Understanding the Formulas for Major Head Loss in Pipes

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the formulas for major head loss in pipes, specifically comparing two different expressions for friction loss: one based on velocity and the other on flow rate. Participants are trying to reconcile these formulas and explore the underlying assumptions and models used in their derivation.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the equivalence of two formulas for major head loss and whether they stem from the same physical models. They explore the relationship between flow rate and velocity, and how assumptions affect the resulting equations.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants offering insights into the nature of mathematical models and the assumptions behind different equations. There is an ongoing exploration of whether the differences in the equations are substantive or superficial, and how these relate to their intended applications.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of understanding the definitions of variables and the derivation of the formulas, as well as the assumptions that may lead to different representations of the same physical phenomenon.

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