STEADY FLOW MOMENTUM

FLUID MECHANICS II

ELSETOUHY, HEBA
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON
GROUP 8

STEADY FLOW MOMENTUM EXPERIMENT

FLUID MECHANICS II

1. Introduction
The aim of this report is to analyse the horizontal displacement due to the force applied to a vane
deflector pendulum by a vertical jet at a varying heads. The momentum principle will be applied to
provide the theoretical predictions and comparing this result with the results obtained
experimentally. Also the measured displacement of the pendulum for different flow rates will be
compared with the theoretical predictions.

Experimental Setup

Figure 1: Schematic of the apparatus

The figure shown above shows a cylindrical tank with an orifice of diameter d. A tube connected to
the base of the tank is used to monitor the head of water within the tank. The jet is directed toward
the vane deflector where the jet change its direction, this change in direction causes the deflector to
displace horizontally. An ultrasonic distance sensor is used to measure the displacement by
producing voltage signal proportional to the distance. A calibration chart that relates voltage to
displacement is provided.
1.1. Experimental Procedure
Before carrying out the experiment the inlet valve of the cylindrical orifice tank was turned
fully open and manometer tube was monitored for the depth h0 to stabilize by keeping the
pendulum away from the jet.
The times t taken to collect 10, 20, 30 litres of water were recorded as well as the depth h0
and the voltage reading of the ultrasonic distance sensor. These measurements were
repeated for three different levels of water in tank.

2. Results and Data Analysis

2.1. Theoretical and Measured horizontal force
Measurements taken during the experiment and results obtained were recorded table 1
just show summary of the average data collected.
Initial height
(m)
0.537
0.409
0.387
0.507
0.513
0.397
0.474

Displacement
(m)
0.253
0.258
0.259
0.255
0.254
0.259
0.256

Time
(s)
43.620
50.620
51.780
44.850
44.860
50.880
46.450

dx
(m)
0.025
0.020
0.019
0.024
0.024
0.020
0.023

Volumetric flow rate ,Q

x10-3 (m3/s)
0.230
0.198
0.194
0.224
0.224
0.197
0.218

Table 1: Average results obtained from experiment

These obtained results were used to calculate the horizontal force applied in the vane
deflector pendulum experimentally as well as theoretically.
To calculate the theoretical horizontal force, an initial assumption of CD = CV =1 were made
where CD is the discharge coefficient and CV is the empirical velocity coefficient. This
assumption implies that the fluid is ideal with no viscose force (frictionless), the flow of
water at the nozzle outlet is steady and the energy losses are negligible.
Applying the momentum principle to drive equations for horizontal forces based on
Bernoulli equation so by using the equation X=m g x/L 1 to obtain the measured horizontal
force, and the equation X= 2CD CV A g 0(0 + )2 the data were recorded as shown in
Table 2.
Head, h0
m
0.537
0.456
0.387
0.507
0.513
0.397
0.474

Measured Horizontal Force

N
0.595
0.474
0.451
0.566
0.576
0.470
0.541

Theoretical Horizontal Force

(with CD=CV=1)
N
1.771
1.461
1.405
1.699
1.714
1.429
1.618

Table 2: Initial assumption of theoretical horizontal force and measured horizontal force

Shows the relation between the horizontal force X and the displacement x of the deflector.
Shows the relation between the head in the tank and the horizontal force applied to the pendulum along a
streamline.
2

Horizontal Force, (N)

Measured

Theoretical

2.00
1.80
1.60
1.40
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

Head, h0 (m)
Graph 2: Theoretical and Measure horizontal force against varying head, h0

Figure 2 shows that the horizontal force applied to a vane deflector pendulum is directly
proportional to varying head. It also shows that the theoretical horizontal force exceed the
measured force which can be due to the initial assumption made where CD and CV are
assumed to be equal to 1. In reality the fluid will never be ideal which means that there will
always be energy lost during the flow of the fluid through the orifice. These problems have
to be solved in order to produce a realistic theoretical calculation which will be considered
more below.
2.2. Finding the discharge coefficient CD
Based on the volumetric flow rate equation Q=CDA2 0 3 , the discharge coefficient, CD

Volumetric Flow Rate,Q x10-3 (m3/s)

can be obtained by plotting a graph of Q against A2 0 , where the gradient is equal to

CD. Q was found using the equation Q=V/t with V=10 litres and t is the average time taken to
collect every 10 litres.
0.30
0.25

y = 0.6728x - 0.0158

0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

A(2 0)

0.25

x10-3

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

(m3/s)

Graph 2: flow rate against A (2 g h0)

The volumetric flow rate Q for given orifice which is a function of the water head, h 0.

From the graph CD is equal to 0.673(3.s.f).

2.3. Finding the empirical velocity coefficient CV
The coefficient of velocity can be found by using the obtained discharge coefficient to
recalculate the theoretical horizontal forces and plotting them again against the
experimental measured data. Where CV is the gradient of the graph. Finding CV will account
for any viscous losses throughout the experiment.
Head, h0
m
0.537
0.456
0.387
0.507
0.513
0.397
0.474

Measured Horizontal Force

N
0.595
0.474
0.451
0.566
0.576
0.470
0.541

Theoretical Horizontal Force

(with CD=0.673)
N
1.192
0.983
0.945
1.143
1.153
0.962
1.089

Table 3: Measured and Theoretical horizontal forces with the new adjusted value for CD

Measured Horizontal Forces, (N)

0.70
y = 0.5826x - 0.0967
0.60
0.50

0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

Theoretical Horizontal Forces, (N)

Graph 3: Measured against Theoretical horizontal forces

Referring to the graph CV is equal to 0.583(3.s.f). The value of CV normally have high ranges
closer to one and the reason for why the obtained CV value didnt fall within this range is
because the experiment was done in a smaller scale with low head differences and
significantly small orifice diameter which leads to a higher number of uncertainties that
could cause this result to be lower than it should be which allow the obtained value to be
acceptable.
Now that both values of coefficient are obtained, they can now be used to recalculate the
theoretical horizontal forces acting on the vane deflector using equation 2, to solve the
overestimation problem and to get a realistic comparison between the theoretical and the
measured horizontal forces acting on the vane deflector pendulum. The data were recorded
in table 4.

Head,h0
m
0.537
0.456
0.387
0.507
0.513
0.397
0.474

Theoretical horizontal force

Measured horizontal force
(with CD=0.673, CV=0.583
N
N
0.595
0.694
0.474
0.573
0.451
0.551
0.566
0.666
0.576
0.672
0.470
0.560
0.541
0.634

Table

4: Measured against adjusted horizontal forces

Graph of the new adjusted theoretical horizontal forces against measured forces was obtained
as shown:
Theoretical

Measured

0.80

Horizontal Forces, (N)

0.70

y = 0.9566x + 0.1809

0.60
0.50
0.40

y = 0.9564x + 0.0843

0.30
0.20
0.10

0.00
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Head, h0 (m)
Graph 4: Measured and the new adjusted theoretical horizontal forces against varying head, h0

Comparing graph 5 with graph 1 is clearly noticeable that when adjusted the values for the two
coefficients CV and CD the approximation between the adjusted horizontal forces gives and the actual
measuring horizontal forces becomes closer. Although the adjusted theoretical value made a closer
approximation to the experimental results there are still some uncertainty within the experiment
that cause 0.1N difference.

3. Conclusion
From the experiment it can be deduced that by applying an ideal theoretical assumptions of CV=CD=1
when calculating the horizontal forces applied to the vane deflector pendulum it leads to an
overestimation of the results comparing to the experimental measured results. As in reality the fluid
will never be ideal due to the energy losses caused by the friction of fluid as it flow through the
orifice as well as viscous losses which cant be neglected. So the use of the obtained empirical
coefficients led to better prediction as shown in Graph 5, although these values are not perfect to
cancel the 10% difference between the theoretical and the measured horizontal forces this is due to
the complicity of the experiment which means the results can still be acceptable.
5