Results and Discussion

In order to find the entry length of a flow through a pipe using COMSOL software, a cutline was made
between points (0.01,0) and (0.01, 5) in the coordinate form (r, z) where r is in the radial distance from
the center and z is in the direction of increasing length of the pipe. A velocity profile across the cutline
was plotted and can be seen in the figure 1. The graph below is for a pipe with parameters p=0.0001Pa
L=5m r=0.2m.

Figure 1: Graph showing the velocity profile across the length of the pipe of 5m

From the graph it can be seen that the velocity initially increased and then it reached a point
where the velocity remained relatively constant. This confirms the theory that the velocity near
the center of the radius accelerates before the flow becomes fully developed as the cutline was
at a radial position of 0.01m compared to the actual radius of 0.2m. The entry length was found
using this graph and excel sheet generated by the software at the length where the velocity had
just become constant/ was equilibrium.
For this assignment the relationship between the entry length, Le and; (1) pressure difference,
p (2) radius, R (3) length of the pipe, L was to be investigated using the software.

Relationship between Entry Length and Pressure Difference

Keeping the radius, length and outlet pressure of the pipe constant at 0.2m, 5m and 0Pa
respectively, the inlet pressure was varied using values between 0.9x10-3Pa to 3.0x10-3Pa. These
values were used because a pressure below 0.9x10-3Pa was insufficient to move the fluid while
a pressure greater than 3x10-3Pa created a turbulent flow. Using the procedure described
above to find the entry length, a graph of entry length against pressure was plotted and this is
shown in figure 2.
 4.00

3.50

3.00

2.50
Le (m)

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50
Δp (x10-4Pa)

Figure 2: Graph of entry length against pressure

difference
The graph shows a direct proportionality between Le and p. Re-arranging equations (3), (4), (6)
d 2
and using A  , Le can be written in terms of pressure difference as
4
0.0575d 4
Le  p (7)
32 2 L
The equation above also shows that Le p. Therefore the experiment confirms the
relationship.

Relationship between Entry Length and Radius

In this case, the length of the pipe, the inlet and outlet pressure were kept constant with values
of 5m, 0.0001Pa and 0Pa respectively. The values of radius used were between 0.18m and
0.3m. As before, using a radius greater than 0.3m the entry length could not be easily
determined as it occurred near the end of the pipe and using a radius less than 0.18, the
pressure difference for the radius was insufficient to cause a proper flow in the pipe this can be
seen in figure 3 and figure 4 respectively. The graph of entry length against radius is shown in
figure 3.
 Figure 3: Velocity Profile across the pipe for R=0.34

Figure 4: Velocity Profile across the pipe for R=0.14

 6

4
Le (m)

y = 143.86x2 - 33.104x + 1.8164

1

0
0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
R (m)

Figure 5: Graph of entry length against radius

4
Le (m)

0
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
R2 (m2)

Figure 6: Graph of entry length against radius squared

Equation (6) shows that entry length is directly proportional to the square of the radius. Figure
5 which is the graph of entry length against radius produces a curve which is of quadratic
nature. Plotting a graph of entry length against the square of the radius (figure 6) gives a linear
relationship therefore this justifies equation (6)
Relationship between Entry Length and Radius

The radius, inlet and outlet pressures were kept constant at 0.2m, 0.0001Pa and 0Pa
respectively. Using a pipe length in the range of 4.5m to 5m, a graph of entry length against
length of pipe was plotted and is shown in figure 7
1.8

1.6

1.4
Le (m)

1.2

0.8

0.6
4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6
L (m)

Figure 7: Graph of entry length against Length of pipe

Equation (7) suggests that the entry length is inversely proportional to length of the pipe. It can
be seen from the graph that there is not a clear relationship between the entrance length and
the length of the pipe. ( I am still thinking about a reason for this)

Appendix
Table 1
Δp(10-4Pa) Le (m)
0.90 0.80
0.95 1.10
1.00 1.00
1.50 1.90
2.00 2.40
2.50 2.80
3.00 3.40

Table 2
R (m) R2 (m2) Le (m)
0.18 0.03 0.50
0.20 0.04 1.00
0.22 0.05 1.50
0.24 0.06 2.05
 0.26 0.07 3.07
0.28 0.08 3.75
0.30 0.09 4.85

Table 3
L (m) Le (m)
4.5 1.39
4.7 1.02
4.9 1.18
5.1 1.33
5.3 1.11
5.5 1.59