Comparison of Methods for Predicting Incipient Motion

for Sand Beds

Nick A. Marsh1; Andrew W. Western2; and Rodger B. Grayson3

Abstract: A comparison of four methods for predicting the incipient motion conditions of a uniform sand bed is presented. The four
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DAYTON, UNIVERSITY OF on 06/05/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

methods are: 共1兲 the Shields diagram, 共2兲 an empirical approach, 共3兲 a method derived from resolution of rotational forces, and 共4兲 a
simplified resolution of rotational forces with a variable lift force coefficient. The four methods are used to predict the incipient motion
conditions for 97 experimental runs taken from seven independent experimental flume studies. The effectiveness of predicting depth
averaged incipient motion velocity for each of the four methods are compared. The simplified resolution of rotational forces model 共4兲 and
Shields method 共1兲 were most successful in predicting the incipient motion velocity 关 R 2 ⫽0.77, 0.74 and root mean square error
共RMSE兲⫽0.18, 0.15, respectively兴. The slope of line of best fit for plots illustrating predicted versus measured incipient motion velocity
were similar 共slope⫽0.63, 0.65, respectively兲, illustrating that both methods provide a similarly justifiable prediction of depth averaged
incipient motion. The empirical method was the least successful at predicting the measured incipient motion conditions (R 2 ⫽0.49,
RMSE⫽0.41兲.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0733-9429共2004兲130:7共616兲
CE Database subject headings: Incipient motion; Lift coefficients; Sediment transport; Sand.

Introduction
The prediction of incipient motion is an important first step for
analyzing sediment transport. Incipient motion has been studied
extensively over the past 60 years following the work by Shields
共1936兲, who presented a semiempirical approach to incipient mo-
tion. Much of the subsequent research into incipient motion
builds on the original work of Shields. Reviews and extensions of
the Shields diagram have been undertaken by several authors
共e.g., White 1970; Mantz 1977; Miller et al. 1977兲, while only
limited comparisons of Shields method against alternative meth-
ods for predicting incipient motion have been presented previ-
ously.
This paper compares four methods for the practical prediction
of incipient motion: 共1兲 the Shields method, 共2兲 Yang’s 共1973兲
empirical method, 共3兲 Wiberg and Smith’s 共1987兲 theoretical
model, and 共4兲 a simple resolution of rotational forces method
which uses a variable lift coefficient. The methods are briefly
presented and then compared using incipient motion data gleened
1
PhD, Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, Centre
for Riverine Landscapes, Faculty of Environmental Sciences,
Griffith Univ., Nathan Campus, Brisbane 4111, Australia. E-mail:
nick.marsh@griffith.gu.edu.au
2
PhD, Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, Dept.
of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Melbourne, Parkville,
Victoria 3052, Australia. E-mail: a.western@civag.unimelb.edu.au
3
Associate Professor, Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment
Hydrology, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ.
of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia. E-mail:
r.grayson@civag.unimelb.edu.au
Note. Discussion open until December 1, 2004. Separate discussions
must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing
from mobile bed flume experiments not used in the development
of any of the methods. An electronic summary of this data is
available from the corresponding author.
Approaches to Predicting Incipient Motion
Shields Critical Shear Stress Method
The Shields 共1936兲 method does not explicitly predict incipient
motion, but was presented as a nondimensional framework for
comparing experimental results. The well-known Shields curve is
essentially an empirical result where a line of best fit has been
applied to the scattered experimental data. Some of the same vari-
ables are present on both the x and y axes of the Shields curve
关Eqs. 共1兲 and 共2兲兴, hence an iterative approach is needed for pre-
dicting incipient motion values. Here we use the particle shear
Reynolds number (R ) values calculated from experimental data
*
to predict a dimensionless shear stress (␶ ) value from the
*
Shields diagram presented by Mantz 共1977兲. Buffington and
Montgomery 共1997兲 present a summary of empirical relationships
for directly predicting critical shear stress values
共 ␶ c /␳ f 兲 1/2 dU
R ⬅d ⬅ * (1)
* ␯ ␯
␶c ␶c
␶ ⬅ ⬅ (2)
* d 共 ␳ s ⫺␳ f 兲 g d␳ f g 关共 ␳ s /␳ f 兲 ⫺1 兴
where U ⫽shear velocity 共m/s兲 (U ⫽ 冑␶/␳ f , or 冑RgS);
* *
d⫽particle diameter 共m兲; ␯⫽kinematic viscosity of the water
共m /s兲; ␳ s ⫽particle density 共kg/m 兲; ␳ f ⫽fluid density 共1,000
2 3

Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pos- kg/m3兲; g⫽acceleration due to gravity 共m/s2兲; ␶ c ⫽average shear
sible publication on June 21, 2000; approved on December 4, 2003. This stress at the point of sediment motion 共Pa兲, where the average
paper is part of the Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 7, shear stress 共␶兲 is a function of the hydraulic radius 共R兲 and water
July 1, 2004. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9429/2004/7-616 – 621/$18.00. surface slope 共S兲 (␶⫽␳ f gRS).

616 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2004

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2004.130:616-621.


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DAYTON, UNIVERSITY OF on 06/05/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 1. Particle configuration for derivation of Wiberg and Smith
共1987兲 model and simple rotational model
Yang’s Critical Velocity Method
The incipient motion approach presented by Yang 共1973兲 was
based initially on resolving the translational forces acting on a
particle, assuming a logarithmic velocity profile to predict a depth
average incipient motion velocity (V c ). Empirical formulas were
created with constants representing the drag coefficient, ratio of
lift to drag forces, and lift coefficient. Yang 共1973兲 then calibrated
the formulas using the results of 8 independent flume studies to
obtain
Vc 2.5 U d
冉 冊
⫽ ⫹0.66 0⬍ * ⬍70
␻ U d ␯ Reynolds number (R ) 共James 1990兲
log * ⫺0.06
␯
Vc U d
⫽2.05 70⬍ *
␻ ␯
where ␻⫽terminal fall velocity of sediment 共m/s兲.
Wiberg and Smith
The Wiberg and Smith 共1987兲 model 共WSM兲 is essentially the
derivation of a critical shear stress based on the balance of rota-
tional forces on a particle. The WSM differs from other force
balance approaches 共e.g., Ikeda 1982兲 by using the law of the wall
velocity profile to calculate forces on a particle. The law of the
wall describes the near boundary velocity profile using a viscous
sublayer, an intermediate buffer zone and logarithmic velocity
profile. This effectively allows a single, albeit complicated, veloc-
ity profile formula to consider both low R laminar flow and high
*
R turbulent flow conditions. Wiberg and Smith 共1987兲 showed
*
that their resulting formulas 关Eq. 共4兲兴 produced a curve similar in
shape to that of the Shields diagram. Kuhnle 共1993兲 found that the
WSM generally followed the trend of their experimental data for
measuring incipient motion of uniform sand
2 1 共 tan␾ 0 •cos ␧⫺sin ␧ 兲
共 ␶ 兲 cr⫽
* 共 C D 兲 cr␣ 具 f 共 z/z 0 兲 典 关 1⫹ 共 F L /F D 兲 cr tan ␾ 0 兴
2 experiments, James 共1990兲 presents a formula 关Eq. 共7兲兴 to de-
where C D ⫽drag coefficient; F L ⫽particle lift force 共N兲;
F D ⫽particle drag force 共N兲; ␾ 0 ⫽particle packing angle 共0兲 共Fig.
1兲; ␧⫽mean bed slope 共0兲 共Fig. 1兲; ␣⫽particle geometry param-
eter 共␣⫽1.5 for a sphere兲; f (z/z 0 )⫽velocity profile function
where z 0 ⫽bottom roughness parameter and the zero level of the
bed is taken as mean level of centers of the grains comprising the
bed surface.
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2004.130:616-621.
Simple Rotational Model
Several authors have illustrated incipient motion criteria as the
point at which moments about a point of contact between the
particle and bed becomes unstable 共e.g., White 1940; Baker 1980;
Chang 1988; Ling 1995; Yang 1996兲. The method of resolving
forces presented by Wiberg and Smith 共1987兲 is complicated by
the calculation of the velocity profile near the wall. A simpler
alternative can be presented by assuming a simple linear flow
field over the height of the particle, and by assuming a standard
particle configuration 关simple rotational model 共SRM兲兴. The case
that Wiberg and Smith 共1987兲 present as being most like the
Shields curve is when ␾ 0 ⫽60°. We have adopted ␾ 0 ⫽60° for
both the WSM and SRM. In addition, the SRM also includes a
variable lift force.
The derivation of the method is presented in Baker 共1980兲 for
a different packing angle (␾ 0 ). Incipient motion is presented in
terms of the critical velocity acting at a height d/2 above the bed
4 sin共 ␾ 0 ⫺␧ 兲共 ␳ s ⫺␳ f 兲 gd
V 2c-bed⫽ (5)
3 ␳ f 共 C L sin ␾ 0 ⫹C D cos ␾ 0 兲
Drag and Lift Coefficients
In order to apply Eq. 共5兲 one must calculate appropriate drag and
lift coefficients. Baker 共1980兲 suggests that C D and C L are con-
stant for a particle Reynolds number range 70–1,000, however
the following section shows how lift and drag coefficients vary
with flow condition. The drag coefficient C D and lift coefficient
C L are known to depend on the flow condition as described by the
particle Reynolds number 共R兲 共Chang 1988兲 and particle shear
*
(3) Vd
R⫽ (6)
␯
where V⫽velocity near particle 共m/s兲. There are also secondary
effects on these coefficients due to particle shape, extent of expo-
sure to flow 共Fenton and Abbott 1977兲 and the particle’s location
with respect to surrounding particles.
The plots of C D versus R presented in most fluid mechanics
texts 共e.g., Robertson and Crowe 1985; Chang 1988; Yang 1996兲
have been created by recording the terminal velocity of particles
falling through a quiescent fluid. In an experimental study, Cole-
man 共1967兲 measured the drag and lift on an instrumented sphere
positioned on a bed of similar spheres for 50具R典10,000. Cole-
man’s 共1967兲 plot of the experimentally-derived C D values
showed considerable scatter, with a variation of up to 1 order of
magnitude for R⬍200. However the average C D – R relationship
was similar to that for a sphere in free fall, suggesting that C D
values from terminal velocity measurements provides a reason-
able approximation for a particle positioned on a boundary.
The selection of an appropriate lift coefficient is not as
straightforward as selecting the drag coefficient. The measure-
ment of lift forces is difficult, and as a consequence there are a
limited number of suitable experimental studies from which to
derive lift coefficients. In a summary of the results of lift force
(4)
scribe the observed variation in particle lift force
C L /C D ⫽⫺0.560⫹0.212 ln R for R ⬍150
* * (7)
C L /C D ⫽0.5 for R ⭓150
*
It is not clear exactly which data James has used to derive Eq. 共7兲.
To test the suitability of Eq. 共7兲 we extracted data from studies
where there was an appreciable protrusion of the test particle
JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2004 / 617
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DAYTON, UNIVERSITY OF on 06/05/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 2. Lift coefficient as function of shear Reynolds number for nine independent studies 关Eq. 共7兲 shown as dotted line兴
from the test bed and lift coefficients were computed. The form of
data presented for the nine experimental studies varied between
experiments 共Fig. 2兲. Some data manipulation was required to
compute C L and R . A tabulated summary of lift studies and data
*
manipulation can be requested from the communicating author.
The scatter of data on Fig. 2 is likely to be due to the different
particle configurations 共especially exposure of the particle to the
oncoming flow兲 and force measuring techniques used in the stud-
ies. In an experiment using hemispheres on a flat bed, Einstein
and El-Samni 共1949兲 identified a fluctuation in the lift force of
similar magnitude to the average lift force. Cheng and Clyde
共1972兲 considered whole spheres resting on a bed of similar
spheres and found the fluctuation in lift force to be considerably
less. The relative intensity of the lift force fluctuations 共deviation
of the instantaneous lift force from the average lift force/average
lift force兲 for Cheng and Clyde’s 共1972兲 study was determined to
be within the range 0.16 –0.22 for all measurements. Studies by
both Cheng and Clyde 共1972兲 and Einstein and El-Samni 共1949兲
were for conditions of high shear Reynolds values (3.2
⫻104 具 R 典 5.5⫻104 , and R ⫽1,400, respectively兲. It is likely
* *
that the magnitude of the fluctuations in lift force would reduce
for laminar boundary conditions present at low R values, how-
*
ever there are no experimental data to confirm that this is the case.
Several authors have conducted experiments where the lift
force was measured at different distances from the channel
boundary 共e.g., Bagnold 1974; Arumugam and Coates 1981; Ap-
perley and Raudkivi 1989兲. These studies found a maximum mag-
nitude in the lift force for particles at the channel boundary, with
a rapid decrease as the particle was moved away from the bound-
ary. Southard 共1971兲 shows that for fully suspended particles the
lift force is negligible. The rapid decrease in the lift force as a
particle is moved away from the boundary 共Bagnold 1974兲 im-
plies an importance in the initial positioning of the instrumented
particle used in experiments. For example, Davies and Samad
共1978兲 located the instrumented particle with a slight gap 共1 mm兲
between it and the fixed bed of particles to allow the operation of
measuring equipment. Presumably such a configuration would
produce an underestimation of lift forces because of the separa-
tion from the boundary. The datum presented on Fig. 2 from
Bagnold 共1974兲 is for a particle placed on a bed of much finer
618 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2004
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2004.130:616-621.
material. With this packing arrangement there is a relatively large
proportion of the particle’s surface area exposed to the flow,
hence one would expect a larger lift force than packing arrange-
ment where all particles were of a similar size.
Despite the scatter of data in Fig. 2 there is a clear decrease in
the lift coefficient for low R values. For each of the experiments
*
where conditions of R ⬍100 were experienced 共i.e., Coleman
*
1967; Watters 1971; Davies and Samad 1978兲 conditions of nega-
tive or downward lift force were experienced for at least some
experimental runs. Eq. 共7兲 provides a reasonable fit to the data
presented, but a lower limit for C L of ⫺0.3, and a constant C L of
0.2 for R ⬎100 provide an improvement to Eq. 共7兲.
*
Comparison of Incipient Motion Prediction Methods
The ability of each of the above four methods in predicting in-
cipient motion are tested against experimental data from seven
studies that were independent of the development of the above
methods. The studies are: Chang 共1939兲; Guy et al. 共1966兲; Rath-
burn and Guy 共1967兲; Paintal 共1971兲; Yalin and Karahan 共1979兲;
Bathurst et al. 共1982兲; and Kuhnle 共1993兲. In each of these data
sets incipient motion was defined using a transport rate of
0.42g/m/s 共1 lb/ft/h兲 共Wilcock and McArdell 1993兲. A range of
⫾80% about 0.42g/m/s was allowed due to difficulties in mea-
suring small bedloads and because experiments typically are not
run at exactly 0.42g/m/s. In order to meet the requirements of
Yang’s 共1973兲 method, only experiments using sediment with a
density near 2.65⫻103 kg/m3 and water as the fluid could be
used. Only sediment with a uniform particle size distribution was
considered. Uniform particle size distribution is defined here as
having a geometric standard deviation (␴ g ) less than 1.4. A total
of 97 independent measurement sets were suitable, representing
the ranges R ⫽1.45– 3,600, d 50⫽0.1– 22.2 mm, and ␶⫽0.16 –
*
26.9 kg/m/s2. For the SRM ␧⫽0° 共flat bed兲 was assumed for all
experiments.
For a true comparison of the incipient motion methods, the
results of all four methods must be presented in a common form.
The Shields method and the WSM calculate ␶ , while Yang’s
*
共1973兲 method and the SRM calculate velocity values. For the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DAYTON, UNIVERSITY OF on 06/05/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 3. Comparison of experimentally derived and predicted depth averaged incipient motion velocity: 共A兲 Shields diagram method, 共B兲 Yang’s
共1973兲 model, 共C兲 Wiberg and Smith 共1987兲 model, and 共D兲 simple rotational model

range of R values of the experimental data one would anticipate depth average velocity by applying Eq. 共11兲, which is a combi-
* nation of Eqs. 共9兲 and 共10兲. To apply Eq. 共11兲 the point of zero
a small range of ␶ values using the Shields diagram
* velocity was taken as the top of the underlying layer of particles
(␶ 0.036– 0.053). The range of experimental V c values presents
* and the V c-bed value from Eq. 共5兲 was assumed to act at d/2 above
a greater range (V c 0.19– 1.38 m/s) and hence a more suitable
basis by which to compare results. To convert ␶ 共Shields and this zero bed level
*
WSM兲 to V c we have assumed a logarithmic velocity profile 关Eqs.
共8兲 and 共9兲兴 and adopted a cutoff from hydraulically rough to
hydraulically smooth at R ⫽5. The depth averaged critical ve-
V av⫽U 5.75 log 12.27
* 冉 Y
⌬ 冊 (10)

冉 冊
*
locity for incipient motion was calculated at the level Z⫽0.4Y Y
where Y is the flow depth log 12.27
⌬

冉 冊 冉 冊
V ZU V av⫽V c-bed (11)
* ⫹5.5 d/2
⫽5.75 log for hydraulically smooth (8) log 30.2
U ␯ ⌬
*
V
U
*
冉 冊
⫽5.75 log 30.2
Z
⌬
for hydraulically rough (9)
Results
where ⌬⫽effective roughness parameter⫽K s /X; K s ⫽d 65 (m) 共or
taken as d 50 particle size where sediment is uniform兲; and The correlation coefficients for Shields, WSM, and the SRM are
X⫽correction factor as given in Fig. 3.6 of Chang 共1988兲. similar 共Fig. 3兲 while for Yang’s method it is lower. Shields
For the Shields method ␶ was predicted from the Shields method has both a high R 2 , a slope of line of best fit 共slope兲 near
*
diagram using R values calculated from experimental data. For unity, and a low root mean squared error 共RMSE兲. The RMSE is
*
WSM, Eq. 共4兲 was applied using the velocity profile specified in a measure of the deviation of the prediction from the line of
Wiberg and Smith 共1985兲 and based on a particle packing angle of perfect agreement 共slope of 1兲. The low RMSE of Shields method
60°. For Yang’s 共1973兲 method, Eq. 共3兲 was directly applied. The shows that it predicts V c values consistently close to the experi-
SRM predicts a near bed velocity (V c-bed) that was converted to a mental values. The SRM similarly has a high R 2 and low RMSE

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2004 / 619

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2004.130:616-621.

 value, indicating that the method consistently predicts V c values 2.
close to those measured for these experiments. The WSM has a
slightly lower R 2 value and higher RMSE than the SRM and 3.
Shields methods, indicating a slightly poorer prediction of experi- 4.
mental values, however the slope for the WSM is closer to unity
than the SRM and Shields method, indicating that it may be a 5.
more robust method across a wider range of prediction scenarios.
Yang’s 共1973兲 method produced a poor R 2 , a very low slope, and 6.
high RMSE value. The spread of data for Yang’s 共1973兲 method
关Fig. 3共B兲兴 shows that for this data set the method was a poor
predictor of incipient motion conditions. It is not clear why
Yang’s method should perform so poorly since the base data set Acknowledgments
from which the empirical formula was derived (R ⫽1.5– 757,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DAYTON, UNIVERSITY OF on 06/05/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
The drag coefficient obtained from standard terminal veloc-
ity measurements is representative of near-bed conditions;
The drag effectively acts at half the particle height;
The lift force on a particle varies with particle shear Rey-
nolds number 共Fig. 2兲;
A logarithmic velocity profile is valid for converting a near-
bed velocity to a depth-average-velocity; and
the two-dimensional packing idealization presented in Fig. 1
adequately represents real sediments.

*
d 50⫽0.1– 7 mm, V c ⫽0.36– 1.32 m/s) was similar to the range of During the development of this paper the first writer received a
conditions considered here. scholarship from the Univ. of Melbourne and further financial
To simplify the SRM further, one could adopt a uniform lift support from the Cooperative Research Center for Catchment Hy-
coefficient (C L ). By replacing the variable C L with the uniform drology. The writers thank J. Fenton, I. C. O’Neill, and A. R.
C L value of 0.2 suggested by Wiberg and Smith 共1987兲, the per- Ladson of Univ. of Melbourne as well as the reviewers for their
formance of the SRM is reduced slightly R 2 ⫽0.76, RMSE⫽0.17, advice on the presentation of this paper.
slope⫽0.56.
The portion of the Shields diagram used for predicting the
incipient motion conditions for the experiments considered is Notation
relatively flat 共predicted ␶ range from 0.036 to 0.053兲. One
*
could simplify the incipient motion prediction process by adopt- The following symbols are used in this paper:
ing a uniform ␶ value within this range. For a uniform ␶ value C D ⫽ drag coefficient;
* *
of 0.05, the comparison yields R 2 ⫽0.78, slope⫽0.72, and RMSE C L ⫽ lift coefficient;
⫽0.13, which is better than any of the four alternative methods d ⫽ particle diameter 共m兲;
presented. Another interesting result is that if one uses the experi- d 16 ⫽ sediment size, of which 16% of bed material is
mentally derived ␶ ⫽0.05 value to derive a V c value using the finer 共m兲;
*
method illustrated above, the measured experimental velocity is d 50 ⫽ sediment size, of which 50% of bed material is
poorly predicted (R 2 ⫽0.57, slope⫽0.50, RMSE⫽0.41兲. It is finer 共m兲;
likely that this discrepancy is partly due to the experimentally d 84 ⫽ sediment size, of which 84% of bed material is
derived shear stress being calculated (␶⫽␳gRS) using the bed finer 共m兲;
slope rather than the water surface slope and partly because the F D ⫽ drag force 共N兲;
Shield’s diagram is so flat in this region. For this reason alone it is F L ⫽ lift force 共N兲;
useful to consider incipient motion conditions in terms of a di- g ⫽ acceleration due to gravity 共m/s2兲;
rectly measurable quantity such as velocity. Even if the water K s ⫽ d 65 共or taken as d 50 in this study兲 共m兲;
surface slope was measured for these experiments, the surface is R ⫽ hydraulic radius 共m兲;
rarely completely smooth and the subsequent error in a surface R ⫽ particle Reynolds number;
slope measurement is likely to exceed the error associated with a R ⫽ particle shear Reynolds number;
velocity measurement calculated from the discharge. *
S ⫽ energy slope;
U ⫽ shear velocity (R g S) 1/2 (m/s);
*
V ⫽ velocity near particle 共m/s兲;
Conclusions V av ⫽ depth averaged flow velocity 共m/s兲;
V c ⫽ depth averaged incipient motion velocity 共m/s兲;
In this paper we compared alternative methods for predicting in- V c-bed ⫽ near bed incipient motion velocity acting at particle
cipient motion. Yang’s 共1973兲 method was a poor predictor of height (d/2) above bed surface 共m/s兲;
experimental conditions. The Wiberg and Smith 共1987兲 model, X ⫽ correction factor as given in Fig. 3.6 of Chang
simple rotational model, and Shields method provided a similar 共1988兲;
level of capacity to predict experimental observations. Of these Y ⫽ flow depth 共m兲;
three methods it may be argued that the simple rotational model is ␣ ⫽ particle geometry parameter 共␣⫽1.5 for sphere兲;
useful for field application because it is computationally simpler ⌬ ⫽ effective roughness parameter⫽K s /X;
than the Wiberg–Smith model and because the depth-averaged ␧ ⫽ mean bed slope 共°兲;
velocity can be more accurately determined using conventional ␯ ⫽ kinematic viscosity 共m2/s兲;
techniques than the shear stress as used in the Shields method. ␳ f ⫽ fluid density 共kg/m3兲;
Rubey 共1938兲 illustrates that when predicting incipient motion, ␳ s ⫽ sediment density 共kg/m3兲;
the near-bed velocity is a more appropriate parameter to consider ␴ g ⫽ geometric standard deviation of sediment: where
than depth-averaged velocity. The simple rotational model used ␴ g ⫽(d 84⫺d 16)/d 50 ;
here assumes a logarithmic velocity profile to convert from near- ␶ ⫽ shear stress 共Pa兲;
bed to depth-averaged velocity. ␶ c ⫽ critical shear stress to initiate motion 共Pa兲;
The key assumptions for the simple rotational model are: ␶ ⫽ dimensionless critical shear stress;
*
1. That the mechanism for incipient motion is grain rotation by ␾ 0 ⫽ particle packing angle 共°兲; and
pivoting; ␻ ⫽ terminal fall velocity of sediment 共m/s兲.

620 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2004

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2004.130:616-621.

 References
Apperley, L., and Raudkivi, A. 共1989兲. ‘‘The entrainment of sediments by
the turbulent flow of water.’’ Hydrobiologia, 176/177共39– 49兲, 39– 49.
Arumugam, K., and Coates, L. 共1981兲. ‘‘Lift and drag forces on horizon-
tal cylinders near the bed of and open channel.’’ Particle motion and
sediment transport: Measurement techniques and experimental re-
sults, A. Muller, ed., IAHR, Rapperswii, 6.1– 6.7.
Bagnold, R. 共1974兲. ‘‘Fluid forces on a body in shear-flow: Experimental
use of ‘stationary flow’.’’ Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 340, 147–171.
Baker, C. 共1980兲. ‘‘Theoretical approach to prediction of local scour
around bridge piers.’’ J. Hydraul. Res., 18共1兲, 1–12.
Bathurst, J., Graf, W., and Cao, H. 共1982兲. ‘‘Initiation of sediment trans-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DAYTON, UNIVERSITY OF on 06/05/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
port in steep channels with coarse bed material.’’ Mechanics of sedi-
ment transport, B. Sumer and A. Muller, eds., A.A. Balkema, Rotter-
dam, The Netherlands, 207–231.
Buffington, J., and Montgomery, D. 共1997兲. ‘‘A systematic analysis of
eight decades of incipient motion studies, with special reference to
gravel bed rivers.’’ Water Resour. Res., 33共8兲, 1993–2029.
Chang, H. H. 共1988兲. Fluvial processes in river engineering, Wiley, New
York.
Chang, Y. 共1939兲. ‘‘Laboratory investigation of flume traction and trans-
portation.’’ Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 104, 1246 –1284.
Cheng, E., and Clyde, C. 共1972兲. ‘‘Instantaneous hydrodynamic lift and
drag forces on large roughness elements in turbulent open channel
flow.’’ Sedimentation: Symp. to Honor Professor Hans A. Einstein, H.
Shen, ed., Fort Collins, Colo., 5.1–5.17.
Coleman, N. 共1967兲. ‘‘A theoretical and experimental study of drag and
lift forces acting on a sphere resting on a hypothetical streambed.’’
Proc., 12 Congress, IAHR, Fort Collins, Colo., C22.1–C22.8.
Davies, T., and Samad, M. 共1978兲. ‘‘Fluid dynamic lift on a bed particle.’’
J. Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 104共8兲, 1171–1182.
Einstein, H., and El-Samni, E. A. 共1949兲. ‘‘Hydrodynamic forces on a
rough wall.’’ Rev. Mod. Phys., 21共3兲, 520–524.
Fenton, J., and Abbott, J. 共1977兲. ‘‘Initial movement of grains on a stream
bed: The effect of relative protrusion.’’ Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A,
352, 523–537.
Guy, H., Simons, D., and Richardson, E. 共1966兲. ‘‘Summary of alluvial
channel data from flume experiments, 1956 –1961.’’ Professional
Paper 462-I, U.S. Geological Survey.
Ikeda, S. 共1982兲. ‘‘Incipient motion of sand particles on side slopes.’’ J.
Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 108共1兲, 95–114.
James, C. 共1990兲. ‘‘Prediction of entrainment conditions for nonuniform,
noncohesive sediments.’’ J. Hydraul. Res., 28共1兲, 25– 41.
JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY 2004 / 621
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2004.130:616-621.
Kuhnle, R. 共1993兲. ‘‘Incipient motion of sand-gravel sediment mixtures.’’
J. Hydraul. Eng., 119共12兲, 1400–1415.
Ling, C. 共1995兲. ‘‘Criteria for incipient motion of spherical sediment
particles.’’ J. Hydraul. Eng., 121共6兲, 472– 478.
Mantz, P. 共1977兲. ‘‘Incipient transport of fine grains and flakes by
fluids—Extended Shields diagram.’’ J. Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ.
Eng., 103共6兲, 601– 615.
Miller, M., McCave, I., and Komar, P. 共1977兲. ‘‘Threshold of sediment
motion under unidirectional currents.’’ Sedimentology, 24, 507–527.
Paintal, A. 共1971兲. ‘‘Concept of critical shear stress in loose boundary
open channels.’’ J. Hydraul. Res., 9共1兲, 91–113.
Rathburn, R., and Guy, H. 共1967兲. ‘‘Measurement of hydraulic and sedi-
ment transport variables in a small recirculating flume.’’ Water Resour.
Res., 3共1兲, 107–122.
Robertson, J. A., and Crowe, C. T. 共1985兲. Engineering fluid mechanics,
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.
Rubey, W. W. 共1938兲. ‘‘The force required to move particles on a stream
bed.’’ Professional Paper 189-E, 121–140, U.S. Geological Survey.
Sheilds, A. 共1936兲. ‘‘Anwendung der Ahnlichkeitsmechanik und Turbu-
lenzforschung auf Geschiebebewegung.’’ Mitteilungen der Preuss.
Versuchsanst. f. Wasserbau u. Schiffbau, Heft 26, Berlin.
Southard, J. 共1971兲. ‘‘Lift forces on suspended sediment particles in lami-
nar flow: Experiments and sedimentological interpretation.’’ J. Sedi-
ment. Petrol., 41共1兲, 320–324.
Watters, G. 共1971兲. ‘‘Hydrodynamic effects of seepage on bed particles.’’
J. Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 97共3兲, 421– 439.
White, C. 共1940兲. ‘‘The equilibrium of grains on the bed of a stream.’’
Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 174, 322–338.
White, S. 共1970兲. ‘‘Plane bed thresholds of fine grained sediments.’’ Na-
ture (London), 228, 152–153.
Wiberg, P., and Smith, J. 共1985兲. ‘‘A theoretical model for saltating grains
in water.’’ J. Geophys. Res., 90共C4兲, 7341–7354.
Wiberg, P., and Smith, J. 共1987兲. ‘‘Calculations of the critical shear stress
for motion of uniform and heterogeneous sediments.’’ Water Resour.
Res., 23共8兲, 1471–1480.
Wilcock, P., and McArdell, B. 共1993兲. ‘‘Surface-based fractional transport
rates: Mobilization thresholds and partial transport of a sand-gravel
sediment.’’ Water Resour. Res., 29共4兲, 1297–1312.
Yalin, M., and Karahan, E. 共1979兲. ‘‘Inception of sediment transport.’’ J.
Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 105共11兲, 1433–1443.
Yang, C. 共1973兲. ‘‘Incipient motion and sediment transport.’’ J. Hydraul.
Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 99共10兲, 1679–1704.
Yang, C. 共1996兲. Sediment transport: Theory and practice, McGraw-Hill,
New York.