Scuba Forum / General / January 2004
Law of communicating tubes
|
|
Thread rating:  |
mike gray, CID - 17 Jan 2004 14:58 GMT Can someone please state (Bernoulli's?) Law of Communicating Tubes as applied to elastic fluids?
(yes, it is scuba related)
Matthias Voss - 17 Jan 2004 16:38 GMT "mike gray, CID" schrieb:
> Can someone please state (Bernoulli's?) Law of Communicating Tubes as > applied to elastic fluids? > > (yes, it is scuba related) Never heard of. It would be difficult though, probably, because of variations of velocity of sound, and the related influence of Machs number.
This variation with density is what really limits gas flow in your throat with heavy exertion, when SAV reaches values of about 180 l/min.
This is based on air as a breathing gas, and a thoracic passage of 19 mm. Related studies with german S.E.A.L.S. showed a discontinuity of the respiratory quotient when this effort was reached, in a controlled submerged chamber experiment, where the guys had to swim against a settable resistance under full respiratory monitoring.
Does this about meet the problem area you were mentioning ?
Matthias
Popeye - 17 Jan 2004 18:35 GMT >From: "mike gray, CID" mikegrayCID@worldnut.nut >Date: 1/17/04 9:58 AM Eastern Standard Time [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >(yes, it is scuba related) Probably not.
Popeye "Naked force has settled more issues in history than any other factor.The contrary opinion 'violence never solves anything' is wishful thinking at its worst."
bullshark - 17 Jan 2004 20:34 GMT >Can someone please state (Bernoulli's?) Law of Communicating Tubes as >applied to elastic fluids? "For all tubes constructed of silly putty, it shall forthwith be deemed unlawful for said tubes to communicate. When one, either, or both tubes are constructed of any other material, this law shall not apply."
safe diving,
bullshark
bullshark - 17 Jan 2004 22:55 GMT >Can someone please state (Bernoulli's?) Law of Communicating Tubes as >applied to elastic fluids? > >(yes, it is scuba related) AFAIK, it is not Bernoullis Law of communicating tubes.
However the bernoulli effect ( high velocity = low pressure ) can provide some entertaining experiments.
I can't say it very well but I'll try:
(In a Karst:) Any number of tubes connected (communicating) to the same supply will all have the same level no matter what their shape, routing or length.
A long piece of clear tubing filled with water is a great way to get a deck on one side of a house to be exactly the same elevation as a deck on the other. Your helper keeps the fluid level on his end exactly even with the deck. Wherever your side ends up is exactly the same elevation.
(In a freshwater Karst at the beach:) It gets interesting when you fill one side of a U-shaped tube with saltwater and the other with sweet. One side is deeper than the other in that case, but if you remove any water, both sides will move the same amount, no matter which side you withdraw from.
(Either of the above when the wind blows:) The Bernoulli effect comes into play when you blow over the top of one tube. The pressure is reduced in that tube so it rises, and the other side falls.
safe diving,
bullshark
Jan-Olov Newborg - 18 Jan 2004 08:42 GMT > >Can someone please state (Bernoulli's?) Law of Communicating Tubes as > >applied to elastic fluids? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > However the bernoulli effect ( high velocity = low pressure ) > can provide some entertaining experiments. This Professor Physics shows that "The Bernoulli Effect" is a misunderstanding:
http://muweb.millersv.edu/~jdooley/macro/macrohyp/eulerap/eulap.htm
Down the page Professor Dooley writes:
"One confusing detail about Bernoulli's equation needs discussion: In elementary treatments it is often stated that, because of Bernoulli's equation, high velocity causes low pressure. This is like saying that the high velocity of bullet leaving a gun caused the low pressure of the gas outside the barrel of the gun. The field treatment embodied in Euler's and Bernoulli's equations does not discuss cause and effect. The field view tells us what parameters "go together" without implying that one causes the other. If we trace back to the roots of these equations in Newton's laws, we can extract a cause and effect statement: Forces are said to cause accelerations. In the same sense, pressure gradients cause changes in velocity; not the other way around."
Jan-Olov Newborg
mike gray, CID - 18 Jan 2004 16:09 GMT > Can someone please state (Bernoulli's?) Law of Communicating Tubes as > applied to elastic fluids? > > (yes, it is scuba related) Let me be more specific.
Several nineteenth century mixed gas scuba systems used what was described as "Bernoulli's Law of Communicating Tubes as applied to elastic fluids" to control the gas mix. These rigs used two (or more) gases at calculated pressure differentials feeding the main breathing tube through tubes of a calculated diameter, the result being a predicted gas mix. i.e. doubles, one tank containing Oxygen the other containing Helium, yields heliox of a specific mix depending on the pressures and the diameters of the manifold leading to the mixing point.
This was not theory, it was practice, and this "law" was stated and used by several different designers, some unknown to one another.
So I decided to do some calculations myself. But, like the Moche system for making hollow gold beads, it seems to be forever lost in antiquity.
Scott - 18 Jan 2004 16:24 GMT > Let me be more specific. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > So I decided to do some calculations myself. But, like the Moche system > for making hollow gold beads, it seems to be forever lost in antiquity. This would be fairly simple to set up and test, which would give a baseline from which to extrapolate other diameters. What do you do about the changing ambient pressure, or are you going to feed this device with a 1st stage regulator? Constant flow or demand?
There are a number of formulae for calculating gas or liquid flow through orifice of varying diameters, but these are really only jumping off points, as I am sure you know.
mike gray, CID - 18 Jan 2004 20:28 GMT >> Let me be more specific. >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > orifice of varying diameters, but these are really > only jumping off points, as I am sure you know. Yeah, that's why I can't seem to back into the formula. Not only ambient, but the pressure ratio between tanks changes as tanks flow.
I can't find any references to the principle after WW I, which is when high pressure tanks came into use. I suspect the law I'm looking for is only practical when the pressure at each communicating tube (i.e. tank pressure) is constant, but I really don't know.
What also baffles me is that even if the law does not apply for fixed volume reservoir-fed systems, it should not have disappeared completely. Unless it was a hypothesis that was untrue in the first place.
Damn, I hate store-bought gear!
But the El Stroko Guapo Mk One regulator-less rig will dive this year for sure. It just won't be using elemental gases mixed on the go.
Matthias Voss - 18 Jan 2004 21:21 GMT "mike gray, CID" schrieb:
> >> Let me be more specific. > >> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > only practical when the pressure at each communicating tube (i.e. tank > pressure) is constant, but I really don't know. I think the pressures should be about equal, so that the calibrated mix ist done settable diameter of the source tubes. The question is, will the flow be subsonic, or critical mass flow.
If subsonic, gasses may be regarded as imcompressible ( rather incompressed), when velocity is beyond 0.6 mach ( according to my book of engineering phsyics). If its beyond, things will be nonlinear, and/or turbulent.
If it is sonic flow, it may be much easier to calculate, but in any case you would have to consider the different sonic velocities.
You'd need a relief valve as well, probably ;-)
Matthias
Lee Bell - 19 Jan 2004 01:40 GMT > Yeah, that's why I can't seem to back into the formula. Not only > ambient, but the pressure ratio between tanks changes as tanks flow. It doesn't if you use a couple of first stages. Using ones with external spring adjustments gives you the abilty to vary the relative pressures and the mix.
> I can't find any references to the principle after WW I, which is when > high pressure tanks came into use. I suspect the law I'm looking for is > only practical when the pressure at each communicating tube (i.e. tank > pressure) is constant, but I really don't know. Hence the idea of employing first stages.
> What also baffles me is that even if the law does not apply for fixed > volume reservoir-fed systems, it should not have disappeared completely. > Unless it was a hypothesis that was untrue in the first place. What I found relative to the law was consistent with what Bullshark said, ie the equal height regardless of shape or path. When you threw in "as applied to elastic liquids, I no longer knew how it would apply unless, somehow, the movement of water in tubes is used to activate some form of valve which, in turn, allows you to maintain a constant feed pressure.
Lee
mike gray, CID - 19 Jan 2004 14:10 GMT >> Yeah, that's why I can't seem to back into the formula. Not only >> ambient, but the pressure ratio between tanks changes as tanks flow. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Hence the idea of employing first stages. I understand what yer saying, and it would prolly work, but the whole idea of the ESG Mk 1 is to eliminate regulators. Regulators are unnecessary complications that increase drag and introduce failure points, and are best left nailed to the barn wall.
Lee Bell - 20 Jan 2004 00:41 GMT > I understand what yer saying, and it would prolly work, but the whole > idea of the ESG Mk 1 is to eliminate regulators. Regulators are > unnecessary complications that increase drag and introduce failure > points, and are best left nailed to the barn wall. So put them in a different case and call them something else. You're either going to have a constant flow device with horrible waste or a regulator of some kind even if it's manual. The only solution I can think of that does not rely on a regulator is to Use nozzles that give the same flow rate from the same pressure. Adjust the mix in one of the tanks to achieve the desired mix. This way, both drain at the same rate and, while the rate of flow might change, the resultant mix will be consistent.
Lee
Greg Mossman - 20 Jan 2004 17:54 GMT > So put them in a different case and call them something else. You're either > going to have a constant flow device with horrible waste or a regulator of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > desired mix. This way, both drain at the same rate and, while the rate of > flow might change, the resultant mix will be consistent. A constant flow device is also a regulator, it's just not a demand regulator. Avoid the horrible waste by scrubbing out the CO2 and rebreathing your exhalations. I bet no one ever thought of that before.
mike gray, CID - 20 Jan 2004 20:12 GMT > A constant flow device is also a regulator, it's just not a demand > regulator. In scuba, when we say "regulator" we always mean "automatic regulator" of which a demand regulator is the more common. But you are technically correct.
> Avoid the horrible waste by scrubbing out the CO2 and > rebreathing your exhalations. I bet no one ever thought of that before. Works great until the partial pressure of the O2 in the exhaled gas drops below .17 or so.
Then ya need to replace consumed O2 from a bottle with pressure and orifice determined by Bernoulli's Law of Communicating Tubes.
Which brings us full circle.
And shame on us all that some frenchie is the only one that knew the answer!
Scott - 21 Jan 2004 06:32 GMT > And shame on us all that some frenchie is the only one that knew the answer! Frenchies know a lot of things;
How to win wars or deal with radical Moores aint among them.
Lee Bell - 21 Jan 2004 13:03 GMT "mike gray, CID" wrote
> And shame on us all that some frenchie is the only one that knew the answer!
With all due respecty to froggy, it was the question rather than the answer that was difficult. The formula he provided was not Bernoulli's law of communicating tubes. Bullshark stated that earlier. In fact, a communicating tube device is used to demonstrate the effect of his theorum, a theorum.
Here's a site that you might also find useful. http://astron.berkeley.edu/~jrg/ay202/node13.html
Lee
H. Huntzinger - 19 Jan 2004 14:42 GMT > > There are a number of formulae for calculating gas or liquid flow through > > orifice of varying diameters, but these are really [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > only practical when the pressure at each communicating tube (i.e. tank > pressure) is constant, but I really don't know. It kind of sounds like you might be mucking around with "choked nozzle flow". Might want to try those keywords to see if it leads you in your desired direction.
-hh
Matthias Voss - 18 Jan 2004 19:38 GMT A mixing tool from Airway, Cyprus, was shown some years ago which should mix from HP bottles based on the same principle.
It incorporated a sort of Vortex mixing chamber, and a pp-meter for Oxygen.
Matthias
"mike gray, CID" schrieb:
> Let me be more specific. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > So I decided to do some calculations myself. But, like the Moche system > for making hollow gold beads, it seems to be forever lost in antiquity. rnf2 - 18 Jan 2004 21:47 GMT > like the Moche system > for making hollow gold beads, it seems to be forever lost in antiquity. Hollow gold beads? How do they make hollow chocolate easter eggs??? Same way...
rhys
froggy - 20 Jan 2004 18:33 GMT > > Can someone please state (Bernoulli's?) Law of Communicating Tubes as > > applied to elastic fluids? [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > So I decided to do some calculations myself. But, like the Moche system > for making hollow gold beads, it seems to be forever lost in antiquity. My training in these matters dates back a long time but I will try.
I assume that this is essentially based on Bernouilli s formula as applied to "perfect fluids" (non-viscous fluids, not sure about the proper wording in English).
For the application you describe, this should be a correct approximation. Viscosity will become an issue as pressure increases so that might explain why no reference is made to Bernouilli s law when high-pressure gases were used.
I also understand that you can neglect the impact of gases compressibility for mach numbers below 0.3 which should also be the case for the application you describe.
I assume that no significant differences in elevation exist in the circuit you describe.
So the law states that for a steady flow of gas in a tube, at constant elevation:
static pressure + 1/2 x density x velocity2 = total pressure = constant
In the tank you may assume that velocity is zero, thus the constant is know to be equal to the tank s pressure. So we have :
static pressure + 1/2 x density x velocity2 = tank pressure
At the exit point of the tube pressure is whatever it is, but from your example I assume it is known. So we have :
exit pressure + 1/2 x exit density x velocity2 = tank pressure
exit density x velocity2 = 2 x (tank pressure - exit pressure)
velocity2 = 2 x (tank pressure - exit pressure) / exit density
If I recal correctly density is proportional to pressure, at a given temperature (we assume a perfect gas) :
exit density = constant1 x exit pressure
velocity2 = 2 x (tank pressure - exit pressure) / (constant1 x exit pressure)
For a given set of tank pressure and exit pressure, this is a constant. If the exit pressure changes but remains low compared to the tank's pressure, this will be about equal to :
velocity2 = 2 x tank pressure / (constant1 x exit pressure)
velocity = square root of : 2 x constant1 x tank pressure / exit pressure
So we have a direct relationship (non-linear) between velocity and pressure ratios
And flow = area x velocity (expressed as a volume per unit of time)
So for a given gas :
flow = area x square root of : 2 x constant1 x tank pressure / exit pressure
So you can control the flow of each gas, using either tank pressure or tube diameters of each gas circuit.
Limitations will come from changes in tank pressure as it empties (I imagine that some people must have tried to link manifolds - area - to pressure gauges), from the fact that the exit pressure is not actually constant when you dive, and may not be that small relative to the tanks pressure.
Sorry if what I wrote is trivial or off-subject. And I may well have made more than a few mistakes (I am re-discovering it as I write).
I could post some links but they would be in French. I am sure you have researched that on your side as well.
Hope this helps,
Froggy
mike gray, CID - 20 Jan 2004 20:19 GMT >> > Can someone please state (Bernoulli's?) Law of Communicating Tubes as >> > applied to elastic fluids? [quoted text clipped - 95 lines] > Sorry if what I wrote is trivial or off-subject. And I may well have > made more than a few mistakes (I am re-discovering it as I write). BINGO! That is obviously the set of calculations I was looking for. Not that I understand them, but they are clearly it.
> I could post some links but they would be in French. I am sure you > have researched that on your side as well. German, Russian, or - preferably - English.
Thanks very much.
froggy - 21 Jan 2004 08:49 GMT > BINGO! That is obviously the set of calculations I was looking for. Not > that I understand them, but they are clearly it. In essence it means that in a flow, all other things being equal, pressure will decrease when velocity increases (but the relationship is not linear).
This actually is a bit counter-intuitive. For instance when your car moves, part of the air is forced down under the car. The section through which this air is channeled decreases and its velocity increases. As a result (Bernoulli s law) its pressure DECREASES and the car is sucked down, improving its handling. Intuitively I would have thought that, as the air is forced into a narrower passage, its pressure would increase.
BTW, I might well be wrong so please double-check before you use that for any life-sustaining apparatus!
> > I could post some links but they would be in French. I am sure you > > have researched that on your side as well. > > German, Russian, or - preferably - English. In English: http://www.princeton.edu/~asmits/Bicycle_web/Bernoulli.html
I found a very clear and well-written article in the French Yahoo! encyclopedia but it does not seem to exist in the English version.
Type Bernoulli + law in google and will get many results as well.
Всего наилучшего! Vsego nayluchtchevo!
|
|
|