CHAPTER 7RELATIONS FOR 1D BEDLOAD TRANSPORT.ppt

* 1D SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MORPHODYNAMICS with applications to RIVERS AND TURBIDITY CURRENTS ? Gary Parker November, 2004 CHAPTER 7: RELATIONS FOR 1D BEDLOAD TRANSPORT Let qb denote the volume bedload transport rate per unit width (sliding, rolling, saltating). It is reasonable to assume that qb increases with a measure of flow strength, such as depth-averaged flow velocity U or boundary shear stress ?b. A dimensionless Einstein bedload number q* can be defined as follows: A common and useful approach to the quantification of bedload transport is to empirically relate qb* with either the Shields stress ?* or the excess of the Shields stress ?* above some appropriately defined “critical” Shields stress ?c*. As pointed out in the last chapter, ?c* can be defined appropriately so as to a) fit the data and b) provide a useful demarcation of a range below which the bedload transport rate is too low to be of interest. The functional relation sought is thus of the form BEDLOAD TRANSPORT RELATION OF MEYER-PETER AND MüLLER All the bedload relations in this chapter pertain to a flow condition known as “plane-bed” transport, i.e. transport in the absence of significant bedforms. The influence of bedforms on bedload transport rate will be considered in a later chapter. The “mother of all modern bedload transport relations” is that due to Meyer-Peter and Müller (1948) (MPM). It takes the form The relation was derived using flume data pertaining to well-sorted sediment in the gravel sizes. Recently Wong (2003) and Wong and Parker (submitted) found an error in the analysis of MPM. A re-analysis of the all the data pertaining to plane-bed transport used by MPM resulted in the corrected relation If the exponent of 1.5 is retained, the best-fit relation is LIMITATIONS OF MPM The “critical Shields stress” ?c* of either 0.047 or 0.0495 in either the original or corrected MPM relation(s) must be considered as only a matter of convenience for correlating the data. This ca