Fmcpra2 Lab Report PDF

P a g e | 1
MABENGO N.D. STUDENT NO. 48591238 July 2013

INTRODUCTION

On or about the 29
th
June 2013, we were embarked on an endeavour of completing
our practical exercise in relation with the theoretical part of Fluid Mechanics II Module;
the said session took place at Room D014A of the Vaal University of Technology.

After a brief introductory excerpt by Mr. PITA, our instructor, data on two experiments;
namely Hydrostatic Pressure and Bernoulli Theorem Demonstration, had to be
recorded, analysed and interpreted to constitute the backbone of this report.

1. HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE PRACTICAL

Before any attempt to get into the core of this subject, we unassumingly believe that it is
worth to underline that the effect of hydrostatic pressure is of major significance in many
areas of engineering, such as shipbuilding, the construction of dykes, weirs and locks,
and in sanitary and building services engineering.

Furthermore, hydrostatic pressure is, the pressure exerted by a fluid at equilibrium due to
the force of gravity. A fluid in this condition is known as a hydrostatic fluid. So our
Hydrostatic pressure practical was to determine the hydrostatic pressure of water on a
flat surface. Adding weight and then filling the tank with water to the point where the
apparatus was in equilibrium so that we can calculate the force on the flat surface
using the given equations.

1.1 AIM OF THE EXPERIMENT

The aim of this experiment is to experimentally locate the centre of pressure of a vertical
submerged surface, determine the position of the line of action of the thrust and
compare the measurements to theoretical predictions.

1.2 SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION OF THE APPARATUS

The equipment required for the accomplishment of our task is:

The F1-12 Hydrostatic Pressure Apparatus
F1-10 Hydraulics Bench (water source)

A fabricated quadrant is mounted on a balance arm which pivots on knife edges. The
knife edges coincide with the centre of arc of the quadrant. Thus, of the hydrostatic
forces acting on the quadrant when immersed in water, only the force on the
rectangular end face gives rise to a moment about the knife edges (forces on the
curved surfaces resolve through the pivot and have no effect on the moment). This
moment is counteracted by variable weights at a fixed distance from the pivot allowing
the magnitude and position of the hydrostatic force to be determined for different
water depths. The quadrant can be operated with the vertical end face partially or fully
submerged, allowing the difference in theory to be investigated.

P a g e | 2

The balance arm incorporates a weight hanger for the weights supplied and an
adjustable counterbalance weight to ensure that the balance arm is horizontal before
immersing the quadrant in water. The assembled balance arm is mounted on top of a
clear acrylic tank which may be levelled by adjusting three screwed feet. Correct
alignment is indicated on a circular spirit level mounted on the base of the tank.

A level indicator attached to the side of the tank shows when the balance arm is
horizontal.

Water is admitted to the top of the tank by a flexible tube and may be drained through
a cock in the side of the tank. The water level is indicated on a scale on the side of the
quadrant.

The key geometrical parameters of the device are:

d: the submersion depth (distance from the bottom of the surface to the free surface)

h: the depth of the centre of pressure from the free surface

h: the distance of the centre of pressure below the pivot position

B: the width of the surface

D: the height of the surface

W: the weight (mg) of the hangar

L: is the distance from the pivot point to the hangar weight

H: is the distance from the pivot point to the bottom of the vertical surface

h: either the distance from the bottom of the face to the free surface if the surface is
partially submerged or equal to D/2 if the surface is fully submerged.
P a g e | 3

Figure 1. Diagram of the Armfield hydrostatic pressure apparatus with the key geometrical
parameters defined with the surface partially submerged. F is the hydrostatic thrust and mg is the
hangar weight

Figure 2 Photo of the Armfield hydrostatic pressure apparatus

P a g e | 4

[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]

1.3 THEORY

When the quadrant is immersed in water, it is possible to analyze the forces acting on
the surfaces of the quadrant as:

1) The hydrostatic force at any point on the curved surfaces is normal to the surface
and therefore resolves through the pivot point because the pivot point is located at
the origin of the radii. Hydrostatic forces on the upper and lower curved surfaces
therefore have no net torque effect;

2) The forces on the sides of the quadrant are equal and opposite horizontal forces;

3) The hydrostatic force on the vertical submerged face is counteracted by the
balance weight. At equilibrium, the sum of the moments about the pivot point is
zero.

Thus,

where m is the hanging mass, g is the acceleration due to gravity, L is the distance from
the pivot point to the hanging mass, and h is the distance from the pivot point to the
centre of pressure.

With the mass, balance length, and hydrostatic force determined, the location of the
centre of pressure on the end face may be determined for either a partially submerged
vertical face or a fully submerged vertical face.

For the case of a partially submerged face the hydrostatic thrust is defined as

Where A is the wetted surface area of the vertical face (Bd), is the density of water,
and h is the mean depth of immersion (h = d/2). Therefore the hydrostatic thrust is

Substituting Eq. 3 into Eqn. 1 and solving for h yields the experimentally determined
distance between the pivot point and centre of pressure

P a g e | 5

[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[12]
[11]
The theoretical depth of pressure below the free surface is

where Ix is the 2
nd
moment of area of immersed section about an axis in the free surface.
Applying the parallel axes theorem yields

Substituting Eqn. 6 into Eqn. 5 yields

From geometry, the theoretical depth of centre of pressure below the pivot point is

Combining Eqn. 7 and Eqn. 8 yields the theoretical depth of centre of pressure

For the case where the vertical face of the quadrant is fully submerged, the hydrostatic
thrust is

Substituting Eqn. 10 into Eqn. 1 the experimental distance between the pivot point and
the centre of pressure is

The theoretical depth of pressure below the free surface is given by Eqn. 5. Applying
the parallel axes theorem for the fully submerged surface yields

P a g e | 6

[13]
[14]
Inserting Eqn. 12 into Eqn. 5 yields

Substituting Eqn. 13 into Eqn. 8 the theoretical depth of centre of pressure below the
pivot point is

1.4 METHOD

Setup

- The empty tank had to be positioned on the hydraulic bench
- The screwed feet was adjusted until the base was horizontal
- The drain valve were to be closed to avoid losing water

Readings

A small mass of 50g had to be added to the balancing arm
Water had to be added to the tank until the balancing arm was horizontal
The depth of immersion readings from the scale on the face of the quadrant had to
be recorded.
The same thing was to be repeated by adding more weight to the increment of 50g
each until we had 5 readings and the quadrant was totally submerged.

1.5 RESULTS

A priori technical data of the hydrostatic apparatus were given in the table bellow:

Description Symbol Size
Length of balance L 275 mm
Quadrant to pivot H 200 mm
Height D 100 mm
Width of quadrant B 75 mm

P a g e | 7

At the end of the 5 readings, the results obtained were recorded in a table as follows:

Height of
Quadrant
D (m)
Width of
Quadrant
B (m)
Length
of
Balance
L (m)
Quadrant
to pivot H
(m)
Mass
(kg)
Depth of
immersion
d (m)
Thrust
(Fr) (N)
2
nd
Moment
Experimental
h(m)
2
nd

moment
theory
h(m)
1 0.1 0.075 0.275 0.2 0.05 0.044 0.712206 0.189394 0.185333
2 0.1 0.075 0.275 0.2 0.1 0.064 1.506816 0.179036 0.178667
3 0.1 0.075 0.275 0.2 0.15 0.08 2.3544 0.171875 0.173333
4 0.1 0.075 0.275 0.2 0.2 0.094 3.250544 0.165988 0.168667
5 0.1 0.075 0.275 0.2 0.25 0.107 4.193775 0.160819 0.164620

Calculations

For reason of space, we have opted to only represent on this report sample calculations
performed as they appear on the above table.

Sample calculations of the Thrust (Fr) for a partitially submerged quadrant:

( ) N gBd Fr 712206 . 0 044 . 0 075 . 0 81 . 9 1000
2
1
2
1
2 2
= = =

Sample calculations of the Thrust (Fr) for a fully submerged quadrant:

N
D
d gBD Fr 193775 . 4
2
1 . 0
107 . 0 1 . 0 075 . 0 81 . 9 1000
2
=
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
.
|
\
|
=

Sample calculation of the Theoretical 2
nd
Moment h for a partially submerged
quadrant:

m
d
H h 185333 . 0
3
044 . 0
2 . 0
3
" = = =

Sample calculation of the Experimental 2
nd
Moment h for a partially submerged
quadrant:

( )
m
Bd
mL
h 189394 . 0
044 . 0 075 . 0 1000
275 . 0 05 . 0 2 2
"
2 2
=

= =

P a g e | 8

Sample calculation of the Theoretical 2
nd
Moment h for a fully submerged quadrant:

m
D
d
D
d
D
H h 16462 . 0 107 . 0
2
1 . 0
107 . 0
2
1 . 0
107 . 0
12
1 . 0
2 . 0
2
2 12
"
2
2
2
2
=
|
.
|
\
|
+
+ =
|
.
|
\
|
+
+ =
Sample calculation of the Experimental 2
nd
Moment h for a fully submerged quadrant:

m
D
d BD
mL
h 160819 . 0
2
1 . 0
107 . 0 1 . 0 075 . 0 1000
275 . 0 25 . 0
2
" =
|
.
|
\
|

=
|
.
|
\
|

=

Graphs

THRUST vs DEPTH OF IMMERSION

Depth of immersion (m)
H
y
d
r
o
s
t
a
t
i
c

F
o
r
c
e

(
N
)

P a g e | 9


2
n
d

M
o
m
e
n
t

E
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l

(
m
)

2
n
d

M
o
m
e
n
t

T
h
e
o
r
e
t
i
c
a
l

(
m
)

P a g e | 10

Discussion of results

From the above graphs we can inconspicuously conclude that as the depth of the
water increased, the hydrostatic thrust increased and the distance to the centre of
pressure decreased. The centre of pressure moved closer to the centre of the vertical
face as the depth increased. The experimental values for the distance to the centre of
pressure were smaller than the theoretical distances at nearly all submersion depths.
Since the same hydrostatic force is used to calculate the turning moments, the
experimental turning moment was also smaller than the theoretical turning moment at
nearly all submersion depths, this is the reason why the relationship between the 2
nd

moment theoretical and the depth of immersion is purely linear and that of the 2
nd

moment experimental and the depth of immersion is more or less linear.

The reader should also bear in mind that as the depth of immersion increased, the
second moment turning moment decreased.

1.6 CONCLUSION

In this practical the turning moment and the distance to centre of pressure in relation to
depth were determined. The objectives of this practical were to determine the
hydrostatic thrust acting on a plane surface immersed in water when the surface is
partially submerged or fully submerged, to determine the position of the line of action of
the thrust and to compare the position determined by experiment with the theoretical
position.

The objectives of this endeavour were accomplished using a F1-10 Hydraulics Bench
and F1-12 Hydrostatic Pressure Apparatus. As the depth of the water increased, the
hydrostatic thrust increased and the centre of pressure moved closer to the centre of
the vertical face.

Causes of inaccurate readings

The experimental distances to the centre of pressure were lower than the theoretical
distances to the centre of pressure. Many factors may have contributed to this
discrepancy. Water splashing onto the balance arm or quadrant would cause
overestimation of the water depth for equilibrium, changes in water temperature would
cause variations in the water density, and excess weight on the masses would cause
underestimation of the experimental distance to the centre of pressure.

What was learnt from this experiment?

Besides the theoretical part about hydrostatic forces acting on plane surfaces, I have
gained a lot in terms of familiarising myself with equipment that can be used in a Fluid
Mechanics Lab: I was unaware of the fact that there is a countless of manufacturers of
such equipment to advance the cause of science and technology in the country.
Furthermore, I have gained more insight in the use of software such as Excel in the
generation of graphs for results comparison.
P a g e | 11

2. BERNOULLIS THEOREM DEMONSTRATION

2.1 AIM OF EXPERIMENT

The main objective of this experiment is to investigate the validity of the Bernoull is
equation when applied to steady flow of water in a tapered duct.

2.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPARATUS

The equipment used to for the test is:

The F1-15 Bernoullis theorem demonstration Apparatus
F1-10 Hydraulics Bench (water source)

The test section is an accurately machined clear acrylic duct of varying circular cross
section. It is provided with a number of side-hole pressure tappings which are
connected to the manometers housed on the rig. These tappings allow the
measurement of static pressure head simultaneously at each of 6 sections.

Fig. 3 accurately machined clear acrylic duct of varying circular cross section

The apparatus has the following elements:

- Venturi meter
- Pad of manometer tubes
- Pump
- Water tank equipped with valves water controller
- Water hosts and tubes.

In addition to the above students should also use:

- A stop watch
- Water
P a g e | 12


Fig. 4 Photo of the Bernoullis Theorem Apparatus

2.3 SHORT SUMMARY AND THEORY

In fluid dynamics, Bernoullis principle is best explained in the application that involves
inviscid flow, whereby the speed of the moving fluid is increased simultaneously whether
with the depleting pressure or the potential energy relevant to the fluid itself. In various
types of fluid flow, Bernoullis principle usually relates to Bernoullis equation.

Technically, different types of fluid involve different forms of Bernoullis equation.

Bernoullis principle complies with the principle of conservation of energy. In a steady
flow, at all points of the streamline of a flowing fluid is the same as the sum of all forms of
mechanical energy along the streamline. It can be simplified as a constant practice of
the sum of potential energy as well as kinetic energy.

Fluid particles core properties are their pressure and weight. As a matter of fact, if a
fluid is moving horizontally along a streamline, the increase in speed can be explained
due to the fluid that moves from a region of high pressure to a lower pressure region
and so with the inverse condition with the decrease in speed. In the case of a fluid that
moves horizontally, the highest speed is the one at the lowest pressure, whereas the
lowest speed is present at the highest pressure.

Bernoullis principle relates much with incompressible fluids flow. Below is a common
form of such an equation, where it is valid at any arbitrary point along a streamline
when gravity is constant.

constant
2
2
= + +
p
gz
v
[1]
P a g e | 13

Where v: the fluid flow speed at a point on a streamline;
g: the acceleration due to gravity
z: the elevation of the point above a reference plane, with the positive z-
direction pointing upward so in the direction opposite to the gravitational
acceleration.
p: the pressure at the point, and
: the density of the fluid at all points in the fluid.

If equation [1] is multiplied with fluid density, , it can be rewritten as follows:

constant
2
1
2
= + + p gz v [2]

or constant = + = + gz p gh q
o
[3]

Where:
2
2
1
v q = is the dynamic pressure,

g
p
z h
+ = is the piezometric head or hydraulic head (the sum of the elevation z

and the pressure head)

po = p + q is the total pressure (the sum of the static pressure p and dynamic
pressure q).

The above equations suggest there is a flow speed at which pressure is zero, and at
even higher speeds the pressure is negative. Most often, gases and liquids are not
capable of negative absolute pressure, or even zero pressure, so clearly Bernoullis
equation ceases to be valid before zero pressure is reached. In liquids, when the
pressure becomes too low, cavitations occur. The above equations use a linear
relationship between flow speed squared and pressure.

Generally in many applications of Bernoullis equations, it is common to neglect the
values of g z term, since the change is so small compared to other values. Thus, the
previous expression can be simplified as follows:

P + q = p0 [4]

Where p0 is the total pressure and q is the dynamic pressure, whereas p usually refers as
static pressure. Therefore,

Total pressure = static pressure + dynamic pressure

P a g e | 14

However, a few assumptions are taken into account in order to achieve the objectives
of experiment, which are:

- The fluid involved is incompressible (water);
- The flow is steady;
- The flow is frictionless.

2.4 METHOD (EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE)

1. The discharge valve and the inlet valve are opened.
2. The pump switch is opened. The flow control valve is then opened and the
bench valve is adjusted to allow the flow through the manometer.
3. The air bleed screw is opened and the cap is removed from the adjacent air
valve until the same level of water in manometers is reached. The bench valve is
adjusted until a certain head difference of water is obtained.
4. The ball valve is closed and the time taken to accumulate a known volume of
water in a measuring tube is taken to determine the volume of flow rate.
5. The whole process is repeated 3 times so as to obtain 3 different set of readings.

2.5 RESULTS

Tables

To allow the calculation of the dimensions of the test section, the tapping positions and
the test section diameters are shown on the following table:

Tapping position Manometer legend Diameter (mm)
A H1 25
B H2 13.9
C H3 11.8
D H4 10.7
E H5 10
F H6 25

P a g e | 15

Results obtained for the 3 set of data readings are recorded in the tables bellow:

Pressure difference = 29mm water
Volume (m
3
) = 25 x 10
-5

Time = 5s
Flow rate (m
3
/s) = 5 x 10
-5

Setting
Pressure
head
Area of
duct (m
2
)
Velocity
(m/s)
Static
head h,
(m)
Dynamic
head, (m)
Total head
h
o
(m)
1 H1 490.9 x10
-6
0.1019 0.274 0.0005 0.2745
1 H2 151.7 x10
-6
0.3296 0.270 0.0055 0.2755
1 H3 109.4 x10
-6
0.457 0.264 0.0106 0.2746
1 H4 89.9 x10
-6
0.5561 0.258 0.0158 0.2738
1 H5 78.5 x10
-6
0.6369 0.245 0.0207 0.2657

Volume (m
3
) = 455 x 10
-6

Time = 5s
Flow rate (m
3
/s) = 91 x 10
-6

Setting
Pressure
head
Area of
duct (m
2
)
Velocity
(m/s)
Static
head h,
(m)
Dynamic
head, (m)
Total head
h
o
(m)
2 H1 490.9 x10
-6
0.1854 0.295 0.0018 0.2968
2 H2 151.7 x10
-6
0.5999 0.280 0.0183 0.2983
2 H3 109.4 x10
-6
0.8318 0.265 0.0353 0.3003
2 H4 89.9 x10
-6
1.0122 0.249 0.0522 0.3012
2 H5 78.5 x10
-6
1.1592 0.219 0.0685 0.2875

P a g e | 16


Pressure difference = 31 mm water
Volume (m
3
) = 266 x 10
-6

Time = 5s
Flow rate (m
3
/s) = 53.2 x 10
-6

Setting
Pressure
head
Area of
duct (m
2
)
Velocity
(m/s)
Static
head h,
(m)
Dynamic
head, (m)
Total head
h
o
(m)
2 H1 490.9 x10
-6
0.108 0.277 0.0006 0.277
2 H2 151.7 x10
-6
0.351 0.270 0.0063 0.276
2 H3 109.4 x10
-6
0.486 0.264 0.0121 0.276
2 H4 89.9 x10
-6
0.599 0.258 0.0178 0.276
2 H5 78.5 x10
-6
0.678 0.246 0.0234 0.269

Difference (%) margin between using Bernoullis equation and continuity equation for
the 3 set of readings

Pressure
head
Using Bernoullis equation
Using Continuity
Equation
Difference
Total head,
h
o
(m)
Static head,
hi (m)
) ( 2
i
o
a
h h g V =
Duct Area
(m
2
)
A
Q
V
b
=
( )
b
b a
V
V V

H1 0.2745 0.274 0.0990 490.9 x10
-6
0.1019
-2.8%
H2 0.2755 0.270 0.3285 151.7 x10
-6
0.3296
-0.3%
H3 0.2746 0.264 0.4560 109.4 x10
-6
0.4570
-0.2%
H4 0.2738 0.258 0.5568 89.9 x10
-6
0.5561
0.1%
H5 0.2657 0.245 0.6373 78.5 x10
-6
0.6369
0.1%

P a g e | 17


Pressure
head
Using Continuity
Equation
Difference
Total head,
h
o
(m)
Static head,
hi (m)
) ( 2
i
o
a
h h g V =
Duct Area
(m
2
)
A
Q
V
b
=
( )
b
b a
V
V V

H1
0.297 0.295 0.187925517 490.9 x10
-6

0.1854 1.36%
H2
0.298 0.280 0.599204473 151.7 x10
-6

0.5999 -0.12%
H3
0.300 0.265 0.83221752 109.4 x10
-6

0.8318 0.05%
H4
0.301 0.249 1.012009881 89.9 x10
-6

1.0122 -0.02%
H5
0.288 0.219 1.159297201 78.5 x10
-6

1.1592 0.01%

Pressure
head
Using Continuity
Equation
Difference
Total head,
h
o
(m)
Static head,
hi (m)
) ( 2
i
o
a
h h g V =
Duct Area
(m
2
)
A
Q
V
b
=
( )
b
b a
V
V V

H1
0.2776 0.277 0.1085 490.9 x10
-6

0.1084 0.09%
H2
0.2763 0.27 0.3516 151.7 x10
-6

0.3507 0.25%
H3
0.2761 0.264 0.4872 109.4 x10
-6

0.4863 0.19%
H4
0.2758 0.258 0.5910 89.9 x10
-6

0.5918 -0.14%
H5
0.2694 0.246 0.6776 78.5 x10
-6

0.6777 -0.02%

P a g e | 18

Calculations

The reader should bear in mind that these are only sample calculations as the full
calculated data appear on the tables above.

Flow rate (Q) = s m / 10 5
5
10 25
3 5
5

Velocity (V) = s m
A
Q
/ 1019 . 0
10 9 . 490
10 5
6
5
=

Dynamic head =
( )
m
g
v
0005 . 0
62 . 19
1019 . 0
2
2 2
= =

Total head = Static head + Dynamic head

= 0.274 + 0.0005

= 0.2745m

Graphs

Velocity (m/s)
A
r
e
a

o
f

d
u
c
t

(
m
2
)

P a g e | 19


2.6 DISCUSSION

From the above graphs we can easily deduce that as fluid flows from a wider pipe to a
narrower one, the velocity of the flowing fluid increases. This is also shown in all the
tables, where the velocity of water that flows in the tapered duct increases when the
duct area decreases, regardless of the pressure difference and type of flow of each
result taken. For instance, the velocities at pressure head H5 at pressure difference of
29mm, 31mm and 76mm are 0.637, 0.678 and 1.1592 respectively.

2.7 CONCLUSION

From the experiment conducted, the total head pressure increases and the velocity is
increasing along the same channel. This is following exactly the Bernoullis principle for a
steady flow of water.

Cause of inaccurate readings

There must be some error or weaknesses when taking the measurement of each data.
One of them is, the observer must have not read the level of static head properly,
where the eyes are not perpendicular to the water level on the manometer, this may
cause some minor defects on the calculations.

2.8 RECOMMENDATION

Repeat the experiment several times to get the average value;
Make sure the bubbles are fully removed and not left in the manometer;
The eye of the observer should be parallel to the water level on the manometer;
The values should be controlled slowly to maintain the pressure difference
unchanged;
The valve and bleed screw should regulate smoothly to reduce the errors;
Make sure there is no leakage along the tube to avoid the water flowing out.
T
o
t
a
l

h
e
a
d

(
m
)

Static head (m)
P a g e | 20

REFERENCES

1. B.R. Munson, D.F. Young, and T.H. Okiishi, Fundamentals of Fluids Mechanics, 3
rd
ed.,
1998, Wiley.

2. C.F. Meyer, Principles of Fluid Mechanics, 2
nd
ed, 1995, CM TEK Lecture materials cc.

3. Armfield Limited, 2002, Instruction Manual F1-16, Ringwood, Hampshire. BH24 1DY
England

Fmcpra2 Lab Report PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fmcpra2 Lab Report PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fmcpra2 Lab Report PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

P a g e | 1

MABENGO N.D. STUDENT NO. 48591238 July 2013

+ = is the piezometric head or hydraulic head (the sum of the elevation z

You might also like