Calculating pressure required to flow at desired rate through pipe

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the pressure required for a specific flow rate through a pipe with varying diameters, Bernoulli's equation can be applied, but it does not account for friction losses. The user is attempting to pump 3-4 bbl/min through a 1/4" pipe, which raises concerns about achieving such flow rates given the size constraints. Friction loss in the larger 1-1/2" pipe over a long distance will significantly impact the total pressure needed, while the friction in the short 1/4" section can be considered negligible. The Darcy-Weisbach equation is recommended for a more accurate assessment of pressure drop due to friction. Overall, achieving over 100 GPM through a 1/4" pipe is flagged as unrealistic, suggesting a need for reevaluation of the flow requirements.
MightyG
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I have a problem which I am working on and its been a while since I did this at uni so I am after a little guidance :)

Im trying to work out what pressure will be required to flow at a specific rate through a piece of pipe, the pipe begins with an ID of approximately 1-1/2" then drops to around 1/4" and I am hoping to pump at around 3-4bbl/min through the 1/4" pipe. (126-168Gal/min)

I was thinking of using bernoulis equation and working out the pressure and velocity in the 1/4" pipe then use that work work out the pressure and velocity in the 1-1/2" pipe at the opening of the 1/4"

from this I can then add on the friction loss through the 1-1/2" to get the total pump pressure to pump through the entire length? (I am ignoring the friction loss through the 1/4" as I assume it will be negligible, its only going to be approximately 6-ft compared to approximately 2000-ft of the 1-1/2")

Am I thinking along the right tracks with this or is there another, better way to work this out?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If I am correct in this line of thought then can I say the pressure of the end of the 1/4" pipe will be the same pressure as the area it is pumping into?

In this instance the 1/4" tubing will be pumping into an area which is pressurised up to 11Kpsi, can I use this as the pressure for one half of the Bernoulli equation and us it to work back to the pressure in the 1-1/2"?
 
Bernoulli's equation assumes the pipe does no work against the flow. In real life, friction with the walls of the pipe and viscosity of the fluid reduces pressure of a flowing fluid as the fluid flows down the pipe. The longer the distance, the more reduction there is in pressure, assuming pipe diameter doesn't change. Turbulence at transition points in pipe diameter is also going to affect the pressure. Flow will remain constant throughout the pipe (other than initial start up).
 
As mentioned, Bernoulli's isn't going to provide the irreversible pressure loss through the pipe. Generally, the Darcy Weisbach equation is used to determine this pressure drop. The attachment on https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=179830" goes through pipe pressure drop analysis.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apriori calculating the thing is probably nigh impossible since you need to know all the friction and elevation change components. As a fire-person I'm interested in results so I looked up these tables for you:
http://www.elkhartbrass.com/files/aa/downloads/catalog/catalog-e-T.pdf
Page 8 has a nice table "DISCHARGE OF SMOOTH BORE NOZZLES/TIPS"...

The red flag was wanting to get >100gpm from a 1/4" pipe -- if it was 3/4" I'd say fine, go for it -- of course the above referenced tables are for hoses with nozzles that may restrict the flow a bit, but 'smooth bore' is pretty much exactly what it says.
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top