bs_bs_banner

Water and Environment Journal. Print ISSN 1747-6585

Verification of numerical study of scour around spur dikes

using experimental data
Hojat Karami1, Hossein Basser2, Abdollah Ardeshir2 & Seyyed Hadi Hosseini2
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran and 2Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Amirkabir University of
Technology, Tehran, Iran

Keywords
experimental model; numerical model;
scour; sediment transport; spur dike;
three-dimensional models.
Correspondence
H. Karami, Department of Civil Engineering,
Semnan University, Semnan 35131-19111,
Iran. Email: hkarami@semnan.ac.ir
doi:10.1111/wej.12019
Abstract
Scour phenomenon around a series of impermeable, nonsubmerged spur dikes has
been investigated with both experimental and numerical methods. The experiments
were conducted under different states of flow intensity (U/Ucr). The scour geometry
was measured with a high-resolution laser bed-profiler (LBP). For the numerical
simulation phase, a three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model,
namely SSIIM 2.0, was used to compute the sediment transport around the spur
dikes. The numerical model was based on the finite-volume method. Two turbulence
models, namely k-e standard and k-e with re-normalization group (RNG) extensions,
were used to predict turbulence, and the k-e model with some RNG extensions was
selected because of its best agreement with the measurements. Furthermore, a
variety of grids and empirical sediment transport equations were used to find the
best state for simulation of scour around a series of spur dikes. Finally, a comparison
between experimental and numerical results was carried out to verify the CFD
model.

Introduction Estimation of the maximum scour depth around spur dikes

River banks are often exposed to degradation and aggrada-
tions. Failure of the banks depends on the type of erosion and
characteristics of banks, such as their shapes and mechanical
properties. Using spur dikes as an indirect technique for
erosion protection is one of the common and economic
methods. A spur dike is a structure that projects from a
stream bank into the river channel and causes a redirection of
flow away from the bank towards the tip of the spur dike.
These structures are usually preferred to be built in a group.
Spur dikes benefit the stream by reducing velocities near the
banks and create still water areas that encourage deposition
and channelling of flow to reduce the width and create a
defined channel. Construction of spur dikes against the flow
causes a difference in hydrostatic pressure upstream and
downstream of the structure that will cause a whirlpool dis-
turbance around it. These whirlpool flows account for the
main local scouring mechanism that produce large vortexes
at the spur dike head, and this phenomenon may lead to
structural failure. The study of scour around hydraulic struc-
tures constitutes an important field of research because of its
frequent occurrence in engineering applications (Melville
et al. 2006; Emiroglu & Tuna 2011; Tuna & Emiroglu 2011).
has been the main concern of engineers and researchers for
years. Therefore, knowledge of the anticipated maximum
depth of scour for a given discharge is a significant criterion
for the proper design of a spur dike’s foundation. Numerous
researchers such as Gill (1972), Zaghloul (1983), Richardson
et al. (1990), Ghodsian & Vaghefi (2009), Kang et al. (2011)
and Karami et al. (2011) made a variety of experiments in
order to determine the maximum scour depth around spur
dikes. Most of these researchers studied the effect of a single
spur dike, although using series of spur dikes is more effec-
tive in protection of rivers. The scour behaviour of spur dikes
has not progressed because of the complexities involved in
the spur arrangement and the streamwise spur extension
(Gisonni & Hager 2008). Useful recommendations on design
parameters of spur dikes were suggested by Zhang (2005).
Herein, the effect of different states of flow intensity (U/Ucr)
on scour around a series of spur dikes was experimentally
tested. Besides the experimental studies, a variety of compu-
tational fluid dynamics (CFD) models, such as SSIIM, Fluent
and Flow three-dimensional (3D), have been developed for
computing flow pattern and bed-profile changes around
hydraulic structures. The simulation of flow and sediment
transport processes around spur dikes requires at least a

Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM. 1

Numerical study of scour around spur dikes H. Karami et al.

Outlet tank
Inlet tank
Flow

Gate
Flume Spur dikes

Weir
Pump Reservoir

Fig. 1. Schematic view of the experimental flume.

two-dimensional hydrodynamic and sediment transport Table 1 Characteristics of the tests

model (Duan & Nanda 2006; Kuhnle et al. 2008). In the Test No. Q (m3/s) Y (m) U (m/s) U/Ucr Fr
present study, SSIIM 2.0, a 3D model, was used to compute T1 0.035 0.15 0.233 0.65 0.19
sediment transport around spur dikes, and its capability T2 0.041 0.15 0.273 0.75 0.23
for simulation of scour around hydraulic structures was T3 0.046 0.15 0.307 0.85 0.25
T4 0.052 0.15 0.347 0.95 0.29
investigated.
This paper is a comprehensive research into scour phe-
nomenon around consecutive parallel spur dikes with experi-
mental and numerical methods. This study contains 2.65 and geometric standard deviation (sg) of 1.38. Table 1
experimental results and a numerical investigation that shows details of the conducted experiments. At the start of
can be used by researchers or engineers in future works. each experiment, the laboratory flume was first filled gradu-
Experimental equations, numerical parameters and sediment ally using the supply pipe in order to entirely saturate the bed
formulas have been studied, and recommendations are materials. Then, the sluice gate located at the end of the
proposed to solve the scour problems. flume for controlling water level was lifted to achieve the
desired discharge (Q). The experiments were conducted for a
variety of velocities [i.e. the ratio of approaching flow velocity
Experimental study
to critical velocity for incipient motion for bed sediment
The experiments were carried out at the Porous Media Labo- movement (U/Ucr)] by changing the flow discharge. However,
ratory, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran. A clear water condition (U/Ucr < 1) was satisfied in all experi-
rectangular-section flume 14 m long, 1 m wide and 1 m deep ments. At the end of each experiment, the water was drained
was used for the experiments. The bed and sides of the flume off from the flume with sufficient care to prevent any distur-
were made of glass supported by a metal frame. Three 25 cm bance in the scour holes. Then, the variations of bed profile
long, impermeable, nonsubmerged and perpendicular to the around spur dikes were measured by a laser bed-profiler
flow direction, spur dikes were installed in the flume. The first (LBP), with an accuracy of ⫾ 1 mm in width and ⫾ 0.1 mm in
spur dike was installed 6.16 m from the flume entrance, and depth.
space between them was fixed equal to twice the length of In order to calibrate the results of CFD model for the flow
spur dike (L). These values were selected based on the rec- simulation, a 25 Hz NorTek ADV was used to measure instan-
ommendations of Zhang (2005) and Gisonni et al. (2005). taneous 3D velocity components on a rough rigid bed. To
Figure 1 shows a schematic view of the experimental flume conduct these, the sediment of the top bed layer was glued
and spur dikes. To ensure that a uniform flow will be estab- onto the channel bottom. As the flow pattern near the bed
lished and fully developed turbulent flow will be reached in has a significant effect on sediment transport, 50 points of
the upstream of the test sections, the velocity profiles were velocity measurements were taken at z = 2 cm above the bed
measured in all the test cases by an acoustic Doppler veloci- for flow characteristics of test T3.
meter (ADV). A small reservoir was constructed at the down-
stream end of the flume to collect transported sediments.
The flow discharge was regulated by an inlet valve. It was
Experimental observations and results
measured by a rectangular weir at the flume. The approach Scour time is one of the important parameters in these
flow depth (Y) was always set to 15 cm. The flume was filled experiments. After conducting some preliminary experi-
with uniform bed sediments (sg < 1.4), with a thickness of ments, it was observed that maximum depth and time varia-
0.35 m, median size (d50) of 0.91 mm, specific gravity (Ss) of tion of scour depth around the first spur dike was more

2 Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM.

H. Karami et al. Numerical study of scour around spur dikes

100
0.30
90
0.25
80
0.20
70
d st (m)

(dst/dse) %
0.15 60
Test T1
50 Test T1
0.10 Test T2
Test T2
Test T3
40 Test T3
0.05 Test T4
Test T4
30
0.00
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
t (min) (t/T) %
(a) (b)
Fig. 2. (a) Time variation of scour depth and (b) dimensionless scour depth (dst/dse) as a function of dimensionless time (t/T).

Table 2 Results obtained from the experiments 1.2

3
Test No. U/Ucr dS1 (m) dS2 (m) dS3 (m) Volume (m )
T1 0.65 0.156 0 0.026 0.0165 1
T2 0.75 0.181 0.011 0.062 0.0371
T3 0.85 0.225 0.029 0.072 0.0668 R² = 0.98
Predicted dst /dse

0.8
T4 0.95 0.281 0.078 0.103 0.1171

0.6

0.4
critical than the other spur dikes. Therefore, long duration
experiments were conducted, and the time variation of scour 0.2
depth around the first spur dike was measured carefully
(Fig. 2). In this research, equilibrium depth of scour was 0
defined based on Chiew (1992) as a depth with less than 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
1 mm change after 8 hours of experimental run. Parameters
Measured dst /dse
of Fig. 2 are time of scouring (t), maximum scour depth at
time [t (dst)], equilibrium scour depth (dse) and time to reach Fig 3. Comparison between experimental data and regression model.
equilibrium scour depth (T). After finishing each experiment,
scour profile and maximum scour depth were carefully meas- The time variation of scour depth (dst) can be written as a
ured by LBP. Table 2 shows the results of the tests. In this function of U, Ucr, t, T and dse. A dimensional analysis was
table, ds1, ds2 and ds3 are maximum scour depth at the first, carried out, and nondimensional parameters of t/T and U/Ucr
second and third spur dike, respectively, and volume repre- have been obtained for developing a regression model. The
sents total volume of scour hole. following equation for estimation of time-dependent scour
Figure 2a and Table 2 indicate that it takes 1260 min for depth at the first spur dike was obtained.
U/Ucr = 0.65, 1310 min for U/Ucr = 0.85 and 1620 min for
−0.10
dst ⎡ ⎛ ⎛ t ⎞ ⎞ ⎤⎛ U ⎞
0.31
U/Ucr = 0.95 to achieve 90% of the equilibrium scour depth.
= ⎢1− exp ⎜ −2.48 ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ (1)
This observation shows that scour depth reaches an equilib- dse ⎣ ⎝ ⎝ T ⎠ ⎠ ⎦ ⎝ Ucr ⎠
rium condition in a shorter time for lower flow intensities in
comparison with the higher values. At an equal time of Figure 3 shows a good agreement between the measured
experiments, maximum scour depth increases by increasing scour depth and developed regression model. The coefficient
the U/Ucr. Figure 2b shows dimensionless scour depth (dst/dse) of determination for Eq. (1) is R2 = 0.98. Therefore, Eq. (1) is a
versus dimensionless time (t/T). It can be concluded from this practical and simple equation that can be used with high
figure that more than 80% of scouring occurs during the first accuracy.
20% of the equilibrium time. Therefore, maximum rate of Figure 4 illustrates the scour profiles including contour
scouring occurs during the first hours of experiments. lines of different scour depths. Experimental results indicated

Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM. 3

Numerical study of scour around spur dikes H. Karami et al.

1
1 X = 6.16 m
X = 6.41 m

Y (m)
Flow
Y (m)

Flow 0.5
0.5
Y = 0.35 m

Y = 0.15 m

0 0
5.2 5.7 6.2 6.7 7.2 5.2 5.7 6.2 6.7 7.2
X (m) X (m)
m)

m)
Y(

Y(
X (m X (m
)

1 1
Y (m)
Y (m)

Flow 0.5 Flow

0.5

0 0
5.2 5.7 6.2 6.7 7.2 5.2 5.7 6.2 6.7 7.2
X (m) X (m)
(a) (b)
Fig. 4. Scour profile around spur dikes: (a) test T1 and (b) test T3.

that in a series of consecutive parallel spur dikes, the
maximum scour depth occurred around the first spur dike.
After the first spur dike, the last spur dike had the maximum
scour depth (Table 2, Fig. 4). This result is similar to the result
of the studies made by Zhang (2005) and Karami et al. (2008).
It was concluded that 96, 78, 73 and 72% of the total volume
of scour hole occurred around the first spur dike in tests T1,
T2, T3 and T4, respectively. These results show the impor-
tance and necessity of reduction of scour around the first
spur dike in a series of spur dikes. The results also indicate
that scour depth increased by increasing the value of flow
intensity (U/Ucr). By increasing U/Ucr by 46%, scour depth
around the first and second spur dike was increased 80 and
78%, respectively, while, it was increased by four times
around the third spur dike.
Figure 5 shows a schematic diagram of the flow pattern
and scouring around a spur dike (Karami 2011). Experimental
observations indicated that in the scour hole upstream of
the spur dikes, a creeping motion of sediments occurred
because of the downward flow and primary vortex (Fig. 5a).
Downstream of the spur dikes, sediments were suspended
and lifted, owing to upward flow into the scour hole and
deposited because of reduction in velocity between two con-
secutive spur dikes (Fig. 5b). In all experiments, the location
of maximum scour depth occurred always near the upper tip
of each spur dike, and a conical shape of scouring was
formed at the tip of all spur dikes. In the test region, where
the spur dikes were located, the shear stress on the bed was
more than the critical shear stress causing removal of sedi-
ments from the bed. Furthermore, the slope of the scour
holes in the upstream side was always more than on the
downstream side. Average upstream slope of the scour hole
was close to the angle of repose of sediment particles
(f = 30°). It was observed in all experiments that there are

4 Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM.

H. Karami et al. Numerical study of scour around spur dikes

(a) (b)
Fig. 5. Scouring process because of spur dikes: (a) schematic diagram of flow pattern and scouring around spur dike (Karami 2011), (b) sediment
transport and bed changes around spur dikes (test T4).

two zones in which scour depth and their slope are different
(Figs 5b and 4b). As can be seen in Figs 5(b) and 4(b), scour
depth in zone 1 is more than it in zone 2. It was observed that
on moving primary vortex along the first spur dike causes
formation of a horseshoe vortex. When the horseshoe vortex
meets the approaching flow, it forms another vortex that is
named the secondary vortex. It can be concluded that the
scour in zone 1 is formed due to the horseshoe vortex, while
scour in zone 2 is formed due to the secondary vortex.
optimum grid (92 ¥ 21 ¥ 10) was selected on the basis of
time duration and accuracy of computation (Fig. 6). Another
sensitivity analysis was carried out for investigation of the
effect of various turbulence models. The results showed that
the k-e turbulence model with some RNG extensions showed
the best agreement with experimental measurements.
Figure 7 illustrates the comparison of simulated and meas-
ured absolute velocity (V). It can be concluded from this
figure that the CFD model simulated the flow pattern with
sufficient accuracy.

Numerical study Sediment transport

SSIIM 2.0 computes both suspended load and bed load. The
Flow
suspended sediment transport was computed by solving the
In this study, SSIIM 2.0 CFD was used for 3D numerical mod- transient convection-diffusion equation for sediment concen-
elling of scour around spur dikes. SSIIM 2.0 uses a finite- tration c.
volume approach to discretize the equations. The water flow
was computed by solving the Reynolds-averaged Navier– ∂c ∂c ∂c ∂ ⎛ ∂c ⎞
+ Ui +w = ⎜Γ ⎟ (2)
Stokes equations using the k-e turbulence model. SSIIM 2.0 ∂t ∂x i ∂z ∂x i ⎝ ∂x i ⎠
uses the semi-implicit method for pressure-linked equations
method to compute the pressure (Olsen 2009). In the present where U = Reynolds-averaged water velocity, w = fall velocity
study, flow around spur dikes was simulated for conditions of of the sediment, x = general space dimension, z = dimension
test T3 (U/Ucr = 0.85). Two sensitivity analyses were carried in the vertical direction and G = diffusion coefficient that is set
out for investigation of the effect of various grids and turbu- equal to the eddy viscosity taken from the k-e model. The
lence models. Two sizes of computational grids (92 ¥ 21 ¥ 10 equation describes the transport of sediments and includes
and 156 ¥ 21 ¥ 10) were used initially, and the results were the effect of turbulence on reducing the settling velocity of
compared (Fig. 6). The distortion ratio in the finer grid around sediments. This equation is solved using a control-volume
the spur dikes was 0.2, while this value was changed to 1 in method on all cells, except the cell closest to the bed, where
other regions. A computer with a 2.2 GHz processor was the concentration is specified by Van Rijn (1987) formula:
used to run the numerical models. 1.5
⎛ τ − τc ⎞
d 0.3 ⎜
It was found that the finer grids (156 ¥ 21 ¥ 10) not only ⎝ τ c ⎟⎠
increase the accuracy of computations but also increase the c bed = 0.015 0.1 (3)
⎛ρ −ρ ⎞
time of computations significantly. The CPU time for finer grid a ⎜ s 2w ⎟
⎝ ρwν ⎠
and courser gird were 780 and 180 min respectively. The

Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM. 5

Numerical study of scour around spur dikes H. Karami et al.

Fig. 6. Two developed meshes with three spur

dikes: (a) grid size 92 ¥ 21 ¥ 10 and (b) grid size
156 ¥ 21 ¥ 10.

Fig. 7. Comparison of simulated and measured

absolute velocity (V).

1.5
where d = sediment particle diameter, t = bed shear stress, ⎛ τ − τc ⎞
⎜⎝ ⎟
tc = critical bed shear stress for movement of sediment qb τc ⎠
= 0.053
⎛ ( ρ − ρw ) g ⎞
0.1
particles according to Shields’ diagram, rw and rs = density ρs − ρw (4)
d1.5 g d 0.3 ⎜ s ⎟
of water and sediment, n = viscosity of water and g is ρw ⎝ ρwν 2
⎠
acceleration of gravity.
In addition to the suspended load, the bed load qb is com- In the present research, bed changes around spur dikes were
puted by Van Rijn (1987) formula: simulated for all experimental test conditions. Boundary con-

6 Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM.

H. Karami et al. Numerical study of scour around spur dikes

ditions were as follows. In the discharge editor, inlet and analysis on bed roughness, it was found that a value of 5d50
outlet water flow were defined to show the inflow and outflow was the best value for simulating the scour depth around
discharge values. To estimate the effect of a wall on the flow, spur dikes. According to various studies, the value of bed
an empirical wall function known as standard wall function roughness can range from d50 to 100d50 (Olsen 2009).
was used (Olsen 2009). In order to simulate the geometry of channel and spur
dikes, the two structured meshes in the previous section were
U 1 ⎛ 30h ⎞ used (Fig. 6). In order to explore and compare the achieved
= ln⎜ ⎟ (5)
ux κ ⎝ k s ⎠ results, two tests, namely R2 and mean absolute error (MAE)
were utilized using measured results and numerical results
where ks = bed roughness, k = Prandtl constant and equals around the spur dikes.
0.4, and h = distance from the wall.
To simulate the bed changes around the spur dikes,
∑ (E − N )
n 2
i i
various sensitivity analyses on bed roughness, mesh sizing, R 2 = 1− i =1
(6)
∑ (E − E )
n 2
turbulence models and sediment transport formulas were i =1 i i

carried out to achieve the result that had the best agreement
with the observed measurements. Based on the sensitivity
1 n
MAE = ∑ Ei − Ni
n i=1
(7)

Table 3 Statistical results for the two developed meshes

where Ei are experimental results and Ni are numerical results.
Computation It is achieved from the R2 and MAE tests, the finer grid had
Grid size MAE R2 time (min) better agreement with experimental results. The coarser grid
92 ¥ 21 ¥ 10 0.039314 0.41 490 also cannot simulate the scour upstream of the first spur dike.
156 ¥ 21 ¥ 10 0.018286 0.82 900
This is likely due to the primary vortex that occurs upstream

Table 4 Comparison of results of experimental model and various sediment transport formulas
Sediment transport model dS1 (m) dS2 (m) dS3 (m) Volume (m3) R2 MAE
U/Ucr = 0.65 Experimental model 0.1560 0.0000 0.0260 0.0165 – –
Van Rijn (1987) 0.1015 0.0333 0.0133 0.0127 0.89 0.018
Engelund & Hansen (1972) 0.0711 0.0075 0.0017 0.0039 0.42 0.025
Ackers & White (1973) 0.0245 0.0103 0.003 0.0020 0.07 0.055
Yang (1973) 0.0519 0.0519 0.0377 0.0175 0.16 0.029
Shen & Hung (1972) 0.1007 0.0644 0.0395 0.0213 0.33 0.028
Einstein & Chien (1955) 0.0204 0.0000 0.0000 0.0004 0.33 0.032
U/Ucr = 0.75 Experimental model 0.1810 0.0110 0.0620 0.0371 – –
Van Rijn (1987) 0.1330 0.0591 0.0392 0.0252 0.85 0.027
Engelund & Hansen (1972) 0.0706 0.0065 0.0002 0.0053 0.23 0.044
Ackers & White (1973) 0.0662 0.0554 0.0368 0.0125 0.05 0.043
Yang (1973) 0.0601 0.0501 0.0599 0.0618 0.08 0.42
Shen & Hung (1972) 0.0173 0.0143 0.0173 0.0253 0.30 0.047
Einstein & Chien (1955) 0.0397 0.0000 0.0000 0.0015 0.31 0.046
U/Ucr = 0.85 Experimental model 0.2250 0.0290 0.0720 0.0668 – –
Van Rijn (1987) 0.2122 0.033 0.066 0.0596 0.88 0.036
Engelund & Hansen (1972) 0.1028 0.0267 0.0041 0.0133 0.26 0.074
Ackers & White (1973) 0.0878 0.0789 0.0664 0.0277 0.19 0.070
Yang (1973) 0.0246 0.0000 0.0082 0.0533 0.12 0.091
Shen & Hung (1972) 0.1110 0.1077 0.0961 0.1152 0.35 0.051
Einstein & Chien (1955) 0.0562 0.0010 0.0000 0.0029 0.35 0.084
U/Ucr = 0.95 Experimental model 0.2810 0.0780 0.1030 0.1171 – –
Van Rijn (1987) 0.1758 0.0880 0.0806 0.0773 0.69 0.060
Engelund & Hansen (1972) 0.1382 0.0572 0.0227 0.0303 0.21 0.084
Ackers & White (1973) 0.1051 0.0963 0.0792 0.0669 0.04 0.092
Yang (1973) 0.1792 0.1461 0.1451 0.2373 0.07 0.088
Shen & Hung (1972) 0.1791 0.1436 0.1458 0.2387 0.44 0.049
Einstein & Chien (1955) 0.0380 0.0006 0.0005 0.0016 0.25 0.110

Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM. 7

Numerical study of scour around spur dikes H. Karami et al.

of the first spur. In the finer grid, the area around the spur transport formulas for all tests. Based on sensitivity analysis
dikes used a finer mesh than the other regions that is suitable of the effect of two k-e standards and k-e with some RNG
for simulating primary vortex and intense velocity gradients extension turbulence models, the k-e turbulence model with
(Table 3). some RNG extensions showed the best agreement with
Two sensitivity analyses were carried out to investigate the experimental measurement (the coefficient of determination,
effect of various turbulence models and various sediment R2, for k-e standards and k-e with some RNG extension was
0.66 and 0.83, respectively).
Table 4 indicates the results of R2 and MAE criteria for
1.2 various sediment transport models. In order to calculate the
value of these criteria, 74 points were used based on: two
1.0 sections at upstream, two sections at downstream and one
section along the first spur dike. Based on the sensitivity analy-
0.8
sis of sediment transport formulas, the results that were
achieved from Van Rijn’s (1987) formula showed the best
(dst /dse)

0.6
agreement with the measured topography. It can be con-
Numerical
0.4 cluded from the results that Engelund and Hansen (1972),
Experimental (Test T3) Ackers and White (1973), and Einstein and Chien (1955) formu-
0.2 las underestimated the amount of scour depth and volume of
scour hole. In contrast, Shen and Hung (1972), and Yang’s
0.0 (1973) formulas overestimated the amount of scour volume.
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
After selecting the k-e with some RNG extension’s turbu-
(t/T) lence model and Van Rijn’s sediment transport formula, the
Fig. 8. Comparison of numerical and experimental results for dimension- bed changes around spur dikes were computed numerically.
less time variation of scouring.

0.05 0.05

Y (m)

0 Y (m)
0.25 0.45 0.65 0.85
0.00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

-0.05

Numerical -0.05
Numerical
-0.1 Experimental (Test T1)
Experimental (Test T1)
Z (m)
Z (m)

-0.15 -0.10

0.05 0.05

Y (m) Y (m)
0 0
0.25 0.45 0.65 0.85 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

-0.05 -0.05

-0.1 -0.1

Numerical
-0.15 -0.15
Experimental (Test T3)
Numerical

-0.2 Experimental (Test T3)

-0.2
Z (m)
Z (m)

-0.25 -0.25

(a) (b)
Fig. 9. Comparison of computed and measured bed changes at sections: (a) X = 6.16 m, (b) X = 6.41 m.

8 Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM.

H. Karami et al. Numerical study of scour around spur dikes

0.04 0.05

X (m)
0
X (m) 5.4 5.8 6.2 6.6 7 7.4
0
5.6 6 6.4 6.8

-0.05

Numerical
-0.04 Experimental (Test T1) Numerical
-0.1 Experimental (Test T1)
Z (m)

Z (m)
-0.08 -0.15

0.04 0.05

X (m) X (m)
0 0
5.4 5.8 6.2 6.6 7 7.4 5.4 5.8 6.2 6.6 7 7.4

-0.04 -0.05

-0.08 -0.1

Numerical
-0.12 -0.15
Experimental (Test T3)
Numerical
-0.16 -0.2 Experimental (Test T3)
Z (m)

Z (m)

-0.2 -0.25

(a) (b)
Fig. 10. Comparison of computed and measured bed changes at sections: (a) Y = 0.15 m, (b) Y = 0.35 m.

Figure 8 indicates the time variation of maximum scour depth
around the first spur dike. It can be concluded from this figure
that about 80% of maximum scour depth occurred during the
first 20% of the computation time and maximum rate of scour-
ing occurred during the first hours of computation. From this
figure, it can be seen that the agreement between numerical
results and experimental results is satisfactory.
Figures 9 and 10 illustrates a comparison of computed bed
changes and measured bed changes at sections [X = 6.16 m
(a), X = 6.41 m (b)] and [Y = 0.15 m (a), Y = 0.35 m (b)],
respectively, for tests T1 and T3 (the sections are illustrated in
Fig. 4).
These results indicate the accuracy of the numerical model
in calculating the bed changes around spur dikes. Maximum
scour depth was observed around the tip of the first spur dike
(Fig. 9a). It can be seen in Fig. 9 that the numerical model
underestimates the amount of scour in most areas; maximum
scour depth reached around 0.23 m in experimental results,
while the computation underestimated the value to 0.20 m.
This underestimating may be due to complexities of flow
pattern and vortexes, or other factors that are not consid-
ered in the sediment transport formulas. Furthermore, Figs 9
and 10, and Table 4 show that numerical bed changes around
spur dikes in lower flow intensities have better agreement
with experimental measurements in comparison with
numerical bed changes in higher flow intensities. This differ-
ence may be due to complexities and high vortex intensities
in flows with higher U/Ucr values that reduce the accuracy of
the numerical model.
Conclusion
In this research, bed changes around spur dikes in a straight
channel were studied with experimental and numerical
methods. The experiments were under clear water condition.
Uniform bed sediment with constant diameter was used to fill
the flume. By comparing the 3D model with the experimental
measurements, the model was found to produce bed
changes around spur dikes with sufficient accuracy. Experi-
mental data from this study was used to verify the simulated
flow field and bed changes around a series of spur dikes. The
following main results were found in this research:
(1) Scouring develops rapidly in the initial moments of the
scouring process. Both experimental and numerical results

Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM. 9

Numerical study of scour around spur dikes
showed that around 80% of scouring occurred during the first
20% of the equilibrium time. Also, it was concluded that
maximum rate of scouring occurred during the first hours of
experiments and computations, and decreased with time.
(2) From the experimental data, a new empirical equation
was developed for the prediction of time variation of scour
depth around spur dikes.
(3) In a series of consecutive parallel spur dikes, depth and
volume of the scour hole around spur dikes are increased by
increasing the velocity ratio. It was also observed that depth
and volume of scour around the last spur dike is increased
significantly by a small increase in flow intensity.
(4) The average upstream slope of the scour hole was
almost equal to the angle of repose of sediment particles (f).
(5) In a series of consecutive parallel spur dikes, the first
and last spur dikes have the maximum scour depth.
(6) The results showed that there are two distinct zones
with different depth and slope in the scour hole. The deeper
hole was formed due to a horseshoe vortex, and the shallow
hole was formed due to the secondary vortex.
(7) The results showed that in order to simulate bed
changes around spur dikes or other hydraulic structures,
numerically, it is necessary to use a finer mesh around spur
dikes, especially the first one to simulate the primary vortex,
which is the main reason of scouring around the structure.
(8) The k-e turbulence model with some RNG extensions
had the best agreement with measurements for both flow
and sediment transport computation.
(9) Using the 5d50 for roughness value showed the best
agreement with experimental results.
(10) Comparison of computed and measured bed changes
proved that Van Rijn’s sediment transport formula has the
best agreement with experimental results.
Acknowledgement
Authors would like to thank Professor Sayed-Farhad Mousavi
for his effective suggestions and editing.
To submit a comment on this article please go to
http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/wej. For further information please
see the Author Guidelines at wileyonlinelibrary.com
References
Ackers, P. and White, W.R. (1973) Sediment Transport: New
Approach and Analysis. ASCE, J. Hydr. Div., 99 (11), 2041–
2060.
Chiew, Y.M. (1992) Scour Protection at Bridge Piers. ASCE, J.
Hydr. Eng., 118 (9), 1260–1269.
Duan, J.G. and Nanda, S.K. (2006) Two-Dimensional Depth-
Averaged Model Simulation of Suspended Sediment Concen-
tration Distribution in a Groyne Field. Elsevier, J. Hydrol., 327,
426–437.
10
H. Karami et al.
Einstein, H.A. and Chien, N. (1955) Effects of Heavy Sediment
Concentration near the Bed on Velocity and Sediment Distri-
bution. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Missouri River Division
Sediment Series No. 8.
Emiroglu, M.E. and Tuna, M.C. (2011) The Effect of Tailwater
Depth on the Local Scour Downstream of Stepped-Chutes.
KSCE J. Civil Eng., 15 (5), 907–915.
Engelund, F. and Hansen, E. (1972) A Monograph on Sediment
Transport in Alluvial Streams. Teknisk Forlag, Copenhagen,
Denmark.
Ghodsian, M. and Vaghefi, M. (2009) Experimental Study on
Scour and Flow Field in a Scour Hole Around a T-Shape Spur
Dike in a 90° Bend. Intl. J. Sedim. Res., 24 (2), 145–158.
Gill, M.A. (1972) Erosion of Sand Beds Around Spur Dikes. ASCE,
J. Hydr. Div., 98 (9), 1587–1610.
Gisonni, C. and Hager, W.H. (2008) Spur Failure in River Engineer-
ing. ASCE, J. Hydr. Eng., 134 (2), 135–145.
Gisonni, C., Hager, W.H. and Unger, J. (2005) Spurs in River
Engineering – A Preliminary Review. 31st IAHR Congress,
pp. 1894–1901, Seoul, Korea.
Kang, J., Yeo, H., Kim, S. and Un, J. (2011) Experimental Investiga-
tion on the Local Scour Characteristics around Groynes Using
a Hydraulic Model. Water & Environ. J., 25 (2), 181–191.
Karami, H. (2011) Effect of protective spur dike on reduction of
local scour around spur dikes (experimental investigation).
Doctoral Dissertation, Amirkabir University of Technology,
Tehran, Iran.
Karami, H., Ardeshir, A., Saneie, M., Behzadian, K. and Jalilsani, F.
(2008) Reduction of Local Scouring with Protective Spur Dike.
Proceedings of the World Environmental and Water Resources
Congress, pp. 1–9. ASCE, Hawaii, USA.
Karami, H., Ardeshir, A., Behzadian, K. and Ghodsian, M. (2011)
Protective Spur Dike for Scour Mitigation of Existing Spur
Dikes. J. Hydr. Res., 49 (6), 809–813.
Kuhnle, R.A., Jia, Y. and Alonso, C.V. (2008) Measured and Simu-
lated Flow near a Submerged Spur Dike. ASCE, J. Hydr. Eng.,
137 (7), 916–924.
Melville, B.W., Ballegooy, S.V., Coleman, S. and Barkdoll, B. (2006)
Scour Countermeasures for Wing-Wall Abutments. ASCE, J.
Hydr. Eng., 132 (6), 563–574.
Olsen, N.R.B. (2009) A Three-Dimensional Numerical Model for
Simulation of Sediment Movement in Water Intakes with Multi-
Block Option. Department of Hydraulic and Environmental
Engineering, The Norwegian University of Science and Tech-
nology, Trondheim.
Richardson, E.V., Simons, D.B. and Julien, P. (1990) Highways in
the river environment. Report No. FHWA-HI-90-16, FHWA,
USDOT, Washington, DC.
Shen, H.W. and Hung, C.S. (1972) An Engineering Approach to
Total Bed-Material Load by Regression Analysis. Proceedings
of the Sedimentation Symposium, Chap. 14, pp. 14.1–14.17.
Water Resources, Fort Collins, CO.
Tuna, M.C. and Emiroglu, M.E. (2011) Scour Profiles at Down-
stream of Cascades. Scientia Iranica, Elsevier, 18 (3), 338–347.
Van Rijn, L.C. (1987) Mathematical modeling of morphological
processes in the case of suspended sediment transport. PhD
Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.
Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM.
H. Karami et al. Numerical study of scour around spur dikes

Yang, T.C. (1973) Incipient Motion and Sediment Transport. ASCE, Zhang, H. (2005) Study on flow and bed deformation in channels
J. Hydr. Div., 99 (10), 1679–1704. with spur dike. Doctoral Dissertation, Kyoto University,
Zaghloul, N.A. (1983) Local Scour around Spur-Dikes. J. Hydrol., Japan.
60, 123–140.

Appendix A

Notations

a = Reference level
b = Width of the flume
c = Sediment concentration
d = Sediment particle diameter
d50 = 50% finer particle diameter
dsi = Maximum scour depth around the ith spur dike
dst = Scour depth around the first spur dike at time t
dse = Equilibrium scour depth around the first spur dike
Fr = Froude number
g = Acceleration of gravity
h = Distance from the wall
k = Turbulent kinetic energy
ks = Bed roughness
L = Length of spur dike
Q = Volumetric discharge
qb = Bed load
Ss = Specific gravity
T = Time of equilibrium of sour depth
t = Time of scouring
U = Average approaching flow velocity
Ucr = Critical velocity of approaching flow
w = Fall velocity of sediment
x = General space dimension
Y = Approaching flow depth
z = Dimension in the vertical direction
rw = Density of water
rs = Density of sediment
sg = Standard deviation of bed material sediment
t = Bed shear stress
tc = Critical bed shear stress
n = Viscosity of water
k = Prandtl constant
f = Angle of repose of sediment particles
G = Diffusion coefficient
e = Dissipation of turbulent kinetic energy

Water and Environment Journal •• (2012) ••–•• © 2012 CIWEM. 11