U. S. Dept.

of A g r i c u l t u r e

August 19, 1969

S o i l Conservation Service
Engineering Divis ion
Design Branch
DESIGN NOTE NO. 8
Subject:

Entrance Head Losses i n Drop I n l e t Spillways

During t h e p a s t s e v e r a l y e a r s , h y d r a u l i c model tests of drop i n l e t

spillways have been i n progress a t S t . Anthony F a l l s , Minnesota, and
S t i l l w a t e r , Oklahoma. New elbows and t r a n s i t i o n s have been t e s t e d
a t St. Anthony F a l l s , and i n l e t s with t r a s h racks and simulated t r a s h
have been t e s t e d on large-scale models a t S t i l l w a t e r . Although t h e
t e s t s have not been completed and r e p o r t s a r e not y e t a v a i l a b l e ,
considerable information on e n t r a n c e l o s s e s has been obtained which
can be used i n design.
Table I i s a summary of e n t r a n c e head l o s s c o e f f i c i e n t s compiled from
a r e c e n t review of a l l a v a i l a b l e data. The c o e f f i c i e n t s rnarked with
a s t e r i s k s were estimated from test data. The o t h e r s are measured
values. A l l a r e considered r e l i a b l e f o r design purposes.
The nomenclature i n t h i s design n o t e i s t h e same a s i n Technical
Release No. 29. The entrance head l o s s c o e f f i c i e n t , K,, m u l t i p l i e d
by t h e v e l o c i t y head i n t h e conduit ( b a r r e l ) gives t h e t o t a l entrance
head l o s s from t h e r e s e r v o i r t o t h e conduit, i n c l u d i n g elbow and
t r a n s i t i o n l o s s e s a t t h e conduit entrance. For f u l l pipe flow, a s
shown i n TR 29,

where H, = t o t a l head on
v, = mean v e l o c i t y
& = entrance head
K, = f r i c t i o n l o s s
& = length of t h e

the spillway
of flow i n t h e conduit
loss coefficient
c o e f f i c i e n t f o r t h e conduit (see ES-42)
conduit

Figure 1 i l l u s t r a t e s how t h e q u a n t i t i e s i n Equation (1) are r e l a t e d .

The h y d r a u l i c grade l i n e u s u a l l y i s considered t o i n t e r s e c t t h e plane
of t h e conduit o u t l e t 0.5D a b w e t h e i n v e r t of t h e conduit o r a t t h e
t a i l w a t e r s u r f a c e , whichever is higher. % is equal t o t h e d i f f e r e n c e
i n e l e v a t i o n between t h e HGL a t t h i s p o i n t and t h e r e s e r v o i r water
s u r f ace.

*by A. S. Payne, A s s i s t a n t Chief, Design Branch

ENTRANCE LOSS COEFFICIENTS

IN DROP I U T SPILLWAYS

D e s c r i p t i o n of Spillway

r--I

Minimum
Clear
Water

Maximum
With
Debris

'1. Round conduit and Standard Covered Top R i s e r ,

except with s p e c i a l elbow and t r a n s i t i o n (Fig. 2
and ES -150)
D x 1.5D R i s e r
D x 2D R i s e r
D x 3D R i s e r
D X 5D R i s e r
2. Round conduit and Standard Covered Top R i s e r ,
with round bottom and square-edged entrance t o
conduit (ES -150)
D x 3D R i s e r

3. Round conduit and Standard Rectangular Open

Top R i s e r , with round bottom and square-edged
entrance t o conduit (ES -15 1 )
D x 3D R i s e r

4. Round conduit and Standard Rectangular Open

Top R i s e r , with f l a t bottom and s quare-edged
entrance t o conduit (ES -15 1)
D x 3D R i s e r

5. Round c o n d u i t and Standard Square Open Top

with f l a t bottom and square-edged e n t r a n c e t o
conduit (ES -152)
(D + 12) X (D + 12) R i s e r
6. Rectangular conduit1 with Standard Covered
Top R i s e r , except with f l a t bottom, and with
elbow a s shown i n Figure 4. R i s e r width equal
t o conduit width. D 2 4 f t . ,
B X 3D R i s e r , Rounded elbow
S p e c i a l elbow

7. Rectangular conduit1 w i t h open t o p riser,

no t r a s h r a c k , and with elbow a s shown i n
Figure 4. R i s e r width equal t o conduit width,
D 5 5 ft.,
B x 3 D R i s e r , Rounded elbow
S p e c i a l elbow
*Estimated v a l u e s
' ~ e c t a n ~ u l aconduit
r
B wide X D high with B X 3D r i s e r .

Conduit
Lb

Figure 1.

Pull Pipe Flow

Special Elbow and Transition

Details of two elbows and a transition tested a t St. Anthony Falls,
for a rectangular r i s e r and round pipe conduit, are shown i n Figure 2
and Figure 3. Hydraulic performance of the two elbows i s about the
same.

Riser

Figure 2.

Special Elbow and Transition

(SAF Elbow 6 and Transition A)

Figure 3.

A l t e r n a t i v e S p e c i a l Elbow

(SAF Elbow 3 and T r a n s i t i o n A)

The bottom of t h e riser and t h e i n v e r t of t h e elbow and t r a n s i t i o n

a r e h o r i z o n t a l , and form a continuous h a l f - c y l i n d e r of diameter D,
matching t h e lower h a l f of t h e round conduit. The change from
h o r i z o n t a l a t t h e o u t l e t of t h e t r a n s i t i o n , t o t h e conduit s l o p e
f a r t h e r downstream i s made by s m a l l angle changes a t t h e f i r s t few
pipe j o i n t s . The elbow i s r e c t a n g u l a r a b w e t h e h o r i z o n t a l diameter.
The upper h a l f of t h e t r a n s i t i o n i s r e c t a n g u l a r a t t h e upstream end
and s e m i c i r c u l a r a t t h e downstream end. Its s u r f a c e c o n s i s t s of
t h r e e plane t r i a n g l e s , on t h e t o p and s i d e s , and two quarter-cones.
The c o n i c a l s u r f a c e s can be formed from f l a t s h e e t stock. Both t h e
elbow and t h e t r a n s i t i o n were designed f o r e a s e of forming:
The s p e c i a l elbow and t r a n s i t i o n were developed t o f i l l t h e need f o r
a smooth t r a n s i t i o n from a r e c t a n g u l a r riser t o a round conduit. The
standard square-edged conduit e n t r a n c e is s a t i s f a c t o r y i n most cases.
It i s s u b j e c t t o flow s e p a r a t i o n and a s u b s t a n t i a l p r e s s u r e drop j u s t
i n s i d e t h e conduit entrance, however, as i n d i c a t e d i n TR 29. I n l a r g e
s t r u c t u r e s , e s p e c i a l l y high-head, h i g h - v e l o c i t y s t r u c t u r e s , t h e
v i b r a t i o n s caused by t h e r e s u l t i n g turbulence may be i n t o l e r a b l e . I n
some circumstances, t h e p r e s s u r e drop may be s u f f i c i e n t t o cause c a v i t a t i o n . L i t t l e , i f any, s e p a r a t i o n occurs i n t h e s p e c i a l elbow and

t r a n s i t i o n , and t h e l o c a l p r e s s u r e drop is e s s e n t i a l l y eliminated.

An added advantage is t h a t t h e energy l o s s is much less than i n t h e
square-edged e n t r a n c e ; enough t o make a d i f f e r e n c e of s e v e r a l f e e t
i n t h e t o t a l head required f o r a given discharge i n some cases.
Entrance Loss C o e f f i c i e n t s
The "minimum, c l e a r water1' values of IC, i n Table I r e p r e s e n t t h e
condition where minimum l o s s e s occur i n t h e t r a s h racks. The
"maximum with debris" v a l u e s a r e f o r t r a s h r a c k s p a r t i a l l y blocked
by debris. The s u s c e p t i b i l i t y of t h e v a r i o u s types of i n l e t s t o
clogging with d e b r i s was considered i n e s t i m a t i n g t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s .
Minimum c o e f f i c i e n t s w i l l give t h e h i g h e s t discharges and v e l o c i t i e s .
They should be used i n a p p r a i s i n g t h e downstream e f f e c t s of maximum
discharge and i n determining t h e requirements f o r energy d i s s i p a t i o n .
Maximum c o e f f i c i e n t s should be used f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g r e s e r v o i r s t o r a g e
volume requirements and computing drawdown t i m e . The r e l a t i o n s h i p
between f r i c t i o n l o s s i n t h e conduit and l o c a l p r e s s u r e d e v i a t i o n s
w i l l i n d i c a t e whether maximum o r minimum v e l o c i t i e s a r e more c r i t i c a l
for cavitation p ~ t e n t i a l .
Table I g i v e s new values of % f o r t h e Standard Cwered Top Riser.
I n TR 29, a t e s t v a l u e of 0.687 i s quoted and K, = 1.0 i s r e c o m n d e d
f o r design. The tests were made with a f l a t bottom riser, however,
while t h e s t a n d a r d r i s e r has a round bottom. Losses a t t h e conduit
e n t r a n c e probably a r e lower with t h e round bottom riser. Subsequent
t e s t s of t h e s p e c i a l elbow with a round bottom riser have given f u r t h e r
support t o lower values of & . The v a l u e s i n Table I (0.60 and 0.70),
t h e r e f o r e , a r e believed t o be t h e b e s t e s t i m a t e s on t h e b a s i s of d a t a
available thus far.
The c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r r e c t a n g u l a r conduits a r e a p p l i c a b l e t o conduits
not less than 4 f e e t deep having r i s e r s with t h e s t a n d a r d covered t o p
and t r a s h r a c k (ES-150), and t o conduits n o t less than 5 f e e t deep
having open t o p risers with no t r a s h racks. Spillways of t h i s s i z e ,
d e t a i l e d a s i n d i c a t e d , are capable of pa8sing:most d e b r i s without
danger ' o f clogging. Hence, only " c l e a r water'' c o e f f i c i e n t s a r e
applicable. The "rounded" and l l s p e c i a l l l elbows f o r which c o e f f i c i e n t s
a r e given a r e i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure 4.

Rounded
Figure 4. Elbows f o r Rectangular Conduit
* E l l i p t i c a l curve may be used f o r s p e c i a l elbow, as i n Fig. 3
Example :
A drop i n l e t s p i l l w a y i s r e q u i r e d t o discharge 470 c f s when t h e
r e s e r v o i r water s u r f a c e i s a t t h e c r e s t of t h e emergency spillway.
E l e v a t i o n of t h e hydraulic grade l i n e a t t h e conduit o u t l e t i s 100
(assumed datum). The emergency s p i l l w a y c r e s t e l e v a t i o n is t o be
approximately 170, and maximum pool l e v e l w i l l be 6 f e e t above t h e
c r e s t . Crest of t h e p r i n c i p a l s p i l l w a y is t o be a t e l e v a t i o n 150.

Actual e l e v a t i o n of t h e s t r u c t u r e is about 2000 f e e t a b w e s e a l e v e l .

The conduit is t o be 380 f e e t long, on a s l o p e of 6 f e e t p e r 100 f e e t .
A 48-inch r e i n f o r c e d concrete p r e s s u r e pipe conduit with a StandardCove r e d TopRiser (ES-150) w i l l be t r i e d . Estimated Manning's n f o r t h e
conduit i s .010, minimum, t o .013, maximum.

Figure 5.
I.

Example

Compute required head and emergency spillway crest elevation.

Conduit a r e a

a, = n(2.0)'

Velocity

vb

47 0
12.6

= 12.6 ft.'

37.3 f p s

Velocity head
If n

2g

= (37*3)2 = 21.6 f t .
2(32.2)

I$ = .00493 @S-42)

.013
1

154

= (.00493) (380)

1.87

With standard square-edged conduit entrance

Maximum

K, = 0.70 (Table I)
2

T o t a l hr ad
= (21.6)(1
= 77.2 f t .

+ 0.70 + 1.87).\_

Emergency spillway
crest elevation

= 100

+ 77.'2

= 177

With s p e c i a l elbow and t r a n s i t i o n

& = 0.35 (Table I )

Maximum
T o t a l head

= 69.6 f t .

Emergency spillway
crest elevation

A 100

+ 69.6

= 170

11. Compute minimum pressure a t conduit entrance

With standard square-edged conduit entrance

2

Maxi-

l o c a l deviation of hydraulic grade l i n e = 1.2

a t crown of conduit

D downstream
7

Elevation of crown of conduit

2g
from entrance (Ref. TR 29).

7 downstream

Elevation of hydraulic grade l i n e

entrance

D
7

from entrance

downstream from conduit

Here, the coefficient applied to velocity head for the

local negative deviation of the hydraulic grade line is
larger than the positive coefficient for friction head.
Therefore, as shown by Equation (a), the low point on the
EGL at the conduit entrance will be lowest when the velocity
is highest.

.', To find the lowest pressure,

w e conditions giving the

highest velocity.
Maximum pool elevation = 177
Maximum )b = 183

+6

= 183 ft.

- 100 = 83 ft.

Minimum % = 0.60 (Table I)

HGL = 100

- 0.1

2g

= 100

- 0.1

(30.6) = 96.9 ft.

Pressure head at crown of conduit

t$,

= HGL

- Z,

= 96.9

- 124.7

= -27.8 ft.

Robable minimum atmospheric pressure at elevation 2000

(TR 4, Table 11)
= 1876 psf
= 30.0 ft. %o

Absolute pressure head at crown of conduit

= 30.0

- 27.8

= 2.2 ft.

This is higher than the vapor pressure of water at usual

temperatures, but pulsations could easily produce momentary
cavitation pressures locally when the average pressure is this
low.

With s p e c i a l elbow and t r a n s i t i o n

Local d e v i a t i o n of hydraulic grade l i n e i s e s s e n t i a l l y zero.
Elevation of crown of conduit a t entrance
(downstream end of t r a n s i t i o n , Figure 2)
Ze

100

+ 0.06

(I,

- 3.2070)

+ 5D

Elevation of hydraulic grade l i n e a t conduit entrance

In t h i s case, t h e r e i s no l o c a l drop i n t h e hydraulic grade

l i n e . The f r i c t i o n head c o e f f i c i e n t i s p o s i t i v e . Therefore,
as shown by Equation (b) , t h e H a is lowest a t t h e conduit
entrance when t h e v e l o c i t y is lowest.
To f i n d t h e lowest pressure, use conditions giving t h e
lowest v e l o c i t y (with f u l l pipe flow).

.*.

Minimum pool e l e v a t i o n f o r pipe flow

150

= 152

Minimum
Maximum

vb2

= S O

&

H,

= ===

+ 2.0

152

- 100 = 5 2 f t .

= 0.35 (Table

I)

52

= 21.1 ft.

(TR 29)

HGL = 100

+ 1.07

2g

= 100

+ 1.07

(21.1) = 122.6

Pressure head at crown of conduit

$,

HGL

- 2,

= 122.6

124.0 =

- 1.4 f t .

Absolute pressure head a t crown of conduit (see

page 30)

= 30.0

1 . 4 = 28.6 f t .