TECHNICAL NOTES

Determination of Form Friction Factor

Hossein Afzalimehr1; Vijay P. Singh, F.ASCE2; and Elham Fazel Najafabadi3

Abstract: Friction factor plays a fundamental role in hydraulic analysis and design. In coarse-bed rivers friction factor depends on grain
size and bed forms. Considering boundary-layer characteristics, this study first determines the total friction factor in gravel-bed rivers with
bed forms. Then it determines the grain friction factor by the Keulegan and the Shields parameter methods and compares these methods.
Finally it determines the form friction factor by subtracting the grain friction factor from the total friction factor. Field observations are
employed to test the methods.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲HE.1943-5584.0000175
CE Database subject headings: Friction; Bedforms; Boundary layers; Parameters; River beds.
Author keywords: Friction factor; Bed forms; Boundary-layers characteristics; Shields parameter.

Introduction
Prediction of friction factor is fundamental for river hydraulic
analysis, including design of stable channels, estimation of flow
velocities for determination of design floods, flow and sediment
routing, and determination of channel flood capacity. Meyer-Peter
and Muller 共1948兲, Petit 共1989兲, Robert 共1997兲, among others,
have emphasized that evaluation of incipient motion and sediment
transport processes requires determination of friction factor. In
coarse-bed rivers, the value of friction factor depends not only on
grain size but also on bed forms. Bed forms can have a significant
effect on friction factor and transport of sediment in alluvial chan-
nel 共Garcia 2008兲. Further, form friction is the major source of
boundary resistance and is vital in determining flow depth
共Brownlie 1983兲. Ecologically, bed forms are important features,
for they affect flow characteristics and influence fish habitat.
Existing friction factor relations underestimate flood discharge
by as much as 100% for coarse-bed rivers 共Jarrett 1991兲. This is
because estimation of friction factor is a complex problem, not
easy to quantify only by the grain friction factor. Further, the bed
configuration varies with variations of flow conditions and makes
it considerably difficult to obtain the friction due to these bed
forms by estimating only the grain friction factor.
1
Associate Professor, Dept. of Water Engineering, Isfahan Univ. of
Technology, Isfahan 84156, Iran. E-mail: hafzali@cc.iut.ac.ir
2
Caroline and William N. Lehrer Distinguished Chair in Water Engi-
neering, Professor of Biological and Agricultural Engineering and Profes-
sor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Dept. of Biological and
Agricultural Engineering, Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77802-
2117. E-mail: vsingh@tamu.edu
3
Graduate Student, Dept. of Water Engineering, Isfahan Univ. of
Technology, Isfahan 84156, Iran 共corresponding author兲. E-mail:
e.fazel@ag.iut.ac.ir
Note. This manuscript was submitted on March 3, 2009; approved on
August 19, 2009; published online on August 24, 2009. Discussion period
open until August 1, 2010; separate discussions must be submitted for
individual papers. This technical note is part of the Journal of Hydro-
logic Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 3, March 1, 2010. ©ASCE, ISSN 1084-
0699/2010/3-237–243/$25.00.
The friction factor can be divided into two parts 共Yalin 1972;
Yen 1991兲
f = f⬘ + f⬙ 共1兲
in which primed f is the grain friction factor and the double prime
is the form friction factor. The grain friction factor f ⬘ is due to the
bed shear stress applied on the grains; the form friction factor f ⬙
is due to the local energy loss on the downstream side of bed
forms. Yen 共2002兲 surveyed investigations on grain and form fric-
tion factors. Fedele and Garcia 共2001兲 showed that the friction
factor in alluvial channels in the presence of bed forms was a
nonlinear and nonunique function of the Shields parameter, grain
size, and the relative flow depth.
Review of literature on the division of friction factor shows
that the grain friction factor f ⬘ is normally computed using the
Reynolds number and the relative roughness 共d50 / R兲, where d50 is
the median grain size and R is the hydraulic radius, as indepen-
dent variables 关e.g., Vanoni and Hwang 共1967兲, Alam and
Kennedy 共1969兲, Acaroglu 共1972兲, and van Rijn 共1982, 1984兲兴.
van Rijn 共1984兲 expressed the grain friction factor 共f ⬘兲 as
1/共f ⬘兲0.5 = 2.03 log共12.2h/d90兲 共2兲
in which h is the flow depth and d90 is the grain size for which
90% of grains are finer.
In gravel-bed rivers, pools and riffles are dominant bed forms.
Prestegaard 共1983兲 and Griffiths 共1989兲 estimated friction factor
along the riffle-pool sequence and attributed part of the total fric-
tion factor directly to bed undulations. Investigations on the in-
fluence of pools and riffles on form friction factor have applied
average flow conditions at the reach scale rather than measure-
ments of velocity profiles along bed forms.
The ASCE Task Force 共1963兲 in Hydromechanics Committee
stated that any progress in friction factor problem depended on
the concept of boundary layer. This means more sophisticated
approaches based on measurement of the velocity distribution are
required along and across a river to predict friction factor. This
technical note seeks to ameliorate the accuracy of form friction
factor for coarse-bed rivers by using velocity profiles and
boundary-layer characteristics, including displacement and mo-

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2010 / 237

Downloaded 03 Dec 2010 to 144.122.101.171. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
http://www.ascelibrary.org
 100
Section 4 - Pool into account the influence of flow nonuniformity in the Darcy-
Section 5 - Riffle Weisbach equation, it is necessary to estimate shear velocity in
this equation using the velocity distribution and boundary-layer
parameters. Accordingly, the total friction factor 共f兲 is determined
共Yalin 1972兲 as

冉 冊
10
u2ⴱ
% Finner

f=8 共3兲
um2
where um = weighted value of velocity in a cross section and the
shear velocity 共uⴱ兲 is calculated using the boundary-layer charac-
1
teristics method 共BLCM兲 as follows 共Afzalimehr and Anctil
1 10 100 2001兲:
Grain size (mm)
共␦ⴱ − ␪兲umax
Fig. 1. Grain size distribution in the selected reach uⴱ = 共4兲
C␦ⴱ
where C = 4.4 共Afzalimehr and Anctil 2001兲; ␦ⴱ = displacement
mentum thicknesses. Accordingly, the objective of this study thickness; ␪ = momentum thickness; and umax = maximum velocity
therefore is to 共1兲 apply boundary-layer characteristics 共displace- observed over a velocity profile; these thicknesses are defined
ment thickness ␦ⴱ and momentum thickness ␪兲 to evaluate the 共Schlichting and Gersten 2000兲 as
total friction factor in gravel-bed rivers in the presence of bed

冕冉 冊
h
forms; 共2兲 identify the regions of the highest velocities and shear u
stresses in a gravel reach with bed forms; and 共3兲 determine and ␦ⴱ = 1− dy 共5兲
0 umax
compare form friction factors obtained by using the Keulegan and

the Shields parameter methods.
Determination of Form Friction Factor
When grains of sediment begin to move, random patterns of sedi-
mentation and erosion generate small perturbations in the bed
surface elevation. These perturbations develop various bed forms
over the bed surface. The friction factor depends on the configu-
ration of these bed forms.
Determination of Total Friction Factor
Friction factor is normally estimated by the dimensionless Darcy-
Weisbach equation, which assumes uniform flow. In mountain
rivers, due to bed and flow nonuniformities, it is difficult to justify
this assumption and this equation may therefore not hold. To take
冕 冉 冊
h
u u
␪= 1− dy 共6兲
0 umax umax
Eq. 共4兲 not only uses the boundary-layer characteristics but also
contains the effect of flow nonuniformity via velocity profile. The
displacement thickness reveals that the thickness of the water
should be augmented so that the fictious uniform nonviscous flow
has the same mass flow rate properties as actual viscous flow
共Munson et al. 1994兲. Also, the momentum thickness 共␪兲 is an
index that is proportional to the decrement in momentum flow
due to the nonuniformity of velocity profile. Therefore, ␪ presents
a height proportional to the missing momentum flow at the free
stream condition. Furthermore, it should be stressed that the esti-
mated ␪ at a given section is proportional to the grain friction
factor of that section. Ludwieg and Tillmann 关see Young 共1989兲兴
were the pioneers in the application of ␦ⴱ and ␪ for predicting

1568.4

1568.2

1568

1567 8
1567.8
Y (m)

1567.6

1567.4

1567.2
Bed river

1567
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Distance from upstream (m)

Fig. 2. Velocity profiles along the selected reach

238 / JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2010

Downloaded 03 Dec 2010 to 144.122.101.171. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
http://www.ascelibrary.org
 1568.4

1568.2

1568

1567.8
Y (m)

1567.6

1567.4

1567.2 Bed river

1567
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Distance from left bank (m)

Fig. 3. Velocity profiles across the selected reach

friction factor, and their methodology has found considerable sup- Keulegan Method
port in aeronautical engineering. To calculate the grain friction, the equation of Keulegan 共1938兲
was applied
Determination of Grain Friction Factor
Considering the division of the total friction factor into two parts,
冋
f ⬘ = 2.03 log 冉 冊册
12.2h
ks
−2
共7兲

grain part 共f ⬘兲 and form part 共f ⬙兲, it should be noted that the value in which ks = Nikuradse equivalent roughness size. Yen 共1991兲
of grain friction factor cannot be measured in the field and can presented a list of ks values reported in the literature, with ks
only be estimated by assuming that part of the roughness is due to
surface shear stress applied directly to the grains as if the river
bed would have a plane rough surface 共Julien et al. 2002兲.

Fig. 4. 共a兲 Topographic map of the selected reach; 共b兲 schematic of

the three-dimensional bed form in the selected reach. Flow over runs Fig. 5. 共a兲 Velocity distribution map for the selected reach; 共b兲 shear
from top right to bottom left. stress distribution map for the selected reach

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2010 / 239

Downloaded 03 Dec 2010 to 144.122.101.171. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
http://www.ascelibrary.org
Table 1. Measured and Calculated Hydraulic Parameters
f⬘ f⬙
共Kulega 共Kulega
ⴱ
h um uBL n with n with f⬘ f ⬙ 共Kulegan
Reach name Section number Sf D50共m兲 共m兲a 共m/s兲b 共m/s兲 f d50兲 d50 共Kulega n with sheilds兲 with sheilds兲 Reⴱ ⫻ 103
Zayanderud 1 0.0031 0.010 0.85 0.65 0.07 0.089 0.027 0.062 0.044 0.045 0.70
2 0.0083 0.009 0.80 0.76 0.08 0.092 0.026 0.066 0.058 0.034 0.72
3 0.0015 0.009 0.71 0.74 0.08 0.102 0.028 0.075 0.036 0.066 0.791
4 0.0026 0.012 0.65 0.86 0.09 0.093 0.030 0.062 0.042 0.051 1.10
5 0.0025 0.013 0.64 0.84 0.09 0.083 0.032 0.052 0.041 0.042 1.11
Kaj 1 0.0109 0.014 0.28 0.83 0.09 0.091 0.043 0.048 0.064 0.027 1.28
2 0.0028 0.012 0.22 0.63 0.06 0.080 0.044 0.036 0.042 0.037 0.73
3 0.0028 0.012 0.24 0.61 0.06 0.069 0.042 0.027 0.042 0.027 0.66
4 0.0028 0.012 0.32 0.45 0.04 0.056 0.038 0.018 0.042 0.014 0.44
5 0.0009 0.008 0.32 0.54 0.04 0.054 0.034 0.020 0.032 0.023 0.38
6 0.002 0.008 0.25 0.78 0.08 0.075 0.036 0.039 0.039 0.036 0.57
7 0.0017 0.008 0.27 0.63 0.06 0.061 0.035 0.026 0.037 0.024 0.42
8 0.0023 0.008 0.26 0.64 0.06 0.060 0.035 0.024 0.040 0.019 0.42
Gamasyab 1 0.0037 0.018 0.28 1.10 0.10 0.064 0.047 0.017 0.046 0.018 1.76
2 0.004 0.018 0.28 1.08 0.10 0.066 0.047 0.019 0.047 0.019 1.76
3 0.00396 0.018 0.32 1.14 0.11 0.069 0.044 0.025 0.047 0.023 1.91
4 0.0052 0.021 0.25 0.90 0.10 0.107 0.052 0.056 0.051 0.057 2.18
5 0.0057 0.020 0.28 1.18 0.12 0.081 0.048 0.032 0.052 0.029 2.38
6 0.00457 0.022 0.27 1.08 0.12 0.096 0.051 0.044 0.048 0.047 2.60
7 0.00537 0.020 0.45 1.62 0.16 0.081 0.041 0.040 0.051 0.030 3.26
8 0.0027 0.021 0.18 0.62 0.06 0.086 0.059 0.027 0.042 0.044 1.34
9 0.0026 0.017 0.26 0.88 0.08 0.064 0.047 0.017 0.042 0.022 1.34
10 0.0026 0.022 0.38 1.20 0.11 0.062 0.045 0.017 0.041 0.021 2.33
11 0.0030 0.018 0.37 1.28 0.12 0.064 0.042 0.022 0.043 0.021 2.07
12 0.0028 0.014 0.30 0.98 0.08 0.058 0.041 0.017 0.042 0.016 1.18
13 0.0033 0.019 0.40 1.37 0.12 0.065 0.042 0.024 0.044 0.021 2.36
14 0.0019 0.016 0.34 1.05 0.09 0.058 0.042 0.016 0.038 0.020 1.42
15 0.0034 0.016 0.33 1.08 0.09 0.061 0.042 0.019 0.045 0.017 1.52
16 0.0024 0.019 0.33 1.03 0.09 0.063 0.046 0.017 0.040 0.023 1.75
17 0.0028 0.023 0.23 0.80 0.08 0.070 0.055 0.015 0.042 0.028 1.72
18 0.0029 0.023 0.21 0.78 0.08 0.076 0.058 0.018 0.043 0.033 1.75
19 0.003 0.017 0.22 0.87 0.08 0.061 0.050 0.011 0.043 0.018 1.29
20 0.0028 0.018 0.26 0.87 0.08 0.066 0.048 0.019 0.042 0.024 1.42
21 0.0027 0.018 0.25 0.80 0.08 0.072 0.049 0.023 0.042 0.030 1.37
a
h is the weighted value of depth in a cross section.
b
um is the weighted value of velocity in a cross section.

varying from 1.23d35 共Ackers and White 1973兲 to 3d90 共van Rijn
1982兲 or 6.6d50 共Hammond et al. 1984兲. However, it was found
that application of ks = d50 without any coefficient was most com-
patible with the other method that entailed the critical Shields
parameter.
Shields Parameter Method
The critical Shields parameter 共␶ⴱcr兲 is defined 共Buffington and
Montgomery 1997兲 as
␶ incipient motion where the grain Reynolds number was larger
␶ⴱcr =
␥共SG − 1兲d50
Considering the shear stress as ␶ = ␥hS f 共Chow 1959; Keshavarzy
and Ball 1997兲, the median grain size can be determined by Eq.
共8兲 as
hS f
d50 = 共9兲
共SG − 1兲␶ⴱcr
in which S f = friction slope; SG = ␥s / ␥ = 2.65; ␥s and ␥ = specific
gravities of sediment and water, respectively; and the value of ␶ⴱcr
is determined from the equation of Lamb et al. 共2008兲 as
␶ⴱcr = 0.15S0.25 共10兲
where S = bed slope.
Using a large set of experimental field data for studies on
共8兲 than 100, Lamb et al. 共2008兲 found that much of the data were not
within 0.03⬍ ␶ⴱcr ⬍ 0.06; however they found a relationship be-
tween ␶ⴱcr and bed slope 共S兲 such as Eq. 共10兲. Graf and Suszka
共1987兲 found that for the grain Reynolds number greater than 500,
the Shields parameter depended on slope. In the grain Reynolds

240 / JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2010

Downloaded 03 Dec 2010 to 144.122.101.171. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
http://www.ascelibrary.org
number 共Reⴱ = uⴱd50 / ␷ in which ␷ is the kinematic viscosity兲 in-
dependent region of the Shields diagram, ␶ⴱcr is considerably
lower when dealing with fully exposed spherical grains. Coleman
共1967兲 and Fenton and Abbott 共1977兲 obtained values of ␶ⴱcr close
to 0.01 for this region. Afzalimehr et al. 共2007兲 showed that under
decelerating flow ␶ⴱcr is lower than the values reported in the
literature. Keshavarzy and Ball 共1997兲 reasoned that sediment
particles commence to move at flow depths lower than those es-
timated from Shields’ diagram. This is because the instantaneous
shear stress applied to sediment particles is higher than the mean
shear stress 共Keshavarzy and Ball 1999兲.
Eq. 共10兲 does not represent the effect of flow nonuniformity
due to the application of bed slope S. On the other hand, the use
of friction slope 共S f 兲 in Eq. 共10兲 which is different in nonuniform
flow from bed slope 共S兲 allows us to take into account the influ-
ence of flow nonuniformity on the estimation of ␶ⴱcr. If one as-
sumes that the coefficient and the exponent of Eq. 共10兲 reflect the
morphological characteristics of rivers, then application of S f in-
stead of S in Eq. 共3兲 leads to
␶ⴱcr = 0.15S0.25
f 共11兲
The friction slope S f can be defined by the St. Venant equation as
dh
Sf = S − 共1 − Fr2兲
dx
where dh / dx = water surface variation; Fr= Froude number de-
fined as 关Fr= um / 共gh兲0.5兴; h = weighted value of depth in a cross
section; and g = gravitational acceleration.
Substituting Eq. 共9兲 into Eq. 共7兲 gives
f ⬘ = 关2.03 log共20.13␶ⴱcr/S f 兲兴−2
Putting ␶ⴱcr from Eq. 共11兲 into Eq. 共13兲 and using the logarithm
rules, f ⬘ can be written as
f ⬘ = 关0.9742 – 1.5225 log共S f 兲兴−2
This equation shows that f ⬘ can be predicted from the friction
slope and hence Eq. 共14兲 includes the effect of flow nonunifor-
mity. Employing flow data from a wide range of gauging sites,
Golubtsov 共1969兲 found a positive dependency of friction factor
on slope for slopes in the range of 0.4–20%. At lower slopes no
specific dependency was observed. A physical explanation for a
slope dependency in the friction factor can be due to the change
in the river morphology which typically occurs on moving up-
stream along river profiles 共Bathurst 2002兲.
Determination of Form Friction
Now returning to Eq. 共1兲, the form friction factor 共f ⬙兲 can be
estimated as
f⬙ = f − f⬘
Field Experimentation and Testing
A 100-m-long reach of Zayandehrood River in central Iran was
selected for this study. The width of reach varies from 37 to 42 m.
The selected reach was almost straight and was formed of gravel
grains. The grain size distribution was calculated using the Wol-
man method 共Fig. 1兲. Surveying along this reach and reading the
water surface and bed levels, the profiles of water and bed sur-
faces were constructed. Five sections in the selected reach, spaced
Downloaded 03 Dec 2010 to 144.122.101.171. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
20–29 m from each other, were chosen to measure velocity pro-
files 共Fig. 2兲. These sections were selected based on bed form
variations. The velocity was measured in such a way that one
profile was obtained in the center and two profiles were taken on
the both sides of the river 共Fig. 3兲. The point velocities were
measured in the vertical direction from the bed to the water sur-
face by using a butterfly current meter with horizontal axes. The
distance between measurement points was between 1 to 2 cm in
the 20% depth near the bed and between 3 to 5 cm in the upper
80% depth. In this manner smaller velocity gradient in the upper
80% depth in comparison to 20% flow depth near the bed was
adequately accommodated. The time step of each point velocity
measurement was taken as 50 s with three repetitions. Further-
more, for constructing a topographic map of the reach 共Fig. 4兲 and
distributions of velocity and shear stress 共Fig. 5兲 along the reach,
62 points were randomly measured. At these points, flow veloci-
ties were measured at 0.2h and 0.8h from the water surface. Table
1 presents hydraulic characteristics of the selected reach. Further-
more, using the same method data were obtained for other reaches
of two gravel-bed rivers in Iran. In total 34 sections were used in
this study.
Computation and Discussion of Results
共12兲
For a reasonable estimate of form friction factor, one needs to
determine the total and the grain friction factors. The flow char-
acteristics, such as the longitudinal nonuniformity of flow charac-
terized by deceleration or acceleration, can change the velocity
profile and hence the determination of ␦ⴱ and ␪ in Eq. 共4兲 共Afza-
共13兲 limehr and Rennie 2009兲. Accordingly, using Eqs. 共5兲 and 共6兲, the
value of uⴱ was calculated for three velocity profiles in each sec-
tion and then its weighted value along with the weighted velocity
at each section were used in Eq. 共3兲 for estimating the total fric-
共14兲 tion factor 共f兲. Also, the grain friction factor was calculated using
Eqs. 共7兲 and 共14兲. However, Eq. 共7兲 needs only the weighted flow
depth and median grain size at each section. On the other hand,
for estimation of f ⬘ by Eq. 共14兲, one needs to calculate friction
slope from Eq. 共12兲. Therefore, application of Eq. 共14兲 to estimat-
ing f ⬘ depends on flow conditions at the upstream via S, dh / dx,
and Fr. Using the calculated f 关from Eq. 共3兲兴 and f ⬘ 关from Eqs. 共7兲
or 共14兲兴 the value of f ⬙ is determined by Eq. 共15兲. The results
showed that the calculated form friction factors using grain fric-
tion of Eqs. 共7兲 and 共14兲 were in agreement. It should be stressed
that both methods 关Eqs. 共7兲 and 共14兲兴 take into account flow non-
uniformity; however, Eq. 共14兲 uses it directly by applying the
friction slope and Eq. 共7兲 uses it indirectly by applying ␦ⴱ and ␪ in
f for the determination of f ⬙.
The BLCM including ␦ⴱ and ␪ 共Afzalimehr and Rennie 2009兲
can be reasonably applied for the estimation of shear velocity in
the presence of bed forms by using Eq. 共4兲. The results 共not pre-
共15兲
sented here in兲 revealed that BLCM had an acceptable agreement
with the log law method. However, since the later method uses
the near bed data, it is sensitive to the reference level 共Hinze
1975兲, while the former applies all of velocity profile data and is
not affected by the reference level and illustrates the effect of bed
or flow nonuniformity by the velocity shapes.
Fig. 4共a兲 shows a topographic map of the selected reach. At the
upstream end of the reach, bed level was 1,567.6 m and along the
reach it became 1,567.5 m and at the end of the reach it became
again 1,567.5 m. This shows that the central part of the reach
formed a pool. However, on the left margin of the reach topo-
graphic variation was more pronounced than the central part. Fig.
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2010 / 241
http://www.ascelibrary.org
 0.08 Notation
0.07 + % 35
The following symbols are used in this paper:
0.06 d50 ⫽ median diameter of sediment particles;
f ''(kulegan withh using SP)

f ⫽ friction factor;
0.05
f ⬘ ⫽ grain friction factor;
0.04
f ⬙ ⫽ bed form friction factor;
- % 35
Fr ⫽ Froude number defined by um / 共gh兲0.5;
0.03 g ⫽ gravitational acceleration;
h ⫽ flow depth;
0.02 h / d50 ⫽ relative flow depth;
0.01
ks ⫽ Nikuradse’s equivalent roughness;
R ⫽ hydraulic radius;
0 Re ⫽ Reynolds number that is umh / ␯;
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 Reⴱ ⫽ particle Reynolds number uⴱd50 / ␯;
f ''(kulegan with using d50) S ⫽ bed slope;
S f ⫽ friction slope;
Fig. 6. Comparison of form friction 共f ⬙兲 values estimated using the um ⫽ mean flow velocity;
Keulegan and the Shields parameter application methods umax ⫽ maximum velocity observed over a velocity
profile;
uⴱ ⫽ shear velocity;
v ⫽ vertical component of flow velocity;
4共b兲 exhibits a three-dimensional view of the bed level in the W ⫽ width of river;
reach. w ⫽ lateral component of flow velocity;
Plan form maps of flow velocity and bed shear stress for the x ⫽ deviation point of the inner layer from the
reach are shown in Fig. 5. The highest velocities and shear outer layer;
stresses occurred over the central part of the reach. Fig. 5 also y ⫽ distance from the reference level of channel
shows lower shear stresses along the channel margins, especially bed;
on the left bank and in the deeper part of the reach. ␥ ⫽ specific gravity of water;
Fig. 6 compares the form friction factor values obtained using ␥s ⫽ specific gravity of sediment;
the two methods discussed above. It is observed that 82% of data ␦ⴱ ⫽ boundary-layer displacement;
are included in the limits of ⫾35%, illustrating a good agreement ␪ ⫽ momentum thickness;
between the simple method of Keulegan which involves only ␬ ⫽ von Karman’s constant;
depth and grain size to calculate grain friction factor with the ␯ ⫽ kinematic viscosity;
other method which involves the friction slope. The latter method ␶ ⫽ bed shear stress; and
takes into account the water surface variation and flow nonunifor- ␶ⴱcr ⫽ critical shear stress.
mity for the estimation of f ⬘ and is better from a theoretical point
of view. However, the former method is more practical from an
engineering point of view. Part of the scatter in the data must References
therefore be a function of the unknown effects of, for example,
bed material size distribution, shape, and orientation. Acaroglu, E. R. 共1972兲. “Friction factors in solid material systems.” J.
Hydr. Div., 98共HY4兲, 681–699.
Ackers, P., and White, W. R. 共1973兲. “Sediment transport: New approach
Conclusions and analysis.” J. Hydr. Div., 99共HY11兲, 2041–2060.
Afzalimehr, H., and Anctil, F. 共2001兲. “Vitesse de frottement associée à
un écoulement nonuniforme et une rugosité relative intermédiaire.” J.
The following conclusions can be drawn from this study:
Hydraul. Res., 39共2兲, 181–186.
1. Application of the boundary-layer parameters 共␦ⴱ and ␪兲,
Afzalimehr, H., Dey, S., and Rasoolianfar, P. 共2007兲. “Influence of decel-
based on the ASCE Task Force recommendation, to the esti- erating flow on incipient motion of a gravel-bed stream.” J. Sadhana,
mation of the total friction factor 共f兲 shows that the major 32共5兲, 545–559.
part of friction factor in gravel-bed rivers is due to the form Afzalimehr, H., and Rennie, C. D. 共2009兲. “Determination of bed shear
friction factor; stress using boundary layer parameters in a gravel-bed river.” Hydrol.
2. Application of d50 for the Nikuradse equivalent roughness Sci. J., 54共1兲, 147–159.
size 共ks兲 without any coefficient in the Keulegan equation Alam, A. M. Z., and Kennedy, J. F. 共1969兲. “Friction factor for flow in
displays the best agreement with the method of based on the sand bed channels.” J. Hydr. Div., 95共HY6兲, 1973–1992.
use of the critical Shields parameter for calculation of the ASCE Task Force. 共1963兲. “Friction factor in open channels.” J. Hydr.
grain friction factor; Div., 89, 97–143.
Bathurst, J. C. 共2002兲. “At a site variation and minimum flow resistance
3. Using the friction slope in the equation of Lamb et al. is
for mountain rivers.” J. Hydrol., 269, 11–26.
more realistic than the application of bed slope because the Brownlie, W. R. 共1983兲. “Flow depth in sand-bed channels.” J. Hydraul.
former parameter takes into account the flow structure in the Eng., 109共7兲, 959–990.
estimation of the critical Shields parameter; and Buffington, J. M., and Montgomery, D. R. 共1997兲. “A systematic study of
4. There is a reasonable agreement between the methods of eight decades of incipient motion studies, with special reference to
Keulegan and that which applies the Shields parameter to gravel-bedded rivers.” Water Resour. Res., 33共8兲, 1993–2029.
estimate the form friction factor. Chow, V. T. 共1959兲. Open-channel hydraulics, McGraw-Hill, New York.

242 / JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2010

Downloaded 03 Dec 2010 to 144.122.101.171. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
http://www.ascelibrary.org
Coleman, N. L. 共1967兲. “A theoretical and experimental study of drag and
lift forces acting on a sphere resting on a hypothetical stream bed.”
Proc., 12th Congress of the Int. Association for Hydraulic Research,
Vol. 3, Fort Collins, Colo., 185–192.
Fedele, J. J., and Garcia, M. H. 共2001兲. “Alluvial roughness in streams
with dunes: A boundary-layer approach.” River, coastal and estuarine
morphodynamics, G. Seminara and P. Blondeaux, eds., Springer, Ber-
lin, 37–60.
Fenton, J. D., and Abbott, J. E. 共1977兲. “Initial movement of grains on a
stream bed: The effect of relative protrusion.” Proc. R. Soc. London,
Ser. A, 352, 523–537.
Garcia, M. H. 共2008兲. “Section 2: Sediment transport and morphodynam-
ics.” ASCE manual of practice 110: Sedimentation engineering, M. H.
Garcia, ed., ASCE, Reston, Va., 2.21–2.163.
Golubtsov, V. V. 共1969兲. “Hydraulic resistance and formula for comput-
ing the average flow velocity of mountain rivers.” Sov. Hydrol. Select.
Pap. Am. Geophys Union, 5, 500–511.
Graf, W. H., and Suszka, L. 共1987兲. “Sediment transport in steep chan-
nels.” J. Hydrosci. Hydr. Eng., 5共1兲, 11–26.
Griffiths, G. A. 共1989兲. “Flow resistance in gravel channels with mobile
beds.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 115共3兲, 340–355.
Hammond, F. D., Heathershaw, A. D., and Langhorne, D. N. 共1984兲. “A
comparison between shields threshold criterion and the Henderson
movement of loosely packed gravel in a tidal channel.” J. Sedimen-
tology, 31, 51–62.
Hinze, J. O. 共1975兲. Turbulence, 2nd Ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
Jarrett, R. D. 共1991兲. “Hydraulic of mountain rivers.” Channel flow resis-
tance: Centennial of Manning’s formula, B. C. Yen, ed., Water Re-
sources, Littleton, Colo., 287–298.
Julien, P. Y., Klaassen, G. J., Ten Brinke, W. B. M., and Wibers, A. W. E.
共2002兲. “Case study: Bed resistance of Rhine river during 1008
flood.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 128共12兲, 1042–1050.
Keshavarzy, A., and Ball, J. E. 共1997兲. “An analysis of the characteristics
of rough bed turbulent shear stresses in an open channel.” Stochastic
Hydrol. Hydraul., 11共3兲, 193–210.
Keshavarzy, A., and Ball, J. E. 共1999兲. “An application of image-
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2010 / 243
Downloaded 03 Dec 2010 to 144.122.101.171. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit
processing in a study of sediment motion.” J. Hydraul. Res., 37共4兲,
559–575.
Keulegan, G. H. 共1938兲. “Laws of turbulent flow in open channel.” J.
Res. Natl. Bur. Stand., 1151共21兲, 707–741.
Lamb M. P., Dietrich, W. E., and Venditti, J. G. 共2008兲. “Is the critical
Shields stress for incipient sediment dependent on channel-bed
slope?” J. Geophy. Res., 113, F02008.
Meyer-Peter, E., and Muller, R. 共1948兲. “Formulas for bed-load trans-
port.” Proc., 3rd Meeting of IAHR, Stockholm, Sweden, 39–64.
Munson, B. R., Young, D. F., and Okiishi, T. H. 共1994兲. Fundamental of
fluid mechanics, 2nd Ed., Wiley, New York.
Petit, F. 共1989兲. “The evaluation of grain stress from experiments in a
pebble-bedded flume.” Earth Surf. Processes Landforms, 14, 499–
508.
Prestegaard, K. L. 共1983兲. “Bar resistance in gravel bed streams at bank-
full stage.” Water Resour. Res., 19, 472–476.
Robert, A. 共1997兲. “Characteristics of velocity profiles along riffle-pool
sequences and estimates of bed shear stress.” J. Geomorphology, 19,
89–98.
Schlichting, H., and Gersten, K. 共2000兲. Boundary-layer theory, Springer,
Berlin.
van Rijn, L. C. 共1982兲. “Equivalent roughness of alluvial bed.” J. Hydr.
Div., 108共HY10兲, 1215–1218.
van Rijn, L. C. 共1984兲. “Sediment transport. Part III: Bed forms and
alluvial roughness.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 110共12兲, 1733–1754.
Vanoni, V. A., and Hwang, L. S. 共1967兲. “Relation between bed forms
and friction in streams.” J. Hydr. Div., 93共HY3兲, 121–144.
Yalin, M. S. 共1972兲. Mechanics of sediment transport, 2nd Ed., Perga-
mon, Oxford, N.Y.
Yen, B. C. 共1991兲. “Hydraulic resistance in open channels.” Channel flow
resistance: Centennial of Manning’s formula, B. C. Yen, ed., Water
Resource, Highlands Ranch, Colo., 1–135.
Yen B. C. 共2002兲. “Open channel flow resistance.” J. Hydr. Eng., 128共1兲,
20–39.
Young, A. D. 共1989兲. Boundary layers: American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, BSP Professional Books, Washington D.C.
http://www.ascelibrary.org