Canadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne

des ressources hydriques

ISSN: 0701-1784 (Print) 1918-1817 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tcwr20

Stepped Spillway as an Energy Dissipater

Jean G Chatila & Bassam R Jurdi

To cite this article: Jean G Chatila & Bassam R Jurdi (2004) Stepped Spillway as an Energy
Dissipater , Canadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques,
29:3, 147-158, DOI: 10.4296/cwrj147

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.4296/cwrj147

Published online: 23 Jan 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 5671

View related articles

Citing articles: 8 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tcwr20

Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161

 Stepped Spillway as an Energy Dissipater

Jean G. Chatila and Bassam R. Jurdi

Abstract: This paper describes an experimental investigation into the hydraulics of ogee-profile stepped
spillways, examines their viability as an alternative to smooth-back spillways and investigates their
efficiency in reducing the downstream energy and length of the hydraulic jump. Tests were performed
in a long rectangular flume with glass walls on both sides. One smooth model was used as a benchmark
for comparison with stepped models made out of a combination of crests and bottoms of different step
heights. Significant reductions in terminal velocities and total energies were observed, where the stepped
spillway profiles tested proved to be very effective in terms of energy dissipation for flows of the order
of the design head or lower. For flows beyond the design head, the effectiveness of the stepped spillway
configuration was reduced and became negligible for heads greater than one and a half times the design
head. It was concluded that the number of steps is the overbearing factor in expending flow kinetic
energy and, therefore, reducing the length of the downstream forming hydraulic jump.

Résume : Le présent article décrit une étude expérimentale sur l’hydraulique des déversoirs en marches
d’escalier en doucine et examine leur viabilité en tant que solution de rechange aux déversoirs à dos lisse.
Il est également question de leur efficacité pour ce qui est de réduire l’énergie en aval et la longueur du
ressaut. Des essais ont été menés dans un long chenal rectangulaire flanquée de parois de verre de chaque
côté. Un modèle lisse a été utilisé comme point de repère à des fins de comparaison avec des modèles
en marches d’escalier fabriqués à partir d’une combinaison de crêtes et de fonds de différentes hauteurs
de marche. Des réductions considérables des vitesses limites et des énergies totales ont été observées,
les profils des déversoirs en marches d’escalier testés s’étant avérés très efficaces en fait de dissipation
d’énergie pour les débits de l’ordre de la chute brute ou d’un degré moindre. Pour les débits dépassant
la chute brute, l’efficacité de la configuration du déversoir en marches d’escalier a été réduite et est
devenue négligeable pour les hauteurs de chute supérieures à une fois et demie la chute brute. Il en a été
conclu que le nombre de marches constitue un facteur décisif pour ce qui est de l’expansion de l’énergie
cinétique du débit et, par conséquent, de la réduction de la longueur du ressaut se formant en aval.

Jean G. Chatila1 and Bassam R. Jurdi1

1
Department of Civil Engineering, Lebanese American University, P.O. Box 36 Byblos, Byblos, Lebanon.

Submitted February 2003; accepted February 2004. Written comments on this paper will be accepted until
March 2005.

Canadian Water Resources Journal Vol. 29(3): 147–158 (2004) © 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association
Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques

Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161

 148 Canadian Water Resources Journal/Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques
Introduction
A spillway is a hydraulic structure that is usually provided
at storage and detention dams to release surplus or flood
water that cannot be safely stored in the reservoir. Since
the failure of dams and their related appurtenances may
cause serious loss of life and property, their design and
maintenance are commonly controlled by government
regulation. Historically, spillways of improper design
or insufficient capacities have caused failures of dams.
Also, many embankment dams were identified as
being unable to pass their design flows without failure
due to overtopping (Frizell, 1991). Thus, the spillway
must be hydraulically and structurally adequate. When
the reservoir’s storage capacity is exceeded, water
flows over the spillway crest and accelerates down the
spillway face to produce high velocities at the spillway
toe, which may cause dangerous scour in the natural
channel below the structure. Some form of stilling
basin structure located at the foot of the spillway
has been used for energy dissipation. Depending on
the expected Froude Number (Fr) of the incoming
flow, the form of the stilling basin can range from a
simple concrete apron to a complex structure that may
include rows of chute blocks, baffle piers and a plain
or dentated end-sill. If the basin requires all three
features, this can add substantially to the overall costs.
Consequently, alternative solutions to the problem
are worth investigating. One possible solution is to
consider a stepped spillway instead of the traditional
smooth ogee-profile spillway, where a series of drops in
the invert are provided from near the crest to the toe.
Over a wide range of operating conditions, the stepped
spillway is expected to generate substantial energy
losses on the spillway structure itself, thereby reducing
the need for a more costly form of stilling basin.
The steps act as roughness elements to reduce flow
acceleration and hence terminal velocity. Moreover,
excessive turbulence induced by the steps helps
speed the development of a boundary layer and the
entrainment of air to bulk the flow. Both the reduced
velocity and the cushioning effect of the entrained air
thus reduce the cavitation potential.
Stepped Spillways
Considerable interest in stepped spillways is shown
mainly because of the technical advances in the Roller-
Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161
Compacted Concrete (RCC) construction method
for building gravity dams, where including stepped
spillway construction concurrent with horizontal RCC
placement can be easily accomplished, which reduces
the cost and time of construction. In addition, stepped
spillways contribute to the stability of the dam.
Several researchers have performed studies on
stepped spillway physical models. However, the results
obtained for each case were valid only for that case
and could only be used as a guide for other similar
cases. Young (1982) studied the feasibility of a stepped
spillway for the Upper Stillwater Dam and managed
a 75% energy reduction. Sorensen (1985) performed
a physical model investigation for stepped spillways,
where he found that adding a few steps to the face
of the spillway eliminated the deflecting water jet.
Christodoulou (1993) found that energy loss due to the
steps depends primarily on the ratio of the critical depth
to the height of the step, as well as on the number of
steps. Sorensen (1985) studied the design of steps and
their spacing on the spillway face in order to optimize
the energy dissipation. Degoutte et al. (1992) stated:
“The size requirements for stilling basin downstream
of stepped spillway were not well known.” A practical
guideline for the design of stepped spillways has been
published (CIRIA, 1978). However, this document
provices no indication as to what degree the spillway
step configuration may impact the energy dissipation.
Chamani and Rajaratnam (1999a, b) developed an
equation to predict the incipient value of the ratio of
the critical depth to step height, which agreed well
with most of their experimental observations. Chanson
(1999) proposed a pre-design calculation method that
provides a general trend for preliminary designs.
Experimental Study
The literature indicates that there are considerable
gaps in knowledge in the design of stepped spillways.
The choice of an experimental model, computational
model, or interpolating/extrapolating the necessary
information from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) or the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR)
design/performance curves can be a difficult and
dangerous task (USACE, 1990; USBR, 1977). This
is especially true if scaling effects in experimental
modelling are ignored, basic assumptions and
capabilities in computational modelling are not taken
© 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association
 Chatila and Jurdi
into consideration and interpolation/extrapolation of
design curves leads to physically incorrect situations.
From a computational standpoint, simulating
the flow is difficult due to non-linearity and other
factors. The flow changes from subcritical upstream of
the crest to supercritical along the spillway and then
it must pass through a hydraulic jump to reach the
subcritical tailrace channel. Furthermore, the curvature
of the spillway profile may be significant, thus causing
pressure variations due to centripetal fluid acceleration,
which rival the hydrostatic pressure component. Many
researchers have discussed the topic of stepped spillways
and tried to implement some numerical finite element
techniques for solving the flow field (Chamani and
Rajarantnam, 1999b; Pegram et al., 1999; Sanchez et
al., 2000; Yildiz and Kas, 1998). However, it is crucial
to have reliable data against which mathematical
models can be calibrated and validated. Chen et al.
(2002) report that stepped spillways have increasingly
become effective energy dissipaters. When the
hydraulic performance of the overflow is clearly known,
the energy dissipation could be increased. Thus, it is of
great importance to thoroughly examine the hydraulics
of stepped spillways through experimentation in order
to optimize the energy dissipation, where different
step heights have to be tested.
If both gravitational and viscous forces are
important, then dynamic similitude requires both
Froude and Reynolds numbers be held constant. Thus,
one degree of freedom in the modelling exercise is lost
and the length ratio is no longer arbitrary but depends
on the choice of the fluid viscosity. To overcome this
obstacle, the Froude number is held constant since
gravitational forces are predominant, and the Reynolds
number is maintained in the same flow regime as
the prototype. The general modelling laws can be
developed and the specific equation involving the
additional constraint of the Froude number modelling
introduced. Geometric, kinematic, and dynamic laws
of similitude apply in this instance (Prasuhn, 1992).
Rice and Kadavy (1996) report that, according to the
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, it is recommended that
models of large dams and spillways be constructed
to scale ratios of 1:30 to 1:100, and for medium size
structures the Bureau recommends that models should
not be smaller than 1:60 scale. In 1953, the USBR
recommended that flow heads larger than 3 cm should
be used in order to avoid surface tension problems.
However, Rice and Kadavy (1996) reported that if
Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161
149
the water depth exceeds a few centimetres, the effects
of the surface tension, and thus the Weber number,
could be disregarded as well. This complies with the
conditions of the experiments performed in this study.
Flow Regimes
Flow regime over a stepped spillway can either be nappe
or skimming flow. In nappe flows, water from each
step hits the step below as a falling jet, with the energy
dissipation occurring by jet breakup in the air and
mixing on the step, with or without the formation of
a partial hydraulic jump. When the upstream-directed
flow meets the vertical step wall, it is forced to reverse
direction and a pool is formed. This flow is recirculated
in the pool and joins the downstream-directed flow
with a lesser velocity. Rajaratnam (1990) suggested that
nappe flow occurs when yc/h < 0.8. A nappe flow regime
is possible for higher discharges, but this needs a very
flat slope. In the skimming flow regime, water flows
down the stepped face as a coherent stream, skimming
over the steps and is cushioned by the recirculating
fluid trapped between them. Skimming flow occurs at
moderate to high discharges. No nappe is visible and
the external edges of the steps form a pseudo-bottom
over which the flows pass. Vortices, which transmit
shear stresses, develop and large friction losses
characterize skimming flows. Downstream of the point
of inception, a layer containing a mixture of air and
water extends through the fluid and the flow becomes
uniform far downstream, where measurements may not
vary for a given discharge. Chanson (1994) reported
that as the skimming flow becomes fully developed
the stepped spillway behaves similar to a smooth
one with high roughness. Rajaratnam (1990) defined
the onset of skimming flow for values of the ratio
yc/h > 0.80, which is the case throughout the current
experimental program. Although the mechanisms of
energy loss are quite different between the nappe flow
and skimming flow regimes, both flows can dissipate a
major proportion of the flow energy.
Experimental Setup
The tests were performed in the Hydraulics Laboratory
at the Lebanese American University, Byblos Campus,
Lebanon. Experiments were conducted in a 6.0 m long
© 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association
 150 Canadian Water Resources Journal/Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques
flume, 30.4 cm wide and 40.0 cm deep. The walls of the
flume are glass on both sides (Figure 1). An end weir
controlled the position of the downstream forming
hydraulic jump. Two pumps supplied the flow into the
channel through calibrated orifice meters located in
the feed pipes into the channel, with two independent
valves to control the flow. Discharge was measured
using these meters. The channel was kept at zero slope
throughout the experiments. Depth of water at any
point was measured using a point gauge with accuracy
to the nearest millimetre, or division thereafter. In the
case of a fluctuating water surface profile, average values
of depths were taken based on several measurements.
The models had a height of 25.7 cm, a base length of
29.7 cm, and a width equal to that of the channel. The
hydraulic design charts 111-2-/1 of USACE-WES
were used for the design of the spillway model profiles
(USACE-WES, 1952). A vertical upstream face and a
curved surface defined by the radii 0.2Hd and 0.5Hd in
front of the crest centreline were selected. The profile
downstream of the crest centreline is defined by
xn = KH d1-n y (1)
Using K = 2, n = 1.85, Hd = 5.08 cm, yields the following
equation for the spillway profile at the crest
y = 0.12559x1.85 (cm) (2)
A face slope = 60° (or slope 1.73:1) was used after
the point of tangency with the crest curve. A smooth
transition, at the toe of the spillway, is needed to avoid
excessive vibration and structural damage. Thus, a
circular curve, or bucket, tangent to the foundation
and the spillway’s terminal downstream slope, is used.
Steps in the stepped spillway models were
introduced at a point just downstream of the spillway
crest so that the envelope of their tips follows the
standard smooth profile down to the toe (Figure 2).
Two stepped spillway models, built of plexi-glass, were
used in the study. In general, step geometries may be
horizontal, inclined or pooled. Horizontal steps were
selected in this instance for more effectiveness and ease
of manufacturing. The models, which had the same
overall height and general crest shape, had different
step heights. Since the crest sections of the two models
were removable and interchangeable, this permitted
a wider combination of step heights to be tested. A
Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161
smooth ogee-profile spillway was manufactured and
used as a benchmark for comparison purposes.
The literature indicates that step sizes are classified
in either one of two categories: (i) large-step sizes of
height = 1/20 Hdam, and (ii) small-step sizes of height
= 1/40 Hdam (Sorensen, 1985; Christodoulou, 1993;
Bindo et al., 1993; and Rice and Kadavy, 1996). When
applied to the experimental spillway models, steps of
0.6 to 1.3 cm are used. However, these are only general
guidelines for step sizes and in the current study steps
of 0.5 to 1.5 cm were utilized. As for the stepped model
geometries, bottom 1 (B1) had a total of 14 steps, each
with a 1.0 cm drop. Bottom 2 (B2) had a total of nine
steps, with a 1.5 cm drop. Crest 1 (Cl) had a total of
19 steps, each with a 0.5 cm drop. Crest 2 (C2) had
a total of 12 steps, with a 0.75 cm drop (Figure 2).
Smaller step sizes were implemented for the crests as
compared to the bottoms in order to have a smooth
flow transition. In general, one has to be careful about
the significance of scale effects on the experiments and
the consequent interpretation of results.
Primary concerns included the amount of energy
dissipated by the steps, the optimum size of the steps for
maximum energy dissipation and the effect of steps on
the downstream-forming hydraulic jump, which affects
the length of stilling basin required. While conducting
the experiments, measurements were repeated to
ensure that the results are reproducible with minimal
measurement errors. In some instances, average values
were considered. The following measurements were
recorded for a wide range of flows over the smooth
and stepped spillway models (Figure 1): (i) water head
at the upstream of the spillway, H (m), defined as the
upstream vertical difference between crest level and
water level; (ii) water head at the crest of the model
spillway, (m); (iii) profile of free surface for different
discharges; (iv) depth of flow at the bottom or the toe
of the model, Y1 (m), which is the upstream depth of
the hydraulic jump; (v) depth of flow at the downstream
end of the hydraulic jump, Y2 (m); (vi) differential
head across the orifice metres, (m), and (vii) length of
the hydraulic jump, Lj (m). The longitudinal element
of the jump is, without doubt, the most difficult to
measure. This is partially due to the differences in
opinion as to exactly where the terminus of the jump
lies (Elevatorski, 1959). It was easier to determine
the section at which the hydraulic jump has started
than where it ended. In this instance, a dye-tracer,
Rhodamine WT, was dropped at different locations in
© 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association
 Chatila and Jurdi 151

Figure 1. Experimental Facility with Flow over a Stepped Spillway Model.

Figure 2. Typical Crest and Bottom Configurations of a Stepped Spillway Model.

© 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association

Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161

 152
the vicinity of the hydraulic jump. The termination of
the hydraulic jump was determined visually through
the circulation of the dye.
Results and Discussion
A major concern for stepped spillways is providing
smooth transition flow from the spillway crest to the
first few steps. Based on experimental observations,
the flow at the transition is very good with no
undesirable disturbance of flow, no tumbling action,
and no separation of the flow at the break in slope.
This was the case for all discharges and models tested.
It was seen that there may be some air entrained at low
discharges but this disappeared at high discharges.
Average flow velocities were calculated from the
measured flow rates and depths using the continuity
equation. The discharge over an uncontrolled crest
structure can be defined as
Q = CLH 3/2
where C = discharge coefficient (in m0.5/s), L = the crest
length (in m), and H is as previously defined.
Figure 3 shows the variation of the flow rate
with the flow head over different spillway models.
Theoretically, such a plot, on a log-log scale, should
yield a straight line with a slope of 1.5 and an intercept
of log(C L). Based on a regression analysis of the
0.020
C1B1
Flow Rate, Q (m3/s)
0.015
0.010
0.005
0.000
0 3
Figure 3. Variation of Flow Rate with Flow Head over Different Spillway Models.
Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161
Canadian Water Resources Journal/Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques
measured data with r² = 0.88, the computed value
of the slope was 1.54, which is close to the expected
theoretical value for a spillway. Based on the intercept,
a value of C = 2.35 m0.5/s is obtained. This value is
close to that computed by Sorenson (1985) and also
falls within the range recommended by King and
Brater (1963). Baban (1995) reported a C value of
2.225 when H/Hd > 1.33.
The available energy in the different models was
computed for each flow condition at the toe of the
spillway close to the upstream end of the hydraulic
jump. The aim was to determine the efficiency of
step configuration in releasing energy. The percentage
energy dissipated in each stepped model was calculated
in reference to the available energy for the smooth
model. Figure 4 shows the variation of the percentage
energy dissipated at the toe of the spillway with H/
Hd, the ratio of the flow head (H) to the design head
(Hd) of the spillway. Figure 4 shows that model C1B1
produced the highest value of energy dissipation for
the models under consideration. For flow heads less
(3) than 60% of the design head (H/Hd = 0.6), most of the
models produced more than 60% energy dissipation
with model C1B1 reaching up to 80%. All models had
relatively low energy dissipation at H/Hd = 1.40. In
addition, energy dissipation was in the range of 20 to
30% for flows around the design head and increased to
30 to 40% for H/Hd in the vicinity of 1.25. The energy
dissipation rate will then decrease with increasing
discharge as it reaches a stage where the effect of the
C2B2 C2B1 C1B2 Smooth
6 9
Flow Head, H (cm)
© 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association
 Chatila and Jurdi 153

100
C1B1 C2B2 C2B1 C1B2
80

% Energy Dissipated
60

40

20

0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
H/H d

Figure 4. Variation of Percent Energy Dissipated at the Spillway Toe with (H/Hd).

steps is very small and a stepped spillway acts similar
to a smooth one. The amount of energy dissipated for
various discharges is determined and for all discharges
the flow was found to be a skimming flow.
Figure 5 shows the variation of the Fr1 at the
upstream side of the hydraulic jump with H/Hd. This
figure shows that for model C1B1 with H/Hd = 0.45,
Fr1 was reduced by about 82% as compared to the
smooth model. In general, for all models and with H/
Hd < 1.0, Fr1 was considerably reduced. The reduction
in Fr was not significant for H/Hd > 1.20 and became
negligible for H/Hd > 1.40.
Figure 6 shows the variation of the dimensionless
quantity Lj/Hd with H/Hd. It clearly indicates that Lj
is reduced approximately by 64% or more for model
C1B1 as compared to the smooth model. Considerable
reduction in Lj is also noticed for all other models. As a
result, the length of the stilling basin is also reduced.
Figure 7 shows the variation of Lj with the difference
between downstream and upstream depths (Y2–Y1) or
conjugate depths. In general, Lj is about five to seven
times the difference in conjugate depths. Performing
a regression analysis on the data plotted in Figure 7
produces a ratio of Lj/(Y2 - Y1) = 5.16 with r2 = 0.84.
This is well within the normally accepted values.

14
C1B1 C2B2 C2B1 C1B2 Smooth
12
Froude Number, Fr1

10

0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
H/H d

Figure 5. Variation of Froude Number (Fr1) at the Upstream Side of the

Hydraulic Jump with H/Hd.

© 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association

Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161

 154 Canadian Water Resources Journal/Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques

14
C1B1 C2B2 C2B1 C1B2 Smooth
12

10

8
L j /H d
6

0
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
H/H d

Figure 6. Variation of Lj/Hd with H/Hd.

70
C1B1 C2B2 C2B1 C1B2 Smooth
60

50
L j , (cm)

40

30

20

10

0
0 3 6 9 12
(Y2-Y1), (cm)

Figure 7. Variation of Lj with the Difference in Downstream and Upstream

Depths.

© 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association

Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161

 Chatila and Jurdi 155

Figure 8 shows that the percentage

energy dissipated due to the steps 100
depends primarily on the Yc /h ratio, C1B1 C2B2 C2B1 C1B2
where Yc = critical depth of flow 80

% Energy Dissipated
passing over the spillway and h =
step height, as well as on N, the 60
number of steps. For Yc/h = 2.5, the
stepped surface was very effective in 40
dissipating energy. For values of 2.5 <
Yc/h < 6, the effect is still appreciable. 20
However, for values of Yc/h > 6, the
effect starts to reduce.
0
Using model results, a
2 4 6 8
relation between the ratio Y c/h
Lj/Hd and the parameter Yc/Nh is
presented in Figure 9. This figure
shows that Lj is reduced with Yc/Nh. Figure 8. Variation of Percentage Energy Dissipated with Yc /h.
As the number of steps increases, the
energy dissipated is increased, and Lj
is reduced. A similar conclusion was
reached by Chamani and Rajaratnam
(1994), where they reported that the
number of steps is more important 12
than the size of the steps. C1B1 C2B2 C2B1 C1B2
The results of the study indicated 10
that the model consisting of bottom
B1 and crest C1 (C1B1) produced 8
higher energy dissipation as compared
L j /H d

to combinations of models with other 6

crests and bottoms. In this instance, for
flows lower than the design discharge, 4
the energy dissipated amounted to
approximately 80% as compared 2
to the equivalent smooth spillway
model. At the design discharge, 0
approximately 25% of the energy was 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
dissipated. Consequently, using such Yc/Nh
a stepped spillway design reduced the
required length of the stilling basin.
Although the use of a stepped spillway Figure 9. Variation of Lj/Hd with Yc/Nh.
was recommended for 1.2Hd, our
results showed that about 15 to 20%
of the energy, as compared to a smooth spillway flow, conditions, model C1B1 (33 steps) displayed the most
was dissipated even at 1.4Hd. Finally, Fr1 at the toe of efficient energy dissipation ratio and shortest Lj/Hd, as
the spillway was significantly reduced for the optimal compared to models C2B2 (19 steps), C1B2 (28 steps),
stepped spillway geometry. or C2B1 (26 steps). This is mainly due to the fact that
More steps on the spillway face mean a better steps act as macro-roughness elements that increase
expenditure of energy and a shorter hydraulic jump. friction in a sustainable way thus changing the flow’s
This is evidenced by the fact that, under similar kinetic energy into heat or thermal energy. Therefore,

© 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association

Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161

 156 Canadian Water Resources Journal/Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques
having more steps means more energy drops to slow
down the flow.
Summary and Conclusions
Based on the analysis of the experimental results of
this study, the following can be summarized. The water
flow over a spillway presents a difficult mathematical
problem. In this instance, physical models are built to
examine the amount of energy dissipated by a particular
stepped spillway design. In this study, physical models,
with different step sizes, were tested to determine the
optimum amount of dissipated energy.
In general, compared to the equivalent smooth
spillway flows, significant reductions were observed
in the terminal velocities and total energies of the
stepped spillway flows. The stepped spillway profiles
tested proved to be very effective in terms of energy
dissipation for flows in the order of Hd or lower. For
flows beyond Hd, the effectiveness of the stepped
spillway configuration was reduced and diminished
for heads greater than 1.4Hd. Also, more steps on the
spillway face mean a better expenditure of energy and
a shorter hydraulic jump.
Finally, it can be concluded that stepped spillways,
with the maximum possible number of steps, are
an efficient and desirable alternative to traditional
smooth-back spillways. They are a viable option
when considering the design of a dam, provided
that a well-studied model is experimented upon
for the spillway prototype. In addition, one should
not forget the drawbacks of stepped spillways such
as noise and erosion of the steps. Experience shows
that flow conditions at the transition between the
nappe and skimming flow must be avoided. Further,
the design of stepped chutes requires a higher quality
of construction and more maintenance work than
conventional smooth spillways.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by the Lebanese
American University Research Council through a
grant.
Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161
References
Baban, R. 1995. Design of Diversion Weirs. John Wiley
& Sons Ltd., UK.
Bindo, M., J. Gautier and F. Lacroix. 1993. “The
Stepped Spillway of M’Bali Dam.” Journal of Water
Power and Dam Construction, 14(1): 35-36.
Chamani, M.R. and N. Rajaratnam. 1994. “Jet Flow on
Stepped Spillways.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
ASCE, 120(2): 254–259.
Chamani, M.R. and N. Rajaratnam. 1999a. “Onset
of Skimming Flow on Stepped Spillways.” Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, 125(9): 969-971.
Chamani, M.R. and N. Rajaratnam. 1999b.
“Characteristics of Skimming Flow over Stepped
Spillways.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE,
125(4): 361–368.
Chanson, H. 1994. “Comparison of Energy Dissipation
in Nappe and Skimming Regimes on Stepped Chutes.”
Journal of Hydraulic Research, IAHR, 32(2): 213–218.
Chanson, H. 1999. “Current Expertise and Experience
on Stepped Chute Flows: Hydraulics of Stepped
Spillways.” April 27, Lecture presented as an invited
speaker at Kyoto University, Disaster Prevention
Research Institute.
Chen, Q., G. Dai and H. Liu. 2002. “Volume of
Fluid Model for Turbulence Numerical Simulation
of Stepped Spillway Overflow.” Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, ASCE, 128(7): 683-688.
Christodoulou, G.C. 1993. “Energy Dissipation on
Stepped Spillway.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
ASCE, 119(5): 473-482.
CIRIA. 1978. The Hydraulic Design of Stepped Spillways,
Second Edition, R033M, CIRIA, currently available
on microfiche.
Degoutte, G., L. Peyras and P. Royet. 1992. “Skimming
Flow in Stepped Spillway.” Discussion, Journal
Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, 118(1): 111-114.
© 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association
 Chatila and Jurdi 157

Elevatorski, E. 1959. Hydraulic Energy Dissipaters,
McGraw-Hill Inc., New York.
Frizell, K.H. 1991. “Stepped Spillway Design for Flow
over Embankment.” Proceedings, The 1991 National
Conference Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, Nashville,
Tennessee, July 29 to August 2, 118-123.
Yildiz, D. and I. Kas. 1998. “Hydraulic Performance of
Stepped Chute Spillway.” Hydropower and Dams, (4):
64–70.
Young, M.F. 1982. “Feasibility Study of a Stepped
Spillway.” Proceedings, Hydraulics Division Speciality
Conference, ASCE, New York, 96-106.

King, H.W. and E.F. Brater. 1963. Handbook of

Hydraulics, fifth edition, McGraw-Hill Book Company,
Inc., New York.

Pegram, G.G.S., A.K. Officer and S.R. Mottram.

1999. “Hydraulics of Skimming Flow on Modeled
Stepped Spillways.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
ASCE, 125(5): 500–510.

Prasuhn, A.L. 1992. Fundamentals of Hydraulic

Engineering, Oxford University Press.

Rajaratnam, N. 1990. “Skimming Flow in Stepped

Spillways.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE,
116(4): 587–591.

Rice, C.E. and K.D. Kadavy. 1996. “Model Study of a

Roller Compacted Concrete Stepped Spillway.” Journal
of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, 122(6): 292–297.

Sanchez, J.M., J. Pomares and J. Dolz. 2000. “Pressure

Field in Skimming Flow over a Stepped Spillway.”
Proceedings, International Workshop on Hydraulics of
Stepped Spillways, Zurich, Switzerland.

Sorensen, R.M. 1985. “Stepped Spillway Hydraulic

Model Investigation.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
ASCE, 111(12): 1461-1472.

USACE. 1990. Hydraulic Design of Spillways. United

States Army Corps of Engineers, EM 1110-2-1603,
Department of the Army, Washington D.C.

USACE-WES. 1952. United States Army Corps of

Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Corps of
Engineers Hydraulic Design Criteria.

USBR. 1977. Design of Small Dams. United States

Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington D.C.

© 2004 Canadian Water Resources Association

Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161

Gabrielle Amorim Sena Souza - gabiass@hotmail.com - IP: 187.57.152.161