Final Project Sub

BACKWATER CALCULATIONS COMPARISON OF DIFERENT
NUMERICAL METHODS (DATA ANALYSIS AND NUMERICAL

MODELLING)

Submitted by

AJALA OLUKUNLE MOSES

For the
MSc in Civil Engineering

LONDON SOUTH BANK UNIVERSITY
Faculty of Engineering, Science and the
Built Environment (FESBE)

November 2010
Backwater Calculations

Abstract Page ii

Abstract
The most common occurrence of gradually varied flow is the backwater created by channels,
storm sewer inlets, or channel constrictions. For these conditions, the flow depth needs to be
greater than the normal depth in the channel and the water surface profile should be computed
using backwater techniques.
There are many reasons why it is necessary to compute water-surface profiles. For instance
the stage of a river may need to be determined for a given discharge; or it may be necessary to
calculate Manning's "n" for a cross section. The main objective of using backwater techniques
for computation is to determine the shape of the flow profile. There are many methods for
analysing water surface profile, two of which would be compared in this thesis namely:
- Direct step method : first suggested by Polish engineer Charnomskii in 1914 and then
by Husted in 1926 (Chow 1959)

- ISIS software packaging for river modelling
In this thesis, three different channels (rectangular, trapezoidal and circular) would be
analysed. All channels have different geometrical cross-section area to enable a fair
comparison of the methods, based on the assumption that the flow is gradually varied flow
and the channel is prismatic.
To begin with, calculating the coordinate of the water surface profile using direct step method
is an iterative process achieved by choosing a range of flow depths, beginning at the
downstream end, and proceeding incrementally up to the point of normal flow depth (Chow

Abstract Page iii

1959). This method is best accomplished by the use of spread sheet (see Table 1, 4 and 5).
This table is then used to compute the flow profile required (see Figs. 4-1, 4-3 and 4-5)
Subsequently ISIS analyses were performed for all the channels to confirm the findings of the
direct step method and the water surface profile computed. Both methods showed similarities
in the water surface profiles for all the three channels as expected.

Acknowledgements Page iv

Acknowledgements
There are lots of people that I have to thank after one year of Master Study, hard work and
unforgettable experiences.
First I would like to thank my project supervisor, Dr. Stephen Mitchell, for his guidance,
support, word of encouragement, invaluable suggestions and contributions throughout this
project.
A special regard again goes to Dr. Stephen Mitchell for his enormous time, effort and
assistance with regards to advice on presentation of the work. And I wish you good luck with
your new job.
Also, my deep respect goes to the entire staff of Engineering Department. My greatest regards
goes to you Mr Abdul Rahim for your massive support throughout my studies in London
South Bank University without you I don't think my master program would have been a
reality. Claudia I have nothing for you but love and forever you guys will remain in my heart.
Appreciation is also extended to my family and friends: Mr and Mrs Ajala, Mr and Mrs Toye,
Gavin Okoror, Jummy Ibidapo-Obe, Mr and Mrs Akanbi, Niyi Akanbi, Funke Alimi. I
sincerely appreciate your support and words of encouragement.
My deepest gratitude goes to my best friend Gmoney, thank you for rocking my world over
the last few years you are the best.
A special thanks to Sylvia Okuku, remember the time when I needed someone to just push me
to reach for this goal? You are heaven sent!!
My greatest pleasure to Mrs Madu for your word of support (have you handed in your
project?). Also, my deepest feeling goes to Yvonne Madu for your word of encouragement.
Without you, I would not have been capable to bring this to an end.
Additionally, I wish to thank my line manager Mark Vara, Joe Price and Craig for not giving
up on me on shift changing. It was a pleasure to work under your supervision.
Lastly but most importantly, I thank God for making the completion of my Master degree a
reality, and my parents Mr and Mrs Ajala, thank you for bringing me up in the way of the
Lord, without which this would not be possible. Love you loads!!!
People like this are essential to make a project possible.

Ajala Olukunle Moses
26
th
October, 2010

List of Figures Page v

Table of Contents
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ iix
Common Notations .................................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................ 1
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Aim and Objectives ........................................................................................................ 6
1.3 Scope of the Thesis ........................................................................................................... 6
1.4 Thesis Layout ................................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................ 8
Literature Review ....................................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Development of Backwater Equation ............................................................................... 8
2.2 Backwater Calculations with Ferut ................................................................................. 14
2.3 Backwater Computation for Transcritical River flows ................................................... 16
2.3.1 Energy and Momentum Equation ............................................................................ 18
2.3.2 Discrete Solution ...................................................................................................... 21
2.4 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 25
CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................. 27
3.1 Methods of Computation ................................................................................................ 27
3.2 Choosing a Method ......................................................................................................... 27
3.3 Direct Step Method ......................................................................................................... 28
3.4 Computation of Backwater Profile by the Direct Step Method ...................................... 32
3.4.1 Rectangular Channel ................................................................................................ 32

List of Figures Page vi

MODEL 1 ......................................................................................................................... 32
3.4.2 Trapezoidal Channel ................................................................................................ 33
MODEL 2 ......................................................................................................................... 33
3.4.3 Circular Channel ...................................................................................................... 34
MODEL 3 ......................................................................................................................... 34
3.5 Data's Analysis Computation Procedures ..................................................................... 35
3.6 Building the Model in ISIS ............................................................................................. 37
3.7 Translate the descriptive cross section geometry to ISIS format ................................... 44
3.8 Backwater Profile Outputs by the ISIS Method ............................................................. 45
3.8.1 Rectangular Channel ................................................................................................ 45
3.8.2 Trapezoidal Channel ................................................................................................ 45
3.8.3 Circular Channel ...................................................................................................... 46
CHAPTER FOUR .................................................................................................................... 47
Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................. 47
4.1 Analysis of Results for Direct Step Method and ISIS Method ....................................... 47
CHAPTER FIVE ...................................................................................................................... 61
Conclusions and Recommendations ......................................................................................... 61
5.1 Conclusions .................................................................................................................... 61
5.2 Different Between the Direct Step Method and ISIS Method ........................................ 62
5.3 Similarities ...................................................................................................................... 63
5.4 Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 64
References and Bibliography ................................................................................................... 65
APPENDIX .............................................................................................................................. 67

List of Figures Page vii

List of Figures
Figure 1-1: Outlet Control Headwater for Channel with Free Surface (after Hydraulics
Manual (2009)) 1
Figure 2-1: The smooth drop inlet experiment photograph Flow from the bottom right to top
left (after Chanson (2009)). ...................................................................................................... 12
Figure 2-2: Comparison between experimental data and backwater calculations (after
Chanson (2009)). ...................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 2-3: Free-surface measurement (DARCY and BAZIN 1865) (after Chanson (2009)). 13
Figure 2.4: Definition sketch of non-uniform flow (after Chow (1959)) ................................. 17
Figure 2-5: Calculation intervals above which the scheme is numerically stable as a function
of flow depth and Froude number for a hydraulically wide section (after Beffa (1996)) ........ 23
Figure 2-6: Calculation flow depths in a Transcritical channel using different flow equations
(after Beffa (1996)) .................................................................................................................. 23
Figure 3-1: Channel reach for the derivation of step methods ................................................. 29
Figure 3-2: Upstream cross section for the rectangular channel .............................................. 32
Figure 3-4: A schematic representation of a single channel with eight sections and two
boundary conditions (after Batica (2009), Fu (2009)) ............................................................. 38
Figure 3-5: Simple schematic diagram of a Flow-Time data entry form (after Batica (2009),
Fu (2009)) ................................................................................................................................. 39
Figure 3-6: Connecting a river unit to a QTBDY unit entry form (after Batica (2009), Fu
(2009)) ...................................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 3-7: Schematic specification of cross section data form (after Batica (2009), Fu (2009))
.................................................................................................................................................. 40

List of Figures Page viii

Figure 3-8: The Stage-Time data entry form for the downstream boundary condition (after
Batica (2009), Fu (2009)). ........................................................................................................ 41
Figure 3-9: Run form interface (after Batica (2009), Fu (2009)). ............................................ 42
Figure 3-10: Notification of the successful completion of a simulation (after Batica (2009), Fu
(2009)). ..................................................................................................................................... 42
Figure 3-11: The progress of the unsteady simulation in ISIS (after Batica (2009), Fu (2009)).
.................................................................................................................................................. 43
Figure 3-12: Simple schematic for conversion of cross-section geometry to ISIS format (after
Batica (2009), Fu (2009)). ........................................................................................................ 44
Figure 3-13: The Cross-Section Data for Section 30 ............................................................... 45
Figure 4-1: An S2 Flow Profile Computed by the Direct Step Method for Rectangular
Channel ..................................................................................................................................... 50
Figure 4-2: Elevation vs. Nodal Label Output by the ISIS Method for Rectangular Channel A
.................................................................................................................................................. 51
Figure 4-3: An M1 Flow Profile Computed by the Direct Step Method for Trapezoidal
Channel ..................................................................................................................................... 55
Figure 4-4: Elevation vs. Nodal Label Output by the ISIS Method for Trapezoidal Channel . 56
Figure 4-5: An S2 Flow Profile Computed by the Direct Step Method for Circular Channel . 59
Figure 4-6: Elevation vs. Nodal Label Computed by the ISIS Method for Circular Channel . 60


List of Tables Page ix

List of Tables

Table 2-1: Computed Flow Depth in a Rectangular Channel Using Momentum Equation
(2.10), Energy Equation (2.11), and Reduced Momentum Equation (2.12) (after Beffa (1996))
.................................................................................................................................................. 24
Table 1: Computation of Flow Profile by the Direct Step Method for a Rectangular Channel49
Table 2: Critical Depth and Normal Depth Computation by Direct Step Method ................... 52
Table 3: Result Values for Froude Number and Velocity for Both Direct Step and ISIS
Method ..................................................................................................................................... 53
Table 4: Computation of Flow Profile by the Direct Step Method for a Trapezoidal Channel 54
Table 5: Computation of Flow Profile by the Direct Step Method for a Circular Channel ..... 58


Common Notations Page x

Common Notations

A AREA OF FLOW: (m
2
)

b WIDTH' OF RECTANGULAR CHANNEL: (m)

D
a
DIAMETER OF CONDUIT: (m)

D DEPTH OF FLOW: (m)

Fr FROUDE NUMBER

H TOTAL HEAD

y CHANGE IN WATER SURFACE ELEVATION :( m)

g ACCELERATION OF GRAVITY ( 9.81m/s
2
)

K CONVEYANCE: (m
3
/s)

L BACKWATER LENGHT: (m)

n MANNING'S ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT

P WETTED PERIMETER :( m)

Q DISCHARGE: (m
3
/s)

R HYDRAULIC RADIUS = (A/P): (m)

S
F
FRICTION SLOPE

S
0
BED SLOPE

T TOP WITH OF CHANNEL: (m)

V VELOCITY: (m/s)

Y FLOW DEPTH: (m)

y
c
CRITICAL DEPTH: (m)

y
n
NORMAL DEPTH :( m)

Z SIDE SLOPE OF A CHANNEL

AJALA OLUKUNLE MOSES Page 1

CHAPTER ONE
Introduction
1.1 Background
A backwater condition (or subcritical flow) exists if there are flow restrictions that raise the
water level above the normal depth within a given channel reach. As such, the backwater
profile must be computed to verify that the channel's capacity is adequately designed, if
backwater conditions are found to exist for the design flow. Analysis and computation of
backwater profile in open channels are important from the point of view of safe and optimal
design and operation of any hydraulic structure.
A typical configuration considered as a prototype case study for this thesis is shown in Fig. 1-
1. The hydraulics profiles change with flow depth along the length of the channel if free
surface flow occurred in a channel. It is compulsory to calculate the backwater profile based
on the outlet depth H
0
.

Figure 1-1: Outlet Control Headwater for Channel with Free Surface (after Hydraulics
Manual (2009))



Where:
- HWoc

= headwater depth due to outlet control (m)
- h
va
= velocity head of flow approaching the channel entrance (m)
- h
vi
= velocity head in the entrance (m)
- h
e
= entrance head loss (m)
- h
f
= friction head losses ( m)
- S
o
= culvert slope ( m/m)
- L = culvert length ( m)
- H
o
= depth of hydraulic grade line just inside the Channel at outlet (m)
- h
vo
= velocity head inside culvert at outlet (m)
- h
TW
= velocity head in tailwater (m)
- h
o
= exit head loss (m)
- d
c
= critical depth
- d
u
= normal depth
A backwater calculation is used to analyse the capacity of a channel systems to convey the
required design flow. In this case, channel system structures must established to contain the
hydraulic grade line as shown in Fig. 1-1 above for the specific flow rate. Direct step method
is used to compute a simple backwater profile (hydraulic grade line) in a channel for the
purpose of verifying adequate capacity of the flow. This method incorporates a re-
arrangement of the Manning's formula (Eq. 1.6) which expressed in terms of friction slope
(i.e. the gradient of the head line in m). The friction slope is used to establish the head loss in
each channel section due to barrel friction, which will be combined with other head losses to


obtain water surface elevation at all points along the channel system (as discussed in chapter
3). The general equation that this thesis is based upon is shown below:
Gradually Varied Flow Equation:
( )
2
1 Fr
S S
dx
dy
f o
=
(1.1)
Where:
S
o
= Bottom slope, positive in the downward direction
S
f
= Friction slope, positive in the downward direction
y = Water depth, measured from culvert bottom to water surface
x = Longitudinal distance, measured along the culvert bottom
Fr = Froude number
In English Units the Manning's Equation Form is:

2 / 1 3 / 2
49 . 1
S R
n
v =
(1.2)
Where:
v = Average cross section velocity in (m/s)
R

= Hydraulic radius, (Wetted Area / Wetted Perimeter in m)
n = Manning's coefficient (dimensionless) values developed through experimentation.
S = Slope of the channel in (m)
If velocity is known, the discharge (Q) can then be computed as



Q = AV (1.3)

2 / 1 3 / 2
49 . 1
S AR
n
Q=
(1.4)
Where Q is the discharge in m
3
/s
For uniform flow, Q is referred to as Normal discharge
The above equation can also be re-arranged such that:

2 / 1
3 / 2
S
nQ
AR =
(1.5)
The Friction Slope is approximated From Manning's Equation Above:

3
4
2 2
R
V n
S
f
m
=
(1.6)
Where:
S
f
= Friction slope, positive in the downward direction
n = Manning's roughness coefficient (various values of n are included in the appendix)
V = Average cross section velocity
m = Constant equal to 1.49 for English units and 1.00 for SI units
R = Hydraulic radius (Area / Wetted Perimeter)
In General, the gradually varied flow will be the only flow to be discussed in this thesis. For
the gradually varied flow condition, the depth of flow must be established through a water
surface profile analysis. The basic principles in water surface profile analysis are where:
- Water surface approaches the uniform depth line asymptotically,


- Water surface approaches the critical depth line at a finite angle,
- Subcritical flow is controlled from a downstream location, and
- Supercritical flow is controlled from an upstream location.
There are three general methods for determining flow profiles in prismatic channels (channel with
unvarying cross section, constant bottom slope, and relatively straight alignment) for backwater
computation:
1. The Direct Step method
2. The Standard Step method
3. Direct integration
These three methods make use of the energy equation to compute the water surface profile.
The direct integration and direct step method analyse straight prismatic channel sections while
the standard step method analyses nonprismatic channels (when the cross section, alignment,
and/ or bottom slope change along the channel). The direct integration method solves the
varied flow equation to determine the length of reach between successive depths. This method
is not commonly used unless sufficient profiles and length of channel are involved to
guarantee the amount of pre computational preparation.
In this thesis, the direct step method and ISIS program for river modeling will be used to
analyze the water surface profile in three different channels namely: rectangle, trapezoidal and
circular channels. These methods would be used to determine the length of reach between
successive depths by solution of the energy and friction equation that will be written for end
section of the reach.



1.2 Aim and Objectives
The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the changes in water surface profile with flow
depth in three different channels (rectangle, trapezoidal and circular). This will be done by
adopting Manning's equation to develop backwater calculations by using the direct step
method. For comparison, ISIS software packages for river modelling would be developed to
model a similar water surface profile. The results from both investigations (data analysis and
numerical modelling) will be compared to check that the methods conform together.
1.3 Scope of the Thesis
This thesis covers backwater calculations in an open channel flow. It gives necessary
background theories on gradually varied flow and water surface profile in open channels. It
does not attempt to give elaborate information on backwater calculation in any other media
other than open channels; neither does it examine deeply on various forms of water profiles.
It was considered reasonably appropriate to carry out calculation analysis studies for the
backwater calculations on rectangular, trapezoidal and circular channels.
1.4 Thesis Layout
The present thesis is organised into six chapters and a few appendices. Some of these chapters
are based on further development from previous chapters, but in general, all of them can be
read independently as self-contained entities.
Chapter 2 presents in-depth information about the research carried out in the last decade on
the backwater calculation equations.


Chapter 3 shows different methods of computation of flow profiles in prismatic channels,
analyses of basic equations for gradually varied flow and procedures of using direct step
method and ISIS program for analysis.
Chapter 4 gives the computation results for both the direct step method and ISIS analysis.
Chapter 5 presents the discussions based on the calculated results in chapter 4, with respect to
the conclusions of the thesis, they are presented in detail at the end of each chapter and the
most important concepts are summarised in chapter 6.



CHAPTER TWO
Literature Review
The backwater calculation is not an easy task to carry out without solid background
knowledge on the theme. However in the past decades, this subject has attracted the attention
of many researchers around the world. This chapter summarizes the most important
developments and results found in the specialized research literature on development of
backwater equation.
2.1 Development of Backwater Equation
Belanger (1828) developed the backwater equation with following assumptions in other to
calculate the free-surface profile of gradually varied flow in an open channel.
- A steady flow
- A one-dimensional flow motion
- A gradual variation of the wetted surface with distance x along the channel
- Frictional losses that are discharge
- A hydrostatic pressure distribution
Backwater equation (Eq. 2.1) was derived by Belanger from momentum considerations in a
method somehow comparable to the modern development of normal flow conditions
(Henderson 1966; Chanson 1999, 2004) obtained
( ) 0 cos sin
3
2
2
= c + + c c A bV aV
A
P
d
gA
Q w
u ; u
(2.1)


Where:
u between the bed and the horizontal x = longitudinal distance positive downstream
d = flow depth measured normal to the invert
A = cross-sectional area
P
w
= wetted perimeter
Q = discharge
In Belanger (1828) Eq. (16) corresponds to Eq. (2.1) above, the equation is now
rewritten in a more conventional form as a differential equation as:
( ) 0 cos sin
3
2
2
=
c
c
+ +
c
c
; ;
u u
A
bV aV
A
P d
gA
Q
w
(2.2)
Belanger used equations (2.1) and (2.2) to estimate the frictional losses using the prony
formula to produce:
( )
g
V
D
f
bV aV
D x
H
H H
2
4
2
2
= + =
c
c
(2.3)
w
H
P
A
D
4
=

Where:
H = total head


D
H
= hydraulic diameter
a and b are constant
Numerous values were proposed for the coefficient of a and b. BELANGER (1828) used a =
4.44499 10
-5
and b =3.093140 10
-4
(in SI units) that were estimated by Johann EYELWEIN
(Chanson 1999, 2004). The values of a and b in Prony formula and Belanger (1828) are with
the same accuracy as reported. The right term in Eq. (2.3) above corresponded to the
traditional expression of the head losses in terms of the Darcy-Weisbach frictional factor f.
Where S
f
is denoted as the friction slope (Sf = -H/x), and S
0
as the bed slope (S
0
= sinu),
continuity equation may be combined with the Belanger's backwater Eq. (2.1) to yield
f
S S
g
V
d
x
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
c
c
0
2
2
cosu
(2.4)
Eq. (2.4) is similar to the modern expressions of backwater equation (Henderson 1966;
Montes 1998; Chanson 2004). Backwater equation is expressed in general form by
Chanson as
f
S S
x
A
A g
Q
x
d
x
d
=
c
c
c
c
c
c
0
3
2
sin cos o
u
u u
(2.5)
(Chanson 1999)
The main differences between Belanger's Eq. (2.4) and Eq. (2.5) above are the Coriolis
coefficient () or kinetic energy correction coefficient and the non constant bed slope
term. Based on the Belanger's developed equation (Chanson 2009) no further assumption
was made and is basically the same to the modern forms of the backwater equation


adopted by today's hydraulic engineers. BELANGER introduced the kinetic energy
correction coefficient t in a later development of the backwater equation. Eq. (2.1) was
tested for a non-prismatic smooth drop inlet. The experimental facility and the comparison
between the experimental observation with Eq. (2.1) are shown in Fig 2-1 and 2.2 in
which the flow resistant was calculated using Prony formula (left hand side of Eq. (2.3),
with equation (2.4) in which the friction slope was calculated in term of the Darcy friction
factor, and with Eq. (2.5). All of this calculation was performed using the step method,
distance calculated from depth (Chanson 2009).
The experimental data are plotted together with the bed elevation Zo and sidewall profile,
and the results show very little differences between data and calculations. But overall they
all correlate well with the computations (Fig 2-2) despite the difficult geometry and the
crude nature of the prony formula. BELANGER (1828) computations give the same
results to modern estimates. But JeanBaptiste BELANGER integrate backwater
calculations manually without the uses of neither computer nor calculator, nor even slide
rule and this explains the common usage of PRONY's simplified formula at the time
(BROWN 2002).
Jean-Baptiste BELANGER selected know water depth to integrate backwater equation
and calculating manually the distance in between. This was done by integrating two water
depth limits BELANGER (1828). The method is known as step method distance
calculated from depth (HENDERSON 1966; CHANSON 2004) today or the direct step
method.
The originality of BELANGER's 1828 work proved the successful development of the
backwater equation for steady one-dimensional gradually-varied flows in an open channel


(Chanson 2009). BELANGER's work was drawn out the fundamental assumption and
worked out an equation of gradually varied in open channel flows, which was derived
from momentum equation that is still in use today, but for the flow resistant model.
Jean-Baptiste BELANGER also introduced further modern concepts:
- The step method
- Distance calculated from depth and the critical flow conditions
Jean-Baptiste BELANGER's technique of numerical integration was ahead of his time, when
there was neither computer nor electronic calculator which makes him investigated further.
(Chanson 2009)

Figure 2-1: The smooth drop inlet experiment photograph Flow from the bottom right
to top left (after Chanson (2009)).



Figure 2-2: Comparison between experimental data and backwater calculations (after
Chanson (2009)).

Figure 2-3: Free-surface measurement (DARCY and BAZIN 1865) (after Chanson
(2009)).



BELANGER investigated further on the two singularities of the water equation. One
matched up with uniform equilibrium flow condition S
0
= S
f
for which the normal depth is
equal to the flow depth achieved the normal depth expression of PRONY (1804):
BELANGER (1828)
u sin
4
) (
2
=
+
H
D
bV aV
(2.6)
The second singularity of the backwater equation corresponded to x/d = 0 which gives:

1
cos
3
2
=
c
c
d
A
A g
Q
u
(2.7)
Eq. (2.7) corresponded to the critical flow condition in a channel of non-prismatic channel
with hydrostatic pressure distribution. In a case of a channel of regular cross-section, i.e. a
prismatic rectangular open channel, Eq. (2.7) gives a typical result: V
2
=g d cos u
(LIGGET 1993; CHANSON 2006).
2.2 Backwater Calculations with Ferut
Ferut (1952) was a first-generation British electronic computer that was installed at the
University of Toronto in 1952 (Campbell 2009). The role of Manchester pioneer, which
carried the computer from Manchester to Canada on its Voyage across the Atlantic in April
1952, cannot be left without a proper prologue, long before the construction of the St
Lawrence Seaway begin in 1954. In the early 1950s, severe planning was underway
concerning St. Lawrence Seaway and Power Project, but before construction can commence,
a lengthy series of backwater calculations was required to predict upriver changes to the water


profile. The calculations were made much complicated by the numerous islands along the
route and 99 specific backwater cases were identified (Gotlieb 1960).
When Ferut was discovered the first real problem was to learn to write programs. Despite four
years spent developing UTEC, almost no one in the Computation Centre (or for that matter,
anywhere in the world) had much experience programming electronic computers. The
computer Centre turned to Christopher Strachey for immediate help. There were several
problems for Strachey in preparing the backwater calculations on Ferut. The problems were:
1. Numerical scale: the Ferut was a fixed-point machine with no hardware facilities for
floating-point arithmetic.

2. The data from the 267 stations along the St. Lawrence River far exceeded the primary
and secondary storage capability of Ferut.
Although it was Strachey's mission to teach the Computation Centre staff how to program, he
received most of the credit for the backwater program and most of Strachey hand written
notes, routines, and plans survived (Strachey 1953). McFarlane verified that the computer
and computer program were producing proper results, most of the character backwater cases
were carried out by hand on a desk-top calculator. The hand and computer results were
compared with favourable results: the water level profile was nearly identical, mostly through
the relevant 29 km section (McFarlane 1960).
The comparison of Strachey and McFarlane's work show that the entire set of backwater
computations would have taken 20 person-years of time, if done manually. However, it took
Ferut just 500 h of machine time, with all the calculations finished in May 1953 (Gotlieb
1960). Construction of the St. Lawrence Seaway and Power Project did not begin until 1954


and by then it was no longer an all-Canadian enterprise. Just as Ferut had been printing the
final backwater results in 1953, the white house publicly announced that it would seek to
convince Congress and the Americans that the Canadians were capable or ready to begin
construction, but all signs north of the border were of a country anxious to begin (Mabee
1961).
President Eisenhower signed the Wiley-Dondero Seaway Act in May 1954, authorizing US
participation in the St. Lawrence Seaway and Power Project, and another four month before
ground was broken in August. When completed in 1959 it was officially opened by Her
Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and President Dwight D Eisenhower (Campbell 2009).

2.3 Backwater Computation for Transcritical River flows

The construction of the St. Lawrence Seaway and Power Project gives an engineer the
solution limit that the upstream backwater computation can be extended to Froude number
exceeding one (Beffa 1996). It was discovered that backwater computation can be applied to
model steady flows in non-uniform channels (Fig. 2.4).The method can also be used to
analyse slightly unsteady flows (e.g. water surface profiles for flood waves or even dam break
waves). For subcritical flows the computation is more simple, whereas it becomes more
complicated for flows which change from one state to another (i.e. transcritical flows). In this
type of flow, the direction of the computation varied from upstream to downstream or vice
versa depending on the Froude number (Molinas and Yang 1985).


Figure 2.4: Definition sketch of non-uniform flow (after Chow (1959))
This practice is well suitable for well-defined hydraulic jumps (e.g. in abrupt changes of bed
slope) but is more complex to deal with if the flow conditions oscillate between subcritical
and supercritical from one cross section to the other. This always happens in steep natural
channels where supercritical flows may occur for short distance and varies between
subcritical and supercritical (Trieste 1992; Wahl 1993). For near critical flow conditions, no
hydraulics jump is formed but standing waves occur with less energy dissipation than in the
formal practice which is well suitable for well defined hydraulics jumps. Analysis of the
discrete equation for steady flow open-channel flows shows that the solution of the upstream
backwater computation can be extended to Froude numbers exceeding one. An iterative
method is proposed that allows for solution of either the momentum equation or the energy up
to a limiting Froude number. The method is especially useful for transcritical flows in natural
rivers where the flow oscillates between subcritical and supercritical, and changing the
direction of calculation would be impracticable.


Adopting a different iteration process, Chawdhary and Samuels (1990) found that the
backwater computation can be applied for transcritical flows without altering the direction of
the calculation (Beffa 1996). The energy and momentum equation shows that the limitation
on Froude number depends on the energy looses and the size of the calculation interval. These
limits are analyzed and a procedure is proposed, for higher Froude numbers, which minimizes
divergence from a solution based on the complete flow equation shows below.
2.3.1 Energy and Momentum Equation
Let's assume hydrostatic pressure distribution, the flow through a cross section may be
characterized either by the total energy head
.
o
+ =
2
2
2gA
Q
H
(2.7)
Where:
Q = discharge;
A = wetted area;
= velocity distribution coefficient;
g = gravitational;
= water surface level above data or by the specific force
+ = y A
gA
Q
M
2
|
(2.8)



Where
= momentum coefficient
y = distance from the water surface to the centroid of the cross section.
The energy equation for steady non-uniform channel flow basically defined equilibrium
between the gradient of the energy head and energy slope S
H
, i.e.
0
2
2
2
= +
|
|
.
|
\
|
+ = +
H H
S
gA
Q
dx
d
S
dx
dH
.
o
(2.9)
Where x = longitudinal dimension of the channel. The energy slope accounts for bed friction
and local energy losses, i.e., S
H
= S
F
+ S
e
. For bed frictional in turbulent flows the quadratic
friction law can be applied
2
|
.
|
\
|
=
K
Q
S
f
(2.10)
With the conveyance factors K as a function of bed roughness and channel geometry. On
using Manning's formula the conveyance factor reads
3 / 2 1
AR n K

= , with Manning's n and the
hydraulic radius R. Eddy losses due to channel expansion and contraction can be related to the
gradient of the velocity head
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
2
2
2gA
Q
dx
d
c S
e e
o
(2.11)
Where c
e is
the empirical energy loss coefficient. For contraction c
e
is set to 0.1 and 0.3 for
expansion (CHOW 1959).


In the case of shocks and for lateral inflows and outflows the momentum equation should be
applied (Henderson 1966). The momentum equation expresses a balance between forces
acting on the flow and, also, account for external force due to channel expansion and
contraction (Cunge et al. (1980)). It can be expressed as:
0
1
2
= + +
|
|
.
|
\
|
f
S
dx
d
A
Q
dx
d
gA
.
|
(2.12)
Combined energy momentum equations can be used for backwater calculations. Using a box
scheme where the variables are located at cross sections on either side of the computation
interval, the discrete form of Eq. (2.9) may be written as
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
| A
+ +
|
|
.
|
\
|
2
2
0
2
2
2
2
2 2
1
K
Q
K
Q x
A
Q
A
Q
g
c
r
o
o
o
o
o
e
E
. . o o
(2.13)
Where the values with subscript o = downstream cross section; the vales without o =
downstream cross section; x = distance between the cross section. The arithmetic mean for
frictional slope is used and r
e
is the residual that is equal to zero for a converged solution. A
discrete form of the momentum equation (2.12) may be written as
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
| A
+ +
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
2
2
0
2 2
2
1
K
Q
K
Q x
A
Q
A
Q
gA
r
o
o
o
o
o
m
E
. . | |
(2.14)
With the mean wetted area ( )( ) A A A
o m
+ = 2 / 1 ; and residual r
m
= 0.



2.3.2 Discrete Solution
The standard backwater analysis for subcritical flow carry on to an upstream direction from a
given water level at a downstream section, equations (2.13) or (2.14) may possibly be applied
to estimate the solution at the next section. Making the water level as the independent
variable, an iteration Newton scheme can be obtained from the local Taylor expansion of the
residual:
( ) ( ) ( ) 0
2
= A + A
c
c
+ = A + . .
.
. . . O
r
r r
(2.15)
yielding:
( )
( ) .
.
.
.
2
A +
c c
= A O
r
r
(2.16)
The initial guess for the water level should be above or equal to the critical water level for the
given discharge for the change in the water level to obtain a new estimate. Assuming that the
variation of the coefficient and are small, the derivative of the energy residual from (2.13)
will be:
( ) x
K
K
Q
w
gA
Q
c
r
e
E
A
c
c
=
c
c
.
o
.
3
2
3
2
1 1 (2.17)
Where . c c = A w = surface width. The first right hand side is equal to the square of the
Froude number ( )
3 2 2
gA w Q F o = ; thus, for critical flow (i.e. F = 1), equation (2.17) reduce
to
x
K
K
Q
c
r
e
E
A
c
c
=
c
c
. .
3
2
(2.18)


Given that the conveyance of a wide section increases with increased water level, the
derivatives of equation (2.18) might remain negative for subcritical flow. This allows the
continuation of the computation until 0 = c c .
E
r , where the maximum value of no solution is
available for the upstream procedure. Using equation (2.17) we obtain the requirement for the
allowable Froude number:
2 / 1
3
3
1
|
|
.
|
\
|
A
c
c
< x
K
w K
gA
c F
e
. o
(2.19)
For a hydraulically wide section (with R h, where h is the mean depth h = A / w) and using
manning's equation (2.19) can be rewritten as:
2
3 / 4
2
5
3 1
1
gn
h
F
c x
e
|
|
.
|
\
|
> A (2.20)
Equation (2.20) is illustrated in Fig 2-5 for a channel contraction (i.e. ) 1 . 0 + =
e
c . Therefore,
for a given depth, there is a particular computation interval, x, above which the iterative
scheme is unconditionally stable due to friction term. After this interval, the upstream method
is applicable only for flows up to a certain Froude number.
Fig 2-6 shows the results for the reduced momentum equation. Compared to the complete
momentum equation, the variations in the depths are diminished for the whole channel.
Clearly, the reduced equation should be used only if the full equation cannot be solved. The
results of the computation are also shown in Table 2-1 for the momentum equation and the
energy equation, together with the bed levels to allow a comparison with other computation
scheme.


Figure 2-5: Calculation intervals above which the scheme is numerically stable as a
function of flow depth and Froude number for a hydraulically wide section (after Beffa
(1996))

Figure 2-6: Calculation flow depths in a Transcritical channel using different flow
equations (after Beffa (1996))



Table 2-1: Computed Flow Depth in a Rectangular Channel Using Momentum Equation
(2.10), Energy Equation (2.11), and Reduced Momentum Equation (2.12) (after Beffa
(1996))



2.4 Conclusion
Jean-Baptiste BELANGER's contributions were remarkable and have influenced other
leading hydraulic engineers including BRESSE (1860), DARCY and BAZIN (1865), BARRE
de SAINT VENANT (1871), and BOUSSINESQ (1877). In the 1820s, Jean-Baptiste
BELANGER (1790-1874) succeeded on the method to calculate gradually-varied open
channel flow properties for steady flow condition. BELANGER success article are in use for
the treatment of the stationary hydraulic jump, at the moment called the Belanger equation.
But at the time of computation, he applied the wrong basic principle at the time. The error
was discovered and corrected ten years later and the correct solution was first published by
BELANGER in 1841 Chanson (2009). The uniqueness of BELANGER's (1828) work paved
way for development of the backwater calculation for steady one-dimensional gradually-
varied flow in an open channel. His technique of numerical integration was ahead of time
schedule, when there was neither computer nor electronic calculator.
In the early 1950s, a lengthy series of backwater calculation was required to predict upriver
changes to the water profile. It was estimated that these calculations would have taken 20
person-years to complete by using BELANGER (1828) work, but in 1952 and 1953 Ontario
Hydro was able to make use of the first modern electronic computer in Canada- the Ferut at
the University of Toronto to complete the work in about eight months. These were the first
major calculations carried out on any electronic computer in Canada, and helped prove that an
all Canadian navigation route was possible. Despite the significance of the computer's
assistant, Ferut's role was not widely revealed until 1960, when a short series of semi-
celebratory articles appeared in the Engineering Journal explained how the backwater results
had been derived (Gotlieb 1960; McFarlane 1960).


Overall, this chapter reviews the conceptual/theoretical dimension and the methodological
concept of the literature review on backwater calculations and discovers research questions or
hypotheses that are worth researching in later chapters.



CHAPTER THREE

3.1 Methods of Computation
The computation of gradually-varied flow profiles involves the solution of the dynamic
equation of gradually varied flow. The main objective of the computation is to determine the
shape of the flow profile.
This chapter would describe two well established computations (direct step method and ISIS
modelling) adopted for this thesis.
3.2 Choosing a Method
The choice of an appropriate method for computing water profiles for data and numerical
modelling was based on these characteristics:
- The channel reach
- The type of flow hydrograph and the thesis objective
However, quantitative information on the variation of the flow depth and flow velocity along
a channel is required in many engineering applications (Less Hamill 1995). Estimation of the
extent of inundation in such a case is possible only by performing computations to determine
the flow depths. Thus quantitative knowledge of flow depths and velocities is essential when
conducting backwater calculations. These computations, generally known as gradually varied
flow computations determine the water-surface elevations along the channel length for
specified:
- Discharge
- Flow depth at any one location


- The manning roughness coefficient
- Longitudinal profile of the channel and Channel cross-sectional parameters
Generally, all the numerical procedures mentioned earlier are based on the numerical solution
of the non-linear first-order ordinary differential equation for GVF and the direct application
of the algebraic energy equation, using certain approximation. These methods for gradually
varied flow computation are presented in the following section.
3.3 Direct Step Method

Since prismatic channel is the only channel that will be discussed for this thesis, the direct
step method is a simple step applicable to it. In general, direct step method is characterized by
dividing the channel into short reaches and carrying the computation step by step from one
end of the reach to the other and computing the profile upstream (Chow 1959).
Calculating the coordinates of the water surface profile using this method is an iterative
process achieved by choosing a range of flow depths, established at the downstream end of
the channel, and proceeding incrementally up to the point of interest or to the point of normal
flow depth. This is best accomplished by the use of spread sheet table (see chapter 4).
To illustrate analysis of a single reach, consider the following diagram below



Figure 3-1: Channel reach for the derivation of step methods

Equating the total head at the two end sections 1 and 2, the following may be written:
x S
g
V
y
g
V
y x S
f
A + + = + + A
2 2
2
2
2 2
2
1
1 1 0
o o
(3.1)
Where,
x = distance between cross sections (m)
y
1
, y
2
= depth of flow (m) at cross sections 1 and 2
V
1
, V
2
= velocity (m/s) at cross sections 1 and 2

1
,
2
= energy coefficient at cross sections 1 and 2
S
o
= bottom slope
1 2


S
f
= friction slope = (n
2
V
2
)/ (2.22R
1.33
)
g = acceleration due to gravity, (9.81 m/sec
2
)
If the specific energy E at any cross section is defined as:
g
V
y E
2
2
o + =
(3.2)
Assuming =
1
=
2
where is the energy coefficient that correlates with the non-uniform
distribution of velocity over the channel cross section. Combining and rearranging Equations
3.1 and 3.2 to solve for x:

f f
S S
E
S S
E E
x
A
=
= A
0 0
1 2
(3.3)

The average value of S
f
is denoted by
f
S . When the manning formula is used, the friction
slope is expressed by:

3 / 4
2 2
22 . 2 R
V n
S
f
=
(3.4)
From the above equations, the Manning roughness coefficient "n" can be related to the Darcy
and Chezy coefficient by:

6
1
2
1
093 . 0 R f n = (3.5)
The roughness coefficient used for computation in this thesis can be found in Appendix A1.


From Fig. 3-1 above, the channel slope, Manning's "n" and energy coefficient , together with
water surface elevation y
2,
the value of x were calculated for arbitrarily chosen values of y
1
.
The coordinate defining the water surface profile was obtained from the cumulative sum of
x and corresponding values of y. The normal flow depth, y
n
was initially calculated from
Manning's Equation to establish the upper limit of the backwater effect and then the critical
flow depth calculated to determine the flow profile type (Chow 1959).
The direct step method adopted for this thesis is based on Eq. (3.3), which was used to
analyse the water profile in three different channels as shown in the examples below.
In order to prove the visibilities of the backwater calculations in open channels by the
theoretical formula above, three different channel models will be analysed based on the direct
step method.



3.4 Computation of Backwater Profile by the Direct Step Method
3.4.1 Rectangular Channel
MODEL 1

Figure 3-2: Upstream cross section for the rectangular channel

A proposed rectangular cross section channel above (Fig 4.1) where b = 6 m, S
o
= 0.100, and
n = 0.0117 carrying a discharge of 4.48 m
3
/s to compute the backwater profile created by a
dam which backs up the water to a depth of 7 m immediately behind the dam.
As mentioned earlier the normal flow depth, y
n
will first be calculated from manning's Eq
(1.4) above to establish the upper limit of the backwater effect.
Following the solution in Appendix B1, the critical depth and normal depths were found to be
y
c
= 0.38 m and y
n
= 0.12 m, respectively. The computation of water surface profile by means
of Eq. (3.3) is given in Table 1 for various values of y varying from 7 m.
The computed profile is plotted as shown in Fig. 4-1 (see chapter four)
7m
2m
2m
Datum 2m
Water Surface
6m


3.4.2 Trapezoidal Channel
MODEL 2

1
2
1
2
6m
Datum 2.5m
3m
Water Surface
Y
Figure 3-1: Upstream cross section for the trapezoidal channel
A trapezoidal channel in Fig 3-3 where b = 6 m, z = 2 m, S
o
= 0.0016, and n = 0.025 carrying
a discharge of 11.6 m
3
/s. Table 2 shows the computation of backwater profile created by a
dam which backs up the water depth of 4 m immediately behind the dam. The upstream end
of the profile assumed at a depth equal to 1% greater than the normal depth.
Following the same procedure adopted for the rectangular channel, the critical depth and
normal depths were found to be y
c
= 0.317 m and y
n
= 0.90 m respectively in Appendix B2.
Since y
n
is greater than y
c
, let the flow start form a depth greater than y
n
(Table 4) and the
computed profile is plotted as shown in Fig. 4-3.


3.4.3 Circular Channel
MODEL 3

For the circular channel the following data were assumed for water surface computation:
Discharge Q = 1 m/s
3
Width B = 6 m
Manning's n = 0.015
Bottom Slope S
0
= 0.0016
Diameter = 5.5 m
The table in Appendix B3 for geometric elements for a circular section was used to determine
the critical and normal depths which was found to be y
c
= 0.33m and y
n
= 0.16m respectively.
With the data given above, the direct step computations are carried out as shown in Table 5
and computed profile is plotted as shown in Fig 4-5.


3.5 Data's Analysis Computation Procedures

The values in each column of Tables 1 and 4 are explained as follows:
Column 1 (channel bottom):- a trial value is first entered in this column; this will be verified
or rejected on the basic of the computation made in the remaining columns of the table. And
the next steps are imitative by adding the previous assumed value to product of bottom slope
and x in col. 16.
Column 2 (water - surface elevation):- For the first step the elevation must be given or
assumed. Since the first channel bottom elevation assumed is 293 m and the height of the
water 7 m, the first entry is 300 m (Table 1). When the trial value in the second step has been
verified, it becomes the basic for the verification of the trial value in the next step and so on.
Column 3 (depth of flow in m):- arbitrarily assigned values ranging from 7 to 0.116 m (Table
1).
Column 4 (water area in m
2
):- corresponding to the depth, y, in column 3).
Column 5 (wetted perimeter in m):- calculated based on the formula given for various
geometric elements of channel sections in the appendix.
Column 6 (mean velocity (m/s)):- obtained by dividing 4.48 m/s
3
by the water area in column
2 of Table 1.
Column 7(Froude number):-"F" =
2 / 1
) /(gy V
.

Column 10:- (hydraulic radius in m) corresponds to y in column 3 (Area/ Wetted perimeter).
Column 11:- (velocity head in m)
Column 12 (frictional slope):- computed by Eq. (3.4) with n = 0.017 and V as given in
column 6 and R
3/4
in column 10.
Column13:- difference between the bottom slope 0.017 and frictional slope.


Column 14:- average of the difference between the bottom slope and frictional slope just
computed in column 11 and that of the previous step.
Column 15:- length of the reach in m between the consecutive steps, computed by Eq. (3.3).
Column 16:- this is equal to the cumulative sum of the value in col. 15 computed for previous
steps
Column 17:- elevation of the total head in m, this is computed by adding the calculated
bottom elevation in col. 1 to normal flow depth y
n
calculated and that of previous steps, which
is found in column 17.
The above procedures were applied to both rectangular and trapezoidal channel. For circular
channel, different procedure is introduced because of the shape of the channel. The
computation is arranged in a form similar to that used for the rectangular channel, but the Eq.
(3.6) is used to determine angles for different reach in circular channel.
|
|
.
|
\
|
=

a
D
y 2
1 cos 2
1
u
(3-6)
Where:
u = Angle in radians
D
a
= Diameter in m
y = Water depth in m
For the entire table prepared, the assumed depth is considered correct when the resulting
value of x entered in column 17 agrees with the length of the reach in column 2 (as shown in
Tables 1 and 4). It should be noted that the depth of flow computed in this thesis has been
carried to more decimal places than would be necessary for practical purposes.


3.6 Building the Model in ISIS

An ISIS model constructed for this thesis used a number of different hydraulic units, which
can be assumed as a building block that is connected together in Fig. 3-4. The ISIS has the
following types of unit as a minimum:
- Upstream boundary: to represent the flow entering the model
- Downstream boundary: to represent the downstream water level
- River section: to represent the river channel
Each unit mentioned above contains model data appropriate to the unit type, e.g. a River
Section unit contains cross-section geometry and roughness data for the river, these also
contain one or more node labels in other to be able indentify the unit and to be able to define
the connectivity with other units in the model.
The following description explains brief ways of building a model representing a single
rectangular channel in Fig. 3-2.
The single channels modelled for the rectangular channel contained: upstream boundary
condition, downstream boundary condition and 30 sections to represent a channel as shown in
Appendix C1. Fig. (3.4) shows a very simple channel with eight cross sections by which the
rectangular model was developed and other channels modelling were based upon.



Figure 3-4: A schematic representation of a single channel with eight sections and two
boundary conditions (after Batica (2009), Fu (2009))

QTBDY is shorthand for the discharge (Q) Time series boundary condition (for the upstream
inflow to the channel). HTBDY represents the water level time series boundary condition for
the downstream end of the channel.
In order to build a rectangular channel in Fig. 3-2, these steps were followed:
1. Start a new (blank) model in ISIS (> File > New)
2. Insert a Flow-Time Boundary (QTBDY) unit to represent an upstream boundary by
either click on the Flow-Time Boundary picture button or select > Edit > Insert >
Boundaries > Hydrographs > Flow/Time from the main menu. And label it in upper
case as SECT 1, click 'OK' and save the file with a proper name.
3. Specify the data for the boundary condition by double clicking the newly inserted unit
to display the data entry screen for the boundary. Insert 4.48 m
3
/s for both the peak
flow and base flow and time peak is 12 hours into the Flow-Time table. Remember to
make sure that the unit of the time is hours (by defaults it is "seconds").
QTBDY
HTBDY


Figure 3-5: Simple schematic diagram of a Flow-Time data entry form (after Batica
(2009), Fu (2009))
4. Insert a river section unit by clicking on the river section picture button or select >
Edit > Insert > Channels > River > River Section from the main menu. When the
Node label editor dialog appears, enter the label with the same label as SECT 1 and
click OK.

Figure 3-6: Connecting a river unit to a QTBDY unit entry form (after Batica (2009), Fu
(2009))
5. To connect the SECT 1 labels together click 'Yes'. The river section unit is located
immediately downstream of the Flow-Time Boundary (hence the node labels of these
units are the same.).


6. To enter the cross section data. Double click on the newly inserted units to display the
data entry screen for the river section. Enter the cross section data into the table,
leaving the rest of the parameters in the table at their default values. The cross section
data's entered for the rectangular channel are giving in Appendix C1

Note: The cross-section geometry has to be translated to the format recognisable by
ISIS. As shown in Fig. 3-12

Figure 3-7: Schematic specification of cross section data form (after Batica (2009), Fu
(2009))
7. To specify the distance between the cross-sections. Enter 6 meters for the 'distance to
next section' field.
8. Specify the cross-section data for all the cross-sections. The same procedures were
repeated 30 times to insert 30 river sections, (SECT 1 to SECT 30). The last section
have a 'distance to next section = 0', this is used by ISIS to recognise it as the last
section of a channel reach.
9. Specify the information for the downstream boundary condition. For the last channel
section a HTBDY boundary condition unit is inserted in a similar manner as the first


QTBDY boundary condition unit ( by clicking the picture icon , and prescribing the
time series data in the table, for example a constant water level of 2 meters was
inserted).
10. To visualise the channel that we have just build. This is done by clicking on the
visualiser picture icon or select > Tool > Visualiser from the main menu.

Figure 3-8: The Stage-Time data entry form for the downstream boundary condition
(after Batica (2009), Fu (2009)).
11. Click the 'Flow simulation' icon or select > Run > flow simulation. A flow
simulation run form interface will appear.



Figure 3-9: Run form interface (after Batica (2009), Fu (2009)).
In this report we will only deal with the 'Time' tab which has a button names 'run' on the
bottom left side. There are five simulation types displaying on the 'Time' tab. The 'Steady
(Direct)' and the 'Unsteady (Fixed Timestep)' options are used for this report.
12. Running a steady simulation. Select 'Steady (Direct)' simulation type and click on
'Run' button.

Figure 3-10: Notification of the successful completion of a simulation (after Batica
(2009), Fu (2009)).



13. Running and unsteady simulation. Select 'Unsteady (Fixed Timestep)' simulation type.
Enter the 'start time' and 'finish time'. The time spans for simulation are within the
range of the shortest time span of the boundary conditions which are defined in the
model set-up step. Also, the time step and save interval were defined.
14. Click on the 'Run' button after prescribing the parameters for the unsteady simulation.

Figure 3-11: The progress of the unsteady simulation in ISIS (after Batica (2009), Fu
(2009)).
15. After finishing the unsteady simulation, the summary outputs can be viewed in the
form of plain text as shown in Appendix C4, C5 and C6.



3.7 Translate the descriptive cross section geometry to ISIS format

Figure 3-12: Simple schematic for conversion of cross-section geometry to ISIS format
(after Batica (2009), Fu (2009)).
River section geometry is specified by pairs of X and a Y value, where X is the distance
across the cross-section and Y is the bed elevation.


3.8 Backwater Profile Outputs by the ISIS Method

For the results comparison, 'three channels' (rectangular, trapezoidal and circular) that were
analysed by direct step method earlier were also modelled with ISIS software packages for
river modelling. Some of the outputs for computed cross-sections are given below:
3.8.1 Rectangular Channel

Figure 3-13: The Cross-Section Data for Section 30

3.8.2 Trapezoidal Channel




3.8.3 Circular Channel



CHAPTER FOUR
Results and Discussion
4.1 Analysis of Results for Direct Step Method and ISIS Method

Tables 1, 4 and 5 below represent the computation of the flow profile by the direct step
method for three different model channels. In order to establish the upper limit of the
backwater effect, the normal flow depth, y
n
, was first calculated from manning's equation as
mentioned previously (Appendix B1 B3). In Table 1 below, the depth of flow (D) is
assumed and entered in col. 3 at each step. The assumed depth is considered correct when the
resulting values of normal depth line elevation (NDL) entered in column 17 agrees with the
water surface depth in column 2. These values are correct water-surface elevation because of
their agreement.
To check the comparison of two different numerical methods adopted for our calculations.
The computed water surface profile is plotted for the three channels as shown in Fig (4.1),
(4.3) and (4.5) by using Table 1, 4 and 5. Also, ISIS model was also used to analyse the same
geometrical channel based on the same data's for all the channels. The direct step method
computed flow profile Fig (4.1) and (4.3) is practically identical with that obtained by ISIS
method in Fig (4.2) and (4.4) respectively. This comparison highlighted the similarity in
performance of the two methods for the analysis.
For simplicity, the prismatic channel is considered for this thesis, and Eq. (4.1) below with
reference to the derivation of the gradually-varied flow equation in Chow textbook is used for
the discussion.


( )
( )
2
2
0
/ 1
/ 1
Z Z
K K
S
x
y
c
n
=
c
c
(4.1)
The values of K and Z in this equation are assumed to be increase or decrease with the depth
y. This is true for all open- channel sections (Chow 1959). For a backwater curve x y c c / is
positive; thus, Eq. (4-1) gives two possible cases:
1. ( ) 0 / 1
2
> K K
n
and ( ) 0 / 1
2
> Z Z
c

2. ( ) 0 / 1
2
< K K
n
and ( ) 0 / 1
2
< Z Z
c

Since the values of K and Z increase or decrease continuously with the depth y, the first case
indicates y > y
n
and y > y
c
.
From Table 2 below, y = 7 m, y
c
= 0.38 m and y
n
= 0.12 m (Rectangular channel). Case 1
proves the flow profile of the three channels. The first case indicates y > yn and y > yc. As y
> yn, the flow type for both rectangular and trapezoidal channel are subcritical.
Fig. (4-1), Fig. (4-3) and (4-5) correlated well with ISIS profile computed in Fig (4-2), (4-4)
and (4-6) respectively.


Table 1: Computation of Flow Profile by the Direct Step Method for a Rectangular Channel

Col. 1 Col. 2 Col. 3 Col.4 Col.5 Col.6 Col.7 Col.8 Col.9 Col.10 Col.11 Col.12 Col.13 Col.14 Col.15 Col.16 Col.17
CHANNEL BOTTOM WATER SURFACE D (m)
A(m
2
)
W(m) V (m/s) F
(1 -F
2
)
(1 -F
2
)
AVG
R (m)
V
2
/2g
S
F
(S
O
- S
F
) (S
O
- S
F
)
(AVG)
X(m) E(X) (m)
NDL ELEVATION
293 300.000 7.000 42.000 20.00 0.107 0.013 1.000 0 2.100 0.001 0.000001 0.1000 0.0000 0 0 293.116
293.00 299.500 6.500 39.000 19.00 0.115 0.014 1.000 1.000 2.053 0.001 0.000001 0.1000 0.1000 2.000 2.000 293.116
293.20 299.200 6.000 36.000 18.00 0.124 0.016 1.000 1.000 2.000 0.001 0.000002 0.1000 0.1000 2.000 3.999 293.316
293.40 298.900 5.500 33.000 17.00 0.136 0.018 1.000 1.000 1.941 0.001 0.000002 0.1000 0.1000 1.999 5.999 293.516
293.60 298.600 5.000 30.000 16.00 0.149 0.021 1.000 1.000 1.875 0.001 0.000003 0.1000 0.1000 1.999 7.998 293.716
293.80 298.300 4.500 27.000 15.00 0.166 0.025 0.999 0.999 1.800 0.001 0.000004 0.1000 0.1000 1.999 9.997 293.916
294.00 298.000 4.000 24.000 14.00 0.187 0.030 0.999 0.999 1.714 0.002 0.000005 0.1000 0.1000 1.999 11.995 294.116
294.20 297.700 3.500 21.000 13.00 0.213 0.036 0.999 0.999 1.615 0.002 0.000007 0.1000 0.1000 1.998 13.993 294.316
294.40 297.399 3.000 18.000 12.00 0.249 0.046 0.998 0.998 1.500 0.003 0.000010 0.1000 0.1000 1.997 15.990 294.515
294.60 297.399 2.800 16.800 11.60 0.267 0.051 0.997 0.998 1.448 0.004 0.000013 0.1000 0.1000 1.996 17.986 294.715
294.80 297.399 2.600 15.600 11.20 0.287 0.057 0.997 0.997 1.393 0.004 0.000015 0.1000 0.1000 1.994 19.980 294.915
295.00 297.398 2.400 14.400 10.80 0.311 0.064 0.996 0.996 1.333 0.005 0.000019 0.1000 0.1000 1.993 21.973 295.114
295.20 297.397 2.200 13.200 10.40 0.339 0.073 0.995 0.995 1.269 0.006 0.000024 0.1000 0.1000 1.991 23.964 295.313
295.40 297.396 2.000 12.000 10.00 0.373 0.084 0.993 0.994 1.200 0.007 0.000032 0.1000 0.1000 1.988 25.952 295.512
295.60 297.395 1.800 10.800 9.60 0.415 0.099 0.990 0.992 1.125 0.009 0.000043 0.1000 0.1000 1.984 27.936 295.711
295.79 297.394 1.600 9.600 9.20 0.467 0.118 0.986 0.988 1.043 0.011 0.000059 0.0999 0.0999 1.977 29.913 295.910
295.99 297.391 1.400 8.400 8.80 0.533 0.144 0.979 0.983 0.955 0.014 0.000087 0.0999 0.0999 1.967 31.880 296.107
296.19 297.388 1.200 7.200 8.40 0.622 0.181 0.967 0.973 0.857 0.020 0.000137 0.0999 0.0999 1.949 33.829 296.304
296.38 297.383 1.000 6.000 8.00 0.747 0.238 0.943 0.955 0.750 0.028 0.000236 0.0998 0.0998 1.914 35.743 296.499
296.57 297.374 0.800 4.800 7.60 0.933 0.333 0.889 0.916 0.632 0.044 0.000465 0.0995 0.0996 1.839 37.581 296.690
296.76 297.358 0.600 3.600 7.20 1.244 0.513 0.737 0.813 0.500 0.079 0.001128 0.0989 0.0992 1.639 39.220 296.874
296.92 297.322 0.400 2.400 6.80 1.867 0.942 0.112 0.424 0.353 0.178 0.004037 0.0960 0.0974 0.871 40.092 297.038
297.01 297.125 0.116 0.696 6.23 6.437 6.034 -35.409 -17.649 0.112 2.112 0.222635 -0.1226 -0.0133 264.674 304.766 297.125


288.000
290.000
292.000
294.000
296.000
298.000
300.000
302.000
0 2.000 3.999 5.999 7.998 9.997 11.995 13.993 15.990 17.986 19.980 21.973 23.964 25.952 27.936 29.913
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N

(
m
)
DISTANCE UPSTREAM (m)
WATER SURFACE PROFILE
NDL WATER SURFACE CHANNEL BOTTOM

Figure 4-1: An S2 Flow Profile Computed by the Direct Step Method for Rectangular Channel


Figure 4-2: Elevation vs. Nodal Label Output by the ISIS Method for Rectangular Channel A



Table 2: Critical Depth and Normal Depth Computation by Direct Step Method

For rectangular channel, as y > y
c
> y
n
, the subcritical flow must occur in a steep channel.
While, trapezoidal channel with y > y
n
> y
c
, the subcritical flow must occur in a mild channel.
The corresponding flow for circular channel is supercritical and it occur in a steep channel as
y
c
> y
n
> y. Table 2 results proves the flow profile computed by ISIS program for all the three
channels (rectangular, trapezoidal and circular) by correlating the profiles type computed by
direct step method.
As shows in Fig (4.1) and (4.2) for rectangular channel, the control section is at the upstream;
water will enter the channel at the critical depth and thereafter flow at a depth less than y
c
but
greater than y
n
, since y
c
> y
n.
The flow profile is of the S2 (Appendix A2)
The ISIS flow profile Fig. (4.4) shows that flow starts with a depth greater than y
n
, the flow
profile is of the M1 which is similar to the direct step method computation for trapezoidal
channel. It should be noted that, when the depth approaches the normal depth, the increment
Channel Type Starting
depth (y)
(m)
Normal
depth
(y
n
)
(m)
Critical
depth (y
c
)

(m)
Flow Type Profiles
Type
Rectangular 7 0.12 0.38 y
>
y
n

Subcritical
flow
Steep
Trapezoidal 4 0.82 0.32 y
>
y
n
Subcritical
flow
Mild
Circular 0.10 0.16 0.33 y
<
y
n
Supercritical
flow
Steep


area varies so greatly with the changes in y value that it becomes difficult for the fact that y
n
is
greater than y
c
.
Figs (4.1) (4.6) show the maximum water levels in each of the channels for both the direct
step and ISIS method. The three channels clearly show the extent of the accuracy of both
methods adopted. It is only comparison between Fig (4.3) and (4.4) that any different between
the two methods can possibly be seen, but this different is only slightly, which might due to
some little errors in channel modelling or method used.
Table 3: Result Values for Froude Number and Velocity for Both Direct Step and ISIS
Method
RECTANGULAR
CHANNEL
FROUDE
NUMBER
VELOCITY (m/s)
Direct Step Method 0.94 1.87
ISIS Method 0.91 1.83

TRAPEZOIDAL
CHANNEL
FROUDE
NUMBER
VELOCITY (m/s)

CIRCULAR
CHANNEL
FROUDE
NUMBER
VELOCITY (m/s)

Table 3 shows the similarities between the Froude number and velocity computed for both the
direct step method and ISIS method. These values also prove the validity of both methods as
the differences is just 2%, which is insignificant. Also, the rate at which the Froude number
varies with velocity for the direct step method (Table 1, 3 and 5) is equivalent to ISIS method
(Appendix C1, C5 and C8).



Table 4: Computation of Flow Profile by the Direct Step Method for a Trapezoidal Channel
Col. 1 Col. 2 Col. 3 Col.4 Col.5 Col.6 Col.7 Col.8 Col.9 Col.10 Col.11 Col.12 Col.13 Col.14 Col.15 Col.16 Col.17
CHANNEL BOTTOM WATER SURFACE y(m)
A(m
2
)
W(m) V (m/s) F
(1 -F
2
)
(1 -F
2
)
AVG
R (m)
V
2
/2g
S
F
(S
O
- S
F
) (S
O
- S
F
)
(AVG)
x (m) Ex (m)
NDL
266.00 270.00 4.00 56.00 23.89 0.207 0.033 0.999 0 2.34 0.0002 0.000004 0.00160 0 0.0 0 266.82
266.00 269.75 3.75 50.63 22.77 0.229 0.038 0.999 0.999 2.22 0.0003 0.000005 0.00159 0.001596 156.5 156.5 266.82
266.25 269.75 3.50 45.50 21.65 0.255 0.044 0.998 0.998 2.10 0.0003 0.000007 0.00159 0.001594 156.6 313.1 267.07
266.50 269.75 3.25 40.63 20.53 0.286 0.051 0.997 0.998 1.98 0.0004 0.000009 0.00159 0.001592 156.7 469.8 267.32
266.75 269.75 3.00 36.00 19.42 0.322 0.059 0.996 0.997 1.85 0.0005 0.000013 0.00159 0.001589 156.9 626.6 267.57
267.00 269.75 2.75 31.63 18.30 0.367 0.071 0.995 0.996 1.73 0.0007 0.000018 0.00158 0.001584 157.1 783.7 267.82
267.25 269.75 2.50 27.50 17.18 0.422 0.085 0.993 0.994 1.60 0.0009 0.000027 0.00157 0.001577 157.5 941.2 268.07
267.51 269.76 2.25 23.63 16.06 0.491 0.105 0.989 0.991 1.47 0.0012 0.000041 0.00156 0.001566 158.2 1099.4 268.33
267.76 269.76 2.00 20.00 14.94 0.580 0.131 0.983 0.986 1.34 0.0017 0.000064 0.00154 0.001548 159.3 1258.7 268.58
268.01 269.76 1.75 16.63 13.83 0.698 0.168 0.972 0.977 1.20 0.0025 0.000107 0.00149 0.001514 161.3 1420.0 268.83
268.27 269.77 1.50 13.50 12.71 0.859 0.224 0.950 0.961 1.06 0.0038 0.000192 0.00141 0.001451 165.6 1585.6 269.09
268.54 269.79 1.25 10.63 11.59 1.092 0.312 0.903 0.926 0.92 0.0061 0.000377 0.00122 0.001316 176.0 1761.6 269.36
268.82 269.82 1.00 8.00 10.47 1.450 0.463 0.786 0.844 0.76 0.0107 0.000848 0.00075 0.000988 213.7 1975.3 269.64
269.16 269.98 0.82 6.26 9.67 1.852 0.653 0.574 0.680 0.65 0.0175 0.001721 -0.00012 0.000316 538.4 2513.7 269.98



264.00
265.00
266.00
267.00
268.00
269.00
270.00
271.00
156.5 313.1 469.8 626.6 783.7 941.2 1099.4 1258.7 1420.0 1585.6 1761.6 1975.3 2513.7
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N

(
m
)
DISTANCE UPSTREAM (m)
WATER SURFACE PROFILE
NDL WATER SURFACE CHANNEL BOTTOM

Figure 4-3: An M1 Flow Profile Computed by the Direct Step Method for Trapezoidal Channel


Figure 4-4: Elevation vs. Nodal Label Output by the ISIS Method for Trapezoidal Channel


Note: The vales taken for the results analysis in Table 3 above were taken from computed of
flow table for direct step methods for the three channels and output results from ISIS method,
highlighted in red (Appendix C).
The similarities of water surface profiles produced by both methods are explained better by
ISIS results output. The unsteady graphical interface (Appendix C3, C6 and C9) proves the
accuracy of all the assumed vales used for our geometrical modelling for both methods.
Moreover, the unsteady interface graphs show the stability of our models. Because, the values
of model conveyance and iterations are between tolerant boundaries and also both discharge
hydrographs have the same shape. Also the maximum inflow is equal to the maximum
outflow except for the trapezoidal channel which is beyond the scope of this thesis.



Table 5: Computation of Flow Profile by the Direct Step Method for a Circular Channel

u (Radian)
y (m) (1-2y/D
a
) cos
-1
(1-2y/D
a
) 2cos
-1
(1-2y/D
a
)
A (m
2
)
W(m) V (m/s) F
(1 -F
2
)
(1 -F
2
)
AVG
R (m)
V
2
/2g
S
F
S
O
- S
F
(S
O
- S
F
)
(AVG)
x (m) Ex (m)
z (m) y + z (m) y
n
+ z (m) y
c
+ z (m)
0.20 0.93 0.38 0.767 0.277 2.111 3.615 2.581 -5.661 0 0.131 0.6661 0.0000882 0.00151 0.00000 0.0 0.00 0.0000 0.20 0.17 0.33
0.45 0.84 0.58 1.160 0.920 3.191 1.086 0.517 0.733 -2.464 0.288 0.0602 0.0000228 0.00158 0.00154 -398.9 -398.89 0.6382 1.09 0.80 0.97
0.70 0.75 0.73 1.459 1.760 4.013 0.568 0.217 0.953 0.843 0.439 0.0165 0.0000109 0.00159 0.00158 133.1 -265.80 0.4253 1.13 0.59 0.76
0.95 0.65 0.86 1.714 2.740 4.715 0.365 0.120 0.986 0.969 0.581 0.0068 0.0000065 0.00159 0.00159 152.3 -113.51 0.1816 1.13 0.35 0.51
1.20 0.56 0.97 1.944 3.830 5.346 0.261 0.076 0.994 0.990 0.716 0.0035 0.0000044 0.00160 0.00159 155.2 41.70 -0.0667 1.13 0.10 0.26
1.45 0.47 1.08 2.157 5.005 5.931 0.200 0.053 0.997 0.996 0.844 0.0020 0.0000032 0.00160 0.00160 156.0 197.65 -0.3162 1.13 -0.15 0.01
1.70 0.38 1.18 2.358 6.248 6.485 0.160 0.039 0.998 0.998 0.963 0.0013 0.0000025 0.00160 0.00160 156.2 353.84 -0.5661 1.13 -0.40 -0.24
1.95 0.29 1.28 2.551 7.542 7.016 0.133 0.030 0.999 0.999 1.075 0.0009 0.0000020 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 510.11 -0.8162 1.13 -0.65 -0.49
2.20 0.20 1.37 2.739 8.874 7.532 0.113 0.024 0.999 0.999 1.178 0.0006 0.0000016 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 666.42 -1.0663 1.13 -0.90 -0.74
2.45 0.11 1.46 2.923 10.232 8.038 0.098 0.020 1.000 1.000 1.273 0.0005 0.0000013 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 822.74 -1.3164 1.13 -1.15 -0.99
2.70 0.02 1.55 3.105 11.604 8.539 0.086 0.017 1.000 1.000 1.359 0.0004 0.0000011 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 979.05 -1.5665 1.13 -1.40 -1.24
2.95 -0.07 1.64 3.287 12.978 9.040 0.077 0.014 1.000 1.000 1.436 0.0003 0.0000010 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 1135.37 -1.8166 1.13 -1.65 -1.49
3.20 -0.16 1.74 3.470 14.343 9.543 0.070 0.012 1.000 1.000 1.503 0.0002 0.0000008 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 1291.68 -2.0667 1.13 -1.90 -1.74
3.45 -0.25 1.83 3.656 15.687 10.055 0.064 0.011 1.000 1.000 1.560 0.0002 0.0000007 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 1447.99 -2.3168 1.13 -2.15 -1.99
3.70 -0.35 1.92 3.847 16.998 10.579 0.059 0.010 1.000 1.000 1.607 0.0002 0.0000007 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 1604.29 -2.5669 1.13 -2.40 -2.24
3.95 -0.44 2.02 4.045 18.263 11.123 0.055 0.009 1.000 1.000 1.642 0.0002 0.0000006 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 1760.59 -2.8169 1.13 -2.65 -2.49
4.20 -0.53 2.13 4.252 19.467 11.694 0.051 0.008 1.000 1.000 1.665 0.0001 0.0000005 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 1916.88 -3.0670 1.13 -2.90 -2.74
4.45 -0.62 2.24 4.474 20.594 12.305 0.049 0.007 1.000 1.000 1.674 0.0001 0.0000005 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 2073.17 -3.3171 1.13 -3.15 -2.99
4.70 -0.71 2.36 4.718 21.621 12.975 0.046 0.007 1.000 1.000 1.666 0.0001 0.0000004 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 2229.46 -3.5671 1.13 -3.40 -3.24
4.95 -0.80 2.50 4.996 22.522 13.740 0.044 0.006 1.000 1.000 1.639 0.0001 0.0000004 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 2385.74 -3.8172 1.13 -3.65 -3.49
5.20 -0.89 2.67 5.340 23.253 14.686 0.043 0.006 1.000 1.000 1.583 0.0001 0.0000003 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 2542.02 -4.0672 1.13 -3.90 -3.74
5.45 -0.98 2.95 5.901 23.723 16.228 0.042 0.006 1.000 1.000 1.462 0.0001 0.0000003 0.00160 0.00160 156.3 2698.29 -4.3173 1.13 -4.15 -3.99


0.0000
1.0000
2.0000
3.0000
4.0000
5.0000
6.0000
7.0000
y
,

z

(
m
)
x (m)
Water Profile
Channel Bottom Water Surface NDL CDL

Figure 4-5: An S2 Flow Profile Computed by the Direct Step Method for Circular Channel



Figure 4-6: Elevation vs. Nodal Label Computed by the ISIS Method for Circular Channel


CHAPTER FIVE
Conclusions and Recommendations

An approach for backwater calculations by the two different methods is presented in this
section. The work provides a comparison between direct step method and hydraulic modelling
using ISIS program. As inputs, the approach requires a completed ISIS model simulation and
complete computation of direct step method. The discussion in this chapter includes
conclusions of methods, recommendations and suggestions for additional research.

5.1 Conclusions

The results show that the direct step method and ISIS perform well in modelling backwater
profile. Both methods correctly produced similar water surface profiles, as all the flow
profiles are similar.
The observed increase in maximum outflow for trapezoidal channel in Appendix C8 was
examined. However, no ready explanation could be found and further work was beyond the
scope of this study.
For all the analyses carried out, ISIS required fewer amendments to ensure channels stability.
In particular the changes made in direct step method to accommodate the required flow for
specific depth assumed required some iteration of parameter values. In contrast to ISIS, which
also has similar functionality, did not require many changes.
Both methods used the same method of iterative process for their computation, archived by
choosing a range of flow depths, beginning at the downstream end, and proceeding
incrementally up to the point of interest.



Running the unsteady (Fixed Timestep) simulation gives better and accurate water profiles
which is similar to water profiles produced with direct step method. The basic assumptions
below prove the results output for both direct step method and ISIS method:

- Flow characteristics do not change with time
- The velocity distribution in the channel section is varies.
- Channel bottom slope is small. This implies that the depth of flow measured
vertically is same as depth of flow measured perpendicular to channel bottom.
- Channel is prismatic.
Despite the fact that both direct step method results and ISIS software outputs computed for
the backwater calculation comparison correlated well; both methods still have one or two
advantages over the other, as discussed below.
5.2 Different Between the Direct Step Method and ISIS Method

- Direct step method cannot be applied if the flow depths are required in a specific
location as it would require interpolations method which is can be quite difficult and
time consuming to carry out. On the other hand, ISIS software can define a flow depth
at any particular section within a channel.
- Direct step method can only applied to prismatic channel because the cross-section
shape at the unidentified location must be known, while ISIS method can be applied to
both prismatic and non-prismatic channel.
- Direct step computation were based only on the steady flow assumption, that the
depth, water area, discharge and velocity at every section of the channel reach are
constant, also energy line, water surface, and channel bottom are all parallel.
Moreover, under natural conditions the slope and alignment of a channel are irregular


and most assumption made for steady flow for direct step method is never met. While
ISIS can be used to solve problems under steady flow and non-steady flow conditions.
- Direct step method can only be applied to a channel with a small slope. This is
because direct step method is based upon gradually varied flow with this restriction.
Whereas ISIS can be applied to a channel of any slope.
- Some of the basic equations that were used to developed direct step method are
applied as an approximation, which can limit the accuracy of the method.
- ISIS program uses simplified method for computations which may result in a loss of
accuracy compared to direct step method.
- ISIS incorporates a wide range of diagnostic errors checks, which makes the method
more flexible than direct step method.
5.3 Similarities

- Both direct step and ISIS method are easy to use
- Direct step and ISIS method are applicable to prismatic channel
- Both methods are cost effective with regards to their capacity
- Even though both methods have one or two differences, they both still produce an
accurate results



5.4 Recommendations

During the course of this thesis, several important concepts were discovered and noted, that
have an important effect on the ease of backwater calculations. These concepts are shared in
below:
1. It may be of interest to repeat this test with the method of direct integration rather than
direct step method.
2. It is recommended that the simulations with ISIS be repeated using a culvert and rules
based operation to investigate whether this gives improved development of initial
conditions
3. It is recommended that further investigations into the increase in outflow with ISIS,
reported in trapezoidal channel be carried out to determine whether it occurs
physically.
4. The step computation should be carried upstream if the flow is subcritical and
downstream if the flow is supercritical. Step computations carried in the wrong
direction tend inevitably to make the result diverge from the correct flow profile.



References and Bibliography

1. Bakhmeteff, B. (1932) Hydraulics of open channels, 1st Ed,
McGraw-Hill, New York.
2. Beffa, C. (1996) Backwater Computation for Transcritical River Flow, Hydraulics
Engineering Journal, Vol. 1, No. 1.
3. Benn J & Bonner V R (2002), A review of current practice in the USA, Environment
Agency R&D project Scoping Study into Hydraulic Performance of Bridges and other
Structures, Environment Agency, Bristol
4. Brown, J. (1978) Computer in Civil engineering, An overview. In proceedings of the
Conference on Computing in Civil Engineering. Atlanta, Georgia, 26-29 June 1978.
American Society of Civil Engineers, New York. Pp. 1-11.
5. Chanson, H. (1999) The hydraulics of open channel flow: An introduction, London.
Edward Arnold.

6. Campbell, S.M. (2008) Backwater calculation for St. Lawrence Seaway with the first
computer in Canada. Canada, NRC Research.
7. Chanson, H. (2004) The hydraulics of open channel flows, 2nd Ed, Oxford,
Butterworth-Heinemann.
8. Chanson, H. (2008) The Backwater equation, and the Blanger equation, Hydraulic
Model Report No. CH69/08, Div. of Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland,
Brisbane, Australia

9. Chow, V.T. (1959) Open channel hydraulics. New York, McGraw Hill.
10. Cooper A, Baugh, & Millington .R (1995). Two dimensional numerical modelling of
the River Severn in Gloucester and the associated flood plain, HR Wallingford,
Report SR 429, September 1995
11. DHI Water & Environment (2001), MIKE11 Hydrodynamic Reference Manual, DHI,
Horsham, Denmark


12. Douglas, J.F et al (1979) Fluid Mechanics. 4
th
ed. Barcelona, Longman.
13. Environmental Agency (1997), Benchmarking and Scoping Study of Hydraulic
Models, Stage 2 Final Report Volume 1, Project 508, Environment Agency, Bristol
14. French, R.H, (1985), Open channel hydraulics. New York, McGraw Hill.
15. Henderson, F. M. (1966) Open channel flow. London, Macmillan.
16. HR WALLINGFORD (1997), ISIS user reference manual, Wallingford, Oxon. HR
Wallingford.
17. Hamill, L. (1995) Understanding hydraulics. 2
nd
ed. New York, Palgrave Macmillan.
18. McDonald, I. J. A. (1996) "Analysis of a model minimum energy loss culvert."
Undergraduate thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland,
Brisbane, Australia
19. McKay, G. R. (1971) "Design of minimum energy culverts." Research
Report, Dept of Civil Eng University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
20. McKay, G. R. (1978). "Design principles of minimum energy waterways."Proc.,
Workshop on Minimum Energy Design of Culvert and Bridge Waterways, Australian
Road Research Board, Melbourne, Australia, Session 1, 139.
21. Montes, J. S. (1998), Hydraulics of open channel flow, Virginia, ASCE, Reston.
22. ISIS Free and ISIS Professional Quick Start Guide. Available from:
http://www.halcrow.com/isis/ (Accessed 14 July 2010)
http://www.isisuser.com/docs/manuals/elearning_riverhydraulics/Teaching_Hydraulics_
Using_ISIS.htm (Accessed 14 July 2010)
http://www.euroaquae.org (Accessed 14 July 2010)
http://www.hydroeurope.org (Accessed 14 July 2010)
http://ec.europa.eu/research/headlines/news/article_09_03_19_en.html (Accessed 14
July 2010)


APPENDIX









Final Project Sub

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Final Project Sub

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Project Sub

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BACKWATER CALCULATIONS COMPARISON OF DIFERENT

NUMERICAL METHODS (DATA ANALYSIS AND NUMERICAL

You might also like