This preview shows pages 1–11. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full DocumentThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: V 1 2 / 2 + p 1 / ρ + gz 1 = α V 2 2 /2 + p 2 / ρ + gz 2 + h Δ Total (2) 1 (0) z o = [V 2 2 /(2g)] + [V 1 2 /(2g)][f(L/D 1 ) + K ent + K diff ] 2m = (0.36V 1 ) 2 /(2g) + [V 1 2 /(2g)] (K diff + f(2/.03) + 0.5) V 2 = V 1 (3/5) 2 (1) (2) (0) 2m = (0.36V 1 ) 2 /(2g) + [V 1 2 /(2g)] (K diff + f(2/.03) + 0.5) f = (1.8 log [( ρ V 1 D/µ)/6.9])2 With proper choice of diffuser Q with diffuser can result in 33% increase Moody Plot – guess Re D and get f, calculate V 1 , check Re D – if not close use that Re D and repeat…. V 1nodiffuser = [2gz o /(1 + K entrance )] 1/2 V 1diffuser = [2gz o /{( A 1 /A 2 ) 2 + K entrance + K diffuser }] 1/2 No pipe at exit so f = 0 0.25 0.3 .55 < 1 so V 1diffuser > V 1nodiffuser Does diffuser reduce energy “losses”? Does diffuser increase V 1 ? Is V 2 faster than V 1diffuser ? Is V 2 faster than V 1nodiffuser ?...
View
Full
Document
This note was uploaded on 04/26/2010 for the course MAE 101B 101B taught by Professor Rohr during the Summer '09 term at UCSD.
 Summer '09
 Rohr

Click to edit the document details