Calibration of rectangular weir and a triangular weir

Jithu Alexander, Syed Humza Ali

October 1, 2016

Purpose:
The purpose of this experiment was to compare the head of the triangular and rectangular
weirs to its discharge respectively. The discharge would be the flow from each head that
computes to the coefficient of discharge which takes into consideration friction.
Procedure:

Procedure is taken from Lab Manual. (Bagchi S.)

The tank was filled with water to the crest of the weir and an initial reading of zero on the

hook gauge was established.

The water flowed over the weir until the flow became constant.
The hook gauge was read again to determine the height of the water above the crest of the

weir.
A stopper was placed at the bottom of the tank.
An initial starting point was established by a student and simultaneously another student

started a timer
Once the water rose up four inches, the timer was stopped and the time was recorded.
The stopper was then removed and the water drained out.
These steps were repeated five more times with the rectangular weir and six times with
the triangular weir.

Results and Discussion:

For the rectangular weir an experimental and expected value of the coefficient of
discharge were calculated. (See appendix) The experimental coefficient of discharge was greater
than the coefficient of discharge from the Rehbocks equation in run one. The same trend

followed for the sixth run. The main difference between these runs is shown in the percent error.
The percent error for run one was more than three times the percent error for run six. (See table1)
The average experimental CD leaned towards a higher value while Rehbocks varied less.
Table 1: Rectangular Weir, Coefficient of Discharge and Error

Run

1
2
3
4
5
6

Time
(sec)

Discharge
Q
(cm3/sec)

9.58
12.38
16.2
21.64
28.78
42.87

899.51
696.07
531.93
398.21
299.42
201.01

Rectangular Weir: Coefficient of Discharge

Head
Q unadjusted
Experimental
2
above
Coefficient of
( 2 g)(L0.1 nH )( H 1.5 )
3
the Weir
Discharge
Crest
(cm)
(cm3/sec)
5.3
1022.4
0.88
4.5
856.2
0.81
3.9
712.2
0.75
3.3
568.3
0.70
2.6
427.5
0.70
2.0
293.7
0.68
Averages:
0.75

()

Coefficient
Percent
of Discharge Error
(%)
using
Rehbocks
Equation
0.66
0.65
0.65
0.64
0.63
0.63
0.64

33.3
24.6
15.6
9.6
10.7
9.3
17.2

Table 2: Triangular Weir, Coefficient of Discharge and Error

Ru
n

Time(sec) Discharg
e
Q
(cm3/sec)

1
2
3
4
5
6

10.41
12.12
15.96
20.91
27.53
40.94

827.79
711.00
539.93
412.11
313.01
210.49

Triangular Weir: Coefficient of Discharge

Head Q unadjusted
Experimenta

2.5
above
tan ( )( 2 g H ) l Coefficient
2
the
of Discharge
8
Weir
( )
15
Crest
(cm)
8.6
1372.9
0.60
7.9
1110.4
0.64
7.2
880.5
0.61
6.5
681.8
0.60
5.9
535.2
0.58
5.2
390.3
0.54

Figure 1: Rectangular Weir: Q actual versus Q unadjusted

Coefficien
t of
Discharge
(using
figure 3)

%
Difference

0.622
0.625
0.631
0.635
0.639
0.641

3.1
2.4
2.9
4.9
8.9
17.2

Figure 2: Triangular Weir: Q actual versus Q unadjusted

Figure 3: Head versus Coefficient of Discharge (Table 11.29 from Finnemore, Franzini. 2002)

References:
Bagchi, S. 2016. Fluids Mechanics Laboratory Manual, 2016 edition.
Manhattan College Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
Riverdale, NY.
Figures reprinted by permission of publisher from Finnemore, JE and JB
Franzini, 2002. Fluid mechanics with engineering applications, 10th ed.
McGraw-Hill