Fluid Mechanics CEE 3311

LECTURE 16

Flow in Pipes
(Internal Flows)

L. Handia
Boundary layer: Laminar flow
 Boundary layer: Turbulent flow

The viscous sublayer is a layer

where shear is predominantly due to
viscosity alone. It is extremely thin,
usually only a few hundredths of a
mm, but its effect is great because of
the very steep velocity gradient
within it and because τ = μ du/dy in
that region
Laminar and turbulent flow
• If the head loss in a given length of
uniform pipe is measured at different
velocities, it will be found that, as
long as the velocity is low enough to
secure laminar flow, the head loss,
due to friction, will be directly
proportional to the velocity, as
shown in the Fig.
• But with increasing velocity, at some
point B, where visual observation of
dye injected in a transparent tube
would show that the flow changes
from laminar to turbulent, there will
be an abrupt increase in the rate at
which the head loss varies.
 Laminar and turbulent flow
• If these two variables are plotted on log-log paper, it will be found
that, after a certain transition region (BCA) has been passed, lines
will be obtained with slopes ranging from about 1.75 to 2.00.
• It is thus seen that for laminar flow the
drop in energy due to friction varies as
V, while for turbulent flow the friction
varies as Vn, where n ranges from
about 1.75 to 2. The lower value of
1.75 for turbulent flow is found for
pipes with very smooth walls; as the
wall roughness increases, the value of
n increases up to its maximum value
of 2.
• Point B is known as the higher critical
point, and A as the lower critical point.
Laminar and turbulent flow
• However, velocity is not the only factor that determines
whether the flow is laminar or turbulent. The criterion is
Reynolds number, which has been discussed in previous
lectures.
• For a circular pipe the significant linear dimension L is
usually taken as the diameter D, and thus

ρvL ρvD vD
Re = = =
μ μ ν
 Laminar and turbulent flow
Critical Reynolds Number
• The upper critical Reynolds number, corresponding to point B of
Figure is really indeterminate and depends upon the care taken to
prevent any initial disturbance from affecting the flow. Its value is
normally about 4000 but laminar flow in circular pipes has been
maintained up to values of Re as high as 50,000. However, in such
cases this type of flow is inherently unstable, the least disturbance
will transform it instantly into turbulent flow.
• On the other hand, it is practically impossible for
turbulent flow in a straight pipe to persist at
values of Re much below 2000, because any
turbulence that is set will be damped out by
viscous friction.
• However, for normal cases of flow in straight
pipes of uniform diameter and usual roughness,
the critical value may be taken as Recrit = 2000.
Laminar and turbulent flow
 Hydraulic radius
For conduits having noncircular cross sections, some value
other than the diameter must be used for the linear dimension
in the Reynolds number. Such a characteristic is the hydraulic
radius, defined as

where A is the cross-sectional

area of the flowing fluid, and P
is the wetted perimeter, that
portion of the perimeter of the
cross section where there is
contact between fluid and
solid boundary.
Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)
Consider steady flow in a conduit of uniform cross section A, not
necessarily circular. The pressures at sections 1 and 2 are P1 and
P2, respectively. The distance between them is Δs. For
equilibrium in steady flow, the summation of forces acting on
any fluid element must be equal to zero (i.e., ΣF = ma = 0). Thus
in the direction of flow
 dP 
PA −  P + s A − W sin  −  2rs = 0
 ds 

1
Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)
 dP 
PA −  P + s A − W sin  −  2rs = 0
 ds 
dz
Where W = ρg ∆A ∆s and sinθ = ds . Therefore equation 11.1
reduces to
dP dz
− ∆s∆A − ρg ∆A ∆s − τ2πr∆s = 0
ds ds

Δz
Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)
Divide by ΔA Δs dP dz
− sA − gsA −  2rs = 0
ds ds
sA

dP dz  2r
− − g − =0
ds ds A

 2r
= −
d
(P + gz )
r 2
ds

= − (P + gz )
2 d

r ds
r d 
 = − (P + gz )
2  ds 
r  dP * 
 =  − 
2  ds 
where P* = P + ρgz = piezometric pressure
 Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)
𝑟 𝑑𝑃∗
𝜏= −
2 𝑑𝑠
Since the gradient itself, dP*/ds, is negative (piezometric pressure
decreases in the direction of flow) and constant across the section for
uniform flow, it follows that - dP*/ds will be positive and constant
across the pipe. At the wall of the pipe, r = R, the shear stress is

r d r dP∗
τ= − P + ρgz = − 11.3
2 ds 2 ds

R dP∗
τ0 = − 11.4
2 ds
 Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)
Thus, dividing 11.3 by 11,4 gives r  dP * 
r dP∗  =  − 
τ= − 𝜏 𝑟 2  ds   r r
2 ds 𝑟  =   =  0 11.5
R dP∗ = 𝜏 = 𝜏0 R  dP   0 R
11.5
*
R
τ0 = − 𝜏0 𝑅0 𝑅0  0 =  − 
2 ds 
2  ds 
Consequently τ varies linearly with r from a value of zero at the
centerline of the pipe to a maximum at the wall. This distribution of
stress is represented graphically in Fig 11.2

Note: in the derivation of 11.5 no restrictions concerning laminar or

turbulent flow have been made. Therefore, the law of linear distribution
of shear stress over a circular section, represented by 11.5, holds for
both flow conditions
 Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)
dV
From Newton’s law of viscosity τ = μ . Substituting this into 11.3
dy
r  dP * 
gives  =  −
2  ds 

dV r dP∗
μ = − 11.6
dy 2 ds

dV dV
Noting that =− (since velocity decreases in the direction of r Fig
dy dr
11.3), 11.6 becomes
dV r dP∗
= − − 11.7
dr 2μ ds
Separating variables and assuming a Newtonian fluid (μ =
constant), then integrating across the section
1  dP *  1  dP * 
dV = −  − rdr   dV = −  −   rdr
2   ds  2   ds 
r 2  dP * 
V =−  −  + C 11.8
4   ds 
 Laminar
r  dP 
2
flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s
*
formula)
V = R2  −dP∗
−  +CC
V=  dsds
− 4μ4 − + 11.8
 
Boundary condition: at 𝑟 = 𝑅 ⟶ 𝑉 = 0 (no slip)

R2 dP ∗ R2 dP ∗
0=− − +C⟹C= − +C
4μ ds 4μ ds
Putting this in 11.8 becomes
R2 −𝑟 2 dP∗
V= − 11.9
4μ ds
11.9 indicates that the velocity distribution for laminar flow in a pipe is
parabolic across the section with the maximum velocity at the centre of
the pipe Fig 11.3
 Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)

dr
dQ = vdA
Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)
Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)
In non ideal fluid dynamics, the Hagen–Poiseuille
equation, also known as the Hagen–Poiseuille
law, Poiseuille law or Poiseuille equation, is
a physical law that gives the pressure drop in
an incompressible and Newtonian fluid in laminar
flow flowing through a long cylindrical pipe of
constant cross section. It can be successfully applied
to air flow in lung alveoli, or the flow through a
drinking straw or through a hypodermic needle. It
was experimentally derived independently by Jean
Léonard Marie Poiseuille in 1838 and Gotthilf
Heinrich Ludwig Hagen, and published by Poiseuille
in 1840–41 and 1846. The theoretical justification of
the Poiseuille law was given by George Stokes in
1845.
Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)
Eq. 11.12 is strictly applicable only to the laminar flow of constant
density fluids and laminar flow which is "fully developed". From the
entrance of the pipe the fluid has to traverse a certain distance before the
parabolic velocity distribution is established.
The formula of Eq.11.12 is applied for many types of viscometer, a
device for determining the viscosity of a fluid.
Rearranging the Hagen-Poiseuille law as
 (P1* − P2* )D 4
=
128QL
shows that for a laminar flow in a circular tube, the viscosity can easily
be determined after the difference of piezometric pressure between the
ends of a capillary tube has been measured by a manometer. When the
fluid is a liquid, the volume flow rate Q may be determined simply by
collecting and measuring the quantity passing through the tube in a
certain time.
 Laminar flow (Hagen-Poiseuille’s formula)
From 11.11 the mean velocity vത may be calculated
πR4 dP∗
− 8μ ds R2 dP∗
vത =
Q
= ൘ = − 11.13
A πR2 8μ ds
R2 −𝑟 2 dP∗
From 11.9 V = 4μ
it can be seen that the maximum velocity vmax
− ds
occurs in the centre of the pipe, where r = 0. Thus
dP∗ R2
vmax = − 11.14
ds 4μ
Hence, from 11.13 and 11.14 it may be concluded that vv == vvmax / 2.
max 2
For a length L of the pipe, it follows from 11.13 that
R2 8μLഥ
v
vത = P1∗
− P2∗ → P1∗ = P2∗ + 2 11.15
8μL R
In terms of “heads” (with P ∗
= P + ρgz) and dividing by ρg
p1 p 8μLഥ
v p2
+ z1 = 2 + z2 + 2 = + z2 + hf 11.16
ρg ρg ρgR ρg
8μLഥ
v
Where hf = = head loss due to frictional resistance of the pipe.
ρgR2
Equation 11.16 is the same as the energy equation except there are no velocity, turbine and pump heads
  (P1* − P2* )D 4
=
128QL
 Turbulent flow (Darcy-Weisbach formula)
Velocity profile in turbulent flow

In Fig. 8.10 may be seen profiles for both a smooth and a rough pipe.
Comparing the turbulent-flow velocity profiles with the laminar-flow
velocity profile (Fig. 8.10) shows the turbulent-flow profiles to be much
flatter near the central portion of the pipe and steeper near the wall.
It is also noticeable that the turbulent profile for the smooth pipe is flatter
near the central section (i.e., blunter) than for the rough pipe.
In contrast, the velocity profile in laminar flow is independent of pipe
roughness.
 Turbulent flow (Darcy-Weisbach formula)
In the previous lecture 15, the shear force on a flat plate, friction drag,
was expressed as

The shear stress on a flat plate is then .

For pipe flow it is customary to express τ0 in a similar manner;
however, we use the mean velocity as the reference velocity, and the
coefficient of proportionality is given as f/4 instead of Cf. Here f is
called the resistance coefficient, or more usual, the friction factor of
the pipe.
 Turbulent flow (Darcy-Weisbach formula)
2
Thus we have 0 = Cf 
v0 f v2
= 
2 4 2 12.5
In section on Laminar Flow it was found that the shear stress at the
wall of the pipe
R  dP *  11.4
0 = − 
2  ds 
Equating 12.5 and 11.4
R  dP *
2
f v
 
 − 
f v 2
R  dP 
*
2  ds  f v 2
RdP *
 =  −   4 2 =  =−
4 2 2  ds  g g 4 2g 2 gds

− dP * f v 2 2ds ds v 2 ds v 2
= = f = f
g 4 2g R 2R 2 g D 2g

− 1 P2* * 1 v2 s2 P1* P2* L v2


g 1P *
dP = f
D 2g 
s1
ds  −
g g
= f
D 2g
Turbulent flow (Darcy-Weisbach formula)
P1* P2* L v2 L v2
− = f  h1 − h2 = f
g g D 2g D 2g

L v2
h1 − h2 = hL = f 12.6 Darcy Weisbach
D 2g
Equation
where hL = head loss created by viscous effects and is equal to the
change of piezometric head.

Although the Darcy Weisbach Equation is for turbulent flow, it can

still be used for laminar flow. For laminar flow, where
(Eq.11.16), it can easily be shown that

f = 64/Re 12.7

Hence, if Re is less than 2,000 (laminar flow), one may use Eq. 12.6
with the value of f as given by Eq. 12.7
Turbulent flow (Darcy-Weisbach formula)
Turbulent flow (Darcy-Weisbach formula)
As a member of the Corps, Darcy built an impressive pressurized water distribution system in Dijon following the failure of attempts
to supply adequate fresh water by drilling wells. The system carried water from Rosoir Spring 12.7 kilometres (7.9 mi) away through a
covered aqueduct (watercourse) to reservoirs near the city, which then fed into a network of 28,000 meters of pressurized pipes
delivering water to much of the city. The system was fully closed and driven by gravity, and thus required no pumps with just sand
acting as a filter. He was also involved in many other public works in and around Dijon, as well as in the politics of the Dijon city
government.
During this period he modified the Prony equation for calculating head loss due to friction, which after further modification by Julius
Weisbach would become the well-known Darcy–Weisbach equation still in use today.
In 1848 he became Chief Engineer for the département of which Dijon is the capital. Soon thereafter he left Dijon due to political
pressure, but was promoted to Chief Director for Water and Pavements and took up office in Paris. While in that position, he was able
to focus more on his hydraulics research, especially on flow and friction losses in pipes. During this period he improved the design of
the Pitot tube, into essentially the form used today.
He resigned his post in 1855 due to poor health, but was permitted to continue his research in Dijon. In 1855 and 1856 he conducted
column experiments that established what has become known as Darcy's law; initially developed to describe flow through sands, it has
since been generalized to a variety of situations and is in widespread use today. The unit of measure of material permeability,
the darcy is named in his honour.
Darcy died of pneumonia while on a trip to Paris in 1858, and is buried in Cimetière de Dijon (formerly known as Péjoces) in Dijon.

Julius Ludwig Weisbach (born 10 August 1806 in Mittelschmiedeberg (now Mildenau Municipality), Erzgebirge, died 24 February
1871, Freiberg) was a German mathematician and engineer.
Weisbach studied at the Bergakademie in Freiberg from 1822 - 1826. After that, he studied with Carl Friedrich Gauss in Göttingen and
with Friedrich Mohs in Vienna.[1]
In 1831 he returned to Freiberg where he worked as mathematics teacher at the local Gymnasium. In 1833 he became teacher for
Mathematics and the Theory of Mountain Machines at the Freiberg Bergakademie. In 1836 he was promoted to Professor for applied
mathematics, mechanics, theory of mountain machines and so-called Markscheidekunst.[2]
Weisbach wrote an influential book for mechanical engineering students, called Lehrbuch der Ingenieur- und Maschinenmechanik,
which has been expanded and reprinted on numerous occasions between 1845 and 1863.[3]
He also refined the Darcy equation into the still widely used Darcy–Weisbach equation.
In 1868 he was elected a foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
Chart (and equations) for friction factor
The friction factor f depends on the various quantities that affect the
flow, written as
f = f (ρ, μ, V, D, e) (7.6.24)
where the average wall roughness height e accounts for the influence
of the wall roughness elements. A dimensional analysis, not covered
in this course, provides us with
 VD e 
f = f  , 
  D
where e/D is the relative roughness and the first term is Reynolds
number.

Experimental data that relate the friction factor to the Reynolds

number have been obtained for fully developed pipe flow over a wide
range of wall roughnesses. The results of these data are presented in
Fig. 7.13, which is commonly referred to as the Moody diagram.
There are several features of the Moody diagram that should be noted.

▪ For a given wall roughness, measured by the relative roughness

e/D, there is a sufficiently large value of Re above which the
friction factor is constant, thereby defining the completely
turbulent regime. The average roughness element size e is
substantially greater than the viscous wall layer thickness δv, so
that viscous effects are not significant; the resistance to the flow
is produced primarily by the drag of the roughness elements that
protrude into the flow.
▪ For the smaller relative roughness e/D values it is observed that,
as Re decreases, the friction factor increases in the transition
zone and eventually becomes the same as that of a smooth pipe.
The roughness elements become submerged in the viscous wall
layer so that they produce little effect on the main flow.
▪ For Reynolds numbers less than 2000, the friction factor of
laminar flow is shown. The critical zone couples the turbulent
flow to the laminar flow and may represent an oscillating flow
that alternately exists between turbulent and laminar flow.
▪ The e values in this diagram are for new pipes. With age a pipe
will corrode and become fouled, changing both the roughness
and the pipe diameter, with a resulting increase in the friction
factor. Such factors should be included in design Similar to
considerations; they will not be reviewed in this course. calcification
of blood
arteries in
human beings
In 1944, Lewis Ferry Moody plotted
the Darcy–Weisbach friction
factor against Reynolds number Re for various
values of relative roughness ε / D.[1] This chart
became commonly known as the Moody
Chart or Moody Diagram. It adapts the work
of Hunter Rouse[2] but uses the more practical
choice of coordinates employed by R. J. S.
Pigott,[3] whose work was based upon an
analysis of some 10,000 experiments from
various sources.[4] Measurements of fluid flow
in artificially roughened pipes by J.
Nikuradse[5] were at the time too recent to
include in Pigott's chart.
The chart's purpose was to provide a graphical
representation of the function of C. F.
Colebrook in collaboration with C. M.
White,[6] which provided a practical form of
transition curve to bridge the transition zone
between smooth and rough pipes, the region of
incomplete turbulence
Empirical equations for the moody diagram
The following empirical equations represent the Moody diagram for
Re > 4000:

Good approximations can be made for the head loss in conduits with
noncircular cross sections by using the hydraulic radius R.

The transition zone equation (7.6.28) that couples the smooth pipe
equation to the completely turbulent regime equation is known as the
Colebrook equation. Note that Eq.7.6.26 is the Colebrook equation
with e = 0 (since it is smooth), and Eq. 7.6.27 is the Colebrook
equation with Re = ∞.
Solution of pipe flow problems by trials
Three categories of problems can be identified for developed
turbulent flow in a pipe length L:

A category 1 problem is straightforward and requires no iteration

procedure when using the Moody diagram. L v2
h1 − h2 = hL = f
D 2g
Category 2 and 3 problems are more like problems encountered in
engineering design situations and require an iterative trial-and-error
process when using the Moody diagram.
 Solution of pipe flow problems using
empirical equations
➢An alternative to using the Moody diagram that
avoids any trial-and-error process is made possible
by empirically derived formulas.
➢Perhaps the best of such formulas were
presented by Swamee and Jain (1976) for pipe
flow; an explicit expression that provides an
approximate value for the unknown in each
category above is as follows:
 Solution of pipe flow problems using
empirical equations
➢Equation 7.6.32 is as accurate as the Moody diagram, and Eqs.
7.6.31 and 7.6.33 are accurate to within approximately 2% of the
Moody diagram. These tolerances are acceptable for engineering
calculations. It is important to realise that the Moody diagram is based
on experimental data that likely is accurate to within no more than
5%.
➢Hence the foregoing three formulas of Swamee and Jain, which can
easily be input on a programmable hand-held calculator or computer,
are often used by design engineers.
 L v2
h1 − h2 = hL = f
D 2g

P1* P2* P
*
L v2
− = = hL = f
g g g D 2g
P = ghL since points 1 and 2 are at same elevation z1 = z 2
Minor losses in pipe flow
Minor losses in pipe flow
Minor losses in pipe flow
Difference in elevation
between the two reservoirs is
equal to the head loss
between the two reservoirs