Calculation of Bed Shear Stress

Why is bed shear stress important?

Provides an index of fluid force per unit
area on the stream bed, which has been
related to sediment mobilization and
transport in many theoretical and empirical
treatments of sediment transport

Calculation of Bed Shear Stress

Various methods based on
Reach-averaged relations
Theoretical assumptions about structure
of turbulence
Direct measurements of turbulence

Reach-Averaged Method
Mean Bed Shear Stress
- force per unit area
exerted by a block of
water on the channel
boundary as it moves
downstream
F = WDXsin (N) [MLT-2)

b = RS (N m-2)
(downstream oriented
component of the weight of
the block)

Reach-Averaged
Method
Advantages
Serves as an index of the total
resistance by ALL frictional
influences on the flow (particle-,
bedform-, bar-, and planformscale effects)
Relatively easy to measure

Disadvantages

Does not provide information on spatial variation in resistance at

sub-reach scale
Is not necessarily a good index of the competence of the stream
to move sediment

Law of the Wall Method

Based on the
assumption that the
velocity profile in
the lower portion
(15-20%) of an open
channel flow has a
logarithmic
structure:

Law of the Wall Method

u* z
u = ln
z0
u = mean velocity (in vertical), u* = shear velocity ( gRS = b / ),
= von Karmans constant, z = distance above bed, z0= roughness
height (height above bed where velocity goes to zero)

Law of the Wall Method

z u*
u*
u = ln = ln z ln z0 = m ln z + b
z0

where
u*

m=

u*

, b=

u*

ln z0 = m ln z0

Law of the Wall Method

Measure mean velocities (u) at various heights
above bed in lower 15-20% of the flow
Regress the values of u against the logarithms
of z to get estimates of m and b
Calculate values of shear velocity, bed shear
stress, and roughness height

u* = m , b = u , z 0 = e
2
*

b / m

Law of the Wall Method

Advantages
Provides local measure of shear stress
Can be used to map spatial patterns of shear
stress and roughness height at subreach scale
Standard error of estimate of regression can
provide an estimate of error in u*
Disadvantages
Flow must conform with logarithmic velocity
profile
Errors in measurement of u and z can influence
results (least precise of law of wall methods)

Variants on Law of the Wall

u*
z
u = ln
ad p / 30

a = 3, p = 84 Whiting and Dietrich, 1990

a = 2.85, p = 90 Wilcock et al. 1996

d p = particle size for which p % of material is finer

Advantage
requires only a single near-bed velocity reading in lower 20% of
flow for estimate of u*
Disadvantage
requires information on the grain-size distribution of bed material
Applies to gravel-bed rivers only and assumes that empirical
relation z0 = (adp/30) applies to all such rivers

Variants on Law of the Wall

u*
h

U = ln
e( ad p / 30)
U = depth - averaged velocity
h = flow depth
e = base of natural logarithms
Advantage
Has less variability than other law of the wall methods
Disadvantage
requires measurement of velocity profile to determine mean [could
perhaps be used with a single measure of U (6/10th depth)]

Evaluation of Law of the Wall

Precision (Wilcock, 1996)
Lowest precision slope
of velocity profile
Highest precision
depth-averaged velocity
Says nothing about
accuracy of the various
methods

Direct Measurement:
Near-bed Reynolds
Shear Stress
b' = ub' wb'
ub' = near - bed downstream velocity fluctuation
wb = near - bed vertical velocity fluctuation
can also look at resultants in 2D and 3D

b 2d = bxz + bxy =
2

b 3d = bxz + bxy + byz

2

) +( )
= (u w ) + (u v ) + (v w )

u'bw 'b

u'bv 'b

'
b

'
b

v 'b = near-bed lateral velocity fluctuation

' '
b b

'
b

'
b

Direct Measurement: Near-bed

Reynolds Shear Stress
Advantage
Direct measurement of turbulent shear stress near
the bed
Disadvantage
How close to the bed do you need to be? (seems to
depend on roughness characteristics and purpose of
measurement)
Many measurement devices cannot measure velocity
fluctuations accurately close to the bed
Need 2-D measurements of turbulent fluctuations

Rough Boundary
Layers

Outer Layer
Logarithmic Layer
Roughness Layer

Form-Induced
Sublayer
Interfacial Sublayer
(pressure in these two
regions may deviate from
hydrostatic and form drag
components of the total
stress emerge)

Subsurface Layer

Boundary Layer Structure over Rough

Beds (Nikora et al. 2001)

Shear stress
Profile method

Recall
b = DS

For any level in the flow

= g ( D z )S

or
= b ( 1 z / D )
i.e. shear stress varies
linearly with height above
the bed (assumes
hydrostatic conditions)
Project profile of shear
stresses measured over
depth to the bed

Shear Stress Profile Method

Advantages
No need to estimate roughness height
Based on shear stress measurement over
fluid column

Disadvantages
Requires 2D velocity measurements
Viscous effects or near-bed effects
disrupt linear profile of shear stresses
near the bed

Turbulent Kinetic Energy Method

TKE = k = 0.5(u + v + w )
b = C1k
'2

C1 0.19
Alternative Formulation

b = C2 w
C2 = 0.9

'2

'2

'2

Turbulent Kinetic Energy Method

Advantages
No need to estimate roughness height
Single near-bed reading of 3-D velocities

Disadvantages
How close to bed
3-D velocity measurements
Values of C1 and C2 not derived from
streams or rivers (oceans)

Shear Stress Partioning

Bed forms and large roughness
elements produce form drag
(resistance) that differs from
the drag required to mobilize
grains on the bed of the river

Connecting shear stress

to sediment movement
requires isolating the
portion of the shear
stress associated with
grain drag

sf

C H
= b 1 + D 2
2

H
1
ln
( z0 )sf

sf = bed shear stress due to skin friction

b = total bed shear stress

CD = drag coefficient for bedforms (0.21 separated

flows; 0.84 unseparated flows)
= bedform wavelength
H = bedform height
(from Wiberg and Smith 1989)

Is Turbulent Shear Stress the

Right Index?

Some recent studies have

questioned whether looking at
turbulence stresses is the right
approach for understanding
sediment transport

Instead look at actual sediment

mobilization and transport and
relate it to metrics other than
shear stress (readings for
today)

instantaneous longitudinal

velocity and its duration above

a threshold level for transport
u = <u> +u
Thorne et al., 1989

High bedload transport rates occur

during sweeps (quad IV) and
outward interactions (quad I) when
instantaneous U is high and
sustained

References
Bauer, B. O., D. J. Sherman, and J. F. Wolcott (1992), Sources of uncertainty in shear stress and roughness length
estimates derived from velocity profiles, The Professional Geographer, 44, 453-464.
Bergeron, N. E., and A. D. Abrahams (1992), Estimating shear velocity and roughness length from velocity profiles,

Water Resources Research, 28, 2155-2158.

Biron, P. M., S. N. Lane, A. G. Roy, K. F. Bradbrook, and K. S. Richards (1998), Sensitivity of bed shear stress
estimated from vertical velocity profiles: the problem of sampling resolution, Earth Surface Processes and
Landforms, 23, 133-139.
Biron, P. M., C. Robson, M. F. Lapointe, and S. J. Gaskin (2004), Comparing different methods of bed shear stress
estimates in simple and complex flow fields, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 29, 1403-1415.
Kim, S.-C., C. T. Friedrichs, J. P.-Y. Maa, and L. D. Wright (2000), Estimating bottom stresses in tidal boundary
layer from acoustic doppler velocimeter data, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 126, 399-406.
Nikora, V. and Goring, D. 2000. Flow turbulence over fixed and weakly mobile gravel beds. Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, 126, 679-690.
Nikora, V., Goring, D., McEwan, I, and Griffiths, G. 2001. Spatially averaged open channel flow over rough bed.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 127,123-133.
Thorne, P.D., Williams, J.J. and Heathershaw, A.D. (1989) In situ acoustic measurements of marine gravel
threshold and transport. Sedimentology, 36, 61-74.
Wiberg, P.L. and Smith, J.D. 1989. Model for calculating bed load transport of sediment. Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, 115, 101-123.
Wilcock, P. R. (1996), Estimating local bed shear stress from velocity observations, Water Resources Research, 32,
3361-3366.