The better approach would be to use the Hagen-Poiseuille relation, which describes flow rate in a pipe based on the pipe size, the fluid properties and the pressure drop. I will skip the derivation, but it can be easily derived from the Navier-Stokes equations, meaning it is a momentum balance. The relationship is:
\Delta P = \frac{128\mu L Q}{\pi d^4}
where:
\Delta P is the pressure drop [\mathrm{Pa}]
\mu is the fluid viscosity (easy to look up for water) [\mathrm{Pa}\cdot\mathrm{s}]
L is the length of the pipe over which the pressure drop takes place [\mathrm{m}]
Q is the volumetric flow rate [\mathrm{m}^3/s]
d is the pipe diameter [m]
This also assumes the following:
Steady state
Irrotational
Axisymmetry
These assumptions are valid assuming you are sufficiently far from the pipe entrance or the pipe is sufficiently lengthy that the error induced by the entrance is minimal and as long as the pipe is straight. If your pipe has a bend in it, then you will not have accounted for that.
If you have a more complicated system of pipes with bends and elbows in it, then you are probably better off using the Bernoulli equation modified with the Darcy-Weisbach equation and other correction factors for the head loss in elbows and bends.
Q_Goest said:
Note that pressure drop (ie: head loss) is a function of the velocity squared, so doubling the flow rate doubles velocity which quadruples pressure drop. However, the friction factor f, also changes depending on Reynolds number, which may or may not change significantly as flow rate changes. But as a general rule of thumb, pressure drop changes as a function of the square of flow rate, assuming the change in density is relatively small. So this holds well for water, but less well for compressible gasses.
The head loss is a function of velocity squared
and the friction factor. For laminar flow, the friction factor varies linearly with 1/Re, so the head loss (or pressure drop) varies linearly with velocity, just as the OP surmised. For turbulent flow, the relationship is more complicated. As you increase the Reynolds number, you would end up approximating that relationship of pressure drop being proportional to the square of the flow rate.
It would be fairly easy to Taylor expand something like the Haaland equation (approximation of the Colebrook equation) about Re and determine the actual relationship, though I would imagine this is beyond the OP's concern. You would just need to expand it about the Reynolds number you expect to see in your situation.
EDIT: I remember for certain that for very high Reynolds number you approach the velocity squared relationship.