Comparison of Newton Raphson and Hard Darcy methods for gravity main nonlinear water network

A. Saad, Hasan Ahweedi, HusamEL DinAbdulkaleq, A. Khaleel, A. Abdulsalam
{"title":"Comparison of Newton Raphson and Hard Darcy methods for gravity main nonlinear water network","authors":"A. Saad, Hasan Ahweedi, HusamEL DinAbdulkaleq, A. Khaleel, A. Abdulsalam","doi":"10.9790/1684-1403030717","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: A water network of 24 pipes depending on mainly gravity and covers an area of 3.78 square kilometers was taken an as a case study to test and compare the analysis. The governing equation of this network are internal flow in pipe equations, which consist of the continuity equation, the modified Bernoulli's equation, and the head loss due to the length of the pipe. The three equations are nonlinear algebraic equations because of the square power of the discharge in the head loss equations, which need to be solved numerically. Hard Darcy method and Newton Raphson method are used to solve the system of nonlinear equations, and to compare the solution.So, twenty four nonlinear equations (nine Bernoulli's equations and fifteen continuity equations) in twenty four unknowns discharges were got by these two method by using MATLAB code. There are not differences in the resulted discharges between Hard Darcy and Newton Raphson methods. Also, it was found that Newton Raphson was faster than Hard Darcy Method when they compared by the number of iteration. The final solution of the discharges have tested by the basic of fluid mechanics that says the summation of head losses inside a loop must be equal zero which can be seen clearly in the plots of the two methods.","PeriodicalId":14565,"journal":{"name":"IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering","volume":"18 1","pages":"07-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9790/1684-1403030717","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract: A water network of 24 pipes depending on mainly gravity and covers an area of 3.78 square kilometers was taken an as a case study to test and compare the analysis. The governing equation of this network are internal flow in pipe equations, which consist of the continuity equation, the modified Bernoulli's equation, and the head loss due to the length of the pipe. The three equations are nonlinear algebraic equations because of the square power of the discharge in the head loss equations, which need to be solved numerically. Hard Darcy method and Newton Raphson method are used to solve the system of nonlinear equations, and to compare the solution.So, twenty four nonlinear equations (nine Bernoulli's equations and fifteen continuity equations) in twenty four unknowns discharges were got by these two method by using MATLAB code. There are not differences in the resulted discharges between Hard Darcy and Newton Raphson methods. Also, it was found that Newton Raphson was faster than Hard Darcy Method when they compared by the number of iteration. The final solution of the discharges have tested by the basic of fluid mechanics that says the summation of head losses inside a loop must be equal zero which can be seen clearly in the plots of the two methods.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重力主非线性水网的Newton Raphson法与Hard Darcy法比较
摘要:以面积3.78平方公里、以重力为主的24条管网为例,进行试验对比分析。该管网的控制方程为管内流动方程,由连续性方程、修正伯努利方程和管道长度引起的水头损失组成。由于水头损失方程中有放电功率的平方,这三个方程都是非线性代数方程,需要进行数值求解。采用Hard Darcy法和Newton Raphson法求解非线性方程组,并对其解进行了比较。利用MATLAB代码,用这两种方法得到了24个未知放电中的24个非线性方程(9个伯努利方程和15个连续性方程)。硬达西法与牛顿-拉夫森法所得放电量无差异。通过迭代次数的比较,发现Newton Raphson算法比Hard Darcy算法更快。用流体力学的基本原理对放电的最终解进行了检验,即回路内水头损失的总和必须等于零,这在两种方法的图中可以清楚地看到。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
An Evaluation OfSoil Condition And Flood Risk For Road Network Of Bangladesh—Compiled From Engineering Soil Maps And Digital Elevation Model Improved Limiting Criteria for Deflection in Multi-Story Buildings Subjected to Aerodynamic Load Study on Eco-Friendly Concrete Blocks without Cement and Curing Evaluation of High Performance Concrete by Partial Replacement of Cement with Silica Fume Natural Sand and Manufactured Sand Multi Response Optimization TIG welding parameters for dissimilar weld of MONEL 400 and AISI 304 using RSM
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1