Travising Experiment Report

Introduction The objective of this experiment was to create a viable model of a tank draining apparatus consisting of two geometric tank sections connected to tubes of varying lengths and diameters. The derived model represents the height as a function of time as the water level drops. The model generated did not accurately depict the tank draining and exhibited a large dichotomy between the two shapes of the tank apparatus. This could be due to several factors such as incorrect assumptions made in the beginning stages and left-out correcting factors, but it all boils down to an over-simplified model. Experimental Equipment and Procedures The tank draining apparatus consists of a cylindrical upper portion (16" ID X 12" height) and a conical

Gravity causes the water to convert its potential energy into kinetic energy. Torricelli's law, dh/dt=(-A)/a √2gy, equates the loss of potential energy to the gain of kinetic energy2. At larger diameters, friction is essentially negligible, and Torricelli's law is an accurate estimate. For example, if the tank consisted of the upper cylindrical portion only (a straight piece of smooth piping), Torricelli's law could be used. Due to the decrease in diameter from the tank draining apparatus to the connecting tubing, a portion of the potential energy is converted into friction loss. Therefore, Torricelli's law is invalid and a friction factor is needed. The derived cylindrical model: 〖dh/dt〗_cylinder=-√(2gh_1-2gh_f ) is synonymous with Torricelli's law except for the addition of friction and the removal of the areas. The derived conical model: 〖dh/dt〗_cone=-(A_2 √(2gh_1-2gh_f ))/12[A+πh(0.124h+0.159)] is also similar to Torricelli's law except it is more complex due to the changing radius as a function of the changing height.

As the tubing diameters increased, the time to drain the tank decreased. When comparing tubing with the same lengths, there is a correlation between amount of friction loss and the time it takes to drain the tank. In this case, as the diameters increased, the friction loss and time decreased. This is a logical phenomenon because there is less friction loss at larger diameters. This notion is the

I recommend larger diameter tubing for faster draining and smaller diameter tubing for slower draining. Because the length of the tubing only effects the draining slightly, I recommend varying the tubing length for refining drain time. I conclude that the model would not be a viable representation of the experiment. The tee, reducer, and bushing friction factors were disregarded in the model calculations. This was due to the confusion in the directions. I recommend, the addition of area calculations in the cylindrical section and friction loss calculations for the tee, reducer, and bushing. These factors will increase the accuracy of the model and make it a more practical representation of the