حساسیت‌سنجی پارامترهای مؤثر در معادله‌های تجربی برآورد عمق آب‌شستگی موضعی پیرامون پایه‌ پل‌ها در جریان‌های ماندگار

نویسندگان

1 گروه علوم و مهندسی آب، دانشکده‌ی کشاورزی، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان، ایران.

2 استاد گروه سازه های آبی، دانشکده مهندسی آب و محیط زیست، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز.

چکیده

متغیرهای به‌کار رفته در معادله‌های تجربی برآورد عمق آب‌شستگی موضعی پیرامون پایه‌ی پل‌ها مشخصه‌های جریان و رسوب، مانند سرعت جریان، عمق جریان و اندازه‌ی ذرات رسوب هستند. محاسبه‌ی عمق آب‌شستگی موضعی پایه‌ی پل با استفاده از معادله‌های تجربی نیز بر پایه‌ی داده‌های اندازه‌گیری شده‌ی این خصوصیات صورت می‌گیرد. خطاهایی که در اندازه‌گیری‌های این خصوصیات رخ می‌دهد و در کاربردهای مهندسی معمول است، بر صحت برآورد عمق آب‌شستگی پایه‌ی پل تأثیر می‌گذارد. در تحقیق حاضر انتشار خطای ناشی از داده‌های ورودی و تأثیر آن در برآورد عمق آب‌شستگی موضعی پایه‌ی پل، با استفاده از روش عددی مونت کارلو، بررسی شده و براساس آن میزان حساسیت و نقاط ضعف و قوت نسبی معادله‌ها تعیین شده است. در این تحقیق چهار معادله‌ی برآورد عمق آب‌شستگی موضعی پیرامون پایه‌های با مقطع دایره‌ای، با مواد بستر غیرچسبنده در شرایط آب‌شستگی آب زلال و بستر زنده، شامل معادله‌های فروهلیچ (1991)، گائو و همکاران (1993)، شِفرد/مِلویل (2014)، و 18-HEC (2016) بررسی شده است. نتایج نشان می‌دهد که از بین متغیرهای ورودی، به ترتیب، سرعت جریان و اندازه‌ی ذرات رسوب بیشترین، و تغییرات عمق جریان کمترین تأثیر را بر محاسبات عمق آب‌شستگی موضعی پایه‌ی پل دارند. همچنین نتایج این تحقیق نشان می‌دهد که از بین چهار معادله‌ی مورد بررسی، معادله‌ی 18-HEC کمترین و معادله‌ی گائو و همکاران بیشترین حساسیت را نسبت به خطاهای موجود در داده‌های اندازه‌گیری شده دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Sensitivity Analysis of Effective Parameters in Empirical Equations for Estimating Local Scour Depth at Bridge Piers in Steady Flows

نویسندگان [English]

  • Reza Azizi 1
  • Mahmood Shafai Bajestan 2
1 Department of Water Sciences and Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran.
2 Professor, Department of Hydraulic Structures, Faculty of Water & Environmental Engineering, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Scour around bridge piers is an important challenging issue in hydraulic engineering and one of the primary causes of bridge failures (Singh et al., 2022). To date, a large number of empirical equations have been proposed by researches for estimating local scour depth at bridge piers. However, their applicability and results are very different from each other, in such a way, calculated local scour depths using these equations, for a 1 m diameter pier in fine and coarse sand beds, could vary almost from 0.2 m to 3 m, and 0.25 m to 5 m, respectively (Sheppard et al. 2014). In these conditions, evaluation of the performance and accuracy of pier scour empirical equations is very important. In fact, it is necessary to assess the effect of errors in measurements of input properties on estimation of local scour at piers in order to specify the equations that are mostly affected by propagation of input data errors. Sensitivity analysis of these equations and determining the effect of data uncertainties on them could result in precise computation of pier scour that leads in safe designs and reduction in further damages.
Variables that are used in local scour equations at bridge piers, are flow and sediment properties, such as flow velocity and depth, and sediment grain sizes. Computation of local scour depth at bridge piers using empirical equations is based on the measurements of these properties. Errors in these measurements, that are common in engineering applications, affect the accuracy of estimations of pier scour. In the present research, propagation of input data errors and its effect on the pier scour estimation analyzed by Monte Carlo numerical method, that determines the sensitivity level, and relative strengths and weaknesses of the equations. In this research, sensitivity analysis carried out for four empirical equations of local scour depth around cylindrical piers in non-cohesive sediment beds and in both clear-water and live-bed scour conditions. Evaluated equations are: Froehlich (1991), Gao et al. (1993), S/M (2014), and HEC-18 (2016) equations.
Monte Carlo method is based on generation of random numbers. The goal of the Monte Carlo method is to simulate an existing model (in the present study, an empirical equation to estimate the local scour at bridge piers) by randomly sampling from the input physical properties distribution using a large number of samples and finally predicting the output response (Pinto et al., 2006). The physical properties selected for the error analysis include the depth-averaged flow velocity (v ̅_1), flow depth (y_1), and sediment median grain diameter (d_50). Bridge pier width (w) is a property in the equations that is supposed to be known precisely, therefore it is excluded from the analysis. In this research, pier’s reference width is supposed to be constant in the value of 1 m. The densities of water (ρ) and sediment (ρ_s) are variables that could be the error source in the computation of pier scour. However, they are both excluded from sensitivity analysis of pier scour equations, because their values are usually known and supposed to be constant. In order to analyze the results, four output quantities are defined: 1- local scour depth around bridge pier that is computed based on the mean values of physical properties (z_mp=z(v ̅_1,y ̅_1,d ̅_50)), 2- pier scour depths in each Monte Carlo simulation (z_i=z(v_1i,y_1i,d_50i );i=1,…,N), the number of computations (N) set to 10 000 in all simulations, 3- Mean pier scour depth (z_m=z ̅_i), and 4- standard deviation of pier scour depths (σ_z). The error analysis is based on the ratio between fourth and first quantities, that is defined as r ratio (r=σ_z/z_mp).
In evaluating velocity errors on local scour depth at piers, in all velocities, except in v ̅_1=0.5 m/s acceptable values of r (r≤0.3) obtained for all equations. In relative comparison of the equations, two equations, Gao et al. and HEC-18 show most and least sensitivity to the velocity variations, respectively. For flow depth (y_1) variations, small values of r obtained for all equations. In all cases, values of r were below 0.1. comparison of equations reveals that HEC-18 and S/M equations are the most and least sensitive to the flow depth errors, respectively. In analysis of sediment median grain size errors on pier scour depth, acceptable values of r observed for all the cases simulated. In all simulations, values of r were smaller than 0.07, except for Gao et al. equation, with d_50 = 0.2 mm and 0.5 mm and with α = 0.4, that values of r reached to 1.3 and 0.17, respectively.
Among four evaluated equations, Gao et al. and HEC-18 equations show most and least sensitivity to the sediment grain size variation, respectively. Therefore, Gao et al. equation is more sensitive to physical properties than the other equations analyzed. Results also show that among three input variables, errors in the measurements of flow depth and velocity have minimum and maximum effect on the estimation of pier scour depth, respectively.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Bridge pier
  • error propagation
  • local scour
  • Monte Carlo method
  • sensitivity analysis
Aksoy AO, Bombar G, Arkis T and Guney MS, 2017. Study of the time-dependent clear water scour around circular bridge piers. Journal of Hydrology and Hydrodynamics, 65(1): 26-34.
Brunner GW, 2016. HEC-RAS, River Analysis System Hydraulic Reference Manual, Version 5.0.
Chiew YM, 1984. Local scour at bridge piers. PhD Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Auckland University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Day S and Sarkar A, 2006. Scour downstream of an apron due to submerged horizontal jets. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 132(3): 246-257.
Fernandez R and Garcia MH, 2017. Input-variable sensitivity assessment for sediment transport relations. Water Resources Research, 53: 8105-8119.
Fortunato AB, Oliveira A and Alves ET, 2002. Circulation and salinity intrusion in the Guadiana Estuary. Thalassas 18(2): 43-65.
Froehlich DC, 1991. Analysis of onsite measurements of scour at piers. Proceedings of the ASCE National Hydraulic Engineering Conference, Colorado Springs, CO.
Gao D, Posada GL and Nordin CF, 1993. Pier scour equations used in the People’s Republic of China. FHWA-SA-93-076, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC.
Guo J, Suaznzbar O, Shan H and Shen J, 2012. Pier scour in clear-water conditions with non-unform bed materials. P.66, Report No. FHWA-HRT-12-022, Federal Highway Administration, McLean, VA.
Hamill L, 1999. Bridge Hydraulics, USA and Canada, Routledge 29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001.
Johnson PA, Clopper PE, Zevenbergen LW and Lagasse PF, 2015. Quantifying uncertainty and reliability in bridge scour estimations. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 141(7): 4015013.
Kabiri Samani AR, Mahinparvar N and Salamatian A, 2018. Reliability analysis of scouring around the bridge abutments. Sharif Journal of Civil Engineering, 34.2(3.2): 23-31. (In Persian with English Abstract)
Kim HS, Chen HC and Briaud JL, 2022. Numerical simulation of scour hole backfilling in unidirectional flow. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 148(7): 04022013
Lagasse PF, Clopper PE, Zevenbergen LW and Girard LG, 2007. Countermeasures to protect bridge piers from scour, National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP Report 593), Washington DC.
Li J, Tao J and Yu X, 2015. Streamlining of bridge pier as a scour countermeasure: A feasibility study. Pp. 319-329. Proceedings of International Foundations Congress and Equipment Expo, Reston, VA.
Li J, Zhang B, Shen C, Fu X and Li W, 2021. Experimental study on local scour depth around monopile foundation in combined waves and current. MDPI, Sustainability13, 13614.
Lin C, Han J, Bennett C and Parsons RL, 2014. Case history analysis of bridge failures due to scour. International Symposium of Climate Effects on Pavement and Geotechnical Infrastructure, Fairbanks, Alaska, US.
Martín-Vide JP, Fael CMS, Núñez-González F, Ferrer-Boix C, Santos CAV, Prats-Puntí A and Chavarrias V, 2022. A large bridge pier in an alluvial channel: local scour versus morphological effects and the role of physical models. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 148(8): 05022001.
Melville BM, 1997. Pier and abutment scour: Integrated approach. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 123(2): 125-136.
Olivito G and Hager WH, 2002. Temporal Evolution of Clear-Water Pier and Abutment Scour. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 128(9): 811-820.
Olivito G and Hager WH, 2005. Further Results to Time-Dependent Local Scour at Bridge Elements. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 131(2): 97-105.
Pinto L, Fortunato A and Freire P, 2006. Sensitivity analysis of non-cohesive sediment transport formulae. ScienceDirect, Continental Shelf Research, 26: 1826-1839.
Ranjbar Zahedani M, Keshavarzi A and Khabbaz H, 2017. Control of local scour at vicinity of bridge piers using flow diversion structure. Proceedings of the 37th IAHR World Congress, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Shafie Bajestan M, 2015. Basic theory and practice of hydraulics of sediment transport (2nd ed.), Shahid Chamran University Press, Ahvaz. (In Persian)
Shan H, Kilgore R, Shen J and Kerenyi K, 2016. Updating HEC-18 pier scour equations for non-cohesive soils. P.32, Report No. FHWA-HRT-16-045, Federal Highway Administration, McLean, VA.
Sharp JA and McAlpin TO, 2022. Case study: experimental investigation into the feasibility of pier nose extensions to reduce local scour around bridge piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 148(1): 05021010
Sheppard DM, Melville B and Demir H, 2014. Evaluation of existing equations for local scour at bridge piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 132(7): 635-642.
Sheppard DM and Miller W, 2006. Live-bed local pier scour experiments. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 132(7): 635-642.
Sheppard DM, Odeh M and Glasser T, 2004. Large scale clear-water local scour experiments. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 130(10): 975-963.
Shields A, 1936. Anwendung der Aehnlichkeitsmechanik und der turbulenz forschung auf die geschiebebewegung. Mitt. Preuss. Vesuchanstalt Wesserbau Schiffbau, Berlin (In German).
Singh NB, Devi TT and Kumar B, 2022. The local scour around bridge piers – a review of remedial techniques. ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 28(sup 1): 527-540.
Wu P, Balachandar R and Ramamurthy A, 2018. Effects of splitter plate on reducing local scour around bridge pier. River Research Application 1-9.
Yu P and Zhu L, 2020. Numerical simulation of local scour around bridge piers using novel inlet turbulent boundary conditions. Journal of Ocean Engineering 218, 108166.