Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Q = CL h3 / 2
(1)
2
Q = 0.63 2g L h3 / 2 = Ccip L h3 / 2
3
(2)
73
Gary P. Merkley
X. V-Notch Weirs
Q = Ch5/2
Gary P. Merkley
74
(3)
BIE 5300/6300 Lectures
dQ 5 3 / 2
= Ch
dh 2
(4)
dQ 5 dh
=
Q
2 h
(5)
It is seen that the variation of discharge is around 2.5 times the change in head
for a V-notch weir
Thus, it can accurately measure the discharge, even for relatively small flows
with a small head: h is not too small for small Q values, but you still must be able
to measure the head, h, accurately
A rectangular weir can accurately measure small flow rates only if the length, L,
is sufficiently small, because there is a minimum depth value relative to the crest;
but small values of L also restrict the maximum measurable flow rate
The general equation for triangular weirs is:
Q = Cd 2 2g tan
2
because,
hu
(hu hx )
(6)
dA = 2x dh
x
= tan( / 2)
hu hx
dQ = Cd 2gh dA
hx dh
75
(7)
(8)
(9)
Gary P. Merkley
Integrating Eq. 6:
Q = Cd
2g tan hu2.5
15
2
(10)
For a given angle, , and assuming a constant value of Cd, Eq. 10 can be
reduced to Eq. 3 by clumping constant terms into a single coefficient
Q=
where,
2g Ce tan he5 / 2
15
2
(11)
he = hu + K h
(12)
The curves in the two figures below can be closely approximated by the following
equations:
(13)
(14)
for in radians
Of course, you multiply a value in degrees by /180 to obtain radians
Some installations have an insertable metallic V-notch weir that can be placed in
slots at the entrance to a Parshall flume to measure low flow rates during some
months of the year
Gary P. Merkley
76
0.075
0.050
Kh (inches)
Kh (mm)
0.100
0.025
0
20
60
80
40
Notch Angle, (degrees)
100
20
40
60
80
Notch Angle, (degrees)
100
0.60
0.59
Ce
0.58
0.57
Q f = k + h
(15)
where k = 0 for the V-notch and rectangular weirs, but not for the Sutro; and is
as defined below:
77
Gary P. Merkley
h nf
Qs = Qf 1 d
hu
0.385
= K sQ f
(16)
Eq. 16 is approximately correct, but may give errors of more than 10% in the
calculated flow rate, especially for values of hd/hu near unity
Gary P. Merkley
78
Multiple Curves
Q = K sCf LHnuf
(17)
where Q is the flow rate; Cf and nf are calibration parameters for free-flow
conditions; L is the length of the crest; Hu is the total upstream hydraulic head
with respect to the crest elevation; and Ks is a coefficient for submerged flow, as
defined above. As before, the coefficient Ks is equal to 1.0 (unity) for free flow
and is less than 1.0 for submerged flow. Thus,
K s 1.0
(18)
V
2g
EL
HG L
hu
Hu
weir
hd
P
flow
5hu
79
Gary P. Merkley
h
Ks = A d + B
Hu
h
Ks = 1 d
Hu
(19)
(20)
h
h
Ks = a d + b d + c
Hu
Hu
(21)
Below the straight line (Eq. 19) the function from Eq. 20 is applied
And, Eq. 21 is applied above the straight line
In Eq. 19, let A = 0.2 y B = 0.8 (other values could be used, according to
judgment and data analysis)
In any case, A+B should be equal to 1.0 so that the line passes through the point
(1.0, 1,0) in the graph (see below).
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
-0.20
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
hd/Hu
This curve is defined by Eq. 20, but the values of and depend on the value of
Hu/P
Gary P. Merkley
80
The functions are based on a separate analysis of the laboratory results from
Scoresby (ibid) and are the following:
FG H IJ + 0.76
HPK
FH I
= 0.014 G J + 0.23
HPK
= 0.24
(22)
(23)
The point at which the two parts of the curves join is calculated in the following:
F hI
F hI
AG J + B = G1 J
HH K
H HK
t
(24)
h
F = A d + B 1 d = 0
Hu
Hu
h
F
= A + 1 d
h
Hu
d
Hu
(26)
With Eqs. 25 and 26, a numerical method can be applied to determine the value
of hd/Hu
Then, the value of Ks can be determined as follows:
h
Ks = A d + B
Hu
(25)
(27)
The resulting values of hd/Hu and Ks define the point at which the two parts of the
curves join together on the graph
81
Gary P. Merkley
hu
hinge
The calibration equations presented below for overshot gates are based on the
data and analysis reported by Wahlin & Replogle (1996)
The representation of overshot gates herein is limited to rectangular gate leafs in
rectangular channel cross sections, whereby the specified leaf width is assumed
to be the width of the cross section, at least in the immediate vicinity of the gate;
this means that weir end contractions are suppressed
The equation for both free and submerged flow is:
Q = K s Ca Ce
2 2g
Gwh1.5
e
3
(28)
where Q is the discharge; is the angle of the opening (10 65), measured
from the horizontal on the downstream side; Gw is the width of the gate leaf; and
he is the effective head
Gary P. Merkley
82
h
Ce = 0.075 u + 0.602
P
(29)
where P is the height of the gate sill with respect to the gate hinge elevation (m
or ft)
The value of P can be calculated directly based on the angle of the gate opening
and the length of the gate leaf (P = L sin, where L is the length of the gate)
The coefficient Ca is a function of the angle setting, , and can be adequately
described by a parabola:
(30)
where is in degrees
h 1.5
K s = C1 1 d
hu
C2
(31)
where,
C1 = 1.0666 0.00111
for < 60
C1 = 1.0
for 60
(32)
and,
(33)
in which is in degrees
83
Gary P. Merkley
hu
P
hd
flow
duckbill weir
oblique weir
The issue of approach velocity was raised above, but there is another standard
way to compensate for this
The reason this is important is that all of the above calibrations are based on
zero (or negligible) approach velocity, but in practice the approach velocity may
be significant
To approximately compensate for approach velocity, one approach (ha ha!)
method is to add the upstream velocity head to the head term in the weir
equation
For example, instead of this
nf
Qf = Cf ( hu )
(34)
84
nf
V2
Qf = Cf hu +
2g
(35)
or,
nf
Q2f
Qf = Cf hu +
2gA 2
(36)
which means it is an iterative solution for Qf, which tends to complicate matters a
lot, because the function is not always well-behaved
For known hu and A, and known Cf and nf, the solution to Eq. 36 may have
multiple roots; that is, multiple values of Qf may satisfy the equation (e.g. there
may be two values of Qf that are very near each other, and both positive)
There may also be no solution (!*%&!#@^*) to the equation
Conclusion: it is a logical way to account for approach velocity, but it can be
difficult to apply
One of the possible flow measurement errors is the effect of siltation upstream of
the weir
This often occurs in a canal that carries a medium to high sediment load
Some weirs have underflow gates which can be manually opened from time to
time, flushing out the sediment upstream of the weir
The effect is that the discharge flowing over the weir can be increased due to a
higher upstream apron, thus producing less flow contraction
The approximate percent increase in discharge caused by silting in front of a
rectangular weir is given below:
P/W
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
zero
85
2.5
16%
10%
6%
3%
Gary P. Merkley
hu
P
W
X
Gary P. Merkley
86