This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Redrose64 (talk | contribs) at 22:45, 25 June 2015 (→Recent edits to Darcy friction factor formulae: blocked). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:45, 25 June 2015 by Redrose64 (talk | contribs) (→Recent edits to Darcy friction factor formulae: blocked)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Most people have liked my web sites, but for the last month, I have forgot type right. I type error and I don't know the errors. I forger typing right, so if someone can fink my errors about typing wrong and forgetting think. someone can fix the miss timing thinks. Please read my thinks and fix them if you can fix the miss thinks I typed.
Over the last few month, I forget the right typing, and some folks have helped me because I did not now the wrong things, but when I re=read the fixed thing, I then see understate there info fixed my errors. Some times when I re-read things I typed I see the errors I made, and I try to fix them.
I am old, and forget lots of stuff, and mostly type something wrong. I don't understand the section below. Harrell Geron
Welcome!
|
if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the October 2013
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Darcy friction factor formulae has been reverted.
Your edit here to Darcy friction factor formulae was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://colebrook-white.blogspot.com) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Misplaced Pages. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Misplaced Pages's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 01:50, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm XLinkBot. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page Darcy friction factor formulae, because it seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links.
Your edit here to Darcy friction factor formulae was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://colebrook-white.blogspot.com) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Misplaced Pages. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Misplaced Pages's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 04:57, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Easy and TRUE solution to Colebrook-White equations.
Starting back about two years ago, I added the solution several times, but it was always deleted. From the "f" computed, folks could compute the Left and right side of the equation and see it was right. But dumb Misplaced Pages guys did not want to test it.
Now my easy solution is being published in many countries, Japan was the first. See URL... keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1380521258
Several Pipe companies have learn my solution, but they only shared it with their company members because it the public learned it it would stop the selling of those many approximations.
The first training I have done to 100's of folks asking how it works is to solve for X in the equation X=Log(X)+10. Because of the Log function, each loop will increase the right digits by an average two to three digits. To solve this training equation, Guess an X and figure "Log(X)+10", that will approximately get about 2 correct digits. Use the answer for the next X and figure X again. Very quick you will see each loop increases the correct digits. Using XLprecision that in Excel it will compute 99 decimals in average of about 36 loops. Those beat the Explicit Newton solution, because it can not get that many correct decimals to show the left side is the same as the right side of each of the different Colebrook equations.
Excel can not do more that 15 digits, and sometimes Excel misses rounding of the 14th or 15th digits.
To solve the main Colebrook-White Equation, just let X=1/sqrt(f) and the equation will be...
X=-2*Log(Rr/3.7+2.51/Rn*X) Rr is the relative roughness, and Rn is the Reynolds Number In and average of 7 loops you will have X to 15 digits, but Excel may miss round the last digit.
This is an Excel VBA solution that works very great. Mode "2.51" is the Main Colebrook-White equation. Some of the others are listed as Text below in the Excel's VBA Function. In the Excel worksheet a Cell with =Easy(Rn,Rr) will give f. But it you want, another Cell with =Easy(Rn,Rr,,Right) ... (Enter values for Rn and Rr) (Left or Right) will give the Left or Right side on the Main equation. If you want a different "mode" like 1.74 then enter 1.74 between the second and thirded comma.
'Excel VBA Function (VBA's Log is actually Ln, so use Log10 to convert to the right Log.
'===================================================================-===================
Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).
Function Easy(Rn As Double, Rr As Double, Optional mode, Optional Find As String) As Double
'mode 2.51 1/sqrt(f)=-2*Log(Rr/3.7+2.51/Rn*1/sqrt(f))
'mode 1.74 1/sqrt(f)=1.74-2*Log(2*Rr+18.7/Rn*1/sqrt(f))
'mode 1.14 1/sqrt(f)=1.14+2*Log(1/Rr)-2*Log(1+(9.3/(Rn*Rr)*1/sqrt(f)))
'mode 9.35 1/sqrt(f)=1.14-2*Log(Rr+9.35/Rn*1/sqrt(f))
'mode 3.71 1/sqrt(f)=-2*Log(Rr/3.71+2.51/Rn*1/sqrt(f))
'mode 3.72 1/sqrt(f)=-2*Log(Rr/3.72+2.51/Rn*1/sqrt(f))
Dim A As Double, B As Double, D As Double, X As Double, F As Double, Left As Double, Right As Double
If IsMissing(mode) Then mode = 2.51
If IsMissing(Find) Then Find = ""
If Rr > Rn Then Exit Function
If Rn < 2000 Then
Easy = 64 / Rn
Exit Function
End If
L = 0
D = 3
Select Case mode
Case 2.51
A = 2.51 / Rn
B = Rr / 3.7
While X <> D
X = -2 * Log10(B + A * D)
D = -2 * Log10(B + A * X)
L = L + 1: If L > 20 Then X = D 'Excel can't go to more digits, each loop adds about two more correct digits
Wend
F = 1 / X / X
Easy = F
If Find = "Left" Then Easy = 1 / Sqr(F)
If Find = "Right" Then Easy = -2 * Log10(Rr / 3.7 + 2.51 / Rn * 1 / Sqr(F))
Case 1.74
A = 18.7 / Rn
B = 2 * Rr
While X <> D
X = 1.74 - 2 * Log10(B + A * D)
D = 1.74 - 2 * Log10(B + A * X)
L = L + 1: If L > 20 Then X = D
Wend
F = 1 / X / X
Easy = F
If Find = "Left" Then Easy = 1 / Sqr(F)
If Find = "Right" Then Easy = 1.74 - 2 * Log10(2 * Rr + 18.7 / Rn * 1 / Sqr(F))
Case 1.14:
A = 9.3 / (Rn * Rr)
B = 1.14 + 2 * Log10(1 / Rr)
While X <> D
X = B - 2 * Log10(1 + (A * D))
D = B - 2 * Log10(1 + (A * X))
L = L + 1: If L > 20 Then X = D
Wend
F = 1 / X / X
Easy = F
If Find = "Left" Then Easy = 1 / Sqr(F)
If Find = "Right" Then Easy = 1.14 + 2 * Log10(1 / Rr) - 2 * Log10(1 + (9.3 / (Rn * Rr) * 1 / Sqr(F)))
Case 9.35
A = 9.35 / Rn
B = Rr
While X <> D
X = Abs(1.14 - 2 * Log10(B + A * D))
D = Abs(1.14 - 2 * Log10(B + A * X))
L = L + 1: If L > 20 Then X = D
Wend
F = 1 / X / X
Easy = F
If Find = "Left" Then Easy = 1 / Sqr(F)
If Find = "Right" Then Easy = 1.14 - 2 * Log10(Rr + 9.35 / Rn * 1 / Sqr(F))
Case 3.71
A = 2.51 / Rn
B = Rr / 3.71
While X <> D
X = -2 * Log10(B + A * D)
D = -2 * Log10(B + A * X)
L = L + 1: If L > 20 Then X = D
Wend
F = 1 / X / X
Easy = F
If Find = "Left" Then Easy = 1 / Sqr(F)
If Find = "Right" Then Easy = -2 * Log10(Rr / 3.71 + 2.51 / Rn * 1 / Sqr(F))
Case 3.72
A = 2.51 / Rn
B = Rr / 3.72
While X <> D
X = -2 * Log10(B + A * D)
D = -2 * Log10(B + A * X)
L = L + 1: If L > 20 Then X = D
Wend
F = 1 / X / X
Easy = F
If Find = "Left" Then Easy = 1 / Sqr(F)
If Find = "Right" Then Easy = -2 * Log10(Rr / 3.72 + 2.51 / Rn * 1 / Sqr(F))
Case Else
Easy = 0
End Select
End Function
Static Function Log10(X)
Log10 = Log(X) / Log(10#)
End Function
'Solution by Harrell Geron, (Texas NRCS)
'Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).(Federal NRCS-USDA)
Colebrook-White approximations?
The United States (USDA) has now discovered my EASY and TRUE solution for each of the different Colebrook-White equations, and they say they will POST it to the USA in January.
I have posted some different methods. But I made a slight change to Japan in October, and then Japan connected to the USDA. I have worked for the NRCS-USDA since 1971, The NRCS did not want to publish my true solution, because it might stop the sale of those approximations.
My solution is how Log works when the same variable is on both sides. I change the 1/sqr(f) to X, then solve for X, which gives the f value. Excel Example: 1/sqrt(f)=-2*Log(Rr/3.7)+2.51/Rn*1/sqrt(f)) Rr is the relative roughness (e/D) and the far right was "2.51/(Rn*sqft(f))" where Rn is the Reynolds Number, and I just change it to "2.51/Rn*1/sqrt(f)" to show 1/sqrt(f) is on both sides, and I call it X. So X=-2*Log(Rr/3.7+2.51/Rn *X)
Part 1 compute b=Rr/3.7 and a=2.51/Rn and X=3, a guess for X Part 2 compute X=-2*Log(b+a*X) Part 3 if both X's are not the same then go back to Part 2 until Left X = Right X Part 4 f=1/X/X
Each step 2 will get approximately 2 to 3 more correct digits per loop
Example: Rr= 0.01494 b= 4.03783783783784E-03 Re= 4688329 a= 5.35371984346662E-07 X = 3 . X = 4.78735682642257 X = 4.78715109141833 X = 4.78715111509681 X = 4.78715111509408 X = 4.78715111509408 (Same as last X) then f = 4.36360796710116E-02
But it you guess 100 (not 3) it will take one extra loop, because the Log makes it much closer.
This was 5 loop, the average is about 7 loops, If the Loops go to 20 then Excel has made a re-rounding of the last digit.
Published?
When your new method is published in a WP:RS, let us know, and we can then consider including a brief mention of it. Dicklyon (talk) 07:18, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
I have undone your edit again. Please edit Talk:Darcy friction factor formulae to say what you're up to; maybe we can help you find a way to make an acceptable contribution. Dicklyon (talk) 08:04, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
And again you have been reverted. Perhaps you will infer that the approach you are using is not working. You can respond here if you have questions or would like advice. Dicklyon (talk) 02:41, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Reverted again today. It apparently isn't worth it to you to discuss this on the article's talk page. Why not? - Ac44ck (talk) 03:59, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- See above. - Ac44ck (talk) 14:46, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
- Ditto. - Ac44ck (talk) 19:21, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Recent edits to Darcy friction factor formulae
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. I noticed that you recently added commentary to the Darcy friction factor formulae article. While Misplaced Pages welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Thank you! : Noyster (talk), 09:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed. You have been asked four times to use the article's talk page for your additions. I've already put your latest contribution on there for you. Your most recent two edits have also removed the list of references, so your actions now have to be regarded as "disruptive editing": Noyster (talk), 10:08, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- See above. Again. - Ac44ck (talk) 05:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Darcy friction factor formulae. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:36, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Misplaced Pages's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Darcy friction factor formulae, you may be blocked from editing. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:13, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Misplaced Pages's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Darcy friction factor formulae. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:53, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Harrell Geron and original research. Thank you. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:51, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Redrose64 (talk) 22:45, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
/* Solving */
Since I got old, I miss type things. If someone can fix my text, I will like his changing, because my typing sometimes is not right. I am sure the thing is right for the whole word, but I might miss type something and I might fix the error when I re-read it. Some times I miss type the right work.
Harrell Geron