1.

Introduction
This report has described the process of the experiment
about the fluid friction in pipe flow and has analysed the
relationship between the flow rate, velocity of water, friction
factor, the Reynolds number and the head loss.
The flow of a fluid in a pipe is accompanied by the loss of
energies due to the interaction between the fluid and the
viscous stresses on the wall of the pipe. As we see below, the
figure 1 illustrates the difference in manometer levels between
the stations A and B, so the height h represents the static
pressure drop occurring along this length due to the frictional
resistance to which a fluid is subjected as it flows along a pipe.

Figure 1: Schematic illustrating static pressure loss due to

friction along a pipe.

It has been known that the main factor that causes the
loss of energy of fluid is resisting force in the hydraulic
transmission system, so the friction factor has been one of the
most important parts of hydraulic flow in a pipe.
Therefore, this experiment will focus on the energy losses
due to friction in the pipe by measuring the pressure drop and
flow rate through a pipe, then an estimate of the friction factor
will be obtained using the Moody chart provided. In this way,
using the Darcy-Weisbach equation, shown below, we will obtain
the head loss along the pipe used in the experiment.
h=

L v2
2dg

Where: h = head loss, L = length of pipe, d = diameter of

the pipe, v = mean velocity of flow, and = friction factor,
which varies with and pipe roughness.
Note: The Reynolds number, Re is given by Re =

vd

Where:

= density of fluid, and

= fluid viscosity.

2. Methods
The equipment used in this experiment are listed below:

The C6-MKII-10 Fluid friction apparatus

The C6-50 Data logging accessory
A stopwatch
Measuring cylinder
Internal Vernier calliper

First, using the Vernier calliper, measure the internal diameter

of the test pipe sample and ensure that the control valve is closed
before starting the pump.
Therefore, by operating a control valve on the hydraulic bench,
the flow rates may be adjusted and then it can be measured using the
volumetric flow tank and the stopwatch, or directly via the C6-304
software.
The head loss can be measured by connecting the two pressure
sensors to the pair tappings along the pipe and then the results will
be displayed on the monitor.
Therefore, repeat this process altering the flow rates using the
control valve on the hydraulics bench for 10 times, taking notes of the
flow rates and the pressure drops shown on the monitor.
The image shown below demonstrate this process described:

Figure 2: Diagram of the pipe flow test rig.

3. Results
3.1 Table: Experimental data, calculated friction factor and
calculated Reynolds number for each flow rate.

3.2 Graphs:

Head Loss versus Velocity

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6

Head Loss (m)

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
2.0099999999999998
2.4500000000000002
1.2
1.65
2.23
2.81
2.88
3.12
3.57
3.7

Velocity (m/s)

a) Head Loss versus Velocity

b) Log Head Loss versus Log Velocity

Calculated Head Loss

Linear (Calculated Head
Loss)
Measured Head Loss
Linear (Measured Head
Loss)

Log h versus Log v

0.9
0.8
0.7
Calculated Head Loss
(m)

0.6

Logarithmic (Calculated
Head Loss (m))

0.5

Head Loss (m)

0.4

Measured Head Loss (m)

Logarithmic (Measured
Head Loss (m))

0.3
0.2
0.1
0

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Velocity (m/s)

Thus, taking into account the classification of laminar and

turbulent regimes based on the Reynolds number and the Moody
chart provided, we have that for the laminar and turbulent regimes:

Therefore, analysing the table and the graphs shown above, we

can see that for all the cases the flow is turbulent because the
minimum value found for the Reynolds number was 17617.

3.3 Calculating the percentage error between the calculated

head loss and the measured head loss:

Percentage

error

aproximate valueexact value

x 100
exact value

(e)

In this way:

4. Conclusions
When comparing the difference between the experimental and
predicted values for head loss, the measured value is hugely different
to the calculated value achieved, as we can see in the percentage

error table shown above. The reason for this is because of the pipe
roughness and also the human and apparatus errors will need to be
taken in consideration.
Other sources of error were present in this experiment. One source
of error was due to the measurement of the head loss from the
pressure traduces. Due to unsteady flow in the testing apparatus, the
air over water manometer did not give a steady reading. Another
source of error was due to the flow meter of the testing apparatus.
In conclusion, we manage to finish our experiment successfully
without many problems. We also manage to understand the Reynolds
number clearly and the Moody chart correctly and manage to
differentiate between laminar and turbulent flow. Overall, the
experiment is a success.

5. References
Water Engineering Laboratory Manual;
Fluid Mechanics Laboratory Guidelines for Biotechnology
engineering Lab1, 3rd edition (Jan 2007), Syed Abu Bakar
Al-Saggoff ;

Module Code: CE 3002

Assessment Title: Water Engineering 2015/16
Module Tutor: Dr Robin Wakelin

Laboratory Report
Fluid Friction in Pipe Flow

Student ID: 1531256

Date: 19/11/2015
Signature:

November 2015