INTRODUCTION.

WATER HAMMER-A PHENOMENON

TYPICAL TRANSIENT

Water-hammer effects in closed conduits constitute one particular class of a broad family of electrical and mechanical wave movements which engineers have chosen to designate by the term transient phenomena. These disturbances may be said to mark the transition stage between any two successive steady states of the system. They are initiated by the application of a definite causative force or action, frequently but not necessarily applied with comparative suddenness, and are dissipated down to the level of the second steady state by the operation of some form of damping. In the case of hydraulic pressure conduits, water hammer is the mechanism immediately responsible for every change in steady-state velocity, gradual or sudden. It is a wave movement propag&ted with the velocity of sound, usually initiated by a change in setting of the conduit control valve or its equivalent, and is attenuated down to the level of the second steady state by damping in the form of conduit friction. Because water-hammer pressures reach significant magnitudes only in the case of comparatively rapid valve operation, we are prone to lose sight of the fact that water hammer is, nevertheless, the direct means of effecting even the most gradual change in steady-state velocity. Although it is assumed that most engineers have some acquaintance with water hammer, it may be advantageous, as a means of breaking ground for the essential differential relationships, to review just qualitatively, subject to subsequent mathematical confirmation, the salient steps of the water-hammer cycle for the elementary case of the simple conduit with instantaneous valve closure and with conduit friction and velocity head neglected. Referring to Fig. 1, upon closure of the valve, a wave of positive pressure travels upstream with the velocity of sound (in this particular case converting 4Ie conduit velocity to zero), compressing the water and stretching the conduit shell. Upon reaching the reservoir, the pressure wave obtains relief and drops down in intensity to the reservoir pressure. This in turn allows the compressed water stored in the stretched pipe to drop down to reservoir pressure again by means of the passage of a negative pressure wave traveling downstream with the velocity of sound and converting the conduit velocity from zero to minus V I in the reverse direction. When this negative wave has reached the closed valve at the downstream end of the conduit, all the water in the conduit is at that instant traveling upstream with a velocity minus VI' Owing to the inertia of the water, this negative pressure wave traveling downstream will next be reflected at the valve so as to travel upstream with the same negative sign. Behind and downstream of the negative wave so reflected, th.e conduit velocity will again drop to zero, and the conduit shell will shrink a proportionate amount below the original size so as to furnish the volume of water necessary to maintain the velocity minus V I ahead of the traveling wave until the wave reaches the reservoir. When the reflected negative wave reaches the reservoir,

27-1

Front of water hammer wave traveling toward reservoir PressurePi e normal wH diameter hammer Pressure -w H normal diame tilr

Front of ne ative water hammer wave traveling toward reservoir Pressure w H- water hammer Pi e shrunk below normal Water empties pstream from shrinkage space

Water

Velocit normal

Veloc it .0 Water compressed

5tored water under pressure w H+ water hammer

CD
Front

Front

DIRECT POSITm
of water hammer

WAVE STARTS fROM VALVE

wave reaches reservoir

NEGATIVE WAVE REFLECTED TOWARD RESERVOIR FROM VALVE WITH NEGATIVE SIGN
of negative water hammer hammer Water entirely emptied from shrinkage space wave

Pressure w H + water hammer Pi stretched and water compressed Stored water under pressure w H+water hammer

Pressure

w H- water

Pi e diameter

shrunk below normal

Velocit

=0

NEGATIVE WAVE REACHES RESERVOIR

Front

of positive

water

ham~er

wave traveling hammer

downstream

Pressure wH Pressure w H- water Pi diameter Pi e diameter shrunk normal below normal

Velocit

Water normal density

-=-v
NEGATIVE Front WAVE STARTS hammer fROM of water Pressure = wH

Stored water unde r pressure w H+ water hammer discharges to reservoir

Water fills expanded space

(j)
RESERVOIR valve~ -~

NEGATIVE

Q)

REfLECTED

WAVE REFLECTED WITH POSITIVE FROII RESERVOIR

SIGN

wave reaches

front

of positive water ha~ Pressure w H Pipe normal diameter

__wave reaches

valve) ---------./

J
Velocity in pipe=-V, NEGATIVE -

_
~IO-E-i!EV'-=~_"_----l
REfLECTED WAVE REACHES VALVE COMPLETING ONE Ct'CLE

.1

REfLECTED

WAVE REACHES VALVE PROCESS

INCLUSIVE

CD

TO

THEN REPEATS INDEfiNITELY

the pressure will rise to reservoir level, and a positive pressure wave elevating the conduit. pressure to normal reservoir head will be propagated downstream. The velocity upstream from and behind the wave will next be converted to plus VI. This completes one cycle of the wave motion, and since the effect of friction in the conduit has been neglected, the procedure outlined will be repeated indefinitely and without diminution in intensity.

The physical process outlined in Fig. 1 has been so well substantiated by experiment and observation that we are justified in employing the fundamental concept of water hammer as a wave motion, compressing the water and stretching the conduit circumferentially, in formulating the primary differential equations of water hammer. To facilitate cross reference with current literature, the basic derivations will be made in terms of pressure rather than head, and the origin of coordinates will be taken at the reservoir. Subsequently, in making application of the basic relationships to the various detailed methods of computation, appropriate changes in notation will be made where desirable to facilitate similar cross reference to the literature pertaining to these particular methods. The following notation will be employed:
D L A P diameter of pipe, ft. length of pipe, ft. area of pipe, 8q ft. total preR8Ure (8urge plu8 8teady 8tate), pal. total velocity (8urge plu8 8teady 8tate) , fps; positive in p08itive direction of:e. distance of section along axis of pipe, It; measured from origin at reservoir. volume modulu8 of compression of water, ft units. thickn888 of pipe wall8, ft. modulu8 of elasticity of pipe waU, ft units. friction force coefficient. weight of unit volume of water, Ib/cu ft. acceleration of gravity, ft/8BC.' factor of proportionality in establiahmg linear approximation to conduit friction.
fI

V z K b E F '" (/ II -

W-~ Q _
(the reciprocal of the equivalent K bE (8heU in combination). , - time, see.
I I vWQ

.!. + .!!..

bulk modulus of water and pipe)

-it.

/I _

- water-hammer

wave velocity,

fps.

Referring to Fig. 2, as the water-hammer wave travels along the conduit, in each element of time at, a length of water ax loses a decrement of velocity av. The pressure behind the wave is greater than that ahead of the wave by an increment aP. In the figure the sigJl.of ax must be plus to agree with the convention that x and V are both positive in the downstream direction. Since P and V depend upon x as well as t, the notation of partial derivatives is employed. A material simplification results from dropping second-order differentials at the outset of the analysis. F = M aV

at

Newton's second law - P =

'rDI W

'lfDI

4"

(P

+ ap)

"""4

Ii ax ( - av) at

_ aP
az

wav

at

Under the effect of the increase in pressure due to water hammer aP, the diameter of the conduit increase by an amount aD.

aD

DlaP
2bE

The volume per unit length of pipe made available by compression of the watel under the increased pressure aP is

II =

0 at reservoir

---=--~ m .. ~" .n..

_v__ +_ __
Algebraic sign a= wave velocity

ax

Front of water hammer wave traveling with velocity a~

conventions

0,

l~
L
(

~:

ax

-i

NOTE:

W~er~teady-st~e density FIG. 2.

Second order water hammer neglected Conditions during transit of water-hammer wave.

differentials

-rD' aP 4K

+ -r(D + aD)1
4

_ 1l'D2] () = -rDt aP ax 4 x 4K

+ .".D3aP
4bE

ax

But the volume of water resulting from the decrement of velocity in time

av, accumulated
and with due

at, is

-r~1

aV at.

Equating volumes for hydraulic continuity,

regard to sign conventions (Fig. 2), we obtain -rD3 aP ax = 1l'DI av at 4bE 4

the pressure will rise to reservoir level, and a positive pressure wave elevating thQ conduit. pressure to normal reservoir head will be propagated downstream. The velocity upstream from and behind the wave will next be converted to plus Vl. This completes one cycle of the wave motion, and since the effect of friction in the conduit has been neglected, the procedure outlined will be repeated indefinitely and without diminution in intensity.

The physical process outlined in Fig. 1 has been so well substantiated by experiment and observation that we are justified in employing the fundamental concept of water hammer as a wave motion, compressing the water and stretching the conduit circumferentially, in formulating the primary differential equations of water hammer. To facilitate cross reference with current literature, the basic derivations will be made in terms of pressure rather than head, and the origin of coordinates will be taken at the reservoir. Subsequently, in making application of the basic relationships to the various detailed methods of computation, appropriate changes in notation will be made where desirable to facilitate similar cross reference to the literature pertaining to these particular methods. The following notation will be employed:
D - diameter of pipe, ft. L - length of pipe, ft. A - area of pipe, sq ft. P - total pr ure (surge plus steady state). psf. V - total velocity (surge plus steady state), fps; positive in positive direction of:J:. II: distance of section along axis of pipe, ft; measured from origin at reservoir. K - volume modulus of compression of water, ft unite. b - thickness of pipe walls, ft. E - modulus of elasticity of pipe wall, ft units. F - friction force coefficient. '" - weight of unit volume of water, Ib/cu ft. /I - acceleration of gravity, ft/sec.' k - factor of proportionality in establishing linear approximation to conduit friction.

W -~. Q _

.!.. + !!..
K
,I vWQ

/I

(the reciprocal

of the equivalent

bulk modulus of water and pips)

bE (shell in combination).
_ water-hammer wave velocity, fps.

t - time, sec.
II __

Referring to Fig. 2, as the water-hammer wave travels along the conduit, in each element of time at, a length of water ax loses a decrement of velocity aVo The pressure behind the wave is greater than that ahead of the wave by an increment aP. In the figure the sig~ of ax must be plus to agree with the convention that x and V are both positive in the downstream direction. Since P and V depend upon x as well as t, the notation of partial derivatives is employed. A material simplification results from dropping second-order differentials at the outset of the analysis. F =M
WDI

av at

Newton's second law P =

lI'Dt~

(P

+ ap) _

_ aP

ax

4 g W aV

ax (_ av)
at

at

Now, if a is the velocity of propagation of thc water-hammer wave, the velocity in a length of conduit having a length of adt will be decreased iJV in the time iJt. Fat
== lof aV
. Dt

Newton's second law

= _
TDt

ap at

~va~t

av

The minus sign of a is taken to agree with the sign convention of Fig. 2,

but and

- ax ax
at
a

av

=aiJt 1 == WQ
== ----

,/WQ

By successive differentiation and combination of Eqs. (1) and (2), and using the notation of Eq. (3), 1 atV atV WQ axt == @ 1 atp atp WQ axt == att From their very form, the mathematical physicist! would immediately recognize Eqs. (4) and (5) as representative of a wave motion propagated in the x dimension with a velocity of propagation equal to the square root of 1/JVQ. These identical equatiolls apply not only to water-hammer waves but, also to the propall;ation of elastic stress waves in solid media and a wide variety of other mechanical and electrical transients. In each of these fields the essential character of the wave motion is the same, consisting basically of two subsidiary wave components traveling in opposite directions with the velocity .y1/WQ and without mutual interference. In other words, then, the existing fund of established knowledge regarding the geneml pflIperties of Eqs. (4) and (5) gives us an independent check on the derivation of wave velocity expressed in Eq. (3). In order to include the effect of conduit friction in our mathematical analysis, it will he necessary to introduce an approximation in order to obtain solvable differential equations. Instead of taking conduit friction proportional to the square of the velocity, we shall develop an equivalent device that permits us to express friction as propor . tional to the first power of the velocity. ' Referring to Fig. 3, the pressure .loss in length of conduit ax is 1IJck V vax. The corresponding drop force due to friction in length ax is accordingly,
. Dt

1IJckV.Vax

'lI'Dt

==

TFVax

. Dt [

(P

+ ap)

- P

+ -4

. Dt

FV ax == ==

lI'Dt 1IJ

ax

av) iJt

_ ap -FV

ax

waY

at

_ ap _ ax

FV =

waY at
Qap

_ aY

ax

at

Equations (1), (2), (3), and (6) form the very foundation of the science of water hammer and are the basis of the development of every known method of computation.

V"," maltimum velocity k factor assumed to fill position equivalent straight line Straight friction
FIG.

of best ck (Vrn)l ~'"

line loss for drop per

any unit

velocity length

V lilt'"

= ck V",V

force

~Ol WCkV",V&x=1T:lfVlhC.

3.

Development of approximate equation for friction force term in water-hammer equations.

MECHANISM

OF WAVE REFLECTION

With the basic differential relationships of wat~r hammer at our disposal, we are now able to give independent mathematical confirmation to the wave reflection sequence outlined qualitatively in the introduction (Fig. 1). Referring to Fig. 4, the basic equations to be solved are

The constants of integration are to be determined to comply with the two boundary conditions: When x = 0, P = Po x=L V =0 and Let us note very carefully at this point that no other boundary conditions whatever are adduced and in particular that no assumpt.ion whatever has been made regarding the genesis or character of reflections at the reservoir or at the valve. This means that the results we obtain regarding the internal mechanism of water hammer areexelusively the result of rigorous mathematical processes.

ri~
H.

--t
--~.

h - closure

h - full opening

L__
Sign conventions HORIZONTAL CONDUIT

FIG. 4.

INCLINED CONDUIT Simple conduit with instantaneous

valve closure.

For manipulative details of the solution the reader is referred to the current literature.' The solution is givcn below in the form of an infinite summation of two wave components, the time of arrival of each successive component at the section x being denoted by the subscripts. P = Po

+ waVo
g

"=1
(-1)"+1 (1

(-1)"+1 [1

(2"-1)L-x
II

(2"-1)L+xJ
II

(7)

t>
(2"-1)L-x
II

t>

V =

VO[I-

"=1

t>

+1

(2"-1)L+X)]
II

(8)

t>.

P=PO+waVO[1,>o+2~ g

n=l

(-l)nl

t>a

2,.,[,]

r>ressure rise at valve

W:Vo [t:ozt,H1n! waVo

X=

)-J
""T
waVo

... I ... ... ... I

... ... ::> '" ... '"

'" a:
II: II: 11.

I I I I
j

""T

I I
I
I

I I I

I I

10

I
'- waVo I 9

I I I

I I
0

I I 1_ waVo I
I 9 I
IOL a IZL a 14L

II
8

4L

6L

I
u

TIME - SECONDS

8L a

Velocity at reservoir Vo

1.&

[J -zf
t>O

fl-I

(-I)n+i I ~Znil)LJ
t

:x
II: C

...
-' ... >
S o
FIG. 5.

.. ... ~ ..
u o

I
I-V

..
~ 0
u

I
L

-v

-v

..
SL

..
7L

a
9L

ilL avaive closure.

TIME - SECONDS

Diagrams of pressure and velocity-simple conduit--instantaneous Conduit friction neglected.

are a complete confirmation of the physical process described qualitatively in the introduction (Fig. 1). The sequence of wave propagation is summarized in the general rule that, at the reservoir, pressure waves are reflected with opposite sign and velocity waves with the

llIajority of cases ordinarily encounten'c\ in practice, the rate of attE'nuation would h.e so slow as to have no sensihle effect upon the magnitude of water-hammer pressures and veloeitiell, and it ill of course for this very reason that it is almost invariahly neglected in practical computation. Unfortunately direct llnalytical solution of the hasic differential equations for other than instantaneous closures is not pOllsihlewher., as is customary, the time ratt> of decrease of valve opening with effiux velocity proportional to the square root of tlll. steady state plus water-hammer head is specified as one of the boundary conditions. In fact it is because of this very impediment that the seemingly academic case o. instantaneous valve closure becomes of such importance from the standpoint of practical detailed computation, by virtue of the assumption that the net actual pressure rise resulting from any gradual noninstantaneous closure may, with sufficient accuracy, be considered as consisting of a series of superimposed elemental square-topped waves, each generated hy a small component clement of valve movement in a correspondingly short interval of time. The only difference then remaining for the case of more gradual closures is to take proper account of the effect of the partially open gate valve upon the reflected waves arriving from the reservoir at the downstream terminal section. As would naturally be expected under such conditions, the wave elements from the reservoir will be only partially reflected, the degree of reflection being dependent upon the relative amount of valve opening, the fully closed valve giving complete reflection. The additional physical principle not yet utilized in our discussion, which controls and estahlishes the magnitude of wave reflection, is the discharl/;e law corresponding to the settinl/; at the particular instant of the terminal discharge mechanism. In the simplest ease, that of a gate valve system in which the nozzleirea is reduced according to a given function of the time, frequently a linear rclati n, the effiux velocity is assumed to follow the simple orifiee law. When the term in 1mechanism is a pump or turbine, the effiux velocity depends upon the machine speed, as well as the gate opening and total head, and must be taken from performance curves of the machine for conditions corresponding to the particular instant. In this case, algebraic formulation of the discharge law is not feasible. The practical details of inserting this discharge mechanism law will be developed in greater detail in the illustrative examples given in the suhsequent paragraphs. The only point to be emphasized at this juncture is that ahsolutely no additional compensation in the form of reflection factors is necessary. The truth of this statement can be verified by independent computation using the reflection factor method,! and also by deriving formulas for representative cases independently hy the method of differential equations. 3 Since this feature has heen one of the most trouhlesome in contemporary literature, it will not be superfluous to add that all derivations of reflection factors at the open control valve reduce simply to restatements of the orifice law and were introduced originally only in the attempt to obviate a portion of the trial-and-error detail in some forms of computation. We have now forged all the basic tools required and may proceed to their application in various detailed methods of numerical calculation, the first, and in many respects the simplest, being that of arithmetic integration.
1 Ibid. By prescribinj( the efflux velocity pattern, instead of the time rate of decrease of valve opening, dire~t analytical solution may be effected and general formulas obtained. Although this method appears to hold promise of future development, it cannot yet be considered to have advanced beyond the stage of research to general acceptance by practicing engineers . ASME-ASCE Symposium on Water Hammer, 1933. GLOVER, ROBERT E Computations of Water-hammer Pressures in Compound Pipe, p. 66, Eq. (8), et 8eq.; ibid., discussion of F. Knapp, p. 129 following Eq. (2); ibid., High-speed Penstock Design, by:A. W. K. Billings, O. H. Dodaon, F. Kn..,P. and A. Santos, Jr., p. 38, Eq. (8), et 8eq., and Fig. 4, p. 86.

RICH.

op. cit.

same sign. At the control valve, pressure waves are reflected with the same sign and velocity waves with opposite sign. Since the effect of the damping agent, friction, has not been included in the pre ceding analysis, the wave pattern shown in Fig. 5 will, as indicated by Eqs. (9) and (10), continue indefinitely with the time without attenuation. To illustrate the man1i!-=IOsec: F FVoL 5FVo8

= 0.05
RISE AT

?J.t (W;V

o)

0.125 (W~Vo)
PRESSURE THE VAI.VE ~

....

..-I I
I

...I

.....
<-Ill

-.

12L AT THE

._ 0 0-

>u

<;>

~~

<- 01 IV

loo...

I
-- -18L 90

"'2L 4L 6L ~ 10L aT T a a10 14L

T T

II

16L

m a
100

20 40 70 SO 60 30 Time Seconds 8r Intel"vals VELOCITY

of

80 -\b

RESERVOIR

> ~ u
0

I.Z 0.8
+0.4 0

.
I I

...
0

~ -0.4

..

01

'u

~ ... .3

- T'TTTaaaaa
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Time Seconds 5L 71. 9L ilL 13L 15L

17L

21L

19L

"
of

~
~L

Ie Intel"vals

Pressure rise and velocity-simple conduit-instantaneous duit friction included.

valve ciosure,

ner in whieh friction operates to damp down the wave Illotion, Fig. 6 has been calculated, based upon the solution of Eqs. (6) and ~2), oP

ox

+ FV + W iJV ot ilV + QOP

ox ot

=0

by the technique described in the current literature.! In this particular example, the conduit friction coefficient has been magnified far beyond any normal occurrence in order to accentuate the damping effect and make it more perceptible. In the great

!I,*,.

Water-hammer parative minimum of studying every in the form most using the notation finite increments.

analysis by the method of arithmetic integration requires a comof specialized technique and yet affords a direct and incisive means physical element of the process. To arrange the basic equations advantageous for step computation, we shall first write Eq. (1), of heads rather than pressures, and shall replace differentials by ~V = _g~h ~t
Ax

(11)
(12)

Q = A(Vo

+ 2:~V)

For convenience, we shall select for the value of interval ~t some submultiple of L/a such as L/4a; then ~x will be the length of conduit traversed by the water-hammer wave in time ~t. For the sake of simplicity in explanation, it will be assumed that the terminal mechanism is simply a gate valve in which the nozzle area is decreased linearly with the time. For the case of nonlinear decrease of valve area, an obvious appropriate modification will be made in the calculation; and for the case of a turbine or pump as a terminal mechanism the same general procedure will be followed except that the trial values of discharge would have to be taken from performance curves at the correct machine speed for the particular instant, head, and gate. For linear reduction of valve area the discharge at the outlet at any instant will be

Q = Qo X A.YHo+
AyHo

2:~h

assuming constant values of discharge coefficients at all valve openings. 2:~h is the sum of all direct and reflected (positive and negative) pressures up to and including the instant in question. The mechanism of computation then follows directly from the conception of integration as a process of summation. By trial and error, we simply establish for each successive interval values of h and V that satisfy Eqs. (11), (12), and (13). With respect to the pertinent question of partial reflections at the valve, we find that by arranging our intervals as even submultiples of L/a we shall, after time 2L/a has elapsed, have a reflection arriving from the reservoir at exactly each instant when we are completing the execution of one of our small gate movements. Since friction is neglected, every new elementary square-topped wave that is generated will continue its cycle of reflection according to Fig. 1, forever without diminution, except for the influence of partial reflection. Now let us carefully examine the illustrative example, Table 1, in complete detail to satisfy ourselves that we actually do make the requisite correction to each reflected wave to compensate for partial reflection at the partly open control valve. For this purpose we select the interval at time 4.17 sec. At that time the wave originally genemted at time 0.83 has returned to the valve with negative sign and we multiply it by 2 in column 7, because waves reaching the control valve are reflected upstream with the same algebraic sign. If it were not for the arrival of this reflection, we should make the computation at time 4.17 sec exactly as we would in the case of the first four intervals. Then, to balance the trial-and-error com putation, the value of ~h would be 80 instead of 105 and yHG + 2: ~h would be Yl,281 + 80 instead of Yl,281 + 105 - 124. In other words, we have increased the value of ~h by 25 ft, and the negative wave reflected back upstream has the magnitude (62 - 25), or 37 ft instead of 62 ft; that is, about 60 per cent 01 toe wave is reflected.

TABLE

1.

ARITHMETIC INTEGRATION-SIMPLE

CONDUIT

(FOR LINEAR

DECREASE

01

VALVE AREA) Conduit length L - 5,OOU ft Initial conduit velocity V - 12 fpl! Conduit diameter - 15 ft Wave velocity a - 3,000 fpl! Conduit area - 177 Bq ft Initial bead - 1,000 ft Valve cloBure time - 10 sec Initial Q - 2,120 cf. For Al - O.lla Bee, AV _ Ah X 32.2 X 0.83 2,500 _ Column (3) X 32.2 X 0.83 C oIumn (4) 2,500 Column (8) - previous (H.Ah) C I (10) o umn + Column (3)

+ Column
(8)

(7)

2,120 X Column (9) X VColumn Vl,OOO

Note on calculation ol.e/leclion: Reflected wave component at time t - 4.17 sec equalB dir""t wave component at time t - 0.83 .ec X (- 2). Reflected wave compone'\t at time t ':'.50 see equals direct wave component at time t = 0.83 see X (+2), added to direct wave component at time t = 4.17 Bee X (-2). Reflected wave component at time I - 11.67 Bee equalB minuB twice the .um of the direct wave component at time I - 0.83 Bee pluB the direct wave component at time t - 1.67 sec; plu8 twice thE Bum o( the direct wave component at time t ... 4.17 see plua the direet wave component at time t - 5 see: minuflo twice the sum of the direct wave component at time t ." 7.50 sce plus the direct wave componont at 8.33 Bee. (1) (2) (3) Ah at valve, ft (4) (5) -(6) (7) 2Ah reflected from r8!'ervoir, ft (8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

Time,
see

Interval At, see

Av, fpl!

V, fps

Q177 V,

cr.

Total head Valve H. + h, opening ft

Cf.

Column (8)1,000 ft

--- --- --0.00 0.83 1.67 2.50 3.33 4.17 5.00 5.83 6.67 7.50 8.33 9.17 10.00 11.67 13.33 15.00 16.67 18.33 20.00 21.67 23.33

--12.000 11.339 10.636 9.866 8.986 7.846 6.671 5.496 4.325 3.223 2.155 1.907 0 time t - 10.0 2,120 2,010 1.885 1,145 1,592 1.390 1,180 973 764 571 382 194 0 see

--....... .......
-J.24.0 -130.0 -144.0 -164.0 86.0 9O.J 76.0 52.0 -230.0 -273.0 230.0 273.0 -230.0 -273.0 230.0 273.0

.... ..... .......

0.83 0.84 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.83 1.67 1.66 1.67 1.67 1.66 1.67 1.67 1.66 62.0 -0.661 66.0 -0.703 -0.770 72.0 82.0 -0.880 -1.140 105.0 -1.175 110.0 -1.175 110.0 -1.171 108.0 103.0 -1.102 -1.068 100.0 -1.058 98.0 -1.097 102.5 Valve closed at

....... .......

..... .....

..... ....... ..... ....... ..... ....... ..... .......

..... .......

....... .......

...... . ..... ....... ...... ...... .. .. , ......

. .... ..... ..... ..... ..... . .... . ....

1,000.0 1,062.0 1,127.0 1,199 ..0 1,281.0 1,262.0 1,242.0 >,208.0 1,152.0 1,169.0 1,179.0 1.201.0 1,251.5 1,021. 5 748.5 978.5 1,251.5 1,021. 5 748.5 978.5 1,251.5

1.000 0.916 0.834 0.750 0.667 0.583 0.500 0.417 0.333 0.250 0.167 0.083 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2,120 2,008 1,880 1,747 1,595 1,390 1,180 971 760 573 384 194 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 62.0 127.0 199.0 281.0 262.0 242.0 208.0 152.0 169.0 179.0 201.0 251. 5 21.5 -251.5 21.5 251. 5 21.5 -251.5 21.5 251.5

If we chose, we could llrtltnl;e the l'omputation to show 80 - 37, or 4::1 ft, as thp net head increment; carry it forward as 4:~ft in the computation and enter the l'orresponding reflection 2L/a see later at that value. \Ve delibemtely e1eet to Jnalw tlw entries separately and carry forward the reflect ion from each newly generated wavp forever, simply because experience appears to iIHlil,ate t.hat we arc lH'tter able to kpep track of waves this second way and that fewer mistakes rpsult. It will be applll'pnt, upon examination, that the two methods of bookkeeping arc in every respl,et equivalent; that is, 105 - 62 = 43 and 80 - 37 = 43. One of the most important fields of application of water-hammer analysis by the arithmetic integration method is in the comput.at.ion of speed variation' in turbines and pumps during openinll; or closure of t.he control valve. In a typic:ll case, that of sudden loss of load by a hydroeleetrie generating unit, a certain definite interval of time is required to close the turbine gates; anll during this time the energy of watl,r f1owinll; through the turhine is absorbed by the IV U2 of tllP gpnerator and manifested as an increase in speed of rotation. As previously noted, this speed of rotation, head and gate opening at the particular im:tant determine tile so-called setting of the turbine with respect to discharge. A solut.ion of the problm'l J'('l!twes to a matter of trial-and-error balance between water haJnmcr, power input to the machine, WU2 of the generator, and instantaneous values of head, gate, and diHeharge. In handling compound or branched pipes by the arithmetic integration method, the same general form of tabulation is applicable, and the only additional essential difference is that provision must be incorporated in the tabulation to facilitate keeping accurate track of wave reflections. It is believed that this is best arranged to suit the preferences of the particular computer. In this connection it has been the experience of the author that greater accuracy and much better understandinl/; of the computation generally results from writing the actual basic relationships at each junction point rather than placing blind dependence upon general formulas for reflection and transmission coefficients. Only two elementary hydraulic prineiples arc involved at junctions: (1) the total hydraulic pressure (steady Htate plus surge head) is the same for all branches and (2) to comply with hydraulic continuity, the sum of the discharll;es of the branches terminating in a junction point is zero, flows toward the junction point being counted positive, and flows away from the junction point being counted nell;ative. The water-hammer wave velocities in cach of the eomponent clements terminating in a junction point will naturally reflect the diameters, WIllithicknesses, and clastic moduli of the individual branches. In general practice it has been customary in computation to substitute for the compound pipe a simple pipe of equivalent characteristics determined from the equations: = V,I'I V2L2 V,L, L aiL, ad'2 a,f" L

For comparatively slow rates of valve closure, this artifice docs not appear to introduce any substantial error, but for rapid closures, particularly those approaching instantaneous closure, there is a marked discrepancy between the true magnitudes of water hammer and the superpressures yielded by use of the above equation.In such cases it will generally be worth while to make more accurate determinations, taking full account of partial reflections at points in the conduit where the wave velocity changes,
Load, STROWGER,E. B., and S. L. KERR, Speed Changes of Hydraulic Turbines and Sudden Changes of Trans. AS.lf E, 1926, p. 220, Table I. RICH, op. <it. AS.lfE-ASCE Symposium on lVater Hammer, 1933. BILLINGS, DODSON, KNAPP, and SANTOS, op. <it., p. 58, Fig. 8.
1

ANGUS GRAPHICAL METHOD The graphical method developed by Prof. R. W. Angus and predicated upon the so-called interlocked series of Allievi furnishes an exceptionally rapid and easily understood means of solving the basic differential equations. To facilitate cross reference with basic literature, the differential equations in Art. 2 are based upon taking x = 0 at the reservoir and x = L at the control valve. However, the literature dealing with the Allievi and Angus methods employs x = L at the reservoir and x = 0 at the control valve, so that we shall use the latter convention in Arts. 5 and 6. This is equivalent in Eqs. (1) and (2), Art. 2, to replacing x by I, - x, and since the literature for Arts. 5 and 6 uses the notation of heads rather than pressures, we shall also replace P by wHo This gives the basic equations in the following form:'

-ax=gat
- ax
aV
=

aH

1 aV

at at
+

g aH

As can readily be verified by differentiation, the so-called general integral solution of this pair of partial differential equations' is

H - Ho
Vo -

(t -~) +f(t

D
r

V = ~F

(t -~) -

~f

(t +~)

valid for every x along the entire conduit. It is well known that F and represent two traveling pressure heads propagated in the upstream and downstream directions with constant velocity a and without mutual interference. Now, in these two preceding equations let us place x = 0 to obtain conditions at the control valve. Then, in view of the relatively high velocity of wave propagation, we may, with no practical sacrifice in accuracy, conceive the gate motion to consist . 0f partia '1 gate movements executd 't erva 12L4L6L8L S' . of a senes e at m s mce, m

a' a' a' a'

the first interval tt

< 2L, no negative a

I'eflection will have returned from the reservoir,

the pressure head will be due to the direct wave alone. Now, write Eqs. (16) and (17) to represent conditions at the control valve during these successive intervals.' H, = Ho H. = Ho HI = Ho

+ F, + F. + F,
a

- F1 - F.

VI = Vo - f!. F, V Vo - f!. (F, a VI = Vo - f!. (F.

+ F.) +
FI)

'ALLI""I, LOlt&"EO, "The Theory of Water Hammer," translated by Eugene E. Halmoa, Rome, 1925, Eq. IV and V, p. IX. AMouB,R. W., Simple Graphical Solution for Preeeure Riee in Pipes and Pump Dischar.e Lines, Enq. Jour. of the Encineerin. Institute of Canada, February, 1935,p. 74, EqB. (6), (7), and (8). Artiele 5 is very largely an abetract of this excellent paper. ALLIEVI, op. cil., p. 6; WI:B8T&., loco oil.

HI - Ho = ~ (Vo g HI H2

VI)

+H

2Ho = ~ (VI - V2)

g g

+ H.
n_1

- 2Ho = ~ (V. - V.)

Hn 8
Reflected

+H

2Ho = ~ (Vn_1
g

Vn)
(20)

~
W~Ve

Basic notation. Angus graphical method. H - Ho =

Equation (20) gives the relation between values of pressure and velocity at the start of each successive interval 2L/a. From the general character of the wave motion and Eqs. (16) and (17) we perceive that the function F, the sum of all direct or positive pressures at the time t taken at the section x along the conduit is identical with the same function F ~aken at the gate at a time x/a see earlier.~ Correspondingly, the sum of all reflected or negative pressures at the section x for time t is the same as the function / at the gate x/a see later. While Eq. (20) applies only to pressure rise at the valve at the ends of two successive intervals of 2L/a, Eqs. (16) and (17) apply to any point on the pipe. First, adding Eqs. (16) and (17), we obtain V)

-i

(Vo -

+ 2F (t
2/

Second, subtracting Eqs. (16) and (17), H - H0 =

+ ~(V

0 -

V)

Let A and B be any two sections on the pipe, as shown in Fig. 7a. gives HB' - HB. HAil - H . - ~ (VB. - VB') 2F

n + (t + n + (t - n
-

(22) Equation (21) then

(VA. - VAn)

+ 2F (h -~)

Since the conduit is of uniform diameter

It is also apparent from Fig. 7a that

t - t, = x - x, a

We then obtain by subtracting Eq. (24) from Eq. (23),

HBt HAll

+~ (Va. g

VAll)

By the same type of reasoning, the reflected wave Eq. (22) and Fig. 7b afford the following:
HBt! HAt HR. =

+ ~(VBo

VBll)

+ 21 (t, +~)

HAo = +~(VAO

VAt) +2/

(t +~)

t - t, t

x, - x
a

+~ = t, + ~ a a

and subtracting Eq. (26) from Eq. (27) gives

HAt HBll = - ~ (VAt
g

VBn)

If we are analyzing three points on the pipe, A, 13, and C in Fig. 7c, the following equations may be written by means of Eqs. (28) and (25):
~ (VBt g VCt2) VBt2)

+~ (VCt g

Equations (29) and (30) are also applicable if the pipes AB and BC are of different diameters; the only change being in the value of a, which is different for each section, it being as usual assumed that the difference in velocity heads in the two sections is negligible compared to Hoo Equations (25), (28), (29), and (30), used in conjunction with the law correlating gate motion, head H, and velocity V, permit us to solve all problems. It is generally more convenient to use ratios H /H 0 and V /Vo instead of H and V, so that we shall denote the former by h and the latter by II. Following Allievi's notation the quantity a Vo/2gH 0 will be designated p. Dividing Eq. (25) by H 0 gives
HBt = HAll Ho Ho hAll hBIl hcn hBn = aVo (VBt _ VAll) gHo Vo Vo - 1181) - IIAt) - 1181) - IICt)

hBt = +2p(IIAll hAt = -2p(IIBtl hBt = -2p(IICt2 hCt = +2p(IIBt2

Fig. lIa} Fig. lIb Fig. 12b Fig.12a

where E varies only with the gate setting and is usually assumed to vary linearly witt. the time, starting with E = 1 for full gate. Equations (31) are the loci of two series or parallel lines with slopes equal to tan 2p and tan - 2p. Conditions at the reservoir are always represented by some

H/H

OllYli OYlH

point on the horizontal line Y = 1, because there

::0

= 1, if conduIt friction is neg-

lected. Conditions at the valve will be given by the intersection of the lines of negative slope with the curves representing the orifice discharge relationship. Now let us apply the theory we have developed to solution of the identical problem solved by arithmetic integration in Table 1 of the preceding article, regarding the graphical construction, Fig. 8, not as au exercise in drafting but rather as applied

;::
0::
C

01.0 c ... :z:

0.2

0.3 0.4 VELOCITY RATIO

0.5

vIVo

I"in tol'lduiJ w'otity -IZfp, W..,e velodt,-3000 fpa

ca ,_!YA",m '2. ~ 1I1io 11000

'4.00
1300 .1.

..

1.t17

Valve tloiurc tirrMI io 5tCOIlds

:H,-IOOO'

...
~

. 1200

~ 1100

I'
-

.....

+-"
I

1\
I

.L..

Frictionhtlcf loss at Yalve,-O;~VZ

...
Z

1000 I"

1 1 1\ .1 ....

II
~

'i't
I

v"

AlH

~
1\

11

too
100

-f - t- ~-i
.iL
4

I
J6

\~ ~I
\I
20

fOO

t
'HEAD-TIME

; r
I 24 2.

1/ \
Il>J

/1
~

..

~
36

32

T1M- $[COflO~

D1AGRAU

hAul

hc .

+2p(VA . 8. -

vc . )

and the horizontal axis. It is evident that B1.67 is the same as AO.83 hy drawing from C2.50:
hBI.87 hc . = +2p(VB1.67 vc . )

B3.33 is obtained from the intersection of

hA . - hB3.33 = +2P(VA . - VB3.n) he . - hB3.33 = -2p(vc . - VB3.3.)

and the remaining points of the charts are obtained by a continuation of the same process. In the present state of our technique, the direct analytical solution of the basic differential equations is the only method capable of distributing the effect of friction along the conduit in accordance with nature. The graphical method, however, enables us to obtain very satisfactory and useful results by means of the artifice of lumping the cumulative effect of friction at certain selected points, most frequently at the control valve. As an illustration of the method of application (Fig. 9), let us incorporate the effect of conduit friction in the previous example, assuming for simplicity that the aggregate friction head loss at the valve is represented by the expression 0.50112w , here v is the instantaneous value of total velocity at the valve. Next plot a curve of this equation below the horizontal axis, as indicated, so tha.t the vertical intercept will represent the aggregate relative friction-head loss at the valve for various velocity ratios. Then point AO, representing initial conditions at the valve, will be located at the intersection of the valve-setting parabola for the time t = 0, and the friction-head loss curve. Point C1.67, representing conditions at the reservoir for all times up to = 1.67, will then be located on the horizontal axis directly above A, the intercept represcnting the aggregate steady-state friction-head loss along the conduit from C to A. But as our basic system of equations has been developed on the basis of neglecting friction, we shall continue to plot our fundamental network of solid lines as representing conditions with friction effect deducted, and shall apply dotted line corrections for friction at all points A. Obviously no such eorrection will be necessary until we reach the zone of afterwaves for all points C. The method will be readily understood by explaining the true location of A3.33. The basic equation with friction neglected is

So starting at C1.67, produce the requisite solid line of negative slope beyond the intersection with the gate-setting parabola for t = 3.33. Then in the vicinity of this intersection transfer the range of intercepts from the friction-head loss curve to give the dotted line. The intersection of the dotted line with the gate-getting parabola gives the true location of A3.33. To proceed in determing C5.00 we revert to our fundamental system of solid lines by drawing the vertical line upward from A3.33 to intersect the first solid line C1.67A3.33. To locate C5.00 we draw the li~e of positive slope from the point so found to

Initial velocity in conduit =0 fps Final velocity in conduit = 12fpo Wave velocity. Valve opening 3000 fps time = 10 seconds

1100

----r-HoIOOO'

J..

~ 1000 ~ , 900
0

5000 a 3000' aVo

1.67 seconds 3000 - 12

c ...
%

100 700 600 0 2 4

2p= gHO = 32.Z- 1000 = 1.117

~--

01.0

o ~ 09 a: o c ~ 0 I

01

02

04

05 VELOCITY

06 RATIO

07

vivo
opening.

Graphical analysis-simple

conduit-gradual

-"" -

... z
0

./

'\

,... ,/
...
CD Z

\
0

't..J

_-CO!
CO_ O

...

'\ \

"
\1')0 ""0

.'\.
'\
o o
0 0 CO

~~
ON

.. "

<t

ItlN N ..,

.... . I/)

"

.eOIl

...
\I')

III "'Cl

cD
II

ONI >%:

0
<II

c
u

,r

II OJ

~
II>

"~ o " O"!

ON

NO - 0

..,
N

+=
V
OJ

L::s

.., ... !:: " -:

Il

. ... . ~
Q.

0 >

0 - 0 0 00

fti

o-

~17o"

>

>

'!!

., g..,'=!
oJ .., II

...
Q.

OIl

'" II

-to

m'"

fg~
, iJ ~

lumped friction correction is to the points C, fairly close to the friction-loss intercept curve. The key suggestion to keep in mind is that friction operates to decrease the conduit velocity at C, whether the conduit flow is in the positive or the negative direction. This explains why the dotted line is drawn below the solid for C11.67 and above the solid for C15.00. A very interesting exercise to develop better understanding of the method is to check Fig. 6. remembering, of course, to replace the curve ClI' by the assumed straight-line friction lOBS.

Figure 10 shows the construction for the case of the simple conduit, friction neglected, under gradual opening; while Fig. 11 illustrates the solution of the compound pipe for gradual closure with friction neglected. It will be noted at once for the latter prohlem that the effect of differences in wave velocity or diameter of the component sections of the pipe is simply to change the values of slope of the corresponding straight lines. The number of intersections necessary to establish the solution is noticeably greater than would be expected from comparison with the illustrations for this case usually given in textbooks. This is because the latter examples are prefabricated so that the reflection times of the component sections of the conduit are even multiples. In actual practice this is seldom the case, so that Fig. 11 represents the degree of complexity normally to be expected. If only slight changes in the conditions of the given problem are sufficient to make the reflection times of the component sections even multiples, the resultant solution is obviously very greatly simplified; but more often than not changes of substantial magnitude would be necessary, and these could not be effected without introducing serious error. Before proceeding with the analysis of the more involved problems in branched and compound system, the engineer should consult Prof. Angus' excellent article.l

By a combination of the so-called interlocked series equations and a rather cumbersome graphical device since superseded by the Angus method, the great pioneer investigator, Lorenzo Allievi, developed charts that are probably still the most widely used devices for the rapid solution of the elem ntary conventional cases of waterhammer analysis. It should be emphasized, however, that these charts have, strictly speaking, a comparatively limited field of applicability. Their derivation is predicated upon the fulfillment of two conditions that in many cases are not even remotely approached. These fundamental assumptions are that the nozzle area at the control valve is decreased or increased linearly with the time and that the efflux velocity at the nozzle at any instant is proportional to the square root of the sum of the steadystate plus water-hammer heads. Obviously when the terminal mechanism is a centrifugal pump or hydraulic turbine operating through a transient range of speeds, the efflux velocity follows the law of the machine performance curve for the individual mechanism and departs markedl) from the conventional orifice law. In commercial turbomachines not only is the dis charge dependent upon the instantaneons speed but still further complication result~ from the fact that the gate motion is characterized by intervals of dead and cushioning time and is accordingly not at all a linear relationship. Results obtained by the application of Allievi charts to snch cases may very naturally produce wide discrepancies from the true values of transiE'nt pressure and velocity. Nevertheless, when used within their intended zone of application, the Allievi diagrams do effect an exceedingly great saving in time and labor for determining maximum or minimum point values. Allievi's great ingenuity in the use of his so-called Cartesian synopsis enabled him to summarize the entire field of uniform linear closure by means of two basic parameters, and the valve operation or time constant, 8 =

~r.

the pipe-line constant p =

2~i;o

The maximum rise or fall, as the

case may be, is then taken from a single reading of the applicable chart, the dotted curved lines on the chart for closure indicating the interval in which maximum point pressure occurs. The charts do not enable us to plot a time history of the waterhammer wave.

..
III

c J.O

..

1.0

P
FIG. 12. Allievi diagram.

AXIS

Maximum pressure rise for uniform gate motion and simple conduits (for small values of p and fJ).

As the first illustrative example in the use of the Allievi charts, let us establish the maximum values of pressure rise for the case covered by the arithmetic integration method in Table 1 and by the Angus graphical method in Fig. 8.
Simple Conduit--Gradual Clo .,re Conduit Fridion N "!Ileeled Initial head Ho ..................................... " Initial velocity in conduit ... " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Water-hammer wave velocity .......................................... Valve cloeure time .............................................. '. Length of pipe line ........ '" " Plpe- I'IDe constant Va Ive opera t Ion constant 1.000 ft 12 fps 3.000 fps 10 see 5,000 ft

p = 2gH.

aVo

3,000 X 12 0558 2 X 32.2 X 1,000 .

aT 3,000 X 10 300 U'... 2L . 2 X 5,000 .

z. _ H. + hma" _
H.

1,000 hma" -'1.280 1,000 Since the point p - 0.56, , - 3.00 Ii.

SelviJlc, muimum

preoaure rise at valve - h " - 280 ft.

\!l.O

12.
3 4 PAXIS
FIG.

13. Allievi diagram. Maximum pressure rise for uniform gate motion and simple conduits (for intermediate values of p and 6).

to the left of dotted line SI, Fig. 12, the maximum value of pressure rise occurs at some time during the first interval 2L/a, or between t = 0 and t = 3.33 sec. This checks very closely the values obtained by the arithmetic integration and graphical methods.

ABa typical example of pressure drop during gradual opening by means of the Allievi charts, let us solve the problem given graphically in Fig. 10.
Simple Conduit--Gradual Opening Conduit Friction Neglected Initial head H...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Final velocity in conduit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Water-hammer wave velocity ....................................... Valve opening time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Length of pipe line. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Pipe-line constant aVo p = 2gH. 1,000 ft 12 fpo 3,000 fpo 10 see 5,000 ft

3,000 X 12 2 X 32.2 X 1,000

0.558

aT Valve operatIOn constant 6 - 2L

3,000 X 10 = 2 X 5,000 - 3.00

z' _ Ho=-!!
H.

_ 1,000 - h _ 0700 1,000 .

oJl

~o
U

..

.. -'
0

-'

~
"i-

~
"

4" ....

~ ....

....

..~ ..~
"

,;-.'1> ,,,'I>

,.'I>

,.~ ,.."
'l. .

3.0 34 '" 30 ;C .c 2.
Cll

.11 !I:O

22

,.11 ,.0 10.0 '!I.1l 2.0.0 311.0 40.11 ,0.11 lot :1Il.1l 10 12 14 II II 20 22 24 2f 2. 30 32 34 31 31 40

FIG. 14.

P AXIS Allievi diagr~m. M~ximum pressure rise for uniform g~te motion ~nd simple conduits (for large values of p and 8).

As a third and final illustrative example in the use of the Allievi chartJI, let us check the compound pipe analyzed graphica.lly in Fig. 11.
Compo . nd Cond . it--Gradual Clo .r. Cond . it Friction N .glect.d (See Fig. 11) Initial head Ho " Valve closure time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. VI V, Wave velocity al Wave velocity a, ..................................................... Length LI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Length L,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . I d' I't V E qUlva ent con Ult ve QCI Y VILI L.

1,000 ft 10.ee 12 fpo 18.75fpo 3,000 fpa 2,500 fpe 3,000 ft 2,000 ft

+ Ls V,L, + + 18.75 X + 2,000 + 2,500 + 2,000

2,000 _ 14 7 f . PlI

E qUlvalent .

_ 12 X 3,000 3,000 . alLI a,L, wave velOCity a LI

+ + y;;:-

~,OOO

X 3,000 3,000

X 2.000 _ 2 800 f ' pe 064

t Plpe-I' IDe con.tan p Val . ve operation COD8tal1

aVo 2(/Ho -

2,800 X 14.7 2 X 32.2 X 1,000 -

4
117 -

aT 2,800 X 10 280 2L - 2 X 5.000 -. .

,
42 )I 34 ;; 30 c
[/

71 -

.. ..

,/

k'...

-28
1/

1.4 10 .

- ..

2 I

II
o
2 4

--.

24 28

'-

0.02 Z':O.OI

_.

10 12 14 16 18 20 22 28

...

l-t ,
.

30

32

34

3S

38

40

1<'10. 15.

Allievi diagram.

P AXIS Maximum fall in pressure for uniform gate motion and simple conduits.

\1\

,\
~

>
~
I

3000

'\

"
\.
\.

I--STEEL
II'

PIPE

i'..
"- , r---...

a: :;)

.......

r---...

:s a:
A. t-

fI)

.........

........

.....

CAST IRON PIPE-

>-

.......

2000

I'-..

..........

>

........
......

1000

SO

100

ISO RATIO

200

2S0

300
and steel pipe.

FIG.

16.

Chart for calculation of velocity of pressure wave in cast-kon

z.-

H.

+ 11 _
H.

1,000 11 _ 1.320 1,000

Solving. the m imum preuure riae at the valve is 320 ft and occure between the timl! 0 and 3.60 .ec. giving a clcee check on the graphical analyaie. Fig. 11.

There is one feature I of the Allievi charts that warrants particular emphasis. It will be noted that over the major portion of the diagram, Fig. 12, the radial lines giving value of ZS are straight, but that in the lower left-hand eorner there is a pronounced break in slope. This means that in many cases closures starting from part gate with proportionally reduced velocity will produce higher water hammer than closure from the fully open position and full discharge velocity. For this reason, it is good practice to test all possible partial closures to establish the true maximum. The following example illustrates the procedure.
Simple Condllit--<Jroo 1 Clo&ur& Conduit Fridion NOllleckd Initial head H ............................................. " Initial velocity in conduit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Water-ham_ wave velocity ValYe closure time " Length 'of pipe line. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. Firet. for complete closure, I' ta t V. P lpe- me cono n p - 2gH. . Val ve operation cono tant, T 3,000 X 100 466 2 X 32.2 X 1,000

1.000 ft 100 fPII 3,000 fPII 33 sec 5.000 ft

2L -

3,000 X 33 990 2 X ..5.000 - .

z. _

H.

+ 11 _
H.

1,000 11 __ 1,000

-+'

159 .

Preuure

rise lamax - 590 ft

.. 'Ii t npe- ne conotan p . t t, Val ve operation cone an

2gH.

V.

3,000 X 10 2 X 32.2 X 1,000-

047

T .. 2L

-=

3,000 X 3.3 099 2. X 5,000' .

z. _

H.

+ 11 _
H.

1,000 llmax = 200 1,000 .

In foot units, the general expression for water-hammer wave velocity is from Eq.
(3): a=---

VWQ

~!!?
g

(.! +.Q.) K bE

For steel pipes the value of E is 29,400,000 psLor .42.3 ;><10 paf, while the bulk modulus of w~ter is 294,000 psi or 42.3 X 10 psr.
I KIlRB, S.-LoGAN, New AsPects of Maximum 1928, paper HYD-51-3.

= ~~:~ = 2.00 closely enough.

Conduits, TrA8ME,

P ute Rise inClosed

4,660 ~1

+ l~b

which is plotted for convenience as the curve for stcel pipe, Fig. 16. For cast-iron pipe, the value of E is 15,000,000 psi or 21.60 X 10 psf, and the corresponding value of the wave velocity is 3,290 a =-----~0.51

l~b

the curve of which is plotted as cast iron, Fig. 16. For concrete pipe with an assumed modulus of 2,500,000 psi = 3.60 X 10 psf, the wave velocity becomes a'" 1,340 ~0.085

l~b

For a tunnel in solid rock the value of b becomes very large, and consequently the wave velocity approaches the velocity of sound in water, 4,660 fps. For wood-stave pipe, Strowger1 has developed the formula
a'"

4,660 ~1

+ E.b K.J! E.",

where b = stave thickness, ft. '" = total cross-sectional area of steel bands, sq ft/lin ft of pipe. E. = modulus of elasticity of steel bands in tcnsion, 4.23 X 10' psf. E", = modulus of elasticity of wood staves. British Columbia or Douglas fir. . . . . . . . . . . .. 2.30 X 10 psf Redwood or cypress 1.92 X 10 psf White pine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1.00 X 10 psf For old deteriorated staves, tests show values as low as 0.60 X 10s psf. FIELD OF APPLICABILITY OF VARIOUS METHODS

Although selection of the method best adapted to fit the various particular problems arising in practice is very largely a matter of preference of the individual engineer, it .may be worth while in summary to indicate what the author believes to be the characteristic merits of the various devices. For all but the cases of instantaneous valve operation, direct analytical solution of the basic differential equations is possible only by prescription of the efBux velocity extinction pattern rather than the conventional time rate of decrease of valve opening with discharge velocity determined from the orifice law. In spite of requiring this departure from tradition and also the command of relatively advanced technique, this method is still believed to be the most effective instrument for research investigation and for establishing in rigorous fashion the fundamental laws of water hammer. Once the manipulative technique has been mastered, the analytical solution does have the
1 STRowalla, E. B., Water-hammer Problems Plants, Trans. A8MB, 1944, paper 44-A42.

in Connection

with the Design of Hydroelectric

additional advantage of affording a continuous time history of pressure and velocity in compact and perfectly general formulas. Development along such lines is believed to be incipient and affords definite promise for the future. The author has found the arithmetic integration method to be particularly incisive in those cases in which the terminal mechanism is a turbomachine and in which, therefore, the discharge characteristics depend upon the instantaneous value of gate and speed. This method also is exceedingly valuable in teaching the computer the internal mechanism of water hammer and the synthesis of total pressures from direct and reflected wave components. The graphical method, developed very largely on this continent through the efforts of Prof. Angus, is not only one of the greatest savers of time and labor in the hydraulic field, but it has the added advantage that the underlying theory is simple and readily understood. It handles with equal ease cases in which the valve closure is uniform or even nonlinear; and although it may be used effectively for those cases in which the machine speed passes either above or below normal, the author is slightly prejudiced in the case of the latter class in favor of arithmetic integration. As already outlined, the Allievi charts, in spite of their limitations, continue to be the most popular and widely used of all water-hammer methods; but it should always be borne in mind that they were never intended to apply, even as a rough approach, to more highly specialized cases in which the efflux velocity depends upon the instantaneous setting and speed of the terminal mechanism. One of the cascs occurring most commonly in practice is that of a penstock, surge tank, and pipe line or tunnel. The standard method of analysis is to consider the free surface of water in thc tank as an open reservoir and neglect the pressure wave traveling up the pipe line or tunnel. A more accurate determination of the system as a branched conduit problem may readily be effected by means of the graphical method, Ref. 4 in the Bibliography, or by the appropriate Calame and Gaden formulas, Ref. 6.

1. ALLIEVI, LORENZO,"The Theory of Water Hammer," Garroni, Rome, 1925. The original waterhammer elM.ic, giving the development of the fundamental equations, description of the interlocked eeries, and presentation of the Allievi charts. 2. "Symposium on Water Hammer," publisbed by the joint committee of ASME. Hydraulic and ASCE Power Divisions, 1933. A r~um6 of the principal modee of water-hammer analysis available up to that time. 3. ANGUS,ROBERT W., Simple Graphical80lution for Pressure Rbe in Pipe and Pump Discharge Lines, Eng. Jour. of the Enllineering Institute of Canada. February, 1935. An exceptionally clear treatment of the graphical method with valuable illustrative examples. 4. ANGUS, ROBERT W., Graphical Analysis of Water Hammer in Branched and Compound Pipes, Trona. A80E, 1939. A valuable extension of araphical analysis to cover several more important illustrative cases. 5. ANGUS, ROBERT W., Air Chambers and Valves in Relation to Water Hammer, Trona. A8M E, 1937, HYD-59-S. 6. STROWGER,E. B., Water-hammer Problems in Connection with Design of Hydroelectric Plante, T1'ona. A8M E, 1944. A concise r~um6 of the arithmetic integration and graphical methods brought up to date. 7. RICH, GEORGJlR., Water-hammer Analysis by the Laplace-Mellin Transformation, Trons. A8M E, 1945. Outlines the basic method of applying the complex variable operational calculus to the direct analytical solution of the basic differential equations. 8. WOOD, F. M., The Application of Heaviside's Operational Calculus to the Solution of Problems in Water Hammer, Trona. A8ME, 1937, HYD-59-15. 9. STROWGBR,EUL B., Relation of Relief Valve and Turbine Characteri.tica in the Determination of Water Hammer, Trona. A8ME, 1937, HYD-59-14. 10. RICH, GEORGE R., "Hydraulic Tranaients," McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 1951.

4&

~I ]

Ii;