Technical Note

Mass Angle of Repose of Open-Graded Rock Riprap

David C. Froehlich, Ph.D., P.E., D.WRE, M.ASCE1

Abstract: Mass angle of repose (that is, the angle at which a mass of sliding particles will come to rest) is a fundamental material property
that is needed to design drainage channel linings composed of open-graded riprap stone, also called dumped rock riprap, which protect
earthen slopes from erosion by flowing water. Multiple regression analysis of measurements at 74 stockpiles of dumped natural and crushed
rock shows the angle to depend primarily on rock particle angularity and, to lesser extents, on the gradation and the median particle diameter
of the stone mixture, the angle increasing with angularity, mixture nonuniformity, and particle size. Uncomplicated expressions are developed
from the data to calculate the expected mass angle of repose of open-graded rock riprap along with prediction intervals. DOI: 10.1061/
(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000316. © 2011 American Society of Civil Engineers.
CE Database subject headings: Rocks; Riprap; Drainage; Stones; Channels; Shear stress.
Author keywords: Angle of repose; Rock; Riprap; Open-graded stone; Drainage channel; Protective lining; Shear stress.

Introduction
To control intermittent flow of water from highways, commercial
and residential developments, and agricultural land, a ditch or a
system of ditches is often constructed to carry away the expected
surface runoff. These permanent drainage channels are usually laid
out on well-defined courses that need to remain stable without
meandering or significant change in cross-section shape or size.
However, almost any channel excavated in sand, silt, or clay soil
will erode when stream-flow velocities are high enough. Open-
graded riprap stone, also called dumped riprap, is often used to line
the banks and beds of open drainage channels to guard against ero-
sion because it provides excellent protection that costs little in com-
parison to other types of linings (Froehlich and Benson 1996). If
designed and installed properly, open-graded stone offers a visually
appealing solution to erosion problems [National Stone, Sand and
Gravel Association (NSSGA) 1991].
Open-graded rock riprap has a narrow range of particle sizes and
as a result void spaces within a mixture are relatively large. When
dumped into place from a skip, bucket, dragline, or directly from a
truck, even with subsequent spreading by a bulldozer, the maxi-
mum inclination of a covered slope cannot exceed the mass angle
of repose, also called the natural slope or the natural angle of re-
pose, of the stone. Mass angle of repose is also used to calculate the
size of rock riprap needed to protect slopes from erosion by water
currents and waves [see, for example, Vanoni 1977, pp. 106–107;
Maynord et al. 1989; Brown and Clyde 1989; U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) 1994, p. 3-5].
Although angle of repose usually means the angle at which a
mass of sliding particles will come to rest (Van Burkalow 1945;
Lambe and Whitman 1969, p. 192), it has also been defined as
the maximum angle that can be attained by a slope before avalanch-
ing occurs (Carrigy 1970; Ulrich 1987). Statham (1977, p. 45)
1
Consulting Engineer, 303 Frenchmans Bluff Drive, Cary, NC, 27513.
E-mail: dcfroehlich@aol.com
Note. This manuscript was submitted on July 12, 2010; approved on
October 21, 2010; published online on June 15, 2011. Discussion period
open until December 1, 2011; separate discussions must be submitted for
individual papers. This technical note is part of the Journal of Irrigation
and Drainage Engineering, Vol. 137, No. 7, July 1, 2011. ©ASCE, ISSN
0733-9437/2011/7-454–461/$25.00.
suggests that for a loose material the difference between the two
angles is analogous to the difference between the static and dy-
namic pane-sliding friction angles. To distinguish between the
two angles, which differ by only a few degrees at most, Allen
(1969, p. 75) refers to the smaller angle as the angle of residual
shear ϕr , and to the larger angle as the angle of initial yield ϕi .
Explanation of the difference between the two angles seems to
have been given first by Reynolds (1885), who described it as di-
latation; that is, for particles to slide or roll along the surface, ϕr
needs to be increased to allow for clearance of the profile of the
underlying layer. For this reason, the difference Δϕ ¼ ϕi
ϕr is
commonly known as the dilatation angle (Allen 1985, p. 35).
The angle of residual shear equals the average slope angle of a
stockpile when the height of the stone supply is large in comparison
to the size of the particles forming it. For the following analysis,
mass angle of repose is defined as ϕr , that is, the angle at which
mass sliding ceases or the average angle of a stockpile slope.
Mass angle of repose of dumped coarse stone commonly used as
riprap to line open drainage channels is evaluated here on the basis
of data collected at 74 stockpiles of natural and crushed stone Pre-
diction equations for ϕr are developed from linear regression analy-
sis, and information is given that allows straightforward calculation
of prediction intervals, which provides a means of evaluating the
uncertainty of an estimate. A discussion of factors that influence ϕr
is given next, followed by a description of the collected data, and
then development of the prediction equations. Finally, a brief ex-
ample is presented to illustrate calculation of ϕr using the relations
presented here.
Influential Factors
Mass angle of repose of cohesionless granular material varies with
the size, shape, angularity, degree of sorting, closeness of packing,
and surface texture of the particles in a mixture (Van Burkalow
1945; Fowler and Chodziesner 1959; Miller and Byrne 1966;
Carrigy 1970; Allen 1969; Allen 1970a, b). Ranges of the angle
for various coarse materials are given by Metcalf (1966), Allen
(1970a), and Statham (1977).
Stone riprap mixtures produced by quarries are usually prepared
for standard size distributions, or gradations, having specified
median diameters D50 (where Di = intermediate particle diameter

454 / JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2011

Downloaded 06 Jul 2011 to 152.1.24.251. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
for which i% of the mixture is smaller, by weight), although custom
gradations can be provided if needed. Standard gradations are often
chosen on the basis of those specified by state highway departments
or other agencies in the area served by a particular quarry, and they
tend to have relatively narrow ranges with 1:4 ≤ D85 =D50 ≤ 2:2
(USACE 1990, p. 2-3, 1994, p. 3-2; Brown and Clyde 1989,
p. 36). The smallest particle diameter usually considered for rock
riprap is about 5 cm (2 in.). Median rock riprap diameters greater
than about 30 cm (12 in.) are uncommon in small-to-moderately
sized drainage channels on all but the steepest of slopes.
Form describes the gross shape of particles and reflects varia-
tions in their dimensional proportions (that is, ratios of lengths of
particle axes). Particle form is one of the most difficult sedimentary
properties to characterize and quantify. Despite a large amount of
literature on the subject, considerable confusion still exists regard-
ing the meaning and relative value of different measures (Barrett
1980; Benn and Ballantyne 1993; Blott and Pye 2008).
Rounding, roundness, or angularity are terms used to describe
the shape of the corners of a particle, whether it be a grain of sand, a
pebble, cobble, or boulder (Krumbein 1941; Blair and McPherson
1999). The physical effect of angularity is to increase particle inter-
locking, which is accompanied by an increase in the angle of
repose. Although roundness can be quantified numerically, for
practical reasons simple visual charts with up to several categories
of roundness are used, such as the chart shown in Fig. 1, which was
adapted from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) procedure
for describing and identifying soils (USBR 1990, p. 208).
Surface texture refers to small-scale microrelief markings such
as pits, scratches, and ridges that appear on the surfaces of particles.
The small-scale relief of the surface of a stone is too small to
influence the general shape, but it is responsible for increasing par-
ticle-to-particle friction and, therefore, the frictional strength of a
cohesionless mass of particles. Roughness of a surface is measured
by its vertical deviations. If the deviations are large the surface is
rough. If they are small the surface is smooth. Rough rock surfaces
produce higher interparticle friction coefficients than do smooth
surfaces.
Form, angularity, and surface texture are properties that theoreti-
cally are independent of each other. However, form and angularity
are positively correlated for both natural and crushed aggregates
(that is, particles that are highly spherical in shape are also well
rounded).
Particle sorting describes the uniformity of a mixture. The per-
centage of void space decreases and frictional resistance increases
when fine particles are present in a mass (Statham 1974). Similarly,
densely packed granular materials exhibit larger angles of repose
because of increased particle interlocking and frictional resistance
(Allen 1970a, b). The angle of internal shearing resistance of a

Fig. 1. Angularity classification of coarse-grained sediment particles

JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2011 / 455

Downloaded 06 Jul 2011 to 152.1.24.251. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
granular material in which there is no volume change during
shearing is roughly a constant for a specific material and is related
to the standard loose-packed condition (Lambe and Whitman 1969,
p. 144). When coarse stone is dumped, it generally comes to rest in
a loose state. Therefore, mass angle of repose ϕr for dumped co-
hesionless aggregate is about equal to the angle of internal shearing
resistance for the loose state and can be thought of as a material
property reflecting the combined effect of surface texture and
the degree of interlocking that occurs (Lambe and Whitman
1969, p. 144). Additionally, submergence of coarse material in
water does not seem to affect the angle significantly (Van Burkalow
1945; Allen 1985, p. 36).
From a series of experiments, Van Burkalow (1945) found that
the influence of particle size on ϕr is weak, becoming evident only
when all particles in a mixture are of nearly the same size. Focusing
on practical hydraulic engineering design of stable channels,
Simons (1957) related mass angle of repose of stone stockpiles
to the median particle diameter D50 of the mixtures by means of
a graph, which is reproduced in Simons and Şentürk (1977,
p. 442), Richardson et al. (2001, p. 3.13), and Julien (2002,
p. 19). Simons’ graph also seems to be the basis for the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) mass angle of repose graphical
relations (Chen and Cotton 1988, Chart 12, p. 49), which show the
angle to increase with both particle angularity and size. Because
standard gradations of quarried rock have a relatively narrow range
(as noted previously), the 38 data points shown on Simons’ (1957)
graph likely represent mixtures having comparatively small varia-
tions in size. For this reason, it is not surprising that Simons’ rela-
tions showing ϕr to increase slightly with D50 confirm the findings
of Van Burkalow (1945).
Stockpile Data
Mass angles of repose ϕr were measured at 74 dumped stockpiles
composed of either crushed quarry stone or stone obtained from
natural river deposits. The stockpiles, which were located at quar-
ries or other rock-supply storage sites, had been formed either by
dumping from a truck, from a front-end loader, from a conveyor
belt, or directly from a crusher. Data collected from the 74 stock-
piles are summarized in Table 1 and, in addition to ϕr and the
method of placement, include a visual estimate of angularity, the
distribution of particle sizes, and a measure of particle form.
Stockpile side-slope angles were measured using a wooden
board with a mechanical inclinometer attached. A board 1 m in
length was used for stones having averaged diameters < 10 cm,
and a board 2 m in length was used for larger stones. The board
was placed along a line of steepest descent within the central third
of the slope, and the slope angle was read from the inclinometer
to the nearest degree. Ten slope angles were measured at random
locations on each stockpile.
Samples of 100 stones were randomly selected from the surface
of all measured stockpiles. If the stones were small enough to be
carried from the location of the stockpile, they were bagged and
stored for future measurement; otherwise, the particles were photo-
graphed and measured at the site. The three principal axes (major,
intermediate, and minor) of each particle in a sample were mea-
sured with a caliper, if the maximum diameter was < 15 cm, or
with a ruler for larger particles. A measure of particle form is given
by the average value of the factor ψ ¼ ½ðb × cÞ ÷ a2 1=3, where a, b,
and c are the lengths of the major, intermediate, and minor axes,
respectively, of a particle (Allen 1985, p. 22). Gradation of the
material was calculated on a percent-by-area basis from the random
surface sample, which corresponds to a percent-by-weight analysis
456 / JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2011
Downloaded 06 Jul 2011 to 152.1.24.251. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
from a bulk sample as shown by Kellerhals and Bray (1971).
However, for several of the stockpiles, sieve analyses of bulk sam-
ples were available and were used to establish gradation curves.
Sizes of dumped stone in stockpiles that are high enough to ob-
tain reasonable estimates of side-slope angles has a practical upper
limit that depends on the equipment available for placement. Small-
diameter stone can be piled to comparatively large heights by
dumping from conveyor belt, truck, or front-end loader, such as
the stockpile shown in Fig. 2(a). However, large stones are difficult
to deposit in a loose configuration on a stockpile either en masse
(such as from a front-end loader) or individually from a large height
(such as by conveyor belt). Consequently, large stones are usually
placed on a stack one by one, often to heights that are small in
comparison to the stone diameters, such as the stockpile shown
in Fig. 2(b). When rock particles are stacked individually, stock-
piles can be created with unusually steep slopes, as, for example,
in stone walls. For these reasons, the largest D50 measured for a
stockpile was about 36 cm (14 in.), which is also the upper range
of dumped rock riprap commonly used for protective channel
linings.
Angularity of stockpile rock particles was estimated visually
using the classification scheme presented in Fig. 1. Most of the
stockpiles were composed of angular-to-subangular crushed quarry
stone. For several stockpiles, angularity classification was difficult,
and decisions were made on the basis of several average-sized par-
ticles from the mixtures.
No measure was made of particle surface texture, which did
seem to not vary to a large extent among quarried rock stockpiles.
However, well-rounded, semipolished stone supplies obtained from
natural deposits found in and next to rivers and streams (often
called bank stone or run-of-bank stone) were noticeably smoother,
although stones rounded by means other than abrasion in rivers and
streams may be considerably rougher. Because all rounded stone
stockpiles were obtained from natural river deposits, any effect
of surface texture on mass angle of repose is taken into account
by the angularity classification.
Mass Angle of Repose Prediction Relations
Multiple regression analysis of the collected data was used to de-
velop relations for predicting the angle of repose of dumped coarse
open-graded stone. Logarithmic transformation of variables was
found to provide the highest quality linear relations.
Rock angularity or roundness was found to be the most impor-
tant factor for predicting ϕr . Considering only the qualitative shape
classifications of round, subround, subangular, and angular, the fol-
lowing regression model provides the best estimate of ϕr :
⌢
ln ϕr ¼ 3:46 þ 0:0833I 1 þ 0:188I 2 ð1Þ
⌢
where ϕr = expected value of ϕr , and the indicator variables I 1 and
I 2 are defined as


1; for subround and subangular stone
I1 ¼ ;
0; otherwise


1; for angular stone
I2 ¼
0; otherwise
The coefficient ⌢
of determination of Eq. (1) is 0.814, and the stan-
dard error of ϕr is 0.0331. All coefficients in the regression model
are extremely significant (that is, the probability of an estimated
value not being different from zero is < 1%). Differences between
ϕr for subround and subangular rock mixtures were not found to be
statistically significant. For this reason, subround and subangular
Table 1. Summary of Coarse Open-Graded Rock Riprap Data
Particle sizes Di for which i percent of the mixture is finer (cm)
Stockpile Angle of repose Mixture Average particle Method of
code ϕr (degrees) angularitya form factor ψ D10 D15 D30 D50 D60 D85 dumpingb
CH01 34.9 SA 0.67 0.7 0.75 0.92 1.0 1.1 1.3 T
CH02 36.7 A 0.74 1.7 1.8 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.5 T
CS01 35 SR 0.74 4.3 4.5 4.9 5.5 6.0 7.4 T
CS02 35.2 SR 0.72 2.5 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.7 T
CS03 34.7 SR 0.74 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.3 T
CS04 33.4 SR 0.73 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.1 T
CS05 32.9 R 0.73 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.8 T
CS06 31.9 R 0.75 0.75 0.8 0.9 0.95 1.0 1.1 T
CS07 30.6 R 0.73 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.1 T
CS08 32.2 R 0.73 2.8 2.9 3.3 3.7 4.0 4.9 T
CS09 32.1 R 0.73 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.9 T
CS10 30.4 R 0.74 1.2 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.8 2.1 T
FP01 35.1 SA 0.71 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.3 T
FP02 34.2 SA 0.71 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.8 T
FP03 40 A 0.66 9.1 10.1 11.6 13.4 14 18.3 T
FP04 34.1 SA 0.62 4.3 4.6 5.5 6.7 7.3 8.5 B
FP05 35.4 SA 0.69 1.5 1.7 2.0 2.3 2.3 2.7 B
FP06 38.1 A 0.69 3.8 4.0 4.8 5.6 6.0 7.0 B
GE01 33.5 SA 0.76 5.2 5.4 6.0 6.7 7.2 8.3 T
GE02 35.7 A 0.65 2.4 2.7 3.0 3.4 3.6 4.2 T
GE03 33.9 SA 0.65 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.7 T
GE04 35.1 SA 0.61 9.1 10.1 12.5 14.6 15.9 20.1 T
HC01 33.8 SA 0.73 2.5 2.6 2.9 3.3 3.5 4.3 T
HC02 30.3 R 0.66 4.4 4.6 5.1 6.0 6.4 7.3 T
HE01 35.9 A 0.62 0.68 0.73 0.83 0.92 1.0 1.1 T
KS01 41.6 A 0.66 4.2 4.4 5.0 5.8 6.1 7.3 B
KS02 37.5 A 0.68 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.4 2.7 B
KS03 34.3 SA 0.72 0.71 0.75 0.89 1.1 1.1 1.3 T
LQ01 38.1 A 0.67 7.9 8.6 9.8 10.8 11.4 14 T
LQ02 34.6 SA 0.65 2.2 2.4 2.7 3.2 3.5 4.2 B
LQ03 38.1 A 0.64 2.8 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.7 B
LQ04 33.9 SA 0.68 1.3 1.4 1.7 2.1 2.2 2.5 T
LQ05 40.1 A 0.67 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.6 B
LQ06 31.9 R 0.75 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.9 T
LQ07 39.8 A 0.66 3.2 3.3 3.9 4.6 5.0 6.0 B
LQ08 35.6 SA 0.65 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.3 B
LQ09 29.6 R 0.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.8 1.9 2.2 T
NU01 32.6 R 0.7 4.5 4.7 5.2 5.7 5.9 6.9 T
NU02 34.5 SA 0.67 2.7 2.7 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.9 T
NU03 32.8 R 0.71 3.8 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.3 6.0 T
NU04 33.2 SR 0.74 3.0 3.2 3.5 3.9 4.0 4.8 T
NU05 34.3 SA 0.68 11.6 12.2 13.1 14.9 15.5 18 T
RE01 40.3 A 0.61 0.71 0.76 1.0 1.1 1.6 1.85 T
RR01 39.3 A 0.64 0.72 0.74 0.86 1.0 1.1 1.6 T
RR02 38.5 A 0.66 8.3 9.2 10.5 13.7 15.3 19.1 T
RR03 34.2 SA 0.68 5.4 5.6 6.1 7.0 7.5 8.7 T
RQ01 39.6 A 0.71 16.8 18.3 21.3 27.4 29 35.1 T
RQ02 37 A 0.67 12.2 13.7 15.2 17.7 18.3 21.3 T
RQ03 38.1 A 0.68 11.3 13.1 13.7 15.2 16.8 19.8 T
RQ04 33.4 SA 0.71 1.4 1.5 1.7 2.1 2.2 2.5 T
RQ05 35.1 SA 0.69 2.5 2.6 3.0 3.5 3.8 4.6 T
RQ06 34.8 SA 0.76 0.56 0.62 0.82 1.2 1.3 1.7 T
RQ07 36.3 A 0.62 3.6 4.1 4.9 6.1 6.6 8.3 T
RQ08 35 SA 0.61 0.51 0.54 0.65 0.82 0.92 1.2 T

JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2011 / 457

Downloaded 06 Jul 2011 to 152.1.24.251. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
Table 1. (Continued.)
Particle sizes Di for which i percent of the mixture is finer (cm)
Stockpile Angle of repose Mixture Average particle Method of
code ϕr (degrees) angularitya form factor ψ D10 D15 D30 D50 D60 D85 dumpingb
RQ09 34 SA 0.73 0.26 0.32 0.43 0.62 0.70 0.92 T
RQ10 33.4 SA 0.72 0.21 0.22 0.26 0.32 0.35 0.44 T
RQ11 33.9 SA 0.65 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.5 2.7 3.4 C
RQ14 38.3 A 0.66 16.8 16.8 19.8 22.9 24.4 30.5 T
TB01 35.5 A 0.69 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.3 T
TB02 36.6 A 0.67 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 T
TB03 37.5 A 0.7 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.9 1.9 2.3 T
TQ01 41.6 A 0.66 4.2 4.4 5.8 6.1 7.3 7.4 T
TQ02 37.5 A 0.66 1.7 1.8 2.3 2.4 2.7 2.8 T
TQ03 34.3 SA 0.7 0.71 0.75 1.06 1.11 1.26 1.28 T
VR01 35.1 SA 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.4 T
VR02 34.2 SA 0.68 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.9 B
VR03 40 A 0.67 9.1 10.1 13.4 14 18.3 18.3 T
VR04 34.1 SA 0.62 4.3 4.6 6.7 7.3 8.5 9.1 T
VR05 35.4 SA 0.69 1.5 1.7 2.3 2.3 2.7 2.8 T
VR06 38.1 A 0.7 3.8 4.0 5.6 6.0 7.0 7.4 T
PB01 32.2 R 0.74 8.3 8.7 9.9 11.1 12.1 15.1 T
PB02 32.8 R 0.67 22.9 26.1 29.8 32.3 35.5 45.2 T
PB03 35.4 SA 0.65 22.7 25.2 31.3 35.5 39.8 52.2 T
PB04 35 SA 0.62 18.2 20.2 25.0 29.2 31.8 42.4 T
a
A = angular; SA= subangular; SR = subround; R = round.
b
T = dumped from a truck or front-end loader; B = dumped from a conveyor belt; C = dumped directly from a crusher.

stone classifications have been combined. Transforming from log-

arithmic units, Eq. (1) gives
8
⌢
< 31:8°; for round stone
ϕr ¼ 34:6°; for subround and subangular stone ð2Þ
:
38:4°; for angular stone

Residuals [that is, the differences between observed values of

ln ϕr and the corresponding predicted values given by Eq. (1)]
are graphed against ln D50 , the ratio D85 =D50 , and the average par-
ticle form factor ψ in Figs. 3(a)–3(c), respectively. The graphs show
slight trends of increasing residuals with both D50 and the ratio
D85 =D50 , and decreasing residuals with ψ. Only D50 and the ratio
D85 =D50 improve prediction of ϕr significantly.
The best prediction equation for ln ϕr when ln D50 is added to
the regression model is
⌢
ln ϕr ¼ 3:45 þ 0:0847I 1 þ 0:186I 2 þ 0:00778 ln D50 ð3Þ

where D50 = median particle diameter in centimeters. The coeffi-

cient of determination of Eq. (3) is 0.825, and the standard error of
estimate is 0.0323. All regression model coefficients are extremely
significant except for the coefficient of ln D50 , which is significant
(that is, not different from zero at less than a 5% probability but
more than a 1% probability). Transforming Eq. (3) gives
⌢
ϕr ¼ ϕr1 D0:00778
50 ð4Þ

where
8
< 31:5°; for round stone
ϕr1 ¼ 34:3°; for subround and subangular stone ð5Þ
Fig. 2. (a) Small diameter stone can be piled to comparatively large :
37:9°; for angular stone
heights by dumping from conveyor belt, truck, or front-end loader;
(b) large stones stacked individually can form stockpiles with steep side
Values of ϕr given by Eq. (3) are graphed as a function of D50
slopes
and particle shape in Fig. 4. The graphical relations for all particle

458 / JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2011

Downloaded 06 Jul 2011 to 152.1.24.251. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
 Fig. 4. Mass angle of repose ϕr given by Eq. (3) as a function of par-
ticle shape and D50 , along with measured values of ϕr

Fig. 3. Prediction residuals of Eq. (1) graphed against the following

rock stockpile properties: (a) median particle diameter D50, (b) the ratio
D85 =D50 , and (c) the average particle form factor ψ

shape classes show ϕr to increase gradually with D50 , and are sim-
ilar to those presented by Simons (1957). However, Simons’ curves
for particle shape classes similar to those used here, which likely
were determined visually and drawn by hand, nearly converge at
ϕr ≈ 42° for D50 ≥ 60 cm, a marked difference with the relations
given by Eq. (3).
The measurements evaluated here, which are also plotted in
Fig. 4, do not suggest converging relations for ϕr , as were shown
by Simons. These data include 27 measurements with D50 ≥ 5 cm Fig. 5. Mass angle of repose ϕr given by Eq. (6) as a function of par-
(the smallest size rock riprap commonly used to line drainage chan- ticle shape and the ratio D85 =D50 , along with measured values of ϕr
nels) and six measurements that have D50 ≥ 18 cm. In stark con-
trast, Simons’ graphs were constructed on the basis of only five  0:125
measurements for which D50 > 5 cm, and on only one measure- ⌢
ϕr ¼ ϕr1
D85
ð7Þ
ment for which D50 > 18 cm. For these reasons, the relations given D50
by Eq. (3) likely provide more accurate predictions of ϕr for open-
graded rock that is commonly used to construct protective linings in where
drainage channels. 8
Replacing ln D50 in the regression model by lnðD85 =D50 Þ leads < 30:9°; for round stone
to the following prediction for ϕr : ϕr1 ¼ 33:4°; for subround and subangular stone ð8Þ
:
⌢ 37:1°; for angular stone
ln ϕr ¼ 3:43 þ 0:0799I 1 þ 0:183I 2 þ 0:125 lnðD85 =D50 Þ ð6Þ
The coefficient of determination of Eq. (6) is 0.832, and the stan- Predicted values of ϕr given by Eq. (7) are plotted against the
dard error of estimate is 0.0317. All coefficients in Eq. (6) are measured values in Fig. 5. Although the influence of gradation
extremely significant, except for the coefficient of lnðD85 =D50 Þ, given by the ratio D85 =D50 is statistically highly significant, the
which is highly significant (that is, not different from zero at increase of ϕr with D85 =D50 for the range of values contained
less than a 1% probability but more than a 0.1% probability). in the assembled data is modest. Nonetheless, Eq. (6) provides bet-
Transforming from logarithmic units yields ter estimates of ϕr than do either Eq. (1) or Eq. (3).

JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2011 / 459

Downloaded 06 Jul 2011 to 152.1.24.251. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
 A 100 × ð1
αÞ% prediction interval for ln ϕr given by Eqs. (1),
(3), and (6) is given by (Montgomery and Peck 1982, p. 141)
⌢
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
⌢
ln ϕr
tα=2;n
p σ2 ð1 þ x00 ðX0 XÞ
1 x0 Þ ≤ ln ϕr
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
⌢
⌢
≤ ϕr þ tα=2;n
p σ2 ð1 þ x00 ðX0 XÞ
1 x0 Þ ð9Þ
where t = two-tailed Student’s t-statistic with n
p degrees of free-
dom; α = exceedance probability associated with the two-tailed
Student’s t-distribution; n = number of observations = 74 for all
three regression models; p = number of regression model param-
⌢
eters; σ2 = variance of ln ϕr ≈ s2 ; x0 = the vector of p regressor
variables for ln ϕr ; X ¼ ðn × pÞ matrix of the levels of the regressor
variables; and X0 = transpose of X. The vector x0 and the matrix
ðX0 XÞ
1 for each of the three regression models described here are
given in the Appendix.
Mass angle of repose was shown to depend primarily on particle
angularity and, to much lesser extents, on median particle diameter
D50 and on nonuniformity or gradation of a mixture, which is char-
acterized by the ratio D85 =D50 . Average particle form factor ψ was
not a significant predictor of ϕr .
Regression models were developed that predict ϕr on the basis
of particle angularity alone, on angularity and D50 , and on angu-
larity plus the ratio D85 =D50 . The third model provides the most
accurate estimates of ϕr . Additionally, information is given that
allows prediction intervals to be calculated, which provides a
means of establishing reasonable margins of error for ϕr. The
relations for mass angle of repose of open-graded stone presented
here will be useful to drainage engineers who design riprap-lined
drainage channels, rock chutes, shoreline revetments, and protec-
tive riprap aprons around bridge piers and abutments.

Appendix. Regression Model Parameters

Example Application
For the regression model given by Eq. (1), s ¼ 0:0331,
An uncomplicated example illustrates use of the relations presented x00 ¼ ½1; I 1 ; I 2 , p ¼ 3, and
here. Suppose the mass angle of repose is needed for rock riprap 2 3
that is to be dumped in place on the banks of a drainage channel to 0:07692
0:07692
0:07692
form a protective lining. The mixture consists of subangular quarry ðX0 XÞ
1 ¼ 4
0:07692 0:10550 0:07692 5 ð13Þ
stone with D50 ¼ 20 cm and D85 ¼ 28 cm. A 95% prediction in-
0:07692 0:07692 0:11539
terval on ϕr is also needed to provide cautious estimates of the bank
shear stress that can be tolerated during large flows in the channel Using appropriate values of I 1 and I 2 gives
(the upper prediction limit of will be used in shear stress calcula-
tions), and the area required to contain the rock stockpile at the s2 ð1 þ x00 ðX0 XÞ
1 x0 Þ
construction site (which will be found using the lower prediction 8
limit of ϕr ). < 0:00118; for round stone ð14Þ
With I 1 ¼ 1, I 2 ¼ 0, and D85 =D50 ¼ 28=20 ¼ 1:4, Eq. (6) gives ¼ 0:00113; for subround and subangular stone
:
⌢ 0:00114; for angular stone
ln ϕr ¼ 3:43 þ ð0:0799 × 1Þ þ ð0:183 × 0Þ þ ð0:125 × ln 1:4Þ
¼ 3:552 ð10Þ For the regression model given in Eq. (3), s ¼ 0:0323,
⌢ x00 ¼ ½1; I 1 ; I 2 ; ln D50 , p ¼ 4, and
from which ϕr ¼ e3:552 ¼ 34:9°. From the Appendix, for subround
2 3
and subangular stone evaluated with Eq. (6), we have 0:09509
0:07975
0:07200
0:01534
6
0:07975 0:10594 0:07616 0:00239 7
s2 ð1 þ x00 ðX0 XÞ
1 x0 Þ ¼ 0:001 ðX0 XÞ
1 6
¼4 7

0:07200 0:07616 0:11672
0:00416 5
× f1:14329
ð0:98504 × ln 1:4Þ
0:01534 0:00239
0:00416 0:01296
þ ½2:11449 × ðln 1:4Þ2 g ð15Þ
¼ 0:00105 ð11Þ
Letting y ¼ ln D50 , where D50 is in centimeters, applying appropri-
Then, with tα=2;n
p ¼ t 0:05=2;74
4 ¼ 1:9944, Eq. (9) gives ate values of I 1 and I 2 gives
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
3:552
1:9944 0:00105 ≤ ln ϕr ≤ 3:552 þ 1:9944 0:00105 s2 ½1 þ x00 ðX0 XÞ
1 x0  ¼ 0:00104
8
ð12Þ > 1:09509
0:03068y þ 0:01296y2 ; for round stone
>
<
1:04153
0:02590y þ 0:01296y2 ;
and the 95% prediction interval is 3:487 ≤ ln ϕr ≤ 3:617, ×
>
> for subround and subangular stone
or 32:7° ≤ ϕr ≤ 37:2°. :
1:21597
0:03900y þ 0:01296y2 ; for angular stone
ð16Þ
Summary and Conclusions
For the regression model given by Eq. (6), s ¼ 0:0317,
Uncomplicated methods for rapidly estimating the mass angle of x00 ¼ ½1; I 1 ; I 2 ; lnðD85 =D50 Þ, p ¼ 4, and
repose ϕr of coarse open-graded stone are found from linear regres-
sion analysis of data collected from 74 stockpiles of both natural 2 3
0:16627
0:06503
0:05790
0:43466
and crushed rock. Stockpile rock angularity was classified visually 6
0:06503 0:10708 0:07945
0:05786 7
ðX0 XÞ
1 6
¼4 7
as being either (1) round, (2) subround, (3) subangular, or (4) an-
0:05790 0:07945 0:11943
0:09252 5
gular. For the rock stockpiles evaluated, 0:32 cm ≤ D50 ≤ 35:5 cm

0:43466
0:05786
0:09252 2:11449
ð0:8 in: ≤ D50 ≤ 14 in:Þ, which spans the range of dumped rock
riprap commonly used for protective drainage channel linings. ð17Þ

460 / JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2011

Downloaded 06 Jul 2011 to 152.1.24.251. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
 Letting y ¼ ln D85 =D50 and substituting values of I 1 and I 2 , U.S. Dept. of Transportation, McLean, VA.
gives Carrigy, M. A. (1970). “Experiments on the angles of repose of granular
materials.” Sedimentology, 14(3/4), 147–158.
s2 ½1 þ x00 ðX0 XÞ
1 x0  ¼ 0:001 Chen, Y. H., and Cotton, G. K. (1988). “Design of roadside channels with
8 flexible linings.” Publication No. FHWA-IP-87-7, Hydraulic Engineer-
>
> 1:16627
0:86932y þ 2:11449y2 ; for round stone ing Circular No. 15, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway
<
1:14329
0:98504y þ 2:11449y2 ; Administration, McLean, VA.
×
>
> for subround and subangular stone Fowler, R. T., and Chodziesner, W. B. (1959). “The influence of variables
:
1:30725
1:05436y þ 2:11449y2 ; for angular stone upon the angle of friction of granular materials.” Chem. Eng. Sci., 10(3),
157–162.
ð18Þ Froehlich, D. C., and Benson, C. A. (1996). “Sizing dumped rock riprap.”
J. Hydraul. Eng., 122(7), 389–396.
Julien, P. Y. (2002). River mechanics, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge,
United Kingdom.
Notation Kellerhals, R., and Bray, D. I. (1971). “Sampling procedures for coarse
fluvial sediments.” J. Hydraul. Div., 97(8), 1165–1180.
Krumbein, W. C. (1941). “Measurement and geological significance of
The following symbols are used in this paper: shape and roundness of sedimentary particles.” J. Sediment. Petrol.,
a = major axis length of a particle; 11(1), 64–72.
b = intermediate axis length of a particle; Lambe, T. W., and Whitman, R. V. (1969). Soil mechanics, Wiley,
c = minor axis length of a particle; New York.
Di = intermediate axis length of a particle that is larger than i National Stone, Sand and Gravel Association. (1991). “Quarried stone for
percent, by weight, of the mixture; erosion and sediment control.” Alexandria, VA.
I 1 , I 2 = indicator variables of particle angularity; Maynord, S. T., Ruff, J. F., and Abt, S. A. (1989). “Riprap design.”
n = number of observed values used to develop a regression J. Hydraul. Eng., 115(7), 937–949.
Metcalf, J. R. (1966). “Angle of repose and internal friction.” Int. J. Rock
model;
Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr., 3(2), 155–162.
p = number of regression model parameters; Miller, R. L., and Byrne, R. J. (1966). “The angle of repose for a single
s = standard error of estimate; grain on a fixed rough bed.” Sedimentology, 6(4), 303–314.
t = Student’s t-statistic; Montgomery, D. C., and Peck, E. A. (1982). Introduction to linear regres-
X = (n × p) matrix of independent variables augmented by a sion analysis, Wiley, New York.
column of ones; Reynolds, O. (1885). “On the dilatancy of media composed of rigid par-
X 0 = transpose of the vector of p regression model parameters; ticles in contact, with experimental illustrations.” Philos. Mag., 20(6),
y = regression model variable (either D50 or the ratio 469–481.
D85 =D50 ); Richardson, E. V., Simons, D. B., and Lagasse, P. F. (2001). “River engi-
σ
^ = regression standard error; neering for highway encroachments—Highways in the river environ-
ment.” Publication No. FHWA/NHI-01-004, National Highway
ϕ
⌢r
= mass angle of repose, in degrees;
Institute, Washington, D.C.
ϕr = predicted mass angle of repose, in degrees; and
Simons, D. B. (1957). “Theory and design of stable channels in alluvial
ψ = particle form factor. material.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. of Civil Engineering,
Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO.
Simons, D. B., and Şentürk, F. (1977). Sediment transport technology,
Water Resources Publications, Fort Collins, CO.
References Statham, I. (1974). “The relationship of porosity and angle of repose to
mixture proportions in assemblages of different sized materials.”
Allen, J. R. L. (1969). Physical processes of sedimentation, American Sedimentology, 21(1), 149–162.
Elsevier Publishing Company, New York. Statham, I. (1977). Earth surface sediment transport, Clarendon Press,
Allen, J. R. L. (1970a). “The avalanching of granular solids on dunes and Oxford, United Kingdom.
similar slopes.” J. Geol., 78(3), 326–351. Ulrich, T. (1987). “Stability of rock protection on slopes.” J. Hydraul. Eng.,
Allen, J. R. L. (1970b). “The angle of initial yield of haphazard assemb- 113(7), 879–891.
lages of equal spheres, in bulk.” Geol. Mijnbouw, 49(1), 13–22. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (1990). “Construction with large
Allen, J. R. L. (1985). Principles of physical sedimentology, George Allen stone.” Engineering Manual No. 1110-2-2302, Dept. of the Army,
and Unwin, London. Washington, D.C.
Barrett, P. J. (1980). “The shape of rock particles, a critical review.” U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (1994). “Hydraulic design of
Sedimentology, 27, 291–303. flood control channels.” Engineering Manual No. 1110-2-1601, Dept.
Benn, D. I., and Ballantyne, C. K. (1993). “The description and represen- of the Army, Washington, D.C.
tation of particle shape.” Earth Surf. Processes Landforms, 18(7), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. (1990). “Earth manual, Part 2, 3rd ed.
665–672. Materials Engineering Branch, Research Laboratory Services Div.,
Blair, T. C., and McPherson, J. G. (1999). “Grain-size and textural classi- Denver.
fication of coarse sedimentary particles.” J. Sediment. Res., 69(1), 6–19. Van Burkalow, A. (1945). “Angle of repose and angle of sliding friction: an
Blott, S. J., and Pye, K. (2008). “Particle shape: A review and new methods experimental study.” Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 56(6), 669–707.
of characterization and classification.” Sedimentology, 55(1), 31–63. Vanoni, V. A. ed. (1977). “Sedimentation engineering.” ASCE manuals and
Brown, S. A., and Clyde, E. S. (1989). “Design of riprap revetment.” Hy- reports on engineering practice no. 54, American Society of Civil
draulic Engineering Circular No. 11, Federal Highway Administration, Engineers, Reston, VA

JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2011 / 461

Downloaded 06 Jul 2011 to 152.1.24.251. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org