Calculate Reynolds Number for 0.3m Diameter Pipe Flow

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the Reynolds number for a 0.3m diameter pipe carrying water at 71 m/s. The calculated Reynolds number is approximately 27 million, indicating turbulent flow, which is typical for high velocities in large diameter pipes. Participants express concerns about potential errors in using the pipe diameter as the characteristic length and the accuracy of the flow speed derived from a height difference of 500m. One user corroborates the result with an online calculator, yielding a similar value of 23.9 million. The consensus suggests that the high Reynolds number confirms the flow is likely turbulent.
tomwilliam
Messages
141
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


Estimate a reynolds number for a pipe of 0.3m internal diameter, carrying water at a rate of 71 m/s, and say what that says about the likely nature of the flow.


Homework Equations


Re = (density x L x velocity of flow)/coefficient of dynamic viscosity for water
Viscosity of water = 8.9 x 10^-4 kg/m s
density of water = 1000 kg/m^3

The Attempt at a Solution



Well, I have produced a result of some 27 million, which seems excessive to me. Possible mistakes: I used the diameter of the pipe as L. Also, the flow speed is something I calculated in a previous question, so could potentially be wrong. The speed is just due to potential energy coming from a reservoir exactly 500m higher up, where pressure is atmospheric only.
Does anything sound wrong with this solution? I have no reference for typical reynolds numbers in these situations...
Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I got a similar result.
 
Thanks - In that case I'd better check that I've got the right flow speed for a height difference of 500m and a diameter of 0.3m.
 
I just used one of those on-line RN calculators--I got 23.9 million which is close, esp in the world of Reynolds numbers--certainly the answer to the next question will be the same.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top