168 views

Uploaded by Roberto FErnandes

- Head loss calculation for hydropower
- Calculating NPSHa for booster pumps - Pipelines, Piping and Fluid Mechanics engineering - Eng-Tips.pdf
- fluid and particle mechanics
- Head Losses in Tunnel
- Fluid Mechanics Benno 7
- Hydraulics 2009 Exam
- Analysis of Continous Water Distribution in Surat City using Epanet: A Case Study
- Mechanized Excavability Rating for Hard-rock Mining
- lab 7
- Chapter 3 Hydraulic Properties of Soils Edited
- Concrete Dam by r s Varshney Mtech nitrr student
- GATE Civil Engineering 2015_Mock 2
- A_Review_Study_on_Methods_of_Tunneling_i.pdf
- e 0421029034
- Tunnel Roughness
- Ce6303 Mechanics of Fluids Unit 4 Notes
- Shourya
- Darcy–Weisbach equation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- MM301 Deney 2 Foy
- Static and Kinetic Friction

You are on page 1of 18

1999 - 2001 F DRALE D E L AUSANNE

HIGH HEAD POWER PLANT

THEORETICAL APPROACH AND COMPARISON WITH THE MEASURED VALUES

1

Contents

1 INTRODUCTION 2

WATER CONDUCTOR SYSTEM OF CHIMAY 2

2.2 Bend losses 3

2.3 Losses due to expansion 3

2.4 Losses due to contraction 3

LOSSES IN AN UNLINED DRILL & BLAST TUNNEL 4

3.2 Colebrooks method 4

3.3 Huvals method 5

3.4 Prihas method 5

3.5 Reiniuss method 5

3.6 Wrights method 5

3.7 Johansens method 6

3.8 Solviks method 6

3.9 Ronns IBA method 6

3.10 Czarnotas values from model study on a different project 7

COEFFICIENT FOR CHIMAY DRILL & BLAST TUNNEL 7

TUNNEL 11

9 CONCLUSION 14

2

1 INTRODUCTION

Key words

Unlined drill & blast tunnel, TBM tunnel, friction losses, singular losses, statistical

distribution, overbreak, measured head loss, roughness, lined invert, shotcrete,

Cross sections and shapes of an unlined drill & blast tunnel vary randomly from one

section to another. The flow in it lacks longitudinal and lateral symmetry. Most

convenient measurable dimensions of a tunnel at a construction site are the cross

sections at 5 to 10 m intervals. The surface of the excavated rock has irregular

projections due to blasting that offer high resistance to flow. This is commonly termed

as micro-roughness. Variation in areas from one location to another causes continuous

expansion, contraction and change of direction, called macro-roughness. Based on the

statistical distribution of the measurements from site, methods to evaluate friction losses

in an unlined tunnel, taking both these roughness together into account, are available in

literature. Analytically, it is difficult to separate both the roughness. Addition of micro

and macro roughness shall give equivalent hydraulic roughness of the unlined drill &

blast tunnel.

2x72 MW Chimay hydropower project in central Peru has a pressurised water conductor

system which consists of an unlined drill & blast (D&B) tunnel (D-shape, nominal base

width 7.0 m, height 6.15 m) of 5130 m long; a 5.7 m diameter TBM excavated tunnel

of 4021 m long; a 4.5 m diameter concrete lined vertical pressure shaft of 107 m

height; a 3.8 m diameter steel lined high pressure horizontal tunnel of 220 m long; and

two penstocks, 2.65 m diameter, of 63 m long each. Head losses in the water conductor

system have been measured between the entry to the tunnel and at the end of the

penstocks. The paper deals with the design discharge of 82 m 3/s.

WATER CONDUCTOR SYSTEM OF CHIMAY

Friction losses and singular losses in the pressurised water conductor system have been

treated separately. Singular losses arise due to bends, expansion, contraction, transition,

obstruction in rock traps, flow combination, flow division, and entry losses at the tunnel

intake.

Darcy-Weisbach equation for friction head losses in a pressure pipe is expressed as:

v2 L

hf = f (2.1)

2g D

given by equation (2.2):

3

0.25

f = 2

(2.2)

k 5.74

log 3.7 D + 0.9

Re

The bend loss coefficients in the layout are calculated from Idelcik (equation 2.3)

b = m (2.3)

m = x y z (2.4)

Where

R

y = F 0 , ratio of radius of curvature of the bend and the equivalent hydraulic

D

diameter of the tunnel

h

z = F , ratio of height and width of the cross section of the tunnel

w

The expansion loss coefficients are calculated from Borda-Carnots relation

2

A

e = e 1 1 , 0e1 (2.5)

A2

Where

2

e= Coefficient of correction = + sin 2 for /6

5

= for /6/2

4 2

= shape factor of the conduit = 1 for circular, 0.75 for open channels

A1, and A2 are the areas upstream and downstream of the expanded flow.

The contraction loss coefficients are Calculated by Gardels equation

4

2

1

c = 1 (2.6)

Where

=

( )(

1 (1 a ) 1.032 b + 1.38 a 1.48 b 0.7 1.495 b 0.49 )

1.03 0.03 b

A2

a = ratio of downstream area to upstream area=

A1

b=

180

Other local losses like entry, combination, division, obstructions are referred from

standard literatures.

LOSSES IN AN UNLINED DRILL & BLAST TUNNEL

Methods to define equivalent absolute hydraulic roughness k or the friction coefficient f

of an unlined D&B tunnel are reviewed from the literature and are presented in this

section.

This method makes a statistical distribution of the measured areas to find out

hypothetical cross section areas with 99% and 1% cumulative frequency to determine

relative overbreak and is calculated as per equation (3.1).

A99% A1%

= 100 % (3.1)

A1%

The relative equivalent roughness in the rock tunnel can be expressed through

15

0.5 = 0.105 log (3.2)

k/R

f = 2.75 10 3 (3.3)

In this method the normal overbreak t m of an unlined D&B tunnel is defined as the half

of the difference between the mean hydraulic diameter and the hydraulic diameter of the

area with 1% cumulative frequency. The normal overbreak t m is equal to the absolute

5

roughness k of the surface. The value of the friction factor f is calculated from equation

(3.4).

t m R 1.5

f = 0.55 (3.4)

( R + t m ) 2.5

The overbreak is measured as the difference between the mean hydraulic diameter and

the nominal hydraulic diameter of the drill & blast cross section. The overbreak is equal

to the equivalent hydraulic roughness k.

4

k = Dm Dn = ( Am An ) (3.5)

0 .5

3 A1%

f = 3. 30 10 (3.6)

( A1% + 9) 0.5

The method suggests that if drill & blast tunnel is constructed in the direction of flow,

there would be more head losses than if the construction is in opposite direction.

Different friction coefficients are empirically given for normal, slow and rapid progress

of work.

Natural overbreak t n of a drill & blast tunnel is described according to equation (3.10).

A50% A1%

tn = (3.10)

0.5 ( P50% + P1% )

6

tn 1

=2 100 % (3.11)

R 50% tn

(1 ) 2

2 R 50%

After knowing the values of the relative overbreak , friction coefficients are read out

from the graphs provided by the author for an exposed drill & blast rock surface, or with

a concrete lined invert of a drill & blast unlined tunnel.

The absolute roughness for a cross section is defined in equation (3.12).

Ai

ki = + (3.12)

Ai

For m measured cross sections along a drill & blast tunnel stretch, the absolute

roughness is calculated according to equation (3.13).

1 m Ai

k = + (3.13)

m 1 Ai

Where, and are experimentally determined constants having the values 0.15 m and

0.37, respectively.

Relative area difference between adjacent cross sections defines the roughness ki arising

due to the variation of cross section areas. To it wall roughness kw of 0.15 m is added to

obtain the overall roughness k of the drill & blast tunnel.

Ai Ai 1

ki = (3.14)

Pi

1 m

k avg = ki

m i =1

(3.15)

Total roughness of the tunnel, k = wall roughness (kw) + area roughness (kavg)

0.667

k

f = 0.49 (3.16)

4 R avg

The root mean square (rms) value of r measurements on any of the lines parallel to a

reference line along the tunnel is calculated as

7

(x

i =1

i x) 2

rms j = (3.17)

r

For m numbers of such lines (at least 3 numbers of lines on the blasted rock surface

parallel to a reference line are required for which distance measurements are taken at

0.25 m to 0.50 m intervals), the wall roughness is expressed in equation (3.18).

(rms

j =1

j )2

rms wall = (3.18)

m

The area roughness for any stretch (measured at 0.5 m to 1.0 m intervals) is calculated

as

(A A 0.5 )

0.5

j

j =1

rms Ai = 0.53 (3.19)

r

(rms Ai )2

rms A = i =1

(3.20)

m

The representative friction coefficients from the model test for a different project were:

Average friction coefficient with unlined invert and shotcrete on wall and roof

f = 0.0519

Average friction coefficient with lined invert and shotcreted on wall and roof

f = 0.0411

COEFFICIENT FOR CHIMAY DRILL & BLAST TUNNEL

The drill & blast section of the tunnel is divided into 5 stretches, named km 1, km 2,

km 3, km 4, and km 5. Cross sections have been recorded at 5 m or 10 m intervals

8

covering around 92% length of the drill & blast tunnel. The statistical distribution of the

surveyed areas and the calculated perimeter are shown in figure 4.1 and 4.2,

respectively. Out of 903 measured cross sections, 888 number of cross sections have

been chosen (204 in km 1, 190 in km 2, 126 in km 3, 199 in km 4, and 169 in km 5).

Rest of the cross sections are disregarded due to incompatibility.

110

100 km 1

90

km 2

80

Number of samples

70 km 3

60

km 4

50

40 km 5

30

20 all

10

0

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

variation of area over the nominal area %

Figure 4.1: Chimay, Statistical distribution of area with respect to nominal area of

37.792 m 2.

110

km

100 1

90 km

2

80 km

Number of samples

3

70

km

60 4

50 km

5

40 all

30

20

10

0

-2 2 6 10 14 18 22

variation of perimeter %

perimeter of 23.296 m.

9

Absolute roughness k and friction coefficient f have been calculated directly for each km

by applying the suggested methods in section 3. The values are presented graphically in

figures 4.3 and 4.4, respectively. In the figure, the values are joined by representative

smooth curves, but it is not to be understood that k values and f values keep on changing

from one point to another. They remain same for a particular km. The k and f values are

for the exposed rock in a drill & blast tunnel. These values shall be corrected when

either the invert is lined or the surface is shotcreted or both.

0.8

Rahm

0.6

Colebrook

k (m)

0.4 Huval

Wright

0.2

Johansen

0 Solvik

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 IBA

km

Rahm

0.12

0.1 Colebrook

0.08 Huval

f [-]

0.06 Priha

0.04 Reinius

0.02 Wright

0 Johansen

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Solvik

km

IBA

Nominal diameter of the TBM tunnel is 5.7 m. Cross section areas of the TBM

excavated tunnel vary along its length due to placement of supports in form of shotcrete

and steel ribs within the excavated diameter (figure 5.1). In addition to the friction

losses, there shall be losses due to flow expansion and contraction in the tunnel.

Area variation in the TBM tunnel is not erratic, but it remains constant over a stretch.

Each stretch shall have its flow velocity and effective hydraulic radius, therefore, a

different friction coefficient. The roughness of the TBM exposed rock and the shotcrete

layer is of the same magnitude. The roughness of the shotcrete and the rock is varied

from 4 mm to 10 mm. Average friction head losses in the TBM is of the order of 8.23

m. The friction coefficient f of the TBM tunnel varies from 0.0181 to 0.0233.

10

26

24

22

20

18

16

2

Area, m

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

5100 5600 6100 6600 7100 7600 8100 8600 9100

chainage,m

Area variation in a TBM bored tunnel is not abrupt. The difference in cross section area

is gradual by applying shotcrete between two adjacent stretches. The transition angles

vary from 20 to 45. Average head losses due to expansion and contraction due to area

variation in the TBM tunnel are of the order of 0.28 m and 0.19 m, respectively.

On average, without considering the effect of the expansion and contraction, the TBM

tunnel has a friction coefficient of f = 0.02, k = 6.03 mm, and K=59.24 m1/3s-1. Taking

into account the effect of local expansion and contractions, TBM tunnel has an average

f = 0.0211, k = 7.48 mm, and K=57.67 m1/3s-1.

A smaller part of Chimay water conductor system has concrete lining, and the penstocks

are steel lined. The absolute roughness of the concrete in the lined part of the tunnel is

varied with 0.50 mm, 0.75 mm and 1.0 mm. An average, calculated head losses due to

friction are 0.62 m. Similarly, varying the absolute roughness of the steel lined part with

0.025, 0.050, 0.075, and 0.1 mm, an average friction head loss of 2.05 m is expected.

The cross section area of the rock trap goes on varying. Therefore, taking an average

roughness of the wall surfaces, friction head losses of 0.14 m is calculated. Similarly in

the transition between the D&B tunnel and the TBM tunnel a friction head loss of 0.02

m is expected.

There are 15 bends in the water conductor system of Chimay. The cross section areas of

the bends in the D&B stretch keep on changing. Therefore, average area of the cross

sections at a bend is taken to define the bend geometry. Head losses in the bend with

lower R0/D ratios are much more in comparison to those with higher bend ratios. For

practical reasons, bends with R0/D > 50, and v < 5 m/s can be neglected during

preliminary design. Bends placed within 30 times the hydraulic diameter (with respect

to the upstream bend) between them interfere. In Chimay head losses due to bends can

come down by 9% on account of the bend interference. A head loss of 1.5 m is

estimated in the bends.

11

Losses due to entry at the tunnel, expansion, contraction and transition in the defined

geometry of the tunnel are estimated at 0.32 m.

Similarly head losses due to flow division, combination and bifurcation in the system

works out to another 0.32 m.

Head losses due to obstruction of flow in the rock trap caused by the beams and the

concrete wall is of the order of 0.1 m.

TUNNEL

The invert of the drill & blast tunnel is concrete lined from ch.1+035 m onwards,

covering 80% of the total length. First 16.5 m of the D&B tunnel has a defined shape,

and losses in this are already included in the lined part. Therefore, ch.0+016.5 m to

ch.1+035 m of the D&B tunnel has an unlined invert. From the geological mapping

drawings, it was calculated that around 45% of the excavated surface (walls and crown)

of the D&B tunnel has been covered with a layer of shotcrete. The lined invert, a

shotcrete layer and the exposed rock bring in the concept of composite roughness. Very

often the shotcrete is applied only to a part of the exposed rock without full coverage of

the walls and the crown. Therefore, the D&B tunnel length is linearly proportioned in

equivalent lengths consisting of completely exposed rock, completely covered shotcrete,

completely lined invert and unlined invert which can be seen in the table 7.1. Length of

the rock trap (108 m in km 5) is excluded from the table for which friction losses have

been computed separately and included in section 6.

Type of All km 1 km 2 km 3 km 4 km 5

surface [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m]

Exposed 2751.86 574.46 451.08 578.20 394.88 753.24

rock (55%)

Shotcrete 3.50 3.50

25 cm (0%)

Shotcrete 139.70 73.00 35.00 31.70

10/12 cm (3%)

Shotcrete 846.94 238.93 192.04 131.05 204.92 80.00

8 cm (17%)

Shotcrete 1167.5 201.61 227.88 290.75 290.2 157.06

5 cm (23%)

Steel ribs 96.00 21.00 75.00

with (2%)

shotcrete

Table 7.1: Chimay; covering over the excavated surface of D&B tunnel

interpreted that when one layer of shotcrete, 5 cm to 10 cm thick, is applied the

roughness of the natural D&B rock surface reduces by around 11 cm.

Absolute roughness of the exposed rock surface is calculated as per the existing

methods briefed in section 3. Where shotcrte is applied, the surface roughness of the

blasted rock is, therefore, reduced by 11 cm.

12

The friction factor of a composite section is given by euation (7.1).

Pr f r + Pc f c + Ps f s

f = , and (7.1)

P

P = Pr + Pc + Ps (7.2)

After taking into account the influence of invert lining and shotcrete, as applicable,

theoretically, the expected friction head losses for every km and for the total tunnel is

furnished in the table 7.2.

[mwc] [mwc] [mwc] [mwc] [mwc] [mwc]

Table 7.2: Chimay; friction head losses in the D&B tunnel calculated by various

methods (*only recommended friction factors considered).

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

RAHM

HUVAL

PRIHA

REINIUS

WRIGHT

IBA

CZARNOTA

MEASURED

COLEBROOK

JOHANSEN

SOLVIK

13

Head losses for the entire water conductor system, amounting to 21.8 m, has been

measured at the design discharge of 82 m3/s. Deducting the losses already calculated in

sections 5 and 6, balance losses are accounted towards the measured head losses in the

unlined D&B tunnel. Theoretically calculated head losses and the measured one are

compared graphically in figure 7.1.

It is seen that Rahms method overestimates the losses by 10.8%, Colebrooks method

underestimates it by 30%, Huvals method overestimates by 4.6%, Prihass method

overestimates by 20%, Reiniuss method underestimates by 5.2%, Wrights method

overestimates by 4%, Johansens method underestimates by 20%, Solviks method

underestimates by 39%, and IBA method overestimates by 0.6%, than the measured

values. The methods that estimate the friction losses of the D&B tunnel within an

acceptable range are retained and the others are discarded to arrive at an average

calculated value of the friction head losses. Therefore Rahm, Huval, Reinius, Wright

and IBA methods are retained.

If the rock surface of the D&B tunnel were completely exposed, friction head losses of

around 10.9 m would have been expected. Since 80% of the D&B tunnel length is invert

lined and 45% of surface is covered by shotcrete, reduction of head loss has reduced by

2.86 m (26% of the losses). The invert lining contributes to 83% of this reduction, and

balance 17% is from the shotcrete layer.

Equivalent average friction coefficient of the completely exposed rock surface would

have been f = 0.0813, K = 28.41 m1/3s-1 and k = 454 mm. After 80% of the tunnel invert

has been lined and 45% of the surface is shotcreted, the new parameters have been f =

0.0600, K = 33.06 m 1/3s-1 and k= 273 mm.

The methods of Rahm, Reinius, Wright and IBA require enough measurement at site to

have a statistical distribution of the areas and perimeter. However, the method of Huval

depends on the mean and the nominal hydraulic diameter. It is seen that the average

excavated area and the nominal area plot almost a linear graph. It means that, once

knowing the nominal area, the average excavated area can be ascertained approximately

for preliminary design. From the mean excavated area, a mean hydraulic diameter can

be calculated. The roughness k will be calculated according to equation (3.5), and the

friction coefficient can be known from equation (2.2).

sections are required at closer intervals to apply other methods to verify the estimated

head losses calculated during preliminary design stage.

The graph of nominal area versus mean excavated area is shown at figure 8.1.

14

Nominal area versus excavated area of a drill and blast unlined tunnel

240

230

220

210

200

190

180

170

160

150

140

130

120

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Nominal area, m2

Figure 8.1: Nominal area vrs. Average excavated area of a D&B tunnel

9 CONCLUSION

Head losses in an unlined D&B tunnel can be estimated as per some of the existing

methods (Rahm, Huval, Reinius, Wright and IBA). Correction for invert lining and for

shotcrete shall have to be applied in real site condition. Enough and systematic record of

cross section data are required for better statistical distribution. Cross sections formed

due to geological overbreak or due to intentional enlargement shall be excluded from

the standard distribution.

If the invert of a D&B tunnel of Chimay size is lined, around 27% of the head losses,

with respect to complete exposed D&B rock, can be reduced. If shotcrete is applied on

the wall and the roof, around 10% of the head losses can be reduced.

Cross section of a TBM excavated tunnel may vary due to the placement of supports

within the excavated diameter. In addition to the friction losses, there shall be losses due

to expansion and contraction. The surface roughness of such a tunnel can be between 4

mm to 10 mm.

K value for an unlined D&B tunnel is around 28 m1/3s-1. This corresponds to a friction

coefficient f = 0.0813.

Separation of macro and micro roughness is difficult in a D&B tunnel. Both are to be

treated integrally as one roughness.

15

[-] Coefficient

[-] Coefficient

[-] Angle

[-] Parameter for contraction loss

[-] Relative overbreak (in decimal or percentage)

[-] Co-efficient for singular head losses

A [m2] Area variation

X [m] Length variation

a [-] Ratio

b [-] Ratio

f [-] Friction factor / friction coefficient

g [m/s2] Acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s2

hL [mwc] Head loss general

hf [mwc] Head loss due to friction

hb [mwc] Head loss due to bends and curves

he [mwc] Head loss due to expansion

hc [mwc] Head loss due to contraction

hi [mwc] Head loss at intake

k [m] Equivalent absolute roughness

t [m] Overbreak

v [m/s] Velocity

x [-] Ratio

xi [m] Measured distance

x [m] Mean distance

y [-] Ratio

z [-] Ratio

A [m2] Area

A [m2] Mean area

D [m] Diameter or hydraulic diameter

F Functional relation

K [m1/3 s-1] Stricklers coefficient

L [m] Length

P [m] Wetted Perimeter

Pr [m] Wetted Perimeter of exposed rock

Pc [m] Wetted Perimeter of concrete invert

Ps [m] Wetted Perimeter of shotcreted wall and roof

Q [m3/s] Discharge

R [m] Hydraulic radius

Re or Re [-] Reynolds number

R0 [m] Radius of curvature

Subscripts

1%, 50%, 99% cumulative frequency of 1%, 50%, 99% for statistical

distribution.

avg average

m mean, average

n nominal, natural

t theoretical

16

Abbreviations

ch. Chainage

D&B Drill and Blast

log Logarithm function to base 10

m asl Metre Above Mean Sea Level

mean Arithmetic mean

mwc Metre of water column

rms Root mean square

TBM Tunnel Boring Machine

Bibliography

Borch E. Unlined high pressure tunnels in areas of complex topography, Water Power & Dam

Construction, November 1984.

Carstens T. and Hansen S.E. Rehabilitation in the unlined rock tunnels of Nedre Rossaga after 40

years, Hydropower97.

Cuesta L. Unlined hydroelectric tunnels, Rock Mechanics and Power Plants, Pages 289-292, ISBN

90 61918 278.

Technology, Stockholm, 1986

Stockholm, 1980.

Dann H.E.- Unlined tunnels of the Snowy Mountains Hydro-electric Authority, Australia, Journal of

the Power Division, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, October 1964.

du Laboratoire de Construction Hydrauliques, EPFL, Laussane, 1998.

Hydraulic considerations (Section 6) describing method [Solvik, 1984] for unlined pressure tunnels,

received from Kukule Ganga Hydropower Project, Sri Lanka.

I.E. Idelcik- coefficients de pertes de charge singulirs et de pertes de charge par frottement, traduit

par Mme. Meury, 1979.

Lecocq R. et Marin G. Evaluation des pertes de charge des galleries damnee deau forees au

tunnelier et non revetus, 1986 (collected from Prof. Schleiss, EPFL, Laussane).

17

Metcalf J.R. and Jordaan J.M.- Hydraulic roughness change in the Orange-Fish Tunnel: 1975-1990,

The Civil Engineer in South Africa, August 1991.

Nord G.- Drilling Accuracy in Underground Construction, World Tunnelling, December 2000.

Pennington M.S- Hydraulic roughness of bored tunnel. Paper on internet, IPENZ Transactions,

Vol.25, No. 1/CE,1998.

Petrofsky A.M.- Contractors view on unlined tunnels, Journal of the Power Division, Proceedings of

the American Society of Civil Engineers, October 1964.

singulirs.

Natural Water Courses

Reinius E. Head losses in unlined rock tunnels; Water Power July / August 1970.

Ronn and Skog New method for estimation of head loss in unlined water tunnels. Hydropower

1997.

Solvik O. and Tesaker E.- Floor paving in unlined hydropower tunnels, Hydropower 1997.

Spencer R.W.- Unlined tunnels of the Southern California Edison Company, Journals of the Power

Division, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, October 1964.

- Head loss calculation for hydropowerUploaded byBalkrishna Pangeni
- Calculating NPSHa for booster pumps - Pipelines, Piping and Fluid Mechanics engineering - Eng-Tips.pdfUploaded bySuhas Natu
- fluid and particle mechanicsUploaded byChristina Hill
- Head Losses in TunnelUploaded bymuazeemK
- Fluid Mechanics Benno 7Uploaded byisafir
- Hydraulics 2009 ExamUploaded byMohafisto Sofisto
- Analysis of Continous Water Distribution in Surat City using Epanet: A Case StudyUploaded byGRD Journals
- Mechanized Excavability Rating for Hard-rock MiningUploaded byrannscribd
- lab 7Uploaded byFalcon Tech
- Chapter 3 Hydraulic Properties of Soils EditedUploaded byAwoke
- Concrete Dam by r s Varshney Mtech nitrr studentUploaded bytram_bak
- GATE Civil Engineering 2015_Mock 2Uploaded bykishanrwt
- A_Review_Study_on_Methods_of_Tunneling_i.pdfUploaded bypa
- e 0421029034Uploaded byInternational Journal of computational Engineering research (IJCER)
- Tunnel RoughnessUploaded byvpamatya
- Ce6303 Mechanics of Fluids Unit 4 NotesUploaded bynkchandru
- ShouryaUploaded byXienkieHiroto
- Darcy–Weisbach equation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaUploaded bydonodoni0008
- MM301 Deney 2 FoyUploaded byefeln1
- Static and Kinetic FrictionUploaded byvmscotti
- Aptitude QuestionsUploaded byapi-3818780
- Wu_et_al-2014-Irrigation_and_Drainage.pdfUploaded byAntonioPiresdeCamargo
- Trans Atlantic MaglevUploaded bySean Madson
- A Case Study of Fire Suppression SystemUploaded byssgjmlim
- Fluid Mechanics Labarotary workbook record CUSAT PSRTUploaded byArjun Satheesh Kumar
- (7562)Lecture Notes 1 Friction eUploaded bydeepak123456789abc
- Cent PumpUploaded byMohamed Rjeb
- 2018_klaas_numerical_groundwater_modeling.pdfUploaded byAbiued Ejigue
- B PipeNetworksUploaded byamrezzat
- Fluid Dynamics - Is There a Way to Fill Tank 2 From Tank 1 Through Gravity Alone_ - Physics Stack ExchangeUploaded byBADRI VENKATESH

- 5 LEIS TONALISMO.pdfUploaded byLucas Correia
- 312476862 Carlos Almada Harmonia FuncionalUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- 01 - Aprendendo a Compor - Cadernos de Música da Universidade de CambridgeUploaded byOdair Sebaniski
- Tabela de derivadas.pdfUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- 17 - KeyWorld2016Uploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- Compêndio de Teoria Elementar da Música - Osvaldo LacerdaUploaded byUirá Garcia
- arranjo (método prático) - ian guest (editado por almir chediak)Uploaded byHamilton Fortini
- 162767711-Livro-do-musico-antonio-adolfo.pdfUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- Como Ler Uma PartituraUploaded byrodrigoferreira2
- Apostila Curso HEC-RASUploaded bycopinxa
- revista_ingenium_162Uploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- 101974473-Harmonia-Vol-2-Ian-Guest.pdfUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- LIVRO_NocoesBasicasEngenhariaUploaded byLuciano Dalla Corte
- Tabela de DerivadasUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- 117503408 Manual de Harmonia CompletoUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- livro hidrologia estatisticaUploaded byRodrigo Silva
- hidrologia_hidrograma_unitarioUploaded byFelipe Lemes
- Geraldo Magela Pereira - Salto Esqui Maciços Rochosos FraturadosUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- IRENA Brochure 2012Uploaded byLeo Borges
- Física - Energia 03 - Energia Solar IUploaded byFísica Concurso Vestibular
- OliveaDewhurst-maddock-ACuraPeloSom.pdfUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- Quatro Teses Contra a Acusação de Vitimismo de Negros, Mulheres e LGBT _ Negro BelchiorUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- Infiltração UFSergipe 01Uploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- FFEA_23_09_2013_José_Bione_Filho_CHESF[1]Uploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- Critérios de ProjetosUploaded bywdebastiani
- Modelos Hidráulicos Aplicados a BarragensUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- RenewableEnergyJobs.pdfUploaded byHimanshu Agrawal
- WiseUp_Mistakes_In_Business_English_Guide.pdfUploaded byRoberto FErnandes
- ganhe-dinheiro-vendendo-musica-digital.pdfUploaded byRoberto FErnandes

- 1336 Resistor BrakeUploaded byjoticamario123
- E1 Pri TroubleshootingUploaded byAlemseged Habtamu
- Boil Off Gas QatarUploaded byrvkumar61
- 03813_19_GPRS-LA_R7AUploaded byMuradHassis
- Green Power GenerationUploaded byFaisal Jalal
- Methods of Soil and Base StabilizationUploaded bySunil Bose
- PF ImprovementUploaded byAerwin Bautista
- Madrigal vs MeladUploaded byDennise Talan
- P-1583-Fernandez Villarroel, Ricardo AndresUploaded byJuan Contreras
- Physics MS.pdfUploaded byDeepanshu
- Attachment J (Draft Offshore Pipelines Decommissioning Guideline)Uploaded bysmithwork
- 7742 Selenium (Atomic Absorption, Borohydride Reduction)Uploaded byagusmustop
- CA report on Potential Violation of Virginia Conflict of Interest LawUploaded by13News Now
- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Case Studies in Environmental Medicine Cholinesterase InhibitorsUploaded byRiantika
- 5G TECHNOLOGY REPORTUploaded byshifaligowda
- ec341Uploaded bynagendra90
- Fly Ash UtilizationUploaded bysarkar82722
- Mhf 4u Unit 7 Practice Test2 (2)Uploaded byZiyangLiu
- Solvent Cementing Literature as on WebsiteUploaded byNaeemSiddiqui
- Evaluation of Wine prepared from Sugarcane and Watermelon JuiceUploaded byayam Victor Singh
- Como trabajar con el cockpit.pdfUploaded byAnonymous dHKnhwHU
- MRUploaded byLiaqat Shahani
- Using Domain Ontology as Domain Knowledge for Requirements ElicitationUploaded byJojo Kaway
- Intial Public Offer Icici 2012Uploaded byraghavkaranam
- sap Basic NavigationUploaded byaliuad2380
- Portland-General-Electric-Co-Large---Non-Residential---Direct-Access-Service-(201-1000-kW)Uploaded byGenability
- The Journal of Portfolio Management Volume 44 issue 6 2018 [doi 10.3905_jpm.2018.44.6.120] López de Prado, Marcos -- The 10 Reasons Most Machine Learning Funds Fail.pdfUploaded byFrancisco Gutierrez
- China’s global kidnapping campaign has gone on for years. It may now be reaching inside U.S. borders..docxUploaded byThavam
- Reyes Fitness Centers Inc_IMUploaded byMohammad Rafiq
- Snes9x LicenseUploaded bymilind071286