Manipal University
Department of Chemical Engineering
CE 1531- TRANSPORT PHENOMENA LABORATORY-I
III YEAR, 5TH SEMESTER, 2018
EXPERIMENT #2
ROTAMETER
INSTRUCTOR:
Dr. Harsh Pandey
GROUP #1
MEMBERS: NOSHITA NANDKAR
Experiment carried on: September 28, 2023
Report submitted on : October 5, 2023
PRELAB (10) ______
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (10) ______
OBJECTIVES/INTRODUCTION/SCOPE/PROCEDURE (30) ______
RESULTS & DISCUSSION (30) ______
CONCLUSIONS (5) ______
REFERENCES (5) ______
APPENDIX
a) Original data, sample calculations, other information (5) ______
GENERAL COMPLETENESS
a) Conciseness and neatness (5) ______
TOTAL (100) ______
1
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................3
1. OBJECTIVE......................................................................................................................................4
2. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................4
3. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP...............................................................................................................6
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION........................................................................................................6
5. CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................................8
6. REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................8
APPENDIX................................................................................................................................................9
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In our recent pipe friction experiment, we investigated the effects of fluid flow through
different pipe materials and diameters. The goal was to understand the frictional losses incurred
during the flow and their impact on overall system efficiency. We conducted a series of tests
using varying flow rates and pipe configurations, measuring pressure drops and velocities.
The results highlighted significant differences in frictional losses between pipes of different
materials, emphasizing the importance of material selection in designing efficient fluid transport
systems. Additionally, we observed that smaller diameter pipes tended to exhibit higher frictional
losses, underscoring the need for careful consideration of pipe size in system design.
Our findings have practical implications for industries relying on fluid transport, offering
insights that can inform optimal pipe material and diameter choices. This executive summary
provides a concise overview of the key outcomes, paving the way for more detailed analysis and
application of the results in real-world engineering scenarios.
3
1. OBJECTIVE :-
To determine the volumetric flow rate of fluid in a closed tube using Rotameter.
2. INTRODUCTION :-
INTRODUCTION The fundamental laws of fluid flow govern pipe technology. When a fluid
runs through a pipe, some of its energy is used in keeping the flow going. Friction loses energy
as a fluid passes through a pipe. The amount of energy lost is affected by a variety of factors,
including the fluid's speed and viscosity. The roughness of the pipe walls may also be an issue if
the flow is turbulent. Friction losses cause pressure to drop throughout the length of the pipe,
increasing the amount of power needed to keep the flow going. These losses can build up in
systems with long piping sections, such as heat exchangers, oil pipelines, and fire suppression
systems. The energy in pipe is transformed into thermal energy because of internal friction and
turbulence. This conversion results in the expression of the energy loss in terms of fluid height,
which is known as the head loss and is generally classified into two categories. The major
losses are caused by frictional energy loss caused by the viscous effects of the fluid and the
roughness of the pipe wall. Because the pressure must work against frictional resistance, major
losses result in a reduction in pressure along the pipe. Minor losses, on the other hand, are
energy losses caused by changes in the magnitude or direction of the flowing fluid's velocity
and occur through fittings such as bends and couplings. The total energy loss in a pipe system is
the sum of the major and minor energy losses.
3. THEORY :-
Bernoulli’s theorem assumes that the flow is frictionless, steady, and incompressible.
These assumptions are also based on the laws of conservation of mass and energy. Thus,
the input mass and energy for a given control volume are equal to the output mass and
energy:
First, we will calculate the work done (W1) on the fluid in the region BC. Work done is
W1 = P1A1 (v1∆t) = P1∆V
Moreover, if we consider the equation of continuity, the same volume of fluid will pass through BC
and DE. Therefore, work done by the fluid on the right-hand side of the pipe or DE region is
W2 = P2A2 (v2∆t) = P2∆V
Thus, we can consider the work done on the fluid as – P2∆V. Therefore, the total work done on the
fluid is
4
W1 – W2 = (P1 − P2) ∆V
The total work done helps to convert the gravitational potential energy and kinetic energy of the
fluid. Now, consider the fluid density as ρ and the mass passing through the pipe as ∆m in the ∆t
interval of time.
Hence, ∆m = ρA1 v1∆t = ρ∆V
Now, we have to calculate the change in gravitational potential energy ∆U.
Similarly, the change in ∆K or kinetic energy can be written as
Calculation of Bernoulli’s Equation
Applying work-energy theorem in the volume of the fluid, the equation will be
Dividing each term by ∆V, we will obtain the equation
Rearranging the equation will yield
The above equation is the Bernoulli’s equation. However, the 1 and 2 of both the sides of the
equation denotes two different points along the pipe. Thus, the general equation can be written as
5
Thus, we can state that Bernoulli’s equation state that the Pressure (P), potential energy (ρgh) per
unit volume and the kinetic energy (ρv2/2) per unit volume will remain constant.
6
4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
1.20
1.00
0.80
overdamped
0.60 critically
Y(t)
underdamped
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00
-0.20
time, min
Figure [Link] Manometer response to step input
7
Figure 4.1, is drawn with reference to Table 1 as shown in Appendix. It shows the manometer
response to a step input. The first curve is underdamped. For ζ < 1, the response curve is
oscillatory in nature and it becomes less oscillatory when ζ is increased. The slope at origin is
zero for all values of ζ. [1]
The second curve is non-oscillatory for ζ = 1 and is known as critically damped function. [1]
The third curve is overdamped, response is non-oscillatory and becomes more sluggish when ζ is
increased.[1]
1.600
1.400
0.1
1.200 0.2
1.000 0.3
0.4
0.800 0.5
Y(t)
0.600 0.6
0.7
0.400 0.8
0.9
0.200
0.000
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00
-0.200
t/tau
Figure [Link] Response of a second order system to a unit-step forcing function
Figure 4.2 is drawn in reference to the Table 2, we can observe that with the increasing values of
ζ from 0.1 to 0.9, the overshoot as well as oscillations decreases. The second order function has
its nature mainly towards the underdamped response. [3]
Figure 4.3 is drawn with reference to Table 5, first curve shows the curve for period of
oscillations, second curve shows the response of overshoot and third curve shows the decay ratio
response.
8
6. CONCLUSION
Of all three cases it can be concluded that underdamped response occurs most frequently in
control systems. For lower values of ζ, the system is oscillatory. As we increase the value of ζ,
9
the overshoot decreases making the response more stable. Therefore, we prefer higher values of
damping coefficient for our system.
7. REFERENCES
1. [Link]
2. [Link]
%27s+theorem+apparatus&cvid=277c2b77df824264b35aa8e450a8ff8f&aqs=edge.2.69i57j69i59j0j6
9i59j0j46j0j46l2.7125j0j1&FORM=ANNTA1&PC=DCTS
3. bernoulli's theorem apparatus - Search ([Link])
10
