Abstract

Water hammer is phenomena that occur when water that flow inside the pipe
suddenly block. This experiment was conducted to study, understand and calculate the
pressure caused by water hammer that occurs in the pipe when there is a sudden closure of
valve. At the end of this experiment, the results that obtain from this experiment compared
with the theoretical values and have been discussed. The objective of this experiment was
achieved. Unfortunately, the results that obtain from this experiment is not like what have
been expected due to some reasons.

1.0 Introduction
The normal sound of water moving through pipes is a steady, even sound. Although it
might seem to be a smooth flow, the water inside the pipe actually churns and tumbles as it
moves through. When water flows in the pipe at a certain velocity, suddenly there is
obstruction to the flow, a vibrating sound is produce. This phenomenon is called water
hammer and it is not only for water but all fluids. Water hammer is usually recognized by a
banging or thumping in water lines. This condition can be related to Newton's Second law
which states that for every action there is reaction. This action is caused by the dynamic force
of water and when there is a sudden obstruction, the reaction is the energy being converted to
elastic energy and hence a series of positive and negative pressure waves will move to and
form in the pipe until it is stopped by friction. These cases will fail the pipeline fast. Hence all
pipeline design with connection must be considered.
Water hammer can be a big thump that shakes the house, or a series of banging noises
starting with a loud bang followed by several "echoes". Rapidly closing or opening a valve
causes pressure transients in pipelines. If the noise occurs when you open a valve or a faucet,
it is probably air in the pipes. If it occurs when a valve closes or the washer changes cycles, it
is probably water hammer. If it occurs when a pump starts, it could be water hammer, air in
the pipes, or both. Although opening valves can sometimes create water hammer, this
typically only occurs with valves larger than 3" in size, and even then it is reasonably rare.
However the problem is important for hydroelectric projects where the water flow
must be quickly changed which is equivalent to the load change on the turbine. This
phenomenon occurs in fluid flow pressure system when the valve is closed. When the valve is
closed, water element near the valve will be compressed by the water flowing towards it.
Thus will cause the pressure near the valve to increase and cause the nearby pipe to be
stressed. The water element that flows later will stop and compress the incoming water. The
process will continue for the water element for a short while, the pressure wave will return
upstream and finally the water in the pipe will stop.
The first variable is the length of the pipe the water is traveling through. We can't do
much about the length of your pipes, assuming that you can't move your house closer to the
water source. But it is an important factor in creating water hammer, so it is useful to take a
look at it, especially as it relates to the pipe size. For example, in some situations you can
force a high rate of flow through a small pipe without problems, provided the length of the
pipe is short, say, a few feet. The shorter the pipe, the smaller it can be. Knowing this will
help you when you try to identify the source of the water hammer. So keep in mind that a
small pipe may not be a problem if it is a very short length.
2

The second variable is time, or specifically how fast the water is being stopped. When
a closing valve is causing water hammer, time is how long it takes for the valve to close.
Most irrigation valves take several seconds to close. Theoretically this would not cause a
problem, as several seconds is very slow when dealing with water hammer. The valve may
take a few seconds to go from full open to full closed, but it has a tendency to snap closed.
Realistically the actual closing time of a typical irrigation solenoid valve is around 1/2 to 1
second. But it varies greatly, even when testing the same valve. For example, an irrigation
valve closes much faster if there is higher water pressure present. It also closes faster as you
increase the flow through the valve (increasing the flow creates a greater pressure differential
across the valve, which causes it to close faster.) So a valve that would not cause a water
hammer problem at a low flow and low pressure, will cause all kinds of problems if you
increase the flow through the valve and/or the water pressure.
The third factor that influences water hammer is the velocity of the water. The faster
the water is traveling in the pipe, the greater the water hammer. It is this last factor which is
easiest for us to correct in a sprinkler system, so most of the suggested solutions for water
hammer will be aimed at reducing the water velocity.
The most effective means of controlling water hammer is a measured, compressible
cushion of air which is permanently separated from the water system. Water hammer
arresters employ a pressurized cushion of air and a two o-ring piston, which permanently
separates this air cushion from the water system. When the valve closes and the water flow is
suddenly stopped, the pressure spike pushes the piston up the arrester chamber against the
pressurized cushion of air. The air cushion in the arrester reacts instantly, absorbing the
pressure spike that causes water hammer.

2.0 Objective
To study, understand and calculate the pressure caused by water hammer that occurs in the
pipe when there is sudden closure of valve.

3.0 Literature review

3.1 Basics mechanism of water hammer event
A water hammer event or hydraulic transient results when the velocity of flow
charges in a pipeline. Water hammer is the transmission of pressure waves along pipeline
resulting from a charge in flow velocity. When the steady flow of an elastic fluid in a pipe is
disturbed (for example, opening or closing a valve in a pipeline) the effect is not felt
3

immediately at other points in the pipeline. The effect is transmitted along the pipeline at a
finite velocity called the wave speed of the fluid.
Typical cause of water hammer include the adjustment of a valve in a piping system,
starting or stopping of a pump, and load rejection of a turbine in a hydro-electric power plant.
Water hammer in system is becoming increasingly important as technology advances, large
equipment is constructed, and higher speeds are employed for pump and turbines. Possible
outcomes of water hammer events include dangerously high pressure, excessive noise,
fatigue, pitting due to cavitation, disruption of normal control of circuit, and the destructive
resonant vibration associated with the inherent period of certain pipes.

Bergant,Simpson and Sijamhodzic (2012)

3.2 Transition flow in pipe are more likely water hammer to occur
As has been shown (Leiter & Maslach, 2008) water hammer are more likely occur in
transition flow area. Factors that effecting transition flow are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Pump trip as a result of switching off the power supply or a power failure.
Starting or stopping up one or more pumps whilst other pumps are in operation.
Closing or opening of shut-off valves in the piping system.
Excitation of resonant vibrations by pumps with an unstable H/Q curve.
Variations of the inlet water level.

3.3 Water hammer formula

As stated by Wylie and Streeter (1978) mass conservation and momentum
conservation are the fundamental equations used to analyze hydraulic transients (water
hammer). The boundary conditions consist of a large reservoir at the upstream end of the
pipeline and a valve at the downstream end discharging to the atmosphere. The equations,
subject to the boundary conditions, are not readily solved analytically - a numerical solution
is required. We used the method of characteristics to obtain a solution. The method of
characteristics is a finite difference technique where pressures are computed along the pipe
for each time step. Our calculation automatically sub-divides the pipe into sections (i.e.
reaches or intervals) and selects a time interval for computations. Computational accuracy is
enhanced by having lots of pipe sections and time steps; however, 2 or 3 digit accuracy is
generally obtained in a pipe having as few as 5 sections while 6 digit accuracy is typically
obtained with 50 sections. The number of pipe sections used is shown in the calculation next
to the pipe number after the calculation runs. You can "force" the calculation to have more
pipe sections by decreasing Tmax, the total calculation time. Our calculation uses 100,000
pipe sections times time steps, with a maximum of 1000 sections per pipe. The product
4

100,000 was selected to provide maximum accuracy and fast computations. The Courant
stability criterion is used to determine the number of sub-sections versus time steps.

Figure 1 water hammer equations

The following equations can be found in Wylie and Streeter (1978).

4.0 Methodology
4.1 Apparatus
1. Switch Control Board Water Hammer
2. Computer
3. Selenoid valve
4. Manual Closing Lever
5. Pressure transducer
6. Pressure Gauge
7. Flowmeter
8. Control Valve and Water Pump

4.2 Material
1. Water
2. A4 paper

4.3 Experimental Procedure

4.3.1
1.
2.
3.

Automatic closing
WATER HAMMER program are opened
The Pump on the control board panel is turned on
On the panel, the auto program has been selected. Before that, the
manual closing laver is fully opened. This laver is remaining at that
position until the automatic closing experiment finished.
4. The reset button pushed.
5. The water flowrate are adjusted. For the first flowrate, a suitable
initial flowrate (Q) which is close to the maximum value of
flowrate (Q) has been chosen and all flowrate values have been
converted from liter/minute to liter/hour for calculation purpose.
6. On the WATER HAMMER program, the reset button was clicked
followed by button CLEAR and START. After the word
AUTOMATIC appear on the monitor screen, the READY button
was clicked.
7. After a few second, the AUTO RESET button was pushed on the
board panel. At the same time, the initial pressure was recorded
from the pressure gauge. The actual pressure obtain by using
experimental pressure - initial pressure = actual pressure. The value
of actual pressure was recorded in bar unit.
8. Right after the appeared, the CAPTURE GRAPH button was
clicked to save the graph.
9. The flowrate (Q) then reduced 5 different values by adjusting the
control valve clockwise.
10. Step 4 to step 9 were repeated for different flowrates.

4.3.2
1.
2.
3.

Manual closings
WATER HAMMER program are opened.
The Pump on the control board panel is turned on.
On the panel, the manual program has been selected. Before that,
the manual closing laver is fully opened. This laver is remaining at
that position until the automatic closing experiment finished.
4. The reset button pushed.
5. The water flowrate are adjusted. For the first flowrate, a suitable
initial flowrate (Q) which is close to the maximum value of
flowrate (Q) has been chosen and all flowrate values have been
converted from liter/minute to liter/hour for calculation purpose.
6. On the WATER HAMMER program, the reset button was clicked
followed by button CLEAR and START. After the word
7

MANUAL appear on the monitor screen, the READY button was

clicked.
7. After a few second, the lever closed. At the same time, the initial
pressure was recorded from the pressure gauge. The actual pressure
obtain by using experimental pressure - initial pressure = actual
pressure. The value of actual pressure was recorded in bar unit.
8. Right after the appeared, the CAPTURE GRAPH button was
clicked to save the graph.
9. The flowrate (Q) then reduced 5 different values by adjusting the
control valve clockwise.
10. Step 4 to step 9 were repeated for different flowrates.

5.0 Result
Table 1: Automatic Closings result

Pressure Gauge
(P)

Oscilloscope reading
P theory
(m water)

Ordinate
Max
(cm)

Voltage
(V)

Pressure (P)
(atm)

(m water)

(l/h)

(m/s)

(bar)

(m water)

420

0.0172

23.0000

234.5264

136.5880

3.3240

1.6620

33.2400

343.0364

360

0.0147

19.5000

198.8376

117.0750

2.7510

1.3755

27.5100

283.9032

300

0.0122

17.0000

173.3456

97.5630

2.4454

1.2227

24.4540

252.3653

240

0.0098

13.0000

132.5584

78.0500

2.0252

1.0126

20.2520

209.0006

180

0.0073

12.9000

131.5387

58.5380

1.7578

0.8789

17.5780

181.4050

120

0.0049

6.0000

61.1808

39.025

1.5668

0.7834

15.6680

161.6938

Table 2: Manual closings

Q
(l/h)

V
(m/s)

Closing
time
(sec)

Oscilloscope reading

Pressure Gauge
(P)
(bar)

(m water)

P theory
(m water)

Ordinate
Max
(cm)

Voltage
(V)

Pressure (P)
(atm)

(m water)

420

0.0172

0.1327

23.0000

234.5264

136.5880

3.1130

1.5665

31.3300

323.3256

360

0.0147

0.1253

19.2000

195.7785

117.0750

2.7128

1.3564

27.1280

279.9670

300

0.0122

0.1400

16.0000

163.1486

97.5630

2.5218

1.2609

25.2180

260.2498

240

0.0098

0.6265

13.0000

132.5584

78.0500

2.0252

1.0126

20.2520

209.0006

180

0.0073

0.1548

10.8000

110.1254

58.5380

1.6050

0.8025

16.0500

165.6340

120

0.0049

0.1769

10.0000

101.9680

39.025

1.3376

0.6688

13.3760

138.0403

6.0 Discussion

In this experiment there are two types of approach that have been used in order to obtain
information about water hammer pressure. First is automatic closings and the second is
manual closings. Automatic closing is a program that will open and close the lever
automatically. As it automatic program the closing time would be constant throughout the
experiment. In this case, the pressure of water hammer fully is depended on the amount of
flowrate. The manual program is a program that required the lever to be open and close
manually. Therefore, the times of closing are different depending on the individual skill.
Thus, the water hammer pressure would not only depend on flowrate but also depend to the
closing times.
Switch board control water hammer is one of the important tools that have been used in
this experiment. This is because, there are many apparatus such as manual lever, pressure
gauge control valve, water pump and solenoid valve are attached on this board. Therefore,
without this board this experiment will be impossible to carry on. A set of computer used in
this experiment to run the water hammer program. This water hammer program provided
several information about water hammer just a few seconds after it detection of water
hammer phenomenon. Those information are, ordinate, voltage and pressure. All this
information have been classified under oscilloscope reading in the result table.
Basically, the sudden blocking of flowrate movement would cause the rising in pressure.
Thus, in this experiment the pressure transducer has been used to stabilize the pressure come
9

from the water hammer. This device make this experiment can be carry on without waiting
the pressure inside the pipe to stabilize itself. Flowmeter is being used in this experiment to
measure the amount of flowrate that enter to the pipe. The amount of water supply to the pipe
using water pump is cannot be adjusted. Therefore, control valve is being used to
manipulating the amount of flowrate so that the various data can be obtain from this
experiment as shown in result table (table 1 and table 2).
Based on the experimental result, there is about 70.123% of error on the experimental
result. The error calculation is as follow,
(

(
(

)
)

= 70.123%
There are two main factors that can cause such experiment result. First, the water
hammer device was very sensitive. There are may be some kinds of error during the
experiment since, all group members are in their first experience using that device. Second, it
may be happened some kind of mistakes during taking the pressure gauge reading. This is
because, the gauge needle was too fast and forced the experiment team to take the
approximate readings. Therefore, as the reading recorded in term of approximation high
accuracy experiment should not be expected. The device problem itself also contributes to
this problem. It may be some kinds of detection problem since the water pump are also
attached to the switch control water hammer. Water pump will produce some sort of vibration
that indirectly interrupting the water pressure gauge detection. However, mistake during
recording should be considered also. As working in laboratory that quit hot during the day
will interrupt the consistence and focus of the entire team member.

Question 1:
P Gauge conversion:
(

= 234.5264 m H2O
10

P theory calculation:
g= 9.81 m/s2
Cp= 1298.45 m/s

Question 2:

Figure 2: automatic closing

11

Figure 3 Manual closing

Question 3:
This is because, the pressure of manual closing are not totally depending on flowrate
of the water. It also depends on the time of closing. The automatic closings have a constant
value of closing time compare to manual closing. Even though, both result are far from the
theoretical value, as can be seen from the graph the result of automatic closing is more
directly proportional to the amount of flowrate compare to manual closings.

Question 4:

12

7.0 Conclusion

The objective achieved. The experiment was successfully conducted with maximum
precaution and focus. Unfortunately, the result is not like been expected due to some reasons.

8.0 Recommendation
Error:
There are several errors that occur during the experiment. Among them are:
1. Personal error ( parallax error & skills)
2. Systematic error ( device & equipment)
3. Random error ( readings and situation)

Suggestions:
1. Ask student to do test run before begin the experiment.
2. Student should have enough rest before carry out experiment.
3. Technician should explain clearly about devices before the experiment begin and tell
student what can cause inaccurate gain.

13

9.0 Refrences

Bergant, Agus R. Simpson and Sijamhodzic (2012).water hammer analysis of pumping

system for control of water in underground mines. Department of Civil Engineerin
Universiti Aldelaide, 63(3), 182-196. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.3.182

Leiter & Maslach, 2008. Copyright renewal, copyright restoration, and the difficulty of
determining copyright status. D-Lib Magazine, 14(7/8). doi:10.1045/july2008-hirtle

Wylie and Streeter (1978) Science, values, and human judgment. In H. R. Arkes & K. R.
Hammond (Eds.), Water hammer:(pp. 127-143). Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.

14

15

16

17