How to calculate head loss in a pipe with sudden diameter expansion?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating head loss in a pipe experiencing a sudden diameter expansion from 350mm to 700mm, with a flow rate of 0.7 m³/s. Participants are exploring the implications of Bernoulli's equation and the relationship between pressure, velocity, and head loss in fluid dynamics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of Bernoulli's equation and question the assumptions regarding pressure at the inlet and outlet. There is confusion about how to express head loss and the relationship between pressure and velocity at different points in the pipe.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the definitions of head and head loss. Some have offered algebraic approaches to express head loss without needing to know individual pressures, while others are still grappling with the implications of their assumptions and calculations.

Contextual Notes

There is a focus on the assumption of horizontal flow, and participants are working with the given pressure at the entrance. The discussion also highlights the need to clarify the definitions and relationships between various parameters in fluid mechanics.

  • #31
foo9008 said:
SUf8eu4.png

here it is , it should be 105N/(m^2)
Well, it's hard to know what they are referring to by "energy head lost." It isn't clear whether that is the same as "head lost." It also isn't clear whether the "given solution" is correct, because there is actually a head gain calculated , not a head loss.

Also, have you been learning about discharge coefficients and frictional head loss? If so, then the given solution is incorrect. There should be a frictional head loss included in the equation that is calculated from a discharge coefficient, based on the velocity at the 350 mm location (and and the diameter ratio at the sudden enlargement). So, have you been learning about discharge coefficients and, if so, what does your book give for the discharge coefficient for a sudden expansion to twice the diameter?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Chestermiller said:
Well, it's hard to know what they are referring to by "energy head lost." It isn't clear whether that is the same as "head lost." It also isn't clear whether the "given solution" is correct, because there is actually a head gain calculated , not a head loss.

Also, have you been learning about discharge coefficients and frictional head loss? If so, then the given solution is incorrect. There should be a frictional head loss included in the equation that is calculated from a discharge coefficient, based on the velocity at the 350 mm location (and and the diameter ratio at the sudden enlargement). So, have you been learning about discharge coefficients and, if so, what does your book give for the discharge coefficient for a sudden expansion to twice the diameter?
no , i haven't learn about discharge coefficient , but , according to the book , the loss due to expansion is given by [(V1 -V2)^2 /] 2g
 
  • #33
Chestermiller said:
Well, it's hard to know what they are referring to by "energy head lost." It isn't clear whether that is the same as "head lost." It also isn't clear whether the "given solution" is correct, because there is actually a head gain calculated , not a head loss.

Also, have you been learning about discharge coefficients and frictional head loss? If so, then the given solution is incorrect. There should be a frictional head loss included in the equation that is calculated from a discharge coefficient, based on the velocity at the 350 mm location (and and the diameter ratio at the sudden enlargement). So, have you been learning about discharge coefficients and, if so, what does your book give for the discharge coefficient for a sudden expansion to twice the diameter?
but , if the solution look like the previous post ( your working ) , the question should be rephrased as estimate the head loss , but not estimate the total head loss/ total energy loss ?
 
  • #34
foo9008 said:
but , if the solution look like the previous post ( your working ) , the question should be rephrased as estimate the head loss , but not estimate the total head loss/ total energy loss ?
For calculating the frictional head loss at a sudden expansion, see Table 7.5-1 of Transport Phenomena by Bird, Stewart, and Lightfoot.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K