(210VINEH,August2007)

Technical
Supplement 14C
Stone Sizing Criteria
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
(210VINEH,August2007)
Advisory Note
Techniquesandapproachescontainedinthishandbookarenotall-inclusive,noruniversallyapplicable.Designing
streamrestorationsrequiresappropriatetrainingandexperience,especiallytoidentifyconditionswherevarious
approaches,tools,andtechniquesaremostapplicable,aswellastheirlimitationsfordesign.Notealsothatprod-
uctnamesareincludedonlytoshowtypeandavailabilityanddonotconstituteendorsementfortheirspecifcuse.
Cover photo:Stonemaybeneededasafoundationonwhichtoimple-
mentotherrestorationfeaturessuchassoilbioengineering
practices.Stonemayalsobeneededtoformanerosionre-
sistantlayer.Howlarge,howthick,andhowdeeplykeyed-in
arequestionsthatareaddressedinthedesign.
IssuedAugust2007
(210VINEH,August2007) TS14Ci
Contents Purpose TS14C1
Introduction TS14C1
Basic concepts TS14C1
Descriptionofforcesonastone..................................................................TS14C1
Flowconditions.............................................................................................TS14C2
Sizing techniques TS14C3
Summary guide of selected techniques TS14C11
Factor of safety TS14C12
Examplecalculations..................................................................................TS14C12
Conclusion TS14C13
Tables Table TS14C1 High-energyvs.low-energyconditions TS14C2
Table TS14C2 FederalHighwayAdministrationtechniques TS14C11
Table TS14C3 Summaryoftechniques TS14C11
Figures Figure TS14C1 Forcesonasubmergedstone TS14C1
Figure TS14C2 Riprapusedtocontrolaheadcut TS14C2
Figure TS14C3 Riprapusedtopreventerosionfromfowfroma TS14C2
sideinlettoachannel
Figure TS14C4 Toeoftheslopelinedwithstonetocontrol TS14C2
erosion
Figure TS14C5 RocksizebasedonIsbashCurve TS14C3
Figure TS14C6 GraphicalsolutionforIsbashtechnique TS14C4
Figure TS14C7 Rockchutespreadsheet TS14C9
Figure TS14C8 Lanesmethod TS14C10
Technical
Supplement 14C
Stone Sizing Criteria
(210VINEH,August2007) TS14C1
Purpose
Manychannelprotectiontechniquesinvolverockor
stoneasastand-alonetreatmentorasacomponent
ofanintegratedsystem.Stoneusedasriprapcanalso
beacomponentofmanystreambanksoilbioengineer-
ingprojects.ManyFederalandstateagencieshave
developedmethodsandapproachesforsizingriprap,
andseveralofthosetechniquesarebriefydescribed
inthisdocument.Stonesizingmethodsarenormally
developedforaspecifcapplication,socareshouldbe
exercisedinmatchingtheselectedmethodwiththe
intendeduse.Whilemanyoftheseweredevelopedfor
applicationwithstoneripraprevetments,theyarealso
applicableforotherdesignsinvolvingrock,aswell.
Introduction
Whentheattackingforcesoffowingwaterexceed
theresistingforcesoftheexistingchannelmaterial,
channelprotectionisneededaspartofarestoration
design.Channelprotectiontypicallyrangesfromsoil
bioengineeringtreatmentstomoretraditionalarmor-
ingmethods.Numerousmethodshavebeendeveloped
forthedesignandsizingofriprap.Severalcommon
techniquesforestimatingtherequiredstonesizeare
briefyoutlinedinthisdocument.Thedesigneris
encouragedtoreviewthecompletedevelopmentofa
selectedmethodandassesstherelevanceoftheas-
sumptionsbehindthatselectedmethodtotheirappli-
cation.Inthisdocument,thewordsrockandstoneare
usedinterchangeably.
Sizeisoneofmanyconsiderationswhendesigning
riprapforuseinprotectingchannelbedandbanks.
Thedesignermustalsoaddressissuessuchasmaterial
strength,density,angularity,durability,length-to-width
ratio,gradation,bedding,pipingpotential,andchannel
curvature.Theseimportantdesignandconstruction
considerationsareaddressedinNEH654TS14K.
Basic concepts
Description of forces on a stone
Arockwillbestableuntiltheliftanddragforcesof
movingwaterexceedacriticalvalueorthreshold.
Therefore,foragivenrocksizesubjectedtoagiven
forceofmovingwater,thereissomeunitdischarge
wheretherockwillmoveandbecomeunstable.
Forcesonasubmergedstone,asindicatedinfgure
TS14C1,typicallyconsistoftheforceexertedbythe
fowingwater(F
F
),dragforce(F
D
)associatedwith
fowaroundtheobject(skinfrictionandformdrag),
liftforce(F
L
)associatedwithfowaroundtheparticle
(pressuredifferencescausedbystreamlinecurvature
andincreasedvelocityaroundaparticle),submerged
weightofthestone(F
W
),andresistingforceduetothe
particleinterlockand/orcontactbetweenstones(F
C
).
Whilesomemethodsarebasedonaparticleforcebal-
ance,allrocksizingmethodsareessentiallyempirical
techniques.Fieldperformancedata,physicalmodels,
andtheoreticaldevelopmentshaveallcontributedto
thediversesetofapproachesusedtodeterminestable
stonesizesforrestorationdesigns.
Velocity-basedapproachesandboundaryshearor
stress-basedapproachesarethetwoprominent
classesofmethodsthathavebeenusedtoevaluatethe
erosionresistanceofmaterials.Whileshearorstress-
basedapproachesareconsideredmoreacademically
correct,velocity-basedmethodsarestillwidelyused.
Thedesignstressandthedesigndischargedonot
necessarilyrepresentthesameconditions.
Figure TS14C1 Forcesonasubmergedstone
F
L
F
W
F
F
F
D
F
C
Flow direction
Technical
Supplement 14C
Stone Sizing Criteria
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
TS14C2 (210VINEH,August2007)
Flow conditions
Thefowconditionsassociatedwithaparticularap-
plicationwillhaveamajorinfuenceonselectingthe
rightrocksizingmethod.Whileitisdiffculttoselect
asinglecriterionthatseparatesrocksizingmethods,
highenergyandlowenergyareusedinthisdevelop-
ment.Forexample,atechniquedevelopedforthe
designofariprapblanketrevetmentinalow-energy
environmentwouldnotnecessarilybesuitableforesti-
matingtheminimumstonesizeinahigh-energyenvi-
ronment,wherethestoneprojectsintothefow.Such
applications,includinginstreamhabitatboulders,
gradestabilization,andstreambarbs,shouldbead-
dressedwithimpingingfowdesigntechniques.Table
TS14C1listssomeofthefowdescriptorsthatcanbe
associatedwithhigh-andlow-energyfowconditions.
Photographsofthedifferentenergyconditionswhere
stoneisappliedaspartofthesolutionareshownin
fguresTS14C2through4.InfgureTS14C2,riprapis
usedtocontrolaheadcut.Riprapchutescanbeused
tocontrolerosionfromaheadcutinachannelorin
asideinlettoachannel.Riprapforthistypeofstruc-
turewouldfallinthesteep-slope,high-energydesign.
FigureTS14C3showsriprapusedtopreventerosion
fromfowfromasideinlettoachannel.Thisstructure
alsopreventsaheadcutfrommovingintothefeld.As
illustratedinfgureTS14C4,ifthetoeoftheslopeis
eroding,anditcannotbecontrolledwithbioengineer-
ingalone,liningthetoeoftheslopewithstonemaybe
asolution.Riprapforthistypeofstructurewouldfall
inthemildslope,low-energydesign.
Theappropriaterocksizingmethodmustconsiderthe
fowenergyassociatedwiththeparticularapplication.
Whilethereareexceptions,mostrocksizingmethods
weredevelopedforeitherahigh-orlow-energyfow
condition.
High energy Low energy
Supercriticalfow Subcriticalfow
Steepslope Mildslope
Highturbulence Lowturbulence
Impingingfow Parallelfow
Rapidlyvariedfow Uniformorgraduallyvaried
fow
Unsteadyfow Steadyfow
Table TS14C1 High-energyvs.low-energyconditions
Figure TS14C2 Riprapusedtocontrolaheadcut
Figure TS14C3 Riprapusedtopreventerosionfrom
fowfromasideinlettoachannel
Figure TS14C4 Toeoftheslopelinedwithstoneto
controlerosion
TS14C3 (210VINEH,August2007)
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
Sizing techniques
Therearemanytechniquesforsizingstone,andeach
methodhasadvantagesanddisadvantages.Many
techniqueswerederivedunderspecifcconditionsand
developedforparticularapplications.Whilethislist
isnotcompleteandthedescriptionisnotexhaustive,
severalcommonlyusedmethodsarepresented.The
designershouldreviewtheapplicabilityofatechnique
beforechoosingittosizestoneforaparticularproject.
Followingisabriefdescriptionofseveralrocksizing
techniques.
Isbash method
TheIsbashformula(Isbash1936)wasdevelopedfor
theconstructionofdamsbydepositingrocksinto
movingwater.TheIsbashcurveshouldonlybeused
forquickestimatesorforcomparisons.Acoeffcientis
providedtotargethigh-andlow-turbulencefowcon-
ditions,sothismethodcanbeahigh-orlow-energy
application.Theequationis:

V C g D
c
s w
w

j
(
,
\
,
(
( ) 2
0 50
50
0 50

.
.
(eq.TS14C1)
where:
V
c
=criticalvelocity(ft/s)
C =0.86forhighturbulence
C =1.20forlowturbulence
g =32.2ft/s
2

s
=stonedensity(lb/ft
3
)

w
=waterdensity(lb/ft
3
)
D
50
=medianstonediameter(ft)
AgraphicalsolutionisprovidedinfgureTS14C5(ch.
16oftheEngineeringFieldManual)Thisgraphshould
beusedonlyforquickestimatesataconceptualde-
signlevel.
TheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers(USACE)provides
additionalguidancefortheuseoftheIsbashtechnique
inEM111021601.Therequiredinputsarechannel
velocity,specifcgravityofthestone,andaturbulence
coeffcient.Theturbulencecoeffcienthastwovalues
thatrepresenteitherhighturbulenceorlowturbu-
lence.Thegraphicalsolutionforthisisshowninfgure
TS14C6(a)and(b).
Figure TS14C5 RocksizebasedonIsbashcurve
Estimate the design velocity
Note
s
=165 lb/ft
3
Procedure:
1. Estimate the design velocity
2. Track right to the basic rock size
D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

o
f

s
t
o
n
e

(
i
n
)
W
e
i
g
h
t

o
f

s
t
o
n
e

a
t

1
6
5

l
b
/
f
t
3

(
l
b
)
Velocity (ft/s)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
60
40
20
0
15,000
10,000
5,000
1,000
500
250
100
50
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
TS14C4 (210VINEH,August2007)
Figure TS14C6 GraphicalsolutionforIsbashtechnique
5
10
20
30
40
60
80
100
200
M
i
n
i
m
u
m

W
5
0

s
t
o
n
e

w
e
i
g
h
t

(
l
b
)
300
400
600
800
1,000
6 7 8 9 10 14 18
V = Velocity, ft/s

s
= Specific stone weight, lb/ft
3

w
= Specific weight of water, 62.5 lb/ft
3
W
50
= Weight of stone, subscript denotes

Percent of total weight of material
containing stone of less weight
D
50
= Spherical diameter of stone having
the same weight as W
50

C = Isbash constant (0.86 for high
turbulence level flow and 1.20
for low turbulence level flow)
g = Acceleration of gravity, ft/s
2
where: Stone stability
velocity vs. stone
diameter
Hydraulic design
chart 7121
(Sheet 1 of 2)
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
205
185
165
155
145
135

s

i
n

l
b
/
f
t
3
135
145
155
165
185
205

s

i
n

l
b
/
f
t
3
135
145
155
165
185
205

s

i
n

l
b
/
f
t
3
Spherical diameter, D
50
(ft) Average velocity (ft/s)
0.9 1.0 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 22 04
Low turbulence
(river closures)
High turbulence
(stilling basins)
Basic equations :
V C g D
D
W
c
s w
w
s

j
(
,
\
,
(
,

,
,
]
]
]
]
( )

j
(
,
\
,
(
2
8
1
2
50
1
2
50
50
1
3

(a)
TS14C5 (210VINEH,August2007)
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
Figure TS14C6 GraphicalsolutionforIsbashtechniqueContinued
10
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
20,000
M
i
n
i
m
u
m

W
5
0

s
t
o
n
e

w
e
i
g
h
t

(
l
b
)
30,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
10,000
12 14 16 18 20 30 40
V = Velocity, ft/s

s
= Specific stone weight, lb/ft
3

w
= Specific weight of water, 62.5 lb/ft
3
W
50
= Weight of stone, subscript denotes

Percent of total weight of material
containing stone of less weight
D
50
= Spherical diameter of stone having
the same weight as W
50

C = Isbash constant (0.86 for high
turbulence level flow and 1.20
for low turbulence level flow)
g = Acceleration of gravity, ft/s
2
where: Basic equations : Stone stability
velocity vs. stone
diameter
Hydraulic design
chart 712-1
(Sheet 2 of 2)
205
185
165
155
145
135

s

i
n

l
b
/
f
t
3
135
145
155
165
185
205

s

i
n

l
b
/
f
t
3
Spherical diameter, D
50
(ft) Average velocity (ft/s)
3.0 4.0 5.0 8.0 6.0 7.0 9.010.0 48 2.0
High turbulence
(stilling basins)
V C g D
D
W
c
s w
w
s

j
(
,
\
,
(
,

,
,
]
]
]
]
( )

j
(
,
\
,
(
2
8
1
2
50
1
2
50
50
1
3

135
145
155
165
185
205

s

i
n

l
b
/
f
t
3
Low turbulence
(river closures)
(b)
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
TS14C6 (210VINEH,August2007)
National Cooperative Highway Research Pro-
gram Report 108
Thismethod(Anderson,Paintal,andDavenport1970)
issuggestedfordesignofroadsidedrainagechannels
handlinglessthan1,000cubicfootpersecondanda
maximumslopeof0.10footperfoot.Therefore,this
applicationcanbeusedforhigh-orlow-energyappli-
cations.Photodocumentationshowsthatmostofthe
researchwasdoneonroundedstones.Thismethod
willgivemoreconservativeresultsifangularrockis
used.

o e
RS (eq.TS14C2)

c
D 4
50
(eq.TS14C3)
therefore,

D
RS
e
50
4

(eq.TS14C4)

c
=criticaltractivestress
=62.4lb/ft
3
R =hydraulicradius(ft)
S
e
=energyslope(ft/ft)
D
50
=medianstonediameter(ft)
AsimilarapproachhasbeenproposedbyNewbury
andGaboury(1993)forsizingstonesingradecontrol
structures.Thisrelationshipis:
tractiveforce(kg/m
2
)=incipientdiameter(cm)
USACEMaynord method
Thislow-energytechniqueforthedesignofriprapis
usedforchannelbankprotection(revetments).This
methodisoutlinedinUSACEguidanceasprovidedin
EM111021601,andisbasedonamodifcationtothe
Maynordequation:

D FS C C C d
V
K g d
S v T
W
S w
30
0 5
1
2 5

j
(
,
\
,
(


,

,
,
]
]
]
]

.
.
(eq.TS14C5)
where:
D
m
=stonesizeinft;mpercentfnerbyweight
d =waterdepth(ft)
FS =factorofsafety(usually1.1to1.5),suggest1.2
C
s
=stabilitycoeffcientZ=2orfatterC=0.30,(0.3
forangularrock,0.375forroundedrock)
C
v
=velocitydistributioncoeffcient(1.0forstraight
channelsorinsideofbends,calculateforout-
sideofbends)
C
T
=thicknesscoeffcient(use1.0for1D
100
or1.5
D
50
,whicheverisgreater))

w
=specifcweightofwater(lb/ft
3
)

s
=specifcweightofstone(lb/ft
3
)
V =localvelocity;ifunknownuse1.5V
average
g =32.2ft/s
2
K
1
=sideslopecorrectionascomputedbelow

K
1
2
2
1
sin
sin

(eq.TS14C6)
where:
=angleofrockfromthehorizontal
=angleofrepose(typically40)
Notethatthelocalvelocitycanbe120to150percent
oftheaveragechannelvelocityorhigher.Theoutside
bendvelocitycoeffcientandthesideslopecorrection
canbecalculated:

C
R
W
V

j
(
,
\
,
(
1 283 0 2 . . log
(eq.TS14C7)
where:
R =centerlinebendradius
W =watersurfacewidth
Intheanalysisusedtodevelopthisformula,failure
wasassumedtooccurwhentheunderlyingmaterial
becameexposed.Itshouldbenotedthatwhilemany
oftheothertechniquesspecifyaD
50
,Maynord(1992)
specifesaD
30
whichwilltypicallybe15percentsmall-
erthantheD
50
.Thisassumesaspecifcgradationof:

1 8 4 6
15 85 15
. . D D D < <
(eq.TS14C8)
TheUSACEdevelopedthismethodforthedesignof
riprapusedineitherconstructedornaturalchannels
whichhaveaslopeof2percentorlessandFroude
numberslessthan1.2.Asaresult,thistechniqueisnot
appropriateforhigh-turbulenceareas.
Maynordsside-slopeandinvertequationisforcases
wheretheprotectiveblanketisconstructedwitha
relativelysmoothsurfaceandhasnosignifcantpro-
jections.Itisappropriateforusetosizestone-toe
protection.However,ithasbeensuggestedthatwith
someadjustmenttothecoeffcients(typicallyusinga
velocitycoeffcientof1.25andalocalvelocityequalto
160%ofthechannelvelocity),Maynordsmethodcan
TS14C7 (210VINEH,August2007)
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
beusedforexposedbouldersorstonesexposedto
impingingfow.
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation method
Thishigh-energytechniqueisoutlinedinU.S.Bureau
ofReclamation (USBR)EM25(Peterka1958)and
wasdevelopedforsizingriprapbelowastillingbasin.
Itwasempiricallydevelopedusing11prototypeinstal-
lationswithvelocitiesrangingfrom1footpersecond
to20footpersecond.Theformulais:
D V
50
2 06
0 0122 .
.
(eq.TS14C9)
where:
D
50
=medianstonediameter(ft)
V =averagechannelvelocity(ft/s)
U.S. Geological Survey method (Blodgett1981)
Thistechniqueisbasedonanalysisoffelddataof39
largeeventsfromsitesinArizona,Washington,Or-
egon,Nevada,andCalifornia.Riprapprotectionfailed
in14ofthe39cases.Anenvelopecurvewasempirical-
lydevelopedtorepresentthedifferencebetweensites
thatperformedwithoutdamageandthosethatwere
damagedbyparticleerosion.Theformulais:
D V
50
2 44
0 01 .
.
(eq.TS14C10)
where:
D
50
=medianstonediameter(ft)
V =averagechannelvelocity(ft/s)
Thismethodtypicallyprovidesoverlyconservative
results.
Tillatoba model study
Thisstudy(Blaisdell1973)providesanequationfor
sizingstonetoremainstableintheturbulentfow
foundbelowstillingbasins.Thishigh-energytechnique
resultsinanestimateforD
50
.

D
V
d
50
3
0 00116 .
(eq.TS14C11)
where:
V =velocity(ft/s)
d =fowdepth(ft)
D
50
=

stonediameter(ft)
USACE steep slope riprap design
Thishigh-energytechniqueisoutlinedinstandard
USACEguidanceasprovidedinEM111021601.It
isdesignedforuseonslopesfrom2to20percent.
However,thesideslopesshouldbe1V:2.5Horfatter.
Atypicalapplicationwouldbearock-linedchute.The
formulais:
D
S Cq
g
30
0 555
2
3
1
3
1 95

. ( )
.
(eq.TS14C12)
where:
D
30
=stonesize;mpercentfnerbyweight
S =channelslope
q =unitdischarge(q=Q/b,whereb=bottom
widthofchuteandQistotalfow)
C =fowconcentrationfactor(usually1.25,butcan
behigheriftheapproachisskewed)
g =gravitationalconstant
Thisequationisapplicabletothickness=1.5D
100
,
angularrock,unitweightof167poundspercubicfoot,
D
85
/D
15
from1.7to2.7,slopesfrom2to20percent,
anduniformfowonadownslopewithnotailwater.
Thisequationtypicallypredictsconservativesizes.
USACE habitat boulder design
ThistechniqueisoutlinedinUSACEguidanceprovid-
edinEMRRPSR11.Itisdevelopedforsizingboulder
clustersinachannelforhabitatenhancement.This
high-energyrelationshipisanincipientmotionrelation
forfullyimmersedbouldersinturbulentfowonafat
bed.Thismethodisforimpingingfow.Theformulais:

D
depth S
SG
f

18
1
( )
( )
(eq.TS14C13)
where:
D =minimumstonesize
depth =channeldepth
S
f
=channelfrictionslope
SG =specifcgravityofthestone
Thisequationhasalsobeenusedtosizestonesforuse
inlowinstreamweirs.However,estimatingthefriction
slopeacrossadropcanbediffcult.
Abt and Johnson (1991)
AbtandJohnson(1991)conductednear-prototype
fumestudiestodetermineriprapstabilitywhensub-
jectedtoovertoppingfowssuchasinspillwayfowor
inslopingloose-rockgradecontrolstructures.Slopes
variedfrom2to20percent.Riprapdesigncriteriafor
overtoppingfowsweredevelopedfortwoconditions:
stonemovementandripraplayerfailure.Criteriawere
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
TS14C8 (210VINEH,August2007)
developedasafunctionofmedianstonesize,unitdis-
charge,andembankmentslope.Theequationis:

D q S
design 50
0 56
0 43
5 23
( )

.
.
.
(eq.TS14C14)
where:
D
50
=stonesizeininches;mpercentfnerby
weight
q
design
=unitdischarge(ft
3
/s/ft)
S =channelslope(ft/ft)andSbetween0.02and
0.20ft/ft
q
q
q
design
failure
failure
( )

( )
.
.
0 74
1 35 (eq.TS14C15)
Stonemovementoccurredatapproximately74per-
centofthefow,causinglayerfailure.Itwasdeter-
minedfromtestingthatroundedstoneshouldbe
oversizedbyapproximately40percenttoprovidethe
sameprotectionasangularstone.
ARS rock chutes
Thisdesigntechnique(Robinson,Rice,andKadavy
1998)isprimarilytargetedathigh-energyapplications.
Looseriprapwitha2D
50
blanketthicknesscomposed
ofrelativelyuniform,angularriprapwastestedto
overtoppingfailureinmodelsandfeldscalestruc-
tures.Thismethodappliestobedslopesof40percent
andless.Thistechniquecanbeusedforlowslope,and
thus,low-energyapplications,butitisparticularlyuse-
fulforslopesgreaterthan2percent.Afactorofsafety
appropriatefortheprojectshouldbeappliedtothe
predictedrocksize.Theequationsare:
forS<0.1

D qS
50
1 5
0 529
12 1 923
( )
.
.
.
(eq.TS14C16)
0.10<S<0.40
D qS
50
0 58
0 529
12 0 233
( )
.
.
.
(eq.TS14C17)
where:
D
50
=medianstonesize(in)
q =higheststableunitdischarge(ft
3
/s/ft)
S =channelslope(ft/ft)
Aspreadsheetprogram(Lorenz,Lobrecht,andRobin-
son2000)isavailabletoassistinsizingripraponsteep
slopes.Ascreencaptureofthisspreadsheetprogram
isshowninfgureTS14C7.
Thismethodisbestusedinsteepslopesforgrade
control,embankmentovertopping,oronsideinlets
fromfeldstoamajordrainageoutlet.Thespreadsheet
providesmuchadditionalinformationrelatedtorock
chutessuchasguidanceoninletandoutletconditions,
quantityestimates,andhydrology.
California Department of Transportation RSP
ThistechniquewasdevelopedbytheCaliforniaDe-
partmentofTransportation(CALTRANS)fordesigning
rockslopeprotection(RSP)forstreamsandriver-
banks.Unlikemostoftheotheravailabletechniques,
itresultsinarecommendedminimumweightofthe
stone.Theequationis:
W
G
VM V G
r a
S
S

( )


( )
0 00002
1
3
6
3
.
sin
(eq.TS14C18)
where:
W =minimumrockweight(lb)
V =velocity(ft/s)
VM =0.67ifparallelfow
VM =1.33ifimpingingfow
G
S
=specifcgravityofrock(typically2.65)
r =angleofrepose(70forrandomlyplacedrock)
a =outsideslopefaceangletothehorizontal(typi-
callyamaximumof33)
Theweightindicatedbythismethodshouldbeusedin
conjunctionwithstandardCALTRANSspecifcations
andgradations.
Far West states (FWS)Lanes Method
VitoA.VanoniworkedwiththeNorthwestE&WPUnit
todeveloptheprocedurefromtheASCEpaperenti-
tledDesignofStableAlluvialChannels(Lane1955a).
Theequationis:

D
C K
D S
w f 75
3 5

(eq.TS14C19)
where:
D
75
=stonesize,(in)
C =correctionforchannelcurvature
K =correctionforsideslope
S
f
=channelfrictionslope(ft/ft)
d =depthoffow(ft)

w
=densityofwater
Thisisgenerallyconsideredtobeaconservative
technique.Itassumedthatthestressonthesidesof
thechannelwere1.4timesthatofthebottom.This
TS14C9 (210VINEH,August2007)
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
: y t n u o C : t c e j o r P
: y b d e k c e h C : r e n g i s e D
Date: 3/30/2006 Date:
Bw = 20.0 Bw = 20.0 Bw = 40.0
Side slopes = 4.0 Factor of safety = 1.20 Side slopes = 4.0
n-value = 0.035 Side slopes = 4.0 2.0:1 max. n-value = 0.045
Bed slope = 0.0060 Bed slope (5:1) = 0.200 2.5:1 max. Bed slope = 0.0050
Freeboard = 0.5 Outlet apron depth, d = 1.0 Base flow = 0.0
Drainage area = 450.0 Rainfall = Note : The total required capacity is routed
105.0 99.0 5 ft.) through the chute (principal spillway) or
Chute capacity = Q5-year Minimum capacity (based on a 5-year, in combination with an auxiliary spillway.
Total capacity = Q10-year 24-hour storm with a 3 - 5 inch rainfall) Input tailwater (Tw) :
Q
high
= 330.0 High flow storm through chute Tw (ft.) = Program 0.20
Q
low
= 75.0 Low flow storm through chute Tw (ft.) = Program
Notes:
h
pv
= 0.38 ft. (0.18 ft.) 1) Output given as High Flow (Low Flow) values.
H
pe
= 2.67 ft. 0.71 ft. (0.32 ft.) 2) Tailwater depth plus d must be at or above the
Energy Grade Line H
ce
= 2.51 ft. hydraulic jump height for the chute to function.
3) Critical depth occurs 2y
c
- 4y
c
upstream of crest.
0.715y
c
= 1.28 ft. 4) Use min. 8 oz. non-woven geotextile under rock.
H
p
= 2.3 ft. (0.52 ft.)
(0.93 ft.) 1.8 ft. z
1
= 1.07 ft.
Design Storm Data (Table 2, NHCP, NRCS Grade Stabilization Structure No. 410)
Slope = 0.006 ft./ft.
Profile and Cross Section (Output)
Woodbury
Rock Chute Design Data
Inlet Channel Chute Outlet Channel
(Version 4.01 - 04/23/03, Based on Design of Rock Chutes by Robinson, Rice, Kadavy, ASAE, 1998)
Spillway protection
Jim Villa
Input Channel Geometry
) . t f 4 4 . 0 ( ) . t f 2 7 . 0 ( Height, z
2
= 2.76 ft. (1.09 ft.)
Inlet Apron
y
n
= 2.34 ft. 18 ft. Tw+d = 3.04 ft. - Tw o.k.
Slope = 0.006 ft./ft.
n
=
0
.
0
5
4
(
0
.
0
4
9
)
. k . o w T - ) . t f 6 8 . 1 ( . t f 5 ) . t f 3 0 . 1 (
45 ft.
4.79 fps radius 2.04 ft. (0.86 ft.)
at normal depth
Slope = 0.005 ft./ft.
n
=
0
.
0
5
4
(
0
.
0
4
9
)
Slope = 0.005 ft./ft.
n
=
0
.
0
5
4
(
0
.
0
4
9
)
Note: When the normal depth (y
n
) in the inlet
5 Outlet Apron
channel is less than the weir head (H
p
), ie., the weir capacity is less 20 ft. d = 1 ft. {1 ft. minimum
than the channel capacity, restricted flow or ponding will occur. This 15(D
50
)(F
s
)
reduces velocity and prevents erosion upstream of the inlet apron. 3.37 fps
at normal depth
Auxiliary Spillway
q
t
= 13.65 cfs/ft.
Equivalent unit discharge
Freeboard = 0.5 ft. F
S
= 1.20 Factor of safety (multiplier)
z
1
= 1.07 ft. Normal depth in chute
n-value = 0.054 Manning's roughness coefficient
D
50
(F
s
) =
1 2(D
50
)(F
s
) = 32.4 in. Rock chute thickness
m = 4 Tw + d = 3.04 ft. Tailwater above outlet apron
. n i 4 . 2 3 . t f 0 2 z
2
= 2.76 ft. Hydraulic jump height
(Bw) *** The outlet will function adequately
H
p
Slope = 0.005 ft./ft.
Profile Along Centerline of Chute
16.2 in. (309 lbs. - 50% round / 50% angular)
High Flow Storm Information Typical Cross Section
Berm
Inlet
Outlet
Channel
Channel
H
drop
=
1
40(D
50
) =
8 oz. Min.
Geotextile
y
c
=
h
cv
=
1
1
Velocity
inlet
=
Velocity
outlet
=
10y
c
=
Use H
p
along chute
but not less than z
2
.
*
*
8 oz. Min.
Geotextile
suggested}
ft.
cfs
ft./ft.
(m:1)
ft.
ft.
ft./ft.
(m:1)
ft.
ft.
ft./ft.
(m:1)
acres
(F
s
)
cfs
cfs
Rock
thickness
=
2.5
1
Apron elev. --- Inlet =
Hydraulic Jump
ft. --- Outlet = ft. --- (H
drop
=
Rock Chute
Bedding
Rock
Chute Bedding
0 - 3 in. 3 - 5 in. 5+ in.
Figure TS14C7 Rockchutespreadsheet
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
TS14C10 (210VINEH,August2007)
isabout1.8timestheactualstressonthesidesofa
straightchannel.Itisveryclosetothestressesonthe
sidesinacurvedchannelreach.Thecurvedcorrec-
tionsincludedintheprocedureonlymakethecon-
servativeanswerevenmoreconservative.Inaddition,
itwasdevelopedforstoneswithaspecifcgravityof
2.56.However,ithasbeensuccessfullyappliedon
manyprojects.Thisproceduremaybeusedwithfgure
TS14C8andis:
Figure TS14C8 Lanesmethod
Step 1 EnterfgureTS14C8withenergyslope
(channelgrade)andfowdepth.
Step 2 Trackrighttosideslope.
Step 3 Trackuptoratioofcurveradiustowater
surfacewidth.
Step 4 Trackrighttoestimaterequiredriprap
size.
Ratio of curve radius to
water surface width
D
7
5

(
n
o
m
i
n
a
l

d
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
i
n
)
)
.

S
i
z
e

o
f

r
o
c
k
f
o
r

w
h
i
c
h


2
5
%

b
y

w
e
i
g
h
t

i
s

l
a
r
g
e
r
40
30
20
10
0
0.005 0.010
D
e
p
t
h

o
f

f
l
o
w

d

(
f
t
)
0.015 0.020
10
8
6
4
2
Side slope
3
H
:
1
V
2
H
:
1
V
4
-
6
6
-
9
9
-
1
2
S
t
r
a
i
g
h
t

c
h
a
n
n
e
l
S
=
1
.
0
=
0
.
9
0
=
0
.
7
5
=
0
.
6
0
1
1
/2
H
:1
V
K
=
0
.8
7
=
0
.7
2
=
0
.5
2
Channel slope, S (ft/ft)
D
75
=
w
d S
3.5
CK
Rc = Curve radius
W
s
= Water surface width
S = Energy slope or channel grade
w = 62.4
1. Ratio of channel bottom width to depth
(d) greater than 4
2. Specific gravity of rock not less than 2.56
3. Additional requirements for stable riprap
include fairly well-graded rock, stable
foundation, and minimum section thickness
(normal to slope) not less than D
75
at maximum
water surface elevation and 3 D
75
at the base.
4. Where a filter blanket is used, design filter material
grading in accordance with criteria in NRCS Soil
Mechanics Note I.
Notes
Rc/W
s
C
46 0.6
69 0.75
912 0.90
straight channel 1.0
Side slope K
1-1/2H:1V .52
1-3/4H:1V .63
2H:1V .72
2-1/2H:1V .80
3H:1V .87
TS14C11 (210VINEH,August2007)
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
U.S. Department of Transportation Federal
Highway Administration techniques
Severaladditionalcomputationaltechniquesforde-
signingriprapareavailablefromtheU.S.Department
ofTransportationFederalHighwayAdministration
(FHWA).Whilethesearenotdescribedindetail,a
briefdescriptionofeachisprovidedintableTS14C2.
Reviewthereferences(FHWAHEC1987,1988,2001a,
2001b)toobtainthedesignrelationshipsandapplica-
tionmanualsforthesemethods.
HEC11 Thistechniquewasdevelopedforuseonnaturalstreamsorriverswithafowgreaterthan50ft
3
/s.Itislimited
tostraightormildlycurvingreacheswithrelativelyuniformcrosssections.ThismethodcalculatesaD
50
based
onaveragechannelvelocity,sideslope,riprapangleofrepose,specifcgravityofthestone,andaveragechannel
depth
HEC15 Thistechniquewasdevelopedforuseonsmall,constructedchannelswithafowlessthan50ft
3
/s
HEC18 Thistechniquewasdevelopedfordesignofstoneatbridgepiersandabutments
Table TS14C2 FederalHighwayAdministrationtechniques
Summary guide of selected
techniques
Attributesofselectedmethodsaresummarizedin
tableTS14C3toallowtheusertoquicklyselecta
method.
Thedesignershouldnotbesurprisedifthedifferent
techniquesproducedifferentanswers.Theuserneeds
torecognizethelimitsandapplicabilityofeachtech-
niqueandmatchittothesiteandprojectconditions.
Table TS14C3 Summaryoftechniques
Technique
High or low
energy Slopes Typical application(s)
Isbash Both Notspecifed Rockrevetment,stillingbasins,riverclosures
108Report Both <10% Quickassessmentsforstablestonerequirements
Maynord Low <2% Rockrevetment,bankprotection,stonetoe
AbtandJohnson High 2%to20% Overtopping,gradeprotection
ARSrockchute High 2%to40% Overtopping,rockchutes,gradeprotection
USBR High Notspecifed Riprapbelowastillingbasin
USGSBlodgett Both Notspecifed Riprapstability
USACESteepSlopeRiprap High 2%to20% Rockchutes,gradeprotection
USACEHabitatBoulder High Notspecifed Instreambouldersforhabitatenhancement
CALTRANSRSP Low <2% Rockrevetment,bankprotection,stonetoe
Lane's(FWS) Low <2% Stonebankprotection,streambarbswithadjustments
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
TS14C12 (210VINEH,August2007)
Factor of safety
Stonesizingshouldbeapproachedwithcarebecause
rocktreatmentscanbeexpensiveandcangiveafalse
senseofsecurityifnotappliedappropriately.Afactor
ofsafetyisoftenadvisabletoaccountforunknowns
anduncertainty.Insomecases,thefactorofsafetyis
partofthesizingformulasprovided.Whereafactor
ofsafetyisnotbuiltintotheprocedure,thedesigner
shouldmultiplytheresultingsizebyanappropriate
value.Appropriateengineeringjudgmentshouldbe
appliedwhenassigningafactorofsafety.Maynord
(1992)suggestsaminimumfactorofsafetyof1.1.
Typically,afactorofsafetywillrangefrom1.1to1.5.
Theriskanduncertaintyassociatedwithaproject
shouldberefectedinthefactorofsafety.
Example calculations
Examplecalculationsarepresentedforselectedmeth-
odstoillustratethevariabilityassociatedwithrock
sizingmethods.Theexamplesmayalsoprovideanew
userwithconfrmationthattheyarecorrectlyapplying
amethod.
Example problem: Mild slope
Problem:Forthefollowingfowconditions,determine
therequiredrocksizeforstonetoeprotection.
G
s
=2.65or
s
=165.36lb/ft
3
Width =40ft
n =0.045
Slope =0.01ft/ft
Depth =6ft
Solution:Solverelevanthydraulicparameters
Vel =9.1ft/s
Q =2,200ft
3
/s
Y
crit
=4.54ft
Theriprapsizedeterminedfromseveralmethodsis:
Isbash D
50
=6.5in
Maynord D
30
=4.6in,D
50
=5.5in
Lanes(FWS) D
75
=15in,D
50
= 12.7in
AbtandJohnson D
50
=8.1in
ARSrockchute D
50
=3.6in
Discussion:Thecomputedcriticaldepthindicatesthat
thisisasubcriticalfow.Thedesigncallsforarevetment-
typeprotection,sothestonesarenotprojectingintothe
fow.Therefore,thisisalow-energyfowcondition.The
Isbash(1936)andtheMaynord(1992)methodsbothindi-
cateaD
50
ofabout5.5to6.5inches.Thesemethodswere
developedforconditionsthataresimilartothoseinthe
problemstatement.Therefore,astonesizeof6inches
withanappropriatefactorofsafetyshouldbeaccept-
able.
Lanes(1955a)FWSmethodprovidesaconservative
estimateof12.7inches.Whilethistechniqueisusedin
similarsituations,aconservativeanswerisexpected.
TheAbtandJohnson(1991)methodandtheARSmeth-
od(Robinson,Rice,andKadavy1998)weredeveloped
forsteeperhigh-energyfowconditions(>2%);therefore,
useofthesemethodswouldnotbeadvisableforthis
application.
Example problem: Steep slope
Problem:Forthefollowingfowconditions,determine
therequiredrocksizeforarockchute.
G
s
=2.65or
s
=165.36lb/ft
3
Width =40ft
n =0.045
Slope =0.06ft/ft
Depth =3.5ft
Solution:Solverelevanthydraulicparameters
Vel = 16.7ft/s
Q = 2,340ft
3
/s
Y
crit
= 4.7ft
Theriprapsizedeterminedfromseveralmethodsis:
Isbash D
50
= 1.6ft
Maynord D
30
= 1.6ft,D
50
= 1.9ft
Lanes(FWS) D
75
= 3.7ft,D
50
= 3.2ft
AbtandJohnson D
50
= 1.3ft
ARSrockchute D
50
= 1.1ft
Discussion:Thecomputedcriticaldepthindicatesthat
thisisasupercriticalfow.Whilesimilarinprediction,
theIsbashandtheMaynord(1992)methodswerenotde-
velopedforconditionsthataredescribedintheproblem
statement.TheAbtandJohnson(1991),aswellasthe
ARSrockchutemethods(Robinson,Rice,andKadavy
1998),werederivedforsimilarconditionstotheproblem
statement.Therefore,the1.1to1.3footD
50
riprapwith
anappropriatefactorofsafetyshouldbeacceptable.
TS14C13 (210VINEH,August2007)
Part 654
National Engineering Handbook
Stone Sizing Criteria Technical Supplement 14C
Conclusion
Rockisoftenusedwherelong-termdurabilityis
needed,velocitiesarehigh,periodsofinundationare
long,andthereisasignifcantthreattolifeandprop-
erty.Whetherastreambankprojectinvolvestheuseof
rockaspartofastand-alonetreatmentorasacom-
ponentofanintegratedsystem,thedeterminationof
therequiredstonesizerequiresengineeringanalysis.
Stonesizingshouldbeapproachedwithcarebecause
rocktreatmentscanbeexpensiveandcangiveafalse
senseofsecurityifnotappliedappropriately.Since
stonesizingmethodsarenormallydevelopedforaspe-
cifcapplication,careshouldbeexercisedmatching
theselectedmethodwiththeprojectpurposeandsite
condition.Therefore,theintendedapplicationshould
dictatewhichrocksizingtechniqueisused.Byusing
severalmethods,thedesignerwilloftenseeaconver-
genceofrocksizesforagivenapplication.