Dadalhin Kita Sa’king Daloy By Regime Velasquez:

Investigation of Flow Regimes and their Reynolds Number

Baralla, Adrian Laurence A.
Infante, Aaron Paul D.
Jalandoni, Kaylen Yvon K.
Martus, Rievelyn B.

I. Introduction
Reynold’s Number is a dimensionless quantity that is used to determine the
type of flow pattern a fluid has as it flows through a pipe. It is the ratio between the
inertial and viscous forces of a liquid. It is essential in examining various transport
characteristics of a fluid or a particle in a moving fluid (Rapp, 2016). From a
mathematical standpoint, Reynolds number is defined as
𝐷𝑣ρ
𝑁𝑅𝑒 = µ
Eq. 1

where D is the diameter of the pipe, v is the velocity of the dynamic fluid, ρ is the
density, and µ is the viscosity of the fluid (Rehm et al., 2013). Typically, Reynolds
number categorizes a fluid flow in three regimes: laminar, transition, and turbulent
(Menon, 2014).
Laminar flow, also known as streamline flow, is a flow pattern in which the
fluid travels constantly in a regular path (Menon, 2014). It is characterized by thin
layers of fluid stacked in a parallel orientation with one another, and these layers are
smoothly sliding past each other (Islam & Hossain, 2020; Villanueva, 2023). Laminar
flow often appears in instances when pipe and fittings have relatively small
cross-sectional area, fluid feed rate is low, the fluid density is comparatively small,
and the viscosity is large (Gregersen, 2023). In a mathematical sense, a fluid flow is
considered to be laminar if its Reynolds number is less than 2100 (𝑁𝑅𝑒 < 2100)
(Green & Southard, 2018).
Transition flow regime, on the other hand, describes a flow pattern in a way
that the fluid acts fully laminar at the beginning and develops progressively into
turbulent in the boundary layer (Channabasav & Hampali, 2022). This behavior is
caused by a sudden increase in the kinetic energy of the fluid as it travels through a
system. A fluid undergoes through transition flow if its viscous and frictional forces
are unable to keep up with its inertial forces. For a flow to be considered flowing in
the transition region, its Reynolds number should be greater than 2100 but less than
4000 (2100 < 𝑁𝑅𝑒 < 4000) (Green & Southard, 2018).

Turbulent flow is a category of flow where the fluid undergoes a lot of

fluctuations and back mixing (Augustyn, 2020). This is the type of flow where eddies
and swirls are evident (Pawliszyn, 2012). This behavior of the fluid is influenced by
the drastic changes in its pressure and velocity that the viscosity forces cannot
compensate enough to act as a resistance (Iverson, 1997). In numerical terms, a fluid
is considered to be flowing in a turbulent manner if its Reynolds number is greater
than 4000 (𝑁𝑅𝑒 > 4000) (Green & Southard, 2018).
 Categorization of fluid flow and determining a fluid’s Reynolds number is
essential as it is commonly present in a lot of daily mundane activities and industrial
applications. Reynolds number is used in solving friction factors of different pipes
and deriving equations in fluid dynamics (He & Zhang, 2012; Mlblevins, 2014). It is
also utilized in flight testing in the field of aeronautics to determine if the aircraft is
safe enough to fly in the atmosphere at a certain speed (Sforza, 2014). Furthermore, it
is helpful in the field of medicine as blood is classified to be flowing in a turbulent
manner as it passes through large blood vessels and laminar in smaller vessels
(Secomb, 2016). Lastly, the different types of flow are present in every household
such as the water running in the faucet, showers, and hoses, excretion of bodily fluids,
etc (Freund et al., 2012).
The concept of Fanning friction factor is often tied with Reynolds number
especially when dealing with a fluid running through a pipe. This friction factor,
generally, is a function of both the Reynolds number and the relative roughness of a
pipe (Takacs, 2015). Knowing this is significant as it is essential in determining the
pressure losses in a pipe system. There are multiple methods to derive the Fanning
friction factor, including graphical and numerical approaches. One of them is the
Churchill equation, which deals with the relationship among the Reynolds number (
𝑁𝑅𝑒), inside pipe diameter (D), surface roughness of the pipe (ϵ), and Fanning friction
factor (f) (Green & Southard, 2018).
1
12 12
⎡
𝑓 = 2⎢
⎢
⎣
( )8
𝑁𝑅𝑒
+
1
(𝐴+𝐵)
1.5
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎦
Eq. 2
16
⎡ ⎤ 16
⎢
where 𝐴 = ⎢2. 457𝑙𝑛
⎢ ( )
7
1
0.9
ϵ
+0.27 𝐷
⎥
⎥
⎥
and 𝐵 = ( ) 37530
𝑁𝑅𝑒
⎣ 𝑁𝑅𝑒
⎦
II. Objectives
The main objective of the laboratory experiment was to investigate the
different flow regimes and their corresponding Reynolds numbers. Specifically, the
experiment aimed to visually determine the conditions needed to differentiate the flow
categories. It was also intended to derive the Reynolds number and establish the
effects of varying parameters such as diameter, flow velocity, temperature, density,
viscosity, and Fanning friction factor.
III. Materials and Methodology
The different flow regimes were investigated in this experiment using two
setups with varying pipe diameters, particularly the Horizontal Osborne-Reynolds
Demonstration Unit (FME31) and the Reynolds Apparatus available in the Unit
Operations Laboratory. Water served as the working fluid in the experiment, and it
was supplied by a hydraulic bench for the FME31 unit and the faucet for the Reynolds
Apparatus.
The first part of the experiment was conducted using the FME31 unit with a
polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) test pipe that has a 16-mm inner diameter. Before
switching the hydraulic bench on, the drain valve of the unit was initially closed to fill
the water supply tank. Once the water reached the overflow level, the control valve of
the bench was fully closed, and its pump was turned off to avoid any backflow. Then,
the water in the supply tank was allowed to calm for at least 10 minutes before the
experiment was started.
Thereafter, the pump was switched on again, and the control valve was opened
to let the water flow through the overflow to the horizontal test pipe. The drain valve
was also opened such that a constant level in the tank remained. Since there were air
bubbles formed inside the pipe, the flow control valves at both ends were opened and
closed to purge all residual air. Then, the iodine injection valve was gradually turned
to add a coloring matter to the water current. The flow rate was modified using the
bench control and drain valves until the iodine drew a parallel line along the inside of
the test pipe, which corresponded to the laminar regime.
To measure the volumetric flow rate of water, a 1000 mL graduated cylinder
was placed at the outlet of the FME31 unit, and the amount of water collected after a
specified time was recorded. The volumetric flow rate was then calculated by dividing
the volume of water by the time.
Afterward, the drain valve was adjusted steadily and simultaneously with the
control valve of the bench to compensate for the level drop while increasing the flow
rate. The flow rate was increased until the iodine began oscillating along the length of
the pipe, signifying the transition regime, and more until the coloring matter was
completely dispersed in the current, which indicated the turbulent regime. Four trials
for each regime were conducted in the FME31 unit, and the temperature of water
collected in each trial was also measured using a thermometer.
Similar procedures were performed for the second part of the experiment,
which utilized the Reynolds Apparatus with a test pipe measuring 29.7 mm in inside
diameter. However, methylene blue was used as a coloring matter in this part instead
of iodine.
At the end of the experiment, the ink injection valve was closed, and the
coloring matter in both setups was removed from the test pipes before the other valves
were closed to prevent staining. Finally, the hydraulic bench and the faucet were
switched off to stop the supply of water.
For the post-laboratory calculations, the density and dynamic viscosity of
water were interpolated using the recorded temperature and available data from the
steam table for saturated liquid. Meanwhile, the flow velocity was computed by
dividing the volumetric flow rate by the cross-sectional area of the test pipe. Then,
substituting these values and the given diameter to the formula, the Reynolds number
was calculated. Additionally, the surface roughness of the PMMA test pipe was
identified from available data, while the test pipe of the Reynolds Apparatus was
assumed to be smooth. The Churchill equation (Eq. 2) was then used to solve for the
Fanning friction factor.
These calculations were done for all trials and in both parts of the experiment.
The resulting data were used to investigate the flow regimes and their corresponding
Reynolds numbers.
 IV. Results and Discussion
This section summarizes the calculated results of the experiment and its
implication to the known concepts and theories on fluid flow phenomena.
Table 1. Summary of Experimental Data from FME31 Unit

Viscosity
Temperature Flow Rate Velocity Density Reynolds Type of
Trial (10-4
(K) (10-5 m3/s) (10-1 m/s) (kg/m3) Number Flow
kg/m-s)

1 300.95 17.1 8.5048 996.2140 8.3861 16,165.0880 Turbulent

2 300.65 15.24 7.5798 996.3091 8.4342 14,326.0036 Turbulent

3 300.9 14.94 7.4305 996.2299 8.3941 14,109.9214 Turbulent

4 300.65 13.8 6.8636 996.3091 8.4342 12,972.3654 Turbulent

5 301.15 4.18 2.0790 996.1506 8.3541 3,966.3778 Transition

6 301.15 3.80 1.89 996.1506 8.3541 3,605.7980 Transition

7 301.15 3.59 1.7855 996.1506 8.3541 3,406.5302 Transition

8 301.15 2.87 1.4274 996.1506 8.3541 2,723.3264 Transition

9 301.65 2.0667 1.0279 995.9920 8.2739 1,979.7298 Laminar

10 302.15 0.375 1.8651 995.8335 8.1938 362.6813 Laminar

11 302.15 0.2367 1.1771 995.8335 8.1938 228.8922 Laminar

12 302.15 0.3325 1.6537 995.8335 8.1938 321.5774 Laminar

Table 2. Summary of Experimental Data from Reynolds Apparatus

Viscosity
Temperature Flow Rate Velocity Density Reynolds Type of
Trial (10-4
(K) (10-5 m3/s) (10-1 m/s) (kg/m3) Number Flow
kg/m-s)

1 302.15 27.3333 3.9454 995.8335 8.1938 14,241.3130 Turbulent

2 302.15 26.9333 3.8877 995.8335 8.1938 14,032.9035 Turbulent

3 302.15 24.9667 3.6038 995.8335 8.1938 13,008.2237 Turbulent

4 302.15 17.3333 2.5020 995.8335 8.1938 9,031.0765 Turbulent

5 302.15 7.54 1.0883 995.8335 8.1938 3,928.5183 Transition

6 302.15 6.99 1.0090 995.8335 8.1938 3,641.9553 Transition

7 302.15 5.92 0.8545 995.8335 8.1938 3,084.4600 Transition

8 302.15 53.6 0.7737 995.8335 8.1938 2,792.6867 Transition

9 302.15 0.30 0.0563 995.8335 8.1938 203.1992 Laminar

10 302.15 0.325 0.0469 995.8335 8.1938 169.3327 Laminar

11 302.15 0.280 0.0404 995.8335 8.1938 145.8866 Laminar

12 302.15 01517 0.0219 995.8335 8.1938 79.0219 Laminar

Figure 2. Comparison of NRe from the Different Flow Regimes

During the experiment, the different flow regimes were visually determined
according to the pattern the dyes had exhibited from the FME 31 and Reynolds
apparatuses. In a laminar flow, the iodine and methylene blue fluid particles traveled
smoothly and in a particularly ordered motion— almost like a straight line. Moreover,
it is further supported by solving its corresponding Reynolds number wherein the
Reynolds number of a laminar flow is less than 2,100 (Green & Southward, 2018). In
the transition regime flow, the dyes used exhibited a similar pattern with the laminar
flow with only difference that the observed dyes were oscillating as they moved
through the pipes. This is backed by the values for Reynolds number calculated
ranging from 2100 to 4000, the range for a flow to be considered transitional (Green
& Southward, 2018). Lastly, the turbulent flow was documented due to the erratic and
random patterns made by the dyes as they flow with the water. By calculating the
Reynolds numbers, it was discovered that the recorded flows fit the criteria of having
values more than 4000 (Green & Southward, 2018).
Laminar flow is also called streamline due to the observable paths or
streamlines created by the fluid particles as they move through the pipe. Likewise, it
is considered a viscous flow because of its relationship to the fluid’s viscosity (US
Department of Energy, 1992). When a fluid flow is characterized due to its smooth,
continuous stream without mixing layers, laminar flow happens. On top of that, this
observable movement of the iodine used in this experiment is mainly due to the
inertial and viscous forces of the fluid. Due to the low velocity of the water that enters
the test pipe, its individual particles would still travel in parallel paths because the
inertial forces of the flowing water cannot overcome its viscous force because of too
much friction and resistance between these particles which causes them to overlap
(Young, 2018).
A flow tends to be turbulent when there are no specific layers and no
observable paths and random movement of fluid particles (US Department of Energy,
1992). Due to the high velocity, low-viscosity fluids tend to have less resistance
between its particles which creates enough inertial force to dominate the said
resistance caused by the viscous force of the fluid (Young, 2018).
Between these two flow regimes is the transition flow where an oscillating
coloring matter is observed. Laminar and turbulent flow characteristics can both be
seen in transition flow with turbulence in the center of the pipe, and laminar flow near
the edges. This occurs when the flow is changing from a completely laminar to a
purely turbulent domain at "intermediate" flow rates (Engineering ToolBox, 2004).
In many fluid flows, the transition from laminar to turbulent flow is induced
by a long streamwise perturbation which creates a boundary layer between the
laminar and transition, and transition and turbulent. This phenomenon is known as the
Bypass Transition which is due to the fluctuations in stream velocity which results in
vortical disturbances and eddies (Lee & Zaki, n.d.). Moreover, as shown in Figure 1,
the Reynolds number in the last two trials for the transition flow in FME31 unit is
near 2,100 that is why the presence of an oscillating coloring matter is more
prominent and visible. This is due to the existence of a Tollmien-Schlichting wave
(T-S wave) which is defined as an unstable wave in a viscous boundary layer that
arises when the Reynolds number is high enough to cause disturbances which
obstructs the parallel flow of the fluid in the Blasius boundary layer (Kundu, Cohen,
& Dowling, 2016).

As for the fluid’s properties influencing the Reynolds number of a fluid flow,
various relationships are established through analyzing the obtained data from this
experiment. From Tables 1 and 2, it can be seen that there is a direct relationship
between the velocity and the Reynolds number; as the velocity increases, so does the
Reynolds number. This increase in velocity is also observed during the experiment,
where viscous forces are insufficient to maintain the alignment of all the fluid
particles, resulting in the formation of eddies and turbulence, consequently leading to
the occurrence of a turbulent flow (Loughborough, n.d.).

Figures 3 and 4. Velocity vs NRe vs Flow Rate Graphs

 Additionally, the flow rate has a direct relationship with the Reynolds number
as shown in Figures 3 and 4. From the data gathered, it is apparent that for the FME31
unit, turbulent flow has the highest flow rates and also has the largest Reynolds
numbers, with a range of approximately 12,000 to 16,000, while laminar flow has the
lowest flow rates and has the smallest Reynolds numbers, ranging from about 300 to
2,000. The Reynolds Apparatus exhibits the same trend, with turbulent flow having
the highest flow rates and largest Reynolds numbers at roughly 9,000–14,000, while
laminar flow has the lowest flow rates and smallest Reynolds numbers at about
80–200. This direct relationship can be explained by the fact that flow rate is directly
proportional to velocity (Texas Gateway, n.d.).

On the other hand, when viscous forces are larger compared to the inertial
forces, the fluid's disturbances are smoothed out and fluid flows slowly through the
pipe, where the flow became stable, with little to no variation in the velocity field
(Materials Science and Engineering, n.d.); in this case, laminar flow prevails in pipes
(University of Babylon, n.d.). Therefore, it can be deduced that the Reynolds number
is inversely proportional to the fluid’s dynamic viscosity, and thus to the fluid's
kinematic viscosity, since kinematic viscosity is simply the ratio of the fluid's
dynamic viscosity to its density (Camuffo, 2013).

From this definition, it follows that density is inversely proportional to the

fluid’s kinematic viscosity, and thus directly proportional to the Reynolds number.
This is supported by the fact that when a fluid has a higher density, it also possesses
higher inertia. It is important to note that inertia is not a restriction of motion, rather a
restriction of change in motion (Butto, 2021). A heavy object, by analogy, is more
difficult to stop once it has begun to move. In the context of laminar and turbulence, if
the flow has high density and has disturbance, it is more difficult for viscous force to
dampen out this disturbance in order to bring order to the flow.

Viscosity and density are both temperature-dependent properties related to the

behavior of fluid flow. These properties decrease as the temperature rises (Lee, 2019;
Skybrary, n.d.), as reflected in the results. In the data shown in Tables 1 and 2, it
should be noted that temperature values vary in different trials. It is observed that
when using the FME31 unit, the temperature changes; this can be attributed to the
equipment’s release of heat by using an electricity to operate, whereas temperature
remains constant when using the Reynolds apparatus, where water is only stored in a
large metallic tank. Another possible explanation for temperature fluctuations is the
changes in room temperature, which are directly affected by the laboratory's heating
and cooling systems. As the day progresses toward noon, heat accumulates inside the
laboratory during the experiment. This explains why temperature readings based on
collected data for the FME31 unit are generally increasing, as it is known that
surrounding temperature influences the fluid's temperature in order to achieve
equilibrium. However, discrepancies in temperature readings also exist as a result of
biases and inconsistencies.
 Figure 5. Diameter vs NRe vs Flow rate Graph for FME 31 unit and Reynolds Apparatus
Trials

Furthermore, the Reynolds number and diameter are directly related, with an
increase in diameter causes an increase in the Reynolds number and the likelihood of
turbulence, given that the velocity remains constant (Nur, Ansiha & Afrianita, R &
Ramli, R., 2019; SBMDStudent, 2015). It is worth noting, however, that increasing
the diameter reduces the Reynolds number in a changing velocity. This is illustrated in
Figure 5, where the FME31 unit with a pipe diameter smaller than that of the
Reynolds Apparatus, yields greater Reynolds numbers. The reason for this is that the
flow rate equals the velocity divided by cross-sectional area, where the area is
proportional to diameter squared; hence, this suggests that diameter squared in
inversely related to the velocity at constant flow and thus has an indirect relationship
with the Reynolds number.

Table 3. Summary Table for the Fanning Friction Values

FME31 Unit (Diameter: 16 mm) Reynolds Apparatus (Diameter: 29.7 mm)

Surface Roughness: 0.0017 mm Surface Roughness: 0 mm (Smooth Tube)

Trial Velocity Reynolds f (10-3) Velocity Reynolds f (10-3)

(10-1 m/s) Number (10-1 m/s) Number

1 8.5048 16,165.0880 6.8783 3.9454 14,241.3130 7.0478

2 7.5798 14,326.0036 7.0926 3.8877 14,032.9035 7.0752

3 7.4305 14,109.9214 7.1203 3.6038 13,008.2237 7.2184

4 6.8636 12,972.3654 7.2768 2.5020 9,031.0765 7.9727

5 2.0790 3,966.3778 10.2048 1.0883 3,928.5183 10.2045

6 1.89 3,605.7980 10.5045 1.0090 3,641.9553 10.4444

7 1.7855 3,406.5302 10.6700 0.8545 3,084.4600 10.7881

8 1.4274 2,723.3264 10.0241 0.7737 2,792.6867 10.2971

9 1.0279 1,979.7298 8.0895 0.0563 203.1992 78.7405

10 1.8651 362.6813 44.1159 0.0469 169.3327 94.4886

11 1.1771 228.8922 69.9019 0.0404 145.8866 109.6742

12 1.6537 321.5774 49.7547 0.0219 79.0219 202.4755

Figures 6 and 7. Fanning Friction vs Reynolds Number Graphs

By using the Churchill equation, an equation that is applicable for all types of
flow, the following data from Table 3 were obtained which exhibits the relationship
between the fanning friction and Reynolds number as shown in Figures 6 and 7.
Fanning friction is defined as the quantity needed in solving the pressure losses and
pressure drop in a piping system due to friction. (Young, 2018)

A head loss occurs when the potential energy of a fluid is transformed into
kinetic energy due to friction created by the fluid, the roughness of the tubes’ walls,
and other frictional resistances of the piping system (Stewart, 2019). It is directly
proportional to the friction factor (𝑓), pipe length (𝐿), and the square of the fluid
2
velocity (𝑣 ) and indirectly proportional to the pipe diameter (𝐷) as mathematically
defined in Eq. 6 below (US Department of Energy, 1992).
2
𝐿𝑣
𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 ∝ 𝑓 𝐷
Eq. 3

Figure 6 and 7 exhibits the relationship between fanning friction and Reynolds
number, and it can be established that Reynold number values nearer to the pure
laminar region have greater fanning friction factor. With this, laminar flowing fluids
lead to high pressure drops due to their high fanning friction values. Furthermore, it
can be highlighted that there is a huge decrease in the fanning friction values as the
data enters the transitional flow. This is due to the fact that turbulent flows are starting
to develop in this regime. Lastly, turbulent flow regime has the set of data with the
lowest f-values due to the fact that it has the highest fluid velocity among the three.
V. Conclusion and Recommendations
After conducting the experiment and visually and numerically analyzing the
data collected, it was discovered that three flow lines—laminar, turbulent, and
transitional—are developed depending on the relationship between viscous and
inertial forces. In a laminar flow, the motion of the fluid particles is organized, where
they move in the same direction, are in parallel layers, and have a Reynolds number
less than 2,100. Meanwhile, in a turbulent flow, the motion of the fluid particles is
completely dispersed, with fluid particles moving in a random direction and in no
specific layers, and the Reynolds number is greater than 4,000. Moreover, in a
transitional flow, the motion of the fluid particles is subjected to an oscillatory flow
and the Reynolds number of the transition flow ranges from 2,100 to 4,000.
Regarding the parameters involved in solving for the Reynolds number, it was
determined that Reynolds number shares a direct proportional relationship with pipe
diameter, fluid velocity, and flow rate. Furthermore, temperature-dependent
parameters such as density and viscosity, shared a direct and inverse relationships
with NRe, respectively. On the other hand, velocity and diameter shared an inverse
relationship with one another as backed by the data collected and interpreted. Lastly,
in terms of fanning friction, the laminar regime has the highest set of values, followed
by the transitional regime, and the turbulent flow regime.
The presently available results might be used to make modifications to the
experiment's design in order to mitigate further errors. Firstly, make sure to remove all
the possible air bubbles trapped in both of the apparatuses to avoid any potential
discrepancies during data gathering. Secondly, the flow of water and the dye must be
regulated carefully to correctly visualize the different flow regimes. By not doing so
may lead to errors, especially in the data collection. Moreover, human errors caused
by inconsistencies in reflexes and lack of synchronization during the collection of the
liquid and time recording could have been avoided by using a device that accurately
measures the volume flow rate. Lastly, it is suggested to ensure that the temperature of
the water used during the experiment would be consistent all throughout to produce
more accurate and precise data.
VI. References

12.1 flow rate and its relation to velocity. 12.1 Flow Rate and Its Relation to Velocity |
Texas Gateway. (n.d.).
https://www.texasgateway.org/resource/121-flow-rate-and-its-relation-velocity

5. The Bernoulli Equation - Loughborough university. (n.d.).

https://learn.lboro.ac.uk/pluginfile.php/504743/mod_resource/content/1/Fluid_
Mechanics_5.pdf
Augustyn, A. (2020). Turbulent flow. Encyclopedia Britannica.
https://www.britannica.com/science/turbulent-flow

Butto, N. (2021). The nature and origin of inertia. Journal of High Energy Physics,
Gravitation and Cosmology.
https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=108888

Camuffo, D. (2013). Atmospheric stability and pollutant dispersion.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780444632968000081
Channabasav, & Hampali, C. D. (2022). Numerical analysis of laminar to turbulent
transition boundary layer flow. Numerical Analysis of Laminar to Turbulent
Transition Boundary Layer Flow, 319–324.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.09.183

Density altitude. (n.d.).

https://www.skybrary.aero/articles/density-altitude#:~:text=Density%20is%20
directly%20proportional%20to,with%20pressure%20constant%2C%20density
%20decreases.

DOE Fundamentals Handbook: Thermodynamics, Heat Transfer, and Fluid Flow,

DOE-HDBK-1012/3-92, US Department of Energy, June 1992.
https://engineeringlibrary.org/reference/laminar-and-turbulent-fluid-flow-doe-
handbook

Engineering ToolBox, (2004). Laminar, Transitional and Turbulent Flow. [online]

Available at:
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/laminar-transitional-turbulent-flow-d_57
7.html
Freund, J. B., Goetz, J. G., Hill, K. L., & Vermot, J. (2012). Fluid flows and forces in
development: functions, features and biophysical principles. Development,
139(7), 1229–1245. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.073593
Green, D. W., & Southard, M. Z. (2018). Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook, 9th
Edition. McGraw Hill Professional.
Gregersen, E. (2023). Laminar flow. Encyclopedia Britannica.
https://www.britannica.com/science/laminar-flow
He, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2012). Advances and Outlooks of Heat Transfer Enhancement
by Longitudinal Vortex Generators. Elsevier EBooks, 119–185.
https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-396529-5.00002-0
IOP conference series: Materials science and engineering. (n.d.).
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/602/1/012058/pdf
Islam, M. R., & Hossain, M. E. (2020). DRILLING ENGINEERING: TOWARDS
ACHIEVING TOTAL SUSTAINABILITY. Gulf Professional Publishing.
Iverson, R. M. (1997). The physics of debris flows. Reviews of Geophysics, 35(3),
245–296. https://doi.org/10.1029/97rg00426
Kundu, P., Cohen, I., & Dowling, D. (2016) Chapter 11 - Instability. Fluid Mechanics
6, 533-602. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-405935-1.00011-3

Lee, K. S. (2019). Hybrid thermal recovery using low-salinity and smart waterflood.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128167762000064
Menon, E. S. (2014). Transmission Pipeline Calculations and Simulations Manual.
Gulf Professional Publishing.
Mlblevins, M. (2014). What is Reynolds Number and What are its Applications?
Science Struck.
https://sciencestruck.com/what-is-reynolds-number-what-are-its-applications

Nur, A., Afrianita, R., & Ramli, R. D. T. F. (2019). Effect of pipe diameter changes on
the properties of fluid in closed channels using Osborne Reynold Apparatus.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335664166_Effect_of_pipe_diamete
r_changes_on_the_properties_of_fluid_in_closed_channels_using_Osborne_R
eynold_Apparatus
Pawliszyn, J. (2012). Comprehensive Sampling and Sample Preparation: Analytical
Techniques for Scientists.

Pipe flow software. Pipe Flow Software. (n.d.).

https://www.pipeflow.com/pipe-pressure-drop-calculations/reynolds-numbers#
:~:text=The%20Reynolds%20number%20(Re)%20of,viscous%20force%20pe
r%20unit%20length).
Rapp, B. E. (2016). Microfluidics: Modeling, Mechanics and Mathematics. Elsevier.
Rehm, B., Schubert, J., Haghshenas, A., Paknejad, A. S., & Hughes, J. (2013).
Managed Pressure Drilling. Elsevier.

SBMDStudent. (2015). Help with Reynold's number and diameter. Physics Forums |
Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion.
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/help-with-reynolds-number-and-diam
eter.808514/
Secomb, T. W. (2016). Hemodynamics. Comprehensive Physiology, 975–1003.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cphy.c150038
Sforza, P. M. (2014). Commercial Airplane Design Principles. Elsevier.

Significance of Reynolds number in pipe flow - University of Babylon. (n.d.).

https://www.uobabylon.edu.iq/eprints/paper_2_2117_1369.pdf
Stewart, M. (2019) Pump fundamentals. Surface Production Operations Pump and
Compressor Systems: Mechanical Design and Specification 4, 7-59.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809895-0.00002-8
Takacs, G. (2015). Sucker Rod Pump Handbook. Gulf Professional Publishing.
Villanueva, N. (2023) Liquid Glass: The characteristics of Laminar Flow. Fossil
Consulting Services, Inc.
https://www.fossilconsulting.com/2023/01/20/laminar-flow/
Young, C. (2018) Why Does Flow Become Turbulent? Engineer Excel.
https://engineerexcel.com/why-does-flow-become-turbulent/#:~:text=Why%2
0Flow%20Becomes%20Turbulent,moving%20at%20a%20slower%20pace

Zaki, T. & Lee, J. (n.d.) Transition. Flowing Science and Engineering.

https://engineering.jhu.edu/zaki/research/bypass-transition/
VII. Appendices
Appendix A
Table 4. Raw Data Gathered During the Experiment for FME31 Unit

FME31 Unit

Temperature
Type of Flow Trial Volume (mL) Time (s)
(°C)

1 27.8 855 5

Turbulent 2 27.5 762 5

Flow 3 27.75 747 5

4 27.5 690 5

1 28 418 10

Transition 2 28 380 10
Flow 3 28 359 10

4 28 287 10

1 28.5 310 15

Laminar 2 29 75 20
Flow 3 29 7.10 3

4 29 6.65 2

Table 5. Raw Data Gathered During the Experiment for Reynolds Apparatus

Reynolds Apparatus

Temperature
Type of Flow Trial Volume (mL) Time (s)
(°C)

1 29 820 3

Turbulent 2 29 808 3
Flow 3 29 749 3

4 29 520 3

Transition 1 29 754 10
Flow
 2 29 699 10

3 29 592 10

4 29 536 10

1 29 78 20

Laminar 2 29 65 20
Flow 3 29 56 20

4 29 91 60

Table 5. Raw Data Gathered During the Experiment for FME 31 Unit

Trial Observation Type of Flow

Turbulent
1

2 Turbulent

3 Turbulent

4 Turbulent
5 Transition

6 Transition

7 Transition

8 Transition

9 Laminar

10 Laminar
 11 Laminar

12 Laminar

Table 5. Raw Data Gathered During the Experiment for Reynolds Apparatus

Trial Observation Type of Flow

Turbulent
1

2 Turbulent

3 Turbulent

4 Turbulent
5 Transition

6 Transition

7 Transition

8 Transition

9 Laminar

10 Laminar

11 Laminar
12 Laminar
Appendix B.

Sample Calculations of Data Collected

1. Converting all the raw data gathered during the experiment to follow consistent
dimensions all throughout the calculations.

Temperature in Celsius (°C) converted to Kelvin (K)

Volume in milliliters (mL) converted to cubic meters (m3)

Using the data collected from Trial 1 using the FME13 Unit,

𝑇 (𝐾) = 27. 8°𝐶 + 273. 15 = 300. 95 𝐾

−6 3
3 10 𝑚 −4 3
𝑉 (𝑚 ) = 855 𝑚𝐿 × 1 𝑚𝐿
= 8. 55 × 10 𝑚

*Similar computation was utilized for other temperature and volume readings from
different trials.

2. Calculation of the cross-sectional area (A) of the test pipe given its diameter
2
π𝐷
𝐴= 4

Using the data given for the FME31 unit,

2
π(0.016 𝑚) 2
𝐴= 4
= 0. 0002 𝑚

*Similar computation was utilized for an area with a different diameter.

3. Calculation of the flow rate in different trials and pipe diameters
𝑉
𝑄= 𝑡

Using the data from Trial 1,

−4 3 3
8.55×10 𝑚 𝑚
𝑄= 5𝑠
= 0. 00017 𝑠

*Similar computation was utilized for other volumes and times from different trials.
4. Calculation of the velocity in different trials and pipe diameters
𝑄
𝑣= 𝐴

Using the calculated values for the flow rate and cross-sectional area from Trial 1,
3
𝑚
0.00017 𝑠 𝑚
𝑣= 2 = 0. 85048 𝑠
0.00020 𝑚
 *Similar computation was utilized for other calculated flow rates from different trials.
5. Calculation of the density in different trials and pipe diameters

Using the data for density obtained from Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook, 9th
Edition by Green, D. W., & Southard, M. Z. (2018), and linear interpolation,

Temperature (K) Density (𝑚𝑜𝑙/𝑑𝑚 )

3

300 55.315

310 55.139

𝑚𝑜𝑙
𝑚𝑜𝑙 ⎡ (55.139−55.135) 𝑑𝑚 3
⎤ 𝑚𝑜𝑙
ρ@300.95𝐾 = 55. 315 + (300. 95 − 300) 𝐾 ⎢ ⎥ = 55. 29828
𝑑𝑚
3
⎢ (310−300) 𝐾 ⎥ 𝑑𝑚
3
⎣ ⎦
*Similar computation was utilized for other temperatures from different trials.
6. Calculation of the viscosity in different trials and pipe diameters
Using the data for viscosity obtained from Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook,
9th Edition by Green, D. W., & Southard, M. Z. (2018), and linear interpolation,

Temperature (K) Viscosity (10

−6
𝑃𝑎 · 𝑠)

300 853.84

310 693.54
−6
−6
µ@300.95𝐾 = 853. 84 × 10 𝑃𝑎 · 𝑠 + (300. 95 − 300) 𝐾 ⎡⎢
(693.54−853.84) ×10 𝑃𝑎·𝑠 ⎤ = 838. 6115 × 10−6𝑃𝑎 · 𝑠
(310−300) 𝐾 ⎥
⎣ ⎦

*Similar computation was utilized for other temperatures from different trials.
7. Calculation of the Reynolds number
𝐷𝑣ρ
𝑁𝑅𝑒 = µ

Using the calculated values for velocity, density, and viscosity, as well as the given
data for pipe diameter,
3
𝑚 𝑚𝑜𝑙 18.01528 𝑔 1 𝑑𝑚 1 𝑘𝑔
0.016 𝑚 × 0.85046 𝑠
× 55.29828 3 × 𝑚𝑜𝑙
× −3 3 × 1000 𝑔
𝑑𝑚 10 𝑚
𝑁𝑅𝑒 = 1
𝑘𝑔 = 16 165. 08797
−6 2
𝑚·𝑠
838.6115 × 10 𝑃𝑎·𝑠 × 1 𝑃𝑎·𝑠

*Similar computation was utilized to solve for the Reynolds number in other trials.
8. Calculation of the Fanning friction factor
1
12 12
⎡
𝑓 = 2⎢
⎢
⎣
( ) 8
𝑁𝑅𝑒
+
(𝐴+𝐵)
1
1.5
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎦
16
⎡ ⎤ 16
⎢
where 𝐴 = ⎢2. 457𝑙𝑛
⎢ ( )7
1
0.9
ϵ
+0.27 𝐷
⎥
⎥
⎥
and 𝐵 = ( )
37530
𝑁𝑅𝑒
⎣ 𝑁𝑅𝑒
⎦
Using the calculated values for Reynolds numbers as well as available data for the
diameter and surface roughness of the pipe,
1
12
⎡ ⎤
⎢ ⎥
⎢ 12 ⎥
𝑓 = 2⎢
⎢
( 8
)
16 165.08797
+
⎧⎡
1

⎤
16
16⎫
1.5 ⎥
⎥
−3
= 6. 8783 × 10
⎢2.457𝑙𝑛 1
⎥ +( 37530 )
⎢ ⎨⎢⎣ ( 7
)
0.9 0.0017 𝑚𝑚
+0.27 16 𝑚𝑚 ⎥ 16 165.08797
⎬ ⎥
⎣ ⎩ 16 165.08797 ⎦ ⎭ ⎦

*Similar computation was utilized to solve for the Fanning friction factor in other
trials.
Appendix C.
Documentation During the Experiment Proper

Preparation: Preparation of the necessary materials and equipment, including the Reynolds
Apparatus (FME31) on top of a hydraulic bench, a thermometer, a stopwatch, and the 1000
mL beaker and graduated cylinder used to measure the flow rate for each trial and diameter.

Filling the Test Pipe: The test pipe was filled by starting the hydraulic bench, and opening
the control valve and drain valve. Also, the flow control valve was opened to purge the
trapped air in the test pipe.
 Injection of Ink: The ink was injected into the test pipe by opening the iodine injection
valve.

Observation of Type of Flow: The type of flow was then observed as the control valve and
drain valve is adjusted.