• 沒有找到結果。

第五章 結論與建議

5.2 建議

√ (5- 1) ( ) ( ) ( ) (5- 2) 可用於計算攔河堰下游軟弱岩盤沖刷深度。

5.2 建議

1. 現地流量隨時間變化,任一時間的流量皆不相同。當洪水來時,

流量會先增加,達到最大值之後開始降低,並非一直保持最大流 量;但在本研究中並未考慮時間因素,因此在計算過程中採用的 流量為歷史最大流量,並以歷史最大流量的情況下持續沖刷,所 得到的沖刷結果。因一場洪水事件中並非全時段其流功皆大於沖 刷門檻,故可採用單一事件的流量歷線將時間因素加入,以表示 任一時間的水流條件皆不相同,因此可找出某一時段內的流功大 於沖刷門檻,如此表示才能更接近現地的情況。

2. 計算出的沖刷坑深度與形狀無法以現地資料來驗證,除了義興壩 與石岡壩有進行地形測量外,其餘攔河堰皆缺乏相關資料。即使

137

有地形測量資料也無法保證沖刷坑內完全為水流所沖刷的沖刷 坑,也許沖刷坑內有經由水流所攜帶下來的卵礫石或泥沙淤積。

可利用室內實驗加以佐證,或是以現地的長期量測來觀察沖刷坑 的深度以及變化。

3. 在案例研究中有些攔河堰在歷史最大流量的情況下因下游尾水 深大於堰體與下游岩盤之間的高程差,使得水流型態並非本研究 所探討之垂直射流,因此無法使用本研究之方法計算沖刷坑深度 與形狀;但當水流流量較小時,下游尾水深小於堰體與下游岩盤 之間的高程差,此時的水流型態即為本研究所探討之射流型態,

仍可使用本研究之方法計算沖刷坑深度與形狀。未來可針對特定 攔河堰不同流量條件下,分別計算其沖刷坑深度與形狀,以避免 下游尾水深大於堰體與下游岩盤之間的高程差。

4. 現地攔河堰下游岩盤的沖刷,除了會在堰前產生局部沖刷坑之外,

往往也會判隨著下游河道的下刷,使河道深槽化。這部分需計算 水流經過跌水消能後剩餘的流功以及水流在下游河道對岩盤作 用之流功,並以此流功與下游岩盤之沖刷啟動門檻相比較,以判 斷是否能繼續對下游岩盤造成沖刷。

i

參考文獻

1. Aihua, Li and Peiqing, Liu (2010). “Mechanism of rock-bed scour due to impinging jet.” Journal of Hydraulic Research, 48(1): 14-22.

2. Akhmedov, T. H., (1988). “Calculation of the depth of scour in rock downstream of a spillway.” International Water Power and Dam Construction, 40(12): pp. 25-27.

3. Annandale, G.W., (1995). “ERODIBILITY.” Journal of Hydraulic Research, 33(4): pp. 471-494.

4. Annandale, G. W., (2006). “Scour technology.” McGraw Hill, New York.

5. Atkinson, B. K., (1987). “Fracture mechanics of rock.” Academic Press, London.

6. Beltaos, S., (1976). “Oblique impingement of plane turbulent jets.”

Journal of the Hydraulics Division, 102(9): pp. 1177-1192.

7. Beltaos, S. and N. Rajaratnam, (1977). “Impingement of

Axisymmetric Developing Jets.” Journal of Hydraulic Research, 15(4): pp. 311-326.

8. Bollaert, E., (2002). “Transient water pressure in joints and formation of rock scour due to high-velocity jet impact.” in Lausanne, EPFL.

9. Bollaert, E., and A. J. Schleiss, (2003). “Scour of rock due to the impact of plunging high velocity jets Part I: A state-of-the-art review.” Journal of Hydraulic Research, 41(5): pp. 451-464.

10. Bollaert, E., (2004). “A comprehensive model to evaluate scour formation in plunge pools.” International Journal on Hydropower &

Dams. 11(1): pp. 94-101.

11. Bollaert, E., and A. J. Schleiss, (2005). “Physically based model for evaluation of rock scour due to high-velocity jet impact.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, 131(3): pp. 155-167.

12. Bollaert, E., (2010). “A prototype scaled rock scour prediction

model.” The 30th Annual USSD Conference Sacramento, California, pp. 1269-1283.

13. Bollaert, E., (2010). “Physics of rock scour: The power of the

bubble.” Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Scour and Erosion, pp. 21-40.

14. Bormann, E., and Julien, P. Y., (1991). “Scour Downstream of

Grade-control Structures.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, 117(5): pp. 579-594.

15. Castillo E. L. G., (2006). “Aerated jets and pressure fluctuation in plunge pools.” Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Hydroscience and Engineering, Philadelphia, PA.

16. Cheng, M.-H., Liao, J.-J., Pan, Y.-W., Li, G.-W., Huang, M.-W., Lo, W.-H., and Hsu, S.-T., (2010). “Soft-rock scouring processes

ii

downstream of weirs.” Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Scour and Erosion, pp. 724-733.

17. Ervine, D. A., and Falvey, H. T., (1987). "Behavior of Turbulent Water Jets in the Atmosphere and in Plunge Pools." Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, 83(2): pp. 295-314.

18. Ervine, D. A., Falvey, H. T., and Withers, W., (1997). “Pressure fluctuations on plunge pool floors.” Journal of Hydraulic Research, 35(2): 257-279

19. Fahlbusch, F. E., (1994). “Scour in Rock Riverbeds Downstream of Large Dams.” Hydropower & Dams 1(4): pp. 30-32.

20. Fiorotto, V., and Rinaldo, A., (1992). “Fluctuating Uplift and Lining Design in Spillway Stilling Basins.” Journal of Hydraulic

Engineering, ASCE, 118(4): pp. 578-596.

21. Hoffmans, G. J. C. M., (1998). “Jet Scour in Equilibrium Phase.”

Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, 124(4): pp. 430-437.

22. Kirsten, H. A. D., (1982). “Classification system for excavation in natural materials.” Civil Engineer in South Africa, 24(7): pp.

293-308.

23. Kirsten, H. A. D., Moore, J. S., Kirsten, L. H., and Temple, D. M., (2000). “Erodibility criterion for auxiliary spillways of dams.”

International Journal of Sediment Research, 15(1): pp. 93-107.

24. Liu, P.Q., (2005). “A new method for calculating depth of scour pit caused by overflow water jets.” Journal of Hydraulic Research, 43(6): pp. 696-702.

25. Manso, P., E. Bollaert, and A. Schleiss, (2007). “Impact pressures of turbulent high-velocity jets plunging in pools with flat bottom.”

Experiments in Fluids, 42(1): pp. 49-60.

26. Mason, P. J., and Arumugam, K., (1985). “Free jet scour below dams and flip buckets.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, 111(2): pp. 220-235.

27. Mason, P.J., (1989). “Effects of Air Entrainment on Plunge Pool Scour.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, 115(3): pp.

385-399.

28. Martins, R., (1973). “Contribution to the knowledge on the scour action of free jets on rocky river beds.” Proceedings of the 11th Congress on Large Dams, Madrid, pp. 799-814.

29. Martins, R. (1975). “Scouring of rocky river beds by free jet

spillways.” International Water Power and Dam Construction, 27(4):

pp. 152-153.

30. Melo, J.F., Pinheiro, A.N., and Ramos, C.M., (2006). “Forces on Plunge Pool Slabs: Influence of Joints Location and Width.” Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, 132(1): pp. 49-60.

31. Spurr, K.J.W., (1985). “Energy approach to estimating scour downstream of a large dam.” International Water Power and Dam Construction, 37(7): pp. 81-89.

32. Stein, O.R., Julien, P.Y., and Alonso, C.V., (1993). “Mechanics of

iii

jet scour downstream of a headcut.” Journal of Hydraulic Research, 31(6): pp. 723-738.

33. Temple, D. and Moore, J., (1994). “Headcut advance prediction for earth spillways.” Transactions of the ASABE, 40(3): 557-562.

34. Tregnaghi, M., (2008). “Local scouring at bed sills under steady and

unsteady conditions.” [Tesi di dottorato].

35. Van Schalkwyk, A., Jordaan, J.M., and Dooge, N., (1995). “The Erodibility of Different Rock Formations under Varying Flow Conditions.” Water Research Commission, Report.

36. Whipple, K.X., Snyder, N.P., and Dollenmayer, K., (2000). “Rate and processes of bedrock incision by the upper Ukak river since the 1912 Novarupta ash flow in the valley of Ten Thousand Smokes, Alaska”, Geology, 28(9): pp.835-838.

37. Whittaker, B. N., Singh, R. N., and Sun, G., (1992). “Rock fracture mechanics: Principles, design, and applications.” Amsterdam and New York.

38. 經濟部水利署水利規劃試驗所,2008,「臺灣西部多砂河川沖淤 模式研發及復育研究計畫」

39. 經濟部水利署水利規劃試驗所,2009,「設置攔河堰引致岩盤沖 刷之機制與評估研究(1/2)」

40. 經濟部水利署水利規劃試驗所,2010,「設置攔河堰引致岩盤沖 刷之機制與評估研究(2/2)」

I

附錄一 抗沖蝕能力指數(Kh)估算依據

1、材料強度參數(mass strength number, Ms)

岩體材料評估強度的代表參數是無圍壓縮強度(UCS),Ms值計算 方式如下,也可採用附表 1- 1:

for ( 1 ) for ( 2 ) UCS:無圍壓縮強度(MPa)

g:重力加速度(9.81 m/s2) ρr:岩塊密度(kg/m3)

附表 1- 1 岩石材料強度評分表(Annandale, 1995,2006)

材料強度數值(Ms)

岩石硬度 無圍壓縮強度-UCS(MPa) 材料強度數值, Ms

極軟岩 < 1.7 0.87

1.7~3.3 1.86

軟岩 3.3~6.6 3.95

6.6~13.2 8.39

硬岩 13.2~26.4 17.70

極硬岩 26.4~53.0 35.0

53.0~106.0 70.0 極堅硬硬岩 > 212.0 280.0

II

2、顆粒或塊體尺寸參數(Kb)

Kb由鑽探取得之岩心岩石品質指標(RQD)與節理組數參數 Jn來定 義:

( 3 )

當沒有鑽孔取樣時,RQD 值可以用經驗公式推得:

( ) ( 4 ) Jx、Jy、Jz分別為 x, y, z 三個方向上每公尺出現的節理組數。節理 組數參數 Jn非直接使用節理組數的值,必須查附表 1- 2,當 RQD 越 大、節理組數越少則 Kb越大,即岩體越完整抗侵蝕能力越高。

附表 1- 2 節理組數參數評分表(Annandale, 1995,2006)

節理組數值(Jn)

節理組數 Jn

完整岩石或有少數節理與裂隙 1.00

一組節理/裂隙 1.22

一組節理/裂隙,附加不規則節理 1.50

兩組節理/裂隙 1.83

兩組節理/裂隙,附加不規則節理 2.24

三組節理/裂隙 2.73

三組節理/裂隙,附加不規則節理 3.34

四組節理/裂隙 4.09

多組複合節理/裂隙 5.00

III

3、弱面抗剪強度參數(Kd)

Kd值由岩體的節理面粗糙參數(joint roughness number, Jr)與節理 改變參數(joint alteration number, Ja)來定義:

( 5 )

附表 1- 3 節理面粗糙參數評分表(Annandale, 1995,2006)

節理分離程度 節理面狀態 Jr

IV

附表 1- 4 節理面狀態參數評分表(Annandale, 1995,2006)

節理面間描述

岩塊的形狀因素採用節理間距比(ratio of joint spacing, r)來代表,

可由水流與岩層之縱剖面,如附圖 1- 1,看兩個方向的岩塊長度比值 y/x 來作 r 的計算,其中 y/x 值最大取到 8。r 參數能反應出岩石河床 材料受到侵蝕時,瘦長的塊體較等邊的塊體抗侵蝕能力高的行為。

V

附表 1- 5 地盤構造條件參數評分表(Annandale, 1995,2006)

地盤構造條件參數

VI

附圖 1- 1 岩塊長度比值 y/x 示意圖(Annandale, 1995,2006)

上述的流功以及 Kh計算出來後,當水流流功的能量大於由 Kh轉 換得來的流功時即表示會沖刷,相反的,當水流流功的能量小於或等 於 Kh所轉換得到的流功時則不會沖刷。

由此以上觀念可計算出沖刷深度;由於尾水的關係,當下游沖刷 坑深度越來越深時,尾水深度也會越來越深,當尾水深度增加的同時,

尾水可消耗的能量也同時增加,因此當水流經過尾水的消能後所剩餘 的流功小於或等於 Kh即表示水流的能量不足以產生沖刷行為。

VII

附錄二

本研究採用 Mathematica 計算 Annandale(2006)所提出之水面射流流功,下列公式為本研 究在程式中計算用之式子。前四個參數為可變參數,需輸入後才能計算。

VIII