×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Submerged Weir Discharge Computation

Submerged Weir Discharge Computation

Submerged Weir Discharge Computation

(OP)
What is the best method to compute Q over a submerged weir?

My discharge is 344 cfs, weir length = 40'. Tailwater is 1.4' above the weir (H2). Assume a sharp crested weir.

The procedure in HEC-RAS results in no reduction, so H1 = 2.0'

The equation developed by Brater & King, '76 results in H1 = 2.3'

Which is the better answer?

RE: Submerged Weir Discharge Computation

Obviously, there should be some reduction in flow (or increase in head) due to the tailwater. The submerged weir equation by Brater & King is reasonable. Another approach is to calculate weir flow for the flow area above the tailwater, and add constant-head orifice flow for the submerged area. Doing this with HydroCAD I get a head of 2.22' vs 2.26' for the submergence equation, which is pretty good agreement.

Peter Smart
HydroCAD Software
www.hydrocad.net

RE: Submerged Weir Discharge Computation

(OP)
I said "developed by Brater & King," but that's not really the case. Brater and King published work done in '47 by Villemonte. Possibly the method used in HEC-RAS is based on something more recent?

RE: Submerged Weir Discharge Computation

(OP)
>Possibly the method used in HEC-RAS is based on something more recent?
As suggested by Lincoln. Just noticed your post, thanks.

RE: Submerged Weir Discharge Computation

Don't know if you are still interested, but I did some investigation of this a couple of years back. We were dealing with a weir operating v close to modular limit, so the position of this and further drowning effects was important.

I compared formulae/charts provided by Ackers (1971); King and Brater (Villemonte) (1963); Davis (1952); Bligh (1927) and Bos (1989). The comparison showed that there are significant differences in the results obtained by these different approaches. Withough going into too much detail I found that if you are using the Villemonte equation then you are probably getting results at the conservative end of the scale (ie indicating that drowning has a greater impact on discharge, with a lower modular limit). The more recent Ackers (and Bos), on the other hand, indicates that the modular limit is at around 0.9 and flow rates decrease rapidly above this. It sounds like this is more akin to what HEC-RAS is telling you.

So, it comes down to whether you need to be conservative or are struggling to get something to work. Personally I put a lot of faith in Bos in these things, but it is aimed at flow measurement structures and so may give an optimistic view of things on other less "refined" weirs. Hope this provides some useful context.

RE: Submerged Weir Discharge Computation

(OP)
One thing I learned is that the HEC-RAS procedure used is based on a broad crested weir which is not affected as much by submergence as a sharp crested weir.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources