V O R T E X D R O P INLET FOR SUPERCRITICAL

APPROACHING F L O W
By Willi H . Hager, 1 M e m b e r , A S C E

ABSTRACT: The inlet of vortex drops for supercritical approaching flow is dis-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad de los Andes on 03/10/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

cussed. Based on detailed experimental observations collected at various inlet ge-

ometries, the shape of vortex inlet was optimized. The geometry recommended is
of spiral shape, and depends mainly on the shaft radius and on the width of the
approaching channel. Particular features of the inlet are its wide domain of appli-
cation regarding the Froude number and bottom slope of the approaching channel,
and zero transverse inlet slope. The discharge capacities of vortex drops are shown
to be of the same order for both sub- and supercritical approach flows. Further,
the surface profile along the outer guiding wall is analyzed. It is found that both
the Froude number of the approach flow and the radius of outer inlet wall influence
significantly the maximum height of standing wave. A nondimensional surface
profile along the outer wall is given, and prominent flow features in drop inlet
structures are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

A vortex drop consists of the inlet structure, the drop shaft, and the outlet
works. The inlet structure may either be spiral-shaped or tangential. Spiral
inlets have been developed by Drioli (1947), Viparelli (1950), Pica (1970),
and Kleinschroth (1972), among others, and are suitable for a wide range
of discharges. The tangential inlet was developed only recently by Jain (1984).
A description of vortex drops is due to Jain and Ettema (1987).
Except for Kleinschroth and Wirth (1981), and the Laboratory of Hy-
draulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (VAW) of the Swiss Federal Institute
of Technology (ETH) in Zurich, the writer is unaware of investigations con-
cerning drop inlets for supercritical approach flow. The latter may occur at
relatively small bottom slopes of typically 0.5%. This paper summarizes the
results of Kellenberger (1988). Particular attention is paid to the relation
between shaft diameter and design discharge, and the surface profile along
the outer guiding inlet wall. The drop shaft is assumed to be nonsubmerged.

GEOMETRY OF INLET STRUCTURE

The approach channel to the vortex drop is rectangular of width b (Fig.

1). For supercritical inlet conditions to occur, the approach Froude number
Fi = Q/(Qb3hf)1/2 must be larger than one. Herein, Q = discharge, g =
gravitational acceleration, and hi = approach flow depth. The domain 1.5
< Fi < 10 will be considered. The range 1 < Fj < 1.5 is excluded to inhibit
the formation of weak jumps.
A spiral vortex inlet generates extreme curvature effects resulting in a
change of the cross-sectional area from the rectangular shaped cross section
'Sr. Res. Engr., Lab. of Hydr., Hydro, and Glaciology, VAW, Swiss Federal Inst,
of Tech., ETHZ, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland.
Note. Discussion open until January 1, 1991. To extend the closing date one month,
a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript
for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on January 2, 1990.
This paper is part of the Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 116, No. 8, Au-
gust, 1990. ©ASCE, ISSN0733-9429/90/0008-1048/$1.00 + $.15 per page. Paper
No. 24948.
1048

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1990, 116(8): 1048-1054

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad de los Andes on 03/10/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

APPROACHING CHANNEL [NLET STRUCTURE

FIG. 1. Geometry of Inlet Structure: (a) Plan View; (b) Side View

at the inlet, to an almost triangular shape in the spiral inlet structure. As-
sociated with such flow is a pattern of so-called standing waves of which
the maximum elevation hm determines the height of inlet structure.
The recommended inlet geometry (Fig. 1) is based on model tests that
involved optimizing the height of standing wave, the reduction of cross-
waves, and prevention of choking flow. The inlet consists of an inner guid-
ing wall up to a = 225°, and an outer wall. Along both walls, the respective
radii of curvature change after a = 180° where
1
Ri = - (a + R + t + c) (1)

R2 = - (2R + t + c) (2)

1
R3 = - (a + R + t - b) (3)

R4 = R + t (4)
Herein, R = shaft radius; a = distance of shaft axis to outer approaching
wall; t = wall thickness to be determined from statics; and c = channel
width opposite the inlet section. The centers of the circular arcs are
el = a-R1 (5)
e2 = R + t + c - R2 (6)
e3 = a- b- R3 (7)
The thickness tx of the inner wall at the inlet section is
tx = a - b - R (8)
The following conditions for a, b, and c (i = b) and (i = c) should be
satisfied
R + t + c < a < 3R + t (9)
0.8/f <i<2R (10)

1049

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1990, 116(8): 1048-1054

 Small values of both b/R and c/R are preferable. The bottom slope S„ is
limited to 30%, and the longitudinal slope of the inlet structure £'„,- with 5%
^ Soi < 30% should be larger than S0. The radial slope be Sor = 0. For
given design dischaige QD both the approach width b, and the shaft radius
R depend on hydraulic considerations.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad de los Andes on 03/10/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

EXPERIMENTS

Experimental Facilities
Since an optimal inlet geometry had to be developed, a model was de-
signed by which all pertinent parameters could be varied. Fig. 2 shows its
side view, including the approach channel, the inlet structure, and the drop
shaft of radius R = 75 mm. Three channel widths b = 60 mm, 120 mm,
and 200 mm were considered and 20 variants of inlet geometries were in-
vestigated. For each variant, a range of discharges was run. Velocities and
surface profiles along the outer guiding wall were measured.

Design Discharge
The design discharge, QD, and the diameter D = 27? of drop shaft ac-
cording to Fig. 1 are related independent of approach flow conditions as

The safety coefficient T| = 1.25 against pressurized flow in the shaft pro-
duced an economic and hydraulically efficient design. For D = 150 mm,
Eq. 11 yields QD = 15.7 L/s. In all tested variants, the shaft flow never
got pressurized, even when Q = l.6QD. Fig. 3 shows the drop inlet at Q
= l.3QD. A considerable radius of air core may be observed. Use of Eq.
11 with i\ = 1.25 prevents the formation of excessive flow depth along the
outer guiding wall, and crosswaves along the inlet structure. QD in accor-

FIG. 2. Side View of Model (VAW 27/72/09)

1050

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1990, 116(8): 1048-1054

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad de los Andes on 03/10/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

* W t L-lV
' ---
i VUl'J I'" -•'-•

FIG. 3. Plan View at Discharge 30% Larger than Design Discharge QD (VAW 34/
27/23)

dance with Eq. 11 is identical to the recommended design discharge for

subcritical approach flow (Hager 1985). The discharge capacities of the drop
shafts for both sub- and supercritical approach flow are of comparable order,
therefore.

Surface Profile
Fig. 4 shows a schematic view of the "standing wave" along the outer
guiding wall and defines the pertinent quantities. Let 5 = oRi be the lon-
gitudinal coordinate along the outer wall measured from the inlet section
one, hm the maximum flow depth with respect to the inlet section, and sm
= ajti its location. Based on the experimental data, Kellenberger (1988)
deduced

(1.1 + 0.15Fi) (2W#?r3)1/2F, - |HS„ (12)

The maximum increase of flow depth depends significantly on Fi and Rt. A

free board of R/2 should be accounted for. The location of maximum wave
height may be described by the angle a,„ = sm/Rt. Fig. 5 shows a,„/Fi as
a function of ht/Ri for three values of inlet radius Ru together with

FIG. 4. "Standing Wave" along Outer Guiding Wall: (a) Side View; (b) Section at
Maximum Wave Height

1051

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1990, 116(8): 1048-1054

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad de los Andes on 03/10/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 5. Location ct„,/F, in Degrees of Maximum Height of Flow as Function of

Relative Approaching Depth hj/R^. (a) «, = 15.5 cm; (ft) Ri = 18.5 cm; (c) «! =
29.5 cm; S0 = (A) < 5%; (•) 10 %; (@) 20%; and (•) 30%

1/2

5= = 7 5 ^ (13)
F, VRi
Fig. 6 shows some typical free surface profiles y(A) where y - (h - hx)f
(hm - hx) and A = a/a m and h is the flow depth along the outer guiding
wall measured from the invert of the inlet section upwards (Fig. 4). The
portion of increasing depth may be represented as
y=[A exp (1 - A)f (14)

FIG. 6. Nondimensional Surface Profile of First Standing Wave; Series 14, F, =

(A) 5.78, (A) 4.84, (V) 5.28, and (¥) 5.72; Series 1G, F, = (D) 6.32, ( • ) 5.87, (O)
5.72, (#) 4.56; Series 1H, F, = ( • ) 7.70, ( • ) 7.62, (B) 8.31, (H) 7.41, (D) 7.18

1052

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1990, 116(8): 1048-1054

 I I
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad de los Andes on 03/10/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

b)
FIG. 7. Side View at Standing Wave: (a) Series 14, F, = 5.72 (VAW 28/03/18);
(ft) Series 2F, F, = 1.81 (VAW 33/71/08)

For A » 1, the function y(A) depends on a„, and Sol. For small a,„, a
number of undulations follow the primary wave. The effect of increasing Soi
is to decrease the second wave amplitude. Both photographs of Fig. 7 relate
to waves with a single maximum.

CONCLUSIONS

The main flow features in the inlet structure of vortex drops with super-
critical approach flow are analyzed. The spirally shaped inlet geometry is
defined in terms of shaft radius R and width b of approach channel. The
shaft radius, in turn, depends only on the design discharge, Eq. 11. The
height of the inlet structure corresponds to the sum of maximum flow depth
in accordance with Eq. 12 plus allowance for a freeboard of (R/2). The
surface profile of standing wave is discussed. The discharge of the drop shaft
for both sub- and supercritical flow are found to be about the same.

APPENDIX I. REFERENCES

Drioli, C. (1947). "Su un particolare tipo d'imbocco per pozzi di scarico." V Ener-
gia Elettrica, 24, 447-452 (in Italian).
Hager, W. H. (1985). "Head-discharge relation for vortex shaft." J. Hydr. Engrg.,
ASCE, 111(6), 1015-1020.
Jain, S. C. (1984). "Tangential vortex-inlet." J. Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, 110(12), 1693-
1699.
Jain, S. C , and Ettema, R. (1987). "Vortex flow intakes." IAHR hydraulic struc-
tures design manual, Vol. 1, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Kellenberger, H. (1988). "Wirbelfallschachte in der Kanalisationstechnik," thesis
presented to the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, at Zurich, Switzerland, in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Technical Sci-
ences.
Kleinschroth, A. (1972). "Stromungsvorgange im Wirbelfallschacht." Mitt. Dtsch.
Forsch. Versuchsanst. Luft. Raumfahrt., 8, (in German).
Kleinschroth, A., and Wirth, H. (1981). "Dimensionierung von Wirbelfallschachten

1053

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1990, 116(8): 1048-1054

 unter Beriicksichtigung verschiedener Zuflussbedingungen." Mitteilung, 36, West
Germany (in German).
Pica, M. (1970). "Scaricatori a Vortice." U Energia Elettrica, 47(4), 217-234 (in
Italian).
Viparelli, M. (1950). "Su un particolare tipo d'imbocco e suU'efflusso con vortice."
VEnergia Elettrica, 27(10), 610-621.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad de los Andes on 03/10/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

APPENDIX II. NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

A = normalized angular coordinate;

a = distance of outer approach channel wall from shaft axis;
b = width of approach channel;
c = channel width opposite of inlet section;
D = diameter of drop shaft;
e = distance of center of circular arcs from shaft axis;
F = Froude number;
9 = gravitational acceleration;
h = flow depth;
m = maximum;
Q = discharge;
QD = design discharge;
R = radius of drop shaft;
s = coordinate along outer wall of inlet structure;
So = bottom slope of approach channel;
solt = longitudinal slope of inlet structure;
= thickness of wall;
y = relative depth of flow;
a = angular coordinate;
•n = safety coefficient; and
1 = inlet section.

1054

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1990, 116(8): 1048-1054