SOLUTIONS FOR LATERAL INFLOW

IN PERFORATED CONDUITS
By Z b i g n i e w Siwon 1

ABSTRACT: A one-dimensional model for a steady inflow of a Newtonian, in-

compressible fluid to a horizontal pipe perforated with circular orifices along
the entire length is considered. Experiments show that perforated pipes have
a greater equivalent sand roughness height of the wall compared to nonper-
forated pipes. At a certain spacing of the orifices, the Darcy-Weisbach friction
factor depends on the Reynolds number, wall permeability, and wall roughness
height. In some cases the friction factor in perforated pipes was found to be
80% higher than in nonperforated pipes. The equation of motion includes both
the effect of the discontinuity of inflow along the perforated pipe and the effect
of the lateral inflow angle on the total energy loss in the main stream. The
maximum value of the coefficient i\p, which describes this influence, is 0.77
and is lower than the theoretical maximum value 1.0.

INTRODUCTION

Feed-water inflow to a perforated pipe or a pipe system arises in many

practical applications and in a number of fields (e.g., in water distri-
bution and sewage disposal systems, in land amelioration, and in chem-
ical engineering design and practice). Since systems are designed to pro-
vide a uniform distribution of inflow rate along the entire length of
perforated pipe, it is necessary to determine an adequate diameter and
an appropriate spacing and arrangement of inlet orifices. Most of the
information in the literature (2-7,10,12,17) deals with the outflow of a
fluid along the pipe length. These investigations use the one-dimen-
sional equation of steady motion, generally a differential form of Ber-
noulli's energy equation, and the continuity equation. Unlike the equa-
tion of motion given in this paper (Eq. 7), Bernoulli's equation does not
consider the energy loss associated with the inflow [the term P(V - V)
dV].
In the available literature, the experimental work was done for per-
forated pipes with wall permeabilities, (j>, smaller than 0.01, and the
models for energy loss assumed that: (1) The inflow (or outflow) of fluid
is continuous along the pipe length; (2) the friction factor of perforated
pipe, fp, is identical to the friction factor of nonperforated pipe, /; and
(3) the discharge coefficient at each perforation, p., is constant along the
path of the stream [thus the inflow (or outflow) rate is solely a function
of the piezometric pressure in the pipe]. In some of the available ref-
erences, further simplifications were made. Refs. 2 and 4 fail to incor-
porate the energy loss due to stream mass decrement along the flow.
Ref. 3 neglects energy losses resulting from linear friction resistance—
and such an approach is only valid as applied to very short pipes.
'Prof., Inst, of Envir. Protection Engrg., Tech. Univ. of Wroclaw, Wroclaw,
Poland.
Note.—Discussion open until February 1, 1988. To extend the closing date one
month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The
manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on
March 24, 1986. This paper is part of the Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol.
113, No. 9, September, 1987. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9429/87/0009-1117/$01.00. Pa-
per No. 21776.
1117
ownloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyri
 In this paper, analysis and experimental results are given for energy
losses caused by the steady inflow of an incompressible Newtonian fluid
to a perforated pipe, having uniformly sized and spaced circular wall
openings.

EQUATION OF MOTION

The motion of a fluid flowing through a perforated pipe with spaced

inlets drilled along its length can be considered as a stream flow char-
acterized by changes in mass, momentum, and energy (Fig. 1). The one-
dimensional equation of motion incorporates all of the forces (internal
and external) acting on the elementary liquid volume and takes the form
(13)
dV d (p \ , , , T? dp , V(V-V')dQ

I u2dA
JA
in which B= - (2)
H
V2A W

dV dV dV
— =_ V +— (3)
dt dx dt
dQ 8Q dQ
-^ = J*V + J± (4)
dt dx dt
dS 33 3S
"T = — V +— (5)
dt dx dt
and V = mean velocity at point x; V = projection of lateral inflow ve-
locity on the direction of the main stream velocity vector; Q = discharge
in conduit at point x; t = time; A = cross-sectional area of pipe; u = local

0.866 I
JUL
energy grode line
hydraulic grade line

perforated
section

~ -t Ei
459 mm
38 mm 38 mm

FIG. 1.—Pressure Changes In Perforated Pipe with Lateral Inflow along Its Length
and Arrangement of Orifices

1118
Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copy
 velocity in cross-sectional area dA of pipe; ig = energy loss due to fric-
tion; and p = fluid density.
Eq. 1 has been derived using the following assumptions: (1) The stream
mass increases along the path in a continuous manner; (2) the velocity
of the lateral inflow differs from the velocity of the main stream, and
(3) the stream mass is independent of velocity. For steady flow through
a horizontal, perforated pipe of constant area and a constant value of (3
along the flow, multiplying Eq. 1 by dx and using V (dQ/Q) = (l/A)dQ
= dV we obtain
dp LV2
— + &VdV + ,JL—dx + |3(V - V')dV = 0 (6)
p 2D
in which fp = Darcy-Weisbach friction factor in perforated pipe; and D
= internal diameter of pipe.
The last two terms of Eq. 6 describe the loss of total specific energy
of the stream. The variation of pressure energy along the path of the
stream is greater than the variation of total energy by the value of the
pVdV term characterizing the variation of specific kinetic energy of the
stream. The term P(V - V')dV is the loss of energy caused by the con-
tinuous addition of mass along the stream. This energy loss owes its
origin both to the turbulent mixing of the main stream particles with the
particles of the lateral inflow and to the change in the direction of the
velocity vectors in the lateral inflows. When V > V, the particles of the
lateral inflow display a lower kinetic energy than the particles of the
main stream. Thus, the mixing of the two types of particles accounts for
the loss of specific energy in the main stream.
In engineering practice, the inflow of a fluid to a perforated pipe takes
place through independent, lateral inflows entering the main stream
through orifices drilled in the pipe wall. Thus changes in the mass and
momentum of the main stream occur discretely. Energy loss in the main
stream may differ from those occurring with a continuous inflow. The
difference is caused by turbulence generated by the independent lateral
inflows, the forces resulting from the limitation of the stream due to the
pipe wall (and its determined thickness), and the expansion and con-
traction of the main flow. A theoretical formulation of energy loss as-
sociated with discrete changes in the mass and momentum of the stream
(derived from conservation of momentum) has not yielded satisfactory
results.
In this paper, consideration is given both to the effect of the discon-
tinuity of inflow and to the effect of the angle between the velocity vec-
tors of the lateral inflow and the axis of the main stream. This joint effect
is represented by the coefficient T|p in the last term of Eq. 6. Thus, we
can write
dp LV2
-*• + (1 + ^WdV + '^dx =0 (7)
(fp is the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor for perforated pipe). The orifices
in the pipe wall cause the laminar sublayer to be discontinuous and a
perturbation of flow at each opening. Consequently, fp differs from /
(friction factor for nonperforated pipe).
1119
ownloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyr
 EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
For the empirical verification of the coefficients fp and t\p in Eq. 7, lab-
oratory tests were run on a hydraulic model that enabled measurements
to be made under conditions of lateral inflow along the pathway of the
stream (14).
The perforated pipes under test were made of polyvinyl chloride (PVC),
and had an internal diameter of 56.6 ± 0.1 mm, and a wall thickness of
5.2 mm. They were placed in a 114-mm-diameter nonperforated mantle
pipe consisting of 10 sections (each 0.46 m long), connected with piezo-
metric rings that sensed the average piezometric pressure inside the per-
forated pipe. Each of these mantle pipe sections was fed with controlled
amounts of water. The following quantities were measured throughout
the experiments: flow rate in the perforated pipe (at the inlet to and the
outlet from the whole section); rate of inflow to each section (used ro-
tameters); difference in piezometric head along the perforated pipe
(measuring locations 0.5 m apart); water temperature and the temper-
ature of the ambient environment. The perforation consisted of checker-
wise arranged, drilled orifices having diameters of 4.5 mm, 6.0 mm, and
9.0 mm. The hole pattern is equilateral triangles (Fig. 1). The perme-
ability, <)>, of the pipe wall (measured as a ratio of the surface area of all
orifices to the internal surface area of the pipe wall) was 0.00787, 0.03147,
and 0.1259 for 4.5-mm-diameter orifices; 0.00763, 0.03052, and 0.1259 for
6.0-mm diameter orifices; and 0.007153, 0.03147, and 0.1259 for 9.0-mm-
diameter orifices. Friction factors (/) were determined for nonperforated
pipes (before the orifices were drilled). The measurements were per-
formed in two stages. In the first stage, /,,, was investigated for no lateral
inflow (constant flow rate along the pipe) for the Reynolds number (R)
range 3,545-166,000. In the second stage the coefficients P and T)P were
studied over a Reynolds number range (R2) 9,680-125,830, based upon
the terminal cross section of the pipe, and over the Reynolds number
range (Rs) 12.6-4,562 for the lateral inflow. The relative, root-mean-square
error in the determination of fp equaled 0.8%, whereas the maximum
error was 3.67% (14).

EQUIVALENT SAND ROUGHNESS HEIGHT OF WALL IN PERFORATED PIPE

The measurements of / (Darcy-Weisbach friction factor) in nonperfor-

ated pipes show that, if the Reynolds number ranges between 3,545 and
105,000, the flow through the pipe will occur under turbulent smooth
flow conditions. The best-fit relation to these experimental results is
1 , 5.28
^=" 2 l 0 g
R^ (8)

which has a form similar to that of the Colebrook formula.

From dimensional analysis, the friction factor, fp, for flow through a
perforated pipe is expected to be

(9
'-T'5'5'5) >
where l0 = orifice spacing and 8 = wall thickness. Some of the measured
results for fp are shown in Figs. 2 and 3. Since identical results were
1120
Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/c
 obtained for pipes with different orifice diameters (d) and the same value
of <j», Eq. 9 can be reduced to
fp=f(R,*)=fo + f, (10)
f0 in Eq. 10 reflects local flow perturbation at each of the orifices. For a
given pattern, f0 depends exclusively on <(>. If the orifices are spaced as
shown in Fig. 1, then
/„ = 0.0106 (j)0413 (11)
for all <J>.

0.20
3 5 36 3.7 3.8 39 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3
lg R

FIG. 2.—Plots of f(R) and fp(R) for Orifice Diameter of 4.5 mm

0.65 'e

0.60
V ^
^V^.
^ ^ ° * ^
Q50
5SJ 0 (

• ^ ^
0.40 — d=9.0 mm ^ ^v
<"?=0
• ¥=0.007153 ^
0.30
» ¥=0.03147
. ¥=0.1259 ^ 5^
v
ttfc^

i i
0.20 • 1 i

3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 46 4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3
log R

FIG. 3.—Plots of f(R) and fp(R) for Orifice Diameter of 9.0 mm

1121
ownloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyri
 In Eq. 10, /, depends on the wall roughness of an identical nonper-
forated pipe. If the value of <>
| is less than 0.01, then /, = /, and Eq. 10
becomes
(12)
W.+/ •
If ()> > 0.01, the flow perturbations at each orifice interact, and the hy-
draulic roughness of the wall (ke + Afce) is greater than the hydraulic
roughness, ke, of an identical nonperforated pipe. Increasing <J> above a
certain value, if = 0.01, yields effects similar to those achieved with the
increasing roughness height of the wall in a nonperforated pipe. For the
hole pattern in Fig. 1 and for 4> > 0.01 the experiments gave

^ = 0.282 4,24 (13)

D
in which Me = increase in equivalent roughness height for a perforated
pipe.
In Eq. 10, /, is calculated from/, (R, (ke + Ake/D)), the same expression
used in the calculation of / for commercial, nonperforated pipes (e.g.,
from the Colebrook-White formula). For approximate calculations of /,
the simple mathematical Altshul (1) formula for nonperforated pipes
/68 ke + Ak(
(14)
ft = 0.11 — + - •
" \R D
can be applied.
0.150
145
0.140
135
0.130
125
Q120 \v

115

ix
0.110
105 f=6^ 0 5 R - Q996'
0.100 f
95 /
0090 \
85
0.080
75
I \
0

o
*=t

«f=Q098,d = 2.8mm
0.070
65
0.060 11 ^ i M •^
v "W *•»w<t
55
0.050 M
^
I *S
">••
T

45
0.040 i J A vj
N M
s.
35
0.030
1i i
i '4 ft ^ 1 a. 0

25 4t|
R
0.020 -
15
a.
0.010
25 26 2.7 2.6 2.9 30 31 3.2 33 3.43.5 3.6 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 4.44.5
IgR

FIG. 4.—Plots of f(R) and fp(R) for Region of Laminar and Transitory Flow

1122
Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyr
 Eqs. 10 and 11 also hold if the flow is laminar. Fig. 4 presents results
of hydraulic measurements o n a model of a radial intake having per-
forated pipes with a 9.9-mm internal diameter, a 2.0-mm wall thickness
and drilled orifices of the following diameters: 2.0 m m , 2.8 m m , and 4.0
m m (8). For 1,250 s R < R ^ (laminar region)
64
, 64 n«,
fP = f0 + - = 0.0106 4>0413 + - (15)

The results in Fig. 4 also agree with m e a s u r e m e n t s on 56.6-mm-diameter

PVC pipes, w h e n the flow t h r o u g h the pipe is in the turbulent region.

ENERGY LOSSES DUE TO FRICTION

The pressure loss d u e to friction, dpf, is given by the third term in Eq.
7 as
pV2dx
dpf = ff 2 D (16)

For a power law variation of V along the pipe a n d A = const

Q 2 - Qi
V=V1 + V{x" = V1 + v „lnA. V (17)

in which Q x , Vx = discharge, m e a n velocity at section 1; a n d Q2, V2 =

discharge, mean velocity at section 2 (a distance I from section 1). When
n < 1 or n > 1, the inflow decreases or increases, respectively, along
the pipe. For turbulent rough flow conditions fn = fn = f0 + f, = const.
Integrating Eq. 16 from section 1 to 2 gives

(fo+ftW 2V,{V2 Vi) + (V2 V1f

Vh ~ Vh vi + (18)
2D tt + 1 In
For turbulent smooth flow the friction factor /> is influenced by Rey-
nolds number R. Combining Eqs. 10, 14, 17, a n d 16 yields
/ * „ , , _.,..^..
n . o-Hp r 'k, + Afc, 68v
n 25
°'
dpf • (Vi + v[ x fdx +•
1DK ' ID D n
(Vt + v[ x )D_
(Vj + v[ x"fdx (19)
After integration of Eq. 19, the results were reduced to the form
2V1{V2-V1) , {V2-Vif
Vh ~Vh = V\ + (20)
2D n +1 2n+ 1
in which fh = value of /, at section 2 a n d B = coefficient. W h e n n = 1,
Eq. 20 has a form similar to that given by Altshul (1) for the case in
which f = fp and there is outflow of fluid along the pipe. A comparison
of Eqs. 20 and 18 shows that B describes the influence of the change of
V along the flow on the energy loss d u e to friction. W h e n the lateral
inflow is uniform along the entire length (n = 1), the coefficient B is
influenced by R2 (ke + Ake/D) a n d the Vi to_ V2 ratio. Curves of the func-
tion B[R2(fc£ + bkJD), VVV2] for n = 1 are plotted in Fig. 5. The maxi-
1123
Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/cop
 inVv,
/ 0.2
1.07- I / / 0,3
iM
i. / / 0,4

W y//// d.6
1.04 ///// 0.7
. ///// 0.8
1.02- Pj ^7/V 0.9

1.01 -
1,0
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 BOO 900 1000
k e + &k e

FIG. 5.—Plots of B(R2 (ke + Ake)/D, (Vyy2)) for n = 1

mum value of B is 1.091 for R2(A:e + Ake/D) < 10 turbulent smooth flow.
In an earlier report (14) the writer presented some results obtained
from the analysis of the B-coefficient values for n ¥= 1. These results
showed that the values of B for nonuniform flow are essentially the same
as those for a uniform inflow (n = 1), when 0.6 s « < 1.5.

COEFFICIENT \
Energy losses resulting from the increase in fluid mass are described
by the term i\r$vdV in Eq. 7. For a continuous addition of mass along
the pipe with the lateral inflow entering 90° to the pipe axis, T\P = 1.0.
Its deviation from unity indicates the affects of both the lateral inflow
angle and the discontinuity of inflow. If the perforated pipe has orifices
of the same diameter and spacing and the inflow velocity is constant
over the entire length of the pipe (Vs = const), the coefficients i\p and (3
depend on the mean velocity V. Combining Eqs. 7 and Eq. 17 (for n =
1) and integrating, the loss of pressure due to turbulent flow in the pipe
section of length / with Vs = const can be written
, T/ . V2p KaP
P = c(V)- + — ViV + V-(V- Vrf +C (21)
3
1
Pi V2 = \ [c(V2)VJ ciV^Vfi + Kp^ — + —+ 1 (22)
vj v2 _ 3

or Pi - p2 = ce(V! ,V2)-^——lp + Kep~ 1 (23)

1 Vi\
in which ce{Vi,V2) c(V2) - (24)
1 -

1124
Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copy
 Ke = (25a)
D D

(25b)
D
Eq. 23 was used to analyze the measured energy losses with a forced,
constant inflow rate q over the entire length of perforated pipe (Vs =
const) for 11 values of q(q = 0.0778 to 0.833 dm 3 /s along a length of 1
m; Rs = 12.6 to 4,562) and 6 values of Qx (including Qj = 0). Charac-
teristic measurement results are shown in Fig. 6. From this figure it is
evident that, under conditions of turbulent flow and a uniform distri-
bution of inflow rates over the entire length of the perforated pipe (Vs
= const), the value of ce(Vx ,V2) in Eq. 23 depends on the permeability
of the perforated wall, §, and on the V to Vs ratio. Expressions for ap-
proximating the measured results are (14,15):

Ce(Vy,V2) = Ce(^,,^,^

= 1.05 +
"'£ b[—j +1.235 b(-) +1.235
. . . (26)

10 4
• u- u u
(27)
in which b = —-—— + —=
(103<j>)4'2 107

iWls^sB^y^g^H^-*
T* . . L J . . . 1 I I R5=112084-125830
- -a d = 4.5mm <f=0.03147 R^= 54 5 -1173
- o d = 60mm f=0.03052 L- 5 —
td=a0mm f=0.03147
"0 Q01 0.02 003 004 Q05 0.06 0D7 0.08 0D9 010 011 012

2D
1.9 I II fi-
I I | 1.
- Ui -Vv,.o -
'» "Tr *
=*. 1.7
i 16
/
6< Qd=45mm
| I
f=Q007868
R2= 11009^116047

t4
5 f>d = 60mm ("=0007630
Rs= 217.9 V 5038

t3
12
p ~~i
^ V ''V,=0.50
k d = 90mm f= 0.007153

1.1 1 V /
V ' V,=098 "
0 Q10 0.20 Q30 a40 a: 0
v,/v

FIG. 6.—Plots of ce(Vi, V2) According to Author's Own Study

1125
ownloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyrig
 Comparing Eqs. 24 and 26 yields
2

c(V) = c[ <(,,-) =1.05 +

[i\ + 1.235

Eq. 28 has a minimum value of 1.05 (which is equal to the value of

(28)

P) and a maximum value of 1.86 (see Fig. 7).

The first term on the right-hand side of Eqs. 22 and 23 describes the
loss of pressure resulting from both the change of kinetic energy in the
fluid stream and the discontinuous increment of mass, whereas the sec-
ond term characterizes flow resistance due to friction. In long perforated
pipes it is the energy loss due to friction that dominates the total hy-
draulic loss. Thus, the first term on the right-hand side of Eqs. 22 and
23 takes a low value and can be neglected. When the perforated pipes
are short, the first term on the right side of Eqs. 22 and 23 cannot be
omitted.
As shown by Eq. 26, it is possible to adopt a constant value (i.e., 1.86)
for the ce(Vi,V2) coefficient in engineering calculations, when the per-
forated pipes are relatively long, display a high wall permeability (<J> >
0.10), and have a uniformly distributed inflow (Vs = const). Such con-
ditions occur in horizontal collectors of radial intakes under infiltration.
The inflow rate received by the collectors is approximately uniform along
the entire length. Wall permeability generally falls between 0.10 and 0.20.
Substituting V-i = Vpi = 0, V2 = Vpe, and / = L into Eqs. 23 and 25 (when
Vs/Vpe > 0.01), the head loss along a horizontal collector is
(/•+/>„«)!•" V2
1.86 + 3D (29)
PS 2g
The term (ppi Vpe)/PS represents a portion oi the total depression in
the well.
Combining Eqs. 21 and 28 yields
1
1.05 + • ViV + - (V - V,)2 + C . . . (30)
2 2
W-| +1.235

Differentiating (with respect to V) the first term on the right-hand side

of Eq. 30 gives {1.05 + 1.235 [b(V2/V2) + 1.235y2}pVdV, which corre-
sponds to the term (1 + T\p)$VdV in Eq. 7. Thus
V2
(1 + np)p = 1.05 1 + 1.175 b—2 + 1.235 (31)
V
The maximum and minimum value of Eq. 31 is 1.86 (t]p = 0.77) and
1.05 (i)v = 0), respectively. The minimum value of Eq. 31 corresponds
to the p-coefficient value when Vs/V = 0 (J3 = 1.05).'
Analysis of the results substantiates the theoretical assumption that
the value of r\p should range between unity (T^ = 1) and zero (i\p = 0),
respectively. In the study reported here, the maximum value of T\P equals
0.77 (at p = 1.05) and is smaller than the theoretical maximum value of
1.0. This difference reflects the action of additional forces of response
1126
Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copy
 FIG. 7.—Plots of c(<)>, (Vs/V))

resulting from the thickness of the pipe wall at the orifices, the angle
(smaller than 90°) at which the lateral inflow enters the main stream,
and other quantitative changes in energy resulting from the interaction
between the main stream and each of the lateral streams entering the
main stream through orifices.

SOLUTION TO EO. 7

Eq. 7 (combined with Eqs. 10, 11, 13, and 31, which describe the pa-
rameters fp, tip, and P) can be applied to hydraulic calculations of inflow
to a perforated pipe. For example, consider a horizontal perforated pipe
placed in a settling tank (widely used for water and wastewater treat-
ment) with a constant fluid level (Fig. 8). The rate of inflow along a short
section of the pipe drilled at a distance x from the beginning of the pipe
is described by the relationship

cjx = ^2flV2gH; = (x,2a , / 2g[ Hpi + (32)

PS

PIG. 8.—Pressure Variations along Length of Perforated Pipe

1127
Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyr
 in which \x.x = discharge coefficient of perforations at station x, 2a =
surface area of orifices along a pipe section of a unit length, and Hx, Hpi
are shown in Fig. 8. The velocity head and head loss in the initial cross
section of the pipe, Hp(, is the sum of pressure head required for the
generation of the velocity of fluid flow through the initial orifices, VSpl,
and hydraulic head loss due to the fluid flow through this orifice.
The behavior of the discharge coefficient, |x, in perforated pipes with
lateral inflow along the entire length was studied by Yegorov (16) who
gave the empirical formula
R*
(JL = 0.44 + 0.43 erfc 0.023 | — - 10 (33)

in which R* = R/Rs, R = VD/v, Rs = Vsd/v and 8* = b/d.

Combining Eqs. 7, 10, 11, 13, and 31-33, the particular forms of func-
tions V(x), Vs(x), fp(x), and t\p{x) in Eq. 32 are not known a priori. Thus,
an approximate method was used to solve Eq. 32. In this method, the
integrals were replaced by finite sums for 0.1-m long segments, (X2 -
Xi), with a uniform inflow. Computer calculations were done for 5 val-
ues of D (from 0.057 to 0.2034 m), 10 values of <> | (from 0.0002 to 0.10),
and 5 values (at a coefficient of contraction of 1.0) of flow velocity through
orifices, VSfj, in the initial cross section of the pipe (from 0.1 to 4.0 m /
s). The pipe of interest was made of PVC (ke = 0). The length of pipe
did not exceed 60 m. The calculated results (including approximated for-
mulas to calculate the coefficient n = qPi/qpe) are given in Refs. 14 and
15. For illustration, calculated results are shown for the equivalent head
loss coefficient, Kp, which characterizes the total head loss, H^, due to
the resistance to fluid motion through a horizontal perforated pipe of a
length L and a wall permeability ((>:

P
Hpe = Hpi + -^^ = Kp^ (34)
2
PS 8
The approximate formulas for engineering calculations (with an ac-
curacy of ±2%) are
t 7 L\ 1.70 0^66
Kp( R„, 4», - ) = — - - r s + K (35)
D/ 4.LV *
16.6R' 0 1 7
in which K=1.75 +
(104<t>)043
475R-"-31
+ T^ITTU
(10»2 • (36)

and 4>v = 4<|>- (37)

and Rpe = Reynolds number in the end cross section of the pipe. Eq. 35
is plotted in Fig. 9.
The calculated results given in this paper were compared to the ex-
perimental results obtained by other investigators. The data reported by
1128
Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/cop
 fjtjtff

||||||||l||Rpe>5000 tttttttlt

3 4 5 6 7 89,, 2 3 « 5 6 7 89 t n

FIG. 9.—Plots of Kp(fa,K)

Mirkis (11) are from laboratory and field investigations of pressure loss
in perforated pipes used for feed-water and sludge supplies. The labo-
ratory tests involved a 51-mm ID perforated steel pipe, 2.8 m long, hav-
ing a wall permeability of 0.000775 (fa = 0.17) and 0.004 (fa = 0.88).
Flow velocity, Vpe, varied from 0.24 to 2.35 m/s (Rpe = 9,350-92,000).
The field investigations covered collecting pipes operated by a number

140
Vpe = (0.15-2.5)m/s Sy = 0.2 -0.88
120 T = (276.2- 280.2 )K R = 5700-574000

100
1° 1 after Eq.35 for f= 0.0002
and Rpe=5000
80
2 after Eq.35 for f=0.008
and FL=500
pe 000
60

L O 1 2
40 U /K=9.19 /K=2.52

20 1
/
0 "soO ^
fe^o
Q O
/
-#- J,, —orr —\ —a-
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 12 14

FIG. 10.—Plots of Kp(<|>i) According to Mirkis (11)

1129
ownloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyri
 of water treatment plants in the Soviet Union. The following parameters
were involved: pipe diameter—100, 125, 150, 200, a n d 300 m m ; pipe
length—6.6-29.5 m; wall permeability, §\—0.12-1.38; a n d flow velocity,
Vr—0.15-2.5 m / s (R^ = 5,700-574,000).
The results obtained by Mirkis a n d Kp(<|>i) (according to Eqs. 35 a n d
36) are shown in Fig. 10. The report by Mirkis (11) includes n o data on
the wall permeability <}> so that Eq. 35 is plotted with the lowest a n d
highest possible values of <>| a n d R^ (<|> = 0.0002, Rpe = 5,000; a n d <)> =
0.008, Rpe = 500,000).

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In this paper, a one-dimensional model is considered for a steady flow

of a Newtonian, incompressible fluid in a horizontal pipe perforated with
circular orifices along the entire length. Experiments s h o w that perfo-
rated pipes are characterized b y a greater equivalent sand r o u g h n e s s
height of the wall as compared to nonperforated pipes. At a certain spac-
ing of the orifices, the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor, fp, d e p e n d s u p o n
the Reynolds number, R, the permeability of the wall, §, a n d the rough-
ness of the wall, ke. In some extreme cases in this study the values of
/ p measured in perforated pipes w e r e 80% higher than those in a non-
perforated pipe. The equation of motion incorporates both the influence
of the discontinuity of inflow along the length of the perforated p i p e
and the influence of the angle at which the lateral streams enter the m a i n
stream, on energy loss. The m a x i m u m value of the coefficient T\P (which
describes this influence) is 0.77 (at p = 1.05) a n d is lower than the the-
oretical maximum value, 1.0, corresponding to a flow with a continuous
addition of mass along the pipe.

APPENDIX I.—REFERENCES

1. Altshul, A. D., "Gidravlicheskye Soprotivlenya," Isd. Nedra, Moskva, 1970

(in Russian).
2. Berlamont, J., and Van der Beken, A., "Solutions for Lateral Outflow in Per-
forated Conduits," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 99, No. 9,
Sep., 1973, pp. 1531-1549.
3. Burrows, F. M., "Mean Flow and Pressure in a Straight Suction Duct with
Porous Walls," The Aeronautical Quarterly, The Royal Aeronautical Society,
Vol. XXI, May, 1970, pp. 101-120.
4. Camp, T. R., and Graber, S. D., "Dispersion Conduits," Journal of the Sanitary
Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, No. 1, Jan., 1968, pp. 31-39.
5. Camp, T. R., Graber, S. D., and French, J. A., discussion of "Manifold Flow
in Subirrigation Pipes," by Edwin Zsak, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE,
Vol. 98, No. 4, Apr., 1972, pp. 728-736.
6. Dow, W. M., "The Uniform Distribution of a Fluid Flowing Through a Per-
forated Pipe," Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 17, No. 4, Dec, 1950, pp.
431-438.
7. Keller, J. D., "The Manifolds Problem," Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 16,
No. 1, Mar., 1949, pp. 77-85.
8. Kotowski, A., and Siwori, Z., "On the Laminar and Transitory Flow of Liq-
uid in Pipes with Permeable Walls," Archiwum Hydrotechniki, Vol. XXVIII,
No. 1, 1981, pp. 23-35 (in Polish).
9. Kotowski, A., HotloS, H., and Siwori, Z., "Determining the Efficiency of
Radiant Water Intakes with Regard to Loss of Energy in Collectors," Envi-

1130

Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copy
 ronment Protection Engineering, Vol. 10, No. 3, 1984, pp. 85-97.
10. Marklamd, E., "The Analysis of Flow from Pipe Manifolds," Engineering, Vol.
187, No. 4847, 1959, pp. 150-151.
11. Mirkis, I. M., "Issledovanye rabofy pryamolineynykh sbornykh dyrchatykh
trab i ikh raschet," Vodosnabzhenye i Sanitarnaya Tekhnika, No. 1, 1960 (in Rus-
sian).
12. Olson, F. C. W., "Flow Through a Pipe with a Porous Wall," Journal of Ap-
plied Mechanics, Trans., American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 71,
Mar., 1949, pp. 53-54, and Sep. 1949, pp. 317-318.
13. Pietrov, G. A., "Gidravlika pieremiennoy massy," Isd. NGU, Kharkov, 1964
(in Russian).
14. Siwort, Z., "Turbulent Flows of Liquid in Perforated Pipes with a Discontin-
uous Exchange of Mass of the Stream." Scientific Papers of the Institute of
Environment Protection Enginering of Wroclaw Technical University, No.
33, Monographs, No. 10, Wroclaw, 1976 (in Polish).
15. Siwon, Z., "Hydraulics of Permeable Wall Pipes," Archiwum Hydrotechniki,
Vol. XXIV, No. 3, 1977, pp. 313-335 (in Polish).
16. Yegorov, A. Y., "Issledovanye zakonomyemostyei dvizhenya zhidkosti v
trubchatykh raspredelitelakh i sbomikakh wody," Trudy Instituta Vodgeo
"Vodnoye Khozyaystvo," No. 27, 1970 (in Russian).
17. Zsak, E., "Manifolds Flow in Subirrigation Pipes," Journal of the Hydraulics
Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No. 10, Oct., 1971, pp. 1737-1746.

APPENDIX II.—-NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

A = cross-sectional area of pipe;

a = area of orifice;
B = coefficient in Eq. 20;
b = coefficient in Eqs. 26 a n d 28;
C = constant of integration;
c(V) = coefficient in Eqs. 21 a n d 22;
Ce(Vi,V2) = coefficient in Eq. 23;
D = internal diameter of pipe;
d = diameter of orifice;
/ = Darcy-Weisbach friction factor in nonperforated pipe;
/p = Darcy-Weisbach friction factor in perforated pipe;
/o = equivalent friction factor influenced b y presence of ori-
fices;
g = gravitational acceleration;
Hc = pressure head of tank above axis of perforated pipe in
terminal cross section (see Fig. 8);
K, Ke, Kp = equivalent head-loss coefficients;
ke = equivalent sand r o u g h n e s s height of wall in nonperfor-
ated pipe;
L = total length of perforated pipe;
I = length of pipe section;
/0 = spacing of orifices (see Fig. 1);
p = pressure;
Q = discharge;
q = rate of inflow along unit length of perforated pipe;
R = Reynolds n u m b e r of main stream;
R* = R/R s ;

1131
Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyri
 RCT1 = first critical Reynolds number;
R„2 = second critical Reynolds number (see Fig. 4);
Rs = Reynolds number of lateral streams;
t = time;
u = local velocity in cross-sectional area dA of pipe;
V = mean velocity at point x;
V = projection of lateral stream velocity vector on direction
of main stream velocity vector;
Vs = mean velocity of fluid flow through orifices (when coef-
ficient of contraction is 1.0);
x = distance along pipe;
z = height of center of gravity of stream cross section above
reference level;
2a = surface area of orifices along pipe section of unit length;
8 = wall thickness;
8* = 8/d;
rip = coefficient in Eq. 7;
(A = discharge coefficient of perforation;
v = kinematic viscosity of fluid;
p = fluid density;
Afce = increase in equivalent sand roughness height of wall in
pipe after perforation;
<>| = permeability of perforated pipe wall, ratio of surface area
of all orifices to surface area of internal pipe wall; and
()>i = ratio of surface area of all orifices to cross-sectional area
of pipe.

Subscripts
p = perforated pipe;
pe = end cross section of perforated pipe of length L;
pi = initial cross section of perforated pipe of length L;
s = stream of lateral inflow;
1 = initial cross section of perforated-pipe section of length
I; and
2 = end cross section of perforated-pipe section of length /.

1132
Downloaded 27 Feb 2009 to 146.164.93.240. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyr