INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Of ACADEMIC RESEARCH

Vol. 3. No.1. January, 2011, Part III

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HYDRAULIC JUMP ON SERIAL DROPS

Nadjadji Anwar , Edijatno , Very Dermawan
1 1 1 1,2

Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering and Planning, Sepuluh Nopember Institute of Technology (ITS), Surabaya, 2 Water Resources Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Brawijaya, Malang (INDONESIA) ABSTRACT A hydraulic model investigation is conducted to evaluate the performance of drop structure with serial o drops. The serial drops had 45 slope that would compare with single drop structure. This paper presents the o results of the experimental studies on serial drops structure of 45 and to find out the hydraulic jump conditions at serial drops structure with 4 and 2 drops. Hydraulic model of drop structure conducted at laboratory with 100 cm high, 30 cm wide, and 5 variations of flow rates. The number of drops significantly increases the flow depth at downstream of serial drops, y2. The 2 serial drops increase y2 approximately 18.72% and 4 serial drops increase y2 about 19.81%. Key words: Hydraulic Jump, Drop Structure 1. INTRODUCTION The hydraulic jump is the transition between the supercritical and subcritical regimes of flow. This transition involved varying amounts of energy dissipation, which depended on the velocity and depth of the supercritical flow generating the jump, properties which are embodied in the Froude number of the supercritical flow. This feature of energy dissipation is perhaps the most outstanding characteristic of the jump and the reason why this hydraulic phenomenon has received such wide attention and utilization in hydraulic structures used for irrigation, hydropower and ornamental cascades. A hydraulic jump is formed whenever flow changes from supercritical to subcritical flow. In this transition from supercritical to subcritical flow, water surface rises abruptly, surface roller are formed, intense mixing occurs, air is entrained, and large amount of energy is usually dissipated. By utilizing these characteristics, a hydraulic jump can be used to dissipate energy, to mix chemicals, or to act as an aeration device [2]. Considering first the situation of relatively minor energy dissipation, or scour control such as might be desirable in irrigation canals with a small Froude number Fr, there are several simple types of hydraulic jump controls that may be employed in practice. One of the simplest is straight drop, which may be of constant width or may coincide with a channel width variation at the drop location [7]. In the present situation, such drops are preceded by subcritical flow, but a hydraulic jump is formed at the toe of the drop, in location that depends primarily on the tail water level. A very considerable body of experiment and analysis on this type of energy dissipater has been presented by Moore (1943), Rand (1955) and Dominguez (1958,1974) [7]. The straight drop spillway is commonly used in small drainage structure to dissipate energy. An aerated, free-falling nappe in a straight-drop spillway will reverse its curvature and result in a supercritical flow on the apron which will, in turn, result in a hydraulic jump [5]. Drop structure such as is installed at interval in steep channels in order to dissipate energy without scouring the channel. Energy loss EL at the base of an over fall may be 50 percent or more of the initial energy, referred to the basin floor as datum. If there is a hydraulic jump at downstream dissipating further energy, the energy loss in the entire drop structure may be very substantial [6]. The geometry of the straight drop structure can be related to the following independent variables: drop height and unit discharge [1]. Based on the fact that the drop structures dissipate energy ahead of stilling basin and its considerably reduces of the requirements of the stilling basin, it is important to conduct a research of hydraulic jump behavior on drop structure. 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS Experiments This research implemented at Hydro and Coastal Engineering Laboratory, ITS Surabaya. The serial drops o structures model of 45 slope made from acrylic with 30 cm wide and 100 cm high. The water was circulated from the laboratory sump with 5 variations of discharge, Q1=1,71 l/s, Q2=2,69 l/s, Q3=3,76 l/s, Q4=4,92 l/s, and Q5=6,14 l/s, through the V-notched weir tank, the approach channel, the serial drops section, the outlet and then back to the sump. There were 2 number variations of uniform flat-drops: 4 drops and 2 drops. Monitoring and measurements were taken at definite sections at the hydraulic model, such as: the water depth and the water flow velocity at the drop structure and downstream, and the depth and the length of hydraulic jump at the downstream. The data analysis is conducted to determine the flow conditions such as: the length of the hydraulic jump (Lj) and the height of hydraulic jump (y2) at the downstream of serial drops related to the number of drops, flow rates, and ratio of critical depth and the drop height, yc/h.

732 | www.ijar.lit.az

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Of ACADEMIC RESEARCH

0.80 m 0.40 m 1.00 m 1.00 m

Vol. 3. No. 1. January, 2011, Part III 4.50 m Outlet channel

Tank with Vnotch

Approach channel and Serial Drops Structure

15 cm 100 cm

Fig. 1. The hydraulic model set-up of serial drops structure

25 cm 100 cm 25 cm
45
o

50 cm

50 cm
45
o

45

(a) single drop

(b) 4 drops Fig. 2. Drop dimension on serial drops structure

(c) 2 drops

Drop Structure The aerated free-falling nappe in a straight drop spillway will reverse its curvature and turn smoothly into supercritical flow on the apron. Consequently, a hydraulic jump may be formed downstream. Based on his own experimental data and those of Moore and Bakhmeteff and Feodoroff, Rand found that the flow geometry at straight drop spillways can be described by functions of the drop number, which is defined as [3]:

q2 gh 3

(1)

where q is the discharge per unit width of the crest of over fall, g is the acceleration of gravity, and h is the height of the drop. The functions are [3]:
Ld 4,30D 0,27 h

(2) (3) (4)

yp h

1,00.D 0,22

y1 0,54D0,425 h

y2 (5) 1,66D 0,27 h where Ld is the drop length, that is, the distance from the drop wall to the position of the depth y1; yp is the pool depth under the nappe; y1 is the depth at the toe of the nappe or the beginning of the hydraulic jump; and y2 is the tail water depth sequent to y1.

Fig. 3. Flow geometry of a straight drop spillway [3]

B a k u , A z e r b a i j a n | 733

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Of ACADEMIC RESEARCH

Vol. 3. No.1. January, 2011, Part III

Fig. 4. Conjugate depth and distance from vertical drop at which the hydraulic jump begins (experimental data from Rand, 1955 and Dominguez, 1958) [7] The experimental data of Dominguez showed that the distance between the vertical drop and the toe of the jump is well represented by the simple relation [7]:

h Ld 3 y yc c

0.3

(6)

Rand (1943) suggested the alternative expression:

h Ld 4,3 y yc c

0.19

(7)

Using for the length of the jump the equation proposed by Dominguez (1944):

y L 18 20 1 y yc c
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

(8)

The equation from Rand and Dominguez were used to analyze theoretical result and compared with the result of observations at laboratory. The table summarized the results obtained on the hydraulic model. Table 1. The result of Rand and Dominguez equation for single drop
No. Run 1 2 3 4 5 yc (cm) 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 q 2 (cm /s) 57.54 88.59 123.81 162.75 205.09 Drop Number D -6 3.4*10 -6 8.0*10 -6 15.6*10 -6 27.0*10 -6 42.9*10 Ld (cm) Rand 14.33 18.08 21.67 25.12 28.46 Dom. 15.86 19.40 22.68 25.77 28.71 yp (cm) Rand 6.25 7.56 8.76 9.88 10.94 Rand 0.26 0.37 0.49 0.62 0.75 y1 (cm) Dom. 0.26 0.37 0.49 0.62 0.75 y2 (cm) Rand Dom. 5.53 4.23 6.98 5.43 8.36 6.59 9.70 7.73 10.99 8.83

Table 2. The result of hydraulic model of serial drops

No. Run 1 2 3 4 5 yc (cm) 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 q 2 cm /dt 57.54 88.59 123.81 162.75 205.09 Ld (cm) 4 drops 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 2 drops 39.00 43.00 41.00 44.00 49.50 yp (cm) 4 drops 6.00 5.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 2 drops 3.50 3.50 3.50 4.75 4.50 y2 (cm) 4 drops 7.00 7.69 8.75 9.57 9.53 2 drops 6.93 7.81 8.59 9.40 9.35

734 | www.ijar.lit.az

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Of ACADEMIC RESEARCH

Vol. 3. No. 1. January, 2011, Part III

Table 3. The comparison of the y1 and length of the jump (Lj) on serial drops No. Run 1 2 3 4 5 yc (cm) 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 q 2 (cm /dt) 57.54 88.59 123.81 162.75 205.09 y1 4 drops 6.00 7.50 8.50 9.50 10.00 y1 2 drops 6.50 7.50 7.50 10.50 9.50 Lj (cm) 4 drops 55.00 48.00 49.00 50.00 62.00 Lj (cm) 2 drops 67.00 84.00 93.00 95.00 100.00 Lj (cm) Dominguez 3.26 3.52 3.73 3.91 4.07

From the theorem of Rand and Dominguez, at the toe of single drop was occurs the supercritical flow with the flow depth y1. Then the flow becomes subcritical at downstream after the hydraulic jump. Whereas at the toe of serial drops, that was occurs subcritical flow because of steps along the chute face. The flow at the serial drops toe were the turbulent water because of water plunged of preceding steps and air entrainment process that could swelling the flow. After small hydraulic jump in downstream, the flow becomes a still water. Ld, yp, y1, y2 and Lj = the corresponding length of occurring y1 on single drop, flow depth in aerated area on single drop, flow depth at the toe of single drops, flow depth at downstream of single drop after hydraulic jump, and length of hydraulic jump on single drops. Ld, yp, y1, y2 and Lj = the corresponding length of occurring y1 on serial drops, flow depth in aerated area of serial drops, flow depth at the toe of serial drops, flow depth at downstream after hydraulic jump on serial drops, and length of hydraulic jump on serial drops. The relative energy loss was defined by E/E1, with E = E0 E1. The relative energy loss of single drop were 70.21%, 66.28%, 62.92%, 59.96%, and 57.30% respectively, and 63.33% in average. The relative energy loss caused by 4 serial drops were 94.09%, 92.65%, 91.71%, 90.77% and 90.29% respectively, and 91.90% in average. The relative energy loss caused by 2 serial drops were 93.60%, 92.65%, 92.64%, 89.84% and 90.75% respectively, and 91.90% in average. From the comparison between the model investigation result with the theoretical analysis of Rand and Dominguez, shown that the 4 serial drops had smaller values of Ld and yp, but had higher values of Lj and y2 and the 2 serial drops only had smaller values of yp, but had higher values of Ld, Lj and y2. On the model of serial drops, there were y1 exist almost equal with y2. The water flows were turbulent after the drops and develop the high fluctuation current. The Lj condition on serial drops was indeed longer than Lj on single drop, but the serial drops had higher efficiency to dissipate the energy. As the Fig. 5 is drawn, the relationship between Ld/yc and h/yc had the same trend for all conditions. The 4 serial drops has smaller value than Rand and Dominguez, whereas the 2 serial drops has higher value than that. The relationship of Ld/yc and h/yc could defined as: Ld/yc=0.04h/yc+2 with R = 1.00 for 4 drops, and Ld/yc=0.332h/yc+4.025 with R = 0.978 for 2 drops. Fig. 6 shown that the relationship between y2/yc and h/yc on serial drops have the same trend with Rand and Dominguez, but much higher than those. The relationship of y2/yc and h/yc could defined as: y2/yc=2.17Ln(h/yc)0.621 4.514 with R = 0.984 for 4 drops, and y2/yc=0.343(h/yc) with R = 0.987 for 2 drops.

Fig. 5. The relationship of Ld/yc and h/yc

Fig. 6. The relationship of y2/yc and h/yc

Fig. 7. The relationship of Ld/h and D

Fig. 8. The relationship of yp/h and D

B a k u , A z e r b a i j a n | 735

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL Of ACADEMIC RESEARCH

Vol. 3. No.1. January, 2011, Part III

Fig. 7. shows that the relationship between Ld/h with drop number D on serial drops had the same trend 0.177 2 with Rand and Dominguez. The relationship of Ld/h and D could defined as: Ld/h = 0.649D with R = 0.996 for 2 4 drops, and Ld/h = 4E+07D +455.3D+0.401 with R = 0.879 for 2 drops. Fig. 8. shown the relationship between yp/h with drop number D on serial drops compare with the result of 2 2 Rand. The relationship of yp/h and D could defined as: yp/h = 2E+07D -871.6D+0.061 with R = 0.765 for 4 drops, 2 and yp/h = -7E+06D +637.8D+0.031 with R = 0.733 for 2 drops. Fig. 9. exhibit the relationship between y2/h with drop number D on serial drops compare with the result of 2 2 Rand and Dominguez. The relationship of y2/h and D could defined as: y2/h = -3E+07 D + 1970.D + 0.063 with R 2 = 0.999 for 4 drops, and y2/h = -3E+07 D + 1840.D + 0.064 with R = 0.996 for 2 drops.

Fig. 9. The relationship of y2/h and D For the same value of D, the model investigations give the information that the value of Ld/h 4 drops, much smaller than Rand and Dominguez, whereas for 2 drops had the value of Ld/h higher than that. For the ratio of yp/h, model investigation of serial drops had the smaller value than Rand, whereas the ratio of y2/h, serial drops had higher value than Dominguez, but equivalent with Rand. 4. CONCLUSIONS The number of drops significantly increases the flow depth at downstream of serial drops, y2. The 2 serial drops increase y2 approximately 18.72% and 4 serial drops increase y2 about 19.81%. The serial drops had the great efficiency to dissipate the energy, approximately 92%. The drops significantly decrease the flow depth below the aerated flow region of the drops, yp. The 2 serial drops decrease yp approximately 53.73% and 4 serial drops decrease yp about 32.76%. The 4 serial drops significantly decrease the length of distance from the drops which the hydraulic jump begin, Ld, approximately 58.47%. But the 2 serial drops increases the length of distance from the drops which the hydraulic jump begin, Ld, approximately 11.38%. REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Bos, M.G. (1978), Discharge Measurement Structures, International Institute For Land Reclamation and Improvement/ILRI, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Chaudry, M.H. (1993), Open Channel Flow, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Chow, Ven Te. (1973), Open Channel Hydraulic, International Student Edition, McGraw-Hill International Book Company. Christodoulou, G.C. (1993), Energy Dissipation on Stepped Spillways, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 119, No. 5, pp. 644-650. French, H.R. (1986), Open Channel Hydraulics, International Student Edition, McGraw-Hill International Book Company. Henderson, F. M., (1966), Open Channel Flow, Mac Millon Publishing Co. Inc., New York. Montes, S. (1998), Hydraulics of Open Channel Flow, ASCE Press, Reston USA. Subramanya, (1986), Flow in Open Channel, Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi.

736 | www.ijar.lit.az