Advertisement

Investigating the Removal of Hydraulic Cavitation from Pressurized Steel Piping Systems

  • Mohamed Amir ChakerEmail author
  • Ali Triki
Conference paper
  • 66 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering book series (LNME)

Abstract

This paper assessed the branching strategy capacity to mitigate the cavitating flow regime induced into an existing steel piping system. This strategy was based on adding a ramified high or low density polyethylene ((HDPE) or (LDPE)) short penstock to the transient sensitive regions of the existing piping system. The 1-D water-hammer model combined with the Vitkovsky et al. and Kelvin-Voigt formulations was used to describe the hydraulic behavior, along with the fixed grid Method of Characteristics, being used for numerical computations. From the case studied, it was found that such a technique could palliate the cavitating flow regime. In addition, this strategy allowed an acceptable first hydraulic-head peak and crest attenuation. Specifically, positive and negative surge magnitude attenuation was slightly more important for the case of a short penstock made of (LDPE) material than that using an (HDPE) material. Ultimately, it was observed that other factors contributing to the attenuation rate depended upon the short-penstock length and diameter.

Keywords

Cavitation Design Kelvin-Voigt Plastic LDPE Method of characteristics HDPE Viscoelasticity Vitkovsky 

References

  1. 1.
    Aklonis JJ, MacKnight WJ, Shen M (1972) Introduction to polymer viscoelasticity. Wiley-Interscience-WileyGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bergant A, Simpson AR, Tijsseling A (2006) Waterhammer with column separation: a historical review. J Fluids Struct 22(2):135–171.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2005.08.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brinson HF, Brinson LC (2008) Polymer engineering science and viscoelasticity: an introduction. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fersi M, Triki A (2019a) Investigation on redesigning strategies for water-hammer control in pressurized-piping systems. J Press Vessel Technol Trans ASME.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4040136
  5. 5.
    Fersi M, Triki A (2019b) Alternative design strategy for water-hammer control in pressurized-pipe flow. In: Fakhfakh T, Karra C, Bouaziz S, Chaari F, Haddar M (eds) Advances in acoustics and vibration II. ICAV 2018. Applied condition monitoring, 13 135–144, Springer, pp 157–165  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94616-0_16
  6. 6.
    Keramat A, Haghighi A (2014) Straightforward transient-based approach for the creep function determination in viscoelastic pipes. J Hydraul Eng 140(12).  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)hy.1943-7900.0000929
  7. 7.
    Pezzinga G, Scandura P (1995) Unsteady flow in installations with polymeric additional pipe. J Hydraul Eng 121(11):802–811.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9429(1995)121:11(802)
  8. 8.
    Triki A (2017) Water-hammer control in pressurized-pipe flow using a branched polymeric penstock. J Pipeline Syst Eng Pract ASCE 8(4):04017024.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ps.1949-1204.0000277
  9. 9.
    Triki A (2016) Water-hammer control in pressurized-pipe flow using an in-line polymeric short-section. Acta Mech 227(3):777–793.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-015-1493-13MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Triki A (2018a) Further investigation on water-hammer control inline strategy in water-supply systems, J Water Suppl Res Technol AQUA 67(1):30–43.  https://doi.org/10.2166/aqua.2017.073
  11. 11.
    Triki A (2018b) Dual-technique based inline design strategy for water-hammer control in pressurized-pipe flow. Acta Mech 229(5):2019–2039.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-017-2085-z
  12. 12.
    Triki A, Chaker MA (2019) Compound technique-based inline design strategy for water-hammer control in steel pressurized-piping systems. Int J Pres Ves Pip 169(C):188–203.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2018.12.001
  13. 13.
    Triki A, Fersi M (2018) Further investigation on the water-hammer control branching strategy in pressurized steel-piping systems. Int J Press Vessel Pip 165(C):135–144.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2018.06.002
  14. 14.
    Vitkovsky JP, Lambert MF, Simpson AR, Bergant A (2000) Advances in unsteady friction modelling in transient pipe flow. In: The 8th international conference on pressure surges bhr the hague the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wan W, Huang W, Li C (2014) Sensitivity analysis for the resistance on the performance of a pressure vessel for water hammer protection. J Press Vessel Technol Trans ASME 136(1):011303.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4025829
  16. 16.
    Wylie EB, Streeter VL (1993) Fluid transients in systems. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs NJGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yao E, Kember G, Hansen D (2015) Analysis of water hammer attenuation in applications with varying valve closure times. J Eng Mech 141(1):04014107.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)em.1943-7889.0000825CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanics, National Engineering School of SfaxUniversity of SfaxSfaxTunisia
  2. 2.Research Unit: Mechanics Modelling Energy and Materials M2EMGabesTunisia

Personalised recommendations