Major and Minor Losses

J. Payne
BSEN 3310
Group 5

ABSTRACT
Pressure drop or loss happens when frictional forces act on a
fluid. Major loss result is due to the roughness of the pipe, but in minor
loss it is due to the loss coefficient. Minor losses occur pipes when
certain fittings, like elbows, enlargements, contraction, and angles are
present. This experiment focused on how pipe diameter effects the
friction factor, and the effect of fitting types in pipes. A Technovate
fluid circuit system and an Edibon Energy Losses in Bends Module were
used to find readings for major and minor losses. Six different
recordings were obtained for each mechanism. From various
calculations, percent errors were obtained for both major and minor
losses (Figure 3 and 5). Results showed, that as velocity increases the
friction factors respectively decreases in all pipes sizes. In testing the
various fittings to test minor loss, the coefficient percent errors were
lower in the elbow and angle fittings than the sudden enlargement and
contraction fittings.

INTRODUCTION
Pressure drop can be defined as the change in two pressure
points of a fluid; this is an irreversible effect. Pressure drop or loss
happens when frictional forces act on a fluid. Pressure loss is
proportional to the frictional forces. Therefore when the friction force is
larger the pressure loss increases. Friction (Equation 1) is often due to
the roughness rating, which depends on the material, but in minor loss
situations a loss coefficient (Equation 2) is used instead of friction.
Minor losses occur when elbows, enlargements, contraction, and angle
fittings are present. Which will also affect the pressure and head loss.
Objective
The purpose of the lab is to measure the effect of pipe diameter
on friction factor, major loss, and the effect of fitting type on minor
losses due in pipes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Equipment
A Technovate fluid circuit system is a hydraulic circuit system.
This system uses mechanisms that carry fluid. This system was used to
obtain pressure readings to compare the effect of pipe diameter on the
friction factor. The fluid circuit system consisted of four pipes, water
tank, motor, pump, valves and fittings, points for pressure

measurements, and a manometer for recording measurements. Also,

the Technovate piping system was manufactured out of copper.
For minor losses due to fitting type the Edibon Energy Losses in
Bends Module (FME05) was used. This module also consisted of a
hydraulic circuit with elements that disrupted the flow of the fluid in
the pipe. The components that affected the flow in the order
occurrence were a long elbow, a sudden enlargement, a sudden
contraction, a medium elbow, a short elbow, and a right angle fitting. It
also has twelve pressure taps, which were used to measure the
pressure losses (Equation 3) in the system.
Procedures for major loss
For major loss 6 set readings were recorded from pipe two and
three of the fluid circuit system. The recordings across the orifice were
in the range between 0 inches and the maximum reading for each pipe
section. The pressure drop (Equation 3) across the orifice was then
found. Then the pressure drop was used to estimate the volumetric
flow rate (Equation 4) through the system. Head loss across a pipe
section was calculated along with flow velocity to get the estimated
Darcy friction factor (Equation 5) for each pipe section. Knowing that
the fluid circuit system is made from copper a theoretical value for
friction was the determined.
Procedures for minor loss
The Edibon Energy Losses in Bends Module control valve was
used to obtain 6 flow rate and the corresponding 12 pressure readings.
When obtaining flow rate (Equation 6), the time and the volume was
recorded while water filled the Edibon Hydraulics tanks. While running
the experiment, manometer reading differences between taps 11 and
12 could only vary from 5 mm to 60 mm. The head loss for each fitting
was calculated along with velocity of flow squared (Equation 7). Head
loss and velocity of flow squared were plotted and used to calculate
the experimental values of the loss coefficient (Equation 2). Once
plotted, a trendline was then applied to obtain the loss coefficient
through the slope.
Equations
This equation was used to calculate the
theoretical friction factor from experiment:
1
6.9 /D 1.11
1.8 log
+

3.7
f
Where
= Reynolds Number
= Roughness value (m)

[ ( )]

(1)

John Payne
Jep0024@auburn.edu
BSEN 3310 Group 5
Page 2 of 8

f = Theoretical friction factor

D= Diameter of the pipe (m)
This equation was used to calculate friction
factor from the minor loss experiment:
V2
h L=K
(2)
2g
Where
h L= Head loss (m)
V = Flow velocity (m/s)
K= Loss coefficient
g= Gravity (9.8 m/s2)
This equation was used to calculate the
change in pressures:
P= gh 1g h2
(3)
Where
P= Change in pressure (Pa)
= Density of water (1000 kg/m3 )
g= Gravity (9.8 m/s2)
h= Recorded height from
manometer (m)
This equation was used to find the volumetric
flow rate:
2 Porifice
Q=C d Ao
(4)
d 4
1
D
Where
Q= Volumetric flow rate (m3/s)
C d= Discharge coefficient (0.656)
A O = Area (m2)
P= Change in pressure (Pa)
d= Diameter of orifice (m)
D= Diameter leading to orifice (m)

( ( ))

This equation was used to calculate the

friction factor from the major loss experiment:
L V2
h L=f
(5)
D 2g
Where
h L= Head loss (m)
V = Flow velocity (m/s)
John Payne
Jep0024@auburn.edu
BSEN 3310 Group 5
Page 3 of 8

f = Experimental friction factor

L= Length of the pipe (m)
g= Gravity (9.8 m/s2)
D= Diameter of the pipe (m)
This equation was used to calculate the flow
rate for minor loss from the time and volume
recorded:
V
Q=
(1.667 105)
(6)
t
Where
Q= Flow rate (m3/s)
V = Change in volume recorded (L)
t= Time recorded (s)
This equation was used to calculate the flow
velocity (m/s):
V =Q A
(7)
Where
V = Flow velocity (m/s)
Q= Flow rate (m3/s)
A= Area (m2)
This equation was used to estimate
percentage of error (%):
|T E|
PE=
100
T
Where
PE= Percentage error (%)
T = Theoretical value
E= Experimental value

(8)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Major loss
For each pipe, the theoretical values for friction versus velocity
squared were plotted (Figure 1 and 2). Along with the experimental
values for friction against velocity squared (Figure 1 and 2). This was to
show a visual for the different in the theoretical and experimental
friction calculations. Along with figure 1 and 2, percent error was
calculated (Equation 8 and Figure 3). When looking at the percent error
for the pipes, the larger diameter pipe (pipe 3) has a significantly lower
error than pipe 2. This is due to such a small difference (less than .01)
in the friction factors. With that, the larger the pipe diameter, the lower
John Payne
Jep0024@auburn.edu
BSEN 3310 Group 5
Page 4 of 8

the probability of error. Another thing noticeable is as velocity

increases, the friction factors decreases in all pipes.
Minor loss
For the Edibon Energy Losses in Bends Module the head loss
across each fitting versus velocity squared were plotted (Figure 4).
Once the linear trendline, with intercept of zero, was applied the slope
was taken and multiplied by gravity times two to obtain the
experimental loss coefficient (Equation 2). In Figure 5 the theoretical
values for the loss coefficient are displayed, found in the textbook. The
percent errors for the coefficients are low, with the exception of the
sudden enlargement and contraction fittings. This issue could be one
of two things: there are more variables when calculating the
coefficients than the other fittings, or failure due to operation which
created an inaccurate slope.

TABLES AND GRAPHS

Calculated Friction Factor

Theoretical Friction Factor

Figure 1. The Relationship between Friction Factor and Velocity Squared For Pipe 3
(ID 0.785 in)

John Payne
Jep0024@auburn.edu
BSEN 3310 Group 5
Page 5 of 8

Calculated Friction Factor

Theoretical Friction Factor

Figure 2. The Relationship between Friction Factor and Velocity Squared For Pipe 2
(ID 0.545 in)

Pipe 3
Percent Error
19.17%
21.41%
19.40%
25.54%
20.36%
6.13%

Pipe 2
Percent Error
30.75%
32.20%
38.37%
29.89%
32.55%
80.83%

Figure 3. Percent Error Data for both Pipe 3 and Pipe 2

John Payne
Jep0024@auburn.edu
BSEN 3310 Group 5
Page 6 of 8

Long Elbow

Linear (Long Elbow)

f(x) = 0.05x
Sudden Enlargement

Linear (Sudden Enlargement )

Sudden
f(x) = 0.03x
Contraction

Linear (Sudden Contraction )

f(x) = 0.03x
Medium Elbow

Linear (Medium Elbow )

Short Elbow

Linear (Short Elbow)

f(x) = 0.01x
f(x) = 0.01x
Right Angle

Linear (Right Angle)

f(x) = 0.01x
Figure 4. The Relationship between Head Loss and Velocity Squared For Minor Loss

Loss Coefficient (K) Values

Long
Elbow

Sudden
Enlargement

Sudden
Contraction

Medium
Elbow

Short
Elbow

Right
Angle

Theoretica
l

0.25

0.59

0.45

0.3

0.9

1.1

Experimen
tal

0.25

0.102

0.67

0.233

0.6

0.94

Percent

0%

82.7%

48.9%

22.3%

33.3%

14.5%

John Payne
Jep0024@auburn.edu
BSEN 3310 Group 5
Page 7 of 8

Error
Figure 5. Minor Loss in Pipe Bend Data

CONCLUSION
A Technovate fluid circuit system was used to measure the effect
of pipe diameter on friction factor, and Edibon Energy Losses in Bends
Module was used to study the effect of fitting type on minor losses due
in pipes. With major losses in the fluid circuit system it was determined
that the larger pipe diameter correlates with a lower chance of error.
Also, as velocity increases the friction factors respectively decreases in
all pipes sizes. With the minor losses the coefficient percent errors
where lower, other than the sudden enlargement and contraction
fittings. This happened because there are more variables to take into
account when determining the coefficients than other fittings, or it is
failure due to operation, which created an inaccurate slope. In the
future, the two areas to focus on: record more data from a smaller pipe
size, using the Technovate system, and more data pertaining the
contraction and enlargement fittings from Edibon Energy Losses in
Bends Module.

REFERENCES
Edibon Technical Teaching Equipment. (2009). Hydrostatics Bench &
Fluid Propertie. Edibon Technical Teaching Equipment. Retrieved
from
http://www.edibon.com/products/catalogues/en/units/fluidmecha
nicsaerodynamics/fluidmechanicsgeneral/BHI.pdf
engel, Y. A., Cimbala, J. M. (2014). Pressure and Fluid Statics. In Fluid
Mechanics, (pp. 355-380). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

John Payne
Jep0024@auburn.edu
BSEN 3310 Group 5
Page 8 of 8