Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chute Guidelines PDF
Chute Guidelines PDF
www.toolkit.net.au/chute
GUIDELINES
CRC for Catchment Hydrology 2003. Except as permitted under the Australian Copyright Act 1968, these
Design Guidelines may not be copied or distributed by itself except with express written permission of the
Director of the CRC for Catchment Hydrology
Document History
Date Author Revision Description of Change
Aug 2003 R.J. Keller 1.0.0b Creation
Conversion to Toolkit Template. This manual
01 Sep 2003 Nick Murray 1.0.0
applies to CHUTE version 1.0.0
Copyright notice
CSIRO Australia 2003
Legal Information
To the extend permitted by law, CSIRO (including its employees and consultants) accepts no responsibility
and excludes all liability whatsoever in respect of any person's use or reliance on this publication or any
part of it.
TOC
Acknowledgements
These Design Guidelines, in part, reproduce material originally prepared by Ian Drummond
and Associates (now Earth Tech Pty Ltd). The permission of Dr. John Tilleard to freely use this
material is appreciated.
TOC
CHUTE
CONTENTS
1 Introduction ..................................................................... 1
1.1 The User Guide ........................................................................................2
1.1.1 Purpose.......................................................................................2
1.1.2 Structure .....................................................................................2
2 Installation ....................................................................... 3
2.1 Technical Specifications ............................................................................3
2.2 Installation...............................................................................................3
2.3 Uninstalling CHUTE..................................................................................4
3 Hydraulic Design Elements ............................................... 5
3.1 Explanation of Terms ................................................................................5
4 Design Program ............................................................... 8
4.1 Inputs ......................................................................................................8
4.1.1 Rating Table ................................................................................9
4.1.2 Normal Depth. ............................................................................9
4.1.3 ycrit+10% .................................................................................10
4.1.4 Average Normal, ycrit................................................................10
4.2 Outputs .................................................................................................10
4.3 Rock Details and Factor of Safety ............................................................12
4.3.1 Angle of Repose ........................................................................12
4.3.2 Specific Gravity of Rock ..............................................................12
4.3.3 Factor of Safety .........................................................................13
5 Other Design Details...................................................... 14
5.1 Rock quality, Grading, and Thickness ......................................................14
5.2 Incorporation of a Fixed Crest.................................................................16
5.3 Filters and Hydraulic Cutoffs ...................................................................16
5.4 Treatment of Abutments .........................................................................17
Appendix A Theory for the Hydraulic Design of Rock Chutes.... 19
Appendix A.1 Theory ........................................................................................19
Appendix A.2 Program Flow Details ..................................................................23
Appendix A.3 References ..................................................................................27
i
TOC
TABLE OF FIGURES
ii
Introduction
1 Introduction
A rock chute is a relatively short and steep section of the bed of a channel that has been
armoured with rock. Its normal function is to either:
Stabilise an erosion head and prevent it from moving upstream in the channel.
Reduce the overall grade of a channel by providing a weir within the channel bed.
A rock chute offers an alternative to other forms of drop structure such as sheet piling or
reinforced concrete weirs.
Although the concept of a rock chute is simple, proper hydraulic design is very important to
ensure that the chute geometry and rock size are matched with the expected flow conditions
such that the rock remains stable under all expected flow conditions. In addition, appropriate
rock chute design requires that a number of other issues are adequately addressed. In
particular:
Chutes should be located where they can serve their function most efficiently and
effectively
The abutments must be treated to prevent failure by outflanking of the crest
The grading of rock sizes within the rock mixture must minimise the presence of voids
and minimise the area of individual rocks exposed to forces from the flow
Where the underlying material is largely non-cohesive or where high ground-water
levels or seepage occur, consideration should be given to the use of filter layers.
The program CHUTE has been developed as a design tool in the hydraulic design of rock
chutes and these design guidelines are primarily concerned with this aspect. It is emphasised
very strongly, however, that this is only one aspect of the correct application and design of
these structures. Indeed many chutes fail for reasons other than inadequacies in their specific
hydraulic design. Such failures are often related to poor understanding of the prevailing site
conditions such as hydrology, overall stream morphology, floodplain and channel hydraulics,
and foundation conditions.
1
CHUTE Design Guidelines
1.1.1 Purpose
These guidelines first address the program CHUTE and its proper use to design and analyse
the performance of a chute under a range of flow conditions. It is clearly not possible to
provide a complete treatise on the other issues of importance. However, design notes on
these other issues are provided for guidance only and not as a set of prescribed rules. In all
cases it is important to access local knowledge and experience with other chutes on the same
stream or under similar conditions.
1.1.2 Structure
These guidelines describe:
hydraulic design elements
the design program CHUTE
other relevant design details
In the appendix, the hydraulic theory underpinning the program CHUTE is presented.
2 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Installation
2 Installation
2.1 Technical Specifications
CHUTE requires the following system configuration.
2.2 Installation
To install CHUTE:
1 Double-click the setup.exe file on the CD. The CHUTE Setup Wizard appears.
2 Click Next. The Licence Agreement window appears. To confirm that you agree with the
CHUTE licence conditions, click the I agree button. If you do not agree to the licence
conditions, you cannot install CHUTE.
Click Next to continue the installation. The Select Installation Folder window appears.
3 Leave the installation folder at the default setting.
4 Click Next. The Confirm Installation window appears.
5 Click Next. CHUTE is installed onto your computer, and the Installation Complete
window appears.
6 Click Close to exit the installer.
3
CHUTE Design Guidelines
4 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Hydraulic Design Elements
3 Hydraulic Design
Elements
A typical rock chute is shown schematically in Figure 1 together with an illustration of the
various terms used in describing and designing a rock chute. From a hydraulic point of view,
the primary elements are the chute face and the apron, since these provide protection to the
bed from the erosive forces of the water.
Jump location
x=0
q
Chute
drop Downstream depth
chute slope
Downstream bed
1 apron rise
5
CHUTE Design Guidelines
The profile shown in Figure 2 (c) is most likely to be associated with the maximum design
flow in the river. With lower controlling tail water levels, the profiles shown in Figure 2 (a)
and Figure 2(b) are associated with flow rates less than the maximum. Because of the lower
minimum depths associated with the latter profiles, it is likely that the bed shear stresses will
be larger with a consequent increase in the rock size required for stability.
This discussion demonstrates that the chute design flow rate that for which the required
rock size is a maximum will be lower than the channel design flow rate that for which the
required channel capacity is a maximum. This is a most important distinction in the design of
a rock chute. A particular feature of the program CHUTE is that it examines the entire range
of flows and explicitly determines the flow within that range for which the required rock size
for stability is a maximum.
Figure 2: Alternate Flow Profiles over Chute and Location of Minimum Depth
It is clear also from this discussion that determination of the critical rock size requires the
determination of the water surface profile throughout the chute for a given flow rate and the
consequent determination of the minimum value of depth. The normal design situation is
shown in Figure 3 and corresponds to the case shown in Figure 2 (a).
For the case shown in Figure 3, two depths control the combined flow profile critical depth
at the chute crest and a known downstream subcritical depth. The downstream depth is
dependent on controls further downstream and would normally be established from a one-
dimensional program such as HEC-RAS.
The S2 profile downstream of the chute crest and the A1 or M1 profile over and upstream of
the chute apron are computed using the standard step method, described in (eg) (Henderson
1966). The location of the hydraulic jump is then determined as the point where the
6 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Hydraulic Design Elements
upstream and downstream depths form a conjugate pair ie the Momentum Function is the
same.
For the case shown in Figure 2 (c), the subcritical profile, controlled by the downstream
depth, is everywhere higher than the conjugate profile, computed from the assumed
upstream supercritical profile. In this case, the chute is said to be drowned.
Energ
y gra
de l i n
Con e
q yc ju gat e
S2 dep
th l i
ne
S1 A1 or M1 ydownstream
So
1
Figure 3: Water Surface Profile with Hydraulic Jump on Chute
The discussion presented in this section is expanded with the full mathematical equations and
solution procedure in Appendix A.
7
CHUTE Design Guidelines
4 Design Program
The design program is set up as a Microsoft Excel workbook, with separate sheets devoted to
site inputs and the downstream rating table and a number of other sheets for presenting
aspects of the results. Figure 4 shows the Input worksheet and the various inputs in the top
table are summarised in the following sub-section.
4.1 Inputs
1 Structure Variables. With reference to the sketch in Figure 1, the following variables
describing the dimensions of the proposed structure are entered into the input table:
Chute Drop, Chute Length. The vertical and horizontal distance respectively
between the upstream lip of the chute and the lowest point
Apron Rise, Apron Length. The vertical rise and horizontal length respectively
of the downstream apron section
Chute Width. This is used by the program, in conjunction with the flow data, to
determine the range of unit flow rates on the chute.
2 Flow Rate. The nominal minimum and the maximum design flow rate specifying the
range over which the program will calculate the D50 required.
3 Rock Variables. The angle of repose and the specific gravity of the proposed rock that
will be used in the chute. Typical values are presented in Section 4.3.
4 Factor of Safety. This is a critical input that reflects the degree of conservatism built into
the design. Further comments on this factor are presented subsequently.
8 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Design Program
9
CHUTE Design Guidelines
This option normally produces a more conservative chute design than the Rating Table
option and should be used where a downstream backwater profile is not available or cannot
be computed and where the downstream channel can be approximated as a rectangular
wide channel with a known slope and Mannings roughness.
4.1.3 ycrit+10%
With this option, the program assumes the downstream boundary depth is 10% greater than
critical depth. This is the most conservative of the options. It is valid for preliminary design,
but should only be used for detailed design where downstream channel information is
completely lacking.
4.2 Outputs
On completing the calculations, the program automatically switches to the Results
spreadsheet. This sheet contains two tables the first and part of the second are presented in
Figure 5.
The first table contains summary information for each of the flow rates within the specified
flow range. The five blocks of information contain:
1 Flow Rate.
2 Required rock size and side slope, representing the required D50 assuming normal
(uniform) flow, calculated D50 with full profile calculations, and required chute bank
angle for stability.
3 Downstream boundary depths, representing that used by the program and that
specified by the rating table. The critical depth is also calculated and reported.
4 Specific energy results, representing the specific energy at the spillway crest (u/s) and
at the toe of the apron (d/s). The column labelled extra has meaning only for a
Scenario 3 profile which is the case where the hydraulic jump is swept downstream with
supercritical flow throughout the structure. In this case, the number reported in this
column is the additional specific energy required at the toe of the apron for a hydraulic
jump to form.
5 Jump conditions. In the first column of this block is the scenario number which
represents the type of flow profile as follows:
Scenario 1: Jump contained within the structure - (a) and (b) of Figure 2.
Scenario 2: Chute drowned out (c) of Figure 2.
Scenario 3: Jump swept downstream.
The second column is a scenario description. In the next three columns, the location of the
hydraulic jump from the chute crest, the depth immediately upstream of the jump, and the
10 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Design Program
depth immediately downstream of the jump respectively are listed. The final two columns list
the energy loss across the hydraulic jump and the friction loss down the chute. The sum of
the last two columns represents the total energy loss within the chute.
Details of the flow profile at the flow rate for the maximum required rock size are presented
in the second table. Figure 5 lists only the first few lines of this table. Listed in this table are
the variations with distance of bed elevation, bed slope, water surface elevation, total energy
line, friction slope, velocity, and Froude Number.
11
CHUTE Design Guidelines
12 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Design Program
13
CHUTE Design Guidelines
14 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Other Design Details
3000
Rock beaching on batter min
3000 3000 Minimum 300mm
min min 1000 Typ.
above design
water line
Crest R.L.
Rock chute
Bed
Bed
1500 Typ.
Filter layer
1000 Typ.
ELEVATION
Excavate and place rock to
form a key in bank Transition the cross section of the
Fold of geotextile to form creek upstream and downstream
a barrier to fine material to match the cross section of the
structure as shown
A B C
Extend rock beaching on bank Where required place and compact
upstream and downstream of excavated material to form an
chute by three metres minimum alignment bank.
PLAN
Rock armour
SECTION 'A'
Filter layer
SECTION 'C'
Trench continues into bank
15
CHUTE Design Guidelines
16 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Other Design Details
For permeability:
Rock
(a)
Figure 8: Alternative Arrangements for Filters and Cutoffs
17
CHUTE Design Guidelines
Rock
Geotextile
(bi)
Rock
Rock
18 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Other Design Details
Appendix A
Theory for the
Hydraulic Design of
Rock Chutes
Appendix A.1 Theory
The determination of the critical shear stress at which bed particles will start to move on a flat
bed is given by:
c
= constant (1)
D50 (S s 1)
where
D50 is the particle size for which 50% of the sample is finer
Ss is the relative density of the bed material
Equation (1) is correct provided the particle Reynolds Number is above a certain value,
typically taken to be about 400. This corresponds to a particle size of about 6mm
(Henderson 1966). In all practical chute designs, the rock size will always be larger than this
value, so the use of the equation is justified.
The magnitude of the constant is the subject of some difference of opinion in the literature.
The classic work of Shields (Henderson 1966) produced a value of 0.056, although other
studies have yielded lower values. For the present study, a more conservative value of 0.047
is chosen, consistent with the work of (Meyer-Peter and Muller 1948) and (Yalin and Karahan
1979).
19
CHUTE Design Guidelines
Noting that, on the bed of a trapezoidal channel, the shear stress may be expressed as
= 0.97 y S (Chow 1959), where y is the depth and S is the local energy slope, and
introducing a factor of safety, FS, Equation (1) may be transposed to:
0.97 FS yS
D50 = (2)
0.047(S s 1)
Now, flow over a chute may be considered as being hydraulically wide, leading to the
expression of Mannings Equation as:
1 5 3 12
q = vy = y S (3)
n
where n is Mannings roughness parameter
q is the flow rate per unit width
Combining Equations (2) and (3) yields:
0.97 FS q 2 n 2
D50 = (4)
0.047(S s 1) y
7
3
Equation (4) demonstrates that, for a given flow rate per unit width, particle density, and
Mannings roughness parameter, the minimum rock size required for stability is strongly
inversely proportional to the local depth, y. It is evident that the critical design condition, ie
the condition requiring the largest stone size for stability, will be that for which the depth is a
minimum.
There are three possible types of flow profile that may occur on a rock chute. These are
illustrated in Figure 9.
20 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Other Design Details
Figure 9: Alternate Flow Profiles on Rock Chute and Location of Minimum Depth
In Figure 9, for each type of profile, the location of the point of minimum depth is shown by
an asterisk.
The circumstances under which each profile will occur will vary according to site conditions.
However, in general, profile types a) and b) are associated with low and mid-range flows and
type c) is associated with large flows.
It is evident that solution of Equation (4) requires the determination of the water surface
profile throughout the chute for a given flow rate and the consequent determination of the
minimum value of depth. In most cases, the critical design situation, requiring the largest
stone size for stability, is shown in Figure 10 and corresponds to the case shown in Figure
9(a).
21
CHUTE Design Guidelines
Energ
y gr a
de l i n
Con e
q yc ju g a te
S2 dep
th l i
ne
S1 A1 or M1 ydownstream
So
1
Figure 10: Water Surface Profile with Hydraulic Jump on Chute
For the case shown in Figure 10, two depths control the combined flow profile critical
depth at the chute crest and a known downstream subcritical depth. Determination of critical
depth at the chute crest is developed from the standard equation for critical depth in a
rectangular channel (Henderson 1966):
q2
yc = 3 (5)
g
The downstream depth is dependent on controls further downstream. Program CHUTE
currently incorporates four options for determining this depth and these are discussed in the
Guidelines. The most reliable and exact is the use of a rating table which would normally be
established from a one-dimensional program such as HEC-RAS.
The S2 profile downstream of the chute crest and the A1 or M1 profile over and upstream of
the chute apron are computed using the standard step method, described in (eg) (Henderson
1966). The location of the hydraulic jump is then determined as the point where the
upstream and downstream depths form a conjugate pair ie the Momentum Function is the
same.
For the case shown in Figure 9(c), the subcritical profile, controlled by the downstream depth,
is everywhere higher than the conjugate profile, computed from the assumed upstream
supercritical profile. In this case, the chute is said to be drowned.
Although the computational details for the water surface profile are standard, it needs to be
recognised that the computed profiles are dependent on Mannings roughness coefficient,
which, in turn, is linked to the unknown rock size through the Strickler Equation (Henderson
1966):
1
n = 0.041D506 (6)
0 tan 2
= cos 1 (7)
c tan 2
where is the bank angle
22 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Other Design Details
Equation (7) was obtained by equating the disturbing forces on the particle to the restoring
forces. In the present study, this approach was modified by the introduction of the factor of
safety, FS, defined in this context as the ratio of restoring forces to disturbing forces. This
modification alters Equation (7) to:
0 1 tan 2
= cos (8)
c FS2 tan 2
Noting that, on the bank of a trapezoidal channel, the shear stress may be expressed as
= 0.75 y S (Chow 1959), and incorporating Equation (1) for c yields:
0.75 yS 1 tan 2
= cos (9)
c D50 (S s 1) FS2 tan 2
Algebraic manipulation of Equation (9) yields:
0.75 yS
D50 = (10)
1 tan 2
c (Ss 1) cos
FS2 tan 2
A flat bed is equivalent to = 0 and it is readily shown that, with the multiplying factor
0.75 replaced by the value 0.97, Equation (10) devolves to Equation (2).
Equation (10) is used by the design program to determine the maximum allowable value of
the side slope angle, , such that the value of D50, required for stability on the side slope, is
no greater than that calculated by Equation (4). In this way, rock stability is assured on both
the bed and side slopes of the chute.
23
CHUTE Design Guidelines
downstream boundary depth computed earlier. If the flow is indeed sub-critical throughout
the chute (drowned) then the program uses the minimum depth value, at the upstream
boundary, to compute a value of D50. As this will normally differ from the initial trial value,
the water surface profile must be recalculated. This process is repeated until convergence is
achieved, defined as less than 1% difference between the newly calculated value of D50 and
the old one. This fully-drowned, subcritical scenario is dubbed Scenario 1 in the program.
The subroutine contains a special routine to detect the presence of a hydraulic jump. If one is
found, program flow proceeds to the supercritical section, where the S2 curve of the
supercritical flow region is computed. This section begins computations at the upstream
boundary, with the assumption that the depth there is 99% of critical depth. Once the water
surface has been computed to the hydraulic jump, the minimum depth is taken as the depth
just before the jump, unless the jump is on the apron, in which case the minimum depth is
taken as the depth at the beginning of the apron. The required rock size is then calculated
using this depth. Again, convergence is checked before exiting the subroutine. This situation
is referred to as Scenario 2 in the program. If convergence has not yet been achieved, the
whole process is repeated using the average of the new value of D50 and the old value,
starting with the subcritical flow at the downstream boundary.
In the event that supercritical flow is found throughout the chute and the apron, the D50 is
calculated using the depth at the start of the apron, as before. However, a warning is given
that the hydraulic jump exists past the end of the apron, ie, in the bed of the downstream
river, as this is an undesirable situation. This situation is termed Scenario 3.
24 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Other Design Details
Figure 11: Flowchart for section of program that calculates rock size
The sections in the flow chart labelled compute S1 curve and compute S2 curve are
handled by separate subroutines. These make use of the generalised form of the non-uniform
resistance equation:
dy S o S f
= (11)
dx 1 Fr 2
In the case of wide flow with R = y, we have
q2
Fr 2 = (12)
gy 3
q 2n2
S f = 10 / 3 (Manning) (13)
y
25
CHUTE Design Guidelines
Hence,
q2n2
S
o
dy y 10 / 3
= f (y) = (14)
dx q2
1 3
gy
Note that: dx is positive moving downstream,
So is positive if the slope is downstream,
Sf is always positive,
(1-Fr2) is positive for subcritical flow and negative for supercritical flow.
Equation (14) will be undefined at critical depth, (Fr = 1). The use of the equation should be
restricted to depths that are at least 5% smaller or greater than critical.
The water surface profile is evaluated using the 4th order Runge-Kutta numerical technique to
forward predict the next y value based on a known y. With reference to
dy
Figure 12, at the point 1, y1is known, and hence = f ( y ) is known from Equation (14).
dx
The Runge-Kutta method estimates y2 as follows
k1 = f ( y1 )
k dx
k 2 = f y1 + 1
2
k dx
k 3 = f y1 + 2
2
k 4 = f [ y1 + k 3 dx ]
dx
y 2 = y1 + (k1 + 2k 2 + 2k 3 + k 4 )
6
26 Issued: 8-Sep-03
Other Design Details
1
2
y1
y2
So
1
dx
27