Neural Computing and Applications

, Volume 23, Issue 5, pp 1343–1349 | Cite as

An expert system for predicting Manning’s roughness coefficient in open channels by using gene expression programming

  • H. Md. Azamathulla
  • Z. Ahmad
  • Aminuddin Ab. Ghani
Original Article

Abstract

Manning’s roughness coefficient (n) has been widely used in the estimation of flood discharges or depths of flow in natural channels. Accurate estimation of Manning’s roughness coefficient is essential for the computation of flow rate, velocity. Conventional formulae that are greatly based on empirical methods lack in providing high accuracy for the prediction of Manning’s roughness coefficient. Consequently, new and accurate techniques are still highly demanded. In this study, gene expression programming (GEP) is used to estimate the Manning’s roughness coefficient. The estimated value of the roughness coefficient is used in Manning’s equation to compute the flow parameters in open-channel flows in order to carry out a comparison between the proposed GEP-based approach and the conventional ones. Results show that computed discharge using estimated value of roughness coefficient by GEP is in good agreement (±10%) with the experimental results compared to the conventional formulae (R2 = 0.97 and RMSE = 0.0034 for the training data and R2 = 0.94 and RMSE = 0.086 for the testing data).

Keywords

Open channel Friction coefficient Neural networks Genetic programming Manning’s equation 

References

  1. 1.
    Ab. Ghani A, Zakaria NA, Chang CK, Ariffin J, Abu Hasan Z, Abdul Ghaffar AB (2007) Revised equations for Manning’s coefficient for sand-bed rivers. Int J River Basin Manag 5(4):329–346Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alavi AH, Ameri M, Gandomi AH, Mirzahosseini MR (2011) Formulation of flow number of asphalt mixes using a hybrid computational method. Constr Build Mater 25(3):1338–1355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Altun H, Bilgil A, Fidan CF (2006) Treatment of multi-dimensional data to enhance neural network estimators in regression problems. Expert Syst Appl 32(2):599–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Azamathulla HMd, Ahmad Z (2012) Gene-expression programming for transverse mixing coefficient. J Hydrol 434–435:142–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Azamathulla HMd, Deo MC, Deolalikar PB (2008) Alternative neural networks to estimate the scour below spillways. Adv Eng Softw 39(8):689–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barnes HH Jr (1967) Roughness characteristics of natural channels. US Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1949Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bilgil A (1998) The effect of wall shear stress on friction factor in smooth open channel flows. Ph.D. Thesis. Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon (Turkey) (in Turkish)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bilgil A, Altun H (2008) Investigation of flow resistance in smooth open channels using artificial neural networks. Flow Meas Instrum 19:404–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Çiray, C. (1999) On some special corner flows (with emphasis on uniform flows in rectangular channels), Memorial Volume of L. Prof. Dr. K. Çeçen, Faculty of Civil Engineering, ÏTÜGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chow VT (1959) Open channel hydraulics. McGraw-Hill Book Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dingman SL, Sharma KP (1997) Statistical development and validation of discharge equations for natural channels. J Hydrol 199:13–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dooge JCI (1991) The Manning formula in context channel flow resistance; centennial of Manning’s formula. Water Resources Publications, Littleton (Colo), pp 136–185Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ferreira C (2001) Gene expression programming in problem solving. In: 6th online world conference on soft computing in industrial applications (invited tutorial)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ferreira C (2001) Gene expression programming: a new adaptive algorithm for solving problems. Complex Syst 13(2):87–129MATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    French RH (1985) Open channel hydraulics. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gandomi AH, Alavi AH, Mirzahosseini MR, Moqhadas Nejad F (2011) Nonlinear genetic-based models for prediction of flow number of asphalt mixtures. J Mater Civ Eng 23(3):248–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gandomi AH, Babanajad SK, Alavi AH, Farnam Y (2012) A novel approach to strength modeling of concrete under triaxial compression. J Mater Civil Eng (in press). doi:10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000494
  18. 18.
    Gandomi AH, Tabatabaie SM, Moradian MH, Radfar A, Alavi AH (2011) A new prediction model for load capacity of castellated steel beams. J Constr Steel Res 67(7):1096–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gandomi AH, Alavi AH (2011) Multi-stage genetic programming: a new strategy to nonlinear system modeling. Inf Sci 181(23):5227–5239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    GEPSOFT (2006) GeneXproTools. Version 4.0. http://www.gepsoft.com
  21. 21.
    Giustolisi O (2004) Using genetic programming to determine Chèzy resistance coefficient in corrugated channels. J Hydroinform 6(3):157–173Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Green JC (2006) Effect of macrophyte spatial variability on channel resistance. Adv Water Resour 29:426–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Guven A, Aytek A (2009) A new approach for stage-discharge relationship: gene-expression programming. J. Hydrologic Eng 14(8):812–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Guven A, Gunal M (2008a) Genetic programming approach for prediction of local scour downstream of hydraulic structures. J Irrig Drain Eng 134(2):241–249Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Guven A, Gunal M (2008b) Prediction of scour downstream of grade-control structures using neural networks. J Hydraul Eng 134(11):1656–1660Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Henderson FM (1966) Open channel flow. MacMillan Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hicks DM, Mason PD (1991) Roughness characteristics of New Zealand rivers. Water Resources Survey, WellingtonGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jarrett RD (1984) Hydraulics of high gradient streams. ASCE J Hydraul Eng 110:1519–1539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jiang M, Li L-X (2010) An improved two-point velocity method for estimating the roughness coefficient of natural channels. Phys Chem Earth Parts A/B/C 35(3–5):182–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kazemipour AK, Apelt CJ (1982) Shape effects on resistance to uniform flow in open channels. J Hydraul Res 17:129–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Keulegan GH (1938) Laws of turbulent flow in open channels. J Natl Bureau Stand 1151(21):707–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Koza JR (1999) Genetic programming: on the programming of computers by means of natural selection. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Riggs HC (1976) A simplified slope area method for estimating flood discharges in natural channels. J Res US Geol Survey 4:285–291Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Solomatine DP, Otsfeld A (2008) Data-driven modelling: some past experiences and new approaches. J Hydroinform 10(1):3–22Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Myers WRC (1982) Flow resistance in wide rectangular channels. J Hydraul Div ASCE 108:471–482Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Powell RW (1970) Resistance studies on smooth open channels. J Hydraul Div ASCE 364–367Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pillia NN (1970) On uniform flow through smooth rectangular open channels. J Hydraul Res 8:403–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pillia NN (1997) Effect of shape on uniform flow through smooth rectangular open channels. Journal of Hydraulics Research 8:655–658Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rahman HK, Williams JR, Wormleaton PR (1997) Identification problem of open channel friction parameters. J Hydraul Res 8:1078–1088Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rao KK (1969) Effect of shape on the mean-flow characteristics of turbulent flow through smooth rectangular open channel. PhD Thesis presented to the University of Iowa at Iowa City, IowaGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Reinus E (1961) Steady uniform flow in open channels transactions. Royal Institute Technology, Stockholm, p 179Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Syamala P (1998) Velocity shear and friction studies in smooth rectangular channels of small aspect ratio for supercritical flows, PhD Thesis presented to the Indian Institute of Science at Bangalore, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tinkler KJ (1997) Critical flow in rockbed streams with estimated values for Manning’s n. Geomorphology 20:147–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Tracy HJ, Lester CM (1961) Resistance coefficients and velocity distribution-smooth rectangular channel. US Geol Surv Water Supply Paper 1592-A, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wilson C (2007) Flow resistance models for flexible submerged vegetation. J Hydrol 342(3–4):1213–1222Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Yen BC (2002) Open channel flow resistance. J Hydraul Eng 128:20–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Md. Azamathulla
    • 1
  • Z. Ahmad
    • 2
  • Aminuddin Ab. Ghani
    • 1
  1. 1.River Engineering and Urban Drainage Research Centre (REDAC)Universiti Sains MalaysiaNibong Tebal, Pulau PinangMalaysia
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology RoorkeeRoorkeeIndia

Personalised recommendations