.e. considering only the first order
terms) by: The points corresponding to the pairs of computed values
(Re, f) obtained for each steady flow rate in each conduit
        are shown in Figures 4 to 8. Vertical and horizontal bars in
Df DD DQ DJ
¼5 22 þ ð15Þ the figures illustrate the approximate maximum deviations
f D Q J (symmetric) for a given point determined by the error

o
PVC - Internal diameter 17.35 mm - Water temperature 28 C

0.040
Karman Prandtl Smooth Pipe
Colebrook White k=0.004 mm
Colebrook White k=0.010 mm
Blasius
Scimemi Fibrocement
Experimental

0.020
Friction Factor

0.010

0.005
1.00E+03 1.00E+04 1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07
Reynolds Number

Figure 4. Pairs of values (Re, f) observed for the 17.35 mm PVC pipe.
 Urban Water Journal
PVC - Internal diameter 21.75 mm - Water temperature 29 C
0.040
0.020
Friction Factor
0.010
0.005
1.00E+03 1.00E+04
Reynolds Number
Figure 5. Pairs of values (Re, f) observed for the 21.75 mm PVC pipe.
analysis explained in the previous section. The Colebrook-
White equation for roughness values of 0.002, 0.004,
0.010, 0.030 and 0.050 mm, the Karman-Prandtl equation
for smooth-pipes (k ¼ 0), and the Blasius and new-
fibrocement Scimemi empirical formulas are also shown
in the logarithmic graph.
In all the pipes tested, even though this is less evident
for the 63 mm HDPE pipe, the qualitative profile of the
plotted points seems to agree in general with the layout of
the Colebrook-White plotted curves, even for relatively
small Reynolds numbers in the majority of the pipes. For
instance, the smaller PVC pipes appear to show this
general tendency (Figures 4 and 5).
Only for the flexible transparent pipe (Figure 6) an
important number of measurements yielded friction
factors slightly below the Karman-Prandtl curve for
smooth-pipes, but the differences observed were extre-
mely small (in general not more than 3% and on average
about 1%), of little significance, and not conclusive,
especially when compared to the accuracy estimates
obtained for the measurements.
421
o
Karman Prandtl Smooth Pipe
Colebrook White k=0.004 mm
Colebrook White k=0.010 mm
Blasius
Scimemi Fibrocement
Experimental
1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07
Although being relatively low, the roughness of all
other tested pipes seems to play an important role for
higher Reynolds numbers and appears to display
important differences among the plastic pipes tested.
The 63 mm HDPE seems to point to a roughness of
around 0.010 mm. In spite of the larger Re that was
possible to achieve when testing this pipe, the uncertainty
in the measurements taken with this pipe (see Figure 7)
constituted a considerable drawback when attempting to
reach a more conclusive finding. Old PVC pipes seem to
point to a k around 0.004 mm, but no measurements were
conducted very far from the smooth-pipe regime. It
should be observed that these pipes were cleaned fully
before the experiments and that the corresponding
measurements were performed under warm temperatures.
The 110 mm LDPE tested seemed to show substantially
higher roughness than all the other pipes tested (no less
than 0.030 to 0.040 mm). In Figure 8, a limiting line for
k ¼ 0.050 mm was noted. However, an important length
of the pipe tested exhibited a curve of great radius and,
due to a larger section and to the limitations of the power
422 A.F. Diogo and F.A. Vilela
Transparent plasticpipe (Crystal) -Internal diameter 35mm - Water temperature 18 C
0.040
0.020
Friction Factor
0.010
0.005
1.00E+03 1.00E+04
Reynolds Number
Figure 6. Pairs of values (Re, f) observed for the 35 mm transparent plastic pipe.
and capacity of the equipment used, the 110 mm pipe is
by far the most sensitive among the pipes tested to
drawing firm conclusions (the maximum total volumetric
flow rate pumped was about 5.5 liters per second).
As the figures show, the empirical laws of Blasius, up
to Re ¼ 105, and Scimemi, up to Re < 106, which are
extremely easy to apply, appear to be good approximations
for the smooth-pipe regimes in general, and for the whole
Re domain of the steady flows that were established in the
pipes.
These experiments suggest that plastic pipes seem to
show the same general tendency as any other smooth
pipes. But even if this tendency seems to be solidly based
and allows these important basic conclusions, more
accurate experiments and measurements using larger
conduits, more powerful installations and equipment, may
yield more conclusive results, particularly in relation to the
absolute roughness to be used in the practical applications
of larger pipe sizes. Depending on the type and condition
of the plastic pipe, it is expected that a great variation of
roughness is likely, which may somehow explain several
different results reported on literature. The presence of any
layer, such as grease or film on the inside wall arising
from normal practical use, for instance in the case
of wastewater, may change the hydraulic behavior
o
Karman Prandtl Smooth Pipe
Colebrook White k=0.004 mm
Colebrook White k=0.010 mm
Blasius
Scimemi Fibrocement
Experimental
1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07
significantly. A considerable head loss increase seems to
have occurred recently in the inverted siphon 110 mm
pipe, after a long period of no flow and the pipe full of
water.
With the exception of the transparent plastic pipe
(which is relatively flexible, but has significant thickness),
the modulus of elasticity of the other materials was
assumed to be relatively large, i.e. not less than 1GPa for
the polyethylene tubes and 20 GPa for the PVC pipes. The
pressure was lower than approximately 0.55 MPa for
the pressurized conduits and less than about 0.045 MPa for
the gravity pipes. Thus, the influence of pressure in all the
diameters tested was not considered. The influence of the
pressure on the resistance law may be relevant for flexible
pipes under important static heads, given that even for a
relatively small increase in diameter, as J varies
approximately with an exponent around -5 of the diameter
(shown by applying the continuity equation in the different
laws), the head loss may be significantly changed.
Conclusions
Continuous head losses per unit pipe length and the
corresponding friction factors were determined exper-
imentally, for several plastic pipes of different character-
 Urban Water Journal
HDPE - Nominal diameter 63 mm - Water temperature 18 degrees Celsius
0.040
0.020
Friction Factor
0.010
0.005
1.00E+03 1.00E+04
Reynolds Number
Figure 7. Pairs of values (Re, f) observed for the 63 mm HDPE pipe.
istics, in straight lengths and with curves of great radius,
for steady turbulent flow of water. Head losses substan-
tively smaller than those resulting from the application of
the Karman-Prandtl equation for smooth-pipes were not
found, for any of the pipes tested.
The absolute roughness of plastic pipes seems to vary
substantially according to the type of plastic or the pipe
condition. Even if k was detected relatively small in some
tested pipes, it appears to have an important role in the
resistance law, which may be relevant, mainly for the
larger sections and large lengths, frequently requiring
precise calculations in practical applications, and/or for
relatively high Reynolds numbers.
In this experimental study, the Colebrook-White
equation was confirmed also as a powerful tool for
determining continuous head losses for water flowing
through pressure plastic pipes in turbulent regimes. For Re
up to approximately 105 and a little less than 106, however,
it was found that the empirical formulas of Blasius and
Scimemi for fibrocement may be also used (with good
results). Absolute roughness from approximately
0.004 mm to 0.040 mm, or more, was determined by
trend analysis, which somewhat confirms the data
sometimes used in current hydraulic engineering appli-
cations, but more robust experiments with larger Re
423
Karman Prandtl Smooth Pipe
Colebrook White k=0.002 mm
Colebrook White k=0.010 mm
Colebrook White k=0.030 mm
Blasius
Scimemi Fibrocement
Experimental
1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07
numbers are deemed to be necessary, principally for larger
sections.
Although the observed changes of n, and Re, with
normal variations of average water temperature through-
out different seasons of the year in Portugal are fairly
important (an increase of 11 degrees Celsius between the
beginning of spring and the summer was observed in the
laboratory, with a reduction of 22.4% in n), the influence
of these variations on the turbulent resistance law appears
to be attenuated due to the low slope of the f vs. Re curves.
The friction factor f (and J) appears to vary, at maximum,
with the power 0.25, in modulus, of Re (or n),
corresponding to the Blasius equation (maximum
reduction of about 6%, for the increase of temperature
observed). Conversely any slight alteration in the internal
diameter, caused, for instance, by the fluid-pipe interaction
that may occur for multiple reasons, especially in a plastic
pipe, severely affects the friction factor computation and
the energy line estimation. In addition, the internal
diameter of a plastic pipe may not always be constant
along its axis, and the cross section shape may change
owing to external factors. A reduction or increase of just
2% in the diameter (0.4 mm in a 20 mm pipe, for instance)
can be expected to introduce a change of around 10% or
more.
424 A.F. Diogo and F.A. Vilela
LDPE - Nominal diameter 110 mm - Water temperature 24 C
0.040
0.020
Friction Factor
0.010
0.005
1.00E+03 1.00E+04
Reynolds Number
Figure 8. Pairs of values (Re, f) observed for the 110 mm LDPE pipe.
References
Armfield Technical Education Equipment Division, undated.
Fluid friction apparatus model C6. Issue 1. Ringwood,
Hampshire, England: Armfield Engineering Limited.
Armfield, undated. Fluid friction apparatus model C6. Issue 1.
Ringwood, Hampshire, England: Armfield Technical Edu-
cation Company Limited.
Armfield, 1980. Instruction manual for C6 fluid friction
apparatus. Issue 2. Ringwood, Hampshire, England:
Armfield Technical Education Company Limited.
Bagarello, V., Ferro, V., Provenzano, G., and Pumo, D., 1995.
Experimental study on flow-resistance law for small-
diameter plastic pipes. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
Engineering, 121 (5), 313– 316.
Bernuth, R.D. and Wilson, T., 1989. Friction factors for small
diameter plastic pipes. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
115 (2), 183– 192.
Bernuth, R.D., 1990. Simple and accurate friction loss equation
for plastic pipe. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
Engineering, 116 (2), 294– 298.
Blasius, H., 1913. Das Aehnlichkeitsgesetz bei Reibungsvorgän-
gen in Flüssigkeiten. In: Mitteilungen über Forschungsar-
beiten auf dem Gebiete des Ingenieurwesens. Vol. 131.
Berlin: VDI-Verlag, 1 – 41.
Butera, L., Ridolfi, L., and Sordo, S., 1993. On the hypothesis of
self-similarity for the velocity distribution in turbulent flows.
Excerpta, 8, 63 – 94.
o
Karman Prandtl Smooth Pipe
Colebrook White k=0.004 mm
Colebrook White k=0.050 mm
Blasius
Scimemi Fibrocement
Experimental
1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07
Cardoso, G.G.G., Frizzone, J.A., and Rezende, R., 2008. Factor
de atrito em tubos de polietileno de pequenos diâmetros. Acta
Scientiarum. Agronomy, 30 (3), 299– 305.
Colebrook, C.F., 1939. Turbulent flow in pipes, with particular
reference to the transition region between smooth and rough
pipe laws. Journal of the Institution of Civil Engineers, 11
(4), 133–156.
Diogo, A.F. and Oliveira, M.C., 2013. A preliminary numerical
approach for the study of compressed air injection in inverted
siphons. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 139 (7),
772– 784.
Ferro, V., 1997. Applying hypothesis of self-similarity for flow-
resistance law of small-diameter plastic pipes. Journal of
Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 123 (3), 175 –179.
Franzini, J.B. and Finnemore, E.J., 1997. Fluid mechanics with
engineering applications. int. ed New York: McGraw-Hill.
Haaland, S.E., 1983. Simple and explicit formulas for the friction
factor in turbulent pipe flow. Journal of Fluid Engineering,
105 (3), 89 – 90.
Lamont, P.A., 1954. A review of pipe-friction data and formulae
with a proposed set of exponential formulae based on the
theory of roughness. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers, Part III, 3 (2), 248– 275.
Lamont, P.A., 1969. The choice of pipe flow laws for practical
use. Water and Water Engineering, 73 (875), 9 –17.
Lamont, P.A., 1970. Flow Characteristics of Plastics Pipes.
Plastic Pipes Conference Association. Plastics Pipes
 Urban Water Journal
Symposium, British Plastics Federation, University of
Southampton, Paper 5, 53. Available from: http://www.
borouge.com/IndustrySolution/Pages/test/
Lamont, P.A., 1981. Common pipe flow formulas compared with
the theory of roughness. Journal of the American Water
Works Association, 73 (5), 274.
Lencastre, A., 1996. Hidráulica geral. Edic ão do Autor. Lisboa,
Portugal: Armando Lencastre.
Levin, L., 1972. Étude hydraulique de huit revêtements intérieurs
de conduites forcées. La Houille Blanche, No. 4 (June)
263– 278.
Liou, C.P., 1998. Limitations and proper use of the Hazen-
Williams equation. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 124
(9), 951– 954.
Long, C.E., Wiberg, P.L., and Nowell, A.R.M., 1993. Evaluation
of von Karman’s constant from integral flow parameters.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 119 (10), 1182– 1190.
Marques, J.A.S. and Sousa, J.J.O., 2009. Hidráulica Urbana -
Sistemas de Abastecimento de Água e de Drenagem de Águas
Residuais. 2nd ed. Coimbra, Portugal: Imprensa da
Universidade de Coimbra.
McKeon, B.J., Zagarola, M.V., and Smits, A.J., 2005. A new
friction factor relationship for fully developed pipe flow.
Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 538, 429– 443.
Moody, L.F., 1944. Friction factors for pipe flow. Transactions of
the ASME, 66 (8), 671– 684.
Moody, L.F., 1947. An approximate formula for pipe friction
factors. Trans. ASME, 69 (12), 1005 –1006.
Nikuradse, J., 1932. Gesetzmäßigkeit der turbulenten Strömung
in glatten Rohren. VDI (Verein Deutscher Ingenieure)
Forschungsheft 356. (“Laws of turbulent flow in smooth
pipes”, NASA TT F-10,359, Washington, DC, 1966).
Nikuradse, J., 1933. Strömungsgesetze in rauhen Rohren. VDI
(Verein Deutscher Ingenieure) Forschungsheft 361. (“Laws
of flow in rough pipes”, NACA TM 1292, Washington, DC,
1950).
425
Norum, E.M., 1984. Determining friction loss in polyethylene
pipe used for drip irrigation laterals. Irrigation Age, 26 k
17 – 18.
Novais-Barbosa, J., 1986. Mecânica dos Fluidos e Hidráulica
Geral. vol. 2. Porto, Portugal: Porto Editora.
Paraqueima, J.R., 1977. Study of some frictional characteristics
of small diameter tubing for trickle irrigation laterals, Thesis
(MSc). Department of Agricultural and Irrigation Engineer-
ing, Utah State University.
Prandtl, L., 1942. Führer durch die Strömungslehre. Braunsch-
weig: F. Vieweg & Sohn.
Quintela, A.C., 1962. Perdas de carga contı́nuas. Rugosidade de
túneis revestidos e não revestidos. Técnica, 322, 105–124.
Quintela, A.C., 1973. Perdas de carga unitárias no escoamento de
fluidos incompressı́veis. Fomento (Lisboa), 11 (2), 63 – 89.
Quintela, A.C., 2000. Hidráulica. 7th ed. Lisboa, Portugal:
Fundac ão Calouste Gulbenkian.
Romeu, E., Royo, C., and Monzón, A., 2002. Improved explicit
equations for estimation of the friction factor in rough and
smooth pipes. Chemical Engineering Journal, 86, 369– 374.
Scimemi, E., 1951. Sulle condotte di cemento-amianto-eternit di
lungo esercizio. L’Ingegnere, 25 (3), 247– 253.
Scimemi, E., 1964. Compendio di Idraulica. 3rd ed. Padova,
Italy: CEDAM.
Travis, Q.B. and Mays, L.W., 2007. Relationship between
Hazen-Williams and Colebrook-White roughness values.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 133 (11), 1270– 1273.
Urbina, J.L., 1976. Head loss characteristic of trickle irrigation
hose with emitters, Thesis (MSc). Department of Agricultural
and Irrigation Engineering, Utah State University.
Vilela, F.C., 2009. Leis de resistência em tubagens de plástico,
Thesis (MSc). MIEC, DEC-FCTUC, University of Coimbra,
Coimbra, Portugal.
Yildirim, G., 2009. Computer-based analysis of explicit
approximations to the implicit Colebrook-White equation
in turbulent flow friction factor calculation. Advances in
Engineering Software, 40 (11), 1183– 1190.
Copyright of Urban Water Journal is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.