5.4K views

Uploaded by Arvin De Lara Sanchez

Fluid Mechanics: Application of Momentum Principle

- Hydraulic Jump Experiment( Complete Report)
- Hydraulic Jump report
- Hydraulic Jump
- HYDRAULICS JUMP
- Sluice Gate and Hydraulic Jump Lab Report
- Flow of Water Over Weirs
- Hydraulic Jump
- Hydraulic Jump
- FULL REPORT consolidation.docx
- Flow Over a Broad-crested Weir Exp4
- Hydraulic Jump Lab
- Venturi Flume Experiment
- Direct Shear Test
- Open Channel Flow Report Lab
- Report 2 Open Channel
- KIRK - Hydraulic Jump
- FLOW IN OPEN CHANNEL
- Hydraulic Jump Experiment
- Lab Report 5. Investigating the Hydraulic Jump
- Hydraulic Laboratory

You are on page 1of 10

2012-2013

ABSTRACT The vast applications of hydraulic jumps are of great importance in civil engineering especially in water resources engineering. Hydraulic Jumps are usually used as energy dissipators and their turbulent actions are used for mixing chemicals for treatment of water. The characteristics of hydraulic jumps are described by the conjugate depth equation. Hence, the goal of this experiment is to verify the validity of the conjugate depth equation and investigate the head loss developed during jumps. At the end of the analysis, percentage errors less than 10% were obtained from comparing conjugate depths obtained experimentally to the ones computed using the conjugate depth equation. INTRODUCTION When the spillways of dams are opened mainly by lifting its gates, the fluid that will escape would have appreciably high velocity associated with high kinetic energy. The escaping fluid tends to erode the surrounding masses that it will encounter (e.g. soils or parts of the masonry). Due to this problem it is desirable to transform most of the fluids kinetic energy to a high potential energy instead. The solution may be achieved by converting a high velocity flow to a flow of greater depth (i.e. low velocity and relatively low energy). Such sudden variation in open channel flow produces what we refer as hydraulic jump. The hydraulic jump is the phenomenon that occurs when an abrupt shift of flow velocity from high (supercritical) to low (subcritical) exists. Hydraulic jumps are mainly used to dissipate energy in water flowing over dams, weirs, and other hydraulic structures to prevent scouring downstream from the structure as illustrated earlier. They are also use to maintain water level in the irrigation channels or for other water distribution purposes. In masonry structures, hydraulic jumps are used in raising water depth in an apron to increase its weight to be able to reduce the force of uplift acting underneath. Other applications include aeration of water, mixing chemicals for water purification and removing air pockets from water in supply lines. Because of the energy losses in a hydraulic jump, analysis of flow using the energy equation cant be used. However, the linear momentum equation can be used. In the analysis, shear forces were neglected because of the short length of the jump. Having noted the importance of hydraulic jump in civil engineering applications, it is of great interest to have a study of the flow behavior in such a phenomenon. In the study of hydraulic jump in open channels, flow patterns will be observed by measuring required parameters before and after the jump. From the obtained parameters, we will check for the validity of the conjugate depth equation by comparing the values of the observed and theoretical downstream to upstream depth ratio. We will also quantify the energy lost in the jump. Lastly, conclude whether a jump will occur or not base on the observed characteristics. THEORY The transition from supercritical to subcritical in a hydraulic jump is generally a turbulent process with non-negligible energy loss. If a supercritical flow occurs (by use of hydraulic controls which in our case is a sluice gate) with the ambient flow is the subcritical, a hydraulic jump will occur. In horizontal rectangular channels, the relationship between the upstream and downstream depth is given by the conjugate depth equation. In addition, the energy loss in a hydraulic jump can be shown to be a function of those two depth referred in Figure 1 as y1 and y2.

In the analysis of hydraulic jumps, we assume that the length of the jump is so small that shear forces can be neglected (i.e. friction head is not considered). The flow is assumed incompressible, uniform and the pressure distribution is hydrostatic before and after the jump. Also, the grade of the channels bed is very gentle so that component of the fluid weight ceases in the direction of the jump. Let us first define the variables that we will be using throughout this discussion. Let Q i be the volumetric th flow rate in the i section of the control volume. The uniform velocity in section i will be denoted as vi, yi th will stand for the depth of fluid at the section. Ai is the cross sectional area of the i section. is the density of the fluid and g is the constant assumed for the acceleration due to gravity. Since flow is incompressible, continuity equation holds. Applying continuity equation in the upstream section (section 1) and in the downstream section (section 2) we have: (1) (2) Let the width of the rectangular channel be w. The area of the i section will be wyi. Thus, the continuity equation becomes (3) Eliminating the constant width w we have: (4) Newtons second law states that the net force experienced by a body is equal to the time rate of change of its linear momentum in the specified direction. Let x be the axis representing the direction of flow. Applying the Linear Momentum Equation along x we have:

2 y12 y2 F x F1 F2 g 2 g 2 Q (v2 v1 )

th

(5)

(6)

Factoring the right hand side gives us:

(7)

We take the supercritical velocity as a primary parameter. Thus, we write Q in terms of . Equation (7) will be reduced to: and as

(8)

Moreover, we also take note that so that Equation (8) becomes:

(9)

Multiplying Equation (9) by will yield

(10)

Further simplification will give us:

(11)

Let the Froude number denoted by Fr be defined as

(12)

Multiplying Equation (12) by 8 and completing the square on the right hand side we have

[ [ ]

(13)

(14)

Algebraic manipulation leads us to the desired form of the conjugate depth equation. Take note that it shows that the conjugate depth (i.e. the ratio between the upstream and downstream depths) is only a function of the Froude number, Fr.

(15)

To obtain the energy loss across a hydraulic jump in a rectangular channel, we need to compute more precisely than what is required for the difference. A river engineer Professor Frank Henderson (1966) suggested that a rearrangement of the expression for the energy loss obtained from specific energy equations so that will be written in a form involving products than differences. Equation (16) shows this point.

Making a substitution

(16)

leads us to

(17)

Recalling Equation (12) and setting , the bracketed expression reduces to

Simplifying further and substituting r back into the conjugate depth again we have the energy loss as a function of the upstream and downstream depth to be

(18)

Figure 2 illustrates the hydraulic flume used in this experiment. In the start of the experiment, the channel is ensured to be in a horizontal position. After checking for a very gentle slope or nearly level channel, the pump is started. Installed in the flume is a sluice gate that will be used to create a supercritical flow immediately after the gate, followed by a jump, and then a subcritical flow downstream from the hydraulic jump. Given that the created jump from controlling the two gates has become stable, the required parameters should now be obtained. The experimenter should then measure the supercritical depth upstream and the subcritical depth downstream. The experimental group takes about 10 trials observing the hydraulic jumps formed. The constant flow rate for each run is estimated by timing the discharge of 15L of the fluid downstream. The time in seconds for the passage of 15L of fluid in the spillway for every run is recorded so that the discharge in will be a derived quantity. In taking this procedure, careful readings should be sought to minimize the trial error. If reading the discharge Q directly via flow meter is possible, the experimenter is recommended to perform it to achieve better accuracy. The supercritical and subcritical depths are obtained directly using the calibration in the flow demonstrator. Upon noting the discharge, upstream depth and downstream depth, analysis of data will include calculations of the conjugate depth and head loss for us to compare it to the theoretical values computed using Equations (15) and (19) respectively.

TEST RESULTS

The experiment is conducted with ten trials creating hydraulic jumps at different flow rates with corresponding pairs of upstream and downstream depths. Table 1 summarizes the obtained data from conducting the experiment.

Table 1 Summary of Data Collected during the experiment

Flow Rate RUN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Volume (m3) 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 Time (s) 23.67 13.98 13.97 23.2 9.79 12.33 14.36 29.56 22.33 18.98 ( ) 0.000633714 0.001072961 0.001073729 0.000646552 0.001532176 0.001216545 0.001044568 0.000507442 0.000671742 0.000790306

Water Level at the Tank (mm) 92 88 141 66 293 148 212 88 190 263

y1(mm) 10 15 13 10 11 13 10 8 6 8

y2(mm) 38 44 43 36 80 62 62 35 50 54

From this set of data we calculate the experimental conjugate depth ( each section is obtained by using

of the upstream section, the Froude number, Fr is calculated. Consequently, the theoretical conjugate depth is obtained from the Froude number using Equation (15). The summary of this phase is shown in Table 2.

Experimental RUN (mm) 1 10 2 15 3 13 4 10 5 11 6 13 7 10 8 8 9 6 10 8 (mm) 38 44 43 36 80 62 62 35 50 54 0.833833634 0.941194187 1.086770668 0.850725953 1.83274604 1.231320863 1.374431901 0.834609358 1.473118533 1.299844712 0.219429904 0.320861655 0.328558574 0.236312765 0.252002581 0.258180181 0.221682565 0.190767853 0.176774224 0.192569587 3.8 2.933333333 3.307692308 3.6 7.272727273 4.769230769 6.2 4.375 8.333333333 6.75 Fr 2.662680582 2.453992714 3.043728385 2.716622817 5.580146609 3.448571414 4.388972797 2.979736898 6.072978315 4.640728277

Theoretical 3.298649202 3.006302965 3.833424161 3.374284329 7.407342939 4.402579892 5.727051022 3.743543797 8.103030351 6.081999535 %error 15.19867 2.427221 13.71442 6.68929 1.817327 8.328091 8.258159 16.86787 2.842183 10.98324

All Froude numbers are greater than 1which means that the upstream section is in the supercritical velocity. It is also proven that for Fr>1, hydraulic jump is possible otherwise it is not. Most of the test runs yield percentage errors between the theoretical and experimental ratio of depths to be less than 10%. The great deviation reflected by percentage errors greater than 10% might come from blunders introduced by inaccurate reading of depths or loss of accuracy in determining the flow rate. Performing a two-tailed paired t-test on the theoretical and experimental conjugate depth, a p-value of 0.778076859 is obtained. That is, the null hypothesis taking the difference between the population means of the theoretical and experimental conjugate depths to be zero is plausible. To illustrate this test result further, a plot relating the theoretical and experimental conjugate depths with the theoretical is generated. The plot shows the deviation between the experimental and theoretical results more explicitly.

10

Conjugate Depth

We also compute the specific energies for the upstream and downstream sections. By taking the difference between these state functions, we obtain the experimental energy loss. Following Equation (19) gives us the theoretical head loss. Table 3 summarizes the results of this procedure.

RUN (mm) (mm) (m) (m) 1 10 38 0.045449339 0.04045494 2 15 44 0.060165602 0.049249101 3 13 43 0.073217836 0.048503956 4 10 36 0.046900198 0.038847237 5 11 80 0.182259199 0.083237869 6 13 62 0.090302191 0.065398561 7 10 62 0.106315411 0.064505604 8 8 35 0.043515328 0.036855495 9 6 50 0.116643197 0.051593262 10 8 54 0.094145436 0.055890709

Experimental (m) 0.004994399 0.0109165 0.02471388 0.00805296 0.09902133 0.02490363 0.041809807 0.006659833 0.065049935 0.038254727

Theoretical (m) 0.014442105 0.009238258 0.012075134 0.012205556 0.09332642 0.036491625 0.056696774 0.017574107 0.070986667 0.056328704

%error 65.41779122 18.16622638 104.6675421 34.02217416 6.102140492 31.75521917 26.25716748 62.10428685 8.363164738 32.08661999

Large percentage errors between the experimental and theoretical head losses are due to the fact that friction losses are not negligible. Also, the specific energy equation for each section should include the pressure term. It must also be noted that in trials 5 and 9, deviations in the conjugate depths and head losses are the least. We can say from these facts that only the random errors greatly affect the deviation for this runs. We can classify the kind of hydraulic jump observed per trial according to the U.S. Bureau Reclamation (USBR). Table 4 shows the classification of jumps according to flow characteristics. Table 4 Characteristics of Hydraulic Jump [USBR, 1955]

Classification Undular Jump Weak Jump Oscillating Jump Steady Jump Strong Jump

Fr Energy Dissipation 1.0-1.7 <5% 1.7-2.5 5-15% 2.5-4.5 15-45% 4.5-9.0 45-70% >9.0 70-85%

Now, Table 5 shows the classification of the hydraulic jumps observed in this experiment. Most of the jumps observed were oscillatory in nature. Table 5 Classified Hydraulic Jumps Based on Flow Characteristics

RUN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Energy Dissipation (%) 10.98893639 18.14408903 33.75390699 17.17041844 54.32994894 27.57810125 39.32619629

8 9 10

Lastly, we want to verify if the energy curve will be asymptotic to a grade 1 line. Figure 4 depicts the nonasymptotic specific energy curve versus stream depth.

Energy vs Depth

Specific Energy, E(m) 0,2 0,15 0,1 0,05 0 0 0,02 0,04 0,06 0,08 0,1 Depth of Stream (m) Supposed Asymptote Energy Curve

CONCLUSIONS

From the results obtain from the analyses of the data, relatively low deviations were obtained for the conjugate depths than that of the energy losses. Frictional losses and shear forces were not negligible as assumed in the formulation of the theory. Specific energy generally decreases as stream depth increases. Energy losses in jumps decrease as the difference between the supercritical and subcritical depths decreases. The obtained plot for E vs. y did not asymptote a 45 degree line which signifies errors in the obtained data. If replication of the experimental set-up is needed, careful procurement of parameters should be observed to attain better accuracy. Error due to parallax should be minimized as possible. Pressure terms should be included in the calculation of specific energies and effects of shear should not be neglected. Even though the experimental deviations do not satisfy standards, we can conclude that the objectives given before the experiment were met. We have successfully verified the conjugate depth equation on the experimental set-up.

REFERENCES

[1] Chin, D.A. (2006) Water Resources Engineering, 2nd edition, Prentice Hall [2] Sutley, David. (2005) An Instruction Manual of Open Channel Hydraulic Experiments for Water Resources Engineering. Thesis. The University of Alabama [3] Mays, Larry (1999) Hydraulic Design Handbook, McGraw Hill. New York. [4] Hickin, Edward J. River Hydraulics and Channel Form, Chapter 3: The Momentum Equation for open-Channel Flow. Available from: http://www.sfu.ca/~hickin/FLUIDS/Chapt3-Momentum.pdf [Accessed: 03/20/13] [5] Federal Highway Administration. US Department of Transportation; Hydraulic Design of Energy Dissipators for rd Culverts and Channels. Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 14, 3 edition Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/hydraulics/pubs/06086/hec14ch06.cfm [Accessed: 03/22/13]

- Hydraulic Jump Experiment( Complete Report)Uploaded byBshfirnaudz
- Hydraulic Jump reportUploaded bySukrit Sood
- Hydraulic JumpUploaded bysafder_ali90
- HYDRAULICS JUMPUploaded byEngr. Ikhwan Z.
- Sluice Gate and Hydraulic Jump Lab ReportUploaded byRaJ ShlrzvesteR
- Flow of Water Over WeirsUploaded bymujette godmalin
- Hydraulic JumpUploaded byAhmed Gamal
- Hydraulic JumpUploaded bySuhaimi Sam
- FULL REPORT consolidation.docxUploaded byFatin Nabihah
- Flow Over a Broad-crested Weir Exp4Uploaded byAhmad Ismail
- Hydraulic Jump LabUploaded bycowboys20
- Venturi Flume ExperimentUploaded byMatumbi Naito
- Direct Shear TestUploaded byObaid Khalid
- Open Channel Flow Report LabUploaded byShauQi Lutfi
- Report 2 Open ChannelUploaded byAin Sherin
- KIRK - Hydraulic JumpUploaded byKirk Woo Chong
- FLOW IN OPEN CHANNELUploaded byEngr. Ikhwan Z.
- Hydraulic Jump ExperimentUploaded by1man1book
- Lab Report 5. Investigating the Hydraulic JumpUploaded byfazeen
- Hydraulic LaboratoryUploaded bySyafiq Seped
- OpenChannel flow Lab ReportUploaded byjk3lly0904974
- Experiment No_1 Flow Through a Sluice GateUploaded bysalman
- Direct Shear TestUploaded byNishanth Nanthakumar
- Lab Manual (Hydraulics Engineering)Uploaded byShahid Kamran
- Hydraulics Report Final VersionUploaded byMohafisto Sofisto
- Hydraulic JumpUploaded byKafeel Bichu
- hydraulic jumpUploaded byHarshad Shrigondekar
- LAB 5 ConsolidationUploaded byHafiza Kamaruddin
- Consolidation TestUploaded byNicholas Kwong
- Determine Mannings Roughness Coefficient and Chezy Roughness Coefficient in a Labortary FlumeUploaded byFaisal Sardar

- Floresdediosmosqueda2014 Unlocked (1)Uploaded byAbraham Lopz
- AeroUploaded byAnonymous LU3Dz3TKtV
- Calc Example (Imper) HOT WATERUploaded bysmithwork
- Shell Lubricants 2012 Product CatalogueUploaded byletranquangha
- CV1.pptUploaded bySridhar Gudapati
- DupuitUploaded byyaseen90aziz
- Control Valve Selection for Multi-Phase Flow. KentintrolUploaded byNeil Carrasco
- Turbulence Effect on High Angle of Attack Aerodynamics Vertically Launched MissileUploaded byrob
- 01. Hydropower Impact on Water QualityUploaded byCarlos HV
- Water producedUploaded byBlake Charles Diniz Marques
- Water Recycling From POME Using MembraneUploaded byKhairul Imran Azman
- PiMag MicroJetUploaded byNikken, Inc.
- RVFUploaded byeph
- SGP_MauritiusUploaded byRahul Tripathi
- API RP 19G13 --- Section 5.6 --- Very Deep Gas-Lift --- Version 2011-04-03Uploaded bySufian R Ellabbad
- 1 (1)Uploaded bySquidward Tentacles
- Lecture 01 CUploaded byRene Raynes
- The Settling Stone ChamberUploaded byererd
- chocolate milk argument essay samplesUploaded byapi-349881433
- AIAA-2008-0315 GAW(1) HysteresisUploaded bytdfsks
- HYDRAULIC JUMP_2Uploaded byManmohit Singh
- Small Hydraulic StrucutresUploaded bynvnrev
- Turkey - Oil & Fats Profile.pdfUploaded bymrithika25012011
- Freeze Desalination Process-an OverviewUploaded byInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- Water Case StudiesUploaded byGeorgi Savov
- Xxxxx BoatUploaded bymaterozzi
- Curva Del SistemaUploaded byMauricio Barrios Castellanos
- 1 Boundary Layer TheoryUploaded byMoisés Solis
- Preform Design for PET BottlesUploaded byWerner Schrammel
- kaylie low policy analysisUploaded byapi-357633020