Conservation of Energy

Fluid Mechanics ME 332

Tyler Finses
Tuesday 11:20 AM
Ethan
11/4/2014

Abstract
The main principles of this report are to reinforce the concepts of control volume analysis and
the conservation of energy using the energy equation. A characteristic load curve will be examined in
detail in addition to a system load curve that will determine the operation point. Pressure drop across
valves and tubes will be examined in detail to look at the losses associate with these flows. Three
separate experiment will be done to prove key concepts of the conservation of energy.
Each of the experiments was approached with an experimental mind set but also a predictive,
mathematical mindset that will challenge the experimental results. This will help to verify the results.
Prior to the first experiment the operating point will be predicted using the parallel combined system
model. This will be compared with the measured operation point found in the first experiment using the
pressurized flow system. The predicted operation point and the measuring point calculated out to be
within 5% of each other giving a high confidence in the accuracy of the experiment.
In the second experiment the FLL unit will be in conjunction with several DMM units to measure
the pressure drop across 3 given valves. Those valves are the gate valve, globe valve, and butterfly valve.
Each valve has a unique internal geometry that causes losses. The valve that causes the lowest pressure
differential is the gate valve due the non-intrusive nature of the gate mechanism. Following the gate
valve was the butterfly and globe valve in that order.
In the last experiment the loss values were calculated for a plumbing structure made up of
individual components that all added to the K value. The effects of gravity were also examined and
found to be negligible for plumbing structures with a delta z that is not extremely large. This is due to
the density of air being extremely light in comparison to most fluids.

Table of Contents
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Nomenclature ............................................................................................................................................... 4
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 5
Description of Experiment 1 ................................................................................................................... 11
Description of Experiment 2 ................................................................................................................... 12
Description of Experiment 3 ................................................................................................................... 14
Experimental Setup ..................................................................................................................................... 17
Procedure Experiment 1 ......................................................................................................................... 17
Procedure Experiment 2 ......................................................................................................................... 18
Procedure Experiment 3 ......................................................................................................................... 19
Results and Discussion ................................................................................................................................ 20
Results Experiment 1 .............................................................................................................................. 20
Results Experiment 2 .............................................................................................................................. 24
Results Experiment 3 .............................................................................................................................. 28
Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 30
Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 31
References .................................................................................................................................................. 32

Nomenclature
- Internal discharge coefficient
- Discharge coefficient of the jet
- Discharge coefficient of the stack
g- Gravity
h- Height
hl- Head loss
- Mass flux
p- Fluid pressure
patm- Atmospheric pressure
prec- Recorded pressure
ps- Static pressure
pt- Stagnation pressure
A - Area
K- Loss coefficient
L- Jet span
Q- Flow rate
- Average velocity
- Fluid velocity vector
V- Velocity
W- Jet width
- Shaft work
- Change in pressure
-Kinetic energy correction factor
- Density
- Degree of valve opening
- Dimensional coefficient for the jet
- Dimensional coefficient for the stack
4

Introduction
There are a total of 3 separate experiments that are to be conducted in this experiment. These
three experiments will prove the conservation of energy theme of this lab using the pressurized flow
system, and two different experiments that use the FLL system. This lab will reinforce concepts of
control volume and energy equation formulation related mostly to the characteristic curve, system load
curve, and operating point. Last several pressure drop characteristics of 3 different valves will be
analyzed to determine several values.
The formulation of conservation of energy has already been done out in the classroom portion
of ME 332 but the basics will be reviewed for the clarity of this report. This experiments assumes
incompressible flows, zero heat added, the flow is at steady state, and the gravitational effects do not
play a part. For a fixed control volume the energy equation is given below in equation 1.

) ( )

Equation 1:
In equation 1 is the work done by a machine with
vector and speed to the second power. The variables p and

and describing the fluid velocity

representing the fluid pressure and

density respectively. The source of the negative sign is based on a sign convention from
thermodynamics that says the sign of machine work is defined as positive for output out of a control
volume. In this case the sign is negative because energy is inputted into the system. The last term in the
equation describes losses that are irreversible processes. In this case we are talking about processes
that convert mechanical energy to thermal energy typically through friction. These losses in flow
5

situations are called loss coefficient K and the head loss

. Mathematically they can be defined by

equation 2 below. In this equation and are the mass flux and characteristic average flow in the
tube where the loss occurs. K is a dimensionless quantity and

has units of length.

Equation 2:
Equations 1 and 2 are the base for what will be expanded on in terms of the control volume
analysis. It is often assumed that the pressure is uniform across the inlets and outlets of a control
volume when doing calculations with equation 1. This cannot be assumed for the kinetic energy flux
which must be integrated in terms of

which is the kinetic energy correction factor. This allows

average quantities to be used when calculating the kinetic energy flux. This is detailed in equation 3.

) ( )

Equation 3:
Alpha, the kinetic energy correction factor, is equal to unity under a uniform velocity profile and
is greater than unity for velocity profiles that are not uniform. In the case of turbulent flows alpha is
between 1.04 and 1.11. Equations 1,2 , and 3 can be combined into the following equation.

Equation 4:
Each of the subscripts 1 and 2 represent the inlet and outlet respectively. This makes V the
velocity at the inlet and the outlet and all the other variables stay consistent with their previous

definitions. The equation could also be applied to systems with multiple inlets and outlets using a
summation of the inlets and outlet.
In a system the pump provides a power input to the system. The power in does not often get
translated into flow rate. The true flow rate is determined by the power input and the load that is seen
throughout different parts of the flow.
The characteristic cure will now be introduced and dissected. If a fan or pump is examined with
equal inlet areas and outlet areas it is expected that V1 = V2 and that 12. Then if all the losses are
collected under pump efficiency the actual power delivered to the flow is the result of the equation
below.

Equation 5:
The simple relation of

simplifies the above equation into the following.

Equation 6:
As it would seem, the pump will increase the pressure in the flow which is a direct result of the
power being delivered to the flow. In the example of the FLL system the FLL draws air from the test
section and delivers it to the ambient in the lab. This makes it pretty clear that

. In the case

of the PFS it is totally opposite.

The characteristic curve is the relationship between pressure rise and flow rate in a pump.
Additionally it is a function of the device type and internal design. The characteristic curve is typically
7

provided by the manufacturer. The characteristic curve of the fan that is in the PFS system has been
determined in previous experiments and is displayed below. The PFS uses a centrifugal fan that is driven
at a constant rpm resulting in the particular characteristic curve.

Characteristic Curve vs. System Load Curve

Pressure Rise Ppl-Patm (Inches Water)

5.00E+00

4.00E+00

3.00E+00

2.00E+00

1.00E+00

0.00E+00
0

200

400

600

-1.00E+00

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Flow Rate Q (CFM)

Figure 1: The Characteristic curve.

The change in p, pressure differential, across a flow system describes a system load curve. The
relationship associated with this is represented by

. This can be examined in the case of the

PFS as a flow passes over the sharp edge of the jet. Previously it has been proven that
[

] and Q gives the volume flow rate.

Equation 7:

Equation 8:
The additions in this equation as far as variable are limited to cd which is the slit jet discharge
coefficient. In this case the value is given to be 0.61. The slip jet follows a simple square law behavior
provided

in the previous equation is a dimensioned coefficient. By applying

equation 5 along with the idea that

we can obtain a slightly more useful equation.

Equation 9:
A1 and A2 represetn the inlet and outlet areas and A is the area where losses occur.

and K are

independent of the Reynolds number and velocity and therefore are not functions of flow rate.
There is one special case for equation 10 that uses constant area, so that the velocity in is equal
to the velocity out. An example of this flow system would be flow through a 90 degree elbow, or a
valve. In these flows there is a pressure drop across system that is a result of the system loss coefficient.
That is described by the equation below.

Equation 10:
The operating point is the joint solution of two curves. Those curves are for a flow passage that
is connected to a plenum that has a system load curve (
described by

and a characteristic curve that is

. The operation conditions of this flow are determined from the graphical

intersection of the two curves. This is often referred to as the system operating point. A simple
operating point graph is shown below.

Figure 2: The system operating point.

Figure 2 represents a system that has what is called a single prime or single load combination
that uses the square-law system loading curve. In other words this would work for a PFS with only one
inlet and one outlet, but it will not work with the PFS set up in the lab unless the stack is closed. In the
case of this experiment the stack opening will be at a fixed opening of 3.5 inches. In this case the system
is in a parallel configuration. The combined system loading curve for the parallel set up is described by
following equation.
[

Equation 11:

10

The flow rates through the slit jet and the stack are Qj and Qs respectively

.
Figure 3: The flow rates through the slit jet and stack.

Description of Experiment 1
In the first experiment the pressurized flow system, or PFS for short, will be used to measure the
operating point of the PFS. Prior to measuring the operation point, the operating point will be predicted
using a series of equations.
The stack open diameter that was given was 3.5 inches. Therefore, the entire experiment will
revolve around that opening diameter. Using equation 12 the system load curve for the slit-jet can be
obtained.

Equation 12:
In equation 12

represents the area of the jet. This is the width and length of the jet span.

Represents the slit jet discharge coefficient that is given to be 0.61. The equation can then be computed
to get the

value. Simalrily equation 13 can be used to obtain the system load curve for the stack.

11

Equation 13:
In order to obtain the combined system loading curve equation 14 will be used. The combined
loading curve will be very important to determine the operating point.

Equation 14

Description of Experiment 2
The setup for experiment 2 is shown in figure below. It consists of 3 different valves each
connected to the same plenum pressure by the same diameter and length pipe. The losses of 3
different valves will be examined in the experiment. To generate the flow for the experiment the FLL
will be used with the door open.

Figure 4: The basic set up for experiment 2.

12

To figure out the pressure drop across each valve is simply described by equation 15 below.
represents the pressure at the inlet of the pipe. The average velocity in the pipe can be determined
using

(the pressure differential) in equation 16. Equation 17 takes care of the losses that are

typically seen due to square edges on the inlets of the tube. This is shown in figure 5 below. This allows
us to use equation 16 to calculate the loss coefficient K.

Figure 5: The separation Bubble.

Equation 15:

Equation 16:

Equation 17:
13

In equation 16 A describes the cross-sectional area of the connecting pipe. K is the valve loss
coefficient which depends on the type of valve. Between different valves the internal geometry changes
which is really what makes the K value vary. A valve is used to control the flow rate of a fluid based on
the amount the valve is opened. When the valve is being opened the K value decreases. The system
load curve for the valve also moves to the right. When the valve is being closed the K value decreases as
one would expect and the system load curve moves to the left.
Using a validyne pressure transducer

and

should be measured. Each valve

needs to go from fully open to fully close in 8 steps. This means that in the case of the gate valve each
step will be 1 turns. In the case of the globe valve each step will be of a turn. Last the butterfly valve
step will be as marked on the top of the valve.

Description of Experiment 3
In the third experiment the flow rate behavior and pressure drop in a piping system is in a
system made up of several different pipe components connected together in series. The variety of
components available to use are shown below in the figure.

14

Figure 6: Shows the individual components available.e:

The FLL will be used slightly different in this experiment that it is usually used. This time the
door to the FLL will be left open as shown in the figure below. This is because it is desired that the
ambient pressure in the room is desired to be the atmospheric pressure. The piping system takes the air
at the inlet outside of the FLL and flows it through the valves. This causes a pressure differential in the
tube that causes the flow. A Pitot tube is located at the centerline of the exit that will be used to
determine the velocity.

Equation 18:
The variable

represents the total pressure that is given from the Pitot tube. The flow rate

through the tube can be easily determined by using Q=VA. Q is the flow rate, V is the velocity and A is
the area of the system. A simple diagram of the entire system is shown below.

Figure 7: Basic set up.

15

The pressure drop across the pipe system will be determined to determine the K and values which are
known as the system losses. The pressure drop across components composed of components
connected in series can be analyzed as the sum of pressure drops across each individual component.
This is shown mathematically in the equation below.

Equation 19
is the pressure drop across the individual component. Therefore the pressure drop across
each component can also be shown as the following equation.

Equation20:
This leaves the two system loss coefficient equations to be the result of the following equation.

Equation 21:

16

Experimental Setup
Procedure Experiment 1
In the first experiment the pressurized flow system, or PFS for short, will be used to measure the
operating point of the PFS. Prior to measuring the operation point, the operating point will be predicted
using a series of equations described in the introduction. The stack open diameter that was given was
3.5 inches. Therefore, the entire experiment will revolve around that opening diameter. Using equation
1 the system load curve for the slit-jet can be obtained.
The system load curve for the slit jet can be obtained using equation 13. Using a similar
equation but different values for the stack opening, the system load equation for the stack opening can
be obtained. The parallel combined system loading curve can be determined using equation 14.
In order to measure the operation point of the PFS the PFS inlet flow rate and pressure
differential [ppl-patm] must be determined using the process previously outlined in the Conservation of
Mass principles from the conservation of mass lab. The digital multimeter (DMM) will be used to get
this value. For convenience this equation is displayed below.

Equation 22:
The PFS inlet pressure differential will help get to the flow rate which is show above. The
measurement for the PFS plenum pressure that is measured is

] which is

measured in volts straight out of the DMM, but can be converting into inches of water. Then the flow
rate and change in pressure can be calculated and compared to the calculated value we predicted
earlier. This is shown in the results section.
17

Procedure Experiment 2
The set up for experiment 2 had 3 tubes connected to three different valves. A butterfly, globe
and gate valve were the three that were connected to the end of the tubes. These tubes were
connected to the flow exit portion of the test section on the FLL. This was designed in such a way that
the unrestricted flow should be even across all three tubes.
In this experiment we will be looking to obtain the loss coefficient for each of the valves, Kgate,
Kglobe, Kbutterfly, as a function of the valve opening angle. 8 increments of valve opening will be obtained in
this experiment. For each valve the increment will be different. This means that in the case of the gate
valve each step will be 1 turns. In the case of the globe valve each step will be of a turn. Last the
butterfly valve step will be as marked on the top of the valve.
This experiment, unlike most others, will be done with the door to the FLL room open. This will
enable the pressure in the room to be atmospheric pressure. The FLL can be turned on and all of the
valves should be adjusted to be fully open. One valve should be chosen to perform the first data
collection. LabView is the program that is used to collect the data from the pressure taps. There are a
few preliminary set ups that need to be done in the LabView program before recording data. The first is
that the channel 0 and channel 1 must be set to Y=A0*E and Y=A1*E respectively. The A0 value is
exactly what the DMM reads out for

and should be inputted for both channel 0 and channel

1.
With the FLL on, door open, and all the valves open the pressure tap for the valve that will be
studied first should be connected. One person should be controlling the computer and inputting the
step number as another person changes the opening of the valve based on the earlier specified amount.

18

This should be done two more times for the other two valves that are left. LabView outputs a plot that
can be seen in the results section.
Considering each of the valve openings individually the pressure drop
the pressure differential

and

]. With these values the average velocity for each of the

valves can be computed using the following equation.

Equation 23:
Additionally the loss coefficient K can be computed using the following equation. This should be
done for all three valves.

Equation 24:

Procedure Experiment 3
Experiment 3 will again use the FLL system. The setup for this experiment will have the inlet
flow of the FLL connected to 1 tube that extends into the test section area. Using individual
components a self-made plumbing system will be made by connecting several different pieces together
to form a full system. This will be done for 4 different configurations. An important note is that one of
the configurations must be out of the elevation plane of the tube. In other words an angle piece must
be used to give the plumbing system z axis height.

19

This experiment will be performed with the door to the FLL room open in order to have
atmospheric pressure throughout the room. This will make calculations easier. The diameter of the
pipe that is connected to the FLL inlet should be recorded as well as the overall length. For each
configuration the pressure drop across the system,

, must be determined in order to

calculate the velocity, V, and flow rate, Q, through the system. Finally the piping systems overall losses
can be calculated. The following equations can be used to calculate these values. The values will be
read off of two DMM units that are connected to respective pressure taps. It is important to record the
mp value of the DMM in order to convert the pressure in volts from the transducer to inches of water
which will be more useful for calculations later on.

Equation 25:

Equation 26:
A sketch of each configuration should be shown and the trend based on configurations should
be inferred from the results. The gravitational influence will also be calculated in the results section.

Results and Discussion

Results Experiment 1
The results of experiment 1 revolve around a stack opening diameter of 3.5 inches. The
predicted values of the operating point will be presented first followed by the measured values.

20

System load Curve Slit-Jet

Jet Width W (in)

Jet Span L (in)

Jet Area AJ (ft^2)

Discharge Coefficient [Cd]j

0.75

43.5

0.22656

0.61

26.177

System load Curve Stack

Stack Diameter D (in)

Stack Shape

Stack Area A s (ft^2)

Discharge Coefficient [Cd]s

0.75

Cylindrical

0.06681

0.61

26.177

Table 1: The results for experiment 1.

The combined system loading curve can then be found using equation 14 That value turns out
to be parallel= 15.5767 1/ft4. The system load curve which is described by the following equation can be
plotted against the characteristic curve also shown below. The predicted operating point pressure which
was found by setting the system load curve equal to the characteristic load curve was found to be 4.70536
inches of water. The predicted flow rate was easily found using the flow relation Q=VA to be 16.83 cubic
feet per second.

Equation 27:

21

Characteristic Curve vs. System Load Curve

Pressure Rise Ppl-Patm (Inches Water)

5.00E+00

4.00E+00

3.00E+00
Characteristic Curve

2.00E+00

System Load
1.00E+00

0.00E+00
0

200

-1.00E+00

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Flow Rate Q (CFM)

Figure 8: Shows the characteristic curve superimposed on the combined load curve.
The experimental measurement of the operating point used the same procedure outlined in the
conservation of mass lab.
Plenum
Measured Volume Flow Rate Q
Patm-Pi (in H20)

Inlet Discharge Coefficient Cd

Pressure (In
(CFS)
H20

1.4717

0.955376

7.616

2.0914

Table 2: Shows the results form experiment 1.

Using a standard percent difference calculation the percent difference between the measured
pressure differential and the predicted pressure differential can be obtained. Additionally the same can
be done for the predicted flow and the measured flow. The predicted flow and measured flow had a
large difference in the values. While energy was still conserved it would appear that there were either
significant losses or that there was an error in measurement.
22

Pressure Percent Difference

Flow percent Difference

4.6%

129%

Table 3: The percent differential.

Last in the results for experiment one the characteristic curve graph that was seen earlier was
used to show the system load curve for the gate valve. This is assuming the gate valve is superimposed
into the PFS with only one flow exit. The Gate valves system load curve was taken at all 8 increments
and plotted below.

Pressure Rise Ppl-Patm (inches of

Water)

Gate Valve Load Curve At Individual Openings

5.00

Characteristic Curve

4.00

Gate 0

3.00

Gate 1/8

2.00

Gate 1/4

1.00

Gate 3/8
Gate 1/2

0.00
0

500

1000

1500

Flow Rate Q (CFM)

Gate 5/8
Gate 3/4

Figure 9: The Gate Valve Load Curve and Individual Openings

23

Flow Rate as a Function of Gate Opening in Terms of Area and

Steps
1.2000

1.0000

Flow rate CFM

0.8000
Gate Opening in Steps

0.6000

Gate Opening in Area

Linear (Gate Opening in Steps)

0.4000

Linear (Gate Opening in Area)

0.2000
y = -0.97x + 0.9978

y = -0.3088x + 0.9978
R = 0.9964

0.0000
0

1/2

1 1/2

2 1/2

Area ft^2/ Valve opening in steps

Figure 10: The flow rate out as a function of gate valve opening.

Results Experiment 2
In experiment two the diameter of the pipe was measured to be 2 inches and the area of the
pipe was calculated to be 0.021817 square feet. Then for each of the valve openings the two pressure
readings were recorded and the velocity, flow rate, and K value at each point could be calculated. The
results are show below.

24

Gate Valve Opening

Gate Opening

1/8

1/4

3/8

1/2

5/8

3/4

7/8

0.12

0.247

0.402

0.565

0.697

0.818

0.907

0.965

[pi-prec] (psf)

0.624

1.2844

2.0904

2.938

3.6244

4.2536

4.7164

5.018

[ppl-pi] (in. H2O)

0.698

0.585

0.453

0.314

0.208

0.115

0.051

0.014

3.6296

3.042

2.3556

1.6328

1.0816

0.598

0.2652

0.0728

44.21

40.48

35.62

29.66

24.14

17.95

11.95

6.26

Q (ft^3/s)

0.9646

0.8831

0.7771

0.6470

0.5266

0.3915

0.2607

0.1366

K gate

0.2741

0.6732

1.4149

2.8689

5.3427

11.3409

28.3551

109.8989

[pi-prec] (in.H2O)

[ppl-pi] (psf)
V (ft/s)

Table 4: The results for the gate valve.

Globe Valve Opening
Globe Opening
[pi-prec] (in.H2O)
[pi-prec] (psf)
[ppl-pi] (in. H2O)
[ppl-pi] (psf)

1/8

3/8

5/8

7/8

0.711

0.729

0.746

0.76

0.782

0.837

0.868

0.891

3.6972

3.7908

3.8792

3.952

4.0664

4.3524

4.5136

4.6332

0.131

0.119

0.108

0.096

0.08

0.041

0.022

0.01

0.6812

0.6188

0.5616

0.4992

0.416

0.2132

0.1144

0.052

V (ft/s)

19.15449 18.25612 17.39189 16.39723 14.96856 10.71586 7.849578 5.292184

Q (ft^3/s)

0.417886 0.398287 0.379432 0.357732 0.326563 0.233784 0.171251 0.115458

K gate

8.653509

9.7673 11.01309 12.62224 15.58514 32.54884 62.90584 142.0599

Table 5: The results for the globe valve.

25

Butterfly Valve Opening

ButterFly Opening

1/8

1/4

3/8

1/2

5/8

3/4

7/8

[pi-prec] (in.H2O)

0.929

0.926

0.914

0.911

0.979

1.092

1.17

1.206

4.8308

4.8152

4.7528

4.7372

5.0908

5.6784

6.084

6.2712

0.204

0.205

0.212

0.213

0.16

0.078

0.03

0.011

1.0608

1.066

1.1024

1.1076

0.832

0.4056

0.156

0.0572

23.90287 23.96138 24.36705 24.42445 21.16874 14.78027 9.166332

5.55049

[pi-prec] (psf)
[ppl-pi] (in. H2O)
[ppl-pi] (psf)
V (ft/s)
Q (ft^3/s)
K gate

0.52148 0.522756 0.531606 0.532859

0.46183 0.322455 0.199978 0.121093

7.260717 7.201966 6.873917 6.819189

9.75566 22.32143 62.18112 174.8029

Table 6: The results for the butterfly valve.

From the tables above one can rank the order of the lowest pressure drop while the valves are
fully open. From lowest pressure drop to highest pressure drop the order is the gate valve, butterfly
valve, and the globe valve. This is consistent with the internal geometry of the valve as the gate valve
when fully open is far clear of the fluid flow. Whereas the globe valve still has a significant amount of
surface area that causes a higher pressure differential over the other valves. Additionally as the value
increases the K values also increases. This is somewhat apparent upon thinking about the mechanics of
the system along with a good understanding of the definition of the K value. As the valve closes there is
more geometry that impedes the flow of fluid which causes the K value to go up by its definition. If one
does not understand the definition of the K value it can be proven mathematically as well.
In the experiment the fully closed position was not measured but one could use pattern
recognition and understanding of the concept to determine what it would be with the valve fully closed.
With the valve fully closed no fluid will flow through the valve therefore rendering the K value to be

26

infinite. This can also be proven mathematically using the following equation:

As the velocity

approaches zero in the equation above K approaches infinity.

The following plot shows the opening angle of each of the valves vs the respective K values for
each of the valves. Each valve type shows a similar loss coefficient at small openings up to open. For
much of that time the globe valve has a slightly higher K value than the butterfly or the gate valve. This
is most likely due to the irregular geometry in the globe valve versus the other valves geometry. At a
larger opening the data becomes a little more spread. The butterfly valve becomes the highest K value
toward the more open positions as the globe valves geometry starts get out of the way. The
butterflies geometry still has an obstruction down the middle to add to the K value.

Loss Coefficients vs Opening

200.0000
180.0000
Loss Coeffecient K

160.0000
140.0000
120.0000
100.0000

Gate Valve

80.0000

Globe Valve

60.0000

Butterfly Valve

40.0000
20.0000
0.0000
0

1/8

1/4

3/8

1/2

5/8

3/4

7/8

Valve Opening (step)

Figure 11: Shows the loss coefficients for the three valves at each opening.

27

Results Experiment 3
In experiment 4 several different pipe configurations were constructed using tubing of diameter
2 inches which yields an area of 0.0218 square feet. The figure below shows the 4 configurations
chosen.

Figure 12: The 4 different plumbing configurations.

Data was collected for each configuration and compiled in the table below. Each of the
configurations was analyzed independently. While in this experiment the number of elements in the
configuration as not varied one could imagine that as the number of elements increases the K value
would increase. This is because as there are more elements added there is more geometry that causes
losses.

28

configuration
1
2
3
[patm-ps] (volts)
7.31
7.24
7.24
[patm-ps] (in. H2O) 4.149156 4.109424 4.109424
[patm-ps] (psf)
21.57561 21.369
21.369
[pT-ps] (volts)
4.2
4.05
4.85
[pT-ps] (in. H2O)
2.38392 2.29878 2.75286
[pT-ps] (psf)
12.39638 11.95366 14.31487
V (ft/s)
103.1758 101.3166 110.8725
Q (ft^3/s)
2.250946 2.210385 2.418864
K
1.740476 1.787654 1.492784
Table 7: The results from experiment 2.

4
7.26
4.120776
21.42804
3.21
1.821996
9.474379
90.19981
1.967855
2.261682

In most calculations the gravitational constant is ignored especially when the experiment is
being conducted with a fluid that is quite light like air. The gravitational constant contribution the
pressure differential across a system can be given by the following equation:

The

term of the equation gives the height differential between the input and output. The height differential
in this experiment for set up number two was 0.75 ft. This made the pressure differential due to gravity
about 0.108 inches of water. In this experiment it can be seen that by including the gravitational
pressure differential was quite trivial and made a very little impact on the solution. Therefore unless the
height of the structure was much higher the gravitational portion can be ignored in calculations.

29

Conclusions
After examining the results for the experiments the conservation of energy principles that were
introduced in the introduction were analyzed, measured, and confirmed. A characteristic load curve
was be examined in detail in addition to a system load curve that determined the operation point.
Pressure drops across valves and tubes were examined in detail to look at the losses associated with
these flows. Three separate experiment were done with the brief following results.
Each of the experiments was approached with an experimental mind set but also a predictive,
mathematical mindset that will challenge the experimental results. Prior to the first experiment the
operating point will be predicted using the parallel combined system model. This will be compared with
the measured operation point found in the first experiment using the pressurized flow system. The
predicted operation point and the measuring point calculated out to be within 5% of each other giving a
high confidence in the accuracy of the experiment. The flow rate measured versus predicted values
came out much worse. This was most likely due to an error in collecting data.
In the second experiment the FLL unit was used in conjunction with several DMM units to
measure the pressure drop across 3 given valves. Those valves are the gate valve, globe valve, and
butterfly valve. Each valve has a unique internal geometry that caused losses. The valve that causes the
lowest pressure differential is the gate valve due the non-intrusive nature of the gate mechanism.
Following the gate valve was the butterfly and globe valve in that order. The valve that caused the most
losses was the globe valve.
In the last experiment the loss values were calculated for a plumbing structure made up of
individual components that all added to the K value. The effects of gravity were also examined and
found to be negligible for plumbing structures with a delta z that is not extremely large. This is due to
the density of air being extremely light in comparison to most fluids.
30

Appendix
See attached output plots from labview.

31

References
Koochesfahani, Manochehr M. Laboratory Session #8 Conservation of Energy. Fluid Mechanics
Laboratory: Handouts Fall 2014. 2006. Print
Potter, M.C. and Foss, J.F. Fluid Mechanics, Great Lakes Press, 1982, Chapter 2.
White, F.M. Fluid Mechanics, McGraw-Hill, 1994,Chapter 3.

32