Pressure losses if going from a 1/2" pipe to 3/4" pipe?

AI Thread Summary
Switching from a 1/2" pipe to a 3/4" pipe for a 100' buried water line will not decrease water pressure or volume; in fact, it will likely increase pressure due to reduced energy losses from friction and turbulence. The larger diameter pipe allows for a lower water velocity while maintaining a higher flow rate, which is beneficial for tasks like washing a car or irrigating. Using a 5/8" hose at the end will still provide adequate pressure for effective use. Additionally, considerations for freezing conditions may necessitate precautions like winterization. Overall, using a 3/4" line is advantageous for maintaining water pressure and flow.
DWDman
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am thinking of burying a 3/4" water line which is tied into my outdoor 1/2" house spigot line. This buried line would run about 100' to where I can better use it for washing a car or irrigating a flowerbed. My question is: by taking the new addition of water line from a 1/2" feed water line to 3/4" water line for 100' and then using a 5/8" hose to wash a car, would I be defeating my purpose by greatly decreasing water pressure and water volume? Since fluid is essentially not compressible, I think not, but need some advice. thanks,
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF, DWDman!

The pipe size change does not change the energy of the water. The speed of the water will decrease in going from the 1/2" to the 3/4" inch line and the pressure will increase. Bernoulli's principle.

AM
 
DWDman, what are you trying to compare? 100 feet of 3/4 inch pipe compared to 100 feet of 5/8 inch hose? The pressure drop through the pipe will be much lower than if you used hose; leaving you with more pressure & flow to wash the car or water the garden. On the other hand, it would take some work to bury the pipe. Depending on your climate you might need to think about freezing and the need to blow it clear or anti-freeze it for the winter months.
 
Andrew Mason said:
Welcome to PF, DWDman!

The pipe size change does not change the energy of the water. The speed of the water will decrease in going from the 1/2" to the 3/4" inch line and the pressure will increase. Bernoulli's principle.

AM
Bernoulli is only part of what's going on. A pipe with a lot of water flowing through it will dissipate significant Energy due to friction and turbulence. A fatter pipe will involve lower velocity for a given volume rate. This means that, for a given drop in pressure over the length of the pipe, you will get more water through. That is not Bernoulli at work but it is the reason that supply companies use big pipes.
It must be his sexy name that explains why it crops up so often when it may not be most relevant thing at work. (See all the arguments on PF about how aeroplanes fly, too.)
 
sophiecentaur said:
Bernoulli is only part of what's going on. A pipe with a lot of water flowing through it will dissipate significant Energy due to friction and turbulence. A fatter pipe will involve lower velocity for a given volume rate. This means that, for a given drop in pressure over the length of the pipe, you will get more water through. That is not Bernoulli at work but it is the reason that supply companies use big pipes.
It must be his sexy name that explains why it crops up so often when it may not be most relevant thing at work. (See all the arguments on PF about how aeroplanes fly, too.)
Yes, but the question was whether he would "be defeating my purpose by greatly decreasing water pressure and water volume?" It seems to me that the answer to that question is that pressure would not decrease by using the larger line. Rather it will increase.The slower speed in the larger pipe reduces energy losses too. So, it would be a good idea to use the 3/4" line over that 100'.

AM
 
Andrew Mason said:
Yes, but the question was whether he would "be defeating my purpose by greatly decreasing water pressure and water volume?" It seems to me that the answer to that question is that pressure would not decrease by using the larger line. Rather it will increase.The slower speed in the larger pipe reduces energy losses too. So, it would be a good idea to use the 3/4" line over that 100'.

AM
I don't think we can really be disagreeing (Quote "yes, but"). But there are conflicting requirements when using a hose for different applications. Plant watering will probably need as high a volume flow as possible (= wide supply pipe). Car washing will need pressure with (probably) less actual flow. Either way, the fatter the main length of pipe, the better. It it will give only a small drop in pressure over its length. For the most Kinetic Energy per Second, delivered in the form of a car-washing jet, you want as much pressure as possible just before the nozzle. A nozzle will, of course, lower the pressure (Bernoulli) but the pressure will still be higher because of the fat pipe and the velocity of the water will be higher (more KE) without losing energy on the way there.

No risk of "defeating my purpose" with wide supply pipes.
 
  • Like
Likes Andrew Mason
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top