CurlyDave
Elite Member
if I plug the vent on the top of the holding tank installed 10 feet BELOW the top one. I thought it would kind of step up the pressure...
There are a couple of possibilities, none good.
If you actually plug the vent completely, it is certainly possible to pressurize the lower tank, which runs the risk of bursting it. It is only built to withstand unpressurized water inside it.
Even worse, if you withdraw water from the tank faster than the inlet can make it up, you will place the tank under vacuum and run the risk of collapsing it when you open a water faucet down below.
Holding tanks are designed for storage of water -- they are neither pressure nor vacuum vessels.
I propose that the reduction in pipe size as they neared the nozzle only reduced the effectiveness of the water cannon by creating more loss due to friction. It was likely cheaper to use smaller pipe and easier to move around. The nozzle itself is where the high flow/low velocity is switched to low flow/high velocity. Would have been great fun to run a cannon like that.
I think Highbeam is right on this. By tapering down the very tip of a pipe discharge velocity can be increased, but it is not done by slowly reducing pipe size in steps. For a given pressure and flow rate it is possible to calculate exactly the pipe shape which will produce the maximum discharge velocity of water. The reduction is not quite the shape most people think, and is surprisingly short. For a good example, examine a fire hose nozzle which is designed to produce the maximum water velocity and distance of travel.
The nozzle is typically only a few pipe diameters in length.
There are a couple of possibilities, none good.
If you actually plug the vent completely, it is certainly possible to pressurize the lower tank, which runs the risk of bursting it. It is only built to withstand unpressurized water inside it.
Even worse, if you withdraw water from the tank faster than the inlet can make it up, you will place the tank under vacuum and run the risk of collapsing it when you open a water faucet down below.
Holding tanks are designed for storage of water -- they are neither pressure nor vacuum vessels.
I propose that the reduction in pipe size as they neared the nozzle only reduced the effectiveness of the water cannon by creating more loss due to friction. It was likely cheaper to use smaller pipe and easier to move around. The nozzle itself is where the high flow/low velocity is switched to low flow/high velocity. Would have been great fun to run a cannon like that.
I think Highbeam is right on this. By tapering down the very tip of a pipe discharge velocity can be increased, but it is not done by slowly reducing pipe size in steps. For a given pressure and flow rate it is possible to calculate exactly the pipe shape which will produce the maximum discharge velocity of water. The reduction is not quite the shape most people think, and is surprisingly short. For a good example, examine a fire hose nozzle which is designed to produce the maximum water velocity and distance of travel.
The nozzle is typically only a few pipe diameters in length.