HYPERCONCENTRATED F L O W AND SEDIMENT

TRANSPORT AT STEEP SLOPES

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

By Dieter Rickenmann1

ABSTRACT: In order to simulate a fine-material slurry of a debris flow, a clay

suspension of various concentrations was recirculated in a steep flume. The effect
of an increasing fluid density and viscosity on the flow behavior and the bed-load
transport capacity of the flow was examined. Viscous effects were found to become
important below a limiting particle Reynolds number of about 10. Above this
limiting value, density effects cause an increase in the bed-load transport rates as
compared to similar conditions with clear water as transporting fluid. The exper-
imental data in this range can be described with conventional (Newtonian) formulas
and is analyzed together with other bed-load transport data. Two different calcu-
lation schemes are proposed for the steep slope range (S >~ 10%) where the bed-
load concentration is significant with respect to the total flow depth. Below the
critical particle Reynolds number of 10, the bed-load transport rates decreased
strongly.

INTRODUCTION

In a torrent catchment, different sediment transport processes may occur.

During a flood event, increasing discharges can destroy the armor layer of
the torrent bed and fluvial transport of bed material will start. In addition
there may be sediment supply to the channel from slope failures (slides and
undercutting of banks) and thus, sediment availability could be sufficient
for the flow to move sediment in rates close to its transport capacity. In
steep reaches of the channel, saturated parts of loose material may be set
in motion rather suddenly and a debris flow can form. Then the flow of this
sediment-water mixture is highly unsteady; debris flows usually consist of
one or several pulses or waves. At the front of the flow, the particles are
more or less uniformly distributed over the flow depth, while the mixture
behind the front becomes more and more diluted, and at the end, the coarser
particles are concentrated near the bed as in fluvial sediment transport (e.g.,
Costa 1984; Davies 1988).
The water and the suspended fine sediment may be considered as a new
fluid matrix that can have a different rheological behavior than that of a
Newtonian fluid like clear water (Johnson 1970; Costa 1984). In the tran-
sition region between normal streamflow (with fluvial sediment transport)
and a debris flow, increasing amounts of fine material form a hypercon-
centrated slurry. These conditions may also be present in the rear, more
diluted part of a debris-flow wave.
Here a hyperconcentrated flow is defined as a still more or less uniform
flow with a high suspended fine-material concentration and a viscosity larger
than that of water; coarse sediment may be transported as bed load. The
term debris flow is restricted here for an unsteady, pulsing flow of a mixture
of water and both coarse and fine sediment. To distinguish between these

•Hydr. Engr., Amt fur Gewasserschutz und Wasserbau des Kantons Zurich,
Walchetor, 8090 Zurich, Switzerland.
Note. Discussion open until April 1, 1992. To extend the closing date one month,
a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript
for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on December 13,
1990. This paper is part of the Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 117, No. 11,
November, 1991. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9429/91/0011-1419/$1.00 + $.15 per page.
Paper No. 26320.

1419

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 two flow types, a sediment concentration by volume between about 30%
and 60% was proposed by various researchers; a comparison of different
classification schemes including such limiting values is given by Bradley
(1986).
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

In the past, studies on sediment transport in rivers and flumes were mainly
concerned with bed slopes up to a few percent. It is only recently that
interest on sediment-transport processes in steep channels has grown. Such
studies, including flume slopes in excess of 10%, were performed by Mi-
zuyama (1977), Mizuyama and Shimohigashi (1985), and Smart and Jaeggi
(1983). The transporting fluid used in these flume tests was clear water. In
torrents where debris flows also occur, the influence of large amounts of
suspended fine particles may become important. Accordingly, the objective
of the present study was to examine the effect of an increasing density and
viscosity of the fluid on the flow and the sediment-transport behavior. A
series of steep flume tests was performed using a clay suspension to represent
the fine slurry of a debris flow, and the flow resistance and the sediment-
transport capacity were determined for various clay concentrations. The
experiments of Smart and Jaeggi (1983) [see also Smart (1984)], which were
carried out at the same hydraulic laboratory, served as a reference condition
for the clear-water case.

EFFECT OF HIGH FINE MATERIAL CONCENTRATIONS

In the past, two principally different debris-flow theories have been de-
veloped. One of them is the viscoplastic model that was applied to flows
containing a lot of fine material in a viscous slurry. It is based on the
approach by Bingham (1922) to describe a particular type of non-Newtonian
flow. The Bingham model also applies to clay suspension flows as used in
this study and it can be written as:

T = T + T1 (1)
* *(!)
where T = the shear stress in the fluid; iB = the (Bingham) yield stress;
r\B = the Bingham viscosity; and dvldy = the velocity gradient perpendic-
ular to the flow direction.
Considering mainly the interaction between the coarser particles in a
debris flow, Takahashi (1978) proposed an alternative model based on Bag-
nold's (1954) concept of dispersive pressure. Combining these two basic
approaches, more complex models were formulated, for example, Chen
(1988a, 1988b) and Julien and Lan (1991). A detailed discussion on debris-
flow models can be found elsewhere (Bradley 1986; Rickenmann 1990).
Many hyperconcentrated slurries of fine particles suspended in water
behave like a Bingham fluid (Costa 1984; Chen 1986). The flow resistance
of these fluids can be analyzed either by a set of equations in terms of the
Bingham parameters (Johnson 1970; Naik 1983) or by defining an effective
viscosity (xe2 and using conventional Newtonian formulas (Quian et al. 1980;
Wan 1982):

(xe2 = T)B + -^ (2)

where h = the flow depth; and V = the mean fluid velocity.

Several studies were concerned with the effect of hyperconcentrated flows
1420

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 on sediment transport, but they are mainly confined to flatter slopes. There
seems to be general agreement that in turbulent hyperconcentrated flows,
the suspended load transport rates increase with increasing fine-material
concentration; this was concluded both from field observations (Beverage
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

and Culbertson 1964; Bradley 1986) and from laboratory experiments (up-
per-regime tests of Simons et al. 1963; Kikkawa and Fukuoka 1969; Wan
1982; Bradley 1986; Wan and Song 1987). With regard to the effect on bed-
load transport rates qB, an increase in qB due to an increase of the fluid
density is predicted from experimental results by Shields (1936), by Meyer-
Peter and Mueller (1948), and by Luque and van Beek (1976), and from
theoretical considerations by Yalin (1977) and by Woo (1985). However,
Wan and Song's (1987) theory predicts a decrease in the dimensionless bed-
load transport rates Q>B for an increasing fluid density at higher shear stresses.
Low (1989) found that many bed-load transport formulas adequately ac-
count for a change in the solid/fluid density ratio, but that the Smart and
Jaeggi (1983) equation should be modified. Information on the effect of an
increasing viscosity alone on qB in open-channel flow is less conclusive (Hong
et al. 1984; Woo 1985; Lau 1987). Wan (1982) concluded from his experi-
ments that <$>B was smaller in the bentonite suspension flows than in the
corresponding clear-water flows, particularly in the low flow-intensity
region.
There is not yet much information available on sediment transport in
laminar flow. In their experiments, both Wan and Song (1987) and Bradley
(1986) observed an increase in the total bed-material discharge; in Bradley's
study the transport rates in laminar flow were about an order of magnitude
higher than in the corresponding turbulent flow (with the same fluid dis-
charge). Pipe flow tests reported by Thomas (1979b) may suggest that the
bed-load transport rates decrease in laminar flow, assuming that bed load
is the predominant mode of transport at a velocity slightly above depositional
conditions. Negative lift forces for particles near the bed (Coleman 1967;
Davies and Samad 1978) and theoretical considerations by Bagnold (1956)
also seem to indicate that bed-load transport should be smaller in laminar
flow than in turbulent flow.

EXPERIMENTS

In the experiments, a clay suspension of various concentrations was re-

circulated in a 20.1-cm-wide and 5-m-long flume. Commercially available
Opalinus clay was added to the water system so as to obtain different clay
concentration levels. After settling of the larger components, the concen-
tration of the flowing clay suspension could be kept approximately constant.
At a given concentration level, a series of tests was performed with different
slopes and flow rates. The clay suspension showed increasingly non-New-
tonian characteristics with increasing concentration. The maximum density
of the suspension was about 1.36 g/cm3 (corresponding to a volume con-
centration of 22%), and the maximum effective viscosity |xe2 (defined as
analogous to the Newtonian viscosity) reached 1,800 cps.
At each clay concentration level, two different kinds of experiments were
performed. In the first series of tests (case A), a fixed rough bed made of
gravel was installed to measure the flow resistance of the clay suspension
flows without any bed-load transport. In the second series (case B) a mov-
able bed of gravel was used, and the same particles were also fed at the
flume entrance in order to determine the equilibrium bed-load transport
1421

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 rate for a preset slope and flow rate. A rather uniform gravel mixture with
a mean diameter d,„ = 1 cm was used as bed material; for this material,
d9i) = f .2 cm where dgn is the grain size at which 90% of the material by
weight are finer. In the case B tests the bed slope S was varied between
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

7% and 20%, and the fluid flow rate Q between 10 and 30 1/s. Experiments
were performed at five different clay concentration levels; the corresponding
fluid properties are summarized in Table 1. The measured flow parameters
are given in Table 2 for the experiments without sediment transport (case
A). The fixed rough bed in these experiments had the same grain-size
characteristics as the bed material used in the sediment. The data of clay
suspension flows with bed-load transport (case B) is shown in Table 3. The
experimental results labeled H z O were taken from Smart and Jaeggi (1983).
(See section on bed-load transport for distinction between case Bl and case
B2 experiments.
The Bingham parameters iH and r\B were measured with a rotational
viscometer, and the effective viscosity |x(>2 was determined according to (2).
The salt tracer technique was used to measure the mean fluid velocity; at
the highest concentrations this method was not reliable because of insuffi-
cient mixing of the salt solution in the clay suspension (see also remarks in
Tables 2 and 3). The flow depth was inferred from a flow surface level
determined by ultrasonic distance measuring devices and information about
the bed level. In the case B tests, the boundary between nonmoving grains
of the bed and the transport layer was detected by electric conductivity
readings at different levels across the flume width, since no visual obser-
vation was possible in the muddy suspension. All measurement methods
are described in more detail in Rickenmann (1990).
In the analysis of both the case A and the case B experiments, a correction
for sidewall friction effects was applied. A procedure used by Smart and
Jaeggi (1983) was adapted; the method is based on the approach by Einstein
(1934) who postulated equal velocities in flow sections with different rough-
ness. Thus the reduced flow depth, hr, and the reduced flow rate per unit
width, qn were determined from the measured flow depth, H, and the

TABLE 1. Clay Concentration Levels, Ci, and Fluid Properties

a P (g/cm3) Cr (%) T« (N/m2) f\B (cps) fx,2 (cps)
(D (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
(a) Case A Experiments (No Bed-Load Transport)
H,0 0.998 0.0 0.0 1.02 1
CI 1.078 4.7 0.44 1.93 5-10
C2 1.165 10.0 2.82 3.60 25-55
C3 1.238 14.4 7.29 5.92 60-140
C4 1.324 19.6 23.6 20.0 180-400
C5 1.365 22.1 40.8 34.3 250-1800
(b) Case B Experiments (with Bed-Load Transport)
H,0 0.998 0.0 0.0 1.02 1
CI 1.072-1.096 4.4-5.8 0.43-0.67 1.87-2.17 10-15
C2 1.141-1.160 8.6-9.7 2.20-2.77 3.00-3.33 35-65
C3 1.201-1.246 12.2-14.9 4.31-8.55 4.35-6.74 100-200
C4 1.257-1.293 15.6-17.8 12.8-20.1 11.2-16.2 200-450
C5 1.356-1.363 21.6-22.0 33.6-40.8 28.8-34.3 800-1000

1422

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 measured flow rate per unit width, g, as follows (Rickenmann 1990): hr =
H - 2 • [V/(kh\/S)Y5 • (HIB) and qr = q - V • (H - ft,.), where /c,„ is
the Striekler value characterizing the flume wall (Ar,v = 110 m1/3/s was used
for the perspex side walls) and B denotes the flume width.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FLOW RESISTANCE

Flow resistance measurements were performed for both cases A and B

experiments. The case A test series allowed an analysis of the clay suspen-
sion flows alone, without any interference of a two-phase flow as in experi-
ments B.
The flow resistance data was plotted on a Moody-type diagram in terms
of the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor/ = 8T„/(pV2) and the Reynolds num-
ber R2 = 4V77,.p/m2, defined with the effective viscosity (jie2. Here T0 =
pgh,S = the bed shear stress; p = the fluid density; g = the gravitational
acceleration; and S = the bed slope. Some of the clay suspension flows
without bed-load transport (case A) were in the laminar region, and the
corresponding data points lie close to the relation for laminar Newtonian
flow, / = 96/R2 [Fig. 1(a)]. This confirmed the findings of other studies
(Quian et al. 1980; Wan 1982) that by using the effective viscosity \x.e2, the
flow resistance may be described by conventional Newtonian formulas.
The data was also analyzed by using a Colebrook-type flow resistance
equation:

$!•*»{$+* <3>
where ks = the equivalent sand roughness; (3 = a coefficient depending to
some extent on the relative flow depth; and A is constant in the hydraulically
fully turbulent region where no viscous effects are present (Yalin 1977). In
Fig. 2, the data is plotted in terms of A' = [1/V/ — 2 • \og(hrld9Q)] and
RJ, and R2 = v*dp/\ie2 is the particle Reynolds number, with v* = (gh,.S)0-5
and d = dgo. It is seen that viscous effects only become important for
R2 :£ 10. Above this critical value, A' is approximately constant with an
average of 2.4; from a comparison with (3) it can be concluded that a value
of ks = 0.76 • d90 would best describe the clay suspension experiments in
the turbulent region.
In the experiments with bed-load transport (case B), no flows in the
laminar region were observed. The analysis of the flow resistance data shows
only a very slight increase of the friction factor / for some of the C2 and
C3 tests [Fig. 1(b)]. This minor change is associated with an increase in bed-
load concentration and thus, flow depth, and is not a direct effect of altered
fluid properties.
In further analysis, a search was made for a prediction equation for the
fluid velocity that would apply to both the bed-load transport experiments
in the fully turbulent clay suspension flows (for which R* > 10, case Bl,
see also section on bed-load transport) and the bed-load transport tests of
Smart and Jaeggi (1983).
Jaeggi (1983) proposed a modified flow resistance equation for a sediment
transporting flow over a movable bed at smaller relative depths hldgo, be-
cause many conventional formulas tend to overpredict the velocities in the
range 5 < h/d9n < 20. His equation is given as:
1423

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 TABLE 2. Case A Experiments, No Bed-Load Transport

Q V H Tfl •<\B P
a S (l/s) (m) (cm) (N/m2) (ops) (g/cm3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

H20 0.05 10.0 1.20 4.01 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.05 20.0 1.62 6.02 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.05 40.0 2.13 9.38 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.10 10.0 1.46 3.19 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.10 20.0 1.95 5.04 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.10 30.0 2.27 6.44 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.15 10.0 1.63 2.83 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.15 15.0 1.95 3.63 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.15 30.0 2.63 5.83 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.20 10.0 1.76 2.58 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.20 20.0 2.35 4.24 0.00 1.02 0.998
H,0 0.20 40.0 3.18 6.29 0.00 1.02 0.998
CI 0.05 10.0 1.18 3.98 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.05 20.0 1.69 5.86 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.05 40.0 2.35 8.45 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.10 10.0 1.42 3.08 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.10 20.0 1.98 4.79 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.10 30.0 2.41 6.03 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.15 10.0 1.60 2.72 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.15 15.0 1.90 3.44 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.15 30.0 2.65 5.38 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.20 10.0 1.77 2.44 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.20 20.0 2.39 3.78 0.47 1.92 1.079
CI 0.20 40.0 3.36 5.90 0.47 1.92 1.079
C2 0.05 10.0 1.15 3.99 2.92 3.62 1.165
C2 0.05 20.0 1.64 5.87 2.92 3.62 1.165
C2 0.05 40.0 2.18 9.10 2.92 3.62 1.165
C2 0.10 10.0 1.19 3.09 2.51 3.55 1.163
C2 0.10 20.0 • 1.97 4.76 2.51 3.55 1.163
C2 0.10 30.0 2.42 6.02 2.51 3.55 1.163
C2 0.15 10.0 1.54 2.70 2.92 3.62 1.165
C2 0.15 15.0 1.87 3.42 2.92 3.62 1.165
C2 0.15 30.0 2.61 5.36 2.92 3.62 1.165
C2 0.20 10.0 1.69 2.36 2.92 3.62 1.165
C2 0.20 20.0 2.38 3.68 2.92 3.62 1.165
C2 0.20 40.0 3.24 5.82 2.92 3.62 1.165
C3 0.05 10.0 1.22" 3.59 8.65 6.70 1.250
C3 0.05 20.0 1.66a 5.90 8.65 6.70 1.250
C3 0.05 40.0 2.23 a 8.89 8.65 6.70 1.250
C3 0.10 10.0 1.43 3.09 6.60 5.46 1.227
C3 0.10 20.0 1.90 4.84 6.60 5.46 1.227
C3 0.10 30.0 2.30 6.00 6.60 5.46 1.227
C3 0.15 10.0 1.58 2.89 6.95 5.75 1.237
C3 0.15 15.0 1.85 3.66 6.95 5.75 1.237
C3 0.15 30.0 2.51 5.56 6.95 5.75 1.237
C3 0.20 10.0 1.73 2.53 6.95 5.75 1.237
C3 0.20 20.0 2.28 3.79 6.95 5.75 1.237
C3 0.20 40.0 3.16 5.68 6.95 ' 5.75 1.237

1424

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 TABLE 2. Continued

Q V H Tfl 1)B P
a S (l/s) (m) (cm) (N/m2) (cps) (g/cm3)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(D (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

C4 0.05 10.0 1.18° 4.20 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.05 20.0 1.78" 5.58 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.05 40.0 2.41" 8.27 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.10 10.0 1.50" 3.31 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.10 15.0 1.87" 4.00 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.10 30.0 2.46" 6.06 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.15 10.0 1.73" 2.87 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.15 15.0 2.00" 3.73 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.15 30.0 2.66" 5.62 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.20 10.0 1.82" 2.74 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.20 20.0 2.40" 4.14 23.60 20.00 1.324
C4 0.20 40.0 3.36" 5.92 23.60 20.00 1.324
C5 0.05 10.0 0.75" 6.69 40.80 34.30 1.365
C5 0.05 15.0 1.14" 6.53 40.80 34.30 1.365
C5 0.05 20.0 1.46" 6.83 40.80 34.30 1.365
C5 0.10 10.0 1.13" 4.43 40.80 34.30 1.365
C5 0.10 15.0 1.54" 4.85 40.80 34.30 1.365
C5 0.10 20.0 1.86" 5.37 40.80 34.30 1.365
C5 0.15 10.0 1.42" 3.50 40.80 34.30 1.365
C5 0.15 15.0 1.77" 4.21 40.80 34.30 1.365
C5 0.15 20.0 2.07" 4.80 40.80 34.30 1.365
C5 0.20 10.0 1.74" 2.87 30.00 26.00 1.340
C5 0.20 20.0 2.27" 4.39 30.00 26.00 1.340
C5 0.20 30.0 2.76" 5.41 30.00 26.00 1.340
"In these tests, velocity measurement by salt tracer technique was not reliable (C3,
C4), or not possible at all (C5); the velocity determined as V = Q [B • H) was used here.

12.27ft
2 1 exp In (4)
7 =" L - U^V M9o
where the coefficients (^ and ax depend on the grain-size distribution and
the packing and the shape of the bed material. For their steep channel bed-
load transport tests, Smart and Jaeggi (1983) determined o^ = 0.05 and Bt
= 15. Using the same coefficients, the performance of (4) is shown in Fig.
3 for the steep flume data sets of Smart and Jaeggi and of the writer. It is
observed that (4) tends to slightly overpredict the velocities of the clay
suspension tests. It may be noted that (4) was developed from experimental
data with flatter slopes; for large relative flow depths and small slopes, the
correction factor in square brackets of (4) approaches unity and the formula
becomes similar to a Nikuradse-type equation.
Based on the concept of dispersive stresses between the moving grains,
Takahashi (1978) proposed an equation for the mean velocity of a quasi-
steadily moving debris-flow front. Replacing concentration and density terms
together with grain-shearing coefficients by one single parameter A*, the
following expression is obtained (Takahashi 1978):
1425

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 TABLE 3. Case B Experiments with Bed-Load Transport

Q V H O fl f« T}B P
a s (l/s) (m/s) (cm) (kg/s) (N/m2) (cps) (g/cm3)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(D (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

(a) Case Bl Experiments
H20 0.07 15.0 " 1.28 5.90 0.68 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.07 25.0 1.55 8.20 1.42 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.10 10.0 1.07 5.00 0.84 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.10 15.0 1.38 6.30 1.60 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.10 30.0 2.06 6.00 3.53 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.15 10.0 1.18 4.80 2.30 0,00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.15 15.0 1.57 6.00 4.08 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.15 ' 30.0 2.52 8.00 9.49 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.20 10.0 1.26 6.00 4.80 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.20 15.0 1.74 6.80 8.84 0.00 1.02 0.998
H20 0.20 20.0 2.44 7.60 10.30 0.00 1.02 0.998
H,0 0.20 30.0 2.59" 8.50 14.91 0.00 1.02 0.998
CI 0.07 15.0 1.16 5.19 0.88 0.67 2.17 1.092
CI 0.07 25.0 1.57 7.31 1.49 0.61 2.09 1.084
CI 0.10 10.0 1.11 4.61 1.49 0.43 1.93 1.075
CI 0.10 15.0 1.35 5.25 2.31 0.60 2.13 1.084
CI 0.10 30.0 2.01 7.69 4.34 0.63 2.13 1.087
CI 0.15 10.0 1.18 4.82 3.52 0.59 2.05 1.091
CI 0.15 15.0 1.52 6.01 5.29 0.52 1.93 1.072
CI 0.15 30.0 2.03 8.12 9.08 0.63 2.13 1.088
CI 0.20 10.0 1.25 5.62 7.05 0.59 2.17 1.086
CI 0.20 15.0 1.60 6.89 10.58 0.58 2.03 1.096
CI 0.20 20.0 1.90 7.77 12.88 0.43 1.93 1.077
CI 0.20 30.0 2.47 9.07 17.63 0.63 2.13 1.088
C2 0.07 15.0 1.27 5.83 1.15 2.70 3.33 1.152
C2 0.07 25.0 1.46 7.80 1.97 2.56 3.22 1.149
C2 0.10 10.0 1.12 4.80 2.03 2.50 3.32 1.160
C2 0.10 15.0 1.40 5.96 3.12 2.77 3.33 1.153
C2 0.10 30.0 2.18 8.54 5.08 2.26 3.06 1.145
C2 0.15 10.0 1.18 4.95 4.75 2.20 3.16 1.153
C2 0.15 15.0 1.58 6.30 7.05 2.20 3.16 1.152
C2 0.15 30.0 2.22 8.52 10.85 2.41 3.19 1.147
C2 0.20 10.0 1.29 6.58 9.63 2.50 3.32 1.158
C2 0.20 15.0 1.83 7.70 14.37 2.38 3.22 1.159
C2 0.20 20,0 2.19 8.25 16.27 2.26 3.00 1.141
C2 0.20 30.0 2.75 9.79 20.74 2.26 3.06 1.145
C3 0.07 15.0 1.21 5.62 1.49 8.06 6.27 1.245
C3 0.07 25.0 1.60 8.11 2.24 4.31 4.35 1.201
C3 0.10 10.0 1.15 4.50 2.58 8.07 6.43 1.243
C3 0.10 15.0 1.41 5.91 3.91 8.07 6.43 1.243
C3 0.10 30.0 1.93 8.72 4.95 7.35 6.00 1.223
C3 0.15 10.0 1.23 5.44 5.97 6.95 5.75 1.240
C3 0.15 15.0 1.61 6.70 9.01 8.14 6.74 1.241
C3 0.15 30.0 2.34 9.04 12.20 7.75 6.37 1.228
C3 0.20 10.0 1.58 7.46 13.56 8.55 6.10 1.246
C3 0.20 15.0 1.73 8.69 17.55 8.14 6.74 1.236

1426

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 TABLE 3. Continued
Q V H GB T/J Tie P
a .V (l/s) (m/s) (cm) (kg/s) (N/m2) (cps) (g/cm3)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) 0)

(a) Case Bl Experiments-Continued
C4 0.07 25.0 1.69 7.06 2.39 18.60 16.20 1.286
C4 0.10 30.0 2.08 8.15 7.18 17.60 15.70 1.275
C4 0.15 10.0 1.32 6.21 6.38 20.10 17.50 1.266
C4 0.15 30.0 2.49 8.53 13.32 16.20 14.80 1.257
(b) Case B2 Experiments
C4 0.07 15.0 1.36 5.83 1.20 18.60 16.20 1.287
C4 0.10 10.0 1.16 4.90 1.76 20.10 17.50 1.293
C4 0.10 15.0 1.43 6.00 3.35 16.20 14.80 1.275
C5 0.07 15.0 1.36b 6.85 0.59 40.80 34.30 1.363
C5 0.10 10.0 1.16" 5.75 0.81 40.80 34.30 1.363
C5 0.10 15.0 1.43b 6.50 2.17 40.80 34.30 1.363
C5 0.15 10.0 1.32b 6.60 3.06 33.60 28.80 1.356
C5 0.20 10.0 1.58b 7.80 7.65 33.60 28.80 1.356
"No velocity was measured in this experiment; velocity calculated by Smart and Jaeggi
(1983) was used here.
b
In these tests, velocity measurement by salt tracer technique was not reliable (C5);
as approximation, velocity of corresponding flow at next lower concentration level (C4
or C3) was used here.

U
(gdf ^5 = A*(sin a)" 2
(5)
3L
gd3
where U = the mean velocity of the moving grains; q = the fluid discharge
per unit flume with; and a = the bed slope angle. Takahashi plotted his
experimental results in terms of the nondimensional velocity [given by the
left-hand side of (5)] versus the bed slope tan a. As predicted by (5), there
is only a slight dependence on tan a in his figure. From his diagram (Tak-
ahashi 1978), it can be determined that A* ~ 1.3. Using this experimental
value for the parameter A*, (5) can be transformed into:
(sin af-2q°-6g0-2
U = 1.3 (6)
d0A
Interestingly a regression analysis with the two steep flume data sets dis-
cussed previously results in an empirical relation very similar to (6). In fact,
Fig. 4 shows good agreement for the steep flume data between measured
and calculated fluid velocities; putting sin a ~ tan a = S, d = d9Q and U
= V, (6) becomes:
6
'0.2„0.6 n 0.2
13S^q°- g
V 0 (7)
d'
«Q<)

1427

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 T
* + 0
* *
I c, [% 22.1 19.6 14.4 10.0 4.7 0.0

\ 11 f S = 20°/c1
0.40 ^ . 96 J-~\
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

\ \ ]S=15%f.
0.30
f
" Re ->!
1-
\
0.20
f
0.10
\
i .l^*--^
\I
% V
fS = 5%] ^
"
i Sl~A

0.08
\ ^ * s X, ^
•>. N <\»\ \ * \ ~^
0.06 \ \ N , \ -tr~ X
* «<\ r
\ \V \ \
• »

0.04 N \
0.03 \
102 10 3 10" 10 5 10s
Re2

C, [%]
0.80 96 1 S = I5%[ | | |
\
\ '/ |
0.60
x \ |s-m%l\ nL5^20%]
0.40 \ -r
^ \ \L-
\ n• "—
I
^r-
V \ \ \ ^ V V
0.30 kv
0.20
\\
A
4.
X +
^ \ -N \ \
^\
\
\
^ \
\ xa
f
0.10
\
V
1

s?
*
\
^ \ | S = 5°/ V
•u ft
• *

0.08 2
10 3
\ 10 4 105 „ 106
10
Re 2

FIG. 1. Flow Resistance Data of (a) Clay Suspension Flows over Fixed Rough
Bed; and (b) Experiments with Bed Load Transport. Data Points with Equal Slope
are Connected by Straight Lines

The correlation coefficient squared is r2 = 0.79 and the standard error is

SE = 14% of the mean measured velocity. It is remarkable that the fluid
velocity of a bed-load transporting flow at slopes 0.05 < = S < = 0.20 may
be predicted by the same formula as the velocity of the front of a debris
flow. The corresponding debris-flow experiments of Takahashi (1978) cover
a slope range 0.17 < = S < = 0.47.

BED-LOAD TRANSPORT

In the case of bed-load transport in the clay suspension (case B), each
experiment was performed with the same preset slope and flow rate as for
the clear-water tests by Smart and Jaeggi (1983), which served as a reference
condition. The ratio of the corresponding bed-load transport rates per unit
width, qB/qB,Hicn w a s found to increase with increasing clay concentration
of the suspension (and thus, fluid density) up to a limiting value, above
which transport rates decreased strongly. This change in bed-load transport
capacity can also be plotted against the particle Reynolds number R* (Fig.
5), which represents the effect of a changing fluid viscosity; here RJ is
determined with the mean grain size dm. It can be concluded from Fig. 5
1428

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 1 hr
A ' = T p -2 log d90
T
rl * +
^
« I C, [%]| 22.1 19.6 14.4 10.0 4.7 0.0
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ft

"++ «
t-
[» * *
+ i+ * *** A A<£ .A

Y
r i 0
T
1
Y 1
1
r 1
1
_|~Re 2 * = 10[]Re 2 * = 5a •
1
1

0 1 2 3 4
log (Re2*)
FIG. 2. Flow Resistance Data of Clay Suspension Flows over Fixed Rough Bed,
Shown in Terms of Parameters A' = [l/(Vf - 2 • log(hJdmi)] and K

that the strong decrease in transport rates occurs for values of R* below
about 10-15.
For open-channel flow, the thickness of the laminar (viscous) sublayer,
k, is given as (Yalin 1977): X = 11.6Wu* = 11.6(T|/p)/w*, where v is the
kinematic and T| is the dynamic (Newtonian) viscosity. This implies that in
a flow with R* ~ 12, the laminar sublayer is of the same magnitude as the
equivalent sand roughness ks. It is assumed that the relationship for X is
also valid in the case of the clay suspension, using the effective viscosity
|xe2. With regard to the critical value of R* shown in Fig. 5, this implies
that the thickness of the laminar sublayer is of the order of the grain size
of the transported bed material. Thus it appears that once the flow around
the grains becomes laminar, the bed-load transport capacity starts to de-
crease, for otherwise equal flow conditions.
Interestingly, also for the clay suspension flows over fixed rough bed (case
A), a limiting value of RJ = 10 was found below which viscous effects
become important. It is therefore concluded that in the bed-load transport
experiments, the decrease in qB for RJ <~ 10 (case B2) is due to the
increasing viscosity while viscous effects are negligible in the region R* > ~
10 (case Bl).

Transport Equation, Steep Slopes

In the following analysis, only those clay-suspension bed-load transport
experiments with negligible viscous effects (case Bl) are considered. It was
found that the transport rate qB can be described by a simple relationship
including the (corrected) fluid flow rate qr, the bed slope S, and the param-
eter (s — 1), where s = cr/p is the ratio of the grain density to the fluid
density.
A bed-load transport equation of a similar form was already proposed by
Smart and Jaeggi (1983) from their steep flume tests (slope range 3% < S
< 20%) in which clear water was used as transporting fluid:
1429

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 V co ic.[m/sl
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Vmeas.[m/S]

FIG. 3. Comparison between Measured Fluid Velocities, V„„m, and those Calcu-
lated with (4), V„k, for Two Steep Flume Data Sets

-^fePM-fc) ; <»
where d30 = the grain size at which 30% by weight of the material is finer;
6„ = the critical Shields stress at initiation of motion; and 9„, = hrjn • SI
[{s — 1) • dm] — the dimensionless bed shear stress determined with the
mixture flow depth hrm (including the space occupied by the transported
solids but corrected for sidewall friction) and the mean grain size d,„. It is
noted that (8) was developed in order to predict also the bed-load transport
rates of the Meyer-Peter and Mueller (1948) experiments covering a slope
range of 0.04% < S < 2% [data given by Smart and Jaeggi (1983)].
The data of the clay-suspension experiments (case Bl) was analyzed to-
gether with the Smart and Jaeggi tests, and a regression calculation yielded
the following transport equation, valid for the slope range 5% < X < 20%:

(9)
' • - < r r ^ (£)"<''"'-^
where qcr = the critical discharge at initiation of motion. The correlation
coefficient squared is r2 = 0.95 and the standard error is SE = 20% of the
1430

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 Vcalc.[m/S]

X A
X ./
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

2.5 4 " / *
ft
A * / *

A &

2.0 A /

A / X
«
A^ Oy/ x
1.5

* "
£
Uniform
1.0 Data set
grain size Mixture -
J *X

Smart/Jaggi A x

Rickenmann *
0.5 I
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Vmeas.[m/S]

FIG. 4. Comparison between Measured Fluid Velocities, Vmem, and those Calcu-
lated with (7), V,.„,c, for Steep Flume Data

qB
qB,H20
3.2
-i 1 1
c, [%]
2.8 T 21.6-22.0
"-••-J
ft 15.6-17.8
+ 12.2-14.9
2.4
« 8.6-9.7
s V-':" < * 4.4-5.8
2.0
+ 0

1
0
ft <5
1.6 *
* **
1.2
"f >
+ " * + /
>
0.8
T *
n J5
1.0 10.0 100.0 1000.0
Re 2 *

FIG. 5. Ratio of Bed Load Transport Rate Measured in Clay Suspension to Value
Obtained in Clear Water, qBlqBM20, as Function of Grain Reynolds Number R*

1431

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 1

mean measured transport rate. The critical discharge qcr is expressed by a

relationship proposed by Bathurst et al. (1987), which was slightly modified
to include also the density factor (s - 1) (Rickenmann 1990):
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

q„ = 0.065(5 - l)1-67g°-srfi6S'S-1-12 (10)

where d50 = the grain size at which 50% by weight of the material is finer.
By comparing (8) and (9), some differences can be observed. First, the
exponent of the density factor (s - 1) is larger in the second formula. This
is not surprising since no variation of the density ratio was included in the
Smart and Jaeggi (1983) tests. Apart from the clay-suspension data of this
study there is other evidence that the exponent of (s - 1) should be larger
than in (8). Low (1989) conducted a large number of experiments with
lightweight sediments to investigate the effect of a change in the density
ratio s on bed-load transport rates. He used water as transporting fluid, and
thus, no possible viscous effects were involved as in this study. He examined
his results in terms of the parameters used by Smart and Jaeggi (1983) and
concluded that the exponent of the density factor (s - 1) in (8) should be
increased to 1.5 (and the constant adjusted) to obtain best agreement with
his data. An improved version of the Smart/Jaeggi equation (Rickenmann
1990) also better predicts some data of Meyer-Peter and Mueller (1948)
which included transport tests with coal (s = 1.25) and barite (s = 4.22)
as bed load.
A second difference concerns the influence of the slope parameter. In
the analysis of this study, it was found that the exponent of S should be
larger for the steep flume tests than for the flatter slope conditions of the
Meyer-Peter and Mueller experiments. In the development of (8), the num-
ber of tests with a slope S s 5% was considerably larger than the number
of tests for the steeper slope range. This may explain why the exponent 1.6
in (8) is close to the exponent of 1.5, which results from a regression analysis
of the Meyer-Peter and Mueller experiments alone (Rickenmann 1990). It
is interesting that both Mizuyama (1981) and Mizuyama and Shimohigashi
(1985) also proposed a dependency of qB on S2, based on steep flume
experiments in a similar slope range as in this study.
To describe the critical conditions at initiation of motion, the use of (10)
has the advantage that no information of the flow depth is needed to de-
termine the critical discharge qcr. The bed-load transport rate is given as a
function of the flow rate (q) in both (9) and (8). With (9), only the slope,
bed material, and fluid characteristics are needed as further input parameters
whereas (8) requires in addition the use of a flow resistance relationship in
order to determine 0m.

Transport Equation, Steep and Flat Slopes

As an alternative form to (8) or (9), an analysis was made of both the
steep flume experiments (clay-suspension data of the author and clear-water
tests of Smart and Jaeggi) and the low slope data of Meyer-Peter and Mueller
in terms of the dimensionless parameters $>B and 8,„, where the dimension-
less bed-load transport rate is defined as $ B = qB/[g(s - l)^,] 1 - 2 . In this
study, the following equation was determined by regression analysis to give
best agreement between measured and predicted transport rates for the
entire slope range of 0.1% < = S < = 20%:

*° = j^{tY^-«')F1A ' (11

>
1432

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 where F = V7(g • /?,..,„) = the Froude number, determined with the mixture
flow depth /(,.,„. The critical Shields stress at initiation of motion was taken
as 0.047 for the Meyer-Peter and Mueller experiments, while for the steep
flume tests this value was somewhat reduced by a slope correction according
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

to Stevens et al. (1976). With (11), the correlation coefficient squared is r2

= 0.96 and the standard error SE = 35%, for a total number of 252 ex-
periments. It is interesting that (11) predicts both the steep and low slope
data almost as well as do separate formulas valid only over a limited slope
range. Considering the steep flume data only (115 experiments), as used in
the development of (9), the correlation parameters for (11) are: r2 — 0.96
and SE = 25%. The performance of (11) over the entire slope range can
also be judged from Fig. 6, where calculated transport rates are shown
against measured values on a log scale. It is seen that the scatter is consid-
erably larger in the low slope region (data of Meyer-Peter and Mueller); in
this region the flow conditions are much closer to the critical conditions at
incipient motion, which makes prediction of transport rates much more
difficult.
In comparison, an improved version of the Smart and Jaeggi transport
equation [(8)], with the exponent 1.5 instead of 1.0 for the density factor
(s — 1), gives a similar correlation (r2 = 0.96) and a slightly greater standard
error (SE = 44%) when applied to the entire data set (252 experiments).
If the whole slope range could be as well described by a single formula in
the form of (8) as in the form of (11), the standard error should rather be
smaller since the flow rate could be much more accurately measured in the
experiments than the flow depth. However, by the use of hrm in (11) (con-

l°g(qB,caic.[m3/s m])

,«*/

4m

f
I'rf

o
e

/i*
s°
i*
• !&
J
43: 1
s>
Uniform
' , y< i
Data set grain size
Mixture
i
/ I
Smart/Jaggi * *
Rickenmann *
o
Mtiller
C I r~
X
1 1
-0.7 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1
3
l°g(qB,meas.[m /s m])

FIG. 6. Comparison between Measured Bed Load Transport Rates, <7B,mcas., and
those Predicted by (11), qB,mlc_, for Three Data Sets Covering Slope Range 0.1%
< = 5 < = 20%
1433

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 tained in the parameters 0,„ and F), there is also some information included
on the flow resistance. With (8) and (9), on the contrary, the parameter qr
= V • hrf contains only the fictitious flow depth hrf, thus not taking into
account the increased flow depth due to high bed-load concentrations at
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

steep slopes. These findings are consistent with the aforementioned con-
clusion that in the form of (8) and (9) the exponent of the slope factor
should be different in the steep and low slope region. To distinguish between
the two regions, a limiting slope of about 10% may be assumed above which
the space occupied by moving grains is significant with respect to the total
flow depth.

DISCUSSION

Increasingly clay concentrations in the clay-suspension experiments of the

author produced an interesting result: For a given slope and flow rate, the
bed-load transport rates increased considerably with increasing fluid density,
particularly at steeper slopes. This change was associated with only a minor
increase in flow depth and in flow velocity, implying that the flow resistance
did not significantly change [Fig. 1(b)]. It can be concluded that the fluid
velocity is largely determined by the slope and the flow rate. Since these
two parameters also determine the bed-load transport rates [see (9)], any
effects of bed load on the fluid velocity could be implicitly accounted for
by q and S. This may explain the rather good performance of (7), in which
the fluid velocity is related to the slope, the flow rate, and a characteristic
grain size.
As a rough approximation, it is proposed that the turbulent flow in a
steep rough channel is mainly governed by the slope, the flow rate, and the
fluid density. For a given q and 5, larger depths were observed for the flows
over a movable bed than for the flows over a fixed bed, while the fluid
velocities were only slightly higher in the latter case. These larger flow depths
(or shear velocities) are mainly associated with the space required for the
transported grains. The only minor difference in fluid velocity suggests that
the adjustment of the (mixture) flow depth could be the primary mechanism
by which the flow supplies the energy required for grain movement. It may
be hypothesized therefore that the fluid-grain mixture is a self-regulating
system, adjusting flow depth and transport rates in such a way that the fluid
velocity is not greatly affected, but instead is largely determined by the slope
and flow rate.
At clay concentrations Q above about 17% (p > = 1.28 g/cm3), a decrease
in the bed-load transport rates was observed with further increasing de-
values. This decrease was found to be associated with a grain Reynolds
number R2 below about 10 (Fig. 5), which implies that the thickness of
the laminar sublayer, \ , is greater than the grain size, d. A similar conclusion
can be drawn based on a study about the hydraulic transport of solids in
pipes (Thomas 1979a, 1979b) in which the transport capacity can be expected
to decrease if \ > ~ d. Negative lift forces may be an explanation for this
decrease. Based on experiments, Davies and Samad (1979) found the lift
forces to decrease with decreasing particle Reynolds numbers; they meas-
ured negative values for R* < ~ 5. Similar experimental results were re-
ported by Coleman (1967).
It is noted that the case B2 experiments of this study were in the hy-
draulically smooth turbulent regime. For a given pressure gradient in pipe
flow, Thomas (1979b) concluded that the transport capacity should be smaller
in laminar than in turbulent flow. Since the flow resistance increases strongly
1434

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 in laminar flow with increasing viscosity, larger flow depths will occur in
open channel flows (for a given flow rate), implying an increase in shear
stress. With increasing viscosity, the bed-load transport rate is expected to
decrease; however, a part of the grains may then be transported in suspen-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

sion (not supported by turbulence but due to a very small settling velocity).
It is difficult to predict what the combined effect will be on the bed-load
transport capacity in laminar open-channel flow. Experimental evidence
(Bradley 1986; Wan and Song 1987) suggests that the total transport capacity
may be considerably higher in laminar flow.
Three mechanisms were proposed by Takahashi (1981) for the initiation
of a debris flow: (1) A landslide from a hill slope may transform into a
debris flow; (2) at sufficiently steep slopes ( > ~ 27%) and with large bed
shear stresses, material deposited in a channel bed may be mobilized and
eventually form a debris flow; and (3) accumulation of debris material from
the side slopes can cause a temporary blockage of material to be built up
in the channel, and a debris flow may be initiated when this material starts
to move.
It was noted by Davies (1988) that a temporary blockage of large grains
can occur in a uniform flow of a grain-fluid mixture in a steep, narrow
channel. He further pointed out that the development of roll waves may
cause the pulsing of a debris flow; the critical Froude number for the oc-
currence of roll waves is much smaller in laminar than in turbulent flow.
Based on field data, Davies showed that the limiting conditions developed
for clear-water flows also apply generally for debris-flow conditions. Re-
cently, Savage (1989) demonstrated theoretically that the critical Froude
number for the occurrence of roll waves decreases with increasing cohesion
(Bingham yield stress), viscosity and particle interaction.
In the light of the experimental results of this study, the pronounced
decrease of the bed-load transport rate in macroviscous flow (i.e., having
R2 s 10) may also be seen as an element enhancing the instability of a
uniform flow, and thus offer a possible explanation for the pulsing behavior
of debris flows. In the experiments, macroviscous flow occurred at clay
concentrations Cf above about 17%. Scaling considerations suggest that a
higher critical value of Cf can be expected in the field (Rickenmann 1990).
In the range of fine-material concentrations Cf between 20% and 50%, the
Bingham yield stress TB increases strongly with Cf (Chen 1986; O'Brien and
Julien 1986). According to field data compiled by Davies (1988), the tran-
sition to macroviscous flow may be expected to occur in this concentration
range. For a given flow rate in a torrent, a local input of fine material might
thus cause a sudden decrease in bed-load transport capacity (at R* — 10),
causing a part of the grains to be deposited. If such events are frequent and/
or large enough, the deposited material could form a temporary dam. In
contrast to direct deposition of material from the side slopes, a partial or
full blockage to the flow might therefore also be caused by a change in flow
properties.

CONCLUSIONS

To study the effect of the increasing non-Newtonian properties with in-

creasing fine-material concentration (i.e., increasing Bingham yield stress
and Bingham viscosity) on the flow, experiments were performed with a
clay suspension flowing over a fixed rough bed in a steep channel without
any sediment transport (case A). The flow resistance analysis indicated that
Newtonian formulas can still be used if an adequate viscosity is defined,
1435

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 such as the effective viscosity \xe2. No viscous effects could be detected in
the hydraufieally transitional region [10 £ R* < 54, (Fig. 7)]. This is in
agreement with the analysis of the bed-load transport tests (Fig. 5). It is
interesting that a semitheoretical equation can be applied to both the ex-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

perimental flows with intense bed-load transport (with slopes up to 20%)

and experimental debris flows (with slopes up to 47%).
The case A experiments with R? ^ 10 were in the laminar region, and
the corresponding data points lie close to the relation for laminar Newtonian
flow [Fig. 1(a)]. It appears that the hydraulically smooth turbulent regime
(RJ :S 10) is obscured by the formation of a plug flow in a Bingham fluid.
This is a zone with no shearing between adjacent fluid layers, extending
from the flow surface downwards; with increasing Bingham yield stress of
the fluid, this zone occupies increasing proportions of the flow cross section.
When it merges with the viscous sublayer, the flow becomes laminar.
Also bed-load transport experiments were performed with clay-suspen-
sion flows in a steep channel (case B). With increasing clay concentration,
the bed-load transport capacity increased due to the decreasing solid/fluid
ratio s. Once the effect of the increasing viscosity of the fluid becomes
important (at R| s 10) and the flow around the grains is laminar, the trans-
port capacity decreases markedly with further increasing clay concentration.
The bed-load transport experiments in the turbulent region (RJ < 10)
were analyzed together with the data sets of Smart and Jaeggi (1983) and
of Meyer-Peter and Mueller (1948). It was found that in the g^-form [such
as (9)] the equations for the steep and the lower slope range should have
a different exponent in the slope factor. In the $B-form [such as (11)],
however, a single equation may be used for the whole slope range since the
dimensionless bed shear stress 6,„ also contains some information on the
flow resistance increase due to significant bed-load concentrations at steep
slopes. As a result of the interaction between bed-load transport and flow
resistance in the steep slope range (S >~ 10%), two different calculation
procedures are proposed. Since (4) predicts the flow velocity as a function
of the flow depth, it may be used in connection with the bed-load transport
equation [(11)]. This calculation procedure can be applied over a slope range
0.1% <~ S < ~ 20%. If, however, the flow rate is used as input parameter
instead of the flow depth, it is recommended that (7) and (9) are used to
calculate the other parameters of the two-phase flow. These formulas should,
however, only be applied in the steep flume range, i.e., 5% < ~ S <~ 20%.
The two proposed calculation schemes are discussed in more detail by Rick-
enmann (1990).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The presented study was performed at the Laboratory of Hydraulics,

Hydrology and Glaciology of the ETH in Zurich where the writer worked
as a research engineer.

APPENDIX I. REFERENCES

Bagnold, R. A. (1956). "The flow of cohesionless grains in fluids." Phil. Trans.

Royal Soc, 249A, 235-297.
Bathurst, J. C, Graf, W. H., and Cao, H. H. (1987). "Bed load discharge equations
for steep mountain rivers." Sediment transport in gravel bed rivers, Thorne, Ba-
thurst, and Hey, eds., John Wiley and Sons, New York, N.Y., 453-477.
Beverage, J. P., and Culbertson, J. K. (1964). "Hyperconcentrations of suspended
sediment."/. Hydr. Div., ASCE, 90(6), 117-126.
1436

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 Bingham, E. C. (1922). Fluidity and plasticity, McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y.
Bradley, J. B. (1986). "Hydraulics and bed material transport at high fine suspended
sediment concentrations," thesis presented to Colorado State Univ., at Fort Col-
lins, Colorado, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

of Philosophy.
Chen, C. (1986). "Chinese concepts of modeling hyperconcentrated streamflow and
debris flow." Proc. 3rd Int. Symp. on River Sedimentation, Univ. of Mississippi,
1647-1657.
Chen, C. (1988a). "Generalized viscoplastic modeling of debris flow." /. Hydr.
Engrg., ASCE, 114(3), 237-258.
Chen, C. (1988b). "Generalized solutions for viscoplastic debris flow." /. Hydr.
Engrg., ASCE, 114(3), 259-282.
Coleman, N. L. (1967). "A theoretical and experimental study of drag and lift forces
acting on a sphere resting on a hypothetical stream bed." Proc. 12th IAHR Con-
gress, Fort Collins, Vol. 3, 184-192.
Costa, J. E. (1984). "Physical geomorphology of debris flows." Developments and
applications of geomorphology Costa and Fleisher, eds., Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
Germany, 268-317.
Davies, T. R. H. (1988). "Debris flow surges—A laboratory investigation." Mitt.
Nr. 96 der Versuchsanstalt fur Wasserbau, Hydrologie und Glaziologie, ETH
Zurich.
Davies, T. R. H., andSamad, M. F. A. (1978). "Fluid dynamic lift on a bed particle."
/. Hydr. Div., ASCE, 104(8), 1171-1182.
Einstein, H. A. (1934). "Der hydraulische oder Profilradius." Schweiz. Bauzeitting, 8.
Hong, R.-J., Karim, M. R., and Kennedy, J. F. (1984). "Low-temperature effects
on flow in sand-bed streams." J. Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, 110(2), 109-125.
Jaeggi, M. N. R. (1983). "Alternierende Kiesbanke," Diss. ETH Nr. 7208, Ziirich
Mitt. Nr. 62 der Versuchsanstalt fur Wasserbau, Hydrologie und Glaziologie der
ETH Zurich.
Johnson, A. M. (1970). Physical processes in geology. Freeman Cooper and Co.,
San Francisco, Calif.
Julien, P. Y., and Lan, Y. (1991). "Rheology of hyperconcentrations." /. Hydr.
Engrg., ASCE, 117(3), 346-353.
Kikkawa, W., and Fukuoka, S. (1969). "The characteristics of flow with wash load."
Proc. 13th IAHR Congress, Kyoto, Japan, Vol. 2, 233-240.
Lau, Y. L. (1987). Discussion of "Low temperature effects on flow in sand-bed
streams," by Hong et al. (1984). J. Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, 113(1), 111-115.
Low, H. S. (1989). "Effect of sediment density on bed-load transport." /. Hydr.
Engrg., ASCE, 115(1), 124-137.
Luque, R. F., and van Beek, R. (1976). "Erosion and transport of bed-load sedi-
ment."/. Hydr. Res., 14(2), 127-144.
Meyer-Peter, E., and Mueller, R. (1948). "Formulas for bed-load transport." Proc.
2nd meeting IAHSR, Stockholm, Sweden, 39-64.
Mizuyama, T. (1977). "Bedload transport in steep channels." thesis presented to
Kyoto Univ., at Kyoto, Japan, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Mizuyama, T. (1981). "An intermediate phenomenon between debris flow and bed
load transport." Proc. Symp. on Erosion and Sed. Transp., IAHS Publication No.
132, Int. Association of Hydrol. Sci., 212-224.
Mizuyama, T. and Shimohigashi, H. (1985). "Influence of fine sediment concentra-
tion on sediment transport rates." Jpn. Civ. Engrg. J., 27(1), 46-49 (in Japanese).
Naik, B. (1983). "Mechanics of mudflow treated as the flow of a Bingham fluid,"
thesis presented to Washington State Univ., at in partial fulfillment of the re-
quirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
O'Brien, J. S., and Julien, P. Y. (1986). "Rheology of non-Newtonian fine sediment
mixtures." Proc. Speciality Conference on Advances in Aerodynamics, Fluid Me-
chanics, and Hydraulics, ASCE, New York, N.Y., 989-996.
Quian, Y., Yang, W., Zhao W., Cheng X., Zhang L., and Xu W. (1980). "Basic
1437

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 characteristics of flow with hyperconcentration of sediment." Proc. Int. Symp. on
River Sedimentation, Beijing, China, 183-184.
Rickenmann, D. (1990). "Bedload transport capacity of slurry flows at steep slopes."
Diss. ETH Nr. 9065. Zurich Mitt. Nr. 103 der Versuchsanstalt fur Wasserbau,
Hydrologie und Glaziologie der ETH Zurich.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Savage, S. B. (1989). "Flow of granular materials." Theoretical and applied me-

chanics. Germain, Piau, and Caillerie, eds., Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Nether-
lands, 241-266.
Shields, A. (1936). "Anwendung der Aehnlichkeitsmechanik und der Turbulenz-
forschung auf die Geschiebebewegung," Mitt. d. Preuss. Vers. anst. fur Wasserbau
und Schiffbau, Berlin, Nr. 26.
Simons, D. B., Richardson, E. V., and Haushild, W. L. (1963). "Some effects of
fine sediment on flow phenomena." Water-Supply Paper 1498-G, U.S. Geological
Survey.
Smart, G. M. (1984). "Sediment transport formula for steep channels." J. Hydr.
Engrg., ASCE, 110(3), 267-276.
Smart, G. M., and Jaeggi, M. (1983). "Sediment transport on steep slopes," Mitt.
Nr. 64 der Versuchsanstalt fur Wasserbau, Hydrologie und Glaziologie, ETH
Zurich.
Stevens, M. A., Simons, D. B., and Lewis, G. L. (1976). "Safety factors for riprap
protection." J. Hydr. Div., ASCE. 102(5), 637-655.
Takahashi, T. (1978). "Mechanical characteristics of debris flow." J. Hvdr. Div.,
ASCE, 104(8), 1153-1169.
Takahashi, T. (1981). "Debris flow." Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 13, 57-77.
Thomas, A. D. (1979a). "Predicting the deposit velocity for horizontal turbulent
pipe flow of slurries." Int. J. Multiphase Flow. 5, 113-129.
Thomas, A. D. (1979b). "The role of laminar/turbulent transition in determining
the critical deposit velocity and the operating pressure gradient for long distance
slurry pipelines." Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on the Hydraulic Transport of Solids in
Pipes, BHRA Fluid Engineering, Cranfield, Bedford. England, 13-27.
Wan, Z. (1982). "Bed material movement in hyperconcentrated flow." Ser. Paper
31, Inst. Hydrodyn., Tech. Univ. of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark.
Wan, Z., and Song, T. (1987). "The effect of fine particles on vertical concentration
distribution and transport rate of coarse particles." Proc. 22nd IAHR Congress,
Lausanne, Switzerland. 80-85.
Woo, H. (1985). "Sediment transport in hyperconcentrated flows." thesis presented
to Colorado State Univ., at Fort Collins, Colo., in partial fulfillment of the re-
quirements for the degree'of Doctor of Philosophy.
Yalin, M. S. (1977). Mechanics of sediment transport, 2nd Ed., Pergamon Press,
Oxford, England.

APPENDIX ! l . NOTATION

The following symbols are used hi this paper:

A = constant in flow resistance equation;

A* = parameter in velocity equation for debris-flow front;
B = flume width;
Cf = volume concentration of fine material;
Ci = clay-concentration level;
d = grain size;
d,„ = mean grain size;
d30 = characteristic grain size, 30% of the material by weight is finer;
d5tt = characteristic grain size, 50% of the material by weight is finer;
d90 = characteristic grain size, 90% of the material by weight is finer;
(dv/dy) = fluid velocity gradient (shear rate) perpendicular to flow direc-
tion;

1438

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439

 Froude number = (V/(g/hy-2);
Darcy-Weisbach friction facioi = (8-iy'pV2);
sediment-feeding rate;
acceleration due to gravity;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by "Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati" on 03/06/24. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

measured flow depth;

flow depth;
(reduced) flow depth corrected for sidewall influence;
fictitious fluid flow depth in flow of grain-fluid mixture = (qj
V), corrected for sidewall influence;
mixture flow depth (including space occupied by moving grains),
corrected for sidewall influence;
Strickler coefficient for flume walls;
equivalent sand roughness;
flow rate in flume;
volumetric water or fluid discharge per unit width;
reduced fluid discharge per unit width, corrected for sidewall
influence;
critical flow discharge at beginning of bed-load transport;
volumetric bed-load transport rate per unit width;
Reynolds number defined with effective viscosity |x(,2 = {AVhpl

particle Reynolds number defined with effective viscosity \x.L,2 =

(T<*rfp/u,(,,);
correlation coefficient (between measured and calculated val-
ues);
slope (= tan (3);
standard error;
ratio between grain and fluid density = (cr/p);
mean velocity of debris-flow front;
average fluid velocity;
shear velocity = (ghS)U2\
bed slope angle;
coefficient in flow resistance formula of Smart and Jaeggi (1983);
coefficient in flow resistance equation;
coefficient in flow resistance formula of Smart and Jaeggi (1983);
dynamic fluid viscosity;
Bingham viscosity;
dimensionless bed shear stress = (T„/pg(s — l)d,„) = (hSI(s ~
i)4,);
critical value of 9 at initiation of motion;
dimensionless bed shear stress in grain-fluid mixture; = {hrmSI
{s - 1)4,);
thickness of laminar (viscous) sublayer;
effective viscosity = (T| S + iBh/2V);
kinematic viscosity;
fluid density;
grain density;
shear stress in fluid;
fluid shear stress at bed = (gpSh);
Bingham (yield) stress; and
dimensionless bed-load transport rate = qB/[g(s ~ l ) ^ ] 1 ' 2 -
1439

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1991, 117(11): 1419-1439