VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY

HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

OFFICE FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDY PROGRAMS (OISP)
FACULTY OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF PROCESS & EQUIPMENT
----------

CHEMICAL PROCESS SAFETY

LABORATORY REPORT
Instructor: Dr. Dao Thi Kim Thoa
Class: CC02
Group: 02

Full name Student ID

Le Tuan Minh Thong 1953006
Tran Ton Quoc Dao 1952225
Phan Ngoc Truc Vy 1953112
Ngo Hong Thao 1952988

ACADEMIC YEAR: 2022 – 2023

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CLEVELAND OPEN-CUP FLASH POINT DETERMINATION..............................4

1. Data processing...........................................................................................................4
2. Discussion....................................................................................................................4
ELECTROSTATIC CHARGES ACCUMULATION...................................................6
1. Data processing...........................................................................................................6
2. Discussion....................................................................................................................6
Gas Flow From Vessel To Outside Through Orifice...................................................8
1. Data processing...........................................................................................................8
2. Discuss questions......................................................................................................11
Flow Of Liquid Through A Hole In A Tank.................................................................13
1. Data processing.........................................................................................................13
2. Discussion question...................................................................................................21
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Result from 2 tests for flash point.........................................................................4
Table 2. Raw data electrostatic charges accumulation........................................................6
Table 3. Experimental results for experiment 1: Orifice plate 1, hole diameter d = 3mm 14
Table 4. Experimental results for experiment 2: Orifice plate 2, hole diameter d = 6mm 18

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Raw data for Gas Flow From Vessel To Outside Through Orifice......................8
Figure 2. Reynolds number ranging from 10 to 100000.....................................................9
Figure 3. Calculated data for Gas Flow From Vessel To Outside Through Orifice..........11
Figure 4. The graph plotting the relationship liquid height and time................................16
Figure 5. The graph plotting the relationship liquid height and time................................19
Figure 6. An orifice-type leak in a process vessel............................................................21
Figure 7. Liquid flow through pipe....................................................................................22
 CLEVELAND OPEN-CUP FLASH POINT
DETERMINATION

1. Data processing

Table 1. Result from 2 tests for flash point

Experiment Flash point (¿ o C )¿

1 238

2 239

2. Discussion

2.1. Investigate to find Vietnam national standard on acceptable flash point of

motor lubricant. The test sample satisfies the requirement on minimum flash point?

Minimum 180°C by using test methodology TCVN 7498:2005 (ASTM D92-02b).

2.2. Describe factors that influence the result of open-cup flash point
determination (including conditions used when performing the experiment and
conditions of the surrounding environment). Among these factors, which factor has
strongest impact?

Oxidation, contaminants, and composition are the main elements that influence the
discrepancy between the measured and expected flash point of a flammable liquid. When
oxidation occurs, oxygen deficiency is inevitable. When oxygen is deficient, the air is
insufficient for complete combustion, causing the fuel to burn partially, so the flash point
temperature will increase in value.
 Additionally, impurities can raise a flammable liquid's flash point. The lower limit
concentration will be achieved at just a little bit over the temperature of the flash point of
the pure flammable liquid when an impurity, such as water vapor, which is present when
water is present in the sample, exists.

When testing two or more component liquids, the more volatile component will
have a higher vapor content. According to Astbury (2004), the flash point will be much
higher than the actual

Systematic error: The flash point will vary or rise slightly or significantly above
the flash point of the pure component (kerosene or diesel) due to the presence of impurities
in the pure component.

Parallax error: When measuring flammable material, the eyes are at an angle that
causes a reading that is consistently high or consistently low.

2.3. Discuss the relationship (if such a relationship exists) between flash point
and popular types of physical properties that characterize a liquid matter (boiling point,
saturated vapor pressure, specific density, molecular weight)?

Flash point increases with an increase in boiling point.

A high vapor pressure, a decrease in flash point

 ELECTROSTATIC CHARGES ACCUMULATION
1. Data processing
Table 2. Raw data electrostatic charges accumulation

Funnel Fluid V

Metal Oil 0.003

Metal Water 0.006

Plastic Oil 0.006

Plastic Water 0.048

No Funnel Oil 0.007

No Funnel Water 0.005

No Funnel Powder 0.004

2. Discussion
2.1. Comment on the influence of fluid nature and fabrication material of
funnel on electrostatic capacitance

Water poured down a metal sheet dissipates potential difference effectively due to
the conductive nature of both materials. Water poured through down plastic demonstrates
that plastic is a poor conductor; a charge separation and potential difference are observed.

Because of nonconductive powder, charge separation is observed regardless of

what additional materials or contact methods are involved difference are observed.
 Diesel fuel through an ungrounded metal filter demonstrates how contact between
a Semiconductive liquid and an improperly bonded and grounded filter can easily result
in charge separation.

2.2. Comment on factors affecting charge accumulation

Charge separation takes place at the interface when two materials, one of which is
an insulator, come into contact. This is known as contact and frictional charging.

Transport-based charging: An isolated object becomes charged when charged

liquid droplets or solid particles land on it.

The fluid's conductivity.

2.3. Comment on environmental factors affecting electrostatic

A high humidity, a high electrostatic.

With high temperature, electrostatic happens easily.

Gas Flow From Vessel To Outside Through Orifice

1. Data processing

1.1. Raw data

D = 0.5 mm
1 bar/ 0.1 Mpa 3 bar/ 0.3 MPa 5 bar/ 0.5 Mpa
t Ti To Po t Ti To Po t Ti To Po
15 32.5 31.3 0.085 15 34.3 33 0.263 15 34.4 34.9 0.468
30 32.5 31.3 0.067 30 34.3 32.6 0.227 30 34.3 34.2 0.411
60 32.7 31.1 0.041 60 34.2 31.4 0.137 60 34.2 32.7 0.392
90 32.9 30.3 0.02 90 34.1 30.3 0.131 90 34.1 31.6 0.344
120 33 30.3 0.07 120 34.2 30.7 0.094 120 34.1 31.2 0.299
150 33.1 30.3 0.01 150 34.1 30.6 0.064 150 34.1 31 0.265
180 34.1 30.7 0.038 180 34.1 30.9 0.177
210 34.1 30.3 0.019 210 34.1 30.9 0.103
240 34.1 31.3 0.06 240 34.1 31.1 0.069
270 34.1 31.6 0.01 270 34 31.4 0.039
300 34 31.7 0.016
330 34 32 0.04

D = 1 mm
1 bar/ 0.1 Mpa 3 bar/ 0.3 MPa 5 bar/ 0.5 Mpa
t Ti To Po t Ti To Po t Ti To Po
15 33.9 33.4 0.051 15 34.3 33.4 0.199 15 34.9 32.3 0.314
30 33.9 32.1 0.019 30 34.1 31.2 0.124 30 34.5 30.3 0.208
60 33.9 31.4 0.01 60 34 28.3 0.034 60 34.4 26.6 0.08
90 33.9 28.3 0.01 90 34.3 26.5 0.015
120 34.2 27.4 0.01

Figure 1. Raw data for Gas Flow From Vessel To Outside Through Orifice
1.2. Calculated results

When the choked pressure is larger than the ambient pressure which is at
around 101325 Pa, the discharge coefficient can be estimated from the formula:

√ ( )
γ+1
γ gc M 2
Q m = C o A Po γ-1
R g To γ + 1

Otherwise, the discharge coefficient can be determined as the way: firstly,

assume Co. Then we calculate Qm , v, Re, respectively; next, we use the graph below
to find Co. If Co from the graph and Co we assume have the approximate value, the
value is valid. If not, we have to assume and calculate again.

The discharge coefficients with Reynolds number ranging from 10 to 100000

are shown:

Figure 2. Reynolds number ranging from 10 to 100000

 D = 0.5 mm
Assume:
v
Po Pchoked (const) Qv Qm Co Co' Qm' v' vis' Re' T
(m/s)
186325 168240.1 349.58 6.8639E-05 0.0001 0.4316 31.3
1 bar 168325 151987.2 349.58 6.8639E-05 0.0001 0.4316 31.3
142325 128510.8 349.46 6.86165E-05 0.0001 0.4316 31.1
121325 109549.1 0.655 0.000110254 561.5176 1.65782E-05 33870.84 30.3
171325 154696.1 0.655 0.000202795 1032.828 1.65782E-05 62300.35 30.3
111325 100519.7 0.67 8.0028E-05 407.5792 1.65782E-05 24585.25 30.3

v
Po Pchoked (const) Qv Qm Co Co' Qm' v' vis' Re' T
(m/s)
364325 328963.3 350.55 6.88304E-05 0.0003 0.4316 33
328325 296457.5 350.32 6.87854E-05 0.0003 0.4316 32.6
238325 215193 349.63 6.86503E-05 0.0002 0.4316 31.4
3 bar 232325 209775.3 349 6.85262E-05 0.0002 0.4316 30.3
195325 176366.6 349.23 6.85713E-05 0.0002 0.4316 30.7
165325 149278.4 349.17 6.856E-05 0.0001 0.4316 30.6
139325 125802 0.655 0.000150927 768.66 1.66158E-05 46261 30.7
120325 108646.2 0.655 0.0001075 547.49 1.65782E-05 33024.8 30.3
161325 145666.7 0.655 0.00018806 957.78 1.66722E-05 57447.7 31.3
111325 100519.7 0.67 7.98571E-05 406.71 1.67004E-05 24353.2 31.6

v
Po Pchoked (const) Qv Qm Co Co' Qm' v' vis' Re' T
(m/s)
569325 514065.85 351.6363 6.90436E-05 0.000445 0.431558 34.9
512325 462598.32 351.2365 6.89651E-05 0.000401 0.431558 34.2
493325 445442.48 350.3784 6.87966E-05 0.000387 0.431558 32.7
445325 402101.39 349.7478 6.86728E-05 0.00035 0.431558 31.6
5 bar 400325 361469.13 349.5182 6.86277E-05 0.000315 0.431558 31.2
366325 330769.2 349.4033 6.86052E-05 0.000288 0.431558 31
278325 251310.55 349.3459 6.85939E-05 0.000219 0.431558 30.9
204325 184493.05 349.3459 6.85939E-05 0.000161 0.431558 30.9
170325 153793.12 349.4607 0.655 0.000201142 1024.408 1.66534E-05 61513.45 31.1
140325 126704.94 349.633 0.655 0.000152671 777.5488 1.66816E-05 46611.16 31.4
117325 105937.34 349.8051 0.655 9.85257E-05 501.7874 1.67098E-05 30029.53 31.7
141325 127607.88 349.9772 0.655 0.000154411 786.41 0.000016738 46983.51 32
 D = 1 mm
Assume:
v
Po Pchoked (const) Qv Qm Co Co' Qm' v' vis' Re' T
(m/s)
1 bar
152325 137540.2 350.78 0.000275501 0.0005 1.7262 33.4
120325 108646.2 0.63 0.000103091 131.26 1.62732E-05 8066.03 32.1
111325 100519.7 0.665 7.928718E-05 100.95 1.62088E-05 6228.2 31.4

v
Po Pchoked (const) Qv Qm Co Co' Qm' v' vis' Re' T
(m/s)
3 bar 300325 158656.2 350.78 0.000275501 0.0009 1.7262 33.4
225325 119035.1 349.52 0.000274511 0.0007 1.7262 31.2
135325 71489.73 0.63 0.000138049 175.77 1.59236E-05 11038.3 28.3
111325 58810.97 0.665 7.96938E-05 101.47 1.59236E-05 6372.26 28.3

v
Po Pchoked (const) Qv Qm Co Co' Qm' v' vis' Re' T
(m/s)
415325 219408.6 350.15 0.000275007 0.0013 1.7262 32.3
5 bar
309325 163410.8 349 0.000274105 0.001 1.7262 30.3
181325 95790.7 346.87 0.000272429 0.0006 1.7262 26.6
116325 61452.38 0.63 9.25814E-05 117.88 0.000015758 7480.53 26.5
111325 58810.97 0.665 7.98131E-05 101.62 1.58408E-05 6415.15 27.4

Figure 3. Calculated data for Gas Flow From Vessel To Outside Through Orifice

2. Discuss questions
2.1. Comment on factors affecting gas volume flow

The diameter of orifice throat.

If it is the choked flow, for a fixed upstream and temperature, the mass flow will
not increase with a further reduction in downstream ambient pressure.

The different sonic velocity of gas because of the different temperature of the tank
outlet leads to a minior impact on the volumetric flow rate.
 2.2. Comment on factors affecting discharge coefficient Co

If it is the choked flow, the discharge coefficient will be almost constant. The
reason is that the gas sonic velocity and Reynolds number is not much difference at
different time.

By constrast, when the flow is not choked, the gas velocity and Reynolds number
change dramatically with time, which leads to differences in discharge coefficient.

Upstream pressure. In other words, it is whether the flow is choked or not.

 Flow Of Liquid Through A Hole In A Tank

1. Data processing

Parameters:

Inside diameter of the tank Dt = 20 cm

Cross sectional area of the tank Ar = 0.0314 m2

Experiment 1:

Conduct experiment with the following experimental setups:

Orifice plate 1, diameter of the hole: d = 3 mm.

Cross sectional area of the hole: A = 7,07.10-6 m2

The hole is 106 mm away from the bottom of the tank.

Fill water into the tank up to the liquid level 405 mm. Thus, initial liquid
height (liquid height above the hole) ho = 405 – 106 = 299 mm.

Calculations and handling of experimental data are illustrated in the first

step of calculations (table 1, row 3).
Table 3. Experimental results for experiment 1: Orifice plate 1, hole diameter d = 3mm
Average
Time t (second) liquid
Liquid
∆t ∆h height Qv
level h C0
(second) (mm) above the (m3/s)
t1 t2 (mm)
hole havg
(mm)
0 0 400 - - - - -
22.86 25.27 390 24.07 10 290 0.01305 24.4914
47.24 44.89 380 22 10 280 0.01428 27.2702
71.58 74.16 370 26.8 10 270 0.01172 22.7967
95.76 92.72 360 21.37 10 260 0.0147 29.1339
119.7 120.82 350 26.02 10 250 0.01207 24.4013
145.62 142.95 340 24.03 10 240 0.01307 26.9668
172.05 174.86 330 29.17 10 230 0.01077 22.6929
199.44 195.3 320 23.91 10 220 0.01314 28.3073
226 225.15 310 28.21 10 210 0.01114 24.5571
253.43 249.46 300 25.87 10 200 0.01214 27.4396
281.17 283.03 290 30.65 10 190 0.01025 23.762
310.98 307.92 280 27.35 10 180 0.01149 27.3587
341.74 342.21 270 32.53 10 170 0.00966 23.6691
373.55 369.8 260 29.7 10 160 0.01058 26.7222
406.59 405.8 250 34.52 10 150 0.0091 23.745
439.32 433.47 240 30.2 10 140 0.0104 28.0943
473.99 472.34 230 36.77 10 130 0.00854 23.9455
510.87 504.81 220 34.67 10 120 0.00906 26.4329
549.73 547.65 210 40.85 10 110 0.00769 23.4316
588.35 580.84 200 35.91 10 100 0.00875 27.9559
598.23 600.57 195 14.8 5 92.5 0.01061 35.2636
622.8 621.57 190 22.79 5 87.5 0.00689 23.5457
645.23 648.63 185 24.74 5 82.5 0.00635 22.3374
666.76 664.76 180 18.83 5 77.5 0.00834 30.2802
688.62 690.96 175 24.03 5 72.5 0.00654 24.5322
714.48 713.25 170 24.08 5 67.5 0.00652 25.3718
742.78 746.18 165 30.61 5 62.5 0.00513 20.7423
767.18 765.18 160 21.7 5 57.5 0.00724 30.5046
792.9 795.24 155 27.89 5 52.5 0.00563 24.8388
820.39 819.16 150 25.71 5 47.5 0.00611 28.3277
851.46 854.86 145 33.38 5 42.5 0.00471 23.0663
 885.14 883.14 140 30.98 5 37.5 0.00507 26.4583
922.64 924.98 135 39.67 5 32.5 0.00396 22.195
959.45 958.22 130 35.03 5 27.5 0.00448 27.3245
978.43 981.83 128 21.29 2 24 0.00295 19.2503
990.3 988.3 126 9.17 2 22 0.00685 46.6809
1005.2 1007.54 124 17.07 2 20 0.00368 26.3009
1027.32 1026.09 122 20.34 2 18 0.00309 23.2666
1053.04 1056.44 120 28.03 2 16 0.00224 17.9076
1070.2 1082.4 118 21.56 2 14 0.00291 24.889
1100.98 1103.32 116 25.85 2 12 0.00243 22.4217
1123.58 1122.35 114 20.82 2 10 0.00302 30.4957
1153.35 1156.75 112 32.08 2 8 0.00196 22.1279
1198.12 1200.46 110 44.24 2 6 0.00142 18.528
1236.47 1235.24 108 36.57 2 4 0.00172 27.4514
1324.89 1325.6 106 89.39 2 2 0.0007 15.8824
1480.83 1478.83 105 154.58 1 0.5 0.0002 9.18441
 Relation between liquid level height and time, D2 = 3mm
450
400
f(x) = 0.000161648850282748 x² − 0.436702694293267 x + 400.066183575803
350 R² = 0.999940885580401
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Figure 4. The graph plotting the relationship liquid height and time

Notes:

- Qv is calculated as volume of liquid (water) that escapes through the

hole within the time interval Δt: Qv = At*Δh /Δt.
- Co is calculated from experimental data (as shown in table 1) would
have certain degree of variations due to random errors in experiments, and Co
depends on Reynolds number.
- Average value of Co calculated from experimental results is: 25.16
- Determine Co from method of least square parameter estimation: Co
= 25.53

Value of Co deduced from equation (3) is determined such that sum of squares of
errors between experimental data and data calculated from equation (2) is minimum. Co
following method of least square parameter estimation is determined by using Excel
solver (the Excel file is provided to students). This value of Co is: 25.53
 Preparing the graph plotting the relationship liquid height vs. time t for two sets of
data: i) experimental data, ii) data plotted from equation (3).

- Time te (the time for the vessel to empty to the level of the leak)

Experimental data te = 1479.83 s

Value calculated from equation (4): te = 1370.83 s

 Experiment 2:

Conduct experiment with the following experimental setups:

Orifice plate 1, diameter of the hole: d = 6 mm.

Cross sectional area of the hole: A = 2,83.10-5 m2

The hole is 103,5 mm away from the bottom of the tank

Fill water into the tank up to the liquid level 455 mm. Thus, initial liquid height
(liquid height above the hole) ho = 455 – 103,5 = 351,5 mm.

Calculation and handling of experimental data are illustrated in first step of

calculation (row 3)

Table 4. Experimental results for experiment 2: Orifice plate 2, hole diameter d = 6mm
Average
Time t (second) liquid
Liquid
∆t ∆h height Qv
level h C0
(second) (mm) above the (m3/s)
(mm)
t1 t2 hole havg
(mm)
0 0 400 - - - - -
7.31 6.66 390 6.66 10 293 0.04717 22.0151
12.49 11.82 380 5.16 10 283 0.06088 28.9126
19.15 18.24 370 6.42 10 273 0.04893 23.6599
25.92 24.57 360 6.33 10 263 0.04963 24.4483
32.79 30.92 350 6.35 10 253 0.04947 24.8482
39.08 36.89 340 5.97 10 243 0.05262 26.9682
45.32 43.27 330 6.38 10 233 0.04924 25.7709
51.8 49.8 320 6.53 10 223 0.04811 25.7373
57.91 56.03 310 6.23 10 213 0.05043 27.6027
64.75 62.79 300 6.76 10 203 0.04647 26.0576
70.84 69.17 290 6.38 10 193 0.04924 28.3158
77.96 75.86 280 6.69 10 183 0.04696 27.7317
85.06 82.46 270 6.6 10 173 0.04760 28.9109
92.52 90.07 260 7.61 10 163 0.04128 25.8315
99.94 97.84 250 7.77 10 153 0.04043 26.1133
108.45 105.89 240 8.05 10 143 0.03903 26.0714
116.32 113.8 230 7.91 10 133 0.03972 27.5123
124.91 122.6 220 8.8 10 123 0.03570 25.7154
133.95 131.78 210 9.18 10 113 0.03422 25.7186
143.34 141.1 200 9.32 10 103 0.03371 26.5335
153.17 150.88 190 9.78 10 93 0.03212 26.6102
163.54 161.25 180 10.37 10 83 0.03029 26.5651
174.73 172.52 170 11.27 10 73 0.02788 26.0641
187.15 184.95 160 12.43 10 63 0.02527 25.4382
200.33 195.91 150 10.96 10 53 0.02866 31.4543
207.42 205.42 145 9.51 5 45.5 0.01652 19.5619
215.13 213.24 140 7.82 5 40.5 0.02009 25.2153
223.19 221.69 135 8.45 5 35.5 0.01859 24.9246
231.52 230.14 130 8.45 5 30.5 0.01859 26.8901
241.66 240.66 125 10.52 5 25.5 0.01493 23.6218
253.28 250.87 120 10.21 5 20.5 0.01538 27.1454
264.98 264.48 115 13.61 5 15.5 0.01154 23.4193
280.79 279.31 110 14.83 5 10.5 0.01059 26.1134
288.4 288.4 108 9.09 2 7 0.00691 20.8711
297.01 297.01 106 8.61 2 5 0.00730 26.0718
310.3 310.3 104 13.29 2 3 0.00473 21.8058
374.21 388.23 102 77.93 2 1 0.00081 6.44102

Relation between liquid level height and time, D1 = 6mm

450
400
f(x) = 0.00267582248498738 x² − 1.7968518874368 x + 401.368919132196
350 R² = 0.999750510522599
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Figure 5. The graph plotting the relationship liquid height and time
 - Average value of Co calculated from experimental results is: 25.21
- Determine Co from method of least square parameter estimation: Co
= 26.12
- Time te (the time for the vessel to empty to the level of the leak)
- Experimental data te = 388.23 s
- Value calculated from equation (4): te = 343.74 s
 2. Discussion question
2.1. In actual laboratory equipment system, the hole is created not on the wall of
the vessel but on a nozzle, the hole is actually 3 cm away from the wall of the vessel.
The discrepancy between actual equipment system and the theoretical configuration
(figure 4-5 in reference book [1]) has any effect on the determination of Co and the
time for vessel to empty?

Figure 6. An orifice-type leak in a process vessel

For theoretical configuration, a new discharge coefficient Co is defined as:
C o=C 1 √ α

The liquid level height in the tank yields, hL:

h L =hoL−
Co A
At √(
g P g
)
2 c g + g hoL t + ( (Co . A ) . t/ At )
ρ 2
2

The time t, for the vessel to empty to the level of the leak for t after setting hL = 0:

t e=
1
( )(√ (
At
Co . g A
2
gc P g
ρ )
o
+ g hL −
√ )
2 g c Pg
ρ

If the vessel is at atmospheric pressure, Pg = 0:

t e=
1
( )
At
Co . g A
¿

Then if the hole is actually 3 cm away from the wall of the vessel
 Figure 7. Liquid flow through pipe
The Co will be effect by liquid flowing through a pipe. We will apply the 2-K
method:

1
C o=
√1+∑ K f

If the vessel is at atmospheric pressure, P g = 0

√1+∑ K
t e=
g
f
( AA ) √ 2( g h )
t o
L

2.2. Discussion on measurement errors: repetition of measurement data, relative

errors are acceptable?

 Repetition of measurement data: Measurement mistakes come in

various forms, include

+ Instrumentation error when changing to another test.

+ When measuring a product, a person may unintentionally use various

techniques or pressure, resulting in inconsistent measurements.

We need the repetition of measurement data in order to create more accuracy for
the experiment. Such multiple measurements are carried out for each experimental unit
over time (as in a longitudinal study) or under multiple conditions.

 Relative errors are acceptable.

  A measurement of measurement uncertainty based on the size of the
measurement is called relative error. It is employed to put error into context.
Comparing a measurement to an exact value determines relative inaccuracy. There
are two causes for this mistake

+ Using an estimate rather than actual data.

+ Instrumentation-related measurement error (e.g., a ruler measuring to the

nearest millimeter).

2.3. There are two methods to determine Co (calculation from experimental

results and method of least square parameter estimation). We should accept value of
Co from which method? Why?

In this experiment we should accept the value from experimental results. The
results we get from carrying out experiment is suitable because we can use the developed
novel experimental module under various conditions affecting the performance at that
moment. Meanwhile, results from least square method we just accept the data shows a
linear relationship between two variables, the line that best fits this linear relationship is
known as a least-squares regression line, which minimizes the vertical distance from the
data points to the regression line. The least square may cause errors if the R square
obtained doesn’t approach, so we should use least-square method when we don’t have
enough equipment and apparatuses to conduct experiments.

2.4. The diameter of the hole has significant impact on the value of Co? Why?

Based on the following equation:

 If we change the value of diameter of the orifice, it will affect the value of A. Due
to the change of A and unchanged of At, the results of coefficient changes too, therefore,
Co will change accordingly.

2.5. Which physical property of fluid has the strongest influence on Co and the
time for vessel to empty te ? If we replace water with a fluid that is more viscous such
as lubricant, Co and the time te increase or decrease?

Fluid flow in pipes is affected by three main physical factors: the viscosity,
density, and velocity of the fluid, changes in the fluid temperature will change the
viscosity and density of the fluid. However, the fluid density has the strongest influence
on Co and te due to the equation [4.5] and [4.20].

Therefore, if we replace water with a fluid that is more viscous such as lubricant,
Co and the time te will increase.