International Journal of Engineering Science

Flow Resistance and Velocity Distribution in a Smooth Triangular Channel

--Manuscript Draft--

Manuscript Number:

Article Type: Full Length Article

Section/Category: Fluids and Gas

Keywords: Open channel; Stage-discharge relationship, Friction factor; Manning's roughness;

Velocity contour.

Corresponding Author: Mirali Mohammadi, Ph.D

Urmia University
IRAN, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF

First Author: Hossein MohammadNezhad, Ph.D

Order of Authors: Hossein MohammadNezhad, Ph.D

Mirali Mohammadi, Ph.D

Amir Ghaderi, Ph.D

Mohammad Bagherzadeh, Ph.D

Ana M. Ricardo, Ph.D

Alban Kuriqi, Ph.D

Abstract: Accurate prediction of the hydraulic properties such as flow resistance and velocity
distribution is crucial in the accurate determination of energy dissipation and the
correct design of hydraulic structures. However, the sidewall and bed slope's combined
effect on such hydraulic properties remains yet poorly investigated. Therefore, this
study investigates the flow resistance and velocity distribution in a smooth triangular
channel under varying slope conditions in a laboratory environment. For this purpose,
two triangular cross-sectional shaped channels with 30° and 45° of the slopes of the
sidewalls was made. In various hydraulic conditions at different flow discharges and
channels, bed slopes were carried out. The results have been used in tests for the
stage-discharge curve, Manning roughness coefficient, n, the Darcy-Weisbach friction
factor, f, and flow velocity profiles. By increasing the channel bed slope and flow
discharge, the water surface fluctuation increased simultaneously. The fluctuation of
flow surface profile in Triangular Cross Section (TCS) by 45° is more than TCS 30°
cases. The stage-discharge rating curve has less curvature by increasing the channel
bed slope. The Darcy-Weisbach f obtained from TCS 30° is higher than TCS 45°,
which means that TCS 30° have more resistance against flowing water passing
through the channel to a 45° cross-section. Examination of the velocity contours shows
that the maximum velocity occurred in a 30° triangular cross-section. Practical-sound
findings from this research might be helpful for hydraulic engineers to design cost-
effective open channels and other similar hydraulic structures.

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
Cover Letter

Dear Editor,

We would like to submit our article entitled "Flow Resistance and Velocity Distribution in a
Smooth Triangular Channel" to be considered for possible publication in the "International
Journal of Engineering Science". The data included in this manuscript have not been published
previously and are not under consideration by any other journal. The authors have been
participated in the preparation of the manuscript, and have given their permission to submit this
manuscript with its present format. In this study, an attempt is made with experimental investigates
the flow resistance and velocity distribution in a smooth triangular channel under varying slope
conditions in a laboratory environment. The obtained results in this paper can be interesting for
readers and the other related researchers. In terms of the originality and the importance in the
scope, in our opinion, the paper is suitable for publication in your journal.
Your kind consideration and attention is highly appreciated

Best Regards
Dr. Mirali Mohammadi
The corresponding author
Title Page (with Author Details)

Flow Resistance and Velocity Distribution in a Smooth Triangular

Channel

Hossein MohammadNezhad1, Mirali Mohammadi1*, Amir Ghaderi2, Mohammad Bagherzadeh1,

Ana M. Ricardo3, Alban Kuriqi3
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Eng., Urmia University, P O Box 165, Urmia 57561-51818, Iran.
2
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Eng., University of Zanjan, Zanjan 537138791, Iran.
3
CERIS, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, 1049-001, Lisbon, Portugal.
Corresponding author: m.mohammadi@urmia.ac.ir

Abstract
Accurate prediction of the hydraulic properties such as flow resistance and velocity distribution is
crucial in the accurate determination of energy dissipation and the correct design of hydraulic
structures. However, the sidewall and bed slope's combined effect on such hydraulic properties
remains yet poorly investigated. Therefore, this study investigates the flow resistance and velocity
distribution in a smooth triangular channel under varying slope conditions in a laboratory
environment. For this purpose, two triangular cross-sectional shaped channels with 30° and 45° of
the slopes of the sidewalls was made. In various hydraulic conditions at different flow discharges
and channels, bed slopes were carried out. The results have been used in tests for the stage-
discharge curve, Manning roughness coefficient, n, the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor, f, and flow
velocity profiles. By increasing the channel bed slope and flow discharge, the water surface
fluctuation increased simultaneously. The fluctuation of flow surface profile in Triangular Cross
Section (TCS) by 45° is more than TCS 30° cases. The stage-discharge rating curve has less
curvature by increasing the channel bed slope. The Darcy-Weisbach f obtained from TCS 30° is
higher than TCS 45°, which means that TCS 30° have more resistance against flowing water
passing through the channel to a 45° cross-section. Examination of the velocity contours shows
that the maximum velocity occurred in a 30° triangular cross-section. Practical-sound findings
from this research might be helpful for hydraulic engineers to design cost-effective open channels
and other similar hydraulic structures.

Keywords: Open channel; Stage-discharge relationship, Friction factor; Manning’s roughness;

Velocity contour.
Manuscript (without Author Details) Click here to view linked References

1 Flow Resistance and Velocity Distribution in a Smooth

2 Triangular Channel
3
4
5 Abstract
6 Accurate prediction of the hydraulic properties such as flow resistance and velocity distribution
7 is crucial in the accurate determination of energy dissipation and the correct design of hydraulic
8 structures. However, the sidewall and bed slope's combined effect on such hydraulic properties
9 remains yet poorly investigated. Therefore, this study investigates the flow resistance and
10 velocity distribution in a smooth triangular channel under varying slope conditions in a
11 laboratory environment. For this purpose, two triangular cross-sectional shaped channels with
12 30° and 45° of the slopes of the sidewalls was made. In various hydraulic conditions at different
13 flow discharges and channels, bed slopes were carried out. The results have been used in tests
14 for the stage-discharge curve, Manning roughness coefficient, n, the Darcy-Weisbach friction
15 factor, f, and flow velocity profiles. By increasing the channel bed slope and flow discharge,
16 the water surface fluctuation increased simultaneously. The fluctuation of flow surface profile
17 in Triangular Cross Section (TCS) by 45° is more than TCS 30° cases. The stage-discharge
18 rating curve has less curvature by increasing the channel bed slope. The Darcy-Weisbach f
19 obtained from TCS 30° is higher than TCS 45°, which means that TCS 30° have more
20 resistance against flowing water passing through the channel to a 45° cross-section.
21 Examination of the velocity contours shows that the maximum velocity occurred in a 30°
22 triangular cross-section. Practical-sound findings from this research might be helpful for
23 hydraulic engineers to design cost-effective open channels and other similar hydraulic
24 structures.
25
26 Keywords: Open channel; Stage-discharge relationship, Friction factor; Manning’s roughness;
27 Velocity contour.
28

1
29 1. Introduction

30 An accurate prediction of flow resistance in open channels is crucial for sustainable river
31 management and the cost-effective design of the hydraulic structure, such as weirs, spillways,
32 and open channels, among others (Saghebian, Roushangar, Ozgur Kirca and Ghasempour
33 2020, Daneshfaraz, Aminvash, Ghaderi, Kuriqi and Abraham 2021, Ghaderi, Abbasi and Di
34 Francesco 2021). Most approaches for determining flow resistance in open channels use the
35 general concept of boundary shear stress. This concept is based on uniform flow conditions
36 and was initially developed for open channels with mild slopes (Aberle and Smart 2003,
37 Mohammadi 1998). Open channels under-construction commonly leads to sediment deposition
38 on the channel bed, while over-design increases construction cost. Routinely, channel design
39 procedures involve velocity checks at different sections to ensure the adequate conveyance
40 capacity of sediment transport to avoid a deposition (Ebtehaj, Bonakdari and Es-haghi 2019,
41 Myers 1982, Javid, Mohammadi, Najarchi and NajafiZade 2018). In that regard, shear stress
42 has an essential role in sediment mobility. The distribution of shear stress is uniform in two-
43 dimensional flow. Thus, the shear stress in open channel flows represents the flow resistance,
44 determines the conveyance capacity, and provokes sediment transport (Yen 2002, Ardıçlıoğlu
45 and Kuriqi 2019, Mohammadi, MohammadNejad and Ebrahim Nejadian 2015, Mohammadi
46 and moludi 2021). In general, the most popular semi-empirical flow resistance models such as
47 Chezy, Manning, and Darcy–Weisbach show a linear relationship between energy losses and
48 the mean flow velocity (Banerjee, Naik, Singh and Khatua 2019, Daneshfaraz, Aminvash,
49 Ghaderi, Abraham and Bagherzadeh 2021).

50 Nevertheless, the validation of those models is made through experimental and/or field data
51 investigations. Consequently, literature had already proposed a wide range of calibration
52 coefficients. Therefore, there is no unique calibration coefficient covering different geometries
53 and hydraulic components in open channels. However, the flow in open channels of finite
54 aspect ratio is three-dimensional. Wall shear stress is not distributed uniformly on the wetted
55 perimeters due to the free surface and secondary current and changes in the channel slope
56 (Myers 1982, Glaister 1993, Glaister 1995, Javid, Mohammadi, Najarchi and NajafiZadeh
57 2018). The computation of the friction coefficient, f, is a challenging task due to the complexity
58 of the problem in an open channel flow with a finite aspect ratio.
59 Furthermore, while the conventional approaches can provide adequate accuracy in predicting f
60 in pipe flow, it is widely accepted that the accuracy of the conventional methods is insufficient
61 in open channel flow (Bilgil and Altun 2008, Mohammadi 2001). As f is a fundamental
62 parameter in the computation of flow discharge, practical and accurate techniques are still
63 highly demanded. Thus, the accurate estimation of flow resistance and its variability are
64 essential for stable channel design, mitigating high discharges hazards, fluvial ecosystem
65 rehabilitation, and river morphodynamics prediction (Righetti and Armanini 2002, Sun and
66 Shiono 2009). Different factors influence the flow resistance; nevertheless, it is widely
67 recognized that the most important ones are: the channel shape, dimensions, the arrangement
68 of elements that form the roughness, cross-sectional shape, vegetation, and dissipative effects
69 triggered by macro-vortices due to the flow separation in the abrupt changes of direction
70 (Cowan 1956). The skin resistance, resistance induced by the boundary surface that depends
71 upon the flow depth relative to the size of roughness elements on the boundary surface, is one

2
 72 of the main components of the flow resistance. At the same time, another critical component
73 of the flow resistance is form drag associated with the bed features that influence secondary
74 circulations and eddies (Mazumder and Sarkar 2014, Mohammadi 2008). Therefore, the
75 overall Manning’s coefficient, n, can be expressed as the sum of the relevant values. Although
76 accurate estimation of flow resistance in open channels is of great interest to hydraulic
77 engineers, yet the problem remains unsolved despite numerous studies done over the past
78 decades. The main challenge arises in assessing the sidewall effect on the flow resistance. In
79 practice, the bed and geomorphology of the open channels are continually changing due to the
80 interaction with the flow (Yang and Tan 2008). While there is a handful of studies that
81 investigate the influence of bed slope on the hydraulic properties (Aberle and Smart 2003,
82 Banerjee, Naik, Singh and Khatua 2019, Dey and Debnath 2000), yet to the best of our
83 knowledge, the influence of the sidewall geometry and slope on the hydraulic regimes remain
84 scarcely investigated. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to investigate the hydraulic
85 properties such as flow resistance and velocity distribution in a smooth triangular channel under
86 varying slope conditions considering different discharge releases in a laboratory environment.
87 The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 briefly describes the experimental work
88 conducted in the hydraulics laboratory at Urmia University and its limitations. Section 3
89 presents the main results and discussions the relevance of the key findings achieved in this
90 study. Finally, the main conclusions drawn from this study are presented in Section 4.
91
92 2. Experimental Apparatus and Procedures
93 2.1 Experimental Setup

94 The laboratory tests were performed in a rectangular tilting flume of 0.3 m width, 0.5 m depth,
95 and 15 m long located at the Hydraulics Laboratory of Urmia University. The sidewalls were
96 made of transparent glass to improve flow visibility and reduce friction. The slope of the
97 channel is adjustable by a hydraulic jack. The schematic design of the experimental setup is
98 shown drawn in Fig 1.

99
100 Fig. 1. Schematic view of the experimental setup.

3
101
102 A recirculation pump with a maximum discharge rate of 24 L/s was used to supply water to the
103 head tank from the storage tanks. An ultrasonic flowmeter with the precision of ±1 L⁄s was
104 used on the transmission pipe to measure the flow discharge. To reduce turbulence in the
105 entrance region, a honeycomb planar mesh has been added. In addition, a tailgate is installed
106 at the end of the channel to control the inflow conditions with the intended flow depth. Two
107 triangular-shaped channels with 30° and 45° sidewall slopes were made of glass with five
108 different channel bed slopes. After stabilizing the flow conditions, the flow depth, for both the
109 upstream and downstream sections, was determined by a pointer gauge mounted on the top of
110 the flume with an accuracy of ±1 mm. Table 1 shows the geometric parameters and the main
111 hydraulic properties of the experimental rig.
112
113 Table 1. Geometric parameters and flow characteristics of the experimental channel.
Parameter Dimension Range
Discharge L/s 5.65-20.55
Velocity m/s 0.45-1.67
Flow depth M 0.093-0.387
Sidewall slope - 30° and 45°
Bed slope - 0.001-0.016
Froude number, Fr, - 0.6-2.95

114 The flow velocity was measured using a propeller velocity flowmeter H32-1A (produced by
115 Armfield Engineering Co.: https://armfield.co.uk) positioned over the channel centerline. The
116 flow velocity varied between 25 to 3000 mm/s with an accuracy of ±1 mm/s (see Fig. 2).

117
118 Fig. 2. Propeller velocity flowmeter (armfield 3000 mm/s - H32-1A model).
119

120 2.2 Limitations of experiments

121 Open channels are important water transfer structures used in water resources systems. As such,
122 they may require a substantial amount of investment depending on their length and cross-
123 section. Therefore, cross-section design should be carried out on an optimization basis. A
124 channel section is defined as the cross-section that is taken perpendicular to the main flow
125 direction. A triangular channel is an open channel with a triangular cross-section where one
126 side is vertical and the other inclined. In practice, for straight open channels, it is known that
127 secondary currents might be present. The patterns of secondary currents are affected by the
128 aspect ratio of the channel, the roughness of the bottom and walls, and the shape of the cross-

4
129 section (Tominaga, Nezu, Ezaki and Nakagawa 1989, Blanckaert, Duarte and Schleiss 2010).
130 Blanckaert, Duarte and Schleiss (2010) all confirm those implications and elaborate on the
131 influence of roughness on trapezoidal channels. The demonstrated influence of the cross-
132 sectional shape in a straight channel already indicates that this parameter might be influential
133 in a confluence as well. In particular, depending on the cross-sectional shape, the incoming
134 channels of the confluence will have a different fully developed velocity profile, which might
135 result in different mixing of these two streams. Additionally, the shape of the confluence area
136 itself might influence the extent of flow features like the contraction and the separation zone.
137 However, for the sake of the experimental design simplification, those issues were overlooked,
138 and it was assumed that there were no confluence or secondary channels connected to the
139 channel.
140
141 3. Results and Discussion

142 3.1 Free surface profile and flow discharge estimation

143 Fig. 3 shows the water surface profile for different discharges having different channel bed
144 slopes, i.e., 0.001, 0.002, 0.004, 0.008, and 0.016. As it can be noticed from the Figure, when
145 the channel bed slope is getting steeper, the flow depth decreases. The decrease is sharp for the
146 outlet of the channel bed slope compared to the inlet of the channel. By increasing the channel
147 bed slope and flow discharge, the water surface fluctuations increased as well. The results show
148 that the fluctuation of water surface profile in TCS 30° was higher than the TCS 45°. Also, the
149 decrease of water depth in the channel outlet was more abrupt in TCS 30° than the TCS 45°.

150

151

5
152
153 Fig. 3. Water surface profile for triangular cross-sections for different bed and sidewall channel bed slope:
154 (a) TCS-30° and (b) TCS-45°.
155
156 Regression analysis of the data from different channel bed slopes and two-channel cross-
157 sections was conducted to find the stage-discharge rating curve. Mathematically, the stage-
158 discharge relationship is expressed by Eq. 1 as:
Q  a ( y )b (1)
159 Q is the flow discharge (L/s), y is the stage (m), and a and b are adjustment parameters. From
160 Fig. 4, it was observed that in the case of steeper channel bed slope (i.e., S= 0.016), the increase
161 in the stage is comparatively lesser than the mild channel bed slope (i.e., S= 0.004) for the same
162 flow discharges.

163
164 Fig. 4. Stage-discharge rating curves for two cross-sections of the channel.

6
165
166 In other words, by increasing channel bed slope, the stage-discharge rating curve has less
167 curvature, which can be attributed to more increase in flow velocity at a steep channel than its
168 lower increase at the mild channel. Some parameter values from a and b are proposed in Table
169 2 to estimate the stage-discharge relationship for different values in the channel bed slopes and
170 cross-section of the channel.
171
172 Table 2. Proposed values of coefficients a and b in equation (1) for various channel bed slopes.
Cross section Channel bed slope (S) A b R2
0.001 107.54 0.435 0.996
0.002 103.58 0.386 0.998
30° 0.004 90.43 0.388 0.998
0.008 79.38 0.382 0.997
0.016 67.12 0.389 0.999
0.001 99.93 0.334 0.995
0.002 83.59 0.357 0.996
45° 0.004 63.43 0.385 0.999
0.008 54.84 0.391 0.998
0.016 46.88 0.4 0.998

173 The coefficient of determination (R2) of the stage-discharge relationships indicated a good fit
174 with different values of channel bed slope. From Table 2, it can be seen that by increasing the
175 slope of the channel, the values a decrease for both cross-sectional cases. For TSC 30° by
176 increasing the channel bed slope, b remains almost the same whereas, for TSC 45° by
177 increasing slope of the channel, b increase, this means that the stage-discharge rating curve has
178 increased less curvature.

179 3.2 Flow resistance coefficient

180 The roughness coefficients represent the resistance of friction resistance that water experiences
181 when it flows over land or a channel characterized by specific geomorphological
182 characteristics. Flow resistance is traditionally represented in one of two ways. The commonest
183 is a fixed value of n in the Manning equation as:
1
V  R 2/3 S 1/ 2 (2)
n
184 V is mean velocity, R and S denote hydraulic radius and channel bed slope, respectively. Thus,
185 two main alternatives are a fixed value of the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor, f:

V  (8gRS / f )1/2 (3)

186 Where g is the gravity due to acceleration. Fig. 5 further present the variation of Manning’s n
187 with flow discharge along the different bed slope of the channel. Over the full range of flow
188 discharge, the values of n reduce with a Triangular Cross-Section (TCS) 45° compared to the
189 other type, i.e., TCS 30°.

7
190

191
192 Fig. 5. Variation of Manning’s n versus flow discharge and flow depth
193 (a). TCS-30° and (b). TCS-45°.
194

195 A decrease has occurred because the cross-sectional sidewall’s slope increases from 30° to 45°.
196 In other words, a triangular channel with a 30° cross-section has more resistance against
197 flowing water passing through the channel to a 45° cross-section. As shown in Figure 5, the
198 values of n increase by increasing discharge for each cross-section. By increasing n values, the
199 flow depth in the channel decrease. For steep slopes where the flow regime is supercritical, the
200 values of n are close to each other. However, for the mild slopes where the flow regime is
201 subcritical, the values of n are pretty different from each other (Cowan 1956). It was noticed
202 that the average n values were found between 0.008 and 0.0075 for steep slopes and 0.0095
203 and 0.0085 for mild slopes in the case of 30° and 45°, respectively. The variation of Darcy-
204 Weisbach friction factor, f, with discharge along the different slopes of the channel is illustrated
205 in Fig. 6. It is inferred from Figure 6 that the trend of Darcy-Weisbach f for both cross-sections
206 of the channel is the same, and the values of f decrease by increasing flow discharge or water
207 flow depth (Myers 1982, Yen 2002).

8
208

209
210 Fig. 6. Variation of Darcy-Weisbach f versus flow discharge and flow depth
211 (a). TCS-30° and (b). TCS-45°.

212 Here, it is noted that by increasing the channel's bed slope (S), the Darcy-Weisbach f increases
213 (Bilgil and Altun 2008). Also, in the same discharge values, the Darcy-Weisbach f obtained
214 from TCS 30° is higher than TCS 45°. This means that in the same flow conditions, resistance
215 against flowing water passing through the channel in the TCS 45° case is less than TCS 30°.

216

217 3.3 Velocity distribution

218 Fig. 7 presents the 2D velocity distribution for cross-sections, namely TCS 45° and 30° with a
219 different channel bed slope. It appears that the velocity closest to the wall is almost zero in all
220 models.

221

9
222

223
224 Fig. 7. Velocity distribution in a triangular channel with different sloped walls and bed slopes.

225 However, the higher velocity occurs in the central part of the triangle cross-section, slightly
226 above the gravity of a triangle and near the free surface. By comparing the velocity contours
227 between two cross-sections, it can be seen that the maximum velocity occurred in a 30°

10
228 triangular cross-section; with an increase in the slope of the channel, the longitudinal
229 component of velocity increases (Banerjee, Naik, Singh and Khatua 2019). Fig. 8 shows the
230 maximum velocity for different flow discharge values within the two cross-sections of the
231 channel.

232
233 Fig. 8. Maximum velocity values in triangular channels with different channel bed slopes.
234
235
236 There is almost the same trend between the maximum velocity and discharge passing through
237 two different cross-sections of triangular channels. However, as seen from this Figure, the
238 calculated Vmax at TSC 45° is higher than TSC 30° for the same conditions. This difference
239 may be attributed to common effects of resistance against flowing water passing through the
240 channel in TCS 30° than the TCS 45° cases (Myers 1982, Yang and Tan 2008).
241
242
243 4. Concluding remarks

244 The experimental work was accompanied by studying flow resistance and velocity distributions
245 in two triangular-shaped channels considering five different channel bed slopes. In addition,
246 experiments were carried out for the stage-discharge relationship, Manning's n, the Darcy-
247 Weisbach f, and flow velocity profiles in various hydraulics conditions. The following major
248 conclusions are drawn:

249 • By increasing the channel bed slope and flow discharge, the water surface fluctuations
250 increased. The fluctuation of the water surface profile in TCS 30° was higher than in TCS 45°.
251 This is because the stage-discharge rating curve has less curvature.

252 • The values of n increase by increasing flow discharge for each cross-section. By increasing n
253 values, the flow depth of the channel decreases. However, the average n values were found
254 between 0.008 and 0.0075 for steep slopes and 0.0095 and 0.0085 for mild slopes in the cases
255 of 30° and 45°, respectively.

256 • By increasing the slope of the channel, the Darcy-Weisbach f increases. The f obtained from
257 TCS 30° is higher than that of TCS 45°. This means that resistance against flowing water

11
258 passing through the channel in the case of TCS 45° is less than TCS 30° case in the same flow
259 conditions. In addition, the values of f are more sensitive than the n values, indeed.

260 • The higher velocity occurs in the central part of the triangle cross-section and near the free
261 surface. With an increase in the channel bed slope, the longitudinal component of velocity
262 increases. Furthermore, the maximum velocity occurred in 30° Triangular cross section.

263 Although the values of n have been practiced and investigated in hydraulics and hydrology
264 analysis, the determination of n is becoming a challenge to engineers and researchers because
265 its value cannot be computed equally for all types of open channels. In hydraulic structures,
266 the velocity distribution is essential to understand most fluid flow problems and flow
267 resistances, and sediment transport. Due to the lack of data and laboratory studies, a research
268 laboratory in this field can significantly help understand several aspects and features of
269 hydraulic regimes in open channels. In this regard, for many practical applications, the
270 determination of n in natural channels with the river crossing during the flood is needed.
271 Therefore, future work remains an above issue to be faced.

272
273 References
274
275 [1] S.M. Saghebian, K. Roushangar, V.S. Ozgur Kirca, R. Ghasempour, Modeling total resistance and
276 form resistance of movable bed channels via experimental data and a kernel-based approach,
277 Journal of Hydroinformatics, 22 (2020) 528-540.

278 [2] R. Daneshfaraz, E. Aminvash, A. Ghaderi, A. Kuriqi, J. Abraham, Three-Dimensional Investigation

279 of Hydraulic Properties of Vertical Drop in the Presence of Step and Grid Dissipators, Symmetry 13
280 (2021) 895.

281 [3] A. Ghaderi, S. Abbasi, S. Di Francesco, Numerical Study on the Hydraulic Properties of Flow over
282 Different Pooled Stepped Spillways, Water 13 (2021) 710.

283 [4] J. Aberle, G.M. Smart, The influence of roughness structure on flow resistance on steep slopes,
284 Journal of Hydraulic Research, 41 (2003) 259-269.

285 [5] M. Mohammadi, Resistance to flow and the influence of boundary shear stress on sediment
286 transport in smooth rigid boundary channels, in, University of Birmingham, 1998.

287 [6] I. Ebtehaj, H. Bonakdari, M.S. Es-haghi, Design of a Hybrid ANFIS–PSO Model to Estimate
288 Sediment Transport in Open Channels, Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of
289 Civil Engineering, 43 (2019) 851-857.

290 [7] W. Myers, Flow resistance in wide rectangular channels, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, 108
291 (1982) 471-482.

292 [8] S. Javid, M. Mohammadi, M. Najarchi, M. NajafiZade, Laboratory investigation of flow resistance
293 in composite roughened rectangular open channels, Journal of Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 27
294 (2018) 4921-4929.

295 [9] B.C. Yen, Open channel flow resistance, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 128 (2002) 20-39.

12
296 [10] M. Ardıçlıoğlu, A. Kuriqi, Calibration of channel roughness in intermittent rivers using HEC-RAS
297 model: case of Sarimsakli creek, Turkey, SN Applied Sciences, 1 (2019) 1080.

298 [11] M.A. Mohammadi, H. MohammadNejad, H. Ebrahim Nejadian, Flow Resistance and Velocity
299 Distributions in Channels with Triangular Cross-Section, Experimental Research in Civil Engineering, 2
300 (2015) 55-66.

301 [12] M. Mohammadi, m. moludi, Determination of Resistance Coefficient in Gravel Bed Rivers (case
302 study: Urmia Shahr-Chay River), Water and Soil Science, Articles in Press (2021) -.

303 [13] S. Banerjee, B. Naik, P. Singh, K.K. Khatua, Flow resistance in gravel bed open channel flows
304 case: intense transport condition, ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 25 (2019) 298-309.

305 [14] R. Daneshfaraz, E. Aminvash, A. Ghaderi, J. Abraham, M. Bagherzadeh, SVM Performance for
306 Predicting the Effect of Horizontal Screen Diameters on the Hydraulic Parameters of a Vertical Drop,
307 Appl. Sci. , 11 (2021) 4238.

308 [15] P. Glaister, A numerical scheme for two-dimensional, open channel flows with non-rectangular
309 geometries, International Journal of Engineering Science, 31 (1993) 1003-1011.

310 [16] P. Glaister, Prediction of steady, supercritical, free-surface flow, International Journal of
311 Engineering Science, 33 (1995) 845-854.

312 [17] S. Javid, M. Mohammadi, M. Najarchi, M. NajafiZadeh, An Experimental Study of the Effect of
313 Boundary Roughness in Rectangular Open Channels, Water and Soil Science, 28 (2018) 95-107.

314 [18] A. Bilgil, H. Altun, Investigation of flow resistance in smooth open channels using artificial neural
315 networks, Flow Measurement and Instrumentation, 19 (2008) 404-408.

316 [19] M. Mohammadi, Shape effects and definition of hydraulic radius in manning's equation in open
317 channel flow, International Journal of Engineering, 10 (2001) 127-142.

318 [20] M. Righetti, A. Armanini, Flow resistance in open channel flows with sparsely distributed
319 bushes, Journal of Hydrology, 269 (2002) 55-64.

320 [21] X. Sun, K. Shiono, Flow resistance of one-line emergent vegetation along the floodplain edge of
321 a compound open channel, Advances in Water Resources, 32 (2009) 430-438.

322 [22] W.L. Cowan, Estimating hydraulic roughness coefficients, Agricultural Engineering, 37 (1956)
323 473-475.

324 [23] B.S. Mazumder, K. Sarkar, Turbulent flow characteristics and drag over 2-D forward-facing dune
325 shaped structures with two different stoss-side slopes, Environmental Fluid Mechanics, 14 (2014)
326 617-645.

327 [24] M. Mohammadi, Local and global friction factor in a channel with v-shaped bottom,
328 International Journal of Engineering, 21 (2008) 325-336.

329 [25] S.-Q. Yang, S.-K. Tan, Flow resistance over mobile bed in an open-channel flow, Journal of
330 Hydraulic Engineering, 134 (2008) 937-947.

331 [26] S. Dey, K. Debnath, Influence of streamwise bed slope on sediment threshold under stream
332 flow, Journal of irrigation drainage engineering, 126 (2000) 255-263.

13
333 [27] A. Tominaga, I. Nezu, K. Ezaki, H. Nakagawa, Three-dimensional turbulent structure in straight
334 open channel flows, Journal of Hydraulic Research, 27 (1989) 149-173.

335 [28] K. Blanckaert, A. Duarte, A.J. Schleiss, Influence of shallowness, bank inclination and bank
336 roughness on the variability of flow patterns and boundary shear stress due to secondary currents in
337 straight open-channels, Advances in Water Resources, 33 (2010) 1062-1074.
338

14