1

Energy Analysis of Pipes and Fittings

Clifford Hansel Fel A. Sagarino1, Eros Tristan A. Jabines2, and Dewey Siong3

3
4Abstract: Losses are always present in a piping system and this should be taken into
5consideration. The experiment deals with the losses on pipes and fittings. The head losses in the
6system are observed as a drop in the hydraulic and energy grade line. When fluid flows through
7any passage which in the experiment it passes through pipes and fittings there is hydraulic drop
8due friction and some restrictions and this head losses can be determined by the use of
9manometers installed along the piping system. Losses can be read as the change of height of the
10fluid seen from the manometer. The head of the tank is maintained at a constant to achieve.
11Corresponding pipe coefficients (K) are determined by getting the volume flow rate hence
12obtaining the velocity of the fluid along the pipes. The K values of the similar and identical
13fittings calculated is used to calculate the head loss for the piping system that do not have
14manometers installed in similar and identical fittings. Lastly, the hydraulic and energy grade line
15of each pipe is plotted in a graph to observe the head losses along the pipes.
16
17
18Author Keywords:Pressure drop; Pipe friction; Discharge loss; Losses in Pipe Fittings;
19Hydraulic grade; Energy grade line; Manometer; Piezometer
20
21
22
23_________________________
1
24
Student, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of San Carlos, Cebu City,
25Philippines. E-mail: chf_saga24@yahoo.com
2
26
Student, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of San Carlos, Cebu City,
27Philippines. E-mail: erosjabines@yahoo.com
3
28
Student, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of San Carlos, Cebu City,
29Philippines. E-mail:djohn_14@yahoo.com

1
2

1Introduction
2Fluid experiences losses along a piping system and is taken into consideration in piping
3construction. Pipe losses happens along the pipe length and pipe fittings which includes the gate
4valve. The losses in pipe length may be computed using the Darcy-Weisbach equation(Potter,
52012). Other cause of this losses may be due to sudden expansion and contraction of the flow of
6the fluid (Cengel, 2006), installations of orifice, venture flow meters, rotameter, and flow nozzles
7(Cimbala, 2004), installations of pipe fittings (Esposito, 2000), and the pressure losses due to
8some leaks along the fittings(Morse, 1953).The list can contribute to the decreasing of the
9hydraulic and energy grade line wherein the greater the slope upward, the greater the loss per
10unit length (Kundu, 2008). Piping systems installations and materials used must follow the
11ASTM standards (Avallone, 1916). When the right type of materials are chosen, the pipe system
12will require pipe fittings as shown in Fig. 1 and will ultimately be used to interconnect machines
13and equipment. There is a need to understand the hydraulic and energy grade line as
14modifications in the pipe system regarding the water elevation and pipe set-up.
15

The head losses in the pipes are measure through some gauges with regards to the change

16The manometer is an instrument that utilizes a column of liquid to measure pressure. Commonly
17used manometers are U-tube manometers (Cengel, 2006). A piezometer is a device which utilizes
18a column of liquid that rises against gravity and that measures pressure. Piezometers are long
19transparent tubes with graduations. (Esposito, 2000). All these may be used to find the change in
20pressure between the fittings. Studies are being performed to optimize flow through pipe
21networks. These include the optimization of design (Gawad, 2001), (Abebe). The ultimate goal is
22to reduce the lost energy due to friction.

1
2

Reynolds number which the properties of the fluid flowing through the pipe and pipe

2characteristics are parameters used to determine the friction factor with the use of the moody
3diagram. With the Reynolds number, it will be utilize which ultimately solve the losses along
4pipes by the use of the Darcy-Weibach equation (Potter, 2012). The velocity head plays a key
5role in establishing the energy grade line of the pipeline. Hydraulic grade line is defined as
6elevation head plus pressure head and energy grade line is the hydraulic grade line plus the
7velocity head (White, 2008).
8
9Experimental Methods
10In doing the experiment, some safety hazards were observe to safeguard the student. Before
11doing the experiment a centrifugal pump, as shown in Fig. 2 is required to provide a steady flow
12of water to the tank. The centrifugal pump requires an axial pump at is used to deliver water to
13the centrifugal pump as in a method of priming. Initially air pocketswere removed from the
14centrifugal pump when the axial pump is delivering water to it, if not done, this will cause
15damage to the pump by virtue of cavitation(Wright, 1999).Priming was needed for the
16centrifugal pump because pumping air will cause the centrifugal pump to reach speed of run17away that will lead to overheating(Esposito, 2000). When there is a steady flow of water
18coming out of the centrifugal pump gate valve the axial pump is turned off.
19The experiment proper was started by choosing a tank head by turning the crank head control to
20100cm from the cylinder reading. Water was then operated to flow to a single pipe line at a time.
21Flow is measured by the use of a 22 liter bucket with the help of a timer. The method must be
22done with two person and the velocities of each pipe flow were then calculated. Each pipe fitting

1
2

1were studied by the use of manometers in between the fitting but some do not have manometers
2to determine the head loss along it. The difference in manometer height is recorded to be the
3head loss due to the pipe fitting and in some connections because of the pipe length. The head
4loss caused by the fitting may be computed by this equation:

h Lfitting =

KV
2g

(1)

6And can now be calculated (Kundu, 2008). Connections that do not have manometers in their
7fittings will have an equal K to other fittings that have. This is because it is assumed that the all
8same fittings have the same coefficient of loss, K.
9
10Results and Discussion
11Fitting head losses are calculated using eq. (1) while head losses on pipes are calculated using
12the equation,
2

H L=

13

fL V
D2 g

14The pipe length, L, is measured manually. V is the velocity at outlet. D is the hydraulic diameter
15or the inner diameter of the pipe and g is acceleration due to gravity. The friction coefficient, f, is
16calculated using Colebrook equation.

17

1
2

2.51
=2 log (
+
)
3.7 D f
f

1The relative roughness, , is assumed to be 0.0015 for galvanized pipe. Re is the Reynolds
2number.
3The measured and calculated data of the experiment are shown on Tables 1-6.
4
5Sample Calculations:
6The K values of the Gate valve at pipe line 1at tank head of 100cm is calculated as follows:

KV2
2g

( )

((

gate valve1

=H LGate valve1

K 70.35
s
ft
2 32.2 2 (12 )
ft
s

(3)

=2

(4)

gate valve 1

K Gate valve 1=K Gate valve2 =K Gate valve 3 =0.3123

(5)

10Since the other gate valve head loss cannot be measured, they may be calculated as follows:

11

12
ft
2(32.2 2 )( )=1.2119
s
0.3123(54.7625 s)2

H L Gate valve2 =

(6)

12
ft
)( )=0. 2838
s2
0.3123(26.5 s)2

H LGate valve 3=

2(32.2
12

1
2

(7)

1The experiment performed shows that each fitting corresponds to a head loss that is unique to
2each other. These losses can be termed as the decrease energy of the piping system along the
3pipes and fittings. This is stated in (Kundu, 2008) that when the slope of the Hydraulic or Energy
4grade line increases with respect to the pipe length and fittings. The head loss also increases
5corresponding to the increase in velocity. This observation is observed in (Potter, 2012) that head
6loss is proportional to the average velocity. This is due to the decrease in velocity since velocity
7is directly proportional to the losses in the fitting. As seen in Fig. 4, Fig. 5, and Fig. 6 hydraulic
8and energy grade line was observe to fall as it nears the outlet of the pipe. Further observation is
9that the major losses in the pipe setup happens along the pipe fittings.
10Conclusion
11The experiment done determines some parameters such as pipe diameter, flow velocity, initial
12head, and pipe fitting coefficient of loss. K dictates the form and behaviour of the hydraulic and
13energy grade line of the piping system which is unique to corresponding fitting. It can be
14concluded that the hydraulic and energy grade line is an important indicator to be used in the
15design of plants and other industrial application that requires piping. A critical analysis of the
16pipe network is required to optimize the energy of the fluid wherein the design takes into account
17the effects of the fittings, pipe diameter, pipe material, and pipe flow velocity.
18Notation
19 h L

Head loss, in

20v

Velocity, in/s

21K

coefficient of loss

1
2

1g

gravitational constant, 32.3 in/s2

2 HV

Velocity Head, in

3
4
5
6
7
8
9References
10Abebe, A. J. (n.d.). Application of global optimization to the design of pipe networks
11Avallone, E. (1916). Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers
12Cengel, Y. A. (2006). Fluid Mechanics Fundamentals and Applications. New York: McGraw-Hill
13Cimbala, J. (2004). Fluid Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications.
14Didactic, F. (n.d.). Introduction to pneumatics.
15Esposito, A. (2000). Fluid Power with applications. New Jersey: Prentice Hall-Inc
16Gawad, A. (2001). Optimal design of Pipe Network by an improved algorithm. Sixth
17International Water technology Conference.
18J. David Bankston, J. (2013). Piping Systems. SRAC

1
2

1Kundu, P. K. (2008). Fluid mechanics.

2Morse, F. (1953). Power Plant Engineering
3Potter, M. C. (2012). Mechanics of Fluids. Cengage learning
4White, F. M. (2008). Fluid mechanics
5Wright, T. (1999). Fluid Machinery: Performance, Analysis, and Design
6
7
8
9Table Captions
10Table 1: Measured and computed data on Pipeline 1 at Tank Head of 100cm
11Table 2: Theoretical data on Pipeline 1
12Table 3: Measured and computed data on Pipeline 2 at Tank Head of 100cm
13Table 4: Theoretical data on Pipeline 2
14Table 5: Measured and computed data on Pipeline 3 at Tank Head of 100cm
15Table 6: Theoretical data on Pipeline 3
16
17
18Figure Captions
19Fig 1. Commonly used Pipe fittings.

1
2

1Fig 2. Experimental Set up

2Fig 3. List of coefficient of loss K in Pipe fittings
3Fig. 4. Hydraulic and Energy grade line of Pipeline 1 (Experimental and Theoretical vs. Section)
4Fig. 5. Hydraulic and Energy grade line of Pipeline 2 (Experimental and Theoretical vs. Section)
5Fig. 6. Hydraulic and Energy grade line of Pipeline 3 (Experimental and Theoretical vs. Section)
6
7
8
9Table 1: Measured and computed data on Pipeline 1 at Tank Head of 100cm
Flow rate (in3/s)
Diameter of outlet, in
velocity at outlet, in/s
Head of outlet, in

279.713
2.25
70.35

10

Section number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Pipeline 1

Head loss, in
2
19.8517
3
20.0825
4.95
13.85
3
3.4625
3
13.7346

11
12Table 2: Theoretical data on Pipeline 1
Pipeline 1
1
2

Fittings

Head loss, in
9

Flow rate (in3/s)

279.713

Gate
valve
Union
Fittings
45 bend
45 bend

1.0887
0.25617
0.25617
2.2415
2.2415

Diameter of outlet, in
velocity at outlet, in/s
Head of outlet, in

2.25
70.35

1
2
3
4
5
6Table 3: Measured and computed data on Pipeline 2 at Tank Head of 100cm
Flow rate (in3/s)
Diameter of outlet, in
velocity at outlet, in/s
Head of outlet, in

217.74
2.25
54.7625

Section number

Pipeline 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Head loss, in
1.2119
0.615
36.3
1.876
1.8178
4.367
3
1.876
10.374
1.5683

8
9
10Table 4: Theoretical data on Pipeline 2
Pipeline 2

1
2

Fittings
Gate valve
Flow meter

Head loss, in
0.6597
27.1642
10

Flow rate (in3/s)

Diameter of outlet, in
velocity at outlet, in/s

217.74
2.25
54.762
5

Union
Fittings
90 bend

0.1552
0.1552
2.9105

Head of outlet, in

1
2
3
4
5Table 5: Measured and computed data on Pipeline 3 at Tank Head of 100cm
Flow rate (in3/s)
Diameter of outlet, in
velocity at outlet, in/s
Head of outlet, in

32.51135
1.25
26.5

Section number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Pipeline 3

Head loss, in
0.2838
0.752
64
0.28516
0.6407
0.1750
8.5
2.25535
6.429
0.5703

7
8Table 6: Theoretical data on Pipeline 3

Fittings
Gate valve
Pipeline 3

1
2

Head loss, in
0.2325

Union

0.0547

Flow meter
90 bend

6.36
1.0258
11

Flow rate (in3/s)

Diameter of outlet, in
velocity at outlet, in/s
Head of outlet, in

32.5113
5
1.25
26.5

1
2
3

4
5

Fig 1. Commonly used Pipe Fittings

6
7
8
9
10
11
1
2

12

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

1
2

Fig 2. Experimental Set up

13

1
2

Fig 3. List of coefficient of loss K in Pipe fittings

Courtesy of engineering toolbox

4
5
6

1
2

14

Experimental (HGL)
Theoretical (HGL)
Experimental (EGL)
Theoretical (EGL)

1
2
3
4

Fig. 4. Hydraulic and Energy grade line of Pipeline 1

(Experimental and Theoretical vs. Section)

5
6

1
2

15

Experimental(HGL)
Theoretical(HGL)
Experimental(EGL)
Theoretical(EGL)

1
2
3
4

Fig. 5. Hydraulic and Energy grade line of Pipeline 2

(Experimental and Theoretical vs. Section)

5
6

1
2

16

Experimental(HGL)
Theoretical9HGL)
Experimental(EGL)
Theoretical(EGL)

1
2
3
4

Fig. 6. Hydraulic and Energy grade line of Pipeline 3

Experimental and Theoretical vs. Section)

1
2

17