Evaluation of internal surface roughness in fiberglass pipes by surface roughness instruments

Subject Areas : Article frome a thesis

Farnoush Aghaee Daneshvar ¹ , Nasser Talebbeydokhti ² , Seyed Mehdi Dehghan ³ , Seyed Mohammad Mehdi Elhamian ⁴

1 - Assistant Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Shiraz University of Technology, Shiraz, Iran
2 - Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Head of Environmental Research and Sustainable Development Center, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
3 - Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Shiraz University of Technology, Shiraz, Iran
4 - Faratec N.P. Technology Center, Farassan Industrial Group, Shiraz, Iran

Received: 2023-02-03 Accepted : 2024-02-12 Published : 2024-04-20

Keywords: Roughness parameters, Sandpaper, U-PVC pipe, Surface roughness measuring devices, glass reinforced plastic pipe (GRP),

Abstract :

Abstract Introduction: Investigation of the internal surface roughness of fluid transmission systems pipes is very important in the amount of energy loss. Different concepts and methods have been used to examine surface roughness. Some of these methods are based on roughness measurement devices and equipment in this field. Significant researches are done in surface roughness measuring in steel, copper, plastic, or coated pipes. Methods: In this study, the inner surface roughness of fiberglass pipes, has been evaluated using laboratory methods and roughness measuring devices in several diameters and two different types. Calibration and verification results of the surface roughness tester machine on sandpaper and U-PVC pipe wall surfaces are evaluated. In addition, the effect of roughness parameters and their calculated surface roughness and time using of fiberglass pipe have been investigated. Findings: According to the results, the roughness parameters Rz and Ra in the cut length of 0.8 and 2.5 respectively are suitable parameters to estimate the roughness of the inner surface of the fiberglass tube. Also, the roughness of the inner surface of biaxial tubes is lower than uniaxial tubes. In addition, in comparing the roughness of newly produced and old fiberglass pipes, the surface roughness parameters decrease due to the passage of time and the use in projects. Whereas, the roughness parameters related to the type of pipe have not changed. Conclusion: Based on the results of the Surftest SJ-210 device has best results with accuracy of the roughness height reported for fiberglass pipes is equal to 98.84%. In U-PVC, similar to fiberglass pipe, the average roughness values has been estimated with high accuracy using the Ra with a cutting length of 2.5.

References:

1. 1.    Landolfo R. Lightweight steel framed systems in seismic areas: Current achievements and future challenges. Thin-Walled Structures. 2019;140:114-31.


2. 2.    Nikuradse J. Stromungsgesetze in rauhen Rohren. vdi-forschungsheft. 1933;361:1.


3. 3. Moody LF. Friction factors for pipe flow. Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 1944;66(8):671-8.


4. 4.    Colebrook CF, Blench T, Chatley H, Essex E, Finniecome J, Lacey G, et al. Correspondence. turbulent flow in pipes, with particular reference to the transition region between the smooth and rough pipe laws.(includes plates). Journal of the Institution of Civil engineers. 1939;12(8):393-422.


5. 5.    Chadwick A, Morfett J, Borthwick M. Hydraulics in civil and environmental engineering: Crc Press; 2021.


6. 6.    Kudela H. Hydraulic losses in pipes. Wroclas University of Science and. 2012.


7. 7.    Brkić D, Praks P. Unified friction formulation from laminar to fully rough turbulent flow. Applied Sciences. 2018; 8(11):2036.


8. 8.    Rawool A, Mitra SK, Kandlikar S. Numerical simulation of flow through microchannels with designed roughness. Microfluidics and nanofluidics. 2006;2:215-21.


9. 9.    Taylor JB, Carrano AL, Kandlikar SG. Characterization of the effect of surface roughness and texture on fluid flow—past, present, and future. International journal of thermal sciences. 2006;45(10):962-8.


10. 10. Thomas T. Rough Surfaces, edited by Imperial College Press. London; 1999.


11. 11.  Ren J. Micro/nano scale surface roughness tailoring and its effect on microfluidic flow. 2013.


12. 12.  Farshad F, Rieke H, Garber J. New developments in surface roughness measurements, characterization, and modeling fluid flow in pipe. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 2001; 29(2):139-50.


13. 13. Farshad FF, Rieke H, Mauldin C, editors. Flow test validation of direct measurement methods used to determine surface roughness in pipes (OCTG). SPE Western Regional/AAPG Pacific Section Joint Meeting; 2002: OnePetro.


14. 14.  Farshad FF, Pesacreta TC. Coated pipe interior surface roughness as measured by three scanning probe instruments. Anti-Corrosion Methods and Materials. 2003; 50(1):6-16.


15. 15. Kleinstreuer C. Modern fluid dynamics: Springer; 2018.


16. 16.  Dzarma G, Adeyemi A, Taj-Liad A. Effect of Inner Surface Roughness on Pressure Drop in a Small Diameter Pip. Int J Novel Res Eng Pharm Sci. 2020; 7(1):1-8.


17. 17. Liu Y, Li J, Smits AJ. Roughness effects in laminar channel flow. Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 2019; 876:1129-45.


18. 18. Xue P, Huang Z, Chen C. Effect of Substrate Roughness on the Friction and Wear Behaviors of Laser-Induced Graphene Film. Lubricants. 2022;10(10):239.


19. 19.  Effendi MK, Soepangkat BO, Noorcahyo R, Batan IML, Wahyudi A, Harnany D, editors. An analysis of frictional coefficient and surface roughness in surface grinding of SKD 11 tool steel using Minimum Quantity Lubrication (MQL) and dry techniques. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; 2021: IOP Publishing.


20. 20. Khaday S, Li K-W, Peng L, Chen C-C. Relationship between friction coefficient and surface roughness of stone and ceramic floors. Coatings. 2021;11(10):1254.


21. 21.  Farshad FF, Rieke HH. Surface-roughness design values for modern pipes. SPE Drilling & Completion. 2006; 21(03):212-5.


22. 22.  Manual A. M45: Fiberglass Pipe Design. American Water Works Association; 2005.


23. 23.  Raja J, Muralikrishnan B, Fu S. Recent advances in separation of roughness, waviness and form. Precision Engineering. 2002; 26(2):222-35.


24. 24.  Muralikrishnan B, Raja J. Computational surface and roundness metrology: Springer Science & Business Media; 2008.


25. 25.  Fadzil MA, Prakasa E, Fitriyah H, Nugroho H, Affandi AM, Hussein S. Validation on 3D surface roughness algorithm for measuring roughness of psoriasis lesion. International Journal of Biomedical and Biological Engineering. 2010; 4(3):82-7.


26. 26.  Blunt L, Jiang X. Advanced techniques for assessment surface topography: development of a basis for 3D surface texture standards" surfstand": Elsevier; 2003.


27. 27.  ASME B46.1. Surface texture—surface roughness, waviness, and lay. 1995.


28. 28. Iso E. 4288–Geometrical product specifications (GPS)–Surface texture: profile method–Rules and procedures for the assessment. 1996.


29. 29.  Iso E. 4287–Geometrical product specifications (GPS)–Surface texture: profile method–terms, definitions and surface texture parameters. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland. 1997.


30. 30.  DIN4768/1. Determination of Surface Roughness of Parameters Ra, Rz, and Rmax by means of Electrical Stylus Instruments. Deutsche Inst fuer Normung eV Berlin; 1987.


31. 31. Mitutoyo productivity quality INC. Surface Finish Analysis, Mitutoyo corporation 80th anniversary since 1934. 2014; 1-58.


32. 32.  Mitutoyo America corporation. Quick guide to surface roughness measurement, Reference guide for laboratory and workshop Bulletin. 2016; 2229, 1-888-MITUTOYO (1-888-648-8869).


33. 33. Adams T, Grant C, Watson H. A simple algorithm to relate measured surface roughness to equivalent sand-grain roughness. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Mechatronics. 2012; 1(2):66-71.


34. 34.  Kandlikar SG, Schmitt D, Carrano AL, Taylor JB. Characterization of surface roughness effects on pressure drop in single-phase flow in minichannels. Physics of Fluids. 2005; 17(10):100606.


35. 35.  Darcy H. Recherches expérimentales relatives au mouvement de l'eau dans les tuyaux: Mallet-Bachelier; 1857.


36. 36. Kandlikar SG. Single-phase liquid flow in minichannels and microchannels.  Heat transfer and fluid flow in minichannels and microchannels. 2: Elsevier Oxford, UK; 2006. p. 87.


37. 37.  Brown CA. Introduction to surface roughness measurement roughness measurement guidebook.  OLYMPUS Corporation Shinjuku Monolith, Tokyo 163-0914, Japan. N8600858-102020.


38. 38. Mitutoyo corporation user’s manual. Surface roughness tester SJ-210, No. 99MBB122A2, SERIES No. 178.


39. 39.  Mitutoyo America corporation. Surface roughness measurement, Practical tips for laboratory and workshop Bulletin, 1984, 1-888-MITUTOYO (1-888-648-8869). 2009.


40. 40.  Sheen S, Bao G, Cooke P. Food surface texture measurement using reflective confocal laser scanning microscopy. Journal of food science. 2008; 73(5):E227-E34.


41. 41.  Kessels PHL. Engineering toolbox for structural-acoustic design applied to MRI-scanners. 2003.