This article was downloaded by: [McGill University Library]

On: 14 January 2015, At: 14:53

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Hydraulic Research

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tjhr20

Prediction of downpull on closing high head gates

a

Ismail Aydin , Ilker T. Telci & Onur Dundar

Civil Engineering Department , METU , 06531, Ankara, Turkey Fax:

Published online: 26 Apr 2010.

To cite this article: Ismail Aydin , Ilker T. Telci & Onur Dundar (2006) Prediction of downpull on closing high head gates,
Journal of Hydraulic Research, 44:6, 822-831, DOI: 10.1080/00221686.2006.9521733
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221686.2006.9521733

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Hydraulic Research Vol. 44, No. 6 (2006), pp. 822831

2006 International Association of Hydraulic Engineering and Research

Prediction of downpull on closing high head gates

Calculs de labaissement de fermeture de vannes sous fortes charges
ISMAIL AYDIN, Associate Professor, Civil Engineering Department, METU, 06531 Ankara, Turkey. Tel.: + 90 (312) 210 54 55;
fax: + 90 (312) 210 24 38; e-mail: ismaydin@metu.edu.tr (author for correspondence)
ILKER T. TELCI, Graduate Student, Civil Engineering Department, METU, 06531 Ankara, Turkey. Tel.: + 90 (312) 210 24 19;
fax: + 90 (312) 210 24 38; e-mail: telci@metu.edu.tr

Downloaded by [McGill University Library] at 14:53 14 January 2015

ONUR DUNDAR, Graduate Student, Civil Engineering Department, METU, 06531 Ankara, Turkey. Tel.: + 90 (312) 210 24 76;
fax: 90 (312) 210 24 38; e-mail: dundar@metu.edu.tr
ABSTRACT
Downpull on tunnel gates installed in the intake structure of a hydroelectric power plant was studied experimentally using a hydraulic model. The
pressure distribution on the gate lip surface was measured, and the lip downpull was evaluated by surface-area integration of the measured pressure
distribution. An easy to use lip downpull coefficient was defined as a function of the lip angle and gate opening. The lip downpull coefficient function
is linked to a one-dimensional mathematical model of unsteady flow in the intake-penstock system. The model is based on the integral energy and
continuity equations. Overflow through the gate spacings is also included in the model to compute the water level in the gate shaft and to evaluate the
downpull component on the top face of the gate. Time-dependent calculation of the total downpull force acting on a closing gate is exemplified. The
total downpull is also measured by the direct weighing method for fixed and closing gates. Predictions of the mathematical model compare favorably
with the downpull obtained from the direct weighing method.
RSUM
Labaissement des vannes de tunnel installes dans la structure de prise deau dune usine hydrolectrique est tudi exprimentalement sur un modle
hydraulique. La distribution de pression sur la surface de la tranche de la vanne a t mesure, et leffort a t valu par lintgration de la pression
mesure sur la surface. Un coefficient, facile demploi, de leffort sur la tranche a t dfini en fonction de langle de la tranche et de louverture
de la vanne. La fonction donnant ce coefficient est lie un modle mathmatique unidimensionnel de coulement instationnaire du systme de
prise-conduite force. Le modle est bas sur lintgrale des quations dnergie et de continuit. Le dbordement dans lespace interne de la vanne
est galement inclus dans le modle pour calculer le niveau deau dans la vanne et valuer leffort sur la face suprieure de la vanne. Le calcul en
fonction du temps des efforts agissant sur la vanne en fermeture est illustr. Leffort total de fermeture est galement mesur par la mthode de pese
directe pour les vannes fixes et en fermeture. Les prvisions du modle mathmatique donnent de bonnes comparaisons.

Keywords: Pressure distribution, downpull, hydraulic gate, dams, hydropower.

1 Introduction

through the spacings between the gate faces and walls of the gate
chamber. The spacings around the gate can be adjusted to control overflow and therefore the water level in the gate chamber.
Pressure on the lip surface mainly depends on the lip geometry,
flow rate under the gate and the streamline pattern around the lip.
Gate geometry is characterized by the lip angle, corner roundings and the end plate. The flow rate is usually characterized by
the average velocity in the flow section under the gate lip. The
streamline pattern of the gate region is characterized by the gate
opening.
For opening a gate, the hoist mechanism should resist the
weight of the gate, the downpull and the frictional resistance.
When the gate is closing, hydrodynamic downpull added to the
dead weight of the gate minus the frictional resistance determines

Vertical leaf gates are widely used high head gates for discharge
control and emergency closure in large cross-sectional conduits
since they provide many advantages in construction and maintenance. However, leaf gates may cause problems in certain
circumstances due to large downpull or uplift.
The hydrodynamic downpull can be defined as the total force
induced by the flowing water on the gate surfaces acting in the
closing direction. Hydrodynamic downpull results mainly from
the difference between pressure forces acting on the top and lip
surfaces of the gate. The pressure on the top surface depends
on the gate position (opening) and water level in the gate chamber. The water level in the gate chamber is affected by overflow

Revision received January 9, 2006/Open for discussion until June 30, 2007.

822

Downloaded by [McGill University Library] at 14:53 14 January 2015

Prediction of downpull on closing high head gates

the hoist capacity required. In some cases, negative downpull

resulting in an uplift force may prevent safe closure of the gate.
Downpull force prediction methods were developed by hydrodynamic analysis of high head gates (Colgate, 1959; Naudascher
et al., 1964; Murray and Simmons, 1966; Naudascher, 1986,
1991) and have been validated by simultaneous model studies.
Naudascher et al. (1964) and Naudascher (1986) presented a
one-dimensional analysis of the discharge passing under a tunnel
gate and of the hydraulic downpull acting on it. The studies of
Naudascher showed that the downpull is significantly affected
not only by the geometry of the gate bottom but also by the rate
of flow passing over the top of the gate through the gate chamber.
Sagar (1977) and Sagar and Tullis (1979) indicated that important factors such as geometry, boundary layers and turbulence
influence the downpull on a gate and discussed various forces
which play important roles during opening and closing. Sagar
developed non-dimensional formulae to illustrate the dependence
of downpull on these factors and also outlined the limitations on
the prediction capability.
The accurate prediction of the downpull force acting on a gate
is important to the designer to determine the capacity of the lifting system and to ensure safe closure in adverse circumstances.
Available methods for determination of hydrodynamic downpull
are based on steady-state measurements obtained for fixed positions of the model gates and are not verified for moving conditions
(Naudascher, 1991). When the gate moves fast, as in the case of
emergency closure, pressures on the gate faces can be different
than the corresponding steady-state values.
A mathematical model for the determination of air demand
during gate closure was presented by Aydin (2002). The model
was based on the numerical solution of the continuity and integral form of the one-dimensional unsteady energy equations. The
time-dependent piezometric line along the intake-penstock structure and pressures on the upstream and downstream faces of the
gate were computed. Later (Aydin et al., 2003), the mathematical model was improved to include the overflow for accurate
determination of air demand.
Experimental work on downpull including lip pressure distribution measurements and direct weighing of downpull are

823

presented in this paper. The time-dependent calculation of the

total downpull force acting on a closing gate is illustrated through
the numerical solution of the one-dimensional energy equation.

2 Experimental facilities
2.1 Hydraulic model
The hydraulic model (Figs 1 and 2) consists of a streamlining
pool to represent the reservoir, entrance details of the intake,
0.30 0.24 m rectangular discharge control (gate) region (section 2), ventilation shaft (section 3), transition from a rectangular
to a circular cross-section, the penstock represented by a 0.30 m
diameter circular plexiglass pipe, end valve to represent the turbine, and the discharge measuring channel. H1 is the reservoir
water surface level, h2 is the water level in the gate chamber, h3
is the piezometric head at the contracted section (section 3), and
H4 is the tail water level. For partial openings of the gate, h2 is
affected by the overflow through the spacings between the walls
of the gate chamber and the gate (Fig. 2). The gate opening is indicated by e, which is equal to e0 , the tunnel height, when the gate is
fully open. Discharge through the intake (upstream of section 2)
is indicated by QI , and discharge in the penstock (downstream of
the gate) is indicated by QP . Water discharge in the experimental
set-up is measured from a sharp-crested weir located at the end
of the prismatic measuring channel. Water levels (H1 , h2 , h3 , H4 )
are measured by manometer tubes for steady-state cases and by
electronic transducers for unsteady cases.

2.2 Gate design

Two model gates are constructed to perform pressure and downpull measurements alternately. One of the gates is equipped with
piezometer connections for measurement of the pressures on
the gate lip (Fig. 3). The second gate (without piezometer connections) is used for direct measurement of the downpull using
force transducers connected to the lift mechanism. Both gates are
wheeled to move up and down in the gate chamber. Four vertical

Figure 1 Experimental set-up.

824

Aydin et al.

Downloaded by [McGill University Library] at 14:53 14 January 2015

Table 1 Gate lip parameters.

Lip symbol

n (m)

Lip angle ( )

A
B
C
D

0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05

26.5
36.7
44.7
51.6

the measuring points and to help the arrangement of copper pipes

along the gate width.
The gate lip angles used in the present study (Table 1) are
selected to cover the complete practical range. Corner roundings
and end plate variations are not considered in the experimental
program. The gate slot spacings are minimized to reduce leakage
from the sides and subsequent vortex formations. Overflow is
also prevented in the pressure measurements.

2.3 Data acquisition system

An electronic data acquisition system is used to measure the
instantaneous pressures at five measuring points on the gate lip
and the water level in the reservoir simultaneously. Electronic
pressure transducers (HBM type PD1) are capable of sensing
time-wise fluctuations accurately. Transducers are connected to
HBM MC55 amplifier system for electronic amplification. Analog signals obtained from the amplifier system are directed to
a computer equipped with an analog-to-digital converter for
digitization.

Figure 2 Gate region parameters.

Piezometer tubes
0.04 m

r
3 Measurements and analysis
3.1 Experimental procedure

s
r = 0.01 m

Figure 3 Gate lip details.

faces of the gates are wheeled to minimize friction and to ease

motion of the gate in the gate chamber.
In the pressure measurements, four different lip angles are
considered. The gate is designed such that the lip section on it
can be de-mounted and another one can be plugged in. On the
lips there are five piezometer tappings (Fig. 3), each of which is
connected to a vertical copper pipe in the gate chamber. Plastic
manometer tubes are used to connect the copper pipes to electronic pressure transducers. The piezometer tappings were shifted
in the transverse direction to avoid any streamwise interaction at

Pressure recordings from the gate lip surface contain timedependent fluctuations due to vortex structures and turbulence
around the gate lip. Record duration and data sampling rate are
determined from power density spectrum analysis of the pressure records. The upper and lower limits on the frequency axis of
the spectrum are determined as 2 Hz and 0.01 Hz, respectively.
The digital data sampling rate is fixed as 20 Hz, which provides
10 discrete data points for a fluctuation component at the highest frequency level. The record duration is decided as 10 mins,
which enables recording six consecutive fluctuations from the
lowest frequency band.
To start a pressure recording, the gate is positioned at a desired
opening and the discharge is adjusted by the end valve. When the
discharge in the system is high, the piezometric line may fall
below the tunnel ceiling, which causes the entrance of air into
the gate region from the ventilation shaft. Air in the gate region
is entrapped into the measuring tubes due to the strong mixing
action of the vortices around the gate lip, which prevents accurate
measurement. Discharges causing low piezometric levels are not
considered to avoid any air entrainment into the measuring tubes.

825

3.2 Pressure distributions on the gate lip

3.3 Definition of lip downpull coefficient

Piezometric levels from five points arranged on the gate lip are
measured to obtain pressure head distributions and to evaluate the
lip downpull coefficients. Three parameters, i.e., the lip angle (),
dimensionless gate opening (y = e/e0 ), and the discharge under
the gate (Qg ), are considered as variables of the experimental
investigation. The discharge is replaced by the Reynolds number,
Rg , defined by using the hydraulic radius of the cross-sectional
area and the average velocity under the gate lip, Ug . Thus, all
variables are made dimensionless.
To observe variations of the pressure distributions, five gate
openings (y = 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.8) and (for each opening)
five different discharge values are considered for the four gate lips
described in section 2.2. Pressure head distributions as a function
of the inclined distance, s, in the streamwise direction along the
gate lip are shown in Fig. 4 for y = 0.4. The pressure on the
upstream edge is lower than the pressure on the downstream edge
for lip A, which has a lip angle of 26.5 . As the lip angle increases
(lip B and lip C), pressure on the upstream edge increases. At
high Reynolds numbers, the downstream edge pressure is lower
than the upstream edge pressure for large lip angles (lip D). To
visualize the flow pattern around the gate lip, color photographs
and video records were taken by dye injection from the most
upstream piezometer tapping. It was not easy to identify any
separation vortices in the photographs. However, video records
showed that large separation vortices are formed spontaneously
for very short duration causing intermittent spikes in the pressure
records.

The measured piezometric head distributions are used to evaluate the dimensionless downpull coefficient for the gate lip. The
piezometric head, hp , is integrated over the horizontally projected
area, AhL , of the gate lip and divided by the same area to obtain
the average piezometric head, h , acting on the gate lip.


hp dAhL
h =
(1)
AhL

1.5

In the literature (Naudascher, 1991), the downpull coefficient for

a gate lip is defined as
KB =

KL =

(3)

Lip B

p/w (m)

p/w (m)

h2 h
Ug2 /2g

1.5

Rg
100694
190873
320387
358681
470089

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.5

Rg
141915
256994
352679
449653
494544

0.04

-0.5
0

0.01

0.02

s (m)
1.5

0.03

0.04

0.05

s (m)
1.5

Lip C

Lip D

p/w (m)

Rg

0.5

140724
264983
342956
409177
474008

-0.5
0

(2)

where h2 (= H1 (1 + Ke )Ut2 /2g) is the piezometric head

just upstream from the gate, Ke is the head loss coefficient for
the intake section (excluding the conversion of potential energy
to velocity head) and Ut is the average velocity in the tunnel

Lip A

0.5

-0.5
0

h h 3
.
Uc2 /2g

where Uc is the average velocity at section 3. The reference

piezometric head h3 and the reference velocity Uc , are both
dependent on the gate region and gate design details. Therefore, the downpull coefficient given by Eq. (2) is dependent on
the characteristics of the model on which the measurements are
performed. To reduce the influences of the specific experimental set-up on the lip downpull coefficient, a new definition is
introduced:

p/w (m)

Downloaded by [McGill University Library] at 14:53 14 January 2015

Prediction of downpull on closing high head gates

0.01

0.02

0.03

s (m)

0.04

Rg

0.5

161458
241071
328423
399702
472867

0.05

-0.5
0

0.02

0.04

s (m)

Figure 4 Gate lip pressure distributions at y = 0.4.

0.06

Aydin et al.
3

y = 0.1
Lip A
Lip B
Lip C
Lip D

KL

3.5 Comparison of lip downpull coefficients

0

-1

0.5

1.5

Rg x 10
3

-5

y = 0.8
Lip A
Lip B
Lip C
Lip D

KL

Downloaded by [McGill University Library] at 14:53 14 January 2015

Reynolds number is obtained at the highest discharge, which is

defined as the discharge that maintains pressurized flow behind
the gate without any air volume. This restriction on the discharge
is required to avoid any air bubbles in the pressure measuring
tubes.

3.6 Lip downpull coefficient as a function of the gate

opening and the lip angle

-1

Rg x 10

The lip downpull coefficient, KB , defined by Eq. (2), is evaluated

from the measured pressure data. The results are shown in Fig. 6
together with the measurements of Naudascher (1991) for comparison purposes. Since the lip angles are not identical in both
data sets, it is not possible to give a measure of agreement. However, for close lip angles, similar KB distributions are obtained.
The present data provides a complete description of the lip downpull coefficient near full openings of the gate that was not shown
before.

-5

Figure 5 Downpull coefficientReynolds number relationship.

cross-section when the gate is open. In the present study, both

definitions of the lip downpull coefficient are evaluated.
3.4 Lip downpull coefficientReynolds number relationship
The downpull on the gate lip is assumed to depend on the lip angle,
dimensionless gate opening and the Reynolds number Rg . It is
expected that the downpull coefficient becomes independent of
the Reynolds number for sufficiently high values of Rg . However,
in model studies, high Reynolds numbers may not be reached,
due to the limitations on the size of the hydraulic model and the
model discharge. Before conducting the detailed downpull experiments, the relationship between the lip downpull coefficient and
the Reynolds number was studied.
Naudascher (1991) reported that lip downpull coefficient
becomes independent of the Reynolds number when the Reynolds
number exceeds 165,000. In the present study, the values of KL
independent of the Reynolds number are easily achieved at about
Rg = 150,000 for small gate openings (Fig. 5).
As the gate opening increases, an asymptotic approach to a
constant KL value is observed at a Reynolds number of approximately 400,000 for lip A. The lip downpull coefficient, KL , is
shown in Fig. 5 as function of the Reynolds number for the gate
at y = 0.1 and y = 0.8. Downpull coefficients presented in the
following sections are measured at the highest Reynolds number that can be achieved for a given gate opening. The highest

The complete data set for the lip downpull coefficient, KL , evaluated according to the new definition, Eq. (3), using measured
pressure data of this study is shown in Fig. 7 as a function of y
and the lip angle. At both ends of the graph, for a fully open gate
(y = 1) and completely closed gate (y = 0), KL is zero since
the average pressure on the gate lip is equal to the local static
pressure. The maximum downpull on the lip is observed at about
y = 0.4. The lip downpull increases with decreasing lip angle for
a given y value. The lip downpull coefficient is negative for gate
openings around y = 0.9, indicating that the average pressure
on the gate lip is greater than the static component due to the
stagnation pressure that result from the constriction of the flow
section by the gate. The scatter of data near the fully open gate
cases is increased due to the pressure fluctuations induced by the
vortices created around the corners of the gate chamber. That is
also the reason why the measured data of KL is not exactly zero
at y = 1.
Finally, a functional representation of KL dependent on y and
can be given. The general form of the fitting function is assumed
Lip A (=26.5 )
o
Lip B (=36.7 )
Lip C (=44.7o)
o

Lip D (=51.6 )
=20o (Naudascher, 1991)

0.8

=30o (Naudascher, 1991)

=45o (Naudascher, 1991)

0.6

KB

826

0.4
0.2
0

-0.2

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 6 Comparison of downpull coefficients.

Prediction of downpull on closing high head gates

827

the top surface of the gate can be expressed as:

1.5

FdT = (h2 zgT )w AhT

(8)

where zgT is the averaged elevation of the gate top surface and
AhT is the horizontally projected area of the gate top face. The
total downpull acting on the gate is the sum of the forces acting
on the lip and on the top surface of the gate, or

KL

0.5
Lip A
Lip B
Lip C
Lip D
Eq. 5

-0.5

Fd = FdL + FdT

(9)

4 Mathematical model
-1

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Downloaded by [McGill University Library] at 14:53 14 January 2015

Figure 7 Downpull coefficient as a function of the gate lip angle and

the gate opening.

to be:
KL = c1 + c2 y + c3 y2 + + cn yn1

(4)

where ci are considered as functions of . The curvature of

KL over y changes sign at about y = 0.8 as shown in Fig. 7.
Therefore, the curve fitting is accomplished in two steps:
For 0 y < 0.8:

4.1 Modeling of overflow

KL = (14.584 0.2296 + 0.000355 )y

2

+ (17.111 0.3353 + 0.01065 )y

2

+ (9.0974 + 1.772 0.030452 2 )y3

+ (14.246 1.394 + 0.0217 2 )y4

(5a)

For 0.8 y 1:
KL = (316.90 2.1243 0.03056 2 )
+ (1485.95 + 4.643 + 0.22213 )y
2

+ (2605.91 + 2.708 0.54872 )y

2

+ (569.89 + 6.926 0.21069 2 )y4

(5b)

Equation (5) is valid for 26 52 . The lip downpull coefficient, KL , can now be determined from Eq. (5) for given values
of y and , and the downpull on the gate lip can be evaluated.

3.7 Determination of lip downpull from known KL

The average piezometric head is computed from the KL
definition:
Ug2
Ut2
KL
2g
2g

(6)

The downpull component on the gate lip can be written as:

FdL = (zgL h )w AhL

The flow section in the tunnel after the gate (Fig. 2) is a junction
point of overflow, Qod , underflow beneath the gate lip, Qg , and
the inflow from the ventilation shaft, Qs . Overflow is formulated
in terms of piezometric heads at upstream and downstream points
on the tunnel ceiling (see Fig. 2), Hu and Hd , respectively. Head
losses are written in terms of head loss coefficients Kou and Kod
along the upstream and downstream spacings in the gate chamber:
Hu h2 = Kou Q2ou

(10a)

h2 Hd =

(10b)

Kod Q2od

+ (2006.75 12.153 + 0.56784 2 )y3

h = H1 (1 + Ke )

Prediction of the time-dependent downpull is possible when

unsteady flow around the closing gate is simulated. Previous
works (Aydin, 2002; Aydin et al., 2003) on the determination of
air demand provide time-dependent flow rates and pressures on
both upstream and downstream faces of the gate. Time-dependent
total downpull can be computed for a closing gate when the lip
downpull coefficient given by Eq. (5) is utilized together with the
water level in the gate chamber to be estimated by the model. For
the sake of completeness, the mathematical model described in
the previous works is summarized below.

(7)

where zgL is the averaged elevation of the inclined gate lip surface
and w is the specific weight of water. The downpull acting on

where Qou is the inflow into the gate chamber through the
upstream face, and Qod is the outflow from the gate chamber
through the downstream face. The head loss coefficients are
written in analogy to steady pipe flow:



f Ls dx
Kmu
1
Kou =
(11a)
+

u
2
2gw2 aum
2 0 au3



f Ls dx
Kmd
1
Kod =
(11b)
+ d
2
2gw2 adm
2 0 ad3
where w is the width of the gate, Kmu and Kmd are the loss
coefficients for the limiting case of Ls = 0, au and ad are the
spacings, aum and adm are the minimum values of au and ad
along the upstream and downstream faces, respectively, u and
d are the correction coefficients for non-uniform flow as a result
of variations in the spacings, f is the Darcys friction coefficient,
x is the streamwise distance along the gate face and Ls is the
length of the gate inside the gate chamber. The loss coefficients
Kmu and Kmd are taken equal to unity since they represent exit
losses for the case of Ls = 0. The correction coefficients u and
d are determined from a series of steady-state measurements

828

Aydin et al.

of Qo , Hu , h2 and Hd for various spacings on the upstream and

downstream faces of the gate for no underflow (Qg = 0). The
correction coefficients are obtained from Eqs (10) and (11) by
utilizing the experimental data:
aum
u = 3.893
0.189, 1 u 3.7
(12a)
max(au )
adm
d = 10.32
0.42, 1 d 9.9
(12b)
max(ad )
Equations (10)(12) give a closed form solution for overflow from
known values of Hu and Hd . The water level in the gate chamber
is determined from the unsteady continuity equation written for
the gate chamber:

Downloaded by [McGill University Library] at 14:53 14 January 2015

h2
Qod Qou
=
t
Agc

(13)

where Agc is the cross-sectional area of the gate chamber. The

upstream piezometric head at the top corner of the tunnel is
obtained from:
2
Ustg
U2
Hu = H1 (1 + Ke ) t +
(14)
2g
2g
where Ustg is the stagnation velocity such that, in dynamic head
form, it represents the head converted into pressure near the
tunnel ceiling due to blockage of the partially closed gate. Measurements of Hu as function of Qg were performed for variable
gate openings to determine the stagnation velocity from Eq. (14).
The stagnation velocity is assumed to be proportional to the tunnel
velocity through a function of the gate opening:
Ustg = fs (y)Ut

(15)

The function fs is obtained as a polynomial fitted to the

experimental data:
fs = 12.985y+13.73y2 30.05y3 +31.45y4 13.14y5

(16)

The piezometric head on the downstream side of the gate, Hd , is

taken as the elevation of the tunnel ceiling plus the pressure head
at the ventilation shaft exit on the tunnel ceiling.
4.2 Unsteady flow due to closing gate

 
p

(17)


U2
+ z w d = Hcg Qg w + Hd Qod w + Hs Qs s
2g
hj Qg w hd Qp w
H 4 Q p w

Qs = Qp Qg Qod

(19)

The model equations are solved iteratively starting from full gate
opening to complete closure. In this iteration cycle, when the
ventilation shaft discharge is evaluated, the pressure at the bottom end of the ventilation shaft can be obtained by writing the
unsteady energy equation for the flow in the shaft. Detailed
description of the mathematical model, evaluation of model
parameters and the solution method were presented in Aydin
(2002).
The one-dimensional formulation of unsteady flow in the
intakepenstock system, together with the lip downpull coefficient given by Eq. (5), provide a complete mathematical model
for determination of total downpull on the gate. Some example
calculations as functions of lip angle (a), initial discharge Qm
(b), gate spacing adm (c) and closure time Tc (d) are shown in
Fig. 8. For lip A ( = 26 ), the net hydrodynamic force is positive (downpull) for 0.1 < y < 0.5 and negative (uplift) for the
other gate openings (Fig. 8a). For lip C ( = 44.7 ), positive
downpull is observed only around y = 0.25 for small downstream spacings. For lip D ( = 51.6 ), the hydrodynamic force
is always negative (uplift) for all gate openings. Increased initial
discharge produces larger downpull and shifts the occurrence of
the maximum downpull to larger gate openings (Fig. 8b). Larger
downstream spacings cause larger uplift forces (Fig. 8c). The
gate closure time has a significant influence on the downpull only
when the upstream spacing is small and downstream spacing is
relatively larger (Fig. 8d).

5 Direct measurement of total downpull

The volume of the structure between the reservoir and section 3

is called the intake region (I), and the volume between section 3
and the end valve is called the penstock region (p). The integral
form of the modified energy equation is applied to the intake and
penstock regions to compute the time-dependent volume flow
rates of water and air:

  2

U
+ z w d = H1 QI w he QI w hg Qg w
t I 2g
Hu Qou w Hcg Qg w

Hs is the total head at the exit from the shaft into the penstock,
and he , hg , hj ,and hd are head losses at the intake section, in the gate region, due to hydraulic jump, and in the penstock
region, respectively. The link between the intake and the penstock
is completed by the continuity equation written at the interface
of the two volumes:

(18)

where Hcg is the total head of the underflow fluid in the contracted section, the subscript s indicates the ventilation shaft,

5.1 Measuring system

The gate was hung on a chain-gear system actuated by a variable
speed electric motor, which is controlled by the computer of the
data acquisition system. Tension on the lift chain was measured
by electronic force transducers, and digitized data was recorded.
Before the downpull measurements, the gate was moved in the
gate chamber with no water in the intake, and the dry weight
of the gate-chain system was measured as a function of the gate
opening. The total hydrodynamic downpull is evaluated as the
force measured during the experiments minus the dry weight
measured at the same gate opening. The friction force from the
gate wheels for both fixed and moving gate cases is small and
neglected. When there is no flow, the total downpull is equal
to the negative of the lifting force due to water, which is the
buoyancy for a totally submerged gate. Downpull weighing was
performed with lip C only.

Prediction of downpull on closing high head gates

40
20

Fd (N)

60

aum = 0.005 m
adm = 0.001 m
u = 2.0
d = 1.0
3
Qm = 0.090 m /s

(a)

Lip A
Lip B
Lip C
Lip D

20

-20

-40

-40

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

-60

20

-20

Fd (N)

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

-20
-40

-40
-60
-80

0.2

0.4

adm (m)

0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004

1.00
1.55
2.53
3.51

0.6

0.8

(d)

Fd (N)

(c)

-60
-80

5
10
20

-120

-140
1

-160

Lip A
aum = 0.001 m
adm = 0.004 m
u = 1.00
d = 3.51
3
Qm = 0.090 m /s

Tc (s)

-100

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 8 Downpull obtained from the mathematical model. (a) Variations with the lip angle, (b) variations with initial discharge, (c) variations with
downstream spacing and (d) variations with closure time.

5.2 Measurement of downpull on fixed gate

The measurement of total downpull at static positions of the
gate is important to compare with the results of the pressurearea integration. Different overflow spacing configurations are
studied for different initial discharges by measuring the total
downpull at six gate openings. Measured and computed downpull data for aum = 0.0088 m and adm = 0.0032 m are shown
in Fig. 9. Computed and measured values are in satisfactory
agreement.

10

Qm (m /s)

0.050
0.074
0.119

-10

Fd (N)

Downloaded by [McGill University Library] at 14:53 14 January 2015

20

Lip C
aum = 0.004 m
u = 1.58
3
Qm = 0.090 m /s

-100

0.030
0.060
0.090
0.120

-20

-60

Lip A
aum = 0.005 m
adm = 0.001 m
u = 2.0
d = 1.0
3
Qm (m /s)

(b)

40

Fd (N)

60

829

= 44.70
aum = 0.0088 m
adm = 0.0032 m
u = 3.70
d = 2.73

-20
-30
-40

5.3 Measurement of downpull on closing gate

-50

Downpull measurements for the closing gate were performed

for different closure speeds. In total, 45 test cases were considered. Example records of measured and computed downpull
are presented in Fig. 10. In general, test cases with large
initial discharges and smaller downstream spacings (small overflow discharge and higher water levels in the gate chamber)
show better agreement between the model predictions and
measurements.
It must be noted that the most difficult component to model
is overflow in the unsteady cases. A fast closing gate creates secondary currents in the gate chamber that interact with
the overflow and affect the resultant downpull on the gate.
The one-dimensional mathematical model, based on averaged

-60

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 9 Comparison of measured (symbols) and predicted (lines)

downpull on fixed gate.

experimental data obtained at the steady-state conditions, is not

expected to reproduce the complex unsteady flow characteristics
around the gate. However, comparisons of model predictions
and measured quantities for both steady and unsteady cases give
confidence for use of the model results when detailed downpull
measurements are not available.

830

Aydin et al.
20

-20

-40
Measured
Computed

-60

-80

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

-80

Measured
Computed

Measured
Computed
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

-20

Lip C
aum = 0.0088 m
adm = 0.0028 m
Qm = 0.120 m3/s
Tc = 7 s

-40

-60

0.2

0.4

Lip C
aum = 0.0088 m
adm = 0.0028 m
Qm = 0.075 m3/s
Tc = 7 s

Fd (N)

Fd (N)

-40

20

Downloaded by [McGill University Library] at 14:53 14 January 2015

-20

-60

20

-80

Lip C
aum = 0.0088 m
adm = 0.0042 m
3
Qm = 0.074 m /s
Tc = 34 s

Fd (N)

Fd (N)

20

Lip C
aum = 0.0088 m
adm = 0.0042 m
Qm = 0.119 m3/s
Tc = 34 s

-20

-40

Measured
Computed

-60

0.6

0.8

-80

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 10 Comparison of measured and predicted downpull on closing gate.

6 Conclusions

Acknowledgments

The hydrodynamic downpull acting on a vertical tunnel gate

has two main components on the top and bottom faces of the
gate. Both components are dependent on numerous geometrical
parameters of the gate and its surroundings. It is not practical to
develop a downpull prediction formula covering the full range of
all variables due to the large number of parameters encountered.
Measurement of the total downpull either by direct weighing or
by pressure integration may not be convenient in model studies for each specific application. Experimental data summarized
by Eq. (5) as a function of the two most significant variables
(the gate opening and the lip angle) is used in the prediction
of the lip downpull. The force on the gate top requires more
detailed modeling of the flow around the gate. The mathematical model developed for this purpose requires the energy loss
coefficients of the intakepenstock system, which can easily be
determined from steady-state measurements of piezometric line
on a hydraulic model. It is then possible to run the computer code
to investigate the downpull for varying gate lip geometry, gate
spacings in the gate chamber and operational conditions.
The methodology described above can be efficiently used
to predict downpull from hydraulic models for variable design
considerations from easy to measure experimental data such as
discharge and piezometric levels. All loss coefficients and expressions based on the experimental data are specific to the physical
model used in this study. Therefore, they can not be directly used
for any other intake structure.

This study was supported financially by the Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK), contract no.
INTAG-831.

Notation
A = Cross-sectional area
a = Spacing between the gate and walls of the gate chamber
e = Gate opening
e0 = Tunnel height
f = Functions of gate opening
g = Gravitational acceleration
H = Total head
h = Piezometric head (water surface elevation)
K = Head loss coefficient
L = Lengths
p = Pressure
Q = Discharge
R = Reynolds number
t = Time
Tc = Closure time
U = Average velocity
w = Tunnel width
x = Axial distance
y = Dimensionless gate opening (e/e0 )

Prediction of downpull on closing high head gates

Downloaded by [McGill University Library] at 14:53 14 January 2015

z=
=
=
=
h =
=

Elevation
Overflow correction coefficient
Kinematic viscosity
Specific weight
Head loss
Volume

Subscripts
c = Vena contracta
d = Downstream side
e = Entrance
g = Gate
I = Intake
o = Overflow
p = Penstock
s = Quantities in the ventilation shaft
t = Tunnel
u = Upstream side
w = Water
1 = Reservoir
2 = Gate section
3 = Ventilation shaft
4 = Tail water
References
1. Aydin, I. (2002). Air Demand Behind High Head Gates
During Emergency Closure. J. Hydraul. Res. IAHR 40(1),
8393.

831

2. Aydin, I., Dundar, O. and Telci, I.T. (2003). Hydrodynamic Loads on Closing Hydraulic Gates (in Turkish). Report
submitted to the Scientific and Technical Research Council
of Turkey, Project no. Intag 831, February 2003, METU,
Ankara.
3. Colgate, D. (1959). Hydraulic Downpull Forces on
High Head Gates. J. Hydraul. Div. ASCE 85(HY11),
3952.
4. Murray, R.I. and Simmons, W.P. (1966). Hydraulic Downpull Forces on Large Gates. Research Report No. 4, U.S.
Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, p. 41.
5. Naudascher, E. (1986). Prediction and Control of Downpull on Tunnel Gates. J. Hydraul. Engng. ASCE 112(5),
392416.
6. Naudascher, E. (1991). Hydrodynamic Forces. A. A.
Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
7. Naudascher, E., Kobus, H.E. and Rao, R.P.R. (1964).
Hydrodynamic Analysis for High-head Leaf Gates.
J. Hydraul. Div. ASCE 90(HY3), 155192.
8. Sagar, B.T.A. (1977). Downpull in High-head Gate Installations, Parts 1, 2, 3. Water Power Dam Construct. (3),
3839; (4), 5255; (5), 2935.
9. Sagar, B.T.A. and Tullis, J.P. (1979). Downpull on
Vertical Lift Gates. Water Power Dam Construct. 12,
3541.