University of Leeds

School of Civil Engineering

Fluid Mechanics 2.2

Worked example to show the use of the Newton-Raphson method to calculate the
normal depth in a rectangular channel


1. The problem

A rectangular channel is 2.3 m wide and laid at a bed slope of 1 in 350. If the Chezy C is
constant and equal to 30 in SI units determine the normal depth when the flow is
0.75 m
3
/s.


2. Setting up the solution

The Chezy formula can be written as i m C A = Q where the symbols have their usual
meanings. In this example Q = 0.75 m
3
/s, C = 30 and i = 1 in 350.

Since the channel is rectangular and of width b (= 2.3 m) then we can write the Chezy
formula as

( )
i
y b
y b
C y b Q
n
n
n
2 +
=

The simplest way to solve for the normal depth, y
n
, is to square both sides of the equation
then gather together all the variables whose values are known. Hence we can write

( )
i
y b
y b
C y b Q
n
n
n
2
2 2 2 2
+
=

Gathering together the variables with known values we have

( )
K
y b
y
i C b
Q
n
n
=
+
=
2
3
2 3
2


where K is a constant which can be evaluated. We can rewrite this as a simple cubic
equation in y
n
as follows

(1) 0 2
3
= b K y K y
n n
3. Solution of the cubic equation

There are several direct methods of solving cubic equations, for example Cardans
method. The choice of which to use depends on the magnitude of the coefficients. As a
general rule it is preferable to use a generalised iterative approach, this is especially true
if a computer is available. Since the equation is easy to differentiate then the Newton-
Raphson method will be used, this has the added advantage that it will converge
exponentially. This method can be written as

( )
( )
0
'
0
0 1
x f
x f
x x =

where x
0
is an initial estimate of the solution of f(x
0
) = 0 and x
1
is a better estimate.
Applying this method to equation 1 yields x
( )
( )
0
0
0 1 '
n
n
n n
y f
y f
y y =
Therefore we can write
K y
b K y K y
y y
n
n n
n n
2 3
2
2
3
0
0 0
0 1

=


4. The detailed solution

For this example

017979 . 0
30 3 . 2
350 75 . 0
2 3
2
= = K

For inexperienced users it may be difficult to make an estimate for ; a simple way of
doing this is to assume that the velocity, v, is 1 m/s, although this may be significantly in
error it is unlikely to be so far wrong that it causes the iterations to diverge
0
n
y
1
. In this case
( ) ( )
m y
f and f
y y b then v A Q
n
n n
391 . 0
2829 . 0
01843 . 0
326 . 0
2829 . 0 326 . 0 01843 . 0 326 . 0
326 . 0 1 75 . 0
1
0 0
'
=

=
= =
= = =


1
An alternative method of obtaining a first approximation is given in section 5 of this note.
2
This process is now repeated using mm y
n
391 . 0 =
( ) ( )
m y
f and f
n
381 . 0
4247 . 0
10 x 365 . 4
391 . 0
4247 . 0 391 . 0 10 x 365 . 4 391 . 0
3
' 3
2
=

=
= =

mm y y
n n
010 . 0
1 2
=

In practice the iterations would stop at this point however, to further make the point that
the Newton-Raphson method converges exponentially, one further iteration is included
with mm y 381 . 0 =
n
f ( ) ( )
mm y
f and
n
380 . 0
3995 . 0
10 x 5477 . 2
381 . 0
3995 . 0 381 . 0 10 x 5477 . 2 381 . 0
4
' 4
3
= =
= =

mm y y
n n
001 . 0
2 3
=

You should note that engineers do not normally work to this level of numerical accuracy
for depth calculations in open channel flow, in practice it is meaningless. It should also
be noted that the accuracy of the input data does not warrant unduly high accuracy.

On completion of the solution it is recommended that the final value of y
n
is substituted
into the Chezy equation to make sure that the solution is correct. In this case the back
substitution yields Q = 0.7501 m
3
/s.


5. An alternative approach for obtaining an initial value for
0
n
y

If it is assumed that the channel is sufficiently wide to permit the analysis to be
undertaken on flow per unit width, q, then it can be assumed that the hydraulic mean
radius, m, is equal to the depth. If this is so then the Chezy formula can be written as

i y y C q
n n
1 x =

hence y
n
can be obtained explicitly as

3
2
2
0
i C
q
y
n
=

3
For this example

m y
m q
n
346 . 0
30
350 326 . 0
326 . 0
3 . 2
75 . 0
3
2
2
0
= =
= =


In this particular example this estimate is slightly nearer the final solution than the one
obtained by assuming that v = 1 m/s. As a general rule this approach gives a somewhat
closer estimate hence may save one or two iterations. It is suggested that you repeat the
solution using this estimate.
4