Lab

© All Rights Reserved

2 views

Lab

© All Rights Reserved

- 9783319089478-t1
- PHY2June2004
- Momentum Examples
- Dynamic Modeling and Simulation of a Palm
- He Viscous Flow
- Assignment 06
- ACMOS-79 Computer fluid dynamics modelling of inside reservoirs fluid flow earthquake induced
- Pipe Flow Expert
- Dynamics Analysis of Fluid-Structure Interaction for a Biologically-Inspired Biped Robot Running on Water
- 9783642347375-t1
- flow_sim_InstructorGuide.ppt
- 8f27974a206ebd47e6cf7f37fff78fe4 9
- m Tech Energy Systems Syllabus
- Cfd Manual Fluent
- CE2134 (Ppt) 0. Introduction
- Design Air Systems
- 6dof Rigid Motion Cfd
- MT BITS
- 2016 WE3 Lec18 OpenChannelReviewPart1(1)
- Design of Oil and Natural Gas Pipelines

You are on page 1of 24

CVG3116 - Hydraulics

T.A.:

Adrian Simpalean

Tuesday Group 3T:

Brendan Wu 7305524

Kirsten Janssen - 7223408

Bart Majerczyk - 7777747

Khale Olumese 7612176

Department of Civil Engineering

Report date: November 1, 2016

ABSTRACT

The purpose of the lab was to create a specific-force and specific-energy diagram, and to

establish a better understanding of hydraulic jump characteristics. Overall the lab was able to

achieve the objectives. However, there was an error in regards to the amount of headloss. The lab

established that the position where the critical depth is reached, is where the hydraulic jump will

occur. In addition, the variation of energy levels of the system will also impact the position of the

jump.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 OBJECTIVE

TYPE CHAPTER LEVEL (LEVEL 2) 5

Type chapter title (level 3)

6

5.1 DATA AND RESULTS 5

5.2 HYDRAULIC LAB REPORT CALCULATIONS

6

5.2.2 Determinations of Theoretical Specific Force and Specific Energy Sample Calculations

6

5.2.3 Plot of Depth vs. Specific Force

6

5.2.4 Plot of Depth vs. Specific Energy

6

5.2.5,6 Experimental Values of Specific Force and Specific Energy 6

5.2.7 Plot of Specific Force Values for y1 and y2 6

5.2.8 Plot of Specific Energy Values for y1 and y2 6

5.2.9 Theoretical Conjugate Depths for Each Gate Opening 6

5.2.10 Head Loss as a Percentage of Specific Energy at Section 1 6

5.2.11 Flow Froude Number at Section 1 6

5.2.12 Length of the Hydraulic Jump, Lj Calculation

6

5.2.13 Percent Difference of Length of the Hydraulic Jump, L j

6

5.2.14 Plot of Computed Values Lj versus the Flow Froude Number at Section 1

5.2.15 Comparison of Specific Energies at Each Location 6

5.3.1 Froude Number Upstream and Downstream of Slope Break 6

5.3.2 Labeled Sketches of Water Profiles in Steps 4 and 6 6

5.3.3 Confirmation that the Slope Downstream of the Slope Break is Steep 6

5.3.4 Froude Number Upstream and Downstream of Hydraulic Jump

6

5.3.5 Labeled Sketches of Water Profiles in Steps 10 and 12 6

6

5

TYPE CHAPTER LEVEL (LEVEL 2) 5

Type chapter title (level 3)

6

7.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

TYPE CHAPTER LEVEL (LEVEL 2) 5

Type chapter title (level 3) 6

REFERENCES

4

3

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1a. Experimental Data for Hydraulic Jump Experiment

1

Table 1b. Experimental Discharge 1

Table 2. Determination of Theoretical Specific Force and Specific Energy 1

Table 3. Determination of Experimental Values of Specific Force and Specific Energy

Table 4. Comparison of Specific Energy at Each Location 1

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Depth vs. Specific Force 1

Figure 2. Depth vs. Specific Energy 1

Figure 3. Depth vs. Specific Force, Theoretical and Experimental Values 1

Figure 4. Depth vs. Specific Energy, Theoretical and Experimental Values 1

Figure 5. Theoretical Conjugate Depths

1

Figure 6. Computed Lj vs. Froude Number at Section 1

1

Figure 7. Sketch of Water Profile in Step 4 1

Figure 8. Sketch of Water Profile in Step 6 1

Figure 9. Sketch of Water Profile in Step 10 1

Figure 10. Sketch of Water Profile in Step 12

1

1.0 OBJECTIVE

The goal of the experiment is to compare and create specific energy and specific force

graphs, to study the characteristics of the hydraulic jump.

2.0 INTRODUCTION

The hydraulic jump is a phenomenon that occurs when a fluid in an open channel

experiences a rapid transition in its flowing state, from supercritical to subcritical state.

The critical states can be determined by using the specific-energy curve as shown below.

Once the water encounters a flow depth above the critical depth, a hydraulic jump will occur.

From the conservation of momentum theorem, an equation can be derived to describe the

depth of a channel with a stable hydraulic jump:

With the equation above, and the specific force and specific energy equations. A specific

force and energy graph can be generated for the experimental channel.

Specific energy:

Where:

v = velocity

Specific force:

where:

q = flow rate

y = values of y along the channel

4.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

5.0 ANALYSIS OF DATA

5.1 DATA AND RESULTS

Table 1a. Experimental Data for Hydraulic Jump Experiment

T.G.

Tail Gate (T.G.) Height

yd (cm) ya (cm)

(cm)

#1

5.4

3.21

1.81

#2

3.4

3.25

1.6

#3

2

3.55

1.47

Table 1b. Experimental Discharge

T.G.

Change in Water Level

(cm)

#1

5

#2

5

#3

5

Average

y1 (cm)

y2 (cm)

Lj (cm)

2.5

2.6

3.9

12

9.5

7.5

56

29

11.5

Volume Difference

(cm3)

21655

21655

21655

5.2.1 Experimental Discharge Sample Calculation (Trial #1):

Time (s)

Q (cm3/s)

5.87

5.64

5.82

3689.10

3839.54

3720.79

3749.81

Length: 122cm

Width: 35.5cm

Change in height of water: 5cm

volume

time

l w height

Q=

time

122 cm35.5 cm 5 cm

Q=

5.87 s

Q=3689.10 c m3 /s

Q=

5.2.2 Determinations of Theoretical Specific Force and Specific Energy Sample Calculations:

Qavg=3749.81 c m3 /s

g=981cm/s2

b=12.7cm

Q

b

3749.81 c m3 / s

q=

12.7 cm

q=295.26 c m2 / s

q=

Q q

=

A y

3

3749.81 c m /s

V=

12.7 cm0.5 cm

V =590.52 cm /s

V=

2

V 2 ( 590.52cm/ s )

=

2 g 2981 cm/s 2

2

V

=177.73 cm

2g

V2

2g

E=0.5 cm+177.73 cm

E=178.23 cm

E= y+

2

y 2 ( 0.5 cm )

=

2

2

2

y

=0.125 c m 2

2

q2/gy Sample Calculation (y=0.5cm):

2 2

295.26 c m

2

s

q

=

gy 981 cm

0.5 cm

2

s

q2

=177.73 c m2

gy

y2 q2

+

2 gy

F=0.125 c m2 +177.73 c m2

F=177.86 cm2

F=

Depth, y

Velocity, V

v2/2g

E (cm)

y2/2

q2/gy

(cm)

(cm/s)

(cm)

(cm2)

(cm2)

0.5

590.52

177.73

178.23

0.125

177.73

1.0

295.26

44.43

45.43

0.500

88.87

1.5

196.84

19.75

21.25

1.125

59.24

2.0

147.63

11.11

13.11

2.000

44.43

2.5

118.10

7.11

9.61

3.125

35.55

3.0

98.42

4.94

7.94

4.500

29.62

3.5

84.36

3.63

7.13

6.125

25.39

F (cm2)

177.86

89.37

60.37

46.43

38.67

34.12

31.52

4.0

4.5

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

11.0

73.82

65.61

59.05

49.21

42.18

36.91

32.81

29.53

26.84

2.78

2.19

1.78

1.23

0.91

0.69

0.55

0.44

0.37

6.78

6.69

6.78

7.23

7.91

8.69

9.55

10.44

11.37

8.000

10.125

12.500

18.000

24.500

32.000

40.500

50.000

60.500

22.22

19.75

17.77

14.81

12.70

11.11

9.87

8.89

8.08

30.22

29.87

30.27

32.81

37.20

43.11

50.37

58.89

68.58

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

140.00

5.2.4 Plot of Depth vs. Specific Energy:

160.00

180.00

200.00

12.0

10.0

8.0

Depth, y (cm)

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0

5.2.5,6 Experimental Values of Specific Force and Specific Energy:

Table 3. Determination of Experimental Values of Specific Force and Specific Energy

Exp. Depth

Velocity, V

V2/2g

E

y2/2

q2/gy

(cm)

(cm/s)

(cm)

(cm)

(cm2)

(cm2)

yd

3.21

91.98

4.31

7.52

5.15

27.68

(TG#1)

ya

1.81

163.13

13.56

15.37

1.64

49.10

(TG#1)

y1

2.5

118.10

7.11

9.61

3.13

35.55

(TG#1)

y2

12

24.61

0.31

12.31

72.00

7.41

(TG#1)

yd

3.25

90.85

4.21

7.46

5.28

27.34

(TG#2)

ya

1.6

184.54

17.36

18.96

1.28

55.54

(TG#2)

y1

2.6

113.56

6.57

9.17

3.38

34.18

(TG#2)

y2

9.5

31.08

0.49

9.99

45.13

9.35

(TG#2)

yd

3.55

83.17

3.53

7.08

6.30

25.03

(TG#3)

ya

1.47

200.86

20.56

22.03

1.08

60.45

(TG#3)

y1

3.9

75.71

2.92

6.82

7.61

22.79

F

(cm2)

32.84

50.74

38.67

79.41

32.63

56.82

37.56

54.48

31.33

61.53

30.39

(TG#3)

y2

(TG#3)

7.5

39.37

0.79

8.29

28.13

11.85

39.97

Specific Force TG#2

Specific Force TG#3

Theoretical Specific Force

Specific Energy TG#2

Specific Energy TG#3

Theoretical Specific Energy

5.2.9 Theoretical Conjugate Depths for Each Gate Opening:

For TG#1, the theoretical conjugate depth is approximately 4.3cm. For TG#2, the theoretical

conjugate depth is approximately 4.9cm. For TG#3, the theoretical conjugate depth is

approximately 5.8cm.

5.2.10 Head Loss as a Percentage of Specific Energy at Section 1:

For T.G. #1:

E1= 9.61cm

E2= 12.31cm

E1E2

100

E1

9.6112.31

Head Loss as a of Specific Energy at Section 1=

100

9.61

Head Loss as a of Specific Energy at Section 1=28.10

Head Loss as a of Specific Energy at Section 1=

For T.G. #2:

E1= 9.17cm

E2= 9.99cm

E1E2

100

E1

9.179.99

Head Loss as a of Specific Energy at Section 1=

100

9.17

Head Loss as a of Specific Energy at Section 1=8.94

Head Loss as a of Specific Energy at Section 1=

For T.G. #3:

E1= 6.82cm

E2= 8.29cm

E1E2

100

E1

6.828.29

Head Loss as a of Specific Energy at Section 1=

100

6.82

Head Loss as a of Specific Energy at Section 1=21.55

Head Loss as a of Specific Energy at Section 1=

5.2.11 Flow Froude Number at Section 1:

For T.G. #1:

y1= 2.5cm

v1=118.10cm/s

v

gy

118.10 cm/s

Fr=

981 cm/s 2 (2.5 cm)

Fr=2.38

Fr=

For T.G. #2:

y1= 2.6cm

v1=113.56cm/s

113.56 cm/ s

981 cm/s 2 (2.6 cm)

Fr=2.25

The flow Froude Number at Section 1 for T.G.#2 is 2.25.

Fr=

y1= 5.6cm

v1=52.73cm/s

Fr=

52.73 cm/s

981 cm/s 2 (5.6 cm)

Fr=0.71

The flow Froude Number at Section 1 for T.G.#3 is 0.71.

5.2.12 Length of the Hydraulic Jump, Lj Calculation:

For T.G. #1:

y1= 2.5cm

y2= 12cm

L j (theoretical )=5.0 ( y 2 y 1)

L j (theoretical )=5.0 (12 cm2.5 cm)

L j (theoretical )=47.5 cm

For T.G. #2:

y1= 2.6cm

y2= 9.5cm

L j (theoretical )=5.0 (9.5 cm2.6 cm)

L j (theoretical )=34.5 cm

The length of the hydraulic jump for T.G.#2 is 34.5cm.

For T.G. #3:

y1= 5.6cm

y2= 7.5cm

L j (theoretical )=5.0 (7.5 cm5.6 m)

L j (theoretical)=9.5 cm

5.2.13 Percent Difference of Length of the Hydraulic Jump, Lj:

For T.G. #1:

L j (experimental )=56 cm

TheoreticalExperimental

100

Theoretical

47.556

Difference=

100

47.5

Difference=17.89

Difference=

The percent difference between computed and measured values of length of the hydraulic jump

at T.G.#1 is 17.89%.

For T.G. #2:

L j (experimental )=29 cm

34.529

100

34.5

Difference=15.94

Difference=

The percent difference between computed and measured values of length of the hydraulic jump

at T.G.#2 is 15.94%.

For T.G. #3:

L j (experimental )=11.5 cm

9.511.5

100

9.5

Difference=21.05

Difference=

The percent difference between computed and measured values of length of the hydraulic jump

at T.G.#3 is 21.05%.

5.2.14 Plot of Computed Values Lj versus the Flow Froude Number at Section 1:

5.2.15 Comparison of Specific Energies at Each Location:

Table 4. Comparison of Specific Energy at Each Location

Tail Gate

Location

TG#1

Upstream of Sluice Gate, yd

Downstream of Sluice Gate, ya

Upstream of Jump, y1

Downstream of Jump, y2

TG#2

Upstream of Sluice Gate, yd

Downstream of Sluice Gate, ya

Upstream of Jump, y1

Downstream of Jump, y2

TG#3

Upstream of Sluice Gate, yd

Downstream of Sluice Gate, ya

Upstream of Jump, y1

Downstream of Jump, y2

E (cm)

7.52

15.37

9.61

12.31

7.46

18.96

9.17

9.99

7.08

22.03

7.02

8.29

For each tailgate height, the specific energy is highest downstream of the sluice gate, and second

highest downstream of the jump. The specific energy is lowest upstream of the sluice gate and

second lowest upstream of the jump for both TG#1 and TG#2, but not for TG#3. The

inconsistency is likely due to experimental error.

5.3.1 Froude Number Upstream and Downstream of Slope Break

3

Qavg=3749.81 c m /s

b=12.7cm

Q

b

2

q=295.26 c m / s

q=

y=6.31cm

Q q

=

A y

295.26 c m2 / s

V=

6.31 cm

V =46.79 cm/s

V=

Fr=

v

gy

46.79 cm/s

981 cm/ s 2 (6.31 cm)

Fr=0.595

Fr=

Downstream of Slope Break:

y=4.0cm

295.26 c m2 / s

4 cm

V =73.82 cm/s

V=

73.82m/ s

981 cm/s 2 (4 cm)

Fr=1.178

Fr=

5.3.2 Labeled Sketches of Water Profiles in Steps 4 and 6

5.3.3 Confirmation that the Slope Downstream of the Slope Break is Steep

For a rectangular channel:

q2

yc=

g

( )

1

3

(295.26 c m2 /s )2

yc=

981 cm/ s2

y c =4.46 cm

yn<yc

1

3

4cm<4.46cm

Therefore, the slope downstream was in fact steep.

5.3.4 Froude Number Upstream and Downstream of Hydraulic Jump

Upstream of Hydraulic Jump:

y=2.17cm

Q q

=

A y

2

295.26 c m / s

V=

2.17 cm

V =136.06 cm/ s

V=

Fr=

v

gy

136.06 cm/ s

981 cm/s 2 (2.17 cm )

Fr=2.95

Fr=

Downstream of Hydraulic Jump:

y=10.3cm

295.26 c m2 / s

10.3 cm

V =28.67 cm/ s

V=

28.67 cm/s

981 cm/s 2 (10.3 m)

Fr=0.285

Fr=

5.3.5 Labeled Sketches of Water Profiles in Steps 10 and 12

I guess question 6 for the additional write-up for non-uniform flow profile should go in here.

Discuss the position of the hydraulic jump as a result of the slope break

The hydraulic jump is seemly harmless initially, but over time, it can cause pitting and

accelerate erosion. As a result, an uncontrolled hydraulic jump can cause catastrophic failures to

hydraulic structures such as dams, and channels. Hence why engineers must understand the

characteristics of the hydraulic jump, and methods to control it.

In the lab, the position of the hydraulic jump was found to be in correlation to the amount

of resistance or energy downstream, which was simulated by the tail gate. Lower energy levels

(higher tail gate position) caused the jump to move upstream, while higher energy created the

opposite reaction. In addition to the position of the jump, the height of the hydraulic jump should

theoretically increase along with the energy levels, and the experimental data matched the theory.

Similarly, the critical depth also increased with respect to energy, this also matches the theory.

With the decrease of the tail gate height, headloss should theoretically decrease as well.

However, the calculated headloss results of the lab was inconsistent with the theory. The

headloss percentage change from 28.1%, 8.9%, 21.6%, while the gate height was at 5.4cm,

3.4cm, 2.0cm, respectively. This may be a result of human error during the measurement of the

stream.

In the second part of the lab, the slope of the channel was changed instead of the tail gate.

Predictably, an inclining slope, with a supercritical upstream, caused a hydraulic jump upstream

of the slope break. When the slope was decreased, and the flow upstream changed to subcritical,

a hydraulic jump occurred downstream of the slope break. The different position of the two

jumps was determined to be caused by where the transition from subcritical to supercritical

(critical depth) occurred and vice versa. The downslope added energy to the system, so the jump

occurred after the break. While the incline slope removed energy from the system, so the jump

occurred upstream the break.

7.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

The characteristics of the hydraulic jump is critical for all open channel designs. Ignoring

it can be catastrophic. The position of the jump was found to be dependent on the initial state of

the flow, and where the critical depth occurs, due to the energy level differences of the flow

(subcritical vs super critical). By understanding this principle, engineers can design hydraulic

structures with a predictable hydraulic jump, and erosion controls around the predetermined

position.

REFERENCES

- 9783319089478-t1Uploaded byamirhosseine00
- PHY2June2004Uploaded byapi-3726022
- Momentum ExamplesUploaded byDinesh Chandrasekaran
- Dynamic Modeling and Simulation of a PalmUploaded byIndra Alamsyah
- He Viscous FlowUploaded byeyob233
- Assignment 06Uploaded byPrethiveDhilip
- ACMOS-79 Computer fluid dynamics modelling of inside reservoirs fluid flow earthquake inducedUploaded byIoan Sorin Leoveanu
- Pipe Flow ExpertUploaded bydchz_62
- Dynamics Analysis of Fluid-Structure Interaction for a Biologically-Inspired Biped Robot Running on WaterUploaded byAurel GS
- 9783642347375-t1Uploaded byVaidyanathan Venkataraman
- flow_sim_InstructorGuide.pptUploaded byManuel Otazú Vera
- 8f27974a206ebd47e6cf7f37fff78fe4 9Uploaded byepiceno
- m Tech Energy Systems SyllabusUploaded bywaku74
- Cfd Manual FluentUploaded byLaxman Kumar
- CE2134 (Ppt) 0. IntroductionUploaded byhout_ang
- Design Air SystemsUploaded byLidijaSpaseska
- 6dof Rigid Motion CfdUploaded byDaniel Coelho
- MT BITSUploaded byKundan Kumar
- 2016 WE3 Lec18 OpenChannelReviewPart1(1)Uploaded byThais Salles
- Design of Oil and Natural Gas PipelinesUploaded byAhmed Moustafa
- Airflow Control.docUploaded byAzura Bahrudin
- BTechCE4SemSyllabusUploaded bySheezan Khan
- CVL100_L3Uploaded byAdarsh Agrawal
- Energy Dissipation - InglesUploaded byWily Rogerio Vasquez Ramirez
- Buchner (2007) Extreme Wave Effects on Deepwater Floating StructuresUploaded byrendezvous26
- LeamyUploaded byAkinbode Sunday Oluwagbenga
- Introduction and Basic Concepts of Fluid Mechanics-1Uploaded byRishi Kumar
- An Analysis of the Impact of Valve Closure Time OnUploaded byAsgard Sanchez R Rmz
- 1545134956299_Transport Phenomena PPTUploaded byzain
- Assignment 1Uploaded byAileen Arada

- Edwin Tan Pei Ming Term PaperUploaded byEdwin Tan Pei Ming
- OffshoreL1 2 Offshore Wall Thickness Design Rev03 10Uploaded bykristenfraser88
- Structural Behaviour of Concrete With Replacement of FevicolUploaded bySanjeevKumar
- Cantera10.1Uploaded byAnmol Kumar
- Syllabus_2305_Spring_2011-1Uploaded byjan boomsma
- Hans-Benjamin Braun et al- Emergence of soliton chirality in a quantum antiferromagnetUploaded byPo48HSD
- single electron Transistor.docxUploaded byPrabhat Sharma
- 1-s2.0-S0043164812003419-main.pdfUploaded byDebashis Puhan
- Gdjp Unit Joe IVUploaded byJoe Kamal Raj
- Lecture-21_Wire-Drawing.pdfUploaded byprasanna
- ThermalUploaded bynirga
- E59ImpactLabUploaded byHafizuddin Razak
- pap12_4.pdfUploaded byJuan Pablo Sepúlveda
- EC105Uploaded byapi-3853441
- ME 1401 FEA- VII Sem (ME)Uploaded bySubramanian Manivel
- Components of CorkUploaded byPeter Schmiedin
- Cantilever DerivationUploaded byOdee Ebita
- Materials for Sour Service Nao Spc d Mw 001Uploaded byTahir Alzuhd
- 2 ULS - Bending with or without axial force (2014).pdfUploaded byLuke Ldh
- Performance of Annular Fins With Different ProfilesUploaded byVasant Sridhar
- 3. Hydodynamic Equation of Flow.pdfUploaded byhout rothana
- E_7403-9008-01_ Air Flow Calculation VENTURI_CustomerUploaded byraobabar21
- The Shear Behaviour of the Reinforced Concrete Four-pile CapsUploaded byHumberto Magno Fuke
- CAL-1 pankaj jeUploaded byAmit Kumar
- Mems Report JournalUploaded byRodriguez Arthurs
- Co-Cr-MoUploaded byAkmal
- Solid ThermalUploaded byMarian Dragos
- Mathermatica-Computer-Programs-for-Physical-Chemistry.pdfUploaded byAmar Alansi
- Final exam-20142015Uploaded byChoa Pei Shuang
- Practice Exam 3.21Uploaded byKevin Hao