Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
The term
Another common form of the Darcy Weisbach equation that is most often
used by engineers because it gives pressure drop in units of pounds per
square inch (psi) is:
Eq. (2)
To obtain pressure drop in units of psi/100 ft, the value of 100 replaces L in
Equation 2.
The total pressure drop in the pipe is typically calculated using these five
steps.
1. Determine the total length of all horizontal and vertical straight pipe
runs.
2. Determine the number of valves and fittings in the pipe. For example,
there may be two gate valves, a 90o elbow and a flow thru tee.
3. Determine the means of incorporating the valves and fittings into the
Darcy equation. To accomplish this, most engineers use a table of
equivalent lengths. This table lists the valve and fitting and an
associated length of straight pipe of the same diameter, which will
incur the same pressure loss as that valve or fitting. For example, if a
2" 90o elbow were to produce a pressure drop of 1 psi, the equivalent
length would be a length of 2" straight pipe that would also give a
pressure drop of 1 psi. The engineer then multiplies the quantity of
each type of valve and fitting by its respective equivalent length and
adds them together.
4. The total equivalent length is usually added to the total straight pipe
length obtained in step one to give a total pipe equivalent length.
5. This total pipe equivalent length is then substituted for L in Equation 2
to obtain the pressure drop in the pipe.
See any problems with this method?
Relationship between K, Friction Factor, and Equivalent Length
The following discussion is based on concepts found in reference 1, the
CRANE Technical Paper No. 410. It is the author's opinion that this manual
is the closest thing the industry has to a standard on performing various
piping calculations. If the reader currently does not own this manual, it is
highly recommended that it be obtained.
As in straight pipe, velocity increases through valves and fittings at the
expense of head loss. This can be expressed by another form of the Darcy
equation similar to Equation 1:
Eq. (3)
When comparing Equations 1 and 3, it becomes apparent that:
Eq. (4)
K is called the resistance coefficient and is defined as the number of
velocity heads lost due to the valve or fitting. It is a measure of the following
pressure losses in a valve or fitting:
Pipe friction in the inlet and outlet straight portions of the valve or
fitting
Pipe friction in the inlet and outlet straight portions of the valve or fitting is
very small when compared to the other three. Since friction factor and
Reynolds Number are mainly related to pipe friction, K can be considered
to be independent of both friction factor and Reynolds Number. Therefore,
K is treated as a constant for any given valve or fitting under all flow
conditions, including laminar flow. Indeed, experiments showed1 that for a
given valve or fitting type, the tendency is for K to vary only with valve or
fitting size. Note that this is also true for the friction factor in straight clean
commercial steel pipe as long as flow conditions are in the fully developed
turbulent zone. It was also found that the ratio L/D tends towards a
constant for all sizes of a given valve or fitting type at the same flow
conditions. The ratio L/D is defined as the equivalent length of the valve or
fitting in pipe diameters and L is the equivalent length itself.
In Equation 4, f therefore varies only with valve and fitting size and is
independent of Reynolds Number. This only occurs if the fluid flow is in the
zone of complete turbulence (see the Moody Chart in reference 1 or in any
Notice that use of equivalent length and friction factor in the pressure drop
equation is eliminated, although both are still required to calculate the
values of K1. As a matter of fact, there is nothing stopping the engineer
from converting the straight pipe length into a K value and adding this to
the K values for the valves and fittings before using Equation 7. This is
accomplished by using Equation 4, where D is the pipe diameter and f is
the pipeline friction factor.
How significant is the error caused by mismatching friction factors? The
answer is, it depends. Below is a real world example showing the
difference between the Equivalent Length method (as applied by most
engineers) and the K value method to calculate pressure drop.
An Example
The fluid being pumped is 94% Sulfuric Acid through a 3", Schedule 40,
Carbon Steel pipe:
Table 1: Process Data for Example Calculation
Mass Flow Rate, lb/hr
63,143
Volumetric Flow Rate, gpm
70
3
Density, lb/ft
112.47
S.G.
1.802
Viscosity, cp
10
o
Temperature, F
127
Pipe ID, in
3.068
Velocity, ft/s
3.04
Reynold's No
12,998
Darcy Friction Factor, (f) Pipe
0.02985
Pipe Line ?P/100 ft
1.308
Friction Factor at Full Turbulence (ft) 0.018
Straight Pipe, ft
31.5
Total
865.63 60.94
Notes:
1. K values and Leq/D are obtained from Reference 1.
2. K values and Leq are given in terms of the larger sized pipe.
3. Leq is calculated using Equation 5 above.
4. The reducer is really an expansion; the pump discharge nozzle is 1"
(Schedule 80) but the connecting pipe is 3". In piping terms, there are
no expanders, just reducers. It is standard to specify the reducer with
the larger size shown first. The K value for the expansion is
calculated as a gradual enlargement with a 30o angle.
5. There is no L/D associated with an expansion or contraction. The
equivalent length must be back calculated from the K value using
Equation 5 above.
K Value Method
Length Method
Straight Pipe ?P, psi
Not Applicable
0.412
Total Pipe Equivalent Length ?P, psi
11.734 Not Applicable
Valves and Fittings ?P, psi
Not Applicable
6.828
Total Pipe ?P, psi
11.734
7.240
The line pressure drop is greater by about 4.5 psi (about 62%) using the
typical equivalent length method (adding straight pipe length to the
equivalent length of the fittings and valves and using the pipe line fiction
factor in Equation 1).
One can argue that if the fluid is water or a hydrocarbon, the pipeline
friction factor would be closer to the friction factor at full turbulence and the
error would not be so great, if at all significant; and they would be correct.
the effect of scaling the sizes of valves and fittings. The reader is
encouraged to get a copy of this article.
The use of the 2-K method has been around since 1981 and does not
appear to have "caught" on as of yet. Some newer commercial computer
programs allow for the use of the 2-K method, but most engineers inclined
to use the K method instead of the Equivalent Length method still use the
procedures given in CRANE. The latest 3-K method comes from data
reported in the recent CCPS Guidlines4 and appears to be destined to
become the new standard; we shall see.
Conclusion
Consistency, accuracy and correctness should be what the Process Design
Engineer strives for. We all add our "fat" or safety factors to theoretical
calculations to account for real-world situations. It would be comforting to
know that the "fat" was added to a basis using sound and fundamentally
correct methods for calculations.