How Does Air Flow Change with 90-Degree Fittings?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the effects of 90-degree fittings on air flow in a system, specifically in the context of a potato gun example. Participants explore the implications of changing air flow from linear to non-linear due to these fittings, focusing on frictional losses and flow characteristics. The conversation includes theoretical considerations and practical applications related to fluid dynamics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a scenario involving air flow through a pressurized source and multiple 90-degree fittings, seeking to understand the losses incurred due to these changes in flow direction.
  • Another participant questions the fluid dynamics background of the original poster, suggesting that bends and fittings contribute to frictional effects equivalent to longer straight tubes.
  • A participant emphasizes the complexity of modeling flow with bends, noting the introduction of vorticity and the need for 2-D flow modeling rather than maintaining 1-D assumptions.
  • There is a mention of using Navier-Stokes equations for accurate modeling, although it is acknowledged that this may be overly complex for the situation at hand.
  • One participant references established industry practices for simplifying the analysis of piping components into equivalent restrictions, while cautioning against overanalyzing the effects of vortices.
  • A participant with a physics background expresses confidence in their understanding of the flow dynamics and seeks confirmation on the comparative flow rates between two configurations involving 90-degree fittings versus straight pipes with bends.
  • Another participant responds that while the mass flow may remain the same, additional pressure drops will occur across each component, potentially affecting the overall flow depending on specific conditions.
  • There is a suggestion that using two 45-degree elbows instead of one 90-degree elbow could reduce frictional effects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying degrees of certainty regarding the effects of 90-degree fittings on air flow, with some agreeing on the general principles of frictional losses while others propose differing modeling approaches. The discussion remains unresolved on the exact implications of these fittings on flow rates and pressure drops.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of accurately modeling flow through fittings and the limitations of simplified approaches. The discussion highlights the dependence on specific conditions such as pressure and flow rates, which may influence the outcomes.

dingpud
Messages
198
Reaction score
1
Lets us a potato gun for an example.

Having a source tank filled with air, and when a trigger is activated, the air is dumped straight threw the valve and out the tube.

--> --> --> -->

What would happen if the flow of air had to go out of the pressurized source (~160 psi ~40 cu. in volume) through a 90 degree fitting, then through another 90 degree fitting, then out the end of the tube?

-->-->-->
^
|
^
|
<--<--<--

I am looking for some sort of relationship or calculation set that would explain the kind of losses that I am going to experince in changing the air flow from being linear to non-linear, any help would be great, and no, it isn't a spud gun.

Scott
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
What kind of fluids background do you have? If we start talking about equivilent lengths, friction factors and compressibility factor will you know what that refers to?

Not to take short cuts here, but the addition of bends, corners and fittings all add up to give you a frictional effect that would be the same as if you used a much longer straight tube.
 
Last edited:
Hi Fred & dingpud,
FredGarvin said:
Not to take short cuts here, but the addition of bends, corners and fittings all add up to give you a frictional effect that would be the same as if you used a much longer straight tube.
In my view, it gets a bit more complex than that. Clearly with the long, straight tube you can assume irrotational flow (no vorticity). Thus, if one is really looking for analytical differences between the two configurations, I think you need to take into account (and model) the 2-D flow, rather than trying to retain 1-D flow assumptions and compensate for them.
dingpud said:
I am looking for some sort of relationship or calculation set that would explain the kind of losses that I am going to experince in changing the air flow from being linear to non-linear
As I note above, you are purposely introducing vorticity into the flow with the bends. Even if we assume continuous, non-surging flow (m-dot=constant throughout the control volume) we can no longer assume 1-dimensional flow. I'm afraid there is no "simple" set of calculations if you want to model this situation accurately. You would need to use the http://www.navier-stokes.net/" with frictional loss terms. The good news is that you would not necessarily have to model the equations in all 3 dimensions (but your solution would be that much more accurate if you did). The bad news is that these equations cannot be solved in closed-form, only numerically via simulation and numerical integration with boundary conditions specified.

Now maybe what I am proposing here is overkill. It is easy to see that the losses will be greater with the two 90 deg elbows, and as Fred mentioned you could estimate this as just another loss term in the 1-D model. But if you really want an accurate comparison, the better your model the better your answers! :biggrin:
Rainman
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Rainman. What Fred eludes to regards the well established and standard practice used throughout industry for the past (roughly) one hundred years of reducing the restriction of a series of piping components to a single equivalent restriction. The fact that vortices are created in an elbow is well known, though it need not be over analyzed by using 2 or 3 dimensional NS equations.
 
Well this gives me a starting point. I have a degree in Physics, but not much of a background in fluids. The links that have been posted appear to be useful in guiding me to the proper equations. I might be able to get some of the equations to work for my system.

Thanks for all of the posts. I'll post again if I get stumped trying to work out the equations. I am going to be shooting for an estimated loss through the system. Fortunatley, I have the luxury of not needing this to be an exact measurement.

I am 98% sure that I am correct on this, but wanted to check...(2) 90 degree fittings with a pipe between them allows less flow than a straight pipe with 90 degree bends at either end...correct?
 
dingpud said:
I am 98% sure that I am correct on this, but wanted to check...(2) 90 degree fittings with a pipe between them allows less flow than a straight pipe with 90 degree bends at either end...correct?
It allows the same mass flow (to a point). What will happen is that the flow will require more pressure drops across each new component to get the same flow through the additional components. Depending on what pressures and flows you are talking about, you may not even notice any difference. That will be something you will find out with the numbers. As always, if you can use two 45° elbows in stead of one 90°, the frictional effects are less.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
17K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K