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. "8.4 Contracted Length Effect: Numerical Simulation Results." 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
69
bottomleft bottomright
Page
69
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 69
69 Z X Y Block 4 Block 3 0 Block 1 -0.2 Z/(0.5B1) -2 -0.4 0 2 0 1) Block 2 0.25 4 0. 5B X /( Y /( 0.5 0 .5 6 B1 0.75 ) 8 Center of the channel 1 Figure 8.1. Grid system for the simulation in the case of B2/B1 = 0.25. also observed that the distance xmax between the beginning of was 0.45 m. The upstream flow was a steady flow with a the fully contracted section and the location of max increases velocity of 0.45 m/s, the contraction channel ratio (B2/B1) when increases was equal to 0.5, the transition angle was 90 degrees, and the water depth was 0.12 m. Four different contraction lengths 8.4 CONTRACTED LENGTH EFFECT: were simulated: L/(B1 - B2) = 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 and 6.76. The NUMERICAL SIMULATION RESULTS difference (B1 - B2) was chosen as the characteristic length B. The Reynolds Number was 101250 and the Froude Number Again, one of the flume experiments was chosen to per- was 0.303. The initial bed shear stress distribution around the form the numerical simulation. The width of the flume used contracted zone is shown in Figures 114 to 116 for various 1 8.50 4.51 6.92 8.12 6.92 Center of channel 3.31 5.71 9.32 4.51 0.91 0.75 2.11 = 0.91 Y/(0.5B1) 0.5 Abutment Flow 0.25 0 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 X/(0.5B1) Figure 8.2. Initial bed shear stress distribution (N/m2) for B2/B1 = 0.25 and V = 0.45m/s.

OCR for page 70
70 1 3.29 Center of channel 3.11 3.29 2.49 0.75 1.25 1.70 2.49 1.70 Y/(0.5B1) = 0.91 4.08 0.91 0.5 Abutment 0.25 Flow 0 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 X/(0.5B1) Figure 8.3. Initial bed shear stress distribution (N/m2) for B1/B2 = 0.50 and V = 0.45m/s. 1 2.18 Center of channel 0.75 1.54 1.78 2.03 = 1.29 2.33 Y/(0.5B1) 0.5 2.03 2.66 1.78 1.54 3.00 1.29 0.91 Flow 0.25 0.91 Abutment 0 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 X/(0.5B1) Figure 8.4. Initial bed shear stress distribution (N/m2) for B2/B1 = 0.75, and V = 0.45m/s. 1 1.83 Center of channel 1.68 1.68 1.06 1.52 0.75 1.37 1.68 = 0.91 1.22 1.99 Y/(B1-B2) 2.45 0.5 Flow 0.25 Abutment 0 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 X/(B1-B2) Figure 8.5. Initial bed shear stress distribution (N/m2) for B2/B1 = 0.5, V = 0.45 m/s, L/(B1 ­ B2) = 6.76, and = 15 degrees).

OCR for page 71
71 1 2.06 1.49 Center of channel 1.10 1.87 1.68 1.49 1.87 0.75 2.06 = 0.91 2.25 Y/(B1-B2) 3.17 0.5 Flow 0.25 Abutment 0 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 X/(B1-B2) Figure 8.6. Initial bed shear stress distribution (N/m2) for B2/B1 = 0.5, V = 0.45 m/s, L/(B1 ­ B2) = 6.76, and = 30 degrees). 1 2.27 2.02 1.36 2.27 Center of channel 1.82 2.02 0.75 2.62 Y/(B1-B2) = 0.91 3.76 0.5 0.25 Flow Abutment 0 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 X/(B1-B2) Figure 8.7. Initial bed shear stress distribution (N/m2) for B2/B1 = 0.5, V = 0.45 m/s, L/(B1 ­ B2) = 6.76, and = 45 degrees). 1 3.25 Center of channel 3.25 1.97 3.02 2.49 0.75 1.44 3.02 3.44 = 0.91 3.75 1.97 Y/(B1-B2) 4.04 0.91 0.5 Flow 0.25 Abutment 0 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 X/(B1-B2) Figure 8.8. Initial bed shear stress distribution (N/m2) for B2/B1 = 0.5, V = 0.45 m/s, and L/(B1 ­ B2) = 0.25).