National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

NCHRP Report 516: Pier and Contraction Scour in Cohesive Soils (2004)
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP)

Citation Manager

Wang, J, Briaud, J-L, Li, Y, Chen, H-C, Nurtjahyo, P, Transportation Research Board. "5.15 Pier Shape Effect on Initial Scour Rate." NCHRP Report 516: Pier and Contraction Scour in Cohesive Soils. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2004.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
39
bottomleft bottomright
Page
39
Front Matter (R1-R10)
Summary (1-7)
1.4 Why Was This Problem Addressed? (8-8)
1.5 Approach Selected to Solve the Problem (9-9)
2.4 Erodibility and Correlation to Soil and Rock Properties (10-13)
3.3 EFA Test Data Reduction (14-14)
3.4 EFA Precision and Typical Results (15-16)
4.2 Small Flood Followed by Big Flood (17-17)
4.3 Big Flood Followed by Small Flood and General Case (18-18)
4.4 Hard Soil Layer Over Soft Soil Layer (19-20)
4.6 Equivalent Time (21-21)
4.7 Extended and Simple SRICOS-EFA Method (22-23)
4.8 Case Histories (24-25)
4.9 Predicted and Measured Local Scour for the Eight Bridges (26-28)
4.10 Conclusions (29-29)
5.4 Measuring Equipment (30-31)
5.5 Soils and Soil Bed Preparation (32-32)
5.6 Flume Tests: Procedure and Measurement (33-33)
5.8 Shallow Water Effect on Maximum Pier Scour Depth (34-35)
5.9 Shallow Water Effect on Initial Shear Stress (36-36)
5.11 Pier Spacing Effect on Maximum Scour Depth (37-37)
5.12 Pier Spacing Effect on Initial Scour Rate (38-38)
5.15 Pier Shape Effect on Initial Scour Rate (39-39)
5.18 Attack Angle Effect on Maximum Scour Depth (40-41)
5.20 Attack Angle Effect on Scour Hole Shape (42-42)
5.21 Maximum Scour Depth Equation for Complex Pier Scour (43-44)
6.2 Existing Knowledge on Numerical Simulations for Scour (45-45)
6.5 Shallow Water Effect: Numerical Simulation Results (46-46)
6.6 Shallow Water Effect on Maximum Shear Stress (47-47)
6.7 Pier Spacing Effect: Numerical Simulation Results (48-48)
6.9 Pier Shape Effect: Numerical Simulation Results (49-50)
6.10 Pier Shape Effect on Maximum Shear Stress (51-51)
6.11 Attack Angle Effect: Numerical Simulation Results (52-52)
6.12 Attack Angle Effect on Maximum Shear Stress (53-53)
6.13 Maximum Shear Stress Equation for Complex Pier Scour (54-55)
7.3 Flume Tests and Measurements (56-56)
7.4 Flume Tests: Flow Observations and Results (57-58)
7.5 Flume Tests: Scour Observations and Results (59-59)
7.6 Maximum and Uniform Contraction Depths for the Reference Cases (60-62)
7.7 Location of Maximum Contraction Depth for the Reference Cases (63-63)
7.8 Correction Factors for Transition Angle and Contraction Length (64-64)
7.9 SRICOS-EFA Method Using HEC-RAS Generated Velocity (65-65)
7.11 Scour Depth Equations for Contraction Scour (66-67)
8.3 Transition Angle Effect: Numerical Simulation Results (68-68)
8.4 Contracted Length Effect: Numerical Simulation Results (69-71)
8.6 Maximum Shear Stress Equation for Contraction Scour (72-75)
9.3 The Integrated SRICOS-EFA Method: Step-by-Step Procedure (76-80)
9.5 The SRICOS-EFA Program (81-83)
9.6 Output of the SRICOS-EFA Program (84-84)
10.4 Gill (1981) Database: Contraction Scour (85-87)
10.5 Remarks (88-88)
11.2 Preparation of the Future Hydrographs (89-89)
11.3 Risk Approach to Scour Predictions (90-90)
11.4 Observations on Current Risk Levels (91-92)
12.2 Example 2: Single Rectangular Pier with Attack Angle and Approaching Hydrograph (93-94)
12.3 Example 3: Group Rectangular Piers with Attack Angle and Approaching Constant Velocity (95-98)
12.4 Example 4: Contracted Channel with 90-Degree Transition Angle and Approaching Constant Velocity (99-102)
12.5 Example 5: Contracted Channel with 60-Degree Transition Angle and Approaching Hydrograph (103-104)
12.6 Example 6: Bridge with Group Piers and Contracted Channel with Hydrograph in Contracted Section (105-110)
13.1 Conclusions (111-112)
13.2 Recommendations, (113-113)
References (114-115)
Nomenclature (116-117)
Unit Conversions (118-118)
Appendix A - Photographs from the Flume Tests (119-125)
Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications (126-126)

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 39
39 5.13 PIER SHAPE EFFECT: 70 FLUME TEST RESULTS 60 The shape of a bridge pier can strongly affect the flow pat- tern around it. In this study, only rectangular piers were con- 50 Scour Depth (mm) sidered. Bridge piers are most often installed with the longer side parallel to the major flow direction; therefore, the length 40 over width ratio, L/B, is kept greater than one for all piers in this study. The rectangular pier was installed with a 0-degree 30 Circular attack angle in the middle of the soil tank. Major scour Square always occurred around the four corners of the rectangular 20 L/B=12 pier but only the time history of the maximum scour depth L/B=8 was used in the analysis. The shapes of the scour holes for 10 L/B=4 different rectangular piers were recorded and compared. In addition, cylindrical piers with a diameter equal to the width 0 of the rectangular pier were used as the reference case. Para- 0 50 100 150 meters and major results for the flume tests for pier shape Time(hr) effect are summarized in Table 5.5. Again, the maximum Figure 5.18. Scour depth versus time curves for pier scour depth and the initial scour rate were calculated in the shape effect tests. same way as in the case of the other flume tests. The scour depth development curves are plotted in Figure 5.18. 2 .0 5.14 PIER SHAPE EFFECT ON MAXIMUM H E C -1 8 , K s h = 1 .1 1 .6 SCOUR DEPTH fo r S q u a re N o s e The cylindrical pier test, SP-1, was chosen as the reference 1 .2 case. The correction factor, Ksp, is the ratio of the maximum Ksh scour depth for a given shape over the maximum scour depth 0 .8 for the cylinder (Figure 5.19). The results on Figure 5.19 indi- cate that there is no noticeable effect on scour depth due to the pier shape. Indeed, the correction factor varies from 1:1 to 1:12. 0 .4 This conclusion is consistent with the correction factor for sand listed in HEC-18. Therefore, it is concluded that a pier shape 0 .0 correction factor of 1.1 is a good approximation for the maxi- 0 5 10 15 L /B mum scour depth around rectangular piers in both clay and sand as long as the L/B ratio is larger than 1. The case of the L/B Figure 5.19. Correction factor for pier shape effect. ratio smaller than 1 was not covered in this research project. 6 5.15 PIER SHAPE EFFECT ON INITIAL SCOUR RATE 5 Initial Scour Rate (m m / h) The initial scour rate for the flume tests on the rectangular Rectangular 4 piers having the same width but different lengths are com- Circular pared in Figure 5.20. As can be seen, the rectangular piers 3 TABLE 5.5 Parameters and results for pier shape effect 2 flume tests Time Test H B V i z Zmax 1 L/B Lasting No. (mm) (mm) (m/s) (mm/hr) (mm) (h) Sp-1 375.00 61.00 0.33 Circular 151.92 1.45 68.03 0 Sp-2 375.00 61.00 0.33 1:1 129.50 5.00 73.53 0 5 10 15 Sp-3 375.00 61.00 0.33 4:1 124.42 2.05 72.99 L/B Sp-4 375.00 61.00 0.33 8:1 131.58 1.93 74.63 Figure 5.20. Initial scour rates for the shape effect flume Sp-5 375.00 61.00 0.33 12:1 131.50 1.84 75.19 tests.