CHAPTER II

UNIFORM FLOW AND ITS FORMULAS – MODULE 1

2.1 Introduction and Objective

This experiment was designed to observe the characteristics of uniform flow in

the teaching flume and to utilize the common uniform flow formulas to explain the

conditions that were observed. The Manning’s roughness coefficient was calculated

based on observations of flow width, flow depth, flow rate, channel slope, and channel

surface material. This data was then used to calculate the Chezy’s C, and the Darcy-

Weisbach friction factor, f.

2.2 Theory and Background

Uniform flow is a unique flow condition that is not extremely common in natural

streams and channels. In order for uniform flow to exist, the depth, cross-sectional area,

velocity, and flow at each section of a channel reach must be constant. In addition, the

energy line, water surface, and channel bed must be parallel. Because uniform unsteady

flow does not exist, it is always classified as steady uniform flow. For practical purposes

uniform flow is often assumed in order to compute the discharge of a natural stream

(Chow 1959).
 The two most common uniform flow formulas are Manning’s equation and

Chezy’s equation. Of these two Manning’s is the most widely used to compute flow in

open channels.

2 1
1
V ! R3S 2 (2-1)
n

V is the velocity in m/s, R is the hydraulic radius in m, S is the slope, and n is the

roughness coefficient called Manning’s n. The hydraulic radius is computed be dividing

the cross-sectional area in m2 by the wetted perimeter in m. The Chezy equation was

developed much earlier and is considered by most to be the first uniform flow equation.

V ! C RS (2-2)

V is the velocity in m/s, R is the hydraulic radius in m, S is the slope, and C is a flow

resistance factor called Chezy’s C. By combining the two equations, the relationship

between Chezy’s C and Manning’s n can be experessed in the following equation.

1
1
C ! R6 (2-3)
n

Even though the Darcy-Weisbach formula was developed primarily for pipe flow, it can

be modified to compute the friction factor in open channels with uniform flow conditions.

8 gRS
f ! (2-4)
V2

8g
f ! (2-5)
C2

2.3 Experimental Procedure

For this experiment, the Mannings n, Chezy’s C and Darcy-Weisbach f were

calculated for a smooth section and rough section of a channel. To simulate a rough
channel section, a one-meter section of artificial turf was installed in the in the upstream

bed of the teaching flume. It is important that each end is secured to the bottom of the

flume bed with duct-tape. Figure 2-1 illustrates the correct installation of the turf. The

next step was to place one vernier scale over a smooth section of the flume and place the

other over a rough section as shown in figure 2-2. Both scales were then zeroed.

Figure 2-1 Turf installation.

 Figure 2-2 Zeroed vernier scales.

A total of nine trials were performed for this experiment. To begin, the initial

channel slope was measured. Refer to chapter I for the channel slope measurement

procedure. The flume was then turned on and the flow rate was set on 1.0 L/s. The water

depths for the rough and smooth sections of channel were recorded in millimeters. Then

the exact flow rate was measured and recorded using the volumetric time method

discussed in chapter I. This concluded trial one. This procedure was repeated for the

remaining trials.

Of the nine trials recorded, there were three different slopes for each measured

flow rate. The water depths were measured over the rough and smooth channel sections

and recorded. This information was then tabulated and manipulated in order to calculate

Manning’s n, Chezy’s C and Darcy-Weisbach’s friction factor f.

2.4 Experimental Data and Results

Table 2-1. Raw experimental data.

Smooth Depth Rough Depth

Run Time (sec) Q (L/s) Q (m3/s) Height (in) Slope (in/in)
(mm) (mm)
1 8.40 1.19 0.00119 49.25 0.0044 21.0 41.0
2 8.40 1.19 0.00119 50.13 0.0106 18.8 34.6
3 8.40 1.19 0.00119 50.88 0.0159 18.1 31.5
4 6.25 1.60 0.00160 49.25 0.0044 26.2 48.1
5 6.25 1.60 0.00160 50.13 0.0106 24.2 41.0
6 6.25 1.60 0.00160 50.88 0.0159 22.9 37.0
7 4.60 2.17 0.00217 49.25 0.0044 33.5 58.1
8 4.60 2.17 0.00217 50.13 0.0106 31.1 50.8
9 4.60 2.17 0.00217 50.88 0.0159 29.6 45.8

Table 2-2. Results for smooth channel section.

Manning's Darcy-
Run A (mm2) A (m2) P (mm) P (m) R (m) V (m/s) Chezy's "C"
"n" Weisbach's "ƒ"
1 1596 0.00160 118.0 0.118 0.0135 0.746 0.00506 96.51 0.0084
2 1429 0.00143 113.6 0.114 0.0126 0.833 0.00668 72.16 0.0151
3 1376 0.00138 112.2 0.112 0.0123 0.865 0.00775 61.98 0.0204
4 1991 0.00199 128.4 0.128 0.0155 0.804 0.00514 97.09 0.0083
5 1839 0.00184 124.4 0.124 0.0148 0.870 0.00713 69.49 0.0163
6 1740 0.00174 121.8 0.122 0.0143 0.919 0.00808 60.99 0.0211
7 2546 0.00255 143.0 0.143 0.0178 0.854 0.00531 96.29 0.0085
8 2364 0.00236 138.2 0.138 0.0171 0.920 0.00743 68.31 0.0168
9 2250 0.00225 135.2 0.135 0.0166 0.966 0.00850 59.41 0.0222
 Table 2-3. Results for rough channel section.

Manning's Darcy-
Run A (mm2) A (m2) P (mm) P (m) R (m) V (m/s) Chezy's "C"
"n" Weisbach's "ƒ"
1 3116 0.00312 158.0 0.158 0.0197 0.382 0.0127 40.93 0.0468
2 2630 0.00263 145.2 0.145 0.0181 0.453 0.0157 32.67 0.0735
3 2394 0.00239 139.0 0.139 0.0172 0.497 0.0169 30.05 0.0869
4 3656 0.00366 172.2 0.172 0.0212 0.438 0.0116 45.20 0.0384
5 3116 0.00312 158.0 0.158 0.0197 0.513 0.0146 35.51 0.0622
6 2812 0.00281 150.0 0.150 0.0187 0.569 0.0156 32.96 0.0723
7 4416 0.00442 192.2 0.192 0.0230 0.492 0.0109 48.87 0.0329
8 3861 0.00386 177.6 0.178 0.0217 0.563 0.0142 37.09 0.0570
9 3481 0.00348 167.6 0.168 0.0208 0.625 0.0153 34.37 0.0664

Table 2-4. Summary of results.

Average Manning's "n" values for… Average values for…

Slope... Smooth Rough Coefficients… Smooth Rough
0.44% 0.005 0.012 Manning's "n" 0.007 0.014

1.06% 0.007 0.015 Chezy's "C" 75.8 37.5

Darcy
1.59% 0.008 0.016 Weisbach's 0.015 0.060
"ƒ"
2.5 Discussion of Results

The determination of the Manning’s roughness coefficient, Chezy’s C, and the

Darcy-Weisbach friction factor was completed upon analyzing the recorded data. Upon

further inspection of these numbers in comparison with commonly utilized civil

engineering structures and materials, several conclusions could be drawn.

Based on the calculated values for the Manning’s roughness coefficient in the

smooth channel, it was found that the comparable surfaces in real world applications

were plastic or glass. Though the computed value was lower than the tabulated accepted

value, this could be explained by the inherent experimental errors or variations in the real

world application of such material including scaling and buildup that occurs in open

channel flow.

Furthermore, upon determination of the Manning’s coefficient for the rough

channel surface, it was determined that a variety of materials could be utilized based on

the values computed. These materials included asbestos cement, brass, new cast iron,

copper, lead, new unlined steel, wood stave, galvanized iron pipe, and formed concrete

with either steel or wooden forms. Because the rough channel was a combination of a turf

bottom and smooth plastic sides, the Manning’s n values were lower than the accepted

values for short grass or turf.

Some of the experimental error in this laboratory experiment included the

possible variation in recordings from the measuring tape and vernier scales as well as the

timing process for finding the flow rate. Human error is also a factor in any experiment

and can be introduced from the possible reading error to recording errors to calculation
errors. Some variation may have been accrued as a result of flume irregularities in the

surfaces themselves or mechanical reasons within the flume components as well.

Lab Data
8 Data inputs shown in yellow cells
0.0345 Data output shown in blue cells

Trial Volume, L Flow, sec Flow Units Flow Units Converted Units
1 10 15.5 0.6452 L/sec 0.00065 m3/sec 0.0228 ft3/sec
2 10 15.5 0.6452 L/sec 0.00065 m3/sec 0.0228 ft3/sec
3 10 15.5 0.6452 L/sec 0.00065 m3/sec 0.0228 ft3/sec
4 10 24.9 0.4016 L/sec 0.00040 m3/sec 0.0142 ft3/sec
5 10 24.9 0.4016 L/sec 0.00040 m3/sec 0.0142 ft3/sec
6 10 24.9 0.4016 L/sec 0.00040 m3/sec 0.0142 ft3/sec
7 10 56.5 0.1770 L/sec 0.00018 m3/sec 0.0062 ft3/sec
7 10 56.5 0.1770 L/sec 0.00018 m3/sec 0.0062 ft3/sec
7 10 56.5 0.1770 L/sec 0.00018 m3/sec 0.0062 ft3/sec

Flow Measurements for Smooth Section

Flume Height, Flume Width, Flume Width, Flow Depth,
Trial Flow, m3/sec in Slope, m/m mm m mm Flow Depth, m
1 0.000645 49.875 0.008833922 76 0.0760 30.4 0.0304
2 0.000645 50.5 0.013250883 76 0.0760 29.4 0.0294
3 0.000645 51.5 0.020318021 76 0.0760 28.6 0.0286
4 0.000402 51.5 0.020318021 76 0.0760 17.2 0.0172
5 0.000402 52.5 0.027385159 76 0.0760 16.2 0.0162
6 0.000402 50 0.009717314 76 0.0760 22.3 0.0223
7 0.000177 50 0.009717314 76 0.0760 10 0.01
8 0.000177 49 0.002650177 76 0.0760 17.4 0.0174
9 0.000177 48.75 0.000883392 76 0.0760 12.1 0.0121

Flow Area, Wetted Wetted Hydraulic

Trial mm2 Flow Area, m2 Perimeter, mm Perimeter, m Radius, m Velocity, m/sec Roughness, n
1 2,310.4 0.0023104 136.8 0.1368 0.016888889 0.279242248 0.022156256
2 2,234.4 0.0022344 134.8 0.1348 0.016575668 0.288740284 0.025917656
3 2,173.6 0.0021736 133.2 0.1332 0.016318318 0.296816935 0.030896003
4 1,307.2 0.0013072 110.4 0.1104 0.01184058 0.307226458 0.02410261
5 1,231.2 0.0012312 108.4 0.1084 0.011357934 0.326191054 0.025634123
6 1,694.8 0.0016948 120.6 0.1206 0.014053068 0.236963905 0.024225441
7 760.0 0.0007600 96 0.096 0.007916667 0.232883093 0.016813704
 8 1,322.4 0.0013224 110.8 0.1108 0.011935018 0.133840858 0.020087725 Average
9 919.6 0.0009196 100.2 0.1002 0.009177645 0.192465366 0.00676932 0.02184476

Flow Measurements for Rough Section

Flume Height, Flume Width, Flume Width, Flow Depth,
Trial Flow, m3/sec in Slope, m/m mm m mm Flow Depth, m
1 0.000645 49.25 0.004416961 76 0.0760 55.5 0.0555
2 0.000645 50.13 0.010636042 76 0.0760 52.5 0.0525
3 0.000645 50.88 0.015936396 76 0.0760 42.1 0.0421
4 0.000402 49.25 0.004416961 76 0.0760 34.3 0.0343
5 0.000402 50.13 0.010636042 76 0.0760 30.2 0.0302
6 0.000402 50.88 0.015936396 76 0.0760 41.5 0.0415
7 0.000177 49.25 0.004416961 76 0.0760 27.1 0.0271
8 0.000177 50.13 0.010636042 76 0.0760 35.6 0.0356
9 0.000177 50.88 0.015936396 76 0.0760 37.7 0.0377

Flow Area, Wetted Wetted Hydraulic

Trial mm2 Flow Area, m2 Perimeter, mm Perimeter, m Radius, m Velocity, m/sec Roughness, n
1 4218 0.0042180 187.0 0.187 0.02255615 0.152954313 0.034687796
2 3990 0.0039900 181.0 0.181 0.022044199 0.161694559 0.0501446
3 3199.6 0.0031996 160.2 0.1602 0.019972534 0.201638108 0.046086942
4 2606.8 0.0026068 144.6 0.1446 0.018027663 0.154061081 0.029659361
5 2295.2 0.0022952 136.4 0.1364 0.016826979 0.174976658 0.038703243
6 3154 0.0031540 159.0 0.159 0.019836478 0.127332411 0.072649473
7 2059.6 0.0020596 130.2 0.1302 0.01581874 0.085934721 0.048735009
8 2705.6 0.0027056 147.2 0.1472 0.018380435 0.065416599 0.109800905 Average
9 2865.2 0.0028652 151.4 0.1514 0.018924703 0.061772704 0.145127982 0.063955035