EXPERIMENT TITLE: COMPRESSIBLE FLOW IN CONVERGING-DIVERGING

NOZZLE

Abstract
The experiment is done to introduce the concept of compressible flow in converging-
diverging nozzle. The experiment is done by adjusting the air blower speed. The pressure reading
at the nozzle, throat and diverging region will be taken. The experiment is to study the pressure-
mass flow rate characteristics for convergent-divergent duct. The experiment is done by using a
compressible flow bench and digital pressure sensors. The experiment is set at different air velocity
and the data pressure at each region will be taken. . It is also to demonstrate the phenomena of
choking in the converging-diverging nozzle.

i
 Table of Contents

Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ i

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ ii

Table of Figure ............................................................................................................................... iii

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1

2. Theory...................................................................................................................................... 2

3. Experiment Procedures ............................................................................................................ 7

3.1 Apparatus ......................................................................................................................... 7

3.2 Procedures ........................................................................................................................ 8

4. Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 8

4.1 Sample Calculation .......................................................................................................... 8

4.2 Result Analysis ............................................................................................................... 10

4.2.1 Experimental Data ........................................................................................................ 10

4.2.2 Mass Flow Rate, 𝑚 vs (𝑃𝑜 − 𝑃2) ................................................................................ 11

4.2.3 Mass Flow Rate, 𝑚 vs 𝑃2............................................................................................ 13

4.2.4 Mass flow rate, 𝑚 𝑣𝑠 (𝑃𝑜 − 𝑃3) .................................................................................. 15

4.2.5 Mass Flow Rate, 𝑚 vs 𝑃3............................................................................................. 17

4.2.6 (Po − P2) vs (Po − P3)............................................................................................... 19

4.2.7 Comparison between maximum mass flow rate, 𝑚 and the minimum for 𝑃2/𝑃𝑜 ...... 21

5. Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 23

6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 24

References ..................................................................................................................................... 25

ii
 Table of Figure

Figure 1.1 Converging-Diverging Nozzle Configuration…………………………………… 1

Figure 2.1: Convergent-Divergent Nozzle…………………………………………………... 2
Figure 3.1.1: Compressible Flow Bench…………………………………………………….. 7
Figure 3.1.2: Digital Manometer…………………………………………………………….. 7

iii
1. Introduction
Compressible flow is a flow that undergoes significant variation in density with trending
pressure. Technically, density variations start to become significant when the Mach number
exceeds 0.3. Converging-diverging nozzles are found in many engineering system such as
steam and gas turbines. The gas flow from a high pressure region through a nozzle to low
pressure region. The gas flow through the chamber into the converging region, pass through
the throat, through the diverging region and flow out to the ambient region. Choked
occurred when it reach maximum flow rate. This happen because the velocity of the flow
is sonic at the throat and the back pressure is lower than the critical pressure cannot be
sensed in the nizzle upstream flow and does not affect the flow rate.

Figure 1.1 Converging-Diverging Nozzle Configuration

1
2. Theory
The governing continuity, momentum, and energy equations for this quasi one-
dimensional, steady, isentropic flow can be expressed, respectively as Continuity:

(1)

Momentum:

(2)

Energy:

(3)

Where subscripts 1 and 2 denote different locations along the nozzle. In addition, we
have the perfect gas equation of state,

(4)

As well as the relation for a calorically perfect gas,

(5)

Equations (1) and (5) can be solved analytically for the flow through the nozzle.

Figure 2.1: Convergent-Divergent Nozzle

2
Assumed Model

Steady, quasi-one-dimensional. There are gradual variations in the geometry, so that the
flow near the nozzle walls is not strictly along the x-direction. However, the flow
angularity is very small. The variation in properties can be calculated assuming that the
properties are constant in each cross-section. The cross-section area, A, is a function of x
alone. Thus, all properties are functions of x alone. A= A(x); u = u(x);
T=T(x), p= p(x) etc.

Continuity:

(6)

The mass flow rate, is constant.

(7)

Momentum: (no friction; differential form of the Euler equation)

(8)

(9)

Using (8) in (10), (10)

Isentropic process:

(11)

Thus,

(12)

Also, (13)

3
Case 1: M<1
dA, dp have the same sign. Thus, as A increases, p increases.
dA , du have opposite signs. Thus as A increases, u decreases.
Diverging duct in subsonic flow: pressure increases, speed decreases.
Converging duct in subsonic flow: pressure decreases, speed increases.

Case 2: M>1
dA, dp have opposite signs. Thus as A increases, p decreases.
dA, du have the same sign. Thus as A increases, u increases.
Diverging duct in supersonic flow: pressure decreases, speed increases.

Case 3: M = 1
dA/dx is 0. Thus we have either a maximum or minimum of area.
The maximum area case is not of much interest, since there is no way to reach Mach 1
atthis point, with flow from either direction.
So the case of interest is where the area becomes a minimum: a "throat".

4
From mass conservation, where the * denotes conditions at Mach 1 So,

Substitute into A/A*:

Thus, for a given isentropic flow, i.e., a flow with mass flow rate, stagnation temperature
and stagnation pressure all fixed, there are two solutions for a given value of A/A*: One
solution is subsonic, the other is supersonic.

5
Mass Flow Rate through a Nozzle

For given stagnation conditions are fixed.

For a given throat area, stagnation pressure and stagnation temperature, the maximum
mass flow rate is the value where the Mach number at the throat reaches 1.0. This is
called the "choked mass flow rate." To increase the mass flow rate, we have to increase
the stagnation pressure, decrease the stagnation temperature, or increase the throat area

For M=1, R=286.7 J/Kg K and γ = 1.4 for air,

6
3. Experiment Procedures
3.1 Apparatus
Apparatus Figure

Compressible Flow Bench

Figure 3.1.1: Compressible Flow Bench

Digital Manometer

Figure 3.1.2: Digital Manometer

Table 3.1: List of Apparatus

7
 3.2 Procedures
1) The power supply is turned on and wait until the digital display is stabilized.
2) Three pressure taps are connected to the system.
3) Manometer pressure readings at no flow passing through the nozzle is recorded
4) The air flowing through the nozzle is increase by rotating speed dial in clockwise
5) The speed dial is rotated until 1 cycle
6) Experiment data is then collected
7) Keep collecting the data until 10 cycles.

4. Data Analysis

4.1 Sample Calculation

Given:
Pressure Ambient, 𝑃𝑜 = 101.325𝑘𝑃𝑎
Room Temperature, 𝑇 = 300𝐾
Diameter Converge, 𝑑1 = 25.4𝑚𝑚
Diameter Choke, 𝑑2 = 10𝑚𝑚
Diameter Diverge, 𝑑3 = 25.4𝑚𝑚
Specific Heat Ratio, 𝛾 = 1.4
𝐽
Gas Constant, 𝑅 = 0.287 ⁄𝑘𝑔. 𝐾

2 𝛾+1
2𝛾 𝑃
Mass flow rate, 𝑚̇ = 𝜌𝑜 𝐴2 √𝛾−1 𝜌𝑜 (𝑟 𝛾 − 𝑟 𝛾 )
0

𝑃𝑜 101325
𝜌𝑜 = =
𝑅𝑇 (300 × 0.287)
𝜌𝑜 = 1176.83 𝑘𝑔⁄𝑚3

𝜋𝑑2 2 𝜋(0.005)2
𝐴2 = =
4 4
𝐴2 = 3.93 × 10−5 𝑚2
8
 𝑃2
𝑟=
𝑃𝑜
0.3 × 103
𝑟=
101.325 × 103
𝑟 = 0.003

2 × 1.4 101325 2 1.4+1

𝑚̇ = (1176.83)(3.93 × 10−5 )√( )( ) (0.0031.4 − 0.003 1.4 )
1.4 − 1 1176.83

𝑚̇ = 0.0228 𝑘𝑔⁄𝑠

9
4.2 Result Analysis

4.2.1 Experimental Data

No. of Reading (Cycle) Mass Flow Rate, 𝒎̇ (𝒌𝒈) 𝑷𝟏 (𝒌𝑷𝒂) 𝑷𝟐 (𝒌𝑷𝒂) 𝑷𝟑 (𝒌𝑷𝒂)
𝒔

0.5 0 0 0 8.3
1 0.0322 7 0.3 8.6
1.5 0.0675 20 0.9 8.8
2 0.1138 41 2 9.1
2.5 0.1654 68 3.6 9.4
3 0.205 102 5.2 9.8
3.5 0.2659 142 8 10.3
4 0.3025 185 10 10.7
4.5 0.3555 230 13.5 11.2
5 0.3998 274 16.9 11.8
5.5 0.4394 327 20.6 12.3
6 0.4813 374 25.2 13
6.5 0.5115 414 29.4 13.7
7 0.5408 449 34.5 14.6
7.5 0.5621 470 39.4 15.5
8 0.5758 487 44 16.5
8.5 0.5826 492 47.4 17.5
9 0.5855 494 49.8 18.6
9.5 0.5862 496 50.6 19.7
10 0.587 496 52 20.8
Table 4.2.1: Experimental Data

10
4.2.2 Mass Flow Rate, 𝒎̇ vs (𝑷𝒐 − 𝑷𝟐 )

𝒌𝒈
No. of Reading (Cycle) 𝒎̇ ( ) 𝑷𝟎 − 𝑷𝟐 (𝒌𝑷𝒂)
𝒔
0.5 0 101.325
1 0.0322 101.025
1.5 0.0675 100.425
2 0.1138 99.325
2.5 0.1654 97.725
3 0.205 96.125
3.5 0.2659 93.325
4 0.3025 91.325
4.5 0.3555 87.825
5 0.3998 84.425
5.5 0.4394 80.725
6 0.4813 76.125
6.5 0.5115 71.925
7 0.5408 66.825
7.5 0.5621 61.925
8 0.5758 57.325
8.5 0.5826 53.925
9 0.5855 51.525
9.5 0.5862 50.725
10 0.587 49.325
Table 4.2.2: 𝑚̇ vs (𝑃𝑜 − 𝑃2 ) Data

11
 𝑚 ̇ vs (Po-P2)
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
𝑚̇
0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
(Po-P2)

Graph 4.2.2: 𝑚̇ vs (𝑃𝑜 − 𝑃2 )

12
4.2.3 Mass Flow Rate, 𝒎̇ vs 𝑷𝟐
𝒌𝒈
No. of Reading (Cycle) 𝒎̇ ( ) 𝑷𝟐 ( 𝒌𝑷𝒂)
𝒔
0.5 0 0
1 0.0322 0.3
1.5 0.0675 0.9
2 0.1138 2
2.5 0.1654 3.6
3 0.205 5.2
3.5 0.2659 8
4 0.3025 10
4.5 0.3555 13.5
5 0.3998 16.9
5.5 0.4394 20.6
6 0.4813 25.2
6.5 0.5115 29.4
7 0.5408 34.5
7.5 0.5621 39.4
8 0.5758 44
8.5 0.5826 47.4
9 0.5855 49.8
9.5 0.5862 50.6
10 0.587 52
Table 4.2.3: 𝑚̇ 𝑣𝑠 𝑃𝑜 Data

13
 𝑚 ̇ 𝑣𝑠 𝑃𝑜
60

50

40

𝑚 (kg/s)̇
30

20

10

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
𝑃𝑜 (kPa)

Graph 4.2.3: ṁ vs Po

14
4.2.4 Mass flow rate, 𝒎̇ 𝒗𝒔 (𝑷𝒐 − 𝑷𝟑 )

𝒌𝒈
No. of Reading (Cycle) 𝒎̇ ( ) 𝑷𝒐 − 𝑷𝟑 (𝒌𝑷𝒂)
𝒔
0.5 0 93.025
1 0.0322 92.725
1.5 0.0675 92.525
2 0.1138 92.225
2.5 0.1654 91.925
3 0.205 91.525
3.5 0.2659 91.025
4 0.3025 90.625
4.5 0.3555 90.125
5 0.3998 89.525
5.5 0.4394 89.025
6 0.4813 88.325
6.5 0.5115 87.625
7 0.5408 86.725
7.5 0.5621 85.825
8 0.5758 84.825
8.5 0.5826 83.825
9 0.5855 82.725
9.5 0.5862 81.625
10 0.587 80.525
Table 4.2.4: ṁ vs (Po -P3 ) Data

15
 𝒎 ̇ 𝒗𝒔 (𝑷𝒐 − 𝑷𝟑)
0.7

0.6

0.5

𝒎 ̇ (kg/s)
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94
𝑷𝒐 − 𝑷𝟑 (kPa)

Graph 4.2.4: ṁ vs (Po -P3 )

16
4.2.5 Mass Flow Rate, 𝒎̇ vs 𝑷𝟑

𝒌𝒈
No. of Reading (Cycle) 𝒎̇ ( ) 𝑷𝟑 (𝒌𝑷𝒂)
𝒔
0.5 0 8.3
1 0.0322 8.6
1.5 0.0675 8.8
2 0.1138 9.1
2.5 0.1654 9.4
3 0.205 9.8
3.5 0.2659 10.3
4 0.3025 10.7
4.5 0.3555 11.2
5 0.3998 11.8
5.5 0.4394 12.3
6 0.4813 13
6.5 0.5115 13.7
7 0.5408 14.6
7.5 0.5621 15.5
8 0.5758 16.5
8.5 0.5826 17.5
9 0.5855 18.6
9.5 0.5862 19.7
10 0.587 20.8
Table 4.2.5: 𝑚̇ vs 𝑃3 Data

17
 𝑚 ̇ vs 𝑃3
0.7

0.6

0.5

𝑚 ̇ (kg/s)
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
𝑃3 (kPa)

Graph 4.2.5: 𝑚̇ vs 𝑃3

18
4.2.6 (𝐏𝐨 − 𝐏𝟐 ) 𝐯𝐬 (𝐏𝐨 − 𝐏𝟑 )
No. of Reading (Cycle) 𝑷𝒐 − 𝑷𝟐 (𝒌𝑷𝒂) 𝑷𝒐 − 𝑷𝟑 (𝒌𝑷𝒂)
0.5 101.325 93.025
1 101.025 92.725
1.5 100.425 92.525
2 99.325 92.225
2.5 97.725 91.925
3 96.125 91.525
3.5 93.325 91.025
4 91.325 90.625
4.5 87.825 90.125
5 84.425 89.525
5.5 80.725 89.025
6 76.125 88.325
6.5 71.925 87.625
7 66.825 86.725
7.5 61.925 85.825
8 57.325 84.825
8.5 53.925 83.825
9 51.525 82.725
9.5 50.725 81.625
10 49.325 80.525
Table 4.2.6: (Po -P2 ) vs (Po -P3 )

19
 (Po − P2) vs (Po − P3)
120

100

80

Po − P2 (kPa)
60

40

20

0
78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94
Po − P3 (kPa)

Graph 4.2.6: (Po − P2 ) vs (Po − P3 )

20
4.2.7 Comparison between maximum mass flow rate, 𝒎̇ and the minimum for
𝑷𝟐
𝑷𝒐

𝒌𝒈 𝑷𝟐
No. of Reading (Cycle) 𝒎̇ ( )
𝒔 𝑷𝒐
0.5 0 0.000
1 0.0322 0.003
1.5 0.0675 0.009
2 0.1138 0.020
2.5 0.1654 0.036
3 0.205 0.051
3.5 0.2659 0.079
4 0.3025 0.099
4.5 0.3555 0.133
5 0.3998 0.167
5.5 0.4394 0.203
6 0.4813 0.249
6.5 0.5115 0.290
7 0.5408 0.340
7.5 0.5621 0.389
8 0.5758 0.434
8.5 0.5826 0.468
9 0.5855 0.491
9.5 0.5862 0.499
10 0.587 0.513
𝑃
Table 4.2.7: 𝑚̇ vs 𝑃2
𝑜

21
 𝑚 ̇ vs 𝑃2/P0
0.7

0.6

0.5

Axis Title
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600
Axis Title

𝑃
Graph 4.2.7: 𝑚̇ vs 𝑃2
𝑜

Based on the Table 4.2.7 and Graph 4.2.7, it can be seen that as the pressure
ratio increase, the maximum flow rate will also increase. Maximum value of
flow rate obtain at the 10 cycle which is 0.587 kg/s at a pressure ratio of 0.513.
The minimum pressure ratio obtain is 0.003 at maximum flow rate of
0.0322kg/s.

22
5. Discussion
In this experiment, the main purpose is to study the pressure-mass flow rate characteristic
for convergent-divergent duct. Flow through nozzles a variant of internal flow with
additional effect of compressibility and possible presence of shocks. Such situations occur
in gas flow when there is a constriction in a passage across which there is a pressure
difference flow through the nozzles. The gas density will remain constant and the velocity
of the flow will increase when it through the nozzle. When the change in flow variables is
small and gradual, isentropic flows occur.

The experiment shows that the calculation based on theory and experimental result have a
quite difference which it usually happened in any experiment. It happened due to the errors
which cannot be avoid that can effects the result of the experiment. In theoretical
calculation, the mass flow rate is 0.0228 𝑘𝑔⁄𝑠 and the mass flow rate for experimental is
0.0322 𝑘𝑔⁄𝑠 for 1 cycle. This show that the mass flow rate of theoretical is slightly smaller
that experiment. From the experimental data, the minimum mass flow rate is 0.0322 𝑘𝑔⁄𝑠
for 1 cycle and the maximum mass flow rate is 0.587 𝑘𝑔⁄𝑠 for 10 cycle.

There are few errors during the experiment that can effects the results of the experiment.
To overcome this error there are some suggestion that can be taken to improve the
experiment result. First, find a suitable place to conduct the experiment that has no sort of
vibration or interruption that may affect the result of the experiment. Second, take the value
three time so that the averaged of the result can be get thus improve the precision and
accuracy of our result. Third, using the difference digital manometer for take pressure value
could also make the error caused by the instrumental error.

23
6. Conclusion

The objective of the experiment have been achieved with some knowledge that have been
learn in this subject which is to study the pressure-mass flow rate characteristic for
convergent- divergent duct and demonstrate the phenomena of choking, all pressure and
mass flow rate are shown in the experimental result data and graph. The conclusion of the
experiment is when the flow of gas through the nozzle with high velocity has high Mach
number and compressibility affects the drag coefficient of bodies by the formation of
shockwaves.

24
 REFRENCES

John Cimbala. Yungus A. Cengel (2004). Fluid Mechanics: Fundamentals and

Applications. McGraw-Hill Higher Education

Frank M. White (2011). Fluid Mechanics Seventh Edition in SI Units. McGraw Hill
Higher Education

William J. Devemport (2001). Nozzle Applet. Retrieved from

http://www.engapplets.vt.edu/fluids/CDnozzle/cdinfo.html#targetText=Gas%20flows%2
0from%20the%20chamber,the%20ambient%20as%20a%20jet.&targetText=You%20ma
y%20expect%20that%20the,ll%20get%20through%20the%20nozzle

Sergiu Klainerman, Andrew Majda. (1982). Compressible and Incompressible Fluid.

Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/cpa.3160350503

Professor J.M Cimbala (2012). Compressible Flow in Converging-Diverging Nozzle.

Retrieved from
http://www.mne.psu.edu/cimbala/me325web_Spring_2012/Labs/Compressible/intro.pdf

25