You are on page 1of 24

# HYDRAULIC JUMP

CVG3116 - Hydraulics

T.A.:
Tuesday Group 3T:
Brendan Wu 7305524
Kirsten Janssen - 7223408
Bart Majerczyk - 7777747
Khale Olumese 7612176
Department of Civil Engineering

## Lab Performed: October 18, 2016

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.

1.0 OBJECTIVE

## 4.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

TYPE CHAPTER LEVEL (LEVEL 2) 5
Type chapter title (level 3)
6

## 5.0 ANALYSIS OF DATA 4

5.1 DATA AND RESULTS 5
5.2 HYDRAULIC LAB REPORT CALCULATIONS

## 5.2.1 Experimental Discharge Sample Calculation (Trial #1)

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 ADDITIONAL WRITE-UP FOR NON-UNIFORM FLOW PROFILES

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

## 6.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 4

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.

## Figure 1: Specific-energy curve

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

## 3.0 MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT

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 HYDRAULIC LAB REPORT CALCULATIONS

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=

## Velocity Head, V2/2g Sample Calculation (y=0.5cm):

2

V 2 ( 590.52cm/ s )
=
2 g 2981 cm/s 2
2

V
=177.73 cm
2g

## Specific Energy, E Sample Calculation (y=0.5cm):

V2
2g
E=0.5 cm+177.73 cm
E=178.23 cm
E= y+

## y2/2 Sample Calculation (y=0.5cm):

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

## Specific Force, F Sample Calculation (y=0.5cm):

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

## Figure 1. Depth vs. Specific Force

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

## Figure 2. Depth vs. Specific Energy

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#1

Specific Force TG#2
Specific Force TG#3
Theoretical Specific Force

## Specific Energy TG#1

Specific Energy TG#2
Specific Energy TG#3
Theoretical Specific Energy

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

5.2.9 Theoretical Conjugate Depths for Each Gate Opening:

## Figure 5. Theoretical Conjugate Depths

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=

## The head loss at T.G.#1 as a percentage of specific energy at section 1 is 28.10%.

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=

## The head loss at T.G.#2 as a percentage of specific energy at section 1 is 8.94%.

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=

## The head loss at T.G.#3 as a percentage of specific energy at section 1 is 21.55%.

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=

## The flow Froude Number at Section 1 for T.G.#1 is 2.38.

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=

## For T.G. #3:

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

## The length of the hydraulic jump for T.G.#1 is 47.5cm.

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

## The length of the hydraulic jump for T.G.#3 is 9.5cm.

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:

## Figure 6. Computed Lj vs. 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 ADDITIONAL WRITE-UP FOR NON-UNIFORM FLOW PROFILES

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=

## Upstream of Slope Break:

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=

## The Froude number upstream of the slope break is 0.595.

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=

## The Froude number downstream of the slope break is 1.178.

5.3.2 Labeled Sketches of Water Profiles in Steps 4 and 6

## Figure 8. Sketch of Water Profile in Step 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

## For a steep slope:

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=

## The Froude number upstream of the hydraulic jump is 2.95.

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=

## The Froude number downstream of the hydraulic jump is 0.285.

5.3.5 Labeled Sketches of Water Profiles in Steps 10 and 12

## 6.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

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