Hydraulics Prof. B.S.

Thandaveswara










Indian Institute of Technology Madras
32.6 Slotted Bucket Stilling Basin

Bradley and peterka in 1959 developed the slotted bucket stilling basin (Fig. 32.10) with
an 8

sloping apron on which teeth of 45

are installed. The teeth introduces stable flow

and little boiling action.

Three types of flow may be distinguished

Sweep out with a too low tailwater level

Minimum tailwater level below which excessive surface waves and scour occur
and

Maximum tailwater above which dividing flow results and the maximum tailwater
level above which dividing results.

A slotted bucket basin has a lower and an upper limit of operation. These depends on
the approach Froude number
( )
1
1 1 2
1
=
/
V
F
gy
and the relative bucket radius
2
br 1
1
R 1 05

= +



b
R
. F
y

in which 1 V is the approach velocity, is the flow depth measured perpendicular to the
bed slope, and
b
R is the radius of the bucket.
The minimum bucket radius should be
1
1
22 =
bm
R
. F
y
and the extreme tail water levels
t
y
are given as a function of
br
R and
1
F . Care should be taken against material entering
the bucket that may cause damage by abrasion.
Hydraulics Prof. B.S. Thandaveswara










Indian Institute of Technology Madras
yt min/F1 = 3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
F1 =
V1
gy1
______
0 0.1 0.2
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
0
2
4
6
8
10
0 0.1 0.2
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
0
2
4
6
8
10
0.7
yt max/F1 = 3
4
5
6
7
8
10
12
15
18
20
30
40
50
70
90
R
bed approx 0.05R
below apron lip
Bed slopes up
R
y
V
1
2
2g
____
________
1
+
R
y
V
1
2
2g
____
________
1
+
Bed approximately 0.05R below lip
(a) Minimum limit (b) Maximum limit
Minimum and maximum tailwater limits (After Peterka, (1958)



H
h
Tail Water Elevation
y
Apron lip
R
y1
Figure-32.7 Definition sketch for Slotted Bucket Stilling Basin
t
y
ts
y
t max
y
t min
Sweep out condition level
Safe minimum tail water level
Upper limit of tail water


Hydraulics Prof. B.S. Thandaveswara










Indian Institute of Technology Madras
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
0.8
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Minimum allowable
Minimum bucket radius
(after Peterka, 1958)
Tailwater sweepout depth
(after Peterka, 1958)
14
13
12
13
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
Figure 32.8
F
rl
=
V
1
____
gy
1
F
rl
=
V
1
____
gy
1
R
y1
V
1
2
______
+
___
2g
R
y1
V
1
2
______
+
___
2g
Ts
y1
___
=15


Following are important characteristics

Tailwater level : Stage discharge relationship should be known.

Cavitation control : Turbulent (fluctuations in the front part of basin and rear
portion of appurtenances).
Scour control

Tailwater waves

Based on the Field Experience following are listed:

The tailwater depth should atleast be equal to the sequent depth of the classical
jump,
Adequate tailwater submergence can reduce the basin length,

Dividing walls help in improving the stilling action and reduce concentration of
flow,

Hydraulics Prof. B.S. Thandaveswara










Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Cavitation damage is likely to be increased by high velocity approach flow and
low tailwater levels, and
End sills reduce scour significantly.


Stilling basins are popular and the designers favorite choice for energy dissipation,
certainly because of the knowledge and experience acquired over the years. They have
proved to be a reliable hydraulic structure if the approach conditions and the tailwater
elevation are within certain limits. Abrasion may become a concern for stilling basins
connected to a bottom outlets.

0.05R
b
0.125R
b
0.5R
b
0.05R
b
16
8
45
R
b
a)


Hydraulics Prof. B.S. Thandaveswara










Indian Institute of Technology Madras
0.05Rb
45
8
Rb
0.125Rb
d)
c)
b)
Figure - 32.9 Geometry of the Slotted bucket stilling basin


}
0 4 8 12
16 20 24 28
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.6
0.37
0.24
0.16
0.12
R
y
t
/y
1
F
1
A slotted bucket basin has a lower and an upper limit of operation
Figure 32.10 - Extreme tailwater levels
as function of initial Froude number and
0
4
8
12
16
2
1
for slotted stilling basin
y
t
/y
1
[1+0.5 F
1
]
R
br
= (R
b
/y
1
2
br
Minimum tailwater depths
Maximum tailwater depths