Mechanical enery equation to valve equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fingon
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mechanical Valve
Fingon
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi

I’m writing my bachelor thesis about valves, and was wondering if anyone could help me with the following derivation:
I need to show the algebraic link between the mechanical energy-equation and the ”valve equation” that is Cv=Q * [Square](Sg/[Delta]p). This can also be called the flow coefficient-equation.

Everything in field units (american units)

All help will be appreciated a lot!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Fingon said:
Hi

I’m writing my bachelor thesis about valves, and was wondering if anyone could help me with the following derivation:
I need to show the algebraic link between the mechanical energy-equation and the ”valve equation” that is Cv=Q * [Square](Sg/[Delta]p). This can also be called the flow coefficient-equation.

Everything in field units (american units)

All help will be appreciated a lot!
Pressure is energy / unit volume so the \Delta P = Q^2\rho/C_v expresses an energy loss per unit volume.

AM
 
Derive it from Bernoulli's. As the length of the valve is generally too small, you can neglect difference in elevation (if any) and also it is a safe assumption to consider constant velocity. The pressure drop across the valve then becomes a function of velocity. Express frictional resistance in terms of velocity and equate it to pressure drop.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top