Understanding the Formulas for Major Head Loss in Pipes

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the formulas for calculating major head loss due to fluid friction in pipes, specifically comparing the Darcy-Weisbach equation, fL(v^2) / 2gD, with an alternative expression, fL(Q^2) / 3(d^5). The participants clarify that the velocity v can be expressed as Q/A, leading to a reformulation of the equations. The conversation emphasizes that different equations may stem from varying assumptions and physical models, and that the choice of formula often depends on the specific context and available measurements.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of fluid dynamics principles
  • Familiarity with the Darcy-Weisbach equation
  • Knowledge of flow rate (Q) and cross-sectional area (A)
  • Basic mathematical manipulation of equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Darcy-Weisbach equation in detail
  • Explore the concept of physical models in fluid dynamics
  • Learn about the implications of different assumptions in fluid flow equations
  • Investigate the relationship between flow rate (Q) and velocity (v) in various contexts
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in engineering, particularly those specializing in fluid mechanics, as well as anyone involved in designing piping systems and analyzing fluid flow behavior.

foo9008
Messages
676
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


why the author use major loss due to fluid friction is fL(Q^2) / 3(d^5) ?
according to darcy weisbech , the major loss due to friction has the formula of fL(v^2) / 2gD why the author wrote it as fL(Q^2) / 3(d^5) ?
I don't understand

RXhKeLk.png


Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


since v= Q/ A , we can rewrite it as
fL(Q^2) / 2g(π^2)(d^5) , am i right ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1. are the authors using the same models?
2. maybe (Q^2) / 3(d^5) = (v^2) / 2gD ?
... do you know what the variables mean and how the two formulas were derived, what assumptions they use?

since v= Q/ A , we can rewrite it as
fL(Q^2) / 2g(π^2)(d^5) , am i right ?
... that's the idea. Does this make the two equations the same?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: foo9008
Simon Bridge said:
1. are the authors using the same models?
2. maybe (Q^2) / 3(d^5) = (v^2) / 2gD ?
... do you know what the variables mean and how the two formulas were derived, what assumptions they use?... that's the idea. Does this make the two equations the same?
what do you mean by same models here ?

ia my idea correct ? or the author's idea is correct ?
 
The mathematical equations you use are based on a set of assumptions about how the world works, which is described, in turn, by other maths.
The combinations of assumptions and maths is called a physical model.
Make different assumptions you get different equations.

You also get equations that look different but are actually the same ... for instance, the volume of a sphere could be written ##\frac{4}{3}\pi r^3## where ##r## is the radius, or it could be ##\frac{4}{3\sqrt{\pi}}A^{3/2}## ... where ##A## is the area of the biggest circular slice through the sphere, or it could be ##\frac{4}{16}\pi d^3## where ##d## is the diameter. You may use one equation instead of another because is is convenient to the information you have: i.e. it is easier to measure diameter than radius, but easier to build a sphere by fixing the radius rather than the diameter.

So do the two authors equation look different because they are actually different or is it more superficial than that?
The question is asking why the authors use the different equations ... that will be related to what they want to use the equations for as well as the assumptions they are making about reality.

I cannot tell if your idea is correct because I don't know what it is supposed to do. You didn't say.
However there is quite a lot going on which you have yet to address.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K