Lab Report #3

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 11

Lab Report #7: Operating characteristics of a Pelton

Turbine
CE 336 - Fluid Mechanics Lab
Instructor: Andres Acosta, MS, PE

Hussein Farhat

Date of lab: 12/2/2020


Date submitted: 12/16/2020

1
Introduction:

Purpose of Study:

The main purpose of this study is to utilize weirs of different geometric design to
demonstrate and observe the characteristics of different flow rates. Theoretically estimated
values will be compared to the actual discharge calculated from the experiment and will be
used to create a ratio of actual to theoretical discharge in order to find the discharge
coefficient for the differently shaped weirs.

Theory:

To start, a weir is a partial obstruction on a channel bottom where fluid must flow
through. They are extremely convenient to determine flow rate in an open channel since the
fluid has one direct channel to flow through. As the fluid flows over the obstruction, it
accelerates throughout its path. A relationship exists between the flow rate of the fluid and
the elevation difference that exists between the existing fluid surface in front of the weir and
the total height of fluid above the weir obstruction.
There are two types of weirs to be touched on, a broad-crested weir and a sharp-
crested weir. The broad-crested weir has a horizontal crest which marks that any fluid
pressure above is considered to be hydrostatic, or fluid at rest. On the other hard, sharp-
crested weirs are best described as a vertical sharp-edged flat plate that runs across the flow
channel. The top portion of the restriction that the fluid flows over is referred to as the crest,
and the stream of fluid that flows over this crest is referred to as the nappe. The following
two figures are included in order to better visualize the flow over a broad-crested weir as well
as the flow over a sharp-crested weir.

Figure 1: Flow running through a broad-crested weir (Munson et al., 2012)

Figure 2: Flow running through a sharp-crested weir along with labels to visualize the
nappe and crest (Munson et al., 2012)

2
We can calculate fluid flow over a weir by applying continuity and the Bernoulli equations to
a theoretical streamline heading through the weir. With the assumption that the velocity
upstream of the weir plate is all the same throughout and remains consistent, along with the
assumptions that the velocity profile is not uniform at the nappe and that the streamlines
located at the nappe are at atmospheric pressure, we can use Bernoulli’s equation. To
calculate streamline going from point A to point B we can use:

(eq. 1)

and

(eq. 2)

Where P A , z A , V A∧P B , z B ,V Bare pressure, elevation, and velocity at points A and B


respectively, Pw is the height of the weir plate, H is the height of the free surface above the
weir crest, and h is the distance that point B is below the free surface. The velocity of point A
is the same as the velocity in section 1, and the velocity at point B is non uniform. Pressure at
B as mentioned earlier is assumed to be atmospheric. Using this equation, we can take eq. 2
and form the following equation:

(eq. 3)

With the continuity equation at the nappe section, we can calculate the theoretical flow rate Q
over the weir.

(eq. 4)

We then determine that for the rectangular weir, l is constant and therefore equal to width b.
We need to consider the equation for other weirs, such as triangular or circular weirs, where l
is a function of h. Using eq. 4:

(eq. 5 and eq. 6)

3
Finally, we determine that the upstream velocity is negligible compared to the velocity at the
nappe, therefore V 12 /2 g≪ H . Therefore, the basic rectangular weir equation comes to be:

(eq. 7)

H is the height of the upstream free surface above the crest of the weir, but the actual flow
rate will indeed be different than this value because many approximations are made to derive
the equations. The actual flow rate can be found with a correction factor, and then used to
find the actual discharge coefficient for a rectangular weir as:

(eq. 8)

Where we have actual flow rate, theoretical flow rate, and discharge coefficient from the
rectangular weir all included in the relationship. For any weir, a discharge coefficient must be
found throughout the experiments in order to find accurate flow rate estimates. Once the
coefficient is found, the weir can be confirmed to be calibrated properly and flow rates will
be measured accurately. The discharge coefficient for a rectangular weir can be
approximately calculated using:

(eq. 9)

For triangular weirs, they have a sharp edged triangular notch opening in order to guarantee
low flow rates when needed, and reasonable heads that are developed. The nappe springs
over the crest. The triangular weir has the following flow rate equation:

(eq. 10)

Where Pa and Pb are pressures


z aand z bare heights
Va and Vb are velocities
Pw is the height of the weir plate
g is acceleration due to gravity
H is elevation of the free surface above weir

Where Qat , Qtt ,∧θ are the actual flow rate, theoretical flow rate, and notch angle as shown in
the following figure:

4
Figure 3: Triangular weir with notch angle shown
Typical values for C dt of triangular weirs range from 0.58 to 0.62.

Equipment:

Figure (4) shows equipment with details below


Weir section instrument on hydraulic bench:
● Rectangular weir plate
● Stilling baffle
● V-notch weir plate
● Vernier point gauge
● Vernier hook gauge
● Hydraulics bench
● Nuts for Vernier scale to lock and adjust apparatus
● Flow adjustment knob
● Stopwatch

5
Experimental Set-Up & Procedures:
Set up includes getting weir equipment set on hydraulic bench.
1. Use height gauge to measure datum height as well as height of water level and
position instrument carrier with height gauge directly above the gauge and lower
gauge to be right on top of notch base. Lock the coarse adjustment screw.
2. Adjust gauge until point touches notch bottom and record the reading of the datum
height.
3. Move the instrument carrier with height gauge to about halfway in between the notch
plate and the stilting baffle.
4. Open bench control valve to let water into the channel and adjust valve about 10 mm
of water above the notch base.
5. Once flow is steady, record the height of the water level with the scale on the
instrument carrier.
6. Record time to collect a specific volume of water in the tank in order to find the flow
rate in the channel (for low flow use lower scale for low flow take and for high flow
use upper scale for high flow).
7. Increase flow rate with control valve in hydraulic bench and record water level height
and flow rate just as done in previous two steps.
8. Repeat steps at least 4 more times in order to have 4 more data sets to work with.
9. Remove rectangular notch from hydraulic bench and then hook on the V-notch plate.
10. Open control valve and find first reading, then control the valve for it to him about 10
mm depth of water into the channel.
11. Repeat the steps yet again in order to collect 6 more data sets.

Calculations:

6
Rectangular Plate:
3
Qexp=V m /t sec=¿ (0.004m^3)/(46.50s) = 8.60 * 1 0−5m3 /s

Qt = 2/3∗√ 2 g∗b∗H 3/ 2=2/3 √ (2∗9.81)∗0.00013=¿3.8*1 0− 4m3 /s


Note: H = 23.1-9.5 =13.6mm = 0.0136m

C dr (experimental)=Qexp /Qt = 8.60∗1 0−5 /3.8∗10−4 = 0.226


C dr (theoretical)= 0.611+0.075*( H / Pw ¿= 0.620

V-notch (triangular) plate:


3
Qexp=V m /t sec=¿ (0.004m^3)/(37.16s) =1.1*1 0− 4 m3 /s

Qt = 8 /12∗¿√ 2g* tan(45)* H 5 /2= (8/12) √ (2g) *0.022 65 /2= 2.3*1 0−5
Note: H = 74.2 - 51.5 = 22.7 mm = 0.0227m

C dr (experimental)=Qexp /Qt = 1.1*1 0− 4 m3 /s / 2.3*1 0−5 = 4.78 *.1 = 0.48


C dr (theoretical)= 0.611+0.075*( H / Pw ¿= 0.620

Discussion:
1. The biggest advantage of utilizing a V-notch (triangular weir) instead of the
rectangular weir is that the water, regardless of position and location of flow, will be
ventilated versus the rectangular weir only being ventilated when there is a larger
flow rate present. It causes small changes in the discharge in order to have a larger
change in the depth and therefore allows for a more precise head measurement than a
rectangular weir allows for
2. The coefficient of discharge, C d, is basically the proportion of experimental flow rate,
Qexp, over the theoretical flow rate, Qt . In simpler terms, the ratio of actual discharge
to theoretical discharge. The typical range for C d is typically 0.58 to 0.62.

7
3. The assumptions used to derive the theoretical discharge formula for the weirs as
previous mentioned in the theory section were the following:
a. Fluid streamlines are parallel to one another at the nappe, therefore pressure at
the nappe is assumed to be atmospheric
b. The velocity profile in the apparatus is uniform on the upstream of the weir
plate, and remains consistent.
c. The velocity profile is not uniform at the nappe.

Table 1: Rectangular weir


Datum Water Volume Collection Qexp Height Qt C dr(ex C dr(t
height(h0) level collected time (t) above p.) heor.
(h 0) (V) notch )
(H)

9.5 m 23.1 m 4 m^3 46.5 s 8.602 × 1 0−5 0.0136 m 0.00038 2.26 × 0.62
−1
m^3/s m^3/s 10

9.5 m 27.7 m 4 m^3 36.0 s 1.111 × 1 0− 4 0.0182 m 0.00059 1.88 × 0.63


−1
m^3/s m^3/s 10

9.5 m 30.4 m 4 m^3 24.8 s 1.613 × 1 0− 4 0.0209 m 0.00072 2.24 × 0.63


−1
m^3/s m^3/s 10

9.5 m 25.6 m 4 m^3 17.17 s 2.330 × 1 0− 4 0.0161 m 0.00049 4.75 × 0.62


−1
m^3/s m^3/s 10

9.5 m 45.0 m 4 m^3 11.29 s 3.543 × 1 0− 4 0.0355 m 0.0016 2.21 × 0.64


−1
m^3/s m^3/s 10

Experimental discharge coefficient versus height above notch

8
The coefficient of discharge has relatively precise data points, as all points appear to be in a
fair range within each other with the window automatically chosen based on the data points
that were inputted. The experimental C d after being plotted with the height over notch H
remained on a fair trendline as the height, H, increased. Comparing the experimental
discharge coefficient, C dr(exp.), and the theoretical discharge coefficient, C dr(theor.), we
clearly see that the experimental was lower than the theoretical.

Table 2: V-notch (triangular) weir

Datum Water Volume Collection Qexp Height Qt C dr(ex C dr(th


height(h0) level collected time (t) above p.) eor.)
(h) (V) notch
(H)

0.0515 m 0.0742 4 m^3 37.2 s 1.076 × 1 0− 4m^3/s 0.0227 m 0.00023 4.68× 0.620
−1
m m^3/s 10

0.0515 m 0.0765 4 m^3 29.6 s 1.351 × 1 0− 4m^3/s 0.0250m 0.000292 4.63 × 0.626
−1
m m^3/s 10

0.0515 m 0.0806 4 m^3 20.2 s 1.979 × 1 0− 4m^3/s 0.0291m 0.000426 4.65 × 0.628
−1
m m^3/s 10

0.0515 m 0.0839 4 m^3 15.6 s 2.571 × 1 0− 4m^3/s 0.0324 m 0.000558 4.61 × 0.630
−1
m m^3/s 10

0.0515 m 0.0883 4 m^3 10.8 s 3.697× 1 0− 4m^3/s 0.0368 m 0.000767 4.82 × 0.633
−1
m m^3/s 10

Experimental discharge coefficient versus height above notch

9
The coefficient of discharge in this plot decreases as head over the notch increases, different
from the relationship identified in the rectangular weir data plot. For specifically a triangular
weir, the height over notch, H, as a whole increased the experimental discharge coefficient,
whereas the theoretical value slightly decreased as a whole.

Next, we will plot the flow rate versus height for both the rectangular and triangular weirs:

From our data, it shows that our theories and relationships of flow over weirs to
heights is valid. The steady trend lines as flow rate increases indicates that there is a direct
relationship between the two characteristics. As flow rate over the weir increases, the height
above the notch increases as well thus larger volumes of water. The percent errors comparing
the theoretical and experimental values for the discharge coefficient of both the rectangular
weir and the triangular weir both amounted to under 6%, which is a fair number and further
validates our relationship. The coefficient of a triangular weir was expected to be between
0.58 to 0.62, and this held true with our data points. Few limitations such as the minimum

10
height of 10 mm being necessary, as lower levels will cause friction between the notch and
water.
In terms of where we can improve this experiment and other limitations, not being
able to perform it in person obviously weighs on the results as students will naturally
understand the experiments more if able to conduct them themselves which unfortunately is
not possible. More trials would obviously lead to even more accurate and fair results as well.
The water did have a trend of surface tension which makes it difficult to make readings, so
that can contribute to small differences in data points as well. Using the Vernier scale also
has some difficulties when attempting to be on eye level to read the scale.

Conclusion:
The main purpose for this experiment was to utilize weirs of different geometric
design to demonstrate and observe the characteristics of different flow rates and compare
their experimental and theoretical coefficients of discharge. We saw that triangular weirs
have advantages over rectangular weirs and tend to lead to more accurate results. The
coefficient of discharge was used to calculate the actual flow rate over each weir, and was
compared to a typical known coefficient range for the triangular weir to test our data and see
if we can fall into the proper range. Many assumptions had to be made in order to calculate
the flow rate as mentioned in the theory and discussion, as without those assumptions we
would not have been able to use the equations. The theoretical and experimental values for
both the triangular weir and the rectangular weir were not fair off and within a fair range of
each other which further proves our theories. Small discrepancies between actual and
theoretical values can be chalked up to frictional aspects as there is not a perfect flow
throughout the weir, especially at a low flow rate. Overall, the experiment comparing our
data points to actual predetermined values was a success.

References:
Munson, B. R., T. H. Okiishi, W.W. Huebsch, A. P. Rothmayer, 2012,
“Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics”, 7th edition, John Wiley, Chapter 8

Armfield, 2012, “Fluid Statics and Manometry”, Instruction Manual.

11

You might also like