CLEAR WATER SCOUR AT CYLINDRICAL PIERS IN CLAY – SAND MIXTURES | Soil | Vortices

CLEAR WATER SCOUR AT CYLINDRICAL PIERS IN CLAY – SAND MIXTURES

Thesis submitted to Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of

Master of Technology
in

Hydraulic and Water Resources Engineering

Submitted by,

Mr. Langhi Manojkumar Namdeo (07CE6108)

Under the guidance of

Prof. Subhasish Dey Chair Professor, IIT Kharagpur

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
KHARAGPUR- 721302, INDIA

2009

Dedicated to,

My lovely Parents and Friends

Departmrnt of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology. Kharagpur-721302 Certificate This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Clear water scour at cylindrical piers in clay – sand mixtures” is a bonafeid work carried out by Mr. Manojkumar N. Langhi under my supervision and guidance for the partial fulfillmet of the requirements for Postgraduate degree of Master of Technology in Hydraulic and water Resources Engineering during the academic session 2007-2009 in the Civil Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, kharagpur, India.

Prof. Subhasish Dey Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institue of Technology Kharagpur India

Acknowledgement
I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my project supervisor Prof. Subasish Dey, Chair Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, for his invaluable guidance, constant encouragement, talented and versed advice and helpful suggestions. I am grateful to Prof. L. S. Ramachandra, Head of the Department, Civil Engineering and also thankful to all the faculty of Civil engineering department. I am very much thankful to Mrs. S. Talukdar madam, Head of Laboratory, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, for providing necessary facilities during the research work. I would like to thank Mr. S. Sarkar, Mr. R. Das, Mr. R. Acharya and Mr. D. Deb for their co-operation and encouragement during the research work. I am also thankful to Amol, Anirudha, Avinash, Irfan, Nilesh, Parag, Pinaki, Ramesh, and Santosh for their cooperation during my project work. I extend my sincere thanks to all, officer, laboratory staff and my friends, who were very co-operative and always eager to help me. I owe a great deal of love, to my parents, my sister, brothers, sister in law and a friend Sanghu, for their blessing and consistent moral support during my study. Finally, I bow before the Almighty who has enable me to complete the project work successfully.

IIT, Kharagpur Date: . 12. 2009 (Manojkumar N. Langhi)

CONTENTS Chapter Description List of Tables List of Figures List of Symbols Abstract I 1.1. 1.2. II 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. 2.6. 2.6.1 2.6.2 2.6.3 III INTRODUCTION General Objectives of present investigation LITERATURE REVIEW General Scour and its classification Mechanism of local scour Scour in non-cohesive and cohesive soils Parameters influencing scour depth at piers Influence of parameters on scour depth Approaching flow velocity Approaching flow depth Time - variation of scour EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE 3.1. 3.2. 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.3. 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.4. 3.4.1 3.4.2 3.4.3 3.4.4 General Experimental setup Flume Water supply system Instrument carriage Scheme of Experiments Non-cohesive sediments The pier model Method of measurements Discharge Bed and water levels Scour depth Velocity and flow field SETUP AND 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 Page No. i ii v vi 1 1 3 4 4 4 4 6 7 8 8 9 10

1 4.4.2.1 4.2 4.3 V VI Experimental Procedure Non-cohesive sediments After 5 % mixing After 10 % and 20 % mixing RESULTS AND DISCUSSION General Time variation of scour depth Scour for non-cohesive soil Scour for mixture of clay and non-cohesive sand 7.3.8 cm pier model Time-Velocity variation Turbulent Intensity Reynolds stresses SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES 15 15 16 16 17 17 17 17 18 28 28 31 33 35 35 38 40 43 45 .3.4.2 4.4 4.3.5.5. 4.4.2.5 cm pier model Time-Velocity variation Turbulent Intensity Reynolds stresses 3.2.2 IV 4.2 4.1. 3.1 3.2 3.5.3. 4.3 4.3. 4.1 4.5.

LIST OF TABLE Table Title Page No.1 Experimental data of obtaining maximum scour depth for different percentage of clay for different pier model 19 i . 4.

13 Photograph of the scour hole for 3.8 cm pier model (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.11 Photograph of the scour hole for 3.3 Schematic diagram of the experimental set-up Time-depth variation for 1 cm pier model Time-depth variation for 2 cm pier model Time-depth variation for 3.5 Time-depth variation for 3.8 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.8 Time-depth variation for 7.14 Photograph of the scour hole for 3.9 Time-depth variation for 7.4 Time-depth variation for 7.5 cm pier model (after mixing 10 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.8 cm pier model (after mixing 5 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.8 cm pier model (after mixing 20 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.7 Time-depth variation for 3.8 cm pier model (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.1 2.1 4.2 4.5 cm pier model (after mixing 5 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.8 cm pier model (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 10 14 19 20 Page 6 ii .2 Title Flow pattern around bridge piers Time-variation of clear water and live bed scour after Chabert and Engeldinger (1956) 3.12 Photograph of the scour hole for 3.6 Time-depth variation for 3.8 cm pier model (after mixing 10 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.10 Time-depth variation for 7.8 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.5 cm pier model (after mixing 20 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.5 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.1 4.

5 cm pier model (after mixing 5 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 30 4.5 cm pier model (after mixing 20 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 31 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 32 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 32 + + 4.5 cm pier model (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 28 4.23 4.15 Photograph of the scour hole for 7.24 4.5 cm pier model (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 27 4.5 cm pier model (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 27 4.30 iii .5 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 26 4.17 Photograph of the scour hole for 7.16 Photograph of the scour hole for 7.26 4.4.5 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 29 4.19 Time-velocity variation for 7.21 Time-velocity variation for 7.18 Photograph of the scour hole for 7.28 4.22 Time-velocity variation for 7.25 Vertical distribution of u and w at vertical section (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 33 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 33 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 34 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 34 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 35 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 35 4.5 cm pier model (after mixing 10 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 30 4.20 Time-velocity variation for 7.27 4.29 4.

8 cm pier model (after mixing 10 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 37 4.34 Time-velocity variation for 3.39 4.32 Time-velocity variation for 3.8 cm pier model (after mixing 20 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 38 + + 4.35 Vertical distribution of u and w at vertical section (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 39 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 39 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 40 + + 4.8 cm pier model (after mixing 5 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 37 4.33 Time-velocity variation for 3.42 iv .37 4.31 Time-velocity variation for 3.4.38 Vertical distribution of u and w at vertical section (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 40 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 41 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 41 + 4.36 4.41 Vertical distribution of uw at vertical section (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 42 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 42 4.40 4.8 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 36 4.

8Uca (LT-1) Critical velocity for sediment particles (LT-1) Critical velocity for armor particle size d50a (LT-1) Shear velocity of approaching flow (LT -1) Critical shear velocity of bed sediment (LT -1) Fluctuating component of streamwise velocity (LT -1) Fluctuating component of vertical velocity (LT -1) Normalized streamwise turbulent intensity component (M0L0T0) Normalized vertical turbulent intensity component (M0L0T0) Normalized vertical depth (L0) Normalized Reynolds stresses (M0L0T0) w u+ w+ y+ uw+ v .LIST OF SYMBOLS Particular d50a H l U Ua Uc Uca u* u*c u Description Median diameter of sediment particles Approaching flow depth (L) Transverse length of abutments (L) Average approaching flow velocity (LT -1) 0.

three-dimensional flow. pronounced bulges were observed in the vertical distribution of normalized streamwise turbulent intensity component and Reynolds stresses.5 cm and 3. The problem of scouring at cylindrical pier model on non-cohesive sand and on a bed containig different percentage of clay in non-cohesive sand was investigated experimentally. low maximum constant scour depth was obtained due to increment of clay content in non-cohesive sand. 0.8 cm pier model. For further sets of experimental runs. The volume of scour hole at the upstream of the pier model was decreased with increased in clay content and the flow velocity in the scour hole of non-cohesive sand with higher clay content was also got reduced. 10 % and 20 % in non cohesive sand were used for depth and velocity measurements in the vicinity of 7. vi . An experimental result have shown that the time required to attain maximum constant scour depth in non-cohesive sand is less and therefore. All the experiments were performed in a 12 m long.8 cm pier model. Due to flow separation. different percentage of clay such as 5. vertical depth components and Reynold stresses within the scoured bed were taken by the Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter (ADV) at the upstream side of two different cylindrical pier models. scour.71 m deep horizontal flume. Four pier size of diameter 7. while spike was observed near the bed for turbulent intensity components because of the shuddering effect of the primary vortex. turbulent intensity components.15 mm. thoroughly mixed clay content of 5 %. In such bed condition velocity measurements were performed only for 7. An evaluation of the effects of scouring around bridge piers forms necessary step in bridge design.ABSTRACT Scour holes created by three-dimensional flow of water around bridge piers are a major cause of failure of bridge pier foundations.5 cm.5 cm and 3. The time-averaged velocity components. Non-cohesive sand of diameter 0. 10 and 20 % and different pier models were used in the experimental runs.8 cm. 2 cm and 1 cm were considered for depth measurement in initial set of experimental runs for noncohesive sand. Keywords: Pier models. 3.6 m wide and 0.

000.000 are considered to be scour susceptible and of those 121. As of 1995 it was estimated that approximately 84 percent of the 575. altering its bed elevation and adjusting its boundaries.000 are considered to be scour critical (Jones 1993).CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1. Scour holes created by flow of water past bridge piers are a major cause of failure of bridge pier foundations. reconstruct or replace bridges whose foundations have been under-cut by the scouring action of stream flow. Scour around bridge piers is just one example of the many different effects resulting from human interference with the river. approximately 121.000 bridges in the National Bridge Inventory are built over waterways (Richardson et al. Until these initiating 1 . transports and deposits sediment in the river. In particular. a total of 90 bridges were destroyed in New York. 1995). 1956). In the year 1947 the considerable bridge losses in the State of Iowa were in large measure responsible for the determination of the Iowa State Highway Commission to sponsor an intensive study of the problem with the goal of evolving means for predicting probable scour depths (Laursen et al. Changes in bed elevation may be due to natural causes or by the activities of man which lead to changes of river bed or river geometry. more extensive studies on scour at bridge crossings are necessary. Flowing water erodes. In 1994 the state of Georgia experienced over 500 bridge failures due to scour caused by Hurricane Alberto (Jones 2002). Pennsylvania. comprehensive studies deciphering the mechanisms themselves which initiate scour should be at the forefront of any current or future research. To ensure public safety and minimize the losses of bridge failures. Of these bridges. It is apparent that failures of bridges have brought significant life and financial losses. Failure of bridges due to such scour at their foundation is a common occurrence and each year a colossal amount is spent to repair. A study completed by the Transportation Research Board in 1984 estimates that an average of 150 bridges in the United States fail each year due to sediment transport and local scouring of piers or abutments (Davis 1984). Virginia and West Virginia due to either pier or abutment failure. approximately 13.1 General An alluvial river bed is subjected to continuous change. Between the years 1985 and 1987.

must be assessed. and this in turn must be correlated with the characteristics of the bed material ranging from clays and fine silts to gravels and boulders. sorting out the influence of each of the various factors is virtually impossible from field evidence alone. If an obstruction. Finally. discharge. Because the capacity for the transport of sediment is a function of the flow. and since the scour phenomenon as well is inherently unsteady. An analytic solution would have to combine a prediction of the flow pattern and a description of the local transport capacity of the flow. Due to the overall complexity of field conditions there is no generally accepted principle for the prediction of scour around bridge piers and abutments have evolved from field experience alone. the transport-capacity pattern will also be modified. Germany. where the transport capacity is less than the rate of supply. In that report it described that study reference is made to an earlier one in France in 1873 by Durand-Claye. usually because the goal was restricted to a particular installation or to some special phase of the general problem. The experimental approach has been tried in the past with limited success.and the capacity pattern . The resultant changes in the stream bed will further modify the flow pattern . as a result of the modified pattern.the pier or abutment . cross section. Neither these early experiments nor subsequent studies done in later period by various investigators in various countries have been sufficiently general to obtain the desired result . the capacity for transport out of the area is greater than the rate at which material is supplied to the area. the flow pattern in the vicinity of that obstruction will be modified.until equilibrium between capacity and supply is again achieved at every point on the stream bed. and great inequality exists among different rivers. the potential for scour around bridge support structures could prove to be a major concern for bridge design engineers. Although an approximation of the flow pattern might be attempted. Conversely. However. The alignment. In any area where. is placed in a stream.mechanisms are well understood. deposition will occur. considerable investigations on pier scour have been carried out further and a reliable design method is now available 2 . An analytical approach is equally difficult. The flow of individual streams exhibits a multiple variation. a comparable solution for the capacity is not yet possible. and slope of a stream must all be correlated with the scour phenomenon. in 1894. scour will occur. the effect of the shape of the obstruction itself . such as a pier. Since several of these factors are likely to vary with time to some degree. The earliest report on a laboratory study which has done by Engels at Dresden.a means of predicting scour in the field.

 Determination of time-variation of scour depth for various bed conditions around different cylindrical pier models.2 Objectives of present investigation The aim of the present investigation is to study experimentally the flow field. These all the investigations pertain to scour around piers founded in cohesionless sediment.(Melville and Sutherland 1988). 3 . only limited study has been carried out on the temporal variation of scour depth around bridge piers founded in cohesive sediments. Study on the problem of local scour around bridge piers in cohesive sediments is still in its intial stage. 1. influence of different parameters on equilibrium scour depth. time variation of scour depth at cylindrical piers under clear water scour condition. Further. Unlike in the case of noncohesive sediments. the flow condition at which cohesive material gets eroded is difficult to predict as it depends upon a variety of factors such as the type and percentage of clay content present. The main objectives of the study are as follows:  Investigation of the three-dimensional turbulent flow fields in the vicinity of two different cylindrical pier models placed on non-cohesive sand and on a bed containing different percentage of clay in non-cohesive sand.  Determination of time-velocity variation for various bed conditions around two different cylindrical pier models. stage of compaction or consolidation etc.

Scour and its classification.1 General In this Chapter. General scour in the river occurs due to change in the characteristics of river while local scour develops near the structure due to modification of the flow field as a result of obstruction to the flow by the structures. volcanic activities. Laursen and Toch (1956) described the formation of horseshoe vortex. The most important of these are the horseshoe vortex and the wake-vortex system. Clear-water scour occurs when the sediment is removed from the scour hole but not supplied by the approaching stream. channel alterations.3 Mechanism of local scour The boundary layer in the flow past a bridge element undergoes a threedimensional separation. scouring mechanism.g.2 Scour and its classification Scour is a natural phenomenon of lowering the level of riverbeds by the erosive action of flowing stream. general scour and local scour. It may occur due to convergence of flow. the stagnation pressure decreases with distance from the water surface and this pressure 4 . and bed-form migration. general scour can be categorized as short-term scour and longterm scour. On the other hand. and climate change) and human causes (e. channel straightening. Scour is classified into two types. On the basis of time taken for scour development. the longterm general scour is the general aggradation or degradation of streambed elevation due to natural (e. a shift in the channel thalweg or braids within the channel. In contrast. and land-use changes). Short-term general scour develops during a single or several closely spaced floods. parameters affecting scour depth and time-variation of scour are discussed in successive section. The dominant feature of the flow about a pier is the system of vortices which develops. At the nose of the pier the approach flow velocity goes to zero.g. Since the flow velocity decreases from a maximum at the free surface to zero at the bed. Local scour is classified as clear-water scour and live-bed scour. 2.CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2. dam/reservoir construction. streambed mining. the live-bed scour occurs when the scour hole is continuously fed with the sediment by the approaching stream. a comprehensive review of the investigations on local scour at bridge pier is presented. 2.

(1992a & b). Dey et al. abutment and spur dike.1).difference drives the flow. The formation of the horseshoe vortex and the associated downflow cause scour at different elements of a bridge such as pier. Therefore. The horseshoe vortex results from a concentration by the pier of vorticity already present in the approaching flow. The temporal variation of scour and the maximum depth of scour at bridge elements therefore mainly depend on the characteristics of flow. Dey (1995). the wake-vortex system is generated by the pier itself (figure 2. Barbhuiya et al. (2004a & b). studies on the mechanism of scour around abutments and spur dikes have been studied by Kothyari et al. changes the flow pattern causing a reduction in shear stress by the flow thus reducing its sediment transport capacity. Dey (1999). Horst (2004) whereas. This leads to the development of a deep hole (scour hole) around the bridge element. this vortex system has the characteristic shape of a horseshoe and thus called a horseshoe vortex. However. Kothyari et al. Barbhuiya (2003). Dey et al. which in turn. (2001). The mechanism of scour around bridge piers has been studied by Melville (1975). 5 . (1995). Viewed from the top. (2004 & 2005). separation occurs at the upstream face of pier and shear layer rolls up along the obstruction to form a vortex system in front of the element which is swept downstream by the river flow. pier and river-bed material. The formation of the horseshoe vortex and the associated downflow around the bridge element results in increased shear stress and hence a local increase in sediment transport capacity of the flow.

For non-cohesive sediment.Pier Surface Roller Wake Vortex Downflow Flow Scour hole Sediment bed Horseshoe vortex Fig. When bridge pier is constructed in such a strata and the discharge is sufficiently large.4 Scour in non-cohesive and cohesive soils Non-cohesive soil consists of the bed material ranging from very fine to very coarse.2. It is believed that 6 . but also the chemical and physical bonding of individual particles and the properties of the eroding fluid. the coarser particles would accumulate in the scour hole and partly inhibit further development of the scour. The mechanism of cohesive material scour is fundamentally different from scouring of alluvial non-cohesive materials. the scour development would progress. Ultimately the accumulated coarser material would stop further scour and the scour depth obtained would be much smaller than that in uniform material. the submerged density of the soil and gravity forces provides the main resistance to erosion. The process involves not only the balancing of flow induced shear stresses and the shear strength of soils to withstand scour. During scour development.1 Flow pattern around bridge piers 2. Hence scour in cohesive materials is more complex and less understood than the scour in non-cohesive sandy material.

particularly. 7 . Along with eroding fluid properties. 1977). Molinas et al. From previous research Rambabu et al. Kamphuis and Hall (1983). Many investigators have studied the scour phenomenon in coarse-grained soils while scouring in cohesive material was studied by Partheniades (1965). shape. the physico-chemical aspects and the resistance to scour in cohesive soils. Briaud et al. type of clay and its adsorbed complex. (1998b) studied pier scour in montmorillonite clay soils and along with analyzing the effects of compaction. moisture content and density of the soil type. according to Molinas et al. initial water content. spacing. initial water content.5 Parameters influencing scour depth at piers Scour at piers is influenced by various parameters (Breusers et al. Whereas. governed by wide variations in the sediment properties. (2003) concluded that the rate of erosion in cohesive soil is dependent on many parameters such as induced shear stress. the scour process in cohesive soils is strongly affected by the amount of cohesive material present in the soil mixture as well as the types of mineral clay. (2003). As a result. remain in suspension. Very little work has been carried out on the basic mechanism involved on the scouring of cohesive soils. Hence by the knowledge gained in the past in cohesive material scour Molinas et al. soil shear strength. One reason could be complexity of the problem. (1999). and the approach flow conditions on pier scour in unsaturated cohesive soils and influence of initial water content of saturated clay on pier scour they developed scour prediction equations in unsaturated and saturated cohesive soils to quantify the scour which may occur around circular piers. which are grouped as follows:  Parameters relating to the pier: Size. and the approach flow conditions on abutment scour. (1998a) cohesive materials. shear strength of the soil. temperature etc.scour in cohesive soils occurs when the fluid shear is sufficient to overcome the tensile strength of the bed material and the submerged unit weight of the soil. soil shear strength. number and orientation with respect to the approaching flow direction. 2. the phenomenon identified as clearwater local scour in non-cohesive materials always prevails. used two different types of clay mixtures and studied local scour around abutments and analyzed the effects of compaction. and compaction of the clay. soil shear strength. once eroded. Rambabu et al.

It is generally recognized that the shear velocity u* is an important parameter not only in distinguishing clear water scour from the live bed scour but also in representing the erosive power of the flowing stream for a given sediment size. if U / U a  1 . gravitational acceleration and temperature (may not be important in scour problems). while live bed scour occurs when U / U c  1 . Parameters relating to the bed sediment: Median size. Dongol (1994) conducted an extensive series of experiments to study the effect of approaching flow velocity on scour depth at vertical-wall. with increasing velocities.For nonuniform sediments. Thus. Most of the conclusions drawn that for a given flow depth. angle of repose. for nonuniform sediments.  Parameters relating to the time: Time of scouring for an evolving scour hole.6 Influence of parameters on scour depth 2.  Parameters relating to the fluid: Mass density. The idea about the effect of approach flow velocity on local scour depth under live-bed conditions have changed over the years. which marks the transition from clear to live bed conditions for a sedimenttransporting flow and is equivalent to U c for uniform sediments. However. shear velocity and roughness. particle size distribution. mass density. Early researchers related the relative scour depth (normalized by the flow depth) to the Froude number. wing-wall and spill-through abutments 8 . approaching flow depth.  Parameters relating to the approaching flow condition: Approaching flow velocity.  Parameters relating to the unsteadiness: Passage of flood wave in rivers and waves in marine environment.6. Melville and Sutherland (1988) defined an armor velocity U a . that is U / U c  1 . 2. Kandasamy (1989) showed that the scour depth increases with increase in flow depth due to incorporation of the flow Froude number. Clear water scour occurs for the approaching flow velocity up to the critical velocity U c for bed sediments. live bed conditions prevail when U / U a  1. armoring of the bed occurs as scour proceeds and clear water conditions exist.1 Approaching flow velocity The depth of the local scour hole is closely related to the undisturbed approach flow velocity. the scour depth increase indefinitely. either at an increasing or a decreasing rate. cohesiveness. The numerous equations relating normalized scour depth and Froude number are summarized by Melville (1975). viscosity.

the approaching flow depth H is an important factor to determine scour depth. For U / U c  1 . the scour depth increases proportionally with H. His results are complimentary to the studies of Chiew (1984) and Baker (1986) for live bed scour at bridge piers in uniform and nonuniform sediments. the maximum scour depth increases with the increase in approaching flow depth.2 Approaching flow depth According to Laursen (1952). the maximum scour depth occurs when U  U c . 2. Chabert and Engeldinger (1956) stated that as the approach flow velocity exceeds the critical velocity for sediment entrainment. Melville (1992) distinguished short and long abutments. The second maximum occurs at about the transitional flatbed stage of sediment transport on the channel bed and is termed the live bed peak. It was also observed that the maximum scour depth increases at a decreasing rate with increase in approaching flow depth. 9 .under live bed conditions in uniform and nonuniform sediments. scour depth initially decreases with increase in approaching flow velocity reaching a minimum value and then increases again toward a second maximum. the scour depth is independent of flow depth. However. an increase in the velocity has no effect on the local scour depth. There is a consensus that the maximum scour depth increases at a decreasing rate with increase in approaching flow depth and there exists a limiting depth corresponding to which the maximum scour depth is independent of the flow depth. the scour depth decreases to about 10 % less than the maximum scour depth at the critical velocity and thereafter. that is under live bed conditions. According to Kandasamy (1989). Experimental results of Kandasamy (1989) indicate that for a constant value of the shear velocity ratio u* / u*c . the scour depth depends on both H and l. However. but is independent of l. However. and for long abutments ( l / H  25 ). most abutments are neither long nor short. On the other hand. for intermediate flow depths. as a result of which the scour depth is influenced by both H and l. This scour depth is called the threshold peak. the scour depth is dependent on flow depth.6. it was recognized that under clear water conditions. for shallow flow depths. respectively. He concluded that for short abutments ( l / H  1 ).

Anderson (1963) stated “By virtue of the logarithmic character of the development of the scour region with time.6. ranging from a day to a fortnight. Time to reach equilibrium scour depth varies widely. Fig.variation of scour Figure 2. however. General consensus is that the equilibrium scour depth at pier is attained asymptotically. stated that scour is an ever-increasing phenomenon and there is no real equilibrium scour depth. after which the increase in the depth and extent of scour becomes virtually imperceptible”. 2. (see Barbhuiya 2003). while Bresuers (1967) and Cunha (1975) gave a power law distribution.2 shows the schematic diagram describing the time-variation of scour depth at cylindrical pier after Chabert and Engeldinger (1956).2.3 Time . a practical equilibrium is reached after a relatively short time.2 Time-variation of clear water and live bed scour after Chabert and Engeldinger (1956) 10 . Rouse (1965). few researchers proposed an exponential time-variation of scour. Some of the researchers thought that the variation of scour depth with time is logarithmic but.

the false floor of same height and 0. a large 11 .85 m length. At the inlet section of the flume concrete stilling basin was provided through which water enters into the flume. At the test section. 3.2. An adjustable tailgate was installed at the downstream end of the flume to control the flow depth. Five small holes were provided at the bottom of the downstream wall of the sediment recess to drain out the water from the sediment bed.CHAPTER III EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND PROCEDURE 3. India.1 Flume Experiments were performed in a horizontal.2 Water Supply System The flume was connected to the water supply system comprised of a constant head reservoir about a height of 4 m above the ground level. while on the downstream side. The location of test section was made in such a way that the flow became fully developed before it reaches the test section.60 m width and inner depth of 0. The sediment recess consisted of rectangular box made up of perspex sheet 12 mm in thickness with a dimension as 0.5 m from the flume entrance. 0.8 m in length was constructed.2. The stilling basin consisted of one perforated baffle wall and two vertical steel screens covering the full cross section for damping the flow turbulence and waves.1 General Experiments were carried out in Hydraulic and Water resources Engineering Laboratory of the Indian Institute of Technology.165 m.71 m deep.2 Experimental Setup 3. Provision was also made to trap the washed-out sediment particles at the downstream side of floor by constructing barrier wall near tailgate with same height of the false floor as shown in fig 3. On the upstream side of sediment recess. The test section was located 3. experimental procedures and method of measurements are given in this Chapter.1. 0.6 m in width and 0. re-circulating flume with a rectangular cross-section 12 m in length. Kharagpur. The details of the experimental setup. the side walls of the flume were made of transparent glasses. an inlet tank.177 m were constructed above the original bed level of the flume in such a way that it allows water to pass uniformly over the test section without causing its turbulent characteristics over the sediment particles. the false floor of height 0. scheme of experiments. 3.

7.underground reservoir and the pumps. ADV probe etc.8 cm) were used. However.8 cm. 3.2 The pier model The experiments were performed using four different types of perspex sheet pipes with diameters.3. travelled in the transverse direction.4 Method of measurements 3. such as point gage. This was used as base material to which clay was added in different proportions for further experimental runs.159 3.5 cm. The data of the sieve analysis were plotted to draw particle size distribution curves. 2 cm and 1 cm to symbolize a small scale model of a bridge pier.1 The water level in the inlet tank was measured using the vernier point gage with an accuracy of ±0.1 Non-cohesive Sediments The Indian Standard sieves were used for the preparation of sediment samples. 3. which travelled on the rails in the longitudinal direction and the auxiliary unit. given as a function of head of water H above the sill level of the V-notch as Q  0. 12 . The water was pumped to the constant head reservoir and supplied to the inlet tank through the valve fitted at their junction. A calibrated V-notch weir was fitted at the inlet tank through which water entered into the flume via stilling basin.1 mm.9174H 2.4. The V-notch was calibrated and calibration equation was used for the measurement of discharge Q.3 Instrument carriage An instrument carriage comprised of a main unit.3 Scheme of Experiments 3.15 mm. for the experiments in the mixture of sand-clay only two models (7.2. which carried the instruments.1 Discharge The discharge into the flume was regulated by a valve fitted at the junction of constant head reservoir and inlet tank and decided using calibrated V-notch fitted at the inlet tank. 3. From the curve the mean diameter of sample was selected to be 0. All the four type of piers were used for the experiments in noncohesive sediment. 3.3.5 cm and 3. 3.

The transmitting transducers emitted acoustic beams with a frequency of 10MHz.5 cm3 respectively.4 Velocity and Flow Field The Vectrino Velocimeter was used for the measurement of instantaneous three-dimensional component of velocity.4. A real-time display of the data in graphical and tabular forms was provided by the data acquisition software. Because of the interference due to echoes from the flume bed.3. The Vectrino velocimeter operated on a pulse-to-pulse coherent Doppler shift to provide instantaneous three-dimensional velocity components at a rate of 50 Hz. The beams travelling through the water arrived at the measuring point which is 5 cm below the transducer. 3. where they were reflected by the ambient particles within the flow being received by the receiving transducers. A special carriage structure was made to facilitate the movement of Vectrino Velocimeter along different radial line with respect to pier centreline. The acoustic sensor comprised with transmitting transducer and receiving transducers. The measurement by the Vectrino probe was not possible in the zone located 5 cm below the free surface. the receiving signal might be disturbed near the bed. Sampling rate and sampling volume adopted for present experiment was 100 Hz and 2. as the signal-noise ratio (SNR) was in the range of 12 to 16. The water surface level above the bed was adjusted by using tailgate at the downstream side of the flume.1 mm was used for the measurement of bed level and water surface level above the bed. 13 . There was no requirement of seeding of the flow during experiments. The receiving transducers were mounted on short arms around the transmitting transducer at 120 0 azimuth intervals. The processing module performed the digital signal processing required to measure the Doppler shift. which may result in inaccurate velocity measurement.4.1 mm.2 Bed and Water Levels Instrument carriage carrying a vernier point gage with an accuracy of ±0. 3.3 Scour Depth The maximum scour depth near the pier for all the experimental runs were measured using a vernier point gage with an accuracy of ±0.4.

3.1 Schematic diagram of the experimental set-up 14 .5 m (Dimension not in scale) Fig.177 m 0.85 m 3.Perforated baffles Outlet Tailgate Sediment recess Sediment trap Pier model False floor Screens From inlet tank 0.5 m 0.

sediment trap and downstream gate. in order to avoid the undesirable scour.5 cm and 3. Once the water level of desirable height was reached.15 m wide was placed. Finally. armor layer of desired thickness and 0. 5.5. Initial run carried out for depth measurement and second run conducted for velocity measurement. The preparatory work for the experimental runs involved the following subtasks 1. In all the experiments.3. to ensure that the maximum scour depth was obtained. 3.8 cm pier model were performed. Both depth and velocity were measured 15 . two runs for 7. 3. which otherwise would happen by the action of sheet flow with inadequate flow depth. The bed was properly levelled using planner and final bed level was checked using a point gage.1 Non-cohesive sediments Initially. To avoid the partial filling of scour hole by the sediments while draining out the water from the flume. 7. non-cohesive sediments of mean diameter 0. the water was first drained out by opening a valve in the upstream end of the flume and adjusting the tailgate so that a minimum flow velocity occurred at the sediment recess. 4. 2 cm and 1 cm pier model was placed successively in the sediment recess and procedure from 2 to 5 was followed. On the upstream and the downstream side of the pier in the sediment recess.5 cm. The runs were taken for a maximum period of 2 hours. 6. water was drained out very slowly by opening the holes at the bottom of downstream walls of the sediment recess. pier model was placed in the middle of sediment recess. 2. the experimental runs were started by adjusting the inflow rate and maintaining the required flow depth within a flume by a downstream gate. At the time of actual runs. In the first part of the experiments non-cohesive sediment was used. Prior to the commencement of the experimental runs.15 mm were used to fill the sediment recess around the pier model of 7.5 Experimental Procedure The experiments were carried out in four different parts. the flume was first slowly filled with the water by a pipe at a low rate at the downstream side.8 cm. For further runs in non-cohesive sediments 3.

For 2 cm and 1 cm pier model only depth measurement were taken at the upstream of the pier. At each run care was taken to maintain 5 % of clay soil in non-cohesive sediments. 3.5. 3. were followed for measurement of depth and velocity at the upstream side of the pier.2 After 5 % mixing In the second and further part of the experiments two pier models (7.5 cm and 3. The non-cohesive sand was dried completely and clay soil of 5 % by weight was mixed in it thoroughly.3 After 10 % and 20 % mixing In the case of 10 % and 20 % of mixing.5. 16 . the non-cohesive sediment was dried completely and 10 % and 20 % of clay soil by weight was added thoroughly in noncohesive sediments. The care was also taken to maintain the required percentage of clay soil in respective run.at the upstream of pier.8 cm) were used. respectively. Procedure from 1 to 5 was followed by using 5 % clay and sand mixture to measure the depth and velocity at the upstream side of the pier. For both cases procedure from 1 to 5 above.

8 cm and 7. Both the depth and velocity were measured for a period of 2 hours to ensure that the maximum constant scour depth could be reached. Clay soil of percentage 5. In each set two runs for two pier models were performed. Non-cohesive sediment of mean diameter 0. Time-Velocity variation. such as 1 cm. the size of the horseshoe vortex also increased and therefore its strength decreased. Data collected in each run was used to plot Time-Depth variation. due to small dimensions of the scour hole the size of the horseshoe vortex was small. the 17 .2. Time variation of scour depth for these pier models is shown in figures 4. the high bed shear stress developed beneath the vortex which caused rapid dislodgement of the sediment particles. Consequently.2 Time variation of scour depth 4. 3. 10 and 20 was thoroughly mixed in non-cohesive sediment for further sets of experimental runs. 4. This was because of the horseshoe vortex. At the initial periods of scouring. First run carried out for depth measurement and according to such measurement and initial bed condition velocity measurements took place in the second run. Turbulent Intensity and Reynolds stresses discussed further in this chapter. there was rapid increment of profile in short period of time.15 mm was used for four different types of pier model.1 . Thus.1 General The experiments were conducted in four different sets.CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.4.4.5 cm.1 Scour for non-cohesive soil Depth measurements were taken as an initial measurement in each set of experimental runs to study the behaviour of scour at the upstream side of the pier model. These entire scour profiles showed that during the initial periods of scouring the pick-up rate was very high (for about 20 minutes) but it decreased and gradually become asymptotic to the time axis in the final periods. For first set. 2 cm. 1996).15 mm was used in initial set of experimental runs. non-cohesive sediment of mean diameter 0. The particles at the base of the cylinder are removed due to fluid-induced forces under the combined effect of bed shear stress. turbulent agitation. As scour hole increased with time. and oscillation of the horseshoe vortex (Dey. Hence. Velocity measurements were taken during the formation of scour hole.

4. depth over the bed and time for scouring process were kept constant. Hence scour in clayey materials is more complex and less understood than the scour in non-cohesive sandy material (Garde et al. Time-variation of scour depth for all these experimental run showed that initially sediment pick-up rate was very high but it decreased and gradually become asymptotic to the time axis in final periods as in case of non-cohesive sediment. increment of clay content in noncohesive sediment caused less scour depth compared to full non-cohesive sediment..5 cm and 3. These are Van der Waal’s forces.bed shear stress induced by the vortex gradually decreased which resulted into the process of sediment pick-up to proceed at decreasing rate.11 – 4. The major difference between a non-cohesive and a cohesive sediment scour is that the erodibility for a fully consolidated. electric surface and other bonding mechanisms such as hydrogen bond. and chemical cementation between particles. shown in figures 4.3 – 4.1 as well as the volume of scour hole around the pier model decreased with increased in clay content. Thus.10.18.8 – 4. As shown in figures 4. The plot of depth variation with time for all these runs is shown in figures 4.2.8 cm pier model. Therefore.10. Clay content of 5 %. Even run (not given in the table) were conducted for velocity measurement. cohesive clay material is much less than that of sand (Hsu.2 Scour for mixture of clay and non-cohesive sediment The main cause of scour occur in clayey soil is due to different types of forces act between soil particles which resist the dislodgement of particles. 18 . 10 % and 20 % were mixed thoroughly in non-cohesive sediment and respective run carried out for depth measurement. FWRRC Annual Technical Report 2006). the profile changed its trend (after about 20 minutes) and gradually increased till the maximum constant scour depth could be reached. 1998). For all the experimental runs discharge. Therefore for next three sets of experimental runs different percentage of clay in non-cohesive sediment was used. The same result was observed for both 7. although the initial rate of scouring was high for all runs the maximum depth attained for non-cohesive sediment was maximum as compared to the other runs which carried out by mixing different clay content given in the table 4.

5 3.5 3.8 Maximum scour depth attained after 2 hours (cm) 15.5 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Depth (cm) Time (min) Fig.5 2 1. 4.5 1 0.8 8.5 3 2.8 7.5 8.1 Experimental data of obtaining maximum scour depth for different percentage of clay for different pier model Clay content in nonRun cohesive sediment (%) 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 0 0 5 5 10 10 20 20 Pier model diameter (cm) 7.9 14.1 Time-depth variation for 1 cm pier model 19 .8 7.5 7.Table 4.8 7.5 5 4.5 3.7 14.65 7.5 3.5 4 3.8 13.

5 1 0.5 3 2.2 Time-depth variation for 2 cm pier model 8 7 6 Depth (cm) 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.5 4 3.5 2 1. 4.8 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 20 .5 4. 4.3 Time-depth variation for 3.5 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Depth (cm) Time (min) Fig.

5 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 8 7 6 Depth (cm) 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.5 Time-depth variation for 3. 4.4 Time-depth variation for 7.8 cm pier model (after mixing 5 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 21 . 4.16 14 12 Depth (cm) 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.

8 cm pier model (after mixing 10 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 8 7 6 Depth (cm) 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig. 4.6 Time-depth variation for 3.8 cm pier model (after mixing 20 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 22 . 4.7 Time-depth variation for 3.8 7 6 Depth (cm) 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.

5 cm pier model (after mixing 10 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 23 .16 14 12 Depth (cm) 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.5 cm pier model (after mixing 5 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 16 14 12 Depth (cm) 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.8 Time-depth variation for 7. 4.9 Time-depth variation for 7. 4.

8 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 24 .10 Time-depth variation for 7. 4.11 Photograph of the scour hole for 3.5 cm pier model (after mixing 20 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) Fig.16 14 12 Depth (cm) 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig. 4.

8 cm pier model (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) Fig.13 Photograph of the scour hole for 3. 4. 4.12 Photograph of the scour hole for 3.8 cm pier model (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 25 .Fig.

4. 4.Fig.5 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 26 .14 Photograph of the scour hole for 3.15 Photograph of the scour hole for 7.8 cm pier model (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) Fig.

Fig.5 cm pier model (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 27 . 4.16 Photograph of the scour hole for 7.17 Photograph of the scour hole for 7. 4.5 cm pier model (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) Fig.

In the present experimental runs. 28 .5 cm pier model 4. 1995.. It was observed earlier that. Dey.3 7.22. Higher negative velocity was observed for such type of pier model. forming a vortex flow field around the pier which moved downstream (Dey et al. the obstruction of the flowing stream by a bridge pier caused a threedimensional separation of flow.3. Due to flow separation negative streamwise velocity was observed during the formation of scour hole upstream of the pier as well as almost constant negative velocity was observed during the formation of scour hole. 4. as it travels by the side of the pier. Thus.1 Time-Velocity variation Velocity measurements for all experimental runs were taken as secondary measurement during the formation of scour hole for both the pier models.Fig. 1995). streamwise velocity changed its direction near the bed.19 – 4. Almost similar pattern was observed for all the profile depicted in the figures 4.5 cm pier model (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.18 Photograph of the scour hole for 7. the vertical distributions of time averaged streamwise velocity component for this pier model is plotted.

5 % and 0 % of clay content in non-cohesive sediment in succession. It was observed that.2 Velocity (m/s) 0. 4.25 0. the flow velocity in the scour hole of sediment with higher clay content was lower than the lower or without clay content in non-cohesive sediment.15 -0.2 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.05 -0.5 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 29 . Consequently. clay content was increased in non-cohesive sediment and velocity measurements were taken at the upstream side of the pier model. the volume of scour hole upstream of the pier decreased with the increment of clay content.15 0. Hence.3 0. the time averaged streamwise velocity profile exhibited higher constant negative velocity for a run performed after mixing 20 % of clay content in non-cohesive sediment than the run conducted after mixing 10 %.19 Time-velocity variation for 7. Therefore.1 0.1 -0.05 0 -0. 0.In successive experimental runs. size of horseshoe vortex became small.

2 Velocity (m/s) 0.1 -0.15 0.5 cm pier model (after mixing 10 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 30 .05 0 -0.15 -0.25 0. 4.5 cm pier model (after mixing 5 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 0.3 0.05 -0.2 Velocity (m/s) 0.2 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig. 4.05 0 -0.3 0.25 0.1 0.05 -0.1 -0.20 Time-velocity variation for 7.15 0.1 0.21 Time-velocity variation for 7.0.2 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.15 -0.

it is apparent that w+ do not show spike near the scour bed. A most significant feature of the distribution is the pronounced bulges immediately above y+ = -0. The vertical distribution of normalized vertical turbulent intensity component w+ in the scour hole at the upstream side of the pier model is shown in the same figures 4.2 Velocity (m/s) 0.25 0. 31 .15 having distribution more or less linear.1 -0.05 0 -0. due to flow separation inside the scour hole.15.5 / U ].05 -0. For all runs performed in different experimental conditions. It was observed that the streamwise turbulent intensity varies little in the zone for y+ < -0.23 – 4.26. On the other hand.16 line. where the reversal of flow occurred. in the zone for y+ > -0.2 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.26.5 cm pier model (after mixing 20 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4. normalized streamwise turbulent intensity component increases towards the scoured bed.3.1 0. However. The experimental runs conducted using different percentage of clay in non-cohesive sediment showed similar pattern of turbulent intensity component.2 Turbulent Intensity The vertical distribution of normalized streamwise turbulent intensity component u+ [= u 2   0.0. as there is no shuddering effect of horseshoe vortex in the vertical direction.22 Time-velocity variation for 7.15 0. but it reduced in the vicinity of the bed. same distribution pattern of w+ was observed. 4.15 -0. These are due to the shuddering effect of the horseshoe vortex.3 0. where u  is the fluctuation of U] at the upstream of pier model is illustrated in the figures 4. The distribution pattern of w+ is almost similar to that of u+.23 – 4. Near the scoured bed at the upstream side of pier model the spike was observed.

4 u+ w+ Fig.5 2 2.25 -0.5 1 u+.5 2 2.1 -0.05 -0.0 0 -0. w+ 1.35 -0.5 y + -0.25 -0.05 -0.15 0. w+ 1.35 -0.4 u+ w+ Fig.15 0.24 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 32 .5 1 u+.1 -0. 4.2 -0. 4.2 -0.5 y + -0.3 -0.23 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 0 0 -0.3 -0.

15 0.26 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4. as a result of flow separation. 4.4 u+ w+ Fig.25 -0.15 0.35 -0.30 represents the vertical distributions of normalized Reynolds stresses uw+ (= u w / u*2 ) at upstream section of pier model for different experimental condition.2 -0. w+ 1.5 y+ -0. in the vicinity of the 33 .25 -0.2 -0. w+ 1.1 -0.1 -0.05 -0.0 0 -0.27 – 4.05 -0.5 1 u+.5 1 u+. inside the scour hole. 4.5 y+ -0. Reynolds stresses shows the distinguishable swell immediately below y+ = 0 line.3 -0.35 -0.4 u+ w+ Fig.25 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 0 0 -0.3 Reynolds stresses Figures 4. However.3 -0.3.5 2 2.5 2 2.

scoured bed it reduces drastically.4 Fig.05 -0.2 -0.1 -0. Similar pattern of observation was also made for all conditions of experimental runs.2 -0.1 -0. Also normalized Reynolds stresses changed its sign due to reversal of flow near the scoured bed.15 0 20 40 + 60 80 100 y+ -0.05 -0.35 -0.3 -0. 4. 4.35 -0.25 -0.3 -0.27 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) uw -20 0 -0.4 Fig.28 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 34 .15 0 20 40 + 60 80 100 y+ -0.25 -0. uw -20 0 -0.

25 -0.29 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) uw+ -20 0 -0.4 Fig.4.35 -0.34.30 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4. The phenomenon of three-dimensional separation of flow caused by the bridge 35 .05 -0.1 -0.05 -0.15 0 20 40 60 80 100 y+ -0.4 3.25 -0. 4.2 -0.35 -0.8 cm pier model 4.3 -0. 4.1 -0. Almost similar distribution pattern was observed for all the profile.4 Fig.2 -0.3 -0.15 0 20 40 60 80 100 y+ -0.uw+ -20 0 -0.1 Time-Velocity variation The vertical distribution of time averaged streamwise velocity component is shown in figures 4.31 – 4.

31 Time-velocity variation for 3. 0. Due to flow separation negative streamwise velocity observed during the formation of scour hole upstream of the pier is shown in figures.25 Velocity (m/s) 0.3 0.pier which obstructs the flowing stream as it travels by the side of the pier formed a vortex flow field around the pier which moved downstream.2 0. In this case also the volume of scour hole around the pier decreased with the increment of clay content.8 cm pier model (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 36 . Thus.15 0. size of horseshoe vortex became small.1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig. 4. This is more apparent in the profile plotted for such pier model than the profile plotted for 7. 5 % and 0 % of clay content in non-cohesive sediment in succession. Almost constant negative velocity was observed during the formation of scour hole. For further experimental runs clay content was increased in non-cohesive sediment and velocity measurements were taken at the upstream side of the pier model. Thus. because of the flow.05 -0. which was more contained in the scour hole the time averaged streamwise velocity profile illustrated in figure exhibited higher constant negative velocity for a run performed after mixing 20 % of clay content in non-cohesive sediment than the run conducted after mixing 10 %. streamwise velocity changed its direction near the bed.1 0. Consequently.5 cm pier model.05 0 -0. Therefore. the flow velocity in the scour hole of sediment with higher clay content was lower than the lower or without clay content in non-cohesive sediment.

25 Velocity (m/s) 0.15 0.05 -0.33 Time-velocity variation for 3.05 0 -0.1 0.32 Time-velocity variation for 3.3 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.3 0. 4.05 -0.05 0 -0.8 cm pier model (after mixing 10 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 37 .35 0.25 Velocity (m/s) 0. 4.8 cm pier model (after mixing 5 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 0.0.2 0.

normalized streamwise turbulent intensity component u+ increases towards the scoured bed and reduced in the vicinity of the bed.38.15 0.8 cm pier model.05 -0. there was no shuddering effect of horseshoe vortex in the vertical direction no spike was observed near the scour bed for w+ but this pier model also depicted almost similar distribution pattern of w+ to that u+. where u  is the fluctuation of U] at the upstream side of the pier model depicted in figures 4.35 – 4.1 0. Because of the shuddering effect of the horseshoe vortices less distinct spike as compared to 7. The vertical distribution of normalized vertical turbulent intensity component w+ in the scour hole at the upstream side of the pier model is also illustrated in the same figures 4.0. Same vertical distribution of normalized streamwise turbulent intensity component u+ and pronounced bulges were observed for runs conducted using different percentage of clay in non-cohesive sediment. 4. Due to the reversal of flow occur for the zone y+ > -0.3 0.2 Turbulent Intensity The vertical distribution of normalized streamwise turbulent intensity component u+ [= u 2   0. 38 .34 Time-velocity variation for 3.04 line.38.2 0. As in this case.1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) Fig.5 cm pier model was observed near the scour bed at the upstream side of the 3.05 0 -0.25 Velocity (m/s) 0.8 cm pier model (after mixing 20 % of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4. due to separation of flow inside the scour hole.4. Every run conducted in different experimental condition containing different percentage of clay content in noncohesive sediment for such pier model shows similar result.04. A distinguishable feature of pronounced bulges was observed above y+ > -0.5 / U ].35 – 4.

0 0 0. w+ 1 1.15 u+ w+ -0.5 -0.5 u+.15 -0. w+ 1 1. 4.5 -0. 4.2 Fig.05 y+ -0.35 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 0 0 0.5 u+.2 Fig.1 -0.1 u+ w+ -0.36 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 39 .05 y + -0.

15 -0. inside the scour hole.1 -0.05 y+ -0.2 Fig. 4.4. In this case also. 4. w+ 1 1.3 Reynolds stresses Figures 4. w+ 1 1.37 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 0 0 0.5 -0.05 y + -0.38 Vertical distribution of u+ and w+ at vertical section (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 4.1 u+ w+ -0. as a result of flow separation.5 u+.5 -0. distinguishable bulges was observed immediately below y+ = 0 line.42 exhibits the vertical distributions of normalized Reynolds stresses at the upstream section of the pier.15 u+ w+ -0.2 Fig.0 0 0. In the vicinity of the scoured bed Reynolds stresses changed its sign due to 40 .5 u+.39 – 4.

4.1 -0.05 y+ -0. 4.05 y+ -0.2 Fig.2 Fig. Similar distribution pattern was observed for all experimental runs performed in different experimental conditions.15 -0.15 -0.reversal nature of flow and became small near the scoured bed.40 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 5 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 41 .1 -0.39 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (before mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) uw -20 0 0 20 40 + 60 80 100 -0. uw -20 0 0 20 40 + 60 80 100 -0.

4.05 y+ -0.uw -20 0 0 20 40 + 60 80 100 -0.1 -0.42 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 20 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) 42 . 4.15 -0.1 -0.41 Vertical distribution of uw+ at vertical section (after 10 % mixing of clay in non-cohesive sediment) uw -20 0 0 20 40 + 60 80 100 -0.15 -0.05 y+ -0.2 Fig.2 Fig.

8 cm pier model. predicting the maximum constant scour is the most fundamental step to study a scour problem. The state of equilibrium provides the most important step toward simplifying the erosion problem from an engineering point of view because the maximum equilibrium scour can be estimated as the most conservative design. thoroughly mixed clay content of 5 %.8 cm. 2. In such bed condition.5 cm. 10 % and 20 % in non. 2 cm and 1 cm were considered for depth measurement in initial set of experimental runs containing non-cohesive sand of mean diameter 0. Depth and velocity measurements were taken at the upstream side of the pier models by using Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter (ADV) in the laboratory flume.8 cm pier model. Four pier size of diameter 7. The time required to attain maximum constant depth in noncohesive sand is less compared to the bed containing even small clay content in non-cohesive sand. For further sets of experimental runs. The volume of scour hole at the upstream of the pier model was decreased with increase in clay content.CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The experiments were conducted in four different sets using different percentage of clay content in non-cohesive sand such as 20 %.5 cm and 3. the flow velocity in the scour hole of non-cohesive sand with higher clay content was lower than the lower or without clay content. velocity measurements were performed for 7. low maximum constant depth was obtained due to increment of clay content in non-cohesive sand compared to full noncohesive sand bed condition. The time scale required to attain the maximum constant depth is important parameter. Data captured in each run was used for the development of relationship between time and depth and time and velocity as well as turbulent intensity in streamwise and vertical direction and Reynolds stresses were plotted. 3.5 cm and 3.cohesive sand were used for depth and velocity measurements in the vicinity of 7. 5 % and without clay (0 %). 43 . 3. Therefore. Thus. Measurements were taken in the vicinity of the pier model for a maximum period of two hours.15 mm. which leads to the following conclusions: 1. 10 %. As the flow is more contained in the scour hole.

The vertical distribution of normalized streamwise turbulent intensity component and Reynolds stresses for both type of pier model (7.8 cm) showed distinguishable features of the pronounced bulges and were reduced in the vicinity of the scoured bed. The distribution pattern of vertical velocity component w+ is almost similar to that of streamwise velocity component u+ except the spike near the scour bed.4. 6. the accurate estimation of scour depth would be possible in different bed conditions using flow field model. Thus. 5. The data captured for different conditions of experimental runs would be useful for the development of mathematical models of flow field in a scour hole at bridge pier.5 cm and 3. 44 . Using similitude modelling (geometric/ dynamic/ kinematic) obtained results can be extended for real world situation. as there was no shuddering effect of primary vortex in the vertical direction. 7.

Davis. (1984). (1963). Barbhuiya A.. Hydraul. Eng. “SRICOS: Prediction of scour rate in cohesive soils at bridge piers.” Serie A.. 221-237. “Discussion of „Sediment Transportation Mechanics: Erosion of Sediment. S.” Rep.. Chatou. Briaud.. R. Chen.. H. Div. G. N. India.. 15. C.. “Etude des affouillements autour des piles de ponts.. 125 (4). No. 89(6).. Barbhuiya A. University of Auckland. Chiew. “Local scour around cylindrical piers. France (in French). and Shen. “Local scour at bridge piers in nonuniform sediment. Washington D.. “Turbulent flow measurement by the ADV in the vicinityof a rectangular cross-section cylinder placed at a channel sidewall. Second Bridge Engineering Conference (2). “Measurement of turbulent flow field at a vertical semicircular cylinder attached to the sidewall of a rectangular channel. “Case Histories of Scour Problems at Bridges. K. S. G.” PhD thesis. E. A. Hydraul. H. Y. 87-96. 717-729. Ansari. C.CHAPTER VI REFERENCES Anderson. and Ranga Raju. R. Perugu. W. Flow meas. Env.. and Dey. K. Ting. Baker. (1999).‟ by the Task Force on Preparation of Sedimentation Manual. K.” J. 40(6). (1986). K.. (1956). J.” J.. C. Indian Institute of Technology. P. and Wei. Auckland. (1984). 45 . Hydraul. C.. 237–246. New Zealand. Kharagpur. Auckland.” J. 15(3). 237-248. Res. Breusers. S.” J. New Zealand. and Dey. H. ASCE. C. 15. (2004b). M. A. Nicollet. “Clear water scour at abutments..” J. S. 402. Transportation Research Board. Flow meas. 211-252. Barbhuiya A.” PhD thesis. Res. Kothyari. S.. Chabert. Rao. (2002). (1977). “Influence of cohesion on scour around bridge piers. G. Instru. J. G.. K. (2003).” J. “Local scour at bridge piers. L. U. Instru.” Transportation Research Record 950. (2004a). and Engeldinger. School of Engineering. Laboratoire National d‟Hydraulique. Geotech. G. University of Auckland..

. 32. Proc. and Barbhuiya A. 64 A (4). S. J. "Sediment pick-up for evolving scour near circular cylinders. Auckland. New Zealand. Dey. Eng. New Zealand. Proc. Kandasamy. No. S. (2004).” Rep.. Indian Acad. M. “Three-dimensional vortex flow field around a circular cylinder in a quasi-equilibrium scour hole. 109 (1). Coast. (1996).. 544.. S. D. (2006). Eng. 20(7). Florida Water Resources Research Center. Garde.” Can. Wat. 771-785.. Dongol. Inst. J.. 140-155. W. (1994). ASCE. Eng. L. Dey. M. 77-97. C.. Inst. W.. S. ASCE. 136. and Barbhuiya A. The Pennsylvania State University. (1998). “Time variation of shear stress measurements at the base of rectangular piers.” J. 157. K." Appl. 916-921. “Scour around bridge piers. Management. Wat. and Hall. 458. J.Dey. S. Dey. S. 67-75. Bose. University of Auckland. and Kothyari. Civ. K. (1999). “Abutment scour. N. No..” PINSA... Jones. “Indirect Methods of Measuring Shear Stress in the Bottom of a Scour Hole. “Time variation of scour in the vicinity of circular piers. J. and Sastry. “Clear water scour at circular piers: a model. Hydraul. University of Auckland.. University of Florida. 534-539. “Cohesive material erosion by unidirectional current. J. Eng. Auckland. Kamphuis. R. (1995). Eng.” Rep. “Measurement of erosion around hyrdaulic structures.” Conference Proceedings. S. K. 1993 National Conference.. Hsu. S.” PhD thesis.. S. (2005).” Proc. S.” Proc. 50–61. “Preliminary Studies on Pressure Flow Scour.” Annual Technical Report. Civ. K. Civ.. Maritime Eng..” Sadhana. 869-876. Sci. U. (1993). T. Modelling. First International Conference on Scour of Foundations. Pennsylvania. (1989). R. J. (1995). “Turbulent flow field in a scour hole at a semicircular abutment. (2004). Civ. G. Dey. School of Engineering. (2002). Math.. Jones. “Clear water scour at abutments. Eng. School of Engineering. J.. 569-580.” J. 121(12). 46 . Dey. K.” J. (1983). 20. Eng. 213–232. “Local scour at bridge abutments. Horst. Hydraul. Hydraul.

Hydraul. Auckland. 114(10). Hydraul. Melville. Rambabu. Eng. “Observations on the nature of scour.. University of Auckland. NY... (1998). G. Hydraul. Jan. 30. M. (1992). (1). B. Eng.” J. 117. C. State Univ. T.. ASCE. V. W. (1956).” J.. (1998). ASCE. Eng.. “Temporal variation of scour around circular bridge piers. Eng.” J. (1995). E.. J. “Scour around bridge piers and abutments. A. E.. Hydraul. “An experimental study of local scour around circular bridge piers in cohesive soils. of Iowa. N. U. 47 . Ames. Wat.” Rep. 292-297. M. W. Garde... ASCE. 179-197. 701-715. School of Engineering. Res. ASCE. “Evaluating Scour at Bridges.” J. W. U. (1). (1975). K. John Wiley and sons. Richardson. J. 30(5). 105-138.. J. Unpublished paper. “Design method for local scour at bridge piers. and Glendinning. J.Kho. 367-374.” J. “Local scour at bridge abutments. K. Paper 4204. H.” J. “Current-induced scour around a vertical pile in cohesive soil.. (1992a).. Melville. G. 615-631. Kothyari. R. No. 252-257..” J. IAHR. 118(4). Partheniades. K. Res. Proc. Iowa Highways Research Board. “Erosion and Deposition of Cohesive Soils. Res. (1965).” Kothyari. and Davis. Narasimha Rao S. A.. 1210-1226. “Pier scour in montmorillonite clay soils. Melville. 1091-1106. Y. 4.. New York.. 118(8). Wat.. (1952). and Jones. IAHR. Laursen. (2003). Hydraul. New Zealand.. Iowa. and Jones. S.” HEC-18. Report FHWA-IP-90-017. “Effect of cohesion on abutment scour. Div. A.. Garde. Eng. Ocean Eng. No. “Live-bed scour around cylindrical bridge piers. E. U. L. (1988).” J. and Toch. C.. Washington D. E.” Bull.. (1965). R.. Iowa. Valentine.. 893-920. and Ranga Raju. and Ranga Raju. C.” J. 5 Hydraul.. G. C. Iowa city.. S. Res. A. and Sundar V. S.” Proc. S.. (1992b). M. R. and Sutherland. Molinas. (2001). “Scour around spur-dikes and bridge abutments. Harrison. G.. Laursen. Hydraul. Hosny. Kothyari. Conf.. Rouse. “Local scour at bridge sites. Reiad. M. B. E. 39(4). K. B. and Ranga Raju. Molinas. Engineering hydraulics: sediment transportation.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.