Jump to content



Featured Articles

Check out the latest featured articles.

File Library

Check out the latest downloads available in the File Library.

New Article

Product Viscosity vs. Shear

Featured File

Vertical Tank Selection

New Blog Entry

Low Flow in Pipes- posted in Ankur's blog

0

Compressible Fluid Flow

fluid mechanics compressible flow line losses dp gas phase derivation

5 replies to this topic
Share this topic:
| More

#1 emmamov

emmamov

    Brand New Member

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 29 August 2017 - 10:27 PM

I have been trying to figure out how to calculate compressible fluid flow. I have been doing some research and have worked through a derivation for isothermal compressible flow. I keep finding contradicting equations, ones which have gravity included and ones which do not.

 

I have attached two pictures. One is an isothermal equation from crane TP-10 which includes gravity and the other is from an article by Robert Kern which does not include gravity.

 

I can follow the derivation in the article up until the point where they simply change units, at this point the gravity term disappears with no mention of it. I have seen this in several different references so I doubt it is just a typo. Can anyone explain why we can neglect the gravity term?

 

Thanks in advance!

 

 

Attached Files



#2 IGC

IGC

    Veteran Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 30 August 2017 - 03:19 AM

Assumption number 7 in the crane paper - the pipe line is straight and horizontal.  

 

www.cchem.berkeley.edu/cbe150a/mom/CompressableFlow.ppt

 

That ppt has an example of isothermal flow + an energy balance to show why it is neglected.  



#3 breizh

breizh

    Gold Member

  • ChE Plus Subscriber
  • 4,505 posts

Posted 30 August 2017 - 08:03 AM

Hi ,

You may find pointers in this paper.

Breizh

Attached Files



#4 Bayo Alabi

Bayo Alabi

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 26 posts

Posted 31 August 2017 - 07:19 AM

Can anyone explain why we can neglect the gravity term?

 

 

 

nmoverley,
 
For all practical purposes, gravity term or potential-energy term is not considered should the density of the gas due to high pressure or high molecular weight be greater than 5 lb/ft3 (80 k/m3) with a difference in elevation of about 50 ft (15 m)
 
Bayo


#5 breizh

breizh

    Gold Member

  • ChE Plus Subscriber
  • 4,505 posts

Posted 01 September 2017 - 07:11 AM

Hi ,

let you consider this resource too.

Breizh

Attached Files



#6 Bayo Alabi

Bayo Alabi

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 26 posts

Posted 01 September 2017 - 09:54 AM

I have been trying to figure out how to calculate compressible fluid flow. I have been doing some research and have worked through a derivation for isothermal compressible flow. I keep finding contradicting equations, ones which have gravity included and ones which do not.

 

I have attached two pictures. One is an isothermal equation from crane TP-10 which includes gravity and the other is from an article by Robert Kern which does not include gravity.

 

I can follow the derivation in the article up until the point where they simply change units, at this point the gravity term disappears with no mention of it. I have seen this in several different references so I doubt it is just a typo. Can anyone explain why we can neglect the gravity term?

 

Thanks in advance!

 

nmoverley,

 

I made mistake in my last post. The densities of most common gases and vapours are sufficiently low that differences in potential energy for normal piping configurations and flow conditions are negligible with respect to kinetic-energy changes and friction losses. That's why potential energy changes usually need not be included in the evaluation. However, if your gas density is greater than 80 kg/m3 with a difference in elevation greater than about 15 m, then you should consider potential-energy term.

 

Bayo






Similar Topics