Pipe flow theory

Overview
Introduction
Pipe friction theories
head loss
friction factor
Pipe friction in networks

Local head losses

Re-cap

Hydraulic Head
Head relates the energy in an incompressible fluid
to the height of an equivalent static column of that
fluid
The total energy at a given point in a fluid:
energy associated with the movement of the fluid
energy from pressure in the fluid
energy from the height of the fluid
Head is expressed in units of height such as
meters or feet. It is usually measured as a water
surface elevation, expressed in units of length.
3

Introduction
When designing pipelines, engineers are primarily
concerned with the head losses caused by:
friction
- due to viscosity
local head losses
- due to concentrated losses that occur due to
eddies that form at abrupt changes in section
e.g. at valves and sharp bends

Introduction
qualitative overview of pipe flow
Recall the Reynolds experiments, which
identified 3 types of flow
laminar (low vel.)

- smooth dye flow

transitional (medium vel.)

- wavy dye flow

turbulent (high vel.)
- random dye flow
- dye mixes with water
5

Introduction
qualitative overview of pipe flow
Results of Reynolds experiments explained
simply by considering what happens when
parallel streamlines diverge due to a small
disturbance
The small disturbance brings streamlines:
closer together at A

further apart at B
VA, pA and VB, pB
pB > pA

A
B

Introduction
qualitative overview of pipe flow
Pressure difference

transverse force B to A

this transverse force is opposed by an equal

transverse viscous force

if fluid is moving slowly viscous force is

sufficient to cause the disturbance to die out
if fluid is moving faster, viscous force is not
sufficient to cause the disturbance to die out
flow pattern may disintegrate into disorderly
pattern of eddies
A
B

stable

transition

unstable

Development of pipe friction theories

Date

Researcher

Contribution

1841

Hagen and Poiseuille

Equation for head loss in laminar flow

1850

Darcy and Weisbach

Equation for head loss in turbulent flow

1913

Blasius

Friction factor equation for smooth pipes

1930

Nikuradse

Friction factor experimental data for artificially

rough pipes

1930s

Prandtl and Karman

Friction factor equation for rough and smooth

pipes

1937 39 Colebrook and White

Friction factor experimental data and equation

1944

Moody

Friction factor data (Moody diagram)

1958

Ackers

Friction factor data (HRS charts and tables)

1975

Barr

Friction factor equation (explicit solution of

C-W equation)

Pipe friction theories

head loss: Hagen and Poiseulle
Experimental work confirmed the equation for
friction loss (hf) in laminar flow (Re < 2000)
32 LV
hf
gD 2
D = pipe diameter
L = pipe length
V = mean flow velocity
= coefficient of dynamic viscosity

Can be derived from momentum equation and

Newtons law of viscosity
9

Pipe friction theories

head loss: Hagen and Poiseulle
Note that equation:
32 LV
hf
2
gD
does not contain a term for pipe roughness
confirms that roughness has no effect in
laminar flow
indicates that head loss is proportional to ?
L, V,1/D

10

Pipe friction theories

head loss: Darcy and Weisbach
Equation for head loss in a turbulent flow:

LV 2
2gD

hf

= friction factor
Be careful as this equation is often written as:
hf

4f =

4fLV 2
2gD

= friction factor

Can be derived from momentum equation

11

Pipe friction theories

head loss: Darcy and Weisbach
Note that equation:

hf

LV 2
2gD

does contain a term for pipe roughness

confirms that roughness has an effect in
turbulent flow
indicates that head loss is proportional to ?
L, V, 1
D

Initially thought that was constant

later proved to be wrong
12

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Blasius
Experimental work led to equation for friction
factor in smooth pipes:
0.316
Re
1
4

Applicable up to Re = 100,000

Underestimates

at high Re

highlighted the need to differentiate

between smooth and rough pipes

13

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Nikuradse
Experimental work with pipes of different
heights of wall roughness (ks)
roughness varied by sticking different
diameters of sand grain to pipe walls
related friction factor to Re and relative
roughness (ks/D)

identified five regions of flow for both

smooth and rough pipes

ks

pipe wall

14

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Nikuradse: region 1: laminar flow
Friction factor depends on Re only (< 2000)
one line
Equating Hagen-Poiseuille and Darcy-Weisbach
hf

32 LV
gD

LV 2
2gD

64
DV

64
Re

15

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Nikuradse: region 2: laminar to turbulent
Transition between laminar and turbulent flow
Can be unstable and ill defined
Typically when: 2000 < Re < 4000

16

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Nikuradse: region 3: smooth turbulent
Turbulent flow in hydraulically smooth pipes
smooth turbulent flow
i.e. roughness lies within boundary layer
Typically when: 2000 < Re < 4000

17

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Nikuradse: region 4: transitional turbulent

Transition: smooth turbulent

fully turbulent

transitional turbulent flow

i.e. roughness just penetrates boundary layer
Friction factor depends on both Re and ks/D

18

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Nikuradse: region 5: rough turbulent
Fully turbulent flow in hydraulically rough pipes
rough turbulent flow
i.e. roughness fully penetrates boundary layer
Friction factor depends only on ks/D

19

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Prandtl and Karman
Combined theories of turbulent boundary layer
flows with experimental results
semi-empirical equations

smooth pipes :
rough pipes :

Re
2 log
2.51
3.7D
2 log
ks

note that rough equation does not have V or

Re term, as depends only on ks
20

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Colebrook and White
Experimental investigation of commercial pipes,
rather than artificially roughened smooth pipes
real pipes have non-uniform roughness size
and spacing
Discovered that - Re curves changed gradually
from smooth to rough turbulence in the turbulent
transition region
Nikuradse diagram
showed tendency
to droop in the
middle
21

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Colebrook and White
Also determined effective ks values for wide range
of commercial pipe diameters and materials
4 to 61

drawn brass to concrete lined pipes

Material

ks (mm)

brass, copper, glass

0.003

wrought iron

0.06

galvanised iron

0.15

asbestos cement

0.03

plastic

0.03

bitumen-lined ductile iron

0.03

spun-concrete lined iron

0.03

slimed concrete sewer

6.0
22

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Colebrook and White
Also combined the Karman-Prandtl equations to
give an equation which fitted:
smooth region

transition region
rough region
This yielded the famous Colebrook-White
equation

ks
2.51
= -2 log
+
3.7D Re

from Prandtl and Karman

smooth pipe equation

from Prandtl and Karman rough pipe equation

23

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Moody
As Colebrook-White equation is implicit ( on
both sides), it was not used until a graphical
version was developed

Moody diagram

24

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Moody
64
Re

laminar critical transitional

zone zone zone

rough
turbulent zone

Recrit
rough pipes

smooth
pipes

0.316
1

Re 4

25

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Moody
Moody also proposed an explicit version of the
Colebrook-White equation

0.0055 1
correct to

20000ks
D

106
Re

1
3

5% for: 4 x 103 < Re < 1 x 107

ks/D < 0.01

26

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Ackers: HRS Charts
Charts combining the Colebrook-White and DarcyWeisbach equations
Developed by the Hydraulics Research Station
Based on equation

ks
2.51
- 2 2gDSf log
+
3.7D
D 2gDSf
kinematic viscosity

Sf

hydraulic gradient

hf
L
27

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Ackers: HRS Charts
ks = 0.03mm
Good samples of:
wrought iron
coated steel
clayware (sleeve joint)
sewer (V = 2m/s)
Normal samples of:
asbestos cement
spun bitumen lined metal
pipes
spun concrete lined metal
pipes
uncoated steel
clayware (spigot and
socket joint)
uPVC with chemically
cemented joints

e.g. given: D and S

V and Q

28

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Ackers: HRS Charts
ks = 0.15mm
Good samples of:
rusty wrought iron
uncoated cast iron
sewer (V = 1m/s)
Normal samples of:
galvanised iron
coated cast iron
precast concrete
(O ring joints)
uPVC (sewer slimed to
about half depth)
sewer (V = 1.5m/s)
Poor samples of:
wrought iron
coated steel
clayware (sleeve joints)
sewer (V = 2m/s)

29

Pipe friction theories

friction factor: Barr
Proposed an explicit version of the ColebrookWhite equation
1
= - 2 log

ks
5.1286
+
0 .89
3.7D
Re

accurate to 1% for Re > 105

30

Pipe friction theories

applicability
Head loss
Equation

Laminar

Hagen Poiseuille

yes

Darcy Weisbach

yes
if

Friction factor

hf

Equation

LV 2
2gD 2

Smooth
turbulent

Transitional
turbulent

Rough
turbulent

yes

yes

yes

Transitional
turbulent

Rough
turbulent

64
Re

hf

Laminar

32 LV
gD 2

Smooth
turbulent

Blasius

yes

Prandtl and Karman

yes (smooth)

Colebrook White

yes

yes (rough)
yes

yes

Ackers (HRS charts)

yes

yes

Barr

yes

yes

yes

yes

Moody

yes

yes

31

Recap
Losses in pipes caused by
friction
local head losses
Pipe friction theories
large number of different pipe friction theories

most theories have limited application

Colebrook-White is widely applicable
Moody diagram widely applicable &easy to use

Head loss theories

Darcy-Weisbach equation is generally applicable

32

Pipe friction theories

example 1
A pipeline 10km long, 300mm in diameter and
with roughness size 0.03mm conveys water
from a reservoir (top water level 850m above
datum) to a water treatment plant (inlet level
700m above datum).
Assuming the reservoir remains full and
kinematic viscosity is 1.13 x 10-6m2/s, estimate
the discharge, using:
a.Colebrook-White/Darcy-Weisbach

b.Moody diagram
c. HRS charts
33

Pipe friction theories

solution 1: part a: Colebrook White
Combining the Colebrook-White equation with
the Darcy-Weisbach equation gives HRS eqn.
V

ks
2.51
- 2 2gDSf log
+
3.7D
D 2gDSf

Sf

hydraulic gradient

850 700
0.015
10000
0.03 10 3
2.51 1.13 10 6
- 2 2g 0.3 0.015 log
+
3.7 0.3
0.3 2g 0.3 0.015

V
V

hf
L

2.515m/s

Q VA

2.515

0 .3 2
4

0.178m3 /s

34

Pipe friction theories

solution 1: part b: Moody diagram
Steps required:
1. calculate ks/D
2. guess a value for V (try V = 2.75m/s)
3. calculate Re
4. estimate

from the Moody diagram

5. calculate hf
6. compare hf with the available head
7. if H

hf then repeat from step 2

35

Pipe friction theories

solution 1: part b: Moody diagram
ks 0.03 10 3
1.
0.0001
D
0 .3
2. Assume V 2.75m/s
0.3 2.75
5
3. Re
7
.
30
10
1.13 10 6
4. Moody diagram gives :
0.014
DV

5. hf
6. H

LV 2 0.014 100000 2.752

2gD
2g 0.3
850 700 150m 179.9m

179.9m

7. Decrease V, and repeat from step 5

( will not change significan tly, V 2.51m/s)
36

Pipe friction theories

solution 1: part c: HRS charts
Q = 180l/s

100s = 100

0.015 = 1.5

D = 0.3m
37

Pipe friction theories

example 2
The known outflow from a branch of a
distribution system is 30 l/s.
The pipe diameter is 150mm, length 500m and
roughness coefficient 0.15mm.
Find the head loss in the pipe, using the HRS
charts and the explicit formulae of Barr.

38

Pipe friction theories

solution 2: part a: HRS charts
Q = 30l/s

100S
hf

L*S

0.02
500 * 0.02 10m

D = 0.15m
39

Pipe friction theories

solution 2: part b: Barr equation
1

= -2 log
Q
A
V
Re
1

ks
5.1286
+
3.7D Re 0.89

0.03m3 /s
D2
0.152
0.0177m2
4
4
Q
0.03
1.7m/s
A 0.0177
VD 1.7 0.15
5
2
.
26
10
1.13 10 6
0.15 10-3
5.1286
= -2 log
+
3.7 0.15 2.26 105 0.89
0.02128

hf

10.45m
40

Pipe friction theories

example 3
What is the head loss due to friction when crude
oil at 20 C flows at the rate 1.2 l/s along 100m
of 50mm diameter smooth pipe

The density of crude oil at 20 C is 860kg/m3

and = 0.008 Pas)
Use the Moody diagram

41

Pipe friction theories

solution 3
First determine the type of flow

VD

Re
V

Re

Q
A

0.012
0.052
4

0.612m/s

0.612 0.05
0.008

3290

42

Pipe friction theories

solution 3
The Moody diagram shows that this is in the
critical regime between laminar flow and
transitional turbulence

can not be certain about value of

All we can say is that: 0.03 <
If
If

0.03 :
0.045 :

< 0.045

hf

LV 2
2gD

0.03 100 0.612

1.15m
2g 0.05

hf

LV 2
2gD

0.045 100 0.612

1.72m
2g 0.05

43

Pipe friction in networks

Hazen-Williams equation
The Colebrook-White formula and HRS charts
are only appropriate for the design of single
pipes

not suitable to the analysis of pipe networks

unless a computer program is available
The Hazen-Williams equation is one of the most
frequently used empirical equations
V
Q

0.355CD

0 .63

0.278CD

2.63

hf
L
hf
L

0 .54

0.54

6.78 L V
hf = 1.165
D
C
10.7 L Q
hf =
D 4.77 C

1.85

1.85

44

Pipe friction in networks

Hazen-Williams equation
Coefficient C depends on ?
pipe diameter
pipe material
pipe age
C values are taken from
rough-turbulence zone of
Moody diagram
roughness coefficients
assumed to be
independent of Re
approximation

Pipe

Extremely smooth
pipes
New steel or cast
iron
Wood, average
concrete
Clay, new riveted
steel
Brick, old cast iron

140

Old riveted steel

95

Badly corroded cast

iron
Very badly corroded
iron or steel

80

130

120
110
100

60
45

Local head losses

In addition to friction losses head losses also
occur locally at:
bends

valves
junctions
orifice plates
enlargements
tapers, etc
Often referred to as minor losses but may be
substantial
46

Local head losses

Local losses usually expressed in terms of an
empirically determined coefficient kL in the
equation:
hL

V2
kL
2g

assumes that flow regime is rough-turbulent

independent of Re

47

Local head losses

sudden enlargement
As flow passes into enlarged section

V, P
turbulent eddies form at section 1*
local head loss

To analyse this situation, we need to consider the

change in conditions between 1* and 2
We have 3 equations

continuity equation 1 2

i.e. flow in = flow out

Q Q1 Q2 V1A1 V2 A2

1*

(eqn.1)
48

Local head losses

sudden enlargement
energy equation 1 2
i.e. energy at 1 = energy at 2 + losses
P1
g

V1
2g

P2
g

V2
2g

hL

hL

P1 P2
g

V1

V2
2g

(eqn. 2)

momentum equation 1* - 2
i.e. net force = momentum at 1* - momentum at 2
P1* A1*

P2 A2

Q V2 V1*

- as pressure change at 1* can not occur

instantaneously
1
assume: P1*

P1, V1*

1*

V1

- note that A1* = A2

P1A2

P2 A2

Q V2 V1

(eqn. 3)
49

Local head losses

sudden enlargement
Combining eqn. 1 and eqn. 3 eliminates Q
P1A2

P2 A2

P1A2

Q V2 V1

P2 A2

P1 P2

with

Q V2 A2

V2 A2 V2 V1
(eqn. 4)

V2 V2 V1

Combining eqn. 2 and eqn. 4

P1 P2
g

hL
hL

2
1

V2
2g

V2 V2 V1
g

V1

with
V2
2g

P1 P2

hL

V2 V2 V1

V1 V2
2g

50

Local head losses

sudden enlargement
From eqn. 1:

A1V1

A2V2

A1
V1
A2

V2

hL

V1 V2
2g

hL

V1
kL
2g

A1
1
A2

V1
2g

i.e. k L

A1
1
A2

for a sudden enlargemen t

51

Local head losses

sudden contraction
Assume:
head loss between 1 and 1* is negligible
flow expands from 1* to 2
- assume area of vena contracta (A1*) is
60% of downstream area (A2)
Use sudden enlargement approach
A1*
1
A2

hL

V1*
2g L

0.6 A2
1
A2

V2
0 .6
2g

1*

hL

i.e. kL

0.44V2
2g
0.44 for sudden contractio n
52

Local head losses

coefficients for common fittings
Fitting

kL

L/D

Entry

Fitting

kL

L/D

Bends

Sharp edged

0.50

22

Slightly rounded

0.25

Bell mouth
Foot valve and strainer (pump)

r/D = 0.5:

Fitting

kL

L/D

Valves
22.5

0.20

Gate valve : fully open

0.12

11

45

0.40

18

closed

1.00

45

0.05

90

1.00

45

closed

6.00

270

2.50

113

22.5

0.15

closed

24.00

1080

45

0.30

14

Globe valve

10.00

450

90

0.75

34

Butterfly valve

0.30

13

22.5

0.10

Exit

r/D

1:

Tapers
Contraction, large to small

negligible

Expansion, inlet to outlet: 4:5

0.03

3:4

0.04

45

0.20

Sudden enlargement

1.00

45

1:3

0.12

90

0.40

18

Bell mouth outlet

0.20

0.05

r/D = 2 - 7:

r/D = 8 - 50: 22.5

Tees
Flow in line

0.35

16

45

0.10

Line to branch or vice versa

(sharp edged)

1.20

54

90

0.20

Line to branch or vice versa

(radiused)

0.80

36

L
D

length of straight pipe to give equivalent loss of head

pipe diameter
53

Local head losses

example 4
A pipeline conveys water from a reservoir to a water
treatment plant. Assuming that the reservoir remains full,
estimate the discharge using the combined Colebrook-White
and Darcy-Weisbach equation.

pipeline data
- 10km long, 300mm diameter and roughness size
0.03mm
- 20 long radius bends (kL = 0.4), 2 1/4 closed gate
valves (kL = 1.0), bellmouth entrance (kL = 0.05),
sudden exit (kL = 1.0)
reservoir data
- top water level 850m above datum
water treatment plant data
- inlet level 700m above datum
54

Local head losses

solution 4
Total head loss (H) = elevation difference (res - wtp)
H = 150m
Also:
H hf

hL

V2
V2
hL
20 0.4
2 1.0 0.05 1.0
11.1
2g
2g
Use this equation with the combined D-W/C-W
equation to determine V and hf

ks
2.51
- 2 2gDSf log
+
3.7D
D 2gDSf
55

Local head losses

solution 4
Iterative process
steps:
1. assume hf = H (i.e. ignore hL)
2. calculate V (using D-W/C-W)
3. calculate hL (hL = 11.1 V2 /2g)
4. calculate hf2 = H- hL
5. If hf

hf2

hf = hf2

repeat from step 2

ks
2.51
- 2 2gDSf log
+
3.7D
D 2gDSf
56

Local head losses

solution 4

hf
Sf
V
hL
hf

150
hf
L

150
10 103

-2 2 gDS f log

0.015
ks
2.51
+
3.7 D
D 2 gDS f

2.514m/s

V2
11.1
3.53m
2g
150 3.53 146.47m 150m

Second iteration: Assume hf= 146.47mSf V

hf2=146.51m
57

Recap
Losses in pipes caused by
friction
local head losses
Pipe friction theories
large number of different pipe friction theories

most theories have limited application

Colebrook-White is widely applicable
Moody diagram is widely applicable AND easy to
use
58

Recap
Head loss theories
Darcy-Weisbach equation is generally applicable
to all types of flow

Pipe friction in networks

Hazen-Williams equation enables rapid
calculation of network wide conditions
Local head losses
concentrated losses occurring at pipe elements
expressed as some multiple of the flow velocity
head
59