American

University of
Madaba
Faculty of
Engineering

Fluids Mechanics Lab Report

Experiment 4 Minor Head Losses-Pipes' fittings

(Bends and valves)

Submitted by
Samer melad

1810362
Supervised by Dr. Monther Nimri
Eng. Heba Homaimat
 Objective:

The main objective for this experiment is to estimate pressure head losses due to pipes' fittings
like valves and bends.

 Apparatus:

Apparatus for fluid flow friction in pipes.

  Theory:

Losses in pipe networks could be divided typically into major and minor losses. Major Losses
are produced mainly due friction or viscous action while miner losses are due to valves bends,
elbows, sudden expansion or contraction, etc.

Losses due to valves and bends:

The head losses due to a valve are given by the expression:

K . v2
∆ P=
2. g
Where:

v = average velocity inside the pipe (m/s)

g = acceleration of gravity (9.81 m/s )
2

K = dimensionless friction factor which depends for valves upon the type of valve and the degree
of opening. And for bends depends upon the bend radius per pipe radius ratio and the angle of
the bend.
Globe valve, fully open 10
Gate valve, fully open 0.2
Gate valve, half open 5.6
Table 4.1: Typical values of losses coefficient for gate and globe valves

 Procedure

1. Open valve V7 to carry out the test on 90° bend, 90° elbow, gate valve and globe valve.
2. Open valve V6 to carry out the test on 45° elbow.
3. Measure the head losses at different values of flow rate.
 4. Measure the flow rate.
5. Open fully the water control valve.
6. Record the readings on the piezometer tubes and the U-tube.
7. Repeat the above procedure for a total of different flow rate, and different valves/bends.

 Results and Conclusion:

1- Fill in the following table:

Valve no. Q (m^3/s) D for A( v (m/s) ∆P ∆P K= Valve position

pipe d2 (H2O (Hg 2g∆ P
(m) π ¿ Monometer) Monometer)
4 v2
0.000319 0.01425 0.00015 2 0.37 1.814 Fully open
Globe valve 948491 85
V1 3/8” 0.000278 1.7 0.295 2.002 Fully open
73
0.000194 1.2 0.14 1.907 Fully open
5
Fully open
0.000278 0.01425 0.00015 1.7 0.244 1.656 Fully open
Gate valve V2 948491 49
3/8” 0.000222 1.39 0.2 2.030 Fully open
95
 0.000166 1 0.17 3.335 Half Open
4
Half Open
0.000333 0.01425 0.00015 2.08 0.291 1.307
90° bend 948491 07
(3/8” ) 0.000261 1.6 0.163 1.249
24
0.000213 1.33 0.08 0.887
33
0.000341 0.01425 0.00015 2.13 0.25 1.081
45° bend (3/8”) 948491 13
0.000297 1.86 0.123 0.697
55

Smooth 90° 0.000347 0.01425 0.00015 2.17 0.227 0.945

bend. Large 948491 81
0.000278 1.74 0.173 1.121
10
0.000222 1.39 0.145 1.472
43
0.000347 0.01425 0.00015 2.17 0.09 0.374
“Smooth 90° 948491 99
bends. small 0.000283 1.77 0.072 0.450
90

Table 4.2

2. Confirm that K is constant as flow rate varies

3. Plot a chart for the values of K versus the opening degree of the valve.

globe valve
2.05

1.95

1.9
Y-Values
k

1.85

1.8

1.75

1.7
8 10 12 14 16 18 20
degree of the valve
 gate valve
4
3.5
3
2.5
2 Y-Values
k

1.5
1
0.5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
degree of the valve

Discussion:
Assume that the pipe friction losses between the upstream and downstream
manometer ports are negligible, so the total head loss is due to minor head losses.
Remember the piezometric head is what is
measured with the piezometer (manometer) board on the experimental apparatus.

Two types of energy loss predominate in fluid flow through a pipe network; major
losses, and minor losses.  Major losses are associated with frictional energy loss
that is caused by the viscous effects of the medium and roughness of the pipe wall. 
Minor losses, on the other hand, are due to pipe fittings, changes in the flow
direction, and changes in the flow area.  Due to the complexity of the piping
system and the number of fittings that are used, the head loss coefficient (K) is
empirically derived as a quick means of calculating the minor head losses.
Conclusion:
In this experiment, the major and minor losses were computed. For the major
losses, the flow was pushed through a long pipe; one with a large diameter and one
with a small diameter. For these, the fraction factor was plotted against the velocity
squared of the fluid. The graph showed that for the large pipe, the theoretical and
experimental friction factor values were close. This shows that the calculated
values are close to the actual friction factor values of the large diameter pipe. For
the small diameter pipe, the percent error was around 98% for each flow reading.
This shows that the calculated values are not close to the actual experimental
values. The theoretical values do not take everything into account when calculating
the value. This causes a high percent error of the small pipe. For the minor losses,
the pipe had 6 different fittings that have different losses based on the type of
fitting. A graph that compared pressure drop for each fitting versus the velocity
squared was made for the minor losses. The graph shows that the pressure drop
increased as the velocity increased. The highest pressure drop came from a right
angle fitting, while the lowest pressure drop came from an enlargement fitting. The
K values were found by the slope of each fitting on the graph. These experimental
values were compared to theoretical values. The highest percent error came from a
contraction fitting and the lowest percent error came from the right angle fitting.
The differences in the fittings came from the theoretical values not taking
everything about the pipe into effect. The experimental K value was found to be
directly proportional to the pressure drop. This relates the loss coefficient (K) to
the head loss of the system.