21.11.2013 Views

pdf, 12 MiB - Infoscience - EPFL

pdf, 12 MiB - Infoscience - EPFL

pdf, 12 MiB - Infoscience - EPFL

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

3.2 Flow equations and flow resistance<br />

Flow equations and flow resistance<br />

The flow resistance is influenced by the structure of the surface layer and the presence of sediment<br />

load and suspended load transport. The roughness of the surface layer is due to the characteristics<br />

of the surface layer and the presence of bedforms. Many works and textbooks give an overview<br />

over the different flow equations and the flow resistance, like e.g. DUBOIS (1998), SINNIGER &<br />

HAGER (1989), HUNZIKER (1995), ZARN (1997).<br />

3.2.1 Flow resistance and friction laws<br />

In his pioneer work, CHEZY (1768) related the average flow velocity to the bed slope and the<br />

water depth.<br />

V = C⋅<br />

h ⋅ S<br />

(3.10)<br />

For the friction coefficient C , CHEZY made important simplifications. About 100 years later,<br />

GANGUILLET & KUTTER published a formula, which allowed the computation of C as a function<br />

of the bed roughness. Authors like CHÉZY, GAUKLER, FORCHHEIMER, MANNING, CHRISTEN,<br />

(see SINNIGER & HAGER, 1989, §2.2) and many others published velocity power laws.<br />

In Switzerland, the formula of STRICKLER (1923) found a wide application:<br />

V = K s<br />

⋅ R2 3<br />

h<br />

⋅<br />

⁄ S 1⁄<br />

2<br />

(3.11)<br />

The relation between STRICKLER’S roughness coefficient K s<br />

and the size of the characteristic<br />

roughness ε (usually the mean diameter of the surface layer d m<br />

) is given by<br />

K s<br />

=<br />

Cst<br />

-------<br />

(3.<strong>12</strong>)<br />

6<br />

ε<br />

STRICKLER put the value of the constant Cst to 21.1 and used as characteristic roughness ε the<br />

mean diameter. MEYER-PETER & MÜLLER (1948) used a value of Cst = 26 combined with<br />

ε = d 90 (of the substrate). The higher constant Cst is partially compensated by the bigger grain<br />

diameter. MEYER-PETER & MÜLLER justified the increased constant with a better fit to the results<br />

of NIKURADSE. JÄGGI (1984) and HUNZIKER (1995) analyzed the constant Cst for the computation<br />

of the bed friction. They concluded that the initially proposed value of STRICKLER fits better<br />

to the observed values than the one of MEYER-PETER & MÜLLER. SCHÖBERL (1981) performed a<br />

series of tests and proposed an intermediate value of 23.5. In the present study a value of<br />

8.2 g = 25.7 is used in combination with d 90 .<br />

DARCY-WEISSBACH (VANONI, 1975) proposed the following friction law:<br />

V =<br />

8 ⋅g ⋅R h<br />

⋅ S<br />

----------------------------<br />

f<br />

(3.13)<br />

<strong>EPFL</strong> Ph.D thesis 2632 - Daniel S. Hersberger November 9, 2002 / page 27

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!