River and Canal Engineering, the characteristics of open flowing streams, and the principles and methods to be followed in dealing with them.Bellasis, E. S. (Edward Skelton)
Science
River and Canal Engineering, the characteristics of open flowing streams, and the principles and methods to be followed in dealing with them.
Bellasis, E. S. (Edward Skelton)
Canals; Hydraulic engineering; Rivers
under-sluices was often as much as the canal supply, and the water in
the pond was thus kept in rapid movement and full of silt. The canal
was closed in heavy floods. This did some good, but probably the canal
was often closed needlessly when the water looked muddy but contained
no excessive quantity of sand. The above comments on the measures taken
were made by Mr Kennedy when chief engineer. The above measures did
not reduce the silt deposits, but the scour in the clear water season
improved, probably because higher supplies were run owing to increased
irrigation. The deposit in the upper reaches of the canal, when at
its maximum about the end of August of each year, was generally more
than twenty million cubic feet. From the year 1900 a better system
of regulation was enforced, the under-sluices being kept closed as
much as possible, so that there was much less movement in the pond and
much less silt in its water. By 1904 the deposit in the canal had been
reduced to three million cubic feet, and no further trouble occurred.
During the period from 20th September 1908 to 10th October 1908 the
quantity of silt in the canal above Chamkour (twelfth mile) decreased
from 19,325,800 cubic feet to 12,477,600 cubic feet. The quantity
scoured away was 6,848,200 cubic feet. During this period no silt
entered the canal. The quantity which passed out of the reach in
question in suspension was 4,183,660 cubic feet, so that 2,664,540
cubic feet of material must have been rolled along the bed. The rolled
material was 64 per cent. of the suspended material. During this period
the Daher escape, in the twelfth mile, was open, and the mean velocity
in the canal just above the escape was about 4 feet per second, the
depth of water being about 10 feet. The velocity near the escape was
thus greater than the critical velocity for mixed silt (CHAP. IV.,
_Art. 6_), and even a long way up the canal it would be in excess of
the critical velocity. The water seems to have carried about 1/1800
of its volume of silt. Whether the above proportions of rolled to
suspended matter would hold good in a fully charged stream flowing with
the critical velocity it is not easy to say.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account