United States or Morocco ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
D'Aubuisson's formula would have given p1 p = 0.284 atm., and M. Arson's would have given p1 p = 0.4329 atm. Second series of experiments: Conduit composed of wrought-iron pipes, with joints as in the first experiments. Cent. Cent. It is clear that these experiments give very small values for the coefficient.
He has represented the results of his experiments by the binomial formula, au + bu squared, and gives values for the coefficients a and b, which diminish with an increase in diameter, but would indicate greater losses of pressure than D'Aubuisson's formula.
Gothard Tunnel, has made some experiments on the air conduit of this tunnel, the results of which he has kindly furnished to the author. These lead to values for the coefficient b1 appreciably less than that which is contained implicitly in D'Aubuisson's formula.
The divergence from the results which D'Aubuisson's formula would give is due to the fact that his formula was determined with very small pipes. The divergence from the results obtained by M. Arson's formula does not arise from a difference in size, as this is taken into account. The author considers that it may be attributed to the fact that the pipes for the St.
M. Deviller, in his Rapport sur les travaux de percement du tunnel sous les Alpes, states that the losses of pressure observed in the air pipe at the Mont Cenis Tunnel confirm the correctness of D'Aubuisson's formula; but his reasoning applies to too complicated a formula to be absolutely convincing. Quite recently M. E. Stockalper, engineer-in-chief at the northern end of the St.
Word Of The Day