Suspended Load Transport - Seminar NIT SURAT

A
GRADUATE REPORT
On
SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN

ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM
SEDIMENTS
PREPARED BY
KODINARIYA ANKIT MULJIBHAI
Of
M.TECH. (Sem. III), WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING.
(Roll No.: P10WR330)
GUIDED BY:
Dr. P.L.Patel
Dr. S.M.Yadav
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

SARDAR VALLABHBHAI NATIONAL INSTTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
SURAT- 395 007, GUJARAT
2011-2012
SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

Page 1
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the graduate report on SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN
ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS is prepared and presented by
Mr. KODINARIYA ANKIT M. Roll no. P10WR330 of M.Tech. (Sem. III) Water Resources
Engineering. His work is satisfactory during academic year 2011-2012.
Dr. P.L.PATEL
PROFESSOR
CED, SVNIT
Dr.S.M.YADAV
ASSO.PROFESSOR
CED, SVNIT

Page 2
CONTENTS
Sr.No.
Description
Page No.
Acknowledgement
Introduction
Literature Review
About Suspended Load Transport
Concentration Distribution of The Individual Fraction

in a Mixture
10
Suspended Load Transport of Sediment Mixtures
25
Conclusions
32
Notation
33
References
34

Page 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to take this as an opportunity to express my deep gratitude towards my guide
Dr. P.L.Patel, Professor and Dr.S.M.Yadav, Associate Professor, also my sincere thanks to our
Water Resources Engineering Section SVNIT Surat and acknowledge the help received from
them during the course of the G.R. without his tireless efforts and encouragement it would have
been difficult to complete the report. I would also like to acknowledge the cooperation and help
extended to me by other members of the SVNIT Surat, for providing me with adequate
infrastructure and the right environment for my Graduate Report.
Last but not the least a special thanks to my family and friends for providing the
necessary encouragement and mental support for completing my report.
KODINARIYA ANKIT M.
M.Tech (3rd Sem.)
Water Resource Engineering
P10WR330

Page 4
LIST OF TABLE
Sr.No.
Description
Page No.
Range of data collected during the study
11
Variation of LC with M
18
3
4
Range of data collected during the study

Relation between Ls and Kramer's Uniformity
Coefficient
25
30

Page 5
LIST OF FIGURES
Sr.No.
Description
Page
No.
Illustration of Hiding and Exposure Effects in Case of Non-Uniform
10
Sediments
2
Size distribution of bed materials used in the investigation
11
Verification of Rouse's equation for concentration distribution (a = 0.2D).
15
Comparison of predictions from various models with measurements.
15
Typical dimensionless concentration profiles on log-log scale.
16
Predictor for concentration at 0.2D for uniform material
18
'
Non-uniform material data plotted on uniform material relation of u* 0
19
with C1 ib
8
Variation of c with 0i 0 a and M
19
Relation between Lc c and 0i 0 a
20
10
Relation for concentration at 0.2D for non-uniform sediment
21
11
Proposed predictor for sediment distribution exponent above 0.2D
21
12
Effect of variation in Sediment distribution exponents above and below 0.2D
22
13
Relation between sediment distribution exponent over the depth on
22

Page 6
concentration distribution
14
Diagram showing agreement of data using modified exponent (a = 0.2D)
23
15
Comparison of predicted and observed values of average concentration for
24
U.S.G.S. data
16
Computed and observed concentration profiles for Rhine river
25
17
Suspended Load Transport Law for Uniform Sediment
27
18
Transport Rate of Individual Fractions Plotted on Suspended Load Transport
28
Law for Uniform Sediment

19
Variation of s with 0 s d i , and 0 0 c (M 0.285)
29
20
Variation of Ks with 0 0 c
29
21
Relation between s Ks and 0 s d i for Various Values of M
30
22
Variation of Ks Ls s with 0 s d i
31
23
Suspended Load Transport Law for Individual Fractions
31
1 . INTRODUCTION
Sediment transport is the general term used for the transport of material (e.g. silt, sand, gravel
and boulders) in rivers and streams. The transported material is called the sediment load.
Distinction is made between the bed load and the suspended load. The bed load characterizes
grains rolling along the bed while suspended load refers to grains maintained in suspension by
turbulence. The distinction is, however, sometimes arbitrary when both loads are of the same
material. In the case of a powder snow avalanche, the fluid phase is air and the solid phase
Page 7
consists of snow particles. The dominant mode of transport is suspension. These flows are close
analogies of turbidity currents, insofar as the driving force for the flow is the action of gravity on
the solid phase rather than the fluid phase. That is, if all the particles drop out of suspension, the
flow ceases. In the case of sediment transport in rivers, it is accurate to say that the fluid phase
drags the solid phase along. In the case of turbidity currents and powder snow avalanches, the
solid phase drags the fluid phase along.
Considering a particle in suspension, the particle motion in the direction normal to the bed is
related to the balance between the particle fall velocity component W0 COS and the turbulent
velocity fluctuation in the direction normal to the bed. Turbulence studies (e.g. Hinze, 1975;
Schlichting, 1979) suggested that the turbulent velocity fluctuation is of the same order of
magnitude as the shear velocity.
With this reasoning, a simple criterion for the initiation of suspension (which does not take into
account the effect of bed slope) is:
V*
0.2to 2.0
W0
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Samaga, B. R., Ranga Raju, K. G., and Garde, R. J (1985) state that Rouse's equation and
some of the recently developed equations for concentration distribution in the case of flow in an
open channel have been checked for their accuracy with the help of data of suspended-sediment
concentration-distribution of the individual fractions in a mixture. The agreement between
predictions and measurements is not found to be satisfactory. It is found that the sediment
distribution exponent for any size in the mixture is not constant over the whole depth of flow. A
Page 8
two-layer model is accordingly suggested herein to describe the sediment distribution in the
vertical. A predictor for the reference concentration at 0.2D is also suggested. The model showed
satisfactory agreement with the measurements on the Rhine river and the Middle Rio Grande
river.
Samaga, B. R., Ranga Raju, K. G., and Garde, R. J (1986) state that Careful experiments
were conducted on alluvial beds of four sediment mixtures having different arithmetic mean
diameters and standard deviations. The suspended load transport rates of individual fractions
were measured and compared with both Einstein's and Holtroff's methods of calculation of
suspended load for individual fractions. These methods were found to be unsatisfactory in the
present range of sediment parameters. A relationship is found to exist between the dimensionless
shear stress and the suspended transport rate for uniform sediment. To make this relation
applicable to nonuniform sediments, a corrective multiplying factor for shear stress is introduced.
The dimensionless parameters which govern this correction factor are identified and a relation
for the same obtained. In this manner the relation can be applied to individual size portions of a
sediment mixture.
3. ABOUT SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT
1. What is Suspended Load?
The word sediment refers commonly to fine materials that settle to the bottom. Technically,
however, the term sediment transport includes the transport of both fine and large materials.
Suspended load is the material moving in suspension in the fluid, being kept in suspension by the
turbulent fluctuations.
2. Uniform vs. Non-uniform sediments
Sediments in nature are non-uniform in character. Coarser particles in a non-uniform
sediment bed are more exposed to flow than they would have been in uniform sediment bed
Situation is reversed for finer fractions due to their sheltering in the wakes of coarser
fractions.

Page 9
Fig 3.2.1. Illustration of Hiding and Exposure Effects in Case of Non-Uniform Sediments
4. CONCENTRATION DISTRIBUTION OF THE INDIVIDUAL FRACTION IN A
MIXTURE
1. Experimental work
The experimental work was carried out in a re-circulating tilting flume 30 m long, 0.50 m deep
and 0.20 m wide located in the Hydraulics Laboratory of the University of Roorkee. The
sediment used was sand of relative density 2.65. Four mixtures having different arithmetic mean
sizes and geometric standard deviations were used in the experiments; see (Fig. 4.1.2). A 0.15 m
thick bed of sediment was laid on the flume bed in all cases.

Page 10
Fig. 4.1.2 Size distribution of bed materials used in the investigation
After the required sediment was placed in the flume and the flume set to the desired slope, water
at a predetermined rate was allowed into the flume. The sediment-water mixture at different
elevations at this section was collected in containers using a Pitot tube ensuring that the velocity
through the tube during sampling was the same as the flow velocity at that elevation. The
samples so collected were dried and analysed for the size distribution by means of a VisualAccumulation tube. Knowing the size distribution of the sample and its concentration at a
particular level, the concentration of individual fractions at that level was determined and hence
the concentration distribution of each fraction obtained. The experiments were repeated for other
discharges, slopes and sediments. The temperature of water was also recorded. No pronounced
bed undulations occurred in these experiments. The range of data collected during the study is
given in Table 4.1.1.

Page 11
Table 4.1.1. Range of data collected during the study

sediment
M1
Arithmetic
Mean
da
mm
0.57
M2
Discharge
QX 103
5.58-14.64
Flow
depth
D,
M
0.06-0.11
Average
Velocity.
U
m/s
0.49-0.73
5.05-6.87
total
load
qt
N/ms
0.94-4.59
0.55
7.54-14.36
0.07-0.10
0.53-0.78
4.96-6.93
1.39-6.46
M3
0.42
6.26-13.38
0.06-0.09
0.60-0.76
5.42-6.93
1.90-5.77
M4
0.25
8.14-13.46
0.06-0.09
0.61-0.75
4.49-6.10
1.81-4.48
m /s
Slope
5x103
2. Verification of existing methods

Rouse proposed the sediment distribution equation as
C
D Y
a

C a Y D a
Z0
(1)
Here
Ca =the concentration at Y= a
C = the concentration at any level Y
Z0 =the sediment distribution exponent
The theoretical value of Z0 is given as 0 u* k , where 0 is the fall velocity of particle of size
d, u* is the shear velocity and K is Karman constant, which was taken to be 0.4.
Itakura and Kishi argued that the value of K for sediment-laden flows is not different from its
value for clear-water flow. They wrote the concentration distribution equations as
C
Here
D Y

Ca
D a
1 D*
Z0
..(2)
D* 2.8 s D 0 C Q f u*3
s s f
s = specific weight of sediment
= specific weight of fluid

C = average volumetric concentration of sediment
Qf = mass density of fluid
f
Willis proposed a model for concentration distribution based on error function distribution of
diffusivity. He assumed s m and distribution of m as

Page 12
6 m
Ku* D
2 exp P12 2
.(3)
where
m = the momentum transfer coefficient
s = the sediment transfer coefficient
P1 = the normalised depth variable defined as
P
Y
1 1
exp r 2 2 dr
D
2
The concentration distribution was then derived as
exp 3
P1 P1a
0 u*K
.. ..(4)
Ca
where P1a is the value of P1 at Y=a.
He observed that the use of measured concentration at Y=0.2D as Ca gave good agreement
between measured and computed suspended loads for 0.1 mm sand.
Antsyferov and Kos'yan proposed a two-layer model for the distribution of sediment. They
argued that the sediment transfer coefficient s differs considerably from the momentum
transfer
coefficient m close to the boundary. Introducing an additive term for s below Y/D = 0.20,
they
expressed the sediment distribution equation as
dy
C / C a exp 0
2
2
f
u
Y
Y
D
u
Y
*
tanh *
2.8u*Y 15.7
0 D
0.14 s
v2
13
u0
0 e 30Y
.(5)
where u0 is the fluid velocity close to the bottom given by

u0
1.25
D
log 8.8
d
U being the average velocity of flow and v the kinematic viscosity of the fluid.
McTigue proposed a mixture theory using a two-layer model. He considered a fluid and a solid
phase and wrote down the mass and momentum balance equations for both phases. Using
turbulent diffusion equation he wrote
C Ca exp 0 Y a K1u* D for Y 0.2 D .(6)

Page 13
where a = 0.2D and K1 =0.11. He also wrote

Y
C Ca
0 K 2u*
for Y 0.2 D .. (7)
where K2 = 0.35
All the above models were checked for their accuracy with the help of the present data. The
values of u* were calculated as 0 Q f , where Q f is the mass density of the fluid and to is the
average shear stress on the bed obtained from the measured depth and slope of uniform flow. The
reference concentration was taken as C1, the concentration at Y= 0.2D. Calculations of C/C1 were
carried out at all depths and for all the eight fractions of the mixture using these methods and
these values compared with the observed values of C/C1. A typical plot of observed values of
C/C1 with those computed from Rouse's equation is shown in (Fig.4.2.3.). (Fig. 4.2.4) shows bar
diagrams for the different methods indicating the percentage of data lying within certain band of
error. It can be seen that Rouse's equation and the equation of Itakura-Kishi, Antsyferov-Kos'yan
and Willis give almost the same errors in spite of the rather more involved derivation in the latter
three cases. About 56% of the data lie within, 40% of the predicted values in the case of
Rouse's method and the corresponding percentages are about 59, 54 and 58 in case of ItakuraKishi, Antsyferov- Kos'yan and Willis methods respectively. The corresponding value is 69% for
McTigue's model. The equation of Navntoft showed better agreement and 73% of the data lie
within 40% of the predicted values. But the use of his equation necessitates knowledge of the
values of Y/D where the concentration is zero. Determination of this value in case of the coarser
fractions of a mixture is not easy, since these tend to move in significant amounts only close to
the bed.
Fig.4.2.3. Verification of Rouse's equation for concentration distribution (a = 0.2D).

Page 14
Fig. 4.2.4 Comparison of predictions from various models with measurements.
3. New Approach
Willis, McTigue and Antsyferov-Kos'yan argued that the convenient reference
concentration is that at Y= 0.2D. (Fig. 4.3.5) shows a typical plot of concentration versus Y on
log-log paper. It can be seen from this figure that there seems to be a break in the concentration
profile for two sizes of the mixture at (D - Y)/ Y= 4.0 or Y= 0.2D. In fact a break at this
elevation was observed in the velocity profile also in most cases. It was therefore felt that a twolayer model in which the concentration at Y=0.2D is chosen as the reference concentration will
be an appropriate one for sediment distribution in the vertical.
The concentration distribution equation of Rouse can be written in terms of Q as
D Y
4Y
C C1
(8)
In the light of the variation seen in (Fig. 4.2.5) it is hypothesised that the values of Z would be
different below and above Y=0.2D.
Thus
Z=ZU in the region Y 0.2 D
Page 15
Z=ZL in the region Y 0.2 D

An analysis concerning the importance of the various relevant parameters indicated that
u*

, M , 0i
0 a
0i
C1 f
(9)
Fig.4.3.5 Typical dimensionless concentration profiles on log-log scale.

U
ZU
f1
, *'
Z0
oi
..(10)
ZL
f2
, *'
Z0
oi
..(11)
and
where
oi = fall velocity of sediment of size di
oa = fall velocity of the arithmetic size da

50
M = Kramer's uniformity coefficient =
pi d i
0
100
pd
i
50
*' 0' s d a
Z0
= the theoretical value of the sediment distribution exponent for size da i.e.
Z0
0 a
u* K

Page 16
Here Pi is the percentage of sediment of size di in the mixture.

4. Reference concentration
A relation was found to exist between u* 0 and C1 for uniform material as shown in
(Fig.4.2.6). Here u*' is the shear velocity corresponding to grain roughness. The correlation
'
'
between C1 and u* 0 was inferior to that between C1 and u* 0 and hence the latter was
preferred. This suggests that
Fig. 4.4.6 Predictor for concentration at 0.2D for uniform material

Page 17
Fig. 4.4.7 Non-uniform material data plotted on uniform material relation of u*' 0 with C1 ib
Fig. 4.4.8 Variation of c with 0i 0 a and M

Page 18
the concentration is dependent on the grain shear stress rather than on the total shear stress. Data
of 0.18 mm sand collected by Barton and Lin and 0.1 mm sand and 0.04 mm sand collected by
Laursen were used to establish the above relation, since the material used by them was of fairly
uniform size. This relation was used as the basic curve to study the effect of non-uniformity on
reference concentration. When data of individual fractions were plotted on this curve, in general,
sizes, smaller than da showed less concentration and sizes larger than da showed higher
concentration than that for uniform material; see (Fig. 4.4.7) where ib is the fraction by weight of
any size di in the bed mixture. This decrease is due to the sheltering-cum-exposure effects in case
of bed load motion which would eventually affect suspended load transport and interference
'
effects in case of suspension of sediment mixtures. Thus a factor c u*eff u* can be introduced
to predict the concentration of individual fractions; see (Fig. 4.4.7). Here u*eff is the shear
velocity which would give the same concentration as that of uniform material of the same size in
question. c as defined above was determined for various size fractions and plotted against
0i 0 a for different M values; see (Fig. 4.4.8). It was observed that there was a systematic
increase in c with increase in 0i 0 a for each value of M. Examination of (Fig. 4.4.8.)
showed that a unique relation was possible between Lc c and 0i 0 a where Lc is a coefficient
dependent on M as shown in (Table 4.4.2.).
Table 4.4.2. Variation of LC with M
M
LC
0.23 0.50
0.30 0.75
0.40 0.90
0.60 1.00
The variation of Lc c with 0i 0 a is shown in (Fig. 4.4.9.) Thus, if the effective shear
velocity is computed as u*' c , (Fig. 4.4.5) can then be used to compute the reference
'
concentration for individual fractions. The parameter c u* 0i was computed for each size
fraction and plotted against C1 ib in (Fig. 4.4.10.). The data showed good agreement with the
relation derived for uniform material.

Page 19
Fig. 4.4.9 Relation between Lc c and 0i 0 a
Fig. 4.4.10 Relation for concentration at 0.2D for non-uniform sediment

Page 20
Fig. 4.4.11 Proposed predictor for sediment distribution exponent above 0.2D
The procedure for computation of reference concentration can thus be outlined as below.
1. Divide the bed material into various size fractions and find ib for each fraction.
2. Read the value of Lc corresponding to the known value of M from (Table 4.4.2.).
3. Compute the value of 0i 0 a for any desired size.
4. Read the value of Lc c for the known value of 0i 0 a from (Fig. 4.4.9.).
5. Knowing the value of Lc, compute c ,
6. Compute c u*' 0i
'
7. Read the value of C1 ib corresponding to the known of c u* 0i from (Fig. 4.4.10).
8. Repeat steps 3-7 for different sizes and compute C1, of each fraction and hence C1 of the
mixture
5. Exponent of concentration distribution
By plotting the concentration profiles in log-log form the values of Z U and ZL were
determined for all the runs for all fractions. The location of the lines of content *' indicated a
unique relation between
ZU Z 0
and U 0i *'
2.25
. This relationship is shown in (Fig. 4.5.11).
decreases from a little over unity to about 0.10 as U 0i *'

increases
2
4
from 10 to 10 . No effect of M on this relationship was noticed. Based on the hypothesis that ZL
The value of
ZU Z 0
2.25

Page 21
Fig. 4.5.12 Relation between sediment

distribution exponents above and below
0.2D (ZU and ZL)
Fig. 4.5.13 Effect of variation in sediment

distribution exponent over the
depth on concentration distribution
should be related to ZU, a plot of Z L ZU was prepared as shown in (Fig. 4.5.12). It can be seen
that, for the finer fractions (characterized by low Z U values), ZL is greater than Z0 at high values
of Z0, i.e. in case of coarse material. In other words, departure from the theoretical distribution
are pronounced below Y= 0.2D in case of coarse fractions, whereas such is the case above
Y= 0.2D in case of fine material. The effect of difference between Z L and ZU is shown in
(Fig. 4.5.13). It may be seen from here that a value of Z L less than ZU implies smaller
concentration close to the bed than obtained in case of a constant exponent ZU for the whole
depth. Since ZL < ZU for large values of ZU or for coarse fractions, it means that the sediment
distribution equation with an exponent fitting the data in the upper portion of the flow tends to
give concentrations which are too large in the lower portion of flow in case of coarse material.
Alternatively, if one uses the measured or estimated concentration near the bed along with a
value like ZU the concentrations are under predicted over the whole depth in case of coarse
material and over predicted in case of fine material.
Using the above values of C1, ZU and ZL for individual fractions the relative concentration is
computed and compared with the observed values in (Fig. 4.5.13). About 88% of the data lie
within 40% of the predicted values, thereby showing that the proposed method is more
accurate than the ones discussed earlier in the paper. The validity of the above method was firstly
checked with the help of the USGS data of 0.28 mm and 0.45 mm sands. Plane bed, dune bed
and anti-dune bed data were chosen at random covering a wide range of concentration. The
concentration distribution and hence the average concentration was determined for each fraction.

Page 22
Fig. 4.5.14 Diagram showing agreement of data with equation (1) using modified exponent
(a = 0.2D)
The sum of the average concentrations of individual fractions gave the average concentration of
the mixture. These values are compared with the observed values in (Fig. 4.5.14). The
comparison is satisfactory, barring a few data of the anti-dune regime of high concentration.

Page 23
Fig.4.5.15
Comparison of predicted and observed values of average concentration for U.S.G.S.

data

Page 24
Fig. 4.5.16 Computed and observed concentration profiles for Rhine river
5. SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT OF SEDIMENT MIXTURES
1. EXPERIMENTAL WORK
The Experiment work is done as earlier mention
Table 5.1.3. Range of data collected during the study
Sediment
Arithmetic
Mean
da
mm
Geometric
standard
deviation
Flow
depth
D,
m
Average
Velocity.
U
m/s
Slope
5x103
Suspended
load
qt
N/ms
M1
0.57
5.58-14.64
0.06-0.11
0.49-0.73
5.05-6.87
0.46-0.89
M2
0.55
7.54-14.36
0.07-0.10
0.53-0.78
4.96-6.93
0.33-1.22
M3
0.42
6.26-13.38
0.06-0.09
0.60-0.76
5.42-6.93
0.36-1.40
M4
0.25
8.14-13.46
0.06-0.09
0.61-0.75
4.49-6.10
0.57-1.30
2. Approach
Page 25
The suspended load is customarily calculated by first determining the velocity and concentration
distribution curves and then integrating the "Cu" curve over the depth D-2d i. Although this is a
rational approach to the problem, the ultimate accuracy is dependent on the accuracy in the
prediction of velocity and concentration distributions. The present state of knowledge is such
that, with the uncertainties in the Karman constant and the exponent for sediment concentration
distribution, a high degree of accuracy cannot be attained in the prediction of u-y and C-y
profiles.
A relation for suspended load transport of uniform material is the first step towards the study of
the effect of non-uniformity. Vittal, et al. argued that the turbulence within the standing eddy
behind a ripple or a dune helps in throwing material into suspension. Consequently, they felt that
at least a large fraction of the form drag may aid in suspended load transport. Engelund also
related the average suspended load concentration to the total shear stress. Accordingly, the
functional relationship for suspended load qs of uniform material was written as
Qs f * ..(12)
f 1
..(13)
s gd
where
Qs
qs
sd
and
0
...(14)
s d
Uniform material data of 0.18 mm sand collected by Barton and Lin and those of 0.1 mm and
0.04 mm sands collected by Laursen were used to establish the variation between Q s and * .
The standard deviation of the material used by them was close to unity and hence these sands
were considered to be uniform. A plot of Qs versus * was prepared and is shown in
(Fig.5.2.17). The data indicate a unique relation between these parameters (for dune and plane
beds), which is
Qs 28 *6 ...(15)
The scatter band for Qs ranging from half to twice the predicted value is also shown on this
figure. Following a line of analysis similar to that for bed load, one can define a coefficient s
for non-uniform sediment as follows s = shear stress required to give same suspended load as
in case of uniform sediment / actual shear stress 0
or
s
eff
(16)
0

Page 26
Fig.5.2.17 Suspended Load Transport Law for Uniform Sediment

Following Misri, et al. the functional relationship for s can then be written as
0 0
s f
, , M ..(17)
s di 0c
in which 0 c is the critical shear stress for the arithmetic mean size determined from Shields'
criterion. The dimensionless shear stress 0 s d i for each size was plotted against the
dimensionless transport parameter Qs in all cases. A typical plot for mixtures M 2 and M3 is shown
in (Fig.5.2.18). Here
Qs
is q s
ib s d i
f 1
s gd i
(18)
It is seen from (Fig.5.2.18) that in general, the fractions finer than the arithmetic mean size d a
show transport rates smaller than those given by the relation for uniform material, while coarser
fractions show higher transport rates. The coefficient s represents the cumulative effect of:
(1) Sheltering- exposure on the bed load transport rate and hence on the reference concentration;
and
(2) The interference of one size on the other in the processes of entrainment and suspended load
movement
which would affect the value of sediment distribution exponent.

Page 27
Fig.5.2.18
Transport Rate of Individual Fractions Plotted on Suspended Load Transport Law

for Uniform Sediment
Since the lines for different fractions are not truly parallel to the lines for uniform material, the
values of s are dependent on 0 s d i apart from 0 0 c and M. The values of s were
calculated for all the data as indicated above. In accordance with Eq. 17 the variation of s was
studied with 0 0 c for various values of 0 0 c for a constant value of M. A systematic
variation of s with 0 0 c and 0 s d i was observed, as may be seen from (Fig.5.2.19). The
parameter s decreases with increase in 0 0 c for given values of M and 0 s d i . A careful
study of (Fig.5.2.20) indicates that a unique relation can be established between 0 s d i and
s Ks for a particular value of M, where Ks is a coefficient depending on

Page 28
Fig.5.2.19 Variation of s with 0 s d i , and 0 0 c (M 0.285)
Fig.5.2.20 Variation of Ks with 0 0 c

Page 29
Fig.5.2.21 Relation between s Ks and 0 s d i for Various Values of M
Table 5.2.4 Relation between Ls and Kramer's Uniformity Coefficient

Kramer's uniformity
LS
coefficient M
<0.20
0.80
0.30
0.90
0.40
0.96
>0.5
1.0

Page 30
Fig.5.2.22 Variation of Ks Ls s with 0 s d i
Fig.5.2.23 Suspended Load Transport Law for Individual Fractions

0 0 c as shown in (Fig.5.2.20). The data are of limited range in (Fig.5.2.20) and extrapolation
as shown by the dotted line is justified by subsequent check with some field data. The variation
of s Ks with 0 s d i for different values of M is shown in (Fig.5.2.21). The parameter s Ks
decreases with an increase in 0 s d i in all cases. A unique relation was established between
Ks Ls s and 0 s d i , where Ls is a coefficient dependent on M. The relation between L s and
M is shown in (Table 5.2.4). The variation of Ks Ls s with 0 s d i for all the data is shown in
(Fig.5.2.22). The data plot neatly around a single curve as shown in this figure. see (Fig.5.2.23).
It may be noticed that field data from the Snake river are also plotted (Fig.5.2.23). The value of
0 0 c for the river was smaller than those in the case of the present laboratory data and the
extrapolation of (Fig.5.2.20) was used in the calculations for this river.
Page 31
3. Procedure for Computation

The following stepwise procedure is recommended for the computation of suspended load
transport rates of different fractions in a mixture.
1. Divide the bed material into various size fractions and find ib for each fraction.
2. Compute the average shear stress, 0 f RS .
3. Compute the critical shear stress 0 c corresponding to the arithmetic mean diameter da from
Shields' criterion.
4. Compute the value of 0 0 c and read the value of Ks from (Fig.5.2.20).
5. Read the value of Ls corresponding to the known value of M from (Table 5.2.4).
6. Read the value of Ks Ls s for the value of 0 s d i , corresponding to any desired size from
(Fig.5.2.22).
7. Compute the value of s knowing values of Ls and Ks.
8. Compute the value of s 0 s d i ; and read the value of Qs corresponding to the computed
value of s 0 s d i from (Fig.5.2.23).
9. Compute the transport rate of the fraction from the relation in Eq. 18 for the known value of
ib.
10. Repeat steps 6-9 for other sizes.
11. Compute the total suspended load transport rate as the sum of the rates of individual
fractions, i.e. q s is q s .
6. CONCLUSION
It has been shown that predictions from the relations of Rouse, Itakura-Kishi, Willis, AntsyferovKos'yan are not in good agreement with the measurements of concentration distribution on
alluvial beds of non-uniform sediments. The agreement is slightly better in case of McTigue's
and Navntoft's methods. The actual exponents of concentration distribution for individual
fractions are different from their theoretical values. In case of coarser fractions, the departure
from the theoretical concentration distribution is more pronounced below Y= 0.2D, whereas such
is the case above Y= Q.2D for the finer fractions. The methods for determination of
Page 32
concentration distribution were checked with some field data of the Rhine river and the Middle
Rio Grande river and found to result in predictions in good agreement with the measurements.
A unique relation is found to exist between * and Qs for suspended load transport of uniform
material. This relation can be used to predict the transport rate of individual fractions in a
mixture by introducing a correction factor s . s has been related to 0 s d i , 0 0 c and M.
The relation has shown fair agreement with the data of the Snake river.
7. NOTATION
A2, B2 empirical constants
a
reference level
C
concentration in ppm by weight at any level Y
C1
concentration in ppm by weight at Y = 0.2 D
Ca
concentration in ppm by weight at Y= a
D
depth of flow
D*
dimensionless parameter in Itakura-Kishi model
da
arithmetic mean size of the mixture
di
size of particle
ib
fraction by weight of any size d, in the mixture
K
Karman constant
Lc
a correction coefficient dependent on M
M
Kramer's uniformity coefficient
P1
normalized depth variable in Willis' model
P1a
value of P1 at Y=a
U
average flow velocity
uo
fluid velocity close to the bottom as defined by Antsyferov-Kos'yan
u*
shear velocity
*
shear velocity based on shear stress calculated on the basis of grain resistance
Z0
theoretical sediment distribution exponent = 0 u* K
Z0
theoretical exponent for the size d a 0 a u* K
ZU
sediment distribution exponent above Y=0.2D
ZL
sediment distribution exponent below Y=0.2D
s
sediment transfer coefficient
m
momentum transfer coefficient
s
specific weight of sediment
f
specific weight of fluid
Qf
mass density of fluid
kinematic viscosity of fluid

'
'
*
dimensionless grain shear stress = 0 s d a
grain shear stress
'
Page 33
0
0 a
0i
c
fall velocity of a particle

fall velocity of a particle of size da
fall velocity of a particle of size di
correction factor
8. REFERENCES
1. Samaga, B. R., Ranga Raju, K. G., and Garde, R. J, (1985). Concentration Distribution of
Sediment Mixtures in open-channel flow, Journal of Hydraulic Research, Vol.23, No.5,
467-483
2. Samaga, B. R., Ranga Raju, K. G., and Garde, R. J.,(1986). Suspended Load Transport of
Sediment Mixtures, J. Hydraul. Eng., 112, Page 10191035
3. Garde R.J. and Ranga Raju K.G.(2006). Mechanics of Sediment Transportation and
Alluvial Stream Problems, 3rd Edition, New Age Int.(P)Ltd., Pg.79
4. Garde R.J. (2006), River Morphology, New Age Int.(P)Ltd., Pg.120

Page 34

Suspended Load Transport - Seminar NIT SURAT

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Suspended Load Transport - Seminar NIT SURAT

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

A

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

About Suspended Load Transport

Concentration Distribution of The Individual Fraction

Suspended Load Transport of Sediment Mixtures

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

Range of data collected during the study

Range of data collected during the study

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

Illustration of Hiding and Exposure Effects in Case of Non-Uniform

Size distribution of bed materials used in the investigation

Verification of Rouse's equation for concentration distribution (a = 0.2D).

Comparison of predictions from various models with measurements.

Typical dimensionless concentration profiles on log-log scale.

Predictor for concentration at 0.2D for uniform material

Variation of c with 0i 0 a and M

Relation between Lc c and 0i 0 a

Relation for concentration at 0.2D for non-uniform sediment

Proposed predictor for sediment distribution exponent above 0.2D

Effect of variation in Sediment distribution exponents above and below 0.2D

Relation between sediment distribution exponent over the depth on

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

Diagram showing agreement of data using modified exponent (a = 0.2D)

Comparison of predicted and observed values of average concentration for

Computed and observed concentration profiles for Rhine river

Suspended Load Transport Law for Uniform Sediment

Transport Rate of Individual Fractions Plotted on Suspended Load Transport

Law for Uniform Sediment

Variation of s with 0 s d i , and 0 0 c (M 0.285)

Relation between s Ks and 0 s d i for Various Values of M

Suspended Load Transport Law for Individual Fractions

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

Fig. 4.1.2 Size distribution of bed materials used in the investigation

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

Table 4.1.1. Range of data collected during the study

2. Verification of existing methods

s = specific weight of sediment

= specific weight of fluid

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

where u0 is the fluid velocity close to the bottom given by

C Ca exp 0 Y a K1u* D for Y 0.2 D .(6)

where a = 0.2D and K1 =0.11. He also wrote

for Y 0.2 D .. (7)

Fig.4.2.3. Verification of Rouse's equation for concentration distribution (a = 0.2D).

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

Fig. 4.2.4 Comparison of predictions from various models with measurements.

Z=ZL in the region Y 0.2 D

Fig.4.3.5 Typical dimensionless concentration profiles on log-log scale.

oa = fall velocity of the arithmetic size da

M = Kramer's uniformity coefficient =

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

Here Pi is the percentage of sediment of size di in the mixture.

preferred. This suggests that

Fig. 4.4.6 Predictor for concentration at 0.2D for uniform material

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

Fig. 4.4.8 Variation of c with 0i 0 a and M

SUSPENDED LOAD TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL STREAM FOR NON-UNIFORM SEDIMENTS

Fig. 4.4.9 Relation between Lc c and 0i 0 a