Introduction

The name of the experiment conducted was Pipe Flow. The purpose of this experiment is to
observe the variation of head loss with velocity for the flow of water through a small diameter
pipe over a range of Reynolds numbers including both laminar and turbulent flow, and to
compare the variation of friction factor with Reynolds number with published results. This
experiment was conducted by groups of Engineering Students of San Diego State University in
room ALOT-107. It was conducted on October 13, 2015 at 10:00AM. This report was written by
David Blanco; with data obtained by Group B.

Theory
The purpose of this lab was to show how Reynolds Number (Re) changes with the velocity. If the
Reynolds number is above 2000, the flow is termed turbulent; while if the number is less than
2000, the flow is termed laminar. The head loss(energy lost to friction) is measured in the
experiment and is plotted against the velocity of the fluid. From these measurements we can find
the friction factor (f). From a Re vs. f on a Moody diagram, we can observe and calculate the
relative roughness of the pipe. When the flow is turbulent, the roughness will have an effect on
the energy of the fluid, while when the flow is laminar the roughness will not have an effect on
the flow. This is because of the boundary layer forming in the absence of turbulence.

These were the terms and equations used in this experiment:

Head Loss of an incompressible flow
h L=f

L v2
D 2g

Where,

f=

64

L = .524m (Length of tube)

D = .003m (Diameter of the tube)
v = Fluid Velocity
The Flow-Rate
Q=

V
t

Where,
V = Volume
t = Time
The Velocity:
v=

Q
A

A = Cross-Sectional Area of Tube

Reynolds Number:
=

vD

(30 ) = Kinematic Viscosity = 8.00E-07

m2
s

It is also to be noted that the densities are:

W =9795

N
m3

(Water) and M =13.6 W (Mercury)

Test Procedure and Equipment

Figure 1. Manometer

Figure 2. Volumentric Hydraulic Bench

The Manometer in Figure 1 is powered by the Hydraulic Bench shown in Figure 2. Before
beginning the experiment, the temperature of the water must be recorded. At the end of the
experiment the temperature must be recorded again. From these temperatures, record the density
and kinematic viscosity of the water. The group conducting the experiment must initially remove
all air bubbles from the instrument by tilting the manometer until air leaves the system. Through
this, the manometer is successfully zeroed out. In order to zero out the height of the fluid, adjust

the air valve until the height of the fluid in the second tube is at zero. The initial run has a height
of 50mm. Each run must be the previous height multiplied by 1.25. When the height of the water
is at the exceeding point, the mercury manometer height must be used. Once head loss reaches
about 180mm, multiply the height by 1.5. For each run the Volume flow is calculated by
measuring the volume in a beaker and also the time of each run.

Results and Discussion

The results from this lab are questionable. The reason is because on the f vs. Re Moody Diagram
graph, all points on the turbulent values are questionable. However, the points on the laminar
values seem to be accurate. For the laminar values we are able to see the roughness value. Yet
with the questionable results form the turbulent value, all values were below the lowest pipe
roughness. This implies that the roughness is 0 or that the pipe is perfectly smooth. However, we
know this is not the case here. This is where our sources of error come into play. These results
could be because of inaccuracy while measuring the height difference of the fluid. Another error
could result from the measurement of the volume flow because a new beaker was used.
For the head loss vs. velocity graph, our values were also questionable to a point. All the points
plotted were distant from the drawn slope, this lead to a significant scatter on the graph. The
recorded slope for the laminar values was about 0.44; compared to a theoretical value of 1.0 our
percentage error was about 55%. The recorded slope for the turbulent values was 1.52; compared
to a theoretical value of 2.0 our percentage error was about 24%. These errors are due to human
errors such as measurements of time and volume.
Though our results do not show it on the Moody Diagram, the objective was to show how there
is a linear relationship for laminar flow and a quadratic relationship for turbulent flow. On the

head loss vs. velocity graph, it is shown that it is linear because head loss is a function of
velocity. When taking the log graphs one can see the theoretical slopes.
Laminar:

log ( h L ) =log f

L v2
32 Lv
32 L
=log
=log ( v ) +log (
)
2
D 2g
D
D2

log ( h L ) =log ( v ) + log

) (

( 32 DL ) m=1
2

Turbulent:

L v2
L
log ( h L ) =log f
=2 log ( v )+ log ( f
)
D 2g
D2g

log ( h L ) =2 log ( v ) +log f

L
m=2
D2g