×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

24"x14" Concentric Reducer
2

24"x14" Concentric Reducer

24"x14" Concentric Reducer

(OP)
I am trying to find any source/chart about the pressure losses in the above black steel reducer using the cold water as an internal liquid in motion.

Do you know what should be the resistance coefficient (K)? Is it the same for an eccentric reducer?
Can I just use K=1 in the below equation?
(Or the K could be close to 0.05?)

        h=k[(v1-v2)^2/2g]

Per this equation it will be the same with the flow in the opposite direction (14"x24")!?

Thank you in advance!

RE: 24"x14" Concentric Reducer

For a gradual expansion (IE, cone shaped expansion), my fluids book shows K=h/(V1^2/(2g)) = 0.6 or so, depending on the inlet condtions and angle.  Losses are higher going into an expansion than into a contraction; it's not the same both ways.  I would expect that an eccentric reducer would have higher losses than a concentric reducer.

Weldbend has some flow loss data on their fittings, but not on reducers- plus, they don't show a 24x14 anyway.

RE: 24"x14" Concentric Reducer

(OP)
Thank you JStephen!
You have listed just the velocity v1 in the above equation, is it v2=0!?
I have seen that Weldbend doesn't show a reducer 24x14 in their catalog, they have one 24x16, but we can get that "custom" size.
I was wondering more about the pressure losses through the different size of a reducer in function of  high flow.
Thanks one more!

RE: 24"x14" Concentric Reducer

The graph I was looking at shows K as a function of the inlet velocity and angle only.  This doesn't mean that V2 is zero, just that the head loss is not dependent on V2.  This is also in a part of the graph where K varies quite a bit depending on the flare angle, so you'd need to confirm actual length before using that information.

Weldbend reducers aren't conical sections, they do have a smoothly curved profile.  I'm assuming that the conical shape would be a bit higher loss than the reducer.

FYI- we sometimes buy reducers, and sometimes just have a cone formed to the appropriate dimensions.

RE: 24"x14" Concentric Reducer

It has always struck me as strange that almost all compilations of K-values include tapered (conical) reducers but very seldom include standard pipe reducers when in actual plants you will see MANY more standard reducers than you will ever see conical ones. Even the very practical and comprehensive Crane 410 manual ignores standard pipe reducers.

The article "Calculate Head Loss Caused by Change in Pipe Size" by William B Hooper, published in Chemical Engineering, Nov 7, 1988, pgs 89-92 does give a correlation specifically for standard reducers. But Hooper includes the caveat "The correlation given in the table looks reasonable, but no published data are available for checking its accuracy".

Hooper is the developer of the "2K" method.  Traditionally K-values are assumed to be constant for a given type of fitting, irrespective of size or flowrate.  The "2K" method is aimed at correcting the K values of various fitting for varying size and flowrate.

Hooper's correlation for standard pipe reducers in "reducing mode" is

K = (0.1 + 50/Re)((D/d)^4 - 1)

D is upstream diameter (larger diameter)
d is downstream diameter (smaller diameter)
Re is Reynolds number in upstream pipe (diam = D)

When used in "expanding mode" Hooper recommends that you assume a sudden expansion.

This correlation in "reducing mode" will give less friction than a conical reducer, so if you want to be conservative use the conical reducer K-value. It depends on the purpose of your calculation.

My catalog does show a 24"x14" reducer as being a standard, but I would expect them to be hard to come by. If you are going to make up a compound reducer (e.g. 24"x18" plus 18"x14") then you are going to introduce additional turbulence and losses.  In this case it might be better to simply assume K=1, but as stated above, it depends on the purpose of your calculation.

Be careful with your h calculation - remember that (V1-V2)^2 is not equal to V1^2 - V2^2.

RE: 24"x14" Concentric Reducer

(OP)
Thank you very much Katmar on all excellent comments you have made up there!
Best Regards,
BGD011


Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources