Next Article in Journal
Review of Artificial Downwelling for Mitigating Hypoxia in Coastal Waters
Next Article in Special Issue
Comprehensive Assessment of Water Sensitive Urban Design Practices based on Multi-criteria Decision Analysis via a Case Study of the University of Melbourne, Australia
Previous Article in Journal
From Highs to Lows: Changes in Dissolved Organic Carbon in a Peatland Catchment and Lake Following Extreme Flow Events
Previous Article in Special Issue
On the Rainfall Intensity–Duration–Frequency Curves, Partial-Area Effect and the Rational Method: Theory and the Engineering Practice
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Study of Scour Characteristics Downstream of Partially-Blocked Circular Culverts

1
Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt
2
Department of Water and Water Structures Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt
3
Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Kosice, 042 00 Kosice, Slovakia
4
Department of Building Construction, Technical University of Kosice, 042 00 Kosice, Slovakia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2020, 12(10), 2845; https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102845
Submission received: 7 August 2020 / Revised: 7 October 2020 / Accepted: 8 October 2020 / Published: 13 October 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Urban Rainwater and Flood Management)

Abstract

:
Debris accumulations upstream and through crossing hydraulic structures such as culverts cause the upstream water level and the downstream scour depth to increase, which can lead to structure failure. This experimental study aimed to investigate the effects of various inlet blockage ratios on culvert efficiency and scour hole depth. In a non-blocked case, various submergence ratios (S = 1.06, 1.33, 1.60, and 1.90) were tested with different discharge rates. In a blocked case, the effects of inlet blockage with various blockage ratios (Ar = 10%, 20%, and 30%) were seen as sediment blockage on the pipe bed or floating debris upstream of the culvert. The results show that as the submergence ratio increases, the maximum scour depth decreases at the same discharge rate, and the relative energy loss also decreases in the non-blocked case. In the sediment blockage (Ar d) case, the relative maximum depth increases with increasing densimetric Froude number and with an increasing blockage ratio. An empirical equation was developed to predict the relative scour depth under the present study conditions.

1. Introduction

Culverts are hydraulic structures used to transport water below roads and railways. Local scour downstream of culverts involves the removal of granular bed material through the action of hydrodynamic forces. As the maximum scour depth downstream of the culvert increases, the stability of the foundation of the structure may be threatened, with a consequent risk of damage and failure [1].
Many previous studies have studied the factors affecting the scour hole characteristics downstream of the culverts. Abt [2,3] experimentally studied the effect of culvert shape on scour hole dimensions. Different culvert sections such as square, arch and rectangular culvert shapes were investigated with uniform graded sand (D50 at 1.86 mm). The results revealed that culvert cross-section shape had a limited effect on outlet scour. Chen [4] and Ruff et al. [5] observed that under equivalent discharge conditions, a square culvert with a height equal to the diameter of a circular culvert would reduce scour. Abt [6] studied the culvert slope influence on the maximum scour depth. Experimental tests were performed on a circular pipe with various slopes (0, 2, 5, 7 and 10%), and uniform graded sand (D50 at 1.86 mm) was used. The results showed that the maximum scour depth increased as the culvert slope increased within the range of the slopes tested.
Doehring and Abt [7] studied culvert drop height effects on the maximum scour depth. Experimental tests were performed in a 4-inch diameter circular culvert and uniform sand with D50 at 1.86 mm. Drop heights of 0, 1, 2 and 4 times the culvert diameter above the bed were investigated. The results showed that the depth of scour was directly proportional to discharge intensity. As the relative drop height increased, the maximum scour depth increased proportionally, the width of scour increased, the scour length decreased, and scour hole volume increased. Abt et al. [8] investigated the effects of varying non-cohesive bed material on local scour geometry at circular culvert outlets. Five non-cohesive bed materials were tested downstream of a four-inch diameter circular culvert. The results produced a single expression for estimating the relative scour depth. Aderibigbe and Rajaratnam [9] investigated the effects of sediment gradation on scour hole shape deformed by wall jets. Three sediment mixtures were investigated with D50 at 6.75, 1.32 and 1.62 mm, and geometric gradations (σ) of 1.32, 2.02 and 3.13, respectively. The results demonstrated that sediment non-uniformity had a significant effect on the scour hole dimensions deformed by the jets. There is good correlation between the effective sediment size D95 and scour depth at more than D50 for estimating Fd Abida and Townsend [10] investigated experimentally the effects of bed material properties on scour hole patterns downstream of a box culvert. The results showed that the maximum scour in uniform sands was greater than in well-graded mixtures. Sarathi et al. [1] studied sediment grain size effects on scour hole dimensions in a non-cohesive sand bed.
Experimental tests were conducted using submerged square jets with three different values of a densimetric Froude number. Two sediment sizes were used with D50 at 2.46, 0.71 mm and σ of 1.24, 1.14. At a given densimetric Froude number, it was noted that the results correlated with the nozzle size-to-grain size ratio. An empirical procedure was developed to check the relationship between scour hole parameters and the densimetric Froude number (Fd). Abida and Townsend [10] studied the effects of tailwater depth on scour hole dimensions. The results indicated that tailwater depth had only a marginal effect on the maximum depth of scour for the submerged flow condition (S > 1.0) [1,10,11]. Emami et al. [12] experimentally investigated the effect of tailwater depth on scour depth. The results confirmed that scour depth decreased with increasing tailwater depth [1,10,11]. Chiew et al. [13] investigated the local scour produced by a submerged horizontal circular jet. Azamathulla and Haque [14] used gene-expression programming for predicting scour hole dimensions at culvert outlets. Their results demonstrated that GEP was quite effective in predicting scour depth at culvert outlets. Negm et al. [15] used a vertical flow deflector to minimize the scour hole dimensions downstream of a circular culvert under different flow conditions, and developed an empirical equation to estimate the relative scour depth.
One of the problems affecting crossing structures such as culverts is debris accumulation upstream or inside them, which becomes an obstruction in the waterway. Floating or submerged debris causes higher velocities and vortices, which increase the scour depth downstream of the culvert as well as raising the upstream water level, which increases the possibility of the structure failure during a flood event. [16]. Yasser Abdallah et al. [16,17] studied experimentally the effects of partial blockage permeability on scour characteristics in front of bridge piers and found that partial blockage occurrence in front of a bridge pier had considerable interest due to its influence on the stream flow and the formed scour around the neighboring bridge supports. Sorourian et al. [18,19,20] experimentally investigated blockage ratio effects on scour characteristics downstream of a square culvert under steady flow. The results showed that blockage had a significant effect on the flow structure and scouring hole dimensions at the culvert outlet. The velocity distribution was rapidly increased in the culvert barrel in blocked condition and the average turbulent intensity was three times greater than the non-blocked condition.
It may be concluded from the above studies that culvert shape, culvert slope, soil properties, tailwater depth and culvert blockage are the main factors affecting downstream scour deformation. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of different inlet blockage ratios on clear-water scour depth and culvert transport efficiency.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Theoretical Study

Dimensional analysis was used to correlate the different variables affecting the scour phenomenon downstream of a blocked circular culvert. Figure 1 shows a definition sketch of the physical model. The main factors affecting maximum scour depth are presented in Equation (1):
d s = f ( D , L , a c , a b , Q , v d , h u , h d , d 50 , ρ , ρ s , g , l s , d d , l d )
Using the Buckingham theory, the relative maximum scour depth (ds/hd) can be written as shown in Equation (2). From this equation it can be seen that relative scour depth is a function of blockage ratio, densimetric Froude number and submergence ratio:
d s h d = f ( A r , F d , S )
Culvert efficiency (Eu/Ed) is calculated as:
E u E d = f ( A r , F d , S )

2.2. Experimental Work

This experimental study was carried out in the Hydraulics and Water Engineering Laboratory, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Egypt. The physical model was put in the middle of a rectangular flume with dimensions 66 cm width, 65.5 cm depth and 16.2 m length, as shown in Figure 2. A circular culvert was used, 0.188 m in diameter and 1.60 m long, with sudden inlet and outlet as shown in Figure 1. The removable bed was elongated for about 4.0 m after the culvert outlet with 0.66m width and a depth of 0.20 m, containing coarse uniform sand with D50 = 4.00 mm and standard deviation σ = 1.46, as presented in Figure 3. The experimental model was tested for different tailwater depths and different blockage areas with a range of discharge flows from 19.00 to 33.00 L/s. Table 1 shows the different experimental runs.

3. Analysis and Discussions

3.1. Effect of Downstream Submergence Ratio (S) on Scour-Hole Characteristics

Scour downstream of a non-blocked culvert was investigated at various submergence ratios (S) and densimetric Froude numbers ranging 4–9. The results were analyzed for both scour characteristics and culvert efficiency. Figure 4 describes the relationship between the densimetric Froude number and relative scour depth for different submergence ratios. The results show that as the flow rate rises, the scour depth increases. At the same densimetric Froude number, the relative scour depth decreases with increasing downstream submergence ratio. When the densimetric Froude number equals 6.64, the relative scour depth increases at S = 1.06 by 96% more than at S = 1.90. Figure 5 shows the relationship between the relative deposition height and the densimetric Froude number, the relative deposition height being directly proportional to the densimetric Froude number. At Fd 6.64, the relative deposition height increases at S = 1.06 by 96.7% more than at S = 1.90. Figure 6 shows bed deformation downstream of a circular culvert at different submergence ratios S = 1.06, 1.33, 1.60 and 1.90 and Ar = 0.00. The negative contours indicate that the scour region, and positive contours indicate the deposition region. It can be seen from this figure that as the submergence ratio increases, the scour hole becomes more symmetrical, with reduced maximum scour depth, scour hole width and scour area. The deposition height, area and volume decreases as the submergence ratio increases.
In the non-blocked culvert, culvert efficiency decreases with increasing densimetric Froude number, as shown in Figure 7. When the submergence ratio increases, culvert efficiency also increases at the same densimetric Froude number for the tested submergence ratios. Culvert efficiency decreases to 70% at S = 1.06 and reaches up to 80% at S = 1.90 when Fd = 6.64. This is because as the submergence ratio increases, the upstream water level rises, but not to the same degree as the downstream water level. The flow discharge is constant and the mean velocity through the culvert is constant too, so the friction losses through the culvert are approximately the same for all submergence ratios. Thus, the difference between upstream and downstream water levels decreases as the submergence ratio increases, and thus culvert efficiency increases as the submergence ratio increases.

3.2. The Blockage Effect on Scour Characteristics and Culvert Efficiency

Figure 8 and Figure 9 present the relationship between relative scour depth and densimetric Froude number at the same submergence ratio and different blockage ratios Ar d and Ar u, respectively. As shown in these figures, the relative scour depth increases with an increasing densimetric Froude number. As the blockage ratio increases, the relative scour depth also increases at the same densimetric Froude number, because as the relative blockage area (Ar d) increases, the near-bed velocity increases compared to that in the non-blocked case. When the relative blockage area rises to 10%, 20 and 30%, the relative scour depth increases by 2.63%, 5.78% and 10.53%, respectively, compared to the non-blocked case (Ar = 0.0). The relative scour depth increases by 1.32%, 2.63% and 7.90% compared to the non-blocked case when the relative blockage area Ar d becomes 10%, 20% and 30%, respectively. Figure 10 shows that at blockage ratio 30%, relative scour depth is greater when blockage occurs near the culvert bottom (Ar d) than when the blockage is near the culvert upper part (Ar u). This is because, when the blockage accumulates in the lower part of the culvert, the near-bed velocity increases compared to when debris accumulates in the upper part. Figure 11 demonstrates the scour contour maps for different blockage areas, showing that as the blockage ratio increases, the maximum scour depth, scour hole width, area and volume also increase proportionally. At the same blockage ratio, the maximum scour depth, scour hole width, area and volume for Ar d were greater compared to Ar u.
Figure 12 indicates culvert efficiency for different blockage ratios and its relationship with the densimetric Froude number. The figure shows how culvert efficiency decreases with increasing flow rate and increasing blockage ratio. For the same densimetric Froude number and blockage ratio, the culvert’s ability to transport water decreases when the blockage is near the culvert bottom. Culvert efficiency decreases by 15.97%, 18.06% and 23.61% when the relative blockage area Ar d increases to 10%, 20% and 30%, respectively. However, culvert efficiency decreases by 13.89%, 17.365% and 20.835% compared to the non-blocked case when Ar u increases to 10%, 20% and 30% respectively at the same Fd = 6.00. Lower blockage ratios (Ar d) increase the relative head loss and decrease the culvert efficiency. Culvert efficiency is more sensitive to debris accumulation upstream of the culvert inlet, decreasing by about 23.6% in the case of Ar d = 30% compared to the non-blocked case at the same Fd = 6.00.

4. Location of Scouring Hole

Figure 13a,b display the scour profiles along the centerline for non-blocked and blocked cases respectively. Two estimated equations are investigated to predict the scour depth (ds) at distance (ls) along the x-axis downstream of a non-blocked and blocked culvert. Equation (4) is for the non-blocked case. According to Figure 13a and Equation (5), the maximum scour depth is equal to 0.41 of the culvert diameter, and is located at a distance of three times the culvert diameter from the culvert outlet.
d s D = 0.0016 ( l s D ) 4 + 0.0205 ( l s D ) 3 0.0363 ( l s D ) 2 0.1753 ( l s D ) + 0.018
The maximum scour depth in the blocked case occurs at a distance of 3.20 times the culvert diameter from the culvert outlet. In the non-blocked case, the protection length is about 5.70 times the culvert diameter, while in the blocked case this distance increases to 6.10 times the culvert diameter.
d s D = 0.0009 ( l s D ) 4 + 0.0117 ( l s D ) 3 + 0.0032 ( l s D ) 2 0.206 ( l s D ) 0.0041

5. Maximum Scour Depth Prediction

Regression analysis was used to predict maximum scour depth downstream of a circular culvert for different ratios of inlet blockage area by correlating the maximum relative scour and other variables affecting it in one formula. An equation was developed to predict maximum scour depth. As shown in the equation below, the relative maximum scour depth (ds/hd) is a function of densimetric Froude number (Fd), blockage ratios Ar d and Ar u and submergence ratio (S). Equation (6) clearly reveals the higher impact of downstream submergence ratio and lower effect of blockage ratio on maximum scour depth in the present study experimental conditions.
d s   h d = 0.067   F d + 0.16   Ar   d + 0.11   Ar   u 0.245   S + 0.224
The correlation coefficient (R2) is 0.97 with standard error 0.017 and residuals do not exceed 0.05.
Figure 14 shows a comparison between relative maximum scour depth (ds/hd) as measured in the experimental model and estimated using the empirical equation. Figure 15 presents a comparison between residuals and estimated ds/hd. It can be seen from these figures that there is very good agreement between the measured and estimated relative scour depths.

6. Comparing with Previous Studies

Many previous empirical formulas have been investigated for estimating the relative scour depth downstream of culverts. Table 2 presents scour depth estimation formulas downstream of a circular culvert developed in the present study and in those by Sorourian et al. [20], Emami and Schleiss [12], Chiew et al. [13], Abt et al. [8] and Negm et al. [15]. Figure 16 shows a comparison of scour depth estimations between the above empirical formulas for a range of densimetric Froude numbers (Fd = 4.00–8.00). It can be seen in this figure that the present study formula results fall between the other scour depth estimation results. The results of Abt et al. [8] and Emami and Schleiss [12] are quite close to the present formula results, with average relative errors equal to 2.25 and 1.63, respectively. The results of Chiew et al. [13] and Abt et al. [8] exceed the results of the present study equation, because their equations do not take into consideration the submergence ratio downstream of the culvert. The results obtained by Negm et al. [15] are closest to those produced by the present study formula, with an average relative error 0.12. While the present scour prediction equation includes the blockage effect, there is still good agreement between it and the mentioned researchers’ formulas.

7. Conclusions

Blockages can be a considerable factor affecting flow structure and scour hole characteristics at culvert outlets. Notwithstanding that, the downstream submergence ratio has a higher effect on maximum scour depth from Equation (6). The present results lead to the following conclusions:
(a)
For non-blocked culverts, the relative scour depth increases as the submergence ratio decreases at the same densimetric Froude number (Fd = 6.64). The maximum relative depth increases by 96% at S = 1.06 compared to S = 1.90.
(b)
In the blocked case, the relative scour depth is directly proportional to the blockage ratio. When the relative area of blockage (Ar) equals 10%, 20 and 30%, the relative scour depth increases by 2.63%, 5.78% and 10.53%, respectively, compared to the non-blocked case (Ar = 0.0). The relative scour depth increases by 1.32%, 2.63% and 7.90% compared to the non-blocked case when the relative blockage area Ar d increases to 10%, 20% and 30%, respectively. In the non-blocked case, the protection length is about 5.70 times the culvert diameter, while in the blocked case, this distance increases to 6.10 times the culvert diameter. The inlet blockage has a limited effect on the maximum scour depth, but has a greater effect on culvert efficiency.
(c)
From the present experimental data, an empirical equation has been created to predict the relative scour depth at a range of densimetric Froude numbers Fd = 4.00–8.00. The estimated relative scour depth shows good agreement with the measured relative scour depth with R2 = 0.97. Good agreement was also found when the predicted scour formula was compared with five other scour estimating formulas.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.F. and M.Z.; methodology, M.M.E.-F. and A.A.E.-S.; validation, I.F. and N.T.; formal analysis, F.V.; investigation, N.T.; resources, F.V.; data curation, M.M.E.-F.; writing—original draft preparation, N.T.; writing—review and editing, A.A.E.-S., I.F. and M.Z.; visualization, M.M.E.-F.; supervision, A.A.E.-S.; project administration, M.Z.; funding acquisition, F.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the Ministry for Education of the Slovak Republic in projects VEGA 1/0217/19 Research of Hybrid Blue and Green Infrastructure as Active Elements of a Sponge City; VEGA 1/0308/20 Mitigation of hydrological hazards—floods and droughts—by exploring extreme hydroclimatic phenomena in river basins; and by the Slovak Research and Development Agency in project APVV-18-0360 Active hybrid infrastructure towards the sponge city.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

List of Symbols

abinlet blockage area
acculvert inlet area
Arblockage percentage (ab/ac %)
Ar dblockage ratio in lower part of culvert
Ar ublockage ratio put in upper part
Dculvert diameter
dsmaximum scour depth
ddmaximum deposition height
Eutotal energy at culvert inlet
Edtotal energy at culvert end
Fddensimetric Froude number
D50median particle size of bed material
ggravitational acceleration
hdtailwater depth
huupstream water depth
httailwater depth
ldlocation of maximum deposition height
lslocation of maximum scour depth
Lculvert length
Qflow rate
Ssubmergence ratio (hd/D)
uflow velocity
vdvelocity just before culvert outlet
Wchannel width
ρwater density
ρsbed material density
σstandard deviation of soil particle size

References

  1. Sarathi, P.; Faruque, M.; Balachandar, R. Influence of tailwater depth, sediment size and densimetric Froude number on scour by submerged square wall jets. J. Hydraul. Res. 2008, 46, 158–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Abt, S.R.; Donnell, C.A.; Ruff, J.F.; Doehring, F.K. Culvert Slope and Shape Effects on Outlet Scour. Transp. Res. Rec. 1985, 1017, 24–30. [Google Scholar]
  3. Abt, S.R.; Ruff, J.F.; Doehring, F.K.; Donnell, C.A. Influence of Culvert Shape on Outlet Scour. J. Hydraul. Eng. 1987, 113, 393–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chen, Y.H. Scour at Outlets of Box Culverts. Master’s Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA, 1970. [Google Scholar]
  5. Ruff, J.; Abt, S.; Mendoza, C.; Shaikh, A.; Kloberdanz, R. Scour at Culvert Outlets in Mixed Bed Materials; Federal Highway Administration. Office of Research and Development: Wahington, DC, USA, 1982.
  6. Abt, S.R.; Ruff, J.F.; Doehring, F.K. Culvert Slope Effects on Outlet Scour. J. Hydraul. Eng. 1985, 111, 1363–1367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Doehring, F.K.; Abt, S.R. Drop Height Influence on Outlet Scour. J. Hydraul. Eng. 1994, 120, 1470–1476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Abt, S.R.; Kloberdanz, R.L.; Mendoza, C. Unified Culvert Scour Determination. J. Hydraul. Eng. 1984, 110, 1475–1479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Aderibigbe, O.; Rajaratnam, N. Effect of Sediment Gradation on Erosion by Plane Turbulent Wall Jets. J. Hydraul. Eng. 1998, 124, 1034–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Abida, H.; Townsend, R.D. Local Scour Downstream of Box?Culvert Outlets. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 1991, 117, 425–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ali, K.; Lim, S. Local scour caused by submerged wall jets. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. 1986, 81, 607–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Emami, S.; Schleiss, A.J. Prediction of Localized Scour Hole on Natural Mobile Bed at Culvert Outlets. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Scour and Erosion (ICSE-5), San Francisco, CA, USA, 7–10 November 2010; pp. 844–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chiew, Y.-M.; Lim, S.-Y. Local Scour by a Deeply Submerged Horizontal Circular Jet. J. Hydraul. Eng. 1996, 122, 529–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Azamathulla, H.M.; Ghani, A.A. ANFIS-Based Approach for Predicting the Scour Depth at Culvert Outlets. J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Prac. 2011, 2, 35–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Negm, A.; Nassar, M.A.; Elnikhely, E. Minimization of Scour and Deposition Downstream Pipe Culvert with a Limited Floor Protection. Int. Water Technol. J. IWTJ 2014, 4, 208–221. [Google Scholar]
  16. Hemdan, N.-A.T.; Abdallah, M.Y.; Mohamed, A.-A.G.; Basiouny, M.; Abd-Elmaged, A.B.A.-E. Experimental Study on the Effect of Permeable Blockage at Front of One Pier on Scour Depth at Mult-Vents Bridge Supports. J. Eng. Sci. 2016, 44, 27–39. [Google Scholar]
  17. Moussa, Y.A.M.; Nasr-Allah, T.H.; Abd-Elhasseb, A. Studying the effect of partial blockage on multi-vents bridge pier scour experimentally and numerically. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2018, 9, 1439–1450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Sorourian, S.; Keshavarzi, A.; Ball, J.; Samali, B. Blockage effects on scouring downstream of box culverts under unsteady flow. Australas. J. Water Resour. 2014, 18, 180–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Sorourian, S. Turbulent Flow Characteristics at the Outlet of Partially Blocked Box Culverts. In Proceedings of the 36th IAHR World Congress, The Hague, The Netherlands, 28 June–30 July 2015. [Google Scholar]
  20. Sorourian, S.; Keshavarzi, A.; Ball, J. Scour at partially blocked box-culverts under steady flow. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Water Manag. 2016, 169, 247–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Figure 1. Definition sketch of model elevation and plan.
Figure 1. Definition sketch of model elevation and plan.
Water 12 02845 g001
Figure 2. The experimental flume.
Figure 2. The experimental flume.
Water 12 02845 g002
Figure 3. Particle size distribution for sediment bed.
Figure 3. Particle size distribution for sediment bed.
Water 12 02845 g003
Figure 4. Relationship between (ds/hd) and (Fd) for different S and Ar = 0.00.
Figure 4. Relationship between (ds/hd) and (Fd) for different S and Ar = 0.00.
Water 12 02845 g004
Figure 5. Relationship between (dd/hd) and (Fd) for different (S) and Ar = 0.00.
Figure 5. Relationship between (dd/hd) and (Fd) for different (S) and Ar = 0.00.
Water 12 02845 g005
Figure 6. Scour contour maps downstream of circular culvert at Ar = 0.0 (a) S = 1.06, Fd = 6.64, (b) S = 1.33, Fd = 6.69, (c) S = 1.60, Fd = 6.30, (d) S = 1.90, Fd = 6.75.
Figure 6. Scour contour maps downstream of circular culvert at Ar = 0.0 (a) S = 1.06, Fd = 6.64, (b) S = 1.33, Fd = 6.69, (c) S = 1.60, Fd = 6.30, (d) S = 1.90, Fd = 6.75.
Water 12 02845 g006
Figure 7. Culvert efficiency for different S.
Figure 7. Culvert efficiency for different S.
Water 12 02845 g007
Figure 8. Relationship between (ds/hd) and (Fd) at S = 1.06 and Ar d = 10%, 20%, 30% and Ar u = 0.00.
Figure 8. Relationship between (ds/hd) and (Fd) at S = 1.06 and Ar d = 10%, 20%, 30% and Ar u = 0.00.
Water 12 02845 g008
Figure 9. Relationship between (ds/hd) and (Fd) at S = 1.06 and Ar u = 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% and Ar d = 0.00.
Figure 9. Relationship between (ds/hd) and (Fd) at S = 1.06 and Ar u = 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% and Ar d = 0.00.
Water 12 02845 g009
Figure 10. Relationship between (ds/hd) and (Fd) at S = 1.06 and different Ar.
Figure 10. Relationship between (ds/hd) and (Fd) at S = 1.06 and different Ar.
Water 12 02845 g010
Figure 11. Scour contour maps downstream of blocked circular culvert at S = 1.06 (a) Ar = 0.00, (b) Ar d = 10%, Ar u = 0.0 (c) Ar d = 0.0, Ar u = 10% (d) Ar d = 20%, Ar u = 0.0 (e) Ar d = 0.00%, Ar u = 20% (f) Ar d = 30%, Ar u = 0.0% (g) Ar d = 0.0, and Ar u = 30%.
Figure 11. Scour contour maps downstream of blocked circular culvert at S = 1.06 (a) Ar = 0.00, (b) Ar d = 10%, Ar u = 0.0 (c) Ar d = 0.0, Ar u = 10% (d) Ar d = 20%, Ar u = 0.0 (e) Ar d = 0.00%, Ar u = 20% (f) Ar d = 30%, Ar u = 0.0% (g) Ar d = 0.0, and Ar u = 30%.
Water 12 02845 g011
Figure 12. Culvert efficiency for different Ar.
Figure 12. Culvert efficiency for different Ar.
Water 12 02845 g012
Figure 13. Scour profile along centerline for (a) non-blocked case (b) blocked case.
Figure 13. Scour profile along centerline for (a) non-blocked case (b) blocked case.
Water 12 02845 g013
Figure 14. Comparison between measured and estimated dsm/h in present study.
Figure 14. Comparison between measured and estimated dsm/h in present study.
Water 12 02845 g014
Figure 15. Comparison between residuals and estimated dsm/h.
Figure 15. Comparison between residuals and estimated dsm/h.
Water 12 02845 g015
Figure 16. Comparison of relative maximum scour depths estimated using the formula proposedin the present study, and using other scour formulas with the same Fd range.
Figure 16. Comparison of relative maximum scour depths estimated using the formula proposedin the present study, and using other scour formulas with the same Fd range.
Water 12 02845 g016
Table 1. Tested submergence and blockage ratios.
Table 1. Tested submergence and blockage ratios.
CaseS (hd/D)ArRuns
Ar dAr u
Non-blocked1.060.00.022
1.330.00.0
1.600.00.0
1.900.00.0
Blocked1.060.100.015
1.060.200.0
1.060.300.0
1.060.00.1015
1.060.00.20
1.060.00.3
Table 2. Summary of some scour prediction formulas.
Table 2. Summary of some scour prediction formulas.
ResearchersScour Formula
Present study d s   h d = 0.067   F d + 0.16   Ar   d + 0.11   Ar   u 0.245   S + 0.224
Sorourian et al. [20] d s h d = 0.27 F d + 0.29 Ar 0.3
Emami and Schleiss [12] d s D = alnF d + b
a = 0.6 ( h t D ) + 1.8
b = 1.23 ( h t D ) 2.25
Chiew et al. [13] d s D = 0.21 × F d
Abt et al. [8] d s D = 3.67 F d 0.57 × d 50 0.4 σ 0.4
Negm et al. [15] d s D = 0.229 + 0.037 ( l d D ) 0.603 ( H d D ) + 0.243 ( D . I ) 0.024 ( h t D ) + 0.392 ( H d D ) 2

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Taha, N.; El-Feky, M.M.; El-Saiad, A.A.; Zelenakova, M.; Vranay, F.; Fathy, I. Study of Scour Characteristics Downstream of Partially-Blocked Circular Culverts. Water 2020, 12, 2845. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102845

AMA Style

Taha N, El-Feky MM, El-Saiad AA, Zelenakova M, Vranay F, Fathy I. Study of Scour Characteristics Downstream of Partially-Blocked Circular Culverts. Water. 2020; 12(10):2845. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102845

Chicago/Turabian Style

Taha, Nesreen, Maged M. El-Feky, Atef A. El-Saiad, Martina Zelenakova, Frantisek Vranay, and Ismail Fathy. 2020. "Study of Scour Characteristics Downstream of Partially-Blocked Circular Culverts" Water 12, no. 10: 2845. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102845

APA Style

Taha, N., El-Feky, M. M., El-Saiad, A. A., Zelenakova, M., Vranay, F., & Fathy, I. (2020). Study of Scour Characteristics Downstream of Partially-Blocked Circular Culverts. Water, 12(10), 2845. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102845

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop