• Korean Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.183-193
• /
• 1995

Assuming that fishing nets are porous structures to suck water into their mouth and then filtrate water out of them, the flow resistance N of nets with wall area S under the velicity v was taken by $R=kSv^2$, and the coefficient k was derived as $$k=c\;Re^{-m}(\frac{S_n}{S_m})n(\frac{S_n}{S})$$ where $R_e$ is the Reynolds' number, $S_m$ the area of net mouth, $S_n$ the total area of net projected to the plane perpendicular to the water flow. Then, the propriety of the above equation and the values of c, m and n were investigated by the experimental results on plane nettings carried out hitherto. The value of c and m were fixed respectively by $240(kg\cdot sec^2/m^4)$ and 0.1 when the representative size on $R_e$ was taken by the ratio k of the volume of bars to the area of meshes, i. e., $$\lambda={\frac{\pi\;d^2}{21\;sin\;2\varphi}$$ where d is the diameter of bars, 21 the mesh size, and 2n the angle between two adjacent bars. The value of n was larger than 1.0 as 1.2 because the wakes occurring at the knots and bars increased the resistance by obstructing the filtration of water through the meshes. In case in which the influence of $R_e$ was negligible, the value of $cR_e\;^{-m}$ became a constant distinguished by the regions of the attack angle $ \theta$ of nettings to the water flow, i. e., 100$(kg\cdot sec^2/m^4)\;in\;45^{\circ}<\theta \leq90^{\circ}\;and\;100(S_m/S)^{0.6}\;(kg\cdot sec^2/m^4)\;in\;0^{\circ}<\theta \leq45^{\circ}$. Thus, the coefficient $k(kg\cdot sec^2/m^4)$ of plane nettings could be obtained by utilizing the above values with $S_m\;and\;S_n$ given respectively by $$S_m=S\;sin\theta$$ and $$S_n=\frac{d}{I}\;\cdot\;\frac{\sqrt{1-cos^2\varphi cos^2\theta}} {sin\varphi\;cos\varphi} \cdot S$$ But, on the occasion of $\theta=0^{\circ}$ k was decided by the roughness of netting surface and so expressed as $$k=9(\frac{d}{I\;cos\varphi})^{0.8}$$ In these results, however, the values of c and m were regarded to be not sufficiently exact because they were obtained from insufficient data and the actual nets had no use for k at $\theta=0^{\circ}$. Therefore, the exact expression of $k(kg\cdotsec^2/m^4)$, for actual nets could De made in the case of no influence of $R_e$ as follows; $$k=100(\frac{S_n}{S_m})^{1.2}\;(\frac{S_m}{S})\;.\;for\;45^{\circ}<\theta \leq90^{\circ}$$, $$k=100(\frac{S_n}{S_m})^{1.2}\;(\frac{S_m}{S})^{1.6}\;.\;for\;0^{\circ}<\theta \leq45^{\circ}$$

• Magazine of the Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.2206-2217
• /
• 1971

Spillway and discharge channel of reservoirs require the Control of Large volume of water under high pressure. The energies at the downstream end of spillway or discharge channel are tremendous. Therefore, Some means of expending the energy of the high-velocity flow is required to prevent scour of the riverbed, minimize erosion, and prevent undermining structures or dam it self. This may be accomplished by Constructing an energy dissipator at the downstream end of spillway or discharge channel disigned to dissipated the excessive energy and establish safe flow Condition in the outlet channel. There are many types of energy dissipators, stilling basins are the most familar energy dissipator. In the stilling basin, most energies are dissipated by hydraulic jump. stilling basins have some length to cover hydraulic jump length. So stilling basins require much concrete works and high construction cost. Flip bucket type energy dissipators require less construction cost. If the streambed is composed of firm rock and it is certain that the scour will not progress upstream to the extent that the safety of the structure might be endangered, flip backet type energy dissipators are the most recommendable one. Following items are tested and studied with bucket radius, $R=7h_2$,(medium of $4h_2{\geqq}R{\geqq}10h_2$). 1. Allowable upstream channel slop of bucket. 2. Adequate bucket lip angle for good performance of flip bucket. Also followings are reviwed. 1. Scour by jet flow. 2. Negative pressure distribution and air movement below nappe flow. From the test and study, following results were obtained. 1. Upstream channel slope of bucket (S=H/L) should be 0.25<H/L<0.75 for good performance of flip bucket. 2. Adequated lip angle $30^{\circ}{\sim}40^{\circ}$ are more reliable than $20^{\circ}{\sim}30^{\circ}$ for the safety of structures.