Fluid Dynamics - increasing pressure

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a hobby project involving electronic solenoid valves that require 3 PSI to open, necessitating a water column height of approximately 7 feet for proper drainage. To reduce this height, one suggestion is to use a larger diameter pipe, but it's clarified that pressure is solely dependent on height, not pipe diameter. Alternative solutions include modifying the valve with a return spring or using a soft silicon pipe that can be squashed to manage flow. The concept of an eductor is introduced as a potential solution, utilizing high-pressure water to control the flow and maintain the necessary pressure without excessive height. Overall, the focus is on finding creative ways to manage water pressure and flow in a budget-friendly manner.
Scorp1us
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am working on hobby project with almost no budget.
I bought some "nice" (cheap & simple) electronic solenoid valves for water flow. I've since discovered that they need 3PSI to open. Which is ok for the supply lines. But the drain line requires that as well. Now I either need a column of water of 3x27.7" (about 7 ft) or soe other way. The valves have a 1/2" inlet, which I calculate to be .78 sqin. I'm not interested in the flow but I need a way to reduce the required height. I thought about putting a fat section of pipe to increase the water held above it.
A 6" PVC pipe has a area of 28", divide this by .78 = 36. Divide the 3PSI height (83") by 36 = 2.3" So a 6x2.3" canister should do it.

However, I know that pressure is not linear and weird things happen like velocity increases and pressure drops.

What can I do to get the height of the column of water down to less than 12" using my 1/2" valve and gravity?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I thought about putting a fat section of pipe to increase the water held above it.

That won't increase the pressure at all. The pressure depends only on the height not the diameter. The pressure experienced by a diver only depends on the depth not the area of the ocean/lake/pool he's diving in.

Is there some sort of return spring in the valve you could modify?
 
How much pressure is in the vessel feeding the output drain pipe? Suppose it was only 12" head of water... then the drain pipe would only need to be raised 12" to stop the flow... Perhaps you could arrange for the solenoid to allow high pressure water into another tank with a float that raises and lowers the drain pipe shutting off the flow. You might have an issue with syphoning but that's solvable.

or another approach..

Suppose the drain pipe was a soft silicon pipe that could be squashed. Perhaps you could arrange for the solenoid to squash the pipe by allowing high pressure water to flow into something resting on the pipe. If that "something" had a small hole in it then when the valve turned off the would flow out reducing the load on the silicon drain pipe allowing the pipe to open. Perhaps wasteful of water.

You need to hire Heath Robinson :-)
 
You also might want to check your calculation of the area of the 1/2" inlet.

Remember, the formula is A = pi * (D^2) / 4
 
An eductor?

http://www.amproduct.com/eductorPIC.jpg

The motive fluid is high Pressure water that you control using the solenoid. The educted fluid line comes from your drain.

Eductor is placed at a level higher than tank to prevent auto-draining. You'll need only a very low power eductor since all you are fighting is the low tank head.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top