4.6 Article

Experimental and Numerical Determination of Head Loss Coefficients of Two-Way Surcharged Manholes

Journal

WATER
Volume 15, Issue 23, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/w15234082

Keywords

energy loss; manhole; surcharge flow; sewer junction; sewer hydraulic; CFD

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper investigates the significance of loss coefficient in computing the hydraulic grade line of sewer systems. Experimental and numerical studies were conducted to determine the loss coefficient for two-way straight-through and angled manholes. The results show that the flow structure inside the chimney is a significant parameter for the magnitude of the energy loss coefficient.
The loss coefficient is one of the most critical parameters in computing the hydraulic grade line of sewer systems. The head loss coefficient of a manhole is dependent on various hydraulic and structural characteristics, such as manhole mold, connection angle, and the ratio of manhole diameter to pipe diameter. Three different manhole molds, flat, half-bench, and full-bench, and connection angles of 180 degrees, 90 degrees, and 135 degrees are investigated, where the manhole diameter to pipe diameter ratio is 5.3. This paper presents the results of experimental and numerical investigations focused on determining the loss coefficient for two-way straight-through and angled manholes. The flow structure inside the chimney is the significant parameter for the magnitude of the energy loss coefficient. The head loss coefficient is almost constant under the surcharged flow conditions for all kinds of manholes. In terms of head loss coefficients, half-channel manholes do not have a significant advantage over flat-bottomed manholes in the cases of 135 degrees and 90 degrees flow inputs. The full-bench bottom manhole head loss coefficient is the smallest. The computational fluid dynamic modeling results agree with the experimental studies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available