DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
FRANKFORT
D. L 7,
The first reports were concerned with item 1 , and a report was
made to the Department in 1956*. That report presented data obtained
Station, University of Kentucky, 1956*. For reasons which are now obscure
perhaps , the model was disassembled and was not operable for several years,
However , interest in drop inlets persisted; and , inasmuch as this was
one of the areas which we were more-orless committed to study , the model
was restored and adapted for the study of drop-inlets, The tests on this
phase were made over a year ago , and the model was then returned to stor
age. The reporting of this work has been delayed , so to speak , by other
matters,
The study was made by R. D, Hughes, and his report , "A Study
of the Hydraulics of Drop-Inlet-Type Culvert Models , " is attached,
hereto, His results and analyses are best summarized by the discharge
coefficient presented in the report, These coefficients, which are
dimensionless , may be used directly in the basic formulae to compute
discharges in full-scale culverts; whereas, the similitude analysis
merely yields a factor relating the discharge in the model to the dis
charge of its fullscale counterpart , The end results would be the
same , but the similitude analyses seem to be somewhat cumbersome.
'
W, B, Drake
Director of Research
WBD:dl
Enc,
cc : Research Committee Members
Bureau of Public Roads (3)
Commonwealth of Kentucky
Department of Highways
by
R. D. Hughes
Research Engineer Associate
January , 1963
INTRODUCTION
funne1 the channe1 water into the drop" section, Thus , intercepting
dams and sidewalls may be needed to form the entrance, Figure 1 illus
cular case where the difference between inlet and outlet elevations is
tions have arisen in which this type of culvert might have been pre
ferred to other alternatives ,but was not used because reliable design
parameters and criteria for design were not available and appropriately
was reported by Kessler in 1934 (1) and by Huff in the early 1940"s (2),
- 1 -
- 2 -
open or close d
--- -
=
- - -.:....-:-
ou tfall flume
::::.. --
- ,
____.t:..._ - ::::::
-
"'-
""""'--
--
I -- - - -
- -.-
' "'
I I - -
-\R CO U
-
IIIII
--
' -- '
1 l
--=-_-=:_-=:_
"-..... .. 0 aion
-:::- - - \
inlet
.::-'>,.
- ""' -
_
-
L- ---
- - -
I ow di!lchorg velocity
uniform grade
L -
L---------
installations,
The inlets used in all tests were similar in that each had sidewalls
above the crest of the approach channel. Other features of the models
and the test procedures are included in the body of the report,
THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS
velocity through the culvert must be greater than the velocity in the
up at the entrance, but , even so, the barrel of the culvert may not
flow full; hence, the capacity of the barrel exceeds the capacity of
The control may thus be at the outlet rather than at the entrance ,
Likewise , the control would be in the barrel only when the barrel itself
2 2
(HW TW) + y 1
-- y 2 ; he + hf + ho + \) " 0'
Zg
pending upon the location of the controL In the case where the outfall
<> 4
0 5
Fig, 3, The edge or top surface of the weir is called the crest, and
square-crested weir, If the length of the weir is less than the width
the velocity at some point upstream from the weir is taken to be the
drop inlet
crest
1/ orrel
-::-
_
I
L __
llJ l=+dll
L
elevation above and o<... h is the approach velocity-head; and the effec
dQ+ = L f dh zg (h + ' h) 1
= JL Vzg V
"
Q+ h + o(h dh 2
'{fi L
0
formula, and the resulting equation for actual flow over the weir is:
Qw = Lfiw 3/ 2
4
flow over the weir, has a value of 2/3 V Zg or 5, 35, Since head
flows. The inlet may act as an orifice if the headwater floods the
well as the total head acting at the center of the orifice, Theoreti
the area of the opening and velocity, The general equation is:
Go = Ao Vo = Ao 5
less than the area of the orifice: due to convergence of the flow
passing the orifice is found to be the product of the actual area of the
jet times the actual velocity in the jet just beyond the orifice, or
Go = Ao C c Cv 6
and {iii gives the orifice coefficient C0, The general formula for
l/2
Go = Ao C o Ho 7
- 9 -
t_Ho
-
-
-=-
-
- - --_
-=- --... , .
.... . .-. .\\. ... ,.
0
1\. '.tll'
-
- -
_ _
" t
-
-
..
v.
., ("";". "
l}lll. - -:/-:. ---.::-
/0 ----,
-
Short-Tube-Flow
section but not the barrel, This condition is likely to produce surging
the drop section is running full, and the main barrel of the culvert is
not running full, discharge is again found to be the product of the area
of the vertical section and the velocity. Since the vertical section
1/ 2
Qst - Ast Vst - t
- A Cst Hst 8
- 10 -
section.
full flow in both the drop-section and barrel, control switches to the
barrel and to the domain of ordinary pipe-flow. The total head causing
the difference between headwater elevation and the point at which the
- 11 -
assumption.
R's represent the hydraulic radii; and L's represent the lengths of the
of flaw (when areas of all sections are equal), 2) total head causing
ty/4 R;J
ll
Q =A 10
APPARATUS AND TEST METHODS
Figs , 8 and 9,
Water was pumped from a pit and into the approach channel,
from which it passed through the mode l culvert to the weir tank for
gaging and was then returned to the pit for reuse, Turbulence of in
tank and by means of baffles placed perpendicular to the flow from the
Provision for affixing various inlets was made through use of a flanged
l et , drop section, elbow and barrel, All inlets were identical except
for the flange-angles which were varied according to the channel slope
for which each particular inlet was designed and in order that each
13
APPROACH CHANNEL
HOOK GAGE
......
...
BARREL
SUPPORT
at the designated slope, The inlets , one of which is shown in Fig, 10,
flush with the bottom of the approach channeL The headwal l extended
two inches above its juncture with the embankment portion of the end
section , The sidewalls were constructed to the same e levation as
the headwall, Four inlets were constructed one each for channel
inches was obtained with the e lbow connected directly to the inlet ,
bottom of the barrel and e lbow , at Zinch intervals , and were connected
to the manometer board, One tube was attached at the top of the e lbow
Test Procedure
set by screw jacks and checked by means of a leve l, Tests were conducted
- 8T -
....
N
- 6I -
20 -
was al lowed after final adjustment of the valve in order to permit the
gage in the weir tank, Photographs were made of the manometer boards
obtained for each variable as wel l as the specific data needed to calcu
types of controL The resulting coefficients are listed in the fol low
ing table and are designated Cw, C0, Cst and Cp for the weir , orifice,
21
22
to be constant for variable lengths of drop and for each e lbow since
D ISCHARGE COEFFICIENTS
vary more or less directly with the length of drop for a constant
may be attributed to gain in head, The gain in head more than com
slopes,
a lmost identical, For this reason , data obtained from tests using
each e lbow were combined in the analysis for effect of s l ope and length
and 15, The continuous portion of these curves were plotted from the
from tests, The headwater elevations are shown as Hw and H0, The
3% SLOPE
1---
- O"'o SLOPE
6.5" DROP 6.5" DROP
" H0,11,..
' 1.6 1.4 '
1.8 1.8
"" .,;'\.
1.6
1.4 1.2 I I 1 .6
1.4 1.2 II I
II II VI II
!A
I1/
"'
..
1.2 1.0 . 1.2 1.0
::;: 1.4
/;
c
"' ..
1.0 .6 "'
1.0 .6 --------
...--
Ill l
1.2 :1: 1.2
/; 7 ..-----
...--
p Jj/fl
.6- .6 .6 .6
1.0 1.0
/-
1
.6
I/ //
.4 .6 .4
//I ?
.6 .6
.4- .2 /
[/ 1/ 1/
.4 .2
.6
JL-
. 6
/ olZ- [? 17 1/
1/
.2- 0 /
[/
.2
.4 .4
.2
0-'-- ,_.../
/
l/ .2
0
./
/
0
____ ,/ 0
-
0 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .6 0 .I .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .6
0 ISCHARGE-(c.f.s.l OISCHAAGE-(c.f.s.)
I I
1----
7% SLOPE 5% SLOPE
-
6.5" DROP 6.5" DROP
1.6
1.4 1.2 I 11 1 1.6
1.4 1.2 I I
I I;II IllII
I fl
"'
.a
2
" 1.0 1.0 .6
I vi 1----
1. 1.2
1.0
.8 .s
IIjI[-v
.6 .6 /; I -----
t'!-kl-----
1.0
v I v 7/
.6 .4 .6 .4
.a .6
/
l/ Gl
.4 .2 /
v / [/
.4- .2
.6 .6
2
v
-
/
0 .2 0
.4 .4
v /
v
_v
0 -
.2 0__[_
I/
.2
/ 0
0
0 .2 .3 !4 .5 .6 .7 .8 0 .I .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8
DISCHARGE -(c. f.s.) DJSCHARG E- (c.f.s.)
I I I 1
0% SLOPE 3% SLOPE
-
9" DROP
,1--
He. 9"0ROP liM
H..,M.,
1.4
liM
"
1.8 1.4 ' 1.8
2.0 2.0
1.6
1.2 I I; 1.8
1.6
1.2
I I
1.8
I I
f/ I
_...-l. . I _...-
1.0 1.0
1.4 1.4
1.6 2t.6
7 I r7/ /
II 1 -----
II
.8
.
1.2 .8
1.2
0
"' 1.4
1/.....-: II 7 -----
',21.4 "'
'/
1.0 .6
/
1.0 .6
j.v
0
..--!-VI
"'1.2 1.2
"'
I/
.8- .4
v:::
8 .4
1.0 1.0
v 1/ r7 I 1/
)/ I
.2
\{--
.2 .6
6 / .8
6
.8
0 I / .6
.4 0
/ 1/
I/
.
I;
1/
' .2-
.2
I./ /
.4
.4
/'
o_L_-
0
l../
.2
.2
-v 0
0 0 .1 .2 .4 .8
.8
.3 5
0 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .1
DISCHARGE- (c.f.s.l
DISCHARGE(c.f.sJ
1 I I I
.
5% SLOPE 7% SLOPE
r--
-
9" DROP
9" DROP
.a '"'
",J\, " ......
1.8 1.4
It' '
" 2.0
2.0
I 1.6 1.2 I ,I
1.6 1.2 I 1.8
7
\I /,
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.0
\ II 1.6
1.4 1.0
I 'I ; \II
I jl
.8 1.2 .8
0
<c:l.4
1.2 1.4
"'
.6
r7 /, ]... "'
1.0
.6
-;
%
1.0
1.2
w
1.2 /
r;
.4 // 8 4 /
1/1
.a- 1.0
f:1
1.0
I
!7
v-:: ......:.
1/j
.2 .6 .2 /
-
/
.6 .8
0
.8
l;
1/ I
.4 0
0
.4 .6
I/ 1/
.6
7 v 1/
.2
.2 .4
.4
v
_v-
0
0 .2
.2
0
v 0
.I .2 .5 .6 ,7 .8
0
0 .2 .3 A .5 .6 .7 .e .3 A
DISCHARGE-( c.f.s.)
DISCHARGE ( c.f.s.)
"ollw
H.,.l!
"t 1.4- " I :4
f-- r---
"
1;1
2.0 O'Yo SLOPE " 2.0 3% SLOPE
2.2 22
I; I
12' DROP 12" DROP
12
I I
1.2
18 1.8
2.0 2.0
10
I J 1.0
IlL
I
I
I
16 1.6
I I
1.8 1.8
1---
$
.8 -
.8
/ ----
'--t
14 14
I
1.6
I
16
.6
:Jt.4
.6
/
0
12- / 12
1.4
4
v _,/-
v
V/
I 4
'/
10 / 10
/
12 1.2
/ /
L
.2 .2
/
jL--
/ ll
.8 .8
/_ 1/
1.0 10
0 f'--- 0
/
.6 .6
8 .8
/ --t-- /
v 1/
.4 .4
.6 .6
/ I
/ 1/
.2 .2
.4 .4
/v v
/
0 0
.2 .2
_v 0
0
0 .2 .3 A .5 .7 0 .I .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .B
D!SCHARG E (c.f.s.) DISCHARGE- (cJ.s.l
I l
,
-
H00H, ....
-
11ot 1.4
... . "
I II
2.0- 7% SLOPE
" 2.0 5 % SLOPE 2
2.2
j_
12" DROP
1.2
12" DROP
18
12
II
I
1.8 2.0
II II II
2.0
10 1.0
I /, I
16
1.6
1.6
..
I I /;---
1.6
/-/
0 1.2 1.
.;
1/
cXt.4
'I v
/v
.4
.4
/
10
10 t.:
1----/
1.2
/ .2 ?
.2
/;
jL
.8
/
/ (I
.8 10
r/
10
0 L-- 0
//
.6 6
8
I//
..
7
.4
.4 6
L
6
I
v I//
.2
.2
/
4
/7
.4
v
__
0
0 .2
.2
0
---/ 0 .I .2 .3 .4 .5 .6
0 .z .3 A .s .s .7 .a
DISCHARGE-{ c.f.s.)
DISCHARGE ( c.f.s.)
height of the barreL The datum for pipeflow was taken to be the
centerline of the barrel at the outlet and is thus plotted below the
the elevation of the bottom of the approach channel and the centerline
curves for the 9- and 12"inch drop"sections are shown in Figs , 14 and
inches, Above three inche's, the weir became flooded and the control
seven inches ,
to 15 inches ,
specific slope, represents the combined results from the three drop
WEIR FLOW
0-3-5-7
percent channel
s I opes I
I
-
....:
-
0
I
<t
w
:::r:
1.0
O%
.8
3%
5%
7%
c;:-
__..-
--
.6
/ :::---
.4
.2
0
0 .I .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 . .7 .a
DISCHARGE- (c.f.s)
2.4
ORIFICE FLOW
0-3-5-7 0,3,5,7 percent
2.2
percent channel
!I
s l opes
1/
2.0
1/$
1.8
1.6
/;w
..;
-
'
0
1.4
1/j
<(
w
J:
1.2
V/11
A
1.0
.8
II
Av
.6
.4
/
.2
0
.
0 .I .2 .3 4 .5 .6 .7 .8
DISCHARGE- (c.f. s l.
2.4
SHORT TUBE
- SHORT TUBE
f!!
1--
FLOW 6. "9"12" drop FLOW 6 5"9"12 " drop
2.2
I,u
2.2
0- percent 3-percent
s Io p e slope
II[/
2.0 2.0
I II;
1// 1//1
1.8 1.8
-
!J'I r!l
1.6 ....., 1.6
0 !.4 *1.4
Ill p;
w w
1.2 1.2
.8
/!, .8
.6 l&_ .6 II
.4 h .4
I!w
,
v v
.2 .2
-"" 0
__.
0
0 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 0 .I .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8
OISCHARGE-(c.f.s.l DISCHARGE- (c.f.s.)
2.4
sI o pe
I 1/ s I ope
I I
;I/I
2.0 20
I
II II
1.8 1.8
21
.,.
.6
1.4
/II
. .
f----- :21.6
w
!.4 II;1/
rl!
II 'I
1.2 1.2
10
.
I/; 1.0
w lj;
;;r;
.8 8
.6 !J 6
/.ljl . .4
kP .I
_,.,/ /
.2 .2
0
O
0 .I .2 .3 .4 .5 6 .7 8 0 2 .3 .4 .5 6 7 .8
DISCHARGE -(c.f.s.) DIS CHARGE- (c.f.s.}
I I
PIPE FLOW
l PIPE FLOW
1--
Op&rcent 6.5;Ef
' l:i'dtop 3- percent 6.if,12''drop
2.2 - 2.2
1-- s I o pe s l o pe
II
VII
2.0 2.0
1.8 1. 8
1.6 1.6 J
1.4 1.4
I
h
I
1.2 1.2
1.0
I
I
1.0
I
.a .8
J! .6
f/
.6
f
]/ /
.4 .4
_.... /
.2 .2
_.....
- 0
0 .I .2 .4 .5 .6
0
0 .I .2 .s .4 .a .6 .7 .3 .7 .B
DISCHARGE-(c.b) DISCHARGE- (c.f.s.)
I I I l
PIPE FLOW PIPE FLOW
If
I--
6.5;'(12" 6. rt
&-percent
2.2 -
2.2 slope 7-percent
II ope
2.0
VI!
2.0
l#
d
1. 8 1.6
2t.G
1/!
..., 1.6
'
1
VI
1.4 1.4
Q
/!;
1.2 1.2
II!
1.0
1,0
lf .B
/)
.8
j
I'
.6
Jl
6
v
.4
v
.4
y
.2 .2
0
0
_....V .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .B
0
0 2 .3 .4 .5
DISCHARGE -{c.f.s.l
.6
-
.7 .B
DISCHARGE- (c.f.s.J
equivalent of the model) from model studies were reported previously (5)
e levations for the prototype are given by: 1 inch 1 foot, since a
=
Q(p) =
(p) L(p) Hw(p) 3/2
1
Q(m) (m) L(m) Hw(m) 3 2
where (p) and (m) subscripts denote prototype and model values respec
Iiw(p) and Iiw(m) are: L(p) = 12 L(m) and Iiw(p) = 12 Iiw(m); thus, the
- 33 -
34
equation becomes:
3/ 2
Q(p) _ Cw(p) 12 L(m) (12 I-Iw(m)
3 /Z
Q (m) --rw(m) L(m) Cf\v(m) )
Q(p) Cw(p)
=
(12)5/2 X
Q(m) Cw(m)
The factor becomes unity since Cw(p) and Cw(m) are dimensionless
/
and are nearly equa l , Q(p) is thus (12)5 2 times Q(m) or approximately
500 Q (m) ' Similar relationships for orifice, shorttube , and pipe
to Q(p) is who lly dependent upon the scale modulus, Alternatively, then
3, B laisde ll, F , W , and Donnel ly, Co A.; Capacit{' of Box Inlet Spill
ways Under Free Flow and Submered Flow COnctitlons, St , Anthony
Falls Hydrauhc Laboratory ; Umversity of Minnesota Technical Paper
No, 7, Series B,, 1951 ,
35 "
BIBLIOGRAPHY
2, Allen, J,, Jr.; Sc[!le 1odels in" Hydraulic Engineering, New York:
Logmans, Green & CO, 1941
s. (?
Blaisdell, F. W. and Donnelly, C. A.; C acitr of Box Inlet Spill
wa s Under Free F low and Submer ed Flow ondit1on, St, Anthony
Fal s y rau 1cs a oratory: 1vers1ty o nnesota Technical
Paper No. 7, Series B, 1951.
6. t
Blaisdell, F. w. and Donnelly, c. A.; H draulicDesign of Drop
Spillway,. St, Anthony Falls Hydraulic aboratory, Univers1ty of
Minnesota, Technical Paper No. 8, Series B, 1951.
7. l
Blaisdell, F. W,; !;Jl::draulics of Closed Conduit S illways - Part I -
Theory and A ation, St. Anthony Falls Hydrau ics Laboratory;
ITn1versity o nllesota, Technical Paper No, 12, Series B, 1952,
- 36
Bibliography (Continued)
24, Wes t , E , M, ; "Model Study of Flow Through CUlverts ," Bulletin No,
(Some Technical Papers , Kentucky Highway Conference;" March 28
ZY , 1956) , Engineering Experiment Station , University of Kentucky ,
1956 ,
37