CHEMICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

PROCESS ENGINEERING C
3
rd
YEAR LABORATORY REPORT № 4

Name: Fidan Jabrayilova KM 18.2

Experiment Title: Pressure Losses within Pipe System
Experiment Date: 08.03.2021
Submission Date: 24.04.2020
Supervisor: Natavan Samadova
Contents
Synopsis.......................................................................................................................................................2
Introduction................................................................................................................................................2
Theory.........................................................................................................................................................3
Experimental Technique..............................................................................................................................7
Equipment...............................................................................................................................................7
Experiment Procedure.............................................................................................................................8
Safety...................................................................................................................................................8
Steps of procedure...........................................................................................................................8
Results.........................................................................................................................................................9
Discussion..................................................................................................................................................14
Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................15
Reference..................................................................................................................................................17

1
 Synopsis
This paper aims to investigate pressure loss in straight pipeline and in pipe section with
enlargement and contraction. Pressure loss are a significant factor in designing process for
engineers. In this experiment, water was utilized via HM 150 base unit and HM 150.11. Various
head losses were studied at different flow rates. Theoretical and practical values were
compared numerically and visually. Initially, information about pressure loss and its significance
and application in industry was provided. After Theory section which contains all relevant
theoretical information needed for experiment, experimental procedure was introduced which
contains steps to carry out laboratory study. Results of both parts of experiment were discussed
in Discussion section.

Introduction
Fluid enters the gas line with certain pressure and loss of line pressure is observed at the end of
fluid-carrying network. The reason behind the pressure drop is the fact that every device has
frictional resistance. So, physical obstruction (even wall of pipe) results in certain amount of line
pressure loss due to its friction. Having technical acquaintance of computing it enables process
engineers to design the plant in a suitable way, to define if flow will be continuous or not, and to
identify system parameters like pump characteristics, valve types. Nevertheless, if pressure loss
is not fully known for a specific unit, there will be damaging impacts. Therefore, carrying out
pressure loss in pipe system experiment is essential for engineering students to sharpen their
knowledge practically in this important practice.

Pressure loss matters for engineers because knowledge of pressure reduction within a pipeline
helps process engineers to calculate the size of pumps or motors to transfer a substance from
one point to another and required pipe dimensions. In our daily life, water is delivered to fixtures
concerned in distribution and use of water in a building. If water has low pressure, it can be
provided with insufficient flow or not at all. There are several causes behind this problem. If
installment is older, continuous increase of rust and precipitate over time in fluid transport
network block the movement of liquid due to drastic deduction in pipe diameter. Roughness of
pipe increases, and it causes a pressure drop.

Low water pressure issue can be observed

in new fluid transport network also. If
engineers design pipes too little due to false
calculation, bantam size pipe will cause
pressure loss.

In several different areas of science and

engineering such as agriculture, oil and gas
engineering, food and chemical sciences,
2

Figure 1. Delivering water to higher floors in building [1]

operation of single and multiphase flow has been commonly encountered. Pressure drop must
be predicted to define desiderated operation condition and physical magnitude of devices for
the process [2].

TAP and TANAP gas corridor whose

birthplace is “Shah Deniz-l l” intends to bring
natural gas from Caspian Sea to Europe.
Total length of possible shortest route is
3500km. Construction of this type of lengthy
pipeline requires conscientious planning and
the highest caliber of engineering. The
design pressure of TAP will be 95.5 barg
from the TANAP/TAP connection to Kipoi
compressor station (CS00); 95 barg Figure 2. TAP and TANAP projects [3]

through Greece and the majority of onshore Albania; and 145 barg throughout offshore and
onshore Italy [4]. To transport gas through this high distance, pressure drop must be analyzed
carefully. At expected operation parameters like flow rate and temperature, available system
pressure must be higher than total pressure drops of units in the system. If entire system is
supplied with very low pressure at the inlet, gas pressure will be insufficient throughout the
operation at maximum flows.

Theory
Definitions and formulas used in this experiment to carry out necessary calculations are
demonstrated in this part of paper.

Bernoulli’s equation in head form is utilized in calculations:

2 2
P1 ⁄ ρ∗g +u1 /2 g+ Z 1=P2 ⁄ ρ∗g+ u2 /2 g+ Z 2+ hf (1)

P1∧P2 → Static pressure values in the first and second points respectively (𝑃𝑎)

ρ → Liquid density (𝑘𝑔/m3)

u1∧u 2 → Velocity in the first and second points respectively (𝑚/𝑠)

g → Gravitational constant (𝑚/ s2)

𝑍1 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑍2 → Elevation values from datum state in the first and second points respectively (𝑚)

h f →total frictional head loss (m)

Formula for head loss due to friction and fitting between two points is shown below:
3
 h p =h1−h2 (2)

h p →practically measured frictional head loss (m)

h2 →height of water in left manometer (m)

h1 → height of water in right manometer (m)

Fluid properties like viscosity, heat capacity, temperature and density affect head loss. Head
loss can also be influenced by mechanical parameters like length, cross sectional area and
roughness of pipe. Darcy–Weisbach equation is used to calculate major head loss:

L u2
h m=λ × × (3)
d 2g

h m → major head loss due to friction (m)

λ → friction factor

L → length of pipe (m)

d → internal diameter of pipe (m)

u → flow speed (m/s)

g → Gravitational acceleration (𝑚/ s2)

Depending on flow regime (laminar or turbulent), head loss can be changed. For laminar flow,
friction factor is computed by dividing 64 by the Reynold’s Number [5]:

64
λ l= (4 )
ℜ

λ l → friction factor for laminar flow (unitless)

ℜ→Reynold’s Number (unitless). It also helps to determine flow regimes. There are three main
flow regimes:

1. Laminar flow – Re < 2000

2. Critical flow – Re > 2000 and Re < 4000

3. Turbulent flow – Re > 4000 [5]

Reynold’s Number is figured via below formula:

ud
ℜ= (5)
ϑ

4
d → internal diameter of pipe (m)

u → flow speed (m/s)

ϑ → kinematic viscosity (m¿¿ 2/s )¿

For turbulent flow, Blasius formula can be used to find friction coefficient taking the pipe as
hydraulically smooth (it should be noted that Reynold’s Number is greater than 2320 and less
than 105000):

−0.25
λ t=0.3164 ℜ (6)

λ t → friction factor for turbulent flow (unitless)

ℜ→Reynold’s Number (unitless)

Velocity of flow in a pipeline is the average velocity based on the pipe diameter and liquid flow
rate. It may be calculated as follows:

V̇
u= (7)
A

u → velocity of flow (m/s)

V̇ → flow rate (m3 /s )

A → area of flow (m2)

Frictional head loss plays a significant role in overall head drop especially in long pipelines while
valves and fittings make very low contribution to it and this contribution is called as minor head
loss. Minor loss is caused by pipe enlargements, bends, valves, and contractions. Head loss
due to fittings is calculated via the formula below:

2
u ( )
h min=k 8
2g

h min →minor head loss due to fittings or valves (m)

k → resistance coefficient for the valve or fitting (unitless)

u → velocity of flow (m/s)

g → Gravitational acceleration (𝑚/ s2)

5
Resistance coefficient demonstrates the proportionality between energy loss and velocity head.
The magnitude of k relies on the geometry of loss causing equipment and sometimes on flow
speed.

When liquid is exposed to abrupt enlargement

in the pipe, velocity decreases suddenly, and
turbulence leads to energy loss. From the
equation below, k can be obtained:

k ENL=¿
Figure 3. Enlargement in pipe [6]
For sudden contraction, resistance coefficient is:

2
A1
k CON=( −1) =¿ ¿
A0

k ENL∧k CON → coefficient of resistance for

enlargement and contraction respectively

(unitless) Figure 4. Sudden Contraction [7]

A1 → exit cross sectional area for contraction and inlet for enlargement (m2)

A2 → exit cross sectional area for enlargement and inlet for contraction (m2)

A0 → cross sectional area of Vena Contracta (m2)

d 1 → exit diameter for contraction and inlet for enlargement (m)

d 2 → exit diameter for enlargement and inlet for contraction (m)

d 0 → diameter of Vena Contracta (m)

Coefficient for resistance can also be found below equations where l 1 and l 2 are length of pipe:

( ( )) ( ( ) )
4 4
2 ghv (total ) d2 λ1 l 1 d 2 λ l
k ( exp )= − 1− − ∙ + 2 2 (11)
v 22 d1 d1 d1 d2

( ( )) ( ( ) )
4 4
2 gh v (total) d λ l d λ l
k ( cons )= − 1− 1 − 1 1 ∙ 1 + 2 2 (12)
v1
2
d2 d1 d 2 d2

6
 Experimental Technique
Equipment
To investigate pressure loss in pipe system, HM 150 and HM 150.11 units by G.U.N.T.S are
operated. HM 150 hydraulic bends provide water supply to pipe system with changing flow rates
depending on position of flow control valve. Another function of HM 150 is to help for
determination of volumetric flow rate.

Figure 5. HM 150

HM 150.11 is located above the HM 150 and is the pipe system consists of 6 distinct pipe parts
(each furnished with piping components such as bends, elbow and branches) to transport
water. Those distinct pipe sections can be turned off separately. Pressure loss can be evaluated
with the help of HM 150.11 while permitting to record opening characteristics of shut-off
devices. This unit has 2 twin-tube manometers to measure the pressure at specific locations.
Pipe system is made of PVC [8]. Picture of HM 150.11 and information about parts are
provided below:

7
 5 4
1
2

Figure 6. HM 150.11 [8]

1. Twin tube manometers show the heads (in centimeters) at two different measurement
points. When there is no flow in the system, water levels are equal in both manometer
because they are U-shaped.
2. Pipe section that has enlargement and contraction.
3. Straight pipe section
4. Annular chambers
5. Ball valve [8]

Experiment Procedure

Safety
To accomplish experimentation freely from any harm or risk, experimenters should obey some
safety rules:

 Before starting experiment, outlet ball valve should be kept open, otherwise water
coming through the pipe can create additinonal pressure in the system and lead to
explosion.
 Manometers has glass parts, so be careful about not breaking it, otherwise it can
damage different parts of body.
 Be careful when slanted seat valve is close. input ball valve must be open.
 When connecting manometer and pressure measuring nipple, do not tear hose in order
to avoid any damage to skin.

Steps of procedure
Experiment consists of 2 parts.

8
First part:

1. Bring electric connection and valve positions to suitable condition and connect annular
chambers of straight pipe section to head measuring device via hoses.
2. Open ball valve of that part to some degree. After a few moments when water levels in
manometers do not change, write down head values of both tube manometers at
specific flow rate.
3. Measure that flow rate by using beaker and stopwatch.
4. Open ball valve to slightly higher degree in such a way that after 6 times valve will be
fully opened.
5. Repeat second and third steps until full opening of valve is achieved.
6. Once experiment is done, close ball valve and slanted seat valve of base unit slowly.
Turn off pump and main switch.

Second part:

1. Hoses must be joined to annular chambers of enlargement and contraction parts to

connect them with head measuring equipment.
2. Start base unit constituents.
3. Open ball valve of top pipeline to some degree.
4. Note head values for each manometer.
5. Make a measurement of flow rate via beaker and stopwatch.
6. Repeat 3rd, 4th and 5th steps one more time.
7. Close ball and slanted seat valve.
8. Turn off the pump and main switch, and electric plug.

Results
Part 1:

To determine relationship between flow speed and head loss and compare measured head loss
values with the ones recorded by using pressure gauges, below calculations are carried out.

Volumetric flow is:

2L L L 60 s L L 1 m3 m3
V̇ = =0.387 7 =0.387 7 × =23.2648 =0.387 7 × =38.7 7 × 10−5
5. 158 s s s 1min min s 1000 L s

Flow speed is:

−5 m3
4∗38.7 7 ×10
s m
u= 2 2
=1.708 1
π∗0.017 m s
9
Kinematic viscosity is 0.98 ×10−6 m2 / s at 21⁰C. So, Reynold’s number for water is:

m
1.708 1∗0.017 m
s
ℜ= −6 2
=2963 0 . 31
0.98 × 10 m /s

Re is higher than 4000 therefore flow regime is turbulent.

Pipe friction factor according to Blasius equation:

λ t=0.3164 ×29630.31−0.25=0.0241

m
Length of pipe is 0.8m and gravitational acceleration is 9.81 .
s2

Major head loss is:

m2
1.70812
0.8 m s2
h m=0.0241 × × =0.16 8 6 m
0.017 m m
2∗9.81 2
s

Variance between calculated and recorded head losses is:

0. 1686−0.169
variance= ∗100 %=−0.237 %
0.1686

As experiment was repeated six times, rest of results are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Measuring section for part 1

Parameters unit 1 2 3 4 5 6
Pressure h1 mm 963 932 928.5 897 878 865
loss on
double
pressure h2 mm 794 806 810 828 839 845
gauge

Head loss
hp m 0.169 0.126 0.1185 0.069 0.039 0.02

time for 2 t sec 5.158 6.349 6.667 9.032 13.237 25.287

L

10
 Volumetric
flow V̇ L/min 23.2648 18.9006 17.9991 13.2861 9.0655 4.7455

Volumetric
flow V̇ L/s 0.3877 0.315 0.3 0.2214 0.1511 0.0791

Volumetric
m^3/s
flow V̇ 38.77 31.5 30 22.14 15.11 7.91
10^-5

Flow
u m/s 1.7081 1.3878 1.3217 0.9754 0.6657 0.3485
speed
Reynold’s
Re - 29630.3 24074.08 22927.4 16920.20 11547.85 6045.408
Number
Pipe
friction
coefficient
λ - 0.0241 0.0254 0.0257 0.0277 0.0305 0.0359
according
to Blasius

Calculated
head loss hm m 0.1686 0.1173 0.1077 0.0632 0.0324 0.0105

Variance % -0.237 -7.417 -10.028 -9.177 -20.37 -90.476

Seeing variance between two type of head losses will help to analyze data better. Therefore, in
Figure 7., this comparison is demonstrated.

11
 Comparison of head losses
0.18
0.16
0.14

Head Loss in m
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Volumetric flow rate in L/min

Calculated Experimental

Figure 7. Comparison of experimental and calculated head losses

Part 2:

Part 2 was carried out in the pipe section with expansion and constriction. Firstly, head loss due
to enlargement and contraction is found:

h p , expansion=84.8 cm−92.2 cm=−7.4 cm=−0.074 m

h p , constriction=65.8 cm−53.4 cm=12.4 cm=0.124 m

Volumetric flow rate is:

3
2L L −4 m
V̇ = =0.4 9346 =4. 9346× 10
4.053 s s s

Speed on an input is:

−4 m3
4∗4.9346× 10
s m
u1 , expansion= 2 2
=2.1740
π∗0.017 m s

−4 m3
4∗4.9346× 10
s m
u1 , constriction = 2 2
=0 . 7789
π∗0.0 284 m s

To calculate speed on an exit, take diameter as 0.0284 m for expansion and 0.017m for
constriction and use the same formula.

12
Due to autumn season, water temperature is taken as 21⁰C and kinematic viscosity is

−6 m2
0.98 ×10 . Reynold’s Number on an input is computed:
s

m
2.1740 ∗0.017 m
s
ℜinput ,expansion = 2
=37712.777
−6 m
0.98 ×10
s

m
0.77 8981 ∗0.0284 m
s
ℜinput ,constr i ction= 2
=22574.55
−6 m
0.98× 10
s

For output Reynold’s number, take corresponding flow velocity values and diameter as 0.0284m
for expansion and 0.017m for constriction.

Factor of hydraulic resistance of a friction is computed via Blasius formula:

−0.25
λ 1=0.3164∗37712.777 =0.0227

Experimental value of factor of local resistance for expansion is calculated by using equation:

m
2∗9.81 ∗(−0.074 ) m
s2
( ( ) )−¿
4
0.0284
k exp .expan= − 1−
2 m
2
0.017
0.77898 ( )
s

Other experimental k values are found via equations 11 and 12.

Factor of local resistance for expansion under the formula of Bourd’s Law is:

k cal=¿ ¿

Resistance coefficient for constriction is obtained from graph showing the coefficient of
resistance for constriction depending on A2/A1 which is 0.287.

In order to check accuracy, variance between calculated and experimental resistance

coefficients must be computed:

3.20−3.6893
variance %= ∗100 %=−15.29 %
3.2

All results obtained from abovementioned calculations are shown in Table2.

13
Table 2. All results of experiment part 2

Parameter Expansion Constriction

notation unit 1 2 1 2
Height value in first
h1 cm 84.8 85.2 65.8 54.4
tube
Height value in
h2 cm 92.2 85.8 53.4 53.6
second tube
Pressure loss on
Double pressure hp m -0.074 -0.006 0.124 0.008
gauge
Volume of measured
V m
3
0.002
liquid
Time of filling 2L t sec 4.053 12.5 4.053 12.5
m3
The volume flow rate V̇ 0.0004934 0.00016 0.00049 0.00016
s
Speed on an input u1 m/s 2.1740306 0.70490 2.17403 0.70490
Speed on an exit u2 m/s 0.7789809 0.25257 0.77898 0.25257
Liquid temperature T ⁰С 21
Kinematic viscosity of a
ϑ 3
m /s 9.8E-07
liquid
Reynolds's number
ℜ - 37712.777 12227.9 37712.78 12227.99
on an input
Reynolds's number
ℜ - 22574.5496 7319.572 22574.55 7319.57
on an exit
Factor of hydraulic
resistance of a friction
λ1 - 0.0227046 0.03008 0.02270 0.03008
on an entrance site
from Balsius formula
Factor of hydraulic
resistance of a friction on
λ2 - 0.0258126 0.03420 0.02581 0.03420
a target site from Blasius
formula

Experimental value of k exp .expan - 3.6893191 4.00676 - -

factor of local
resistance

14
 (with respect to u2)
Experimental value of
factor of local
k exp .cons - - - -0,42439 -0,64521
resistance
(with respect to u1)
Factor of local
resistance under the k cal . - 3.20 3.20
formula Bordo
Factor of local
resistance under the k cal . - 0.287 0.287
diagram
Variance % -15.29122 -25.211 247.872 324.812

Discussion
Results for first part of experiment show that with increasing flow rate, head loss also rises up.
Head drop due to friction plays a significant role in total head drop and changes as the square
of the flow rate [9]. In our experiment, flow regime was turbulent which triggered energy loss.
Between 2320 and 105000 values of Reynold’s Number, pipe friction factors were calculated via
Blasius equation for hydraulicly smooth pipes at different flow rates. Theoretical head losses
were obtained via Darcy–Weisbach equation and compared with the ones recorded from
pressure gauge. Visual representation of differentiation between those values are demonstrated
in Figure 7. It is observed that at high flow rates, contrast can be considered low such as -
0.237%, 7.417% while at the lowest flow rate, the highest variance is noticed which is -
90.476%. There can be possible factors behind those errors. Firstly, manometers are connected
to annular chambers via hoses which is plastic pipe. Weak connection between them or twisting
hose can lead to erroneous head value. Another reason why theoretical and experimental
results differ is that sediment and rust accelerate over the time in pipe sections which blocks
free movement of liquid and additional energy is wasted due to them. Therefore, experimental
head loss values are higher than theoretical one in our experiment. Also, corrosion can happen
inside the pipe which increase the roughness and hydraulically smooth nature of pipe is no
longer real. As a result, one condition for Blasius equation is not satisfied and it gives wrong
value for actual pipe.

For the second part of experiment, impact of geometry of pipe like enlargement and constriction
was studied by repeating this part twice. Head loss due to dimension of pipe was lower than the
one due to friction. Therefore, this type of head drop is called minor. As it is expected, pressure

15
value decreased through the expansion and increased through the contraction. Every fittings,
enlargement or reduction of pipe, valves have its own coefficient of resistance (k) to flow. In part
2, k value was calculated via equations and compared with experimental ones. For expansion,
variation between them can be considered as low (-15.29% and -25.21%) however for
constriction part, results were drastically high like 247.87% and 324.81%. As accuracy for
hydraulic devices is important for process engineers, reasons behind these erroneous values
should be investigated. Firstly, factor of local resistance was obtained from the diagram for
constriction part which was not so accurate. Therefore, such high deviations happened between
experimental and calculated k values. However, for enlargement, k value was calculated via
Bourd’s Law and variances were low. Moreover, conditions in the system like temperature can
affect viscosity of fluid which in turn leads to different head loss and affects calculated
coefficient of resistance. Another reason is equipment has been used over the years which
influenced its working efficiency. This causes deflection of values and lead to errors.

There are some ways to prevent errors for both experiments. Firstly, pipes should be cleaned
for a while. If corrosion happens, pipe section should be exchanged. In order to avoid corrosion,
purity of used liquid must be assured. Hoses should be connected to pressure gauge and
annular chamber carefully to avoid erroneous pressure value. If it is possible, double tube
gauge can be replaced with electronic one which gives more accurate results and prevent
human factor. Also, more precise diagram should be found in order to find k value of
constriction part or experimenters should refer to another reliable literature. During experiment,
windows and doors should be kept close to avoid temperature difference.

Conclusion
Pressure loss plays a significant role in designing process of plant. With the knowledge of this
phenomenon, size of pumps, desired operation condition and continuous transport of liquid can
be determined. Liquid characteristics like viscosity, density, heat capacity, temperature and
physical parameters like diameter, roughness and geometry of pipe affect pressure drop. Being
informative about pressure loss both theoretically and practically helps engineering students to
understand its significance. Therefore, small-scale pressure loss in pipe system was conducted
during experiment which consisted of 2 part. In the first part, head losses in straight pipe at
different flow rater were learned and relationship between velocity of fluid and head loss was
observed with the help of Figure 7. The faster the water speed, the higher the head drop was. In
the second part, coefficient of resistance was found via equations. Experiment proved that in
real life, values for head loss and k can differ from theoretical ones due to the reasons like
sediment acceleration, corrosion, instability of condition.

16
Reference

[1] https://www.google.com/search?
q=pressure+drop+and+motor+in+industry&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwjqrYHo3cXvAhWO
17
-yoKHfX5C4MQ2-
cCegQIABAA&oq=pressure+drop+and+motor+in+industry&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQA1CRe
FidkQFg1pcBaABwAHgAgAGPCYgBoTeSAQ8wLjEuMS4wLjEuMS4xLjSYAQCgAQGq
AQtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZ8ABAQ&sclient=img&ei=YoNZYOr0CI73qwH186-
YCA&bih=657&biw=1366#imgrc=V38-mC8Susj9PM
[2] Hamad, F. A., Faraji, F., Santim, C. G. S., Basha, N., & Ali, Z. (2017). Investigation
of pressure drop in horizontal pipes with different diameters. International Journal of
Multiphase Flow, 91, 120–129.
[3] https://apa.az/en/azerbaijan_energy_and_industry/EU-keen-on-extending-Southern-
Gas-Corridor-into-Western-Balkans-338482
[4] Cumulative Impact Assessment – Executive Summary of TAP
https://www.eib.org/attachments/registers/79817065.pdf

[5] Shashi Menon, E. (2015). Fluid Flow in Pipes. Transmission Pipeline Calculations

and Simulations Manual, 149–234.
[6] https://www.google.com/search?
q=sudden+enlargement&sxsrf=ALeKk034DXugUs55oF6XhsbAt0OUymECPQ:1616526
367961&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwidlrr_jcfvAhW1AxAIHcdwBBEQ
_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1366&bih=657#imgrc=sahoXZjsKyxrNM

[7] Azizaga Azizov (2018). Methodical Instructions For Performance of Laboratory Works on “Process
Engineering” and “Mechanics”, 62-79

[8] G.U.N.T. , 2020, HM-150.11 Losses in a pipe system pdf

[9] Stewart, M. (2019). Pump fundamentals. Surface Production Operations, 7–59.

18