THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES,

ST. AUGUSTINE.
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

Kirk Woo Chong

809003758
Group: J

CVNG 2005 – MECHANICS OF

FLUIDS II – EXPERIMENT 1:
HYDRAULIC JUMP
Table of Contents
OBJECTIVES....................................................................................................................3

INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................3

PROCEDURE....................................................................................................................3

Equipment....................................................................................................................3

Method..........................................................................................................................4

THEORY............................................................................................................................4

RESULTS..........................................................................................................................5

SAMPLE CALCULATIONS...............................................................................................9

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS............................................................11

GRAPH 1 - ΔE vs Upstream Froude Number Analysis......................................11

GRAPH 2 - Jump Length vs Upstream Froude Number Analysis...................11

Hydraulic Jump Classification and Stability........................................................11

Practical Applications of Hydraulic Jumps...........................................................12

Errors & Precautions................................................................................................13

CONCLUSION................................................................................................................13

REFERENCES.................................................................................................................13

REFERENCES
OBJECTIVES

I. Experience taking experimental measurements and appreciate the inherent error

in comparison to theoretical calculations.
II. Observe that energy dissipation is a function of the upstream and downstream
depths and hence Froude numbers.
III. Demonstrate that hydraulic jumps are difficult to stabilize in a fixed flume length.
IV. Qualitatively understand and observe translations in the location of a hydraulic
jump.

INTRODUCTION

For a positive wave travelling upstream in a horizontal channel the wave may be
stationary relative to the bed of the channel, in which case the wave velocity, c may be
zero. This stationary surge wave, through which the depth of flow increases, is known
as a hydraulic jump (Massey, 2006).

Essentially, the experiment involves simulating a hydraulic jump in a hydraulic

channel by adjusting the flow rate, a sluice gate and a weir so that a shallow and rapid
supercritical flow develops upstream as well as subcritical flow due to the back up of
flow. A hydraulic jump would then form at the transition where measurements can thus
be taken.

PROCEDURE

Equipment
○ Hydraulic Channel
○ Depth Gauge
○ Flowmeter
○ Stopwatch
Method
1. The flow rate and tailgate elevation was set so that a stable hydraulic jump
occurred about midway through the channel.
2. The time taken for two revolutions on the flowmeter was noted, and an average
of two readings was taken.
3. The depth of flow in front of and behind the hydraulic jump as well as the
corresponding length of the jump was measured.
4. All relevant dimensions of the flume equipment were measured.
5. Steps 1 to 4 were then repeated for three other discharge values.

THEORY

The hydraulic jump itself is caused by a sudden dissipation of energy as a result of a

change from supercritical to subcritical or from very fast to slow flow. Hence for the
upstream flow the Froude number is greater than 1 and for the downstream flow the
Froude number is less than 1. This would occur when the depth of the liquid is less
than the critical depth before the jump and greater than critical depth after it. This
phenomenon may be observed when the liquid passes through a flood gate or entering
a channel through a spillway.

As a result of the jump, there is significant turbulence and eddy formation

causing the mechanical energy in the system to be reduced. Hence, there is a
decrease in both the specific energy and total energy after the jump. Because of this,
hydraulic jumps are used in the reduction of unwanted energy to reduce scour of
channels.

FIGURE 1
 RESULTS

Time for 2
Jump Upstream Downstream Jump Volume, V Revolutions,
Number Depth, Du / m Depth, Dd / m Length / m / m3 t/s
1 0.0492 0.1726 0.508 0.2 19.67
2 0.0514 0.1607 0.406 0.2 20.67
3 0.0492 0.1401 0.330 0.2 23.08
4 0.0504 0.1111 0.178 0.2 29.38
TABLE 1 showing the data obtained from the experiment

Discharge, Q / Specific Discharge, q /

Jump Number m3s-1 m2s-1 Critical Depth, Dc / m
1 0.0102 0.1004 0.1009
2 0.0097 0.0955 0.0976
3 0.0087 0.0856 0.0907
4 0.0068 0.0669 0.0770
TABLE 2 showing calculated values for depth and discharges

Upstrea
m Downstrea
Upstream Downstrea Critical Upstrea
Velocity, m Velocity,
Jum Cross m Cross Velocity m Kinetic Downstrea
vu / vd /
p Sectional Sectional , vc / ms- Energy / m Kinetic
No. Area / m2 Area / m2 ms-1 ms-1 1
J Energy / J
1 0.0050 0.0175 2.040 0.5829 0.9950 0.2121 0.0173
2 0.0052 0.0163 1.865 0.5951 0.9782 0.1773 0.0181
3 0.0050 0.0142 1.740 0.6127 0.9441 0.1543 0.0191
4 0.0051 0.0113 1.333 0.6018 0.8692 0.0906 0.0185
TABLE 3 showing velocity and energy data
 Specific Specific Critical
Jump Energy Energy Specific Energy Froude Froude
Numbe Upstream, Downstream, Energy, Loss, Number Number
r Esu / J Esd / J Ec / J ΔE / J Upstream Downstream

1 0.2613 0.1899 0.1514 0.0553 2.936 0.4480

2 0.2287 0.1780 0.1464 0.0395 2.626 0.4740

3 0.2035 0.1592 0.1395 0.0272 2.505 0.5226

4 0.1410 0.1296 0.1155 0.0100 1.896 0.5764

TABLE 4 showing energy and energy loss as well as the Froude numbers

Critic
al Downstrea
Force Force Force Upstream m Critical Fu + Fd + Fc +
Upstrea Downstrea , Fc / Momentu Momentum Momentu Mu / Md / Mc /
Jum m, Fu / m, Fd / kgms- m, Mu / , Md / kgms- m, Mc / kgms kgms kgms
p kgms-2 kgms-2 2
kgms-2 2
kgms-2 -2 -2 -2

22.0 20.7 15.1

1 1.207 14.82 5.074 20.81 5.946 10.05 2 7 2
19.4 18.6 14.2
2 1.311 12.85 4.747 18.09 5.772 9.489 0 2 4
16.3 15.1 12.3
3 1.207 9.827 4.100 15.14 5.330 8.214 5 6 1
10.3 10.2 8.86
4 1.261 6.158 2.955 9.064 4.092 5.911 3 5 6
TABLE 5 showing the forces and momentum

Upstream Energy Specific Energy Energy

Jump Froude Loss, Upstream, Esu / Dissipation / Classificatio
Number Number ΔE / J J % n

Oscillating
1 2.936 0.0553 0.2613 21.16 Jump

Oscillating
2 2.626 0.0395 0.2287 17.27 Jump

3 2.505 0.0272 0.2035 13.37 Weak Jump

 GRAPH 3

4 1.896 0.0100 0.1410 7.09 Weak Jump

TABLE 6 showing the Hydraulic Jump Classification

SAMPLE CALCULATIONS

All values obtained were in inches, therefore they were multiplied by 0.0254 to convert it
to meters.

Depth of water = measured height of water – measured height of channel

for eg. Jump 1 = 0.212 m – 0.1670 m = 0.0492 m

Volume, V = 100 L per revolution; 2 revolutions would be equal to 200 L

= 0.2 m3

Discharge, Q = Vt = 0.2 / 19.67 = 0.0102 m3s-1

Specific discharge, q = Qb = 0.0102 / 0.1016 = 0.1004 m2s-1

Critical depth, Dc = 3q2g = 30.100429.81 = 0.1009 m

Cross sectional area, A = width of channel x depth of flow

= 0.1016 x 0.0492 = 0.005 m2

Velocity, v = QA = 0.0102 / 0.005 = 2.04 ms-1

Critical velocity, vc = Qb x Dc = 0.01020.1016 x 0.1009 = 0.9950 ms-1

Kinetic energy, ke = v22g = 2.042 x 9.81 = 0.2121 J

Specific Energy, E = D + V22g = 0.0492 + 4.16219.62 = 0.2613 J

Energy Loss, ΔE = (Dd-Du)34DuDd = (0.1726 – 0.0492)3 / (4 x 0.0492 x 0.1726) =

0.0553 J

Froude Number = vgD = 2.04 / √(9.81 x 0.0492) = 2.936

Force, F = ρgbD2 / 2 = 1000 x 9.81 x 0.1016 x 0.10092 / 2 = 5.074 N

Momentum, M = ρQv = 1000 x 0.0102 x 2.04 = 20.81 kgms-2

Measured height of channel = 0.1670 m

Measured width of channel = 0.1016 m

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

GRAPH 1 - ΔE vs Upstream Froude Number Analysis

The graph plotted from the experimental data showed that as the upstream
Froude number increased, so did the energy loss associated with the system. Theory
suggests that both the Froude number and specific energy are a function of the velocity
in the system as seen in the equations Fr = vgh and E = h+v22g. Increased
velocities caused both the Froude number and specific energy to increase. Also, since
the Froude number increased, there was more energy dissipated as the jumps got more
energetic (both total and specific energy). Hence the experimental data held true to the
theory.

GRAPH 2 - Jump Length vs Upstream Froude Number Analysis

This graph showed that there was a linear increase of the jump length as the
upstream Froude number increased. Theoretically the increased velocity would cause
the Froude number to increase making the flow more critical. This would influence the
distance the liquid would travel since velocity is also a function of the displacement.
Again, the theory and experimental data is supportive of each other.

For both graphs, the second point showed a greater deviation to the line of best
fit than the others, and thus may be considered erroneous since it does not fit the
recognized trend of the results. This may have been due to the method of
measurement for the experiment which relies greatly on human averaging and good
sense, leaving a greater allowance for human error.

Hydraulic Jump Classification and Stability

Name F1 Energy Dissipitation
Undular jump 1.0 – 1.7 < 5%
 Weak jump 1.7 – 2.5 5 – 15%
Oscillating jump 2.5 – 4.5 15 – 45%
Steady jump 4.5 – 9.0 45 – 70%
Strong jump > 9.0 70 – 85%
TABLE 6 showing the characteristics of hydraulic jump (USBR 1995) [1]

Table 6 shows the criteria to which the results of the hydraulic jump were
classified. Jumps 1 and 2 clearly fitted the characteristics of an oscillating jump in both
upstream Froude number and energy dissipation. Jump 4 was easily classified as a
weak jump however jump 3 there was some debate since the upstream Froude number
was 2.505 (oscillating jump) but the energy dissipation 13.37% fitted a weak jump.
Since the upstream Froude number was marginally close to a weak jump and the
energy dissipation was well within weak jump criteria, it was classified as a weak jump.

There were difficulties in obtaining a stable hydraulic jump in the centre of the
channel since slight variations in the flow rate would have a delayed effect on the
position of the jump and obtaining the right conditions for the jump were tricky. Factors
affecting the stability of the jump included the flow rate, position of the sluice gate as
well as the friction due to the hydraulic channel.

Practical Applications of Hydraulic Jumps

• As a measure to reduce scour downstream of weirs, dams and other hydraulic
structures by dissipating the energy.
• To mix chemicals used for water purification.
• To aerate water for city water supplies.
• To remove air pockets from water supply lines.
• To maintain high water levels in channels for irrigation purposes.

FIGURE 2
One such example is at St. Anthony Falls on the Mississippi River where the hydraulic
jump is used to prevent scour on the channel bed.

Errors & Precautions

• In determining the actual positions of the beginning and end of the jump as well
as the length of the jump there was no specific methodology used except “good
judgement”. This may have contributed to human errors.
• Error due to parallax in reading the vernier scale and flow guage.
• The flow may not have been fully stabilized when the readings were taken.
• Inserting of the depth gauge into the flow may have caused the jump to shift
along the channel.
• Reaction time error in obtaining the time for flow rate.
• It was assumed that the density was for pure water however it should be noted
the water in the experiment was brown indicating it may have contained other
substances and impurities which may have caused erroneous momentum and
energy values.
• There were addition energy losses (however minor) due to friction.

CONCLUSION
Within the limits of experimental error, it was found that the experimental
approach to the hydraulic jump phenomenon was not without errors and difficulties,
inclusive of stabilizing the jump in a fixed flume length, the method of obtaining the jump
parameters and not being able to account for additional energy losses, however was
comparable to theoretical calculations. It was also observed that as the depth
decreased upstream, the Froude number increased and more energy was dissipated.
REFERENCES
• Borthwick, M., Chadwick, A., Morfett, J. 2004. Hydraulics in Civil and
Environmental Engineering. Taylor & Francis.
• Massey, Bernard. 2006. Mechanics of Fluids. Taylor & Francis