You are on page 1of 10

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET

)
Volume 8, Issue 10, October 2017, pp. 677–686, Article ID: IJCIET_08_10_071
Available online at http://http://www.iaeme.com/ijciet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=10
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

EFFECTS OF CROSS-SECTIONAL GEOMETRY
OF PRISMATIC REACHES ON THE MANNING
COEFFICIENTS
Mas Mera
Civil Engineering
The University of Andalas, 26163, Indonesia

Rahmi Hardianti
Civil Engineering
The University of Andalas, 26163, Indonesia

Mochammad Riondy
Civil Engineering
The University of Andalas, 26163, Indonesia

Rico Dwi Buana Putra
Civil Engineering
The University of Andalas, 26163, Indonesia

ABSTRACT
The resistance coefficient is needed in designing a channel and in determining the
characteristics of both man-made and natural channels. Many factors affect the value
of the coefficient; some of them have been reported. The present research gives
emphasis on the effects of cross-sectional geometry on the resistance coefficient in the
uniform-flow formula of Manning by modelling physically the uniform flow in the
laboratory. Nine model-prismatic reaches are used in the present investigation. They
consist of two kinds of cross-sectional geometry, i.e. rectangular shape (three reaches)
and semi-circular shape (six reaches). Three kinds of homogeneous surface are
considered, they are PVC, gutter carpet and sandy carpet. The longitudinal slope of
each reach can be adjusted. The slope has 10 variations from 0.0025 to 0.025 m/m
with the step of 0.0025 m/m. The flow rate is determined by measuring the water
volume and the time taken. This is done five times to get the discharge average. The
flow depths are measured at five points to get the flow depth average. Such
measurements are performed for each slope variation of the considered reach. The
experimental results show that the reaches with the same cross-sectional geometry
even though they are different in size give ‘nearly' the same resistance coefficient.
However, the reaches with the different cross-section give the different coefficient

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 677 editor@iaeme.com

com/IJCIET/index. The reaches with sharp-curvature geometry (e. and the resistance factor n is called as Manning roughness-coefficient or Manning resistance-coefficient or just simply Manning’s n or Manning coefficient. Chow [1] insisted that. (6) obstruction. whereas sharp curvature with severe meandering will increase the coefficient. PVC. we believe that the shape of the cross section of a channel can significantly affect the value of the coefficient. (4) channel alignment. whereas scouring may do reverse and increase the coefficient. and shape along the channel length. in which the value of the coefficient in most streams decrease with increase in stage and in discharge.asp 678 editor@iaeme. that is something like the present of log jams and bridge piers in which tend to increase the coefficient. which is treated as constants for all unit systems [2. Mas Mera. This statement of Chow is as a starting point of the present investigation. k is a proportionality constant representing reach conductance. 8(10). 5]. INTRODUCTION Chow [1] stated that factors that have the greatest influence upon the Manning resistance- coefficient in both man-made and natural channels are: (1) surface roughness. in 1889 published an simple equation that best fit the experimental results was [2. The Manning equation has come to be http://www. As reported by Dingman [2] and Dooge [4] that subsequent researchers replaced the constant k by its inverse 1/n. an Irish engineer. rectangular) give higher value of the coefficient than those with smooth one (e. As reported by Dingman [2] that in the century following the publication of the Chézy equation in 1769. that consists of irregularities in wetted perimeter and variations in cross section. size. that may be regarded as a kind of surface roughness.com/IJCIET/issues. Effects of Cross-Sectional Geometry of Prismatic Reaches on the Manning Coefficients. pp.iaeme. there was no definite evidence about the size and shape of a channel as an important factor affecting the value of resistance coefficient. For that reason we try to find some definite evidences for that.g. Rahmi Hardianti. (7) stage and discharge. Then. Robert Manning. (3) channel irregularity. sandy carpet Cite this Article: Mas Mera. 2017. R is the hydraulic radius. Keywords: Manning coefficient. that is represented by the size and shape of the grains of the material forming the wetted perimeter and producing a retarding effect on the flow. This leads to 1 23 12 v= R S n (2) The resulting equation is now called as Manning’s equation or just simply Manning equation. Rahmi Hardianti. and S is the longitudinal slope. Mochammad Riondy and Rico Dwi Buana Putra even though they have the same surface. (2) vegetation. cross-sectional geometry. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology. in which silting may change a very irregular channel into a comparatively uniform one and decrease the coefficient. but it can reduce the capacity of the channel and retard the flow. 677–686 http://www.com .g.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=10 1. 3] 2 1 v = kR 3 S 2 (1) Where v is the velocity. in which the channel with smooth curvature with large radius will give a relatively low value of the coefficient.iaeme. European hydraulic engineers did considerable experimental researches to develop practical ways to predict open-channel flow resistance. At this moment. gutter-carpet. Mochammad Riondy and Rico Dwi Buana Putra. (5) silting and scouring. In the future. however. semi-circular). the selection of the cross-sectional geometry should be considered in designing a channel.

A set of physical model of reaches is built up in the laboratory (Figure 1). a stilling basin at the upstream of the reach. the Manning resistance-coefficient can be used to describe water basin characteristics [6]. 9]. Based on the above explanations. the water is circulated by pumping it from the receiving basin to the stilling basin.iaeme.com . it will focus on the effects of geometrical shape of the channel cross-section against the Manning resistance-coefficient. In the work of Mera&Robi [11]. and a receiving basin at the downstream. The model consists of a metal frame as a support. This was done by measuring the discharge and hydraulic variables at a given time in a given reach. The Manning equation uses empirically determined resistance-coefficient [8]. 2.asp 679 editor@iaeme. METHODOLOGY The previous investigators [10. Meanwhile. The Manning resistance-coefficient can be determined by modeling the uniform flow and then solving the Manning equation as done by Djajadi [10] and Mera&Robi [11]. and semi-circular shapes with a diameter of 135 mm. the discharge Qi is determined by measuring the volume of water Vi that comes out of the reach and also by measuring the time taken ∆ti Vi Qi = ∆ti (3) These measurements are done five times in every slope variation S to get the average discharge Q http://www. The cross-sectional geometries are prismatic. The homogeneous surfaces considered are PVC. Dingman [2] also reported that the Manning equation was not derived based on the principles of the fluid mechanics. semi-circular shapes with a diameter of 85 mm. In the work of Djajadi [10]. the reach slopes were varied so that the resulting coefficients are ranged from minimum to maximum. however. gutter carpet. Firstly. The water from the stilling basin flows through a considered reach and comes to the receiving basin. we determine the resistance coefficient for reaches with a homogeneous surface. the longitudinal slope of the reach was constant. That is why the Manning equation is sometime called as the semi-empirical Manning equation [5. The Manning coefficient can be included in the shallow water-wave equations to both simulate and reproduce wind and tidally driven hydrodynamics [7]. Then. there will be some possibilities to identify other significant factors that significantly influence the Manning resistance-coefficient such as factor of the geometry shape of channel cross-section. As a result.com/IJCIET/index. and solving the Manning equation for n. that was from sub-critical to super-critical flow. Effects of Cross-Sectional Geometry of Prismatic Reaches on the Manning Coefficients largely accepted as the resistance equation for open-channel flow. determining the reach-average velocity. and sandy carpet. Moharana&Katua [12] made an effort to predict Manning coefficient of a meandering open-channel flow using neuro-fuzzy inference system. nor that was established by rigorous statistical analysis. replacing the Chezý equation in practical applications [2]. As a result. The sandy carpet-surface is the gutter-carpet surface with sand stuck on. The states of uniform flow in the works of Mera and Robi were also varying. The longitudinal slope can be varied as needed. The geometries considered are rectangular shapes with a width of 12 cm. In the present investigation. Nowadays. the primary objective of the present study is to find out the effects of cross-sectional geometry of prismatic reaches on the Manning resistance-coefficient. 11] focused on the determination of the Manning resistance- coefficients for channels either with homogeneous surfaces or composite surfaces.

[15] proposed a procedure to predict a river discharge using only water level data at a single gauged site. In each slope S. the average discharge in the normal events is estimated using a rating curve which is made specifically for a certain cross-section [13.0025 m/m. In a natural channel. The next step is to replace the present reach with one of other reaches. and one resistance coefficient n. one average depth y.. http://www. as well as 1-D shallow-water wave equations and occasional maxima surface flow-velocity by measurements.iaeme. 14]. Ayvaz [16] estimated the Manning coefficient values by lingking simulation–optimization model simultaneously in shallow water flows. The average velocity v can be determined by dividing the average discharge Q by wetted area A. Coratoet al. Mochammad Riondy and Rico Dwi Buana Putra 1 5 Q= ∑ Qi 5 i =1 (4) The slope variations are from 0. Mas Mera. and every slope variation we should have one average discharge Q. Meanwhile.com/IJCIET/index.com .0025 to 0. like a river. each reach we have 10 slope variations. the flow depth yi is measured at five positions along the middle of the cross-sectional reach to get the average water-depth y 1 5 y= ∑ yi 5 i =1 (5) Section A-A: 12 cm 85 mm 135 mm Slope adjuster Slope adjuster Pump A A Reach Stilling Receiving basin basin Figure 1 The physical model in the laboratory Finally.025 m/m with the step of 0. Rahmi Hardianti. the open-channel flow resistance is expressed as 1 2 1 n= AR 3 S 2 Q (6) If the experiment is successfully done. and the procedures are repeated. For convenience.asp 680 editor@iaeme. the Manning resistance-coefficient n can be determined by use of the uniform- flow formula as expressed in Equation (2). In the flood events.

Figure 2 shows that the relationship between the water depth and the Manning resistance-coefficient in which confirms that the increase of water depth will decrease the coefficient. [17] made a list of the Manning resistance- coefficients for three depth ranges. Reaches with a PVC Surface The reaches with the PVC surface are in the rectangular shape with a width of 12 cm.00 1.0 Water Depth (cm) Figure 2 Reaches with a PVC surface: the relationship between the water depth (cm) and the Manning resistance-coefficient 0.9 3.007 0. This is due to the water depth in the 85 mm one is a bit higher than that in the 135 mm one.e.011 135 mm Semi-circular 0.65 0. Pritchard &Leylegian [9] reported that Linsleyet al. 15 to 60 cm.009 0. 3 and 4. normal and maximum values.30 1.6 2. This also validates Chow’s report [1].com .003 2.20 1.iaeme.7 3.1 3.7 2. The experimental results and the solution of the Manning resistance- equation for open-channel flow are shown in Figures 2.40 Velocity (m/s) Figure 3 Reaches with a PVC surface: the relationship between the flow velocity (cm/s) and the Manning resistance-coefficient http://www.35 1.0 3.3 3.25 1.95 1.013 12 cm Rectangular Manning Coefficient 0.8 3.011 135 mm Semi-circular 0.15 1.015 85 mm Semi-circular 0.015 85 mm Semi-circular 0.6 3.e.1.5 3.013 12 cm Rectangular Manning Coefficient 0.2 3.asp 681 editor@iaeme. 3. However.com/IJCIET/index.8 2. whereas the reaches with semi-circular shape give ‘nearly’ the same value of the resistance coefficient even though they are different in size.007 0.009 0. The reach with an 85 mm semi-circular has slightly lower coefficient than that with a 135 mm one. 0.70 0.005 0. i. There are three reaches with a PVC surface.90 0. three reaches with a gutter-carpet surface.60 0.4 3.75 0.9 4. minimum.005 0. i. and > 60 cm. Effects of Cross-Sectional Geometry of Prismatic Reaches on the Manning Coefficients 3. and in other semi-circular shape but with a diameter of 135 mm. All of the figures show that the reach with the rectangular shape has the highest values of the coefficient. Chow [1] made a list of the coefficients for three categories.5 2. in the semi-circular shape with a diameter of 85 mm.80 0. 0 to 15 cm.85 0. and three reaches with a sandy carpet-surface.10 1.003 0. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Each reach has a homogeneous surface.05 1.

0043 to 0. that is the reach with the rectangular shape has the highest coefficient.8 3.9 4.004 2. 0. Reaches with a Gutter-Carpet Surface The reaches with the gutter-carpet surface also have the same geometries and sizes as those with the PVC surface.5 3.6 3.014 135 mm Semi-Circular 0.iaeme.0 3. and 0.003 0. In case of a non-prismatic channel. Rahmi Hardianti.015 85 mm Semi-circular 0.asp 682 editor@iaeme.0089 for the 135 mm semi-circular geometry.0150 0.2. 0.011 0.0068 to 0.007 0.3 3.014. 6 and 7. Saleh et al. The Manning resistance-coefficients for this PVC surface are ranged from 0.0072 for the 85 mm semi-circular geometry.0250 Longitudinal slope (m/m) Figure 4 Reaches with a PVC surface: the relationship between the longitudinal slope (m/m) and the Manning resistance-coefficient 3.0225 0. The results are shown in Figures 5. The relationship between the longitudinal slope and the Manning coefficient is shown in Figure 4 in which the steeper slope will lead to the higher resistance coefficient.1 4.2 3.7 2.0200 0. Based on Figures 2 and 4 that the stages are in contrast to the longitudinal slopes in which the steeper slope makes the stage lower.com . The longitudinal slope is function of topography which in turn will affect the travel time [19]. [18] reported that the impact of river longitudinal slope on stages is bigger than that of the irregularity of cross sections.010 0. Mochammad Riondy and Rico Dwi Buana Putra The relationship between the velocity and the Manning coefficient is shown in Figure 3 in which the faster flow will lead to the higher resistance coefficient.0075 0.1 3.8 2.com/IJCIET/index.0100 0.0025 0. They are: 0.3 4.9 3.4 Water Depth (cm) Figure 5 Reaches with a gutter-carpet surface: the relationship between the water depth (cm) and the Manning resistance-coefficient http://www. Mas Mera.006 0.0175 0.013 12 cm Rectangular 135 mm Semi-circular Manning Coefficient 0. whereas the reaches with semi-circular shape give ‘nearly’ the same coefficient even though they are different in size.005 0.0 4.004 to 0.008 0. All of the figures show the same trends as those in the previous figures for the PVC surfaces.0049 to 0.2 4.0139 for the rectangular geometry.4 3.016 85 mm Semi-Circular 12 cm Rectangular Manning Coefficient 0. 0.0050 0.009 0.018 0.7 3. Figure 5 shows that the relationship between the water depth and the Manning coefficient in which confirms that the coefficient decreases since the water depth increases.012 0.0125 0.

3.018 0.0100 0. sandy carpet-surface. Effects of Cross-Sectional Geometry of Prismatic Reaches on the Manning Coefficients Figure 6 shows that the increase of the velocity is proportional to the increase of the resistance coefficient.008 0.0050 0.65 0.014 135 mm Semi-Circular 0.85 0. The coefficients and the water depths are inversely related.0081 for the 85 mm semi-circular.asp 683 editor@iaeme.016 12 cm Rectangular Manning Coefficient 0.95 1. i.018 85 mm Semi-Circular 0.60 0.005 to 0.0075 0.010 0.004 0.20 1. whereas the reaches with semi-circular shape give ‘nearly’ the same coefficient even though they are different in size.com . The relationship between the water depth and the Manning resistance-coefficient is shown in Figure 8.0161 for the rectangular geometry. They are: 0.012 0.05 1. also have the same geometries and sizes as those with the PVC and gutter-carpet surfaces.008 0. Reaches with a Sandy Carpet-Surface The reaches with the third homogeneous surface.75 0.0250 Longitudinal Slope (m/m) Figure 7 Reaches with a gutter-carpet surface: the relationship between the longitudinal slope (m/m) and the Manning resistance-coefficient 3.15 1.0025 0.0047 to 0. 0.0053 to 0.006 0.0075 to 0. The same corresponding also happens to the relationship of the longitudinal slope variation and the coefficient as shown in Figure 10.014 135 mm Semi-Circular 0.012 0.0200 0.80 0. Figure 9 shows that the corresponding of the flow velocity and the coefficient are proportional.0125 0.0225 0. The Manning resistance-coefficients for this gutter- carpet surface are ranged from 0. The results which are shown in Figures 8.010 0. 9 and 10 indicate the same trends as those in the previous figures for PVC and gutter-carpet surfaces.e.004 0. that is the reach with the rectangular shape has the highest coefficient.0150 0.016.016 85 mm Semi-Circular 12 cm Rectangular Manning Coefficient 0.10 1. http://www.70 0.0175 0.00 1.55 0.25 Velocity (m/s) Figure 6 Reaches with a gutter-carpet surface: the relationship between the flow velocity (cm/s) and the Manning resistance-coefficient 0.006 0.90 0. The relationship between the longitudinal slope and the Manning coefficient is shown in Figure 7 in which the steeper slope will lead to the higher resistance coefficient as those in the PVC surfaces.com/IJCIET/index.0095 for the 135 mm semi-circular. 0. and 0.iaeme.

1 3. They are 0.7 4.50 0.asp 684 editor@iaeme.006 to 0.0055 to 0.5 4.008 0.020 85 mm Semi-Circular 12 cm Rectangular 0.012 85 mm Semi-Circular 0.006 0.0125 0.020 0.006 2.9 4.021.006 0. 0.com .60 0.0206 for the rectangular geometry.022 0.5 3.014 0.0250 Longitudinal Slope (m/m) Figure 10 Reaches with a gutter-carpet surface: the relationship between the longitudinal slope (m/m) and the Manning resistance-coefficient 4.010 0.018 Manning Coefficient 135 mm Semi-Circular 0.0225 0. Mochammad Riondy and Rico Dwi Buana Putra The Manning resistance-coefficients for this sandy carpet-surface are ranged from 0.3 4.0150 0.008 0.1 5. CONCLUSIONS Another factor which has significant influence upon the Manning resistance-coefficient is successfully determined by conducting laboratory works and then solving the equation of the http://www.65 0.80 0.0075 0.85 Velocity (m/s) Figure 9 Reaches with a sandy carpet-surface: the relationship between the flow velocity (cm/s) and the Manning resistance-coefficient 0.0098 to 0. and 0.008 135 mm Semi-Circular 0.012 0.1 4. Mas Mera.0050 0.016 0.014 0.3 3.7 3.0112 for the 85 mm semi-circular.7 2.010 12 cm Rectangular 0.0100 0.75 0.com/IJCIET/index.018 Manning Coefficient 0.0079 to 0.022 0.014 0.016 0.9 3.70 0.010 0.0175 0.018 Manning Coefficient 135 mm Semi-Circular 0.0142 for the 135 mm semi-circular.012 0.55 0.016 0.0200 0.45 0.3 Water Depth (cm) Figure 8 Reaches with a sandy carpet-surface: the relationship between the water depth (cm) and the Manning resistance-coefficient 0. 0. Rahmi Hardianti.022 0.9 5.iaeme.020 85 mm Semi-Circular 12 cm Rectangular 0.0025 0.

. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. and Bratos. We also thank to the School of Civil Engineering.0049 to 0. C. semi-circular).. Fluvial Hydraulics. Open-Channel Hydraulics. The PVC surfaces give the Manning resistance- coefficients 0.. and Leylegian. 2002. 2009.0043 to 0. 5. L. A. and 0.net/18/4485/2014/hess-18-4485-2014. Then. 2001.asp 685 editor@iaeme. ISBN: 0-4705-5755-3. Inc. Meanwhile. W (Ed). ISBN: 0-07-134213-3. 570p. J.. 2011. 20. (http://www.0139 for rectangular geometry.hydrol-earth-syst-sci. (ed).S.0053 to 0.0098 to 0. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank to the School of Civil Engineering and the Faculty of Engineering.com/IJCIET/index. Water Resources Publications. Eighth Edition. Water Distribution Systems Handbook. McGraw-Hill.0161 for the rectangular geometry. REFERENCES [1] Chow. Transactions of the Institution of Civil Engineers of Ireland.S. The Manning Formula in Context. p161–195. 1017p. 2014. 0. [3] R. Introduction to Fluid Mechanics. [8] May. McGraw-Hill Book Co-Singapore.0112 for the 85 mm semi-circular.com/science/article/pii/S002216941100919X accessed on 11 Nov 2014). Highlands Ranch. CO.0079 to 0. Dallyc W.0095 for the 135 mm semi-circular geometry. The results explicitly show that the reaches with the same geometrical shape even though they are different in size give ‘nearly’ the same value of the Manning resistance-coefficient.C.. the University of Andalas for funding this research through the scheme of RKAKL JTS / DIPA FT-UNAND with a Contract Number: 044/PL/SPK/PNP/FT-Unand/2014. 0.com . 1973. 420–421. 18(11). ISBN: 0-07-135471-9. 899p.pdfaccessed on 11 Nov 2014) [7] Bacopoulosa.On the flow of water in open channels and pipes. the gutter-carpet surfaces give the coefficients 0. M. and Mognard.0068 to 0.A.. the sandy carpet-surfaces give the coefficients 0. Journal of Hydrology. 2000. Johns and Nassau Rivers. p136–185. T.Hagena. T. C.0206 for the rectangular geometry.0047 to 0. 1889. the reaches with the different cross-sectional geometry give the different coefficients even though they have the same surface.g. p4485–4507. V. J. McGraw-Hill. Effects of Cross-Sectional Geometry of Prismatic Reaches on the Manning Coefficients Manning open-channel flow for the resistance coefficient. p391–402. 644p. P. I. 2012. However. P.Cox. Yen B.g. [2] Dingman.V.. [6] Pedinotti. L. the University of Andalas for funding publication of this research. All reaches used in the investigation have a homogeneous surface.0055 to 0. 0.S. Observation and simulation of winds and hydrodynamics in St.N.0081 for the 85 mm semi-circular. R. In Channel Flow Resistance: Centennial Manning’s Formula. [5] May.0089 for semi-circular geometry with a diameter of 135 cm. rectangular) give higher values of the coefficient than those with smooth-curvature geometry (e. (http://www. Assimilation of satellite data to optimize large-scale hydrological model parameters: a case study for the SWOT mission. [4] Dooge. John Wiley & Sons.0142 for the 135 mm semi-circular. L.Ricci.. Manning. The results show that the reaches with sharp-curvature geometry (e. C. [9] Pritchard. Oxford University Press. Boone.sciencedirect.Biancamaria S.0072 for semi-circular geometry with a diameter of 85 mm.0075 to 0. and 0. http://www.iaeme. W (Ed).Stormwater Collection Systems Design Handbook. ISBN: 978-0- 19-517286-7. S. J. and 0.

Hydrology and Earth System Sciences.pdfaccessed on 11 Nov 2014) [15] Corato. JurnalTeknikSipil ITB. [18] Sudhina H. Water Resources Engineering. Dr.Flipo. M. R. (http://www. A. 2013. 2013. E. 500. (http://www. Issue 1.php/civ/article/view/17227accessed on 12 Nov 2014) ISSN: 1410-9530 (Print) 1979-570X (Online). and Brath.itb.. R. and Robi.sciencedirect. R. A. Stage-dependent hydraulic and hydromorphologic properties in stream networks translated into response functions of compartmental models. F. 476. K. 16(4).Castellarin.net/15/2979/2011/hess-15- 2979-2011.com/science/article/pii/S0022169413005362accessed on 11 Nov 2014) [17] Abdi Mirgissa.ftsl.asp 686 editor@iaeme. Jagadeesha S.ac. (http://www. J. p113–118. Mas Mera. Impact of river bed morphology on discharge and water levels simulated by a 1D Saint–Venant hydraulic model at regional scale. (http://www. Mochammad Riondy and Rico Dwi Buana Putra [10] Djajadi.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.sciencedirect.. 2009. [20] Saleh. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. A.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.com/science/article/pii/S002216941100792Xaccessed on 10 Nov 2014) http://www. D. Journal of Hydrology.net/16/1191/2012/hess-16-1191- 2012. [11] Mera. p923–933. (http://www. A. 11(2). (http://www. K.. 2017. (http://puslit2. 420–421.id/?page_id=8390accessed on 12 Nov 2014) ISSN: 0853-2982. M. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. Journal of Hydrology. L..com/science/article/pii/S002216941200902X#accessed on 10 Nov 2014) [21] Åkesson.net/17/923/2013/hess-17-923-2013. and Tucciarelli.Franzini. and Tchobanoglous. (http://www. K. Journal of Hydrology. p183–199.com .Moramarco. and Wörman. Civil Engineering Dimension.. Dr.Girish Attimarad. International Journal of Electronics and Communication Engineering & Technology (IJECET). pp. G.. Assessing rating-curve uncertainty and its effects on hydraulic model calibration. p2979–2994. January (2015).Freyberg. 2012. S.C. A. B. 51.com/IJCIET/index. Measurement. pp. Shetti.sciencedirect. Volume 6. Addisu Mesele. Desta Lemma. Discharge estimation combining flow routing and occasional measurements of velocity.com/science/article/pii/S0263224114000402accessed on 12 Nov 2014) [13] Domeneghetti.. Prediction of roughness coefficient of a meandering open channel flow using Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System. K.sciencedirect. Design and Manufacturing of Cross-Flow Turbine to Power Coffee Processing Plant & Nearby Community Village in Kaffa Zone. p153–160.iaeme. T. Estimating water discharge from large radar altimetry datasets. p169–177.G. N. 17(3). 8(1).petra. 08-16 [19] Linsley. 20(2). Comparative Study of Equivalent Manning Roughness Coefficient for Channel with Composite Roughness. T.Oudin. L. 2011.id/ejournal/index.. Sierpinski Carpet Fractal Microstrip Antenna for Improved Bandwidth using Stacking Technique with Probe Feeding. 2013. [12] Moharana. 2013.. A.pdfaccessed on 11 Nov 2014) [14] Getirana. p25–36. 2014. 54–61. 15(9). International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology. V. Technical Notes: Determination of Manning Roughness Coefficient for PVC Gutters. 2012.pdfaccessed on 10 Nov 2014) [16] Ayvaz. McGraw-Hill. C. A linked simulation–optimization model for simultaneously estimating the Manning’s surface roughness values and their parameter structures in shallow water flows. A. and Khatua. T. and Peters-Lidard.Ducharne. Dr. M. (http://www. p1191–1202.ac. N. Rahmi Hardianti.hydrol-earth-syst-sci. 1991. p112–123. and Ledoux.