Advances in Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering pp 2152-2156 | Cite as
Surge Effects in Pressure Systems for Different Pipe Materials
In pressurised transient flows the cavitation or water column separation, will induce the presence of free gas/vapour which will affect the elastic wave speed, as well as the propagation of transient pressure waves. Hence, several transient tests have been tested to calibrate simplified numerical models developed by using the Method of Characteristics with local gas cavities along the pipe and with variable wave speed. The developed analysis aims at the parameterisation of special dynamic effects. Extreme pressures, even with small duration, can reach excessive values with undesired safe and operational conditions: the maximum pressure values can cause ruptures in pipes and fittings, while low values can induce the collapse of the pipe-wall, air admission and release or the formation of vapour cavities. The analysis of surge effects due to cavitation occurrence in two pipelines with different pipe materials (i.e., metal and plastic), as well as the modelling of an air-valve behaviour for different pipe profiles, type of manoeuvres and quantity of retained air, are performed. Mathematical models are increasingly more used in design, as well as in the daily management and control of hydraulic systems, in particular for the prediction of unstable dynamic conditions.
Key wordstwo-phase flows cavitation air release air venting pressure surges
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bergant A, Simpson AR (1994). Estimating Unsteady Friction in Transient Cavitating Pipe Flow. Proceedings 2nd International Conference on Water Pipeline Systems, BHR Group Ltd., Edinburgh, UK, 3–16.Google Scholar
- Borga A, Ramos H, Covas D., Dudlick A, Neuhaus T (2004) Dynamic effects of transient flows with cavitation in pipe systems. 9th International Conference on Pressure Surges — The Practical Application of Surge Analysis for Design and Operation, bHrGroup — The Fluid Engineering Centre. Chester, 24–26 March 2004, UK.Google Scholar
- Bughazem MB, Anderson A (2000). Investigation of an unsteady friction model for waterhammer and column separation. Proceedings 8th International Conference on Pressure Surges, BHR Group Ltd., The Hague, The Netherlands, 483–499.Google Scholar
- Burrows R, Qiu DQ (1996). The effect of air pockets on pressure surge in sewerage rising mains. Rotterdam, Hong Kong, 1193–1198.Google Scholar
- Chaudhry MH (1987). Applied Hydraulic Transients, Litton Educational Publishing Inc. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.Google Scholar
- Covas D, Stoianov I, Mano J, Ramos, H, Graham N, Maksimovic C (2002). The Dynamic Effect of Pipe-Wall Viscoelasticity in Hydraulic Transients. Part I — Experimental Analysis and Creep Characterization. Journal of Hydraulic Research, IAHR.Google Scholar
- Covas D, Stoianov I, Ramos H, Graham N, Maksimovic C (2003). The Dissipation of Pressure Surges in Water Pipeline Systems. First Joint Conference IAHR-IWA on Pumps, Electromechanical Devices and Systems (PEDS 2003), Valencia, Spain, 22nd–25th April 2003.Google Scholar
- Lee TS (1999). Air Influence on Hydraulic Transients on Fluid System with Air Valves. Journal of Energy Resources Technology, Trans. ASME, 121(3), 646–650.Google Scholar
- Wiggert DC, Sundquist M J (1979). The Effect of Gaseous Cavitation on Fluid Transients. Journal of Fluids Engineering, Trans. ASME, 101(3), 79–86.Google Scholar
- Wylie EB, Streeter VL (1993). Fluid Transients in Systems, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar