Concentration and flow velocity measurements in a local scour hole

(1)

I

1 I

I

J

I

1 I

I

-I

I

l!~f

T

U

Delft

Delft University of Technology

Faculty of Civil Engineering

(2)

I

Concentration and flow velocity

measurements in alocal scour hole

Report n° 4-90

G.J.C.M Hoffmans

Faculty of Civil Engineering Hydraulic Engineering Delft University of Technology

(3)

I

(4)

I

Contents 1. Introduction ₅

2. Summary and conclusions

2.1 2.2 Summary Conclusions 6 6 6

3. Experimental equipment and procedures

3.1 F1ume 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 Water discharge

Water and bed surface e1evations Sediment concentration

Longitudina1 flow velocity Water temperature 8 8 9 9 9 9 11 12 12 3.2 Measurements 3.3 Experimenta1 procedures 4. Experimental results 4.1 Flow conditions 4.2 Sediment conditions 4.2.1 Sieve curve 4.2.2 Fa11 velocity

4.3 Maximum scour depth

4.4 Sediment concentration

4.5 Longitudina1 flow velocity

13 13 13 13 14 15 17 18 References

(5)

I

Contents (continued)

Tables

I

TableTable Bl.l- Blo2A Maximum scour depth versus time (4 rPROVO measurements of run CSO uns)

Table B2.1- B2.3 PROVO measurements of run Csl

Table B3.1- B3.2 PROVO measurements of run CSS

Table B4 PROVO measurements of run C60

I

Table Cl.l- Cl.5 Concentration measurements of run CSO

Table C2.1- C2.6 Concentration measurements of run Cs1

I

Tab1e C3.1- C3.4Table C4.1- C4.2 Concentration measurements of run CSSConcentration measurements of run C60

Table 01.1-

m

,

5 Mean flow velocity measurements of run CsO

I

Table 02.1- 02.6 Mean flow velocity measurements of run Csl

Table 03.1- 03.5 Mean flow velocity measurements of run Css

I

Table 04 Mean flow velocity measurements of run C60

I

Figures

Figure A Oevelopment maximum scour depth (4 runs)

I

Figure B1Figure B2 Bed-level development of run CSOBed-level deve10pment of run CS1

Figure B3 Bed-level development of run Css

I

Figure B4 Bed-level development of run C60

Figure Cl.l- Cl.5 Concentration profiles of run CsO

I

Figure C2.l- C2.6 Concentration profiles of run CS1

Figure C3.1- C3.4 Concentration profiles of run Css

'I

Figure C4.l- C4.2 Concentration profiles of run C60

Figure 01.1-

m

,

5 Mean flow velocity profiles of run CsO

I

Figure 02.1- 02.6Figure 03.1- 03.5 Mean flow velocity profiles of run CslMean flow velocity profiles of run CSS

Figure 04 Mean flow velocity profiles of run C60

I

(6)

I

Notation A B wet cross-section width (of flume)

c sediment mass concentration

sediment mass concentration (of sucked sample) particle diameter

Froude number

maximum scour depth (flow depth minus initial flow depth) - initial flow depth (fixed bed)

- empirical coefficient

= length (of fixed bed)

= flow rate

= Reynolds number

voltage

time in which h = ho (in hours)

m

= time-averaged ambient (main) flow velocity

= time-averaged intake velocity (nozzle brass pipe)

time-averaged flow velocity depth-averaged flow velocity depth-averaged bed-shear velocity volume of water-sediment sample

fall velocity

weight of the sediment sample (dry) weight of the sediment sample (wet)

c s d Fr h m ho K L Q Re S u c u s Ü Üo Ü cr V w w s W s,d W S,w a scour factor = parameter = empirical coefficient

= empirical coefficient

= (suction) trapping efficiency

= relative density - kinematic viscosity = density of sediment density of fluid 2 (L ) (L) 3 (ML ) 3 (ML ) (L) (

-

) (L) (L) (L) 3 _1 (L T ) (

-

) (V) 1 (LT ) 1 (LT ) 1 (LT ) 1 (LT ) 1 (LT ) 3 (L ) 1 (LT ) (M) (M) (

-

) (

-

) (

-

) (-) 2 1 (L T ) 3 (ML ) 3 (ML )

(7)

I

5 1. Introduction

The general objective of this research project is to model the scour hole downstream of a structure (2-D) for which basically two models are used namely a flow model and a morphological model.

Since there are no measurements available of concentrations in scour holes to verify the morphological parameters, flume experiments are carried out to determine the sediment concentration. The longitudinal

flow velocities are measured as weIl. The bed-Ioad, which is strongly

dependent on time and place, is not measured.

The measuring data are used to check the accuracy of the scour model DUCT-SUSTRA. The flow model is based on the momentum equation for turbulent flow and the equation of continuity in which the eddy viscosity is prescribed according to existing theories. The

morphological model is based on the convection-diffusion equation for suspended sediment.

The project is sponsored by Rijkswaterstaat, ministry of Public Works of the Netherlands.

(8)

I

6

2. Summary and conclusions

2.1 Summary

Flume experiments with small Froude numbers have been carried out to

study the concentration field in alocal scour hole without supply of

sediment load. The measuring results will be used to check the validity of the two dimensional scour model DUCT-SUSTRA.

The objective of the experiments was to measure the concentrations at various locations in the flume above a movable bed of fine sand

(dso = 165 ~m). The experimental set-up and the equipment and procedures

of the measurements are described in chapter 3. The flow velocities were measured with an electromagnetic flow meter (EMS). The sediment

concentrations were determined from water-sediment samples, which were collected by siphoning (free fall method).

The experimental results such as the bed-configuration profiles, the sediment concentrations and the flow velocities are presented in

chapter 4. The time, in which the maximum scour depth in the experiments is equal to the initial flow depth, is compared with the time predicted by an analytical scour formula.

2.2 Conclusions

Based on bed-configuration profiles at the flume axis and halfway between the flume axis and the side it can be deduced that the scour process was mainly two-dimensional.

The slope of the scour hole was smooth, while ripples were formed

downstream of the re-attachment point, where a new wall layer develops.

The equivalent roughness height, which is defined as the height from the averaged bed level till the top of the ripples, was approximately 1.5 cm.

The coefficient a, which represents a dimensionless scour factor

(9)

I

7

intensity due to the geometry of the structure, is not unambiguous and

varied from 1.75 to 2.15 for the four runs (run C60). This reflects a

difference of about a factor three for the time, in which the maximum

(10)

I

8

3. Experimenta1 equipment and procedures

3.1 F1urne

The experiments were conducted in a 45 m long, 80 cm wide and 90 cm deep

f1urne,which was divided into an upstream section, a test reach and a

downstream section, figure 3.1. The upstream section consisted of a

reception area for the laboratory water and a fixed ti1ted rough bed, to

ensure the turbulent boundary 1ayer was fu1ly developed before reaching the test section. To dampen disturbances and to provide an even flow

distribution across the flurnea flow smoothing device was plunged in the

upstream contracting section before a concrete ramp, which led to the fixed bed. The fixed bed was situated 250 mm above the f1ume hottom. The test reach was composed of a movab1e bed with fine sediment to a depth of 250 mm, which was locked up by a concrete si11 at the end. The

downstream section consisted of a sand trap, a water level control weir

at the outflow point of the channel and a stilling basin from which the

water was drained back into the laboratory system.

The side walls of the flume were made of glass, while the f1ume itself

was constructed on pi11ars.

upstr,am seenen te st rroch downstre-am s e etie o

smoothing dfVict"

rcbercter tloo'

mecs uremen ts in m

Figure 3.1 Experimenta1 set-up

0.25

(11)

I

9 3.2 Measurements 3.2.1 Water discharge

The water was supp1ied from an underground reservoir and pumped through

a va1ve-controlled pipe. At the downstream end of the channel, a

submerged weir was provided to control the outlet backwater. The flow rate was measured by means of a measuring-flange with an inaccuracy of about 3% (calibration error).

3.2.2 Water and bed surface elevations

The water surface elevation was measured at three stations along the fixed bed by means of static head tubes connected to gauge-glasses, which were read with point gauges.

The bed configurations were measured with an electronic profile

indicator (PROVO), which consists of a probe, i.e. a needle, placed

vertically in the water. A servomechanism maintains the tip of the probe at a constant distance above the bed. The needle itself will follow the configuration of the bed continuously. The profile indicator was mounted on a four-wheeled carriage at a position corresponding to the centre of the channel. Also some measurements were carried out at a quarter of the width at both sides of the flume to measure three dimensional effects. The signals of the PROVO were transmitted to a recorder and manually processed to calculate the scour depths. Possible errors in the

elaboration of the mean scour depth are estimated at ± 5 mmo

3.2.3 Sediment concentration

The mixture of sand and sediment was siphoned perpendicular to the flow

direction. The sediment concentrations were measured in the centre of

the flume at five sections in the main direction of the flow. At each

location eight rectangular brass pipes with an internal diameter of 2.8 mm were simultaneously immersed into the flow during a measuring

(12)

I

10

I

session. The averaged length of the brass pipe was about 50 cm, while

the averaged intake nozz1e amounted to 2 cm. The brass pipes were

attached to a wooden beam. At the end of the brass pipe a plastic tube

was connected, which had an internal diameter of 4 mm and a length of approximately 2 m. The water-sediment samples were collected in

calibrated buckets with a capacity of about 10 liter, which were

situated at the laboratory f1oor. The fall varied from 1.10 m at the end

of the experiment to 1.35 m at the beginning of the run. The sampling

rate was by approximation 1 liter in 2 minutes resu1ting in an intake

velocity

(ü )

of about 1.35 mis. The sampling period varied from 18 to

s

22 minutes. To determine the volume of the sample (V ) it was weighed

w

with an accuracy of 10 g. The water was gently poured off from the

bucket. The sediment, which was left behind, was weighed under water

with an electronic balance (Mettier PE 360). The weights (W ) were

s,w

I

read with an accuracy of 10 mg.

The calibration of the suction is determined by the trapping efficiency

(~), which is defined by the ratio of the sediment concentration in the

sucked sample, c , and the concentration in the flow c: ~ = c

Ic

(Bosman

s s

et al, 1987). The value of ~ depends on many parameters, such as the nozzle dimensions, its orientation relative to the flow, the velocities

of intake and ambient flow, the sediment particle characteristics (size

and shape) and the relative density. With the nozzle projecting upstream and with the velocities of intake and ambient being identical, ~ equals to unity. Generally under other conditions ~ differs from unity, figure 3.2.3. The experimental values in the figure mentioned above are based on experiments where the magnitude of the ambient flow velocity varied

from 0.9 to 2.4 mis, whi1e the Reynolds number ranged from 50,000 to

100,000.

I

When the intake velocity exceeds the ambient flow velocity by more than

a factor two, the suction trapping efficiency is independent of the

velocity ratio. Then the calibration of the normal suction (900 degrees)

gives an almost constant value of 0.75 for sediment dso = 170 ~m.

The sediment mass concentrations (c) were calcu1ated as fol10ws:

I

W ~ c = ~ V w

I

(13)

I

11

I

in which W d represents the dry weight of the sediment, p (=2650 gil)

s, s

the density of the sediment and p (-1000 gil) the density of the fluid.

w

I

Q

• 0-·

~

• <,

.0 oo·t-.. ~ ~ • _.. -, 1..

~

-/'

.

,

~ f'-~

• V

i

_/

I.-·

90" ~ I

I

,

C.

0 _o. IQ z.e .D IQO _____. ;i./û.

I

Y I o

I

0.0.1

Figure 3.2.3 Trapping efficiendy (7)of a ~ 3 mm suction nozzle

related to the relative orientation and to the velocity

ratio for 170 urn (Bosman et al. 1987)

I

3.2.4 Longitudinal flow velocity

I

The flow velocities in the main direction of the flow were measured with

an electromagnetic flow meter (EMS). The instrument consists of three

basic parts: the probe with attached electronics (conditioning-unit), a

pre-amplifier and a signal-processor. The probe detects a microvolt

level signal, which will be transmitted to the signal processor. The

signals were averaged over a period of 20 seconds. The time averaged

flow velocities (Ü) in the longitudinal direction were calculated by

U =

P

l S +

P

2, in which S represents the time averaged voltage (V) over

_1

a period of 20 s. The empirical constants

P

l (-0.099 V ) and

P

2 (-0.0101 mis) respectively are obtained by calibration.

The measurements were taken at 6-14 points along the vertical axis, for

6 sections in the streamwise axis along the center line of the flume.

I

(14)

I

12 3.2.5 Water temperature

The water temperature during the measurements was 23.S

±

0.5

oe

.

The

maximum variation during the tests was small, since the water was pumped

up from a large underground reservoir.

3.3 Experimental procedures

At the beginning of almost every run the bed in the test reach was

levelled with the fixed bed, excepting run CSO. Unaccountably the sand

bed was approximately 1.5 cm lower than the level of the fixed bed,

which was determined during the elaboration of the PROVO-measurements.

Before each run the test reach was refilled with the sediment from the sand trap and the rest from the supply container.

The experiment session was started with run C60. At the start of this

run the development of the scour process passed relatively faster

compared with calculations based on an analytical scour formula (Delft

Hydraulics, 1972), which will be discussed in 4.3. Because of this some

information about the scour process is missing, figure A.

Before and after each set of measurements of concentrations and

velocities the experiment was stopped to measure the bed with an

electronic profile indicator. The experiment was ended in case the

changes were not significant anymore.

It was not feasible to measure the velocities and concentrations at the

same time because of the labour-intensive efforts. The bed profiles

corresponding to the concentration and velocity measurements are

(15)

I

13 4. Experimental results 4.1 Flow conditions

I

Four experiments were carried out, in which the flow rate (Q) and the

initia1 flow depth (ho) were varied and consequent1y the initial dept

h-averaged flow velocity (Üo), the Reynolds and Froude numbers, as shown

in tab1e 4.1.

I

experiment _Q _ho Uo Re Fr (ljs) (m) (mjs) (-) (

-

) C50 47.2 0.116 0.509 51300 0.45 C51 97.6 0.246 0.496 106100 0.31 C55 56.8 0.136 0.522 61800 0.37 C60 92.8 0.199 0.583 100900 0.41 Üo ho Üo _6 note: Re Fr J(g ho) 11 = 0.92*10 m2js 11

Table 4.1 Hydraulic conditions

I

4.2 Sediment conditions 4.2.1 Sieve curve

I

The sediment for this experiment had a mean particle diameter of 163 ~m,

which was based on a sieve ana1ysis (10 sieves), while the

characteristic grain diameters were dlo = 111 ~m and dgO = 210 ~m. The

sample was taken from the supp1y container.

The roughness of the fixed bed was achieved by gravel, which was embedded into the cement. Tab1e 4.2.1 gives an overview of the sieve analysis of the gravel.

I

(16)

I

sieve (mrn) 14 11.2 8.00 5.60 4.00 3.30 rest cumulative % Table 4.2.1

I

4.2.2 Fa11 velocity

The fall velocity of the suspended sediment is deterrnined in a settling tube. This is a device to determine the fall velocity distribution of particles in a sample. At the lower end of the settling tube the sediment particles accumulate on a very sensitive weighing device. A cumulative weight distribution of the sample as a function of the

measuring time is obtained. This distribution is converted int0 the fall velocity distribution of the sample using the height of the settling

tube (Slot and Geldof, 1986).

A sample was taken from the bed in the test reach. Af ter it was dried,

it was split into smaller test amounts to determine the fall velocity using the settling tube. The mean fall velocity at 200C was w 0.019

s

mis, while the mean fall velocity of suspended sediment amounted to

0.017 mis. The probability distribution of the fall velocity is shown in

figure 4.2.2.

,

I

'

I

,

I

r

I

e .~ u C_~

I

"

"c

..

I

:ö o D o Q.

I

Figure 4.2.2

I

4.9

o

94 96.9 98.1 100

Results sieve analysis gravel (fixed bed)

0.10

0.05

0.00

2.0 10.0 20.0 JO.O 40.0 50.0

(17)

I

15

I

4.3 Maximum scour depth

I

The deve10pment of the (maximum) scour depth decreases with the time, figure A. The deepest point of the hole moves into the longitudina1 direction, figures B1-B4. The resu1ts of a two-dimensiona1 scour for the re1ationship between the maximum scour depth and the time can be

summarized in (Breusers, 1965):

I

in which h represents the maximum scour depth in m, ho the initia1 flow

m

depth in mand tI the time in which h ho

m

'

I

For a two dimensiona1 flow the average of the factor

p

proves to be

0.38, however, for a three-dimensiona1 flow this factor is dependent on

the geometry of the construction (e.g. degree of turbu1ence). A numerical ana1ysis, which is based on the least square method, shows

that the exponent

ft

in the experiments ranges from 0.29 to 0.36, tab1e

4.1 and tab1e A, in which tI is the time at the moment that h is equal

m

I

to the flow depth (ho).

I

experiment

_ft

_tI _ho (

-

) (hours) (m)

*

C50 0.354 65 0.116

*

C51 0.293 340 0.246 C55 0.341 33 0.136 C60 0.363 30 0.199

*

extrapo1ated scour time

Table 4.1 The factor 8

I

The dependence of the characteristic scour time tI on the conditions of the flow etc. or in other words the re1ationship between the time-scale

(18)

I

16

I

on the one side and the ve1ocity-sca1e, materia1-sca1e, 1ength-sca1e and

geometrie situation on the other side, can be described by the same

general re1ationship both for two and three-dimensiona1 loca1 scour (Delft Hydrau1ics, 1972):

I

'

I

112 Kt:.' ho _ _ "3 [QUo - U

1 .

cr

in which Q represents a dimension1ess scour factor invo1ving the

velocity distribution and the inf1uence of the turbulence intensity due

to the geometry of the structure, Üo the initia1 depth-averaged flow velocity in mis, Üo =

Q/A

,

Q

= discharge in m3/s, A = wet cross-section

at the end of the bottom protection in m2,

Ü

the critica1 depth

-er

averaged flow velocity for initiation of motion in mis, t:. the re1ative density of bottom material under water t:. = (ps - pw)lpw and K a

numerical coefficient.

I

Origina11y the va1ue of K was determined to be 250 (Meu1en and Vinjé,

1977), however, a later eva1uation showed that a va1ue of K of about 330

was more appropriate (Graauw and Py1arczyk, 1980).

Some pre-ca1cu1ations were made to plan the experiment with the formula

mentioned above in which Q was equa1 to 1.75. The va1ue of Q was based

on experiments (Delft Hydrau1ics, 1972) with a1most the same hydrau1ic

conditions, table 4.2

I

fixed bed

I

dso L dso B ho Üo Ü tI Q: cr

(m) (m) (IJm) (m) (m) (mis) (mis) (hours) (

-

)

.01 2.50 120 .50 .25 .64 .257 100 1.72 .01 2.50 280 .50 .25 .64 .316 175 1.65 .0075 3.00 225 .50 .25 e,55 .290 430 1.62 .0075 6.00 225 1.00 .50 .95 .320 60 1.72 smooth 3.00 225 .50 .25 .65 .294 32 2.15

I

Tab1e 4.2 Hydraulic conditions (M648lM863)

I

(19)

I

17

I

in which L represents the length of the bed-protection before the test

reach and B the width of the flume.

The length of the fixed rough bed was the main difference between the experiments mentioned above and the experiments, which were carried out in the Laboratory of F1uid Mechanics.

The geometric conditions for these experiments were:

B 0.5 m

L 10 m

7.5 mm (fixed bed)

Using a value of 1.75 for the experimental coefficient a, the following calculated values for the time tI were obtained, table 4.3.

I

C50 C51 C55 C60 U_cr tI_,_c tI_,m

(mis) (hours) (hours)

.231 62 65 .253 378 340 .235 76 33 .247 93 30 experiment

I

'

I

Table 4.3 Calculated versus measured time

It can be concluded, that the empirical coefficient a is not unambiguous, since there is a difference of almost a factor three between the calculated and the measured time tI for experiment C60.

However, the computed time for C50 and C51 is satisfactory. In order to calculate the measured time the value of a should be equal to 2.15 for experiment C60.

I

4.4 Sediment concentration

(20)

I

18

The figures Cl.l-C4.2 show the measured concentration profiles of the runs of C50 ,C5l, C55 and C60 respectively. The measurements of the concentrations are given in the tables Cl.l-C4.2. The concentrations were measured in order to verify and to calibrate the morphological model SUSTRA (Rijn and Meyer, 1986). The model SUSTRA, which means suspended transport, describes the bed and suspended load and the erosion of the bottom.

4.5 Longitudinal flow velocity

The figures Dl.l-D4.l show the measurements of the longitudinal flow veloeities. The experimental values are tabulated in the tables Dl. l-D4.l. The flow veloeities were measured to verify the velocity

computations of the DUCT-model (Hoffmans, 1988), which is a flow model based on the momentum equation for turbulent flow and the equation of continuity.

(21)

I

19 References

I

Breusers, H.N.G., 1965, Gonformity and time-scale in two dimensional

local scour, publication n° 40, Delft Hydraulics.

Bosman, J.J., van der Velden E.T.J.M. and G.H. Hulsbergen, 1987,

Sediment concentration measurement by transverse suction,

Goastal Engineering, vol 11, pp 353-370, Elsevier Science

Publishers B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Delft Hydraulics, 1972, Systematical investigation of two and three

dimensional local scour, Investigation M648/M863 (Duteh).

Graauw, A.F.F de, and K.W. Pylarczyk, 1980, Model-prototype conformity

of local scour in non-cohesive sediments beneath overflow-dam,

publication n° 242, Delft Hydraulics.

Hoffmans, G.J.C.M., 1988, Flow model with prescribed eddy viscosity,

Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering,

n° 11-88.

Meu1en, T. van der, and J.J. Vinjé, 1975, Three-dimensiona1 local scour

in non-cohesive sediments, XVIth congress IAHR, Sao Pau10.

Rijn, L.G. van, and K. Meyer, 1986, Three-dimensional mode11ing of

suspended sediment transport for currents and waves,

SUTRENGH-3D model, Delft Hydrau1ics, n° H461/Q250/Q422.

Slot, R.E. and H.J. Geldof, 1986, An improved sett1ing tube system for

sand. ISSN 0169-6548, Gommunications on Hydrau1ics and

Geotechnica1 Engineering, Delft University of Techno1ogy,

Facu1ty of Givil Engineering, n° 86-12.

(22)

(23)

I

C50 C51 C55 C60

I

time h_m time h_m time h time h

m m

I

3h 05m(hours) .036(m) 2h SOm(hours) .060(m) 1h 21m(hours) .041(m) 3h 41m(hours) .0(m)92

I

5h 35m4h lOm ..040044 4h 15m5h lOm .072.073 4h OOm3h 22m .068.064 23h 26m5h 26m ..101808

8h 55m .059 5h 46m .074 4h 53m .073 24h 56m .184

I

10h SOm .062 7h 16m .081 11h 08m .095 26h 11m .188 15h 20m .071 8h 41m .086 11h 48m .096 29h 31m .200

I

18h 25m .078 9h 11m .088 12h 29m .097 23h 57m .083 10h 36m .089 16h 40m .108

I

44h 35m48h 15m ..103100 12h 06m12h 36m ..093092 17h 23m18h 02m ..109110 14h 19m .096 36h 35m .140

,

I

18h 06m .104 43h 20m .149 22h 06m .109 44h 35m .150

I

22h 36m .110 24h Slm .ll5

I

35h 46m .126 52h 21m .142

\

1

75h 31m99h 41m ..160172 107h 21m .174

I

172h llm .202

I

note: h = maximum scour depth (m)

m

I

At the start of experiment C50 the level of the erodib1e bed was

I

approximate1y 1.5 cm lower than the level of the fithe other experiments the bed in the test reach was leveled withxed bed. For

the fixed bed.

I

Tab1e A Maximum scour depth versus time

I

(24)

I

,

I

,

I

'

I

'

,I

Experiment: C50 time: Oh 55m 3h 05m 4h lOm 5h 35m 8h 55m 10h SOm 15h 20m x z z z z z z z (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) .00 .116 .116 .116 .116 .116 .116 .116 .20 .131 .143 .152 .157 .166 .166 .166 .40 .146 .153 .161 .165 .180 .182 .186 .60 .157 .160 .166 .169 .185 .188 .192 .80 .161 .164 .169 .172 .188 .192 .196 1.00 .162 .166 .170 .174 .190 .193 .199 1.25 .152 .167 .171 .175 .190 .193 .201 1.50 .142 .167 .171 .175 .189 .192 .202 1.75 .138 .166 .171 .175 .187 .190 .202 2.00 .136 .162 .170 .174 .183 .188 .200 2.40 .135 .158 .167 .171 .179 .185 .195 2.80 .134 .154 .164 .168 .175 .181 .190 3.20 .134 .151 .161 .165 .172 .178 .186 3.60 .134 .148 .158 .163 .170 .176 .182 4.00 .134 .145 .155 .161 .168 .174 .179 4.50 .134 .143 .153 .159 .166 .172 .177 5.00 .134 .142 .151 .157 .164 .170 .175 5.50 .134 .141 .149 .155 .163 .168 .173 6.00 .134 .140 .147 .153 .162 .166 .171 6.50 .134 .139 .146 .152 .161 .165 .170 7.00 .134 .139 .145 .151 .160 .164 .169 7.50 .134 .139 .145 .151 .160 .164 .168 8.00 .134 .139 .145 .151 .160 .164 .168 8.50 .134 .139 .145 .151 .160 .164 .168 9.00 .134 .139 .145 .151 .160 .164 .168

note: x = distance from fixed bed in downstream direction (m) z = distance beneath water surface (m)

(25)

I

'I

I

a

I

,

I

Experiment: C50

·

1 I

I

time: 18h 25m 23h 57m 44h 35m 48h 15m x z z z z (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) .00 .116 .116 .116 .116 .20 .166 .166 .166 .166 .40 .188 .189 .193 .194 .60 .196 .201 .215 .216 .80 .201 .207 .227 .228 1.00 .205 .211 .230 .231 1.25 .208 .213 .231 .233 1.50 .209 .214 .231 .234 1.75 .209 .214 .230 .233 2.00 .207 .212 .227 .230 2.40 .203 .208 .222 .225 2.80 .198 .203 .215 .218 3.20 .194 .198 .210 .213 3.60 .189 .194 .204 .207 4.00 .184 .190 .198 .202 4.50 .182 .188 .192 .196 5.00 .180 .186 .187 .191 5.50 .178 .184 .184 .188 6.00 .176 .182 .181 .185 6.50 .175 .181 .180 .184 7.00 .174 .180 .179 .183 7.50 .173 .179 .179 .183 8.00 .173 .179 .179 .183 8.50 .173 .179 .179 .183 9.00 .173 .179 .179 .183

I

'--I

I

~

-I

note: x - distance from fixed bed in downstream direction (m)

z = distance beneath water surface (m)

Tab1e B1.2 PROVO-measurements of experiment C50

(26)

I

Experiment: C51 time: Oh 45m 2h SOm 4h 15m 5h lOm 5h 46m 7h 16m 8h 41m x z z z z z z z (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) .00 .246 .246 .246 .246 .246 .246 .246 .20 .272 .282 .291 .291 .292 .292 .291 .40 .280 .296 .306 .306 .308 .311 .311 .60 .282 .305 .316 .316 .316 .322 .326 .80 .279 .306 .318 .319 .320 .326 .330 l.00 .272 .302 .316 .317 .319 .327 .332 l.25 .262 .293 .310 .312 .314 .324 .328 l.50 .254 .287 .304 .306 .308 .319 .323 l.75 .248 .282 .300 .302 .304 .313 .317 2.00 .245 .277 .296 .298 .300 .307 .311 2.40 .244 .272 .291 .293 .295 .301 .305 2.80 .244 .268 .286 .288 .290 .296 .300 3.20 .243 .264 .282 .284 .286 .292 .296 3.60 .243 .260 .278 .280 .282 .288 .292 4.00 .243 .256 .274 .276 .278 .284 .288 4.50 .243 .253 .270 .272 .274 .280 .285 5.00 .243 .250 .266 .268 .270 .276 .282 5.50 .243 .247 .262 .264 .266 .273 .279 6.00 .243 .245 .259 .261 .263 .271 .277 6.50 .243 .245 .256 .258 .260 .269 .275 7.00 .243 .245 .254 .256 .258 .268 .274 7.50 .243 .245 .252 .254 .256 .267 .273 8.00 .243 .245 .251 .253 .255 .266 .272 8.50 .243 .245 .250 .252 .254 .265 .271 9.00 .244 .246 .249 .251 .253 .264 .270

note: x = distance from fixed bed in downstream direction (m)

(27)

I

,

I

/

1 I

"

I

Experiment: C51 time: 9h 11m 10h 36m 12h 06m 14h 19m 18h 06m 22h 06m 22h 36m x z z z z z z z (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) .00 .246 .246 .246 .246 .246 .246 .246 .20 .291 .291 .291 .291 .296 .296 .297 .40 .311 .311 .313 .318 .323 .327 .331 .60 .326 .328 .331 .336 .338 .343 .346 .80 .332 .332 .336 .341 .346 .351 .352 1.00 .334 .335 .338 .342 .349 .355 .356 1.25 .330 .332 .335 .341 .350 .354 .355 1.50 .325 .327 .332 .339 .346 .351 .352 1.75 .319 .321 .326 .333 .341 .346 .347 2.00 .313 .315 .320 .327 .336 .341 .342 2.40 .307 .309 .314 .321 .330 .336 .337 2.80 .302 .304 .309 .316 .324 .332 .333 3.20 .298 .300 .305 .312 .320 .328 .329 3.60 .294 .296 .301 .308 .316 .324 .325 4.00 .290 .292 .297 .304 .312 .319 .32~0 4.50 .287 .289 .294 .301 .308 .315 .316 5.00 .284 .286 .291 .298 .305 .311 .312 5.50 .281 .283 .288 .295 .302 .307 .308 6.00 .279 .281 .286 .293 .300 .305 .306 6.50 .277 .279 .284 .291 .298 .303 .304 7.00 .276 .278 .283 .290 .296 .301 .302 7.50 .275 .277 .281 .288 .294 .299 .300 8.00 .274 .276 .280 .287 .293 .298 .299 8.50 .273 .275 .279 .286 .292 .297 .298 9.00 .272 .274 .278 .285 .291 .296 .297

(28)

I

t

I

(

I

Experiment: C51 time: 24h Slm 35h 46m 52h 21m 75h 31m 99h 41m 107h 2lm 172h Urn x z z z z z z z (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) .00 .246 .246 .246 .246 .246 .246 .246 .20 .301 .301 .301 .301 .301 .301 .301 .40 .332 .336 .340 .341 .341 .341 .346 .60 .346 .355 .366 .371 .371 .376 .381 .80 .357 .366 .381 .388 .396 .397 .411 1.00 .361 .372 .386 .401 .411 .414 .436 1.25 .360 .371 .388 .405 .416 .418 .446 1.50 .357 .369 .388 .406 .418 .420 .448 1.75 .352 .366 .387 .405 .417 .419 .447 2.00 .347 .362 .385 .402 .415 .417 .446 2.40 .342 .357 .382 .398 .411 .413 .443 2.80 .339 .352 .376 .393 .406 .408 .439 3.20 .335 .349 .371 .388 .401 .403 .435 3.60 .331 .345 .366 .383 .396 .398 .430 4.00 .326 .340 .361 .378 .391 .393 .425 4.50 .322 .335 .356 .373 .386 .388 .418 5.00 .318 .331 .351 .367 .380 .382 .412 5.50 .314 .327 .346 .360 .373 .375 .402 6.00 .311 .323 .342 .354 .366 .368 .393 6.50 .309 .319 .338 .348 .359 .361 .384 7.00 .307 .316 .334 .342 .352 .354 .375 7.50 .306 .314 .331 .337 .347 .349 .368 8.00 .304 .313 .328 .333 .342 .344 .361 8.50 .303 .312 .326 .331 .339 .341 .356 9.00 .302 .311 .324 .329 .336 .338 .351

z = distance beneath water surface (rn)

(29)

I

Experiment: C55 time: Oh 44m 1h 21m 3h 22m 4h OOm 4h 53m 11h 08m 11h 48m x z z z z z z z (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) .00 .136 .136 .136 .136 .136 .136 .136 .20 .156 .166 .178 .181 .181 .186 .186 .40 .166 .172 .190 .192 .196 .201 .202 .60 .171 .176 .196 .199 .201 .214 .216 .80 .170 .177 .200 .204 .207 .226 .228 l.00 .168 .177 .200 .204 .209 .231 .232 l.25 .164 .175 .199 .203 .207 .231 .232 l.50 .160 .172 .196 .200 .205 .230 .231 l.75 .157 .168 .192 .196 .202 .228 .229 2.00 .155 .165 .189 .193 .198 .225 .226 2.40 .150 .161 185 .189 .194 .220 .221 2.80 .145 .157 .182 .186 .191 .216 .217 3.20 .140 .154 .179 .183 .188 .211 .212 3.60 .136 .151 .176 .180 .185 .207 .208 4.00 .134 .148 .173 .177 .182 .203 .204 4.50 .132 .146 .170 .174 .179 .199 .200 5.00 .131 .144 .168 .172 .177 .195 .196 5.50 .130 .143 .166 .170 .175 .192 .193 6.00 .130 .142 .164 .168 .173 .190 .191 6.50 .131 .141 .162 .166 .171 .189 .190 7.00 .132 .141 .161 .165 .170 .188 .189 7.50 .133 .141 .160 .164 .169 .187 .188 8.00 .134 .141 .159 .163 .168 .186 .187 8.50 .135 .141 .158 .162 .167 .185 .186 9.00 .135 .141 .157 .161 .166 .184 .185

(30)

I

Experiment: C55 time: 12h 29m 16h 40m 17h 23m 18h 02m 36h 35m 43h 20m 44h 35m x z z z z z z z (m) (m) (m) (m) Cm) Cm) (m) (m) .00 .136 .136 .136 .136 .136 .136 .136 .20 .186 .186 .186 .186 .186 .186 .186 .40 .203 .211 .215 .216 .216 .216 .216 .60 .217 .227 .228 .229 .242 .246 .247 .80 .229 .234 .235 .236 .261 .266 .267 l.00 .233 .240 .241 .242 .268 .277 .278 l.25 .233 .243 .244 .245 .275 .285 .286 l.50 .232 .244 .245 .246 .276 .284 .285 l.75 .230 .244 .245 .246 .275 .282 .283 2.00 .227 .242 .243 .244 .274 .279 .280 2.40 .222 .235 .236 .237 .268 .272 .273 2.80 .218 .228 .229 .230 .262 .265 .266 3.20 .213 .222 .223 .224 .255 .258 .259 3.60 .209 .218 .219 .220 .248 .251 .252 4.00 .205 .214 .215 .216 .241 .245 .246 4.50 .201 .210 .211 .212 .229 .233 .234 5.00 .197 .206 .207 .208 .222 .225 .226 5.50 .194 .202 .203 .204 .217 .219 .220 6.00 .192 .199 .200 .201 .213 .215 .216 6.50 .191 .196 .197 .198 .210 .212 .213 7.00 .190 .195 .196 .197 .208 .210 .211 7.50 .189 .194 .195 .196 .207 .209 .210 8.00 .188 .193 .194 .195 .206 .208 .209 8.50 .187 .192 .193 .194 .205 .207 .208 9.00 .186 .191 .192 .193 .204 .206 .207

note: x = distance from fixed bed in downstream direction (m) z = distance beneath water surface (m)

(31)

I

Experiment: C60

I

time: 3h 41m 5h 26m 23h 26m 24h 56m 26h 11m 29h 31m x z z z z z z (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) .00 .199 .199 .199 .199 .199 .199 .20 .249 .249 .249 .249 .249 .249 .40 .279 .285 .288 .294 .294 .294 .60 .286 .299 .325 .327 .329 .334 .80 .289 .305 .351 .353 .355 .360 1.00 .291 .307 .366 .369 .372 .381 1.25 .291 .307 .376 .379 .383 .390 1.50 .290 .306 .378 .382 .386 .397 1.75 .289 .305 .379 .383 .387 .399 2.00 .288 .304 .379 .382 .386 .398 2.40 .285 .302 .377 .379 .382 .393 2.80 .281 .297 .373 .375 .377 .388 3.20 .277 .293 .367 .369 .371 .382 3.60 .273 .289 .360 .362 .364 .375 4.00 .267 .283 .351 .353 .355 .366 4.50 .260 .276 .341 .343 .345 .356 5.00 .253 .270 .332 .334 .336 .347 5.50 .246 .264 .324 .326 .328 .339 6.00 .240 .259 .316 .318 .320 .331 6.50 .235 .255 .309 .311 .313 .324 7.00 .231 .251 .303 .305 .307 .318 7.50 .228 .248 .298 .300 .302 .313 8.00 .226 .246 .294 .296 .298 .309 8.50 .225 .245 .291 .293 .295 .306 9.00 .224 .244 .289 .291 .293 .304

I

Tab1e B4 PROVO-measurements of experiment C60

(32)

I

Experiment: G50 Date: 17 Ju1y 1989

Scour time: 1h 56min

I

Type of experiment: Goncentration measurements in a scour hole; the

mixture of sediment and water is siphoned (free fa11

method) perpendicu1ar to the main flow direction

I

x = 1.0m x = 2.4 m x - 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

z c z c z c z c z c

(m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil)

.120 .054 .077 .066 .074 .114 .059 .115 .055 .226 .130 .055 .087 .041 .084 .129 .069 .196 .065 .292 .140 .064 .097 .056 .094 .171 .079 .225 .075 .382 .150 .075 .107 .076 .104 .248 .089 .290 .085 .488 .160 .083 .117 .111 .114 .338 .099 .414 .095 .546 .127 .195 .124 .481 .109 .521 .105 .719 .137 .319 .134 .771 .119 .868 .115 .977 .147 .471 .129 1.694 .125 3.130 1 1 1 1 1 (.166) (.148) (.142) (.138) (.138)

I

1

note: ( ) = mean flow depth (m)

c = concentration (gil)

x = distance from fixed bed in downstream direction (m)

z - distance beneath water surface (m)

Tab1e C1.1 Concentration measurements of experiment C50

(33)

I

Experiment C50 Date: 18 Ju1y 1989

I

Type of experiment: Concentration measurements in a scour hole; the

I

x = 1.0m x = 2.4 m x = 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m z c z c z c z c z c (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) .102 .000 .105 .022 .085 .029 .075 .061 .070 .081 .112 .004 .115 .034 .095 .038 .085 .076 .080 .104 .122 .006 .125 .048 .105 .049 .095 .102 .090 .129 .132 .012 .135 .079 .115 .069 .105 .117 .100 .160 .142 .021 .145 .132 .125 .091 .115 .155 .110 .191 .152 .035 .155 .181 .135 .135 .125 .207 .120 .225 .162 .057 .165 .282 .145 .196 .135 .344 .130 .296 .172 .093 .155 .315 .145 .503 .140 .380 1 1 1 1 1 (.172) (.169) (.158) (.149) (.148)

I

1

c = concentration (g/l)

I

(34)

I

x = l.0 m x = 2.4 m x = 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

z c z c z c z c z c (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil)

.120 .007 .ll5 .023 .106 .033 .085 .030 .097 .052 .130 .009 .125 .029 .ll6 .046 .095 .035 .107 .099 .140 .014 .135 .038 .126 .057 .105 .047 .ll7 .125 .150 .014 .145 .057 .136 .082 .ll5 .065 .127 .157 .160 .023 .155 .071 .146 .121 .125 .088 .137 .191 .170 .033 .165 .ll8 .156 .184 .135 .122 .147 .247 .180 .051 .175 .174 .166 .264 .145 .174 .157 .393 .190 .082 .155 .258 .167 .555 1 1 1 1 1 (.191) (.182) (.171) (.163) (.162)

I

1

x - distance from fixed bed in downstream direction (m)

(35)

I

mixture of sediment and water is siphoned (free fa11 method) perpendicu1ar to the main flow direct ion

x = l.Om x = 2.4 m x ₌ 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x ₌ 8.5 In

z c z c z c z c z c

.125 .010 .118 .012 .108 .012 .088 .017 .080 .033 .135 .007 .128 .020 .118 .02l .098 .022 .090 .042 .145 .016 .138 .025 .128 .030 .108 .026 .100 .044 .155 .015 .148 .026 .138 .043 .118 .039 .110 .068 .165 .020 .158 .033 .148 .063 .128 .055 .120 .085 .175 .029 .168 .048 .158 .077 .138 .096 .130 .104 .185 .058 .178 .068 .168 .130 .148 .159 .140 .160 .195 .084 .188 .096 .178 .420 .158 .316 .150 .232 1 1 1 1 1 (.200) (.197) (.181) (.172) (.170) 1

z

= distance beneath water surface (m)

(36)

I

Experiment C50 Date: 28 July 1989

mixture of sediment and water is siphoned (free fall method) perpendicular to the main flow direction

x = l.Om x = 2.4 m x = 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

z c z c z c z c z c

(m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil)

.170 .010 .145 .010 .122 .008 .110 .008 .100 .008 .180 .010 .155 .014 .132 .013 .120 .014 .110 .015 .190 .009 .165 .016 .142 .019 .130 .017 .120 .018 .200 .021 .175 .021 .152 .018 .140 .024 .130 .023 .210 .016 .185 .034 .162 .036 .150 .026 .140 .028 .220 .035 .195 .052 .172 .045 .160 .042 .150 .043 .230 .043 .205 .080 .182 .067 .170 .051 .160 .065 .215 .112 .192 .145 .180 .137 .170 .138 1 1 1 1 1 (.230) (.223) (.200) (.182) (.181) 1

c = concentration (gil)

(37)

I

Experiment: C51 Date: 15 August 1989 Scour time: Oh 30min

Type of experiment: Concentration measurements in a scour hole; the mixture of sediment and water is siphoned (free fa11

x = LOm x = 2.4 m x = 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

z c z c z c z c z c

(m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil)

.071 .000 .066 .000 .054 .022 .053 .032 .056 .049 .111 .001 .106 .041 .094 .076 .093 .083 .096 .127 .141 .002 .136 .119 .124 .165 .123 .158 .126 .225 .166 .018 .161 .241 .149 .293 .148 .268 .151 .425 .186 .062 .181 .447 .169 .488 .168 .446 .171 .699 .201 .199 .196 .773 .184 .738 .183 .684 .186 1.086 .216 .557 .211 1.489 .199 1.250 .198 1.267 .201 1.975 .226 1.105 1 1 1 1 1 (.259) (.245) (.245) (.245) (.245) 1

c = concentration (gil)

z

-

distance beneath water surface (m)

(38)

I

Experiment: C51 Date: 21 August 1989 Scour time: 5h 28min

I

x = l.Om x = 2.4 m

x

_- ₄_._{0 m} _x _- _{6.5 m} _x = 8.5 m z c z c z c z c z c

.150 .003 .125 .001 .113 .007 .085 .006 .075 .012 .190 .004 .165 .008 .153 .025 .125 .029 .115 .033 .220 .009 .195 .017 .183 .063 .155 .055 .145 .068 .245 .005 .220 .046 .208 .126 .180 .096 .170 .132 .265 .014 .240 .085 .228 .194 .200 .157 .190 .229 .280 .022 .255 .178 .243 .293 .215 .224 .205 .356 .295 .054 .270 .277 .258 .500 .230 .368 .220 .618 .305 .101 .280 .396 .268 .898 .240 .548 .230 .976 1 1 1 1 1 (.318) (.294) (.277) (.259) (.253)

I

1

note: ( ) ~ mean flow depth (m)

x = distance from fixed bed in downstream direct ion (m)

I

Tab1e C2.2 Concentration measurements of experiment C51

(39)

I

Experiment C5l Date: 22 August 1989

I

mixture of sediment and water is siphoned (free fall

method) perpendicular to the main flow direction

I

x = l.Om x = 2.4 m x - 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m z c z c z c z c z c

(m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil)

.154 .002 .136 .004 .127 .001 .113 .001 .087 .008 .194 .001 .176 .02l .167 .010 .153 .018 .127 .018 .224 .000 .206 .015 .197 .028 .183 .037 .157 .044 .249 .004 .231 .023 .222 .044 .208 .075 .182 .091 .269 .001 .251 .043 .242 .086 .228 .132 .202 .153 .284 .008 .266 .064 .257 .157 .243 .213 .217 .234 .299 .012 .281 .116 .272 .324 .258 .359 .232 .419 .309 .036 .291 .158 .282 .833 .268 .665 .242 .697 1 1 1 1 1 (.333) (.306) (.289) (.276) (.272)

I

1

I

(40)

I

Experiment C51 Date: 24 August 1989

I

x = 1.0m x = 2.4 m x - 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

z c z c z c z c z c

.171 .002 .152 .003 .136 .005 .113 .010 .113 .007 .211 .004 .192 .006 .176 .012 .153 .012 .153 .017 .241 .000 .222 .015 .206 .024 .183 .031 .183 .041 .266 .010 .247 .024 .231 .044 .208 .048 .208 .071 .286 .008 .267 .035 .251 .087 .228 .079 .228 .119 .301 .018 .282 .057 .266 .151 .243 .117 .243 .147 .316 .033 .297 .095 .281 .290 .258 .205 .258 .259 .326 .054 .307 .133 .291 .397 .268 .313 .268 .378 1 1 1 1 1 (.338) (.315) (.298) (.285) (.280)

I

1

I

,

(41)

I

x = 1.0m x = 2.4 m x = 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m z c z c z c z c z c (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) .194 .003 .165 .005 .156 .002 .135 .002 .123 .005 .234 .001 .205 .001 .196 .007 .175 .009 .163 .006 .264 .001 .235 .006 .226 .009 .205 .015 .193 .017 .289 .008 .260 .015 .251 .020 .230 .030 .218 .029 .309 .007 .280 .021 .271 .028 .250 .055 .238 .051 .324 .022 .295 .037 .286 .043 .265 .092 .253 .080 .339 .037 .310 .062 .301 .060 .280 .143 .268 .159 .349 .071 .320 .092 .311 .089 .290 .218 .278 .338 1 1 1 1 1 (.355) (.336) (.319) (.303) (.297)

I

1

I

Tab1e C2.5 Concentration measurements of experiment C51

(42)

I

'

I

Experiment C5l Date: 30 August 1989

x = l.Om x - 2.4 m x - 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

z c z c z c z c z c

(m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil) (m) (gil)

.218 .001 .202 .005 .186 .006 .167 .004 .154 .006 .258 .001 .242 .000 .226 .001 .207 .005 .194 .005 .288 .003 .272 .009 .256 .010 .237 .008 .224 .010 .313 .005 .297 .006 .281 .009 .262 .016 .249 .017 .333 .008 .317 .022 .301 .025 .282 .029 .269 .028 .348 .02l .332 .026 .316 .026 .297 .045 .284 .062 .363 .023 .347 .052 .331 .074 .312 .097 .299 .141 .373 .037 .357 .085 .341 .207 .309 .220 1 1 1 1 1 (.386) (.382) (.361) (.338) (.326) 1

note: ( ) - mean flow depth (m)

(43)

I

Experiment: C55 Date: 2 August 1989

Scour time: Oh 27min

I

x = 1.0m x = 2.4 m x = 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m z c z c z c z c z c (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (gil) .061 .007 .051 .151 .042 .185 .044 .159 .042 .151 .071 .012 .061 .201 .052 .237 .054 .204 .052 .193 .081 .026 .071 .295 .062 .302 .064 .270 .062 .251 .091 .050 .081 .421 .072 .373 .074 .339 .072 .317 .101 .108 .091 .598 .082 .466 .084 .449 .082 .422 .111 .225 .101 .835 .092 .665 .094 .611 .092 .579 .121 .504 .111 1.220 .102 .847 .104 .905 .102 .957 .121 1.874 .112 1.466 .114 1.461 .112 1.961 1 1 1 1 1 (.152) (.143) (.135) (.134) (.136)

I

1

c ~ concentration (g/l)

I

(44)

I

x = l.Om x = 2.4 m x = 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m z c z c z c z c z c

.105 .007 .095 .047 .095 .089 .072 .117 .062 .128 .115 .011 .105 .065 .105 .111 .082 .150 .072 .162 .125 .016 .115 .083 .115 .144 .092 .190 .082 .217 .135 .02l .125 .117 .125 .192 .102 .252 .092 .259 .145 .029 .135 .144 .135 .278 .112 .340 .102 .327 .155 .045 .145 .179 .145 .453 .122 .466 .112 .411 .165 .069 .155 .267 .155 .920 .132 .686 .122 .543 .175 .116 .165 .386 .165 l.062 .141 1.111 .132 .754 1 1 1 1 1 (.202) (.187) (.175) (.164) (.160)

I

1

c = concentration (gil)

I

(45)

I

Experiment C55 Date: 7 August 1989 Scour time: 11h 29min

I

Type of experiment: Concentration measurements in a scour hole; the mixture of sediment and water is siphoned (free fa11 method) perpendicu1ar to the main flow direction

I

x = LOm x = 2.4 m x = 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

z c z c z c z c z c

.145 .008 .124 .029 .105 .036 .096 .078 .085 .054 .155 .017 .134 .032 .115 .044 .106 .081 .095 .070 .165 .017 .144 .042 .125 .057 .116 .115 .105 .090 .175 .030 .154 .048 .135 .079 .126 .141 .115 .114 .185 .039 .164 .057 .145 .108 .136 .185 .125 .154 .195 .050 .174 .075 .155 .151 .146 .234 .135 .197 .205 .076 .184 .099 .165 .227 .156 .363 .145 .279 .215 .142 .194 .158 .175 .375 .166 .511 .155 .410 1 1 1 1 1 (.232) (.221) (.204) (.190) (.186)

I

1

x - distance from fixed bed in downstream direct ion (m) z = distance beneath water surface (m)

I

Tab1e C3.3 Concentration measurements of experiment C55

I

(46)

I

x = l.Om x = 2.4 m x = 4.0 m x=6.5m x = 8.5 m

z c z c z c z c z c

.150 .008 .140 .028 .119 .042 .105 .048 .096 .046 .160 .013 .150 .031 .129 .053 .115 .066 .106 .057 .170 .015 .160 .042 .139 .070 .125 .060 .116 .073 .180 .020 .170 .055 .149 .087 .135 .092 .126 .087 .190 .027 .180 .078 .159 .118 .145 .148 .136 .121 .200 .041 .190 .109 .169 .151 .155 .174 .146 .177 .210 .059 .200 .164 .179 .217 .165 .295 .156 .301 .220 .083 .210 .331 .189 .448 .175 .451 .166 .518 1 1 1 1 1 (.240) (.235) (.214) (.196) (.192)

I

1

c = concentration (gil)

(47)

I

I·

Experiment: C60 Date: 10 Ju1y 1989

I

,

I

x = l.Om x = 2.4 m x - 4.0 m x = 6.5 m x = 8.5 m z c z c z c z c z c (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) (m) (g/l) .135 .000 .ll9 .007 .108 .035 .075 .017 .066 .023 .175 .000 .159 .014 .148 .055 .ll5 .040 .106 .038 .205 .006 .189 .029 .178 .066 .145 .081 .136 .075 .230 .029 .214 .039 .203 .143 .170 .170 .161 .138 .250 .039 .234 .066 .223 .206 .190 .249 .181 .267 .265 .052 .249 .105 .238 .293 .205 .420 .196 .391 .280 .084 .264 .155 .253 .472 .220 .615 .2ll .684 .290 .152 .274 .208 .263 .763 .230 .825 .221 .918 1 1 1 1 1 (.302) (.296) (.278) (.248) (.238)

I

1

I

(48)

I

Experiment C60

Date: 11 Ju1y 1989

I

method) perpendicular to the main flow direction

I

x ~ l.0 m x ~ 2.4 m x - 4.0 m x = 6.5 m z c z c z c z c (m) (gj1) (m) (gjl) (m) (gjl) (m) (gjl) .200 .008 .210 .006 .183 .009 .127 .009 .240 .019 .250 .010 .223 .015 .167 .011 .270 .029 .280 .020 .253 .026 .197 .020 .295 .050 .305 .025 .278 .042 .222 .043 .315 .044 .325 .040 .298 .060 .242 .073 .330 .085 .340 .056 .313 .086 .257 .120 .345 .080 .355 .093 .328 .149 .272 .194 .355 .110 .365 .131 .338 .254 .282 .292 1 1 1 1 (.371) (.381) (.354) (.312)

I

,

I

1

c = concentration (gjl)

Table C4.2 Concentration measurements of experiment C60

(49)

I

Experiment: G50 Date: 18 Ju1y 1989

Type of experiment: EMS measurements in a scour hole

I

x = -0.1 m x = 1.0 m x - 2.4 m x - 4.0 m x - 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

-

-z u z u z u z u z u z u

(m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis)

.021 .503 .027 .417 .029 .393 .023 .404 .020 .428 .020 .462 .041 .510 .047 .415 .049 .413 .043 .428 .040 .446 .040 .470 .061 .516 .067 .406 .069 .398 .063 .428 .060 .446 .060 .479 .071 .509 .087 .374 .089 .360 .083 .398 .080 .444 .080 .450 .081 .496 .107 .321 .109 .359 .103 .366 .100 .345 .100 .406 .091 .476 .127 .277 .129 .339 .123 .327 .120 .295 .110 .353 .101 .453 .147 .242 .149 .297 .133 .266 .130 .265 .120 .339 .111 .379 .157 .209 .130 .325 1 1 1 1 1 1 (.116) (.168) (.162) (.150) (.142) (.142)

I

,

I

1

u = averaged longitudina1 flow velocity (mis)

z

Tab1e D1.1 Mean flow velocity measurements of experiment G50

(50)

I

Experiment: G50 Date: 19 Ju1y 1989 Scour time: 10h OOmin

I

'.

I

,

I

x - -0.1 m x - 2.0 m x - 3.8 m x - 6.2 m x - 8.5 m

-

-z u z u z u z u z u

(m) (mis) (m) (mjs) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mjs)

.029 .523 .032 .360 .032 .357 .033 .381 .037 .382 .049 .544 .052 .363 .052 .374 .053 .385 .057 .394 .069 .534 .072 .353 .072 .376 .073 .387 .077 .405 .089 .471 .092 .355 .092 .317 .093 .360 .097 .368 .109 .398 .112 .299 .112 .318 .113 .346 .117 .327 .132 .286 .132 .293 .133 .292 .127 .276 .152 .265 .152 .240 .143 .215 .137 .228 .162 .223 .162 .236 .153 .152 .147 .196 .172 .222 1 1 1 1 1 (.116) (.186) (.172) (.163) (.162)

I

1

u = averaged longitudina1 flow velocity (mis)

Tab1e D1.2 Mean flow velocity measurements of experiment G50

(51)

I

'

I

'I

I

Experiment: G50 Date: 20 Ju1y 1989

I

,

'

I

'

I

x = -0.1 m x = LOm x = 2.4 m x - 4.0 m x - 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

-

_-

-

(m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis)

.031 .500 .020 .392 .028 .338 .020 .361 .026 .383 .027 .395 .061 .533 .050 .370 .068 .341 .060 .354 .056 .377 .067 .410 .081 .495 .080 .324 .098 .310 .090 .362 .086 .374 .097 .360 .101 .468 .HO .244 .128 .280 .120 .316 .106 .361 .H7 .337 .H1 .413 .140 .195 .148 .243 .140 .284 .126 .338 .137 .265 .160 .179 .168 .232 .160 .229 .146 .295 .147 .248 .180 .156 .178 .217 .170 .207 .156 .247 .190 .132 1 1 1 1 1 1 (.H6) (.200) (.197) (.181) (.172) (.170)

,

I

1

z

Tab1e 01.3 Mean flow velocity measurements of experiment G50

(52)

I

Experiment: e50 Date: 27 Ju1y 1989

1 I

I

'

I

'

I

x - -0.1 m x - l.0 m x - 2.4 m x - 4.0 m x - 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

-

(m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis)

.031 .500 .030 .398 .030 .350 .030 .348 .030 .364 .030 .389 .061 .533 .050 .398 .050 .361 .050 .356 .050 .376 .050 .412 .081 .495 .070 .364 .070 .355 .070 .347 .070 .368 .070 .405 .101..468 .090 .333 .090 .322 .090 .322 .090 .359 .090 .386 .111 .413 .110 .246 .110 .308 .110 .331 .110 .322 .110 .345 .130 .212 .130 .276 .130 .316 .130 .298 .130 .334 .150 .165 .150 .268 .150 .274 .150 .263 .150 .298 .170 .129 .170 .247 .170 .238 .170 .144 .163 .206 .190 .106 .190 .186 .180 .179 .195 .178 1 1 1 1 1 1 (.116) (.210) (.207) (.189) (.180) (.178)

I

1

I

Tab1e D1.4 Mean flow velocity measurements of experiment e50

(53)

I

,

I

Experiment: G50 Date: 28 July 1989

I

x = -0.1 m x = l.Om x - 2.4 m x - 4.0 m x - 6.5 m x = 8.5 m

-

(m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis)

.015 .504 .030 .426 .030 .323 .030 .331 .045 .361 .040 .386 .045 .524 .050 .413 .050 .327 .050 .326 .065 .352 .060 .380 .065 .527 .070 .386 .070 .319 .070 .323 .085 .340 .080 .373 .085 .502 .090 .352 .090 .316 .090 .314 .105 .347 .100 .333 .105 .410 .110 .276 .110 .292 .110 .316 .125 .307 .120 .322 .115 .293 .130 .258 .130 .262 .130 .277 .145 .266 .140 .283 .150 .155 .150 .233 .150 .282 .165 .219 .160 .239 .170 .085 .170 .236 .170 .271 .190 .096 .190 .178 .190 .192 .210 .069 .200 .151 .210 .133 1 1 1 1 1 1 (.116) (.230) (.223) (.200) (.182) (.181)

I

,

I

J

•

I

1

u - averaged longitudinal flow velocity (mis)

z

(54)

I

Experiment: C51 Date: 16 August 1989

x = -0.1 m _{x - 1.0 m} _{x - 2.4 m} _{x - 4.0 m} _x _- _{6.5 m} x = 8.5 m

-

(m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis) (m) (mis)

.046 .540 .052 .510 .047 .531 .052 .552 .050 .575 .050 .570 .086 .591 .092 .548 .087 .564 .092 .574 .090 .594 .090 .605 .116 .556 .122 .535 .117 .533 .122 .563 .120 .583 .120 .586 .136 .554 .142 .510 .137 .534 .142 .543 .140 .541 .140 .563 .156 .524 .162 .514 .157 .507 .164 .512 .162 .513 .162 .569 .176 .510 .182 .469 .177 .497 .182 .504 .180 .478 .180 .504 .196 .498 .202 .447 .197 .460 .202 .433 .200 .422 .200 .468 .216 .447 .222 .400 .217 .421 .222 .374 .220 .367 .220 .371 .236 .368 .242 .370 .237 .356 .262 .300 1 1 1 1 1 1 (.246) (.287) (.258) (.249) (.244) (.244)

I

1

u - averaged longitudina1 flow velocity (mis)

Tab1e 02.1 Mean flow velocity measurements of experiment C51