X hits on this document

PDF document

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences - page 5 / 9

46 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

5 / 9

VOL. 3, NO. 2, APRIL 2008

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

©2006-2008 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

result was compared to the actual discharge as determined by the weir. Figure-4 shows the relationship between measurement discharge by weir (Qm) and total energy at upstream (H1) for 11 type of long-throated flumes which used in this study. Figure-5 shows the flow measurement error (flume rating compared to actual discharge) as a

the flow measurement error is generally in the range of ± 20%. The average of flow measurement error of long- throated flume with rectangular cross section was achieved 1.4%. The average error indicates this structure has high accuracy for measurement of passing flow through long- throated flow.

function of the actual discharge. This Figure shows that

H1 (cm)

30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2

Flume C Flume D Flume J Flume G Flume I Flume J Flume L Flume N Flume H Flume M Flume E

0

5

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Discharge (lit/s)

Figure- 4. The relationship between measurement discharge by weir (Q) and depth of the flow above the crest level at approach channel (H1).

Flow Measurement Error, %

20

15

10

5

0

  • -

    5

  • -

    10

  • -

    15

  • -

    20

0.00

0.01

0.02 0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

Discharge (m^3/s)

Figure- 5. Flow measurement errors as a function of actual discharge.

66

Document info
Document views46
Page views46
Page last viewedThu Dec 08 02:51:28 UTC 2016
Pages9
Paragraphs439
Words3485

Comments