Journal of Hydraulic Research Vol. 41, No. 4 (2003), pp.

427438
2003 International Association of Hydraulic Engineering and Research

Distribution of sediment concentration in the vortex chamber type

sediment extractor
Distribution de concentration en sdiment dans lextracteur de sdiment de type
chambre de vortex
M. ATHAR, Reader, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India
U.C. KOTHYARI, Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, Roorkee, India
R.J. GARDE, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, Roorkee, India
ABSTRACT
In this paper an attempt has been made to study the distribution of suspended sediment concentration within the chamber of vortex type sediment
extractor. The governing equation for variation of sediment mass concentration is solved numerically by using an unconditionally stable second order
accurate CrankNicholson type of implicit finite difference scheme. Values of components of velocity and sediment diffusion coefficients appearing
in sediment mass equation are computed by making use of the empirically derived relationships developed using experimental data collected in
the present study. The equivalent finite difference form of governing equation is solved with the Gauss-elimination method by making use of the
appropriate boundary conditions. A satisfactory agreement is found to exist between the observed values of sediment concentration and its values
computed using the method proposed herein.
RSUM
Dans cet article on tente dtudier la distribution de la concentration de sdiment en suspension dans une chambre dextraction de sdiment de type
vortex. Lquation rgissant la variation de la concentration de masse du sdiment est rsolue numriquement avec un schma implicite en diffrences
finies de type Crank-Nicholson prcis au second ordre et inconditionnellement stable. Les valeurs des composantes de la vitesse et des coefficients
de diffusion du sdiment apparaissant dans lquation de la masse du sdiment sont calcules au moyen de relations empiriques obtenues partir des
donnes exprimentales de la prsente tude. La formulation en diffrences finies de lquation du sdiment est rsolue par la mthode dlimination
de Gauss avec des conditions aux limites appropris. On obtient un accord satisfaisant entre les valeurs observes de la concentration en sdiment et
ses valeurs calcules par la mthode propose ci-dessus.

Keywords: Concentration; diffusion coefficient; sediment; abatement and removal; vortex chamber.
Introduction

towards the orifice, thereby obtaining a settling length which is

longer than the basin dimensions. Thus relatively higher inflow
velocities can be allowed in to the chamber. The sediment reaching the centre of the chamber can be flushed out through the
orifice continuously. Relatively sediment free water is allowed to
leave the chamber through an outlet channel/pipe taking off from
the chamber at a location of relatively higher elevation.
Knowledge regarding the variation of sediment concentration
within the vortex chamber is useful in the determination of sediment removal efficiency of the vortex chamber type extractor.
Also this knowledge can be made use of in evolving such sediment extractors that are more efficient in flushing out sediment
from its flow. The variation of sediment concentration within
the chamber of a vortex extractor is greatly affected by variations in the velocity components in vertical, radial and tangential
directions of the chamber.

Vortex chamber type sediment extractor makes use of the vortex

flow in a chamber or basin for separation of sediment particles
from the flow. A higher velocity flow is introduced tangentially
into a cylindrical chamber/basin having an orifice at the centre of
its bottom. This gives rise to combined vortex conditions (Rankine vortex) with free vortex forming near the orifice at the centre
and forced vortex forming in the outer region towards the periphery. The sediment particles being heavier than water are forced
towards the periphery of the chamber due to the centrifugal force
imparted by vortex flow to them. The secondary flow resulting
due to the combined vortex causes the fluid layers near the chamber periphery to move towards the outlet orifice at the centre along
the chamber bottom, as a result the sediment particles from the
chamber periphery move with the flow along a helicoidal path

Revision received February 21, 2003. Open for discussion till December 31, 2003.

427

428

M. Athar et al.

Elaborate studies have been made on velocity variations within

the vortex chamber of pipe intakes by Odgaard (1986), Hite and
Mih (1994) and others. Elaborate studies were also made on this
aspect in a Rankine vortex chamber by Julien (1985) and Vatistas (1989). Mainly the variation of tangential and radial velocities
were investigated. It was concluded that flow pattern in the vortex
chambers very well compare with the combined vortex system.
Also the flow pattern is affected by the inlet and outlet conditions. Rea (1984) observed the secondary currents within a vortex
chamber. Variation of velocity components in the vortex chamber
of a sediment extractor is studied by Curi et al. (1979), Mashauri
(1986), Zhu et al. (1989) and Paul (1988). These investigations
found that tangential and radial velocities remain uniform over
most part of the flow depth in the vortex chamber and the vertical
velocity is significant only near the orifice existing at the centre
of the chamber. No generalised relations were however provided
for velocity components within the vortex chamber.
Distribution of sediment concentration in the Rankine vortex
system was studied by Julien (1986) and Vatistas (1989). Julien
(1986) considered that with rotation of fluid containing very fine
sediment in a circular basin with very fine sediment, when vortex
is formed the sediment concentration gradient gradually builds
up across the vortex. A diffusive flux proportional but opposite to
the centrifugal flux is induced. The equilibrium is reached when
two fluxes are equal and at that stage, the sum of all the forces
i.e. pressure, centrifugal as well as viscous force reduces to zero
and the sediment particles attain a limit velocity in the radial
direction. Vatistas (1989) also conducted studies on development
of fine silt concentration gradient caused by the influence of a
combined vortex. The sediment concentration profiles obtained
by Julien (1986) were found to be in good agreement with the
results obtained by Vatistas (1989). However the values of diffusion coefficient in radial direction used by Vatistas (1989) were
different from those used by Julien (1986). In the studies of
Julien and Vatistas the vortex motion was generated by means
of a magnetic stirrer and thus no inflows and outflows existed to
the container containing the vortex.
No investigation is however available on study of suspended
sediment concentration within the chamber of a vortex chamber
sediment extractor in which the vortex motion is mainly generated
due to the inflows and outflows from the chamber occurring in the
peripheral and the vertical directions. It may also be noted that
the studies of Julien (1986) and Vatistas (1989) are not directly
applicable to the case of a vortex chamber type sediment extractor.
Thus there is a need to collect such information for evolving more
efficient sediment extractors.

Governing equation for concentration of sediment in the

chamber of vortex extractor
The equation governing the variation of sediment mass concentration in the chamber of a vortex type sediment extractor is derived
for steady flow of an incompressible fluid by considering the
inflow and outflow of the sediment flux through various faces of
an elementary volume (Athar, 2001). This equation is written as

below.
1

1
(v c) + (vz c)
(rvr c) +
z
r
r r






1
c
1
c
=
+ 2
1
r r

r
r
r r


c
+
+ (o c)
z
z
z
z

(1)

Here vr , v and vz are the velocity components and r , 1 and

z are the sediment diffusion coefficients along radial, tangential
and axial directions respectively, r is the radial spacing measured
from the centre of the vortex chamber, o is the fall velocity of
the sediment particle and c be the sediment concentration at any
point within the chamber.
Equation (1) is a parabolic partial differential equation. The
order of magnitude of various terms appearing in Eq. (1) could
be largely different in problems involving real data. However it is
considered that the order of magnitude of various terms in nondimensional form of the equation will not vary much from each
other. The non-dimensional variables are defined as
c
r
z
o
C=
, R=
, Z=
, =
,
RL
hp
f RL
Ci
vr
v
vz
VR =
, V =
, VZ =
,
f RL
f R L
f RL
r
z
1
, Z =
, =
(2)
R =
2
2
f R L
f R L
f RL2
Here VR , V and VZ are the non-dimensional velocities and R ,
and Z are the non-dimensional sediment diffusion coefficients along radial, tangential and vertical directions respectively,
is the non-dimensional fall velocity, R and Z are the nondimensional radial and vertical distances measured from the
centre of the vortex chamber, hp is the depth of flow at the periphery of the chamber, C is the non-dimensional concentration, Ci is
the concentration of sediment at the inlet of the vortex chamber,
RL is the characteristic length which is taken as equal to the radius
of the vortex chamber and f is the reciprocal of characteristic
time (also called characteristic frequency) and it is defined as
Qi /(Ai RL ), where Qi is the inlet discharge, and Ai is the cross
sectional area of inlet channel. Substituting the values of these
variables into Eq. (1) and after simplification we can get the
following equation.



2C
C R
R
2 C
R 2 +
VR +
+ 2 2
R
R R
R
R

2

RL
2C
C
V
+ 2
+
+
L 2

R
R
hp
Z






RL C
RL Z
+
VZ +
hp Z
hp Z




VR
VR
1 V
RL VZ
+C

=0
(3)
R
R
R
hp Z
Solution of Eq. (3) will yield the non-dimensional values of the
unknowns involved i.e. the sediment concentration values at the
computational grid points. These are multiplied by the scaling
parameters to obtain the results in dimensional form. As can be

Distribution of sediment concentration in the vortex chamber type sediment extractor

seen from Eqs. (1) and (3) that information on velocity components are needed for the computation of distribution of suspended
sediment concentration within the chamber of a vortex type
extractor. Julien (1986), Odgaard (1986) and Mashauri (1986)
gave expressions for velocity distribution in vortex chambers by
assuming axi-symmetric flows by approximating the turbulence
by mixing length model. Indeed it is not easy to model turbulence even in simplest of the flow conditions whereas the vortex
flow that occurs in the chamber of an extractor is quite complex.
Keeping these points in mind it was decided to make experimental observations for the velocity components in the chambers of
the extractor studied herein. Experiments were also conducted
for taking observations on the distribution of sediment concentration within the vortex chamber of the extractors. Details on
these are described below.

Experimental programme
The experimental work being reported herein was part of a major
programme on study of vortex chamber type sediment extractors.
Details on these are available in Athar (2001). These experiments
were conducted in the hydraulics laboratory of the Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee (formerly: University of Roorkee),
India. Vortex chamber extractors having two different types of
geometric configurations and hence flow conditions were used.
Details of these extractors are given in Athar et al. (2002) and
Athar (2001).
Circular cylindrical vortex chamber having internal diameter
equal to 1.0 m was provided in both of these extractors. This value
of diameter is chosen on the basis of space and discharge available
in the laboratory and also by making use of the results of investigations by Sullivan (1972), Cecen and Bayazit (1975), Salakhov
(1975), Chrysostomou (1983), Mashauri (1986) and Paul et al.
(1991). The vortex chamber was made of 6 mm thick perspex
sheet. The bottom of the chamber was made of painted steel
and it was given a slope of 1 : 10 towards the centre to facilitate
the sediment movement towards the outlet orifice at the centre.
The overall height of the chamber was 0.45 m. Circular railing
was provided along the top of the vortex chamber for supporting the equipment used in measurements. A sharp edged orifice
with internal diameter of 0.10 m was provided at the centre of
the chamber in both the extractors. The orifice was further connected to an underflow outlet pipe with diameter equal to 0.10 m
for flushing out the sediment collected at the centre of the vortex
chamber. A gate valve was provided at the outlet end of this pipe
to regulate the flow through it. The inlet channel used in both the
extractors was 6.5 m long, 0.20 m wide and 0.25 m deep and had
adjustable slope. The inlet channel bed and walls were made-up
of painted steel. The overflow outlet channel provided in both
the extractors were 2.5 m long, 0.20 m wide and 0.25 m deep and
had adjustable longitudinal slope. The level difference between
invert of the overflow outlet channel and the bottom of the vortex
chamber was varied for studying its effect on sediment removal
efficiency of the extractor. Circular steel pipes were used as the

429

railing in the inlet and the overflow outlet channels and they were
made parallel to the channel beds by adjusting the railing screws.
In the first type of the extractor (termed herein as geometrical model type-I), both the inlet and outlet overflow channels
were kept in an alignment following a straight line tangential
to the vortex chamber. In the second type of extractor (termed
herein as geometrical model type-II), the straight inlet channel joined the vortex chamber tangentially at its one side. The
straight outlet channel was taken off tangentially to the chamber
but from the point that was diametrically opposite to the junction
of the inlet channel with the vortex chamber. Both the extractors
received water supply from a constant head water supply tank.
A pre-calibrated sharp edged circular orifice meter was used to
regulate the discharge into the inlet channel. Three half brick size
grill walls and a floating wooden wave suppresser were provided
at the entrance of the inlet flume for braking large eddies and
damping the disturbances at the free surface. The discharge of
overflow outlet channel was measured by using a pre-calibrated
sharp crested rectangular weir. Outflow from the overflow outlet channel was collected in a rectangular tank having sides and
bottom made of the fine wire mesh thus only allowing water to
pass through it. This tank had a hopper for collecting the flow
and sediment at the downstream of the channel. Outflow of this
tank joined a sump provided at the downstream most end.
Outflow from the underflow-flushing pipe was collected in
another rectangular tank at its end. Sides and bottom of this tank
were also made-up of fine wire mesh thus only allowing water
to pass through it. This tank also had a hopper for collecting the
flow and sediments. Uniform sand having relative density of 2.65
and size as 0.055 mm was used. The sediment was washed and
dried before being used. A sediment-feeding device was used for
feeding the sediment into the flow of inlet channel. The sedimentfeeding device consisted of a hollow circular cylinder of 2.5 cm
diameter, split along its length . The cylinder could be kept on
the channel bottom and operated through a cable system from the
top of the channel. The cable system would open out the cylinder
along its length thereby the sediment contained in the cylinder
would get emptied on to the bed of the flume.

Measurements of velocity components of flow in the

vortex chamber
A programmable Electro-Magnetic Liquid Velocity Meter
(PEMS) manufactured in the Delft Hydraulics Laboratory was
used for measuring the velocity components of the flow within
the vortex chambers. The PEMS simultaneously measures the
components of velocity in mutually perpendicular directions at
the point in the flow where its probe is fixed with the least count of
0.001 m/s. Electrodes in the PEMS probe were so oriented that
it simultaneously measured the velocity components in radial
and tangential directions. The PEMS, although is an intrusive
device but does not affect the flow characteristics because of
the streamlined (disc type) shape of the sensing probe. Observations on the velocity components were taken after establishing
the steady flow conditions within vortex chamber by operating

430

M. Athar et al.

the tail gate and the outlet valve for different inflow and underflow flushing discharges. During each of these runs the tangential
and radial velocity components were measured within the vortex
chamber at 205 different nodal points formed at five different
elevations through eight angular and five circular (annular) lines.
These experiments were conducted for two inflow discharges of
0.01 m3 /s and 0.017 m3 /s while the flushing discharge through
the underflow orifice was varied as 10, 13 and 17% respectively.

Measurement of sediment concentration within the

vortex chamber
For steady flow conditions, sediment load as per the Engelund
Hansen transport capacity was fed into the inflow and samples
were taken for the measurement of the sediment concentration
15 min after the start of sediment feed. Sediment concentration
within the vortex chamber was observed by taking the samples
exactly at the location where velocity components were also
measured. A pre-calibrated orifice-meter and centrifugal pump
were provided on a delivery pipe (a rubber tube) and theses were
carefully operated to withdraw in to a collector the sample of
sediment laden water from given location in tangential direction
to the chamber and at a velocity which was equal to the measured
tangential velocity there.
Sediment concentration was observed in both types of geometrical models of the extractor with an inflow discharge of 0.01 m3 /s
while the flushing discharge through the underflow was 13% of
the inflow discharge.

Figure 1 Computational grid in r z co-ordinate system.

in which

Finite difference scheme for solution of governing

equation

Let R,  and Z are the computational grid sizes in r, and z

directions respectively. The solution grid adopted in r z coordinate system is shown in Fig. 1. For numerical discretization of
the governing differential equation viz. Eq. (3), a centered finite
difference scheme is used for first order partial derivatives and
the unconditionally stable scheme of CrankNicholson is used
for second order partial derivatives. The finite difference methods require for computations the use of the grids with square
corners, straight edges and parallel lines. Under these conditions
the finite difference methods are simple and easy to implement.
The computational grid of the present study satisfies these conditions (see Fig. 1). A finite difference method rather than the finite
volume method therefore, is selected for use herein. Substituting
the values of differential equivalents into Eq. (3) to get second
order accuracy and by re-arranging the same we obtain,
Ei,j,k Ci,j,k + Di,j,k Ci+1,j,k + Fi,j,k Ci1,j,k + Gi,j,k Ci,j +1,k

Di,j,k

+ Hi,j,k Ci,j 1,k + Oi,j,k Ci,j,k+1 + Pi,j,k Ci,j,k1

+ Qi,j,k Ci+1,j +1,k + Si,j,k Ci1,j +1,k + Ti,j,k Ci+1,j 1,k
+ Ui,j,k Ci+1,j,k+1 + Vi,j,k Ci+1,j,k1 = 0

(4)


(1 ) Ri,j,k
VRi,j,k
R 2
R
Ri,j,k
 
2


2(1 )Zi,j,k
Ri+1,j,k Ri,j,k
RL

+
R
hp
Z 2



Vi,j,k
RL (1 ) (1 )
+

hP
Z

Ri,j,k



i,j,k+1 i,j,k
1
+ 2

Ri,j,k



VRi+1,j,k VRi,j,k
VRi,j,k

+
R
Ri,j,k




VZi,j +1,k VZi,j,k
RL
+
Z
hp
 


Vi,j,k+1 Vi,j,k
1
+

Ri,j,k


(1 )Ri,j,k
(1 ) Ri,j,k
=
+
VRi,j,k
R
R 2
Ri,j,k
 
2




Ri+1,j,k Ri,j,k
2i,j,k
RL

+
R
hp
Z 2

Ei,j,k =

2(1 )Ri,j,k

Distribution of sediment concentration in the vortex chamber type sediment extractor

w VZi,j,k
Z




Zi,j +1,k Zi,j,k
RL

RL
hP
hp

+


Fi,j,k =

Vi,j,k
Ri,j,k

Z
+

(1 )Ri,j,k

1
2
Ri,j,k

+

i,j,k+1

2i,j,k

2
 2
Ri,j,k
 
i,j,k

R 2



RL 2 (1 )Zi,j,k
RL (1 )
=
+
hp
Z 2
hp
Z





Zi,j +1,k Zi,j,k
RL
VZi,j,k +
hp
Z



2Ri,j,k
Ri,j,k

VRi,j,k
2
R
R Ri,j,k


2

(1 )Zi,j,k
RL
=
hp
Z 2

(1 )i,j,k
(1 )
=
+
2
2

Ri,j,k 



 
Vi,j,k
i,j,k+1 i,j,k

+
Ri,j,k


(1 )i,j,k
=
2
Ri,j,k
 2



2
Zi,j,k
Ri,j,k
RL
=
+
R 2
Z 2
hp




Ri+1,j,k Ri,j,k
Ri,j,k

+
VRi,j,k +
R
R Ri,j,k



RL
+
VZi,j,k
Z hp
 



Zi,j +1,k Zi,j,k
RL
+
hp
Z



Ri,j,k
=
R 2


2

Zi,j,k
RL
=
hp
Z 2


i,j,k
Vi,j,k

=
+

2

Ri,j,k
Ri,j,k  2


 
i,j,k+1 i,j,k
1
+ 2

Ri,j,k

i,j,k
=
2
 2
Ri,j,k


Gi,j,k

Hi,j,k
Oi,j,k

Pi,j,k

Qi,j,k

Si,j,k
Ti,j,k
Ui,j,k

Vi,j,k

In the above is the weighting factor which must be more than

0.5 for stable solution, the subscripts i, j, k denote the position
of computational nodes in r, and z directions respectively with

431

i and k = 1 occurring at the inflow section and j = 1 at bottom

of the chamber as shown in Fig. 1.
Equation (4) is written for all the computational nodes of the
finite difference grid. Nevertheless, it can not be solved by itself,
as the number of unknowns it contains is larger than the number
of equations. Therefore use of boundary conditions is made in
order to derive the solution of the stated equations.
Boundary conditions
The following boundary conditions are made use of in the present
method.
(i) Inlet conditions
Inlet concentration of suspended sediment C1,j,1 is considered to
be known. Here j varies from 1 to nj , with nj being the total
number of computational nodes in z-direction.
(ii) Condition at water surface
Since sediment flux cannot cross the top surface of water hence,


RL
C
Z
+ C = 0
(5a)
hp
Z
Since at water surface j = nj , therefore in terms of finite
difference, the same equation is expressed as under
Ci,nj 1,k
Ci,nj ,k =
(5b)
{1 + (hp /RL )(z /Zi,j,k )}
(iii) Bottom condition
The bottom boundary condition is written as below:


RL
C
Z
+ C = do eo
hp
Z

(5c)

Here do and eo represent deposition and entrainment respectively

in non-dimensional form. These are considered to be zero at the
bottom of the vortex chamber. However at centre of the chamber
where an orifice exists do is considered to be equal to VZ C and
since j = 1 at the bottom of the chamber the Eq. (5c) can further
be written as:
Ci,j +1,k
Ci,j,k =
(5d)
{1 + ((hp L)/RL )((VZi,j,k )/Zi,j,k )}
(iv) At periphery
The concentration gradient at the side wall of the vortex chamber
is zero hence
C
R
= 0.
(5e)
R
Hence,
Ci+1,j,k = Ci,j,k

(5f)

However on the computational node coinciding with entrance of

the outlet
C
R
(5g)
= VR C
R

432

M. Athar et al.

In terms of finite difference

VRi,j,k
Ci+1,j,k = Ci,j,k 1 +
R
Ri,j,k

outlet, the following relation is used as per Odgaard (1986) for

computation of vz ;
(5h)

Subsequent to making use of the boundary conditions described

above the number of unknowns remaining in the system of equation (represented by Eq. (4)) become equal to the number of
unknowns. The coefficients of these equations when collected
together result in the formation of an unsymmetrical banded
matrix of coefficients. The resulting system of equation can be
re-written as below
[CO][C] = [RO]

vz = 21 z

(7)

Here 1 is the factor of proportionality. In computation of sediment concentration by above method, the values of 1 have
been used as 0.59 and 0.42 for geometrical model type-I and
II respectively.

Sediment diffusion coefficients

(6)

Here CO is the square matrix of coefficients, the order of which

is equal to the number of unknowns, C is the vector of unknowns
and RO is the vector of values of the elements which are known.
The matrix system represented by Eq. (6) can be solved by using
Gauss elimination method (Smith, 1984).
The parameters to be used as input in the solution scheme
are , R, Z and . In addition, sediment concentration in
the flow in the inlet channel, dimensions of the inlet and outlet
channels, outlet orifice, vortex chamber and inlet and outlet flow
rates are the inputs to the numerical scheme for the computation
of the sediment concentration.
Relationships for velocity distributions
The laboratory data on velocity components observed at various
nodal points within the vortex chamber were analyzed to derive
the relationships for the velocity distributions in non-dimensional
form. The plots (not shown here) for velocity distributions
revealed that both the radial and tangential velocities did not have
significant variation in the vertical direction. It was also noted
that the distribution of tangential velocity compared well with
of the Rankine vortex in some segments of the vortex chamber.
However flow in the segments of the vortex chamber which are
affected due to inlet and outlet flow conditions did not compare
well with Rankine vortex. Thus it was concluded that the flow
patterns are different in different segments of both geometrical
models of the vortex chamber studied herein. Segments of the
vortex chamber having similar velocity distributions were identified by visual inspection and the empirical relationships were
established separately for both radial and tangential velocities and
for both the geometric models are shown in Tables 1(a) and 1(b).
Values for velocity components computed by using the above
mentioned empirical relationships were compared with the corresponding observed values and these were found to produce
results with maximum error of 10% for most of the data (Athar,
2001). Hence, the empirical relationships derived are considered to be satisfactory enough to predict radial and tangential
velocities in the chamber of the vortex extractors used herein.
Based upon these considerations the derived empirical equations
were considered to satisfy the flow continuity locally as well as
globally.
The vertical component of velocity vz is found to significant
only near the centre of the vortex chamber i.e. at the orifice

Information on sediment diffusion coefficients is required while

making the computations for the distribution of suspended
concentration within the vortex chamber. Review of literature
suggests that the sediment diffusion coefficient can be considered
to be equal to the momentum transfer coefficient. The turbulent
diffusion coefficient is considered by many investigators (Emad
and McCorquodale, 1983; Admas and Rodi, 1990; Atkinson,
1992; Demuren, 1988; Siping and McCorquodale, 1992; Wang
1992) to be proportional to U h , here U is shear velocity of the
flow and h is the flow depth. The variation of over the depth
of flow was also accounted for by Ismail (1952) considering it
to be proportional to U z(1 (z/ h)). Here is Karmans constant. Thus is found to be significantly dependent on U . It is
considered that value of the velocity gradient would provide a
good measure of the shear velocity hence following functional
relationships are assumed for r and respectively.






vr
v
r = f
and = f
(8)
r

Value of z is considered to remain constant within the vortex

chamber. A trial and error procedure was used to ascertain the
relationships for determination of values. Through this method
the empirical relationships adopted for are the ones which produced minimum value of the error E as defined by Eq. (9). If
Y1 and Yi1 (i = 1, N ) are corresponding observed and computed
values of suspended sediment concentration within the vortex
chamber then the error of estimate E is defined by Eq. (9):
1/2
N 

(Yi Yi1 )2
E=
(9)
N
l=1
Here N is total number of points in the flow domain where
observations on sediment concentration are available. Solution
of Eq. (6) produced the computed values of the sediment concentration. Values of the discretization parameters used in the
computations are  = /4, R = 0.2, Z = 0.33 and
= 0.55. It is to be further mentioned that values of  , R
and Z smaller than those finally used did not produce different
results; hence they were adopted for use in computations.
A study about effect of sediment size d50 on diffusion coefficient could not be conducted in the present investigation because
of the paucity of such data. The relationships for diffusion coefficients listed in Table 2 are therefore, valid only for the d50 size
used in present study. These relationships would however require
further examination for other sizes of sediment.

0.05 r/RT < 0.20

n
0.05 r/RT < 0.20
0.50 r/RT 1.0
0.05 r/RT < 1.0

0.20 r/RT 1.0

0.05 r/RT < 0.20
0.05 r/RT < 0.20
0.50 r/RT 1.0
0.05 r/RT < 1.0

/2 5/4

/2 /4

0.0 3/4

7/4

0.0 2

3/4 3/2

/4 /2

/4

5/4 2

II

III

II

III

II

Tangential

Radial

Radial

(b) Type-II
Tangential I

II

Tangential

Tangential

Tangential

Radial

Radial

Range of r/RT
0.20 r/RT 1.0

Range of

0.0 2

Segment

(a) Type-I
Tangential I

Velocity

Vr = [{0.74 + 0.11 log(r/RT )}(3.37 + 1.74 0.17 2 )]

{1.36 1.63(Zh / hp )}

Vr = [(0.442 + 0.578 0.13 2 ){(r/RT )0.097 }]

{1.32 1.6(Zh / hp )}

V = [{1.39 0.95(r/RT )}(0.86 + 0.12 0.21 2 )]

{1.27(Zh / hp )0.14 }

V = {(7.90 4.24 + 0.45 2 ) + (r/RT )(100.6 64.32 + 10.42 2 )}

{1.23(Zh / hp )0.31 }

V = [{1.17 0.34(r/RT ) + 0.30(r/RT )2 }(0.97 + 0.88 0.036 2 )]

{1.27(Zh / hp )0.14 }

Vr = [{1.01 + 2.35(r/RT ) 1.74(r/RT )2 }(0.91 0.11 + 0.03 2 )]

{0.88 3.78(Qu /Qi )}

Vr = [{0.47 1.33(r/RT ) + 0.753(r/RT )2 }(0.102 + 2.14 0.067 2 )]

{0.62 9.26(Qu /Qi )}

V = [{0.83 + 7.68(r/RT )}(1.18 0.177 0.23 2 )]

{0.22 Exp (12.7(Qu /Qi ))}

V = [(6.78 + 5.46 1.27 2 ) + (r/RT )(67.56 26.48 )]

{5.58 + 2.25 Log (Qu /Qi )}

V = [{2.22 4.46(r/RT ) + 3.05(r/RT )2 }(0.83 + 0.224 0.059 2 )]

{8.18(Qu /Qi )0.97 }

Relationships

Table 1 Relationships for velocity components in geometrical model

Distribution of sediment concentration in the vortex chamber type sediment extractor

433

434

M. Athar et al.
Table 2 Relationships for sediment diffusion coefficients.

Geometrical Diffusion coefficient in

model type radial direction


 Vr  0.082


R = 2.42 
R 


 Vr  0.16


R = 4.67 
R 

I
II

Diffusion coefficient in
tangential direction

Diffusion coefficient
in axial direction

= 3.78

Z = 2.36 102

V
= 6.98 + 2.87


Z = 2.36 102

R , and Z are non-dimensional diffusion coefficients defined by Eq. (2).

Variation of suspended sediment concentration within the

vortex chamber
The concentration of suspended sediment within the chambers of
both geometrical models of the extractor was computed through
use of relations given in Tables 1 and 2 and Eq. (7) in the solution
of Eq. (3) for all the experimental runs. The property of mass
conservation of the numerical scheme used herein was verified by
comparing the quantity of sediment inflows to the chamber with
the sum of computed sediment storage within the chamber and
computed sediment outflows from the chamber over a selected
period of time.
Figures 24 depict the comparison of the computed sediment
concentration with the corresponding observations. The computed sediment concentration is indeed found to increase in the
vertical direction measured downward from water surface. Flow
having larger concentration of the sediment is also found to occur
near the centre of the chamber. Hence flushing out the sedimentladen flow through an orifice provided at the centre of the chamber

is appropriate for sediment extraction. Also it can be seen from

Figs. 24, that smaller concentration of suspended sediment is
found to occur around the outer bend of the vortex chamber.
Hence providing the outlet channel at such location is advantageous because relatively sediment free water would flow into the
outlet channel. This advantage is indeed derived in the second
geometric model of the extractor studied herein. The comparison between observed and corresponding computed values of
sediment concentration shown in Figs. 24 revealed a maximum
error of 20 percent for most of the data (Athar, 2001).
The computations using proposed numerical scheme as well
as the observations on variation of sediment concentration within
the chamber of vortex extractor having geometrical configuration
type-I had revealed that relatively clear water conditions existed
within the chamber at locations that were diametrically opposite
to junction of the inlet channel with the vortex chamber. Therefore
the outlet channel was placed at that location in the second extractor used in experimentation. Indeed this extractor was noticed to
remove sediment with much higher efficiency as discussed below.

NOTATION:
o
OBSERVED CONCENTRATION OF SEDIMENT
5

1.00

0.80 365
o

301o

300
o

267
o

290
o

310
o

332o

306
o

360
o

356
o

478
o

0.60
Z

401
o

332
o

365
o

447
o
0.00
1.00

425
o

467
o

0.40

0.20

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

373
o
0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

Figure 2 Distribution of computed sediment concentration along chamber diameter 15 (geometrical model type-I).

1.00

Distribution of sediment concentration in the vortex chamber type sediment extractor

435

NOTATION:
o
OBSERVED CONCENTRATION OF SEDIMENT
0

5
1.00

o
160

o
156

o
133

o
153

o
154

o
135

o
140

151
o

163
o

160
o

178
o

o
174

181
o

192
o

186
o

212
o

0.80
179
o

187
o

0.60
Z
0.40
195
o

198
o

168
o

180
o

168
o

225
o

210
o

203
o

215
o

176
o

0.20

0.00

0.20

1.00

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

Figure 3 Distribution of computed sediment concentration along chamber diameter 15 (geometrical model type-II).
NOTATION:
o
OBSERVED CONCENTRATION OF SEDIMENT
8
1.00

o
172

o
152

o
130

o
143

o
138

o
147

o
177

177
o

165
o

147
o

155
o

157
o

169
o

o
181

180
o

176
o

185
o

191
o

175
o

179
o

201
o

194
o

192
o

225
o

198
o

234
o

0.20

0.00
R

0.20

0.80

0.60
Z
0.40

o
232

0.20

1.00

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.40

0.60

241
o
0.80

1.00

Figure 4 Distribution of computed sediment concentration along chamber diameter 48 (geometrical model type-II).

Thus the proposed numerical scheme was utilized in designing

an efficient sediment extractor.
Sediment removal efficiency of the extractor is also computed
as per following equation.
o =

Wso + Wvs
Wto

(10)

Here Wso is the weight of sediment flushed out through underflow

orifice, Wvs is the weight of sediment settled, if any, in vortex
chamber and Wto is the total weight of sediment inflowing into
the chamber.
The amount of sediment incoming into the vortex chamber
over a selected period of time was computed by integrating over

436

M. Athar et al.
Table 3 Computation of sediment removal efficiency using the distribution of suspended sediment concentration within the vortex chamber.

Sediment inflow
Computed sediment outflow Computed sediment outflow
Geometrical to the vortex chamber to the outflow orifice
to the overflow outlet channel
model type (N)
(N)
(N)

0 (computed)
%

0 (observed)
%

I
II

19.3
32.5

23.0
38.0

17.4
27.6

the flow cross-section at the end of the inlet channel the product of
observed sediment concentration and inlet channel velocity profiles. The amount of the sediment extracted through the underflow
orifice over the period of time was computed by algebraically
summing up the product of computed sediment concentration
and velocity of the flow at different computational nodes on the
inlet surface of the underflow orifice. The amount of the sediment going out into the outflow channel over the selected period
of time was computed by integrating over the flow cross-section
the product of outflow velocity and computed sediment concentration at various computational nodes at the inlet of the outflow
channel. Table 3 presents a comparison between thus computed
values of o and their corresponding observed values.
A very good agreement between the observations and the
corresponding computed values as shown in Table 3 is noted.
A close study of o values in the two geometric models of the
extractor studied herein indicated that for similar flow conditions
much larger o values are observed within the second type of
the geometric configuration of the extractor. This was found to
be so particularly for the fine sediments, which were transported
completely in suspension by the incoming flow. This result is
justified because of the reason that outlet channel is located in
extractor with geometric configuration type-II at the outer bend
of the curved flow occurring within the vortex chamber. Removal
efficiency of both geometrical models of the extractor was high
for coarse sediment that moved as bed load. In addition all the
sediment that is deposited in the vortex chamber is observed to
be simultaneously flushed out of the chamber through the outlet orifice due to occurrence of the vortex flow therein. Thus
sediment removal efficiency of the vortex chamber does remain
constant with time. This becomes an added advantage of the proposed extractor as compared to the settling basins which require
frequent desiltation.

Sensitivity of the parameters

Sensitivity analysis of the each parameter of the proposed
numerical scheme was performed by altering its optimum value
determined through calibration by 10%. Results of this sensitivity analysis are presented in Fig. 5. It revealed that the
computed value of suspended sediment concentration within the
vortex chamber is most sensitive to changes in the value of the
parameter r followed by o , Z and . It was however noted that
a change of 10% in the value of even the most sensitive parameter namely r caused a maximum variation of about 11% in

72.6
57.4

Per cent maximum

change in
concentration

90
85

15
15
15

r
z
Model Parameters
(10%)

(+10%)

Figure 5 Sensitivity analysis of model parameters.

the computed value of sediment concentration and such variation

was even smaller with respect to the change in values of the other
parameters. Such results are attributed mainly to the robustness
of the scheme. The constant value used for Z is justified as it
is found to be the least sensitive parameter of the scheme. The
variation in values of concentration is also not large (see Fig. 5)
while values are altered by a factor of 10%.

Conclusions
The governing equation for variation of sediment mass concentration within the chamber of a vortex type extractor viz. Eq. (1)
is solved numerically by using an unconditionally stable second
order accurate CrankNicholson type of implicit finite difference
scheme. Values of components of velocity to be used in numerical
solution of Eq. (1) are computed by making use of the empirical
relationships derived on the basis of experimental data.
The equivalent finite difference form of Eq. (1) is solved by
using the Gauss-elimination method and the appropriate boundary conditions. The descretization non dimensional parameters
used in solution of the numerical scheme are  = /4,
R = 0.2, Z = 0.33 and = 0.55. A satisfactory agreement is found to exist between the computed and observed
values of sediment concentration within the chamber of the vortex type extractor. Empirically derived relations given in Table 2
are used for the computation of sediment diffusion coefficients
appearing in Eq. (1). Computed values of the sediment removal
efficiency of the extractor were also found to compare well with
the corresponding observed values.

Acknowledgements
The authors wish to sincerely thank Professor K.G. Ranga
Raju and the anonymous reviewers whose comments greatly
improved the quality of this paper. Financial assistance received

Distribution of sediment concentration in the vortex chamber type sediment extractor

for this study from the Indian National Committee on Hydraulic

Research is gratefully acknowledged.
Notations
Ai = Area of the inlet channel
a = Factor of proportionality
C = Non-dimensional concentration
c = Concentration in parts per million
Ci = Concentration in parts per million at inlet of vortex
chamber
D = Coefficient
d = Median size of the sediment particles
do = Rate of deposition of sediment on the bottom of
the vortex chamber
du = Diameter of the underflow outlet
E = Coefficient
eo = Rate of entrainment of the sediment from bottom
of vortex chamber
F = Coefficient
G = Coefficient
g = Gravitational Acceleration
H = Coefficient
HT = Overall height of the vortex chamber
hc = Depth of flow in the inlet channel
hi = Depth of flow at entrance of the vortex chamber
hp = Depth of flow at the periphery of the vortex
chamber
ni , nj , nk = Total number of computational nodes along r,
and z directions
O = Coefficient
P = Coefficient
ppm = Parts per million
Q = Coefficient
Qi = Discharge in inlet channel
Qo = Discharge in overflow outlet channel
Qu = Discharge through underflow outlet
Qu /Qi = Water abstraction ratio
R = Dimensionless radial spacing
RB = Dimensionless radius of the basin
RL = Characteristics length
RT = Radius of the vortex chamber
r1 = Dimensionless radius
S = Coefficient
ST = Bottom slope of the vortex chamber
T = Coefficient
U = Coefficient
V = Coefficient
Vc = Average velocity in the inlet channel
Vi = Average velocity at inlet of the vortex chamber
Vu = Velocity of flow through underflow outlet
Vr , V , VZ = Dimensionless velocity components along radial,
tangential and vertical directions
v = Velocity of flow at any point in the flow field
vr , v , vz = Components of the velocity along radial, tangential and vertical directions

437

Wso = Weight of sediment flushed out through underflow orifice

Wvs = Weight of sediment settled in vortex chamber
Wts = Weight of sediment inflowing into the chamber
Z = Non-dimensional vertical co-ordinate
z = Depth in the chamber measured from the bottom
of chamber
zt = Axial co-ordinate downward positive
Zh = Difference between the bed levels of vortex
chamber and overflow outlet channel
= Weighting coefficient
= Mixing length coefficient or Karmans constant
= Eddy viscosity
r , , z = Diffusion coefficients along r, and z directions
R , , Z = Non-dimensional diffusion coefficients along r,
and z directions
f = Specific weight of fluid
s = Specific weight of sediment
= Constant
c = Computed sediment removal efficiency
o = Efficiency of sediment removal
= Kinematics viscosity
= Mass density
f = Characteristic frequency
o = Fall velocity of the sediment particle
r, z = Cylindrical polar co-ordinate system
r, , z = Increments along r, , z directions
R, , Z = Size of computational grid

References
1. Athar, M., Kothyari, U.C. and Garde, R.J. (2002).
Sediment Removal Efficiency of Vortex Chamber Type
Sediment Extractor, J. Hydr. Engrg., Proc., American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 128(2).
2. Athar, M. (2001). Study of Vortex Chamber type Sediment
Extractor, Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian
Institute of technology (Formerly: University of Roorkee),
Roorkee, India.
3. Adams, E.W. and Rodi, W. (1990), Modelling of Flow and
Mixing in Sedimentation Tanks, JHE, Proc. ASCE, 116(7),
895913.
4. Atkinson, E. (1992). The Design of Sluiced Settling
BasinsA Numerical approach, Overseas Development
Unit, Report OD 124, Hydraulic Research Wallingford Ltd.
Wallingford, U. K.
5. Cecen, K. and Bayazit, M. (1975). Some Laboratory Studies of Sediment Controlling Structures, Proc. 9th Congress
of ICID, Moscow, Soviet Union, 107111.
6. Chrysostomou, V. (1983). Vortex Type Settling Basin,
Thesis presented to the University of Southampton,
Southampton, England, in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (Irrigation
Engineering).

438

M. Athar et al.

7. Curi, K.V., Esen, I.I. and Velioglu, S.G. (1979). Vortex

Type Solid Liquid Separator, Progress in Water Technology,
7(2), 183190.
8. Demuren, A.O., (1988). Calculation of Sediment Transport in Meandering Channels, Proc. 23rd Congress, IAHR,
Ottawa, Canada, Aug. 2125, pp. A323A327.
9. Emad, I. and McCorquodale, J.A. (1983). Numerical
Modelling of Sedimentation Tanks, JHE ASCE, 109(HY12), 17401754.
10. Hite, E.J. and Mih, W.C. (1994). Velocity of Air-Core
Vortices at Hydraulic Intakes, JHE, Proc. ASCE, 120(3),
284297.
11. Ismail, H.M. (1952). Turbulent Transfer Mechanism and
Suspended Sediment in Closed Channels, Trans. ASCE,
117, 409446.
12. Julien, P.Y. (1985). Motion of a Sediment Particles in a Rankine-Combined Vortex, Report CER84PYJ6, Colarado State University, Fort Collins, USA,
37 p.
13. Julien, P.Y. (1986), Concentration of Very Fine Silts in a
Steady Vortex, JHR, Proc. IAHR, 24(4), 255264.
14. Kerssens, P.J.M., Prins, A. and Van Rijn, L.C. (1979).
Model of Suspended Sediment Transport, JHD, Proc.
ASCE, 105(5), 461476.
15. Mashauri, D.A. (1986), Modelling of a Vortex Settling
Basin for Primary Clarification of Water, Ph.D. Thesis, presented to the Tampere University of Technology, Finland,
217 p.
16. Odgaard, A.J. (1986), Free Air-Core Vortex, JHE, Proc.
ASCE, 112(7), 610620.
17. Paul, T.C. (1988). Designing Circulation Chamber Sediment Extractor, Report OD 91, Hydraulics Research
Limited, Wallingford, England.

18. Paul, T.C., Sayal, S.K., Sakhuja, V.S. and Dhillon,

G.S. (1991). Vortex Settling Basin Design Considerations,
JHE, Proc. ASCE, 117(2), 172189.
19. Rea, Q. (1984). Secondary Currents within the Circulation
Chamber Sediment Extractor M.Sc. Engrg. Dissertation,
Presented to Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science,
Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of Irrigation
Studies, University of Southampton, England.
20. Salakhov, F.S. (1975). Rational Designs and Methods of
Hydraulic Calculations of Load-Controlling Water Intake
Structures for Mountain Rivers, Proc., 9th Congress of ICID,
Moscow, Soviet Union, pp. 151161.
21. Smith, G.D. (1984). Numerical Solution of Partial Difference Equations: Finite Difference Methods, Oxford Applied
Mathematics and Computing Science Series, 3rd Edition.
22. Siping, Z. and McCorquodale, A.J. (1992). Modelling
of Rectangular Settling Tanks, JHE ASCE, 118(HY-10),
13911405
23. Stamou, A.I., Admas, E.W. and Rodi, W. (1989). Numerical Modelling of Flow Settling in Primary Rectangular
Clarifires, JHR, Proc. IAHR, 27(5), 665682.
24. Sullivan, R.H. (1972). The Swirl Concentrator as a Combined Sewer Regulator Facility, EPA-R2-72-008, 180 p.
25. Vatistas, G.H. (1989), Analysis of Fine Particles Concentration in a Combined Vortex, JHR, Proc. IAHR, 27(3),
417426.
26. Wang, Z.B. (1992). Theoretical Analysis on Depthintegrated Modelling of Suspended Sediment Transport,
JHR, Proc. IAHR, 30(3), 403421.
27. Zhou, Z., Wang, C. and Hou, J. (1989). Model Study on
Flushing Cone with Strong Spiral Flow, Fourth International
Symposium on River Sedimentation June 5-9, Beijing,
China, pp. 12131219.