LABORATORY REPORT

Bsc. (Hons) Civil Engineering

6HX509 Civil Engineering Hydraulic
Tutor: V.Oke
Internal verifier: A.Janbey
EXECUTIVE SUMMERY:
The experiment below was all about an investigation of an open channel flow and hydraulic
jumps in various types of weirs. There are different types of weirs which are; the broad
crested weir, shard crested weir, crump weir, over short weir and venture flume. But the
experiment is majorly on crump weir, broad crested weir and computer model of gradually
varied flow in an open channel. It was carried out mainly to determine that in every different
surfaces from different weirs will give varying outcome in flow discharge and energy.
Weirs are the majorly utilized hydraulic jump models in significant spaces of hydrodynamics,
natural, water system, and compound designing, as stream estimating and stream control
gadgets in open channels. The objective this experiment is to contemplate the impact of the
math of crump weir on the coefficient discharge under different stream conditions.

INTRODUCTION:
Weirs are the normally hydraulic models. They have been seriously utilized for stream
estimation in channels and water streams as a result of its simple nature. There are four useful
applications of weirs in particular; management of the level of water in an open channel, flow
checking, for ecological points and finally for channel adjustment.
Flow of water in an open channel is a recognizable sight for us whether in common channel
like natural streams or an artificial channel like water system trench and water dam. The rule
powers in an open channels and hydraulic jumps that works are inertia, gravity,
consistency/viscosity, which assumes a significant part (Robert W. Fox, 2005).
The most well-known use of the force condition in an open channel streams are managed in
the investigation of the hydraulic jumps. The ascent of water level, happens during the
change of unsteady "fast" or supercritical stream to the stable 'peaceful' or the subcritical
stream in known as hydraulic jump, showing itself as a standing wave. At the point when
hydraulic jump happens, a ton of energy of the streaming liquid is scattered. Hydraulic jump
is supposed to be a dissipater of the overflow energy of liquid and past the pressure driven
hop, water streams with more prominent profundity hence with less speed (Harrawood, P,
2016).
Hydraulic jump has several important applications. Which include the following:
 Raising of the downstream water level in irrigation channels
 Reduction of energy and velocity downstream of water dam to control erosion of
channel bed
 Acting as mixing device for the addition and mixing of chemicals in industrial and
also water and water waste treatment plants.
 The hydraulic jump in natural water streams is also used to provide air circulation in
the water for managing pollution/contamination.
OBJECTIVE:
This experiment is conducted to,
 Determine the coefficient of discharge (Cd) in different type of weirs used in hydraulic
structures.
 Determine specific energy and discharge at critical depth of flow.
  Determine the computer model of a gradually varied flow in an open channel at pre-
jump and post-jump conditions and characterizing the flow characteristics.

Part 1.A & B

THEORY:
CRUMP WEIR AND BROAD CRESTED WEIR:
Stream of water in conduit might be directed either in open channel stream or line stream or
pipe. These two sort of flow are comparable from multiple points of view yet vary on one
significant regard. The open channel stream should have a free surface while the line stream
has none. The free surface is exposed to the barometrical pressing factors while in pipe
stream, there is no immediate climatic pressing factor stream except for water driven pressing
factor that just happens (Yoon, S.; Lee, 2008).
Different types of weirs which is broad crested weir, sharp crested weir, over shot weir,
crump weir, and venture flume are used to obtain the coefficient of discharge at the end of
this experiment. Different weirs will have different formula in order to obtain the coefficient
of discharge.
EXPERIMENT
APPARATUS AND MATERIALS:
The following apparatus were used to ensure the experiment was completed well;
Measuring instrument, working bench, broad crested weir, crump weir.
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
The lab flume utilized in this investigation is a rectangular flume of estimations of about 18.6
m long, 0.6 m in width and 0.6m in stature. The flume dividers are produced using a glass
fiber to give visual perception, while the bed is hardened steel. A V-indent sharp peaked weir
is situated underneath the power source of the channel tank estimating the real release which
goes through the flume area as demonstrated beneath;
Crump weirs are raised pressure driven models implied for estimating stream and controlling
the water rise at surges from dams and channels. The crump weir has a three-sided profile as
demonstrated beneath. There are two kinds of stream conditions:
- The measured stream condition;
- The non-measured stream condition.

Measured Flow happens when the weir works in a possessed way, with extremely high
downstream water level. In this condition, the upstream head isn't influenced by the
downstream head; hence it is simpler to decide the volumetric stream by thinking about
taking a solitary estimation of upstream. The non-secluded stream condition then again works
at a low downstream water level. It is influenced by the downstream head.

Fig 2; the flume

Open channel: 2.5m laboratory flume, channel width, B = 0.079m
THE LAB PROCEDURE
1. Flume is placed in a levelled position, with no stop beams fixed at the discharge end
of the channel. Actual height and width of the crump weir, B (m) is measured.
 2. Crump weir is installed in the flume with circular right angled upstream at a position
of 800mm downstream. Weirs is maintained to be safe by the use of a fixing hook
along the bed of flume. The spaces left between weir and the channel needs to be
sealed on the upstream part by the use of a wax in order to get a correct experimental
results.
3. The pump of the hydraulic bench is then turned on, and the flow adjusted to its
maximum by opening the valve. The water is not to overflow from the channel.
4. The point of reference for all measurements will be the bed of the flume. The level
gauges is carefully adjusted to coincide with the bed of the flume and readings taken.
The depth of flow at different locations are obtained using the level gauge both form
the Bottom bed and surface water for the following;
a) Some 100mm upstream of the weir (y1)
b) At the lowest depth at the bottom of the weir (y2)
c) Just before the jump (y3)
d) After the jump where the water is in tranquil flow (y4)
The length of the jump between ie (y3) and (y4) is then estimated and abbreviated as
L.
5. By using the Pitot tube the velocity head is measured with a possibility of the same 4
locations, and any difficulties recorded.
6. Using the first level gauge, the height of the weir above the bed, P (m) is measured.
7. The second level gauge is positioned some way upstream from the weir, usually 4
times the maximum height of water above the weir.
8. Flow of water is adjusted into the flume to obtain heads (h). By decreasing the flow
rate the valve is closed slightly and the procedure is repeated from point 5. Verify that
the depth upstream of the weir decreases at least 5 mm. And repeat this procedure at
least 5 times more, every time with a different discharge.
9. For each step, upstream depth of flow over the weir is measured, where the flow
becomes parallel to the weir. Flow rate, Q, can be determined by using the direct
reading from flow meter. To acquire accurate results, the level gauge must be far
enough the upstream to be clear of the drawdowns over the weirs.
10. Observe and sketch the flow patterns over the weir at each settings and record the
results in the table.
11. Process 1-9 is repeated again by using another weir which is broad crested weir,
crump weir, over shot weir and venture flume.

DATA, RESULTS AND CALCULATIONS

Part A; Crump weir
Table 1;
Depth (mm);
Flow number y-1 y-2 y-3 y-4
1 31 15 18 30
2 26 11 14 24
3 21 8 11 19
4 16 6 8 15.5
5 11 6 8 16
Table 2;
Distance from start of the channel (mm);
Flow number y-1 y-2 y-3 y-4
1 400 730 1600 2000
2 400 730 1488 2000
 3 400 730 1450 1790
4 400 730 1310 1685
5 400 730 1350 1800
Table 3;
Discharge (m³/s);
Flow 1st Timing 2nd Timing 3rd Timing Average 5L/Average Q
number (s) (s) (s) Timing(s) Timing
1 9.9 9.73 10.03 9.89 0.506 5.06*10¯4
2 11.79 12.01 12.16 11.99 0.417 4.17*10¯4
3 14.57 15.41 15.49 15.02 0.333 3.33*10¯4
4 21.33 21.0 19.35 20.56 0.247 2.49*10¯4
5 36.29 37.26 35.86 36.57 0.137 1.38*10¯4

Table 4;
Run no. Q (m3/s) B(m) H(m) H3/2(m) Cd
1 5.06 ×10−4 0.079 0.023 3.488 ×10−3 1.064
2 4.17 × 10−4 0.079 0.026 4.192 ×10−3 1.187
3 3.33 ×10−4 0.079 0.030 5.196 ×10−3 1.186
4 2.49 ×10−4 0.079 0.034 6.269 ×10−3 1.184
5 1.38 ×10−4 0.079 0.038 7.408 ×10−3 1.173

Mean Flow rate=5.06+4.17+3.33+2.49+1.38;

=16.43/5
=3.286*10m³/s
a) Critical depth and Critical Energy
The critical depth is when Fr=1, and not it is a flow which is not normal. It does not depend
on the slope S. Where Fr is the Froude number.
But E=y+q²/2gy²;

E1=21+ (5.06*10¯ 4)/2*9.81*21²;

=21

Therefore;

E1b=9.2; E1c=11.8; E1c=20.9

b. Flow Depth(y) (m) against Specific Energy, E (m).
Graph below shows the relationship between energy and channel depth when the flow rate
per unit width, q using the energy curve shown below, it is clear that the critical depth, yc and
minimum energy (critical energy) can be determined at various flow rates.

y/yc vs E/yc
0.12

0.1

0.08
y/yc

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11

E/yc

c. The graph above has proven that the critical energy, Ec(m) and critical depth, yc
(m) can be determined. Therefore, the mathematical formula to find these figures by
theory can be done by comparison. The table below represents the summary of
comparison between the critical energy, Ec (m) and critical depth,yc(m) by theory and
experimental results (Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2007).

EXPERIMEN
y4/y3 THEORY T
Ec yc Ec yc
0.000504 0.00625 0.00417 0.0062 0.0039
0.000417 0.00394 0.00263 0.00375 0.0026
0.000333 0.00248 0.00166 0.00248 0.0016
0.000249 0.00174 0.00086 0.00181 0.001
0.000138 0.00153 0.00077 0.00156 0.00071

We know that;

Dividing the above equation by h1;

Therefore;
But;
y4/y3=0.77Fr + 0.94

y4/y3 against Fr number

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6
Fr number

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

y4/y3

The grapg above should be a straight line across the axes but due to human error it could not
be obtained.
DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
This study is majorly focusing on the lab experiment that utilizes an open channel flow model
with a crump weir. The hydraulic jump of an unsteady open channel is predicted and how to
determine the relationship between the specific energy and flow depth of water flow over a
crump weir.
In the experiment, the relationship between Critical Energy and critical flow depth graph is
clear almost straight line, the features of hydraulic jump for variable flow rate is presented in
the graph. The change increase of flow depth can results to an increase in critical energy.
Hence, the flow is sub-critical. The energy as seen in the experiment decreases at super
critical flow. It has proven that when we increase the rate of the flow, flow depth is also
increasing at sub-critical flow therefore this decreases in the super critical flow.

In the drawn graphs above, the surface profile and total hydraulic energy line, indicates that
the upstream flow is sub-critical while the downstream flow is super critical of the
channel/flume. Head energy hence is decreased when our flow is over a crump weir. In that
case, flow for an unsteady open channel of surface profile can controlled by the present weir
along the channel as shown above (Fahlbusch, F.E, 2010).

Sources of Errors;
- The data collected during the experiment were not more enough and sufficient to get
the best flow profile;
- Human error such as parallax error during reading of the data. This led to incorrect
data recordings for analysis.
 - There was no better measuring methods which are well calibrated such as for
measuring the exact volume.

Conclusion;
It can be concluded that, at any flow rate of 0.0010m3/s and 0.0020m3/s, the hydraulic
energy, E (m) and flow depth, y (m) cannot be gotten by the graph plotting since the graph is
seen to be almost a straight line and not a curve in any direction. Therefore, at this point of
flow, the curve cannot be determined by seeing how it flows and this makes it difficult to get
the minimum hydraulic energy or critical energy, Ec (m). This is also applicable when we are
analyzing the critical depth flow and critical energy.
An increase of the flow depth will results into the hydraulic energy value increase for this
reason it is used to get the sub-critical flow that occurs in the channel. In addition to that, an
increase of flow depth shall results into a decrease of hydraulic energy for super critical flow.
This experiment has obtained the objectives to find the relationship between upstream flow
and flow rate of water flow over crump weir.

Recommendations;
The best depth of crump weir for the experiment is to design a hydraulic flume is 0.062m
breadth with 0.32m width. The suggested flow rate should be; 0.017m³/s, 0.019m³/s or
0.002m³/s. These values are best for determining the rate of flow over a crump weir to
manage the flow in the area of application such as; flood control or irrigation or in the dam
construction. For the reasons of continuous research, I would suggest to determine the flow
profile by using the bigger amount of flow rate.

Formula:
3
2
Q=1.705Cd BH

Where

Q = Water flow rate.

Cd = Coefficient of discharge.
B = Channel width.
H = Height of water level above crest.

For run no 1, use the formula above to find C d

3
2
Q=1.705 C d BH

5 ×10−4=1.705 ×C d × 0.079× 3.488× 10−3

5 ×10−4
C d=
1.705 ×0.079 ×3.488 ×10−3
 C d=¿1.064

Find Cd for run no.2 to no.5 by using the same formula.

Average = (1.064+1.187+1.186+1.184+1.173) / 5 = 1.1588
Graph of the crump weir;

crump weir
0.04
0.04
waterdepth

0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Rate of Flow

Broad Crested Weir

Run no. Q (m3/s) B(m) H(m) H3/2(m) Cd
1 0.000619 0.079 0.029 4.939 × 10−3 0.7516
2 0.000432 0.079 0.034 6.269 ×10−3 0.7935
3 0.000293 0.079 0.037 7.117 × 10−3 0.8658
4 0.000195 0.079 0.047 0.010 0.7424
5 0.000200 0.079 0.050 0.011 0.7897

a. Calculation of the specific energy at every cross sections;

 b. Calculation of the drag coefficient of the weir;
Formula:
3
2
Q=1.705Cd BH

Where

Q = Water flow rate.

Cd = Coefficient of discharge.
B = Channel width taken to be 0.079m
H = Height of water level above crest.

For run no 1, use the formula above to find C d

3
Q=1.705 C d BH 2

6 ×10−4 =1.705× Cd × 0.079 ×4.939 ×10−3

 5 ×10−4
C d=
1.705 ×0.079 × 4.939× 10−3
C d=¿0.7516

Find Cd for run no.2 to no.5 by using the same formula.

Average= (0.7516 + 0.7935 + 0.8658 + 0.7424 + 0.7897) / 5 = 0.7886

broad crested weir

0.06

0.05
waterdepth

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Rate of Flow

c. DISCUSSION
From data and analysis results above, we see that the normal of the coefficient of release are
contrast from one another however are not in a major flow distinction. Normal coefficient of
release for broad crest weir is 0.7886. This shows that diverse sort of shape or state of the
spot will in the long run influence the water profundity just as its coefficient of release
despite the fact that we set the stream rate in same speed (Chanson, H. (2011).).
During the experiment, the outcome shows that expanding the stream rate or release rate will
bit by bit builds the profundity of water until it arrives at its breaking point. This theory is
demonstrated by taking a gander at the information examination and furthermore our
estimations.
From the graph, straight straightforwardly corresponding line diagram is drawn dependent on
the information, shows the theory is acknowledged. Thus, the theory is demonstrated that the
increment pace of release Q, will build the profundity of water (Rajaratnam, N.;,2012).
d. CONCLUSION
Different types of weirs shape such as crump and broad crest affect the outcome of the flow
which means this will results into different coefficient of discharge, Cd. Based on this
experiment, we also can see that different type of weirs shape will have different value of
water depth even though the flow rate, Q is the same.
The experiment can be concluded that, increasing the rate of flow will increase the depth of
water. Depth of water is directly proportional to the rate of flow, Q.

PART B: GRADUALLY VARIED FLOW SIMULATION

This part of the experiment is mainly dealing with analysing the flow using MS EXCEL to
show the flow of the fluid.
Direct Method;
Making our consideration on the above experiment, the flow depth at every points of the
channel is already known and the aim of this section/part of the report is to get the position of
point, let’s say point 2, in which a designated flow depth of y2 will happen in a specific open
channel for a specific discharge, Q. In some words, the objective of this experiment can be
described as follows;
The flow depth at a specific distance of z is known; find a distance of x2 where a specified
flow depth y2 will occur. The properties of the channel section, So, Q, and n are known
(Abrahams, A. D, 2013).
Therefore;
So=is the slope of the bottom of an open channel described above,
Hence; z2=z1-So(x2-x1);
Where specific energy;
E1=y1+a1V1²/2g;
And E2=y2+a2V2²/2g;
 a. experimental procedure
1. The condition of the flow was identified, type of the transition and the subsequent
profiles,
2. The control depth was identified, and the calculations of go upstream or downstream
from control section was determined, by setting that point as change x=0 as we
assumed an increment of y,
3. The geometrical characteristics of two consecutives cross sections (control depth and
the control depth with the increment): hydraulic area (A), wetted perimeter (P) and
hydraulic radius (R) were determined,

Calculation analysis;
Consider the diagram of the GVF shown below;

b. Calculation of the final length;

c. Spreadsheet of the data
The above calculations are used to draw the table below;

yc 1.823 yn 3
So 0.0005 dx 800
q 7.711 n 0.025
x(m) y(m) dy(m) bed(m) HGL EGL
 0 3.3 0.141 0 3.33 3.3
4 3.2 0.141 0.138 3.26 3.3
8 3.1 0.141 0.278 3.22 3.32
12 3 0.141 0.417 3.21 3.36
16 2.8 0.141 0.556 3.21 3.39
20 2.7 0.141 0.693 3.21 3.49
24 2.6 0.139 0.833 3.21 3.51
28 2.5 0.138 0.971 3.21 3.59
32 2.5 0.126 0.984 3.2 3.66
36 2.4 0.106 1.03 3.2 3.73
40 2.4 0.103 1.11 3.24 3.75
44 2.2 0.102 1.34 3.27 3.77
48 2.1 0.1 1.78 3.33 3.82
52 1.7 0.0971 1.87 3.36 3.95
56 1.7 0.097 1.95 3.419 3.99
60 1.7 0.077 2.16 3.523 4.01
64 1.6 0.067 2.27 3.576 4.05
68 1.5 0.051 2.309 3.619 4.11
72 1.5 0.039 2.555 3.789 4.12
76 1.5 0.029 2.807 3.791 4.456
80 1.4 0.021 3.01 3.867 4.466
84 1.2 0.019 3.14 3.967 4.467
88 1.2 0.011 3.224 4.12 4.587
92 1.1 0.01 3.333 4.23 4.692
96 1 0.0093 3.45 4.47 4.709
100 1 0.009 3.667 4.86 4.867

d. plotting of the flow

 BACKWATER PROFILE

4
Axis Title

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Axis Title

Where series 1=Bed slope; series 2=HGL; series 3=EGL;

e. Final length calculation

Discussion of the results;

There exist three flow depths that used in backflow profile calculations:
(1) the flow depth y;
(2) the normal depth 𝑦𝑛 ; and
(3) the critical depth 𝑦𝑐.
Which can therefore be examined if dy/dx is real value or negative value using the equation
below;
REFERENCES
i. Robert W. Fox, Alan T. McDonald, (2005), Introduction to Fluid Mechanics,
Wiley.
ii. Boxer G, (2008), Work Out Fluid Mechanics, Palgrave.
iii. Harrawood, P. (2016). Correlation of weir crest depth, Froude number, H/P ratio,
weir thickness.
iv. Jalil, S. A., Sarhan, S. A., & Yaseen, M. S. (2015). Hydraulic Jump Properties
Downstream a Sluice Gate with Prismatic Sill. Research Journal of Applied
Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 11(4), 447-453.
v. Li, C.-F. (2018). Determining the location of hydraulic jump by model test and
HEC-2 flow routing. Ohio University.
vi. Abrahams, A. D., Li, G., & Atkinson, J. F. (2013). Step‐pool streams: Adjustment
to maximum flow resistance. Water Resources Research, 31(10), 2593-2602.
 vii. Chanson, H. (2011). Development of the Bélanger equation and backwater
equation by Jean-Baptiste Bélanger (1828). Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
135(3), 159-163.
viii. Leutheusser, H. J., & Birk, W. M. (2018). Drown proofing of low overflow
structures. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 117(2), 205-213.
ix. Te Chow, V. (2015). Open-channel hydraulics (Vol. 1): McGraw-Hill New York.
x. Leutheusser, H. J., & Fan, J. J. (2016). Backward flow velocities of submerged
hydraulic jumps.
xi. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 127(6), 514-517. Bhowmik, G.N. Hydraulic
Jump Type Stilling Basins for Froude Number 2.5 to 4.5; Report of Investigation
67; Illinois State Water Survey: Champaign-Urbana, IL, USA, 2007.
xii. Rajaratnam, N.; MacDougall, R.K. Erosion by plane wall jets with minimum
tailwater. J. Hydraul. Eng. ASCE 2012, 109, 1061–1064.
xiii. Yoon, S.; Lee, J.; Son, K.; Kim, J. Experiment study on downstream local scour of
free-falling jet, J. Korea Water Resour. Assoc. 2008, 28, 147–154. (In Korean)
xiv. Hoffmans, G.J.C.M.; Verheij, H.J. Scour Manual; A.A. Balkema: Rotterdam,
Netherlands, 2014; pp. 68–87.
xv. Fahlbusch, F.E. Scour of rock due to the impact of plunging high velocity jets part
I: A state-of-the-art review. J. Hydraul. Res. 2010, 46, 853–858.

APPENDIX
The Teaching Flume

Figure 1 Gauge
Figure 2Teaching Flume On Off Button

Figure 3 Rate of Flow Meter

Figure 4 Teaching Flume