was not referring to a theoretical validation, rather the correspondence of the calcs with actual test results
typical calcs have a fairly large margin of error, which is ok given their intended use
- the problem for us is that the inaccuracy increases as the size decreases
-> and there are many assumptions that must be made in the characterization of some of the bits and pieces
and then the real bugger:
you need
accurate head loss curves for the wb, rad, and res (if used)
I am aware of only one source for such data, though pHaestus is ramping up
e.g.
note that this is a test result rather than a calculation