FYP Project ID: WR-16

DETERMINATION OF MAXIMUM TAILWATER

LEVEL FOR FREE FLOW BELOW A
COMBINED SLUICE-FLAP GATE







KOK JEE YUIN JONATHAN





SCHOOL OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

2005

FYP Project ID: WR-16
DETERMINATION OF MAXIMUM TAILWATER
LEVEL FOR FREE FLOW BELOW A
COMBINED SLUICE-FLAP GATE







Submitted by
KOK JEE YUIN JONATHAN


School of Civil and Environmental Engineering
College of Engineering
Nanyang Technological University



A Final Year Project presented to the Nanyang Technological University in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Engineering

2005
Abstract



ii

ABSTRACT


Sluice gates are common structures use as control sections in open channel flow. A hydraulic
jump usually occurs at the downstream section of this structure. The hydraulic jump can be in
the form of free-flow or submerged flow. One criterion which will govern a free flow condition
is the tailwater depth, and the maximum tailwater depth which allows for a free-flow hydraulic
jump is dependent on the sluice coefficient of the gate and the exit flow velocity.

This project establishes the criteria necessary for free-flow condition below the sluice gate of the
Jurong Lake Tidal Gate. A model gate of scale 1 in 40 was constructed to simulate the open
channel flow downstream of the gate. The sluice coefficient below this sluice gate and the
maximum tailwater under a free-flow condition was determined through monitoring the various
flow rates, upstream water depth, downstream tailwater depth and the size of the gate opening.

Modelling of the flow under the sluice gate was conducted in a horizontal rectangular glass
flume. Based on the experimental data obtained, empirical equations for the sluice coefficient
and the maximum tailwater for free flow below the gate have been established. Constraints have
been set to the empirical equations to indicate a situation of either a submerged flow has
occurred or the tailwater depth is not at its maximum level.



Acknowledgements

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


Although only the authors name appears on the cover, this report would not have been possible
without the invaluable advice and guidance of his project supervisor, Associate Professor Dr.
Lim Siow Yong. His advice and guidance has been instrumental in the smooth and successful
completion of this project.

Appreciation is also extended to a project officer, Mr. Toh Hong Seong for guiding him
and providing supports in the various matters throughout the experiments that were
conducted. In addition, the author is grateful to Mr. Chia for assisting him in all his
experimental setup and all other technical staffs that are in the Hydraulic Laboratory for
providing him with their knowledge of the equipments in the laboratory. Last but not
least, the author would like to thank his parents who have given him the much needed
moral support.


Table of Contents
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS


ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
LIST OF SYMBOLS vi
LIST OF FIGURES viii
LIST OF TABLES xi


CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 General Introduction 1
1.2 Objective 1
1.3 Scope of Work 2
1.4 Outline of Thesis 2

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 3

2.1 Types of Under-flow Gates 3
2.2 The Vertical Sluice Gate 4
2.3 Free flow under a gate 4
2.4 Contraction coefficient, C
c
for vertical gate 8
2.5 The Hydraulic Jump and Energy Dissipation Structures 10
2.6 Application of Momentum Equation in Hydraulic Jump 13
2.7 Initial Depth and Sequent Depth Relations in Rectangular Channel 14
2.8 Length of Hydraulic Jump 16
2.9 Conclusion of Review 19

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 20

3.1 Experimental Setup 20
3.2 Experimental Procedures
Table of Contents
v

3.2.1 Procedure for determining the sluice coefficient 24
3.2.2 Procedure for determining the maximum tailwater 24

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS 25

4.1 Analysis of Sluice Gate Coefficient 25
4.2 Analysis of Maximum Tailwater Depth for 32
Free-flow condition under Sluice Gate
4.3 Data Analysis 36
4.4 Comparison of Current Findings with Previous Findings 37

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 39

5.1 Conclusion 39
5.2 Recommendations 40


REFERENCES

APPENDIX A Experiment Data and Formulae used

APPENDIX B Extracted Blue-Print of Jurong Lake Tidal Gate



List of Symbols

vi
List of Symbols


A area
a gate opening
b width of channel
C constant, coefficient
C
c
coefficient of contraction
C
d
coefficient of discharge
C
f
coefficient of friction
C
v
coefficient of velocity
c empirical constant
d empirical constant
Fr Froude number
f
w
frictional force
g gravitational acceleration
K
s
sluice coefficient
L
j
length of hydraulic jump
EL energy line
L length
P pressure
Q volumetric flow rate
q flow rate per unit width
S
s
specific gravity
t time
V velocity
W Weber number = L V [dimensionless]
y depth of water
y
1
upstream depth
y
2
downstream depth
y
3
tailwater depth
small increment of, or difference between heads
summation
empirical constant
List of Symbols

vii
empirical constant
specific weight = g
empirical constant
absolute or dynamic viscosity
kinematic viscosity
circular circumference-diameter ratio ; also in name of Buckingham- theorem
fluid density
surface tension



List of Figures

viii
List of Figures


Figures Description Page
no.

Figure 2-1 Different types of under-flow gates (source: Montes,
Sergio).
3
Figure 2-2 Sketch of free flow hydraulic jump. 5
Figure 2-3 Sketch of submerged hydraulic jump. 5
Figure 2-4 Flow net of equipotential and streamlines for flow
under a plane, vertical sluice gate.
6
Figure 2-5 Coefficient of discharge, C
d
, for planar and sector
gates after Gentiline, 1941.(source: Montes, Sergio).
8
Figure 2-6 C
c
of sharp-edged Vertical Gate: A comparison
between the theoretical value of C
c
for the non-
gravity case with that computed with gravity.
9
Figure 2-7 Photo of the Hydraulic jump (source: CALTECH). 10
Figure 2-8 Different profiles and internal flow direction of the
hydraulic jump according to its initial Froude
Number (source: Montes, Sergio).
12
Figure 2-9 Sketch of energy line (EL) across a hydraulic jump
on horizontal bed.
13
Figure 2-10 Energy and momentum relations in a hydraulic jump
(source: Finnemore).

15
List of Figures

ix
Figure 2-11 Schematic velocity distribution under a hydraulic
jump.
17
Figure 2-12 Length of the hydraulic jump in sloping channels,
data from Peterka, 1964 (source: Montes, Sergio).
18
Figure 2-13 Length of the hydraulic jump in horizontal,
rectangular channels.
18
Figure 3-1a The 6 m flume. 20
Figure 3-1b Sketch of layout for experiments. 21
Figure 3-2 Dimensions of model tidal gate. 22
Figure 3-3 Extract of original cross-section of sluice gate from
Jurong Lake Tidal Gate.
22
Figure 3-4 Front view of the installed gate on the test flume. 23
Figure 3-5 Side view of the installed gate on the test flume. 23
Figure 4-1 Dimensionless plot of y
1
/a vs. K
s
25
Figure 4-2

Dimensionless plot of y
1
/a vs. Fr
a
27
Figure 4-3 Plot of calculated y
2
vs. a 28
Figure 4-4 Best fitted curve super-imposed on Figure 4.1 29
Figure 4-5

Q
(actual)
vs. K
s
Q
(theory)
30
Figure 4-6 Annotations during maximum tailwater condition. 31
Figure 4-7 Top view of maximum tailwater condition. 34
Figure 4-8 Side view of maximum tailwater condition. 34
Figure 4-9 y
3max
/a vs. (2y
1
/a) - 1 35

List of Figures

x
Figure 4-10 Measured y
3max
vs. Calculated y
3max
using Belanger
Equation.
38
Figure 4-11 Measured y
3max
vs. Calculated y
3max
using Equation
4.5.
38

List of Tables

xi
List of Tables


Tables Description Page no.

Table 2.1 Forms of Hydraulic Jump 12

Chapter 1 Introduction
1
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION


1.1 General Introduction

A sluice gate is an artificial passage for water, fitted with a valve or gate, as in a mild or
horizontal stream, for stopping or regulating the flow. It is sometimes also known as a water
gate, underflow gate or flood gate. The sluice gate may be constructed over a rectangular
horizontal channel (which are one of the most common and simplest form) or may be across a
trapezoidal sloping channel, or even across channels with irregular cross sections and slopes.
Water exits from the bottom of the sluice gate when the gate is either vertically lifted up or
being rotated up in a radial manner, depending on the type of construction of the gate.

The main purpose of a sluice gate is to act as flow discharge controls and energy dissipators
near the base of a dam or at the outlet of a lake to a river or in an irrigation cannel. Many types
of sluice gates have evolved and developed over the decades through various studies and
development. The choice of one type or another in a particular case may depend on a variety of
factors, and each type has its own advantages.

A hydraulic jump usually occurs downstream of such control structures. This hydraulic jump
acts as an energy dissipater to dissipate the excess kinetic energy possessed by the downstream
flow. The downstream hydraulic jump may be free or submerged depending on the downstream
flow conditions.

Study on the various functions of sluice gate forms a large and important subject, to which
numerous technical papers in the literature have been devoted. However, studies on the
tailwater effect to these structures are still at rudimentary stages.


1.2 Objective

This project aims to establish the criteria necessary for free-flow condition below the sluice of
Jurong Lake Tide Gate, by monitoring 2 features:

i. the sluice coefficient for Jurong Lake Tide Gate, and
Chapter 1 Introduction
2
ii. the maximum tailwater under a free-flow condition below the sluice.


1.3 Scope of Work

One criterion which will govern a free flow condition is the tailwater depth. However, the
maximum tailwater depth which allows for a free-flow condition is also dependent on the sluice
coefficient. Modelling of the open channel flow will be conducted to determine the maximum
tailwater depth and the sluice coefficient using a glass flume and a model gate. The shape of the
model gate will be similar to the Jurong Lake Tide Gate. Other criteria which may contribute to
the cause of a free or submerged flow include:

the relative roughness of the channel bed and walls,
the water temperature,
the dynamic and kinematics viscosity or water
the water surface tension effect and
the presence of any abrupt drop.

However, investigations on these criteria are beyond the scope of this project. Also, the
parameter(s) which causes a submerged jump will not be determined in this project too.


1.4 Outline of Thesis

This report consists of five chapters. Chapter 2 provides the background information essential
for the understanding of sluice gate and hydraulic jump phenomenon. Chapter 3 presents the
methods and procedures that were used to determine the necessary parameters which are
required to establish the equations coefficients. Chapter 4 gives a detail analysis of the outcome
from the experiments that were conducted and establishes the required equations. The
concluding chapter offer a solution for the objective that has been established in part 1.2 and
discusses some other areas of hydraulic features that are worthy for future research.


Chapter 2 Literature Review
3
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW


2.1 Types of Under-flow Gates



Figure 2-1 Different types of under-flow gates (source: Montes, Sergio).


The vertical sluice gate shown in Figure 2-1(a) will be the main focus of this review and will be
elaborated in the later part of this chapter; as it forms one of a general class of underflow gate.
Other gates such as the roller gate, sector or Tainter gate, and the drum gate are also typical
form of underflow gates. Such gates may be used for a variety of purposes e.g., as controls at
the crest of an overflow spillway, or at the outlet from a lake to a river or irrigation canal. The
choice of one type or another in a particular case may depend on a variety of factors, and each
type has its own advantages. For example, the vertical gate has the disadvantage of requiring a
costly roller-and-track assembly by which to transmit its trust to the sidewalls; the Tainter gate
is more economical in this respect but may incur extra structural costs through having its thrust
concentrated at the hinge.

Chapter 2 Literature Review
4
2.2 The Vertical Sluice Gate.

The vertical sluice gate is a device used to control the passage of water in an open channel.
When properly calibrated, the sluice gate may serve as a good means of flow measurement. The
flow through the gate may be free or submerged (also called drowned) depending on the
tailwater depth, as illustrated in Figures 2-2 and 2-3 respectively. The discharge coefficients for
the two cases are different. The discharge through a sluice gate is affected by the upstream
depth for a free flow case and by both upstream and downstream depth for a submerged case.
Similarly, for a given discharge, the upstream depth is independent of tailwater depth in free-
flow situation, but increases with the tailwater depth when a gate operates in a submerged
situation. To avoid upstream surcharge and achieve accurate discharge control, one must be
able to determine whether a gate will be free or submerged, and the hydraulic performance in
both free and submerged conditions must be well understood.

Vertical sluice gates can conveniently be discussed under the heading of free outflow and
submerged outflow. However, only free outflow will be discussed in this review as the study of
submerged outflow is beyond the scope of this project.


2.3 Free flow under a gate.

The flow after the gate may be free, in the form of an S3, H3 or M3 profile shown in Figure 2-2.
This is referred to as conventional jump or free-flow hydraulic jump. Alternatively, a
hydraulic jump may be formed just downstream of the gate with the jet opening submerged, as
shown in Figure 2-3. This condition is referred to as a submerged hydraulic jump.

When the gate is being used as a discharge control device, then the relation between gate
geometry, upstream flow energy and discharge is of paramount importance. Many studies have
been conducted since the 1830s to establish such relations and a general theoretical framework
has been developed, which follows that of flow through orifices in closed conduit flow.

Chapter 2 Literature Review
5

Figure 2-2 Sketch of free flow hydraulic jump.



Figure 2-3 Sketch of submerged hydraulic jump.


During the free-flow hydraulic jump condition, the issuing jet of super-critical flow is open to
atmospheric pressure. The analysis is elementary provided that the contraction coefficient C
c
is
known, and provided that we are concerned only with the regions of substantially uniform depth
upstream of section 1 and downstream of section 2, denoted by y
1
and y
2
depth on Figure 2-2.

Taking the case of a rectangular horizontal channel, the energy equation may be written
between an upstream and downstream section of the gate, in sections where the flow is
c
y g V <
c
y g V >
c
y g V <
Chapter 2 Literature Review
6
approximately parallel. In this case, using the notations from Figure 2-4, the energy equation
reads:

E
gy
q
y
gy
q
y + + = +
2
2
2
2 2
1
2
1
2 2
[2.1]

E is the energy loss between these sections; and through a simple rearrangement and
neglecting the energy loss, we get:

2 1
2 1
2
y y
g
y y q
+
= [2.2]




Figure 2-4 Flow net of equipotential and streamlines for flow under a plane, vertical sluice
gate. The static pressure on the gate, floor opening and floor are also indicated in dotted lines.


Chapter 2 Literature Review
7
It is customary to express this discharge as the product of the depth y
2
, the velocity
1
2gy , and
a discharge coefficient C
d
accordingly. Equation 2.2 can be rewritten as follows (noting that y
2

= C
c
a):
2 1
1
1
2
y y
y
gy a C q
c
+
=


1
2gy a C
d
= [2.3]

where
1
1
y
a C
C
C
c
c
d
+
= [2.4]

and since C
c
is dependent on the boundary geometry, C
d
will be wholly dependent on a/y
1
and
the angle of the lip as shown in Equation 2.4 and Figure 2-5. The velocity
1
2gy does not of
course occur anywhere in the system; it simply makes a convenient reference velocity on which
to base a standard equation such as Equation 2.3.

The actual flow rate Q = C
c
C
v
Q
i
= C
c
C
v
(AV
2i
), where Q
i
is the theoretical value of the
volumetric flow rate and A = ab is the area of the gate opening and b is the width of the channel.
For free flow condition, y
2
= C
c
a, where C
c
is the contraction coefficient, which will be further
elaborated in the next paragraph. The velocity coefficient, C
v
, is defined as the ratio of the
actual velocity to the ideal velocity, (V/V
i
). This difference in velocity is due to the frictional
effect between the water and the surfaces of the channel at the opening.

Absorbing the effect of flow contraction, friction, velocity of approach, water surface tension
effect and the downstream depth y
2
into an experimental flow coefficient, the discharge under a
sluice gate may express through a simple equation:

[2.5]

where K
s
is defined as the sluice coefficient, and the values of K
s
depend wholly on a and y
1
,
since y
2
= a / C
c
. However, it should be noted that Equation 2.5 is only valid if there is
substantial energy head at the upstream of the gate to form a free-flow condition at the
downstream section, since A = ab and
1
y a for any form of flow to establish.
1
2gy A K Q
s
=
Chapter 2 Literature Review
8

Figure 2-5 Coefficient of discharge, C
d
, for planar and sector gates after Gentiline, 1941.
(source: Montes, Sergio).


2.4 Contraction coefficient, C
c
for vertical gate

The coefficient of contraction C
c
may be determined experimentally by accurate measurement
of the surface level below the gate, a task that appears simple but where considerable
disagreement exists between different experimental sources. Alternatively, the discharge and
the upstream depth can be measured directly and use the energy equation to determine the
coefficient of contraction.

Many experimental sources of coefficients of contraction for vertical gates set in a rectangular
channel are readily available from various technical papers. However, those experiments from
Smetana, 1948, Benjamin, 1956 and Fawer, 1937 [source: Montes, Sergio], are some of the
more convenient to be used. It may be observed from Figure 2-6 that for a/y
1
0.6, the
experimental coefficients of contraction are relatively constant within the range of 0.62 0.66.
For a/y
1
higher than 0.7, the coefficient of contraction shows a steep rise.

Also shown in this figure are a number of theoretical solutions to the problem. One group of
solutions assumes that the flow below the gate is not influenced by gravity. This assumption is
surprisingly good as during the case of high velocity flow, the inertia forces are predominant.
C
d

Chapter 2 Literature Review
9
The classical gravity-free theory of Kirchoff (Milne-Thomson, 1968) indicates that contraction
coefficient reaches the value 611 . 0
2
=
+
=

c
C when the ratio a/y
1
tends to zero.




Figure 2-6 C
c
of sharp-edged Vertical Gate: A comparison between the theoretical value of C
c

for the non-gravity case (Betz, Von Mises), with that computed with gravity (Pajer, Larock,
Fangmeier) and the data of Fawer, Smetana and Banjamin (source: Montes, Sergio).


Gravity effects were introduced in the inviscid flow computation by Pajer, 1937, whose results
are shown also in Figure 2-6. Other theoretical results which take into account the effect of
gravity have been obtained using numerical solutions of the Laplace equation conducted by
Larcock, 1969, Fangmeter and Strelkoff, 1968 are also shown in Figure 2-6. It may be noticed
that there is a little discrepancy among the theoretical results and the numerical results (less than
3% at a/y
1
= 0.5) but it is evident that the trend is quite different from that of the experimental
data when a/y
1
tends to get greater than 0.5. This different could be accounted for by the
presence of a boundary layer forming downstream of the gate section (Benjamin, 1956).
Chapter 2 Literature Review
10
2.5 The Hydraulic Jump and Energy Dissipation Structures




Fig. 2-7 Photo of the Hydraulic jump (source: CALTECH)


The Hydraulic Jump.

In short, hydraulic jump is a phenomena in an open channel flow that connect a region with
supercritical flow (at the upstream) and subcritical flow (at the downstream). It is the transition
between the supercritical and subcritical regimes of flow. This transition involved varying
amounts of energy dissipation, which depends on the velocity and depth of the supercritical
flow generating the jump, properties which are embodied in the Froude Number of the
supercritical flow. The turbulent expansion and retardation of the high flow velocity are
associated with appreciable energy loss which will ultimately be dissipated as heat. This feature
of energy dissipation is perhaps the most outstanding characteristic of the jump and the reason
why this hydraulic phenomenon has received such wide attention and utilisation in hydraulic
structures used for irrigation, hydropower and ornamental cascades.

Hydraulic jump was described by Leonardo da Vinci at the close of the 15
th
century (Levi, 1989)
but its modern investigation was initiated by Bidone, 1826, who dealt with the jumps in terms of
the energy equation. Later, Blanger in 1828, Moller in 1894 and Unwin in 1895, predicted the
ratio of sequent depths of the jump by using the momentum equation. Outstanding early
experiments were due to Darcy and Bazin, 1865 and Gibson, 1914, in Europe and Horton, 1916,
Kennison, 1916, and Riegel and Beebe, 1917, in USA. These experiments confirmed the
accuracy of the momentum theory for the calculation of the conjugate depths of the jump.
[Source: Montes, Sergio]

Chapter 2 Literature Review
11
Generally, hydraulic jumps can be classified into two broad categories: the conventional jump
(or jump under free flow condition) and the submerged jump. However, only the conventional
jump will be further review in this report, as the submerged jump is beyond the scope of this
project.


The horizontal conventional jump as energy dissipators.

Among the possible applications of the hydraulic jump is that of acting as energy dissipators at
certain locations of a channel, usually at the downstream end of structures such as steep chutes,
canal drops or artificial structures. The high velocity flow generated there would be detrimental
to the stability of the natural river or channel downstream. The excess energy of the flow must
be dissipated to reduce the mean flow velocity. Peterka, 1964 proposed a method in classifying
the jumps in terms of their energy dissipation and stability using their initial Froude number.
The classifications are tabulated on Table 2.1 and illustrated in Figure 2-8.

A surge or tidal bore will be formed if river water enters into an estuary with high tide. This is
in the form of a small hydraulic jump which can be seen travelling upstream and can cause
minor damage. Such jump is usually characterise with Fr < 2, with undular smooth waves over
the surface of jump.

For F
r
> 2 the jumps are characterized by the expansion of a high velocity jet between the
shallow supercritical flow and the deeper subcritical flow existing under given tailwater
conditions. The expansion is not regular or smooth but exhibits a recirculating roller with a
highly turbulent structure, and with may entrain appreciable quantities of air from the
atmosphere. The air entrainment lends the roller a distinctive appearance, but does not extend
much beyond the end of the recirculating roller.

When the initial value of Fr is comprised between 2 and 4, the expanding jet oscillates from the
bottom to the surface with irregular frequency. Each oscillation induces the formation of long
waves which can travel for appreciable distances, and may cause damage to the banks of the
channel if there is no adequate freeboard allowance.

The expanding jet stabilizes for Fr greater than about 4, as the separation zone under the jump
now coincides with the end of the roller. The separation from the solid boundary is a feature of
Chapter 2 Literature Review
12
flows which have a pressure gradient adverse to the direction of flow imposed on them, as is
particularly the case in a steep hydraulic jump, where the flow depth and hence the pressure, is
rapidly increasing along the roller. At this relatively high Fr there is considerable energy
dissipation, which may reach values of over 70% of the initial energy for Fr equal to 9. At
these values of Fr, the jump steepness is so high that the water that rolls down the face of the
jump intermittently fall back into the high velocity jet, generating waves downstream, causing a
rough surface to be formed.

Thus the ideal characteristic of the jump from the point of view of their energy dissipation and
stability is to have initial Froude number in the range 4 to 9 approximately.


Table 2.1 Forms of Hydraulic Jump
Name Fr Energy Dissipation
Undular jump 1.2 2.0 < 15 %
Oscillating jump 2.0 4.0 15 45 %
Stable jump 4.0 9.0 45 70 %
High dissipation jump > 9.0 70 85 %




Figure 2-8 Different profiles and internal flow direction of the hydraulic jump according to its
initial Froude Number (source: Montes, Sergio).
Chapter 2 Literature Review
13
2.6 Application of Momentum Equation in Hydraulic Jump

The advantage of using the momentum equation in the analysis of open channel flow is that the
details of the internal flow patterns in a control volume are not important. What is important is
to be able to quantify the forces and momentum fluxes at the control surfaces (sections) that
form the boundaries of the control volume. The most common application of the momentum
equation in open channel flow is the analysis of the hydraulic jump phenomenon.






Figure 2-9 Sketch of energy line (EL) across a hydraulic jump on horizontal bed.


Referring to Figure 2-9, and applying the momentum equation to sections 1 and 2, we have

( )

= =
1 2 2 2 1 1
V V Q A h A h F
c c x
[2.6]

where F
x
= summation of forces in the streamwise x-direction, = specific weigh of water =
g, = water density, h
c1
and h
c2
= depths from water surface to the centroid of the end areas, V
1

and V
2
are velocity at the respective sections, and Q = volumetric flow rate across the channel
section.

2 2 2 1 1 1
A h QV A h QV
c c
+ = + [2.7]
Chapter 2 Literature Review
14
Equation 2.7 states that the momentum (QV) plus the pressure force (h
c
A) on the cross
sectional area is constant. Dividing Equation 2.7 by and noting that V = Q/A, we get

= + =
c m
Ah
Ag
Q
F
2
constant [2.8]

Equation 2.8 is general and applies to any shape of channel cross section.


2.7 Initial Depth and Sequent Depth Relations in Rectangular Channel

For rectangular channel, h
c
= y/2, A = by, and q = Q/b, where q = discharge per unit width, and
b = channel width. Substituting for these into Equation 2.8, it reduces F
m
to

= + = + =
2 2
2
2
2
2 2
1
1
2
y
gy
q y
gy
q
f
m
constant [2.9]

where f
m
= force per unit width of channel, y
1

= initial depth and y
2

= sequent depth. Both y
1

and
y
2

are called the conjugate depths, i.e., y
1

is the conjugate of y
2

and vice versa.

Figure 2-10 shows f
m

versus y for a constant q. As the energy loss does not affect the force
quantity f
m
, the latter is the same after the jump as before, and the vertical line intersecting the
f
m

curve gives the 2 conjugate depths.

In Figure 2-10, the line y
1

intersects at point a, giving the f
m

value which must be the same after
the jump. The value between point a and b then fixes the depth y
2
, which is then transposed to
the E-y diagram to determine the value between point c and d, which is equal to g V 2
2
2
. The
value of g V 2
2
1
is given by values between point e and f.

The following differentiation shows that for a given flow rate in a rectangular channel the
minimum value of f
m

(Equation 2.9) occurs at the same flow depth as the minimum value of the
specific energy.

Chapter 2 Literature Review
15
2
2
y
gy
q
f
m
+ =
0
2
2
2
2
= + =
y
gy
q
dy
df
m


and
3
2
g
q
y = [2.10]





Figure 2-10 Energy and momentum relations in a hydraulic jump (source: Finnemore).


If q and y
1
are given, then Equation 2.9 becomes a cubic equation when solving for y
2
. It can be
shown that the solution for y
2
can be obtained by rearranging equation 2.9 to get the following
equation:

( )( )
1 2 1 2
2 1
1
2
2
2
2
1
y y y y
y gy
y q y q
+ =

[2.11]

and by solving the above quadratic equation on y
2
, we get:

( ) 1 8 1
2
1
2
1
1
2
+ = Fr
y
y
[2.12]

Chapter 2 Literature Review
16
Conversely, if q and y
2
are given, the solution for y
1
is

( ) 1 8 1
2
1
2
2
2
1
+ = Fr
y
y
[2.13]
where Fr = Froude number =
gy
V
. Equations 2.12 and 2.13 are often referred as the Blanger
equation.


2.8 Length of Hydraulic Jump

The length of the jump is a useful characteristic that serves to determine the length needed for
the bottom velocities to return to acceptable levels, in cases where the channel downstream of
the jump is unlined and susceptible to erosion.

The length of the jump is difficult to determine with accuracy, as the surface slope of the jump
is very small near the end and surface turbulence has returned to lower levels. The beginning of
the jump is well defined, as the roller will mark clearly the initiation of the jet expansion, but
the end is less so and it has been necessary to devise some arbitrary criterion for defining the
end of the jump. For example, the end may be defined as the point at which the surface roller
ends, or alternatively, where the separation from the bottom of the channel takes place. Peterka
has stated that either criterion enables the length of the jump to be measured with an error less
than 5%. Figure 2-12 shows the experimental results by Peterka on various angles of slope
including hydraulic jump in horizontal channels. [Source: Montes, Sergio]

There have been many other empirical equations proposed for the calculation of the hydraulic
jump length; the difference among them is in many cases due to alternative definition of the
length. Safranez, 1929, considered the length as the elapsing from the beginning to the
complete expansion of the flow. The equation given by Safranez is particular simple:
5 . 4
3
=
y
L
[2.14]
where y
3
is the final depth of the jump. Domnguez, 1944, defined the total length as the start of
the roller or the distance from the beginning at which the jet starts to separate from the bottom
to the point at which the roller stops, whichever is the longer. Domnguez suggested an
empirical relation in terms of the initial Froude number, and is written in the following form:
Chapter 2 Literature Review
17
1 8 1
40 36
2
1
3
2
1
3 +

=
F
F
y
L


Figure 2-13 shows a comparison of the data obtained by the USBR in narrower channels (b =
0.3m) with the data obtained by Dominguez and Safranez. [Source: Montes, Sergio]

The size of the flume in which the experiments were conducted seems to have a noticeable
effect on the length of the jump (Figure 2-13). The narrower channels seem to produce shorter
jumps. Experiments from the United State Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) have shown that
tests in channels up to 1.3 m in width appear to be the most useful for the prediction of jumps in
prototype structures. [Source: Montes, Sergio]




Figure 2-11 Schematic velocity distribution under a hydraulic jump. The regions of
separation have been omitted for clarity (source: Montes, Sergio).


Chapter 2 Literature Review
18

Figure 2-12 Length of the hydraulic jump in sloping channels, data from Peterka, 1964
(source: Montes, Sergio).




Figure 2-13 Length of the hydraulic jump in horizontal, rectangular channels. The data
obtained by the USBR in narrower channels (b = 0.3m) agrees better with the data by
Dominguez, 1944, and Safranez, 1929, also obtained in narrower channels (b<0.5 m) (source:
Montes, Sergio).






Chapter 2 Literature Review
19
2.9 Conclusion of Review

All the studies that were mentioned in this review are able to predict the discharge by obtaining
an empirical constant from past experimental results plotted on the various figures. However, it
was also mentioned that the sluice coefficient has certain dependency on the gate geometry as
well. Furthermore, most studies of the sluice coefficient were based on gate with geometry
having a sharp-edged cut-back at the lip. The current study will emphasize on finding the sluice
coefficient of a gate with a rectangular hip with beveled edge on the downstream portion during
the first part of this project.

The hydraulic jump in open channel has also been mentioned much in the review. It was noted
that the hydraulic jump can occur in many locations downstream of the artificial structure. The
type of hydraulic jump, whether free or submerged, could be dependent on many factors. Also,
different definitions on the length of the jump have also been also highlighted in this review.
However, little findings have been done in the area of tailwater affecting the hydraulic jump
phenomenon.

Therefore, the present study will attempt to supplement the previous studies by investigating the
effect of maximum tailwater depth for free-flow hydraulic jump situation during the second part
of this project. For the purpose of consistency in this project, the end of the hydraulic jump will
be defined as the point when the surface roller ends.
Chapter 3 Methodology

20
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY


3.1 Experimental Setup

The flume

The experiments of the present study were conducted on a glass-sided horizontal flume of 6 m
long as shown in Figure 3-1a. The flume is 17.6 cm wide and 20 cm deep. The walls at both
sides of the flume are vertical, forming a rectangular cross-section. The overall layout of the
experiments is shown in Figure 3-1b.




Figure 3-1a The 6 m flume.


Chapter 3 Methodology

21


Figure 3-1b Sketch of layout for experiments.


The model tidal gate

A model tidal gate was fabricated using perplex. The dimensions of the model gate are shown
in Figure 3-2. The longitudinal length along the direction of flow was constructed to a scale of
1: 40 of the prototype gate (from Jurong Lake Tidal Gate, see Figure 3-3 for the extracted
dimensions of the cross-section or refer to Appendix B for details of the gate) to simulate a
similar profile of flow under the gate. The side with chamfered edge faces the downstream
direction. All surfaces of the model gate are smooth and the corners sharp. The width of the
gate is tailored to the same width as the flume that is shown in Figure 3-1a.

The model gate was mounted onto the two walls of the flume using silicon gel. Sufficient
support will be placed under the model gate to keep the gate at the test height until the silicon
gel has gain sufficient strength. Special precautions are taken during the application of the
silicon gel at the connection area such that the angles of the connections between the gate and
the walls of the flume are kept at 90
o
to each other. After a particular test height has been
conducted, the gate will be dismounted and re-mounted to the next test height using the same
procedure. Figure 3-4 and Figure 3-5 show the front and side views of the installed gate on the
test flume.

The gate was mounted at different heights in the channel throughout the entire experimental
process to obtain several sets of representable series of data that is necessary for the analysis of
this project to be carried out.
Chapter 3 Methodology

22

Figure 3-2 Dimensions of model tidal gate.



Note: All dimensions are in mm unless otherwise stated.

Figure 3-3 Extract of original cross-section of sluice gate from Jurong Lake Tidal Gate.
Chapter 3 Methodology

23


Figure 3-4 - Front view of the installed gate on the test flume.




Figure 3-5 - Side view of the installed gate on the test flume.
Chapter 3 Methodology

24
3.2 Experimental Procedures

3.2.1 Procedure for determining the sluice coefficient:

The derivation of the sluice coefficient for underflow gate has been described in Chapter 2 of
this report. It has been noted that there is certain dependency of sluice coefficient on the
geometry of the gate. Experiments will be required to determine the coefficient necessary for
the discharge equation:
1
2gy A K Q
s u
=
where: Q
u
is the discharge under the gate during free flow condition (Figure 2-2).
K
s
is the sluice coefficient.
g = 9.81 m/s
2

y
1
is the upstream water depth as illustrated in Figure 2-2.

Parameters that are required to be recorded during the experiment process are:
Q : the volumetric flow indicated by the meter-reading (m
3
)
t : the time required for 0.1 m
3
to flow through the meter-reading (s)
a : the gate opening (m)
y
1
: the upstream water depth as illustrated in Figure 2.2 (m)


3.2.2 Procedure for determining the maximum tailwater:

Concurrently, while conducting the experiment to obtain the parameters for the sluice
coefficients, the maximum tailwater depth (under free flow condition) was also observed by
adjusting the tailgate at the exit of channel.

The height of the tailgate was adjusted so that a hydraulic jump (under free flow condition) will
occur just after the opening of the sluice gate (i.e. the toe of the hydraulic jump coincides with
the vena contractor at y
2
as illustrated in Figure 4-6). The tailwater depth at this particular
instance is called the maximum tailwater, and was recorded as y
3max
.

Ten sets of experiments with different gate openings were conducted in the laboratory. Each set
of experiment consist of several sets of data with varying discharge. The results of the
experimental data were tabulated in Appendix A.
Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

25
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS


4.1 Analysis of Sluice Gate Coefficient, (K
s
)


0.55
0.56
0.57
0.58
0.59
0.60
0.61
0.62
0.63
0.64
0.65
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
y
1
/a
K
s
0.009
0.012
0.015
0.018
0.021
0.024
0.027
0.030
0.033
0.036
a:

Figure 4-1 Dimensionless plot of y
1
/a vs. K
s



Figure 4-1 shows the changing values of K
s
as the relative depth y
1
/a and gate opening, a,
changes. It can be observed that there is a diverging trend of K
s
as the relative depth y
1
/a
increases. However, when the gate opening is relatively small (a = 9 mm), K
s
is almost a
constant value (K
s
0.64). This constant value could most likely due to Kirchoffs gravity-free
theory, which states that as the upstream relative depth y
1
/a gets sufficiently large, the C
c

approaches a constant value. Since K
s
is a product of C
c
and C
v
(as mentioned in Chapter 2), K
s

would approach a constant value also if C
v
also approaches a constant value for large relative
depth. Hence, at sufficiently large relative upstream depth (y
1
/a > 12), K
s
is almost a constant
Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

26
value (approximately equal to 0.64). The range of K
s
values may varies between 0.56 and 0.64
for the gate geometry tested in this study. As compared to the values of C
d
for 90
o
sharp-edged
gate from the results of Gentiline (Figure 2-5), which ranges between 0.54 to 0.60, there is some
difference which could be due to the different gate geometry and the base friction in the flumes
that were used.

A parameter which is of much importance during the analysis of free flow hydraulic jump under
a sluice gate is the Froude number at the gate opening (Fr
a
) and at the end of the hydraulic jump
(Fr
3
); which will be discussed later.

A relationship between Fr
a
and y
1
/a can be derived by combining Equation 2.5 with Fr
a
. Using
the reference velocity from Equation 2.5, V =
1
2gy , a coefficient could be multiplied to V
such as:
a
V gy c =
1
2 ; where c is a relating coefficient between the reference velocity
1
2gy and V
a
. By substituting V
a
with
1
2gy c into the Froude number at the opening of
the gate:
Fr
a
=
a g
V
a

=
a g
gy c
1
2


5 . 0
1
2
|

\
|
=
a
y
c [4.1]

It can be shown from Equation 4.1 that Fr
a
can be express as a function of y
1
and a, (i.e. Fr
a
=
f(y
1
,a)). Hence, Fr
a
can be express in the form:
d
a
a
y
c Fr
|

\
|
=
1


in which c and d are empirical constants to be obtained through experiments. One useful
function of knowing the Froude number at the exit of the gate is that a classification of
hydraulic jump (under maximum tailwater condition) can be obtained through Table 2.1 or
Figure 2-8.


Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

27
y = 0.6978x
0.5877
R
2
= 0.998
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
y
1
/a
F
r
a

Figure 4-2 Dimensionless plot of y
1
/a vs. Fr
a


The correlation from Figure 4-2 shows the values of c and d to be 0.6978 and 0.5877
respectively. Hence giving us the following equation:
5877 . 0
1
6978 . 0
|

\
|
=
a
y
Fr
a
; for 2.47
|

\
|

a
y
1
12.00 [4.2]

Figure 4-3 shows the estimated values of y
2
that were calculated using the Blanger
equation:
|
|
|
|
|

\
|

\
|
+ + |

\
|
=
3
max 3
2
max 3
2
8
1 1
2 y g
b
Q
y
y [4.2a]

where Q is the measured discharge from the flow meter and y
3max
is the measured
maximum tailwater depth.

The calculated y
2
values were plotted against the opening of the gate, a, as shown in
Figure 4-3. The trend of the data indicated that:
5877 . 0
1
6978 . 0 |

\
|
=
a
y
Fr
a
Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

28
a y 8528 . 0
2
[4.2b]

which corresponding to the equation in Figure 2-4 from Chapter 2:

y
2
= C
c
a 8528 . 0
c
C from Figure 4-3.


y = 0.8528x
R
2
= 0.9643
0.000
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.035
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04
a
c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
e
d


y
2

Figure 4-3 Plot of calculated y
2
vs. a (dimensions are in m)


It should be noted that the Blanger equation that is used here to determine y
2
depth does not
mean that Blanger equation can be used to determine y
2
depth for all cases in an open channel
flow. In fact, it only shows that under maximum tailwater depth condition for a free flow
situation, the toe of the hydraulic jump will coincide with the vena contractor at y
2
. The
intended purpose of the Blanger equation has been stated in the literature review of this report.

By observation, it can be seen that a linear trend line can be inserted among the points in Figure
4-3 to approximate the value of C
c
. When comparing the C
c
value of the current test gate with
the computations that was done with gravity effect by Pajer, Larock and Fangmeier, as shown in
a y 8528 . 0
2
=
Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

29
Figure 2-6, it was observed that the value of C
c
for the current test gate (C
c
0.8528) is much
larger than that of a sharp-edged vertical gate (C
c
0.61).

Finally, K
s
of the sluice can be determined confidently after the above analyses have shown
consistency with one other, as well as those from the literature review.


R
2
= 0.9159
0.55
0.56
0.57
0.58
0.59
0.60
0.61
0.62
0.63
0.64
0.65
0.66
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
y
1
/a
K
s

Figure 4-4 Best fitted curve super-imposed on Figure 4.1


Figure 4-4 shows the best fitted curve for all the experimental data obtained in this study. It is
observed that the sluice gate coefficient, K
s
, has the following equation:

0877 . 0
1
519 . 0
|

\
|
=
a
y
K
s
; for 2.47
|

\
|

a
y
1
12.00 [4.3]

Since the relationship between Q
(actual)
and Q
(theory)
is represented by the following equation:

0877 . 0
1
519 . 0 |

\
|
=
a
y
K
s
Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

30
Q
(actual)
= K
s
Q
(theory)



and Q
(theory)
=
1
2gy A , the final equation for the sluice gate discharge can be written as:

1
2gy A K Q
s
= [4.4]
where:
0877 . 0
1
519 . 0 |

\
|
=
a
y
K
s
; for 2.47 |

\
|

a
y
1
12.00
and:
Q = Actual discharge under sluice gate during free flow condition
y
1
= Upstream depth
a = Sluice gate opening
A = Cross-sectional area of sluice gate opening, given by b a
b = Width of channel
g = Acceleration due to gravity, 9.81 m/s
2

K
s
= Dimensionless Sluice coefficient

The empirical constraint set to Equation 4.4 indicates that values beyond these limits portray a
situation of submerged hydraulic jump or a non-maximum tailwater condition. The lower
bound limit of the constraint indicates the formation of a submerged hydraulic jump whereas the
upper bound limit indicates that there is a change of boundary layer condition and K
s
tends to
approach a constant value as indicated in Figure 4-1. Therefore, when the relative depth (y
1
/a)
is beyond the limits of the constraint, Equation 4.4 will no longer yield accurate results. Lastly,
Equation 4.4 is verified by plotting the measured discharge from the flow meter (Q
(actual)
) versus
the calculated discharge (K
s
Q
(theory)
, using Equation 4.4) in Figure 4-5.

Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

31
y = x
R
2
= 0.9995
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006
Q
actual
, m
3
/s
K
s

x

Q
t
h
e
r
o
y

,

m
3
/
s

Figure 4-5 Q
(actual)
vs. K
s
Q
(theory)



Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

32
4.2 Analysis of Maximum Tailwater Depth for Free-flow condition under Sluice Gate




Figure 4-6 Annotations during maximum tailwater condition.


Applying Continuity Equation to the control volume as shown in Figure 4-6,

3

= m ma

where a m

= mass of water entering the control volume

3

m = mass of water leaving the control volume

Applying Momentum Equation to the control volume as shown in Figure 4-6,

= 0 F F
a
= F
3
+ f
w


F
a
is the hydrostatic force (assuming it to be hydrostatically distributed) at gate opening given
by:
b a
y a y
g F
a
.
2
] ) [(
1 1
+
=
f
w

L
j

control volume
F
a

F
3


Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

33

F
3
is the hydrostatic force at downstream given by:
b
y
y g F
2
max 3
max 3 3
=
f
w
is the frictional force between water particles and bed of channel between exit of gate and end
of hydraulic jump:

f
w
= g[w]

where:
= density of water in control volume
g = gravitational acceleration, 9.81 m/s
2

y
1
= upstream water depth

a = height of gate opening
b = width of channel
y
3max
= maximum tailwater depth
[w] = volume of water between exit of gate and end of hydraulic jump, which can be
approximated by using:
2
) (
max 3
y a
bL
j
+

= frictional coefficient between water particle and bed of channel.
L
j
= length of hydraulic jump

Since F
a
= F
3
+ f
w


] [
2 2
] ) [(
max 3
max 3 1 1
w g b
y
gy b
a
y a y g + = +

dividing both sides of the equation by
2
b a g
, we get:

( )
ba
w
a
y
a y
] [
2 2
2
max 3
1
+ =

since
ba
w] [
2 is a function of y
3max
and a ( ) a y f
ba
w
,
] [
2
max 3
=
Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

34

by absorbing the function ( ) a y f ,
max 3
into
a
y
2
max 3
and introducing 2 arbitrary constant: and ,
which will also account for the slight distance difference between y
2
and the gate opening a,
water surface tension effect, frictional resistance for the channel bed, we get a simple equation:

(
(

\
|
=
2
max 3 1
1
2
a
y
a
y


Since and are arbitrary constants, they can be shifted to the left hand side of the equation,
and after rearranging, giving the final equation as follows:

\
|
= 1
2
1 max 3
a
y
a
y


where and are arbitrary constants that has to be determined empirically.

Figures 4-7 and 4-8 show that during maximum tailwater condition, the toe of the hydraulic
jump coincides with the y
2
depth. The two figures also show that the distance between the y
2

depth and the gate opening, a, is relatively small as compared to the whole hydraulic jump.
This is deliberate as the tailwater in the experiment was adjusted such that the toe of the
hydraulic jump occurred as close as possible to the gate exit. The f
w
that is caused by this small
distance is considered negligible.

Therefore, when considering for [w], the size of the gate opening, a (which is more measurable),
will be used instead of y
2
. Furthermore, since a, is only slightly greater than y
2
(as shown in
Figure 4-3), this slight difference of forces that is gained in this assumption will compensate for
the slight losses that was caused by the convenience of neglecting the distance between y
2
and a.
This offset of forces is based on an assumption that the two forces are of equal magnitude and
will eventually cancel each other. Other assumptions that have been used include the
hydrostatic fore at the gate opening to be linearly distributed instead of polynomial (Figure 2-4).
However, these differences are assumed to be negligible and can be absorbed by the coefficients
and . The hydraulic jump length, L
j
, is assumed to follow the simple equation of Safranez
(equation 2.14), such that L
j
is wholly depend on y
3max
.
Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

35


Figure 4-7 Top view of maximum tailwater condition.




Figure 4-8 Side view of maximum tailwater condition.
Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

36
4.3 Data Analysis


R
2
= 0.9747
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
0 5 10 15 20 25
(2y
1
/a) - 1
y
3
m
a
x
/
a

Figure 4-9 y
3max
/a vs. (2y
1
/a) - 1


From the experimental results, we find that and to be 0.7077 and 0.5648 respective as shown
in Figure 4.9. Hence, the equation which relates the maximum tailwater depth, upstream water
depth and gate opening is:
5648 . 0
1 max 3
1
2
7077 . 0
|

\
|
=
a
y
a
y
[4.5]

where and are derived base on the test range of:
22 . 4 53 . 1
max 3

\
|

a
y
and
00 . 12 47 . 2
1

\
|

a
y
.

5648 . 0
1 max 3
1
2
7077 . 0 |

\
|
=
a
y
a
y
Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

37
Hence, the assumption mentioned in Part 4.2 of this report is deem to be valid. The empirical
constraint set to Equation 4.5 indicates that the values beyond these limits portray a situation of
either submerged flow or a non-maximum tailwater condition has occurred. Therefore,
Equation 4.5 is only valid within the range of the empirical constraint.


4.4 Comparison of Current Findings with Previous Findings

Previous findings (by C. H. Lin, J. F. Yen; and c. T. Tsai) have attempted to use the Blanger
equation to determine the maximum tailwater depth by using the y
2
value as the toe of the
hydraulic jump. The conjugate depth obtained from the Blanger equation will give the
maximum tailwater.

Hence, by substituting Equation 4.4 into the Blangers Equation (noting that y
2
= C
c
a,), we get
the following equation:

(
(

|
|

\
|
+ + =
5 . 0
3 2
2
1
max 3
) (
) 2 ( 8
1 1
2 g a C b
y g A K a C
y
c
s c
[4.6]

where C
c
= 0.8528 from Equation 4.2b.

The calculated values of y
3max
from Equation 4.6 are plotted against the measured y
3max
in Figure
4-10. Another plot using the calculated values of y
3max
from Equation 4.5 is plotted against the
measured y
3max
in Figure 4-11 for comparison purpose. Upon comparing Figures 4-10 and 4-11,
it can be deduced that both equations (Equations 4.5 and 4.6) yields equally good results.
However, Equation 4.5 is much simpler to be used that Equation 4.6. Also, one other major
limitation of Equation 4.6 is that the constraint at which it could be applied is uncertain; since
we know that the equation is derived for only a free-flow situation and y
1
has to be substantially
larger than a for a free-flow situation to be possible.
Chapter 4 Results And Analysis

38
y = x
R
2
= 0.9693
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
Calculated y3max using Belanger Eq.
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
d

y
3
m
a
x

Figure 4-10 Measured y
3max
vs. Calculated y
3max
using Belanger Equation.


y = x
R
2
= 0.9744
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
Calculated y
3max
using current empirical Eq.
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
d

y
3
m
a
x

Figure 4-11 Measured y
3max
vs. Calculated y
3max
using Equation 4.5.
Chapter 5 Conclusion and Recommendations

39
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS


5.1 Conclusion

This concluding chapter of the report will provide a summary for the two empirical equations
that were required to be obtained as stated at the beginning of this project.

From the results and analysis in Chapter 4, the following can be concluded for this study:

1) The discharge under the sluice gate of Jurong Lake can be expressed in the following
form:
1
2gy A K Q
s
= and
0877 . 0
1
519 . 0

=
a
y
K
s
; for 2.47

a
y
1
12.00

2) An analysis based on momentum equation for the maximum tailwater depth for free
flow condition under the sluice gate has been conducted. An empirical formula based
on the analysis has been derived. A comparison of the derived empirical formula with
the Blangers Equation proposed by previous studies (by C. H. Lin, J. F. Yen; and c. T.
Tsai) was made and it is found that both equations yield equally satisfactory results.
However, the derived empirical formula is much simpler to be used and has a more
certain range of constraint.

3) The simple equation for Jurong Lake Tidal Gate which relates the maximum tailwater
condition, upstream water depth and the gate opening can be expressed in the following
form:
5648 . 0
1 max 3
1
2
7077 . 0

=
a
y
a
y


22 . 4 53 . 1
max 3

a
y
and 00 . 12 47 . 2
1

a
y


The empirical constraints set to the above equations indicate that values beyond these limits
portray a situation of either submerged flow or a non-maximum tailwater condition has occurred
in the hydraulic jump.
Chapter 5 Conclusion and Recommendations

40
5.2 Recommendations

The following recommendations are suggested for future researches:

1) As a sluice gate can also double up as a weir for water to flow over; a situation thought
uncommon, but possible to occur. This situation could occur during the event that the
discharge upstream is extremely large, causing over spill of water from the top of the
sluice gate. The sluice may be open or close during this situation. If the sluice is closed,
the sluice gate would behave like a weir. Whereas when the sluice is open, a situation
of combination under and flow over the sluice may occur. In this situation, discharge
across the gate would be difficult to quantify without specific device or empirical
equations. A specific coefficient of discharge may be specially obtained for such a
situation. Although, some similar studies have been done previously on such a topic, an
accurate formula has yet been devised. Furthermore, such coefficient of discharge is
highly dependent on gate geometry. Therefore, further research may be done to
calibrate the coefficient of discharge for situation of a combined over and under flow of
the sluice gate. Knowing this coefficient would be useful when the discharge in such
situation is required to be obtained.

2) Also, for the above mentioned situation, empirical formulae for maximum tailwater can
also be devised, which could be useful when it is necessary to control the precise
location of the hydraulic jump.

References

REFERENCES


1. BOOKS

i. Montes, Sergio. Hydraulics of Open Channel Flow, ASCE PRESS.
ii. Henderson. Open Channel Flow, Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
iii. Finnemore, E.J. and Franzini, J.B. (2002) Fluid Mechanics with Engineering
Applications 10
th
International Edition, Mc Graw Hill.


2. JOURNALS

i. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering Jul / Aug 2002 pg249; C. h. Lin, J. F.
Yen, and C. t. Tsai; Influence of Sluice Gate Contraction Coefficient on Distinguishing
Condition.
ii. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Mar 1996, pg 165; Chander K. Sehgal,; Design
Guidelines for Spillway Gates.
iii. Journal of Hydraulic Research, Vol. 40, 2002, No. 4; Michele Mossa, Antonio Petrillo,
Hubert Chanson; Tailwater level effects on flow conditions as an abrupt drop.
iv. Technical Paper from Water & Water Structures Eng, Zagazig University; Abdel-Azim
M. Negm; Modeling of submerged simultaneous flow through combined weirs and
gates devices.








Appendix A

Page A 1







Appendix A



Experiment Data and Formulae used.
Appendix A

Page A 2
Formulae used.


Symbol Description Unit Formulae

V
Volume of water
flowing into the
flume
m
3

Recorded from meter-reading during
experiment
t
Time taken for
volume of water
passes the meter-
reading
s Recorded from stop-watch used.
Q Volumetric flow rate m
3
/s
t
V
Q =
y
3max

Maximum tailwater
depth
m
Recorded from tail-end of flume
during experiment
y
1
Upstream water depth m
Recorded from some short distance
away from gate at the upstream end
during experiment
a Gate opening size m Recorded during experiment
b Width of channel m b = 0.176
g
Gravitational
acceleration
m/s
2
g = 9.81
Fr
a

Froude number at the
exit of the gate
Dimensionless
a g
b a
Q
Fr
a

=
) (

Appendix A

Page A 3
Fr
3

Froude number at the
end of hydraulic jump
Dimensionless
max 3
max 3
3
) (
y g
b y
Q
Fr

=
y
2

Depth of water at the
vena contracta
m
|
|
|
|
|

\
|

\
|
+ + |

\
|
=
3
max 3
2
max 3
2
8
1 1
2 y g
b
Q
y
y
C
c

Coefficient of
Contraction
Dimensionless
a
y
C
c
2
=
A Area at section m
2
b a A =
V
theroy
Reference velocity m/s
1
2 y g V
theory
=
Q
theory

Discharge from
reference velocity
m
3
/s
a b V Q
theroy theory
=
,
Experimental
coefficient obtained
by trial and error
Dimensionless
K
s

A function obtained
by iteration
Dimensionless
K
s

(calibrated)
Sluice gate coefficient Dimensionless

\
|
=
a
y
K
s
1


Calculated y
3max
using
Belanger Eq.
m
(
(

|
|

\
|
+ + =
5 . 0
3 2
2
1
max 3
) (
) 2 ( 8
1 1
2 g a C b
y g A K a C
y
c
s c

Calculated y
3max
using
current empirical Eq.
m
5648 . 0
1
max 3
1
2
7077 . 0
|

\
|
=
a
y
a y

Appendix A

Page A 4
Experiment Data

s/n
Volume,
V, (m
3
)
time,
t, (s)
Q,
(m
3
/s)
y
3max

(m)
Upstream,
y
1
(m)
Gate opening,
a (m)
1 0.1 71.20 0.0014 0.038 0.108 0.009
2 0.1 77.93 0.0013 0.034 0.091 0.009
3 0.1 81.65 0.0012 0.032 0.082 0.009
4 0.1 85.32 0.0012 0.03 0.076 0.009
5 0.1 91.16 0.0011 0.027 0.066 0.009
6 0.1 55.91 0.0018 0.043 0.106 0.012
7 0.1 57.89 0.0017 0.041 0.098 0.012
8 0.1 62.01 0.0016 0.038 0.089 0.012
9 0.1 65.48 0.0015 0.035 0.079 0.012
10 0.1 69.00 0.0014 0.032 0.071 0.012
11 0.1 44.12 0.0023 0.046 0.110 0.015
12 0.1 46.34 0.0022 0.044 0.101 0.015
13 0.1 48.06 0.0021 0.042 0.096 0.015
14 0.1 51.09 0.0020 0.038 0.085 0.015
15 0.1 56.45 0.0018 0.032 0.071 0.015
16 0.1 57.29 0.0017 0.031 0.068 0.015
17 0.1 37.48 0.0027 0.050 0.108 0.018
18 0.1 39.32 0.0025 0.048 0.099 0.018
19 0.1 41.74 0.0024 0.044 0.092 0.018
20 0.1 43.41 0.0023 0.041 0.083 0.018
21 0.1 47.20 0.0021 0.036 0.071 0.018
22 0.1 31.32 0.0032 0.058 0.119 0.021
23 0.1 32.42 0.0031 0.054 0.111 0.021
24 0.1 34.00 0.0029 0.051 0.103 0.021
25 0.1 35.95 0.0028 0.046 0.093 0.021
26 0.1 37.85 0.0026 0.044 0.084 0.021
27 0.1 38.45 0.0026 0.041 0.081 0.021
28 0.1 41.00 0.0024 0.037 0.072 0.021
Appendix A

Page A 5
s/n
Volume,
V, (m
3
)
time,
t, (s)
Q,
(m
3
/s)
max y
3
at
freeflow (m)
Upstream,
y
1
(m)
Gate opening,
a (m)
29 0.1 27.91 0.0036 0.060 0.116 0.024
30 0.1 28.69 0.0035 0.057 0.110 0.024
31 0.1 29.99 0.0033 0.053 0.100 0.024
32 0.1 31.35 0.0032 0.050 0.093 0.024
33 0.1 32.61 0.0031 0.048 0.086 0.024
34 0.1 34.92 0.0029 0.043 0.078 0.024
35 0.1 24.19 0.0041 0.063 0.121 0.027
36 0.1 25.04 0.0040 0.060 0.114 0.027
37 0.1 26.29 0.0038 0.057 0.106 0.027
38 0.1 28.36 0.0035 0.050 0.092 0.027
39 0.1 29.59 0.0034 0.047 0.086 0.027
40 0.1 30.63 0.0033 0.043 0.081 0.027
41 0.1 22.70 0.0044 0.066 0.117 0.030
42 0.1 23.96 0.0042 0.061 0.106 0.030
43 0.1 25.38 0.0039 0.057 0.099 0.030
44 0.1 25.82 0.0039 0.056 0.094 0.030
45 0.1 26.45 0.0038 0.053 0.088 0.030
46 0.1 27.94 0.0036 0.048 0.081 0.030
47 0.1 20.07 0.0050 0.071 0.124 0.033
48 0.1 21.06 0.0047 0.066 0.114 0.033
49 0.1 21.42 0.0047 0.064 0.109 0.033
50 0.1 22.53 0.0044 0.059 0.100 0.033
51 0.1 23.10 0.0043 0.058 0.096 0.033
52 0.1 23.95 0.0042 0.055 0.091 0.033
53 0.1 24.39 0.0041 0.051 0.086 0.033
54 0.1 18.56 0.0054 0.074 0.124 0.036
55 0.1 19.43 0.0051 0.069 0.114 0.036
56 0.1 20.27 0.0049 0.066 0.106 0.036
57 0.1 20.76 0.0048 0.063 0.101 0.036
58 0.1 21.78 0.0046 0.059 0.094 0.036
59 0.1 22.38 0.0045 0.055 0.089 0.036
Appendix A

Page A 6

= = = = 0.5190
At gate opening, a = = = = 0.0877
s/n
A, area
(m
2
)
V
theory
,
(m/s)
Q
theory

(m
3
/s)
K
s

K
s

(callibrated)
K
s
x Q
theory

1 0.001503 1.46 0.00219 0.64194770 0.64539138 0.00141203
2 0.001503 1.34 0.00201 0.63894893 0.63576970 0.00127682
3 0.001503 1.27 0.00191 0.64243383 0.62998959 0.00120102
4 0.001503 1.22 0.00184 0.63860729 0.62580532 0.00114856
5 0.001503 1.14 0.00171 0.64137973 0.61811019 0.00105717
6 0.002004 1.44 0.00289 0.61888557 0.62828125 0.00181574
7 0.002004 1.39 0.00278 0.62163605 0.62397228 0.00173391
8 0.002004 1.32 0.00265 0.60897021 0.61872302 0.00163847
9 0.002004 1.24 0.00249 0.61211154 0.61228930 0.00152763
10 0.002004 1.18 0.00237 0.61273758 0.60658285 0.00143472
11 0.002505 1.47 0.00368 0.61590102 0.61811019 0.00227468
12 0.002505 1.41 0.00353 0.61196425 0.61350026 0.00216338
13 0.002505 1.37 0.00344 0.60523409 0.61077458 0.00209978
14 0.002505 1.29 0.00323 0.60505855 0.60429055 0.00195485
15 0.002505 1.18 0.00296 0.59916943 0.59482761 0.00175864
16 0.002505 1.16 0.00289 0.60326689 0.59257973 0.00171458
17 0.003006 1.46 0.00438 0.60974755 0.60732734 0.00265750
18 0.003006 1.39 0.00419 0.60705832 0.60271052 0.00252502
19 0.003006 1.34 0.00404 0.59321915 0.59884684 0.00241851
20 0.003006 1.28 0.00384 0.60052721 0.59346446 0.00227652
21 0.003006 1.18 0.00355 0.59715950 0.58539219 0.00207690
22 0.003507 1.53 0.00536 0.59582607 0.60429055 0.00323821
23 0.003507 1.48 0.00518 0.59599173 0.60061360 0.00310844
24 0.003507 1.42 0.00499 0.58995271 0.59668643 0.00297475
25 0.003507 1.35 0.00474 0.58718420 0.59136592 0.00280145
26 0.003507 1.28 0.00450 0.58682581 0.58611067 0.00263879
27 0.003507 1.26 0.00442 0.58826889 0.58424428 0.00258299
28 0.003507 1.19 0.00417 0.58514652 0.57824035 0.00241024
Appendix A

Page A 7
s/n
A, area
(m
2
)
V
theory
,
(m/s)
Q
theory

(m
3
/s)
K
s

K
s

(calibrated)
K
s
x Q
theory

29 0.004008 1.51 0.00605 0.59256221 0.59591924 0.00360324
30 0.004008 1.47 0.00589 0.59196482 0.59315006 0.00349251
31 0.004008 1.40 0.00561 0.59394512 0.58821276 0.00330226
32 0.004008 1.35 0.00541 0.58917426 0.58448100 0.00316438
33 0.004008 1.30 0.00521 0.58901013 0.58048360 0.00302215
34 0.004008 1.24 0.00496 0.57756551 0.57553420 0.00285362
35 0.004509 1.54 0.00695 0.59503390 0.59198219 0.00411274
36 0.004509 1.50 0.00674 0.59222060 0.58889643 0.00397119
37 0.004509 1.44 0.00650 0.58496077 0.58515065 0.00380496
38 0.004509 1.34 0.00606 0.58206317 0.57792643 0.00350103
39 0.004509 1.30 0.00586 0.57700034 0.57451832 0.00336498
40 0.004509 1.26 0.00567 0.57613642 0.57119798 0.00323679
41 0.00501 1.52 0.00759 0.58035534 0.58481073 0.00443911
42 0.00501 1.44 0.00723 0.57766097 0.57976869 0.00418885
43 0.00501 1.39 0.00698 0.56429156 0.57630533 0.00402400
44 0.00501 1.36 0.00680 0.56923633 0.57369194 0.00390328
45 0.00501 1.31 0.00658 0.57430918 0.57038299 0.00375487
46 0.00501 1.26 0.00632 0.56668780 0.56625177 0.00357634
47 0.005511 1.56 0.00860 0.57964470 0.58290580 0.00501059
48 0.005511 1.50 0.00824 0.57611515 0.57862321 0.00476901
49 0.005511 1.46 0.00806 0.57927845 0.57635173 0.00464495
50 0.005511 1.40 0.00772 0.57498815 0.57201220 0.00441555
51 0.005511 1.37 0.00756 0.57236424 0.56996801 0.00431088
52 0.005511 1.34 0.00736 0.56701412 0.56730058 0.00417747
53 0.005511 1.30 0.00716 0.57274204 0.56449592 0.00404101
54 0.006012 1.56 0.00938 0.57456969 0.57847463 0.00542455
55 0.006012 1.50 0.00899 0.57240880 0.57422460 0.00516301
56 0.006012 1.44 0.00867 0.56901648 0.57057214 0.00494689
57 0.006012 1.41 0.00846 0.56917195 0.56815943 0.00480839
58 0.006012 1.36 0.00816 0.56235392 0.56459178 0.00460964
59 0.006012 1.32 0.00794 0.56244031 0.56189186 0.00446392
Appendix A

Page A 8

s/n y
1
/a y
3max
/a Fr
a
Fr
3
(2y
1
/a) - 1 y
3max
/a
1 12.00000 4.22222 2.98407 1.51119 23.00000 4.22222
2 10.11111 3.77778 2.72637 1.92756 19.22222 3.77778
3 9.11111 3.55556 2.60215 2.20670 17.22222 3.55556
4 8.44444 3.33333 2.49022 2.56292 15.88889 3.33333
5 7.33333 3.00000 2.33069 3.29044 13.66667 3.00000
6 8.83333 3.58333 2.46826 1.32817 16.66667 3.58333
7 8.16667 3.41667 2.38384 1.47977 15.33333 3.41667
8 7.41667 3.16667 2.22546 1.73515 13.83333 3.16667
9 6.58333 2.91667 2.10752 2.10299 12.16667 2.91667
10 5.91667 2.66667 2.00001 2.61126 10.83333 2.66667
11 7.33333 3.06667 2.23810 1.37480 13.66667 3.06667
12 6.73333 2.93333 2.13088 1.49567 12.46667 2.93333
13 6.40000 2.80000 2.05462 1.65813 11.80000 2.80000
14 5.66667 2.53333 1.93277 2.10602 10.33333 2.53333
15 4.73333 2.13333 1.74925 3.19180 8.46667 2.13333
16 4.53333 2.06667 1.72360 3.45928 8.06667 2.06667
17 6.00000 2.77778 2.00422 1.26020 11.00000 2.77778
18 5.50000 2.66667 1.91043 1.35773 10.00000 2.66667
19 5.11111 2.44444 1.79966 1.66050 9.22222 2.44444
20 4.61111 2.27778 1.73043 1.97337 8.22222 2.27778
21 3.94444 2.00000 1.59148 2.68102 6.88889 2.00000
22 5.66667 2.76190 1.90328 0.96615 10.33333 2.76190
23 5.28571 2.57143 1.83870 1.15653 9.57143 2.57143
24 4.90476 2.42857 1.75325 1.30906 8.80952 2.42857
25 4.42857 2.19048 1.65815 1.68724 7.85714 2.19048
26 4.00000 2.09524 1.57492 1.83116 7.00000 2.09524
27 3.85714 1.95238 1.55034 2.22793 6.71429 1.95238
28 3.42857 1.76190 1.45392 2.84289 5.85714 1.76190
29 4.83333 2.50000 1.74814 0.97935 8.66667 2.50000
Appendix A

Page A 9
s/n y
1
/a y
3max
/a Fr
a
Fr
3
(2y
1
/a) - 1 y
3max
/a
30 4.58333 2.37500 1.70061 1.11121 8.16667 2.37500
31 4.16667 2.20833 1.62689 1.32235 7.33333 2.20833
32 3.87500 2.08333 1.55632 1.50661 6.75000 2.08333
33 3.58333 2.00000 1.49618 1.63710 6.16667 2.00000
34 3.25000 1.79167 1.39721 2.12652 5.50000 1.79167
35 4.48148 2.33333 1.69033 0.97609 7.96296 2.33333
36 4.22222 2.22222 1.63295 1.09159 7.44444 2.22222
37 3.92593 2.11111 1.55531 1.21265 6.85185 2.11111
38 3.40741 1.85185 1.44179 1.66546 5.81481 1.85185
39 3.18519 1.74074 1.38185 1.92181 5.37037 1.74074
40 2.98148 1.59259 1.33494 2.42436 4.96296 1.59259
41 3.90000 2.20000 1.53796 0.90467 6.80000 2.20000
42 3.53333 2.03333 1.45708 1.08561 6.06667 2.03333
43 3.30000 1.90000 1.37556 1.25613 5.60000 1.90000
44 3.13333 1.86667 1.35212 1.30205 5.26667 1.86667
45 2.93333 1.76667 1.31991 1.49933 4.86667 1.76667
46 2.70000 1.60000 1.24952 1.91073 4.40000 1.60000
47 3.75758 2.15152 1.50777 0.82191 6.51515 2.15152
48 3.45455 2.00000 1.43689 0.97512 5.90909 2.00000
49 3.30303 1.93939 1.41274 1.05145 5.60606 1.93939
50 3.03030 1.78788 1.34314 1.27595 5.06061 1.78788
51 2.90909 1.75758 1.31000 1.30995 4.81818 1.75758
52 2.75758 1.66667 1.26350 1.48168 4.51515 1.66667
53 2.60606 1.54545 1.24071 1.82485 4.21212 1.54545
54 3.44444 2.05556 1.43094 0.78501 5.88889 2.05556
55 3.16667 1.91667 1.36687 0.92497 5.33333 1.91667
56 2.94444 1.83333 1.31022 1.01313 4.88889 1.83333
57 2.80556 1.75000 1.27930 1.13737 4.61111 1.75000
58 2.61111 1.63889 1.21939 1.31988 4.22222 1.63889
59 2.47222 1.52778 1.18669 1.58563 3.94444 1.52778


Appendix A

Page A 10
s/n y
1
/a y
3max
/a Fr
a
Fr
3
(2y
1
/a) - 1 y
3max
/a
minimum 2.472222 1.527778 1.186695 0.785012 3.944444 1.527778
maximum 12.000000 4.222222 2.984070 3.459278 23.000000 4.222222
mean 4.768013 2.319464 1.713211 1.634510 8.536026 2.319464
standard
deviation
2.060834 0.610735 0.414218 0.624416 4.121669 0.610735


Appendix A

Page A 11

s/n
Calculated
y
2

C
c
a/y
1

1 0.008 0.91241 0.08333
2 0.008 0.92867 0.09890
3 0.008 0.94084 0.10976
4 0.009 0.96209 0.11842
5 0.009 1.00445 0.13636
6 0.010 0.85159 0.11321
7 0.010 0.86325 0.12245
8 0.010 0.86231 0.13483
9 0.011 0.88891 0.15190
10 0.011 0.92717 0.16901
11 0.014 0.91197 0.13636
12 0.013 0.89759 0.14851
13 0.014 0.90415 0.15625
14 0.014 0.94241 0.17647
15 0.015 1.01274 0.21127
16 0.015 1.03088 0.22059
17 0.016 0.87855 0.16667
18 0.016 0.86168 0.18182
19 0.016 0.88421 0.19565
20 0.016 0.91472 0.21687
21 0.017 0.95273 0.25352
22 0.017 0.81462 0.17647
23 0.018 0.85289 0.18919
24 0.018 0.85601 0.20388
25 0.019 0.90171 0.22581
26 0.019 0.88298 0.25000
27 0.020 0.94414 0.25926
28 0.020 0.97410 0.29167
Appendix A

Page A 12
s/n
Calculated
y
2

C
c
a/y
1

29 0.020 0.81831 0.20690
30 0.020 0.84109 0.21818
31 0.021 0.86601 0.24000
32 0.021 0.87345 0.25806
33 0.021 0.86718 0.27907
34 0.022 0.89942 0.30769
35 0.023 0.85354 0.22314
36 0.023 0.86375 0.23684
37 0.023 0.85743 0.25472
38 0.024 0.90462 0.29348
39 0.025 0.91689 0.31395
40 0.026 0.96998 0.33540
41 0.024 0.79692 0.25641
42 0.024 0.81447 0.28302
43 0.024 0.81486 0.30303
44 0.024 0.81216 0.31915
45 0.025 0.84028 0.34091
46 0.026 0.87561 0.37037
47 0.026 0.79626 0.26613
48 0.027 0.81471 0.28947
49 0.027 0.82650 0.30275
50 0.028 0.84978 0.33000
51 0.028 0.83621 0.34375
52 0.028 0.84661 0.36264
53 0.030 0.90350 0.38372
54 0.028 0.78029 0.29032
55 0.029 0.79773 0.31579
56 0.029 0.79223 0.33962
57 0.029 0.81114 0.35644
58 0.030 0.81972 0.38298
59 0.031 0.85818 0.40449
Appendix A

Page A 13
s/n
Calculated
y
2

C
c
a/y
1


minimum 0.008 0.78029 0.08333
maximum 0.031 0.97410 0.40449
mean 0.020 0.87760 0.24249
standard
deviation
0.007 0.05763 0.08242

Appendix A

Page A 14

s/n
Gate
opening
, a, (m)
y
2
=
C
c
a
Calculated
y
3max
using
Belanger
Eq.
Measured
y
3max

Discrepancy,
(m)
Calculated
y
3max
using
current
empirical
Eq.
Measured
y
3max
(m)
Discrepancy,
(m)
1 0.009 0.0077 0.040 0.038 0.002 0.037 0.038 -0.001
2 0.009 0.0077 0.036 0.034 0.002 0.034 0.034 0.000
3 0.009 0.0077 0.034 0.032 0.002 0.032 0.032 0.000
4 0.009 0.0077 0.032 0.030 0.002 0.030 0.030 0.000
5 0.009 0.0077 0.029 0.027 0.002 0.028 0.027 0.001
6 0.012 0.0102 0.044 0.043 0.001 0.042 0.043 -0.001
7 0.012 0.0102 0.042 0.041 0.001 0.040 0.041 -0.001
8 0.012 0.0102 0.039 0.038 0.001 0.037 0.038 -0.001
9 0.012 0.0102 0.036 0.035 0.001 0.035 0.035 0.000
10 0.012 0.0102 0.034 0.032 0.002 0.033 0.032 0.001
11 0.015 0.0128 0.049 0.046 0.003 0.046 0.046 0.000
12 0.015 0.0128 0.046 0.044 0.002 0.044 0.044 0.000
13 0.015 0.0128 0.044 0.042 0.002 0.043 0.042 0.001
14 0.015 0.0128 0.041 0.038 0.003 0.040 0.038 0.002
15 0.015 0.0128 0.036 0.032 0.004 0.035 0.032 0.003
16 0.015 0.0128 0.035 0.031 0.004 0.035 0.031 0.004
17 0.018 0.0154 0.051 0.050 0.001 0.049 0.050 -0.001
18 0.018 0.0154 0.048 0.048 0.000 0.047 0.048 -0.001
19 0.018 0.0154 0.046 0.044 0.002 0.045 0.044 0.001
20 0.018 0.0154 0.043 0.041 0.002 0.042 0.041 0.001
21 0.018 0.0154 0.038 0.036 0.002 0.038 0.036 0.002
22 0.021 0.0179 0.057 0.058 -0.001 0.056 0.058 -0.002
23 0.021 0.0179 0.055 0.054 0.001 0.053 0.054 -0.001
24 0.021 0.0179 0.052 0.051 0.001 0.051 0.051 0.000
25 0.021 0.0179 0.048 0.046 0.002 0.048 0.046 0.002
26 0.021 0.0179 0.045 0.044 0.001 0.045 0.044 0.001
27 0.021 0.0179 0.044 0.041 0.003 0.044 0.041 0.003
28 0.021 0.0179 0.041 0.037 0.004 0.040 0.037 0.003
Appendix A

Page A 15
s/n
Gate
opening
, a, (m)
y
2
=
C
c
a
Calculated
y
3max
using
Belanger
Eq.
Measured
y
3max

Discrepancy,
(m)
Calculated
y
3max
using
current
empirical
Eq.
Measured
y
3max
(m)
Discrepancy,
(m)
29 0.024 0.0205 0.059 0.060 -0.001 0.058 0.060 -0.002
30 0.024 0.0205 0.057 0.057 0.000 0.056 0.057 -0.001
31 0.024 0.0205 0.053 0.053 0.000 0.052 0.053 -0.001
32 0.024 0.0205 0.051 0.050 0.001 0.050 0.050 0.000
33 0.024 0.0205 0.048 0.048 0.000 0.047 0.048 -0.001
34 0.024 0.0205 0.045 0.043 0.002 0.044 0.043 0.001
35 0.027 0.0230 0.063 0.063 0.000 0.062 0.063 -0.001
36 0.027 0.0230 0.060 0.060 0.000 0.059 0.060 -0.001
37 0.027 0.0230 0.057 0.057 0.000 0.057 0.057 0.000
38 0.027 0.0230 0.052 0.050 0.002 0.052 0.050 0.002
39 0.027 0.0230 0.050 0.047 0.003 0.049 0.047 0.002
40 0.027 0.0230 0.047 0.043 0.004 0.047 0.043 0.004
41 0.030 0.0256 0.064 0.066 -0.002 0.063 0.066 -0.003
42 0.030 0.0256 0.059 0.061 -0.002 0.059 0.061 -0.002
43 0.030 0.0256 0.057 0.057 0.000 0.056 0.057 -0.001
44 0.030 0.0256 0.055 0.056 -0.001 0.054 0.056 -0.002
45 0.030 0.0256 0.052 0.053 -0.001 0.052 0.053 -0.001
46 0.030 0.0256 0.049 0.048 0.001 0.049 0.048 0.001
47 0.033 0.0281 0.068 0.071 -0.003 0.067 0.071 -0.004
48 0.033 0.0281 0.064 0.066 -0.002 0.064 0.066 -0.002
49 0.033 0.0281 0.062 0.064 -0.002 0.062 0.064 -0.002
50 0.033 0.0281 0.059 0.059 0.000 0.058 0.059 -0.001
51 0.033 0.0281 0.057 0.058 -0.001 0.057 0.058 -0.001
52 0.033 0.0281 0.055 0.055 0.000 0.055 0.055 0.000
53 0.033 0.0281 0.053 0.051 0.002 0.053 0.051 0.002
54 0.036 0.0307 0.070 0.074 -0.004 0.069 0.074 -0.005
55 0.036 0.0307 0.066 0.069 -0.003 0.066 0.069 -0.003
56 0.036 0.0307 0.063 0.066 -0.003 0.062 0.066 -0.004
57 0.036 0.0307 0.061 0.063 -0.002 0.060 0.063 -0.003
Appendix A

Page A 16
s/n
Gate
opening
, a, (m)
y
2
=
C
c
a
Calculated
y
3max
using
Belanger
Eq.
Measured
y
3max

Discrepancy,
(m)
Calculated
y
3max
using
current
empirical
Eq.
Measured
y
3max
(m)
Discrepancy,
(m)
58 0.036 0.0307 0.058 0.059 -0.001 0.057 0.059 -0.002
59 0.036 0.0307 0.055 0.055 0.000 0.055 0.055 0.000

minimum

-0.004

-0.005
maximum

0.004

0.004
mean

0.001

0.000
standard
deviation

0.002

0.002

Appendix B







Appendix B





Extracted Blue-Print of
Jurong Lake Tidal Gate

GATE GUIDE
I NOTES:-
I
1 1. THIS DiiA'?!!b!G TO BE READ IN
I CON JUNCTION WITH DRG. NO.
88/ 726/ 12 , 13 & 1 4 .
2- ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES
UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN.
SECTION .B - 8