{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

# flow_result - 3 RESULTS In this experiment the aim was to...

This preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

3. RESULTS: In this experiment the aim was to measure the pressure drop in a flow system by using nozzle, orifice meter and pitot tube. The experiment was repeated five times for five different flow rates. By regulating the valve we filled the bucket for five times and since the total mass that the bucket can be filled with water is a constant value the only changing parameter is flow rate of the water during the experiment. Below in the table those different values are tabulated. time (s) mass flow rate (kg/s) 1 st experiment 70,16 0,281 2 nd experiment 87,75 0,225 3 rd experiment 121,7 0,162 4 th experiment 179 0,110 5 th experiment 290,78 0,068 Table 3.1: Experimental values of mass flow rates of water a) Calibration curve for rotameter: Calibration curve for rotameter is obtained by plotting logarithm of rotameter reading versus mass flow rate of water. Since we have five different data for water mass flow rate it would not be surprising that we would read five different values for each flow rate since the operation principle of the rotameter is based on the force balance. mass flow rate (kg/s) Rotameter reading 1 st experiment 0,068 5 2 nd experiment 0,110 10 3 rd experiment 0,162 15 4 th experiment 0,225 20 5 th experiment 0,281 25 Table 3.2: Experimental values for rotameter reading & mass flow rate

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
Figure 3.1: Rotameter calibration m = 0,0108*R + 0,0069 0,05 0,1 0,15 0,2 0,25 0,3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Rotameter reading m (kg/s) From the theory we know that there should be a linear relationship between the mass flow rate and the value read from the rotameter and it is clear from the figure that the experimental values almost satisfies the theory. b) Calibration curve for flow nozzle: The calibration procedure is the same as in the case of rotameter, the flow rates and the nozzle readings are tabulated in the below table. mass flow rate (kg/s) h(cm) 1 st experiment 0,281 8,6 2 nd experiment 0,225 5,7 3 rd experiment 0,162 3,1 4 th experiment 0,110 1,6 5 th experiment 0,068 0,6 Table 3.4: Flow nozzle reading versus mass flow rate Figure 3.2: Calibration curve of flow nozzle
m= 0.5377N + 0.02 -1,4 -1,2 -1 -0,8 -0,6 -0,4 -0,2 0 -2,5 -2 -1,5 -1 -0,5 0 logN (h) logm (kg/s) c) Calibration curve for orificemeter: mass flow rate (kg/s) h(cm) 1 st experiment 0,281 16 2 nd experiment 0,225 9,1 3 rd experiment 0,162 6,1 4 th experiment 0,110 2,6 5 th experiment 0,068 1,4 Table 3.4: Orifice meter reading versus mass flow rate Figure 3.3: Calibration curve of orifice meter y = 0,5792x - 0,0709 R 2 = 0,9884 -1,4 -1,2 -1 -0,8 -0,6 -0,4 -0,2 0 -2 -1,5 -1 -0,5 0 logh logm d) Calibration curve for Pitot Tube:

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

### What students are saying

• As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

• I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

• The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern