1?- Cj.".JjJ[ ,; :~.

~ r:r
~ Lj;! Fi /i' .
__
'
~HI.t< L7 (
/-
..
. ~".
,,;,
L

._ _t ·J~tJk~.'r------·---~'"

~~.

oordlltllENT OF' ~ .
~OF WATER RESOURCES
)

:.... _~::". : -_;-'..... ~:::.~ . .:.~..,;,::~:~.... ~:".~-:........."'......~..i'>.:;;,;...~~~-:-~~ ...~_'~..;'..>,~i: ....~:.;-:.~.:.:.....;,;::,.:~;.;.'Sv.;~ .. ~;.:.r;.,"-

GUIDELINES.
FOR
DESIGN OF DESILTINGBASINS
(PRESSURE FLOW)

,
i

T··;
I
lilt
CENTRAL WATER & POWER RESEARCH STATION j!
Khradakwas~a, Pune - 411 024
W'~t:
I'~II
'Iiii:'ll
11."

.lIt:
, I
I,

'I!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --==-----=._-.::...'--"-.. -.' ~"'-
 .
J
~
,, ,
~
:3 CWPRS : Guidelines for Design of Desilting Basins

]~ ~ ...

?
,~ ~
.~

.,:), r~

I·t..:.
..,." PREFACE
~ f:?~
;)
,
.....
Use of desilting basins in the water conductor systems of thermal, nuclear and f~~
tlJo' hydel projects has often caused concern in the minds of designers due to the
I apprehension regarding their settling efficiency and performance in respect of
)"""\
\\.-.' flushing. While ascertaining the adequacy of the water conductor system as a whole, It
~
.,\. ....
possibility of its silting or damages to the turbines and otherequipment due to silt
has to be considered. Various procedures for estimation of settling efficiency of the r'
-,;. desilting basin based on theoretical analysis coupled with laboratory and prototype ~
\ .... t
experiment have been attempted by research works all over the world and several
~
\ .... procedures have been derived and suggested for use. Also hydraulic model studies,
for individual projects, have been used as the principle tool for assessing the f,r.
\,. -\
performance of desilting basin in re~pect of settling as well as flushing. All these
fc-~:.;

approaches involve assumptions which leave the designer in doubt while choosing r
'"
o

'\'. "

any particular method. With a view to appraise the design and research engineer of ~;.
,"'"... the several approaches, a brief review of the theoretical, experimental and analytical

:",
-. work carried out so far is presented in this report. Central Water and Power Research
Station which is the premier hydraulic research organization in India has also
f~

~
t.
conducted several model studies on desilting basins. The experience ofCWPRS
---
.\...
on the various aspects of research and design practices is also presented in the ,
..... report.
\~
~:

,......
... The information from various sources has contributed greatly to the realization of
~... this report. While every source of information, save the references listed at the end,
,,- could not be acknowledged individually, specific mention must be made of
organizations like Central Water Commission, National Hydro-electric Power
......
~:r
Corporation, NationalThermal Power Corporation, Nathpa Jhakri Power Corporation
as well as authorities of Trishuli, Baira-Suil, Shanan, Chukha, Kosi and Dul-Hasti
r
~.

'"."" Projects who made available the necessary funds, data and designs for conducting
-
,v·
... f '.. .-
lne SlUUles at me
_~ ... ~ _ • • • ~-:-- :-.'
lJVV~H;:;.
f\ .
~ ..
f
t"

=- ,

t V. MI. Bendre
,
ill Director
~

.')

..~
-
-\

"$
'".,
....

~
-
"
~
~

-
.L .

.(
1
,
~ CWPRS : Guidelines for Design olDesi/fing Basins

•~ CONTENTS . [.

L
~
•
,I

Ii:-
r,-.
~

111:
jr~ '
'I

"1'li
lit!
~
. _..
. : llfll
;',. I;
!;f
..~

\~ ,I ,
CWPRS : Guidelinesfor Design ofDesilting Basins
\,:,
CHAPTER -I
.':'
INTRODUCTION
.~
River flows carry considerable sediment load due to which a variety of complicated problems arise be
~ it a multipurpose dam or a diversion weir for irrigation, navigation or hydel channe/or storage tank.
~ The water sediment equilibrium is very sensitive and intricate. Despite the quantum of work done in
this field, the laws of sediment transport are not clearly understood. Sediment plays such a vital role
.~.
in the design of hydraulic structures that a new branch of engineering known as "Sedimentation
Engineering" has come· into existence.
.:J .
.;J Success of an irrigation canal system depends to a large extent on the degree of control achieved on
tt1i. . the sediment entry into the off-take channel. If the channel draws sediment load in excess of its
-~ II
• ..,
~, I transporting capacity and effective measures are not taken for the ejection of unwanted sediment
load entering the channel, the channel would gradually get silted up resulting in a. decrease in the
~l
... I
carrying capacity affecting irrigation of the command area, .
.:J~
In the case of hydel projects,. heavy sediment load, particularly sharp edged silVsand leads to
~! damage of the turbine runner blades/buckets due to abrasion resulting in decrease in. the efficiency
~ .• of the power plant. In many cases abroad as well as in India, it has been found that the turbines/pelton
wheels have been considerably damaged after 2000 to 3000 hours of operation because of the
:j presence of sandin water. In some cases the turbines are required to be repaired twice in a year.
This results in shut down of units for considerable duration thereby causing enormous loss of power
3 and revenue. In the case of thermal/nuclear power projects; the presence of sediment in the water
may affect the performance of the pumps and water conductor system. The deposition of sediment in
~ ...
the ~ondenser tubes may also reduce the efficiency of heat transfer besides requiring replacement of
fue~bes. .
,.-'.J fI
.~!. ! The problem of sediment exclusion is so complicated and enormous that it is required to be tackled in
different ways such as:
~l
~ Watershed management.
~. > Stabilization of river course by training and channel improvements.
~ Sediment exclusion devices at the diversion and head works.
.~
)0- Sediment ejection devices in the canals
...... '.
:~'.

......, The sediment yield can be reduced by judicious watershed management by adopting various measures
'-' such as afforestation, adopting suitable crop pattern, gulley control works etc. Stall (1) cited a
-., number of cases where conservation programme successfully reduced the incoming sediment volume.
:~

Allen and Welch (2) stated that the sediment yield dropped sharply after flood retarding structures
.....
'~ were installed. The reduction ranged from 48 to 60 %. For large reservoirs with large drainage areas,
however, it should be recognized that it may not be economically feasible to control or reduce the
1~'
_. 1
sediment i.nflow,

:~J. . . . The stabilization of the river course and the training of the rivers also reduce the sediment load as
.~/ this results in reduction of the migration of the channels and also the bank erosion. These methods

~ :r\·\;~l~~·-:-:-~--------------------­
1
~::-,:~:~,;:,
.?.'~ : ,: ;':;'
v;; -..-.. --._-
,?
,~:;;
J
 .~ .,..~

CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins.

..... t' )
have their own limitations depending upon the various considerations. Provision of the sediment
excluders in barrages is a common and age-old practice adopted in the northern part of India. However
it has been found that their efficiency is limited to, generally, 30 to 40 %in the case of coarse fraction~
~l
of sediment which move as bed load. Moreover, the satisfactory functioning of the sediment excluder
depends upon the availability of adequate head for generating the required velocity for transporting
the sediment through the tunnels effectively. It .has been found in the' case of many barrages that
-.,..
the required head difference is many a time not available during the floods when the sediment exclusion
is most needed. The bottom panels, surface panels or skimming platforms are also provided at the
..',
head works of the branching canals for reducing the sediment entry into the branch canal.These • .c-,
measures, therefore, can be classified under sedimerlt~xclusion devices though they are not provided

.'"
in the river but on the canals. The efficacy of such arran'gements is limited as they are generally more
effective for exClusion of the bed load. .
"c
Several ejectors have been constructed in the canals especially in the north India for ejection of
the excessive arid undesirable sediment entering the canal. They are deSigned by taking advantage.
of distribution of the suspended sediment load in trapping the heavily sediment laden layers near the
bed and hence their efficiency mainly depends on the distribution of the sediment over the vertical in
the approach channel. These are also found to be more suitable for exclusion of the coarse sediment. l"'
.' ~~

~"
Attempts have been made for changing the distribution of the sediment on a vertical by enlarging the ..
~. . -~
'approach channel so that th~ percentage of the sediment travelling on the bed is increased to achieve .,:

a higher efficiency of the ejectors. This, however, results in the deposition in the approach channel
and has met with limited success. Other methods such as vortex tubes are also provided across the
e.J
bed of the canal for extracting the sediment moving along the bed. However, these tubes are found to 4;
be effective for Froude number higher than 0.8 and as such these are useful for removal of only very
coarse sediment. Studies have been conducted in IPRI, Amritsar (3), and by Curikriton et al (4), on 4£~
vortex type sediment ejector which function as a solid-liquid separator on the principle of vorticity.
This device is also useful mainly for the removal of the sediment moving as bed load. ~I
i

i/i4.
However, in the case of desilting basins, it is possible to achieve the desired efficiency by adjusting !
~

the shape and size of the basin for obtaining the required settlement of sediment particles. Desilting ~id
basins are used in water conductor systems of hydel, thermal and irrigation projects. In the case of
hydel and thermal projects undesirable medium and coarse sediment are excluded through the desilting .+" ~­
basins. In the case of irrigation projects, the desilting basins are used to limit the sediment concentration "
in the canal to its carrying capacity on the downstream. Several model studies were made at the '-"1
"
CWPRS for various types of desilting basins for improving discharge capacity and optimizing the

~J~
design. Many of, them have since been put into operation. Their performance in respect of settling and
flushing has been reported to be excellent.

'-,;t, ;
.,
'·.1;; ..-r

.\

.1
2

,
. f.

•
~;
'--'·1' :' CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesiltin[? Basins
I~ ':!. CHAPTER -II
I'~"~
. 1.1
TYPES AND FUNCTIONS OF DESILTING BASINS
)~ J
rl . Desilting basins are also known by other names such as settling tanks, settling basins, debris tanks,
~ J.'
:.-r. q sediment traps, decantation chambers etc. Desiltingbasins can be classified into various types as
indicated below. .
~::I
:' ,;i
-~ . ::;j SI. No. Type of basin Basis of classification
,-, '.~
. "." "1
~

:~:,tj
,r"';1;
1. Natural or artificial Mode of construction
2. Manual or mechanical or Method of cleaning
~':
3. hydraulic removal of deposition Continuous or intermittent Mode of operation
,~ .. ,

: • <' 4. . Open channel or closed conduit Type of flow

':J':.,..
~ 5. Single or multiple unit
.

Configuration/layout
~.-
, I. ' t .
~.:. NATURAL DESILTING BASIN
:~;.; ..
In the earlier days low lying areas adjacent to the canal were used as natural desilting basins which

~J: were generally known as settling tanks. Sometimes part or entire flow of the canal is diverted into low
lying areas along the banks which were converted into settling tanks by providing high embankments

'~Jjill . along their periphery. Water is let in at the upstream end. and is taken out on the downstream end of
the settling tank. Special arrangement for achieving the proper distribution of the flow at the inlet or<for
skimming of the top layers of water containing less sediment at the outlet were not possible in such
case as the inlets and outlets were made by simply cutting the banks to the required width and depth

~· ·;·l· ·<·
for diverting the required flow. As such the settling performances of these basins were not expected to
be very high. After sometime when the low lying area gets silted up and the resultant velocity through
,~ .
"'. --:, settling basin is no longer small to induce settling of the sediment load, the tank is abandoned. Such
'.~j; tanks were provided on the Western Yamuna Canal and on the Upper Bari Doab Canal before the
. ./ . development of silt ejector. According to Uppal (5), these have functioned successfully.

~Jl
)~~~.:
'-"
..
.,

-.~
ARTIFICIAL DESILTING BA~lN$ .
.. -. . ---- ._- .-
.~

f" These types of. basins are constructed in the water conductor system by enlarging the area for
-"V'
. reducing the velocity to the desired extent depending upon- 'the size of materia! to be iemoved..
~:~.'.
__ I,· Generally basins are designed for the settlement of sediment coarser than 0.2 'mm in diameter in
the case of lll~ium.bea<Lplaf)ls.Jn the case of small head project, higher velocity-is-permissible
'·1·: when the
'~~"I particles coarser than .Q..2 rn.!Jl ar§ permissible to spme ~).(t~nt. In the cas~,Q.t. high head
'..... .
hydeI plant or cooling water system for nuclear or thermal projects, sediment upto·O.1mrn,9! sometimes
)-~~
:-.'-'1 '. even upto 0.075 mm diameter ~s. required to be rempved. . --.. . - ' - .... "..,.,,_._-

In specially constructed basins, the inlet isYiQR.erly oriented and d~§ign~Q..1o achieve satisfactory
distribution of flow in the desilting basln:-j'n addition~ thegrid~ or screens are also provided near the
inlet for reducing the turbulence. Theouile,t_ii~I~_().9r:i~mtesL~m:t9.?sigoe~tQL~kirpmfng"Qfftbe floiN
without disturbance to the already-settled sediment at the bottom neqr the outlet zone.

T''fe''>p ':
-~
\

'J
\ ''f
 CWPRS : Guideline~v for Design ofDesilting Basil1.\'
". ~"':.

;·I:l{,~

:';~J .,ar
-
..~~~.~
BASIN WITH MANUAL CLEANING
-~~r
,~
The deposited sediment is required to be removed for maintaining its settling efficiency. When I

mechanical removal is not permissible due to the high cost of operation or when hydraulic flushing
I
;..... ,

(7
is not possible due to inadequate head, manual cleaning is resorted to. In the case of hydel projects,'
~
hydraulic flushing is possible. In the case of thermal/nuclear projects, mechanical removal can be
allowed for in the cost estimates. Hence manual cleaning is generally adopted in the case of irrigation t~~
..... ~
!
;

projects. In this case the size of the basin is decided mainly from the point of view of storage of the
,,~,~.
sediment which is likely to be deposited during the entire monsoon period. When the monsoon

-'I~
period is over or when the canal is shut down during the period of no demand for irrigation water,
cleaning is done manually. Such an arrangement has been proposed for a desilting basin on Periyar
Main Canal which has been designed to accommodate the expected volume of 25,000 cum of annual
sediment load in the monsoon.

Manual cleaning type of desilting basins are some times adopted for thermal power projects where
;<i&.J
··I~-,·
discharge requirement is very small compared to that of hydel projects. In some such cases, the
required water is directly pumped from the river. To avoid two-stage pumping under these conditions
manual cleaning type of desilting basins are provided. Such basins have been provided for Assam
Gas Based power Project at Kathalguri, for a super thermal power project at Talcher, Orissa and
;kf' [.
.~~~,f

11!f~-
Tripura Gas Based Power Project, Tripura.

BASIN WITH HYDRAULIC FLUSHING ~:~~f I ;

. ~~f:J

j:t
When sufficient head is available between the Full Supply Level in the basin and Highest Flood Level
in the outlet Channel near the river, the provision of hydraulic flushing system becomes convenient
and economical. In this case, the bed of the basin is given a steeper slope and the deposited sediment
on the bed is periodically flushed by opening the low level large size outlets, or sediment is allowed to
settle continuously on the steep hopper botto,m through which it slips into the holes provided at the
/i1£ I I

bottom and is then sucked through flushing conduit or trench which outfalls into the nearby drainage :;14.~
channel.

BASIN WITH MECHANICAL SEDIMENT REMOVAL

When adequate head for hydrauiic flushing is not available, the flushing conduits are allowed to
discharge the sediment load into a sediment pit or well from where the sediment is pumped into the
river. Some1imes pumps are directly connected to the flushing system through booster pumps to get
'11
;~;~11
f.l/ "-
the required head. This arrangement is suitable when the designed discharge of the basin is small ;~i ""
:~'.l
and, therefore, the discharge in the fiushliag system :s also furth€r !lO'ss. In. the case of the basin with ;g. ,.,I':
i'~.' ,<
large discharge, the quantity of the sediment laden water to be pumped becomes enormous. Under
such circumstances mechanical removal by means of dredge pumps mounted on floating barges is
preferable. Such an arrangement has been provided for Soccaro settling basin (6) at San Acacia
Diversion Dam in New Mexico.

BASIN WITH COMBINATION OF MECHANICAL & HYDRAULIC FLUSHING

Sometimes the accumulated sediment on the bed is scraped by mechanical scrapers towards the
location of the sluice from where it is syphoned or sluiced. Such an arrangement has been provided
on All American Canal (7) at Imperial Dam across Colorado river in Arizona and California in U.S.A.

-:--:=.-=-..:-:..... -
-·_:'J..~-\"''''-·t;.''@K;&;'iln)lit-'m ...¥'i>we:ebtt·)ft: ,., ..~ i'
.~

:.,"
.', -'II

\
,
~ " CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ot'Desilting Basins
J
BASIN WITH INTERMITTENT FLUSHING
1 .In the case of the basin where hydraulic flushing is proposed from the low level outlets, the sediment

•
).
is allowed to accumulate on the bed of the basin for some period. After sufficient accumulation of the
sediment, the low level outlets at the downstream end are opened and the water level is lowered for
t generating high velocity for flushing. After flushing out the deposition, the outlets are closed, the I
i basin is filled and the discharge on the downst.ream canal.is resumed. T.hiS is a simple arran.gement. i\!

r
,
~
However, it needs a provision of ~ balancing reservoir on th_~_do~'l?~!eam fo~£~tinuin9 t~~lo~o
~J~~~.r~~2-:~.~..,9_~~~~ . ~~~_!!~~~~<~"~.~.!~~~"~: Such an arrangement has been provided for Trisuli
ueslltmg Basm In Nepal (8). .. . .
I
~ .

r BASIN WITH CONTINUOUS FLY.S.HJN,~

...::,__.... ..... _ .. , . '. _._,,_,,' __
~,-=- ~ .--.Jo-.- •. ---- ....••-_ ...
i
-) In this case, the sediment settling on the steep slope of the hopper into deep and narrow flushing
\ trench on the bed of desilting basin from where it is flushed continuously. The flushing cOhduit is
~.
j

'\
located either below or by the side of flushing trench and it is connected with flushing trench with'
~ openings at closer interval. The size of the flushing conduit and the sizes and the spacings of the
openings from the settling trench to the flushing conduit varies from upstream to downstream. The
~ velocity in the flushing conduit generally varies from 2.5 to 4 m/s. This system requires 10 to 20 % of
the inlet discharge for the flushing of the sediment. This type of arrangement has been provided for
J Basin in Siul (9), Kahalgaon (10) projects .
.t
OPEN CHANNEL DESILTING BASIN
...\
I These types of desilting basins are provided on the irrigation canals or in the run of the river systems
J. where atleast upstream reach of the power canal from the diversion weir runs in open channeL Such
types of basins are common and some of the examples could be cited as desilting basin for the
;)

•.,..
Trisuli (8), Shanan (11), Kahalgaon (10) and Kosi Projects (12) .

j CONDUITTYPE DESILTING BASIN

J.
These types of basins are provided for the diversion works located in the very narrow and steep
~ valleys where the intake has to be located abutting the hills and the flow is required to be diverted to
the head race tunnel through the hills. In such case the desilting basin with open channel flow requires
J
large size of opening which may not be economical or possible on account of the characteristics of
.-"'\ the rock. Under such circumstances the excavation above the FSL of the basin is avoided by, converti.ng.
the basin into a conduit. The forward velocity is, however, restricted to achieve the desir.ed settlement
~. at specified dia'meter of the sediment. Such types of basins have been constructed for Chukha and
Tala Hydel Project in Bhutan (13), Dul-Hasti (14), Sewa (51) and Nathpa Jhakri,(15),(16) in J & K
~.
State, Chamera Stage-II (47), Parbati Stage II (48) in Himachal Pradesh, Dhauliganga (49) in
~ Uttaranchal and Teesta (50) Project in Sikkim.

~. SINGLE OR MULTIPLE UNIT BASIN

~ Many a time the basin is required to be divided into multiple units for achieving flexibility in the
operation or for limiting the size of the tunnels in the hills. In the case of the Shanan Hydel Project
~ (11), the basin has been divided into six compartments for obtaining the continuous flow to the
1 5
f
:;)
\

?
J
\

;;
 .~. ,""

: i

CWPRS: Guideliiiesjor DeS:?12 ofDesiltin,:; ,':lsi"s :~~.~ • I~

power house withintermiUent flushing arrangement'for each unit separately. In the case of Chukha,
,I

,.-
i

. 'I(
.~

Dul-Hasti and Nathpa Jhakri Projects, the basins have been divided into 2, 2 and 4 units respectively
depending upon the number of turbines and permissible size of tunnels. Similar arrangement has . <t'
been done in many otherhydel projects such as Chamera Stage II and III, Parbati Stage /I and "', J
Teesta Stage V, Dhauliganga. (
~,
FUNCTIONS OFTHE BASIN : (
.~
'(
From the above description, it will be evident that the functions of the basins are to induce the settlement
of sediment by reducing the velocity and the turbulence and to skim the sediment free layer of the t- (
water from the surface at the outlet. Depending upon the flushing system, the basin also has to be "
provided with the required storage for the accommodation of the sediment as in the case of intermittent .
\
I
flushing and also to be provided with adequate hopper arrangement with openings at the flushing ;t
conduit for efficient transport of settled sediment.
.:. I
i

.j.
I i
'f
'- ..... ~

'f
J.
:.'I
'~~
-'1
,i
t'.
~I
4
".t.:
".,"
.'
<1,i
J
";<:.

:f'
j~

----.,..·-_7..:::...:.;=_ ""0': "- -~.:-- ....

-~
·'~~

,;~"
...
"
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins
I . ··~ CHAPTER., III
1
i ~
3"
LAYOUT AND DESIGN ASPECTS
I~ The performance of the desilting basin depends upon the. reduction in the. velocity and turbulence,
I ~-~ provision of adequate length of the basin for' aChieving the desired settlement and the skimming

I~
'arrangements at the outlet. The settled sediment is, however, required to be removed periodically or
continuously to maintain it's settling efficiency. Thus, though the design of the desilting basin includes

I'~ two main parts viz. ' ' ,

I?
;.3
~
~
Settling efficiency and
Flushing system
I VI
I·:T Following aspects are also required to be taken into consideration: '

I ·~
.~
~
>-
Location and orientation
Inlet transition
3 ~' Gridor the flow distribution device
1
-~ ~ Size of the basin
l~ ~
~
Outlet arrangement
Bed slope (in the case of intermittent flushing)
I >- Size of the flushing outlets (in case of intermittent flushing system)
1'"3
I' . \
~
~
Size and slope of the hopper (in the case of continuous flushing)
Size of flushing conduit (in the case of continuous flushing)
3
1 >- The size and spacing of the openings from the hopper bottom to flushing conduit
)~ (in the case of continuous flushing)
~ Escape ChanneVtunnel, and
.;, ~ Location of the flushing outlet
~. ~ Flushing tunnel gate

,3 Out of the above, the aspects of inlet transition and size of the desilting basins are dealt with separately
in subsequent chapter.
~
LOCATION AND ORIENTATION
~
The selection of the proper location and orientation of a basin is an important aspect from the point of
~.
view of its overa!! performa.nce. Genera!!y desi!ting, basin, should be· located as near the head \."orks!
intake as possible to achieve the desired control and to minimize the sedimentation in the approach
~, channel. However, the location of the basin too near the intake/head works would create a problem
~ due to the turbulence downstream of the intake/head regulator. Moreover, the required head for flushing
may not be available in the immediate vicinity of the head works in the case of hydraulic flushing.
~.
The basin is also required to be properly ori~nted with respect to the alignment of the inlet channel/

-
,~

~
tunnel 01:'\ the upstream to achieve satisfactory distribution of flow as naturally as possible(fQr-tbis, ;"'f'
purpose, the.J2g§,Ln may be located i!1J~e reach where atleasta straight length equal!o ten times the
, ave.r.?ge-width of th~-Ctiann'eT.or.diameterof.the .inlet, ~ur}n~I'is available on the upstream. The centre
line of the desilting basin in such a case should coincide with the cen'freline of the-channel/tunn,el on
~. fheTipsfream.), ,. . , . "
, c.~

7
,,i
~,-~~-'"'' .,-

J
-'T
 ~
CWPRS : Guidelinesfor Design ofDesilting Basins

INLET TRANSITION

The flow area in the desilting basin is required to be increased for reducing the velocity to induce the
,
-: )

,•
settlement of the sediment. This increase in the area is to be achieved by suitable horizontal and lor
vertical divergence. It has been observed that in the expansion, the boundary zone of retarded liquid ,
expands rapidly, velocity distributions becomes highly uneven with increase in the divergence and the
flow may fail completely to follow the channel walls which would result in a separation zone. Under
1
such circumstances the detention period is reduced which in turn affects the settling efficiency. This
effect is also defined as(§;hort circuiting). - - 1
I
For obtaining the satisfactory distribution of flow, the flow with relatively large velocity at the inlet has f
to mix satisfactorily in a desilting basin and a proper diffusion/dispersion is to be achieved. From the
study of the mechanism of the dispersion of the jet in the water body, it has been seen that the region
is
of the expansion of flow the region of appreciable modification of mean flow pattern and the region
of appreciable eddy motion (17) (18). Under normal circumstances, an angle of 12° to 14° on either
side of the centre line of the jet has been found to include the major portion of tFiisregion"which wves-
the expansion ratio approximately to 1:4 to 1:5. In the case of wide desilting basins in the open area
the inlet divergence is, therefore, required to be flatter tharD:4 to 1:5). _ _ _

In the case of deep basins in the tunnels, such a flat vertical expansion results in the deposition along
the bed. If the bed slope in the inlet transition is kept steeper than the angle of repose for the sediment
settling on the bed to slip in the first opening to the flushing conduit, a zone of separation develops
resulting in the burial of the upstream reach of the flushing trench. Such a phenomenon was observed
at the inlet for desilting basins for Dul-Hasti and Nathpa Jhakri Projects during the model studies and
the designs were subsequently modified to ensure proper functiOning. From the model studies of
these basins a bed slope of betwee~_@.q~':lst?"-3)asfound to be satisfactory.

GRIDS AND OTHER FLOW DISTRIBUTION DEVICES

In addition to the proper design of the inlet divergence, provision of grids/screens or other flow
equalising devices are required to be provided for further reducing the turbulence as well as the
inequalities in the flow distribution. The design of the grid could be similar to the trash·rack at the
is
intakes. The purpose of these scr~Ems/ grids to preak the large eddies into' small ones. Too large
openings would clefeatthepurpose whereas too small openings would increase the head ioss.Sc":eeri~
having openings upto 60 to 80 % of gross flow are? at the location of screen may be considered as a
- generai guidelines forfhe Tnitia! desianIThe <:Irids are required to be located at the end of Inlet trarisition.
W~f.lthe intennLttent fll,lshing is to be ~OPted;lhe bottom level of the grid shouicJ bE: above th;-;:ie'pth
of flow during th~ flushing.

OUTLET TRANSITION

The settling efficiency of the desilting basin also depends upon proper arrangement at the outlet
for skimming off the relatively less 'sediment laden top layers of flow as seen from the modifications
based on the procedure proposed by Hippola (44). From the results of the model studies and prototype
data for desilting basins, it is evident that settling effici_~ncyjr:nproves with. prQVi~jo!lOl.outlets.havin.g
l!!9.~~L~jIJJ~YeJ~-

8
.~

,'"" CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

'"
.~
The centre line of the outlet should coincide with the aXis of the desilting basin for uniform withdrawal
of flow over the entire width of the basir(jne outlet should be as high and as wide as possible.
Narrow outlets ()r outlets located on the side would result in a reduction in the effective length of the
"~ basin)

-~ ;k BED SLOPE IN THE CASE OF INTERMITTENT FLUSHING

.~ For efficient flushing of the sediment, higher velocity is required to be generated in the entire length
.~ and width of the basih. The velocities required during flushing are many a times more in comparison
'r to the forward velocity of flow during settling. The basin is thus practically required to be emptied as
.~~ I
the depth of flow would be much smaller during flushing. A steeper bed slope is, therefore, needed
for conveyance of the flow with a small hydraulic depth and higher value of roughness to account
3 for roughness due to bed forms with high rate of sediment transport.
'~
.~
, If a large head is available, the bed slope may be made steeper to achieve supercritical flow during
flushing. With supercritical conditions, the flow would fan over the entire width of the basin satisfactorily
~
.~ and works almost as a hydraulic broom as was seen in the model of Trisuli desilting basin.
:3,
;ASIZE OF FLUSHING OUTLET IN CASE OFINTERMITTENT FLUSHING
~
t..
.
.~
. The sill of the flushing outlet should be flush with the bed of the desilting'basin at the downstream
end for transporting the sediment in the escape channel. If small outlets are provided, the time required
for emptying the basin would be longer which may not be permissible. Moreover, complete emptying
'-3 of the tank for generating higher velocities throughout the length and the width of the basin may not
'\ be possible. The flushing outlet should have the overall width equal to the bed width of the basin at
the outlet. If this width is smaller, the sediment deposited in the corner portions may not get flushed
~ out. Similarly if the flushing outlets are located on one side, the flushing of the deposition from the
entire width of the basin as observed in the case of desilting basin on Fort laramie Canal (7) may not
.~
be possible. If flushing outlet is required to be located on the side, a better arrangement would be to

.~ provide a deep flushing trench on the downstream. During flushing the basin would be almost
emptied and in that case the flow from the entire width of the basin would fall freely in the flushing
~ trench. The flushing trench in that case would function as a side channel spillway. Such an arrangement
was tried in the model for desilting basin for Rammam and lodhama Project in the Darjeeling District
~ of West Bengal and was found to be satisfactory.

~ SIZE AND SLOPE OFTHE HOPPERS

.~
In. the ~ase of. continuous- f!ush:i1g' system, the bed of· the desliting basin wiii' have to be divided into a
nu'mber of hoppers. For long and narrow basins a single row of hoppers could be sufficient. However,
<~
in the case of wide basins, more rows of hoppers would be needed as seen in the case of desllting
" """\
'-' basin for Kosi project~~pe of the hoppers is reguiredJ2.-be steeper thao..lha.aogl§ of repose pf
~u.spelJde.ds.edimenttQ,?-l9-wJbe$~irnent to slipiotQJhe opEmin s aLthe omconnectin' to
'..;) t e f u~hing.,C~"1.~!-!i~p.!p'~s ~n_.~i.Q~Clt .• The width of tt]~.h9Pperis tlJ,u§_related. t9Jbe..depth.Qf.Jbe
-. ~ l!.opeer, §!~~.P .. " e 9P~!llrlg ?~.the.bQttom of h.'2Pper_~~~.~_~dwidth of the basin..lrUbe .~.al?~__ot[1.ar!.Qw
desilting basins, instead of individual rectangular hopper, a continuous'hOpper bottom side with ~e.~i!Jl~f.lt
i~ accU'mulationtrench below is preferable. ~pacing.0ffha.Qpei1lngstJ.~!Ween'the settliri..9Jr~nctt9nd
!us~m9~~hduit is decided in.sucb~y that the top of t~~dune~ (qrmeQt>~tWeenthe successiye
.~ openings would not protrude in the settlingzor:u~l a60ve: . .... '-'

.·t 9
~
;zr

t",,-; ~~""'~;_..::._ ~ __ " _ . ._ - _ . - •..• _-- '----7'"

I
~•
-'

I:~
"'--.
 ~

, ,. -0;;::,

CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins.

""'"
;

SIZE OF FLUSHING CONDUIT ,

~-
The size of the flushing conduit is required to be decided for the efficient transport of the sediment. ,.
From the experience of the performance of the ejectors arid excluders, it is seen that the minimum <
velocity of ?-,§9_m!s i.§'l~quiredjor- .. the efficient··functi~ning--·of.·-the-!uno.eJs. In the flushing system of '\..

~.
the desilting basins, the concentration is likely to be more due to higher settling efficiency. The flow I.
....
in the flushing system could be a pressure flow since the' sediment enters in the flushing conduit ~
through the opening from the basin. The flushing discharge is controlled by a gate at the downstream r-
\

end or an open channel flow depending upon the site considerations. .~.

Four modes or regimes of transport of solid/fh.iid mixtures thrqugh pipelines for a given fluid, sediment ~
.material and pipe size can be qualitatively described as shown in Fig.1 Since the sediment in the
..
.
flushing system would be mostly coarse having a wide range of particle size, the flow in the flushing C;
system is likely to be in the two regions such as . , ~
'"

)
)
Flow with moving bed/saltation
Heterogeneous flow with all solids in suspension
-.,
C ,.
~

A~
FLOW WITH ... OYlNG BED
SAU"UOH(WtlK AND- )j....
WITHOUT SUSPENSION)
---.1,
",._ •..

~;
. I ,
--,,:;
<II
N --..
(j)
f\.O'fl
J j
.!! £

~ E.~E.Q\l" 5 ~
't:
CD
v-.E.' f.~G -;0\.,\0 ,tl-
'fl\' ~ ..\..\..
0..
S\lSf'E.1lS\O~ -,

FLOW "S HOMOGENEOUS

-
.~
,
j

SUSPENSIOf,l
'-..
J
ivi'::Qij F:vvv V~:Ot~y ~

....j
\_~

FIGURE 1 : FLOW REGIMES FOR GIVEN FLUID, SEDIMENT AND PIPE SIZE
! 1
-_... ~ j

~~_~!~D&.Q.~§lIOW_ist~~_~<?~_~ i!T.IP9r.!~nt regime.. ot~~Jtrn~DLtr..~DSP_Qrt in-pipe.s...sio.c_~tgi~~§> t~~

_ '-r'!
'.'
-
maxi l11 um sed.irn~nttrCl!1sportper lInitofbeadlo§:Due to its importance, considerable research has ...
been concentrated in this regime, but unfortunately no generally accepted criteria to describe head '.~.....
loss under various conditions within this regime has yet been established. The analysis of datal .~:
results published by various research workers such as Wilson (19), Durand and Condolios (20), .1..

Zandi and Gawatos (21) etc and by the CWPRS (22) (23) revealed the validity of Durand and Condolios ~,
!.~.
. -~-'

10
, .... ,
;i,
j ' '.
..1.-
. ~
~ .
.,f

'f
 .......::1 '
,,
,"..,
;1
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins
13
i '

,." -expression for heterogeneous flow. Durand and his co-workers at Sogreach Laboratory, Grenable,
France, contributed greatly to the understanding of sediment transport through pipes. They conducted
~ 310 t~sts with sediment sizes ranging from 0.2 to 25 mm, sediment concentrations ranging from 2to

..y
. " 23 % by volume, and pipes ranging in size from 1.5 to 28 inches in diameter. They concluded from
their experiments thatfor heterogeneous flow

~
~ <Po =i~-I
Iocr
.
=K' (~J3(
~
. "(
_1_)
~
1.5 - .......................................(1)
.~.
3 where
~
-3 CPD isa dimensionless parameter;
;
,;'~'
i",
i
is the energy gradient for pipe with suspended particles;
is the energy gradient for pipe;
, . d is the diameter of pipe;
.3 g is the acceleration due to gravity; c~ -
~
3 r is the specific weig~t of liquid; -
Co is the drag coefficient;
-3. K'is a constant;
cr is the sediment concentration by volume.
3
~- This functional relationship together with the data points are shown in Fig.2.

~ The ASCE also have concluded that the equation given by Duraf}d, and his co-workers seems to give -
the best agreement with the observations and the value of therc.onstant 'K'in the equation is 176-:J
~ . ~ ... _---_.- _._---_._.-._---_ ... ,,..... ~._- - .

3
~
-~
~'
w
~
.J -o

.;)
•
~
-,
G
> o 1=, ~:,
o • , • ' -
, -1" , ··tad ' '1,1"",=1
:~ 10 20 ~O 40

-~~ V~h.. of ( vi (gO nVCO

~
-"1, FIGURE 2: HEAD LOSSES IN PIPE WITH NON DEPOSIT FLOW REGIMES

~ 11

?
~ _.. - ..... _--_._-..... --_.._._. _.... _---:-.-:----

)
.. ~,'!1
,;1
 ~~
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins
~
The above -equation is applicable for heterogeneous flow which occurs in the pipe for the veloCity
greater than the limit velocity VL, which is given by Figs. 3 and 4 - ~

~f
2
~'

1i ::1,
~

u:'
t--

1
f/
i/J/
~
"I).....

/~...:I·~AWE
~-
OF
PERCENTlG
7'AS'
.
-
~C

.
'J

.4
~
o
w
!
/

•
~
::> ---
-J
~
o L.....l.-.L-...I-...I-...L
L-
o 1 1
~
VALUE OF DIAMETER ci... IN mm If
C
f
FIGURE 3 : LIMIT DEPOSIT VELOVITY FOR UNIFORM MATERIAL e
f
eIf
ell 3,I
O~10 .... .. ..
I

.....
~ ~
......
•
III

- : 10
on
2 .&.
'
"
f
~
x
111 I
'\ .e o
"

~
E 10
'i'\':l..l
>
'\ ~
10It J .I ~
10-/; 10-3 10-2 10 1 10-0
dss/o ~
~
~
FIGURE 4: PROPOSED CO-RELATION FOR MAXIMUM LIMIT DEpOSIT VELOCITY
~
The above recommendation of ASCE is based only on hydraulic conditions in the pipe line. The 1;
design velocity in the conduit should be greater than VL At mean velocity less than VL for
heterogeneous flow, some of the suspended particles begin t6 settle and move along the bottom of II;
the pipe boundary as bed load. Generally the head losses in the transportation pipe line with bed
load are greater than those associated with the limit deposit velocity. However, due to some practical 1
and site considerations it may not be possible to satisfy the criteria of limit deposit velocity. After a
~I
review of the literature on this aspect, ASCE has concluded that a formula for use in pipe can not be
suggested, although experienced specialist may be able to recommend some values for the friction
coefficient that may be used in some specific cases. The figure presented by Graf and Acaroglu (24)
~
!
may be used as a guide line which gives following relationship. 41'
~
12
t
. ~,f

~j

,(l
-
-,If
,
,'l
~
CWPRS ; Guidelines for Design of Desilting Basins
)

~ C Vr . ' .
v = 10.39
((5-1\-1
fJ's
)-3;52
........ ~ :.(2)
~.
~(s:"'fXJd~ imr

"
~
I.
where
im is the energy gradient for pipe with suspended particles;

~ ds
g
is the diameter of particle;
is the acceleration due to gravity;
~ Cv is the sediment concentration by volume;
,) V is the mean velocity;
" r is the hydraulic radius;
.) 5 is the specific gravity of sediment.
/
The above equations for heterogeneous flow or flow with bed are applicable for uniform size of sediment.
,J little is known about transportation of graded sediment having a wide range of particle size. Previous
investigators have concentrated their efforts on the determination of characteristic size that will represent

-i.
the entire range of sediment. It is difficult to choose a representative sediment size from a graded
sediment. The size most likely depends upon the concentration of sediment in the flow. ,If very lar~
~. ~~~fJtr:~tionjsjrrV.91~d,J>l?[hap~.doo may be selected as .the repre~entative ,s.i~~; . F()rl1).Qg~rClte
concentrations~
....
a less' consery'?tive
..,
~... .•..•,......
choice
....
j<o~--._
of d . . .may
," . . " . 75
~.
be ...•.........
__ . _.", ..
".~,_
called_._._as.... -.
representative size. '';
~"""''''-''-

~..
Generally velocities larger than 3.0 mls are provided in flushing systems. The velocity should increase
towards the downstream with addition of flow from the basin to the flushing trench.. However too high
~: velocities, which may create problem to the linings, should also not be adopted. Normally 10 to 20 %.
I of the inflow discharge is used for flushing of the basin from which the size ofthe f1lishing'condJ,lit
~, .could be decided.
,.
.~
SIZE AND SPACING OF OPENINGS FROM HOPPER BOTTOM TO FLUSHING CONDUIT
.)
The first opening from the desilting basin to flushing conduit is required to be larger to allow for the
.3 higher rate of deposition and larger size of particles. Though no definite criteria can be suggested
from experience of model studies for desilting basins for Chukha, Dul-Hasti and Nathpa Jhakri, Tala,
.;) Chamera, Teesta, Parbati Projects .!b?t the~iz:e.9fJb~. first 9P~nil}g appeQrsJobe ade.g~?te· to
pass 20 to 30 % OfJhettushmg~dr~charge with,aveloeity of ,3..0 mls..The size of the flushing conduit
~ at the beg.i!1ning shou!d have the same area. Tne total area of the openings can be bro~dJY e.st!m~~g.
~. of
for passing the remaining discharge with velocityof 3.0 mls. The size tiiE30penings maY.Qe~re~~e.
'progressivety towards the 'd6wnstrea lTl .as
~~>!1c.entration and size of the sediment.settling.. goes.Qn
.,» 'qecreasing'towards downstream. This reduction equid be done in steps on the basis of the practical
conSiderations. .. . .... ,. .. . '.
.).
:3' For this purpose, however, the total number of .openings is required to be estimated. From the
observations made in the models, it is seen that the length of dunes of the deposition are formed in
;,)
"
the flushiD9. trench of desilting basin. The base width of the dUl1es in the direction of fJow is abo'ut 3
times the tleight of tne duoe$.The height of the d.lJDe onth~bed of flushing trench is to ~e fixed in '.
~' such a way that it should not obstruct" the" flow in the settling zone. Taking into consideration the'
permissible top level of the dunes and the bed level of the flushing trench iii-tfieE'asin,-'thespaCingof .
'~
\
~. 13 .

?
~.

~~
,~
!
 'i'-

1:
"
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins,
c
~
the openings,ean be estimated. Due to the slope of the flushing trench, the permissible depth of the
dune may increase progressively towards downstream~ advantage of which can be taken for increasing ~
the spacing either for reducing the number of openings or reducing the flushing discharge or
combinations of both. ' ~

It has also been observed that the smaller size of the material settling near the outlet end forms a
, ",
I
.
reverse ramp at the upstream edge of the skimming weir. The last opening should, therefore, be a little
I
larger than the opening just on its upstream. This has to be decided jUdiciously for each case. Typical '$0

layout of openings connecting main basin to flushing tunnel is shown in figure 5. t

.
;t..
f~~~()lL(~.. n. Ii..
.-& , ,'-'
I r""'~na<R 'I
.
j '~l'jY/ :4
!~
~

1.. 1 ..... • .. !". . • • • • '

• ;~
i-
LnR.~f(Jjof~l<II' ~
~ t
I "
/ !~

~ lNb /Ii /NUT1lI<o\lil!rnlJt<

S1.u:r OJ <llI!".ET .........."'~
;~
;~
i 4
..
:,
Sf . -r
, !ATfl.t:'!(i 1I!)j(),

~
I"'"

,...
~

~
i
-

-
FLL.:'SItV\Ti n;Nh,"!!',,,,

~,
SrCTIO!'I "'10 J

1.
~

...
FIGURE 5 :TYPICAL LAYOUT OF OPENINGS CONNECTING MAIN BASINTO FLUSHING TUNNEL "-
~
\"".
ESCAPE CHANNEL ITUNNEL
~, ""
As mentioned earlier, the flushing discharge varies generally between 10,and 20 % of the inlet
~.
design discharge. Since the sediment transport is a function of the veiodty' iOt given ct.araeteristics
and concentration of sediment and hydraulic parameters of transporting system, it is essential that
the velocities in the escape channel should be more or atleast ,equal to the velocities in the flushing
~
,
- ,
..:
system at its outlet at the tail end of the desilting basin. Generally the escape channels are lined.
~
However, for the estimation of flow depth and slope, the resistanCe of the sediment moving on the bed I '....

in different bed forms is required to be taken into consideration. Nearly every investigator of the !~
, , I

problem h~s developed his own formula and no single formula has been generally accepted. As a ( ~
1 ~,
broad guideline, the hydraulic parameters such as width, depth and slope may be calculated on the
basis of Manning's formula with appropriate roughness corresponding to the bedforms and its ~"I t'f ..
adequacy verified for the desired rate of sediment transport for the coarse materi~i1 using as appropriate i J
sediment transport formula adopting the guide lines given by ASCE (25).. ,;~.

':1 '"'
_,J~,
14 ',~ ~
,-j ",
f~ I .....
.f-l
~~
f

. ~
..:
~.

t--"'J
I"

t" CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

P" In the case of escape tunnels, the adequacy of the size may be ascertained and the" head loss

rp "
calculated using the criteria. given for the design of flushing conduit.

LOCATION OF FLUSHING OUTLET

p In the case of the escape channel, the sill level in the ,escape channel' should be such that it

P discharges freely in the river during floods also. If the slope of the flushing channel is flatter than the
,slope of the river, which would generally 'be the case in the case of diversion works in hilly streams,

11'· the outfall may be shifted further down to satisfy the ,above requirement. In the .case of the tunnel,
,

it may .get submerged during the floods. However, it may be ascertained that the residual energy
~', ',in the tunnel after allowing for the head loss is adequate for letting out the desired discharge in the

~
river. In both the cases the outfall should be located in the forward region of the flow along the bank '
or on the conCave bank of the bend for further efficient transport orthe sediment in the river. '

rr
~'"
FLUSHING TUNNEL GATE

The flow in the flushing tunnel is always a pressure flow upto the flushing tunnel gate. Due to substantial
r7
~,'
head, the flushing tunnel gates are partially opened to pass the required flushing discharge. In the
design of these gates, the static pressure on these gates is an important parameter.
~.

~
l-. "
"
1360F."_ onnnnn.nlnnnn rnn.nonnnn< '
I'.J ~------------ -------~------1-----------·
~, I I ! ;
I
,5
iI
f 1 f
l t !,
-----~.--'1-------- "
E ''I

l~ -~
•
• 1350 1-
...- - - - - - .~.
'lingTun:><J - -
- ' :
I
-----
! l I --<.:' ,
I~
~
j
' -- '-- , I
,
;

i~ , ~-

~~,
.. r
!

1
,
Endollr_li:ln

upstJeam
' ---

~w",e(~
--

T1 : 1355.8t m
12: 1358,18 m
13 : 1300,00 m
(m) '-

I~ 1340

.'" o
I 50 100 150 200 250

Otatance fnlrn End of Transition (m)

.~ ,

I "
FIGURE 6 : OBSERVATIONS FOR STATIC PRESSURE ALONG MAIN BASIN & FLUSHING TUNNEL
i~
It is very difficult to estimate the head loss in the system, particularly in the flushing tunnel at various
~,
I '-, operating water levels in the reservoirs. However, scale model is an excellent tool for estimating the
-..
I" '. .

head acting on the flushing tunnel gate. Such an attempt was made in the case . of the model studies
1-.' ,

conducted for the desilting basin for Tala H.E. Project. For this purpose piezometers were installed in
,~
; "
the model for measuring pressure gradient in the main basin as well as in the flushing tunnel below
;~,"

;)" 15

',~

~ '"
~
-. ,
,,;..
 .~

CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

•
main basin. The observations of the pressure gradient are shown above in figure 6. The head acting ......
on the flushing tunnel can thus be estimated forthe design purpose.
.,
~

.....
From the figure 6 it would also be seen that the pressure in the flushing tunnel was alwaY$ less than
the pressure in the desilting basin at any section and the difference went on increasing towards the
- ...
.....,
~-
downstream. This was obvious because the velocity of the flow in the flushing tunnel was more and its
size was small. As a result the pressure gradient in the flushing tunnel was steeper than that in the 1-'
......
main basin. This was the reason why the part of the flow from the desilting basin entered into the
flushing tunnel through the openings provided in the slab separating both of them. This also indicated
that the flow was taking place from the desilting basin to the flushing tunnel throughout its le.ngth
.- I
~.

" -.

keeping all the openings effective and not only through the opening at the end which would have' ~ "

rendered the openings in the upstream reach and the upstream length of the flushing tunnel as non
operative. _ . .~
...
iJ ~

-
~ .
....
.

'_i I .

...-h
...,

.~J
-
":J
.tJ
,-I
'.!
"':';:'

-.J

.,'-
I
~

-- \,.
~

- ....

-.-
.~

...
~

...
...
~
...
\.~

,-...
.,-
(~
..
-
•
16

.-:.=-..... -..-.:
'--"~- -:
..
_4~

;
• ,<,~ .•

f
~
,'3 CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins
t·
~ .
.. ~
! ~ • INLET TRANSITION .--_ .~ /_.

,~
~.
. .

INTAKE . '. *__.,. ,

. ... ..-.,:' ......__........
. -..- ~-;....~~~~~!':~~.- .- ~ .. ~:. -
I'\

r.. .·.. · \

HRT
\

.-~~l
'~tar:::".

'~j -
. .. FLUSHING TUNNEL

I
"
\OAMAXIS
,.1:
,~.;
-,1

if
. -.~l .
i ,-1
RIVER

~1 . J

~
.
!.fj
..
:J"
~'.
..
'. I
'~-'.
TYPICAL LAYOUT OF WATER CONDUCTOR SYSTEM

~ ....
"~:
, . :~~ '.: ..... :;.
. ",-:,;: .
LAYOUT PLAN OF DESILTING COMPLEX·
".".

~
•.~

,~,:
HEAD FACE TUNNEL
~- ·..· ~(-------
--- • ; >r

~
...~
"
."
ADITIII

~Lli
~.rSILTFLUSHINGTUNNEL
~
-''l
. .. DESILTING CHAMBER )jt •
i;~, ~' ..... ~ _. ..r .'
\~ ... .

1·
,-
\~.2~A~. ! \

~~.> .',' tADITIi

"'~~;i,"~"""
'4~ . ..;
"-

,. 'INLET TUNNELS ~1~

I I'---

!
... :~'7' .' )," 1/
j(, .

J~)
~

,. .. .i

..
J ~

.~
••
 :J
:)
J CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

-l CHAPTER-IV

~ MODEL STUDIES

From the earlier chapters, it would be seen that in absence of any definite criteria in many aspects,
J a
the design is to be based on broad guide lines, assumptions and experience. Verification of these
assumptions and adequacy of the layout as well as other design aspects is, therefore, required to
1 be assessed by conducting studies in physical hydraulic models. These studies are generally
conducted in geometrically similar seale rigid bed models for open channel type desilting basins. In \
,~. ,the case of closed conduit type basins, transparent Perspex 1 Polycarbonate sheets are used for
.3
~'
convenience of fabrication and for visualization of the flow in the basin. ' ,

.) Generally basins are designed for removal of the sediment coarser than 0..20 mm or 0.10 mm. For
•
~,'
simulation of the sediment in the model, a low specific gravity material such as bakelite, shellac,
walnut shell or coal powder is required to be, used. However, it would not be possible/advisable to
~, go in for very small size of particles of low specific gravity material from the practical considerations.
Taking these aspects into consideration, the scales of the models generally vary from ,1/1 0 ~o 1130.
.j , Table 1 shows the scales adopted for the various model studies conducted at .CWPRS.

.3 In the case of the multiple unit layout of the basin such as those adopted for two tunnel arrangement

~ for Chukha and four tunnel arrangement for Nathpa Jhakri Project, only a single unit with adequate
reach of the inlet tunnel on the upstream and theHead RaCe Tunnel on the downstream is reproduced.
j
For getting the settling efficiency accurately, it is essential that the distribution of the suspended
.3 sediment on the
upstream is reproduced satisfactorily in the model. For this purpose, the following
equation developed by Rouse is used which gives the concentration Cy at any levelY in terms of Ca,
j the y concentration at arbitrary level 'a.' ' , ',
~ (d -
- = - -yx -a - JZ
',C)'
.......................................................(3)
3 Co y d-a

'j in which

':j W'
z= kJgds ......................................................... ;.(4)
~
..) where

,d
c:
C i s the concentration at depth 'y' above bed level·;
is the concentration at depth '0.05 d' above ~ed level;
is the depth of flow;
'~'" a is 0.05 d;
w is the fall velocity of particles;
~: ,k is the Karman's constant;
9 is the acceleration due to gravity;
4 s is the water surface slope.
J' Value of k is 0.4 for clear water and reduces with sediment concentration.
=-:
~!
17

1~~~~c'
~
"i",
..,,~

•
 ,."

CWPRS : Guidelines tor Design of Desilting Basins -4:

«-

1.>
A relationship between the diameters of quartz particle in the prototype to the diameter of the low .,
, I
specific gravity material used in. the model is established by using equations 3 & 4. The specific
gravity of bakelite, walnut shell or the coal powder is about 1.4. In the earlier studies, a procedure ...r..
of crushing the low specific gravity material and sieving the same through different sieves ana
~
remixing it in the required proportfon for obtaining the desired size distribution curve or proportion of ~-

coarse, medium and fine fractions of the sediment in the prototype was adopted. This procedure was .,.
~~.
tedious and clumsy. To avoid these difficulties, the following alternative procedure was followed in !--.

the subsequent studies. ° •

"
~~:
",.
The available low specific gravity powder is analyzed for the determination of the size distribution
:F!
i ~~
curve. After injecting the material in the model, the settling efficiency of the basin is determined by
measurement of the volumes trapped at the outlet of the desilting basin and flushing system, taking i~
into due consideration of the volume of the sediment trapped inside the desilting basin or by .I~
'-
simultaneous measurements of the concentration in the inlet and both the outlets. The expected
settling efficiency using Camp's and others criteria is also estimated, for the gradation curve using the
;n
: \l
;'~

mean diameter qf the different fractions of the gradation curve and by integrating the results. The :~t
procedure adopted for simulation of suspended sediment derived from the equation proposed by ;~l
Rouse is given in Annexure 1. Thus, once· the satisfactory correlation between the model results and
the estimated settling efficiency for the model parameters is established, the actual efficiency curve
for the sediment in the prototype could be estimated. This results not only in the convenience for the
..--... "
,
~
model studi~s but also enables to estimate the actual efficiency for the different gradation curves at )~
s~e. .
.r-J
After the development of numerical methtods for simulation of two dimensional flow pattern, better
.V
mathematical models for the desilting basin, such as hose proposed by Imam (26), Schamber (27),
...'"
.Larock (28), Abdel-Gawad (29), Devantier (30), Bhargava (31), Stamou (32) etc. These models are
divided into the following two parts: .,
J j

...
~ Flow field model; ~Ol

~ Suspended sediment transport model. """

In the flow field model, sophisticated numerical methods have been proposed, which manage to ~;
!
predict the flow field in the settling tanks with atleast partial success. These models employ various ~~
forms of mean flow equations. Finite difference or finite element techniques are used for the numerical
~o!utkm 01 the· flew. Some of the m0de!s employ simple, constant eddy diffusivity assumptions while
others use more refined turbulent models. .
'- ~

~:'i:
!
In a suspended sediment transport model, the suspended sediment transport equations are numerically .~,.
solved for the determinations of suspended sediment and concentration field. The suspended sediment 1 • ./

particles are assumed to be discrete and their size distribution is described by settling velocity curve. ~
-
The complete spectrum of particle size is divided in different groups of' constant particle size associated
with the corresponding settling velocity and representing a mass function of total sediment which is ~'lI!';~~
determined by the settling velocity curve. The boundary conditions used for solving the suspended
"'-;0.0
sediment equations are the following. , !~

e~
.~:

18
it
f
..

~.

,
 CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

y There is no flux of suspended sediment to the side walt,

~ All the particles reaching the bottom are not thrown again in suspension,

~ There is no net transfer of suspended sediment across the surface~ ;

In the settling basin flow is three dimensional especially in the inlet divergence and outlet convergence.
At the inlet, there are structural arrangements for proper distribution of flow. Similarly, at ttie outlet the
arrangements.are made for smooth skimming off the flow layers containing less sediment in the
suspension. Geometrical approximations are required to be made in two dimensional mathematical
modelling which is not considered. adequately in the mathematical modelling. All these add to the
three dimensionality of the flow.

,
,I

19'

-~.: ..

it
 ,
)

, CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

, CHAPTER-V'

, INLETTRANsmON
For obtaining the satisfactory distribution of flow, the flow with relatively large velocity at inlet has to -

, ~ mix satisfactorily in a desilting basin and a proper diffusion / dispersion is to be achieved. From the
study of the mechanism of the dispersion of the jet in the water body, it has been seen that the region

, of expansion of flow is the region of appreciable modification of mean flow pattern and the region of
appreciable eddy motion. Under normal circumstances flanLangle...oU22_to. 142 on .§itMLside o..f th~.
-centre line olJ.I).~_~Lhas been found to include_the. major .portionof ·this -region. which gives the
expansiQ.ij:ratio ()LaRP~9xirn~t~!YJ:4JQ.1 :5~ .!!1~~~_of wide desilting basin in the open area the inlet
) diversion is; therefore;.required to be flatter than 1:4 to 1:5. In the case of deep basins in tunnels such
) a flat vertical expansions results in deposition along the bed:Jlthe bed slope {oJbeJolettr:ans.itiQn.Js
k~e.t s~eep~rtha.l"1,t~e~!19.!e of repose for the se~i,rr:'~':lt ~ett!ingon,thebed~to.siipjn.thejirs,t~p'ening of -'')
~ ~e fJushing conduit I tunnel, a~z()ne'Of separation developes, resulting in the burial of upstream reach' :
of the settling trench and flushing tunl1eCFromthemod~L~~9i~f)_~9n9!J.QtEid~afcWPRS:,iibe.iLs(Qpe !.;
between 1:2 to 1~g.3.b.iis_be.en.generally found to ·be satisfactory. The perform~lI}ce,h()wever, needs
~, ~c>nfirmation by model experiments..

The procedure to design an inlet transition having pressure flow is given below:
~

,
t Purpose I Function
To reduce the flow velocity to desired extent by increasing the cross-sectional area to induce settlement
- of undesirable sediment. '
) Input Parameters
3 \
Inflow Velocity V,
,V,
1
,

t Outflow Velocity 2
) Upstream depth 0 1,
~ Downstream depth
Width of the basin
- O2 ,
B,
~ Bed slope
Sediment Size amm,
) Flare Angle a
i i
General Layout Plan of Inlet Transition
)
), I. r;:-' "' -ill-=--.~
C? s.~:~ .'-,. i Ji
,s=~>

)
:),- -:. . . '~J--- ,~.t_
~

j -----n
~==-_._._]-~ {.
~ ..... c..c
--~

) 'l~~-=~ ~_ J
)
i -
RGURE 7 : GENERAL LAYOUT PLAN OF INLET TRANsmON

~ 20
~
'I
~~:­
~
:J
1
 !-
I.
,I~

CWPRS : Guidelinesfor Design ofDesilting Basins

,:: "II

Design Parameters
:i 1i,
I

>-
Width Depends· upon the rock conditions./""" 'i i
.' 1i
>-
Length .Depends upon the width of the desilting basin,
. ~ Overall Depth As per the cross. sectional area required for .,
settlement of the desired size of sediment. r

-
:1,
).> Bed Slope 1V: 2H to 1V: 2.3H.
Flange Angle a 60 to go. "7

~ Particle size to be removed. ;'"

1:- ~

Design Considerations
f~
"
~ Ad~~~rop" in forward vel~' r~
~ NC?~~~ration..QUlQw.. .
~
~ Uniform velocity..distrjb.ution.alQf)g,b.QI~Q.ntaLRlan~.
Sufficiently high velocity prevailing in the transition to prevent settlement of coarse sediment
til
l~
f !.>,
on the slope of transition.
~ No settlement of sediment immediately downstream of transition to prevent blocking of openings
connecting desilting chamber to flushing tunnel below. _ .

Physics I Phenomenon'
. .
til
,
.~1(1
.:~
..
ir1...
If the bottom is covered with a leveled sand bed, Shields reasoned that the turbulent flow theory as ~ ......
;~~'
developed by Nikuradse; Prandtl and Karman should be applicable to the beginning of bed-load ,J

movement. o ...
3>

:........
For the beginning of bed load movement, the experiments shows that: h ~
i-.·"
...~
'tc = f3 (r s - r) ds ......................................................................(5) ~
r
where .....«
'tc is the Critical Tractive Force; .." :

.'-.
/3 is the Constant of proportionality; l.
...
rs is the Specific Weight of sediment grain; \'"'-
~""I .
,
r ;~ .h", C",o,.ifi,... \l\Ioi"ht nf I _·..,_·_-t
,.,:, "'-Ie:' '-If'''"''''''I'''' •• _.:;, ... . : _.'
inl,irl' .~

ds is the Size of particle.

.....ill
In which the value of /3 ' is about 0.04. For non-uniform material Or..f9!.~tigJ(y. andJ!9£9..!)~.nt materiall i"-
~...
~

the value of /3 may be greater than 0.04. Fine.r.!()':l~uniforlT1.l5ands tend to exhibit two values for the ~
~~

critical tractive force, a lower value (/3 equal to about 0.04) for impending motion fron:.~_r:!l_O()th.b~gs ...
1~
and a higher value (f3 equaling from 0.10 to 0.25) for impending motion fro~ sand. r!pples torme.d ...
!~.
from the smooth bed; the values or.J3, in both cases corresponding to the mean grain size.
'.
~

I~~
21 --...
,~

--==:-;:-';;-:..:-.. ;"; "•. : - ._.:--:-." •."

1-
.,-"
,
.'./
I
'
;..

!
 .n
. ~

,
)
I

CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

•
~ It is evident that the average value of the tractive force 'f in a unit length of open channel is r .r.hf.
) From the Darcy-Weisbach formula,
t
\

~ h, = (f * \I2)/4*r*2g ....................................(6)
\

~
~ It follows that:
~
r = (f.r.v 2 ) / 8g ....................................(7)
• where
~ .

'i is the Tractive Force

Ys is the Specific Weight of sediment grain
h, is the Head Loss
~ f is the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor
)
V is the Mean velocity
~
.,
, g is the Acceleration due to gravity
~ r is the radius .
\

~ From Eqs. 5 and 7. the channel velocity required to start motion of particles of size ds is given by
following formula:
.-r----
8{3
~Vc= -g(s -l)d s ... ~ ~,""""""""'" ..(8)

W~
f

'i is the Tractive Force; ------------_...:-------_.

::.;'.
-

~~'.
rs is the Specific Weight of sediment grain;
h, is the Head Loss;
f is the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor;
~ -_ .....-.,-_.............. _-~

Vc is the Critical velocity;

~
n
'"
.'-' . . . _;AlX'olor"ti('\o:'\
ic:: th~ . . . . . . _._.. . . . . _.1 N'_.. .'0_eo....,
t-:-. ('\...". ,it;.~.
~1.\.4"I\J, .~~_ ..-:.> ,.~.
;
r is the radius;
f3 is the Constant of proportionality; £S 'X. O· 0'-1

I· ds is the Size of particle.

)
I Eq. 8 indicates that the velocity required to start the scour is independent of the size and depth of
t~nk; and it 9,~J?~.r::'_~~__91)!Y, ~I] tbeJri9!!QLt f.ClstC?r",!!~~n particle, size ~nd specific gravity. Actually, the
,j.

I
value of the tractive force r in Eq.7 is the mean value 'around the wetted pei'imeter:lfis·constantonly
for circular pipes flowing full. In open channels, the tractive force is greater at the invert than on the
sides, and hence its value at the bottom is influenced by the shape of the cross section. The mil'!i_~m .
yelocity that may be used in a transition to avoid deposition is given by Eq.8.
••• __ • • • ~ 0" • _ ••• _ • •
, "_ • . __ M __'" _ . _ . . . . . . _ - _ • • • _-"~ ,_.- . ,• • • - - - -. • • • • • •- . . ~- .... - • • •

i .
22

- .... -.-_. ---'--' ,._-._._----;.-.-

 ,.:.;"....
. \...--

CWPRS : Guidelines for Design of Desilting Basins ;""

I
i
i A:~,
Model Studies
4-
~ CWPRS has carried out hydraulic model studies for many hydroelectric projects. Recently . ro•
,

studies have been conducted for Chamera Stage-II, Sewa, Tala (Bhutan), Nathpa Jhakri etc. ""'.'
On the basis of mode~ tests, the bed slope and flare angle recommended finally are as follows: I .
'""~,
,'"
~.:;
.... j
. Project Inlet Tunnel Length(m) Slope (V:H) Flare Angle ,\ !
Width (m)
ri
Sewa 3.00 25.00 1:2;3 '5°42' '...1
,.'~~
Tala 4.90 27.20 1;2.0 6032'
,n
I. l
Chamera (II) 6.00 28.50 1:2.0 9°57'
';~
Parbati (Jiwa) 3.00 24.00 1:2.3 9029' 4(,J1I
-1 ......i:
of
,~
! -.Q
'

~ The desilting basins are designed for removal of particles ranging from 0.10mm to 0.30mm
diameter and coarser. In absence of any literature,.following limits of forward velocity can be ,jrl,.
,
used as a guideline in the design of desilting basin. -(cAJ, I" _"'-' I -
----~~;:/ J,IJ
~ While conducting these studies it was also seen that even though the overall performance of r-:
..'~'~
the transition was satisfactory from hydraulic as well as sedimentation point of view, thin layer I
i,.~
of sedimentation deposition was observed on the slope. However, this deposition does not ,') .i.
remain there with reduction in inlet sediment concentration.
,. .-
Model Observations _ :.1
-.. ;
,

~ Steeper Bed Slope:

~:
'-.
If bed slope is steeper than 1H : 2V, it is seen that the flow does not follow the lower boundary (
I I.
and high veiocity jet emerging from inlet tunnel travels to a great distance in the main basin. ~

Th!s 1:1 tum cause!'; separation of coarse sediment which finally deposits on the bed forming '-t
,~-
a natural transition with flatter slope and blocking the openings connectfng main basin io ihe i
flushing tunnel below. \ t...
......--, .
:. I

~ Flatter Bed Slope: '.!~

. ...
\0-l-"
If the bed slope is flatter than 1H : 2.3V, expansion is gradual, return flow prevails in the lower f

part of the depth of desilting chamber. This induces settlement of coarse sediment on the l
l."".
bed slope of transition itself which slowly slides down into the main basin till stable slope is
"-
attained. This again results in sequential blocking of the openings'. ¢'i··
J
'-
~c
,
f'r-r.
23 ~
..,::"

,~ "I.
•
'. .i.;;:':

b-
•
. ~:::

, ,'
;
'-.~.I'-

f1
'-
 CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesiltingBas.ills

~. Flare Angle: .

If flare angle is more than go separation of flow is observed and the transition length becomes
too short. If the flare angle is less than go, then the diffusion is smooth and the transition
becomes too long.

~ Formulation:

Even though enough work has been done on the desilting chambers and their transitions for
different projects at CWPRS, no standard relation could be suggest~d for the design of transition
because of interdependency of parameters and site constraints. Preliminary hydraulic design
may appear to be feasible I workable from hydraulic point of view, however, its'performance
will have to be confirmed from sedimentation point of view by hydraulic model testing. Further,
model studies have resulted in optimization of size and shape there by causing reduction in
construction cost.

Particle Diameter (mm) Max Forward Velocity (m1s)

0.10 0.15

0.20 0.30 '!

0.30 0.35

The cross sectional area provided at the end of transition should be sufficient to reduce the flow
through velocity to the above specified limits. From the model studies conducted so f~ it is seen that,
if_.th~.li~itinQ!0rwar~_veloci~~~~:'.d~~ilt~~g chamber ~~~ithin the above limits, then particles once. .
settled would not be thrown again In separa1f<5'i1.""' f-cJkv/ !>fi >v-;::]' . --
-------. -p- ;z. J --f'

24

~,.,
(-,)
Ii..\

"' .... _.. _---"

 t

_ _~~==T;;;;';""
T_" ~_'~liiIiiIiiiiiiiiiiliiilill
..
•
t
?I
~;
I CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesiliing Basins

'\-J; CHAPTER -VI .

.I MAIN BASIN

~l In this chapter the basic theory and approach to the design of a settling basin is summarized, and the
practical aspects involved in their layout are reviewed. The,,~99Rejs_lif!lj.t~p to._g!.C:1YJ.!V?~.91!!,~_nt8:!iQn -
"~~ I;

. I
Le. to settling 'out discrete particles which retain. their inqividual settling characteristics without
Ir11erferencEr6f1loccITlerifeffe-Cts,~.,~i~cussion is limited to horizontal flow basins, Figure 8. . """'-'
~i FALL VELOCITY OF DISCRETE PARTICLES
)i
~!"
,II Fall velocity, w, in quiescent water ch~racterizes the ability of different sized particles to settle out
~ under gravity (and indeed is commonly used as standard measure of particle size for fine sediment).
-,I
.
Fall velocity for discrete particles is dep'endent on particles size, specific gravity, particle shape, and
i: the viscosity of water.
-JI' .
,'
~

~.
i'i
.. '

--~,;;:.- _.- *-
I Lk ~~'

R---'-'-'-
I I ._ ..
~'
~ ..
4
.- i J.@
I . ltW1&letD-r-.

'~' .. rLAH

~,
\~.,

~. lIUTu-u.
outUTJ:N ocmn

!
t-L, 'uwoIm_ ,,"
LPlGTtr

I
nHe

~ ..
:_'~
I

L: . ft.OlW _ !
~.' .
I

~ ====1
..
i
'-.Ill.T rUlSltNlO l\*ICL
. U!C'OOIO_ IICI:I1l*N

f .....
~I····.·· ': "~:'-'.

.\Ji ·: AGURE 8 : GENERAL LAYOUT OF DE~ILnNG BASIN

...':l
"~f
. 'T
~ .

Figure 9 Shows fall velocity in water, w, plotted against particle diameter, 0, for reference quartz .•
spheres. Various equations exist which give approximate solutions for fall velocity of single particles·.
-\~. , - the Rubey equation (33) is commonly used for particles with the shape of naturalsal'ld~~",~.•.
I·
:~ equation- is
"'-._-- _.. _.-
~ ... _.
valid.. for.". relatively
.~ - .- ...
- ~
course seqimentcornpared
, '.
to. Stoke
-., .. _..
," -
range.
."~
. .. ..
~, _.~ ._~-~

\1.
. ;..:~.~~.~.~.(9).> .'
~~, .. '. . . . .
':':" ..'
.
Cd = (24/Re +2) .. .its application is up to Re =5

~
!:.
~.

25

':L'"
/.

_.~
.. . .-. __"...... -.-

-~
I

::;
~~
I
 ,
'1
j'
,(
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins
. I

where
(

Cd is the drag coefficient;

Re is the Reynold's number.
i
I (

The ASCE Manual on Sedimentation Engineering (34) can be consultedJQrfurtheLcle.J!'!'!l~:_.!r.L

significant effect QlYi,~t~JJmnp~ral~U]LQn...fiiJLy'~locity -,.particular:lyJn.relatio-o.to.design.for-the tropical

... __
envii'onment - should be noted.
._--.. __ -. "-"--' ~ ..----..
- _... ~

1
• • r

7' . , (

I II
{

d I

I
~ 1.1
W
l- I. t
~~~.

1
.i ~
-~~ /-
1,(
I~
1 .. .....
m
_
'QI}
11 t
FAlL VELOCITY W, ell' SEC I
(

FIGURE 9 : FALL VELOCITY OF QUARTZ SPHERES IN WATER

:~ i
!
.ti
i
EFFECT OF CONCENTRATION ON FALL VELOCITY (I:

With increasing concE-ntration of sediment, actua} particle faa velocity wili- differ iiOm that iOr discrete 1~
i~
particles due to interference of other particles. Flocculation can occur in high concentrations of silt,
clay and organic particles when the particles coalesce to fall in a group at the higher velocity (44).
I;
Removal of such fine particles is, however, generally outside the scope of gravity sedimentation.
Hindered settling occurs when discrete particles settle in close proximity to one another, and their ••
velocity fields interfere. Interferenge. effects become significa!JL~1.~l,J~R~D2~~~_!~9im.~ntfQ.I}~E!ra­ J4
!J9!:l_~Jn.. ~!.~.~~ _?_!..?!.QQ9...~9CL(4_S)~hen-thereduction in~all velocity fora coarse silLSU_SR~.D~t~~
might be about 10% (44). The relation between concentration of suspended sediment and K - the I.~
"Karman constant is given by Vanoni (36) and is shown in Figure 10.
:t.~
In general, the effects of hindered settling are not significant for settling basin design.
~~
26
d( L

t,~
---=.;;::.,,1..: ...... '.'_ . __.-.' I(
..... _"
:,
,,; I
•
1'·/
 ~
..
, " CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins
..
"T

~ 0·4

~ \\
.
, ~
..
lie

1°<)
.

,)
i
0-1~
"- ~
......
J r--- ... ....
,
..).
.. • ' •. 10 "
MIAII ~.CXINCIIRRATlOH CII. ~ GIWa Pt:It~
•

9
..l'
FIGURE 10 : EFFECT OF CONCENTRATION ON SUSPENDED SEDIMENT LOAD
j~
l'. DETERMINATION OF SETTLING CHARACTERISTICS OF SUSPENDED SEDIMENT

,).... Design tall velocity for discrete particles can be measured directly by timing of fall through a kno~n
depth. It is usual, however, to use published data (such as figure9) to estimate fall velocity when the
). basin is principally concerned with settling out sand and coarse silt sizes. It is usual to carry out a
settling column analysis to det~rmine the settling characteristic curve for the suspension (45).
~.
.
I '

~ .. . :The Ideal Basin

~),
'l
The ideal horizontal settling basin, figure 11, demonstrates the basic theory of sedimentation developed
by Hazen (37).The following asSumption are made: !Jniform distribution.of flow and suspended solids
,).' at entry to settling zone; quiescent flow; solids entering deposition zone are not re-suspended. Consider
I
a sediment particle entering the basin at point x:

3
! : PLAHAREA
.) -;
~
. ":
~""

........
~: .. ~
:
.

T
, ~.

DEPTH
DISCHARGE •
~...
1
~.'

4 8ETTUNG PATH OF PART'ICLE

.~
FIGURE 11 : IDEAL SETTUNG TANK

27
r$
~
~
~_ ..".'- .:- ...

]
-:J
J
 ,
I

CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

I~

! f
Settling time, . t s = d!w
. /
Retention time, . t R = basin volume I discharge = dAlO ),
I

Where d =basin flow depth; A =mean plan area of basin; 0 =discharge. ~

f
For quiescent settling, all particles of settling velocity ware removed when retention time equals
~
settling time: ,I
I~
i.e. dAlO =d!w, or Q/A =w
il
In general for both ideal and real basins,the ratio wA 10 can be regarded as a dimensionless indicator , (
of the physical ability of a basin of plan area A to remove particles of fall velocity w at supply discharge ;I
Q. . <
,II
It follows, in the .ideal case, that for discrete particles: (
~ removal is independent of basin depth and flow-through velocity, !~
~ for a given discharge and suspended sediment load, remoVal is a function of basin surface
area; !~
The ratio Q/A is termed the "surface loading" or "surface overflow rate". !
It
Eff~cts of turbulence I
Camp (38) based his classic approach to settling basin design of the work of Dobbins (39). After
making simplifying assumptions that(a) fluid velocity, and (b) the turbulent mixing Coefficient are the
same through out the fluid, Camp derived a relation for:
I:
Ie
w] I
WA
ti =f· [Q'v.
;~
where v. is· the shear velocity and wI v. can be regarded as a dimensionless indicator of distribution Ie
of suspended sediment in vertical. Camp's solution to equation is shown graphically in Figure 12.
.,~
100r .l(~ .. _. -- .
,-r
I
. I). . ---~ I
.--cc·
t-
. -'?::~ , :~
aO~l'S ~ -- 1 I

~~--l
'(CI60~.
o-,,-~---'-',
n
t
>
o
.}
"::::::--===-- .!.
.(
II
~~
I

I,'" loG
'#-
-JJ \i'(
~~
I'~
(N.--
r. J

b ';'
2 o2
0.
J
o
(}Ol
~l

. ._--...1
;6
. 0-\ ",/
'1''(. 2-D 1(;-( (
.. Increasing Turbulance r
FIGURE 12 : CAMP'S SOLUTION FOR SETTliNG BASIN EFACIENCY

.f
,"
,II

28
~
{

~>,

~
~
 ,~.
;~~ CWPRS': Guidelinesfor Design ofDesi/ting Basins
, '

:_~
The shear velocity in the relation is given by Shear velocity,
r·i.3
p v. = .JgRS ..· (10)

!....~.' =
Where R hydraulic mean depth, and S = hydraulic gradient which is calculated from a boundary
resistance equation such as Manning1s and essentially depends on flow -.through velocity.
1

I.
I·~.
.' REVIEW OFTHE FUNCTIONS

}:l~' .' For the dimensioning of the basins, various sedimentr~m.9.yal fu~~tiQns such as proposed by ~.p.
J~
I r'..
Vetter - (40), T.R. Camp - (38), Hunter Rouse (17) Technical Conditions and Standards of .. '
USSR I.e.
,." ' " .. . TeaS (41), J Lambie (42), H.A.Einstein (43) and Hippola (44) are in use. These functions are based
I a:a . ,.
on the gravitational, diffusion or probability theory of the sediment transport. The functions evolved
.'. I~ ~ ..•.'.. . priorto 1958 were based on the assumption of unifo.rm distribution of suspended sediment'along the

~n"!' ',.
~., verticalwhich is not always justifiable. lambie, while proposing a function based on the hypothesis of
'~".. .... ." turbulent diffusion, showed that if a uniform distribution of sediment along the vertical is assumed, as
I.. : ~.".' is often done, the length of the basin would be excessive by as much as.. 35%. Hippola proposed a
-- !>\ .~<: ,
design procedure on the b~sis of the experimental research and the theory o~ probabili~and~Iaimed
. :,.,:~,' that the length of the baSin could be reduced by about 30 to 40 percent, In compan~on With that
I ~ obtained assuming uniform distribution of sediment along the vertical. .. ' " ." .

:.. ~.
,... ·In .1971, Pe~berton
and Lara (45) proposed a procedure for determining till; sediment deposition in
" :~. a settling basin. The procedure is based on the methodology contained in a study made by Einstein.
'", Lt:,' (43). E~nstein had studied the behavior of fine se?iments ~rried in s~spens~on by ~I~w ov~r gravel
" .'
i
r~' bed. Since the bed roughness was more andstudies pertained to the fine sediment, It IS obvIous that
;1'·... '. the vertical distribution of the sediment in the experiments conducted by Einstein would be nearing to
'. ,::~,.) uniform di?tribution. T~is is confirmed indirectly by the close.agreement of the results by the Einstein's
i,,' ;$>'"
method With the function proposed by Vetter brought out by Pemberton and Lara.

i ,::' ~1i•. ', Fro~ the above, ~t is seen t~at while dime~si?ning~he .basin, the estimation of t~e distri~ution of the
J.'i\ -., sediment on vertical at the Inlet of the baSin. IS of vital Importance as has been .rlghtly pOinted out by
':'- 1:-;). Hl~pola a~d also .by ~a~ble. Thi~ could be done by conducting actual measurement at the site or by
I; -,i uSing sediment dlstnbutlon function proposed by Hunter Rouse.
,,"- ~.'

b~':""
'

If the distribution is nearing triangular, the function proposed by Hippola would be appropriate, if it is
..'.- I'w ......'
"- r.L~.· ' paiabollc 01' trapezoidal, method proposed by Lambie would be preferable. If the distribution of the· ,'; ;,.
"--'~
...." : :,: .;"
.. sediment at the inlet is nearing rectangular.shape, then any other functions such as by Camp, Hunter ... ':;:~
Rouse, Vetter and Einstein could be used. In these also, if the sediment is mostly of medium size ~J1d· . ·:.:\>
.,-:'~,',
j .-~ r.., the basin is to be designed for the removal of medium sediment, then the function proposed by Roti~~;It~;
':"~
;J> .
,.:.:., or Camp would be suitable. However, if the sediment is mostly fine or the basin is to be design~q·!9L~~}':;,'~,;;;
: !,~~
1; .' the removal of fine fractions also, then the function proposed by Vetter or Einstei n would be preferabl~o'0\~;·~~~;,
. f .. ' ..;'.,: "/':";~C"':"'it
I·.::: (-~~ , ".
. as t hey have been denved or such conditions. '.~.:''--~':'jo'':',i;;,9y};
.
,', ..
. . '.• ;. :::;<~:~~f:~}~~;~
:'.;.. i-' '. Seyeral studies were conducted by Garde et al at (46) in 16 m long 0.75 m wide and 0.5Q .rryc'd.~:PJ{~~::~I,

;~' '~;: , f:';. .

flu~e for ~erification of existing m_ethods of the desig.n. of se~ling basins.. The length~.~L~~~"!~Wl~1$~1l
baSins vaned from 0.8 m to 5.0 m. Natural sand of speCific gravity of 2.65 was used as S~?!:~!;~!.;JJn:giS~J:M~

·',>~~;~r;{.
! i~ .,-.
... . ,".

~~~-. ~ .:
1 ' , . . 29 . .
t~_ t~:-'
.~<
·r~

~
l\ ~~'_::": 'C.' ,
..:.: _.:~: ".-: ':-•..• -.~t:':.~.=' .
r. .
I
I ..

f·1 ;3
:~
; ~
 CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

uniform s~mples of diameter 0.082 mm andO.106 mm were used. The discharge varied from 15.6 to
40.50 ips. Depth of fl.ow varied from 0.114 m to 0.405 m. The forward velocity ranged from 0.08 mls
to 0.2234 mls. the concentration ranged from 33 to 615.4 ppm. A total of 162 experiments were
conducted. On the basis of the experimental results Grade has proposed following relationship for
estimation of settling efficiency. .

11 = 110 (1-e -KLfJ) .........................(11)

For 110 & K I relationships· with ratio of fall velocity to shear velocity are given. The results of the
experiments with.coarse sediment were in good agreement·with.those actual efficiency was much
less. Further work for estimation of settling efficiency in respect of fine sediment, therefore, appears
to be necessary.

MODEL STUDIES CONDUCTED AT CWPRS

The CWPRS had opportunities to conduct hydraulic scale model studies for many projects, some of
which are Chukha and Tala Project in Bhutan, Dul Hasti , Nathpa Jhakri, Dhauli Ganga, Chamera
Stage-II, Teesta Stage-V, Parbati Stage-II and III, Sewa. All these projects have substantial power
potential and are Run-of-the-River schemes. Being Himalayan, these rivers carry heavy sediment
load during floods and have desilting basins with pressure flow due to local topography. The discharge
varied from 15 m3/s to 122 m3/s per unit and the lengths varied from 100m to 525 m. The generally
adopted shapes are shown below Figure 13:. .

WIDTH
~ .1 "-:-,n "I
4

x.
. ~
., .
Isl T
1
§ c' t'I!:
~,y , ! i/I
. . -. - SETTUNG TRENCH-- .

All the models were fabricated for using clear transparent acrylic or polycarbonate sheets for visualizing - ~
the flow conditions and sediment movement inside the desilting basin. The scales of the geometrically Ji
similar models varied from 1:16 toJ:~9~for~lrnulation of suspended sediment, crushed and sieved .
walnut shell powder having· size 0.06mm to---'-"'-'-'
0.3mm and specific
_.-.--- gravity.Qt1.35
-..... .
to l.4Q..w.asJls.ecL
~-
- .,~
~
.~

~
30 1
,~~
,':'

--"7,..7::';:':.-:';:... :_
 """.
~
~. CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins
-3
Observations made during experiments
~.

~ Turbulence generated by separation in inlet transition prevails just downstream of the inlet
~ transition which travels to about 15% to 20% of length of main basin and the flow in this region
is not fully forward. . .
,~,

oJ
.~
.

y To ensure effective settleme~t ofJtle qesired sedim~nt maximum forward velocity in the m:in )
basin should be limited to :

ForO.1mmparticle - 0.15m/s
~b ' !
I:'-~
I~ For 0.2mm particle - 0.30m/s I
.::1' For 0.3mm particle - 0.35m/s --.J
~ ..

,) ~ The hopper angle of around 40° (Fig-8) help in continuous sliding down of the settled sediment.

} With flatter angle of hopper, 'the sediment deposits on the side slope and after some deposition,
the material slides down in lumps causing blocking of the openings. Steeper slope is not

13 .. , ~
preferred as it causes higher turbulence and requires larger depth and longer length.

Formation of dunes in the space between two consecutive openings connecting main basin to

:~j. flushing tunnel is a c::ommon phenomenon.

~.'.
~,
j
~
.3
i

j')
I~ DUNE FORMATION IN SETTLING TRENCH

,~ FICm the observations made in the mode!s·, it is seen that the base width of the dunes in the.
I~'. direction of flow is about three times ot.the height of the dune. To prevent the obstruction to the
I;'
flow and to limit the height of dunes, settling trench below hoppers is essential in the main
I'~
~ '. :
basin. Due to longitudinal slope of the settling trench, the permissible depth of the dune can If
increase progressively towards downstream, advantage of which can be taken for increasing
"'"
.~

~.
the spacing either for reducing the number of openings or reducing the flushing discharge or
combination of both. The depth of settling trench of the order of 0.5m at the beginning varying I
to about 2.0m at the end is adequate. Lesser depth in the initial reaches is adequate because
-~ it is observed that no dunes are forming in the initial reaches of the main basin due to turbu-
lence. Advantage of the increased depth of settling trench can be taken in increasing the
~,.;>. spacing of the openings.

~;'?
31
~
't
.,
. ~,,-.-,

,I
.,..,J
.1
 CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

>- Flushing discharge of the order of 15% to 20% of Head Race Tunnel discharge is desirable to
avoid blocking of openings in the initial reaches of the main basin.

~ Pressure flow in the silt flushing tunnel is preferred to open channel flow in the case of con-
tinuous flushing system. As in the case of open channel flow in the flushing tunnel, the size of
the openings, required to pass the flushing discharge, as a free discharging orifice is ex-
tremely small as compared to the pressure flow. This results in blocking of the openings when
the sediment deposited slides down in lumps. As well as, the size of flushing tunnel and the
slope required in the case of open channel flow is much larger than pressure flow.

.-...-"':'~
~/
The first opening from the main basin to flushing tunnel is required to be larger ballow for the
, ..... ,/
... removal of coarser particles. Though no definite criteria can be suggested, it appears from
experience of model studies conducted in the past that the size of the first opening should be
adequate to pass 20 to 25% of flushing discharge with a velocity of 3 m/s. The size of the
flushing tunnel at the beginning should have nearly same area for this velocity..The minimum
.width of the flusrung tunnel at the beginning should be between 0.6m to 0.7m from construc-
tion point of view and accordingly depth is required to be adjusted. The total area of the
openings can be broadly estimated for passing the remaining discharge with minimum veloc-
ity of ~ m/s. The size of the openings may decrease progressively towards the downstream as
concentration and.size of sediment settling g6es on decreasing and depth of settling trench
increases towards downstream. The spacing can be effectively designed on the basis of model
experiments. It is also observed that the finer particles settling near the outlet end forms a
reverse ramp at the upstream edge of the skimming weir I outlet tunnel. !he la§!.c:?J:~ej}j.!]g
should, therefore, be sufficiently larger than the opening just on its upstream. .
...
-::=:::::::::::,,;=---~--~ -_._----=~----~~---..,...,~=_.

» The settling efficiency of the basin observed in the model was in close agreement with that
estimated analytically using Camp's criteria for the' hydraulic model parameters and the gra-
dation of the low specific gravity material used in the model.

12 -5 t1$ f{je-~I,?ij~r I

.-'.~-'"
~.

./

i-

..•...
~,/.
..... " .'""
' ....
"-.
I
...
''''''''-''-.." .
"""..........
. ,. '" _ _.. _-~
.... "

--- --_...-.-
..... --_.-_...

32

/
.. _---_._------------- .-'
 )

~ CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

j
CHAPTER - VII
~,
SCOPE FOR FUTURE STUDIES
J
~ From the chapter on the 'Layout and Design', it would be evident that many aspects of the design of
, the desilting basin are to be based on the assumptions and general guidelines. Therefore, there is
wide scope for future work on the different aspects.

~ ~ From the limited number of model studies conducted at the CWPRS, it was seen that inspite
of proper inlet divergence, provision of grid I screen for reducing the turbulence and inequalities
~ in the flow due to the divergence, is necessary. When the expansion ratio is small, the provision

J
.J
of grid I screen serves the purpose. However, there is no definite criteria for deciding the size
and number of openings. From the new model studies it was seen that the net flow area of all
'the openings should be between 60 to 80% of the gross flow ~rea at the end of inlet divergence.

I
~ ~
Further studies are therefore required to'be conducted for different hydraulic parameters for
giving better I more realistic criteria.

When the divergence is large and Froude number in the desilting basin is small, obtaining'
J satisfactory distribution of the flow in the desilting basin becomes a very difficult problem due

•~
to instability of the flow in the sub-critical expansions. In the case ofTrisuli Desilting Bas'in, the
design of a T shaped floating devi,ce had to be evolved by various trials and errors. Further

~
work on this aspect is therefore, needed for obtaining better distribution of flow in the basin.

~ In the case of basins designed for the removal of the coarse sediment, the flow velocity is
~,
limited to 0.30 mls: For desired removal of the medium sediment, the flow velocity is limited to
~ ?
0.15 mls. This is however, a broad classification. For sediment coarser upto 0.5 mm, velocities
larger tha~s would be permissible. Similarly for sediment finer than 0.1 mni diameter, ,

<~ t
further reduction from 0.15 mls may be necessary.J.!:1 the case of deep desilting basins havin,g
vertical expansions a~ the inlet and hi h level weii' at ,the outlet, the flow near the hopper
bottom would e m~c sac er !han the Q1ain flow In t e, asin, a.Qvantag£LOLWbich can be
taken for redUCing the Width and de th of the baSin by permlttihg veloCities larger 'than the
~ cntlca ve OCI cn lca tractive force critena or e open channel flow.
~
:;-----. --~---
~ While conducting the model studies for different basins the settling efficiency in the model was
-~ , estimated by using the model parameters for the low specific gravity material injected in the
model and then compared with that of actual removal obtained in the model. These studies
~" revealed that the settling efficiency estimated using Camp's criteria was in close agreement
,~ with the settling efficiency actually measured i obtained in the rnodel.ln prototyp6', the turbulence·
! would be higher and therefore, the settling efficiency could be less than that obtained in the
.,), model. However, in the model, though the turbulence is less, the low specific graVity material
i is 'used for reproducing the scalar fall velocity. Therefore, the particles having low specific

] gravity but scalar velocity in the model will have relatively larger surface area. It would, therefore,
be difficult to judge which effect would predominate. More work, on this aspect, would, therefore,
be needed.
J i );> An alternative would be to estimate the scale effects by conducting studies ona few basins
~,,' having different scales. Another alternative could be to establish amodel prototype conformity

.1,
,~-',
",
',' 33
1"-,

-~'- .. ' -"---

~ -.' ~-.,-_.- " ~_ .. -_ _-:':.:~

7)
"~
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins
,\
by conducting extensive and systematic field measurements for the different basins. So far the
feedback on this aspect from the projects already in operation is very poor. l\
~ The design of ah efficient flushing system is a must for obtaining the satisfactory performance
of the desilting basin. Inspite of extensive research work, it is not yet possible to give a well
defined criteria for the transport of the sediment through closed conduits or open channel for
whichcqnsiderable work is needed. , ~

~
The effect of temperature has not been taken into account while conducting the model studies.
Further research in this area is also needed. •
~

•
~
C
(

4
(

4
(

• (

, ~

.~
, ~
i

1
1
t
~
I I

•
~

j -
,J
.I.
,'4
I !

I~
(
j :

'l'~'
I
l
1J
34
I4
;1: i'
. I
I
~

"
~.
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins

~ REFEFlENCES
.~ 1. Stall J B: "Soil conservation can reduce Reservoir Sedimentation", Public Works Magazine,
Sept. 1962.
~.~

.~ 2. Allen P.B. and Welch N.H.: "Sediment yield reductions on water sheds and treated with flood
retarding structures", Transactions, American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Vol. 14, No.5,
1 Medison Wise., Sept-nct. 1971 .

~'..
. 3. DHILLON G.S. :"Sediment Exclusion", A State of Art Report, Status ReportNo.7, CBIp, March,
,~
3····. 1980.
w·
..)~. 4. CURIKRITON, ESEN I. LlKIN & VELIGOlU S. G. :"Use of Vortex Type Solid Liquid Separator

J in Pollution Contro!", Proc. XVlth Congress, IAHR, Vol.3 pp. 580-588 (1975).

~., 5. UPPAL H.L. : "Sediment Control in Rivers and Canals", CBIP Publication No.79, May 1966.

'J. 6.. U.S.B.A.: "Hydraulic Model Studies to Determine Sediment Control Arrangementfor Soccaro
Main Canal Head Works", . Hydraulic Branch Report No.. HY 479, March 1962. .
3
~.'.
7.. FOSTER D.M. : "Desilting Works for the All American Canal", Civil Engineering, Vol.8,
No.10, Oct. 1938, pp 649-652.
~.'
8. GalE C.v., CHITAlE S.V., AND KUlKANI V.K.: "Settling cum Flushing Tank on TrisuJi Power
Channel", "' International Symposium on River Mechanics - IAHR, Bangkok, 1973, pp 265-
'?S. · 276.
. ~ .•
~ .. ' 9~ SAXENA P.C. and KULKARNI V.K. : "Design of Desilting Basins", National Seminar on
Hydrological Problems Related to 'the Development of Power and Industries, liT, Kanpur,
Sept. 1976.

. ~. 10. C.W.P.R.S. : Specific Note No.2639 dated 06.07.1989 on "Energy Dissipation Arrangements
and Desilting Tank for Kahalgaon Super Thermal Power Project".
~~ .. '.,

-~ 11. C.W.P.R.S : Specific Note No.1584 dated 02.08.1976 on "The Design of Decantation Chamber
in Extension Scheme of Shanan Hydel ProJect". . .
~-:' 12. C.W.P.R.~. : "Studies for Western Kosi Main Canal Silt Ejector", 53rd Annual R&D Session
!~ of CBIp, May 1986, VoLlI, pp 181-193. .

~... 13. C.W.P.R.S. : Specific Note NO.2007 dated 03.10.1981 on "Model Studies for the Desilting
Chamber Complex for Chukha Hydel Project".
,~
~
'~
,,,

~ . ...,.....:. .
I 14. C.W.P.R.S. : Specific Note NO.2501 dated 18.02.1988 on "Hydraulic Model Studies for Dul-
Hasti Desilting Basin".

-
~ .. 35

:~,,-
".~
'-. ...
';'::::'~,.--.~-~_

;II

1
,~
._-
 '.-
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins i"
,,-.
15. C.W.P.R.S.: Specific Note NO.2708 dated 14.03.1990 on Model Studies for Desilting Basin·
A!.
for Nathpa Jhakri Projecr (Interim Report).

16. C.W.P.R.S.: Specific Note No.2753 dated 07.08.1990 on"Studies for Nathpa Jhakri Desilting
../;
r

Basin" (Second Report). -<It

17. ROUSE HUNTER: "Engineering Hydraulics", John Wiley and Sons Inc. New York-1949, pp
",...,
811-814. ~
, I

.~
18. ALBERTSON M.L., DAI 'lB., JENSEN R.A. AND ROUSE H.: "Diffusion of Submerged Jets",
Transactions, ASCE, Vol.115, 1950, P 588.

.'-
.~
' ....
19. WILSONW.E.:"Mechanics of Flow with Non-colloidal Inert Solids", Transactions ASCE
Vol.107, Paper No.2167, 1942, pp 1576-1594.
I ,#!t
,:f ..
20. DURAND R. and CONDOLIOS E. : "Experimental Investigation on Transport of Solids in
Pipes", Le Journels d' Hydraulique, Societe Hydrotechnique de France, Grenoble France,
,
.111
....
.1 'W:f
.-:.:..
June 1952. i ,.
"
I -
21. ZANDII. and GOVATOS G.: "Heterogeneous Flow of Solids on Pipelines", Jnl. Hyd. Divn.- I ~
!~-
ASCE, VoJ.93, No. HY 3, Proc. Paper 5244, pp 145-159, May 1967. i-

22. C.W.P.R.S. : "Sediment Transport and. its Exclusion Through Closed Conduits", Annual
/.,:
Review of Research Scheme Applied to River Valley Projects - 1976. I:
I~
:~
23. C.W.P.R.S. : "Sediment Transport and its Exclusion Through Closed Conduits", Annual
Reviewof Research Scheme Applied to River Valley Projects - 1979. 1/'
I~
24. GRAF W.H. and ACAROGLU E.R: "Sediment Transport in Conveyance Systems",
Bulletin of the 'International Association of Scientific Hydrology, V.oI.XIII, No.2, 1968.
ri'" ..:
25. VANONI. V.A., Editor: "Sedimentation Engineering" - ASCE Manuals and Reports on
j'"'
Engineering Practice - No.54, Reprint 1977 "-
f l:
26. EMAD IMAM and McCORGUODALE : "Simulation of Flow in Rectangular Clarifiers", ASCE
Journal of Environmental Engg., VoJ.109, No.3, June 1983. if'"
27. SCHAMBER, D.R.and LAROCK, B.E.:"Particle Concentrattion Predictions in Settling Basins",
ASCE Journal of Environmental Engg., Vol. 109, No.3, June 1983.
li·:
If~
".-,,' J.

28. LAROCK, B.E., CHUN, W.K.C., Schamber, D.R.: "Computation of Sedimentation Basin ~~i
Behaviour", Water Research, Vol.17, No.8, 1983.
.lr~~
-
29. McCORQUODALE, and ABDEL-GAWAD, S.M.: "Numerical Simulation of Rectangular Settling ,~.!ii
Tanks", Journal of Hydraulic Research, Vo1.23, No.2, 1985.. "'
jr1
.~~

36 ., ~ifi' t'
-<..'

-- '~--:.:' ...... -- -_:.---. ~.

.;._ ., .
.
.

.,.A.
1«:
..
."
~.
-t..

.J

,.. ,
~.
'"
"
:~

~
.~.
.,' C W P R S :.Guldeline$iJL~"~=,,_~__..
30. DeVANTIER. B.A. and LAROCK. B.E.:"Modelling Sediment - Indu~',~~~riY;c~~~;ti;:::
1~ Sedimentation Basins.... ASCE Journal of Hydraulic Engg.• Vo1.113. No.1. January 1987.

~ 31. RAJAGOPAL. K and BHARGAVA. D.S.: "Modelling for Class-I Sedimentation". ASCE Journal
of Environmental Engg.• Vol.115, No.6, December 1989. .
~.

32. STAMOU. A.I.• ADAMS. E.W. and RODI.W. : "Numerical Modelling of Flow and Settling in
.~' Primary Rectangular Clarifiers". Journal of Hydraulic Research, Vo1.27. No.5. 1989.
,
33. Chapters (a) A 8 and (b) C 2. In Applications in hydraulics. Book3. Techniques in Water
I:~ Resources Investigations of the US Geological Survey. US .Govt.• Printing Office. 1970.
i~'"
~ 34. Chapters (a) A 8 and (b) C 2. In Applications in hydraulics. Book3. Techniques in Water
,~ Resources Investigations of the US Geological Survey. US Govt.• Printing Office, 1970.

•
j 35. Tebbutt. T.H.Y. Principles of water quality control. 20d edition. Pergamon Press. Oxford. 1977.

36. Vanoni. V.A.: "Some Effects of Suspended Sedimentation Flow Characteristics" Proc. Of 5 th
'. t
~. Hyd. Conference 1952. State University of IOWA, Tech. Bulletin 34.

3 37. Hazen. A. on sedimentation. Trans ASCE. Vol LIII, 1904. P 63.

~ 38. Camp, T.R. Sedimentation and the Design of settling tanks, Trans ASCE. Vo1111. 1946, Paper

3 No.2285. . .

~ 39. Dobbins. W.E. Effects of turbulence on sedimentation. Trans ASCE. Vol 109. 1944, P 629.

j 40. Vetter, C. P.: Technical aspects of silt problem on Colorado fiver Civil Engineeri ng Vol.1 O. No.11.

~
Nov.1940. pp 698-701.

41. 1: CaS:TechniCal Conditions and Standards for designing settling basins of hydropower stations-
r? Moscow 1949. .

.~ 42. Lambie, J.: Method de Calcule approache des ouvrage de decantation' La Houille Balanche
~,~l No. Special B/1958; pp 744-758.
.) 43. Einsiein. H.A.: Finai' report spawni'ng ground;' University of California Hydraulic Engineering
Laboratory 16 P. 2 tables 10 figs.•1965.
~"
~.' 44. Hippola. U.T.B.: Influence of suspended sediment 'distribution on settling basin design'
International symposium of river mechanics Bangkok Jan.1973, pp 277 to 288.
,J'
f. .,

I ,
.' 45. Lara, J.M. & Pemberton, E.L.: A procedure to determine sediment deposition in a settling
:~ basin' Sedimentation Section. Division of Planning Co-ordination Bureau of ReGlamation, U.S.

~
Department of Interior August 1971.

iJ,.
'~"
~
<o>'
. . 37

~.-c.~--_.~~.__
~
~
;J
•
 "
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins ~ I

(
46. Garde, R.J., Ranga Raju, K.G.and Sujudi, A.W.R.: Design of settling basins, Journal of Hydraulic I

Research, Vo1.281990"No. 1, IAHR Journal.

)C

47. C.W.P.R.S.: Technical Report No. 3813 dated Aug. 2001 on "Hydraulic Model Studies for
Desilting Basin of Chamera H.E. Project Stage-II, Himachal Pradesh".
If
~
48. C.W.P.R.S.: Technical Report No. 3930 dated Oct. 2002 on "Hydraulic Model Studies for Desilting
,

Basin of Parbati H.E. Project Stage-II, Himachal Pradesh".

'
~

~
49. C.W.P.R.S.: Technical Report No. 3725 dated June 2000 on "Hydraulic' Model Studies for
Desilting Basin of Dhauliganga H.E. Project, Uttaranchal". '

50. C;W.P.R.S.:Technical Report No. 3897 dated July. 2002 on "Hydraulic Model Studies for Desilting
,Basin of Teesta H.E. Project Stage-V, Sikkim". I
51. C.W.P.R.S.:Technical Report NoA093 datedMar. 2004 on "Hydraulic Model Studies for Desilting
I
I

Basin for Sewa H.E. Project Stage-II, J&K".

\
I
(

I,

"

38 ·t:
;>:~

,;1

II
J
fi

. '.(
~
.,
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basills

TABLE-1

DESIGN PARAMETERS OF DESILTING BASINS IN PROTOTYPE AND MODEL SCALES

'~
Project Size (m) Discharge in cumec Size of Mean % Model
i particle
be
flow' effi- Scale

I;~··
to through ciency (G.S.)
.1 settled velocity
,;f (mm) mls

:~•... L B D Inlet Outlet Flushing

Trishuli 170 33.5 '7.4 31.2 • • 0.2 0.15 90 . 1:20

,; J'
:i~.'·
'~
Shanan 30.5 46.2 2.5 33.3 27.75 5.q5 0.2 0.3 80 1:16

\ .') .. Ramam 75 22 4 9.35 • • 0.1 0.1 . 90 1:10

I '. .
;~ Kosi 138 84 3.92 240 201 39 0.23 0.55 80 1:25

\~
Baira-Siul 105 6.6 5.2 14.2 11.34 2.86 0.2 0.35 90 1:20

.\ : ",
Chukha' 348 8.5 11.7 59.4 47.4 12.0 0.2 0.63 90 1:25

F~ b1 our Hasti 300 15 ,14.5 ~22.5 106.5 16

,~ 0.64 90 1:30
(~ / .Kahalgaon 50 13.5 2.75 2.83 2.27 0.56 0.1 OJ3 90 1:10

I~ Nathpa Jhakri 525 15 25.5 121.5 101.25 20.25 0.2 0.33 90 1:30

I ~·~
~:-

'j

Ohauli Ganga 300 13.0 16.2 64.0 53.5 10.5 0.2 - 90 1:30
~. ~ -

l'~''
I,· L Tala 250 13.9 18.5 57.0 47.5 9.5 0.2 0.263 90 1:30

.'I; '7.
Chamera (II). :175 16 '. 21,8 : 85.2 :710 , 1.4.20 . 0.2 ' 0.262 9{t . 1.:30 1

1, ~'~
~~
, .// Teesta (V) 300
.. _.
20.0 22.8
- 116.95 97.46 19.49 0.2 0.317 90 1:30

\~
t~ ~
Parbati 200 15.0 16.0 38.67
~-
~
29.01 9.66
® 0.251 90 1:25

.~.
I~ -' . (Intermitt~nt flushing using all the inlet discharge)

R
!~
)1, ,
\.~'
-;;; . 39
~';;~. '
.L

•. _~'"'"'7_- -;:-~- .-::::"~~_~~-'--"':"~

_ _,-,,__ , _

'1.]
, .J
.Cj
 ·r
I"
>

CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basin.> ;.

~
~
ANNEXURE-I 'I,
~
SIMULATION OF SUSPENDED SEDIMENT IN THE MODEL ~
. . . fA
Apart from proper reproduction of design features and inlet and outlet conditions for achieving ad- (
equate distribution of flow in the basin, the accuracy of the results of the model studies would depend ~
upon the realistic simulation of the distribution of the suspended sediment on a vertical Which is given
by following equation developed by Rouse. •
fA
t
I .
where; ~
(
Cy = Concentration at depth "y" above bed level i'
Ca
d
=
=
Concentration at O.05d above bed level
Depth of flow . ~,
y = Depth at which concentration
.
Cy is to be calculated t
a = O.05d I.

f
~

~: ~[d~Y a:.J ,
J.

~
wherein; ~
w
and' z= KJgds
~
. t
t
w' = Fall velocity of particles
K =
--
Von Karman constant
Acceleration due to gravity
*
g
s = Water surface slope f
k
Thus, for the proper simulation of the distribution of sediment on a vertical, 'Z' in model should be
equal to 'Z' in prototype for corresponding diameter of the sediment. ~

w w
~
2 = =2 = . p
1Il,J
Kill g nr dill Sill
III
P 'C-
K!.' 'lj g!.' d!! S!! if
L

K p JgpdpSI'
C
:. wI' = 1\'//1 K g/ll d/ll Sill
/II
J.I
K
_1'-
g
and ---f!- are equal to J f
Kill gl/l
~
(
(
i

•
i.l

'I

40 •
C
"1

t'
~ ._-::.::=:.=_......_.__.__.-'-"-'- -- ..':'..-. _ __
.. ._~,
I

~ {

1
"
 J

~ CWPRS : Guidelinesfor Design ofDesilting Basins

t1 Moreover in geometrically similar scale model
It
fI' ~=]
rt Sill

'I Hence for geometrically similar scale models

If
It' W
l'
=W/II
,
Jf:
-d
l'
/II

~ ..
Thus, a relationship between the diameterof low specific gravity material used in the model and that
, of the sediment in prototype can be worked out uSing above equation.

I~,,' ,
, ,

~:
(~
~
I~
f~ I'

~"

·~,
a~ --
r

~
I~
I~
t~
r~
•'J
,:~"
'; )
-----------------------------------------------
~ 41

!. "
.,~

~~<L,_,
,~
:~
~J
,J
';~
 , . ,.
'!"

CWPRS : Guidelinesfor Design ofDesilting'Basins ~

ANNEXURE-II ~
~
TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF DESIGN OF DESILTING BASIN
,.1
Data given:
~
Inlet Discharge = 48 cumecs \ ),
Outlet discharge = 40 cumecs ,
~umecs (Qav) I
Average discharge
Flushing discharge
Inlet tunnel
=
=
=
.r8 cumecs {20%}
4 m. dia 0 shaped
\
t"
r
"

Assuming width of basin = l 12m

),
Note: Width of basin depends on geology of the area.

Stepwise calculations are given below: -F S'~S"

~

r',
•

Step-1 : ~
; :\.~x~t
- - -'
Area of Basin ~~"~"
: ~~""
." I~..$o" ~
./ " (9'
+
t
," .J.
. .'\ J-t.o~
Given width of basin = 12m
P5ssumingvelocity in the basin < 0.3 m/s.- J' ~
f

i Assuming hopper angle

Assuming trench size
=
=
40Q
1.5mx1 m
-
~
I Area of basin = Q average I velocity
= Qav IV
~

I =
=
44/0.3
~67 m2 (Say 1~O m2)
-
t"

Area of basin = A1+A2+A3

"
..
;-
=
=
=
[(TI r2 /2) +(h2x12)+(Y2 (12+1.5)xh3]
[ (TI 6 2 /2)+(h2x12)+(Y2 (12+1.5)xh3]
[(56.54)+(h2x12)+29.7]
,;

= [86.24+( h2x12)] ~
150 = [86.24+( h2x12)]
h2 = 5.31m ~
h2 = 5.35m (Say)
Actual Area = 150.44 m2 •
Actual velocity = 44/150.44 "'~9"
.,
II
••
-;.
I'
= 0.292 m/s.
~~ ~~'.-
.. -.. . . . . . . . '1",:!'
. . '·..··1I
,~
) • -..................; J
Step-2:
' ..........., j ->. i
Length of inlet transition I'<..
I Assuming slope of transition fin 2.3
= I
1 ...
~----
1 r·=~l· ..
"*·
:I'
II
I
I"

~
L~jJ""
1.!J3x2.3 26.979
= 27.0m •
j! ,(
I

<
42
,
"
,4

.,
I
I
'.1

~t.,:_,

-::- ....
-"::.;::::::o:--'":'--~- ':" __ __
.:_~._J ' -_~ •• ~.

.,
., ...... ----=-.' :'

'~
(
 ~_.

"r--
~.-!
-. ""....i . '
. ,
r-.
.
~

~
CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Basins
' -:-.-... .
I J '.
§tep-3:
~ij
-...,,", /1 - 71~.I-rZ
~
~.~-
Check for flar(! angle of inlettransition ---
o,vn
0

.;
~'.
I ~
Tancj> 4/27.0
~!! =
~

= 8.42 l! < 9Q . IS.-f) _ 8 rS, Ch

(;:W
(Ai,,! ,.. ~--~----

r L (3'"
fIC' ". J
.step-4:
0·6\'9
~~--:-"'-

'- .
1""'-1 '
,...- if. I":"";' . Length of basin
'- .1 .
~ ~"'. d=Effective, depth = 15.75m
i'l ~. Average forward = [(40+48) /2]1150.44
~·I.i velocity (V)
Le!ft~. Dt? I)t~
~'.J
~ l~
=
=
44/150.44
0.292 m/s. < 0.3m/s
- ..
Z
_-'-
~i I~.·."
Ii .. ..:\
I·~.d I .} :
Fa y;.; :7vv ~ V
C" .~
\ Required fall velocity (V0)
V~GJY'
CrS
/
J, . r·
'" f' r, '"'="'
LJF't·
(UV) =(0/ V0)
:-. I,J
~.
t\:;
I \ •

As two parameters fall velocity and Length are unknown trial and error method is used:
pi
~:
I....-.
'- I: .
~- ~.
Assuming L
For 0.2mm diameter particle fall velocity
=
=
210m.
0.025 m/s.-
I ". (210/0.29?) . .
)>-

~~'"

~ I"
~.
~\fo'
1122 x wlV
.
:1
=
=
15.75No)
0.0222 .
\
~r-
~.. "\0
'-122xO.025/Q.,2~7
w/v --
i =
=
19~?~9
0.025/0.0222

"'-.;"'IS .
__--::,.0

.-
~ .. Removal ratio
=
=
t126
91%'
I
--,~."--.

\
~.~. Performance and efficiency subjected to confirmation by hydraUlic model experiments. \
I

';~ ~:
1

c·!'
St13P-5.:· I
i
~".,~.
.. .
Estimation of settling efficiency by camp's criteria
jC; .~.
" I".:.-
'~' .. Typical gradation curve has been developed below considering the size of opening in the trash rack

!e: ~ . '
and presuming that pebbles up trash rack size may enter into the desilting basin though its percentage
would be small. In the gradation curve shown below size of opening in trash rack has been assumed
i~i: I~
~ ';'.-
'. to be 60 mm.
I"..~-
d:
1 '-..or..
,,~

•••• .,-:.
.~

! .• '"'~.
'1'"
'f "
,"" '~.
./,-

'/.:v).-/:
c~ ~',~: .. '. 43 . .'(
I'~' ~<)
.c
I
.' "J :,.~''C='':''<''''''
,~
,.!

'~,,1
c ,. rT

~'J'
';1 ~~I
 CWPRS : Guidelines for Design ofDesilting Ba. !.

TYPICAL GRADATION CURVE

100 I
ill ! I
I !
lUI Ilj I
a: 80 'V't' IiI. !
zw 60 1--.-
.
i i
I
u: 40
I ';fl..20
I o
,

,I 0.01 0.1
I

1 10 100
I
PARTICLE DIAMETER (mm)
L-- ~ - l
I

ESTIMATION OF SETTLING EFFICIENCY BY CAMP'S CRITERIA

I
I
v = 0.292 mls v =0.0219m/s
0

Ia;
:~ .,
~ 51. No. % Finer Particle Oia
(mm)
Fall Velocity
(w) mls -----_.
122x wN W/Vo R. Ratio I
I
I
1. 5 0.043 0.0016 0.668 0.073 0.07
2. 15 0.048 0.0020 0.835 0.091 0.09
3. 25 0.050 0.0022 0.919 0.100 0.10
. 4. 35 0.057. 0.0029 1.211 0.132 0.13
5. 45 0.065' 0.0038 1.587 0.173 0.17
6. 55 0.075 0.0049 2.040 0.223 0.22
7. 65 0.095 0.0077 3.217 0.351 0.35
8. 75 0.~50 0.0167 6.9n. 0.762 0.68
. 9. 85 0.850 0.089 37.18 4.00 t.OO
r
~

10. 95 15.000 0.4500 188.013 20.54 1.00

I

Overall settling efficiency = 3.81 x 100/10

= 38.10%
V = average forward velocity (mls),
Vo = required vertical velocity (mls)
II = (UV) = (0/ Vo)

For national gradation curves refer figure above.

I.
;j ,.
~ '~:;' ..
44

L ....... -)" ..... ~._-._ .. _ .. _-_.. -.- ~...:-.~

 ~-. ~

.
I

~ .< •

f&" ,:-
;.~~ CWPRS ; Guidelinesfor Design ofDesilting Basins, .

~~.
~.' .. ~.
Step-6:

Using the above results settling efficiency curve for various size sediment particles is prepared and
---
~I . 1-' '.-l' ~~
.is .shown below: .
,k, "'".
(&:.."
....,. -,
r
i
e~ . ,i
I
SETTLING EFFICIENCY CURVE
i
,.-i
....... !
1. )
I 100
i
~ Ii .".
0
z 80
/~J~
...-.. t. .
I w
I u: (3 60 I j

C'! i LL 40
I Wrf.
CI~!
j
20
I I
I 1
j

(",
,,--.
. i o !

I o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

t! . ~. PARTICLE DIAMETER (mm)
1

~: ~,
C ~;i . . ~

~! ~it::
.,",

w,
-. 'j
~: ;
lot;,' "1 '\J o.:y ·'~J,A..,
, ~i
'".• Ii
~ r~:
• 1'.rD· ~:t-' 'D~~ ~.

.-...J . . . . !
1).·~·~6~ J,.;s. :J--"'~.L flO> cYU,'/,rt j"i--

""'- ~ ...
... . I,,: "j
~..::;. - I r~cL ~ v-..... ~.L... ')l'...._.t'''''J ( )...\ u.-v. ~ I'..Q.hvt",.., J.-.'4'P'- '..;. ..\'1A..~-v.:.(.
~: .,~~ .•
J

J.. I . j a <-"-·'-f;~"·i-0. 0-.:>. v--.•. ~ r. .,)

~>C~;
. :, i {~lt-0 ...u.... . ."'1]..,
.
'd I.. ~ •.".l.",
-'

~.",,'
~;.
l---.
~ oO.·o",~ )~o",o
tN--A "}--y ~~.I
-- ....
" .. "j" ,
$~-.n-.t ~~ l '5'00", )00':- 1~ ) L:
~ ~
:~~

~'::; F fw-... . I . •

~:! L~
~
~.--A ~ '"'", ..... ~ ....D~J.~.

Lu, ~ \ ~.' YoJ:;-o

':.1
1
.........
.'-.. ~l\' ; • S ,,V, .r ~1 .Q..,~t

,~.'._f ;~i-
.. ~ ~'
:I~":': 13,;....
.' ; :
~-~ ~ ..

'i, ),'
:.~~
,. ...r~~!
. -~ .
'.-
l'""~~<_<,~« <
,'

~J . • ' ......

1~.I~
,~~: :J
'0