Confidence in Fluid
Origins of
System Design
This blog series will cover the
historical context which led to the
creation of Internal Flow Systems.
Encompassing both the motives and
the methods behind the book, the
series will inevitably raise questions
about the reliability of many of the
other available sources of available
data. I also hope to make it clear
that this isn’t a subject of academic
interest alone; the subject of loss
coefficients and system design
will prove to be a critical one as
global pressure mounts for energy
consumption to be reduced.
Part 3
www.mentor.com
Internal Flow
Systems
Don Miller
If we transport back to 1950s, we
would find ourselves at the brink of a
substantial shift in the world’s energy
needs. The current power station units
simply weren’t large enough, and to
meet the population’s need for power,
new designs were delivering ever
increasing unit sizes. This continued
until the mid-60s when the sizes
stabilized but at nearly ten times the
1950s designs.
Cooling water pipes and culverts to
and from the condensers of 660 MW
generating sets are over 2 m in hydraulic
diameter and the connections are built
into a power station’s foundations. Space
is limited and components such as
bends are closely spaced causing flows
to be highly 3D. Construction is largely
in reinforced concrete with shuttering
against which concrete is cast allowing
for flow passage designs that would be
prohibitively expensive to make in steel -
provided of course that one knows what
the shape should be.
Funding to establish 3D loss
coefficients
At the time of rapid growth in generating
set size the British Hydromechanics
Research Association (BHRA) had built
up a reputation for modelling large fluid
systems using air as the working fluid. Air
models construction allowed for rapid
modification of flow passage shapes
and for studying flow behaviour. Using
air models of cooling water systems
BHRA demonstrated that pump power
requirements could be reduced by a
third by improved design practices. For
a 660 MW generating unit the saving in
pump power was over 1 MW. Significant
improvements were also possible in other
power station fluid systems involving
fans/blowers as well pumps.
At the time of the sustained growth
in power station size the generation
and distribution of electricity in many
countries was still effectively state
monopolies. For England and Wales
the Central Electrical Generating Board
(CEGB) in the UK, was responsible for the
design, construction and operation of
power stations. With the size of the new
power station building programme the
CEGB engineering department was in
a position to fund large scale research
studies that today would unlikely to
be considered. One of these studies
was awarded to BHRA to extend their
experimental modelling work on cooling
water systems to provide a guide for the
design of large fluid systems.
The study commissioned by the CEGB
was continued by funding from industrial
companies and the UK Department
of Industry culminating in a study for
the Compressor Committee of the
American Gas Association related to
compressor yard piping. The later
study was particularly interesting as
gas compression in the US and Canada
was consuming an estimated 1 billion
US dollars per year by the end of the
1970s. 10% of energy added at some
compressor stations was being dissipated
within the compressor yard piping.
The CEGB had its own extensive research
laboratories that it could have used
and the Compressor Committee of the
American Gas Association had the choice
of laboratories. In today’s terminology
you could say they both exercised due
diligence in funding BHRA group.
Transition from the analogue to the
digital age
In the 1960s the changeover from
analogue to digital methods began to
take off in engineering; out with the
slide rule and nomographs and in with
main frame computers and software.
Computers had a dramatic effect on
aeronautical research which, in the pre
CFD age, relied almost exclusively on
wind tunnel tests involving extensive
static pressure measurements. By linking
electronic pressure scanning systems and
computers the collection of wind tunnel
pressure data was revolutionised.
BHRA was able to use the pressure
scanning technology developed for
aeronautical research to both improve
and speed up the process of measuring
static pressures when testing fluid system
components. Computer analysis of
pressure measurements provided rapid
feedback on fluid system component
pressure losses. Any unusual results
could then be investigated using
measurements of flow velocities
and turbulence levels and by flow
visualisation studies.
With computer analysis of static
pressures the pressure gradients along
a component’s inlet and outlet pipes or
ducts could be established, allowing a
direct measurement of a component
loss coefficient. This replaced the
method used by most experimenters
of measuring the pressure difference
between a location upstream and a
location downstream of a component
and subtracting a calculated pipe friction
pressure loss equivalent to the straight
pipe length between the upstream and
downstream measuring points. Many
of the loss coefficients in the literature
were gathered using water flows in pipes
in various stages of corrosion and in
which friction losses were likely to have
been changing with time so that friction
loss values used in determining loss
coefficients were unreliable.

Don Miller
After 10 years service in the RAF as an
apprentice and engine technician, Don
Miller joined the celebrated British aero-
engine company Bristol-Siddelely to
work on defect investigation. Following
his Master’s degree in Aeronautical
Engineering at Cranfield University, Don
went on to join the British Hydrodynamic
Research Association (BHRA, now BHR
Group) in 1965.
While at BHRA, he was involved in
a number of research programmes
focussing on fluid system performance,
cavitation and pressure surge. Don rose
within the organisation to become Head
of the Industrial Fluid Mechanics group
before taking up the post as Research
Director.
Don Miller is the author of Internal Flow
Systems, the de facto standard source for
fluid system pressure loss data.

www.mentor.com