SETTLING BASIN

Definition sketch of settling basin

 .
PLAN AND L-SECTION OF DESILTING CHAMBER
 .
CROSS SECTION OF DESILTING CHAMBER
 .
DETAILS OF SILT FLUSHING DUCT
.

View of the desilting

chamber in upper part

Downstream view of
the desilting
chamber
1. Flushing Discharge

about 20 to 30 % of intake discharge

Flushing Q Intake Q
Yamuna Hydel 24% 310 m3/s
Maneri Bhali-I 29% 99 m3/s
Maneri Bhali-II 26% 192 m3/s
Binwa (HP) 19% 4 m3/s
Bhabha (HP) 19% 21.2 m3/s
2. Velocity in the Basin

Mosonyi: desirable velocity 0.4 to 0.6 m/s more velocity results in

more length of basin.

Nigam: 0.35 m/s

Old basin = 0.2 to 0.3 m/s a very low velocity and large x-section lead
to hydraulic short circuit.

Camp U (m/s) a d (mm)

d = maximum size of sediment to be removed
a = 0.36 for d > 1mm
a = 0.44 for 1mm > d > 0.1mm
a = 0.51 for 0.1 mm > d
Varshney (1985) for Himalayan rivers
a = 0.55 for d > 1mm
a = 0.66 for 1mm > d > 0.1mm
a = 0.77 for 0.1 mm > d
3. Size of Sediment to be removed

generally 0.15 mm size

4. Basin Dimensions

Q = BDU (1)

(D = Depth of flow in basin; B = Width of basin)

w = fall velocity in stagnant water.

Settling time t = D / w

Length of basin, L = Ut = UD / w (2)

For known Q, w,U and assumed value of D, calculate L and B from Eqs.
(1) and (2). 20% increase in length is recommended to account for effect
of turbulence on fall velocity (Ranga Raju & Garde 2000)
Fall velocity in flowing water is different than the stagnant water, Mosonyi
proposed fall velocity in flowing water = w w

Levin
w U
0.132

D( m )
DU D1.5 U
thus L 0.5
w - w D w 0.132 U

gives often long length of basins

 .

Fall velocity of spherical particles (relative density = 2.65 ) in water

Sediment Removal Efficiency .

Camp (1944) and Dobbin (1944)

For known value of L, D, U, w,

and Mannings roughness
coefficient, one can calculate
efficiency = (1-qse/qsi)

qse = outgoing sediment load

qsi = incoming sediment load

Camp and Dobbins relation for efficiency of settling basin

Sumer (1977)

Proposed the following relationship for

efficiency

u * L
ln(1 )
15UD

may be read from the graph. (u*= shear

velocity in the basin)

Sumers relation between and

USBR

wL

1 e UD
 Garde et al. (1990)

Proposed the following

relationship for efficiency

0 1 e kL / D

k and 0 may be read from the

graph. (u*= shear velocity in the
basin)

Ranga Raju et al. (1999) Variation of k and o with w/u*

Found that the following equation yields better results than above equation when
w/u*<2.5:
0.23 0.98
w
0.81
LB D1/ 6
11.7
U n g
Bc D c
Dc and Bc are depth of flow and bed width of the approach channel, respectively
DATA OF SOME EXISTING BASINS (after Ranga Raju & Garde 2000)
Basin with hoppers used on river Yamuna
(a) Longitudinal section (b) Plan, (c) X-section
 .

Recommended geometry for vanes at a basin entry for 2:1 expansion

(After Atkinson 1992)