Accepted Manuscript

Dispersion of settling particles in oscillatory turbulent flow subject to deposition and re-entrainment B.S. Mazumder, Suvadip Paul PII: DOI: Reference: To appear in: S0997-7546(11)00064-1 10.1016/j.euromechflu.2011.07.001 EJMFLU 2517 European Journal of Mechanics B/Fluids

Received date: 12 June 2010 Revised date: 1 July 2011 Accepted date: 1 July 2011 Please cite this article as: B.S. Mazumder, S. Paul, Dispersion of settling particles in oscillatory turbulent flow subject to deposition and re-entrainment, European Journal of Mechanics B/Fluids (2011), doi:10.1016/j.euromechflu.2011.07.001 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Dispersion of settling particles in oscillatory turbulent ow subject to deposition and re-entrainment

B. S. Mazumder, Suvadip Paul
Fluvial Mechanics Laboratory, Physics and Applied Mathematics Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata - 700108, India ABSTRACT This paper presents a numerical study to the stream-wise dispersion of settling particles in an oscillatory turbulent shear ow. The dispersion process is formulated in two dierential equations, one for suspension and other one for deposition. The exchange of particles between the bed and the ow is permitted. The statistical parameters viz., centroid displacement, variance, dispersion coecient which describe the transport process satisfactorily, are determined for both suspended and deposited materials. Parameters associated with their combined distributions are also discussed. It is shown that the tendency of the silt particles towards deposition and temporary storage on the bed can profoundly eect the longitudinal dispersion process. The eect is found to depend on the rate at which deposited particles are re-entrained in the ow, bed absorbency capacity and fall velocity of the particles. For oscillatory turbulent ow, a time-varying diusivity model is considered and comparisons are made with the time-invariant one. Numerical results show that the time-varying eddy diusivity has a nite eect on the dispersion coecients when the ow is oscillatory with non-zero mean.

Keywords : Dispersion, turbulent ow, settling velocity, deposition, re-entrainment, timevarying eddy diusivity

1.

Introduction

The release of waste materials from chemical plants and industries into river or atmosphere is a common phenomenon. So, the studies concerning the longitudinal dispersion of sus-

pended and deposited particles in natural ow are important to understand the process of contamination in the environment. A river uses its energy to carry or transport eroded materials such as mud, sand, boulders and dissolved materials. These materials are called its load. River transport their load by four processes. These processes are traction, saltation, suspension and solution. Larger particles like pebbles and boulders roll and slide along the river bed. Large particles such as gravel and coarse sand are lifted and dropped along the river, so they bounce along the river bed in a series of bed. Dissolved materials containing minerals like calcium and sodium are carried in the water. Smaller particles such as clay, silt and ne sand are carried along without contact with the river bed. Materials carried in suspension usually forms the greatest part of the total river bed. So primarily transport in rivers are controlled in three phases - suspension phase, deposition phase (traction) and a third phase where the rst two phases interacts (saltation). The present study provides an insight into the basic phenomena of dispersion of settling particles in turbulent shear ow in the above mentioned three phases separately. In his classical paper, Taylor [1] described the phenomenon of dispersion of passive contaminant in a steady, uniform, axi-symmetrical turbulent ow through a tube. He observed that the dispersion was due to the combined action of shearing current along the stream-wise direction and the mixing in the cross-sectional plane. Elder [2] later applied the Taylors method to describe the longitudinal dispersion in turbulent open channel ow. Longitudinal dispersion due to the shear eect of oscillatory currents, which generally occur in tidal basins, was rst analyzed by Bowden [3], and subsequently studied by Okubo [4], Holley et al. [5], Yasuda [6, 7] and so on. Allen [8] examined in detail the dispersion of passive contaminant in steady and oscillatory turbulent shear ows, employing the random walk technique proposed by Sullivan [9]. When the ne sand particles are released into the turbulent open-channel ow, they move under the combined action of the mean shearing current, turbulence and gravity. Depending on the ow and the particles characteristics, the particles will either continue to travel in the main body of the ow, or will fall due to gravity. Bed material particles are transported at rates which are much less than the rates for dissolved or suspended materials. Particles, like silt and ne sand, are transported mainly in suspension. While suspended, they tend to

settle and eventually be deposited on the bed. They behave like bed-material particles until they are bounced back in the ow. The particle motion in a turbulent ow, particularly close to the bottom, shows a quite complex phenomenon, especially when the exchange of particles between the bed and the main ow is permitted. Sayre [10] extensively studied the dispersion process of sediment particles in open channel ow, utilizing the concept of exchange of particles between the bed and the ow. Extensive research had been performed theoretically as well as experimentally to study the longitudinal dispersion of suspended ne particles with settling velocity in a steady, uniform, two-dimensional shear ow [11-17]. In particular, Sumer [13] analysed analytically the mean velocity and longitudinal dispersion of heavy particles in a turbulent open-channel ow with a smooth bottom surface by employing the Eulerian formulation. Although, we have gained considerable insight into the mechanism of dispersion of suspended heavy particles in a statistically steady shear ow, limited attempts have been made to study the dispersion of ne suspended particles in oscillatory turbulent shear ow. Yasuda [18] investigated the longitudinal dispersion of suspended ne particles with settling velocity from initial to the stationary stage in an oscillatory current with a Stokes layer. Mei and Chian [19] examined theoretically the long time dispersion of settling particles in a wave boundary layer considering the ow to be three dimensional. Longitudinal dispersion of settling particles in oscillatory turbulent ows was examined by Bandyopadhyay [20]. Recently Mondal and Mazumder [21] studied the dispersion of ne settling particles from an elevated source in an oscillatory turbulent ow. But such limited attempts are not sucient considering its vast practical importance. This type of ow contributes signicantly to the large-scale dispersion of suspended particles in estuaries or tidal basins, mass transport in coastal environment and biological processes in the sea. The main objective of the present work is to explore the phase-wise dispersion of settling particles released in an oscillatory turbulent shear ow. Transport equations are formulated for two dierent phases: one for the suspended particles (suspension phase) and the other for the deposited particles (deposition phase). Due to the exchange of particles between the bed and the ow, these two phases are mutually dependent. Interaction of these two phases can be seen in a third phase viz. combined or composite phase. Statistical parameters (mean 3

displacement, variance, dispersion coecient) for these three phases are evaluated separately and the inuence of controlling factors like settling velocity, bed-absorption capacity, reentrainment rate etc. on those parameters are described. The eect of frequency parameter associated with the oscillatory ow and time dependence of eddy diusivity on the statistical parameters of the three phases are also focused.

2.

Theoretical Formulations

Consider a two-dimensional model for the longitudinal dispersion of suspended particles which settle toward the bed in an estuary of uniform ow depth h. We employ a Cartesian co-ordinate frame with x-axis along the direction of the ow and y-axis normal to the bed of the estuary. The ow is considered to be bounded below at y = y0 and above y = h, where y0 is the roughness height. The process is considered to be independent of the lateral position. Assuming the ow to be uniform along the longitudinal direction (x-direction) with the velocity u(y, t) varying only in y-direction and with time t; the concentration C(x, y, t) of the particles in suspension satises the following convection-diusion equation C C 2C C C + u(y, t) s = (y, t) 2 + (y, t) t x y x y y (1)

where s is the settling velocity of the particle assumed to be constant and (y, t) is the eddy diusivity assumed equal in both directions (x and y) for isotropic case. It should be noted that the concentration C(x, y, t) refers only to that component of dispersant (which is being dispersed) which is entrained in the ow and remain in suspension. The remainder has settled and stored at the bed. To dierentiate between the forms of the dispersant that exist in the uid and that on the bed, they are referred to as suspension phase and deposition phase respectively. The initial condition is restricted to an instantaneous plane source uniformly distributed over the cross section and is given by C(x, y, 0) = B(y)(x) for y [y0 , h] at t = 0 where (x) is the Dirac Delta function and B(y) is a function of y. 4 (2)

The boundary conditions are given by (y, t) C + s C = 0 at y = h y (3)

which states that there is no net transport of mass across the upper surface, and (y, t) C + (1 )s C + W = 0 at y = y0 y (4)

where is the bed absorbency coecient representing the probability that a particle of dispersant coming into contact with the bed is deposited, W = W (x, t) is the concentration of the deposition phase and is the rate of entrainment so that W represents an average rate of entrainment. Equation (4) is a general boundary condition which permits the bed to behave either as an absorbing or a reecting barrier and also permits temporary storage of the dispersant (e.g. sediment particles) on the bed. When = 1, the bed behaves as a completely absorbing boundary. Particles which come into contact with the bed remain there and are eliminated from the dispersion process. When = 0, the bed behaves as a completely reecting boundary so that no deposition is permitted; and the particles which come in contact with the bed are immediately re-suspended in the ow. When 0 < < 1, the bed behaves as a partially absorbing boundary and the value of represents the fraction of particles striking the bed that are retained there. The remaining fraction, 1 , is reected. It should be mentioned here that C represents the mass of the dispersant per bulk volume of the uid and W represents the amount of dispersant stored per unit area of the bed surface, they dier only by a dimension of length. Deposition distribution function W (x, t) in Eq. (4) satises the equation (Sayre [10]) as W W U = s C(x, y0 , t) W t x (5)

with the initial condition W (x, 0) = 0, where U is the mean (cross-sectional) uid velocity. Let us now introduce the following non-dimensional parameters C C= , C(0) W W = , hC(0) x= x Ut , h 5 y= y , h D t t= 2 , h u= u , U = , D

s =

s h , D

y0 =

y0 , h

Pe =

Uh , D

d2 D

where C(0) is the reference concentration and D is the mean eddy diusivity. Here P e is the Peclet number which measures the relative characteristic time of the diusion process (h2 /D ) to the convection process (h/U ) and is the dimensionless entrainment-rate coecient. Now in dimensionless form, Eq. (1) can be written as, C C C 2C C + P e(, t) uy s = (, t) 2 + y (, t) y x y x y y t and the corresponding initial and boundary conditions are x C(, y , 0) = B()(); y x and (, t) y (, t) y y0 < y < 1 (7) (8) (9) (6)

C + s C = 0 at y = 1 y

C + (1 )s C + W = 0 at y = y0 y

The deposition distribution function W , given by Eq. (5), is rewritten as W W x Pe = s C(, y0 , t) W x t x with the condition W (, 0) = 0 For simplicity, from here, we omit the caret over the notation for the non-dimensional quantities. (10)

3.

Velocity and eddy diusivity

Here a two-dimensional model for velocity is considered as the sum of a steady and a timedependent component. The dimensionless velocity distribution ([8]) is given by u(y, t) = u0 (y) + u1 (y)sint 6 (11)

where u0 (y) is the standard log-law given by u0 (y) = 6 {ln (y) + 1} 2 (12)

with k is the von Karmans constant taken to be equal to 0.4. The second term in the right hand side of velocity prole (11) is suggested by Bowden and Fairbairn [22] in which u1 (y) is a quadratic function of y given by u1 (y) = 1.15(0.63 + 0.37y 2 ) (13)

where is the depth-averaged tidal amplitude taken from Allen [8], and is the dih2 mensionless frequency parameter ( = , being the frequency of oscillation) of the D 2 h2 semi-diurnal tide. Here = is a measure of the ratio of the characteristic time of T D 1 transverse diusion to the period of oscillation ( ). The parabolic eddy diusivity given by 0 (y) = 6y(1 y) is considered for the present analysis when the ow is steady. For oscillatory ow, time variant eddy diusivity model is adopted for the present analysis, which is the sharp contrast to the existing approaches. Very few literature exists where the time dependence of eddy diusivity is taken into consideration. The works of Trowbridge and Madsen [23] and Ng [24] can be referred in this regard. In general, for analytical simplicity, time-independent or constant eddy diusivities that may be related to the timemean characteristics of the turbulent eld have been adopted even for the dispersion in oscillatory turbulent ow. The instantaneous inter-dependence of turbulent mixing and the ow is not accounted for in these models [7, 25, 26, 27]. Kay [28] allowed the diusivity to change with time but only parametrically through a prescribed relation with the velocity. To investigate transport process in oscillatory currents [18] and in wave boundary layers [19], the eddy diusivities were assumed to be constant, despite the ow under consideration being turbulent which is in sharp contrast with the experimental evidence. Laboratory and eld observations have indicated that eddy diusivity can change substantially in magnitude over a period in turbulent oscillatory boundary layers [29, 30]. 7 (14)

In this study, the eddy diusivity given by (14) is modied following the approach used by Trowbridge and Madsen [23], to investigate the eects of time-variant eddy diusivity in oscillatory turbulent ow on the statistical parameters which describe the transport process. Trowbridge and Madsen [23] suggested that the time-dependent variation of the eddy diusivity models can be approximated by using a truncated Fourier series (retaining only rst two terms of the series) and is given by (y, t) = 0 (y) [(1 + 0.4 cos 2t)] (15)

where 0 (y) is the time-independent eddy diusivity given by the Eq. (14) and the value of the constant depends on the form of the turbulent velocity scale. In the present study, the value = 0.763 has been considered from Trowbridge and Madsen [23].

4.

Moment equations

Following the method of integral moment proposed by Aris [31], we dene the p-th moment of the distribution of the solute in the suspended phase as, Cn (y, t) = and in the deposited phase as, Wn (t) =
+ +

xn C(x, y, t)dx

(16)

xn W (x, t)dx

(17)

So using Eqs. (16) and (17), the diusion equation (1) subject to the initial and boundary conditions can be written as Cn Cn Cn s t y y y = nP euCn1 + n(n 1)Cn2 (18)

with Cn (y, 0) = 1 for n = 0 = 0 for n > 0 Cn + s Cn = 0 at y = 1 y 8 (19) (20)

Cn + (1 )s Cn + Wn = 0 at y = y0 y

(21)

The equation for the longitudinal deposition distribution is dWn = s Cn (y0 , t) nP eWn1 Wn dt with the initial condition Wn (0) = 0 (23) (22)

The n-th moment of the distribution of solute in suspension phase over the cross-section is given by, Cn (t) = 1 1 y0
1 y0

Cn (y, t)dy

(24)

In general, analytical solutions of the moment equations (18) subject to the conditions (19)-(21) can not be obtained except for some simplied cases where certain restrictions are to be imposed. Instead of the analytical solutions for the particular cases, attempts are made to nd the numerical solutions for more general cases by means of nite dierence technique.

5.

Numerical scheme

In order to solve the Eq. (18) together with the conditions (19)-(21), a nite dierence method based on Crank-Nicholson implicit Scheme has been adopted. For this purpose, we divide the whole depth of the ow into M 1 equal parts each of length y which are

represented by the grid point j, so that j = 1, M corresponds to y = y0 , 1 respectively i.e., y = y0 + (j 1) y. The grid point i identies time t according to the relationship t = (i 1) t; t being the time increment. Cn (i, j) indicates the value of Cn at the i-th grid point along the t-axis and j-th grid point along y-axis. After discretization of Eq. (18), a simultaneous system of linear algebraic equation with tri-diagonal coecient matrix is obtained as: Pj Cn (i + 1, j 1) + Qj Cn (i + 1, j) + Rj Cn (i + 1, j + 1) = Sj 9 (25)

valid for 1 < j < M where the matrix elements are given by Pj = Qj Rj Sj t (i, j) ( y)2 t t = 2+ s + [(i, j) + (i, j + 1)] y ( y)2 t t = s (i, j + 1) y ( y)2 = Pj Cn (i, j 1) + (4 Qj )Cn (i, j) Rj Cn (i, j + 1) +2nP eu(i, j)Cn1 (i + 1, j) + 2n(n 1)(i, j)Cn2 (i + 1, j) (26)

The above set of equations can be readily solved provided the initial and boundary conditions are specied. The discretized form of the initial condition is, Cn (1, j) = 1 for n = 0 = 0 for n > 0 and that of the boundary conditions are (i, j + 1) Cn (q, j + 1) Cn (q, j) + s Cn (q, j + 1) = 0, y (q = i, i + 1) (28) (27)

for the upper boundary where j = M and (i, j) Cn (q, j) Cn (q, j 1) + (1 )s Cn (q, j) + Wn (i) = 0, y (q = i, i + 1) (29)

for the lower boundary where j = 1 Wn (i) is computed from the relation Wn (i + 1) = [Wn (i) + s tCn (i + 1, 1) n P eWn1 (i + 1) t]/[1 + t] along with the condition Wn (1) = 0 obtained by discretization of the Eq. (22). A matlab code has been developed to solve the tri-diagonal coecient matrix by the method of Thomas algorithm [32]. The values of the variables can be calculated for all time 10 (30)

iteratively in the marching direction. Although the present scheme is stable for all nite t 1 y0 values , a grid size of y = with t = 0.0001 gives satisfactory results for 2 ( y) M 1 1 y0 with t = 0.00001 has been used for oscillatory steady ow and a grid size y = M 1 ow with zero and non-zero means. Varying the time step and grid spacings, we have assured ourselves for a good order of accuracy of the results generated by the above mentioned spatial and temporal discretization parameters. Actually smaller time interval is needed to trap the oscillatory nature in the dispersion process. Suciently small spatial discretizations have been used in order to keep the accuracy of the results. The results of Cn (i, j) and Wn (i) obtained from the numerical solution, were used to calculate some selected parameters which successfully describe the principal statistical properties of the longitudinal concentration distribution curves. The following formulae were used to calculate the statistical parameters.

6.

Description of statistical parameters

The n-th order central moment of the concentration distribution for the suspension phase can be dened as c (t) = n and for the deposition phase as w (t) n where xc (t) =
1 y0 xCdxdy 1 y0 Cdxdy 1 n y0 (x xc ) Cdxdy 1 y0 Cdxdy

(31)

(x

xw )n W dx W dx

(32)

C1 (t) C0 (t)

and xw (t) =

xW dx W dx

W1 (t) W0 (t)

where subscripts c and w correspond to suspension and deposition phase respectively. Here xc and xw are the centroid or rst moment of the distribution of dispersant in suspension phase and deposition phase respectively. C0 and W0 represent respectively the

11

total mass of the solute in suspension and in deposition. The expressions for the central moments for two phases are obtained from (31) and (32) as c (t) = 2 c (t) = 3 c (t) = 4 C2 xc 2 ; C0 C3 3xc c xc 3 ; 2 C0 C4 4xc c 6xc 2 c xc 4 ; 3 2 C0 w (t) = 2 W2 xw 2 (33) W0 W3 w (t) = 3xw w xw 3 (34) 3 2 W0 W4 w (t) = 4xw w 6xw 2 w xw 4 4 3 2 W0 (35)

Each of the integral moment of concentration dened by (33)-(35) has an important contribution for predicting dispersion phenomena. They serve as simple and physically meaningful descriptors of the overall behaviour of the slug. 1. The zeroth moment gives the total area under the longitudinal concentration distribution curve, which corresponds to the total mass of dispersant remaining in suspension or in storage on the bed. 2. The rst moments measure the location of the center of gravity of the slug moving with the mean velocity of the uid initially located at the source. 3. The second order central moments c and w represent the variance of the entrained 2 2 dispersant and that of the deposited dispersant respectively. The rate of growth of variance which indicates the degree of dispersion at any time is given by
c Da =

1 dc 2 2P e2 dt

(36)

c where Da is the apparent dispersion coecient for the suspension phase. The dispersion w coecient Da for the deposited dispersant (deposition phase) can similarly be dened. c c 4. The coecients of skewness 2 and kurtosis 3 for entrained dispersant are dened as c 2 =

c 3

2 2

, c3

c 3 =

c 4 3 respectively. c 2 2

c c For a Gaussian distribution, 2 and 3 are both zero, non-zero values of skewness and

kurtosis indicate deviations from Gaussian distribution. 12

w w Similarly 2 and 3 , the respective coecients of skewness and kurtosis for the deposited

dispersant, can be computed. The parameters describing the composite distribution of the entrained and deposited dispersant can be calculated in a similar manner. The formulae are: 1. Total quantity of dispersant: M0 (t) = C0 (t) + W0 (t) From (19), (23) and (24), it follows that M0 (t) = 1 when t = 0. For conservation of mass it should hold for all t and in the numerical calculation it will be veried. 2. Mean displacement from x = 0 of all dispersant: xcw (t) = 3. Variance of all dispersant: 2 (t) = C1 (t) + W1 (t) M0 (t)

C2 (t) + W2 (t) [xcw (t)]2 and consequently the M0 (t) dispersion coecient for the total amount of dispersant is given by the rate of change of variance. 4. Third and fourth moment for the distribution of mass in the whole volume: 3 (t) = and 4 (t) = C3 (t) + W3 (t) 3xcw 2 x3 cw M0 (t)

C4 (t) + W4 (t) 4xcw 3 6x2 2 x4 cw cw M0 (t)

The coecients of skewness (2 ) and kurtosis (3 ) for all the dispersant can then be 3 4 calculated from the relations: 2 = 3 and 3 = 2 3 2 2 2 Though these coecients are important factors for measuring the degree of symmetry and peakedness of the concentration distribution, the present study is concerned only to the mean displacement, variance and dispersion coecient.

7.

Discussion of results

The paper deals with some important physical processes which occur very frequently in environmental problems viz. suspension, absorption or reection, deposition and re-entrainment. The outbreak of these processes are controlled by some factors such as settling velocity (s ), 13

bed absorbency coecient () and re-entrainment rate () etc. The overall transport behaviour is greatly inuenced by the rate of change of these coecients. Results of the investigations are discussed in the following two stages: 1. Investigations are made to determine the inuence of controlling factors on the transport in suspension and deposition phase. The steady part of the ow is taken into consideration to nd out the role played by the controlling factors. The accuracy of the numerical scheme adopted is ensured by the excellent agreement of the results with Sayre [10]. 2. In the second stage, the investigations are extended to determine how the transport in three phases (suspension, deposition and the combined) are inuenced by the oscillatory ow eld and time dependent eddy diusivity. Here the oscillatory part of the ow is taken into consideration. In order to validate the numerical scheme with the existing results (Sayre [10]), a check has been made on the mean longitudinal displacement, variance of the suspended and deposited particles. Results are in excellent agreement. Once the accuracy of the numerical scheme is established, the analysis is extended by taking into consideration of suspension, absorption or reection, deposition and re entrainment. To concentrate on the transport process in a particular phase, the cases like zero fall velocity (s = 0), zero deposition ( = 0)/complete absorption ( = 1) or zero re-entrainment ( = 0) were discussed by Sayre [10]. As main concern of the present paper is to determine the aggregate eect of these parameters on transport process in various phases, the above cases are not considered. The parameters are therefore allowed to vary over the ranges shown in Table 1.
w c Fig. 1 shows the time variation of the dispersion coecients (Da , Da , Da ) in three dierent

phases (suspension, deposition and combined) for various values of the controlling parameters listed in Table 1 for P e = 102 . Rows of Fig. 1 represent a comparative study between three parameters on a particular phase, e.g., the rst row shows the eect of s , and on the dispersion coecient of suspension phase, the second shows the eects on deposition phase and the third shows that on the combined phase; while columns represent a comparative study between three dierent phases with the variation of a particular parameter, e.g., rst, 14

second and third columns show respectively the eect of s , and . From the gure it is observed that the increase of fall velocity leads to decrease of dispersion coecient in all three phases, which agree well with Sayre [10]. For the suspension and combined phases, when settling velocity is suciently high, the dispersion coecient rises to a local peak, and then decreases to approach a steady value. For the deposition phase (2nd row), it is seen that the dispersion coecient does not attain the steady-state in a short time unless the fall velocity is suciently fast, though proper choice of the re-entrainment rate can minimize the time. The larger value of the bed absorbency coecient () leads to a decrease of the dispersion coecient. The eect of re-entrainment rate factor () on the three phases can be seen from the third column of Fig. 1. It is observed that strong re-entrainment rate produces larger dispersion in all the three phases. For the combined phase, higher value of the fall velocity or slower value of the re-entrainment rate, both facilitate the dispersion coecient to rise to a local peak before approaching a steady value. Fig. 1(f) shows that strong or weak re-entrainment rate both can assist the dispersion coecient to reach the asymptotic steady state earlier than that of moderate re-entrainment rate. An overall observation is that dispersion coecients for the suspension phase and the combined phase are closely matched. This is not be the case for dispersion coecients only, distributions of other statistical parameters in the two phases are also in close agreement implying that overall distribution of the sediment is largely dominated by the distribution of the suspension phase, the eect of deposition phase is rather small. To make a better comparison between the transport parameters of these phases, the mean displacement, variance and dispersion coecient are brought together in a same frame in Fig. 2. For all cases, a close similarity between the nature of the suspension phase and combined phase is observed, which proves that in the distribution of the combined phase, suspension phase plays more signicant role. All the transport parameters (mean displacement, variance and dispersion coecient) for the suspension phase are slightly more than that for the combined phase, but the parameters for the deposition phase fall far behind compared to that of the other two phases. It is interesting to note the conservation of mass from Fig. 3. It shows the amount of suspended load, deposited load and total load against dispersion time with two sets of values

15

of settling velocity (s ), bed absorbency coecient () and re-entrainment factor () taken in such a way that for one set of values of the parameters ( = 0.02, = 0.9, s = 1.8), the transport is deposition dominated (continuous lines) and for the set of values of the parameters ( = 20, = 0.1, s = 0.06), the transport is suspension dominated (dotted lines). It is seen from the gure that for deposition dominated transport, the suspended load gradually decreases and the deposited load gradually increases, whereas the total load is constant for all time implying the conservation of mass. In case of suspension dominated transport, the deposition is negligible and the total load is again constant. The variation of C0 (y, t) against y at dierent time have been plotted in Fig. 4 (a) for steady ow when P e = 102 . The gradients of the distribution become more pronounced as time increases. Fig. 4(b, c) shows the vertical distributions of the suspended sediment averaged over the length of the dispersing cloud at dierent values of s for both the strong absorbing ( = 0.1) and the strong reecting ( = 0.9) boundary conditions. Figure shows that when the fall velocity term s is high, the slopes of the distribution are prominent. In this section the analysis has been extended to investigate the oscillatory eect of the ow with time dependent eddy diusivity on the transport process. So the unsteady component of the velocity given by Eq. (18) is taken into consideration. To understand the simultaneous inuence of controlling factors the non-zero and moderate values of s , and as indicated by the asterisk marks in Table 1 are used. Here the dimensionless values of the settling velocity s correspond to the particle diameter ranging from 15 to 62 for natural silt are taken from the experimental data of Sayre [10]. For = 0.5, the amount of particles absorbed by the bed is equal to the amount that are reected from the bed. The value = 0.1 represents strong reection leading to minimum deposition at the bed. On the other hand, = 0.9 signies strong absorption in the bed. The value of = 0.02 demonstrates more dramatically than the others the importance of even a small amount of re-entrainment in the longitudinal dispersion for suspended particles. When = 20, the re-entrainment is strong and most of the particles which come into contact with the bed will be bounced back into the ow. The results for 20 tend to resemble more closely those for the reecting boundary ( = 0). Fig. 5(a,b) shows the variance of three dierent phases against time for various parameters 16

when the ow is purely oscillatory (u = u1 (y)sint). The same is shown in Fig. 5(c,d) for oscillatory ow with nonzero mean (u = u0 (y) + u1 (y)sint). In both cases P e = 102 is considered. To look into the eect of time dependence of eddy diusivity relative to time independent one, variance is plotted for both time dependent and independent eddy diusivity in the same gure. Fig. 5(a,b) shows that variance for the deposition phase is much higher than the other two phases, though at large time there is a substantial retardation in the development of variance. Variance of the distribution of sediment in the combined phase is found to exceed that for the suspended phase. The wavy nature of the variance diminishes with time except for the combined phase, where it persists even at large time. Perhaps this is due to the superposition of the oscillatory eect of the other two phases on the combined phase. It is seen that the time varying eddy diusivity yields a nominal eect on the variance of all the phases for purely oscillatory ow. It is interesting to note that considerable eect is observed for oscillatory ow with non-zero mean (Fig. 5(c,d)). It is also seen that variance in all three phases increases over time. Variance for the suspension phase exceeds slightly to that for the combined phase, but for the deposition phase the variance is much less compared to the other two phases. As time goes on the dierences become more signicant. The time dependent eddy diusivity leads to increase the variance for all phases and the eect is pronounced at large time. The eect of time-variant eddy diusivity on the dispersion coecients of the three dierent phases at small and large times can be seen from Fig. 6(a,b) for purely oscillatory ow and in Fig. 6(c,d) for oscillatory ow with non-zero mean when P e = 102 . For oscillatory ow with zero mean, the initial dominance of the deposition phase is superseded by the combined phase at large time. For all time, the dispersion coecient for the suspension phase is much less compared to the other two phases, which is quite contrary to the steady case. For all phases, dispersion coecient for oscillatory ow is found to be much smaller than the steady ow. The uctuations in the velocity prole causes the positive and negative dispersion of the dispersant during the period of oscillation which contracts at each ow reversal during the period of oscillation [26]. The time-variant eddy diusivity shows appreciable eect on the dispersion coecients when the steady component of the ow (u0 (y)) combines with the oscillatory component (u1 (y)sint) (Fig. 6(c,d)). A remarkable rise in the dispersion coefcients for all phases is observed when the eddy diusivity is time dependent. Thus when 17

the ow is oscillatory with non-zero mean, dispersion coecients of all the phases due to time-independent eddy diusivity are lower than those due to time-variant eddy diusivity. This result is consistent with that of Trowbridge and Madsen [23], who found that in the rst order the eects of a time-dependent eddy diusivity on the wave boundary layer are to produce quantities which are 2030% dierent from those obtained from a time-independent eddy diusivity model. This reveals that ignoring the time dependent eddy diusivity to the dispersion phenomena in oscillatory ow leads to a nite eect to the dispersion coecient. Whether such a eect is signicant or not, it depends on the application itself. For biological processes where precision is required, the dierence may be regarded as appreciable, while for problems encountered in environmental transport, the eect may be considered as relatively insignicant [24]. Similar to the case of steady ow, the dispersion coecient for the suspension phase slightly exceeds compared with that for the combined phase, whereas for deposition phase it is much less compared to others. Thus the steady part of the ow plays a more signicant role than the oscillatory part during dispersion in oscillatory ow with non-zero mean. Similar results were also obtained for variance. So the steady part of the ow is more inuential in the determination of the statistical parameters of the three phases. When the ow is purely oscillatory and the eddy diusivity is time dependent, the eect of the frequency parameter () on the dispersion coecients for the three phases has been plotted in Fig. 7. It is seen that the double frequency oscillation of the dispersion coecient in the combined phase tends to almost a single frequency at large time i.e., at the initial stage, amplitudes of oscillation of Da during the rst and second half of the period of oscillatory ow are approximately equal, but at large time, Da varies with almost single frequency oscillation and this trend is prominent when frequency is large (Fig. 7(f)). With the increase of , dispersion coecients of all the phases are found to be reduced. It is interesting to note how the dispersion coecient in the combined phase overcomes its initial shortcomings at large time for all . For oscillatory ow with nonzero mean, the dispersion coecients are shown in Fig. 8 for dierent values of frequency parameter when the eddy diusivity is time variant. For all , at an early stage, dispersion coecients of the suspension phase and combined phase are

18

close to each other, whereas at large time former one exceeds the later. Dispersion coecient for the deposition phase is far behind for all time and for all .

8.

Conclusions

In the present paper, the dispersion of settling particles released in an oscillatory turbulent shear ow is examined. Objective of the work is to ascertain the inuence of the various controlling factors (settling velocity s , bed absorbency coecient , re-entrainment factor ) on the statistical parameters that governs the transport of suspended and deposited materials in an oscillatory turbulent shear ow. Numerical computation was performed to check how the statistical parameters of the three phases (suspension, deposition and composite) are inuenced by the variation of the controlling factors (s , and ) when the ow is steady. Dispersion coecients in all three phases increase initially with time and then asymptotically reach to a steady state. Increase of settling velocity or re-entrainment rate helps to rise the dispersion coecients in all the phases, though the eect of bed absorbency coecient is to diminish the dispersion coecients. Statistical parameters of the suspension phase slightly exceed that of the composite phase, but for the deposition phase these are less by several orders of magnitude compared to other two phases. Close similarity between the curves representing the suspension phase and combined phase indicates that suspension phase plays signicant role during transport in composite phase, while the deposition phase is not much inuential. Taking into consideration of the oscillatory component of the ow, the eects of time dependent eddy diusivity on dispersion coecient of the three dierent phases are compared with that of time independent one. It is found that the time dependent eddy diusivity produces a signicant rise in variance and dispersion coecient when the steady component of the ow combines with the oscillatory component. It may be mentioned that very little experimental as well as theoretical information exists on dispersion with time-dependent eddy-diusivity model. During dispersion in oscillatory ow with non-zero mean, steady part of the ow is more inuential than the oscillatory part. 19

Acknowledgement
Authors would like to express their sincere thanks to anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the paper.

References
[1] G.I. Taylor, The dispersion of matter in turbulent ow through a pipe, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 219 (1954) 186-203. [2] J.W. Elder, The dispersion of marked uid in turbulent shear ow, J. Fluid Mech. 5 (1959) 544-560. [3] K.F. Bowden, Horizontal mixing in the sea due to a shearing current, J. Fluid Mech. 21 (1965) 83-95. [4] A. Okubu, The eect of shear in an oscillatory current on horizontal diusion from an instantaneous source, Intl. J. Oceanol Limnol. 1 (1967) 194-204. [5] E.R. Holley, D.R.F. Harleman, H.B. Fisher, Dispersion in homogeneous estuary ow, J. Hydraul. Div. ASCE 96 (1970) 1691-1709. [6] H. Yasuda, Longitudinal dispersion of matter due to the boundary layer in an oscillatory current: theoretical analysis in the case of an instantaneous line source, J. Oceanograph. Soc. of Japan 38 (1982) 385-394. [7] H. Yasuda, Longitudinal dispersion of matter due to the shear eect of steady and oscillatory currents, J. Fluid Mech. 148 (1984) 383-403. [8] C.M. Allen, Numerical simulation of contaminat dispersion in estuary ows, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 381 (1982) 179-194. [9] P.J. Sullivan, Longitudinal dispersion within a two-dimensional turbulent shear ow, J. Fluid Mech. 49 (1971) 551-576.

20

[10] W.W. Sayre, Dispersion of mass in open-channel ow, Colorado State Univ. Hydraul. Paper No. 3 (1968) pp.73. [11] J.N. Hunt On the turbulent transport of a heterogenous sediments, Quart. J. Mech. and Appl. Math. 22 Part 2 (1969) 235-246. [12] H.E. Jobson, W.W. Sayre, Predicting concentration proles in open channels, Proc. Amer. Civ. Engrs. 96 HY 10 (1971) 1983-1996. [13] B.M. Sumer, Mean velocity and longitudinal dispersion of heavy particles in turbulent open channel ow, J. Fluid Mech. 65, Part 1 (1974) 11-28. [14] H.S. Woo, P.Y. Jullien, E.V. Richardson, Suspension of large concentrations of sands, J. Hydr. Engng. ASCE 114 (1988) 888-898. [15] B.S. Mazumder, Grain size distribution in suspension from bed materials, Sedimentology 41 (1994) 271-277. [16] B.S. Mazumder, K. Ghoshal, Velocity and suspension concentration in sediment-mixed uid, Int. J. Sed. Res. 17, No. 3 (2002) 220-232. [17] K.K. Mondal, B.S. Mazumder, Dispersion of settling particles from an elevated source in an open channel ow, J. Comp. and Appl. Math 193, (2006) 22-37. [18] H. Yasuda, Longitudinal dispersion of suspended particles in oscillatory currents, J. Mar. Res. 47 (1989) 153-168. [19] C.C. Mei, C. Chian, Dispersion of small suspended particles in a wave boundary layer, J. Phys. Oceanograph. 24 (1994) 2479-2495. [20] S. Bandyopadhyay, On contaminant dispersion in laminar and turbulent ows, Ph.D thesis, Jadavpur University, 2004. [21] K.K. Mondal, B.S. Mazumder, Dispersion of the settling particles from an elevated source in an oscillatory turbulent ow, Euro. J. Mech. B/Fluids, 27(6) (2008) 707-725. [22] K.F. Bowden, L.A. Fairbain, A determination of the frictional forces in a tidal current, Proc. of R. Soc. Lond. A 214 (1952) 371-392. 21

[23] J. Trowbridge, O.S. Madsen, Turbulent wave boundary layer: Model formulation and rst-order solution, J. Geophys. Res. 89 (1984) 7989-7997. [24] C.O. Ng, A time-varying diusivity model for shear dispersion in oscillatory channel ow, Fluid Dyn. Res. 34 (2004) 335-355. [25] P.C. Chatwin, On the longitudinal dispersion of passive contaminant in oscillatory ows in tubes, J. Fluid Mech. 71 (1975) 513-527. [26] R. Smith, Contaminant dispersion in oscillatory ows, J. Fluid Mech. 114 (1982) 379398. [27] E.J. Watson, Diusion in oscillatory pipe ow, J. Fluid Mech. 133 (1983) 233-244. [28] A. Kay, Advection-diusion in reversing and oscillating ows: Flows with multiple reversals, IMA J. Appl. Math. 58 (1997) 185-210. [29] I.G. Jonsson, N.A. Carlsen, Experimental and theoretical investigations in an oscillatory turbulent boundary layer, J. Hydraul. Res. 14 (1976) 45-60. [30] K.F. Bowden, Turbulent processes in estuaries. In: Estuaries, Geophysics and the Environment, National Academy of Sciences. Washington DC (1977) 46-56. [31] R. Aris, On the dispersion of a solute uid owing through a tube, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 235 (1956) 67-77. [32] D.A. Anderson, J.C. Tanehill, R.H. Pletcher, Computational Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer, Washington: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation (1984) pp. 599.

22

Table 1

Table 1: Values of the controlling parameters considered for the present study s : : : 0.06 0.1 0.02 0.18 0.5* 0.2 0.36 0.9 2* 0.6* 20 1.8 -

* indicates the moderate value of the corresponding parameter considered xed for plotting the gures.

Figure 1

120

100

100

(a)
100 80

s = 0.06
80

(b)

(c)
= 20 = 0.2

= 0.1
80

=2 = 0.02

= 0.9 s = 0.18 s = 0.36 s = 0.6 s = 1.8

40 60

= 0.5
60

Da c

60 40 20 0 0

40

20

= 2, = 0.5
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0 0.2

= 2, s = 0.6
0.4 0.6 0.8 1

20

= 0.5, s = 0.6
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0 0

80 70 60

(d)

80

s = 0.06

(e)

100

70 60

= 0.1
80

(f)
= 20 =2
60

Da w

50 40 30 20 10 0 0

s = 0.18 s = 0.36 s = 0.6 s = 1.8

50 40 30 20

= 0.9 = 0.5
40

= 0.2

= 2, = 0.5
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

10 0 0

= 2, s = 0.6
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

20

= 0.02

= 0.5, s = 0.6
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0 0

100

(g) s = 0.06

100

(h)

100

(i)

= 0.1
80 80 80

= 20 = 2 = 0.2

s = 0.18
60

= 0.5 s = 0.36
60

Da

s = 0.6
40

= 0.9

60

= 0.02
40

40

s = 1.8

20

20

= 2, = 0.5
0 0 0.2 0.4

= 2, s = 0.6
0.2 0.4

20

= 0.5, s = 0.6
0.2 0.4

0.6

0.8

0 0

0.6

0.8

0 0

0.6

0.8

Figure 1: Dispersion coecients of suspension, deposition and combined phase against time with the variation of the controlling parameters for P e = 102 .

Figure 2

100 0
Mean displacement

(a)

16 14

x 10

(b)

= 2, = 0.5, s = 0.6
2 c 2

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0

xc
Variance

12 10 8 6 4

xcw xw

2 w

= 2, = 0.5, s = 0.6
0.2 0.4

2 0.8 1 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0.6

90 80
Dispersion coefficient

(c)

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0

Da c

Da Da w

= 2, = 0.5, s = 0.6
0.2 0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 2: Comparison of all three phases (suspension, deposition and combined phase) with time - (a) mean displacement (b) variance and (c) dispersion coecient.

Figure 3

1.4 1.2 1

M0 (t)

C0 (t)

Load

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.5 1

Deposition dominated Suspension dominated

W0 (t)

1.5

2.5

Figure 3: Amount of suspended load, deposited load and total load against time. For continuous lines = 0.02, = 0.9, s = 1.8 and for dotted lines = 20, = 0.1, s = 0.06.

Figure 4

0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6

(a)

t = 0.3 t = 0.4 t = 0.5

0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1

t = 0.1 t = 0.2
1 1.01 1.02

C0

1.03

1.04

1.05

0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6

s = 0.06 s = 0.6 s = 1.8

(b)

y
0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.5 1

= 2, = 0.9, t = 0.5

C0 (y, t)/ C0 (t)

s = 0.06 s = 0.6

1.5

2.5

0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5

(c)

s = 1.8 = 2, = 0.1, t = 0.5

y
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.5 1

C0 (y, t)/ C0 (t)

1.5

2.5

Figure 4: Variation of C0 (y, t) against the channel width y. (a) for dierent time (b) for dierent fall velocities at t = 0.5 when the bed is strongly absorbing ( = 0.9) and (c) same as (b), for strongly reecting bed ( = 0.1).

Figure 5

700 600 500

(a) = 2, = 0.5

1600

(b)

s = 0.6, = 50

1400 1200

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50

2 w

Variance

400 300 200 100 0 0 x 10

5

Variance

1000 800 600

2 2 c
0.7
6

2
0.1 0.2

c
400 0.4 200 0.6 x 10 0.8

0.3

0.9

7 6 5

(c)

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50

2 c

(d)

1.8 1.6

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50

2 c 2

Variance

4 3 2 1 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3

Variance

1.4 1.2 1 0.8

2 t

w
0.6 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

2 w t
1

Figure 5: Variance (c , w , 2 ) of the three dierent phases at small and large time. (a,b) 2 2 When the ow is oscillatory with zero mean and (c,d) oscillatory with non-zero mean. Dotted lines indicate the time dependent eddy diusivity.

Figure 6

0.8 0.6
Dispersion coefficient

(a)

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50 Da w Da
Dispersion coefficient

(b)
1

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50

0.4 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0

Da w
0.5

Da

Da c
0.1 0.2

0.5

Da c

0.3

0.4

1 0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

120 (c)
Dispersion coefficient

140

(d)

Da c
Dispersion coefficient

130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 0.4 50 0.6 0.7

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50

100 80 60 40 20 0 0

Da w Da

Da c

Da

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50
0.1 0.2

Da w
0.8 0.9 1

0.3

w c Figure 6: Variation of dispersion coecients (Da , Da , Da ) with time in the three phases at small and large times. (a,b) When the ow is purely oscillatory and (c,d) when the ow is oscillatory with non-zero mean. Dotted lines correspond to time dependent eddy diusivity.

Figure 7

(a)
Dispersion Coefficient

Dispersion Coefficient

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 30

Da c Da w Da

1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1

Da c Da w Da

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 30

(b)

0.5

0.5 0 0.1 0.2

0.3

0.4

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1 0.8
Dispersion Coefficient

(c)

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50

0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25

Dispersion Coefficient

Da c Da w Da

1.5 (d) 1

Da c Da w Da

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50

0.5

0.5

0.3

1 0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

0.5 0.4
Dispersion coefficient

(e)

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 80

Dispersion coefficient

0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

Da c Da w Da

1.5 (f) 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 0.75

Da c = 2, = 0.5 = 0.6, = 80 Da w s Da

0.25

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

w c Figure 7: Time variation of dispersion coecients (Da , Da , Da ) of the three phases at dierent frequency parameter , when the ow is purely oscillatory with time dependent eddy diusivity and P e = 102 .

Figure 8

120 100
Dispersion coefficient

(a)

150
c Da w Da

(b)

140 130
Dispersion coefficient

c Da w Da

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 30

Da

Da

120 110 100 90 80

80 60 40 20 0 0 = 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 30 0.1 0.2 t 0.3 0.4

70 60 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

120 100
Dispersion coefficient

(c)

150
c Da w Da

(d)

c Da w Da

140
Dispersion coefficient

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50

Da 80 60 40 20 0 0 = 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 50 0.05 0.1 0.15

130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 0.65 0.7

Da

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.75

0.8

0.85

0.9

0.95

100
Dispersion coefficient

(e)

150
c Da w Da

(f)

140
Dispersion coefficient

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 80

c Da w Da

80 60 40 20 0 0

Da

130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95

Da

= 2, = 0.5 s = 0.6, = 80 0.05 0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

w c Figure 8: Time variation of dispersion coecients (Da , Da , Da ) of the three phases at dierent frequency parameter when the ow is oscillatory with non-zero mean and time dependent eddy diusivity.