Figure 1.37: Scour amplification factor for spill-through abutments and clear-water conditions (Ettema et al. 2010)

이 기술 요약은 Iqbal Singh Budwal이 2021년 워털루 대학교(University of Waterloo)에 제출한 석사 학위 논문 “Influence of Soil Parameters on Local Pier Scour Depth”를 기반으로 하며, STI C&D에서 기술 전문가를 위해 분석 및 요약했습니다.

키워드

  • Primary Keyword: 교각 세굴 깊이
  • Secondary Keywords: 토질 매개변수, CFD 시뮬레이션, 교량 안전, SSIIM, 수치 모델링, 세굴 예측

Executive Summary

  • 도전 과제: 현재 사용되는 교각 세굴 예측 방법들은 중요한 토질 매개변수를 간과하여 부정확한 설계와 잠재적인 교량 붕괴로 이어질 수 있습니다.
  • 연구 방법: CFD 소프트웨어(SSIIM)를 사용한 포괄적인 수치 연구를 통해 토양의 입자 크기, 안식각, 점착력이 교각 세굴 깊이에 미치는 영향을 체계적으로 분석했습니다.
  • 핵심 발견: 토양의 안식각과 점착력은 세굴 깊이에 극적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났으며, 이들 변수의 변화는 세굴 깊이를 각각 100% 및 90% 이상 변화시켰습니다.
  • 핵심 결론: 안전하고 비용 효율적인 교량 설계를 위해서는 상세한 토질 매개변수를 세굴 분석에 반드시 포함해야 하며, CFD 시뮬레이션은 이를 위한 가장 효과적인 도구입니다.
Figure 1.3: Flow and scour at single pier (Akib et al. 2014)
Figure 1.3: Flow and scour at single pier (Akib et al. 2014)

도전 과제: 이 연구가 CFD 전문가에게 중요한 이유

교량 세굴(Scour)은 교량 붕괴의 가장 주된 원인으로 지목됩니다. 흐르는 물이 교각 주변의 하상 퇴적물을 침식시키면서 기초의 지지력을 약화시키기 때문입니다. 따라서 교각의 최대 세굴 깊이를 정확하게 예측하는 것은 교량의 안전성과 경제성을 확보하는 데 매우 중요합니다.

하지만 현재까지 널리 사용되는 세굴 깊이 예측 방법들은 대부분 실험실 데이터에 기반한 경험식에 의존하고 있습니다. 이러한 경험식들은 다음과 같은 근본적인 한계를 가집니다.

  1. 스케일링 효과: 실험실의 축소 모델에서 얻은 결과는 실제 크기의 교각에 적용될 때 오차를 유발합니다.
  2. 제한된 변수: 대부분의 공식은 유속, 수심, 교각 폭과 같은 유체 및 구조적 요인에만 초점을 맞춥니다.
  3. 토질 매개변수 무시: 토양의 입자 크기(D50) 외에, 침식 저항성에 결정적인 영향을 미치는 안식각(angle of repose)이나 점착력(cohesion)과 같은 중요한 토질 매개변수들이 대부분 무시됩니다.

이러한 한계로 인해 기존의 예측은 실제보다 과도하게 보수적이어서 불필요한 건설 비용을 증가시키거나, 반대로 세굴 깊이를 과소평가하여 교량의 안전을 심각하게 위협할 수 있습니다. 본 연구는 이러한 지식의 격차를 해소하고, 특히 중요한 토질 매개변수가 세굴 깊이에 미치는 영향을 정량적으로 분석하여 보다 신뢰성 높은 예측 방법론의 필요성을 제시합니다.

연구 접근법: 방법론 분석

본 연구는 실제 현장 계측의 어려움과 실험실 연구의 스케일링 한계를 극복하기 위해 수치 시뮬레이션, 특히 CFD(전산 유체 역학) 접근법을 채택했습니다. 연구에 사용된 주요 도구는 퇴적물 이동 해석 기능이 내장된 오픈 소스 CFD 소프트웨어인 SSIIM(Sediment Simulation in Intakes with Multiblock option)입니다.

연구는 다음 두 단계로 진행되었습니다.

  1. 수치 모델 검증: 먼저, 기존에 발표된 신뢰성 있는 실험 연구(고정상 및 이동상 조건)의 결과와 SSIIM 시뮬레이션 결과를 비교하여 모델의 정확도를 검증했습니다. 이를 통해 유동장, 전단 응력, 최대 세굴 깊이 예측에 대한 모델의 신뢰성을 확보했습니다.
  2. 매개변수 연구: 검증된 모델을 사용하여 대규모 매개변수 연구를 수행했습니다. 총 128개의 시뮬레이션 케이스를 통해 다음과 같은 주요 변수들의 영향을 체계적으로 분석했습니다.
    • 구조적 요인: 4가지 다른 직경의 원형 교각 (0.1m, 0.25m, 0.5m, 0.8m)
    • 유동 요인: 2가지 다른 유속 강도 (I=0.5, 0.75)
    • 토질 요인: 16가지 다른 토질 조건 (상이한 입자 크기, 안정 경사각, 점착력)

이 체계적인 접근법을 통해 각 토질 매개변수가 다른 구조 및 유동 조건 하에서 세굴 깊이에 미치는 영향을 독립적으로 정량화할 수 있었습니다.

핵심 발견: 주요 결과 및 데이터

매개변수 연구를 통해 기존 경험식들이 간과해왔던 토질 매개변수들이 교각 세굴 깊이에 얼마나 지대한 영향을 미치는지 명확히 밝혀졌습니다.

결과 1: 안정 경사각(안식각)의 극적인 영향

토양 입자가 무너지지 않고 쌓일 수 있는 최대 각도인 안정 경사각(안식각)은 세굴 구멍의 형태와 깊이를 결정하는 핵심 요소였습니다. 기준값인 30°와 비교했을 때, 안정 경사각의 변화는 세굴 깊이에 엄청난 변화를 가져왔습니다.

논문의 표 3.7에 따르면, 안정 경사각이 30°에서 40°로 증가했을 때 세굴 깊이는 평균 145.1%까지 증가했으며, 20°로 감소했을 때는 평균 41.9% 감소했습니다. 이는 안식각이 큰 토양일수록 더 깊고 가파른 세굴이 발생할 수 있음을 의미하며, 이 매개변수를 무시하는 것은 예측에 심각한 오차를 유발할 수 있음을 보여줍니다.

Figure 1.37: Scour amplification factor for spill-through abutments and clear-water conditions (Ettema et al. 2010)
Figure 1.37: Scour amplification factor for spill-through abutments and clear-water conditions (Ettema et al. 2010)

결과 2: 미소한 점착력의 막대한 세굴 억제 효과

모래에 점토나 실트 같은 미세 입자가 섞여 발생하는 점착력 또한 세굴 깊이를 결정하는 중요한 변수임이 확인되었습니다. 시뮬레이션 결과, 아주 작은 양의 점착력만으로도 토양의 침식 저항성이 크게 증가했습니다.

논문의 표 3.8에 따르면, 불과 0.5 Pa의 점착력이 추가되었을 때 세굴 깊이가 평균 90.9% 감소하는 것으로 나타났습니다. 이는 점착력을 고려하지 않는 현재의 설계 방식이 실제보다 훨씬 과도한 세굴 깊이를 예측하여 막대한 비용 낭비를 초래할 수 있음을 시사합니다.

R&D 및 운영을 위한 실질적 시사점

본 연구 결과는 교량 설계, 시공 및 유지관리와 관련된 다양한 분야의 전문가들에게 중요한 시사점을 제공합니다.

  • 공정/토목 엔지니어: 현장별 토질 데이터(특히 안식각, 점착력) 없이 표준 경험식에만 의존하는 것은 매우 위험합니다. CFD 시뮬레이션은 이러한 현장 고유의 특성을 설계에 반영하여 신뢰도를 높일 수 있는 강력한 도구를 제공합니다.
  • 품질 관리/지반 공학팀: 본 연구는 상세한 지반 조사의 중요성을 강조합니다. 안식각과 점착력 측정은 단순한 절차가 아니라, 정확한 세굴 위험 평가를 위한 핵심 입력 데이터입니다.
  • 설계 엔지니어: 연구 결과는 교량 기초 설계에 직접적인 영향을 미칩니다. 이러한 토질 매개변수를 고려하면 과소 설계(붕괴 위험)와 과대 설계(불필요한 비용)를 모두 피하고, 안전하면서도 경제적인 설계를 달성할 수 있습니다.

논문 상세 정보

Influence of Soil Parameters on Local Pier Scour Depth

1. 개요:

  • 제목: Influence of Soil Parameters on Local Pier Scour Depth (국부 교각 세굴 깊이에 대한 토질 매개변수의 영향)
  • 저자: Iqbal Singh Budwal
  • 발행 연도: 2021
  • 발행 학술지/학회: A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo (워털루 대학교 제출 석사 학위 논문)
  • 키워드: Bridge scour, pier scour, soil parameters, numerical simulation, SSIIM, cohesion, angle of repose

2. 초록:

교량 세굴은 교량 기초 주변의 퇴적층이 해류, 파랑, 난류로 인해 발생하는 유체력에 의해 침식되는 현상이다. 교각, 말뚝, 교대와 같은 기초 구성 요소 주변의 세굴은 구조적 불안정성과 붕괴 가능성을 초래할 수 있다. 세굴은 교량 붕괴의 주요 원인으로 기록되어 왔으며, 따라서 안전하고 비용 효율적인 교량 설계를 위해서는 세굴의 예측, 모니터링 및 완화가 가장 중요하다. 현재 교각 세굴 추정 방법은 계산에서 토질 매개변수에 대한 정보를 적절히 사용하지 않는다. 그러나 토질 매개변수는 다른 요인들 중에서도 세굴 과정에서 중요한 역할을 한다. 토질 매개변수 입력을 무시하면 교각 세굴 깊이를 상당히 과소평가하게 되고, 과도하게 비싼 교량 기초 설계로 이어진다. 더 정확한 세굴 예측 방법을 개발하기 위해서는 입도 분포, 광물 구성, 점착력, 안식각, 공극비와 같은 토질 매개변수의 영향을 체계적으로 조사하고 이를 세굴 예측 방정식에 통합하기 위한 매개변수 연구가 필요하다. 대부분의 발표된 세굴 연구는 축소된 실험실 실험을 활용했지만, 수치 시뮬레이션을 사용한 세굴 연구도 일부 제한적으로 이루어졌다. 수치 연구는 비용이 적게 들고 체계적인 매개변수 연구를 통해 다양한 시나리오를 조사할 기회를 제공한다.

본 논문에서는 기존 교량 세굴 이론 및 세굴 추정 방법에 대한 포괄적인 검토를 수행한다. 이어서 SSIIM 소프트웨어를 사용하여 교각 세굴의 수치 시뮬레이션을 수행한다. SSIIM을 사용하여 퇴적물 매개변수가 교각 세굴에 미치는 영향을 정량화하고 가장 적절한 세굴 예측 방법에 대한 권장 사항을 제공하기 위해 매개변수 연구를 수행한다. 본 논문에서 수행된 검토는 제어 메커니즘 및 교량에서 발생하는 세굴 유형을 포함한 기존 세굴 문헌을 다룬다. 관련 토양, 유체 및 구조적 요인과 세굴에 미치는 영향을 조사한다. 세굴에 가장 영향력 있는 토양 매개변수는 입자 크기, 안식각, 점착력으로 밝혀졌다. 그러나 현재 경험적 방법에서 고려되는 유일한 토양 매개변수는 입자 크기 또는 입도이다. 또한 평형 세굴 깊이와 세굴 속도를 추정하는 데 사용되는 일반적인 경험적 방정식에 대해 자세히 논의한다. 검토는 실험실 규모 연구, 수치 모델링, 그리고 인공 신경망과 같은 소프트 컴퓨팅 기술을 다룬다. 세굴 모니터링 기술과 세굴 완화를 위한 대책에 대한 간략한 논의도 이루어진다.

3. 서론:

교량에서의 세굴 과정과 영향을 이해하는 것은 안전하고 효율적인 엔지니어링 설계에 필수적이다. 세굴은 유체력으로 인해 해양 구조물 주변의 퇴적층 물질이 침식되거나 제거되는 것으로 정의된다. 시간이 지남에 따라 세굴 과정은 교량의 측면 저항력을 약화시키며, 교량 붕괴의 약 60%를 차지하는 원인이었다. Wardhana와 Hadiprio(2003)는 1989년에서 2000년 사이 미국에서 발생한 500건의 교량 붕괴 원인을 조사하여 주된 원인을 파악했다. 홍수와 세굴이 가장 큰 기여 요인으로, 교량 붕괴의 48.31%를 차지했다. 심각한 세굴은 유효 기초 깊이를 감소시키고 기초 푸팅을 노출시킨다. 본 장에서는 교량 기초에서의 세굴 속도와 평형 깊이를 예측하는 데 사용되는 이론과 방법을 논의한다. 토양, 유체, 구조물 간의 상호작용이 세굴 현상을 유발하고 제어한다. 이 세 가지 요소에서 비롯된 요인들의 영향과 상호작용을 연구하는 것은 교량 세굴을 이해하는 데 매우 중요하다. 실험실 테스트, 수치 시뮬레이션, 다양한 데이터 기반 알고리즘이 세굴 발생 방식과 추정 최적 관행을 조사하는 데 사용되어 왔다.

4. 연구 요약:

연구 주제의 배경:

교각 세굴은 교량 안전을 위협하는 가장 큰 요인 중 하나이다. 기존의 세굴 깊이 예측 공식들은 주로 유체역학적 변수와 구조물의 기하학적 형태에만 집중하며, 세굴 저항성의 핵심인 토질의 공학적 특성을 제대로 반영하지 못하는 한계가 있다. 이로 인해 예측의 정확도가 떨어져 과소 또는 과대 설계의 문제가 발생한다.

이전 연구 현황:

과거 연구들은 대부분 실험실 수조 실험을 통해 경험식을 개발하는 데 중점을 두었다. 일부 연구에서 토질의 입자 크기(D50)나 입도 분포를 고려했지만, 안식각이나 점착력과 같은 중요한 매개변수들은 거의 다루어지지 않았다. 최근 수치 모델링(CFD) 기술이 발전하면서 세굴 현상을 모사하려는 시도가 있었으나, 유체와 퇴적물 간의 복잡한 상호작용을 정확히 모델링하는 데에는 여전히 어려움이 있다.

연구 목적:

본 연구의 목적은 다음과 같다. 1. 수치 시뮬레이션을 통해 기존에 간과되었던 주요 토질 매개변수(안식각, 점착력)가 교각 세굴 깊이에 미치는 영향을 정량적으로 분석한다. 2. 시뮬레이션 결과를 바탕으로 현재 널리 사용되는 12개의 경험적 세굴 예측 공식의 성능을 평가한다. 3. 가장 정확하고 안전한 예측 방법을 제시하고, 향후 수치 모델링의 개선 방향을 논의한다.

핵심 연구:

본 연구는 CFD 소프트웨어 SSIIM을 사용하여 총 128가지 조건에 대한 교각 세굴 시뮬레이션을 수행했다. 4가지 다른 교각 직경과 2가지 유속 조건 하에서, 3가지 핵심 토질 매개변수인 입자 크기(D50), 안정 경사각, 점착력을 체계적으로 변화시키며 최대 세굴 깊이를 계산했다. 이 결과를 통해 각 매개변수의 민감도를 분석하고, 기존 경험식들의 예측 오차(SSE, UE)를 정량적으로 평가했다.

5. 연구 방법론

연구 설계:

본 연구는 수치 시뮬레이션을 기반으로 한 매개변수 연구로 설계되었다. 먼저 SSIIM 소프트웨어의 신뢰성을 확보하기 위해, 기존에 발표된 3가지 실험 연구(Roulund et al. 2005, Melville 1975, Ahmed and Rajaratnam 1998)의 결과를 수치적으로 재현하고 비교하는 검증 단계를 거쳤다. 검증 후, 교각 직경, 유속, 토질 매개변수를 조합한 총 128개의 가상 시나리오를 설정하여 매개변수 연구를 수행했다.

데이터 수집 및 분석 방법:

  • 데이터 생성: SSIIM 2.0 소프트웨어를 사용하여 각 시나리오에 대한 3차원 CFD 및 퇴적물 이동 시뮬레이션을 수행했다. 시간에 따른 세굴 깊이 변화를 기록하고, 최종 평형 세굴 깊이를 도출했다.
  • 데이터 분석: 시뮬레이션으로 얻은 최대 세굴 깊이 데이터를 12개의 주요 경험식으로 계산한 예측값과 비교했다. 분석 지표로는 총 제곱 오차 합(SSE)과 과소예측 오차(UE)를 사용하여 각 공식의 정확성과 안전성을 평가했다. 또한, 안정 경사각과 점착력 변화에 따른 세굴 깊이의 변화율을 계산하여 그 영향을 정량화했다.

연구 주제 및 범위:

  • 연구 주제: 원형 단일 교각 주변에서 발생하는 국부 세굴(Local Pier Scour)
  • 연구 범위:
    • 유동 조건: 유사 이동이 없는 청수 세굴(Clear-water scour) 조건
    • 토질: 균일한 입경의 깨끗한 모래(Clean sands)
    • 주요 변수: 교각 직경(4종), 유속 강도(2종), 토질 입자 크기(10종), 안정 경사각(5종), 점착력(5종)

6. 주요 결과:

주요 결과:

  • 안정 경사각의 영향: 안정 경사각은 세굴 깊이에 지대한 영향을 미쳤다. 기준 각도 30° 대비 40°에서는 세굴 깊이가 최대 +145.1% 증가했고, 20°에서는 최대 -41.9% 감소했다.
  • 점착력의 영향: 소량의 점착력(0.5 Pa)만으로도 세굴 깊이가 평균 90.9% 감소하여, 점착력이 세굴을 억제하는 데 매우 효과적임을 확인했다.
  • 경험식 성능 평가: 12개 경험식 중 TAMU(Texas A&M University) 방법이 과소예측 없이 SSIIM 결과와 가장 근접한 예측을 제공하여 최상의 성능을 보였다. 반면, 일부 널리 사용되는 공식들은 특정 조건에서 세굴 깊이를 심각하게 과소예측할 위험이 있었다.
  • 수치 모델링의 한계 및 가능성: SSIIM은 최대 세굴 깊이를 성공적으로 예측했지만, 미세 입자의 초기 침식률 모사나 안식각 효과를 통합적으로 모델링하는 데에는 한계를 보였다. 이는 향후 더 정교한 퇴적물 수치 모델 개발의 필요성을 시사한다.
Figure 3.19: Model 3b scour depth versus D50 with empirical equations
Figure 3.19: Model 3b scour depth versus D50 with empirical equations

Figure List:

  • Figure 1.1: Scoured bridge foundation (MTO 1997)
  • Figure 1.2: Flow and scouring at a contraction (MTO 1997)
  • Figure 1.3: Flow and scour at single pier (Akib et al. 2014)
  • Figure 1.4: Flow and local scour at abutment (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.5: Live-bed and clear-water scour over time (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.6: Live-bed and clear-water scour comparison on time (Melville 1999)
  • Figure 1.7: Forces acting on a bed sediment particle (Van Rijn 1993)
  • Figure 1.8: Difference between scour in sands and clays (Wang et al. 2017)
  • Figure 1.9: Critical shear stress as a function of mean grain size (Briaud et al. 2011)
  • Figure 1.10: Critical velocity as a function of mean grain size (Briaud et al. 2011)
  • Figure 1.11: Erosion rates versus flow velocity for soils (Briaud et al. 2011)
  • Figure 1.12: Erosion rates versus applied shear stress for soils (Briaud et al. 2011)
  • Figure 1.13: Erosion function plot from EFA (Briaud et al. 2001a)
  • Figure 1.14: EFA detail (Briaud et al. 2001a)
  • Figure 1.15: Open channel flow profile (Van Rijn 1993)
  • Figure 1.16: Channel velocity profile (Van Rijn 1993)
  • Figure 1.17: Wave and current coupled scour at a monopile (Qi and Gao 2014)
  • Figure 1.18: Compound pier shapes (Whitehouse 2004)
  • Figure 1.19: Single pile, pile group, and complex foundation example (Wang et al. 2017)
  • Figure 1.20: States of scour at complex piers due to elevations (Ataie-Ashtiani et al. 2010)
  • Figure 1.21: Flow around scoured abutment (Barbhuiya and Dey 2004)
  • Figure 1.22: Abutment scour in a compound channel (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.23: Abutment shapes (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.24: Competent velocity method design chart for critical velocity (MTO 1997)
  • Figure 1.25: RTAC guide to bridge hydraulics (1973) method (MTO 1997)
  • Figure 1.26: CSU (1977) method pier shape and angle of attack factors (MTO 1997)
  • Figure 1.27: Flow alignment correction factor (Melville and Sutherland 1988)
  • Figure 1.28: HEC-18, HEC-20, and HEC-23 manual summary chart (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.29: Sediment fall velocity versus grain size (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.30: Florida DOT pier scour curve (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.31: FHWA pier debris dimensions (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.32: Rock quarrying scour around bridge pier (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.33: Pier scour in rock as a function Pc and GSN (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.34: Abutment orientation angle (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.35: Scour amplification factor for spill-through abutments and live-bed conditions (Ettema et al. 2010)
  • Figure 1.36: Scour amplification factor for wingwall abutments and live-bed conditions (Ettema et al. 2010)
  • Figure 1.37: Scour amplification factor for spill-through abutments and clear-water conditions (Ettema et al. 2010)
  • Figure 1.38: Scour amplification factor for wingwall abutments and clear-water conditions (Ettema et al. 2010)
  • Figure 1.39: Normalized scour depth versus flow intensity (Sheppard and Miller 2006)
  • Figure 1.40: Angle of attack correction factor (Breusers 1977)
  • Figure 1.41: Abutment alignment angle factor (Melville 1992)
  • Figure 1.42: Pier and abutment classifications (Melville 1997)
  • Figure 1.43: Influence of flow intensity on equilibrium time scale (Melville and Chiew 1999)
  • Figure 1.44: Example test results of scour depth versus time (Briaud et al. 1999)
  • Figure 1.45: Projected width of rectangular pier (Briaud et al. 2004)
  • Figure 1.46: Scour hole shape at rectangular piers (Briaud et al. 2004)
  • Figure 1.47: Contraction scour details (Briaud et al. 2005)
  • Figure 1.48: Location of maximum contraction scour (Briaud et al. 2005)
  • Figure 1.49: Abutment parameter details (Briaud 2015a)
  • Figure 1.50: Pier scour equation relationship comparison (Richardson and Davis 2001)
  • Figure 1.51: Underprediction error of dimensional scour depth versus total error for laboratory data (Sheppard et al. 2014)
  • Figure 1.52: Underprediction error of dimensionless scour depth versus total error for laboratory data (Sheppard et al. 2014)
  • Figure 1.53: Underprediction error of field dimensional scour depth versus total error for laboratory data (Sheppard et al. 2014)
  • Figure 1.54: Underprediction error of field dimensionless scour depth versus total error for laboratory data (Sheppard et al. 2014)
  • Figure 1.55: Comparisons of equations with laboratory scour measurements: (a) 65-1R; (b) 65-2; (c) HEC-18 4th;(d) Melville and Sutherland (1988); (e) Melville (1997) (Qi et al., 2016)
  • Figure 1.56: Comparisons of equations with field scour measurements: (a) 65-1R; (b) 65-2; (c) HEC-18 4th; (d) HEC-18 5th; (e) Melville and Sutherland (1988); (f) Melville (1997) (Qi et al., 2016)
  • Figure 1.57: Numerical model boundaries of flow around a pile (Roulund et al. 2005)
  • Figure 1.58: Numerical model of scour hole around a bridge pier (Afzal et al. 2015)
  • Figure 1.59: Particle modeling approaches at different time and length scales (Zhu et al. 2007)
  • Figure 1.60: Three-layer artificial neural network structure (Lee et al. 2007)
  • Figure 1.61: Circular and hooked collars for piers (Chen et al. 2018)
  • Figure 2.1: Case 1 model mesh and boundary conditions
  • Figure 2.2: Shields diagram example (Vanoni 1975)
  • Figure 2.3: Case 1 Velocity profiles flow development
  • Figure 2.4: Case 1 velocity profiles pier influence
  • Figure 2.5: Case 1 rigid bed horizontal velocities
  • Figure 2.6: Case 1 rigid bed vertical velocities
  • Figure 2.7: Case 1 bed shear stress amplification (a) Roulund et al. (2005) (b) Hjorth (1975)
  • Figure 2.8: Case 1 bed shear stress amplification around pier in SSIIM
  • Figure 2.9: Case 1 bed shear stress amplification comparison (a) Roulund et al. (2005) (b) Hjorth (1975)
  • Figure 2.10: Case 2 upstream horizontal velocity profiles
  • Figure 2.11: Case 2 experimental bed shear stress contour (Melville 1975) (flow towards left)
  • Figure 2.12: Case 2 bed shear stress contour comparison with Melville (1975) (Salaheldin et al. 2004)
  • Figure 2.13: Case 2 bed shear stress in SSIIM (flow towards right)
  • Figure 2.14: Case 2 bed shear stress in SSIIM compared with Melville (1975) (flow towards left)
  • Figure 2.15: Case 3 upstream horizontal velocity profiles
  • Figure 2.16: Case 3 Upstream vertical velocity profiles
  • Figure 2.17: Case 2 soil gradation (Melville 1975)
  • Figure 2.18: Case 2 experiment scour hole (upstream face view) (Melville 1975)
  • Figure 2.19: Case 2 SSIIM scour holes for Test A (left) and Test b (right) (flow towards right)
  • Figure 2.20: Case 2 experimental scour hole depth contours (units: cm) (Melville 1975)
  • Figure 2.21: Case 2 SSIIM scour hole depth contours (units: m) (Test A left and Test B right)
  • Figure 2.22: Case 2 scour depth over time
  • Figure 2.23: Case 2 scour hole cross section (view from upstream)
  • Figure 2.24: Case 2 scour hole longitudinal section (flows toward left)
  • Figure 2.25: Case 2 coarse grid SSIIM scour hole depth contours (units: m)
  • Figure 2.26: Case 2 20-layer grid SSIIM scour hole depth contours (units: m)
  • Figure 2.27: Case 2 Brooks (1963) uphill parameter test
  • Figure 2.28: Case 2 Brooks (1963) downhill parameter test
  • Figure 2.29: Case 3 SSIIM scour hole (flows to right)
  • Figure 2.30: Case 3 SSIIM Scour Hole Contour (Units: m)
  • Figure 2.31: Case 3 Scour Depth over Time
  • Figure 2.32: Case 3 scour hole longitudinal section (flows toward left)
  • Figure 2.33: Case 4 SSIIM scour hole (flows to right)
  • Figure 2.34: Case 4 SSIIM scour hole contour (units: m)
  • Figure 2.35: Case 4 scour depth over time
  • Figure 2.36: Case 4 scour hole longitudinal section (flows toward left)
  • Figure 3.1: Inlet and outlet erosion in model 1b (flow towards right)
  • Figure 3.2: Model 1a scour depth versus time
  • Figure 3.3: Model 1b scour depth versus time
  • Figure 3.4: Model 2a scour depth versus time
  • Figure 3.5: Model 2b scour depth versus time
  • Figure 3.6: Model 3a scour depth versus time
  • Figure 3.7: Model 3b scour depth versus time
  • Figure 3.8: Model 4a scour depth versus time
  • Figure 3.9: Model 4b scour depth versus time
  • Figure 3.10: Scour depth versus time for D50 = 1 mm
  • Figure 3.11: Scour depth versus time for D50 = 0.05 mm
  • Figure 3.12: Scour depth versus stable slope angle for all models
  • Figure 3.13: Scour depth versus D50 for all models
  • Figure 3.14: Model 1a scour depth versus D50 with empirical equations
  • Figure 3.15: Model 1b scour depth versus D50 with empirical equations
  • Figure 3.16: Model 2a scour depth versus D50 with empirical equations
  • Figure 3.17: Model 2b scour depth versus D50 with empirical equations
  • Figure 3.18: Model 3a scour depth versus D50 with empirical equations
  • Figure 3.19: Model 3b scour depth versus D50 with empirical equations
  • Figure 3.20: Model 4a scour depth versus D50 with empirical equations
  • Figure 3.21: Model 4b scour depth versus D50 with empirical equations
  • Figure 3.22: Scour depth versus stable slope angle for all models
  • Figure 3.23: SSE and UE for empirical pier scour equations
  • Figure 3.24: Live bed scour in model 1b

7. 결론:

본 논문은 교량 기초에서 발생하는 수축 및 국부 세굴에 대한 검토를 다루었다. 세굴 이론과 예측 방법은 영향 요인과 함께 상세히 논의되었다. 연구 범위는 교각에서의 국부 세굴 깊이 예측을 다루는 데 초점을 맞췄다. 교량 세굴 예측을 위한 기존 방법의 주요 격차는 입자 크기 이외의 토질 매개변수를 고려하지 않는다는 점이었다. Sheppard/Melville(2011) 및 HEC-18 방정식과 같은 방법은 좋은 성능을 보였지만, 토질 매개변수를 통합함으로써 크게 개선될 수 있다. 발표된 문헌을 검토한 결과, 세굴에 가장 중요한 토질 매개변수는 입자 크기, 입도, 점착력, 안식각임이 밝혀졌다. 이러한 토질 매개변수들은 운동 시작, 침식 거동, 그리고 교각에서의 최대 세굴 깊이를 제어하는 세굴 구멍의 모양을 제어하는 것으로 밝혀졌다. 더욱이, 대부분의 방법은 제한된 실험 시나리오에서 파생되었으며, 이로 인해 더 큰 구조물로 현장 세굴을 예측할 때 스케일링 효과가 부정확성을 유발한다. 따라서 현재의 설계 방법은 세굴을 과도하게 예측하여 비싼 건설 비용을 초래하는 경향이 있다. 또한, 토질 매개변수 입력의 부족은 세굴 깊이의 과소예측으로 이어져 세굴이 교량 붕괴의 가장 흔한 원인이 되었다. 더 나은 세굴 예측 방법을 개발하기 위해서는 토질 매개변수가 세굴 깊이에 미치는 영향에 대한 추가 연구가 필요했다.

8. 참고 문헌:

  1. Lancaster, J. F., 1984, The physics of welding, Physics in Technology, 15:73-79.
  2. Kou, S., 2003, Fusion welding processes, In: Welding Technology, 2nd Ed., John Willey & Sons Inc., NJ, USA, pp.3-36.
  3. Steen, W.M., Mazumder, J., 2010, Laser welding: laser material processing, 4th Ed., Springer-Verlag London Limited, UK, pp. 199-250.
  4. Merchant, V., Laser beam welding, In: Ahmed, N., editor, New developments in advanced welding, 1st Ed., Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge, UK, pp. 83-84.
  5. Kugler, T.R., 2001, Fusion front penetration: Conduction Welding, In: Ready, J.F., editor, LIA handbook of laser materials processing, 1st Ed., Magnolia Publishing Inc., FL, USA, pp. 310-312.
  6. Matsunawa, A., 2002, Science of laser welding-mechanisms of keyhole and pool dynamics. In: ICALEO 2002 proceedings, Phoenix, LIA, Orlando, paper: 101.
  7. Lacroix, D., Jeandel, G., Boudot, C., 1996, Spectroscopic studies of laser-induced plume during welding with a Nd:YAG laser, In: Proceedings of SPIE, 2789, pp. 221–227.
  8. Dumord, E., Jouvard, J.M., Grevey, D., 1996, Keyhole modeling during CW Nd:YAG laser welding, In: Proceedings of SPIE, 2789, pp. 213–220.
  9. Berkmanns, J., Faerber, M., 2005, Facts about laser technology: laser welding, http://www.laserdeal.com/, access date: January 20, 2012.
  10. Coherent Inc., 2004, High speed welding of metals with diamond CO2 laser – stainless steels, Technical Note, http://www.coherent.de/, access date: November 15, 2011.
  11. LWS, 2006, A technical report on the LWS flexcell cladding system, http://www.laserweldingsolutions.com/, access date: April 01, 2009.
  12. Shannon, G., 2009, Source selection for laser welding, http://www.industrial-lasers.com/, access date: April 01, 2009.
  13. Faerber, M., Berkmanns, J., 1996, Gases for increased laser welding productivity, In: Proceedings of the ISATA Conference, pp. 791–798.
  14. Schuberth S, Schedin E, Fröhlich T, Ratte E., 2008, Next generation vehicle – engineering guidelines for stainless steel in automotive applications, In: Proceedings of the 6th stainless steel science and market conference, Helsinki, Finland.
  15. Kou, S., 2003, Weld metal solidification, In: Welding Technology, 2nd Ed., John Willey & Sons Inc., NJ, USA, pp.199-207.
  16. Han, W., 2004, Computational and experimental investigations of laser drilling and welding for microelectronic packaging, Ph.D. Dissertation, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA, USA, pp. 85-87.
  17. Buchfink, G., 2007, A world of possibilities – joining, In: Kammϋller, N.L., editor, The laser as a tool, 1st Ed., Vogel Buchverlag, Wϋrzburg, Germany, pp. 166-167.
  18. ISO13919-1:1996, Welding – Electrons and laser beam welded joints – guidance on quality levels for imperfections – Part I: Steel, pp. 4-13.
  19. Zhang, Y.M., Kovacevic, R., Li, L., 1996, Characterization and real time measurement of geometrical appearance of the weld pool. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 36(7):799–816.
  20. Bull, C.E., Stacey, K.A., Calcraft, R., 1993, Online weld monitoring using ultrasonic. Journal of Non-destructive Test, 35(2):57–64.
  21. Tarng, Y.S., Yang, W.H., 1998, Optimization of the weld bead geometry in gas Tungsten Arc welding by the Taguchi Method. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 14:549–54.
  22. Benyounis, K.Y.,Olabi, A.G.,Hasmi, M.S.J., 2008, Multi-response optimization of CO2 laser welding process of austenitic stainless steel, Optics & Laser Technology, 40:76–87.
  23. Antony, J., 2003, Introduction to industrial experimentation, In: Design of Experiments for Engineers and Scientists, Elsevier Publishing Solutions, USA, pp. 1-4.
  24. Sudnik, W., Radaj, D., Erofeev, W., 1996, Computerized simulation of laser beam welding, modeling and verification, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 29:2811-2817.
  25. Arata, Y., Miyamoto, I., 1972, Heat processing by CO2 laser, Journal of Japan Welding Society, 41:81.
  26. Swift-Hook, D.T., Gick, A.E.F., 1973, Penetration welding with lasers, Welding Journal Research Supplement, 52:492s–9s.
  27. Steen, W.M., Dowden, J., Davis, M., Kapadia, P., 1988, A point and line source model of laser keyhole welding, Journal of Physics D, 21:1255–60.
  28. Dowden, J., Davis, M., Kapadia, P., 1983, Some aspects of the fluid-dynamics of laser-welding. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 126:123–46.
  29. Ducharme, R., Kapadia, P., Dowden, J., 1993, A mathematical model of the defocusing of laser light above a workpiece in laser material processing. In: Farson, D., Steen, W., Miyamoto, I., editors, Proceedings of ICALEO’92, LIA, Orlando: Laser Institution of America, 75:187–97.
  30. Kaplan, A., 1994, A model of deep penetration laser welding based on calculation of the keyhole profile, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 27(9):1805–1814.
  31. Klemens, P.G., 1976, Heat balance and flow conditions for electron beam and laser welding, Journal of Applied Physics, 47(5):2165–2174.
  32. Chande, T., Mazumder, J., 1984, Estimating effects of processing conditions and variable properties upon pool shape, cooling rates, and absorption coefficient in laser welding, Journal of Applied Physics, 56:1981–6.
  33. Borland, J.C., 1960, Generalized theory of super-solidus cracking in welds (and castings), British Welding Journal, 7: 508–512.
  34. Hemsworth, B., Boniszewski, T., Eaton, N.F., 1969, Classification and definition of high temperature welding cracks in alloys, Metal Construction and British Welding Journal, 2:5–16.
  35. Hoffmann, P., Geiger, M., 1995, Recent developments in laser system technology for welding applications, Annals of the CIRP, 44(1):151-156.
  36. Weichiat, C., Paul, A., Pal, M., 2009, CO2 laser welding of galvanized steel sheets using vent holes, Materials and Design, 30:245–251.
  37. Lippold, J.C., Kotecki, D.J., 2005, Welding metallurgy and weldability of stainless steel, 1st ed., John Willey & Sons, NJ, USA, pp. 63-70.
  38. Brooks, J.A., Garrison, W.M., 1999, Weld microstructure development and properties of precipitation-strengthened martensitic stainless steels, Welding Journal, 78(8): 280s -291s
  39. Tzeng, Y.F., 2000, Parametric analysis of the pulsed Nd:YAG laser seam-welding process, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 102: 40-47.
  40. Hector Jr., L.G., Chen, Y.-L., Agarwal, S., Briant. C.L., 2004, Texture characterization of autogenous Nd: YAG laser welds in AA5182-O and AA6111-T4 aluminum alloys, Metall. and Mater. Trans A, 35A:3032-3038.
  41. Al-kazzaz, H., Medraj, M., Cao, X., Jahazi, M., Xiao, M., 2005, Effects of welding speed on Nd:YAG laser weldability of ZE41A-T5 magnesium sand castings, Proceeding of 44th annual conference of metallurgists of CIM, Light Metals:137-149.
  42. Huang, R. S., Kang, L., Ma, X., 2008, Microstructure and phase composition of a low-power YAG laser-MAG welded stainless steel joint, Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance, 17:928–935.
  43. Liu, Q.S., Mahdavian, S.M., Aswin, D., Ding, S., 2009, Experimental study of temperature and clamping force during Nd:YAG laser butt welding, Optics & Laser Technology,41(6):794-799
  44. Berzins, M., Childs, T.H.C., Ryder, G.R., 1996, The selective laser sintering of polycarbonate, Annals of the CIRP, 45(1):187–190.
  45. Childs, T.H.C., Berzins, M., Ryder, G.R., Tontowi, A.E., 1999, Selective laser sintering of an amorphous polymer: simulations and experiments. Proc. IMechE, Part B: J. Engineering Manufacture, 213:333-349.
  46. Jin, X., Li, L., 2004, An experimental study on the keyhole shapes in laser deep penetration welding, Optics and Lasers in Engineering, 41: 779–790.
  47. Sudnik, W., Radaj, D., Breitschwerdt, S., Erofeew, W., 2000, Numerical simulation of weld pool geometry in laser beam welding, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 33: 662–671.
  48. Antony, J., 2003, Systematic Methodology for design of experiment: Design of Experiment for Engineers and Scientists, 1st Ed., Butterworth-Heinemann Publication, MA, USA, pp. 38-39.
  49. Kurt, B., Orhan, N., Somunkiran, I., Kaya, M., 2009, The effect of austenitic interface layer on microstructure of AISI 420 martensitic stainless steel joined by keyhole PTA welding process, Materials and Design, 30:661–664.
  50. Ping, D.H., Ohnuma, M., Hirakawa, Y., Kadoya, Y., Hono, K., 2005, Microstructural evolution in 13Cr–8Ni–2.5Mo–2Al martensitic precipitation-hardened stainless steel, Materials Science and Engineering A, 394:285–295
  51. Berretta, J.R., de Rossi, W., Neves, M.D.M., de Almeida, I.A., Junior, N.D.V., 2007, Pulsed Nd:YAG laser welding of AISI 304 to AISI 420 stainless steels, Optics and Lasers in Engineering, 45:960–966.
  52. Srinivasan, P.B., 2008, Effect of laser beam mode on the microstructural evolution in AISI 410 martensitic stainless steel welds, Lasers in Engineering, 18:351–359.
  53. Rajasekhar, A., Reddy, G.M., Mohandas, T., Murti, V.S.R., 2009, Influence of austenitizing temperature on microstructure and mechanical properties of AISI 431 martensitic stainless steel electron beam welds, Materials and Design, 30:1612–1624.
  54. Sharifitabar, M., Halvaee, A., 2010, Resistance upset butt welding of austenitic to martensitic stainless steels, Materials and Design, 31(6):3044–3050.
  55. Gualco, A., Svoboda, H.G., Surian, E.S., de Vedia, L. A., 2010, Effect of welding procedure on wear behaviour of a modified martensitic tool steel hardfacing deposit, Materials and Design, 31:4165–4173
  56. Khan MMA, Romoli L, Fiaschi M, Dini G, Sarri F., 2010, Experimental investigation on laser beam welding of martensitic stainless steels in a constrained overlap joint configuration, Journal of Material Processing Technology,210:1340–53
  57. Kou, S., 2002, Welding metallurgy, 2nd ed. John Willey & Sons Inc., NJ, USA, pp. 143- 169.
  58. Nakagawa H, Matsuda F, Uehara T, Katayama S, Arata Y. A., 1979, New explanation for role of delta ferrite improving weld solidification crack susceptibility in austenitic stainless steel, Trans Jpn Weld Res Inst. 8:105–12.
  59. Huang, Q., Hagstroem, J., Skoog, H., Kullberg, G., 1991, Effect of laser parameter variation on sheet metal welding, Int. J. Join. Mater., 3:79–88.
  60. Benyounis, K.Y., Olabi., A.G., 2008, Optimization of different welding processes using statistical and numerical approaches – A reference guide, Advances in Engineering Software, 39:483–496.
  61. Montgomery, D.C., 2004, Design and Analysis of Experiments, 6th ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.
  62. Yang, Y.K., Chuang, M.T. Lin, S.S., 2009, Optimization of dry machining parameters for high-purity graphite in end milling process via design of experiments methods, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 209:4395– 4400.
  63. Douglass, D.M., Wu, C.Y., 2003, Laser welding of polyolefin elastomers to thermoplastic polyolefin, In: Proceedings of the 22nd international Congress on applications of lasers & electro-optics, Jacksonville, Florida, USA, 95:118–23.
  64. Koganti, R., Karas, C., Joaquin, A., Henderson, D., Zaluzec, M., Caliskan, A., 2003, Metal inert gas (MIG) welding process optimization for joining aluminum sheet material using OTC/DAIHEN equipment, In: Proceedings of IMECE’03, November 15–21, Washington [DC]: ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress, pp. 409–425.
  65. Balasubramanian, V., Guha, B., 2004, Fatigue life prediction of load carrying cruciform joints of pressure vessel steel by statistical tools. J Mater Des, 25:615–623.
  66. Cicala, E., Duffet, G., Andrzjewski, H., Grevey, D., 2005, Optimization of T-joint properties in Al-Mg-Si alloy laser welding, 24th International Congress on Applications of Lasers and Electro-Optics, ICALEO: 543-548.
  67. Kim, C., Choi, W., Kim, J., Rhee, S., 2008, Relationship between the weldability and the Process parameters for laser-TIG Hybrid welding of galvanized steel sheets, Materials Transactions, 49:179-186.
  68. Datta, S., Bandyaopadhyay, A., Pal, P.K., 2008, Modeling and optimization of features of bead geometry including percentage dilution in submerged arc welding using mixture of fresh flux and fused slag, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 36:1080–1090.
  69. Sarsılmaz, F., Çaydaş, U., 2009, Statistical analysis on mechanical properties of friction-stir-welded AA 1050/AA 5083 couples, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 43:248–255.
  70. Khan M.M.A., Romoli L., Fiaschi M., Sarri F., Dini G., 2010, Experimental investigation on laser beam welding of martensitic stainless steels in a constrained overlap joint configuration, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 210(10):1340-1353.
  71. Design-Expert software, v7, user’s guide, technical manual, Stat-Ease Inc., Minneapolis, MN; 2005.
  72. Zulkali, M.M.D., Ahmad, A.L., Norulakmal, N.H., 2006, Oryza sativa L. husk as heavy metal adsorbent: optimization with lead as model solution, Bioresour. Technol., 97:21–25.
  73. Sun, Z., 1996, Feasibility of producing ferritic/austenitic dissimilar metal joints by high energy density laser beam process, International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 68:153-160.
  74. Katayama, S., 2004, Laser welding of aluminium alloys and dissimilar metals, Weld International, 18(8):618–25.
  75. Kaiser, E., Schafer, P., 2005, Pulse sharpening optimizes the quality of seam and spot welds. In: Lasers in manufacturing, proceeding of the third international WLT conference on lasers in manufacturing, pp. 695–698.
  76. Li, Z., Fontana, G., 1998, Autogenous laser welding of stainless steel to free-cutting steel for the manufacture of hydraulic valves, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 74:174–182.
  77. Mai, T.A., Spowage, A.C., 2004, Characterisation of dissimilar joints in laser welding of steel–kovar, copper–steel and copper–aluminium, Materials Science and Engineering: A, 374:224–233.
  78. Liu, X.B., Yu, G., Pang, M., Fan, J.W., Wang, H.H., Zheng, C.Y., 2007, Dissimilar autogenous full penetration welding of superalloy K418 and 42CrMo steel by a high power CW Nd:YAG laser, Applied Surface Science, 253:7281–7289.
  79. Mousavi, S.A.A.A., Sufizadeh, A.R., 2009, Metallurgical investigations of pulsed Nd:YAG laser welding of AISI 321 and AISI 630 stainless steels, Materials and Design, 30:3150–3157.
  80. Pekkarinen, J., Kujanpää, V., 2010, The effects of laser welding parameters on the microstructure of ferritic and duplex stainless steels welds, Physics Procedia, 5:517–523.
  81. Allabhakshi, S., Madhusudhan Reddy, G., Ramarao, V.V., Phani Babu, C., Ramachandran, C.S., 2002, Studies on weld overlaying of austenitic stainless steel (AISI 304) with ferritic stainless steel (AISI 430). In: Proceedings of the national welding conference, Indian Institute of Welding, Chennai, India, Paper 8.
  82. Pan, C., Zhang, E., 1996, Morphologies of the transition region in dissimilar austenitic–ferritic welds, Material Characterization, 36(1):5–10.
  83. Wang, S. C., Wang, C., Tu, Y. K., Hwang, C. J., Chi, S., Wang, W. H., Cheng, W. H., 1996, Effect of Au coating on joint strength in laser welding for invar-invar packages, Electronic Components and Technology Conference, IEEE, pp. 942-945.
  84. Cui, C., Hu, J., Gao, K., Pang, S., Yang, Y., Wang, H., Guo, Z., 2008, Effects of process parameters on weld metal keyhole characteristics with COR2R laser butt welding, Lasers in Engineering, 18:319–327.
  85. Steem WM, Mazumder J, 2010, laser material processing, Springer-Verlag London limited, London.
  86. Mackwood AP, Crafer RC, 2005, Thermal modeling of laser welding and related processes: a literature review, Opt Laser Technol, 37:99–115
  87. Sun Z, Kuo M, 1998, Bridging the joint gap with wire feed laser welding, J Mater Process Technol, 87:213–222
  88. Liu X-B, Yu G,Guo J, Gu Y-J, Pang M, Zheng C-Y, Wang H-H, 2008, Research on laser welding of cast Ni-based superalloy K418 turbo disk and alloy steel 42CrMo shaft, J Alloy Comp, 453(1–2):371–378.
  89. Juang SC, Tarng YS, 2002, Process parameter selection for optimizing the weld pool geometry in the tungsten inert gas welding of stainless steel, J Mater Process Technol, 122:33–37
  90. Marya M, Edwards G, Marya S, Olson DL, 2001, Fundamentals in the fusion welding of magnesium and its alloys. In: Proceedings of the seventh JWS international symposium. pp. 597–602.
  91. Haferkamp H, Niemeyer M, Dilthey U, Trager G, 2000, Laser and electron beam welding of magnesium materials, Weld Cutt 52(8):178–80.
  92. Haferkamp H, Bach Fr-W, Burmester I, Kreutzburg K, Niemeyer M, 1996, Nd:YAG laser beam welding of magnesium constructions. In: Proceedings of the third international magnesium conference. pp. 89–98.
  93. Benyounis KY, Olabi AG, Hashmi MSJ, 2005, Effect of laser welding parameters on the heat input and weld-bead profile, J Mater Process Technol, 164-165:978–985.
  94. Manonmani K, Murugan N, Buvanasekaran G, 2007, Effects of process parameters on the bead geometry of laser beam butt welded stainless steel sheets, J Adv Manuf Technol, 32(11-12):1125-1133.
  95. Elangovan K, Balasubramanian V, 2008, Developing an empirical relationship to predict tensile strength of friction stir welded AA2219 aluminium alloy joints, J Mater Eng Perform, 17:820–830.
  96. Moradi M, Ghoreishi M, 2010, Influences of laser welding parameters on the geometric profile of NI-base superalloy Rene 80 weld-bead, Int J Adv Manuf Technol, doi: 10.1007/s00170-010-3036-1.
  97. Padmanaban G, Balasubramanian V, 2010, Optimization of laser beam welding process parameters to attain maximum tensile strength in AZ31B magnesium alloy, Opt Laser Technol, 42:1253–1260
  98. Rajakumar S, Muralidharan C, Balasubramanian V, 2010, Optimization of the friction-stir-welding process and the tool parameters to attain a maximum tensile strength of AA7075-T6 aluminium alloy, J Eng Manuf, 224:1175–1191.
  99. Ruggiero A, Tricarico L, Olabi AG, Benyounis KY, 2011, Weld-bead profile and costs optimization of the CO2 dissimilar laser welding process of low carbon steel and austenitic steel AISI316, Opt Laser Technol, 43:82–90.
  100. Myers RH, Montgomery DC, 2002, Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments, Wiley, New York.
  101. Robinson TJ, Wulff SS, 2006, Response surface approaches to robust parameter design. In: Khuri AI (ed) Response surface methodology and related topics, World Scientific, Singapore, pp. 123-157.
  102. Gunaraj V, Murugan N, 1999, Application of response surface methodologies for predicting weld base quality in submerged arc welding of pipes, J Mater Process Technol, 88:266–275.
  103. Chang W. S., Na S.J., 2002, A study on the prediction of the laser weld shape with varying heat source equations and the thermal distortion of a small structure in micro-joining, Journal of Material Processing Technology, 120:208 – 214.
  104. Goldak J. A., Chakravarti M. B., 1984, A new finite element model for welding heat source, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, 15B:299–305.
  105. Su W., Haiyan Z., Yu W., Xiaohong Z., 2004, A new heat source model in numerical simulation of high energy beam welding, Transaction China Welding Institute, 25:91–94.
  106. Kazemi K., Goldak J. A., 2009, Numerical simulation of laser full penetration welding, Computational Materials Science, 44:841–849
  107. Siva Shanmugam N., Buvanashekaran G., Sankaranarayanasamy K., 2012, Some studies on weld bead geometries for laser spot welding process using finite element analysis, Materials and Design, 34:412–426
  108. Balasubramanian K.R., Siva Shanmugam N., Buvanashekaran G., Sankaranarayanasamy K., 2008, Numerical and experimental investigation of laser beam welding of AISI 304 stainless steel sheet, Advances in Production Engineering and Management, 3(2):93–105
  109. Sabbaghzadeh J., Azizi M., Torkamany M.J., 2008, Numerical and experimental investigation of seam welding with a pulsed laser. Journal of Optics and Laser Technology, 40:289–296
  110. Kruth J.P., Froyen L., Rombouts M., Van Vaerenbergh J., Mercells P., 2003, New Ferro Powder for Selective Laser Sintering of Dense Parts, CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 52/1: 139–142.
  111. Romoli L., Tantussi G., Dini G., 2007, Layered Laser Vaporization of PMMA Manufacturing 3D Mould Cavities, CIRP Annals -Manufacturing Technology, 56/1: 209-212.
  112. Vollertsen F., Walther R., 2008, Energy balance in laser-based free form heading, CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 57/1: 291–294.
  113. Mills K.C., Su Y., Li Z., Brooks R.F., 2004, Equations for the Calculation of the Thermo-physical Properties of Stainless Steel, ISIJ International, Vol. 44, No. 10, pp. 1661–1668.
  114. Ahmad, N., Bihs, H., Myrhaug, D., Kamath, A., & Arntsen, Ø. (2018). Three-dimensional numerical modelling of wave-induced scour around piles in a side-by-side arrangement. Coastal Engineering (Amsterdam), 138, 132–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2018.04.016
  115. Ahmed, F., & Rajaratnam, N. (1998). Flow around Bridge Piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 124(3), 288–300. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1998)124:3(288)
  116. Akib, S., Jahangirzadeh, A., & Basser, H. (2014). Local scour around complex pier groups and combined piles at semi-integral bridge. Vodohospodársky Časopis, 62(2), 108–116. https://doi.org/10.2478/johh-2014-0015
  117. Alemi, M., & Maia, R. (2018). Numerical Simulation of the Flow and Local Scour Process Around Single and Complex Bridge Piers. International Journal of Civil Engineering, 16(5), 475–487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-016-0137-8
  118. Amini Baghbadorani, D., Beheshti, A., & Ataie-Ashtiani, B. (2017). Scour hole depth prediction around pile groups: review, comparison of existing methods, and proposition of a new approach. Natural Hazards (Dordrecht), 88(2), 977–1001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-2900-9
  119. Amini, A., Melville, B., Ali, T., & Ghazali, A. (2012). Clear-Water Local Scour around Pile Groups in Shallow-Water Flow. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 138(2), 177–185. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000488
  120. Annandale, G. (1995). Erodibility. Journal of Hydraulic Research. 33. 471-494.
  121. Annandale, G., Smith, S., Nairns, R., & Jones, J. (1996). Scour power. Civil Engineering (New York, N.Y. 1983), 66(7), 58–60.
  122. Annandale, G. (2000). Prediction of scour at bridge pier foundations founded on rock and other earth materials. Transportation Research Record, 2(1696), 67–70.
  123. Ataie-Ashtiani, B., & Beheshti, A. (2006). Experimental Investigation of Clear-Water Local Scour at Pile Groups. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 132(10), 1100–1104. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2006)132:10(1100)
  124. Ataie-Ashtiani, B., Baratian-Ghorghi, Z., & Beheshti, A. (2010). Experimental Investigation of Clear-Water Local Scour of Compound Piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 136(6), 343–351. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2010)136:6(343)
  125. Babu, M., Sundar, V., & Rao, S. (2003). Measurement of scour in cohesive soils around a vertical pile – simplified instrumentation and regression analysis. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 28(1), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1109/JOE.2002.808198
  126. Barbhuiya, A., & Dey, S. (2004). Local scour at abutments: A review. Sadhana (Bangalore), 29(5), 449–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02703255
  127. Bieniawski, Z. T. (1989). Engineering rock mass classifications: a complete manual for engineers and geologists in mining, civil, and petroleum engineering. John Wiley & Sons.
  128. Bierawski, L., & Maeno, S. (2006). DEM-FEM Model of Highly Saturated Soil Motion Due to Seepage Force. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 132(5), 401–409. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2006)132:5(401)
  129. Bonnefille, R. (1963). Essais de synthese des lois du début d’entrainement des sédiments sous l’action d’un courant en regime continu. Bull. du Centre de Rech. et d’ess. de Chatou. 5. 17-22.
  130. Brandimarte, L., Montanari, A., Briaud, J., & D’Odorico, P. (2006). Stochastic Flow Analysis for Predicting River Scour of Cohesive Soils. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 132(5), 493–500. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2006)132:5(493)
  131. Breusers H N C 1963 Discussion of ’Sediment transportation mechanics: erosion of sediment’ by Task Force on Preparation of Sedimentation Manual.J. Hydraul. Div, Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. 89: 277–281
  132. Breusers, H., Nicollet, G., & Shen, H. (1977). Local Scour Around Cylindrical Piers. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 15(3), 211–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221687709499645
  133. Briaud, J., Ting, F., Chen, H., Gudavalli, R., Perugu, S., & Wei, G. (1999). SRICOS: Prediction of Scour Rate in Cohesive Soils at Bridge Piers. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 125(4), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1999)125:4(237)
  134. Briaud, J., Ting, F., Chen, H., Cao, Y., Han, S., & Kwak, K. (2001a). Erosion Function Apparatus for Scour Rate Predictions. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 127(2), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2001)127:2(105)
  135. Briaud, J., Chen, H., Kwak, K., Han, S., & Ting, F. (2001b). Multiflood and Multilayer Method for Scour Rate Prediction at Bridge Piers. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 127(2), 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2001)127:2(114)
  136. Briaud, J., Chen, H., Li, Y., & Nurtjahyo, P. (2004). SRICOS-EFA Method for Complex Piers in Fine-Grained Soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 130(11), 1180–1191. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2004)130:11(1180)
  137. Briaud, J., Chen, H., Li, Y., Nurtjahyo, P., & Wang, J. (2005). SRICOS-EFA Method for Contraction Scour in Fine-Grained Soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 131(10), 1283–1294. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:10(1283)
  138. Briaud, J., Brandimarte, L., Wang, J., & D’Odorico, P. (2007). Probability of scour depth exceedance owing to hydrologic uncertainty. Georisk, 1(2), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499510701398844
  139. Briaud J.-L., Chen H.-C., Chang K.-A., Oh S.J., Chen S., Wang J., Li Y., Kwak K., Nartjaho P., Gudaralli R., Wei W., Pergu S., Cao Y.W., Ting F (2011). Summary Report: The SRICOS–EFA Method. Texas A&M University
  140. Briaud, J., & Govindasamy, A. (2014). Application of the Observation Method for Scour to Two Texas Bridges. In Geo-Congress 2014 (pp. 2640–2654). https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784413272.255
  141. Briaud, J., Gardoni, P., & Yao, C. (2014). Statistical, Risk, and Reliability Analyses of Bridge Scour. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 140(2), 4013011–. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000989
  142. Briaud, J. (2015a). Scour Depth at Bridges: Method Including Soil Properties. I: Maximum Scour Depth Prediction. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 141(2), 4014104–. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001222
  143. Briaud, J. (2015b). Scour Depth at Bridges: Method Including Soil Properties. II: Time Rate of Scour Prediction. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 141(2), 4014105–. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001223
  144. Brooks, H. N. (1963), discussion of “Boundary Shear Stresses in Curved Trapezoidal Channels”, by A. T. Ippen and P. A. Drinker, ASCE Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 89, No. HY3
  145. Chen, G., Schafer, B., Lin, Z., Huang, Y., Suaznabar, O., Shen, J., & Kerenyi, K. (2015). Maximum scour depth based on magnetic field change in smart rocks for foundation stability evaluation of bridges. Structural Health Monitoring, 14(1), 86–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475921714554141
  146. Chen, Q., Yang, Z., & Wu, H. (2019). Evolution of Turbulent Horseshoe Vortex System in Front of a Vertical Circular Cylinder in Open Channel. Water (Basel), 11(10), 2079–. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11102079
  147. Chen, S., Tfwala, S., Wu, T., Chan, H., & Chou, H. (2018). A hooked-collar for bridge piers protection: Flow fields and scour. Water (Basel), 10(9), 1251–. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10091251
  148. Cheng, Nian-Sheng. (2015). Representative Grain Size and Equivalent Roughness Height of a Sediment Bed. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering. 142. 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001069.
  149. Chiew, Y., & Melville, B. (1987). Local scour around bridge piers. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 25(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221688709499285
  150. Coleman, S., Lauchlan, C., & Melville, B. (2003). Clear-water scour development at bridge abutments. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 41(5), 521–531. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221680309499997
  151. Coleman, S. (2005). Clearwater Local Scour at Complex Piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 131(4), 330–334. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2005)131:4(330)
  152. Dargahi, B. (1987). ‘‘Flow field and local scouring around a pier.’’ Bulletin No. TRITA-VBI-137, Hydraulic Laboratory, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
  153. Dargahi, B. (1989). The turbulent flow field around a circular cylinder. Experiments in Fluids, 8(1-2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00203058
  154. Dargahi, B. (1990). Controlling Mechanism of Local Scouring. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 116(10), 1197–1214. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1990)116:10(1197)
  155. Debnath, K., Nikora, V., Aberle, J., Westrich, B., & Muste, M. (2007). Erosion of Cohesive Sediments: Resuspension, Bed Load, and Erosion Patterns from Field Experiments. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 133(5), 508–520. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2007)133:5(508)
  156. Debnath, K., & Chaudhuri, S. (2010a). Bridge Pier Scour in Clay-Sand Mixed Sediments at Near-Threshold Velocity for Sand. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 136(9), 597–609. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000221
  157. Debnath, K., & Chaudhuri, S. (2010b). Laboratory experiments on local scour around cylinder for clay and clay–sand mixed beds. Engineering Geology, 111(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.12.003
  158. Debnath, K., Chaudhuri, S., & Manik, M. (2014). Local scour around abutment in clay/sand-mixed cohesive sediment bed. ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 20(1), 46–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/09715010.2013.835103
  159. Deng, L., & Cai, C. (2010). Bridge Scour: Prediction, Modeling, Monitoring, and Countermeasures—Review. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 15(2), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000041
  160. Dey, S. (1999). Time-variation of scour in the vicinity of circular piers. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Water, Maritime and Energy, 136(2), 67–75. https://doi.org/10.1680/iwtme.1999.31422
  161. Dey, S. (2003) “Threshold of sediment motion on combined transverse and longitudinal sloping beds”, Journal of Hydraulic Research, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 405-415.
  162. Ehteram, M., & Mahdavi Meymand, A. (2015). Numerical modeling of scour depth at side piers of the bridge. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 280, 68–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2014.11.039
  163. Escauriaza, C., & Sotiropoulos, F. (2011). Initial stages of erosion and bed form development in a turbulent flow around a cylindrical pier. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 116(F3). https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JF001749
  164. Ettema, R., Constantinescu, G., & Melville, B. (2017). Flow-Field Complexity and Design Estimation of Pier-Scour Depth: Sixty Years since Laursen and Toch. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 143(9), 3117006–. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001330
  165. Froehlich, D.C. (1988) Analysis of On-Site Measurements of Scour at Piers. In: Abt, S.R. and Gessler, J., Eds., Hydraulic Engineering—Proceedings of the 1988 National Conference on Hydraulic Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, 534-539.
  166. Froehlich, D. C. (1989). Local scour at bridge abutments. In Proceedings of the 1989 national conference on hydraulic engineering (pp. 13-18).
  167. Ge, L., & Sotiropoulos, F. (2005a). 3D Unsteady RANS Modeling of Complex Hydraulic Engineering Flows. I: Numerical Model. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 131(9), 800–808. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2005)131:9(800)
  168. Ge, L., Lee, S., Sotiropoulos, F., & Sturm, T. (2005b). 3D Unsteady RANS Modeling of Complex Hydraulic Engineering Flows. II: Model Validation and Flow Physics. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 131(9), 809–820. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2005)131:9(809)
  169. Govindasamy, A., Briaud, J., Kim, D., Olivera, F., Gardoni, P., & Delphia, J. (2013). Observation Method for Estimating Future Scour Depth at Existing Bridges. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 139(7), 1165–1175. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000838
  170. Guan, D., Chiew, Y., Wei, M., & Hsieh, S. (2019). Characterization of horseshoe vortex in a developing scour hole at a cylindrical bridge pier. International Journal of Sediment Research, 34(2), 118–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsrc.2018.07.001
  171. Hamzah M. Beakawi Al-Hashemi, Omar S. Baghabra Al-Amoudi, A review on the angle of repose of granular materials, Powder Technology, Volume 330, 2018, Pages 397-417, ISSN 0032-5910, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2018.02.003.
  172. Huang, W., Yang, Q., & Xiao, H. (2009). CFD modeling of scale effects on turbulence flow and scour around bridge piers with Ansys-Fluent. Computers & Fluids, 38(5), 1050–1058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2008.01.029
  173. Ismail, A., Jeng, D., Zhang, L., & Zhang, J. (2013). Predictions of bridge scour: Application of a feed-forward neural network with an adaptive activation function. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 26(5-6), 1540–1549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2012.12.011
  174. Jahangirzadeh, A., Basser, H., Akib, S., Karami, H., Naji, S., & Shamshirband, S. (2014). Experimental and numerical investigation of the effect of different shapes of collars on the reduction of scour around a single bridge pier. PloS One, 9(6), e98592–e98592. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098592
  175. Jain, S. C. (1981). Maximum clear-water scour around circular piers. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, 107(5), 611-626.
  176. Jain, S. C., and Fischer, E. E. (1979). “Scour around bridge piers at high Froude numbers.” FHWA-RD- 79-104, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Washington, DC.
  177. Jiang, H., Cheng, L., & An, H. (2017). On numerical aspects of simulating flow past a circular cylinder. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 85(2), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1002/fld.4376
  178. Jones, J. S., & Sheppard, D. M. (2000). Local scour at complex pier geometries. In Building Partnerships (pp. 1-9).
  179. Karami, H., Basser, H., Ardeshir, A., & Hosseini, S. (2014). Verification of numerical study of scour around spur dikes using experimental data. Water and Environment Journal: WEJ, 28(1), 124–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/wej.12019
  180. Kaya, A. (2010). Artificial neural network study of observed pattern of scour depth around bridge piers. Computers and Geotechnics, 37(3), 413–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2009.10.003
  181. Keaton, J. (2013). Estimating erodible rock durability and geotechnical parameters for scour analysis. Environmental & Engineering Geoscience, 19(4), 319–343. https://doi.org/10.2113/gseegeosci.19.4.319
  182. Keaton, J. R. (2011). Modified Slake Durability Test Applicability for Soil. In International Symposium on Erosion and Landscape Evolution (ISELE), 18-21 September 2011, Anchorage, Alaska (p. 7). American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.
  183. Khalid, M., Muzzammil, M., & Alam, J. (2019). A reliability-based assessment of live bed scour at bridge piers. ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/09715010.2019.1584543
  184. Khan, M., Azamathulla, H., Tufail, M., & Ab Ghani, A. (2012). Bridge pier scour prediction by gene expression programming. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Water Management, 165(9), 481–493. https://doi.org/10.1680/wama.11.00008
  185. Kocaman, S., Seckin, G., & Erduran, K. (2010). 3D model for prediction of flow profiles around bridges. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 48(4), 521–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221686.2010.507340
  186. Kumar, A., Kothyari, U., & Ranga Raju, K. (2012). Flow structure and scour around circular compound bridge piers – A review. Journal of Hydro-Environment Research, 6(4), 251–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jher.2012.05.006
  187. Lagasse PF, Clopper PE, Zevenbergen LW et al (2007) National cooperative highway research program (NCHRP Report 593): countermeasures to protect bridge piers from scour. Transportation research Board, Washington DC
  188. Larras, J. (1963). Profondeurs Maximales d’Erosion des Fonds Mobiles Autour des Piles en Rivere. Ann. Ponts Chaussees, 133, 411-424.
  189. Laursen, E. M., & Toch, A. (1956). Scour around bridge piers and abutments (Vol. 4). Ames, IA: Iowa Highway Research Board.
  190. Laursen, E. M., 1960, Scour at Bridge Crossings, ASCE Hyd. Div. Jour., V 89, No. Hyd 3, May.
  191. Laursen, E M. (1963) An analysis of relief bridge scour. [Journal Article]. ASCE Journal of Hydraulic Division, 89(HY3), 93-109.
  192. LEE, T., JENG, D., ZHANG, G., & HONG, J. (2007). Neural network modeling for estimation of scour depth around bridge piers. Journal of Hydrodynamics. Series B, 19(3), 378–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-6058(07)60073-0
  193. Liang, F., Wang, C., Huang, M., & Wang, Y. (2017). Experimental observations and evaluations of formulae for local scour at pile groups in steady currents. Marine Georesources & Geotechnology, 35(2), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/1064119X.2016.1147510
  194. Liang, F., Wang, C., & Yu, X. (2019). Widths, types, and configurations: Influences on scour behaviors of bridge foundations in non-cohesive soils. Marine Georesources & Geotechnology, 37(5), 578–588. https://doi.org/10.1080/1064119X.2018.1460644
  195. Link, O., Mignot, E., Roux, S., Camenen, B., Escauriaza, C., Chauchat, J., Brevis, W., & Manfreda, S. (2019). Scour at bridge foundations in supercritical flows: An analysis of knowledge gaps. Water (Basel), 11(8), 1656–. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11081656
  196. Lu, J., Hong, J., Su, C., Wang, C., & Lai, J. (2008). Field Measurements and Simulation of Bridge Scour Depth Variations during Floods. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 134(6), 810–821. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2008)134:6(810)
  197. Manes, C., & Brocchini, M. (2015). Local scour around structures and the phenomenology of turbulence. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 779, 309–324. https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2015.389
  198. Melville, B. W. (1975). ‘‘Local scour at bridge sites.’’ Rep. No. 117, Dept. of Civil Engineering, School of Engrg., Univ. of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
  199. Melville, B., & Raudkivi, A. (1977). FLOW CHARACTERISTICS IN LOCAL SCOUR AT BRIDGE PIERS. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 15(4), 373–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221687709499641
  200. Melville, B. (1984). Live-bed Scour at Bridge Piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 110(9), 1234–1247. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1984)110:9(1234)
  201. Melville, B., & Sutherland, A. (1988). Design Method for Local Scour at Bridge Piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 114(10), 1210–1226. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1988)114:10(1210)
  202. Melville, B. (1992). Local Scour at Bridge Abutments. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 118(4), 615–631. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1992)118:4(615)
  203. Melville, B., & Raudkivi, A. (1996). Effects of Foundation Geometry on Bridge Pier Scour. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 122(4), 203–209. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1996)122:4(203)
  204. Melville, B. (1997). Pier and Abutment Scour: Integrated Approach. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 123(2), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1997)123:2(125)
  205. Melville, B., & Chiew, Y. (1999). Time Scale for Local Scour at Bridge Piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 125(1), 59–65. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1999)125:1(59)
  206. Melville, B. W., and Coleman, S. E. (2000). Bridge scour, Water Resources, Colo.
  207. Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO). 1997. Drainage Management Manual, Ministry of Transportation Ontario. Drainage and Hydrology Section, Transportation Engineering Branch, Quality and Standards Division.
  208. Mohamed, T., Noor, M., Ghazali, A., & Huat, B. (2005). Validation of Some Bridge Pier Scour Formulae Using Field and Laboratory Data. American Journal of Environmental Sciences, 1(2), 119–125. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajessp.2005.119.125
  209. Mohamed, Y., Abdel-Aal, G., Nasr-Allah, T., & Shawky, A. (2013). Experimental and theoretical investigations of scour at bridge abutment. Journal of King Saud University. Engineering Sciences, 28(1), 32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksues.2013.09.005
  210. Nagel, T., Chauchat, J., Bonamy, C., Liu, X., Cheng, Z., & Hsu, T. (2020). Three-dimensional scour simulations with a two-phase flow model. Advances in Water Resources, 138, 103544–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2020.103544
  211. Najafzadeh, M., Barani, G., & Hessami Kermani, M. (2013a). GMDH based back propagation algorithm to predict abutment scour in cohesive soils. Ocean Engineering, 59, 100–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2012.12.006
  212. Najafzadeh, M., Barani, G., & Azamathulla, H. (2013b). GMDH to predict scour depth around a pier in cohesive soils. Applied Ocean Research, 40, 35–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2012.12.004
  213. Namaee, M., & Sui, J. (2019). Local scour around two side-by-side cylindrical bridge piers under ice-covered conditions. International Journal of Sediment Research, 34(4), 355–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsrc.2018.11.007
  214. Nasr-Allah, T., Moussa, Y., Abdel-Aal, G., & Awad, A. (2016). Experimental and numerical simulation of scour at bridge abutment provided with different arrangements of collars. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 55(2), 1455–1463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2016.01.021
  215. National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2010b, “Estimation of Scour Depth at Bridge Abutments,” NCHRP Project 24-20, Draft Final Report, Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Science, Washington, D.C. (Ettema, R., T. Nakato, and M. Muste).
  216. Neill, C. R. 1964. Local scour around bridge piers. Council of Alberta, Highway and River Eng. Div., Alberta, Canada.
  217. Neill, C. R. (ed) (1973). RTAC Guide to Bridge Hydraulics, University of Toronto Press.
  218. Nielsen, A., Liu, X., Sumer, B., & Fredsøe, J. (2013). Flow and bed shear stresses in scour protections around a pile in a current. Coastal Engineering (Amsterdam), 72, 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2012.09.001
  219. Olabarrieta, M., Medina, R., & Castanedo, S. (2010). Effects of wave–current interaction on the current profile. Coastal Engineering (Amsterdam), 57(7), 643–655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2010.02.003
  220. Olsen, Nils Reidar B. (2018). SSIIM User’s Manual. Department Of Civil and Environmental Engineering the Norwegian University of Science and Technology
  221. Olsen, Nils Reidar B. (1999). Class Notes: Computational; Fluid Dynamics in Hydraulic and Sedimentation Engineering. Department Of Civil and Environmental Engineering the Norwegian University of Science and Technology
  222. Pal, M., Singh, N., & Tiwari, N. (2011). Support vector regression based modeling of pier scour using field data. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 24(5), 911–916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2010.11.002
  223. Pandey, M., Ahmad, Z., & Sharma, P. (2018). Scour around impermeable spur dikes: a review. ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 24(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/09715010.2017.1342571
  224. Park, C., Park, H., & Cho, Y. (2017). Evaluation of the applicability of pier local scour formulae using laboratory and field data. Marine Georesources & Geotechnology, 35(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/1064119X.2014.954658
  225. Patankar, S. V. (1980) “Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow”, McGraw-Hill Book Company New York
  226. Qi, W., & Gao, F. (2014). Physical modeling of local scour development around a large-diameter monopile in combined waves and current. Coastal Engineering (Amsterdam), 83, 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2013.10.007
  227. Qi, M., Li, J., & Chen, Q. (2016). Comparison of existing equations for local scour at bridge piers: parameter influence and validation. Natural Hazards (Dordrecht), 82(3), 2089–2105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2287-z
  228. Rambabu, M., Rao, S., & Sundar, V. (2003). Current-induced scour around a vertical pile in cohesive soil. Ocean Engineering, 30(7), 893–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-8018(02)00063-X
  229. Raudkivi, A., & Ettema, R. (1985). Scour at Cylindrical Bridge Piers in Armored Beds. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 111(4), 713–731. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1985)111:4(713)
  230. Rhie, C.-M and Chow, W.L. (1983) “Numerical study of the turbulent flow past and airfoil with trailing edge separation”, AIAA Journal, Vol. 21, No. 11.
  231. Richardson, E., & Lagasse, P. (1996). Stream Stability and Scour at Highway Bridges. Water International, 21(3), 108–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508069608686502
  232. Richardson EV, Davis SR (2001) Evaluating scour at bridges. Hydraulic engineering circular no. 18 (HEC-18), Report no. FHWA: NHI 01-001, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC
  233. Richardson, J., & Panchang, V. (1998). Three-Dimensional Simulation of Scour-Inducing Flow at Bridge Piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 124(5), 530–540. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1998)124:5(530)
  234. Roulund, A., Sumer, B., Fredsøe, J., & Michelsen, J. (2005). Numerical and experimental investigation of flow and scour around a circular pile. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 534, 351–401. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112005004507
  235. Salaheldin, T., Imran, J., & Chaudhry, M. (2004). Numerical Modeling of Three-Dimensional Flow Field Around Circular Piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 130(2), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2004)130:2(91)
  236. Salim, M. and J.S. Jones, 1995, “Effects of Exposed Pile Foundations on Local Pier Scour,” Proceedings ASCE Water Resources Engineering Conference, San Antonio, TX.
  237. Salim, M. and J.S. Jones, 1996, “Scour Around Exposed Pile Foundations,” Proceedings ASCE North American and Water and Environment Congress, ’96, Anaheim, CA (also issued as FHWA Memo).
  238. Salim, M. and J.S. Jones, 1999, Scour Around Exposed Pile Foundations,” ASCE Compendium, Stream Stability and Scour at Highway Bridges, Richardson and Lagasse (eds.), Reston, VA.
  239. Schlichting, H. (1979) “Boundary layer theory”, McGraw-Hill.
  240. Sheppard, D., & Miller, W. (2006). Live-Bed Local Pier Scour Experiments. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 132(7), 635–642. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2006)132:7(635)
  241. Sheppard, D., Demir, H., & Melville, B. (2011). Scour at wide piers and long skewed piers. Transportation Research Board.
  242. Sheppard, D., Melville, B., & Demir, H. (2014). Evaluation of Existing Equations for Local Scour at Bridge Piers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 140(1), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000800
  243. Sheppard, D., Odeh, M., & Glasser, T. (2004). Large Scale Clear-Water Local Pier Scour Experiments. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 130(10), 957–963. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2004)130:10(957)
  244. Shields, A. (1936). Application of similarity principles and turbulence research to bed-load movement (translated version). Mitteilungen der Preußischen Versuchsanstalt für Wasserbau.
  245. Smith, W.L., 1999, “Local Structure-Induced Sediment Scour at Pile Groups,” M.S. Thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
  246. Sonia Devi, Y., & Barbhuiya, A. (2017). Bridge pier scour in cohesive soil: a review. Sadhana (Bangalore), 42(10), 1803–1819. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-017-0698-5
  247. Sturm, T., Ettema, R., & Melville, B. (2011). Evaluation of bridge-scour research abutment and contraction scour processes and prediction. National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.
  248. Sumer, B., Fredsøe, J., & Christiansen, N. (1992a). Scour Around Vertical Pile in Waves. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 118(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(1992)118:1(15)
  249. Sumer, B. M., Christiansen, N., and Fredsoe, J. (1992b). “Time scale of scour around a vertical pile.” Proc., 2nd Int. Offshore and Polar Engrg. Conf., International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers, San Francisco, Calif., Vol. III, 308-315.
  250. Sumer, B., Christiansen, N., & Fredsøe, J. (1993). Influence of Cross Section on Wave Scour around Piles. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 119(5), 477–495. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(1993)119:5(477)
  251. Sumer, B., & Fredsøe, J. (1998). Wave Scour around Group of Vertical Piles. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 124(5), 248–256. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(1998)124:5(248)
  252. Sumer, B., & Fredsøe, J. (2001). Wave Scour around a Large Vertical Circular Cylinder. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 127(3), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2001)127:3(125)
  253. Sumer, B., Whitehouse, R., & Tørum, A. (2001). Scour around coastal structures: a summary of recent research. Coastal Engineering, 44(2), 153–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3839(01)00024-2
  254. Sumer, B., Hatipoglu, F., & Fredsøe, J. (2007). Wave Scour around a Pile in Sand, Medium Dense, and Dense Silt. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 133(1), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(2007)133:1(14)
  255. Toth, E., & Brandimarte, L. (2011). Prediction of local scour depth at bridge piers under clear-water and live-bed conditions: Comparison of literature formulae and Artificial Neural networks. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 13(4), 812–824. https://doi.org/10.2166/hydro.2011.065
  256. Van Rijn, L. C. (1993). Principles of sediment transport in rivers, estuaries and coastal seas.
  257. Vanoni, V.A., ed., 1975, Sedimentation Engineering: American Society of Civil Engineers, Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice, No. 54, 745 p.
  258. Wang, C., Yu, X., & Liang, F. (2017). A review of bridge scour: mechanism, estimation, monitoring and countermeasures. Natural Hazards (Dordrecht), 87(3), 1881–1906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-2842-2
  259. Wardhana, K., & Hadipriono, F. (2003). Analysis of Recent Bridge Failures in the United States. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 17(3), 144–150. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2003)17:3(144)
  260. White, C. M. (1940). The Equilibrium of Grains on the Bed of a Stream. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 174(958), 322–338. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1940.0023
  261. Whitehouse, R. (2004). Marine scour at large foundations. In: Second international conference on scour and erosion (ICSE-2), Singapore
  262. Wu, Peng. Hirshfield, Faye. Sui, Jue-yi. (2015). Local scour around bridge abutments under ice covered condition-an experimental study. International Journal of Sediment Research, 30(1), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-6279(15)60004-X
  263. Wu, P., Balachandar, R., & Sui, J. (2016). Local Scour around Bridge Piers under Ice-Covered Conditions. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 142(1), 4015038–. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001063
  264. Wu, W., Rodi, W., & Wenka, T. (2000). 3D Numerical Modeling of Flow and Sediment Transport in Open Channels. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 126(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2000)126:1(4)
  265. Xiong, W., Cai, C., Kong, B., & Kong, X. (2016). CFD Simulations and Analyses for Bridge-Scour Development Using a Dynamic-Mesh Updating Technique. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 30(1), 4014121–. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000458
  266. Yalin, M. S. (1971). Theory of hydraulic models. Macmillan International Higher Education.
  267. Yankielun, N., & Zabilansky, L. (1999). Laboratory Investigation of Time-Domain Reflectometry System for Monitoring Bridge Scour. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering (New York, N.Y.), 125(12), 1279–1284. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1999)125:12(1279)
  268. Zaid, M., Yazdanfar, Z., Chowdhury, H., & Alam, F. (2019). Numerical modeling of flow around a pier mounted in a flat and fixed bed. Energy Procedia, 160, 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2019.02.118
  269. Zanke, U., Hsu, T., Roland, A., Link, O., & Diab, R. (2011). Equilibrium scour depths around piles in noncohesive sediments under currents and waves. Coastal Engineering (Amsterdam), 58(10), 986–991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2011.05.011
  270. Zhao, M., Zhu, X., Cheng, L., & Teng, B. (2012). Experimental study of local scour around subsea caissons in steady currents. Coastal Engineering (Amsterdam), 60(1), 30–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2011.08.004
  271. Zheng, S., Zheng, S., Xu, Y., Xu, Y., Cheng, H., Cheng, H., Wang, B., Wang, B., Lu, X., & Lu, X. (2018). Assessment of bridge scour in the lower, middle, and upper Yangtze River estuary with riverbed sonar profiling techniques. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 190(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-6393-5
  272. Zhu, H., Zhou, Z., Yang, R., & Yu, A. (2007). Discrete particle simulation of particulate systems: Theoretical developments. Chemical Engineering Science, 62(13), 3378–3396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2006.12.089
  273. Zhu, H.P. Zhou, Z.Y. Hou, Q.F. Yu A.B. (2011). Linking discrete particle simulation to continuum process modelling for granular matter： Theory and application. Particuology, 9(4), 342–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.partic.2011.01.002
  274. Zhu, Zw., Liu, Zq.. (2012). CFD prediction of local scour hole around bridge piers. Journal of Central South University, 19(1), 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-012-1001-x

전문가 Q&A: 자주 묻는 질문

Q1: 이 연구에서 SSIIM 소프트웨어를 선택한 이유는 무엇입니까?

A1: SSIIM은 오픈 소스 CFD 소프트웨어이면서도 퇴적물 이동 해석을 위한 기능이 내장되어 있어 세굴 시뮬레이션에 이상적인 도구였습니다. 특히 입자 크기, 안식각, 점착력 등 다양한 토질 매개변수를 모델에 직접 입력하고 그 영향을 분석할 수 있는 유연성을 제공했기 때문에 본 연구의 목적에 가장 적합했습니다.

Q2: 연구 결과, 미세 모래(0.05mm)의 초기 침식률이 시뮬레이션에서 예상보다 낮게 나타났습니다. 이는 수치 모델에 대해 무엇을 시사합니까?

A2: 이는 SSIIM 모델이 침식률을 계산할 때 사용하는 ‘활성 퇴적층(active sediment layer)’ 두께가 D50(중앙 입경)을 기본값으로 사용하기 때문일 가능성이 높습니다. 미세 입자로 구성된 토양은 입자 단위가 아닌 덩어리(chunk) 단위로 침식될 수 있는데, 현재 모델이 이러한 물리적 현상을 완벽하게 포착하지 못함을 시사합니다. 따라서 시간에 따른 세굴 변화와 미세 토양의 침식 메커니즘을 더 정확히 모사하기 위한 수치 모델의 개선이 필요합니다.

Q3: 연구가 청수 세굴(clear-water scour) 조건에 국한된 이유는 무엇입니까?

A3: 청수 세굴은 유사(sediment)의 유입이 없어 침식만 발생하므로, 명확한 최대 평형 세굴 깊이에 도달합니다. 이는 수치 시뮬레이션에서 결과를 분석하고 비교하기에 더 용이한 조건입니다. 반면, 유사 이동이 활발한 유수 세굴(live-bed scour)은 침식과 퇴적이 반복되는 복잡한 주기적 거동을 보여, 특정 시점의 최대 깊이를 정의하기 어렵기 때문에 초기 연구 범위에서는 제외되었습니다.

Q4: 경사면의 임계 전단 응력 감소를 모델링하기 위해 Brooks(1963) 공식을 사용했지만, 그 매개변수가 실제 측정된 안식각과 직접적으로 일치하지 않았습니다. 이것의 의미는 무엇입니까?

A4: 이는 경사면 효과에 대한 현재의 경험적 모델이 가진 한계를 보여줍니다. 최적의 수치 매개변수는 물리적 특성을 직접 입력해서가 아니라, 실험 결과와 일치하도록 맞추는 과정을 통해 찾아졌습니다. 이는 향후 안식각과 같은 물리적 특성을 직접 입력하여 토사의 붕괴(sand slide)와 임계 전단 응력 감소를 통합적으로 계산할 수 있는 더 견고한 퇴적물 모델이 필요함을 의미합니다.

Q5: 테스트한 12개의 경험식 중 어떤 것이 가장 성능이 좋았으며, 그 이유는 무엇입니까?

A5: TAMU(Texas A&M University) 방법이 가장 우수한 성능을 보였습니다. 이 방법은 안전에 치명적인 과소예측 사례가 없으면서도 SSIIM 시뮬레이션 결과와 가장 근접한 예측값을 제공했습니다. 이는 TAMU 방법이 다른 오래된 공식들보다 더 많은 토질 및 유동 매개변수를 고려하여 현실을 더 잘 반영하기 때문인 것으로 분석됩니다.

결론: 더 높은 품질과 생산성을 향한 길

본 연구는 토양의 안식각과 점착력 같은 매개변수가 교각 세굴 깊이를 결정하는 데 있어 부차적인 요소가 아닌 핵심적인 역할을 한다는 것을 수치적으로 증명했습니다. 이러한 요인들을 무시한 기존의 예측 방식은 부정확하고 잠재적으로 위험한 설계를 초래할 수 있습니다. CFD 시뮬레이션은 이러한 실제 현장의 복잡성을 설계에 통합하여 안전성과 경제성을 동시에 확보할 수 있는 필수적인 도구입니다.

(주)에스티아이씨앤디에서는 고객이 수치해석을 직접 수행하고 싶지만 경험이 없거나, 시간이 없어서 용역을 통해 수치해석 결과를 얻고자 하는 경우 전문 엔지니어를 통해 CFD consulting services를 제공합니다. 귀하께서 당면하고 있는 연구프로젝트를 최소의 비용으로, 최적의 해결방안을 찾을 수 있도록 지원합니다.

  • 연락처 : 02-2026-0442
  • 이메일 : flow3d@stikorea.co.kr

저작권 정보

  • 이 콘텐츠는 Iqbal Singh Budwal의 논문 “Influence of Soil Parameters on Local Pier Scour Depth”를 기반으로 한 요약 및 분석 자료입니다.
  • 출처: https://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/handle/10012/17156

이 자료는 정보 제공 목적으로만 사용됩니다. 무단 상업적 사용을 금지합니다. Copyright © 2025 STI C&D. All rights reserved.

PDF View