2016
DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/49/6/062009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Head loss coefficient through sharp-edged orifices

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…9 and Table 5. The second type is rack geometry as defined by Adam et al (2016c). These grids consist only of horizontal beams.…”
Section: Model Test Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…9 and Table 5. The second type is rack geometry as defined by Adam et al (2016c). These grids consist only of horizontal beams.…”
Section: Model Test Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, examples of successful application can also be found in a wide range of cases: from wind forces on photovoltaic panels (Edgar et al, 2015) to anti-icing systems for wings (Hannat et al, 2014) or hydro power intakes (Bermúdez et al, 2017;Gabl et al, 2018). This commercial code is well validated for free surface (Andersson et al, 2013;De Cesare et al, 2001) and pressurized flow conditions (Adam et al, 2016b;Adane et al, 2008;Gabl et al, 2014bGabl et al, , 2018Seibl, 2016;.…”
Section: Generalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The optimum improvement in orifice meter pressure loss and energy consumption is found at a ring diameter ratio βr = 0.5 and a normal distance Lr/D = 0.38, according to optimization results. Adam et al (2016) investigated the effect of the edge angle of a typical orifice on head losses in both directions. This angle causes unequal behavior and affects head losses.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%