Optimization of Power Dissipation through a hydraulic jump

Pugliese, Victor*; Figueroa, Oswaldo**

*Fundacin Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla, Colombia
**Fundacin Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla, Colombia - Assessor
ARTICLE INFO
Article history:
Elaborated 13 June 2015
Key words
Hydraulic jump
Power dissipation
Subcritical flow
Supercritical flow

ABSTRACT
Purpose: Optimize the efficiency of power dissipation during the hydraulic
jump.
Method: Using a statistical technique, known as a Response Surface
Methodology (RSM), in order to optimize the response variable.
Results: Efficient power dissipation is influenced by flow rate and flume
slope. The maximum efficiency reached was 35%.
Conclusions: The maximum efficiency of power dissipation was reach
when the open channel was horizontal. The flow rate was 62 lpm, the
width channel was 7,6 cm and flow depth 1,3 cm. In this condition, the
Froude number was 3

1. Introduction
1.1. Purpose of paper
The condition of flow in an open channel can go
from a supercritical to subcritical flow due to
changes in the channel characteristics, boundary
conditions, or the presence of hydraulic
structures. This change occurs abruptly through a
hydraulic jump. A hydraulic jump is highly
turbulent, with complex internal flow patterns,
and is accompanied by a considerable loss of
energy. [1]
The amount of energy loss depends on several
variables involving flow conditions, geometric
conditions of the channel, presence of external
forces, among others.

*E-mail: vpugliese@uninorte.edu.co
**E-mail: figueroao@uninorte.edu.co

One of the most widespread uses that have the

hydraulic jump is to dissipate the energy of water
flowing over dams, weirs and other hydraulic
structures, and thereby prevent scouring of the
structures downstream. It is also used for mixing
quickly additives in the water flow for water
treatment.
It is plan to use the concepts developed in the
Course of Design of Experiments to optimize the
efficiency of power dissipation during the
hydraulic jump, and the results and conditions
operation could be scaled to larger open channels.

1.2. Theory model

Because the energy loss due to the hydraulic jump
is usually significant and unknown, we cannot use
the energy equation to relate the depths before
and after the phenomenon occurs.

Momentum is a quantity vector, and separate

equation are needed if there are flow components
in more than one direction. However, open
channel flow is usually treated as being one
dimensional, and the momentum equation is
written in the main flow direction. Consider a
volume element of an open channel between an
upstream section U and a downstream section D
as show in Figure 1.

(they are included in the cross-section areas).

However, the forces are hard to determine
experimentally. Using the energy equation,
including the loss of energy, we have,
( + +

2
2

) = ( + +

2
2

) +
(Eq. 2)

If the friction force is negligible and there are no

obstacles or contractions, is zero. So, the energy
loss is due to the hydraulic jump.

1.3. Response Surface method

Figure 1 Volume of control for conservation of

momentum equation. [1]

The element has an average cross-sectional area

of , flow velocity , and length . The
momentum within this element is . The
momentum is transferred into the element at
section at a rate and out of the element
at section at rate . The external forces
acting on this element in the same direction as the
flow are the pressure force at section , =
and the weight component sin =
sin . The external forces acting opposite to
the flow direction are the pressure force at section
, = , friction force on the channel
bed, , and any other external force, , opposite
to the flow direction. [1] For stationary flow, the
conservation of momentum equation is,
(

+ )

+ 0

+
2

=(

Response surface methodology (RSM) is a

collection of mathematical and statistical
techniques that are useful for modeling and
analysis of problems in which a response of
interest is influenced by several variables and the
objective is to optimize this response. In most RSM
problems, the form of the relationship between
the response and the independent variable is
unknown. Thus, the first step in RSM is to find a
suitable approximation for the true functional
relationship between the output variable and the
set of independent variables. A first-order model
is simple and efficient to move rapidly to a vicinity
of the optimum. Near the optimum condition, is
possible that the system has curvature; so a
second-order model bust be used to approximate
the process. [2]

2. Methodology
2.1. Material and equipment
Flume
The practical work was development in the
installations of the Hydraulic Laboratory in
Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla. It was used a
flume to produce a controllable hydraulic jump.

(Eq. 1)

This equation relates the external forces (included

the component of weight) with the depths
upstream and downstream the hydraulic jump

The flume consists of a clear-sided rectangular

working section supported on a frame, with an
inlet tank at one end. The frame is supported on
pedestals, and a jack allows the flume to be tilted

(Figure 2). The flume is designed to be used with

an Arm-field F1-10 Hydraulic Bench, which
provides a re-circulating water supply and a
volumetric measuring facility. [3]

Weir
The undershot weirs are adjustable allowing a
constant head of the upstream reservoir under
uniform flow conditions. During the experiments,
there were used two types of undershot weirs.
Figure 4 shows an undershot straight and curve
weir.

Figure 2 C4-MKII Multi-propuse Teaching Flume. [3]

Flowmeter
Provides a direct reading of the volume flowrate of
the water passing through the working section.
Overshot weir
The level in the working section of the flume may
be controlled by an overshot weir arrangement at
the exit consisting of stop logs in a slot. Stop logs
are simply added or taken away to provide the
required depth of water in the working section to
reach a subcritical flow and generate the hydraulic
jump. [3]
Pedestals and Jack
The flume is supported on a
pair of pedestals which are
bolted to the floor for
additional safety. The pedestal
at the inlet end of the working
section is fitted with a handoperated jack. This jacking
arrangement permits the slope
of the channel bed to be
manually adjusted. The jack is
operated by a handwheel and
the mechanism incorporates a
slope indicator calibrated
directly in units of % slope. [3]

Figure 4 Undershot weir used.

According the equation (1), the flowrate, the

cross-sectional area before and after the hydraulic
jump, and the slope of the channel influence the
phenomenon. Table 1 shows the design factor and
their feasible operating region.
Table 1 Feasible Operating Region.

Design Factor

Low Limit

High Limit

Flow Rate [LPM]

Overshot weir high [cm]
Flume slope [%]
Type of undershot weir

0
0
0
Straight

96
10
3
Curve

2.2. Detecting influential factors for power

dissipation
The statistical design was a screening experiment
24 . Table 2 reports the processing parameters
analyzed in the present paper. Initial values were
determined during a familiarization stage, where
trial and error experiments were conducted to
specify the experimentation window of the
process, and being sure that depths can be
measured and generate a hydraulic jump.
Figure 3 Jack and slope
indicator.

Table 2 Experimental Operating Region.

Design Factor

Low Limit

High Limit

Flow Rate [LPM]

Overshot weir high [cm]
Flume slope [%]
Type of undershot weir

40
3.5
1
Straight

50
6
2
Curve

Table 3 shows the runs used during the screening

stage. The high and low values are identified with
the symbols (+) and (-). The runs were
implemented randomly
Table 3 Factorial design 24.

Run

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Design Factors
Flow
rate
(A)

Overshot
weir
high (B)

Flume
slope
(C)

Undershot
weir
(D)

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

2.3. The method of steepest ascent

The method of steeps ascent is a procedure for
moving sequentially along the path of steepest
ascent, that is, in the direction of maximum
increase in the response. [2] By definition, the
direction of maximum increase in a point of a
function is the gradient of the function evaluated
in the point.
If the fitted first-order model is
= 0 +

=1

2.4. Analysis of second order response

surface
After obtaining an experimental region with the
presence of a local maximum, an model to
approximate the natural curvature of the process
is done. Regression analysis is performed and the
optimal combination of parameters is defined.

2.5. Measurement of the response variable

The response variable was the efficiency of power
dissipation. This is the percentage of initial
(upstream the hydraulic jump) energy that is loss
when the supercritical flow becomes subcritical
flow. Equation (2) permits compute the energy
loss ( []) using the datum ( ), the flow depth
() and the flow velocity (), upstream and
downstream of hydraulic jump.

Figure 5 Measurement of response variable.

Figure 5 show two millimeter rulers that were

used in order to measure the flow depth.
Downstream ruler was positioned where visibly
the flow was stable. The position of each ruler, and
the bottom slope were used to calculate the
datum, taking as zero the level of the channel end.
Flow velocity was computed using the registered
flow and the cross-section area (flow depth times
channel width).
The efficiency of power dissipation was calculated
using,
[%] =

(Eq. 3)

(Eq. 4)

Where, is left side of equation (2).

The gradient is defined by the coefficients .

4

3.2. Critical factors that affect Power

dissipation

3. Results
3.1. Measurement results
Table 4 reports the efficiency of power dissipation,
Reynold number and Froude number for each run
are displayed in Table 4. The Reynold number
confirms that flow conditions were turbulent in all
runs. The Froude number corresponds at flow
conditions before the hydraulic jump occurs, and
is necessary a supercritical flow ( > 1).
Table 4 Results for screening stage.

Run

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Measured Variables
Efficient
Power
Dissipation

Reynolds
Number

Froude
Number

0,17

28611

2,9

0,31

35461

4,1

0,21

27101

3,7

0,31

34894

4,0

0,01

25000

1,6

0,03

30494

1,7

0,06

26933

2,2

0,15

32867

2,6

0,06

26154

1,7

0,16

32075

1,9

0,19

28652

3,3

0,30

34722

3,5

0,17

27000

2,2

0,20

32244

2,1

0,09

27067

2,2

0,16

33467

2,7

The effects of each factor on Table 2, and the

interactions between them, were computed and
displayed in a normal plot graphic, in order to
define possible factors that may have a significant
influence at the response variable. See Figure 6.
Figure 6 permits to lump interactions as
experimental error. Despite of undershot weir (D)
appears to have a little effect in the efficient
power dissipation, it was included in the ANOVA
analysis.
According to Table 5, the independent variables
that have a significant effect in the response
variable are flow rate and flume slope.
The approximation of the response surface is
= 0,162 + 0,041 0,053

Eq. (5)

Where,
1 =

[] 45
5

3 =

1,5%
0,5%

Figure 6 Normal plot of effect in efficiency of power dissipation.

Table 5 ANOVA Analysis.

SoV

SS

DoF

A
0,0267
1
B
0,0085
1
C
0,0440
1
D
0,0006
1
Error
0,0555
11
Total
0,1879
15
SoV: Source of variation.
SS: Sum of squares.
DoF: Degree of freedom.
MS: Mean square.
F: Statistic of Fisher
: Reference value.

3.3. Model adequacy checking

MS

0,0267
0,0085
0,0440
0,0006
0,0050

5,3
1,7
8,7
0,1

4,8
4,8
4,8
4,8

The decomposition of the variability in the

observations through an analysis of variance
(Table 5) requires that certain assumptions be
satisfied.
The residuals are normal and independently
distributed with mean zero and constant variance.
A check of the normality assumption is construct a
normal probability plot of the residuals. Figure 7
shows that error distribution resemble a straight
line. This indicate the assumption is satisfied.

For the following stages, we use only a straight

undershot weir.

Figure 7 Normal probability plot for residuals.

Meanwhile, the homoscedasticity is verified for

the significant factors, the flow rate and flume
slope. Figure 9 and Figure 10 show that the
variance has a little change when the factors vary
from low to high values. Even if the assumption of
homogeneity of variances is violate, the test in
only slightly affected in the balanced design used.
[2]

Independence
0,2

Residuals

Plotting the residuals in time order of data

collection permits detecting correlation between
the residuals. Figure 8 shows no tendency in the
residuals of the run. This implies that the
independence assumption on the errors has not
been violated.

0,1
0
-0,1 0
-0,2

10

15

20

Time

Figure 8 Residuals in time variation.

Table 6 Path of steepest ascent.

Flow rate
0,15

Run

Flow
rate
[lpm]

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

45
49
53
57
61
65
69

Residuals

0,1

-2

0,05
0
-1 -0,05 0

-0,1
-0,15

Overshot
weir
high
[cm]
3,5
3,5
3,5
3,5
3,5
3,5
3,5

Flume
slope
[%]

Undershot
weir

Effic.

1,5
1,0
0,5
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0

Straight
Straight
Straight
Straight
Straight
Straight
Straight

0,08
0,25
0,27
0,34
0,35
0,34
0,32

Figure 9 Residuals versus values of flow rate.

Ascent
Flume slope
Efficient

0,15

Residuals

0,1

-2

0,05
0
-1 -0,05 0

-0,1
-0,15

0,40
0,35
0,30
0,25
0,20
0,15
0,10
0,05
0,00
0

Condition

Figure 10 Residuals versus values of flume slope.

3.4. Steepest ascent

The direction of maximum increase is,

Figure 11 Path of steepest ascent.

For the 4-7 experiment conditions, the response

variable can be approximated with the following
equation.

= 0,04 0,05 = 0,05(0,8 1)

This indicates that an decrement of one unit for
the coded variable 3 , require a increment of 0,8
units. Table 6 reports the path of steepest ascent.
It shows the values of the design factors and the
corresponding efficiency of power dissipation.
Flow increases 5 lpm in each condition, while
bottom slope decrease 0.5%. It is important to
note the natural limit for the slope; in this limit,
the channel is horizontal.
Figure 11 shows graphically the result of each
experiment condition on Table 6. The presence of
a local maximum seem to be between conditions
4-7. In this runs, only flow rate was changing, so
the response is a one-variable function.

[%] = 3 + 0,1106[]
0,0009([])2
Eq. (6)

3.5. Location of maximum response

Table 1 shows the feasible values for each design
factor. The type of undershot weir is not a
significant factor, we choose a straight weir
because is widely use as gate in different uses.
Meanwhile, the overshot weir high at the channel
end, is fixed at a value of 3,5 cm. In the
familiarization stage, was noted that higher weir
avoided the formation of hydraulic jump, a choke
was produced.

In a negative slope, the hydraulic jump cannot

occurs. This fixed the value of bottom slope as 0%.
See Table 6.
Using the equation (6), the value of flow rate was
stablish in order to get a maximum. This
correspond a flow rate of 62 .

4. Conclusions
The independent variables that have a significant
effect in the response variable are flow rate and
flume slope.
The maximum efficiency of power dissipation was
reach when the open channel was horizontal. The
flow rate was 62 lpm, the width channel was 7,6
cm and flow depth 1,3 cm. In this condition, the
Froude number was 3. We can use the equation
for Froude Number, for a fixed flow rate, to design
a channel to dissipate energy.

References
[1] A. Osman Akan, Open Channels Hydraulics,
Butterworth-Heinemann, 2006.
[2] D. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of
Experiments. 5th Edition, Arizona: John Wiley
& Sons, 2004.
[3] ARMFIELD, "Instruction Manual Multipropose
Teaching Flume," 2012.