Ijciet 08 10 071

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 8, Issue 10, October 2017, pp. 677686, Article ID: IJCIET_08_10_071
Available online at http://http://www.iaeme.com/ijciet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=10
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed
EFFECTS OF CROSS-SECTIONAL GEOMETRY

OF PRISMATIC REACHES ON THE MANNING
COEFFICIENTS
Mas Mera
Civil Engineering
The University of Andalas, 26163, Indonesia
Rahmi Hardianti
Civil Engineering
Mochammad Riondy
Civil Engineering
Rico Dwi Buana Putra

Civil Engineering
ABSTRACT
The resistance coefficient is needed in designing a channel and in determining the
characteristics of both man-made and natural channels. Many factors affect the value
of the coefficient; some of them have been reported. The present research gives
emphasis on the effects of cross-sectional geometry on the resistance coefficient in the
uniform-flow formula of Manning by modelling physically the uniform flow in the
laboratory. Nine model-prismatic reaches are used in the present investigation. They
consist of two kinds of cross-sectional geometry, i.e. rectangular shape (three reaches)
and semi-circular shape (six reaches). Three kinds of homogeneous surface are
considered, they are PVC, gutter carpet and sandy carpet. The longitudinal slope of
each reach can be adjusted. The slope has 10 variations from 0.0025 to 0.025 m/m
with the step of 0.0025 m/m. The flow rate is determined by measuring the water
volume and the time taken. This is done five times to get the discharge average. The
flow depths are measured at five points to get the flow depth average. Such
measurements are performed for each slope variation of the considered reach. The
experimental results show that the reaches with the same cross-sectional geometry
even though they are different in size give nearly' the same resistance coefficient.
However, the reaches with the different cross-section give the different coefficient
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 677 editor@iaeme.com

Mas Mera, Rahmi Hardianti, Mochammad Riondy and Rico Dwi Buana Putra
even though they have the same surface. The reaches with sharp-curvature geometry
(e.g. rectangular) give higher value of the coefficient than those with smooth one (e.g.
semi-circular). In the future, the selection of the cross-sectional geometry should be
considered in designing a channel.
Keywords: Manning coefficient, cross-sectional geometry, PVC, gutter-carpet, sandy
carpet
Cite this Article: Mas Mera, Rahmi Hardianti, Mochammad Riondy and Rico Dwi
Buana Putra, Effects of Cross-Sectional Geometry of Prismatic Reaches on the
Manning Coefficients, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology,
8(10), 2017, pp. 677686
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=10
1. INTRODUCTION
Chow [1] stated that factors that have the greatest influence upon the Manning resistance-
coefficient in both man-made and natural channels are: (1) surface roughness, that is
represented by the size and shape of the grains of the material forming the wetted perimeter
and producing a retarding effect on the flow; (2) vegetation, that may be regarded as a kind of
surface roughness, but it can reduce the capacity of the channel and retard the flow; (3)
channel irregularity, that consists of irregularities in wetted perimeter and variations in cross
section, size, and shape along the channel length; (4) channel alignment, in which the channel
with smooth curvature with large radius will give a relatively low value of the coefficient,
whereas sharp curvature with severe meandering will increase the coefficient; (5) silting and
scouring, in which silting may change a very irregular channel into a comparatively uniform
one and decrease the coefficient, whereas scouring may do reverse and increase the
coefficient; (6) obstruction, that is something like the present of log jams and bridge piers in
which tend to increase the coefficient; (7) stage and discharge, in which the value of the
coefficient in most streams decrease with increase in stage and in discharge. Chow [1] insisted
that, however, there was no definite evidence about the size and shape of a channel as an
important factor affecting the value of resistance coefficient. This statement of Chow is as a
starting point of the present investigation. At this moment, we believe that the shape of the
cross section of a channel can significantly affect the value of the coefficient. For that reason
we try to find some definite evidences for that.
As reported by Dingman [2] that in the century following the publication of the Chzy
equation in 1769, European hydraulic engineers did considerable experimental researches to
develop practical ways to predict open-channel flow resistance. Then, an Irish engineer,
Robert Manning, in 1889 published an simple equation that best fit the experimental results
was [2, 3]
2 1
v = kR 3 S 2 (1)
Where v is the velocity, k is a proportionality constant representing reach conductance, R
is the hydraulic radius, and S is the longitudinal slope. As reported by Dingman [2] and
Dooge [4] that subsequent researchers replaced the constant k by its inverse 1/n. This leads to
1 23 12
v= R S
n (2)
The resulting equation is now called as Mannings equation or just simply Manning
equation, and the resistance factor n is called as Manning roughness-coefficient or
Manning resistance-coefficient or just simply Mannings n or Manning coefficient, which
is treated as constants for all unit systems [2, 5]. The Manning equation has come to be

Effects of Cross-Sectional Geometry of Prismatic Reaches on the Manning Coefficients
largely accepted as the resistance equation for open-channel flow, replacing the Chez
equation in practical applications [2]. Nowadays, the Manning resistance-coefficient can be
used to describe water basin characteristics [6]. The Manning coefficient can be included in
the shallow water-wave equations to both simulate and reproduce wind and tidally driven
hydrodynamics [7].
Dingman [2] also reported that the Manning equation was not derived based on the
principles of the fluid mechanics, nor that was established by rigorous statistical analysis. The
Manning equation uses empirically determined resistance-coefficient [8]. That is why the
Manning equation is sometime called as the semi-empirical Manning equation [5, 9]. The
Manning resistance-coefficient can be determined by modeling the uniform flow and then
solving the Manning equation as done by Djajadi [10] and Mera&Robi [11]. This was done
by measuring the discharge and hydraulic variables at a given time in a given reach,
determining the reach-average velocity, and solving the Manning equation for n. In the work
of Djajadi [10], the longitudinal slope of the reach was constant. In the work of Mera&Robi
[11], however, the reach slopes were varied so that the resulting coefficients are ranged from
minimum to maximum. The states of uniform flow in the works of Mera and Robi were also
varying, that was from sub-critical to super-critical flow.
Based on the above explanations, there will be some possibilities to identify other
significant factors that significantly influence the Manning resistance-coefficient such as
factor of the geometry shape of channel cross-section. As a result, the primary objective of the
present study is to find out the effects of cross-sectional geometry of prismatic reaches on the
Manning resistance-coefficient.
2. METHODOLOGY
The previous investigators [10, 11] focused on the determination of the Manning resistance-
coefficients for channels either with homogeneous surfaces or composite surfaces.
Meanwhile, Moharana&Katua [12] made an effort to predict Manning coefficient of a
meandering open-channel flow using neuro-fuzzy inference system. In the present
investigation, it will focus on the effects of geometrical shape of the channel cross-section
against the Manning resistance-coefficient. As a result, we determine the resistance
coefficient for reaches with a homogeneous surface. The cross-sectional geometries are
prismatic. The homogeneous surfaces considered are PVC, gutter carpet, and sandy carpet.
The sandy carpet-surface is the gutter-carpet surface with sand stuck on. The geometries
considered are rectangular shapes with a width of 12 cm; semi-circular shapes with a diameter
of 85 mm; and semi-circular shapes with a diameter of 135 mm.
A set of physical model of reaches is built up in the laboratory (Figure 1). The model
consists of a metal frame as a support, a stilling basin at the upstream of the reach, and a
receiving basin at the downstream. The longitudinal slope can be varied as needed. The water
from the stilling basin flows through a considered reach and comes to the receiving basin.
Then, the water is circulated by pumping it from the receiving basin to the stilling basin.
Firstly, the discharge Qi is determined by measuring the volume of water Vi that comes
out of the reach and also by measuring the time taken ti
Vi
Qi =
ti (3)
These measurements are done five times in every slope variation S to get the average
discharge Q

1 5
Q= Qi
5 i =1 (4)
The slope variations are from 0.0025 to 0.025 m/m with the step of 0.0025 m/m. In each
slope S, the flow depth yi is measured at five positions along the middle of the cross-sectional
reach to get the average water-depth y
1 5
y= yi
5 i =1 (5)
Section A-A:
12 cm 85 mm
135 mm
Slope adjuster Slope adjuster Pump
A
Reach
Stilling Receiving
basin basin
Figure 1 The physical model in the laboratory

Finally, the Manning resistance-coefficient n can be determined by use of the uniform-
flow formula as expressed in Equation (2). The average velocity v can be determined by
dividing the average discharge Q by wetted area A. For convenience, the open-channel flow
resistance is expressed as
1 2 1
n= AR 3 S 2
Q (6)
If the experiment is successfully done, each reach we have 10 slope variations, and every
slope variation we should have one average discharge Q, one average depth y, and one
resistance coefficient n,. The next step is to replace the present reach with one of other
reaches, and the procedures are repeated.
In a natural channel, like a river, the average discharge in the normal events is estimated
using a rating curve which is made specifically for a certain cross-section [13, 14]. In the
flood events, Coratoet al. [15] proposed a procedure to predict a river discharge using only
water level data at a single gauged site, as well as 1-D shallow-water wave equations and
occasional maxima surface flow-velocity by measurements. Meanwhile, Ayvaz [16] estimated
the Manning coefficient values by lingking simulationoptimization model simultaneously in
shallow water flows.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Each reach has a homogeneous surface. There are three reaches with a PVC surface, three
reaches with a gutter-carpet surface, and three reaches with a sandy carpet-surface.
3.1. Reaches with a PVC Surface

The reaches with the PVC surface are in the rectangular shape with a width of 12 cm, in the
semi-circular shape with a diameter of 85 mm, and in other semi-circular shape but with a
diameter of 135 mm. The experimental results and the solution of the Manning resistance-
equation for open-channel flow are shown in Figures 2, 3 and 4. All of the figures show that
the reach with the rectangular shape has the highest values of the coefficient, whereas the
reaches with semi-circular shape give nearly the same value of the resistance coefficient
even though they are different in size. Figure 2 shows that the relationship between the water
depth and the Manning resistance-coefficient in which confirms that the increase of water
depth will decrease the coefficient. The reach with an 85 mm semi-circular has slightly lower
coefficient than that with a 135 mm one. This is due to the water depth in the 85 mm one is a
bit higher than that in the 135 mm one. This also validates Chows report [1]. Pritchard
&Leylegian [9] reported that Linsleyet al. [17] made a list of the Manning resistance-
coefficients for three depth ranges, i.e. 0 to 15 cm, 15 to 60 cm, and > 60 cm. However, Chow
[1] made a list of the coefficients for three categories, i.e. minimum, normal and maximum
values.
0.015
85 mm Semi-circular
0.013 12 cm Rectangular
Manning Coefficient
0.011 135 mm Semi-circular
0.009
0.007
0.005
0.003
2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0
Water Depth (cm)
Figure 2 Reaches with a PVC surface: the relationship between the water depth (cm) and the Manning
resistance-coefficient
0.015
85 mm Semi-circular
0.013
12 cm Rectangular
Manning Coefficient
0.009
0.007
0.005
0.003
0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30 1.35 1.40
Velocity (m/s)
Figure 3 Reaches with a PVC surface: the relationship between the flow velocity (cm/s) and the
Manning resistance-coefficient

The relationship between the velocity and the Manning coefficient is shown in Figure 3 in
which the faster flow will lead to the higher resistance coefficient. The relationship between
the longitudinal slope and the Manning coefficient is shown in Figure 4 in which the steeper
slope will lead to the higher resistance coefficient. Based on Figures 2 and 4 that the stages
are in contrast to the longitudinal slopes in which the steeper slope makes the stage lower. In
case of a non-prismatic channel, Saleh et al. [18] reported that the impact of river longitudinal
slope on stages is bigger than that of the irregularity of cross sections. The longitudinal slope
is function of topography which in turn will affect the travel time [19].
The Manning resistance-coefficients for this PVC surface are ranged from 0.004 to 0.014.
They are: 0.0043 to 0.0072 for the 85 mm semi-circular geometry; 0.0049 to 0.0089 for the
135 mm semi-circular geometry; and 0.0068 to 0.0139 for the rectangular geometry.
135 mm Semi-circular
Manning Coefficient
0.011
0.009
0.007
0.005
0.003
0.0025 0.0050 0.0075 0.0100 0.0125 0.0150 0.0175 0.0200 0.0225 0.0250
Longitudinal slope (m/m)
Figure 4 Reaches with a PVC surface: the relationship between the longitudinal slope (m/m) and the
3.2. Reaches with a Gutter-Carpet Surface

The reaches with the gutter-carpet surface also have the same geometries and sizes as those
with the PVC surface. The results are shown in Figures 5, 6 and 7. All of the figures show the
same trends as those in the previous figures for the PVC surfaces, that is the reach with the
rectangular shape has the highest coefficient, whereas the reaches with semi-circular shape
give nearly the same coefficient even though they are different in size. Figure 5 shows that
the relationship between the water depth and the Manning coefficient in which confirms that
the coefficient decreases since the water depth increases.
0.018
0.016 85 mm Semi-Circular
12 cm Rectangular
Manning Coefficient
0.014
135 mm Semi-Circular
0.012
0.010
0.008
0.006
0.004
2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4
Water Depth (cm)
Figure 5 Reaches with a gutter-carpet surface: the relationship between the water depth (cm) and the

Figure 6 shows that the increase of the velocity is proportional to the increase of the
resistance coefficient. The relationship between the longitudinal slope and the Manning
coefficient is shown in Figure 7 in which the steeper slope will lead to the higher resistance
coefficient as those in the PVC surfaces. The Manning resistance-coefficients for this gutter-
carpet surface are ranged from 0.005 to 0.016. They are: 0.0047 to 0.0081 for the 85 mm
semi-circular; 0.0053 to 0.0095 for the 135 mm semi-circular; and 0.0075 to 0.0161 for the
rectangular geometry.
0.018
12 cm Rectangular
Manning Coefficient
0.014
0.012
0.010
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25
Velocity (m/s)
Figure 6 Reaches with a gutter-carpet surface: the relationship between the flow velocity (cm/s) and
the Manning resistance-coefficient
0.018
85 mm Semi-Circular
0.016
12 cm Rectangular
Manning Coefficient
0.014
0.012
0.010
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.0025 0.0050 0.0075 0.0100 0.0125 0.0150 0.0175 0.0200 0.0225 0.0250
Longitudinal Slope (m/m)
Figure 7 Reaches with a gutter-carpet surface: the relationship between the longitudinal slope (m/m)
and the Manning resistance-coefficient
3.3. Reaches with a Sandy Carpet-Surface

The reaches with the third homogeneous surface, i.e. sandy carpet-surface, also have the same
geometries and sizes as those with the PVC and gutter-carpet surfaces. The results which are
shown in Figures 8, 9 and 10 indicate the same trends as those in the previous figures for PVC
and gutter-carpet surfaces, that is the reach with the rectangular shape has the highest
coefficient, whereas the reaches with semi-circular shape give nearly the same coefficient
even though they are different in size. The relationship between the water depth and the
Manning resistance-coefficient is shown in Figure 8. The coefficients and the water depths are
inversely related.
Figure 9 shows that the corresponding of the flow velocity and the coefficient are
proportional. The same corresponding also happens to the relationship of the longitudinal
slope variation and the coefficient as shown in Figure 10.

The Manning resistance-coefficients for this sandy carpet-surface are ranged from 0.006
to 0.021. They are 0.0055 to 0.0112 for the 85 mm semi-circular; 0.0079 to 0.0142 for the 135
mm semi-circular; and 0.0098 to 0.0206 for the rectangular geometry.
0.022
12 cm Rectangular
0.018
Manning Coefficient
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.010
0.008
0.006
2.7 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.5 4.7 4.9 5.1 5.3
Water Depth (cm)
Figure 8 Reaches with a sandy carpet-surface: the relationship between the water depth (cm) and the
0.022
12 cm Rectangular
0.018
Manning Coefficient
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.010
0.008
0.006
0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85
Velocity (m/s)
Figure 9 Reaches with a sandy carpet-surface: the relationship between the flow velocity (cm/s) and
the Manning resistance-coefficient
0.022
0.020
0.018
Manning Coefficient
0.016
0.014
0.012
85 mm Semi-Circular
0.006
0.0025 0.0050 0.0075 0.0100 0.0125 0.0150 0.0175 0.0200 0.0225 0.0250
Longitudinal Slope (m/m)
Figure 10 Reaches with a gutter-carpet surface: the relationship between the longitudinal slope (m/m)
and the Manning resistance-coefficient
4. CONCLUSIONS
Another factor which has significant influence upon the Manning resistance-coefficient is
successfully determined by conducting laboratory works and then solving the equation of the

Manning open-channel flow for the resistance coefficient. The results show that the reaches
with sharp-curvature geometry (e.g. rectangular) give higher values of the coefficient than
those with smooth-curvature geometry (e.g. semi-circular). All reaches used in the
investigation have a homogeneous surface. The PVC surfaces give the Manning resistance-
coefficients 0.0043 to 0.0072 for semi-circular geometry with a diameter of 85 mm, 0.0049 to
0.0089 for semi-circular geometry with a diameter of 135 cm, and 0.0068 to 0.0139 for
rectangular geometry. Then, the gutter-carpet surfaces give the coefficients 0.0047 to 0.0081
for the 85 mm semi-circular, 0.0053 to 0.0095 for the 135 mm semi-circular geometry, and
0.0075 to 0.0161 for the rectangular geometry. Meanwhile, the sandy carpet-surfaces give the
coefficients 0.0055 to 0.0112 for the 85 mm semi-circular; 0.0079 to 0.0142 for the 135 mm
semi-circular; and 0.0098 to 0.0206 for the rectangular geometry. The results explicitly show
that the reaches with the same geometrical shape even though they are different in size give
nearly the same value of the Manning resistance-coefficient. However, the reaches with the
different cross-sectional geometry give the different coefficients even though they have the
same surface.
5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank to the School of Civil Engineering and the Faculty of Engineering, the University of
Andalas for funding this research through the scheme of RKAKL JTS / DIPA FT-UNAND
with a Contract Number: 044/PL/SPK/PNP/FT-Unand/2014.
We also thank to the School of Civil Engineering, the University of Andalas for funding
publication of this research.
REFERENCES
[1] Chow, V. T. Open-Channel Hydraulics, McGraw-Hill Book Co-Singapore, 1973.
[2] Dingman, S. L. Fluvial Hydraulics, Oxford University Press, 2009, 570p, ISBN: 978-0-
19-517286-7.
[3] R. Manning,On the flow of water in open channels and pipes, Transactions of the
Institution of Civil Engineers of Ireland, 20, 1889, p161195.
[4] Dooge, J. C. I. The Manning Formula in Context. In Channel Flow Resistance: Centennial
Mannings Formula, Yen B.C. (ed), Highlands Ranch, CO., Water Resources
Publications, 2002, p136185.
[5] May, L. W (Ed).Stormwater Collection Systems Design Handbook, McGraw-Hill, 2001,
1017p, ISBN: 0-07-135471-9.
[6] Pedinotti,V., Boone, A.,Ricci,S.,Biancamaria S. and Mognard,N. Assimilation of satellite
data to optimize large-scale hydrological model parameters: a case study for the SWOT
mission, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 18(11), 2014, p44854507,
(http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/18/4485/2014/hess-18-4485-2014.pdfaccessed on 11
Nov 2014)
[7] Bacopoulosa, P.,Hagena,S. C.,Cox,A. T., Dallyc W. R. and Bratos,S. M. Observation and
simulation of winds and hydrodynamics in St. Johns and Nassau Rivers, Journal of
Hydrology, 420421, 2012, p391402,
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002216941100919X accessed on 11
Nov 2014).
[8] May, L. W (Ed). Water Distribution Systems Handbook, McGraw-Hill, 2000, 644p,
ISBN: 0-07-134213-3.
[9] Pritchard, P. J. and Leylegian, J. C. Introduction to Fluid Mechanics, Eighth Edition, John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2011, 899p, ISBN: 0-4705-5755-3.

[10] Djajadi, R. Comparative Study of Equivalent Manning Roughness Coefficient for Channel
with Composite Roughness, Civil Engineering Dimension, 11(2), 2009, p113118,
(http://puslit2.petra.ac.id/ejournal/index.php/civ/article/view/17227accessed on 12 Nov
2014) ISSN: 1410-9530 (Print) 1979-570X (Online).
[11] Mera, M. and Robi, R. Technical Notes: Determination of Manning Roughness
Coefficient for PVC Gutters, JurnalTeknikSipil ITB, 20(2), 2013, p153160,
(http://www.ftsl.itb.ac.id/?page_id=8390accessed on 12 Nov 2014) ISSN: 0853-2982.
[12] Moharana, S. and Khatua, K. K. Prediction of roughness coefficient of a meandering open
channel flow using Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System, Measurement, 51, 2014, p112123,
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263224114000402accessed on 12
Nov 2014)
[13] Domeneghetti, A.,Castellarin, A. and Brath, A. Assessing rating-curve uncertainty and its
effects on hydraulic model calibration, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 16(4),
2012, p11911202, (http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/16/1191/2012/hess-16-1191-
2012.pdfaccessed on 11 Nov 2014)
[14] Getirana, A. C. V. and Peters-Lidard,C. Estimating water discharge from large radar
altimetry datasets, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 17(3), 2013, p923933,
(http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/17/923/2013/hess-17-923-2013.pdfaccessed on 11
Nov 2014)
[15] Corato,G.,Moramarco, T. and Tucciarelli, T. Discharge estimation combining flow
routing and occasional measurements of velocity, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences,
15(9), 2011, p29792994, (http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/15/2979/2011/hess-15-
2979-2011.pdfaccessed on 10 Nov 2014)
[16] Ayvaz, M. T. A linked simulationoptimization model for simultaneously estimating the
Mannings surface roughness values and their parameter structures in shallow water flows,
Journal of Hydrology, 500, 2013, p183199,
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022169413005362accessed on 11
Nov 2014)
[17] Abdi Mirgissa, Addisu Mesele, Desta Lemma, Design and Manufacturing of Cross-Flow
Turbine to Power Coffee Processing Plant & Nearby Community Village in Kaffa Zone.
International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 8(1), 2017, pp. 5461.
[18] Sudhina H. K., Dr. Jagadeesha S., Dr. N. M. Shetti, Dr.Girish Attimarad, Sierpinski
Carpet Fractal Microstrip Antenna for Improved Bandwidth using Stacking Technique
with Probe Feeding, International Journal of Electronics and Communication Engineering
& Technology (IJECET), Volume 6, Issue 1, January (2015), pp. 08-16
[19] Linsley, R. K.,Franzini, J. B.,Freyberg, D. L. and Tchobanoglous, G. Water Resources
Engineering, McGraw-Hill, 1991.
[20] Saleh, F.,Ducharne, A.,Flipo, N.,Oudin, L. and Ledoux, E. Impact of river bed
morphology on discharge and water levels simulated by a 1D SaintVenant hydraulic
model at regional scale, Journal of Hydrology, 476, 2013, p169177,
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002216941200902X#accessed on 10
Nov 2014)
[21] kesson, A. and Wrman, A. Stage-dependent hydraulic and hydromorphologic
properties in stream networks translated into response functions of compartmental models,
Journal of Hydrology, 420421, 2012, p2536,
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002216941100792Xaccessed on 10
Nov 2014)

Ijciet 08 10 071

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Ijciet 08 10 071

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

EFFECTS OF CROSS-SECTIONAL GEOMETRY

Rico Dwi Buana Putra

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 677 editor@iaeme.com

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 678 editor@iaeme.com

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 679 editor@iaeme.com

Slope adjuster Slope adjuster Pump

Figure 1 The physical model in the laboratory

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 680 editor@iaeme.com

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

3.1. Reaches with a PVC Surface

0.011 135 mm Semi-circular

0.011 135 mm Semi-circular

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 681 editor@iaeme.com

3.2. Reaches with a Gutter-Carpet Surface

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 682 editor@iaeme.com

3.3. Reaches with a Sandy Carpet-Surface

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 683 editor@iaeme.com

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 684 editor@iaeme.com

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 685 editor@iaeme.com

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 686 editor@iaeme.com

Вам также может понравиться