Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Shields parameter

The Shields parameter is a dimensionless quantity in fluid mechanics and sedimentology that quantifies the ratio of destabilizing fluid forces to the stabilizing submerged weight of sediment grains on a bed, serving as the primary criterion for predicting the initiation of particle motion under shear stress from flowing water or other fluids.^[1] It is mathematically defined as \theta = \frac{\tau_b}{(\rho_s - \rho) g D}, where \tau_b is the bed shear stress, \rho_s is the density of the sediment particles, \rho is the density of the fluid, g is the acceleration due to gravity, and D is the characteristic grain diameter (typically the median diameter D_{50}).^[1] Developed by hydraulic engineer Albert F. Shields in 1936 through systematic flume experiments using materials such as sand, gravel, and denser grains like barite, the parameter established a rational, similarity-based framework for analyzing bedload transport, moving beyond empirical observations to incorporate turbulence and hydraulic scaling principles.^[2] The parameter's practical utility is encapsulated in the Shields diagram (or curve), which plots the critical Shields value \theta_c against the grain Reynolds number Re_* = \frac{u_* D}{\nu} (where u_* = \sqrt{\tau_b / \rho} is the shear velocity and \nu is the fluid kinematic viscosity), delineating the threshold between no motion and incipient entrainment across laminar, transitional, and turbulent flow regimes.^[3] For gravel and coarser sands in fully turbulent flows over rough boundaries, \theta_c approximates 0.047, though it decreases to around 0.1–0.2 for finer particles in laminar conditions and can vary with factors like bed slope, particle shape, packing, and armoring.^[1] This curve has been refined through subsequent studies, incorporating data from natural rivers and extended to non-uniform sediments, but Shields' original formulation remains foundational for avoiding over- or under-prediction of motion thresholds.^[2] In applications, the Shields parameter underpins sediment transport models for river engineering, coastal protection, and environmental assessments, enabling calculations of critical flow velocities or depths required to mobilize bed material and informing designs for stable channels, bridge piers, and dredging operations.^[1] It also aids geomorphological interpretations of ancient depositional environments by linking flow hydraulics to preserved bedforms like ripples or dunes, where values of \theta > \theta_c indicate active transport phases.^[4] Limitations include its assumption of uniform, non-cohesive sediments on flat beds under steady unidirectional flow, necessitating adjustments for cohesive effects, waves, or steep slopes in real-world scenarios.^[3]

Definition and Formulation

Mathematical Expression

The Shields parameter, denoted as \theta (or sometimes \tau^* or \psi), is a dimensionless number given by the formula

\theta = \frac{\tau_b}{(\rho_s - \rho_f) g d},

where \tau_b is the bed shear stress, \rho_s is the density of the sediment, \rho_f is the density of the fluid, g is the acceleration due to gravity, and d is the diameter of the sediment particle.^[5]^[6] The bed shear stress \tau_b is commonly expressed as \tau_b = \rho_f u_*^2, where u_* is the shear velocity (also known as the friction velocity).^[5]^[6] A related dimensionless group is the grain Reynolds number R_* = \frac{u_* d}{\nu}, where \nu is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid.^[5]^[6] This formulation originates from the non-dimensionalization of the force balance acting on a sediment particle, beginning with the dimensional shear stress exerted by the fluid flow and the submerged weight of the particle.^[6]

Physical Interpretation

The Shields parameter provides an intuitive measure of the balance between the forces exerted by flowing fluid on sediment particles and the particles' resistance to motion due to their submerged weight. Physically, it represents the ratio of the volumetric drag force, which is the product of the bed shear stress and the particle's projected area (approximately proportional to d^2), to the submerged weight of the particle, given by (\rho_s - \rho_f) g times the particle volume (proportional to d^3).^[2] This ratio simplifies upon canceling the common geometric factors, yielding a form where the parameter is approximately the drag-to-weight ratio scaled inversely by the particle diameter d, highlighting how larger particles require proportionally higher shear stresses for destabilization relative to their size.^[7] This force balance underscores the parameter's role in assessing particle stability on the bed: when the fluid-induced shear stress generates sufficient drag (and potentially lift) to overcome gravitational and frictional resistance, particles begin to shift or roll.^[2] The parameter thus quantifies the point at which bed shear stress exceeds the threshold needed to destabilize particles embedded in or resting on the sediment bed.^[7] In the context of incipient motion, the Shields parameter exceeding its critical value \theta^* signals the onset of particle entrainment, where fluid forces dominate over particle stability.^[8] For typical natural sediments like quartz sand in water, the submerged specific gravity ( \rho_s - \rho_f ) / \rho_f \approx 1.65, which influences the resisting weight and thus the required shear stress for motion.

Historical Background

Development by Albert Shields

Albert Frank Shields (1908–1974) was an American mechanical engineer who developed the Shields parameter during his doctoral research in hydraulic engineering at the Preussische Versuchsanstalt für Wasserbau und Schiffbau (Prussian Research Institute for Hydraulic Engineering and Shipbuilding) in Berlin, Germany, from 1933 to 1936. Born in Cleveland, Ohio, Shields earned his bachelor's and master's degrees in mechanical engineering from Stevens Institute of Technology before pursuing advanced studies in Germany, where he received a Doktor-Ingenieur degree from the Technische Hochschule Berlin in 1936. His work at the institute focused on applying principles of fluid mechanics to sediment dynamics, marking a pivotal contribution to the field amid growing interest in river engineering during the interwar period. Shields' seminal publication, "Anwendung der Ähnlichkeitsmechanik und der Turbulenzforschung auf die Geschiebebewegung" (Application of Similarity Mechanics and Turbulence Research to Bed Load Transport), appeared in 1936 as Mitteilung No. 26 of the institute's reports.^[9] In this work, he introduced a dimensionless parameter to characterize the onset of sediment motion, derived from dimensional analysis incorporating bed shear stress, submerged particle weight, and grain diameter.^[9] The publication stemmed from extensive flume experiments conducted in two tilting, recirculating channels at the Berlin facility: one 80.7 cm wide and 14 m long for coarser materials, and a narrower 40 cm wide version for finer sediments. Shields tested uniform sediments of various densities and shapes, including angular grains of coal, barite, amber, and granite, under steady, uniform open-channel flows to ensure controlled hydraulic conditions. To determine the critical condition for incipient motion, Shields measured bed-load transport rates across a range of shear stresses and identified the threshold by extrapolating to the point of zero transport, often observing initial particle dislodgement visually.^[10] His results were plotted as an empirical curve relating the critical dimensionless shear stress (θ*) to the grain Reynolds number (R*), demonstrating that θ* approached approximately 0.06 in the turbulent regime for large R* (typically R* > 500), while values were higher—up to 0.8 or more—in the laminar regime for small R* (R* < 2).^[9] This curve collapsed data from diverse particle types onto a single locus when plotted in dimensionless form, highlighting the parameter's universality for uniform, non-cohesive sediments. Shields' approach represented a fundamental shift in sediment transport studies, moving from purely empirical correlations based on dimensional variables to a rigorous dimensionless framework grounded in similarity principles and turbulence theory.^[9] Although initially published in German and overlooked due to World War II disruptions, the work gained prominence post-war through translations and advocacy by researchers like Hunter Rouse, profoundly influencing hydraulic engineering and geomorphology by enabling predictive models independent of scale. Following Albert Shields' foundational work, refinements to the Shields parameter and its associated curve emerged in the mid-20th century, incorporating additional experimental data and analytical expressions to better capture variations in flow regimes and particle characteristics. In the 1950s and 1960s, researchers such as M.S. Yalin extended the empirical basis of bedload transport, with subsequent studies providing analytical approximations for the critical Shields parameter in turbulent flows. Concurrently, V.A. Vanoni and collaborators incorporated data on non-spherical particles, demonstrating that angular sediments often exhibit slightly higher critical values than spherical ones due to altered drag and pivot mechanics, thus broadening the curve's applicability beyond uniform spheres.^[2] By the 1970s and 1980s, the Shields parameter became integrated into practical sediment transport formulas, with the Meyer-Peter-Müller equation adopting a constant critical value of \theta^* \approx 0.047 for gravel-bed rivers under turbulent conditions, facilitating engineering predictions of bedload flux.^[11] Studies on mixed-size sediments, such as those by T. Egiazaroff (1965), quantified hiding effects where finer particles are shielded by coarser ones, reducing their exposure to shear stress and elevating the effective critical Shields parameter for smaller grains by up to a factor of 2 in heterogeneous beds. From the 1990s onward, theoretical advancements shifted toward force-balance models, with R. Fernandez Luque and R. van Beek (1976) deriving a semi-empirical relation by equating drag, lift, and submerged weight forces, yielding predictions that closely match the original curve for Reynolds numbers above 100 while highlighting deviations at low stresses. Numerical simulations using computational fluid dynamics have since confirmed the curve's robustness across a wider range of flow conditions, including unsteady flows. Extensions to cohesive and non-traditional sediments appeared, such as J.C. Winterwerp's (2007) modifications for fine-grained cohesive beds, where interparticle bonding increases the critical Shields parameter by incorporating yield stress terms, enabling applications to mud-dominated environments. Modern compilations, notably R. Soulsby's (1997) synthesis, provide digitized versions of the Shields curve with uncertainty bands derived from over 10,000 laboratory and field experiments, reflecting a transition from purely empirical fits to semi-theoretical models that account for probabilistic entrainment.

The Shields Curve

Description and Empirical Basis

The Shields curve is depicted as a log-log plot with the critical Shields parameter \theta^* on the y-axis and the grain Reynolds number R^* on the x-axis, encompassing flow regimes from laminar conditions (R^* < 5) to fully turbulent ones (R^* > 70). This graphical representation illustrates the threshold for incipient sediment motion by normalizing critical bed shear stress data across varying grain sizes, fluid viscosities, and flow velocities. The curve separates regions of sediment stability from those where particle entrainment occurs, serving as a foundational tool in sediment dynamics.^[12] The empirical foundation of the Shields curve stems from an aggregation of flume and field measurements, primarily compiled and dimensionless-analyzed in Shields' 1936 publication. Shields integrated critical shear stress observations from multiple laboratory experiments, including flume tests by Gilbert (1914) on gravel transport, Kramer (1932) on uniform sediments, Casey (1935) on bedload initiation, and data from the U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, transforming raw shear stress values into the dimensionless \theta^* and R^* to reveal a consistent pattern amid diverse conditions. Subsequent expansions incorporated additional datasets to extend the curve's applicability, minimizing scatter through visual fitting of the plotted points.^[10] Across regimes, the curve exhibits distinct behaviors: in the laminar range (R^* < 5), \theta^* declines with rising R^* as viscous effects amplify drag relative to gravity; a transitional zone bridges this to the turbulent regime (R^* > 70), where \theta^* stabilizes in a plateau typically between 0.045 and 0.06, indicating inertial forces' overriding influence on entrainment. Representative points along the curve include \theta^* \approx 0.10 at R^* = 1 and \theta^* \approx 0.045 at R^* = 100, highlighting the trend derived from aligning scattered data to form a coherent envelope.^[13]^[14] Rather than a precise line, the Shields curve manifests as a band of data points with inherent scatter, attributable to experimental variations in grain shape, bed configuration, and measurement techniques for incipient motion. This variability underscores its empirical nature, and for practical use, the curve is frequently approximated via piecewise linear or logarithmic functions to interpolate critical values within the band.^[12]^[15]

Key Features and Interpretation

The Shields curve exhibits distinct behaviors across flow regimes, reflecting the evolving dominance of hydrodynamic forces relative to particle stability. In the laminar regime at low particle Reynolds numbers (R* < 5), the critical Shields parameter θ* is notably high, often exceeding 0.2, because viscous forces play a stabilizing role by dampening flow perturbations and increasing the resistance to particle dislodgement.^[16] Here, the drag is primarily viscous, generating torques that favor particle rolling over sliding as the initial mode of motion, requiring greater shear stress to initiate entrainment.^[17] This regime is characteristic of fine sediments in low-velocity flows, where inertia is minimal and viscosity enhances bed stability.^[5] As R* increases into the transitional regime (approximately 5 < R* < 70), θ* reaches a minimum value around 0.03–0.04 near R* = 10–20, marking a peak in relative particle mobility due to the shifting balance between diminishing viscous effects and emerging inertial forces.^[16] In this zone, turbulence begins to intensify, introducing fluctuating lift and drag that more effectively overcome gravitational and frictional resistance, thus lowering the threshold for motion before the flow fully transitions.^[5] The curve's dip highlights the interplay of viscosity waning and inertia rising, with transitional dynamics sensitive to subtle changes in flow structure.^[17] In the turbulent regime at high R* (> 70), θ* stabilizes at a near-constant value of approximately 0.045–0.06, as turbulent fluctuations dominate and viscosity becomes negligible, allowing drag and lift forces to balance the submerged particle weight in a consistent manner.^[16] This plateau is influenced by the angle of repose and interparticle friction, with turbulent eddies generating lift forces that partially counter gravity and reduce the effective threshold.^[5] Overall, the curve's shape embodies the fundamental interplay among viscous, inertial, and gravitational forces, enabling a dimensionless framework that scales predictions across diverse fluids (e.g., water or air) and particle sizes without loss of generality. Variability and scatter in θ* arise from factors such as irregular particle shapes, bed packing density, and flow unsteadiness, which perturb the idealized force balances.^[5] This interpretation underscores the curve's utility in capturing universal hydraulic principles governing sediment stability.^[17]

Critical Conditions for Sediment Motion

Initiation of Motion

The Shields parameter determines the onset of sediment entrainment in steady, uniform flow by comparing the applied dimensionless bed shear stress, denoted as θ, to the critical value θ* derived from the Shields curve using the particle Reynolds number R*. When θ exceeds θ*, particles on the bed surface are dislodged and initiate motion primarily through rolling, sliding, or saltation, marking the transition from rest to transport.^[2]^[6] Incipient motion, or the threshold for initial particle movement, is commonly defined in experimental studies as the condition where approximately 50% of particles on the bed surface are in motion, though some contexts use the first observable dislodgement of a single particle. This criterion serves as a practical benchmark in engineering applications, such as calculating the minimum bed shear stress τ_b required to prevent or initiate erosion in channels and riverbeds. The critical θ* from the Shields curve provides this threshold under ideal, non-cohesive conditions.^[6]^[18] The workflow for assessing initiation involves first estimating the friction velocity u* from flow parameters, such as mean velocity U and flow depth h, often via the relation u* = √(g h S) under uniform flow assumptions, where g is gravitational acceleration and S is the energy slope. The Shields parameter is then computed as θ = u*^2 / [(ρ_s/ρ - 1) g d], with ρ_s as sediment density, ρ as fluid density, and d as particle diameter. Finally, R* = u* d / ν is calculated, where ν is kinematic viscosity, and θ* is obtained from the Shields curve for the given R*. For example, for 1 mm quartz sand (d = 0.001 m) in a river with u* = 0.03 m/s and ν = 10^{-6} m²/s, R* ≈ 30 yields θ* ≈ 0.05; the corresponding critical shear stress is τ_b = θ* (ρ_s - ρ) g d ≈ 0.8 N/m², using ρ_s = 2650 kg/m³ and ρ = 1000 kg/m³.^[2] This shear stress-based approach complements velocity-oriented thresholds, such as those in the Hjulström curve, by directly linking flow forces to particle stability rather than relying solely on bulk flow speed.

Factors Influencing Critical Shields Parameter

The critical Shields parameter, which determines the onset of sediment motion under steady, uniform flow conditions as described in the Shields curve, is modified by bed slope through alterations in flow hydraulics and relative roughness. Experimental and theoretical studies show that steeper bed slopes lead to higher critical Shields values, contrary to simple gravitational expectations, primarily because slope increases the grain-to-depth ratio (d/h), enhancing turbulence suppression near the bed and stabilizing particles. For instance, in steep gravel-bed channels, critical Shields stress can rise from approximately 0.04 at low slopes (∼2°) to over 0.20 at slopes exceeding 20°. A representative formulation for the slope-adjusted critical Shields stress is

\tau^*_c = \frac{h_c \sin \alpha}{(s - 1) d},

where h_c is the critical flow depth, \alpha is the bed slope angle, s is the relative submerged density of sediment (\rho_s / \rho), and d is the median grain diameter; this contrasts with the flat-bed case where \sin \alpha \approx 0 is negligible, highlighting how slope amplifies the effective stress component parallel to the bed. Sediment gradation in non-uniform beds introduces a hiding factor that adjusts the critical Shields parameter based on particle exposure relative to the mean size, with protruding larger grains sheltering smaller ones and vice versa. The seminal Egiazaroff (1967) formulation accounts for this by defining a hiding-exposure coefficient \xi_k = \left[ \frac{\log_{10} 19}{\log_{10} (19 d_k / d_m)} \right]^2, where d_k is the diameter of the grain class and d_m is the mean diameter; the adjusted critical Shields parameter is then \theta_{cr,k} = \xi_k \theta_{cr}, assuming a base \theta_{cr} \approx 0.06. For smaller particles (d_k < d_m), \xi_k > 1, resulting in a higher \theta_{cr,k} relative to the uniform case, meaning they require greater dimensionless stress to initiate motion despite their size advantage in absolute terms; conversely, larger protruding grains have \xi_k < 1 and lower \theta_{cr,k}, making them more mobile. This correction is essential for mixed-size beds, where it can alter effective thresholds by factors of 1.5–3 depending on gradation width.^[19] Particle packing density and degree of protrusion further modulate the critical Shields parameter by influencing intergranular resistance and exposure to flow. Loose packing reduces particle interlocking, lowering the critical Shields value by 15–30% compared to tightly packed or imbricated beds, as the reduced friction allows easier dislodgement under applied shear. In contrast, buried or poorly protruding particles experience higher thresholds, requiring up to twice the Shields stress of fully exposed ones due to shielding by overlying grains and increased pivot stability. These effects are pronounced in gravelly sediments, where protrusion levels can cause the overall critical Shields parameter to vary by an order of magnitude across bed configurations.^[20] Fluid properties, particularly density and kinematic viscosity, indirectly influence the critical Shields parameter through their roles in the grain Reynolds number (Re_* = u_* d / \nu) and buoyancy. Variations in fluid density alter the density ratio (\rho_s / \rho), with lower ratios (e.g., sediments in water, \rho_s / \rho \approx 2.65) yielding Shields values around 0.03–0.06, while higher ratios (e.g., in air, \approx 2200) reduce it to 0.01–0.03 by diminishing buoyant forces relative to drag. Temperature affects kinematic viscosity \nu, which decreases with rising temperature (e.g., from 1.8 × 10^{-6} m²/s at 0°C to 0.3 × 10^{-6} m²/s at 100°C for water); this shifts Re_* upward along the Shields curve, where \theta_{cr} is typically constant or slightly decreasing in the turbulent regime (Re_* > 500); the effect on \theta_{cr} is minor (less than 10%) over typical river ranges of 5–25°C. These adjustments are minor for standard aqueous environments but critical for non-aqueous or extreme thermal conditions.^[21]^[22] Field measurements of the critical Shields parameter often exceed laboratory values by 1.5–3 times, attributed to natural variations in the above factors like tighter packing, complex gradation, and realistic slopes not fully replicated in controlled flumes. In coarse-bedded steep streams, field \theta_{cr} ranges from 0.03 to 0.22, systematically higher than the classic lab-derived 0.056, emphasizing the need for site-specific corrections in predictive models.^[23]

Applications in Engineering and Science

Sediment Transport Prediction

The Shields parameter is fundamental to sediment transport prediction, serving as the key dimensionless measure of excess bed shear stress that governs the initiation and rate of particle movement. Transport formulas generally express the rate as a function of (θ - θ_c), where θ_c is the critical Shields parameter, reflecting the driving force beyond the threshold for motion. For bedload, this excess shear determines the volumetric flux of rolling or saltating grains along the bed. A classic empirical relation is the Meyer-Peter-Müller formula, derived from flume experiments on coarse non-cohesive sediments, which calculates the volumetric bedload transport rate per unit width q_b as:

q_b = 8 (\theta - 0.047)^{3/2} \sqrt{ \frac{(\rho_s - \rho_f) g d^3}{\rho_f} }

where ρ_s and ρ_f are the densities of sediment and fluid, g is gravitational acceleration, and d is the median grain diameter; the constant 0.047 approximates θ_c for gravel-sized particles under uniform flow.^[24] This relation highlights how transport scales with the 3/2 power of excess shear, emphasizing the nonlinear increase in flux as θ exceeds θ_c. Shields' original framework underpins probabilistic bedload models for non-uniform sediments, where θ informs the entrainment probability of individual grain sizes. The Einstein-Brown model, developed from Einstein's stochastic approach and integrated numerically by Brown, treats bedload as a fraction of total load transported via intermittent "bursts" of motion, with θ modulating the probability that a particle on the bed surface is entrained based on hiding and exposure effects among mixed sizes.^[24] This probabilistic view extends Shields' deterministic threshold into statistical predictions, improving accuracy for gravel-bed rivers where selective transport of finer fractions occurs at lower θ values. Neglecting hiding in mixed beds can significantly overpredict rates.^[25] For suspended load, the Shields parameter contributes indirectly by setting the reference concentration at the bed, typically at a height of one grain diameter, where suspension begins via lift forces at elevated shear stresses.^[26] Models like van Rijn's compute this reference as proportional to (θ - θ_c), linking bedload entrainment to the flux available for vertical suspension. In engineering applications, the Shields parameter integrates into numerical models such as HEC-RAS and MIKE 21 to simulate total load transport, combining bedload and suspended components for unsteady flows.^[27] These tools apply θ within capacity formulas to route sediment. Practically, θ-based transport predictions inform river management, such as estimating equilibrium slopes where aggradation or degradation balances sediment supply and capacity, preventing channel instability in designs like dam releases or channel realignments.^[28]

River and Coastal Morphology

In river engineering, the Shields parameter plays a key role in predicting bed armoring, where a coarse lag layer forms on the bed surface as finer sediments are selectively entrained and transported when the applied shear stress exceeds the critical value for those particles (θ > θ* for fines) but remains below that for coarser grains.^[29] This process stabilizes the bed by reducing further erosion, and it is commonly observed in gravel-bed rivers with heterogeneous sediment mixtures.^[29] For stable channel design, the Shields parameter informs the balance of sediment supply and transport capacity, as incorporated in Lane's empirical relations, which relate critical shear stress to particle size (e.g., τ_cr ≈ 0.4 d_75 in appropriate units) to ensure long-term channel equilibrium under varying flows.^[30] In coastal applications, the Shields parameter is essential for assessing local scour around structures such as bridge piers and piles, where flow acceleration and turbulence amplify bed shear stress, elevating the local θ and initiating sediment entrainment when it surpasses θ*.^[31] This amplification can lead to significant scour depths, necessitating protective measures like riprap to maintain structural integrity during high-energy events.^[31] Additionally, in beach profile equilibrium, the parameter helps model the balance between wave- and current-induced shear stresses, where sediment transport rates adjust to form stable profiles that neither erode nor accrete under prevailing conditions.^[32] Morphological modeling employs the Shields parameter within the Exner equation to simulate bed evolution, expressed as:

\frac{\partial z}{\partial t} \propto (\theta - \theta^*)

where z is bed elevation, t is time, and the proportionality reflects bedload transport rates that drive topographic changes.^[33] This framework enables predictions of large-scale geomorphic processes, such as delta formation through progradational sediment deposition in standing water and meander migration via differential erosion on outer banks during floods.^[34] A notable case study from the 1993 Upper Mississippi River flood evaluated flood-induced erosion and scour at bridge sites, revealing that observed scour depths were generally lower than predictions.^[35]

Limitations and Extensions

Applicability Limits

The Shields parameter is derived under the assumptions of steady, uniform, unidirectional flow over a flat, non-cohesive bed consisting of uniform, spherical particles, and it may fail to accurately predict sediment motion initiation when these conditions are violated.^[36] In accelerating flows, such as those during floods, the standard parameter often underestimates the critical shear stress required for motion, as unsteady accelerations introduce additional forces that raise the threshold beyond the steady-flow framework.^[37] The parameter's applicability is limited for very fine sediments with grain diameters less than 0.06 mm, where interparticle cohesion and wash-load behavior dominate, rendering the non-cohesive assumption invalid and typically requiring higher effective shear stresses for initiation.^[5] Conversely, for very coarse sediments exceeding 100 mm in diameter, form drag on individual particles or bedforms becomes significant, reducing the effective skin friction and shifting the critical Shields value upward compared to the standard curve.^[38] Flow unsteadiness, including turbulent bursts, can cause the Shields parameter to underpredict motion initiation, as short-lived high-momentum events lower the effective threshold below steady-flow predictions, while spatial variability from bedforms like dunes locally alters shear stress distribution and the parameter's value.^[39] In armored beds, where a layer of larger particles protects underlying fines, or in the presence of biofilms, the effective critical Shields parameter can increase by a factor of 2 or more due to enhanced particle interlocking and biological stabilization, respectively.^[23]^[40] For air flows, the low fluid density shifts the entire curve, necessitating Shields values approximately 30 times higher than in water for equivalent motion probabilities under the standard curve's ideal conditions.^[2] A notable discrepancy exists between laboratory and field applications, where lab-derived critical Shields values typically range from 0.03 to 0.06, while field observations often yield 0.1 to 0.2, attributable to unaccounted factors like bed packing, slope effects, and natural heterogeneity not present in controlled experiments.^[18]^[41]

Modifications for Complex Conditions

In environments involving combined wave and current actions, the Shields parameter is modified to account for the additive contributions of oscillatory and steady shear stresses. The total Shields parameter θ is approximated as θ = θ_current + θ_waves, where θ_current represents the contribution from steady currents and θ_waves = \frac{1/2 f_w U_b^2}{(\rho_s - \rho_f) g d} captures the wave-induced component, with f_w denoting the wave friction factor and U_b the near-bed orbital velocity. This formulation, derived from wave-current interaction models, enables prediction of sediment entrainment in coastal zones where waves dominate the boundary layer dynamics.^[42] For cohesive sediments, such as those rich in clay on mudflats, the standard Shields parameter is extended by incorporating an additional cohesion term to reflect interparticle bonding forces. The modified critical Shields parameter θ_c is given by θ_c = θ_noncohesive × (1 + F_C / F_W), where F_C is the cohesion force (often modeled via van der Waals interactions) and F_W is the submerged particle weight; this adjustment increases θ_c with higher clay content, raising the threshold for erosion compared to non-cohesive sands. Such modifications are essential for accurately simulating deposition and resuspension in estuarine and shelf environments dominated by fine-grained materials.^[43] In unsteady flows, including flood pulses or turbulent bursts, the Shields parameter is adapted using either time-averaged shear stress over the flow cycle or instantaneous peak values to assess entrainment during short-duration events. Probabilistic approaches further refine this by linking the Shields criterion to the frequency of turbulent fluctuations exceeding the critical threshold, thereby quantifying intermittent sediment pickup in rivers and coastal currents. These extensions improve forecasts of transport rates under variable hydrodynamic conditions, such as during storm surges.^[44] For non-spherical particles, prevalent in natural gravel beds, the Shields parameter incorporates a shape factor ψ defined as the ratio of drag force on an equivalent sphere to that on the actual particle, which adjusts the critical value upward for angular grains due to enhanced interlocking and altered hydrodynamic exposure. This correction, often ψ > 1 for non-spherical shapes, elevates the required shear stress for initiation of motion, ensuring more realistic thresholds in applications involving mixed sediment shapes.^[45] Emerging modifications address anthropogenic and climatic influences, such as warmer water temperatures under climate change, which reduce fluid kinematic viscosity ν by up to 63% from 1°C to 40°C, thereby increasing the grain Reynolds number Re* = u_* d / ν and shifting the critical Shields parameter along its empirical curve toward higher values in the turbulent regime. Similarly, microplastics, with densities ρ_s often below that of quartz (e.g., 0.92–1.4 g/cm³ versus 2.65 g/cm³), alter the denominator in the Shields formulation, reducing the effective submerged weight and lowering the critical shear stress relative to natural sediments, facilitating their easier entrainment and burial in beds. These adaptations are increasingly integrated into models to predict altered transport dynamics in polluted or warming aquatic systems.^[46]

References

[1]
None
Summary of each segment:
[2]
[PDF] CHAPTER 9 THRESHOLD OF MOVEMENT - MIT OpenCourseWare
And recall from Chapter 8 that the Shields parameter also has a real physical meaning: by multiplying the top and bottom of the Shields parameter by D2 you.
[3]
https://geo.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Oceanography/Coastal_Dynamics_(Bosboom_and_Stive)/06%3A_Sediment_transport/6.03%3A_Initiation_of_motion/6.3.2%3A_Shields_curve
[4]
Visualizing the Shields Parameter - SERC (Carleton)
The Shields parameter is a fundamental dimensionless variable that embodies the complex factors that interact to initiate motion on a sediment bed.
[5]
[PDF] Theoretical Model for Shields Diagram and Its Application
This research intends to propose a theoretical model for sediment initiation, which can reproduce the empirical curve in the extended Shields diagram (Mants.
[6]
[PDF] HYDRAULICS BRANCH OFFICIAL FILE COPY
"Applications of similarity principles and turbulence research to bed-load movements". Quoting from a translation [6], Shields main proposition is: "The ...
[7]
https://eng.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Civil_Engineering/Slurry_Transport_(Miedema)/05:_Initiation_of_Motion_and_Sediment_Transport/5.01:_Initiation_of_Motion_of_Particles
[8]
Anwendung der Aehnlichkeitsmechanik und der ...
Anwendung der Aehnlichkeitsmechanik und der Turbulenzforschung auf die Geschiebebewegung · A. Shields · Published 30 June 1936 · Geology, Engineering, ...
[9]
Anwendung der Aehnlichkeitsmechanik und ... - TU Delft Repository
Anwendung der Aehnlichkeitsmechanik und der Turbulenzforschung auf die Geschiebebewegung · Publication Year. 1936 · Copyright. © 1936 Shields, A. · Related content.Missing: Ähnlichkeitsmechanik | Show results with:Ähnlichkeitsmechanik
[10]
[PDF] The Legend of A.F. Shields
He was trying to find the dimensionless parameters that would lead to dynamic similarity and, hence, would facilitate the de- sign and operation of river models ...
[11]
Meyer-Peter and Müller - Hydrologic Engineering Center
The Meyer-Peter and Müller (MPM) formula (1948) is a bed-load formula ... Shields parameter [-]. ρsk = sediment density [M/L3]. ρw = water density [M/L3].
[12]
https://geo.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Sedimentology/Introduction_to_Fluid_Motions_and_Sediment_Transport_(Southard)/09%3A_Threshold_of_Movement/9.04%3A_Movement_Threshold
[13]
Fluid flow: Shields and Hjulström diagrams - Geological Digressions
Feb 27, 2023 · The Shields diagram plots (Θ) against the Reynolds Number that describes the hydraulic conditions across the grain boundary. The original ...
[14]
Flume study of the effect of relative depth on the incipient motion of ...
Abstract. An experimental study of the incipient motion of coarse uniform sediments was undertaken in an 8 m long by 0.3 m wide tilting flume.
[15]
[PDF] A systematic analysis of eight decades of incipient motion studies ...
Shields' [1936] curve redrafted from Rouse [1939]. BUFFINGTON AND MONTGOMERY ... general form of the original Shields curve but reveals system- atic ...
[16]
[PDF] Dredging Processes - Erosion - TU Delft OpenCourseWare
Egiazaroff (1965) found a relation between the threshold shear stress ... Shields values of the Coleman (1967) experiments match the Shields curve for ...<|separator|>
[17]
Is the critical Shields stress for incipient sediment motion dependent ...
May 1, 2008 · Data from laboratory flumes and natural streams show that the critical Shields stress for initial sediment motion increases with channel ...
[18]
Hiding and Exposure Corrections - Hydrologic Engineering Center
Egiazaroff (1965) also assumed a critical Shields parameter of θcr = 0.06, which is relatively high for most sediments. Hayashi et al. The Hayashi et al ...Missing: 1967 | Show results with:1967
[19]
[PDF] A systematic analysis of eight decades of incipient motion studies ...
Shields parameters of other grain sizes of interest will vary as a func- tion of size-specific friction angle, grain protrusion, and mo- bility of neighboring ...<|separator|>
[20]
[PDF] Viscosity
Viscosity tends to fall as temperature increases (for example, water viscosity goes from 1.79 cP to 0.28 cP in the temperature range from 0 °C to 100 °C); see ...
[21]
Critical Shields values in coarse‐bedded steep streams - Bunte - 2013
Oct 21, 2013 · Critical Shields values are predictable for steep streams; Relation of critical Shields values vs slope is stratified by other parameters; Non ...
[22]
[PDF] Bed-Load Sediment Transport Formulae Dimensionless Quantities
Bed-Load Transport Formulae. Reference. Formula. Comments. Meyer-Peter and. Muller (1948). 2/3. ) (8. *. *. * crit q. −. = The original paper assumed. 047.0. * ...
[23]
applications to the initiation of sediment motion and lift-off studies
A turbulent velocity u′ lower than that u estimated by the Shield diagram is required to start sediment motion. The minimum u′ required to start sediment lift - ...
[24]
Critical Thresholds for Transport and Erosion
Some of the transport formula utilize constant Shields parameters while others utilize a Shields parameter as function of the non-dimensional grain diameter.Soulsby and Whitehouse · Laursen and Laursen-Copeland · Wilcock and CroweMissing: definition | Show results with:definition
[25]
[PDF] Applicability of bed load transport models for mixed-size sediments ...
Jul 14, 2015 · Here we evaluate bed load transport models for mixed-size sediments and models based on a median grain size using a large field data set of ...
[26]
The equilibrium alluvial river under variable flow and its channel ...
Aug 11, 2017 · Slope adjustment arises through reach-scale aggradation/degradation or changes in channel sinuosity [e.g., Buffington, 2012]. In cases where the ...
[27]
[PDF] CHAPTER 3 TRANSPORT OF GRAVEL AND SEDIMENT MIXTURES
Figure 3.35 Plots of a) hiding function obtained from Egiazaroff relation, the modified Egiazaroff relation, the condition of size-independence, the ...
[28]
Tractive Force Method - Hydrologic Engineering Center
Essentially an analytical stable design method, the tractive force approach utilizes a critical shear stress to define when initiation of motion begins, ...
[29]
The Science behind Scour at Bridge Foundations: A Review - MDPI
Local scour occurs around these structures because of the limited influence range they have on the river flow.
[30]
Thermodynamic solutions for equilibrium beach profiles
Feb 11, 2006 · Solutions are developed for beach profiles using equilibrium principles of thermodynamics applied to simple representations of the nearshore ...
[31]
[PDF] Sediment Transport and Morphodynamics - USU
Jan 21, 2008 · Because air is so much lighter than water, quartz sand particles saltate in long, high trajectories, ... sand with a submerged specific gravity R ...
[32]
[PDF] Morphodynamic Modeling of River-Dominated Deltas: A Review and ...
Apr 13, 2006 · Numerical models based on the solution of fluid and sediment transport equations have helped unravel how flow hydrodynamics affect the formation ...
[33]
[PDF] Scour Measurements at Bridge Sites During 1993 Upper Mississippi ...
The record flood on the upper Mississippi River basin during the sum- mer of 1993 provided a rare opportunity for collection of data on streambed scour at ...
[34]
ANFIS- and GEP-based model for prediction of scour depth around ...
May 5, 2023 · Results indicate that the ANFIS model (R2CWS = 0.95, MAPECWS = 9.39% and R2LBS = 0.95, MAPELBS = 5.29%) is the most accurate predictive model in ...
[35]
[PDF] Incipient motion of sediment particles in the presence of bed forms ...
Results reveal that the Shields diagram underestimates the particle incipient motion under accelerating and decelerating flows for the both case of laboratory ...Missing: floods | Show results with:floods<|control11|><|separator|>
[36]
Variation in the reference Shields stress for bed load transport in ...
Apr 12, 2005 · The present study examines variations in the reference shear stress for bed load transport (τr) using coupled measurements of flow and bed ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[37]
Revisiting the problem of sediment motion threshold - ScienceDirect
Oct 1, 2019 · The doctoral dissertation of Shields (1936) laid the foundation for this research direction, leading to the famous Shields curve that still ...
[38]
(PDF) Effects of biofilm on turbulence characteristics and the ...
Nov 12, 2017 · Biofilms reduce the local bed roughness and thus wave dissipation on the terrace. On the other hand, biofilms increase the critical shear stress ...
[39]
[PDF] Note: Stability and movement of coarse materials Date: 4 Februari ...
The critical Shields-parameter varies considerably in the range of 0.01 to 0.12. Hence, the lowest values are much smaller than the Shields-curve values ( ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[40]
Sediment transport formulas for the coastal environment
Aug 31, 2022 · ... tan\phi} \normalsize \lt \mid\vec{u}\mid^2\vec{u}\gt \right) \qquad ... Shields parameter ({\it cf.} figure 1) with the instantaneous ...
[41]
Erosion threshold of saturated natural cohesive sediments ...
Nov 29, 2008 · When using Shields parameter, results are presented as a function of the particle Reynolds number Re* based on the particle diameter and on ...
[42]
Formulae of Sediment Transport in Unsteady Flows (Part 2)
The unsteadiness parameter P1 is useful for the prediction of time average sediment transport rate, but it cannot be used to explain the measured ...
[43]
A novel critical velocity model for the incipient motion of non ...
This model incorporates a shape correction factor to account for the effects of non-spherical particles. Furthermore, a threshold equilibrium equation for the ...
[44]
https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/74115