See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/310175993

APPLICATION OF GEONET IN REDUCING SCOUR DOWNSTREAM STILLING

BASIN

Conference Paper · November 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 913

3 authors:

Amin Ghassemi Mohammad Hossein Omid

Queen's University University of Tehran
5 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION    82 PUBLICATIONS   645 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

A.R Estabragh
University of Tehran
96 PUBLICATIONS   935 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Internal waves-Sediment resuspension View project

Resilience of Water Management Infrastructure View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Amin Ghassemi on 14 November 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 6th Asian Regional Conference on Geosynthetics - Geosynthetics for
Infrastructure Development, 8-11 November 2016, New Delhi, India

APPLICATION OF GEONET IN REDUCING

SCOUR DOWNSTREAM STILLING BASIN
AMIN GHASSEMI, MOHAMMAD HOSEIN OMID
AND ALI RAEESI ESTABRAGH
Irrigation Engineering Department, University of Tehran, Iran
ABSTRACT
Local scouring is one of the important issues in the design of hydraulic structures. Since the
development of the scour downstream of hydraulic structures increases the risk of structural
damages, finding an economical and environmental solution is important for reducing that
risk. This study was aimed to evaluate the application of Geonet on the scour downstream of a
sluice gate with a rigid apron. Hence, the results of experimental tests have been used in the
different Froude numbers, sediment size distributions, and different placement depth of
Geonet. First, some experiments were conducted to obtain and compare scour profiles on
non-cohesive sediment. The results of experiments on the effect of Geonet on local scouring
showed that if placement depth of Geonet is lower than maximum scour depth at equilibrium
and without Geonet states, the maximum scour depth and volume of scour hole decrease, and
maximum length of scour hole will increase.
1. INTRODUCTION
Scour around hydraulic structures on the permeable foundation is one of the most important issues in
hydraulic engineering that affect the initial expected performance for this structure and its stability over
the operation time. This phenomenon occurs when the shear stress due to the flow around the structures
is exceeded the critical shear stress related to initiation of motion. In such a situation, however, bed
material was moved and then carried by flowing water, which results in disturbance of the riverbed
surface and generation of scour hole around the structures. Obviously, the development of the scour
holes may threaten the stability of the structure.
One of the locations affected by scouring is downstream of such hydraulic structures as stilling basins.
The water jet which issues from opening a gate over the apron move into the rigid erodible bed, and
may gradually causes creation of scour hole.
Various methods have been presented for protection and mitigation the bed scour downstream of an
apron, including, increasing the length of the protected bed and the use of riprap. Most of these methods
are very expensive and maintaining them is also a problem. Many studies in the past years by various
researchers have been made in order to study the mechanisms of development and predict the scour
hole downstream of sluice gates with rigid apron as well as methods for reducing and controlling its
effects.
Among the most important ones includes Rajaratnam and Macdougall (1983), Hassan and Narayanan
(1985), Chatterjee and Ghosh (1994), Kells et al. (2001) and Dey and Sarkar (2006). Some researchers

830
 Application of Geonet in Reducing Scour Downstream Stilling Basin 831

also have suggested many approaches to reduce the amount of scour, such as oven Hamidifar et al.
(2011) and Nasrabadi et al. (2015).
Considering the importance of scouring, if one can enhance the stability of the bed downstream
hydraulic structures against scouring to be from the view of the optimum economic and environmental
in any way possible, one can use a practical approach in operational work. With the development of
polymer science in recent decades, one of the newest methods that can be used in soil improvement is
soil reinforcement using geosynthetics. Of course, this method is mainly used in field of geotechnical
engineering problems and there have been a few attention in the area of river and, especially,
sedimentation engineering. Due to the high life time, low environmental problems and low cost of these
materials, if one can be use them to reduce the damaging effects of scouring, they can be used as a new
method in practice.
Geonet is one type of geo-synthetic materials that includes two strings coarse and parallel fiber, and
intersecting with fixed angle. They produce by extrusion method and are connected to each other by
partially melt. Application of Geonets is in drainage and facilitating flow into the drains. Geonet is also
used for protection of the geomembrane against external factors (Koerner, 2012). Although Geonets are
indeed gridlike materials and were included in geogrid classification, But with developing the
applications of these materials in drainage and considering Geonets are usually used for reinforcement,
they can put in a unique category and many applications of geogrids listed can also be expected from
Geonet. In the recent years, many studies have been done in the area of Geonets and Geogrids with the
application in Geotechnical problems (Bergado et al. (1987), Zagorski and Wayne (1990), Huang
(2006), Mok et al. (2012), Elsawy(2013) and Elkholy (2013)).
Until now, there are few studies about the possibility of the application of these materials in river and
sedimentation engineering. For this reason, the main aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of
Geonets on local scouring downstream of a rigid apron.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1 Experimental Flume
In order to achieve the objectives of this study, experiments were conducted in a flume with rectangular
cross-section and 9 m length, 0.5 m width, and a depth of 0.6 m. Walls and bottom of the flume was
from Plexy-Glass and slope was set to zero. Sedimentation basin was built with 15 cm depth, 1.5 m
length and a width equal to the width of the flume. According to research conducted by Dey and Sarkar
(2006), hydraulic jump was as a submerged hydraulic jump and in order to unify the hydraulic
conditions in the experiments, the length of rigid apron was selected based on the length of submerged
hydraulic jump. According to Honget al. (2015), with increasing the submergence ratio, maximum
scour depth decreases due to the reduction in flow velocity and generation of vortices near the bed. As a
result, by taking into account a constant submergence ration (S = 1.9), a horizontal rigid apron was
constructed with two variable length of 1.15 and 1.65 m, respectively, for two corresponding Froude
numbers equal to 4.5 and 7.5 during the experiments after the sluice gate. The gate opening during the
experiments was constant and equal to 2 cm. Tail-water depth was set using a hinged gate installed at
the end of the flume to maintain constant submergence ratio (S= 1.9). Scour hole profiles were recorded
by taking pictures. In this study, flow discharges was measured by a rectangular weir installed in the
upstream reservoir. This weir was calibrated using an electromagnetic flowmeter before the
experiments. The rate of the flow was controlled using an adjustable gate valve. The overall scheme of
the flume is shown in Figure 1.
 832 Amin Ghassemi et al.

Fig. 1: Experimental setup

2.2 Sediments
In this study, three uniform sands were used as non-cohesive sediments. Sieve analysis was conducted
using the ASTM standard sieve series. The grain size distributions are shown in Figure 2, and other
information related to grain size distributions are given in Table 1.

Fig. 2: The grain size distribution of the sands used in this study.

Table 1: General properties of the sands used in this study

d50 da d10 d30 d60 d90 g
Sand type Cu Cc  Gs
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
D1 0.4 0.35 0.23 0.31 0.45 0.61 1.96 0.93 1.56 35.62 2.65
D2 0.67 0.60 0.54 0.63 0.70 0.80 1.30 1.05 1.16 35.70 2.65
D3 1.13 1.09 0.85 1.05 1.17 1.60 1.38 1.11 1.26 37.05 2.65
 Application of Geonet in Reducing Scour Downstream Stilling Basin 833

As shown in Table 1, the Cu value is lower than 4 and, therefore, the grain size distribution for all
sediments used in this study is uniform (Das, 2013). The relative density (G s) and angle of repose (φ)
have been calculated according to standard ASTM-D854 and the relationship proposed by Lim and
Cheng (1998), respectively.
2.3 Geonet
In this research, a solid rib biplanar Geonet has been used with a commercial name of GS. Its primary
materials is high density polyethylene (HDPE) which it has been strengthen using anti-UV.The
advantages and features of this material include ease of installation, light weight, resistance to corrosion
and biological corrosion, high resistance to chemicals and having good tensile strength with economical
cost. The physical and mechanical properties of the Geonet used in this study are presented in Table 2
(based on laboratory results). A general scheme of the Geonet is shown in Figure 3.
Table 3: The physical and mechanical properties of the Geonet used in this study

Property Standard Value/Description

Mass per Unit Area (g/m2) ASTM-D5261 250
Relative Density (GS) ASTM-D792 0.95
Aperture size (mm) 3*3
Roll dimensions (m) 1.5*3
Nominal Thickness (mm) ASTM-D5199 1.3
Chemical Resistance ASTM D5322 high

Fig. 3: A general scheme of the Geonet

2.4 Test Procedure

Given that the main aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of Geonet on scour downstream of stilling
basin. Consequently, it is necessary to determine scour profiles without Geonet. For this purpose, a set of
experiments was performed on the three types of grain size distributions and two Froude numbers. First,
sediment was poured in the sedimentation basin and was leveled as the bottom of rigid apron. According to
Farhoudi and Smith (1985) and recommendation of Dey and Sarkar (2006), the time of experiment was set to
24 hours. An overview of scour profiles downstream of rigid apron and characteristic parameters are shown
in Figure 4. Scour hole parameters examined in this study including, maximum scour depth (d s), maximum
length of scour hole (l0), horizontal distance of maximum scour depth from the edge of the apron (lm),
distance of dune height from the end of the apron (lc), height of dune (hc), and the volume of the scour hole.
834 Amin Ghassemi et al.

Fig. 4: Scour hole parameters (Dey and Sarkar, 2006)

In the second step of the experiments, after installing the Geonet in different depths (dG), the effect of
Geonet on the scour profiles were investigated. For this purpose, the sediment surface was leveled to
the desired depth. Then, the Geonet was placed over the sediment surface and its edges was fixed to the
flume’s wall, so that it cannot move due to the fluctuations of the flow during the experiments. Then,
some sediments was poured over the Geonet until the sediment surface was leveled to the bottom of
apron and the experiment was performed as the method used in the first step. A scheme of the installed
Geonet is shown in Figure 5.

dG

Fig. 5. Scheme of the installed Geonet

Totally, 26 experiments were conducted for the three grain size distribution and two Froude numbers
according to table 3.
Table 3: Parameters relating to GeoNet pages on the scouring effect of non-cohesive sediments

Run No. Distribution Frj S ds (cm) dG (cm)

D1-4.5-GS-0 D1 4.5 1.9 6.62 0
D1-4.5-GS-1 D1 4.5 1.9 6.62 1
D1-4.5-GS-2 D1 4.5 1.9 6.62 2
D1-4.5-GS-3 D1 4.5 1.9 6.62 3
D1-4.5-GS-7 D1 4.5 1.9 6.62 7
D2-4.5-GS-1 D2 4.5 1.9 6.15 1
D2-4.5-GS-2 D2 4.5 1.9 6.15 2
 Application of Geonet in Reducing Scour Downstream Stilling Basin 835

Run No. Distribution Frj S ds (cm) dG (cm)

D2-4.5-GS-3 D2 4.5 1.9 6.15 3
D2-4.5-GS-6.2 D2 4.5 1.9 6.15 6.2
D3-4.5-GS-0 D3 4.5 1.9 5.73 0
D3-4.5-GS-1 D3 4.5 1.9 5.73 1
D3-4.5-GS-2 D3 4.5 1.9 5.73 2
D3-4.5-GS-3 D3 4.5 1.9 5.73 3
D3-4.5-GS-5.7 D3 4.5 1.9 5.73 5.7
D1-7.5-GS-1 D1 7.5 1.9 8.22 1
D1-7.5-GS-2 D1 7.5 1.9 8.22 2
D1-7.5-GS-3 D1 7.5 1.9 8.22 3
D1-7.5-GS-8.2 D1 7.5 1.9 8.22 8.2
D2-7.5-GS-1 D2 7.5 1.9 7.94 1
D2-7.5-GS-2 D2 7.5 1.9 7.94 2
D2-7.5-GS-3 D2 7.5 1.9 7.94 3
D2-7.5-GS-8 D2 7.5 1.9 7.94 8
D3-7.5-GS-1 D3 7.5 1.9 6.99 1
D3-7.5-GS-2 D3 7.5 1.9 6.99 2
D3-7.5-GS-3 D3 7.5 1.9 6.99 3
D3-7.5-GS-7 D3 7.5 1.9 6.99 7

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Figure 6 shows the scour profiles in the sidewall of the flume for three sands and two Froude numbers.
As can be seen, by decreasing the d50, scour hole dimensions, dune height, and also the distance of dune
height from the end of the apron will increase. Furthermore, for a given sand size, with increasing
Froude number, scour hole dimensions increase. As a result, it can be said that by reducing d 50 and
increasing the Froude number, dimensions of scour hole will increase. These results are in accordance
to the results obtained by Rajaratnam and Macdougall (1983), farhoudi and Smith (1985), Hassan and
Narayanan (1985), Chatterjee and Ghosh (1994), Kells et al. (2001) and Dey and Sarkar (2006).

Fig. 6: Scour profiles at equilibrium time and in both Froude numbers and three sands
836 Amin Ghassemi et al.

Figures 7 and 8 represent scour profiles in the sidewall of the flume and different placement depths of Geonet
for size distribution of D2 and Froude numbers equal to 4.5 and 7.5, respectively. As can be seen, due to the
presence of Geonet, the maximum scour depth (dS) decreased and its length (l0) will increase. The more
placement depth of Geonet is less, its effect on reducing the maximum depth of scour hole and increasing
maximum scour length is increased. On the other hand, it is observed that due to the presence of Geonet, the
general form of scour hole is changed and it is completely different from scour holes without Geonet. So that
the scour hole before reaching the Geonet is similar to that of without Geonet and after reaching the Geonet is
inclined to the horizontal position and continues until the distance in parallel with Geonet. Then, scour hole at
the top level (reduction in scour hole dimensions) is tilted, and after passing through Geonet levels are
climbing again as Geonet the primary level profiles of bed without it. Also, considering Figures 7 and 8 and
the scour profiles related to the other sands and Froude numbers, it is observed that the determination of
horizontal length of maximum scour depth from the edge of apron (lm) is impossible, because the maximum
depth of scour is a surface; not a point.
The results showed that at the presence of Geonet, the formation of dunes after the scour hole is not
inevitable and in many experiments, dunes have not been formed in the sidewall of the flume. For this
reason, for the formation of dune, it is necessary to supply sufficient sediment from upstream, which at
the presence of Geonet and reduction in scour depth, the required sediment for the formation of dune
will decrease.

Fig. 7: Scour profiles in the sidewall of the flume for Fr = 4.5, D2 and different placement depth of Geonet

Fig. 8: Scour profiles in the sidewall of the flume for Fr = 7.5, D2 and different placement depth of Geonet
 Application of Geonet in Reducing Scour Downstream Stilling Basin 837

Using the scour hole profiles in Figure 8, the scour area was calculated by a trapezoid method at the
sidewall of the flume. The scour hole area in the sidewall of the flume typically represents the volumes
of transported sediment. So, by comparing the area of scour holes obtained for different depths Geonet
installation, the effect of Geonet on changes in the volume of transported sediment and in the scouring
process can be examined. According to Table 4, it is observed that by reducing placement depth of
Geonet, the maximum scour depth and the scour area are reduced. Thus, increasing the length of scour
hole at the presence Geonet is not so high to increase the volume of transported sediment in comparison
to the without Geonet condition.
Table 4: Comparison of the scour area in the sidewall of flume, Fr = 7.5, D2
and different placement depth of Geonet

Scour hole area (cm 2) Run No.

460.3 Fr=7.5-D2
294.8 D2-7.5-GS-3
251.5 D2-7.5-GS-2
185.7 D2-7.5-GS-1

According to Table 3, in some experiments such as: D1-4.5-GS-7, D2-7.5-GS-8, and D3-7.5-GS-7, the
placement depth of Geonet (dG) is equal to or greater than the maximum scour depth without Geonet (d s).
The experimental results have shown that the presence of Geonet do not have any significant impact on the
scour profiles. This suggests that the presence of Geonet is effective when Geonet put at a depth less than the
maximum scour depth in the without Geonet conditions (d G<dS).The reason for these changes in scour
profiles due to the presence of Geonet is that the network of these materials against fluctuations in acts as a
calming and the ability of bed erosion after passing through the Geonet will reduce. For this reason, when the
placement depth of Geonet is equal to or greater than the maximum scour depth for without Geonet
condition, the characteristics of scour profiles does not change. As the fluctuations of flow is reduced under
the Geonet, the fluctuations of the flow over the Geonet cause further displacement in the flow direction and
therefore, the maximum length of scour hole will increase. As mentioned in the literature review, such
researcher as Bergado et al. (1987), Elsawy (2013) and Elkholy (2013) have suggested the use of Geogrids in
order to increase the load capacity, shear strength and slope stability. In all these applications the main
effective factor is the interaction between soil particles with Geonet as increasing the amount of friction
between soil and Geonet. Also, based on the studies conducted by Zagorski and Wayne (1990), Huang (2006)
and Mok et al. (2012), the Geonet usually uses as filter over the drainage cover which the effective
parameters are thickness and aperture diameter. But, in this study it was shown that the main effect of Geonet
is the reduction in the maximum scour depth, and weakening the energy of flow after flow impact to the
network.
It should be mentioned that in this study, Geonet aperture diameter was much larger than the diameter
of sand particles (For example for size distribution of D3, aperture diameter = 1.9D50). Therefore the
particles pass easily from Geonet aperture. If the particle size is equal to or greater than the Geonet
aperture, conditions will be completely different and the Geonet and sediments under it acted as a
Gabion and scour hole do not extent to the below Geonet.
4. CONCLUSION
In this research work, the effect of Geonet on the scour profiles downstream of stilling basin were
experimentally investigated. Based on the experimental results, it can be concluded that the existence of
838 Amin Ghassemi et al.

a Geonet parallel with the sediment surface and at a depth less than the maximum scour depth in
equilibrium condition without Geonet, may reduce the maximum scour depth and volume of the scour
hole and increase the maximum length of scour hole, because of the attenuation the energy of
fluctuations. By decreasing the placement depth of Geonet the amount of these changes increases.

REFERENCES
ASTM D792-13, Standard Test Methods for Density and Specific Gravity (Relative Density) of Plastics
by Displacement, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D854-14, Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Soil Solids by Water Pycnometer,
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D5199-12, Standard Test Method for Measuring the Nominal Thickness of Geosynthetics,
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D5261-10, Standard Test Method for Measuring Mass per Unit Area of Geotextiles, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D5322-98(2009), Standard Practice for Immersion Procedures for Evaluating the Chemical
Resistance of Geosynthetics to Liquids, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
Bergado, D. T., Bukkanasuta, A., & Balasubramaniam, A. S. (1987). Laboratory pull-out tests using
bamboo and polymer geogrids including a case study. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 5(3), 153-
189.
Chatterjee, S. S., Ghosh, S. N., & Chatterjee, M. (1994). Local scour due to submerged horizontal jet.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering. 120(8),973-992
Das, B. M. (2013). Advanced soil mechanics. CRC Press.
Dey, S., & Sarkar, A. (2006). Scour downstream of an apron due to submerged horizontal jets. Journal
of hydraulic engineering, 132(3), 246-257.
Elkholy, S. M. (2013). Cases of Slope Failure of Irrigation And Drainage Channels In Egypt and Their
Rehabilitation. University of Engineering and Technology Taxila. Technical Journal, 18(1), 1.
Elsawy, M. B. D. (2013). Behaviour of soft ground improved by conventional and geogrid-encased
stone columns, based on FEM study. Geosynthetics International, 20(4), 276-285.
Farhoudi, J., & Smith, K. V. (1985). Local scour profiles downstream of hydraulic jump. Journal of
hydraulic research, 23(4), 343-358.
Hamidifar, H., Omid, M. H., & Nasrabadi, M. (2011). Scour downstream of a rough rigid apron. World
ApplSci J, 14(8), 1169-1178.
Hassan, N. N., & Narayanan, R. (1985). Local scour downstream of an apron. Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering.
Hong, S., Biering, C., Sturm, T. W., Yoon, K. S., & Gonzalez-Castro, J. A. (2015). Effect of
Submergence and Apron Length on Spillway Scour: Case Study. Water, 7(10), 5378-5395.
Huang, C. C. (2006). Laboratory simulation of installation damage of a geogrid. Geosynthetics
International, 13(3), 120-132.
Kells, J. A., Balachandar, R., & Hagel, K. P. (2001). Effect of grain size on local channel scour below a
sluice gate. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 28(3), 440-451.
 Application of Geonet in Reducing Scour Downstream Stilling Basin 839

Koerner, R. M. (2012). Designing with geosynthetics (Vol. 1). Xlibris Corporation.

Lim, S. Y., & Cheng, N. S. (1998). Prediction of live-bed scour at bridge abutments. Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, 124(6), 635-638.
Mok, M. S., Blond, E., Mylnarek, J., & Jeon, H. Y. (2012). A new approach to evaluate the long-term
designing normal pressure of geonets using a short-term accelerated compressive creep test method.
Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 30, 2-7.
Nasrabadi, M., Omid, M. H., &Hamidifar, H. Local scouring at bed sill downstream of turbulent jets.
E-proceedings of the 36th IAHR World Congress, The Hague, the Netherland.
Rajaratnam, N., & Macdougall, R. K. (1983). Erosion by plane wall jets with minimum tailwater.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 109(7), 1061-1064.
Zagorski, G. A., & Wayne, M. H. (1990). Geonet seams. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 9(4), 487-
499.

View publication stats