242 Chapter 8: Vertical distribution of suspended sediment

Figure 8.5 Variation in concentration with time a t different levels from t h e

bed for a / k N = 3916, Qkax = 1.45 and w,/Ulm = 0.018.
(Fredsoe et al., 1985).

Just above the bed, the maximum concentration occurs at the same time as
the maximum bed shear stress occurring, as described in Chapter 2, at a phase 4
before the maximum wave velocity outside the boundary layer. Increasing distance
from the bed causes the maximum concentration to lag more and more behind the
maximum bed shear stress, the suspended sediment reacting to changes in the flow
with a certain lag, because it takes some time for the sediment to settle after it
has been picked up from the bed.
Furthermore, Fig. 8.5 shows that the variation in c follows a n asymmetric
pattern: the rise in concentration occurs much faster than the fall, for two reasons:
First, the variation in U f is asymmetric, see Chapter 2. However, this contribution
is not very important, as can be seen from Fig. 8.5, as the variation in the bed
concentration for z / k N Y 0.8 is nearly symmetric. The reason is that the bed
concentration is insensitive to changes in bed shear stress if 6” is sufficiently large
(see Fig. 7.16).
The second contribution to the asymmetric shape arises because the rise in
the concentration is very rapid when the sediment is brought into suspension and
pushed away from the bed during periods of large bed shear stresses, while the fall
in concentration simply occurs because the sediment falls towards the bed at the
fall velocity w , with almost no turbulence present.
 Suspended sediment in pure oscillatory p o w 243

c IF Theory, z l k , z 37.9
A Measurements
I
-
C''-One-

-.-
equation model
- M i x i n g length theory
integrated-momentum I

Figure 8.6 Comparison between measured and predicted variation in c

during one wave period 1.8 cm above the bed. Fig. A: Ex-
perimental data: dso = 0.19 mm, a = 1.86 m, T = 9.1 s
(from Staub et al., 1984). (These d a t a correspond to the non-
dimensional data in Fig. 8.4). Dashed-dotted curve, Fig. A:
Gradation of sediment incorporated. Fig. B: Comparison be-
tween three different hydrodynamic approaches t o estimating
E,. (Justesen and Freds@e,1985).

Fig. 8.6 shows a comparison between the results shown in Fig. 8.5 and the
time variation in the concentration measured by Staub et al. (1984), who applied
a mechanical suction system to measure the concentration. It is seen that both
the asymmetric behaviour and the amplitude in the variation of the normalized
concentration c/C during a wave cycle confirm the theoretical predictions.
As outlined in the last part of Example 8.3, the effect of including the
sediment gradation in the theory is indicated by a dashed-dotted curve in Fig.
8.6A. The suspended sediment has been divided into three fractions.
Figs. 8.7A and B depict the average concentration over one wave period
at different combinations of the dimensionless parameters a / k N , w,/U~,,,,, and
Om,,. From the figure it is noticed that changes in 0Laxare only important close to
the bed. The fully-drawn curves are those predicted from theory setting QLax= 10,
while the dashed ones are based on OAax = 1.
On the ordinate in Fig. 8.7, the value 6 1 / k indicates a measure of the
mean value of the turbulent boundary layer thickness, 61 being the boundary layer
244 Chapter 8: Vertical distribution of suspended sediment

zfk,
I I I I
A
lo2

6,
-
k

lo’

loo
lo3 10-1 100
Efcb.max

lo3 102 10’ loo

b.rnax

Figure 8.7 Theoretical vertical distribution of the average concentration C

in pure wave motion. A: a / k N = lo3. B: a / k N = lo4. T h e
fully drawn line corresponds to e,!,, = 10, while t h e dashed
line corresponds to @Aax = 1. (Fredsde et al., 1985).

thickness at wt = n/2 (maximum wave-induced velocity outside the boundary

layer). It is seen that a significant amount of sediment may be present above this
mean boundary layer thickness.

Other hydrodynamic approaches

Instead of adopting the eddy viscosity variation given by Eq. 8.58 obtained
from the momentum integral method, VT can be obtained from more refined models
like those described in Section 2.3. In Fig. 8.6B three different models for VT have
 S u s p e n d e d s e d i m e n t in p u r e o s c i l l a t o r y flow 245

been used to solve the diffusion equation, Eq. 8.47, for the same data as those
used in Fig. 8.6A. Besides the one mentioned above, the other approaches are: the
eddy viscosity found from mixing length theory and from a one-equation turbulent
model (k-equation). As seen from Fig. 8.6B, the latter two approaches predict
slightly smaller variations in the concentration during a wave cycle, because the
predicted time variation in the eddy viscosity is smaller, as described in Chapter
2.

0’ I I
1o -~ 5 5 10-2 5 10-1

Figure 8.8 Predicted vertical mean Concentration distribution C. Experi-

ments by Staub et al. (1984).

In Fig. 8.8 the predictions of the time-averaged vertical distribution of the

concentration C from the same three different models are shown. These predictions
are compared with measurements by Staub et al. (1984), showing the average
concentration for the data at different distances from the bed. The line surrounding
each experimental point indicates the uncertainties in the measurement. These
uncertainties arise from the inexact determination of the bed level, which varies
slightly with time, even through a single wave period.
It is seen that the more refined hydrodynamic models predict a slightly
larger concentration of suspended sediment away from the bed. The experimental
data base is, however, too limited to confirm which theory should be preferred.

Example 8.6: Discussion on the bed boundary condition

Some researchers are not in favour of the bed boundary condition given by
Eq. 8.62 in the case of unsteady flow, and prefer instead the instantaneous bed
concentration to be given by a so-called ’pick-up function’, also called the gradient