See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/260056734

Development of Drop Number Peformance for Estimate Hydraulic Jump on

Vertical and Sloped Drop Structure

Article  in  International journal of physical sciences · September 2010

CITATIONS READS

6 753

2 authors:

Mohammad Sholichin Shatirah Akib

Brawijaya University Heriot-Watt University, Malaysia
39 PUBLICATIONS   85 CITATIONS    105 PUBLICATIONS   1,195 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Using deep eutectic solvents as functionalization agents of carbon nano materials for water treatment applications View project

Flow and energy dissipation over on flat and pooled stepped spillway View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Shatirah Akib on 16 January 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of the Physical Sciences Vol. 5(11), pp. 1678-1687, 18 September, 2010
Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/IJPS
ISSN 1992 - 1950 ©2010 Academic Journals

Full Length Research Paper

Development of drop number performance for estimate

hydraulic jump on vertical and sloped drop structure
Mohammad Sholichin1 and Shatirah Akib2*
1
Department of Water Resources, Faculty of Engineering, University of Brawijaya, Indonesia.
2
Department of Civil Engineering, University Malaya, Malaysia.
Accepted 31 August, 2010

Hydraulic jumps primarily serve to dissipate the excess energy of flowing water downstream of
hydraulic structures, such as spillways, weir, sluice gates etc. This type of jump is of practical
importance when tail water depth is inadequate to give a good jump. The research conducted at the
hydraulics laboratory aimed to obtain suitability of drop number (D) and an estimated hydraulic jump
using the drop number. The objective was to obtain the affectivities of application of D on vertical drop
and sloped drop structures and to develop the model equation for the sloped drop structure. The
hydraulic laboratory conducted research on a hydraulic rectangular flume. Results showed that the D
equation could predict drop length (Ld), and hydraulic jump length (Lj) for vertical drop structures;
however, the equation could not estimate the hydraulic jump length for sloped drop structure.
Therefore, development of a D equation that could be used to estimate hydraulic jump for sloped drop
structures, with analysis of non dimensional relationships based on mathematical equations, was
needed. These equations have correlation regression with a range between 60 - 87% and relative error
with a range between 5 - 13%.

Key word: Drop number, hydraulic jump and drop structure.

INTRODUCTION

The hydraulic jump is a practical subject in hydraulic a series of gentle slopes and vertical drops. Instead of
engineering because the hydraulic jump is the best way slowing down and transferring high erosion producing
to dissipate energy present in a moving fluid. The velocities into low non- erosive velocities, drop structures
hydraulic jump causes a reduction in the total energy of a control the slope of the channel in such a way that the
moving fluid, which, in turn, prevents the fluid from high, erosive velocities never develop. The kinetic energy
scouring the channel banks. The hydraulic jump also or velocity gained by the water as it drops over the crest
enables conversion of a portion of the fluid's kinetic of each structure is dissipated by a specially designed
energy, which can stabilize downstream flow conditions. apron or stilling basin.
The theory of the hydraulic jump was developed by Design of irrigation systems has followed the book of
Safranez in 1929, in Germany, and a series of two- irrigation design standards with small modifications
dimensional experiments were verified (Elevatorski, situated on site. In irrigation systems, the three important
1959). However, the theory of the hydraulic jump is not parts are the main structure, the irrigation channel and
yet fully developed (Cheng, 1995). the drainage channel. The drop structure is a support
Drop structures are commonly used for flow control and structure that has function in dropping water elevation
energy dissipation. Changing the channel slope from (Anonymous, 1986). Henderson (1966) and French
steep to mild, by placing drop structures at intervals along (1986) explained the drop number for the design of drop
the channel reach, changes a continuous steep slope into structures in irrigation systems. Kindsvater (1944)
observed the effects of a sloping channel on the hydraulic
jump. Wilson (1972) investigated the boundary layer
effects in the hydraulic jump locations. Rhone (1977)
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]. studied the effects of channel bottom roughness on the
 Sholichin and Akib 1679

jump. Z = height above a datum plane (m),

According to the results of the experiments by Moore P = pressure at the point, pounds per square meter,
(1943; Backheteff (1932); Rand (1965); Locher and Hsu V = average flow velocity, meters per second (m/sec),
2
(1984), drop number (D) function can explain the g = acceleration due to gravity, m/sec ,
geometric flow in drop structures. Hager (1992) examined = contante.
the hydraulic jump on free surface profiles, and
developed an empirical equation to determine the length The mean presure, at any location along a chute, is
of the jump. The value of the drop number can determine determined using the principal of conservation of energy,
length (Ld) in the stilling basin. There are two expresed by the energy equation. Conservation of energy
classifications of hydraulic conditions in the drop requires that the energy at one location on the spillway
structure: low flow and high flow (Iwao, 1991). Much of will be equal to the energy at any downstream location
the literature does not give detailed explanations of drop plus all intervening energy losses. Expressed in equation
numbers, especially the ratio of critical depth (yc) and form and in units of meter,
water fall (z). The purpose of the current study was to
obtain the boundary conditions for application of Drop P1 V12 P V2
Number on vertical and sloped drop structures and to Z1 + + α1 = Z2 + 2 +α2 2 + H L . (2)
develop the model equation for the sloped drop structure.
γ 2 .g γ 2 .g

In order for a hydraulic jump to occur, the flow must be

Theoretical expression supercritical. The jump becomes more turbulent and
more energy dissipates, as Froude’s number increases.
Similarities between the two different sized phenomena A jump can occur only when the Froude’s number is
provided the basis for the hydraulic model’s development. greater than 1.0. Froude’s number (Fr) is a ratio relating
In all branches of engineering, mechanical, electrical, civil inertia and gravity forces.
and others, the laws of similarity provide the foundation
for the testing of models. These laws state that the V (3)
Fr 1 =
equations used to express the behaviour of the machine g.y
or other structure must be dimensionally homogeneous.
For complete similarity between the model and the full- This number, representing the ratio of inertial and gravity
sized structure (prototype), this similarity must be forces, is expressed by the average flow velocity V and
geometric, kinematics and dynamic.
the celerity of gravity wave in shallow water g. y . Using
(i) Form geometric similarity, all the relevant linear the Froude number one can distinguish:
dimensions of the model must be directly proportional to
the corresponding full-size dimension, (i) Critical flow when Fr = 1,
(ii) For kinematics similarity, there must be a linear (ii) Supercritical flow when Fr > 1,
relationship between the two sets of corresponding (iii)Subcritical flow when Fr < 1.
velocities,
(iii) For dynamic similarity, there must be a linear According to Chow (1959), jumps in a horizontal channel
relationship between the corresponding sets of forces. can be further classified into several types (Table 1).
Drop number functions that have two variables, water fall
The basic principle used to analyze steady (z) and specific discharge (q), can explained the
incompressible flow through a channel is the law of geometric flow in drop structures (Moore, 1943). An
conservation of energy expressed by the Bernoulli equation can determine critical depth (yc) on a
(energy) equation. The energy equation, generalized to rectangular channel.
apply to the entire cross section of flow, expresses the
energy at any point on the cross section in feet of water q 2 , and with substitution, we can obtain
yc = 3
by equation, g

P V2 yc q2 . (4)
H = Z + +α (1) Z
= 3
g .Z 3
γ 2.g
Therefore,
Where,
yc
3
q 2 , or q2
H = total energy head in meter of water above the datum = D= (5)
plane (m), Z g .Z 3 g .Z 3
1680 Int. J. Phys. Sci.

Table 1. Types of hydraulic jumps.

Name Froude’s number Energy dissipation % Characteristics

Undular jump 1.0 - 1.7 <5 Standing waves
Weak jump 1.7 - 2.5 5 - 15 Smooth rise
Oscillating jump 2.5 - 4.5 15 - 45 Unstable; avoid
Steady jump 4.5 - 9.0 45 - 70 Best design range
Strong jump > 9.0 70 - 85 Choppy, intermittent

Figure 1. Common vertical drop structure (Bos, 1976).

Figure 2. Sloping drop structure (Anonymous, 1986).

Where, Rand, 1965):

D = drop number Ld
3
q = specific discharge (m /sec/m) = 4.30 D 0.27 (6)
z = water fall (m) z
2
g = gravitational constant = 9.81 (m /sec)
L j = 6.9( y 2 − y1 ) (7)
The common vertical and sloped drop structure with
aerated free-falling napped hits the downstream basin
floor with turbulent circulation in the pool beneath the y1
= 0.54 D 0.425 (8)
napped contributing to the energy dissipation are shown z
in Figure 1 and 2. The value of the vertical drop number
can predict drop length (Ld), hydraulic jump length (Lj), y2
water depth in upstream (y1) and water depth in down = 1.66 D 0.27 (9)
stream (y2) using the following formulae (Moore, 1943; z
 Sholichin and Akib 1681

Table 2. Matrix formulation for dimensional.

Depended variable Free variable Other

Variables k1 k2 k3 k4 k5 k6 k7 k8 K9 k10
Q v1 Ld yc y1 y2 Lj h Z g
M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
L 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
T -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2

DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS h = water depth in upper drop structure

z = water fall
Dimensional analysis, one approach to identify useful g = the acceleration due to gravity
parameter combinations, requires dimensional
consistency in the equation governing a process of
interest. Although, the requirement for dimensional Statistical analysis
consistency applies to equations that have dimensions in
each term, it is invariably applied in ways that convert all Data consisting of two variables or more require the
the terms to dimensionless groups. Main physical variables to correlate with each other. A mathematical
quantity is some combination of length, mass and time equation that expresses the functional relationship
(denoted L, M, and T, respectively). A matrix method between any variables generally expresses the correla-
formulates a dimensional equation is shown in Table 2. tion. To determine the equation that expresses any
The Buckingham i theorem is a tool to provide the variables requires transformation of the collected data,
relationships between N quantities with M dimensions. showing the free variable value perceived. Therefore, a
This theorem arranges the quantities as N-M scatter diagram can express the results of the measure-
independent dimensionless parameters. Therefore, the ments. This results in a depiction of a regression curve
2
functional relation must exist as (Hanche-Olsen, 2004). that expresses many variables. This correlation test (R )
indicates the degree of correlation between any variables
π = ρ1k1 , ρ 2k 2 , ρ 3k 3 ,..........., ρ nkn , (10) (Henriksen et al., 2003):

These parameters contain three main variables, such as

R = 2
[ (x − x )(y − y )] 2

(15)
(x − x ) (y − y )
i i i
M, L and T. If 1 has dimension M , L , T , then the 2 2
dimension of is as follows:
1 1 1 k1 2 2 i k2 n n n kn
= (M L T ) , (M L T ) ….(M L T ) (11) Where,

It can be ( ) non-dimensional if 2
R = coefficient of correlation
x = free of variable
2k1+ 2k2+……………. nkn =0 (12) y = depended of variable
x = average value of free variable
1k1+ 2k2+…………… nkn =0 (13)
y = average value of depended variable
1k1+ 1k1+…………… 1k1 =0 (14)
2 2
The range of values for R is 1.0 (best) to 0.0. The R
The Buckingham i method analyzed hydraulic coefficient measures the fraction of the variation in the
parameters involved in a drop structure and hydraulic measured data that is replicated in simulated model
jump as follows: 2
results. A value of 0.0 for R means that none of the
variance in the measured data is replicated by the model
q = the flow discharge per unit width predictions. On the other hand, a value of 1.0 indicates
v1 = the mean velocity of upstream section. that all of the variance in the measured data is replicated
Ld = drop length by the model predictions. Henriksen et al. (2003) suggest
yc = critical depth 2
that a R value > 0.85 is excellent for a model, a value
y1 = the initial depth of the jump upstream between 0.65 - 0.85 is very good, values between 0.5 -
y2 = the sequent depth of the jump downstream 0.65 are good, those between 020 - 0.50 are poor and
Lj = the length of the hydraulic jump any < 0.20 are very poor. In order to know the relative
1682 Int. J. Phys. Sci.

Figure 3. Flume channel in hydraulic laboratory.

error, the relative error equation ( ) was used. The vertical drop structure had several heights of drop. The
heights of the drops were 4.0, 6.0, 8.0, 10.0, and 12.0 cm,
respectively. The discharge flows were 75, 220, 350, 500, 700 and
x− y 940 cm3/ sec, respectively. Then, the same methods were repeated
∆= 100% (16) for sloping drop structure. Table 3 shows the description of
x scenarios of the hydraulic test. In part I, measurements of water
jump length (Lj) were measured at the vertical drop structure by the
Where, following discharges, (Q) 75, 220, 350, 500, 700 and 940 cm3/sec,
respectively, and with condition of water fall height (z) of 4, 6, 8 10
= relative error and 12 cm, respectively. In part II, III and IV similar experiments
were conducted with discharge and water fall height variations as in
x = teoritical results part I but with different drop structures.
y = model measurement results

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
The jump length, the distance between the beginning and
The experiments used a rectangular laboratory flume at the
University of Brawijaya. The flume was 7.5 m long, 0.078 m wide,
the end of a hydraulic jump, usually moves up and down
and 0.35 m high; a hydraulic circuit, connected to the flume, allowed in the channel and is difficult to measure. Basically, the
for a recirculation of discharge. The walls and the bed of the flume section of water surface starting to rise and having rollers
were made of Plexiglas sheets (Figure 3). The experiments coming out was regarded as the beginning of the jump,
included both vertical drop and sloping drop structures. A pump and the section of the water surface having the most
supplied water from an underground storage tank in the laboratory. bubbles coming out from the water surface was
A point gauge measured the flow depth h. The runs were carried
out for selected values of the flow depth y1, y2 and the Froude considered the end of the jump. The average of the
number Fr1; the jump was set within the experimental measuring distances from the beginnings to the ends of the jumps
reach, using the downstream gate. For each run, the discharge Q, constitutes an average of jump length. The initial depth
the flow depths y1 , y2 and the jump length Lj were measured. A and sequent depth of the jump are the depths of the
weight method measured the discharges, which varied from 75 - beginning and the end of a hydraulic jump, respectively.
950 cm3/s (Bos, 1976; Novak et al., 1981). The model vertical drop
In order to know the suitability of the drop number
structure and sloped drop structure were constructed by using
wooden material with a high quality performance. Figure 4 (a) and used, a comparison between theoretical graphs based on
(b) show the model before and after installation in the flume. the Moore equation is required, with measurement
 Sholichin and Akib 1683

Figure 4. Wood material for vertical and sloped drop structure with ratio (m = 1:1.0; m = 1:1.25; m = 1:1.5; m = 1:1.75;
m=1:2.0); where (a) before install in flume, (b) after install in flume.

Table 3. Design experimental.

3
Part Drop structure High drop (Z) (cm) Discharge (cm /sec)
1 Vertical drop 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 75, 220, 350, 500, 700 and 940
2 Sloping with ratio 1:1.0 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 75, 220, 350, 500, 700 and 940
3 Sloping with ratio 1:1.5 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 75, 220, 350, 500, 700 and 940
4 Sloping with ratio 1:2.0 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 75, 220, 350, 500, 700 and 940

100 100

Fr1
10 10
Ratio (y1/z) and (Lj/z

Froud number
Lj/z
1 1

Ld/z
0.1 0.1
y1/z
Lj/z
0.01 0.01
Ld/z
y1/z
Fr1
0.001 0.001
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1
2 3)
Drop number [q /(g.z ]
Figure 5. Theoretical curve of relationship between Lj/z, Ld/z, y1/z and Fr with D based on Rand (1955); Moore (1943)
equation.

records on the rectangular flume at “vertical drop theoretical curve of the relationship between Lj/z, Ld/z,
structure” and “sloped drop structure”. Statistical analysis y1/z and Fr with D based on the Rand (1955) and Moore
is used to determinate relative error. Figure 5 shows the (1943) equation. The increase of drop number resulted to
1684 Int. J. Phys. Sci.
 100 100

Fr1
10 10
/z)j/z

Froud number
and(L(L
Lj/z
j

1 1
/z) and
ratio(y(y1/z) 1

0.1 Ld/z 0.1

y1/z
Ratio

0.01 y1/z Lj/z 0.01

Ld/z
Fr1
0.001 0.001
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1
2 3)
Drop number [q /(g.z ]

Figure 6. Curve of relationship between Lj/z, Ld/z, y1/z and Fr with D based on measurement in hydraulic flume.

Figure 7. Vertical drop structure on hydraulic rectangular flume.

the increase ratio of Lj/z, Ld/z and y1/z, respectively. In analysis, the maximum error degree was less than 5%.
contrast, the Fr value decreased. Figure 6 shows the The hydraulic jump length (Lj) value was about 5 - 8%
curve of relationship between Lj/z, Ld/z, y1/z and Fr with relative error. The drop number (D) equation predicted
D based on measurement in the hydraulic flume. Most of drop length (Ld) and hydraulic jump length (Lj) on vertical
relationship graphs such as Lj/z, Ld/z and y1/z with D in drop structure. Figure 7 shows the vertical drop structure
2
Figure 6 had similar trend in comparison with graphs in in the hydraulic flume with discharge 75 cm /sec and
Figure 5. height water fall 8 cm. Based on the results of
According to statistical analysis and comparison measurements at the flume for the sloped drop structure,
between the resulting calculations by Moore’s formula, such as (m = 1:1, m = 1:1.5 and m = 1:2) and statistic
with reading data from the channel flume for drop length analysis, the relative error between measurement records
(Ld), there was not much difference. Based on statistical with the empirical formulation equation was more than >
Sholichin and Akib 1685
 Table 4. Matrix formulation for dimensional.

k1 k2 k3 k4 k5 k6 k7 k8 k9 k10
Variables
q v1 Ld yc y1 y2 Lj h z g
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1.5 -0.5
2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0,5 -0.5
3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 -1.0 0
4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 -1.0 0
5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -1.0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 -1.0 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 -1.0 0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 -1.0 0

15%. The drop number could not estimate hydraulic jump y2 Lj h

in the sloped drop structure. Therefore, in order to 6= ; 7= , and 8 =
develop the drop number (D) to estimate hydraulic jump z z z
on the sloped drop structure, the analysis of non
dimensional relationships, based on mathematical The measurements of hydraulic jumps length on sloped
equations, was needed (Table 4). Formulation based on drop structure in each condition were conducted 5 times
3
dimensional analysis: in the range of discharges between 75 - 940 cm /s and
height of waterfall from 4 - 12 cm. The resume of
measurement of hydraulic jump is shown in Table 5.
α1 = 0 Figure 8 shows the development curve of relationship
between Lj/z and y1/z with D and Figure 9 shows the
β1 = 2k1 + k2 + k3 + k4 + k5 + k6 + k7 + k8 + k9 + k10 development curve of relationship between y2/z, h/z with
D.
Therefore, this establishes the correlation between 1
γ 1 = −k1 − k 2 − 2k10 with 5, 6, 7 and 8, respectively. Based on statistical
analysis, this research has developed a new formula for
By elimination of k10 + k9, can be found sloping drop structures in laboratory conditions.
2k10 = − k1 − k2
Lj
y = 17.038 x 0.268 with R2 = 0.867, where y = and
k10 = −0.5k1 − 0.5k2 z
Lj
x = D , therefore = 17.038 D 0.268
k9 =−2k1 −k2 −k3 −k4 −k5 −k6 −k7 −k8 −(−0.5k1 −0.5k2) z

k9 = −1.5k1 − 0.5k2 − k3 − k4 − k5 − k6 − k7 − k8 y1
y = 0.494 x 0.40 with R2 = 0.809, where y = and
z
In order to finish this equation, Langhaar matrix was used
x = D , therefore y1 = 0 . 494 D 0 .40
(Table 4). 1 variable had relationship with k1, k9 and k10 z
but it had no relationship with k2, k3, k4, k5, k6, k7, and k8,
respectively. The 2 variable had relationship with k2, k9
and k10 but it had no relationship with k1, k3, k4, k5, k6, k7, y = 0.73x 0.25 with R2 = 0.60, where y = y 2 and
and k8, respectively. The 3 variable had relationship with z
k3, k9 and k10 but it had no relationship with k1, k2, k4, k5, y2
k6, k7, and k8, respectively. Moreover, variable 4, 5, 6 ,
x = D , therefore = 0.73D 0.25
z
7 , and 7 had relationship with k9. The final analyses
based on Langhaar matrix can be summarized by eight
h
dimensionless relationships as follows: y = 0.79 x 0.31 with R2 = 0.60, where y =
z
q2 v2 Ld yc y1 h
1= ; 2= ; 3= ; 4= ; 5= ; and x = D , therefore = 0.79D0.31
g.z 3 g .z z z z z
1686 Int. J. Phys. Sci.
 100

y = 17.038x 0.268
10 2
Ratio (Lj/z) and (y1/z) R = 0.867

z =4 cm
0.1
z =6 cm
z = 8cm
0.01 z = 10 cm
y = 0.494x 0.400
2 z = 12 cm
R = 0.809

0.001
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1
2 3
D ro p nu mb er [q /(g.z )]

Figure 8. Development curve of relationship between Lj/z and y1/z with D based on measurement data analysis

Table 5. Resume of measurement of hydraulic jump Lj (cm) in each sloped drop structure.

m = 1: 1 m = 1: 1.5 m = 1:2
h Q
z (cm ) z (cm ) z (cm )
3
cm cm /s 4 6 8 10 12 4 6 8 10 12 4 6 8 10 12
1.0 75 6.3 8.0 11.5 15.9 19.1 8.3 10.0 13.5 17.9 21.1 11.3 13.0 16.5 20.9 24.1
1.5 220 11.4 13.8 19.0 21.7 27.9 16.4 18.8 24.0 26.7 32.9 20.4 22.8 28.0 30.7 36.9
2.0 350 15.2 18.7 26.8 28.7 35.9 20.2 25.0 32.5 39.2 45.0 24.2 30.0 40.0 45.0 53.0
2.5 500 18.8 24.8 35.0 36.2 42.9 23.8 32.3 33.8 46.9 51.5 27.8 35.0 45.0 50.5 59.0
3.0 700 22.0 29.6 42.2 43.6 50.1 27.0 39.9 40.0 51.0 60.0 31.0 40.0 50.0 56.0 64.0
3.5 940 24.8 34.6 54.3 56.3 59.8 31.8 49.8 50.0 60.2 70.2 37.8 45.0 55.0 60.0 68.0

100
Ratio (y2/z) and (hj/z

10

y = 0.73x 0.25
R2 = 0.60
1

0.1 y = 0.79x 0.31

R2 = 0.60

0.01
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
Drop number [q2/(g.z3)]
Figure 9. Development curve of relationship between y2/z, h/z with D based on measurement data analysis.
 Sholichin and Akib 1687

Figure 10. Sloped drop structure with slop; (a) m = 1:1; (b) m = 1:1.5, (c) m = 1:2.

Figure 10 shows the sloped drop structure on the Chow VT (1959). Open Channel Hydarulics. McGraw, New York, NY.
Elevatorski EA (1959). Hydraulic Energv Dissigators, McGraw, New
rectangular flume with ratio m = 1:1.0, m = 1:1.5 and m = York, NY.
1:2.0, respectively. French RH (1986). Open Channel Hydraulics, McGraw-Hill Book
Company, New York.
Hanche-Olsen H (2004). Buckingham's pi-theorem, Retrieved April 9,
2007.
Conclusion
Hager WH (1992). Energy Dissipaters and Hydraulic Jump, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, London.
Drop number use for vertical drop structures was Henderson FM (1966). Open Channel Flow. MacMillan Company, New
appropriate to conditions from weak to oscillation York, USA.
Henriksen H, Troldborg L, Nyegaard P, Sonnenborg T, Refsgaard J,
(transition) hydraulic jump (at the Froude number value Madsen B (2003). Methodology for construction, calibration and
range: 1.70 < Fr < 4.5) and at range 0.1 < yc /z < 0.6 with validation of a national hydrological model for Denmark, J. Hydrol.,
3
the specific discharge range: 30 cm /sec/m < q < 120 280: 52-71.
3
cm /sec/m. The hydraulic jump length (Lj) value was Iwao O, Youichi Y (1991). Transition from supercritical to sub critical
flow at an abrupt drop, J. Hydraulic Res., 29: 3.
about 5 - 8 % relative error. The D equation predicted Kindsvater CE (1944). The hydraulic jump in sloping channels. Trans.
drop length (Ld) and hydraulic jump length (Lj) on vertical Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 109: 1107-1120.
drop structures. Based on the results of the Locher FA, Hsu ST (1984). Energy dissipation at high dams-in
measurements at the flume for sloped drop structure, (m Development in Hydraulic Engineering. Vol. 2, P. Novak (Ld.),
London, Elsevier Applied Science.
= 1:1, m = 1:1.5 and m = 1:2) and statistic analysis, the
Moore WL (1943). Energy Loss at the Base of a Free Overfall.
relative error between measurement records, with the Transactions, ASCE, 108: 1343-1360. Discussion: 108: 1361-1392.
empirical formulation equation, was more than > 15%. Novak P, Cabelka J (1981). Models in Hydraulic Engineering- Physical
This indicated that drop numbers were not useful in principles and Design Applications. Pitman, London, pp. 160-173,
185-193.
estimating hydraulic jump on sloped drop structures.
Rand W (1965). Flow Over A vertical Sill in An Open Channel. J.
Development of drop number (D) that can be used to Hydraulic Div. ASCE, 91(4): 97-121.
estimate hydraulic jump on sloped drop structures, with Rhone TJ (1977). Baffled Apron as Spillway Energy Dissipater. J.
analysis of non-dimensional relationships, based on Hydraulic Div., ASCE, 103(12): 1391-1401.
Safranez K (1929). Untersuchung über den Wechselsprung
mathematical equations, was needed. These new (Investigation on the hydraulic jump), Der Bauingenieur, 10, Heft 37:
equations have correlation regression with a range 649-651; Heft 38: 668-678.
between 60 - 87% and relative error with a range Wilson EH, Turner AA (1972). Boundary Layer Effects on Hydraulic
between 5 - 13%. Jump Location. J. Hydraulic Div., ASCE, 98(7): 1127-1142.

REFERENCES

Anonymous (1986). Irrigation Design Standard, Design Criteria,

Department of Public Work, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Bacheteff BA (1932). Hyraulic open Chaneels. McGraw, New York, NY.
Bos MG (1976). Discharge Measurement Structure, Working Group on
Small Hydraulic Structure, Oxford & IBH Publishing CO, New Delhi.
Cheng F (1995). L-D Etermining The Location of Hydraulic Jump by
Model Test and Hec-2 Flow Routing, thesis, Fritz J. and Dolores H.
Russ College of Engineering and Technology, Ohio University.

View publication stats